[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]







                                       United States                    Office Of Water                  EPA 842-13-93-001
                                       Environmental Protection         (WH556F)                         March 1993
                                       Agency
               EPA                     National Estuary
                                       Prog,,ram
                                                         n
                                       Guida. ice
                                         Base Program Analysis















                   GC
                   97.8
                   .U56
                   N38
                   1993
















                                                                   Table of Contents


                                                Background             ......................................................................      I

                                                Overview of the National Estuary Program                         ..........................................1

                                                Purpose of this Document                  .......................................................................1

                                                Role of Characterization           ..........................................................................3


                                                Elements of a Base Program Analysis                                    ..........................  6

                                                Institutional Inventory            ...............................................................................6

                                                Institutional Analysis        ................................................................................ 11

                                                Base Program Analysis Report                    ............................................................... 15

                                                Public Report          .............................................................................................. 17


                                      M. Bibliography









                                                                                 Figures

                                      Figure 1         Matrix of Management Conference Information
                                                       Needs     ...................................................................................................4

                                      Figure 2         Matrix Approach for the Institutional Inventory                      .........................9

                                      Figure 3         Sample Inventory Fact Sheet                   ......................................................... 10

                                      Figure 4         Checklist for Institutional Analysis              .............................................. 12

                                      Figure 5         Question Guide for Institutional Analysis Interviews                             .............. 13

                                      Figure 6         Sample Base Program Fact Sheet                       ................................................ 14

                                      Figure 7         Sample Outline for the Base Program Analysis
                                                       Report       ................................................................................................. 16



                                                                                   Tables


                                      Table 1          Typical Sources of Estuary Problems                       ..........................................5

                                      Table 2          Typical Management Framework                       ..................................................7









                                    1. Background

                   Overview of the National Estuary Program

                        Estuaries are waterways such as bays and sounds where fresh
                   water drained from the land mixes with salt water from the ocean.
                   This blend of fresh and salt water makes estuaries biologically
                   productive, sustaining many kinds of finfish, shellfish, marshes,
                   underwater grasses, and microscopic marine life. Since estuaries have
                   economic, aesthetic, and recreational value to people, they are
                   attracting a growing number of coastal residents and commercial
                   activities. Aquatic life and scenic values are affected in many ways by
                   these growing populations.

                        Section 320 of the Clean Water Act established the National
                   Estuary Program (NEP) to identify nationally significant estuaries
                   threatened by pollution, development, or overuse and to promote the
                   preparation of comprehensive management plans to ensure their
                   ecological integrity. The program's goals are protection and
                   improvement of water quality and enhancement of living resources.
                   To reach these goals, the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental
                   Protection Agency (EPA) convenes a Management Conference for each
                   estuary in the NEP to provide a forum for consensus building and
                   problem solving among interested agencies and user groups. The
                   Management Conference studies environmental conditions and trends
                   in the estuary and their likely causes, identifies the most significant
                   problems, and develops an action-oriented Comprehensive
                   Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP) to address high-priority
                   problems.


                   Purpose of this Document

                        Section 320 establishes several purposes (see box) for NEP
                   Management Conferences, including a requirement under purposes 1-3
                   to conduct an objective, technical assessment of the state of the estuary.
                   This assessment, called characterization, is the basis for defining and
                   selecting problems to be addressed @n the CCMP. In addition, purpose 5
                   calls for Management Conferences to develop plans to coordinate
                   implementation of the CCMP by federal, state, and local agencies. Also,
                   purpose 7 requires the Conference to review all federal financial
                   assistance programs and development projects for consistency with the
                   CCMP.






                Background




                                  Purposes of the Management Conference

                  As Defined in Section 320 of the Water Quality Act Amendments of 1987


                (1) Assess trends in water quality, natural resources, and uses of the estuary

                (2) Collect, characterize, and assess data on toxics, nutrients, and natural resources
                    within the estuarine zone to identify the causes of environmental problems

                (3) Develop the relationship between the inplace loads and point and nonpoint
                    loadings of pollutants to the estuarine zone and the potential uses of the zone,
                    water quality, and natural resources

                (4) Develop a comprehensive conservation and management plan that recommends
                    priority corrective actions and compliance schedules addressing point and nonpoint
                    sources of pollution to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological
                    integrity of the estuary, ... and assure that the designated uses of the estuary are
                    protected

                (5) Develop plans for the coordinated implementation of the plan by states as well as
                    federal and local agencies participating in the conference

                (6) Monitor the effectiveness of actions taken pursuant to the plan

                (7) Review all federal financial assistance programs and federal development projects
                    ... to determine whether such assistance programs or projects would be consistent
                    with and further the purposes or objectives of the plan prepared under this section.



                       EPA has interpreted these purposes to call for a two-part
                characterization process:

                    LI A technical investigation of pollution sources and their
                       impacts on the estuary.

                    U An analysis of existing federal, state, and local resource
                       management programs.


                       This document provides guidance for NEPs on conducting a
                management characterization, or base program analysis. A
                companion document, Guidance on Technical Characterization for the
                National Estuary Program, provides guidance on characterizing the
                physical, chemical, and biological processes of the estuary and their
                relationship to environmental conditions.






                2






                                                                                                  Background



                              Role of Characterization

                                     NEP Management Conferences follow four phases in developing
                              CCMPs:

                                 Phase 1:     Convening the Management Conference and establishing a
                                              structure of committees and procedures for conducting the groups
                                              work.



                                 Phase 2:     Characterizing the estuary to determine its health, reasons for
                                              its decline, and trends for future conditions; assessing the
                                              effectiveness of existing efforts to protect the estuary; and
                                              defining the highest priority problems to be addressed in the
                                              CCMP-


                                 Phase 3:     Specifying action plans in the CCMP to address priority problems
                                              identified through characterization and public input. The CCMP
                                              should build on existing federal, state, and local programs as
                                              much as possible.

                                 Phase 4:     Monitoring the implementation of the CCMP, reviewing progress,
                                              and redirecting efforts where appropriate.

                                     These phases need not occur sequentially; as the NEP has
                              evolved, EPA has encouraged Management Conferences to proceed
                              with the four phases simultaneously as often as possible. For example,
                              early results of characterization (Phase 2) may indicate obvious
                              management actions prior to completion of the CCMP. In these cases,
                              implementation of management actions should proceed using funds
                              other than those available under Section 320. EPA has found this
                              concurrent approach so effective that the Agency will base the selection
                              of any new estuaries on their ability to streamline the NEP phases,
                              focusing on estuaries where:

                                 ï¿½ significant problem characterization is complete;

                                 ï¿½   a management framework analogous to a Management
                                     Conference already exists; and

                                 Ll  key state and local agencies have already committed to
                                     participate in and support the NEP process.

                                     But to address less obvious or more complex problems, sound
                              characterization of the estuary's environmental and management
                              status is critical for developing action plans in the CCMP. During
                              Phase 2, the Management Conference identifies and fills in
                              information necessary to define priority problems, determine areas for
                              action, and identify appropriate corrective actions. Figure 1 outlines a
                              matrix of the Management Conference's major information needs.



                                                                                                                3



















                                                                                             W
                                                                                                                 L
                                                                                                    cs 1                0  S@
                                                                                                   1.419         1@     4  to,
                                                                                                                        a                  .0  1 5@
                                                                                                                               24


                                                                                                                               74
                                   to
                                                                                                            it                                    to




                                                        o                                                                               fD


                                                                                                                                                         fp

                                                                                                                . .... . ..                                      Priority Problem 1


                                                                                                                                                                 Priority Problem 2


                                                                                                                                               tv
                                                                                                                                                                 Priority Problem 3
                                                        QQ_



                                                                                                                    to                         M
                                                                                                                    H                                            Priority Problem 4

                                         0-0-

                                                                                                                                                                 Priority Problem n
                                                                                                                                             z






                                                                                                                          Background


                                              Though essential, science cannot marshall action alone.
                                    Decision makers must also consider whether corrective actions are
                                    possible. Some problems, for example, may rate as high priorities for
                                    the CCUT because mechanisms to address them are already in place or
                                    could be readily implemented. The base program analysis, therefore,
                                    serves as a management characterization of the estuary through a
                                    process of:

                                         ï¿½ describing the framework of institutions and programs
                                              within which a CCMP will be implemented;

                                         ï¿½    assessing the effectiveness of that framework in managing
                                              and protecting the estuary's resources; and

                                         ï¿½    recommending, in conjunction with the technical
                                              characterization, issues to be addressed in the CCW based on
                                              potential management enhancements or alternatives.

                                              Together, the technical characterization and base program
                                    analysis create a receptive audience @or program findings and
                                    recommendations and help the Management Conference secure
                                    effective mechanisms for addressing priority problems and their
                                    causes.








                                                                                   Table 1

                                                                  Typical Sources of Estuary Problems
                                    Point Sources                                                       Nonpoint Sources
                                    ï¿½    Wastewater discharges from POTWs                               U     Agricultural runoff
                                    ï¿½    Direct wastewater discharges from industrial facilities        U     Urban and suburban runoff
                                    ï¿½    Combined sewer overflows                                       U     Silvicultural runoff
                                    ï¿½    Storniwater discharges                                         U     In-place sediments
                                    ï¿½    Animal feedlots                                                U     Mining runoff
                                    0    Boat discharges                                                Q     Construction site runoff
                                                                                                        U     Landfill runoff/leachate
                                    Other                                                               U     Septic system leaks and
                                    U    Shipping and mannas                                                  overflows
                                    U    Dredging                                                       U     Atmospheric deposition
                                    U    Shoreline development                                          Q     Groundwater pollutant
                                    U    Freshwater inflow                                                    transfer
                                    Q    Sea level rise
                                    U    Other












                                                                                                                                          5








                  11. Elements of a Base Program Analysis

                    Base program analysis offers decision makers a clearer picture of
             the existing institutional "infrastructure" of the estuary. It examines
             the likelihood and extent of environmental improvements that could
             be achieved based on:

                Ll existing institutional capabilities for implementing
                    preventive and corrective actions;

                Q   potential enhancements or opportunities to close gaps and
                    strengthen weaknesses; and

                Ll  value of the estuary to the public as reflected in public and
                    private resources directed to it.


                    To fully consider these factors, the Management Conference:

                ï¿½   develops an institutional inventory to identify programs
                    likely to influence conditions in the estuary;

                ï¿½   analyzes these programs for their current effectiveness; and

                Lk  recommends management enhancements or alternatives to
                    improve their ability to carry out recommendations of the
                    CC1*AP.



             Institutional Inventory

                    An institutional inventory is the first step in both the base
             program analysis and in developing a process to review federal
             financial assistance programs and development projects for consistency
             with the CCW. In light of both these needs, EPA has identified a
             number of potentially relevant federal programs. (See bibliography at
             the end of this document.) These programs are merely starting points,
             however. NEP inventories are expected to identify an array of
             available mechanisms to protect the estuary that go beyond basic
             statutes, codes, and legal authorities. This would include powerful
             influences on input and behavior such as economic incentives,
             technical assistance programs, and the impacts of public pressure
             factors not typically considered part of a management infrastructure.

                    Core elements of the inventory include program authorities,
             regulatory and resource management programs, finance mechanisms,
             incentive programs and voluntary initiatives, planning efforts, and
             public education and technical assistance. Table 2 lists typically


             6






                                                         Elenwnts of a Bass Program Analysis


                         available management tools that should be examined for their
                         relevance to each NEP.




                                                       Table 2

                                            Typical Management Framework

                           Below are programs, authorities, and activities which should be examined for
                           their potential relevance in implementing CCUPs.
                                     Legal/Management Infrastructure
                                        U organizational structure
                                        U administrative/ de6sion-making process

                                     Regulatory Programs
                                        U   laws/program authorities
                                        0   water quality
                                            - pern-dfting/enforcernent
                                            -  standard setting/criteria development
                                        ï¿½   wetlands protection/dredging/durnping
                                        ï¿½   rernediation/ernergency response
                                        ï¿½   coastal zone management plans
                                        ï¿½   public health/welfare
                                            -  shellfish sanitation standards
                                            -  septic system standards
                                            -  drinking water protection
                                        U   hydropower licensing

                                     Resource Management Programs
                                        ï¿½ agriculture
                                        ï¿½ fisheries
                                        ï¿½   habitat /wildlife
                                        ï¿½   parks/reserves

                                     Finance Mechanisms
                                        U revenue access
                                        U revenue management
                                        U   institutional arrangements
                                     Voluntary Initiatives/Incentive Programs
                                        U public/private efforts

                                     Public Education And Technical Assistance

                                     Planning Efforts
                                        U growth management/corridor plans
                                        U land use controls
                                        U regional agencies








                                                                                            7

Al





            Elements of a Base Program Analysis


            Key steps in developing the institutional inventory include:

               ï¿½ identifying activities or sources of concern for each potential
                   priority problem;

               ï¿½   identifying existing programs, controls, or other tools for
                   managing problem sources and activities;

               ï¿½   identifying standard topics to be included in the inventory;

               Q   reviewing existing programs, activities, or organizations to
                   identify those that should be added to the inventory; and

               U   describing each program based on interviews, questionnaires,
                   and other background materials.

                   The information needed for the inventory lends itself easily to a
            matrix approach. Such an approach, illustrated in Figure 2, has several
            advantages, particularly for highlighting program operating
            mechanisms and authorities.

                   A matrix approach organizes information along lines the
            Management Conference is likely to find most useful by classifying
            programs by the tools they provide and by referencing programs to
            activities or sources of concern. It presents the information
            consistently among issues, making it easier to update databases and
            reports, as well as develop public outreach tools such as fact sheets,
            newsletters, and electronic bulletin boards.

                   The matrix format is also particularly helpful in highlighting
            programs' inadvertent or unexpected impacts on each other; for
            example, large-lot zoning to preserve open space may also result in
            sprawl, habitat loss, and uncontrolled nonpoint source pollution.

                   Finally, presenting the institutional inventory in a matrix
            simplifies the production of summary fact sheets for each program.
            Figure 3 illustrates a fact sheet based on a matrix. The information in
            such fact sheets can serve as the basis for further assessment of program
            effectiveness in protecting the estuary and its resources and can be
            revised (Figure 6) to accommodate the inclusion of new information
            from the institutional analysis.
















                                                                                                                 9          51   M                         0 Cn
                                                                                                       0                                                                                                                         0
                                                                                                       0
                                                                                                       00
                                                                                                       CO
                                                                                                                 CD
                                                                                                                            0
                                                                                                                            0
                                                                                                                            0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            7,


                                                                                                                                 0                                                                                                                                                                   ki
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Cc


                                                                                                       n              '0'                                                                                                                                          Legal/Managemt
                                                                                                            Dig                                                                                                i             i                                           Infrastructur
                                                                                                       0                                                                                                                                                                    Regulatory
                                                                                                            8 Q.W4
                                                                                                            w         tr 8                                                                                                                                                    Programs
                                                                                                            R,        C@ rj ff                                                                                               6
                                                                                                                            0                                                                                                                                               Resource
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Management

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Finance
                                                                                                                                                                                                    .........                             ..........
                                                                                                                                                                                              .................

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ..........
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Mechanisms
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ..........
                                                                                                                                                                                        t4
                                                                                                                                                              QQ                  0*
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Voluntary Initia
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ............
                                                                                                                                                                            El          0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Incentive Progr
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          .............
                                                                                                                                                                      >                                             . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
                                                                                                                            (IQ           .0                                                    >
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Public Education
                                                                                                       IiQ


















                                                                                                                                                                      P.    0                                                .... .. .... ..
                                                                                                                                                                      R.   OQ     >
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Technical Assist


                                                                                                                                                                                                              ............
                                                                                                                                                                                                     0
                                                                                                                                                                                  9                                                                                 Planning Effor






             Elements of a Base Program Analysis






                                              Figure 3

                                   Sample Inventory Fact Sheet


                          Name of Program:

                          Priority Problem Addressed:

                          Implementing Organization:

                          Program Authorities (laws, ordinances, contract):

                          Program Description:

                          I    Purpose

                          II.  Functions

                               A.  Regulatory
                               B   Resource Management
                               C   Finance Mechanisms
                               D.  Voluntary Initiatives/Economic Incentives
                               E.  Public Education/rechnical Assistance
                               F . Planning

                          III. Geographic Jurisdiction

                          IV.  Resource or Activity Managed

                          V.   Funding

                               A. Source of Funding
                               B. Funding Rationale
                               C. Allocation of Funding
                               D. Proposed Budget and Actual Funding
                               E. Other Resources Available


                          VI.  Administration

                               A. Organizational Structure
                               B. Decision-Making Process
                               C. Linkages to Cooperating Agencies
                               D. Total Staff










            to






                                                                Elenwnts of a Base Program Analysis


                            Institutional Analysis

                                   After the institutional inventory has identified the programs
                            most relevant for managing the estuary, those programs are analyzed
                            further to describe their capabilities and effectiveness in relation to
                            problems likely to be addressed in the CCMP. This analysis considers
                            program funding issues as well as management strengths or gaps, and
                            identifies an array of potential management enhancements or
                            alternatives for consideration by the Management Conference. The
                            focus is on how the framework and individual programs or activities
                            within it are able to protect the estuary, not on the general effectiveness
                            of the agencies responsible for those activities.

                                   Figure 4 shows a checklist of major questions to address in the
                            institutional analysis. The checklist is intended to ensure that the
                            institutional analysis includes as much objective, quantitative
                            information as possible, including data on resources invested and
                            environmental results. This is also an opportunity to update the
                            inventory to include any significant changes in programs, authorities,
                            or resources committed to an existing activity. The checklist also seeks
                            to ensure that a variety of views are represented in the analysis. The
                            credibility of the analysis depends on incorporating the insights of both
                            vested program participants and disinterested observers. In addition to
                            appropriate members of the Management Conference, commenters
                            should include:

                                U program staff and mangers;

                                U public and private sector individuals who deal with or are
                                   subject to the program;

                                L) key legislative or political figures;

                                U  persons with a stake in the resource;

                                ï¿½  implementing agencies, particularly at the local government
                                   level; and

                                ï¿½  informed members of the public.
                                   The perspectives of these reviewers will provide more detail on
                            each activity's strong points, gaps in authority, and any other factors
                            that may hamper its effectiveness, as well as highlight areas for
                            improvement. Figure 5 is a sample question guide based on the
                            checklist. Figure 6 shows an inventory fact sheet revised to include
                            information from the interview.





             Elements of a Base Program Analysis





                                                Figure 4

                                 Checklist for Institutional Analysis


                    Ll Do existing programs already address priority problems?
                             0 laws/program authorities

                    U How effective are they?
                             ï¿½ enforcement successes
                             ï¿½  sustained budgets and staff
                             ï¿½  environmental results
                             ï¿½  public resistance to budget cuts

                    U If programs aren't effective, why not?
                             ï¿½  inadequate enforcement or limited authority to enforce
                             ï¿½  inadvertent or unanticipated impacts
                             ï¿½  inadequate staff or budget support
                             ï¿½  lack of monitoring to document results
                             ï¿½  regulatory gaps
                             ï¿½  lack of technical/scientific bases for decisions

                    ï¿½ What institutional and management barriers impede solutions?
                             ï¿½  unclear program accountability
                             ï¿½  inconsistent or conflicting program missions
                             ï¿½  pressure to address symptoms rather than causes
                             ï¿½  fragmented program responsibilities
                             ï¿½  restricted financing or revenue-raising authorities
                             ï¿½  overlapping or duplicative responsibility
                             ï¿½  lack of coordination mechanisms

                    ï¿½ What are some potential solutions?
                             ï¿½  consistent program accountability
                             ï¿½  cross-program review or coordination
                             ï¿½  increased support for enforcement
                             ï¿½  increased funding and staff allocations
                             ï¿½  technical assistance to improve implementation,
                                particularly for local governments
                             ï¿½  increased monitoring
                             ï¿½  new legislation or enabling authorities

                    U What resources (funding, staff, public support, etc.) are
                        available for addressing problems and their causes?
                             ï¿½ Aedicated funding or authority to raise or earmark funds
                             ï¿½ complementary activities of other programs
                             ï¿½ lobbying/pressure from public and organized groups
                             ï¿½ leveraged resources from other programs





            12






                                                                       Elenvents of a Base Program Analysis




                                                                    Figure 5

                                                              Question Guide for
                                                      Institutional Analysis Interviews


                                U   Has the program or activity changed since information was gathered for the
                                    institutional inventory? Information such as an agency's mandate and goals,
                                    position in its government's organization, resource trends, scope of
                                    jurisdiction and responsibilities are very important in evaluation.

                                U   What are the most successful aspects of t1iis program or activity -- things that
                                    work well and should be capitalized upon in the future?

                                L)  What innovative programs or approaches could serve as models for future
                                    activities?

                                U   Are there any gaps in existing statutory authority that limit ability to take action
                                    on one or more of the priority problems?

                                Ll  What kinds of problems has this program experienced, aside from a lack of
                                    authority? For example:
                                         ï¿½ unclear goals, responsibilities, or procedures?
                                         ï¿½ conflicting efforts by other programs?
                                         ï¿½ difficulties in coordinating with other organizations?
                                         a drastically insufficient resources?

                                U   Do other activities duplicate any of this program's efforts?

                                U   Are there complementary programs that enhance each other's effectiveness?

                                U   Are there programs that impede each other's effectiveness?

                                U   How much support does the program enjoy from the public and the legislature?
                                    What is the extent of cooperation with other agencies and the potential for
                                    leveraging?

                                U   What specific actions could improve the effectiveness of the institutional
                                    framework?
                                             What current activities should be accelerated or expanded?
                                             What new efforts should be instituted? Are new authorities or entities
                                             required?
                                             What obstacles to effectiveness must be overcome?
                                             What should be the Management Conference's action priorities?

                                U For each action suggested, what are the appropriate tasks, actors, and timing?

                                LN What are the potential barriers to redirection? How can support be generated?




                                                                                                                13






             Elements of a Base Program Analysis





                                               Figure 6

                                 Sample Base Program Fact Sheet

               This fact sheet shows an inventory fact sheet that has been updated. The new
               Section VII summarizes discussions on the effectiveness of the program and
               identifies the source of the observations.


                        Name of Program:
                        Priority Problem Addressed:
                        Implementing Organization:
                        Program Authorities (laws, ordinances, contract):
                        Program Description:
                        I.  Purpose
                        11. Functions
                            A.   Regulatory
                            B .  Resource Management
                            C .  Finance Mechanisms
                            D.   Voluntary Initiatives/Economic Incentives
                            E.   Public Education/rechnical Assistance
                            F .  Planning
                        III. Geographic Jurisdiction
                        IV. Resource or Activity Managed
                        V.  Funding
                            A. Source of Funding
                            B. Funding Rationale
                            C. Allocation of Funding
                            D. Proposed Budget and Actual Funding
                            E. Other Resources Available

                        VI. Administration
                            A. Organizational Structure
                            B. Decision-Making Process
                            C. Linkages to Cooperating Agencies
                            D. Total Staff
                        VII. Report
                             Interviewee:
                             Perceived Strengths:
                             Perceived Weaknesses:
                             Effects From or On Other Activities:
                             Suggested Improvements:





             14






                                                               Elements of a Base Program Analysis


                            Base Program Analysis Report

                                   The final base program analysis presents findings on the overall
                            management framework for the estuary based on a synthesis of the
                            institutional analysis and consideration of crosscutting issues. These
                            findings form the basis of recommended management changes,
                            including suggestions for financing mechanisms. They further suggest
                            issues that should be addressed as priorities in the CCW because of the
                            feasibility of corrective actions.
                                   Figure 7 suggests an outline for the base program analysis report
                            based on the information needs first identified by the Management
                            Conference. In this format, the report first briefly describes the nature
                            and extent of each priority problem, summarizing the conclusions of
                            the technical characterization. Then, it integrates and condenses the
                            relevant inventory and assessment fact sheets pertaining to the priority
                            problems. Finally, the report discusses gaps and management needs
                            documented in the institutional analysis.

                                   This discussion is the heart of the base program analysis and
                            identifies resource and management changes that must occur if priority
                            problems are to be successfully addressed in the CCMIP. The intent is to
                            provide clear, objectively documented conclusions that provide the
                            Management Conference with a number of options for formulating the
                            CC?VV.

                                   A useful approach to developing management options is to
                            examine case studies in areas of particular concern to the Management
                            Conference, such as the framework for managing development, or the
                            process of issuing permits. By comparing initial program goals with
                            final administrative and environmental outcomes, case studies can be
                            especially helpful in reviewing such complex issues as the adequacy of
                            scientific and technical support for decisions, the standards used in
                            decisionmaking, the consistency of decisions, and the unavoidable
                            political considerations affecting decisionmaking.

                                   Case studies are also an opportunity to provide real world
                            information on the costs of pollution controls and to review financial
                            mechanisms available for implementing them. Identifying sources of
                            funding in advance is critical to the success of the CCUP. EPA has
                            studied a number of approaches for financing resource management
                            (See bibliography at the end of this document), including pollution
                            prevention and economic and ma:rket incentives. Economic incentives
                            include tax subsidies or credits, grants, and awards, while economic
                            disincentives usually include effluent or emission fees and fines.
                            Another financing option is to establish special-purpose governments -
                            - such as regional authorities, districts, compacts, or commissions -- to
                            assist in regional projects or projects with a limited group of



                                                                                                       15






                  Elements of a Base Pirogram Analysis




                                                              Figure 7

                                                    Sample Outline         for the
                                              Base Program Analysis Report
                                          Base Program Analysis Report
                                                   For Moonlight Bay


                    1.       Executive Summary

                    11.      The Estuary and Its Problems
                             (brief overview of technical characterizationfindings)

                             A. Priority Problem #1
                                 (a problem the Management Conference has decided to address in the CCMP)

                                 1 .  The Existing Framework for Managing the Problem
                                      (from inventoryfact sheets)
                                 2.   Strengths and Weaknesses of Existing Programs
                                      0@-om assessmentfact sheets)

                                 3.   Synergism or Conflicts Among Existing Programs
                                      &om assessmentfact sheets)

                                 4.   Gaps in the Institutional Framework
                                      (kom interviews and other sources)

                                 5.   Recommended Improvement Actions
                                      &om assessmentfact sheets and other sources)
                             B. Priority Problem #2
                                 (repeat section headingsfrom Priority Problem #1)

                             N. Priority Problem #n
                                 (repeat section headingsfrom Prionty Problem #1)

                    111.     Cross-Cutting Findings and Recommendations

                    IV.      Case Studies

                    V.       Alternative Management Options

                    VI.      Appendix - Inventory and Assessment Fact Sheets
                             (optional)








                  16






                                                            Elenvents of a Base Program Analysis


                          beneficiaries or purposes. Although limited, special-purpose
                          governments typically have powers to raise and manage money to
                          finance operation, construction, and upkeep of physical plants; many
                          have authority to levy ad valorem taxes or to issue their own bonds. A
                          case study examining the effectiveness of organizations such as the
                          Cape Cod Commission or the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
                          offers a chance to apply the lessons of their experience and avoid
                          mistakes or lost opportunities.

                                 Despite the availability of such models, however, the universe
                          of financing options can be limited. Local governments in particular
                          often are restricted by state constitutions from raising revenue for
                          certain purposes. The base program analysis, thus serves as an
                          important catalyst to build financing capacity for environmental
                          quality in general, as well as for specific CCMP action plans.




                          Public Report

                                 Although components of the technical characterization and base
                          program analysis may be too lengthy and complex for broad public
                          distribution, the public will be extremely interested in the results of
                          these studies. To facilitate the dissemination of this information, the
                          Management Conference may wish to publish a State of the Estuary
                          Report aimed at audiences with no scientific or regulatory background
                          in environmental protection or natural resources management. This
                          report can summarize clearly the key findings of both characterizations,
                          describing the priority problems, the existing management framework,
                          and potential avenues for improvement. All estuary programs can
                          benefit from a professionally written and visually attractive State of the
                          Estuary Report that highlights the main findings and conclusions for
                          the general public.
















                                                                                               17









                                               Ill. Bibliography


                         Federal Financial Assistance Programs: Targeting Programs Applicable to
                         Coastal Management; Washington, DC. U.S. Environmental Protection
                         Agency; EPA 503 /8-90-001; November 1989.

                         Financing Marine and Estuarine Programs: A Guide to Resources;
                         Washington, DC; U. S. Environmental Protection Agency; EPA 503/8-
                         88-001; September 1988.

                         Financing Strong State Water Programs in New Ways: Proceedings of a
                         National Workshop; Washington, DC; U. S. Environmental Protection
                         Agency; August 1989.

                         Local Government Water Quality Finance Guidebook, Olympia,
                         Washington; prepared for Puget Sound Water Quality Authority.

                         Protecting Coastal and Wetlands Resources: A Guide for Local Governments;
                         Washington, DC; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; EPA 842-R-
                         92-002; October 1992.

                         Saving Bays and Estuaries: A Primer for Establishing and Managing Estuary
                         Programs: Appendices G, H, and I; Washington, DC; U. S.
                         Environmental Protection Agency; EPA 503/8-90-005; September 1990.

                         Small Community Financing Strategies for Environmental Facilities;
                         Environmental Financial Advisory Board, August 9, 1991.











                                                                                                                                                      CY)


         United States protection
          Environmental                                                                                                                               (0
          Agency                                                                                                                                      C.0
                                                                                                                                                      (D
            IH-556F)                                                                                                                                  Cf)
          (W             20460
          Washington, D-C-
          United States
           Oflicial Business
           penalty for Private Use
           %300