United States Office of Wetlands, Oceans
Environmental Protection and Watersheds July, 1991
Agency Washington DC 20460
CONTENT REQUIREMENTS AND
APPROVAL PROCESS FOR
NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM
COMPREHENSIVE
CONSERVATION AND
MANAGEMENT PLANS
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT 1
II. CCMP CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 3
Management Conference Membership 5
Characterization Report 6
Base Program Analysis 7
Action Plans 8
Monitoring Plan 10
Federal Consistency Report 12
Public Participation 13
Public Review 14
CZM Consistency Review 15
III. CCMP APPROVAL 17
Public Review 19
Management Conference Review and Approval 22
Governor's Concurrence 24
EPA Administrator's Approval 26
APPENDIX - CLEAN WATER ACT § 320
CCMP Approval Process
-------
- CCMP Approval Process
-------
PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT Chapter I
I. PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT
The purpose of this document is to describe the content requirements and
approval process for Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans
(CCMPs) prepared under the National Estuary Program (NE?)
The information in this document supplements the information previously
published in “Saving Bays and Estuaries: A Primer for Establishing and
Managing Estuary Projects” (the NEP Primer). Before reading this document,
you should be familiar with the information in the NEP Primer; the
information in this document expands on the NE ? Primer, focusing on the
details of what must be included in CCMPs and on the CCMP approval
process. Refer to the Primer for additional guidance on the preparation of
Action Plans and a Characterization Report, committee membership, and
CCMP implementation.
This document is intended to be a practical reference that management
conferences, Regional Project Officers, and State Program Directors can
consult to ensure that their CCMPs are complete and to guide them through
the CCMP approval process. Note that content requirements may differ
somewhat from estuary to estuary depending on when they entered the NEP
and the contents of their State - EPA Conference Agreements.
Included in this document are:
O A list of CCMP content requirements, based on the
review form that the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) will use in determining whether to approve individual
C MPs.
O Explanations of the content requirements that must
be met for CCMPs to be approved.
o A step-by-step explanation of the CCMP approval process.
O Examples of public notices and transmittal letters.
o The full text of Clean Water Ad § 320.
Chapter II of this document provides explanations of the CCMP content
requirements. For more detailed explanations of the content requirements of
particular sections (e.g., monitoring plan, base program analysis), refer to the
appropriate EPA Guidance. Chapter ifi contains a step-by-step explanation of
the approval process itself.
CCMP Approval Process I
-------
Chapter I PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT
2 CCMP Approval Process
-------
CCMP CONTENT REQUIREMENTS Chapter II
II. CCMP CONTENT REQUIREMENTS
CWA § 320(0(1) specifies that
the Administrator shall approve such plan if the plan meets
the requirements of this section ...“
The basic CCMP content requirements are set forth in Clean Water Act
(CWA) § 320, the NEP Primer, and the individual State - EPA Conference
Agreements for each estuary program. When a CCrvIP is submitted to the
EPA Administrator, EPA’s review will be based on the requirements as
defined in this document.
EPA has determined that the seven purposes of a management conference
listed in CWA § 320 (see the Appendix of this document for the full text of
CWA § 320) define the following content requirements for CCMPs and their
supplementary documents::
1. Conference Membership § 320(c)
2. Characterization Findings § 320(b)(1)-(3)
3. Base Program Analysis § 320(b)(5)
4. Action Plans (including finance plan) § 320(b)(4)
5. Monitoring Plan § 320(b)(6)
6. Federal Consistency Review § 320(b)(7)
7. Public Review § 320(f)
In addition to the requirements derived from CWA § 320, EPA has
determined that each CCl 1P must also be submitted to the appropriate State(s)
for Coastal Zone Management Program consistency determination.
It is the management conference’s responsibility to demonstirate that any
other applicable Federal and State requirements have been identified and
met.
A list (see next page) has been developed to help ensure that CCMPs meet all
content requirements. The CCMP content requirements are explained
individually in the following sections, with each explanation detailing:
O The requirement’s origin
o What the requirement specifies.
o What must be included in or accompany the CCMP to demonstrate
that the requirement has been met.
CCMP Approval Process 3
-------
Chapter II CCMP CONTENT REQUiREMENTS
CCMP CONTENT LIST
Li Conference Membership List
Li Characterization Findings . Summary
O Environmental Quality Objectives 0 Priority Problems
0 Status and Trends 0 Probable Causes
O Linkage to Pollutant Loads
Li Base Program Analysis
3 Review Existing Framework U Evaluate Framework
o Recommend Action Options
Li Action Plans
U Problem: Causes and Source U Relation to Program Goals
U Management Options Considered 0 Selection Criteria
O Selected Management Options U Affected Location
o Lead Agency/Group & Others Involved U Implementation Schedule
U Procedure to Perform Activity
Li Finance Plan - Separate or Part of Action Plans
Li Monitoring Plan
3 Objectives & Performance Criteria 0 Data Archiving
U Testable Hypotheses U Schedule
13 Analytical Methods, Sampling Design 0 Redirection Strategy
0 Monitoring Program Evaluation
Li Federal Consistency Report
o Inventory of Federal Programs 0 Federal Consistency
o Areas of Cooperation/Inconsistency Strategy
Li Public Participation and Public Review
o Public Meetings Held U Issues Discussed
U Media Used for Notification U Responsiveness Summary
Li CZM Consistency Determination
4 CCMP Approval Process
-------
CCMP CONTENT REQUIREMENTS Chapter II
Management Conference Membership
The CCMP must demonstrate that the membership of the management
conference meets the requirements of CWA § 320(c), which specifies that:
“The members of a management conference... shall include, at a
minimum, the Administrator and representatives of:
1. each State and foreign nation located in whole or in part in
the estuarine zone for which the conference is convened;
2. international, interstate, or regional agencies or entities
having jurisdiction over all or a significant part of the
estuary;
3. each interested Federal agency, as determined appropriate by
the-Administrator;
4. local governments having jurisdiction over any land or
water within the estuarine zone, as determined appropriate
by the Administrator; and
5. affected industries, public and private educational
institutions and the general public, as determined
appropriate by the Administrator.’ 1
Management conference membership is determined in consultation with
EPA in the early stages in order to satisfy the requirements of CWA § 320(c).
Nonetheless, the CCMI’ must demonstrate that management conference
membership meets the requirements of CWA § 320(c). Refer to the NEP
Primer, pages 11-22, for further guidance on management conference
membership
In addition to the members specified in CWA § 320(c), a representative of the
State Coastal Zone Management (CZM) program must participate in the
management conference’s management committee. This requirement
derives from a policy developed by EPA and NOAA in 1988 to avoid
conflicting NE? and CZM program activities.
The CCMP can demonstrate that this requirement has been met by listing the
management conference members, indicating each member’s organizational
affiliation.
CCMP Approval Process 5
-------
Chapter II CCMP CONTENT REQUiREMENTS
Characterization Report
CWA § 320(b)(1) - (3) and the individual State - EPA Conference Agreements
commit each estuary program to characterize the estuary. CWA § 320(b)
specifies that:
“The purposes of any management conference convened with
respect to an estuary under this subsection shall be to --
(1) assess trends in water quality, natural resources, and uses of
the estuary;
(2) collect, characterize, and assess data on toxics, nutrients, and
natural resources within the estuarine zone to identify the
causes of environmental problems;
(3) develop the relationship between the inpiace loads and
point and nonpoint loadings of pollutants to the estuarine
zone and the potential uses of the zone, water quality, and
natural resources;”
In support of this, CWA § 320(d) specifies that:
“... the management conference shall survey and utilize existing
reports, data, and studies relating to the estuary...”
Each CCMP should include a summary of the estuary’s characterization. The
summary should include synopses of:
o The estuary program’s environmental quality goals.
O The status and trends of the estuary’s water quality, natural
resources, and uses.
0 The probable causes of environmental problems, including data on
toxics, nutrients, and natural resources.
o The linkages between water quality, potential uses, and natural
resources and in-place point and nonpoint pollutant loads.
o Evidence that existing data were identified and used, where
appropriate.
U The estuary program’s priority problems and the selection criteria
used to determine priority problems.
Refer to the NEP Primer and EPA Guidance for a discussion of full
characterization findings.
6 CCMP Approval Process
-------
CCMP CONTENT REQUIREMENTS Chapter II
Base Program Analysis
CWA § 320(b)(5) specifies that each management conference shall:
“(5) develop plans for the coordinated implementation of the
plan by the States as well as Federal and local agencies
participating in the conference;’
This requirement entails an analysis of existing institutional structures,
which should proceed in parallel with the characterization investigation.
The aim of this analysis is to ensure that the greatest possible use is made of
existing programs and authorities. It is vital to understand what actions are
already being taken and to identify gaps in the regulatory and institutional
management framework to the extent that it is applicable to the action plans.
The results of the characterization study and the base program analysis feed
into action plan development.
A base program analysis should include the components discussed below.
For a more detailed description of the content requirements of a base program
analysis, refer to the NEP Primer and to EPA guidance.
o Review - Describe the Existing Regulatory and Institutional Frame-work
Inventory Federal, State, and local laws, regulations and programs that
pertain to each priority problem by: listing and briefly describing the relevant
laws; identifying lead and support implementation agencies; and describing
implementation programs, including resources available, jurisdiction, extent
of responsibility, and deadlines. Other considerations might include: existing
criteria, standards, and regulatory control programs; support from
management institutions; integration among agencies, institutions, and
programs; and levels and allocations of resources. This should define the
scope of agencies’ responsibilities and the coverage of regulations and
programs.
o Evaluation - Assess the Existing Framework’s Effectiveness
Determine individual program and overall framework effectiveness. This
requires defining both environmental and administrative effectiveness
measures. This should identify gaps and overlaps in the framework.
U Recommendations - Identi,fy and Evaluate Action Options
Assess opportunities for addressing weaknesses and expanding strengths.
Questions to be answered include: are new laws needed; is support for
redirection required; what timing is appropriate; how can support be
generated; does any agency need new or additional authority; and is another
entity needed?
CCMP Approval Process 7
-------
Chapter I I CCMP CONTENT REQUIREMENTS
Each Tier II and later estuary program CCMP must include a base program
analysis, as described above.
Action Plans
CWA § 320(b) specifies that each management conference shall:
“(4) develop a comprehensive conservation and management
plan that recommends priority corrective actions and
compliance schedules addressing point and nonpoint
sources of pollution to restore and maintain the chemical,
physical, and biological integrity of the estuary, including
restoration and maintenance of water quality, a balanced
indigenous population of shellfish, fish, and wildlife, and
recreational activities in the estuary, and assure that the
designated uses of the estuary are protected;”
Given the results of the characterization study and the base program analysis,
action plans must be developed to address each of the priority problems
identified by the management conference. An action plan should include
discussions of:
U The problem, identifying probable causes and sources.
O The specific program objective(s) related to the problem, source, or
cause.
O The various management options considered.
o The criteria used for selecting management options, including the
selected management options and performance vis a vis criteria.
An action plan must also outline the specific abatement, control, or
protection plans that will be followed to achieve each objective, including:
o The procedures that will be used to achieve the objective.
o Who will execute, pay for, and enforce the various portions of each
action plan. This should include commitments from each
participating agency, institution, and enterprise.
o The funding required by the action and the potential sources of that
funding, i.e. a finance plan.
o The location(s) that will be affected by the action.
o The schedule for achieving the objective, including provisions for
evaluating action plan performance and for revising action plans.
8 CCMP Approval Process
-------
CCMP CONTENT REQUIREMENTS Chapter II
To avoid duplication of effort, unnecessary expenditures of funds, and
development of conflicting regulatory mechanisms, EPA strongly encourages
the sponsoring agencies to endorse and include in their CCMP an agreement
of responsibilities. An agreement signed by all participating agencies is one
way to ensure that all action plan responsibilities are clearly understood and
agreed upon
The requirement for a finance plan does not apply specifically to Tier I
programs, although Tier I programs are required to address cost as part of the
milestones for Purposes 4 and 5 in their State - EPA Agreements. The finance
plan requirement does apply to Tier II and later programs and can be met in
one of two ways:
0 As described above, individual action plans may include
information on costs, financial mechanisms, and commitments.
[ 3 Alternatively, a separate finance plan may be developed, specifying
how funds will be raised for all actions to be implemented.
Finance plans should match action plan costs and cash flow needs to a
suitable funding source and managing entity. The plan may identify existing
or potential new sources of funding, in which case implementation may
require new State or local legislation. If the finance strategy is developed as a
CCMP companion document, the conference should ensure that the funding
recommendations it contains also receive public review and comment.
A CCMP must demonstrate how the action plan(s) address each priority
problem. Any action plans initiated prior to CCMP completion (including
action plan demonstration projects) should also be described, including the
problem the action plan addressed, the roles of different agencies and users,
financial commitments, and results to date. After the CCMP has been
approved, the management conference may add new action plans or modify
existing plans; CCMPs are ‘living documents’ that can and should be
modified as needed.
Refer to the NEP Primer for further information on action plan
development.
CCMP Approval Process
-------
Chapter II CCMP CONTENT REQUIREMENTS
Monitoring Plan
CWA § 320(b) specifies that each management conference shall:
“(6) monitor the effectiveness of actions taken pursuant to the
plan;”
Each CCMP must include a monitoring plan that specifies how the actions
defined in the CCMP’s action plans will be monitored for effectiveness. This
entails monitoring at two overlapping levels: environmental quality
monitoring and overall program monitoring. The water quality monitoring
plan must be carefully designed to ensure that the results can be used to
monitor and evaluate the overall program, which may in turn suggest
changes to action plans. The basic monitoring plan requirements are
summarized below; for more detailed information, refer to the forthcoming
EPA “National Estuary Program: Monitoring Guidance Document.”
Each monitoring plan must address the following issues:
0 Objectives and Performance Criteria
The objectives of the monitoring plan must be defined carefully.
Objectives might, for example, be to obtain data sufficient to:
• determine the effectiveness of nutrient reduction strategies;
• determine trends in sediment contaminant concentrations; or
• evaluate the persistence of PCBs in the tissue of recreational and
commercial fish.
Decision or performance criteria, i.e. specific parameter values that can
be used to measure success and thereby guide management decisions,
must also be defined.
o Testable Hypotheses
The study objectives must be translated into testable hypotheses to
ensure unambiguous results and that the objectives of the monitoring
program can be met. For example, a testable hypothesis for
determining the effectiveness of nutrient reduction strategies might
include questions such as: are there annual trends in measured
dissolved oxygen concentrations? are the trends increasing or
decreasing?
0 Analytical Methods and Sampling Design
Detailed specifications for each monitoring parameter of the
monitoring program must be developed. Each specification should
10 CCMP Approval Process
-------
CCMP CONTENT REQUIREMENTS Chapter II
include sampling locations and frequency, field sampling procedures,
and quality assurance and control procedures. The data management
and statistical test methods that will be used to analyze monitoring data
must also be specified. The monitoring plan must specify how
monitoring data will be stored.
0 Expected Monitoring Program Performance
To determine the expected performance of the initial sampling design,
the minimum difference desired to be detected in samples over time or
between locations must be defined for each monitoring parameter.
Without this determination, there is a risk of collecting and analyzing
either too many samples or too few samples to detect statistically
significant temporal or spatial trends.
The results of this determination should be used to identify
modifications to the initial monitoring program design that would
result in increased effectiveness. Information from this evaluation
should also be used to assess the ability -- and cost effectiveness — of the
monitoring program to provide information that can be used to
evaluate the action it is designed to monitor.
L I Monitoring Program Performance Evaluation
The monitoring plan should specify a timetable for analyzing data and
assessing the monitoring program’s performance. The results of this
assessment should be used to refine the monitoring program’s
objectives and to modify individual study elements to satisfy these
objectives.
O Action Evaluation and Redirection Strategy
The monitoring plan should specify how the results of the monitoring
program will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the actions that
are being monitored. This should include a schedule for performing
evaluations and for considering modifications to the actions. Where
NEPs have committed -- in their State - EPA conference agreements —
to preparing biennial reports; their CCMPs should demonstrate that
these reports will be prepared.
O Funding
The monitoring plan should identify the resources needed to perform
the monitoring and the sources for these funds.
The management conference must develop an overall monitoring plan to
cover all action plans. The monitoring plan must either be included in the
CCMP itself or accompany the CCMP when it is submitted for approval.
CCMP Approval Process I I
-------
Chapter II CCMP CONTENT REQUIREMENTS
Federal Consistency Report
CWA § 320(b)(7) specifies that the final purpose of a management conference
is to:
“(7) review all Federal financial assistance programs and Federal
development programs in accordance with the requirements of
Executive Order 12372, as in effect on September 17, 1983, to
determine whether such assistance program or project would be
consistent with and further the purposes and objectives of the
plan prepared under this section.
For purposes of paragraph (7), such programs and projects shall
not be limited to the assistance programs and development
projects subject to Executive Order 12372, but may include any
programs listed in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance which may have an effect on the purposes and
objectives of the plan developed under this section.”
Based on this requirement, EPA has determined that each CCMP must
include, completely or by reference:
O an inventory of Federal Assistance programs and development
projects that may have an effect on the purposes and objectives of
the CCMP;
o identification of possible areas of inconsistency;
0 identification of possible areas of cooperation;
O a review strategy that outlines how the management conference
will review Federal financial assistance programs and development
projects to meet this requirement.
For more information, refer to “Program Guidance: Federal Consistency
Review Required by Clean Water Act Section 320(b)(7),” available from EPA.
12 CCMP Approval Process
-------
CCMP CONTENT REQUIREMENTS Chapter II
Public Participation
EPA has determined that CCMP development falls under the public
participation requirements of CWA § 101(e), which specifies that:
“Pubhc participation in the development, revision, and
enforcement of any regulation, standard, effluent limitation,
plan, or program established by the Administrator or any State
under this Act shall be provided for, encouraged, and assisted by
the Administrator and the States.”
40 CFR 25.2(a)(5), “Public Participation in Programs under... the Clean Water
Act,” specifies that public participation is required when:
“Development and implementation of plans, programs,
standards, construction, and other activities [ are] supported with
EPA financial assistance (grants and cooperative agreements) to
State, interstate, regional and local agencies.”
Because the NE? is mandated by the CWA and because individual programs
receive EPA financial assistance, each management conference is required to
conduct a public participation program in the development and
implementation of its CCMP. 40 CFR 25 sets forth minimum requirements
and suggested approaches for public participation. Guidelines for NE? public
participation programs can be found in Appendix B of the NE? Primer.
An estuary program’s public participation program must be summarized and
submitted as part of its CCMP. The summary should include:
0 Identification of target groups. Knowing who constitutes the public
for an estuary program is essential to conducting an effective public
participation program. Identifying target audiences and creating a
representative mailing list will lay the groundwork for
participation activities.
o Public participation activities conducted: where, when, attendance,
and matters presented. Public participation, as defined in 40 CFR
Part 25.4, includes public hearings or meetings, advisory groups,
workshops, seminars, and informal personal communications
with individuals and groups.
o Public notifications: what, how, and when. Adequate time must be
given between public notification and any public hearings or
meetings. 40 CFR 25.5(b) specifies that a notice of public meeting or
workshop must be publicized at least 45 days prior to the date of the
meeting. Reports, documents and data relevant to the discussion
at the public meeting should be available to the public at least 30
days prior to the meeting.
CCMP Approval Process 1 3
-------
Chapter II CCMP CONTENT REQUIREMENTS
Public Review
CWA § 320(0(1) specihes that a CCMP can be approved only
“after providing for public review and comment”
The mechanics of providing for public review and comment are presented in
Chapter III In brief, the public must be given the opportunity to review and
comment on the draft CCMP; any comments received as the result of this
public review must be addressed by the management conference, either by
making changes to the CCMP or by explaining why no change was made.
As described in Chapter ifi, the public review period(s) should also serve to
allow EPA to review and comment on the draft çCMP.
To demonstrate that public — including EPA -- comments on the draft C MP
have been addressed, the management conference must prepare a
responsiveness summary, which summarizes the public review process and
its results, for inclusion in the final CCMP. A responsiveness summary
should specify:
O Dates, locations, and lengths of public comment periods;
o Media used for disseminating public meeting notices and notices of
availability; and
U Significant comments received and the management conference’s
responses.
Each CCMP submission to the EPA Administrator for approval must include
a responsiveness summary.
14 CCMP Approval Process
-------
CCMP CONTENT REQUiREMENTS Chapter II
CZM Consistency Review
The Coastal Zone Management Program (CZMP) and the National Eshiary
Program coordination paper (1988) specify that:
“CCMPs developed under the NEP will voluntarily, as a matter
of policy, be submitted for review under the Federal consistency
provisions of Section 307(c) of the Coastal Zone Management
Act of 1972, as amended.”
CZMA § 307(c)(1)(A), as amended in the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization
Amendments of 1990, specifies that:
“Each Federal agency activity within or outside the coastal zone
that affects any land or water use or natural resource of the
coastal zone shall be carried out in a manner which is consistent
to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies
of approved state management programs.”
The term “affecting” includes direct effects caused by the activity and
occurring at the same time and place and indirect effects which may be caused
by the activity, which are reasonably foreseeable, although later in time or
farther removed in distance
The management conference should become familiar with the State(s)’ CZM
process(es) for determining consistency. Most States have formal consistency
determination processes, but the process may differ from State to State.
If the State has a CZM program, the EPA Administrator and State Governor
share responsibility for ensuring that the CCMP is consistent with the State
CZM plan. As the final voice of State interests, the Governor’s concurrence
that the CCMP should be approved implies that the CCMP is consistent with
other State requirements, including the State CZM consistency review.
Certification of CZM consistency need not be included in the CCMP itself, but
should at least be included in the materials accompanying the CCMP. The
Governor’s letter of concurrence (see Chapter ifi) should include a statement
that the CCMP is consistent with the affected State(s)’ CZM plan(s).
CCMP Approval Process 1 5
-------
Chapter II CCMP CONTENT REQUIREMENTS
16 CCMP Approval Process
-------
THE APPROVAL PROCESS Chapter III
III. CCMP APPROVAL
Chapter II contains definitions of what must be included in a final CCMP for
it to receive the EPA Administrator’s approval; this chapter focuses on the
approval process itself. The two chapters mirror each other;- for example,
Chapter II indicates that a final CCMP must include a public review summary
and this chapter discusses how public reviews should be conducted.
The basic requirements for CCMP approval are defined in CWA § 320(0(1),
which specifies that:
“Not later than 120 days after completion of a conservation and
management plan and after providing for public review and
comment, the Administrator shall approve such plan if the plan
meets the requirements of this section and the affected Governor
or Governors concur.”
CWA § 320(0(1) stipulates that a final CCMP will be approved if:
O It has been reviewed by the public.
O It meets the requirements of CWA § 320.
(3 The affected State Governor(s) concur that it should be approved.
The management conference is responsible for meeting these requirements;
the EPA Administrator is responsible for ensuring that the requirements
have been met and for approving a final CCMP within 120 days of
completion, given that the three other requirements have been met. CCMP
“completion” is the date when a final CCMIP is submitted to the EPA
Administrator for approval.
In addition to the requirements defined in 320(0(1), EPA has determined that
each final CCMP must be adopted formally by its management conference and
must be submitted for CZM consistency determination by the affected State(s).
Any CCMP approval process must therefore include:
O Public Review
o Management Conference Review and Adoption
O Governor’s Concurrence
O State CZM Consistency Determination
o EPA Administrator Review and Approval
The following sections contain step-by-step explanations of these
requirements; the flow chart on the next page depicts the approval process.
CCMP Approval Process 1 7
-------
Chapter III
THE APPROVAL PROCESS
4 Months
(120 Days)
APPROVAL PROCESS FLOW CHART
3+
Months
30 - 60
Days
30 Days
30 Days
________$__________
__* I
Governor’s Concurrence
$
[
EPA Review
$
J
EPA
Administrator’s
Approval
Page 22
Page 24
Page 26
I Draft CCMP I
4
First Public Review
Informal EPA and CZM
Consistency Review
30 - 60
Days
Page 20
*
6-8
Months
Management Conference
Incorporates Comments
Other State
Public Review
Requirements
/
Second Public Review
Formal CZM Consistency
Determination
Management Conference
Review and Approval
18
CCMP Approval Process
-------
THE APPROVAL PROCESS Chapter III
Public Review
CWA § 320W(1): “ after providing for public review and
comment ...“
Although public participation ensures that substantial review is built into the
CCMP development process, the draft CCMP must be made available to the
general public for review and comment. This includes:
O Notice of the CCMP’s availability for review.
O Public access to all parts of the CCMP.
C) Opportunity to participate in workshops and public meetings.
o Opportunity to submit comments.
O Consideration of public comments and revisions as appropriate.
o Preparation of a Responsiveness Summary for inclusion in the
CcMP.
The entire CCMF, including any appendices and other requirements as
defined in this guidance, must be available to the public for review in at least
one central location. Programs may also elect to provide summaries of the
CCMP to the public for review.
The management conference must hold at least one public meeting to discuss
the entire CCMP, including a discussion of the management options available
to implement the plan.
In addition to the requirements of § 320, the management conference also
must meet any State imposed public commenting period requirements.
To ensure that the public’s comments have been addressed, the management
conference must prepare a Responsiveness Summary (see Chapter II) to
transmit with the final CCMP to the EPA Administrator for approval.
Number of Reviews
Although only one public review of the draft CCMP is required, EPA
recommends two public review periods. The first review period should
provide the opportunity for:
0 The public to react to different management options.
O An informal State CZM consistency review.
O The Governor’s office to review the CCMP.
CCMP Approval Process 19
-------
Chapter III THE APPROVAL PROCESS
0 EPA offices to complete informal reviews.
The second public review period would provide an opportunity for the
reviewers to ensure that their comments have been addressed. This second
review period would also provide a good opportunity for the formal State
CZM office consistency determination and any other State review
requirements.
Notification of Availability
Although the management conference should include representatives of all
affected interests (see Chapter II), notification of CCMP availability for review
must extend far beyond the management conference itself.
The public must be notified of the availability of the CCMP and of any public
workshops or hearings being held by the management conference about the
CCMP. These notifications should be placed in major newspapers around the
watershed and should contain:
o Location where relevant documents may be reviewed or obtained;
O Information on location, dates, and times of public workshops,
meetings, or hearings;
O Timetable of the review and approval;
O Major issues under consideration; and
0 Contacts for more information.
An example notice is shown on the next page. The management conference
should mail copies of the public notice to staff in selected Federal and State
agencies and other interested persons or groups in the applicable State(s).
The management conference may also elect to publish the public notice in the
Federal Register and! or in applicable State Register(s), though doing so is not
required and is not a substitute for the above requirements.
The CCMF is a lengthy document and the public should be given at least 45
days for review before a public meeting; 60 days is recommended for a
complete review period.
20 CCMP Approval Process
-------
THE APPROVAL PROCESS Chapter III
EXAMPLE PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE
Availability for Review and Comment
of the
Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
for Example Bay
/ I
The Example Bay Project, a program of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the
Example State Department of Environmental Resources, is concluding its five year effort to
develop a management plan to guide the Example Bay communities and State and Federal
Agencies in protecting the Bay.
As required by Section 320 of the Clean Water Act, the Example Bay Program management
conference has prepared a Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP)
that details the condition of the Bay and lays out an agenda for cleaning up and protecting
the Bay.
The draft CCMP is available for public review and comment.
Location The CCMP may be reviewed at or obtained from the Example Bay
Program office. See below for address.
Hearing A public hearing has been scheduled for ._j. J_ at the Example Bay
Program office. The hearing will begin at 19;00.
Timetable Any comments on the draft CCMP must be received within 60 days of
this notice. After comments have been incorporated, the final CCMP will
also be available for review. Another Notice will be posted at that time.
Issues The major issues for the Example Bay Program are:
I
S
Contact Example Person (000) 000-0000
Example Bay Program Office
I Main Street
Anytown, Mystate
PLEASE HELP TO PROTECT THE BAY
READ THE CCMP!
WRITE DOWN YOUR COMMENTS!
COME TO THE PUBLIC HEARING!
CCMP Approval Process 21
-------
Chapter III THE APPROVAL PROCESS
Management Conference Review and Approval
Once the public’s comments have been incorporated in the CCMP, the
management conference should formally review and approve the CCMP
before submission to the affected Governor(s) for approval concurrence and
to the EPA Administrator for approval All Chairs of all committees
participating in the management conference must sign the transmittal letters
to indicate that they have reviewed the final CCMP and approve of its
submission to the Administrator and the Governor(s).
The management conference should transmit a copy of the CCMP to the
Governor’s office and the EPA Administrator at the same time. To ensure
timely review, the EPA Headquarter’s Office of Wetlands, Oceans and
Watersheds should also receive a copy of the transmittal letter to the EPA
Administrator.
The transmittal letter to the Governor should request the Governor to review
the CCMP and to advise the EPA Administrator of whether the Governor
believes that the CCMP should be approved.
The transmittal letter to the EPA Administrator should request the
Administrator to approve the CCMP and, if necessary, to extend the
management conference. The transmittal letter to the EPA Administrator
should also indicate that a copy of the CCMP has been sent to the appropriate
Governor(s).
An example transmittal letter to the EPA Administrator is shown on the
following page.
22 CCMP Approval Process
-------
THE APPROVAL PROCESS Chapter III
EXAMPLE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
TRANSMITTAL LETTER
February 22, 1991
Administrator ___________
United States Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Dear Administrator ____________
We are pleased to transmit to you the __________________ management
plan. We ask that you approve it as the Comprehensive Conservation
and Management Plan (CCMP) for ______________ under the National
Estuary Program, Section 320 of the Clean Water Act. This plan
has been developed through a five year process that included
extensive public review and comment.
We have transmitted a copy of the CCMP to Governor ________ for
approval concurrence. We hope that your approval of this
Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan and extension of
the management conference will be q-uickly forthcoming so that we
can move ahead with implementation.
Sincerely,
Enclosure
CCMP Approval Process 23
-------
Chapter III THE APPROVAL PROCESS
Governor’s Concurrence
CWA § 320(0(1): “... and the affected Governor or Governors
concur ...“
The management conference should work early with the Governor’s(s’)
office(s) to enlist full support for the CCMP’s objectives and to ensure
concurrence with the Administrator’s approval. The management
conference should transmit a copy of the final CCMP to the Governor at the
same time it is transmitted to the EPA Administrator. The transmittal letter
should ask the Governor to review the final CCIvIP and to advise the EPA
Administrator of whether the Governor believes that the final CCMP should
be approved.
The Governor may delegate concurrence authority to a State agency, but EPA
strongly recommends that the Governor retain concurrence authority. The
Governor’s personal support of the final CCMP will be extremely important
when the CCMP is implemented; delegating concurrence authority to another
agency reduces the importance of the CCMP.
In concurring with the Administrator’s decision to approve a final CCMP, it
is also the Governor’s responsibility to ensure that the CCMP is consistent
with other State requirements, including the State CZM Program. The
Governor’s letter of concurrence should include assurances that the final
CCMP is consistent with the State CZM Plan (if the State has a CZM Program)
and that any other state review requirements have been fulfilled. An
example Governor’s concurrence letter is shown on the next page.
A copy of the Governor’s letter of concurrence to the EPA Administrator
should be forwarded to the management conference.
24 CCMP Approval Process
-------
THE APPROVAL PROCESS Chapter III
EXAMPLE GOVERNORS CONCURRENCE LETTER
February 22, 1991
Achninistrator ___________
United States Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Dear Administrator _____________
I am pleased to transmit to you the __________________ management
plan. I ask that you approve it as the Comprehensive Conservation
and Management Plan for _______________ under the National Estuary
Program, Section 320 of the Clean Water Act. This plan has been
developed through a five year process that included extensive
public review and comment. The plan, as adopted by the management
conference, is consistent with the federally approved coastal zone
management plan for ____________ State. This letter signifies my
concurrence with the plan.
The plan lays out an ambitious agenda for addressing existing and
future threats to _____________. I have shown my support for the
plan by proposing significant increases in state funding for
implementation of the plan and hope to work with you and the
Congress to obtain necessary federal support.
We hope that your approval of this Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plan will be quickly forthcoming so that we can move
ahead with implementation. We believe that our plan provides a
model for other estuary plans currently being developed, because
the problems and solutions are often similar and because the open
process we have followed and philosophy of stewardship that
underlies the plan can be applied to other problems and other
places.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Governor, State of ___________
Enclosure
cc: Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection
Management Conference
CCMP Approval Process 25
-------
Chapter III THE APPROVAL PROCESS
EPA Administrator’s Approval
CWA § 320(0(1) specifies that the EPA Administrator shall approve a CCMP
within 120 days of submission if:
1. The CCMP was reviewed by the public.
2. The CCMP meets the requirements of CWA § 320.
3. The affected State Governor(s) concur that the CCMP should be
approved.
Upon receipt of the CCMP package, EPA will review the CCMP and
accompanying materials, using a longer version of the check list duplicated in
Chapter II of this document as the basis for the review. If, based on this
review, the CCMP is found to meet the requirements defined in this
document, the EPA Administrator will approve the CCMP.
The initial five years of the management conference allowed by § 320(e) may
expire before the Administrator approves the CCMP. The Administrator’s
approval of the CCMP will include, as necessary, extension of the
management conference to meet the requirements of § 320. If the initial five
year period of the management conference expires without extension, the
Administrator may reconvene the management conference to complete its
responsibilities under § 320(b).
The Administrator will not approve the CCIvIP if it fails to meet any of the
requirements outlined in Chapter II of this document. The CC?4P may be
resubmitted for approval -- as per the process described in this Chapter — at
any time.
26 CCMP Approval Process
-------
CLEAN WATER ACT 320 Appendix
APPENDIX . CLEAN WATER ACT § 320
(a) Management Conference. —
(I) Nomination of Estuaries. — The Governor of any State may nominate to the
Administrator an estuary lying in whole or in part within the State as an estuary of
national significance and request a management conference to develop a
comprehensive management plan for the estuary The nomination shall document the
need for the conference, the likelihood of success, and information relating to the
factors in paragraph (2).
(2) Convening of Conference. —
(A) In General. - L it any case where the Administrator determines, on his own
initiative or upon nomination of a State under paragraph (1), that the
attainment or maintenance of that water quality in an estuary which assure
protection of public water supplies and the protection and propagation of a
balanced, indigenous population of shellfish, fish, and wildlife, and allows
recreational activities, in and on water, requires that control of point and
nonpoint sources of pollution in more than one State, the Administrator shall
select such estuary and convene a management conference.
(B) Pnority Consideration. — The Administrator shall give pnority consideration
under this section to Long Island Sound, New York and Connecticut;
Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island; Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts; Puget Sound,
Washington; New York - New Jersey Harbor, New York and New Jersey;
Delaware Inland Bays, Delaware; Albemarle Sound, North Carolina; Sarasota
Bay, Florida; San Francisco Bay, California; Santa Monica Bay, California;
and Galveston Bay, Texas.
(3) Boundary dispute exception. — In any case in which a boundary between two States
passes through an estuary and such boundary is disputed and is the subject of an action
in any court, the Administrator shall not convene a management conference with
respect to such estuary before a final adjudication has been made of such dispute.
(b) Purposes of Conference. - The purposes of any management conference convened with
respect to an estuary under this subsection shall be to —
(I) assess trends in water quality, natural resources, and uses of the estuary;
(2) collect, characterize, and assess data on toxics, nutrients, and natural resources within
the estuarine zone to identify the causes of environmental problems;
(3) develop the relationship between the inplace loads and point and nonpomt loadings
of pollutants to the estuanne zone and the potential uses of the zone, water quality,
and natural resources;
(4) develop a comprehensive conservation and management plan that recommends
priority corrective actions and compliance schedules addressing point and nonpoint
sources of pollution to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological
integrity of the estuary, including restoration and maintenance of water quality, a
balanced indigenous population of shellfish, fish, and wildlife, and recreational
activities in the estuary, and assure that the designated uses of the estuary are
protected;
(5) develop plans for the coordinated implementation of the plan by the States as well
as Federal and local agencies participating in the conference;
CCMP Approval Process 27
-------
Appendix CLEAN WATER ACT § 320
(6) monitor the effectiveness of actions taken pursuant to the plan, and
(7) review all Federal financial assistance program and Federal development project in
accordance with the requirements of Executive Order 12372, as in effect on September
17, 1983, to determine whether such assistance program or project would be consistent
with and further the purposes or objectives of the plan prepared under this section.
For purposes of paragraph (7), such programs and projects shall not be limited to the assistance
progran- arid development projects subject to Executive Order 12372, but may mdude any
programs listed in the most recent catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance which may have an
effect on the purposes and objectives of the plan developed under this section.
(c) Members of Conference. — The members of a management conference convened under this
section shall include, at a minimum, the Administrator and representatives of —
(1) Each State and foreign nation located in whole or in part in the estuarine zone of the
estualy for which the conference is convened,
(2) international, interstate, or regional agencies or entities having jurisdiction over all
or a significant part of the estuary;
(3) each interest Federal agency, as determined appropriate by the Administrator
(4) local governments having jurisdiction over any land or water within the estuarine
zone, as determined appropnate by the Administrator; and
(5) affected industnes, public and private educational institutions, and the general
pubhc, as determined appropriate by the Administrator.
(d) Utilization of Existing Data. — In developing a conservation and management pl,an under
this section, the management conference shall survey and utilize existing reports, data,
and studies relating to the estuary that have been developed by or made available to
Federal, interstate, State, and local agencies.
(e) Period of Conference. — A management conference convened under this section shall be
convened for a penod not to exceed 5 years. Such conference may be tended by the
Administrator, and if terminated after the initial penod, may be reconvened by the
Administrator at any time thereafter, as may be necessary to meet the requirements of
this section.
(f) Approval and Implementation Plans. —
(1) Approval. — Not later than 120 days after the completion of a conservation and
management plan and after providing for public review and comment, the
Administrator shall approve such plan if the plan meets the requirements of this
section and the affected Governor or Governors concur.
(2) Implementation. — Upon approval of a conservation and management plan under this
section, such plan shall be implemented. Funds authorized to be appropriated under
title 11 and VI arid section 319 of this Act may be used in accordance with the
applicable requirements of this Act to assist States with the implementation of such
plan.
(g) Grants. —
(1) Recipients. — The Administrator is authonzed to make grants to State, interstate,
and regional water pollution control agencies and entities, State coastal zone
management agencies, interstate agencies, and other public or nonprofit private
agencies, institutions, organizations, and individuals.
28 CCMP Approval Process
-------
CLEAN WATER ACTS 320 Appendix
(2) Purposes — Grants under this subsection shall be made to pay for assisting research,
surveys, studies, and modeling and other technical work necessary for the
development of a conservation and management plan under this section.
(3) Federal Share. — The amount of grants to any person (including a State, interstate, or
regional agency or entity) under this subsection for a fiscal year shall not exceed 75
percent of the costs of such research, survey, studies, and work and shall be made on
condition the the non-Federal share of such costs are provided from non-Federal
sources.
(h) Grant Reporting. — Any person (including a State, interstate, or regional agency or entity)
that receives a grant under subsection (g) shall report to the Administrator not later than
18 months after receipt of such grant and biennially thereafter on the progress being made
under this section.
(i) Authorization of Appropriations. — There are authonzed to be appropriated to the
Administrator not to exceed $12,000,000 per fiscal year for each of fiscal years 1987, 1988,
1989, 1990, and 1991 for—
(1) expenses related to the administration of management conferences under this section,
not to exceed 10 percent of the amount appropnated under this subsection;
(2) making grants under subsection (g), and
(3) monitoring the implementation of a conservation and management plan by the
management conference or by the Administrator, in any case in which the conference
has been terminated.
The Administrator shall provide up to $5,000,000 per fiscal year of the sums authorized to
be appropriated under this subsection to the Administrator of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration to carry out subsection (j).
(j) Research. —
(1) Programs. — In order to determine the need to convene a management conference under
this section or at the request of such a management conference, the Administrator
shall coordinate and implement, through the National Marine Pollution Program
Office and the National Marine Fisheries Service of the National Oceanic and
Atmosphenc Administration, as appropriate, for one or more estuarine zones —
(A) a long-term program of trend assessment monitoring measuring variations in
pollutant concentrations, marine ecology, and other physical or biological
environmental parameters which may affect estuarine zones, to provide the
Administrator the capacity to determine the potential and actual effects of
alternative management strategies and measures;
(B) a program of ecosystem assessment assisting in the development of (i) baseline
studies which determine the state of estuanne zones and the effects of natural
and anthropogenic changes, and (ii) predictive models capable of translating
information on specific dischargers or general pollutant loadings within
estuarine zones into a set of probable effects on such zones;
(C) a comprehensive water quality sampling program for the continuous monitoring
of f nutrients, chionne, acid precipitation dissolved oxygen, and potentially
toxic pollutants (including organic chemicals and metals) in estuarine zones,
after consultation with interested State, local, interstate, or international
agencies and review and analysis of all environmental sampling data presently
collected from estuarine zones, and
CCMP Approval Process 29
-------
Appendix CLEAN WATER ACTS 320
(D) a program of research to identify the movements of nutnents, sediments and
pollutants through estuanne zones and the impact of nutnents, sediments, and
pollutants on water quality, the ecosystem, and designated or potential uses of
the estuarme zones.
(2) Reports. — The administrator, in cooperation with the Administrator of the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, shall submit to the Congress no
less often than biennially a comprehensive report on the activities authorized under
this subsection including —
(A) a listing of priority monitoring and research needs;
(B) an assessment of the state and health of the Nation’s estuanne zones, to the
extent evaluated under this subsection;
(C) a disussion of pollution problems and trends in pollutant concentrations with a
direct or indirect effect on water quality, the ecosystem, and designated or
potential uses of each estuarine zone, to the extent evaluated under this
subsection, and
(D) an evaluation of pollution abatement activities and management measures so
far implemented to determine the degree of improvement toward the objectives
expressed in subsection (b)(4) of this section
(k) Definitions. — For purposes of this section, the terms “estuaiy” and “estuanne zone” have
the meanings such terms have in section 104(n)(4) of this Act, except that the term
“estuarine zone” shall also include assodated aquatic ecosystems and those portions of
tributaries draining into the estuary up to the historic height of migration of anadromous
fish or the historic head of tidal influence, whichever is higher.
30 CCMP Approval Process
------- |