It's a national craze: More and more communities are setting up stormwater utilities or, with various levels of desperation, looking for other ways to fund fledgling Phase II stormwater programs. Rarely, though, does even a steady source of funding cover everything you need to pay for, and no matter what your main source of revenue - including a utility - it pays to continue looking for other complementary resources.

One that many people at the local level overlook is Nonpoint Source Implementation Grants, more commonly called Clean Water Act Section 319(h) grants. Compared to many other federal water-quality funds, 319 grants are well endowed: Throughout the 1990s, EPA distributed more than $1.3 billion to states and territories under this program, and the funding level for 2003 is more than $238 million.

EPA recently issued new requirements for state nonpoint-source agencies to follow when they apply for federal 319 funding as well as when they award that money to programs and agencies within the state. Because the funds are administered through the states, understanding exactly what your state's NPS program involves is the first step to finding out how you might benefit. States can award the money not only to cities, counties, and tribal authorities but also in some cases to local school systems or universities, watershed groups, and others. A good resource on EPA's site is a state-by-state list of NPS coordinators (www.epa.gov/owow/nps/319hfunds.html).

Although the process of applying for funding is never simple, EPA's new guidelines offer an overview of the process and answer some common questions about what types of projects qualify for a grant. There are, of course, some restrictions, especially regarding how this type of funding will mesh with your NPDES program. For example, 319 grants can't be used to pay for specific activities your NPDES permit requires you to do or for directly implementing your permit. But they can be used to fund related projects, such as characterizing nonpoint-source pollution within a watershed, setting up a monitoring program, developing and implementing BMPs, developing local ordinances that deal with stormwater runoff, and public education.

A 319 grant can't pay for more than 60% of the cost of a project, and the other 40% must come from local - rather than other types of federal - funds. You might be able to use 319 money to help finance some long-term options that utility fees can't or shouldn't cover. There are hundreds of examples of local projects funded in this way in the last decade or so. In Georgia: establishing natural buffers along Atlanta-area streams to mitigate urban runoff and reduce sedimentation. In Mississippi: identifying some of the sources of urban runoff affecting Lake Hazle, then providing 60% of the funding to install BMPs throughout the watershed to treat the runoff. In Illinois: installing sediment control practices in the watershed around Lake Pittsfield and, through the Section 319 National Monitoring Program, funding 10 years of monitoring to evaluate the effectiveness of these and other measures. In Minnesota: along with local, regional, and state governments, helping to fund a wetland restoration project and nature center in North St. Paul, including construction of a multicell wetland treatment system.

Other supplemental sources of revenue, depending on your situation, might include hazardous mitigation grants, state revolving loans, bonds, impact fees, and federal funding in the form of other Clean Water Act grants (Section 106 Water Pollution Control Program Grants, for example). But if you're at the local level and not working with your state agency, or if you're just starting to examine your financial options, 319 is definitely worth a look.

Send Janice an email

SW September/October 2003