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 ------- |