EPA’S WATERSHED PLANNING APPROACH FOR THE SECTION 319 PROGRAM Dov Weitman Chief, Nonpoint Source Control Branch 202-566-1207 October.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
West Virginia Conservation Agency. Section 319 Non Point Source Program WVCA is the primary entity responsible for the implementation of the: Agriculture.
Advertisements

1 NPS MANAGEMENT PLANNING FOR THE NORTH CANDADIAN RIVER (from Canton dam through Lake Overholser)
1 Watershed Planning: A Key to Integrated Planning FHWA Environmental Conference Ann Campbell Wetlands Division.
Using RMMS to Track the Implementation of Watershed-based Plans
Assessment of Utah’s Nonpoint Source control program Nancy Mesner, Doug Jackson-Smith, Phaedra Budy, David Stevens Lorien Belton, Nira Salant, William.
What are they and why are they important? Presented by: Andrew Craig and Chad Cook DNR Nonpoint Source Planning Coordinator and UWEX WI Land and Water.
Minnesota Watershed Nitrogen Reduction Planning Tool William Lazarus Department of Applied Economics University of Minnesota David Mulla Department of.
IDEM TMDL 101 Everything you wanted to know about Total Maximum Daily Loads.
Current Planning for 2017 Mid-Point Assessment Gary Shenk COG 10/4/2012 presentation credit to Katherine Antos and the WQGIT ad hoc planning team.
Montana’s 2007 Nonpoint Source Management Plan Robert Ray MT Dept Environmental Quality.
Indiana 6217 Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program – What it is, and What it Means!
DESIGNING MONITORING PROGRAMS TO EVALUATE BMP EFFECTIVENESS Funded by grants from USDA- CSREES, EPA 319, NSF Nancy Mesner - Utah State University, Dept.
Incorporating the 9-Elements into a WMP Lindsey PhillipsMike Archer Source Water CoordinatorState Lakes Coordinator (402) (402)
Components of every Good Watershed Management Plan NDEQ – Planning Unit August 6 th, 2014 NDEQ – Planning Unit gust 6 th 2014.
EPA Region 6 Dallas, Texas EPA Region 6 Dallas, Texas.
9.Monitoring Plan + 10.Implementation Plan + 4. LAs* 5. WLAs* 6. MOS* 7.Seasonal Variation* 8.Reasonable Assurance + TMDL Process 1 Problem Understanding.
Watershed Planning Tools and an Integrated Watershed Approach Stuart Lehman U.S. EPA NPS Control Branch January 19, 2007 Bordentown, NJ.
Who does the monitoring?. State agency staff University/Extension Consultant Volunteer/citizens’ groups Soil & Water Conservation District, Irrigation.
1 National Hydrography Dataset Applications Overview Symposium on Terrain Analysis for Water Resources Applications Austin, Texas December 16, 2002.
Determining the effectiveness of best management practices to reduce nutrient loading from cattle grazed pastures in Utah Nicki Devanny Utah State University,
Water Quality Monitoring The Role of the Clean Water Act.
Nonpoint Source Pollution Reductions – Estimating a Tradable Commodity Allen R. Dedrick Associate Deputy Administrator Natural Resources & Sustainable.
The Product: Watershed Plan Components Barry Tonning Tetra Tech.
Wetland Monitoring and Assessment National Water Quality Monitoring Council Meeting August 20, 2003.
Environmental Finance Center Boise State University Working on the “How to Pay” Issues of Watershed Restoration The Environmental Finance Center.
Bill Carter Nonpoint Source Program Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Trade Fair and Conference, May 2015.
Section 319 Grant Program Nonpoint Source Pollution Control
Impaired and TMDL Waterbody Listings Impacts on DoD Facilities Bill Melville, Regional TMDL Coordinator
State Approaches to Funding Local Projects A Survey of RFPs The State/EPA NPS Partnership New Orleans, November 27, 2001.
Region III Activities to Implement National Vision to Improve Water Quality Monitoring National Water Quality Monitoring Council August 20, 2003.
Region 1 & 2 IR Workshop October 28,  The Water Quality Framework is a new way of thinking about how EPA’s data and information systems can be.
Total Maximum Daily Loads in MS4 Storm Water Programs.
VIRGINIA’S TMDL PROCESS.
Partnership Demonstrations. ◦ High Impact Targeting of NPS Pollution – GLRI, MSU ◦ Pesticide Drift Registration (“Drift Watch”), Purdue ◦ LID—LTHIA/ Fort.
1 Sandra Spence EPA Region 8 TMDL Program EPA Region 8 TMDL Program Integrating Watershed Plans and TMDLs to Help Answer Watershed Planning Questions November.
Sustaining Long Term Regional Coordinated Monitoring Programs Todd Running, H-GAC May 9, 2006.
Taking the Next Step: Implementing the TMDL. What IDEM Provides to Help With Implementation  Compiling all the data in one place  Data-driven recommendations.
Virginia Assessment Scenario Tool VAST Developed by: Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin.
Update on Wyoming Draft 303(d) List and Changes to Watershed Planning.
Amy Walkenbach Illinois EPA 217/
Phase II WIP Background & Development Process Tri-County Council – Eastern Shore June 2,
Michigan Watershed Plan Reviews Presentation at the Michigan Watershed-Based Planning Workshop, Mt. Pleasant, Michigan
Straight to the Point – Watershed-based Plans Should: be designed to restore water quality from nonpoint source impairments using sufficiently analyzed.
Nonpoint Source Success Stories: Linking Projects with Water Quality Improvement Steve Epting, ORISE Fellow US EPA – Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds.
The Northeast AVGWLF A Watershed Scale Model for New England and New York State Becky Weidman NEIWPCC Barry Evans Penn State University.
Chesapeake Bay TMDL 2017 Midpoint Assessment: A Critical Path Forward Lucinda Power EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting.
Overview of the Total Maximum Daily Load Program.
FY 2016 EAP Proposals 1.Groundwater Sampling at Coulee Creek 2.Deep & Coulee Straight to Implementation Project 3.Little Spokane DO/pH TMDL 4.Lake Spokane.
HAMPTON ROADS REGIONAL WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Presentation John M. Carlock, AICP Deputy Executive Director, Physical Planning Hampton Roads.
Commonwealth of Virginia TMDL Program Update Citizen for Water Quality Annual Summit September 22, 2001.
Modeling Fecal Bacteria Fate and Transport to Address Pathogen Impairments in the United States Brian Benham Extension Specialist and Associate Professor,
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT Dov Weitman Chief, Nonpoint Source Control Branch U.S. Environmental Protection Agency May 4, Federal.
CLEAN WATER ACT AND MUNICIPAL STORMWATER CALIFORNIA STORMWATER WORKSHOP David W. Smith, Manager NPDES Permits Section EPA/Region 9.
1 Chesapeake Bay TMDL Watershed Implementation Plan – Phase II James Davis-Martin, Chesapeake Bay TMDL Coordinator Citizens Advisory Committee to the Chesapeake.
GIS M ETHODOLOGY Swearing Creek Watershed Restoration Plan 8/26/2015 Piedmont Triad Regional Council.
Using RMMS to Track the Implementation of Watershed-based Plans
Using RMMS to Track & Report BMP Implementation
Brian Haggard Arkansas Water Resources Center University of Arkansas
Mike Bira EPA Region 6 NPS Program
NPS Management Update September 27, 2017
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Chesapeake Bay TMDL Milestones, Progress, Mid-point Assessment
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Straight to the Point – Watershed-based Plans Should:
Jim Edward Acting Director Chesapeake Bay Program Office May 23,2018 EPA’s Draft Final Phase III WIP Expectations.
Section 319 Grant Program – writing a proposal that can be funded
NPS Management Update September 21, 2016
Jon Capacasa, Director Water Protection Division U.S. EPA Region III
The Nine Elements that Must Be Included in a 319 Watershed Based Plan
Upper Clark Fork Watershed Restoration and TMDLs
Presentation transcript:

EPA’S WATERSHED PLANNING APPROACH FOR THE SECTION 319 PROGRAM Dov Weitman Chief, Nonpoint Source Control Branch October 11, 2005 CSREES Watershed Modeling Research Committee Meeting

Our Web-Site is Great!!!!!!!!!  Includes watersheds, wetlands, TMDL’s,NPS  All of “our” NPS stuff: Management Measures Handbooks, Watershed planning, Urban/LID, great outreach tools

Watershed Planning Paradigm Shift The traditional paradigm for 319, EQIP, etc. has not enabled us to achieve our WQ goals Until you have quantitative knowledge of  (a) the nature and source of the WQ problem,  (b) the pollutant load reductions needed to meet WQS,  (c) the BMP’s that will achieve that pollutant load reduction, you’re not ready to implement BMP’s that will solve the problem.  (unless you are very lucky)

EPA’s 319 Funding Guidelines  “Incremental Funds” - $100 million/year  Must be used to develop and implement WATERSHED – BASED PLANS that are designed to achieve water quality standards ** Where TMDL’s have been developed, the plans incorporate them and go from there

“Watershed-Based Plans” Our Section 319 Program and Grants Guidelines Identify 9 Components that must be included in each “Watershed- Based Plan” to restore impaired waters Before a State implements a 319 restoration project, it must develop a watershed-based plan

Nine Elements of Watershed Plan A. Identification and quantification of causes and sources at the subcategory level (e.g., X dairy cattle, Y acres needing N management, Z miles of streambank needing remediation) B. Estimate of needed load reductions, by subcategory, to achieve WQS C. ID BMP’s needed to achieve the load reductions, and ID the critical areas for implementing the BMP’s

Nine Elements (cont.) D. Estimate of needed technical & financial resources EFCs - MD, BSU, others E. Information/ Education component Get in Step F. Schedule (who does what, when) Plan2Fund G. Description of measurable milestones for implementation BMP tracker H. Criteria to determine if loadings/ targets are being achieved Ecosystem response I. Monitoring component for above criteria

National Program Goals Motivated in part by OMB PART and EPA Strategic Plan, but builds on our previously-adopted watershed-based planning approach Remediate (meet WQS) 250 impaired waterbodies by 2008; 700 by 2012

Polished draft to be published this Fall

Technical Analysis Challenges in Planning addressed by our Handbook GIS and geographic data Statistical interpretation of data Modeling and Spreadsheet tools Defining the pollution reductions from BMPs for Nonpoint Sources Setting up a monitoring program Evaluating changes due to management

Water Quality Assessment Steps

Types of Data for Assessment

Types of Data ( cont.)

Assessing Critical Flows

From Goals to Management Measures

Which model to chose?

Data needs for common models

Monitoring and Evaluation Criteria

Watershed Management Decision Support System Integrated Tools Eventually will provide decision support to help users select the most appropriate tool for each step of the watershed planning process Data bases – weather, soils, land use, land cover, Existing BMPs, W.Q. (Storet, etc), resource condition, point source info, etc  Connect to: GIS – Mapping and Analysis Tools Connect to: Modeling and Data analysis Tools  Connect to BMP Efficiency Data and Cost Data  Connect to tools to help support WQ Monitoring and Implementation Tracking  Plans of appropriate scale, level of detail, and suited to site-specific and local needs.

Decision-Support System Not Really a “System” – very flexible, modular, and open to addition/subtraction Multiple analytical tools (e.g., a number of models that are similar but have different strengths and weaknesses) and data bases Probable paradigm is “Thin Client” using grid computing technology

Examples of Grants to Support Watershed Planning Tools Penn State University – AvGWLF Model Improvements- Manual + LID tools; model calibration for New England States Virginia Tech TMDL Support Center – Evaluate stream channel erosion component of AgNPS and compare with SWAT and GWLF in same watersheds (dueling models!) Auburn University/ TVA Research & Extension Center – SWAT Model improvements to ID &rank contributing areas, & compute BMP impacts Swarthmore College - Using AvGWLF – urban BMP optimization/prioritization to reduce flow/plts at lowest $

Watershed Tools Training Watershed Conservation Resource Center (WCRC) in Little Rock, Arkansas Water Environment Federation (WEF) – Course and Webcasts Training Contractor-assisted Training – Soil & Water Conservation Society(SWCS) Water Resource Education Network (WREN) in Pennsylvania, & in conjunction with Getting-in-Step USFWS Training Center – Part of 2 Week Course

HOW UNIVERSITIES CAN HELP 1. Better mousetraps (why are many NMP’s still inadequate, etc.) 2. Cheaper mousetraps 3. More/better technical tools 4. Training (perhaps this should be listed first!!!!!)