National Water Quality
Inventory: Report to
Congress
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
August 2017
EPA 841-R-16-011

-------
Table of Contents
Executive Summary	2
Introduction	4
Rivers and Streams	6
Lakes, Ponds and Reservoirs	9
Bays and Estuaries	12
Great Lakes	15
Wetlands	17
References	20
Appendix: Causes and Sources of Impairment	21
National Water Quality Inventory
1
Report to Congress

-------
National Water Quality Inventory:
Report to Congress
Executive Summary
This National Water Quality Inventory Report summarizes the findings of four statistically-
representative National Aquatic Resource Surveys and the site-specific assessment results reported by the
states in their Integrated 305(b)/303(d) Reports submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
While different in design and goals, these two sources of information complement each other and provide
a valuable perspective on national water quality.
National, statistically-based surveys provide water quality baselines based on consistent sampling at
randomly-selected sites across the U.S. They were developed in response to critiques about water quality
monitoring and our ability to report on the condition of the nation's waters.
Rivers and streams: According to the National. Rivers and Streams Assessment 2008-09, 46% of
river and stream miles are in poor biological condition; phosphorus and nitrogen are the most widespread
of the chemical stressors assessed.
Lakes, ponds and reservoirs: The National Lakes Assessment 2012 finds that that 21% of the
nation's lakes are hypereutrophic (i.e., with the highest levels of nutrients, algae and plants). Phosphorus
and nitrogen are the most widespread stressors in lakes.
Coastal waters: According to the National Coastal Condition Assessment 2010, 18% of the nation's
coastal and Great Lakes waters are in poor biological condition and 14% are rated poor based on a water
quality index. Phosphorus is the leading stressor contributing to the poor water quality index rating.
Wetlands: The National Wetland Condition Assessment 2011 finds that 32% of the nation's wetland
area is in poor biological condition, with leading stressors including surface hardening (soil compaction)
and vegetation removal.
For more information on the national statistical surveys, visit https://www.epa.gov/national-aquatic-
resource-survevs.
National Water Quality Inventory
2
Report to Congress

-------
Using targeted, site-specific monitoring needed to support local management decisions, states
identified a wide range of assessed waters as not fully supporting at least one of their designated uses.
This report represents a snapshot of the state submissions as of July 2016.
•	Mercury (primarily in fish tissue), pathogens, nutrients, PCBs, sediment, and organic
enrichment/oxygen depletion were all cited as leading causes of impairment in assessed waters.
•	Leading known sources included atmospheric deposition and agricultural activities.
These findings are based on data collected using a variety of sampling methods and parameters, state
water quality standards, methods of interpretation, and time periods. As states submit their Integrated
Reports and EPA approves their lists of impaired waters, the information on site-specific assessments is
updated online at https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/assessment-and-total-maximum-dailv-load-tracking-
and-implementation-svstem -attains.

-------
Introduction
This National Water Quality Inventory, prepared under Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act
(CWA), presents information on water quality conditions in the U.S. It draws from two complementary
types of information on water quality. First, it summarizes the results of statistically-representative,
national aquatic surveys conducted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in partnership
with state and tribal water quality agencies. Second, it provides a tally of the local, site-specific
assessment results reported by states in the Integrated 303(d)/305(b) Reports submitted to EPA. The
surveys and the state assessments have different goals and approaches, and each provides valuable
information that contributes to our overall picture of national water quality as called for in Section 305(b)
of the CWA.
Known as the National Aquatic Resource Surveys (NARS), the statistical surveys summarized in this
report sample monitoring sites using a stratified, randomized design to provide unbiased estimates of the
condition of the broader population of waters (e.g., rivers and streams, lakes) throughout the nation. These
nationally-consistent surveys, conducted on a five-year cycle, report on the extent of waters that meet the
CWA goals of supporting healthy biological communities and recreation. NARS also examines the
prevalence of priority physical and chemical stressors. Detailed results from these surveys are available at
https://www.epa.gov/national-aquatic-resource-survevs.
Targeted, site-specific monitoring and assessments provide information states need to support
management decisions at watershed and local scales (e.g., whether a specific water meets its water quality
standards, what the sources contributing to degradation are, etc.) for the individual waters that are
monitored. The methods states use to monitor and assess their waters ~ including what they monitor, how
they monitor it, and how they report their findings to EPA ~ vary from state to state and within individual
states over time. This reflects the differing objectives and needs of site-specific water quality issues. As
states submit water quality assessment decisions, the information is loaded into the ATTAINS database
available at https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/assessment-and-total-maximum-dailv-load-tracking-and-
implementation-svstem-attains.
States incorporate statistical survey designs into their monitoring programs as a complement to their
site-specific monitoring. While site-specific monitoring focuses on waters that are priorities either for
protection or restoration, state surveys provide broader context of the condition of all state waters. They
serve as a cost-effective approach to assess conditions statewide using a relatively small representative
sample. The finer scale resolution of state-scale surveys help states evaluate priorities for additional site-
specific monitoring to fully characterize waters that need special protection or to develop local restoration
plans. Some state surveys are integrated enhancements of the national surveys, while others focus on
state-specific water quality standards or assessment methods. States and EPA are working on updates to a
module in ATTAINS for presenting state-scale survey results with site-specific assessments for a more
complete story on water quality.
National Water Quality Inventory
4
Report to Congress

-------
How do national statistical surveys and site-specific water quality assessments work together to
present the best picture of water conditions nationwide? Fundamentally, the statistical survey design
ensures that the data collected from a sample of waters represent the broader population of waters being
surveyed. This is a cost-effective means of generating national or statewide estimates to track changes in
water quality. The national surveys provide consistent environmental indicators of the condition of the
nation's water resources, much as economic indicators report on the health of the nation's economy. Their
consistent sampling methods ensure that results can be aggregated into regional and national indicators of
the health of the resource. The survey results quantify, with documented confidence, how widespread
water quality problems are across the country and estimate the extent of waters affected by key stressors.
This helps set priorities for water resource protection and restoration. Nationally-consistent surveys
provide a standardized measure for tracking changes in the condition of the nation's waters overtime and
for evaluating progress in investments to protect and restore water quality at a broad scale.
Site-specific monitoring efforts are an important complement to statistical surveys. By targeting
specific waters that are of concern or interest to the state or tribe, these monitoring activities provide
information needed to support management decisions at watershed and local scales for those individual
waters that are monitored. The methods states use to monitor and assess their waters vary from state to
state and within individual states over time. Under the CWA each state or tribe may set its own water
quality standards, including designated uses, narrative and numeric water quality criteria, and
antidegradation policies. These may differ among states and tribes. Thus, the state-reported assessment
decisions reported in ATTAINS cannot be used to compare water quality conditions among states and
tribes, identify trends in statewide or national water quality, or compare the impacts of specific causes or
sources of impairment over time. The strength of the site-specific water quality assessment is that it
provides information on localized water quality problems, supports the identification of specific waters
not meeting water quality standards, and helps the state set priorities and implement actions for restoring
these waters.
This National Water Quality Inventory: Report to Congress is a brief summary of the key findings of
both the National Aquatic Resource Surveys and the state water quality assessment reports available in
the ATTAINS website at https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/assessment-and-total-maximum-dailv-load-
tracking-and-implementation-svstem-attains. The ATTAINS website contains more detailed and
explanatory information about the state submissions; since it is updated as new reports arrive, it also
contains more recent state-reported information. This report represents a snapshot of the state submissions
as of July 2016.
National Water Quality Inventory
5
Report to Congress

-------
Rivers and Streams
This section summarizes the findings of both the statistically-representative national rivers and
streams survey and site-specific assessment results reported by the states in their Integrated
303(d)/305(b) Reports to EPA. While different in design and goals, these two sources of information
complement each other and provide a valuable perspective on national water quality.
Key Findings of the National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2008/2009
The National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2008-2009: A Collaborative Survey (NRSA) presents
the results of an unprecedented sampling effort undertaken by the EPA and its state and tribal partners. It
provides information on the ecological condition of the nation's rivers and streams and the key stressors
that affect them, both on a national and an eco-regional scale. It also discusses change in water quality
conditions in streams sampled for an earlier study, the Wadeable Streams Assessment of 2004.
During the summers of 2008 and 2009, more than 85 field crews sampled 1,924 river and stream sites
across the country, representing 1.2 million miles of rivers and streams. Using standardized field methods,
they sampled waters as large as the Mississippi River and as small as mountain headwater streams. Sites
were selected using a random sampling technique that uses a probability-based design. This design
ensures that the results of the survey reflect the full variety of river and stream types and sizes across the
U.S. To determine water quality conditions, sampling results were compared to regionally-relevant
reference condition. Reference condition is developed from a set of least-disturbed sites in each
ecological region and is used to select thresholds for good, fair and poor. Ratings of good, fair, and poor
were applied to the findings; however, these categories have no regulatory implications. For a few
indicators, such as the human health screening value for mercury in fish tissue, nationally-consistent
thresholds were used.
The goals of the NRSA are to determine the extent to which rivers and streams support healthy
biological condition and recreational uses, and the extent of major stressors that affect them. In addition,
the survey supports a longer-term goal: to determine whether our rivers and streams are getting cleaner
and how we might best invest in protecting and restoring them. To learn more about the NRSA, visit
https://www.epa.gov/national-aquatic-resource-survevs/nrsa.
Biological Quality
Biological condition is the most comprehensive indicator of water body health: when the biology of a
stream is healthy, the chemical and physical components of the stream are also typically in good
condition. Twenty-eight percent of the nation's river and stream length is in good biological condition,
National Water Quality Inventory
6
Report to Congress

-------
25% is in fair condition, and 46% is in
poor condition (Figure 1). These
findings are based on a robust,
commonly-used index that combines
different measures of the condition of
aquatic benthic macroinvertebrates
(aquatic insects and other creatures such
as crayfish).
Chemical Stressors
West
Plains
National Biological Condition
Four chemical stressors were	I
assessed: total phosphorus, total
nitrogen, salinity, and acidification. Of
these, phosphorus and nitrogen are by
far the most widespread. Forty-six
percent of the nations river and stream Figure 1. Biological condition of the nation's rivers and streams
miles are rated poor because of excess	(Source. NRSA 2008/09)
levels of phosphorus and 41% are rated poor because of excess levels of nitrogen. Poor biological
condition (for macroinvertebrates) is almost twice as likely in river and stream miles with excess levels of
phosphorus and nitrogen.
Physical Habitat Stressors
Four indicators of physical habitat condition were assessed for the NRSA: excess streambed
sediments, riparian vegetative cover (vegetation in the land corridor surrounding the river or stream),
riparian disturbance (human activities near the river or stream), and in-stream fish habitat. Of these, poor
riparian vegetative cover and high levels of riparian disturbance are the most widespread stressors.
Twenty-four percent of river and stream miles are rated poor because of poor riparian vegetative cover,
and 20% are rated poor because of high levels of riparian disturbance. However, excess levels of
streambed sediments, reported in 15% of river and stream length are found to have a somewhat greater
impact on biological condition. Poor biological condition is about twice as likely in rivers and streams
with excessive levels of streambed sediments.
Human Health Indicators
Two indicators that provide insight into potential risks to human health were assessed: mercury in fish
tissue and enterococci (bacteria). Human health screening values for mercury in fish tissue are exceeded
in 13,144 miles of U.S. rivers (streams were not evaluated). In 23% of river and stream miles, samples
exceed an enterococci threshold level for protecting human health.
National Water Quality Inventory
7
Report to Congress

-------
Key Findings of the State Site-Specific Assessments - Rivers and Streams
States assessed 1,107,002 of the nation's 3.5 million miles of rivers and streams. Of these assessed
miles, 614,153 were identified as impaired (e.g., unable to support one or more of the uses designated for
them by the states, such as fishing or swimming). Another 487,299 assessed miles were rated good (e.g.,
fully support all uses), and 5,550 were considered threatened (e.g., support their uses but exhibit a
deteriorating trend).
The top causes of pollution associated with impairment in assessed rivers and streams were:
•	Pathogens—bacteria which indicate possible fecal contamination that may cause illness in
people;
•	Sediment, which can smother stream beds, suffocate fish eggs and bottom
dwelling organisms, and interfere with drinking water treatment and
recreational uses; and
•	Nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen, which at excess levels can
stimulate the growth of undesirable algae and aquatic weeds and lead to
reduced levels of dissolved oxygen.
In many cases, states cannot always confidently identify sources of pollution
when making assessment decisions; as a result, sources are often reported as
unknown or unspecified. Where states identified probable sources of pollution, the
most common included:
•	Agricultural activities such as crop production, grazing, and animal feeding
operations;
•	Atmospheric (air) deposition, the settling of airborne pollution from many diverse sources such as
factory or auto emissions; and
•	Hydrologic modifications such as water diversions, channelization, and dams that alter the natural
circulation or distribution of water.
It is important to note that some river and stream segments are impaired by more than one cause or
source.
Updated and detailed
state information on
assessed river and
stream miles is
available from the
ATTAINS website at
https://www.epa.gov/
waterdata/assessment
-and-total-maximum-
dailv-load-tracking-
and-implementation-
svstem-attains.
National Water Quality Inventory
8
Report to Congress

-------
Lakes, Ponds, and Reservoirs
This section summarizes the findings of both the statistically-representative national lakes survey and
site-specific assessment results reported by the states in their Integrated 303(d)/305(b) Reports to EPA.
While different in design and goals, these two sources of information complement each other and provide
a valuable perspective on national water quality.
Key Findings of the National Lakes Assessment 2012
In the summer of 2012, 1,038 lakes were sampled for the National Lakes Assessment (NLA) 2012.
This was the second statistical survey of the condition of our nation's lakes, ponds, and reservoirs. The
survey results represent the state of nearly 112,000 natural and man-made lakes in the U.S. that are
greater than 1 hectare in area and at least one meter deep. Lakes were sampled for their water quality,
biological condition, habitat condition, and recreational suitability. The goals of the NLA are to generate
scientifically-valid information on the condition of the nation's lakes, establish baseline information for
future trends assessment, and assist states and tribes in enhancing their lake monitoring and assessment
program.
Field crews used the same methods at all lakes to ensure that results were nationally comparable. To
determine water quality conditions, sampling results were compared to regionally-relevant reference
condition. Reference condition is developed from a set of least-disturbed sites in each ecological region
and is used to select thresholds for evaluation. Ratings of least disturbed/moderately disturbed/most
disturbed were applied to the findings; however, these categories have no regulatory implications. For the
algal toxin indicator, analysts used thresholds developed by the World Health Organization.
Trophic Condition
Based on nationally-consistent chlorophyll-a concentrations, the NLA estimated the trophic
condition, or biological productivity, of lakes. Twenty-one percent of lakes have the highest
concentrations of chlorophyll-a and are classified as most disturbed, or hypereutrophic; 34% are
eutrophic; 35% are mesotrophic; and 10% have low levels of chlorophyll-a and are classified as
oligotrophic.
Biological Condition
The NLA 2012 developed two new research indicators as indicators of biological condition: benthic
macroinvertebrates and zooplankton. The survey finds that 31% of lakes have macroinvertebrate
communities in most disturbed condition; in 21% of lakes, communities of zooplankton are in most
disturbed condition.
National Water Quality Inventory
9
Report to Congress

-------
Chemical Condition
High nutrient levels are the leading problem in the nation's lakes. In main lakes, phosphorus is
considered the limiting nutrient; small amounts can trigger rapid increases in algal growth. About 40% of
U.S. lakes are in most disturbed condition for phosphorus, 15% are in a moderately disturbed condition,
and 45% are in least disturbed condition (Figure 2). Lakes with high levels of phosphorus are more than
twice as likely to have poor conditions for benthic macroinvertebrates. While there has been no detectable
change in the proportion of lakes in each condition category since 2007, additional analysis of NLA data
indicates that significant increases have occurred in the concentration of phosphorus in previously low
phosphorus lakes (see Stoddard et al, 2016).
Condition Category	2012 Percentage of Lakes	2007-2012	Change in % Points
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%	-40% -20% 0% 20% 40%
I	i	1	I	I	1	111	I	1
Most Disturbed
—4f)%









Moderately Disturbed
15%




f-




Least Disturbed
,







—1— 45%

Not Assessed








Figure 2 National condition estimates for phosphorus in lakes, with change from 2007 (Source: NLA 2012)
Physical Habitat Condition
For the NLA, physical habitat condition was assessed based on observation of four indicators:
riparian (lakeshore) vegetation cover, shallow water habitat, lake habitat complexity at the land-water
interface, and lakeshore human disturbance. Healthy lakeshore habitat slows pollution runoff and
provides varied and complex ecological niches for aquatic life. The 2012 survey finds that 28% of U.S.
lakes are in most disturbed condition for vegetation along the lakeshore and 29% are in most disturbed
condition for lake habitat complexity.
Recreational Condition
Algae and cyanobacteria are a natural part of freshwater ecosystems. However, some algae blooms,
powered by high levels of nutrients and warm temperatures, can be harmful to people and animals. The
NLA 2012 finds that an algal toxin, microcystin, is detected in 39% of lakes, but concentrations reach
World Health Organization levels of concern in less than 1% of lakes.
For more information on the NLA, visit https://www.epa.gov/national-aquatic-resource-survevs/nla.
National Water Quality Inventory
10
Report to Congress

-------
Key Findings of the State Site-Specific Assessments - Lakes
States assessed 18,513,899 of the nation's 41.7 million acres of lakes, ponds, and reservoirs
(excluding the Great Lakes). The states identified 13,009, 273 acres as impaired (e.g., unable to support
one or more of the uses designated for them by the state, such as fishing or swimming). Another
5,470,004 assessed acres were rated good (e.g., fully support all uses), and 34,621 acres were considered
threatened (e.g., support their uses but exhibit a deteriorating trend).
The top causes of pollution associated with impairment in assessed lake acres were:
•	Mercury, which has been widely detected in fish tissue where it may pose a health risk to people
and animals who eat fish;
•	Nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen, which at excess levels can disrupt lake ecosystems by
stimulating growth of undesirable algae and aquatic weeds and lead to reduced levels of oxygen;
and
•	Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which are toxic chlorinated chemicals of industrial origin that
are persistent in fish tissue or sediments.
In many cases, states cannot always confidently identify sources of pollution when making assessment
decisions; as a result, sources are often reported as unknown or unspecified. Where states identified
probable sources, the most common included:
•	Atmospheric deposition from both local and long-range sources, primarily of toxic substances
such as mercury, PCBs, and metals;
•	Agricultural activities such as crop production, grazing, and animal feeding operations.
•	Natural sources such as internal nutrient recycling, drought or waterfowl.
It is important to note that some lake acres can be impaired by more than one cause or source.
Updated and detailed state information on assessed lake and
reservoir acres is available from the ATTAINS website at
https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/assessment-and-total-
maximum-dailv-load-tracking-and-implementation-svstem-
attains.
National Water Quality Inventory
11
Report to Congress

-------
Coastal Waters - Bays and Estuaries and the Great Lakes
This section summarizes the findings of both the statistically-representative national coastal survey
and site-specific assessment results on bays and estuaries, the Great Lakes, coastal shorelines, and ocean
and near coastal waters reported by the states in their Integrated 303(d)/305(b) Reports to EPA. While
different in design and goals, these two sources of information complement each other and provide a
valuable perspective on national water quality.
Key Findings of the National Coastal Condition Assessment 2010
The National Coastal Condition Assessment 2010 (NCCA 2010) is the fifth in a series of reports
assessing the condition of the coastal waters of the United States, including a vast array of productive
estuarine, Great Lakes and coastal embayment waters. The NCCA 2010 addresses questions such as:
What is the condition of the nation's coastal and Great Lakes nearshore waters, and is that condition
getting better or worse? What is the extent of the stressors affecting them?
This report is based on an analysis of indicators of ecological condition and key stressors in the
coastal waters of the Northeast Coast, Southeast Coast, Gulf Coast, Great Lakes, and West Coast regions
of the conterminous United States.
In the summer of 2010, EPA and state, tribal, and federal partners monitored 1,104 sites representing
35,400 square miles of U.S. coastal and Great Lakes nearshore waters. Of this total, 405 sites representing
6,700 square miles were Great Lakes nearshore or embayment waters. They used the same methods at all
sites to ensure that results were nationally comparable. This report examines four indices as indicators of
U.S. coastal condition: a benthic index, a water quality index, a sediment quality index, and an ecological
fish tissue contaminants index. Figure 3 summarizes the findings for these indices.
Biological Quality
Fifty-six percent of the nation's coastal and Great Lakes nearshore waters are rated good for
biological quality based on the benthic macroinvertebrate index; 10% are rated fair and 18% are rated
poor. Data are incomplete or missing for 15% of waters.
Within these results but specific to the Great Lakes, 20% of nearshore and embayment square miles
are rated good, 12% are rated fair, and 18% are rated poor. Half of the Great Lakes area could not be
assessed for various reasons, including unsuitable substrate conditions.
Water Quality
Water quality is rated good in 36% of coastal and Great Lakes nearshore waters, fair in 48% and poor
in 14% based on the water quality index. Components of the water quality index include phosphorus,
nitrogen, water clarity, chlorophyll a, and dissolved oxygen. The three indicators contributing most to the
National Water Quality Inventory
12
Report to Congress

-------
poor index rating are phosphorus (found at high levels and rated poor in 21% of waters), water clarity
(rated poor in 16%), and chlorophyll a (found at high concentrations and rated poor in 12%).
Within these results but specific to the Great Lakes, the NCCA finds that 60% of nearshore area is
rated good for water quality, 22% is rated fair, and 18% is rated poor. Water clarity contributes most to
the fair and poor water quality scores for the region, and is rated poor in 31% of nearshore area. Other
components of the water quality index include phosphorus, rated poor in 10% of area; dissolved oxygen,
rated poor in 1% of area; and chlorophyll a, rated poor in 18% of area.
Sediment Quality
Overall, the NCCA 2010 sediment quality index finds that 55% of coastal and Great Lakes nearshore
waters have good sediment quality, 21% have fair quality, and 13% have poor sediment quality. Data are
incomplete or missing for an additional 11% of waters. This index is based on two component indicators:
sediment toxicity and sediment contaminants. Overall, 79% of coastal and Great Lakes waters are rated
good based on low levels of sediment contaminants and 57% of waters are rated good for sediment
toxicity.
Within these results but specific to the Great Lakes, the sediment quality index for the nearshore
coastal region shows that 51% of nearshore area is in good condition, 21% is in fair condition, and 2% is
in poor condition. About a quarter of the area could not be assessed due to unsuitable substrate
conditions. The sediment quality index is based on two component indicators: sediment toxicity and
sediment contaminants. Overall, 56% of the Great Lakes area is rated good based on low levels of
sediment contaminants and 65% is rated good for sediment toxicity.
Ecological Fish Tissue Contaminants
Overall, less than 1% of coastal and Great Lakes nearshore waters are rated good based on levels of
contaminants in fish tissue, 26% are rated fair, and 49% are rated poor, i.e., fish tissue demonstrates one
or more contaminants exceeding "low effects" ecological guidelines. Data are incomplete or missing for
an additional 24% of waters. It is important to note that fish tissue contamination findings are based on
ecological guidelines designed to evaluate whether concentrations of contaminants in fish tissue pose a
potential risk to fish and wildlife. Fish contaminant levels were not compared to human health thresholds
because this survey analyzed the whole fish, not the fillet portion generally consumed by humans.
Screening values are based on impacts to the most sensitive freshwater or saltwater fish, birds, and
wildlife species.
Within these results but specific to the Great Lakes, less than 1% of nearshore area is rated good
based on levels of contaminants in fish tissue, 20% is rated fair, and 38% is rated poor, i.e., fish tissue
demonstrates one or more contaminants exceeding "low effects" ecological guidelines. Data are
incomplete or missing for an additional 42% of area.
National Water Quality Inventory
13
Report to Congress

-------
More information on the NCCA 2010 is available at https://www.epa.gov/national-aquatic-resource-
survevs/ncca.
Sediment Quality Index
Fish Tissue
Contaminants Index
Area (ml2)
Nations Conditions
iiS 3
19,932
3,670
6,490
5.311
Benth c ndex
'B 3"J-L
Rh_36_4%
12,875
16.927
5,086
517
HH47.8%
Water Quality Index
14,4%
0H55.3%
19,591
7,302
4,714
3,795
/:j i-i
13.3%
in. 7
214
9,327
17,331
8,521
2b .4 .
24 ¦
40	60
% of Area
i i Good l i Fair	Poor r i Missing
Figure 3. Percentage of coastal area achieving each condition ranking for all indices (Source: NCCA 2010).
Key Findings of the State Site-Specific Assessments - Coastal Waters
Bays and Estuaries
States assessed 35,094 of the nation's total 87,791 square miles of bays and estuaries. (Note that
Great Lakes, coastal shoreline miles, and ocean and near coastal square miles were assessed separately by
the states, and are reported below). The states identified 27,483 square miles as impaired (e.g., unable to
support one or more of the uses designated for them by the state, such as fishing or swimming). Another
7,611 square miles were rated good (e.g., fully support all uses).
The top causes of pollution associated with impairment in assessed bay and estuarine square miles
were:
•	Mercury, most common in fish tissue;
•	PCBs, toxic chemicals which, though no longer produced in the U.S., persist in sediments and
fish tissue and may be released via spills, leaks, and from poorly maintained hazardous waste
sites or the incineration of some wastes; and
•	Pathogens, bacteria which indicate possible fecal contamination that may cause illness in people.
National Water Quality Inventory
14
Report to Congress

-------
Since states cannot always confidently identify sources of pollution when making assessment
decisions, they often report sources as unknown or unspecified. Where they identified probable sources,
the most common included:
•	Atmospheric deposition, which can transport airborne pollutants such as mercury and PCBs from
industrial and urban centers; and
•	Municipal discharges/sewage, which includes sewage treatment plants, septic systems, and wet
weather sewer overflows.
•	Other sources, such as those outside the state's boundaries or jurisdiction.
It should be noted that some bay or estuary square miles can be impaired by more than one cause or
source.
Great Lakes Shoreline and Open Waters
States assessed 4,431 of the nation's 5,000 miles of Great Lakes shoreline miles. Of these assessed
miles, 4,353 were reported as impaired for one or more designated use. The leading causes of impairment
included PCBs, dioxins, and pesticides. The leading probable sources of impairment were atmospheric
deposition, legacy/historical pollution - primarily contaminated sediment - and agriculture.
States also assessed 53,332 of 60,500 total U.S. square miles of Great Lakes open waters. Of these, all
but 62 square miles were reported as impaired for one or more designated use. PCBs, dioxins, and
mercury were identified as leading causes of impairment, with leading probable sources including
atmospheric deposition, legacy/historical pollution, and urban-related runoff/stormwater.
UJJUcUCU clliu UCUU1CU Sld-lC llliuilllauuil Ull U-bbCbbCU
Coastal and Great Lakes waters is available from the
ATTAINS website at
https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/assessment-and-total-
maximum-dailv-load-tracking-and-implcmcntation-
National Water Quality Inventory
15
Report to Congress

-------
Wetlands
This section summarizes the findings of both the statistically-representative national wetlands survey
and site-specific assessment results on wetlands reported by the states in their Integrated 303(d)/305(b)
Reports to EPA. While different in design and goals, these two sources of information complement each
other and provide a valuable perspective on national water quality.
Key Findings of the National Wetland Condition Assessment 2011
The National Wetland Condition Assessment 2011 (NWCA) is the first national evaluation of the
ecological condition of U.S. wetlands. It encompasses all wetlands, from the tidal and non-tidal wetlands
along our coasts to the forested swamps, prairie potholes and meadows of the interior plains. The NWCA
uses a statistical survey design to examine the chemical, physical and biological integrity of wetlands
through a set of commonly-used and widely-accepted indicators, and begins to address some of the gaps
in our understanding of wetland health.
During the spring and summer of 2011, more than 50 field crews sampled 1,179 wetland sites across
the country. Each crew used standardized field protocols to sample vegetation, soils, hydrology, algae,
water chemistry, and potential stressors at each site. Most sites were selected using a random sampling
technique that ensures that the results of the survey reflect the range of wetlands in the target population
across the U.S. Data collected at these randomly selected sites are used to produce national and regional
estimates of wetland condition.
Biological Condition
Plant presence, abundance and trait information - e.g., invasive or native status, tolerance to
disturbance - are used to assess biological condition. Vegetation is a particularly good indicator of
wetland condition because of its ability to integrate different wetland processes and because plants
respond to physical, chemical, and biological disturbances at multiple temporal and spatial scales. Using
field-collected data and plant trait information, a national Vegetation Multimetric Index (VMMI) was
developed.
The NWCA finds that 48% of wetland area nationally has healthy plant communities and is in good
condition, 20% is in fair condition and 32% is in poor condition (Figure 4). Poor biological condition can
adversely affect fish and wildlife species, reduce recreational opportunities, and lead to diminished water
quality and flood retention benefits.
Of the four major ecoregion-based units reported on by NWCA, the West has the lowest percentage
of wetland area in good condition (21%). The Coastal Plains, Eastern Mountains and Upper Midwest, and
Interior Plains have a range of 44% to 52% of wetland area in good condition.
National Water Quality Inventory
16
Report to Congress

-------
Vegetation MMI	Vegetation MMI
Percent Area	Area
National
Coastal
Plains
Eastern Mtn. &
Upper Midw.
Interior
Plains
West
0 20 40 60 80 100 0	20,000,000	40,000,000
Percent Area	Area
Figure 4. Estimated extent of wetland biological condition by condition classes
(good, fair, poor) based on the VMMI. (Source: NWCA 2011). Results are
reported for the nation and by NWCA Aggregated Ecoregion.
Physical Disturbance
Nationally, 27% of wetland area has high occurences of activities related to surface hardening (e.g.,
soil compaction, roads). These activities affect how water flows in and out of wetlands and the amount of
water that enters and stays within wetlands, potentially affecting plant productivity, nutrient cycling, and
overall physical habitat.
An equal percentage of wetland area nationally (27%) has high occurrences of activities related to
vegetation removal. Removal or loss of vegetation due to activities such as grazing, mowing, and forest
clearing may increase sediment, nutrient, and pollutant loads entering and staying in a wetland.
Nearly one quarter of wetland area nationally (23%) has high occurrences of ditching. Ditching
affects how water flows in and out of wetlands, potentially affecting plant productivity, nutrient-cycling,
and physical habitat.
Normative plants are abundant in 19% of wetland area. Nonnative plants replace native plants,
resulting in loss of biodiversity and habitat for fish and wildlife species.
Chemical Indicators
Two chemical indicators of stress were assessed for N WCA using soil data: Heavy Metal Index and
soil phosphorus concentration. Stressor levels for both of these indicators are low for the majority of
wetland area nationally. However, stressor levels for the Heavy Metal Index are moderate for 47% of
wetland area in the West and 31% of wetland area in the Eastern Mountains and Upper Midwest. Stressor
levels for soil phosphorus are high for 13% of wetland area in the Eastern Mountains and Upper Midwest.
National Water Quality Inventory
17
Report to Congress

-------
NWCA conducted the first national study of algal toxins in wetlands. Microcystin, a chemical toxin
that can harm people, pets, and wildlife, is detected in 12% of wetland area nationally . However, based on
recreational exposure risk levels established by the World Health Organization, very little wetland area
(<1%) poses either moderate or high risk levels.
Key Findings of the State Site-Specific Assessments - Wetlands
States assessed 1,232,559 of the nation's estimated 107,700,000 wetland acres. Of these, 657,653
acres were reported as impaired for at least one designated use and 574,907 acres were reported in good
condition (i.e., fully support all of the uses designated by the states).
The top causes of impairment in assessed wetland acres were:
•	Organic enrichment/oxygen depletion, occurring when high levels of organic materials use up
oxygen when they degrade;
•	Mercury, a toxic metal most commonly found in fish tissue; and
•	Metals other than mercury, such as arsenic and selenium.
Since states cannot always confidently identify sources of pollution when
making assessment decisions, they often report sources as unknown or unspecified.
Where states identified probable sources, the most common included:
•	Agricultural activities such as crop production, grazing, and animal feeding
operations; and
•	Atmospheric deposition, the settling of airborne pollution from many
diverse sources (both near and far) such as factory or auto emissions.
•	Industry, primarily petroleum and natural gas production activities.
It should be noted that the same wetland segments can be impaired by more
than one cause or source.
r "
Updated and detailed
state information on
assessed wetland
acres is available
from the ATTAINS
database at
https: //www .epa. gov/
waterdata/assessment
-and-total-maximum-
dailv-load-tracking-
and-implementati on-
svstem-attains.
National Water Quality Inventory
18
Report to Congress

-------
References
Stoddard, J. L., J. Van Sickle, A. T. Herlihy, J. Brahney, S. Paulsen, D. V. Peck, R. Mitchell, and A.
I. Pollard. 2016. Continental-Scale Increase in Lake and Stream Phosphorus: Are Oligotrophic Systems
Disappearing in the United States? Environmental Science & Technology 50:3409-3415.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water and Office of Research and Development.
National Coastal Condition Assessment 2010 (EPA 841-R-15-006). Washington, DC. December 2015.
http: //www .epa. go v/national-aquatic-re source -surve vs/ncca
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water and Office of Research and Development.
National Lakes Assessment 2012: A Collaborative Survey of Lakes in the United States. (EPA 841-R-16-
113). Washington, DC. December 2016. https://nationallakesassessment.epa.gov/
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water and Office of Research and Development.
National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2008-2009: A Collaborative Survey (EPA 841-R-16/007).
Washington, DC. March 2016. http://www.epa.gov/national-aquatic-resource-survevs/nrsa
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water and Office of Research and
Development. National Wetland Condition Assessment 2011: A Collaborative Survey of the Nation 's
Wetlands (EPA 843-R-15-005). Washington, DC. May 2016. https://www.epa.gov/national-aquatic-
resource-survevs/nwca
National Water Quality Inventory
19
Report to Congress

-------
Appendix: Causes and Sources of Impairment
States, tribes and other jurisdictions monitor for a variety of pollutants, or causes of impairment.
Table 1 provides a list of major causes of impairment cited in this report.
Table 1. Major Impairment Cause Categories Used in this Report
Category
Examples
Cause Unknown - Impaired Biota
Impairment or degradation of the biological community (e.g. fish, macroinvertebrates) due
to unknown/unidentified cause
Dioxins
Highly toxic, carcinogenic petroleum-derived chemicals that are persistent in the
environment and may be found in fish tissue, water column, or sediments.
Fish Consumption Advisory
Contaminated fish tissue (contaminant unspecified)
Flow Alterations
Changes in stream flow due to human activity; includes water diversions for purposes such
as irrigation.
Habitat Alterations
Modifications to substrate, streambanks, fish habitat; barriers.
Metals
Substances identified only as "metals," such as selenium, lead, copper, arsenic,
manganese, others. (NOTE: may, in some include mercury)
Mercury
A toxic metal with neurological and developmental impacts found in fish tissue, water
column, or sediments.
Nuisance Exotic Species
Non-native fish, animals, or plants such as Eurasian milfoil, Hydrilla, or zebra mussels
which choke out native species and alter the ecological balance of waters.
Nutrients
Primarily nitrogen and phosphorus; in excess amounts, nutrients over-stimulate the growth
of weeds and algae and can lead to oxygen depletion.
Organic Enrichment/Oxygen
Depletion
Low levels of dissolved oxygen; high levels of biochemical oxygen demanding substances
(organic materials such as plant matter, food processing waste, and sewage) that use up
dissolved oxygen in water when they degrade.
Pathogens
Bacteria and pathogen indicators, E. coli, Enterococci, total coliforms, fecal coliforms, used
as indicators of possible contamination by sewage, livestock runoff, and septic tanks.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
A toxic mixture of chlorinated chemicals that are no longer used but are persistent in the
environment; used originally in industry and electrical equipment), primarily found in fish
tissue or sediments.
Pesticides
Substances identified only as "pesticides;" also, chlordane, atrazine, carbofuran, and
others. Many older pesticides are persistent in the environment.
Sediment
Excess sediments, siltation; affects aquatic communities by altering and suffocating habitat
and clogging fish gills.
Toxic Organics
Chemicals identified only as "toxic organics;" also, priority organic compounds, non-priority
organic compounds, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), others; often persistent in
the environment.
National Water Quality Inventory
20
Report to Congress

-------
Where possible, the states, tribes and other jurisdictions identify the sources of those pollutants
associated with water quality impairment. Point sources discharge directly into surface waters from a
conveyance such as a pipe; nonpoint sources deliver pollutants from diffuse origins, such as fields and
streets. Table 2 identifies the source categories cited in this report.
Table 2. Major Pollutant Source Categories Used in this Report
Category
Examples
Agriculture
Crop production, feedlots (including concentrated animal feeding operations), grazing,
manure runoff
Atmospheric Deposition
Airborne pollution from many diverse sources (such as factory and automobile emissions
and pesticide applications) that settles to land or water
Construction
Residential development, bridge and road construction, land development
Habitat Alterations (not directly
related to hydromodification)
Riparian and in-stream habitat modification and loss, filling and draining of wetlands,
removal of riparian vegetation, streambank erosion
Hydromodification
Pond construction, channelization, dam construction, dredging, flow alterations from water
diversions, flow regulation, hydropower generation, stream bank destabilization and
modification, upstream impoundments
Industrial
Factories, industrial and commercial areas, cooling water intake structures, mill tailings
Land Application/Waste
Sites/Tanks
Salt storage piles, land application of biosolids, land disposal, landfills, leaking
underground storage tanks
Legacy/Historical Pollutants
Brownfield sites, contaminated sediments, in-place contaminants
Municipal Discharges/Sewage
Septic systems, sewage treatment plants, domestic sewage lagoons, sanitary sewer
overflows, municipal dry and wet weather discharges, unpermitted discharges of domestic
wastes, combined sewer overflows, septage disposal
Natural/Wildlife
Flooding, drought-related impacts, waterfowl
Recreation and Tourism
Golf courses, marinas, turf management, boat maintenance
Resource Extraction
Abandoned mining, acid mine drainage, coal mining, dredge mining, mountaintop mining,
petroleum/natural gas activities, surface mining
Silviculture (Forestry)
Forest management, forest fire suppression, forest roads, reforestation, woodlot site
clearance
Spills/Dumping
Accidental releases/spills, pipeline breaks
Unknown
Source of impairment is unknown
Unspecified Nonpoint Source
Source of impairment is identified as nonpoint, but no further information available
Urban-related Runoff/Storm Water
Discharges from municipal separate storm sewers (MS4), parking lot and impervious
surfaces runoff, highway and road runoff, storm sewers, urban runoff, permitted storm water
discharges
National Water Quality Inventory
21
Report to Congress

-------