a national program to control nonpoint sources of water pollution. Through. §319, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides states, territories.
275 KB – 24 Pages
PAGE – 3 ============
Congress enacted Section 319(h) (§319) of the Clean Water Act in 1987, establishing a national program to control nonpoint sources of water pollution. Through §319, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides states, territories and tribes with guidance and grant funding to implement their nonpoint source (NPS) programs. This can include a wide variety of activities including regulatory training, technology transfer, watershed projects and monitoring to assess the than 2,000 projects across the country.1This report offers a glimpse of NPS activities underway across the United States. It [email protected] .NPS pollution, unlike pollution from industrial and sewage treatment plants, comes from many diffuse sources. NPS pollution is caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the ground. As the runoff moves, it picks up and carries away natural and human-made pollutants, ˜nally depositing them into lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands, coastal waters and ground waters.
PAGE – 4 ============
4Why Is the NPS Program Important? The CWA™s regulatory programs include enforceable provisions that are directed at point source pollutionŠthe discharge of pollutants to surface waters from pipes, outlets and other discrete conveyances. The NPS Program, in contrast, addresses NPS pollution, or polluted runoff , primarily through nonregulatory means. Of all the waterbodies across the nation that have been assessed and a possible source of impairment of rivers and streams and and reservoirs are polluted by nonpoint sources. 2An overwhelming majority of AmericansŠ215 million (>70%)Šlive within 2 miles 3 of these waters are considered unsafe for swimming or are unable to support Total Assessed Waters of the United States Rivers and Streams (Miles) Lakes, Reservoirs, Good Waters 487,299 5,470,004 Threatened Waters 5,550 34,621 Impaired Waters 614,153 13,009,273 Source: USEPA July 2016 4The Role of §319 Funding as a Catalyst to Restore and Protect the Nation™s Waters NPS pollution encompasses a wide range of sources that are not subject to population growth and land use changes. Even as waters are restored, others are multiple funding sources. Although not the entire remedy, §319 funding is an essential part of the solution to the costly challenges of NPS pollutionŠit is a critical source of support for NPS management programs and for watershed projects. State NPS programs typically leverage other programs and funding §319 Funding as a Path to Improvement Since 1990, the NPS program at the federal, state, tribal and local levels evolved of suites of best management practices (BMPs), and new monitoring and modeling continues to improve partnerships with federal, state and local entitiesŠ improvements.
PAGE – 5 ============
5Total §319 Funding Per Year (in millions) Source: USEPA 5§319 Catalyzes Other Project Funding Source: USEPA Success Stories 6 §319 f unding. 6The Watershed Approach The watershed approach is fundamental to implementing work at the local scale to achieve water quality results. A˜watershed plan is a strategy and roadmap for achieving water quality resource goals: ŁWatershed plans provide the technical basis to guide work related to pollutant loads, sources, and BMPs strategically prioritized in critical areas that will have the greatest impact on water quality. ŁWatershed plans lay out a path for engaging affected stakeholders and landowners in the process along the wa y. Basically, without local capacity and land owner engagement, projects don™t happen.
PAGE – 6 ============
6Achieving Water Quality Improvement in a Dynamic Environment Creating a Path to Success NPS Success Stories Number of Waterways Re˜ored Source: NPS Success Stories web site: www.epa.gov/nps/success 61Watershed plans lay out the route for water quality improvements. These plans address the sources of the problem and identify critical areas where focused work will make the most impact on water quality. A watershed can contain dozens or hundreds of NPS pollution sources and these can ˚uctuate over time. Finding solutions is not a simple task! Watershed plans help local groups take a holistic approach to restoring water quality. This approach requires four key things: people, money, work and time. If one of those four is missing, success is simply out of reach. 2Success takes peopleŠ many people. People from local communities, state agencies, tribal governments, conservation districts and other organizations are working hard every day to reduce NPS pollution. They˛are the foundation that sets everything into motion. 3Success also takes money, of course. Many times, the §319 program serves as the catalyst to set watershed plans into motion. State, local and regional staff work with other partners to identify funding from additional sources to meet costs for the entire project. A little bit of §319 money goes a long way! 6EPA™s Success Stories website communicates the results of partners™ efforts that achieved water quality goals. Each story documents the speci˜c water quality problems, the water quality restoration activities that took place, data showing improvement, funding sources used, and the valuable partnerships that were pivotal to the success. Although it can take years to see water quality improvements, success stories provide a glimpse into what we can expect in time from the many projects going on in watersheds across the country. 6
PAGE – 8 ============
This graph shows the source categories NPS 8 1,968 Ł Livestock and crop production activities and facilities Ł Forestry (silviculture) operations 1,507 Ł Stormwater runoff (e.g., motor oil and road salts) from roads and parking lots Ł Stormwater runoff from lawns and gardens Ł Stormwater runoff from pet waste and failing septic systems Hydrologic/ 609 Ł Stream channelization and channel Ł Impacts from dams Ł Impacts from streambank and shoreline erosion Other 578 Ł Some state work might not be easily captured by one Examples of recent projects in this category include technical analysis, emerging contaminant studies, and rehabilitation work after Waste Disposal 197 Ł Inappropriate waste disposal practices Ł Malfunctioning or poorly placed septic systems Ł Leaking storage tanks Resource Extract ion 177 Ł Abandoned mine drainage or former fuel extraction sites and activities Legacy Pollutants 117Ł Chemicals used historically in agricultural, manufacturing and mining activitiesŠsome of which are Ł Usually these pollutants are associated with contaminated sediment. Marinas 54Ł Boat cleaning, boat fueling or marine head (toilet) discharge Ł Stormwater runoff from parking lots and hull maintenance/ repair areas Source: USEPA Grants Reporting and Tracking System 8This graph shows the source categories NPS funding has addressed over the longer term (2000Œ2013).
PAGE – 9 ============
9Land Use Drives NPS Work A snapshot of completed projects provides insight into the focus of NPS efforts. The type of NPS pollution affecting local waters is driven primarily by an area™s include population, climate, soil and topography. As a result, the number, funding level and focus of §319 projects vary across the country (see images, below). In the HUC 4 Scale (2008Œ2013) Source: USEPA Grants Reporting and Tracking System 9Note: HUC 4 = four-digit hydrological unit code representing large river basins across the nation. This map includes the overall distribution of NPS efforts as dollars from 2008Œ2013. Projects can vary from thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
PAGE – 10 ============
Agriculture 10 States reported that agricultural NPS pollution was the leading source of water quality impacts on surveyed rivers and lakes, the second largest source of impairments to wetlands, and a major contributor to contamination of surveyed estuaries and groundwater. Of §319 funds that go to watershed projects, 30% to 40% annually go towards addressing agricultural sources. Tribal §319 dollars also have a strong focus on projects that address agricultural impacts on waterbodies. 10 Partnerships with U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) agencies such as the Natural Resources Conservation Service, Farm Service Agency and Forest Service are able to identify the most effective approach along with the resources necessary to protect and restore rivers, streams, lakes and estuaries. NPS funds often work in concert with USDA program funding to demonstrate innovative BMPs, coordinate implementation efforts, or provide technical assistance and landowner outreach to accelerate practice adoption. Top Pollutants Nutrients Suspended solids/sediments Pathogens Others include pesticides, temperature˛and selenium. Frequent BMPs Nutrient management planning Livestock exclusion Conservation cropping (including cover crops) Riparian buffers and grassed waterways Pasture, Private Forest Sources: National Land Cover Dataset, 2011 and NOAA™s Land Cover Atlas 11 Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service Quick Stats 12Systems of conservation practices that avoid, control and trap nutrient losses can be the most effective strategy to treat agricultural NPS pollution.
PAGE – 11 ============
11 HUC 4 Scale (2008Œ2013) Source: USEPA Grants Reporting and Tracking System 9As shown on the maps on pages 10 and 11, the §319 funds awarded for agriculture and silviculture broadly align with two of the country™s major land usesŠfarms and forests. Before After Richland Soil Conservation District Installing a vegetated diversion dike reduces soil erosion, holds the soil in place, and reduces ˚ooding in crop ˜elds. The Faces of Success Donny Latiolias, Capital Resource Conservation & Development Council, Louisiana fiLittle Silver Creek would not have been removed from the list of impaired waters without Section 319 funding which covered 34 percent of the cost of grain drills, pasture renovators, and aerator equipment for producers to lease from a local co-op,fl says Donny Latiolias, watershed coordinator with the Capital Resource Conservation & Development Council. Landowners saw the bene˜ts of this equipment immediately. One even noted that when it rained after his ˜rst time using the pasture renovator, he could see the water in˜ltrating the soil instead of standing on the surface and making its way downhill to local waterbodies as it had done in the past. Jennifer Klostreich, Richland Soil Conservation District, North Dakota Jennifer Klostreich has used funding from three §319 grants to upgrade many older septic systems in addition to improving agricultural practices that were causing high bacteria levels in the Wild Rice River. fiWhether it™s a new farming practice or a septic system upgrade, the Nonpoint Source Program gives landowners the little bit of a push they need to try something new,fl says Klostreich. fiThe 319 program helps us guide people through the process of making a change and ultimately, making that change become the new status quo.fl
275 KB – 24 Pages