OCOA United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Water Quality Research Program
Multi-Year Plan
Office of Research and Development
Version: 2003 Update
Date last peer reviewed: October 2001
-------
The Office of Research and Development's (ORD) multi-year plans (MYPs) present ORD's
proposed research (assuming constant funding) in a variety of areas over the next 5-8 years. The
MYPs serve three principal purposes: to describe where our research programs are going, to
present the significant outputs of the research, and to communicate our research plans within
ORD and with others. Multi-year planning permits ORD to consider the strategic directions of
the Agency and how research can evolve to best contribute to the Agency's mission of protecting
human health and the environment.
MYPs are considered to be "living documents." ORD intends to update the MYPs on a regular
basis to reflect the current state of the science, resource availability, and Agency priorities. ORD
will update or modify future performance information contained within this planning document
as needed. These documents will also be submitted for external peer review.
-------
PREFACE
The Water Quality Multi-Year Plan was developed and reviewed by the following individuals
representing the Office of Research and Development, the Office of Water and EPA Regions.
Writing Team
Lee Mulkey, NRMRL, ORD (Lead Author)
Ben Blaney, NRMRL, ORD
Mimi Dannel, OSP, ORD
Bruce Mintz, NERL, ORD
Cynthia Nolt-Helms, NCER, ORD
Lynn Papa, NCEA, ORD
Robert Spehar, NHEERL, ORD
Laura Gabanski, OWOW, OW
Roland Hemmett, Region 2
Renee Morris, OGWDW, OW
Laura Phillips, OWM, OW
Review and Evaluation Team
Mary Reiley, OST, OW
Rita Schoeny, OST, OW
Barbara Walton, NHEERL, ORD
Molly Whitworth, OSP, ORD
-------
Table of Contents
Introduction 1
Scope of the Plan 7
Long Term Goals and Science Questions 8
Setting Priorities and Science Questions 8
Annual Performance Goals and Measures: The General Roadmap and Challenges ... 11
Long Term Goal 1 14
Summary of Research Questions and Approaches 14
Expected Impact and Outcomes 15
Long Term Goal 2 15
Summary of Research Questions and Approaches 15
Expected Impact and Outcomes 17
Long Term Goal 3 17
Summary of Research Questions and Approaches 17
Expected Impact and Outcomes 18
Long Term Goal 4 19
Summary of Research Questions and Approaches 19
Expected Impact and Outcomes 19
Resource Allocation Among the Long Term Goals 20
Summary of the Non-EPA research supportive of the LTGs 20
Concluding Notations for Current Resource Base 22
Unfunded Priorities 22
Appendix 51
List of Tables
Table 1. Long Term Goals and Priority Science Questions 13
Table 2. Relative Resource Trends Among the Long Term Goals 20
Table 3. Long Term Goal 1 25
Table 4. Long Term Goal 2 34
Table 5. Long Term Goal 3 38
Table 6. Long Term Goal 4 44
List of Figures
Figure 1. Goal 2 Context for Water Quality Multi-year Plan 3
Figure 2. Water Quality Framework 4
Figure 3. Relationship of OW Programs and Science Needs to ORD Research Areas .... 9
Figure 4. Setting Priorities for the Water Quality Multi-year Plan 10
Figure 5. Long Term Goal 1 46
Figure 6. Long Term Goal 2 47
Figure 7. Long Term Goal 3 48
Figure 8. Long Term Goal 4 49
-------
Introduction
The Water Quality Multi-year Plan (MYP) is one of 16 MYPs developed by the Office of
Research and Development. The purpose of the MYPs is to aid ORD as a planning and
communication tool. Multi-year planning allows ORD to consider the future strategic direction
of the Agency, as described in the EPA and ORD Strategic Plans, and determine where scientific
discovery can contribute. MYPs also help ensure the relevance, quality, and performance of our
research program.
The primary client for the Water Quality MYP is the U.S. EPA's Office of Water. The research
to support the Office of Water's Goals under the Clean Water Act (CWA) is described, or
referenced, in this document. The Long Term Goals (LTGs) guiding research for the next 5-8
years are given in the text box below. By design, the long term research goals and the interim
steps and planned accomplishments proposed here are directed specifically to enhance the
science and engineering content of EPA, State, and local action programs. Accordingly, ORD
envisions this research as the "application and demonstration vehicle " for both its relevant
science programs described in Goal 4 (Healthy Communities and Ecosystems) and the
fundamental and applied science needed to underpin the strategic goals for the Agency Goal 2
(Clean and Safe Water) programs. Consistent with this approach, many of the annual goals and
planned products are phrased as "providing tools and data for..." or as " demonstrating the
application to achieve...." where the specific goals or products correspond to one or more of the
major logical steps required to meet the Nation's water quality goals.
TEXT BOX 1
Water Quality Long Term Research Goals
LTG 1: Provide the approaches and methods to develop and apply criteria for habitat
alteration, nutrients, suspended and bedded sediments, pathogens and toxic chemicals
that will support designated uses for aquatic systems
LTG 2: Provide the tools to assess and diagnose the causes and pollutant sources of
impairment in aquatic systems
LTG 3: Provide the tools to restore and protect impaired aquatic systems and to forecast
the ecological, economic, and human health benefits of alternative approaches to attain
water quality standards
LTG 4: Provide the approaches, methods and tools to assess the exposures and reduce
the human health risks from biosolids contaminants for use by OW, States and others in
updating biosolids guidance and regulations
-------
The level of resources for Water Quality research in Fiscal Year (FY) 2003 is approximately $45
Million including 225 full time equivalent (FTE) personnel.
Background
The conceptual and logical description of the EPA's Water Quality programs are provided in
Figures 1 and 2. Included in Figure 1 are the relevant Agency policy instruments on the left-
most column; included as the right-most columns are the typical research topics from both this
plan and relevant topics from ORD's core research program in Goal 4. Figure 2 illustrates the
same support and cross-connection keyed to a recent description of the Agency's watershed
approach as provided by the Office of Water. In addition to the Agency's mandates to guide and
enhance our meeting "fishable and swimmable" clean water goals, a number of specific and
technology-based components of the Act require periodic or stake-holder driven increased
attention. This plan also includes the specific issue of generation, treatment, and use/disposal of
biosolids. Biosolids are sewage sludge that have been treated in accordance with 40 CFR Part
503 (the "Part 503 rule"). Land application is one of several management options for biosolids
and disposal of biosolids. In this case, the EPA commissioned a review of current practices and
regulations for land application of biosolids by the National Research Council (NRC) which has
recommended research issues that should be addressed. Accordingly this Plan includes ORD's
response to that study. The Long Term Goals for this Multi-Year Plan included in Text Box 1
reflect both the logical construct of the Agency's programs and the current priority among a
much broader programmatic effort.
The programmatic processes outlined in Figures 1 and 2 are not entirely new. The details of each
of the programmatic and policy-level programs will not be repeated here; such information is
available from the Agency's Office of Water's Strategic Plan and other web-site materials
available from the OW (http://www.epa.gov/ow). While the programs are varied and seemingly
complex, the major drivers for this research plan are the Agency's watershed approach, specific
regulatory and guidance "tracks", and the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) program. A
TMDL is a calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a waterbody can receive and
still meet water quality standards, and an allocation of that amount to the pollutant's sources.
Analysis and implementation are via watershed management, water quality restoration and
protection.
ORD has been engaged in supporting the science needs of various aspects of the relevant
portions of the CWA for a number of years. Particularly, ORD has developed and defended
chemical water quality criteria, conducted dose-response experiments and developed cause-
effect models, provided hydrologically-based modeling frameworks and models for TMDL
modeling, investigated the performance and costs of treatment technologies, developed and
evaluated best management practices, and provided indicators for assessing biological condition.
A number of
environmental and institutional trends have emerged from application and use of previously
developed science and technology.
-------
Goal 2 Instruments: Policy Guidance,
Regulations, and Program Initiatives
Community and
watershed action
groups
Water Quality Criteria and
Designated Use Guidance
305(b), 303(d) Reporting
TMDL's, 319 Program,
Stormwater Reg's, WRAS'
Beach Bill
NPDES,CWAP
106 Grants
National Estuary Program
Wetlands Program
Steps Required to Meet
Water Quality Goals
C o m m
>3takeholde
r formulatio
sett in
d e s g in a
V.
A
unity & to Support Use 1
rprob em Designations |
a for 1 ^ \
e d u se s 1 M o n ito rin g fo r
L ^^ Attainm ent ofW Q
^ S ta n d a rd s
1
Applying
Designated Use,
W Q C riteri a,
and O then Listing
C rite ria
+
D iagnostic
Assessm ents
1
Form ulating Alternative Solutions an
Forecasting Outcom es
1
Deve oping and Evaluating Costs,
Effectiveness, and Implem entation
S tra t e g ie s
1
^_^_ Im plem entinq W atershed Protectio
™"~^ Kestoration ana Managem ent
±
M easurinq Progress and Ensuring
Long-term Success
Goal 2
Criteria development methods
Stressor-response Models
Habitat and water body classification
microbial, chemical, IBI's
SIE, Diagnostic methods & models, sit
watershed threshold approaches, eco-
approaches, eco-risk characterization
Load allocation modeling,
d NFS Loading models & data,
BMP design methods, landsca
methods, restoralion and trea
technologies
Cost effectiveness data,
integrated case studies for \
and watersheds
! Near-Lab pilot s
and State Pilots
Research products required to provide
sound scientific basis for implementing steps
GoalS
Reference Condition
Methods
EMAP, Indicators
Landscape
Indicators
REV A, Smart Growth
Ecosystem Restoration
Landscape
characterization,
Multi-media modeling
Implementation
Strategies, Water-
watershed grants
EMAP & Indicators
Figure 1. Goal 2 Context for Water Quality Multi-Year Plan
-------
Water Quality Standards
Monitor/Assess WQS Attainment
^ !7
List Impaired Waters
TMDL Minimum Elements
Identify Watershed
Identify and locate pollutant sources
Estimate existing pollutant loading
Determine assimilative capacity
Point Source
NPDES Permits
Integrated
Watershed
Process
Ref. OW
Figure 2. The "Problem," a.k.a. Water Quality Framework
-------
Among the major trends that present remaining challenges are:
> over 20,000 waters identified by States as impaired due to one or more pollutants
> a shift from point source discharges as the major source of pollutants to nonpoint sources
> an increasing use of biological indicators and metrics as the preferred method for
determining the condition of aquatic ecosystems
> an increasing awareness of the importance of landscape- and watershed- scale processes
and activities as determinants of water quality
> an increasing awareness of the role of atmospheric deposition and multimedia sources as
determinants of water quality
> an increasing awareness of the role of habitat alteration as a cause of aquatic ecosystem
impairment
> an increase in human-health risks from apparent ecosystem responses to stressors,
particularly pathogens
> pressures to increase the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of implementation
> an increase in the role of citizen stakeholders in setting watershed management goals and
in implementing action programs at the local and watershed levels
> increasing calls for more efficient, more nearly accurate models and methods, and more
explicit representation of uncertainties in decision-making processes used by EPA and
State Agencies (NRC, 2001)
> lack of systematic and statistically-robust evidence that best management practices
(BMP's) for non-point source controls are working
> increasing calls for outcome-based implementation and accountability
»• increasing calls for documentation of the economic benefits derived from Agency
approaches to meet Water Quality Standards and Goals
> an increasing awareness of the role of invasive species as a cause of aquatic ecosystem
impairment
> integrated assessments for allocation of restoration resources to support water quality
standards attainment within the context of socioeconomic factors
-------
> recycling of biosolids through field application is the preferred method for biosolids
management, but there is increasing public concern that biosolids land application
practices may be causing adverse health effects in nearby residents
> the NRC and others have called for an update of the scientific basis for the Part 503 rule,
particularly for Class B biosolids - those that are treated to reduce pathogens but still
contain detectable levels of them and consequently are restricted in their use.
The trends and challenges cited above drive the current research agenda and help set the
priorities laid out in this multi-year plan. In particular, previously developed and current science
and technologies are apparently inadequate to meet the challenges for the following reasons:
> BMP's and other nonpoint source control measures have rarely been evaluated for their
effectiveness in achieving improved water quality (particularly biological condition),
rather only for pollutant load or concentration reduction
> previous focus on chemical and pollutant-specific determinants of water quality does not
fully address biological condition
> the data, analysis tools, and assessment methodologies for landscape and regional scale
processes are leading edge research areas not yet exploited to solve problems
> atmospheric deposition of nutrients (e.g., nitrogen) and toxic substances (e.g., mercury)
have not been integrated into watershed management science
> biological indicators and measurements of habitat alterations, particularly related to flow
and sediment, have only recently emerged as issues
> the causes and control of increasing hazardous algal blooms (HAB's), Pfiesteria, and
pathogens are not fully known
> ecological risk assessment guidelines, public awareness tools, and risk communication
programs are largely new and rarely applied
> free market based and economically robust risk management systems and frameworks are
limited in scope and application
> many models and decision-support tools are often cumbersome to apply, require data all
too often unavailable, and fail to explicitly address uncertainty
> guidance for setting action and management priorities to achieve outcome-based goals
remains problematic
-------
> water quality management solutions that also lead to sustainable ecosystems and related
economies are desirable; the ability to design and implement such solutions is lacking, in
large part because of scientific limitations.
> economic valuation of water quality benefits cannot yet be applied to action programs
and regulatory activities
> assessing exposures and risks of critical pathways and contaminants are limited by the
lack of improved scientific information and tools to identify hazards of biosolids
application.
> there are limited tools for analyzing pathogens and emerging chemicals in biosolids
> there are limited data on the appropriate use of existing or emerging biosolids
management techniques to minimize human health risks.
Scope of the Plan
Note that the long-term goals in Text Box 1 follow the logical construct of the steps in Figures 1
and 2. Simply stated, ORD envisions a logical progression in meeting water quality goals by: 1)
setting water quality criteria that are logically connected to specific designated uses; 2)
monitoring for the condition of designated water bodies and listing those having impairment; 3)
applying relevant criteria and stakeholder input to evaluate if action programs are needed to
either protect high quality systems or to restore impaired waters; 4) diagnosing the causes of
observed impairment (stressors) and determining the sources of the stressors; 5) developing an
array of technologies, management, and restoration actions that can be deployed to protect high
quality habitats, restore degraded systems to desired designated uses, and protect public health;
and 6) deploying institutional, implementation, and monitoring systems to ensure that long-term
and sustainable success is achieved. The geographical scope of the problem is national and both
freshwater and coastal systems are included. Critical habitats, particularly wetlands and riparian
zones, are included, largely as a part of the surface water network subject to the processes in
Figures 1 and 2. While other specific and perhaps critical or unique habitats and features of the
landscape are of interest to the Office of Water, ORD has made a strategic decision to limit the
scope of our research so that we can focus on high priority issues presented by TMDL's and
related processes identified in Figure 1. In a later section of this Plan, ORD will identify areas of
needed emphasis should additional resources become available.
The plan described in this document includes pathogens as a priority stressor. Pathogens are
regulated via both the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA). Only
the CWA is considered here, with logical references to the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Accordingly, the scope of this plan for pathogens includes: TMDL-driven issues (i.e., setting and
meeting limits on loadings of pathogens from point and nonpoint sources); the role of aquatic
ecosystems in the survival and proliferation of human and ecological pathogens; ecosystem-
-------
derived harmful microorganisms (e.g., hazardous algal blooms (HAB's)); and development of
human exposure and effects data for risks in recreational water use designations.
ORD will support the specific steps illustrated in Figure 1 by providing data, methods, models,
and experimental protocols. ORD will also investigate innovative approaches that could
transform currently configured complex processes (e.g., TMDL's) into profoundly simpler and
more cost-effective ways to meet water quality goals. Accordingly, ORD envisions interactive
partnerships with both the Office of Water and the State, interstate, and local agencies charged
under the Clean Water Act to design and implement action programs.
Long Term Goals and Science Questions
Setting Priorities and Formulating Science Questions
Resource materials that inform the content and priorities of this plan are derived in the most part
from the body of information jointly developed by ORD and the Office of Water through the
Strategic Planning and Research Coordination (SPRC) workshops held during 1999 - 2002. The
purpose of these workshops was to establish joint goals and strategic research directions in OW
program areas related to water quality and aquatic ecology. Figure 3 was used as a coordinative
guide to relate the OW program and science needs to the ongoing ORD research areas. While
this figure is somewhat dated, having been developed in 1999, it is instructive to modify the
figure by adding the right-most column as a means to inter-relate current ORD Multi-Year Plans.
This figure shows that research planned and budgeted in Goals 4 (Healthy People, Communities
and Ecosystem - Ecological Research ), 5 (Compliance and Environmental Stewardship -
Pollution Prevention Research), and in Goal 3 (Land) also support the Long Term Goals
identified in this Plan.
Observations from the Regions and States on the condition of U.S. waters were heavily weighted
in the SPRC workshops and in development of this plan. ORD attended a National meeting of
the EPA Regional coordinators for nonpoint sources, monitoring, and TMDL's and used a
questionnaire to query the group on the contents of this MYP. The response was remarkably
positive and supportive with notable requests for more integrated products and technical support
for monitoring and modeling.
The SPRC workshops resulted in the development of comprehensive "research needs" and
"program needs" statements. ORD subsequently followed up with detailed in-house planning
activities. Notable among these efforts is NHEERL's science planning for aquatic stressors
(Aquatic Stressors: A Framework and Implementation Plan for Effects Research 2002, EPA
600/R-02-074). Another notable effort was the generation and publication of five white papers
on the risk management of sediments, nutrients, toxics, flow, and pathogens by NRMRL.
Science planning documented in MYP's must be sufficient to enable and guide the detailed
project planning steps at the Division and Investigator levels. This MYP is intended to provide
-------
ow
GOALS
OW
PROGRAMS
OW
SCIENCE NEEDS
ORD
MYP
Water Safe to Drink
Fish and Shellfish
Safe to Eat
Water Safe for
Swimming
Protect and Improve
WQ on Watershed Basis
Improve Coastal and
Ocean Waters
Source Water
Protection
Beach Action Plan &
Fish Advisories
Wetlands, NEP,
Wetlands/Critical Habitats
Wet Weather Flow, Sediments,
Ecological Restoration,
Watershed Management
Biocriteria,
Monitoring, W/S classification
Modeling: development and
support
Nutrient Criteria
Chemical-Specific Criteria
Wildlife Criteria
Assessment Research
Invasive Species
Trading, C:B
Economics, CSO's, ETV
CAFO's
Water Quality (WQ)
WQ
— Ecological Research
Drinking Water (DW)
_ WQ
Eco
_ Eco
WQ
WQ
_ WQ, RCRA
Contaminated Sites
_ WQ
-Eco
Eco
Eco
WQ
Econ, P2
Figure 3. Relationship of Office of Water Program and Science Needs to ORD Research Areas
-------
the "top down" priorities and expectations for detailed water quality science planning at the
bench and field level within and among the ORD Laboratories and Centers. While the science
questions included in this plan are projected to be appropriate and the related outputs and goals
the "right" milestones, the reader should understand that detailed implementation planning is not
the intent nor the content.
Priorities within this plan were selected by "weighing" the combination of the reported reasons
for listing U.S. waters as impaired and the levels of uncertainty the Agency and States face in
using the steps in Figures 1 and 2 to achieve water quality goals, i.e. restoring the impaired
waters and maintaining designated uses. Conceptually the priority-setting approach is illustrated
in Figure 4. An elaboration on priorities is useful here because the priorities identified in this
plan imply changes in the content and pace of ORD's research. It is also true that ORD envisions
this as an ongoing process that will require reconsideration of the current plan on a biennial
basis.
(0
•e
0)
ll
(0
0)
L
medium
priority
low
priority
high priority
medium
priority
Increasing Sensitivity or
Magnitude of Impact
Figure 4. Setting Priorities for the Water Quality Multi-Year Plan
Consider, for example, nutrients, pathogens and suspended and bedded sediments, which are the
most-cited stressors reported by the States as the reasons for listing U.S. waters as impaired.
Recall that such listings set in motion many of the policy and regulatory steps depicted in
Figures 1 and 2, including requirements for setting and implementing TMDL's. Accordingly,
nutrients, pathogens and suspended and bedded sediments would occupy a "high" position on the
x-axis of Figure 4. That is, the listing process is demonstrably "sensitive" to these stressors and
their impact on water quality is judged to be substantial. From an uncertainty perspective, (the
10
-------
y-axis of Figure 4) the ability to reliably measure pathogens and to infer their sources within
watersheds is very limited and the quantitative dose-response data for suspended and bedded
sediments are virtually non-existent. Clearly, in these cases, uncertainty is also "high". This
uncertainty is a major, if not an absolute, limiting factor in the ability of the Agency and States
to successfully implement the steps (Figures 1 and 2) needed to meet water quality goals. And, a
high priority "weight" is now attached to these problems. This process is, of course, somewhat
qualitative but it is also believed to be reasonably objective. (Actually, it is also akin to the
concepts of "analysis of the value of data" and first-order error analyses, both representing
formal analytical and mathematical procedures.)
Another perspective on the use of Figure 4 is application to the four LTGs. (See Text Box 1.)
While meeting all the goals is critical to Agency programs and success, the recent NRC study
calls for increased attention to the "listing problem" and for more explicit "adaptative
management" approaches for implementing TMDL requirements. Accordingly, this MYP has
proposed relative increases in resources for LTGs 2 and 3, within an overall level-resource
environment.
Table 1 provides specific research questions and topics under each LTG. Approximate time
frame for their completion is in the figures and tables to follow. The content as expressed in
annual performance goals and measures and their respective timing reflect the priorities as
judged by the above process.
Note that the questions in Table 1 are informed by additional specific information. For example,
the order and specificity of the major stressors (suspended and bedded sediments, pathogens,
nutrients, etc.) reflect the outcomes and priorities of the ORD-OW workshops. This does not
mean that all ORD resources will be deployed in a simple sequential fashion in order to answer
the questions, rather that the detailed science planning at the Division and investigator levels
should reflect the topics in a balanced and sufficiently focused manner so that the questions can
be answered in a timely fashion. The importance of this principle cannot be overstated -
projected resource levels simply do not accommodate relevant but lower priority research.
Annual Performance Goals and Measures: The General Roadmap and Challenge for Meeting
Agency Long Term Goals
Meeting the Agency long term goals and their related research goals by answering the associated
research questions summarized in Table 1, will enable OW, the Regions, the States, and
watershed stakeholders to develop and apply creative and robust approaches to meet Clean
Water Act requirements. The steps illustrated in Figure 1, while straight-forward in form, operate
in a challenging institutional environment of multiple interests, diverse constituencies,
overlapping jurisdictional boundaries, and calls for accelerated time frames. Such operational
complexities produce pressures for "faster, cheaper, more accurate" solutions. The overriding
public interest is in the outcome - clean water on a sustained and sustainable basis.
11
-------
The annual performance goals and measures outlined in this plan are designed to provide a
product stream of data, methods, models, and tools that both recognize the operational
complexities of Figure 1 and that support the specific steps taken by the various entities charged
with clean water action programs (of course, all entities respond to the Agency's policy
development and guidance). All stakeholders serve the interest to protect high quality aquatic
systems and to restore U.S. waters currently listed as impaired.
Stakeholders and resource managers need to be able to set criteria or goals and monitor for
condition, to identify and list impaired waters for action, to diagnose the causes and sources of
current and future problems, and to formulate and implement cost-effective prevention and
restoration solutions. Some stakeholders need support in making local decisions and
implementing action programs while others need support in formulating policies that integrate
multi-objective interests while providing improved water quality outcomes.
Operational time-lines among States and other stakeholders are variable with some depending on
rotation cycles among river basins or watersheds within a given jurisdiction, while others are
following a litigation-based schedule mandated by the Courts. The problem remains to provide
the science necessary to inform decision-making and document outcomes across this range of
needs. A specific time-frame from FY03 through FY08 has been adopted for this plan. The
cyclical and ongoing nature of the Clean Water Act will require both operational and research
support beyond the FY08 target.
12
-------
Table 1. Long Term Goals and Priority Science Questions
Long Term Goal 1: Provide the approaches and methods to develop and apply criteria for
habitat alteration, nutrients, suspended and bedded sediments, pathogens and toxic chemicals
that will support designated uses for aquatic systems
• What are the quantitative and causal relationships between varying levels of stressors, alone and in
combination, and the biological response of aquatic ecosystems and the resulting services such systems
provide? For habitat alteration? For nutrients? For suspended and bedded sediments? For pathogens?
For toxic chemicals?
• What are the best ways to classify ecosystems, landscapes, and watersheds to enable efficient and
scientifically sound development and application of indicators, biocriteria, listing criteria, and water
quality criteria?
• How can stressor levels, biological-response relationships, classification schemes, bioassessment
methods, ecological risk assessments, and indicators be applied across U.S. surface waters to set criteria
for identifying/restoring impaired waters and maintaining designated uses?
Long Term Goal 2: Provide the tools to assess and diagnose the causes and pollutant sources of
impairment in aquatic systems
• How can multiple and possibly related causes of biological impairment be inferred from indicator and
other observations, and cause-effect modeling? For habitat alteration? For nutrients? For suspended
and bedded sediments? For pathogens? For toxic chemicals?
• How can the sources and source strengths of stressors be inferred from in situ measurements? From
stressor measurements? From biological indicators? From remotely-sensed observations and watershed
properties?
• How does one determine the most appropriate and efficient scale for application of diagnostic methods
within the TMDL and 303 (d) process?
Long Term Goal 3: Provide the tools to restore and protect impaired aquatic systems and to
forecast the ecological, economic, and human health benefits of alternative approaches to attain
water quality standards
• What additions to models are most needed for the TMDL process? For habitat alteration? For nutrients?
For suspended and bedded sediments? For pathogens? For toxic chemicals?
• What BMP's treatment systems and restoration technologies remain as uncertain options for watershed
management? For mixed land use watersheds? For habitat alteration? For nutrients? For suspended
and bedded sediments? For pathogens? For toxic chemicals?
• How can classification schemes, modeling scenario analyses, landscape classification, and economic
projections be applied to provide alternatives for meeting water quality goals efficiently at multiple
scales? What are the economic benefits of watershed management?
Long Term Goal 4: Provide the approaches, methods and tools to assess the exposures and
reduce the human health risks from biosolids contaminants for use by OW, States and others in
updating biosolids guidance and regulations
• Do contaminants in biosolids pose a significant health risk to the public when applied in compliance
with current regulations?
• What additional models, tools and methods are needed to identify, measure and assess aggregate
exposure pathways and risks?
• What improved analytical techniques can be developed to adequately determine pathogen and priority
toxic chemicals in or released from biosolids?
• What is the current state of management practices for biosolids production and application, and how can
those be made more effective?
-------
Consider in detail the first Long Term Goal.
Long Term Goal 1. Provide the approaches and methods to develop and apply criteria for
habitat alteration, nutrients, suspended and bedded sediments, pathogens and toxic
chemicals that will support designated uses for aquatic systems
Summary of Research Questions and Approaches
• What are the quantitative and casual relationships between varying levels of stressors,
alone and in combination, and the biological response of aquatic ecosystems and the
resulting services such systems provide? For habitat alteration? For nutrients? For
suspended and bedded sediments? For pathogens? For toxic chemicals?
• What are the best ways to classify ecosystems, landscapes, and watersheds to enable
efficient and scientifically sound development and application of indicators, biocriteria,
monitoring and assessment methodologies, and water quality criteria?
• How can stressor levels, biological-response relationships, classification schemes,
bioassessment methods, ecological risk assessments and indicators be applied across U.S.
surface waters to set criteria for identifying /restoring impaired waters and maintaining
designated uses?
ORD envisions an approach to meeting the first Long Term Goal that develops and integrates
indicators, classification schemes, stressor-response relationships and modeling, and
bioassessment methods into generally applicable ways to set criteria for a wide array of
designated uses. ORD's role does not currently extend to deriving criteria, rather to provide the
science to develop improved or new criteria. The recent National Research Council (NRC) study
on TMDL's has recommended that more comprehensive and flexible consideration be given to
listing impaired waters. While this recommendation may be directed to policy constructs within
TMDL and Agency monitoring guidance, the related scientific issue includes the rationale for
relating designated use to water quality criteria.
Table 2 arrays the APG's and APM's proposed to meet this goal. Figure 5 shows the linkage and
timing of the proposed Annual Performance Goals for this Long Term goal. Note that the
structure of the APG's illustrated in Figure 5 implies both the provision of relevant and
necessary science and the application, or, demonstration, of the science. The structure and
choice of wording were deliberate; ORD needs to both produce peer-reviewed science and to
demonstrate via application and case studies that the research can be used to satisfy the
requirements shown in Figure 1.
Priorities include increased stressor-specific efforts for sediments, nutrients, pathogens, and
highly persistent bioaccumulative toxic chemicals (PBT's) for the protection of wildlife
populations. Bioassessment research is proposed to continue as a field-oriented approach to
14
-------
setting biocriteria as the basis for relating designated uses to biological condition in streams and
rivers.
Research for this long term goal builds on a longstanding program having already "plucked the
low-hanging fruit." Much of the remaining work will focus on aquatic populations and
communities and will specifically address multiple stressors. In the case of nutrients, a strategic
decision has been made to focus on coastal and Great Lakes systems with an expectation that the
knowledge gained will address national priorities (hypoxia in coastal systems) that can be
extrapolated across a wide array of geographical systems (e.g., streams, rivers, lakes and
wetlands). In the case of suspended and bedded sediments, this MYP sets near term goals but
defers projection of expected research products pending a state of the science assessment on the
topic and the integration of these results with research being conducted under the Goal 4
Ecological Research MYP.
Research progression over time is envisioned as moving from laboratory and conceptual
approaches of increasing complexity to watershed and regional demonstrations as part of
interactive partnerships with Regions and States. The Logic Flow Diagram of Figure 5 illustrates
the cumulative progress over time for the major stressor categories (habitat alteration, nutrients,
suspended and bedded sediments, pathogens, and toxic chemicals).
Expected Impact and Outcomes
Currently, the States operate from a mixture of narrative and numerical water quality criteria.
The major causes of impairment (nutrients, pathogens, and suspended and bedded sediments)
often reflect nonattainment of narrative criteria caused in many cases by episodic events and that
will require, over time, numerically-based reductions in loads and monitoring of the outcomes. If
successful, the research outlined for this goal will enable the Agency and States to avoid over-or
under- managing stressors and their related costs. National, regional, and watershed-based
management strategies for stressors discussed in the plan (e.g. nutrients, pathogens, etc.) that are
based on criteria thresholds and quantitative targets will emerge. While ORD has not set targets
for the number and extent of States and other organizations that develop water quality criteria or
standards based on products in Table 2, such statistics will best document the outcomes of this
research.
Now, consider Long Term Goal 2 in more detail.
Long Term Goal 2. Provide the tools to assess and diagnose the causes and pollutant
sources of impairment in aquatic systems
Summary of Research Questions and Approaches
• How can multiple and possibly related causes of biological impairment be inferred from
indicator and other observations, and cause-effect modeling ? For habitat alteration?
15
-------
For nutrients? For suspended and bedded sediments? For pathogens? For toxic
chemicals?
• How can the sources and source strengths of stressors be inferred from in situ
measurements? From stressor measurements? From biological indicators? From
remotely-sensed observations and watershed properties?
• How does one determine the most appropriate and efficient scale for application of
diagnostic methods within the TMDL and 303(d) process?
Once an impaired water body is listed for restoration, it is rarely the case that the exact causes of
the impairment and the stressor sources are known. Indeed, the NRC report (June 2001) suggests
that the process of listing impaired waters in the first place (the CWA as amended, 303(d) listing
process) may have identified waters that should be further analyzed before TMDL and
restoration actions are required. While such recommendations are policy-related, an important
science issue is clearly raised: what is the most robust and practical approach for identifying
impaired waters for further analysis and actions? Accordingly, ORD has developed a diagnostic
research program having two dimensions. First, ORD is developing approaches and diagnostic
methods that encompass the analysis of watershed, land use, hydrological properties, biological
outcomes, and other features that are most likely to lead to impaired waters. Such methods, when
integrated into probability or other monitoring designs, should specifically enable EPA and the
States to address the NRC recommendation.
ORD envisions the second dimension as one of diagnostic analysis to solve the "inverse
problem". That is, given evidence of biological or physicochemical impairment in surface
waters, how does one infer the causes (stressor or suite of stressors) and the sources (e.g., current
or historical discharges, point or nonpoint sources, anthropogenic or natural)? For example, if
the observed benthic invertebrate indicators suggest aquatic impairment, what are the specific
stressors and their related sources? And, given evidence of stressors in surface water, how does
one infer the sources and their magnitudes? For example, if nitrogen levels exceed nutrient
criteria, how does one infer the sources, their magnitudes, and transport pathways leading to the
observed levels?
An array of data and tools will be investigated as approaches for both dimensions of the problem.
Included among the approaches are water body and ecosystem classification schemes, landscape
characterization, cause-effect modeling and experimental watershed analysis methods including
gradient studies. Table 3 arrays the APG's and APM's proposed to meet this goal. Figure 6
shows the linkage and timing of the proposed Annual Performance Goals for this Long Term
Goal. Note, again, that the structure of the APG's illustrated in Figure 6 implies both the
provision of relevant and necessary science and the application, or demonstration of the science.
A major, and perhaps overriding, challenge for this entire body of work is to provide robust
methods that can be implemented by watershed managers and State Agencies within the
expected operational constraints of limited data sets and analysis time frames.
16
-------
Priorities include continued development of the science from this plan (e.g., stressor-response
relationships and diagnostic indicators) and from other multi-year plans (e.g., Goal 4 Ecology
Research) to support OW Stressor Identification Guidance. The expectation is that such
guidance will be supported by an ongoing product stream of increasing complexity and
robustness.
Progression over time is envisioned as moving from empirical methods that embed limited
causality to robust and field-capable methods and models that provide robust causality and
unambiguous source identification. ORD also envisions, pending resource availability,
watershed demonstrations as part of interactive partnerships with EPA Regions and States.
Expected Impact and Outcomes
A notable and potentially powerful outcome of research proposed to meet this long term goal is
the prospect of inventing alternative but efficient and economical ways to implement major steps
in the TMDL development process, especially in the listing and assessment phases (e.g., use of
extrapolation techniques such as classification schemes). Because this goal speaks both to the
NRC report on 303(d) listing decisions and to existing and proposed TMDL guidance on
problem and source identification, reasonable expectations for outcomes include efficient,
precise, and robust prescriptions for intervening to restore impaired waters, i.e., we can cure the
patient only when we have diagnosed the illness.
Now, consider Long Term Goal 3 in more detail.
Long Term Goal 3. Provide the tools to restore and protect impaired aquatic systems and
to forecast the ecological, economic, and human health benefits of alternative approaches
to attain water quality standards
Summary of Research Questions and Approaches
• What additions to models are most needed for the TMDL process? For habitat alteration?
For nutrients? For suspended and bedded sediments? For pathogens? For toxic
chemicals?
• What BMP's, treatment systems and restoration technologies remain as uncertain options
for watershed management? For mixed land use watersheds? For habitat alteration? For
nutrients? For suspended and bedded sediments? For pathogens? For toxic chemicals?
• How can classification schemes, modeling, scenario analyses, landscape classification,
and economic projections be applied to provide alternatives for meeting water quality
goals efficiently at multiple scales? What are the economic benefits of watershed
management?
17
-------
ORD envisions an approach for meeting the third long-term goal that also builds on prior work
in both modeling and technology development but that shifts the focus of research from
"pollutant loading and load reduction" to pollution prevention, multimedia modeling, and
restoration approaches for watershed management. Priorities are proposed for "performance-
based" technologies, increasing use of and anticipation for market-based risk management
frameworks, and more efficient and cost-effective forecasting and modeling. Another feature of
the proposed research is integration of economic data into watershed planning and
implementation that will lead to a better understanding of both the costs and benefits of
alternative ways to achieve water quality.
Table 4 arrays the APG's and APM's proposed to meet this goal. Figure 7 shows the linkage and
timing of the proposed Annual Performance Goals for this Long Term Goal. Note, again, that
the structure of the APG's illustrated in Figure 7 implies both the provision of relevant and
necessary science and the application, or, demonstration, of the science.
Priorities include the stressor-specific emphases common to Long Term Goals 1, 2, and 3 for
habitat alteration, nutrients, suspended and bedded sediments, and pathogens, and toxic
chemicals, while working to resolve remaining uncertainties for PBT's and metals. The proposed
priority sources and watershed types are intended to reflect both the weights illustrated in Figure
4 and in ORD's understanding of the non-EPA research being conducted by other Federal and
State agencies responding to other constituencies.
The recent TMDL NRC (June 2001) study also specifically challenged the Agency to address
science needs in both the modeling and implementation strategies currently being deployed for
topics under this long term goal. Adaptive management (watershed scale hypothesis-driven
research with feedback monitoring) and increased use of uncertainty analysis in modeling and
decision-making are notable and appropriate challenges.
Expected Impact and Outcomes
The public rightly holds EPA accountable for the outcome of our collective efforts in research
and operational activities to be measured as improvements in water quality. Simply put, the
expectation is the formulation and implementation of solutions that work, are affordable, and that
are sustainable in social, economic, and ecological terms. This outcome-based expectation
provides the focus for research under this long-term goal.
If successful, the results from this research will enable States and watershed stakeholders to be
more efficient in meeting process requirements (e.g., load allocations, implementation plans,
load reductions, etc.) and, more importantly perhaps, develop linked socioeconomic and water
quality management and policy strategies that lead to sustainable and sustained improvements in
both environmental and economic well being.
18
-------
Expected outcomes include moving from technology-based to performance-based approaches,
full integration of biological and physicochemical factors, and decision-making that is fully
informed by inherent variability and uncertainties.
Finally, consider the Long Term Goal 4 in more detail.
Long Term Goal 4. Provide the approaches, methods and tools to assess the exposures and
reduce the human health risks from biosolids contaminants for use by OW, States and
others in updating biosolids guidance and regulations
Summary of Research Questions and Approaches
• Do contaminants in biosolids pose a significant health risk to the public when applied in
compliance with current regulations?
• What additional models, tools and methods are needed to identify, measure and assess
aggregate exposure pathways and risks?
• What improved analytical techniques can be developed to adequately determine pathogen
and priority toxic chemicals in or released from biosolids?
• What is the current state of management practices for biosolids production and
application, and how can those be made more effective?
ORD envisions a program that addresses key issues identified in the 2002 NRC report:
"Biosolids Applied to Land: Advancing Standards and Practices" The key finding of that report
was that the scientific basis for protecting human health needs to be updated. The science
questions listed above are key to addressing this finding.
As dictated by the large number of uncertainties associated with the science questions, ORD is
conducting several studies in FY03 and FY04 to better formulate the problem, including
screening level risk assessments and field studies of biosolids composition, management
techniques and releases to the environment. These initial studies will be used to better define
research gaps and will support others in EPA in addressing the NRC findings.
Based on work in FY03 and FY04, ORD plans to identify more specific research that is needed
to address the science questions. This research in FY04 and beyond may address the
improvement of assessment methods and their application, analytical technique development,
and further evaluation and/or development of biosolids management techniques. The biosolids
research APGs and APMs beyond FY04 that are listed at the end of this plan are current ORD
proposals and subject to change (see Table 5 and Figure 8).
Expected Impact and Outcomes
If successful, the results of this research will lead to a reduction of uncertainties about the
impacts on the public near biosolids sites and provide alternatives for reduction of any health
risks posed by biosolids land application. The research can support EPA and others in
19
-------
determining if there are significant risks associated with current management of biosolids
application. The research also supports decisions on what improved management techniques
might be chosen.
Resource Allocation Among the Long Term Goals
Table 2 illustrates the relative resource allocation among the Plan's Long Term Goals. This table
was constructed by including all relevant resources including intramural accounting (personnel
and related costs) and extramural accounting (funding for grants, cooperative agreements, and
contracts).
Table 2. Relative Resource Trends
Among the Long Term Goals
Goal FYOSBase FYlOBase
% of total % of total
LTG1 53
LTG2 16
LTG
31
LTG 4 TBD
40
20
40
TBD
The proposed resource shifts shown are modest,
project trends to reflect priorities, and are
consistent with the principle embedded in Figure
3. Precise and annual allocation of limited
resources among essential components of the
research will remain difficult and are subject to
Agency priorities and contingencies; the guidance
in the Table should inform the annual processes.
Summary of the non-EPA research supportive
of the LTG's
The process illustrated in Figure 1 is EPA and
"State-centric" in that it describes the Agency's
mandate under the Clean Water Act, as widely,
but not exclusively, implemented by the States. It
also invites interest from multiple groups and institutions, especially those serving
constituencies with real or perceived liabilities for the action programs implemented by EPA and
the States. Such groups advocate and support research programs in both the public and private
sector. Among Federal natural resource management agencies, research programs are responsive
to Department priorities, which are relevant to, if not overlapping with, ORD research. For
example, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USD A) has both natural resource management
and Clean Water Act responsibilities (e.g., the U.S. Forest Service's multiple-use management of
the National Forests). Also, the USDA responds to constituencies (e.g., animal producers and
row-crop commodity groups) who advocate research to enable appropriate and effective
responses to Clean Water Act programs. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are federal agencies charged with providing
data and public information on surface water resources and marine fisheries. These agencies
often view EPA as clients within the federal community and ORD often partners with them to
leverage our respective missions, interests, and resources (e.g., coastal monitoring, surface water
monitoring as part of field research projects, joint solicitations for competitive grants on HAB's
and algal toxins). While common interests with the non-EPA research community are varied,
and opportunities for meaningful and effective partnerships are acknowledged (and often
20
-------
implemented within Labs and Centers), the scope and intensity of such research has been
implicitly integrated into the content and priorities of this proposed plan. Formal coordination is
provided via standing and ad hoc working groups and committees within the prevailing
Administration research coordinative mechanisms (e.g., the Committee on the Environment and
Natural Resources (CENR) as configured by the White House Office of Science and Technology
Policy).
A summary of how knowledge of the non-EPA research was factored into the proposed APG's
and APM's is summarized below:
4 ORD's National Center for Environmental Research (NCER) issues joint solicitations
with NOAA, USD A, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), and the National Science
Foundation (NSF) on topics related to HAB's, pathogens in recreational waters, and
CAFO's
4 field and laboratory experimental work in pursuit of LTG's 1-4 are supplemented by
Interagency Agreements with USGS, NOAA, TV A, USD A, and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.
4 for LTG 3, ORD has set a priority on reducing uncertainties for urban and mixed land-
use watersheds, and watersheds in transition from development pressures; completely
forested and agricultural watersheds are largely the domain of USD A
4 ORD will (and has to date) coordinate if not negotiate with relevant federal research and
funding agencies in order to avoid unnecessary duplication
4 a limited number of cooperative agreements with research universities are issued as part
of the ORD Laboratory or Center research portfolio across the long term goals
4 ORD proposes to integrate research from other Agencies and the academic community as
a means to provide leadership in advice to the OW, Regions, States, and local agencies; a
renewed interest in technology transfer is expected to focus on the long term goals as
well
4 Due to its long term involvement in biosolids research, ORD has a strong with a strong
understanding of current biosolids research in the Office of Water and outside EPA.
Outside research is being further evaluated by EPA to determine critical research needs.
In addition, ORD is conducting collaborative research with USD A, States and others.
Concluding Notations for Current Resource Base
21
-------
EPA's mission to protect human health and the environment via the Clean Water Act is among
the most mature and longstanding mandates entrusted to the Agency. Progress over the last thirty
years is notable, even commendable. Much remains to be done; public support is strong, direct
stakeholder interest and participation are growing, and the watershed approach is firmly
established. Our continued progress and success depend on the continued dedication of ORD's
and the Nation's researchers to resolve the increasingly complex and interacting factors that
determine both biogeophysical response and human behavior in watersheds. The multi-year plan
described herein is proposed as a framework for achieving the research components required to
achieve measurable and measured improvement in water quality. Desirable, overall outcomes
are as follows:
> impaired waters are accurately and efficiently identified and characterized
> causes and sources of stressors leading to impairments are made readily apparent
> all interested stakeholders will have robust and efficient tools at their disposal to assess
the restoration requirements, evaluate their costs and feasibility, and project their
optimum deployment
> locally developed and implemented systems to regulate or motivate actions are available
> water quality improvements from action programs are fully documented at reasonable
costs
> water quality is sustained and maintained in a balanced fashion that reflects legislative
mandates, reflects public and stakeholder interests, and that provides ecosystem and
public health services for future generations.
Unfunded Priorities
The decisions leading to the research described in this plan are intended to be largely strategic
and to reflect the highest priorities with consideration for ORD workforce skills and Office of
Water programmatic priorities. The challenges presented by the long term goals are daunting and
merit a sustained research program. That said, a number of emerging issues and policy-relevant
questions remain under- studied and must be integrated into the resource allocation process.
Accordingly, this section of the Plan identifies a number of research areas and questions that
remain largely unaddressed. As such, this section is intended to describe areas for which
additional funding is needed.
In some cases, this section will also identify alternative priorities beyond those embedded in the
research program that should be carefully weighed as annual budgets are developed. Progress in
some areas should enable a different resource allocation than is now in force and hence these
priorities are also candidates to displace lower priorities within the base program.
22
-------
Issue 1 - economic benefits from water quality programs and rule-making
What are the economic benefits of meeting water quality goals and standards? What is the
cost-effectiveness of the programs and approaches designed to achieve the goals and
standards?
The 305(b) reports and the 303(d) listed waters are evidence that failure to attain water quality
goals and standards is widespread. From the perspective of an economist, it must be true that the
benefits of achieving water quality goals are less than the costs and hence the lack of attainment.
The reasons for this apparent condition are no doubt manifold and complex. Among the reasons
must be the difficulty in assigning monetary benefits to "ecosystem conditions" that are
typically not part of market transactions. Other reasons include uncertainties in the connection
and relationship between management or program variables (e.g., nutrients reduction, BMP's for
nonpoint source controls, permit conditions for CAFO's, among many others) and the water
quality condition indicators (e.g., IBI's, coastal hypoxia, fish abundance and species richness,
among many others). Research is needed on non-market valuation methods, on cost-benefit
methodologies, and on the translation of control/programmatic variables into benefits measures.
This issue is made all the more urgent when one considers the nascent EPA Report on the
Environment, which is expected to serve as the baseline for a sustained public communication of
the EPA's progress in achieving our mission.
Issue 2 - BMP effectiveness
What is the effectiveness of Best Management Practices as the conceptual and
programmatic solution to meeting water quality goals?
BMP's were invented circa 1974 and have stood as the EPA policy to achieve nonpoint source
pollutant control. Over this time period, the BMP research and implementation communities
have provided an array of BMP's, design and operational procedures, and models that are
intended to implement EPA policies. The context and "design parameters" for BMP's have not
changed.
Since 1974, the measures and indicators of ambient water quality have evolved to accommodate
more complex and biologically-based outcomes. Non-attainment of water quality goals is often
attributed to failure to meet these more relevant indicators of ecosystem health. This trend has
resulted in less ability to know or estimate the effectiveness of the BMP policy and the
cumulative investments in that policy.
Research is needed to develop new approaches to empirically documenting the effectiveness of
BMP's in meeting biologically-derived water quality goals. New models are urgently needed to
forecast outcomes from BMP's at different scales.
Issue 3 - use attainability and adaptive management
23
-------
What additional knowledge is needed to engage in adaptive management of the waters of
the U.S. as an outcome-oriented approach to achieving Clean Water Act goals?
Water quality standards, when properly constructed and met, ensure that the waters of the U.S.
provide the ecosystem goods and services required to achieve the designated use. The
"designated use" decisions reflect long-standing public expectations and regulatory bodies at the
State and Federal level have been reluctant to call for "use attainability" as a scientific issue.
Arguably, if the scientific and policy communities respond to the call for "increased use of
adaptive management" as expressed in the NRC study on TMDL's, then the interaction among
standards, designated uses, and the "attainability" of both must be better understood.
Research is needed to provide more focus on this use attainability issue so that the scientific
basis for possible policy developments will exist.
Issue 4 - ecological and human health links
What are the scientific links and interactions among ecological and human health
endpoints and benefits vis-a-vis the Clean Water Act?
The reality that the Nation often fails to meet the water quality goals of the Clean Water Act
begs many questions. Arguably, one science issue is the lack of understanding available that
links human health benefits to ecological health and biological integrity and sustainability. That
said, it is very clear that much of the early success in water pollution control came from actions
driven by public health goals, particularly reduction in water-bourne diseases.
There is a need to re-visit this vital link between water quality to protect ecosystems and public
health and well-being.
24
-------
TABLES
LONG TERM GOAL 1: Provide the approaches and methods to develop and apply criteria for
habitat alteration, nutrients, suspended and bedded sediments, pathogens and toxic chemicals
that will support designated uses for aquatic ecosystems
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
YEAR
LAB/
CENTER
HABITAT ALTERATION
APG 8 (GPRA) - Provide demonstration stressor-response
relationships and/or models linking loss and alteration of
habitat to selected fish, shellfish, and wildlife endpoints.
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
58
GPRA
Report on Penaeid shrimp dependence on seagrass habitat
Report on finfish dependence on seagrass and oyster reef
habitats
Prototype watershed- stream network model for Pacific
Salmon
Report characterizing relationships between multiple
habitat types and economically valuable fish at the scale
of an estuarine shoreline
Report characterizing the relationship between habitat in
stream networks and salmon-native fish for coastal
Oregon watersheds
Report characterizing the relationship between alteration
of vegetated habitats and nekton use of those habitats
Report characterizing relationships between abundance,
quality, and arrangement of various habitat types and
selected biotic assessment endpoints in coastal systems
APG - Provide stressor-response relationships and/or models
linking loss and alteration of habitat to selected fish, shellfish,
and wildlife endpoints
APM
Report on habitat suitability indices to support population
models for projecting relative risks of multiple stressors
including toxic chemicals and habitat alteration to
common loons
2006
2003
2003
2004
2004
2005
2006
2006
2006
2004
ORD
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
ORD
NHEERL
25
-------
APM
APM
APM
Report on indices of watershed integrity based on land
use/land cover and relationships to fish (e.g., salmon,
pike, and/or others)
Reports characterizing the relationship between
landscape-scale habitat mosaics and native fish by
wetland type in the Great Lakes
Final report characterizing relationships between
abundance, quality, and arrangement of various habitat
types and selected biotic assessment endpoints in coastal
systems
APG - Provide suites of habitat alteration - biological response
relationships and generalization/extrapolation schemes suitable
for developing broad-scale habitat criteria for streams and
coastal systems, and provide approaches for evaluating
combined effects of habitat alteration and other stressors
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
Report on the ecological consequences of marine derived
nutrients and nutrient enrichment for aquatic biota and
stream habitat quality, with an emphasis on salmon and
native fish
Initial report on food web-mediated vs. habitat-based
alteration offish communities from field studies across a
representative group of Great Lakes coastal wetlands
Report on estimating the feasibility of restoring currently
at-risk wild salmon habitat through use of replacing lost
marine derived nutrients and the likely ecological side
effects of such additions
Regional models of landscape influence of salmon/native
fish in the Pacific Northwest and native fish in Great Lake
coastal wetlands
Empirical and model -based evaluation of effectiveness of
habitat and nutrient criteria as protective of the health of
aquatic life in Great Lakes coastal wetlands
Report on the interactions between stream nutrients and
habitat alteration on water quality and aquatic life
Synthesized quantitative species-habitat relationships
suitable for developing regional habitat-based biocriteria
for shorelines, lakes, and estuaries
2005
2005
2006
2008
2004
2006
2006
2007
2008
2008
2008
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
ORD
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
26
-------
NUTRIENTS
APG 15 GPRA) - Complete the framework for including
dissolved oxygen and other receiving water thresholds into
watershed management for nutrients
APM
201
GPRA
APM
APM
Report on the effects of nutrient enrichment on coastal
phytoplankton communities
Propose classification scheme for predicting sensitivity of
coastal receiving waters to effects of nutrients on DO
Provide minimum dissolved oxygen requirements for a
suite of the important marine organisms in the Atlantic,
Pacific, and Gulf of Mexico coastal waters of the U.S.
APG - Provide the scientific foundation for establishing site-
specific nutrient threshold criteria to protect estuarine SAVs
and freshwater organisms
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
Report on the correlation of water quality with SAV
change
Report on environmental requirements of three main
species of seagrasses
Development of stress-response model for Zostera
marina in Pacific Northwest and validation of stress-
response model for Thalassia testudinum.
Development of empirical load-response models for
Zostera marina in NE U.S.
Report on a spatial approach to assessing nutrients and
nutrient criteria at landscape and watershed scales
Report on an approach to refining regional nutrient
criteria on the basis of adverse effects to faunal
assemblages.
Development of load-response models for estuaries of
Pacific Northwest and Gulf Coast, and validation of
stress-response model for Zostera marina in NE U.S.
Propose classification scheme for predicting sensitivity of
coastal receiving waters to the effects of nutrients on
SAV
2003
2003
2003
2003
2007
2003
2004
2004
2004
2005
2005
2005
2005
ORD
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
ORD
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NCEA
NCEA
NHEERL
NHEERL
27
-------
APM
APM
Report on the empirical and numeric models for SAV
Report on a classification scheme for grouping coastal
receiving waters based on sensitivity to nutrients
APG - Provide scientific foundation for development and
application of quantitative measures of food web attributes that
are sensitive to ecological changes associated with nutrient
enrichment
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
Report on the sensitivity of food web responses to
nutrient loading in coastal systems
Propose classification scheme for coastal receiving waters
based on food web sensitivity to nutrients
Report on coastal wetlands of the Great Lakes:
Discrimination of trends in food web response as a
function of nutrient loading and ecosystem classification
factors
Report on empirical and numeric models for food webs
Report on the parameterization of food web models
Report on classification scheme for grouping coastal or
lake receiving waters based on sensitivity to food web
alterations
Final report on Great Lake coastal wetlands to define
food web-nutrient response thresholds
APG - Provide the scientific foundation and information for the
development of a water quality model of the Gulf of Mexico
hypoxic zone
APM
APM
APM
Field cruise report for 2002-2004 for hypoxia surveys in
the Gulf of Mexico
Report on the conditions and seasonal trends of water
quality in the Gulf of Mexico hypoxic zone
Report on the database of environmental information
necessary to develop the water quality model of the Gulf
of Mexico hypoxic zone
2006
2007
2007
2004
2005
2005
2006
2007
2007
2007
2008
2005
2006
2007
NHEERL
NHEERL
ORD
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
ORD
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
28
-------
BIOCRITERIA/BIOASSESSMENT
APG - Demonstrate bioassessment methods to establish
biocriteria for a range of designated uses in freshwater systems
within Eastern US rivers
APM
APM
APM
Report on newly developed and review of existing
biocriteria and bioassessment tools for rivers and streams
in MidAtlantic
Report on newly developed and review of existing
bioassessment tools and biocriteria for New England
Statistical/analytical guidance, including case studies, to
help states choose scientifically sound methods for setting
biocriteria in the eastern U.S.
APG - Demonstrate bioassessment methods to establish
biocriteria for a range of designated uses in freshwater systems
within Mid-Western U.S. rivers
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
NEW
APM
Report comparing differences among invertebrate data
collected using EMAP, NAWQA and OEPA methods in
large rivers
Report on the association among invertebrates and habitat
indicators for large rivers in the midwest
Report on prototype indicators of condition for deep river
fish assemblages
Guidance Document on the Bioassessment of Large
Rivers: Concepts, Approaches and Theory
Report on the field and laboratory performance
characteristics of a new sampling method for riverine
macroinvertebrate assemblages
Report on the comparison of random site selection and
systematic site selection for assessment of 305(b)
reporting segments of the Ohio River
Report that compares aquatic life criteria , direct bioassay
results and bioassessments of macroinvertebrates or fish
assemblages; to examine the protectiveness of chemical
criteria in streams and estuaries
2004
2004
2004
2004
2006
2003
2004
2004
2005
2005
2006
2006
ORD
NERL
EERD
NERL
EERD
NERL
EERD
ORD
NERL
EERD
NERL
EERD
NERL
EERD
NERL
EERD
NERL
EERD
NERL
EERD
NCEA
29
-------
PATHOGENS/INDICATORS OF FECAL CONTAMINATION
APG Provide a rapid means of measuring recreational water
quality and an assessment of the health risks associated with
swimming in waters of varying quality
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
Report on faster, simpler indicator method for fecal
contamination
Produce a report on the pilot studies and preliminary
statistical analyses used to evaluate the beaches
epidemiological data
Report on the evaluation of water quality indicators and
health outcomes for beaches evaluated in FY03
Report on determination of exposure characteristics^. g.,
activity patterns, ingestion rates) for recreational users
Report on fecal indicator monitoring protocols for
different types of recreational waters
An evaluation of alternative indicators of recreational
water safety for tropical regions
An evaluation of the risk posed by exposure to pathogens
in the swash zones (sand/water interface regions) of
recreational beaches
Report on the evaluation of water quality indicators and
health outcomes for beaches evaluated in FY04
Report on the evaluation of water quality indicators and
health outcomes for beaches evaluated in FY05
Deliver a rapid method (less than 2 hours to results) for
monitoring beach water quality that provides the best
relationship to the frequency of swimming-associated
illness
Report describing swimming associated illness and the
quality of water measured using a rapid indicator method
2007
2003
2003
2004
2004
2004
2004
2004
2005
2006
2007
2007
ORD
NERL
MCEARD
NHEERL/
NERL
NHEERL/
NERL
NERL
MCEARD
NERL
MCEARD
NCER
NCER
NHEERL/
NERL
NHEERL/
NERL
NERL/
NHEERL
NHEERL/
NERL
TOXIC CHEMICALS
APG - Provide a summary of the available methods to set risk-
based water and sediment quality criteria for toxic chemicals
2003
ORD
30
-------
APM
Describe a framework for water quality criteria for
nonbioaccumulative chemicals based on risks to aquatic
organisms
APG - Provide methods for extrapolating chemical toxicity data
across exposure conditions and across endpoints, life stages, and
species which can support assessment of risks to aquatic life and
aquatic-dependent wildlife for chemicals with limited data
APM
APM
APM
Acute-to-chronic estimation (ACE) user guide and
software
PBTK/TD model for predicting individual effects on birds
from chronic mercury exposure to facilitate cross-species
extrapolation of toxicity responses
Report on evaluating importance of dietary route of
exposures to aquatic risk assessments for metals
APG - Provide approaches for evaluating the relative and
cumulative risks from toxic chemicals, with respect to risks
from nonchemical stressors, on populations of aquatic life and
aquatic-dependent wildlife at various spatial scales
APM
APM
APM
Report regarding assessment of risks to aquatic organisms
from combined exposure to polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbon mixtures and ultraviolet radiation in natural
systems
Benthic Macroinvertebrate indicators of pesticides in
stream water and sediment
Develop and test an approach for assessing risks of
multiple stressors to wildlife populations in spatially-
diverse landscapes
2003
2006
2003
2005
2006
2008
2005
2006
2008
NHEERL
ORD
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
ORD
NHEERL
NERL
EERD
NHEERL
MULTIPLE STRESSORS
APG 111 (GPRA) - Provide methods for characterizing
population-level risks of multiple stressors to aquatic life and
aquatic-dependent wildlife for use in developing improved
criteria to protect water quality
APM
Two final reports (and a database) comparing and
analyzing the quantitative dose-response relationship
form recently published studies of aquatic and aquatic-
associated wildlife
2005
2003
ORD
NCEA
31
-------
APM
59
GPRA
APM
Develop and test simple population models that project
the relative risks of multiple stressors (toxics, habitat
alterations) to piscivorous birds
Methods for characterizing the exposure and response of
sensitive ecosystems components to pesticides or nutrient
stress using biomonitors and stable isotope ratios of
nitrogen
2004
2005
NHEERL
NCEA
OTHER STRESSORS
APG Data and analysis are made available to help OW
characterize the potential risk of PPCPs to impair waterbodies
and evaluate the need for human health and ecological criteria
(i.e., MCLs and AWQC)
APM
APM
281
APM
282
APM
283
APM
APM
APM
APM
Toward a green pharmacy - Cradle to cradle stewardship
of drugs for minimizing their environmental disposition
while promoting human health
Concentration, detection and measurement of four
widely-prescribed pharmaceutical s at three municipal
wastewater treatment plants using POCIS and LC/MS.
Levels of synthetic musks in municipal wastewater for
estimating biota exposure in receiving waters
Closed-loop stripping of synthetic musk compounds from
fish tissues and analysis by GC/MS/SIM.
"Virtual" Symposium: State of the Science — PPCPs as
Environmental Pollutants
Review of Environmental forensic techniques (e.g., high
resolution MS and ICE software) over the last decade.
Review article.
Sensitive Hemoglobin Adduct Methodology Applied to
the Terminal Valine Proteins in Carp as an Indicator of
Environmental Exposure. Journal article.
Applications of Advanced Mass Spectrometric
Techniques to Defining Environmental Exposures.
Internal report.
2006
2004
2005
2005
2005
2005
2005
2005
2006
ORD
NERL
NERL
NERL
NERL
NERL
NERL
NERL
NERL
32
-------
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
Improved detection methods for, and occurrence levels of,
Pharmaceuticals and personal care products in effluents,
surface waters, treated drinking water and groundwaters
[Brownawell, Graham, Weinberg, Roberts]
An evaluation of how effective wastewater treatment
practices are at decreasing levels of pharmaceuticals and
antiseptics in drinking water [Brownawell Graham,
Roberts]
An evaluation of conferred antibiotic resistance in
microbial communities resulting from pharmaceuticals
and personal care products in the water [Weinberg,
Graham]
An evaluation of the influence of amphiphiles on the fate
and transport of pharmaceuticals in the environment.
[Kibbey]
An evaluation of the ecotoxicity of seclective serotonin
reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in wasteaters, effluents, &
surface waters & the ecotixicity of fluoroquinolone
antibiotics via lab- & field-scale systems [Armbrust,
Graham]
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
NCER
NCER
NCER
NCER
NCER
33
-------
TABLE 4
LONG TERM GOAL 2: Provide the tools to assess and diagnose sources and causes of
impairment in aquatic systems.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
YEAR
LAB/
CENTER
APG 16 (GPRA) - Provide the scientific foundation and
information management scheme for the 303(d) listing process
including a classification framework for surface waters,
watersheds, and regions to guide problem formulation
2003
ORD
APM
202
GPR
A
Classification frameworks for geographic regions and at the
watershed, water body and habitat scale
2003
NHEERL
APG - Provide first generation diagnostic methods, including
stressor identification (SI) methods, for causal linkage of
observed major classes of single stressors and biological
indicators to stressors in freshwater and marine systems; scale
the methods to States and watershed organizations
2005
ORD
APM
Develop molecular diagnostic techniques to identify
Pfiesteria complex organisms and better delineate their
distribution. And identify, purify, and chemically
characterize their toxins (R82-6791; R82-7084; & R82-
6655)
2003
NCER
APM
Develop a method for cryopreserving strains of Pfiesteria
complex organisms and establish over 50 culture isolates to
be available to the scientific community (R82-6793)
2003
NCER
APM
Model of the biophysical interactions Gymnodinium breve
red tides with its chemical and physical habitat and
determine the production, occurrence, fate and effects of
brevetoxins in the environment during and after blooms.
(82-6792 & 82-7085)
2003
NCER
APM
Guidance on whole sediment Toxicity Identification
Evaluation (TIE) procedures
2003
NHEERL
34
-------
APM
APM
APM
APM
Publication of the newly identified mechanisms of lesion
initiation and the contributory environmental and
biological conditions required for lesion development &
progression in fish following exposure to PCO (Pfiesteria
complex organisms) (R82-8224 & Shields)
Landscape Atlas for pesticides, nutrients and sediments for
streams in the Mid-Atlantic coastal plain
Application of coastal watershed and estuarine/lacustuary
classification schemes to predict probability of impairment
based on Great Lakes and Gulf of Mexico regional case
studies
Guidance on and user-friendly interfaces for derivation of
diagnostic indicators for individual stressors
Equip EPA Regions, States and Tribes with knowledge, skills
and tools to determine the causes of impairments for freshwater
and coastal systems required in various regulations
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
Case study implementation plans for multivariate
approaches to community data analysis to apportion cause
among stressors in coastal ecosystems
Case study demonstrating the Stressor Identification
Process that identifies the causes of biological impairment
in the nation's waterbodies
Evaluate the efficacy of AFLP technology as a fast and
reproducible molecular tool to discriminate among species
of enterococci
Report on methods/indicators for determining when
biological impairments of rivers and streams are due to
sediment loads
Report on potential of swine CAFOs to contribute
pathogens, EDCs and other contaminants of concern to
ground water (Also included in LTG 3 2007 APG on
CAFOs)
Determine the nature and concentration of aquatic stressors
released from animal agriculture operations in the form of
aerosols (Also included in LTG 3 2007 APG on CAFOs)
2004
2004
2005
2005
2008
2003
2003
2004
2004
2004
2005
NCER
NERL
ESD
NHEERL
NHEERL
ORD
NHEERL
NERL/
NCEA
NERL
NERL
EERDI
NCEA
NRMRL
GWERD
NRMRL
LRPCD
35
-------
APM Application and evaluation of molecular methods (AFLP 2005 NERL
and others) to discriminate between human and non-human
sources of fecal indicator bacteria
APM Report on methods/indicators for determining when
biological impairments of rivers and streams are due to
toxics
2005
APM Produce landcover/landuse digital database for watersheds
in southwest US
2005
NERL
EERDI
NCEA
APM Training and problem solving workshop: determining the 2005 NERL/
causes of biological impairment, the scientific basis, tools NCEA
and applications applied to state-listed 303(d) streams
NERL
ESD
APM Make landcover/landuse digital database for watersheds in
southwest US publically available thru website
2006
NERL
ESD
APM Produce landscape atlas for pesticides and nutrients in
Midwest streams
APM
2006
Watershed Academy website training for causal analysis
2006
APM Publication presenting the influence of grazing pressure and
viral activity on the dynamics of blooms caused by harmful
dinoflagellates and algae (R82-9366 & R82-9367)
2006
NERL
ESD
APM Implementation plans for extension of case studies from 2006 NHEERL
coastal ecosystems into their watersheds
APM Report on the importance of subsurface transport in the 2006 NRMRL
release of nutrients, pathogens, and antibiotics into the GWERD
watershed (Also included in LTG 3 2007 APG on CAFOs)
APM Case study determining the causes of biological impairment 2006 NERL/
in an urban setting with non-point source impacts so that NCEA
states and tribes will have prototypes to facilitate
completion of TMDL's.
NERL/
NCEA
APM Publication of an in situ method for determining growth 2006 NCER
rates of natural populations of Karenia brevis (formerly G.
breve), utilizing radiolabeling of the biomarker pigment
gyroxanthin (R82-9369)
APM Publication of a behavioral model for G. breve based on a 2006 NCER
characterization of the chemotaxis of the organism obtained
by using G. breve Population Mimics (GBPMs) as
Lagrangian drifters (R82-9370)
NCER
36
-------
APM Publication of an evaluation of 3 8-year Narragansett Bay 2006 NCER
Time Series (NETS) data to discern long-term patterns and
variability in blooms of representative HAB species due to
the effects of meteorological, climatic, physical, chemical
and biological parameters (R82-9368)
APM Publication presenting a suite of microsatellite markers for 2007 NCER
use as tools to link diversity and structure of isolates of K.
brevis with the physiological and ecological bases of bloom
formation (R830413)
APM Publication of an assay to identify a nitrogen-regulated 2007 NCER
enzyme in Alexandrium for use as a new tool for
identifying and monitoring nitrogen nutrition in field
populations of harmful algae (R83-0415)
APM Publication of an evaluation of the physiology and ecology 2007 NCER
of macroalgae to identify different combinations of factors
that lead to bloom formation and the potential for
herbivores to control these blooms (R83-0414)
APM Simulation of key stressor interactions with generic 2007 NHEERL
ecosystem models using sensitivity analysis to define the
range of stressors and stressor combinations under which
nonadditive interactive effects will occur
APM Evaluate the DNA-based technology in impaired
watersheds impacted by fecal contamination from diverse
sources under a range of temporal (different flow dynamics,
after strong rain episodes)and spatial (distance from the
source, water vs. sediment)variability
2007
NERL
APM Produce landscape atlas for pesticides and nutrients in
California streams
2007
NERL
ESD
APM Collection of case studies determining the causes of
biological impairment, the scientific basis, tools and
applications toward improving stream quality.
2007
NERL/
NCEA
APM Report on methods/indicators for diagnosing when 2007 NCEA/
biological impairments of rivers and streams are due to NERL
stressors associated with habitat alteration
APM Case study focusing on the special needs to perform causal
analysis in biologically impaired large rivers.
2008
NERL/
NCEA
37
-------
TABLE 5
LONG TERM GOAL 3: Provide the tools to restore and protect aquatic systems and to forecast
the ecological, economic, and human health outcomes of alternative solutions
ANNUAL GOALS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES
APG Provide updated models for stormwater management, and for
allocating suspended solids and sediment loads, and related
uncertainties for mixed land use watersheds.
APM
APM
172
APM
173
APM
Report on GSTARS predictive model for sediment transport
for use in TMDL watershed assessments for protecting aquatic
ecosystems from siltation
Provide States and watershed managers a document on
managing pathogen contamination in the urban watersheds
with information on health effects, detection methods and best
management practices to meet TMDL requirements
Update Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) for use by
states, utilities and consulting firms in allocating pollutants in
urban watersheds to meet TMDL requirements
Develop and verify a numerical model for sediment oxygen
demand exerted by organic material in the sediments and
nitrogen and methane production under aerobic and anaerobic
conditions at the sediment-water interface
APG Provide indicators, monitoring strategies, and guidance for
determining the effectiveness of Best Management Practices
(BMP's) in meeting water quality goals.
APM
144
APM
APM
142
APM
Develop a strategy to evaluate BMP performance via
molecular based methods in watersheds impaired by fecal
contamination
Provide guidance on indicator selection and monitoring
strategies for evaluating effectiveness of BMPs
Report to the states, regions and program offices on methods
to evaluate wet pond design effectiveness to control sediments
and nutrients
Develop an innovative BMP filter fence for sediment control
to address inefficiencies with current practices at construction
sites
YEAR
2003
2003
2003
2003
2003
2004
2004
2004
2004
2004
LAB/
CENTER
ORD
NERL
ERD
NRMRL
WSWRD
NRMRL
WSWRD
NRMRL
LRPCD
ORD
NRMRL
WSWRD/
LRPCD
NRMRL
WSWRD
NRMRL
WSWRD
NRMRL
WSWRD
38
-------
APM
148
Report on microbial source tracking and its utilization to
identify sources and measure the effectiveness of mitigation
measures in waters impaired due to microbiological
contamination
2004
NRMRL
WSWRD
APM
Report on BMP performance data for controlling nutrients,
suspended solids and sediments, and flow variations within
urban watersheds and identifying information/research gaps
2004
NRMRL
WSWRD
APG Complete at least three (3) demonstrations of updated models
for stormwater management, suspended solids, sediment, and
nutrients to meet water quality objectives.
2005
ORD
APM
137
Decision support tool for a lake/reservoir based on system
assimilative capacity
Linkage to Goal 4 Ecological Research
2004
NRMRL
GWERD
APM
175
Prepare a document for use by states to assist in modeling risk
management options and restoration measures in water bodies
impaired due to suspended solids and sediment
2004
NRMRL
LRPCD
APM
New sediment modeling protocol for instream processes
2004
NERL
ERD
APM
Report demonstrating the effectiveness of applying stormwater
structural BMPs as a tool to address sediment TMDL's
2005
NRMRL
WSWRD
APM
Report to states, regions, and program offices demonstrating
the use of time series analysis to identify non-point source
impacts
2005
NRMRL
LRPCD
APM
Report to states and program offices on the performance of
models (risk management options and restoration measures) to
meet water quality objectives for nutrients and sediments
2005
NRMRL
LRPCD
APM
Report on the application of the updated Storm Water
Management Model (SWMM) to predict drainage from
alternative systems as a tool to assist in meeting TMDL
requirements
2005
NRMRL
WSWRD
APM
Technical outreach for new spatial grids of storm erosive
power (R-factor and EI-30) for use in innovative landscape
indicator development and the Revised Universal Soil Loss
Equation
2005
NERL
ESD
APM
Report describing processes controlling oxidation state in
subsurface environments and related controls on nitrogen fate
2005
NERL
ERD
39
-------
APM
APM
Report describing factors and processes controlling the fate of
nutrients in streams
Documentation of linked TMDL modeling system for
nutrients
APG Provide at least six (6) reports of performance data and
information for controlling nutrients, suspended solids, sediments,
pathogens, toxic chemicals (metals and PBTs), and flow variations
urban and rural watersheds.
APM
APM
(EDC-
177)
APM
APM
146
APM
APM
APM
Determine effectiveness of field application of clays to
mitigate HABs NCER&NHEERL (CR-82-7091)
Report on the stressor reduction (pathogen, EDC, antibiotic,
and airborne nitrogen, particulate and pathogens) achievable
using existing manure management practices at CAFOs
Provide a method to identify areas within mixed-use
watersheds most susceptible to channel instability and erosion
as a tool to drive restoration prioritization for waterbodies
impaired due to suspended solids and sediments
Guidance document on Best Management Practices (BMP)
for sewer solids management
Report on BMP performance (including effectiveness/cost of
constructed wetlands) for controlling nutrients, suspended
solids and sediments, within mixed land-use watersheds
Report on placement of BMP' s in urban-watersheds to meet
water quality goals
Evaluation of the effectiveness of watershed management for
suspended solids and sediments in controlling excess turbidity
and the resulting biotic degradation in receiving waters
APG - Provide State of the Science Synthesis and Application
Approaches for Managing Risks from CAFO's
APM
APM
Report on potential of swine CAFOs to contribute pathogens,
EDCs and other contaminants of concern to ground water
(Also included in LTG 2 2008 APG)
Determine the nature and concentration of aquatic stressors
released from animal agriculture operations in the form of
aerosols (Also included in LTG 2 2008 APG)
2005
2005
2006
2003
2004
2004
2004
2006
2006
2006
2007
2004
2005
NERL
ERD
NERL
ERD
ORD
NCER
NRMRL
LRPCD
NRMRL
WSWRD
NRMRL
WSWRD
NRMRL
LRPCD
NRMRL
WSWRD
NRMRL
LRPCD
ORD
NRMRL
GWERD
NRMRL
LRPCD
40
-------
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
Report on the importance of subsurface transport in the release
of nutrients, pathogens and antibiotics into the watershed (Also
included in LTG 2 2008 APG)
Report on CAFO pollution prevention opportunities and a
framework for successful implementation
Report on lifecycle assessment/sustainability evaluations of
CAFOs including thresholds at which animal density begins to
impair watersheds
Capstone report on the use of natural and constructed wetlands
for the management of environmental stressors
Capstone report on methods to reduce environmental risk from
synthetic and natural hormones, pathogens and nutrients from
CAFO manure management practices
APG Provide at least seven (7) key reports, updated models, and
data bases for allocating and managing suspended solids, sediment,
pathogen, nutrients, and toxic chemical (metals and PBTs) loads
among all sources in mixed land-use watersheds.
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
TMDL database for sediments, nutrients, & organic carbon in
the South Fork Broad River
Database on pathogen indicators in the South Fork Broad
River
Visual Beach Model adapted to coastal, riverine, and lake
systems
Report to states and program offices on the performance of
models (risk management options and restoration measures) to
meet water quality objectives for nutrients, sediments,
pathogens and toxic chemicals
Report on the field validation of the updated Stormwater
Management Model to predict pollutant loadings to meet
TMDL requirements
Report on a state-of-the-science meeting on progress made in
the restoration of water bodies impaired by key stressors
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
2007
2003
2004
2005
2007
2007
2007
NRMRL
GWERD
NRMRL
STD
NRMRL
STD
NRMRL
LRPCD
NRMRL
LRPCD
ORD
NERL
ERD
NERL
ERD
NERL
NRMRL
LRPCD
NRMRL
WSWRD
NRMRL
LRPCD
41
-------
APM
Report that outlines improvements made to existing models to
predict reductions of key stressors (nutrients, pathogens, toxics
and clean sediments) in water bodies and improvement in
biological integrity in mixed land-use watersheds and identify
research gaps
2007
NRMRL
LRPCD
APG Demonstrate the application of innovative wet weather flow
technologies in urban watersheds regulated under the National
CSO Control Policy and SSO Programs
2007
ORD
APM
Report demonstrating a Real Time Control system to
maximize storage of wet weather flows in an urban sewer
system to minimize CSOs/SSOs and meet the National CSO
Policy
2005
NRMRL
WSWRD
APM
Report on using/demonstrating CSO pollution control
methods/concepts for urban stormwater pollution control
2005
NRMRL
WSWRD
APM
Report on emerging engineering practices applying CSO
pollution control methods/concepts for SSO pollution control
2005
NRMRL
WSWRD
APM
Report on computer tools for predicting rainfall dependent
infiltration/inflow in sanitary sewer systems and SWMM
EXTRAN modeling analysis for SSO control planning
2006
NRMRL
WSWRD
APM
Report on emerging engineering practices for the application
of urban stormwater management techniques for CSO
pollution control
2006
NRMRL
WSWRD
APM
Report demonstrating a vacuum flushing system to remove
sediments in an urban combined sewerage system
2007
NRMRL
WSWRD
APM
Develop a manual on new sewer design methodology for
preventing sewer solids deposition during dry-weather low-
flow periods in combined and sanitary sewerage systems
2007
NRMRL
WSWRD
APG Demonstrate the application of models, landscape
characterization methods, and economic analyses to formulate
alternative approaches for protecting and restoring water quality
and critical habitats and to forecast the ecological, economic, and
human health outcomes of the alternatives
2008
ORD
APM
Report on selected methods for integrating ecological risk
assessment and economics to support watershed decision
making
2003
NCEA
42
-------
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
GIS and landscape models to evaluate effectiveness of BMPs
(case studies)
Final methods for integrating ecological risk assessment and
economics to support water body uses, water quality
standards, and TMDL's
Economic analysis of changes to human and ecological risk
due to specific management alternatives
Produce landscape indicator "tool box" to forecast impacts
from pesticide use strategies
Provide to the regions a framework for evaluating whether a
TMDL restoration will be effective to restore water quality in
the urban watershed.
APG Demonstrate proof-of-concept integrated assessments for
allocation of restoration resources to support water quality
standards attainment within the context of relevant socioeconomic
factors and ecological integrity.
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
Develop and deliver a methodology for economic evaluation of
West Virginia watershed ecological restoration including
market and non-market costs and benefits
Linkage to Goal 5 Pollution Prevention and New Technologies
MYP
Ecological evaluation of West Virginia watershed restoration as
a basis for environmental decision making
Evaluation of watershed-based classification and assessment
for State of West Virginia as a framework for watershed
restoration decisions
Report on the use of ecological and economic evaluation as a
basis for environmental decision making in West Virginia
watershed ecological restoration.
Report on the demonstration of ecological analysis/cost-benefit
analysis as an approach to make more integrated resource
management decisions in watershed ecological restoration in
West Virginia to meet water quality standards
2006
2007
2008
2008
2008
2010
2005
2005
2005
2008
2010
NERL
ESD
NCEA
NCEA
NERL
ESD
NERL/
NRMRL
WSWRD
ORD
NRMRL
STD
NHEERL
NHEERL
NHEERL
Lead
NRMRL,
Support
STD
NHEERL,
Lead
NRMRL,
Support
STD
43
-------
TABLE 5
LONG TERM GOAL 4: Provide the approaches, methods and tools to assess the exposures and
reduce the human health risks from biosolids contaminants for use by OW, States and others in
updating biosolids guidance and regulations.
ANNUAL GOALS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES
YEAR
LAB/
CENTER
APG
Provide the EPA Program Offices, EPA Regions, States,
utilities and others with improved tools for characterizing
pathogens in biosolids
2004
ORD
APM
Development and validation of methods for enumeration of
fecal coliforms in biosolids to develop a draft EPA Method
1680 entitled "Fecal Coliforms in Biosolids by Multiple-Tube
Fermentation Procedures"
2004
NRMRL
APM
Development and validation of methods for enumeration of
salmonellae in biosolids to develop a draft EPA Method 1682
entitled "Salmonella in Biosolids by Enrichment, Selection and
Biochemical Characterization"
2004
NRMRL
APG
Provide the EPA Program Offices, EPA Regions, States and
others with study findings that improve the understanding
of the effectiveness of current biosolids practices and of the
significance of human health risks to support decisions on
biosolids management and research
2005
ORD
APM
147
Report on the evaluation of contaminant concentrations and on
the reduction of biosolids contaminants achieved by current
biosolids management practices at field application sites
2005
NRMRL
APM
Risk Assessment Analysis Plan that defines needs for biosolids
research to support NRC recommendations and 503(b) listings
2005
NCEA
APG
Provide the EPA Program Offices, EPA Regions, States and
others with improved data, tools, and methods for the
analysis of risks, and for selection of more effective
management options
2007
ORD
APM
Methods for selected pharmaceutical and personal care
products (PPCPs) (e.g., antibiotics and musks) adapted for solid
materials
2005
NERL
44
-------
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
APM
Reports on case studies of up to 7 biosolids production and/or
application sites providing data on contaminant occurrence,
treatment and application process cost-effectiveness and
contaminant transport and fate for selected biosolids
contaminants
An optimized method for measuring enteric viruses in biosolids
Improved risk assessment methodologies and assessment of
key contaminants for land application of biosolids in support of
503 listings
Improved pathogens risk assessment methodologies for
regulatory decisions
An optimized method for measuring helminth ova in biosolids
Report on small pilot survey to identify pharmaceutical and
personal care products (PPCPs) in biosolids
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
2007
NRMRL
NERL
NCEA
NCEA
NERL
NERL
45
-------
FY03
FY04
R05
FY06
FY07
FY08
Cbmplete the framework
for inclirlng dissolved
oxygen and other
receivingwater
thresholds i nto
watershed management
for nutrients
H center ia for
designated uses in
Eastern rivers
Relationships
antfor models
linkinglossand
alteration of
habitat to
selected fish,
shellfish, and
wildife
endpcints.
Bocriteriafor designated uses in
Md-Wfestem Rvers
I
> Link loss and alteriticn of habitat
tofish, shellfish, end wildife •
endpoints
Site-specific nutrient
threshdd criteria to protect
estuarine SAVs and
freshwater organisms
Btrapdate chemical toxi city across
exposure condtbns, endpcints,
I ifestages, and species for aquatic life
and wildlife for cherricalswith limited
Application of food web
attri butes sensitive to
ecdogical changes
associated with nutrient
enrichment
Provide the sdentific
foundaticnandinfbrmalicnfor
the development of a welter
quality model of the Gilf of
Mexico hypoxic zone
f
Relative and cumulative risks
from toxic cherricalsand
noncherrical stressors, on
populatbns of aquatic I ife and
aquatic-dependent wildife at
various spatial scales
Rsk of PPCPsto impair
waterbodies and need for
human health and ecological
criteria
Provide a rapid means of
measuring recreational water
quality and an assessment of
the health risks associated
withswmrring in waters of
varying quality
Habitat alteration - bdogica1
response relationships
suitable for broad-scale habitat
criteriafcr streams and coastal
systems, and approaches tor
eva1 uati ng comb: ned effects of
habitat alteration and other
stressors
LONG TERM GOAL 1. Provjdetheapproachesandmethodstodevelcpandapplycriteriafor habitat alteration,
nutrients, suspended and bedded sed rrents, pathogens and toxic chemicals that wi II support desi gnated uses
for aquatic ecosystems
Figure 5. Long Term Goal 1
-------
FYD3
FYD4
FY05
FYD6
FYD7
FYD8
Provide the scientific
foundation and
intbnrBbcn
managerrErt scheme
for the 303(d) listing
process including a
classification
trameworkfor surface
waters, watersheds, anc
regions to guide
prctiemforrrulation
Proude f rst generation
diagnostic methods,
including stressa
identification (3)
methods, for causal
linkage of observed
major classes of single
stressors and tidogica1
indJcators to stressors
in freshwater and
marinesystems; scale
the methods to Slates
and watershed
organizations
k.
Equip EPA Regions,
States and Tribes with
knowledge, skils and
tods todeterrrine the
tor freshwater and
coastal systems
required in various
regulations
LongTermGoal2: Provide the tods toassess and dagiose sources and causes of
impairment inaquaticsystems.
Figure 6. Long Term Goal 2
-------
BVPs&
V^a^sfed
IVbnagemert
PltMCfe
hdcators,
mntcring
strategesand
gud-noefor
detenn ri ng the
effectivaiessof
test IVanagenwit
Practices (BIVPs)
inmeetingwder
qualiy goals
Prcwideat least
six (6) leportsof
perfcrrrBncedata
and infomtion
forcortrding
nutrients,
suspended
sdids.
sedmerts,
pdhogens, toxic
didii cA s (nBtals
andPBTs),aid
flowvariations
urban and nial
watersheds.
Demonstaate the application
of innovative wet weather
flcwtechndogiesin uban
watersheds regJated under
the National CSOCortrol
Pd icy and SSO Prog-am
Provide State of tte Science
Syntheasand/ipp: cation
^pproadiesforlVlarEcing
RsksfromCflFas
Piouide updated
models for
stomwater
managarEntanc
for allocating
suspBTctedsolicc
andsedrnert
loads, and relate
uncertamties for
rrixed land use
watersheds.
Corrpletect least three (3)
dEmonstaabons of updated
models for storro\ater
nHragament, suspended
solids, sediTEnt, and
nitrierts tomeet water
qua'tycbjecfves.
Pro/ideal least seven
(7) ley reports ipobted
rrooels, ^nddste bases
brallocatrgand
managngsuspaxfed
solids, sedfrent,
pEttnojEn, nitrients, and
toxic charicd (metals
and PBTs) loads arong
al I sorces h nixed land-
use watersheds
Forecasting Outcomes
1
Demonstrdeths
application of models,
characterization
andeconomc
analyses to foimJate
attemati\Ae approaches
for prcteuti y and
restoring water quafty
and critical habitats and
to fciecast the
ecological, economQ
and huran heath
outccnBS of the
cHemabves.
Long Term Goal 3. Provide the tods to restore and protect aquatic systems anc
to forecast the ecological, economc, and human health outconBS of altematr
solutions
ive4i
rjemonstiate proof-of-
concept integrated
assessments for
allocation of restoration
resorces to support
water qua1 iy standards
attainment witri nthe
cortext of relevant
sodoeoonorric factors
andecokgcalritegity
Figure 1. Long Term Goal 3
-------
FY03
FYM
FYC6
FY06
FY07
R08
ProvidetheffiA
FtogramOffices, EPA
Regions, States, Utilities
and others with
improved tods for
characterizing
pathogens in biosdids.
Provide the ffA
ProgramOflices, ff>A
Regions, States and
others with study
findings that improve
the understanding of
the effectiveness of
current biosdids
practices and of the
significance of himan
health risks tosipport
decisions on biosdids
rranageiTEnt and
researchi
ProvidetheEPA
Prog ram Offices, B3^
Regions, States and
others with improved
data, tools, and
met hods for the
analysis of risks, and
for selection of more
effective myiageiTEnt
options.
LongTermGoal4 Provide the approaches, methods and tods to assess the
exposures and reduce the human health risks from biosdidscontamnantsfbruseby
States and others in updati ng biosd ids giidance and regJations
Figure 8. Long Term Goal 4
-------
APPENDIX
-------
-------
EPA Strategic Plan Goals and Related ORD MYPs
Goal
Goal 1 : Clean Air
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water
Goal 3 : Protect and Restore the Land
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and
Ecosystems
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental
Stewardship
MYP
Participate Matter
Air Toxics
Tropospheric Ozone
Drinking Water
Water Quality
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA)
Contaminated Sites
Mercury
Global Change
Ecological Research
Human Health Risk Assessment
Endocrine Disrupters
Safe Pesticides/Safe Products
Safe Food
Economics and Decision Sciences
Pollution Prevention and New Technologies
for Environmental Protection
52
-------
LIST OF ACRONYMS
ACE Acute-to-Chronic Estimation
AFLP Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphisms
APG Annual Performance Goal
APM Annual Performance Measure
AWQC Ambient Water Quality Criteria
BMP Best Management Practice
CAFO Confined Animal Feeding Operation
CDC Centers for Disease Control
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CSO Combined Sewer Overflow
CWA Clean Water Act
DO Dissolved Oxygen
EDC Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals
EMAP Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ERD Ecosystems Research Division of NERL
ESD Environmental Sciences Division of NERL
ETV Environmental Technology Verification
EXTRAN Extended Transport Module in Storm Water Management Model
FTE Full Time Equivalent
GC/MS/SIM Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry - Selective Ion Monitoring
GIS Geographic Information System
GPRA Government Performance and Results Act
GSTARS Generalized Stream Tube model for Alluvial River Simulation
GWERD Ground Water and Ecological Restoration Division of NRMRL
HAB Hazardous Algal Bloom
IBI Index of Biotic Integrity
ICE Ion Composition Elucidation
LC/MS Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry
LRPCD Land Remediation and Pollution Control Division of NRMRL
LTG Long Term Goal
MCL Maximum Contaminant Level
MS Mass Spectrometry
MYP Multi-year Plan
NAS National Academy of Science
NAWQA National Ambient Water Quality Assessment (within USGS)
NCEA National Center for Exposure Assessment within EPA's Office of Research
and Development
NCER National Center for Environmental Research within EPA's Office of Research
and Development
NEP National Estuary Program
NERL National Exposure Risk Laboratory within EPA's Office of Research and
Development
53
-------
NHEERL National Health and Ecological Effects Research Laboratory within EPA's
Office of Research and Development
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NFS Nonpoint Source
NRC National Research Council of the National Academies
NRMRL National Risk Management Laboratory within EPA's Office of Research and
Development
NSF National Science Foundation
OEPA Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
OGWDW Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water within EPA's Office of Water
ORD Office of Research and Development
OSP Office of Science Policy within EPA's Office of Research and Development
OST Office of Science and Technology withing EPA's Office of Water
OW Office of Water
OWM Office of Wastewater Management within EPA's Office of Water
OWOW Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds within EPA's Office of Water
P2 Pollution Prevention
PBT Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxic
PBTK/TD Physiologically-Based Toxicokinetic/Toxicodynamic
PCO Pfisteria Complex Organisms
POCIS Polar Organic Chemical Integrative Sampler
PPCP Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products
SAV Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
SI Stressor Identification
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SPRC Strategic Planning and Research Coordination
SSO Storm Sewer Overflow
SSRI Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors
STD Sustainable Technology Division of NRMRL
SWMM Storm Water Management Model
TIE Toxicity Identification Evaluation
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
TVA Tennessee Valley Authority
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
USGS United States Geological Survey
WSWRD Water Supply and Water Resources Division of NRMRL
WWT Waste Water Treatment
54
-------
References
National Research Council (NRC), 2001. Assessing the TMDL Approach to Water Quality
Management. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC), 2002. Biosolids Applied to Land: Advancing Standards and
Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
USEPA,1999. Action Plan for Beaches and Recreational Waters. EPA/600/R-98/079.
Office of Research and Development and Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA, 2002. Aquatic Stressors: A Framework and Implementation Plan for Effects Research
2002. EPA 600/R-02-074. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, National Health and Ecological Effects Research Laboratory, Research Triangle
Park, NC.
USEPA, 2002. Draft Strategy for Microbial Waterborne Disease Control. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA, 2002. Strategic Planning and Research Coordination (SPRC) Action Plan for Aquatic
Ecology and Water Quality. (Unpublished internal planning document) U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development and Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA, 2002. The Twenty Needs Report: How Research Can Improve the TMDL Program.
EPA 841-B-02-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA, 2003. Draft 2003 Strategic Plan. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of the
Chief Financial Officer, Washington, DC.
USEPA,2003. Ecological Research Multi-Year Plan. FY2005 Planning - Final Version, April
25, 2003. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Washington, DC.
55
------- |