United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4503F)
EPA841-R-96-002
June 1996
Reprint September 1996
vvEPA
Environmental Indicators
of Water Quality in the
United States
This report describes water quality in the United States using a set of 18
environmental indicators that measure progress toward national water
goals and objectives.
The indicators were chosen through an intensive multi-year process involving
public and private partners including EPA's Office of Water in collaboration with the
Center for Marine Conservation; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;
EPA's Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation and Office of Research and Devel-
opment; the Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality; Native
American Tribes; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; The Nature
Conservancy; the States; the U.S. Department of Agriculture; the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service; and the U.S. Geological Survey.
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
MAY 20 I996
OFFICE OF
WATER
Dear Reader:
The Office of Water and our many partners are pleased to present the first national water
environmental indicators report. This report is the result of an extensive collaborative effort over the
past several years, and I wish to thank all of those involved for their hard work and commitment.
Many indicators contain data from Federal or private agencies other than the Environmental
Protection Agency. Some are the result of collaborative efforts, for instance when States and Tribes
report information into national databases. All indicators have been chosen and shaped through
extensive public meetings and reviews.
The information presented in this report will be used in three ways: (I) to characterize the
quality of our waters, giving us an environmental equivalent to economic indicators; (2) to chart our
progress in meeting water quality goals; and (3) to help determine if our programs to solve water
quality problems are working. The report presents the indicators on a national scale. The indicators
also work at smaller geographic scales, for instance State, Tribal, and watershed. Eight States —
Arizona, Delaware, Georgia, Maine, Maryland, Ohio, South Carolina, and Wisconsin - are
conducting specific pilot projects to test the indicators, and the State results, due in late summer 1996,
will help us further refine both the indicators and the monitoring and data programs that support
them.
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States is the first report in a series
that, when taken together, will show trends in water quality over time. For some of the indicators,
the data presented here is complete enough to represent a baseline or report on trends at this time.
For others, however, improvements to the data are needed before a baseline can be established. We
and our many private and public partners are committed to improving the data supporting all of the
indicators. Each subsequent report, therefore, will document not only any changes that have occurred
in the indicators, but also the progress we have made to improve the data.
As a first step in improving the indicators, we solicit your comments on this report. Your
suggestions will help us to refine the indicators and to ensure their usefulness for different purposes
and at multiple geographic scales. Please send your comments to the address given on the inside back
cover.
Thank you again to all our partners in this significant step towards environmental
accountability.
Robert Perciasepe
Assistant Administrator
Recycled/Recyclable . Printed with Vegetable OH Based Inks on 100% Recycled Paper (40% Postconsumer)
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water
Quality in the United States
JUNE 1996
National Environmental Goals and Objectives for Water. ii
Water Quality Objectives and Indicators iii
I. Introduction 1
II. Water Resources 2
III. Human Activities and Their Effect on Water Quality 4
IV. Water Quality Objectives and Indicators 5
Objective I: Conserve and Enhance Public Health 5
Objective II: Conserve and Enhance Aquatic Ecosystems 10
Objective III: Support Uses Designated by the States and Tribes
in Their Water Quality Standards 11
Objective IV: Conserve and Improve Ambient Conditions 13
Objective V: Reduce or Prevent Pollutant Loadings
and Other Stressors 19
V. Water Quality Monitoring and Information Management 23
VI. Conclusion 23
VII. References 23
-------
National Environmental Goals for Water
CLEAN WATERS: America's rivers, lakes, and coastal waters will support healthy communities of fish, plants, and
other aquatic life, and will support uses such as fishing, swimming, and drinking water supply for people. Wetlands will
be protected and rehabilitated to provide wildlife habitat, reduce floods, and improve water quality. Ground waters will
be cleaner for drinking and other beneficial uses.
SAFE DRINKING WATER: Every American public water system will provide water that is consistently safe to drink.
Note: Goals taken from Environmental Goals for America With Milestones for 2005: A Proposal from the Environmental
Protection Agency. Government Review Draft. EPA 230-D-96-002. Washington, DC: USEPA. In press.
Water Objectives to Meet These Goals
Objectives are measured by indicators presented in this report
Conserve
& Enhance
Public Health
Conserve
& Enhance
Aquatic Ecosystems
Support Uses Designated by States & Tribes
in Their Water Quality Standards
Conserve and Improve
Ambient Conditions
Reduce or Prevent Pollutant Loadings
and Other Stressors
Water Management Programs and Human Activities Affect Our Waters
The objectives adopted by EPA's Office of Water and its partners are shown above. These objectives are like building blocks in a
pyramid, where success in reaching the goals at the top is dependent on successful attainment of those lower in the pyramid. For
example, by reducing pollutant loads to waters, the overall quality, or ambient condition, of the water and sediment is improved.
Consequently, the waters can support the uses designated for them by states and tribes in their water quality standards. Ultimately,
the health of both the general public and aquatic ecosystems is protected.
indicator Data Completeness
Indicators are used to show changes in environmental conditions and are only as good as the quality of the measurements that
support them. The indicators presented in this report contain measurements of varying quality. These measurements might differ
in precision, accuracy, statistical representativeness, and completeness. This comprehensive national report uses data from many
agencies. While these data sources have undergone data quality assessment by their respective agencies, this first national report
makes no attempt to describe data quality attributes other than completeness for the indicators. This report includes data of varying
quality for two reasons: (1) the indicator describes an important, if as yet imperfect, way to measure a national objective, and (2)
efforts are under way to improve indicator measurements in future reports. Further details on the data used to support each indicator
are presented in individual fact sheets available from EPA in hard copy or on the Internet at the address at the end of this report.
Each indicator graphic in this report shows the level of data completeness using the following symbols:
• Data consistent/sufficient data collected
I Data somewhat consistent/additional data needed
O Data need to be much more consistent/much additional data needed
-------
Water Quality Objectives and Indicators
Objective I: Conserve and Enhance Public Health
1. Population served by community drinking water systems violating health-based requirements—Population
served by drinking water systems with one or more violations of health-based requirements.
2. Population served by unfiltered surface water systems at risk from microbiological pollution—Population
served by, and number of, systems that have not met the requirements to filter their water to remove microbio-
logical contaminants.
3. Population served by drinking water systems exceeding lead action levels—Population served by, and number
of, systems with lead levels in drinking water exceeding the regulatory threshold.
4. Source water protection—Number of community drinking water systems using ground water that have pro-
grams to protect them from pollution.
5. Fish consumption advisories—Percentage of rivers and lakes with fish that states have determined should not
be eaten, or should be eaten in only limited quantities.
6. Shellfish growing water classification—Percentage of estuarine and coastal shellfish growing waters approved
for harvest for human consumption.
Objective II: Conserve and Enhance Aquatic Ecosystems
7. Biological integrity—Percentage of rivers and estuaries with healthy aquatic communities.
8. Species at risk—Percentage of aquatic and wetland species currently at risk of extinction.
9. Wetland acreage—Rate of wetland acreage loss.
Objective III: Support Uses Designated by the States and Tribes in Their Water Quality Standards
10. Designated uses in state and tribal water quality standards
a. Drinking water supply designated use—Percentage of assessed waterbodies that can support safe drinking
water supply use, as designated by the states and tribes.
b. Fish and shellfish consumption designated use—Percentage of assessed waterbodies that can support fish and
shellfish consumption, as designated by the states and tribes.
c. Recreation designated use—Percentage of assessed waterbodies that can support safe recreation, as designated
by the states and tribes.
d. Aquatic life designated use—Percentage of assessed waterbodies that can support healthy aquatic life, as
designated by the states and tribes.
Objective IV: Conserve and Improve Ambient Conditions
11. Ground water pollutants—Population exposed to nitrate in drinking water. In the future, the indicator will
report the presence of other chemical pollutants in ground water.
12. Surface water pollutants—Trends of selected pollutants found in surface water.
13. Selected coastal surface water pollutants in shellfish—The concentration levels of selected pollutants in oysters
and mussels.
14. Estuarine eutrophication conditions—Trends in estuarine eutrophication conditions.
15. Contaminated sediments—Percentage of sites with sediment contamination that might pose a risk to humans
and aquatic life.
Objective V: Reduce or Prevent Pollutant Loadings and Other Stressors
16. Selected point source loadings to (a) surface water and (b) ground water—Trends for selected pollutants
discharged from point sources into surface water, and underground injection control wells that are sources of
point source loadings into ground water.
17. Nonpoint source loadings to surface water—Amount of soil eroded from cropland that could run into surface
waters. Future reports will include additional nonpoint source surface water pollutants as well as sources of
nonpoint source ground water pollution.
18. Marine debris—Trends and sources of debris monitored in the marine environment.
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
I. Introduction
Our waters are one of our most valuable re-
sources. They support human, plant, and ani-
mal life and the natural environment; promote
economic opportunity; and provide beauty and enjoy-
ment to us all.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
working with other federal, state, tribal, regional, lo-
cal, and nongovernmental groups, has proposed na-
tional goals for many aspects of environmental pro-
tection. These goals include Clean Waters and Safe
Drinking Water. To check our progress toward the na-
tional goals, EPA developed a series of milestones for
each goal that set a 10-year target to be reached by the
year 2005. In addition, EPA's Office of Water and its
partners have adopted five objectives for meeting the
Clean Waters and Safe Drinking Water national goals
and have developed a series of indicators to measure
progress toward those objectives. The relationship
among goals, milestones, objectives, and indicators is
explained in Figure 1.
This report describes the indicators EPA and its part-
ners have chosen to measure progress toward water
quality objectives. The EPA-proposed national goals
and milestones are described in detail in a separate re-
port. This report is the first in a series that, taken to-
gether, will show trends over time. For some indica-
tors, the data presented here currently provide a baseline
for trends. For other indicators, improvements in data
are needed to provide a baseline for trends in future
reports. By documenting water quality status and
trends, EPA will be able to determine whether national
water programs are meeting their objectives and to ad-
just management strategies accordingly. This report will
also provide the public with a better understanding of the
condition of our waters, whether they meet the uses we
wish to make of them, and what affects their quality.
Many people at all levels of government have been
working together to choose and describe the indicators.
In addition to EPA data, specific data from states, Na-
tive American tribes, the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, the Center for Marine Conservation,
The Nature Conservancy (TNC), the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. De-
partment of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) are included. Many others were also
integral to the development of the indicators through a
series of public meetings and review comments.
The indicators in this first national report will improve
if a strong partnership is maintained among the agen-
cies working together to report water quality trends over
time.
FIGURE 1: Relationship of Water Quality Goals,
Objectives, Milestones, and Indicators
National Goals: A set of 12 national environmen-
tal goals with supporting milestones is proposed by
EPA in the draft report Environmental Goals for
America With Milestones for 2005: A Proposal from
the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Two of the goals from this report relate specifically
to water:
(1) Safe Drinking Water - Every American public
water system will provide water that is consistently
safe to drink.
(2) Clean Waters - America's rivers, lakes, and
coastal waters will support healthy communities
of fish, plants, and other aquatic life, and will sup-
port uses such as fishing, swimming, and drink-
ing water supply for people. Wetlands will be pro-
tected and rehabilitated to provide wildlife habi-
tat, reduce floods, and improve water quality.
Ground waters will be cleaner for drinking and
other beneficial uses.
Milestones: EPA is proposing milestones as 10-year
targets in its national goals report. They express how
far the Nation will have progressed toward the na-
tional goals by the year 2005, starting from the
baseline year of 1995. Each Clean Waters and Safe
Drinking Water milestone uses a water quality indi-
cator to measure progress toward the 2005 target.
Most of the indicators have a related milestone in
the national goals report.
Water Objectives: The Office of Water and its part-
ners have adopted five water quality objectives that
further specify how to meet the national goals. The
objectives are to (1) conserve and enhance public
health; (2) conserve and enhance ecosystems; (3)
support uses designated by the states and tribes in
their water quality standards; (4) conserve and im-
prove ambient conditions; and (5) prevent or reduce
pollutant loadings and other stressors.
Indicators: Indicators measure progress toward
water quality goals, milestones, and objectives. In-
dicators provide information on environmental and
ecosystem quality or give reliable evidence of trends
in quality.
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
Environmental Indicators
Understanding the condition of our nation's water re-
sources, identifying what causes problems, and deter-
mining how to solve these problems are essential but
difficult undertakings. The natural water cycle is itself
intricate, and the addition of human activities increases
this complexity. Consequently, answering the basic
question "How clean and safe is our water?" is not easy.
One way to present the condition of our water resources
and the impacts of related human activities is to de-
velop understandable measures, or indicators, that sin-
gly or in combination provide information on water
quality. Managers and scientists can then use this in-
formation to develop effective solutions and make
sound decisions to protect our water resources. In ad-
dition, all Americans can use this information to better
understand the condition of our waters. It is important
to note that environmental indicators can be used to
measure a variety of phenomena. Indicators can present
information on status or trends in the state of the envi-
ronment, can measure pressures or stressors that de-
grade environmental quality, and can evaluate society's
responses aimed at improving environmental condi-
tions. The first two types of indicators (state of the en-
vironment and pressure) deal with information most
closely associated with environmental results. The third
type measures program and policy responses to envi-
ronmental problems and is primarily administrative.
II. Water Resources
Water resources in the United States take
many forms—running freely as rivers and
streams; washing against coastlines and into
estuaries; pooling as lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands;
and moving under the land as ground water. We use
these waters for many different purposes, including
drinking, swimming, fishing, agriculture, and indus-
try. Water resources are affected by many activities,
both natural, such as rain, and human, such as water
withdrawal and urbanization. Following is a brief de-
scription of our water resources and events that affect
them.
Rivers and Streams
There are 3.5 million miles of rivers and streams in the
country. About one-third of these flow all the time, and
two-thirds flow only periodically and are dry during a
portion of the year. Figure 2 shows selected major U.S.
river systems. Rivers and streams supply water for
drinking, agriculture, industrial processes, and irriga-
tion and support aquatic habitats, fishing, and recre-
ation. Rivers and streams are impacted by pollution
discharged directly into the water, as well as by pollu-
tion generated by activities occurring on land, which
rainwater or snowmelt carries into these waterways in
the form of runoff.
While all three types of indicators
are valuable for measuring progress
toward goals, this report concen-
trates on the actual condition of our
water resources. Thus, the indica-
tors presented are predominately
state of the environment and pres-
sure indicators. Societal responses
to environmental problems are
summarized in this report and in-
cluded in the accompanying indi-
cator fact sheets.
This report describes our nation's wa-
ter resources, human activities and
natural events and their effect on wa-
ter quality, and the indicators that will
be used to measure progress toward
goals and objectives.
FIGURE 2: Selected Major Rivers of the United States j~
, COLUMBIA RIVER
WILLAMETTE
RIVER
ELAWARE RIVER
POTOMAC RIVER
IAMA-COOSA RIVER
Source: U.S. EPA
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
Lakes and Reservoirs
Estuaries
There are 41 million acres of lakes and reservoirs in
the country. Lakes and reservoirs support the same uses
as rivers and streams and are affected by the same types
of pollution. These impacts, however, can be more se-
vere because lakes and reservoirs do not have the natu-
ral flushing process characteristic of flowing streams
and rivers.
FIGURE 3: Estuaries Designated by EPA and States
Under the National Estuary Program
MASSACHUSETTS BAYS, MA
BUZZARDS BAY
MORRO BAY
Estuaries are coastal waters where the tides mix fresh
river water with ocean salt water. For example, the
Chesapeake Bay is a large estuary that receives fresh-
water flow from several rivers in Virginia and Mary-
land and connects with the Atlantic Ocean. There are
many other smaller estuaries all along the coastline of
the United States—in total, over 34,000 square miles
of estuaries. Estuaries are noted
for their unique aquatic habitats,
as well as for the fishing,
shellfishing, and other recre-
ational and economic opportuni-
ties they provide. Estuaries are in
increasing danger of pollution
considering that almost half the
U.S. population now lives in
coastal areas, many on estuaries.
Figure 3 shows the location of the
estuaries identified by EPA and
states under the National Estuary
Program (NEP). An NEP desig-
nation recognizes the national sig-
nificance of these estuaries and
initiates a consensus- based, com-
prehensive management process
to protect these resources.
SCO BAY, ME
PECONIC BAY
BARNEGAT BAY
DELAWARE
INLAND BAYS
INDIAN RIVER
LAGOON
CHARLOTTE HARBOR, FL
SAN JUAN BAY, PR
Source: U.S. EPA
FIGURE 4: Principal Ground Water Aquifers in the United States I"
Northern Atlantic
Coastal Plain
aquifer system
theastern Coastal
in aquifer system
Source: U.S. Geological Survey
Ground Water
Because ground water flows be-
neath the earth's surface, it is hard
to map the aquifers in which it re-
sides or to know the overall qual-
ity of ground water in the United
States. Figure 4 shows the esti-
mated location of the principal
ground water aquifers of the
United States. Ground water flows
are usually slower than surface
waters and are replenished by in-
teraction with streams, rivers, and
wetlands and by precipitation that
seeps through the soil. Ground wa-
ter also can replenish other water-
bodies by maintaining base flow
to streams, rivers, and wetlands.
Ground water provides almost
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
one-fourth of all water used in the country, serving ag-
ricultural, industrial, and drinking water needs. Waste
disposal, contaminated runoff, and polluted surface wa-
ters can degrade ground water quality.
Wetlands
Wetlands include swamps, marshes, tundra, bogs, and
other areas that are saturated with water for varying
periods of time. Under normal circumstances, these
areas support plants specifically adapted to saturated
conditions. Seeping water from wetlands can recharge
ground water supplies. Unaltered wetlands in a flood-
plain can reduce flooding. The natural water filtration
and sediment control capabilities of wetlands help main-
tain surface and ground water quality. More than 200
million acres of wetlands existed in the lower 48 states
during colonial times. Less than half remain today, how-
ever, largely due to conversion to agricultural, urban,
or suburban land. Wetland water quality can be im-
pacted by many of the same sources that affect other
surface water resources.
III. Human Activities and
Their Effect on Water
Quality
Urbanization, dams, forestry practices, and agricultural
development all impact the quality of our waters. Rain-
fall and snowmelt runoff from urban areas—those ar-
eas dominated by paved roads, parking lots, rooftops,
and other similar impervious surfaces where pollution
collects—can alter stream characteristics and habitats,
increase pollutant loads and water temperature, and re-
duce the diversity of aquatic life. As the percentage of
imperviousness in an area increases, the quality of ad-
jacent or receiving waterbodies decreases. Highly de-
veloped commercial and business districts are estimated
to be 85 percent impervious, while even our least de-
veloped urban areas—suburban residential districts
with 1-acre lots—are considered to be about 20 per-
cent impervious. Distinct water quality problems are
observed at relatively low levels of imperviousness (10
to 20 percent).
Similarly, agriculture and forestry practices can lead
to water quality problems. Clear-cutting forests and
removing streambank vegetation result in increased ero-
sion rates, as well as more severe and frequent flood-
ing, as the natural runoff storage capacity in vegeta-
tion, wetlands, and soil is reduced. Figure 6, from the
U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Resources
Inventory, depicts the amount of surface area in the
United States that is developed land (urban), agricul-
tural land, forest land, or a mix of these uses, and fed-
eral land. Each land use type results in different im-
Human activities have a
profound effect on our
water resources. The
population in the United States
has grown from approximately
30 million in 1860 to 260 mil-
lion in 1990. At the same time,
the U.S. economy has expanded.
Figure 5 shows both population
and economic growth over the
last four decades. Although
economic growth can occur
hand-in-hand with environmen-
tal protection and restoration, it
can alter both our land and wa-
ter. As a result, it is important
that we work to understand these
effects in order to capitalize on
beneficial changes and prevent
or minimize harmful ones.
FIGURE 5: U.S. Population and Economic Growth 1960 -1990
-•-Gross Domestic Product
1987 Dollars (trillions)
C3 Population
.1 200 H
§ 15°H
QL
O
Q.
100 -
50 -
0
1960 1970 1980 1990
Source: U S Census and U.S. Department of Commerce
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
pacts that must be addressed by appropriate federal,
state, tribal, local, and individual efforts to improve
and conserve the quality of our waters.
IV. Water Quality
Objectives and Indicators
In the following section, indicators of water quality
are discussed according to how they measure their
respective water quality objectives: public health,
ecosystem health, designated uses, ambient conditions,
and pollutant loadings. Although the indicators are pre-
sented on a national level, they also can be used at a
state or watershed level. These indicators could pro-
vide a consistent core set of data to be used at all geo-
graphic levels. Managers at the state and watershed
levels, however, will probably want to add specific in-
dicators of their own.
Objective I: Conserve and Enhance
Public Health
We use many of our waters to supply drinking water
and fish and shellfish for human consumption, as well
as for recreation. There are times, however, when poor
water quality limits these uses.
FIGURE 6: Dominant Cover/Use Types, 1992
J
NRI (ample data. collected at approximately 800,000 ahee
formed bv the Intaraactlon of countlee NRC8 Major Land Raaouroa
Areea end USGS hydrologlo cataloging unit ereee Beceua* the
eranatlcal variance In anme of thaaa araaa may be large, the mop
reader ahould uae thla map to (dentlfy faroad apatlal tranda and avoid
making highly localized Interpretationa
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture
Reducing the risk of drinking contaminated water has been
a priority for public health agencies and EPA for many
years. Public water systems manage surface and ground
water supplies across the country to make them safe to
drink. Most Americans can safely drink their tap wa-
ter, although the number of water systems continuing
to violate health standards and posing a risk to public
health remains too high. Figure 7 shows the number of
community water systems in each state that are regu-
lated by EPA and the states under the Safe Drinking
Water Act. Although most of these systems use ground
water as their principal water supply source, approxi-
mately 63 percent of the population served is provided
water from systems using surface water.
Fish and shellfish have become more widely used as a
source of low-fat, high-quality protein foods. Consump-
tion of contaminated fish and shellfish, however, can
pose a risk to human health. As fish prey on the species
below them in the food chain, concentrations of chemi-
cal contaminants can increase, reaching levels many
times greater than those found in the water and increas-
ing the risk to humans and other animals higher in the
food chain. Also, microbial contamination of shellfish
remains a problem.
We sometimes take for granted that our favorite beaches
and swimming holes are safe for swimming, water-ski-
ing, and boating. However, waters that become pol-
luted can pose a health risk to people who choose to
play in them. At times, states or
towns are forced to close beaches
due to high levels of bacterial
contamination. These closures are
undertaken as precautionary mea-
sures to prevent the outbreak or
spread of disease resulting from
swimming in polluted waters.
State health departments track the
number of disease outbreaks from
swimming in all kinds of waters.
EPA is encouraging states to re-
port information on beach clo-
sures and disease outbreaks to ob-
tain a national perspective on
these issues
In the future, EPA would like to
add nationwide indicators on the
quality of our recreational waters.
Q Fwteral land/Water/
Non-SampM ATM
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
Such information is available from individual states and
tribes, but not on a consistent nationwide level. In the
meantime, state and local health departments should be
contacted for information on conditions in particular
areas.
INDICATOR 1: Population served by
community drinking water systems violating
health-based requirements
EPA and the states regulate approximately 200,000 pub-
lic drinking water systems that serve over 240 million
people. (Public water systems are defined as systems
that provide piped water for human consumption to at
least 15 service connections or serve an average of at
least 25 people for at least 60 days each year. Approxi-
mately 60,000 of these water systems are known as com-
munity drinking water systems—systems that provide
water to the same population year-round. The remain-
ing 120,000 are non-community water systems that pro-
vide drinking water for non-residential use (e.g., work-
places, schools, restaurants)).
The concentration of contaminants in drinking water sys-
tems is strictly controlled by health-based requirements
established to minimize or eliminate risk to human health.
These health-based requirements address several areas
including surface water treatment, total coliform, lead
and copper treatment, and chemical/radiological con-
tamination. When violations of these requirements oc-
cur, water systems must remove
the contaminants and notify the
public or face severe penalties un-
der EPA and state regulatory pro-
grams.
INDICATOR 1: Population Served by
Community Drinking Water Systems Violating
Health-Based Requirements
81%
Percent of Population Served by Systems with:
No reported violations 81%
Surface water treatment violations 9%
Total coliform violations 8%
Lead and copper treatment violations 1%
Chemical/radiological contamination violations 1%
Note: As many as one-fourth of the water systems did not complete all required
monitoring The compliance status of some of these could not be assessed from
reported data 243 million people were served by community drinking water systems
in 1994
Source State data in EPA Safe Drinking Water Information System, 1994
Proposed Milestone: By 2005, the population served by community water
systems in violation of health requirements will be reduced from 19 to 5 percent
Note: Related Milestone-The U S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) in its Healthy People 2000 report has established a
similar target for the year 2000 that complements the EPA milestone
related to Indicator 1. The HHS target is: [By 2000,] Increase to at
least 85 percent the porportion of people who receive a supply of drink-
ing water that meets the safe drinking water standards established by
EPA.
This indicator displays the popu-
lation served by community drink-
ing water systems in 1994 that
violated one or more health-based
requirements. More than 80 per-
cent of the population is served by
community drinking water sys-
tems that reported no violations
of these requirements during the
past year. Indicators 2 and 3 show
more detailed information on two
of the health-based requirements,
filtration treatment and lead in
drinking water.
FIGURE 7: Number of Community Drinking Water Systems by State |
Source. Safe Drinking Water
Information System, 1995
55,633 Total Community Water Systems
I I 0-600 Community Water Systems
IIIIIIIH 601 -1200 Community Water Systems
1201-1800 Community Water Systems
IB > 1800 Community Water Systems
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
INDICATOR 2: Population Served by
Unfiltered Surface Water Systems at Risk
from Microbiological Pollution
_ 10 •
1993
1,000
Systems
750 400
Systems Systems
Source: State data in EPA Safe Drinking Water Information System, 1994
Proposed Milestone: By 2005, every person served by a public water system
that draws from an unprotected river, lake, or reservoir will receive drinking
water that is adequately filtered.
INDICATOR 3: Population Served by
Community Drinking Water Systems
Exceeding Lead Action Levels
15-30 31-80 81-130 >130
Lead Action Level Exceedance (ppb)
Source: State data in EPA Safe Drinking Water Information System, 1995
INDICATOR 2: Population served by
unfiltered surface water systems at risk from
microbiological pollution
Drinking water systems supplied by surface waters can
sometimes withdraw water that contains harmful lev-
els of disease-causing microbiological contaminants,
such as Giardia lamblia, Legionella, and viruses. Un-
der the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR), EPA
and the states require all inadequately protected drink-
ing water systems using surface water sources to disin-
fect and install filtration treatment to remove these mi-
crobiological contaminants from the drinking water.
Compliance with the rule will dramatically reduce the
probability of human exposure to harmful levels of mi-
crobiological contaminants from surface water sources.
This indicator displays the population provided water
by unfiltered community water systems that did not
comply with the SWTR in 1993. In 1993, over 12 mil-
lion people were provided drinking water from more
than 1,000 unfiltered community water systems not in
compliance with the SWTR. Through aggressive ac-
tion by EPA, the states, and the water systems, the risk
of human exposure to microbiological contaminants is
being reduced. By the end of fiscal year 1995, the num-
ber of water systems not complying with the SWTR
was reduced from 1,000 to 400, with most of the
progress being made in small and medium water sys-
tems. However, the population at risk has not dropped
as dramatically—from 12 million to 9.9 million—
primarily because of the time needed for completing
infrastructure improvements.
INDICATOR 3: Population served by
community drinking water systems
exceeding lead action levels
EPA estimates that 20 percent of human exposure to
lead is attributable to lead in drinking water. Lead en-
ters drinking water through pipes in the distribution
system, service lines, and household plumbing, includ-
ing faucets and other fixtures. Lead in drinking water
is controllable through actions taken by water systems
and their customers.
EPA, under its Lead and Copper Rule (LCR), requires
that water systems follow a series of steps to reduce
the likelihood of lead entering the drinking water from
distribution system materials. Water systems are re-
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
quired to monitor for lead in their distribution systems,
and to take action when lead in more than 10 percent
of the samples taken at the tap exceeds the regulatory
action level of 15 parts per billion (ppb). Depending on
the size and type of the system, remedial actions range
from establishing a public education program to imple-
menting corrosion control treatment or replacing lead
pipes. EPA requires large systems to install lead con-
trols regardless of sampling results.
This indicator measures the population provided water
by community water systems that have exceeded lead
action levels and are required to take corrective action.
It is not a precise predictor of the risk of exposure to
the general population provided water by the targeted
water systems. The monitoring results reflect the situ-
ation in only the worst portions of the distribution sys-
tem and represent only the relative probability of risk
for consumers who rely on those targeted water sys-
tems.
Based on the results of lead monitoring through fiscal
year 1995,69.1 million people were provided drinking
water by water systems that exceeded the action level
of 15 ppb at least once. Of that number, 42.8 million
people were provided water by systems where sam-
pling results showed lead levels between 15 and 30 ppb,
and 26.3 million people received water from systems
where sampling results showed lead levels over 30 ppb,
which EPA views as a significant exceedance. About
2.1 million people received water from water systems
where sampling results showed lead levels greater than
130 ppb. Higher exceedances increase the probability
that people consuming water are at risk.
INDICATOR 4: Source water protection
To protect our sources of drinking water even before
water is withdrawn by a drinking water supplier, EPA,
states, and tribes have instituted the Source Water Pro-
tection Program. EPA also continues to promote ground
water protection efforts through legislation, grants, and
partnerships for state programs. Currently, EPA's fo-
cus in the Source Water Protection Program is on pro-
tecting ground water used for drinking water. The re-
sulting Wellhead Protection Program covers four prin-
cipal activities: (1) delineating a wellhead protection
area (the protected area around a drinking water sup-
ply well), (2) identifying potential sources of contami-
nation, (3) developing a contingency plan in case of a
threat to the drinking water source, and (4) developing
a source management plan to control potential sources
of contamination. In the future, the Source Water Pro-
tection Program will be extended to surface waters.
This indicator shows that approximately 18,700 of al-
most 60,000 surface and ground water community drink-
ing water systems (31 percent) have initiated the Source
Water Protection Program and 3,800 systems (6 per-
cent) are covered by all four parts of the ground water
protection program. EPA has established a milestone
for 60 percent of the population, which corresponds to
50 percent (30,000) of all community drinking water
systems, to have source water protection programs in
place by 2005.
INDICATOR 5: Fish consumption advisories
States issue fish consumption advisories to alert an-
glers of risks associated with eating fish from rivers
and lakes that are contaminated by chemical pollutants.
Some tribes also use state advisories on their own wa-
ters. A fish consumption advisory can involve one or
more of the following warnings: (1) do not eat any fish
INDICATOR 4:
Source Water Protection
60,000 -i
I
o 3
Delineations
Source
Inventories
Contingency Source
Planning Management
Source: State Biennial Wellhead Reports to EPA, 1993
Proposed Milestone: By 2005, 60 percent of the population served by
community water systems will receive their water from systems with source
water protection programs in place
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
INDICATOR 5:
Fish Consumption Advisories
25% n
Lakes
Rivers
Source: State data reported to EPA's Office of Science and
Technology, 1994
INDICATORS:
Shellfish Growing Water Classification
63%
9%
I I Approved
^•1 Conditionally Approved
r~m Restricted
•• Prohibited
Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1990
caught in a certain area; (2) eat only a specified limited
amount of fish, particularly if you are in a high-risk
group (e.g., pregnant women or young children); or
(3) eat fish only after special preparation.
States and tribes report that 14 percent of total lake
acres and 4 percent of total river miles have one or more
fish consumption advisories. EPA is working with state
and tribal agencies to link fish consumption advisory
information with assessments of the fish and shellfish
consumption designated use set by state water quality
standards.
INDICATOR 6: Shellfish growing water
classification
Shellfish growing waters are classified by individual
states using the guidelines set forth in the National Shell-
fish Sanitation Program (NSSP) manuals of operation.
These manuals are written and periodically updated by
the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Commission (ISSC),
which includes representatives from the states, the
shellfishing industry, and the federal government.
Every 5 years, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, in cooperation with the ISSC and EPA,
produces the National Shellfish Register of Classified
Estuarine Waters. The Register reports the classifica-
tions of all coastal and estuarine shellfish growing wa-
ters. These waters are classified as one of the follow-
ing: (1) approved (harvest is allowed at all times), (2)
conditionally approved (harvest is allowed at certain
times depending on environmental conditions), (3) re-
stricted (harvest is allowed if shellfish undergo a cleans-
ing or purification process), (4) conditionally restricted
(harvest is allowed at certain times depending on envi-
ronmental conditions and whether the shellfish undergo
a cleansing or purification process, or (5) prohibited
(harvest is not allowed at any time). The Register also
reports on the actual and potential sources of pollution
that cause a shellfish growing water to be classified as
anything other than approved.
In 1990, there were 17 million acres of classified shell-
fish growing waters in U.S. coastal areas, with 63 per-
cent approved for shellfish harvest—a 6 percent de-
cline from 1985. Of the other 37 percent, 9 percent
were conditionally approved for harvest, 3 percent were
classified as restricted, and 25 percent were classified
as prohibited.
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
10
EPA and NOAA are considering how NOAA's shell-
fish growing waters data can be correlated with state
assessments of attainment of the fish and shellfish con-
sumption designated use set by state water quality stan-
dards (see Indicator lOb).
Objective II: Conserve and Enhance
Aquatic Ecosystems
Clean water is also critical to the health and survival of
most plant and animal species. Water quality encom-
passes not only the chemical composition of the water,
but also its physical and biological properties. Impaired
aquatic habitats can cause a severe decline or even ex-
tinction of an aquatic species and aquatic-dependent
wildlife. The quality of the biological communities can
be used as an indicator of the cumulative effect of all
chemical and physical stressors on the waterbody.
Sometimes the conditions in a waterbody might appear
suitable for aquatic life, but the absence of healthy and
diverse aquatic life might indicate water quality problems
that have gone undetected. Assessing the ability of the
waterbody to support aquatic life is the first step in ensur-
ing healthy biological communities, referred to as "bio-
logical integrity." The next step is determining the kind
and abundance of plants and animals found in the water-
body, referred to as "biological diversity." Aquatic plant
and animal habitats that are degraded or modified can
also be indicators of poor water quality.
INDICATOR 7: Biological integrity
Assessing a waterbody for healthy biological communi-
ties is a complex process, and the science to do so is newer
than that used in chemical monitoring. Biological integ-
rity can be measured using fish, macroinvertebrates, or
plants, including algae. The Intergovernmental Task Force
on Monitoring Water Quality recommends that at least
two of these three assemblages be used together to make
an accurate assessment. The extent of biological integ-
rity is determined by comparing the monitored site against
a "reference site" that exhibits the desired characteristics.
Assessing waterbodies for biological integrity is impor-
tant because it takes into account the cumulative effects
of a wide variety of stressors.
This indicator shows data from (1)31 states that cur-
rently have comprehensive biological monitoring pro-
grams in streams and wadeable rivers and (2) EPA's
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
(EMAP), which uses biological monitoring to evaluate
estuaries. States were able to assess only 9 percent of
their rivers for biological integrity; of those, 50 percent
were found to have healthy aquatic communities. EMAP
assessed 50 percent of the Nation's estuaries using a
statistically representative sampling design and found
that 74 percent of estuaries have healthy aquatic com-
munities.
Methods for biological monitoring in lakes are under
development; consequently, there are not enough data
yet to confidently report the number of lakes that sup-
port healthy aquatic life. EPA and its partners are work-
ing together to strengthen biological monitoring pro-
grams, assess more waters in this fashion, and gather
better data for supporting this indicator.
INDICATOR 8: Species at risk
In assessing the biological diversity and integrity of a
waterbody, it is important to determine whether the
aquatic species that should naturally exist in the waters
are actually there and at the expected population size.
INDICATOR 7:
Biological Integrity
100%
75% -
o> E
2 i
•a E
o> O
<
50% -
25% -
£2
£
Rivers
9% Assessed
Estuaries
55% Assessed
iource: EPA EMAP, 1994, and state biological monitoring data, 1992-1994
Proposed Milestone: By 2005, 80 percent of the Nation's surface waters will
support healthy aquatic communities
-------
11
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
INDICATOR 8:
Aquatic and Wetland Species at Risk
100%
75% -
50% •
25% •
Source: The Nature Conservancy and State Natural Heritage Data
Centers, 1996
INDICATOR 9:
Wetland Acreage
600 n
400 -
290
£ 8
(0 3
it
200 •
* mid 1950s-
mid 1970s
* mid 1970s-
mid 1980s
**mid 1980s-
early 1990s
Source: * U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1990 (Data includes federal lands)
** U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1992 (Data excludes federal lands)
Proposed Milestone: By 2005, there will be an annual net increase of at least
100,000 acres of wetlands, thereby supporting valuable aquatic life, improving
water quality, and preventing health- and property-damaging floods and drought.
Oftentimes, declines in natural aquatic species can be
attributed to factors such as poor water quality and habi-
tat loss.
Both The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS), in cooperation with
states and tribes, keep data that show which native plant
and animal species are at risk (TNC) or are legally listed
as endangered (USFWS). This indicator uses data from
TNC and the state Natural Heritage Network and shows
the proportion of species dependent on freshwater
aquatic or wetland habitats that are at risk. Currently,
the groups of animals at greatest risk overall are those
dependent on aquatic systems. More than 60 percent
of freshwater mussels and crayfish are at risk, the high-
est imperilment ratio documented for any group of
plants and animals in the United States.
INDICATOR 9: Wetland acreage
Wetlands are especially important habitats for many
different kinds of aquatic species. An estimated 80 per-
cent of the Nation's coastal fisheries and one-third of
its endangered species depend on wetlands for spawn-
ing, nursery areas, and food sources. Wetlands are home
to millions of waterfowl and other birds, plants, mam-
mals, and reptiles. Protecting the quantity and quality
of wetlands is important to the continued abundance of
healthy and diverse aquatic species.
This indicator shows historical wetland loss, which has
been significant. The average annual rate of wetland
loss, however, has slowed to less than 90,000 acres per
year. Ultimately, there will be a net increase in wet-
land acreage.
Objective III: Support Uses Designated
by the States and Tribes in Their
Water Quality Standards
The Clean Water Act requires states and, if authorized,
Native American tribes to adopt water quality standards
that include uses they designate for their waterbodies or
waterbody segments. These designated uses reflect the
way we want to use our waterbodies and include such
things as supplying clean drinking water, providing fish
and shellfish safe for human consumption, allowing safe
swimming and other forms of recreation, and supporting
healthy aquatic life. State/tribal water quality standards
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
12
establish the goals of and provide the requirements for
the Nation's water quality-based improvement programs.
Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act requires that
states survey, assess, and report on the degree to which
their surface waters support the designated uses. Some
Native American tribes also submit this information.
The results of the assessments are reported to EPA ev-
ery 2 years. Data from the reports are then aggregated
to form the National Water Quality Inventory Report
to Congress (the national 305(b) Report), which por-
trays the status of the Nation's waters assessed during
that period.
Most states cannot assess all their waters in a 2-year
period. As a result, EPA is working with the states to
change the 305(b) Report to a 5-year report that de-
scribes national, state, and tribal waters comprehen-
sively. For the 2-year period reported in the 1994 305(b)
report, states and tribes assessed 42 percent of lakes
and reservoirs, 78 percent of estuaries, and 17 percent
of all rivers and streams, usually targeting their moni-
toring efforts to areas of particular interest. The as-
sessment figure for rivers and streams rises to 48 per-
cent if the intermittent waters that are dry during por-
tions of the year are excluded.
INDICATOR 10a: Drinking water supply
designated use
States and tribes evaluate the quality of their waters as
sources for drinking water supplies. This does not mean
that the water is safe to drink directly from the source,
but rather that with conventional treatment the water
can be safely distributed for public consumption. In
the EPA guidance to the states for the fiscal year 1996
305(b) Report, EPA defines conventional treatment as
disinfection and filtration treatment only.
This indicator shows that of the rivers and lakes assessed
and reported on for the 1994 305(b) Report, 87 percent
of the lake acres and 83 percent of the river miles that
supply drinking water systems support this use.
INDICATOR 10b: Fish and shellfish
consumption designated use
Just as the states and tribes report to EPA on the quality
of their waters for supplying drinking water systems,
INDICATOR 10a:
Drinking Water Supply Designated Use
100% n
I?
6 OP
75% -
a so% -
25% -
0%
Rivers
Lakes
Source: National Water Quality Inventory: 1994 Report to Congress,
1995; 17 percent of all river and stream miles (48 percent of constantly
flowing miles), 42 percent of lake and reservoir acres, and 78 percent of
estuarine square miles were assessed.
Proposed Milestone: By 2005, 90 percent of the Nation's rivers, streams, lakes,
and reservoirs designated as drinking water supplies will provide water that is
safe to use after conventional treatment.
INDICATOR 10b: Fish and Shellfish
Consumption Designated Use
100% -I
Rivers (fish) Lakes (fish)
Estuaries
(fish)
Estuaries
(shellfish)
Source: National Water Quality Inventory: 1994 Report to Congress,
1995; 17 percent of all river and stream miles (48 percent of constantly
flowing miles), 42 percent of lake and reservoir acres, and 78 percent of
estuarine square miles were assessed.
Proposed Milestone: By 2005, 90 to 98 percent of the Nation's fish and shellfish
harvest areas will provide food safe for people and wildlife to eat.
-------
13
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
INDICATOR 10c:
Recreation Designated Use
100% i
Rivers
Lakes
Estuaries
I • Swimming a Other Recreation |
Source: National Water Quality Inventory: 1994 Report to Congress,
1995; 17 percent of all river and stream miles (48 percent of constantly
flowing miles), 42 percent of lake and reservoir acres, and 78 percent of
estuarine square miles were assessed
Proposed Milestone: By 2005,95 percent of the Nation's surface waters will be
safe for recreation.
INDICATOR 10d:
Aquatic Life Designated Use
100% -i
75% -
50% •
25%
Rivers
Lakes
Estuaries
Source: National Water Quality Inventory: 1994 Report to Congress,
1995; 17 percent of all river and stream miles (48 percent of constantly
flowing miles), 42 percent of lake and reservoir acres, and 78 percent of
estuarine square miles were assessed
Proposed Milestone: By 2005, 80 percent of the Nation's surface waters will
support healthy aquatic communities.
they also report on the quality for fish and shellfish
consumption. This indicator shows that 74 percent or
more of all assessed river miles, lake acres, and estua-
rine square miles are safe for fish and shellfish con-
sumption. EPA is working with the state agencies that
issue fish consumption advisories (Indicator 5) to link
advisory information with fish and shellfish consump-
tion designated use data.
INDICATOR 10c: Recreation designated use
States and tribes also report to EPA how many of their
waters support recreational uses, especially swimming
and boating. Currently, 77 percent or more of all river
miles, lake acres, and estuarine square miles that the
states and tribes have assessed are safe for all forms of
recreation.
INDICATOR 10d: Aquatic life designated use
The states and tribes also provide EPA with informa-
tion on whether their waters can support their aquatic
life designated use. Approximately 70 percent of the
Nation's assessed river miles, lake acres, and estua-
rine square miles can support the designated aquatic
life use.
Objective IV: Conserve and Improve
Ambient Conditions
Measures of ambient water quality evaluate the over-
all impacts of various sources and causes of pollution
and other stressors. Measures of ambient conditions in
ground water, surface water, and wetlands—both in the
water column and in sediments—cover a range of physi-
Note: Related Milestones - The U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) in its Healthy People 2000 report has es-
tablished targets for the year 2000 that complement the EPA mile-
stones related to Indicators lOb and lOc. The HHS targets are: [By
2000,] reduce potential risks to human health from surface water,
as measured by an increase in the proportion of assessed rivers,
lakes, and estuaries that support beneficial uses. For recreation use,
from 1992 to 2000 the percentages would improve as follows: Riv-
ers (from 71 percent to 85 percent), Lakes (from 77 percent to 88
percent), and Estuaries (from 83 percent to 91 percent). For con-
sumable fishing use the improvement would be: Rivers (from 89
percent to 94 percent), Lakes (from 64 percent to 82 percent), and
Estuaries (from 94 percent to 97 percent).
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
14
cal, chemical, and biological characteristics of the
waterbody. These measures provide critical informa-
tion about potential risk to human and ecosystem health
(Objectives I and II) and often are evaluated to deter-
mine the degree to which there is impairment of a
waterbody's designated use (Objective III). By provid-
ing the link to causes and sources of pollution and pol-
lutant loadings (Objective V), ambient water quality
indicators complete the picture of how the water ob-
jectives support and build on one
another (see page ii).
Water Pollutants, and 15, Contaminated Sediments),
with trends to be established at a later date.
Based on discussions at the last national water indica-
tors workshop in June 1995, potential parameters were
selected to express national ambient water quality.
Many of the parameters are presented in these indica-
tors. Participants in these discussions expressed the im-
portance of tracking both ambient water quality and
The United States does not have
a linked national ambient water
quality monitoring network that
can produce a statistically valid
picture of all our waters. In lieu
of a complete and representative
national data set on ambient con-
ditions, several sources of infor-
mation taken together can pro-
vide a national picture of water
resource conditions.
States and some tribes report to
EPA the leading pollutants and
other stressors they find in the
ambient waters they assess, and
the leading sources that produce
these stressors. EPA publishes
this information in the 305(b) re-
port. Figure 8 shows the percent
and quality of waterbodies as-
sessed, and Figures 9a and 9b
show the leading stressors and
sources of impairment in as-
sessed rivers, streams, lakes, res-
ervoirs, and estuaries reported by
states in 1994.
This report uses several sets of
these data as indicators. Using
these data, we can summarize
and evaluate trends for selected
parameters (Indicators 12, Sur-
face Water Pollutants, and 13
and 14, Pollutants in Coastal Wa-
ters and Estuaries). In some
cases, only a 1-year baseline is
presented (Indicators 11, Ground
FIGURE 8: Percent and Quality of Waterbodies Assessed E~
Quality of Assessed
River Miles
Quality of Assessed
Lake Acres
' f- I- / \ -• ,. U^-i
«A*ttM'df- -^ r ^ YS
:• r.
Quality of Assessed
Estuary Sq. Miles
Source U S EPA, 1995
FIGURE 9a: Leading Stressors Causing Water Quality Impairment |
Nutrients
Bacteria
Siltation
Oxygen- Depleting
Substances
Metals
Habitat Alterations
Suspended Solids
Oil & Grease
Pesticides
Priority Organic Toxic
Chemicals
M^M^MM^^ 24% • Estuaries
HI Hiiiiillllllllllll QC/- D Lakes
^^^^^^^ ti ' 21% • Rivers
^^^^^^^^^» ,_J Note This graph shows the
^^^^^^^^^^ * percentage of nver miles, lake
acres, and estuanne square
^•••••^ 14% miles that are affected by a
particular stressor The
147. affected waters include only
those which have been
assessed by states and tnbes
] 11% and identified as impaired
(see Figure 8)
10%
' ' 8%
0% 20% 40% 60%
Percent of Impaired River Miles, Lake Acres, and Estuarine Square Miles
Source- U S EPA, 1995
-------
15
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
INDICATOR 11:
Ground Water Pollutants: Nitrate
4 -\
Rural
Domestic
Wells
Community
Water
System
Wells
Source: National Survey of Pesticides in Drinking Water Wells, 1990.
Proposed Milestone: By 2005, the number of Americans served by community
and rural water wells containing high concentrations of nitrate, which can cause
illness, will be reduced.
pollutant loadings (the amount of a pollutant delivered
to a waterbody) from both point and nonpoint sources
(see Objective V). Future efforts will continue to en-
hance and expand ambient monitoring coverage to in-
clude key parameters and define methods for summa-
rizing data for national reporting.
FIGURE 9b: Leading Sources of Water Quality Impairment |
Agriculture
Municipal Point Sources
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Hydrologic/Habitat Modification
Industrial Point Sources
Land Disposal
Petroleum Activities
Construction
Resource Extraction
Streamside Vegetation Loss
Forestry
Unspecified Nonpoint Source
P«BHBBM17%
^553»1%3% • Rivers
BaaaB^BBMBHai 13%
Note This graph shows
1MMBHM13% the percentage of nver miles,
lake acres, and estuanne
square miles that are affected
^^^^^ by a particular source The
^^^^^ ' 1 * affected waters include only
^^^^^ those which have been
^^•^•10% assessed by slates and tnbes
and identified as impaired
••^•i 9% (see Figure 8)
0% 20% 40% 60%
Percent of Impaired River Miles, Lake Acres, and Estuarine Square Miles
Source: U.S. EPA, 1995
INDICATOR 11: Ground water pollutants:
Nitrate
Many contaminants in ground water are naturally oc-
curring. Some, however, are from human activity.
Because ground water monitoring is expensive, infor-
mation on ground water quality is usually obtained from
the monitoring of known or suspected contaminated
sites or from specific studies designed to monitor for
various contaminants in limited areas. Available data,
therefore, do not always provide a complete and accu-
rate representation of ambient ground water conditions
or the extent and severity of ground water contamina-
tion problems.
In the meantime, one of the best available sources of
ground water data is studies of drinking water supplies.
Indicator 11 uses information from rural wells and com-
munity water systems to determine the number of
people exposed to nitrate in ground water. According
to the National Survey of Pesticides in Drinking Water
Wells, a total of 4.5 million people are estimated to be
exposed to elevated levels of nitrate in drinking water
wells (approximately one-third from rural domestic
wells and two-thirds from community water system
wells). The survey also found nitrate to be the most
widespread agricultural contaminant in drinking water
wells.
Nitrate is a human health concern because it can cause
methemoglobinemia or "blue-baby syndrome." Nitrate
is also an environmental concern
as a potential source of nutrient
enrichment of coastal waters. Ni-
trate contamination of ground
water can result from the inap-
propriate application of fertiliz-
ers to cropland, where excess
nitrate filters down into the
ground during rainfall; from the
misuse of septic systems; and
from the improper disposal of
wastewater.
Improved understanding of the
natural and human-induced fac-
tors affecting ground water qual-
ity will come about only through
research at the federal, state, and
private levels. Research is
needed to better understand what
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
16
activities affect changes in ground water conditions, to
guide monitoring and management priorities, and to
evaluate the effectiveness of land and water manage-
ment practices and programs. The results of such re-
search will be more cost-effective monitoring and a
significant expansion and improvement in the infor-
mation that can be used for decision making.
EPA and other federal, state, and local agencies con-
tinue to promote ambient ground water monitoring to
characterize the existing condition of the Nation's aqui-
fers. Many recent monitoring studies, especially from
the U.S Geological Survey, have focused on nitrate as
an indicator for the presence of other contaminants. In
addition, many studies have targeted other contaminants
as indicators of specific types of land use or industrial
activities. EPA plans to review all of these studies and
use them as a follow-up to the information currently
covered by this indicator. Thus, in the future, this indi-
cator will provide a more accurate picture of overall
ground water quality by including other contaminants,
such as pesticides or industrial contaminants, and uses
other than drinking water supply.
INDICATOR 12: Surface water pollutants
EPA and its partners have chosen to track a few of the
many constituents that have significant effects on our
surface waters. This indicator currently presents the
change in concentration levels of six constituents, in-
cluding dissolved oxygen, dissolved solids, nitrate, to-
tal phosphorus, fecal coliform, and suspended sedi-
ments. Data from the U.S. Geological Survey on ambi-
ent surface water quality are the best current represen-
tation for this indicator. These data show trends in the
concentration levels of the six constituents from 1980
to 1989. Increases in the concentration level of dissolved
oxygen, which is necessary for fish and aquatic plant
life, indicate an improvement in ambient water qual-
ity. In contrast, increases in the concentration level of
all of the other constituents reflect a decrease in ambi-
ent water quality. In the future, trends of other con-
stituents might be added to improve this indicator.
INDICATOR 13: Selected coastal surface
water pollutants in shellfish
Pollution in coastal areas is of particular concern given
the population concentration in coastal regions and the
INDICATOR 12:
Surface Water Pollutants
Trends in River and
Stream Water Quality
1980-1989
Data
Completeness
11%
Suspended Sediment
Fecal coliform
Total phosphorus
Nitrate
Dissolved solids
Dissolved Oxygen
87%
84%
73%
86%
78%
TJ
6%
85%
2%
3%
5%
3
6%
]
8%
9%
u
324 Tola!
Stations
313 Total
Stations
410 Total
Stations
344 Total
Stations
340 Total
Stations
424 Total
Stations
0%
50%
100%
% of Stations Showing Changes
in Concentration Levels
11 Downward trend No trend I I Upward trend
Note The presence of an upward trend indicates an increase in the concentration
of a particular constituent while a downward trend indicates a decrease in the
concentration. Analyses were made on data from USGS National Stream Quality
Accounting Network stations. Trend data for phosphorus are from 1982-1989.
Source' U.S. Geological Survey, 1990
INDICATOR 13: Selected Coastal Surface
Water Pollutants in Shellfish
50% -
en
en
1 30%
o
r-
CO O)
5 «9 10% -
i-
-10% -
-30% -
-50% -
-70%
4.6%
9.1%
3.6%
-41 9%
-53.8%
Copper Mercury Lead DDT PCB PAH
Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1995
-------
17
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
importance of coastal waters as nurseries for aquatic
life. NOAA collects data on the concentration and ef-
fect of persistent pollutants in the coastal waters of the
United States. This indicator shows the average con-
centration levels of six pollutants in shellfish (oysters
and mussels) collected from about 140 locations around
the Nation's coastline. Shellfish serve as good indica-
tors because they filter water as they feed and tend to
accumulate pollutants.
The pollutants shown are six of the toxic chemicals of
greatest concern in terms of their effects on fish and
other organisms in U.S. estuaries. Three metals and
three groups of organic chemicals are included. The
metals copper, mercury, and lead are commonly used
in our society for many purposes. The use of two of the
organic chemicals, the DDT pesticides and the indus-
trially important polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), was
very common until about 20 years ago. Although these
chemicals are now banned, they can still be found in
the environment. The carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs) are common constituents of oil
and are also produced by the burning of coal and wood.
INDICATOR 14:
Estuarine Eutrophication Conditions
NOAA DATA
Submerged
Aquatic
Chlorophylla Nitrogen Anoxia vegetation
Hudson River | | | | | |
Delaware Bay
fO I1 II
yiM I I I I
Chesapeake Bay | | | | | | jj
Neuse River
St. Johns River
Biscayne Bay
D
Trends observed from 1974 to 1995
D
better | J no trend
Note EPA and NOAA data should not be compared
Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1996
INDICATOR 14: Estuarine eutrophication
conditions
This indicator shows changes in specific constituents
related to water quality that together can be used to
assess the extent of eutrophication within an estuary,
and thus assess its health and condition. Eutrophica-
tion is a process by which a body of water begins to
suffocate from receiving more nutrients, such as nitro-
gen and phosphorus, than it can handle. The excess
nutrients fuel the heavy growth of microscopic aquatic
plants. As these plants die and decompose, the supply
of dissolved oxygen in the water is depleted. Oxygen
is then no longer available to other aquatic organisms,
especially those which live on the bottom. Symptoms
of eutrophication include low levels of dissolved oxy-
gen, extensive algal blooms, fish kills and reduced
populations of fish and shellfish, high turbidity in the
water, and diebacks of seagrasses and corals. Estua-
rine and coastal waters are monitored to determine if
they are receiving too many nutrients and becoming
eutrophic. Parameters that are monitored include chlo-
rophyll a, nitrogen, other nutrients, dissolved oxygen,
and the spatial coverage of seagrassess (or submerged
aquatic vegetation).
This indicator shows trends in eutrophication-related
conditions from the 1960s to 1995 in selected estuar-
ies throughout the country as measured by two differ-
ent data sets. The nationwide framework for the indi-
cator of estuarine eutrophication is NOAA's National
Estuarine Inventory. The 129 estuaries contained in
the inventory represent a consistent and complete
framework for characterizing the Nation's estuarine
resource base. NOAA is collecting information on 16
eutrophication-related water quality parameters for
each estuary in the inventory through a knowledge-
based consensus process with over 400 estuarine sci-
entists. In 1990, NOAA estimated that nearly half the
Nation's estuaries were susceptible to eutrophication.
In 1992, NOAA initiated its National Estuarine
Eutrophication Survey to evaluate which estuaries had
problems in the following regions: North Atlantic (16
estuaries), Mid-Atlantic (22 estuaries), South Atlantic
(21 estuaries), Gulf of Mexico (36 estuaries), and the
West Coast (34 estuaries).
This indicator also uses data from EPA's National Es-
tuary Program (NEP). Currently, there are 28 estuaries
around the country in the NEP. In many of these estu-
aries, state and local managers have identified eutrophi-
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
18
cation and excess nutrients as critical problems. NEPs
are collecting historical and baseline monitoring in-
formation to assess the effectiveness of corrective ac-
tions being undertaken. Taken together, the NOAA
and EPA efforts will provide the most comprehensive
and complete information base possible for the fore-
seeable future.
INDICATOR 15: Contaminated sediments
Certain types of chemicals in water tend to bind to
particles and collect in sediment. Chemicals often per-
sist longer in sediment than in water because condi-
tions might not favor natural degradation. When
present at elevated concentrations in sediment, pol-
lutants can be released back to water. Pollutants can
also accumulate in bottom-dwelling organisms and in
fish and shellfish and move up the food chain. In both
cases, excessive levels of chemicals in sediment might
become hazardous to aquatic life and humans.
This indicator shows the percent of measurements of
contaminated sediments that indicate potential risk to
ecological and human health by chemical or chemical
group. Of the 37 percent of measurements that de-
tected contaminant levels, 14 percent exhibited a po-
tential risk to human or ecological health due to sub-
stances such as mercury, pesticides, PCBs, and PAHs.
These levels of concern are based on field surveys,
laboratory toxicity tests, and studies of the behavior
of chemicals in the environment and in living fish tis-
sue. EPA collects and analyzes sediment and fish tis-
sue data from state, EPA region, and other monitor-
ing programs as part of the National Sediment Inven-
tory (NSI). The goals of the NSI are to survey data
regarding sediment quality nationwide, identify loca-
tions that are potentially contaminated, and describe
the sources of contaminants.
The Importance of Habitat
Habitat is an additional indicator that measures ambi-
ent conditions. Without healthy habitat, plants and ani-
mals cannot survive. Habitat is the area where living
and nonliving factors interact to provide at least mini-
mal life support for a given species. Habitat important
to water quality begins instream (factors such as wa-
ter flow rate), includes the riparian zone (habitat bor-
dering water), and extends into dry-land habitats where
INDICATOR 14:
Estuarine Eutrophication Conditions
EPA DATA
Submergtd
Aquatic
Chlorophyll a Nitrogen Anoxia Vigitatlon
Massachusetts Bays
Long Island Sound
Delaware Inland Bays
Albemarle-Pamlico
Sounds
Tampa Bay
Barataria-Terrebonne
1960s to 1995
• worse x better no trend [ffffl not known [y] non
liLI LJ ffl IAI >pp,,c,bl.
Note EPA and NOAA data are not comparable For EPA's NEP data, collection periods
varied from 15 to 30 years, seasonal or short-term trends are not reflected, and individual
NEPs are not comparable
Source: Data from EPA's National Estuary Program, 1996
INDICATOR 15:
Contaminated Sediments
PAHs
19%
No Risk
Indicate*
63%
Detected
37%
Not
Detecte;
63% '
Percentage of
measurements
of sediment
(including fish
tissue)
contaminant
levels that
indicate
potential risk
to ecological
and human
health by
chemical or
chemical
group
Source National Sediment I nventory from
EPA's Office of Science and Technology, 1993
Proposed Milestone: By 2005, point sources of contamination will be controlled
in 10 percent of the watersheds where sediment contamination has been
determined to be widespread
-------
19
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
rainwater and snowmelt carry pollutants over land into
water.
Although healthy habitat is a key link in understanding
our water resources, we are currently unable to report
on habitat quality nationally. It is important, however,
to use habitat as an indicator regionally. EPA hopes to
be able to include a national habitat quality indicator in
future reports. To fill this information gap, EPA and its
partners are placing increased emphasis on supporting
habitat quality assessments and developing a habitat
quality indicator.
One of the first documents issued by EPA encourag-
ing states to assess habitat quality is Rapid Bioassess-
ment Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers. The
Rapid Bioassessment Protocols evaluate the quality of
the riparian corridor habitat by comparing the moni-
tored stream to a "reference condition" that expresses
the desired condition of the water. Habitat data, together
with traditional chemical and toxicity data, enable re-
searchers to evaluate biological monitoring data and
understand the environmental stressors to the aquatic
ecosystem.
Some habitat quality stressor information is reported
in theNational Water Quality Inventory Report to Con-
gress. According to the 1994 305(b) Report, states and
tribes ranked hydromodification and habitat alteration
as a leading source of water quality impairment in as-
sessed waters (see Figure 9b).
Objective V: Reduce or Prevent
Pollutant Loadings and Other
Stressors
Water is affected by stressors from both natural and
human activities. Habitat alteration, for instance, can
cause major water quality degradation. However, de-
termining where the stressors come from is not al-
ways easy. Stressor indicators are the link between
management programs, which are usually designed
to prevent or reduce stressors, and the condition of
the environment. The following indicators present
information on the sources of pollutant loads for se-
lected pollutants. A pollutant load is the mass of a
pollutant (e.g., tons of sediment) delivered to the
waterbody.
Sources of pollution to surface and ground waters
are characterized as point and nonpoint. Point source
pollution usually enters waters through a specific
point, such as a pipe. Ground water can be contami-
nated by point source pollution through underground
injection of waste. Nonpoint source pollution typi-
cally is carried in rainwater and snowmelt runoff
over and through land to surface water, or in water
that seeps through soils to un-
derground aquifers.
FIGURE 10: Estimated Share of Nitrogen Delivered to Streams by
Point and Nonpoint Sources
Connecticut
Pilous* River, WA Platte River, NE R«d River, MN & ND White River, IN Susquehanna River, PA River, CT
Willamette Rlw,
Snake River, ID
Potomac River, VA
Tar River, NC
San Joaquin
Altamaha River, GA
South Platte River, CO Trinity River, TX White River, AR Apalachlcola
River, FL
Source: U.S. Geological Survey
Major accomplishments of the
past several decades include con-
trolling industrial discharges,
providing adequate wastewater
treatment to a growing popula-
tion, and protecting drinking
water supplies from underground
injection of waste. EPA uses
regulations and permit limits to
control these point source dis-
charges. The sections that follow
present indicators to measure our
progress in controlling both
point and nonpoint source pol-
lution, which continue to persist.
To demonstrate the relative con-
tribution of point and nonpoint
sources, Figure 10 illustrates
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
20
how the mix of point and nonpoint sources of nitrogen
entering our streams varies across the Nation.
INDICATOR 16a: Selected point source
loadings to surface water
For surface waters, the major point sources of pollu-
tion are sewage treatment plants, industrial facilities,
and "wet weather" sources like combined sewer over-
flows (CSOs), sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs), and
storm water sewers. Sewage treatment plants treat and
discharge wastewater from homes, public buildings,
commercial establishments, some storm water sewers,
and some industries. Many industrial facilities treat and
discharge their own wastewater, either directly to
nearby waters or to sewage treatment plants. Combined
sewers combine storm water and sewage in one sys-
tem and, during periods of intense rainfall, can over-
flow directly to nearby waters without treatment. Fig-
ure 11 illustrates the annual amount of pollution dis-
charged by these sources.
Many pollutants have been identified as a priority or of
particular concern. EPA and other agencies with point
source loading information have identified a group of
toxic and conventional pollutants to track as indicators
of progress toward reducing point source pollution in
surface waters. Information about these pollutants is
contained in EPA's Permit Compliance System (PCS).
EPA is working to improve the
quality of data entered into PCS
in order to extract more useful
information for each state on
whether the amount of these
contaminants being discharged
is increasing, decreasing, or re-
maining stable. EPA is working
with other federal agencies like
NOAA and USGS to improve
the tracking of point source load-
ings nationwide. Improvements
will include the ability to project
expected loadings from sources
not covered in national databases
like PCS.
INDICATOR 16a: Selected Point Source
Loadings to Surface Water
100% -,
60% -
40% •
20% •
• Significantly increasing loads (<100%)
O Increasing loads
S Stable loads
D Decreasing loads
42%
44%
Biochemical
Oxygen
Demand
Source: Permit Compliance System, 1995
Lead
Proposed Milestone: By 2005, annual pollutant discharges from key point
sources that threaten public health and aquatic ecosystems will be reduced by
3 billion pounds, or 28 percent
lutants to be tracked under this indicator—biochemical
oxygen demand (BOD) and lead. BOD is a mea-
sure of pollution expressed in terms of the amount
of oxygen needed by micro-organisms to break
down waste material. A high level of BOD in-
For illustrative purposes, the
graph above presents data ex-
tracted from PCS on two pol-
FIGURE 11:
Annual Amount of Pollution Discharged
by Selected Point Sources
1
Sewage Treatment Plants ' Toxic Industrial '
If
" S
M Q.
Is
2 .2
Ji -]=
£~
4000 •
3000 -
2000 -
1000 -
?»•
3318 21? 15°-|
^B ^ i
^B H a. 100 -
^M 5-5
^1 ~ ? 50
• « I
• II „
0 -I —^— 1 -5 t u -*—
1992 a. ""
146
^^H
II EZ
^J
IBH
| |
1995
Pollution settling
into sediments
Combined Sewer Overflows * Conventional Industrial *
4) "£•
? -s
£§
O O
M Q.
5 0
v> m
c c
flj O
^ "=
£~
6000 -
4500 -
3000 -
1500 -
0
5340 f,f 600°
• 1 § 4500
^^1 M °"
^M 5 o 3000 -
^1 i g 1500
• = =
I ^ , = f 0-1
1992 <£ •=•
4170
MH
^^H
•
•
•
H^
1995
1 The indicator pollutant is biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), the degradable
organics typically controlled by discharge permits
2 Pollutants include priority pollutants (e g , RGBs, lead, m
CWA and some nonconventional pollutants (e g chlorin
3rcury) defined by the
3).
3 Pollutants include total suspended solids, BOD, total nitrogen, orthophosphate.
Source: U.S.
metals, and toxic volatile organics
EPA, 1 995 4 Pollutants include oil and grease, to al suspended solids
and BOD
-------
21
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
dicates that there will be lower levels of oxygen
available for fish and other aquatic life. A high BOD
also indicates possible bacterial contamination from
sewage released into the waterbody. In 1995, 66 per-
cent of the states reported BOD as either decreasing or
stable, while 34 percent reported increasing or signifi-
cantly increasing BOD levels. In addition, 48 percent
of the states reported either decreasing or stable lead
levels, while 52 percent reported increasing or signifi-
cantly increasing lead levels.
INDICATOR 16b: Sources of point source
loadings through class V wells to ground water
Major sources of pollution to ground water are septic
systems, cesspools, or dry wells used to dispose of in-
dustrial and commercial wastewater. Businesses in strip
malls and industrial parks and areas that are not served
by municipal sewer systems are likely to dispose of
industrial and commercial wastewater in shallow wells
or in septic systems that are designed to treat only sani-
tary wastes. EPA studies show that approximately 10
percent of the 10 billion gallons of this wastewater con-
tains chemicals, such as ethylene glycol. These chemi-
INDICATOR 16b: Sources of Point Source
Loadings Through Class V Wells
to Ground Water
2,400
Note. As well closures
increase, loadings or
discharges to ground
water decrease
1 992-1 995
Source: EPA Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, 1995
Proposed Milestone: By 2005, wellhead protection areas and vulnerable ground
water resources will no longer receive industrial wastewater discharges from
septic systems
cals can pass through septic systems unchanged and
eventually enter ground water aquifers while still toxic.
As much as 1 billion gallons of untreated chemicals,
therefore, have the potential to degrade the water re-
sources of 60,000 community water systems and half
the U.S. population.
One million new septic systems are constructed every
year. The number of these systems that will be used for
disposal of industrial and commercial wastewater is not
known. Stopping the misuse of these systems is best
left in the hands of the public health agencies or other
local government agencies that regulate them.
Through the Underground Injection Control (UIC) Pro-
gram, EPA works with other federal agencies, states,
tribes, and local governments to address this major point
source of pollution. Aside from technical and financial
assistance to regulators, the UIC program will provide
compliance assistance to commercial and industrial op-
erations as part of source water protection programs
that will be developed for 30,000 community water sup-
plies by the year 2005. EPA will collect annual reports
from states that describe the number of septic systems
no longer used for industrial waste disposal (Class V
well closures). In the future, EPA expects to report re-
ductions in specific point source pollutants to ground
water as this indicator is further developed.
INDICATOR 17: Nonpoint source sediment
loadings from cropland
Nonpoint source pollution is a diffuse source that is dif-
ficult to measure and is highly variable due to different
rain patterns and other climatic conditions. In many ar-
eas, however, nonpoint source pollution is the greatest
source of water quality degradation. Presently, states and
tribes identify nonpoint source pollution from cropland
and livestock, urban runoff, and storm sewers as the great-
est water quality threat to the Nation's surface waters.
Other nonpoint sources of pollution to surface water in-
clude runoff from roads, construction sites, mining, and
logging; drainage from waste disposal sites and land-
fills; and airborne pollutants that settle in the water.
In the absence of direct national measures of nonpoint
source pollution, national figures can only be estimated.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimates
soil erosion with field measurements and statistical
models, such as the universal soil loss equation. USDA
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
22
tracks and reports progress in reducing erosion rates
from the Nation's agricultural lands through the Na-
tional Resources Inventory.
This indicator shows the amount of erosion from agri-
cultural cropland. Cropland erosion is often, but not
always, associated with the delivery of sediment, nu-
trients, and pesticides to receiving waters. Other na-
tional measures for nonpoint source loadings are under
consideration and may be developed as more national
data become available.
INDICATOR 18: Marine debris
Marine debris includes trash left behind by visitors to
the beach, discarded from boats, carried by inland wa-
terways to the coast, or conveyed by overflowing sewer
or storm systems. As an indicator, marine debris can
be useful in ascertaining (1) early warning signs of pos-
sible human health risk associated with pollution,
(2) biological health risk such as entanglement or in-
gestion by wildlife, (3) limits on coastal recreation and
fishing, (4) the effectiveness of programs to control or
prevent marine debris, (5) the aesthetic value of a
coastal area and the economy it supports, (6) ambient
conditions, and (7) human health risks through en-
tanglement injury or exposure to medical waste.
EPA chairs an interagency workgroup on marine de-
bris that includes representatives from the National Oce-
anic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Park
Service, the U.S. Coast Guard, and other organizations.
The workgroup has developed a statistically valid meth-
odology for monitoring the trends and sources of ma-
rine debris. This monitoring effort will begin in 1996,
and data from that year will be used as the baseline for
this indicator. Past data, although not collected using a
statistically designed protocol, are presented in this re-
port to give an indication of the problem.
INDICATOR 17: Nonpoint Source Sediment
Loadings from Cropland
2,000 -i
1,500-
o
UJ
If
oo 2 1,000 -
500 -
1977 1982 1987
Source USDA, National Resource Inventory, 1992
1992
Proposed Milestone: By 2005, the annual rate of soil erosion from agricultural
croplands will be reduced 20 percent from 1992 levels to a total of 948 million
tons per year
INDICATOR 18:
Marine Debris
4 1
3 -
2 -
32
28
28
2 6
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
Note Data in this graph are variable by number of beaches cleaned,
number of volunteers participating, and weather conditions on the day of
cleanup
Source: Center for Marine Conservation, 1995.
-------
23
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
V. Water Quality
Monitoring and
Information Management
Water quality monitoring supplies the data and
information that are the backbone of each
of the indicators described in this report.
Each indicator is supported by a monitoring network
and data systems that provide and store the data. In
some cases, we need better, more efficient monitoring,
easier ways to access and understand data, and better
programs to analyze and present water quality infor-
mation.
Many public and private organizations, states, tribes, and
federal agencies are working to improve monitoring pro-
grams across the country to provide better information to
measure these indicators. The Intergovernmental Task
Force on Monitoring Water Quality (TTFM) has already
adopted a nationwide water quality monitoring strategy
that, when fully implemented, will provide better data
for many of the indicators presented in this report.
VI. Conclusion
The indicators presented here are keys to answer-
ing the question "How clean is our water?" Al-
though we know water resources in this country
have improved considerably since the formation of EPA
in 1970, the passage of the Clean Water Act and Safe
Drinking Water Act, and as a result of the hard work of
many public and private partners, we still have prob-
lems to address. All levels of government and public and
private entities need to work together closely to improve
our understanding of the environment and our ability
to protect and enhance it. A critical part of that process
is improving the collection and assessment of data. The
steps we are taking to improve the indicators are de-
scribed in individual fact sheets for each indicator, avail-
able from EPA at the address on the inside back cover.
As the indicators are improved, we should be able to
more precisely track changes, both positive and nega-
tive, in water quality. The status and trends indicator data
will be invaluable for targeting resources and for man-
aging and improving key water quality programs that
protect and enhance public health and the environment.
VII. References
Objective I: Conserve and Enhance
Public Health
Indicator 1
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water. 1994. Data ex-
tracted from the Safe Drinking Water Information
System on the population served by community
drinking water systems in violation of health-based
requirements.
Indicator 2
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water. 1994 Data ex-
tracted from the Safe Drinking Water Information
System on drinking water systems and population
served by these systems not meeting filtration require-
ments.
Indicator 3
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water. 1994. Data ex-
tracted from the Safe Drinking Water Information
System on drinking water systems and population
served by these systems exceeding lead action levels.
Indicator 4
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water. 1993. Data from
State Biennial Wellhead Reports on the number of
states with source water protection programs.
Indicator 5
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Sci-
ence and Technology. 1994. National Listing of Fish
Consumption Advisories. Geo-referenced data of
state-issued fish consumption advisories.
Indicator 6
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
1990 Data extracted from the 7990 National Shell-
fish Register of Classified Estuarine Waters on the
number of estuaries providing shellfish approved,
conditionally approved, and not approved for human
consumption.
-------
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
24
Objective II: Conserve and Enhance
Aquatic Ecosystems
and recreation, and (4) aquatic life. EPA-841-R-
94-001.
Indicator 7
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Policy, Planning, and Evaluation. 1996. Summary of
State Biological Assessment Programs for Streams
and Wadeable Rivers. Draft. 1992 and 1994 data on
the percent of assessed streams and wadeable rivers
with good biological integrity determined through
biological monitoring.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Re-
search and Development. 1995. Data extracted from
EMAP Estuaries: A Report on the Condition of the
Estuaries of the United States in 1990-1993 -A Pro-
gram in Progress on the percent of assessed estuar-
ies with good biological integrity determined through
biological monitoring.
Indicator 8
The Nature Conservancy. 1994. Data extracted from
the Heritage Program Database on the percent of se-
lected aquatic species at risk of extinction, critically
imperiled, and apparently secure.
Indicator 9
Dahl, T.E. 1990. Wetlands Losses in the United States
1780s to 1980s. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish
and Wildlife Service. Data on the amount of wetland
acreage loss from 1780 to mid-1980s.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Ser-
vice. 1992. Summary Report National Resources In-
ventory. Data on the amount of wetland loss from
mid-1980s to mid-1990s.
Objective III: Support Uses Designated
by the States and Tribes in Their Water
Quality Standards
Indicator 10a - 10d
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wa-
ter. 1995.National Water Quality Inventory: 1994
Report to Congress. 1994 data on the percent of
assessed rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs, and es-
tuaries that can support (1) drinking water supply,
(2) fish and shellfish consumption, (3) swimming
Objective IV: Conserve and Improve
Ambient Conditions
Indicator 11
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of
Drinking Water and Office of Pesticide Programs.
1990. National Survey of Pesticides in Drinking
Water. Data on the potential number of people drink-
ing water with high levels of nitrate and pesticides.
Indicator 12
U.S. Geological Survey. 1993. National Water Sum-
mary 1990-1991, Hydro logic Events and Stream
Water Quality. U.S. Geological Survey Water Sup-
ply Paper 2400. Data on trends of selected pollut-
ants found in surface water.
Indicator 13
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
1995. Data on selected coastal surface water quality
pollutants in shellfish.
Indicator 14
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
1995. Data presented in NOAA's National estua-
rine inventory: Data atlas, Volume 1: Physical and
hydrologic characteristics.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and As-
sessment. 1995. Data from NOAA's National Estua-
rine Eutrophication Survey Project.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996. NEP
data extracted as of 1996 from continuing monitor-
ing programs and synthesis of historical data in in-
dividual estuaries.
Indicator 15
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Sci-
ence and Technology. 1993 Data from National Sedi-
ment Inventory on the percentage of sites with sedi-
ment contamination that might pose a risk to humans
and aquatic life.
-------
25
Environmental Indicators of Water Quality in the United States
Objective V: Prevent or Reduce
Pollutant Loadings and Other
Stressors
Indicator 16a
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of En-
forcement and Compliance Assurance. 1995 Data
from the Permit Compliance System on lead and BOD
loadings from permitted facilities.
Indicator 16b
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water. 1995. Data from
underground injection control state reporting forms
on the number of shallow (Class V) injection wells
closed annually.
Indicator 17
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Ser-
vice. 1992. National Resources Inventory Summary
Report. Data on the annual rate of sediment eroded
from agricultural cropland.
Indicator 18
Center for Marine Conservation. 1995. 7994 U.S. Na-
tional Coastal Cleanup Results. Data on the amount
of marine debris annually collected from cleanup
events from 1990 to 1994.
Figures
1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1996. Goal
statements taken from Environmental Goals for
America With Milestones for 2005: A Proposal from
the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Government Review Draft. EPA 230-D96-002.
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Water. 1996. Selected major rivers of the United
States.
3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Water. 1995. Estuaries designated by EPA and states
under the National Estuary Program.
4. U.S. Geological Survey. 1996. Principal ground wa-
ter aquifers of the United States.
5. U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Department of Com-
merce. 1996. Data on U.S. population and economic
growth from 1960 to 1990.
6. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources
Conservation Service. 1996. Dominant Cover/Use
Types. Map ID:RWH.1429. Data extracted from the
1992 National Resources Inventory.
7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Water. 1995. Data extracted from the Safe Drink-
ing Water Information System on the population
served by primary water supply sources.
8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Water. 1995. National Water Quality Inventory:
1994 Report to Congress. 1994 data on the percent
and quality of waterbodies assessed.
9a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Water. 1995. National Water Quality Inventory:
1994 Report to Congress. 1994 data on the leading
stressors causing water quality impairment.
9b. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Water. 1995. National Water Quality Inventory:
1994 Report to Congress. 1994 data on the leading
sources of water quality impairment.
10. U.S. Geological Survey. 1995. Data on the estimated
share of nitrogen delivered to streams by point and
nonpoint sources.
11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Water. 1996. Analyses based on EPA support docu-
ments for Effluent Limitation Guidelines and Pretreat-
ment Standards and Toxic Release Inventory data.
------- |