Jw~EDSTqT~S UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

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

## MAY 25 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 anddescribes EPA's commitment to accelerating the pace for progress. EPApublished itsJune 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 andTennesseestreams. However, overall progress has been uneven over the past nine years. Now

is the time for EPAand its partners to take bold steps, relying on a combination of science, innovation andcollaboration. 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 canexhibit themselves locally or much further downstreamleading to degraded estuaries, lakes and reservoirs, and to hypoxic zones where fish andaquatic 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 twoareas 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 everyState and Territory is impacted by nutrient-related degradation of our waterways. All but one State and two Territories have CleanWaterAct Section 303(d) listed Internet Address (URL) e http://www .epa .gov Recycled/Recyclable a Printedwith VegetableOil Based Inks on 100%Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paperimpairments for nutrient pollution. States have listed over 10,000 nutrient and nutrient-related

impairments. Fifteen States have more than 200nutrient-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 andwatershed 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 allowus to manage more effectively, measure progress, andsupport broader partnerships based on nutrient trading, Best Management Practices (BMPs), land stewardship, wetlands protection, voluntary collaboration, and urban stormwater runoff control strategies. The progress of States andTerritories in setting numeric nutrient water quality standards is extremely important to help address nutrient pollution. Numeric nutrient standards will facilitate more effective andefficient program implementation. Notable progress has been made relying on site-specific application of narrative standards to developnutrient TMDLs. But this can often be difficult, resource-intensive and time-consuming. Adopting numeric standards, however, has a number of keyadvantages: " 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, EPAis encouraging all States, Territories andauthorized Tribes to accelerate their efforts andgive priority to adopting numeric nutrient standards or numeric translators for narrative standards for all waters in States andTerritories that contribute nutrient loadings to our waterways. Incremental progress can be an effective wayto accelerate progress. If a State needs to implement numeric nutrient criteria incrementally, EPAstrongly 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 mayalso 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 thatcontrolling both nitrogen and phosphorus is important to successfully combating nutrient

pollution in all waters. As always, States, Territories and authorized Tribes have theflexibility to address nutrient pollution using asubset 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 onecausal variable (nitrogen or phosphorus) is the limiting nutrient, it should developcriteria for at least that nutrient. However, if the non-limiting nutrient is likely contributing to a downstreamimpairment, numeric criteria for that nutrient should be considered as well . By accelerating the establishment of numeric nutrient standards, state governments and local communities canset goals, establish controls, agree on risk management approaches, measure performance, demonstrate progress, and learn fromeach 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 anyenvironmental professional understands, we can't effectively manage what we can't measure. Numeric environmental baselines help us to measure success, gauge effectiveness, andevaluate alternative approaches. Current Status Over the last nine years, EPAhas taken a number of steps to provide leadership and articulate its goal of working in partnershipwith States, Territories andauthorized 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 andestablishment of numeric nutrient criteria. EPApublished technical guidance for developing criteria for lakes and reservoirs in May 2000, rivers and streams inJune 2000, andestuaries andcoastal waters in October 2001 . EPAalso published recommended nutrient criteria for most streams and lakes in 2001 . This combined strategy of EPA, State, Territorial, andTribal partnership supported by technical assistance was intended tojump-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 fromincreasing population, expandingand more intensive agricultural activities, andspreading urbanization. Anumber of States andTerritories 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 anddeciding which standards development approach will work best for them . A summary ofthe current status is attached. Next Steps EPAremains 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, EPAwill : " Providedirect assistance to States close to adopting numeric criteria. For these States, EPAwill 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, EPAwill 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. EPAwill complete its suite ofnutrient criteria manuals for nutrient criteria, and continues to work to meet the goals of thefederal and state Mississippi River/Gulfof Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force. " Clearly andeffectively 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. EPAis committing itselfto support development of numeric nutrient criteria, and to use EPA's tools and metrics to help States, Territories, andauthorized Tribes adopt numeric nutrient standards more quickly. EPAwill also continue to do research, develop new tools, and collaborate to strengthen partnerships for consensus solutions. EPAwill work with States andTerritories to review their nutrient criteria plans developed over five years ago to ensure they reflect current expectations, realistic goals, and clear interim milestones. Workingtogether, 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. EPArecognizes the importance of keeping the public informed of ourjoint progress. EPAwill periodically publish a report of the status of ourjoint efforts, including the actions EPAhas completed and the progress that States have made in adopting numeric nutrient water quality standards. EPAwill also continue to track progress regarding nutrient pollution reduction, such as quarterly reporting ofthe number of TMDLs completed in nutrient impaired waters in the Mississippi River Basin. Attachments: 1. OW Numeric Nutrient Standards Strategy 2 . Current Status ofStates & 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 ofsubmerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) . SAV serves as critically important habitat and food for many organisms. o Algal blooms eventually die offand consume dissolved oxygen (DO) fromthe water column. Low

DOconcentrations lead to die offofaquatic organisms. o One result ofalgal blooms is decreased biological diversity and populations, including smaller populations ofgame 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 49states and 4territories have 303(d) listings due to nutrients, and about 50%ofthe 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 ofScience 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 ofthis mission, OST develops nutrient waterquality 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 10years, 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 10Regional 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 approachthey 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 toprovide 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 ofwater 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 ofstate 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 ofstates thatare 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, andthe general public. " Work conducted under these themes should reflect a collaborative effort/partnership between EPAOffices/Regions, and States that builds on work to date and coordination/relationships between EPAand States. " We've developed specific projects under each ofthese 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 WQSMAmeeting 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. EPAwill 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 BMPeffectiveness, thus providing states with information supporting that their criteria can be attained. o Developing common principles for EPAreview ofstate nutrient standards submittals, thus providing assurance to states that EPAreview 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 oftheir 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 allowstates to evaluate a causative approach for developing criteria and assessing the likelihood ofcriteria being attained. o Making all tools more accessible to states via the OST website.

Page 2 of 3Theme 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 Gulfof Mexico. o Working to meet the goals ofthe 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 3Current Status ofStates &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 p

rocess 8 WV, ND, SD, WY, AK, ID, OR, WA Notes: OK* : scenic rivers onl y Entire Class of Lakes and Im oundments Stag e 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 p

rocess 4 ND, SD, WY, AK Notes: OK* : drinking water lakes; TX* : large lakes; NE & VA packages in regions for review