Definitions: Coastal and Ocean Waters

Water: Planning

You are here: Water

Resources & Performance

Planning

2.2.2
SP-16
SP-17
SP-18
SP-19
SP-20
4.3.2
CO-1
CO-2
CO-3
CO-4
CO-5
CO-6

2.2.2 [related to Subobjective 2.2.2 in FY 07]

Measure: Prevent water pollution and protect coastal and ocean systems to improve the national and regional aquatic systems health on the “good/fair/poor” scale of the National Coastal Condition Report.

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Headquarters

(top) (BROKEN)

SP-16, SP-17, SP-18, SP-19 [new measures in FY 08]

Measure: Maintain aquatic ecosystem health on the “good/fair/poor” scale of the National Coastal Condition Report in the following Regions:

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Headquarters

(top)

SP-20 [related to CO-9 in FY 07]

Measure:Percent of active dredged material ocean dumping sites that will have achieved environmentally acceptable conditions (as reflected in each site’s management plan and measured through on-site monitoring programs).

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

(top) (BROKEN)

4.3.2 [related to Strategic Target IV-D in FY 07]

Measure:Working with partners, protect or restore additional acres of habitat within the study areas for the 28 estuaries that are part of the National Estuary Program (NEP).

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

(top) (BROKEN)

CO-1 [related to CO-2 in FY 07]

Measure: Number of coastal waterbody impairments restored.

Type: Indicator measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

(top) (BROKEN)

CO-2 [related to CO-3 in FY 07]

Measure: Number of coastline miles protected from vessel sewage by “no discharge zone(s).” (cumulative)

Type: Indicator measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

(top) (BROKEN)

CO-3 [related to CO-5b in FY 07]

Measure: Number of National Estuary Program priority actions in Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans (CCMPs) that have been completed. (cumulative)

Type: Indicator measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition:Each National Estuary Program (NEP) uses a consensus-based, inclusive process to identify the major concerns in the estuary watershed and potential solutions to those problems. The resulting plan (Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan, or CCMP) contains a variety of actions designed to protect and restore the estuary, tailored to the problems and solutions identified through that process. For a well-designed plan, implementation will result in environmental progress. It also shows respect for the process, and thereby earns continued support. Implementation also allows for mid-course corrections when it is determined that additional or different actions are needed to address a particular issue.

This measure reports on the number of CCMP priority action items that have been initiated and/or completed by the NEPs. Regular increases in implementation of priority actions will indicate continued progress in protecting and restoring our nation's estuaries and their watersheds.

(top) (BROKEN)

CO-4 [related to CO-6 in FY 07]

Measure:Rate of return on Federal investment for the National Estuary Programs [dollar value of “primary” leveraged resources (cash or in-kind) divided by Section 320 funds].

Type: Indicator measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition: Definition and how to report (PDF, 86KB, 2 pages, about PDF) (BROKEN)

(top) (BROKEN)

CO-5 [related to CO-7 in FY 07]

Measure: Number of dredged material management plans that are in place for major ports and harbors.

Type: Indicator measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition:Effective dredged material planning and sediment management, including the beneficial re-use of dredged materials, requires open and early communication among federal and state dredged material regulators, watershed planners, and other interested parties. EPA Headquarters will work with the Corps of Engineers to track the number of dredged material management plans developed for major ports and harbors, and the percentage of dredged material that is managed in a beneficial manner. Such tracking is essential to evaluating our progress in managing sediments and using this valuable resource.

Excessive sediment erosion, transport, and deposition are estimated to cause damages of approximately $16 billion annually in North America. The U.S. spends about $800 million annually on dredging. Sediment overloading from land and stream erosion causes significant environmental and economic challenges - excessive sediment in rivers, reservoirs, and estuaries may contribute to low water clarity, increased oxygen demand, eutrophic conditions, sediment contamination, loss of flood-carrying capacity, and sediment deposition in navigable waterways.

Much of the several hundred million cubic meters of sediment dredged each year from these navigable waterways could be used in an environmentally beneficial manner, such as for habitat restoration and creation, beach nourishment, aquaculture, forestry, agriculture, mine reclamation, and industrial and commercial development. Unfortunately, most of this dredged material is instead disposed in open water, confined disposal facilities, and upland disposal facilities.

We need to ensure open and early communication among Federal and State dredged material regulators, watershed planners, and other interested parties so that: (1) sources of sediment (and sources of contamination carried by the sediments) can be addressed; (2) the broadest range of beneficial use and disposal alternatives for dredged material can be evaluated; and (3) adequate funding for dredged material use or disposal can be secured. Local Planning/Project Groups can be an excellent vehicle to facilitate this communication and to foster the development of effective dredged material management plans to address these issues and to identify and implement beneficial use projects for dredged material.

(top) (BROKEN)

CO-6 [related to CO-8a in FY 07]

Measure: Number of active dredged material ocean dumping sites that are monitored in the reporting year.

Type: Indicator measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition:The monitoring of ocean dredged material disposal sites for proper and accurate dredged material disposal operations will assure the maintenance of high-quality estuarine and marine habitats, the continued health of coastal and oceanic fish and invertebrate populations, and compliance with the requirements of the law. For each ocean dumping site that is monitored in the reporting year, the Regions will report (1) the name of the site, (2) the name and date of the Site Management and Monitoring Plan (SMMP), and (3) the following information on the monitoring:

Type of Monitoring (check appropriate box(es) below)	Who paid for it?	If EPA paid, how much did it cost?	Was an EPA vessel used?
Bathymetry
Other Physical Monitoring (e.g., grain size, current speed)
Chemical Monitoring
Biological Monitoring

Establishing appropriate SMMPs for these sites, and meeting the goals and requirements of these SMMPs, will contribute to improvements in water clarity and benthic health. In addition, testing requirements for the disposed dredged material will ensure that there are no negative impacts to dissolved oxygen concentrations, sediment condition, and fish tissue contaminant levels. Analysis of these monitoring efforts will substantially improve EPA's ability to assess coastal and marine conditions, leading to more accurate national reporting results.

(top) (BROKEN)

2.2.2 [related to Subobjective 2.2.2 in FY 07]

SP-16, SP-17, SP-18, SP-19 [new measures in FY 08]

SP-20 [related to CO-9 in FY 07]

4.3.2 [related to Strategic Target IV-D in FY 07]

CO-1 [related to CO-2 in FY 07]

CO-2 [related to CO-3 in FY 07]

CO-3 [related to CO-5b in FY 07]

CO-4 [related to CO-6 in FY 07]

CO-5 [related to CO-7 in FY 07]

CO-6 [related to CO-8a in FY 07]

Area Navigation