Resources for Watershed Assistance Grants

Resources for 604(b) or 319 grant recipients for acquiring, understanding and reporting.

For examples of past NHDES Watershed Assistance and Restoration grant-funded projects, you can search the document library for Watershed-based Plans.

Resources for Grantees

Governor and Executive Council (G&C) Resources for Grantees

Additional Resources for Grantees

  • NHDOT NH Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Directory
    Organizations using grant funds are required to conduct a competitive bid process for a contractor selection and to make a good faith effort to hire disadvantaged businesses. This list of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises is just one resource and is not a complete list of certified woman and minority owned businesses.
  • Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement Example for Stormwater Best Management Practices
    This is an example of an O&M agreement for stormwater best management practices.
  • Pollutants Controlled Report (PCR)
    This form must be submitted after a BMP is installed using 319 funding.
  • Value of Volunteer Time
    In addition to cash or other in-kind contributions, the required matching funds for grant projects can include the value of volunteer labor. Donated professional services may be credited at their regular hourly professional rate. See the above link for recommended New Hampshire match values and methodology from Independent Sector. The 2023 match value for New Hampshire is $34.64. This is just one resource and is not a complete list.

Resources for Grant Applicants

Section 319 Guidance for Watershed-based Plans
To ensure that Clean Water Act Section 319 projects funded with incremental dollars make progress toward restoring waters impaired by nonpoint source (NPS) pollution, watershed-based plans that are developed or implemented with Section 319 funds to address 303(d)-listed waters must include at least the elements listed below.

Nine Elements of an a-i Watershed-based Plan

  • An identification of the causes and sources or groups of similar sources that will need to be controlled to achieve the load reductions estimated in this watershed-based plan (and to achieve any other watershed goals identified in the watershed-based plan), as discussed in item (b) immediately below. Sources that need to be controlled should be identified at the significant subcategory level with estimates of the extent to which they are present in the watershed (e.g., X numbers of dairy cattle feedlots needing upgrading, including a rough estimate of the number of cattle per facility; Y acres of row crops needing improved nutrient management or sediment control; or Z linear miles of eroded stream bank needing remediation).
  • An estimate of the load reductions expected for the management measures described under paragraph (c) below (recognizing the natural variability and the difficulty in precisely predicting the performance of management measures over time). Estimates should be provided at the same level as in item (a) above (e.g., the total load reduction expected for dairy cattle feedlots; row crops; or eroded stream banks).
  • A description of the NPS management measures that will need to be implemented to achieve the load reductions estimated under paragraph (b) above (as well as to achieve other watershed goals identified in this watershed-based plan), and an identification (using a map or a description) of the critical areas in which those measures will be needed to implement this plan.
  • An estimate of the amounts of technical and financial assistance needed, associated costs, and/or the sources and authorities that will be relied upon, to implement this plan. As sources of funding, States should consider the use of their Section 319 programs, State Revolving Funds, USDA’s Environmental Quality Incentives Program and Conservation Reserve Program, and other relevant federal, state, local and private funds that may be available to assist in implementing this plan.
  • An information/education component that will be used to enhance public understanding of the project and encourage their early and continued participation in selecting, designing, and implementing the NPS management measures that will be implemented.
  • A schedule for implementing the NPS management measures identified in this plan that is reasonably expeditious.
  • A description of interim, measurable milestones for determining whether NPS management measures or other control actions are being implemented.
  • A set of criteria that can be used to determine whether loading reductions are being achieved over time and substantial progress is being made towards attaining water quality standards and, if not, the criteria for determining whether this watershed-based plan needs to be revised or, if a NPS TMDL has been established, whether the NPS TMDL needs to be revised.
  • A monitoring component to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation efforts over time, measured against the criteria established under item (h) immediately above.

Other Resources

  • Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)
    Guidance for developing and getting approval of a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) is available upon request.
    • If the grant project involves collection, analysis or manipulation of environmental data (including modeling and the use of BMP pollutant removal performance curves), it may require a QAPP or Site Specific Project Plan (SSPP) submitted for approval by USEPA or NHDES respectively. Grantees should consult their NHDES project manager for further guidance and appropriate templates.
  • Trophic Classes for New Hampshire Lakes
    You may use the Lake Information Mapper to determine the trophic status of your lake.
Watershed-Management
Watershed Specialist