iiiei uuioiiiieu nujuciny^^^^
The Watershed Academy presents..
\l\latefS
heds
101
I «v
,^tDS'«v,
\
SB,
PIJO^
August 9-10, 2000
Philadelphia, PA
Sponsored by US Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds
-------
VJ
TT>
M30
3C500
The Watershed Academy Presents
Watersheds 101: Clean Water Act Tools for Watershed Protection
A Training Workshop
ABOUT THE WORKSHOP:
Purpose
Watershed management involves using many tools to answer key questions and taking actions to
achieve our clean water goals. One of the primary tools is the Clean Water Act and its
authorities that are available to assess, restore, and protect water resources. Watersheds 101
provides information on how the various authorities under the CWA and other tools fit together
to help protect and restore watersheds. The course is not designed to give attendees a detailed
working knowledge of the CWA, but rather to provide them with a sound understanding of the
basic framework of the law and the linkages between its different components.
The course will introduce participants to key EPA databases and analytical tools, other federal
statutes that may relate to watershed protection, and local watershed protection tools such as
takings, land use controls, and best management practices. The course uses a combination of
lecture, group exercises, case studies, and games to reinforce the concepts presented.
Target Audience
The primary target audience for the course will be EPA and other federal employees and state
environmental agency staff who are currently involved in watershed management/protection
projects or plan to become involved. Other audiences include tribal representatives, local agency
personnel, environmental nongovernmental organizations, and other local watershed
practitioners.
Workshop Schedule
The workshop is designed for 2 days.
Preregistration
If you are interested in the course, please contact Bill Painter at painter.william@epa.gov or
(202) 260-5489.
About the Academy
EPA's Office of Water initiated the Watershed Academy in 1994 to provide training and
information on implementing watershed approaches to a variety of audiences. These audiences
include water resource/watershed managers and technical staff in local, state, tribal, and federal
agencies, and other public or private sector practitioners of watershed management. The
Watershed Academy sponsors its own training courses and develops training materials on
different aspects of watershed approaches; it also publicizes watershed-related training courses
and materials developed by others. In addition, the Academy has developed an Internet distance
learning program called Academy 2000 to help train those who cannot attend the courses. For
more information on the Academy, visit EPA's web site at:
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/wacademy.htm
U.S. EPA Begion III
Regional Center for Environmental
Information
1650 Arch Street (3PM52)
Philadelphia, PA 19103
-------
CWA Tools Agenda
August 9,2000
Morning
8:30-8:40 Welcome and Course Overview
8:40-9:15 Introductions, Participant Expectations
9:15-9:45 Overview of Watershed Approach
9:45-9:55 Pop Quiz
9:55-10:30 Introduction to the Clean Water Act
Goals, water quality standards
10:30-10:50 Break
10:50-11:00 Brain Stumpers
11:00-11:45 Monitoring to Meet Water Quality Standards and Fact or Fiction
Section 305, Section 303(d)
11:45-12:30 Rocky River Basin
12:30-1:30 Lunch
Afternoon
1:30-2:30 Strategy Development and Brain Stumpers
Total Maximum Daily Loads, Water Quality Certification (section 401), National Estuary Program
(section 320)
2:30-2:45 Break
2:45-3:45 Strategy Development (cont.)
3:45-4:15 Region 3 TMDL Overview (USEPA Region 3 Staff)
4:15-5:00 CWA Jeopardy
August 10,2000
Morning
8:30-8:40 Fact or Fiction
8:40-9:30 Strategy Implementation and Brain Stumpers
NPDES, 319,404, SRF
9:30-10:15 Using CWA Tools for Watershed Protection
10:15-10:30 Break
10:30-12:00 Using Local Tools in Watershed Protection
Buildout analysis, takings, local land use controls, best management practices
12:00-1:00 Lunch
Afternoon
1:00-1:15 Review of Group Exercise
1:15-3:00 Breakout Session for Group Exercise
3:00-4:00 Reconvene and Group Discussion
4:00 Adjourn
Group Exercise (Participants are provided with information and work in a group to identify the key CWA tools used
during different phases of a watershed management cycle.)
-------
Front Matter
-------
AFO
BAT
BATEA
BMP
BOD
CAFO
CCMP
COD
COE
CSO
CWA
CZMA
CZM
CZARA
DMR
DO
DOT
DU
DW
Acronyms
Animal Feeding Operations DWSRF
Best Available Technology
Best Available Technology
Economically Achievable
Best Management Practice
Biological Oxygen Demand
Confined Animal Feeding
Operation
Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plan
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Army Corps of Engineers
Combined Sewer Overflow
Clean Water Act
Coastal Zone Management Act
Coastal Zone Management
Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization
Amendments
Discharge Monitoring Report
Dissolved Oxygen
Department of Transportation
Designated Use
Drinking Water
EQUIP
FCA
ISTEA
LA
MCLs
MEP
MGD
MOS
MS4
NEPA
NOAA
NPDES
NPS
NRCS
NSPS
ONRW
Drinking Water State Revolving
Fund
Environmental Quality Incentives
Program
Fish Consumption Advisory
Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act
Load Allocation
Minimum Contaminant Level
Maximum Extent Practicable
Million Gallons per Day
Margin of Safety
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer
System
National Environmental Policy Act
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System
Nonpoint Source
Natural Resource Conservation
Service
New Source Performance
Standard
Outstanding Natural Resource
Water
-------
POTW
Publically Owned Treatment
Works
PS
Point Source
PSES
Pretreatment Standards for
Existing Sources
SDWA
Safe Drinking Water Act
SEP
Supplemental Environmental
Project
SRF
State Revolving Fund
T&E
Tidal and Estuary
TEA-21
Transportation Efficiency Act
TMDL
Total Maximum Daily Load
UAs
Designated Urban Areas
USDA
United Stated Department of
Agriculture
WLA
Waste Load Allocation
WHPP
Wellhead Protection Program
WQ
Water Quality
WQC
Water Quality Criteria
WQS
Water Quality Standards
WRAS
Watershed Restoration Action
Strategy
-------
About the Watershed Academy.
More and more environmental programs in recent years have structured themselves around
watersheds. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Water is among the
many that have promoted watershed approaches and witnessed their successes all around the
country.
Through the Clean Water Act, EPA works with States, tribes, and a variety of other
governmental and non-governmental organizations to restore and maintain the physical, chemical,
and biological integrity of the nation's waters, often through activities involving watershed
approaches. This involves a multidisciplinary blend of sound watershed science, effective
communication and partnerships and well-designed organizational management to reach its
highest levels of success." Even watershed management professionals seldom are experienced in
every discipline. Thus, training in the many facets of watershed approaches are in high demand.
The EPA Office of Water initiated the Watershed Academy to provide training for watershed
managers. The Watershed Academy includes core courses and EPA reference materials about
watershed processes, functions, and management techniques, as well as a series of co-sponsored
special training events on different aspects of watershed approaches. The target audience for
Academy courses includes water resource/watershed managers and technical staff in local, state
and federal agencies and tribes, EPA regions, and other public or private sector practitioners of
watershed management.
Academy 2000
The Internet-based distance learning program, Academy 2000, was developed to help train people
who cannot attend live training courses. Academy 2000 is a set of self-paced training modules
that provide a basic but broad introduction to the many facets of watershed management,
organized under the following themes:
• Introduction/Overview
• Watershed Ecology
• Watershed Change
• Analysis and Planning
• Management Practices
• Community/Social Context
Academy 2000 now has more then 20 modules available and more under development. These
modules cover the most important watershed management topics—those subjects about which
watershed managers, local officials, involved citizens, decision makers, and others should have at
least an introductory level of knowledge. Completing a series of 15 modules earns the Academy
2000 watershed training certificate. Ten of the required certificate modules and their self-tests are
now available at (http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/wacademy.htm), and the rest will be
completed during early 2000.
-------
Information Transfer Series
The Watershed Academy provides watershed references through the watershed academy Transfer
Series. The documents in the series are available on the Watershed academy's web site
(http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/wacademy/its.html). The Information Transfer Series
publications available to date include the following:
no. 1 Watershed Protection: A Project Focus (EPA841-R-95-003)
no. 2 Watershed Protection: A Statewide Approach (EPA841 -R-95-004)
no. 3 Monitoring Consortiums: A Cost-Effective Means to Enhancing Watershed
Data Collection and Analysis (EPA841-R-97-006)
no. 4 Land Cover Digital Data Directory for the United States (EPA84 ] -B-97-005)
no. 5 Designing an Information Management System for Watersheds (EPA841 -R-
97-005 )
no. 6 Information Management for the Watershed Approach in the Pacific
Northwest (EPA841-R-97-004)
no. 7 Inventory of Watershed Training Courses (EPA841 -D-98-001)
no. 8 Statewide Watershed Management Facilitation (EPA841 -R-97-011)
no. 9 Watershed Approach Framework (EPA840-S-96-001)
no. 10 Top Ten Watershed Lessons Learned (EPA840-F-97-001)
no. 11 Catalog of Federal Funding Sources for Watershed Protection (second
edition) (EPA841-B-99-003)
no. 12 Watershed Training Opportunities (EPA841 -B-98-001)
no. 13 Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes and Practices (EPA841 -R-
98-900)
-------
THT AtTEHSKD \CAPEWV
The Watershed Academy
Information Transfer Series Documents
The Watershed Academy's Information Transfer Series includes documents that, like the
Academy's courses, explain different components of the watershed approach. The Series includes
documents that are technical/scientific, communications-oriented, or involve organizational
development and management. Single copies may be ordered from the National Center for
Environmental Publications and Information (NCEPI) by calling 1-800-490-9198 or 513-489-8190,
or faxing the document title, EPA publication number, and your mailing address to 513-489-8695.
Most of these documents may be browsed or downloaded from the Internet at
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/wacademy/its.html
no. 1: Watershed protection: a project focus (EPA841-R-95-003)
Numbers 1 and 2 of the Information Transfer Series are most central to the watershed approach and among the EPA
Office of Water's most heavily requested technical documents. This document focuses on developing watershed-
specific programs or projects. It provides a blueprint for designing and implementing watershed projects including
references and case studies for specific elements of the process. The document illustrates how the broader
principles of watershed management-including all relevant federal, state, tribal, local and private activities-can be
brought to bear on water quality and ecological concerns.
no. 2: Watershed protection: a statewide approach (EPA841 -R-95-004)
Numbers 1 and 2 of the Information Transfer Series are most central to the watershed approach and among the EPA
Office of Water's most heavily requested technical documents. This document was primarily designed for state
water quality managers. A common framework for a statewide watershed approach focuses on organizing and
managing by a state's major watersheds, which are called basins in this document. In this statewide approach,
activities such as water quality monitoring, planning and permitting are coordinated on a set schedule within large
watersheds or basins. Involvement of other natural resource agencies is actively sought to achieve water quality
and ecosystem goals. Establishing good working relationships among the statewide framework participants, the
managers in major basins, and local watershed efforts is crucial to making this approach work.
no. 3: Monitoring consortiums: A cost-effective means to enhancing watershed data collection and analysis
(EPA841 -R-97-006)
This document addresses coordination in watershed monitoring. Monitoring is absolutely essential to track overall
watershed health and detect changes in any valued features or functions, but monitoring costs are often a limiting
factor, ,4s demonstrated in the document's four case studies, consortiums can stretch the monitoring dollar,
improve cooperation among partners, and increase sharing of expertise as well as expenses of data collection and
management.
no. 4: Land cover digital data directory for the United States (EPA841-B-97-005)
Land cover, which is the pattern of ecological resources and human activities dominating difterent areas of the
earth's surface, is one of the most important data sources used in watershed analysis and the management of water
resources throughout the country. Yet, despite the high demand for land cover data, a single source of up-to-date,
nationally consistent land cover mapping at moderate to high spatial detail is not available. In the absence of a
single national data source, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Water has researched the
availability of single-state and multi-state, moderately detailed land cover data sets across the country and compiled
a summary description about each finding. The 75 summaries in this directory include contact information to assist
readers who may want to acquire copies of the digital data for their own use. It should be noted, however, that this
directory is not a centralized source for ordering and acquiring digital data; to obtain land cover data, readers must
contact the reference given for each individual data set in the directory.
-------
no. 5: Designing an information management system for watersheds (EPA841-R-97-005)
This document is an introduction to the information management responsibilities and challenges facing any
watershed group. The document reviews the fundamentals of identifying information management needs,
integrating different data bases, evaluating hardware and software options, and developing implementation pL
no. 6: Information management for the watershed approach in the Pacific Northwest (EPA841-R-97-004)
This document centers on a series of interviews with leaders and key participants in the statewide watershed
approach activities in the State of Washington. The document reviews Washington's statewide watershed activ
in case study fashion. Following this review, the document describes how a watershed information clearinghouse
can serve multiple planning, information management and communication roles for watershed groups.
no. 7: Watershed Academy catalogue of watershed training opportunities (EPA841-D-97-001)
The EPA Office of Water, through its Watershed Academy, has developed several training courses to address thi
major facets of the watershed approach. EPA's courses, however, represent just a fraction of what is available
nationally through government and non-govemment training sources. The Catalogue of Watershed Training
Opportunities was developed with the intent fo help anyone with a need for watershed training to locate informs"!
about suitable courses. The Catalogue contains course summaries that show the reader enough to determine the
level of interest and who to contact for further information—much like a college course catalogue. A master
calendar is cross-referenced to the course summaries to show where and when they are currently offered. The
Catalogue is updated periodically.
no. 8: Statewide watershed management facilitation (EPA841-R-97-011)
This document addresses statewide watershed management and the process of facilitating the development or
reorientation of statewide watershed programs. In the past few years, many states have decided to create new
statewide watershed management frameworks or reorient existing water programs along watershed lines. Many
states have undergone this process with expert facilitation assistance from EPA. Part I of this document desc
the facilitation process, and Part II summarizes the experiences of 13 states in statewide watershed managerr,
framework development and implementation.
no. 9: Watershed approach framework (EPA840-S-96-001)
This publication revisits and updates EPA's vision for a watershed approach, first explained in a 1991 document
entitled Watershed Protection Approach Framework. It describes watershed approaches as coordinating framew
for environmental management that focus public and private efforts to address the highest priority problems witI
hydrologically-defined geographic areas, taking into consideration both ground and surface water flow. Although
watershed approaches may vary, the guiding principles of partnerships, a geographic focus, and sound managen i
techniques based on strong science always remain important. Local, state, tribal and EPA experiences in
implementing these guiding principles are detailed throughout the publication.
no. 10 Top 10 watershed lessons learned (EPA840-F-97-001)
Watershed work has been going on for many years now and this 60 page document summarizes the "top" lessons
that have been learned by watershed practitioners across the United States regarding what works and does not.
Each lesson includes 2 or more case studies and key contacts and resources for more information. Over 100
practitioners were involved in its development and reviews by the target audience have been positive. Visit
www.epa.gov/owow/lessons on the Internet or call 1-800-490-9198 to order a copy.
no. 11: Catalog of federal funding sources for watershed protection (second edition) (EPA841-B-99-003)
Many sources of federal funding are available to support different aspects of watershedprcrt'ectioh and specific
types of local-level watershed pro/ects. Th/s document presents information on 52 federal funding sources (gra
and loansl that may be used to fund a variety of watershed protects. The information on funding sources is
organized into categories including coastal waters, conservation, economic development, education, environm>.
justice, fisheries, forestry, Indian tribes, mining, pollution prevention and wetlands.
-------
dEPAMUPnM.Aw
£Jffice off |^orer
Academy 2000:
Internet-Based Training Modules
On Key Watershed Management Topics
http://www.epa.gov/owow/wBtershed/wacademy/acad2000.html
The Watershed Academy's Distance Learning Program, Academy 2000. is a set of self-
paced training modules that provide a basic but broad introduction to the many facets of
watershed management. Academy 2000 utilizes a variety of Internet-based formats,
including:
• Slide show/lectures
• Interactive exercises
• On-line downloadable documents
• Hot links to related sites
• Interactive self-tests
These modules cover what we feel are the most important watershed management topics
- those subjects about which watershed managers, local officials, involved citizens,
decision makers, and others should have at least an introductory level of knowledge. Our
goal has been to provide this basic but broad introduction to the watershed approach in a
format available to anyone who has Internet access. The time and complexity of each
module varies, but most are at the college freshman level of instruction.
Completing a series of 15 of these modules earns the Academy 2000 watershed training
certificate. Several of these modules are still under construction, but we plan to have the
15 certificate modules completed in the winter of 2000. Beyond these 15, many
additional modules have been completed or are in progress (see back of this page: the 15
certificate modules are asterisked). We have identified about 60 topics for which we'd
like to have modules. On our website these are organized into six themes:
1. Introduction/Overview. These modules introduce the principles of the watershed
approach and justify the values of working at a watershed level.
2. Watershed Ecology. These modules show that watersheds are natural systems,
whose structure and functions provide substantial benefits to people and the
environment when allowed to operate properly.
3. Watershed Change. These modules describe both natural and human-induced
changes in watersheds, and the concepts of change vs. change of concern.
4. Analysis and Planning. These modules address how watershed problems are
analyzed as a first step toward finding solutions.
5. Management Practices. These modules present overviews of the ways in which
the common categories of watershed management challenges - urban runoff
issues, cropland management, forestry and other issues - are addressed by
techniques that reduce or control negative environmental impacts.
6. Community/Social Context. These modules concentrate on the human element of
watershed management, in recognition that community support for watershed
management is one of the strongest determinants of the chances for success.
-------
Major Themes and Modules Under Development for Academy 2000: Status as of 9/99
( * denotes the 15 modules required for the Certificate Program)
Introductory/Overview
Modules
Watershed Ecology
Modules:
Watershed Change
Modules:
Analysis and
Planning Modules:
Management Practices
Modules:
ACTIVE MODULES:
'Principles of
watershed
management
•Ecosystem services:
benefits to human
societies
Ohio's virtual
watershed tour
MODULES UNDER
CONSTRUCTION:
Why watersheds?
Getting started: key
sources of information
for more information,
contact:
Doug Norton
202-260-701
in.d
ACTIVE MODULES:
•Introduction to
watershed ecology
•Protecting Instream
flows: how much
water does a river
need?
•Stream corridor
structure
MODULES UNDER
CONSTRUCTION:
Six basic ecosystem
functions in
watersheds
The key role of riparian
zones
The key role of
wetlands
ACTIVE MODULES:
•Agents of watershed
change
*Nonpoint pollution of
surface waters with
Nitrogen and
Phosphorus
Invasive non-native
species
Human alteration of
the global Nitrogen
cycle
MODULES UNDER
CONSTRUCTION:
General effects of land
uses on watersheds
Impervious surface
effects on aquatic
systems
Water temperature
effects on aquatic
systems
Sediment effects on
aquatic systems
ACTIVE MODULES:
'Overview of
watershed monitoring
Watershed modeling
MODULES UNDER
CONSTRUCTION:
•Introduction to
watershed planning
mAn overview of
watershed assessment
Aerial photography for
stream corridor
analysis
Rapid bioassessment
protocols
Classification:
characterizing eco-
regions, watersheds,
land cover, streams,
and landscapes
Watershed ecological
risk assessment
Remote sensing and
watershed
characterization
Indicators and the
concept of watershed
condition
Wetershed delineation
Developing TMDLs for
watershed
fianagement
ACTIVE MODULES:
'8 Tools of watershed
management In
developing anas
Stream corridor
restoration tools
Restoration: what's
right/wrong with this
picture?
MODULES UNDER
CONSTRUCTION:
•Best management
practices overview:
forestry
•Best management
practices overview:
agriculture
Best management
practices overview:
grazing
Better site design for
development In urban
watersheds
Best management
practices overview:
mined lands
Community/Social
Context Modules:
ACTIVE MODULES:
* Top ten watershed
lessons learned
• Getting in step:
public information and
outreach
Statewide watershed
menagement
executive overview
Economics of
sustainabitity
Monitoring
consortiums
MODULES UNDER
CONSTRUCTION:
Community profiling to
study wetershed
perspectives
Environmental risk
communication
Water quality
standards overview
Children's learning
links for watersheds
Drinking water/source
water protection
Reising funding for
watershed
management efforts
Conflict resolution
Watershet
lart,
-------
Watershed 101: Clean Water Act Tools for Watershed Protection
Evaluation Form
Please use this scale to rate the following:
Highest
1
Lowest
1. Overall program and materials: Objectives clear 4
Objectives met 4
Content relevant 4
Well organized 4
Pace effective 4
Materials 4
Meeting Facilities 4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2. Comments on overall program and materials:
3. Overview of the Watershed Approach
~ Very Useful ~ Useful ~ Adequate ~ Not Useful
Comments on Instructor and/or materials:
4. Introduction to the Clean Water Act:
~ Very Useful ~ Useful ~ Adequate ~ Not Useful
Comments on Instructor and/or materials:
5. Using CWA Tools for Watershed Protection:
~ Very Useful ~ Useful ~ Adequate
Comments on Instructor and/or materials:
~ Not Useful
-------
8. Using Local Tools for Watershed Protection:
~ Very Useful ~ Useful ~ Adequate ~ Not Useful
Comments on Instructor and/or materials:
9. Group Exercise:
~ Very Useful ~ Useful ~ Adequate ~ Not Useful
Comments on Instructor and/or materials:
-------
Overview of the Watershed
Approach
-------
Overview of the Watershed
Approach
Overview of the Watershed
Approach
• Holistic approach to problems and
solutions
• Integrates issues and programs
• Reduces duplication of effort
• Targets solutions to resources, not
political boundaries
• Uses full array of tools and
strategies
-------
Watersheds
Small
Watershed
(draining small
waterbody
system)
Natural Factors Affecting
Water Quality
Vegetation
Effects
Sedimentation
and Soil
Effects
Ground
Subsurface Biochemistry
Effects
Human Factors
Wetland
Habitat
Degradation
Urban Development,
Storm Water, CSO, and
Wastewater Discharge
Runoff/Infiltration
from Animal
* (derations
and LTPp Farming
Aquifer
Confining Bed
Contamination
of Drinking
Water
-------
Need for an Integrated
Approach
ANAGEMENT^
aDttr Programs
StptejtfrPn
I Ordinances^
Public Actions
ate Sector ActionsJ
POLITICAL
BOUNDARY
WATER MANAGEMENT
(Surface Ground, Drinking)
Federal Water Programs
State Water Programs
Local Water Programs
General Public Actions
riunlcj tiftm Actions
LAND MANAGEMENT
Federal Luurograms
State LandPrograms
Local Ordinances
|General Public Actions
Private Landowner
Actions
Using a watershed approach
helps to... czji
M-
1. Encourage Sound
Science
2. Facilitate
Communication
and Partnerships
^£7
3. Provide Means of Cost-
Effective Management
Q
4. Focus on
Environmental Results
The Emerging Framework
GOAL: Watershed
Ecosystem Integrity
Environmental /Resource
Objectives > Standards/
Coordination
Framework .
Natural Resource Management
Programs, Tools, and Resources
-------
Goal Setting - The Anacostia
River Watershed Restoration
Effort
• Regional Partnership formed in 1987 -
The Anacostia Watershed Restoration
Committee
- District of Columbia
- Prince George's and Montgomery Counties
- State of Maryland
• Developed Action Plan
- Pollution reduction
- Watershed restoration
- Outreach/education and stewardship
Common Elements in a Basin
Elements Occurring
Throughout the Process
• Stakeholder involvement
• Information gathering and analysis
• Adjustment of strategies
4
-------
Ohio
"Water Wheel"
Implement
and
Evaluate
Build
Public
Support
Create
an Inventory
of the
Watershed
Create
an Action
Plan
Set
Goals and
Develop
Solutions
Define
the
Problems
Watershed Approach
• Build public support
- Establish the core watershed group
- Create a mission statement
- Promote activities in the watershed
- Recruit new stakeholders
• Create an inventory of the watershed
- Define the watershed
- Assess the quality of the water resource
- Examine the human and ecological features that
affect the quality of the water resource
Watershed Approach
• Build public support- Chester Water
Authority, Chester, PA
- Drinking water reservoir wrth 140-mi2 watershed
- Octoraro Watershed Association formed 30 years
ago
- Large Amish agricultural community
- Association promotes BMPs such as streambank
fencing, barnyard management, crop rotation, and
forested buffers
- Association members visit farms and Grange halls
and build trust among the local farmers
5
-------
Watershed Approach (cont.)
• Define the problems
- Identify the pollutants causing the problems
- Identify the sources of the pollutants
- Identify high-quality areas to protect
- Formulate a problem statement
• Set goals and develop solutions
- Evaluate potential solutions for the identified
problems
- Set goals based on measurable indicators
- Select solutions that will achieve the goals
Watershed Approach (cont.)
• Set goals and develop solutions - Santa
Monica Bay, CA - Measurable indicators
- Santa Monica Bay Restoration Program - 1988
- Developed a Comprehensive Monitoring Framework
- Natural stressors and processes (precipitation,
salinity, temperature)
- Human stressors and processes (storm water,
wastewater, dredging, sedimentation, beach
closings) all relate to CWA authorities and activities
- Human and biotic response indicators (fish catches,
bird surveys, wetlands, exotic vs, native species)
Watershed Approach (cont.)
• Create an action plan
- Set priorities
- Set timeframes
- Assign tasks
- Obtain funding
• Implement and evaluate
- Measure progress
- Revisit and make adjustments where needed
-------
Steps don't always
occur in this order or in
any other particular
order.
Where are we now?
Where are we headed?
Where do we want to go?
How do we get there?
How do we know when
we've arrived and what do
we do if we haven't?
%
What Is Watershed
Management?
Top-Down
Other Federal
Jl CWA Tools
Programs
State/Local )
Laws I
/J—y\ z"5"3 Community
Private Sectors*^
V f y Organizations
Initiatives
U
Bottom-up
-------
Watershed Approach -
Discussion
• Class participants' experiences with
watershed protection related to the
Clean Water Act
- Water quality standards
- 305(b) reports
- 303(d) listings
- TMDLs
- Storm water
- National Estuary Program
- NPDES permits
- Others
-------
Introduction to the Clean Water
Act
-------
Introduction to the
Clean Water Act
First...
A Pop Quiz!
The CWA and the related
EPA and state programs
deal only with pollution
from chemicals
-------
EPA and "states" cannot
consider economics at
any point when
implementing the CWA
"Technology-based" controls
specify which treatment
equipment regulated
entities must use
Best management
practices are not only
employed in voluntary
programs, but also can be
a regulatory requirement in
some cases
-------
Water quality standards
consist of three basic
components: designated
uses, water quality criteria,
and antidegradation
requirements
EPA does not play a central
role in selecting which
specific local projects get
loans from the CWA State
Revolving Funds
-------
The CWA State Revolving
Fund may fund only
projects done by
government entities
Now...
A History Lesson
4
-------
History of the CWA
• Rivers and Harbors Act (1899)
• Water Pollution Control Act (1948)
• Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(1956)
• Water Quality Act (1965)
• Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments (1972)
-Clean Water Act (1987)
History of the CWA (cont.)
• Pre CWA (1972): water quality-based
approach
• CWA, Part I: technology-based
approach
• CWA Part II: technology- and water
quality-based approaches
CWA: Part I, Tech-Based
Goals
j Ambient/effluent
monitoring
~ZD n^~i
5
-------
CWA: Part I
• Focus on point source (PS) discharges to surface
waters, through NPDES permitting
• Same limits placed on all PS within each of dozens
of categories of industries
• Generally, municipal sewage plants must achieve
discharge equal to "secondary treatment"
• Treatment levels determined by
technical/economic feasibility
• Limits apply regardless of condition of receiving
water, or contribution from the source relative to
total loadings
Cost-Effective Analysis
CWA: Part II
• Part I ("tech-based") limits on PS (existing and
new) still apply
• Additional limits placed on PS, only where
WQS still not met after tech-based level of
treatment
• New limits "driven by" WQS, not technical
feasibility or economics
• Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) consistent
with meeting WQS is determined, then
allocated among point and nonpoint sources
-------
CWA: Part II, WQ-Based
Set goals and WQS
Key Elements of the CWA
• Set CWA goals and establish Water
Quality Standards (WQS)
• Conduct monitoring to determine if
meeting WQS
• Develop strategies and controls to help
attain WQS
• Implement strategies
• Monitor results
• Revise strategies if necessary
Key Elements of the CWA
7
-------
Key Elements of the CWA
Clean Water Act Goals
• "Restore and maintain the chemical, physical
and biological integrity of the Nation's
waters"
• "Water quality which provides for the
protection and propagation of fish, shellfish,
and wildlife and provides for recreation in
and on the water" (fishable/swimmable goal)
• Zero discharge of pollutants to navigable
(i e., surface) waters
-------
Water Quality Standards
• Apply to surface waters
• Key elements
- Designated uses
- Water quality criteria
- Antidegradation
• Additional policies (e.g., exemptions)
Why do we need clean water?
9
-------
10.
-------
Biomagnifocation
Contaminant
Transport^
Corttamhant
Source
|i:w^Contcrnlrant
Btabglcd
Response
iJatton
Least Tern
Endangered Species
WQS: Designated Use
Categories
• Aquatic life
- Healthy aquatic ecosystems
- Warmwater species/habitat
- Coldwater species/h
• Industrial water s
• Navigation
-------
-------
j WQS: Designating
Waterbodies
The General Rules
• Must designate all "existing" uses
• Fishable/swimmable required, with
rare exceptions
• "Waste transport" not OK
• Multiple uses OK; "most sensitive use
reigns"
• Can consider economic factors
WQS: Designating
Waterbodies (cont.)
The General Rules
• "Downgrading" of designated (not existing)
uses allowed in limited situations
- Natural background conditions, irreversible
human impacts, substantial and widespread social
and economic costs
- Only if use cannot be attained through
implementation of technology-based
requirements for PS and cost-effective and
reasonable best management practices for
nonpoint sources
• Use attainability analysis and public review
required
- Subject to EPA review and approval
-------
WQS: Water Quality Criteria
(WQC)
• Consistent scientifically with protecting
all designated uses (DUs)
• Basic types of criteria
- Narrative/numeric
- Water column/sediment/fish tissue
• Categories of criteria
- Aquatic life
• Pollutant-specific/aquatic community indices
- Human health (drinking/fish consumption)
- Wildlife (semiaquatic/food chain effects)
WQS: Narrative Criteria
• Waters must be "free from"
- Putrescent or otherwise objectionable bottom
deposits
- Oil. scum, and floating debris in amounts that are
unsightly
- Nuisance levels of odor, color, other conditions
- Substances in amounts toxic to humans or aquatic
life
• Balanced, indigenous populations of
aquatic life
WQS: Numeric Criteria
• Parameter-specific: DO, temperature,
turbidity, N, P, Cu, dioxin, etc.
- Level/concentration. 1 mg/L, 5 mg/kg
- Duration:
• Acute, instantaneous, 1-hour, 1-day
• Chronic 4-day, 7-day, 30-day
- Recurrence interval: 1 year, 3 years
• EPA WQC - "state"* can digress, with
rationale
* "state" = state, territory, or authorized tribe
-------
EPA Numeric Criteria
• Several for each pollutant
- Acute/chronic; human health/aquatic life;
freshwater/marine
- Currently none for nutrients or clean sediments
• "States" must have criteria if EPA does
- Can adjust EPA's numbers with scientifically
defensible rationale
WQS: Numeric Criteria
(Cont.)
• Integrative/indices
- Biological' diversity indices (e.g., IBI)
- Multi-pollutant chemical
- Biological/physical
- Physical/chemical
- Biological/physical/chemical
- Ambient toxicity
WQC: Concentration vs.
Duration
-------
IWQC: Examples
-------
Ammonia Criteria: Chronic
Note: varies with pH, too!
WQC: Antidegradation
• Purpose: Prevent deterioration of existing
levels of good water quality
• Generally applies parameter-by-
parameter, not waterbody-by-waterbody
• Three tiers of protection
• Tiers 1 and 2 apply to all waters with
some features at or better than WQS
• Tier 3 applies only to specially classified
waters
Tier 1: The "Absolute Floor"
• Cannot allow loss of any "existing use"
• Cannot allow water quality to drop
below levels needed to maintain
existing use
• Applies to all waters, regardless of use
designation
17
-------
Tier 2: Use of Assimilative
Capacity Not Automatic
• "Brakes" slide from really good WQ to
barely at WQS by saying can't degrade
WQ unless:
- Allowing lower WQ is "necessary to
accommodate important economic or social
development"
- Point sources are meeting relevant technology-
based limits
- Have "achieved all cost-effective and reasonable
best management practices for nonpoint
sources"
- Go through public review and comment process
Antidegradation: Tier 3
• Applies only to waters classified
Outstanding National Resource Waters
(ONRW)
- This classification "overlays" designated uses
- Candidates include, but are not limited to,
"waters of National and State parks and
wildlife refuges and waters of exceptional
recreational or ecological significance"
• Only minimal, or significant but short-
term, decreases in WQ are allowed
WQC Exemptions: Spatial
• Mixing Zones
- Limited portions of a waterbody where WQC are
waived
- Applies in outfall areas of point sources
- Chronic critena waived, usually not acute
- Size varies from site to site, but zone of passage
for organisms usually required
- Often prohibited in critical habitat areas
18
-------
Regulatory Mixing Zone
1 Receiving Water
. .. Acute Criteria\
i ByH3l! Met/Chronic )
fv^ceeded^ Criteria J
t ExceectaJ/
¦ Acute and Chronic
| Criteria Met
WQC Exemptions: Temporal
• Design Flows
- Allow WQC to be exceeded during rare
events
• Extreme low flows- 7Q10, 1Q3
• Exceptional high flows (storm water,
CSOs)
-------
WQC: Process
• WQS established by "states"; EPA
must review/approve prior to
becoming effective
• If EPA disapproves a state WQS and
state doesn't revise it, EPA
promulgates a WQS
• Public review and comment at state
and federal levels (if EPA
promulgates)
i i Brain Buster #1
For decades, the very polluted river that
flowed through a city had virtually no fish.
Also, copper and PCBs contaminated the
bottom sediments. After years of clean-up
activity, fish (including sun perch and
bass) returned to the river. Soon, fishing
tournaments were being held.
• What can one say about existing uses before
and after'
• What might the designated use of the river
have been before the cleanup? After?
• Should the WQC for copper or PCBs be
changed after the cleanup' Why?
Brain Buster #1 (cont.)
A few years later, a large number of
people from Southeast Asia moved to
a neighborhood along the banks of
the river.
• Should the state consider changing the
designated use again?
• What about the criteria for copper and
PCBs?
-------
|V4
Brain Buster #2
mJ
1 A state has adopted the following water
quality criteria for pollutant "X"
Not to exceed 100 mg/L
1-day average 50 mg/L
y
7-day average 25 mg/L
In which of the situation graphed below
is there evidence of one or more of the
above criteria? Which ones, for each
graph?
-------
22
-------
Key Elements of the CWA
Funding for Monitoring
CWA Sec. 106
• Funds distributed to states by
allotment formula
• Supports baseline state water quality
programs
- Monitoring
- Permitting and enforcement
- Other activities
• Approximately $115 M/yr
Ambient Monitoring Elements
Eligible Under Sec. 106
• Development of monitoring strategies
and plans
• Fixed station networks and intensive
surveys
• Chemical, physical, and biological
analyses
• Laboratories and data storage systems
• Reporting, including 305(b)
• Training
-------
Conduct Monitoring to
Determine if Meeting WQS
• 305(b) - National Water Quality
Inventory
• 303(d) - Threatened and Impaired
Waters List
305(b): National Water
Quality Inventory
• States submit biennially to EPA
• EPA overview Report to Congress
• Condition of all waterbodies
• Key causes of impairment
- Pollutants/other stressors
- Sources
• Progress toward CWA goals
-------
303(d): Threatened and
Impaired Waters List
• Biennial submission by states, EPA
review and approval
• List of waters currently not meeting
WQS and threatened waters
- 21,000 waters in 1998 reports
• Listing of priorities for TMDL
development
- Approximately 40,000 needed (two or more for
some waters, one for each pollutant)
Causes of Impairments
Pollutant
Sediments
Nutrients
Pathogens
Metals
Dissolved Oxygen
Other Habitat Alterations
pH
Temperature
Biologic Impairment
Fish Consumption Advisories
Flow Alterations
Pesticides
Ammonia
Legacy
Unknown
Orgonics
Number of Times Named as Cause
6502
5730
4884
4022
3889
2163
1774
1752
1331
1247
1240
1097
781
546
527
464
-------
Top Four Reasons for 303(d)
Listing (by Waterbody Type)1
LAKES
ESTUARIES
STREAMS/RIVERS
NUTRIENTS
r~ PATH6C£M5"^~~
SEDIMENTS
SEDIMENTS
, •• FCA' . .
METALS
DfSSOLVEO OXYGEN
METALS .
i PATHOGENS
pH""
• DISSOLVED OXYGEN
NUTRIENTS
1 Based on 1998 303(d) listing cyde
'Fish Consumption Advisory
The CWA and the related
EPA and state programs
deal with only pollution
from chemicals
-------
Water quality standards
consist of three basic
components: designated
uses, water quality criteria,
and antidegradation
requirements
All water quality criteria address
instantaneous levels of
pollutants that can never be
exceeded
27
-------
The only kinds of criteria
contained in water quality
standards are numeric criteria
(pollutant levels, etc)
The "fishable" part of the
CWA's "fishable and
swimmable" goal simply
means providing for
acceptable populations of
sport fish
States must update their
lists of impaired waters
every 2 years after
reviewing the best
available data
28
-------
Changes to state water quality
standards are to be
considered at least once
every 3 years, with at least
one public hearing and
opportunity for public review
and written comment
"Antidegradation" means that all
waters must be maintained at or
brought to a "zero level" of
pollution
A waterbody is covered by
either Tier I, Tier II, or Tier
III of antidegradation
29
-------
Tier III of antidegradation requires
states to avoid, or at least hold to
an absolute minimum, any
lowering of quality of designated
receiving waters
Mixing zones are areas designated
by "states" where some or all
water quality standards are
waived to allow for dilution of
pollution
The CWA's zero discharge goal has
no operative meaning: it is
entirely symbolic
-------
EPA operates a large national
network of ambient water
quality monitoring stations
i The Watershed Approach is totally
J "bottom-up"—stakeholders are
" free to pick any goals they find
" appropriate, regardless of goals
j and mandates set by the CWA
; and other federal laws and
corresponding regulations
V
JS
-------
Key Elements of the CWA
Develop Strategies to Help
Attain Water Quality
Standards
• Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)
• Sec. 320 - National Estuary Program
• Watershed Restoration Action Strategies
(WRASs)
-------
TMDLs
• Amount of a specific pollutant
that a waterbody can receive and
still meet water quality standards
• "States" required to develop
TMDLs for (some) waters on their
303(d) lists
• TMDLs approved or disapproved
by EPA; if disapproved, EPA
develops TMDL
Elements of a TMDL
• Allowable pollutant load (cap)
• Allocation of cap among sources
• Margin of safety (MOS)
• (Loading reserved for growth)
• (Implementation plan )
TMDL Definition
TMDL = t\NlA; + iLAj + MOS
+ (growth)
IWLA,: Sum of waste loads (point
sources)
ILA,: Sum of loads (nonpoint sources)
MOS: Margin of Safety
-------
TMDL "Caps"
• For specific pollutants
- Sediment, nrtrogen. phosphorus, temperature.
copper, mercury
• For pollutant indicators
- BOD, COD
* Not necessarily mass load
- Percent reduction from key sources, biological
indicators
• Not necessarily daily
- Often weekly, monthly, yearly
• May vary seasonally
TMDL: Allocations
• Each point source with individual
NPDES permit
• Point sources covered under general
permits (WLA)
• Individual sources, categories,
subcategories of nonpoint sources
(LA)
No EPA rules on how to allocate
TMDL Allocation
-------
TMDLs and Watersheds
• TMDLs are quantified and include
allocations to point sources and
nonpoint sources
- Link use impairment to particular pollutants
- Link pollutants to particular sources
- Enhance the ability to predict source reduction
from best management practices (BMPs)
TMDLs in the Watershed Context
• A key foundation for a comprehensive
watershed-based approach. TMDLs
- Are a core technical process
- Complement and support many other activities
• TMDLs drive point source controls through
NPDES
• TMDLS are not self-implementing for
nonpoint sources
• TMDLs can help drive local watershed plans
- Help focus CWA 319 and non-CWA programs
- Provide technical basis for trading
Black River, WA - Assembling
the Phosphorus and Nitrogen
TMDL
TMDL
Water Quality
Indicators
• OluoM oxygen t.0
mpA.
• Total phokphorua
0 05 ug/L
929 lb/day BOOS (May 1
1o Octobar 31)
2*3 lb/day NH,-N (May 1
to Octobar 31)
29.3 lb/day TP (Uay 1 to
Octobar 31)
Water Quality
Controls
¦ NPOCS diacharga
linvta lor point
•ou reaa
> Improved BMP» at
dairy oparaliona
• Narrativa LA lorfulurv
growth
35
-------
Synaptic Stumper #1
While studying monitoring data in a river,
state agency staff determined that the
critical low flow is 100 cfs, rather than the
150 cfs previously thought
• Will this finding affect any of the water
quality criteria for the river? If so, how?
• Might this finding change the river's
impaired/unimpaired status? If so, in
which "direction"?
Synaptic Stumper #1 (cont.)
Would this change the pollutant cap for
any TMDLs done for this waterbody? If
so, would the cap be increased or
decreased?
Could this result in a change in a
discharger's technology-based limits?
Water quality-based limits?
Synaptic Stumper #2
When implementing the following
provisions of the CWA, what rule applies
to consideration of economics by "states"
and/or EPA: (a) must consider,
(b) may consider, or (c) cannot consider?
¦ Issuing effluent guidelines for industries
• Setting WQS designated uses for
waterbodies
• Setting WQS criteria for waterbodies
• Determining the loading cap component of
a TMDL
• Determining the allocation of allowable
loadings under a TMDL
-------
TTT5"| (
Synaptic Stumper #3
Some have expressed the concern that
TMDLs could thwart efforts to foster
"smart growth," in which new
development would be focused on
redevelopment of already urbanized
areas, rather than going to "green fields"
on the urban fringe or beyond.
• Why might this be a possibility?
• What other key CWA program could be
used to avoid this eventuality?
• What other arguments/strategies might you
use to address this concern?
T"
Synaptic Stumper #4
Analysis of conditions in a waterbody
done in conjunction with development of
a TMDL indicates that natural
background levels of the pollutant of
concern are above the water quality
criterion.
• Should this issue be handled in the
TMDL? If so, how?
• If not, might another CWA program be
more appropriate? If so, which one?
-------
Sec. 320: National Estuary
Program
• 28 estuaries designated in 18 states
and Puerto Rico
• 17 have "comprehensive conservation
and management plans" (CCMPs)
• Collaborative decision making
• Considerable federal funds for
developing CCMPs, but less for
implementing them
Watershed Restoration
Action Strategies (WRASs)
• "States" develop WRASs
- Led by stateftribal leaders and NRCD state
conservationists
- Integrate and build on existing programs and
authorities (TMDL. NPDES, NPS, wetlands, DW,
and Agricultural Conservation)
- Should include antidegradation as well as
restoration, and address stressors beyond
pollutants
- Adaptive planning approach with flexible schedule
• Use existing plans
• No federal approval (but grant conditions) '
Key Elements of the CWA
38
-------
Implement Strategies
• Regulatory
- Section 402 - NPDES permits
- Section 404 - Wetlands
- Section 401 - Certification
- CZARA: WRASs
• Voluntary
- Section 319 - Nonpoint Source Program
• Funding
- SRF
- Section 319 - Nonpoint Source Program
- Section 106
-------
NPDES Permitting
• Illegal for point source (pipe, ditch, channel,
tunnel, vessel) to discharge pollutants to
surface waters without a permit
• Coverage
- Industrial and municipal wastewater
- Industrial, urban, and construction-related storm water
runoff
- Concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs)
- Active and abandoned mines
• Ships, other vessels, and offshore oil rigs
• Exempted: return flows from
irrigated agriculture
Direct and Indirect
Discharges
NPDES Permits (cont.)
• NPDES permits are required for DIRECT
discharges ONLY
• Indirect discharges covered by
"pretreatment program"
-------
NPDES Permits (cont.)
• Permit term: 5 years
• Issued by authorized "states" or EPA
• Public review and comment on draft
permits
• Administrative and judicial appeal
processes
NPDES Permits (cont.)
• Individual permits
- All point sources not covered by general permits
must obtain (no de minimis exemption)
- Required to submit detailed permit application
form, including data on actual/expected levels of
pollutants in discharge
• General permits (many sources)
- Similar sources
- Same requirements for all or minimal
reporting
- Notice of intent vs passive coverage
NPDES Permits: Elements
• Effluent (discharge) limits
- Technology-based" end-of-pipe performance
requirements (concentration/mass)
• BAT, NSPS, PSES, secondary treatment, etc
• Spelled out in EPA regulation packages
(effluent guidelines)
• Use best professional judgment (BPJ) rf no EPA
regulations
- Water quality-based (linked to TMDLs)
• Only where tech-based controls are insufficient to
meet WQS
- Bark-calculated from numeric WOC
pollutant concentrations in discharge
- Derived from narrative criteria: whole
effluent toxicity testing
-------
Technology-Based Requirements
for Municipal Discharges:
Secondary Treatment
NPDES Permits: Elements
(cont.)
• Best management practices
• Compliance schedule
• Monitoring requirements
- Setf-monitoring by permittee
- Traditionally, effluents only
- Increasingly, ambient too
- Specifies parameters
- Specifies frequency
NPDES Permits: Elements
(cont.)
• Reporting requirements
- Discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) sent to the
permitting agency
• Often monthly but sometimes
less frequently
• Reopener provisions
-------
Direct and Indirect
Discharges
Pretreatment
• Applies to POTWs >5 MGD
- Objective- Prevent upset, pass through, sludge
contamination, etc. from "incoming toxics"
- Oversight of compliance of "indirect dischargers"
with EPA-issued tech-based limits (categorical)
- "Local limits" addressing additional problems,
including meeting WQ-based limits for POTW
Sludge
43
-------
Municipal Sewage Sludge
• Deals with sewage sludge disposal
• Addresses effects of toxics in sludge
• Requirements depend on type of
disposal used
- Landfill, incineration, land disposal
- Limit application rates too with land disposal
requirements
Municipal Wet Weather Flows
• Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs)
• Municipal Separate Storm Sewer
Systems (MS4s)
i Effluent Guideline Excerpt
Metal Finishing Subcategory
Note: Several other parameters also are
limited, but are not included here.
-------
MS4/CS0 Permits: Special
Features
• No end-of-pipe limits on pollutants
• Applications of various types of BMPs
required
• Strategic plans for addressing problems
required
- Opportunity for public input
- Links to land use issues, etc.
-------
MS4s: Coverage
• 1000 community systems serving
> 100,000 people currently must have
permits
• Numerous smaller systems need
permits by late 2002/2003
- Located in census-designated urban areas (UA)
- Outside UAs, but meeting certain criteria
MS4s: Permit Conditions
• Map system, including outfalls
• Sample/analyze "representative" outfalls
• Identify key categories/individual
sources
• Eliminate non-storm water discharges
to storm sewer system
• Program to reduce runoff from
industrial, commercial, and residential
areas, to "maximum extent practicable"
(MEP)
NPDES: Industrial Storm
Water
• Eleven categories: Manufacturing; Mineral,
Metal, Oil and Gas; Hazardous Waste
Treatment, Storage, or Disposal Facilities;
Landfills; Recycling Facilities; Steam Electric
Plants; Transportation Facilities; Treatment
Works; Light Industry; any other facility covered
by an EPA effluent guideline and
• Construction activities
- Affecting >5 ac - Need permits now
- Affecting > 1 ac - Permits starting
Nov 2002
-------
Vi Cerebral Cruncher
What might be a low-tech/low-cost
ft means for cities with MS4s covered by an
t| NPDES permit to determine whether illicit
H (i.e., non-storm water) discharges are
J I,, going into their separate storm sewer
\' \ systems? If evidence of such discharges
was found, how might the discharges be
pinpointed? What ultimately should be
done about them according to EPA's Phase
I and Phase II storm water rules?
"State"-Issued Permits
• EPA retains the right to review
- "Major" municipal and industrial disharges
- General permits
- Certain sludge facilities
• EPA-issued permits
- State/Tribal section 401 certification required
• Certifies that permit will achieve water quality
standard
Types of Violations
• Discharge without a permit
• Permit effluent exceedances
• Non-effluent permit violations
- Failure to submit required monitoring reports
- Falsification of monitoring/other data
- Failure to meet construction schedule deadlines
-------
NPDES: Enforcement
• Primary responsibility: authorized
"states"
- EPA "overfile" authority
• Increased emphasis on "compliance
assistance"
• Focused on "majors"
- POTWs serving 10,000 or more
- Industries: several factors, including
flow, toxics, etc
NPDES: Enforcement (cont.)
• Penalties:
- Fines for typical violations (exceed limits, fail to
report)
- Imnrisonment for criminal violations (reoeated.
willful violations)
- SuDDlemental environmental oroiects (SFP1 -
money goes to restoration projects, not to US
Treasury
• Citizen suits: directed against
dischargers
- Must provide 60-day notice to EPA/state to give
them a chance to take action
Connections: Pretreatment
and Sludge
• What role might pretreatment play in
meeting sludge requirements?
• If a community land-applied its
municipal sludge, how might its
allowed rates of sludge application to
farmland be affected by a new indirect
discharger of heavy metals (Cd, Pb)
hooking up to the municipal sewer
system?
-------
Connections: WQS, NPDES,
Sludge, Pretreatment
• The state sets a new, more stringent
WQS for cadmium in the receiving
water for a POTW
- How would this affect the POTW's NPDES
effluent limits?
- What two strategies might the POTW
employ to meet its new permit limits?
- How might each of these strategies affect
the Cd levels in the POTW's sludge?
49
-------
319: Nonpoint Source (NPS)
Program
• State NPS management programs
• Federal grants to states
319: NPS Management
Programs
• States, territories, tribes (i.e., "states")
• ID of waters impaired or threatened by
nonpoint sources
• Short- (< 5 years) and long-term goals
for NPS Program
• Key categories of NPS: loadings from
each
• Best management practices
(BMPs) for each key category
319: NPS Programs (Cont.)
• Programs to ensure use of BMPs
- Cost-sharing, technical assistance, land
purchase and easements, regulations
- Statewide baseline and targeted to key areas
- Address both impaired and threatened
waters
-------
319: NPS Programs (Cont.)
• Strategies for working with other
agencies and private entities
- including identification of federal lands and
activities not being managed in a manner
consistent with state program objectives
• Monitoring and evaluation plan
• Management program updated every
5 years minimum
Examples of BMPs
• Storm drain stenciling
• Street sweeping
• Storm water ponds
• Silt fences
• Grassed waterways
• Conservation tillage
• Streambank fencing
-------
Federal "319" Grants
• To "states" (states, territories, tribes)
- $200 million/year (40% state match required)
- EPA allocation formula
• Population, farmland, water quality problems,
etc.
• "Second" $100 million: states with EPA-
approved upgraded NPS programs, and for
waters with WRASs under the Clean Water
Action Plan
Federal "319" Grants
(Cont.)
• Allowed uses of funds
- Development and implementation of state NPS
program plans
- Grants to localities and others for on-the- ground
controls (BMPs, etc.)
- Development and implementation of TMDLs
- 5% of 319 funds to be used for Clean Lakes
activities
-------
It's time to play point source
or nonpoint source...
-------
404: Wetlands Permits
* Regulate activities that include fills
for developments (e.g. shopping
malls), water resource projects (e.g.,
dams and levees), and infrastructure
(e.g., highways and airports)
- Doesnt cover drainage directly
- Exempted: normal farming, ranching, and
forestry practices
404: Wetlands (cont.)
• Administered jointly by Army Corps of
Engineers and EPA (except delegated
states)
- Issues individual (and general) permits
- Conducts or verifies "jurisdictional
determinations"
- Enforces permit compliance (shared with EPA)
• FWS and NMFS have advisory roles
-------
404: EPA Role
• Develops environmental guidelines,
policies, and guidance
• Reviews permits issued by Army Corps of
Engineers (Elevation/veto authority)
• Approves and oversees state assumption
• Shares enforcement with Corps
• Determines scope of jurisdiction
• Identifies exempt activities
404: Wetlands (cont.)
• "Sequencing"
- AVOIDANCE. Avoid impacts to maximum extent
practicable
- MINIMIZATION Design project to keep effects on
wetlands as small as practicable (only after
avoidance)
- COMPENSATION: Only after avoidance and
minimization
• Restoration, enhancement, creation, or in
exceptional circumstances, preservation
a Mitigation banking is a form of compensatory
mitigation where "credits" are established in
advance of impacts
Wetland: Grant Programs
• Wetland program development
- $15 million/year to states/tribes/local governments
- Projects used to develop new, or enhance existing,
wetland protection, management, and restoration
programs
- Grant funds cannot be used to support program
implementation or operation
- Annual Grant Guidance outlines priorities and
procedures and provides examples of potential grant
projects
-------
Wetland: Grant Programs
• Five Star Restoration Challenge
- S395K in FY 99 to support local governments,
tribal agencies, conservation organizations, youth
corps, local businesses, and schools in their efforts
to restore river corridors and wetlands
i \ —^'
Mind Mangier
A new shopping complex Is proposed. It
would encompass 200 acres and result in
filling 100 acres of wetlands. The
developer proposes to offset the 100-acre
loss of wetlands by restoring 120 acres of
similar wetlands nearby. The developer
submits this plan to the appropriate
authority and requests issuance of a Sec.
404 permit.
• What should the permitting authority's
response be?
State Oversight of Federal Permitting
(Section 401), e.g., FERC licensing of dams
-------
401: State Oversight of
Federal Permitting
• Coverage
- EPA-issued NPDES permits
- FERC licensing of dams
- Section 404 permits
• No federal permit issued without state
certification that is consistent with
meeting WQS
Funding-
"State" Revolving Loan Funds
• EPA capitalization grants to "states"
- $1 35 billion in FY 99 and FY 00
- Allocation specified by Congress
• Ranged from $7 million to $150 million per
state in FY 99
• Federal grants + state match
- State match, minimum of 20%
- Total now over $27 billion; with leveraging, pool
for lending considerably larger
• Congressional earmarks: outside
normal process
-------
SRF Lending
• Usually low, or no, interest
• Allowed recipients: municipalities,
nonprofit organizations, businesses
• Allowable projects
- Construction, expansion, repair of municipal sewage
collection and treatment systems
- Nonpoint source control projects consistent with
"state's" 319 program
- Implementation of National Estuary Program plan
• Can fund wetland restoration
SRF Lending (cont.)
Vast majority of funds to date have gone
to traditional municipal sewage systems,
but balance is beginning to shift
SRF: "State" Obligations
• Protect the capital (principal) in the
fund over the long run
• Develop annual "intended use plans,"
laying out priority projects for loans
• Include procedures for ongoing public
involvement, including a NEPA-like
process for review of projects supported
by SRF
-------
» T ^
Cranium Crippler #1
A lake is meeting its water quality criteria
for nutrients and sediment. A major
residential development is proposed near
the lake. Analysis indicates that
exceedance of the phosphorus criteria will
result from the development, even with the
use of the latest "green" site design
strategies and BMPs. No wetlands would
be affected.
9
Cranium Crippler #1 (cont.)
• What CWA provision(s) is/are most relevant to this
situation'
• Would the CWA prohibit this project7 If so,
through what authorities7
• Regardless of whether the CWA could prohibit the
project, might CWA program(s) be able to
influence the fate of this development proposal7
If yes, which programs, and how7"
• What, If any, non-CWA federal authorities might
prohibit this project7
• What other federal programs might be used to
influence the fate of this project, and how7"
Cranium Crippler #2
A stream is meeting all its WQC, except for
sediment, which is exceeded on a regular
basis. A sediment TMDL for the stream is
due to be completed in 5 years. A new
major shopping complex is being proposed
for a location within the drainage of the
stream. Modeling indicates that, even after
implementation of the most advanced site
designs and runoff controls, the
development will increase sediment loads
to the stream by 5000 Ib/wk. No wetlands
would be affected.
-------
I »¦
*9
Cranium Crippler #2 (cont.)
• What CWA provision(s) is/are most relevant to this
situation?
• Might the CWA prohibit this project? If so, through
what authorities?
• How might the developer and local supporters
ensure tney would not face problems with CWA
provisions?
• Regardless of whether the CWA could prohibit the
project, might CWA program(s) be used to
influence the fate of this development proposal? If
yes, which programs and how?
• What, if any, non-CWA federal authorities might be
employed to prohibit this project7
• What other federal programs might be used to
influence the fate of this project?"
WA'
2\
Cranium Crippler #3
A stream is meeting all its WQC, except for
sediment, which is exceeded on a regular basis.
A sediment TMDL for the stream has been'
completed and indicates that a 40% reduction
in sediment loads is needed watershed-wide.
The TMDL allocates 10,000 Ib/wk for future
growth. A new major shopping complex is being
proposed for a location within the drainage of
the stream. Modeling indicates that, even after
implementation of the most advanced site
designs and runoff controls, the development
will increase sediment loads to the stream by
5000 Ib/wk. No wetlands would be affected.
Cranium Crippler #3 (cont.)
• What CWA provision(s) is/are most relevant to
this situation7
• Might the CWA prohibit this project? If so,
through what authorities?
• How might the developer and local supporters
ensure they would not face problems with CWA
"i provisions?
• If CWA authorities would not prohibit the
project, might CWA program(s) be used to
influence the fate of this development proposal?
If yes, which programs and how7
• What, if any, non-CWA federal authorities might
be employed to prohibit this project?
• What other federal programs might be used to
influence the fate of this project7"
-------
Cranium Crippler #4
Wy A stream is meeting all Its WQC, except for
Y% sediment, which is exceeded on a regular
basis. A sediment TMDL for the stream has
II been completed and indicates that a 40%
11 reduction in sediment loads is needed
I Li watershed-wide. The THDL allocates nothing
\* A for future growth. A new major shopping
complex is being proposed for a location
within the drainage of the stream. Modeling
indicates that, even after implementation of
' the most advanced site designs and runoff
controls, the development will increase
sediment loads to the stream by 2000 Ib/wk.
No wetlands would be affected.
Cranium Crippler #4 (cont.)
My • What CWA provision(s) is/are most relevant to
¦¦T I this situation?
A • Might the CWA prohibit this project7 If so,
through what authonties?
II • How might the developer and local supporters
L ensure they would not face problems with CWA
f i provisions?
• If CWA authorities would not prohibit the project,
might CWA program(s) be used to influence tne
fate of this development proposal? If yes, which
programs and how?
I ' What, if any, non-CWA federal authorities might
be employed to prohibit this project7
• What other federal programs might be used to
influence the fate of this project7"
Key Elements of the CWA
-------
CWA: Part II, WQ-Based
Implement strategies
[NPDES, 319, SRF.etc]
1
Develop strategies
and controls
[TMDLs]
Set goals and WQS
a
=>
Conduct monitoring
a
to
Yes
-------
Using CWA Tools for Watershed
Protection
-------
Using CWA and Other
Tools in Watershed
Protection
Overview
Basic Questions for
Watershed Efforts
• Where are we now?
• Where are we headed?
• Where do we want to go?
• How do we get there?
• How do we know when we've arrived...
(and what do we do if we haven't)?
Scale Defines
Everything...
• What is the scale of your effort?
- River basins
- Watersheds (major tributaries)
- Subwatersheds (minor tributaries)
• Why does scale matter?
- Large scales = more issues
- Smaller scales = less existing information
• Other issues...?
-------
Where Are We Now?
Where Are We Now?
Elements
• Scoping- What are the issues?
• Information collection
• Assessment
- Problem identification
- Targeting and prioritization
• Who are the stakeholders?
• What resources are available?
-------
Where Are We Now?
Rocky River Basin
• 500-square-mile watershed
• Watershed includes 2 sub-basins
• Current population 66,000
• Current land use (mi2)
- forest (144)
- residential (53)
- agriculture (257)
- urban (10)
- open space (30
- open water (6)
Where Are We Now?
Rocky River Basin
• Yellow River
- 2S0 square miles
- Wilson Township. 3 developments, 10 small farms
- 48,000 citizens
- 2 wastewater treatment plants
• WWTP #1 discharges 15,000 Ib/yr of phosphorus
• WWTP #2 discharges 20,000 Ib/yr of phosphorus
- Land use (mi2)
• Forest
92
• Residential
40
• Agriculture
100
• Urban
10
• Open Space
5
• Open Water
3
3
-------
Where Are We Now?
Rocky River Basin
• Bear River
• 250 square miles
- 3 small residential developments, 2 schools, 3 large
farms (including 1 farm with 8,000 hogs)
- 18,000 citizens
- 2 package plants (small WWTPs)
- land use (mi2)
• Forest
52
• Residential
13
• Agriculture
157
• Urban
0
• Open Space
25
• Open Water
3
Where Are We Now?
Elements
• Rocky Basin's driving forces:
- WQS violations (drinking water, aquatic life
support, recreation)
- TMDLs required for both rivers and lake
- Proposed increase in WWTP discharge due to
population growth
- Local issues (development impacts, beach closures,
aesthetics, etc.)
Where Are We Now?
Elements (cont.)
• Define the planning/management
framework
- Who will be on the team?
- How will the team be structured?
-Who will have the ultimate authority?
- How will decisions be made?
- What are the roles of each team
member?
-------
Where Are We Now?
Rocky River Basin
• Identify driving forces
- Designated uses.
• Yellow River aquatic life support and primary contact
recreation
• Bear River aquatic life support and primary contact
recreation
• Rocky Lake drinking water supply, aquatic life support,
and primary contact recreation
- State's 303(d) list
• Yellow River Elevated nutrients (phosphorus)
• Bear River Elevated fecal coliform levels
- NPDES permits up for their 5-year renewal
• WWTPs have been told that nutrient removal will be
required in the new permits
Where Are We Now?
Elements
• Identify key stakeholders
- Watershed organizations can be found at the
Adopt Your Watershed web site
- http llwww epa gov/surf/adopt/
• Agencies (federal, state, local)
• Local environmental groups
• Local business interests
• Begin to identify potential implementation
resources
-------
Where Are We Now?
Elements
• Establish a watershed baseline
- ID key community concerns/issues
- ID key stakeholders and conduct outreach to
them
- Collect info on current environmental and social
conditions
- Characterize current conditions
- ID causes/sources of impairment
- Develop tentative problem statement
- List current problems, activities, and agencies
addressing the problems
When Are We Now?
Information Required by
the CWA
• State CWA 305(b) report- WQ
classification
• State CWA 303(d) report - TMDLs
• NPDES discharges - Sec. 304 (DMRs)
• Basinwide plans - Sec. 208
• State game and fish agencies
• Volunteer monitoring programs
• Other information sources?
Where Are We Now?
Information Required by
the CWA
• State 319 (b) NPS control plans/reports
• Permit Compliance System database
• National Estuary Program -Sec. 320
• State wellhead protection programs
• State coastal zone management plans,
including "enforceable BMPs"
• Others?
-------
Where Are We Now?
Information Required by
the CWA, Others
• Unified Watershed Assessment reports
• State heritage programs
• NRCS National Resources Inventory
• USGS data and reports
Where Are We Headed?
7
-------
Where Arc We Headed?
Elements
• Project future land use change in the
watershed and subwatersheds and
impacts from WWTPs, and OWTSs
• Grazing and farming patterns
• Mining activities
• Water uses, water rights
Where Are We Headed?
Elements
• Yellow River population and land use
trends
- Projected population: 92,000 (current
population is 48,000)
- Projected land use (square miles)
2000 2020
forest
92
46
Residential
40
117
Agriculture
100
20
Urban
10
41
Open space 5
23
Open water 3
3
-------
Where Are We Headed?
Elements
• Bear River
- Projected population: 23,000
(current population is 18,000)
- Projected land use (square miles)
2000 2020
Forest
52
52
Residential
13
15
Agriculture
157
145
Urban
0
0
Open space 25
35
Open water 3
3
Where Are We Headed?
Selected Tools
• We can use the CWA to help project future
conditions:
- NPDES permits with compliance schedules to indicate
expected changes in loads
- Source Water Protection Plans
- NEPs and Comprehensive Coastal Management Plans
- Trends suggested by 305(b) reports
- TMDLs
- others7
• EPA tools
- BASINS, WIN, Surf Your Watershed (IWI)
Where Are We Headed?
Selected Tools
• State tools
- Smart Growth Initiatives
- Farmland Protection Programs
- Open Space Plans
- Riparian buffer/protection programs
- Agricultural trends analyses from
agriculture agencies
• Local tools -
- Master plans/zoning/subdivision
ordinances
- Economic development plans
- Urban greenways/parks development
-------
Where Do We Want To
Go?
Where Do We Want To Go?
Elements
• Goal setting
- Obligatory goals: meet WQSs, SDWA provisions,
and other federal and state legal requirements
• No net loss of wetlands
- Local watershed goals
• Promote public awareness and involvement
• Accommodate economic development
- State or regional goals
(recreation, wildlife/fisheries management)
10
-------
Where Do We Want To Go?
Rocky River Basin
Watershed Goals
•'To implement control measures to restore
and protect water quality
^To plan for future economic growth and
land use changes while preserving the
natural character and environment of the
watershed
Where Do We Want To Go?
Elements
• Goal setting (cont.)
- Additional environmental goals
• Reduce impacts from agriculture, forestry, mining,
etc
• Develop a connected buffer system in the
watershed
• Reduce flooding damage
• Prevent development in the floodplain
• Preserve farmland
• Smart growth
• Others'
-------
Where Do Wc Want To Go?
Elements
• Goals must be consistent
- Example: Expansion of a WWTP to accommodate
economic growth may violate an established WQS
- Smart growth/redevelopment of urban areas may
further degrade urban streams by focusing
redevelopment in areas where streams are already
impacted
- Other inconsistent goals?
Where do we want to go?
Selected Tools
• WQS/TMDLs
• Environmental indicators
• GPRA
• Chesapeake Bay/Great Lakes programs
• SWAP Plans under SDWA
• Clean Water Action Strategies
• NEPs/CCMPs
• State watershed management
frameworks
Where do we want to go?
Selected Tools
• WQS/TMDLS:
- Review designated uses
- Develop loading targets that match designated
uses
- Devise plan to achieve targets
- Implement the plan
- Monitor results
12
-------
How Do We Get There?
How Do We Get There?
Elements
• Develop specific management objectives
- Establish a 20O-ft-w»de stream buffer
- Impervious cover cap of 15%
- No new permitted discharges
- Protect 1,000 acres of wetlands from loss
- Clean up discharge from designated mines
- Restore identified streams/fisheries
- Control erosion on targeted tributaries
How Do We Get There?
Elements (cont.)
• Objectives should be SMART:
- Specific
- Measurable
- Achievable
- Relevant
- Time-sensrtive
-------
How Do We Get There?
Elements (cont.)
• Prioritization and targeting
- Prioritize management objectives
• Decide upon prioritization cntena
• Group or triage objectives (high, medium, low)
- Target objectives for action
• D?velop targeting cntena
• Schedule targeted actions for implementation
How Do We Get There?
Elements (cont.)
• Suggested prioitization and targeting
criteria
- Ability of actions to address impacts
• Tons of erosion prevented
• Pounds of acids/metals removed
• Miles of streambank protected
- Likelihood of adoption/implementation
• Funding available
• Landowner willingness
How Do We Get There?
Elements
• Strategy development
- Identify alternatives
- Evaluate alternatives
- Select strategies
- Write implementation plan
• Action-oriented
* Adopt or implement
-------
How do we get there?
Elements
• Strategy development (cont.)
• Identify possible alternatives
• Regulatory
• Voluntary/educational
• Economic incentives
- Cost-sharing
- Tax incentives/user fees
- Market-based mechanisms
• Funding sources
How do we get there?
Elements
• Strategy development (cont.)
- Evaluate Alternatives
• Technical feasibility
* Economic/financial feasibility
• Political feasibility
* Social feasibility
Institutionally
Feasible Plan!
Politically :
Feasible Plans
Socially i
¦ Feasible Plans V
Environmentally
Feasible Plans
The Set of Feasible Alternatives
Economically
Feasible Plain
{ Financially
/Feasible Plans
!/
V/
f/ Legally
Feasible Plans
Technically
Feasible Plans
-------
How do we get there?
Selected Tools
• Use existing plans as a guide
- TMDLs
- NPS management plans
- Source water protection strategies
- Watershed action strategies
- NEP CCMPs
How Do We Know When
We've Arrived...
(and what do we do if we
haven'tj?
How Do We Know When We've Arrived and What If...?
Elements
• Implement selected management actions
- Coordinate management actions
- Work closely with landowners/stakeholders
- Assemble staff and funding support
- Implement management actions
-------
How Do We Know When We've Arrived and What If...?
Elements
• Develop monitoring plan
- Select indicator! (WO. biolotjical.physical,
hydrological, social/economic, programmatic)
- Identify monitoring team(s)
• Develop sampling plan
- Identify monitoring sites
• Statistically based
• Problem area-focused
• Source-based
- Monitoring schedule
How Do We Know When We've Arrived and What if...?
Elements
• Conduct monitoring/analyze results/report
results
• Revisit goals
• Update strategies
• Implement additional management
strategies if necessary
How Do We Know When We'.ve Arrived and What If...?
Selected Tools
• Monitoring
• Modeling tools
- Watershed models
- Waterbody models
17
-------
many Fs?
FINISHED FILES ARE THE
RESULT OF YEARS OF SCIENTIFIC
STUDY COMBINED WITH
THE EXPERIENCE OF MANY
TYPES OF EXPERTS
-------
Using Local Tools for Watershed
Protection
-------
The CWA prohibits EPA from
considering economics when
writing effluent guidelines,
issuing or reviewing NPDES
permits, or reviewing water
quality standards
"Technology-based" controls
specify which treatment
equipment regulated
entities must use
-------
Best management
practices not only are
employed in voluntary
programs, but also can be
a regulatory requirement in
some cases
A waterbody that is
covered by
antidegradation might
also need a TMDL
EPA decides which local
projects get support from
CWA State Revolving Funds
2
-------
The Section 404
program regulates only
activities that involve
depositing materials in
wetlands
The CWA's goal of zero
discharge of pollutants is an
absolute requirement that
must be imposed on all NPDES
permittees, regardless of cost
All federal licenses and permits
for activities that might result in
any discharge into water require
water quality certification under
section 401
3
-------
NPDES permits are a "license
to pollute" and establish a
right to discharge certain
levels of pollution
The NPDES program covers a number
of types of storm water runoff,
including that from industrial
facilities and the discharges from
municipal separate storm water
Best management practices
apply only to agriculture
and other nonpoint sources
-------
Most NPDES permits require the
regulated discharger not only to
monitor and report on pollutant
levels in its own effluents, but also
to monitor and report on pollutant
IaoaIo Sm frltA pa^aSiiimm
f
Any NPDES permit may be reopened
for modification if new information
about the effects of the permitted
\ discharge (including cumulative
; effects) have become available
Section 319 grants for control
of nonpoint sources go directly
from EPA to individual farmers,
local governments, etc.
>TTTT|
5
-------
State Revolving Fund loans may
be made available only to local
governments
WMM
The Section 404 program
regulates all the major
causes of wetland loss
There are exemptions from the
Section 404 program, including
activities affecting small areas
6
-------
Using State and Local Tools
for Watershed Protection
Virginia Tax Incentives
(1998): Tax Credits
• Conservation tillage equipment credit
- 25% of equipment expenditures, up to S2.500
- No-till planter or drill
• Fertilizer and pesticide application equipment
credit
- 25% of equipment (certified more precise)
expenditures, up to $3,750
- Must have SWCD-approved nutrient management
plan
• Agricultural best management practices
- 25% of the first 570K spent on SWCD-approved
practices, up to lesser of $ 17,500 of total state tax
Why Use State and Local
Tools?
• States have greater authority for regulatory
controls
• More opportunities to coordinate among
partners
• Implementation of BMPs easier at smaller
scales
• Public comfort level increases with
localization
• Home rule, public nuisance powers of local
governments
• More tools in more toolboxes
-------
A Few Examples of State
Tools
• Citizen monitoring programs
• Targeted laws to protect water resources
• Smart growth development strategies
• Citizen management of ecosystem programs
• Tax incentives for water quality protection
• Environmental management systems
Examples of Common Local
Tools
• Comprehensive planning and zoning
• Public health and nuisance abatement powers
• Sediment and erosion control ordinances
• Source water protection for drinking water
-------
Citizen Monitoring Programs
• More than 700 active groups nationwide ¦
• Funding comes from:
- State government
310 (45%)
- Donations
303 (44%)
- Local government
260 (37%)
- Federal government
214(31%)
- Memberships
211 (30%)
- Foundations
205 (29%)
Water Resources Monitored
by Volunteers
• Rivers and streams 585 (76%)
• Lakes and ponds 264 (34%)
•Wetlands 166 (22%)
• Estuaries 144(19%)
• Land use/cover 103(13%)
• Reservoirs 83 (11%)
3
-------
Users of Volunteer
Data
• Internal use
654
(85%)
• State government
430
(56%)
• Local government
423
(55%)
• Community organizations
414
(54%)
• University scientists
250
(32%)
• Federal government
204
(26%)
Monitoring by WY ACD
• Association of Conservation Districts'
mandate
• State legislature funding: $385,000
• Protocols, training by WY DEQ
• Monitoring site selection up to volunteers
• Data used by state to develop watershed
plans
Targeted Laws to Protect
Water Resources
• Maryland "Green Card" program
• California Forest Practice Act
• Kentucky Agriculture Water Quality Act
-------
Maryland "Green Card"
Program
• Adopted by state law in 1980
• Covers earth-disturbing activities
• Training and certification required
• Mandatory sediment control plan
• Inspections to ensure compliance
• Exemptions:
- Clearing and grading < 5000 ft2
- Homes > 2 acres, < '/i acre disturbance
California Forest Practices Act
of 1973
• Covers logging on 7.4 million acres of non-
federal land
• Protects soil, water, wildlife, recreation,
aesthetics
• Requires timber harvest plan pnor to logging
• Plan must be prepared by registered forester
• Plan reviewed by multidisciplinary team
• Logging contractors must be licensed
Kentucky Agriculture Water
Quality Act
• Enacted in 1994, sponsored by Farm Bureau
• Covers logging and farming on > 10 acres
• Requires WQ protection plans,
implementation
• TA provided if plan does not protect WQ
• Enforcement provisions for bad actors
-------
Maryland "Smart Growth"
Strategy
• Adopted in 1992 (incentives) and 1997
(strategy)
• Focus: brownfields, neighborhoods, rural
lands
• State sets criteria for infrastructure support
• Local governments designate growth areas
• No funding for projects outside priority areas
• Funds available for habitat, greenways, parks,
farms
Citizen Management of
Ecosystem Programs
• Illinois Water & Land Use Priorities
- 25-member task force appointed by governor
- Observer status for paid staff, lobbyists, directors
- Focus on long-term indicators (status/trends)
- Best available science required for decisions
- Place-based, local focus emphasis
- Informed voluntary compliance on private land
Tax Incentives for Water
Quality Protection
• Illinois tax incentive for stream buffers
- Buffers must be at least 66 ft wide
- NRCS technical standards must be met
- County Soil and Water Conservation District must
certify
- Dense, full-cover vegetation required
- Assessed at one-sixth of value for taxation
-------
Environmental Management
Systems
• Basic EMS components:
- Policy statement and overall commitment
- Analysis of environmental impacts, legal issues
- Statement of measurable goals and initiatives
- Corrective action plan addressing goals, impacts
- Management system review
Example EMS: Idaho Dairy P2
Initiative
• 1995 MOU among DEQ, DOA, USEPA, IDA
• Dairy inspectors trained to assess WQ
impacts
• All dairy farms (1100) inspected first year
• 50% had serious noncompliance problems
• 95% of problems corrected within 2 years
• Program costs paid by dairies via mill levy
• Milk permits revoked for bad actors
-------
Comprehensive Planning and
Zoning
• Used by most municipalities
• Manages and directs development
• Restricts nonconforming uses
• Mostly (!) immune from takings issues
• Conditional use, waiver provisions
A Few Words on Avoiding
Takings. —
• Regulatory actions must
- Fulfill a reasonable government purpose
- Be commensurate with the threat addressed
- Be reasonable and based on dear, updated plans
- Not deny all uses on all of the property
- Provide for exceptions, variances, relief
Locally Implemented Overlay
Zones
• Maryland "Critical Areas" designation
- Covers land within 1000 ft of bays tidal zone
- 100-ft forested buffer required near water
- S & E control plans required for all activities
- Restncts development in some subareas
- No subdividing of tracts < 7 acres
8
-------
Zoning to Minimize OWTS
Impacts
• MA "Nitrogen Sensitive Areas"
- Applies to wellhead areas, embayments
- Restricts system flows to < 440 gpd/acre
- Removals: 40% N; 85% TSS & BOD
- > flows allowed for RSF if N < 25 mg/l
Public Health and Nuisance
Abatement Powers
• Assigned to localities by most states
• Public health powers include
- Onsite wastewater treatment systems
- Control of disease vectors (flies, rodents)
- Nuisance abatement which can include control of
odor, noise, dust
• Nuisances must be defined if enforcement
provisions are to be applied
Sediment and Erosion Control
Ordinances
• Can be more restrictive than state
requirements
• Controls for new developments often enacted
• Local capacity for planning and inspections
essential
• Public education and political support
required
-------
R 5 SKY
I
CAM GMT YOU PfcSHTV
ICS
Drinking
I water:
the number
one priority
A nmaoiii^ duiM to fwothctwo
community MiHtuna WAim*
Source Water Assessment
Programs
• SWAPs required by SDWA amendments of
1996
• Assessments cover both surface and ground
water:
- Identify drinking water source(s)
- Inventory contaminants and potential
contaminants
- Involve the public and inform them of results
• Assessments provide basis for SW protection
plans
Local Watershed Planning in
Washington
• Established under ESHB 2514 in 1998
• Local government sponsors planning effort
• Watershed assessments required
• Allocates water among competing users/uses
• May address WQ, habitat, in-stream flow
revisions
• Counties and tribes must be involved
• Funding and technical assistance available
-------
. . . a few final thoughts
from the corporate boardrooms
of America . . .
Why Quality Initiatives Fail
• No guts: start small; shoot for the moon!
• Not enough agony: real work is required
• Machines over men (and women)
• Supervisors who wont let go
• Attention to plans instead of emotions
• Looking at the wrong numbers
• Lack of consistency & steady progress
- Tom Peters
Why Watershed Plans Fail
• Excessive focus on analytical tools
• Too long/complex for decision makers
• More of a general study; no commitment
• Watershed under study is too large
• No local ownership; stakeholders left out
• Resources devoted to planning, not
implementation of specific actions
- Tom Schueler, Center for Watershed Protection
11
-------
Thoughts on Corporate
Planning
• 'A good deal of corporate planning is like a
ritual rain dance. It has no effect on the
weather that follows.but those who engage
in it think that ft does ... Moreover, much of
the advice related to corporate planning is
directed at improving the dancing, not the
weather."
- Brian Quinn, Dartmouth College
Pitfalls of Strategic Planning
• Everything can (will?) change tomorrow
• Flexibility, innovation can be compromised
• Process saps energy; too mechanical
• Focuses on measuring only the measurable
• Disses random noise, gossip, impressions
• Detached; separates thought from action
• Analysis does not produce synthesis
• Defines and preserves existing categories
- Henry Mintzberg, The Rise and Fall of Strategic
Planning
So what are we supposed to
do?
• Don't preconceive strategies; recognize them
as they emerge
• Be finders rather than designers of strategies
• Intervene only when appropriate
• Immerse yourself in details; synthesize
• Remember: perception is reality
- Tom Peters
-------
Stakeholder involvement for
dummies....
The Last Word....
What's my advice to people who go into a new
area to try and develop a watershed plan?
Talk a little. Listen a lot.
- Dave Martin, Montana DEQ
13
-------
Group Exercise
¦c
-------
Resou rces
-------
Index to Key CWA Sections
Criteria Development and Adoption
CWA §303
CWA §304 (a)
CWA §307 (a)
40 CFR 130.3
40 CFR 130.10
40 CFR 131
Water Quality Standards and Implementation
Plans
Criteria, Guidelines, and Information to be
Publishes by the Administrator
Toxic Pollutants List
Water Quality Standards
State Submittals to EPA
Water Quality Standards
B. AssessmentsAVQ Monitoring
CWA §303 (d)
CWA §304 (1)(1 )(A-B)
CWA §314 (a)(l),(E)&(F)
CWA §319 (a)
CWA §106 (e)(1)
CWA §305(b)
40 CFR 30.503 (a-e)
40 CFR 31.45
40 CFR 35.260 (a)
40 CFR 130.4
40 CFR 130.8
Water Quality Standards and Implementation
Plans
List of Waters Impaired by Toxics
Established and Scope of Clean Lakes
Program
State Nonpoint Source Assessment Report
Monitoring and Data Analysis Requirements
Water Quality Inventory
Quality Assurance Requirements
Quality Assurance
Limitations for Award
Water Quality Monitoring
Water Quality Report (305(b))
C. Total Maximum Daily Loads
CWA §303 (d)(1)(A)
40 CFR 130.7
40 CFR 130.5 and 130.7
Identification and Priority Ranking of Water
Quality Based Waters
Total Maximum Daily Loads and Individual
Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations
Continuing Planning Process
D. Implement Point Source Controls
CWA §301
CWA §302
CWA §307 (a)
CWA §313
CWA §401 (a)
CWA §402
CWA §403
CWA §404
CWA §405
Effluent Limitations
Water Quality Related Effluent Limitations
Toxic Pollutants Lists
Federal Facilities Pollution Control
Certification
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System
Ocean Discharge Criteria
Permits for Dredged or Fill Material
Disposal of Sewage Sludge
-------
CWA §308
CWA §309
CWA §505
40 CFR 130.12
E. Implement Nonpoint Source Controls
CWA §319 (b)
40 CFR 130.6 (c)(4)
F. Program Management
CWA §106
40 CFR 31
40 CFR 36
40 CFR 130
Inspections, Monitoring and Entry
Federal Enforcement
Citizen Suits and Procedures
Coordination With Other Programs
Nonpoint Source Management Programs
Nonpoint Source Management Programs
G. Outer Ring
CWA §208
CWA §209
CWA §303 (e)
CWA §104 (b)(3)
CWA §106 (b)
CWA §205 0X1-3)
CWA §314 (b&c)
CWA §319 (h)
CWA §319 (i)
CWA §604 (b)
40 CFR 130.5
40 CFR 130.6
Areawide Waste Treatment Management
Plans
Basin Planning
Continuing Planing Process
Research, Investigations, Demonstrations.
Studies, etc. Grants
State Allotments for Pollution Control
Programs
Water Quality Management Planning Giants
Clean Lakes Grants
Nonpoint Source Management Program
Implementation Grants
Grants for Protecting Ground Water Quality
Reservation of Funds for Planning
Continuing Planning Process
Water Quality Management Plans
K. Other
CWA §520
CWA §504
CWA §510
CWA §518
National Estuary Program
Emergency Powers
State Authority
Indian Tribes
-------
References
Web Sites 1
Federal Government Agencies 1
Federal Programs and Tools 2
Regulations 8
State Government Agencies and Programs 8
Non Federal Organizations, Programs, and Tools 11
Documents 13
-------
Web Sites
Federal Government
Agencies
American Indian Environmental Office
The American Indian Environmental Office
(AIEO) coordinates the Agency-wide effort to
strengthen public health and environmental
protection in Indian Country, with a special
emphasis on building the capacity of tribes to
administer their own environmental programs.
http://www.epa.gov/indian/
Great Lakes Program
The program monitors lake ecosystem indicators
and manages and provides public access to Great
Lakes data to support local protection and
restoration of important habitats.
http://www .epa.gov/glnpo/
Gulf of Mexico Program
This site includes information on Gulf estuary
programs, teacher and student resources, and
funding and grants.
http://pelican.gmpo.gov/
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA)
Check out this site to get information on weather,
climate, satellites, ocean, and fisheries.
http://www.noaa.gov/
National Weather Service (NWS)
The NWS site provides weather, hydrologic, and
climate forecasts and warnings for the United
States, its territories, adjacent waters, and ocean
areas.
http://www.nws.noaa.gov
Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS)
NRCSs' mission is to provide leadership in a
partnership effort to help people conserve,
improve, and sustain our natural resources and
environment. This site contains information on
watersheds, animal feeding operations, and
buffers, http://www.ncg.nrcs.usda.gov
Office of Wastewater Management
This site contains information on AFOs,
CWSRF, municipal technologies, NPDES
permits, and much more.
http://www.epa.gov/owm/
Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
This site contains valuable information on the
National Estuary Program, nonpoint source
pollution, and TMDLs.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
Check out this site for more information on
drinking water standards, source water protection
programs, and drinking water contaminants.
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/
Office of Science and Technology
This useful web site contains information on
contaminated sediments, water quality criteria
and standards, and water quality models.
http://www.epa.gov/ost/
US Army Corps of Engineers
Check out this site to view the latest US ACE
news, events calendar, and recreation services.
http://www.usace.aimy.mil/
US Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS)
This web site contains valuable information on
FWS programs, endangered species, grant
opportunities, and much more.
http://www.fws.gov/
1
-------
United States Geological Survey (USGS)
Check out this site for information on USGS
programs, maps, earthquakes, and much more.
http://www.usgs.gov/
Federal Programs and Tools
Acid Rain Program
This web page, developed by the Office of Air
and Radiation, includes information on the
program, S02 emissions, and N0X reduction.
http://www.epa.gov/acidrain/
Adopt Your Watershed
Check out this site to learn more about
watersheds, add a watershed group to the
catalogue, and participate in a chat room.
http://www.epa.gov/surf/adopt/
Air Pollution and Water Quality
This informative web site contains information
on atmospheric deposition, key air pollutants,
EPA's actions, and possible citizen actions.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/airdep/
Better Assessment Science Integrating Point
and Nonpoint Sources (BASINS)
The BASINS system integrates an Arc View-
based GIS, national watershed data, and
modeling tools into one easy-to-use package that
is available at no charge.
http://www.epa.gov/OST/BASINS
Chesapeake Bay Program
Check out this page to leam more about the state
of the bay, its animals and plants, and watershed
and restoration efforts.
http://www.chesapeakebay.net/
Clean Water Action Plan (CWAP)
Check out this site to get updates on the CWAP,
facts, a slide show, and key actions.
http://cleanwater.gov/
Clean Water Needs Survey
The Office of Wastewater Management
developed the Clean Water Needs Survey to
research wastewater facilities' needs. This site
includes the 1996 survey and the report to
congress.
http://www.epa.gov/OWM/uc.htm
Coastal America Partnership
This site provides information about coastal
restoration and protection projects and success
stories, http://www.coastalamerica.gov/
Coastal Programs Division
This site was created by the Office of Ocean and
Coastal Resource Management, a division of the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), to summarize Coastal
Zone Management Programs around the nation.
It offers an interactive map to leam more about a
coastal state's program.
http://www.nos.noaa.gov/ocrm/cpd/
Complex Effluent Toxicity Information System
for Personal Computers (PC-CETIS)
The Complex Effluent Toxicity Information
System (CETIS) is a set of computerized
functions that provide standardized entry,
maintenance, storage, and retrieval of toxicity
test data.
http://www.ntis.gov/fcpc/cpn4834.htm
CORMIX (Cornell Mixing Zone Expert
System)
The Cornell Mixing Zone Expert System
(CORMIX) can be used for the analysis,
prediction, and design of aqueous toxic or
conventional pollutant discharges into diverse
waterbodies.
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/tools/mo
del.html#3
2
-------
DYNTOX
This tool assesses the impact of toxic discharges
on receiving water quality over the entire range
of historical and future conditions. DYNTOX is
both a steady-state and dynamic wasteload
allocation model.
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/tools/mo
del.html#5
ECOTOX
The ECOTOXicology database is a source for
locating single-chemical toxicity data for aquatic
life, terrestrial plants, and wildlife.
http://www.epa.gov/ecotox/
Endangered Species
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has created
this page to keep the public informed of the
endangered species list and any applicable
current events. The site contains the current list
of endangered species searchable by state.
http://www.fws.gov/r9endspp/endspp.html
Envirofacts Warehouse
This web site provides access to several EPA
databases that provide information about
environmental activities that may affect air,
water, and land anywhere in the United States.
http://www.epa.gov/enviro/indexJava.html
Enviromapper for Watersheds .
This site provides geographic information system
(GIS) spatial data at the national, state, and
county levels.
http://www.epa.gov/surf2/iwimapper/
Environmental Indicators Web Site
Check out this site to leam more about a state's
water quality reporting process, including
definitions, water quality maps and their
explanations, and other helpful resources.
http://www.epa.gov/indicator/
The Great Waters Program
In response to the CAA amendments, the Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards developed
this web site to offer information on the 1997
report to Congress and an informative brochure.
http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/gr8water/
HSPF
Hydrological Simulation Program - FORTRAN
(HSPF) is a comprehensive package for
simulation of watershed hydrology and water
quality for both conventional and toxic organic
pollutants.
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/tools/mo
del.html#12
Index of Watershed Indicators
This web site enables citizens to view the health
of their watersheds using 17 indicators and
includes county-specific rankings for each of the
indicators and a helpful map library.
http://www.epa.gov/surf/iwi/
Knowing Our Waters: Tribal Reporting
Under Section 305(b)
This report describes section 305(b) of the CWA,
gives examples of the contents of a tribal report,
and helps users get started on their own reports.
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/monitoring/voluntee
r/tr_index.html
Land Use and Land Cover Digital Data
This site explains land cover digital data and its
applications, categories of data, and formats.
http://map.usgs.gov/mac/isb/pubs/factsheets/fs05
294.html
Marine Pollution Control Programs
This site offers valuable marine information
related to the CWA.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/regs/index.htm
3
-------
Model Ordinances to Protect Local Resources
This site contains model ordinances and real-life
examples to help local officials protect water
quality.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/ordinance/
Monitoring Water Quality
This site provides information on methods and
tools to monitor, assess, and report on the health
of a waterbody.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/
National Atmospheric Deposition Program
Check out this site to get more information on the
NADP program, to get meeting information, and
to gather information from their many test sites
across the nation.
http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/
National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)
NCDC is the world's largest archive of weather
data. Use this site to access their numerous
databases.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/
National Coastal Pollutant Discharge
Inventory (NCPDI) Program
The NCPDI Program is a series of database
development and analytical activities that are part
of the assessment of coastal and estuarine areas
conducted by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration's Strategic
Environmental Assessments Division.
http://www.epa.gov/ceiswebl/ceishome/ceisdocs/
usguide/prog(22).htm
National Coastal Wetlands Inventory
The National Coastal Wetlands Inventory is a
database that describes the distribution and
abundance of wetlands in coastal regions of the
United States.
http://www.neonet.nl/ceos-
idn/datasets/NOS00038.html
National Drinking Water Contaminant
Occurrence Database
This database contains information on
contaminated occurrences from public and other
water sources. This database can be queried in a
number of ways.
http://www.epa.gov/ncod/
National Inventory of Dams
The purpose of this site is to update the dam
inventory data with information from the states
and federal agencies.
http://crunch.tec.army.mil/nid/webpages/nidwelc
ome.cfm
National Oceanic Data Center (NODC)
NODC's primary mission is to ensure that global
oceanographic data (physical, chemical, and
biological) collected at great cost is maintained in
a permanent archive that is easily accessible to
the world science community and to other users.
http://www.nodc.noaa.gov
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Permitting Program
The Office of Wastewater Management has
created this site to provide information on the
NPDES permitting program. It offers a history
of the program, downloadable permit
applications, and a library of general permits that
have been issued.
http://www.epa.gov/owm/npdes.htm
National Resources Inventory (NRI)
The Natural Resources Conservation Service, a
division of the US Department of Agriculture,
created this program to gather information on
800,000 sample points on nonfederal land located
around the nation. This site contains maps and
tables summarizing a variety of findings,
including water quality, wetlands, land
capability, and conservation needs.
http://www.nhq.nrcs.usda.gov/NRI/intro.html
4
-------
National Showcase Watersheds
This web site contains information on the Clean
Water Action Plan's 12 successful stream
restoration projects.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/showcase
National Water Information Systems
Check out this site for water resources data for
approximately 1.5 million sites across the nation.
http://water.usgs.gov/nwis
National Water Quality Assessment
(NAWQA) Program
The U.S. Geological Survey monitors 59 "study
units" in rivers and streams around the nation.
Check out this site for their findings of many
pollutants, including pesticides, nutrients, and
volatile organic compounds.
http://wwwrvares.er.usgs.gov/nawqa/
National Water Summary on Wetlands
This site, developed by the U.S. Geological
Survey, teaches about wetlands. It includes
articles on wetlands, including technical aspects,
management and research, and restoration. This
site also lists state USGS representatives who
can be contacted for more information.
http://water.usgs.gov/nwsum/index.html
National Wetlands Inventory
Check out this site to view the wetlands
interactive mapper, to download data, or to view
some of their publications.
http://www.nwi.fws.gov/
Nonpoint Source Pollution Program
This web page contains important information on
section 319 of the CWA, the Coastal Zone
Reauthorization Amendments, and funding
opportunities.
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/
Office of Science and Technology (OST)
Clearinghouse
Check out this site to order OST publications.
http://www.epa.gov/OST/pctoc.html
Permit Compliance System
Use this site to view the Guidance and Standards
for Calculating Point Source Pollutant Loads
Using the Permit Compliance System (PCS).
http://www.epa.gov/owmitnet/pcsguide.htm
QUAL2E Enhanced Stream Water Quality
Model User Interface
This model is intended to be used as a water
quality planning tool for developing Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and also can
be used in conjunction with field sampling for
identifying the magnitude and quality
characteristics of nonpoint sources.
http://www.epa.gov/ostwater/QUAL2E_WINDO
W S/metadata.txt .html
The Quality of Our Nation's Water, 305(b)
Water Quality Report
This site was developed by EPA's Office of
Water and includes the National Water Quality
Inventory Reports to Congress. Reports from
1994, 1996, and 1998; fact sheets; and the report
brochure also can be viewed on this site.
http://www.epa.gov/305b/
Reach Files
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
Reach Files are a series of national hydrologic
databases that uniquely identify and interconnect
the stream segments or "reaches" that compose
the country's surface water drainage system.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/rf/rfindex.
html
Region 8 - Nonpoint Source Pollution
This web site was developed by Region 8 to
address nonpoint source pollution.
http://www.epa.gov/region08/water/nps/nps.html
Region 8 - NPDES Program
Check out this web site to learn more about the
Region 8 NPDES program.
http://www.epa.gov/region08/water/npdes/npdes.
html
5
-------
Region 8 - TMDLs
This web site lists the 303(d) waterbody list,
approved TMDLs, guidance documents, and
much more.
http://www.epa.gov/region08/water/tmdl/tmdl.ht
ml
Region 8 - Water Quality 305(b)
Check out this site to leam about the CWA's
section 305(b), pollution sources, and the water
quality reports.
http://www.epa.gOv/region08/water/305b/305b.h
tml
Region 8 - Water Quality Standards Program
This web site describes water quality standards
and how Indian tribes can participate in the
program and it provides Region 8 contacts.
http://www.epa.gov/region08/water/wqs/
wqs.html
Region 8 - Wetlands Program
This web site was developed by Region 8 to
educate citizens on their wetland program.
http://www.epa.gov/region08/cross/wetland/wetl
ands.html
Region 9 TMDL Program
The web site contains information on TMDLs
and their status and 303(d) lists
http://www.epa.gov/region09/water/tmdl/index.ht
ml
River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration
This web site includes information on the benefits
of a restoration project and an area for listing
new project.
http:www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/restore/index.
htm
Safe Drinking Water Information
System/Federal Version
SDWIS/FED (Safe Drinking Water Information
System/federal version) is an EPA national
database storing routine information about the
nation's drinking water.
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdwOOO/datab/sfed.html
State Drinking Water Information
System/State Version
This database is designed to help states run their
drinking water programs.
http://www.epa.gov/OGWDW/datab/sstate.html
Spatial Data Library System (ESDLS)
ESDLS is a repository for EPA's new and legacy
geospatial data holdings. Users can access these
data holdings through various GIS applications.
http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/esdls/esdls_over.
html
State Source Water Assessment and
Protection Programs: Guidance and
Implementation
This site disseminates information on each state's
source water assessment program to protect
drinking water. It includes information on
background and general information on the status
of each state's program and a contact list.
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/swapnp.html
STORET
The STORET web site was developed to
disseminate raw water quality data and
information on where and when it was obtained,
sampling methods used, and the laboratory used
to analyze the sample.
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/STORET/
Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles,
Processes & Practices
This comprehensive document is now available
online. It contains information on stream
corridors and restoration plans and principles.
http://www.usda.gov/stream_restoration/newgra.
html
Surf Your Watershed (SURF)
This site was created to enable citizens to locate
and check on the health of their watersheds,
identify current restoration efforts, obtain real-
time water quality data for participating states,
and much more. This site also offers a list of
state contacts to contact for further information.
http://www.epa.gov/surf
6
-------
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program
A TMDL is a calculation of the maximum
amount of pollutant that a waterbody can receive
and still meet water quality standards and the
allocation of that amount to the pollutant's
sources. This site includes information on the
status of TMDLs and 303(d) reports in each
state.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/
Toxic Substances Hydrology Program
In 1982, the U.S. Geological Survey initiated the
Toxic Substances Hydrology Program. Its goal
is to provide unbiased earth science information
on the behavior of toxic substances in the nation's
hydrologic environments.
http://toxics.usgs.gov/toxics/
WATERNET
WATERNET is the most comprehensive
bibliographical database on the water industry
available. Check out this site for ordering
information.
http://www.awwa.org/waternet.htm
Water Quality Monitoring Training Program
The Natural Resources Conservation Service
provides a free, self-paced course to the public.
This site provides information on registration and
testing.
http://www.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/iris/wq_mon/netinf
o.html
Water Resources Scientific Information
Center
This database is a collection of international
water research compiled by the Water Resources
Scientific Information Center of the U.S.
Geological Survey. The research abstracted in
this database covers a wide variety of topics that
span the time period from 1967 to 1993.
http://www.uwin.siu.edU/databases/wrsic/index.h
tml
The Watershed Academy
This user-friendly web site contains training
courses, Academy 2000 distance learning
modules, and other helpful publications,
http ://www .epa.gov/owo w/watershed/ wacademy.
htm
Watershed Information Network
This step-by-step interactive guide to help
watershed program coordinators includes
information on how to get started, offers avenues
for financial and technical assistance, and
explains important water-related laws.
http://www.epa.gov/win/
Watershed Information Resources System
(WIRS) Bibliographic Database
The WIRS Database is an online resource center
for information on lake and watershed
restoration, protection, and management. WIRS
can be accessed and searched for specific
information.
http://www.terrene.org/wirsdata.htm
Watershed Protection: A Project Focus
Check out this site to view an interactive
handbook that provides a blueprint for designing
and implementing watershed projects. It includes
sections on defining problems, setting goals, and
measuring success.
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/focus/
Water Use Data
The US Geological Survey has put together this
site to offer real-time water data, a suspended
sediment database, maps, and GIS data for water
resources.
http://water.usgs.gov/data.html
7
-------
Regulations
Clean Air Act (CAA)
This web site offers the full text version of the
CAA, a link to the 1990 amendments web site,
and a plain English guide to the CAA.
http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaq_caa.html
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
Under SDWA, EPA sets standards for drinking
water quality and oversees the states, localities,
and water suppliers that implement those
standards. Check out this site to see the status of
EPA action items.
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/sdwa/sdwa.html
Transportation Equity Act (TEA)
Check out this site to view a fact sheet, the full
text version of the regulation, issues of
Watershed Events, and much more.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/tea/
State Government Agencies
and Programs
Alabama Department of Environmental
Management
http://www.adem.state.al.us/
Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation
http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/
ENV.CONSERV/home.htm
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
http://www.adeq.state.az.us/
Arkansas Department of Environmental
Quality
http://www.adeq.state.ar.us/
California Environmental Protection Agency
http://www.calepa.ca.gov/
California EPA TMDL Program
http://www.epa.gov/region09/water/tmdl/
index.html
California Nonpoint Source Program
http://www.epa.gov/region09/water/nonpoint/caL/
index.html
Colorado Department of Public Health
and Environment
http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/cdphehom.asp
Connecticut Department of Environmental
Protection
http://dep.state.ct.us/
Connecticut DEP Long Island Sound Draft
TMDL
http://dep.state.ct.us/wtr/LIS/tmdl.htm
Delaware Department of Natural Resources
and Environmental Control
http://www.dnrec.state.de.us/
Florida Department of Environmental
Protection
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/
Florida DEP TMDL Program
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/division/tmdl/
default.htm
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
http://www.dnr.state.ga.us/
Hawaii Department of Land and Natural
Resources
http://www.state.hi.us/dlnr/
Hawaii Nonpoint Source Program
http://www.epa.gov/region09/water/nonpoint/hi/
index.html
Idaho Division of Environmental Quality
http://www.state.id.us/deq/
8
-------
Idaho DEQ TMDL Program
http://www2.state.id.us/deq/water/
water 1 .htm#TMDLs
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
http://www.epa.state.il.us/
Indiana Department of Natural Resources
http://www.state.in.us/dnr/
Indiana Department of Environmental
Management
http://www.state.in.us/idem/
Indiana DEP NPDES Permit Overview
http://www.state.in.us/idem/owm/npdes/
municipal/background.htm]
Indiana DEM 303(d) List
http://www.state.in.us/idem/owm/planbr/wqs/
303d.html
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
http://www.state.ia.us/govemment/dnr/index.htm
Iowa DNR 303(d) List
http://www.state.ia.us/government/dnr/organiza/
epd/wtresrce/303dnotc.htm
Kansas Department of Health and
Environment
http://www.kdhe.state.ks.us/
Kansas DHE TMDL Program
http://www.kdhe.state.ks.us/tmdl/
Kentucky Environmental Quality Commission
http://www.state.ky.us/agencies/eqc/eqc.html
Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality
http://www.deq.state.la.us/
Maine Department of Environmental
Protection
http://www.state.me.us/dep/mdephome.htm
Maine DEP Monitoring and Assessment
http://janus.state.me.us/dep/blwq/monitoring.htm
Maryland Department of the Environment
http://www.mde.state.md.us
Introduction to MDE TMDL Program
http://www.mde.state.md.us/tmdl/index.html
Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Protection
http://www.magnet.state.ma.us/dep/dephome.htm
Michigan Department of Environmental
Quality
http://www.deq.state.mi.us/
Michigan DEQ CWA Section 303(d) List
http://www.deq.state.mi.us/swq/gleas/docs/tmdl/t
mdlfaq.htm
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/
TMDLs and Minnesota's Waterways
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/tmdl.htmJ
Mississippi Department of Environmental
Quality
http://www.deq.state.ms.us/newweb/
homepages.nsf
Mississippi TMDL Reports
http://www.deq.state.ms.us/newweb/
homepages.nsf
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
http://www.dnr.state.mo.us/homednr.htm
Missouri DNR TMDL
http://www.dnr.state.mo.us/deq/wpcp/
wpc-tmdl.htm
Montana Department of Environmental
Quality
http://www.deq.state.mt.us/
9
-------
Montana DEQ TMDL
http://www.deq.state.mt.us/ppa/tmdl_wel.htm
Nebraska Department of Environmental
Quality
http://www.deq.state.ne.us/
Nevada Department of Conservation and
Natural Resources
http://www.state.nv.us/cnr/
New Hampshire Department of Environmental
Services
http://www.state.nh.us/des/descover.htm
New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection
http://www.state.nj.us/dep/
New Mexico Environment Department
http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/
New Mexico TMDL Development Section
http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/tmdlds.html
New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation
http://www.dec.state.ny.us
New York State DEC TMDLs
http://www.dec.state.ny.us/web site/dow/
tmdl.html
North Carolina Department of Environmental
Health and Natural Resources
http://www.ehnr.state.nc.us/EHNRy
North Dakota State Water Commission
http://www.swc.state.nd.us
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
http://www.epa.ohio.gov/
Ohio EPA TMDL Program
http://chagrin.epa.state.oh.us/programs/tmdl/
Oklahoma Department of Environmental
Quality
http://www.deq.state.ok.us/
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
http://www.deq.state.or.us/
Oregon TMDL Documents
http://waterquality.deq.state.or.us/wq/TMDLs/
TMDLs.htm
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection
http://www.dep.state.pa.us/
Rhode Island Department of Environmental
Management
http://www.state.ri.us/dem/
South Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Control
http://www.state.sc.us/dhec/eqc/
South Dakota Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
http://www.state.sd.us/state/executive/denr/
denr.html
South Dakota TMDLs
http://www.state.sd.us/state/executive/denr/
DFTA/WatershedProtection/TMDL.htm
Tennessee Department of Environment
and Conservation
http://www.state.tn.us/environment/
Tennessee DEC TMDL
http://www.state.tn.us/environment/wpc/tmdl.htm
Texas Natural Resources Conservation
Commission
http://www.tnrcc.texas.gov/
TNRCC TMDL Program
http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/water/quality/tmdl/
index.html
10
-------
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
http://www.eq.state.ut.us/
Vermont Agency of Natural Resources
http://www.anr.state.vt.us/
Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality
http://www.deq.state.va.us/
Virginia TMDL Priority List
http://www.deq.state.va.us/quality/303d.html
Washington State Department of Natural
Resources
http://www.wa.gov/dnr/
Washington DNR Water Clean Up Plans
(TMDLs)
http://www.wa.gov/ecology/wq/tmdl/index.htm]
West Virginia Division of Environmental
Protection
http://www.dep.state.wv.us/
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/
Wisconsin's 303(d) Waterbody Program
http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/water/wfn/wqs/
303d/index.html
Wyoming Department of Environmental
Quality
http://deq.state.wy.us/
Non-Federal Organizations,
Programs, and Tools
American Water Works Association
The American Water Works Association
(AWWA) is an international nonprofit scientific
and educational society dedicated to the
improvement of drinking water quality and
supply.
http://www.awwa.org/asp/tech.asp
Association of State Wetland Managers
This organization is dedicated to the protection
and restoration of our nation's wetlands.
http://www.aswm.org
Center for Biodiversity and Conservation
The Center for Biodiversity and Conservation
focuses the efforts of the American Museum of
Natural History and outside collaborators to
generate and communicate scientific information
to mitigate threats to biodiversity.
http://research.amnh.org/biodiversity/
Center for Watershed Protection
Check out this site for information about
watersheds, best management practices, and
watershed planning.
http://www.cwp.org/
The ESRI Conservation Program Web Site
Check out this site to find hundreds of
organizations using GIS to protect nature.
http://www.esri.com/conservation/
11
-------
Ground Water On-Line
Ground Water On-Line is a database containing
more than 78,000 ground water literature
citations with abstracts, chemical compounds,
biological factors, geographic locations, and
more. NGWA members automatically receive
free, unrestricted use of the on-line database,
while nonmembers can subscribe for an access
fee.
http://www.h2o-ngwa.org/gwonline/index.html
National Association of Counties
Check out this web site to learn more about
innovative county-wide environmental programs
throughout the United States.
http://www.naco.org/
National Heritage Network
Natural heritage programs maintain databases on
the plants, animals, and natural communities that
occur within their political jurisdiction.
http://www.heritage.tnc.org/
National Small Flows Clearinghouse
The National Small Flows Clearinghouse
provides information about innovative, low-cost
wastewater treatments for small communities
(those with populations of fewer than 10,000).
http://www.estd.wvu.edu/nsfc/nsfc_homepage.ht
ml
Nonpoint Source Education for Municipal
Officers (NEMO)
This program is a University of Connecticut
Cooperative Extension effort to use innovative
techniques to teach local officials about nonpoint
source pollution.
http://www.Iib.uconn.edu/CANR/ces/nemo/index
.html
The River Watch Network
This helpful organization offers workshops,
organizational and technical support, and other
tools to help groups or individuals monitor and
protect rivers.
http://www.riverwatch.org/
Society of Ecological Restoration
This is the main professional society for
restoration currently active in the United States.
The Society is involved in journal publication,
meetings, and training.
http://www.ser.org
Society of Wetland Scientists
The Society of Wetlands Scientists is a nonprofit
organization founded in 1980 to promote wetland
science and the exchange of information related
to wetlands.
http://www.sws.org
Transportation Action Network
Check out this web site to gather information on
TEA-21 and the latest transportation issues and
to view the Progress newsletter.
http://www.transact.org/
12
-------
Documents
Annotated Bibliography for Graduate Level
Introductory GIS Classes Taught at EPA
Use this web page to order this new document. It
cites more than 500 510 GIS resources covering
a range of topics.
http://www.epa.gov/ncea/bibnew4.htm
Catalog of Federal Funding Sources for
Watershed Protection (2nd edition), EPA 841-B-
99-003
This catalog contains a one-page fact sheet for
each of the 69 funding sources and includes
eligibility requirements.
Compendium of Tools for Watershed
Assessment and TMDL Development,
EPA 841-B-97-006
The Compendium includes information on a
variety of watershed loading models and
ecological assessment techniques and models.
Guidance for Water Quality-Based Decisions:
The TMDL Process, EPA 4404-91-001
This document defines and clarifies the
requirements of the Total Maximum Daily Load
(TMDL Program) under CWA section 303(d).
http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/decisions
Protocol for developing Nutrient TMDLs, 1st
Edition, EPA 841-B-99-007
This document presents a developmental process
of rational, science-based assessments and
decisions that leads to the assemblage of an
understandable and justifiable nutrient TMDL.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/nutrient/nutrient.
html
Protocol for Developing Sediment TMDLs, 1st
Edition, EPA 841-B-99-004
This document provides technical guidance to
state, interstate, territorial, tribal, local, and
federal agency staff involved in TMDL
development, as well as watershed stakeholders
and private consultants. It provides a framework
for completing the technical and programmatic
steps in the TMDL development process.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/nutrient/nutrient.
html
Report of the Federal Advisory Committee on
the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
Program, EPA 100-R-98-006
This is the final report of the Federal Advisory
Committee on the Total Maximum Daily Load
(TMDL) Program. The report is a response to
EPA's request for advice and recommendations
on improving the TMDL Program.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/advisory.html
TMDL Development Cost Estimates: Case
Studies of 14 TMDLs, EPA-R-96-001
http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/case.html
This document provides TMDL case studies,
including the following:
Denver Metro, The South Platte River Segment
Central Idaho, South Fork of the Salmon River
Colorado, West Fork of Clear Creek
Virginia, Nomini Creek Watershed
North Carolina and Virginia, Albemarle/Pamlico
Estuary
Southern Minnesota, The Lower Minnesota
River
Michigan, Sycamore Creek
Boulder Creek, Colorado
Appoquinimink River, Delaware
North Carolina, Tar-Pamlico Basin
Lake Chelan, Washington
Eastern Delaware, Modeling the Appoquinimink
River
Truckee River, Nevada
13
-------
Water Quality Standards
1. Compilation of National Recommended Water Quality Criteria and
EPA's Process for Deriving New and Revised Criteria Fact Sheet
2. Water Quality Standards Academy
3. On-Line Publications on Biological Indicators, Assessment, and
Criteria
-------
Compilation of National Recommended Water Quality Criteria and EPAs Process lor Deri.. Pu^e ; o: .
f.\ci Sunti V
. . - ¦ - - • N.'
Ianial States Oliucoi \\ .hit
Hn\iionmcntal Pioiccuon
-\ucncs
Compilation of National Recommended Water Quality Cr iteria and
ERVs Process for Deriving New and Revised Criteria
A b struct
'I he U.S. Tnvironiiieiual Pi oieetinn Aueni \ ll'.PAi litis pithhsheil a i ompiiiinoi.
u cner tjitalnx criteria The compilation o /'resented to a /. , ¦>•¦¦¦ >•<
re( oinme/ided Wtiter c/ualm criteria for the protection hi cnpniln lilt- iiud iiitiiuu. ne.dii:
Jar approximately 150 pollutants These criteria are published pursuant to Set nor.
itii of the Clean Walei Act ICWA) and provule uiiulcitue ioi Slates and I iihes h> u\e in
adopting water quality standards under Sa lion JOjlt i oi the OV.4 Ul' \ has aiso
published ( han^cs to its process tor derivmy new ami revised national u atei t/ualos
cineria
Background
Section 304ia) ol the Clean \\ atcr Act. 3" I' S C 13 14iait i i. icuuircs the
Lnv iionmcntal Protection Agcnc\ ( LP A ) to piml i sii aiki pcrioviica!i\ upuaic amnicni
w ater quality criteria These ci ueria are to " accurate!} lei leei llie latest m. leniu u
knowledge on the kmc! and extern ol all idcruniabic cliecls on iiealth and ueilaie
i lie I ud i rig. but not 11 mi led to. plank ion. I isli. »he 111 ish. w ildlil e. plani In e w hicr. ma\
he e\peeied liorn the presence of pollutants in an\ hod\ of walei ' \\ alei <.]liain\
cr11e11a de\ eloped undei section 3041a i ai e based sole I \ on daia and se lenii I le iiideincni s
on the i e I at i on^h f p between pollutant concentrations and em noninental and runiian
health el'leeis. These recommended criteria punuie guidance loi Stales and 1 11hein
adopting walei qualiu standards undei section 303(ci oi the C'W A
'I lie compilation was published m the hcdcra! keyisic .'..u! sx av.. • o, :: .
ol Science and Technologies I lomc-paiie (htipV/w vvw ,cpa >\ /()S I / i This i-enc:ai
Register nonce also describes changes in LPA's pmccss loi dei 1 11vj nev. and ic\ i-ed
national w ater quality ei itena as well a^ ihe Agcncv s imeniions lor pei h kiicalI•« upd.a ine
the compilation m die iuiuil
Additional Information
Foi additional mlormalion concerning the compilation or I'.FA's ni oi ess 111,- dci i \ m e
new and ie\'ised cruciia contact C'ind\ Ronerts. Health and Lcoloeical ("riieiia
l)n ision. t'4304) 401 \1 Snecl. S \Y. Washington. D C 204fi() t telephone 201' 2Mi
27S7) The Federal_Reei_s_ier notice gives additional intorrnatKui on imv m rc\lev ::u
eompieie iccord lor the nonce
http://www.epa.gov/OST/standards/critsum.html
1 1/30/99
-------
OW Update
New Entry
Water Quality Standards Academy:
The Water Qaulity Standards Academy is a basic introductory course that introduces participants
to all aspects of the water quality standards program, including the interpretation and application
of the water quality standards regulation, policies and program guidance: the development of
water quality criteria: and all other facets of the program. Water quality standards are the
cornerstone of state and Indian tribal water quality management programs.
Representatives of states. Indian tribes, environmental groups, industrial groups, municipalities,
other federal agencies, the academic community, and other parties are invited to attend. This i.s a
highly structured and comprehensive training program. The basic course is designed for
individuals with fewer than six months experience with water quality standards program Others,
including veterans of the water quality standards program, who want a refresher course ma\ also
benefit There is no registration fee to attend the five-day course.
The structure of the course consists of lecture, case studies, video tape, and group exercises.
Two sessions of the Water Quality Standards Academy are planned in Chicago in the Spring of
2000 At the present time. EPA is identifying facilities in which to conduct these sessions
Once facilities have been identified, registration and other pertinent information will be available
at: http.//www.epa.gov/ost. You may also contact EPA's contractor. Greg Smith. Great Lakes
Environmental Center (GLEC) at 614-487-1040 for additional information
-------
Publications
raiie i o.
&EPA
Unne- Swj?
Environmental ProtscDon
Aoencs
Biological Indicators
of Watershed Health
W'h\ Use Biological
Indicators?
Ke\ Concepts
Learn About State
Programs
Fislias 1 nd i ciuor.s
Invertebrates as
Indicators
Periphytonas
1 ndicators
Biocriteria
Resources
LJnks
Site Index
On-Line Publications on Biological
Indicators,
Assessment and Criteria
EPA Publications
-~ Bibliography of water quality documents from EPA. with options for viewing or
ordering.
- Macroinvertebrate Field and Laboratory Methods for Evaluating the Biological
Integrity of Surface Waters EPA/600/4-90/030 (PB91-171363) (1990) This
shows a picture of each page
- Standard Operating Procedures for the Collection of and Laboratory
Identification
of Freshwater Benthic Macroinvertebrates - USEPA Region 5
» Standard Operating Procedures for Conducting Rapid Assessment of
Ambient
Water Quality Conditions Using Fish - USEPA Region 5
Biocriteria
- Biological Criteria: National Program Guidance for Surface Waters by Office
of Water
- Biocriteria Fact Sheet by Office of Water
Coral Reef Bioassessment and Biocriteria
- Development of Biological Criteria for Coral Reef Ecosystem Assessment by
Office of Water
Lakes Bioassessment and Biocriteria
- Review of the Draft Guidance for Lakes_and Resejvoir. B i o a s s e s s m en. t_ a n d
Biocriteria by EPA Science Advisory Board {pdf file)
- Lake and Reservoir Bioassessment and Bio criteria - Tec nnica I. Guidance
Document by Office of Water
Stream and River Bioassessment and Biocriteria
- Biological Criteria Technical Guidance for Streams and Small_Rivers
Revised Edition (1996) -- EPA/822/B-96/001
- Evaluation of Draft Technical Guidance on Biological_Criteria for Streams and
Small Rivers by EPA Science Aavisory Board (Ddf file)
» Revision to Rapid Biological Assessment Protocols for Use in Rivers and
Streams by Office of Water
- Summary of State Biological Assessment Programs for Rivers and Streams
by Office of Policy
Wetlands Bioassessment and Biocriteria
http://wwu .epa.gov/ceiswebl/ceishome/atlas/bioindicators/publications.html
01/20/2000
-------
Publications
I'aLlc _
» Bioindicators for Assessing Ecological Integrity of Prairie Wetlands by Paul
Adamus. September 1995
-» Wetland Bioassessment Fact Sheets by Office of Water
- Impacts on Quality of Inland Wetlands of the United States A Survey of
Indicators. Technigues. and Applications of Community Level Biomonitorinc
Data by Paul Adamus. EPA ORD
- Proceedings of the Wetlands Biological Assessment Methods and Criteria
Development Workshop. Boulder. Colorado 1996 oy Office of Water
VoIunteer Monitonncj Program
» Volunteer Monitoring Page witn links to their publications by Office of Water
- Volunteer Stream Monitoring: A Methods Manual by Office of Water
- The Volunteer Monitor's Guide to Quality Assurance Proiect Plans by Office
of Water
USGS Publications
- Biotic Integrity of the Boise River Upstream & Downstream from Two
Municipal Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Boise, Idaho; 1995-95 By William
H Mullins. USGS (pdf file)
- Concepts of an Index of Biotic Integrity for Streams of the Red River of the
North Basin by USGS
- Index of Biotic Integrity Applied to a Flow-regulated River System by Bowen.
ZH MC Freeman and D.L Watson 1998
- Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality Final Reoort
Technical Appendix E Indicator Selection Criteria
- Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality Final Report
Tecnnical Appendix F' Ecoreoions. Reference Condition and Index Calibration
- Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality Final Report
Technical Appendix G Multimetnc Approach for Describing Ecological
Conditions
- Methods for Sampling Fisn Communities as a Pan oi the National Water-
Quality Assessment Program (USGS Open-File Repon 93-10-1
- Methods for Collecting Benthic Inverteorate Samples as Pan o; tne National
Water-Quality Assessment Program (USGS. Open-File Repon 93-406i
- Guidelines for the Processing and Quality Assurance of Bentnic Invertebrate
Samples Collected as Part of tne National Water-Quality Assessment Program
(USGS_OpervFile.Report 93^407)
- Methods for Characterizing Stream Haoitat as Part of tne National Write -
Quality Assessment Program (USGS .Open-File Report 93 - J 081
- Metnods tor Collecting Algal Samples as Pan ot tne Nations. Water-Quainv
Assessment Program (USG_S_.Open-Fiie Report 93-409)
Non-EPA/USGS Publications
- A_New_Appro.ach_to Assessing Ecoio.gical Health Developing an Index o'
BiojogicaJ.Integrity with Insects a! Hanford by tne Consortium tor Risk
Evaluation with Stakeholder Panicipation
- An Assessment of the Biological Integrity of the Western Canadian River
Basin in Texas Dy the
Red River Authority of Texas (ntml file)
- ARpJjcaUgn_of_tne_lndex_of_Biotic_ Integrity jo. Evaluate Water Resource
Integrity in Freshwater Ecosystems oy Tnomas Simon and Jonn Lyons
- Aguatic Ecosystem Publications from Bntisn Columoia. Canaoa
- Bacterial growth on stream insects potential for use in pioassessment by
Dennis Lemly, in JNABS (pdf file)
litip://wu w epa lion/ceisNvebl/ceishome/atlas/bioindicators/publications.html
01/20/2000
-------
Publications
•. Biological Criteria for Water Resource Management by C Yocjer anc E
Rankin (Measures of Environmental Performance anc Ecosystem Condition
(1999) National Academy of Engineering
~ "Bioassessment of Freshwaters Using Benthic Macroinvertebrates- A
Primer" First Ed Feb 1999-- S.M. Mandavilie from tne Soil & Water
Conservation Society of Metro Halifax
» Determining Comparability of Bioassessment Methods and Tneir Results oy
J.Diamond. J Stribling and C Yoder
» Ecoregions: A Spatial Framework for Environmental Management by James
Omernik
Field Guide to Freshwater Mussels of the Midwest by the Illinois Naturs'
History Survey (ntml file)
- Fish communities as indicators of environmental degradation dv Fausch e; a!
1990 (edited by course)
» History of the EPT Taxa Richness Metric by Dave Lenat and Dave Penrose
from NABS
- Journal of the North American Benthological Society (NABS) Abstracts
- North American Benthological Society (NABS) Bulletins
-- SalmonWeb Biomonitoring Publications
- Rapid Bioassessment of Benthic Macroinvertebrates Illustrates Water Quality
in Small Order
Urban Streams in a North Carolina Piedmont City by City of GreensDorc. Norn
Carolina
State Publications
- Alaska Draft Bioassessment Protocols
- Florida DEP Bioassessment Standard Operating Procedures Biology Section
SOPs (pdf files)
- Florida DEP Nonooint Source Bioassessment Program Factsheets idc" files)
- Florida DEP Biology Section Reference Library including taxonomic Keys (De-
files)
- Hawaiian Rapid Bioassessment Protocols from Hawaii DeDanmen; of Healtn
(odf file)
- Maryland DNR "Development of a Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity for
Maryland Streams" (1998_Benthic IBI pdf 7^0 KB)
- Ohio EPA Bjocriteiia and Bjological_Wajej_QuaJity_Reports (pdf files)
• DATA REPORT Assessment Framework for Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain
Streams Using Benfhic Macroinvertebrates by tne Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain
Workgroup (DC! file)
- Wasnington DEC StreamJ3iological Monitoring publications (pdf fliesi
Find and Order EPA Publications
Return to
BiojogicaiIndicators of Watershed Health
[ EPA Site Scarcn I EPA Heme I EQ Heme I Comments I Sue Map ]
Ijm revised Ol/OVno IV 0(1 00
hupV/wwy. enj L'm/Lci^wcb l/ciM.snome/ailWmniiuiii.alms/public, jtiuns mm!
Contact Wayne Da_vis tor more intormation
httpV/wwu .cpa gov/ceiswebl/ceishome/atlas/bioindicators/publications.html
01/20/2000
-------
Monitorin
1. Volunteer Monitoring
2. EPA's Volunteer Monitoring Program
-------
Volunteer Monitoring
Monitoring Water Quality
U.S Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water
Volunteer
Monitoring
o Upcoming Sixth National Volunteer Monitoring Conference, April 26-29.
2000.
Update on the next national conference in Austin. Texas.
o What is Volunteer Monitoring?
A fact sheet describing the role and activities of volunteer monitors.
o EPA's National Vojunteer Monitoring Program
A fact sheet describing EPA's support for volunteer monitoring, including a list of
EPA volunteer monitoring documents.
o Starting Out in Volunteer Water Monitoring
A fact sheet describing the process of starting out in volunteer monitoring.
o 5th National Volunteer Monitoring Conference
A brief description of the most recent national volunteer monitoring conference,
including planned follow-up activities.
o Proceedings - Fifth National Volunteer Monitoring Conference
Promoting Watershed Stewardship - August 3-7. 1996. University of Wisconsin -
Madison. Wisconsin
o Volunteer Monitor (newsletter)
Past and current issues of The Volunteer Monitor, a national newsletter published
twice yearly.
o 1 ntroduction to the National Directon of Volun teer En vironm en t a I Monitoring
Programs (5th edition. 1998).
Interprets and summarizes the findings of the national survey of volunteer
monitoring programs.
¦ National Directory of Volunteer Environmental Monitoring Programs.
This electronic database contains updated information on volunteer
monitoring programs nationw ide.
o Volunteer Estuarv Monitoring: A Methods Manual
http://www.epa gov/OWOW/monitoring/vol.html
01/20/2000
-------
Volunteer Monitoring
runt _ o:
Methods for volunteer monitoring of estuarine waters.
o Volunteer Lake Monitoring: A Methods Manual
Methods for volunteer monitoring of lakes.
o Volunteer Stream Monitoring: A Methods Manual
Methods for volunteer monitoring of streams
o The Volunteer Monitor's Guide to Quality Assurance Project Plans
Discusses EPA's guidance for documenting quality assurance methods, project
organization, goals and objectives, with examples and references.
o Volunteer Monitoring Groups On-Line l^11
A listing of volunteer monitoring homepages, maintained by Kentucky Water
Watch.
Office of Vv eiiand.s Oceans
-------
EPA's Volunteer Monitoring Program
Monitoring Water Quality
U S Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water
EPA's Volunteer Monitoring Program
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Water encourages all citizens to learn
about their water resources and supports volunteer monitoring because of us many benefits
Volunteer monitors build awareness of pollution problems, become trained it pollution prevention,
help clean up problem sites, provide data for waters that may otherwise be unassessed. and increase
the amount of water quality information available to decision makers at all levels of government
Among the uses of volunteer data are delineating and characterizing watersheds, screening for water
qualnv problems, and measuring baseline conditions and trends
EPA sponsors biennial national conferences that bring together volunteer organizers, stale and local
aeencics. en\nonmental groups, school groups, and business: manages an electronic bulletin board
torum km \olunieers. supports a national newsletter for volunteer monitors, prepares and regular!)
updates a dnectorv of volunteer monitoring programs: and publishes manuals on volunteei
moniioimg methods and on planning and implementing volunteer programs.
Ylanv of CPA's ten regional offices are actively involved in volunteer monitoring Their support
acti\ ities iik lude providing technical assistance related to data quality control: serv ing as contacts for
volunteei programs in the region: managing grants to state agencies that include provision foi
volunteei water monitoring and public participation, and providing information exchange services ioi
volunteers Some offices hold regional workshops to bring volunteers together and build partnerships
Fuiuie I:P-\ activ nies m support of volunteer monitoring will include publishing national conlerence
pioceedings developing methods manuals for volunteer stream monitoring, developing guidance on
the prep.nation ol qualuv assurance plans, and continuing to encourage cooperation and intormation
evchanee within the volunteer monitoring community and among volunteers and state, local, and
tedeial agencies
AVAILABLE EPA VOLUNTEER MONITORING
MATERIALS
l>irc(tor\ of Citizen Volunteer Environmental Monitoring Program. 4th Edition EPA S4 I-
H-i)4-oo;. Januarv 1994 Contains information on 519 volunteer monitoring programs across the
nation
lJrocec(iini'\ oi the Third National Citizen's Volunteer Water Monitoring Conference EPA S41/R-92-
004. September 1992 Presents proceedings from the third national conference on volunteer
moniioimg held in Annapolis in 1992
Starting Out in Volunteer Water Monitoring EPA 84 1-B-92-002. August 1992 A brief fact sheet on
http'/Avwu epa.gov/OWOW/monitoring/volunteer/epasvmp.html
01/20/2000
-------
tPA's Volunteer Monitoring Program
fdilC - u. -
how to become involved in volunteer monitoring.
The Volunteer Monitor. A national newsletter, published twice yearly, which provides information
for the volunteer monitoring movement. Produced through an EPA grant.
The Water Monitor. A monthly newsletter published by EPA to exchange surface water assessment
information among states and other interested parties.
Volunteer Estuary- Monitoring: A Methods Manual. EPA 842-B-93-004. December 1993 Present^
information and methods for the volunteer monitoring of estuarine waters.
Volunteer Lake Monitoring: /A Methods Manuals. EPA 440/4-91-002. December 1991 Discusse>
lake water quality issues and presents methods for the volunteer monitoring of lakes.
Volunteer Monitoring. EPA 800-F-93-008. September 1993 A brief fact sheet on volunteer
monitoring, including examples of how volunteer monitors have improved the environment.
Volunteer Monitoring on the Nonpoint Source Electronic Bulletin Board System. A 2-page fact sheet
on EPA's electronic forum for volunteer monitors.
Volunteer Water Monitoring ,4 Guide for State Managers. EPA 440/4-90-010. August 1990
Discusses the importance of volunteer monitoring, quality assurance considerations, and how to plan
and implement a volunteer program.
< Monitoring
Homepage
()\VQYY Homepage
OMGEj\'LRAL(v'cnamail.epa ijov
I KL: http7/« wm.cpa.toWONN OW/monitonn^/ni'M.html
l.aM I'pd.iictJ April -J. V)1)"
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/monitoring/volunteer/epasvmp.html
01/20/2000
-------
TMDLs
1. TMDL Fact Sheets
2. EPA TMDL Documents
3. EPA Regional TMDL Contacts
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water (A503-)
Wasnington. DC 20460
vavw eoa gov/owow/rmdl
E3A8-' -r-99-C j3~
Aucus: "'939
&EPA
Cleaner Waters Across America:
Identifying and Restoring
Our Polluted Waters
/
Cleaner Waters Across America:
Improving the TMDL Program
EPA is taking steps to achieve Cleaner Waters Across America
by revising the Total Maximum Daily Load - or TMDL —
program. Established by section 303(d) of the Clean Water
Act, the primary mission of the TMDL program is to protect
public health and ensure healthy watersheds. The program
identifies polluted waters, determines how much pollutants
must be reduced to meet water quality standards, and ensures
that on-the-ground actions occur to reduce the pollutants.
Identifying Polluted Waters
Over 20,000 waterbodies across America have been identified
by states, territories, and authorized tribes as polluted. These
polluted waters include over 300,000 river and shore miles and
5 million lake acres. Direct pollution discharges are the sole
cause in only about 10 percent of polluted waters. The
remainder are polluted by runoff from agricultural lands, city
streets, suburban lawns, or by a combination of sources. The
overwhelming majority of people in the U.S. live within 10 miles
of one of these polluted water. What this tells us is that,
despite sianrf icant progress, much work remains to be done in
cleaning up our Nation's waters.
A New Clean-up Framework
EPA is proposing to establish a new framework for identifying
and cleaning up our Nation's polluted rivers, lakes, and
estuaries Locally-developed, comprehensive clean-up plans will
be tailored to each individual waterbody or group of
waterbodies in a shared watershed. Through this new framework, we
and shore miles of healthy aquatic ecosystems, and millions more lake
fishing.
What is a TMDL?
A TMDL or Total Maximum
Daily Load is a framework
for restoring polluted
waters. It is developed in 2
steps'
a calculation of the
maximum amount of a
pollutant that a
waterbody can take in
and still meet water
quality standards, and
a distribution of that
amount to the
pollutant's sources.
Using this framework,
states develop tailored
restoration plans for each
individual polluted
waterbody identified by the
state.
J
i
will have over thousands more river
acres for safer swimming and
Bringing all partners to the table: In creating these new watershed-based clean-up plans, ail
pollution sources will participate in the restoration effort - from factories to farms, sewer
systems to city streets. Pollution reduction will be shared among point and nonpoint sources alike,
taking a truly comprehensive, watershed-based and locally-driven approach to cleaning up our
Nation's waters.
-------
Implementing on-the-ground solutions: The
regulations being proposed require detailed
implementation plans. They also clarify the
authority of the states and EPA to regulate
sources of polluted runoff where necessary
to restore clean water. In addition, they
allow EPA to step in when reasonable further
progress toward meeting water quality
standards is not being achieved.
Using innovative approaches: The proposed
regulations create opportunities for water
pollutant trading that also result in cleaner
water An innovative, new option would allow
for large new and significantly expanding
dischargers to a polluted water only when
tne dischargers commit to reducing pollution
from other sources by 1.5 pounds for every
pound added by the new pollution source.
Improving the TMDL Program
In 1996, EPA set up a Federal Advisory Committee,
composed of members from a broad spectrum of
interests. to recommend ways to improve the
effectiveness and efficiency of state, tribal, and
EPA TMDL programs. The committee's report was
issued in Juiy, 1998, and has been used to guide the
proposed revisions to the TMDL regulations.
EPA is also proposing changes to the National Permit
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES permits) and
Water Quality Standards regulations These changes
will help achieve reasonable further progress in
attaining water quality standards prior to the
esrablisnment of a TMDL, as well as ensure that, once
they arc established, TMDLs will be implemented.
The proposed regulatory changes can be found in the
August 23. 1999 Federal Register, and on EPA's TMDL
website After public review and comment, final
regulations will be published in 2000.
r
Why the Watershed Approach?
Clean Water is the product of a
healthy watershed - where urban,
agricultural, rangelands, forest lands,
and all parts of the landscape are well-
maintained to prevent pollution.
Looking at the whole watershed
helps strike the best balance among
efforts to control point source pollution
and polluted runoff, and protect drinking
water sources and sensitive natural
resources such as wetlands.
A watershed focus helps bring
together the "residents" of the
watershed to examine problems and find
solutions. It also helps identify the most
cost-effective pollution control
techniques to meet clean water goals.
—
Why TMDLs are Important
- Critical for achieving water
quality standards
~ Analytic underpinning for
watershed decisions
~ Way to promote integrated
solutions to water quality
~ Opportunity for innovations,
trading
J
For More Information including state lists and maps &
proposed regulations,
see EPA's TMDL homepage - http.V/www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl
-------
UniteC States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water 14503= '
Wasninaton DC 20450
www eDa aov/owow/tmdl
v-/EPA
Cleaner Waters Across America:
Identification of Polluted Waters
Cleaner Waters Across America:
Improving the TMDL Program
EPA is taking steps to achieve Cleaner Waters Across America
by revising the Total Maximum Daily Load - or TMDL --
program. Established by section 303(d) of the Clean Water
Act, the primary mission of the TMDL program is to protect
public health and ensure healthy watersheds. The program
identifies polluted waters, determines how much pollutants
must be reduced to meet water quality standards, and ensures
that on-the-ground actions occur to reduce the pollutants.
Tne proposed regulatory changes can be found in the August
23, 1999 Federal Register, and on EPA's TMDL website. After
public review and comment, final regulations will be published
in 2000
What is a 303(d) List?
Every two years, states, territories, and authorized tribes
identify their impaired or threatened waterbodies ~ those
not meeting water quality standards States provide an
opportunity for the public to participate as they develop their
lists These lists, also called the "303(d) lists," are submitted
to EPA for approval.
State Lists of Impaired Waters:
Major Changes Proposed
EPA's proposed regulatory changes would significantly revise
the list development and submission process. If adopted,
these revisions would:
/ Provide the public with more information about the health
of their watersheds through a comprehensive accounting
of impaired or threatened waterbodies.
/ Ensure public participation and enhanced clarity in the
development of the lists and the selection of priorities.
S Give clearer direction and promote consistency among
states, territories, and authorized tribes in the
development of schedules and priorities.
What Do the 1998
303(d) Lists Tell Us?
~ Over 20,000 waterbodies
across America have been
identified as polluted
• Over 300,000 river and
shore miles
• Over 5 million lakes acres
~ Many of these waters cannot
be used for fishing, swimming,
boating, or drinking
~ Leading pollutants are
sediments, pathogens, and
nutrients
~ The overwhelming majority of
Americans live within 10 miles
of a polluted waterbody
/
Pollutants vs. Pollution
Section 303(d) of the Clean
Water Act mentions both
pollutants and pollution
• Pollutants art residues,
chemical wastes, heat, and
may include metals, sediments,
excess nutrients.
• Pollution is the man-made
alteration of the water's
integrity, such as changes in
habitat and water flows.
-------
Providing the Public with Better Information: More Comprehensive Lists
/ Lists would provide a comprehensive identifica+ion of oil waterbodies impaired or tnreaTened bv
pollution and pollutants
Lists must include waterbodies impaired by all sources: point and nonpomt sources, air deposition,
and natural background conditions.
Lists would be composed of four parts, with TMDLs being developed for part 1 only
Part 1 - waterbodies impaired or threatened by one or more pollutants or by an unknown cause.
Part 2 - waterbodies impaired or threatened by pollution;
Part 3 - waterbodies with EPA approved or established TMDLs and water quality standards not
attained; and
Part 4 - waterbodies expected to reach water quality standards by next listing cycle.
/
/
Promoting Consistency: Clear Listing Methodology
/ States would list waterbodies according to a methodology that explains to the public and EPA how
existing and readily available data is used to identify impaired waterbodies.
/ Public participation would be required in developing this methodology
/ EPA approval of the methodology
would not be required, but EPA
approval of the list would still be
required.
1998 Impaired River and Shoreline Miles a sedimentation
Schedules and Priorities
/ Lists would be divided into high,
medium, and low priority
waTerbodies, based on severity of
the pollution and the uses of the
waterbody.
/ Some impaired waters that are
drinking water sources or have
endangered or threatened species
would receive high priority.
/ Lists would contain schedules for
establishing TMDLs for each
individual waterbody, phased over
a 15 year period with high priority
waters first.
/ Waterbodies would remain on the
state, territory, or tribal lists
until water quality standards have
been achieved
For More Information including
state lists and maps &
proposed regulations,
see EPA's TMDL homepage -
http: //www. epa. gov/owow/tmd I
I •"
I —
200,000
180.000
150.000
140,000
120.000
100,000
80.000
60.000
40 000
20.000
0
P TMTO M PSO
Impairment Type
¦ Nutrients
l ~ Pathogens
; ~ Toxics/Metals/lnorgaror
I ¦ Toxics/Organics
| D Mercury
¦ Pesticides
I ~ Other
1998 Impaired Lake Acres
N P TM TO M PS O
Impairment Type
I ~ Seoimentation
¦ Nlutrientt
~ Pafnopens
i
I ~ Toxtcs/Metais/inorgamcs |
i ¦Toxics/Organic&
I G Mercury j
i
I
IB Pesticides j
' <
IQOtner I
Please note that waterbodies may be impaired by
more than one pollutant. 'Other* includes, metals,
temperature, pH, habitat degradation, etc.
-------
Unitec Stages Office of Water '452-3- >
Environmental Prote;tion Wasninaton DC 20450
Aaenrv www esa gov/owow/tn-.d1
c Cleaner Waters Across America
Restoration Plans for
Polluted Waters
Cleaner Waters Across America:
Improving the TMDL Program
EPA is taking steps to achieve Cleaner Waters Across
America by revising the Total Maximum Daily Load -
or TMDL — program. Established by section 303(d) of
the Clean Water Act, the primary mission of the
TMDL program is to protect public health and ensure
healthy watersheds. The program identifies polluted
waters, determines how much pollutants must be
reduced to meet water quality standards, and ensures
that on-the-ground actions occur to reduce the •
pollutants.
In addition, EPA is proposing associated revisions to
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) and the Water Quality Standards program
regulations. These changes will help achieve
reasonable further progress in attaining water quality
standards prior to the establishment of a TMDL, as
well as ensure that, once they are established, TMDLs
will be implemented.
The proposed regulatory changes can be found in the
August 23, 1999 Federal Register, and on EPA's TMDL
website After public review and comment, final
regulations will be published in 2000
Identifying Polluted Waters
/
Si
What is a TMDL?
A TMDL or Total Maximum Daily
Load is a framework for restoring
polluted waters. It is developed in
2 steps:
a calculation of the maximum
amount of a pollutant that a
waterbody can take in and still
meet water quality standards,
and
a distribution of that amount
to the pollutant's sources.
Using this framework, states
territories, and authorized tribes
develop tailored restoration plans
for each individual polluted
waterbody that is identified.
Over 20,000 waterbodies across America have been identified by states, territories, and authorized
tribes as polluted. These polluted waters include over 300,000 river and shore miles and 5 million lake
acres. Direct pollution discharges are the sole cause in only about 10 percent of polluted waters. The
remainder are polluted by runoff from agricultural lands, city streets, suburban lawns, or by a combination
of sources. The overwhelming majority of people in the U.S. live within 10 miles of one of these polluted
water. What this tells us is that, despite significant progress, much work remains to be done in cleaning up
our Nation's waters
-------
Developing Restoration Plans
Once the states, territories, and authorized tribes have
identified their polluted waters, they beam to develop
restoration plans called TMDLs Before each TMDL is
submitted to EPA, there must be at least 30 days for
public review and comment. Tne proposed regulatory
changes would require that each TMDL have the
following ten minimum elements.
10 Minimum Elements of a TMDL
/ Name and location of the impaired or threatened
waterbody
/ Identification of the pollutant and the amount
that the waterbody can recieve and still meet
water quality standards.
/ Tne excess amount of the pollutant that keeps
the waterbody from meeting water quality
standards.
/ • Identification of the source or sources of the
pollutant.
/ A determination of the amount of pollutants that
may come from point sources.
/ A determination of the amount of pollutants that
may come from nonpoint sources.
S A margin of safety in case the modeling or
monitoring techniques are not adequate
/ Consideration of seasonal variation to account for
water levels, temperature, etc.
/ An allowance for future growth and reasonably
foreseeable increases in pollutants
/ An implementation plan with on-the-ground
actions to ensure that the TMDL will result in a
healthy watershed.
What Can Be Done to Achieve
Cleaner Waters While a
TMDL is Being Developed?
For Nonpoint Sources
~ Reduce runoff of pollutants through
more efficient use of water,
fertilizer, pesticides
~ Put vegetation on bare lawns and
farm fields
» Keep pets and farm animals out of
streams.
For Point Sources
~ If discharges will not violate water
quality standards, NPDES permits
may be issued.
» If a waterbody is polluted, large
new or expanding dischargers must
work with other pollutant sources
in the watersned to reduce or
"offset" the total amount of the
pollutant coming into the
waterbody.
States, territories, and authorized tribes are to establish TMDLs, but EPA may establish TMDLs in the
following circumstances'
If a state asks EPA to establish a TMDL;
If EPA determines that a state has not or isn't likely to establish TMDLs in accordance
with the state's schedule, or
If EPA determines that it should establish TMDLs for interstate or boundary waterbodies
For More Information including state lists and maps A proposed regulations,
see EPA's TMDL homepage-
http: //www. epa. gov/owow/tmd I
-------
&EPA
Unites States
Environmental Protection
Aaencv
Office of Water (4503-
Wasninaton, DC 20450
ww,' eDa aov/owow/tmdi
vjcjs:
Cleaner Waters Across America:
Actions On-the-Ground
Cleaner Waters
Across America:
Improving the TMDL Program
EPA is taking steps to achieve Cleaner Waters
Across America by revising +ne Total Maximum
Daily Load - or TMDL — program Established by
section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, the
primary mission of the TMDL program is to
protect pubiic health and ensure healthy
watersheds. The program identifies polluted
waters, determines how much pollutants must be
reduced to meet water quality standards, and
ensures that on-the-ground actions occur to
reduce the pollutants.
In addition, EPA is proposing associated revisions
to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
SysTem (NPDES) and the Water Quality
Standards program regulations. These changes
will help achieve reasonable further progress in
attaining water quality standards prior to the
establishment of a TMDL, as well as ensure that,
once they are established, TMDLs will be
implemented
The proposed regulatory changes can be found in
the August 23, 1999 Federal Register, and on EPA's
TMDL website After public review and comment,
final regulations will be published in 2000
Implementing TMDLs:
The Goal is Cleaner Waters
The ultimate goal of the TMDL process is the
achievement of water quality standards. Once
standards have been reached, the waterbody can be
removed from the state's list of polluted waters.
The regulatory changes that are being proposed
would require an implementation plan as part of the
TMDL— the key to translating the TMDL into
actual, on-the-ground actions to reduce pollutants.
mmrnKmaamamumm
Why Are We Concerned about
Restoring Our Waters?
Over 20,000 waterbodies across America have
been identified by states, territories, and
authorized tribes as polluted These polluted
waters include over 300,000 river and shore
miles and 5 million lake acres. Direct pollution
discharges are the sole cause in only about 10
percent of polluted waters The remainder are
polluted by runoff from agricultural lands, city
streets, suburban lawns, or by a combination of
s'ources. The overwhelming majority of people
living in the U.S. live within 10 miles of one of
these polluted water. What this tells ui is
that, despite significant progress, much work
remains to be done in cleaning up our Nation's
waters.
Through this new regulatory framework, we will
have over 200,000 more river and shore miles
of healthy aquatic ecosystems, and 3 million
more lake acres for safer swimming and fishing.
What is a TMDLP
A TMDL or Total Maximum Daily Load is a
framework for restoring polluted waters. It is
developed in 2 steps.
a calculation of the maximum amount of o
pollutant that a waterbody can take in and
still meet water quality standards; and
a distribution of that amount to the
pollutant's sources.
Using this framework, states develop tailored
restoration plans for each individual polluted
waterbody identified by the state.
-------
Minimum Elements of a
TMDL Implementation Plan
The proposed regulations coll for each TMDL to have an
implementation plan with -
/ List of actions needed to reduce pollutants — for
example, NPDES permits revision schedules for point
sources, or description of best management practices
for nonpoint sources
/ Time line describing when these actions will occur
/ Reasonable assurance that pollutants from point and
nonpoint sources will be reduced
/ Legal authorities to be used
/ Estimate of the time it will take to reach water quality
standards
/ Monitoring or modeling plan to determine if on-the-
ground actions are working and pollutants are being
reduced
/ Milestones for measuring progress
/ Plans for revising the TMDL, if progress is not being made
New Tools for TMDL Implementation:
Reasonable Assurance Through NPDES
How can we ensure that TMDLs, once established, will reduce
pollutants? In the proposed regulatory revisions, EPA is
asking that states include "reasonable assurances" in their
implementation plans to make sure that these "on-the-
ground" actions will occur.
There are a variety of ways that a state can demonstrate
reasonable assurance. States could use their nonpoint
source management programs, federal, state or local cost-
snaring programs, or local ordinances and zoning requirements
to demonsTraTe a commitment to reducing pollutants
To enhance EPA and the state's ability to establish
reasonable assurance, the proposed changes would allow
states and EPA to decide that certain currently unregulated
sources are causing significant water quality problems The
proposed regulations would allow states and EPA to require
these sources to have an NPDES permit. This authority
would be limited to: animal feeding operations, aquatic animal
production facilities, and some discharges from forestry
operations.
For More Information including state lists and maps & proposed regulations,
see EP/A's TMDL homepage - http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl
Achieving Healthy Watershed
& Water Quality Standards
f
~ TMDLs set the stage for on-tne-
ground acTions to reduce polluTant
loadings
~ Implementation tools are many-
NPDES permits for point sources |
State nonpoint source management
programs
Other federal laws and
requirements
State and local laws and ordinances
Local or regional watershed
management programs
What is an NPDES Permit?
The Clean Water Act prohibits
anybody from discharging
pollutants into our waters through
a point source unless they have a
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES)
permit. A permit contains limits
on the discharge and monitoring
to ensure that the discharge does
not harm water quality or people s
health. An NPDES permit
translates general requirements
of the Clean Water Act into
specific provisions tailored to
operation of each point source
discharging pollutants
-------
EPA Total Maximum Daily Load Documents*
Guidance for Water Quality-Based Decisions: The TMDL Process. EPA 440/4-91-001, 4/91,
http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/decisions
Defines and clarifies the requirements of the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL Program) under CWA
section 303(d). (59p)
Compendium of Tools for Watershed Assessment and TMDL Development, EPA 841 -B-97-006. 5/97
Includes information on a variety of watershed loading models and ecological assessment techniques and
models.
TMDL Development Cost Estimates: Case Studies of 14 TMDLs, EPA-R-96-001, 5/96,
http://www.epa.gov/owowwtrl/tmdl/tmdlcstt.html
Report of the Federal Advisory Committee on the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program, EPA 100-R-
98-006. 7/98. http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/advisory.html
This is the final report of the Federal Advisory Committee on the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
Program. This report responds to EPAs request for advice and recommendations on improving the TMDL
Program.
Protocol for developing Nutrient TMDLs. 1s: Edition. EPA 841-B-99-007,
http.//www. epa.gov/owow/tmdl/nutrient/nutrient. html
Presents a developmental process of rational, science-based assessments and decisions that leads to the
assemblage of an understandable and justifiable nutrient TMDL.
Protocol for Developing Sediment TMDLs. 1s: Edition. EPA 841-B-99-004,
nttp //www epa.gov/owow/tmdl/nutrient/nutrient.html
This document provides technical guidance to state, interstate, territorial, tribal, local, and federal agency
staff involved in TMDL development, as well as watershed stakeholders and private consultants. It
provides a framework for completing the technical and programmatic steps in the TMDL development
process.
TMDL Case Studies (1-13) (Case studies, without the graphics, are on the Internet at:
nttpV/www. epa.gov/owow/tmdl/case. html
Denver Metro, The South Platte River Segment, EPA841-F-96-001
Central Idaho. South Fork of the Salmon River, EPA841-F-96-002
Colorado, West Fork of Clear Creek. EPA841-F-93-003
Virginia. Nomini Creek Watershed, EPA841-F-93-004
* Documents are available free from National Service Center for Environmental Publications (NSCEP) at 1 -
800-490-9198 or 513-489-8190 and also on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ncepihom. Please provide
the name and document number when requesting documents.
-------
North Carolina and Virginia, Albemarle/Pamiico Estuary, EPS841-F-96-005
Southern Minnesota, The Lower Minnesota River, EPA841-F-92-01
Michigan, Sycamore Creek, EPA841 -F-92-012
Boulder Creek, Colorado, EPA841-F-93-006
Appoquinimink River, Delaware, EPA841-F-93-007
North Carolina, Tar-Pamlico Basin, EPA841 -F-93-010
Lake Chelan, Washington, EPA841-F-94-001
Eastern Delaware, Modeling the Appoquinimink River, EPA841-F-94-00
Truckee River, Nevada, EPA-F-94-006
' Documents are available free from National Service Center for Environmental Publications (NSCEP) at 1 -
800-490-9198 or 513-489-8190 and also on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ncepihom. Please provide
the name and document number when requesting documents.
-------
US Environmental Protection Agency
Regional TMDL Contacts
Region 1:
Region 6
Mark Voorhees
Troy Hill
CWQ
6WQ-EW
USEPA - Region 1
USEPA-Region 6
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
1445 Ross Avenue
One Congress Street. Suite 1100
Dallas. TX 75202
Boston. MA 02114
(214)665-6647
(617)918-1537
hill.troy@epa.go\
voorhees. mark(&;epa. gov
Region 7
Region 2
Patricia Reitz
Rosella O'Connor
WRPBWWPD
USEPA - Region 2
USEPA - Region 7
290 Broadway
901 North Fifth Street
New York. NY 10007
Kansas City. KS 66101
(212)637-3823
(913)551-7674
oconnor.rosellar5,;epa.gov
reitz.patricia@.epa.go\
Region 3
Region 8
Thomas Henry
Bruce Zander
3WP13
8EPR-EP
USEPA - Region 2
USEPA - Region 8
(3\VP20)
999 18th Street. Suite 500
1650 Arch Street
Denver. CO 80202
Philadelphia. PA 19103
(303)312-6846
(215)814-5752
zander. bruceteepa.go\
henry thomas®.'epa.go\
Region 9
Region 4
David Smith
Jim Greenfield
WTR-2
USEPA - Region 4
USEPA - Region 9
61 Forsyth Street
75 Hawthorn Street
Atlanta. GA 30303
San Francisco. CA 94105
(404)562-9238
(4)5)744-2012
greenfield.jimfS'epa.gov
smith.david\v({/.:epa.go\
Region 5
Region 10
Donna Keclik
Bruce Cleland
WC-15J
OW-134
USEPA - Region 5
USEPA - Region 10
77 W Jackson Blvd.
1200 Sixth Avenue
Chicago. IL 60604
Seattle. WA 98101
(312)886-6766
(206)553-2600
keclik.donnaiw)epa.go\
cleland.bruceioJ.epa.gov
-------
NPD
1. NPDES Permitting Program
2. Required Contents of an NPDES Fact Sheet
-------
Office of Wastewater Management - NPDES Permit Program
OFFICE OF WASTEWATER
MANAGEMENT
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Permitting Program
I Ovemev. I Program Areas I Training Courses I Permit Forms I Contacts I
Proposed Rules I Acldi.ijpn.al Information 1
(>vu'\ ii'w
The purpose of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Program is to protect human health and the environment. The
Clean Water Act requires that all point sources discharging pollutants into
waters of the United States must obtain an NPDES permit By point sources.
EPA means discrete conveyances such as pipes or man made ditches
Although individual households do not need permits, facilities must obtain
permits if their discharges go directly to surface waters Some pollutants that
may threaten public health and the nation's waters are: human wastes,
ground-up food from sink disposals, laundry and bath waters, toxic
chemicals, oil and grease, metals, and pesticides.
To learn more about NPDES permits, please read our Fiecjueo]j}_Asked
Questions and/or section on NPDES Permits Program - General lnlormation
Pic_;:am \ivns
There are numerous program areas associated with water permuting,
including Animal Feeding Operations. Pietreaimem. and Stormu atei W ater
Permits Program Areas provides a list ol these areas, including overview's
and links
i raining (. nin -cs
The EPA offers numerous courses to explain the regulatorv fumcwoik and
technical considerations of NPDES and some of us supporting programs
These courses are designed for permiter writers, industrial dischargers. EPA
officials, and other interested parties Click on the links below to learn more
about these courses.
• NPDE.S_Pe.rmit WniejV_Trainmg.Cou.rse
• Pretreatment Training Course
• Whole Effluent Toxicm Training Course
http://www.epa.gov/owm/npdes.htm
01/21/2000
-------
Office of Wastewater Management - NPDES Permit Program
rail _ i'
NPDES Permit Application Forms
The following NPDES permit applications are in Adobe Acrobat PDF
format. You can obtain a FREE copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader by clicking
on the icon below.
Get Acrobat" i
Reader
• Form 1: General Information (must be submitted by all facilities applying
for an
individual NPDES permit, with the exception of MS4s)
• 2A' " NEW " Application for permit to discharge municipal wastewater
from publicly
owned treatment works (POTWs)
• 2B: Application for permit to discharge wastewater - concentrated animal
feeding operations and aquatic animal production facilities
• 2C: Application for permit to discharge wastewater - existing
manufacturing.
commercial, mining and .si 1 vicultural operations (Revisions proposed
for
Form 2C have been discontinued.)
• 2D: Application for permit to discharge process wastewatei - new sources
and
new dischargers
• 2E Application for facilities which do not discharge process wastewaters
• 2F: Application for permit to discharge storm water associated with
industrial
activity
• 2S: " NEW " Appli cation for sewage sludge (biosolids) permit for
treatment works
treating domestic sewage (TWTDS)
\PIH S ( iiiiuk'Is
EPA may authorize States. Territories, and Tribes to implement the NPDES
Program In most States, the state environmental protection office issues
NPDES permits. However. EPA Regional Offices issue NPDES permits in
States that have not received EPA approval to issue permits These Stales
may require additional state permits.
http. //www. epa.gov/owm/npdes. htm
01/2 1/2000
-------
Office of Wastewater Management - NPDES Permit Program
raiV
Here are the regional and state contacts for NPDES Permits:
• EPA Regional Contacts
• Stale Contacts
Proposed Rules
EPA currently has proposed revisions to the NPDES program. Check for
current proposed rules
Additional Iniormulion
• General Permit Library
• Selected Publications on NPDES Program
• C ataloe of Publications for NPDES ('PDF FiIc)
• Ordering Publicaiions
Back To Top
I Wastewater Home I Water Home I EPA home I Contact Us I Search I
Tm> payi* lasi modified IO/2N/99 17 OS
hup //www spa L'ov/owrn/npdes hi in
http://www epa.gov/owm/npdes.htm
01/21 /2000
-------
Required Contents of a NPDES Fact Sheet
A brief description of the type of facility or activity that is being regulated by the
NPDES permit
The type and quantity of pollutants discharged
A brief summary of the basis for the draft permit conditions, including references to the
applicable statutory or regulatory provisions
Name and telephone number of person to contact for additional information
Provisions satisfying the requirements of 40 CFR $ 124.56:
- Explanation of derivation of effluent limitations
- Explanation of any conditions applicable to toxic, internal waste stream*, oi indicator
pollutants
- A sketch or detailed description of the location of the discharge
- For EPA issued permits, the requirements of any State certification
Foi everv permit to be issued to a treatment works owned by a person other than a State
or municipality, an explanation of the decision to regulate the users under a separate
permit
For everv permit that includes a sewage sludge land application plan, a brief description
oi hou each of the required elements of the land application plan are addressed in the
permit
it applicable, reasons why any requested variances do not appeal justified
A description of the procedures for reaching a final decision on the diaft permit,
including'
- The dates of the public comment period and the address
- Procedures for requesting a hearing
- Otliei procedures for public participation
-------
Section 319
1. State NPS 319 Coordinators
2. Supplemental Guidance for Awarding 319 NPS Grants in FY 2000
3. FY 2000 Section 319 Grant Allocations
-------
STATE NPS (319) COORDINATORS
ALABAMA
Norm Blakely. Chief
Nonpoint Source Unit
Office of Education and Outreach
Department of Environmental Management
1751 Cong WL Dickinson Drive
Montgomery. AL 36130
Phone': (334) 213-4354
Fax: (334) 213-4399
nb@adem. state, al. us
ALASKA
Susan Braley. Program Manager
Department of Environmental Conservation
410 Willoughby Avenue. Suite 105
Juneau. AK 99801
Phone: (907)465-5308
Fax. (907) 465-5274
sbraley@envircon.state.ak.us
ARIZONA
Carol Abv
Arizona Department of Environmental
Quality
3033 North Central Avenue. Suite 573
Phoenix. AZ 85012
Phone.(602)207-4508
Fax-(602)207-4467
aby.carol @ev.state.az.us
ARKANSAS
Chuck Bennett
Arkansas Department of Pollution Control
P O. Box 8913
Little Rock. AR 72209-8913
Phone- (501)682-0654
Fax-(501)682-0910
bennett (s'adeq. state, ar. us
CALIFORNIA
Ken Harris
Water Resources Control Board
901 P Street
PO Box 100
Sacramento. CA 95814
Phone-(916)657-0876
Fax: (916)657-2123
harrk@dwq.swrcb.ca.gov
COLORADO
Laurie Fisher
Water Quality Control Division
Colorado Department of Public Health
Environment
4300 Cherry Creek Drive. South
Denver. CO 80246-1530
Phone.(303) 692-3570
Fax:(303) 782-0390
lauri.fisher @ state.co. us
CONNECTICUT
Stan Zaremba
Department of Environmental Protection
79 Elm Street
Hartford. CT 06106
Phone-(860) 424-3730
Fax:(860)424-4055
Stanley.Zaremba@PO.State.ct.US
DELAWARE
Nancy Goggm
Department of Natural Resource
Conservation
Division of Soil & Water Conservation
89 Kings Highway
Dover. DE 19901
Phone:(302)739-3451
Fax-(302) 739-2048
ngoggin @dnrcc. state.de. us
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Sheila A. Besse
Department of Consumer & Regulatory
Affairs
2100 Martin Luther King Avenue, SE
Washington. DC 20020
Phone: (202) 645-6601. ext. 3039
Fax: (202) 645-6622
sbesse@ mail.en viron.state.de.us
FLORIDA
Eric H. Livingston
Department of Environmental Protection
2600 Blair Stone Road (MS2510)
Tallahassee. FL 32399-2400
Phone.(904)921-9915
Fax:(904)921-5217
11 vi ngston_e @dep. state, fl. us
GEORGIA
Frank Carubba
Water Quality Management Program
7 Martin Luther King Drive, AG Annex
Atlanta. GA 30334
Phone (404) 656-4905
Fa\'(404)651-9425
frank_carubba@mail.dnr.state.ga. us
HAWAII
Dcnni.s R Lau
Hawaii Department of Health
Environmental Management Division
9 19 Ala Moana Blvd.. Room 300
Honolulu. HI 96814
Phone (808)586-4309
Fax-(80S)586-4370
IDAHO
Gary Daily
Water Quality Bureau
1410 North Hilton Street
Boise. ID 83706
Phone (208)373-0587
Fax:(208)334-0576
gdaily@deq state.id.us
ILLINOIS
Richard J. Mollahan
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
PO Box 19276
1021 North Grand Avenue East
Springfield, IL 62794-9276
Phone: (217) 785-3958
Fax: (217) 785-1225
EPA1184@epa.state.il.us
INDIANA
Susan McLoud
Indiana Department of Environmental
Management
P.O. Box 6015
Indianapolis. IN 46206-6015
Phone: (317) 233-8491
Fax: (317) 232-8406
smcloud@dem.state.in.us
IOWA
Ubbo Agena
Department of Natural Resources
Wallace State Office Building
Des Moines. IA 50319
Phone: (515) 281-6402
Fax: (515) 281-8895
uagena @ max. stale, la. us
KANSAS
Donald Snethen
Department of Health and Environment
Forbes Field. Building 283
Topeka. KS 66620-0001
Phone:(913) 296-5567
Fax:(913) 296-5509
dsnethen @kdhe. state, ks. us
-------
KENTUCKY
Corrine Wells
Kentucky Division of Water - NPS Section
14 Reilly Road
Frankfort. KY 40601
Phone: (502) 564-3410
Fax:(502) 564-01 11
wells_c@nrdep.nr.state.ky.us
LOUISIANA
Jan Bovdstun
Department of Environmental Quality
PO Box 82215
Baton Rouge. LA 70S84-2215
Phone (504)765-0546
Fax [504)765-0635
jan_b@dcq state.la.us
maim:
Arlene Da\ is
Department of Environmental Protection
State House % 1 7
Augusta. ME 04333
Phone (207)2S7-7726
Fax-(207)2S7-7I91
norman g marcotte@state.me.us
MARYLAND
Elizabeth Bouton
Maryland Department of Natural Resources
5S00 Ta\ lor Avenue. E-2
Baltimoie. MD 2 1401
Phone (4 10)260-8730
eboiiUMiiv dnr state.md.us
MASS \( HI SETTS
Eben Ciiesehough
Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Protection
627 Main Street
Worcester MA 01608
Phone (50Si767-2798
Fax (50Si79 I -4131
eben che.sebough@dep.state.ma.us
MICHIGAN
Susan Benzie
Michigan Department of Environmental
Quality
PO Box 30473
Lansing. MI 48909
Phone: (517) 241-8707
Fax:(517)373-9958
benzies@state.mi.us
MINNESOTA
Fave Sleeper
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
520 Lafayette Road. North
St. Paul. MN 55 155
Phone: (651) 297-3365
Fax: (651) 297-8683
MISSISSIPPI
Zoffee Dahmash
Department of Environmental Quality
PO Box 10385
Jackson. MS 39289-0385
Phone:(601)961-5137
FAX. (601) 961-5376
MISSOURI
Becky Shannon
Nonpoint Source Coordinator
Missouri Department of Natural Resources.
WPCP
PO Box 176
Jefferson City. MO 65102
Phone:(573) 751-4422
Fax (573) 526-6802
nrshanb@mail.dnr.state.mo.us
-------
MONTANA
Stuart Lehman
Montana Department of Environmental
Quality
1520 East Sixth Avenue
Helena, MT 59620-0901
Phone: (406) 444-5319
Fax: (406) 444-1374
stlehman@mt.gov
NEBRASKA
Elbert Traylor
Nebraska Department of Environmental
Quality
Suite 400. Atrium 1200 N Street P
Lincoln, NE 68509-8922
Phone: (402) 471-2585
Fax: (402)471-2909
DEQ107@mail.dea state.ne.us
NEVADA
Kathy Serlic
Nevada Division of Environmental
Protection
333 West Nye Lane
Carson City. NV 89706
Phone: (775) 687-4670. ext. 3101
Fax:(775)687-6396
ksertic@ndep.carson-cuy.nv.us
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Eric Williams
New Hampshire Department of
Environmental Services
Office of State Planning
64 North Main Street. 3rd Floor
Concord. NH 03301
Phone:(603)271-2358
Fax:(603)271-2867
e williams@des.state.nh.us
NEW JERSEY
Liz Rosenblatt
New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection
Office of Environmental Planning
401 East State Street. CN418
Trenton, NJ 08625-0418
Phone: (609) 633-1 179
lrosenbl@dep.state.nj.us
NEW MEXICO
Peter K. Monahan
New Mexico Environment Department
P.O. Box 26110
Santa Fe. NM 87502
Phone:(505)827-1041
Fax:(505) 827-0160
peter_monahan @nmenv. state, nm. us
NEW YORK
Gerard Chartier
Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road. Room 398201
Albany. NY 12233-3508
Phone: (518) 457-8961
Fax:(518)485-7786
gcharti@gw.dec.state.ny.us
NORTH CAROLINA
Alan Clark
Department of Environment and Natural
Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
P.O Box 29535
Raleigh. NC 27699
Phone: (919) 733-5083. ext. 570
Fax.(919)715-5637
alan clark@h2o enr.state.nc.us
-------
NORTH DAKOTA
Greg Sandness
Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program
1200 Missouri Avenue
PO Box 5520
Bismarck. ND 58502-5520
Phone: (701) 328-5232
Fax:(701)328-5200
gsandnes® state.nd.us
OHIO
Gail Hesse
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
1800 Watermark Drive
PO Box 1049
Columbus. OH 43216-1049
Phone: (614) 644-3020
Fax: (614) 644-2329
gai l_hes.se @epa.state.oh. us
OKLAHOMA
J. D. Strong
Office of the Secretary of Environment
3800 North Classen Blvd.
Oklahoma City. OK 731 18
Phone:(405) 530-8995
Fax:(405)530-8999
jdstrong@owrb.state.ok.us
OREGON
Ivan Camacho
Department of Environmental Quality
81 1 SW 6th Avenue
Portland. OR 97204
Phone-(503)229-5088
Fax:(503) 229-5850
camacho. i van @deq. state.or. us
PENNSYLVANIA
Russ Wagner
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection
Water Quality Protection
P.O. Box 8465
Harrisburg. PA 17105
Phone: (7*17) 787-5259
Fax: (717) 772-5156
wagner.russ @ A1 .dep.state.pa.us
RHODE ISLAND
Jim Riordan
Department of Environmental Management
235 Promenade Street
Providence. R1 02903
Phone: (401) 222-4700
Fax: (401) 521-4230
jriordan@dem. state, ri. us
SOUTH CAROLINA
Doug Fabel
Bureau of Water
South Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Control
2600 Bull Street
Columbia. SC 29201
Phone. (803) 734-4222
Fax:(803)734-5355
fabelj@columb3 2.dhcc.state.se. us
SOUTH DAKOTA
James Feenev
Department of Environment and Natural
Resources
Joe Foss Building
523 East Capitol Avenue
Pierre. SD 57501-3 181
Phone1 (605) 733-4254
Fax:(605)773-4068
j im. feeney@.state, sd. us
-------
TENNESSEE
John McClurtan
Tennessee Department of Agriculture
PO Box 40627
Nashville. TN 37201
Phone: (615) 837-5305
Fax:(615)837-5025
j mcclurtan @ mail, state, tn.us
TEXAS
Arthur Talley
Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Commission
P.O. Box 13087 (MC 150)
Austin. TX 787! 1-3087
Phone: (512) 239-4546
Fax: (512) 239-4410
ami ley @tnrcc.state.tx. us
James Moore
Texas Soil and Water Conservation Board
P.O Box 658
Temple. TX 76503
Phone (254) 773-2250
Fa,v (254) 773-33 1 1
UTAH
Roy Gunnell
Department of Environmental Quality
288 North 2460 West
Salt Lake City. UT 841 14
Phone.(801)538-6065
Fax (801)538-6016
eqwq.rgunnelI ©email.slate.ut.us
George Hopkin
Utah State Department of Agriculture
PO Box 146500
Salt Lake City. UT 841 14
Phone-(801)538-7177
Fax (801)538-9436
VERMONT
Rick Hopkins
Department of Environmental Conservation
103 South Main Bldg.. 10 North
Waterbury, VT 05671 -0408
Phone:(802) 241-3770
Fax:(802) 241-3287
rickh@dec.anr.state, vt.us
VIRGINIA
J. Richard Hill. Jr.
Department of Conservation and Recreation
203 Governor Street
Richmond. VA 23129
Phone: (804) 786-71 19
Fax: (804) 786-1798
jrh@dcr.state, va.us
WASHINGTON
David Roberts
Department of Ecology
300 Desmond Dr.
Lacey. WA 98504
Phone:(360) 407-6414
Fax:(360)407-6426
drob461 @ecy wa.gov
WEST VIRGINIA
Lyle Bennett
Division of Environmental Protection
1201 Greenbrier Street
Charleston. WV 253 1 I
Phone: (304) 558-2108
Fax.(304)558-2780
1 bennett @ mail. dep. state, wv. us
WISCONSIN
Russell Rasmussen
W1 Department of Natural Resources
101 South Webster Street
Madison. W1 53707
Phone (608)266-7651
Fax:(608)267-3579
rasmur @dnr. state, wi. us
-------
WYOMING
Beth Pratt
Department of Environmental Quality
Herschier Bldg.. 4 West
122 West 25th
Cheyenne. WY 82002
Phone: (307) 777-7079
Fax:(307) 777-5973
bpratt® missc. state, wy. us
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Award of Section 319 Nonpoint Source Grants m FA 2uuu tJage i o
oEPA
Office of Water
Unit'.'c: Slaloi
Cnviron,Tio-ia1 Pio!ec'>.Dii A^?.-.c>
¦twscmrKM -•*"
Supplemental Guidance for the Award of Section 3'lf-
Nonpoint Source Grants in FY 2000
[This guidance was signed on December 21. 1999]
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Supplemental Guidance for the Award of Seciion 319
Nonpoint Source Grants in FY 2000
FROM: Roberi H. Wayland III. Director
Office of Wetlands. Oceans, and Watersheds
TO: EPA Regional Water Division Directors
State and Interstate Water Quality Program Directors
1 am pleased to inform you that on October 20. 1999. the President signed
the FY 2000 appropriations bill for EPA.- which provides the full amount
included in the President's budget request. S200 million, for States.
Territories, and Tribes to implement their nonpoint source management
programs under Section 3 19 of the Clean Water Act This second veai of
funding at the S200 million level established last yeai pio\ides a continued
opportunitv for Slates. Territories, and Tribes to implement effective,
upgraded nonpoint source programs.
The Section 3 19 grants process and criteria to be used in FY 2000 are.
except as modified below, the same as were used last year The process,
criteria, and schedules are set forth in three documents: ( 1) Nonpoint
Source Program and Grams Guidance for Fisccd Years 1997 and Fuiare
Years (Mav 1996); (2) Process and Criteria for Funding State and
Territorial Nonpoint Source Management Programs in F)' 1999 (August
18. 1998): and (3) Funding the Development and Implementation of
Watershed Restoration Action Strategies under Section 319 oj the Clean
Water Act (Decembci 4. 1998). Each of these documents mav be reviewed
online or downloaded from the nonpoint source website at
ImpV/www.epa eov/owow/nps/.
Before discussing the FY 2000 grants process below. I want to thank the
States and Territories (hereinafter collectively referred to as "States") for
http./Avww.epa gov/owow/nps/Section3 19/fv2000.html
06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Aw ard of Section 319 Nonpoint Souice Grants m F\ 2(J0u Page _ o; :
vour errorts ana accompusnmems to upgraae your nonpoint source
management programs during the past feu years. EPA looks forw ard to the
completion of our mutual effort to upgrade all State nonpoint source
management programs this year. To build upon this success, we plan to
begin a new cooperative EPA/State process that will be designed to
identify, prioritize, and address the States' needs for technical,
programmatic, and financial assistance to overcome any remaining
obstacles to successfully implementing your nonpoint source programs We
intend to work closely with you so that you can help us focus on your
highest needs and jointly develop appropriate plans and strategies to
address those needs.
EPA and the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control
Administrators (ASIWPCA) have scheduled a two-day State/EPA meeting
to take place on April 4 and 5. 2000. in Riverside. California to begin this
process. During the months preceding this conference, we will form a work
group of State and EPA nonpoint source program staff to develop a process
to identify issues and options: plan the April meeting, and considei
approaches to establish a longer-term process that can sustain itself over
time.
States' Section 319 Grant Allocations in FY 2000
States' nonpoint source gram allocations under Section 319 remain
unchanged from last year, with one exception' all .'.llocations are slightK
reduced (by less than one percent each) io accommodate the increase in
Tribal 319 grants nationwide from 1/39c to 1.259r (i.e.. from S666.666 to
S2.500.000). The State allocations for FY 2000 are set forth in Attachment
A to this memo.
Upgrading State Nonpoint Source Management Programs
J am extremely pleased by the progress made to dale in States' efforts to
upgrade'their nonpoint source programs as called for in the May 1996
guidance. To date, almost all States have submitted complete drafts of their
program upgrades to EPA for review and received comments back from
EPA on those drafts. Fifteen upgraded programs have been approved to
dale, still others are nearing approval, and we anticipate that virtu all v all
States will receive approval of their upgraded programs m FY 2000 To
enable you and members of the public to track the States' progress in this
regard, we have posted a map on our nonpoint source website, at
http //www epa.gov/owow/nps/. which indicates the current status of each
State's program upgrade effort. We intend to update that map biweekly
The States' final and draft upgraded programs collectively represent a
tremendous effort by the States to strengthen their programs The increased
level of effort and sophistication of these programs is reflected in many
ways, greatly enhanced targeting of funds and technical assistance to
geographic priorities, such as 303(d)-listed waters and Category 1
watersheds identified through the States' Unified Watershed Assessments:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/Section3 19/fv2000. html
06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Award of Section 319 Nonpoint Source Grants m F^ 2uuu Page oi .
increased and enhanced partnerships among State agencies, private sector
groups, and Federal agencies: improved coordination with key related
programs such as the coastal nonpoint pollution control program under
Section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of
1990 (CZARA): objective long-term and short-term goals and milestones
that provide a framework for future actions over the next five. ten. and
fifteen years: enhanced funding mechanisms, including both significant
new State funding programs as well as increased use of State revolving
loan funds in many States to address nonpoint source pollution: and
increased development of new State enforcement authorities to address
high-priority problems such as animal waste and stormwater.
The Clean Water Action Plan (CWAP) provides that beginning in FY 2000.
EPA will award any section 319 monies exceeding SI00 million to States
and Territories only if they have incorporated all nine key elements ol
successful nonpoint source programs into their approved nonpoint source
management programs. As provided in the CWAP. EPA Regions may
immediately award to all States their allocated portions of the base SI00
million. Regions may award a State its allocated portion of the incremental
SI00 million only after approving the State's upgraded nonpoint source
management program as incorporating all nine key elements as specified in
the May 1996 guidance.
Animal Feeding Operations
In March 1999. EPA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture published the
Unified Animal Feeding Operation Strategy. To review a copy of the
Strategy, see http://www.cpa gov/owm/. This strategy discusses the
relationships between animal feeding operations (AFOs) and
environmental and public health: is based on a national performance
expectation for all AFO owners and operators: and presents a series of
actions to minimize public health impacts and impiove water quality while
complementing the long-term sustain nihility of livestock production
The AFO Strategy includes a goal that all AFOs will have comprehensive
nutrient management plans (CNMPs) by 2009 USDA/EPA funding
assistance programs such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program
and the Section 319 grants program are critical tools to help assure the
development and implementation of almost 300.000 CNMPs for non-
permitted AFOs in the United States during the next 10 vears. Therclore.
we encourage the States to continue, as they have in the past, to use their
base Section 319 funds to assist AFOs in assuring that animal wastes aie
appropriately stored, handled, and land-applied (Incremental Section 319
funds may be used for this purpose where the proicct is part of a Watershed
Restoration Action Strategy.) To this end. we ask the Regions to assure that
all Section 319 grants that include programs or projects that assist AFOs
include a provision (either as a grant condition or through a separate
document such as a workplan or BMP implementation plan) to assure that
anv AFO that receives financial assistance pursuant 10 the grant has and
will implement a comprehensive nutrient management plan.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/Seciion3 19/f'y 2000. html
06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Award of Section 319 Nonpoint Source Grants m F\ 20UU Page -r o.
We recognize that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) will be
working this vear to produce CNMP guidance and technical assistance
documents (which will support USDA's technical and financial assistance
programs for AFO's as well as EPA's). Once that process is completed, we
recommend that anv CNMPs for 319-funded AFO projects should be
developed, reviewed, or approved by a person who has been certified
through a certification program accepted by USDA or by another
equivalent certification program.
Grants to Indian Tribes
EPA is extremely pleased that Congress has. in its FY 2000 authorizing
language, removed the 1/3% cap in Section 518(f) on grants to Indian
Tribes. Pursuant to the one-vcar removal of the cap. EPA will set aside
S2.500.000 of the FY 2000 appropriation for Tribal Section 319 grants, lo
provide funds to Tribes to implement their approved Section 3 19 program.
EPA is pleased that at present, over 30 Tribes, totaling over 28 million
acres (which accounts for over 60% of all Tribal land and is approximately
equal to one percent of all land in the United States), have approved
nonpoint source management programs. EPA is working with additional
Tribes to help them complete development of their nonpoint source
management programs and to thereby become eligible to receive Section
319 funds to implement their approved programs
We are currently developing a process, in cooperation with the Regions,
the American Indian Environmental Office, and Tribes and Tribal
organizations, to develop an equitable process to allocate the funds in a
manner that will help as many Tribes as possible achieve water quality
improvement..As soon as that process is complete, the Office of Water will
publish a separate guidance on awarding Section 319 grants to Indian
Tnbes in FY 2000
Watershed Restoration Action Strategies
As discussed in mv December 4. 1998. memorandum and the Clean Water
Action Plan, the incremental (SI00 million) Section 319 dollars are to be
used to implement watershed restoration action stiategies (WRASs) Like
last year, however. Stales mav use up to 20 percent of the incremental
funds to develop watershed restoration action strategies We recommend
that EPA Regions and the states review the Framework lor developing
UWAs and WRASs (June 9. 199S). and the memorandum. "Unified
Watershed Assessment Framework 2000 Supplement", published lomilv
bv USDA and EPA on November 30. 1999
As was the case in FY 1999. we recognize that many States will not have
completed development of WRAS or may have completed development of
only one or two. Therefore, we again are authonzmg the funding of critical
components of a WRAS that is not yet complete but that the Stale has
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/Section319/fy 2000.html
06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Award oi Section 319 Nonpoini Souice Grants in F\ 2000 Page o;
L-VJ IIII l 11 lieu IU L.VJ11 IJJICl 11 lii . [J1UVIUCU lliai UHJSC S~VJlll|.JVJllCIU;i Ilcivc L'CC 11
developed and are ready for implementation. For example. States and
Territories are encouraged to begin funding the implementation of nonpoini
source components of TMDLs that have been approved under Section 303
(d) of the Clean Water Act in Category I watersheds. Similarly,
implementation of CZARA Section 6217 management measures in
Category 1 watersheds should be considered for funding prior to
completion of the entire WRAS. ]n addition, a program to address the
results of a completed source water assessment can be funded if it is part of
a WRAS that is under development. However, beginning with the FY 2001
grants cycle, we anticipate that only completed or fully drafted WRASs
will be eligible for funding with the incremental Section 319 dollars
Like last year. Section 319fh) grants to States and Territories in FY 2000
should clearly indicate which activities will be implemented using the base
funds and which projects will be supported by the incremental funds The
work plans should clearly identify: (1) the Category 1 watersheds and sub-
watersheds where the incremental funds will be used to implement
WRASs. and (2) the activities to be undertaken to assist m the development
of WRASs. Activities supported by the incremental funds should be
separately tracked.
Clean Lakes
The Senate Appropriations Committee included the following language in
Senate Report 106-161. accompanying the Senate's FY 2000 appropriations
bill (S. 1596):
"Clean Lakes program activities are to be funded through the
sec 3 19 nonpoini source grant piogram. The Committee
suggests'that 5 percent of the section 319 funds be allocated to
clean lakes, and that EPA bettei integrate the Clean Lakes and
section 319 programs by incorporating the section 3 14
guidance into the 319 guidance "
The House and conference committee reports were silent on this issue, as
was the appropriations bill itself The Senate Committee's suggestion is
consistent with the approach that EPA has taken to assuie that the
management needs of lakes, ponds and reservoirs arc addressed under the
Section 3 19 grants program Over the past several years, we have
encouraged Slates. Territories and Tribes (hereinafter collectivclv refeircd
to as "States") to use Section 319 to fund the lakes work which was
previously funded under the Clean Water Act iCWAl Section 3 14 Clean
Lakes Program. In the May 1996 "Nonpoini Source Piogram and Grants
Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years" we included the
following paragraph on Lake Protection and Restoration Activities
"5 Lake Protection and Restoration Activities
Lake protection and restoration activities are eligible for
http.//www. epa.gov/owow/nps/Section3 19/fv2000.html
06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Award of Section 319 Nonpoint Source Grams in FY 200U Page o 01 !
funding under Section 319(h) to the same extent, and subject
to the same criteria, as activities to protect and restore other
types of waterbodies from nonpoint source pollution. Suites
are encouraged to use Section 319 funding for eligible
activities that might have been funded in previous years under
Section 314 of the Clean Water Act. However. Section 319
funds should not be used for m-lake work such as aquatic
macrophvte harvesting or dredging, unless the sources of
pollution have been addressed sufficiently to assure that the
pollution being remediated will not recur." [emphasis added]
(at. http://www.epa.gov/OWOW7NPS/guidc.html)
We also provided additional lakes guidance in July 199S to emphasize the
eligibility of lake and reservoir restoration and protection activities under
Section 319. to ensure the listing of impaired and threatened lakes and
reservoirs on Section 303(d) lists prepared by States, and to encourage
greater use of other funding authorities including the CWA Slate
Revolving Fund (CW-SRF) for implementing priority lake and reservon
management projects in approved State nonpoint source management
programs (see "Guidance on Use of Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking
Water Act Authorities to Address Management Needs for Lakes and
Reservoirs." issued July 9. 1998. signed by Robert H Wayland 111.
Director. Office of Wetlands. Oceans and Watersheds, at
h11p_//www epa.gon/OWOW/NPS/cuide html)
Consistent with the Senate Appropriation Committee's repoit as well as the
above-mentioned EPA guidance, wc are establishing the following
additional guidance for FY 2000 and in future years
1. We suggest that each State use at least 5 percent of its section 319
funds for Clean Lakes activities to address the restoration and
protection needs of priority lakes, ponds and reservoirs
2 We suggest that States give pnontv to funding the following Clean
Lakes activities. (Each of these four types of actmties is described at
greater length in Attachment B )
a. Lake Water Quality Assessment (LWQA) projects
b. Phase I Diagnostic/Feasibility Studies
c. Phase 2 Restoration/Implementation Projects
d. Phase 3 Post-Restoration Monitoring Studies
Please note that while a Slate may decide to fund a LWQA and
several Phase 1 studies with Section 319 funds, such funds aie
included within the overall limitation allowing States to use no more
than 20 percent of their entire Section 319 allocation to upgrade and
refine their nonnoint source nrosrams and assessments .
http./Avww .epa.gov/owow/nps/Section319/fy2000.html
06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Award of Section 319 Nonpoini Source Giant.s in M 2uuu Page
3 These Clean Lakes activities should be funded in lakes that are
publicly owned and that have public access, consistent with the
Clean Lakes regulations at 40 CFR 35.1605-3.
4. Clean Lakes activities should be funded as pan of a State's Section
319 work program, and all operative Section 319 grant guidance
requirements will apply to these projects as well
5. Wc will be adding new data elements for Clean Lakes acuvines to
the Grants Reporting and Tracking System (GRTS) to enable EPA
and the States to track our progress in responding positively to the
Senate Appropriations Committee's suggestion that 5 percent of
Section 319 funds be allocated to clean lakes See Attachmeni B for
more details on the new data elements required for Clean Lakes
activities.
6 We included the following restriction regarding m-lake work m the
May 1996 "Nonpoint Sources Program and Grants Guidance for
Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years."
Section 319 funds should not be used for m-lake work
such as aquatic macrophvtc harvesting or dredging,
unless the sources of pollution have been addressed
sufficiently to assure thai the pollution being remediated
will not recur.
This guidance is still operative and-is fully consistent with the Clean
Lakes regulations at 40 CFR 35.1650-2 (5)(i) and f11) which provide
"The project does not include costs for harvesting
aquatic vegetation, or for chemical treatment to alleviate
temporarily the svmptoms of cutrophication. or for
operating and maintaining lake aeration devices, or for
providing similar palliative methods and procedures,
unless these procedures arc the most energy efficient or
cost effective lake restorative method.
"Palliative approaches can be supported only where
pollution in the lake watershed has been controlled to
the greatest practicable extent, and where such methods
and procedures are a necessary part of a protect during
the project period. EPA will determine the eligibility of
such a project, based on the applicant's justification for
the proposed restoration, the estimated time period for
the improved water quality, and public benefits
associated with the restoration."
Executive Order 13061: American Heritage Rivers
http://www .epa gov/owow/nps/Section3 19/fv2000.htmI
06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Award of Section 319 Nonpoint Source Grants in 2UUU Page ^ o.
In Julv 1998. the President designated 14 rivers across the country as
"American Heritage Rivers" to help their river communities protect and
restore environmental quality and natural resources, preserve historic and
cultural resources, and revitalize waterfronts Executive Order 13061.
"Federal Support of Community Efforts Along American Heritage Rivers."
outlines a process in which Federal agencies have been directed to re foe us
their programs, grants, and technical assistance resources to provide
support for communities adjacent to American Heritage Rivers.
Accordingly. EPA encourages the 25 States that have designated American
Heritage Rivers within or along their borders to consider the designation
when considering their priorities for nonpoint source funding under Section
3 19. For more information, visit the American Heritage Rivers website at
htt p://www.epa.gov/rivers/.
Grants Reporting and Tracking
In FY 2000. the Section 3 19 nonpoint source program will achieve two
major milestones. First, this will be the tenth year of State implementation
of nonpoint source programs with Congressional funding Second, with the
additional funding in FY 2000. we will pass the one billion dollar
(S 1.000.000.000') mark. With the achievement of these major milestones,
we have arrived at an appropriate point for the States and EPA to evaluate
the nonpoint source program's accomplishments and pace of progiess
lelative to the extent of the remaining nonpoint source problems. This
liinciure also affords us the opportunity to consider how we may improve
our efforts to track and report to the public our progress and success m
controlling nonpoint source pollution.
Our current program currently incorporates some tools to enable EPA and
the States to describe our progress in implementing the national nonpoint
source program The May 1996 guidance states that for significant
watershed projects (those whose Section 319 costs exceed $50,000). the
State should include in its grant application a brief synopsis of its
watershed implementation plan, including the en\iionmental indicatois
and/or other performance measures that will be used to evaluate the
project's success. The December 4. 1998. memorandum fuithei clarifies
that for the incremental funds supporting implementation of WRASs that
are included in a State's Performance Partnership Grant (PPG), those funds
must be linked to watershed restoration objectives that are clearly
articulated m the Performance Partnership Agreement or the PPG work
plan
At present. EPA and the States use a computer-based Grams Reporting and
Tracking Svstem (GRTS) for reporting twelve mandated elements The 12
mandated GRTS (listed in Appendix F of the Ma\ 1996 guidance) include
such items as NPS category, waterbody type. 8-digit hydiologic unit code,
the budget, number of State employees funded by the grant, and program
or project start dates and completion dales. The system also allows for
reporting of a significant number of elements beyond the twelve mandated
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/Section319/fy2000. html
06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Award 01'Section 319 Nonpomt Source Grants in FY 2000 Page v o.
elements: about one-half of the States report some additional elements,
such as project descriptions.
Although the mandated twelve elements allow some minimal tracking. the\
are not adequate to answer such fundamental questions as- Where are the
projects specifically located within the identified 8-digit code areas (which
often include a million acres or more)'7 What are the goals of these
projects9 (E.g.. do they have water-quality goals, load reduction goals.
BMP implementation goals, or education goals9) Does the water quality
currently meet water quality standards0 Is the project in the watershed of a
303(d)-listed water? At the close of the project, does the water now meet
standards9 Are other objective measures of on-the-ground or in-the-water
success (e.g.. load reduction, measurable habitat improvement, or
measurable improvement in water quality) being achieved9
EPA plans to work with the States to consider these issues and develop an
improved set of minimum reporting elements that will enable EPA and the
States to effectively account for our progress m implementing the nonpomi
source program and in achieving our near-term and long-term goals. We
will then consider whether any changes to our reporting/tracking system
are needed to support our reporting/tracking needs. Any such changes will
be made in as streamlined a manner as possible to assure that we do not
impose any undue burdens on State NPS staff In addition, we will also
look at this issue in the context of Section 319(h)( 1 1). which requires
States to report annually on progress in meeting NPS program milestones,
reducing NPS loadings and improving water quality
Our data systems themselves are a critical link in the chain of reporting
accomplishments, and we must assure that they aie adequate to the task.
Working with the States, we will consider whether the recently enhanced
GRTS svstem fully meets our reporting/tracking needs, and whether it
needs to be further enhanced and/or. if appropriate, migrated into a more
comprehensive data base system In this regard. EPA has begun efforts to
integrate, consolidate or harmonize several of our water quality data
systems, using the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) as the geo-
referencing standard to enable efficient tracking of data, including the 305
(b) assessment data base. TMDL tracking svstem. and GRTS This would
allow us and other system users to. for example, relate the implementation
of 319-funded projects to the priority problems identified in T.VlDLs In the
long term, it may also enable us to link more effectively with both Federal
agency programs (e g.. USDA's Environmental Quality Incentives
Program) and State funding programs W;e intend to work with the Stales to
examine some of these broad data and accountability issues and consider
how we can focus our efforts better to account for improvements brought
about by the totality of water quality programs that are relevant to nonpomt
source pollution control.
We envision that any enhancements in NPS reporting would be established
and included in the 319 Guidance for FY 2001. If at all possible, we would
also like to use this opportunity to discuss how best to communicate the
http./Av ww.epa.gov/owow/nps/Section319/fv 2000. html
06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Award of Section 319 Nonpomt Source Grams m 2000 Page lu w.
successes and environmental progress that have been accomplished during
FY 1999 and FY 2000 using both the base program and incremental Umd>
CONCLUSION
When we look at how much progress has been achieved by Slates and iheii
partners during the past ten years, there is much to be proud of 1 believe
that with States' renewed focus on solving priority problems with a broad
array of effective technical, programmatic, and regulatory tools, our
accomplishments will accelerate during the next ten years and result m the
restoration of many of our currently impaired u aterbodies. while protecting
those that may be threatened This is indeed an exciting time for all of us
who are working to protect our nation's waters
If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at 202-260-7 166
or waviand.robert@epa.gov. or have your staff contact Dov Weitman.
Chief of the Nonpomt Source Control Branch, at 202-260-7088 or
w e nman.d ov@e pa.gov.
cc State Nonpomt Source Coordinators
EPA Regional Water Quality Branch Chiefs
EPA Regional Nonpomt Source Coordinators
EPA Regional Clean Lakes Coordinators
Kathy Gorospe
Robbie Savage
ATTACHMENT A: FY 2000 SECTION 319 GRANT
ALLOCATIONS
FY 2000 § 319 (IRANI ALLOCATION
STATE
Base
Increment
Total
REGION 1
5.620.2
5.620.2
11.240.4
CONNECTICUT
966 4
966 4
1.932.S
MAINE
1.1588
1.158 8
2,317 6
MASSACHUSETTS
1.339 1
1.339 1
2.678 2
NEW HAMPSHIRE
754 9
754 9
1.509 8
RHODE ISLAND
669 6
669 6
1.339 2
VERMONT
73 1 4
731.4
1.462 8
prnmv ~> z «->« t 11 j
http7/w\\ \v cpa.uo\ /owow/nps/Section3 19/fy2000.htinl
06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Awaid ol Section 3 19 Nonpomi Source Giam> m M Juuu I'auc i i *>.
iMjUivn *
¦ 1
NEW JERSEY
1.647 4
1.647.4
3.294.8
NEW YORK
3.360.8
3.360.8
6.721.6
PUERTO RICO
553.2
553.2
1.106.4
VIRGIN ISLANDS
266 S
266 8
533.6
REGION 3
8.588.9
8.588.9
17.177.8
DELAWARE
708.9
708.9
1.417.8
DIST. OF COL.
617.4
617 4
1.234 S
MARYLAND
1.3 IS.9
1.318 9
2.637.8
PENNSYLVANIA
2.90S.4
2.90S.4
5.816 8
VIRGINIA
1.945.8
1.945 8
3.891.6
WEST VIRGINIA
1.089.5
1.089.5
2.179 0
REGION 4
17.132.0
17.132.0
34.264.0
ALABAMA
1.939.8
1.939 8
3.879 6
FLORIDA
3.S73.2
3.873.2
7.746 4
GEORGIA
2.310 8
2.310.8
4.621.6
KENTUCKY
1.692 6
1.692 6
3.385 2
MISSISSIPPI
1.897.5
1.897 5
3.795 0
N. CAROLINA
S
r i
r i
2.299.9
4.599 8
S CAROLINA
1.543 4
1.543 4
3.086 8
TENNESSEE
1.574 8
1.574 8
3.149.6
REGION 5
18.155.3
18.155.3
36.310.6
ILLINOIS
4.069 9
4.069.9
8.139.8
INDIANA
2.217.9
2.217 9
4.435.8
MICHIGAN
2.891 0
2.891 0
5.782 0
hupV/www.cpa j:ov/owow/nps/Scction319/fv2000.html 06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Award of Section 319 Nonpoint Source Grants m FY 2UUU Pa^e 12 01 i:
MINNESOTA
OHIO
WISCONSIN
REGION 6
ARKANSAS
LOUISIANA
NEW MEXICO
OKLAHOMA
TEXAS
REGION 7
IOWA
KANSAS
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
REGION 8
COLORADO
MONTANA
N DAKOTA
S DAKOTA
UTAH
WYOMING
REGION 9
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
3.414 3
3.003.0
2.559.2
11.811.8
1.944.6
2.405.5
1.208.4
1.564.3
4.689.0
8.176.5
2.261.9
1.827.2
2.285.5
1.801.9
8.438.8
1.250 9
1.309 0
2.388.2
1.618 1
908.2
964.4
9.303.7
1.623 9
5 ?7S
3.414.3
3.003.0
2.559.2
11.811.8
1.944.6
2.405.5
1.208.4
1.564.3
4.689.0
8.176.5
2.261.9
1.827.2
2.285.5
1.S0I 9
8.438.8
1.250 9
1.309 0
2.388.2
1.618.1
908.2
964 4
9.303.7
1.623 9
5 ?7S 3
6.82S 6
6.006.0
5.1 18 4
23.623.6
3.889 2
4.8 1 1.0
2.416.8
3.128.6
9.378.0
16.353.0
4.523 8
3.654 4
4.571.0
3.603 8
16.877.6
2.501 S
2.618 0
4.776.4
3.236.2
1.8164
1.928 8
18.607.4
3.247 8
10 5 50 6
htlp:/Av\v\v. epa.gov/owou/nps/Section319/fy2000.htm I
06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Award ot Section 319 Nonpomt Source Grants m 2UUU Page I.1 u>
HAWAII
NEVADA
TRUST TER.
AM SAMOA
GUAM
MARIANAS
763.0
763.0
1.526.0
841.1
841.1
1.682.2
0.0
00
0.0
266.S
266.8
533.6
266.S
266.S
533.6
266.8
266.8
533.6
REGION 10
5.694.6
5.694.6
11.389.2
ALASKA
l .204.1
l .204.1
2.40S.2
IDAHO
1.221.7
l .22 I 7'
2.443 4
OREGON
l .370.1
1.370 I
2.740 2
WASHINGTON
l .898.7
l .898 7
3.797 4
TRIBAL SET-
ASIDE
S2.500.0
TOTAL S98.750.0 SOS.750.0 200.000 0
ATTACHMENT B
New Grants Reporting and Tracking System (GRTS)
Questions to he added Regarding Clean Lakes
Question 1: Is this a Clean Lakes activity or other lake, icserx on . poiui-
related activitv''
Yes
No
If the respondent answers "yes." the following pop-up questions will
appear.
Question 2: What type of Clean Lakes orothci lakes-related activitv is it''
¦ i , /> u,a . 1 (amount of 319 kinds
Lake Water Quality Assessment (LWQA) ,
http://www .epa.gov/owow/nps/Section319/fy2000.html
06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Award of Section 319 Nonpoint Source Grams in M 20uu Page
Phase 1 Diagnostic/Feasibility Studies -
Phase 2 Restoration/Implementation Projects"'
Phase 3 Post-Restoration Monitoring4
Other lake-specific activity3
(amount of 3 19
funds )
i amount of 3 1L.> funds
)
(amount of 3 1l)
funds )
i amount of ? IHinds
t
'Lake Water Quality Assessment (LAVQA) projects w hich arc intended to compile a
comprehensive statewide assessment of lake water quality, to enhance ovetall State lake
management programs, and to increase public awareness and commitment to piotecting
lakes Specific activities might include
• developing a statewide lake monitoring program.
• listing threatened and impaired waters on State section 303(d) lists.
• meeting the reporting requirements for lakes as outlined in section 3l4ta")i'l )(A-F1
for reporting 111 the Stale's 305(b) report.
• building and enhancing the State's lake-related public outreach and volunteer
monitoring activities, and
• Developing and enhancing state lakes programs including uavel/tiaming foi
piogram managers to attend the annual meeting on "Enhancing State Lake
Management Programs "
:Ph ase 1 Diagnostic/Feasibility Studies which are intended to
• perform comprehensive studies of particular lakes included on State's ptioiity lists
including section 303(d) lists and Unified Watctshcd Assessments.
• determine the causes, sources, and extent ol pollution to the lake.
• evaluate possible solutions and
• recommend the most feasible and cost-ellective methods and measures tor
restoring and protecting lake resources
The specific icquiremcnts loi Phase I studies ate listed in the Seuion 314 Clean Lakes
Program regulations (40CFR Part 35. subpart H) The Clean Lakes Piogiam icgulations
aie still \ alid and provide a sound basis loi the design of Phase 1 studies, and thus, we
suggest that vou consult these regulations when \ou dc\elop woik plans loi Phase I
pioiects. In manv cases. Phase I studies should pro\ ide the basis loi the development ol
a total maximum daily load (TMDL) lor a particular lake 01 icsenou
•' Phase 2 Restoration/Implementation Projects which aie intended to implement lake
protection and restoration measures recommended in Phase 1 studies Histoi icall\. a lot
ol Section 319 lunds have been used to implement Phase 2 Implementation Pto|ccts and
such implementation protects aie 1 ully consistent witii the goals ot the Section 31 y
program e g to implement watershed pioicclinn and icstouiion piugiams Again, we
recommend tocusing these piojects m lakes included on States' pnomy lists
J Phase 3 Post-Restoration Monitoring Studies are to determine the longev ity and
effectiveness ol various lestoiation techniques and to advance the science ol lake
restoration Funding priorities should suppoit the pnmaiy purpose ol theses studies which
is to assess the efleetiveness ol Restoration techniques that have been applied thiotigh
Phase 11 propels Lowei priority consideration will be given to pmiects that suppoit
activities to improve and advance the science ol lake restoration and management (but
not necessarily post-Clean Lakes Phase 11 projects)
h tip://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/Section319/fy 2000.html
06/12/2000
-------
Supplemental Guidance for the Award of Section 319Nonpoint Source Grants m b \ 2U0U Page 0 o; ;
^ Other lakes activity thai is not covered in the lirsi 4 items listed aliene anil in which
the acuvuv is focused on a specific lake, reservoir, or pond
Question 3: Does this activity support the development and
implementation of statewide programs for lakes, reservoirs, or pond-related
activities0
Yes
No
If the respondent answers "yes." the following pop-up question will appear:
Question 4: What type of statewide lake (reservoir or pond) program
activity is this9
Education and training (amount of 319 funds )
Technical assistance (amount of 319 funds t
Regulation/ordinance development (amount ol 319 funds >
Other (amount ol 319 funds )
Oft ice <.»j_NVcI lands, OceansWytersheiK Home I Waicrshctl Pioiection Home
RI'A Home I Oil ice of Wajei I Seaicli 1 ("oinnienis I Contacts
Envnonmenial Pioieclion Agency's Office ol Weilands. Oceans. A; Waicishcds
Revised April 12. 2000
URL: http://w\v\v.t'pa.j;ov/o\\ow/nps/St'ctinn319/l'y200(1.html
http://www.cpa.gov/owow/nps/Section319/fy2000 html
06/12/2000
-------
ATTACHMENT A: FY 2000 SECTION 319 GRANT ALLOCATIONS
FY 2000 §319 GRANT ALLOCATION
STATE
Base
Increment
Total
REGION 1
5,620.2
5,620.2
11,240.4
CONNECTICUT
966.4
966 4
1.932 8
MAINE
1,158 8
1.158.8
2.317.6
MASSACHUSETTS
1,339.1
1,339.1
2.678.2
NEW HAMPSHIRE
754 9
754 9
1.509 8
RHODE ISLAND
669.6
669.6
1.339 2
VERMONT
7314
731 4
1,462.8
REGION 2
5.828.2
5.828.2
1 1.656.4
NEW JERSEY
1,647 4
1,647 4
3.294 8
NEW YORK
3.360.8
3.360 8
6,721.6
PUERTO RICO
553.2
553 2
1.106 4
VIRGIN ISLANDS
266 8
266 8
533 6
REGION 3
8,588.9
8,588.9
17,177.8
DELAWARE
708.9
708 9
1,417.8
DIST OF COL
617 4
617 4
1.234.8
MARYLAND
1.318 9
1,318 9
2,637 8
PENNSYLVANIA
2,908 4
2,908 4
5.816 8
VIRGINIA
1.945 8
1,945 8
3.891.6
WEST VIRGINIA
1,089 5
1,089 5
2.179 0
REGION 4
17.132.0
17.132.0
34.264.0
ALABAMA
1.939 8
1.939 S
3.S79 o
FLORIDA
3.'873 2
3.873 2
7.746 4
GEORGIA
2.310 8
2.3 10 S
4,621 6
KENTUCKY
1.692 6
1.692 6
3.385 2
MISSISSIPPI
1,897 5
1.897 5
3,795 0
N. CAROLINA
2.299 9
2.299 9
4,59^ 8
S CAROLINA
1,54 3 4
1.543 4
3.0S6 8
TENNESSEE
1.574 8
1.574 8
3.149 6
REGION 5
18,155.3
18,155.3
36.310.6
ILLINOIS
4.069 9
4.069 Q
8.139 8
INDIANA
2.217 9
2.217 9
4 4 35 8
MICHIGAN
2.S91 0
2.891 0
5 782 0
MINNESOTA
3.414 3
3,414 3
6.828 6
OHIO
3.003 0
3.003 0
6,006 0
WISCONSIN
2.559 2
2,559 2
5.1 18 4
REGION 6
11.811.8
11,811.8
23,623.6
-------
FY 2000 §319 GRANT ALLOCATION
STATE
Base
increment
Total
ARKANSAS
1,944.6
1,944.6
3.889.2
LOUISIANA
2,405.5
2,405 5
4.811 0
NEW MEXICO
1,208.4
1.208.4
2,416.8
OKLAHOMA
1,564.3
1,564.3
3.128 6
TEXAS
4,689.0
4.689.0
9.378 0
REGION 7
8,176.5
8,176.5
16.353.0
IOWA
2.261.9
2.261.9
4.523.8
KANSAS
1.827.2
1,827.2
3,654 4
MISSOURI
2.285.5
2.285.5
4,571.0
NEBRASKA
1.801.9
1.801 9
3.603 8
REGION 8
8,438.8
8,438.8
16,877.6
COLORADO
1,250.9
1,250.9
2,501.8
MONTANA
1,309.0
1,309.0
2.618 0
N DAKOTA
2,388.2
2,388.2
4,776 4
S DAKOTA
1,618.1
1.618.1
3,236 2
UTAH
908 2
908.2
1,816 4
WYOMING
964 4
964 4
1,928 8
REGION 9
9,303.7
9.303.7
18.607.4
ARIZONA
1.623 9
1.623 9
3.247 8
CALIFORNIA
5,275.3
5,275.3
10.550 6
HAWAII
763 0
763 0
1.526.0
NEVADA
841 1
841.1
1.682 2
TRUST TER
0 0
0 0
0 0
AM SAMOA
266 8
266 8
533 6
GUAM
266 8
266 S
533 6
MARIANAS
266 8
266 8
533 6
REGION 10
5,694.6
5.694.6
1 1,389.2
ALASKA
1.204 1
1.204 1
2,408 2
IDAHO
1.221 7
1.221 7
2.443 4
OREGON
1.370.1
1.370 1
2.740.2
WASHINGTON
1.898 7
1.S9S 7
3.797 4
TRIBALSET-ASIDE
S2.500.0
TOTAL
S98.750.0
S98.750.0
200.000.0
-------
Wetlands
1. Wetlands Fact Sheets
2. Wetland Bioassessment Fact Sheets
3. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act: An Overview
-------
Wetlands Fact Sheets
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Wetlands Fact Sheets
Introductory Information
\Ve 11 andn_Protec110n - Oycrvieu
Values and Functions of Wetlands
Consequences of Losing or Degrading Wetlands
Economic J3eiiefits_of Wetlands
Fac 1 s A hpli i We il a nd s
Weil and Quotes
The Administration Wetlands Plan:.An Update
NRCS to Identif\ AgriculturalAVedands
Alaska Wetlands Initiative
Regulatory Information Clean Water Act Section 404
Section -0J m; ihe Clean \\ aiei Aci. An ()\er\icv.
1 low Weilands Are Defined and Identified
W as 1 he Section 404 Program Intended to Regulate Wetlands''
Issue Resolution Procedures. Clean Water Act/Section 404up
EPA's Clean WaterAct Section 404(c) Veto Authority.
W etlands Eiitoicciiient
Weilands Miugati on Ban king
W ellands Categorization
What about Takings''
Wetlands on Agricultural Lands. Section 404 and Swamphusiei
http /Avww.epa.gov/OWOWAvetlands/contents.html
-------
Wetlands Fact Sheets
Exemptions to Section 404 Permit Requirements
Other Federal, and State, and Local Programs
Stale. Tribal. Local, and Regional Roles in Wetlands Protection
Stale Wetlands Grant Program
State or Tribal Assumption of the Section 404 Permil Program
Section 401 Certification and U;etlands
W ell and s and Runoff
Planning and Partnerships
W el I ands and Watersheds
W hal U a Stale Wetland Conservation Plan'.'
•\ii\ ance IdentificationlADlD,)
EPA n Ouueach Effort
I 'ari nersiii ps _wiih Landowners
Wetlands Acquisition...and Restoration .Funding.and Technical Assistance
Contacts for More Information
1 ,ii\uonmenial Piotecuon Agency Director}
Wetlands. Division homepage
Additional Questions? Call our Wetlands Hotline at 1-800-832-7828 or send e-mail to
\\ el land vhot I mc_(£epamai I.cpa.gov.
< >W (>W ! I ()\I I I" \(; I. I III' \ 11()MI. I SKARCHI COMMENTS I W11 VI S \1.\\
Knwronnuntal Protection Agency's Office of Wetlands, Oceans. Watersheds
URL hup //www cpa gtiv/owow/wetlands/conicnis.himl
Rcmsl-u M;i\ 25. I yyy
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW7vvetlands/contents.html
-------
Wetland Bioassessment Fact Sheets
PuiZC I o.
3 EPA
United ItatLs
Environmental Prcrtectioo Agency
United Slates
Environmental Protection
A«encv
Office of Water
Office of Wetlands. Oceans
and Watersheds (4502-F)
EPA84 3-F-48-00I
JuK !uys
Wetland Bioassessment Fact
Sheets
Bv:
Thomas J. Danielson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Wetlands Division (4502F)
401 M Street, SW
I
Washington, DC 20460
Table of Contents
Ac-know ledgements
I. Assessing Biological integrity of Surface Waters
2 Applications oLBiolqgical Assessments m Wetlands
3. Biological Assessment of Wetlands Workgroup (BAWW'G)
4 Wetland Bioassessment Projects
5 De\eloping an Index of Biological lntegni\
6. Wetland Biological Assessments and HGM Functional Assessment
7. Water Qualu\ Standards
S Evaluating Performance of Wetland Restoration
9. Involvement ot^Volunteers m Wetland Monitoring
l(). Glossary of Bioassessment Terms
These i.iei sheets are an outgrowth of the increasing interest among wetland and water tjualuv
proiessMiuls to develop sound methods that measure the biological condition of wetlands l would
particulaiK like to thank Jim Karr (University of Washington) for providing inspiration and many
helpiul suggestions throughout the development of these fact sheets and to Mark Brmson (East
Carolina l"n!\crsii\) and Dan Smith (U.S Army Corps of Engineers. Waterways Experiment Station)
lot writing and reviewing the HGM column m Fact Sheei . ] extend my heartfeh graiiiude to mv
colleagues at the L'.S EPA for their comments and support Doreen Vetter (Wetlands Division).
Susan Jackson (Office of Science and Technology). Chris Faulkner (Assessment and Watershed
Protection Division). Bill Sipple (Wetlands Division). Matt Wmen (Wetlands Division). Brett
http://www.epa gov/OWOW/wetlands/wqual/bio_fact/mdex html 01/20/2000
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
-------
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act: An Overview
U.S. Environmental 1'roiccuon -U;cnc\
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act: An Overview
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act establishes a program to regulate the discharge of dredged and
fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. Activities in waters of the United
States that are regulated under this program include fills for development. water resource projects
(such as dams and levees), infrastructure development (such as highways and airports), and
conversion of wetlands to uplands for farming and forestry.
What does Section 404 Require?
The basic premise of the program is that no discharge of dredged or fill materia) can he permitted if a
practicable alternative exists that is less damaging to the aquatic environment or if the nation s waters
would be significantly degraded. In other words, when you apply for a permit, you must show that
you have
• taken steps to avoid wetland impacts where practicable
• minimized potential impacts to wetlands
• provided compensation for any remaining, unavoidable impacts through activities to restore or
create wetlands.
Regulated activities are controlled by a permit review process. An individual permit is usually
required for potentially significant impacts. However, for most discharges that will have only
minimal adverse effects, the Army Corps of Engineers often grants up-front general permits These
may be issued on a nationwide, regional, or state basis for particular categories of activities (for
example, minor road crossings, utility line backfill, and bedding) as a means to expedite the
permitting process.
Section 404(f) exempts some activities from regulation undei Section 404 These activities include
many ongoing farming, ranching, and silviculture practices
Agencies' Responsibilities
Army Corps of Engineers
• administers the day-to-day program, including individual permit decisions and lurisdictional
determinations
• develops policy and guidance
• enforces Section 404 provisions.
Environmental Protection Agency
• develops and interprets environmental criteria used in evaluating permit applications
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/wetlands/wet 10.html
01/20/2000
-------
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act: An Overview
• determines scope of geographic jurisdiction
• approves and oversees State assumption
• identifies activities that are exempt
• reviews/comments on individual permit applications
• has authority to veto the Corps' permit decisions (Section 404[c])
• can elevate specific cases (Section 404[q])
• enforces Section 404 provisions.
Individual Permit Process Under the Clean Water Act Section
404
Who's Involved in Regulation?
EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jointly administer the program In addition, the U.S
Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and State resource agencies have
important advisory roles
A Federal permit is required to dis- charge dredged or fill material into wetlands and othei wateis ol
the United States The flow chart tells what the Corps does once it receives an individual permii
application
The 404 Individual Permit Process
Public notice
(issued hx the Corps within 15 daxs of receiving all permit information >
The public nonce describes the permit application, including the proposed ncmity. its location, and
potential environmental impacts The public notice invites comment.-, within a specified time
Comment period
( 15 - 30 days, depending on the proposed activitx)
The application and comments are reviewed bv the Corps and othei interested Fedeial and Slate
agencies. organizations, and individuals. The Corps determines whether an Environmental Impact
Statement is necessary
Public hearing
Citizens ma\ request that the Corps conduct a public hearing however, public hearings are not
normalh held
Permit evaluation
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/wetlands/wet 10.html
01/20/2000
-------
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act: An Overview
j-'aiic -1 u
The Corps evaluates the permit application based on the comments received, as well as its own
evaluation.
Environmental Assessment and Statement of Finding
The Statement of Finding, document, which explains how the permit decision was made, is available
to the public.
~Modified from Kathleen Rude, "Conservation: You Can Make a difference." Ducks Unlimited.
September/October 1990. 26-28.
\\_etl.ands_Division homepage
Additional Questions'/ Call our Wetlands Hotline at 1-800-832-7828 or send e-mail to
wc11 ands.ho111ne @ e pania]Lcpa.£0\.
25. 1999
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/wetlands/wet 10.html
01/20/2000
-------
Funding
1. Catalog of Federal Funding Sources for Watershed Protection
(Second Edition) Fact Sheet
2. SRF State Contacts
3. SRF Activity Update Fact Sheets
4. TEA-21: A Summary
5. TEA-21 and Clean Water
6. Financing Clean Water Action Plan Activities
-------
*8? EPA
Catalog of Federal Funding Sources for
Watershed Protection (Second Edition)
EPA 841-B-99-003
In January 2000, the
EPA Office of Water will
publish the Catalog of
Federal Funding
Sources for Watershed
Protection (Second
Edition), a guide
intended to inform
watershed partners of
federal monies that
might be available to fund a variety of
watershed protection projects. This version
of the Catalog updates EPA's Catalog of
Federal Funding Sources for Watershed
Protection printed in 1997 (EPA-841 -B-97-
008).
The Catalog contains a one-page fact
sheet for each of 69 funding sources that
indicates to the reader the type of projects
funded and eligibility requirements.
Contacts and Internet sites are provided
so the reader can obtain further
information. This Catalog lists federal
sources that provide monetary assistance
(grants, loans, cost sharing) and does not
present sources that offer only technical
assistance. In addition, this Catalog does
not contain information about small, site-
specific federal sources or non-federal
sources.
EPA's Office of Water plans to update the
Catalog periodically. Forms are available
in the back of the Catalog and on the
Internet for users to provide comments and
to submit information about additional
relevant programs.
The Office of Water presents the Catalog
through the Watershed Academy, an EPA
service that includes live and Internet-
based training opportunities, watershed
management facilitation services, and
preparation of a series of watershed-
related educational documents known as
"Information Transfer Series" documents.
The Catalog of Federal Funding Sources
for Watershed Protection, number 11 in
the series, will be available for download
in early 2000 from the Watershed
Academy Internet site:
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/
wacademy/
Once published, hard copies of the
document will be available free of charge
from the National Service Center for
Environmental Publications (NSCEP)
Phone: (513)489-8190
(800) 490-9198
Fax: (513)891-6685
Assessment and Watershed Protection Division
Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds
Office of Water
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20460
-------
STATE REVOLVING FUND
STATE CONTACTS
This list of State Revolving Fund Contacts is provided by the State Revolving Fund Program
(SRF). The list is sorted by EPA Region and State. For further information please contact:
State Revolving Fund Branch
401 M Street, SW (4204)
Washington, D.C. 20460
(202) 260-7359
(202) 260-1827 Fax
REGION I
CONNECTICUT
Robert Norwood
Department of Environmental
Protection
Bureau of Water Management
79 Elm Street
Hartford, CT 06106-5127
(860) 424-3746
(860) 424-4055 Fax
MAINE
Robert Lenna, Executive Directo
Maine Municipal Bond Bank
45 University Drive
P.O. Box 2268
Augusta, ME 04338-2268
(207) 622-9386
(207) 623-5359 Fax
MASSACHUSETTS
Edward Teague, Executive Director
Massachusetts Water Pollution
Abatement Trust
One Ashburton Place - 12th Floor
Boston, MA 02108
(617) 367-3900 EXT. 579
(617) 227-1773 Fax
New Hampshire
John R. Bush, Administrator
Wastewater Engineering Bureau
Department of Environmental
Services
P.O. Box 95, 6 Hazen Drive
Concord, NH 03301
(603) 271-2001
(603) 271-4128
RHODE ISLAND
Anthony B. Simeone, Executive Director
Rhode Island Clean Water
Finance Agency
235 Promenade Street - Suite 119
Providence, Rl 02908-5767
(401) 453-4430
(401) 453-4094 Fax
VERMONT
Larry Fitch, Director
Facilities Engineering Division
Department of Environmental
Conservation
Agency of Natural Resources
103 South Main Street
Old Cannery Building
Waterbury, VT 05671-0406
(802) 241-3742
(802) 244-4516 Fax
-------
REGION II
NEW JERSEY - Finance
David E. Barth, Director
Division of Financial Management and
General Services
New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection, CN 420
428 East State Street
Trenton, NJ 08625
(609) 292-9230
(609) 633-3727 Fax
Dirk Hofman, Executive Director
New Jersey Environ. Infrastructure
Trust, CN 440
3131 Princeton Pike, Bldg,#6
Suite 201, Trenton,. NJ 08625-0029
(609) 219-8600
(609) 219-8620 Fax
NEW JERSEY - Program
Nicholas Binder, P.E., P.P.
Assistant Director
Municipal Finance and Const. Element
New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection CN 425
401 E. State St., 3rd Floor
Trenton, NJ 08625
(609) 292-8961
(609) 633-8165 Fax
NEW YORK - Finance
-Terry Agriss, President
New York State Environmental Facilities
Corporation, 50 Wolf Road
Albany, NY 12233
(518) 457-4222
(518) 485-8773 Fax
Richard Randies, Director
Division of Mangm't. And Budget
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road
Albany, NY 12233
(518) 457-5317
(518) 457-7905 Fax
NEW YORK - Program
Robert E. Davis, Director
Division of Program Management
New York State Environmental Facilities
Corporation, 50 Wolf Road
Albany, NY 12233
(518) 457-4138
(518) 485-8773 Fax
PUERTO RICO - Finance
Lourdes Rovira, President
Government Development Bank/
Puerto Rico Infrastructure and
Financing Authority
P.O. Box 42001
San Juan, PR 00940-2001
(787) 728-6835
(787) 729-5949 Fax
PUERTO RICO - PROGRAM
Robert Ayala, Director
Puerto Rico Environ. Quality Board
P.O. Box 11488
Santurce, PR 00910
(787) 767-8181
(787) 767-1962 Fax
-------
REGION III
DELAWARE - Program & Finance
Alan Farling, Program Manager
Financial Assistance Branch
Division of Water Resources
Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control
5 East Reed St., Suite 200
Dover, DE 19903
(302) 739-5081
(302) 739-2137 Fax
MARYLAND - Finance
Steve Kraus, Director
Maryland Water Quality
Financing Administration
Department of the Environment
2500 Broening Highway
Baltimore, MD 21224
(410) 631-3117
(410) 631-3968 Fax
MARYLAND - Program
Virginia Kearney, Administrator
Water Quality Infrastructure Prog.
Water Managm't. Admin. Dept. of the
Environment
2500 Broening Highway
Baltimore, Maryland 21224
(410) 631-3574
(410) 631-3517 Fax
PENNSYLVANIA - Finance
Paul Marchetti, Executive Director
PENNVEST
22 S. Third Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
(717) 783-4496
(717) 787-0804 Fax
PENNSYLVANIA - Program
Peter Slack, Director
Municipal Financial Assistance Division
Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection
Rachel Carson State Office Building
P.O. Box 8467
Harrisburg, PA 17105-8467
(717) 772-4054
(717) 772-3249 Fax
VIRGINIA - Program
Don Wampler, Program Director
Construction Assistance Program
Department of Environmental Quality
629 East Main Street
Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 698-4132
(804) 698-4136 Fax
VIRGINIA-Finance
Charles Massie
Director of Revolving Funds
Virginia Resources Authority
Suite 707
909 E. Main Street
P.O. Box 1417
Richmond, VA 23218
(804) 644-3106
(804) 644-3109 Fax
WEST VIRGINIA - Program
Mike Johnson, Chief
Construction Assistance Branch
Office of Water Resources
Department of Environmental Protection
617 Broad Street
Charleston, WV 25301
(304) 558-0641
(304) 558-3778 Fax
-------
WEST VIRGINIA - Finance
Bernie Yonkosky, Director
Water Development Authority
180 Association Drive
Charleston, WV 25311
(304) 558-3612
(304) 558-0299 Fax
REGION IV
ALABAMA
Truman Green, Chief
Department of Environmental
Management
1751 Cong. Wm. Dickinson Dr.
Montgomery, AL 36130
(334) 271-7800
(334) 270-5612 Fax
FLORIDA
Don Berryhill, Chief
Florida Department of Environmental
Protection
Bureau of Local Government
Wastewater Financial Assistance 2600
Blair Stone Road
Twin Towers Office Building
Tallahassee, FL 32399
(904) 488-8163
(904) 487-3618 Fax
GEORGIA
Gregg Mason
Georgia Environmental Facilities
Authority, 2090 Equitable Building
100 Peachtree St., N.W.
Atlanta, GA 30303
(404) 656-3824
(404) 656-6416 Fax
KENTUCKY
Marilyn Eaton-Thomas
Kentucky Infrastructure Authority
Finance and Administration Cabinet
318 Capital Annex
Frankfort, KY 40601
(502) 564-2090
(502) 564-7416 Fax
MISSISSIPPI
Mark Smith, Chief
Mississippi Department of
Environmental
Quality
Bureau of Pollution Control
P.O. Box 10385
Jackson, MS 39289
(601)961-5171
(601) 354-6612 Fax
NORTH CAROLINA
John R. Blowe, Chief
Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Construction Grants Section
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, N.C. 27626
(919) 733-6900
(919) 733-9311 Fax
SOUTH CAROLINA
Jeffrey P. deBessonet, Director
Department of Health and
Environmental Control
Domestic Wastewater Division
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, S.C. 29201
(803) 734-5300
(803) 734-5216 Fax
-------
TENNESSEE
Ron Graham, Director
Division of Construction
Grants and Loans
Tennessee Department of Conservation
Eighth Floor, L&C Annex
401 Church Street
Nashville, TN 37243
(615) 532-0445
(615) 741-4608 Fax
REGION V
ILLINOIS
Ron Drainer, Chief
Infrastructure Financial Assistance
Section
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, IL 62706-9276
(217) 782-2027
(217) 782-9891 Fax
INDIANA
Erik Gonzales, Chief
State Revolving Fund Section
Indiana Department of Environmental
Management
100 North Senate
P.O. Box 6015
Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015
(317) 232-8655
(317) 232-8637 Fax
Barbara Lawrence, Program
Representative
State Budget Agency
One North Capital Avenue, #320
Indianapolis, IN 46204-2796
(317) 232-0759
(317) 232-6786 Fax
MICHIGAN
Thomas Kamppinen, Chief
Municipal Facilities Section
Environmental Assistance Division
Michigan Department of Environmental
Quality
P.O. Box 30457
Lansing, Ml 48909-7957
(517) 373-4718
(517) 373-0743 Fax
Janet Hunter-Moore
Michigan Municipal Bond Authority
Treasury Building
430 West Allegan Street
Lansing, Ml 48922
(517) 373-1728
(517) 335-2160 Fax
MINNESOTA
Terry Kuhlman, Executive Director
Public Facilities Authority
Department of Trade and Economic
Development
500 Metro Square
121 7th Place East
St. Paul, MN 55101-2146
(612) 296-4704
(612) 296-5287 Fax
Paul D. Burns, Assistant Director
Agriculture Development Division
Minnesota Department of Agriculture
90 West Plato Boulevard
St. Paul, MN 55107-2094
(612) 296-1488
(612) 297-7678 Fax
Laurie H. Martinson, Executive
Assistant Water Quality Division
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
520 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155-4194
(612) 296-7360
(612) 297-8683 Fax
-------
OHIO
Steven Grossman, Executive Director
Ohio Water Development Authority
Suite 1300
88 East Broad Street
Columbus, OH 43215-3516
(614) 466-5822
(614) 644-9964 Fax
Greg Smith, Director
Division of Environmental and Financial
Assistance
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 163669
Columbus, OH 43216-3669
(614) 644-3640
(614) 644-3680 Fax
WISCONSIN
Kathrvn Curtner, Director
Bureau of Community Financial
Assistance
Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources
P.O Box 7921
Madison. Wl 53707
(608) 266-0860
(608) 267-0496 Fax
Michael D. Wolff
Clean Water Program Administrator
Wisconsin Department of Administration
P.O. Box 7864
Madison. Wl 53707
(608) 267-2734
(608) 266-2164 Fax
REGION VI
ARKANSAS
Michael Chandler, Chief
Construction Assistance Division
Arkansas Department of Pollution
Control and Ecology
P.O. Box 8913
Little Rock. AR 72219-8913
(501)682-0546
(501) 682-0561 Fax
George Mackey
Arkansas Development Finance
Authority
P.O. Box 8023
Little Rock, AR 72203
(501) 682-5917
(501) 682-3350
LOUISIANA
William B. DeVille, Administrator
Municipal Facilities Division
Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality
P.O. Box 82215
Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2215
(504) 765-0810
(504) 765-0745 Fax
OKLAHOMA
Joe Freeman, Chief
Financial Assistance Division
Oklahoma Water Resources Board
3800 N. Classen Blvd.
Oklahoma City, OK 73118
(405) 530-8800
(405) 530-8900 Fax
NEW MEXICO
Haywood Martin, Chief
Construction Programs Bureau
New Mexico Environment Department
1190 St. Francis Drive
Santa Fe, NM 87503
(505)827-2797
(505) 827-2836 Fax
TEXAS
George Green, Director
Northern Project Management Division
Texas Water Development Board
P.O. Box 13231 - Capitol Station
Austin, TX 78711-3231
(512) 463-7853
(512) 475-2053 Fax
-------
REGION VII
REGION VIII
IOWA
Wayne Farrand, Supervisor
Wastewater Permits
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Henry A. Wallace Building
502 East 9th St.
Des Moines, IA 50319
(515) 281-8877
(515) 281-8895 Fax
KANSAS
Rod Geisler, Chief
Municipal Program Section
Kansas Department of Health &
Environment
J Street & 2 North, Building 283
Topeka, KS 66620-0110
(785) 296-5527
(785) 296-5509 Fax
MISSOURI
Steve Townley, Chief
Financial Services Section
Water Pollution Control Program
Missouri Department of Natural
Resources
Post Office Box 176
Jefferson City, MO 65102-0176
(573) 751-1397
(573) 751-9396 Fax
NEBRASKA
Rick Bay, Supervisor
Wastewater Facilities Section
Nebraska Department of Environmental
Quality
Suite 400, 1200 M Street, The Atrium
Post Office Box 98922
Lincoln, NE 68509-8922
(402) 471-4200
(402) 471-2909 Fax
COLORADO
Carl Norbeck, Unit Leader (WQCD-WS-
O&A)
Outreach and Assistance Unit
Water Quality Control Division
Colorado Department of Public Health
and Environment
4300 Cherry Creek Drive South
Denver, CO 80246-1530
(303) 692-3513
(303) 782-0390 Fax
Daniel L. Law, PE, Executive Director
Colorado Water Resources and Power
Development Authority
Logan Tower Building, Suite 620
1580 Logan Street
Denver, CO 80203
(303) 830-1530
(303) 832-8205 Fax
MONTANA
Todd Teegarden, PE, WPCSRF
Program Manager
Technical and Financial Assistance
Bureau
Montana Department of Environmental
Quality
P.O. Box 200901
Helena, MT 59620-0901
(406) 444-5324
(406) 444-6836 Fax
Anna Miller, Financial Advisor
Conservation and Resource
Development Division
Montana Department of Natural
Resources and Conservation
1625 11th Street, P.O. Box 201601
Helena, MT 59620-0601
(406) 444-6689
(406) 444-6721 Fax
-------
NORTH DAKOTA
Jeff Hauge, PE
Division of Municipal Facilities
North Dakota Department of Health
P.O. Box 5520
Bismark, ND 58505-5520
(701) 328-5220
(701) 328-5200 Fax
Tom Tudor, Esq.
Executive Director
North Dakota Municipal Bond Bank
418 East Broadway, Suite 246
Bismark, ND 58501
(701) 328-3981
(701) 328-3979 Fax
SOUTH DAKOTA
Jim Feeney, Office Administrator
Division of Financial and Technical
Assistance
South Dakota Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
Joe Foss Building, 523 East Capital
Pierre, SD 57501-3181
(605) 773-4216
(605) 773-4068 Fax
Lynn Chasing Hawk, Program Specialist
Division of Financial and Technical
Assistance
South Dakota department of
Environment and Natural Resources
Joe Foss Building, 523 East Capital
Pierre, SD 57501-3181
(605) 773-4583
(605) 773-4068 Fax
UTAH
Walt Baker, PE, Manager
Construction Assistance Section
Division of Water Quality
Utah Department of Environmental
Quality
288 North 1460 West
P.O. Box 144870
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4870
(801) 538-6088
(801) 538-6016 Fax
Nancy Hess, Grant and Loan
Coordinator
Construction Assistance Section
Division of Water Quality
Utah Department of Environmental
Quality
288 North 1460 West
P.O. Box 144870
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4870
(801) 538-6070
(801) 538-6016 Fax
WYOMING
Larry Robinson, Manager
SPO/SRF Programs
Water Quality Division
Wyoming Department of Environmental
Quality
Herschler Building, 122 West 25th
Street
Cheyenne, WY 82002-0600
(307) 777-7075
(307) 777-5973 Fax
Sharon Garland, Assistant Director
Accounting and Administration
Wyoming Lands and Investments
Herchler Building, 122 West 25th Street
Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002-0600 (307)
777-6644
(307) 777-5400 Fax
-------
REGION IX
ARIZONA
Greg Swartz, Director
Arizona Water Infrastructure Authority
3033 N. Central Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85012
(602) 207-4707
(602) 207-4888 Fax
CALIFORNIA
Eric Torguson
Division of Clean Water Programs
State Water Resources Control Board
P.O. Box 944214
Sacramento, CA 94244-2120
(916) 227-4449
(916) 227-4349 Fax
Bill Campbell (NPS Contact)
Division of Water Quality Programs
State Water Resources Control Board
P.O. Box 944213
Sacramento, CA 94244-2130
(916) 657-1043
(916) 657-2388 Fax
HAWAII
Dennis Tulang, P.E.
Chief, Wastewater Branch
Environmental Management Division
Hawaii Department of Health
919 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 309
Honolulu, HI 96814
(808) 586-4288
(808) 586-4370 Fax
NEVADA
James Williams, Jr., P.E.
Chief, Bureau of Water Pollution
Control
Nevada Devision of Environmental
Protection
333 W. Nye Lane
Carson City, NV 89706-0866
(702) 687-4670, ext3140
(702) 687-5856 Fax
REGION X
ALASKA
Mike Burns, Chief
Municipal Grants and Loans
Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation
410 Willoughby Avenue, Suite 105
Juneau, AK 99801-1795
(907) 465-5136
(907) 465-5177 Fax
E-mail: mburns@envircon.state.ak.us
IDAHO
Bill Jerrel
Division of Environmental Quality
Idaho Department of Health and
Welfare
1410 North Hilton. Statehouse Mail
Boise, ID 83720-9000
(208) 334-0400
(208) 334-0576 Fax
E-mail: wjerrel@deq.state.id.us
OREGON
Martin Loring
Wastewater Finance Section
Water Quality Division
Department of Environmental Quality
811 Southwest Sixth Avenue
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 229-5415
(503) 229-6037 Fax-
E-Mail: loring. martin. w@deq. state, or. us
WASHINGTON
Brian Howard
Water Quality Financial Assistance
Program
Washington Departmeni of Ecology
PO Box 47600
Olympia, WA 98504-7600
(360)407-6510
(360) 407-6574 Fax
E-mail: brho461@ecy.wa.gov
-------
Clean Water
State Revolving Fund
• •
ACTIVITY
UPDA TE
Ohio CWSRF Provides Loan
for Riparian Zone Conservation
The Nature
Conservancv used a
CWSRF loan to protect
385 acres along Ohio
Brush Creek, a
significant state-wide
water resource
Contact.
Bob Monsarrat
Ohio EPA
614-64-4-3655
The Nature Conservancy of Ohio
recently received three CWSRP loans
for nparjan zone conservation totaling
S264.000. The conservation organization
used the loan funds to protect 383 acres
along Ohio Brush Creek in Adams
County. Ohio - it purchased conservation
easements on 321 acres and purchased
another 62 acres outright. These
purchases have enabled The Nature
Conservancy to undertake restoration
efforts such as the planting of the riparian
corridor with hardwood trees for
streambank stabilization This was the
first time The Nature Conservancy
obtained financing from the CWSRF.
By Ohio EPA water quality standards, this
section of Ohio Brush Creek almost
achieves an exceptional warm-water
aquatic habitat classification. The creek
is a significant state-wide water resource
and is known to contain four endangered
aquatic species, including one mussel that
occurs in only 12 streams nationwide
"Conservation easements are an effective
wav to protect the quality of streams and
their adjacent areas." said Ohio EPA
Director Donald R. Schregardus.
"Restoring and preserving these riparian
areas is an important part of controlling
contaminated runoff that threatens water
quality and stream habitat "
These lands will also act as a buffer foi
the Edge of Appalachia Preserve, a series
of eleven nearly contiguous properties
owned and managed by The Nature
Conservancy and the Cincinnati Museum
Center The nearly 13.000-acre preserve
is the largest privately-owned protected
area in Ohio It is located at the edge of
the Appalachian plateau and contains one
of the most biolosicallv diverse
•lv. :T\ '
r*-£. f f \ .1
collections of natural systems m the
Midwestern United States. It provides
critical habitat for more than 100 rare
species of plants and animals
Land acquisition efforts in the preserve
have focused on consolidating land
holdings and linking critical areas in the
landscape in the interest of creating a more
functional preserve system The
conservation of these properties contributes
to that goal
These purchases with CWSRF funds were a
key part of a larger acquisition effort on
Ohio Brush Creek For example, on one
property. The Nature Conservancy used its
own resources to purchase land abutting the
river and a piece of upland forest but used
CWSRF funds to purchase a conservation
easement on the farmland that comprised
the remainder of the parcel
These loans from Ohio's Water Pollution
Loan Control Fund address nonpoint source
pollution and are consistent with the state's
Nonpoint Source Management Plan. The
loans to The Nature Conservancy carry an
interest rate of 3 2 percent and have a
repayment term of 5 years The loans will
be repaid by The Nature Conservancy with
funds from membership fees and from its
Wills and Bequeaths Program
-------
Clean Water
State Revolving Fund
ACTIVITY
Napa County "Living River Strategy
to Provide Flood Protection
In order to reconnect
the Napa River to its
flood plain and create
wetlands throughout
the area, Napa Count}'
will purchase
300 parcels of land
alon°; a G.9 mile
stretch of the river
Contact
Bill Campbell
Califomi:: SiaiL- Watcr
Resource*. Board
916-657-K)-;;-
The Napa Counts' Flood Control and
Water Conservation District and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have
designed a "living river strategy" to
protect Napa County from periodic
flooding As pan of this strategy to
reconnect the Napa River to its flood
plain, over 300 parcels of land will be
purchased along a 6 9 mile stretch of the
river S43 million dollars in funding will
come from state and federal grants, and
the remaining SI75 million will be shared
equally by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and the district The district's
share has been financed by the issuance of
sales tax supported bonds and the receipt
of a low-interest Clean Water State
Revolving Fund loan
At one time, the Napa River supported a
dense riparian forest, provided significant
wetland habitat alongside the river, and
included significant spawning areas foi
fish such as salmon and steelhead
However, the pressures of urbanization,
agriculture, and grazing have degraded
these habitats and the quality of the
natural environment around the river so
that the existing natural drainage system
provided by the Napa River and Napa
Creek is not sufficient to prevent
extensive periodic flooding and associated
property damage in the project area
Since 1862. more than 27 major floods
have plagued the Napa Valley, resulting in
significant loss of life and damage to
property Among the most damaging was
the flood of 1986 which caused more than
SI40 million in damage and led to the
evacuation of 7.000 residents. The 1995
flood damaeed an estimated 227
businesses and residences at a cost of over
S1 00 million
This project was designed b\ a coalition
that included members of 27 local
community organizations, the U S Army
Corps of Engineers. EPA Region IX. and
25 other federal, state and regional
environmental agencies The project is
designed to provide flood protection by
reconnecting the Napa River to its flood
plain and creating wetlands throughout the
area while maintaining fish and wildlife
habitat and retaining the characteristics of
the river
The project's "hung river strategy", based
on the natural processes and characteristics
of the river, tries to accomplish the
following geomorpluc goals to maintain
the natural slope, w ldth. and depth of the
river, to maintain and.-or restore the
connection of the river to its flood plain, to
allow the rivei to meander as much as
possible, to maintain channel features such
as mudflats, shallows, sandbars, and a
naturally uneven bottom, and to maintain a
continuous fish and riparian corridor along
the river.
-------
Clean Water
State Revolving Fund
ACTIVITY
UPDATE
Napa County "Living River" Project
Project features will include dike removal, !
channel modifications, biotechnical bank i
stabilization, a dry bypass channel,
limited set-back levees and floodwalls,
bridge relocations, pump stations, utility ;
relocations, building demolition. ¦
maintenance roads, and recreation trails. j
The county has received grant funding
from the State Department of
Transportation. State Coastal
Conservancy. State Lands Commission,
Federal Emergency Management Agency. ,
and the Federal Highway Administration.
The county will repay its bond obligations
with the proceeds of a half-cent sales tax.
which was approved by Napa County'
voters by more than a two-thirds majority
on March 3, 1998. The sales tax is
projected to generate over SI20 million m
1998 dollars over 20 years. All sales tax-
revenues in excess of bond debt service
requirements will be allocated to local
cities, towns, and unincorporated areas to
finance local watershed projects.
A one-half cent sales
tax will generate over
SI20 million over 2C
years for the
implementation of a
"living river strategv"
in the Napa River
watershed
-------
Clean Water
State Revolving Fund
ACTIVITY
UPDATE
California CWSRF Loans $8 Million
to The Nature Conservancy
The purchase of the
Howard Ranch protects
rare vernal pools
(springtime wetlands)
from the threat of
increased development
in one of California's
most rapidly-
growing areas.
Contact
Bill Campbell
California State Water
Resources Board
916-657-104?
The Nature Conservancy of California
recently received a CWSRF loan for
the purchase of 12.362 acres (19.3 square
miles) of ranchland in the Cosumnes
River Watershed in southeast Sacramento
County The purchase of the Howard
Ranch protects rare vernal pools
(springtime wetlands) from the threat of
increased development m one of
California's most rapidly-growing areas
The Nature Conservancy plans to resell
the land to a ranching company after
placing conservation easements on the
land that will assure minimal
development or disturbance to the
property m perpetuity.
The vernal pool communities found on
the Howard Ranch only occur west of the
Sierra Nevada They span from southern
Oregon to northern Mexico, occurring at
lower elevations in the Coast Range and
atop the clay soils of California's Central
Valley
These vernal pools host many rare
flowers, invertebrates and amphibians
adapted to extreme conditions - drought
and summer heat, floods and winter
freezes. Vernal pools also serve as
important staging grounds for migrator)
waterfowl.
During the past 150 years. California's
Central Valley has lost an estimated 75
percent of its vernal pools to land
leveling, farming, aggregate mining and
urban growth. If current growth
continues unchecked, the Central Valley
will lose half of its remaining vernal pool
!?>¦•-^-w
tV- ¦ -:f~ ""
I
- -+"\
acreage in the next 50 years. In the past
three vears. most of the property to the
south and west of the Howard Ranch has
been converted to vineyards using a
plowing process (deep ripping) that
destroys the vernal pools
The Nature Conservancy considers vernal
pool habitats to be the most vulnerable
natural communities in the Cosumnes River
Watershed Main other local and regional
planning efforts identify the protection of
venial pools m this watershed as a high
priority.
The vernai pools on the Howard Ranch
property are extraordinary for their
integrity, density, and diversity The
property is one of the last large contiguous
blocks of these natural communities that
remains undisturbed
Conservation goals for this property can be
achieved at the same time that much of it
continues to be used as ranchland The
Nature Conservancy intends to resell much
of the property to a ranching company,
subject to conservation easements held bv
-------
Clean Water
State Revolving Fund
ACTIVITY
UPDATE
California CWSRF Loan to The Nature Conservancy
WBBB
X£iai£££&
The Nature Conservancy and the Natural
Resources Conservation Service. The
easements will require the implementation
of restoration activities detailed m
management plans developed by those
two organizations.
Mike Eaton. Director of The Nature
Conservany's Cosumnes River Project,
said. "The Howard Ranch purchase., will
protect water quality, maintain a wildlife-
compatible agricultural enterprise, and
keep the land on the tax roll.... Everyone
wins.''
California's State Water Resources
Control Board provided SS million in
CWSRF funding as part of the SI 3.6
million project Additional public and
private grants came from a variety of
sources, including the Packard
Foundation, the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, the State Wildlife
Conservation Board, the North American
Wetlands Conservation Council, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Bureau
of Reclamation
This project is eligible for CWSRF
assistance because it is consistent with
both the California Nonpoint Source
Management Plan and the San Francisco
Bay/Delta Estuary Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plan .
The CWSRF loan carries a 2 2 percent
interest rate and has a repayment term of
10 years. The Nature Conservancy will
repay the loan with funds from the resale
of the land and its own resources
"The Howard Ranch
purchase... will
protect water qualit
maintain a
wildlife-compatible
agricultural enterpri
and keep the lane
the tax roll....
Everyone wins."
-Mike Eaton, The
Nature Conservanc
-------
Clean Water
State Revolving Fund
ACTIVITY
UP DA TE
Contact
Bob fvlonsarra;
Ohio EPA
614-64--3655
Ohio CWSRF Provides Loans for
Development Best Management Practices
CWSRF loans
have funded best
management
practices that
address potential
runoff from a
housing development
into a high quality
aquatic habitat
The Ohio Water Pollution Control Loan
Fund has provided over S 1.1 million in
loans to Hidden Creek. Ltd.. a housing
development company in West Jefferson.
Ohio. The CWSRF loans have funded a
wide variety of structural and non-structural
best management practices that protect Big
Darby Creek watershed, one of the highest
quality warm-water aquatic ecosystems in
the Nation.
The Big Darby Creek watershed is a
freshwater aquatic ecosystem encompassing
557 square miles in central Ohio It is
drained by Big Darby Creek.
Little Darby Creek, and a dozen smaller
Trioutaries The watershed is relativeK
free from pollution and is home to 86
species of fish. 40 species of freshwater
mussels. 170 species of birds. 35 species of
mammals. 35 species of reptiles and
amphibians, and at least 25 rare or
endangered plant species
The watershed has received national
attention as a National Scenic River, a U.S
Environmental Protection Agency
Ecological Risk Assessment Case Study, a
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Hydrologic Unit Area, a study area for the
United Stales Geological Survey, and one of
The Nature Conservancy's "Last Great
Places" in the western hemisphere
The property developed by Hidden Creek.
Ltd. was highly erodible agricultural land
A previous owner had planned to dc\ elop
the land as a golf course, w hich would have
had a negative impact on Little Darby
Creek When it was put up for sale and
development. Hidden Creek. Ltd designed a
housing project to demonstrate that
development can be both environmentally
sensitive and profitable.
1 -¦
A comprehensive set of actions were the
undertaken to address potential runoff from
housing development into Little Darby
Creek. These actions included the
construction-of sediment and stormwater
retention lakes, construction of grassed
waterways for stormwater treatment,
restoration of the wooded stream corridor,
and the establishment of emergent wetland
habitat. Furthermore. 230 acres of the
riparian stream corridor and adjacent
wetlands within the development have been
protected via a conservation easement held
by the Natural Resources Conservation
Service A program has been developed to
educate homeowners and housing
contractors about watershed protection and
related deed restrictions attached to each
properly
Hidden Creek. Ltd received a national
wetland award for land stewardship and
development from the Environmental Law
Institute for this work to protect the
watershed
These loans from Ohio's Water Pollution
Loan Control Fund address nonpoint source
pollution and are consistent with the state's
Nonpoint Source Management Plan. They
carry an interest rate of 3 2 percent and have
a repayment term of 5 years. Hidden Creek
has repaid the loans with revenues from the
sale of the housing lots.
-------
Clean Water
State Revolving Fund
ACTIVITY
UPDATE
New York City Applies for $27 Million
CWSRF Loan for Watershed Land Acquisition
New York Cit\' is
acquiring land and
conservation easements
and providing financial
support for BMPs as an
alternative approach to
ensuring the safety of
its drinking water
Contact
Da\ id GeisniL'er
New ^lork En\i:onm-jr.;al
facilities Ccirwr.r. ior.
51 ^15 7 - 3 S 3
The citv of New York has set aside
S260 million for land acquisition and
conservation easements in high priority
areas to protect its Delaware/'Catskill
water supply. It has applied for S27
million in the form of low interest
CWSRF loans The City is acquiring
land and conservation easements and
providing financial support for BMPs as
an alternative approach to ensuring the
safety of us drinking water The City
hopes that this project will result in
compliance with the surface water
treatment rule without employing a more
costly filtration option This alternative
will provide both environmental benefits
(e g.. water quality improvements, open
space and habitat protection) and
economic benefits In this approach, the
City will spend S i billion over the next
10 years, instead of S5-S billion for the
construction of a new filtration plant
After five years. EPA will conduct a final
filtration avoidance determination to
evaluate whether this approach will work
for the long term
In 1995. New York City, the Governor
and upstate communities created a
partnership to reduce pollutants in the
Catskills watershed The\ signed a
Memorandum of Agreement in 199"? that
included land acquisition, new watershed
regulations, development of a watershed
protection partnership council, and
funding for upstate communities to
implement pollution reduction activities
New York City is still designing a
filtration plant for the Catskill/Delaware
system in case the filtration avoidance
process does not work
Drinking water for New York City is
provided by the Croton. Catskill and
NEW YORK crrv
WATER 5UPPLY SYSTEM /
Delaware watersheds and supplies nine
million people—half of the stale's
population These watersheds cover 2000
square miles and 19 reservoirs and suppK
the citv with 1.6 billion gallons of water per
da\ In these watersheds. New York City
owns 7 percent of the watershed lands and
the state of New York owns another 20
percent 355.000 of the 1.2 million acres m
the watershed have been determined
priority areas and eligible for acquisition
These priority areas are adiacent to
reservoirs and maior tributaries m the
system 6.000 acres have been purchased
and other lands are under contract
These loans would address nonpomt source
pollution and are consistent with the New-
York's Nonpomt Source Management Plan
-------
Clean Water
State Revolving Fund
• •
ACTIVITY
UPDATE
New York CWSRF Makes $75 Million
Land Acquisition Loan in Pine Barrens
Suffolk County has
borrowed S75 million
from the New York
CWSRF to protect land
in the main recharge
zone for its drinking
water supply
Contact
David Geisinger
Ne\>. York Environmental
Facilities Corpoi anon
51 S—15 7-3 S3 3
The New York Clean Water State
Revolving Fund made a loan of S75
million for land acquisition in the Pine
Barrens Wilderness and Water Protection
Preserve on Long island. The acquisition
is part of a larger plan by state, local and
private organizations to protect the main
recharge zone for Suffolk County's
drinking water supply. This system is the
sole source aquifer for 2.6 million people
The Pine Barrens is a valuable natural
resource because its sandy, porous soil
readily absorbs precipitation, acting as a
recharge area for the underground water
supply The water is purified as it passes
through layers of soil until it reaches the
underground water stored in the aquifer
system. This characteristic of the porous
soil also creates an added risk from
leaking septic tank effluent reaching the
aquifer untreated
Road paving, housing and commercial
development are disrupting this natural
process by vastly reducing the rate at
which water is being recharged in the
underlying aquifer At the same time,
water continues to be withdrawn at an
increasing rate as the population and
commercial/industrial activity increases
In coastal areas, when withdrawal
increases and recharge cannot keep up
with it. salt water intrusion results A
second impact of increased development
on the porous soils of the Pine Barrens is
that septic tank effluent can reach the
aquifer relatively untreated
In addition, because development lowers
the absorption rate, more of the
precipitation becomes runoff Runoff
becomes contaminated by oils, animal
feces, and garbage as it passes over less
permeable land and road surfaces before it
enters Long Island Sound. Great South Bay,
Peconic Bay or the Atlantic Ocean
The Long Island Pine Barrens aquifers are
so precious thai m 1993 a referendum was
passed to preserve 100,000 acres of the
Pine Barrens as the third largest state park
The Pine Barrens hosts the greatest
diversity of plants and animals in New
York State, including a number of
endangered or threatened species.
As part of a statewide partnership to protect
the Pine Barrens. New York's CWSRF has
made a loan of S75 million to Suffolk
County to acquire land m priority aquifer
recharge areas. The loan addresses
nonpoint source pollution and is consistent
with the New York's Nonpoint Source
Management Plan The loan is guaranteed
by a General Obligation pledge from the
countv
-------
Clean Water
State Revolving Fund
• fc
ACTIVITY
UP DA TE
Ohio CWSRF Provides Loans to
Brownfield Remediation Projects
Ohio has funded
S8.8 million in
brownfield remediation
projects that provide
water quality benefits
to surface water or
groundwater
Coniaci
Das id Reiff
Ohio EPA
614-644-3646
Since its inception in December 1996.
Ohio's Voluntary Action Program
(VAP) has used SS.8 million m CWSRF
loans to support brownfields remediation.
The VAP encourages the reuse of
brownfield sites by specifying cleanup
standards and releasing owners of sites
from further liability when standards are
met. The state has encouraged
participation in the VAP and the
improvement of Ohio's water resources
by offering CWSRF low-interest loans to
projects that will result in water quality
benefits to surface water or groundwater.
Ohio's industrial heritage has left the state
with a legacy of contaminated land that,
prior to the creation of the Voluntary
Action Program, sat idle for fear of
liability and high cleanup costs CWSRF
loans, as part of the Voluntary Action
Program, provide an incentive to
overcome the barriers to redeveloping
commercial land Development is
directed to underutilized commercial land
instead of open spaces
Ohio has provided CWSRF loans to
twelve brownfield remediation projects
Eight loans, for SS.5 million, have funded
actual cleanup activities Four loans for
S320.000 have funded Phase II
assessment activities (sue tests to confirm
the location and identity of environmental
hazards). Phase 1 assessment activities
(historical record searches) are also
eligible for funding.
In one example. Barberton Laundrv and
Cleaning, a small company in Barberton.
Ohio, received CWSRF financing to
undertake Phase II site assessment work.
Soil and groundwater sampling
determined the extent of existing
contamination and the scope of remedial
activities needed to prepare the site for
reuse The loan recipient will use a
revenue stream from accounts receivable
to repav the loan, Inventor) and cash
provide additional collateral. Private
lenders were unwilling !o finance this
assessment work
In another example, the Grant Realty
Company received CWSRF financing for
the cleanup of a 20-acre industrial site m
Cleveland to prepare the site for industrial
reuse Contaminated soil and groundwater
were remediated using vapor extraction and
dual phase vacuum extraction technologies.
Grant Realty will use income from a tank
cleaning operation to repav- the loan, and
personal loan guarantees and a second
position mortgage will provide additional
collateral
These loans from Ohio's Water Pollution
Loan Control Fund address nonpomt source
pollution and aie consistent with the state's
Nonpoint Source Management Plan
Brownfield water quality loans are offered
for five years with an interest rate of 3 2
percent 20-year loans are offered at a rate
indexed 1.25 percentage points below the
20-year GO bond market rate Other terms
and conditions can be negotiated based
upon the specific project and the recipient's
needs
-------
TEA-21 - A Summary . Protecting Our Environment
wysiwyg://6/http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/iea2 l/sumen\ u.nt;
TEA-21 - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
Moving Americans into the 21st Century
TEA-21 Home | DOT Home | Previous | Summary Contents | Next
A SUMMARY - Protecting Our Environment
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement program, continued in TEA-21 at a total authorized
funding level of S8.1 billion for the 6 years of the Act, provides a flexible funding source to State and local
governments for transportation projects and programs to help meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act. Eligible
activities include transit improvements, travel demand management strategies, traffic flow improvements, and
public fleet conversions to cleaner fuels, among others. Funding is available for areas that do not meet the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (nonattainment areas), as well as former nonattainment areas that are now
in compliance (maintenance areas). Under ISTEA, only nonattainment areas were included in the funding formula.
Funds are distributed to States based on a formula that considers an area's population by county and the seventy
of its air quality problems within the nonattainment or maintenance area. Further, greater weight is given to carbon
monoxide nonattainment and maintenance areas.
A State may transfer up to 50 percent of its increase in CMAQ funds compared to what it would have received if
the CMAQ program were funded at S1 35 billion per year nationwide. The funds may be transferred to other
Federal-aid programs, but can be used only for projects located in nonattainment and maintenance areas.
Transportation Enhancements (TE)
Transportation enhancement activities continue to be funded througn a 10 percent setaside from STP funds. In
order to maximize the use of available TE funding, TEA-21 provides innovative financing alternatives for meeting
matching requirements. The list of activities eligible for transportation enhancement funds is expanded, but all
projects must relate to surface transportation Newly eligible are safety education activities for pedestrians and
bicyclists, establishment of transportation museums, and projects to reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality
Provision of tourist and welcome center facilities is specifically included under the already eligible activity "scenic
or historic highway programs." In addition, 1 percent of the transit urbanized area formula funds distributed to
areas with populations greater than 200,000 must be used for transit enhancement projects specified in the Act
TEA-21 allows a State to transfer some of its TE funds to other programs The maximum amount that may be
transferred is up to 25 percent of the difference between the State's current year TE setaside and the State's FY
1997 TE setaside
Bicycle Transportation and Pedestrian Walkways
TEA-21 continues and expands provisions to improve facilities and safety for bicycles and pedestrians The
ehgiDility of NHS funds is broadened to include pedestrian walkways, and safety and educational activities are now
eligible for TE funds Other changes ensure the consideration of bicyclists and pedestrians in the planning process
and facility design
Recreational Trails Program
A total of S270 million in contract authority is authorized for FYs 1998-2003 to provide and maintain recreational
trails. States must establish a State recreational trails advisory committee that represents both motorized and
nonmotorized recreational trail users. Of funds distributed to a State, 30 percent must be used for motorized use,
30 percent must be used for nonmotorized use, and 40 percent must be used for diverse trail uses (any
combination—the diverse category may overlap with the others) The Federal share is raised to 80 percent (from
50 percent), and Federal agency project sponsors or other Federal programs may provide additional Federal
share up to 95 percent. Soft match provisions are allowed, including soft matches from public agencies The
National Recreational Trails Advisory Committee is reactivated until the end of FY 2000
1 of 3
12/29/99 4:20
-------
TEA-21 - A Summary - Protecting Our Environment
wysiwyg://6/http://www.ftiwa.dot.gov/tea21/sumenvir
National Scenic Byways Program
TEA-21 authorizes a total of S148 million for technical assistance and grants to States for the purposes of
developing scenic byway programs and undertaking related projects along roads designated as National Scenic
Byways, All-American Roads, or as State Scenic Byways.
Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot
The Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot program is a comprehensive initiative of
research and grants to investigate the relationships between transportation and community and system
preservation and private sector-based initiatives. States, local governments, and metropolitan planning
organizations are eligible for discretionary grants to plan and implement strategies that improve the efficiency of .
the transportation system; reduce environmental impacts of transportation; reduce the need for costly future public
infrastructure investments; ensure efficient access to jobs, services, and centers of trade; and examine private
sector development patterns and investments that support these goals. A total of $120 million is authorized for this
program for FYs 1999-2003.
Planning
The core metropolitan and statewide transportation planning requirements remain intact under TEA-21,
emphasizing the role of State and local officials, in cooperation with transit operators, in tailoring the planning
process to meet metropolitan and State transportation needs
Continuing at both the metropolitan and statewide level are provisions concerning fiscal constraint, planning
horizon, and public involvement, with modification to the list of named stakeholder groups to add freight shippers
and public transit users. Current MPOs remain in effect unless redesignated, and retain responsibility for adopting
the metropolitan transportation plan.
Metropolitan transportation planning funding remains a 1 percent takedown from certain authorized programs in
Title 23 and in Title 49 has changed to specific funding levels. Funding for State Planning and Research supported
activities remains a 2 percent setaside of certain apportionments in Title 23 and in Title 49 has changed to specific
funding levels
The key change in the new legislation is the consolidation of 16 metropolitan and 23 statewide planning "factors"
into seven broad "areas" to be considered in the planning process, both at the metropolitan and statewide level A
new section exempts plans, transportation improvement plans, project or strategy, and certification actions from
legal review for failure to consider any one of the "areas " The growing importance of operating and managing the
transportation system is recognized as a focal point for transportation planning.
Metropolitan planning area boundaries may be maintained as they currently reflect nonattainment areas, at the
existing limits on the date of enactment, or they may be extended to reflect increases in nonattainment area
bounaaries at the discretion of the Governor and the MPO For new MPOs, the boundaries will reflect the
nonattainment area boundaries based on agreements between the Governor and local officials
Other changes are included to further ensure the involvement of local officials, especially local officials in
nonmetropolitan areas, strengthen the financial aspects of the planning process, and improve coordination,
cooperation, and public involvement. MPOs and States will be encouraged to coordinate the design and delivery of
federally funded non-emergency transportation services The requirement for a stand-alone major investment
study is replaced with a directive that such analyses under the planning provisions of TEA-21 and the National
Environmental Policy Act are to be integrated.
Streamlining
The Secretary will establish a coordinated environmental review process for the DOT to work with other Federal
agencies in ensuring that major highway and transit projects are advanced according to cooperatively determined
time frames. The coordinated process will use concurrent, rather than sequential, reviews. It will allow States to
2 of 3
12/29/99 4:20 I
-------
TEA-21 - A Summary - Protecting Our Environment
wysiwyg://6/http7/www.fhwa doi.gov/tea21/Sumenvir nr
include their environmental reviews in the coordinated environmental review process. The Act also authorizes the
Secretary to approve State requests to provide funding to affected Federal agencies in order to meet established
time limits. If the Secretary finds that a project-related environmental issue has not been resolved with another
Federal agency, the heads of the two agencies will meet within 30 days (of the Secretary's finding) in oraer to
resolve the issue.
Ozone and Particulate Matter Standards
New and revised National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone and particulate matter (PM) were
promulgated in July 1997. Included in the PM NAAQS were new standards for PM2.5—fine particles less than 2.5
microns. TEA-21 ensures the establishment of the new monitoring network for PM2.5 and, within appropriated
totals unaer the Clean Air Act, requires the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to provide
financial support to the States for 100 percent of the cost of establishing and operating the network.
The Act also codifies the timetables for designating areas regarding whether they are attaining the new PM2.5
NAAQS and the revised ozone NAAQS The EPA is to issue final designations for ozone areas in July 2000. and
for PM2.5 areas the earlier of 4 years after the State receives PM2.5 monitoring data or December 31, 2005 The
EPA Administrator is also required to submit to Congress a field study of the PM2.5 Federal Reference Method
within 2 years TEA-21 requires EPA to harmonize the schedules for State submissions of regional haze and
PM2.5 air quality plans.
This page last modified on July 14, 1998
TEA-21 Home | DOT Home | Previous | Summary Contents | Next
United States Department of Transportation
3 of 3
12/29/99 4.20
-------
L'nucd Siaie^ Office ni Water El1 C
Emironmenial Protection i-J5U 1 F) M.ire'" lou"
Agenc>
TEA-21 AND CLEAN WATER
T A pi AT IS TEA-21?
IrV The Transponation Equit\ Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) authorizes ov er S200 billion in im-
prove the Nation's transponation infrastructure, enhance economic growth and proieci the emironmeni.
TEA-21 creates new opportunities to improve air and w aier qualnv. restore wetlands and natural habitat, and
rejuvenate urban areas through transportation redevelopment, increased transit and sustainable alternatives
to urban sprawl. Several provisions of TEA-21 create new opportunities for water qualnv improv emeni.v
The followine describes how these TEA-21 pro\ ision< work and their potential to fund water qualnv en-
hancements.
HOW DOES TEA-21 FUNDING WORK?
Transportation protect planning and funding processes are locallv and State-driven As pan nl in long-term
transponation plan, each State and metropolitan area dev elops transponation impro\ ement program^ (TIPs).
which prioritize proiects and funding Onlv projects in an approv ed TIP are eligible tor Federal funding.
Throuah additions to boili the Surface Transponation Program (STP) and the National Highway S\stem
(NHS). TEA-21 creates fle\ibilit\ to fund en\ ironmental enhancement opponunmes
In TE A-21. l(r; of STP funds (S3.3 billion over si\ years) are set-aside lor transponation enhancements
(TEsi A wide arras of em ironmental and water quality improv ement proiects are eligible tor TE funding,
including pollution abatement and mitigation proiects TEA-21 also pro\ ides that up to 20r' of the cost ol a
transponation facilnv reconstruction, rehabilitation, resurfacing or restoration project under STP mav be used
lor env ironmental mitigation, pollution abatement or construction of storm water treatment svstems This
equate^ to Sb 7 billion in potential STP funding over six years In addition, states may use STP and NHS
funds for wetlands projects designed to offset impacts from past transponation proiects Depending on
specific program requirements, bnth TE and
Washington State's Watershed Approach
restoration protects arc cost-shared between
Federal and Non-Federal sponsors, w uh an is(l',
Federal share.
WHAT WATER RESOURCE
EHANCEMENT PROJECTS CAN
TEA-21 HELP Ft 1ND? TEA-21 creates
funding opportunities tor a w ide v anetv of
watei qualnv enhancement projects and
contains additional water-related en\ ironmen-
tal and planning pro\ isions The follow ing are
the ke\ water-related provisions
Transportation Enhancements (TEs)'
Funded through a 10r<- set-aside ol STP tunds.
TEs are proiects that improve communities' cul-
tural. aesthetic and environmental qualities. Eli-
gible activities include, for example, bicvcle and
pedestrian pathways, historic preservation, ac-
quisition of conservation or scenic easements,
rails-to-trails proiects. and the mitigation ot wa-
ter pollution due to highw av runofl
The Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) is working to integrate
consideration of water quality, habitat,
endangered species and other natural resource
concerns into early transportation decision
making. A Department of Ecology specialist
has been brought on board to ensure wetlands
and other water quality concerns are properly
addressed at the outset. WSDOT is seeking
funding under the new streamlining provisions
in TEA-21 to staff positions in various resource
agencies to help expedite salmon recovery
efforts, habitat enhancement, endangered
species bioassessments, and transportation
improvement projects In the Snohomish Basin,
WSDOT is targeting mitigation dollars to
environmentally beneficial projects. Successes
include the reopening of shellfish beds and the
creation of fish passages for native coho salmon.
For more information contact Jerry Alb, Director
of Environmental Services, at 360-705-7450.
-------
Environmental Restoration and Pollution Abatement:
Under STP. up to 209r of thecosi of reconstructing, rehabili-
tating. resurfacing or restoring a transportation facility may
be used to address w atcr pollution or environmental degrada-
tion associated with current or past projects This could in-
clude retrofit or construction of storm water treaimeni sys-
tems. nonpoint source best management practices, and ripar-
ian or wetland restoration projects
Wetlands Restoration STP and NHS funds can be
used to help address w etlands losses caused by pasi Federal-
aid transportation projects In a February 18. 1W7 memo
trom us chief"counsel, the Federal Highway Administration
indicated that sev eral pro\ isions within Title 23. United States
Code, allow states to use funds to "improve or restore wet-
lands that w ere affected by past Federal-aid highw ay projects,
even if there is no current Federal-aid proiect taking place in
that v icinitv
Environmental Streamlining: TEA-21 requires that
Federal Agencies w ork together to streamline env ironmental
rev lew of transportation proiects Currently. projects should be designed to address env ironment Jimpacts up-front
Streamlining w ill speed up re\ lews under the National Env ironniental Policy Act and other environmental assessments,
including wetlands and storm water permits The goal of this pro\ lsion is 10 integrate tne re\ iew process and allow
Slate and Federal Agencies to better address important considerations such as analysis o! aliernai'ves and cumulative
env ironniental impacts ol transportation protects
Transportation &- Community &¦ System Preservation Pilot T us SI 2d million pilot encourages States,
metropolitan planning organizations and local agencies to plan develop and implement strategies that integrate trans-
portation and community planning
Transportation-Environment Cooperative Research Program: This pmvision will fund research
into the relationship between highway density and ecosystem integrity li also requires the
esiahlishmeni of an Advisory Board that will make recommendations about en\ ironniental
research, conservation and technology tr Ulster
Clean Vessel Act- TEA-21 continues State gram funding lor the construction oi pumpout and
dump station facilities m marinas States submit proposals to build these facilities m both coastal and
inland waters, and an interagency panel selects proposals littering the greatest benefit to lac intended
waterway anil the general public
Metropolitan and State-Wide Planning. ""Protect and enhance the environment" is one ol seven
^ broad categories State DOT's and Metropolitan Plann ng Organisations musi considei ir preparing long-term
transponation plans Tins presents an opportunity to look at "sprawl" and to integrate Consideration of water-
shed plans, wetlands, habitat and open space
WHERE CAN I GET MORE INFORMATION?
V)u mav obtain more lnlormation about TEA-21 protects in your area by contacting your State Department of Trans-
portation or the Federal Highway Administration Division Office in vour State >ou can aWo contact the following
EPA Offices. Nonpoint Source Branch (202) 260-7040. Stormuatcr'NPDES Permits Branch (202) 2bO-9541.
Wetlands (202) 260-77ci|. Coastal Protection Branch (202) 260-1V52
Also visit http:!iwww.epa.govlowowltea'
-------
Restoring &
' l*roUctirtg
America's Waters
CI.EAN WATKR
ACTION PL.AN
&
LLI
2
IXI
CO
£
LU
§
<&
S
LU
UUI
<0
s
LU
£
LU
e&
Funding Sources
CWSKI" loans
~ IV 98 -SI 350
~ IY'99-SI 3511
60-1 (b) Giants
~ /-V98-JM3M
~ IY '99 - SI4.2M
DWSKT loans
~ IY '98 - S725M
~_ I Y '99 - S775M
DWSKI Set asides
~ lip to 31% of Cap Grant
319 Grants
~ IY '98 - SKI5M
~ l-'Y '99 - S200M
NLI'/Coaslal Watershed Grants
~ l-'Y'98 - S12 3M
~ FY '99 - SI2 3M list
106 Grants
~ I Y '98 - $95 5M
~ I Y '99 - SI I 5M
I'WSS Grants
~ I'Y '98 - $93 8M
~ I Y '99 - $93 8M list
Denotes page numbers of Key Topics as they appear in the Clean Water Action Plan, 1998
Current funding Souice
Potential funding Source
I'lujic rluccl questions am/ cumtiiftits to
Kinliti K't'/i.ii/iu at the CU'SRF Btdiich, El'A
'Clean Waler
State Revolving Fund
-------
g
LU
Cfc
( WSKI 1 ojnb
~ 1 Y 98 ¦ il 3511
~ 1 Y '99 - il 3511
I
111
i£
LU
<)U'l (1>) < ujtits
~ l'Y'98-iUJM
~ rvw-jniM
604 (l>) Grants (Water Quality Management Planning) : Provides grants to slates and water quality management agencies for water quality planning activities such as modeling,
projections, assessments, peiforming 1 MI)1 s, basin management plans, etc Eligible regional public comprehensive planning agencies (UCP( )'s) and Interstate Organizations (lO's) are
d.iectly allocated 40% of the funds
2£
LU
DWSKI l.oaiii
~ 1 Y '98 - S725M
~ 1 Y '99 S775M
M
::
§
DWSKI Scl-abukb
~ (/p to 31% uf Cup tjiaiil
Drinking Water Slate Revolving Fund Set-asides. Up to 3 1% of the DWSKI- capitalisation grant may be used for set aside activities including loans fur the acquisition of land or easements
/or source water protection or for iinplementalion of source water protection measures, or direct assistance for wellhead protection piograms
S:
ULI
JI9 (iianls
~ 1 Y '98 - S105M
~ 1 Y '99 - $20UM
|:
LU
Nl'.IVCoaslal Walciblied (iranls
~ IY'98-$I2 3M
~ 1 Y'99-$l2 3MLbl
NliP/Cuastai Watershed Grants (National listuary Program): Primarily provides granls to estuaries designated as nationally significant by the LPA Administrator to improve water quality
and piotect and restore coastal resources through the development of Compiehensive Conservation and Management Plans These plans characterize problems in estuaries, determine
relationships between pollutant loading and impacts, and recommend solutions Also supports training, information transfer, and technical assistance for oilier prionty coastal wateisheds
£
LU
«d
106 (il Jills
~ rY '98 - 195 5M
~ i'Y 99 - $1 ISM
f-
&
I
§
<0
I'WSS Giants
~ I Y '98 - $93 8M
~ I'Y '99 - $93 8M I bl
Public Water System Supervision Grants: Provides grants to stale .ind tubal agencies foi maintenance ot primary enlorcenient programs to ensure public water system compliance with Sale
Drinking Water Act (SDWA) requirements Eligible projects include inventory of drinking water systems, technical assistance, sanitary surveys, data management, laboratory ceriiiicaliun,
enforcement, and emeigency planning
-------
l>enoies page numbers of Key Topics as fhey appear in the Clejn Wafer Action Plan, 1998
Cuncut funding source
Potential funding souue
I'ledse ditect questluiis and comments iu
Knstin Ki'ii.tusts iit the CWSRh Utunch El'A
'Clean Water
State Revolving FiuuJ
-------
£
LU
<0
g
LU
<0
2
Ul
hcsaj>c«jkc Hay 1'iograin
~ KY '98 - S17 8M
~ hV'W.$l7MEii
I ucntJ'10" vvalcr i|ud'"> monitoring, educanon. outiiMcli.
Chesapeake Bay Program. 1'iuvidcs grams to Male and local governments and nonprofit onjmn/fltions 'o( nofifW"' funds ^ u"°cd,tr^ formula grants of 50/30/j0/l0,o M i A.
restoration and program suppoit in the Chesapeake lia> llasin (Mai)land, Penns>lvnua. Virginia. and DistiM oft u ,in i^onirnltieci compeliiivc budget pniccss
VA. Ml) and IX" tcspechvely In addition, Sidles may be eligible for competitive projcvi funding through ibe piogt«u"
( onservatmn Kescivc Program
~ FY '98 - J I 797U
~ FY '99 - SI 694IJ Lsl
j establish proictliNC covering on ciopland and marginal paslurcland
,'"7 . | H,, uibei envnonmcntally sensitive land Hie program
I he land must be owned or operated by the applicant for at least 12 months, enrolled in the Waier Hank I'logram lJI )• Li"
piovides annual lental payment for up to 50%, nol u> exceed J50.000, of ihe cost of establishing land cover
[Resource Cons & Dev Progiajti
~ 1 Y 98 - SUM
~ IY99-S35M
Kcsonue Conservation & Development Program Ptuvides technical assistance foi planning and installation of approved projects in KL4.0 area plans, for hind ionscr\ adon, walci
management, community development, and environmental enhancement Not a grant program, individuals woik with local K( A.D t- ouncils lo lind funding
WWl) (irants & l^oans
~ 98 -1)1 J734M. (1I.S75M. (i(47t>M
~ '99 -1)1 S709M, (J1.S75M, (iS504M
1 Water anil Waste Disposal Systems Provides dncci loans (1)1 ). guaranteed loam (C»L), and grants (G) to public enliitcs, non-profit organizations and federally iccogm/ed Indian tribes in
rural areas lor water, sewer, and stormwater projects \ unds ma> be used for the installation, repair, improvement, and expansion of rural water and waste disposal facilities
1*9^8
-------
t"j: +t(8 - S30M
~ I V '99 - $2UM
Watershed Surveys A Planning
~ TV '9!! - $11 2M
~ I V '09 - SIO 4M
Abandoned Mine Reclamation
~ IY'9R-$M2 3M
~ [:Y'99-SU.S 3M
Water Resources on Indian l.and*;
~ l"Y '9R - S9 RM
~ I'Y '99 - SI 3 4M list
Coastal Zone Mgmt Awards
~ I Y '98 • $'19 7M
~ I'Y '99 - S55 7M Est
P.IJA PW & Infrastructure Grants
~ IV98-SI78M l&SSSJii
~ I'Y'99 - S160 2 M Est
Community l)ev Hlock Grants
~ I Y 98 - U 213
~ TY '99 - 213
Appalachian Regional Grants
~ I'Y '98 - S35M
~ l"Y '99 - $37M Est
Denotes page numbets of Key I opics as they appear in the Clean Water Action Plan, 1998
• Current funding source
O Potential funding source
Please direct questions and comments to
Kristin Kctmirsls ,it the CWSRF Hinnrh ll'A
'Clenn Wntor
o Inp, I inul
-------
mm
Watershed Surveys A Planning
~ FY '98 - SI I 2M
~ I'Y *99 - SIO 4M
Wafer Resources on Indian l.nnds
~ TV '98 - $9 8N1
~ FY '99 - SI3 4M Fst
Watershed Surveys & Planning- Provides planning assistance to federal, state and local agencies for the development of coordinated water program*; and rclnlcd land
resources in watersheds and river basins Priority is given to solving problems of agricultural nonpoint sources, wetland preservation, and floodplatn management
Water Resources on Indian Lands: Provides grants to assist federally lecognized Indian tribes in the manngement, planning and development of water and related Imtd
resources
rg\
V
FDA PW & Infrastructure Grants
~ FY "98 - $ I 78M
~ FY '99 - S160 2M Lst
Fconomlr Development Administration, Public Work* and Development Facilities Provides matching grants to public, tribal and non-profit cnfrlic: to support l
-------
Information Contacts
Conservation
Reserve Program
Headquarters Office Deputy Chief for Programs, Farm Service Agency, USDA, Washington DC 20250-0513, Phone (202) 720-6211
Website www.fsa usda gov/dafpfcepd/12logocv him
Watershed
Protection and
Flood Prevention
Headquarters Office Deputy Chief for Programs, Nalural Resources Conservation Service, USDA, PO Box 2090, Washington DC 20013 Phone (202) 720-3534; Fax (202)
720-2143
Website www nhq nrcs.usda gov/OPA/FB90OPA/ProgFact html
Resource
Conservation and
Development
Headquarters Office Deputy Chief lor Programs, Resource Conservation and Community Development Division, Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA, P O Box
2890, Washington DC 20013; Phone' (202) 720-2241
Website: www ftw nrcs usda gov/rcnd_2 html
Wetlands Reserve
Program
Headquarters Office. Deputy Chief (or Programs, Watersheds and Wetlands Division, National Resource Conservation Service, USDA. PO Box 2890, Washington, DC 20013
Phone (202)690-0848
Website www ftw nrcs usda gov/pl566/WRP html
WWO Systems for
Rural Communities
Headquarters Office' Assistant Administrator, Water and Environmental Programs Rural Utilities Service, USDA. Washington DC 20250 Phone (202) 690-2670
Webslite www usda gov/rus/waler/programs him
Environmental
Quality Incentives
Program
Headquarters Office Deputy Chief Programs, Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA, P O Box 2890, Washington DC 20013 Phone (202) 720-1045, Fax (202) 720
4265
Website' www.nhq nrcs usda gov/0PA/FB96OPA/eqlpfacl html
Wildlife Habitat
Incentive Program
Headquarters Office: Depuly Chief of Programs, Nalural Resources Conservation Service, USDA, P O Box 2890, Washington DC 20013, Phone (202) 720-7157, Fax' (202)
720-2143
Website' www. ftw nrcs usda gov/pl566/WHIP himl
Watershed Surveys
and Planning
Headquarters Office Deputy Chief of Programs. Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA, P.O. Box 2890, Washington DC 20013, Phone: (202) 720-3534, Fax (202)
720-2143
Website www.flwnrcs.usda gov/pl566/plan html
Abandoned Mine
Reclamation
Program
Headquarters Office Office o( Surface Mining, Division of Reclamation Support, Department of the Interior, 1951 Constitution Ave., NW , Washington DC 20240. Phone
(202) 208-5365
Water Resources
on Indian Lands
Headquarters Office. Mo Baloch, Office of Trust Responsibilities, Division of Water and Land Resources, Branch of Agriculture and Range, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1849 C
SI. NW , MS-4513 MIB, Washington, DC 20240; Phone (202) 208-6042
-------
Information Contacts
Clean Water State
Revolving Fund
I teadquarters OKice Krlslln Kenausls, Clean Water Stale Revolving Fund Branch, Municipal Support Division (4204), Office of Wastewater Management, EPA, 401 M SI
SW, Washington DC 20460 ; Phone (202) 260-2036 ; E-mall kenausls krlstln©cpa gov 1
Website www epa gov/OWM
604 (b) Grants
Headquarters Office Don Kunkoskl, Assessment and Watershed Protection Division (4503F), Office of Water, EPA, 401 M St, SW., Washington DC 20460; Phone (301) 694-
7329
Website: www. epa gov/OWM
Drinking Water
State Revolving
Fund
Headquarters Office Veronica Bletle, Implementation and Assistance Division, Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water, EPA, 401 M St., SW, Washington DC 20460;
Phone (202) 260-5526
Webslle www epa gov/ogwdw/dwsif html
319 Grants
Headquarters Office Stu Tuller, Co-Leader, Program implementation Team, Nonpolnt Source Control Branch, Assessment and Watershed Protection Division, Office of
Wetlands, Ocean and Watersheds, (4503F), EPA 401 M St, SW , Washington DC 20460, Phone (202) 260-7100
Website, www epa gov/owow/NPS
NEP/Coastal
Watershed Grants
Headquarters Office Betsy Tam Salter, Ocean9 end Coastal Protection Division. Office of Wetlands, Oceans, Watersheds Protection (4504F), EPA, 401 M St SW,
Washington DC 20460 Phone (202) 260-6466, Fax (202) 260-9960, E-mail satler.belsy(3>epa.gov
Website www epa gov/owow/esluarles/nep
106 Grants
Headquarters Offlco Carol Crow. State and Interstate Agencies, Section 10B Coordinator, Office of Wastewater Management (4201), Office of Wat-r, EPA, 401 M St, SW,
Washington DC 20460, Phone (202) 260-5028
Website, www epa gov/owm
PWSS Grants
Headquarters Office' Ray Enyeart, Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water (4604), Office of Water, EPA, 401 M St ', SW , Washington DC 20460, Phone (202) 260-5551
Website www epa gov/ogwdw
Water Quality
Cooperative
Agreements
Headquarters Office Pat Campbell, Office of Wastewater Management (4203), EPA, 401 M St , SW , Washington DC 20460 Phone. (202) 260-9667
Website www epa gov/owm/flnan htm
Chesapeake Bay
Program
Headquarters Office Jon M Capacasa, Deputy Director, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029 Phone (215) 814-5422
Website, www epa gov/chesapeake
Wetland
Protection: Dev.
Grants
Headquarters Office Lorl Williams, Wetlands Strategies and State Programs Branch. Wetlands Division,(4502F), Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds . EPA, 401 M
St , SW, Washington DC 20460, Phone' (202) 260-5064
Website, www epa gov/owow/wellands
-------
Information Conlacts
Coastal Zone
Management
Administration
1 leadqtiaitcrs Ollico Chief. Coastal Programs division. Ollice ol Ocean and Coastal Resource Management. Nallonal Ocean Service, National Ocoanlc and Atmospheric
Administration, Department ol Commerce. 1305 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, Phone (301) 713-3102
ED Grants for PW
Infrastructure
Development'
Headquarters Office David L Mcllwaln, Director, Public Works Division, Economic Development Administration, Room H7320, Herbert C Hoover Bldg , Department of
Commerce. Washington DC 20230, Phone (202) 482-5265
Community
Development
Black Grants
Headquarters Office Office of Block Grant Assistance, Community Planning and Development, 1IUD, 451 7lh SI, SW, Washington DC 20410, Phone (202) 708-3587
Appalachian
Regional Grants
1 leadciiiarters Office Executive Director, Appalachian Regional Commission, 1666 Connecticut Ave , NW , Washington, DC 20235 Phone' (202) 864-7700
-------
References
1. Surfing EPA's Water Web Sites
2. Guide to Information for Assessing Quality and Threats to
Biodiversity of Freshwater Systems
3. Coastal Program Division
4. Combined Sewer Overflow Control Policy: A Consensus Solution to
Improve Water Quality
5. The National Sewage Sludge Program
6. Sewage Sludge or Biosolids Use or Disposal Documents
7. NACo
8. Data Sources
-------
Office of Wa.,^ water Management
h 11 />: // vv w w. e () a . g o v / o vv/n
The Office of Wastewatei Management (OWM) web site
contains information on
¦ Animal Feeding Operations
¦ Biosolids
¦ Clean Water Needs Survey
¦ Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund (CWSRF)
¦ Indian Program
¦ Municipal Technologies
¦ National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPUES) - Permits
¦ Pretreatment
¦ Small Communities
¦ Wet Weather - Stormwater, Sanitary Sewer
Overflows, Combined Sewer Overflows
¦ US/Mexico Border
LEARN HOW TO CONSERVE WATER
Office of Wetlands, _ans, and
Watersheds
I it tp://www.e/Jo.gov/owow
The Office of Wetlands. Oceans, and Water sheds
(OWOW) web site contains information on:
¦ Adopt Your Watershed
¦ American Heritage Rivers
¦ Index of Watershed Indicators
¦ Monitoring Water Quality
¦ National Estuary Program
¦ Nonpoint Source Pollution
¦ Oceans, Coasts, Estuaries
¦ Pficstcria piscicida and harmful algal blooms
¦ Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)
¦ Watershed Academy Training Courses
¦ Wetlands Protection and Restoration
¦ Watershed Information Network
LEARN ABOU F YOUR WATERSHED
United Stales Office of Water Ei -'-98-002
Environmental 4101 Jul.. _j9
Protection http //www ops gov/water
Agency
SURFING EPA's
WATER WEB SITES
Are you looking for information on drinking
watei protection? Preventing water pollution?
Protecting aquatic habitat? Who's working
on protecting water and how? How you can
get involved7
EPA's water web sites include information on:
-Regulatory and voluntary programs
-Available publications
-Financial assistance
-Contacting EPA
Visit the Office of Water's web sites.
For information on other EPA programs, visit
EPA's main web site at lit fp://www epti.gov
-------
Now, let ,o surfing!
First enter' liil|i://www fijid.gnv/wntiN
in the navigation line of your \
biowsei I here are several J
ways to access information
on the Office of Water's web f
sites. Browse the Water
Topics drop-down menu for
information on a particular
water issue Visit Water Where You Live to find
water quality information on your state. Check
out Featured Sites for a list of highlights from
each water quality protection program. Look
through the Office of Water Calendar of Events
to find local information on public meetings,
hearings, or announcements. Visit What's New
for a listing of all the latest information added to
the web site.
If you are looking for information on EPA's water
quality protection programs, select the National
Water Program that meets your information
needs.
Don't forget to visit EPA's regional office web sites
(i 11p://www. e/xi .gov/epaliome//o<:r> t e 2.M t m For
information on water quality protection programs
on tribal lands, visit EPA's American Indian Envi-
ronmental Office web site liitp.//www c/ia.gov/
hi d i (i m /
Office of Ground W. and
Drinking Water
of PA . .......
V -f
Prinking
4 ~**•«#»
\ AEFVI A
http://www.cf> a.gov/s a fewater
1 he Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
(OGWDW) web site contains information on
Office of Science and lechn
I
Ir.iln
h 11 f>: / /www. epa.gov/ost
The Office of Science and Technology (OST) web
site contains information on
¦ Drinking Water Standards (MCLs)
¦ Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund (DWSRF)
¦ Drinking Water Contaminants
¦ Lessons and Activities for Kids
¦ Microbial and Disinfection Byproducts Rules
¦ Research and Rule-making Priorities
¦ Small Drinking Water Systems
¦ Source Water Protection Programs
¦ Underground Injection Control Programs
¦ "Water on Tap A Consumer's Guide to the Nation's
Drinking Water"
LEARN ABOUT YOUR TAP WATER
¦ Analytical Test Methods
¦ Beach Water Quality
¦ Contaminated Sediment
¦ Drinking Water Criteria and Health Advisories
¦ Effluent Guidelines
¦ Fish & Wildlife Consumption Advisories
¦ Human Health Criteria
' ¦ Shellfish Protection
i
¦ Water Quality Criteria and Standards
¦ Water Quality Models ! /
|- ".f • I r -n
LEARN ABOUT YOUR LOCAL BEACH
i • I
-------
Freshwater threats guide
March 1999
Guide to Information for Assessing Quality of
and Threats To Biodiversity of Freshwater
Systems
March 1999
Michele DePhihp
Freshwater Initiative, Strategy One
The Nature Conservancy
8 S. Michigan Avenue, Suite 2301
Chicago, EL 60603
(312) 759-8017
mdq3hilip@tnc.org
-------
Freshwater threats guide
March 1999
CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION !
II. GENERAL RESOURCES 2
1. EPA's Index of Watershed Indicators (I WD 2
2. EPA's Better Assessment Science Integrating Point and Non-point
Sources (BASINS) 4
III. SOURCES OF DATA THAT ADDRESS PARTICULAR STRESSES 6
1. Hvdrologic Alterations 6
1.1 Dams 6
• National Inventory of Dams database (US ACE) 6
• Dam locations (EPA, BASINS) 6
• Hydrologic modification caused by dams (EPA, IWI 14) 7
• Dam locations (USGS) ~
• Indicators of Hvdrologic Alteration (TNC) 7
• Fragmentation 7
1.2 Water use 8
• Water use data (USGS) 8
• Water use maps (USDA-NRCS) 8
1.3 Channelization, drains, and stream diversions 8
• Reach file, version 3-alpha (EPA) 8
• Digital line graph (USGS) 8
• Levee locations (USGS) 9
1.4 Land use/land cover change 9
• Urban runoff potential (EPA IWI 11) 9
• Forest npanan cover (EPA, IWI 16) 9
• Agriculture/Urban riparian cover (EPA, IWI 18) 10
• Land use/land cover data (USGS) 10
• Human use index (EPA) 10
• Roads along streams (EPA) 10
1.5 Wetland loss 11
• Wetland loss mdex (EPA, PAT 7) 11
• Wetlands mdex of maps, facts, and figures (USDA-NRCS) 11
• National Wetlands Inventory (FWS) 11
2. Sedimentation 12
• Soil erosion maps (USDA-NRCS) 12
• Sediment delivery to rivers and streams from cropland and
pastureland (EPA, IWI 12c) 12
• STATSGO (USDA-NRCS) 12
• SSURGO (USDA-NRCS) 12
-------
coastal urograms uivision
' 5
... |
•\
/ •+
office of ocean and
coastal resource management
Coastal Programs Division
Mission
The mission of the Coastal Programs Division is to achieve the conservation and responsible
management of coastal and ocean ecosystems. The Division provides technical, programmatic and
financial assistance and advocates comprehensive resource management with state and territorial
coastal programs and other agencies, insitutions, and the general public.
The Coastal Programs Division works toward the effective management, beneficial use. protection,
and de\elopment of the coastal zone of the United States of America bv administering the National
Coastal Zone Management Program. The Division does this by developing and issuing guidance on
how to implement the various components of the Coastal Zone Management Act.
Coastal Program Division Guidance Documents
Click on the document to download or open it in Adobe PDF format.
• Coastal Zone Management Act Section 306A Guidance (02/99)
• 306A Checklist (02/99)
• 306A Title Certification (02/99)
• 30r>A Title Opinion (02/99)
• Final Program Change Guidance (07/96)
• FY 1999 Performance Report Guidelines (04/99)
• Section 309 Update and Interim Guidance for FY 99
http://\vu-u .nos.noaa.gov/ocrm/cpd/
01/20/2000
-------
Coastal Programs Division
Page L 01 j
mm
Coastal Zone Management Program
Stalnn'iMTltorial
CZM Program*
mm 33 Approved
OH 1 l'i Devetopmer:
. 1 l.iaclrvtl
Ocean and Coastal
Rosource Managomont
y - Ctnee
OP*MI
Click on map lo access state and territory coastal management program summaries
and links to program homepages
• Text links to program summanes
• Text links to program homepages
For more information on the Coastal Programs Division, please contact:
Joseph A. Uruviich. Chief
Coastal Programs Division
N/0RM3, 1305 East-West Highway
Silver Spring, MD 20910
io.seph.uruviicl;(a]noaa.uov
Tel 301-713-3155 Ext. 195
Fax¦ 301-713-4012
Coastal Programs Division Headquarters Staff List
State.Coastal Management Program Contact List
http://wwvv.nos.noaa.gov/ocrrrL/cpd/
01/20/2000
-------
United States
Environmental Proteacn
Agency
Otlca of Wcer
(4201)
EPA &32-F-M-GC2
Aon! 1934
^ EPA Combined Sewer Overflow Control Policy:
A Consensus Solution to Improve Water Quality
Overview
The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is issuing a "Combined Sewer
Overflow Control Policy" which establishes
a national framework and provides guidance
to communities and State/Federal officials
for controlling combined tewr overflows
(CSOs). The Policy calls for communities
with CSOs to take immediate and long-term
actions to address their CSOs. Rather than
a one-size-fits-all mandate, the Policy
provides communities with the flexibility to
develop a workable, cost-effective solution
to a major environmental problem.
Given the high control cost and
serious nature of CSOs, EPA decided to
pursue a negotiated dialogue wrth all
interested stakeholders in developing the
Policy. Representatives of communities with
CSOs. State officials, plus environmental
and other interest groups joined EPA at the
table and helped develop the consensus
Policy. Endorsements have come from
municipal and environmental groups alike.
President CGnton's Clean Water
initiative recommends that the 1994
amendments to the Clean Water Act (CWA)
endorse the final CSO Policy.
What are CSOs?
CSOs are a remnant of the country's
early infrastructure. In the past, cities built
sewer systems to collect both storm water
and sanitary wastewater in the same sewer.
These are called "combined sewers."
During dry weather, combined sewers
cany wastewater to treatment facilities.
However, when it rains, combined sewers
may not have the capacity to carry all the
storm water and wastewater, or the
treatment plant may not be large enough to
treat all of the combined flow. In these
situations, some of the combined wastewater
overflows untreated into the nearest body of
water - streams, lakes, rivers, or estuanes -
creating a combined sewer overflow
(CSO). These CSOs may pose risks to
your health and environment.
8A-17
-------
Why are CSOs a problem?
Since CSOs are comprised of raw
sewage, commercial and industrial wastes,
and storm water runoff, many different types
of pollutants may be present. The main
constituents of CSOs are untreated human
and industrial wastes, toxic materials like oil
and pesticides, and floating debris washed
into the sewer system from streets and their
drainage area These pollutants can affect
your health when you swim in CSO-polluted
water or eat fish or shellfish contaminated
by CSOs. CSO impacts on water quality are
unique to each location and may be
responsible for beach closures, shellfish bed
closures, fish kills, and other water quality
degradation in your community.
How are CSOs regulated?
CSOs are considered to be 'point
sources" of pollution under the Clean Water
Act (CWA). The CWA requires EPA and
States to issue permits for controlling point
sources, including discharges from CSOs.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permits must be issued to
address CSOs.
Permits are written to meet the water
quality standards for a particular
waterbody. Water quality standards are
State-adopted or Federally-promulgated
rules that serve as the goals for the
waterbody and the legal basis for NPDES
permit requirements under the CWA.
For example, a waterbody may be
designated for a vanety of recreational
activities (e.g., swimming, boating, fishing,
etc.), and standards are developed
accordingly.
— 2
What are the key components
of the Policy?
EPA's CSO Policy ensures that
municipalities, permitting and water quality
standards authorities, and the public
engage in a comprehensive and
coordinated planning effort to achieve cost-
effective CSO controls and ultimately
comply with the Clean Water Act. The
Policy recognizes the site-specific nature of
CSOs and their impacts, and provides the
necessary flexibility to tailor controls to local
situations. Key components include:
Municipalities should immediately
implement the nine minimum
controls (see box on next page);
Municipalities should use a
targeted approach, giving the
highest priority to environmentally
sensitive receiving waters;
Municipalities, in cooperation
with EPA, States, environmental
agencies, and water quality
groups, must develop long-term
CSO control plans. These plans
should identify and evaluate vanous
control strategies, and lead to
selection of an approach that is
sufficient to meet water quality
standards.
States may decide to review and
revise, as appropriate, State water
quality standards during the CSO
long-term planning process.
The financial capability of
municipalities may be considered
when developing schedules for
implementation of CSO controls.
Public participation is essential
throughout all CSO planning and
implementation efforts.
8A-18
-------
The Policy also provides flexibility to
accommodate ongoing or completed CSO
projects, the special needs of small
communities, and watershed planning.
How expensive are CSO control
measures?
Past CSO proposals have carried
national price tags as high as $160 billion or
more. The negotiated Policy has reduced
that cost to $41 billion, a substantial
savings. CSO costs may be high in some
communities, but low in others. The severity
and frequency of CSOs, plus the local water
quality standards, will determine the types of
controls that are needed and their costs.
EPA recognizes that financial
considerations are often a major factor
affecting the implementation of CSO
controls. For that reason, the Policy allows
consideration of a community's financial
capability in connection with the long-term
CSO control planning effort, water quality
standards review, and enforcement actions.
However, communities are ultimately
responsible for aggressively pursuing
financial arrangements for implementation of
the minimum controls and the long-term
CSO control plan.
EPA and State agencies will work
with CSO communities to find economically
achievable solutions that will improve public
health and create a safer environment for
everyone.
How will the Policy be enforced?
Elements of the Policy will be
incorporated into National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permits or other appropriate enforceable
mechanisms.
The enforcement portion of the Poiicy
indicates EPA's intent to commence an
enforcement initiative immediately against
municipalities that have CSOs that occur
during dry weather. It also provides
guidance on the enforcement of the wet-
weather elements of the Policy.
Nine Minimum Controls
Communities should immediately
implement the following minimum controls:
1. Proper operation and regular
maintenance programs for the
sewer system and CSOs;
2. Maximum use of the collection
system for storage;
3. Review and modification of
pretreatment requirements to
assure CSO impacts are minimized; j
4. Maximization of flow to the I
municipal sewage treatment plant j
for treatment;
5. Prohibition of CSOs during dry
weather;
6. Control of solid and floatable
materials in CSOs;
7. Pollution prevention;
8. Public notice to ensure that the
public receives adequate
j notification of CSO occurences
! and impacts; and
! 9. Monitoring to effectively
j charactenze CSO impacts and the
efficacy of CSO controls.
For more information
For copies of the CSO Control
Policy, please contact the Office of Water
Resource Center in Washington, DC, at
(202)260-7786. Or write:
Office of Water Resource Center
US EPA, Mailcode RC-4100
Washington, DC 20460
8 A-19
-------
Diagram of a Combined Sewer System
During Wet Weather
This diagram shows how domestic wastewater (sewage),
industrial and commercial wastes and storm water are
collected in the same sewer pipes in a combined rawer
system. During dry weather, all of this wastewater should
be carried to the wastewater treatment plant tor treatment.
But when it rains, some of the combined wastewater
overflows untreated into the nearest receiving water,
causing a combined sewer overflow.
I
Domestic Wastewater
Wk -
.Street Catch Basin
Storm Water and Dry Weather Flow
Drops to Interceptor
..Excess Wet Weatrw
to Overflow
,0*
Combined Sewer Overflow
wn-t,w
-------
Office of
| | Wastewater Enforcement
and Compliance (EN-336)
The National Sewage
Sludge Program
SJuoge Jm or Oapoui Ragiiasons Fsct ShMt S*nmt
Legal Authority
As mandated by the Clear Water Act
of 1987, EPA has issued national standards
regulating the use or disposal of sewage
sludge. These standards, promulgated in 40
CFR Pan 503, in conjunction with the
permitting requirements established in 40
CFR Pans 122, 123, and 501, trske np the
regulatory framework of the National Sew-
age Sludge Program.
Who is Regulated?
Pan 503 generally regulates trratm and
preparers of sewage sludge that will be land
applied, incinerated, or placed on a surface
disposal site, as well as the generators and
end users or disposers of the sewage sludge.
What is Regulated?
The National Sewage Sludge Pro-
gram generally regulates all sewage sludge
that is used or disposed through land appli-
cation. surface disposal, or mcmeraboo.
What is sewage sludge ?
Sewage sludge is defined as a "solid,
semi-sohd, or liquid residue generated dur-
ing the treatment of domestic sewage in a
treatment worts. Sewage sludge includes,
but is not limited to. domestic septage; scum
or solids removed m primary, secondary, or
advanced wastewater neatmed fucfmi.
and material derived from towage stodge."
(Materials denved from sewage sludge in-
clude the products of sludge camposmaod
digesters. treated sewage sludge which is
bagged for sale as fertilizer, or any other type
of processed or treated sewage sludge which
is Land applied, incinerated, or placed in a
surface disposal site.) "Sewage sludge does
not include ash generated dunng the firing of
sewage si udge in a sewage sludge incinerator
or grit and screenings generated during the
preliminary treatment of domestic sewage
in a treatment works." (§503.9 (w))
Do me sue septage is also regulated by
Pan 503. Domestic septage is "liquid or
solid material removed from a septic tank.
cesspool, portable toilet. Type III manne
sanitation device, or similar treatment works
that receives only domestic sewage..."
(5503.9(0)
Currently exdoded from regulation
under Put 503, are industrial sludge and
septage from inrius.-Tial or commercrj f» ¦
cilines. Generally, sludge generated at an
industrial facility is not regulated by Part
503. However, if the domestic wastewater
is segregated from the process wjuct, the
sewage sludge generated by the treatment of
the domestic wastewater is covered by
Pan 503.
Sludges classified as hazardous and
sludges containing 50 mg/kg or more poly-
chlorinated biphenyis (PCBs) are also not
regulated in Part 503, but are subject to other
regulatory requirements.
When is Compliance
Required?
Deadlines for compliance with Pan
503 regulations were established m the Clean
Water Act of 1987. In most cases. Pan 503
is a "self-implementing" regulation; it is
directly enforceable even in the absence of a
permit. Pan 503 requires compliance with
Marc#i9 1993
the monitoring and recordkeeping require-
ments (except for momtonng of total hydro-
carbon emissions in incinerator exit gases)
by July 20.1993. Part 503 requires compli-
ance with all other standards (including total
hydrocarbon emissions momtonng) as soon
as pogible. but no later than February 19.
1994 (or February 19,1995 if construction
of a pollution control facility is required to
comply with the regulation.)
Permits: Who Applies for
One, and Who Doesn't?
Secoon 405(f) of the Clean Water
Act requires National Pollutant Discharge
Flimirwrion System (NPDES) permits is-
sued to publicly owned treatment works and
other treatment works treating domestic
sewage to t"**" wwtiHnnt implementing
Pan503. EPA has defined treatment worts
treating dnmcric sewage to be "a [publicly
owned trratm wit works] or any other sew-
age sludge or wastewater treatment devices
or systems, regardless of ownership (tnc lud-
ing federal facilities) used in the storage,
tr»n»m»nr recycling, or reclamation of mu-
nicipal or domestic sewage, including land
(Whratrd for the disposal of sewage sludge.
This definition does not include septic tanks
or similar devices In States where there is
no approved State sludge management
program—the Regional Administrator may
rtrsignair any person subject to the stan-
dards for sewage sludge use and disposal in
40 CFR Pan 503 as a treatment works treat-
ing domestic sewage.'— when he or she finds
that such designation is necessary to ensure
that such person is in compliance with 40
CFR Pan 503." (5122.2)
Important Note:
Compliance is required by
the dates above, regardless
of whether a permit has
been issued.
8A-9
-------
5.uage usa or Disoesai Begmaaons Fia Shaat s»r»t Marr- 9
Practices and Materials
Not Regulated by
40 CFR Part 503
Non-hazardous Muatrtai aludga
(Part 257)
Drfotdng watar traatmont aiudga
Industrial atodga gonaraad at at
Industrial taoMiy by wntawol of
sanitary iiitinni mind «tti
prooa»i ¦>¦>¦¦¦1111 (Part 257*)
Hazardous aiudga
(Parts 261 -26»)
Studgo eantatatog SO lag/fcg or
mora ol potycbioriaatad Wphanyta
(PCBa) (Part TBI)
Sawaqa atudga oo-tnctneralad wtth
mora than 30% nonioipal soOd
waato (Part BO)
Sawaga aiudga tndaarator aah
Grit and aeraoninga ramooad
during tho pratarinary uauiuaiu at
domestic —wage in a tmtnad
works
3awaga sludge Uflmataty uaad aa
s iaad lupplawiant lor ahnk
Tharmal oonvarsion of mwmgm
sludga to oO arWeh la uaad to
yanaraio slaain and atoortefty
Usa o( studga aiag aa ooasrata
aggiagata. for rocd aotobaia. to
making pavcmanl btaeka, «r aa
raw malarial to prerfowvdar
btiBdinfl ,
Us« of sfcidga to eooaraGa and
bttumtooua BiUas
OmniuaictaJor todwartaf aaptapa,
or any uiUfcau «fw—twhl
and/or Industrial aaplmu «Mi
domestic aaptags (Part 257*)
Oaptaga dipowd of at a POTW or
othar UaatmarU works
* Practical which may ba ragulatad
by tha National Sawaga Sludga
Program In tha future.
Under this definition. facilities which
must apply for a permit include the genera-
tors, eeaiers. and disposers of sewage sludge.
All generators of sewage sludge that will be
land applied, incinerated, placed in a surface
disposal sue, or sent to a municipal solid
waste landfill, will need to apply for a
permiL Also, all persons who change the
quality (Le., change the pathogen level, the
vector attraction characteristics, orthe pol-
lutant concentration) of sewage sludge that
will be land applied, incinerated, orplaced in
a surface disposal site, will need to apply for
a permiL
For example, a composing facility
would be required to apply for a permit
brcauv composting reduces the level of
pathogens in the sewage sludge. On the
other hand, a facility that only dewaters
sewage sludge is not considered to be chang-
ing sludge quality and therefore, would not
need to apply for a permiL
Surface disposal facilities and sew-
age sludge tndaera&n will also need to
apply for a permiL Landapplierswhodonot
generate or change the quality of the sewage
sludge wiQ not need to apply for a permiL
Scpbc tanks and similar devices, such
as portable toilets, are rrrlurfcd from the
definition of treatment works treating do-
mestic sewage. Domestic septage pampers,
haulers, treaters, and land appiiers will gen-
erally not need to apply for a penniL How-
ever. centralized septage treatment facilities
may be required to apply for a permit.
When Are Permit
Applications Due?
Facilities seeking site-specific permit
limits (as authorized by Part 503) must sub-
orn permit applications within 180 days af-
terpublicanonofPan503 (August 18,1993).
All sewage sludge incinerators will be re-
quired to submit applications for site-spe-
cific permits limits. Any srirfnrr disposal
facility may request site-specific permit
limits.
Facilities must request site-specific
permit limits during the initial 180 day pe-
riod, and may not be allowed to request them
later, unless the applicant can show 'good
cause" exists (e.g.. a change in disposal
practice or a new site that could not be
anticipated during the initial 180-day
penod).
Other facilities which already
NPDES permits must file sew
appliranm information wuh the i.
mining authority at the time of thei
NPDES permit renewal application.
Facilities which do not have NPI
permits are referred to as "sludge-a nl
cilines. These fan lines may include
posting fanlirins. nan-discharging st-
treaonent plants and other facilities wl
generate, treat, or dispose of sewage <
but do not have NPDES permits. If
ars required to (or want to) ap
for sne-sn-x-permit limits, they -
submit per. applications within th
day perioc -escribed above. Othe
these facilities will be required to sub
limited permit application informan
February 19,1994.
Who is the
Permitting Authority?
In most cases the Permitting An tho
will be the EPA Regional Office. E
working with State agencies in the de
ment of approved State programs to adir
ister the Federal sewage sludge reguL-- -
Contaa your EPA Regional Sludf
tutor (listed on the back of this fact ~
more information on the Permitting Auih
ity or permit applications.
Pollutants with
Numeric Limits
Land Application
ars ante cadmium chromli
ooppar Iaad msreur,
ntcfcd aatankmi zinc
motybdanum
Unllned Surface Disposal Stti
arsenic cadmium nick*
Lined Surface Disposal Sites
Nona
Sewage Sludge Incinerators
Iaad cadmium ehroml
nickat marcury baryllk
total hydrocarbons (a surrogsta tor
organic oompounds In tha ax*'
8 A-10
-------
Sludge Use or Duootal Ragiiaaont Faa Shaat Sanat Mam 9 '95:-
Regulated Use and
Disposal Practices
Land Application
Land application is defined as "lite
spraying or sheading of sewage sludge onto
the land surface; the nyecaoc of sewage
sludge below the land surface; or the incor-
poration of sewage sludge into the soil so
that sewage sludge can either condition the
soil or fertilize craps or vegetation grown in
the soil" (§503.11 (h)). Examples are: use at
reclamation sues as a soil conditioner, ose
by sod farms; and the disribuooo of sludge
as a commercial fertilizer.
Surface Disposal
A surface disposal site is an area which
contains one or more "sewage sludge units."
where only sewage sludge is placed for final
disposal. This term does not include mu-
nicipal solid waste landfills thai accept
sewage sludge. Furthermore, this does not
include land on which sewage sludge is
placed for either storage or treatment.
(§503.21 (n) and (p))
As a rule of thumb, storage is placement
of sludge on a site for up to 2 yean. If
sewage sludge is stored for more than 2
years, then a rationale supporting the need
for the additional time should be submitted
to the permitting authority. For more infor-
mation on storage, call your EPA Regional
Sludge Coordinator.
Disposal in a municipal solid waste
landfill (MSWLF) is not considered surface
disposal. A generator who sends sewage
sludge to a MSWLF needs to apply for a
permit, but the MSWLF is Qfi regulated by
the National Sewage Sludge Program.
Examples of surface daponl include
disposal in a sewage sludge mooofiD and the
trenching of septage.
Incineration
Incineration is rtrfinrri as the eombus-
uon of the organic matter and inorganic
maoer in sewage sludge at high tempera-
tures in an enclosed device that fires only
sewage sludge and an auxiliary fueL The
auxiliary fuel can include, but is not limited
10, natural gas, fuel oil. coal, and municipal
solid waste. Municipal solid waste can be up
to 30% of die combined dry weight of the
sewage sludge and themuniopal solid waste.
Hazardous waste is not considered an auxil-
iary fuel. (§503.41(b), (g) and (k))
Are You Regulated by
The National Sewage Sludge Program?
An you a pufcfcty onmad tteapnarn
worts or otoar generator of Murage
UuOgt ngdild by Pan SOT?
No
t
Do you aand aa«age atudga to a
mtnopal aoid waae landB?
No
1
Are you an induattel hefty whcti
aepa«*y
and gawam a
ragduad by Part 500*7
No
t
Do you ehanga t» gurftyt of
umbqc tiudge raguatod by Part
503*7
No
Do you operas a
Incinerator or
Ya#
Ym
No
t
Do you vaat or
punpnga (rem
of
tanfca or
No
Do you fJtt land apply
Yae
No
t
Do you juat haridte or itotut
You an ragukaiad and wO naad e>
appry (or a perm#.
You need 10 apply tor a pmru
However, Vw innapaj tofid wasa
kndU a nor ragulatod by Par. 503
and *41 not naad to appry lor a perrrtt.
You are myitaad and wfl need to
apply tor a permit.
You are legutaad and wfi
apply tor a permft.
You ara regUand and wffl need to
appry tor a pamW.
You ara reguiaied. but generally
do not need id apply tor a
parrrtt However. If you treat
aapnga ai a cerwataad taakry
you may ba feQured to apply tor
apanrit.
You are
do not
No
1
You ara probably not reguiaied
by ta Nasonal Sewage Sludga
Ptoya/iL
* Part 503 0r*f mgutoaaa uwefli riudga ta land apptad. Indraraied to a
aewaga Mjage ronermtof. or placed r a aurfcoe rtipua irtt.
ba generally
to apply tor a
You may be tubfecl to tome
atpeo of ffa Naaonal Sewage
Swage Sludge Piugiani. but
generaty do not need o appry
torapemW.
t To change ta tawage tkidge quaftty meant to ater one of the regulated tludgt
quafty cmana. The oTtaoa ara: pa9egena. vector attacdon
cha/aetBnaoca. and regiiaad orgarac and Inorgane potutanta.
8 A-11
-------
Sluaoe Usi'y Snootai aeqjaacru c»g Shoe; S*"«i
Publication
Sources
National Technical Information
NT1S
5265 Port Royal Ad
Sonngfwti. VA 22161
Tow (703)487-4450
National Small Rows Ctoaringhouaa:
NSFC
P.O. Box 6064
Morgan town. WV 26606-6064
Tata- (800) 624-U01
Environmental Resource Information
Center (EmOCSUEE)
1200 Chamosr* Rd.. Room 310
Columbia. OH 43212
Tele. (614) 292-6717
Federal Register Notices
Pan 503 was putfashsd on February 19.
1993 at 56 Pectoral Regitm (Ftt) 9246.
Amendment* B ffie Manorial jumom(nevi««rf),t»M
Guidanoe tor Writing Pun Mi In tor the
UxandOiapo»aiolliia>«aa9lMdQa.
1993
Simplified radaral EPA Ruiee lor
Land Apple alien ot DoaMHm
Sepage to Agrioumm, Forest,
and Disturbed Lands I
Contact Silas): QwMaaaa, 11
Other Document*
EPA's Poloy
BeneActel Ueeef
and the Near Teohnioai I
Regulations Boofcist(novissd). 1993
BeneftdaJ Use ot liaaga Sludge:
Land AppAoeden Pawphiat/Pu aia»
Final Sewage Siudga State
Program and PimlHhig RegUa
bona. 54 FF 1t71» (Mwy 2.1*99)
(Amended 2/19*3, at S8 FK9404)
REGION 1
Thelrui Hamilton
JFK FeOeraJ Bibg.
One Congms St
Boston. MA 02203
Tata: (617) 565-3569
REGION 2
Alia RoufaaaJ
26 Federal Plaza
New York. NY 10278
Tela: (212)264-3663
REGION 3
Ann Caikhuff
(3WM55)
841 Chestnut St.
Phiadelph®. PA 19107
Tals: (215) 597-0406
REGION 4
Vines Miliar
345 Courtland Si N.E
Atlanta. GA 30365
Teis: (404) 347-2391
REGION 5
John OeHoHK HsU
fcU Svj
(5WQP-16J)
77 W Jackson Blvd.
Chcago. IL 60604-3590
Tals: (312) 88&"6+06- (pill.
REGION 6
Stephanie Kords
(6-WPM)
1445 Ron Ays #1200
Dalao. TX 75202-2733
Tata: (214) 655-7520
REGION 7
John Dunn
726 Minneaota Avs.
Kansas City. KS 66101
Tela: (913) 551-7594
REGIONS
Bob Brabst
(8WM-C)
999 18th St.. Sute 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
Tela: (303)293-1627
REGION 9
Lauran Fondahl
75 Hawthorns St. (W-5-2)
San Franasco. CA 94105
Tsis: (415) 744-1909
REGION 10
Dck Hsthsnngton
1200 Socth Avs.
Seattle. WA 98101
Tola: (206) 553-1941
Laura Fait an
1200 Sixth Avs. (WD-134)
Seattle, WA 98101
Tola: (206) 553-1647
8A-12
-------
#EPA
SEWAGE SLUDGE
OR BIOSOLIDS
USE OR DISPOSAL DOCUMENTS
List Compiled by:
Sharie Centilia, USEPA, OWM/Permrts
Division (202) 260-6052
Sewage sludge publications are avaBabie from the fofiowing sources. Not afl documents are
avaflable from afl sources. Please note sources in margin adjacent to document name.
OWRC Office of Watar Resources Center |OW Resource Center)
USS»A - RC-4100
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Tele: (202) 260-7786
ERIC Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)
1929 Kenny Road
Columbus. OH 43210-1080
Tele: (614) 292-6717 or Fax: (614) 292-0263
CERI Center for Enwhowmnlai Reeeorch bat!tuts
CERI Publications
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45246
Tele: (513) 569-7562 or Fax: (513) 569-7566
NT1S U.S. Department of Commerce
Nattonei Technical Information Service (NT1S)
5285 Port Royal Road
SeringfieW, VA 22161
Teie: (703) 487-4650 or (800) 553-6847
NSFC National Smafl Flows Clearinghouse (NSFC)
cJo WV University
P.O. Box 6064
Morgantown. West Virginia 26506-6064
Tele: (800) 624-8301 or Fax: (304) 293-3161
Document
viiWa DiyRnnQ wnn
PB are usee
by WTTS. Other source*
00 HOT m
• tMs identification code.
8A-13
-------
PUBLICATIONS ON SLUDGE/BIOSOUDS
August 1994
OWRC Guidance for Writing Case-By-Case Permit Requirements for Municipal Sewage Sludge (EPA
NTIS 505/8-90-0011, May 1990; USEPA OWEC/Permits Div; NTIS (PB91-145508); (1989
NSFC document: NTIS only; revised March 1993: new title: Guidance For Writing Permits For Use
or Disposal of Sewage Sludge-, draft only available from OW Resource Center; final
available late 1994}
NTIS POTW Sludge Sampling and Analysis Guidance Document, August. 1989; USEPA
OWEC/Permits Div; available only from NTIS (PB93-227957); (being revised late 1994)
OWRC Preparing Sewage Sludge For Land Application or Surface Disposal: A Guide for Preparers
NTIS of Sewage SJudge on the Monitoring, Recordkeeping, and Reporting Requirements of the
NSFC Federal Standards For Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge, 40 CFR Part 503 (EPA 831B-93-
002a); August 1993.
OWRC Surface Disposal of Sewage Sludge: A Guide For Owners/Operators of Surface Disposal
NTIS Faculties on the Monitoring, Recordkeeping, and Notification Requirements of the Federal
NSFC Standards For the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge, 40 CFR Part 503: May 1994.
OWRC Land Application of Sewage Sludge: A Guide For Land Appliers on the Recordkeeping and
Notification Requirements of the Federal Standards For the Use or Disposal of Sewage
SJudge, 40 CFR Part 503: Available September 1994 from OW Resource Center.
OWRC Questions & Answers on Part 503: available late 1994
OWRC THC Continuous Emission Monitoring Guidance for Part 503 For Sewage Sludge
Incinerators: June 1994
OWRC Federal Register Notice 5/2/89 Final Sludge State Program and Permitting Regulations
OWRC Federal Register Notice 7/24/90 General Ptetiaaartenl A NPDES Regulation Changes (the
Domestic Sewage Study I
OWRC Video: Sewage Sludge Sampling Techniques, 20 minutes long, USEPA OWEC Enforcement
Division; 1993
OWRC State Sludge Management Program Guidance Manual, Oct. 1990, USEPA OWEC
Municipal Support Division Purifications—Sludge Treatment and Disposal:
NTIS Environmental Regulations & Technology: Use & Disposal of Municipal Wastewater Sludge
(PB 80200546 for NTIS only), March 1989
NTIS Anaerobic Sludge Digestion: Operations Manual (EPA 430/09-78-001) (PB 250129/AS for
NTIS orsty), Feb. 1976
NTIS Application of Sewage Sludge to Cropland; Appraisal of Potential Hazards of the Heavy
Metals to Plants and Animals (EPA 430/09-76-013) (PB 264015/AS for NTIS only), Nov.
1976
NTIS Sludge HarxSing A Conditioning - Operations Manual (EPA 430/09-78-002) (PB 279449/AS
for NTIS only), Feb. 1978
8A-14
-------
NACo - About Counties - County Cod...dinances - Category Search ResLhttp://www.naco.org/counties/codes/cat_res.cffn?Categorv_Code=C13
KftCBEOttB
mm
" ' ¦' ¦ A'.- 'In jy> ' .4 *
- -l-li
J'
a>;
County Codes and Ordinaces
County Codes bv Subject | County Codes hv State Count\ Codes h\ Count\
County Codes by Subject Results
Note Some of these codes and ordinances are MS Word 97 documents and are only
available, at this time, in the doc format If you can not open these documents, please
contact the NACo Research Division to order a copy.
Environmental Protection
j Ordinance Name
County/Town State
Forested Buffer Water Resource Easement
Carroll Countv MD
Non-Forested Buffer Water Resource
Easement
Carroll Count\ MD
Voluntas Remediation Act
(state) NiYl
Wellfield Protection Ordinance
Palm Beach Count\ FL ,
Wetlands Protection Policy
Pittsford (town) ¦ NY ;
NACo welcomes all counties to submit their codes and ordinances for
posting to our website. For more information, please contact Jacqueline
Bvers.
About NACo | About Counties | Membership ] Lcgislatu i- Affairs
Programs & Projects | Conferences & Events | Publications | Affiliates & Associates
NACo Website Comments/Questions
© 1999 National Association of Counties
oil 1/13/00 1.50 PM
-------
NACo - About Counties - County Codes and Ordinances
hrtp.//ww w .naco.org/counues. coue:>. mucv.i i
|||||(|
. .-Ai a «Tr
HftCe Bone r^/ Contact SBirS Q^/. Stotodex
County Codes and Ordinances
The NACo Research Division collects examples of various county
codes and ordinances. The Codes and Ordinances are arranged by
subject, state and county.
NACo solicits codes and ordinances throughout the country These
codes and ordinances should be used as examples onl\ Prior to
adoption, counties need to assure compliance with state and local laws.
^ County Codes & Ordinances Listings & Search
(Search by Category by County or b\ State)
Search C'ountv Codes & Ordinances bv Keyword
^ Countv Codes Website Links
NACo welcomes all counties to submit their codes and ordinances for
posting to our website. For more information, please contact Jacqueline
Bvers
About NACo ] About Counties | Membership | Legislative Affairs
Programs & I'roiects | Conferences & Events ] Publications j Affiliates & Associates
N ACo Website Comments/Questions
© 1999 National Association of Counties
I of 1
1/13/00 1 4E
-------
NACo - Programs & Projects - Environmental Projects
http://www.naco.org/programs/en\ iron/nonpoini_res.cin
* 'Lsr if A* i«t;
H&Cciofflo ^ / Contact Bs Jfj/ Soarel Stotniex "V1^/ Links
SiEnvironmental
¦'
Environmental
Non-point Source Water Pollution Prevention
Resources & Website Links
Federal Government
• EPA link on nonpoint source pollution
Organizations
. Watershed Management Institute, Inc.
Develops ways to protect and restore nations waters The consultant entities do
this by providing technical and research support to environmental
professionals through publications, training, and development of innovative
watershed protection tools 850-926-5310
• NACE - National Association of Countv Engineers (a NACo Affiliate)
• Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officers (NEMO)
. Center lor Watershed Protection
Publications
• EPA Publication
NACo Publications
. Minimizing Stormwater Runoff
Conservation design is an approach that incorporates natural features for
stormwater management into the site design of a development proiect -
Count} Environmental QuarterK.
• Westchester Count\ Tackles Nonpoint Source Pollution Countv
Environmental QuanerK- December 1997
Urban Runoffarticle - Count} Environmental Quarterly. December 1997
• NACo Helps Maryland Counties Answer Smart Growth Questions
Smart growth article - Count} News. April 13 1998 issue
• Counties Want Sa\ over Sum'-! of Animal Feed Lots
Article on Confined animal teed lot operations - Count}' News. November 10.
1997 issue
• loua Court Savs Countv Can't Create llo'j Farm Ordinances
Article on confined animal feed lot operations - Count} News March 30
1998 issue
• Westchester Couinv Tackles Nonpoint Source Pollution
Urban Runoff Article - Count} Environmental Quarter!} December 1997
Related NACo Project
. Smarth Grow th
• Watershed Management Proiect
• Source Water Protection Proiect
For more information on this project, e-mail James Da\ enport or
N'aomi Friedman or call (202) 661-8807
About IVACo | About Counties | Membership | Legislative Affairs
1/13/00 I 47 PP
-------
NACo - Programs & Projects - Environmental Projects - Non-Point
http://www .naco org/programs/enviroa nonpoint.i
HI AC"
r xj
HWoae / Cootictis
vironmental
Environmental
Non-point Source Water Pollution Prevention
The most widespread and significant source of pollution to our nation's
rivers, lakes, and estuaries is nonpoint source pollution. These include
runoff from rainfall, snowmelt. or irrigation that picks up pollution as it
moves and deposits it into rivers, lakes, and coastal waters, or into
ground water. While the impact to our waterways of individual
nonpoint sources ma> be small, the cumulative effect of these
significant!) degrades water quality.
Because nonpoint source pollution is
so pervasive, solutions to this
problem involve a broad range of
pla\ers including elected officials,
planners. en\ ironmental specialists,
farmers, and developers. Land-use
decisions made on the county level
greath affects the amount and type of
runnoff dispersed into our water
s\ stems. Through NACo's Nonpoint
Source Water Pollution Project,
county officials, both elected and
professional, can learn more about
the problem and potential solutions
Nonpoint Source
Pollution Origins
• runnoff from streets
and parking lots
. septic systems
• logging and mining wastes
¦ agricultural lands
. animal feed lots
» construction sites
¦ lawn chemicals
i marinas/ recreational
boating
¦ pet waste
• litter/trash
> erosion'sedimentation
Nonpoint Water Pollution Pre\ention Project Information
. educational workshops at our conferences and regional trainings
• periodic articles in the Count\ News and Counn Environmental Quarterly
• access to information produced b\ IIPA and other organizations
. information about new federal regulations and studies
• peer-to-peer exchange and contacts
• a new manual on stormv>ater managemeni (pending Summer
~ Nonpoint Water Pollution Prevention Resources
This project is funded by EPA Office of \\ ater
For more information on this project, e-mail James Davenport or
\aomi Friedman or call (202) (161 -8807
About NACo | About Counties | Memhership | Lcjislatis e Affairs
Programs Projects | Conferences & F.\ents | Publications | Affiliates & Associates
1 of:
1 '13/00 1 47
-------
Data Sources for Watershed
Protection
-------
Data Sources for
Watershed Protection
Why Scale Still Matters...
• Large-scale watersheds
- Lots of information available
• Online sources
• State sources
- Modeling programs easier to develop
- Local involvement, coordination challenging
Why Scale Still
Matters...(cont.)
• Smaller-scale watersheds
- Less inlormation available
~ local data, knowledge important
• Fine-scale monitoring often absent
- Greater need to collect new data
- Greater local interest and involvement
-------
Types of Data Needed for
Assessments
• Chemical
• Physical
• Biological
• Land uses
• Potential pollutant sources
Chemical Parameters
• Dissolved oxygen
• pH
• Nutrients
• Pesticides
• Metals
-------
Physical Parameters
• Flow
• Temperature
• Suspended solids
• Streambank stability
• Imbeddedness
• Pool/riffle configuration
• Bedload (cross-sections, pebble count)
Biological Parameters
• Indices of biological integrity
- Species richness and abundance
- Macroinvenebrates, fish, algae
• Riparian vegetation
- Size, class, zone, width vs slopes, etc
- Percent shading over river/stream
-------
Land Use Information:
Urban
• Impervious surface percentage
• Storm water system
• Onsite wastewater treatment
• New development areas
• Management practices
Land Use Information:
Rural
• Agriculture (crop, pasture, range)
• L'vestock operations
• Fores', and timber harvest plans
• Onsite wastewater treatment
• Management practices
-------
Potential Pollutant
Sources
• NPDES discharge permit holders
- Treatment facilities
- CSOs and SSOs
- Industrial storm water
• CERCLA sites
• Active/abandoned mines and wells
Data Sources
• USGS
• NRCS
• USE PA
• State and local agencies
• User groups
• Environmental organizations
USGS Data Sources
• National Water Information System (NWIS-
\ • 'i
rjciit. values File • streamflow, gage height,
contents, temps, specific conductance,
s.-'jinvni ground water levels
y- ti.'iu- data from selected surface water and
(round water sites
w.H'M-Ouality File - 1 8 million analyses of water
s.impies collected at over 300,000 sites Chemical,
nrvsical biological, and radiochemical
characteristics Surface water and ground water
• http.'/water usgs gov/nwis
-------
USGS Data Sources
(cont.)
• National Water-Quality Assessment
Program (NAWQA)
- Designed to assess historical, current, and future
water-quality conditions in representative basins
and aquifers nationwide
- 60 study units across the country
- http./Avwwrvares er usgs.gov/nawqa/nawqa_hom
e html
USGS Data Sources
(cont.)
• National Atlas of the US
- Web-based maps on environmental, resource,
demographic, economic, social, political, and
historical facts
- http //water usgs gov/atlas
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
(NRCS) ~Data and Management
• Soil surveys
• Management measures
- Provide assistance to farmers, ranchers, and
landowners to improve water quality
- Nutrient and pesticide management
- Soil erosion control
- Water conservation
- Wetlands conservation - wetlands reserve program
6
-------
NRCS Data and
Management (cont.)
• National Resources Inventory (NRI)
- Every 5 years - Inventory of national land cover
and use, soil erosion, prime farmland, and
wetlands
- 1997 data recently available - reports, maps, data
- http //www.nhq.nrcs.usda.gov/NRI/1997
EPA Data Sources
• Storage and Retrieval of U S Waterways
Parametric Data (STORET)
- EPA's primary ambient/raw water quality data
system
- Includes ambient, intensive survey, effluent, and
biological water quality
- 11 files ranging from hydrology to facility
discharges to monitoring sites
- http //www epa gov/OWOW/STORET
• Watershed Information Network (WIN)
- The gateway to watershed data, information, and
resources
EPA Data Sources (cont.)
• EPA Reach Files - National hydrographic
databases that uniquely identify and interconnect
the stream segments of surface drainage systems
- http//www.epa gov/OWOW/monitonng/
rf/rfindex html
• Spatial Data Management - EPA National GIS
Program
• Permit Compliance System (PCS) - all permitted
discharges
• SDWIS - State Drinking Water Information System
• 303(d) listings
-------
US EPA Envirofacts
Warehouse
• EPA environmental databases
- Superfund data
- Safe drinking water info
- Hazardous waste data
- Toxic Release Inventory
- Water discharge permits
- Air releases
- Grants information
US EPA Envirofacts
Warehouse (cont.)
• Integrating databases
- Facility Index System
- Master Chemical Integrator
• Spatial data
- LaVlong info
- EPA's Spatial Data Library
How do you pull these data
together to conduct
watershed assessments?
• Watershed Information Network (WIN)
• BASINS - Data available in one source
• GIS - graphical representations of multiple
layers of data compiled and presented at
the same scale
• Linked water quality models to assess and
predict results
-------
The Watershed Information
Network (WIN)
i| — - —
Ba _____
H
Locate Your Watershed
Using Different Search Techniques
I By ZIP Code,
( School,
Map,
Place, etc
http://www.epa.gov/surt2/locate/
Statewide Watershed
Information
p ' -ir- .':'—- r-v -'l
f .:r. - - r 1 —
I http://www.epa.gov/surf2/states/MN/stateiwi.html |
-------
Watershed-Specific Information
8-, 11-, and
| http^/www epa gov/surt2/hucs/07030005/
Surf 1«ar SiitfiMr »
14-Digit
, HUCs
| http7/www epa.gov/surt2ftiucs/07030005/8core.html
Condition and Vulnerability Indicator
Graphs for HUC 02070010
nttp 'www eps Qowsurf2/huc»/020700l0/score html/
x- U j ]~~~ j •*"
('• g *¦'. i t5, i / I V' " &
. . . — — »— — — Cof«jw Imusn
- n
j-dUHU J J J::
--.V^sT'X -,;TT ^
' http_//www epa gov/sur12/hucs/07030005/
-------
Fish Consumption Category - Score
«. i t * i, ^
S'iJJI. J
]'. KllLlw 'J!.... -Il . t* Itl 1. *:r";
••
One or more\
x^Advisories^/
— • - - - - _ ^ r
Fish Consumption Data View
PCB Advisory on Corp ond
Catfish Consumption 111 •
What Is BASINS? IC
Better Assesonsit Science
Integrating
Paint and Nanpcxnt Sources
GIS, data analysis, and modeling system
;o $uonort watershed-based analysis and
* •• ov.-fosmenf
rational data sets with options to import
local aata
iootj provide quick access to analysis techniques
for watershed assessment
/.foe?*.'! nroviae more detailed analysis and
predictive evaluations to support
studies
-------
BAS INS Facts and
Requirements for Use
• USEPA Product - Office of Science and
Technology (OST)
• Available for every state in the continental
U.S.
• Hardware and software requirements'
- ArcView GIS Version 3 Oa or 3 1
- Windows 95, 98, or NT
- 133-MHz Pentium processor (at minimum)
- 250 mb hard disk space (at minimum)
- 32 mb of RAM
- CD-ROM and color monitor
BASINS Applicability
• Multipurpose support system
- Watershed management and basin planning
- TMDL program
- Source water protection
- Pollutant trading
• Multiple users
- National assessment
- Regional assessment
- States
- Local governments
- Private
USGS Master Water Data Index
IjSGS - Mutter \\ ater Data iniiri
Tbh dirMtcrv *111 alio* sou to locate «»irr moeiioriag lUliooi (ricked
Ihf I 'nilfrt Suir* f .f*>locic«( ,Sur*rt, the ^ n« iroamrnlMl Prouciion
A* mo »l»l* a£enci*v *nd olbrr participant*
Croix 070.10005
3
|http-//orcddw»mdn.er.usgs.gov/pubhc/plsql/mwdi.homei
-------
For Lower St. Croix
USGS Cataloging Unit: 07030005
pUSGS
USGS - Master Water Data Index
l«n« Wirt*
UwiluVWLM
i iiox-lt i'V mic-
£¦; 11D hli." TLL01 _Afi
» iHLTI ^'"0". TW-TaLaTI
Science in Your Watershed
\ W.iiei KrsdUKCN I inks l"i
fTOJIMJrt* - hiwff N Cm.iv
Major VSC.S I.lulu
Real time flow
- | water use
¦ -'."if
Acii»c LSOS Project*
Pnjn« to •'•WO* - l*mmw %t Cr.ii
I http://water.usgs.gov/lookup/getwatershecPOyOSOOOS
-------
Other Relevant Statutes
-------
I
Other Relevant Statutes
Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA)
• Historic focus on quality of water at the
tap, not raw water supply, but
changing, especially in 1996
amendments
• Public water supplies must comply with
EPA standards (MCLs) at the tap
• Administration delegated to 49 states
SDWA (cont.)
Comprehensive State Ground Water Protection
Programs 10 states have EPA-endorsed
programs
- GOAL focusing agency resources on key areas and
problems within a state
Wellhead Protection Programs (WHPP) 47
states have approved programs
- States are mandated to implement preventive measures
and cleanup contingency plans for all ground water-based
community water systems (not all public systems)
-------
SDWA (cont.)
• Underground injection program
- Regulatory mostly delegated to states
- Control injection of waste into deep and shallow
wells
• DW state revolving loan fund (1996)
- Recipients drinking water suppliers only
- Opportunities to fund source water protection
(including TMDLs)
- Around $4 Billion Congressional funding through
FY 2000
SDWA (cont)
• Source Water Assessment and Protection
Program (1996 amendments)
- States required to assess all public water supplies by
?003
- Watershed is protection area for surface waters
- Assessments to be used at local level as basis to
implement protection measures (watershed
management strategies)
- Up to 1 5% of federal DWSRF grant can be set aside
for imDlementtng SWAPPs
Coastal Zone Management
Act (CZMA)
• Administered primarily by National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
• Grants to establish and implement state
CZM programs
• 27 states and 5 territories have programs, 3
remaining eligible states
• Federal actions must be consistent with
state CZM programs and policies
-------
Coastal Nonpoint Program
(CZARA)
• Established in 1990
• Administered jointly by NOAA and EPA
• Creates incentives for states to establish
enforceable programs
- Enforceable measures permit programs, zoning, bad actor
laws
- May try voluntary programs first, but need enforceable tools
as backup
CZARA (cont.)
• States without approved basic program
or failing to implement management
measures (BMPs) might lose some of
annual CZM grants
EPA's Role in CZARA
• Issue guidance on applicable
management measures for key
categories of nonpoint sources
- Agriculture
- Forestry
- Mannas and recreational boating
- Hydro modification
- Urban runoff nor covered oy NPDES
- Wetlands and rioanan areas
• Consult with NOAA on conditions and
final approval of state coastal NPS
programs
3
-------
Farm Bill: Federal Agricultural
Improvement Act of 1996
• Environmental Quality Incentives
Program (EQIP)
- Administered by NRCS
- Combines several existing technical and financial
support programs
- Focused on areas with priority natural resources
and environmental sensitivity
- Participants must have approved conservation
plans
Farm Bill (cont.)
• Conservation Reserve Program
- Participants enter into 10- to 15-year contracts,
committing to withhold certain lands from
production
- USDA provides annual rental payments and cost-
share for conservation practices
- Eligible areas highly erodible land, riparian and
floodprone areas, wetlands, key wildlife habitat,
areas contributing to surface water, ground
water, or air pollution, areas in a local wellhead
protection program
Farm Bill (cont.)
• Wetlands Reserve Program
- Administered by NRCS
- Purchase of permanent, or 30-year, easements on
wetlands, buffer zones around wetlands, and
riparian areas connecting wetlands
- 50%-75% funding for restoration activities on
enrolled wetlands
• Swampbuster. prohibits federal farm
support funding for farming on areas
converted from wetlands after 1985
-------
Transportation Efficiency
Act (TEA-21)
• Passed 6/98' $217 billion authorized
over 6 years
• Very similar to ISTEA (including
planning requirements)
• Requires sediment controls on all
projects, consistent with state 319
programs & CZARA
TEA-21 (Cont.)
• Managed by state DOTs and
"Metropolitan Planning
Organizations"
• Potential source of several billion
dollars for projects aimed at
reducing or mitigating
environmental impacts of current or
past transportation projects
TEA-21 (cont.)
• Types of projects that can be funded
- BMPs for runoff from roads, etc
- Riparian/wetland restoration/creation
(inc wetland banking)
- Mitigation of loss of natural habitat (not just
wetlands)
- Acquisition of easements
- Bike and pedestrian trails
-------
TEA-21 (cont.)
• Specific programs to check out
- Transportation enhancements (TE)' —S500M/yr
- Congestion mitigation and air quality program
(CMAQ) —$1 4B authorized/FYOO
- Transportation, community, and system
preservation pilots (TSCP) S35 M/FYOO
- Environmental restoration and pollution
abatement ("SR Projects")
Clean Air Act (CAA)
• Relevance: air deposition
- Direct deposits/indirect deposits
- Key pollutants mercury and nitrogen
- Percent loadings from direct air deposition
• Mercury
- Great Lakes -60%
- Chesapeake Bay —50%
• Nitrogen
- Aloemarle-Pamlico Sound -40%
- NY/NJ Harbor -40%
- Tampa Bay —30%
- Chesapeake Bay -25%
CAA - Air Deposition
• Section 11 2(m)-Great Waters Program
- EPA'NOAA Lead Research
- Great La»es Chesapeake Bay, Lake Champlam, estuaries
NEP National Estuary Research
- Report to Congress June 1997
• Title IV-Acid Deposition Control Program
- Controls on sulfur (SO?) and nitrogen (NO.)
- Targets 263 big coal-burning power units and - 1700 other
generating units (> 25MW)
- SO, from 445 Phase I units cut m half by '95
-------
Other Useful Federal Laws
• Endangered Species Act
• Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
• Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
• Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA)
• Superfund/CERCLA
• FERC Rehcensing of Dams
• National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA)
Clean Air Act (CAA)
• Relevance Air Deposition
- Direct deoosits/indirect deposits
- Key pollutant* mercury and nrtrogen
- Percent Loadings Irom direct air deposition
• Mercury
- Great lakes —80%
- Chesapeake Bay -50%
» Nitrogen
- Alcemarle-Pamlico Sounds ~4Q%
- NY/NJ Harbor -40%
- Tampa Bay -30%
- Chesapeake Bay -25%
-------
CAA - Air Deposition
• Section 11 2(m)-Great Waters Program
- EPA/NOAA Lead Research
- Great Lakes. ChesaDeake Bay. Lake Champlain, estuaries
NEP, National Estuary Research
- Report to Congress June 1997
• Title IV-Acid Deposition Control Program
- Controls on sulfur (SOj) and nitrogen (NO,)
- Targets 263 big coal-burning power units and -1 700 other
generating units (>25MW)
- S02 from 445 Phase I units cut in
half by '95
CAA - Air Deposition (cont.)
• EPA (OW/OAR) Air Deposition
Initiative
- Better define links between air emissions of
Hg and N and water quality impacts
- Ouantify benefits to water quality of air
controls
- Develop strategies for addressing air
deposition
CAA - Air Deposition (cont.)
• 1998 "NOx SIP Call" Rule
- Requires 22 eastern states and DC to
prepare State Implementation Plans (SIPs)
to reduce NO,
- EPA estimates 40 million lb cut in NO, by
2007
- Primary goal is reducing ozone, but
incidental water quality benefits
8
-------
Endangered Species Act
• Administered by Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) and NOAA
• Requires FWS/NOAA to list endangered
ana threatened animals and plants
• Prohibits "taking" of listed species
• Prohibits federal actions (including CWA
permits) that would jeopardize listed
species or their habitat; agencies must
"consult" to avoid jeopardizing
ESA: EPA's CWA
Responsibilities
• Determine if actions "may affect"
- If they may, must "consult" with FWS/NOAA
• EPA activities covered
- Promulgation/approval of state WQS
- Issuance of NPDES permits and delegation of
program to states
- Development/approval of state TMDLs
ESA: EPA's CWA
Responsibilities (cont.)
• Take measures to aid recovery
- Habitat Conservation Plans similar to
watershed plans
9
-------
Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA)
• Requires EPA registration for all
pesticides sold in the United States
• Revised and strengthened in 1996
• States have primary enforcement
responsibility
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
• Prohibits dams, channelization, and
other federal "water projects"
• Authorizes purchase of land and
easement (willing sellers only)
• Most rivers in system managed by
federal agencies, some by states
• 160 river segments totaling 11,000
miles currently in the system
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA)
• Subtitle C
- Regulates hazardous waste
- From Generation to disposal ("cradle to grave")
• Subtitle D
- Regulates solid/nonhazardous waste
• Subtitle I
- Regulates underground storage tanks
-------
RCRA: Subtitle C
• Waste minimization program for
generators of hazardous waste
• Waste manifest/tracking system for
transporters
RCRA: Subtitle C (cont.)
• Regulation of active waste
management, storage, & disposal sites
- Ban on land disposal of certain wastes
- Site design requirements two liners, leachate
collection system
- Monitoring leak detection, ground water
monitoring
• Corrective action cleanup of inactive,
not abandoned, sites
RCRA: Subtitle D
• Covers active solid waste facilities
Statf soho waste management plans
• Must address protection of ground water and
•,urtace water from leachate
• t ncourage recycling and reuse
- R»'tiui
-------
RCRA: Subtitle I
• Underground storage tanks
(especially for petroleum products)
• Regulations for UST operation
- Design
- Installation
- Monitoring/leak detection
• Regulations for cleanup
Superfund/CERCLA
• Governs cleanup of abandoned
hazardous waste disposal sites
• National Priority List, all sites covered
by CERCLA'Superfund
- EPA compiles the NPL
• Cleanup goals for sites
- Include water quality standards
Federal Power Act (FPA)
• The Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) issues licenses to
construct and operate non-federal
hydroelectric dams
• Dams built by the federal government
are not subject to FERC licensing
requirements
-------
FPA Licensing
• FERC licenses for hydro projects can be valid
for up to 50 years
• Licenses have reopener clauses, in case
unforseen circumstances or environmental
problems arise during the license term
• Clean Water Act Section 401 sta'.e water
quality certification is required for FERC hydro
licenses
• States frequently place conditions on their
401 certs, such as minimum stream flow, and
such conditions must become conditions of
the FERC license itself
FPA Licensing (cont.)
• Exemptions
- Small hydropower projects, which are 5
megawatts or less, that will be built at an
existing dam or utilize a natural water feature
for head
- A conduit exemption, which would be issued
for constructing a hydropower project on an
existing conduit (e g , irrigation canal)
------- |