[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 138 (Thursday, July 17, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41069-41076]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-16385]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8693-8]


Amendment to the 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: This notice amends the ``Guidelines for the Award of 
Monitoring Initiative Funds under Section 106 Grants to States, 
Interstate Agencies, and Tribes'' published in the Federal Register (71 
FR 157190, March 29, 2006). The 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. These guidelines 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. 
This amendment retains the allotment formula set out in the March 29, 
2006, guidelines, and adds a performance-based standard for 
incorporating use of statistically-valid surveys into state water 
monitoring programs. The amended guidelines are in this Federal 
Register notice in their entirety and replace the guidelines published 
March 29, 2006.

DATES: The guidelines are effective on July 17, 2008.

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

[[Page 41070]]

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 Draft 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. In 
combination, these tools can be used by states and tribes to describe 
the magnitude of water resource concerns, help focus on key stressors 
that are both widespread and high risk, and prioritize site-specific 
monitoring activities to identify and address problem areas. 
Incorporating these tools into monitoring strategies and into 
monitoring program designs should help states and tribes meet multiple 
state and national monitoring objectives cost-effectively.
    States have traditionally monitored only a small percentage of all 
the nation's waters: Approximately 20% of streams and rivers, 40% of 
lakes, and 35% of estuarine waters. They have used a site-specific, 
targeted monitoring approach to generally focus limited monitoring 
resources on heavily used or problem waters. The waters monitored may 
not reflect conditions in state waters as a whole. In addition, states 
often monitor a different set of waters from cycle to cycle. These 
targeted assessments, while providing important site-specific 
information, do not fully meet the intent of the CWA section 305(b) 
requirement. Under section 305(b) states must report on the extent of 
their waters meeting the fishable and swimmable goals of the CWA. 
Statistically-valid surveys offer a cost-effective and efficient way to 
fulfill CWA requirements, complement traditional monitoring designs, 
and support a broader range of management decisions. There is 
widespread acceptance of the use of statistical surveys in reports on 
the nation's housing, labor, health, agricultural, and other sectors.
    To address the need for credible reports on water quality status 
and trends nationwide, the President's Fiscal Year 2005 through FY 2009 
budgets specifically requested

    ``Not less than $18.5 million shall be provided through Clean 
Water Act Section 106 grants for State and interstate agencies' 
implementation of EPA-approved statistically representative, 
probabilistic water quality monitoring activities.''

The FY 2006 Conference Report, which accompanied EPA's FY 2006 
appropriation, designated an additional, separate portion of the total 
section 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. On March 29, 2006, EPA published the 
guidelines for applying the increased funding to enhance monitoring 
activities, including maintaining and improving statistically-valid 
water quality monitoring programs to provide information for decision 
makers and the public. These amended 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 
section 106 water pollution control program grant funds that have been 
targeted to support enhanced monitoring efforts by states, interstate 
agencies, and tribes. 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. States may opt to build upon these 
national/regional surveys to obtain a state-scale statistical survey. 
Data gathered through the national/regional-scale surveys can 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. Beginning in November 2007, EPA consulted with states and 
interstate organizations in the development of this amendment through 
conference calls with a workgroup composed of members of ASIWPCA.

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

[[Page 41071]]

comprehensive monitoring strategies and collaboration on statistically-
valid surveys of the nation's waters. A state 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 and beyond: Allocation of Monitoring Initiative 
Funds
    $18.23 million* will be distributed in the following manner:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    * EPA will use this numerical formula to determine the 
monitoring allotments for FY 2009 and beyond based on the amount of 
EPA's final annual budget targeted for these purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. $9.77 million of these funds will be allocated 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
$528,506 to be distributed among the tribes, in accordance with the 
section 106 grant formula for tribes.

    2. $8.45 million will be allocated 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 funding 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 
funds allotted for each site, the remaining funds must be used for 
implementation of its monitoring strategy and/or to build capacity for 
state-scale statistically-valid surveys.
Performance-Based Standard for Implementation of Statistical Surveys
    3. To accelerate the use of state-scale statistical surveys as 
called for in the President's budget requests, EPA is incorporating a 
performance-based standard in the allotment of the section 106 
Monitoring Initiative funds. This performance-based standard will start 
in FY 2008 with adjustments to allocations, if necessary, beginning in 
FY 2009. Monitoring Initiative funds may continue to be used for 
building state monitoring program capacity according to the guidelines, 
set out in March 2006 and discussed above in Section III.A.1, as long 
as at least five states each year adopt state-scale statistically-valid 
surveys as part of their state monitoring programs. During FY 2007, 30 
states were implementing, as part of their monitoring network, 
statistical surveys at the state-scale for at least one water resource. 
This number serves as the baseline for the performance-based standard. 
The goal is to have five additional states adopt the use of state-scale 
statistically-valid surveys each year (i.e., 35 States in 2008, 40 in 
2009, 45 in 2010, and 50 in 2011). For every state below the target of 
five additional states each year, beginning with the allotment of FY 
2009 Monitoring Initiative funds, 20% of the Monitoring Initiative 
funds used for building monitoring capacity (100% equals $169,900 \*\ 
per state) will be reallocated among those states implementing state-
scale statistical surveys. For example, if only three additional states 
adopt the use of statistical surveys by the end of FY 2008 (for a total 
of 33 states, two states short of the goal of five additional states), 
40% of the capacity building funds (i.e., $67,960 per state \*\) of the 
17 states not implementing statistical surveys will be evenly 
reallocated in FY 2009 to the 33 states that are implementing such 
surveys (i.e., $35,009 per state \*\).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    * These amounts assume the same level of funding as specified in 
Section IIIA1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Process and Criteria for Determining Implementation of Statistical 
Surveys as a Component of a State's Monitoring Program
    At the end of each fiscal year beginning in FY 2008, a state must 
submit a certification to EPA that the state is implementing a state-
scale statistically-valid survey meeting the criteria set out below. 
EPA, through Headquarters' and Regional Monitoring Coordinators' 
consultation, will make a determination on the status of state 
implementation of state-scale statistical surveys based on the state's 
certification and adherence to the following criteria:
    a. State is implementing a statistical survey design that provides 
condition estimates for a population of waters (e.g., streams, rivers, 
lakes, coastal waters, or wetlands) of the state based on an unbiased, 
representative sample of a subset of those waters.
    i. The state assesses water quality conditions using core 
indicators for at least one designated use consistent with the Elements 
of a State Water Monitoring and Assessment Program guidance. Over time, 
state surveys incorporate a full suite of appropriate biological, 
chemical and physical indicators as described in the guidance. Initial 
statistically-valid, probability surveys (through 2012), however, may 
be based on a subset of indicators tailored to specific water quality 
issues (e.g., biological integrity, recreation, fish consumption, 
etc.).
    ii. The implementation of a state-scale statistically-valid survey 
may span several years. A state may use a rotating basin approach and 
survey different watersheds over time, or spread the sites required 
across the state over multiple years--as long as these surveys can be 
aggregated for a state-scale survey. For example, a state may choose to 
sample 10 sites each year over a five-year period.
    iii. States may use methods and protocols employed in the national 
surveys, or state methods.
    iv. State surveys aim to achieve 90% confidence +/-10%. This 
typically requires about 50 sites.
    v. Surveys assess at least one water type (streams, lakes, rivers, 
coastal waters, or wetlands).
    vi. A state's monitoring strategy indicates a commitment to 
continuing statewide statistical surveys as a component of its 
comprehensive monitoring program.
    b. State continues to participate in the national/regional scale 
surveys, unless the state-scale survey is fully consistent with 
national survey design and methods.
    c. State reports the results of the state-scale survey by 2012, 
preferably as a component of the state's Integrated Report/305b/303d 
(narrative form) and/or in the probability survey module of the 
Assessment Database. (EPA will modify this module to accommodate state 
assessment categories, e.g., good/

[[Page 41072]]

fair/poor, biocondition gradient levels, etc.).

[Note: EPA acknowledges that because of the unique nature of its 
land and waters, the State of Alaska may take longer to meet the 
above criteria.]

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 and reported 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 implementing or 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 maximize the efficiency of monitoring and 
assessment resources to increase the amount of waters monitored or 
assessed; provide the information needed to allow decision makers 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. These objectives include, but are not limited 
to, assessing the extent of state waters that support the goals of the 
CWA.
 Monitoring Design
    The monitoring design explains how monitoring sites are selected to 
meet monitoring objectives, including providing water quality data of 
documented quality for many purposes such as setting water quality 
standards, assessing overall water conditions, listing impaired waters, 
developing total maximum daily loads (TMDLs), and writing National 
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. 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). Over 
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. Consistent with CWA section 106(e), EPA will 
require states to use the new Water Quality Exchange to transfer data 
to EPA's STORET data warehouse from the state's data management system.
 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 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 CWA 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

[[Page 41073]]

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

    In October 2006, EPA issued Final Guidance on Awards of Grants to 
Indian Tribes under Section 106 of the Clean Water Act that requires 
tribes to develop monitoring strategies appropriate to their 
capabilities and needs, and provide reports on water quality to EPA. 
The tribal guidance outlines reporting requirements and data 
expectations for all tribal programs receiving section 106 funds. These 
requirements will help tribes to collect critical data and information 
for effective management of their water quality programs. The 
requirements will also help EPA measure environmental results of the 
section 106 Tribal Program and comply with the Government Performance 
and Results Act (GPRA) and other federal requirements. In the reports 
that tribes are required to submit as set forth in their CWA section 
106 work plan, tribes will be required to include the following: a 
description of identified needs, goals, and objectives of their 
monitoring programs; a description of sampling methodology and 
parameters sampled; and a narrative account detailing the types of 
water sampled, sampling procedures, data summaries, and the tribe's 
interpretation of both the data and the assessment methodology used. 
Tribes are also required to the maximum extent possible to include 
water quality data for up to nine parameters: dissolved oxygen, pH, 
water temperature, total phosphorus, total nitrogen, turbidity, E. coli 
or enterococci, macroinvertebrates, and basic habitat information.

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 implementing or building 
capacity for state-scale statistically-valid surveys of water 
condition. The monitoring activities for which these funds are used 
must be accounted for and reported on through separate section 106 
workplans, and must be used to help states and tribes build program 
capacity to enhance water monitoring activities. Funds must 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/
or 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 states through their 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 recommends 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, 37% 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

[[Page 41074]]

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 develop 
predictive tools that help prioritize site-specific monitoring and 
identify problem areas.

Basic Activities for Implementing Statistically-Valid Surveys

    The 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, timelines for carrying out survey 
activities, and the funding levels needed for sampling and analyses at 
each sampling site. 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 alternate 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 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 
appropriate 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.
 Laboratory 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

[[Page 41075]]

hold the samples while they await analyses. At the laboratory, samples 
will be processed in accordance with the laboratory SOPs, including QA/
QC activities. Each participating laboratory must certify that they are 
adhering to the approved EPA and/or state QAPP and laboratory SOPs. 
Each laboratory is expected to review their 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, U.S. 
Geological Survey, 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 Use 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 the 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 identified within each jurisdiction. In the 
contiguous 48 states, a state or tribe will receive funding 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 summarized below:
     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

    Because numerous and long-standing critiques have identified the 
need for improved water quality monitoring and analysis at local, 
state, or national scales, the Administration requested and Congress 
appropriated an increase to CWA section 106 grant funds specifically 
targeted for water quality monitoring improvements. States have 
traditionally monitored only a small percentage of all the nation's 
waters, and focused their limited monitoring resources on heavily used 
or problem waters. This targeted monitoring, while providing important 
site-specific information, does not provide scientifically defensible 
state or national reports on the extent of waters meeting the fishable 
and swimmable goals of the CWA. Statistically-valid surveys offer a 
cost-effective and efficient way to fulfill these requirements, 
complement traditional monitoring designs, and support a broader range 
of management decisions. There is widespread acceptance of the use of 
statistical surveys in reports on the nation's housing, labor, health, 
agricultural, and other sectors.
    To accelerate the use of state-scale statistical surveys as called 
for in the President's budget requests, EPA is amending the March 29, 
2006, Guidelines for the Award of Monitoring Initiative Funds under 
Section 106 Grants to States, Interstate Agencies, and Tribes to 
incorporate a performance-based standard in the allotment of the 
section 106 Monitoring Initiative funds. Monitoring Initiative funds 
will continue to be used for building state monitoring program capacity 
according to the guidelines as long as states make progress in adopting 
state-scale statistically-valid surveys as part of their state 
monitoring programs.
    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

[[Page 41076]]

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 
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/.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Information Concerning 2008 
Clean Water Act Sections 303(d), 305(b), and 314 Integrated 
Reporting and Listing Decisions. October 12, 2006. http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/2008_ir_memorandum.html.
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.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Wadeable Streams Assessment: A 
Collaborative Survey of the Nation's Streams. December 2006. http://www.epa.gov/owow/streamsurvey/.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Final Guidance on Awards of 
Grants to Indian Tribes Under Section 106 of the Clean Water Act. 
October 2006. http://www.epa.gov/owm/cwfinance/106tgg07.htm.

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. section 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. section 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. section 3501 et seq.). The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 
801 et seq., generally provides that before certain actions may take 
effect, 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: July 8, 2008.
Benjamin H. Grumbles,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
[FR Doc. E8-16385 Filed 7-16-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P