oversight

Great Lakes: An Overall Strategy and Indicators for Measuring Progress Are Needed to Better Achieve Restoration Goals

Published by the Government Accountability Office on 2003-04-30.

Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)

             United States General Accounting Office

GAO          Report to Congressional Requesters




April 2003
             GREAT LAKES

             An Overall Strategy
             and Indicators for
             Measuring Progress
             Are Needed to Better
             Achieve Restoration
             Goals




GAO-03-515
                                               April 2003


                                               GREAT LAKES

                                               An Overall Strategy and Indicators for
Highlights of GAO-03-515, a report to
congressional requesters                       Measuring Progress Are Needed To
                                               Better Achieve Restoration Goals


The five Great Lakes, which                    There are 148 federal and 51 state programs funding environmental
comprise the largest system of                 restoration activities in the Great Lakes Basin. Most of these programs
freshwater in the world, are                   involve the localized application of national or state environmental
threatened on many environmental               initiatives and do not specifically focus on unique basin concerns. However,
fronts. To address the extent of               several programs specifically address environmental conditions in the Great
progress made in restoring the
Great Lakes Basin, which includes
                                               Lakes. GAO identified 33 federal Great Lakes specific programs, and states
the lakes and surrounding area,                funded 17 additional unique Great Lakes specific programs. Other
GAO (1) identified the federal and             governmental, binational, and nongovernmental organizations also fund
state environmental programs                   restoration activities within the basin.
operating in the basin and funding
devoted to them, (2) evaluated the             GAO identified several Great Lakes environmental strategies being used at
restoration strategies used and how            the binational, federal, and state levels. These strategies are not coordinated
they are coordinated, and (3)                  or unified in a fashion comparable to other large restoration projects such as
assessed overall environmental                 the South Florida Ecosystem. In an effort to improve coordination, federal
progress made in the basin                     and state officials recently published Great Lakes Strategy 2002, but this
restoration effort.                            document is largely a description of existing and planned program activities
                                               rather than an overarching plan. EPA’s Great Lakes National Program Office
                                               has coordination authority over many activities but has not fully exercised it
GAO recommends that the                        to this point.
Administrator, Environmental
Protection Agency                              With available information, it is not possible to comprehensively assess
    • ensure that the Great Lakes              restoration progress in the Great Lakes. Current indicators rely on limited
        National Program Office                quantitative data and subjective judgments to determine whether conditions
        fulfills its coordination              are improving, such as whether fish are safe to eat. The ultimate success of
        responsibilities and
                                               an ongoing binational effort to develop a set of overall indicators for the
        develop an overarching
        Great Lakes strategy; and              Great Lakes is uncertain because it relies on the resources voluntarily
    • develop environmental                    provided by several organizations. Further, no date for completing a final
        indicators and a                       list of indicators has been established.
        monitoring system for the
        Great Lakes Basin that can             Great Lakes: Largest Body of Freshwater in the World
        be used to measure overall
        restoration progress.

EPA generally agreed with GAO’s
conclusions that better planning,
coordination, monitoring and the
development of indicators are
needed, and stated it would provide
the Congress, GAO, and the Office
of Management and Budget with a
formal response to the report
recommendations at a later date.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-515.

To view the full report, including the scope
and methodology, click on the link above.
For more information, contact John
Stephenson at (202) 512-3841, or John
Wanska at (312) 220-7628.
Contents


Letter                                                                                       1


Executive Summary                                                                            3
                    Purpose                                                                  3
                    Background                                                               3
                    Results in Brief                                                         4
                    Principal Findings                                                       6
                    Recommendations for Executive Action                                     9
                    Agency Comments                                                          9

Chapter 1           Introduction                                                            11
                    The Great Lakes Are a Vital Resource                                   11
                    EPA’s Great Lakes National Program Office Is Responsible for
                       Leading U.S. Efforts to Improve the Great Lakes Basin               15
                    States and Other Organizations Actively Participate in Great Lakes
                       Environmental Activities                                            17
                    Significant Environmental Challenges Remain to Restore the Great
                       Lakes                                                               18
                    Objectives, Scope, and Methodology                                     20

Chapter 2           Numerous Federal and State Environmental
                    Programs Operate in the Great Lakes Basin                               22
                    Most Programs Operating in the Great Lakes Have a Nationwide or
                      Statewide Focus                                                      22
                    Great Lakes Specific Environmental Programs Focus on Certain
                      Geographic Areas or Problems                                          25
                    Foundations and Other Organizations Fund Great Lakes
                      Restoration Activities                                               31

Chapter 3           Multiple Programs, Different Strategies, and a Lack
                    of Coordination Impede Restoration Efforts                              35
                    An Overarching Strategy and Clear Responsibilities Are Needed for
                       Management of Large Watershed Restoration Projects                  35
                    Strategies for the Great Lakes Do Not Provide an Overarching
                       Restoration Approach                                                38
                    GLNPO Has Not Fully Exercised Its Authority for Coordinating
                       Great Lakes Restoration Programs                                    41
                    Major Planning Efforts Have Not Yielded Extensive Restoration
                       Activity because of a Lack of Funding and Other Barriers             44



                    Page i                                              GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
               Conclusions                                                            47
               Recommendations for Executive Action                                   47
               Agency Comments                                                        48

Chapter 4      Insufficient Data and Measures Make It Difficult to
               Determine Overall Restoration Progress                                 49
               The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement Calls for a Monitoring
                 System to Ensure Objectives Are Met                                  49
               Current Indicators Do Not Provide an Adequate Basis for Making
                 an Overall Assessment of Restoration Progress                        51
               Conclusions                                                            56
               Recommendations for Executive Action                                   57
               Agency Comments                                                        57

Appendix I     Federal and State Agencies That Provided Great
               Lakes Program Information                                              58



Appendix II    Federal and State Non-Great Lakes Specific
               Programs, Fiscal Years 1992 through 2001                               60



Appendix III    Corps of Engineers Special Authorized Projects
               in the Great Lakes Basin, Fiscal Years 1992
               through 2001                                                           77



Appendix IV    Federal and State Great Lakes Specific Programs,
               Fiscal Years 1992 through 2001                                         80



Appendix V     Comments from the Environmental Protection
               Agency                                                                 87



Appendix VI    GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments                                  90




               Page ii                                            GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Tables
          Table 1: Major Agreements between the United States and Canada
                   Affecting the Great Lakes                                    13
          Table 2: Major Statutes Affecting the Great Lakes                     16
          Table 3: Geographic Area, Population, and States for Three
                   Restoration Areas                                            38
          Table 4: Desired Measurements and Outcomes for Great Lakes
                   Indicators                                                   50
          Table 5: Federal Non-Great Lakes Specific Programs                    60
          Table 6: State Non-Great Lakes Specific Programs                      72
          Table 7: Federal Great Lakes Specific Programs                        80
          Table 8: State Great Lakes Specific Programs                          84


Figures
          Figure 1: Area Comprising the Great Lakes Basin                       12
          Figure 2: Pollution Sources to the Great Lakes                        19
          Figure 3: Percentage of Non-Great Lakes Specific and Great Lakes
                   Specific Programs Operating in the Great Lakes Basin         22
          Figure 4: Federal Non-Great Lakes Specific Programs                   23
          Figure 5: Number of Great Lakes Specific Programs by Federal
                   Agency                                                       26
          Figure 6: Percentage of Expenditures for Great Lakes Specific
                   Programs by Federal Agency, Fiscal Years 1992 through
                   2001                                                         28
          Figure 7: Percentage of Expenditures for Specifically Authorized
                   Projects Received by Great Lakes States, Fiscal Years
                   1992 through 2001                                            29




          Page iii                                           GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Abbreviations

AOCs              Areas of concern
ATSDR             Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
CERP              Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan
Corps             Army Corps of Engineers
EPA               Environmental Protection Agency
FSA               Farm Services Agency
FWS               Fish and Wildlife Service
GLNPO             Great Lakes National Program Office
GLWQA             Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
IADN              International Atmospheric Deposition Network
IJC               International Joint Commission
LaMPs             Lakewide Management Plans
NOAA              National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPS               National Park Service
NRCS              National Resource Conservation Service
OAR               Office of Air and Radiation
ORD               Office of Research and Development
OSWER             Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
RAPs              Remedial Action Plans
RCRA              Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SOLEC             State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference
USDA              United States Department of Agriculture
USGS              United States Geological Survey
USPC              United States Policy Committee
WRDA              Water Resources Development Act



This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the
United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further
permission from GAO. It may contain copyrighted graphics, images or other materials.
Permission from the copyright holder may be necessary should you wish to reproduce
copyrighted materials separately from GAO’s product.




Page iv                                                          GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
United States General Accounting Office
Washington, DC 20548




                                   April 30, 2003

                                   Congressional Requesters

                                   As requested, we are reporting to you on the federal and state
                                   environmental programs operating in the Great Lakes Basin. This report
                                   contains recommendations to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
                                   on the need to develop a comprehensive strategic plan for basin
                                   restoration, coordinate the multiple restoration activities in the basin, and
                                   facilitate the expeditious development of environmental indicators for
                                   measuring restoration progress.

                                   As arranged with your offices, we plan no further distribution of this
                                   report until 30 days after the date of this letter unless you publicly
                                   announce its contents earlier. We will then send copies to appropriate
                                   congressional committees; the Administrator, EPA; various other federal
                                   departments and agencies; and the International Joint Commission. We
                                   will also make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the
                                   report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://gao.gov.

                                   Should you or your staff need further information, please contact me on
                                   (202) 512-3841. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix VI.




                                   John B. Stephenson
                                   Director, Natural Resources
                                    and Environment




                                   Page 1                                                 GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
List of Congressional Requesters

The Honorable Evan Bayh
United States Senate

The Honorable Mike DeWine
United States Senate

The Honorable Carl Levin
United States Senate

The Honorable Debbie Stabenow
United States Senate

The Honorable Sherwood Boehlert
House of Representatives

The Honorable Sherrod Brown
House of Representatives

The Honorable John Dingell
House of Representatives

The Honorable Vernon Ehlers
House of Representatives

The Honorable Marcy Kaptur
House of Representatives

The Honorable Steven LaTourette
House of Representatives

The Honorable James Oberstar
House of Representatives

The Honorable Louise Slaughter
House of Representatives

The Honorable Bart Stupak
House of Representatives




Page 2                             GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
             Executive Summary
Executive Summary


             The United States and Canada recognize the Great Lakes—the largest
Purpose      system of freshwater in the world—as a natural resource that is
             threatened on many environmental fronts. To protect this resource and to
             address common water quality problems, the two countries entered into
             the bilateral Great LakesWater Quality Agreement in 1972 and last revised
             it in 1987. However, three decades after the original agreement, polluted
             beaches are frequently closed to swimmers, fish are unsafe to eat for high
             risk individuals, and raw sewage is still being dumped into the lakes.
             Progress has been made on a number of significant fronts, such as
             controlling the nonnative sea lamprey, reducing the water’s phosphorus
             content, and improving fish populations, but much more remains to be
             accomplished before the overall goals of the agreement can be met.
             Several recently released reports have questioned whether the current
             environmental activities in the Great Lakes being funded by numerous
             organizations and various programs are adequate to fulfill the U.S.
             commitments and whether restoration progress is sufficient in the basin.
             In 2002, GAO reported that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
             needed to take action to improve its oversight for cleaning up
             contaminated areas.

             To address the progress of restoration, 14 members of Congress
             participating on the Great Lakes Task Force asked GAO to (1) identify the
             federal and state environmental programs operating in the Great Lakes
             Basin and the funding being devoted to them, (2) evaluate how the
             restoration strategies are used and coordinated, and (3) assess overall
             environmental progress made in the basin restoration effort thus far.


             Millions of people in the United States and Canada rely on the five Great
Background   Lakes—Superior, Michigan, Erie, Huron, and Ontario—as a principal
             source of drinking water, recreation, and economic livelihood. Over time,
             industrial, agricultural, and residential development on lands adjacent to
             the lakes has seriously degraded the lakes’ water quality, posing threats to
             human health and the environment, and forcing restrictions on activities,
             such as swimming and fish consumption.

             To protect the Great Lakes Basin, and to address water quality problems,
             the governments of the United States and Canada entered into the bilateral
             Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement in 1972. In the agreement, the
             United States and Canada agreed to restore and maintain the chemical,
             physical, and biological integrity of the Great Lakes Basin. A new
             agreement with the same name was reached in 1978. The agreement was
             amended in 1983 and 1987, expanding the scope of activities by


             Page 3                                                GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                   Executive Summary




                   prescribing prevention and cleanup measures to improve environmental
                   conditions in the Great Lakes. The agreement obligates the International
                   Joint Commission (IJC), an international body, to assist in the
                   implementation of the agreement.

                   The Clean Water Act directs EPA to lead efforts to meet the goals of the
                   Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement and establishes the Great Lakes
                   National Program Office (GLNPO) within EPA, charging it with, among
                   other things, cooperating with federal, state, tribal, and international
                   agencies to develop action plans to carry out the U.S. responsibilities
                   under the agreement. GLNPO is further responsible for coordinating the
                   agency’s actions both in headquarters and in the regions to improve Great
                   Lakes’ water quality. In addition to GLNPO, numerous federal, state,
                   binational, and nonprofit organizations conduct activities that focus on
                   improving the overall Great Lakes Basin environment or some specific
                   environmental issue within the basin.


                   There are 148 federal and 51 state programs funding environmental
Results in Brief   restoration activities in the Great Lakes Basin. Most of these programs
                   involve the localized application of national or state environmental
                   initiatives that do not specifically focus on basin concerns. For example,
                   EPA’s Superfund program addresses some of the contaminated sites
                   located within the basin. Superfund officials, like officials for most
                   nationwide, as well as most statewide, programs, do not track or itemize
                   their overall funding by region, such as isolating the portion of funding
                   going to specific areas (e.g., the basin), making it difficult to determine
                   their contribution to total Great Lakes spending. In addition to the
                   nationwide federal programs, the Congress has also enacted 33 federal
                   programs focused specifically on the Great Lakes Basin, for which about
                   $387 million was spent in fiscal years 1992 through 2001, to specifically
                   address environmental conditions in the Great Lakes. Additionally, the
                   Corps of Engineers expended about $358 million during the same time
                   period for legislatively directed projects within the basin, such as $93.8
                   million for restoration of Chicago’s shoreline. States funded 17 additional
                   Great Lakes specific programs, for which about $956 million was
                   expended during the same general time period to address unique state
                   needs, such as Ohio’s program to control shoreline erosion along Lake
                   Erie. In addition to federal and state programs, county and municipal
                   governmental organizations, binational organizations, and
                   nongovernmental organizations, such as nonprofit organizations, fund
                   restoration activities within the basin.



                   Page 4                                                GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Executive Summary




The numerous restoration programs currently underway in the Great
Lakes Basin employ a variety of environmental strategies at the binational,
federal, and state levels to address specific environmental problems, but
there is no overarching plan for coordinating and tying together the
strategies and program activities into a coherent approach to attain overall
basin restoration. Experience with other large-scale ecosystem restoration
efforts, such as the South Florida ecosystem, has demonstrated the
importance of having a comprehensive strategic plan with clearly
articulated goals, objectives, and criteria for measuring success and a
decision-making body for weighing the merits of, and prioritizing funding
for, proposed cleanup and restoration projects. Without such a plan for the
basin, it is difficult to determine overall progress and ensure that limited
resources are being effectively utilized. Although federal and state officials
recently developed and published a report, Great Lakes Strategy 2002, to
fill this void, the document, largely a description of existing and planned
program activities, did not provide a basis or mechanisms to prioritize or
make funding commitments to implement the various activities. GLNPO,
the office within EPA charged with fulfilling U.S. responsibilities under the
agreement and for coordinating federal actions for improving Great Lakes’
water quality, has not fully exercised this authority because it has not
entered into agreements with other agency organizations regarding their
restoration responsibilities as required by the Clean Water Act. GAO is
recommending that EPA ensure that GLNPO fulfills its coordination
responsibilities and, in consultation with the governors of the Great Lakes
states, federal agencies, and other organizations, develop an overarching
strategy that clearly defines the roles and responsibilities for coordinating
and prioritizing funding for Great Lakes projects, and submit a proposal to
the Congress detailing the time-phased funding requirements necessary to
implement the strategy.

A comprehensive assessment of restoration progress in the Great Lakes
Basin cannot be determined with the piecemeal information currently
available. The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement called for the
development and implementation of a monitoring system, but this
requirement has not yet been met. The environmental indicators currently
being used to determine overall progress are inadequate because they rely
on limited quantitative data and subjective judgments to determine
whether conditions are improving. An ongoing binational effort initiated in
1996 has worked to develop a set of overall indicators for the Great Lakes
through a series of biennial conferences. The ultimate success of this
effort, which relies on the volunteer contributions of several organizations,
is uncertain and thus far no completion date for developing a final list of
indicators has been set. GAO is recommending that EPA, in coordination


Page 5                                                 GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                            Executive Summary




                            with Canadian officials, develop environmental indicators and a
                            monitoring system for the Great Lakes Basin that can be used to measure
                            overall restoration progress and require these indicators to be used to
                            evaluate, prioritize, and make funding decisions on the merits of
                            alternative restoration projects.



Principal Findings
Many Federal and State      About 200 programs—148 federal and 51 state—fund restoration activities
Programs Fund               within the Great Lakes Basin. Most of these programs involve the localized
Restoration Activities in   application of national or state environmental initiatives and do not
                            specifically focus on basin concerns. Officials from 11 agencies identified
the Great Lakes Basin       115 of these broadly scoped federal programs, and officials from 7 of the 8
                            Great Lakes states identified 34 similar state programs. EPA administers
                            the majority of the federal programs that provide a broad range of
                            environmental activities involving research, cleanup, restoration, and
                            pollution prevention. For example, EPA’s nationwide Superfund program
                            funds cleanup activities at contaminated areas throughout the basin. While
                            the broad scoped federal and state programs contribute to basin
                            restoration, program officials do not track or try to isolate the portion of
                            funding going to specific areas like the basin, making it difficult to
                            determine their contribution to total Great Lakes spending. However, GAO
                            was able to identify basin-specific information on some of these programs.
                            Specifically, basin related expenditures for 53 of the 115 broadly scoped
                            federal programs totaled about $1.8 billion in fiscal years 1992 through
                            2001, and the expenditures for 14 statewide programs totaled $461.3
                            million during basically the same time period.

                            Several federal and state programs were specifically designed to focus on
                            the Great Lakes Basin environmental conditions. Officials from 7 federal
                            agencies identified 33 Great Lakes specific programs that had
                            expenditures of $387 million in fiscal years 1992 through 2001. Most of the
                            programs funded a variety of activities, such as research, cleanup, or
                            pollution prevention. An additional $358 million was expended for
                            legislatively directed Corps of Engineers projects in the basin, such as
                            $93.8 million to restore Chicago’s shoreline. Officials from 7 states
                            reported 17 Great Lakes specific programs that expended about $956
                            million in 1992 through 2001, with Michigan’s programs accounting for 96
                            percent of this amount. State programs focused on unique state needs,
                            such as Ohio’s program to control shoreline erosion along Lake Erie, and
                            Michigan’s program to provide bond funding for environmental activities.


                            Page 6                                                GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                             Executive Summary




                             Besides federal and state programs, county and municipal organizations,
                             binational organizations, and nongovernmental organizations, such as
                             nonprofit organizations, fund restoration activities within the basin.


Different Strategies, Lack   Restoration of the Great Lakes Basin is a major endeavor involving many
of Coordination, and         environmental programs and organizations. The magnitude of this effort
Limited Funding Impede       cannot succeed without a comprehensive strategy or plan similar to those
                             developed for other large ecosystem restoration projects, such as the
Restoration Efforts          South Florida ecosystem and the Chesapeake Bay. Because of the many
                             parties involved in planning, strategizing, and conducting restoration
                             activities in the basin, an overarching strategy and a comprehensive plan
                             are needed that clearly articulate goals, objectives, and criteria for
                             measuring success and that establish a decision-making body to weigh the
                             merits of, and prioritize funding for, proposed cleanup and restoration
                             projects.

                             Several organizations have developed strategies for the basin at the
                             binational, federal, and state levels that address either the entire basin or
                             the specific problems in the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Strategy 2002,
                             developed by a committee of federal and state officials, is the most recent
                             of these strategies. While this strategy identified restoration objectives and
                             planned actions by various federal and state agencies, it is largely a
                             description of existing program activity relating to basin restoration. State
                             officials involved in developing the strategy told us that states had already
                             planned the actions described in it, but that these actions were contingent
                             on funding for specific environmental programs. The strategy
                             acknowledged that it should not be construed as a commitment for
                             additional funding or resources, and it did not provide a basis for
                             prioritizing activities. In addition, other strategies addressed particular
                             contaminants, restoration of individual lakes, or cleanup of contaminated
                             areas. Ad hoc coordination among federal agencies, states, and other
                             environmental organizations occurs in developing these strategies or when
                             programmatic activity calls for coordination.

                             Although there are many strategies and coordination efforts ongoing, there
                             is no one organization that is coordinating restoration efforts. The Water
                             Quality Act of 1987 amended the Clean Water Act to charge GLNPO with
                             coordinating actions within EPA for improving the Great Lakes’ water
                             quality, but the agency has not fully exercised this authority because it has
                             not entered into agreements with other agency organizations regarding
                             their Great Lakes activities as required by the Clean Water Act. GLNPO
                             officials believe that they fulfilled their responsibilities under the act by


                             Page 7                                                 GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                           Executive Summary




                           having federal agencies and state officials agree to the restoration
                           activities discussed in the Great Lakes Strategy 2002; however, the
                           strategy did not represent formal agreements to conduct specific activities
                           with identified resources. Extensive strategizing, planning, and
                           coordinating have not resulted in significant restoration. The ecosystem
                           remains compromised and contaminated sediments in the lakes produce
                           health problems, as reported by the IJC. Federal and state officials have
                           cited a lack of funding as the chief barrier to restoration progress, but they
                           mentioned that other barriers, such as the absence of an effective
                           coordinating agency, also impede restoration progress.


Insufficient Data and      The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, as amended in 1987, calls for
Measures Prevent           establishing a monitoring system to measure restoration progress and
Determination of Overall   assess the degree that the United States and Canada are complying with
                           the goals and objectives of the agreement. Implementation of this
Restoration Progress       provision has not progressed to the point that overall restoration progress
                           can be measured or determined based on quantitative information. Recent
                           assessments of overall progress, which rely on a mix of quantitative data
                           and subjective judgments, do not provide an adequate basis for making an
                           overall assessment. The current assessment process has emerged from a
                           series of biennial State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conferences (SOLEC)
                           initiated in 1994 for developing indicators agreed upon by conference
                           participants. The number of indicators considered during the SOLEC
                           conferences has been pared down from more than 850 indicators in 1998
                           to 80 indicators in 2000, although data was available for only 33 of them.
                           While this lack of data precluded an overall quantitative-based assessment
                           of the Great Lakes Basin, a qualitative assessment based on general
                           observations was provided. The ultimate success of the SOLEC process in
                           providing an overall quantitative-based assessment of the Great Lakes is
                           uncertain because the assessment process relies on the voluntary
                           participation of many federal, state, and local agency officials in an
                           informal partnership arrangement. In addition, the objectives of the
                           SOLEC process are not directly focused on developing a surveillance and
                           monitoring program as envisioned in the agreement. Other indicators of
                           environmental improvements reported for the numerous federal and state
                           programs operating in the basin focus on program activities, often
                           describing outputs, such as tons of contaminated sediment removed,
                           rather than environmental outcomes, such as improvement of
                           environmental conditions as a result of removing contaminated sediment.




                           Page 8                                                 GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                      Executive Summary




                      To improve coordination of Great Lakes activities and ensure that federal
Recommendations for   dollars are effectively spent, GAO recommends that the Administrator,
Executive Action      EPA, ensure that GLNPO fulfills its responsibility for coordinating
                      programs within the Great Lakes Basin; charge GLNPO with developing, in
                      consultation with the governors of the Great Lakes states, federal
                      agencies, and other organizations, an overarching strategy that, clearly
                      defines the roles and responsibilities for coordinating and prioritizing
                      funding for projects; and submit a time-phased funding requirement
                      proposal to the Congress necessary to implement the strategy.

                      To fulfill the need for a monitoring system called for in the GLWQA and to
                      ensure that the limited funds available are optimally spent, GAO
                      recommends that the Administrator, EPA, in coordination with Canadian
                      officials and as part of an overarching Great Lakes strategy, (1) develop
                      environmental indicators and a monitoring system for the Great Lakes
                      Basin that can be used to measure overall restoration progress and (2)
                      require that these indicators be used to evaluate, prioritize, and make
                      funding decisions on the merits of alternative restoration projects.


                      GAO provided EPA with a draft of this report for its review and comment.
Agency Comments       The agency generally agreed with the findings and recommendations in
                      the report. EPA provided written comments; the full text of which is
                      included in appendix V.

                      EPA stated that significant accomplishments have improved
                      environmental conditions in the Great Lakes and that GAO’s conclusions
                      and recommendations can help ensure that more improvements are made.
                      While EPA agreed with the overall conclusions, namely that better
                      planning, coordination, monitoring, and the development of indicators are
                      needed, it did not specifically address GAO’s individual recommendations,
                      stating that it would provide the Congress, GAO, and the Office of
                      Management and Budget with a formal response to the final report
                      recommendations at a later date.

                      EPA stated that while it can improve its delivery and coordination of
                      restoration programs in the Great Lakes Basin, the complexities of the
                      Great Lakes in terms of scope, geographical scale, and other factors
                      require long-term, complex solutions implemented at a variety of levels. As
                      GAO’s report demonstrates, the complexity of the Great Lakes restoration
                      effort provides the basis for the recommendation that EPA develop an
                      overarching strategy that guides the multiple restoration efforts.



                      Page 9                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Executive Summary




EPA highlighted two of its recent efforts to demonstrate compliance with
its coordinating responsibilities under the Clean Water Act: the formation
of the United States Policy Committee (USPC) and its subsequent release
of the Great Lakes Strategy 2002 and SOLEC for developing
environmental indicators for the Great Lakes Basin. As GAO noted, these
coordination efforts are significant but cannot be sustained over the long
term given the uncertainties surrounding funding sources. Specifically, it
provides extensive information on ongoing restoration efforts, but the
Great Lakes Strategy 2002 provides no commitment for funding and
resources to assure its implementation. As such, the strategy remains
largely a description of ongoing activities that assumes that federal and
state restoration programs will maintain the status quo in both the extent
of their efforts and funding. Similarly, the SOLEC process, which has
successfully engaged a wide range of binational parties, remains a
volunteer effort dependent on voluntary funding and does not replace the
need to develop the surveillance and monitoring program envisioned in
the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.




Page 10                                              GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                        Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 1: Introduction


                        The United States and Canada view the Great Lakes as a valuable national
                        natural resource that needs to be protected and restored to environmental
                        health. The first bilateral agreement between the two countries to protect
                        the Great Lakes was reached in 1972. Since that time further agreements
                        have strengthened the commitment of the two countries to improve
                        environmental conditions in the Great Lakes Basin. The Environmental
                        Protection Agency (EPA), as the lead federal agency, is charged with
                        ensuring that U.S. responsibilities are fulfilled. EPA’s Great Lakes National
                        Program Office (GLNPO) is authorized to implement various Great Lakes
                        activities. States and other organizations also play a vital and integral role
                        in fulfilling U.S. commitments. Despite early success in improving
                        conditions in the Great Lakes Basin, significant environmental challenges
                        remain, including increased threats from invasive species and cleanup of
                        areas contaminated with toxic substances that pose human health threats.


                        The five Great Lakes—Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie, and Ontario—are
The Great Lakes Are a   a critical resource for the United States and Canada. The lakes form the
Vital Resource          largest freshwater system on Earth, accounting for 20 percent of the
                        world’s fresh surface water and over 95 percent of the U.S. fresh surface
                        water supply for the contiguous 48 states. The lakes provide a drinking
                        water source for over 26 million U.S. residents and water for the region’s
                        industry. Together, they form an inland waterway to the Atlantic Ocean
                        that facilitates the relatively inexpensive transport of goods both within
                        and outside the region. The lakes are also a recreational resource for
                        boating, swimming, and sport fishing.

                        The Great Lakes Basin is a large area that extends well beyond the five
                        lakes proper to include their watersheds, tributaries, connecting channels,
                        and a portion of the St. Lawrence River. The basin encompasses nearly all
                        of the state of Michigan and parts of Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, New
                        York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and the Canadian province of
                        Ontario. (See fig. 1.)




                        Page 11                                                GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 1: Introduction




Figure 1: Area Comprising the Great Lakes Basin




Recognizing the importance and mutual interest in the Great Lakes and
other boundary waters, the United States and Canada signed the Boundary
Waters Treaty in 1909. The treaty gave both countries equal rights to use
the waterways that flow along the international border and provided that
the boundary waters and waters flowing across the boundary not be
polluted on either side to the point of injuring human health or the
property of the other country. The treaty also established the International
Joint Commission (IJC) as a permanent binational agency organized to
help resolve and prevent disputes concerning the waters along the border.

With increased concern over contaminants in the Great Lakes, the
governments of the United States and Canada signed the first international
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) in 1972 to improve the
environmental conditions in the lakes. The agreement focused on
controlling phosphorus as a principal means of dealing with
eutrophication in the lakes. In 1978, the two countries signed a new
GLWQA, which was revised again in 1983. The 1978 agreement reflected
an increased understanding of the scope of pollution problems in the


Page 12                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 1: Introduction




Great Lakes and called for (1) controlling all toxic substances that could
endanger the health of any living species and (2) restoring and enhancing
water quality throughout the entire basin. The 1983 supplement added the
requirement to further limit phosphorus discharges and for the two
countries to prepare and implement plans for reducing phosphorus. In
1987, the agreement was revised for the last time to commit the two
countries to cooperate with state and provincial governments to ensure,
among other things, the development of Lakewide Management Plans
(LaMP) to address environmental problems in open waters and Remedial
Action Plans (RAP) for problems in designated “areas of concern” located
in the basin. (See table 1.)

Table 1: Major Agreements between the United States and Canada Affecting the
Great Lakes

Name of agreement               Key provisions
Boundary Waters Treaty of       • Establishes the IJC as a permanent binational
1909                              agency organized to help resolve and prevent
                                  disputes concerning the waters along the border.
                                • Gives both countries equal rights to use the
                                  waterways that flow along the international border.
                                • Provides that the boundary waters and waters
                                  flowing across the boundary are not to be polluted
                                  on either side to the point of injuring human health
                                  or the property of the other country.
Great Lakes Water Quality       • Provides for more effective cooperation to restore
Agreement of 1972                 and enhance the Great Lakes.
                                • Emphasizes finding solutions to the more obvious
                                  water quality problems.
Great Lakes Water Quality       • Establishes both general and specific water quality
Agreement of 1978                 objectives for the Great Lakes.
                                • Calls for developing and implementing programs to
                                  reduce and control phosphorus inputs to the lakes.
                                • Requires a coordinated surveillance and monitoring
                                  program.
Phosphorus Load Reduction       • Further specifies phosphorus inputs and required
Supplement to the Great Lakes     the preparation and implementation of plans for
Water Quality Agreement of        reducing phosphorus.
1978, signed October 16, 1983
Protocol to the Great Lakes     •   Adds several annexes for issues to be addressed
Water Quality Agreement of          and activities to be conducted by the two
1978, signed November 18,           governments. These included the development of
1987                                RAPs and LaMPs, as well as addressing issues,
                                    such as airborne toxic substances, contaminated
                                    sediment, and control of phosphorus.
                                •   Requires a comprehensive review of the
                                    agreement’s operation and effectiveness
                                    approximately every 6 years.
                                •   Calls for a monitoring system to measure
                                    restoration progress and assess the degree to
                                    which the United States and Canada are complying



Page 13                                                      GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 1: Introduction




    Name of agreement               Key provisions
                                      with the goals and objectives of the agreement.
                                    • Calls for semi-annual meetings between the United
                                      States and Canada to coordinate work plans and
                                      evaluate progress in implementing the agreement.
Source: GAO.



In implementing the 1987 revisions to the agreement, officials for the two
countries released complete LaMPs for four lakes in 2000—Erie, Michigan,
Ontario, and Superior—and have updated them every 2 years. For Lake
Huron, an alternative action plan was prepared instead of a LaMP.
Implementation of RAPs for designated areas of concern (AOC)—namely
sites that have failed to meet the objectives of the GLWQA and failures
that have caused, or are likely to cause, impairment of beneficial uses,
such as swimming or fishing—has not fared as well. The countries
identified 43 contaminated areas: 26 located entirely within the United
States, 12 located entirely within Canada, and 5 for which both countries
share responsibility.1 In 2002, we reported slow progress in cleaning up the
contaminated areas and as of April 2002 none of the 26 areas under U.S.
responsibility had been restored to beneficial use.2 We also reported that
the RAP process had either been abandoned or modified for several areas.
We concluded that EPA was not effectively ensuring RAP implementation
for contaminated areas. EPA subsequently took several steps to improve
the RAP process, such as gathering information on the status of the
contaminated areas and consolidating responsibility for the process within
GLNPO.

In addition to two types of plans—LaMPs and RAPs—the agreement
contains 16 other “annexes” that define issues that the two countries need
to address and activities that they need to conduct, such as airborne toxic
substances, contaminated sediment, and control of phosphorus. The 1987
amendment to the GLWQA included a provision that requires a
comprehensive review of the agreement about every 6 years, focusing on
the agreement’s operation and effectiveness. A 1999 binational review of
the agreement found that certain provisions of the agreement were out of
date and concluded that certain changes should be considered; however,
as of March 2003, the two countries had yet to revise the agreement.


1
    Two areas in Canada were restored and removed from the list of AOCs.
2
 See U.S. General Accounting Office, Great Lakes: EPA Needs to Define Organizational
Responsibilities Better for Effective Oversight and Cleanup of Contaminated Areas,
GAO-02-563 (Washington, D.C.: May 17, 2002).




Page 14                                                          GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                         Chapter 1: Introduction




                         The responsibility for leading the U.S. Great Lakes efforts rests with
EPA’s Great Lakes        GLNPO. The Water Quality Act of 1987 amended the Clean Water Act to
National Program         require EPA to lead and coordinate efforts with other federal agencies and
                         state and local authorities to meet the goals in the agreement. It also
Office Is Responsible    established GLNPO within EPA to fulfill U.S. responsibilities under the
for Leading U.S.         agreement and to coordinate EPA’s actions both at headquarters and the
                         affected EPA regional offices. Specifically, the act requires GLNPO to
Efforts to Improve the
Great Lakes Basin        •   cooperate with federal and state agencies in developing and
                             implementing plans to carry out U.S. responsibilities under the
                             agreement,
                         •   coordinate EPA’s efforts to improve water quality of the Great Lakes,
                         •   monitor water quality in the Great Lakes, and
                         •   serve as a liaison with Canada.

                         The Great Lakes Critical Programs Act of 1990 amended the Clean Water
                         Act to further define GLNPO’s role and required that all RAPs be
                         submitted to the office and that the office take the lead in developing a
                         LaMP for Lake Michigan. The act also assigned additional responsibilities
                         to GLNPO in developing water quality standards for the Great Lakes and
                         assessing contaminated sediment characteristics and remediation
                         technologies. In addition to these responsibilities, GLNPO will help
                         implement provisions of the Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002, which
                         authorized funds for cleaning up AOCs. Key provisions of these statutes
                         are summarized in the following table:




                         Page 15                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 1: Introduction




Table 2: Major Statutes Affecting the Great Lakes

 Name of statute                 Key provisions
 Water Quality Act of 1987       • Amends the Clean Water Act to provide that EPA
                                   should take the lead in coordinating with other
                                   federal agencies and state and local authorities to
                                   meet the goals in the agreement.
                                 • Establishes GLNPO within EPA to fulfill the U.S.
                                   responsibilities under the agreement and to
                                   coordinate EPA’s actions at headquarters and the
                                   affected EPA regional offices. Specifically, it
                                   requires GLNPO to
                                   • cooperate with federal and state agencies in
                                       developing and implementing plans to carry out
                                       the U.S. responsibilities under the agreement,
                                   • coordinate EPA’s efforts to improve water quality
                                       of the Great Lakes,
                                   • monitor water quality in the Great Lakes, and
                                   • serve as a liaison with Canada.
 Great Lakes Critical Programs   • Requires that all RAPs be submitted to GLNPO.
 Act of 1990                     • Directs GLNPO to take the lead in developing a
                                   LaMP for Lake Michigan.
                                 • Provides additional responsibility for GLNPO in
                                   developing water quality standards for the Great
                                   Lakes and assessing contaminated sediment
                                   characteristics along with remediation technologies.
                                 • Requires that GLNPO be a separate line item in
                                   EPA’s annual budget request.
 Great Lakes Legacy Act of       • Authorizes $50 million per year from fiscal year
 2002                              2004 through 2008 for contaminated sediment
                                   projects in AOCs for which the United States has
                                   full or partial responsibility.
                                 • Requires EPA to report to the Congress by
                                   November 2003 on oversight of RAPs.
Source: GAO.



The legislative authorization of GLNPO was preceded by an uneven EPA
commitment to addressing Great Lakes issues. In 1972, EPA’s Region V
Office in Chicago established the Office of Great Lakes Coordinator to
monitor a demonstration program on the water quality in the Great Lakes
and to conduct research. In 1978, the region established a larger
coordinating office, also named the Great Lakes National Program Office,
to direct and oversee fulfillment of the U.S. obligations for the agreement
and any spending for that purpose. As we reported in 1982, that office had
difficultly obtaining cooperation from other agency offices to fulfill its
mission, leading us to recommend that GLNPO be allowed to coordinate
actions within EPA, other federal agencies, and states in developing




Page 16                                                       GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                          Chapter 1: Introduction




                          strategies to improve Great Lakes’ water quality.3 In the years immediately
                          following our report, however, the administration excluded GLNPO from
                          the agency’s budget proposal. The Congress restored the funding each
                          time it was excluded from the budget and the region provided staff and
                          other support for the office. The Water Quality Act of 1987 required the
                          EPA Administrator to include in the agency’s annual budget submission to
                          the Congress a separate budget line item for GLNPO. According to GLNPO
                          officials, recent GLNPO budgets have been generally funded by the
                          Congress at the previous years’ level or somewhat greater.

                          GLNPO is a unique entity within EPA. Unlike other EPA entities that have
                          responsibility for an overall media, such as EPA’s Office of Air, GLNPO is
                          focused on a wide range of environmental issues in a specific geographical
                          area of the country. GLNPO and its staff are not physically located with
                          other national program offices in EPA headquarters, and its staff of about
                          40 professionals is relatively small when compared with EPA’s other
                          national programs. The manager is also selected differently than other
                          program office heads. The Great Lakes National Program Manager is the
                          Regional Administrator for EPA’s Region V, as opposed to an individual
                          appointed to specifically head a national program office, such as the Office
                          of Water within EPA.


                          States, provincial governments, international organizations, local
States and Other          organizations, independent commissions, and nonprofit organizations are
Organizations             all involved in Great Lakes issues. The eight Great Lake states and the
                          provincial governments of Ontario and Quebec in Canada have historically
Actively Participate in   played key roles in Great Lakes activities. The GLWQA envisioned that the
Great Lakes               two countries would cooperate with states and provincial governments on
                          a variety of matters, including the development of RAPs for contaminated
Environmental             areas and monitoring environmental conditions within the basin. State and
Activities                provincial government involvement is necessary for implementing other
                          agreements, such as the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy and the
                          Great Lakes Strategy 2002. Similarly, the federal government’s
                          partnerships with the states are essential for implementation of EPA’s
                          Great Lakes and other environmental initiatives.




                          3
                           See U.S. General Accounting Office, A More Comprehensive Approach Is Needed To
                          Clean Up The Great Lakes, CED-82-83 (Washington D.C.: May 21, 1982).




                          Page 17                                                     GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                       Chapter 1: Introduction




                       The IJC assists in the implementation of the agreement between the two
                       countries, reports every 2 years on implementation progress, and offers
                       recommendations to the two countries. The GLWQA created three
                       binational organizations to assist the IJC in its oversight role:

                       •   Great Lakes Water Quality Board, which is the principal adviser to the
                           IJC and is composed of an equal number of Canadian and U.S.
                           members, including representatives from the governments and each
                           state and provincial government.

                       •   Great Lakes Science Advisory Board, which advises the IJC and the
                           Water Quality Board on research and scientific matters. The board is
                           comprised of managers of Great Lakes research programs and
                           recognized experts.

                       •   Great Lakes Regional Office in Windsor, Ontario, which provides
                           administrative and technical support to the boards and operates a
                           public information service for the IJC.

                       In addition, the IJC has established several other organizations that
                       provide advice and assistance, including the Council of Great Lakes
                       Research Managers, the International Air Quality Advisory Board, and the
                       Health Professionals Task Force.


                       Despite early successes in cleaning up the nation’s water, the Great Lakes
Significant            Basin continues to face significant environmental challenges. Specifically,
Environmental          41 areas within the Great Lakes, contaminated with toxic substances, need
                       cleanup actions to restore beneficial uses, such as swimming and fishing.
Challenges Remain to   Water polluted with toxic substances still flows into the Great Lakes from
Restore the Great      specific points, such as wastewater treatment plants, and also from
                       nonpoint sources, such as sediment runoff from agricultural land and
Lakes                  urban areas. Nonnative species continue to invade the Great Lakes,
                       threatening to interrupt the ecological balance in the region. The number
                       of invasive species increased steadily throughout the 1900s, and the basin
                       now contains more than 160 nonnative species that threaten native fish
                       and plants. Figure 2 illustrates the various sources of pollution to the
                       Great Lakes.




                       Page 18                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 1: Introduction




Figure 2: Pollution Sources to the Great Lakes




One of the initial environmental successes in the Great Lakes has been the
significant reduction in the amount of phosphorus that municipal waste
treatment facilities discharged into the lakes. Phosphorus causes
excessive algae growth, which greatly reduced the quality of fish
populations in the Great Lakes. With improved waste treatment facilities
and reduction of phosphates in detergents, phosphorus levels in the Great
Lakes were reduced and fish populations improved. However, a portion of
Lake Erie remains a “dead zone” no longer able to support fish
populations, and this problem appears to be worsening since 1990.

Another notable success was the control of certain invasive species, such
as the sea lamprey. The sea lamprey was first found in Lake Ontario and
quickly spread through out the Great Lakes. Lampreys attached to native
fish, feeding on the body fluids and leaving them either scarred or dead.
Federal, provincial, and state governments initiated control measures that
have reduced the populations significantly.




Page 19                                              GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                     Chapter 1: Introduction




                     Fourteen members of Congress participating on the Great Lakes Task
Objectives, Scope,   Force asked us to (1) identify the federal and state environmental
and Methodology      programs operating in the Great Lakes Basin, (2) evaluate restoration
                     strategies used and how they are coordinated, and (3) assess overall
                     environmental progress made in the basin restoration effort.

                     To identify environmental programs operating in the Great Lakes Basin,
                     we used a structured data collection instrument provided to each of the 8
                     Great Lakes states—Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, New
                     York, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—-and 13 federal agencies. For each
                     program, we requested information about the program’s purpose, the
                     restoration strategies being used, the extent of program coordination with
                     other federal or state agencies, the amount of funding provided, and the
                     overall environmental progress achieved in restoration efforts. A detailed
                     listing of federal and state agencies that provided program information is
                     included as appendix I.

                     Furthermore, we interviewed and gathered program documentation from
                     officials representing EPA’s Office of Water, Office of Air and Radiation,
                     Office of Research and Development, Office of Solid Waste and
                     Emergency Response, and Great Lakes National Program Office, along
                     with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps). These organizations
                     were selected because they have major responsibilities for Great Lakes
                     cleanup and restoration efforts and account for the majority of funds
                     expended for Great Lakes programs. To obtain additional information on
                     state programs, we interviewed state officials from five of the eight Great
                     Lakes states—Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, New York, and Wisconsin.
                     These states were selected because they reported the majority of state
                     programs involved in basin restoration. We also gathered and analyzed
                     documentation from other governmental and nongovernmental
                     organizations involved in restoration activities, including counties,
                     townships, conservation districts, and nonprofit organizations.

                     To evaluate how restoration strategies were used and how they were
                     coordinated, we reviewed and analyzed the data collection instrument
                     responses received from federal and state program officials. From these
                     responses, we identified various coordination methods and determined
                     whether coordination was ongoing or infrequent and whether it was
                     informal or formally documented in a written agreement. We obtained and
                     analyzed strategies for the basin prepared by various organizations or
                     working groups. These strategies were categorized as to whether they
                     were basin-wide strategies or whether they addressed specific
                     environmental problems, such as controlling mercury pollution, or


                     Page 20                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 1: Introduction




geographical areas, such as controlling point source pollution for Lake
Superior. For the recent basin strategy developed by a committee of
regional federal and state officials in 2002, we interviewed officials
representing GLNPO, other federal agencies, and states involved in
developing the strategy to further understand the strategy’s goals,
objectives, and resources available to carry out the strategy. We also
evaluated the agencies’ efforts to coordinate the various strategies.

To determine overall environmental progress made in basin restoration
efforts, we obtained and analyzed Great Lakes progress reports prepared
by representatives of the United States and Canada in response to the
GLWQA. We interviewed GLNPO officials to understand the process for
gathering information and reaching conclusions on progress contained in
the reports. We gathered and analyzed information on the development of
environmental indicators used as part of the reporting process and
interviewed GLNPO officials regarding the resources available and
implementation plan for monitoring agreed-upon indicators. In our effort
to determine the progress environmental programs operating in the basin
have achieved, we obtained information on the program accomplishments
from responses to the data collection instrument and interviews with
various federal and state program officials. We used these responses and
studies to identify barriers to developing indicators and overall restoration
progress in the Great Lakes.

We provided EPA with a draft of this report for review and comment.
EPA’s written comments are presented in appendix V. In addition, we
received technical comments from EPA that we have incorporated
throughout the report as appropriate and technical comments from state
and federal program officials on the information and characterization of
information they provided.

We conducted our work from May 2002 through March 2003 in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards.




Page 21                                                GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                         Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
                         Environmental Programs Operate in the Great
                         Lakes Basin


Environmental Programs Operate in the
Great Lakes Basin
                         About 200 federal and state environmental programs operate within the
                         Great Lakes Basin. Most of these programs involve the localized
                         application of national or state initiatives and do not specifically focus on
                         unique basin concerns, but about 50 specifically address environmental
                         conditions in the basin. The majority of the programs are administered by
                         federal agencies, and for the broad-based programs it is difficult to identify
                         program expenditures that apply to the basin. For the Great Lakes specific
                         programs, expenditures totaled about $1.4 billion over 10 years, with the
                         majority of expenditures coming from state programs. In addition to these
                         program expenditures, the Corps of Engineers expended about $358
                         million on specifically authorized projects within the basin.


                         Most of the federal or state programs that address environmental
Most Programs            conditions in the Great Lakes Basin operate both within and outside of the
Operating in the Great   basin. Of the 148 federal and 51 state programs operating both within and
                         outside the basin, 149 federal and state programs were identified by
Lakes Have a             agency officials as being designed to address environmental conditions at
Nationwide or            a nationwide or statewide level, while 50 programs provide Great Lakes
                         specific restoration efforts. (See fig. 3.)
Statewide Focus
                         Figure 3: Percentage of Non-Great Lakes Specific and Great Lakes Specific
                         Programs Operating in the Great Lakes Basin




                         Page 22                                                   GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
Environmental Programs Operate in the Great
Lakes Basin




Of the 149 non-Great Lakes specific programs, 115 are federal programs
administered by 11 federal agencies and 34 are state programs
administered by 7 states that provide a wide range of restoration activities
that either directly restore or support restoration activities. EPA and
agencies within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) administer
most of the federal programs. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the
Corps); the Department of the Interior’s U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
and Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS); the Department of Commerce’s
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); and the
Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Coast Guard administer the
remaining ones. (See fig. 4.)

Figure 4: Federal Non-Great Lakes Specific Programs




Generally, federal and state programs fund a diverse number of activities
relating to cleanup of contaminated areas, habitat restoration, pollution
prevention, and research that benefit the basin and other geographical
areas outside of the basin. For example, EPA’s RCRA Subtitle I
Underground Storage Tanks and Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
program regulates the use of underground petroleum tanks to prevent the



Page 23                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
Environmental Programs Operate in the Great
Lakes Basin




contamination of drinking water nationwide. This program addresses
associated activities in the basin. Likewise, the Conservation Reserve
Program administered by the Department of Agriculture’s Farm Service
Agency (FSA) provides payments to agricultural landowners to establish
long-term, resource conserving vegetative cover on eligible farmland for
reducing erosion. Some of this funding benefits activities in the basin. The
National Fish Passage Program administered by FWS helps the basin and
other areas of the country restore native fish and other aquatic species to
self-sustaining levels by funding projects to facilitate unimpeded flows and
fish movements by removing barriers or providing ways for fish to bypass
barriers.

Additionally, non-Great Lakes specific research programs provide
information that helps support restoration activities. For example, EPA’s
Aquatic Stressors Research Program funds research activities to advance
scientifically sound approaches for monitoring trends in ecological
conditions of the nation’s aquatic resources, including the Great Lakes.
Another program is the Coastal Remote Sensing, Coastal Change and
Analysis program administered by NOAA, which develops and distributes
regional landscape data through remote sensing technology. The program
develops baseline land cover and characterization information for coastal
areas.

Officials from 7 of the 8 Great Lakes states reported 34 state programs that
affect areas both within and outside the basin. Of the 34 programs, 13 are
in Minnesota, 7 in Ohio, 6 in Wisconsin, 4 in New York, 2 in Pennsylvania,
and 1 each in Indiana and Michigan. The programs cover a wide range of
activities directly involved in restoration or supporting restoration
activities. For example, the Minnesota Mercury Initiative program, which
was created in 1999 to reduce mercury contamination in fish by curtailing
air deposition of mercury in state waters, solicits voluntary mercury
reductions from large companies to achieve its goals. Similarly, Ohio’s
Ground Water Resources program fosters development of groundwater as
a viable and sustainable water supply both within and outside the basin
and involves collecting and distributing information on groundwater
resources in the Lake Erie and Ohio River Basins. A detailed listing of all
federal and state non-Great Lakes specific programs is included as
appendix II.

The portion of expenditures devoted to activities in the basin for most of
these general federal and state programs is generally not available.
However, the following examples provide expenditure information on
some of the programs:


Page 24                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                       Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
                       Environmental Programs Operate in the Great
                       Lakes Basin




                       •   EPA’s Superfund program officials calculated that EPA’s Region V,
                           which encompasses 6 of the 8 Great Lakes states, expended $745.6
                           million on cleanup activities within the basin during fiscal years 1992
                           through 2001.

                       •   NOAA’s National Sea Grant College Program, which supports
                           education programs and research relating to the development of
                           marine resources, expended $69.6 million for the basin during fiscal
                           years 1995 through 2001.

                       •   The Corps’ Shore Protection Program, which provides project funding
                           for planning and constructing structures for protecting shores against
                           waves and currents, expended just over $1 million for these activities in
                           the basin during fiscal years 1992 through 2001.

                       Expenditure data for activities in the basin was available for 53 of the 115
                       federal non-Great Lakes specific programs and totaled about $1.8 billion
                       during fiscal years 1992 through 2001. Similarly, expenditures for activities
                       in the basin for 14 state non-Great Lakes specific programs were about
                       $461.3 million in state fiscal years 1992 through 2001.


                       We identified 50 federal and state programs that focus specifically on
Great Lakes Specific   addressing environmental conditions within the basin. Of these, 33 are
Environmental          Great Lakes specific programs that are funded by federal agencies while
                       17 programs are funded by 7 states. FWS and EPA conduct most of the
Programs Focus on      federal programs while three agencies identified one program each—
Certain Geographic     Interior’s National Park Service (NPS), USDA’s Natural Resource
                       Conservation Service (NRCS), and the Department of Health and Human
Areas or Problems      Service’s Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).
                       (See fig. 5.)




                       Page 25                                                GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
Environmental Programs Operate in the Great
Lakes Basin




Figure 5: Number of Great Lakes Specific Programs by Federal Agency




The federal programs support a variety of activities, such as research,
cleanup, restoration, pollution prevention, and other activities that directly
focus on Great Lakes environmental issues. For example:

•   EPA’s Niagara River Toxics Management Plan program focuses on
    reducing toxic chemicals input into the Niagara River, achieving
    ambient water quality, and improving and protecting the water quality
    of Lake Ontario. The program began in 1987, and funding for
    remediation efforts comes from two EPA programs.

•   EPA’s Great Lakes Air Deposition Program funds projects to better
    understand the impacts of atmospheric deposition of pollutants, such
    as mercury and other toxics, which are a major source of
    contamination. The program funds projects in monitoring, modeling,
    and emissions inventory development, which assist in identifying
    pollution sources.

•   The Corps’ Great Lakes Remedial Action Plans and Sediment
    Remediation program provides technical support to the development



Page 26                                                 GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
Environmental Programs Operate in the Great
Lakes Basin




    and implementation of remedial action plans to clean up contaminated
    areas in the Great Lakes. Funds are provided for planning and
    administrative implementation activities and may not be used for
    actual construction cleanup.

•   FWS’s Lake Trout Restoration program began in the late 1970s to
    rehabilitate the lake-trout populations in Lake Erie and Lake Ontario.
    The goal of the program is to increase the population of native lake
    trout to a level where it is self-sustaining through natural reproduction,
    with a harvestable annual surplus.

•   USDA’s Great Lakes Basin Program for Soil Erosion and Sediment
    Control, administered by NRCS, focuses on improving Great Lakes
    water quality by preventing soil erosion through education programs,
    grants, and technical assistance. Runoff from agricultural land is a
    source of nonpoint pollution to the Great Lakes.

•   FWS’s Lower Great Lakes Ruffe Surveillance program, which began in
    1993, provides surveillance activities for the ruffe—a nonnative fish
    that competes with native species, such as walleye and perch. The
    surveillance activities include monitoring, detecting newly established
    populations, tracking existing populations, and evaluating current
    control and management activities.

EPA, NOAA, and FWS provide most of the funding for Great Lakes specific
programs. Of the $387.4 million expended by federal agencies for these
programs during fiscal years 1992 through 2001, 64 percent, or $248.9
million, was for EPA programs; 17 percent, or $67.2 million, for NOAA
programs; and 9 percent, or $33.4 million, for FWS programs. (See fig. 6.)




Page 27                                                 GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
Environmental Programs Operate in the Great
Lakes Basin




Figure 6: Percentage of Expenditures for Great Lakes Specific Programs by Federal
Agency, Fiscal Years 1992 through 2001




While ongoing Great Lakes specific federal programs fund various
restoration activities, the Corps funds additional activities through
specifically authorized environmental projects that do not fall under its
ongoing programs. Most of these projects are authorized under the
biennial Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) and are for project
studies or construction. Once authorized, these projects can be funded
through the annual Energy and Water Appropriations Acts. For most
projects, the Corps can only expend the funds if local partners meet the
cost-sharing requirements established by the authorization. For example,
specific local government projects for wastewater facilities or combined
sewer overflow mitigation identified in WRDA cannot be funded until a
cost-sharing agreement is reached with the local government. In addition
to projects authorized in WRDA, projects may be authorized and initial
funding provided through the annual appropriation process.

In fiscal years 1992 through 2001, the Corps expended approximately $358
million on specifically authorized projects. These projects funded a variety
of activities, such as the $93.8 million restoration of Chicago’s shoreline
and the $78.7 million for restoring the Little Calumet River in Indiana.
According to a Corps official, many projects are authorized in this manner



Page 28                                                   GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
Environmental Programs Operate in the Great
Lakes Basin




because of the unique nature or scope of the project or because of the
capabilities of states and local organizations to fund projects. Two states,
Illinois and Indiana, received the majority of specific project funding
during fiscal years 1992 through 2001, as shown in figure 7.

Figure 7: Percentage of Expenditures for Specifically Authorized Projects Received
by Great Lakes States, Fiscal Years 1992 through 2001




Information on the individual Corps projects funded during fiscal years
1992 through 2001 for the basin is contained in appendix III.

In addition to the federal programs and specifically authorized Corps
projects, 17 state Great Lakes Basin specific programs fund a wide range
of activities that address unique state concerns or problems in the Great
Lakes. The following examples of some specific state programs show the
range of activities that states undertake.

•   Ohio’s Shore Structure Permit Program protects the Lake Erie
    shoreline by providing assistance to coastal residents and communities
    in the proper design and construction of structures for controlling


Page 29                                                    GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
Environmental Programs Operate in the Great
Lakes Basin




      erosion, wave action, and flooding along or near the shoreline. The
      program began in the 1930s, and funding is provided from state lease
      revenues for mining mineral resources from the bed of Lake Erie.

•     The Clean Michigan Initiative provides general obligation bond funding
      for environmental activities in Michigan. These activities include
      Brownfields redevelopment, nonpoint source pollution control,
      cleanup of contaminated sediments, and pollution prevention. About
      $255.9 million was expended for projects throughout Michigan, with
      only a small portion of the state’s land area extending outside the
      basin.

•     Pennsylvania established the Office of the Great Lakes, which provides
      administrative oversight and support to other state offices that have
      environmental responsibilities. It funds staff travel, salary, and
      administrative costs of about $100,000 per year for outreach and
      education activities. Restoration of a particular contaminated area in
      Lake Erie, Presque Isle Bay, is a major focus of the office’s activities.

The states’ Great Lakes specific programs include those funded through
the Great Lakes Protection Fund. The Great Lakes Governors created and
incorporated the fund as a permanent endowment, with each state
providing a fixed contribution amount based on the average use of Great
Lakes water from 1976 through 1985.4 Each participating state receives
one-third of the fund’s annual income based on its proportional
endowment contribution. Payments to the states totaled about $31 million
from years 1990 through 2001, but payments were suspended in 2002
because of low fund investment performance. States use the funds to
support a wide range of basin activities. For example, Michigan funds
research projects undertaken by universities and for-profit groups in areas
such as toxics and aquatic nuisance species. Minnesota’s dividends from
the fund are relatively small, and therefore they are combined with state-
funded projects, such as a mercury control project and a project
retrofitting a sampling vessel. Ohio’s program involves the award of grants
that support research and implementation projects, in alternating years,
and require 10 percent matching funds by the recipient. New York uses its
program to fund research, environmental planning, monitoring, and field
assessment, and the state has mandated that monies cannot be used to
fund construction or cleanup activities. In addition to paying out state
dividends, the fund supported 191 grants for regional projects totaling


4
    Indiana does not participate in the Great Lakes Protection Fund.




Page 30                                                            GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                         Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
                         Environmental Programs Operate in the Great
                         Lakes Basin




                         about $40 million. These grants were awarded from the remaining two-
                         thirds of the fund’s undistributed income.

                         Of the 17 state Great Lakes specific programs, 5 were funded by Michigan,
                         4 by Ohio, 3 by Wisconsin, 2 by Pennsylvania, and 1 each by Illinois,
                         Minnesota, and New York. Total expenditures for the programs were
                         about $956 million during fiscal years 1992 through 2001. Michigan
                         programs accounted for 96 percent of the expended amount because of
                         major expenditures for three state programs and about 99 percent of the
                         state’s border lies within the basin. A detailed listing of all federal and
                         state Great Lakes specific programs is included as appendix IV.


                         Besides federal and state government agencies, other organizations, such
Foundations and          as foundations, fund a variety of restoration activities in the Great Lakes
Other Organizations      Basin by providing grants to nonprofit and other organizations, including
                         government agencies. Specifically, four foundations and one trust provide
Fund Great Lakes         funds for restoration activities.
Restoration Activities
                         •   The Joyce Foundation supports various public policy initiatives,
                             including long-term efforts to protect the Great Lakes environment, and
                             provides grants to organizations for environmental projects, such as a
                             grant to support activities that examine institutional issues facing the
                             Great Lakes ecosystem.

                         •   The Charles Stewart Mott Foundation supports efforts to conserve
                             freshwater ecosystems in North America, including the Great Lakes.
                             Grants are provided to improve capacity building for environmental
                             organizations and to protect and restore selected freshwater
                             ecosystems through conservation activities.

                         •   The George Gund Foundation provides support for conservation efforts
                             within the Great Lakes Basin and is particularly interested in capacity
                             building of nonprofit environmental organizations. Grants are provided
                             to organizations, such as the National Wildlife Federation, to support
                             ongoing efforts to reduce the contamination of waters by airborne
                             mercury.

                         •   The Delta Institute funds activities for the development of policies and
                             practices for sustainable development and environmental stewardship
                             in the Great Lakes region. Among other things, the Delta Institute
                             provides funding for the development of Lakewide Management Plans,




                         Page 31                                                GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
Environmental Programs Operate in the Great
Lakes Basin




    the Lake Michigan Regional Air Toxics Strategy, and the Lake Erie Fish
    Consumption Advisory Education Project.

•   The Great Lakes Fishery Trust provides grants to nonprofit and
    governmental organizations to benefit Great Lakes fishery resources,
    such as a grant to FWS to develop a management plan for lake
    sturgeon. The trust was created as part of a court settlement for fish
    losses at a hydroelectric facility in Michigan, and the trust manages the
    assets of the settlement.

In addition to these organizations, other governmental and
nongovernmental organizations fund restoration activities. For example,
individual municipalities, such as the City of Toledo, Ohio, led and funded
a demonstration project to develop a process for physically stabilizing and
isolating contaminated sediment under a permeable covering to avoid
dredging the sediment. Municipalities are also instrumental in funding
projects to improve wastewater treatment facilities that discharge treated
water into the Great Lakes. Several municipalities participate in the
International Association of Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Mayors, which
holds annual conferences to adopt unified positions and make
recommendations for the protection, promotion, and development of the
Great Lakes. Counties and township governments also fund environmental
activities that benefit the Great Lakes. For example, township
governments may have growth development plans that include
conservation objectives to help control pollution and preserve open areas
in the township. Counties in the Great Lakes Basin fund activities and
projects to control nonpoint source pollution, soil erosion, and wildlife
areas. Conservation districts within counties provide technical assistance
and education in areas such as erosion control and agricultural chemical
control. Within the basin, there are 213 counties and 209 conservation
districts that support conservation or restoration activities within the
Great Lakes Basin.

Numerous nongovernmental organizations also provide coordination
roles, policy perspectives, or financially support restoration activities,
including the following:

•   Council of Great Lakes Governors, a partnership of governors from the
    eight Great Lakes States and the Canadian Premiers of Ontario and
    Quebec, encourages and facilitates environmentally responsible
    economic growth throughout the Great Lakes region.




Page 32                                                 GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
Environmental Programs Operate in the Great
Lakes Basin




•   Great Lakes Commission, an agency promoting the orderly, integrated,
    and comprehensive development, use, and conservation of water and
    related natural resources of the Great Lakes Basin and the St.
    Lawrence River, includes representatives from the eight Great Lakes
    states and the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec.

•   Great Lakes Fishery Commission, created by the Canadian and U.S.
    Convention on Great Lakes Fisheries in 1955, coordinates fisheries
    management and research, and management of sea lamprey. The U.S.
    Department of State and Canada’s Fisheries and Ocean Department
    provide funding for the commission.

•   International Association for Great Lakes Research, a scientific
    organization comprised of researchers studying the Great Lakes and
    other large lakes of the world, hosts annual conferences and publishes
    the Journal of Great Lakes Research.

•   Great Lakes Research Consortium, an organization of 16 colleges and
    universities in New York, with 9 affiliate campuses in Ontario,
    dedicated to collaborative research and education on the Great Lakes,
    focuses its activities on improving and understanding the Great Lakes
    ecosystem, including the physical, biological, and chemical processes
    along with the social and political forces that affect human impact on
    the lakes.

•   Great Lakes United, an international coalition organization focused on
    preserving and restoring the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River
    ecosystem, promotes effective policy initiatives, carries out education
    programs, and promotes citizen action and grassroots leadership for
    Great Lakes environmental activities. The coalition is made up of
    member organizations representing environmentalists,
    conservationists, hunters and anglers, labor unions, communities, and
    citizens of the United States, Canada, and First Nations and Tribes.

•   Lake Michigan Federation, which works to restore fish and wildlife
    habitat, conserve land and water, and eliminate toxics in the watershed
    of Lake Michigan.

•   The Nature Conservancy, whose mission is to preserve the plants,
    animals, and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on
    Earth by protecting the lands and waters that need to survive. The
    major initiative of the Nature Conservancy’s Great Lakes Office is the
    Great Lakes Planning Initiative. The initiative has designated 270
    priority sites for conservation in the Great Lakes and is in the process



Page 33                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 2: Numerous Federal and State
Environmental Programs Operate in the Great
Lakes Basin




    of developing a planning document for each of these sites that will
    guide conservation work and coordination with other organizations
    and agencies.

•   The Northeast-Midwest Institute, a private, nonprofit, and nonpartisan
    research organization dedicated to economic vitality, environmental
    quality, and regional equity for Northeast and Midwest states, has a
    major area of emphasis on the Great Lakes and has issued several
    reports on a variety of Great Lakes topics.

While these organizations are involved in Great Lakes activities, each is
unique in terms of why it was created, its goals and objectives, scope of
operations, and funding source. Several of the organizations are
binational, such as the Great Lakes Commission and Great Lakes United,
and focus only on Great Lakes issues. For other organizations, such as The
Nature Conservancy and the Northeast-Midwest Institute, the Great Lakes
are one of several issues addressed by the organizations.




Page 34                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                             Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
                             Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
                             Impede Restoration Efforts


Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
Impede Restoration Efforts
                             The magnitude of the area comprising the Great Lakes Basin and the many
                             environmental programs operating within the basin require the
                             development of one overarching strategy to address and manage the
                             complex undertaking of restoring the basin’s environmental health. The
                             Great Lakes region cannot hope to successfully receive support as a
                             national priority without a publicly accepted, comprehensive plan for
                             restoring the Great Lakes. In lieu of such a plan, organizations at the
                             binational, federal, and state levels have developed their own strategies for
                             the Great Lakes, which have inadvertently made the coordination of
                             various programs operating in the basin more challenging. Although
                             coordination among federal agencies, states, and other environmental
                             organizations occurs when strategies are being developed or when
                             programmatic activity calls for coordination, the myriad of current
                             strategies and coordination efforts makes it difficult to determine which
                             organization is in charge. While the Great Lakes National Program Office
                             (GLNPO) has authority for coordinating Environmental Protection Agency
                             (EPA) and other federal efforts, it has not fully exercised its authority.
                             Numerous strategizing, planning, and coordinating efforts have not
                             resulted in extensive restoration activity because of a lack of funding and
                             other barriers.


                             The Great Lakes region cannot be successfully supported as a national
An Overarching               priority without a publicly accepted, comprehensive plan for restoring the
Strategy and Clear           Great Lakes. Clearly defined responsibilities for coordination are essential
                             for effective management of large watershed restoration projects. An
Responsibilities Are         overarching strategy and governance process to guide restoration
Needed for                   activities that transpire over many years have been developed for other
                             large ecosystem restoration projects. The Great Lakes Basin lacks an
Management of Large          overarching strategy and in its absence, numerous strategies have been
Watershed                    developed to address environmental activities, each with a different
Restoration Projects         purpose and scope. Some strategies attempt to address the entire basin
                             while others are focused on specific environmental problems or
                             geographical areas.


Overarching Strategies Are   Because of the complexity of large ecosystem restoration projects and
Essential to Guide           multiple stakeholders, restoration efforts for other large ecosystems, such
Restoration Efforts          as the South Florida ecosystem and the Chesapeake Bay, have developed
                             overarching strategies to guide their activities. These strategies were
                             deemed essential by the organizations involved in the efforts for guiding
                             activities that would occur over extended time periods and with multiple
                             stakeholders whose participation may change over time.


                             Page 35                                                GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
Impede Restoration Efforts




The South Florida ecosystem is a large restoration project initiative with
an overall strategic plan to guide its restoration activities. This ecosystem
covers a large geographical area that encompasses a major portion of
South Florida, including the Everglades wetlands. Numerous changes
brought on by urbanization, agricultural activities, and federal efforts to
control flooding have detrimentally affected the ecosystem. In response to
growing deterioration of the ecosystem, federal agencies established a
task force in 1993 to coordinate their restoration activities. In 1996, the
task force was expanded to include state, local, and tribal members and
was formalized in the Water Resources Development Act of 1996.
However, as we reported in 1999, a strategic plan had not been developed
laying out how the restoration initiative would be accomplished, including
quantifiable goals and performance measures.5 Without a strategic plan,
we noted the ability to accomplish the restoration initiative in a timely and
efficient manner was at risk because of its complexity and a mechanism
was needed to provide the authority for making management decisions. In
a subsequent report,6 we noted that a strategic plan for the ecosystem
would clearly communicate to the Congress and other participants in the
restoration effort what it is trying to achieve, the time frames for achieving
the expected results, and the level of funding that would be needed. Such a
plan was also needed because of the inevitable personnel turnover in task
force representation occurring over time and the subsequent need to
inform new task force members of restoration progress.

The strategic plan developed for the South Florida ecosystem by the task
force made substantial progress in guiding the restoration activities. The
plan, which the task force submitted in July 2000, identifies the resources
needed to achieve restoration and assigns accountability for specific
actions for the extensive restoration effort estimated to cost $14.8 billion.
As we reported in 2001, the plan needed additional elements, including a
clear picture of how the restoration will occur and linkage between
strategic goals and outcome-oriented goals for tracking and measuring
restoration progress. The restoration effort was elevated to nationwide
recognition with the authorization of the Comprehensive Everglades



5
 See U.S. General Accounting Office, South Florida Ecosystem Restoration: An Overall
Strategic Plan and a Decision-Making Process Are Needed to Keep the Effort on Track,
GAO/RCED-99-121 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 22, 1999).
6
 See U.S. General Accounting Office, South Florida Ecosystem Restoration: Substantial
Progress Made in Developing a Strategic Plan, but Actions Still Needed, GAO-01-361
(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 27, 2001).




Page 36                                                       GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
Impede Restoration Efforts




Restoration Plan (CERP) in the Water Resources Development Act of 2000
(P.L. 106-541). This act contained provisions specifying the coordination
among stakeholders, the funding responsibilities, and the authorization for
program regulations.

The Chesapeake Bay watershed is another example of a large restoration
effort with an overarching strategy. In a 1983 agreement to restore the
Chesapeake Bay, the states of Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania; the
District of Columbia; the Chesapeake Bay Commission; and EPA signed an
agreement to protect and restore the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. The
participants saw the need to establish an executive council to marshal
public support for the bay effort and be accountable to the public for
progress made under the agreement. Under the 1983 agreement, the
executive council must meet at least twice yearly to assess and oversee
the implementation of coordinated plans to improve and protect the water
quality and living resources of the bay. The council established an
implementation committee of agency representatives to coordinate
technical matters and the development and evaluation of management
plans. In a subsequent agreement, Chesapeake 2000, the partners agreed to
a new ecosystem approach to the bay. While continuing to focus
restoration efforts on individual species and habitat, such as the blue crab
and the oyster reef, the new agreement recognizes the linkage among
these efforts and addresses their interdependence within the context of a
single, broad ecosystem approach. Several reports by the council have
detailed the status of progress toward the goals set forth in the
agreements.

The South Florida ecosystem and the Chesapeake Bay watershed are large
ecosystems with overarching strategies, but the overall area and
population affected by these ecosystems are significantly less than the
Great Lakes Basin. The Great Lakes influence more people, land, water,
and states by a substantial margin. The population within the basin is more
than five times that of the population near the South Florida project and
more than twice the population near the Chesapeake Bay. The basin
comprises more than 11 times the area of the South Florida project and
more than 3 times the area of Chesapeake Bay. Moreover, the basin
encompasses eight states as opposed to one state for the South Florida
project and six states and the District of Columbia for the Chesapeake Bay
watershed. (See table 3.)




Page 37                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                       Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
                       Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
                       Impede Restoration Efforts




                       Table 3: Geographic Area, Population, and States for Three Restoration Areas

                                                        Area size                               Number of
                       Restoration area          (in square miles)   Area population        affected states
                       Great Lakes Basin                  201,000          33 million                     8
                       Chesapeake Bay
                       watershed                            64,000          16 million                   6
                       South Florida
                       ecosystem                            18,000           6 million                   1
                       Sources: Environment Canada, EPA, and GAO.




                       Numerous strategies developed for the Great Lakes Basin address
Strategies for the     environmental restoration activities with different perspectives, purposes,
Great Lakes Do Not     and scopes. Several comprehensive strategies attempt to address
                       restoration activities for the entire basin. Other strategies address a
Provide an             particular concern or geographic area. However, none of the current
Overarching            strategies provides an overarching approach that can be used as a
                       restoration blueprint to guide overall activities similar to the South Florida
Restoration Approach   ecosystem restoration.

                       The most recent comprehensive strategy developed for the entire basin—
                       the Great Lakes Strategy 2002—was developed by the U.S. Policy
                       Committee (USPC), a group of mostly federal regional, and state officials
                       and coordinated by GLNPO. The group focused on federal, state, and tribal
                       government activities as they relate to environmental protection and
                       natural resource management and to fulfilling the goals of the Great Lakes
                       Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA). The strategy sets forth goals,
                       objectives, and actions in various environmental issues, such as storm
                       water discharges, along with goals, objectives, and key actions to achieve
                       for these issues. The strategy also recognizes the other strategies that have
                       been developed for the Great Lakes. Developing the strategy occurred
                       over several months, requiring significant time and efforts by GLNPO and
                       USPC members to agree on the various goals, objectives, and actions.
                       GLNPO officials plan periodic follow-up with USPC representatives to
                       determine the progress made in reaching the objectives. Toward this end,
                       GLNPO has prepared a matrix listing over 100 planned actions for
                       achieving the objectives and will conduct follow-up inquiries with the
                       responsible agency officials to determine progress as an accountability
                       mechanism.

                       The Great Lakes Strategy 2002 provides extensive information on
                       planned activities to achieve the objectives, but it is largely a descriptive



                       Page 38                                                           GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
Impede Restoration Efforts




compilation of existing program activities that relates to basin restoration.
For example, the strategy addresses Brownfields redevelopment by
identifying the number of Brownfields sites within the basin and
describing ongoing Brownfields activities.7 The key action called for in the
strategy is to continue support for local Brownfields redevelopment
efforts through various planned or ongoing activities at the state and
federal levels. The strategy also promotes clean and healthy beaches by
noting that EPA will implement the Beaches Environmental Assessment
and Coastal Health Act of 2000. The act requires all states with coastal
waters, including the Great Lakes states, to review water quality criteria
for coastal recreation waters and adopt protective water quality standards.

To attain the strategy’s objectives, federal and state agencies need to
provide level funding to avoid modification of the planned actions and
activities, according to GLNPO officials. The strategy states that “(it)
should not be construed as a commitment by the U.S. government for
additional funding and resources for its implementation. Nor does it
represent a commitment by the U.S. government to adopt new
regulations.”8 GLNPO officials agreed that the strategy continues with the
status quo and is a statement of what they hope to accomplish with better
coordination. Some state officials involved in developing the strategy
stated that state actions described in the strategy were already planned
and that implementation is contingent on states funding the relevant
environmental programs.

In 2001, the Great Lakes Commission published another basin strategy,
The Great Lakes Program to Ensure Environmental and Economic
Prosperity, which outlines seven major goals for the Great Lakes Basin.
The goals are

•     cleaning up toxic hot spots,
•     preventing the introduction or limiting the spread of invasive species,
•     controlling nonpoint source pollution,
•     restoring and conserving wetlands and critical coastal habitat,
•     ensuring the sustainable use of our water resources,
•     strengthening decision support capability, and
•     enhancing the commercial and recreational value of our waterways.


7
 “Brownfields” are properties with real or perceived environmental contamination that
hampers redevelopment efforts.
8
    See U.S. Policy Committee, Great Lakes Strategy 2002, (p.3), (Feb. 22, 2002).




Page 39                                                            GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                           Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
                           Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
                           Impede Restoration Efforts




                           For each goal, the strategy contains recommendations for actions that
                           target specific programs, authorizations, and appropriations. For example,
                           the commission helped develop and promote the adoption of an action
                           plan for the prevention and control of aquatic nuisance species.

                           The commission’s strategy involves coordinated efforts among the
                           commission and its partner agencies and organizations to secure much
                           needed federal appropriations and legislative initiatives. This strategy
                           emphasizes federal/state and U.S./Canadian partnerships as a means to
                           achieving its goals, but it does not provide detailed implementation plans
                           or identify funding sources to achieve the goals. GLNPO officials stated
                           that they believe this strategy and the Great Lakes Strategy 2002 are
                           complimentary rather than competing strategies.

                           Two other organizations—Great Lakes United and the Council of Great
                           Lakes Governors—are developing basin-wide restoration strategies. Great
                           Lakes United, an international coalition of basin stakeholders, has
                           developed and circulated several documents addressing Great Lakes
                           issues. By 2003, Great Lakes United plans to integrate these draft issue
                           documents into an overall agenda for the comprehensive restoration of the
                           basin. The Council of Great Lakes Governors’ strategy is being based on
                           the priorities of the Great Lakes governors and is to be used as a basis for
                           identifying priority restoration efforts for the basin.


Additional Strategies      Other Great Lakes specific strategies address unique environmental
Focus on Specific Issues   problems or specific geographical areas. A strategy for each lake
or Geographic Areas        addresses open lake waters through Lakewide Management Plans (LaMP),
                           which EPA is responsible for developing. Toward this end, EPA formed
                           working groups for each lake to identify and address restoration activities.
                           For example, the LaMP for Lake Michigan, issued in 2002, includes a
                           summary of the lake’s ecosystem status and addresses progress in
                           achieving the goals described in the previous plan, with examples of
                           significant activities completed and other relevant topics.

                           The Binational Executive Committee for the United States and Canada
                           issued its Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy in 1997 that established
                           a collaborative process by which EPA and Environment Canada, in
                           consultation with other federal departments and agencies, states, the
                           province of Ontario, and tribes, work toward the goal of the virtual
                           elimination of persistent toxic substances in the Great Lakes. The strategy
                           particularly addresses substances that bioaccumulate in fish or animals
                           and pose a human health risk. After establishing various challenges for


                           Page 40                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                      Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
                      Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
                      Impede Restoration Efforts




                      both or either country to meet, the strategy lays out priority activities to
                      meet the challenges. The strategy also incorporates the regular assessment
                      of progress made. Among the successes in reducing persistent toxic
                      substances in the Great Lakes is the cleanup of contaminated sediment
                      sites at some Great Lakes harbors; reduced levels of PCBs, dioxins, and
                      DDT; and improved sport fisheries.

                      Michigan developed a strategy for environmental cleanup called the Clean
                      Michigan Initiative. This initiative provides money for a variety of
                      environmental, parks, and redevelopment programs. It includes nine
                      components, including Brownfields redevelopment and environmental
                      cleanups, nonpoint source pollution control, clean water, cleanup of
                      contaminated sediments, and pollution prevention. The initiative is funded
                      by a $675 million general obligation bond and as of early 2003, most of the
                      funds had not been distributed.


                      Ultimate responsibility for coordinating Great Lakes restoration programs
GLNPO Has Not Fully   rests with GLNPO, which has the statutory authority to coordinate EPA’s
Exercised Its         and other federal agency activities. However, GLNPO has not fully
                      exercised this authority, and other organizations or committees have
Authority for         formed to assume coordination and strategy development roles.
Coordinating Great
                      The Clean Water Act provides GLNPO with the authority to coordinate the
Lakes Restoration     actions of EPA’s headquarters and regional offices aimed at improving
Programs              Great Lakes water quality. It also provides GLNPO with the authority to
                      coordinate EPA’s actions with the actions of other federal agencies and
                      state and local authorities for obtaining input in developing water quality
                      strategies and obtaining support in achieving the objectives of the
                      GLWQA. Finally, the statute provides that the EPA Administrator shall
                      ensure that GLNPO enters into agreements with the various organizational
                      elements of the agency engaged in Great Lakes activities and with
                      appropriate state agencies. The agreements should specifically delineate
                      the duties and responsibilities, time periods for carrying out duties, and
                      resources committed to these duties. GLNPO officials stated that they do
                      not enter into formal agreements with other EPA offices but rather fulfill
                      their responsibilities under the act by having federal agencies and state
                      officials agree to the restoration activities contained in the Great Lakes
                      Strategy 2002. However, the strategy does not represent formal
                      agreements to conduct specific duties and responsibilities with committed




                      Page 41                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
Impede Restoration Efforts




resources. The absence of these agreements was also reported in a
September 1999 report by EPA’s Office of Inspector General.9 The report
stated that GLNPO did not have agreements as required by the act and
recommended that such agreements be made to improve working
relationships and coordination.

Other organizations or groups have formed to fulfill coordinating roles in
Great Lakes restoration activities, both at the basin level and on a smaller
scale for specific issues of concern. For example, the USPC, which was
formed initially by GLNPO in 1988 to develop a Great Lakes strategy and
provide a coordinating role, developed a strategy and a coordinating plan,
“Protecting the Great Lakes,” in 1992 to cover the 5-year period from 1992
through 1997. Officials from federal agencies not on the USPC never
approved the plan, and many parties involved in environmental activities
in the basin felt left out of the strategy development process. The USPC
was disbanded in 1995, and the strategy was not used as a guide for
restoration activities. GLNPO officials formed a second U.S. Policy
Committee in 1999, similar in structure to the first committee, which
included federal regional and state officials. The USPC recently developed
the Great Lakes Strategy 2002, and it meets semi-annually to coordinate
agency actions and commitments associated with the strategy, as well as
to review progress and ensure accountability. Another group, the Midwest
Natural Resources Group, established in 1998, contains a Great Lakes
focus team that conducts coordination meetings for eliminating
duplication across federal bureaus and agencies. Within this group,
representatives from EPA and the Corps facilitate activities, such as
developing monitoring protocols, sharing facilities and vessels across
agencies, and increasing data sharing.

With several entities involved in coordinating, planning, and strategizing, it
appears at times that federal and state officials cannot be sure which
entity bears ultimate responsibility for and authority over these activities
and their implementation at any given time and whether the entity is a
permanent body or an ad hoc organization that may disband if interest
wanes. State of Minnesota officials, who were asked to provide input for
several restoration plans, stated that they found the significant overlap of
the plans inefficient and thought it would be helpful to have a more
streamlined approach to Great Lakes issues. They stated that it would be



9
 See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA’s Great Lakes Program, EPA/OIG Rept.
99P00212 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 1, 1999).




Page 42                                                     GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
Impede Restoration Efforts




better to have an overall structure to carry out environmental activities.
Officials from The Nature Conservancy, a nonprofit organization
conducting environmental activities in the Great Lakes, stated that it is
difficult to understand the array of public sector entities and their
involvement in Great Lakes issues. They observed that the Great Lakes
community is fractionalized with participants, both public and private,
pushing their own agendas rather than a true vision vetted with all
stakeholders. They further noted that the heavy bureaucratic framework
of many groups and processes made them skeptical that actual work
would be conducted.

A USGS official stated that the lack of a unified vision among the many
Great Lakes federal, state, and local agencies impedes progress. He noted
that individual efforts are not structured or organized in such a way that
they can be integrated to provide the hierarchical means to assess,
diagnose, and restore the system. The burden to provide the leadership
that will bring a Great Lakes program to a level that is consistent with
other large-scale efforts, such as the Chesapeake Bay restoration, rests
largely with EPA--the only agency under the Clean Water Act and
associated agreements with Canada--with regulatory authority to do so.
More money, the official said, would not improve restoration progress
unless it is combined with a strong, overarching effort of coordination and
organization. GLNPO officials stated that the success of the Chesapeake
Bay Watershed Restoration Project can be attributed to the buy-in of high-
level officials, such as the governors of the related states, a level of
influential support that they say GLNPO lacks.

While several organizations are conducting coordination in developing
strategies, at the individual program level, most federal and state officials
reported coordination with their programmatic counterparts in various
ways while implementing their programs. For example, section 404 of the
Clean Water Act requires a formal arrangement between EPA and the
Corps to coordinate management of a dredge and fill permit program each
year, with the agencies jointly reviewing about 10,000 permit applications
for the basin. Coordination activities can be formalized in memoranda of
understanding or agreement, interagency agreements, or letters of
collaboration. For example, in a 1997 memorandum of agreement among
NOAA, EPA, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and two
Wisconsin Indian tribes, the parties agreed to coordinate their efforts in
removing contaminated sediments from the Lower Fox River in
Wisconsin. The agreement specifies an organizational structure, including
what the parties’ duties are, what their responsibilities are, and how
disputes will be resolved. In addition to such formal coordination,


Page 43                                                GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                            Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
                            Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
                            Impede Restoration Efforts




                            informal coordination also occurs between federal and state officials
                            through meetings or telephone calls. For example, officials from EPA’s
                            Region V Water Division coordinated Coastal Environmental Management
                            Program activities with eight federal agencies in developing LaMPs. This
                            coordination included correspondence, conference calls, and various face-
                            to-face meetings.


                            Although major planning efforts aimed at restoring the Great Lakes exist,
Major Planning              several barriers have prevented these efforts from resulting in extensive
Efforts Have Not            restoration activity. Great Lakes program officials often cited insufficient
                            funding for program activities as a major barrier and a reason for not
Yielded Extensive           achieving and measuring restoration progress in the Great Lakes. They
Restoration Activity        also cited several other factors affecting progress, including the lack of
                            local technical expertise for conducting restoration activities, poor
because of a Lack of        coordination among groups conducting environmental activity, and a lack
Funding and Other           of leadership.
Barriers

Limited Restoration         After years of planning restoration activities for the Great Lakes Basin,
Progress after Many Years   significant restoration progress remains to be achieved. Several IJC
of Planning                 reports have pointed out the slow restoration progress. For example, in
                            2002, the IJC reported that after more than 15 years of planning and
                            incremental activity, restoration of the Great Lakes through remedial
                            actions remains elusive and difficult and more needs to be done quickly.10
                            Moreover, the IJC stated in 2000 that the Great Lakes ecosystem remains
                            compromised and that contaminated sediments in the lakes produce
                            health problems.11 Restoration challenges remain in several areas, such as
                            controlling invasive species.

                            The slow restoration progress is illustrated by the 26 contaminated areas
                            in the Great Lakes Basin for which the United States is responsible for
                            ensuring cleanup under the GLWQA. In April 2002, we reported that none
                            of the areas had been restored to beneficial use and only half of the areas
                            selected remedial and regulatory measures to address the problems, and



                            10
                                 See IJC, 11th Biennial Report on Great Lakes Water Quality, (Sept. 12, 2002).
                            11
                              International Joint Commission, Tenth Biennial Report on Great Lakes Water Quality,
                            (June 29, 2000).




                            Page 44                                                            GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                           Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
                           Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
                           Impede Restoration Efforts




                           all areas had defined their respective environmental problems.12 The slow
                           progress of cleanup efforts reflects a general departure from the process
                           specified in the agreement, and in some cases the process was abandoned.
                           Based on these findings, it was clear that EPA was not fulfilling its
                           responsibility to ensure that plans for cleaning up the areas were being
                           developed or implemented. Citing resource constraints along with the
                           need to tend to other Great Lakes priorities, EPA reduced its staff and the
                           amount of funding it allocated to states for developing and implementing
                           plans for contaminated areas. Subsequent to our report, GLNPO officials
                           took actions to improve the implementation of cleanup plans.


Lack of Funding Is a Key   Inadequate funding has also contributed to the failure to restore and
Barrier to Achieving       protect the Great Lakes, according to the IJC biennial report on Great
Restoration Progress       Lakes water quality issued in July 2000.13 The IJC restated this conclusion
                           in a 2002 report, concluding that any progress to restore the Great Lakes
                           would continue at a slow incremental pace without increased funding.14
                           Lack of funding is consistently mentioned in prior IJC reports as a major
                           roadblock to restoration progress. For example, the 1993 biennial report
                           concluded that remediation of contaminated areas could not be
                           accomplished unless government officials came to grips with the
                           magnitude of cleanup costs and started the process of securing the
                           necessary resources.15 Despite this warning, however, as we reported in
                           2002, EPA reduced the funding available for ensuring the cleanup of
                           contaminated areas under the assumption that the states would fill the
                           funding void. States, however, did not increase their funding, and
                           restoration progress slowed or stopped altogether.16

                           Officials for 24 of 33 federal programs and for 3 of 17 state programs
                           reported insufficient funding for federal and state Great Lakes specific
                           programs. They cited specific consequences of funding deficits, including:



                           12
                            See U.S. General Accounting Office, Great Lakes: EPA Needs to Define Organizational
                           Responsibilities Better for Effective Oversight and Cleanup of Contaminated Areas,
                           GAO-02-563 (Washington, D.C.: May 17, 2002).
                           13
                                See IJC, Tenth Biennial Report on Great Lakes Water Quality, (June 29, 2000).
                           14
                                See IJC, 11th Biennial Report on Great Lakes Water Quality, (Sept. 12, 2002).
                           15
                                See IJC, Seventh Biennial Report on Great Lakes Water Quality, (Dec. 15, 1993).
                           16
                                See GAO-02-563, cited on p. 53, footnote 12.




                           Page 45                                                            GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                             Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
                             Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
                             Impede Restoration Efforts




                             •   Funding for GLNPO’s monitoring programs has not kept pace with
                                 increased operating costs, allowed for infrastructure repairs for its
                                 research vessel, provided for sufficient atmospheric deposition
                                 monitoring, or provided for monitoring new or emerging contaminants.

                             •   Michigan’s Great Lakes Protection Fund receives funding requests
                                 exceeding the amount of money that is available in any given year. For
                                 example, in fiscal year 2001, the state received requests for $10.4
                                 million for project funding and was able to fund projects totaling only
                                 $700,000.

                             States are particularly strapped to provide funding for restoration
                             activities within recent budget constraints. For example, an official with
                             the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality stated that the priority
                             for funding an unmandated Great Lakes program is secondary to other
                             programs specifically mandated by the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts
                             and other environmental programs. An official from the Minnesota
                             Pollution Control Agency stated that Minnesota and other states do not
                             routinely set aside funds to implement restoration activities for the Great
                             Lakes. Restoration projects are funded within the constraints of the states’
                             current budgets, and existing funding requirements take precedent. State
                             officials also pointed out the difficulty states face in providing funds to
                             meet federal program matching fund requirements for restoration
                             activities. Although the matching fund percentage required may be
                             relatively low, such as 10 percent, the aggregate amount for several
                             programs can be significant. For example, Michigan Department of
                             Environmental Quality officials informed us that during fiscal years 1992
                             through 2001, the state expended over $83 million in matching funds to
                             obtain federal funding for programs that contributed to restoration or
                             protection in the basin. During this same period, Ohio’s environmental
                             programs expended more than $14 million in matching fund amounts.
                             Corps and other federal officials stated that some states do not solicit
                             federal program funds because they lack the ability to meet the matching
                             fund requirements.


Other Significant Barriers   While the lack of funding is the most often cited barrier to restoration
Exist for Restoration        progress, other factors, such as lack of technical expertise and effective
Progress                     coordination, also create barriers to restoration progress. A NOAA official
                             stated that while financial resource limitations hinder the restoration
                             process, increased funding without better coordination among the various
                             agencies would not be effective. In a similar observation, a Minnesota
                             state official said that there is no agency at the federal or state level that



                             Page 46                                                 GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                      Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
                      Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
                      Impede Restoration Efforts




                      knows all the programs and funding that exist to address Great Lakes
                      problems or the steps one must take to obtain these funds. The official
                      further commented that a significant lack of technical knowledge within
                      program management for many Great Lakes projects prevents agencies
                      from identifying and assessing environmental needs and measuring
                      restoration progress. In commenting on efforts to cleanup contaminated
                      areas in the Great Lakes, the IJC reported several other problems besides
                      the lack of funding for cleanup sites, namely the lack of government
                      leadership and accountability, delays caused by disagreements, and
                      inadequate planning.


                      Although there are several strategies that address restoration of the Great
Conclusions           Lakes Basin, no one overarching strategy or plan unifies these strategies in
                      the pursuit of a common goal, similar to the restoration plan for the South
                      Florida ecosystem. The magnitude of the restoration effort and the
                      number of parties involved in the basin restoration necessitate that the
                      major parties involved develop and agree upon an overarching strategy
                      that addresses basin improvements. Without such an overall strategy or
                      plan, there is no road map to follow for achieving the restoration goals
                      agreed to between the United States and Canada in the GLWQA. An
                      overarching strategy for the basin is needed to establish restoration goals,
                      outline how restoration will occur, identify the resources needed to
                      achieve restoration, assign accountability for restoration, and provide a
                      mechanism for measuring progress for achieving goals. While there is a
                      general consensus that more funding is needed for the restoration, without
                      an overall strategy that prioritizes activities, it is unclear which activities
                      should receive additional funding. Furthermore, without a strategy, the
                      cycle of preparing numerous plans without significant restoration progress
                      will likely continue. Although GLNPO is responsible for coordinating U.S.
                      restoration activities within the basin, EPA has not ensured that GLNPO
                      fulfills this responsibility by entering into agreements for conducting
                      restoration activities.


                      To improve coordination of Great Lakes activities and ensure that federal
Recommendations for   dollars are effectively spent, we recommend that the Administrator, EPA,
Executive Action
                      •   ensure that GLNPO fulfills its responsibility for coordinating programs
                          within the Great Lakes Basin;
                      •   charge GLNPO with developing, in consultation with the governors of
                          the Great Lakes states, federal agencies, and other organizations, an




                      Page 47                                                 GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                  Chapter 3: Multiple Programs, Different
                  Strategies, and a Lack of Coordination
                  Impede Restoration Efforts




                      overarching strategy that clearly defines the roles and responsibilities
                      for coordinating and prioritizing funding for projects; and
                  •   submit a time-phased funding requirement proposal to the Congress
                      necessary to implement the strategy.


                  While EPA stated that it agreed with the need for better coordination and
Agency Comments   that our recommendations can help ensure that environmental
                  improvements are made, it did not address the specific recommendations
                  to improve coordination of Great Lakes activities. Rather, the agency
                  stated it would provide to our agency, the Congress, and the Office of
                  Management and Budget a formal response to the final report
                  recommendations. The agency stated that it fulfilled its coordination
                  responsibilities by convening the USPC and developing the Great Lakes
                  Strategy 2002. We recognized these efforts in our report, but they do not
                  fulfill GLNPO’s responsibility for coordinating programs in the Great
                  Lakes Basin, nor does the strategy fulfill the need for an overarching
                  strategy for the basin. EPA does acknowledge that its strategy can be used
                  as a foundation for any future Great Lakes ecosystem restoration plan. The
                  complete text of EPA’s comments is presented in appendix V.




                  Page 48                                                GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                        Chapter 4: Insufficient Data and Measures
Chapter 4: Insufficient Data and Measures
                        Make It Difficult to Determine Overall
                        Restoration Progress


Make It Difficult to Determine Overall
Restoration Progress
                        The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) calls for a monitoring
                        system to measure restoration progress and ensure that its objectives are
                        met. To date, the implementation of this provision has been limited. While
                        there is recognizable progress in improving some environmental
                        conditions in the Great Lakes Basin, current environmental indicators do
                        not provide an adequate basis for determining overall progress. Recent
                        assessments of overall progress have relied on a mix of quantitative data
                        and subjective judgments, and progress reported on federal and state
                        programs focuses on program activities, frequently citing outputs rather
                        than environmental outcomes. A binational effort to develop a set of
                        overall indicators was initiated in 1996, but the completion date for this
                        effort and the availability of resources needed to gather baseline
                        indicators data are uncertain.


                        One of the 17 agreement annexes in the GLWQA, as amended in 1987,
The Great Lakes         requires that the United States and Canada undertake a joint surveillance
Water Quality           and monitoring program to measure restoration progress and assess the
                        degree to which the parties are complying with goals and objectives of the
Agreement Calls for a   agreement. The program also provides for an evaluation of water quality
Monitoring System to    trends, identification of emerging problems, and support for developing
                        remedial action plans for contaminated areas and lakewide management
Ensure Objectives Are   plans for critical pollutants. Prior to the 1987 amendments, the 1978
Met                     agreement between the two countries also contained a requirement for
                        surveillance and monitoring and for the development of a Great Lakes
                        International Surveillance Plan. The IJC Water Quality Board was involved
                        in managing and developing the program until the 1987 amendments
                        placed this responsibility on the United States and Canada. According to a
                        binational review of the agreement in 1999, this change resulted in a
                        significant reduction in the two countries’ support for surveillance and
                        monitoring. In fact, the organizational structure to implement the
                        surveillance plan was abandoned in 1990, leaving only one initiative in
                        place—the International Atmospheric Deposition Network (IADN). In
                        1990, the two countries initiated IADN—a network of 15 air-monitoring
                        stations located throughout the basin.

                        With the surveillance and monitoring efforts languishing, the IJC
                        established the Indicators for Evaluation Task Force in 1993 to identify the
                        appropriate framework to evaluate progress in the Great Lakes. As the
                        entity responsible for evaluating progress towards meeting the goals and
                        objectives of the agreement, the IJC task force, in 1996, proposed that the
                        following nine desired measurements and outcomes be used to develop
                        indicators for measuring progress (see table 4).


                        Page 49                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 4: Insufficient Data and Measures
Make It Difficult to Determine Overall
Restoration Progress




Table 4: Desired Measurements and Outcomes for Great Lakes Indicators

 Measurement                     Desired outcome
 Fishability                     No restrictions on the human consumption of fish resulting
                                 from the input of persistent toxic substances.
 Swimmability                    No public beaches closed or swimming restrictions
                                 imposed because of human activities.
 Drinkability                    Treated drinking water is safe for human consumption,
                                 and there are no restrictions because of human activities.
 Healthy human populations       Human populations in the Great Lakes Basin are healthy
                                 and free from acute illness because of exposure to high
                                 levels of contaminants or chronic illness because of
                                 exposure to low level contaminants.
 Economic viability              The regional economy is viable and sustainable and
                                 provides adequate sustenance and dignity for the basin
                                 population.
 Biological community            The ability of biological communities to function normally
 integrity and diversity         in the absence of environmental stress by maintaining
                                 ecosystem health, ecological integrity, and the diversity of
                                 biological communities.
 Virtual elimination of inputs   The virtual elimination of inputs of persistent toxic
 of persistent toxic             substances into the Great Lakes.
 substances
 Absence of excess               The absence of excess phosphorus entering the
 phosphorus                      watersheds because of human behavior.
 Physical environment            The development, compatible use, and maintenance of
 integrity                       aquatic habitat in the quantity and quality necessary and
                                 sufficient to sustain an endemic assemblage of fish and
                                 wildlife populations.
Source: IJC.



Shortly before the task force began its work, the United States and Canada
had agreed to hold conferences every 2 years to assess the environmental
conditions in the Great Lakes in order to develop binational reports on the
environmental conditions to measure progress under the agreement.
Conference participants included U.S. and Canadian representatives from
federal, state, provincial, and tribal agencies, as well as other organizations
with environmental restoration or pollution prevention interests in the
Great Lakes Basin. The first State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference
(SOLEC)17 was held in 1994 and culminated in a “State of the Great Lakes
1995” report, which provided an overview of the Great Lakes ecosystem at
the end of 1994 and concluded that overall the aquatic community health
was mixed or improving. The same assessment was echoed in the 1997
state of the lakes report. Meanwhile, the IJC agreed that monitoring the


17
     SOLEC is co-chaired by representatives from the U.S. EPA and Environment Canada.




Page 50                                                            GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                           Chapter 4: Insufficient Data and Measures
                           Make It Difficult to Determine Overall
                           Restoration Progress




                           nine desired outcome areas recommended by the task force would help
                           assess overall progress. It recommended that SOLEC, during the
                           conference in 2000, establish environmental indicators that would allow
                           the IJC to evaluate what had been accomplished and what needed to be
                           done as it relates to the public’s ability to eat the fish, drink the water, and
                           swim in the water without any restrictions. The other outcomes would be
                           addressed at a later date.


                           The indicators developed through the SOLEC process and the
Current Indicators Do      accomplishments reported by federal and state program managers do not
Not Provide an             provide an adequate basis for making an overall assessment for Great
                           Lakes restoration progress. The SOLEC process is ongoing, and the
Adequate Basis for         indicators that are still being developed are not generally supported by
Making an Overall          sufficient underlying data for making progress assessments. The ultimate
                           success of SOLEC is uncertain because of limited resources committed to
Assessment of              the process, and until indicators are finalized, the accomplishments now
Restoration Progress       reported for individual Great Lakes specific programs do not provide an
                           adequate basis for assessing overall progress. Program accomplishments
                           usually describe program outputs, rather than outcomes, and do not
                           adequately portray whether environmental conditions are improving or
                           deteriorating.


Recent Assessments of      SOLEC’s recent assessments of the Great Lakes ecosystem have relied on
Environmental Conditions   limited quantitative data and subjective judgments in determining the
Rely on Limited Data       status of desired outcomes, such as swimmability, drinkability, and the
                           edibility of fish within the Great Lakes. At the 1998 SOLEC conference,
                           groups of experts narrowed down a list of more than 850 indicators to 80
                           basin ecosystem indicators with the objective of reaching an agreement on
                           a list of comprehensive indicators for the basin. The proposed indicators
                           were reviewed, discussed, and revised during the conference and placed in
                           seven categories, such as open waters, coastal wetlands, land use, and
                           human health. Within these categories, the indicators were further
                           classified as a current condition (state), such as population of salmon and
                           trout, or an adverse impact (pressure), such as sea lamprey diminishing
                           fish populations. Conference participants devoted extensive effort to
                           commenting on and modifying these indicators.

                           The SOLEC 2000 conference focused on assessing the previously
                           identified 80 indicators for reporting on the overall condition of the Great
                           Lakes. Participants further reduced the number of indicators ultimately
                           assessed because data was only readily available for 33 indicators. Subject


                           Page 51                                                  GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 4: Insufficient Data and Measures
Make It Difficult to Determine Overall
Restoration Progress




experts assessed and classified the indicators on a scale with five
classifications—good; mixed, improving; mixed; mixed, deteriorating; and
poor. Participants developed these classifications using the following
definitions:

•   Good. The state of the ecosystem component is presently meeting
    ecosystem objectives or otherwise is an acceptable condition.

•   Mixed, improving. The ecosystem component displays both good and
    degraded features, but overall, conditions are improving toward an
    acceptable state.

•   Mixed. The state of the ecosystem component has some features that
    are in good condition and some features that are degraded, perhaps
    different between lake basins.

•   Mixed, deteriorating. The ecosystem component displays both good
    and degraded features, but overall, conditions are deteriorating from an
    acceptable state.

•   Poor. The ecosystem component is severely negatively impacted and
    does not display even minimally acceptable conditions.

For example, the level of contaminants in snapping turtle eggs is an
indicator for coastal wetlands. The indicator was assessed and placed in
the mixed assessment category because of the high levels of contaminants
in snapping turtle eggs found at eight locations in Lakes Ontario and Erie,
and the St. Lawrence River. The classification of indicators into categories
was based on the SOLEC partners’ best professional judgments and was
not necessarily supported by sound science-based reliable data. The 33
indicators became the basis for the “State of the Great Lakes 2001” report,
which concluded that a detailed quantitative assessment could not be
made, but that an overall qualitative assessment of “mixed” should be
applied to the basin ecosystem. The assessment was based on six
observations. One positive observation was that the Great Lakes surface
waters remain one of the best drinking water sources in the world; a
negative observation was that invasive species continue to present a
significant threat to the biological community.

After the SOLEC 2000 conference, IJC staff assessed the indicators
supported by data that measured the desired outcomes of swimmability,




Page 52                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                              Chapter 4: Insufficient Data and Measures
                              Make It Difficult to Determine Overall
                              Restoration Progress




                              drinkability, and the edibility of fish in the Great Lakes.18 Overall, the IJC
                              commended SOLEC’s quick response that brought together information
                              regarding the outcomes and SOLEC’s ongoing efforts. The IJC, however,
                              recognized that sufficient data were not being collected from around the
                              Great Lakes and that the methods of collection, the data collection time
                              frames, the lack of uniform protocols, and the incompatible nature of
                              some data jeopardized their use as indicators. Specifically, for the desired
                              outcome of swimmability, which was assessed as “mixed,” the IJC
                              concurred that it was not always safe to swim at certain beaches but noted
                              that progress for this desired outcome was limited because beaches were
                              sampled by local jurisdictions without uniform sampling or reporting
                              methods. At the 2002 SOLEC conference, the number of indicators
                              assessed under the 5-tiered scale increased from 33 to 45. The IJC
                              expressed concern that there are too many indicators, insufficient
                              supporting backup data, and a lack of commitment and funding from EPA
                              to implement and make operational the agreed upon SOLEC baseline data
                              collection and monitoring techniques. The IJC recommended in its last
                              biennial report that any new indicators should be developed only where
                              resources are sufficient to access scientifically valid and reliable
                              information.


Successful Development        The ultimate successful development and assessment of indicators for the
and Assessment of             Great Lakes through the SOLEC process are uncertain because insufficient
Indicators Are Difficult to   resources have been committed to the process, no plan provides
                              completion dates for indicator development and implementation, and
Discern                       there is a lack of control over the data being collected. While the SOLEC
                              process has successfully engaged a wide range of binational parties in
                              developing indicators, the resources devoted to this process are largely
                              provided on a volunteer basis without firm commitments to continue in
                              the future. GLNPO officials described the SOLEC process as a
                              professional, collaborative process dependent on the voluntary
                              participation of officials from federal and state agencies, academic
                              institutions, and other organizations attending SOLEC and developing
                              information on specific indicators. The resources provided for the process
                              cannot be assured in the future and the financial resources committed by
                              GLNPO to the process have primarily consisted of contributing funding for
                              hosting the conferences and providing two staff members to manage the
                              process. EPA supports the development of environmental indicators as


                              18
                                   See IJC, 11th Biennial Report on Great Lakes Water Quality, (Sept. 12, 2002).




                              Page 53                                                            GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Chapter 4: Insufficient Data and Measures
Make It Difficult to Determine Overall
Restoration Progress




evidenced by the fact that, since 1994, GLNPO has provided about
$100,000 annually to sponsor the conferences.

Additionally, GLNPO spends over $4 million per year to collect
surveillance data for its open-lake water quality monitoring program,
which also provides supporting data for some of the indicators addressed
by SOLEC. A significant portion of these funds supports the operation of
GLNPO’s research vessel, the Lake Guardian, an offshore supply vessel
converted for use as a research vessel. GLNPO also supports activities that
are linked or otherwise feed information into the SOLEC process,
including the following:

•   collecting information on plankton and benthic communities in the
    Great Lakes for open water indicator development;
•   sampling various chemicals in the open-lake waters, such as
    phosphorus for the total phosphorus indicator;
•   monitoring fish contaminants in the open waters, directly supporting
    the indicator for contaminants in whole fish and a separate monitoring
    effort for contaminants in popular sport fish species that supports the
    indicator for chemical contaminants in edible fish tissue; and
•   operating 15 air-monitoring stations with Environment Canada
    comprising the IADN that provides information for establishing trends
    in concentrations of certain chemicals and loadings of chemicals into
    the lakes. EPA uses information from the network to take actions to
    control the chemicals and track progress toward environmental goals.

Because SOLEC is a voluntary process, the indicator data resides in a
diverse number of sources with limited control by SOLEC organizers.
GLNPO officials stated that EPA does not have either the authority or the
responsibility to direct the data collection activities of federal, state, and
local agencies as they relate to surveillance and monitoring of technical
data elements that are needed to develop, implement, and assess Great
Lakes environmental indicators. They further stated that the current
SOLEC indicator process is based on unofficial professional relationships
established between the SOLEC partnerships. Efforts are underway for the
various federal and state agencies to take ownership for collecting and
reporting data outputs from their respective areas of responsibility and for
SOLEC to be sustained and implemented; each indicator must have a
sponsor. However, any breakdown in submission of this information
would leave a gap in the SOLEC indicator process.

SOLEC’s 10-year plan, as presented at the 2000 conference, describes its
objectives and the planned conference themes through 2006 with the



Page 54                                                GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                            Chapter 4: Insufficient Data and Measures
                            Make It Difficult to Determine Overall
                            Restoration Progress




                            theme for 2008 and beyond yet to be determined. Its stated objectives are
                            to

                            •   assess the state of the Great Lakes ecosystem based on accepted
                                indicators,
                            •   strengthen decision making and management,
                            •   inform local decision makers of Great Lakes environmental issues, and
                            •   provide a forum for communication and networking among
                                stakeholders.

                            Three of the SOLEC objectives do not focus directly on developing
                            indicators, nor do the stated objectives align with the surveillance and
                            monitoring program envisioned in the GLWQA. Whereas the agreement
                            called for a joint surveillance and monitoring program to assess
                            compliance with the agreement, evaluating water quality trends,
                            identification of emerging problems, and support for the development of
                            Remedial Action Plans and Lakewide Management Plans, the
                            achievements reported for the SOLEC process, which include the number
                            of background papers produced and reports prepared on the state of the
                            lakes, do not align with the expected results envisioned by the surveillance
                            and monitoring program.

                            In November 2001, EPA committed to an agencywide initiative to develop
                            environmental indicators for addressing the agency’s nationwide
                            environmental conditions, stating that “indicators help measure the state
                            of our air, water and land resources and the pressures placed on them, and
                            the resulting effects on ecological and human health.” However, this
                            initiative does not specifically relate to the Great Lakes. The short-term
                            goal for this initiative is to develop information that will indicate current
                            nationwide environmental conditions and to help EPA make sound
                            decisions on what needs to be done. The long-term goal is to bring
                            together national, regional, state, and tribal indicator efforts to describe
                            the condition of critical environmental areas and human health concerns.


Federal and State           Progress reported by officials from individual federal and state programs
Programs Measure            in the basin is generally not presented in a manner that describes how the
Progress in Several Ways,   programs have improved environmental conditions within the Great Lakes
                            Basin. Program output data are frequently cited as measures of success
Often Citing Outputs        versus actual program accomplishments. As a rule, program output data
Rather than Outcomes        describe activities, such as projects funded, and are of limited value in
                            determining environmental progress. For example, accomplishments
                            reported for Michigan’s Great Lakes Protection Fund were that it funded



                            Page 55                                                GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
              Chapter 4: Insufficient Data and Measures
              Make It Difficult to Determine Overall
              Restoration Progress




              125 research projects over an 11-year period and publicized its project
              results at an annual forum and on a Web site. Another example is the Lake
              Ontario Atlantic Salmon Reintroduction Program administered by FWS.
              Under its accomplishments, program officials cited the completion of a
              pilot study and technical assistance provided to a Native American tribe.
              For the 50 federal and state programs created specifically to address
              conditions in the basin, 27 reported accomplishments in terms of outputs,
              such as reports or studies prepared or presentations made to groups.
              Because research and capacity building programs largely support other
              activities, it is particularly difficult to relate reported program
              accomplishments to outcomes. For example, the National Oceanic
              Atmospheric Administration’s Great Lakes Environmental Research
              Laboratory conducts extensive research and environmental modeling that
              helps to improve management of aquatic environments and understanding
              of coastal and estuarine processes. The federal and state environmental
              program officials responding to our evaluation generally provided output
              data or, as reported for 15 programs, the accomplishments had not been
              measured for these Great Lakes specific programs.

              Only eight of the federal or state Great Lakes specific programs reported
              outcome information, much of which generally described how effective
              the programs’ activity or action had been in improving environmental
              conditions. For example, EPA’s Region II program for reducing toxic
              chemical inputs into the Niagara River, which connects Lake Erie to Lake
              Ontario, reported reductions in priority toxics from 1986 through 2002
              from ambient water quality monitoring. Other significant outcomes
              reported as accomplishments for the Great Lakes included (1) reducing
              phosphorus loadings by waste treatment plants and limiting phosphorus
              use in household detergents; (2) prohibiting the release of some toxicants
              into the Great Lakes, and reducing to an acceptable level the amount of
              some other toxicants that could be input; (3) effectively reducing the sea
              lamprey population in several invasive species infested watersheds; and
              (4) restocking the fish-depleted populations in some watersheds.


              Without a monitoring system for the Great Lakes Basin, it is impossible to
Conclusions   determine overall restoration progress and compliance with goals and
              objectives of the GLWQA. While it is clear that some restoration progress
              has occurred for some environmental conditions, definitive observations
              on overall restoration progress are difficult to make without indicators to
              measure progress, baseline indicator data, and a process for monitoring
              indicators. The current SOLEC process fills an important void, but it
              cannot fulfill the requirements of the surveillance and monitoring program


              Page 56                                              GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                      Chapter 4: Insufficient Data and Measures
                      Make It Difficult to Determine Overall
                      Restoration Progress




                      called for in the agreement. SOLEC serves a useful purpose in creating a
                      consensus on which indicators are the most useful and inventorying
                      available indicator data. There is no assurance, however, that the SOLEC
                      process, which relies heavily on the voluntary participation of interested
                      officials, will continue, or if it does continue, whether it will yield
                      sufficient information for an overall quantitative assessment of the Great
                      Lakes ecosystem.


                      To fulfill the need for a monitoring system called for in the GLWQA and to
Recommendations for   ensure that the limited funds available are optimally spent, we are
Executive Action      recommending that the Administrator, EPA, in coordination with
                      Canadian officials and as part of an overarching Great Lakes strategy, (1)
                      develop environmental indicators and a monitoring system for the Great
                      Lakes Basin that can be used to measure overall restoration progress and
                      (2) require that these indicators be used to evaluate, prioritize, and make
                      funding decisions on the merits of alternative restoration projects.


                      EPA stated that it agreed with the need for better monitoring and generally
Agency Comments       agreed that our recommendations can help ensure improvements.
                      However, it did not address the specific recommendations for a
                      monitoring system called for in the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.
                      Rather, the agency stated it would provide to our agency, the Congress,
                      and the Office of Management and Budget a formal response to the final
                      report recommendations. EPA stated that GLNPO has supported the
                      SOLEC effort, but it did not comment on the recommendations for
                      developing indicators and a monitoring system to measure overall
                      restoration progress. The complete text of EPA’s comments is presented
                      in appendix V.




                      Page 57                                               GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                   Appendix I: Federal and State Agencies That
Appendix I: Federal and State Agencies That
                   Provided Great Lakes Program Information



Provided Great Lakes Program Information

                   Environmental Protection Agency
Federal agencies
                   •   Great Lakes National Program Office
                   •   Office of Research and Development
                   •   Regions II, III, and V

                   Department of Agriculture

                   •   Agricultural Research Service
                   •   Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
                   •   Farm Services Agency
                   •   Forest Service
                   •   Natural Resource Conservation Service

                   Department of Commerce

                   •   National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

                   Department of Defense

                   •   U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

                   Department of Health and Human Services

                   •   Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry

                   Department of Homeland Security

                   •   U.S. Coast Guard

                   Department of Interior

                   •   U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
                   •   U.S. Geological Survey
                   •   National Park Service


                   Illinois
State agencies
                   •   Illinois Environmental Protection Agency




                   Page 58                                             GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Appendix I: Federal and State Agencies That
Provided Great Lakes Program Information




Indiana

•   Indiana Department of Natural Resources

Ohio

•   Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
•   Ohio Department of Natural Resources

Michigan

•   Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
•   Michigan Department of Natural Resources

Minnesota

•   Minnesota Department of Commerce
•   Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
•   Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
•   Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
•   Minnesota State Planning Agency

New York

•   New York Department of Environmental Conservation

Pennsylvania

•   Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

Wisconsin

•   Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources




Page 59                                            GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                           Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great   Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                           through 2001


Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
through 2001
                                           Table 5 contains a listing of the non-Great Lakes specific programs
                                           managed by federal agencies.

Table 5: Federal Non-Great Lakes Specific Programs

                                                                                                                       Program
                                                                                                                   expenditures
                                                                                                                                a
Program name                         Purpose                                                                        (1992-2001)
Army Corps of Engineers
Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration      This restoration program funds the planning, design, and construction of          $2,243,800a
                                   projects to restore and enhance aquatic ecosystems. Program activities
                                   began in 1998.
Beneficial Use of Dredged Material This program, which was established in 1992, funds the planning, design,            $384,600c
                                   and construction of projects to protect, restore, and enhance aquatic
                                   habitats using sediments dredged from federal navigation projects. It is
                                   classified as a restoration program.
Cleaning and Snagging              Originally created in 1954, the purpose of this program is to plan, design,            $4,000
                                   and construct projects for emergency removal of debris that threatens to
                                   aggravate damage caused by flooding.
Confined Disposal Facilities       This cleanup program was established in 1970. Its purpose is to design,           $72,696,140
                                   construct, and operate confined disposal facilities for the disposal of
                                   contaminated dredged materials from federal navigation projects.
Emergency Stream Bank and          This program was created in 1946 and its purpose is to plan, design, and           $8,086,400
Shoreline Protection               construct projects to protect public facilities and services from stream bank
                                   and shoreline erosion.
                                                                                                                                b
Environmental Dredging             This environmental cleanup program was created in 1990. The program's               $670,700
                                   purpose is to assist in the planning, design, and construction of projects to
                                   remove contaminated sediments from areas outside federal navigation
                                   channels.
                                                                                                                                d
Environmental Improvements         The purpose of this restoration program, which was started in 1986, is to        $13,016,400
                                   plan, design, and construct projects to restore and enhance aquatic
                                   ecosystems at sites impacted by Corps projects.
Flood Plain Management Services    Created in 1960, this program provides flood plain information and technical       $4,784,500
                                   assistance to states and local communities.
Planning Assistance to States      This program was created in 1974, and its purpose is to provide staff and          $3,123,500
                                   financial assistance to states in planning for the use, development, and
                                   conservation of water resources.
Shore Protection                   The purpose of this restoration program, created in 1962, is to plan, design,      $1,038,000
                                   and construct projects to restore and protect shores against waves and
                                   currents.
Small Flood Control Projects       This program, which was created in 1948, funds activities related to the          $11,375,100
                                   planning, design, and construction of projects to reduce flood damages.
Small Navigation Projects          Created in 1960, the purpose of this program is to plan, design, and               $7,871,000
                                   construct projects to improve navigation.
                                                                                                                                  f
Tribal Partnership Program         This program was started in 2000, and it seeks to provide tribal groups with
                                   assistance in planning for the use, development, and conservation of water
                                   resources.
Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service (ARS)
Agricultural Research Service      This research and pollution prevention program started in 1990 to develop          $2,293,700
Research Units                     agricultural best management practices, including water management
                                   strategies for corn and soybean production systems, and to assess the
                                   impact of these practices on field, farm, and watershed scales.



                                           Page 60                                                        GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                           Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                           Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                           through 2001




                                                                                                                       Program
                                                                                                                   expenditures
                                                                                                                                a
Program name                      Purpose                                                                           (1992-2001)
Department of Agriculture-Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES)
                                                                                                                                e
Hatch Act Research Program        This research program was started in the late 1800s to promote efficient           $4,582,000
                                  production, marketing, distribution, and utilization of crops and livestock
                                  essential to the food supply and health and welfare of the American people,
                                  while conserving resources and improving rural living conditions.
Integrated Activities Program     This program supports integrated research, education, and extension on            $11,081,000e
                                  critical agricultural issues. Program activities began in 2000.
                                                                                                                                e
McIntire-Stennis Cooperative      The purpose of the program, which began in 1962, is to support research              $140,000
Forestry Research Program         essential to the efficient and effective use of the nation's forest resources.
                                                                                                                                e
National Research Initiative      This program provides support for research with the greatest potential of            $433,000
Program                           expanding the knowledge base needed to solve current problems and
                                  unforeseen issues involving the future agricultural and forestry enterprise.
                                  The program was created in 1965 and activities began in 1991.
Small Business Innovation         The purpose of this program, which began in 1986, is to strengthen the role          $383,000e
Research Program                  of small, innovative firms in federally funded research and development
                                  activities.
Special Research Grants Program   This program was created in 1965 to fund research on problems of national,         $1,675,000e
                                  regional, and local interest that fall beyond the normal emphasis of the
                                  formula programs.
Department of Agriculture-Farm Services Agency (FSA)
Conservation Reserve Program      This voluntary restoration and conservation program for agricultural             $540,718,000
                                  landowners was created in 1985. Through this program, landowners
                                  receive annual rental payments and cost-share assistance to establish
                                  long-term, resource conserving vegetative covers on eligible farmland.
Emergency Conservation Program    This program provides emergency funding for farmers and ranchers to                 $4,670,000
                                  rehabilitate farmland damaged by wind erosion, floods, hurricanes, or other
                                  natural disasters and for carrying out emergency water conservation
                                  measures during periods of severe drought. This restoration program began
                                  in 1978.
Department of Agriculture-Forest Service (FS)
                                                                                                                                  f
Atmospheric Ecosystem             This research program, which began in 1996, focuses on air quality in the
Interactions at Multiple Scales   western Great Lakes. The program examines factors that impact
                                  summertime surface ozone pollution patterns and activities, including
                                  observing smoke trajectories from prescribed and wildland fires.
                                                                                                                                  f
Cooperative Forestry              Originally created in the 1930s, the current program started in 1978 to
                                  address watershed health and water quality activities on nonfederal forest
                                  lands. It provides restoration and management assistance activities,
                                  including cooperative federal, state, and local forest stewardship;
                                  prevention and control of insects and diseases; and improvement of fish
                                  and wildlife habitat.
                                                                                                                                  f
Forest Health Management          This program was created in1947, with current program activities having
                                  begun in 1978 as a coordinated effort among federal, state, and local
                                  entities for the management of forest health on nonfederal forested lands.
                                  The program funds activities to sustain healthy forest conditions.
                                                                                                                                g
Recreation, Heritage, and         The purpose of this program, which dates back to the 1930s, is to connect         $36,685,000
Wilderness Management             people to the land by providing recreational settings and services.
Soil, Water, and Air Management   This program funds activities related to the management of water, soil, and        $8,939,000g
                                  air resources for public use, including the inventory, assessment, and
                                  monitoring of these resources. It is classified as a cleanup, restoration, and
                                  pollution prevention program.




                                           Page 61                                                        GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                           Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                           Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                           through 2001




                                                                                                                        Program
                                                                                                                   expenditures
                                                                                                                                a
Program name                       Purpose                                                                          (1992-2001)
Watershed, Lake, Riparian and      This research and restoration program, which started in 2000, studies               $165,000h
Stream Analysis, and Restoration   watershed and stream processes from relatively undisturbed systems to
                                   highly degraded systems. It develops technologies to restore these
                                   systems and tests them in rural forested and urban landscapes.
                                                                                                                                f
Wildland Fire Management           Originally created in the 1920s, the purpose of the current program is to
                                   protect state and private lands from wildland fires by providing protection
                                   and management assistance.
Wildlife, Fish, and Rare Plants    This program, which began in the 1930s, funds activities related to              $24,486,000g
Resources Management               cleanup, restoration, pollution prevention, and habitat improvement. The
                                   program's goal is to maintain diverse and productive wildlife, fish, and
                                   sensitive plant habitats as an integral part of managing national forest
                                   ecosystems.
Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
                                                                                                                                f
Environmental Quality Incentives   The purpose of this program, created in 1985, is to provide technical,
Program                            educational, and financial assistance to eligible farmers and ranchers to
                                   address soil, water, and related natural resource concerns on their lands in
                                   an environmentally beneficial and cost-effective manner. It funds pollution
                                   prevention, soil and water conservation, and water quality improvement
                                   activities.
                                                                                                                                f
Farmland Protection Program        This program, which began in 1996, provides matching funds to help
                                   purchase development rights to keep productive farm and ranch land in
                                   agricultural uses. The Department of Agriculture provides up to 50 percent
                                   of the fair market easement value.
                                                                                                                                f
National Cooperative Soil Survey   This program is a partnership of federal land management agencies, state
(NCSS)                             agricultural experiment stations, and state and local units of government
                                   that provides soil survey information necessary for understanding,
                                   managing, conserving, and sustaining the nation's limited soil resources. It
                                   dates back to 1935.
                                                                                                                                f
Plant Materials for                The purpose of this program, which began in 1937, is to use native plants to
Conservation/Plant Materials       solve natural resource problems. Scientists search for plants that meet an
                                   identified conservation need, such as wetland restoration, and test their
                                   performance. Once proven, new species are released to the private sector
                                   for commercial production.
                                                                                                                                f
Resource Conservation and          This program, which started in 1962, encourages and improves the
Development                        capability of state and local units of government and local nonprofit
                                   organizations in rural areas to plan, develop, and carry out programs for
                                   resource conservation and development. Program activities include
                                   cleanup, restoration, pollution prevention, coordination, and conservation
                                   technical services.
                                                                                                                                f
River Basin Studies, Watershed     This mid-1940s program was created to provide planning assistance to
Surveys and Planning, and          federal, state, and local agencies for developing and coordinating water
Watershed Protection and Flood     and related land resources programs in watershed and river basins.
Prevention                         Program activities include restoration, pollution prevention, and
                                   financial and technical assistance for watershed protection and flood
                                   prevention.
                                                                                                                                f
Soil and Water                     This program provides voluntary conservation technical assistance to
Conservation/Conservation          land users, communities, units of state and local governments, and other
Technical Assistance               federal agencies in planning and implementing conservation systems. It
                                   began in 1935, and it addresses natural resource issues, such as
                                   erosion, fish and wildlife habitat, and air quality. Its activities relate to
                                   cleanup, pollution prevention, restoration, and technical assistance.



                                           Page 62                                                        GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                           Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                           Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                           through 2001




                                                                                                                        Program
                                                                                                                    expenditures
                                                                                                                                 a
Program name                       Purpose                                                                           (1992-2001)
                                                                                                                                 f
Wetland Reserve Program            This voluntary program provides landowners with financial and technical
                                   assistance to restore and protect wetlands. It began in 1985, and it funds
                                   cleanup, restoration, and pollution prevention activities.
                                                                                                                                 f
Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program This is a voluntary restoration program for the development and
                                   improvement of wildlife habitat, primarily on private lands. It provides
                                   technical assistance and up to 75 percent cost-share assistance to
                                   establish and improve fish and wildlife habitat. The program began
                                   in 1998.
Department of Commerce-National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
                                                                                                                                 f
Coastal Mapping/Mapping and        This program is part of the National Geodetic Survey. The primary mission
Charting Program                   of this program is to define the shoreline for nautical charts.
Coastal Remote Sensing, Coastal    The goal of this program, which started in 2001, is to develop and distribute        $458,000i
Change and Analysis Program        data in the coastal zone through remote sensing technology. The Great
                                   Lakes are the current focus of this program.
                                                                                                                                 j
Coastal Zone Management            This program began in 1972. It is a federal-state partnership that provides      $107,906,394
Program                            a basis for protecting, restoring, and responsibly developing the nation's
                                   important and diverse coastal communities and resources. The program
                                   includes encouraging and assisting states in the wise use of land and
                                   water, and encouraging the participation and cooperation of all government
                                   sectors with programs affecting the coast.
                                                                                                                                 f
Geodesy Program                    This program, managed by the National Geodetic Survey, monitors crustal
                                   motion in the Great Lakes by measuring latitudes, longitudes, and
                                   elevations at 16 water level stations. This information provides better
                                   knowledge about flooding and drainage scenarios in the region.
                                                                                                                                 f
Landscape Characterization and     This restoration program, which began in 1997, helps coastal resource
Restoration Program                managers examine the effects of management on coastal habitat through
                                   habitat restoration planning activities and ecosystem studies.
National Estuarine Research        NERRS is a network of protected areas established to promote informed               $2,174,000
Reserve System (NERRS)             management of the nation's coastal and estuarine habitats. This state-
                                   federal partnership accomplishes this through linked programs of scientific
                                   understanding, education, and stewardship. This research program began
                                   in 1972.
National Sea Grant College         The purpose of this research program, which began in 1968, is to support           $69,600,000
Program                            education and research in the various fields relating to the development of
                                   marine resources. All Great Lakes states, except Pennsylvania, have a
                                   Sea Grant College.
National Status and Trends Mussel This program is a contaminant-monitoring program for U.S. coastal waters.             $240,000
Watch Project                      It collects samples from some 300 sites in the conterminous United States,
                                   Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Great Lakes. Samples are analyzed
                                   for a broad suite of contaminants, including toxic elements, pesticides,
                                   industrial chemicals, and hydrocarbons. This pollution prevention program
                                   began nationwide in 1986, with monitoring in the Great Lakes beginning in
                                   1992.
                                                                                                                                 f
National Weather Service (NWS)     This program, which dates back to the 1890s, provides water, hydrologic,
                                   and climate warnings for the United States and its adjacent waters. Ten
                                   NWS Great Lakes forecast offices provide users with continuous real-time
                                   data and forecasts. NWS also operates the Environmental Modeling
                                   Center, which produces numerical weather prediction models that are
                                   transmitted to these forecast offices, and the National Data Buoy Center,
                                   which manages an observational network.




                                           Page 63                                                         GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                             Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                             Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                             through 2001




                                                                                                                            Program
                                                                                                                        expenditures
                                                                                                                                     a
Program name                       Purpose                                                                               (1992-2001)
                                                                                                                                       f
Office of Response and Restoration This division has undertaken, in coordination with cleanup and trustee
- Coastal Protection and           agencies, environmental assessment, pollution prevention, cleanup,
Restoration Division               mitigation, and restoration activities to protect and restore coastal habitats
                                   and resources at hazardous waste sites nationwide since 1985 (in the
                                   Great Lakes since 1993).
                                                                                                                                       f
Office of Response and Restoration The Damage Assessment Center, which started in 1990, conducts
- Damage Assessment Center         natural resources damage assessments to restore coastal resources
                                   injured by oil and hazardous material releases. The center conducts
                                   cleanup, restoration, and pollution prevention activities.
                                                                                                                                       f
Office of Response and Restoration This program, which started in 1987, conducts activities to reduce risks to
- Hazardous Materials (HAZMAT)     coastal habitats and resources from oil and chemical spills by providing
                                   advice and developing tools to aid in spill response. HAZMAT undertakes
                                   cleanup, restoration, and pollution prevention activities.
Department of Interior-Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
Aquatic Nuisance Species Regional This program provides regional aquatic nuisance species coordination and                   $808,900
Coordination and Technical         technical assistance to the Fisheries Program of FWS's Northeast Region.
Assistance                         Activities support regional prevention and control of aquatic nuisance
                                   species introductions and range expansions.
Aquatic Nuisance Species           This program was started in 1991 to prevent and control infestations                    $3,659,400
Surveillance and Control           in the coastal and inland waters of the United States by the zebra
                                   mussel and other nonindigenous aquatic nuisance species. Its activities
                                   include research, prevention of species introductions, control of
                                   introduced species, and mitigation of impacts to native fish and wildlife
                                   resources.
                                                                                                                                       l
Endangered Species Program         This conservation and restoration program was created in 1973 to provide a              $4,078,500
                                   means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and
                                   threatened species depend may be conserved and to provide for the
                                   conservation of such endangered and threatened species.
Fish and Wildlife Management       This program, dating back to 1972, aids in conservation of native fish and              $5,915,000
Assistance - Great Lakes           wildlife species and their habitats. It provides support for the management
Operations                         of interjurisdictional fisheries, aids in restoration of depleted fish populations
                                   to preclude listing as endangered species, and provides technical
                                   assistance to state and tribal fish and wildlife management agencies to fulfill
                                   federal trust responsibilities. The program funds research, restoration, and
                                   technical assistance activities.
La Crosse Fish Health Center       This center, which began operating in 1962, provides fish health inspection             $3,057,545
                                   services to six national and four tribal fish hatcheries to minimize the risk of
                                   introducing disease agents into the wild. This program assists state
                                   research facilities and private fish hatcheries in diagnosing and controlling
                                   infectious disease agents and provides technical assistance regarding fish
                                   health and propagation.
National Fish Passage Program      This program restores native fish and other aquatic species to self-                     $268,500n
                                   sustaining levels. Generally, this restoration is done by removing barriers to
                                   fish movement or providing ways for aquatic species to bypass them. The
                                   program works on a voluntary basis with federal, state, local, and tribal
                                   agencies, as well as private partners and stakeholders. This restoration
                                   program's activities began in 1999.
Natural Resource Damage            This program's goal is to restore, replace, rehabilitate, or acquire the             $2,496,000(m)(o)
Assessment Program                 equivalent of natural resources injured or lost as a result of contamination
                                   by oil or hazardous substances. This cleanup and restoration program
                                   began in 1981.



                                             Page 64                                                           GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                           Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                           Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                           through 2001




                                                                                                                         Program
                                                                                                                    expenditures
                                                                                                                                 a
Program name                       Purpose                                                                           (1992-2001)
New York Aquatic Resource          The focus of this program is natural resource assessment and                         $197,032p
Management                         management planning on military installations. Specifically, the goal
                                   of this program is to determine the presence or absence of threatened
                                   or endangered species of state or national concern and to prepare a
                                   comprehensive natural resource management plan for the Seneca
                                   Army Depot and Fort Drum, both of which lie within the Great Lakes
                                   Basin.
                                                                                                                                 q
New York Natural Resource          The primary focus of this program is natural resource assessment and                 $174,204
Management Program                 planning on military installations. Activities under this program include
                                   conducting a natural resource community survey for the Niagara Falls Air
                                   Reserve Station, conducting additional surveys as needed, and preparing
                                   and implementing management plans to protect the natural resources.
                                   Program activities began in 1998.
Partners for Fish and Wildlife     This is a voluntary habitat restoration program that provides restoration          $5,240,000m
(Private Lands Program)            expertise and financial assistance to private landowners, tribes,
                                   and other conservation partners who voluntarily restore fish and
                                   wildlife habitat on their properties. The program targets restoring
                                   habitat for migratory birds, interjurisdictional fish, and threatened or
                                   endangered species on private land. Program activities began
                                   in 1987.
Department of Interior-U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
Biological Information Management This research program has two primary areas relevant to the Great Lakes             $1,653,800m
Delivery                           Basin: the National Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII) and the
                                   Gap Analysis Program (GAP). NBII was created in 1993 and provides
                                   increased access to data and information on biological resources. The
                                   GAP provides broad geographic information on biological diversity that
                                   planners, managers, and policy makers need to make informed decisions.
                                   In addition, the program provides support for Great Lakes research,
                                   primarily at the USGS Great Lakes Science Center.
                                                                                                                                 d
Biological Research and Monitoring This research program, dating back to 1927, funds biological studies to           $10,078,775
                                   develop new methods and techniques to identify, observe, and manage fish
                                   and wildlife. Studies are designed to identify, understand, and control
                                   invasive species and their habitats; inventory populations of animals, plants,
                                   and their habitats; and monitor changes in abundance, distribution, and
                                   health of biological resources through time and determine the causes of the
                                   changes.
                                                                                                                                   f
Coastal and Marine Geology         The program provides scientific information needed to evaluate the
                                   origin and impact of natural coastal processes, especially understanding
                                   the effect of human-induced changes. This program has been
                                   providing information and products to guide the preservation and
                                   sustainable development of the nation's marine and coastal environments
                                   since 1994.
                                                                                                                                   r
Cooperative Research Units         This program, created in 1935, establishes and maintains cooperative               $6,250,000
Program                            partnerships with states and universities to address local, state,
                                   regional, national and international issues related to fish, wildlife, and
                                   natural resources of concern. The activities of the program are research,
                                   technical assistance, and student education.
                                                                                                                                   f
Cooperative Topographic Mapping    This research program provides data that locates and describes the
(CTM) Program                      features of the earth's surface. The program provides support for the
                                   National Map by continuing to maintain basic data for the United States
                                   and its territories.




                                           Page 65                                                         GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                         Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                         Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                         through 2001




                                                                                                                        Program
                                                                                                                    expenditures
                                                                                                                                 a
Program name                        Purpose                                                                          (1992-2001)
                                                                                                                                 f
Cooperative Water Program           This is an ongoing partnership between USGS and nonfederal agencies.
                                    The program jointly funds water resources projects in every state, Puerto
                                    Rico, and several U.S. Trust territories. Research, data collection,
                                    assessment, and aerial appraisal activities are conducted through this
                                    program.
                                                                                                                                 f
Geographic Analysis and             This program studies and addresses natural and human-induced changes
Monitoring Program                  on the landscape. It encompasses global change research, integrates
                                    natural hazard data layers, delivers landscape information, and provides
                                    computer support.
                                                                                                                                 f
Land Remote Sensing Program         This program, initiated in the 1930s, promotes the use of remote sensing for
                                    understanding the earth's land environment through photography and other
                                    imagery from aircraft, as well as satellites.
                                                                                                                                 f
Mineral Resources Program           This program, created in 1879, provides scientific information for
                                    resource assessments and research results of mineral potential,
                                    production, consumption, and environmental behavior. This information
                                    is used to characterize the life cycles of mineral commodities from
                                    deposit formation, exploration, and discovery through production, use,
                                    reuse, and disposal.
                                                                                                                                 f
National Cooperative Geologic       This program was established in 1992 to implement and coordinate an
Mapping Program                     expanded geologic mapping effort by USGS, the state geological surveys,
                                    and universities. The primary goal of the program is to collect, process,
                                    analyze, translate, and disseminate earth-science information through
                                    geologic maps.
National Water Quality Assessment   The long-term mission and goals of the NAWQA program, which began in             $16,039,000r
(NAWQA) Program                     1991, are to provide long-term, nationwide information on the quality of
                                    streams, groundwater, and aquatic ecosystems. NAWQA's goals are to
                                    assess the status and trends of national water quality and to understand the
                                    factors that affect it.
                                                                                                                                 f
National Water Use Information      This program was created in 1979 to collect, store, analyze, and
Program                             disseminate water-use information, both nationally and locally, to a wide
                                    variety of government agencies and private organizations. It is a
                                    cooperative program that includes state and local government entities.
                                                                                                                                 i
USGS Ground-Water Resources         This program encompasses regional studies of groundwater systems;                    $60,000
Program                             provides multidisciplinary studies of critical groundwater issues; provides
                                    access to groundwater data, and research and methods development. It
                                    also provides scientific information and many of the tools that are used by
                                    federal, state, and local management and regulatory agencies to make
                                    important decisions about the nation's groundwater resources. It was
                                    created in 1995.
                                                                                                                                 f
USGS Toxic Substances Hydrology     This program was created in 1982 to provide scientific information and tools
Program                             that explain the occurrence, behavior, and effects of toxic substances in the
                                    nation's hydrologic environments. Program results support decision making
                                    by resource managers, regulators, industry, and the public. Work is
                                    performed by USGS scientists who collaborate with a wide range of federal
                                    and nonfederal organizations and individuals.
                                                                                                                                 f
Water Resource Research Act         This program, dating back to 1964, provides an institutional mechanism for
Programs                            promoting state, regional, and national coordination of water resources,
                                    research, and training. It comprises a network of institutes to facilitate
                                    research and information technology transfer. With its matching
                                    requirements, it is also a mechanism for promoting state investments in
                                    research and training.




                                         Page 66                                                           GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                           Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                           Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                           through 2001




                                                                                                                         Program
                                                                                                                     expenditures
                                                                                                                                  a
Program name                       Purpose                                                                            (1992-2001)
Earth Surface Dynamics Program -   This 1998 initiated research program provides scientific information to             $2,977,000p
Central Great Lakes Geologic       evaluate natural coastal processes and understand human-induced
Mapping Coalition                  changes. It develops predictive models of natural systems and the effects of
                                   human activities on them, and the capability to predict future changes.
                                   Program data is used to guide the preservation and sustainable
                                   development of the nation's marine and coastal environments.
Department of Homeland Security-Coast Guard
                                                                                                                                  s
National Invasive Species          Under this program, the Secretary of Transportation issues national                 $8,000,000
Act/Ballast Water Program          guidelines to prevent the introduction of aquatic nuisance species into U.S.
                                   waters by ships.
                                                                                                                                    f
Oil Spill Removal Organization     This is a voluntary pollution prevention program created by the Coast Guard
Program                            to assist facility and vessel responders in writing their oil spill response
                                   plans.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
                                                                                                                                    f
Air Program                        The purpose of this program, which began in 1970, is to (1) protect and
                                   enhance the quality of the nation's air resources, (2) initiate and accelerate
                                   a national research and development program to achieve the prevention
                                   and control of air pollution, (3) provide technical and financial assistance to
                                   state and local governments in connection with the development and
                                   execution of their air pollution prevention and control programs, and (4)
                                   encourage and assist the development and operation of regional air
                                   pollution prevention and control programs.
                                                                                                                                    f
Aquatic Stressors Research         The goal of this research program, which began in 1975, is to advance
Program                            scientifically sound approaches for monitoring trends in ecological
                                   conditions of the nation's aquatic resources, including the Great Lakes;
                                   identify impaired watersheds and diagnose causes of degradation; and
                                   develop risk-based assessments for supporting restoration and remediation
                                   decisions.
                                                                                                                                    f
Children's Health Program          This program (1) identifies and evaluates children's health issues, (2)
                                   develops approaches for addressing these issues, and (3) prioritizes and
                                   implements appropriate actions on children's health issues. This 1997
                                   program funds pollution prevention activities and is largely a voluntary
                                   program building state capacity in human health.
                                                                                                                                    f
Clean Water Act (CWA) Water        Operating since 1972, this program develops and implements
Quality Monitoring and Section 106 comprehensive monitoring programs at the state and tribal levels to
Grants                             address all water quality management needs under the CWA. Section 106
                                   Grants awards grants to states and to eligible Indian tribes as base program
                                   support to maintain their surface water and groundwater programs.
                                                                                                                                    f
Clean Water State Revolving Fund The purpose of this program is to provide grants to states for long-term
                                   financing for construction of wastewater treatment facilities and
                                   implementation of state management plans. This program began in 1972.
                                                                                                                                    f
Drinking Water State Revolving     This program provides grants to states to establish drinking water state
Fund                               revolving funds, whose purpose is to support drinking water system
                                   infrastructure improvements. These grants provide loans and other types of
                                   financial assistance to eligible public water supply authorities. The program
                                   started in 1996.
Environmental Justice Small Grants This program, which began in 1994, provides financial assistance to                  $256,047m
                                   grassroots community-based groups to support projects to design,
                                   demonstrate, or disseminate practices, methods, or techniques related to
                                   environmental justice.




                                           Page 67                                                          GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                             Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                             Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                             through 2001




                                                                                                                            Program
                                                                                                                        expenditures
                                                                                                                                     a
Program name                            Purpose                                                                          (1992-2001)
                                                                                                                                     f
Environmental Justice Through           This pollution prevention program provides low income, minority
Pollution Prevention Grants             communities with pollution prevention resources to address
                                        community environmental issues. This program started as a pilot
                                        program in 1995 through discretionary funds, but the last year of
                                        funding was 2001.
                                                                                                                                     f
Environmental Monitoring and            The goal of this program is to advance scientifically sound approaches for
Assessment Program                      monitoring trends in ecological conditions of the nation's aquatic resources,
                                        including the Great Lakes. The program identifies impaired watersheds and
                                        diagnoses causes of degradation and forecasts risk-based assessments
                                        and options to support restoration and remediation decisions. This
                                        research program began in 1989.
                                                                                                                                     f
Food Quality Protection                 The purpose of this program is to ensure continuing safety of the nation's
Act/Strategic Agricultural Initiative   food supply by promoting the transition from potentially hazardous
                                        conventional pesticides to pesticides with reduced risk to human health and
                                        the environment. This program started in 1998.
                                                                                                                                     f
Global Climate Change Research          The goal of this program is to advance scientifically sound approaches for
Program                                 monitoring trends in ecological conditions of the nation's aquatic resources,
                                        including the Great Lakes. Program activities identify impaired watersheds
                                        and diagnose causes of degradation. This research program began in
                                        1975.
                                                                                                                                     f
Indian Environmental General            This 1992 program assists federally recognized Indian tribes and nations to
Assistance Program                      build their overall capacity to manage environmental programs and conduct
                                        activities.
                                                                                                                                     f
National Pollution Discharge            The goal of this program is to assure that U.S. waters remain fishable,
Elimination System                      swimmable, and drinkable, through regulating point source discharges to
                                        surface water. The program ensures that discharges do not cause or
                                        contribute to a violation of water quality standards. This program started in
                                        1972 and is largely delegated to states.
                                                                                                                                     f
Non-Point Source Program                The purpose of this program is to attain the goals of the CWA. This
                                        restoration and pollution prevention program started in 1987.
                                                                                                                                     f
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)         This program was created in 1980 to conduct several activities related to
Program                                 PCBs. These activities include reviewing and tracking projects involving
                                        the remediation, storage, and disposal of PCBs; conducting inspections to
                                        determine compliance with federal PCB regulations; and conducting
                                        projects for reducing the use of PCBs. This program includes cleanup and
                                        pollution prevention.
                                                                                                                                     f
Pollution Prevention (P2)               This program provides grants for capacity building and for innovative
Demonstration Grants                    pollution prevention projects, especially those projects having potential
                                        for regional impacts. Funded projects include supporting the Great
                                        Lakes regional P2 roundtable, providing technical assistance, and
                                        coordinating P2 partnerships. This pollution prevention program began
                                        in 1993.
                                                                                                                                     f
Pollution Prevention for States         The goal of this grant program is to promote strategies and solutions
Grant Program                           that assist businesses and industries in reducing waste at the source.
                                        The majority of grants fund state-based projects in areas of technical
                                        assistance and training, education and outreach, regulatory integration,
                                        data collection and research, demonstration projects, and recognition
                                        programs. This pollution prevention program began in 1991.
                                                                                                                                     f
Public Water Supply Program             The purpose of this program is to ensure that clean and safe
                                        drinking water is provided to the public. This program was created in
                                        1974.




                                             Page 68                                                           GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                          Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                          Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                          through 2001




                                                                                                                     Program
                                                                                                                 expenditures
                                                                                                                              a
Program name                       Purpose                                                                        (1992-2001)
                                                                                                                                f
Resource Conservation and          The goal of the program is to encourage re-use of properties that have
Recovery Act (RCRA) Brownfields    been stigmatized by the presence of, or perception of, environmental
                                   contamination. This restoration program began in 1998.
                                                                                                                                f
RCRA Subtitle C Enforcement and    This program provides for the on-site evaluation and inspection of
Compliance Program                 hazardous waste sites to enforce compliance with regulations designed for
                                   protecting human health and the environment and conserving valuable
                                   material and energy resources. This program, started in 1976, involves
                                   cleanup, restoration, and pollution prevention.
                                                                                                                                f
RCRA Subtitle C Hazardous Waste This program assists state governments in the development and
Management Program Support         implementation of an authorized state hazardous waste management
                                   program for the purpose of controlling the generation, transportation,
                                   storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. Funding first began in 1978.
                                                                                                                                f
RCRA Subtitle C Corrective Action  The goals of this program are evaluating the potential environmental risk
Program                            impacts from RCRA-regulated hazardous waste facilities, ensuring
                                   adequate facility investigation, ensuring cleanup of contaminants, and
                                   managing facilities’ long-term controls for the protection of human health
                                   and the environment. This cleanup and restoration program started in
                                   1980.
                                                                                                                                f
RCRA Subtitle C Permitting         The purpose of this program is to issue permits that allow for monitoring
                                   the handling of hazardous waste to ensure better waste management
                                   and restoration of contaminated waste sites through a regulated
                                   permitting program. This program started in 1980, and it addresses
                                   restoration and pollution prevention in accordance with RCRA
                                   regulations.
                                                                                                                                f
RCRA Subtitle D Solid Waste        The purpose of this program is to promote use of integrated solid waste
Management Assistance              management systems to solve municipal solid waste generation and
Program/Jobs Through Recycling     management problems at the local, regional, and national levels. The
Initiative                         program provides assistance to state, local, and tribal governments and
                                   organizations to increase waste diversion from landfills and incinerators.
                                   This pollution prevention program started in 1976.
                                                                                                                                f
RCRA Subtitle D Tribal Solid Waste This 1993 program was created to assist tribes to achieve solid waste
Assistance Grants                  management and promote compliance with the provisions of RCRA Subtitle
                                   D. This is a cleanup, restoration, and pollution prevention program.
                                                                                                                                f
RCRA Subtitle I Underground        This program regulates the use of underground storage tanks and requires
Storage Tanks and Leaking          cleanup of releases and spills. This cleanup program started in 1989.
Underground Storage Tanks
Regional Geographic Initiative     The purpose of RGI is to (1) fund projects that are identified as high          $6,753,937t
(RGI)/Environmental Priorities     priority, (2) support geographic place-based projects, (3) address
Program (EPP)                      multimedia problems, and (4) highlight agency priorities and strategies.
                                   The purpose of EPP is to fund projects or purchases that aid in
                                   environmental protection. These activities were started in 1994,
                                   and they include research, cleanup, restoration, and pollution
                                   prevention.
                                                                                                                                f
State and Tribal Environmental     This program was created to provide capacity building financial assistance
Justice (EJ) Program               to states and tribes that are working to address EJ issues. This program
                                   started in 1998.
                                                                                                                              u
Superfund                          The goal of this program is to protect human health and the environment       $749,149,250
                                   from risks associated with abandoned hazardous waste sites and to
                                   respond to hazardous substance spill emergencies. The primary focus of
                                   the program is the assessment and remediation of long-term cleanups.
                                   This cleanup program was created in 1980.




                                          Page 69                                                       GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                                         Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                                         Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                                         through 2001




                                                                                                                                                      Program
                                                                                                                                                  expenditures
                                                                                                                                                               a
 Program name                       Purpose                                                                                                        (1992-2001)
                                                                                                                                                                   f
 Total Maximum Daily Load Program The purpose of this 1973 program is to identify waters not meeting state
                                    water quality standards, and for those waters, calculate the maximum
                                    amount of a pollutant the water can receive and still meet water quality
                                    standards. This is a restoration program according to EPA officials.
                                                                                                                                                                   f
 Tribal Solid Waste Assistance      This 1993 program was created to assist tribes in solid waste management
 Grants                             and promote compliance with the provisions of RCRA Subtitle D. This is a
                                    cleanup, restoration, and pollution prevention program.
                                                                                                                                                                   f
 Underground Injection Control      The program was created to protect underground sources of drinking water
                                    by controlling underground injection. This is a pollution prevention program.
                                                                                                                                                                   j
 Waste Pesticide Collection Program This pollution prevention program achieves reductions in persistent                                                $194,000
 (Agricultural Clean Sweep or Waste bioaccumulative toxins and prevents contamination of air, soil, and water
 Pesticide Disposal)                resources by safely disposing of pesticides. This program started in 1988.
                                                                                                                                                                   f
 Water Quality Management           The purpose of this program, which began in 1972, is to promote the
 Planning                           enhancement of water quality through water quality management planning.
                                    This program involves both restoration and pollution prevention.
                                                                                                                                                                   f
 Water Quality Standards Program    The purpose of this program is to support efforts to restore and maintain the
                                    chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters by defining
                                    the uses to be protected and the water quality conditions needed to protect
                                    these uses.
 Wetlands                           The goal of this 1972 program is to regulate the discharge of dredged or fill                                      $129,000v
                                    material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. Wetland
                                    Program Development Grants are designed to assist state, tribal, and local
                                    government agencies in building their wetland management programs.
Sources: The Corps, ARS, CSREES, FSA, FS, NRCS, NOAA, FWS, USGS, Coast Guard, EPA, and GAO.
                                                         a
                                                          Unless otherwise noted, the funding figures in this column represent program federal fiscal year
                                                         expenditures.
                                                         b
                                                             Funding represents fiscal years 1998 through 2001.
                                                         c
                                                             Funding represents fiscal years 1997 through 2001.
                                                         d
                                                             Funding represents fiscal years 1994 through 2001.
                                                         e
                                                          Funding is for all Great Lakes states, except for Pennsylvania. Figures were only available for fiscal
                                                         years 1999 and 2000.
                                                         f
                                                             Great Lakes Basin funding is not known for this nationwide program.
                                                         g
                                                          Funding amounts are for the Huron-Manistee, Ottawa, and Hiawatha Forests, all of which are entirely
                                                         within the Great Lakes Basin. There is additional funding within the basin, but the precise amount
                                                         could not be determined.
                                                         h
                                                             Funding represents fiscal years 2000 and 2001.
                                                         i
                                                             Funding represents fiscal year 2001.
                                                         j
                                                             Funding represents fiscal years 1993 through 2001.
                                                         k
                                                             This program did not receive any specific funding for the Great Lakes Basin for this time period.
                                                         l
                                                         Funding is for fiscal years 1995 to 2001. Support totaling $47.9 million has come in from additional
                                                         sources over the same time frame. All Sea Grant programs and projects are matched to at least the
                                                         50 percent level by nonfederal funds from academia, state agencies, industry, or other sources.
                                                         m
                                                             Funding represents fiscal years 1995 through 2001.
                                                         n
                                                             Funding represents fiscal years 1999 through 2001.



                                                         Page 70                                                                      GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
through 2001




o
 Funding represents base funding. Department of Interior provides approximately $850,000 more in
competitive funding annually.
p
 This funding is for fiscal years 1998 through 2001 and it was provided by several different sources,
including the program’s specific funding authority.
q
    Funding for this program came from the Department of Defense.
r
    Funding amounts are appropriated funds.
s
 Funding is approximate. The agency did not respond to our survey, so the figures were obtained
from the report entitled The Great Lakes at the Millennium: Priorities for Fiscal 2001, prepared by the
Northeast-Midwest Institute.
t
    Funding amount is for Region 2 and Region 5.
u
    Funding amount is for Region 3 and Region 5.
v
    Funding amount is for Region 2 only.




Page 71                                                                   GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                           Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                           Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                           through 2001




                                           Table 6 contains a listing of the non-Great Lakes specific programs
                                           managed by state agencies.

Table 6: State Non-Great Lakes Specific Programs

                                                                                                                            Program
                                                                                                                        expenditures
                                                                                                                                     a
Program name                       Purpose                                                                               (1992-2001)
Indiana Department of Natural Resources (IDNR)
                                                                                                                                     b
Lake and River Enhancement         This program started in 1987, and it funds restoration activities by
Program                            providing technical and financial assistance for projects that reduce
                                   nonpoint source sediment and nutrient pollution in Indiana's and
                                   adjacent state's surface waters.
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ)
Michigan State University Forestry This is a research program administered by Michigan State                                $594,888
Department Dendroremediation       University. The project began in fiscal year 2000 and funds
                                   activities to determine the existence of woody plants, especially
                                   native species that would be useful for various approaches to the
                                   remediation of heavy metals in soil and/or groundwater. The
                                   program also looked to determine whether plants adapted to
                                   growing on a site with elevated heavy metals in soils results
                                   in greater tolerance for, and ability to takeup, heavy metals.
Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (MBWSR)
Comprehensive Local Water          The challenge grant program began in 1989, and it funds priority                         $428,732c
Planning Challenge Grant Program   projects identified by local governments in their local water plans.
                                   It funds restoration activities by providing financial and technical
                                   assistance to counties for development and implementation of local
                                   water plans.
Erosion, Sediment Control, and     This program was initiated in 1977, and it provides funds to soil                      $1,293,298c
Water Quality Cost-Share Program   and water conservation districts for cost-sharing conservation
                                   projects that protect and improve water quality by controlling
                                   soil erosion and reducing sedimentation. This restoration
                                   program provides technical and financial assistance to
                                   landowners who install permanent nonproduction-oriented
                                   practices to protect and improve soil and water resources.
Lakeshore Engineering Program      This program was created in 1991 to support local governments'                           $976,313d
                                   large erosion control projects on Lake Superior shores by providing
                                   engineering assistance, education, and best management practices.
                                   Its activities relate to restoration and research to control erosion from
                                   private and public shorelines.
                                                                                                                                     e
Local Water Planning and Wetland   This block grant program began in 1985 to assist local                                 $3,205,505
Conservation Act                   governments in implementing four state-mandated programs.
                                   Water planning grants are available for restoration activities
                                   related to implementing comprehensive water plans and the
                                   local administration of grants.
Minnesota Department of Commerce (MDOC)
Petroleum Tank Release Cleanup     The petrofund program was created in 1987 to fund the                                 $18,514,720f
Fund (Petrofund)                   replacement or upgrade of all underground petroleum storage tanks
                                   by 1998. The program provides financial assistance to owners and
                                   operators of petroleum storage tanks to assist in cleaning up
                                   contamination or replacing leaking tanks. Available program
                                   funding is capped at $1 million per project.




                                           Page 72                                                             GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                           Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                           Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                           through 2001




                                                                                                                       Program
                                                                                                                   expenditures
                                                                                                                                a
Program name                       Purpose                                                                          (1992-2001)
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR)
                                                                                                                                b
Conservation Partnership Program   This program was started in 1995 to provide grants to private
                                   organizations and local units of government for activities related to
                                   restorations of fish, wildlife, and native plant habitats. The program also
                                   funds research to improve fish and wildlife habitats.
                                                                                                                                b
Environmental Partnership Grant    This grant program was initiated in 1997 to provide funding for private
Program                            companies and local governments for research, cleanup, pollution
                                   prevention, and education projects that deal with environmental
                                   conservation principles.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
Basin Planning                     MPCA created this program in 1995 to coordinate water management                    $175,000g
                                   efforts around the state's 10 major drainage basins by focusing financial
                                   and staff resources upon key water resource management priorities. The
                                   program provides support to local and state agencies and citizen groups
                                   to develop watershed plans for making sound resource management
                                   decisions. Program activities included research, cleanup, restoration,
                                   and pollution prevention.
Clean Water Partnership            The program was created in 1987 to fund activities related to runoff              $2,613,798h
                                   from agricultural and urban areas. The program provides funds to
                                   local governments for projects that protect and improve lakes,
                                   streams, and groundwater resources in Minnesota. Funds can be
                                   requested for research, cleanup, restoration, or pollution prevention
                                   projects.
Minnesota Environmental Response This is Minnesota's Superfund program. It was created in 1983 to fund                 $864,410h
and Liability Act                  activities related to investigating and cleaning up releases of hazardous
                                   substances or contaminants. As of 1989, the program's authority
                                   included funding to investigate and clean up contamination from
                                   agricultural chemicals.
Minnesota Landfill Cleanup Program This cleanup program was created in 1994 as an alternative to using the             $485,135i
(Closed Landfill Program)          federal and state Superfund laws to address the cleanup and long-term
                                   maintenance of 106 closed municipal sanitary landfills in the state. Eight
                                   of these landfills are in the Lake Superior watershed. Funds are provided
                                   for cleanup activities only.
                                                                                                                                b
Minnesota Mercury Initiative       The purpose of this program is to help reduce mercury contamination in
                                   Minnesota fish. Because about 98 percent of mercury in Minnesota
                                   waters is due to air deposition, the state looked for ways to reduce
                                   mercury in the air. The program solicits voluntary mercury emission
                                   reductions from large companies.
                                                                                                                                b
Voluntary Petroleum Investigation  This program was created in 1996 to provide technical assistance and
and Cleanup                        liability assurance to expedite and facilitate the development, transfer,
                                   and investigation and/or cleanup of property that is contaminated from
                                   petroleum products. MPCA provides technical oversight for this cleanup
                                   program.
New York Department of Environmental Conservation (NYDEC)
                                                                                                                                j
Clean Water and Clean Air Bond Act This program was established in 1996. It consolidates the funding               $428,820,724
                                   application processes of several state agencies and programs with a
                                   focus on cleanup, restoration, water resource improvement, pollution
                                   prevention, nonpoint source abatement, aquatic habitat restoration, safe
                                   drinking water system improvement, solid waste management, and other
                                   environmental conservation efforts.




                                           Page 73                                                        GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                           Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                           Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                           through 2001




                                                                                                                        Program
                                                                                                                    expenditures
                                                                                                                                 a
Program name                        Purpose                                                                          (1992-2001)
Environmental Protection Act and    The purpose of this program is to address the cleanup, restoration,              $97,154,829j
Fund                                historic preservation, land and open space conservation, and waterfront
                                    revitalization of New York watersheds. Proposed projects are reviewed
                                    under the consolidated bond application process.
Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act  This program was created in 1972 to provide the necessary resources to            $2,500,000j
and Environmental Conservation      support the state’s critical fish and wildlife conservation programs by
Fund                                focusing on the care, management, protection, and enlargement of fish
                                    and wildlife resources through research and restoration. Activities also
                                    include habitat improvement and enforcement.
                                                                                                                                 k
New York State Environmental        This program was started in 1980 in response to the federal Superfund.
Quality Protection Fund (Superfund) The state's Superfund program is focused on the investigation,
                                    emergency response, and enforcement of cleanups at hazardous waste
                                    sites.
Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR)
                                                                                                                                 b
Dam Safety                          Created in 1963, the purpose of this regulatory program is to protect the
                                    citizens of Ohio from flooding due to dam failure. The program provides
                                    support to the owners of dams and residents in downstream areas by
                                    permitting the construction of new dams and dikes, approving repairs to
                                    existing dams and dikes, and responding to safety emergencies.
                                                                                                                                 b
Ground Water Resources              This program was started in 1959, and it seeks to collect, maintain,
                                    interpret, and distribute information on the groundwater resources of
                                    Ohio in both the Lake Erie and Ohio River basins. Its basic purpose is to
                                    foster the development of groundwater as a viable and sustainable water
                                    supply for the citizens of the state.
                                                                                                                                 b
Hydraulic/Canal Operations          This program was created during the 1800s to operate and maintain the
                                    watered portions of the historic Miami/Erie and Ohio/Erie Canals,
                                    including water supply distribution, storm water control, historic
                                    preservation and recreation. Residents and properties adjacent and
                                    downstream from the canal and reservoirs are protected from flooding
                                    through the operation of hydraulic structures.
                                                                                                                                 b
Pollution Abatement Cost Share      Since 1979, this program has provided funding to landowners to assist in
                                    the installation of needed best management practices that abate animal
                                    waste pollution, soil erosion, or degradation of the state's waters by soil
                                    sediment.
                                                                                                                                 b
Water Inventory and Stream and      The purpose of this program, created in 1959, is to collect, compile,
Water Gauging                       analyze, and disseminate hydrologic and climatological data and
                                    information concerning all aspects of the hydrologic cycle, operate the
                                    statewide groundwater observation well network, and administer
                                    cooperative agreements with USGS for stream gauging and other water
                                    resource projects.
                                                                                                                                 b
Water Planning                      This program was created in 1959 to address the need for water supply
                                    planning on a regional and statewide basis. It also includes
                                    administering the Lake Erie and Ohio River basins’ diversion permit and
                                    consumptive use permit programs, water resource inventory, and the
                                    Lake Erie Basin Plan.
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA)
                                                                                                                                 b
Clean Ohio Fund                     This program, which began in 2001, awards grants for cleanup and
                                    restoration of polluted areas and the preservation and conservation
                                    of green space and farmland. The first grant was not awarded
                                    until 2002.




                                           Page 74                                                         GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                                    Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
                                                    Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
                                                    through 2001




                                                                                                                                                 Program
                                                                                                                                             expenditures
                                                                                                                                                          a
 Program name                      Purpose                                                                                                    (1992-2001)
 Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PDEP)
                                                                                                                                                            l
 Growing Greener Grant Program     This program began in 1999 to address critical concerns related to                                             $700,000
                                   education and outreach, as well as wetland restoration, soil erosion and
                                   sedimentation controls, and creek assessments in Lake Erie tributaries.
                                                                                                                                                            m
 Pennsylvania Coastal Zone Program This program was created in 1980 to support studies of evasive species,                                       $938,000
                                   bluff evaluations, and property preservation activities identified by the
                                   Office of the Great Lakes.
 Wisconsin Department of Commerce (WDOC)
                                                                                                                                                            b
 Brownfields Grant Program         This grant program began in 1998 to provide financial assistance for
                                   Brownfields redevelopment and related environmental remediation
                                   projects. It also funds associated environmental remediation activities
                                   with emphasis on cleanup and restoration.
 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR)
                                                                                                                                                            b
 Dry Cleaner Fund                  This environmental response program was created in 1997 to provide
                                   financial assistance awards for reimbursement of certain eligible costs to
                                   investigate and remediate contamination from dry cleaning solvents at
                                   current and certain former dry cleaning facilities. Program efforts are
                                   focused on cleanup and restoration.
                                                                                                                                                            b
 Runoff Management Program         This program began in 1998 and is aimed at abating urban and rural
                                   polluted runoff. Three components of the program include (1)
                                   implementation of the voluntary Priority Watershed/Lake Projects, (2)
                                   point source permitting of storm water and agricultural runoff sources,
                                   and (3) implementation of state regulatory performance standards. Its
                                   primary focus is research and cleanup.
                                                                                                                                                            b
 Site Assessment Grants            This grant program was started in 2000 to provide local governments
                                   with grants to perform the initial investigation of contaminated properties
                                   and certain other eligible activities. Its focus is the restoration and
                                   cleanup of abandoned, idle, or underused industrial or commercial
                                   facilities and sites.
                                                                                                                                                            b
 State Funded Response Program     This is the state's version of the Superfund program, authorized in 1978,
 (Environmental Repair)            but not started until 1985. The program focuses on the cleanup and
                                   restoration of all types of hazardous substance sites, including
                                   unlicensed or abandoned sites, and can also be used to respond to
                                   hazardous substance spills.
                                                                                                                                                            n
 Sustainable Urban Development     This 1999 WDNR pilot program operates in cooperation with other state                                       $1,700,000
 Zone Program                      agencies and the cities of Milwaukee, Green Bay, La Crosse, Oshkosh,
                                   and Beloit. It seeks to promote the use of financial incentives to clean
                                   up, restore, and redevelop contaminated properties in the five cities.
                                   Funds may be used to investigate environmental contamination and
                                   clean up Brownfields properties in the cities.
Sources: IDNR, MDEQ, MBWSR, MDOC, MDNR, MPCA, NYDEC, ODNR, OEPA, PDEP, WDOC, WDNR, and GAO.
                                                    a
                                                     Unless otherwise noted, the funding figures in this column represent program state fiscal year
                                                    expenditures.
                                                    b
                                                        Program officials could not provide specific Great Lakes funding for this statewide program.
                                                    c
                                                        This funding was only for those counties that reside within the Great Lakes Basin.
                                                    d
                                                     This amount was provided from 1993 through 2001. It includes total grant funds and 80 percent of
                                                    the administrative salary costs for the engineer.
                                                    e
                                                        This program requires a dollar-for-dollar match by local government.




                                                    Page 75                                                                     GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
Appendix II: Federal and State Non-Great
Lakes Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992
through 2001




f
These funds were spent in the Lake Superior watershed to clean up 628 sites. A 2 percent fee on
bulk petroleum sales generates the funding.
g
    This figure relates to Lake Superior funding only for this statewide program.
h
    This figure is a 10 year average and relates to Lake Superior funding only.
i
    This funding was provided from 1995 through 2001, and only for the eight Great Lakes specific sites.
j
These funds were either expended or committed for Great Lakes Basin projects during the period
1998 through 2001 (state fiscal year).
k
 Program officials could not identify the Great Lakes funding for this statewide program; however,
responsible parties have provided more than $400 million for cleanup actions.
l
    Program funding covers state fiscal years1999 through 2001.
m
    This funding figure is for state fiscal year 2001 only.
n
 This amount was identified as the expenditure during state fiscal years 2000 and 2001 by three of
the cities. It is not total Great Lakes spending.




Page 76                                                                      GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                       Appendix III: Corps of Engineers Special
Appendix III: Corps of Engineers Special
                                       Authorized Projects in the Great Lakes Basin,
                                       Fiscal Years 1992 through 2001


Authorized Projects in the Great Lakes Basin,
Fiscal Years 1992 through 2001
State      Project title                     Program description                                                      Amount
Illinois
           Des Plaines River, Ill.           Flood damage reduction - The purpose of this project was to            $2,496,507
                                             develop measures to reduce or prevent damage from flooding
                                             to areas, such as reservoirs, and levees; make channel
                                             modifications; remove threatened structures from flood-prone
                                             areas; and enhance flood plain management.
           Kankakee River Basin              Flood damage reduction                                                  1,591,856
           Illinois Shore Erosion            Stream bank and shoreline protection – This project was                   254,177
                                             designed to protect public structures or facilities from damages
                                             caused by stream bank erosion or flooding caused by waves
                                             from coastal storms, to include hardened protective structures.
           Chicago River North Branch        Navigation improvements – These projects may involve new                   64,100
           1946                              channels and structures, such as breakwaters and piers or
                                             modifications to existing navigation facilities, such as
                                             deepening or lengthening navigation channel.
           Southeast Chicago, Ill.           Flood damage reduction                                                    595,800
           Waukegan Harbor, Ill.             Flood damage reduction                                                    338,128
           Casino Beach, Ill.                Erosion control – The purpose of this project is providing              2,111,815
                                             erosion control.
           Illinois Beach State Park         Ecosystem restoration – These projects seek to restore,                  160,640
                                             protect, or enhance aquatic habitat, such as wetlands and
                                             spawning areas, and include efforts to restore degraded lakes
                                             and rivers, remove contamination, and provide natural
                                             vegetation.
           McCook & Thornton Reservoir       Flood damage reduction                                                32,770,600
           Kankakee River Icebreaker         Flood damage reduction                                                     9,200
           North Branch Chicago River        Flood damage reduction                                                 6,754,844
           O'Hare Reservoir                  Flood damage reduction                                                28,088,930
           Chicago Shoreline                 Streambank and shoreline protection                                   93,824,976
           Illinois & Michigan Canal         Navigation improvements                                                  307,100
           Chicago Sanitary & Ship Canal     Ecosystem restoration                                                  1,778,721
           Des Plaines Wetlands Project      Flood damage reduction                                                   183,308
                                                                                                                 $171,330,702
Indiana
           Beauty Creek Watershed, Ind.      Flood damage reduction                                                   $95,900
           Deep River Basin, Ind.            Flood damage reduction                                                    68,600
           Long Lake, Ind.                   Ecosystem restoration                                                     75,000
           Hammond, Ind.                     Streambank and shoreline protection                                       42,000
           Little Calumet River Basin,       Flood damage reduction
           Dyer, Ind.                                                                                                 310,700
           Little Calumet River Basin        Flood damage reduction
           Township                                                                                                     82,900
           Lake George                       Flood damage reduction                                                  1,117,300
           Little Calumet River, Cady        Flood damage reduction                                                  1,355,588
           Marsh Ditch
           Indiana Shore Erosion             Erosion control                                                         8,239,944
           Little Calumet River              Flood damage reduction                                                 78,770,000
           Indiana Harbor CDF                Navigation improvements                                                 1,297,300




                                       Page 77                                                          GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                       Appendix III: Corps of Engineers Special
                                       Authorized Projects in the Great Lakes Basin,
                                       Fiscal Years 1992 through 2001




State       Project title                    Program description                                                      Amount
            Burns Waterway Harbor, Ind.      Navigation improvements                                                13,384,194
                                a
            Calumet Region, Ind.             Environmental infrastructure                                               58,903
            Wolf Lake, Ind.                  Ecosystem restoration                                                      98,700
            Fort Wayne Metro Area, Ind.      Flood damage reduction                                                 33,944,000
                                                                                                                  $138,941,029
Michigan
            Clinton River Spillway, Mich.    Flood damage reduction                                                  $2,403,300
            Cedar River Harbor, Mich.        Navigation improvements                                                    193,000
            Great Lakes Connecting           Navigation improvements                                                    300,800
            Channels & Harbors, Mich.
            Great Lakes Connecting           Navigation improvements                                                  2,740,000
            Channels & Harbors
            Replacement Lock, Mich.
                                                                                                                     $5,637,100
Minnesota
            Silver Bay Harbor, Minn.         Navigation improvements                                                 $2,600,100
            Knife River Harbor, Minn.        Navigation improvements                                                    116,000
            Duluth-Superior Harbor, Minn.    Navigation improvements
            & Wisc.                                                                                                     645,400
                                                                                                                     $3,361,500
New York
            New York State Barge Canal       Navigation improvements                                                    $25,479
                                 a
            Onondaga Lake, N.Y.              Environmental infrastructure                                             4,169,999
            Onondaga Lake, N.Y.              Environmental infrastructure                                             2,864,213
            PL 101-596
            Olcott Harbor, N.Y.              Navigation improvements                                                  1,056,243
            Buffalo Flood and Water          Environmental infrastructure                                               435,987
            Quality
            Ellicott Creek, N.Y.             Flood damage reduction                                                    131,307
            Oneida Lake, N.Y.                The purpose of this project is ecosystem restoration and flood             68,881
                                             damage reduction.
            Hamlin and Lakeside Beach        Stream bank and shoreline protection                                        47,887
            State Park
                                                                                                                     $8,799,996
Ohio
            Cleveland Harbor Recon           Navigation improvements                                                  $292,994
            Study
            Cleveland Harbor Phase I         Navigation improvements                                                  4,001,960
            Reno Beach, Howard Farms         Flood damage reduction                                                   4,357,730
            Ottawa River, Ohio               Navigation improvements                                                    183,000
                               a
            Ohio Infrastructure              Environmental infrastructure                                               160,840
            Maumee River, Ohio               Flood damage reduction                                                     102,037
            Western Lake Erie Basin          The purpose of this project is flood damage reduction and                   67,164
                                             ecosystem restoration.
            Cayuga Creek Watershed           Flood damage reduction                                                      25,868
            Sandusky River, Tiffin, Ohio     Flood damage reduction                                                      71,722
                                                                                                                     $9,263,315



                                       Page 78                                                           GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                            Appendix III: Corps of Engineers Special
                                            Authorized Projects in the Great Lakes Basin,
                                            Fiscal Years 1992 through 2001




 State        Project title                        Program description                                                                  Amount
 Pennsylvania
              Presque Isle, Penn. Permanent        Stream bank and shoreline protection                                            $15,295,637
              Erie Harbor, East Canal Basin,       Environmental infrastructure                                                      5,480,000
              Penn.
                                                                                                                                   $20,775,637
 Wisconsin
 Wisconsin had one project that was jointly shared with Minnesota.                                                                           0
 Total                                                                                                                            $358,109,279
Sources: Corps of Engineers and GAO.
                                            a
                                             According to the Corps, this special project was authorized as an open-ended project without a
                                            stated expiration time frame. Project funding could be appropriated several years into the future.




                                            Page 79                                                                  GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                          Appendix IV: Federal and State Great Lakes
Appendix IV: Federal and State Great LakesSpecific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992 through
                                          2001


Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992 through
2001
                                          Table 7 contains a listing of the federal programs that specifically fund
                                          activities in the Great Lakes Basin.

Table 7: Federal Great Lakes Specific Programs

                                                                                                                       Program
                                                                                                                   expenditures
                                                                                                                                a
Program name                                 Purpose                                                                (1992-2001)
Army Corps of Engineers
                                                                                                                                  b
Great Lakes Fishery and Ecosystem           The purpose of this fiscal year 2000 program, which began in 2002,
Restoration                                 is to plan, design, and construct projects to restore Great Lakes
                                            fisheries and their beneficial uses.
                                                                                                                                  c
Great Lakes Remedial Action Plans and       This program was started in 1990 to plan, design, and construct
Sediment Remediation                        research demonstration projects of promising technologies for
                                            contaminated sediment remediation.
Great Lakes Remedial Action Plans and       This program, which was authorized in 1990, is designed to provide       $2,595,600d
Sediment Remediation Support                technical support focused on the development and implementation
                                            of remedial action plans to clean up the Great Lakes' areas of
                                            concern.
Great Lakes Tributary Models                This program was created in 1996. Its purpose is to develop              $1,103,424
                                            computer models of sediment loading and transport to Great Lakes
                                            tributaries to support state and local conservation and pollution
                                            prevention activities.
Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service
Great Lakes Basin Program for Soil Erosion Originally authorized in 1936, the program, as amended, funds             $3,625,000e
and Sediment Control                        pollution prevention projects that improve Great Lakes water quality
                                            by promoting soil erosion and sediment control through information
                                            and education programs, grants, technical assistance, and coalition
                                            building.
Department of Commerce-National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Episodic Events, Great Lakes Experiment     This research program began in 1997 to create a modeling program         $3,792,000f
                                            for seasonal sediment resuspension. It assesses the (1) impact on
                                            transporting and the transformation of chemically important
                                            materials and (2) effect on Lake Michigan ecology.
                                                                                                                                  g
Great Lakes Environmental Research          This program was established in 1970 and established the Great          $63,401,000
Laboratory                                  Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory to conduct physical,
                                            chemical, and environmental modeling research and to provide
                                            scientific expertise and services to manage and protect
                                            ecosystems.
Department of Health and Human Services-Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
                                                                                                                                  h
Great Lakes Human Health Effects Research This is a community-based research program that began in 1992,            $24,400,000
Program                                     with emphasis on public health education and intervention
                                            strategies. Its goal is to prohibit exposure to toxic chemicals and
                                            prevent adverse health outcomes in citizens of the Great Lakes.
Department of Interior-Fish and Wildlife Service
1836 Fisheries Treaty - Implementation of   This program was mandated in 2000 by a Federal District Court              $695,000
the August 7, 2000 Consent Decree           decree. It requires FWS to increase lake trout stocking for
                                            restoration programs and to evaluate factors impeding lake trout
                                            restoration. It also provides technical assistance to five Native
                                            American tribes in the Chippewa-Ottawa Resource Authority, the
                                            State of Michigan, and selected federal agencies involved with
                                            managing sport and commercial fisheries in certain areas of Lakes



                                          Page 80                                                        GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                            Appendix IV: Federal and State Great Lakes
                                            Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992 through
                                            2001




                                                                                                                             Program
                                                                                                                         expenditures
                                                                                                                                      a
Program name                                   Purpose                                                                    (1992-2001)
                                               Superior, Huron, and Michigan.
                                                                                                                                        i
Blue Pike Activities in the Great Lakes        This is a research program that was started in 1993 to establish the
                                               scientific relationships among the original Lake Erie blue pike, the
                                               recently caught "blue walleyes," and other closely related species
                                               using genetic analysis of their DNA.
                                                                                                                                        i
Ecosystem Management in the Lower Great        This program was created in 1990 to develop and adopt aquatic
Lakes                                          community and habitat goals and objectives. It also develops and
                                               conducts comprehensive and standardized ecological monitoring to
                                               support ecosystem management.
                                                                                                                                        i
Evaluation and Restoration of Great Lakes      The purpose of this program, which began in 1992, is to identify,
Estuaries and Tributaries                      inventory, protect, and rehabilitate significant aquatic habitats,
                                               including those used by fish and wildlife for spawning, breeding,
                                               nesting, rearing, and feeding.
Great Lakes Coastal Program                    This program, which began in 2000, funds projects that seek to                $500,000j
                                               protect and restore Great Lakes coastal ecosystems for the benefit
                                               of fish, wildlife, and people. Its goals are to identify and prioritize
                                               coastal habitats and conduct research to evaluate ecosystem
                                               health, identify threats, and lend biological focus to the planning
                                               processes of other agencies.
Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration      Since 1991, this program has developed and implemented                     $10,512,000k
Act                                            proposals for restoration of fish and wildlife resources in the Great
                                               Lakes Basin. It has provided assistance to the Great Lakes Fishery
                                               Commission, states, Indian tribes, and others to encourage
                                               cooperative conservation, restoration, and management of the fish
                                               and wildlife resources and their habitats.
Great Lakes Lake Sturgeon Rehabilitation       This program started in 1993, and it funds projects that seek to              $246,650l
Program                                        conserve, rehabilitate, and reestablish self-sustaining populations of
                                               lake sturgeon to levels that permit delisting from state and federal
                                               endangered species lists. Objectives include identification and
                                               restoration of critical habitat and public education.
                                                                                                                                        i
Lake Ontario Atlantic Salmon Reintroduction    This research program was started in 1993 to determine the
Program                                        feasibility of re-introducing/restoring Atlantic salmon to the Lake
                                               Ontario watershed.
                                                                                                                                        i
Lake Ontario/St. Lawrence River American       This research program, which started in 1997, provides research
Eel Restoration Program                        funds to protect and enhance the abundance of American eel
                                               populations in the Lake Ontario/St. Lawrence River watershed.
                                                                                                                                        i
Lower Great Lakes Lake Trout Restoration       The purpose of this program is to rehabilitate the lake trout
Program                                        population of Lakes Erie and Ontario so the new population can
                                               become self-sustaining through natural reproduction and produce a
                                               harvestable annual surplus. Program activities began in the late
                                               1970s.
Lower Great Lakes Ruffe Surveillance           This 1993 program provides funding for surveillance of invasive              $241,439m
Program                                        species to ensure prompt detection of new populations of ruffe and
                                               monitor or track expansions of already existing populations.
National Fish Hatchery System - Great          This program began operation in 1950 to manage, produce, and               $18,205,000
Lakes Operations                               stock native coaster brook trout and lake trout from native Great
                                               Lakes strains. This program is part of the interagency restoration
                                               programs coordinated through the Great Lakes Fishery
                                               Commission, and is based on a strategic plan for management of
                                               Great Lakes Fisheries.




                                            Page 81                                                            GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                           Appendix IV: Federal and State Great Lakes
                                           Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992 through
                                           2001




                                                                                                                          Program
                                                                                                                     expenditures
                                                                                                                                  a
Program name                                Purpose                                                                   (1992-2001)
New York State Canal System Aquatic         This is a multifaceted program started in 1998. It includes various          $221,342n
Nuisance Species Program                    components to address aquatic invasive species issues within the
                                            Canal system. It seeks to work with partner agencies to detect,
                                            monitor, and manage populations of aquatic invasive species
                                            inhabiting or transiting the Canal and implement prevention
                                            strategies as appropriate.
Department of Interior-National Park Service
                                                                                                                                    o
Midwest Region - Great Lakes Strategic Plan The purpose of this 1993-initiated program is to foster research           $6,127,000
Activities                                  cooperation among state and federal agencies involved with natural
                                            resource issues of mutual interest. These issues include aquatic
                                            exotic species, such as the sea lamprey, shoreline stabilization and
                                            monitoring, bald eagle monitoring, near shore fisheries, beach
                                            nourishment and fecal coliform issues, air quality, and cultural
                                            resource issues.
Environmental Protection Agency
                                                                                                                                    p
Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network   This program, initiated in 1990, assesses the health of the Great
                                            Lakes ecosystem through a series of air-monitoring stations in
                                            cooperation with Canada. It provides information to measure the
                                            amounts of chemicals and toxic substances deposited into the
                                            Great Lakes through air deposition to establish trend analysis and
                                            cause/effect relationships.
Coastal Environmental Management            The purpose of this program, which started in 1991, is to provide         $59,100,000
                                            grants that would assist in the preparation and implementation of
                                            lakewide management plans and remedial action plans for the
                                            areas of concern in the Great Lakes. This program addresses
                                            cleanup, restoration, and pollution prevention.
                                                                                                                                    p
Funding Guidance - Competitive Grants       This is a grant program in which GLNPO, in concert with Regions
                                            2,3, and 5, funds a consortium of programs, agencies, and public
                                            and private institutions for reducing the level of toxic substances in
                                            the Great Lakes; protecting and restoring vital habitats; protecting
                                            human health; and restoring and maintaining stable, diverse, and
                                            self-sustaining populations. This program started in 1993, and it
                                            funds research, cleanup, restoration, and pollution prevention
                                            activities.
Great Lakes Air Deposition Grant Program    The goals of the Great Lakes Air Deposition Grant Program are to          $11,135,500
                                            (1) better understand the impacts of deposition of pollutants to all
                                            water bodies in the Great Lakes region, (2) ensure continued
                                            progress in reducing sources and loadings of atmospheric
                                            deposition to the Great Lakes region, and (3) reduce the
                                            environmental and public health impacts associated with air
                                            emissions and subsequent atmospheric deposition. This research
                                            program began in 1993.
                                                                                                                                    p
Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy      The purpose of this program, which started in 1997, is to reduce
                                            and eliminate persistent toxic substances, especially those that
                                            bioaccumulate, in the Great Lakes. The strategy uses pollution
                                            prevention as a preferred approach. Research and cleanup are
                                            also components of this program.
                                                                                                                                    p
Lakewide Management Plans                   The purpose of the program is to protect the Great Lakes from
                                            beneficial use impairments for the "open waters" of each lake and to
                                            develop strategies to improve the environmental health of the lake.
                                            This program, initiated in 1987, is a cleanup, restoration, and



                                           Page 82                                                         GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                                         Appendix IV: Federal and State Great Lakes
                                                         Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992 through
                                                         2001




                                                                                                                                                      Program
                                                                                                                                                  expenditures
                                                                                                                                                               a
 Program name                                                   Purpose                                                                            (1992-2001)
                                                                pollution prevention program.
                                                                                                                                                               p
 Monitoring Program                                             The purpose of this research program, which began in 1975, is to
                                                                assess the ecosystem health of the Great Lakes. Information is
                                                                gathered to measure whole lake response to control measures
                                                                using trend analysis and cause/effect relationships.
 Niagara River and New York State Areas of                      The purpose of this program, started in 1987, is to restore and                     $2,086,250
 Concern                                                        protect the beneficial uses in these areas of concern through a
                                                                remedial action plan. Cleanup, restoration, and pollution prevention
                                                                are goals of this program.
 Niagara River Toxics Management Plan                           The purpose of this program is to reduce toxic chemical inputs to                  $11,150,000
                                                                the Niagara River; achieve ambient water quality that will protect
                                                                human health, aquatic life, and wildlife; and while doing so, improve
                                                                and protect water quality in Lake Ontario. This program started in
                                                                1987 with the goal of cleanup, restoration, and pollution prevention.
 RCRA Subtitle C State Program Support -                        The purpose of this program, started in 1992, is to assist states in               $22,009,710
 Great Lakes Initiative                                         developing and implementing an authorized state hazardous waste
                                                                management program for the purpose of controlling the generation,
                                                                transportation, storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes.
                                                                Cleanup and pollution prevention are the goals of this program.
                                                                                                                                                               p
 State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference                        The purpose of this program, started in 1994, is to assess the
                                                                ecosystem health of the Great Lakes and to provide information to
                                                                measure whole lake response to control measures using trend
                                                                analysis and cause/effect relationships.
Sources: The Corps, NRCS, NOAA, ATSDR, FWS, NPS, EPA, and GAO.
                                                         a
                                                          Unless otherwise noted, the funding figures in this column represent program federal fiscal year
                                                         expenditures.
                                                         b
                                                             This program was authorized by WRDA in 2000, and first funded in 2002.
                                                         c
                                                             Thus far, no funds have been expended for this program.
                                                         d
                                                             The program was first funded in 1994.
                                                         e
                                                             The Great Lakes funding first began in 1994.
                                                         f
                                                             The amount expended is for fiscal years 1997 through 2001.
                                                         g
                                                          NOAA provides base funding for the facility, which averaged over $6.3 million during the 10-year
                                                         period, but many other federal and state agencies also provide research funds to the laboratory.
                                                         h
                                                         The program is considered Great Lakes specific, but research project results would most likely be
                                                         applicable both within and outside the basin.
                                                         i
                                                         Funding to support this program comes from a portion of the annual allocation received by the lower
                                                         Great Lakes Fishery Resources Office. The amount received from 1992 through 2001 was
                                                         $2,770,450.
                                                         j
                                                             Funding is for fiscal years 2000 and 2001 only.
                                                         k
                                                             According to FWS, the authorizing act expires in 2004.
                                                         l
                                                             Partial funding for fiscal years 1997 through 2001.
                                                         m
                                                             Funding is for fiscal years 1995 through 2001, funding was first provided in 1995.
                                                         n
                                                             Funding provided for fiscal years 1998 through 2001.




                                                         Page 83                                                                     GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                           Appendix IV: Federal and State Great Lakes
                                           Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992 through
                                           2001




                                           o
                                           This is not total funding; expenditures were not available for three known units.
                                           p
                                           This is a GLNPO program. Funding for GLNPO programs was not available individually. Total
                                           GLNPO funding for 1993-2001 is $143,400,000.
                                           q
                                           Funding provided for fiscal years 1993-2001.


                                           Table 8 contains a listing of the state programs that specifically fund
                                           activities in the Great Lakes Basin.

Table 8: State Great Lakes Specific Programs

                                                                                                                                   Program
                                                                                                                               expenditures
Program name                                Purpose                                                                             (1992-2001)a
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA)
Illinois Great Lakes Protection Fund (GLPF) The governors of the eight Great Lakes states created an                             $5,000,000
                                            endowment fund program in 1989. States contributed to the
                                            fund and received dividends to use for their Great Lakes projects.
                                            The Illinois GLPF program funds special studies and projects
                                            related to Great Lakes research, cleanup, restoration, or pollution
                                            prevention. The projects are selected as part of the states' budget
                                            process.
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ)
                                                                                                                                           c
1988 Quality of Life Bond Fund              This $660 million general obligation bond program was initiated                    $492,000,000
                                            in 1988 to finance environmental programs focused on cleanup
                                            of toxic and other contamination sites. It provided funds to
                                            address problems relating to solid waste, sewage treatment
                                            and water quality, reusing industrial sites, and preserving green
                                            space. Funded activities included research, cleanup, restoration,
                                            and pollution prevention. The program was replaced by the
                                            Clean Michigan Initiative in 1998.
Clean Michigan Initiative                   Michigan voters approved this $675 million general obligation                      $255,900,000d
                                            bond program for environmental activities in 1998 to replace the
                                            Quality of Life Bond Fund. It is used for cleanup, restoration, or
                                            pollution prevention projects, and a portion of the fund is
                                            available for parks and monitoring activities.
Michigan Great Lakes Protection Fund        By mandate, Michigan's GLPF program only funds research                              $5,199,601f
(GLPF)                                      projects undertaken by universities and for-profit groups in
                                            areas such as toxics and aquatic nuisance species. The
                                            research project agenda is determined each year by a MDEQ
                                            Technical Advisory Board and may be based on legislative
                                            direction, recommendations from MDEQ departments,
                                            or current environmental issues, such as ballast water.
Part 201 Programs                           This is the state's version of the federal Superfund program                       $169,000,000
                                            that started in 1995. Its funding is provided by the state
                                            Cleanup and Redevelopment Fund, the Revitalization
                                            Revolving Loan Fund, the State Site Cleanup Fund, and the
                                            Municipal Landfill Cost-Share Grant Program. It can be used
                                            to fund research, cleanup, restoration, or pollution prevention.
Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR)
                                                                                                                                           e
Fisheries Research in Great Lakes and       This program funds research projects on fisheries populations,
Inland Waters                               habitats, and anglers. The Fisheries Division of MDEQ began




                                           Page 84                                                                   GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                         Appendix IV: Federal and State Great Lakes
                                         Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992 through
                                         2001




                                                                                                                      Program
                                                                                                                  expenditures
                                                                                                                               a
Program name                                Purpose                                                                (1992-2001)
                                            funding this research in the 1930s, and overtime it has grown in
                                            scope, with Great Lakes fisheries research stations opening in the
                                            early 1970s.
Minnesota State Planning Agency (MSPA)
Minnesota Great Lakes Protection Fund    By state statute, funds from Minnesota's GLPF can only be spent              $987,000g
(GLPF)                                   to protect water quality in the Great Lakes. Grants are awarded to
                                         finance projects that advance goals of the binational Toxic
                                         Substances Control Agreement and Water Quality Agreement.
                                         Projects involve research, cleanup, restoration, or pollution
                                         prevention activities.
New York Department of Environmental Conservation (NYDEC)
New York Great Lakes Protection Fund     New York's GLPF program provides for overall intra- and interstate         $1,494,053h
(GLPF)                                   coordination and planning of the state's Great Lakes programs,
                                         and is a source of grants for research, data collection, technology
                                         development, policy analysis, and public outreach.
Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR)
Great Lakes Charter Programs             This suite of programs was created in response to the charter                $600,000
                                         agreement signed by the Great Lakes governors. The purpose of
                                         this 1985 initiated program is to administer the Lake Erie-Ohio
                                         River Basin diversion and consumptive use permit programs called
                                         for under the charter. The program includes a water resource
                                         inventory and the Lake Erie Basin plans. Program funds support
                                         restoration, planning, and protection activities.
                                                                                                                               i
Shore Structure Permit Program           Created in the 1930s, this program was transferred to ODNR in
                                         1949 to assist coastal residents and communities in the proper
                                         design and construction of structures intended to control erosion,
                                         wave action, and flooding along the Ohio shore of Lake Erie.
                                         Program officials review construction permits for shore structures
                                         and provide technical assistance to shoreline property owners as it
                                         relates to structures involving shoreline erosion, lake access, and
                                         coastal flooding.
Submerged Lands Leasing                  This program, which was established in 1917, reviews lease                 $2,084,296j
                                         applications for the proposed and existing occupation of
                                         submerged lands by structures along the coast of Lake Erie.
                                         Leasing submerged land enables the state to manage the public
                                         trust and protect the rights of shoreline property owners. It
                                         provides technical assistance to shoreline property owners
                                         regarding shoreline erosion and lake access structures as it
                                         relates to flooding and erosion.
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA)
Ohio Lake Erie Commission/Lake Erie      The Ohio GLPF program provides grants to fund research, support            $6,943,894
Protection Fund (Ohio Great Lakes        cleanup and restoration efforts, and educate nonprofit,
Protection Fund - GLPF)                  government, or public entities seeking to protect or enhance Lake
                                         Erie.
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PDEP)
Pennsylvania Great Lakes Protection Fund The Pennsylvania GLPF provides grants to fund education,                     $253,721
(GLPF)                                   research, and monitoring activities.
Pennsylvania's Office of the Great Lakes This program began in 1995 and was created as the focal point for            $700,000k
                                         research, restoration, cleanup, and pollution prevention activities
                                         affecting the Great Lakes. This office works with other PDEP




                                         Page 85                                                         GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                                                      Appendix IV: Federal and State Great Lakes
                                                      Specific Programs, Fiscal Years 1992 through
                                                      2001




                                                                                                                                                 Program
                                                                                                                                             expenditures
                                                                                                                                                          a
 Program name                             Purpose                                                                                             (1992-2001)
                                          offices that provide the projects’ funding.
 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR)
 Great Lakes Harbors and Bays Restoration This 1990 initiated program allows DNR to conduct activities to                                        $2,316,271
 Funding                                  cleanup or restore environmental areas that are adjacent to, or a
                                          tributary of Lake Michigan or Lake Superior, if the activities are
                                          included in remedial action plans approved by the department.
 Wisconsin Great Lakes Protection Fund    The Wisconsin GLPF program provides funds to municipalities and                                        $2,224,914
 (GLPF)                                   other governmental units, groups, nonprofit organizations,
                                          universities and others for various projects. Funds are used for (1)
                                          implementing activities included in remedial action plans, (2)
                                          restoring or protecting fish and wildlife habitats in or adjacent to
                                          Lake Michigan or Lake Superior, or (3) planning or providing
                                          information related to cleaning up or protecting the Great Lakes.
                                                                                                                                                            l
 Great Lakes Salmon and Trout Stamp       This program was created in 1982 to provide funding for projects                                     $11,150,000
 Program                                  pertaining to Great Lakes fish stocking programs. The stocking
                                          program activities include evaluation, research, or species
                                          propagation.
Sources: IEPA, MDEQ, MDNR, MSPA, NYDEC, ODNR, OEPA, PDEP, WDNR, and GAO.
                                                      a
                                                       Unless otherwise noted, the funding figures in this column represent program state fiscal year
                                                      expenditures.
                                                      b
                                                          This figure represents the amount awarded through grants during fiscal years 1993, 1994, and 1998.
                                                      c
                                                      This represents funds expended between 1992 and 1997. After 1997, projects were funded from the
                                                      Clean Michigan Initiative program.
                                                      d
                                                          Clean Michigan Program expenditures were from 1999 through 2001.
                                                      e
                                                          Program officials were not able to provide research expenditures for this program before 2002.
                                                      f
                                                      This figure represents the amount expended for research grants from 1997 through 2001. Grant
                                                      expenditure data were not readily available for earlier years.
                                                      g
                                                      Project funds were first awarded in 1995. Of the amount shown, $537,000 was provided by the
                                                      GLPF, and the other $450,000 in project costs was provided by other state funding sources.
                                                      h
                                                       The program is considered Great Lakes specific, but research project results are primarily applicable
                                                      only within New York’s Great Lakes Basin.
                                                      i
                                                          Funds were not available for this program.
                                                      j
                                                          Amounts relate to the cost to administer the program; leasing fees cover other program costs.
                                                      k
                                                      This figure relates to costs to administer the program since 1995. Program grant amounts were not
                                                      provided.
                                                      l
                                                      Annual expenditures were estimated, but this figure represents total expenditures during the period
                                                      1992 through 2001.




                                                      Page 86                                                                     GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                   Appendix V: Comments from the
Appendix V: Comments from the
                   Environmental Protection Agency



Environmental Protection Agency




         Page 87                                     GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
          Appendix V: Comments from the
          Environmental Protection Agency




Page 88                                     GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
          Appendix V: Comments from the
          Environmental Protection Agency




Page 89                                     GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                  Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff
Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff
                  Acknowledgments



Acknowledgments

                  John Wanska (312) 220-7628
GAO Contact
                  In addition to the name above, Willie Bailey, Heather Holsinger, Stephanie
Staff             Luehr, Karen Keegan, Jonathan McMurray, and Rosemary Torres Lerma
Acknowledgments   made key contributions to this report.




(360170)
                  Page 90                                              GAO-03-515 Great Lakes
                         The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of
GAO’s Mission            Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities
                         and to help improve the performance and accountability of the federal
                         government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds;
                         evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses,
                         recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed
                         oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government
                         is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.


                         The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is
Obtaining Copies of      through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and full-
GAO Reports and          text files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older
                         products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents
Testimony                using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety,
                         including charts and other graphics.
                         Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
                         correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site
                         daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail
                         this list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily
                         E-mail alert for newly released products” under the GAO Reports heading.


Order by Mail or Phone   The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. A
                         check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Documents.
                         GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a
                         single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to:
                         U.S. General Accounting Office
                         441 G Street NW, Room LM
                         Washington, D.C. 20548
                         To order by Phone:     Voice:    (202) 512-6000
                                                TDD:      (202) 512-2537
                                                Fax:      (202) 512-6061


                         Contact:
To Report Fraud,
                         Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
Waste, and Abuse in      E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Federal Programs         Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470


                         Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800
Public Affairs           U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
                         Washington, D.C. 20548