Moreover, land use  activities can also produce toxic pollution. Regional offices are to review and discuss with states  the projects states select for section 319 funding to ensure the plans’  effective implementation. According to our survey results, project managers for 28 percent of all  projects that involved implementing conservation practices or pollution  remediation techniques reported that their projects were unable to  accomplish all objectives originally identified in the project proposal.These projects were generally unable to implement the desired number or  type of conservation practices or to implement them in the originally  proposed locations. Many of the challenges that project staff reported facing resulted from bad  weather, staff turnover, or other factors outside their control. In West Virginia, Department of Environmental Protection officials  selected a project that was to subsidize the cost to homeowners of  pumping and replacing damaged septic systems in rural areas,  among other practices. Environmental  Protection Agency, A National Evaluation of the Clean Water Act Section 319 Program  (Washington, D.C.: November 2011). EPA’s Oversight and Measures of Effectiveness of States’ Programs Have Not Consistently Ensured Projects Likely to Yield Measurable Water Quality Outcomes

EPA regional offices have varied widely in the extent of their oversight  and the amount of influence they have exerted over state nonpoint source  management programs. This variability is seen  most notably in regional offices’ reviews of states’ annual work plans and  project selection criteria, which are to describe the activities that states’  nonpoint source management programs plan to undertake in the  upcoming year and the parameters for which projects are eligible to  receive section 319 funds from the state. Officials from  three regional offices told us that they reviewed annual work plans in  depth and played an active role in influencing the types of projects  selected. EPA’s Primary Measures of Effectiveness May Not Fully Demonstrate Program Goal Achievements

In addition to requiring states to report on their progress in meeting  milestones for their nonpoint source management programs, section 319  requires states to annually report to EPA on two measures of  effectiveness resulting from implementation of their management  programs: (1) reductions in loadings of specific nonpoint source pollutants  and (2) improvement in water quality of water bodies identified on states’  lists of impaired waters as requiring nonpoint source controls to meet  water quality standards. Section 319 does not limit EPA to these two  measures of effectiveness, but the agency has chosen to use these two  reporting requirements as barometers of success for the section 319  program. Since 2000, states have removed  more than 350 water bodies from their lists of impaired waters. According to the Department’s Natural  Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), which manages the program, it  has resulted in substantial pollutant reductions in key watersheds across  the country.program could adversely affect water quality if installed without the proper  suite of companion practices to mitigate these adverse effects. To determine whether the instances we observed when meeting with  state officials were isolated examples or indicative of a more prevalent  problem, we examined EQIP data on three key parameters: (1) the  universe of conservation practices funded by NRCS field units that could  have negative water quality effects in watersheds in which Section 319  projects were funded; (2) for that universe of practices, the extent to  which nutrient management plans were in place to mitigate unintended  adverse effects on water quality; and (3) where nutrient management  plans were not in place, the extent to which alternative mitigation  practices were in place that could reliably serve that same purpose. While NRCS  procedures strive to minimize such problems, state environmental officials  identified instances where these procedures may not always have their  intended effect. To strengthen EPA’s implementation of its responsibilities under the  Clean Water Act’s section 319 nonpoint source pollution control program,  we recommend that the Administrator of EPA take the following two  actions: provide specific guidance to EPA’s 10 regional offices on how they  are to fulfill their oversight responsibilities, such as how to review  states’ plans for project feasibility and criteria to ensure that funded  projects have characteristics that reflect the greatest likelihood of  effective implementation and tangible water quality results, and  in revising section 319 guidelines to states, and in addition to existing  statutorily required reporting measures, emphasize measures that (1)  more accurately reflect the overall health of targeted water bodies  (e.g., the number, kind, and condition of living organisms) and  (2) demonstrate states’ focus on protecting high-quality water bodies,  where appropriate. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

The objectives of our work were to examine (1) states’ experiences in  funding projects that effectively address nonpoint source pollution  problems, (2) the extent to which the Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA) oversees the section 319 program and measures program  effectiveness in reducing the adverse impacts of nonpoint source  pollution on water quality, and (3) the extent to which key agricultural  conservation programs complement EPA’s efforts to reduce nonpoint  source pollution. To examine the extent to which key agricultural conservation programs  complement EPA’s efforts to reduce nonpoint source pollution, we  analyzed data on USDA’s conservation practices funded under the  Environmental Quality Incentives Program that have been implemented in  watersheds where states have allocated section 319 funds.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pollution from nonpoint sourcessuch as runoff from farms or construction sitesremains the leading cause of impairment to the nations waters. Under section 319 of the Clean Water Act, each year EPA provides grants to states to implement programs and fund projects that address nonpoint source pollution; the program received $165 million in fiscal year 2012. Section 319 includes minimum conditions that states must meet to receive grants. By regulation, EPAs 10 regional offices oversee state programs and are to ensure that states projects can be feasibly implemented. USDA also has programs to protect water resources.
GAO examined (1) states experiences in funding projects that address nonpoint source pollution, (2) the extent to which EPA oversees the section 319 program and measures its effectiveness, and (3) the extent to which key agricultural programs complement EPA efforts to control such pollution. GAO surveyed project managers, reviewed information from EPAs 10 regional offices on oversight of state programs, and analyzed USDA data.

What GAO Found

Under section 319 of the Clean Water Act, state-selected projects to reduce nonpoint source pollution have helped restore more than 350 impaired water bodies since 2000, but other projects have encountered significant challenges. According to GAO survey results, 28 percent of projects did not achieve all objectives originally identified in the project proposal (e.g., implementing the desired number of pollution reduction practices), while many that did so still faced considerable challenges. About half such challenges were beyond staff control (e.g., bad weather or staff turnover), but the other half were challenges that generally could have been identified and mitigated before projects were proposed and selected for funding, such as gaining access to desired properties. In one state, for example, $285,000 in section 319 funds was to subsidize the cost to homeowners of repairing damaged septic systems. Once the grant was awarded, however, one homeowner signed up to participate.
The Environmental Protection Agencys (EPA) oversight and measures of effectiveness of states programs have not consistently ensured the selection of projects likely to yield measurable water quality outcomes. EPAs 10 regional offices varied widely in their review of states work plans, which describe projects states plan to undertake in the upcoming year, and project selection criteria, which identify eligibility parameters for receiving section 319 funds. For example, three regional offices reported reviewing annual work plans in depth and actively influencing the types of projects selected, while three others reported limited to no involvement in such reviews, instead deferring to states judgment on project feasibility and selection. EPA, however, has not provided its 10 regions with guidance on how to oversee the state programs. Also, EPAs primary measures of program effectiveness may not fully demonstrate program achievements. Section 319 requires states to report to EPA on two measures, including reductions in key pollutants. It does not limit EPA to these two measures, but the agency has chosen to use them as barometers of success for the section 319 program. States can demonstrate their achievements in additional waysways that may provide a more accurate picture of the overall health of targeted water bodies, such as the number and kind of living organisms in the water.
USDAs Environmental Quality Incentives Program is the key agricultural conservation program that can complement EPA efforts to reduce nonpoint source pollution, and its conservation practices have significantly reduced pollutants coming from agricultural land across the country. Notwithstanding its achievements, certain conservation practices can adversely affect water quality if not properly implementedfor example, by transporting polluted runoff from nutrient-laden fields into nearby water bodies. The agencys Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has procedures in place intended to ensure that its practices do not inadvertently harm water quality. During its field work, GAO identified a few instances where these procedures may not have been followed (including in watersheds where EPAs section 319 funds had been used), and therefore sought NRCS data to determine if they were isolated instances or indicative of a more prevalent issue. NRCS national level data, however, are not sufficiently detailed to identify whether appropriate measures are always in place to mitigate potential water quality impacts. According to NRCS, such data are instead located in its field offices and are not analyzed by the agency.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends, among other things, that EPA provide section 319 oversight guidance to its regional offices and that USDA analyze data to determine if measures were taken to mitigate water quality impacts in section 319 project areas. EPA agreed with the recommendations, while USDA was silent on them. Both agencies commented on specific findings, which are addressed within the report.