l lfrl N200~E"5 . NtJ hI s ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ l,~9~ l l l GENERAL GUIDELINES SECTION 319{h) FY96 GRANT NONPOINT SOURCE IMPLEMENTATION GRANT REVISED DECEMBER, 1998 SECTION 319(h) FY96 GRANT NONPOINT SOURCE IMPLEMENTATION GRANT GRANT OPPORTUNITY UPDATE This is to advise you that Section 319(h) FY96 Grant funds for the prevention, control and/or abatement of nonpoint sources of pollution will be made available to public agencies in Georgia (e.g., cities, counties, local authorities operating local government delivery programs, regional development centers, local school systems, State colleges and universities, and State agencies). Under Section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) awards a Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant to the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GAEPD) to fund eligible projects which support the implementation of the Georgia Nonpoint Source Management Program. The Section 319(h) Grant funds are limited. Therefore, the GAEPD uses a competitive process to ensure that the most appropriate projects are selected for funding. The State has approximately $1 million in Section 319(h) FY96 Grant funds to implement watershed and statewide projects. Maximum Federal reimbursement for a Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant project is 60 percent of the total project cost. Therefore, each project must provide non-Federal matching funds or in-kind services for a minimum 40 percent of the total project cost. Thus, for a total project cost of $250,000, the maximum Federal reimbursement would total $150,000 and the non-Federal matching funds or in-kind services would total $100,000. Section 319(h) Grant project proposals should specifically identify the nonpoint sources of pollution being addressed and the activities proposed to prevent, control and/or abate these nonpoint sources of pollution. Priority will be given to project proposals which encompass or support a watershed management approach and result in measurable improvements in water quality. Project proposals must support milestones and/or implementation activities described in the draft Georgia Nonpoint Source Management Program (Full Revision -April, 1998). In addition, priority will be given to projects located within and benefiting watersheds identified on the Section 305(b) and Section 303(d) lists of waters which are partially or not supporting beneficial uses due to nonpoint sources of pollution. Copies are available upon request. Priority will be given to project proposals which implement Watershed Restoration Action Strategies in areas identified by the State's Unified Watershed Assessment as being "in need of restoration." These areas, referred to as "Category I- Watersheds in Need of Restoration," are those watersheds that "do not now meet, or face imminent threats of not meeting, clean water and other natural resource goals." The Unified Watershed Assessment for Georgia was developed by the GAEPD, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and the Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission (GSWCC), working with other interested Federal, State, local and private stakeholders. In accordance with the Unified Watershed Assessment Framework, the State finalized the Watershed Restoration Priorities in October, 1998. The USGS 8-digit hydrological cataloging unit served as the common scale for reporting the results of the Unified Watershed Assessment. Additional information about watersheds (e.g., rivers and streams in the watershed, land characteristics, river corridor and wetlands restoration efforts, index of watershed indicators, etc.) may be accessed through the USEPA webpage at: http:lwww .epa.govlsurf21hucsl Types of activities which are eligible include: regulatory or non-regulatory programs for enforcement, technical assistance, financial assistance, education, training, technology transfer, watershed projects, demonstration projects, monitoring to assess the success of specific nonpoint source implementation projects, urban stormwater control activities that are not specifically required by a draft or final NPDES permit, and certain ground water activities. Lake protection and restoration activities are eligible provided that they are not used for "inlake" work such as aquatic macrophyte harvesting or dredging unless the nonpoint sources of pollution will be remediated. SECTION 319(h) FY96 GRANT MONIES CAN NOT BE USED TO FUND PROJECT PROPOSALS RESULTING IN THE UPDATE AND REFINEMENT OF NONPOINT SOURCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS AND ASSESSMENTS. Nonpoint source pollution is the greatest source of water quality problems in Georgia today. The Section 319(h) Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant Program presents us all with exciting opportunities to focus our efforts and enhance our resources to solve these remaining water quality problems as well as to sustain good water quality. The application of Section 319(h) FY96 Grant funds to focus on solving our highest priority problems will enable us to make great strides in our efforts to achieve our water quality goals. PROPOSALS FOR THE SECTION 319(h) FY96 GRANT APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE GEORGIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION BY MARCH 31, 1999. ANY PROPOSAL POSTMARKED (OR RECEIVED, IF NOT MAILED) AFTER THIS DATE WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR FUNDING UNDER THE SECTION 319(h} FY96 GRANT. Applicants will be notified by June 30, 1999 if their Section 319(h) FY96 Grant proposals have been reviewed and approved by the GAEPD and the USEPA and are eligible for funding. Contingent upon review and approval by the USEPA, the applicants should receive the Section 319(h) FY96 Grant funds by September 30, 1999. :.. ;:s 0 GENERAL GUIDELINES SECTION 319(h) NONPOINT SOURCE IMPLEMENTATION GRANT PROPOSALS Proposals for the Section 319(h) FY96 Grant application must be submitted to the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GAEPD) by March 31, 1999. Any proposal postmarked (or received, if not mailed) after this date will not be considered for funding under the Section 319(h) FY96 Grant. Please include two (2) printed copies and one (1) 3 Y2" diskette in WordPerfect for Windows format. If another word-processing format must be used, please use ASCII text format (preferably DOS). Section 319(h) FY96 Grant proposals must adhere to the format (i.e., Title Page, Project Proposal Format Parts 1 and 2) as shown on the following pages. FAXES WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. Organizations should send Section 319(h) FY96 Grant proposals to: Section 319(h) FY96 Grant ATTN Frank M. Carubba East Floyd Tower, Suite 1070 205 Butler Street, SE Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 657-9488 E-Mail Address: frank_carubba@mail.dnr.state.ga.us 1 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK All Section 319(h) FY96 Grant proposals must be preceded by a separate TITLE PAGE. The title page must include the following information: (1) PROJECT TITLE - The project title should uniquely identify and describe the project. Limit the length of the title to two (2) type written lines. The project title should identify the type of project (e.g., waste management system demonstration, wetland restoration demonstration) and the name of the watershed, if applicable. (2) LEAD ORGANIZATION - The lead organization will be responsible for managing the proposed project. Please include the name, address, telephone number and fax number of the lead organization. (3) PRIMARY CONTACT - The primary contact will be the individual responsible for all correspondence and communications between the lead organization and the Georgia Environmental Protection Division. Please include the name, title, address, telephone number, fax number and E-m?Jil address of the primary contact. (4) PROJECT ABSTRACT - The project abstract should specifically identify the. nonpoint sources of pollution being addressed and the activities proposed to prevent, control and/or abate these nonpoint sources of pollution. Priority will be given to project proposals which encompass or support a watershed management approach and result in measurable improvements in water quality. 3 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK Project Title: The project title should uniquely identify and describe the project. Limit the length of the title to two (2) type written lines. The project title should identify the type of project (e.g., waste management system demonstration, wetland restoration demonstration) and the name of the watershed, if applicable. Lead Organization: The lead organization responsible for managing the proposed project must be identified. Cooperating Organizations: All Federal, State, regional and local organizations that will assist in the design and implementation of the proposed project must be identified, regardless of the funding source. Nonpoint Source Management Program Milestones Supported: Project proposals must support and specifically identify milestones and/or implementation activities described in the draft Georgia Nonpoint Source Management Program (Full Revision April, 1998). Please include the page number(s). Copies are available upon request. Project Location and Nonpoint Source Priority Watershed: Describe the project location (include the 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code and the coordinates for the latitude and longitude) and the name of the watershed, if applicable. Please delineate the sources of information (e.g., Section 305(b) Report, Section 303(d) list, a consolidated water quality assessment report, ground water protection strategy) that identify the water resources as being threatened or its uses impaired from nonpoint sources of pollution. Additional information about watersheds (e.g., 8-digit hydrological unit codes, rivers and streams in the watershed, land characteristics, river corridor and wetlands restoration efforts, index of watershed indicators, etc.) may be accessed through the USEPA webpage at: http://www .epa.gov /surf2/hucs/ The USGS 8-digit hydrological cataloging unit map for Georgia may be ordered from the USGS Earth Information Science Center (ESIC) at 1-800-USA-MAPS. 5 Priority will be given to projects located within and benefitting watersheds identified in the Water Quality in Georgia, 1994- 1995, as required by Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), and the April 1, 1998 list of waters, as required by Section 303(d) of the CWA, which are partially or not supporting designated beneficial uses due to nonpoint sources of pollution. Copies are available upon request. For example, the Mulberry River in the Upper Oconee River Watershed (USGS Hydrological Cataloging Unit: 03070101) has been included on the most current Section 303(d) list of waters not supporting designated beneficial uses due to violations of fecal coliform bacteria criteria caused by nonpoint sources of pollution. Priority would be given to project proposals in this watershed addressing violations of fecal coliform bacteria criteria caused by nonpoint sources of pollution. Project Objectives: The project objectives should specifically identify the nonpoint sources of pollution being addressed and the activities proposed to prevent, control and/or abate these nonpoint sources of pollution: .,. Major Nonpoint Source Pollution Categories and Subcategories (e.g., (1 0) Agriculture- (12) Irrigated Crop Production, (30) Construction - (32) Land Development, (70) Hydrologic/Habitat Modification- (76) Removal of Riparian Vegetation). See attached list of major nonpoint source pollution categories and subcategories. .,. Pollutants to be Addressed (e.g., fecal coliform bacteria, phosphorus, sedimentation) . .,. Critical Areas - The approximate size and location of the critical areas to be treated must be identified on a map and quantified. The critical areas should be of an appropriate size to ensure that the measures implemented will have a significant impact on restoring or protecting designated beneficial uses within the watersheds. .,. Waterbody Type (e.g., River, Stream, Lake, Tidal Wetlands, Non-Tidal Wetlands). ... Best Management Practices to be Implemented (e.g., (0472) Livestock Exclusion, (0590) Nutrient Management, (0657) Wetland Restoration). See attached list of best management practices. .,. Priority will be given to project proposals which encompass or support a watershed management approach and result in measurable improvements in water quality. The project objectives should relate to the identified water quality problems, be quantitative. and result in progress towards implementation of technology-based measures or achieve and/or maintain State water quality standards. For example, where water quality standards are violated and a 75 percent reduction in pollutant loadings from nonpoint sources is needed to attain and/or maintain water quality standards, an objective might be to reduce fecal coliform bacteria loadings to a waterbody by 75 percent. -- \ 6 } Project Description: All Federal, State, regional and local organizations that will assist in the design and implementation of the proposed project must be identified and included as appropriate in the project development and implementation process. The roles and responsibilities of each organization participating in the proposed project must be identified, regardless of the funding source, and one (1) organization must be identified as the lead organization responsible for managing the proposed project. The project description should delineate specific project activities and measures and indicators of progress and success. Specific project activities may include: BMP Implementation - Demonstration Projects Statewide Education and Information Programs Preparation of Materials Dissemination of Information Assistance to other Agencies Technical Assistance Development of Materials Delivery of Information Technology Transfer Project Management .. Regulatory Develop and Issue Regulations Enforcement Water Quality Monitoring Public Education and Involvement Watershed Projects Groundwater Projects If proposed project activities include Statewide Education and Information Programs and/or Public Education and Involvement, the project description should clearly describe the activities. tangible products, distribution of materials, and target audiences. All educational materrals (e.g., manuals, video scripts, brochures) must be submitted to the GAEPD and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for review and approval prior to distribution to ensure consistency with Federal and State regulations and guidelines. 7 If the proposed project is part of a continuing or multi-phase project, please provide all relevant background information. The information presented in the project proposal should enable the reader to have a complete understanding of what will be accomplished by the proposed project. Specific Outputs: The project proposal should enumerate and describe specific outputs (e.g., best management practices implementation, training workshops, field days, ordinances, educational materials, reports). The project proposal must provide sufficient detail to justify all project costs. The project proposal should include an appropriate monitoring component to evaluate the effectiveness of the project {e.g., water quality monitoring, beneficial use assessments, environmental indicators). See Appendix 8, Measures and Indicators of Progress and Success, in the Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years. Additional information about Section 319{h) Nonpoint Source Implementation Grants may be accessed through the USEPA webpage at: http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/ If a project proposal includes water quality monitoring, a detailed monitoring plan with Quality Assurance/Quality Control {QA/QC) procedures is required. This monitoring plan with QA/QC procedures should be submitted with the project proposal to be reviewed and approved by the GAEPD and the USEPA. See Attachment, Instructions for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Nonpoint Source Projects Involving Monitoring. The lead organization is responsible for submitting semi-annual progress reports to the GAEPD for inclusion in the USEPA Grants Reporting Tracking System (GATS) by March 31st and August 31 st of each year. Upon completion of the proposed project, the lead organization is responsible for submitting two {2) copies of a Final Project Close-Out Report to the GAEPD and the USEPA for review and approval. See Attachment, Close Out Procedures for Section 319 Grant Projects. 8 Milestones: All project proposals must include a schedule of milestones with estimated starting dates and completion dates. Milestones are significant events or tasks that occur throughout the implementation of the proposed project. The schedule of milestones will be used to track the progress of the approved projects. Milestones should include the execution of contracts/interagency agreements, submission of monitoring plans with Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) procedures, specific outputs, submission of final project close-out reports, etc. as shown: Execute contract/interagency agreement with the Georgia Environmental Protection Division. Submit monitoring plan with QA/QC procedures to the GAEPD and the USEPA for review and approval. Develop and prepare Farm-A-Syst assessment worksheets. Submit all draft copies to the GAEPD and the USEPA for review and approval. Submit semi-annual report for GRTS update. 10/99 11/99 12/99 03/00 Install Waste Management System Best Management Practices. Submit semi-annual report for GRTS update. 04/00 08/00 Submit final project close-out report to the GAEPD and the USEPA for review and approval. 02/01 10/99 11/99 09/00 03/00 06/00 08/00 02/01 Milestones must be listed in chronological order according to the proposed starting date. Organizations should not plan on initiating projects before October, 1999. Please note that project activities eligible for Federal reimbursement or non-Federal matching funds or in-kind services can not begin until after the grant has been awarded, all terms and conditions of the grant have been satisfied, and the contract/interagency agreement between the Georgia Environmental Protection Division and the lead organization has been executed. The USEPA generally adds special terms and conditions to the Section 319(h) Grants which may be applicable to the proposed projects. The Section 319(h) FY96 Grant expiration date can not be extended beyond .September, 2004. Therefore, all proposed projects must be completed and all funding must be expended by September, 2004. 9 Project Budget: Maximum Federal reimbursement for a Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant project is 60 percent of the total project cost. Therefore, each project must provide non-Federal matching funds or in-kind services for a minimum 40 percent of the project cost. Thus, for a total project cost of $250,000, the maximum Federal reimbursement would total $150,000 and the non-Federal matching funds or in-kind services would total $100,000. Allowable costs are determined in accordance with the cost principles applicable to the organization incurring the costs identified in 40 CFR Part 31 ( 31.22 Allowable Costs). For example, for the costs of a "State, local or Indian tribal government" use the principles in "OMB Circular A-87." Copies are available upon request. The project budget must delineate proposed Federal and non-Federal expenditures by object class categories as shown below: ITEM> A B c D E F G H I J K OBJECT CLASS CATEGORY .. PERSONNEL FRINGE BENEFITS TRAVEL EQUIPMENT SUPPLIES CONTRACTUAL CONSTRUCTION OTHER TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES (SUM OF A- H) INDIRECT CHARGES TOTAL (SUM OF I AND J) 10 319(hJ GRANT FUNDS c< NON FEDERAL FUNDS TOTAL The project proposal must provide sufficient detail to justify all project costs (i.e., Federal reimbursement and non-Federal matching funds or in-kind services). All proposed budget items must correspond to specific project activities and measures and indicators of progress and success. For example, if a turbidity meter is listed as an equipment budget item, sufficient details about specific project activities are required to justify the purchase of a turbidity meter. The project budget should include supporting information correlating proposed budget items to specific project activities as shown on the following page. Personnel budget items should include position titles, salary rates, full time equivalent (FTE) work years, and specific project activities. Travel budget items should identify personnel by position title and specific project activities. All equipment budget items and costs must be delineated separately; whereas, supply budget items may be collectively described as monitoring supplies, administrative supplies, printing supplies, etc. Contractual budget items must identify the subcontractors and specific project activities. 11 ITEM A B c D E F G H I J K PROJECT BUDGET EXAMPLE OBJECT CLASS CATEGORY .. PERSONNEL: One (1) Engineer- 0.5 FTE ($40,000/Year) (Technology Transfer and Project Management) One (1) Coordinator- 0.5 FTE ($40,000/Year) (Public Education and Involvement) One (1) Technician- 0.5 FTE ($40,000/Year) (Water Quality Monitoring) FRINGE BENEFITS: One (1) Engineer- 0.5 FTE- 35% (Technology Transfer and Project Management) One (1) Coordinator- 0.5 FTE- 35% (Public Education and Involvement) 319(h) GRANT FUNDS NON FEDERAL. ~ FUNDs 20,000 20,000 9,000 7,000 7,000 TRAVEL: One (1) Technician (Water Quality Monitoring) 1,000 0 EQUIPMENT: Two (2) Portable Turbidity Meters (Water Quality Monitoring) 2,000 0 SUPPLIES: Monitoring Supplies (Water Quality Monitoring) 500 0 CONTRACTUAL: ABC Engineering, Inc. (BMP Implementation- Demonstration Project) 30,000 6,900 CONSTRUCTION: 0 OTHER: 0 TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES: (SUM OF A- HI 69,500 33,900 INDIRECT CHARGES: Indirect Charge Rate - 20% MTDC 0 12,600 TOTAL: (SUM OF I AND J) 69,500 46,500 TOTAL 20,000 20,000 9,000 7,000 7,000 1,000 2,000 0 36,900 0 0 103,400 12,600 116,000 12 SECTION A (1) Is the requested funding necessary to adequately fund the state base program? Yes No N/A If Yes, explain: (2) Is the requested funding necessary to complete an ongoing phase project (i.e., multiyear project that has been partially funded by Section 319(h) Grant funds)? Yes No If yes, name project and grant: (3) If this a multi-year project, have you requested sufficient funds to complete the project (assuming funds requested herein are provided)? Yes No If no, explain: (4) The Lead Organization, as listed on the title page, agrees to comply with the requirements stipulated by the grant guidelines and the reference Federal regulations and guidance. (Checking "no" or "excepted" will cause the project to have a lower ranking than a similar project by lead organizations that agree to the requirements.) Yes No Yes _ _, except as noted below (list exceptions); (5) Is this a watershed project, that is, does this project address overall management to nonpoint source pollution throughout a watershed? Yes No If yes, complete SECTION B of this form. 13 SECTION 8 Name of Watershed:-------------------------Watershed Size (acres): - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Has this watershed been listed as a State priority waterbody? If yes, name the State priority list and the rank and/or priority of the watershed: Land Uses within the Watershed (percentages): .......... Agricultural Silvicultural Construction Urban Mining Within the Watershed list the following: .. Stream Miles .. Estuary Acreage .. Lake Acreage List Impaired Designated Beneficial Use(s): List State Water Quality Standard(s) Violated: List Pollutants, Sources, and Affected Use(s): Is the above use(s) impairment information based on monitoring data or professional judgement (i.e., evaluated)? Documentation of use(s) impairment is attached. Yes No -~ 14 Estimate of Pollutant(s) control needed to achieve water quality goal: Best Management Practices and/or Controls to be Implemented: Estimated Improved Water Quality: .. Stream Miles Improved: .. Lake Acreage Improved: .. Estuarine Acres Improved: Monitoring Program Elements: D Not Applicable D Biological D Chemical/Physical D Habitat D Sediment D Volunteer Citizens Monitoring Design (provide monitoring plan with QA/QC procedures in final submittal): .. Paired Watersheds: .. Upstream - Downstream: .. Single Downstream: .. Other: .. No Monitoring Funding Requested from Section 319(h) (include non-Federal matching funds): .. BMP Implementation .. Technical Assistance .. Water Quality Monitoring .. Public Education .. Other TOTAL 319(h) Grant funds Non-Federal Matching funds 15 MAJOR NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION CATEGORIES AND SUBCATEGORIES (10) (20) (30) (40) (50) (60) (70) (80) (90) Agriculture 11 : Non-irrigated crop production 12: Irrigated crop production 13: Specialty crop production (e.g., truck farming and orchards) 14: Pasture land 15: Range land 16: Feedlots - all types 17: Aquaculture 18: Animal holding/management areas Silviculture 21: Harvesting, reforestation, residue management 22: Forest management 23: Road construction/maintenance Construction 31 : Highway/road/bridge 32: Land development Urban Runoff 41 : Storm sewers (source control) 42: Combined sewers (source control) 43: Surface runoff Resource Extraction/Exploration/Development 51 : Surface mining 52: Subsurface mining 53: Placer mining 54: Dredge mining 55: Petroleum activities 56: Mill tailings 57: Mine tailings Land Disposal (Runoff/Leachate From Permitted Areas) 61: Sludge 62: Wastewater 63: Landfills 64: Industrial land treatment 65: On-site wastewater systems (septic tanks, etc.) 66: Hazardous waste Hydrologic/Habitat Modification 71 : Channelization 72: Dredging 73: Dam construction 74: Flow regulation/modification 75: Bridge construction 76: Removal of riparian vegetation 77: Streambank modification/destabilization Other 81: Atmospheric deposition 82: Waste storage/storage tank leaks 83: Highway maintenance and runoff 84: Spills 85: In-place contaminants 86: Natural Source unknown I I 0310 0312 I 0313 0314 0317 I 0320 0322 I 0324 0326 0327 I 0328 0329 I 0330 0331 0335 I 0338 0340 0342 I 0344 0348 0349 0350 0352 0354 0356 0359 0362 0378 0380 0382 0386 0388 0392 I 0393 0394 0395 I BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Bedding Waste Management System Waste Storage Structure Brush Management Compost Facility Irrigation Canal/Lateral Channel Vegetation Chiseling and Subsoiling Clearing and Snagging Conservation Cover Conservation Cropping Sequence Conservation Tillage Contour Farming Contour Orchard/Other Fruit Controlled Drainage Prescribed Burning Cover/Green Manure Crop Critical Area Planting Crop Residue Use Dam-Diversion Dam-Multiple Purpose Sediment Basin Deferred Grazing Delayed Seedbed Preparation Dike Waste Treatment 'Lagoon Diversion Pond Farm and Feedlock Windbreak Fencing Field Border Irrigation Field Ditch Field Windbreak Filter Strip Firebreak Fish Stream Improvement 0397 0398 0399 0400 0402 0404 0408 0409 0410 0411 0412 0422 0423 0425 0428 0430 0436 0441 0442 0443 0447 0449 0451 0452 0453 0454 0455 0456 0460 0462 0464 0466 0468 0472 0482 0484 0490 0500 Commercial Fishponds Fish Raceway or Tank Fishpond Management Floodwater Diversion Dam-Floodwater Retarding Flood way Forest and Erosion Control Forest Land Management Grade Stabilization Structure Grasses/Legumes Rotation Grassed Waterway Hedgerow Planting Hillside Ditch Waste Storage Pond Irrigation Ditch/Canal Irrigation Pipeline Irrigation Storage Reservoir Irrigation Trickle Irrigation Sprinkler Irrigation Surface and Below Irrigation Tailwater Recover Irrigation Water Management Land Fire Control Land Shaft and Adit Closing Land Landslide Treatment Land Subsidence Treatment Land Toxic Discharge Control Land Highwall Treatment Land Clearing Precision Land Forming ~ Irrigation Land Leveling Land Smoothing Lined Waterway or Outlet Livestock Exclusion Mole Drain Mulching Woodland Site Preparation Obstruction Removal BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 0510 0512 0516 0521 0528 0530 0532 0533 0543 0544 0548 0550 0552 0554 0555 0556 0557 0558 0560 ' ~0561 0562 0566 0568 ~ 0570 0571 0572 0574 0575 0580 0582 0584 0585 0586 0587 0589 0590 0595 I I 1 I Pasture and Rayland Management Pasture/Rayland Planting Pipeline Pond Seali~g or Lining Proper Grazing Use Proper Woodland Grazing Pumped Well Drain Pumping Plant-Water Control Land Reconstruction Abandoned Mine Land Reconstruction Current Mine Grazing Land Mechanical Treatment Range Seeding Irrigation Pit/Reservoir Regulate Water-Drain System Rock Barrier Planned Grazing Systems Row Arrangement Roof Runoff Management Access Road Heavy Use Area Protection Recreation Area Improvement Recreation Land Grading Recreation Trail/Walkway Runoff Management System Soil Salinity Management Spoil Spreading Spring Development Stock Trails/Walkways Stream/Shoreline Protect Open Channel Stream Channel Stability Stripcropping-Contour Stripcropping-Field Structure for Water Control Stripcropping-Wind Nutrient Management Pest Management 0600 0606 0607 0608 0609 0610 0612 0614 0620 0630 0633 0636 0638 0640 0641 0642 0644 0645 0648 0650 0652 0654 0657 0660 0666 0900 0901 0902 0903 0904 0905 0906 0907 0908 0909 0910 0911 0912 0913 Terrace Subsurface Drain Surface Drain Field Ditch Surface Drain Maintenance Surface Roughening Toxic Salt Reduction Tree Planting Trough or Tank Underground Outlet Vertical Drain Waste Utilization Water Harvest Catchment Water/Sediment Control Basin Waterspreading Water Table Control Well Wildlife Wetland Management Wildlife Upland Area Management Wildlife Watering Windbreak Renovation Woodland Direct Seeding Woodland Improved Harvest Wetland Restoration Woodland Pruning Woodland Improvement (Not Used) Urban Catch Basin Urban Catch Basin - Oil Urban Catch Basin - Sand Urban Concrete Grid Urban Extension Detention Pond Z, Urban Filtration Basin Urban Grassed Swale Urban Infiltration Basin Urban Infiltration Trench Urban Porous Pavement Urban Stormwater Wetland Urban Vegetated Filter Urban Wet Pond UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 4 Science and Ecosystem Support Division 980 College Station Road Athens, Georgia 30605-2720 ATIACH!\IENT I The itemized elements listed below must be present in any Quality Assurance Project Plan written for environmental data acquisition activies on behalf of the USEPA. The bulleted items listed below each of the required elements, are those deemed crucial in meeting the objectives ofan effective quality assurance program for environmental and chemical data collection. For detailed information concerning the actual format, organization and content requirements, refer to EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Environmental Data Operations, EPA QA/R-5. Grooup A Elements- Project Management Title/Approval Page title of plan name of the organization(s) implementing the project names, titles, signatures, of appropriate officials and their approval dates for organization's Project Manager organization's Quality Assurance Manager EPA Project Manager EPA Quality Assurance Manager other agencies where applicable (e.g. State, other Federal Agencies) Table of Contents list the sections, figures, tables, references and appendices Distribution List list the individuals and their organizations requiring copies of the approved QAPP Project Task/Organization Chart identify all project personnel and their roles and responsibilities also include all data users, decision-makers, the project QA manager and all personnel responsible for implementing the proposed effort r(..... provide a concise organization chart that includes the relationships and lines of communication (or chain of command). This chart should also include all data users and subcontractors. Project Schedule provide a schedule for implementing the project tasks (include anticipated starting and ending dates) Problem Definition/Background concisely state the specific problems to be resolved or decisions to be made and include any relevant background information to provide a historical perspective Project/Task Description include all measurements that will be taken during the course of the project Grooup A Elements- Project Manaeement Cont'd define the applicable or relevant regulatory or program-specific quality standards, criteria or objectives discuss how the acquired data will be used (e.g. site assessment, presence or absense, human health risk assessment, compliance, nature and extent of contamination, ecological risk assessment, or research) list personnel and sampling or monitoring equipment requirements list the assessment tools that will be utilized to ensure that the quality objectives established for the project are met (e.g. program technical review; peer reviews, surveillances, and technical audits) project records or reports that are required (identify the type of reports or records required) Data Quality Objectives/Criteria for Measurement Data include the precision, accuracy, representativeness, comparability and completeness criteria other data quality objectives apply to sample design and collection, implementation of field measurements, statistical analysis of analytical data or mathematical models of contaminant fate and transport, etc. Special Training Requirements/Certifications identify any special training or certification requirements needed by project personnel to accomplish project-specific tasks Documentation/Records list the information and documentation requirements, including the format and organization of the proposed reports several documents or records may be required for a specific project, these include but are not limited to: raw data field logs maintenance logs instrument printouts calibration information quality control checks laboratory case narratives specify the final repository for these documents Reference List . a list of references is required in the final section of the QAPP Group B Elements - Measurement/Data Acquisition _ Sampling Process Design indicate the types and numbers of samples required design of the sampling effort sampling locations and frequency of collection environmental matrices to be sampled summary of the analytical parameters of interest (for field and laboratory analyses) rationale for the design identify field measurements if applicable Sampling Method Requirements discuss in detail the all sampling procedures used in sample collection identify sampling methods, equipment, implementation requirements and decontamination procedures field corrective actions (procedures to be implemented when non-compliance of field sampling protocols are encountered) identify the personnel responsible for implementing corrective actions Sample Handling/Custody Requirements outline sample handling protocols including sample custody procedures, holding time requirements, shipping options and schedules _ Analytical Method Requirements provide the analytical methods to be employed, also include the following information analytical equipment extraction or digestion procedures laboratory decontamination procedures waste disposal requirements corrective actions form and content requirements for harcopy analytical data package submittal Note: If a laboratory-specific QAPP or SOP are referenced, provide these document in appendices to the document. Quality Control Requirements list each required QC procedure, include the acceptance criteria and corrective actions provide a list ofthe QC samples such as matrix spike/matrix spike duplicates, duplicates, field blanks, laboratory method blanks, laboratory control samples, instrument performance check samples, surrogates, internal standards, and second column or mass spectrometry confirmation requirement. Also discuss the frequency of collection or analysis ofthese parameters or QC samples provide a discussion on the data reduction process (precision and bias of analytical data requires discussion) Instrument/Equipment Testing, Inspection and Maintenance Requirements describe the frequency of inspection and provide the inspection procedures to be used in evaluating all field instruments briefly discuss corrective maintenance procedures or provide these in an appendix identify the ovesight or maintenance personnel performing the corrective actions Instrument Calibration/Frequency identify all tools, gauges, instruments, sampling, measuring, and test equipment used for data collection activities where quality may be impacted discuss the instrument to be utilized and the frequency of calibration (field and laboratory instruments) describe the type of reference materials or analytical standards to be used and provide their performance criteria Inspection/Acceptance requirements for supplies and consumables discuss how the standards or consumables will be inspected and by whom provide the acceptance criteria for these materials Data Acquisition Requirements (for Non-direct Measurements) ifnon-measurement sources ofdata are used, provide details regarding the source of this data and discuss its use in meeting the project objectives provide a discussion regarding the processes to be used in evaluating and accepting this data Data Management Requirements/Scheme provide a flow chart or schemata detailing the proposed path from data generation to reporting and archiving (include field measurements as well as laboratory data) describe or reference the standard record-keeping procedures, document control system, and provide a detailed discussion describing the approach selected for the storage and retrieval of electronic data if applicable discuss the procedures to be implemented to prevent the loss of data during data reduction, data reporting, and data entry to forms, reports, and databases. Also indicate whether the analytical data collected from field or laboratory instruments can be directly downloaded into reports, spreadsheets or databases identify and discuss all data handling equipment and procedures used to process, compile and analyze the data. Provide information detailing the software/hardware requirements and address any performance issues that may potentially arise during the course ofdata acquisition and reporting. ifsubmission ofhardcopy and electronic data reports are required, discuss how the analytical results reported in both formats will be checked for consistency if inconsistencies are discovered between the hardcopy and electronic reporting formats, describe the procedures used in rectifying the situation Group C Elements- Assessment/Oversight Assessment/Response Actions provide the type, number and frequency of assessments to be used during the course of the project list the assessments to be employed, their proposed schedule, performance criteria (i.e., goals, performance objectives, acceptance criteria, or specifications), personnel conducting the assessment or audit, their respective qualifications to conduct such an audit, corrective actions to be undertaken, and documentation of findings and remedies define the authority of assessment personnel clearly define the conditions under which the auditor(s) or assessment personnel are authorized to act and provide the criteria for this action discuss the response actions to be performed, the personnel responsible for performing the corrective action, and how response action will be verified, validated and documented Reports to Management identify the type, frequency and distribution of the required project-specific reports and identify the personnel responsible for preparing these reports Group D Elements- Data Validation/Data Usability --- Data ReviewNalidation!Verification Requirements clearly state the criteria used in reviewing and validating the field and chemical data. Include a discussion outlining the criteria to be used to determine data acceptance, rejection or qualification of analytical data provide a list and definitions of the data qualifiers to be employed Validation!Verification Methods describe the process to be employed for validating and verifying the analytical data from data collection to final submittal of the hardcopy or electronic data. Include a discussion on resolutions of data discrepancies and how this information will be communicated to the end data user(s). Reconciliation with User Requirements describe how the results obtained from the project will be reconciled with the data quality objectives discuss how data issues will be resolved and provide details on how any limitations in the analytical data will be reported to decision-makers, key project personnel, and final data users, (e.g. risk assessors, state or federal regulators, project managers, etc.) As a final note, the inclusion ofthe appropriate field and/or laboratory Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and laboratory-specific QAPPs, as attachments or appendices to the document, is strongly recommended. To meet the requirements stipulated in EPA QA/R.-5, it is recommended that the QAPP documents follow the guidance provided in EPA documents EPA QA/G-4 (Data Quality Object Process) and EPA QA/G-5 (Guidance for the Preparation of QAPPs) which are available thru the internet at the following address: www.epa.gov/ncerqalqalqa_docs.html. Notes: ./ - Element is present K - Element is absent NA - Element Not Applicable PRQJECT CLOSB OUT PROCEDURES SBCTIOH 319 GRANT PROJECTS Reqion IV, Watershed t;rnit April 28, 1993 The following are the procedures for closing out projects within a Section 319 grant. 1. Title Page: Must reference the EPA grant number, the work plan project number and title, the State agency submitting the close out report, and the project period (inclu?ing extensions). 2. Project Sm-ry: Summarize project for NPS prevention and control with emphasis on lessons learned. The (EPA approved) project final report will suffice in most cases. For phased or continuing programs or projects, the project summary should focus on work accomplished and lessons learned during the project period of the identified grant. 3. Outputs: List outputs that were required under project and indicate if they were finalized/produced. For outputs committed to producing written material, provide EPA a copy of each output {if not already provided). For outputs such as workshops, meetings, etc., provide EPA a copy of the agenda (if not already provided). All other outputs should beaddressed in the list or final project report. 4. Equipment: List equipment purchased with project funds. Indicate all equipment with a current per-unit fair market value in excess of $5,000. Describe the disposition procedures for equipment (valued in excess of $5,000 per unit) in accordance with requirements of 40 CFR Part 31.32. 5 Project Budget: Summarize final budget expenditures, including matching funds. Recommend how any excess project funds should be reallocated. 6 Special CoDditions 1 List any special grant conditions that applied to the project. Indicate how they were met. ' NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM AND GRANTS GUIDANCE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997 AND FUTURE YEARS PRINTED SEPTEMBER, 1998 -- "'int Source Program :md Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/npsguidl.html NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM AND GRANTS GUIDANCE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997 AND FUTURE YEARS May 1996 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water Washington, D.C. FOREWORD In 1995 and early 1996, senior representatives of State nonpoint source agencies from each of the ten U.S. regions joined with key representatives from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in a series of meetings to discuss the future direction of the national nonpoint source program under Section 319 of the Clean Water Act. These highly productive meetings led to a common understanding that the key to significant further progress in nonpoint source control lies in effective State implementation of well-designed, supported and fmanced State programs. This guidance represents a major step forward in providing to States the tools and the flexibility needed by States to implement highly effective nonpoint source programs. It recognizes the need for States to review and, where needed, revise their programs to focus on effective solutions to water quality problems caused by nonpoint source pollution. It also provides that, consistent with the maturation of State programs, EPA will no longer use a competitive approach to award a portion of the Section 319 funds. This guidance provides a sound framework for setting the future course of the nonpoint source program. Developed collaboratively by EPA and States, this guidance projects a clear vision of dynamic and effective State programs that are designed to achieve and maintain beneficial uses of water. It is consistent with the National Environmental Performance Partnership System and provides flexibility to States to manage their nonpoint source programs and resources in the manner that they believe will produce the best "- - environmental results. We look forward to continuing to work closely with EPA to foster positive working relationships among all our many partners with a stake in clean water. It is our hope and expectation that our efforts will lead to achievement of our common vision of achieving and maintaining beneficial uses of water for the enjoyment of future generations. u; 913/98 11 :59 AM Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/npsguidl h Walton C. Poole, Ph.D. fD~ Co-Cb.:ir Scatei.EPA Nanpoint ~ Program Workgroup ~ This guidance promotes a new generation of strong partnerships between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and State lead nonpoint source agencies. Our long-term vision is: ALL STATES ARE IMPLEMENTING DYNAMIC AND EFFECTIVE NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAMS DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN BENEFICIAL USES OF WATER. To achieve this vision, EPA and State nonpoint source lead agencies have agreed upon a new, streamlined framework for the implementation of State nonpoint source programs under section 319 of the Clean Water Act. States and EPA will work together to review, revise and implement enhanced State nonpoint source management programs that apply nine key elements of State programs t;hat have been developed jointly. States will have flexibility to implement their programs in a manner that maximizes their ability to achieve our long-term vision. Beginning in late Fiscal Year 1996, States will review and, as appropriate, revise nonpoint source management programs to reflect the following nine key elements: I. Explicit short- and long-term goals, objectives and strategies to protect surface and ground water. 2. Strong working partnerships and collaboration with appropriate State, interstate, Tribal, regional, and local entities (including conservation districts), private sector groups, citizens groups, and Federal agencies. 3. A balanced approach that emphasizes both State-wide nonpoint source programs and on-the ground management of individual watersheds where waters are impaired or threatened. 4. The State program (a) abates known water quality impairments resulting from nonpoint source pollution and (b) prevents significant threats to water quality from present and future activities. 5. An identification of waters and watersheds impaired or threatened by nonpoint source pollution and a process to progressively address these waters. 6. The State reviews, upgrades and implements all program components required by section 319 of the Clean Water Act, and establishes flexible, targeted, iterative approaches to achieve and maintain beneficial uses of water as expeditiously as practicable. 7. An identification of Federal lands and objectives which are not managed cpnsistently with State program objectives. 8. Efficient and effective management and implementation of the State's nonpoint source program, including necessary fmancial management. 913/98 11:59 t .JOmL ~ource f'rogram and Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years > http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/npsguid l.html L" 9. A feedback loop whereby the State reviews, evaluates, and revises its nonpoint source assessment and its management program at least every five years. These key elements of upgraded State nonpoint source management programs are discussed in Section III-A of this guidance and a program evaluation guide based on those nine key elements is presented in Appendix A. Consistent with States' implementation of stronger programs, beginning in Fiscal Year 1997 EPA will no longer use a competitive approach to award a portion of section 319 funds. Rather, EPA will use the allocation formula presented in Appendix G to determine the amount to be awarded to each State. EPA will also be paring grants application procedures and reporting requirements to the minimum necessary to assure that grant funds are used legally and effectively. A State which incorporates all nine key elements in its revised nonpoint source management program and which has proven a track record of effective implementation of its nonpoint source programs will be formally recognized by the Regional Administrator and the Assistant Administrator for Water as a Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits State. NPS Enhanced Benefits States will be afforded substantially reduced oversight and maximum flexibility to implement their State programs and to achieve water quality objectives. Thus, while EPA has greatly streamlined the section 319 grants program for all States, EPA is providing further flexibility to the Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits States with complete programs and proven track records. This additional flexibility is discussed in Section III-B. It is our goal that within a few years, all or most States will have improved their programs to the extent that they are recognized as Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits States. EPA's role in the nonpoint source program will shift away from grants oversight and administration and towards technical assistance and cooperation to help States implement well-designed nonpoint source management programs. Technical assistance, training, watershed- or community-based projects, cross-border or ecosystem-wide initiatives, and special assistance in working with other Federal agencies are examples of specific ways in which EPA will collaborate with States to achieve environmental results. Within its resource constraints, EPA will provide more sophisticated assistance such as advanced modeling and monitoring tools and design of high-quality watershed projects. EPA will also help arrange for needed technical assistance in monitoring, modeling and best management practices from other Federal agencies, especially the US Geological Survey, the US Forest Service, the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Bureau of Land Management. Where necessary and appropriate, EPA will also provide special assistance with Federal agencies where Federal activities may not be consistent with State nonpoint '-- source management programs. I. OUR VISION This guidance promotes a new generation of strong partnerships betWeen the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and State lead nonpoint source agencies. Our long-term vision is: ALL STATES IMPLEMENT DYNAMIC AND EFFECTIVE NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAMS DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN BENEFICIAL USES OF WATER. To achieve this vision, this guidance establishes a new, streamlined framework for the implementation of State nonpoint source management programs under section 319 of the Clean Water Act. States and EPA will work together to revise, approve, and implement enhanced State nonpoint source management 9~/QfJ. 11-.c;Q AM Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years http://www.epa.gov/OWQ,W/N"PSJnpsguicii.ht programs that apply nine key elements. States will have the freedom to implement their programs in a flexible manner that maximizes their ability to achieve our long-term vision, supported by a reasonably predictable flow of nonpoint source grants from EPA. ll. INTRODUCTION Congress enacted section 319 of the Clean Water Act in 1987, establishing a national program to control nonpoint sources of water pollution. Nonpoint source pollution is caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the ground and carrying natural and human-made pollutants into lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands, estuaries, other coastal waters, and ground water. Atmospheric deposition and hydrologic modification are also sources of nonpoint pollution. Under section 319, States address nonpoint pollution by developing nonpoint source assessment reports that identify nonpoint source pollution problems and the nonpoint sources responsible for the water quality problems. States also adopt management programs to control nonpoint source pollution and then implement the management programs. Section 319(h) provides for EPA's award of grants to States to help them to implement those management programs. Both the assessment report and management program must be approved by EPA in order for a State to be eligible for section 319(h) funds. All States now have EPA-approved assessment reports and management programs. Congress appropriated the first section 319 grant funds in Fiscal Year (FY) 1990. On December 1 and 15, 1989, EPA issued interim guidance for awarding FY 1990 grant funds to the States, including an interim planning target formula based on nonpoint source control needs. After soliciting and obtaining public comment, EPA issued final grant guidance on February 15, 1991. The 1991 guidance served as the main national guidance for the award of section 319(h) grants in FY 1991 - 1993. On June 24, 1993, EPA published a revised nonpoint source grants guidance to include an expedited schedule for awarding section 319(h) grants, improvements to the process for awarding such grants, and clarifications on reporting and other requirements. This revised guidance served as the basis for nonpoint source grants from FY 1994 to FY 1996. States, Territories, and Tribes have made substantial progress in tackling high priority nonpoint source water quality problems. Projects that have received funding from section 319 grants have ranged from information and educational programs to the demonstration of innovative technologies and watershed-based approaches to solving water quality problems. With the help of section 319 grants, States have been able to address site- and watershed-specific water quality problems as well as to initiate and maintain State-wide nonpoint source programs. In recognition of this progress, representatives of EPA and State lead nonpoint source agencies held a series of meetings in 1995 to consider fundamental changes to the nonpoint source program. These meetings reflected the twin premises that given the increasing maturity of State programs, it is timely for the States to review, revise, and implement enhanced nonpoint source management programs, and it is correspondingly appropriate for EPA to provide States with increased flexibility to manage and implement these programs, supported by a streamlined and more efficient grants oversight process. These meetings led to initial grants policy changes that were announced in a memorandum dated April 7, 1995, which became effective at the beginning ofFY 1996. Those changes, which continue to be reflected 913/98 11:59 . .. ooint Source Program and Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/npsguidl.html in this guidance, provide States greater flexibility to use a portion of their grant funds to improve their nonpoint source assessments and upgrade their nonpoint source management programs. This guidance also continues the policy announced in the April 7, 1995 memorandum that States will now have greater flexibility to set their own priorities. Specifically, several set-asides or separate funding elements that applied in the past are now removed for ground-water protection, watershed resource restoration, and national nonpoint source monitoring projects. The original purposes of these set asides have been fulfilled or exceeded, so they are no longer necessary. In subsequent meetings, EPA and State lead nonpoint source agencies considered more fundamental changes to the national nonpoint source program. The results of these efforts are reflected in this guidance. B. Scope of This Guidance This guidance is primarily directed towards nonpoint source management programs and grants administered by State lead nonpoint source agencies designated under section 319 of the Clean Water Act. Territories of the United States are included by the Clean Water Act in the term "States" and are included as States in this guidance. Properly qualified Native American Tribes may also administer nonpoint source management programs under section 319 of the Clean Water Act. This guidance is not specifically directed to Tribal nonpoint source management programs, however, but may be used for administering section 319 programs and grants with the agreement of EPA and the eligible Tribe. Alternatively, A Tribal Guide to the State Section 319 Nonpoint Source Management Program (USEPA, Office of Water, September 1994) may be used. This guidance contains two components. First, it establishes a framework for reviewing, revising, and approving enhanced State nonpoint source management programs. Second, it establishes a new framework for the national nonpoint source grants program. This guidance will serve as the basis for State nonpoint source management programs and for the national nonpoint source grants program, beginning in FY 1997. This guidance supersedes and replaces the Nonpoint Source Guidance issued by EPA in December 1987 and the Final Guidance on the Award ofNonpoint Source Grants issued in June 1993. This national guidance is intended to serve as the basis for a nationally consistent approach for State nonpoint source management programs and grants. Therefore. beginning in FY 1997. Regions will not issue separate. supplemental guidance specifically for State nonpoint source programs or grants. If particular Regional circumstances require additional clarifications on a particular issue, the Region will consult with the affected States and with EPA Headquarters on the appropriate next steps. As in the past, EPA's policy will be to award all section 319 grants under section 319(h), in lieu of awarding separate grants under section 319(!). Thus this guidance applies to all section 319 grants. This approach will encourage integration of ground-water activities with overall State nonpoint source control programs, while maximizing State flexibility to consider and prioritize all causes and effects of nonpoint sources of water pollution. C. Relationship to the National Environmental Performance Partnership System and Performance Partnership Grants On May 17, 1995, State and EPA leaders signed a "Joint Commitment to Reform Oversight and Create a National Environmental Performance partnership System" (NEPPS). The objective of signing this agreement was to accelerate the transition to a new working relationship between EPA and the States -- 16 913/98 11:59 AM Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years http://www.epa.gov/OWOWINPS/npsguid I ht one which reflects the advancement made in environmental protection over the preceding two decades by both the States and EPA. Key goals that this new partnership agreement shares with Performance Partnership Grants (PPG) are: to allow States and EPA to achieve improved environmental results by directing scarce public resources toward the highest priority, highest value activities; to provide States with greater flexibility to achieve those results; to improve public understanding of environmental conditions and choices; and to enhance accountability to the public and taxpayers. Other key goals of the NEPPS partnership agreement are increased reliance on self-management by State programs and a differential approach to oversight that serves as an incentive for State programs to perform well, rewarding strong programs and freeing up federal resources to address problems where State programs need assistance. This guidance has been drafted to be consistent with the overall framework of The National Environmental ''), Performance Partnership System and Performance Partnership Grants. The nonpoint source program is an eligible grant program in a Performance Partnership Grant. For those States that wish to include the nonpoint source program in their request for a PPG and/or NEPPS Agreement, this guidance should be used as the foundation for substantive discussions on establishing nonpoint source environmental goals and program performance expectations. In particular, States choosing to enter into Environmental Performance Agreements with EPA should address the nine key elements of an effective State nonpoint source program, discussed below, as part of these agreements. D. The Watershed Approach and Community-based Environmental Protection EPA is working to realign its programs to support community-based environmental protection, whereby local stakeholders join forces to plan and implement environmental protection measures that make good sense for the particular conditions found within their communities. For water resources, such community-based environmental protection is frequently embodied in the watershed approach. The watershed approach is a coordinating framework for environmental management that focuses public and private sector efforts to address the highest priority water-related problems within geographic areas, considering both surface and ground water flow. The watershed approach is commonly characterized py four principles: a) well integrated partnerships, b) a specific geographic focus, c) action driven by environmental objectives and by strong science and data, and d) coordinated priority setting and integrated solutions. This guidance should be used by EPA and States to help advance the watershed approach and community-based environmental protection as a means for resolving nonpoint source pollution problems and threats. Some States and EPA Regions have historically focussed their nonpoint source programs narrowly on demonstrations, supported by Federal section 319 grants. As States and EPA move away from demonstrations and toward watershed- or community-based nonpoint source programs to solve nonpoint source pollution problems on a much wider scale, this guidance is intended to clarify State and EPA goals and responsibilities and to hasten the change in focus. E. Relationship to Other Environmental Protection Programs The goal of national and State nonpoint source programs is to achieve and maintain beneficial uses of water. EPA and the States recognize that, to achieve this goal, EPA's and States' nonpoint source programs must be well integrated with other environmental and natural resource management programs. These programs include point soi.Irce programs, particularly with respect to common and overlapping areas such as urban runoff, construction, inactive and abandoned mines, animal waste facilities, and marinas; fi of 16 9!3!98 11:59 A ;)Jll' .:.ource t'rogram ana Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years http://www.epagov/OWOWINPS/npsguid l.html comprehensive State ground-water protection programs; clean lakes programs; wetlands protection programs; estuary programs; watershed planning and total maximum daily loads; and ambient monitoring programs. Moreover, nonpoint source management programs should be consistent with the broad overarching principles of environmental management, including watershed protection and pollution prevention. Accordingly, State nonpoint source programs need to be broadly inclusive so as to best meet States' water quality needs. Beneficial uses of water (usually termed 'designated uses') are established by States, participating Tribes and other jurisdictions as a part of State water quality standards adopted and approved under section 303 of the Clean Water Act. State water quality standards are dynamic in nature and are periodically revised to reflect changes in science and law, which may in tum result in changes to the specific objectives and requirements in State section 319 nonpoint source management programs. Since our vision for national and State nonpoint source programs is tied to the attainment and maintenance of beneficial uses of water, State nonpoint source programs must be closely coordinated with State water quality standards programs and be periodically revised to reflect changes in beneficial. uses. m. NONPOINT SOURCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS EPA and the State lead nonpoint source agencies agree that the national nonpoint source program should be redesigned to create incentives and support for States to develop enhanced nonpoint source management programs that successfully address all of the nine key elements of an effective State program as listed and discussed below. EPA's approach will be to work closely with the States and give them programmatic and technical support as they move into a more advanced and independent level of program implementation. A key feature of the new approach is to recognize and reward States that adopt nine key program elements and which have a proven track record of effectively implementing nonpoint source programs. EPA intends that these States will be formally recognized as Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits States by EPA's Regional Administrators and the Assistant Administrator for Water and be provided benefits commensurate with their advanced level of program accomplishment. These benefits are described in Section ill-B and include priority for multi-year grant work plans, streamlined review of grants applications, increased technical assistance, reduced reporting requirements, and reduced EPA oversight. It is EPA's goal that within the next few years, all or most States will have improved their programs to the extent that they are recognized as Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits States. EPA will focus its available resources on helping States achieve and maintain this advanced level of program development and implementation. A. Nine Key Elements of an Effective State Prouam EPA and the State lead nonpoint source agencies agree that the following nine key elements characterize an effective and dynamic State nonpointsource program. Each key element appears in bold type and is then followed by explanatory text that elaborates on the key element. The explanatory text provides information on means by which the States may choose to implement the key element. All States will review and, as appropriate, revise their nonpoint source management programs in a manner that reflects these nine key elements. States will then submit their upgraded programs to EPA for approval. As discussed below in Sections ill-B and V of this guidance, States that successfully incorporate these nine key elements into their programs and have a proven track record of effective implementation will be recognized Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits States and be provided maximum flexibility in 9/3/98 11 :59 AM Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years http://www .epa.gov/OWOWINPS/npsguidl. h implementing their programs and other benefits. 1. The State program contains explicit short- and long-term goals, objectives and strategies to protect surface and ground water. The State's long-term goals are consistent with the national program vision that all States implement dynamic and effective nonpoint source programs designed to achieve and maintain beneficial uses of water. The shorter-term objectives consist of activities, with milestones, that are designed to demonstrate reasonable further progress that leads to accomplishment of the long-term goals as expeditiously as possible. The State program includes objectives that address nonpoint sources of ground-water pollution. The objectives list both implementation steps and the results to be achieved (e.g., water quality improvements or load reductions). The State program includes long-term goals; shorter-term (e.g., 3- to 5-year) objectives that are periodically updated based on progress; strategies to achieve progress towards achieving the goals, objectives; indicators to measure progress; and annual work plans to implement the strategies. 2. The State strengthens its working partnerships and linkages to appropriate State, interstate, Tribal, regional, and local entities (including conservation districts), private sector groups, citizens groups, and Federal agencies. The State uses a variety of formal and informal mechanisms to form and sustain these partnerships. Examples include memoranda of agreement, letters of support, cooperative projects, sharing and combining of funds, and meetings to share information and ideas. The State nonpoint source lead agency works collaboratively with other key State and local nonpoint source entities in the development and implementation of the section 319 management program, and actively involves them in decision making. Interagency collaborative teams, nonpoint source task forces, and representative advisory groups have all proven effective for accomplishing these linkages, especially where they meet on a regular basis and are managed in a collaborative and inclusive manner. Further, the State seeks public involvement and comment on significant proposed program changes and engages in public education activities to promote public awareness of nonpoint source pollution and its solutions. As appropriate, representatives are involved from local, regional, State, interstate, Tribal and Federal agencies, and public interest groups, industries, academic institutions, private landowners and producers, concerned citizens and others. This involvement helps ensure that environmental objectives are well integrated with those for economic stability and other social and cultural goals. 3. The State uses a balanced approach that emphasizes both State-wide nonpoint source programs and on-the-ground management of individual watersheds where waters are impaired or threatened. The State nonpoint source management program emphasizes a watershed management approach and is well integrated with other important programs to protect and restore water quality. These include point source, ground water, drinking water, clean lakes, wetlands protection, and national estuary programs; coastal zone programs; conservation, and pesticide management programs; forestry programs; and other natural resource and environmental management programs. Each State has the flexibility to design its nonpoint source management program in a manner that is best suited to attain and maintain beneficial uses of water. On-the-ground implementation of practices and programs is the best means of reducing and preventing pollution from nonpoint sources, but States may 8 of 16 913/98 11 :59 t JOJnt Source Program and Grants Guidance for Fiscai Year 1997 and Future Years http:llwww.epagov/OWOW/NPS!npsguidl.html achieve this on-the-ground implementation by a combination of watershed approaches and State-wide programs. Similarly, as described more fully in key element 5 below, the State may use any combination of water-quality or technology-based approaches it deems appropriate to make progress towards attaining and maintaining beneficial uses of water. 4. The State program (a) abates known water quality impairments from nonpoint source pollution and (b) prevents significant threats to water quality from present and future nonpoint source activities. The program is designed to remedy waters that the State has identified as impaired by nonpoint source pollution. Further, the program is designed to prevent new water quality problems from present and reasonably foreseeable nonpoint source activities, especially in waters which currently meet water quality standards. While it may take years to remedy waters that are already impaired, it is also important for States to take appropriate steps expeditiously to protect clean waters from reasonably foreseeable degradation. State programs should place a priority on protecting waters from future nonpoint source pollution as soon as possible (generally within 5 years). 5. The State program identifies waters and their watersheds impaired by nonpoint source pollution and identifies important unimpaired waters that are threatened or otherwise at risk. Further, the State establishes a process to progressively address these identified waters by conducting more detailed watershed assessments and developing watershed implementation plans, and then by implementing the plans. The State identifies waters impaired by nonpoint source pollution based on currently available information (e.g., in reports under sec.tions 305(b), 319(a), 303(d), 314(a), and 320), and revises its list periodically as more up-to-date assessment information becomes available. The State also identifies important unimpaired waters th~t are threatened or otherwise at risk from nonpoint source pollution. In addition the State identifies the primary categories and subcategories causing the water quality impairments, threats, and risks. At 5-year intervals, the State updates the identification of waters and their watersheds impaired or threatened by nonpoint source pollution preferably as part of a single comprehensive State water quality assessment which integrates reports required by sections 305{b), 319(a), 303(d), 314(a) and 320. The factors used by the State to progressively address its waters may include a variety of relevant environmental and administrative considerations, including, for example: human health; ecosystem health including ecological risk; the beneficial uses of the water; value of the watershed or ground-water area to the public; vulnerability of the surface or ground water to additional environmental degradation; likelihood of achieving demonstrable environmental results; implementability; extent of alliances with other Federal agencies and States to coordinate resources and actions; and readiness to proceed. The State links its prioritization and implementation strategy to other programs and efforts as appropriate. 913/98 11 :59 AM Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years http://www.epa.gov/OWOWINPS/npsguid l.ht Examples include total maximum daily loads, clean lakes programs, comprehensive ground-water protection programs, source water protection programs, wetlands protection programs, national estuary programs, ambient monitoring programs, and pesticides management programs. Related programs administered by agricultural, forestry, highway, and other agencies should also be linked, for example, USDA's Water Quality Initiative, PL-534 and PL-566 Watershed Projects and the Northwest Salmon Initiative. In establishing priorities for ground-water activities, the State considers wellhead protection areas, ground-water recharge areas, and zones of significant ground water/surface water interaction. More detailed information on priority setting is also contained in pp. 11 and 12 of the December 1987 Nonpoint Source Guidance; Setting Priorities: The Key to Nonpoint Source Control (EPA, 1987); Selecting Priority Nonpoint Source Projects: You Better Shop Around (EPA, 1989); Geographic Targeting: Selected State Examples (EPA, 1993) and Watershed Protection: A Project Focus (EPA, 1995). 6. The State reviews, upgrades, and implements all program components required by section 319(b) of the Clean Water Act, and establishes flexible, targeted, and iterative approaches to achieve and maintain beneficial uses of water as expeditiously as practicable. The State programs include: o A mix of water quality-based and/or technology-based programs designed to achieve and maintain beneficial uses of water; and o A mix of regulatory, non-regulatory, imancial and technical assistance as needed to achieve and maintain beneficial uses of water as expeditiously as practicable. Section 319(b) specifies the minimum contents of State nonpoint source management programs. Tliese include: (i) An identification of the measures (i.e., systems of practices) that will be used to control nonpoint sources of pollution, focusing on those measures which the State believes will be most effective in achieving and maintaining water quality standards. These measures may be individually identified or presented in manuals or compendiums, provided that they are specific and are related to the category or subcategory of nonpoint sources. They may also be identified as part of a watershed approach towards achieving water quality standards, whether locally, within a watershed, or state-wide; (ii) An identification of programs to achieve implementation of the measures, including, as appropriate, nonregulatory or regulatory programs for enforcement, technical assistance, fmancial assistance, education, training, technology transfer, and demonstration projects. States should establish a flexible, targeted approach to solve their water quality problems. States have the freedom to decide the best approaches for solving the problems that they identify under key element 5 above. These approaches may include one or all of the following: watershed or water quality-based approaches aimed at meeting water quality standards directly; iterative, technology-based approaches based on best management practices or measures, applied on either a categorical or site-specific basis; or an appropriate mix of these approaches. (iii) A description of the processes used to coordinate and, where appropriate, integrate the various programs used to implement nonpoint source pollution controls in the State; (iv) A schedule with goals, objectives, and annual milestones for implementation at the earliest practicable date: legal authorities to implement the program; available resources; and institutional relationships; 10of16 9!3/98 12:03 p JOint Source Program and Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years http://www.epagov/OWOWINPS/npsguid l.html (v) If the State program is changed substantially, certification by the Attorney General or designee; (vi) Sources of funding from Federal (other than section 319), State, local, and private sources; (vii) Federal land management programs, development projects and fmancial assistance programs (see key element 7 below); and (viii) A description of the monitoring and other evaluation programs that the State will conduct to help determine short- and long-term program effectiveness. In addition. State nonpoint source programs must incorporate existing baseline requirements established by other applicable Federal or State laws to the extent that they are relevant. For example, coastal States and Territories should include or cross-reference approved State coastal nonpoint source programs required by section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990. In this manner, States can make sure that these coastal nonpoint source programs, and other relevant baseline programs are integrated into section 319 programs and that they are eligible for section 319(h) grant funding, which is limited by section 319(h)(l) to "the implementation of approved section 319 programs." All of these components should be identified by the State, included in the State nonpoint source management program and be reviewed and approved by EPA under section 319 of the Clean Water Act. 7. The State identifies Federal lands and activities which are not managed consistently with State nonpoint source program objectives. Where appropriate, the State seeks EPA assistance to help resolve issues. The State commits to reviewing and identifying those Federal land management programs, development projects and financial assistance programs that are or may be inconsistent with the State's nonpoint source management program. As a Federal agency, EPA has a special role to play in support of State nonpoint source programs by working with other Federal agencies to enhance their understanding of the significance of nonpoint source pollution and of the need to work cooperatively with States to solve nonpoint source problems. Where appropriate, EPA will help develop memoranda of agreement among States and Federal agencies to help reduce nonpoint source pollution on Federal lands and to better address nonpoint source pollution in Federal assistance programs and development projects. IIi addition, where appropriate, EPA will assist in resolving particular issues that arise between the State and Federal agencies with respect to Federal consistency with the State nonpoint source management program. 8. The State manages and implements its nonpoint source program efficiently and effectively, including necessary f'mancial management. The State implements its program to solve its water quality problems as effectively and expeditiously as possible. Timeliness is key to accomplishing environmental objectives and demonstrating results as soon as possible. To help assure that priority water quality problems are addressed cost-effectively and in a timely manner, the State includes in its program a process for identifying the critical areas requiring treatment and protection within watersheds selected for implementation activities, and assigns the highest priority to addressing those areas. '16 913/98 12:03 PM http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/npsguidl.htJ. The State employs appropriate programmatic and fmancial systems that ensure that section 319 dollars are used consistently with its legal obligations, and generally manages all nonpoint source programmatic funds to maximize environmental benefits. The State ensures that section 319 funds complement and leverage funds available for technical and financial assistance from other Federal sources and agencies. 9. The State periodically reviews and evaluates its nonpoint source management program using environmental and functional measures of success, and revises its nonpoint source assessment and its management program at least every five years. In its upgraded program, the State establishes appropriate measures of progress in meeting its programmatic and environmental goals and objectives identified in key element #1 above. The State also describes a monitoring/evaluation strategy and a schedule to measure success in meeting those goals and objectives. The State integrates monitoring and evaluation strategies with ongoing Federal natural resource inventories and monitoring programs. Appendix A presents a guide for evaluating the effectiveness of State nonpoint source management programs, based on these nine key elements. Approaches to environmental indicators and monitoring and described below. a. Environmental Indicators States are encouraged to use several sets of measures to fully indicate their success in implementing their nonpoint source programs. These include measures that indicate progress towards achieving and maintaining beneficial uses of water; towards long-term goals (e.g., installing appropriate technology at all animal waste facilities that need to be upgraded, or implementing particular watershed projects); and towards shorter-term goals and objectives (e.g., successfully implementing a particular technology). Appendix B contains an illustrative set of indicators and other measures that can help the States and the public gauge the progress and success of their programs. States may identify and use other indicators and measures that are most relevant to their particular nonpoint source problems, programs, and projects. However, States are strongly encouraged to use environmental endpoints to the greatest extent feasible, so that the State and the public may best recognize the State's progress in addressing water quality problems in terms that are most relevant to the public's concerns. In addition, as discussed in section IV-D of this guidance, States must include in its annual reports at least the three measures of progress that are identified in section 319(h)(ll), including implementation milestones, available information on reductions in nonpoint source pollutant loadings, and available information on improvements in water quality. EPA is currently developing a broad strategy for the use of environmental indicators for its various environmental programs, including its water programs. The list in Appendix B, while providing more detail on indicators that are of particular relevance to State nonpoint source programs, is consistent with the environmental indicators adopted nationally by EPA to measure progress towards environmental goals. b. Monitoring in Watershed Projects Appropriate monitoring of watershed project implementation is an essential tool to enable States to identify nonpoint source pollution problems and to evaluate nonpoint source program effectiveness. First, States need to identify sources, document the effectiveness of individual measures and BMP systems, and develop watershed-level strategies to prevent and control nonpoint source pollution. Second, in the case of r ~\ watershed projects intended to demonstrate a new or innovative technical or institutional approach to resolving nonpoint source water quality problems, monitoring is needed to developing the information and ofl6 913/98 12:03 PM lOint Source Program and Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Furure Years .. http://www.epa.gov/OWOW!NPS/npsguid1.html data necessary to demonstrate the project's effectiveness and the applicability of the approach elsewhere. Third, monitoring is needed to help States meet the annual reporting requirements of section 319(h)(11), especially information on reductions in nonpoint source pollutant loading and improvements in water quality. Therefore, an appropriate type of monitoring should be considered for watershed projects funded with section 319 grants. Major watershed projects should include some form of tracking or monitoring to evaluate effectiveness. Watershed implementation plans should include clearly stated monitoring objectives and an evaluation strategy making clear what the State expects to learn as a result of its evaluation of the project. The evaluation approach may be tailored to the specific project, based on factors such as the project's size and objectives. Approaches that can be used to meet the project evaluation needs include ambient water quality monitoring (e.g., edge-of-field, small watersheds, multiple watersheds, in-lake, in-aquifer monitoring)., beneficial use assessment (e.g., biological/ habitat assessment, attainment of water quality standards), implementation monitoring (e.g., audits, activity tracking, geographic information system tracking of land use and land management), model projections, and photographic evidence. Ambient monitoring and beneficial use assessment tracking should be included for projects wherever feasible. While States may use section 319(h) grant funds for monitoring activities for particular watershed projects, States are encouraged to also explore other approaches to conducting monitoring. For examples, the U.S. Geological Survey and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration hold an array of ambient data and can provide support for various monitoring activities, and volunteer monitoring programs are a useful resource in many States. c. National Monitoring Program To provide a credible national documentation of the feasibility of controlling and preventing pollution resulting from nonpoint sources, and to improve technical understanding of nonpoint source pollution and the effectiveness of nonpoint source control technology and approaches, EPA has established a more rigorous and standardized monitoring framework that can be used for a representative subset of watershed projects funded under section 319. This monitoring will be continued for this subset of selected watershed projects for appropriately long periods of time e.g., 6-10 years. States are strongly encouraged to conduct intensive water quality monitoring of one or more projects within the State as part of this national evaluation. EPA has developed a framework for selecting national monitoring projects, issued guidelines for minimum monitoring activities, and developed software for managing and reporting data (see Appendix H for references). To date, 17 high-quality national projects have been selected across the country through a rigorous but collaborative process involving the State the EPA Region, and EPA Headquarters (these projects are listed in Appendix I). Additional high-quality monitoring projects will be selected in future years using the same collaborative process. For all projects, EPA provides specialized technical support in project development, monitoring design, data management and analysis, and reporting. From time to time, and in close collaboration with relevant States and project managers, EPA will publish progress reports and results. Prior to Fiscal Year 1996, a small set aside was provided from section 319 grants for these national monitoring projects. Beginning in FY 1996, this set aSide was eliminated along with all other discretionary set asides. Therefore, States are now strongly encouraged to give priority to projects in the National Monitoring Program. By the nature of nonpoint source pollution, long term monitoring results are crucial to determine successes and BMP effectiveness, which in turn requires sustained year-to-year funding. For those not familiar with this program, a detailed description of the national monitoring projects is available , 16 913/98 12:03 PM http://www.epagov/OWOW/NPS/npsguid1 ~ from EPA. B. Toward Our Vision: Dynamic and Effective Nonpoint Source Prouams All States and Territories now have approved nonpoint source management programs supported by Federal grants awarded under section 319. EPA and designated State lead nonpoint source lead agencies are committed to work to achieve our vision that all States are implementing dynamic and effective nonpoint source programs designed to achieve and maintain beneficjal uses of water. Generally, EPA's administration of section 319 grants, as well as EPA's technical assistance and support to States, should reflect the different levels of capability and accomplishment among the States. Moreover, EPA programs and State nonpoint source management programs alike will flourish best in an atmosphere of open discussion and collaboration. Therefore, based on open and collegial reviews of performance, EPA will provide recognition and enhanced administrative benefits to States which manifest the vision of this program. Specifically, EPA and State senior managers should meet at least once a year to discuss (i) State nonpoint source environmental accomplishments and remaining problems, (ii) State nonpoint source management programs and needs for adjustment or evolution, and (iii) overall progress towards the vision of this program. Similarly, State needs for technical assistance and help from EPA should be discussed and agreed to. To the extent that a State has chosen to apply for a Performance Partnership Grant or participate in the National Environmental Performance Partnership System, the nonpoint source program should be discussed in the context of the overall environmental needs and goals of the State and as a component of the overall State-EPA environmental performance agreement. EPA will promote State progress towards the vision of the program through incentives and technical support, in full collaboration with the State, and EPA will continue to support State programs financially through section 319 grants as a minimum. Administrative incentives will be offered to States to further encouraged to achieve the vision, including but not limited to recognition ofNonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits States. A State which incorporates all nine key elements in its revised nonpoint source management program and which has proven a track record of effective implementation of its nonpoint source programs will be formally recognized by the Regional Administrator and the Assistant Administrator for Water as a Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits State. NPS Enhanced Benefits States will be afforded substantially reduced oversight and maximum flexibility to implement their State programs and to achieve and maintain beneficial uses of water. Thus, while EPA has greatly streamlined the section 319 grants program for all States (e.g., grantee performance reports are generally to be required no more frequently than semi-annually), EPA is providing further flexibility to Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits States with complete programs and proven track records. A proven track record of effective implementation is indicated by the State's success to date in (a) establishing nonpoint source controls and installing measures and practices that provide real movement towards achieving water quality objectives through nonpoint source control, (b) generally meeting legal requirements relating to fiscal and administrative management. Specifically, Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits States will be afforded the following benefits, as a minimum: Top priority for developing multi-year work plans, thus eliminating yearly negotiations and f0fl6 913/9'12, 12m PM ,._;w~ .;,ource nogram ana Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 199/ and Future Years http://www.epa.gov/OWOWINPS/npsguid l.html paperwork; Minimal EPA review of grant work plans; Amount and frequency of reporting reduced to minimum (e.g., grantee performance reports are to be required no more frequently than annually); Substantially reduced intensity and frequency of EPA oversight, including minimal evaluations of States' self-assessments and statutorily-mandated reports; and Top priority for advanced technical expertise and assistance. See Section IV. A. below for additional information on reduced oversight for Enhanced Benefits States. Beginning in FY 1997, the EPA Regional Office will determine whether a State should be recognized as a Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits State, based on a timely and collaborative process involving the State and EPA Headquarters. Information, questions and issues will be discussed and shared among all these parties. EPA's recognition will be provided by the Regional Administrator and the Assistant Administrator for Water, accompanied by a public announcement and written recognition. Once a State has been recognized as a Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits State, it will retain that status unless EPA determines that it no longer qualifies. In consultation with EPA Headquarters, the EPA Region and the State will review a State's Enhanced Benefits status every two or three years as needed to assure that the nonpoint source management program continues to include all nine key elements and that it maintains a proven track record of implementation. EPA and the designated State lead nonpoint source agencies intend that within a few years, all or most States will have improved their programs and track records so that they are recognized as Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits States. EPA's role will increasingly be focused on helping States which have not incorporated all nine key elements in its revised nonpoint source management program to do so, in a manner appropriate to the needs of the State. Further, EPA will focus increasingly on providing appropriate technical assistance and support to these States to help them implement their approved nonpoint source management programs and to build a good track record of implementation. For all States, EPA's role in the nonpoint source program will shift away from grants oversight and administration and towards technical assistance and cooperation to help States implement well-designed nonpoint source management programs. Technical assistance, training, watershed- or community-based projects, cross-border or ecosystem-wide initiatives, and special assistance in working with other Federal agencies are examples of specific ways in which EPA will help States achieve environmental results. '-- Within its resource constraints, EPA will provide more sophisticated assistance such as advanced modeling and monitoring tools and design of high-quality watershed projects. EPA will also help arrange for needed technical assistance in monitoring, modeling and best management practices from other Federal agencies, ineluding the US Geological Survey, the US Forest Service, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Office of Surface Mining, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Bureau of Land Management. Further, where necessary and appropriate, EPA will also provide special assistance with Federal agencies where Federal activities may not be consistent with State nonpoint source management programs. EPA's role should be discussed and opportunities for EPA technical assistance and support to the State should be specifically identified during the annual State-EPA discussions of performance and progress. continue to Section IV. GRANTS 9/3/98 12:03 PM Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidance for Fiscal Year 1997 and Future Years http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/npsguidl.h; Table of Contents NPS Homepage EPA H0MEPAGE IOWOW HOME ISEARCH ICOMMENTS Environmental Protection Agency's Office ofWetlands, Oceans, & Watersheds Revised December 30, 1997 URL: http://www.epa.gov/OWOWINPS/npsguidl.html 16of 16 913/98 12:03 I ,point Source Program and Grants Guidance, Section IV: Grants http:/IWWW.epa.goVJOWOW;NP5mpsguoci.:..ntm. IV. GRANTS A fundamental principle of this guidance is that States should have the flexibility to use section 319 grant funds in a manner that they determine will best implement their nonpoint source management programs effectively to achieve the vision established at the beginning ofthis guidance and to achieve the specific goals and objectives established in their State nonpoint source management programs. Moreover, EPA and States will continue to reduce administrative responsibilities to the lowest level possible to assure that the funds are being used effectively and in a legally appropriate manner. A. Funding Process 1. General Approach to Awarding Funds Beginning in FY 1997, EPA will no longer use a competitive process for awarding section 319 grants. Rather, EPA will use the allocation formula presented in Appendix G to determine the amount to be awarded to each State (this formula remains unchanged from previous guidance but may be updated in the future to reflect up-to-date statistics). Each year, the Congressional appropriation for section 319 will be multiplied by the applicable percentage presented in Appendix G to determine each State's allocation for that year. As soon as the annual section 319 appropriation is made by Congress, EPA Headquarters will immediately notify the EPA Regional offices of each State's allocation, and the Regions will immediately notify the States. Consistent with historical practice, EPA will continue to award all appropriated section 319 funds under section 319(h) and will not award separate grants under section 319(i), grants for protecting ground water quality... Ground-water protection projects and activities will continue to be funded under section 319(h). 2. Expedited Schedule In FY 1994 and 1995, EPA and the States gradually expedited the section 319 grants award schedule to provide for awarding the grants by February 1. This guidance further expedites this schedule over FY 1997 and 1998. By FY 1998 at the latest, the schedule will provide for award of the grants by October 1, ' --.. thus making the 319 award date compatible with the October 1 date used to award water pollution control grants to States under sections 106 and 604(b) ofthe CWA The schedules for FY 1997 and for FY 1998 and beyond are presented in Appendix D. A primary advantage offurther expediting the section 319(h) grant award process is to bring section 319 grants into a cycle consistent with other State grant programs for water, especially funding under sections 106 and 604(b) ofthe Clean Water Act. These grant programs initiate planning in the Spring based on the President's budget request for the next fiscal year. Several other advantages for expediting the 319(h) grant award schedule include: ability to use grant funds in the same year in which they were appropriated; avoiding missing an entire construction season and/or cropping season; and .>fl4 9/4/984:31 PM Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidance, Section IV: Grants http:ttwww.epa.gov;owow;N?S;npsguid2..htn maintaining momentum and enthusiasm for implementation projects at the local level. A few States may determine that it is in their best interest or infeasible not to combine section 319 and other grants and not to expedite their grants award schedules. In that case, the Region and State may agree on a different schedule, but in every case, this different schedule should be based on an open, collaborative discussion and be based on the needs ofthe State. In all cases, Federal funds need to be put to work expeditiously, so States are strongly encouraged to expedite award schedules. 3. Six-Step Process The following process will generally be used to award all section 319 grants. However, Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits States will be accorded priority for negotiating multi-year work plans, which will further reduce administrative costs for those States. (Note: Please see Aggendix D for the schedules for this six-steg grocess.) Step 1: EPA provides a planning target to each State. Step 2: States submit draft grant applications, including a draft work plan. Each State will submit a draft grant application, including a draft work plan. As part ofthe draft work plan, each State should submit a brief (3-4 paragraph) introductory narrative explaining the State's strategy for using section 319 funds in the current fiscal year. Each Region will work closely and collaboratively with each State at this stage to promote the development and submission of high-quality work plans that: (1) conform to all applicable legal requirements of section 319, 40 CFR Part 31, and 40 CFR Part 35, Subpart A, and the requirements of O:MB Circulars A-87, A-102, and A-110; and (2) are consistent with the goals, objectives and priorities in the State nonpoint source management program. Work plans should briefly but clearly describe each significant category of activity (e.g., 2 pages) each, the funding to be used to accomplish each activity, the roles ofvarious local, State and Federal partners in completing each activity, and the outputs to be produced by performance ofthe activity. This will not only assure that the State and EPA have shared expectations, but will also assure that the State's subsequent performance can be assessed objectively. Outputs for activities should always be quantified, as described below in Section IV-C and Appendix B. Work programs for lengthy projects (i.e., multi-year projects) should include both interim milestones and final dates for completion of activities. Interim milestones should be sufficiently frequent to assure timely performance throughout the project period, so that the State can identifY problems and correct them expeditiously. EPA is committed to providing States great flexibility in determining their own priorities and methods for choosing and implementing watershed projects. Therefore, EPA is reducing its request for specific information about watershed projects to the minimum that is needed by EPA to: (1) carry out its legal fiduciary responsibilities of(a) determining that expenditures are necessary, eligible, and reasonable and (b) tracking expenditures and rates of expenditures to assure that they are consistent with the grant, and (2) assure that the State and EPA will mutually be able to assess the success of grant activities in meeting State program goals. 2of 14 0 9/4/98 4:31 ""'lOint Source Program and Grants Guidance, Section N: Grants http://www .epa.gov/owow1NPSmpsguici2.html Therefore, for significant watershed projects (those whose costs exceed $50,000), the State should submit a brief(e.g., 2-3 page) synopsis ofits watershed implementation plan. This synopsis should outline the problem to be addressed; the project's goals and objectives; the lead implementing agency and other agencies that will be authorized to expend project funds; the types of measures or practices that will be implemented; the projected implementation schedule; and the environmental indicators and/or other performance measures that will be used to evaluate the success ofthe project. (Appendix C contains more information on these elements ofwell-designed watershed implementation plans.) Step 3: Regions conduct their reviews of State applications The Region will review each State's application and meet or conduct a telephone conversation with each State to resolve any technical or administrative issues. Following this collaboration, Regions should provide a written reply to the State. The Regional response should include written comments on the State's application, paying particular attention to applicable legal requirements and its consistency with the goals, objectives, and priorities established in the State management program. The written reply should also include any agreements reached with States concerning additional steps the State will take to become a Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits State. For Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits States, the scope ofEPA Regional reviews of grant applications will be as limited as possible, and be highly deferential to State judgements, priorities, and chosen means ofimplementation. For Enhanced Benefits States, EPA's review ofthe section 319 nonpoint source grant applications will focus primarily on assuring that it meets legal minimums and that it does not contain significant errors. Step 4: States submit final work plans and grant applications to EPA Regions Step 5: Regions award grants Each Region will review its States' final work plans. Ifa State's work programs meet all applicable requirements, the Region will award the final grant as quickly as possible. Where issues remain, the Region will elevate discussions to more senior management levels quickly to achieve a satisfactory resolution of the problem. In the unlikely event that funds cannot be fully awarded to a particular State, they must be returned to the Region for reallocation by August I ofthe fiscal year for which funds are appropriated. Step 6: States obligate funds States will obligate the awarded funds as quickly as possible and conduct funded activities according to the schedules in approved work plan. EPA has interpreted section 319(h)(6) to provide that section 319(h) funds granted to a State shall remain available for obligation by the State for one year from the grant award. For example, grant funds awarded to a State on December 1, 1996, remain available for obligation until December 1, 1997. The amount of any such funds that cannot be obligated by one year from the grant award shall be available to EPA for granting to other States. Regions should include grant condition language calling for the grant recipient to award all proposed contracts and interagency agreements within one year after the grant award. The term "obligate" does not mean to "expend." It means that the State must commit the section 319(h) funds to be expended. EPA defines an "obligation (by a recipient)" as "the amount offunds which a recipient legally earmarks for expenditure through orders placed, payrolls, subagreements awarded, travel " 14 9/4/98 4:31 PM Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidance, Section IV: Grants authorizations, and other transactions. 11 4. Multi-Year Work Plans EPA will place high priority upon developing multi-year work plans for section 319 grants for Nonpoint Source Enhanced Benefits States. For example, the State may wish to present a three-year work plan which would guide the State's grant activities for the next three years. This work plan, when approved by EPA, would not have to be resubmitted and reapproved except to the extent that the State wishes to change it to address new circumstances. This approach will reduce paper work and will improve the State's ability to engage in long-term planning and implementation with respect to both programmatic activities and specific watershed projects. These Enhanced Benefits States will, however retain the option of developing aspects oftheir programs or projects on an annual basis where it deems appropriate. States which have not been recognized as Nonpoint Source Benefits States may also work with EPA to develop multi-year work plans for certain components oftheir grants. However, until a State is recognized as a Enhanced Benefits State, it is likely that most ofits activities will require a more careful evaluation by EPA and that a new grant work plan will be required for the coming year. 5. "M Account" Funds and Transfer of Funds Between Projects Section 319 funds appropriated in FY 1990, FY 1991, and FY 1992 are subject to restrictions (often referred to as "M account" restrictions) which automatically cause these appropriations to expire seven years after the date of appropriation. Any unspent funds remain in the U.S. Treasury and are no longer available to EPA or the State. States and EPA Regions should take the necessary actions to be sure unspent funds from these years are transferred to other projects before expiration (e.g., for FY 1990 funds, before September 30, 1996). To increase rates of expenditure of older funds such as "M Account" funds and to reduce paperwork requirements, some States have suggested that the process for transferring funds between projects funded in different years be simplified and streamlined. EPA is exploring whether necessary modifications to allow such transfers could and should be made. Supplementary guidance may be issued on this subject in the future. B. Grant Eligibility Section 319 grant funds are to be directed towards the vision that all States implement dynamic and effective programs designed to achieve and maintain beneficial uses ofwater. Approved State nonpoint source management programs provide the framework for determining what activities are eligible for funding under section 319(h). Therefore, States may use section 319 funds for nonregulatory or regulatory programs for enforcement, technical assistance, financial assistance, education, training, technology transfer, demonstration projects, and monitoring to assess the success of specific nonpoint source implementation projects. 1. Revising Management Programs and Assessments In addition to the eligible activities listed above, States may use section 319 funds to update and refocus their State nonpoint source management programs and nonpoint source assessments to improve program effectiveness. To assist States in these efforts, States may use up to 20 percent of their section 319(h) funds or $250,000, whichever is less, to update and refine their programs and assessments. , 4ofl4 l 9/4/984~ onpoint Source Program and Grants Guidance, Section IV: Grants h t t p : i t w w w.epa.gov,owow/NP Smpsguid2.hunl In refining their programs to reflect the most pressing needs and highest-priority water quality problems in the State, States may need to carry out additional activities and analyses. Based on the key elements of State programs that are described in the preceding section ofthis guidance, program revisions that may be supported with section 319 grants include: establishing appropriate indicator and milestones to gauge program progress; developing total maximum daily loads and other watershed-scale strategies to reduce nonpoint source pollution; focusing on determination ofthe most effective measures and practices to abate or prevent nonpoint pollution; strengthening links with Federal land management agencies; developing enhanced processes to involve public, private, and Federal partners in the design and implementation of State nonpoint source management programs; and instituting systems to assess program effectiveness and make appropriate revisions. In addition, States may need to carry out a number of activities that have generally been associated with nonpoint source assessments. For example, States may require additional assessment work either as part of specific watershed projects, or as part of an overall Statewide, regional, or ecoregional effort. Such additional assessment work will enable States to more clearly identify and prioritize their nonpoint source problems, evaluate the effectiveness of their nonpoint source management programs, and measure progress toward environmental goals. 2. Ground-Water Activities Ground-water activities are eligible for section 319{h) grants to the extent that they are identified directly in the State's nonpoint source management program or through incorporation in the management program by reference to the State's Ground-Water Protection Strategy or Comprehensive State Ground-Water Protection Program. If such activities are not currently included in the State's nonpoint source management program, the program should be amended to include them. 3. Urban Storm Water Runoff Section 3 19 funds may be used to fund any urban storm water activities that are not specifically required by a draft or final NPDES permit. EPA has issued several regulations defining what activities are subject to the NPDES permit requirements of section 402(p)(2) ofthe CWA. The most significant ofthese was the publication of permit application requirements in November 1990 for "Phase I" storm water dischargers, that is, municipal separate storm sewers serving large or medium-sized populations (greater than 250,000 or 100,000 people, respectively), and storm water discharges associated with industrial activity. See 55 FR 47990. EPA is currently in the process of determining what storm water discharges will be covered by "Phase II" ofthe storm water program. Until EPA issues regulations specifying what additional storm water discharges are subject to NPDES permit application requirements, States may use section 319(h) funds for those urban storm water discharges that are not addressed by existing, Phase I storm water program requirements. These include both Phase IT discharges as well as aspects ofPhase I activities that support but do not directly implement activities required by Phase I permits. EPA and the States recognize the benefits of integrating nonpoint source funds and storm water activities as much as is legally allowable. Listed below are a variety ofurban runoff management activities that could be eligible for section 319(h) funding. Technical assistance to State and local storm water programs; Monitoring needed to design and evaluate the effectiveness of implementation strategies; Best management practices for pollution prevention and runoff control (except for BMPs required ..n 4 9/4/984:31 PM Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidance, Section IV: Grants http:1twww.epa..gov, owow;}...;? :::.:npsg,uc.....n:. by a draft or finalNPDES permit); Information and education programs; Technology transfer and training; and Development and implementation of regulations, policies, and local ordinances to address storm water runoff (These may apply to areas covered by NPDES permits, provided that the regulations, policies and ordinances apply to non-permitted areas as well.) Historically, urban storm water management control efforts have focused on water drainage problems i.e., water quantity. Now many storm water control BMPs are designed to control both water quantity and water quality. Section 319(h) funds may be used to assist in the incremental funding of certain water quality components of such practices, except as described below. Section 319(h) nonpoint source control funds may not be used to implement specific requirements of draft or final NPDES storm water permits, nor to implement permit application requirements ofEPA's storm water regulations. For example, section 319(h) funds may not be used to meet permit application requirements such as mapping storm water systems, identifying illicit connections, characterizing storm water discharges, or monitoring required by permits. Section 319(h) grant funds may not be used to pay for BMPs or "end of pipe" treatments which are required as part of a draft or final NPDES permit. These prohibitions are based on the statutory limitations on the use of section 319 funds, including Congressional intent that these funds be used to address nonpoint sources, rather than permitted point sources. Congress determined that permitted point sources (other than publicly owned treatment works that obtained construction grants under section 212 ofthe CWA) would generally comply with NPDES permit requirements without Federal financial assistance. 4. Abandoned Mine Lands As in the case of urban storm water regulated by NPDES permits, many abandoned mine land reclamation projects that are designed to protect water quality are eligible for section 319 funding, except section 319 funds may not be used to implement specific requirements in a draft or final NPDES permit. For example, section 319 funds cannot be used to build treatment systems required by an NPDES permit for an inactive mine, but they may be used to fund a variety of other remediation activities at the same mine. Examples of fundable activities include: Remediation of water pollution from abandoned mines that have not yet been issued a draft or final permit; Remediation of water pollution from portions of abandoned mine sites that are not covered by a draft or final permit; Mapping and planning remediation at abandoned mine land sites; Monitoring needed to design and evaluate the effectiveness of implementation strategies; Technical assistance to State and local abandoned mine land programs; Information and education programs; Technology transfer and training; and Development and implementation of policies to address abandoned mine lands. The Natural Resources Conservation Service and local soil conservation districts have a vast array of on-the-ground experience in the area of rural abandoned mine lands. In addition, the Office of Surface Mining has a 10% set-aside from its Abandoned Mine Land program to address water quality from abandoned mines. 6 of 14 9/4/984: 'l -.,int Source Program and Grants Guidance, Section IV: Grants hnp:/iwww.epa.govJowow;NPS:npsguld::.nllru 5. Lake Protection and Restoration Activities Lake protection and restoration activities are eligible for 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. States are encouraged to use Section 319 funding for eligible activities that might have been funded in previous years under Section 314 ofthe Clean Water Act. However, Section 319 funds should not be used for in-lake work, such as aquatic macrophyte harvesting or dredging, unless the.sources of pollution have been addressed sufficiently to assure that the pollution being remediated will not recur. C. Criteria That Apply to the Award of Section 319 Grants Section 319 grants must meet certain statutory, regulatory and other administrative criteria that have been established to assure that section 319 funds are used in a fiscally prudent manner. All section 319 grants must be consistent with applicable provisions ofEPA's general grant regulations, 40 CFR Part 31, Part 35 Subpart A, and the Agency's guidance on Performance Partnership Grants. The most important of these criteria are discussed below. 1. The Work Plan Must Demonstrate That Each Funded Element Will Implement Specific Activities Identified in the Approved Management Program Section 319(h) of the CWA provides that section 319(h) grants are to be made "for the purpose of assisting the State in implementing such management program." The grant work program must therefore "implement" the approved nonpoint source management program; each funded program activity or project will in fact lead to accomplishment of identified management program objectives. Grant work plans should link the funded activities or projects to the relevant element or elements of the States nonpoint source management program. (Specific ground-water protection activities that are not described in the nonpoint source management program are eligible if the activities are included in a State's Ground-Water Protection Strategy or Comprehensive Program, and the State's nonpoint source management program makes reference to these documents or programs.) Work plans should also indicate which Federal, State and local agencies are responsible for implementing each project or activity. 2. Section 319 Grants Must be Awarded as Continuing Environmental Program Grants All section 319(h) grants should be awarded as continuing environmental program grants, consistent with '40 CFR, Part 35, Subpart A. Section 319(h) grants have some unique administrative characteristics i.e., multi-year vs. one-year budget and project periods, which are different from other EPA continuing environmental grant programs. Unlike most other continuing environmental grants, section 319(h) grants are not required to be closed out annually. Regions are encouraged to award new continuing environmental program grants each year rather than to add funds to an existing State grant through amendments. This should allow for greater program accountability over the multi-year duration of these grants. The Regions must also ensure that all existing State grants are properly closed out at the conclusion of the project period. 3. The Non-Federal Share Must Be At Least 40 Percent Section 319(h)(3) provides that the Federal share shall not exceed 60 percent of the management program implementation cost and shall be made on the condition that the non-Federal share is provided from non-Federal sources. The match need not be on an item-by-item basis, but rather. should be a single 9/4/98 4:31 PM Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidance, Section IV: Grants http://www.epa.govtowowtNPSinpsgu~W.lll:UH NPSMS Version 3.01 User's Guide. Washington, D.C. APPENDIX I NATIONAL MONITORING PROJECTS FUNDED UNDER SECTION 319 PROJECT Lightwood-Knot Creek Oak Creek_ Morro Bay Jordan Cove Lake Pittsfield ISny Magill IWalnut Creek IEastern Snake River Plain IWarner Creek ISycamore Creek IElm Creek ILong Creek IIllinois River IPequea and Mill Creek ILake Champlain IPuget Sound IOtter Creek II STATE I Alabama I Arizona I California I j Connecticut I I Illinois I II Iowa I II Iowa I II Idaho IMaryland I l Michigan I Nebraska I North Carolina I II Oklahoma I II Pennsylvania l I Vermont I II Washington I II Wisconsin I Note: For those not familiar with this program. a detailed description of the national nonpoint source monitoring projects is available from EPA. NPS Homepage EPA HOMEPAGE IOWOW HOME ISEARCH ICOMMENTS Environmental Protection Agency's Office ofWetlands, Oceans. & Watersheds __,f 14 9/4/98 4:25 PM l l UNIFIED WATERSHED ASSESSMENT WATERSHED RESTORATION PRIORITIES FOR SECTION 319(h) FY96 GRANT FUNDING REVISED DECEMBER, 1998 UNIFIED WATERSHED ASSESSMENT (UWA) GRANT OPPORTUNITY UPDATE Under Section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) awards a Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant to the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GAEPD) to fund eligible projects which support the implementation of the Georgia Nonpoint Source Management Program. The Section 319(h) Grant funds are limited. Therefore, the GAEPD uses a competitive process to ensure that the most appropriate projects are selected for funding. The State has approximately $1 million in Section 319(h) FY96 Grant funds to implement watershed and statewide projects. Priority will be given to project which implement Watershed Restoration Action Strategies in areas identified by State's Unified Watershed Assessment as being "in need of restoration." These areas, referred to as "Category I Watersheds in Need of Restoration," are those watersheds that "do not now meet, or face imminent threats of not meeting, clean water and other natural resource goals." The Clean Water Action Plan calls for states to work with the appropriate agencies, organizations and the public to identify Category I watersheds most in need of restoration beginning in the Federal FY1999 - 2000 period. The Unified Watershed Assessment for Georgia was developed by the GAEPD, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and the Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission (GSWCC), working with other interested Federal, State, local and private stakeholders. In accordance with the Unified Watershed Assessment Framework, the State will finalized the Watershed Restoration Priorities in October, 1998. Nonpoint source pollution is the greatest source of water quality problems in Georgia today. The Clean Water Action Plan presents us all with exciting opportunities to focus our efforts and enhance our resources to solve these remaining water quality problems as well as to sustain good water quality. The application of Section 319(h) FY96 Grant funds to focus on solving our highest priority problems will enable us to make great strides in our efforts to achieve our water quality goals. The USGS 8-digit hydrological cataloging unit served as the common scale for reporting the results of Unified Watershed Assessments and to help target resources. The following seventeen (17) watersheds have been identified as Watershed Restoration Priorities for Section 319(h) FY96 Grant funding: . ' : ,:' WATERSHED:.,:.: Tugaloo River Broad River Lower Savannah River Upper Oconee River Upper Ocmulgee River Ocmulgee River Satilla River Alapaha River Upper Ochlockonee River Upper Chattahoochee River Upper Middle Chattahoochee River Upper Flint River Conasauga River Coosawatee River Oostanaula River Etowah River Tallapoosa River I: :: .,.,, USGS CATALOGING UNIT 03060102 03060104 03060109 03070101 03070103 03070104 03070201 03110202 03120002 03130001 03130002 03130005 03150101 03150102 03150103 03150104 03150108 Additional information about the priority watersheds (e.g., rivers and streams in the watershed, land characteristics, river corridors and wetlands restoration efforts, index of watershed indicators, etc.) may be accessed through the USEPA webpage at: http:lwww.epa.gov/surf21hucs/ The USGS 8-digit hydrological cataloging unit map for Georgia may be ordered from the USGS Earth Information Science Center (ESIC) at 1-800-USA-MAPS. --aloo News Flashes: Tugaloo USGS Cataloging Unit: 03060102 http://www.epa.gov/surf!HUCS!hucinfo/03060 1021 FIND YOUR PLACE: Find out wh . lO.~:>< l.:JtSCt.i:i510!,.o,.S.,.,.;,,., ;t.ilZJ l!'fll .S~AA.C.J.-.! J~~m. ~m.>.n.rn< Places Involving this Watershed Environmental Profile Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed States: Georgia North Carolina South Carolina Counties: Franklin Habersham Hart Rabun Stephens Index ofWatershed Indicators Additional infonnation provided by States and Tribes River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: o Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) o Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) o Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) Towns Clay Jackson Macon Water Find informationfocused on waterfor this specific watershed Anderson Oconee Rivers and Streams in this Watershed: 19 (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Metropolitan Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) Areas: River and stream miles: Greenville-Spartanburg-Ange~% oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed 9/4/98 9:03AM Tugaloo http://www.epa.govJsurt/HUCSthucinfot0300Qlu Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson o 191 miles meet all designated uses Nominated Am~rican ~enta~e v;~ Nonpoint Source Projects in this watershed (Funded under Section 319(h) ofthe Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Rivera Drinking Water Information System) o Water Dischargers (Source: PCS -Permit Compliance Other Watersheds: upstream None downstream 03060103 System) Information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): li~itrr-~) o Stream Flow (Source: USGS) o Science in Your Watershed o Historical Water Data Large o Water Resources Ecosystems: Savannah River Southern o Water use (1990): Information about the amount ofwater used and how it is used o Selected USGS Abstracts Appalachians Assessment (SAA) Southern Appalachian Man and the Biosphere Reserve Area Land Find watershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 997.25. sq mi; perimeter: I99.36 mi (SAMAB) Landscape-Scale Assessment Landscape Indicators: I% urban, 96% forest, 6% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than I00% ) Southern Appalachian People Mountains Initiative Find out about local actions in this watershed: (SAMI) American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) !:tali EF~l Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find informationfocused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME l CONTACTS l DISCLAIMER l~I HELP ICOMMENTS TEXT VERSION l SURF HOME 2of2 9/4/98 9:l .<-'A rs in HUC# 03060102 http://www.epa.gov/cgi-binlsur1search2.pl?geography=st:reamsperhuc&vaiue=03060 102 Surf Your Waters FIND YOURPLACE: Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03060102 o Brasswater Creek o Chatooga River o Chauga River o Choestea Creek o Eastanolee Creek o Fowler Creek o Hartwell Res o Lake Burton o Little Beaverdam Creek o Little Choestoea Creek o Panther Creek o Rock Creek o Seneca River o Stekoa Creek o Tallulah River o Taxaway Creek o Tiger Creek o Tugaloo River o Warwoman Creek 1 9/4/98 4:22 PM http://www.epa.gov/surf!HUCS!hucinfo/03060104/ Surf Your Waters WATERSHED ENVIRONMENTAL PROFI Ellll~~l.IBJ.t~~~--- News Flashes: find out wh FIND YOUR PLACE: L::: : ::__~::: :: :: ::::J . .lOi!.>< >xS<:ti:.>Jor.s ;,,,.,, , . ... 'I.H1J lNm~M>'~ ~:i'M((ti ~~~fOf.lt.tAW.lN Broad USGS Cataloging Unit: 03060104 Places Involving this Watershed States: Georgia South Carolina Counties: Banks Clarke Elbert Franklin Habersham Hall Hart Jackson Lincoln Madison Oglethorpe Stephens Wilkes McCormick Metropolitan Environmental Profile Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed Index ofWatershed Indicators Additional information provided by States and Tribes River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: o Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Toxic releases (Source:TRI -Toxic Release Inventory) o Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) o Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) Water Find informationfocused on waterfor this specific watershed Rivers and Streams in this Watershed: 29 (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) River and stream miles: o % oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed 9/4/98 9:00 AM Broad http://www.epa.gov/surfi'HUCS/hucinfo/03060 )Jl. Areas: Athens Nominated American Heritage Rivers: None Other Watersheds: upstream None downstream 03060103 Large Ecosystems: Savannah River Southern Appalachians Assessment (SAA) Southern Appalachian Man and the Biosphere ReseiVe Area (SAMAB) Landscape-Scale Assessment Southern Appalachian Mountains Initiative (SAMI) o % oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed o miles meet all designated uses Nonpoint Source Proiects in this watershed (Funded under Section 319(h) ofthe Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Information System) o Water Dischargers (Source: PCS -Permit Compliance System) Information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): htu rr-~> l o Stream Flow (Source: USGS) o Science in Your Watershed o Historical Water Data o Water Resources o Water use (1990): Information about the amount of water used and how it is used o Selected USGS Abstracts Land Find watershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 1,501.12 sq mi~ perimeter: 199.31 mi Landscape Indicators: 0% urban, 99% forest, 2% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than 100% ) People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) liiail r~>~) Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find informationfocused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME ICONTACTS IDISCLAIMER IABOtrr IHELP ICOMMENTS TEXT VERSION ISURF HOME 2 of2 9/4/98 9:00 AL "'TS in HUC# 03060104 http://www.epa.gov/cgi-binlsurflsearch2.pl?geography=streamsperhuc&vaiue=03060104 Surf Your Waters-h FIND YOURPLACE: :::::::::::::::::: ~~-~ Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03060104 o Beaver Creek o Big Cloud Creek o Big Could Creek o Black Creek o Broad River o Buffalo Creek o Clark Creek o Coody River o Curlan Creek o Double Creek o DoveCreek o DryFk o Falling Creek o Grove Creek o Hickory Level Creek o Hudson River o Hutton Creek o Indian Creek . o Leatherwood Creek o LongBr o Long Creek o Mack's Creek o MiddleFk o Mill Creek o Mill Shoal Creek o Nails Creek o Scull Shoal Creek o Una Watti Creek o Wah3;tchee River 9/4/98 9:01 AM ~rSavanuah http://www.cpa.gov/surf/HUCS/hucinfo/03060 109/ Surf Your Waters WATERSHED ENVIRONMENTAL PROFI IEAI~i.ll:fNE!t?L.................... . ... News flashes: find out wh FIND YOUR PLACE: Jm~ l:"J!SO:~:>>!:O~s um m~os;M;.1 t(>f< .<..:.f.AA..C. t.i.l.t.t..ft)~tAAl."l~ Lower Savannah USGS Cataloging Unit: 03060109 Places Involving this Watershed States: Georgia South Carolina Counties: Chatham Effingham Screven Allendale Hampton ~ Metropolitan Areas: Savannah Nominated American Heritage Rivers: Savannah River Environmental Profile Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed Index ofWatershed Indicators Additional information provided by States and Tribes River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: o Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) o Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) o Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) Water Find information focused on waterfor this specific watershed Rivers an4 Streams in this Watershed: 11 (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) River and stream miles: o 12% oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed 9/4/98 8:59 AM Lower SaV&DII8h http://www.epa.gov/surf/HUCSihucmfo/030oO~~ Other Watersheds: upstream 03060106 03060108 03060204 downstream 03050208 Large Ecosystems: Savannah River West Chatham County Wetlands Advance Identification (ADID) Project o 0 miles meet all designated uses Nonpoint Source Projects in this watershed (Funded under Section 319(h) ofthe Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Information System) o Water Dischargers (Source: PCS -Permit Compliance System) Information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): 1\f:U(u-A) o Stream Flow (Source: USGS) o Science in Your Watershed o Historical Water Data o Water Resources o Water use (1990): Information about the amount ofwater used and how it is used o Selected USGS Abstracts Land Find watershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 933.15 sq mi; perimeter: 177.28 mi Landscape Indicators: I% urban, 91% forest, 30% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than I00% ) People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) ~au [fA) Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find information focused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME ICONTACTS IDISCLAIMER IABOtrr IHELP ICOMMENTS TEXT VERSION I SURF HOME 2of2 9/4/98 8:59 ), -rs in HUC# 03060109 http://www.epa.gov/cgi-binlsur1search2.pl?geography=streamsperhuc&value=03060 109 Surf Your Watersh FIND YOURPLACE: I_:: Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03060109 o Abercorn Creek o Dashers Creek o DryBr o Ebenezer Creek o Lockners Creek o Pipemakers Canal o RunsBr o S Channel o Savannah River o Turkey Creek o Tybee Roads 9/4/98 8:59 AM '.~Oconee News flashes: Upper Oconee USGS Cataloging Unit: 03070 I0 I http://www.cpa.gov/surf!HUCS!hucinfo/03070 1011 FIND YOUR PLACE: find out wh J. Oj~ !:OM ,.,.,.,.,,.,. ... . :>.nn mm~M.S.1K~< . ~:fAACri l!l::t.v.n>.m Places Involving this Watershed States: Georgia Counties: Baldwin Banks Barrow Clarke Greene Gwinnett Hall Hancock Jackson ~ Jones Madison Morgan Newton Oconee Qglethorne Putnam Taliaferro Environmental Profile Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed Index ofWatershed Indicators Additional information provided by States and Tribes River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: o Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) o Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) o Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) Water Find information focused on waterfor this specific watershed Rivers and Streams in this Watershed: 54 (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) River and stream miles: o % oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed 9/4/98 8:56 AM Upper Oconee http://www.epa.gov/sur1HUCS/hucinfo/03070U Walton Metropolitan Areas: Atlanta Athens Macon Nominated American Heritage Rivers: None Other Watersheds: upstream None downstream 03070102 %oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed o miles meet all designated uses Nonpoint Source Projects in this watershed (Funded under Section 319(h) ofthe Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Information System) o Water Dischargers (Source: PCS - Permit Compliance System) Information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): li:!iftN) o Stream Flow (Source: USGS) o Science in Your Watershed o .Historical Water Data o Water Resources o Water use (1990): Information about the amount ofwater used and how it is used o Selected USGS Abstracts Large Ecosystems: Southern Appalachians Assessment (SAA) Southern Appalachian Man and the Biosphere Reserve Area (SAMAB) Landscape-Scale Assessment Southern Appalachian Mountains Initiative (SAM!) Land Find watershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 2,925.27 sq mi; perimeter: 262.47 mi Landscape Indicators: I% urban, 97% forest, 7% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than 100% ) People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) l!;i(EPA] Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find informationfocused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME ICONTACTS IDISCLAIMER IABOUf IHELP ICOMMENTS TEXT VERSION ISURF HOME 2of2 9/4/98 8:56 J-J,i , , in HUC# 03070101 http://www.epa.gov/cgi-binlsurflsearch2.pl?geography=streamsperhuc&value=o3070 l 0 i. Surf Your Waters fTI'I<'D YOURPLACE: c:~~---:: ::::: .J.O~!~ l:l:~c:~.;s:>to~~ .t.t'l!J I~F0$(1'f<>\1"10!.! ~:t~ROt 1~!0!!M.< ,,fs<::~:>>!Or.s M!Zl l:Nm$< MM ~(>!< <.~f.t.l.ltOi. l?~f US.{t.'-"'l"lili< :: :::.; Places Involving this Watershed States: Georgia Counties: Bibb Butts Clayton Crawford DeKalb Fulton Gwinnett ~ Houston ~ Jones Lamar Monroe Newton Peach Rockdale Spalding Twiggs Environmental Profile Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed Index ofWatershed Indicators Additional information provided by States and Tribes River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: o Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) o Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) o Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) Water Find informationfocused on waterfor this specific watershed Rivers and Streams in this Watershed: .21 (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) River and stream miles: o 28% of total rivers and streams have been surveyed 11.2 9/4/98 8:57 AM Upper Ocmuigee ~ Walton Metropolitan Areas: Atlanta Macon Nominated American Heritage Rivers: None Other Watersheds: upstream None downstream 03070104 Large Ecosystems: http://www.epa.gov/surf!HUCS/hucinfo/03070H 28% oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed o 295 miles meet all designated uses Nonpoint Source Proiects in this watershed (Funded under Section 319(h) ofthe Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Infonnation System) o Water Dischargers (Source: PCS -Permit Compliance System) Infonnation provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): g;:,iitN' o Stream Flow (Source: USGS) o Science in Your Watershed o Historical Water Data o Water Resources o Water use (1990): Infonnation about the amount of water used and how it is used o Selected USGS Abstracts Land Find watershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 2,981.07 sq mi; perimeter: 273.77 mi Landscape Indicators: 6% urban, 90% forest, 15% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than 100% ) People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Infonnation Center) 1=*3ii F:P"': Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find informationfocused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME I CONTACTS I DISCLAIMER I ABOliT I HELP I COMMENTS TEXT VERSION I SURF HOME 2of2 9/4/98 8:S7 Alvl --sinHUC# 03070103 http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/surflsearch2.pl?geography=streamsperhuc&value=03070 103 Surf Your \Vatersh FIND YOURPLACE: ::. ~:::::::::::q : Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03070103 o Alcovy River o Bay Creek o BearCreek o Beaver Ruin Creek o Big Cotton Creek o Big Flat Creek o Big Haynes Creek 0 Big Sandy Creek 0 Brushy Fk Creek o Buck Creek o Cabin Creek 0 Cobb Creek 0 Conley Creek 0 Cornish Creek 0 Dee River Creek o Deep Creek o Echeconnee Creek o Edie Creek 0 Failing Creek 0 Fox Creek 0 Gum Creek 0 Herds Creek 0 Honey Creek 0 Indian Creek o Jackson Creek o Jackson Lake o James Creek o Kinnard Creek 0 Little Echeconnee Creek 0 Little Failing Creek o Little Haynes Creek o Little Tobesofkee River o Little Towaliga Creek 0 Mountain Creek 0 Ocmulgee River o Pole Bridge Creek o Rocky Creek o RumCreek 'C... 9/4/98 8:58AM Rivers in HUC# 03070103 o Sampson Creek o Snapping Shoals Creek o South River o Stone Creek o Stone Mountain Creek o Sweetwater Creek o Tobesofkee River o Towaliga Creek o Tussahaw Creek o Walnut Creek o WolfCreek o Yellow River o Yellow Water Creek http://www.epa.gov/cgi-binlsurf/search2.pl?geography=streamsperhuc&value=0307n'l 2of2 9/4/98 8:58 .:J SurfYour Watershed- Watershed Information ... Page 1 of3 Surf Your Watersh News Plashes: Lower Ocmulgee USGS Cataloging Unit: 03070104 . ~u--=-<~ ~f~cu;~t .>NS . J~DO u~~o~ M-~?'1{).!~ '> >.!!< tl m:'G>II>'-P> 0<.>~< MA~ ti~AAII'( . . . ....:.~....;.: ..... ........ ..........~ ' Places Involving Environmental Profile this Watershed Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed States: Georgia Assessments of Watershed Health Index of Watershed Indicators (provided by EPA) Counties: Ben Hill Unified Watershed Assessments (UWA) (provided by States and Tribes) Environmental Information Bleckley Coffee Crawford Dodge Dooly Houston Irwin Je:ffDavis Macon Montgomety Peach Pulaski River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) EnviroMapper for Watersheds- (interactive mapping tool) Telfair Twiggs Wheeler Wilcox Water Find informationfocused on waterfor this specific watershed Metropolitan Areas: Macon Rivers and Streams in this Watershed: 35 (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) River and stream miles: http://www.epa.gov/surf21hucs/03070104/ 12/22/98 SurfYour Watershed-- Watershed Information ... Page 2 of3 Nominated American Heritage Riven: None Other Watenbeds: . upstream ~ Ocmulgee Little Ocmulgee downstream Altamaha Large Ecosystems: None 2641.6 total river miles 1149.4 perennial river miles I2% of total rivers and streams have been surveyed I34 miles meet all designated uses This hue's principal aquifer is No Principal Aquifer which is 875 square miles and has a rock type ofN/A Nonpoint Source Projects in this watershed (Funded under Section 3I9(h) of the Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Information System) Water Dischargers (Source: PCS- Permit Compliance System) Information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): 1~3ii ~-~ l Stream Flow (Source: USGS) Science in Your Watershed Historical Water Data Water use (I990): Information about the amount of water used and how it is used Selected USGS Abstracts Land Find watershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 2249.68 sq mi; perimeter: 288.32 mi Landscape Indicators: 1% urban, I% forest, 59% crop use (overlapping, sum ~ould be more than I00% ) People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) 13ii [r>A) Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find information focused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME ICONTACTS I DISCL-\JMER I ABOtiT I HELP I COMMENTS http://www.epa.gov/surf2/hucs/03070 104/ I2/22"98 Rivers in HUC# 03070 I 04 Page I of I Surf Your Watersh ~Your ,.;0:.<>~aiershed j'->lN D;S(IJ%10"<:> ~00 l~fVRMAHON ,h:O,li(l< tt<'Hli!M."-IJ(!>; M.>l" U!l!l)" Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03070104 Alligator Creek Baptist Creek Bay Creek Bay Gall Creek Big Creek Big Horse Creek Big Indian Creek BluffCreek Brushy Creek Camp Creek Cedar Creek Crooked Creek Dry Creek Evergreen Creek Flat Creek Horse Creek House Creek Indian Creek Jordan Creek Little House Creek Little Ocmulgee River Mosquito Creek Mossy Creek Mule Creek Ocmulgee River Oconee River Otter Creek Richland Creek SProng S SheUstone Creek Sandy Run Creek Savage Creek Shellstone Creek Sturgeon Creek Tenmile Creek http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/surf2/search.pl?geography=streamsperhuc&value=03070I04 12/22/98 SurfYour Watershed- Watershed Information ... Surf Your Watersh News Plashes: Satilla USGS Cataloging Unit: 03070201 Page 1 of3 .. .~o :--~ ~~5.CU,5l~.)NS 4!10 U~~(Jf;Mt,TI01..; .. ~~Hi H J.N: ~ (';~J)V. f J< ~,_.< ~ . MAf" U"RA~Y \:. ... .:\..:. :~ .>~,. .~ ~.:. ;: <.. r~~-.....::;;::: : .., ..... Places Involving this Watershed Environmental Profile Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed States: Georgia Assessments of Watershed Health Counties: Atkinson Bacon Ben Hill Brantley Camden Charlton Clinch Coffee Irwin JeffDavis Pierce Ware Wayne MetropoUtan Areas: Index ofWatershed Indicators (provided by EPA) Unified Watershed Assessments (UWA) (provided by States and Tribes) Environmental Information River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) EnviroMapper for Watersheds- (interactive mapping tool) Water Nominated American Heritage Rivers: None Find informationfocused on water for this specific watershed Rivers and Streams in this Watershed: 21 (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) River and stream miles: http://www.epa.gov/surf2/hucs/0307020l/ 12/22/98 SurfYour Watershed- Watershed Information ... Page 2 of3 Other Watersheds: upstream Little Satilla Cumberland-St Simons downstream None Large Ecosystems: None 2079.1 total river miles 1480 perennial river miles %oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed miles meet all designated uses This hue's principal aquifer is Surficial aquifer system which is 2623 square miles and has a rock type ofUnconsolidated sand and gravel aquifers Nonpoint Source Projects in this watershed (Funded under Section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Information System) Water Dischargers (Source: PCS - Permit Compliance System) Information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): 131 tJA l Stream Flow (Source: USGS) Science in Your Watershed Historical Water Data Water use (1990): Information about the amount of water used and how it is used Selected USGS Abstracts Land Find watershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 2619.09 sq mi; perimeter: 324.24 mi Landscape Indicators: 1% urban, 1% forest, 60% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than 100% ) People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) l=tlii EFA l Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find informationfocused on air for this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Air (Source: AIRS) http://www.epa.gov/surf21hucs/03070201/ . 12/22198 Rivers in HUC# 03070201 Page 1 ofl Surf Your Watersh i&:ateYour ,.~~~ershed .l'-'lN t>;50YiS10"<$ nl>~ I!>F<..>HMAH<:._. . . . . . . . .,~tH~(ti 11-~HJR:\\~IJ(I"; ~~ M.~fo' Ul.lKO.i>l)' Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03070201 Alabaha River Big Creek Broxton Creek Buffalo Creek Halls Creek Hog Creek Hurricane Creek Indian Creek Kettle Creek Little Hurricane Creek Little Satilla River Mill Creek Otter Creek Pudding Creek Red Bluff Creek Rose Creek SProng Satilla River Seventeenmile Creek Whitehead Creek Wiggins Creek http://www. epa.gov/cgi-bin/surt2/search. pl?geography=streamsperhuc&value=0307020 1 12/2Z/98 tpaha http://www.epa.gov/surf/HUCS/hucinfo/0311 02021 Surf Your Waters WATERSHED ENVIRONMENTAL PROFI ~mm~f.~Wt...~---""'=========''' News Flashes: Find out wh FIND YOUR PLACE: . . . lO~N iJ!'S(\t!>510~.. . t>.tJ < .~iAA.Ct.!. j~~.fU.fltMl"l'JN Places Involving this Watershed States: Georgia Counties: Colquitt Decatur Grady Mitchell Thomas Worth Metropolitan Areas: None Nominated American Heritage Rivers: None Other Watersheds: upstream Environmental Profile Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed Index ofWatershed Indicators Additional information provided by States and Tribes River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: o Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) o Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) o Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) Water Find irrformation focused on waterfor this specific watershed Rivers and Streams in this Watershed: 2. (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) River and stream miles: o % of total rivers and streams have been surveyed 9/4/98 4:34 PM , Upper Ochlockonee None downstream 03120003 Large Ecosystems: Gulfof Mexico Program http://www.epa.gov/surf!HUCS/hucmfot0312J)JJ % oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed o miles meet all designated uses Nonpoint Source Projects in this watershed (Funded under Section 319(h) ofthe Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Information System) o Water Dischargers (Source: PCS - Permit Compliance System) Information provided by the United States Geological Survey {USGS): llEU u~>) o Stream Flow (Source: USGS) o Science in Your Watershed o Historical Water Data o Water Resources o Water use (1990): Information about the amount ofwater used and how it is used o Selected USGS Abstracts Land Find watershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 912.68 sq mi; perimeter: 144.48 mi Landscape Indicators: 1% urban, 61% forest, 71% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than 100% ) People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) l:,o:UirP:.) Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find informationfocused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME ICONTACTS IDISCI.AIMER I ABOUf IHELP ICOMMENTS TEXT' VERSION ISURF HOME 2of2 9/4/984:1 .tJ TS in HUC# 03 120002 http://www.epa.gov/cgi-binlsur1search2.pl?geography=streamsperhuc&value=03120002 Surf "Your Waters-h FIND YOURPLACE: 1: :: : :: Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03120002 o Bametts Creek o Bridge Creek o Little Creek o Little Ochlocknee River o Little Tired Creek o Lost Creek o Ochlocknee River o Tired Creek o Turkey Creek 9/4/98 4:36 PM ~ Chattahoochee News Flashes: Upper Chattahoochee USGS Cataloging Unit: 03130001 http:i/www.epa.gov/suri/HIJCS/hucinfo/03130001J find out wh FIND YOUR PLACE: [ :::::::::::: ::::::: : :::::: :: ~ JOm l:.>!S(ti~510"S O.UZl l""~G:XM,:S1l<>!JN Places Involving this Watershed States: Georgia Counties: Banks Cherokee Cobb Dawson DeKalb Forsyth Fulton Gwinnett Habersham Hall Lumpkin Rabun Towns Union White Metropolitan Areas: Environmental Profile Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed Index ofWatershed Indicators Additional information provided by States and Tribes River Conidors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts .Environmental Web Sites: o Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Toxic releases (Source:TR.I- Toxic Release Inventory) o Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) o Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) Water Find informationfocused on waterfor this specific watershed Rivers and Streams in this Watershed: 26 (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) River and stream miles: o 26% oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed 9/4/98 8:5 lAM Upper Chattahoochee hnp:tlwww.epa.gov/suritHUCSiilucinl0!03 i3liliv Atlanta o 26% oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed o 152 miles meet all designated uses Nominated American Heritage Nonpoint Source Proiects in this watershed (Funded under Section 3 19(h) ofthe Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Rivers: Chattahoochee River o Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Infonnation System) o Water Dischargers (Source: PCS -Permit Compliance Other Watersheds: upstream System) Information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): lif,~ii E!"'-' None downstream 03130002 o Stream Flow (Source: USGS) o Science in Your Watershed o Historical Water Data Large Ecosystems: Gulfof Mexico Program o Water Resources o Water use {1990): Information about the amount ofwater used and how it is used o Selected USGS Abstracts Southern Appalachians Assessment Land (SAA) Findwatershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Southern Appalachian Man and the Biosphere Reserve Area (SAMAB) Characteristics: Area: 1,555.66 sq mi; perimeter: 248.96 mi Landscape Indicators: 13% urban, 81% forest, 12% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than 100% ) Landscape-Scale Assessment Southern Appalachian People Find out about local actions in this watershed: Mountains Initiative (SAM!) American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) li1i(P:.] Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find informationfocused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME ICONTACTS IDISCLAIMER IABOUT IHELP ICOMMENTS TEXT VERSION ISURF HOME 2of2 9/4/98 8:51 . ers in HUC# 0313000 I bttp://www.epa.gov/cgi-binlsur1searcb2.pl?geography=streamsperhuc&vaiue=0313000l Surf Your Watersh FIND YOURPLACE: . ..3...U.!I . lt<~<:At.ATION ,,,...,.,, ... ~:!'JOJKtf ll>1fO~tAATION M.4FU5AAR'!' Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03130001 o Big Creek o Blue Creek o Camp Creek o Center Creek o Chattahoochee River o Chestatee River o Deep Creek o Duke Creek o Flat Creek o Glade Creek o Hazel Creek o Ivy Creek o Lake Sidney Lanier o Level Creek o Little River o Mossy Creek o Nancy Creek o Peachtree Creek o Sautee Creek o Smith Creek o Soque River o Swannee Creek o Tesnatee Creek o Town Creek o Ward Creek o Yahoola Creek 9/4/98 8:51 AM Surf Your Watershed- Watershed Information ... Surf Your Watersh News Plashes: Middle Chattahoochee-Lake Hardin USGS Cataloging Unit: 03 130002 Page 1 of3 AateYour ,~.aiersttec~ :(),'i :)f:i.(L"I'.)N) ~.fJD tf"fO~.;v"t,.: 1'1)!'; ).. ~~~i.H J~~G~t)1,;'.[h>~< ~~-.......................... . MA> tll>~il'l' La . .... .~ Places Involving this Watenbed Environmental Profile Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed States: Alabama Georgia Assessments of Watenhed Health Index ofWatershed Indicators (provided by EPA) Counties: Carroll Unified Watershed Assessments (UWA) (provided by States and Tribes) Environmental Information Chambers Clayton Cobb Coweta Douglas Fulton River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) Harris Heard Lee Meriwether Muscogee Paulding Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) EnviroMapper for Watersheds- (interactive mapping tool) Randolph Russell Talbot Troup Water Find informationfocused on waterfor this specific watershed Metropolitan Areas: Atlanta Columbus Rivers and Streams in this Watershed: 25 (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) River and stream miles: http://www.epa.gov/surf2/hucs/03130002/ 12/22/98 SurfYour Watershed-- Watershed Information ... Page2 of3 Columbus 3690.7 total river miles Nominated American Heritage Rivers: Chattahoochee 2418.3 perennial river miles 29% of total rivers and streams have been surveyed 562 miles meet all designated uses River This hue's principal aquifer is No Principal Aquifer which is 3039 square Other Watersheds: miles and has a rock type ofN/A upstream Upper Chattahoochee Nonpoint Source Projects in this watershed (Funded under Section 319(h) ofthe Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) downstream Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Middle Information System) Chattahoochee-Walter Water Dischargers (Source: PCS - Permit Compliance System) F.G Information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): Large 1!411 rf!X) Ecosystems: Gulf ofMexico Program Southern Appalachians Stream Flow (Source: USGS) Science in Your Watershed Historical Water Data Water use (1990}: Information about the amount of water used and Assessment (SAA) Southern Appalachian Man how it is used Selected USGS Abstracts Land and the Biosphere Reserve Area (SAMAB) Landscape-Scale Assessment Southern Appalachian Find watershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 3037.11 sq mi; perimeter: 301.14 mi Landscape Indicators: 5% urban, 5% forest, 7% crop use (overlapping, sum Mountains Initiative(SAMI) could be more than 100% ) People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) li4ii tl't.' Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find informationfocused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (pro\ided by Envirofacts) Air (Source: AIRS) http://www.epa.gov/surf2/hucs/03130002/ 12/22;<}8 Rivers in HUC# 03130002 Page I of I Surf Your Watersh i&.ateYour #~--rshed KNN f..l~:;CFiSitil\:S. .\D-tl H~F~rRMAHON ,?-t%Y. ( tc: ,,.~~ (J~ :\\,1\1 J(l,..;: ....,...........~..................~... ~ M.'>>'Uilil.'>.i>l)' Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03130002 Anneewakee Creek Bear Creek Camp Creek Cedar Creek Chattahoochee River Dog Creek Flat Shoal Creek Halawakee Creek Hillabatchee Creek Lake Harding Long Cane Creek Mountain Creek Mulberry Creek NewRiver Noses Creek Osanippa Creek Oseligee Creek Snake Creek Standing Boy Creek Sweetwater Creek Wahoo Creek Wehadkee Creek West Pont Lake Whooping Creek Yellowjacket Creek http://www. epa.gov/cgi-bin/surf2/search. pl?geography=streamsperhuc&value=03I30002 I2/22J98 )CT Flint hnp:/twww.cpa.gov/surliHUCStbucinfo/03130005' Surf Your Waters WATERSHED ENVIRONMENTAL PROFJ \tltlii.IM.i~~~!~~~~f .................................~........... . News Flashes: find out wh FIND YOUR PLACE: ,_ _::::: ::: :::::::::::: ::::: ::1 lOm ''~ SWiJ.IO~f< <.tAAC:t-! ~~~ft:>~M."'l"lm-1 Upper Flint USGS Cataloging Unit: 03130005 Places Involving this Watershed States: Georgia Counties: Clayton Coweta Crawford Fayette Fulton Harris ~ Lamar Macon Marion Meriwether Monroe Peach Pike Schley Spalding Talbot Tavlor Environmental Profile Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed Index ofWatershed Indicators Additional information provided by States and Tribes River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: o Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) o Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) o Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) Water Find informationfocused on waterfor this specific watershed Rivers and Streams in this Watershed: 18 (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) River and stream miles: o 21% oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed 914198 8:52AM Upper Flint Upson Metropolitan Areas: Atlanta Macon Columbus Nominated American Heritage Rivers: None Other Watersheds: upstream None downstream 03130006 Large Ecosystems: Gulfof Mexico Program http:JJwww.epa.gowsuriirtucs,nucuu.o,O;)l300v. 21% oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed o 535 miles meet all designated uses Nonpoint Source Projects in this watershed (Funded under Section 319{h) ofthe Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Information System) o Water Dischargers (Source: PCS -Permit Compliance System) Information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): Ei!~ii "" l o Stream Flow (Source: USGS) o Science in Your Watershed o Historical Water Data o Water Resources o Water use (1990): Information about the amount ofwater used and how it is used o Selected USGS Abstracts Land Find watershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 2,648.01 sq mi; perimeter: 258.65 mi Landscape Indicators: 2% urban, 92% forest, 20% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than I00% ) People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) l:t3iG~) Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find informationfocused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME ICONTACTS IDISCLAIMER!~ I~ ICOMMENTS TEXT VERSION ISURF HOME 2of2 9/4/98 8:5.. i "TS in HUC# 03130005 http://www.epa.gov/cgi-binlsurt7search2.pl?geography=streamsperhuc&value=03 130005 Surf Jour Waters. FIND YOURPLACE: I : : ::::::::_::::::_ Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03130005 o Auchumpkee Creek o Cedar Creek o Elkins Creek o Flint River o Horse Creek o Lazer Creek o Line Creek o Morning Creek o Patsiliga Creek o Pigeon Creek o Potatoe Creek o Red Oak Creek o Swift Creek o Tobler Creek o Turkey Creek o lncohatchee Creek o White Oak Creek o Whitewater Creek 9/4/98 8:53 AM http://www.epa.goVJsurf/HUCSfnucinfo/03150 1011 Surf Your Waters Mlf,IHI.""fL~J:fVIRONMENTAL PROFI ....,,,.,.....,..,.,:...~l~~~ij~......................................................................... News Flashes: find out wh FIND YOUR PLACE: L..,,_~- :::: : : : :~ . JO~:> ;:J~SOJ:>510~!<1 . '-iAA.Ct! . ~~~fOi.ltAAr18N Conasauga USGS Cataloging Unit: 03150101 Places Involving this Watershed States: Georgia Tennessee Counties: Catoosa Fannin Gilmer Gordon Murrav Walker Whitfield Bradley Polk Metropolitan Areas: Chattanooga Nominated American Heritage Riven: Environmental Profile Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed Index ofWatershed Indicators Additional information provided by States and Tribes River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: o Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) o Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) o Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) Water Find information focused on waterfor this specific watershed Rivers and Streams in this Watershed: l l (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) River and stream miles: o 33% oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed ...-2 914198 8:49AM . Conasauga http://www.epa.gov/surf!HUCS/hucinfo/0315(}10 None Other Watersheds: upstream None downstream 03150103 Large Ecosystems: Gulfof Mexico Program Southern Appalachians Assessment (SAA) Southern Appalachian Man and the Biosphere Reserve Area (SAMAB) Landscape-Scale Assessment Southern Appalachian Mountains Initiative (SAM!) 0 33% oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed o 316 miles meet all designated uses Nonpoint Source Projects in this watershed (Funded under Section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Community Water Sources (Source: SD'WIS Safe Drinking Water Information System) o Water Dischargers (Source: PCS -Permit Compliance System) Information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): r:;:~U!t~l o Stream Flow (Source: USGS) o Science in Your Watershed o Historical Water Data o Water Resources o Water use (1990): Information about the amount ofwater used and how it is used o Selected USGS Abstracts Land Find watershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 729.72 sq mi; perimeter: 128.14 mi Landscape Indicators: 2% urban, 97% forest, 4% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than 100% ) People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) l:t3ii EF"A) Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find informationfocused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME ICONTACTS IDISCLAIMER IABOt.rr IHELP ICOMMENTS TEXT VERSION ISURF HOME 2of2 ' ' 9/4/98 8:49. ,;;,, ers m rtUClf 03150101 bnp:liwww.epa.govicgi-bin/surf/search2.pl?geograpby=streamsperbuc&vaiue=03150 10 1 Surf Your Watersh FIND YOURPLACE: [-~~-~ ::::::::::~ Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03150101 o Coahuila River o Consauga River o Coosawattee River o Haig Creek o Holly Creek o Jacks Creek o Mill Creek o Old Fort Creek o Rock Creek o Sugar Creek o Sumac Creek 9/4/98 8:50AM Surf Your Watershed- Watershed Information ... Surf Your Watersh News Plashes: Coosawattee USGS Cataloging Unit: 03150102 Page 1 of3 &atevour ~aiershect ~(J ::.-~ ~t';Ct...'-;~ t-..... NS l(!J::) t:t~PO~Mc\TI:.)!-.: .~~~it~ v.t~G~M..~(t<>~< -MA'"f~'"t'"i;AA-u;,~-- Places Involving Environmental Profile this Watenbed Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed States: Georgia Assessments of Watershed Health Index ofWatershed Indicators (provided by EPA) Counties: Bartow Unified Watershed Assessments (UWA) (provided by States and Tribes) Environmental Information Cherokee Dawson Fannin Gilmer Gordon Murray River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) Pickens Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Metropolitan Areas: Atlanta Recovery Act) Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act} Nominated EnviroMapper for Watersheds- (interactive mapping tool) American Heritage Water Riven: None Find informationfocused on waterfor this specific watershed Rivers and Streams in this Watershed: !Q (provided by EPA's first River Reach Other Watenbeds: upstream File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) River and stream miles: None 1381.6 total river miles http://www.epa.gov/sur2/hucs/03150102/ 12/22198 SurfYour Watershed- Watershed Infonnation ... Page2 of3 downstream Oostanaula I 000.3 perennial river miles I5% oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed I99 miles meet all designated uses Large Ecosystems: This hue's principal aquifer is No Principal Aquifer which is 615 square miles Gulfof Mexico and has a rock type ofN/A Program Southern Appalachians Assessment Nonpoint Source Projects in this watershed (Funded under Section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) (SAA) Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Southern Appalachian Manandthe Biosphere Information System) Water Dischargers (Source: PCS - Permit Compliance System) Infonnation provi4ed by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): l:f:UCED Reserve Area (SAMAB) Landscape-Scale Assessment Southern Appalachian Stream Flow (Source: USGS) Science in Your Watershed Historical Water Data Water use (I990): Information about the amount ofwater used and how Mountains Initiative (SAMI) it is used Selected USGS Abstracts Land Find watershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 855.43 sq mi; perimeter: 148.95 mi Landscape Indicators: 0% urban, 0% forest, 2% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than I00% ) . People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Infonnation Center) lf3iM) Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find informationfocused on airfor this watershed: . Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME ICONTACTS i D!SCL:\JMER IABOUT IHELP ICOMMENTS TEXI VERSION I SURF HOME http://www.epa.gov/surf2/hucs/031 SO I 02/ 12/22i98 Rivers in HUC# 03150102 Page 1 of1 Surf Your Watersh i.&:ateYour J-~atershed ~0'~~ ();~0))~1 (i1\:S. nOO INF~r. .").l{f~Art{.' Uflf.l.<'.l>!)' Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03150102 Boardtown Creek Cartecay River Carters Lake Cedar Creek Clear Creek Consauga River Coosawattee River E Mountaintown Creek Ellijay River Lick Creek Mountaintown Creek Pine Log Creek Salacoa Creek Scarecorn Creek Talis Creek Talking Rock Creek http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/sur2/search:pl?geography=streamsperhuc&value=03 150102 12/22. qg SurfYour Watershed- Watershed Information ... Surf Your Watersh News Flashes: Oostanaula USGS Cataloging Unit: 03150103 Page 1 of3 li.lkateYour ~ateBhed ~(J ::-4 ::.,t!,(U;<.. t{iNS lH;O lfvF'OftM~710.~~ t ~f ~~it~ j~~ G~M.A h)'~< _.._y,._.......................... .,.,..,..,.....- . MA~ Ut>RMI"f t . \ \'\ . ' E 1 1 fi Places Involviog this Watenhed llVlfOntnenta pfO 1 e Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed States: Georgia Assessments of Watershed Health Index ofWatershed Indicators (provided by EPA) Counties: Bartow Unified Watershed Assessments (UWA) (provided by States and Tribes) Environmental Information Chattooga Floyd Gordon Walker Whitfield Metropontan Areas: Atlanta Chattanooga River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) Nominated American EnviroMapper for Watersheds- (interactive mapping tool) Heritage Riven: Water None Find informationfocused on waterfor this specific watershed Other Watenheds: upstream Rivers and Streams in this Watershed: 1 (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) Conasauga River and stream miles: Coosawattee 997.2 total river miles http://www.epa.gov/surt2/hucs/03150103/ 12/22/98 SurfYour Watershed- Watershed Information ... Page2 of3 downstream Up,perCoosa 54I.2 perennial river miles I5% oftotal rivers and streams have been surveyed 63 miles meet all designated uses Large Ecosystems: This hue's principal aquifer,Js Valley and Ridge aquifers which is 430 square Gulfof Mexico miles and has a rock type of Sandstone and carbonate-rock aquifers Program Southern Appalachians Assessment Nonpoint Source Proiects in this watershed (Funded under Section 3I9(h) of the Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts} (SAA) Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Southern Appalachian Man and the Biosphere Information System) Water Dischargers (Source: PCS -Permit Compliance System) Information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): I:J:Ji(,,.A' Reserve Area (SAMAB) Landscape-Scale Assessment Southern Appalachian Stream Flow (Source: USGS) Science in Your Watershed Historical Water Data Water use (1990): Information about the amount ofwater used and how Mountains it is used Initiative (SAMI) Selected USGS Abstracts Land Find watershed information focused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 553.81 sq mi; perimeter: 115.69 mi Landscape Indicators: 2% urban, 2% forest, 5% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than I00% ) People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) 1#;4ii ftX) Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find information focused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME ICONTACTS I DI$Cl.AJMER IABOtrr IHELP ICOMMENTS TEXT VERSION I SURF HOME http://www.epa.gov/surfl/hucs/03I50 I 03/ I2/22/98 Rivers in HUC# 03150103 Page 1 ofl Surf Your Watersh iA:ateYour '*'~aterstted .K>lN f.>,:i(t::>Stvi\:S Afr:D l~~F\:..1-Rr~AHON ,l 0\li (I< 1~1 0~ :\\"-I J(t; !A.>~ U!lf<.O.J>!)' Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03150103 Armuchee Creek Etowah River Heath Creek Johns Creek Little Armuchee Cre~k Oostanaula River Oothk:alooga Creek http://www. epa.gov/cgi-bin/sur2/search. pl?geography=streamsperhuc&value=03150 103 12/22/98 News Plashes: Etowah USGS Cataloging Unit: 03150104 http://www.epa.gov/surf!HUCS/hucinfo/03150 1041 find out wh FIND YOUR PLACE: [:::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::] . . lO~~ . ;:-.!S(~:iSIO,~.....S........ . :um l:t'<~O~MMWI-! l~~M..i>rlill'l Places Involving this Watershed States: Georgia Counties: Bartow Cherokee Cobb Dawson Fannin Floyd Forsyth Fulton Gilmer Haralson Lumpkin Paulding Pickens Polk Union Metropolitan Areas: Environmental Profile Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed Index ofWatershed Indicators Additional information provided by States and Tribes River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: o Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) o Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) o Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) Water Find informationfocused on waterfor this specific watershed Rivers aqd Streams in this Watershed: 24 (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) River and stream miles: o 15% oftotal rivers and streams have b~n surveyed 9/4/98 8:45AM Etowah http://'www.epa.gov/surf/HUCS/hucinfo/03150 ~n Atlanta Nominated American Heritage Rivers: Coosa River Basin Other Watersheds: upstream None downstream 03150105 Large Ecosystems: Gulfof Mexico Program Southern Appalachians Assessment (SAA) Southern Appalachian Man and the Biosphere Reserve Area (SAMAB) Landscape-Scale Assessment Southern Appalachian Mountains Initiative (SAMI) o 15% of total rivers and streams have been surveyed o 187 miles meet all designated uses Nonpoint Source Projects in this watershed (Funded under Section 319(h) ofthe Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Information System) o Water Dischargers (Source: PCS -Permit Compliance System) Information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): lf.Eji EPii) o Stream Flow (Source: USGS) o Science in Your Watershed o Historical Water Data o Water Resources o Water use (1990): Information about the amount ofwater used and how it is used o Selected USGS Abstracts Land Find watershed information focused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 1,857.62 sq mi; perimeter: 251.04 mi Landscape Indicators: 2% urban, 96% forest, 7% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than 100% ) People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) lii!i(E~>:.) Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air Find information focused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) o Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME ICONTACTS IDISCLAIMER IABOUT IHELP ICOMMENTS TEXT VERSION I SURF HOME 2of2 9/4/98 8:45 A ,;, =rs m HLiC;r 03150104 hnp:iiwww.epa.govicgi-binisurfisearch2.pl?geography=streamsperhuc&value=03150104 Surf Your Watersh FIND YOURPLACE: r::::::::: :: : ::::::::::_ Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03150104 o Allatoona Res o Amicalola Creek o BluffCreek o Canton Creek o Cochrans Creek o Copper Sandy Creek o Etowah River o Euharlee Creek o Hills Creek . o Little Amicalola Creek o Little River o Long Swamp Creek o Mountain Creek o Noonday Creek o Oostanaula River o Pettit Creek o Pumpkinvine Creek o Raccoon Creek o Rock Creek o Settingdown Creek o Sharp Creek o Shoal Creek o Spring Creek o Two Run Creek 914198 8:46AM Surf Your Watershed -- Watershed Information ... Page 1 of3 ..... 0.aer nA ~_~ ~ Af~Mf Surf Your Watersh . News Plashes: ~:no: t(J:-4 ~f';,(t...,~t~.>NS IHJ0 U'<-~0~!\li.l,.TI"O!'; - - - '.. E~RiU j~JG~fi.'Vfh.,h:: MA~ Ut>~!l"( Upper Tallapoosa USGS Cataloging Unit: 03150108 ,. .. . ';~,,, , -=' -:. ~. E 1 1 PtlhaicseWs Iantveonlhviendg OVlfOntnenta pfOfi1 e Find general information integratedfor this specific watershed States: Alabama Georgia Assessments of Watershed Health Index of Watershed Indicators (provided by EPA) Unified Watershed Assessments (UWA) (provided by States and Tribes) Counties: Environmental Information Carroll Clay Cleburne Haralson Heard Paulding River Corridors and Wetlands Restoration Efforts Environmental Web Sites: Real Time Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Toxic releases (Source:TRI- Toxic Release Inventory) Polk Randolph Hazardous Wastes (Source: RCRA- Resource Conservation Recovery Act) Metropolitan Areas: Superfund Sites (Source: CERCLA -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) Atlanta EnviroMapper for Watersheds- (interactive mapping tool) Nominated American Water Heritage Find information focused on water for this specific watershed Riven: None Rivers and Streams in this Watershed:~ (provided by EPA's first River Reach File) Other Lakes in the Watershed (Coming soon) Watenheds: River and stream miles: http://www.epa.gov/surt2/hucs/03150 108/ 12/22/98 Surf Your Watershed- Watershed Information ... Page 2 of3 upstream None 1772.7 total river miles 1332.8 perennial river miles downstream Middle Tallapoosa Large Ecosystems: 9 % of total rivers and streams have been surveyed 150 miles meet all designated uses This hue's principal aquifer is No Principal Aquifer which is 1399 square miles and has a rock type ofN/A Gulfof Mexico Program Southern Appalachians Nonpoint Source Projects in this watershed (Funded under Section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act) Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Community Water Sources (Source: SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Assessment (SAA) Southern Appalachian Information System) Water Dischargers (Source: PCS- Permit Compliance System) Information provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS): 1+30 "" l Man and the Biosphere Reserve Area (SAMAB) Landscape-Scale Assessment Stream Flow (Source: USGS) Science in Your Watershed Historical Water Data Water use (1990): Information about the amount of water used and how Southern it is used Appalachian Mountains Selected USGS Abstracts Initiative (SAMI) Land Find watershed informationfocused on land characteristics Land Characteristics: Area: 1405.89 sq mi; perimeter: 174.23 mi Landscape Indicators: I% urban, I% forest, 2% crop use (overlapping, sum could be more than IOOO/o.) People Find out about local actions in this watershed: American Indian Tribes (Source: US Census): None Known National Watershed Network (provided by Conservation Technology Information Center) 1311 '""Al Citizen-based Groups at work in this Watershed (Provided by Adopt Your Watershed) Join now Air. Find information focused on airfor this watershed: Facilities regulated by EPA (provided by Envirofacts) Air (Source: AIRS) EPA HOME ICONTACTS IDISCI..AIMER I ABOUT I HELP I COMMENTS http://www.epa.gov/surf2/hucs/03I50I 08/ 12/2298 Rivers in HUC# 03150108 Page 1 of1 Surf Your Watersh i&.ateYour i~"'Watershed -~')lN (.1~~(~)}Sif..t1\,;S. .'.!Dfl thw;~o:...1-Rt<':A.HON _ , ~~i31X(tc 1"dU~:\.t..J\1J(l~') ......................................... '''-'~' tlflf<..... y Rivers and Streams in HUC# 03150108 Beach Creek BearCreek Big Indian Creek Brooks Creek Buffalo Creek Cane Creek Chulafinnee Creek Dyne Creek Kelley Creek Ketchepedrakee Creek Little River Little Tallapoosa River C>wen Creek ':.iney Cree.t :.ilas c~eek - ::dlanc_:~osa R1"~ http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/sur2/search.pl?geography=streamsperhuc&value=031 50108 12/22198