County hears NRCS outline for federal Emergency Watershed Protection help after Lee and Elk fires

The Rio Blanco County Board of Commissioners heard a detailed briefing Sept. 10 from the Natural Resources Conservation Service on how the agency’s Emergency Watershed Protection Program (EWP) could help repair erosion and flood risk caused by the Lee and Elk fires and subsequent runoff.

Todd Bolt, who identified himself as an NRCS manager for Colorado, told commissioners that “the Emergency Watershed Protection Program is set up to relieve imminent hazards to life and property caused by a watershed impairment.” He said the program’s main goals are to reduce erosion, sedimentation and the threat from future flooding to life and property.

Bolt walked commissioners through the sponsor-driven process: a unit of local government must submit a written request to the NRCS state conservationist (Clint Evans) within 60 days after access is available to damaged sites; NRCS then convenes a damage survey report team with county staff, estimates costs and requests funds from national headquarters. “The big number is we pay for 75% of the cost. The sponsor has to come up with 25%,” Bolt said, adding that NRCS prefers cash but will accept in‑kind work such as county labor or machinery if agreed in advance.

The briefing clarified other requirements: sponsors must obtain landowner permission to work on private property, secure any required permits, administer any construction contracts (subject to NRCS standards and oversight), and operate and maintain installed measures after construction is complete. Bolt also explained that NRCS technical‑assistance (TA) funds—calculated at 15% of estimated construction costs—can reimburse administrative and engineering work at 100% so the sponsor does not necessarily pay up‑front for project management.

Commissioners asked about the 25 percent local match and staffing demands. Bolt said the match can come from state or other partners and that the damage survey is a short window for initiating federal assistance; the 60‑day clock begins when it is safe to access sites. He cautioned that asking private landowners to pay the 25% share often creates administrative burdens and can complicate change orders during construction. “We had a 100 feet of this. Now when there was a change order… it just turned into a nightmare from an administrative standpoint,” he said when describing another fire recovery.

County officials discussed whether the county or a local conservation district should be the sponsor. Bolt said recent practice around Colorado has often named counties or water agencies as sponsors (examples cited included Grand County, Larimer County and the City of Greeley), though conservation districts can sponsor if they submit the request within the statutory time frame.

The board did not vote to submit a formal request at the meeting. Commissioners agreed to discuss with the conservation district and partners to identify which entity will act as sponsor and how to assemble the 25% match before any agreement is signed. County staff warned that sponsoring EWP work carries an ongoing operation-and-maintenance responsibility after installation and may require additional county staffing or contracted grant/program management.

Bolt urged an early written request to NRCS to open the damage assessment process and stressed that requesting assistance does not bind the county to accept the work or costs until the damage survey report and agreement are signed.

The discussion concluded without a formal action; commissioners asked staff to continue coordinating with NRCS, the conservation district and potential funding partners.