The EAC also believes that if Georgia addresses NPS pollution in a comprehensive andcommitted manner with significant investments <strong>of</strong> people and fiscal resources, <strong>the</strong>enhanced environmental quality across <strong>the</strong> State will fur<strong>the</strong>r enhance it as a place peoplewill want <strong>to</strong> live, work and recreate. The EAC also believes that if NPS pollution is notaddressed <strong>to</strong>day, <strong>the</strong> future costs realized in a reduction in growth and quality <strong>of</strong> life and inremediation, will far exceed investment costs being discussed <strong>to</strong>day.The EAC <strong>of</strong>fers <strong>the</strong> following recommendations <strong>to</strong> address <strong>the</strong>se findings regarding NPSpollution:• Georgia needs <strong>to</strong> execute a comprehensive strategy <strong>to</strong> reduce NPS pollution.• Significant State investment is required in moni<strong>to</strong>ring and enforcement programs.• Non-point source pollution remedies are best addressed at a watershed level.• Market-based incentives and solutions must be developed.• Georgia must become aggressive in buying and protecting land parcels that willsupport <strong>the</strong> reduction <strong>of</strong> NPS pollution.• New legislation and regulation is essential <strong>to</strong> support <strong>the</strong> reduction <strong>of</strong> NPSpollution.
FindingGeorgia needs <strong>to</strong> execute a comprehensive strategy <strong>to</strong> reduce NPS pollution.There are numerous responsible entities across Georgia addressing NPS pollution <strong>to</strong>day.DNR, EPD, Forestry, Agriculture, Soil and Water Conservation, Transportation,Community Affairs, UGA and o<strong>the</strong>rs all have significant programs contributing in somemanner <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> reduction <strong>of</strong> NPS pollution. During <strong>the</strong> February 8 th EAC meeting,representatives from 8 different <strong>of</strong>fices across State government discussed <strong>the</strong>ir ongoingprograms <strong>to</strong> address NPS pollution. Subsequently, a survey sent across State governmentidentified NPS pollution programs, employees doing NPS related work, and budgets,expenditures and contracts for NPS programs. It also identified results and work productsfor NPS-related contracts and programs, and <strong>the</strong> existence <strong>of</strong> any performance measuresfor NPS-related work. Attachment A has <strong>the</strong> complete compilation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> survey results.The survey results are significant, because <strong>the</strong>y represent <strong>the</strong> first time that <strong>the</strong>re has beenany compilation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> resources and programs addressing this important issue. Bot<strong>to</strong>mline, <strong>the</strong>re are numerous programs and people, and significant investment being made inGeorgia <strong>to</strong>ward <strong>the</strong> reduction <strong>of</strong> NPS pollution.Yet, NPS continues <strong>to</strong> grow as a water quality problem. Ei<strong>the</strong>r Georgia must invest morein <strong>the</strong> programs <strong>to</strong> counter <strong>the</strong> problem, or it has <strong>to</strong> get better results from its currentinvestments, or both. What was apparent <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> EAC was <strong>the</strong> lack <strong>of</strong> any unified andcomprehensive strategy <strong>to</strong> address <strong>the</strong> issue. State agencies <strong>to</strong>day are acting in anindependent manner attacking NPS pollution. Undoubtedly, some programs aresucceeding and o<strong>the</strong>rs are not. Some programs may have substantial resources, o<strong>the</strong>rs donot. There is no established means <strong>to</strong> synchronize efforts or cross-level resources.Georgia needs a comprehensive strategy <strong>to</strong> reduce NPS pollution. Such a strategy wouldidentify short term and long range goals for <strong>the</strong> State, and additionally identify individualperformance measures for each State agency contributing <strong>to</strong>ward <strong>the</strong> goals. A lead agencyneeds <strong>to</strong> be identified, and <strong>the</strong> EAC recommends that EPD be that agency responsible forsynchronizing <strong>the</strong> efforts across State government. Periodic reviews against performancemeasures will identify where resources are available or where more investment isrequired. The reviews will serve as a means <strong>to</strong> highlight exceptional programs andinnovation. Coupled with a comprehensive moni<strong>to</strong>ring program, <strong>the</strong> State NPS pollutionteam should also be able <strong>to</strong> focus investments on <strong>the</strong> most impaired watersheds.EAC Recommendation• Create a statewide strategy <strong>to</strong> reduce NPS Pollution and a forum represented by allState agencies involved.• Establish EPD as <strong>the</strong> leader <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> NPS Pollution Forum.• Establish performance measures for those agencies with people and resourcescommitted <strong>to</strong> NPS programs• Through <strong>the</strong> NPS Pollution Forum, review performance, moni<strong>to</strong>r progress, andfocus resources where most needed and where <strong>the</strong>y yield <strong>the</strong> greatest benefits.3
Change language