[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 214 (Thursday, November 5, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59870-59874]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-29664]



[[Page 59869]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part III





Environmental Protection Agency





_______________________________________________________________________



Revised Allotment Formulas for State and Interstate Monies Appropriated 
Under Section 106 of the Clean Water Act; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 214 / Thursday, November 5, 1998 / 
Notices  

[[Page 59870]]



ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-6184-9]


Revised Allotment Formulas for State and Interstate Monies 
Appropriated Under Section 106 of the Clean Water Act

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of revised allotment to formulas and request for 
comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces revised allotment formulas for allotting 
funds appropriated under section 106 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) to 
States and to interstate agencies for use in administering specific 
elements of Clean Water Act programs. The notice includes FY 1999 
allotments for States and interstate agencies and requests comments on 
the revised formulas for use in FY 2000 and beyond.
    Section 106 of the CWA authorizes the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA) to provide grants to States, interstate agencies, and 
Indian Tribes to administer programs for the prevention, reduction, and 
elimination of water pollution, including the development and 
implementation of ground-water protection strategies. EPA has revised 
the CWA section 106 allotment formulas, which are based on ``the extent 
of the pollution problem,'' to better reflect its current understanding 
of the significant sources of pollution nationwide.
    The revised formula will be phased in FY 1999, with no State or 
interstate agency receiving less than its FY 1998 allotment. EPA is 
seeking comment on the revised formula for use in FY 2000 and beyond.

DATES: The revised formula for FY 1999 is effective November 5, 1998.
    Comments on the revised formula for the full implementation for FY 
2000 should be in writing and must be postmarked by January 4, 1999. 
Electronic comments should be posted by January 4, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Public Comments. All public comments regarding the revised 
formula shall be submitted no later than January 4, 1999, to: Water 
Docket, W-98-28, EB 57, USEPA Headquarters, 401 M. St., S.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Crow, Office of Wastewater 
Management (4201), 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460, (202) 260-
6742, Facsimile: (202) 260-1156, e-mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CWA section 106 provides general authority 
for grants to States, Tribes, and interstate agencies to support key 
elements of clean water programs. Grants provide States, Tribes, and 
interstate agencies with critical resources for the effective 
management of water pollution control programs including water quality 
monitoring, standards development, and permit issuance. The 
Administration proposed and Congress appropriated a significant 
increase in grant funds to support these activities in FY 1999.
    The CWA directs the EPA Administrator to allocate section 106 
grants funds ``on the basis of the extent of the pollution problem.'' 
The existing section 106 formula is derived from data more than 25 
years old and is based on population data from the 1960s and an 
estimate from the early 1970s of the number of large cattle feedlots, 
industrial and municipal point sources and power plants.
    Reports of water quality conditions around the country provided by 
States under section 305(b) of the CWA indicate that the location and 
nature of the sources of water pollution has changed significantly 
since the early 1970s. In evaluating this data, EPA decided to consider 
whether an alternate formula would better comply with the statutory 
directive to allocate funds among States and interstate agencies based 
on the ``extent of the pollution problem.'' (The allotment formula for 
the Tribal Section was revised in 1998 and it is not affected by this 
action.)
    EPA organized a work group consisting of geographically-balanced 
representation from the Agency, seven States, and an interstate agency 
to review the existing formula and consider other approaches. The State 
representatives were recommended by the Environmental Council of States 
(ECOS), the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control 
Administrators (ASIWPCA), and the Ground Water Protection Council 
(GWPC). EPA posted minutes from the work group meetings, background 
data, and all written comments on an Internet website and invited all 
States and Interstate agencies to participate in the discussion via the 
website and contact with work group members.
    The work group evaluated a wide range of alternative approaches and 
ultimately developed and recommended a new allocation formula. The work 
group believed that the formula should largely be based on impairment, 
but decided not to give impairment too much weight because of 
shortcomings in data related to water quality monitoring. The work 
group therefore recommended other surrogates for ``extent of the 
pollution problem,'' including surrogates for point and nonpoint 
sources of pollution.
    Work group members were concerned about the impact of reductions in 
funding levels on clean water programs in individual States. A ``safety 
net'' was built into the new formula to provide for a gradual 
transition to adjusted funding amounts. The revised formula 
specifically provides that no State lose more than five percent 
compared with the previous year or more than a total of 20 percent 
compared with 1998. In addition, a significant increase in the section 
106 grant funds appropriated in FY 1999 ensures that no State will 
receive less section 106 funding in FY 1999 than it did in FY 1998, 
while providing additional resources to [most] States. The funding set-
aside for interstate agencies will be increased to its historic (FY 
1976) level of 2.5 percent of the total State monies appropriated under 
section 106.
    Since no State or interstate agency will receive less funding in FY 
1999 than it did in FY 1998, the revised funding formula will be 
effective November 5, 1998 for use in distributing FY 1999 section 106 
funds to State and interstate agencies. EPA is soliciting comments on 
the revised formula for use in FY 2000 and beyond. EPA is particularly 
interested in comments on the accuracy of the data bases used in 
deriving the formula and how well the components meet the statutory 
test of representing the ``extent of the pollution problem'' and 
associated workload. After reviewing the comments on the formula, EPA 
will adopt an allotment formula for FY 2000 and beyond.
    Please send an original and three copies of your comments and 
enclosures to W-98-28, Comment Clerk, Water Docket (MC 4101), USEPA, 
401 M., St. S.W. Washington, D.C., 20460. Comments must be received or 
post-marked by midnight January 4, 1999. Comments may also be submitted 
electronically to [email protected]. Electronic comments must be 
submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and 
form of encryption. Electronic comments must be identified by the 
docket number W-98-28. Comments and data will also be accepted on disks 
in WP 5.1, 6.1 or ASCII file format. Electronic comments on this notice 
may be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.


[[Page 59871]]


    Dated: October 26, 1998.
J. Charles Fox,
Assistant Administrator for Water.

Table of Contents

I. Definitions
II. Background
    A. The Existing Section 106 Allotment Formula
    B. Rationale for Formula Revision
    C. The Development Process for the Revised Section 106 Allotment 
Formulas
III. The Revised Section 106 State Allotment Formula
    A. Components
    B. Minimum Level of Funding
    C. Maximum Annual Funding Increase
    D. Set-Asides
    E. Update Cycle
IV. The Revised Section 106 Interstate Allotment Formula for FY 1999

I. Definitions

    As used herein, the following words and terms will have the meaning 
set forth below:
    (a) The term ``allotment'' means the sum reserved for each State or 
interstate agency from funds appropriated by Congress under the 
Sec. 106 Grant Program. The allotments for States and interstate 
agencies will be determined by separate formulas. However, both the 
Sec. 106 State allotment formula and the Sec. 106 interstate allotment 
formula are designed to reflect the extent of the water pollution 
problem in the several States.
    (b) The term ``State'' means a State, the District of Columbia 
(DC), the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (PR), the U.S. Virgin Islands 
(VI), Guam (GU), American Samoa (AS), and the Commonwealth of the 
Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). [CWA Sec. 502(3)]
    (c) The term ``interstate agency'' means an agency of two or more 
States established by, or pursuant to, an agreement or compact approved 
by the Congress, or any other agency of two or more States, having 
substantial powers or duties pertaining to the control of pollution as 
determined and approved by the Administrator. [CWA Sec. 502(2)]
    (d) The term ``component'' refers to one of the six factors 
selected for use in the revised Sec. 106 State allotment formula. Each 
component of the revised formula was selected based on its potential 
contribution to the extent of water pollution problems within the 
several States and to the workload of State water pollution control 
programs.
    (e) The term ``element'' refers to one of the constituent factors 
used to provide greater specificity to a component in the revised 
Sec. 106 State allotment formula. Certain components are composed of 
two or more ``elements.'' For example, the non-point source component 
of the revised Sec. 106 State allotment formula is composed of an 
agricultural element, a logging element, and an abandoned mine element.
    (f) The term ``sub-element'' refers to one of the constituent 
factors used to provide greater specificity to an element in the 
revised Sec. 106 State allotment formula. Certain elements are composed 
of two or more ``sub-elements.'' For example, the abandoned mine 
element of the non-point source component is composed of a soft-rock 
mining sub-element and a hard-rock mining sub-element.

II. Background

A. Description of the Existing Section 106 Allotment Formula

    The allotment formula currently employed to allot funds 
appropriated under CWA Sec. 106 was first used in FY 1974. The existing 
Sec. 106 allotment formula was revised in 1976, and provided for the 
implementation of a separate allotment formula for interstate agencies 
based on the level of funding each interstate agency had received in FY 
1973. The State and interstate allocation ratios were published in the 
Federal Register on April 27, 1976. These proportionate shares have 
been used to allocate Sec. 106 funds ever since.
    The existing Sec. 106 State allotment formula is based on four 
point source factors. When the existing formula was first adopted in 
1973 (for the determination of FY 1974 allotments), the understanding 
was that the number of point sources in a particular State adequately 
represented the ``extent of the pollution problem'' [as required by CWA 
Sec. 106(b)] in that State. Thus, each of the four point source factors 
selected for use in the formula enumerates potential contributors to 
point source pollution. The four selected point source factors were:

(1) number of cattle feedlots with more than 1,000 head;
(2) number of industrial dischargers;
(3) number of municipal dischargers; and
(4) number of nuclear, oil, coal, and gas power plants.

    The Agency specified that all States and interstate agencies would 
be guaranteed an allotment no less than their FY 1973 allotment for FY 
1974 and beyond. FY 1973 allotments were distributed according to 
Sec. 7 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA). Two 
components of the FWPCA Sec. 7 allotment formula, population and 
population density, drove approximately five-sixths of the FY 1974 
allotments and continue to drive the existing Sec. 106 State allotment 
formula.

B. Rationale for Formula Revision

    The existing Sec. 106 State allotment formula is based on point 
source pollution factors, and minimum levels of funding are determined 
largely by population and population density as established in the 
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, Sec. 7 allotment. However adequate 
this formula was in 1974, it does not reflect the complexity of current 
State water pollution control programs. Also, the data used in the 
formula are from the 1960's and early 1970's. In the 25 years since the 
formula was developed, much has changed.
    EPA recognized the critical need to develop a revised Sec. 106 
allotment formula which reflects the current understanding of the 
factors that contribute to water quality impairment and which utilizes 
current data. Thus, the revised formula is designed to allot funds in a 
manner which more accurately reflects the problems that currently 
confront State water pollution control programs. To achieve this 
objective, the revised Sec. 106 formula is based on six components 
which reflect the extent of water quality impairment and associated 
potential workload in determining State allotments.

C. The Development Process for the Revised Section 106 Allotment 
Formulas

    An EPA/State Work Group examined ways in which the existing 
Sec. 106 State allotment formula could be updated and made responsive 
to the workload associated with water quality impairment. A separate 
Interstate Work Group, composed of EPA personnel and representatives 
from six interstate agencies, participated in the development of the 
revised Sec. 106 interstate allotment formula.
    Work Group recommendations contributed heavily to the development 
of the revised Sec. 106 allotment formulas. First, to ensure that 
monies were directed to the areas where the greatest water quality 
problems and the greatest workload exists, weighting factors that 
reflected the individual contribution of the six different components 
in the revised Sec. 106 State allotment formula were developed. Second, 
modulating procedures [e.g., a base level of funding, a maximum 
increase in annual funding, etc.] were built into both the revised 
Sec. 106 State and interstate allotment formulas to prevent disruption 
of State and interstate programs. Third, a five-year update cycle was 
implemented in each revised Sec. 106 allotment formula to ensure that 
supporting data for the

[[Page 59872]]

formulas would be updated regularly. The weights, modulating 
procedures, and the update cycle for the revised Sec. 106 allotment 
formulas are discussed more fully in sections III and IV of this 
notice.

III. The Revised Section 106 State Allotment Formula

A. Components

    The revised Sec. 106 State allotment formula, as defined in this 
notice, is based on six components that were selected to more 
accurately reflect the extent of the water pollution control problems 
in the United States. These components reflect a shift in emphasis from 
point source pollution and population data to an emphasis on water 
quality impairment and the associated workload. The six components 
selected for use in the revised Sec. 106 State allotment formula were:

(1) surface water area;
(2) ground water use;
(3) water quality impairment;
(4) point sources;
(5) non-point sources; and
(6) population of urbanized areas.
    A primary reason for the development and adoption of a revised 
Sec. 106 State allotment formula was the need to improve the quality 
and the consistency of the data used for allocating Sec. 106 funds. The 
selected components for the revised Sec. 106 formula are presented in 
Table 1 (below) with their associated elements, sub-elements, and 
supporting data sources.1 Data sources for the components 
were selected on the basis of data availability, currency, quality, 
national consistency, and reliability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Note that in the future additional elements and sub-elements 
may be considered for inclusion in the revised Sec. 106 allotment 
formula if they are deemed appropriate and if they are reflective of 
the extent of water quality impairment or State workload.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA invites comments on the revised formula prior to issuing FY2000 
planning targets in early 1999. Comments will be accepted until January 
4, 1999.

                                         Table 1.--Components of the Revised Section 106 State Allotment Formula
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Formula component                        Element                      Sub-element                              Data source
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Surface Water Area.................  ..............................  .............................  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the
                                                                                                        Census, Statistical Abstract of the United
                                                                                                        States.
2. Ground Water Use...................  (a) Non-agricultural            .............................  U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological
                                         withdrawals.                                                   Survey, Preliminary Estimates of Water Use in
                                                                                                        the United States.
                                        (b) Population served by CWSs   .............................  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
                                         that use GW for the majority                                   Water, Safe Drinking Water Information System.
                                         of their source water.
3. Water Quality Impairment...........  (a) Impaired rivers and         .............................  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
                                         streams (miles).                                               Water, National Water Quality Inventory (based
                                                                                                        on Sec.  305(b) reports submitted by the
                                                                                                        States).
                                        (b) Impaired lakes, ponds, and
                                         reservoirs (acres)
                                        (c) Impaired estuaries (square
                                         miles)
                                        (d) Impaired wetlands (acres)
                                        (e) Impaired ocean shoreline
                                         (miles)
                                        (f) Impaired Great Lake
                                         shoreline (miles)
4. Potential Point Sources............  (a) Agriculture (total animal   .............................  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the
                                         units).                                                        Census, Census of Agriculture.
                                        (b) Industrial................  (i) Manufacturers............  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the
                                                                                                        Census, Economic Census, Census of Manufactures.
                                                                        (ii) Mining operations.......  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the
                                                                                                        Census, Economic Census, Census of Mineral
                                                                                                        Industries.
                                                                        (iii) Power plants...........  U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Coal,
                                                                                                        Nuclear, Electric, and Alternate Fuels,
                                                                                                        Inventory of Power Plants in the U.S.
                                        (c) Municipal dischargers.....  .............................  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
                                                                                                        Water, Wastewater Facilities Database.
5. Potential Non-Point Sources........  (a) Agriculture...............  .............................  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the
                                                                                                        Census, Census of Agriculture.
                                        (b) Logging...................  .............................  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the
                                                                                                        Census, Economic Census, Census of Manufactures.
                                        (c) Abandoned mines...........  (i) Abandoned soft-rock        U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of
                                                                         (coal) mining operations.      Surface Mining, Abandoned Mine Land Inventory
                                                                                                        System.
                                                                        (ii) Abandoned hard-rock       U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines,
                                                                         mining operations.             Minerals Availability System/Mineral Inventory
                                                                                                        Location System.
6. Population of Urbanized Area.......  ..............................  .............................  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the
                                                                                                        Census, Census of Population and Housing.*
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The population living in urban areas (Census designated places with 2,500 or more residents) rather than population living in urbanized areas (one or
  more Census designated places and the associated urban fringe that together have 50,000 or more residents) will be used for PR and the Insular Areas
  (VI, AS, GU, and CNMI).


[[Page 59873]]

    To account for the fact that not all of the selected formula 
components contribute equally to the extent of the water pollution 
problem within the States, and to address concerns regarding the 
current consistency of some of the new data sources, each formula 
component will be weighted individually. Component weights will be 
phased-in over the course of the first and second five-year 
implementation periods, according to the schedule presented in Table 2 
(below).

       Table 2.--Component Weights in the Revised Section 106 State Allotment Formula--FY 1999 and Beyond
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      FY 1999         FY 2001        FY 2004+
                            Component                                (percent)       (percent)       (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface Water Area..............................................              13              13              12
Ground Water Use................................................              11              12              12
Impairment......................................................              13              25              35
Potential Point Sources.........................................              25              17              13
Potential Non-Point Sources.....................................              18              15              13
Population of Urbanized Area....................................              20              18              15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             100             100             100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The increase in the weight of the impairment component will be 
phased in over time to allow for improvement in the consistency of its 
data source, the CWA Sec. 305(b) report. This gradual transition will 
also provide greater fiscal stability for State and interstate water 
pollution control programs.

B. Minimum Level of Funding

    Under the revised Sec. 106 State allotment formula, all States will 
be allotted a minimum level of funding. In FY 1999, the minimum level 
of funding for each State will be the larger of: (1) the guaranteed 
base level of funding for which the State qualifies (defined below); or 
(2) the FY 1998 Sec. 106 allotment for that State. This second 
provision allows for stability during the transition to the revised 
Sec. 106 State allotment formula. In FY 2000 and all future years, the 
minimum level of funding for a specific State will be the largest of: 
(1) the guaranteed base level of funding for which the State qualifies; 
(2) 95 percent of the State's Sec. 106 allotment from the previous 
fiscal year; or (3) 80 percent of the State's FY 1998 Sec. 106 
allotment. By limiting the maximum annual reduction in a State 
allotment to 5 percent of the previous fiscal year's allotment and by 
limiting the maximum total reduction to 20 percent of the State's FY 
1998 Sec. 106 allotment, the revised formula allows for gradual funding 
adjustments. These modulating procedures will serve to ease the burden 
that unrestricted allotment reductions might otherwise create.
    The base level of funding for the fifty States, DC, PR, VI, and GU 
will be set at $500,000 for FY 1999, while the base level of funding 
for AS and CNMI will be set at $250,000 for FY 1999. The base level of 
funding is designed to ensure a minimum level of funding for the 
operation of a water quality pollution control program. Beginning in FY 
2000, to protect against erosion in the real value of the base level of 
funding due to inflation, annual adjustments will be made to the base 
level of funding as determined by changes to the Consumer Price Index.

C. Maximum Annual Funding Increase

    All States will be subject to a cap on the annual increase in their 
Sec. 106 allotment. The maximum funding level any State can receive 
will be 150 percent of that State's Sec. 106 allotment from the 
previous fiscal year.2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Note that the minimum level of funding described in section 
III.B. takes precedence over the maximum annual funding increase. 
For example, since the FY 1998 allotment for CNMI ($150,251) 
represents less than two-thirds of its Base level of funding for FY 
1999 ($250,000), CNMI will realize a 66 percent increase in its 
allotment for FY 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Set-Asides

    A portion of the Sec. 106 appropriation available to States will 
continue to be set aside for interstate agencies. For FY 1999 and every 
year thereafter, the size of this set-aside will be set at its historic 
(FY 1976) level of 2.6 percent of the total Sec. 106 State 
appropriation.
    Funds will be distributed to interstate agencies on the basis of a 
separate allotment formula. The particulars of the revised Sec. 106 
interstate allotment formula are described in detail in section IV of 
this notice.
    EPA will provide a single allotment to each State under the 
Sec. 106 Grant Program rather than separate allotments for ground water 
and surface water programs. Since this grant program provides one of 
the few sources of federal funds for State ground water protection 
efforts that, in turn, are critical to the maintenance of water 
quality, EPA strongly advises States to target at least 15 percent of 
their Sec. 106 allotment for ground water protection programs and 
activities. Should the State agency responsible for the administration 
of the Sec. 106 grant not include the State's ground water protection 
program, the appropriate agency should be immediately informed of the 
amount of funds targeted and available for ground water activities.

E. Update Cycle

    The data used in the revised Sec. 106 State allotment formula will 
be periodically updated. The first update will impact allotments for FY 
2001, and will consist of updating the data used to support the 
impairment component of the revised formula. These data will be updated 
based on 1998 CWA Sec. 305(b) reports. After this initial update, the 
data used to support all six components of the revised Sec. 106 State 
allotment formula will be updated in 2003 (for use in the determination 
of FY 2004 allotments). Thereafter, all data will be updated every five 
years (i.e., in FY 2008 for FY 2009 allotments, in FY 2013 for FY 2014 
allotments, etc.).
    The base level of funding for all States will be updated annually 
to account for inflation based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI).

IV. The Revised Section 106 Interstate Allotment Formula for FY 
1999

    The interstate set-aside will be allocated to interstate agencies 
for FY 1999 and all fiscal years thereafter according to the formula 
defined below. The revised Sec. 106 interstate allotment formula will 
consist of two parts: (1) a base portion, and (2) a variable portion.
    The base portion of the formula ensures that each interstate agency 
will receive a minimum base level of funding equal to $125,000, to 
provide for coordination activities among its member States. Should the 
size of the interstate set-aside decrease due to a reduction in the 
total Sec. 106

[[Page 59874]]

appropriation, the minimum level of funding may be modified.
    Funds not allocated by the base portion of the revised Sec. 106 
interstate allotment formula will be allocated based on the sum of 
State allocation ratios from the revised Sec. 106 State allotment 
formula for the signatory States in the Compact of each eligible 
interstate agency. The allocation ratios for those States involved in 
compacts with more than one eligible interstate agency will be 
distributed among those interstate agencies based on the percentage of 
the State's territory that is situated within the drainage basin or 
watershed area covered by each compact.

Revised Section 106 Allotments for States, DC, PR, and the Insular Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Entity                               FY 1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connecticut................................................   $1,241,717
Maine......................................................      952,282
Massachusetts..............................................    1,877,408
New Hampshire..............................................      659,035
Rhode Island...............................................      888,532
Vermont....................................................      518,786
                                                            ------------
    Region One.............................................    6,137,760
                                                            ============
New Jersey.................................................    2,145,811
New York...................................................    4,293,034
Puerto Rico................................................    1,263,308
Virgin Islands.............................................      599,364
                                                            ------------
    Region Two.............................................    8,301,517
                                                            ============
Delaware...................................................      761,034
D.C........................................................      684,123
Maryland...................................................    1,620,935
Pennsylvania...............................................    3,487,826
Virginia...................................................    1,990,420
West Virginia..............................................    1,115,516
                                                            ------------
    Region Three...........................................    9,659,854
                                                            ============
Alabama....................................................    2,103,431
Florida....................................................    3,028,010
Georgia....................................................    2,470,720
Kentucky...................................................    1,202,400
Mississippi................................................    1,799,009
North Carolina.............................................    3,226,738
South Carolina.............................................    1,594,878
Tennessee..................................................    1,467,740
                                                            ------------
    Region Four............................................   16,892,926
                                                            ============
Illinois...................................................    3,125,087
Indiana....................................................    1,665,511
Michigan...................................................    4,136,782
Minnesota..................................................    2,265,180
Ohio.......................................................    2,979,273
Wisconsin..................................................    3,221,840
                                                            ------------
    Region Five............................................   17,393,673
                                                            ============
 Arkansas..................................................    1,241,263
Louisiana..................................................    2,032,092
New Mexico.................................................      873,803
Oklahoma...................................................    1,428,423
Texas......................................................    4,341,770
                                                            ------------
    Region Six.............................................    9,917,351
                                                            ============
Iowa.......................................................    1,756,629
Kansas.....................................................    1,351,923
Missouri...................................................    2,080,385
Nebraska...................................................    1,423,225
                                                            ------------
    Region Seven...........................................    6,612,162
                                                            ============
Colorado...................................................    1,237,173
Montana....................................................      988,553
North Dakota...............................................      720,804
South Dakota...............................................      739,929
Utah.......................................................      912,053
Wyoming....................................................      586,931
                                                            ------------
    Region Eight...........................................    5,185,443
                                                            ============
Arizona....................................................    1,105,960
California.................................................    6,334,978
Hawaii.....................................................      858,690
Nevada.....................................................      552,084
American Samoa.............................................      250,000
Guam.......................................................      613,490
Northern Marianas..........................................      250,000
                                                            ------------
    Region Nine............................................    9,965,202
                                                            ============
Alaska.....................................................      586,931
Idaho......................................................      896,671
Oregon.....................................................    1,558,054
Washington.................................................    2,476,920
                                                            ------------
    Region Ten.............................................    5,518,576
                                                            ============
    U.S. Total.............................................   95,584,464
------------------------------------------------------------------------


         Revised Section 106 Allotments for Interstate Agencies
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Entity                               FY 1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DRBC....................................................        $332,206
ICPRB...................................................         354,506
ISC.....................................................         380,306
NEIWPCC.................................................         469,406
ORSANCO.................................................         681,006
SRBC....................................................         334,106
                                                         ---------------
    Total Interstate Set-Aside..........................       2,551,536
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 98-29664 Filed 11-4-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-60-P