[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 86 (Friday, May 3, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22415-22421]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-11074]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers


Request for Comments on the Draft Estuary Habitat Restoration 
Strategy Prepared by the Estuary Habitat Restoration Council

AGENCY: Department of the Army, Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Corps of Engineers on behalf of the interagency Estuary 
Habitat Restoration Council is soliciting comments on the draft 
``Estuary Habitat Restoration Strategy.''

DATES: Submit comments on or before June 17, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Estuary Habitat Restoration Strategy, U.S. 
Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, 7701 Telegraph 
Road, Casey Building, Alexandria, Virginia, 22315-3868. See 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic filing address.

FOR FURTHER ASSISTANCE CONTACT:  Ms. Ellen Cummings, Headquarters, U.S. 
Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC 20314-1000, (202) 761-4558; or 
Ms. Cynthia Garman-Squier, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the 
Army (Civil Works), Washington, DC, (703) 695-6791.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Estuary Restoration Act of 2000, Title I 
of Public Law 106-457 has four purposes: (1) Promotion of estuary 
habitat restoration; (2) development of a national strategy for 
creating and maintaining effective estuary habitat restoration 
partnerships; (3) provision of Federal assistance for estuary habitat 
restoration projects; and (4) development and enhancement of monitoring 
and research capabilities to ensure that estuary habitat restoration 
efforts are based on sound scientific understanding and innovative 
technologies. The Act authorizes an estuary habitat restoration program 
for implementation of Federal assistance through cost-shared estuary 
habitat restoration projects. The Act authorizes funds to be 
appropriated to Army for this program. Funds were also authorized for 
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to establish a 
database of restoration project information and to develop monitoring 
data standards. The Estuary Habitat Restoration Council consisting of 
representatives from Department of the Army, National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, United 
States Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Department of Agriculture was 
established to oversee these activities.
    The Council is charged to develop an estuary habitat restoration 
strategy designed to ensure a comprehensive approach to maximize 
benefits and foster coordination of Federal and non-Federal activities. 
The goal of the strategy is restoration of 1,000,000 acres of estuary 
habitat by the year 2010. Elements of the draft strategy are discussed 
in section 106(d) of the Act. The intent of this notice is to obtain 
comments on the draft strategy prepared by the Estuary Habitat 
Restoration Council in accordance with these requirements.
    While the authorized estuary habitat restoration program is 
discussed in this draft strategy, the implementation process for 
solicitation and review of project proposals and evaluation criteria 
will be the subject of a separate notice at a later date. The strategy 
is also not intended to be the forum for a detailed discussion of the 
monitoring data standards, but does include a discussion of the need 
for monitoring.
    The Council is looking for comments on the entire strategy, 
including any omissions. The following questions have been developed to 
indicate areas where additional discussion may be beneficial. However, 
these questions are not intended to limit the nature and content of the 
comments you may wish to provide.
    a. Introduction, Paragraph 3--Calls for supporting restoration 
activities that create self-sustaining systems integrated into the 
surrounding landscapes. What criteria should the Council use in 
evaluating whether a project is ``self-sustaining''?
    b. Introduction, Paragraph 5--Interprets the definition of 
``estuary'' that is set forth in the Act. Is the definition of 
``estuary'' contained in this paragraph consistent with how you would 
define estuary? If not, why not? What definition would you propose 
using, consistent with the intent of the Act? Should the Council 
provide more guidance on defining the boundaries of an estuary? If so, 
what would you propose?
    c. Introduction, Paragraph 6--For measuring progress toward the one 
million acre goal, ``restored area'' is considered to be the area where 
monitoring can document restored function. Is this a realistic 
measurement of progress? What other means would you suggest be used to 
measure progress toward the goal and why?
    d. Trends of Estuary Habitats, Paragraph 3--States that the Council 
will develop a habitat classification system based on Cowardin et al. 
to address habitat trends as required in the Act. The Federal 
Geographic Data Committee has adopted Cowardin as the Federal standard 
for wetland mapping, monitoring and data reporting. Does Cowardin 
address all components of estuary habitat for which status and trends 
data should be developed and for which monitoring data should be 
tracked? If not, what components are missing? What classification 
systems are currently being used by States and others who track status 
and trends information?
    e. Trends of Estuary Habitats, Paragraph 6--Directs the Council, 
within two years, to review estuary habitat trends data and identify 
data gaps. What information should be included in the Council's review 
of trends data? What are the most significant gaps in habitat trends 
data, either geographically or in terms of habitat types, which should 
be addressed by the Council?

[[Page 22416]]

    f. Trends of Estuary Habitats, Paragraph 6--States that trends data 
collected by the Council will be used to establish restoration 
priorities. Should the Council use trends data to establish national 
and regional restoration priorities? If yes, how should the data be 
used and which types of information are most critical? If no, how 
should national and regional priorities be identified?
    g. Trends of Estuary Habitats, Paragraph 7--Encourages 
organizations preparing or updating estuary management and restoration 
plans to incorporate available trends data and use it to plan 
priorities. Are there good examples of trends data collection by local 
or regional groups?
    h. Estuary Management or Habitat Restoration Plans, Paragraphs 2-
5--Describes seven elements that are typically found in effective 
estuary habitat restoration plans. Should there be other minimum 
requirements used to identify effective restoration plans? If so, what 
do you think they are?
    i. Ecosystem Level Approach, Paragraph 5--Directs the Council in 
its review of project proposals to support projects developed in an 
ecosystem context with multiple benefits. What do you believe would 
indicate that an ecosystem approach has been used in project planning?
    j. Partnerships, Paragraph 3--Calls for collaboration among 
government and non-government entities involved in habitat restoration. 
How can collaboration among agencies, private organizations and 
individuals be improved to ensure that all interested parties are 
involved and in a position to contribute to the restoration effort?
    k. Partnerships, Paragraph 4--Encourages the use of awards to 
encourage restoration partnerships and the involvement of volunteers. 
Would a national process be beneficial for granting awards or should 
the process be developed locally by project partners? Should such a 
process be run by a Federal agency?
    l. Partnerships, Paragraph 7--Encourages Council members and 
private partners to use web sites to provide the public with 
information on funding for estuary restoration projects. Should a 
Federal agency develop a national Web site that would act as a 
clearinghouse to other Web sites?
    m. Habitat Restoration Program, Paragraph 2--Describes habitat 
restoration activities that are eligible for funding under the Act. Are 
the categories of included activities (1) sufficient to achieve the 
Act's goal of restoring one 4 million acres of estuary habitat by 2010 
and (2) inclusive of all critical restoration activities that are not 
specifically excluded by the Act? If not, which additional activities 
should be considered?
    n. Habitat Restoration Program, Paragraph 4--The Council and the 
Secretary may consider additional factors, other than those set forth 
in the Act, for project evaluation, ranking, and selection. What 
additional factors should the Secretary and the Council consider?
    o. Habitat Restoration Program, Paragraph 6--Defines a small 
project as generally one with a Federal cost of $250,000 or less and 
that manipulates 50 acres or less. Is this definition adequate for 
balancing small and large projects in the program?
    p. Ensuring Success, Paragraph 5--Encourages local, State and 
regional groups to monitor on an estuary or regional scale. How can 
restoration success be documented over estuary or regional scales 
(especially considering funding constraints and the level of effort 
that might be required)?
    q. Ensuring Success, Paragraph 7--Directs NOAA to establish 
standard data formats for project monitoring and to maintain a database 
on restoration projects. What existing monitoring standards and 
guidance are available that should be considered in developing 
monitoring requirements under the Act? What existing restoration 5 
project databases already exist that could serve as a model for the 
database to be created for the Estuary Restoration Act?
    Electronic Filing Address. You may submit comments by e-mail to: 
[email protected]. Comments should be in one of the following 
formats: Word, WordPerfect, or ASCII. The subject line for submission 
of comments should begin with ``Estuary Habitat Restoration Strategy 
comments from [insert name of agency, organization, or individual].''

Draft Estuary Habitat Restoration Strategy

Introduction

    This draft Estuary Habitat Restoration Strategy (Strategy) has been 
developed in accordance with the requirements of the Estuary 
Restoration Act of 2000, Title I of Public Law 106-457 (the Act). The 
purpose of the Strategy is to ensure a comprehensive approach to 
maximize benefits derived from estuary habitat restoration projects, 
provide incentives for the creation of new partnerships between the 
public and private sectors, and foster coordination of Federal and non-
Federal activities related to restoration of estuary habitat. The Act 
also provides Federal assistance, promotes efficient financing of 
technically sound and cost-effective estuary habitat restoration 
projects, and encourages the use of innovative technologies.
    Congress enacted the Estuary Restoration Act to establish a 
collaborative process for addressing the pressures facing our Nation's 
estuaries. As part of the Act, an inter-agency Estuary Habitat 
Restoration Council (Council) was established to develop and submit the 
Strategy to Congress, solicit, review, and evaluate project proposals, 
and recommend projects to the Secretary of the Army. Much of the 
Council's work will involve soliciting and funding on-the-ground 
habitat restoration projects. The Strategy, however, is broader than 
site-specific restoration. It encourages coordinating, integrating, and 
capitalizing upon the broad spectrum of ongoing estuary restoration 
efforts throughout the country. Its goal is to bring together the 
collective expertise, technical, and financial resources of the Federal 
community, the practical experience of State, local and nongovernmental 
groups, and the vision of the corporate world to restore the integrity 
of our Nation's estuarine systems. The Federal investment will be used 
to leverage the financial and technical contribution of non-Federal 
partners, providing sound ecological and economic returns.
    The Strategy calls for restoration activities that improve degraded 
estuaries or estuary habitat, or those that create estuary habitat with 
the goal of attaining a self-sustaining system integrated into the 
surrounding landscape. Restoration projects must improve or reestablish 
function to degraded or destroyed habitats, and be located to recapture 
regional ecological integrity. Successful restoration will protect 
native fish and wildlife in estuaries and their watersheds, while 
providing multiple additional benefits such as improved surface and 
ground water quality and quantity, flood control, outdoor recreation, 
and other services, valued by local stakeholders and consistent with 
the re-establishment and maintenance of healthy ecosystems.
    The goal of the Strategy is to restore one million acres of estuary 
habitat by 2010. The Council will organize and support a task force to 
recommend methods for tracking progress toward the million-acre goal, 
including defining a baseline timeframe for comparison. The task force 
will consider regional and local perspectives on quantifying project 
successes. Subsequently, the Council will produce periodic reports on 
progress toward meeting the Strategy's million-acre goal, as well as 
other habitat trends.

[[Page 22417]]

    The Act defines estuary as ``a part of a river or stream or other 
body of water that has an unimpaired connection with the open sea and 
where the sea water is measurably diluted with fresh water from land 
drainage.'' Estuary also includes the ``* * * near coastal waters and 
wetlands of the Great Lakes that are similar in form and function to 
estuaries. * * *'' For the purposes of this Strategy, estuary is 
considered to extend from the head of tide to the boundary with the 
open sea (to downstream terminus features or structures such as barrier 
islands, reefs, sand bars, mud flats, or headlands in close proximity 
to the connection with the open sea). In the Great Lakes, riparian and 
nearshore areas will be considered to be estuaries. Estuary habitat 
includes the estuary and its associated ecosystems, such as: salt, 
brackish, and fresh water coastal marshes, coastal forested wetlands 
and other coastal wetlands, maritime forests, coastal grasslands, tidal 
flats, natural shoreline areas, shellfish beds, sea grass meadows, kelp 
beds, river deltas, and river and stream corridors under tidal 
influence.
    Some restoration projects can easily measure success in terms of 
acreage (for example, projects that plant vegetation), but many cannot 
(for example, projects that alter hydrology). By manipulating a 
relatively small area, the function of a much larger habitat area can 
be improved. For the purposes of this Strategy, therefore, the restored 
area will be defined as that area over which appropriate monitoring can 
document restored function.
    The Estuary Habitat Restoration Council developed this Strategy 
building on work done by Council member agencies, environmental 
professionals, and private conservation organizations, including 
Restore America's Estuaries (RAE). In consultation with restoration 
professionals, scientists, academics, and nonprofit organizations, RAE 
has developed A National Strategy for Coastal and Estuarine Habitat 
Restoration. The document provides a framework for restoring function 
to estuarine and coastal habitats, which can aid in focusing 
restoration efforts to reach this Strategy's million-acre goal.
    This Strategy is dynamic. It will evolve over time according to 
information collected through monitoring and research programs and 
feedback from restoration practitioners, scientists, and public 
agencies and private organizations. Reaching the one million acre goal 
will require further close coordination among the Federal partners, and 
state, local and private partners as habitat priorities, project 
efficiencies, and funding sources are identified.

Trends of Estuarine Habitats [This section covers 106(d)(4) and (5)]

    Section 106(d) of the Estuaries and Clean Water Act of 2000 
requires that the National Strategy include guidance on addressing 
trends of estuarine habitats. For each estuarine habitat type, the 
Strategy addresses historic losses, estimated current rate of loss, the 
extent of the threat of future loss or degradation, and a measurement 
of the rate of change.
    Understanding trends as well as the structure, function and extent 
of various estuary habitats is key to an effective and efficient 
restoration program. Trends data provide a chronological and geographic 
picture of change in habitat types, thereby helping managers to 
recognize ecological stability or stress. They help to identify 
existing or potential habitat threats so that early action can be taken 
to avoid or rectify them. This information can be used to establish a 
baseline from which to quantify restoration success. By identifying 
both healthy and impaired ecosystems, trends information can help 
managers to target habitat restoration efforts in a cost-effective 
manner. For these reasons this Strategy will promote the development 
and use of trends data in designing restoration programs for estuary 
habitats.
    Council member agencies use different terminology to describe 
estuarine habitat. The Council will use a classification system based 
on Cowardin et al. (1979). The Cowardin classification system is the 
national standard for wetland mapping, monitoring and data reporting as 
determined by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (http://www.fgdc.gov/). Examples of the relevant classes are: estuarine 
subtidal, including open water, bay bottoms, and reefs; estuarine 
intertidal emergents, such as salt marsh; estuarine intertidal 
forested/shrub, such as mangroves; estuarine intertidal unconsolidated 
shore, such as beaches, bars and mudflats; and estuarine aquatic bed, 
such as submerged or floating estuarine vegetation. Freshwater habitat 
categories to be included because they are estuarine-associated 
ecosystems or are found in the Great Lakes include: palustrine forested 
wetlands, such as forest swamps or riparian zones; palustrine shrub 
wetlands; and palustrine emergents, including inland marshes and wet 
meadows.
    For purposes of this Strategy, estuary habitats will include the 
complex of physical and hydrologic features and living organisms within 
estuaries and their associated ecosystems, including salt and fresh 
water coastal marshes, coastal forested wetlands and other coastal 
wetlands, maritime forests, coastal grasslands, tidal flats, natural 
shoreline areas, shellfish beds, sea grass meadows, kelp bed, river 
deltas, and river and stream banks under tidal influence.
    There are several studies that document estuary habitat trends on 
both a national and regional basis. For instance, Dahl (2000) 
summarized the status and trends of wetlands in the conterminous United 
States from 1986-1997. Three categories of estuarine and marine 
wetlands were included and together these comprise about five percent 
(5.3 million acres) of the total wetland acreage in the conterminous 
United States. During the study period, a net loss of 10,400 acres of 
estuarine and marine wetlands occurred. Filling or draining for urban 
and rural development accounted for 43 percent of estuarine and marine 
wetland losses, while saltwater intrusion accounted for an additional 
12 percent of the loss.
    Within two years, the Council will review information available for 
estuary habitats concerning historic losses, current rates of loss, the 
extent of the threat of future loss or degradation, and measures of the 
rate of change, and identify gaps in trends information that can be 
addressed by the Council members and/or its partners. Data collected 
will be used to identify regional and national restoration priorities 
based on this information.
    Organizations and agencies preparing or updating estuary management 
or restoration plans should incorporate available information on 
estuary trends in their documents and consider this data when 
establishing project priorities. Among the sources of information to 
consult are historic maps and navigation charts, State and local 
agencies, available aerial photography and other remote sensing data, 
Federal agencies, such as the members of the Estuary Habitat 
Restoration Council and the United States Geological Survey, reports on 
Federal projects in estuaries, and universities conducting research in 
local estuaries.
    It is also important to collect information relating to the causes 
of change in estuary habitat types, distribution, and quantity. This 
will help in defining the types of projects that may be needed, setting 
realistic goals, and influencing the design. For example, if the 
primary limiting factor is water quality and the source of the problem 
is upstream, success of any

[[Page 22418]]

estuary restoration project might be limited until the upstream problem 
is resolved.
    Project proposals submitted to the Council for potential funding 
should contain information related to the trends for estuary habitat 
types in the project area and explain how this information was 
considered when developing the project proposal. The Council will give 
priority to projects that clearly address historic losses in areas 
where steps are being taken to address the causes of degradation and 
where there is a reasonable likelihood of success in the foreseeable 
future.

Estuary Management or Habitat Restoration Plans [This section covers 
106(d)(2)]

    This Strategy will be implemented in a manner consistent with 
estuary management or habitat restoration plans. An estuary habitat 
restoration plan is defined in the Act as ``* * * any Federal or State 
plan for restoration of degraded estuary habitat that was developed 
with the substantial participation of appropriate public and private 
stakeholders.'' Included are the estuary habitat restoration components 
of comprehensive conservation and management plans approved under 
section 320 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), lake 
wide management plans or remedial action plans developed under section 
118 of the FWPCA, management plans approved under the Coastal Zone 
Management Act of 1972, and the interstate management plan developed 
pursuant to the Chesapeake Bay program under section 117 of the FWPCA.
    Effective estuary habitat restoration plans typically contain 
common elements such as focusing on the watershed as the basic 
management unit, integrating good science with sound decision-making, 
and emphasizing collaborative problem solving. Also essential is public 
and private stakeholder participation. This is crucial to the final 
success of any plan, because those individuals and private interests 
affected by measures to maintain and restore the estuary are ultimately 
responsible for implementing the plan. Providing them the opportunity 
to design and contribute during early planning stages promotes ``buy-
in'' when the time comes to undertake restoration actions and 
activities.
    Another component of successful restoration plans is clearly 
identifying a central goal or set of goals and describing means for 
measuring progress toward achieving these goals. Performance measures 
may be as simple as the number of acres of habitat directly restored or 
protected. Many federally approved estuary management and restoration 
plans track major milestones or other implementation activities to 
ensure progress is occurring, or if it is not, to identify what 
necessary steps to take to move forward.
    Successful plans also include trend assessment, which is critical 
to watershed characterization, such as loss of historic estuarine 
habitat, land use, development, recreation, and fisheries pressures. 
This information is necessary to identify problems facing a given 
estuarine watershed and to select those actions necessary to return it 
to the desired state. Status and trend information can help to assess 
the condition of the highest priority resources and can forecast future 
conditions should current trends continue. It can also highlight data 
gaps.
    Finally, plans should identify management and restoration 
priorities. Identifying regional or estuary-level restoration 
priorities will help projects address the most critical habitat needs. 
The Council will give priority to those projects that have the best 
potential to restore critical habitat functions successfully. Improved 
planning will also allow benefits to be accrued over a larger scale, 
enhancing the overall effectiveness of restoration efforts.
    In accordance with the Act, every project considered for funding 
under this authority must address restoration needs identified in an 
estuary habitat restoration plan. Additionally, one of the factors for 
the Secretary of the Army (Secretary) to consider when selecting a 
project to fund is whether the project is part of an approved Federal 
estuary management or habitat restoration plan. This selection 
criterion will help ensure that the Strategy is implemented in a manner 
consistent with such plans.
    Agency staff supporting the Council participated in and reviewed 
the results of a recent effort supported by the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and led by Restore America's 
Estuaries (RAE), a nongovernmental organization, to review existing 
estuary restoration plans. Plans reviewed included those developed for 
Federal programs such as the National Estuary Program (Comprehensive 
Conservation and Management Plans), State Coastal Zone Management 
Plans, and other State plans and watershed or estuary plans, such as 
the Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan and Ecoregional Plans 
developed by The Nature Conservancy. Review of these plans revealed 
that the level and sophistication of planning for estuarine and coastal 
habitat restoration varies significantly among the regions and 
watersheds of the United States. In some coastal areas, only broad, 
coastal management planning has been completed, while in other areas 
sophisticated planning efforts with strong community and stakeholder 
participation have determined specific habitat restoration goals and 
priorities.
    By working with State and local agencies and nongovernmental 
organizations, the Council will help to identify gaps in planning, and 
encourage sharing of information and other collaborative efforts to 
improve restoration plans. The Council will also seek to promote 
coordination of planning activities associated with other State and 
Federal programs. For example, the Council will encourage regional 
planning workshops, bringing together resource managers, scientists, 
and other stakeholders to establish restoration goals and priorities. 
The Council could also identify and recommend the use of successful 
planning frameworks such as those developed by the National Estuary 
Program and other examples.

Ecosystem Level Approach [This section covers 106(d)(3)]

    This Strategy recognizes that successful estuary restoration 
projects with multiple goals will improve ecosystem function. 
Restoration projects should be designed using an ecosystem or watershed 
approach to re-establish a self-sustaining area that provides the 
structure and function necessary to support the many interrelated 
physical, biological, and chemical components of healthy estuary 
habitats. An ecosystem or watershed approach will facilitate the 
development of projects with multiple benefits. Examining how actions 
fit into the surrounding area and considering economic, recreational, 
water quality, land use, and other parameters is necessary to achieve 
restoration goals. Estuarine habitats are a web of interrelated 
components, each supporting and depending on the other for healthy 
function.
    Estuary restoration projects that include physical and functional 
restoration should provide healthy ecosystems to support wildlife, 
including endangered and threatened species, migratory birds, and 
resident species of an estuary watershed, as well as fish and 
shellfish, including commercial and recreational fisheries.
    Restoration of healthy ecosystem function can provide improved 
water quality and flood control benefits. For example, healthy and 
intact tidal wetlands filter water flowing from rivers

[[Page 22419]]

and tributaries to the ocean, remove pollutants from runoff and trap 
and assimilate nutrients. Estuarine wetlands also have the capacity to 
store floodwater and can provide a critical physical buffer between 
land and water, protecting communities from flooding and storm surge.
    Healthy estuaries also provide multiple opportunities for outdoor 
recreation, such as recreational fishing, boating, birding, and a 
variety of water sports. The recreation industry dependent on healthy 
estuaries provides significant income to coastal regions. Restoration 
projects completed under this Strategy may incorporate recreational 
features that are compatible with the primary goal of restoring healthy 
habitat function.
    In its review of project proposals, the Council will support 
projects developed in an ecosystem context with multiple benefits. The 
Council will work with others to share examples of particularly 
effective projects that exemplify this process.

Partnerships [This section covers 106(d)(1)]

    To achieve the goal of restoring one million acres of estuary 
habitat, it will be important to involve individuals and organizations 
from both the public and private sectors. Enhancing partnerships among 
agencies and establishing new public-private partnerships is a central 
theme of the Act and a critical part of this Strategy.
    In order to meet the goals of the Act, the Council will improve 
coordination among existing restoration programs by reviewing and 
discussing programs administered by agencies represented on the 
Council, and developing shared goals and objectives for habitat 
restoration. Although agencies may differ in their implementation 
strategies, developing common goals will facilitate coordination. The 
Council will also coordinate with State habitat restoration programs to 
improve the effectiveness of restoration efforts.
    In order to maximize public-private partnerships, the Council 
encourages collaboration among public agencies, private organizations, 
companies, and individuals (e.g., private landowners, hunters, birders, 
fishermen, etc.) in restoration efforts. This connectivity encourages 
private organizations, companies, landowners and others to bring their 
resources (financial or in-kind) to the table to assist in planning and 
implementing successful restoration projects. There are several 
existing programs that provide models for successful partnerships, 
including the Coastal America Corporate Wetlands Restoration 
Partnership, a voluntary public-private partnership in which 
corporations join with Federal and State agencies to restore wetlands 
and other aquatic habitats.
    Private support can range from providing materials or funding to 
the use of volunteers for hands-on restoration or monitoring. One way 
to encourage resourceful, active partnerships, and especially to 
acknowledge the efforts of volunteers, is to establish annual awards 
recognizing successful restoration efforts. These awards may be given 
to a wide variety of groups, including nongovernmental organizations, 
individuals, businesses, and local, State and Federal agencies to 
reward efforts at all levels.
    Private partnerships may also be critical for those projects 
involving demonstration or pilot testing of an innovative technology. 
The estuary habitat restoration program established in the Act requires 
a non-Federal interest to provide a minimum of 35 percent of the costs 
of a restoration project. However, when innovative technology is 
involved, the percentage required to be contributed by the non-Federal 
interest shall be reduced to 15 percent for the incremental cost of 
using the new technology. The Council will consider technology 
``innovative'' if it involves a new process, technique, or material or 
uses existing processes, techniques, or materials in a new application.
    The non-Federal interests must provide all of the lands, easements, 
rights-of-way and relocations. The non-Federal interest is also 
responsible for all costs associated with operation, maintenance, 
replacement, repair and rehabilitation of the project, including 
monitoring. This presents many opportunities for the involvement of a 
broad array of individuals and organizations to participate in the 
restoration effort.
    To expand the base of support for restoration, the Council will 
encourage member Agencies and private partners to maintain and expand 
existing web sites that provide information on both public and private 
sources of funding for estuary projects. Web sites should include links 
to other web sites that emphasize accomplishments of completed 
restoration projects. Effective implementation of any restoration plan 
requires a well-developed funding strategy that identifies 
governmental, nonprofit, and private resources to provide support both 
in the near and long term.
    The Council will work with other Federal, State and local agencies, 
nongovernmental organizations and private parties to identify and 
publicize funding sources, and will also identify examples of effective 
partnerships that have implemented estuary restoration projects. For 
example, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has established the 
Environmental Finance Program to assist communities in their search for 
creative approaches to funding their environmental projects. 
Environmental finance centers at universities provide publications, 
analyses of financing alternatives, training, and technical assistance, 
including workshops for local governments that discuss watershed-
financing alternatives. In 2001, the National Estuary Program sponsored 
workshops on funding solutions for estuary programs and comprehensive 
conservation management plan implementation. The National Fish and 
Wildlife Foundation and the Coastal America Corporate Wetlands 
Restoration Partnership (http://www.coastalamerica.gov/text/cwrp) are 
other examples of the resources available to help non-Federal interests 
obtain support for estuary projects.

Habitat Restoration Program [This section covers 106(d)(6) and (7)]

    The Act establishes ``an estuary habitat restoration program under 
which the Secretary may carry out estuary habitat restoration projects 
and provide technical assistance in accordance with the requirements of 
this title.'' This is one means for achieving the one million acre goal 
of the Strategy. The statute includes requirements for non-Federal 
origination of projects, selection criteria, cost-sharing, operation 
and maintenance, authority for nongovernmental agencies to be sponsors, 
a requirement for a written agreement between the non-Federal sponsor 
and the Secretary, and potential delegation of project implementation.
    The Act defines the term estuary habitat restoration activity to 
mean ``an activity that results in improving degraded estuaries or 
estuary habitat or creating estuary habitat (including both physical 
and functional restoration), with the goal of attaining a self-
sustaining system integrated into the surrounding landscape.'' Projects 
funded under this program will be consistent with this definition. 
Eligible habitat restoration activities include re-establishment of 
chemical, physical, hydrologic, and biological features and components 
associated with an estuary. This may entail improvement of estuarine 
wetland tidal exchange or reestablishment of historic hydrology, 
providing fish passage, establishment of riparian buffer zones, 
construction of

[[Page 22420]]

reefs to promote fish and shellfish production, reintroduction of 
native species, and control of nonnative or invasive species. Cleanup 
of pollution for the benefit of estuary habitat may be considered, as 
long as it does not meet the definition of excluded activities in the 
Act. Excluded activities are those required for mitigation of adverse 
effects of a regulated activity or that constitutes restoration for 
natural resource damages.
    Section 104(c) of the Act contains four required elements and seven 
listed selection factors to be considered by the Secretary of the Army 
when determining which projects to fund. Projects must address 
restoration needs identified in an estuary plan, be consistent with 
this Strategy, include a monitoring plan, and include satisfactory 
assurance that the non-Federal interest has adequate authority and 
resources. The listed selection factors are: inclusion in an approved 
Federal plan, technical feasibility, scientific merit, encouragement of 
increased cooperation among government agencies at all levels, 
fostering of public-private partnerships, cost effectiveness, and 
whether the State has a dedicated source of funding for acquisition or 
restoration of estuary habitat. If a project merits selection based on 
the above criteria, then priority consideration will be given to a 
project if it: (a) Occurs within a watershed where there is a program 
being implemented that addresses sources of pollution and other 
activities that otherwise would adversely affect the restored habitat 
water quality in the watershed; or (b) includes an innovative 
technology having the potential for improved cost-effectiveness.
    The Council will consider the factors discussed above during its 
review and ranking of proposals for the Secretary's consideration. 
Additional criteria may also be developed by the Council to facilitate 
review and these will be included in the program guidance. The list of 
recommended projects will be provided in priority order. The Secretary 
may consider other factors when selecting projects to fund from the 
list provided by the Council.
    In addition to considering the selection and priority factors in 
sections 104(c)(3) and (4), the Secretary will also select a balance of 
smaller and larger estuary habitat projects and ensure an equitable 
geographic distribution of the funded projects. The Council recognizes 
that the scope of a project is not always directly proportional to the 
cost and that projects are sometimes difficult to characterize 
adequately in terms of acreage to be restored. For purposes of 
selecting a balance of smaller and larger estuary habitat restoration 
projects, the Council will use a combination of cost and acreage to be 
manipulated as criteria to define small projects. In general, a small 
project would be one with a Federal cost of $250,000 or less and that 
manipulates 50 acres or less. The Council will discuss and classify 
projects that cannot be easily characterized as ``small'' because of 
conflicts between cost and acreage factors. The availability of 
funding, project costs, and the nature of the proposals will affect the 
ability to assure equitable geographic distribution of projects funded 
by this program. In any one year, the Council may recommend funding 
more projects in one region than another but will consider the number, 
scope and cost of funded projects in a region when making subsequent 
funding decisions.
    The goal will be to select those projects of highest national 
priority while assuring that all regions of the country benefit from 
the program. The Council will explore various means for defining 
national priorities and consider those priorities in project selection.

Ensuring Success

    The Act stipulates that monitoring is essential for evaluating and 
documenting our progress toward reaching the goal of restoring one 
million acres of estuary habitat. By closely tracking progress at the 
project level, we can determine whether individual projects contribute 
to meeting the goals of estuary and regional restoration plans, and 
tally habitat acreage restored over a national scale. In addition to 
monitoring at the project level, ecosystem-level monitoring may also be 
needed to judge restoration success. Monitoring information will allow 
restoration planners and practitioners to modify their efforts 
according to on-the-ground results, and can build long-term public 
support for habitat protection and restoration efforts.
    Because monitoring is essential to both documenting success and 
adapting project and program approaches, it should be a central concern 
of those designing a restoration project or regional restoration plan. 
For each habitat type to be restored, the monitoring plan should define 
the desired structure and functions in the context of project goals, 
and identify attributes indicating those functions. Quantitative 
performance standards for projects should include functional and 
structural elements and be linked to appropriate, local reference 
habitats that represent ``target conditions.'' It may also be useful to 
compare the project site to degraded, non-restored ``control'' sites to 
better document project-induced improvements in habitat condition.
    Ideally, restoration goals should be quantitative, as well as 
spatially and temporally specific. Project goals should also be 
measurable and realistic. A realistic goal should consider causes of 
past decline of the habitat proposed for restoration and surrounding 
land cover and ecosystem conditions. Monitoring data should be used to 
guide project operations and maintenance.
    Specific project goals will determine the appropriate complexity of 
each monitoring plan. The project must include monitoring on a regular 
basis and over a meaningful time period. The length of the ideal 
monitoring program will vary depending on the habitat type and project 
goals for restoring function, but should always include pre-
construction measurements to establish baseline conditions, monitoring 
during project construction to determine whether to adjust techniques 
or goals, and post-construction monitoring to confirm success of the 
restoration and alert project managers to the need for adjustments. 
Project monitoring should document any changes to the original 
construction specifications, including what problems were encountered, 
the reasoning behind any changes, and any changes the project staff 
would recommend with the knowledge they now possess. Information on 
changes from baseline conditions and comparison to reference or control 
sites should be included as well.
    Beyond monitoring individual restoration projects, local, State or 
regional groups should also conduct monitoring over the estuary or 
regional scale to allow a more complete evaluation of restoration 
successes. System-wide monitoring of water quality and other habitat 
parameters can gauge ecosystem improvements beyond those achieved at 
project sites. Additionally, remote sensing may be useful in 
documenting both baseline habitat information and large-scale changes 
in habitat coverage and conditions.
    The restoration and maintenance of healthy coasts and estuaries 
will require the long-term support of a broad cross-section of the 
public. Including local communities in planning and implementing 
restoration projects will build interest in protecting and maintaining 
restored habitat. Increased awareness of the attributes needed to 
sustain healthy habitat will increase local stewardship of the 
environment and will help to ensure the long-term success of 
restoration projects.

[[Page 22421]]

    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), in 
consultation with the Council, will develop standard data formats for 
project monitoring, along with requirements for types of data collected 
and frequency of monitoring. These standards will build on existing 
inter-agency efforts to develop monitoring protocols and restoration 
databases. These standards are not intended to limit the types of 
information gathered by project managers, but rather to ensure that 
data will be useful to other parties, and to facilitate regional and 
national tracking of restoration success. Consistent data collection 
and reporting standards should clarify results, make selection and 
justification of restoration methods more straightforward, ensure that 
success is documented based on sufficient data, enhance the restoration 
knowledge base, and increase the comparability of data among 
restoration projects.
    In addition to developing monitoring data standards, NOAA will also 
maintain a database of information concerning estuary habitat 
restoration projects carried out under the Act, including information 
on project techniques, project completion, monitoring data, and other 
relevant information. This database will be Internet-accessible, to 
allow widespread dissemination and use of restoration project and 
monitoring data.

Conclusions

    The actions described in this Strategy facilitate reaching the goal 
of restoring one million acres of estuary habitat by 2010. There are 
many existing programs and organizations actively involved in estuary 
restoration whose efforts will also contribute significantly to estuary 
restoration. Examples include the National Estuary Program, the 
National Estuarine Research Reserve System, Restore America's Estuaries 
member organizations, and the program implementing the Coastal Wetlands 
Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act.
    The Strategy is intended to be dynamic. Working with the 
organizations listed above and other interested stakeholders, the 
Council will review and refine this Strategy over time in an iterative 
process, as new information becomes available and progress toward 
meeting the goals of the Act is evaluated. Section 108(a) of the Act 
requires the Secretary to report to Congress at the end of the third 
and fifth fiscal years. As part of this process the Council will review 
the Strategy and update as necessary.
    The Council will prepare additional documents and make them 
available for public comment regarding habitat restoration program 
implementation and the development of the monitoring standards. As 
indicated in this Strategy, the Council will promote a variety of 
efforts to facilitate promotion of partnerships and efficient, 
effective restoration of estuary habitats.

References

    Cowardin, L.M. V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. 
``Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United 
States.'' U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Biological Services 
Program; FWS/OBS-79/31. 131 pp. Dahl, T.C. 2000. ``Status and trends 
of wetlands in the contiguous United States, 1986-1997.'' US 
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, 
DC.

Luz D. Ortiz,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 02-11074 Filed 5-2-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-92-P