Jw~ED STqT~S 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

r~ Q WASHINGTON, D .C. 20460 oil ~11(` a 

lq ~ PRO~G 

MAY 2 5 2007 

OFFICE OF 

WATER 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Nutrient Pollution and Numeric Water Quality Standards 

FROM: Benjamin H. Grumbl 

Assistant Administrator 

TO : Directors, State Water Programs 

Directors, Great Water Body Programs 

Directors, Authorized Tribal Water Quality Standards Programs 

State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators 

This memo provides a national update on the development of numeric nutrient water quality 

standards and describes EPA's commitment to accelerating the pace for progress. EPA published 

its June 1998 national nutrient criteria strategy and some States and Territories have made 

notable progress in establishing numeric nutrient standards - most recently in connection with the 

Chesapeake Bay and Tennessee streams . However, overall progress has been uneven over the 

past nine years. Now is the time for EPA and its partners to take bold steps, relying on a 

combination of science, innovation and collaboration. 

Why Action is Needed 

High nitrogen and phosphorus loadings, or nutrient pollution, result in harmful algal blooms, 

reduced spawning grounds and nursery habitats, fish kills, oxygen-starved hypoxic or "dead" 

zones, and public health concerns related to impaired drinking water sources and increased 

exposure to toxic microbes such as cyanobacteria. Nutrient problems can exhibit themselves 

locally or much further downstream leading to degraded estuaries, lakes and reservoirs, and to 

hypoxic zones where fish and aquatic life can no longer survive. 

Nutrient pollution is widespread. The most widely known examples of significant nutrient 

impacts include the Gulf of Mexico and the Chesapeake Bay. For these two areas alone, there are 

35 States that contribute the nutrient loadings . There are also known impacts in over 80 

estuaries/bays, and thousands of rivers, streams, and lakes . The significance of this impact has 

led EPA, States, and the public to come together to place an unprecedented priority on public 

partnerships, collaboration, better science, and improved tools to rediace nutrient pollution. 

Virtually every State and Territory is impacted by nutrient-related degradation of our 

waterways . All but one State and two Territories have Clean Water Act Section 303(d) listed 

Internet Address (URL) e http://www.epa .gov 

Recycled/Recyclable a Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper 
impairments for nutrient pollution. States have listed over 10,000 nutrient and nutrient-related 

impairments. Fifteen States have more than 200 nutrient-related listings each. For these reasons, 

Regions have identified nutrient pollution reduction as a priority for EPA. 

Why Numeric Criteria are Important 

Numeric nutrient water quality standards will drive water quality assessments and watershed 

protection management. They will support improved development of nutrient Total Maximum 

Daily Loads (TMDLs). Perhaps most importantly, they will create state- and communitydeveloped environmental baselines that allow us to manage more effectively, measure progress, 

and support broader partnerships based on nutrient trading, Best Management Practices (BMPs), 

land stewardship, wetlands protection, voluntary collaboration, and urban storm water runoff 

control strategies . The progress of States and Territories in setting numeric nutrient water 

quality standards is extremely important to help address nutrient pollution. 

Numeric nutrient standards will facilitate more effective and efficient program 

implementation. Notable progress has been made relying on site-specific application of narrative 

standards to develop nutrient TMDLs. But this can often be difficult, resource-intensive and 

time-consuming. Adopting numeric standards, however, has a number of key advantages : 

" easier and faster development of TMDLs; 

" quantitative targets to support trading programs ; 

" easier to write protective NPDES permits ; 

" increased effectiveness in evaluating success of nutrient runoff minimization programs ; 

and 

" measurable, objective water quality baselines against which to measure environmental 

progress . 

What Action is Needed 

Today, EPA is encouraging all States, Territories and authorized Tribes to accelerate their 

efforts and give priority to adopting numeric nutrient standards or numeric translators for 

narrative standards for all waters in States and Territories that contribute nutrient loadings to our 

waterways. Incremental progress can be an effective way to accelerate progress . If a State needs 

to implement numeric nutrient criteria incrementally, EPA strongly recommends that States 

adopt numeric nutrient standards for their priority waters - i .e ., waters at greatest risk of nutrient 

pollution (such as those identified through the EPA-USGS SPARROW modeling effort) or of 

greatest consequence (such as drinking water sources) - first. States may also choose to 

prioritize their actions for waters where sufficient information is available to move quickly to 

adopt numeric criteria in the near-term. The State's nutrient criteria plan should reflect the 

State's approach to setting standards for its waters, and include schedules for adopting those 

standards. 

To be effective, nutrient criteria should address causal (both nitrogen and phosphorus) and 

response (chlorophyll-a and transparency) variables for all waters that contribute nutrient 

loadings to our waterways . EPA encourages the adoption of standards for all four parameters 

because of the interrelationships between these parameters and its experience showing that 
controlling both nitrogen and phosphorus is important to successfully combating nutrient 

pollution in all waters . As always, States, Territories and authorized Tribes have the flexibility 

to address nutrient pollution using a subset of or alternatives to these parameters if they are 

shown to be scientifically defensible and protective of designated uses. Where a State, Territory 

or authorized Tribe shows that one causal variable (nitrogen or phosphorus) is the limiting 

nutrient, it should develop criteria for at least that nutrient. However, if the non-limiting nutrient 

is likely contributing to a downstream impairment, numeric criteria for that nutrient should be 

considered as well. 

By accelerating the establishment of numeric nutrient standards, state governments and local 

communities can set goals, establish controls, agree on risk management approaches, measure 

performance, demonstrate progress, and learn from each other. In a time of scarce resources and 

competing priorities, we cannot afford delayed or ineffective responses to this major source of 

environmental degradation. As any environmental professional understands, we can't effectively 

manage what we can't measure. Numeric environmental baselines help us to measure success, 

gauge effectiveness, and evaluate alternative approaches. 

Current Status 

Over the last nine years, EPA has taken a number of steps to provide leadership and 

articulate its goal of working in partnership with States, Territories and authorized Tribes to 

establish quantitative endpoints to minimize excess nutrient loadings in our Nation's waters . 

EPA issued a National Strategy for Development of Regional Nutrient Criteria in June 1998, and 

followed with a November 2001 national action plan for the development and establishment of 

numeric nutrient criteria. EPA published technical guidance for developing criteria for lakes and 

reservoirs in May 2000, rivers and streams in June 2000, and estuaries and coastal waters in 

October 2001 . EPA also published recommended nutrient criteria for most streams and lakes in 

2001. This combined strategy of EPA, State, Territorial, and Tribal partnership supported by 

technical assistance was intended to jump-start progress on a difficult and challenging problem. 

We have made progress, but we need to move more quickly and more comprehensively in 

order to meet the growing challenges from increasing population, expanding and more intensive 

agricultural activities, and spreading urbanization . A number of States and Territories have 

already moved ahead to establish numeric standards for priority waterbodies . Others are in the 

process of collecting data and preparing to develop them. Still others are in the earlier stages of 

planning and deciding which standards development approach will work best for them. A 

summary of the current status is attached . 

Next Steps 

EPA remains committed to supporting States' and authorized Tribes' efforts to adopt 

numeric water quality standards for nutrient pollution that are protective of designated uses. As 

outlined in more detail in the attached numeric nutrient standards strategy, EPA will : 

" Provide direct assistance to States close to adopting numeric criteria . For these States, 

EPA will provide implementation guidance addressing technical and policy issues that 

States raise, and technical information to support States' rulemaking for standards. 
" Build capacity for States that are not as close to adopting numeric criteria . For these 

States, EPA will provide sampling/monitoring, training, data/statistical analysis, and 

modeling assistance for developing criteria numbers. 

" Build a science-based foundation for developing new criteria in estuaries wetlands and 

large rivers . EPA will complete its suite of nutrient criteria manuals for nutrient criteria, 

and continues to work to meet the goals of the federal and state Mississippi River/Gulf of 

Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force. 

" Clearly and effectively communicate data and information on nutrient pollution. EPA 

will integrate nutrient messages in water quality standards communications products and 

outreach. 

Conclusion 

We can take steps now that will make a difference in addressing the challenges of growing 

nutrient pollution. The first step is to have numeric nutrient criteria in place to enable action . 

EPA is committing itself to support development of numeric nutrient criteria, and to use EPA's 

tools and metrics to help States, Territories, and authorized Tribes adopt numeric nutrient 

standards more quickly. EPA will also continue to do research, develop new tools, and 

collaborate to strengthen partnerships for consensus solutions . 

EPA will work with States and Territories to review their nutrient criteria plans developed 

over five years ago to ensure they reflect current expectations, realistic goals, and clear interim 

milestones . Working together, we should ask ourselves what is needed to meet these milestones 

and then take appropriate action . 

We should also continue to advance performance measurement and public accountability . 

EPA recognizes the importance of keeping the public informed of our joint progress. EPA will 

periodically publish a report of the status of our joint efforts, including the actions EPA has 

completed and the progress that States have made in adopting numeric nutrient water quality 

standards . EPA will also continue to track progress regarding nutrient pollution reduction, such 

as quarterly reporting of the number of TMDLs completed in nutrient impaired waters in the 

Mississippi River Basin. 

Attachments: 

1. OW Numeric Nutrient Standards Strategy 

2. Current Status of States & Territories: Numeric Nutrient Criteria for Class of Waters 

cc: Marcus Peacock 

Regional Administrators 
OW Numeric Nutrient Standards Strategy 

What is the Environmental Problem? 

" Excessive nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) can cause negative ecological impacts to 

waterbodies on a national scale by stimulating harmful algal blooms. 

o Algal blooms block sunlight and result in the destruction of submerged aquatic vegetation 

(SAV). SAV serves as critically important habitat and food for many organisms. 

o Algal blooms eventually die off and consume dissolved oxygen (DO) from the water 

column. Low DO concentrations lead to die off of aquatic organisms. 

o One result of algal blooms is decreased biological diversity and populations, including 

smaller populations of game and commercial fish. 

" Excessive nutrients also pose public health risks. 

o Algal blooms can cause taste and odor problems in drinking water. 

o Hazardous algal blooms can cause respiratory distress and neurological problems in 

swimmers. 

o Excessive nitrates can cause blue baby syndrome. 

" Nutrient pollution is occurring at a national scale and has not been completely addressed . 

0 49 states and 4 territories have 303(d) listings due to nutrients, and about 50% of the 

states have greater than 100 water quality impairments due to nutrients . 

o Over 10,000 impairments are a result of nutrient pollution . 

What is OW's Role in Reversing Nutrient Pollution? 

" The Office of Water, through its Office of Science and Technology (OST), applies science and 

technology to build a comprehensive framework of state water quality standards, drinking water 

goals, public health programs, and technology-based solutions to implement the national clean 

and safe water program in collaboration with national, state, and public partners . As part of this 

mission, OST develops nutrient water quality criteria recommendations, ensures state adoption of 

protective nutrient water quality standards, develops tools to aid states in implementing their 

nutrient standards, and publishes regulations that reduce the discharge of nutrients by industries . 

" Over the last 10 years, OST has implemented a strong technical approach to address the 

negative impacts of nutrient pollution, which includes: 

" Creating a National Nutrient Team and Regional Technical Assistance Groups (RTAGs) 

with 10 Regional Nutrient Coordinators to support states in the management and 

evaluation of nutrient pollution . 

" Publishing 26 Ecoregional Nutrient Criteria documents for 131akes/reservoirs, 12 

rivers/streams, and 1 wetland (Florida Everglades) . 

" Publishing technical guidance documents for lakes/reservoirs (2000), rivers/streams 

(2000), coastal marine waters (2001), and wetlands (released for comment in 2006), and 

14 wetland method modules to assist states in assessing wetland conditions . 

" Providing policy recommendations to states to develop nutrient plans which outline 

parameters they will set, the approach they will use, and the schedule they will follow. 

" Developing tools designed to aid states in developing numeric criteria (e .g ., nutrient 

database for selecting reference conditions, N-Steps to provide scientific assistance on 

sampling and data analysis, a periphyton sampling methodology for rivers) . 

What is the OW National Nutrient Strategy? 

" Water quality standards (WQS) are the backbone of water quality improvements. Once 

established, numeric standards reduce States' time and effort to establish TMDLs and permits to 

control nutrient levels . 
" Thus, our goal is to accelerate the progress of state adoption of numeric WQS while building the 

scientific and technical infrastructure for developing new nutrient criteria . To accomplish this 

goal, we have four general themes: 

l. Provide direct assistance to states close to adopting numeric criteria. 

2. Build capacity of states that are further from adopting numeric criteria . 

3. Build a science-based foundation for developing new section 304(a) criteria for estuaries, 

wetlands, and large rivers . 

4. Clearly and effectively communicate the dangers of nutrient pollution and the merits of 

numeric nutrient criteria to states, nutrient sources, and the general public. 

" Work conducted under these themes should reflect a collaborative effort/partnership between 

EPA Offices/Regions, and States that builds on work to date and coordination/relationships 

between EPA and States . 

" We've developed specific projects under each of these themes based on input from states at the 

All States meeting in February 2006, subsequent discussions with regions, and the discussion 

with selected state managers at the WQSMA meeting in August 2006. 

Theme 1: Direct Assistance to States Close to Adopting Numeric Criteria . 

" We've identified states that are further along in criteria development for some or all of their 

waters . These states identified implementation and policy support as their primary need. Under 

this theme, OST is : 

o Developing implementation guidance that addresses technical and policy issues raised by 

these states. 

o Issuing a policy memorandum that clarifies EPA'srecommendations, thus providing 

states with a clear statement supporting their work. EPA will foster adoption of standards 

reflective of States' priorities, and recognizing the importance of incremental progress . 

o Assessing the benefits and costs of reducing nutrients, thus providing states with 

information to support their rulemaking to adopt nutrient criteria . 

o Compiling information on treatment and BMP effectiveness, thus providing states with 

information supporting that their criteria can be attained. 

o Developing common principles for EPA review of state nutrient standards submittals, 

thus providing assurance to states that EPA review will be consistent among regions . 

o Making all tools more accessible to states via the OST website. 

Theme 2 : Build Capacity of States That Are Further From Adopting Numeric Criteria . 

" We've identified states that are further along in criteria development for some or all of their 

waters . These states identified sampling/monitoring, data/statistical analysis, and assistance in 

developing criteria numbers as their primary needs. Under this theme, OST is : 

o Providing states with on-demand statistical, sampling and data analysis support through 

N-STEPS. 

o Providing additional statistical, sampling and data analysis support through a variety of 

financial vehicles, with funds targeted towards progress with specific states. 

o Holding technical transfer workshops and training in regional offices to provide on-site 

hands-on training on OST technical tools. 

o Developing modeling tools that allow states to evaluate a causative approach for 

developing criteria and assessing the likelihood of criteria being attained. 

o Making all tools more accessible to states via the OST website. 

Page 2 of 3 
Theme 3: Build a science-based foundation for developing new section 304(a) criteria for estuaries, 

wetlands, and large rivers. 

" We've published technical guidance documents for developing criteria for lakes and reservoirs, 

rivers and streams, and estuaries and coastal waters. We still need to publish criteria or develop 

targets for other waters. Under this theme, OST is : 

o Completing technical guidance for developing wetland criteria. 

o Developing demonstration projects for estuarine and wetland criteria development. 

o Developing the scientific underpinnings for criteria for large rivers . 

o Supporting data collection to support developing criteria for estuaries and watersheds in 

the northern Gulf of Mexico. 

o Working to meet the goals of the Hypoxia Task Force. 

Theme 4: Clearly and effectively communicate the dangers of nutrient pollution and the merits of 

numeric nutrient criteria to states, nutrient sources, and the general public. 

" To be successful, we must engage the general public in understanding the consequences of 

nutrient pollution and the benefits of nutrient controls . Under this theme, OST is : 

o Building web-based and printed materials on the dangers of nutrient pollution . 

o Creating training materials for NGOs on the dangers of nutrient pollution . 

o Improving the OST website to attract more students looking for information on nutrient 

pollution . 

Page 3 of 3 
Current Status of States & Territories Numeric Nutrient Criteria for Class of Waters 

Adopted Post-1997: Updated May 14, 2007 

Entire Class of Rivers and Streams 

Stage Num States 

Has approved criteria for all 5 

parameters TN, HI, AS, GU, CN 

Has approved criteria for N, 4 DC, FL, OK*, NV 

P, or Chlorophyll 

Engaged in developing 6 MA, ME, VT, KY, MI, WI 

criteria for all parameters and 

waters 

Collecting data for all 34 CT, NH, RI, NJ, NY, PR, DE, MD, PA, VA, AL, 

parameters or waters FL, GA, MS, NC, SC, IL, IN, MN, OH, AR, LA, 

OK, NM, TX, IA, KS, MO, NE, CO, MT, UT, AZ, 

CA 

Just starting criteria process 8 WV, ND, SD, WY, AK, ID, OR, WA 

Notes: OK*: scenic rivers only 

Entire Class of Lakes and Im oundments 

Stage Num States 

Has approved criteria for all 4 HI, AS, GU, CN 

parameters 

Has approved criteria for N, 3 RI, FL, IL 

P, or Chlorophyll 

Engaged in developing 15 MA, ME, VT, VA, WV, SC, MI, MN, WI, TX*, 

criteria for all parameters and OK*, IA, MO, NE, AZ 

waters 

Collecting data for all 34 CT, NH, RI, NJ, NY, PR, DE, MD, PA, AL, FL, 

parameters or waters GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN, IL, IN, OH, AR, LA, 

NM, OK, TX, KS, CO, MT, UT, CA, NV, ID, OR, 

WA 

Just starting criteria process 4 ND, SD, WY, AK 

Notes: OK*: drinking water lakes; TX*: large lakes ; NE & VA packages in regions for 

review