Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Pre-Publication Copy 

NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM STRATEGY: 

Response to Climate Change 

Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

September 2008 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Disclaimer 

This National Water Program Strategy: Response to Climate Change provides an 

overview of the likely effects of climate change on water resources and the Nation’s 

clean water and safe drinking water programs. It also describes specific actions the 

National Water Program intends to take to adapt program implementation in light of 

climate change. As such, we hope this document provides useful information and 

guidance to the public regarding those matters. To the extent the document mentions 

or discusses statutory or regulatory authority, it does so for informational purposes 

only. The document does not substitute for those statutes or regulations, and readers 

should consult the statutes or regulations themselves to learn what they require. 

Neither this document, nor any part of it, is itself a rule or a regulation. Thus, it cannot 

change or impose legally binding requirements on EPA, States, the public, or the 

regulated community. The use of words like “should,” “could,” “would,” "will," “intend,” 

“may,” “might,” “encourage,” “expect,” and “can,” in this document means solely that 

something is intended, suggested or recommended, and not that it is legally required, 

or that any expressed intention, suggestion or recommendation imposes legally 

binding requirements on EPA, States, the public, or the regulated community. Agency 

decision makers remain free to exercise their discretion in choosing to implement the 

actions described in this Strategy.

Publication of the: 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Water (4101M) 

EPA 800-R-08-001 

Http://www.EPA.gov/water/climatechange/

September 2008
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Table of Contents 

Foreword 

Executive Summary i 

I. Introduction 1

II. Climate Change Impacts on Water Resources 

 1. Climate Change Basic Science 5 

 2. Air and Water Temperature Change Impacts 6 

 3. Rainfall/Snowfall Levels and Distribution Change Impacts 9 

 4. Storm Intensity Change Impacts 12 

 5. Sea Level Rise Impacts 16 

 6. Coastal/Ocean Characteristic Change Impacts 18 

 7. Changes in Energy Generation 21 

III. National Water Program: Climate Change Goals 

 and Response Actions 

 

 1. Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Related to Water 25 

 2. Adapting Water Programs to Climate Change 38 

 3. Climate Change Research Related to Water 60 

 4. Water Program Education on Climate Change 66 

 5. Water Program Management of Climate Change 68 

Appendices 

 

 1. Climate Change Impacts on Water in Regions of the United States 

 2. Summary List of Climate Change Actions 

 3. Adaptations for Alaska Water Infrastructure 

 4. EPA Global Climate Change Research Related to Water 

 5. Potential Climate Change/Water Research Needs 

 6. Glossary of Water Program and Climate Change Terms 

 7. Water Program and Climate Change Acronyms 

 8. References and Further Reading 

 9. Acknowledgments 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Foreword 

For the past thirty-five years, Federal, State, Tribal, and local governments have 

worked hard to identify and address water pollution problems. This effort has made 

our drinking water safer, improved the quality of rivers, lakes, and coastal waters, and 

protected critical wetlands. 

Today, the scientific consensus on climate change is changing our assumptions about 

water resources. Over the coming years, we in the United States can expect: 

• shorelines to move as a result of sea level rise; 

• changes in ocean chemistry to alter aquatic habitat and fisheries; 

• warming water temperatures to change contaminant concentrations in water 

and alter aquatic system uses; 

• new patterns of rainfall and snowfall to alter water supply for drinking and other 

uses and lead to changes in pollution levels in aquatic systems; and 

• more intense storms to threaten water infrastructure and increase polluted 

storm water runoff. 

 

There remains significant uncertainty about the exact scope and timing of climate 

change–related impacts on water resources, but the National Water Program and its 

partners need to assess emerging climate change information, evaluate potential 

impacts of climate change on water programs, and identify needed responses. 

This National Water Program Strategy: Response to Climate Change is an initial 

effort to evaluate how best to meet our clean water and safe drinking water goals in 

the context of a changing climate. The ideas and response actions outlined here are 

the product of a cooperative effort among EPA water program managers in national 

and Regional offices. The EPA Offices of Air and Radiation and Research and 

Development provided valuable support for this work. And, a wide range of 

stakeholders participated in initial “listening session” meetings. 

A changing climate in the years ahead will raise new challenges for improving the 

quality of the Nation’s waters. This Response to Climate Change starts us in the 

direction of understanding and addressing these challenges. I hope that you will join 

us in making this important work a success. 

 

Benjamin H. Grumbles 

 Assistant Administrator for Water 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

i

Executive Summary 

A long-term, international investment 

in scientific study of the Earth’s 

climate is now resulting in a scientific 

consensus concerning climate 

change and its impacts on water 

resources. This National Water 

Program Strategy: Response to 

Climate Change provides an 

overview of the potential effects of 

climate change on water resources 

and the Nation’s clean water and 

safe drinking water programs. It also 

describes specific actions the 

National Water Program will take to 

adapt program implementation in 

light of climate change. 

EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson has identified “clean energy and climate change” 

as a top Agency priority, and EPA national and Regional offices are working to define 

strategies and actions in this area. This Response to Climate Change is intended to 

support the Administrator’s priority as well as complement the EPA Office of Air and 

Radiation’s leadership of climate change policy and program development and the 

Office of Research and Development’s management of climate change–related 

research. 

Climate change will have numerous and diverse impacts, including impacts on human 

health, natural systems, and the built environment. Many of the consequences of 

climate change relate to water resources, including: 

• warming air and water; 

• change in the location and amount of rain and snow; 

• increased storm intensity; 

• sea level rise; and 

• changes in ocean characteristics. 

It is important to note that not all the near-term impacts of climate change are expected 

to be disruptive, and this Strategy focuses on impacts that are of concern for water 

programs. 

Why is the Earth Warming? 

The Earth absorbs energy from the Sun and 

radiates energy back into space. Much of 

the energy going back to space, however, is 

absorbed by “greenhouse gases” in the 

atmosphere. Because the atmosphere then 

radiates much of this energy back to the 

Earth’s surface, the planet is warmer than it 

would be if the atmosphere did not contain 

these gases. As levels of greenhouse 

gases increase, partly as a result of human 

activity, the Earth will continue to warm. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

ii

Water Impacts of Climate Change: Summarized

Detailed information about water-related impacts of climate change is documented in 

reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and described in 

detail in Section II of this Strategy. These impacts vary in different parts of North 

America, but can be briefly summarized as follows: 

1. Increases in Water Pollution Problems: Warmer air temperatures will result in 

warmer water. Warmer waters will: 

• hold less dissolved oxygen making instances of low oxygen levels and “hypoxia” 

(i.e., when dissolved oxygen declines to the point where aquatic species can no 

longer survive) more likely; and 

• foster harmful algal blooms and change the toxicity of some pollutants. 

The number of waters recognized as “impaired” is likely to increase, even if pollution 

levels are stable. 

2. More Extreme Water-Related Events: Heavier precipitation in tropical and inland 

storms will increase the risks of flooding, expand floodplains, increase the variability 

of streamflows (i.e., higher high flows and lower low flows), increase the velocity of 

water during high flow periods and increase erosion. These changes will have 

adverse effects on water quality and aquatic system health. For example, increases 

in intense rainfall result in more nutrients, pathogens, and toxins being washed into 

waterbodies.

3. Changes to the Availability of Drinking Water Supplies: In some parts of the 

country, droughts, changing patterns of precipitation and snowmelt, and increased 

water loss due to evaporation as a result of warmer air temperatures will result in 

changes to the availability of water for drinking and for use for agriculture and 

industry. In other areas, sea level rise and salt water intrusion will have the same 

effect. Warmer air temperatures may also result in increased demands on 

community water supplies and the water needs for agriculture, industry, and energy 

production are likely to increase. 

4. Waterbody Boundary Movement and Displacement: Rising sea levels will move 

ocean and estuarine shorelines by inundating lowlands, displacing wetlands, and 

altering the tidal range in rivers and bays. Changing water flow to lakes and 

streams, increased evaporation, and changed precipitation in some areas, will affect 

the size of wetlands and lakes. Water levels in the Great Lakes are expected to fall. 

 

5. Changing Aquatic Biology: As waters become warmer, the aquatic life they now 

support will be replaced by other species better adapted to the warmer water (i.e., 

cold water fish will be replaced by warm water fish). This process, however, will 

occur at an uneven pace disrupting aquatic system health and allowing non-
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

iii

indigenous and/or invasive species to become established. In the long-term (i.e., 50 

years), warmer water and changing flows may result in significant deterioration of 

aquatic ecosystem health in some areas. 

6. Collective Impacts on Coastal Areas: Most areas of the United States will see 

several of the water-related effects of climate change, but coastal areas are likely to 

see multiple impacts of climate change. These impacts include sea level rise, 

increased damage from floods and storms, changes in drinking water supplies, and 

increasing temperature and acidification of the oceans. 

These overlapping impacts of climate change make protecting water resources in 

coastal areas especially challenging. 

Response to Climate Change: Goals and Strategic Choices 

 

The National Water Program has an obligation to recognize and address the threats to 

water resources posed by climate change. This Response to Climate Change is an 

initial effort to describe climate change impacts on water programs, define goals and 

objectives for responding to climate change, and to identify a comprehensive package 

of specific response actions. This document expresses the National Water Program’s 

commitment to work in cooperation with national partners, State and local government, 

and public and private stakeholders to understand the science, develop tools, and 

implement actions to address the impacts of climate change on water resources. 

The National Water Program has established climate change–related goals in each of 

the three key climate change topic areas already identified by EPA: 

• Mitigation; 

• Adaptation; and 

• Research. 

In addition, this Strategy includes two supporting goals addressing education of water 

program professionals on climate change issues and management of climate change 

work within the National Water Program. 

Goals for the National Water Program in each of these five areas are discussed below 

in terms of the strategic issue that is presented and the National Water Program’s 

conclusion concerning the issue. At the highest “big picture” level, this document 

represents a “strategic choice” by the National Water Program to change programs and 

invest resources based on a growing understanding of climate change (i.e., climate 

change matters to water programs and demands a response). The five goals described 

below reflect another level of strategic choices, including the decision to expand water 

program efforts related to greenhouse gas mitigation rather than focus only on water 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

iv

program adaptation and the decision to have a sustained management focus on climate 

change issues. 

Goal 1: Water Program Mitigation of Greenhouse Gases: Use core water programs 

to contribute to greenhouse gas mitigation 

Strategic Issue: The severity of impacts on water resources will depend on 

greenhouse gas emissions over the long-term. The National Water Program has a 

range of opportunities to contribute to the goal of reducing greenhouse gases, 

including water and energy efficiency and assuring that sequestration of carbon 

protects human health and the environment. 

Conclusion: The National Water Program will expand existing programs that result 

in greenhouse gas mitigation and expand efforts related to geologic and biological 

sequestration of carbon dioxide. EPA will use the best available science and 

technology to support responsible operation of water treatment and delivery systems 

through water conservation and energy efficiency. EPA will also support carbon 

sequestration related to energy production and industrial processes. 

Goal 2: Water Program Adaptation to Climate Change: Adapt implementation of 

core water programs to maintain and improve program effectiveness in the context of a 

changing climate and assist States and communities in this effort. 

Strategic Issue: EPA, States, and Tribes implementing core water programs will 

need to continue to meet drinking water, clean water, and wetlands protection goals 

as the climate changes. Warmer air and water, changes in weather patterns, and 

rising sea levels will create challenges that may require modifications to programs 

and new tools in order to sustain past progress and avoid new risks to human health 

and aquatic ecosystems. 

Conclusion: The National Water Program will implement a range of actions to tailor 

existing water programs to the challenges posed by climate change. The National 

Water Program will: 

• measure, minimize and manage the impacts of climate change on water 

resources using effective adaptation approaches and will be responsive in our 

standards and permitting programs; 

• be proactive in adapting watershed protection, wetlands, and infrastructure 

programs in light of climate change; 

• develop tools, standards and guidelines, and identify best practices to 

understand and measure the nature and magnitude of chemical, biological, and 

physical effects of climate change on water resources; and 

• apply environmental science, technology, and information to guide and support 

proactive climate change planning and management. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

v

Goal 3: Climate Change Research Related to Water: Strengthen the link between 

EPA water programs and climate change research. 

Strategic Issue: Given the significance of climate change impacts on water and 

water quality, these impacts have been relatively little studied. In addition, 

communication of water-related research findings to water program managers has 

been inconsistent. 

Conclusion: The National Water Program will identify and complement climate 

research by others that supports water programs and this Strategy. The National 

Water Program will expand participation in inter-agency and intra-Agency research 

planning related to climate change and will adjust core water program research to 

climate issues as needed. 

Goal 4: Water Program Education on Climate Change: Educate water program 

professionals and stakeholders on climate change impacts on water resources and 

water programs. 

Strategic Issue: EPA water program staff in national and Regional offices need to 

better understand the anticipated impacts of climate change on water to manage 

programs effectively. Also, given the range of impacts of climate change around the 

country, State, Tribal, and local water program partners need information and 

technical assistance to understand the likely impacts on watersheds, water supply, 

water infrastructure, and water quality. 

Conclusion: The National Water Program will invest in climate change education 

on water issues for water program managers and partners, will support sharing of 

information about State and local responses to water impacts of climate change, and 

will provide tools and technical assistance to support this effort. 

Goal 5: Water Program Management of Climate Change: Establish the 

management capability within the National Water Program to engage climate change 

challenges on a sustained basis. 

Strategic Issue: Prior to creation of the Workgroup that produced this Strategy, the 

National Water Program had not had a comprehensive effort to monitor climate 

change science, systematically assess climate change impacts on water programs, 

work with other Federal agencies on this topic, or develop response actions. 

Implementation of this Strategy, however, will require creation of new management 

capabilities in these areas. 

 

 Conclusion: The National Water Program will maintain a Climate Change 

Workgroup, support EPA Regions’ efforts to supplement this Strategy, and reach 

out to other Federal agencies with climate change interests. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

vi

Each of these five goals is supported by more specific objectives and “Key Actions.” 

Some of these Key Actions involve existing water program work that has climate 

change implications while other actions involve new activities, or changes in the 

direction of current activities, in response to climate change. Key Actions will be 

initiated in the FY 2008 and 2009 timeframe. In some areas, longer-term actions under 

consideration are also identified. 

Implementation of these new Key Actions assumes level funding (i.e., no new funding 

for “climate” actions). Given this assumption, this Response to Climate Change

represents a further refinement of the “big picture” strategic choices associated with the 

five major goals by virtue of the allocation of the Key Actions among the five goals. For 

example, although greenhouse gas mitigation through water programs is a major goal, 

many more Key Actions are allocated to the water program adaptation goal. 

Response to Climate Change: Crosscutting Themes 

In developing Key Actions to support the five major goals, several important 

crosscutting themes emerged (see the introduction to Section III of this Strategy for 

more detailed description of these themes). Understanding these themes was useful in 

the process of weighing different possible response actions and adding strategic focus 

to this Strategy. These themes offer another perspective on the “strategic choices” 

made in the development of the Strategy and new insight into the substantive, new 

directions called for in this document. 

1. Develop Data to Adapt to Climate Change: Water managers need information 

and baseline data to understand how climate change is altering the environment and 

inform long-term planning. 

2. Plan for Extreme Water Events: Water managers need to expand efforts to plan 

for and respond to extreme weather events resulting from climate change, including 

storms, an excess of water, and a lack of water. 

3. Increase Watershed Sustainability and Resilience: Many elements of a 

“watershed approach” will increase the resiliency of watersheds to climate change 

and increase the sustainability of aquatic systems.

4. Develop Analytic Tools: Water managers need a wide range of new analytic tools 

to understand and address water resources impacts of climate change.

5. Strengthen Partnerships: Water program managers need the help of many 

partners, including Federal agencies and State, Tribal, and local governments. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1

I. Introduction 

Protecting the quality of the Nation’s water resources, and the recreational, ecological 

and environmental values that water resources support, is an important goal for the 

country. The growing understanding of climate change is leading to the recognition that 

a changing climate will affect the protection of the quality of water resources. This 

National Water Program Strategy: Response to Climate Change outlines how the 

National Water Program plans to respond to climate change. 

The National Water Program 

The National Water Program is a cooperative effort by Federal, State, Tribal, and local 

governments to implement core laws, including the Safe Drinking Water Act and the 

Clean Water Act, to protect and improve the quality of the Nation’s waters. Key 

elements of this effort are intended to: 

• assure that water provided by public water systems is safe to drink; 

• protect and restore the quality of rivers, lakes, and streams; 

• improve the quality of estuarine, coastal, and ocean waters; 

• protect wetlands; and 

• restore the quality of large aquatic ecosystems around the country such as the 

Chesapeake Bay, the Great Lakes, and the Gulf of Mexico. 

For over thirty years, EPA has worked with other Federal agencies and State, Tribal, 

and local governments to implement a wide range of programs to protect the Nation’s 

waters. EPA works closely with other Federal agencies, such as the Department of 

Agriculture, Department of Interior, and Department of Commerce. Many of the Federal 

water quality programs authorized by Congress are now delegated to States and Tribes 

that implement the programs with the support of grants from EPA. Local governments 

play a critical role in this effort as the managers of the drinking water and waste 

treatment infrastructure and are supported with financing assistance through the State 

Revolving Fund (SRF) loan programs. 

Climate Change and Water 

Over the past several years, new information about climate change has emerged from 

the scientific community. First, recent reports of the United Nations Intergovernmental 

Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the interagency U.S. Climate Change Science 

Program (CCSP) express a growing consensus on climate change. 

Second, it is increasingly clear that climate change may have impacts on water 

resources and affect the programs designed to protect the quality of these resources. 

Not all of the near-term impacts of climate change, however, are expected to be 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

2

disruptive, and this Strategy focuses on impacts that are of concern for water 

programs. Some of the primary consequences of climate change for water resources 

include rising sea levels, warming water temperatures, and changes in the amounts and 

location of rain and snow. 

Purpose and Structure of this Document 

The purpose of this Response to Climate Change is to describe the effects of climate 

change on water resources and define goals for the National Water Program in 

responding to the challenges posed by climate change. 

“Clean energy and climate change” has been identified by EPA Administrator Stephen 

Johnson as a top Agency priority, and EPA national and Regional offices are working to 

define strategies and actions in this area. This Response to Climate Change is 

intended to support the Administrator’s priority as well as complement the EPA Office of 

Air and Radiation’s leadership of climate change policy and program development and 

the Office of Research and Development’s management of climate change–related 

research. 

Following this Introduction, Section II of the document describes the primary impacts of 

climate change on water resources including: 

 

• air and water temperature increases; 

• changes in levels and distribution of rainfall and snowfall; 

• storm intensity increases; 

• sea level rise; and 

• changes in coastal/ocean characteristics. 

Section III of the document describes five general goals for the National Water Program 

response to climate change impacts on water resources: 

Goal 1: Water Program Mitigation of Greenhouse Gases: use water programs to 

contribute to greenhouse gas mitigation;

Goal 2: Water Program Adaptation to Climate Change: adapt implementation of 

core water programs to maintain and improve program effectiveness in the context of a 

changing climate; 

Goal 3: Climate Change Research Related to Water: strengthen the link between 

EPA water programs and climate change research. 

Goal 4: Water Program Education on Climate Change: educate water program 

professionals and stakeholders on climate change impacts on water resources and 

programs; and 

Goal 5: Water Program Management of Climate Change: establish the management 

capability within the National Water Program to engage climate change challenges on a 

sustained basis. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

3

Each of these five goals is supported by a series of objectives and “Key Actions” that 

the National Water Program will implement in cooperation with partners. Although the 

Key Actions defined in this Strategy are a blueprint for accomplishing the five goals 

described above, in a larger sense, the success of the Strategy depends on water 

program staff taking responsibility for understanding climate change impacts and 

helping adapt their programs to address these impacts. 

Process of Developing this Document 

This Response to Climate Change was developed by a Climate Change Workgroup 

established by the Assistant Administrator for Water at the EPA. The Workgroup is 

chaired by the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water and includes senior water 

program managers from national and Regional offices of EPA, including the Office of Air 

and Radiation and Office of Research and Development. 

The Workgroup began meeting in April 2007 and, in May, June, and August conducted 

a series of “listening sessions” with a range of stakeholders. A draft version of the 

Strategy was available for public comment in the spring of 2008 and comments from 

almost one hundred individuals and organizations were considered in the development 

of this final document. 

Next Steps 

With the publication of this Response to Climate Change document, the National 

Water Program will affirmatively implement the Key Actions described in Section III and 

will monitor the implementation of these actions, provide periodic public reports of 

progress, and review and revise the document as needed over time. 

Throughout this process, the EPA Office of Water will continue to work to strengthen 

linkages with other EPA offices; EPA Regional offices; other Federal agencies; State, 

local, and Tribal partners; and others to continue to improve the understanding of both 

the impacts of climate change on water resources and the range of actions that might 

further improve the National Water Program response to climate change. In addition, 

EPA Regional Offices may supplement this Strategy with actions designed to address 

the most significant climate change impacts in the Region. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

4

EPA Climate Change Website: EPA’s 

Climate Change website provides useful 

summaries of a wide range of climate 

change–related information: 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ 

II. Climate Change Impacts on Water Resources 

A first step in understanding how the National Water Program should respond to climate 

change is to understand the basic science of climate change and the consequences of 

climate change for water resources. Some of the primary effects of climate change for 

water resources include: 

• Air and Water Temperature Increases; 

• Changes in Levels and Distribution of Rainfall and Snowfall; 

• Storm Intensity Increases; 

• Sea Level Rise; and 

• Changes in Coastal/Ocean Characteristics. 

Each of these five primary ways climate 

change impacts water resources is 

described briefly below. Much of the 

information in this section is drawn from 

EPA’s climate change website and is 

supplemented with water-related 

information from research reports prepared by U.S. EPA’s Office of Research and 

Development (ORD) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The 

description of the impacts of climate change on water resources and water programs is 

based on the collective experience and best professional judgment of EPA scientists. 

In addition to a general description of 

potential effects on water resources, 

some of the specific impacts expected in 

North America are described and effects 

on a range of water programs are 

identified. More specific information on 

impacts in different areas of the country is 

included in Appendix 1. 

Finally, it is increasingly likely that one response to climate change will be a shift in the 

methods of producing energy (e.g., increased demand for biofuels). Some of these 

changes in the methods of energy production may affect water resources and water 

protection programs. Some of the expected impacts on water resources due to shifts in 

energy production are described at the close of this section. 

The Intergovernmental Panel on 

Climate Change (IPCC): Established 

by the World Meteorological 

Organization (WMO) and the United 

Nations Environment Programme 

(UNEP) in 1988, the IPCC assesses 

scientific, technical, and socio-economic 

information relevant to climate change. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

5

1. Climate Change Basic Science 

Climate change refers to significant change in measures of climate (such as 

temperature or precipitation) lasting for an extended period (decades or longer). 

Energy from the Sun drives the Earth's weather, climate and physical processes at the 

surface. The Earth absorbs energy from the Sun and also radiates energy back into 

space. However, much of this energy going back to space is absorbed by “greenhouse 

gases” in the atmosphere (see Figure 1: Greenhouse Effect). Because much of this 

energy is retained in the surface-atmosphere system, the planet is warmer than it would 

be if the atmosphere did not contain these gases. Without this natural “greenhouse 

effect” temperatures would be about 60°F (about 33°C) lower than they are now, and 

life as we know it today would not be possible (EPA 2007a). 

 

 Climate change may result from: 

• natural factors, such as changes in 

the sun's intensity or slow changes 

in the Earth's orbit around the sun; 

• natural processes within the climate 

system (e.g., changes in ocean 

circulation); and 

• human activities that change the 

atmosphere's composition (e.g., 

through burning fossil fuels) and the 

land surface (e.g., deforestation, 

reforestation, urbanization, 

desertification) 

During the past century, humans have substantially added to the amount of greenhouse 

gases in the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, oil and 

gasoline to power cars, factories, utilities and appliances. The added gases—primarily 

carbon dioxide and methane—are enhancing the natural greenhouse effect and likely 

contributing to an increase in global average temperature and related climate changes 

(EPA 2007a). 

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded in its 2007 report 

on climate change: 

“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from 

observations of increases in global average air and water temperatures, 

widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level” (IPCC 

2007a, Working Group I Summary for Policymakers, p. 5). 

Figure 1: The Greenhouse Effect. 

Source: EPA 2007a. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

6

2. Air and Water Temperature Increases 

Temperatures are changing in the lower atmosphere—from the Earth’s surface all the 

way through the stratosphere (9 to 14 miles above the Earth’s surface) (EPA 2007b). 

Most climate change scenarios project that greenhouse gas concentrations will increase 

through 2100 with a continued increase in average global temperatures (IPCC 2007a, 

as found in EPA 2007c). 

 

The average surface temperature of the Earth is likely1

 to increase by 2 to 11.5°F (1.1-

6.4°C) by the end of the 21st century, relative to 1980-1990, with a best estimate of 3.2 

to 7.2°F (1.8-4.0°C). The average rate of warming over each inhabited continent is very 

likely to be at least twice as large as that experienced during the 20th century (EPA 

2007c and IPCC 2007a). 

A. Background 

According to EPA’s climate change website (EPA 2007b) and data from NOAA and 

NASA (NOAA 2007, NASA 2006): 

• since the mid 1970s, the average surface temperature has warmed about 1°F 

(about 0.6°C); 

• the Earth’s surface is currently warming at a rate of about 0.32°F (about 0.18°C) 

per decade or 3.2°F (about 1.8°C) per century; and 

• the five warmest years over the last century have likely been: 2005, 1998, 2002, 

2003, and 2006. The top 10 warmest years have all occurred since 1990. 

Looking ahead, the IPCC recently concluded that: “All of North America is very likely to 

warm during this century, and the annual mean warming is likely to exceed the global 

mean warming in most areas” (Christensen et al. 2007, p. 887). More specifically, the 

IPCC finds that “[w]arming in the USA is expected to exceed 2°C [3.6°F] by nearly all 

the models...” (Christensen et al. 2007, p. 889). Climate models project regional 

variation of warming—for example, some models project that temperatures in parts of 

Alaska could increase by 10°C (18°F) (Christensen et al. 2007, p. 889)). 

See Figure 2 for a graphic depiction of temperature trends in the continental United 

States for the last century based on data from the National Oceanographic and 

Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). 

NCDC’s observations indicate that in the last century, temperatures rose at an average 

rate of 0.11°F (0.06°C) per decade (1.1°F [0.6°C] per century) in the continental United 

States. Average temperatures for the United States rose at an increased rate of 0.56°F 

 

1

 IPCC used the following terms to indicate the assessed likelihood, using expert judgment, of an 

outcome or a result: virtually certain > 99% probability of occurrence, extremely likely > 95%, very likely > 

90%, likely > 66%, more likely than not > 50%, unlikely < 33%, very unlikely < 10%, extremely unlikely < 

5% (IPCC 2007a, see Working Group I, Summary for Policymakers, p. 3).
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

7

[0.31°C] per decade from 1979 to 2005. The most recent eight-, nine-, and ten-year 

periods were the warmest on record (EPA 2007b). 

 

Water temperatures have also been rising, and increases have been observed in both 

freshwater and salt water. For example, the IPCC reported recently that: “There is 

compelling evidence that the heat content of the World Ocean has increased since 

1955. In the North Atlantic, the warming is penetrating deeper than in the Pacific, Indian 

and Southern Oceans...” (Bindoff et al. 2007, p. 420). Ocean surface temperatures are 

predicted to increase over the next hundred years (IPCC 2007a, see Working Group I 

Technical Summary, p. 72). 

Further, inland water temperature projections 

indicate that “[s]imulated future surface and 

bottom water temperatures of lakes, reservoirs, 

rivers, and estuaries throughout North America 

consistently increase from 2 to 7°C [3.6 to 

12.6°F] ... with summer surface temperatures 

exceeding 30°C [86°F] in Midwestern and 

southern lakes and reservoirs” (Field et al. 2007, 

p. 629). 

B. Impacts on Water Resources 

Warmer air temperatures are expected to have 

several impacts on water resources including 

diminishing snow pack and increasing 

evaporation, which affects the seasonal 

availability of water (Field et al. 2007, p. 619). 

A key impact of warmer air temperatures is 

warmer water temperatures. Some impacts of 

warmer water temperatures are: 

• a shift in aquatic species distribution and population (Field et al. 2007, p. 631); 

• “[t]he rise in global temperature will tend to extend poleward the ranges of many 

invasive aquatic plants ...” (IPCC 2008, p. 70); 

• “[h]igher stream temperatures affect fish access, survival and spawning (e.g., 

west coast salmon) (Field et al. 2007, p. 629); 

• higher temperatures reduce dissolved oxygen levels, which can have an effect 

on aquatic life (EPA 2007h), and according to the IPCC, ”warming is likely to 

extend and intensify summer thermal stratification, contributing to oxygen 

depletion” in lakes and reservoirs (Field et al. 2007, p. 629); 

• increased concentrations of some pollutants (e.g., simulations in the Bay of 

Quinte in Lake Ontario indicated that 3 to 4°C (5.4 to 7.2° F) warmer water 

Figure 2. Annual mean temperature 

anomalies, 1901-2005. Red shades 

indicate warming over the period (+), 

and blue shades indicate cooling over 

the period (-). Source: NOAA/NESDIS/ 

NCDC, as found in EPA 2007b.
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

8

temperatures contribute 77 to 98 percent increases in summer phosphorus 

concentrations (Field et al. 2007, p. 629)); 

• “[h]igher surface water temperatures will promote algal blooms and increase the 

bacteria and fungi content”, which “... may lead to a bad odor and taste in 

chlorinated drinking water and the occurrence of toxins” (Kundzewicz et al. 2007, 

p. 188); 

• “Because warmer waters support more production of algae, many lakes may 

become more eutrophic due to increased temperature alone, even if nutrient 

supply from the watershed remains unchanged.” (CCSP SAP 4-3; page 142); 

and 

• “[a]ctual evaporation over open water is projected to increase, e.g., over much of 

the ocean and lakes, with the spatial variations tending to relate to spatial 

variations in surface warming (IPCC 2008, p. 38). 

Some aquatic organisms are particularly sensitive to temperature. For example, the 

breeding cycle of many amphibians is closely related to temperature and moisture, and 

reproductive failure can occur when breeding phenology—periodic biological 

phenomena correlated with climate—and pond-drying conditions are misaligned (Field 

et al. 2007, p. 630). Further, many coral reefs are surviving at or close to their 

temperature tolerance levels, so rising sea surface temperatures are creating more 

hostile conditions for the corals (EPA 2007k). Saltwater and freshwater fisheries are 

also affected by climate change; in 2001, the IPCC stated that “[p]rojected climate 

changes have the potential to affect coastal and marine ecosystems, with impacts on 

the abundance and spatial distribution of species that are important to commercial and 

recreational fisheries” (Cohen et al. 2001, as referenced in Field et al. 2007, p. 620). 

Further, “[c]old-water fisheries will likely be negatively affected by climate change; 

warm-water fisheries will generally gain; and the results for cool-water fisheries will be 

mixed, with gains in the northern and losses in the southern portions of ranges” (Field et 

al. 2007, p. 631). Although temperature increases may favor warm-water fishes, such 

as smallmouth bass, “changes in water supply and flow regimes seem likely to have 

negative effects” on these fishes (Field et al. 2007, p. 632). 

C. Impacts on Water Programs 

As air and water temperatures warm, water resource managers will likely face 

significant challenges: 

• increased pollutant concentrations and lower dissolved oxygen levels will result 

in additional waterbodies not meeting water quality standards and, therefore, 

being listed as impaired waters requiring a total maximum daily load (TMDL); 

• increased growth of algae and microbes will affect drinking water quality; 

• discharge permits and nonpoint pollution control programs may need to be 

adjusted to reflect changing conditions; 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

9

• States and EPA may need to consider the effects of changing air and water 

temperatures on water quality; 

• increased water use will put stress on water infrastructure and demands on the 

clean water and drinking water State Revolving Funds; and 

• drinking water and wetlands managers will need to account for water losses due 

to increased evapotranspiration rates resulting from temperature increases. 

Air and Water Temperature Increases: Effects on Water Programs 

(Shaded areas reflect programs most affected by air and water temperature increases)

3. Rainfall/Snowfall Levels and Distribution 

According to the IPCC, an increase in the average global temperature is very likely to 

lead to changes in precipitation and atmospheric moisture because of changes in 

atmospheric circulation and increases in evaporation and water vapor (EPA 2007e). 

The effects of increases in temperature and radiative forcing, a measure of irradiation in 

the tropopause, “alter the hydrological cycle, especially characteristics of precipitation 

(amount, frequency, intensity, duration, type) and extremes” (Trenberth et al. 2007, p. 

254). 

Climate models suggest an increase in global average annual precipitation during the 

21st century, although changes in precipitation will vary from region to region (IPCC 

2007a, as found in EPA 2007e). Regional precipitation projections from climate models, 

however, must be considered with caution since their reliability at small spatial scales is 

limited (EPA 2007e). 

A. Background 

The IPCC has concluded that: “Increases in the amount of precipitation are very likely2

in the high latitudes, while decreases are likely3 in most subtropical land 

 

2

 IPCC used the following terms to indicate the assessed likelihood, using expert judgment, of an 

outcome or a result: virtually certain > 99% probability of occurrence, extremely likely > 95%, very likely > 

Drinking Water Standards Surface Water 

Standards 

Technology Based 

Standards 

Emergency Planning 

Drinking Water Planning Clean Water Planning Water Monitoring Water Restoration/ 

TMDLs 

Underground Injection 

Control Permits 

Discharge Permits Storm Water Permits Wetlands Permits 

Source Water Protection Nonpoint Pollution 

Control 

Coastal Zone National Estuaries 

Program 

Drinking Water SRF Clean Water SRF Ocean Protection Combined Sewer 

Overflow Plans 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

10

regions...continuing observed patterns in recent trends [emphasis in original]” (IPCC 

2007a, see Working Group I Summary for Policymakers, p. 16). See Figure 3 for a 

depiction of precipitation trends in the continental United States in the last century. 

Increases in temperature can affect the amount 

and duration of snow cover which, in turn, can 

affect timing of streamflow and impact ground 

water recharge. Glaciers are expected to 

continue retreating, and many small glaciers 

may disappear entirely (EPA 2007i). The IPCC 

Technical Paper on Climate Change and Water 

indicates that warming would lead to changes in 

the seasonality of river flows where much winter 

precipitation currently falls as snow, with spring 

flows decreasing because of the reduced or 

earlier snowmelt, and winter flows increasing. 

This has been found in ... western, central and 

eastern North America (IPCC 2008, p. 40). It 

further states that “[p]rojected warming in the 

western mountains by the mid-21st century is 

very likely to cause large decreases in 

snowpack, earlier snowmelt, more winter rain 

events, increased peak winter flows and 

flooding, and reduced summer flows” (IPCC 

2008, p. 172). 

 

These precipitation trends are expected to 

continue. The IPCC reported this year that: 

“Annual mean precipitation is very likely to 

increase in Canada and the northeast USA, and likely to decrease in the southwest 

USA” (Christensen et al. 2007, p. 887). The IPCC also concluded that: “Snow season 

length and snow depth are very likely to decrease in most of North America...” 

(Christensen et al. 2007, p. 887). 

 

B. Impacts on Water Resources 

Changing precipitation patterns are expected to have several impacts on water 

resources including: 

• increased frequency and intensity of rainfall in some areas will produce more 

pollution and erosion and sedimentation due to runoff (EPA 2007h); 

 90%, likely > 66%, more likely than not > 50%, unlikely < 33%, very unlikely < 10%, extremely unlikely < 

5% (IPCC 2007a, see Working Group I, Summary for Policymakers, p. 3). 

3

 See footnote 2 for the IPCC Working Group I’s use of the term “likely”. 

Figure 3. Annual precipitation trends, 1901-

2005. Green shades indicate a trend towards 

wetter conditions over the period, and brown 

shades indicate a trend towards dryer 

conditions. No data are available for areas 

shaded in white. Source: 

NOAA/NESDIS/NCDC, as found in EPA 

2007d. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

11

• “[w]ater-borne diseases and degraded water quality are likely to increase with 

more heavy precipitation” (IPCC 2008, p. 139); 

• potential increases in heavy precipitation, with expanding impervious surfaces, 

could increase urban flood risks and create additional design challenges and 

costs for stormwater management" (Field et al. 2007, p. 633); 

• flooding can affect water quality, as large volumes of water can transport 

contaminants into waterbodies and also overload storm and wastewater systems 

(EPA 2007h); 

• in general, in areas where precipitation increases sufficiently, net water supplies 

may increase while in other areas where precipitation decreases, net water 

supplies may decrease (EPA 2007i); and 

• “[i]ncreased occurrence of low flows will lead to decreased contaminant dilution 

capacity, and thus higher pollutant concentrations, including pathogens. In areas 

with overall decreased runoff (e.g., in many semiarid areas), water quality 

deterioration will be even worse” (IPCC 2008, p. 54);

• “[a] wide range of species and biomes could be impacted by the projected 

changes in rainfall, soil moisture, surface water levels, and stream flow in North 

America during the coming decades. Lowering of lake and pond water levels, for 

example, can lead to reproductive failure in amphibians and fish, and differential 

responses among species can alter aquatic community composition and nutrient 

flows” (IPCC 2008, p. 140);

• “[c]hanges in rainfall patterns and drought regimes can facilitate other types of 

ecosystem disturbances, including fire and biological invasion” (IPCC 2008, p. 

140); 

• “[s]ome of the greatest potential impacts of climate change on estuaries may 

result from changes in physical mixing characteristics caused by changes in 

freshwater runoff. Changes in river discharges into shallow near shore marine 

environments will lead to changes in turbidity, salinity, stratification and nutrient 

availability” (IPCC 2008, p. 72); and 

• “[g]reater rainfall variability is likely to compromise wetlands through shifts in the 

timing duration and depth of water levels” (IPCC 2008, p. 168). Due in part to 

their limited capacity for adaptation, wetlands are considered among the most 

vulnerable ecosystems to climate change (IPCC 2008, p. 71). 

Although impact assessment studies often focus on negative consequences of changes 

in precipitation and flow, it is important to note that there are water quality benefits to 

increased precipitation (e.g. increased drinking water supply) and of decreased 

precipitation (e.g. reduce frequency of flooding). 

C. Impacts on Water Programs 

Changing precipitation patterns pose several challenges for water program managers: 

• increased rainfall can enhance surface and ground water supplies of drinking 

water; 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

12

• increased rainfall, especially more intense rainfall, will result in increased storm 

water runoff and may make overflows of sanitary sewers and combined sewers 

more frequent, putting increased demands on discharge permit programs and 

nonpoint pollution control programs; 

• increased storm water runoff will wash sediment and other contaminants into 

drinking water sources, requiring additional treatment; 

• additional investments in water infrastructure may be needed to manage both 

decreases in rainfall (e.g., expanded water supply retention facilities) and 

increases in rainfall (e.g., increases in pipe and storm water management 

facilities), and these demands could strain water financing generally including the 

State Revolving Funds; 

• limited water availability and drought in some regions will require drinking water 

providers to reassess supply facility plans and consider alternative pricing, 

allocation, and water conservation options; 

• in areas with less precipitation, demand for water may shift to underground 

aquifers and prompt water recycling and reuse, development of new reservoirs, 

or underground injection of treated water for storage; 

• in areas with less precipitation, limited groundwater recharge combined with 

increasing use will have adverse impacts on stream flow and make meeting 

water quality goals more challenging; and 

• increased incidence of wildfire as a result of reduced precipitation can reduce the 

amount of water retained on the land, increase soil erosion, increase water 

pollution, increase risk of flooding, and pose a threat to water infrastructure. 

Rainfall and Snowfall Levels/Distribution: Effects on Water Programs 

(Shaded areas reflect programs most affected by rainfall and snowfall levels) 

4. Storm Intensity 

According to the IPCC, “[t]he frequency of heavy precipitation events has increased 

over most land areas, consistent with warming and observed increases of atmospheric 

water vapor” (IPCC 2007a, Working Group I Summary for Policy Makers, p. 8). Further, 

Drinking Water Standards Surface Water 

Standards 

Technology Based 

Standards 

Emergency Planning 

Drinking Water Planning Clean Water Planning Water Monitoring Water Restoration/ 

TMDLs 

Underground Injection 

Control Permits 

Discharge Permits Storm Water Permits Wetlands Permits 

Source Water Protection Nonpoint Pollution 

Control 

Coastal Zone National Estuaries 

Program 

Drinking Water SRF Clean Water SRF Ocean Protection Combined Sewer 

Overflow Plans 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

13

“[b]ased on a range of models, it is likely4 that future tropical cyclones (typhoons and 

hurricanes) will become more intense, with larger peak wind speeds and more heavy 

precipitation associated with ongoing increases of tropical sea surface temperatures 

[emphasis in original]” (IPCC 2007a, Working Group I Summary for Policymakers , p. 

15). 

 

A. Background 

There is large natural variability in the intensity and frequency of mid latitude storms and 

associated features such as thunderstorms, hail events and tornadoes. To date, there 

is no long-term evidence of systematic changes in these types of events over the 

course of the past 100 years (IPCC 2007a, as found in EPA 2007d). Analyses of 

severe storms are complicated by factors including the localized nature of the events, 

inconsistency in data observation methods, and the limited areas in which studies have 

been performed (EPA 2007d). 

 

The frequency and intensity of tropical storm systems have also varied over the 20th 

century on annual, decadal and multi-decadal time scales. For example, in the Atlantic 

basin, the period from about 1995-2005 was extremely active both in terms of the 

overall number of tropical storm systems including hurricanes as well as in storm 

intensity. However, the two to three decades prior to the mid-1990s were characterized 

as a relatively inactive period (EPA 2007d). 

Following the Atlantic hurricane season of 2005, which set a record with 27 named 

storms, a great deal of attention has focused on the relationship between hurricanes 

and climate change. Numerous studies have been published on possible linkages, with 

a range of conclusions (EPA 2007d). To provide an updated assessment of the current 

state of knowledge of the impact of global warming on tropical systems, the World 

Meteorological Organization’s hurricane researchers published a consensus statement. 

Their conclusions include (WMO 2006, as found in EPA 2007d): 

• “Though there is evidence both for and against the existence of a detectable 

anthropogenic signal in the tropical cyclone climate record to date, no firm 

conclusion can be made on this point.” 

• “There is general agreement that no individual events in [2004 and 2005] can be 

attributed directly to the recent warming of the global oceans...[but] it is possible 

that global warming may have affected the 2004-2005 group of events as a 

whole.” 

 

Mid-latitude storm tracks are projected to shift toward the poles, with increased intensity 

in some areas but reduced frequency (EPA 2007e). Tropical storms and hurricanes are 

likely5

 to become more intense, produce stronger peak winds, and produce increased 

 

4

 See footnote 2 for the IPCC Working Group I’s use of the term “likely”. 5

 See footnote 2 for the IPCC Working Group I’s use of the term “likely”. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

14

rainfall over some areas due to warming sea surface temperatures (which can energize 

these storms) (IPCC 2007a, as found in EPA 2007e). The relationship between sea 

surface temperatures and the frequency of tropical storms is less clear (EPA 2007e). 

B. Impacts on Water Resources 

The primary impacts of increasing storm intensity on water resources is coastal and 

inland flooding, complicated in the case of coastal storms by storm surges. Many of 

these impacts will vary regionally and can be 

influenced by other factors such as the level of 

development in the watershed. Some of the key 

water impacts of this flooding are the following: 

• water quality changes may be observed in 

the future as a result of “... water 

infrastructure malfunctioning during floods” 

(Kundzewicz et al. 2007, p. 189); and 

• flood magnitudes and frequencies will very 

likely increase in most regions—mainly a 

result of increased precipitation intensity 

and variability—and increasing 

temperatures are expected to intensify the climate's hydrologic cycle and melt 

snowpacks more rapidly (IPCC 2007b, as found in EPA 2007h). 

In addition to flooding, increased storm frequency and/or intensity may result in the 

following: 

• adverse effects in surface and ground water quality and contamination of water 

supply (IPCC 2007b, Working Group II Summary for Policymakers, p. 18); 

• water quality changes may be observed in the future as a result of “overloading 

the capacity of water and wastewater treatment plants during extreme rainfall” 

(Kundzewicz et al. 2007, p. 189); 

• “[w]ater-borne diseases will rise with increases in extreme rainfall” (Kundzewicz 

et al. 2007, p. 189); and 

• “[a]ll studies on soil erosion have suggested that increased rainfall amounts and 

intensities will lead to greater rates of erosion unless protection measures are 

taken” (Kundzewicz et al. 2007, p. 189). 

Figure 4: Coastal flooding. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

15

C. Impacts on Water Programs 

Water resource managers will face significant challenges as storm intensity increases: 

• although there is some uncertainty with respect to climate models addressing 

storm intensity and frequency, emergency plans for drinking water and 

wastewater infrastructure need to recognize the possibility of increased risk of 

high flow and high velocity events due to intense storms as well as potential low 

flow periods; 

• damage from intense storms may 

increase the demand for public 

infrastructure funding and may 

require re-prioritizing of 

infrastructure projects; 

• floodplains may expand along 

major rivers requiring relocation 

of some water infrastructure 

facilities and coordination with 

local planning efforts;

• in urban areas, stormwater 

collection and management 

systems may need to be redesigned to increase capacity; 

• combined storm and sanitary sewer systems may need to be redesigned 

because an increase in storm event frequency and intensity can result in more 

combined sewer overflows causing increased pollutant and pathogen loading; 

• greater use of biological monitoring and assessment techniques will help water 

resource managers assess system impacts of higher velocities from more 

intense storms and other climate change impacts; 

• the demand for watershed management techniques that mitigate the impacts of 

intense storms and build resilience into water management through increased 

water retention (e.g., green roofs, smart growth) is likely to increase; and 

• the management of wetlands for stormwater control purposes and to buffer the 

impacts of intense storms will be increasingly important. 

Storm Intensity: Effects on Water Programs 

(Shaded areas reflect programs most affected by storm intensity) 

Drinking Water Standards Surface Water 

Standards 

Technology Based 

Standards 

Emergency Planning 

Drinking Water Planning Clean Water Planning Water Monitoring Water Restoration/ 

TMDLs 

Underground Injection 

Control Permits 

Discharge Permits Storm Water Permits Wetlands Permits 

Source Water Protection Nonpoint Pollution 

Control 

Coastal Zone National Estuaries 

Program 

Drinking Water SRF Clean Water SRF Ocean Protection Combined Sewer 

Overflow Plans 

Figure 5: Hurricane Rita. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

16

5. Sea Level Rise 

“Global mean sea level has been rising”, according to the IPCC. “From 1961 to 2003, 

the average rate of sea level rise was 1.8 ± 0.5 mm [per year]. For the 20th century, the 

average rate was 1.7 ± 0.5 mm [per year]. There is high confidence that the rate of sea 

level rise has increased between the mid-19th and the mid-20th centuries” (Bindoff et al. 

2007, p. 387). Further, “[t]here are uncertainties in the estimates of the contributions to 

sea level change but understanding has significantly improved for recent periods 

(Bindoff et al. 2007, p. 387).” For example, “... for the period 1993 to 2003, ... the 

contributions from thermal expansion (1.6 ± 0.5 mm [per year]) and loss of mass from 

glaciers, ice caps and the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets together give 2.8 ± 0.7 

mm [per year]” (Bindoff et al. 2007, p. 387). 

A. Background 

The IPCC states that the primary factors driving current sea level rise include the 

expansion of ocean water caused by warmer ocean temperatures, melting of mountain 

glaciers and small ice caps, and (to a lesser extent) melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet 

and the Antarctic Ice Sheet (EPA 2007f). 

Other factors may also be responsible for part of the historic rise in sea level, including 

the pumping of ground water for human use, wetland drainage, deforestation, and the 

melting of polar ice sheets in response to the warming that has occurred since the last 

ice age (EPA 2007f). Considering all of these factors, scientists still cannot account for 

the last century's sea level rise in its entirety. It is possible that some contributors to sea 

level rise have not been documented or 

well-quantified (EPA 2007f). 

According to the IPCC, current model 

projections indicate substantial variability in 

future sea level rise between different 

locations. Some locations could 

experience sea level rise higher than the 

global average projections, while others 

could have a fall in sea level (EPA 2007g). 

In the United States, sea level has been 

rising 0.08 to 0.12 inches (2.0 to 3.0 mm) 

per year along most of the U.S. Atlantic and 

Gulf coasts (EPA 2007f). The rate of sea 

level rise varies from about 0.36 inches per 

year (10 mm per year) along the Louisiana 

Coast (due to land sinking), to a drop of a 

few inches per decade in parts of Alaska 

(because land is rising) (EPA 2007f, and for 

Figure 6: Sea level trends in selected U.S. 

cities. Source: Proudman Oceanographic 

Laboratory’s Permanent Service for Mean Sea 

Level (PSMSL), as found in EPA 2007f. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

17

more information see also the NOAA 2001 technical report in the Further Reading 

section at the end of this document). (See Figure 6 for sea level trends in selected 

cities.) 

IPCC forecasts global average sea level rise of between 0.18 and 0.59 m by the end of 

the 21st century (2090 to 2099) relative to the years 1980 to 1999 under a range of 

scenarios (IPCC 2007a, see Working Group I Summary for Policymakers, p. 13). ). In 

five of the six modeling scenarios, “... the average rate of sea level rise during the 21st 

century very likely exceeds the 1961–2003 average rate (1.8 ± 0.5 mm yr-1)” (IPCC 

2008, p. 37; IPCC 2007a, Working Group I Summary for Policymakers, p. 13). Note 

that these estimates assume that ice flow from Greenland and Antarctica will continue 

at the same rates as observed from 1993-2003. The IPCC cautions that these rates 

could increase or decrease in the future. For example, if ice flow were to increase 

linearly, in step with global average temperature, the upper range of projected sea level 

rise by the year 2100 would be 19.2 to 31.6 inches (48-79 cm or 0.48-0.79 m). But 

current understanding of ice sheet dynamics is too limited to estimate such changes or 

to provide an upper limit to the amount by which sea level is likely to rise over this 

century (IPCC 2007a, see Working Group I Summary for Policymakers, pp. 13-14; as 

found in EPA 2007g). 

B. Impacts on Water Resources 

The primary impact of sea level rise on water resources is the gradual inundation of 

natural systems and human infrastructure in coastal and estuarine areas. Inundation 

impacts include: 

• wetland displacement (Burkett et al. 2001, p. 348); 

• accelerated coastal erosion (Burkett et al. 2001, p. 345); 

• water quality modifications may also be observed in the future as a result of 

storm water drainage operation and sewage disposal disturbances in coastal 

areas due to sea-level rise (Kundzewicz et al. 2007, p. 189); 

• “... low-lying coastal areas such as deltas, coastal plains, and atoll islands are 

regarded as particularly vulnerable to small shifts in sea level” (Burkett et al. 

2001, p. 348). “Coastal areas also include complex ecosystems such as coral 

reefs, mangrove forests, and salt marshes. In such environments, the impact of 

accelerated sea-level rise will depend on vertical accretion rates and space for 

horizontal migration, which may be limited by the presence of infrastructure” 

(Burkett et al. 2001, p. 345); and 

• sea level rise increases the vulnerability of coastal areas to flooding during 

storms (EPA 2007l). 

Impacts of sea level rise other than inundation include: 

• rising sea level increases the salinity of both surface water and ground water 

through salt water intrusion (EPA 2007l); 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

18

• if sea level rise pushes salty water upstream, then the existing water intakes 

might draw on salty water during dry periods (EPA 2007l); and 

• salinity increases in estuaries can harm aquatic plants and animals that do not 

tolerate high salinity (EPA 2007l). 

C. Impacts on Water Programs 

Sea level rise will affect a range of water programs and pose significant challenges for 

water program managers. 

• emergency plans for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure need to 

recognize long-term projections for rising sea levels; 

• drinking water systems will need to consider relocating facilities or intakes as sea 

levels rise and salt water intrudes into freshwater aquifers used for drinking water 

supply; 

• sewage treatment plants will need to consider relocation of some treatment 

facilities and discharge outfalls; and 

• watershed-level planning will need to incorporate an integrated approach to 

coastal management in light of sea level rise including land use planning, 

building codes, land acquisition and easements, shoreline protection structures 

(e.g., seawalls and channels), beach nourishment, wetlands management, 

underground injection to control salt water intrusion to fresh water supplies, and 

related programs. 

Sea Level Rise: Effects on Water Programs 

(Shaded areas reflect programs most affected by sea level rise) 

6. Coastal/Ocean Characteristics 

The IPCC states that the oceans are warming, ocean biogeochemistry is changing, and 

global mean sea level has been rising (Bindoff et al. 2007, p. 387). “The increase in 

atmospheric CO2 causes additional CO2 to dissolve in the ocean.... The increase in 

surface ocean CO2 has consequences for the chemical equilibrium of the ocean. As 

Drinking Water Standards Surface Water 

Standards 

Technology Based 

Standards 

Emergency Planning 

Drinking Water Planning Clean Water Planning Water Monitoring Water Restoration/ 

TMDLs 

Underground Injection 

Control Permits 

Discharge Permits Storm Water Permits Wetlands Permits 

Source Water Protection Nonpoint Pollution 

Control 

Coastal Zone National Estuaries 

Program 

Drinking Water SRF Clean Water SRF Ocean Protection Combined Sewer 

Overflow Plans 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

19

CO2 increases, surface waters become more acidic ...; [h]owever, the response of 

marine organisms to ocean acidification is poorly known and could cause further 

changes in the marine carbon cycle with consequences that are difficult to estimate” 

(Bindoff et al. 2007, p. 403). 

A. Background 

According to the IPCC, “[t]he total inorganic carbon content of the oceans has increased 

by 118 ± 19 GtC between the end of the pre-industrial period (about 1750) and 1994 

and continues to increase (Bindoff et al. 2007, p. 387). “Ocean CO2 uptake has lowered 

the average ocean pH (increased acidity) by approximately 0.1 since 1750. Ocean 

acidification will continue and is directly and inescapably coupled to the uptake of 

anthropogenic CO2 by the ocean” (Denman et al. 2007, p. 533). “It is important to note 

that ocean acidification is not a direct consequence of climate change but a 

consequence of fossil fuel CO2 emissions, which are the main driver of the anticipated 

climate change” (Denman et al. 2007, p. 529). 

“As CO2 increases, surface waters become more acidic and the concentration of 

carbonate ions decreases” (Bindoff et al. 2007, 403). “The availability of carbonate is 

particularly important because it controls the maximum amount of CO2 that the ocean is 

able to absorb. Marine organisms use carbonate to produce shells of calcite and 

aragonite (both consisting of calcium carbonate (CaCO3)” (Bindoff et al. 2007, p. 406). 

“... [O]cean acidification is leading to a decrease in the saturation of CaCO3 in the 

ocean. Two primary effects are expected: (1) the biological production of corals as well 

as calcifying photoplankton and zooplankton within the water column may be inhibited 

or slowed down ..., and (2) the dissolution of CaCO3 at the ocean floor will be 

enhanced. Aragonite, the meta-stable form of CaCO3 produced by corals and 

pteropods (planktonic snails ...), will be particularly susceptible to a pH reduction.... 

According to a model experiment ..., bio-calcification [a process in which organisms use 

CaCO3 to create their shells] will 

be reduced by 2100, in particular 

within the Southern Ocean ..., 

and by 2050 for aragoniteproducing organisms.... ” 

(Denman et al. 2007, p. 529). 

“The overall reaction of marine 

biological carbon cycling 

(including processes such as 

nutrient cycling as well as 

ecosystem changes including the 

role of bacteria and viruses) to a 

warm and high-CO2 world is not 

yet well understood. Several 

Figure 7: Ocean coral reef. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

20

small feedback mechanisms may add up to a significant one. The response of marine 

biota to ocean acidification is not yet clear, both for the physiology of individual 

organisms and for ecosystem functioning as a whole. Potential impacts are expected 

especially for organisms that build CaCO3 shell material.... Extinction thresholds will 

likely be crossed for some organisms in some regions in the coming century” (Denman 

et al. 2007, p. 533). 

In addition to ocean acidification, rising sea level increases the salinity of waters, and 

salinity increases in estuaries can harm aquatic plants and animals that do not tolerate 

high salinity (EPA 2007l). Sea grasses are strongly affected by salinity and temperature 

and these grasses provide important ecological services (Orth; p. 987). 

B. Impacts on Water Resources 

Changes in ocean characteristics are expected to have several impacts on coastal and 

ocean resources including: 

• “... the biological production of corals, as well as calcifying photoplankton and 

zooplankton within the water column, may be inhibited or slowed down” as a 

result of ocean acidification (Denman et al. 2007, p. 529); 

• “[e]cological changes due to expected ocean acidification may be severe for 

corals in tropical and cold waters ... and for pelagic [or oceanic] ecosystems” 

(Denman et al. 2007, p. 529); 

• “[a]cidification can influence the marine food web at higher trophic levels” 

(Denman et al. 2007, p. 529); and 

• salinity increases in estuaries can harm aquatic plants and animals that do not 

tolerate high salinity (EPA 2007l). 

C. Impacts on Water Programs 

Changes in ocean characteristics pose several challenges for water program managers 

including: 

• watershed level protection programs, may need to be revised to account for 

changes in natural systems as salinity and pH levels change; 

• programs to protect coral reefs, including temperate and cold water corals, from 

land-based pollution and impacts may need to be reassessed to provide 

enhanced protection; and 

• wetlands programs may need to be adjusted to account for changing salinity 

levels and impacts on wetlands health.
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

21

Changing Ocean Characteristics: Effects on Water Programs 

(Shaded areas reflect programs most affected by changing ocean characteristics)

7. Changes in Energy Generation 

 

Likely responses to climate change include development of alternative methods of 

energy production that reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and “sequester” carbon 

generated by energy production. Alternative methods of energy generation can have 

impacts on water resources, as can the sequestering of carbon from conventional 

energy generation processes. 

A. Background 

The IPCC lists biofuels and early applications of carbon capture and storage (CCS, e.g., 

storage of removed CO2 from natural gas) as key mitigation technologies and practices 

currently available (IPCC 2007c, Working Group III Summary for Policymakers, p. 10). 

“Biomass energy is primarily used for industrial process heating, with substantially 

increasing use for transportation fuels and additional use for electricity generation” (U.S. 

CCSP 2007, p. 64). “Liquid fuel production from biomass is highly visible as a key 

renewable alternative to imported oil. Current U.S. production is based largely on corn 

for ethanol and, to a lesser extent, soybeans for biodiesel” (U.S. CCSP 2007, p. 69). 

“Sustainable biomass production and use imply the resolution of issues relating to 

competition for land and food, water resources, biodiversity and socio-economic impact” 

(Barker et al. 2007, p. 621). 

“CCS in underground geological formations is a new technology with the potential to 

make an important contribution to mitigation by 2030. Technical, economic and 

regulatory developments will affect the actual contribution” (IPCC 2007c, Working 

Group III Summary for Policymakers, p. 13). Other types of carbon sequestration 

include injection of carbon into the deep ocean, as well as storage in biological forms 

(e.g., forests). 

Drinking Water Standards Surface Water 

Standards 

Technology Based 

Standards 

Emergency Planning 

Drinking Water Planning Clean Water Planning Water Monitoring Water Restoration/ 

TMDLs 

Underground Injection 

Control Permits 

Discharge Permits Storm Water Permits Wetlands Permits 

Source Water Protection Nonpoint Pollution 

Control 

Coastal Zone National Estuaries 

Program 

Drinking Water SRF Clean Water SRF Ocean Protection Combined Sewer 

Overflow Plans 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

22

B. Impacts on Water Resources 

Regarding the geologic storage of carbon, according to the IPCC, “Groundwater can be 

affected both by CO2 leaking directly into an aquifer and by brines that enter the aquifer 

as a result of being displaced by CO2 during the injection process” (IPCC 2005, p. 31). 

More information on underground injection of CO2 is provided in section 1.E. 

Another “... potential CO2 storage option is to inject captured CO2 directly into the deep 

ocean (at depths greater than 1,000 m), where most of it would be isolated from the 

atmosphere for centuries. This can be achieved by transporting CO2 via pipelines or 

ships to an ocean storage site, where it is injected into the water column of the ocean or 

at the sea floor. The dissolved and dispersed CO2 would subsequently become part of 

the global carbon cycle.... Ocean storage has not yet been deployed or demonstrated 

at a pilot scale, and is still in the research phase” (IPCC 2005, p. 34). IPCC also states 

that “[e]xperiments show that adding CO2 can harm marine organisms” (IPCC 2005, p. 

35) and that “[s]tudies are needed of the response of biological systems in the deep sea 

to added CO2, including studies that are longer in duration and larger in scale than 

those that have been performed until now” (IPCC 2005, p. 45). 

At the same time, sequestration of carbon in “biological” forms, (i.e., preserving forests, 

no-till agriculture and related land management practices) may have water quality 

benefits by encouraging practices that reduce the amount of stormwater runoff and the 

pollution levels in the runoff. “Stopping or slowing deforestation and forest degradation 

(loss of carbon density) and sustainable forest management may significantly contribute 

to avoided emissions, conserve water resources and prevent flooding, reduce run-off, 

control erosion, reduce river siltation, and protect fisheries and investments in 

hydroelectric power facilities; and at the same time, preserve biodiversity” (Nabuurs et 

al. 2007, p. 574). 

On the subject of agriculture, according to the IPCC, “[a] mix of horticulture with optimal 

crop rotations would promote carbon sequestration and could also improve agroecosystem function” (Smith et al. 2007, p. 521). Minimal tillage (reduced tillage) or 

without tillage (no-till) “... practices, which result in the maintenance of crop residues on 

the soil surface, thus avoiding water losses by evaporation, are now being used 

increasingly throughout the world. Since soil disturbance tends to stimulate soil carbon 

losses through enhanced decomposition and erosion, reduced- or no-till agriculture 

often results in soil carbon gain, though not always. Adopting reduced- or no-till may 

also affect emissions of N2O, but the net effects are inconsistent and not well quantified 

globally ... Furthermore, no-tillage systems can reduce carbon dioxide emissions from 

energy use. Systems that retain crop residues also tend to increase soil carbon 

because these residues are the precursors for soil organic matter, the main store of 

carbon in soil” (IPCC 2008, p. 164). 

However, “[w]hile the environmental benefits of tillage/residue management are clear, 

other impacts are less certain. Land restoration will have positive environmental 

impacts, but conversion of floodplains and wetlands to agriculture could hamper 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

23

ecological function (reduced water recharge, bioremediation, nutrient cycling, etc.) and 

therefore, could have an adverse impact on sustainable development goals” (Smith et 

al. 2007, p. 522). 

The IPCC Technical Paper on Climate Change and Water states that “...[l]arge-scale 

biofuel production raises questions on several issues including fertilizer and pesticide 

requirements, nutrient cycling, energy balances, biodiversity impacts, hydrology and 

erosion, conflicts with food production, and the level of financial subsidies required. The 

energy production and [greenhouse gas] mitigation potentials of dedicated energy crops 

depends on availability of land, which must also meet demands for food as well as for 

nature protection, sustainable management of soils and water reserves, and other 

sustainability criteria” (IPCC 2008, p. 157). “Implementing important mitigation options 

like afforestation, hydropower and biofuels may have positive and negative impacts on 

freshwater resources, depending on site-specific situations. Therefore, site-specific 

joint evaluation and optimi[z]ation of (effectiveness of) mitigation measures and waterrelated impacts are needed” (IPCC 2008, p. 173).

C. Impacts on Water Programs 

Changing energy generation methods poses several challenges for water program 

managers including: 

• increased water use and withdrawals will require expanded efforts to assure 

water supply availability; 

• increased attention to potential nonpoint pollution impacts of expanded 

agricultural production may be needed; 

• need for increased attention to discharge permit conditions to address increased 

temperature and concentration of pollutants due to low flows; 

• increased interest in more efficient use of electrical energy at water facilities and 

production of power from methane at some wastewater treatment facilities;

• need for new capability to assess effects of ocean sequestration activities; and

• effective market-based practices that have water quality benefits could be a 

source of revenue for these practices.

Energy Generation Shifts: Effects on Water Programs 

(Shaded areas reflect programs most affected by energy generation shifts)

Drinking Water Standards Surface Water 

Standards 

Technology Based 

Standards 

Emergency Planning 

Drinking Water Planning Clean Water Planning Water Monitoring Water Restoration/ 

TMDLs 

Underground Injection 

Control Permits 

Discharge Permits Storm Water Permits Wetlands Permits 

Source Water Protection Nonpoint Pollution 

Control 

Coastal Zone National Estuaries 

Program 

Drinking Water SRF Clean Water SRF Ocean Protection Combined Sewer 

Overflow Plans 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

24

III. National Water Program: Climate Change Response Actions 

Climate change will result in significant impacts on water resources. Water program 

managers need to define goals for responding to climate change and identify key 

response actions to be implemented to accomplish these goals over the coming years. 

Five major goals for the National Water Program Response to Climate change are: 

Goal 1: Water Program Mitigation of Greenhouse Gases: use water programs 

to contribute to greenhouse gas mitigation; 

Goal 2: Water Program Adaptation to Climate Change: adapt implementation 

of core water programs to maintain and improve program effectiveness in the 

context of a changing climate; 

Goal 3: Climate Change Research Related to Water: strengthen the link 

between EPA water programs and climate change research; 

Goal 4: Water Program Education on Climate Change: educate water program 

professionals and stakeholders on climate change impacts on water resources and 

programs; and 

Goal 5: Water Program Management of Climate Change: establish the 

management capability within the National Water Program to engage climate 

change challenges on a sustained basis. 

These five major goals are supported by more specific objectives and “Key Actions” to 

be implemented by the National Water Program. The Key Actions are highlighted in 

text boxes throughout this section. Some Key Actions would expand existing efforts to 

better address climate change while others are new actions specifically focused on 

climate change issues. All the actions in this Strategy are to be initiated within the next 

two years (i.e., FY 2008 or 2009). Appendix 2 includes a summary of Key Actions and 

supporting information, including the water program office responsible for implementing 

the action. 

The Key Actions described throughout this document were selected with several 

general principles in mind. 

1. Define Areas of Uncertainty: Key Actions included in this document draw on the 

best available science and every effort has been made to understand uncertainty 

related to the action and to defer actions not supported by sound science. Given the 

uncertainty associated with some climate change impacts on water resources, it will 

be important for water programs to be able to clearly measure water-related climate 

impacts, to adapt program management based on new information, and to conduct 

research needed to address issues. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

25

2. Evaluate Proactive and Reactive Actions: Some actions seek to proactively avoid 

the consequences of climate change (e.g., protecting wetlands) while others react to 

these consequences (e.g., protecting infrastructure facilities against flooding). Given 

uncertainty, proactive policies can result in needless costs while reactive policies 

can be much more expensive than avoiding the problem in the first place. Careful 

balancing of these concerns is needed. 

3. Guard Against Unintended Consequences: Actions to address climate change 

can have unintended consequences that need to be understood (e.g., hardening of 

sea defenses around a water infrastructure facility can shift rising sea levels to 

inundate wetlands or other infrastructure) and should be weighed in implementation 

plans. 

1. Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Related to Water 

 

The largest sources of emissions and 

of potential reductions of greenhouse 

gases are from the electricity 

generation, transportation and industry 

sectors. However, reductions of 

greenhouse gases associated with 

water programs can play a role in America’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gases, and 

such reductions would contribute to meeting the President’s goal of an 18% reduction in 

greenhouse gas intensity by 2012. 

Many of the actions that can help reduce greenhouse gas releases also help conserve 

scarce water supplies and help improve water quality. Water conservation is a win-winwin situation—in many cases a single program investment will have greenhouse gas, 

water supply, and water quality benefits, and will lead to economic savings and greater 

sustainability of water infrastructure. 

A range of Key Actions related to water programs that lead to mitigation of greenhouse 

gases are described in the following sections: 

• water-related energy conservation/production; 

• water conservation; 

• “green building” design and “smart growth;” and 

• direct greenhouse gas emissions mitigation from agriculture. 

In addition, EPA recognizes that water pollution control processes can be energy 

intensive and, where authorized by statute, will consider the energy and potential 

climate change implications of clean water and drinking water regulations. 

Goal 1: Water Program Mitigation of 

Greenhouse Gases: use water 

programs to contribute to greenhouse 

gas mitigation. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

26

If creation of greenhouse gases cannot be avoided, these gases can be “sequestered” 

so that they are not released to the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide sequestration refers to 

the process of capturing carbon dioxide to prevent release to the atmosphere. 

Sequestration activities related to water programs include: 

• geologic sequestration of carbon through underground injection; and 

• “biological” carbon sequestration through forestry and agricultural practices, 

many of which benefit water resources. 

A. Water- Related Energy Conservation/Production 

Drinking water and wastewater facilities, 

both public and private, spend billions of 

dollars a year on energy to collect, treat, 

and deliver clean water – with much of this cost borne by ratepayers. Pumping water, 

including pumping and conveyance of wastewater to treatment plants, and distribution 

of treated water to customers, are generally the most energy intensive components of 

water and wastewater systems. Energy is also required to treat wastewater and to treat 

water to drinking water standards, and for collection and distribution. Nationwide, 

drinking water and wastewater utilities use 75 billion kilowatt hours (Reardon 1994)—

resulting in the emissions of approximately 116 billion pounds of CO2—per year. 

Energy use by drinking water and wastewater facilities accounts for approximately three 

percent of the United States' energy consumption (Reardon 1994). Drinking water and 

wastewater treatment facilities have the potential to achieve 15–30 percent energy 

savings (CEE 2007, p.1) by implementing energy conservation measures alone, and 

even more with on-site energy generation. Drinking water and wastewater treatment 

facilities have the capacity to generate and use energy from low-head hydroelectric, 

solar and/or wind power, while wastewater treatment facilities also have the capacity to 

generate energy from capture and use of methane. 

Pumping is typically the major use of energy in the treatment stage, although the 

amount of energy used by drinking water facilities is also affected by the quality of the 

source water. Most energy consumed by wastewater facilities is for aeration, pumping, 

and solids processing. Energy requirements for biosolids processing vary according to 

the method used. Pump and blower motors can account for more than 80 percent of a 

wastewater utility’s energy use (EPA 2006). Although lagoons use little energy, trickling 

filters used in attached growth processes and aeration in activated sludge systems 

require large amounts of energy. Advanced treatment also requires a great deal of 

energy, particularly denitrification and membrane filtration processes. The energy 

required for the handling, transport, and beneficial use of treated residuals increases as 

the distance from the treatment site to the disposal/application sites increases.

Energy consumption by drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities is likely to 

continue increasing. New or revised drinking water treatment requirements could also 

OBJECTIVE: promote water-related 

energy conservation. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

27

heighten energy consumption. Further, reduced supplies and increased demand will 

require pumping water greater distances. Climate change will lead to higher 

temperatures that will likely result in buildings and unit processes needing more cooling. 

Changes in rain patterns in some areas may increase CSO and SSO events while in 

other areas declining in-stream flows will cause reduced assimilative capacity for 

wastewater effluent, both of which may require greater treatment for sediments, 

pathogens, and nutrients. 

To improve water and wastewater energy efficiency, EPA’s ENERGY STAR program 

has developed a Focus in the water and wastewater industries. An ENERGY STAR 

Focus is a targeted effort to improve the energy efficiency within a specific industry or 

combination of industries. A Focus creates momentum for continuous improvement in 

energy performance, provides the industry’s managers with the tools they need to 

achieve greater success in their energy management programs, and creates a 

supportive environment where energy efficiency ideas and opportunities are shared. 

The National Water Program will continue working with the ENERGY STAR program to 

promote energy efficiency in this sector. 

Several provisions of the Clean Water Act speak directly or indirectly to the question of 

energy efficiency in wastewater treatment. For example: 

• section 313(b) of the Act encourages demonstration of innovative processes and 

techniques for more efficient use of energy at Federal wastewater treatment 

facilities; 

• section 304(d)(3) of the Act encourages development of innovative processes 

and techniques for publicly owned (wastewater) treatment works (POTWs), 

including those processes described under section 201(g)(5), that take into 

account the more efficient use of energy (e.g., variable frequency drive motors 

reduce energy use of pumps by up to 50 percent); and 

• under sections 304(b)(1)(B), 306, and 307 of the Clean Water Act, the National 

Water Program develops effluent limitations guidelines (ELGs) for industrial (nonPOTW) facilities and the use of energy in these processes is one consideration in 

the development of the guidelines. 

Significant progress is being made in the development of new tools for benchmarking 

energy performance among public water and wastewater utilities. For example, the 

ENERGY STAR program is expanding the capability of its Energy Performance Rating 

System (EPRS) to enable drinking water and wastewater utilities to assess their energy 

use over time and compare it to other utilities—normalized for weather and facility 

characteristics. As of October 2007, wastewater treatment plant energy performance 

can be rated using the ENERGY STAR program's on-line tool, Portfolio Manager. 

Portfolio Manager can be used to establish baseline energy use, prioritize investments, 

set goals, and track energy use and carbon emissions reductions over time. The ability 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

28

to rate the energy performance of drinking water treatment and distribution facilities is 

still under development. 

 

A related effort is the development of audit and tracking systems. For example, a 

Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system monitors the operation of 

water-system control points such as pumps, reservoirs, and metering stations, and 

keeps track of energy usage. Other types of databases, such as the Washington D.C. 

Blue Plains wastewater treatment facility’s Energy Information System, keep track of 

energy use and cost, broken down by the facility's processes. 

In addition to saving energy, public and private drinking water and wastewater facilities 

can produce energy to offset what they would otherwise need to buy from local power 

utilities. The National Water Program could also work with the Office of Air and 

Radiation to promote these practices. Many facilities have already installed alternative 

energy power production facilities, including solar, wind, and hydro, for heating and 

electricity generation. For example, Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant in Pacifica, CA 

is using solar panels that provide 10–15 percent of its energy needs, resulting in an 

estimated $100,000 savings annually in energy costs (EPA 2006). 

Wastewater facilities can also generate energy from the capture and use of methane. 

Combined Heat and Power (CHP) systems can recover biogas (a mixture of methane, 

carbon dioxide, water vapor and other gases) from anaerobic digesters to heat buildings 

or to generate electricity. For example, San Francisco’s East Bay Municipal Utility 

District (EBMUD) captures and uses biogas to generate enough energy to cover 90 

percent of energy needed at its main wastewater facility. If all 544 large sewage 

treatment plants in the U.S. operating anaerobic digesters were to install combined heat 

and power, about 340 megawatts of clean energy could be generated, offsetting 2.3 

million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually (i.e., equivalent to planting 

about 640,000 acres of forest, or the emissions of about 430,000 cars) (EPA 2007n). 

This power is also marketable as “green power” to power utilities that are now required 

by State laws to have alternative or “green” power as a part of their overall production. 

Additional energy savings can be achieved by installing adequate insulation in buildings 

and replacing conventional lighting with energy-efficient options. 

 

KEY ACTION #1: Improve Energy Efficiency at Water and Wastewater Utilities. 

The National Water Program will continue to work with the Office of Air and Radiation 

to promote energy performance benchmarking programs, use of energy audits and 

energy tracking systems, use of alternative energy sources within plants (e.g., solar, 

wind, hydro), installation of Combined Heat and Power systems for heat and energy 

generation in facilities that use anaerobic digesters, and will provide State and local 

governments information on available and emerging treatment technology.
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

29

 B. Water Conservation 

Water quantity and water quality are inextricably linked. Impacts on water resources 

due to climate change will make this connection more visible. For example, discharge 

of treated effluent assumes adequate flow for dilution and low flows require higher 

treatment to avoid impairments; shortages of precipitation and reduced snow melt result 

in increased competition between human uses and aquatic uses of in-stream flows; and 

shortages of surface water drive increases in groundwater pumping, which in turn affect 

recharge. 

Water conservation through water use efficiency will be important not just to extend 

water supply, but also to reduce greenhouse gases. Reduced water consumption 

saves energy because less water is needed to be pumped and treated. On the other 

side of the water/energy equation, when energy use is reduced, water is saved because 

less is needed to operate power plants. About half of the water gathered in the United 

States from surface and groundwater sources is used for power plant cooling (although 

most is returned) compared to 34 percent for irrigation and 11 percent for residential 

and commercial purposes (USGS 2004, pp. 6-7). On average, each kilowatt generated 

consumes approximately 0.2 to 0.3 gallons of water (EPA 2007o), which is based on 

cooling water consumption and annual electricity generation estimates from the Electric 

Power Research Institute (EPRI 2002, p. 6-3) and the Energy Information 

Administration (EIA 2004), respectively. 

 

There are many opportunities for energy savings on the supply side, realized through 

better planning, maintenance, and operation of water delivery systems, as well as 

through the development of new technologies and processes. What is often overlooked 

is how demand-side management or conservation programs can effectively increase 

water and energy savings. For example, California’s State Water Plan (California 

Department of Water Resources 2005) concluded in 2005 that the largest single new 

water supply available to meet their expected growth over the next 25 years will be 

water-use efficiency—made more critical in light of projected water shortages due to 

climate-related decreases in snow pack. 

Residential and business customers use more energy to heat, cool, and otherwise use 

water than utilities spend treating and distributing it. For example, running a hot water 

faucet for five minutes is equivalent to running a 60-watt light bulb for 14 hours 

(Grumbles 2007 and EPA 2007o). By conserving water, less energy is used for these 

purposes. 

For residential consumers, the opportunity to save both water and energy comes 

primarily from using water-efficient fixtures and appliances, including toilets, 

showerheads, faucets, clothes washers, dishwashers, and irrigation equipment. For 

example, an estimated 60 billion gallons and $650 million in energy costs (Grumbles 

2007 and EPA 2007o) could be saved if every household also installed high-efficiency 

faucets or faucet aerators. 

OBJECTIVE: promote water 

conservation to reduce energy use. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

30

To promote water-efficiency and protect the future of our Nation's water supply, EPA 

launched the WaterSense program last year. The WaterSense label will help 

consumers and businesses identify products that meet the program's water-efficiency 

and performance criteria. The WaterSense program sets specifications for the labeling 

of products that are at least 20 percent more efficient than the current standards while 

performing as well or better than their less-efficient counterparts. Once a 

manufacturer’s product is certified to meet EPA’s WaterSense specification by an 

independent third party, they can use the label on their product. The WaterSense 

product specifications do not currently address energy consumption directly. However, 

all water savings realized through the use of WaterSense labeled products and services 

have a corresponding reduction in energy consumption. Both commercial and 

residential products and services will be addressed by WaterSense labeling efforts. 

As noted above, water conservation offers climate change mitigation opportunities 

through energy savings and in addition may serve adaptive needs that arise as a result 

of changes in water availability and/or overall demand. Adaptation is supported 

particularly when water conservation is carried out in a broader context of water 

resources management, including strategies to ensure availability of public water 

supplies (e.g. consideration of alternative sources of water). 

 

A major opportunity for water conservation is the repair of leaking distribution systems. 

Such leaks commonly result in the loss of ten percent of a city’s water. Significant 

amounts of water can be saved by timely investments in leak correction and more active 

implementation of leak detection technologies. In addition, infiltration and inflow in 

wastewater collection systems can significantly increase the volume of wastewater 

required to be treated resulting in increased energy and chemical demand. 

KEY ACTION #4: Water Conveyance Leak Detection and Remediation. The 

National Water Program will promote technologies to identify and address leakage 

from water pipes and other conveyances. 

KEY ACTION #2: Implement the WaterSense Program. EPA will continue its 

current efforts to implement the WaterSense program and will incorporate 

educational information about related reductions in energy use. 

KEY ACTION #3: Water Conservation and Management for Drinking Water 

Systems. The National Water Program will explore opportunities with States and 

drinking water systems to better address expected impacts of climate change on 

water supply and water usage rates through water conservation and water resources 

management. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

31

Industry is also a significant user of water and is becoming aware of the importance of 

measuring, managing, and controlling water use. In particular, energy-intensive 

industries are finding water scarcity to be a limit to growth. In general, there is an 

economic incentive for facilities to use as little water as possible in their industrial 

operations. Reducing water use will also reduce costs (and energy requirements) 

associated with water use. In addition to increasing its water efficiency, industry has 

substantially increased its application of water re-use in the past 15 years through the 

practice of potable substitution, where reclaimed industrial wastewater is used for nonpotable applications. The cost savings of implementing water re-use and reduction 

technologies and pollution prevention practices can be significant. The monetary 

savings of implementing water conservation and efficiency measures can be significant 

with payback periods that may be as short as a few months or years. 

 

In addition, technology to recycle and reuse municipal wastewater is being used by 

communities in water scarce areas. As in the case of industrial water use, reuse of 

municipal wastewater reduces energy use and costs and thus reduces greenhouse 

gases. It also can benefit aquatic ecosystems by recycling water to beneficial uses 

within a community and reducing demand for water from other locations. EPA 

published guidelines for water reuse in 2004 (see Guidelines for Water Reuse; EPA, 

2004) . 

Finally, Executive Order 13423, Section 2 (c), requires that beginning in 2008, Federal 

agencies reduce water consumption intensity, relative to the baseline of the agency's 

water consumption in fiscal year 2007, through life-cycle cost-effective measures, by 2 

percent annually through the end of fiscal year 2015, or 16 percent by the end of fiscal 

year 2015. The Office of Water is responsible for developing Water Efficiency 

Implementation Guidance for all agencies covering the three elements of compliance: 

baseline development, efficiency opportunity identification/implementation, and 

reporting. Federal agencies are also encouraged to include WaterSense products and 

services in their implementation strategies. 

KEY ACTION #5: Industrial Water Conservation, Reuse, and Recycling 

Technology Transfer. The National Water Program will identify industries and 

facilities that best maximize their water efficiency and develop a technical guide for 

control authorities and industry for promoting water minimization, re-use, and 

recycling. 

KEY ACTION #6: Federal Agency Water Conservation Guidance. The National 

Water Program will develop Water Efficiency Implementation Guidance for all Federal 

agencies under Executive Order 13423. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

32

C. Promote “Green Building” Design and “Smart Growth” 

Increasing the water and energy efficiency of 

water utilities has value from a greenhouse 

gas mitigation point of view, but sustaining 

these efficiencies over the long-term will 

require extending the commitment to water and energy efficiency into the building stock 

and the design of communities. By applying “green building” principles and “smart 

growth” policies, energy and water efficiencies at utilities can be multiplied. The 

National Water Program plays a role in this process because it regulates the storm 

water associated with buildings and municipalities. 

Several organizations, such as the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership for Energy 

and Environmental Design (LEED) program and the American National Standards 

Institute (ANSI), are working with State and local governments and the private sector in 

promoting the “green buildings” concept and rating systems. These rating systems 

document the commitment made by a developer to “green” building practices, such as 

reduced use of energy and water, on-site (decentralized) energy generation (e.g., solar 

power, geothermal), and water retention (e.g., green roofs). 

Recent developments are expanding this concept to integrate “smart growth,” “low 

impact design,” and green building practices. For example, the new LEED for 

Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) pilot Rating System reaches beyond the 

building envelope to include site selection and design, infrastructure linkages (e.g., 

mass transit), and credits for onsite stormwater management practices such as green 

roofs, rain gardens, and vegetated swales. The National Water Program is working with 

other offices in EPA to promote low impact development and smart growth concepts. 

The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program 

generally requires stormwater discharge permits for industrial facilities, construction 

sites, and municipalities. These permits are a key regulatory tool for managing 

stormwater. As “green building” standards and “green infrastructure” practices gain 

wider acceptance, there will be a growing demand for recognition of these standards 

and practices within stormwater permits. In some cases, this may require greater 

flexibility in permitting to allow the use of such standards and practices. Recognition of 

“green building” standards and “green infrastructure” practices as an allowable element 

of stormwater permits would encourage their adoption. 

KEY ACTION #7: Promote Energy Saving/Generating “Green Buildings” and 

“Green Infrastructure” Including Provisions Allowing Such Practices in 

Stormwater Permits: The National Water Program will work with other EPA offices 

to support States, Tribes, and local governments and the private sector in promoting 

the “green buildings” rating systems, with a focus on saving water and energy and 

will work to integrate provisions allowing “green infrastructure” practices into 

stormwater permits. 

OBJECTIVE: promote “green 

buildings” and “smart growth” to 

reduce energy and water needs.
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

33

D. Promote Water Quality/Climate-Friendly Agricultural Practices 

Climate change can potentially be mitigated 

not only by the energy and water conservation 

efforts described above that reduce carbon 

emissions from fossil-fuel based energy 

production, but also through reductions in direct greenhouse gas releases, such as 

methane and nitrous oxide releases associated with agriculture and wastewater 

treatment. 

Agriculture accounts for more than 8 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions, more 

than 30 percent of methane releases and 80 percent of nitrous oxide releases. 

Agricultural producers have the potential to reduce nitrous oxide releases by expanding 

use of manure, biosolids or other organic residuals. The impacts of such practices with 

regard to climate change are of interest because soil management and fertilizer use are 

the source of 79 percent of releases of nitrous oxide, which is 300 times more heat 

trapping than CO2. Agricultural animal producers have the potential to reduce methane 

releases from livestock and its manure by considering feed alternatives and utilizing 

methane capture for combined heat and power production (EPA 2007m). 

The National Water Program supports the U.S. Department of Agriculture in promoting 

sound agricultural management practices and works with the EPA Office of Air and 

Radiation to promote agricultural practices that benefit air quality and reduce 

greenhouse gas emissions. In this supporting role, the National Water Program will: 

• identify and promote through nonpoint pollution control programs, agricultural 

management practices that have both water quality and greenhouse gas 

reducing benefits (e.g., no till agriculture); 

• encourage the use of organic residuals in row-crop and animal agriculture 

operations; and 

• support programs, such as the AgStar program, that encourage the development 

of animal waste management practices that both protect water quality and 

reduce releases of methane while generating electric power. 

E. Carbon Sequestration through Underground Injection

Geologic sequestration is one 

technology in a portfolio of options that 

could be effective in reducing CO2

emissions to the atmosphere and 

stabilizing atmospheric concentrations 

of CO2. 

Available evidence suggests that geologic storage capacity in the United States could 

be as high as 3,500 gigatons (Gts or a billion metric tons) of CO2 in some 230 candidate 

OBJECTIVE: reduce greenhouse 

gas emissions from agricultural 

sources.

OBJECTIVE: assure that commercial 

scale geologic sequestration of carbon 

safeguards drinking water and the 

ocean environment. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

34

sites. The 1,715 largest sources of CO2 in the United States release about 2.9 GtCO2 

per year (Dooley et al. 2006, and for more information see also DOE’s 2007 Carbon 

Sequestration Atlas of the United States and Canada in the Further Reading section at 

the end of this document). 

The Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program under the Safe Drinking Water Act 

regulates injection of fluids, including solids, semi-solids, liquids, and gases such as 

CO2, to protect underground sources of drinking water. UIC regulations address the 

siting, construction, operation, and closure of wells that inject a wide variety of fluids, 

including those that are considered commodities or wastes. Proper operation of 

injection wells for sequestration projects is required under the Safe Drinking Water Act 

to safeguard underground sources of drinking water and protect public health. 

Injection of fluids, including CO2, into the subsurface for enhanced oil recovery and 

enhanced gas recovery is a long-standing practice within the UIC program. However, 

there are some key differences anticipated for geologic sequestration. For example 

the relative buoyancy of CO2, its corrosivity in the presence of water, the potential 

presence of impurities in captured CO2, its mobility within subsurface formations, and 

large injection volumes anticipated at full scale deployment warrant specific 

requirements tailored to this new practice. 

The Department of Energy’s (DOE) National Energy Technology Lab and DOE’s 

Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships are conducting research on geological 

sequestration of CO2 to provide information about the capabilities, impacts, and best 

practices related to geologic sequestration (GS). On October 9, 2007, DOE announced 

awards for three demonstration projects that will test large-scale geologic sequestration 

of CO2 (http://www.doe.gov/news/5597.htm). 

EPA’s Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water and Office of Atmospheric Programs 

issued UIC Program guidance in March 2007 (Using Class V Experimental Technology 

Well Classification for Pilot Geologic Sequestration Projects – UIC Program Guidance 

(UICPG # 83)) to assist States and EPA Regional UIC program managers in evaluating 

permit applications for GS pilot projects and setting appropriate permit conditions for 

these projects to protect underground sources of drinking water and public health. (See 

EPA 2007 in the Further Reading section at the end of this document.) 

EPA is also preparing to assist States and Regions in addressing permitting of 

commercial scale GS projects, which are important in addressing climate change. EPA 

will use an adaptive management approach, which includes establishing minimum 

federal requirements for States to protect underground sources of drinking water, 

providing technical assistance to States, Tribes, and Regions, and coordinating with a 

range of other Federal agencies. Through workshops and other outreach, stakeholders 

and the public will have an opportunity to participate in this process. EPA proposed 

revisions to the UIC Program regulations authorized under the Safe Drinking Water Act 

in the summer of 2008 and will work with stakeholders to consider comments on these 

proposed rules. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

35

EPA has held several technical workshops to better define research gaps and needs 

addressing topics including: 

• potential impacts on ground water and underground sources of drinking water; 

• potential impacts on human health and the environment; 

• integrity of CO2 injection wells and other wells in the area of review; 

• fluid displacement and pressure impacts; 

• potential for large-scale CO2 releases; 

• measurement, monitoring, and verification tools related to sequestration of CO2; 

• potential impacts of CO2 injection on geologic media (reservoir and seals); and 

• geochemical and geomechanical effects. 

EPA has held public hearings on the proposed regulations to share information about 

protecting underground sources of drinking water during geologic sequestration 

activities. EPA strongly encourages gathering and sharing of data through the 

permitting process for pilot projects and other efforts. 

 

Finally, carbon can be sequestered in geologic formations under the seabed as well as 

on land. The 1996 Protocol to the London Convention on ocean dumping (“London 

Protocol”) regulates sub-seabed sequestration of carbon dioxide streams from carbon 

dioxide capture processes for sequestration. Parties to the London Convention and 

London Protocol are developing guidance for sub-seabed carbon sequestration. The 

Office of Water and the Office of Air and Radiation are participating in this effort. 

The United States is working toward ratification of the London Protocol, including the 

proposal of amendments to the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act 

(MPRSA), to implement the treaty. One proposed change to the Act would require a 

permit for sub-seabed carbon sequestration. In addition, under the Safe Drinking Water 

Act, sub-seabed sequestration beneath ocean waters within a State’s territorial waters 

must comply with any applicable requirements under EPA's Underground Injection 

Control program regarding the design, operation, and closure of underground injection 

wells. 

KEY ACTION #8: Develop Geologic Sequestration Regulations. In 2008, EPA 

will work with stakeholders to consider comments on regulations, proposed in July 

2008, for siting and managing geologic sequestration (GS) projects to prevent 

endangerment of underground sources of drinking water. 

KEY ACTION #9: Continue Technical Sequestration Workshops. The National 

Water Program will continue to coordinate with EPA’s Office of Research and 

Development, the Department of Energy, and National Laboratories on geologic 

sequestration research and hold public meetings and workshops with experts and 

stakeholders. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

36

F. Water Related “Biological” Sequestration of Carbon 

Carbon can be sequestered in biological 

as well as geologic structures. Some of 

the practices that result in the “biological 

sequestration” of carbon, and estimated 

tons of carbon sequestered per year/per 

acre of each practice, are described in Figure 8. In addition, wetlands have the 

potential to sequester carbon. 

As a result of the world-wide effort to reduce carbon, a market has developed for the 

sequestration of carbon, and there is a worldwide price per ton sequestered. Although 

the price per ton is now low, this price is expected to increase as the demand for carbon 

sequestration rises. EPA has estimated that the biological sequestration resulting from 

forest and agriculture practices in the United States could reach close to 100,000 Tg 

(teragrams or million tonnes6

) by 2095 if prices were to rise to $50 per ton/per acre 

(EPA 2005). 

 

6

 A tonne is a metric ton, equal to 1 megagram (Mg); and 1 gigatonne (Gt) equals 1,000 Tg (therefore, 

100,000 Tg = 100 Gt). 

KEY ACTION #10: Support Evaluation of Sub-seabed and Ocean Sequestration 

of CO2. EPA will work with other interested agencies and the international 

community to develop guidance on sub-seabed carbon sequestration and will 

address any requests for carbon sequestration in the sub-seabed or “fertilization” of 

the ocean, including any permitting under the Marine Protection, Research, and 

Sanctuaries Act or the Underground Injection Control program that may be required. 

Biological Sequestration Practices Related to Water 

Agriculture/Forest Practice Estimated Tonnes of CO2 

 Sequestered/Acre/Year 

• Reduce cropland tillage 0.6 – 1.1 

• Cropland conversion to grassland 0.9 – 1.9 

• Riparian buffers 0.4 – 1.0 

• Afforestation 2.2 – 9.5 

• Reforestation 1.1 – 7.7 

• Changes in forest management 2.1 – 3.1 

 

Figure 8: Source: Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Potential in U.S. Forestry and Agriculture (EPA 

2005, p. 2-3). 

OBJECTIVE: support “biological 

sequestration” of carbon through 

agricultural and forestry practices.
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

37

The National Water Program is now promoting practices to protect water quality and 

wetlands and reduce nonpoint pollution that include some of the practices that also 

sequester carbon. By continuing to promote these practices, water programs are 

contributing to carbon sequestration. Perhaps more important, as the price of a ton of 

carbon rises, land owners will change land uses in response to this price signal, 

adopting some additional practices with both carbon and water quality benefits. 

EPA has estimated that the water quality benefits of carbon sequestration practices may 

be significant, depending on the price and the region of the country. Nationally, EPA 

estimates that, at a price of $6.80 per tonne of CO2 equivalent, nitrogen loadings are 

reduced by 3.1% and phosphorous loadings reduced by 2% for a representative year 

(i.e., 2020). The overall impact on a 100-point water quality index is an improvement of 

about 2%. The biggest benefit would be in corn growing States. In 2020, at higher 

prices of $15 per tonne of CO2 equivalent, phosphorous reductions may approach a 

40% decrease from baseline 

conditions, and nitrogen 

reductions are slightly more 

than 10% below baseline 

conditions. These water 

quality benefits would be 

greater in twenty to thirty years 

(see Figure 9). These benefits 

would diminish or disappear in 

later years (e.g., 2060) as 

alternative sequestration 

practices are implemented 

(EPA 2005). In addition, more 

work is needed to understand 

how new incentives for 

agricultural production related 

to biofuels will impact these 

practices. 

In recognition of the emerging market in biological methods of sequestering carbon, the 

National Water Program needs to learn how to identify which pollution control practices 

can also be marketed for their carbon sequestration value and to help realize this value. 

In addition, the program intends to support the efforts of the EPA Office of Air and 

Radiation and others to develop the documentation and data systems to effectively 

verify that the tons of carbon sequestered by these projects is accounted for and 

recognized as a contribution to mitigation of greenhouse gases. 

Figure 9: Phosphorus loading index over time by (constant) 

greenhouse gas price scenario (baseline = 100). This figure shows 

that estimated phosphorus loadings decline with the introduction of 

greenhouse gas prices ($ per tonne of CO2 equivalent). Source: 

EPA 2005. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

38

2. Adapting Water Programs to Climate Change 

 

As the climate changes, the National Water Program has an obligation to continue to 

ensure that water is safe to drink and that the health of aquatic ecosystems is protected. 

To meet this challenge, Federal, State and Tribal managers of clean water and drinking 

water programs will need to adapt the implementation of the programs in light of the 

changing climate. 

Adaptation of water programs to climate 

change will be a long and iterative 

process. The understanding of the 

impacts of climate change on water that 

is now emerging from scientific studies, 

however, provides a sufficient basis for 

defining an initial set of preliminary steps to adapt water programs to climate change. 

Key actions that National Water Program managers will take in response to climate 

change are discussed in the following five sections representing core water programs: 

• Drinking Water, Water Quality and Effluent Standards; 

• Watershed Protection; 

• NPDES Permits; 

• Water Infrastructure; and 

• Wetlands Protection. 

The National Water Program is implemented through many individual programs 

established under the Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and other laws. Most 

of these programs fit within several core program areas (e.g., standards, watershed 

protection, NPDES permits, infrastructure protection, and wetlands protection). These 

core programs provide the organizing structure for most State and Federal water quality 

agencies and provide the organizing structure for the Key Actions in the ”adaptation” 

goal of this Strategy. 

The challenges posed by climate change, however, do not always fit neatly into existing 

programs and it is important to think about themes that define the critical elements of an 

KEY ACTION #11: Pilot Marketing of Nonpoint Source Biological 

Sequestration. The National Water Program will support cooperative pilot projects 

with selected State section 319 nonpoint pollution control programs to demonstrate 

the potential for marketing of nonpoint source biological sequestration to provide 

carbon sequestration benefits. 

Goal 2: Water Program Adaptation to 

Climate Change: adapt implementation 

of core water programs to maintain and 

improve program effectiveness in the 

context of a changing climate. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

39

effectively adapting core water program in response to climate change. Some of these 

climate change crosscutting themes are: 

• Develop Data to Adapt to Climate Change: Water managers need baseline 

data and information to understand how climate change is altering the 

environment and inform long-term planning. Better information concerning the 

spatial location of waterbodies and wetlands is needed. In order to improve or 

maintain water quality and to protect public health, program managers need to 

understand the changes that might affect standards, permits, implementation 

strategies, etc. Further, in the event that a baseline ecological condition has 

permanently shifted, managers need to be able to identify that point and adapt 

program expectations and requirements. 

• Develop Analytic Tools: In virtually every water program, the analytic and 

decision support tools that water managers rely on to process environmental 

data need to be expanded to address the more complex conditions that will arise 

from a changing climate. 

• Plan for Extreme Water Events: Better data and analytic tools are of little 

value unless water managers recognize that climate change will change longheld assumptions about the norms of water events, including storms, an excess 

of water, and a lack of water. Recognition of the increased frequency of extreme 

water events is important to water program managers responsible for controlling 

nonpoint pollution, protecting wetlands, restoring impaired waters, and protecting 

the quality of drinking water. Perhaps most important, local water infrastructure 

mangers need to adapt emergency plans to reflect the most extreme water 

events. 

• Increase Watershed Sustainability and Resilience: Individual water 

programs, such as standards, permits, and wetlands protection, need to adjust to 

the extremes of climate change. The demands of a changing climate, however, 

make it more important than ever that these programs be integrated and well 

coordinated on a watershed basis. From this more holistic perspective, 

managing stormwater, protecting wetlands, building water infrastructure, and 

sustaining drinking water supply all support an overarching goal of making an 

aquatic system more sustainable and resilient to the stresses of a changing 

climate. 

• Recognize Impacts on Children and the Disadvantaged: The impacts of a 

changing climate can be more serious for children and the disadvantaged and 

these increased risks needs to be considered in developing and implementing 

response actions. Children consume more water per pound of body weight than 

do adults, thus receiving relatively greater water-borne contaminants, and 

exposures through dermal uptake and inhalation of contaminants volatilizing from 

water are also greater. Response actions need to address water-borne 

infectious disease, asthma exacerbation (e.g. water damage from mold), 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

40

displacement of populations, safety in weather related disasters, and 

interruptions of food supply. 

• Strengthen Partnerships and Collaboration: A hallmark of water programs is 

that Federal, State, Tribal and local government share responsibility for program 

implementation. Although many of the Key Actions in this Strategy address 

steps that EPA will take, the success of the National Water Program response to 

climate change will depend on strengthening partnerships with State, Tribal, and 

local governments, the research community, and stakeholders representing 

agriculture, industry, and the environmental community.. 

A. Drinking Water, Water Quality, and Effluent Standards 

Under the Safe Drinking Water Act and 

the Clean Water Act, EPA establishes 

standards that define when water is safe 

to drink and when surface water is clean 

enough to support uses such as fishing 

and recreation. EPA also sets 

standards that must be met by all dischargers in an industry (e.g., paper mills) called 

“effluent guidelines.” Each of these three types of standards may be affected by climate 

change. 

Drinking Water Standards 

The Safe Drinking Water Act provides for a comprehensive process to assess public 

drinking waters for contaminants and to develop drinking water standards for 

contaminants posing the greatest risk. The changes to water resources resulting from 

climate change, including warmer waters and higher levels of organic materials in water, 

suggest that drinking water contaminants may increase as the climate changes. EPA 

intends to assess these risks as part of its regular review of drinking water regulations, 

giving special attention to the risks of waterborne disease. 

 

There are two key processes to identify and evaluate the potential impact of 

contaminants on public water systems. Under the Six Year Review process, the 

Agency reviews existing drinking water standards for more than 90 contaminants to 

determine whether it is appropriate to revise any of these regulations to maintain or 

provide for greater heath protection. Under the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) 

process, EPA identifies new, unregulated contaminants that are known or likely to occur 

in public water systems and may need a national drinking water regulation. Because 

climate change could impact weather patterns and result in increased rain events, the 

runoff from these events could increase the occurrence of regulated and unregulated 

contaminants in public drinking water sources and supplies. Under both the Six Year 

Review and CCL processes, the Agency evaluates the occurrence of contaminants in 

drinking water to determine potential impacts on public health. 

OBJECTIVE: water standards 

continue to protect human health and 

the environment as the climate 

changes.
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

41

In addition to recognizing the need to adapt standards established under the Safe 

Drinking Water Act to changing climatic conditions, the condition of surface water 

providing the supply for drinking water systems may also need attention. To better 

understand this potential problem, EPA will assess implications of climate change for 

biological contaminants and pathogens in surface waters and evaluate needed 

response actions, including revision of criteria recommendations under the Clean Water 

Act. 

Water Quality Standards 

Climate change is likely to have significant effects on water quality standards for surface 

waters in several areas: 

• higher/lower flows; 

• water temperature; 

• modified habitat; and 

• salinity changes. 

Changes in precipitation are expected to result in higher flows in some regions, lower 

flows in other regions, and more variability of flows. Higher flows could increase 

available dilution, but could also increase erosion and sedimentation (especially 

combined with greater peak velocity). Lower flows could substantially reduce available 

dilution, concentrate salts and other pollutants, and indirectly reduce dissolved oxygen 

(by increasing temperature and increasing metabolism). As a result, it may become 

more difficult to meet current water quality or drinking water standards. 

Increases in water temperature can also make some contaminants, such as ammonia 

(EPA 1999) and pentachlorophenol (EPA 1986), more toxic for some species and foster 

KEY ACTION #12: Address Impacts of Climate Change on Potential 

Contamination of Drinking Water Sources. The National Water Program will 

evaluate, as part of the contaminant occurrence analyses supporting the EPA 6 year 

review of drinking water standards and the contaminant candidate list, the potential 

for projected climate change to increase the nature and extent of contaminants in 

drinking water supplies and systems. 

KEY ACTION #13: Assess Need for New or Revised Clean Water Microbial 

Criteria and Risks of Waterborne Disease. The National Water Program will 

assess the potential for increases in waterborne disease and other water-related 

disease vectors as a result of climate change, including recommendations for 

appropriate responses (e.g., publish new or revised biological/pathogen criteria for 

surface waters). 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

42

the growth of microbial pathogens in sources of drinking water. Warmer temperatures 

often result in less water which in turn results in increased contaminant concentration 

levels. Perhaps most significantly, warmer waters hold lower levels of dissolved 

oxygen, the availability of which is critical to the health of aquatic species. Depending 

on the severity of such effects, States may need to consider them in their triennial 

review of water quality standards. 

Changes in climate could change the range and distribution of aquatic species with, for 

example, warm water species expanding their habitat range and increasing in number 

and cold water species reducing their range and being eliminated in some waters. The 

timing and duration of various life stages could also become altered, which may 

produce subtle or possibly dramatic shifts in community structure. As a result, the 

appropriate target for some water quality standards (particularly numeric and narrative 

criteria based on biological assessment) may change. With a changing “natural 

reference”, water quality standards for temperature and biological expectations may 

need to change to reflect these dynamic conditions. 

Changes in sea level and fresh water flow could increase saltwater intrusions and affect 

the position of the salt front in estuaries and tidal rivers. As a result, there may be 

increased pressure to manage freshwater reservoirs to increase flows and attempt to 

maintain salinity regimes to protect estuarine productivity and drinking water supplies. 

Water quality standards in watersheds experiencing reservoir depletion may need to 

reflect these conditions. In the case of saltwater intrusions, biological expectations 

again may need to be adjusted. 

In response to climate impacts to water quality, it may be necessary to consider the 

following actions with respect to water quality standards: 

• expanded efforts to meet current standards; 

• modifying criteria to protect uses; and 

• modifying designated uses. 

A designated use and associated criteria should only be removed or replaced when the 

first two actions above have been exhausted. 

Dischargers and watershed activities may need to change to reflect the increased 

degree of difficulty in meeting current standards, where those standards remain the 

appropriate targets and where they remain attainable. In these cases, program efforts 

will concentrate on ways to better implement actions to meet standards in an altered or 

changing climate. 

Some standards (i.e., pollutant-specific goals) may need to change to reflect more 

sensitive environmental conditions. In these cases, program efforts will concentrate on 

providing better recommendations that reflect necessary levels of protection in an 

altered or changing climate. For example, expected increases in sediment loads could 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

43

be addressed with development of sediment criteria. Program efforts will also focus on 

ways to implement and meet these new recommendations. 

Some designated uses and associated criteria may need to be removed and replaced 

with alternative uses and criteria where conditions have changed, or are anticipated to 

change, to the point that the current water quality standards are not appropriate or are 

not attainable. In these cases, program efforts will concentrate on providing the means 

to discern these situations and providing options and approaches for developing revised 

standards in an altered or changing climate. 

Some examples of altered conditions due to climate change that may require a water 

quality standards change or replacement may be: a persistent instream water 

temperature increase that prevents a cold water fishery from existing in a waterbody 

because the cold water species’ temperature limits have been exceeded; or a 

freshwater coastal wetland, and its freshwater aquatic community, that has been turned 

into a saline waterbody due to salt water intrusion via sea level rise. 

 

In response to these problems, the following tools and procedures will need to be fully 

developed and implemented: 

• measurement of biological condition and detection of changes; 

• models to forecast hydrologic and water quality changes; and 

• partnerships with land use managers. 

The program will need the ability to measure and detect modifications in biological 

conditions as a result of climate change impacts. This may involve more extensive 

biological monitoring, development of indices and indicators that are sensitive to climate 

change impacts, and methods to link monitoring results with the effects of other 

stressors. This biological information base will be crucial to managing adaptation and 

deciding when compensation is appropriate (e.g., change activity in the watershed to 

maintain biology) and when revised goal setting is appropriate (i.e., to reflect reality). 

An example of this work is the development of guidance on coral reef bioassessments 

and biological criteria as part of EPA’s participation in the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force. 

KEY ACTION #14: Clean Water Criteria for Sedimentation/Velocity. In 

anticipation of increased flow and velocity and sediment loadings in some 

streams, rivers, and estuaries, the National Water Program will review the 

potential for development of criteria for sediment and velocity in streams that 

are appropriate to these changing conditions. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

44

The program will need the ability to link ecological process models with landscape 

hydrology models to meet the forecasting need. This may involve predicting the effects 

of new temperature and precipitation patterns and discerning the effects of long-term 

climate change from the effects of normal short-term variability. As “natural conditions” 

become more dynamic, current empirical modeling approaches and characterization of 

current or past conditions may no longer be relevant or effective means of projecting to 

the future. Mechanistic modeling approaches and quantitative uncertainty analysis will 

become more important tools. The Office of Research and Development’s Global 

Change Research Program will support this effort by developing national maps 

depicting projected land use patterns, by decade, through 2040. ORD will also develop 

a downloadable and customizable ArcGIS tool that will enable local decision makers to 

develop their own land use scenarios. 

Effluent Standards 

Development of alternative energy sources may result in effluent sources that need to 

be controlled. For example, EPA intends to evaluate the processes being used to 

generate alternative energy sources such as biofuels and the wastewater generated 

from these processes. In addition, EPA intends to study whether new industries 

associated with climate change, will require permits as new sources and/or new 

dischargers. 

In addition, potential changes in effluent composition, such as changes in pollutants or 

the amount of pollutants due to new or different air emissions control technologies or 

the addition of carbon sequestration technologies, may also require modifications to 

existing effluent guidelines or require changes in permit limitations for some categories. 

 

KEY ACTION #17: Evaluate New Industry Sectors. The National Water Program 

will evaluate new industry sectors (including biofuels) and existing effluent guidelines 

for industrial categories to determine potential NPDES permitting needs and assess 

the need for new or revised technology-based performance standards. 

KEY ACTION #16: Link Ecological and Landscape Models. The National Water 

Program will work with the Office of Research and Development, the Office of Air and 

Radiation, and Federal partners to invest in refinement of models of ecological 

process and landscape hydrology. 

KEY ACTION #15: Develop Biological Indicators and Methods. The National 

Water Program will improve the biological information base to better manage water 

resources in a changing climate, including developing guidance on coral reef 

bioassessments and biological criteria. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

45

B. A Watershed Approach 

For some time, EPA has supported 

management of water resources using 

a watershed approach, which is a 

coordinating framework that focuses 

community efforts on priority problems within a watershed. Using the watershed 

approach, utilities, agricultural producers, and other stakeholders look holistically at 

infrastructure planning, water pollution control, waterbody restoration, and soft path 

technologies, such as low impact development, thereby protecting, maintaining or 

restoring the natural functions of the watershed. Many of the elements of a watershed 

approach lend themselves to adapting water programs to climate change including: 

• water monitoring and data; 

• watershed management tools; 

• protecting estuaries; 

• restoring impaired waters; and 

• reducing pollution from nonpoint sources. 

An important challenge the National Water Program will face in adapting these national 

programs to better address climate change needs will be managing the process of 

implementing the Key Actions described below and making the numerous small scale 

adaptations to core program management that are needed. In support of the prompt 

implementation of climate change adaptation actions related to watershed 

management, the Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds will develop a Climate 

Change Policy Memo that directs the incorporation of responses to climate change into 

these core programs. 

Water Monitoring and Data 

The Nation's waters are monitored by State, Federal, Tribal, and local agencies, 

universities, dischargers, and volunteers. Water quality data are used to characterize 

waters, identify trends over time, identify emerging problems, determine whether 

pollution control programs are working, help direct pollution control efforts to where they 

are most needed, and respond to emergencies such as floods and spills. As the climate 

changes, monitoring the condition of water resources will be increasingly important and 

increasingly challenging. At the same time, identifying and measuring environmental 

changes that result from a changing climate is both difficult and uncertain. In addition, 

assigning effects to “climate” as opposed to other causes is frequently challenging. 

 

KEY ACTION #18: Watershed Climate Change Policy Memo. The Office of 

Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds will develop a Climate Change Policy memo that 

promotes the incorporation of responses to climate change into core programs. 

OBJECTIVE: use a watershed 

approach to adapt core water programs 

to climate change challenges. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

46

The National Water Program will include assessment of climate change impacts in 

water resources assessments at the national level, such as the recent wadeable stream 

assessment and the Coastal Condition Report. These national overviews will provide 

useful information on climate-related changes to water resources but will also form a 

foundation for assessment of trends over time. To support this work, EPA will work with 

States, Tribes and other Federal agencies to include climate change–related 

measurements in monitoring programs, including reports from States under section 

305(b) and ocean monitoring conducted by the Ocean Survey Vessel (OSV) Bold. 

 

While understanding the impacts of climate change on the quality of water resources, it 

will also be increasingly important over time to understand changes in the spatial 

characteristics of fresh waters. The National Water Program will work with the U.S. 

Geological Survey to assess the potential for monitoring the change in the spatial 

characteristics of wetlands, freshwater lakes (including the Great Lakes), rivers, and 

streams as a result of changes in flow, velocity, increased evapotranspiration, and other 

factors associated with climate change and summarize any findings. 

Watershed Management Tools 

One of the most useful tools for understanding climate change impacts on water 

resources, especially impaired waters, is the Climate Assessment Tool (CAT) element 

of the BASINS water modeling program. (For more information about CAT, see 

Johnson et al. 2006 in the Further Reading section at the end of this document or visit 

http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/BASINS/.) EPA intends to promote the use of the 

model and provide training to EPA, State and Tribal program staffs on how to use the 

model to support assessment of climate-related water resources impacts and program 

decisions. 

KEY ACTION #20: Assess Waterbody Spatial Changes Due to Climate Change. 

In cooperation with USGS, explore opportunities and needs to assess change in the 

spatial characteristics of fresh waters due to climate change and summarize any 

findings. 

KEY ACTION #21: BASINS Climate Assessment Tool. The Office of Water will 

develop training sessions in Washington, DC, and selected Regions to assist EPA, 

State, Tribal, and other government staffs in using the CAT element of the BASINS 

decision support tool. 

KEY ACTION #19: Expand National Water Resource Surveys to Include Climate 

Change Indicators. The National Water Program will expand the national water 

resources surveys, such as the recent assessment of wadeable streams and the 

Coastal Condition Report, to address climate change issues and information. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

47

Protecting Coastal Estuaries 

The National Estuary Program (NEP) promotes technical transfer of information, 

expertise, and best management practices within 28 estuaries designated as nationally 

significant watersheds. The accomplishments within these watersheds also assist other 

coastal watersheds facing similar water pollution and water quality impairments. This 

approach has proven to be a success over the past 15 years and the NEP is seen as a 

model for other comprehensive watershed and community-based programs. 

The National Water Program will work with individual estuary programs to promote 

climate change as a priority for NEPs’ Comprehensive Conservation and Management 

Plan revisions. In addition, the National Water Program will work with the Office of Air 

and Radiation to establish a “Climate Ready Estuaries Program” (similar to the existing 

“Climate Friendly Parks” with the National Park Service) that would provide climate 

change outreach to estuaries and recognize efforts of coastal watersheds to adapt to 

climate change. 

In a related effort, the National Water Program will continue participation in the U.S. 

Coral Reef Task Force. In this effort, EPA is supporting local action strategies to 

address threats to reefs, developing guidance on coral reef bioassessments and 

biological criteria, and working to reduce stress on reefs from other sources (e.g., water 

pollution, vessel discharges). 

Restoring Impaired Waters 

The Clean Water Act provides for listing of waters not meeting State water quality 

standards and the development of plans, called “Total Maximum Daily Loads” (TMDLs) 

for reducing pollutant loadings as needed to meet water quality standards. The National 

Water Program is encouraging States and others to look for opportunities to develop 

TMDLs on a watershed basis and to implement restoration at the watershed scale. The 

National Water Program will consider the long range implications for waterbody 

impairment associated with climate change and will make needed revisions to TMDL 

guidance. 

KEY ACTION #22: “Climate Ready Estuaries”. The National Water 

Program will establish a Climate Ready Estuaries Program in partnership with 

the Office of Air and Radiation’s Climate Change Division. 

KEY ACTION #23: Continue Coral Reef Protections: The National Water 

Program will continue participation in the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force and support 

related efforts to protect coral reefs.
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

48

Nonpoint Pollution Control 

Nonpoint source pollution continues to be the largest remaining source of water quality 

impairments in the Nation. State nonpoint source programs, developed under the Clean 

Water Act (CWA) Section 319 Program, are working to meet this challenge. 

Congress enacted the 319 Program in 1987, establishing a national program to address 

nonpoint sources of water pollution. Under section 319(a), all States have developed 

nonpoint source assessment reports that identify nonpoint source pollution problems 

and the sources responsible for those water quality problems. Under section 319(b), all 

States have also adopted management programs to control nonpoint source pollution. 

Since 1990, Congress has annually appropriated grant funds to States under Section 

319(h) to help them to implement those management programs. 

In cooperation with NOAA, EPA has developed guidelines and methods under section 

304(f)(1) and (2) of the Clean Water Act and under Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization 

Amendments (CZARA) of 1990 section 6217 concerning estimates of the nature and 

extent of nonpoint sources of pollutants and methods to control pollution. EPA has 

further developed these guidelines into management measures for multiple stakeholder 

sectors. EPA will review the current guidelines in light of information related to climate 

change impacts on the type and extent of pollutants associated with nonpoint sources 

(e.g., greater storm intensity resulting in high rates of pollutant loads in runoff) and 

revise the guidelines as needed. 

As research develops and nonpoint pollution control methods are better tailored to 

climate change, EPA will work with States to make climate change a priority for funding 

under section 319 and consider asking States and Tribes to amend nonpoint pollution 

management programs as needed to reflect new information relating to climate change, 

including information developed under section 304(f) relating to water movement and 

flow and the value of wetlands in mitigating impacts of climate change. 

C. NPDES Permits 

The National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) permit 

program controls water pollution by 

regulating point source discharges of 

pollutants into the waters of the United States. The NPDES permit program covers 

approximately 500,000 facilities and is administered by either EPA or authorized States. 

KEY ACTION #24: Review/Revise Nonpoint Pollution Management Measures: 

EPA will review the sector specific series “National Management Measures to Control 

Nonpoint Source Pollution” based on emerging information related to climate change 

impacts. 

OBJECTIVE: NPDES permits 

maintain protection of water quality as 

the climate changes. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

49

At the national level, EPA establishes regulations and policies that set technology- and 

water quality–based standards and that provide a framework for implementing those 

standards in discharge permits. Permit authorities are required to reevaluate and renew 

NPDES permits every five years to ensure that permit requirements protect the quality 

of a waterbody. 

Changes in the hydrologic cycle due to climate change will need to be taken into 

consideration throughout the permitting process in order to preserve water quality. The 

NPDES program will undertake the following actions to adapt program management in 

response to climate change impacts: 

• coordinate with other parts of EPA’s Surface Water Program and other agencies, 

such as USGS, to evaluate climate change impacts on water quality and to 

identify appropriate responses by EPA’s water quality program; 

• lay the groundwork to build EPA’s ability to provide technical assistance to permit 

authorities and, in the long term, incorporate new information into permit writer 

training and stakeholder outreach; and 

• build the capability of EPA’s Wet Weather Permit Program to assist communities 

with adaptation to changes in hydrological cycles. 

As discussed in the mitigation section of this Strategy, the NPDES program will also 

promote technologies and practices that will help mitigate emissions of greenhouse 

gases. 

Adapting the NPDES Permit Program 

The five-year permitting cycle, as well as other mechanisms, provide permit writers with 

a significant amount of flexibility to adapt to changing conditions. However, an 

awareness on behalf of the permit writers and other stakeholders of the impacts of 

climate change will be crucial for ensuring that the program is protective of water quality 

within a changing climate regime. As an integral part of the National Water Program, 

conditions written into NPDES permits depend upon other program inputs, such as 

water quality standards, effluent guidelines, and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). 

Cross-program workgroups (e.g., pesticides, ground water, and air programs) may be 

useful to identify changes each program will need to make. The NPDES program will 

be directly impacted by a variety of inter-office and intra-Agency decisions; therefore, 

continuous and effective inter-office dialogue will ensure that permit authorities are 

aware of, and properly able to incorporate, any new or revised permit requirements 

responsive to climate change. 

Technical Assistance 

Education, outreach, and technical assistance efforts will be targeted to permit writers 

as well as municipal, industrial, and agricultural stakeholders to help them understand 

and respond to the potential impacts of climate change in their areas. For example, the 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

50

NPDES program intends to provide technical support to permitting authorities and 

permit writers on how to assess the need for revised water quality–based effluent 

limitations (WQBELs) and other permit conditions, as well as other aspects of program 

implementation. This may include assistance on issues such as: 

• how to address changing values for low flow conditions due to climate change, 

used in calculating permit limits (i.e., 7Q10—the 7-day average low flow 

occurring once in 10 years);

• how to make reasonable potential determinations as other flow conditions 

change (i.e., 1Q10, 7Q10, and 30Q5);

• how to determine whether existing mixing zones continue to be protective of 

water quality;

• evaluating appropriate upset and bypass emergency conditions; and

• how climate change might affect anti-backsliding provisions. 

EPA also intends to provide training and outreach to permit writers that will focus on 

ensuring the latest information and tools are available. The Permit Writers Course is 

one opportunity for providing basic information on a broad range of issues that permit 

writers should consider when developing permits. An introduction to climate change 

impacts can be incorporated into this training, but a more detailed forum for discussion 

will also be useful. Some of the climate change–related topics that may be suitable for 

more advanced training include: 

• watershed–based permitting and the potential impacts that climate change can 

have on this process; 

• use of best professional judgment (BPJ) to develop technology-based effluent 

limitations for pollutant discharges from new technologies that may be developed 

to adapt to climate change; 

• ways to evaluate the need for new or revised permit conditions due to impacts 

caused by climate change. 

• how existing data systems can be used as tools for collecting and querying 

information on facilities and water bodies; and 

• trainings targeted to stakeholders on specific topics related to their areas of focus 

(e.g., CAFOs, POTWs, and wet weather) 

KEY ACTION #25: Review and Adapt NPDES Permit Program Tools. Conduct 

an internal review of the flexibilities and tools in the NPDES program that can be 

used to respond to changing water quality/quantity conditions and new technologies; 

collaborate with programs within the Office of Water and across the Agency, modify 

and expand training to reflect climate change, and provide technical assistance to 

permit authorities and permit writers. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

51

Wet Weather Permits 

As discussed previously in this 

document, climate change is projected 

to cause increased intensity of wet 

weather events in some areas, while 

increasing intensity of drought in other 

areas, and in some cases both “wetter 

wet and drier dry” periods in the same 

region. This variability hits at the heart 

of one of the most challenging sources 

of water pollution—stormwater runoff 

and sewer overflows during “wet 

weather” events. Although overall 

precipitation may decline nationwide, 

precipitation is expected to fall in more 

intense downpours, challenging current 

wet weather controls. 

The NPDES program is charged with controlling urban and industrial wet weather 

discharges. Urban discharges are those from a municipality's stormwater or wastewater 

conveyance infrastructure that are caused by precipitation events such as rainfall or 

heavy snowmelt. Wet weather discharges include stormwater runoff through municipal 

separate storm sewer systems (MS4s), combined storm and sanitary sewer system 

overflows (CSOs), and wet weather sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs). Stormwater 

runoff gathers pollutants such as sediment, oil and grease, chemicals, nutrients, metals, 

and bacteria as it travels across land and over surfaces. CSOs and wet weather SSOs 

contain a mixture of raw sewage, industrial wastewater and stormwater and have 

resulted in beach closings, shellfish bed closings, and aesthetic problems. 

Installing infrastructure, such as pipes and wet weather storage and treatment systems, 

involves long-term planning and may take 15-20 years to fully implement, and these 

systems have projected lifetimes of 50 years or more. Existing systems and current 

planning to reduce or eliminate CSOs and SSOs are based on historical rainfall records. 

EPA and States will need to help communities understand the climate scenarios that 

they are facing and will need to take climate change into account in their long-term 

planning. EPA will evaluate its programs to identify optimal response strategies and will 

work with the research community to develop tools for assessing rainfall patterns and 

design considerations. 

Controlling stormwater discharges begins where water hits the ground. Traditional 

building techniques have created urban landscapes dominated by impervious cover, 

forcing rainfall to run off into waterways and stormwater systems. High volume and 

velocity scours waterways, increases erosion, floods human settlements, and 

overwhelms treatment systems. Shifting practices can significantly reduce both the 

volume and speed of runoff and, in fact, can aid the natural ecosystem by retaining 

Intensifying the Global Water Cycle: 

”According to model predictions, the most 

significant manifestation of climate change 

for humans and the environment is an 

intensification of the global water cycle, 

leading to increased global precipitation, 

faster evaporation, and a general 

exacerbation of extreme hydrologic regimes, 

floods, and droughts” (Asrar et al. 2001, p. 

1313). Further, the National Research 

Council stated that “Water is at the heart of 

both the causes and the effects of climate 

change” (NRC 1999). 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

52

water in the watershed and filtering out pollutants before they reach waterways. In the 

future, this will become even more important in the face of increasing temperatures and 

low flow periods that cause water shortages. 

 

In support of this education effort, the National Water Program’s Green Infrastructure 

Initiative is working to identify and demonstrate improved and new methods and 

techniques for preserving green space, increasing the perviousness of various types of 

land cover, retaining stormwater, and otherwise reducing the impacts of stormwater 

discharges. This work is expected to include assessment of the role of “green building” 

design specifications and approaches in developing CSO, SSO, and MS4 controls, as 

well as in guidance for non-point source stormwater controls. 

Industrial activities are also subject to NPDES permit requirements for their stormwater 

discharges. The NPDES program will evaluate appropriate steps to take to address 

climate change impacts. 

In addition, EPA intends to work with USDA and the agricultural community to better 

understand how climate change may impact major agricultural communities where 

animal feeding operations (AFOs) and concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) 

are located, especially with regard to how manure storage and management systems 

might take into account climatological and hydrological changes. 

D. Water Infrastructure 

Impacts should be expected to vary regionally, but in general, climate change could 

result in increased demands on our infrastructure systems, both in terms of O&M costs 

and the need for capital expenditures. The suite of expected impacts can be grouped 

according to the type of change a system may face and fall roughly into the following 

categories: 

KEY ACTION #26: Evaluate Opportunities to Address Wet Weather/ 

Climate Impacts at Municipal and Industrial Operations. The National 

Water Program will evaluate the wet weather program to identify initiatives to 

effectively address increases in precipitation due to climate change. Actions 

will include identifying best practices for characterizing design storms that take 

climate change into account, incorporating climate change into outreach and 

training materials, and promoting Green Infrastructure and Sustainable 

Infrastructure. 

KEY ACTION #27: Assess Climate Impacts at Animal Feeding Operations. 

The National Water Program will work with USDA to evaluate climate change 

impacts, such as increases in wet weather, on animal feeding operations. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

53

• more water (through increased precipitation and storm intensity) and sea level 

rise; 

• less water, with increased frequency and duration of drought; 

• temperature change; and 

• damage from more intense storms. 

Changes will affect drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater systems and range in 

scope from physical damage, to changes in treatment costs and treatment 

infrastructure, to changes in drinking water supply. Some of the steps that the National 

Water Program can take to respond to the challenges that climate change poses for 

water infrastructure include: 

• continue the Sustainable Infrastructure Initiative, a comprehensive strategy to 

change the way the nation views, values, and manages its water infrastructure—

for more information, please visit http://www.epa.gov/waterinfrastructure/; 

• support infrastructure planning tools; 

• address issues related to use of the State Revolving Fund (SRF) loans; and 

• improve emergency planning. 

Sustainable Infrastructure Initiative 

In attempts to move our systems and the sector as a whole towards greater 

sustainability, EPA initiated and is pursuing its Sustainable Water Infrastructure (SI) 

Initiative. The Initiative includes a suite of approaches that reduce the demands on our 

water and wastewater systems and, paired with innovations in financing, help to ensure 

that our infrastructure serves us for the long term. It is organized around four principles, 

or “pillars”: 

• Better management, 

• Water efficiency, 

• Full cost pricing, and 

• Watershed approaches to infrastructure. 

As all of the work under the Initiative seeks to reduce the demands on infrastructure and 

lessen the gap, it also encompasses the adaptations that help address any additional 

costs and demands resulting from climate change. 

Decision Support Tools 

A number of tools and outreach efforts can be adapted or created to foster the 

consideration of climate change in planning for infrastructure sustainability. For 

example: 

• Advanced Asset Management (AAM) is an approach that plans for the 

replacement and repair of all a utility’s infrastructure. Impacts from climate 

change will be included in EPA’s AAM training and messaging; and 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

54

• Environmental Management Systems (EMSs) provide a means through which 

utilities examine their environmental footprints and constantly work towards 

improvements. This self evaluation process can be used as a vehicle for 

evaluating, adapting to, and mitigating climate change, and discussion of climate 

change will be included in EPA’s outreach to promote EMSs. 

 

Adaptation requires that communities understand the potential consequences of climate 

change at the local level. While climate models are not scaled to project such local 

impacts, communities can use available science to understand the plausible range of 

changes to climate and resulting impacts on water resources they could face. This 

information can then be considered in local decision making processes. Given the long 

lifespan of water and wastewater infrastructure, it is prudent that planning for new and 

existing facilities include climate considerations. EPA can work with the professional 

water and wastewater community to develop and disseminate such decision support 

tools. 

State Revolving Funds and Climate Change 

The Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act both provide for State Revolving 

Funds (SRFs) through which States make low interest loans to finance water 

infrastructure projects. The National Water Program works with States to assure the 

effective management of these funds. The Drinking Water SRF provides about $1.6 

billion in loans each year and the Clean Water SRF provides about $5 billion in loans 

each year. Taken together, the SRFs are a vital tool for financing needed water 

infrastructure. 

It will be important to clarify the SRF eligibility of projects that provide for mitigation of 

greenhouse gases (through energy or water efficiency or energy generation) or for the 

adaptation of treatment and distribution/collection systems to accommodate climate 

change. 

KEY ACTION #29: Develop a Sustainability/Vulnerability Analysis Handbook 

for Climate Change Impacts. Work to publish a document describing a process 

through which utilities can conduct a self analysis of sustainability, including a climate 

change–specific vulnerability analysis.

KEY ACTION #28: Implement the Sustainable Water Infrastructure Initiative 

and Adapt Decision Support Tools to Include Climate Change. The National 

Water Program will continue the implementation of the Sustainable Infrastructure 

Initiative and incorporate climate change into its activities, including incorporating 

climate change considerations in a range of new and existing sustainable 

infrastructure tools and outreach efforts. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

55

Emergency Planning for Water Facilities 

The impacts of climate change present ongoing challenges for the Agency’s emergency 

response program. The possibility of more frequent and severe storms and flooding 

due to climate changes, along with the continued threat of terrorist attacks on our water 

and wastewater infrastructure, calls for a coordinated approach. To address this 

challenge, EPA has developed an agency-wide approach that identifies roles and 

responsibilities for Regions and Headquarters. The EPA approach incorporates an 

Incident Command System (ICS) that provides a set of core concepts, terminologies, 

and technologies common to all federal agencies. 

Under the National Response Framework, EPA serves as an important support agency 

to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) to enable the rapid restoration of 

critical water and wastewater services after a calamitous event. By Presidential 

Directive, EPA also is the federal lead for preparing water and wastewater systems to 

prevent, detect, respond to, and recover from terrorism and natural disasters. 

 

In order to be prepared to respond to natural disasters such as hurricanes and floods, or 

possible terrorist attacks on our water and wastewater infrastructure, the National Water 

Program can take the following additional actions: 

• Provide Training: Provide training (e.g., National Incident Management System 

and Incident Command System) and materials (e.g., best practices and table-top 

exercises) to improve the ability of drinking water and wastewater systems to 

prepare for and recover from all hazards, including natural disasters. 

• Develop Response Networks: Coordinate with States, Tribes, and water sector 

associations to promote the adoption of mutual aid and assistance programs, 

known as Water and Wastewater Agency Response Networks (WARNs), so that 

utilities can exchange equipment and personnel to expedite the restoration of 

critical water services. 

• Participate in Emergency Response Exercises: Integrate the water sector 

into national emergency response exercises such as Spill of National 

Significance (SONS) and TOPOFF (“TOP OFFicials”) to enhance awareness of 

the importance of the sector and to measure the effectiveness of a simulated 

response. Implement a national effort to measure risk reduction efforts against 

all hazards in the water sector. 

KEY ACTION #30: Clarify Use of the Clean Water and Drinking Water SRFs to 

Support Adaptation to Climate Change. Work with State partners to clarify what 

types of climate change–related infrastructure expenditures are eligible for SRF 

assistance. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

56

• Coordinate Incident Control: In coordination with the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA) and the Corps, EPA will work within the National 

Response Framework to improve the marshalling of aid for utilities. This work 

includes identifying Department of Homeland Security and other databases as 

resources for critical infrastructure information that could prove useful in 

preparing for or responding to an event on the State or Federal level, and for 

establishing key definitions across the Federal government to facilitate 

emergency assistance (e.g., credentialing, resource typing).

• Streamline Permitting: In order to address emergency response and climate 

change, the NPDES program intends to develop processes to streamline and 

expedite permits concerning natural disasters. It will be important to provide 

flexible mechanisms for dealing with emergencies, such as permitting for 

emergency package treatment systems to quickly reinstate the ability to treat 

wastewater. 

Following unfortunate events that damage communities and ecosystems, EPA and its 

Federal partners intend to ensure that rebuilding efforts take advantage of the 

opportunity to re-think planning and development. It is appropriate that Federal funding 

promote use of water and energy efficient technologies, use of sustainable redevelopment principles such as smart growth and green buildings/green infrastructure, 

and re-evaluate how to rebuild and preserve wetlands to mitigate future storm damage. 

E. Wetlands Management 

Since 1989, the Federal government as 

a whole has embraced a policy goal of 

no net loss of wetlands under the Clean 

Water Act Section 404 regulatory 

program. In 2004, President Bush 

announced an additional national goal to 

protect, restore, and improve 3 million 

acres of wetlands by 2009. After achieving this goal a year early, the President 

recently announced a new challenge to protect, restore and improve an additional 4 

million acres of wetlands nationwide. The Wetlands Program contributes to these goals 

by fostering effective wetlands management through strategic partnerships with States, 

Tribes, local governments, and other key partners. 

KEY ACTION #31: Develop and Expand Emergency Response Planning. The 

National Water Program will implement a range of actions (see above) to ensure 

existing emergency response planning considers impacts from climate change, and 

will work with federal partners to promote adoption of sustainable practices during 

recovery and rebuilding. 

OBJECTIVE: assure that 

development of wetlands protection 

guidelines and policies includes 

consideration of climate change. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

57

The section 404 permit program regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material into 

all “waters of the United States” (as defined in the Clean Water Act), which includes 

wetlands, rivers, streams, and other aquatic resources. Wetlands are also the focus of 

the voluntary State/Tribal portion of the program, which builds the capacity of State, 

Tribal, and local governments to protect and manage wetlands through grants, by 

promoting wetlands monitoring and assessment, mapping, outreach, and through 

strategic partnerships. 

The important functions and ecosystem services provided by the nation’s wetlands, 

streams and other aquatic resources will continue to grow in importance as the climate 

changes. These resources provide crucial functions in four areas related to climate 

change: 

• Coastal Protection: Facing the certainty of sea level rise and the potential for 

increasing hurricane intensities, the ability of coastal wetlands to reduce wave 

energy and protect coastal settlements may become more important. 

• Protecting Water Supplies: With increasing aridity in some regions of the 

United States, the protection of remaining wetlands and streams that provide 

groundwater recharge and maintain minimum stream flows is important for 

maintaining water supplies. 

• Flood Mitigation: With the projected increase in precipitation and storm 

frequency in other parts of the United States, the capacity of wetlands and 

headwater streams to reduce flood peaks, detain stormwater, and filter 

pollutants, is important to the protection of life, property, and water quality. 

• Carbon Sequestration: Lastly, the high primary productivity of many wetland 

types may make these systems attractive components of existing and future 

carbon sequestration efforts. 

In light of the important contributions wetlands and other aquatic resources can make to 

adapting to climate change, the National Water Program will evaluate strategies for 

enhanced aquatic resource protection and develop a new standard for wetlands 

mapping. Key themes of this assessment process are to consider a watershed 

approach to aquatic resource protection and to emphasize integration with other water 

programs. 

Regulatory Framework 

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act establishes a program to regulate the discharge of 

dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. Activities in 

waters of the United States regulated under this program include fill for development, 

water resource projects (such as dams and levees), infrastructure development (such 

as highways and airports) and mining projects. Section 404 requires a permit from the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) or a state with an EPA-approved program 

before dredged or fill material may be discharged into waters of the United States. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

58

EPA developed the substantive environmental criteria used by the Corps to make its 

permitting decisions, known as the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines (the Guidelines). As 

articulated in the Guidelines, the basic premise of the permitting program is that no 

discharge of dredged or fill material may be permitted if a practicable alternative exists 

that is less damaging to the aquatic environment or the nation’s waters would be 

significantly degraded. Permit applicants must demonstrate that: 

• impacts to wetlands and other waters of the U.S. have been avoided to the 

“maximum extent practicable”; 

• unavoidable impacts have been minimized “to the extent appropriate and 

practicable”; and 

• remaining impacts have been compensated for “to the extent appropriate and 

practicable.” 

Since protecting our Nation’s existing aquatic resource base is critical to ensuring the 

country’s ecological and economic resilience as climatic patterns shift, effective 

implementation of the Section 404 regulatory program and meeting the no net loss and 

net gain goal is an important part of maintaining the ability to adapt to climate change. 

The §404 Guidelines currently prohibit discharges that will cause or contribute to 

“significant degradation” of the waters of the United States. Significant degradation is 

broadly defined to include individual or cumulative impacts to human health and welfare; 

fish and wildlife; ecosystem diversity, productivity and stability; and recreational, 

aesthetic or economic values. In light of the growing concerns regarding the adverse 

effects of climate change and the recognition that protecting the Nation’s wetlands and 

other aquatic resources can help to mitigate these effects, EPA will explore how 

consideration of the effects of climate change should inform significant degradation 

determinations and publish additional guidance where appropriate. 

The §404 permit review process also includes determining where there would be an 

“unacceptable adverse impact” resulting from the proposed activity, as described under 

§404(c), as well as “substantial and unacceptable” impacts to Aquatic Resources of 

National Importance, pertaining to §404(q), often called permit elevations. Criteria used 

for these determinations should take into account the chemical, physical and biological 

importance of an aquatic resource in light of climate change. The program will consider 

developing guidance describing any impacts determined to be “unacceptable” in 

consideration of the potential effects of climate change (e.g., where discharges would 

result in harm to wetlands critical to storm surge reduction). 

General permits under section 404 authorize categories of activities that are expected to 

have minor impacts, without the need for completion of an individual permit application, 

as long as specified procedures and conditions for minimizing impacts are followed. 

Since almost 90% of §404 permits each year are general permits, effective 

implementation of the general permit program is an important component of the broader 

regulatory program role in addressing the potential impacts of climate change. For 

example, conditions in general permits may identify key resource types (e.g., playa 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

59

lakes) or specific locations (e.g., coastal Louisiana) that are protected on a regional or 

State basis. 

In order to offset permitted impacts, the Corps typically requires between 40,000 – 

50,000 acres of compensatory mitigation annually. This compensation takes the form of 

restored, created, enhanced and/or preserved complexes of wetlands and streams. 

EPA, in conjunction with the Corps, will evaluate how these wetland and stream 

compensation projects could be selected, designed and sited to also aid in mitigating 

the effects of climate change. For example, certain types of restoration projects could 

be encouraged because of their relative carbon sequestration benefits or because they 

would facilitate more effective wetland migration as sea level rises. 

National Wetlands Mapping Standard 

Baseline information on the location and condition of wetlands and aquatic resources is 

necessary to manage the wetlands program and develop the models and plans needed 

to adapt to climate change. The existing National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping, 

managed by the Fish and Wildlife Service, is used extensively for those efforts and is 

already used to address the effects of climate change (e.g., modeling sea level rise). 

The NWI maps were innovative when first produced, but additional work is now needed 

to better satisfy the demands for sophisticated analysis that supports effective 

environmental planning. Hardcopy maps are available for 81% of the Nation, and 53% 

of the NWI is available online for use in GIS applications. However, a significant portion 

of the arid West has not yet been mapped. 

Stakeholder agencies and organizations have started an initiative to develop and 

implement a modernized Wetland Mapping Standard to update and improve the quality 

of the data. The goal of this effort is twofold: to accelerate the rate at which the 

national wetlands mapping is completed and to enable real-time updates of the national 

wetlands data layer in the future. Using the new Standard, other groups, such as 

States, local governments, and non-governmental organizations, will be able to collect 

and upload digitally mapped data to the NWI. EPA and other Federal agencies will be 

supporting a range of organizations to complete the national map. The Standard was 

published for public comment in August 2007. 

KEY ACTION #32: Evaluate Opportunities to Refine the 404 Regulatory 

Framework to Address Climate Change: The National Water Program will work 

with the Army Corps of Engineers to ensure effective implementation of the 

regulatory framework under section 404 of the Clean Water Act in a way that 

considers the effects of climate change and will explore the need for additional 

guidance on avoiding or minimizing impacts, defining “significant degradation” and 

“unacceptable adverse impact”, and/or implementing compensatory mitigation. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

60

3. Climate Change Research Related to Water 

 

Research on climate change issues related to water is occurring both internationally and 

in the United States. Much of this research is being managed by Federal agencies, 

including EPA. The National Water Program will benefit from much of the research now 

underway and this Response to Climate Change document will be revised periodically 

to reflect emerging research. At the same time, the National Water Program will begin 

to play a larger role in defining research priorities and working with the research 

community to make research results as useful as possible. Three key research topics 

are addressed below: 

• research projects related to water 

now underway as part of the 

Federal government interagency 

U.S. Climate Change Science 

Program (CCSP);

• research projects underway within the EPA Office of Research and Development 

(ORD) related to water quality, drinking water and ecosystems that relate to 

climate change; and

• elements of the ORD Global Change Research Program that relate to water (all 

of which are consistent with the CCSP Strategic Plan).

Additional research topics were identified by the National Water Program Climate 

Change Workgroup during the development of this Strategy (noted in Appendix 5) and 

will be considered in future research planning. 

Although not addressed below, it is important to note the vital and continuing research 

sponsored by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). ORD scientists 

and grantees make a significant contribution to the IPCC as authors, and through 

research cited by the IPCC. Much of the work is related to water resource impacts of 

climate change and a significant portion addresses water issues in North America. 

KEY ACTION #33: Finalize National Wetlands Mapping Standard: Work with 

other Federal agencies to finalize the National Wetlands Mapping Standard and work 

with Federal partners to fund updates of arid west maps. 

Goal 3: Climate Change Research 

Related to Water: strengthen the link 

between EPA water programs and 

climate change research. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

61

A. U.S. Interagency Research: CCSP Projects Underway 

The interagency U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) coordinates and 

integrates scientific research on global change and climate change, including research 

related to water, sponsored by 13 participating departments and agencies of the U.S. 

Government. The planning and implementation of ORD’s Global Change Research 

Program is integrated by the CCSP with other participating Federal departments and 

agencies to reduce overlaps, identify and fill programmatic gaps, and add integrative 

value to products and deliverables produced under the CCSP’s auspices. ORD 

coordinates with other CCSP agencies to develop and provide timely, useful, and 

scientifically sound information to decision makers. 

A major activity called for in the 2003 

CCSP Strategic Plan is the production of 

21 Synthesis and Assessment Products 

(SAPs) by 2008 that respond to the CCSP 

highest priority research, observation, and 

decision support needs. A full list of the 21 CCSP SAPs is available at 

http://www.climatescience.gov. The following SAPs relate to water resources: 

• Weather and Climate Extremes in a Changing Climate: Focus North 

America, Hawaii, Caribbean, and the U.S. Pacific Islands (SAP 3-3): Report 

published 6/08; NOAA lead with NASA, USGS, DOE. 

• Coastal Elevation and Sea Level Rise (SAP 4-1): Report to be published in 

2008; EPA lead with USGS and NOAA. 

• Thresholds of Change in Ecosystems (SAP 4-2): Report to be published in 

2008; USGS lead with EPA, NOAA, DOE and NSF. 

• Effect of Climate Change on Agriculture, Biodiversity, Land, and Water 

Resources (SAP 4-3): Report published 5/08; USDA lead with many other 

agencies. 

• Review of Adaptation Options for Climate Sensitive Ecosystems and 

Resources (SAP 4-4): Report published 6/08; EPA lead with other contributing 

agencies. 

• Effect of Climate Change on Energy Production and Use (SAP 4-5): Report 

published 10/07; DOE lead. 

• Analyses of the Effects of Global Climate Change on Human Health and 

Welfare and Human Systems (SAP 4-6): Report published 6/08; EPA lead with 

other agencies. 

• Effect of Climate Change on Transportation and Infrastructure: Gulf Coast 

Study (SAP 4-7): Report published by 3/08; DOT lead with USGS, DOE, NASA. 

• Decision Support Experiments and Evaluations Using Seasonal to 

Interannual Forecasts and Observed Data (SAP 5-3): Report to be published 

2008; NOAA lead. 

OBJECTIVE: monitor and make 

good use of Federal interagency 

climate change research. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

62

The National Water Program intends to monitor the development of these key CCSP 

products and use these reports to refine and improve responses to climate change. As 

this Response to Climate Change is revised over time, findings from these reports will 

be considered. 

In addition to the Synthesis and Assessment Products, the CCSP also has detailed 

implementation plans for each of its priority program elements. This includes a plan for 

its Carbon Cycle Workgroup’s research activities related to carbon sequestration. The 

National Water Program will work with ORD to integrate information from these activities 

into the management framework. 

B. EPA/ORD Water Research Related to Climate 

The National Water Program works closely 

with the EPA Office of Research and 

Development (ORD) on a wide range of 

water related research focusing on the MultiYear Plans and Strategies for: 

• Ecosystem Research; 

• Clean Water Research; and 

• Drinking Water Research. 

Some of this research applies to issues related to climate change. 

 

Ecological Research Program 

The Ecological Research Program is undergoing a major shift in direction. The new 

focus is on “ecosystems services, their value, and their relationship to human well 

being, for consistent incorporation into environmental decision making” (Ecological 

Research Program; Multi-Year Plan; draft 4/07). It is clear that in adapting to climate 

change, risk managers make choices involving land use, benefit vs. cost of ecosystem 

maintenance or restoration, value of preserving endangered species in a particular 

location and so forth. Research in ecosystems services will provide direct support in 

these decisions. 

The draft Multi-Year Plan for Ecological Research specifies several outputs that will be 

of use in managing climate change impacts on water programs: 

KEY ACTION #34: Monitoring of Water Related CCSP Reports. The National 

Water Program will monitor the development of reports by the Climate Change 

Science Program and name a representative to join an ORD representative on the 

CCSP Water Cycle Working Group. 

OBJECTIVE: EPA research on 

water issues will address climate 

change 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

63

• measures and dynamic maps of ecosystems services; 

• predictive models relating to the response of stressors; 

• management options, based on alternative future scenarios; and 

• decision support platforms. 

Some specific areas of research that are particularly germane to climate change are 

also described including a focus on nitrogen, concentrated work on evaluating 

ecosystem services of wetlands, and place-based research—for which the Willamette 

River basin and adjacent areas and the Tampa Bay ecosystem have been selected for 

near term studies. 

Clean Water Research Program 

The Water Quality Multi-Year Plan includes many areas that will directly support 

decision making related to climate change impacts including: 

 

• Multiple Stressors: Assessment of multiple stressors (i.e., changes in 

temperature, salinity, water flow, pH and other parameters) on the health of 

waters. 

• Bioassessment/Biocriteria: In developing permits and standards to address 

climate change, the National Water Program will need a greater concentration on 

bioassessment and biocriteria. 

• Nutrients: Increased water flow will mean changes in nutrient status of water 

bodies in some areas of the country and research theme 1.3 is dedicated to 

nutrients research. 

• Flooding Impacts on Infrastructure: To the extent that extreme weather 

events increase, flooding events may increase in magnitude and the Multi-year 

Plan addresses research needs in this area in the Aging Infrastructure research 

theme. 

• Pathogens: Climate change may result in changes in the range of existing 

pathogens and a need to revise traditional indicators of pathogens. New means 

of testing for the presence of microbial pathogens are being developed, including 

rapid indicators based on genomic and other state-of-the-art techniques. These 

methods will be relevant not only to recreational waters, but also to shellfish beds 

and drinking water uses. 

Drinking Water Research Program 

The Drinking Water Multi-year Plan also describes research on microbial contaminants, 

including rapid detection methods and evaluation of emerging pathogens. One area 

addressed in the Plan that is particularly important is improved and rapid detection 

methods for algal toxins so that we can better address harmful algal blooms in both 

freshwater and marine environments. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

64

Underground injection wells figure prominently in some climate mitigation strategies, 

and the Drinking Water Multi-Year Plan identified several projects in this area under 

Source Water Protection including: 

• a report on CO2 transport, modeling and risk assessment (2008); 

• a report on impacts on drinking water sources of carbon capture and storage 

(2010); and 

• a report on mechanical integrity test methods for CO2 injection (2011). 

In addition to climate change research within these water research programs, there is 

important research being conducted by research foundations such as the Water 

Environment Research Foundation (WERF) and the American Water Works Association 

Research Foundation (AWWARF). The National Water Program will coordinate with 

these agencies and foundations to maximize information sharing and to build on 

research efforts of common interest. 

 

C. ORD Global Change Research Program 

The EPA ORD also develops a MultiYear Plan for Global Change Research. 

This Plan provides an implementation 

plan for the 2001 Research Strategy for 

ORD’s Global Change Research 

Program, which was externally peer-reviewed. Although the National Water Program 

has had limited participation in development of this Plan in the past, the current Plan 

includes a number of important research projects related to the impacts of climate 

change on water resources. 

ORD’s Global Change Research Program is stakeholder-oriented, with emphasis on 

assessing the potential consequences of global change on air quality, water quality, 

aquatic ecosystems, human health, and socioeconomic systems. ORD uses the results 

of these studies to investigate adaptation options to improve society’s ability to respond 

to the risks and opportunities presented by global change, and to develop decision tools 

for resource managers coping with a changing climate. 

KEY ACTION #35: Climate Research in Water Related ORD Research. The 

National Water Program will work with the EPA Office of Research and Development 

in development of water research related to climate change and will also coordinate 

with external research foundations engaged in water and climate change related 

research. 

OBJECTIVE: The EPA Global 

Change Research Program will 

address water program research 

needs. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

65

The most significant major study called for in the current Multi-Year Global Change 

Research Plan calls for ORD and the National Water Program to cooperate in the 

development of an assessment of the sensitivity to climate change of the goals 

articulated by the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act and the opportunities 

available within the provisions of these laws to address the anticipated impacts of 

climate change. The assessment will also develop an atlas of vulnerabilities of water 

resources and aquatic ecosystems in the United States to climate change. 

ORD’s Global Change Research Program recognizes that there is a lack of empirical 

data about the importance and prevalence of climate-related decisions, including those 

related to water resources. 

To fill this information gap, the 

ORD Global Change 

Research Program will 

develop a new “decision 

assessment” process to help 

prioritize future climate 

change/water research needs. 

This process will provide a 

foundation for future research. 

ORD will develop a dynamic 

“decision inventory” to identify 

different classes of climatesensitive decisions related to 

water resources in different 

regions of the country, and to 

evaluate the returns from 

providing better scientific 

information to inform those 

decisions. 

Other major research projects in ORD’s Global Change Research Program related to 

the water resource impacts of climate change are described in Appendix 4. ORD will 

also work with the National Water Program to complement research on geologic 

sequestration. The Office of Water will monitor the development of ORD reports on 

climate change impacts on water resources, distribute the reports to water program 

managers, and apply the findings of the reports to program implementation. 

KEY ACTION #36: Revision of ORD Global Change Multi-Year Plan. The Office 

of Water will appoint a representative to participate in the ORD revision of the 

Global Change Multi-Year Plan.

Human Health

Weather-related morbidity

Water & vector-borne disease

Air pollutant health effects

Water Quality

Pollutants & pathogens

Biocriteria

Ecosystems

Aquatic ecosystem watersheds

Aquatic ecosystems coastal

Invasive species

Ecosystem services

American Samoa

Air Quality

Prelim ambient air pollutants 

Ambient air pollutants

Issue-Based

Place-Based

EPA Global Climate Change Research Program 

San Francisco

Bay Watershed

Great Lakes

Coastal

communities

Four Corners,

American Southwest

Figure 10: Source: EPA ORD Global Change Research Program. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

66

4. Water Program Education on Climate Change 

 

Climate change science and policy 

is evolving rapidly and today’s 

understanding of climate change 

impacts on water resources, and 

conclusions about needed 

response actions, may change 

over time. In order for the National 

Water Program to stay current with climate change issues, new practices are needed to 

strengthen outreach to partners and stakeholders on climate change–related water 

program issues and educate water program professionals on climate change generally. 

This communication needs to involve both EPA informing others about new issues and 

activities and EPA listening to and learning from the suggestions of others. 

A key first step toward establishing the strong communication linkages that will support 

successful implementation of water program climate change adaptations is the 

operation of a water and climate change website and listserve. These web tools will 

provide basic information about the impacts of climate change on water programs 

including copies of related materials and links to the EPA climate change website and 

other related sites. The listserve will provide periodic email updates on climate change–

related issues to subscribers. 

 

Keeping partners and stakeholders informed of progress in implementing the Key 

Actions identified in this document will be a continuing task. For many interested 

parties, however, a single, annual report on progress and new or emerging issues will 

best serve their needs. We expect the reports will identify progress toward key goals 

identified in the Strategy and identify “best practices” addressing the water impacts of 

climate change. 

 

As water program partners and stakeholders become more involved in activities related 

to climate change, issues and priorities will become clearer and requests for information 

and analysis will increase. In anticipation of these requests, the National Water 

KEY ACTION #38: Annual Public Reports on Strategy Implementation. The 

Office of Water will publish annual reports describing progress in implementing this 

Strategy. 

KEY ACTION #37: Clearinghouse Website/Listserve. The Office of Water will 

work with other EPA offices to establish a website to provide documents related to 

water and climate change, including research products, and offer as part of this site, 

a listserve to send update emails to interested parties. 

Goal 4: Water Program Education on 

Climate Change: educate water program 

professionals and stakeholders on climate 

change impacts on water resources and 

programs. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

67

Program intends to take the initiative to 

provide existing advisory groups and related 

organizations with information on climate 

change activities. 

State and Tribal organizations are also an 

effective vehicle for providing basic 

information about climate change to water 

program professionals. For example, EPA 

relies on the National Drinking Water 

Advisory Council to provide guidance on a 

range of safe drinking water program 

implementation issues. Some of these other 

organizations include: 

• Association of State and Interstate 

Water Pollution Control Administrators;

• Association of State Drinking Water Administrators;

• Ground Water Protection Council; 

• Association of State Wetland Managers; 

• Coastal States Organization; and

• National Tribal Water Council. 

The National Water Program intends to work with these organizations to identify 

meetings, seminars and other opportunities to provide information about climate change 

and to identify and address climate change issues related to water programs. As part 

of this process, EPA will consult with State, Tribal and local governments and related 

organizations concerning the best mechanism for establishing and maintaining a 

dialogue on climate change program and policy issues over the coming years. 

Among the most important steps that the National Water Program can take to respond 

to the many challenges of climate change is to inform and educate the tens of 

thousands of water program professionals in Federal, State, Tribal, and local 

governments and in the private sector concerning climate change issues and potential 

impacts on water resources. With access to basic information about climate change, 

professionals can apply this knowledge to numerous specific cases and make countless 

valuable program adaptations. 

This Strategy is a first step in building understanding of climate change issues among 

water program professionals. The background information in Section II of this Strategy

KEY ACTION #39: Outreach to Partners. The Office of Water will provide material 

and briefings on the National Water Program climate change response actions 

periodically to a wide variety of EPA advisory groups, State and Tribal organizations, 

and stakeholder organizations. 

Stakeholder Meetings to Date: 

The National Water Program Climate 

Change Workgroup held five listening 

sessions with stakeholders in 2007: 

May 24: Environmental Community 

June 6: Agriculture Community 

June 13: Industry Organizations 

June 14: State and Local 

 Government Organizations 

August 10: Tribal Officials 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

68

provides key information about a range of potential climate change impacts on water 

resources and on water programs. The Office of Water intends to make new reports 

about climate change impacts on water available to a wide range of water program 

managers on a continuing basis with the goal of helping individual program managers to 

recognize climate change issues and impacts and to address these problems 

effectively. 

The National Water Program is now making a significant investment in training for water 

program professionals in the management, policy, and technical challenges arising from 

the management of core clean water and safe drinking water programs. The Water 

Quality Standards Academy, the Watershed Academy, and the Drinking Water 

Academy are just a few examples. By including basic information about climate 

change in these training programs, the National Water Program can build understanding 

of climate change issues among water program staff and strengthen the ability of the 

program to address climate change problems. In addition, short, focused training on 

climate change issues related to water would be a benefit to water program staff in 

national and Regional offices. 

 

5. Water Program Management of Climate Change 

Climate change poses significant 

and long-term challenges for the 

National Water Program. The 

development of this National Water 

Program Strategy: Response to 

Climate Change is a key first step in 

understanding climate change 

impacts on water programs and the 

beginning of the process of implementing response actions. To sustain this focus on 

climate change, the National Water Program will need to establish management 

practices to build on this initial assessment of climate change impacts. 

A first key step in this process is to continue the operation of the National Water 

Program Climate Change Workgroup. This group is chaired by the Deputy Assistant 

Administrator for Water and includes senior managers from national and EPA Regional 

offices as well as representatives of the Office of Air and Radiation and the Office of 

Research and Development and helps maintain good communication among these 

offices on climate change issues. For the next several years, we expect the Workgroup 

KEY ACTION #40: Expand Water Training on Climate Change. EPA will revise 

existing training programs to include attention to the impacts of climate change on 

water programs and will offer training on water-related climate change impacts to 

national and Regional offices. 

Goal 5: Water Program Management 

of Climate Change: establish the 

management capability within the 

National Water Program to address 

climate change challenges on a 

sustained basis.
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

69

will oversee implementation of this Strategy. This work will include oversight of water 

program coordination with other EPA offices and other Federal agencies on climaterelated issues, evaluation of the usefulness of response actions to decision-makers at 

different levels of government, and development of needed revisions to the Response 

to Climate Change document on a periodic basis. As part of this process, the 

Workgroup will develop an implementation plan for the final Strategy, including more 

detailed descriptions of schedules and resources for key actions and opportunities for 

coordination in implementation of key actions. The workgroup will consult with State, 

Tribal, and local governments and organizations and with stakeholders throughout this 

process. 

As the water program begins implementation of the Response to Climate Change, it is 

likely that issues with respect to coordination of this work with other program 

implementation work will arise. To address these issues, the National Water Program 

will integrate climate-related Key Actions with the established water program 

management tools, including the EPA Strategic Plan and the annual water program 

guidance. The FY 2009 annual National Water Program guidance, published in April 

2008, included discussion of implementation of the draft Strategy. The FY 2010 annual 

guidance will include more detailed attention to implementation of the Key Actions 

included in the final Strategy. . 

 

 

EPA Regional water programs will play a central role in responding to climate change 

by implementing Key Actions identified in this document. Regions will take the lead in 

helping State, Tribal and local governments understand climate change consequences 

for water resources and to make sound program adaptation decisions. While this 

national strategy describes actions to be implemented at the national level and in each 

of the ten EPA Regions, there is likely to be significant variation in the nature and extent 

of climate impacts in each Region. For example, drought and water supply issues may 

be a top priority in western Regions while sea level rise may be more critical in other 

Regions. Some Regions may want to supplement this national strategy with Key 

Actions designed to more specifically address the specific needs in the Region. 

 

KEY ACTION #42: Agency Strategic Plan and Water Program Annual 

Guidance. The Office of Water will include Key Actions from this Strategy in the FY 

2010 annual National Water Program guidance, and when appropriate, make needed 

changes to the water elements of the EPA Strategic Plan. 

KEY ACTION #41: Maintain Office of Water Climate Change Workgroup. The 

Office of Water will maintain the National Water Program Climate Change workgroup 

and develop an implementation plan for the final Strategy. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

70

This Response to Climate Change document is the product of an internal, EPA review 

of opportunities to better adapt water programs to climate change. Water program staff 

have discussed this work with staff from other Federal agencies, but have not asked 

other Federal agencies to endorse the document. It is clear that there are numerous 

opportunities to coordinate the climate change–related work of the National Water 

Program with the activities of other Federal agencies. Some of the existing interagency 

coordination mechanisms are working on matters that have a bearing on climate 

change. For example, the Federal Advisory Committee on Water Information (ACWI) 

has a Subcommittee on Ground Water that is working to develop a ground water 

monitoring framework. 

Some of the other Federal agencies with an interest in water-related climate change 

issues include: 

• the Army Corps of Engineers; 

• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; 

• U.S. Department of Energy; 

• Federal Emergency Management Agency; 

• U.S. Department of Interior (Bureau of Reclamation, Geologic Survey, and Fish 

and Wildlife Service); 

• U.S. Department of Agriculture (Natural Resources Conservation Service, Forest 

Service); 

• Department of Transportation (Federal Highway Administration); and 

• National Science Foundation. 

As a first step in strengthening water-related communication among these agencies, 

EPA will convene a staff level coordination group to exchange information, report on 

best practices, and improve program efficiency. 

KEY ACTION #44: Federal Agency Water Climate Coordination Group. The 

Office of Water will work with other Federal agencies with a significant interest in the 

water-related impacts of climate change through creation of a staff level coordination 

group. 

KEY ACTION #43: Regional Additions to National Water Climate Strategy. 

Each EPA Regional Water Division will review climate change potential impacts in 

the Region, identify impacts of special concern to that Region, and develop Regionspecific additions to this national Strategy as needed.
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

71

APPENDICES 

1. Climate Change Impacts on Water in Regions of the United States 

2. Summary List of Climate Change Actions (including responsible offices) 

3. Adaptations for Alaska Water Infrastructure 

4. EPA Global Climate Change Research Program Projects Related to Water 

5. Potential Climate Change/Water Research Needs 

6. Glossary of Water Program and Climate Change Terms 

7. Water Program and Climate Change Acronyms 

8. References and Further Reading 

9. Acknowledgments 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

72

 

 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

73

APPENDIX 1: 

Climate Change Impacts on Water in Regions of the United States 

In addition to the general impacts of climate change on water resources described in 

Section II of this document, the following list provides examples of some effects of 

climate change on water resources in different parts of the United States that have been 

projected by various researchers. More information is available at the EPA Climate 

Change website at: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/usregions.html

The following table is taken from the IPCC Technical Paper on Climate Change and 

Water (2008) and lists observed changes in North America’s water resources in the past 

century (Ç = increase, È = decrease): 

Water Resource Change Examples from the IPCC Fourth Assessment 

Report (AR4) 

1 to 4 week earlier peak stream flow due to 

earlier warming-driven snowmelt 

U.S. West and U.S. New England regions, Canada 

È Proportion of precipitation falling as snow Western Canada and prairies, U.S. West 

È Duration and extent of snow cover Most of North America 

Ç Annual precipitation Most of North America 

È Mountain snow water equivalent Western North America 

È Annual precipitation Central Rockies, south-western U.S., Canadian 

prairies 

and eastern Arctic 

Ç Frequency of heavy precipitation events Most of USA 

È Runoff and stream flow Colorado and Columbia River Basins 

Widespread thawing of permafrost Most of northern Canada and Alaska 

Ç Water temperature of lakes (0.1 to 1.5°C) 

[0.18 to 2.7°F] 

Most of North America 

Ç Stream flow Most of eastern U.S. 

Glacial shrinkage U.S. western mountains, Alaska and Canada 

È Ice cover Great Lakes, Gulf of St Lawrence 

Salinization of coastal surface waters Florida, Louisiana 

Ç Periods of drought Western U.S., southern Canada 

Source: IPCC 2008, table 5.7, p. 137. 

In the East: 

• “streamflow in the eastern U.S. has increased 25% in the last 60 years ...” (Field 

et al. 2007, p. 621) 

• “[s]ea-level rise has accelerated in eastern North America since the late 19th 

century ... and further acceleration is expected ...” (Field et al. 2007, p. 630); and 

• “[u]p to 21% of the remaining coastal wetlands in the U.S. mid-Atlantic region are 

potentially at risk of inundation between 2000 and 2100” (Field et al. 2007, p. 

630). 

• “[t]he water utility serving New York City has identified heavy precipitation events 

as one of its major climate-change-related concerns because such events can 

raise turbidity levels in some of the city’s main reservoirs up to 100 times the 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

74

legal limit for source quality at the utility’s intake, requiring substantial additional 

treatment and monitoring costs” (IPCC 2008, p. 56). 

In the Northeast: 

• coastal erosion, loss of wetland habitat, increased risk from storm surges from 

sea level rise (IPCC 2007b, as found in EPA 2007j). 

In the Southeast and Gulf Coast: 

• increased coastal erosion including loss of barrier islands and wetlands (IPCC 

2007b, as found in EPA 2007j); 

• intense coastal zone development places coastal floodplains at risk to flooding 

from sea level rise, storm surge, and extreme precipitation events (IPCC 2007b, 

as found in EPA 2007j); and 

• “[s]torm impacts are likely to be more severe, especially along the Gulf and 

Atlantic coasts” (Field et al. 2007, p. 619). 

In the Midwest and Great Lakes: 

• lowered lake and river levels, resulting from warmer temperatures and increased 

evaporation (IPCC 2007b, as found in EPA 2007j);

• “[s]tudies of the Great Lakes of North America ... suggest changes in water 

levels of the order of several tens of centimet[er]s, and sometimes met[er]s, by 

the end of the century” (IPCC 2008, p. 40); 

• increased agricultural productivity in many regions resulting from increased 

carbon dioxide and warmer temperatures (IPCC 2007b, as found in EPA 2007j); 

• “[i]n the Great Lakes, both extremely high and extremely low water levels have 

been damaging and disruptive” (Field et al. p. 622); 

• “[i]n the Great Lakes and major river systems, lower [water] levels are likely to 

exacerbate challenges relating to water quality, navigation, recreation, 

hydropower generation, water transfers, and bi-national relationships” (Field et al. 

2007, p. 619); 

• “[r]ising temperatures are likely to lower water quality in lakes through increased 

thermal stability and altered mixing patterns, resulting in reduced oxygen 

concentrations and an increased release of phosphorus from the sediments. For 

example, already high phosphorus concentrations during summer in a bay of 

Lake Ontario could double with a 3-4°C [5.4 to 7.2°F] increase in water 

temperatures” (IPCC 2008, p. 53); 

• “[r]ecent winters with less ice in the Great Lakes and Gulf of St. Lawrence have 

increased coastal exposure to damage from winter storms” (Field et al. 2007, p. 

623); 

• “[r]estoration of beneficial uses (e.g., to address habitat loss, eutrophication, 

beach closures) under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement will likely be 

vulnerable to declines in water levels, warmer water temperatures, and more 

intense precipitation” (Field et al. 2007, p. 629); and 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

75

• “[i]n North America’s Prairie Pothole region [in the upper Midwest], models have 

projected an increase in drought with a 3°C [5.4°F] regional temperature increase 

and varying changes in precipitation, leading to large losses of wetlands and to 

declines in the populations of waterfowl breeding there” (IPCC 2008, p. 140). 

In the West: 

• earlier runoff of snowmelt, stressing some reservoir systems (IPCC 2007b, as 

found in EPA 2007j); 

• “[s]pring and summer snow cover has decreased in the U.S. west” (Field et al. 

2007, p. 622), and “[t]he fraction of annual precipitation falling as rain (rather than 

snow) increased at 74% of the weather stations studied in the western mountains 

of the U.S. from 1949 to 2004” (Field et al. 2007, p. 622); 

• “...in the Ogallala aquifer region, projected natural groundwater recharge 

decreases more than 20% in all simulations with warming of 2.5°C [4.5°F] or 

greater” (IPCC 2008, p. 51); 

• "[t]hreats to reliable supply are complicated by the high population growth rates in 

western states where many water resources are at or approaching full 

utili[z]ation" (Field et al. 2007, p. 633); 

• increased wildfire potential (IPCC 2007, as found in EPA 2007j); and 

• streamflow has decreased by about 2% per decade in the central Rocky 

Mountain region over the last century (Field et al. 2007, p. 621). 

In the Southwest: 

• annual precipitation has decreased (Field et al. 2007, p. 621); 

• “[i]n the southern Great Plains of the United States water temperatures are 

already approaching lethal limits for many native stream fish” (IPCC 2008, p. 69); 

• “[b]y the 2020s, 41% of the supply to southern California is likely to be vulnerable 

to warming from loss of Sierra Nevada and Colorado River basin snowpack” 

(Field et al., 2007, p. 633). 

• “[h]eavily utili[z]ed groundwater-based systems in the southwest U.S. are likely 

to experience additional stress from climate change that leads to decreased 

recharge ...” (Field et al. 2007, p. 629). 

In Alaska: 

• damage to infrastructure resulting from permafrost melting (IPCC 2007b, as 

found in EPA 2007j); 

• “[r]eductions in the extent of seasonally frozen ground and permafrost, and an 

increase in active-layer thickness, have resulted in ... [t]he disappearance of 

lakes due to draining within the permafrost, as detected in Alaska ...” (IPCC 

2008, p. 43); 

• retreating sea ice and earlier snowmelt alter native people's traditional life styles 

(IPCC 2007b, as found in EPA 2007j); 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

76

• general increase in biological production from warming, but reduced sea ice and 

warming disrupts polar bears, marine mammals, and other wildlife (IPCC 2007b, 

as found in EPA 2007j); 

• “[m]any indigenous communities in northern Canada and Alaska are already 

experiencing constraints on lifestyles and economic activity from less reliable sea 

and lake ice (for travelling, hunting, fishing, and whaling) ... and more exposed 

coastal infrastructure from diminishing sea ice (Field et al. 2007, p. 625); and 

• “[s]ome Alaskan villages are threatened and require protection or relocation at 

projected costs up to US$54 million (Field et al. 2007, p. 623). 

In Hawaii and the Pacific Islands: 

• “[s]ea-level rise will exacerbate inundation, erosion and other coastal hazards, 

threaten vital infrastructure, settlements and facilities, and thus compromise the 

socio-economic well-being of island communities and states” (Mimura et al. 

2007, p. 689); 

• for small islands in the Pacific, changes in temperature, rainfall, and sea level 

rise are projected to result in “accelerated coastal erosion, saline intrusion into 

freshwater lenses, and increased flooding from the sea ...” (Mimura et al. 2007, 

p. 696); and 

• the projected sea level rise is expected to result in a 50% loss of mangrove area 

in American Samoa, and a 12% reduction in the mangrove area within 15 other 

Pacific islands (Mimura et al. 2007, p. 696). 

For More Information: 

For more information on how climate change may affect different regions 

and States within the U.S., see: 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/usregions.html 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

77

APPENDIX 2: 

Summary List of Climate Change Actions 

The following 44 key actions appear in the draft strategy, and this table indicates the 

lead and supporting offices for each action. 

Key Actions Office of Water Lead 

with Supporting Offices 

Comments 

1) Greenhouse Gas Mitigation 

Energy Conservation/Production

1 Improve Energy Efficiency at 

Water and Wastewater Utilities 

OWM (Note that OAR 

leads this work for the 

Agency) 

Water Conservation

2 Implement Water Sense 

Program OWM 

3 Water Conservation at Drinking 

Water Facilities OGWDW 

4 Water Conveyance and Leak 

Detection Remedies OGWDW with OWM 

5 Industrial Water Conservation 

and Reuse OST 

6 Federal Agency Water 

Conservation Guidance OWM 

Green Building Design and Smart Growth 

7 Promote Green Buildings OWOW with OWM 

Agriculture Related Mitigation

Carbon Sequestration/Injection 

8 Develop Geologic Sequestration 

Regulations OGWDW 

9 Continue Technical Workshops OGWDW 

10 Evaluate Ocean and 

Subseabed Sequestration OWOW 

Biological Sequestration 

11 Pilot Projects for Marketing NPS 

Biological Sequestration OWOW 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

78

2) Water Program Adaptation to Climate Change

Water Quality and Technology-Based Standards 

12 

Address Impacts of Climate 

Change on Potential 

Contamination of Drinking 

Water Sources 

OGWDW 

13 

Assess Clean Water Microbial 

Criteria and Risks of 

Waterborne Disease 

OST 

14 Consider Criteria for 

Sedimentation/Velocity OST 

15 Develop Biological Indicators 

and Methods OST 

16 Link Ecological and Landscape 

Models OST 

17 Evaluate New Industry Sectors OST with OWM 

Watershed Approach

18 Watershed Climate Change 

Policy Memo OWOW 

19 

Expand National Water 

Resource Surveys to Address 

Climate Change 

OWOW 

20 

Assess Fresh Waterbody 

Spatial Changes Due to Climate 

Change 

OW 

21 Promote BASINS Climate 

Assessment Tool OST 

22 Climate Ready Estuaries OWOW 

23 Continue Coral Reef Protections OWOW 

24 Review/Revise NPS Guidelines OWOW 

NPDES Program

25 Review Permit Program Tools OWM 

26 Evaluate Climate Impacts on 

Wet Weather Program OWM 

27 Assess Climate Impacts at 

Animal Feeding Operation OWM with OWOW 

Water Infrastructure 

28 

Continue Implementing 

Sustainable Infrastructure 

Initiative 

OWM with OGWDW and 

OWOW 

29 Sustainability Handbook with 

Climate Impacts OWM with OGWDW 

30 Clarify Use of SRFs for Climate 

Change Related Projects OWM with OGWDW 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

79

31 Expand Emergency Response 

Planning OGWDW with OWM 

 Wetlands Protection

32 Implementation of 404 

Regulatory Framework OWOW 

33 Complete National Wetlands 

Mapping Standard OWOW 

3) Water/Climate Related Research 

34 Monitoring of Water Related 

CCSP Reports OST 

35 Add Climate Research in ORD 

Water Related Research Plans OST 

36 OW Role in Revision of Global 

Climate Research Plan OST 

4) Education on Climate Change

37 Clearinghouse/Website OW 

38 Annual Public Reports on 

Strategy Implementation OW 

39 Outreach to Partners and 

Stakeholders OW 

40 Expand Existing Training 

Programs OW 

5) Climate Change Management 

41 Maintain Office of Water 

Climate Change Workgroup OW 

42 Strategic Plan and Annual 

Program Guidance OW 

43 Regional Additions to National 

Strategy Regions with OW 

44 Federal Agency Water Climate 

Coordination Group OW 

EPA OFFICES: 

OAR Office of Air and Radiation 

OGWDW Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water (EPA’s Office of Water) 

OST Office of Science and Technology (EPA’s Office of Water) 

OW Office of Water 

OWM Office of Wastewater Management (EPA’s Office of Water) 

OWOW Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds (EPA’s Office of Water)
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

80

APPENDIX 3: 

Adaptations for Alaska Water Infrastructure 

Alaska is particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Changes in 

permafrost have created stability issues for buildings. Greater storm intensity has 

increased coastal erosion. Freeze-up is occurring later, increasing the risk of storm 

surges to inundate the numerous villages located in the large river deltas. The 

Government Accountability Office (GAO) identifies the communities of Kivalina, 

Koyukuk, Newtok, and Shishmaref as being “in imminent danger from flooding and 

erosion and are making plans to relocate” (GAO 2004, p. 3). 

EPA, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, and others are taking 

steps to address these concerns. 

 Existing actions include: 

• use of thermal siphons to ensure the stability of buildings located on 

discontinuous permafrost; and 

• avoid funding long-term improvements of water infrastructure where flooding or 

erosion is an imminent danger to the facility. 

 Likely future actions include: 

• modify designs of buildings and related infrastructure to include hardening to 

address storm surges and/or sea level rise; 

• prepare for extensive retrofitting to protect facilities from melting permafrost, 

flooding, and/or erosion; and 

• refine maps to show climate change impacts on a more local level. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

81

APPENDIX 4: 

EPA Global Climate Change Research Related to Water 

The Global Change Research Program in the EPA Office of Research and 

Development (ORD) is developing important scientific information on the impacts of 

climate change on the nation’s water resources. Research projects now underway are 

identified below. 

• Aquatic Ecosystems and Climate Change: ORD will complete a report 

assessing the impact of climate change on aquatic ecosystems. 

• Uncertainty of Regional Impacts: ORD is developing models to improve 

estimation of climate change impacts on regional and local scales. 

• Regional Climate Change and Invasive Species: ORD will release an 

assessment of the effects of climate change and interacting stressors on the 

establishment and expansion of aquatic invasive species, and the implications for 

resource management.

• Climate-Related Decisions in the Chesapeake Bay Program: ORD will 

complete an assessment that inventories and prioritizes climate-related decisions 

related to water quality in the Chesapeake Bay Program. 

• Climate Change Consequences for Biocriteria: ORD will complete an 

assessment of the consequences of global change for water quality related to 

biocriteria in 2008. 

• CSO Control and Impacts of Climate Change: ORD will release a final report 

in 2008 on the implications of climate change for Combined Sewer Overflows in 

the Great Lakes and New England areas. 

• Water Quality–Based Effluent Limits at POTWs in the Great Lakes Region: 

ORD will release a final report in 2008 on the implications of climate change for 

water quality–based effluent limits at POTWs in the Great Lakes region. 

• Water Erosion Prediction Model: In response to anticipated increases in soil 

erosion as a result of climate change, ORD is incorporating a Climate 

Assessment Tool into USDA’s Water Erosion Prediction Project Model (WEPP), 

expected to be available in 2008, to provide online capability for assessing 

climate change impacts on sediment in streams. 

• National Maps Depicting Land-Use Scenarios: ORD will release national 

maps depicting land-use scenarios for the conterminous United States for use in 

assessments of where climate-land use interactions may exacerbate impacts or 

create adaptation opportunities. 

• Coral Reefs and Climate Change: ORD will develop a report identifying 

adaptation options for protecting coral reefs from multiple stressors, including 

climate change, land-use practices, and other factors. 

• Geologic Sequestration of CO2: ORD will assess and provide decision support 

related to the behavior of injected CO2 in the subsurface and impacts to drinking 

water sources. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

82

APPENDIX 5: 

Potential Climate Change/Water Research Needs 

Given the extensive range of likely impacts of climate change on water resources, the 

potential research topics in this field are almost limitless. The work now underway or 

planned by the IPCC, the CCSP and the EPA ORD will make important contributions to 

questions concerning water resources impacts of climate change, but additional 

research will be needed. The National Water Program expects to play an active role in 

identifying climate change/water resource research needs, both within the context of 

existing research programs as well as in other forums. A key goal of this process will be 

to identify from among the many potential research projects, those that are the most 

important and pressing. 

During the development of this Response to Climate Change, members of the Climate 

Change Workgroup assessed climate change impacts on water resources and, as part 

of this effort, developed ideas for additional research projects to fill gaps in current 

knowledge. Although this is an initial list of research needs and is not yet complete or 

ranked in terms of relative priority, it suggests the range of research needs in this area. 

Human Health 

• Better Predict Municipal Water Supply Impacts Associated with 

Temperature Increases/Snow to Rain Shifts: Develop more complete 

estimates of water supply impacts of snow to rain shifts, the correlation of 

increased use of municipal water supplies, and water loss due to 

evapotranspiration.

• Literature Review on Effects of Heat Stress: It is likely that humans will 

continue to modify their environment to deal with rising temperature. 

Nevertheless, given the expected increase in frequency of extreme temperature 

events, people will be exposed to higher temperatures for at least short periods 

of time. Toxicological tests for all endpoints are done in animals kept at steady, 

standard temperatures. Thus, the extent to which temperature increases affects 

observations in these tests needs to be investigated. 

• Assess Population at Risk of Salt Water Intrusion to Drinking Water Wells: 

Identify the population that relies on public and private drinking water wells that 

may be at risk to intrusion of salt water and the likely impacts on nearby 

community water systems. 

• Determine Climate Change Impacts on Ground Water and Surface Water 

Interactions: Investigate the impacts from climate change on aquifer levels, 

aquifer recharge and surface water levels. In turn this should be related to 

stream flows and wetland health. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

83

Ecosystem Effects 

• Estimate Location of Loss of Shellfishing Areas: Identify coastal waters used 

for shellfishing and assess the impact of expected sea level rise on the 

productivity and viability of these areas, including estimates of economic impacts.

• Maintaining Water Retention Rates within Watersheds: Develop methods to 

scale the rates of retention of watersheds and indices to compare retention rate 

impacts of land use shifts, including retention rates of various practices (e.g., 

green roofs, impervious surfaces, retention basins, wetlands). 

• Increasing Resilience of Aquatic Ecosystems: Identify the elements of 

aquatic ecosystems that foster increased resilience of the ecosystem and identify 

ways to strengthen and expand these elements. 

• Estimate Hypoxia/DO Events: Identify coastal and fresh waters most at risk to 

decreased levels of oxygen in the water as a result of warmer air and water 

temperatures, the extent of increase of such events, and the environmental costs 

and economic impacts of the events. 

• NPS Management Models: Develop models to forecast NPS loadings under 

variable climate change scenarios including changes in velocity of flows and 

pollutant concentrations and describe how these models can be used in design 

of NPS control plans and watershed plans. 

• Impacts of Salinity Changes on Health of Aquatic Systems: Identify the 

waters most at risk of increasing levels of salinity and the likely impacts on 

fisheries and the health of aquatic systems. 

• Identify Flow Changes on Water Quality: Identify the water pollutant increases 

and the hydrologic changes associated with flow changes , i.e., flooding of 

varying types (e.g., inland, coastal) and drought conditions. 

Technology Studies 

• Support Models to Determine Localized Impacts of Climate Change: EPA 

will support and work with leading scientific agencies and academic and research 

foundations which are working toward downscaling of climate change models. 

The goal is to provide regional climate data that states and local water resource 

managers can use to make local predictions of climate change impacts and 

trends on their water resources. 

• Stormwater Injection Wells: Identify potential issues and benefits of injection of 

stormwater into underground geologic formations and recommend how this 

practice might best be managed in the future. 

• Biofuels Impacts on Water Quantity and Quality: Evaluate the impact of 

increased biofuels production on water quality (e.g., increased land in crop 

production and increased use of fertilizer/pesticides) and use of water for 

production of biofuels.

• Assess Drinking Water Treatment Complications Associated with Climate 

Change Impacts: Assess the impacts of climate change (e.g., salt water 

intrusion, increased source water sediment and organic levels, and increased 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

84

microorganism levels in water) for treatment of drinking water and for compliance 

with drinking water standards. 

• Energy Savings of Water Conservation: Evaluate the potential for energy 

savings associated with different water conservation practices in areas of the 

country served by different power generation sources (e.g., coal-fired power 

plants vs. hydropower). 

• Alternative Water Supplies: Assess issues associated with the development of 

alternative water sources as part of a suite of water supply management 

techniques (e.g., the best methods to evaluate the suitability of underground sites 

for the storage of water for future use; the water quality implications of 

desalination.) 

• Effects of Water Conservation on Treatment Plant Operations: Evaluate the 

impact of water conservation practices that reengineer water conveyance and 

reuse on the efficiency of conventional sewage treatment plant operations (i.e., 

dewatering of influent). 

• Methane Cleaning Technology: Identify technologies to more cost effectively 

and reliably clean methane from sewage treatment plant digesters to allow for 

combustion of power of fuel cells.

• Identify Energy Efficient Treatment Technologies: Identify energy efficient 

treatment technologies for drinking water treatment, wastewater treatment, and 

industrial wastewater treatment.

• Investigate Energy Conservation Measures: Topics include assessing less 

energy intensive treatment methods, identifying opportunities for on-site 

combined heat and power production efforts such as utilizing biogas from 

anaerobic digesters and/or low head small hydroelectric, identifying more 

efficient processing of biosolids, and assessing the potential benefits of colocation of power plants and water utilities.
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

85

APPENDIX 6: 

Glossary of Water Program and Climate Change Terms 

Key terms used in this Strategy related to water programs and climate change are 

defined below. Many of these terms are further defined on the EPA Office of Water 

website. 

Adaptation (to climate change) – “Adjustment in natural or human systems in response 

to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits 

beneficial opportunities.” http://www.ipcc-wg2.org/index.html (click on “glossary” of 

the Working Group II (WGII) contribution to the Fourth IPCC Assessment Report) 

AgSTAR – The AgSTAR Program is a voluntary effort jointly sponsored by the EPA, 

USDA, and USDOE. The program encourages the use of methane recovery (biogas) 

technologies at concentrated animal feeding operations that manage manure as liquids 

or slurries. http://www.epa.gov/agstar/ 

Aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) – ASR is the process of injecting water at times 

of high supply with the intention to retrieve the stored water at a later date. 

Better Assessment Science Integrating Point and Nonpoint Sources (BASINS) – 

BASINS is a multi-purpose environmental analysis system that integrates a 

geographical information system (GIS), national watershed data, and state-of-the-art 

environmental assessment and modeling tools. The Climate Assessment Tool (CAT) is 

an element of the BASINS water modeling program that is useful for learning about 

climate change impacts on water resources, especially impaired waters. 

http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/BASINS/ 

Biofuels – A gaseous, liquid, or solid fuel that contains an energy content derived from 

a biological source. http://www.epa.gov/trs/ 

Carbon sequestration – Carbon sequestration refers to “[t]he process of increasing the 

carbon content of a reservoir/pool other than the atmosphere” http://www.ipccwg2.org/index.html (click on “glossary” of the WGII contribution to the Fourth IPCC 

Assessment Report). The draft strategy refers to several types of sequestration, 

including subseabed and ocean, geologic, and biological. 

 

Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) – The interagency U.S. CCSP coordinates 

and integrates scientific research on global change and climate change, including 

research related to water, sponsored by 13 participating departments and agencies. 

The CCSP incorporates the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) and the 

Climate Change Research Initiative (CCRI). http://www.climatescience.gov/, 

http://www.usgcrp.gov, http://www.climatescience.gov/about/ccri.htm 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

86

Combined heat and power (CHP) – CHP, also known as cogeneration, is an efficient, 

clean, and reliable approach to generating power and thermal energy from a single fuel 

source. http://www.epa.gov/chp/ 

Combined sewer overflow (CSO) – Combined sewer systems (CSSs) are sewers that 

are designed to collect rainwater runoff, domestic sewage, and industrial wastewater in 

the same pipe. During periods of heavy rainfall or snowmelt, the wastewater volume in 

a CSS can exceed the capacity of the sewer system or treatment plant. For this reason, 

CSSs are designed to overflow occasionally and discharge excess wastewater directly 

to nearby water bodies. These overflows are referred to as CSOs. 

http://www.epa.gov/npdes/cso 

 

Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) – The SDWA includes a process to identify and list 

unregulated contaminants that may require a national drinking water regulation in the 

future. EPA must periodically publish this list of contaminants—called the CCL—and 

decide whether to regulate at least five or more contaminants on the list. 

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/ccl/index.html 

Effluent limitations guidelines (ELGs) – Effluent guidelines are national standards for 

wastewater discharges to surface waters and publicly owned treatment works 

(municipal sewage treatment plants). http://www.epa.gov/guide/ 

ENERGY STAR – ENERGY STAR is a joint program of the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy designed to help save money 

and protect the environment through energy efficient products and practices. 

http://www.energystar.gov/ 

Five Star Restoration Grant Program – The Five Star Restoration Program brings 

together students, conservation corps, other youth groups, citizen groups, corporations, 

landowners, and government agencies to provide environmental education and training 

through projects that restore wetlands and streams. The program provides challenge 

grants, technical support, and opportunities for information exchange to enable 

community-based restoration projects. 

http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/restore/5star/ 

Green building – Green or sustainable building is the practice of creating healthier and 

more resource-efficient models of construction, renovation, operation, maintenance, and 

demolition. http://www.epa.gov/greenbuilding/ 

Greenhouse effect – Energy from the Sun drives the Earth's weather and climate. The 

Earth absorbs energy from the Sun and also radiates energy back into space. 

However, much of this energy going back to space is absorbed by “greenhouse gases” 

in the atmosphere. Because the atmosphere then radiates most of this energy back to 

the Earth’s surface, the planet is warmer than it would be if the atmosphere did not 

contain these gases. Without this natural “greenhouse effect” temperatures would be 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

87

about 60°F (about 33°C) lower than they are now, and life as we know it today would 

not be possible. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/index.html

Greenhouse gas (GHG) – Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are often called 

greenhouse gases. Some greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide occur naturally 

and are emitted to the atmosphere through natural processes and human activities. 

Other greenhouse gases (e.g., fluorinated gases) are created and emitted solely 

through human activities. The principal greenhouse gases that enter the atmosphere 

because of human activities are: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide 

(N20), and fluorinated gases (hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur 

hexafluoride). 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/index.html#ggo 

 

Green infrastructure – Green infrastructure represents a new approach to stormwater 

management that is cost-effective, sustainable, and environmentally friendly. Green 

infrastructure techniques utilize natural systems, or engineered systems that mimic 

natural landscapes, to capture, cleanse and reduce stormwater runoff using plants, soils 

and microbes. http://www.epa.gov/npdes/greeninfrastructure

Green power – Renewable energy resources such as solar, wind, geothermal, biogas, 

biomass and low-impact hydro generate green power. Not all sources of power 

generation share the same environmental benefits. As a result, green power is 

considered a subset of renewable energy. 

http://www.epa.gov/greenpower/whatis/index.htm 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – The IPCC was established by 

the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment 

Programme (UNEP) to assess scientific, technical and socio-economic information 

relevant for the understanding of climate change, its potential impacts and options for 

adaptation and mitigation. http://www.ipcc.ch/ 

Leadership for Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) – “The [LEED] Green 

Building Rating SystemTM is the nationally accepted benchmark for the design, 

construction, and operation of high performance green buildings.” 

http://www.usgbc.org/LEED/

Low impact development (LID) – LID is development that results in low impacts on 

natural resources. This is done by using planning and designs that preserve green 

space and manage stormwater to minimize increases in flow and pollutants. LID 

techniques include conservation of forests and sensitive waters, water reuse, and 

stormwater controls that detain and retain rainfall throughout the development. 

http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/lid/stormwater_hq/pdf/qanda.pdf 

Mitigation (of greenhouse gases) – “An anthropogenic intervention to reduce the 

anthropogenic forcing of the climate system, it includes strategies to reduce greenhouse 

gas sources and emissions and enhancing greenhouse gas sinks.” http://www.ipcc-
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

88

wg2.org/index.html (click on “glossary” of the WGII contribution to the Fourth IPCC 

Assessment Report) 

National Dredging Team – The interagency U.S. National Dredging Team was 

established in 1995 to implement the recommendations in a 1994 report to the 

Secretary of Transportation on the dredging process, to promote national and regional 

consistency on dredging issues, and to provide a mechanism for issue resolution and 

information exchange among federal, state, and local agencies and stakeholders. 

http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/ndt/ 

National Estuary Program (NEP) – EPA’s NEP was established by Congress in 1987 

to improve the quality of estuaries of national importance. The NEP is a voluntary 

program that brings community members together to improve their estuary using a 

forum to establish working relationships and develop solutions. 

http://www.epa.gov/owow/estuaries/ 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) – As authorized by the 

Clean Water Act, the NPDES permit program controls water pollution by regulating point 

sources that discharge pollutants into waters of the United States. 

http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/ 

National Water Program – The National Water Program is a cooperative effort by 

Federal, State, Tribal, and local governments to implement core laws, including the Safe 

Drinking Water Act and the Clean Water Act, to protect and improve the quality of the 

Nation’s waters. 

 

National Water Program Climate Change Workgroup – This EPA workgroup is 

chaired by the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water and includes managers from 

the Office of Water, the Water Divisions within regional EPA offices, the Office of Air 

and Radiation, and the Office of Research and Development. The workgroup will 

oversee water program work related to climate change.

Nonpoint source (NPS) pollution – NPS pollution, unlike pollution from industrial and 

sewage treatment plants, comes from many diffuse sources. NPS pollution is caused 

by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the ground. As the runoff moves, it 

picks up and carries away natural and human-made pollutants, finally depositing them 

into lakes, rivers, wetlands, coastal waters, and even underground sources of drinking 

water. http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/qa.html 

Radiative forcing – “Radiative forcing is the change in the net, downward minus 

upward, irradiance (expressed in W m–2) at the tropopause due to a change in an 

external driver of climate change, such as, for example, a change in the concentration 

of carbon dioxide or the output of the Sun.” http://ipccwg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Annexes.pdf 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

89

Renewable energy – To be considered renewable energy, a resource must rely on 

naturally existing energy flows such as sunshine, wind and water flowing. The energy 

source, or “fuel”, must be replaced by natural processes at a rate that is equal to, or 

faster than, the rate at which the energy source is consumed. 

http://www.epa.gov/greenpower/whatis/renewableenergy.htm 

 

Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO) – Occasional unintentional discharges of raw sewage 

from municipal sanitary sewers occur in almost every system, which are referred to as 

SSOs. SSOs have a variety of causes, including but not limited to severe weather, 

improper system operation and maintenance, and vandalism. 

http://www.epa.gov/npdes/sso

Smart growth – Smart growth covers a range of development and conservation 

strategies that help protect our natural environment and make our communities more 

attractive, economically stronger, and more socially diverse. http://www.epa.gov/dced/ 

State Revolving Fund (SRF) – There are two types of SRFs—the Clean Water SRF 

(CWSRF) and the Drinking Water SRF (DWSRF). CWSRF programs fund water quality 

protection projects for wastewater treatment, nonpoint source pollution control, and 

watershed and estuary management. CWSRF monies are loaned to communities and 

loan repayments are recycled back into the program to fund additional water quality 

protection projects. http://www.epa.gov/owm/cwfinance/cwsrf/

The DWSRF provides capitalization grants to states to develop drinking water revolving 

loan funds to help finance system infrastructure improvements, assure source water 

protection, enhance operation and management of drinking water systems, and 

otherwise promote local water system compliance and protection of public health. 

http://www.epa.gov/trs/ and http://www.epa.gov/safewater/dwsrf/index.html 

Sustainable Infrastructure Initiative – The Sustainable Infrastructure Initiative for 

Water and Wastewater will guide EPA’s efforts in changing how the nation views, 

values, manages, and invests in its water infrastructure. 

http://www.epa.gov/waterinfrastructure/ 

Total maximum daily load (TMDL) – 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. 

http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/intro.html#definition

Underground Injection Control Program – EPA’s UIC Program works with State and 

local governments to oversee underground injection of fluids in order to prevent 

contamination of drinking water resources. 

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/index.html 

Water infrastructure – Water infrastructure refers to the network of infrastructure that 

provides the public with access to water and sanitation and includes drinking water 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

90

treatment plants, sewer lines, drinking water distribution lines, and storage facilities. 

http://www.epa.gov/waterinfrastructure/ 

Water quality standards (WQS) – WQS are the foundation of the water quality–based 

pollution control program mandated by the Clean Water Act. WQS define the goals for 

a waterbody by designating its uses, setting criteria to protect those uses, and 

establishing antidegradation policies. http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/standards/ 

Water reuse – Water reuse is the use of process wastewater or treatment facility 

effluent in a different manufacturing process. http://www.epa.gov/trs/ 

WaterSense – WaterSense is a voluntary partnership program that seeks to protect the 

future of the nation’s water supply by promoting water efficiency and enhancing the 

market for water-efficient products, programs, and practices. The WaterSense label will 

indicate that products and programs meet water efficiency and performance criteria. 

http://www.epa.gov/watersense/ 

Watershed approach – The watershed approach is a coordinating framework for 

environmental management that focuses public and private sector efforts to address the 

highest priority problems within hydrologically defined geographic areas, taking into 

consideration both ground and surface water flow. 

http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/framework/ch2.html

Wetland Program Development Grant (WPDG) – The Wetland Program Development 

Grants provide eligible applicants an opportunity to conduct projects that promote the 

coordination and acceleration of research, investigations, experiments, training, 

demonstrations, surveys, and studies relating to the causes, effects, extent, prevention, 

reduction, and elimination of water pollution. 

http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/grantguidelines/ 

7Q10 – 7Q10 refers to the 7-day average low flow occurring once in 10 years. 

http://www.epa.gov/trs/ 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

91

APPENDIX 7:

Water Program and Climate Change Acronyms

Acronyms used in this Strategy related to water programs and climate change are 

defined below. 

AAM Advanced asset management 

AFO Animal feeding operation 

ASR Aquifer storage and recovery 

BASINS Better Assessment Science Integrating Point and Nonpoint Sources 

BMP Best management practice 

BPJ Best professional judgment 

CAA Clean Air Act 

CAFO Concentrated animal feeding operation 

CAT Climate Assessment Tool (BASINS) 

CCL Contaminant Candidate List 

CCSP Climate Change Science Program 

CHP Combined heat and power 

CSO Combined sewer overflow 

CWA Clean Water Act 

CWNS Clean Watersheds Needs Survey 

CWSRF Clean Water State Revolving Fund 

CZARA Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

DO Dissolved oxygen 

DWNS Drinking Water Needs Survey 

ELGs Effluent limitations guidelines 

EMS Environmental management system 

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency 

GS Geologic sequestration 

ICS Incident Command System 

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 

LEED-NC Leadership for Energy and Environmental Design for New 

 Construction 

LEED-ND Leadership for Energy and Environmental Design for Neighborhood 

Development 

MPRSA Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act 

MS4 Municipal separate storm sewer system 

MYP Multi-year plan 

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

NEP National Estuary Program 

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

NPS Nonpoint source (pollution) 

NWI National Wetlands Inventory 

OAR Office of Air and Radiation (EPA) 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

92

OGWDW Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water (EPA’s Office of Water) 

O&M Operations and maintenance 

ORD Office of Research and Development (EPA) 

OST Office of Science and Technology (EPA’s Office of Water) 

OWM Office of Wastewater Management (EPA’s Office of Water) 

OWOW Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds (EPA’s Office of Water) 

POTWs Publicly owned treatment works 

SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition 

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act 

SONS Spill of National Significance 

SRF State Revolving Fund 

SSO Sanitary sewer overflow 

TMDL Total maximum daily load 

UIC Underground injection control 

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture 

USDOE U.S. Department of Energy 

USGBC U.S. Green Building Council 

USGS U.S. Geological Survey 

WEPP Water Erosion Prediction Project (USDA model) 

WPDG Wetlands Program Development Grants 

WQBELs Water quality–based effluent limitations 

WQS Water quality standards 

 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

93

APPENDIX 8: 

References and Further Reading 

References for works cited in this Strategy are provided below along with suggested 

further reading. 

References 

Asrar, G., J.A. Kaye, and P. Morel. 2001. "NASA Research Strategy for Earth System 

Science: Climate Component." Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 82, 

pp. 1309-1329. http://www-nacip.ucsd.edu/BAMS8270701AsrarKayeMorel.pdf

Barker, T., I. Bashmakov, A. Alharthi, M. Amann, L. Cifuentes, J. Drexhage, M. Duan, 

O. Edenhofer, B. Flannery, M. Grubb, M. Hoogwijk, F. I. Ibitoye, C. J. Jepma, W. A. 

Pizer, K. Yamaji. 2007. Mitigation from a Cross-sectoral Perspective. In: IPCC. 

2007. Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the 

Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 

[Metz, B., O. Davidson, P. Bosch, R. Dave, L. Meyer (eds.)]. Cambridge University 

Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. 

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-chapter11.pdf 

Bindoff, N.L., J. Willebrand, V. Artale, A, Cazenave, J.M. Gregory, S. Gulev, K. Hanawa, 

C. Le Quéré, S. Levitus, Y. Nojiri, C.K. Shum, L.D. Talley, and A.S. Unnikrishnan. 

2007. Observations: Oceanic Climate Change and Sea Level. In: IPCC. 2007. 

Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group 

I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 

Change. [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. 

Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United 

Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessmentreport/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter5.pdf 

Burkett, V., J.O. Codignotto, D.L. Forbes, N. Mimura, R.J. Beamish, and V. Ittekkot. 

2001. Coastal Zones and Marine Ecosystems. In: IPCC. 2001. Climate Change 

2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to 

the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 

[McCarthy, J.J., O.F. Canziani, N.A. Leary, D.J. Dokken, and K.S. White (eds.)]. 

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, 

USA. http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg2/index.htm

California Department of Water Resources. 2005. Department of Water Resources 

Bulletin 160-05. California Water Plan Update 2005: A Framework for Action. 

Division of Planning and Local Assistance, California Department of Water 

Resources, Sacramento, California. 

http://www.waterplan.water.ca.gov/previous/cwpu2005/index.cfm 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

94

Christensen, J.H., B. Hewitson, A. Busuioc, A. Chen, X. Gao, I. Held, R. Jones, R.K. 

Kolli, W.-T. Kwon, R. Laprise, V. Magaña Rueda, L. Mearns, C.G. Menéndez, J. 

Räisänen, A. Rinke, A. Sarr and P. Whetton. 2007. Regional Climate Projections. 

In: IPCC. 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of 

Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel 

on Climate Change. [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. 

Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 

United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessmentreport/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter11.pdf 

Cohen, S., K. Miller, K. Duncan, E. Gregorich, P. Groffman, P. Kovacs, V. Magaña, D. 

McKnight, E. Mills, and D. Schimel. 2001. North America. In: IPCC. 2001. Climate 

Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working 

Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on 

Climate Change. [McCarthy, J.J., O.F. Canziani, N.A. Leary, D.J. Dokken, K.S. 

White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New 

York, NY, USA. http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg2/548.htm 

Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE). 2007. “Initiative Description: CEE National 

Municipal Water and Wastewater Facility Initiative.” http://www.cee1.org/ind/motsys/ww/ww-init-des.pdf

Denman, K.L., G. Brasseur, A. Chidthaisong, P. Ciais, P. M. Cox, R. E. Dickinson, D. 

Hauglustaine, C. Heinze, E. Holland, D. Jacob, U. Lohmann, S. Ramachandran, P. 

Leite da Silva Dias, S. C. Wofsy, and X. Zhang. 2007. Couplings Between 

Changes in the Climate System and Biogeochemistry. In: IPCC. 2007. Climate 

Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the 

Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 

[Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor 

and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom 

and New York, NY, USA. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessmentreport/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter7.pdf

Dooley, J.J., R.T. Dahowski, C.L. Davidson, M.A. Wise, N. Gupta, S.H. Kim, and E.L. 

Malone. 2006. Carbon Dioxide Capture and Geologic Storage: A Core Element of 

a Global Energy Technology Strategy to Address Climate Change. A Technology 

Report from the Second Phase of the Global Energy Technology Strategy 

Program. PNNL-15296. Battelle, Joint Global Change Research Institute, Pacific 

Northwest National Laboratory, College Park, MD. 

http://www.pnl.gov/gtsp/docs/ccs_report.pdf 

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). 2002. Water and Sustainability (Volume 3): 

U.S. Water Consumption for Power Production--The Next Half Century. Report 

Number 1006786. Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, California. 

http://www.epri.com (This report is downloadable from the EPRI website.) 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

95

Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2004. Table 1.1. Net Generation by Energy 

Source: Total (All Sectors), 1990 through January 2004. Energy Information 

Administration, Washington, DC. 

http://www.eia.doe.gov//cneaf/electricity/epm/table1_1.html 

EPA. 2007a. Climate Change Website. Climate Change—Science. 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/index.html, accessed on February 

8, 2008. 

EPA. 2007b. Climate Change Website. Climate Change–Science: Temperature 

Changes. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recenttc.html, accessed 

on February 8, 2008. 

 

EPA. 2007c. Climate Change Website. Climate Change–Science: Future Temperature 

Changes. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/futuretc.html, accessed 

on February 8, 2008. 

EPA. 2007d. Climate Change Website. Climate Change–Science: Precipitation and 

Storm Changes. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recentpsc.html, 

accessed on February 8, 2008. 

EPA. 2007e. Climate Change Website. Climate Change–Science: Future Precipitation 

and Storm Changes. 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/futurepsc.html, accessed on 

February 8, 2008. 

EPA. 2007f. Climate Change Website. Climate Change–Science: Sea Level Changes. 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recentslc.html, accessed on 

February 8, 2008. 

EPA. 2007g. Climate Change Website. Climate Change–Science: Future Sea Level 

Changes. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/futureslc.html, accessed 

on February 8, 2008. 

EPA. 2007h. Climate Change Website. Climate Change–Health and Environmental 

Effects: Water Quality. 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/water/quality.html, accessed on 

February 8, 2008. 

EPA. 2007i. Climate Change Website. Climate Change–Health and Environmental 

Effects: Water Availability. 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/water/availability.html, accessed on 

February 8, 2008. 

EPA. 2007j. Climate Change Website. Climate Change–Health and Environmental 

Effects: Water Resources in North America. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

96

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/usregions.html, accessed on 

February 8, 2008. 

EPA. 2007k. Climate Change Website. Climate Change–Health and Environmental 

Effects: Coral Reefs. 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/eco_coral.html, accessed on 

February 8, 2008. 

EPA. 2007l. Climate Change Website. Climate Change–Health and Environmental 

Effects: Coastal Zones and Sea Level Rise. 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/coastal/index.html, accessed on 

February 8, 2008. 

EPA. 2007m. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2005. EPA 

430-R-07-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/usinventoryreport.html. 

EPA. 2007n. Opportunities for and Benefits of Combined Heat and Power at 

Wastewater Treatment Facilities. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Combined Heat and Power Partnership, Washington, DC. 

http://www.epa.gov/chp/documents/wwtf_opportunities.pdf 

EPA. 2007o. WaterSense Program Files. Cynthia Simbanin and Stephanie Tanner, 

WaterSense Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. 

EPA. 2006. “Wastewater Management Fact Sheet: Energy Conservation.” U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. EPA 832-F06-024. http://www.epa.gov/owm/mtb/energycon_fasht_final.pdf 

EPA. 2005. Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Potential in U.S. Forestry and Agriculture. EPA 

430-R-05-006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Atmospheric 

Programs, Washington, DC. 

http://www.epa.gov/sequestration/pdf/greenhousegas2005.pdf 

EPA. 2004. Guidelines for Water Reuse. EPA/625/R-04/108. U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. 

EPA. 2002. Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure Gap Analysis. EPA-816-R02-020. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. 

http://www.epa.gov/waterinfrastructure/infrastructuregap.html 

EPA. 1999. 1999 Update of Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia. EPA-822-R99-014. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. 

http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/ammonia/99update.pdf 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

97

EPA. 1986. Ambient Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria for Pentachlorophenol. EPA440-5-86-009. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, 

Washington, DC. http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/1980docs.htm 

Field, C.B., L.D. Mortsch, M. Brklacich, D.L. Forbes, P. Kovacs, J.A. Patz, S.W. 

Running, and M.J. Scott. 2007. North America. In: IPCC. 2007. Climate Change 

2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to 

the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 

[M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, 

(eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, 

NY, USA. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg2/ar4-wg2-

chapter14.pdf

Government Accountability Office (GAO). 2004. Alaska Native Villages: Villages 

Affected by Flooding and Erosion Have Difficulty Qualifying for Federal Assistance. 

GAO-04-895T. GAO, Washington, DC. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO04-895T

Grumbles, B.H. July/August 2007. “Drops to Watts: Leveraging the Water and Energy 

Connection”. Water Efficiency: The Journal for Water Conservation Professionals. 

Forester Communications. 

http://www.waterefficiency.net/we_0707_guesteditora.html 

IPCC. 2008. Technical Paper on Climate Change and Water. 

http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session28/doc13.pdf 

IPCC. 2007a. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of 

Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel 

on Climate Change. [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. 

Averyt, M. Tignor, and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 

United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 996 pp. 

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm

IPCC. 2007b. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution 

of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental 

Panel on Climate Change. [Parry, M., O. Canziani, J. Palutikof, P. van der Linden, 

C. Hanson (eds.)] Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and 

New York, NY, USA, 976 pp. http://www.ipcc-wg2.org/ 

IPCC. 2007c. Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the 

Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 

[Metz, B., O. Davidson, P. Bosch, R. Dave, L. Meyer (eds.)]. Cambridge University 

Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. 

http://www.mnp.nl/ipcc/pages_media/AR4-chapters.html 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

98

IPCC. 2005. IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. Prepared 

by Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [Metz, B., 

O. Davidson, H. de Coninck, M. Loos, L. Meyer (eds.)]. Cambridge University 

Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. 

http://www.ipcc.ch/activity/srccs/index.htm 

Kundzewicz, Z.W., L.J. Mata, N.W. Arnell, P. Döll, P. Kabat, B. Jiménez, K.A. Miller, T. 

Oki, Z. Sen and I.A. Shiklomanov. 2007. Freshwater Resources and Their 

Management. In: IPCC. 2007. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and 

Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of 

the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. 

Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, (eds.)]. Cambridge University 

Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 173-210. 

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg2/ar4-wg2-chapter3.pdf 

Mimura, N., L. Nurse, R. McLean, J. Agard, L. Briguglio, P. Lefale, R. Payet, G. Sem. 

2007. Small Islands. In: IPCC. 2007. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation 

and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment 

Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [M.L. Parry, O.F. 

Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, (eds.)]. Cambridge 

University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 173-210. 

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg2/ar4-wg2-chapter16.pdf

Nabuurs, G. J., O. Masera, K. Andrasko, P. Benitez-Ponce, R. Boer, M. Dutschke, E. 

Elsiddig, J. Ford-Robertson, P. Frumhoff, T. Karjalainen, O. Krankina, W. A. Kurz, 

M. Matsumoto, W. Oyhantcabal, Ravindranath N.H., M. J. S. Sanchez, X. Zhang. 

2007. Forestry. In: IPCC. 2007. Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of 

Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel 

on Climate Change. [Metz, B., O. Davidson, P. Bosch, R. Dave, L. Meyer (eds.)]. 

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, 

USA. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-

chapter9.pdf

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). 2006. Goddard Institute for 

Space Studies (GISS) Surface Temperature Analysis. 

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20070208/

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)/National Environmental 

Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS)/National Climatic Data Center 

(NCDC). http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/ncdc.html

NOAA/NESDIS/NCDC. 2007. Climate of 2006—in Historical Perspective: Annual 

Report. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2006/ann/ann06.html 

National Research Council (NRC). 1999. Global Environmental Change: Research 

Pathways for the Next Decade. Committee on Global Change Research, Board on 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

99

Sustainable Development, Policy Division, NRC. National Academy Press, 

Washington, DC. 

Orth, J.R., T.J.B. Carruthers, W.C. Dennison, C.M. Duarte, J.W. Fourqurean, K.L. Jeck, 

A.R. Hughs, G.A. Kendrick, W.J. Kenworthy, S. Olyarnik, F.T. Short, M. Waycott, 

and S.L. Williams, 2006, A Global Crisis for Seagrass Ecosystems, BioScience, V. 

56. 

Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory, Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level 

(PSMSL). Monthly and Annual Mean Sea Level Station Files. 

http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/psmsl_individual_stations.html and 

http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/ 

Pulwarty, R.S., D.A. Wilhite, D.M. Diodato, and D.I. Nelson. May 2007. “Drought in 

Changing Environments: Creating a Roadmap, Vehicles, and Drivers.” Natural 

Hazards Observer XXXI: 5. Natural Hazards Center, Institute of Behavioral 

Science, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado. 

http://www.colorado.edu/hazards/o/archives/2007/may07/may07.pdf 

Reardon, D. 1994. Energy Audit Manual for Water/Wastewater Facilities: A Guide for 

Electric Utilities to Understanding Specific Unit Processes and their 

Energy/Demand Relationships at Water and Wastewater Plants. EPRI CR-104300. 

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), St. Louis, MO. http://www.epri.com 

Smith, P. D. Martino, Z. Cai, D. Gwary, H. Janzen, P. Kumar, B. McCarl, S. Ogle, F. 

O’Mara, C. Rice, B. Scholes, O. Sirotenko. 2007. Agriculture. In: IPCC. 2007. 

Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth 

Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [Metz, B., 

O. Davidson, P. Bosch, R. Dave, L. Meyer (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, 

Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. 

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-chapter8.pdf

Smith, J.B. 2004. A Synthesis of Potential Climate Change Impacts on the U.S. 

Prepared for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. 

http://www.pewclimate.org/docUploads/Pew-Synthesis.pdf 

Trenberth, K.E., P.D. Jones, P. Ambenje, R. Bojariu, D. Easterling, A. Klein Tank, D. 

Parker, F. Rahimzadeh, J.A. Renwick, M. Rusticucci, B. Soden and P. Zhai. 2007. 

Observations: Surface and Atmospheric Climate Change. In: IPCC. 2007. Climate 

Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the 

Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 

[Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor 

and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom 

and New York, NY, USA. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessmentreport/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter3.pdf 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

100

U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). 2007. Effects of Climate Change on 

Energy Production and Use in the United States. Synthesis and Assessment 

Product (SAP) 4.5. http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap4-5/finalreport/sap4-5-final-all.pdf 

 

U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). 2008. Effects of Climate Change on 

Agriculture, Land Resources, Water Resources, and Biodiversity in the United 

States. Synthesis and Assessment Product (SAP) 4.3. 

http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap4-3/final-report/sap4-3-finalall.pdf 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2004. Estimated Use of Water in the United States in 

2000. Circular 1268. U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Reston, Virginia. http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2004/circ1268/ 

World Meteorological Organization (WMO). 2006. Summary Statement on Tropical 

Cyclones and Climate Change. 

http://www.gfdl.gov/~tk/manuscripts/IWTC_Summary.pdf (see also 

http://www.wmo.ch/pages/prog/arep/tmrp/documents/iwtc_statement.pdf) 

Further Reading 

American Water Works Association Research Foundation (AwwaRF) and the University 

Corporation for Atmospheric Research. 2006. Climate Change and Water 

Resources: A Primer for Municipal Water Providers. AWWA Research 

Foundation, AWWA, and IWA Publishing. 

http://www.isse.ucar.edu/water_conference/fulltext/ClimateChange_Final.pdf 

California Department of Water Resources. 2006. Progress on Incorporating Climate 

Change into Management of California's Water Resources. Technical 

Memorandum Report. California Department of Water Resources, Sacramento, 

California. http://baydeltaoffice.water.ca.gov/climatechange/reports.cfm

Center for Science in the Earth System (The Climate Impacts Group), Joint Institute for 

the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean, University of Washington, and King 

County, Washington. 2007. Preparing for Climate Change: A Guidebook for Local, 

Regional, and State Governments. The Climate Impacts Group, King County, 

Washington, and ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability.

http://www.cses.washington.edu/cig/fpt/guidebook.shtml

Chesapeake Bay Foundation. 2007. Climate Change and the Chesapeake Bay: 

Challenges, Impacts, and the Multiple Benefits of Agricultural Conservation Work. 

http://www.cbf.org/site/PageServer?pagename=exp_sub_state_climatechang

e 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

101

Croley, T. E. II. 1991. “CCC GCM 2xCO2 Hydrological Impacts on the Great Lakes”. 

Task Group 2, Working Committee 3, International Joint Commission Water-Levels 

Reference Study (as found in EPA and Environment Canada 2000). 

Department of Energy (DOE). 2007. Carbon Sequestration Atlas of United States and 

Canada. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy, National Energy 

Technology Laboratory. 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/carbon_seq/refshelf/atlas/ 

Easterling III, W.E., B.H. Hurd, and J.B. Smith. 2004. Coping with Global Climate 

Change: The Role of Adaptation in the United States. Prepared for the Pew Center 

on Global Climate Change. 

http://www.pewclimate.org/docUploads/Adaptation.pdf 

Emanuel, K.A. 2005. “Increasing Destructiveness of Tropical Cyclones over the Past 

30 Years”. Nature 436:686-688. 

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v436/n7051/abs/nature03906.html 

EPA and Environment Canada. 2000. Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP). 

Prepared by the Lake Erie LaMP Workgroup. 

http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/lakeerie/lamp2000/index.html and 

http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/lakeerie/lamp2000/Section11.pdf 

EPA. 2007. Using Class V Experimental Technology Well Classification for Pilot 

Geologic Sequestration Projects – UIC Program Guidance (UICPG # 83).

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/pdfs/guide_uic_carbonsequestration_final03-07.pdf 

EPA. 2006. A Screening Assessment of the Potential Impacts of Climate Change on 

Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Mitigation in the Great Lakes and New England 

Regions (External Review Draft). EPA/600/R-07/033A. U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington, DC. 

http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=166365 

EPA. 2006. A Screening Assessment of the Potential Impacts of Climate Change on the 

Costs of Implementing Water Quality-Based Effluent Limits at Publicly-Owned 

Treatment Works in the Great Lakes Region (External Review Draft Report). 

EPA/600/R-07/034A. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. 

http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=166366 

EPA. 1995. Ecological Impacts from Climate Change: An Economic Analysis of 

Freshwater Recreational Fishing. EPA 220-R-95-004. U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation, Washington, DC. 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

102

EPA. 1989. The Potential Effects of Global Climate Change on the United States: 

Report to Congress. EPA 230-05-89-052. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Washington, DC. 

Furlow J., J.D. Scheraga, R. Freed, and K. Rock. 2002. “The Vulnerability of Public 

Water Systems to Sea Level Rise.” In: Proceedings of the Coastal Water Resource 

Conference. J.R. Lesnik (ed.). American Water Resources Association, 

Middleburg, Virginia, pp. 31-36. http://scheraga.com/Furlow-Scheraga-FreedRock-(FINAL)%20published%20version.doc (accessed on 8/13/07)

Gleick, P.H. 2000. Water: the Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and 

Change for the Water Resources of the United States. The Report of the Water 

Sector Assessment Team of the National Assessment of the Potential 

Consequences of Climate Variability and Change for the U.S. Global Change 

Research Program. This report was prepared by the Pacific Institute for Studies in 

Development, Environment, and Security and supported by the U.S. Department of 

the Interior through the U.S. Geological Survey (grant# 98HQAG2118). 

http://www.gcrio.org/NationalAssessment/water/water.pdf

International Joint Commission. 2003. Climate Change and Water Quality in the Great 

Lakes Basin. Report of the Great Lakes Water Quality Board to the International 

Joint Commission. ISBN 1-894280-42-3. 

http://www.ijc.org/php/publications/html/climate/index.html 

Johnson, T., C. Pyke, J. Kittle, J. Imhoff, and M. Gray. 2006. “The Climate Assessment 

Tool for the BASINS Modeling System: New Capabilities for Evaluating the 

Vulnerability of Hydrologic End Points to Climate Variability and Change”. 

Summary of Presentation. Third Biennial Meeting of the International 

Environmental Modelling and Software Society, Burlington, VT. 

http://www.iemss.org/summit/papers/s5/346_Pyke_0.pdf 

Karl, T.R. and R.W. Knight; NOAA/NESDIS/National Climatic Data Center. 1998. 

“Secular Trends of Precipitation Amount, Frequency, and Intensity in the United 

States.” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 79(2): 231-241. 

http://ams.allenpress.com/archive/1520-0477/79/2/pdf/i1520-0477-79-2-231.pdf

Kleypas, J.A., R.A. Feely, V.J. Fabry, C. Langdon, C.L. Sabine, L.L. Robbins. 2006. 

Impacts of Ocean Acidification on Coral Reefs and Other Marine Calcifiers: A 

Guide for Future Research. Report of a workshop sponsored by the National 

Science Foundation (NSF), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Contribution no. 2897 from the 

NOAA/Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory. 

http://www.isse.ucar.edu/florida/ and http://www.fedworld.gov/onow 

Milly, Christopher (USGS). 6 June 2007. Statement of Christopher Milly, Research 

Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior, Before the 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

103

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water and 

Power, United States Senate. Hearing on Impacts of Climate Change on Water 

Supply and Availability in the United States and Related Issues from a Water Use 

Perspective. http://energy.senate.gov/public/_files/MillyTestimony.doc (See 

also Milly et al. 2005 article in the Further Reading section below.) 

Milly, P.C.D., K.A. Dunne, A.V. Vecchia. 2005. “Global Pattern of Trends in Streamflow 

and Water Availability in a Changing Climate.” Nature 438: 347-350. 

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7066/full/nature04312.html 

Mortsch, L. and F.H. Quinn. 1996. “Climate Change Scenarios for Great Lakes Basin 

Ecosystem Studies.” Limnology and Oceanography 41(5):903-911 (as found in 

U.S. EPA and Environment Canada 2000). 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2001. Sea Level Variations 

of the United States 1854-1999. NOAA Technical Report NOS CO-OPS 36. 

NOAA, Silver Spring, MD. 

http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/publications/techrpt36doc.pdf 

National Research Council. 2001. Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key 

Questions. National Academy Press, Washington, DC. 

http://books.nap.edu/html/climatechange/ 

Rosenzweig, C., D.C. Major, K. DeMong, C. Stanton, R. Horton, and M. Stults. 2007. 

“Managing Climate Change Risks in New York City’s Water System: Assessment 

and Adaptation Planning.” Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change

12(8). 

The Royal Society. 2005. Ocean Acidification Due to Increasing Atmospheric Carbon 

Dioxide. Policy Document 12/05. ISBN 0854036172. The Royal Society, London. 

http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/displaypagedoc.asp?id=13539 

San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. Water Utility Climate Change Summit 2007. 

Summary of Proceedings. 31 January to 2 February 2007. 

Santer, B.D., T.M.L. Wigley, P.J. Gleckler, C. Bonfils, M.F. Wehner, K. AchutaRao, T.P. 

Barnett, J.S. Boyle, W. Brüggemann, M. Fiorino, N. Gillett, J.E. Hansen, P.D. 

Jones, S.A. Klein, G.A. Meehl, S.C.B. Raper, R.W. Reynolds, K.E. Taylor, and 

W.M. Washington. 12 September 2006. “Forced and Unforced Ocean Temperature 

Changes in Atlantic and Pacific Tropical Cyclogenesis Regions”. Proceedings of 

the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS). 

10.1073/pnas.0602861103.

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0602861103v1 

Snover, A.K., P.W. Mote, L. Whitely Binder, A.F. Hamlet, and N.J. Mantua. 2005. 

Uncertain Future: Climate Change and Its Effects on Puget Sound. A report for the 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

104

Puget Sound Action Team by the Climate Impacts Group (Center for Science in 

the Earth System, Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Oceans, 

University of Washington, Seattle). 

http://www.psat.wa.gov/Publications/climate_change2005/climate_home.htm 

Titus, J.G. and V. K. Narayanan.1995. The Probability of Sea Level Rise. EPA 230-R95-

008. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, DC. 

http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/ResourceCenterPubli

cationsProbability.html 

Twilley, R.R., E.J. Barron, H.L. Gholz, M.A. Harwell, R.L. Miller, D.J. Reed, J.B. Rose, 

E.H. Siemann, R.G. Wetzel, R.J. Zimmerman. 2001. Confronting Climate Change 

in the Gulf Coast Region: Prospects for Sustaining Our Ecological Heritage. A 

Report of the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Ecological Society of 

America. http://www.ucsusa.org/gulf/gcchallengereport.html 

U.S. Global Change Research Program. 2000. Climate Change Impacts on the United 

States: The Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change: Overview. 

A Report of the National Assessment Synthesis Team of the Potential 

Consequences of Climate Variability. 

http://www.gcrio.org/NationalAssessment/overpdf/overview.html 

World Meteorological Organization. The World Meteorological Organization’s 

Contribution to Improved Decision Making for Climate Adaptation. Position Paper 

Prepared for United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) 

Conference of the Parties (COP) 13. Bali, Indonesia, 3-14 December 2007. 

http://www.wmo.ch/pages/cop13/documents/COP13-1.pdf

 
Office of Water 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

105

APPENDIX 9: 

Acknowledgments 

This document was prepared by the National Water Program Climate Change 

Workgroup. Members of the Workgroup are: 

EPA Office of the Assistant Administrator for Water 

Michael Shapiro (Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water and Workgroup 

 Chair), Jeff Peterson (Workgroup Staff Lead), William Anderson, Katharine 

 Dowell, Wendy Drake and Surabhi Shah 

Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water 

Ann Codrington, Elizabeth Corr, and Mike Muse 

Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds 

Rachel Fertik Katie Flahive, Kathleen Kutschenreuter, Bonnie Thie, and John 

 Wilson 

Office of Wastewater Management 

Jeremy Arling, Linda Boornazian, Andy Crossland, Sarah Hilbrich, Tom Laverty, 

 Karen Metchis, and Martha Segall 

Office of Science and Technology 

Robert Cantilli, Fred Leutner, Suzanne Rudzinski, and William Swietlik 

American Indian Environmental Office 

Jeff Besougloff 

Office of Research and Development 

 Joel Scheraga 

Office of Air and Radiation 

Rona Birnbaum and Dina Kruger 

EPA Regional Offices 

 Region 1: Stephen Perkins 

 Region 2: Douglas Pabst 

 Region 3: Joe Piotrowski 

 Region 4: Linda Rimer 

Region 5: Joan Karnauskas

 Region 6: James Brown 

 Region 7: Karen Flournoy 

 Region 8: Gene Reetz, Carol Russell 

 Region 9: Karen Schwinn and Cheryl McGovern 

 Region 10: Paula VanHaagen