National nonpoint source program
Download as PPTX, PDF0 likes36 views
This document summarizes the §319 National Nonpoint Source Program, which provides funding to states to manage nonpoint source (NPS) pollution and support on-the-ground watershed projects. Key points include: 1) NPS pollution comes from various sources including agriculture, urban development, mining and forestry; 2) §319 allocates funds annually to states which they use to manage NPS programs and fund watershed projects; 3) §319 funds act as a catalyst, leveraging over $8 for every $1 of federal funds. Projects have restored over 725 waterbodies and improved water quality in thousands of miles of streams and acres of lakes/estuaries.
National nonpoint source program
- 1. §319 National Nonpoint Source Program: A Catalyst for Water Quality Improvements 2018 Soil and Water Conservation Society Annual Meeting Science and Policy Symposium, July 30 Katie Flahive Nonpoint Source Management Branch Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds 1
- 2. NPS Pollution is Diverse • Agriculture • Nutrients, sediment, pathogens, pesticides, metals • Pollutant losses from row crop runoff, irrigation water, animal facilities • Onsite septic systems – nutrients, pathogens • Nonregulated suburban/urban runoff • Pathogens, nutrients (e.g., fertilizer, pet waste), oil • Excess water volume scours streams – sediment • Acid mine drainage (abandoned mines) – metals, pH • Forestry – sediment (landslides, roads), temperature • Hydromodification – dams, channel straightening • Sediment, temperature, habitat destruction 2
- 4. §319 Allocation of Funds • Distributed to states annually based on formula • In FY18 ~ $167M; ranges from ~$1M to $8M per state • 40% non-federal match required • About 5% of funds allocated to Tribes • Grant Guidelines expect 50/50 split of funds • NPS program funds – manage state NPS program • Watershed project funds – support on-the-ground projects • EPA Regions review annual workplans and issue grants, provide assistance and support 4
- 5. §319 Funds: Roles and Results • Support the operation of state and tribal NPS programs • State staff manage programs: prioritize actions, coordinate with state, local and federal programs (e.g., USDA, FEMA), manage RFPs for watershed projects, oversee projects, provide technical assistance, monitor water quality, document success • Catalyst enabling local water quality (WQ) projects • Local staff (e.g., SWCDs) to plan projects and coordinate with community • Landowner outreach and technical assistance • Coordination across agencies to secure funding and support • 9-element watershed plans that focus “the right practices in the right places for the right pollutants” • To date, 725 waterbodies restored to state WQS • Cleaner water in 6000 miles of stream, 164,000 acres of lakes/estuaries • States and local partners are proud of these “NPS Success Stories” 5
- 6. ($555,394,300) ($444,098,740) ($386,967,700) ($392,747,254) 319 federal funding, 13.35% §319 Grants: a Catalyst for Funds Leveraging and Coordination 6 An analysis of WQ projects shows that for each dollar of §319 funds, states and partners invested an additional $8
- 7. Leverage: a Key Priority for the NPS Program • Given the magnitude of the problem and limited resources, EPA’s NPS program invests in building connections and leveraging funding with partner programs and agencies • USDA - especially NRCS conservation programs • FEMA - working the nexus between WQ projects and reducing natural hazards (floods, wildfire), leveraging Hazard Mitigation grant funds • CWSRF - has broader authorities for SRF-funded NPS projects; a shared goal with SRF program is to grow this approach beyond a few innovative states 7
- 8. Tracking Progress Towards WQ Improvement • Meeting WQS (NPS Success Stories) is the gold standard but often takes many years to achieve • Many sources needing treatment in a watershed • Funding and capacity limit the pace of implementation • Lag time for legacy pollutant loads to resolve • Interim metrics are helpful to demonstrate progress towards WQ improvement • Many partners have embraced pollutant load reductions for Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Sediment • EPA compiles annual load reductions for §319-funded projects – data is used by ECOS, ACWA, others • Voluntary load reduction targets have been set with EPA and partners in the Mississippi Basin and Great Lakes; other partners use these targets to guide their work • Load reduction estimates also used by USDA, Field to Market, states 8
- 9. Documenting WQ Success in Agricultural Landscapes • Factors increasing likelihood of measured WQ improvement* • Focused efforts in small watersheds (HUC-12, ~ 40 sq mi) • Critical areas defined and treated with suites of practices • Close coordination between state WQ agencies and NRCS • NRCS shares appropriate practice data with state so WQ agency can assess progress via instream monitoring • Watershed plan developed and implemented with local stakeholders; has adequate data and problem description • Quantitative water quality and monitoring goals • High level of implementation and landowner participation; good outreach capacity • Stable funding, effective information and technical transfer capability * USDA Conservation Effects Assessment Program, EPA NPS Monitoring Program 9
- 10. NPS Loads in a Watershed Vary Widely and Must be Targeted to Improve WQ • A watershed approach considers all sources and prioritizes the most important control actions • Watershed Plans provide technical basis for project success related to pollutant loads, largest sources, critical areas to be treated, practices with greatest WQ impact • Watershed Plans are the roadmap for engagement of stakeholders and landowners throughout the project. Without local capacity and landowner engagement, projects don’t happen • Any given Plan or critical area may include a few or many individual projects, landowner actions 10
- 11. NPS Program and USDA Engagement •EPA NPS Program and USDA Conservation Programs • Are complementary and best deliver WQ results when working together: §319 supports project implementation, planning, documenting success; USDA has ample funding to cost-share practices • Share goals, especially with NRCS WQ-focused initiatives • Rely on local partners and voluntary landowner action •Ongoing work alongside USDA to advance the science and practice of Ag conservation for WQ outcomes •Joint Initiatives with USDA • National Water Quality Initiative and the Hypoxia Task Force 11
- 12. NWQI Background & Recent Developments • Launched in FY12, NRCS coordinates with EPA & State WQ agencies to address Ag nonpoint sources in ~ 200 small watersheds • Funding through 2023, now also source water protection • NRCS targets EQIP funds ($22-33M/yr) to water quality-focused conservation practices to address nutrients, sediment, and pathogens from animal ag • State WQ agencies concur on watershed selection, typically invest §319 or other funds, and monitor in at least one watershed • EPA supports engagement by state NPS agencies, provides monitoring guidance, tracks and reports annual results • In most states NWQI has had great value in building collaboration and leveraging between State WQ agencies and NRCS • ‘Readiness’ program (FY17 on) emphasizes watershed and on-farm planning prior to targeted implementation 12