United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water (4503F)
Washington, DC 20460
Fact Sheet
SEPA
National Water Quality Inventory: 1994 Report to Congress
EPA841-F-95-011
December 1995
Background
Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires that
States and other jurisdictions receiving CWA grant funding
submit a water quality report to EPA every 2 years. The
CWA also requires that EPA analyze the State reports and
transmit the results to Congress every 2 years in the
National Water Quality Inventory: Report to Congress
(the Report).
The Report is the primary vehicle for informing Congress
and the public about water quality conditions in the
United States. The 1994 Report summarizes information
submitted by 61 States, American Indian Tribes, Territories,
Interstate Water Commissions, and the District of Colum-
bia in their 1994 Section 305(b) reports.
Most of the information is based on data collected and
evaluated by the States, Tribes, and other jurisdictions
during 1992 and 1993. The 1994 Report contains national
summary information about water quality conditions in
rivers, lakes, estuaries, wetlands, coastal waters, the Great
Lakes, and ground water. The Report to Congress also
contains information about public health and aquatic
ecosystem concerns, water quality monitoring, and State
and Federal water pollution management programs.
As of 1994, about 40% of the Nation's surveyed
rivers, lakes, and estuaries are too polluted
for basic uses, such as fishing and swimming.
These results are consistent with those reported
in 1992 and show that, on the whole, we have
managed to "hold the line" or prevent further
degradation. However, more work is needed
If we are to achieve our Nation's
clean water goals.
States, Tribes, and other jurisdictions measure water
quality by determining if waterbodies are clean enough to
support basic uses, such as swimming, drinking supply,
and fishing. These uses are part of the water quality
standards set by each State, Tribe, and jurisdiction to
protect their waters. These standards must be approved
by EPA. For waterbodies with more than one use, the
States, Tribes, and other jurisdictions consolidate use
support information into a single overall use support
measure of general water quality conditions. These uses
are characterized as
Good/Fully Supporting - Water quality meets
designated use criteria for all uses.
Good/Threatened-Water quality meets use
criteria now but may not in the future.
Fair/Partially Supporting - Water quality fails
to meet designated use criteria at times.
Poor/Not Supporting - Water quality frequently
fails to meet use criteria.
Rivers and Streams
For the 1994 Report, 59 States, Tribes, and other jurisdic-
tions surveyed water quality conditions in 17% of the
Nation's total 3.5 million miles of all rivers and streams, or
48% of the 1,3 million miles of perennial rivers and
streams (i.e., waterbodies that flow year round) (Figure 1).
Overall, 64% of the surveyed rivers and streams fully
support uses set by the States and Tribes, such as fishing
and swimming (Figure 2). Water quality is good but
threatened in 7% of these rivers. The remaining 36% are
in fair or poor condition. Some form of pollution or habitat
degradation prevents these rivers and streams from fully
supporting healthy aquatic communities or human
activities. Aquatic life use is the most frequently impaired
individual use in surveyed rivers and streams (Figure 3).
States and Tribes
SURVEYED
of their total river miles
for the 1994 report
States and Tribes SURVEYED
615,806 Miles of Rivers and Streams
for the 1994 Report
-------
Overall Use Support
In Surveyed Rivers and Streams
Good ^
(Fully Supporting)
57%
<*«>,
Fair
(Partially
Supporting)
22%
Poor
(Not
Supporting)
14%
Poor
(Not
Attainable)
NOTE: Impaired miles are equivalent
to about 100 Mississippi Rivers.
Bacteria and siltation are the most widespread pollutants
impacting surveyed rivers and streams (Figure 4). Bacteria,
which can cause waters to be unsafe for swimming and
other recreational activities, indicate the possible presence
of inadequately treated sewage or animal waste in waters.
Siltation clouds the water and has many adverse impacts
on fish and other aquatic organisms (Figure 5).
Agriculture is the most widespread source, on a national
basis, of pollutants irnpairing surveyed rivers and streams
(Figure 4). Agricultural activities may introduce siltation,
nutrients, pesticides, and organic matter that depletes
oxygen in surface and ground waters.
Municipal sewage treatment plants also continue to
impact many rivers and streams across the country.
Sewage treatment plants are often a source of bacteria,
nutrients, and organic matter that depletes oxygen.
IMPAIRED River Miles: Pollutants and Sources
Total rivers = 3.5 million miles
Individual Use Support in Rivers and Streams
Good Fair Poor Poor.
M*B (Fully Good (Paraatty (Not (Not
Surveyed - Supporting (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
female Ufe Support
Bacteria
iiltation
Nutrients
Oxygen-Depleting Sub.
Metals
Habitat Alterations
Suspended Solids
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Percent of Impaired River Miles
Leading Sources
Impaired %
Agriculture
Municipal Point Sources
Hydro/Habitat Mod.
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Resource Extraction
Removal of Streamside Veg.
Forestry
60
17
17
12
11
10
9
10 20 30 40 50 60
Percent of Impaired River Miles
70
NOTE: Percentages do not add up to 100% because more than one pollutant or source
may impair a river segment.
-------
The Effects of Siltation in Rivers and Streams
Sediment
abrades gills
Aquatic life use is the most frequently impaired individual
use in surveyed lakes, reservoirs, and ponds, followed by
swimming and fish consumption uses (Figure 8). Fish
contamination problems are a growing concern across the
country, especially in lakes. The States and other jurisdic-
tions reported that 65% of their fish consumption adviso-
ries apply to lake waters.
Sediment suffocates
fish eggs and bottom-
dwelling organisms
. Sediment smothers cobbles
where fish lay eggs
Siltation is one of the leading pollution problems in the Nation's rivers and streams.
Over the long term, unchecked Siltation can alter habitat with profound effects on
aquatic life. In the short term, silt can kill fish directly, destroy spawning beds, and
increase water turbidity resulting in depressed photosynthetic rates.
Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
For the 1994 Report, 48 States, Tribes, and other jurisdic-
tions surveyed water quality conditions in 42% of the
Nation's total 40.8 million acres of lakes, reservoirs, and
ponds (Figure 6).
Overall, 63% of the surveyed lake acres fully support uses
set by States and Tribes, such as fishing, swimming, and
aquatic life habitat (Figure 7). Water quality is threatened
in 13% of these lakes. Thirty-seven percent of the surveyed
lake acres are in fair or poor condition. Some form of
pollution or habitat degradation prevents these lakes from
fully supporting healthy aquatic communities or human
activities.
States and Tribes
SURVEYED
of their total lake acres
for the 1994 report
States and Tribes SURVEYED
17 Million Acres of the Nation's Lake
Waters Excluding the Great Lakes
for the 1994 Report
Acres
Surveyed
Total Acres:
40,826,064
NOTE: Impaired acres cover an"
area about the size of six Great
Salt Lakes.
Nutrients are the most widespread pollutants impacting
surveyed lakes, followed by siltation, oxygen-depleting
substances, and metals (Figure 9). Lakes are especially
susceptible to nutrient overenrichment and the accumu-
lation of other pollutants (such as metals) because lakes
retain their contents for long periods of time.
Nutrient overenrichment can initiate a chain of impacts
that includes algal blooms, low dissolved oxygen condi-
tions, fish kills, foul odors, and excessive aquatic weed
growth that can interfere with recreational activities
(Figure 10).
Agriculture is the most widespread source of pollutants
impairing surveyed lakes, followed by municipal sewage
treatment plants, urban runoff and storm sewers, and
other unspecified npnpoint sources (Figure 9). Agricultural
fertilizers and manure from animal operations can be a
major source of nutrients.
The source of metals in lakes remains unclear, but some
States speculate that air pollution is a significant source of
mercury and other metals.
-------
IMPAIRED Lake Acres: Pollutants and Sources
Individual Use Support in Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
Good Fair Poor Poor
o«kin«Ml Acres (Fully Good (P«t!s% {Not (Not
Oj» Smvsyctl Supporting) (TtireateroKO Supportlfia) Supporting) Attainable)
AaBite life Support
Not "
Surveyed
58%
Total lakes = 40.8 million acres
Total impaired = 6.7 million acres
Leading Pollutants
Total surveyed = 17.1 million
acres
ImpairecWh;;
Nutrients
Siltation
Oxygen-Depleting Substances
Metals
Suspended Solids
Pesticides
Priority Organic Toxic
Chemicals
I I I I I I 1 1
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Percent of Impaired Lake Acres
45
Impaired %
Agriculture
Municipal Point Sources
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Unspecified Nonpoint Sources
Hydro/Habitat Modification
Industrial Point Sources
Land Disposal
10 20 30 40 "50
Percent of Impaired Lake Acres
60
NOTE: Percentages do not add up to 100% because more than one pollutant or source
may impair a lake.
Lake Impaired by Excessive Nutrients
Healthy Lake Ecosystem
Algal blooms form mats
on surface. Odor and
taste problems result.
Nutrients cause overgrowth of algae as well as noxious aquatic plants. Noxious aquatic plants clog shorelines and reduce lake access.
Dead algae sink to the bottom where bacteria deplete oxygen as they decompose the algae. Fish die due to low oxygen concentrations.
-------
Overall .Use Support
. Fair
" "' {Partially «
Supporting).
Good 34% '
(Threatened)
1%
Good 3%
The Great Lakes
Despite dramatic declines in the occurrence of algal
blooms, fish kills, and localized "dead" zones depleted of
oxygen, less visible problems continue to degrade the
Great Lakes. Six of the eight Great Lakes States surveyed
94% of the Great Lakes shoreline miles for 1994. These
States reported that most of the Great Lakes nearshore
waters are safe for swimming and other recreational
activities and can be used as a source of drinking water
with normal treatment. However, about 97% of the
surveyed Great Lakes shoreline is under fish consumption
advisories and shows unfavorable conditions for support-
ing aquatic life (Figures 11 and 12). Aquatic life impacts
result from persistent toxic pollutant burdens in the food
web, habitat degradation and destruction, and compete
tion and predation by nonnative species such as the zebra
mussel and the sea lamprey.
The States reported that most of the Great Lakes shoreline
waters are impacted by priority toxic organic chemicals
(primarily PCBs) that appear in fish tissue samples at much
higher concentrations than in water samples (Figure 13).
IMPAIRED Great Lakes Shoreline: Pollutants and Sources
Total shoreline = 5,559 miles
Total surveyed = 5,224
miles
Leading Pollutants
Priority Toxic Organic
Chemicals
Pesticides
Nonpriority Organic
Chemicals
Nutrients
Metals
Oxygen-Depleting
Substances
Leading Sources ->
Impaired %>
0 20,. 40 60 80 100
Percent of Impaired Great Lakes Shoreline
Air Pollution
Discontinued Discharges
Contaminated Sediment
Land Disposal of Wastes
Unspecified NPS
Agriculture
Urban Runoff/Storm Sew.
.Impaired %
0 5 10 15 20 25
Percent of Impaired Great Lakes Shoreline
-------
Only four of the Great Lakes States identified the sources
of pollutants impacting their shoreline waters. These States
attributed some of the water quality problems in the Great
Lakes to air pollution, discontinued discharges from
industrial sites that no longer operate, urban runoff and
storm sewers, contaminated sediments, land disposal of
wastes, and agriculture.
Estuaries
Rivers meet the oceans in coastal waters called tidal
estuaries. For the 1994 Report, 23 of the 27 coastal States
and Territories surveyed water quality conditions in 78% of
the Nation's total 34,388 square miles of estuarine waters
(excluding Alaska) (Figure 14).
States
SURVEYED
78%
of their total estuarine
waters for the 1994 report
States SURVEYED
26,847 Square Miles of Estuarine
Waters for the 1994 Report
Overall, 63% of the surveyed estuarine waters fully
support uses set by the States and Territories, such as
fishing and swimming (Figure 15). Water quality is threat-
ened in 6% of these estuaries. About 37% of the surveyed
estuaries are in fair or poor condition. Some form of
pollution or habitat degradation prevents these estuaries
from fully supporting healthy aquatic communities or
human activities.
Aquatic life use and shellfishing use are the most fre-
quently impaired individual uses in surveyed estuaries
(Figure 16). Most of the shellfish harvested in the United
States spend at least part of their lives in estuarine waters.
Officials restrict the harvest of sedentary shellfish (such as
oysters and clams) in waters with high bacteria concentra-
tions because these shellfish may accumulate bacteria and
viruses that cause human illness when eaten.
Overall Use Support
' in Surveyed Estuaries
NOTE: Impaired square miles
cover an area about the size
of three Chesapeake Bays.
-------
Figure 17-
Bacteria
Urban runoff and storm sewers are
the leading source of impairment
in estuarine waters
Failing septic systems
may release bacteria
Overloaded or improperly functioning
sewage treatment plants may release
waste that contains bacteria
Some bacteria provide evidence that an estuary is contaminated with sewage that may contain pathogenic bacteria and viruses harmful
to people. Often, the pathogenic viruses and bacteria do not adversely impact aquatic life, such as fish and shellfish. However, shellfish
may accumulate bacteria and viruses that cause human disease when ingested. Bacteria also impair swimming uses.
Nutrients and bacteria are the most widespread pollutants
impacting surveyed estuaries, followed by oxygen-
depleting substances and habitat alterations.
Nutrient overenrichment in estuaries causes many of the
same impacts seen in lakes, including algal blooms, low
dissolved oxygen conditions, fish kills, foul odors, and
excessive aquatic weed growth. High bacteria loads
indicate that waters may be unfit for swimming or harvest-
ing shellfish (Figure 17).
Urban runoff/storm sewers and municipal sewage treat-
ment plants are the most widespread sources of pollutants
impairing surveyed estuaries, followed by agriculture and
industrial point sources (Figure 18). However, estuaries
may be stressed by a wide range of activities that occur
within their watersheds. They receive pollutants carried by
rivers from adjacent cities and upstream agricultural lands;
they often support marinas, harbors, and commercial
fishing fleets; and their surrounding lands are highly prized
for development. These stresses pose a continuing threat
to the survival of these bountiful waters.
Wetlands
Our Nation continues to lose wetlands at a significant rate
(Figure 19), but the net rate of wetlands loss appears to
have slowed from 458,000 acres jost per year during the
mid-1950s through the mid-1970s to between 70,000
acres and 90,000 acres per year between 1982 and 1992
on non-Federal lands (which is about 75% of the land
mass). The net loss reflects the difference between gross
wetlands losses of 1,561,300 acres and gross gains of
768,700 acres between 1982 and 1992.
IMPAIRED Estuaries: Pollutants and Sources
Total estuaries = 34,388 square
miles
Total surveyed = 26,847 square
miles
Total impaired = 9,700 square miles
Leading Pollutants
Nutrients
Bacteria
Oxygen-Depleting Sub.
Habitat Alterations
Oil and Grease
Priority Toxic Chemicals
Metals
Impaired %
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Percent of Impaired Estuarine Square Miles
i||dtn.g Sources .
Urban Runoff/Storm Sew.
Municipal Point Sources
Agriculture
Industrial Point Sources
Petroleum Activities
Construction
Land Disposal of Wastes
^ lmpaired.%
13
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
.Percent of Impaired Estuarine Square Miles
-------
Percentage of Wetlands Acreage Lost,
1780s-1980s
V
Twenty-two States have lost at least 50% of their original wetlands.
Seven of these 22 (California, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Ken-
tucky, and Ohio) have lost more than 80% of their original wetlands.
Source: Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States 1780's
to 19804, U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service.
The States, Tribes, and other jurisdictions report that
wetlands losses result from commercial and residential
development, road construction, agriculture, and indus-
trial development Although the loss rate is decreasing,
progress is still needed to achieve a national interim goal
of no net loss of the Nation's remaining wetlands and the
long-term goal of increasing the Nation's quality and
quantity of wetlands.
The States and other jurisdictions also report that many
activities degrade our remaining wetlands with pollutants,
including sediment, nutrients, and pesticides. Information
on the extent of that degradation is limited since wetlands
monitoring programs are in their infancy. Several States
are currently collecting baseline information on their
wetlands to aid in the development of wetlands indicators
and wetlands monitoring programs. This information will
be useful in defining aquatic life designated uses and
biological criteria and setting restoration goals.
Ground Water
Nationally, 51 % of the population relies to some extent on
ground water as a source of drinking water. Overall, the
Nation's ground water is of good quality; however, many
local areas have experienced significant ground water
contamination. The types and sources of the contamina-
tion vary depending upon the region of the country. The
sources most frequently identified include leaking under-
ground storage tanks, agricultural activities, Superfund
sites, and septic systems. About 139,000 underground
storage tanks have leaked and impacted ground water
quality nationwide.
The most common contaminants associated with these
sources include petroleum compounds, nitrates (a sub-
stance in fertilizers that causes blue-baby syndrome at
high concentrations in drinking water), metals, volatile
organic compounds, and pesticides.
To address ground water contamination problems, States
are developing programs designed to evaluate the overall
quality and vulnerability of their ground water resources,
to identify potential threats to ground water quality, and
to identify methods to protect their ground water
resources. Thirty-three States indicate that they have
implemented ground water monitoring programs.
Although the content and scope of these programs vary
widely, depending on each State's special needs or
concerns, a great deal of information about the nature and
quality of our Nation's ground water resources can be
learned through their monitoring activities. A continued
quest for information about the status of our ground water
will help protect and preserve this vast and vulnerable
resource.
Public Health and Aquatic Ecosystem
Concerns
Based on data provided by the States and other jurisdic-
tions, 1,531 fish consumption advisories were in effect in
47 States, the District of Columbia, and American Samoa
as of September 1994 (Figure 20). These advisories warn
the public to restrict consumption offish contaminated
with toxic chemicals. States and other jurisdictions are
responsible for sampling fish and issuing fish consumption
advisories where needed.
Comprehensive State Ground Water
"/f ' '- Protection Programs ,
' * s^ *
'A Comprehensive State Grpund Water Protection
Procjram (CSGWPP) is.composed of six "strategic ,
^activities." They are
,<"> ^ >,
D Establishing a prevention-oriented goal
, Establishing priorfties, based on trie characterization
- of the resource and Identification of soCirces of
, 5 contamination ' °" - ,
Defining roles, responsibilities, resources, and '
' coordinating mechanisms ," '
Implementing all necessary'efforts to accomplish
the State's ground water protection goal . (
Coordinating information collection and manage-
' - merit to measure progress and reevaluate1 priorities' ^
I,,"1" (** ' > t t
m improving public education and participation, - '
-------
The number of fish consumption advisories in effect grew
from 1,279 advisories in 1993 to 1,531 advisories in 1994
as the States expanded their sampling programs. Most of
the fish consumption advisories (73%) are due to mercury
contamination. Other frequently cited contaminants
include PCBs, chlordane, dioxins, and DDT or its deriva-
tives, such as DDE and DDD. The majority of the advisories
(65%) restrict consumption of fish caught in lakes.
Collectively, 16 of the 27 coastal States and Territories
reported shellfish harvesting restrictions in over 6,000
square miles of estuarine waters. Most of the shellfish
harvesting restrictions result from bacterial contamination.
Advisories were also issued to warn the public about
health risks from water-based recreation. Twenty-two
States identified 374 sites where recreation was restricted
by local health departments at least once during 1992-
1993. Many of these sites were closed more than once. _
The States identified sewage treatment plant bypasses,
malfunctions, and pipeline breaks as the most common
sources of elevated bacteria concentrations in bathing
areas. Runoff, failing septic systems, a livestock operation,
and combined sewer overflows also restricted recreational
activities.
Similarly, 35 States and 1 Territory reported that pollution
caused 737 fish kills in their waters (Figure 21). This figure
underestimates the real number of fish kills in the Nation
because 15 States did not provide fish kill data and fish
kills in remote areas may not be detected or reported to
State officials.
Communities also noted violations of national drinking
water safety standards. In 1993, the drinking water
supplied to nearly 11 % of the population served by
Community Water Systems (26.5 million people) violated
health-based standards. Violations occurred for nitrates,
radiological contaminants, and toxic organic chemicals
(including pesticides).
Improving Nationwide Monitoring
Much of our water quality data cannot be aggregated or
compared because the various organizations that survey
water quality use different monitoring strategies designed
to accommodate their own program objectives and
funding constraints.
In 1995, the Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring
Water Quality (ITFM) issued its strategy for improving
Fish Consumption Advisories in the United States
Number of Reported Fish Kills
Caused by Pollution
V* Number of Advisories in Effect
^b American Samoa (September 1994)
I 1 0
li'Siit'u 1-10
mam si-100
>100
* Statewide Advisory
NOTE: States that perform routine fish tissue analysis (such as the Great
Lakes States) will detect more cases of fish contamination and
issue more advisories than States with less rigorous fish
sampling programs. In many cases, the States with the most fish
advisories support the best monitoring programs for measuring
toxic contamination in fish, and their water quality is no worse.
than the water quality in other States,
$
i Campo Indian Reservation
i Coyote Valley Reservation
i Gila River Indian Community
i Hoopa Valley Reservation
] Hopi Tribe
' Soboba Band of Mission Indians
Not Reported
0
1-10
11-30
31-70
>70
-------
water quality monitoring nationwide. The ITFM is a
partnership of 10 Federal agencies and 10 State and
Interstate agencies and American Indian Tribes, with
liaison to an advisory group of other public and private
organizations. EPA chaired the ITFM with the U.S. Geolog-
ical Survey (USGS) as vice chair and Executive Secretariat.
A permanent successor to the ITFM, the National Monitor-
ing Council, will provide assistance to help public and
private agencies implement the national strategy, which
includes institutional collaboration, environmental indica-
tors, monitoring design, comparable field and laboratory
methods, quality assurance and quality control, data
management and sharing, data assessment, and training.
The ITFM and its successor have also finalized products
that can be used by monitoring programs nationwide,
such as an outline for a recommended monitoring pro-
gram, environmental indicator selection criteria, and a
matrix of indicators to support assessment of State and
Tribal designated uses.
In an associated activity, EPA and the States and Tribes are
developing a multiyear State-wide or Tribal-wide monitor-
fng strategy to assess jurisdictional waters comprehensively
over a 5-year period. The monitoring strategy will include
a variety of techniques adapted to local water conditions
and the State or Tribal goals for their waters. For a copy of
the first, second, or final ITFM reports, contact:
The U.S. Geological Survey
417 National Center
Reston, VA 22092
(703)648-5023
Status of Pollution Management Programs
EPA's Office of Water is supporting a watershed protection
approach (WPA) as the most effective mechanism for
achieving clean water and healthy, sustainable ecosystems
throughout the Nation. The WPA is a place-based strategy
that integrates water quality management activities within
hydrologically defined drainage basins or watersheds,
rather than by politically defined boundaries.
The WPA enables stakeholders to tailor corrective actions
to local concerns within the coordinated framework of a
State, Tribal, and national water program. The emphasis
on public participation also provides the opportunity to
incorporate environmental justice issues into watershed
management
The WPA also provides a framework for integrating
traditional water quality management programs that
address point sources or nonpoint sources. The National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) controls
discharges from industrial and municipal wastewater
treatment plants with a permit system. EPA or States with
approved NPDES programs are responsible for issuing
permits, conducting compliance inspections, and enforc-
ing compliance. Currently, 40 States have EPA approval to
administer their NPDES programs.
EPA and the States evaluate NPDES compliance by screen-
ing self-monitoring reports submitted by the permitted
facilities. As of March 1995, only 8% of the municipal
dischargers and 6% of the nonmunicipal dischargers were
in significant noncompliance with discharge standards
and/or reporting requirements.
Section 319 of the Clean Water Act authorizes EPA to issue
annual grants to assist States in implementing their EPA-
approved nonpoint source management programs.
Roughly half of each State's award supports statewide
program activity (such as staffing, public education and
outreach, and technical assistance) and half supports
specific projects to prevent or reduce nonpoint source
pollution at the watershed level.
EPA is currently involved in a dialogue with stakeholders to
address combined sewer overflows and stormwater
controls. EPA is also revising their Section 319 grant
guidance to provide greater flexibility to the States. A ...
watershed protection approach allows water resource
managers to achieve better integration and coordination
among these and other environmental programs.
Place-Based Management Programs
EPA manages and/or participates in several programs that
embody a watershed protection approach, including the
Gulf of Mexico Program, the Great Lakes National Pro-
gram, the Chesapeake Bay Program, the National Estuary
Program, and the Great Waters Program.
The Gulf of Mexico Program
The five Gulf States (Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Missis-
sippi, and Texas) and 10 Federal agencies established the
Gulf of Mexico Program (CMP) in 1992 to address
persistent water quality issues. These issues include
Coastal and shoreline erosion
Loss of coastal wetlands
Loss of Gulf coast seagrass beds
Sustainability of Gulf coast fisheries
Bacterial contamination of shellfish beds and beaches
Trash on beaches
Degraded coastal habitats for living resources,
such as birds and fish.
10
-------
Since 1992, the GMP's Take-Action Projects have primarily
addressed .sewage treatment, pollution prevention, and
habitat protection and restoration.
The Great Lakes National Program
Rehabilitating the Great Lakes requires cooperation from
numerous organizations because pollutants in the Great
Lakes originate in multiple countries, including Canada
and the United States. The International Joint Commission
(IJC) provides an international framework for managing
the Great Lakes. Within the United States, the EPA Great
Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) coordinates
activities at all government levels and works with nongov-
ernmental organizations to protect and restore the Lakes.
The GLNPO also serves as a liaison to the IJC.
The Great Lakes Water Quality Initiative is a key element of
U.S. protection efforts. The Initiative promotes a consistent
level of protection in the Basin from the effects of toxic
Figure 22
Bottom Dissolved Oxygen
in Chesapeake Bay
Bush
Gunpowder
Back
Patapsco
Elk Run
i
Bohemia
Sassafras
Potomac
Rappahannock
Pocomoke
Severely Impacted
Poor
Stressed
Fair
Good
pollutants. EPA issued the final guidance for implementing
the Initiative in March 1995 following extensive public
comment. The final guidance prioritizes control of long-
lasting toxic pollutants that accumulate in the food web.
The Chesapeake Bay Program
The Chesapeake Bay Program is a regional partnership of
Federal, State, and local participants that has directed and
coordinated restoration of the Bay since 1983. Program
milestones include the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement
to reduce nutrient loads into the Bay by 40% by the year
2000, and the 1992 amendments to the Agreement. The
amendments reaffirm the nutrient reduction goal, stress
managing the Bay as a whole ecosystem, and advocate
broader interstate cooperation and increase local govern-
ment involvement.
Overall, the Chesapeake Bay still shows symptoms of stress
from an expanding population and changes in land use in
the surrounding basin. Elevated loads of the nutrients
nitrogen and phosphorus are the most significant wide-
spread threat to the Chesapeake Bay. Excess nutrients are
a problem because they nourish algal blooms that cloud
the water, deprive underwater grasses of sunlight, and
deplete the water of oxygen needed by living resources.
During warm months, low dissolved oxygen conditions
persist in large portions of the Bay, impairing the survival
and reproduction of fish, oysters, clams, and other bot-
tom-dwelling organisms (Figure 22). Prospects for the
Bay's oyster populations remain poor, and there is growing
concern about the health of the blue crab population.
Although water quality problems persist, signs of recovery
are appearing in the Chesapeake Bay. Aquatic grasses
(which provide critical habitat for fish, crabs, and other
aquatic organisms) have increased by 75% since 1978.
Striped bass, or rockfish, have made a remarkable recovery
over the past decade, and more American shad are
returning to the Bay to spawn.
Phosphorus and sediment concentrations are declining in
the Susquehanna and Potomac Rivers that drain the
largest watersheds in the Bay Basin. Nitrogen concentra-
tions are leveling off or declining in most of the Bay's
tributaries after many years of increasing nitrogen concen-
trations. These trends indicate that both point and
nonpoint source pollution abatement programs are
working.
Algae levels in the Bay and its tributaries have been
reduced in some low-salinity areas that have experfenced
significant phosphorus reductions. On the other hand,
algae levels in the larger, saltier reaches of the mainstem
and tributaries have not been reduced significantly. Algae
growth in these areas is fueled by nitrogen, which has not
changed significantly in the Bay's mainstem, demonstrat-
ing the need to implement further controls.
11
-------
Figure 23
Locations of National Estuary Program Sites
The National Estuary Program
The National Estuary Program (NEP) adopts a watershed
approach to managing estuarine water quality. A State
governor nominates an estuary in his or her State for
participation in the NEP. The State must provide evidence
of institutional, financial, and political commitment to
solving estuarine problems.
Once an estuary is selected, the EPA Administrator con-
venes a management conference of representatives from
Federal, Regional, State, and local governments; affected
industries; scientific and academic institutions; and citizen
organizations. The management conference develops and
initiates implementation of a Comprehensive Conservation
and Management Plan to restore and protect the estuary.
The NEP currently supports 28 estuary projects, including
seven new projects approved by the EPA Administrator in
July 1995 (Figure 23).
The Great Waters Program
Section 112(m) of the 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air
Act established the Great Waters Program to evaluate the
significance of air pollution as a pollutant source in the
Great Lakes, Lake Champlain, Chesapeake Bay, and coastal
waters in the NEP and the National Estuarine Reserve
System.
In May of 1994, EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards prepared and submitted the first Great Waters
Program Report to Congress. In the report, EPA concludes
that atmospheric deposition contributes significant
portions of the pollutant loads entering the Great Waters.
Pollutants of concern in the Great Waters originate at both
local and distant sources, including waste incinerators,
power plants, petroleum refineries, motor vehicles, various
manufacturing facilities, and residential combustion of
fossil,fuels.
Copies of the first Great Waters Program Report to
Congress, Deposition of Air Pollutants to the Great Waters,
can be obtained, as supplies permit, from:
Library Services Office (MD-35)
U.S. EPA
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
12
------- |