FINDINGS FOR THE
   NEW HAMPSHIRE COASTAL NONPOINT PROGRAM


FOREWORD

     This document contains the findings for the coastal
nonpoint pollution control program submitted by the State of New
Hampshire pursuant to Section 6217(a) of the Coastal Zone Act
Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 (CZARA).  The findings are
based on a review of the New Hampshire Coastal Nonpoint
Pollution Control Program, Final Program Submittal, July 1995
and supplemental material provided by New Hampshire
subsequent to the program submittal.  The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) reviewed this information and evaluated
the extent to which it conforms with the requirements of CZARA.

     NOAA and EPA commend New Hampshire on the
substantial amount of time and effort put into developing your
program and we appreciate the commitment you have shown to
complete an ambitious task with limited resources.  We will
continue to work with coastal states and territories to ensure that
these findings represent an accurate assessment of current state and
territory abilities and efforts to address coastal nonpoint source
pollution.  We recognize that there may be further administrative
changes to the coastal nonpoint program that will impact these
findings and we assure you that, once such changes are finalized,
we will review these findings in light of the changes and make any
necessary adjustments. 


APPROVAL DECISION

     NOAA and EPA approve the coastal nonpoint pollution
control program submitted by the State of New Hampshire
pursuant to Section 6217(a) of the Coastal Zone Act
Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, subject to certain
conditions.  

     This document provides the specific findings used by
NOAA and EPA as the basis for the decision to approve New
Hampshire's program.  It also provides the rationale for the
findings and includes conditions that will need to be met for New
Hampshire to receive final approval of its program.  We recognize
that New Hampshire has already proposed changes for its program
that would, if finalized, ensure the implementation of the
management measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance. 
In those cases, the conditions are based on the State's proposed
changes.  Timeframes for meeting conditions will become effective
upon the date stamped on the approval letter for these findings.

INTRODUCTION

      This document is organized by the major nonpoint source
categories and subcategories identified in the section 6217(g)
guidance and the administrative elements identified in the program
guidance (including the boundary for the 6217 management area). 
Where appropriate, NOAA and EPA have grouped categories and
subcategories of management measures into a single finding.  The
structure of each finding follows a standard format.  Generally, the
finding is that the state program includes or does not include
management measures in conformity with the (g) guidance and
includes or does not include enforceable policies and mechanisms
to ensure implementation.  In some cases, the finding reflects that
the state has identified a back-up enforceable policy, but has not
yet demonstrated the ability of the authority to ensure
implementation.  For further understanding of terms in this
document, the reader is referred to the following:

Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of
Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters (EPA, January 1993)
Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program:  Program
Development and Approval Guidance (NOAA and EPA, January
1993)
Flexibility for State Coastal Nonpoint Programs (NOAA and EPA,
March 1995)

     The references in this document refer to the New
Hampshire Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program, Final
Program Submittal, July 1995 ("program submittal").  NOAA and
EPA have written this document as succinctly as possible.  We
have relied upon, but do not repeat here, the extensive information
that the State has included in its program submittal.  Further
information and analysis, including material provided by New
Hampshire subsequent to the program submittal, is contained in the
administrative record for this approval decision and may be
reviewed by interested parties at the following locations:

EPA/Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds
Assessment & Watershed Protection Division
Nonpoint Source Control Branch
401 M St., SW (4503-F)
Washington, DC  20460
Contact:  Kristen Martin (202/260-7108)

NOAA/Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
Coastal Programs Division
SSMC-4, N/ORM3
1305 East-West Highway
Silver Spring, MD  20910
Contact:  Dwight Reynolds (301/713-3105, x154)

U.S. EPA
Office of Ecosystem Protection
New Hampshire State Unit
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA  02203
Contact:  Warren Howard (617/565-3515)
I.  BOUNDARY  

FINDING:   New Hampshire's state-designated boundary
corresponds with the boundary recommended by NOAA.  This
6217 management area is sufficient to control the land and water
uses that have or are reasonably expected to have a significant
impact on the coastal waters of New Hampshire.

RATIONALE:  New Hampshire recognizes that the existing
coastal zone does not encompass the existing and future land and
water uses that are likely to have a significant impact on the State's
coastal waters.  In the program submittal, New Hampshire
proposes to adopt NOAA's recommended management area, the
entire coastal watershed, but recognizes two zones (A and B) for
the purpose of setting program priorities and phasing program
implementation.  Most of the existing State programs that will be
used to implement the management measures apply statewide, but
New Hampshire will initially focus certain enhanced program
activities in Zone A.  NOAA and EPA encourage the State to
continue program development, implementation, and evaluation
efforts throughout the coastal watershed to ensure sufficient control
of land and water uses that have or are reasonably expected to have
a significant impact on the coastal waters of New Hampshire.

II.  AGRICULTURE 

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program includes management
measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance, except for
nutrient management.  The State has identified backup
enforceable policies and mechanisms, but has not yet
demonstrated the ability of these authorities to ensure
implementation throughout the 6217 management area.  New
Hampshire has provided sufficient justification to support an
exclusion of irrigated agricultural lands from the irrigation
management measure.

CONDITION:  Within two years, New Hampshire will include
in its program management measures in conformity with the
6217(g) management measure for nutrient management.  Within
one year, New Hampshire will develop a strategy (in accordance
with Section XIV, page 16) to implement the agricultural
management measures throughout the 6217 management area.

RATIONALE:  New Hampshire has listed the six applicable
6217(g) agricultural management measures in its program
submittal, and has identified the programs that will be used to
implement the measures.  New Hampshire has also identified, in
the program submittal and in supplemental information provided
by the State subsequent to the program submittal, best
management practices (BMPs) that can be used to achieve the
agricultural management measures, except for nutrient
management.

     For storage of runoff and facility wastewater, New
Hampshire's supplemental material indicates that the State applies
several BMPs to meet both the small and large confined animal
facilities management measures.  Specifically, the supplement
describes the USDA/Natural Resources Conservation Service
design criteria for waste storage systems that require
accommodation of the 25-year, 24-hour storm.  NOAA and EPA
interpret that description as setting the minimum requirements for
system design in the State of New Hampshire.  Similarly, the
State's supplement indicates that operation of waste storage ponds
is in accordance with an overall waste management plan for the
facility.  However, supplemental information on nutrient
management is largely related to nutrient management planning
for sludge application.  The New Hampshire agricultural BMP
manual includes practices that address many elements of the
nutrient management measure, but it does not include
development of a nutrient management plan for application of
animal waste.

     New Hampshire has identified backup enforceable policies
and mechanisms to ensure implementation of the agricultural
management measures.  Under the Water Pollution and Waste
Disposal Law (RSA 485-A:12), pollution sources which lower
the quality of classified waters below minimum requirements
must abate such pollution within a specified time period.  If the
responsible person fails to take action to abate the pollution, then
the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services
(NHDES) may seek appropriate action in the courts.  The
classification standards indicate that this authority can be used to
address problems associated with all of the agricultural
management measures.

     In accordance with the Manure, Compost and Fertilizer
Handling Program (developed under RSA 431:33-35), farmers
who do not comply with BMPs are subject to enforcement actions
by NHDES under the authority of RSA 485-A:12 (water quality
standards) and/or by the local health officer under RSA 147:4
(nuisance law).  Provisions under the Nuisance Liability of
Agriculture Operations (RSA 432:34) exempt agricultural
operations from nuisance liability when they conform to federal,
state and local laws, rules and regulations.  This exception does
not apply when the operation is determined to be injurious to
public health or safety, or if a nuisance results from negligent or
improper operation.  Based on the small number of farms within
the management area that meet the applicability thresholds for the
large and small confined animal facility management measures,
New Hampshire should be able to identify measurable results
which, if achieved, will demonstrate the State's ability to achieve
implementation of the management measures using the described
approach.

     Under the Pesticide Rules, private applicators must agree
to report all pesticide use to obtain a permit for use of general-use
pesticides.  These records are required to be made available to the
State annually.  Cease and desist orders can be issued to any
person in violation of the rule or permits issued under the rule. 
Under the Fill and Dredge in Wetlands (RSA 482-A) statute,
NHDES can require corrective action for any soil erosion
problems that impact wetlands.  The Terrain Alteration law (RSA
485-A:17) provides limited authority to address water quality
problems caused by tillage.

III.  FORESTRY

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program includes management
measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance and includes
enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure implementation
throughout the 6217 management area.  New Hampshire has
provided sufficient justification to support exclusions for the Fire
Management and Site Preparation/Forest Regeneration
management measures.

RATIONALE:  The New Hampshire BMP manual for forestry,
Best Management Practices for Erosion Control on Timber
Harvesting Operations in New Hampshire, has adequate standards
and specifications to implement the 6217(g) management measures
for forestry.

     Existing State authority under Env-Ws 415.04 (referenced
on page 35 of the submittal) requires each logger to obtain a site
specific permit and agree to "abide by the Best Management
Practices (BMP) for the protection of water quality" when the
logger signs a required Notice of Intent to Cut (RSA 79:10).  The
forestry BMP manual is also enforceable through RSA 485-A:17,
which requires a permit for the transportation of forest products,
but automatically grants the permit to loggers when they sign the
Notice of Intent to Cut form and agree to follow the BMP's. 

     According to the New Hampshire Technical Input
Committee for the forestry management measures, Site
Preparation/Forest Regeneration and Fire Management occur
infrequently, if at all.  The average size of forest fires in the State is
less than 0.5 acres and prescribed burns are generally done only in
the White Mountains National Forest, outside the NOAA-
recommended 6217 management area.

IV.  URBAN

A.  NEW DEVELOPMENT

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program includes management
measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance but does not
include enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure
implementation throughout the 6217 management area.

CONDITION:  Within two years, New Hampshire will amend its
program to ensure implementation of this measure throughout the
6217 management area.

RATIONALE:  In accordance with Env-Ws 415.09(a)13, each
site specific plan shall include stormwater drainage calculations for
pre- and post-construction, for a storm with a minimum return
frequency of once in ten years.  This requirement addresses the
volume control aspect of the management measure for projects
subject to this authority.  As described in the program submittal,
the State requires a Site Specific permit for larger projects,
including all projects on areas greater than 100,000 square feet or
50,000 square feet within 250 feet of protected waters (Env-Ws
415.03).  Permits for these projects requires treatment via
vegetated swales or sedimentation ponds.  Subsequent to the
program submittal, New Hampshire provided supplemental
information that includes rule changes to Env-Ws 415. 
Specifically, Env-Ws 415.11 includes new language describing the
full range of permanent methods for protecting water quality after
development has been completed.  NOAA and EPA agree that the
new language provides a set of practices that achieve 80% removal
of total suspended solids (TSS) for those activities subject to the
Site Specific Permit Program.

     The Site Specific permit is not in conformity with the
6217(g) guidance applicability statement in that enforceable
policies and mechanisms are not applicable to sites under 100,000
square feet or 50,000 square feet within 250 feet of protected
waters.  For sites falling below the Site Specific permit threshold
and for activities located outside of the State protected shoreland,
New Hampshire is proposing to rely on stormwater management
ordinances developed by municipalities, using their subdivision,
site plan review, and shoreland protection authorities to require
stormwater management measures.  However, New Hampshire
cannot require local stormwater management.  The State has begun
a survey of local governments and found that many have
stormwater programs that meet the 80% TSS standard.  We
encourage the State to work with other local governments and to
ensure that the new development management measure is
implemented throughout the 6217 management area.

B.  WATERSHED PROTECTION AND EXISTING
DEVELOPMENT

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program includes management
measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance and includes
enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure implementation
throughout the 6217 management area.

RATIONALE:  The program submittal describes a number of
programs in New Hampshire that can be used to implement these
management measures, including the Coastal Watershed Program,
the Watershed Approach to Abate Pollution, and the Rivers
Management and Protection Program.  The goals of the Coastal
Watershed Program projects are to identify the water quality
impacts of existing nonpoint sources and then develop
recommendations, for local implementation, to address existing
and future nonpoint sources.  As described in supplemental
material provided by the State, the NHDES Surface Water Quality
Bureau has issued its 1996 Coastal Basin Nonpoint Source
Pollution and Abatement Plan which outlines a three-year action
plan for coastal watersheds.  Working with local governments,
New Hampshire proposes to use the plan and its recommendations
to identify areas which are being adversely impacted by
development and ensure that appropriate site restrictions are put in
place to protect areas that provide important water quality benefits.

     The first project, focusing on the Exeter and Squamscott
River subwatershed, was completed in December 1995. This study
concluded that there are nonpoint pollution problems in the
watershed, arising mainly due to stormwater runoff from urban
areas, septic systems, shoreline development, and agricultural
runoff.  The New Hampshire Coastal Program is working with
NHDES and local governments to implement recommendations of
the study, including the need for education, improved local
regulations and implementation and future monitoring and
management.  A series of similar projects is planned in all coastal
subwatersheds.  We encourage the State to continue this effort and
to use experience from the initial projects to further develop a
comprehensive watershed protection program.

     For existing development, the program submittal includes a
list of proposed activities, including identifying water quality goals
based on local input and taking compliance and enforcement
actions as needed, that were scheduled to begin in Spring of 1995
and run for five years in each basin.  Based on supplemental
information provided subsequent to the program submittal, there
are two watersheds for which the State has completed assessment
work and developed a list of recommendations for locals to address
problems from existing sources.  The State has also provided a list
of remaining watersheds to be addressed in accordance with a
proposed schedule.

     New Hampshire's program submittal includes enforceable
policies and mechanisms that can be used to implement these
management measures.  Authorities under the Site Specific
program, the wetlands program (RSA 482-A) and the
Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act restrict disturbance of
land in particular geographic areas for particular classes of
activities.  These authorities can also be used to restrict the siting
of roads, highways and bridges.

C.  SITE DEVELOPMENT

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program includes management
measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance but does not
include enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure
implementation throughout the 6217 management area.

CONDITION:  Within two years, New Hampshire will include in
its program enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure
implementation of this measure throughout the 6217 management
area.

RATIONALE:  As described in the program submittal, planning,
design, and development of sites is partially addressed by the Site
Specific program.  Applicants for permits under this program are
referred to the Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment
Control Handbook for Urban and Developing Areas in New
Hampshire for appropriate practices.  In order to avoid
inappropriate development in areas that are susceptible to erosion
and sediment loss, the Site Specific program requires permit
applicants to provide soils information in order to ensure that
BMPs are properly selected and designed for the site.  It also seeks
to preserve natural drainage systems whenever possible; however,
as described above, it does not apply to land disturbances less than
100,000 square feet (50,000 square feet within 250 feet of
protected waters).

     Zoning and land use planning are enabled by the Municipal
Subdivision and Site Plan Review Regulations under RSA 674:35-
36 and RSA 674:43-44.  These provisions establish the definition
for subdivision of land and the criteria that local governments can
use in regulating the use of land.  However, New Hampshire has
not demonstrated that municipal governments consistently require
the aspects of the management measure in the review of land
development proposals or that such criteria are used widely
throughout the 6217 management area.  The State has begun a
survey of local governments to determine how they review
development proposals. Other programs that serve to partially
implement this measure include the Wetlands program, which
restricts disturbance of wetlands and the tidal buffer zone and
discourages the disturbance of the natural integrity of waterbodies,
and the Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act, which restricts
disturbances in the protected shoreland.

D.  CONSTRUCTION SITE EROSION AND SEDIMENT
CONTROL 

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program includes management
measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance but does not
include enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure
implementation.

CONDITION:  Within two years, New Hampshire will include in
its program enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure
implementation of this measure throughout the 6217 management
area.

RATIONALE:  Site Specific permits contain erosion control
provisions that must be met and applicants are referred to the
Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control
Handbook for Urban and Developing Areas in New Hampshire as
the technical reference for descriptions of acceptable BMPs. The
Handbook includes practices that can be used to implement the
elements of this management measure.  However, the State does
not require an approved erosion and sediment control plan that
contains erosion and sediment control provisions for sites that
disturb less than 100,000 square feet (50,000 square feet within the
protected shoreline) .  The Office of State Planning and the Coastal
Watershed Program recommend that municipalities require erosion
and sediment control plans to be in place prior to land disturbance,
but there is not a mechanism to ensure that local governments do
so.  Based on supplemental information provided by the State,
several towns have chosen to require a plan, but there is variability
in these requirements and they may not meet the applicability
thresholds described in the (g) guidance.

E.  CONSTRUCTION SITE CHEMICAL CONTROL

FINDING:   New Hampshire's program does not include
management measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance
but includes enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure
implementation throughout the 6217 management area.

CONDITION:  Within one year, New Hampshire will include in
its program management measures in conformity with the 6217(g)
guidance for construction site chemical control.

RATIONALE:  Limits on fertilizer application are included in the
Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control
Handbook for Urban and Developing Areas in New Hampshire and
prohibited in protected areas by the Comprehensive Shoreland
Protection Act.  Nutrient application rates are also addressed in the
Handbook.  However, the Handbook does not include specific
practices for limiting the application, generation and migration of
toxic substances or proper storage and disposal of toxic substances. 
Based on supplemental material provided by the State, the
Groundwater Protection Act (RSA 485-C) authorizes the
development of BMPs to protect groundwater from potential
contamination sources, including above ground storage facilities
for oil and hazardous substances, but the State does not yet have a
list of practices to address these sources.

     In both the program submittal and supplemental
information, New Hampshire identifies several authorities that can
be used to ensure implementation of this management measure. 
New Hampshire has the ability to ensure that pesticide aspects of
the measure are implemented through the State Pesticide Control
Program under RSA 430:28-49 and NH CAR Pes 100-1002.17. 
Action can also be taken in cases where a water quality standard
has been violated due to a spill of toxic materials or groundwater
contamination.  RSA 146-A:3 prohibits the discharge or spillage of
petroleum products or by-products onto surface water or ground
water of the State, or in areas where it will seep into surface water
or ground water.  RSA 485-C:11 requires the Division of Water
Supply and Pollution Control, Department of Environmental
Services to develop and administer BMPs for activities identified
as potential contamination sources. The Comprehensive Shoreland
Protection Act limits the application of fertilizers in residential
areas within the protected shoreland.  New Hampshire may wish to
consider linking construction site chemical control measures to the
process for implementing the construction site erosion control
measure above.  Such a linkage could provide for incorporation of
construction site chemical control practices into sediment and
erosion control plans.

F.  POLLUTION PREVENTION

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program includes management
measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance.

RATIONALE:  New Hampshire's program submittal describes a
number of existing efforts, including extensive public education
programs and outreach efforts.  The State provided a list of
publications and outreach activities that address each of the
components of the management measure.

G.  NEW AND OPERATING ONSITE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS

FINDING:   New Hampshire's program includes management
measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance and includes
enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure implementation of
the management measures throughout the 6217 management area.

RATIONALE: The State has a comprehensive set of
Administrative rules (Env-Ws 1000) and Revised Statutes (RSA
485-A) relative to individual sewage disposal system design,
location, and operation and maintenance.  The Bureau has 25
inspectors, in six regional offices.  Inspections are required pre-
and post-construction and for accumulation of sludge and surface
scum at least once every year (Env-Ws 1023.01).

     Based on information provided by New Hampshire in a
section 309 grant performance report, RSA 485-A:39 requires that
a septic system site assessment be performed at the time of sale of
waterfront property.  The performance report summary also
indicates that in June 1996, the State passed Chapter 219,
expanding the definition of developed waterfront property to
include land contiguous to or within 200 feet of tidal waters and
which uses a septic disposal system.  The assessments are required
to include detailed information on the size of the tank, type, age
and location of the system, any malfunctions and whether the
system meets current OSDS standards.  This gives potential buyers
information about the quality of on-site septic systems and
provides a mechanism by which the State can ascertain whether
systems are failing.

     According to the State, there are few indicators that the
State's tidal waters are nitrogen-limited.  Subject to funding, the
New Hampshire Coastal Program will pursue research designed to
determine nitrogen-loading or nitrogen-concentration thresholds
for New Hampshire's coastal waters.  We encourage the State to
pursue efforts to study the existence of nitrogen-sensitive waters.



H.  ROADS, HIGHWAYS, AND BRIDGES

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program includes management
measures for roads, highways, and bridges in conformity with the
6217(g) guidance for all Department of Transportation (NHDOT)
constructed and maintained projects.  New Hampshire's program is
not yet in conformity with the operation and maintenance and
runoff systems management measures for non-NHDOT roads,
highways, and bridges.  New Hampshire's program includes
enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure implementation
throughout the 6217 management area, except for siting, design,
and construction of roads, highways, and bridges in towns and
municipalities. 

CONDITION:  Within three years, New Hampshire will complete
and implement its planned program to be in conformity with the
operation and maintenance and runoff systems management
measures for all non-NHDOT roads, highways and bridges.  Also
within three years, New Hampshire will include in its program
enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure implementation of
the management measures in towns and municipalities throughout
the 6217 management area.

RATIONALE:  New Hampshire DOT has a comprehensive
program which uses existing authorities, contract specifications,
state design and reviews of contractor designs, consultations, and
inspections to meet the management measures for projects under
their jurisdiction.  Many excellent guidance manuals are available. 
As described above in the rationale for the new development
management measure, New Hampshire issues Site Specific permits
for non-NHDOT projects that disturb areas over 100,000 square
feet or 50,000 square feet in the protected shoreland-within 250
feet of public waters.

     Operation and maintenance and runoff management system
management measures for all non-NHDOT roads (without
thresholds) is proposed to be accomplished using a program
involving education and technology transfer.  NH DOT is in the
process of developing a set of policies, procedures and
specifications for pollution prevention.  The Coastal Nonpoint
Program plans to participate in the development of new procedures
and standards and anticipates that a new manual will be finalized
within two years.  NOAA and EPA encourage the State to
complete this effort to meet the condition above.

     New Hampshire's program includes enforceable policies
and mechanisms through Env-Ws, part 415 and RSA 485 which
provide general and specific permit authority.  NHDOT standard
contract specifications provide the ability to oversee development
of roads, highways, and bridges, including inspections and stop
work orders, if necessary.  

     Siting, design, and construction of non-NHDOT roads and
bridges disturbing smaller areas is the responsibility of local towns
and municipalities under RSA 674:35-36 and 674:43-44 which
gives them authority to regulate these activities.  These local
entities, however, are not required to develop and use such
authorities.  Supplemental material provided by the State describes
the State Aid to Highways Program and Block Grant Aid Program,
both of which provide State funds for local roads, but the State has
not identified any specific mechanisms within these funding
programs that might be used to ensure that local governments
implement the management measures.  The summary of the Block
Grant Aid Program indicates that "[M]uch discretion exists for the
municipality to decide how to utilize these funds."

V.  MARINAS AND RECREATIONAL BOATING

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program includes management
measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance and includes
enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure implementation,
except for the operation and maintenance management measures. 
The State has identified backup enforceable policies and
mechanisms for operation and maintenance, but has not yet
demonstrated the ability of these authorities to ensure
implementation throughout the 6217 management area.

CONDITION:  Within one year, New Hampshire will develop a
strategy (in accordance with Section XIV, page 16) to implement
the marina operation and maintenance management measures
throughout the 6217 management area.

RATIONALE:  New Hampshire has developed a guidance
document entitled Best Management Practices for New Hampshire
Marinas that includes management measures in conformity with
the 6217(g) guidance.  NOAA and EPA understand that this
document has been distributed to marina owners and operators.

     Authority under RSA 482-A:3,1 provides the Wetlands
Bureau with jurisdiction over surface waters and adjacent banks
throughout the State.  The State Wetlands Bureau regulates and
issues permits for developments in freshwater and saltwater
wetlands, including areas up to 100 feet landward from the highest
tide line in coastal areas.  Permits issued under this authority
provide a mechanism to ensure that the siting and design
management measures are implemented.  The program submittal
describes a pending set of proposed rule changes to the Wetlands
Bureau Rules that may provide an opportunity to more fully
implement the siting and design management measures.  NOAA
and EPA encourage New Hampshire to pursue these changes,
including consideration of a possible link between existing
permitting programs and the newly published marina BMP manual.

     For the operation and maintenance management measures,
New Hampshire proposes to rely heavily on the Marina BMP
Manual.  New Hampshire has also proposed to use its State water
quality standards a backup authority.  RSA 485-A:12 provides that
NHDES may require any person to correct water quality standards
violations, and RSA 485-A:15 prohibits the placing of debris or
similar litter into the surface waters of the state.  According to
supplemental material provided by New Hampshire, other relevant
authorities include administrative rule 602.04, prohibiting fish
dumping by commercial fishing vessels, RSA 146-A:3 & 5,
prohibiting discharge or spillage of oil into the surface waters of
the state and a requirement to notify DES if such a spillage does
occur, and RSA 270-D:2 VI(a)(3), which requires decreased
boating speed within 150 feet from shore. 

     New Hampshire DES will also be distributing boater and
marina BMP information in the coastal watersheds over the next
three years as part of its 1996 Coastal Basin Nonpoint Source
Pollution Assessment and Abatement Program, in order to
encourage boater implementation of the marina operation and
maintenance management measures.  NOAA and EPA encourage
the State to continue with efforts to educate the boating public
regarding applicable BMPs and to consider providing a better
linkage between the above listed permitting programs and the
Marina BMP manual.  

VI.  HYDROMODIFICATION

FINDINGS:  New Hampshire's program includes management
measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance, except for
chemical and pollutant control at dams and the lack of a process to
improve surface water quality and restore instream and riparian
habitat through the operation and maintenance of existing modified
channels.  New Hampshire's program includes enforceable policies
and mechanisms to ensure implementation, except for dam
operation.

CONDITION:  Within three years, New Hampshire will include
in its program management measures for chemical and pollutant
control at dams and a process to improve surface water quality and
restore instream and riparian habitat through the operation and
maintenance of existing modified channels.  Within three years,
New Hampshire will include in its program enforceable policies
and mechanisms for dam operation.

RATIONALE:  The Wetlands Bureau permitting process and
Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act implement most aspects
of the hydromodification management measures. The review of
permit applications for channelization considers criteria related to
water quality impacts.  The review of permits for bank stabilization
activities promotes the use of natural vegetation, diversion of
stormwater away from the bank face, and proper design of
engineering structures where appropriate.  The Comprehensive
Shoreland Protection Act establishes a protected shoreland within
250 feet of the reference line of public waters; and establishes
building set backs and a protected 150-foot natural woodland
buffer.

     New Hampshire has proposed to implement the
management measure for chemical and pollutant control at dams
through the Groundwater Protection Act, which gives the State
authority to inspect potential contaminant sources, including
fueling and maintenance of excavation and earthmoving
equipment, for compliance with state BMPs.  However, as
described above for urban construction site chemical control, the
State does not yet have a list of practices to address these sources.

     The management measure for protection of surface waters
and instream and riparian habitat from the effects of dam operation
will be implemented through the Water Management Bureau,
which registers large water withdrawals.  Rivers Management and
Protection Program Rules are also being developed to protect
instream flows, which (in supplemental information provided by
New Hampshire) the State has indicated will be applied to all
rivers in the future.  NOAA and EPA anticipate that these rules can
be used to meet the condition above for enforceable policies and
mechanisms for dam operation.

     Activities on land within 100 feet of the highest observable
tide line for tidal wetlands, or immediately adjacent to nontidal
wetlands, are subject to the New Hampshire Wetlands Bureau's
authority.  Exemptions to the Shoreland Protection Act include the
clearing of land for agricultural utilization under some
circumstances.  NOAA and EPA encourage New Hampshire to
examine the effects of these exemptions on surface water quality in
order to ensure that these activities do not have a significant impact
on coastal waters.

VII.  WETLANDS, RIPARIAN AREAS AND VEGETATED
TREATMENT SYSTEMS

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program includes management
measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance and includes
enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure implementation
throughout the 6217 management area, except that there are
exemptions which may preclude the State from fully implementing
the management measure for protection of wetlands and riparian
areas.

CONDITIONS:  Within three years, New Hampshire will
eliminate or revise current exemptions to the Comprehensive
Shoreland Protection Act or demonstrate that the exemptions do
not preclude the State from fully implementing the management
measures throughout the 6217 management area.

RATIONALE:  The Wetlands Bureau permitting process and
Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act implement most aspects
of the management measure for protection of wetlands and riparian
areas.  The review of permit applications for dredging activities in
wetlands considers criteria related to nonpoint source functions. 
RSA 483-A:7 allows municipalities to designate prime wetlands. 
Any activities in prime wetlands receive a higher level of scrutiny
by state permitting agencies. The Comprehensive Shoreland
Protection Act establishes a protected shoreland within 250 feet of
the reference line of public waters; and establishes building set
backs and a protected 150-foot natural woodland buffer.  However,
exemptions to the Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act
include the clearing of land for agricultural utilization under some
circumstances, and areas which local governing bodies have found
to have special local urbanization conditions.  As currently written,
exemptions in these authorities are likely to significantly restrict
the State's ability to fully implement the management measure for
wetlands and riparian area protection.

     NOAA and EPA encourage New Hampshire to continue its
development and implementation of the Wetlands and Riparian
Areas Project, which will recommend a model ordinance
concerning wetland and riparian area protection to municipalities
for voluntary adoption.  This will assist the State in addressing
problems that do not come up for review under existing authorities. 
NOAA and EPA also encourage New Hampshire to pursue
revisions to Chapter 400 (Shoreline Structures) which would help
the State to further address the management measure for protection
of wetlands and riparian areas.

     Management measures promoting restoration of wetlands
and riparian areas will be implemented through the Coastal
Program's utilization of Coastal Zone Management Act 306 and
306A pass through funding, and other management grants.  The
Coastal Program also completed a marsh restoration project funded
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.  The Wetlands Bureau also
promotes restoration of damaged and destroyed wetlands as a
means of mitigation for projects that impact wetlands.

     Management measures promoting the use of vegetated
treatment systems will be implemented through the Site Specific
Program, which requires treatment of runoff from paved surfaces,
either by vegetated treatment systems or by sedimentation ponds.

          VIII.     ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATION

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program establishes mechanisms to
improve coordination among State agencies and between State and
local officials.

RATIONALE:  New Hampshire is relying primarily on existing
programs and enforceable polices and mechanisms to implement
the management measures.  The program submittal addresses
administrative coordination in Section 3, which describes how the
coastal nonpoint program is coordinated with State and local water
quality programs and the New Hampshire Coastal Program. 
Section 4.6 lists the mission, structure, and operation of each
agency involved in either the development or implementation of
the coastal nonpoint program.  Section 319 program staff have
worked closely with 6217 staff on all aspects of program
development.  These staff administer grants that may be used for
implementation of management measures and conduct nonpoint
source monitoring and assessment projects.  The statewide
nonpoint source committee also provides a vehicle for discussion
of efforts to coordinate nonpoint source control efforts on a
statewide basis.

IX.  PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

FINDINGS:  New Hampshire's program provides opportunities
for public participation in the development and implementation of
the coastal nonpoint program.

RATIONALE:  New Hampshire established Technical Input
Committees composed of State and federal agencies, interest
groups, and members of the regulated community.  These
Committees reviewed and commented on the State's Coastal
Nonpoint Pollution Control program.  New Hampshire also has
provided, and continues to provide, information on the Coastal
Nonpoint Pollution Control program through articles in its Coastal
Program newsletter which is circulated to public libraries and
municipal officials. The State has provided for public review and
comment, and has demonstrated a continuing commitment to
public education throughout development of this program.

X.  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

FINDINGS:  New Hampshire has included programs that will
provide technical assistance to local governments and the public
for implementing additional management measures.

RATIONALE:  New Hampshire has utilized the funds from
various assistance programs to focus technical assistance efforts on
numerous issues relative to nonpoint source pollution in coastal
watersheds, shoreland protection, and rivers management and
protection.  The State intends to continue its effort of working
closely with local land boards and conservation organizations in
designing coastal watershed projects.  The goals of the watershed
projects are to demonstrate the water quality impacts of existing
nonpoint sources and to develop recommendations for local
implementation to address existing and future nonpoint source
pollution.

XI.  ADDITIONAL MANAGEMENT MEASURES

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program provides for the
identification of additional management measures and the
continuing revision of management measures applicable to critical
coastal areas and cases where (g) measures are fully implemented
but water quality threats or impairments persist.

RATIONALE:  New Hampshire's description of its
Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Program, Wetlands Program,
Coastal Watershed Program activities, and Nonpoint Source
Pollution Management Plan identify activities that are currently
underway or planned to address critical coastal areas and areas
where water quality impairments exist even after (g) management
measures or their equivalent have been implemented.  In
conjunction with the monitoring program, the Coastal Nonpoint
Program will rely on periodic reviews of management measure
implementation in order to formulate effective and appropriate
additional management measures.  
XII.  CRITICAL COASTAL AREAS

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program identifies and includes a
process for the continuing identification of critical coastal areas
adjacent to impaired and threatened coastal waters.

RATIONALE:  New Hampshire has generally followed the first
approach described in the program guidance whereby the State has
designated a strip of land along the shoreline that extends inland a
uniform distance. This strip of land is defined by the jurisdiction of
the State's Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act and includes
all land in the 6217 management area that is within 250 feet of
tidal waters, fourth-order streams, or great ponds.

XIII.  MONITORING

FINDING:  New Hampshire's program includes a plan to assess
over time the success of the management measures in reducing
pollution loads and improving water quality.

RATIONALE:  In both the program submittal and in
supplemental material provided by the State, New Hampshire
describes numerous monitoring programs and how they will be
applied to the coastal nonpoint program.  As described in the
supplemental information, NHDES will assess both water quality
and the implementation of best management practices within the
Piscataqua and coastal watersheds.  Tributary monitoring
conducted through the coastal nonpoint program includes
seventeen sampling stations that are monitored for a variety of
parameters, including nutrients and bacteria.  Long term baseline
monitoring is also being conducted at three sites within the Great
Bay Estuary, providing an opportunity to related land use changes
in upper portions of the watershed to water quality and resource
changes within the estuary.  NOAA and EPA encourage New
Hampshire to coordinate monitoring efforts, particularly with
respect to monitoring land treatment, in order to further assess the
extent to which management measures are reducing pollution loads
and improving water quality.

XIV.  STRATEGY AND EVALUATION FOR BACK-UP
AUTHORITIES

Within one year, New Hampshire will develop a strategy to
implement the management measures for agriculture and marinas
operation and maintenance.  This strategy will include a
description and schedule for the specific steps the State will take to
ensure implementation of the management measures; describe how
existing or new authorities can be used to ensure implementation
where voluntary efforts are unsuccessful; and identify measurable
results which, if achieved, will demonstrate the State's ability to
achieve implementation of the management measures using the
described approach.

     In order to evaluate the adequacy of this strategy, New
Hampshire will also develop and apply credible survey tools to
demonstrate the ability of the State's approach to achieve
implementation for these management measures.  The use of
credible assessment techniques is necessary in order for NOAA
and EPA to evaluate, at the end of the three year period described
in the March 16, 1995 guidance issued by NOAA and EPA entitled
Flexibility for State Coastal Nonpoint Programs, whether the
State's approach has been successful or whether new, more
specific authorities will be needed.