[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 60 (Wednesday, March 29, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15718-15724]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-4585]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8051-3]


Guidelines for the Award of Monitoring Initiative Funds Under 
Section 106 Grants to States, Interstate Agencies, and Tribes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: These guidelines describe the formula necessary for EPA to 
allot Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 106 water pollution control program 
grant funds that have been targeted in EPA's appropriation process to 
support enhanced monitoring efforts by states, interstate agencies, and 
tribes for FY 2006 and beyond. These guidelines also describe the 
specific activities that states, interstate agencies, and tribes must 
carry out under the monitoring initiative in order to receive the 
funds. These activities will improve state and tribal capacity to 
monitor and report on water quality, and include two components: 
implementation of comprehensive monitoring strategies, including 
building capacity for state-scale statistically-valid surveys of water 
condition, and collaboration on statistically-valid surveys of the 
nation's waters.

DATES: The guidelines are effective on March 29, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joan Warren, Office of Water, Office 
of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, 4503T, Environmental Protection

[[Page 15719]]

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone 
number: (202) 566-1215; e-mail address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

    Regulated Entities: States, Interstate agencies, and Tribes that 
are eligible to receive grants under section 106 of the CWA.

II. Background

    Numerous reports have identified the need for improved water 
quality monitoring and analysis at local, state, or national scales. In 
2000, the General Accounting Office reported that EPA and states cannot 
make statistically-valid assessments of water quality and lack the data 
to support key management decisions. In 2001, the National Research 
Council recommended that EPA and states promote a uniform, consistent 
approach to ambient monitoring and data collection to support core 
water quality programs. In 2002, the H. John Heinz III Center for 
Science, Economics, and the Environment found that water quality data 
are inadequate for reporting on fresh water, coastal and ocean water 
quality indicators at a nationwide scale. The U.S. Commission on Ocean 
Policy issued similar conclusions in 2004. The National Academy of 
Public Administration (NAPA) stated that improved water quality 
monitoring is necessary to help states make more effective use of 
limited resources. EPA's Report on the Environment 2003 found that 
there is not sufficient information to provide a national answer, with 
confidence and scientific credibility, to the question, ``What is the 
condition of U.S. waters and watersheds?''
    EPA has been working with Federal, state, and other partners to 
develop and promote the use of a variety of monitoring tools to most 
efficiently answer water quality management questions at multiple 
geographic scales. Statistically-based surveys, predictive models, 
remote sensing and targeted monitoring are examples of these tools. 
Used in combination, these tools can help focus and prioritize site-
specific monitoring activities to identify and address problem areas, 
as well as achieve comprehensive assessments of water quality. 
Incorporating these tools into state and tribal monitoring strategies 
and into their monitoring program designs should help them meet 
multiple state and national monitoring objectives cost-effectively.
    In partial response to these critiques and the need for credible 
reports on water quality status and trends nationwide, the President's 
FY 2005 and FY 2006 budgets specifically requested increases in CWA 
section 106 funds to enhance monitoring activities, including funds for 
maintaining and improving statistically-valid water quality monitoring 
programs to provide information for decision makers and the public. The 
FY 2006 Conference Report, which accompanied EPA's FY 2006 
appropriation, designated a separate portion of the total 106 funds to 
be targeted for this monitoring initiative.
    On January 3, 2006, EPA published a revision to its CWA Section 106 
grant regulations (40 CFR 35.162(d)) that provides the Agency with the 
flexibility to allot separately funds such as these which have been 
targeted for specific water pollution control elements (71 FR 17, 
January 3, 2006). In this situation, such allotment can occur only 
after EPA establishes an allotment formula after consultation with 
states and interstate agencies. These guidelines include this allotment 
formula, as well as further details regarding the use of and 
accountability for these funds.

III. Guidelines for the Award of Monitoring Initiative Funds Under 
Section 106 Grants to States, Interstate Agencies, and Tribes

    These guidelines describe the formula necessary for EPA to allot 
Clean Water Act (CWA) section 106 water pollution control program grant 
funds that have been targeted in EPA's appropriation process to support 
enhanced monitoring efforts by states, interstate agencies, and tribes 
for FY 2006 and beyond. These guidelines also describe the specific 
activities that states, interstate agencies, and tribes must implement 
to receive the monitoring initiative funds. These activities will 
improve state and tribal capacity to monitor and report on water 
quality through the two components of the monitoring initiative: 
Implementation of comprehensive monitoring strategies, including 
building capacity for state-scale statistically-valid surveys of water 
condition, and collaboration on statistically-valid surveys of the 
nation's waters.
    The first component will strengthen state and tribal programs 
consistent with priorities contained in their comprehensive monitoring 
strategies. The second component may serve state and tribal programs 
and produce a statistically-valid survey of water condition at 
nationwide and regional scales. Data gathered through the national/
regional scale surveys could be used to support water quality criteria 
development and to identify the extent to which emerging pollutants may 
be of concern. Survey data may potentially be used for developing 
state-scale predictive tools, documenting the performance of monitoring 
methods, and assessing the comparability of data.
    EPA consulted with states and interstate organizations in the 
development of these guidelines beginning in March 2004. EPA reached an 
understanding with the Association of State and Interstate Water 
Pollution Control Administrators (ASIWPCA) on the distribution of the 
monitoring initiative increment in the FY 2005 section 106 grant funds. 
EPA continued discussions with ASIWPCA about the monitoring increment 
grant funds, including use of the FY 2006 increment for statistically-
valid surveys of the nation's waters. EPA also consulted with state 
environmental commissioners through the Environmental Council of the 
States.

A. Formula for Allocation of Monitoring Initiative Funds

    To be eligible to receive monitoring initiative funds, states, 
interstate agencies, and tribes must apply for the funds by preparing a 
workplan that details planned actions for carrying out both components 
of the monitoring initiative: implementation of comprehensive 
monitoring strategies and collaboration on statistically-valid surveys 
of the nation's waters. States may request in-kind assistance from EPA 
under the grant to complete the survey for the sites located within its 
jurisdiction. If a state does not apply for funds or meet the workplan 
criteria in these guidelines to implement its strategy and/or complete 
the survey, including requesting in-kind assistance, EPA may withhold 
the funds allotted for this purpose and award the funds to any eligible 
recipient in the region, including another agency of the same State or 
an Indian Tribe/Tribal consortium for the same environmental program 
(40 CFR 35.117).
For Fiscal Year 2006
    $18.23 million will be distributed in the following manner:*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    * EPA will use this numerical formula to determine the 
monitoring allotments for FY 2007 and beyond based on the amount of 
EPA's final annual budget targeted for these purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Allocate $9.77 million of these funds as follows for 
implementing monitoring strategies and building monitoring program 
capacity--

$169,900 for each state,
$84,950 for each Territory and the District of Columbia,
$240,410 to be distributed among interstate agencies, and

[[Page 15720]]

$528,506 to be distributed among the tribes, in accordance with the 
Section 106 grant formula for tribes.

    2. Allocate $8.45 million for surveying water quality condition 
nationwide. Grant recipients will use this portion of the monitoring 
initiative funds for statistically-valid surveys of water body 
condition repeated over time to determine status and trends in water 
condition. The distribution of these funds will be tailored based on 
the water body type being surveyed, i.e., coastal waters, streams, 
lakes, rivers, and wetlands, and the number of sample sites needed. EPA 
will work with states, interstate agencies, and tribes to define the 
target population (size and type of water body) for each survey. After 
this consultation, EPA will develop a list of randomly selected sites 
to be sampled for the survey. For each survey, approximately 1,000 
sites in the contiguous 48 states will be sampled. A state or tribe in 
the contiguous 48 states will receive $8,000 for each sampling site 
falling within its jurisdiction. A separate fund of $450,000 will be 
used to support survey work in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and the 
trust territories. If a grant recipient is able to sample the sites 
needed for its participation in a nationwide survey for less than the 
$8,000 per site, the remaining funds must be used for implementation of 
its monitoring strategy and to build capacity for state-scale 
statistically-valid surveys.

B. Supplemental Workplans for Monitoring Initiative Activities

    These guidelines describe the types of commitments grant recipients 
must include in a separate workplan covering the monitoring initiative 
portion of their section 106 grant. Because these funds have to be 
tracked separately, EPA will negotiate specific annual activities to be 
included in these workplans that must address how recipients will (1) 
implement the state, interstate agency, or tribal monitoring strategy, 
including building capacity for state-scale statistically-valid surveys 
of water condition, and (2) collaborate on statistically-valid surveys 
of the nation's waters.
1. Implementing Monitoring Strategies
Why Strategies Are Important
    An important objective for state, interstate agency, and tribal 
monitoring strategies is to help maximize the efficiency of monitoring 
and assessment resources to help to increase the amount of waters 
monitored or assessed; provide the information needed to allow 
decisionmakers and the public to set priorities; develop and apply 
controls; and determine the effectiveness of our investments in water 
quality protection and restoration. EPA agrees with the NAPA finding 
that investing in efficient monitoring and assessment programs will 
result in social cost savings by ensuring that the resources invested 
in environmental protection activities are addressing the greatest 
needs and are achieving performance objectives. In addition, the 
successful use of market-based approaches, such as trading for water 
quality protection and restoration, depends on the availability of 
adequate monitoring data and information.
State Water Monitoring and Assessment Strategies
    In March 2003, EPA issued the Elements of State Water Monitoring 
and Assessment Program guidance to provide a framework for 
strengthening state monitoring programs by the end of FY 2014. This 
guidance describes 10 elements of a water monitoring and assessment 
program. The elements provide a basic framework that may be tailored to 
the specific needs of states or other organizations. A brief 
description of each element is provided below.
Monitoring Program Strategy
    The comprehensive monitoring program strategy is a long-term plan 
that describes how the state implements a monitoring program that 
serves water quality decision needs for all its waters, including 
streams, rivers, lakes, the Great Lakes, reservoirs, estuaries, coastal 
waters, wetlands, and ground water. The strategy should describe how 
the state addresses each of the other nine elements of the guidance. It 
should reflect the input of the full range of monitoring partners 
within the state.
Monitoring Objectives
    Monitoring objectives drive the state's implementation of 
monitoring activities. The state's objectives should reflect the needs 
of the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act and other water 
management activities.
Monitoring Design
    The monitoring design explains how monitoring sites are selected to 
meet monitoring objectives. To meet decision needs most efficiently, 
states may integrate several monitoring designs (e.g., fixed station, 
intensive and screening-level monitoring, rotating basin, judgmental 
and probability design). Nearly half of the states are implementing 
statistically-valid surveys as a component of their monitoring network. 
As states implement their state monitoring strategies, EPA expects them 
to build capacity for state-scale statistically-valid surveys of water 
condition. EPA encourages states to leverage the national/regional 
scale surveys to support these state-scale statistically-valid surveys. 
Monitoring designs may also incorporate predictive tools such as 
landscape and water quality modeling, remote sensing and deployed data 
sondes.
Core and Supplemental Water Quality Indicators
    A core set of monitoring indicators (e.g., water quality 
parameters) includes physical/habitat, chemical/toxicological, and 
biological/ecological endpoints selected to assess attainment with 
applicable water quality standards throughout the state. The core 
indicators should be supplemented, as appropriate, to meet the full 
range of monitoring objectives. Supplemental indicators should be 
monitored when there is a reasonable expectation that a specific 
pollutant may be present in a watershed, or to support a special study 
such as screening for potential pollutants of concern.
Quality Assurance
    A state must have a quality assurance program to ensure the 
scientific validity of monitoring data and of sampling and laboratory 
activities. Data of documented quality are critical to support decision 
making and resource allocation.
Data Management
    Timely access to data of documented quality is another key element 
of a state monitoring program. All states are expected to use an 
electronic data system to manage water quality, fish tissue, toxicity, 
sediment chemistry, habitat, and biological data. The state data 
management strategy should address timely data entry, follow 
appropriate metadata and state/federal geo-locational standards, and 
allow public access. In the future, EPA will require states to directly 
or indirectly use the new Water Quality Exchange/STORET-compatible 
system to facilitate public access to data of documented quality.
Data Analysis/Assessment
    A state's assessment methodology describes how water quality data 
are evaluated to determine whether waters are attaining water quality 
standards. The assessment methodology addresses how states collect data 
from various monitoring sources (including federal, state and local 
governments, volunteer monitors, academia, permitted dischargers under 
the National Pollutant

[[Page 15721]]

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), drinking water utilities, etc.), 
what types and quality of data are needed to support different levels 
of decisions, and how data are reviewed, analyzed and compared to water 
quality standards.
Reporting
    A monitoring program must ensure timely submission of water quality 
reports and lists, such as those required under sections 106, 303(d), 
305(b), 314 and 319 of the Clean Water Act and section 406 of the 
Beaches Act. EPA encourages states to streamline reporting activities 
by consolidating reports and using electronic data management and 
reporting systems. EPA's ``2002 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and 
Assessment Report Guidance'' called for integration and consistency in 
the development and submission of section 305(b) water quality reports 
and section 303(d) impaired waters lists. To accomplish this 
integration, EPA expects that all states will use EPA's Assessment 
Database (ADB) or a compatible electronic format to record their water 
quality assessment decisions.
Programmatic Evaluation
    The state, in consultation with EPA, should conduct periodic 
reviews of its monitoring program to determine how well it serves water 
quality decision needs for all waters of the state. This involves 
evaluating each aspect of the monitoring program to determine how well 
each of the elements listed here are being implemented to serve water 
resource management activities and to identify needed changes and 
additions for future monitoring cycles.
General Support and Infrastructure Planning
    The state monitoring strategy should identify current and future 
resource needs to fully implement its monitoring program. This planning 
activity should describe funding, staff, training, laboratory and 
information management resources and needs.
Tribal Monitoring Strategies
    EPA will issue guidelines in 2006 for tribes on the use of Section 
106 grants for building Clean Water Act program capabilities, including 
monitoring and reporting on water conditions. The Tribal Section 106 
Guidance will require that tribes develop monitoring strategies 
appropriate to their capabilities and needs. The specifics of 
implementing the tribal strategies will be included in the tribe's 
annual Section 106 workplan.
Using Section 106 Monitoring Initiative Funds To Implement Monitoring 
Strategies
    EPA expects states, territories, interstate organizations and 
tribes to use the first component of the monitoring initiative to 
assist in implementation of their monitoring strategies in keeping with 
schedules set out in the strategies, including building capacity for 
state-scale statistically-valid surveys of water condition. The funds 
should be accounted for in separate section 106 workplans and should be 
used to help states and tribes build program capacity to enhance water 
monitoring activities. Funds should not be used for ongoing or routine 
monitoring activities. They could be used to develop or augment a 
state's monitoring network design. For example, activities could 
include implementing a state-scale statistically-valid survey, 
expanding coverage, adding waterbody types, increasing intensive 
monitoring (e.g., watersheds); developing or refining core and 
supplemental indicators, including biological assessment programs; 
enhancing data analysis and management; increasing lab capability; and 
hiring new staff or purchasing equipment. EPA Regional monitoring and 
section 106 staff will work with each section 106 grant recipient to 
ensure that the workplan reflects these monitoring activities and that 
the state or tribe is making progress in implementing the priorities 
and milestones set out in its monitoring strategy.
    EPA and the state monitoring strategies have identified the 
following activities, among others, as priorities for enhancing 
monitoring programs:
     Leveraging resources through partnerships to improve data 
management to facilitate data sharing and reduce redundancy of sample 
collection;
     Developing predictive tools to extend use of monitoring 
data;
     Using statistically-valid monitoring designs and 
assessment methodologies to represent the condition of all state or 
tribal waters with statistically-valid (probability-based) surveys and 
account for variability in water quality and uncertainty in sampling 
methods; and
     Improving the rigor of biological condition assessment to 
take advantage of its ability to integrate the effects of multiple 
stressors, provide a more accurate assessment of ecological effects, 
and improve diagnostic ability to identify causes of degradation.
2. Collaborating on Statistically-Valid Surveys of the Nation's Waters
    Supplemental workplans must also address activities that state and 
tribes will implement as part of their participation in the 
statistically-valid surveys of the nation's waters.
    A key element of improving the credibility of reports on the 
condition of the nation's waters as called for under CWA section 305(b) 
is the use of a statistically-valid survey design. The Elements of a 
State Water Monitoring and Assessment Program recommends that 
monitoring strategies include the use of probability-based networks 
that support statistically-valid inferences about the extent of waters 
that support the goals of the CWA and achieve state water quality 
standards. EPA's 1997 Guidelines for Preparation of the Comprehensive 
State Water Quality Assessments (305(b) Reports) and Electronic 
Updates, written with state participation, also recommended the use of 
probabilistic monitoring or statistically-valid surveys as a cost-
effective and reliable means for assessing water quality status and 
trends.
Why Surveys Are Important
    Statistically-valid surveys are an efficient way to determine the 
extent to which waters support healthy aquatic communities. Detailed 
information collected about the health of aquatic communities in a 
random sample of a specific water body type (streams, coastal waters, 
lakes, rivers, and wetlands) can be used to make inferences, with 
documented confidence, about the condition of the larger universe of 
similar waters--most of which are currently unassessed (only 19% of 
streams and rivers, 43% of lakes, and less than 2% of wetlands were 
assessed for the 2002 reporting cycle). This design can be implemented 
at a national, regional, state, or local level to provide a benchmark 
about how much of the resource needs protection or restoration.
    The short-term objective for water quality surveys is to achieve 
comprehensive assessments of water quality. Over the long-term, 
statistical surveys are a cost-effective means of determining trends 
over time and evaluating the effectiveness of water quality protection 
and restoration efforts. Statistically-valid surveys provide data that 
serve other water quality management needs ranging from additional 
information about each monitoring site to contributing to the 
development of water quality standards. They can be used with other 
datasets to

[[Page 15722]]

develop predictive tools that help prioritize site-specific monitoring 
and identify problem areas.
Basic Activities for Implementing Statistically-Valid Surveys
    These CWA section 106 monitoring initiative guidelines require 
states and tribes to collaborate on statistically-valid surveys to 
assess water condition in coastal waters, streams, lakes, rivers and 
wetlands. Many states are already implementing or participating in 
statistically-valid designs for monitoring the condition of coastal 
waters, rivers and streams, and lakes. EPA intends that these national/
regional scale surveys complement existing state efforts using survey 
designs and methods that generate comparable assessment results. The 
collaborative assessments will build upon and continue the success of 
national, regional, state, tribal, and local partnerships such as the 
National Coastal Assessment, the Wadeable Streams Assessment and 
Assessment of Western Rivers and Streams, the National Lake Fish Tissue 
Study, the Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment, and the Southern 
California Coastal Water Research Project.
    The guidelines generally address the roles and responsibilities of 
EPA, states, and tribes in generating cost-effective comparable 
assessments of water resources. As EPA, states, and tribes collaborate 
on the survey for each water resource type, EPA will issue clarifying 
guidance for the specific activities involved in planning and 
implementing the survey. The clarifying guidance will contain 
information on number and location of sampling sites, indicators, 
quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) protocols, field data 
collection and lab methods, and timelines for carrying out survey 
activities. The basic activities involved in statistical surveys are 
described below.
Monitoring Objectives
    The basic objective of these surveys is to generate statistically-
valid estimates of the extent of water resources that support healthy 
aquatic communities and human activities and to assess the relative 
importance of key stressors on water quality. The surveys will produce 
estimates of the condition of various water body types, i.e., coastal 
waters, streams, lakes, rivers, and wetlands, at both regional and 
national scales. States are encouraged to leverage these surveys to 
help support their own state-scale surveys. EPA will host meetings to 
bring together states and other experts to shape the planning and 
implementation of each survey, including detailed definitions of the 
survey objectives, design and indicators, field implementation, and 
analysis and reporting.
Statistically-Valid Design
    The design, developed in collaboration with states, tribes and 
other partners, will reflect the input provided through national 
meetings and other discussions about the definition of the water 
resources under investigation and the various sub-classes of the 
resource that need to be characterized by the survey. EPA will generate 
a statistically-valid representative network design that identifies the 
primary and alternative random monitoring sites within each eco-region. 
In addition, EPA will provide interested states with a randomized 
network design for state-scale or finer characterizations.
Indicators
    The indicators used to describe the condition of water resources 
and extent of waters will vary depending upon the water body type 
surveyed. EPA will work with states and other experts to identify the 
core indicators that will be used to evaluate the ecological condition 
of water resources, the extent of water resources that support human 
activities, and the key stressors affecting waters. The indicator 
measurements will be taken using consistent or comparable procedures at 
all sites to ensure the results can be compared across the country. 
States and tribes are encouraged to include additional indicators (as 
described in the Elements of a State Water Monitoring and Assessment 
Program) to address specific questions and to generate more robust 
assessments.
Quality Assurance
    EPA policy and regulations require documentation and implementation 
of standard operating procedures (SOPs) and quality assurance/quality 
control (QA/QC) protocols for environmental monitoring. After meetings 
and discussions with states and other experts on the objectives, design 
and indicators for each survey, EPA will develop a Quality Assurance 
Project Plan (QAPP) and SOPs. The QAPP describes the study objectives, 
the survey design, the data quality objectives it supports, the core 
indicators or parameters and their related measurement quality 
objectives, and field and lab protocols including quality control 
activities, data management, data analysis and reporting. EPA will 
provide training for field crews and will ensure implementation of the 
quality control measures defined in the QAPP. States and other partners 
participating in the survey will either certify that they will 
implement the EPA QAPP and SOPs or, if the state elects to implement 
comparable methods, the state will provide its QAPP and SOPs to EPA for 
review and approval prior to initiating field work.
Field Data Collection
    Field data collection includes site reconnaissance, field data 
collection, and quality control activities such as repeat sampling. The 
CWA section 106 grant survey fund will provide resources to states and 
tribes for the implementation of field data collection activities as 
well as lab analysis described below. States and other organizations 
accepting responsibility for site reconnaissance and field data 
collection will certify that they are adhering to the approved EPA and/
or state QAPP and SOPs described above. EPA will provide training in 
field sampling protocols and oversee implementation of the QA/QC 
activities.
    EPA's intent is that the survey fund can offset the costs of state-
scale water quality surveys in addition to contributing to national and 
regional assessments of the condition of the nation's waters. State and 
tribal water quality programs may direct these resources a number of 
ways to accomplish the site reconnaissance and field sampling: 
Implementing site reconnaissance and field sampling directly; providing 
the funds to other organizations within the state through interagency 
agreement; issuing grants and/or contracts; and/or requesting EPA 
provide in-kind services consisting of EPA contractor support to 
perform the field data collection activities on behalf of the state.
Lab Analysis
    Any laboratory processing the chemical or biological samples 
collected for the surveys must demonstrate that they can meet the 
quality standards presented in the QAPP. This includes initial 
demonstrations of technical capability and performance evaluations. 
Field samples should be promptly shipped to the approved analytical or 
processing laboratories as these facilities are generally better geared 
to properly hold the samples while they await analyses. At the 
laboratory, samples will be processed in accordance with the lab SOPs, 
including QA/QC activities. Each participating lab must certify that 
they are adhering to the approved EPA and/or state QAPP and lab SOPs. 
Each laboratory is expected to review their

[[Page 15723]]

final data for completeness, accuracy, and precision to assure that the 
basic quality criteria are met prior to submitting their final data 
report. EPA will oversee implementation of the QA/QC activities.
    The CWA section 106 grant survey fund will provide resources to 
states and tribes for the implementation of laboratory analysis of 
field samples. State and tribal water quality programs may direct these 
resources a number of ways to accomplish the laboratory analysis of 
field samples: Analyzing samples directly; providing the funds to other 
organizations within the state through interagency agreement; issuing 
grants and/or contracts; and/or requesting EPA provide in-kind services 
consisting of EPA contractor support to perform the lab analysis 
activities on behalf of the state.
Data Management
    EPA will provide support for data management to facilitate rapid 
access to data and transfer of data into EPA's Water Quality Exchange 
or STORET-compatible system.
Data Analysis and Interpretation
    EPA will work with states and tribes to develop general protocol(s) 
to analyze and interpret the survey results. The data analysis 
protocols will build on existing efforts of states, tribes, EPA, USGS, 
and other organizations to develop statistically-valid and 
environmentally relevant thresholds for interpreting the physical, 
chemical and biological integrity of water resources, including the 
Tiered Aquatic Life Workgroup's framework for reporting data within a 
biological condition gradient that is independent of individual state 
water quality standards. EPA will host national and/or regional 
meetings to facilitate evaluation and selection of appropriate 
protocols for data analysis and interpretation.
Reporting
    EPA will work with states and tribes to develop regional and 
national scale reports that present the results of the surveys and 
provide information to track the condition of the nation's waters and 
help guide setting of national, regional and state priorities for water 
quality protection and restoration. The reports will describe the 
extent that the water body type surveyed supports healthy aquatic 
communities and human activities such as fishing and swimming. The 
reports will also describe key water quality and habitat 
characteristics associated with healthy and degraded resources. As 
states continue to implement state-scale surveys, the report will 
include these results as well as describe additional insights gained 
from analyzing additional data that states and tribes add to the 
analysis. EPA will host national and/or regional meetings to provide 
input to the reports.
Using Section 106 Monitoring Initiative Funds for State Activities To 
Support Surveys of the Nation's Waters
    The distribution of these funds will ensure states and tribes 
receive the basic level of funding required to implement the surveys at 
the minimal scale of regional and national reporting. EPA's intent is 
that this seed money can be leveraged by states to support 
implementation of state-scale surveys as states are able to incorporate 
this tool into their monitoring programs.
    The initial strategy for distribution of the survey funds is to 
tailor distribution, based on the water resource type being surveyed, 
i.e., coastal waters, streams, lakes, rivers, and wetlands, and the 
number of sample sites needed within each jurisdiction. For example, in 
the contiguous 48 states, a state or tribe will receive $8,000 for each 
sampling site falling within its jurisdiction. A separate fund of 
$450,000 will be used to support survey work in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto 
Rico and the trust territories over time.
    To ensure the success of the surveys, states and tribes must commit 
annually, in separate state and tribal section 106 workplans, to 
undertake activities that will be needed as part of the surveys. Grant 
commitments will address both the timing and scope of these activities, 
which are described in the previous section and include:
     Travel to participate in national and/or regional meetings 
for planning, scoping, data analysis and interpretation and reporting;
     Site reconnaissance to verify that sites meet the 
definition for inclusion in the survey;
     Sample collection and lab analysis in accordance with EPA 
approved QAPP and SOPs;
     Participation in QA/QC activities; and
     Provision of final sample results in electronic format.
    State and tribal water quality programs may use the CWA section 106 
survey funds to accomplish these activities in a number of ways 
including implementing the survey directly, providing the funds to 
other organizations within the state through interagency agreement, 
issuing grants and/or contracts, and/or requesting EPA provide in-kind 
services consisting of EPA contractor support to perform the survey 
implementation activities on behalf of the state.
Schedule for Statistically-Valid Surveys
    See http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/repguid.html to view the 
schedule for statistically-valid surveys.
Conclusion
    EPA's long-term goal for water quality monitoring is to enhance 
state and tribal capacity to implement an integrated monitoring 
framework which uses multiple tools to cost-effectively address the 
full range of water quality management decision needs, for all water 
resource types and uses at appropriate scales. EPA and the states will 
work together to meet this goal through assessing all waters using 
sound science; strengthening state monitoring and assessment programs, 
and employing innovations that implement cost-effective monitoring.

References

Council on Environmental Quality. U.S. Ocean Action Plan, The Bush 
Administration's Response to the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy. 
http://ocean.ceq.gov/ and http://ocean.ceq.gov/actionplan.pdf.
General Accounting Office. March 2000. Water Quality--Key EPA and 
State Decisions Limited by Inconsistent and Incomplete Data. GAO/
RCED-00-54.
H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics, and the 
Environment. 2002. The State of the Nation's Ecosystems: Measuring 
the Lands, Waters and Living Resources of the United States. 
Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
National Research Council. 2001. Assessing the TMDL Approach to 
Water Quality Management, Committee to Assess the Scientific Basis 
of the Total Maximum Daily Load Approach to Water Pollution 
Reduction. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
National Academy of Public Administration. December 2002. 
Understanding What States Need to Protect Water Quality. Academy 
Project Number 2001-001.
U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy. An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st 
Century, Final Report, 2004. http://www.oceancommission.gov/documents/full_color_rpt/welcome.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Consolidated Assessment and 
Listing Methodology--Toward a Compendium of Best Practices. http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/calm.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003 Draft Report on the 
Environment. EPA 600-R-03-050.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Elements of a State Water 
Monitoring and Assessment Program. March 2003. http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/elements/.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Monitoring and

[[Page 15724]]

Assessment Program: Integrated Quality Assurance Project Plan for 
Surface Waters Research Activities. June 1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002 Integrated Water Quality 
Monitoring and Assessment Report Guidance. http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/policy.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidance for 2006 Assessment, 
Listing, and Reporting Requirements Pursuant to Sections 303(d), 
305(b), and 314 of the Clean Water Act, 2005. http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/2006IRG/ gov/
owow/tmdl/2006IRG/.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidelines for Preparation of 
the Comprehensive State Water Quality Assessments (305(b) Reports) 
and Electronic Updates. 1997. http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/guidelines.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Coastal Condition 
Report 2001, National Coastal Condition Report 2005. http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/nccr/.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Summary of EPA's 2006 Budget--
``Goal 2'' Section. http://epa.gov/ocfo/budget/2006/2006bib.pdf.

IV. Additional Supplementary Information

    The complete text of today's guidelines, located above, is also 
available at the following EPA Web sites: http://www.epa.gov/owm/cwfinance/pollutioncontrol.htm and http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is therefore not 
subject to OMB review. Because this grant action is not subject to 
notice and comment requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act 
or any other statute, it is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) or sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1999 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4). In addition, this 
action does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. 
Although this action does not generally create new binding legal 
requirements, where it does, such requirements do not substantially and 
directly affect tribes under Executive Order 13175 (63 FR 67249, 
November 9, 2000). This action will not have federalism implications, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). 
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. This action 
does not involve technical standards; thus, the requirements of section 
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This action does not impose an 
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The Congressional 
Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides that before 
certain actions may take affect, the agency promulgating the action 
must submit a report, which includes a copy of the action, to each 
House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United 
States. Since this final grant action contains legally binding 
requirements, it is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and EPA 
will submit this action in its report to Congress under the Act.

    Dated: March 22, 2006.
Benjamin H. Grumbles,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
 [FR Doc. E6-4585 Filed 3-28-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P