FINDINGS FOR THE
    WISCONSIN COASTAL NONPOINT PROGRAM 
                      
FOREWORD

     This document contains the findings for the coastal
nonpoint pollution control program submitted by the State of
Wisconsin pursuant to Section 6217(a) of the Coastal Zone Act
Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 (CZARA).  The findings are
based on a review of the  Wisconsin Coastal Nonpoint Program,
Final Program Submittal, July 1995 and supplemental material
provided by Wisconsin 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 Wisconsin 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 Wisconsin 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
Wisconsin's program.  It also provides the rationale for the findings
and includes conditions that will need to be met for Wisconsin to
receive final approval of its program.  The timeframes associated
with conditions become effective on the date of 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 Wisconsin
Coastal Nonpoint 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 Wisconsin 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:  Robert Goo (202/260-7025)

NOAA/Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
Coastal Programs Division
SSMC-4, N/ORM3
1305 East-West Highway
Silver Spring, MD  20910
Contact:  Diana Olinger (301/713-3113, x168)

U.S. EPA
Office of Watersheds & Nonpoint Source Programs
Water Division
77 West Jackson Street
Chicago, IL  60604
Contact:  Tom Davenport (312/886-0209)

     I.   BOUNDARY

FINDING:  Wisconsin's proposed boundary for the 6217
management area is sufficient to control the land and water uses
that have or are reasonably expected to have a significant impact
on Wisconsin's coastal waters.

RATIONALE:  Wisconsin's proposed boundary follows the basic
NOAA recommendation of coastal watersheds, with the exception
of the area draining to the Brule River that forms part of the
Wisconsin-Michigan state line.  Wisconsin has proposed to
exclude an area in Vilas County, along the Wisconsin-Michigan
border, that drains north through Michigan to Lake Superior.  This
area does not drain to the coastal waters of Wisconsin.

     II.  AGRICULTURE

FINDING:  Wisconsin's program includes management measures
in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance, except for the measures
to address confined animal facilities and nutrient management. 
Wisconsin has presented sufficient justification for exclusion of
the irrigation water management measure for irrigated
agricultural lands.  The State has identified backup enforceable
policies and mechanisms for implementing the agricultural
management measures but has not yet demonstrated the ability of
these authorities to ensure implementation throughout the 6217
management area.

CONDITION:  Within three years, Wisconsin will (1) modify
the design storm for animal lot runoff management to be in
conformity with the two management measures for confined
animal facilities and include storage of wastewater and runoff for
Large Units, and (2) include management measures in conformity
with the (g) guidance for nutrient management.  Within one year,
Wisconsin will develop a strategy (in accordance with Section
XIV, page 16) to implement the agricultural management
measures throughout the 6217 management area.

RATIONALE:  In the program submittal, Wisconsin proposed
an alternative management measure for confined animal facilities,
relying on the 10-year, 24-hour frequency storm for system
design.  The State's proposed measure is not as effective as the
6217(g) management measure, which is based on the larger, 25-
year, 24-hour design storm.  Wisconsin's proposed alternative for
large facilities also does not specify storage of both the facility
wastewater and runoff.  On page 6-21 of the program document,
Wisconsin states it is "considering changing to the 25-year, 24-
hour design storm for animal lot runoff management."  The
condition is intended to provide Wisconsin a reasonable schedule
to implement the change to the 25-year storm for both the B1 and
B2 (large and small units) management measures.

     Wisconsin has also proposed an alternative management
measure for the nutrient management measure.  Wisconsin has
proposed changing part (5) from "use of the limiting nutrient
concept", to "limit nitrogen", and part (6) from "avoid
applications ... to frozen soil" to "manage applications ... to
frozen soil."  Wisconsin's proposed approach to limit only the
amount of nitrogen applied creates the potential for excessive
application and delivery to the aquatic environment of other
nutrients, most notably phosphorus, that may be harmful to
Wisconsin's fresh coastal waters.  The 6217(g) management
measure achieves efficient use of all nutrients (N, P, and K) by
applying only the amounts needed by the crop (i.e., the limiting
nutrient concept), thus minimizing the potential for export of
harmful nutrients to the aquatic environment.  Wisconsin needs to
incorporate the limiting nutrient concept and avoid, as much as
possible, applications to frozen soil and during periods of
leaching and runoff.  In addition, Wisconsin's proposal to
"manage applications" is less effective than the 6217(g)
management measure, since it provides no assurance that
applications are minimized during periods of snowmelt, runoff,
or leaching that have higher potential to cause harm to coastal
waters.

     Wisconsin has demonstrated that irrigation is not a
significant contributor of pollutants to Wisconsin's coastal
waters.  As described on page 6-31 of the program submittal,
there were only 5,079 acres irrigated in the nine counties located
wholly within the 6217 management area.  For those counties
with a portion of their jurisdiction within the 6217 management
area, most of the irrigation occurs outside of the management
area.  The relatively low acreage of irrigated land and the use of
drip or spray irrigation in the 6217 management area demonstrate
that Wisconsin's exclusion of irrigation from its program is
justified.

     Wisconsin has backup enforcement authority for the
agricultural management measures through its regulations for
Nonpoint Source (NPS) Orders (144.025(u) and (v)), which state
that the "department ... may order or cause the abatement of
pollution which the department has determined to be significant
and caused by a nonpoint source", including "pollution which
causes a water quality standard violation, [or] pollution which
significantly impairs aquatic habitat or organisms."  NPS Orders
do not address pollution caused primarily by animal waste.  The
Animal Waste Management Program addresses point source
operations and other animal feeding operations (those less than
1000 AUs) if "the department determines through an onsite
investigation that unacceptable practices of the operation are
causing or have caused the discharge of a significant amount of
pollutants to waters of the state."  Failure of the operation to
comply will result in the facility being required to apply for a
Wisconsin point source permit.

     III. FORESTRY

FINDING:  Wisconsin's program includes management measures
in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance.  The State has
enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure implementation of
the forestry management measures for state and county forests
and for certain activities, such as a stream crossing.  Wisconsin
has identified backup enforceable policies and mechanisms for
implementing the forestry measures on private lands and for the
full range of forestry activities, but has not yet demonstrated the
ability of these authorities to ensure implementation throughout
the 6217 management area.  Wisconsin has provided sufficient
justification to support an exclusion of cable yarding from its
program.

CONDITION:  Within one year, Wisconsin will develop a
strategy (in accordance with Section XIV, page 16) to implement
the forestry management measures on lands other than state and
county lands throughout the 6217 management area.

RATIONALE:  Wisconsin's program submittal describes several
commendable voluntary efforts, including Wisconsin's Forestry
Best Management Practices for Water Quality: A Field Manual
for Loggers, Landowners and Land Managers, a series of best
management practice (BMP) education and training workshops,
the Cooperative Consulting Foresters Program, tax 
incentives, and a monitoring program that "will begin in July,
1995 and continue for several years."  Wisconsin's Nonpoint
Source Orders (144.025 (u) and (v)) allow the Department of
Natural Resources to take action against silvicultural operations
causing impairments of water quality.

     Management measures are implemented as a matter of
policy and procedure on state and county forests, on private
forest lands managed by Cooperating Consultant Foresters, or on
lands which are voluntarily enrolled in the Managed Forest Law
and Forest Stewardship programs.  Additionally, several forest
industry companies in Wisconsin have adopted Wisconsin's
forestry BMPs as part of their corporate land management
policies.  As described in the program submittal, Chapter 28,
Wisconsin Statutes, includes requirements for management of
state and county forests.  Sections 28.04 and 28.11 require plans
to be prepared that include consideration of the forestry
management measures.  On county forests, timber harvesting
cannot be conducted until a cutting notice is received from the
Department of Natural Resources. 

     Private forest lands may be required to implement some
components of the forestry management measures during
silvicultural activities.  These include preharvest notification
requirements, stream crossing restrictions (permits) in accordance
with Chapter 30, and additional zoning restrictions for
ownerships within Wisconsin's Shoreland Management Program
area.  The Shoreland Management program sets minimum road
building and harvesting standards for streamside management
areas and some forested wetlands.  Wisconsin has also developed
a monitoring program to evaluate BMP implementation.  NOAA
and EPA encourage the State to incorporate this effort and the
activities described on page 7-37 of the program submittal into a
strategy to ensure implementation throughout the 6217
management area.

     Wisconsin's proposed exclusion for the cable yarding
element of the timber harvesting management measure is justified
because "no such activity is now occurring, nor is anticipated to
occur within the State" (p. 7-37 of Wisconsin's program).

     IV.  URBAN

     A.   NEW DEVELOPMENT

FINDING:  Wisconsin's program includes management measures
in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance except for development
activities less than 5 acres in area. The State has identified a
backup enforceable policy and mechanism for implementing this
management measure but has not yet demonstrated the ability of
the authority to ensure implementation throughout the 6217
management area.

CONDITION:  Within three years, Wisconsin will include in its
program management measures in conformity with the 6217(g)
guidance for new development activities less than 5 acres in area. 
Within one year, Wisconsin will develop a strategy (in
accordance with Section XIV, page 16) to implement the new
development management measure throughout the 6217
management area.

RATIONALE:  Wisconsin regulates construction and
development activities for sites exceeding 5 acres through its
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
stormwater permit program (Chapter NR 216, Wis. Adm. Code). 
In the program submittal, the State has proposed standards that
would be implemented for construction sites and commercial
building projects that are less than 5 acres in size and not
otherwise exempted.  For these latter projects, the alternative that
the State has provided would control the 1.5-year, 24-hour storm
and not the 2-year, 24-hour storm.  Under State analysis, this
alternative would reduce total suspended solid loadings by greater
than 80%.  This alternative would be consistent with the
objectives of the new development management measure.  The
State's proposed standards, however, exclude post-construction
management, thereby failing to address post-development runoff.  

     Wisconsin has proposed the development of local
stormwater ordinances to implement the new development
management measure for sites not covered by its NPDES
program.  The State's draft technical design manual for
stormwater best management practices (October 1, 1995), which
was provided to NOAA and EPA after the initial program
submittal, includes a draft model stormwater management zoning
ordinance.  Under State enabling legislation, counties, villages,
and cities are authorized to regulate stormwater through the
adoption of ordinances.

     The State's model ordinance includes requirements in
conformity with the new development management measure. 
Where adopted, the ordinance would require a permit and
stormwater management plan for residential development on 5 or
more acres; residential development on at least 3 acres, but less
than 5 acres, if there is at least 1.5 acres of impervious surface;
and non-residential development with an area of 1.5 acres or
more, or that creates more than .5 acre of impervious surface.  In
addition, the ordinance would cover any land development
activity, regardless of size, that is determined likely to result in
erosion or pollution.  NOAA and EPA encourage the State to
finalize the technical manual and ordinance and begin efforts to
assist local governments in adopting it.

     In Section 8.2 of the program submittal, which describes
urban water quality programs, Wisconsin identifies a backup
enforcement authority for this management measure through its 
regulations for NPS Orders (144.025(u) and (v)), which state that
the "department ... may order or cause the abatement of pollution
which the department has determined to be significant and caused
by a nonpoint source", including "pollution which causes a water
quality standard violation, [or] pollution which significantly
impairs aquatic habitat or organisms."  



     B.   WATERSHED PROTECTION and  EXISTING
     DEVELOPMENT

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

RATIONALE:  Wisconsin, through the requirements for
Areawide Water Quality Management Plans, provides water
quality management plans for all sewer service areas of the State. 
All watersheds in each area must be identified in the plan and
water quality problems for each assessed.  This program provides
a strong foundation for watershed level protection.  Wetlands and
other areas unsuitable for installation of waste treatment systems
are considered for exclusion from coverage by water and sewer. 
While areas not served by public sewage systems are not
addressed by the sewer service area plans, these areas may be
covered under the priority watershed program by NR 120. 
Under this program, watershed plans to identify water quality
problems and set objectives to maintain and improve water
quality are developed.  In addition, Wisconsin's Shoreland
Management Program (NR 115, Wis. Adm. Code) and
Floodplain Management Program (NR 116, Wis Adm. Code)
serve to avoid conversion of areas that are particularly susceptible
to erosion or provide important water quality benefits.  Potential
environmental impacts due to road, highway and bridge
development must be considered under numerous administrative
codes (listed on page 8-15 of the program submittal) of the
Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) and criteria
specified in the Facilities Development Manual. 

     Through the development of watershed projects under the
Wisconsin nonpoint source water pollution abatement program,
opportunities for pollution and load reduction for existing
development are identified in priority watershed plans.  For each
project, major sources of pollutants are identified and necessary
pollutant reduction actions are incorporated into the plans. 
Retrofitting of urban runoff control structures is an element in
some plans.  Plans are implemented over an 8-10 year
implementation period.  The navigable waterways, shoreline,
wetland and floodplain management programs provide protection
of natural conveyance systems.

     C.   SITE DEVELOPMENT

FINDING:  Wisconsin's program does not include management
measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance.  The program
includes enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure
implementation in a substantial portion of the 6217 management
area.  However, the program does not yet include enforceable
policies and mechanisms to ensure implementation throughout the
management area.

CONDITION:  Within three years, Wisconsin will include in its
program management measures in conformity with the 6217(g)
guidance for site development and enforceable policies and
mechanisms to ensure implementation of the site development
management measure throughout the 6217 management area.

RATIONALE:   Wisconsin proposes to use a variety of
programs to implement this management measure.  Specific land
use controls described in the program submittal include:  the
Floodplain and Shoreland Management programs and the
Shoreland-Wetland Protection Program, which provide for
protection of water quality through setbacks, preservation of
shore cover, floodplain development restrictions and wetland
protection.  These programs generally implement the elements of
the management measure by protecting areas that provide
important water quality benefits and limiting disturbance of
natural drainage features, but they do not ensure that sites are
planned and developed in accordance with all of the elements of
the management measure.  This management measure is intended
to provide controls and policies that are applied during the site
planning and review process, including site selection and project
design.  The programs listed above do not provide for a planning
review process that ensures the elements of the measure are
considered.  Such a process could be integrated with construction
site erosion and sediment control.

     D.   CONSTRUCTION SITE EROSION AND SEDIMENT
     CONTROL

FINDING:  Wisconsin's program includes management measures
in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance and includes enforceable
policies and mechanisms to ensure implementation, except for
construction sites less than 5 acres that do not involve
construction of one-family and two-family dwellings.

CONDITION:  Within two years, Wisconsin will provide in its
program for implementation of the management measure on
construction sites less than 5 acres that do not involve
construction of one-family and two-family dwellings within the
6217 management area. 

RATIONALE:  Wisconsin's program includes management
measures for erosion and sediment control and enforceable
policies and mechanisms for one and 2-family dwellings under
the Uniform Dwelling Code (ILHR 21.125, Wis. Adm. Code). 
The Code requires erosion and sediment controls to prevent or
reduce erosion until the disturbed areas have been stabilized.  
Enforcement occurs through State-certified building inspectors
with the State retaining oversight authority.  Compliance can be
required through orders, fines and withholding of building
occupancy permits.  The Wisconsin Construction Site Best
Management Practice Handbook serves as a reference for the
Construction Standards contained in the Uniform Dwelling Code.

     However, the Uniform Dwelling Code is limited in scope,
and a number of construction activities are specifically excluded
or omitted from coverage under this Code.  In the program
submittal, the State noted that it is developing administrative rules
to require construction site erosion controls on all public
(commercial) building sites.   In order to achieve conformity with
the 6217(g) guidance, multi-family dwellings, industrial sites and
all other development activities such as utility developments or
repairs, etc. need to receive similar coverage.

     E.   CONSTRUCTION SITE CHEMICAL CONTROL

FINDING:  Wisconsin's program does not include management
measures in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance.  The State has
identified back-up enforceable policies and mechanisms for
implementing this management measure, but has not yet
demonstrated the ability of these authorities to ensure
implementation of throughout the 6217 management area. 

CONDITION:  Within two years Wisconsin will include in its
program management measures that are in conformity with the
6217(g) guidance.  Within one year Wisconsin will develop a
strategy (in accordance with Section XIV, page 16) to implement
this management measure throughout the 6217 management area.

RATIONALE:  Wisconsin has state authority and general
requirements concerning the regulation of hazardous and
flammable wastes through Chapter NR 600, Wisconsin
Administrative Code.  The State also has incorporated pesticide
and nutrient management measures into its Wisconsin
Construction Site Best Management Practice Handbook. 
However, aside from the nutrient and pesticide practices listed in
the BMP handbook, the State's program does not include policies
or procedures to ensure proper construction site chemical control
and proper storage and handling of toxic materials on
construction sites.

     F.   NEW and OPERATING ONSITE DISPOSAL
     SYSTEMS (OSDS)

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

RATIONALE:  Wisconsin has a well-developed OSDS program,
which has been delegated to the county level.  The program
includes sanitary permits and the enforcement authority to ensure
proper siting, construction, operation and maintenance and repair
or replacement.  Wisconsin's Private Sewage System
Replacement or Rehabilitation Grant Program (ILHR 87, Wis.
Adm. Code) provides funds to participating counties to ensure
replacement of failing systems.  ILHR 87.07 (4)(b)(4) requires
that county programs include a maintenance program that
provides for inspections at least once every three years.  NOAA
and EPA encourage Wisconsin to work with the remaining two
counties in the Lake Superior drainage basin who do not yet
participate in this program.

     In the program submittal, Wisconsin proposes that the
elements of these management measures addressing nitrogen-
limited surface waters do not apply because coastal waters in
Wisconsin are not nitrogen-limited.  Even so, the State describes
programs that address nitrogen reduction and there is ongoing
research of alternative designs.  NOAA and EPA encourage
Wisconsin to continue these efforts to ensure that significant
ground water nitrogen loadings from OSDS do not adversely
impact surface waters.

     G.   POLLUTION PREVENTION

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

RATIONALE: As described on pages 8-31 to 8-33 of the
program submittal, Wisconsin has a number of programs that
address all of the elements of the management measure.  The
State is encouraged to consider additional pollution prevention
activities for commercial entities aside from the vehicle fluids
management program.

     H.   ROADS, HIGHWAYS, AND BRIDGES

FINDING:  Wisconsin's program includes management measures
for roads, highways, and bridges in conformity with the 6217(g)
guidance except for the runoff systems management measure. 
Wisconsin's program includes enforceable policies and
mechanisms to implement the management measures. 

CONDITION:  Within three years, Wisconsin will include in its
program a management measure that is in conformity with the
6217(g) guidance for runoff systems.

RATIONALE:  The Wisconsin Department of Transportation
(WisDOT), through programs established by the Wisconsin
Environmental Policy Act (WEPA) and Chapter 85, Wisconsin
Statutes, administers a comprehensive road, highway, and bridge
development and operation and maintenance program for all state-
owned transportation projects.  City and county local roads must
meet state standards and are overseen by WisDOT under the
Local Roads Improvement Program.  Section 85.16 provides the
basis for WisDOT to develop administrative rules and forms that
are used by WisDOT to implement its programs.  As described
on pages 8-35 to 8-36 of the program submittal, WisDOT uses a
number of regulations and procedures, including the WisDOT
Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction 
(1989), to ensure that roads and highways are properly planned,
sited and developed.

     In addition to the procedures used for siting and design of
roads, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
also issues permits for all local projects over or near waters. 
WisDOT and DNR have a cooperative agreement under which
road, highway and bridge projects over or near waters are
reviewed to protect water quality, specifications are developed
and required in contracts, and sites are monitored for compliance. 
  
     Construction site erosion and sediment control is
implemented under the authority of section 85.19, Wis. Stats.,
which requires WisDOT to establish standards for control of soil
erosion related to highway and bridge construction that is funded
in whole or in part with State or Federal highway funds.  The
erosion and sediment control standards included in Chapter 10 of
the Facilities Development Manual are in conformity with the
6217(g) management measure, but planned revisions to
incorporate additional BMP information and specifications will
improve the overall program.

     The Hazardous Materials Management Manual contains
procedures which meet the management measure for construction
chemical control.  WisDOT trained safety/project engineers and
DNR Wardens are responsible for compliance and inspection of
sites.  

     WisDOT has established maintenance procedures in the
Facilities Maintenance Manual, which includes policies limiting
the application of salt, limiting the use of weed control and
requiring cross-compliance with ATCP 29, Wisc. Adm. Code,
Pesticide Use and Control and NR 80, Wis. Adm. Code, Use of
Pesticides on Land and Water Areas of the State of Wisconsin. 
As described on page 8-41 of the program submittal, WisDOT
has incorporated pollution prevention procedures into some of the
operation and maintenance procedures for roads, highways and
bridges and is evaluating any additional steps that may be
necessary.  NOAA and EPA encourage Wisconsin to further
develop pollution prevention practices that may provide additional
reduction of pollutant loadings to surface waters.

     WisDOT is evaluating the extent to which it can
implement the runoff systems management measure, but is only
beginning to implement runoff controls from existing roads,
highways and bridges under municipal stormwater permit
requirements.  It appears that municipal and county governments
can identify improvement projects under the Local Roads
Improvement Program that could include improvements to road,
highway and bridge runoff systems.

V.   MARINAS AND RECREATIONAL BOATING

FINDING:  Wisconsin's program includes management measures
in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance, except for solid waste,
fish waste, liquid material, petroleum control, and boat cleaning,
and includes enforceable policies and mechanisms to ensure
implementation, except for solid waste, fish waste, liquid
material, petroleum control, and boat cleaning.  The State has
identified a backup enforceable policy and mechanism for
implementing the solid waste, fish waste, liquid material,
petroleum control, and boat cleaning management measures but
has not yet demonstrated the ability of this authority to ensure
implementation throughout the 6217 management area.

CONDITION:  Within one year, Wisconsin will develop a
strategy (in accordance with Section XIV, page 16) to implement
the solid waste, fish waste, liquid material, petroleum control,
and boat cleaning management measures throughout the 6217
management area.  Within three years, Wisconsin will include in
its program management measures for solid waste, fish waste,
liquid material, petroleum control, and boat cleaning in
conformity with the 6217(g) guidance.

RATIONALE:  Wisconsin requires a permit under Chapter 30,
(Wis. Stats., Navigable Waters, Harbors, and Navigation), for
new and expanding marina projects.  Chapter 30 prohibits
placement of any structure or deposit, dredging, and diversion of
any water in or from navigable waters of the State, except as
permitted under statute.  Permit applications to the DNR trigger a
detailed staff review process of design and siting requirements at
new and expanding marinas for flushing, water quality, habitat
protection, shoreline stabilization, and storm water runoff (when
not part of an NPDES permit).  State regulations address fueling
station design (ILHR 10, Wis. Adm. Code) and sewage facilities
(ILHR 86, Wisc. Adm. Code).  Wisconsin is considering
legislation that would require that all marinas on the Great Lakes
have sewage pumpout facilities by January, 1999.  NOAA and
EPA encourage the State to pursue this legislation to further
reduce the potential for release of sewage to surface waters.

     Wisconsin has identified Chapter 29, Wis. Stats. as an
authority to implement the operation and maintenance measures at
marinas. Under Chapter 29, no person may throw, or deposit into
waters oil, tar, garbage, refuse, debris, etc., including sewage
from boats, or any other substance deleterious to fish and game. 
Chapter 29.29.3.c, specifies fines and penalties for violations. 
Wisconsin provides extensive outreach and training programs that
stress environmental awareness and boating safety.  The State
encourages marina owners and operators to promote boater
participation in these programs.  As described in the program
submittal, for solid waste, fish waste, liquid material, petroleum
control, and boat cleaning, specific practices to implement these
management measures are not specified.  Wisconsin may wish to
consider developing a BMP manual or other technical guidance
document that marina owners and operators can use to implement
these management measures.

VI.  HYDROMODIFICATION

FINDING:  Wisconsin's program includes management measures
in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance, except for chemical and
pollutant control at dams.  Wisconsin's program does not include a
process to identify and develop strategies to solve existing
nonpoint source problems caused by streambank and shoreline
erosion that do not come up for review under existing permit
authorities.  Wisconsin's program includes enforceable policies
and mechanisms to ensure implementation.

CONDITION:  Within three years, Wisconsin will include in its
program management measures for chemical and pollutant control
at dams in conformity with the 6217(g) guidance and dams that are
constructed on non-navigable waters.  Within three years,
Wisconsin will develop a process to identify and develop strategies
to solve nonpoint source problems caused by streambank and
shoreline erosion that do not come up for review under existing
permit authorities.

RATIONALE:  Wisconsin requires permits for projects involving
channel modifications and stabilization of shorelines or
streambanks.  Proposed channelization projects are reviewed for
their effects on water quality and habitat.  Preference is given to
vegetative practices in evaluating permits for stabilization of
shorelines and streambanks.  To improve surface water quality and
restore instream and riparian habitat in existing modified channels,
the State is preparing watershed assessments for priority
watersheds, which identify nonpoint sources causing the water
quality impairments or threats to impairments.  Landowners may
enter into cost-share agreements on a voluntary basis to install and
maintain practices designed to reduce nonpoint pollution resulting
from activities on their land.

     Subsequent to the program submittal, Wisconsin provided
additional information on how the State implements the erosion
and sediment control and chemical and pollutant control
management measures for dams.  Under Chapter 31, Wisconsin
Statutes, Wisconsin requires permits for the construction,
enlargement, operation and maintenance of dams on navigable
waterways.  As described on page 10-9 of the program submittal,
the Department of Natural Resources has "the authority to
investigate and determine all reasonable methods of construction,
operation, maintenance, and equipment for any dam so as to
conserve and protect all public rights in navigable waters."  Dams
built on non-navigable waterways do not require permits, but still
must be approved by the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources.

     In supplemental material provided by the State, Wisconsin
included a set of standard permit conditions that are used for dam
approvals.  This list of conditions includes a requirement for
development and implementation of an erosion control plan. 
However, the list of conditions does not include management
measures for chemical and pollutant control.  In addition, though
the list of conditions appears to be a standard set of requirements
for dam permit approvals, NOAA and EPA encourage Wisconsin
to further strengthen their program by codifying the standard set of
conditions in rules.

     Wisconsin implements management measures to protect
surface waters and habitat from the effects of dam operation by
issuing permits to construct, operate and maintain dams in
navigable waters, and determining whether the proposed activities
will cause environmental pollution.

     Most elements of the management measure to protect
shoreline features serving a nonpoint source abatement function are
implemented through the State's statutory oversight of shoreland
management ordinances, which establish standards for shoreline
activities related to maintaining and improving water quality. 
However, the State does not have a process to identify and develop
strategies to solve existing nonpoint source problems caused by
streambank and shoreline erosion that do not come up for review
under existing permit authorities.

VII. WETLANDS, RIPARIAN AREAS, AND
VEGETATED TREATMENT SYSTEMS

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

RATIONALE: The State requires permits for most alterations of
navigable waters, including wetlands on the beds of navigable
waters, and projects involving grading and filling within 500 feet
of navigable waters.  In addition, the State makes a determination
of compliance with functional water quality standards for any
proposed activity involving wetlands over which the State has
jurisdiction and which has the potential to affect wetlands.  This
includes all regulatory, planning, management, and financial aid
determinations involving wetlands.  Wetland characteristics
described in Wisconsin's water quality standards include nonpoint
source functions such as storage and retention of runoff, filtration
of sediment and chemical pollutants from surface waters, and
habitat for aquatic organisms.  Shoreland zoning requirements
and the priority watershed program also help to implement
management measures for activities upstream in the watershed
which can affect the nonpoint source functions in wetlands and
riparian areas.

     Management measures promoting restoration of wetlands
and riparian areas are implemented through the State's cost-share
program.  The use of these practices is promoted in priority
watersheds where the restored wetlands and riparian areas will
serve a nonpoint pollution abatement function.  The State also
utilizes opportunities in the USDA Wetlands Reserve Program,
and Agricultural Conservation Program, to promote restoration of
wetlands and riparian areas. 

     Management measures promoting the use of vegetated
treatment systems are implemented through the State's cost-share
program.  The use of these practices is promoted in priority
watersheds where the practices will serve a nonpoint pollution
abatement function.  The State also utilizes opportunities in the
USDA Agricultural Conservation Program to promote treatment
of runoff by vegetated treatment systems or by sedimentation
ponds.

VIII.     ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATION

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

RATIONALE:  Administrative coordination for the coastal
nonpoint program will be achieved through memoranda of
agreement and understanding describing specific agency roles and
coordination.  Interagency advisory committees and boards
provide consultation and serve a policy-making role.  The
agencies involved in these agreements are the DNR, the DATCP,
University of Wisconsin Extension and Cooperative Extension
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources
Conservation Service and Consolidated Farm Services Agency,
DILHR and WisDOT.

     On June 15, 1993 an interagency task force was
established to assist the development of Wisconsin's coastal
nonpoint program.  The task force operates under the
authorization of the Secretaries of Administration; Natural
Resources; Transportation; Industry, Labor, and Human
Relations; and Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 
Within the task force work groups were established to evaluate
the management measures with respect to Wisconsin's program
and produce a series of recommendations regarding the adequacy
of existing programs for management measure compliance.

     IX.  PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

FINDING:  Wisconsin's program provides opportunities for
public participation in the development and implementation of the
coastal nonpoint program.

RATIONALE: As described on pages 13-1 to 13-8 of the
program submittal, Wisconsin's public participation activities
have and will continue to provide opportunities for public
education and input regarding the coastal nonpoint program.  The
State's activities include distribution of printed materials,
publication of newsletter articles, production of teleconferences,
and briefings of State legislators, agency officials, public
advisory groups, and others.  Wisconsin also provided a 30 day
public review and comment period on the program.  NOAA and
EPA encourage Wisconsin to pursue the public participation
activities described in section 13.2 of the program submittal.

X.   TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

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

RATIONALE:  Wisconsin has proposed a variety of technical
assistance efforts for local governments and the public.  These
efforts will focus on numerous issues related to nonpoint source
pollution activities.  The assistance will be conducted by State,
local and regional entities.  Through the State's priority
watershed program, the DNR will be able to identify areas that
may require additional management measures and ensure that
technical assistance is provided in order to ensure
implementation.  Examples of technical assistance include
assistance in implementing forestry practices by DNR foresters
and assistance in the area of marinas and recreational boating by
the DNR Bureaus of Law Enforcement and Water Regulation and
Zoning.  Several State agencies and regional planning
commissions will assist with technical assistance efforts in the
area of  hydromodification.

     XI.  ADDITIONAL MANAGEMENT MEASURES

FINDING:  Wisconsin's program does not provide 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.

CONDITION:  Within one year, Wisconsin will identify a
process for determining whether additional measures are
necessary to attain or maintain water quality standards in
threatened or impaired waters.  This process will include the
identification of coastal waters that are not attaining or
maintaining water quality standards, the identification of land
uses causing or threatening water quality impairments, and
identification of critical coastal areas.

RATIONALE:  While referring to zoning regulations and
ordinances that broadly define critical coastal areas and citing
Chapter NR 115, Wisconsin Administrative Code (Shoreland
Management Program), Chapter NR 117, Wisconsin
Administrative Code (City and Village Shoreland-Wetland
Protection Program) and Chapter NR 121, Wisconsin
Administrative Code (Areawide Water Quality Management
Plans), Wisconsin's program does not describe a process for
developing additional management measures.

XII. CRITICAL COASTAL AREAS

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

RATIONALE:  As described in Chapter 12 of the program
submittal, Wisconsin proposes to use its Shoreland Management
Program (NR 115, Wis. Adm. Code) as the basis for designating
critical coastal areas.  Under NR 115, land within 1,000 feet of a
lake, pond or flowage; and 300 feet from a river or stream or to
the landward side of the flood plain, both from the ordinary high-
water mark of navigable waters, qualify as regulated shorelands. 
Chapter NR 117 also establishes minimum standards for city and
village shoreland-wetland zoning ordinances.



XIII.     MONITORING

FINDING:  Wisconsin's program does not include a plan to
assess over time the success of the management measures in
reducing pollution loads and improving water quality.

CONDITION:  Within one year, Wisconsin will include a plan
that enables the State to assess over time the extent to which
implementation of management measures is reducing pollution
loads and improving water quality.

RATIONALE:  In the program submittal, Wisconsin provides an
overview of its monitoring programs, but does not describe how
these monitoring programs and techniques will be applied to
assess over time whether the management measures are reducing
pollution loads and improving water quality.  The condition,
problem assessment, and evaluation monitoring described by the
State should be adaptable to the needs of section 6217, but
Wisconsin has not yet identified specific monitoring efforts that it
will apply to the coastal program.

     Wisconsin should include in its plan information regarding
the number and location of monitoring stations, the types and
frequency of water quality data being collected, and the analytic
approaches that will be employed in conjunction with existing
monitoring efforts to assess the success of management measures
in achieving water quality objectives.  The State should include
some inexpensive tracking of management measure
implementation in conjunction with water quality monitoring, as
such information is needed to assess the success of management
measures in achieving water quality objectives.

     XIV. STRATEGY AND EVALUATION FOR BACK-UP
     AUTHORITIES

     Within one year, Wisconsin will develop a strategy to
implement the management measures for agriculture, forestry,
new development, construction site chemical control, and marinas
(solid waste, fish waste, liquid material, petroleum control, and
boat cleaning), throughout the 6217 management area.  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,
Wisconsin will also develop and apply credible survey tools to
demonstrate the ability of the State's approach to achieve
implementation of 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.