Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria i

Foreword

Water quality standards and criteria are the foundation for a wide range of programs

under the Clean Water Act. This strategy contains priority strategic actions that the

Office of Science and Technology will undertake in collaboration with other EPA offices,

states and authorized tribes over the next six years to strengthen and improve this foundation.

While developing this strategy, we were frequently reminded of the importance of a strong

standards and criteria program. Beginning in 2001, we held extensive listening sessions and

frank discussions with states, other partners and EPA staff to obtain information, views, and

ideas about needs for the water quality standards and criteria program. We also considered

the recommendations regarding standards and criteria in the National Research Council’s

2001 report, Assessing the TMDL Approach to Water Quality Management, and from the

General Accounting Office’s 2002 report, Improved EPA Guidance and Support Can Help

States Develop Standards That Better Target Cleanup Efforts. This strategy is designed to

carry out our mission under the Clean Water Act, to address the needs expressed by our

partners, and to support EPA’s Strategic Plan. It also includes many changes in response to

public comments on the May 2002 draft.

The Office of Science and Technology will continue to work with its partners as we implement

the strategy, and some priority actions are already well underway. We will continue our

dialogue with partners as we track progress and adjust efforts each year to stay on the strategic

course we have set. Progress will be reported at http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/standards.

Geoffrey H. Grubbs, Director

Office of Science and Technology
ii Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
Contents 

Foreword .............................................................................................................. i


Table of Contents............................................................................................... iii


Disclaimer ............................................................................................................ v


Executive Summary ......................................................................................... vii


Chapter 1—Developing the Strategy ............................................................... 1


Background ..........................................................................................................................1


The Role of Standards and Criteria in Water Quality Programs .......................................... 1


Partnerships to Improve the Program....................................................................................2


Scope of this Strategy ........................................................................................................... 3


How this Strategy Was Developed ....................................................................................... 3


Strategic Themes ..................................................................................................................5


Setting Priorities ................................................................................................................... 6


Chapter 2—Priority Strategic Actions ............................................................. 7


Highest Priorities ..................................................................................................................7


Next Priority Strategic Actions ...........................................................................................18


Chapter 3—Implementing the Strategy ........................................................21


Roles of EPA Offices and Key Partners During Implementation ....................................... 21


Future Strategy Refinements ..............................................................................................23


Other Ongoing Program Activities .....................................................................................24


Chapter 4—Conclusion ................................................................................... 25


Appendix One—Acronyms............................................................................. 27


Appendix Two—Acknowledgments .............................................................. 29


Appendix Three—Information Sources for this Strategy ........................... 31


Appendix Four—Strategic Actions to be Considered for


Future Priority Setting .............................................................................. 34


Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria iii

iv Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
Disclaimer Disclaimer Disclaimer

The discussion in this document entitled “Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria: 

Setting Priorities to Strengthen the Foundation for Protecting and Restoring the Nation’s 

Waters” is intended solely as a planning document for the Office of Science and Technology 

within EPA’s Office of Water. The statutory provisions and EPA regulations described in this 

document contain legally binding requirements. This strategy is not a regulation itself, nor 

does it change or substitute for those provisions and regulations. Thus, it does not impose 

legally binding requirements on EPA, states, tribes, or the regulated community. This strategy 

does not confer legal rights or impose legal obligations upon any member of the public. 

While we have made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the discussion in this strategy, the 

obligations of the regulated community are determined by statutes, regulations, or other legally 

binding requirements. In the event of a conflict between the discussion in this strategy and 

any statute or regulation, this document would not be controlling. 

This is a living document and may be revised periodically without public notice. We welcome 

public input on this document at any time. The general descriptions provided here may not 

apply to a particular situation based upon the circumstances. Interested parties are free to 

raise questions and objections about the substance of this document and the appropriateness 

of the application of this document to a particular situation. EPA and other decision makers 

retain the discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that differ from those described 

in this document where appropriate. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria v 
vi Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
Executive Summary 

Water quality standards and criteria are the regulatory and scientific foundation of programs 

established under the Clean Water Act to protect the Nation’s waters. As such, they are 

among the most critical clean water programs. Due to the many new demands on the program, 

and since the nature of water pollution problems and required solutions have changed 

dramatically in recent years, water quality standards and criteria need to be made a high 

priority and given a renewed focus. The water quality standards and criteria program needs 

clear priorities to address these critical demands. 

This strategy is the product of a wide-ranging review of the existing water quality standards 

and criteria program within the context of all clean water programs. The review covered 

clean water goals, mandates and authorities; EPA’s current strategic goals for clean water and 

other strategic planning efforts; and major needs of the current EPA standards and criteria 

program and key programs linked to it including water quality monitoring, total maximum 

daily loads (TMDLs), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, 

nonpoint source programs, oceans and wetlands programs, and source water protection. The 

review considered the results of more than 50 listening sessions with over 350 people during 

April-September 2001 and recent recommendations from the National Research Council, the 

General Accounting Office, and EPA’s Inspector General. 

This strategy is built upon a long-term vision for the future: 

All waters of the United States will have water quality standards that include 

the highest attainable uses, combined with water quality criteria that reflect 

the current and evolving body of scientific information to protect those uses. 

Further, standards will have well-defined means for implementation through 

Clean Water Act programs. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria vii 
States support this long-term vision and look to EPA to help fulfill it, beginning with the 

priority strategic actions contained in this strategy. These actions in the strategy are designed 

to address the following strategic themes: 

•	 Filling major program gaps to achieve critical environmental results. For example, the 

water quality standards and criteria program needs to help states strengthen water quality 

criteria for three pollutants (sedimentation, pathogens, and nutrients) that are responsible 

for an estimated 40 percent of water quality impairments nationally. 

•	 Strengthening and maintaining the scientific foundation of water quality programs, 

including targeting criteria development for specific pollutants of highest importance. 

•	 Clarifying for states how to implement key scientific and technical components of standards 

and criteria when regulating discharges. 

•	 Establishing important technical and policy linkages between the water quality standards 

and criteria program and other programs such as those that protect drinking water. 

•	 Broadening participation in the water quality standards and criteria program with states 

and other stakeholders. 

The strategy describes and sets milestones for the ten strategic actions of highest priority for 

addressing these findings. These ten highest priority strategic actions are: 

1Issue implementation guidance for the 

1986 bacteria criteria for recreation. 

7Provide technical support, outreach, 

training and workshops to assist states 

and tribes with designated uses, 

including use attainability analyses and 

tiered aquatic life uses. 

8Provide implementation support 

concerning technical issues affecting 

permits and TMDLs, beginning with 

technical support and outreach 

concerning the duration and frequency 

component of existing water quality 

criteria. 

9Identify any drinking-water source waters 

whose water quality standards do not 

protect the use, and work with regions, 

states, and tribes to correct any 

deficient standards as soon as 

possible. 

10Develop a web-based clearinghouse 

for exchanging information on critical 

water quality standards issues, 

beginning with antidegradation. 

2Produce and implement a strategy for 

the development of pathogen criteria 

for drinking water and recreational use. 

3Produce and implement a strategy for 

the development of suspended and 

bedded sediment criteria. 

4Provide technical support to states and 

tribes for developing and adopting 

nutrient criteria and biological criteria. 

5Develop and apply a systematic 

selection process to produce new and 

revised water quality criteria for 

chemicals to address emerging 

needs. 

6Complete the national consultation 

with the Federal Services on existing 

aquatic life criteria. 

The strategy also contains five strategic actions, outlined in Chapter 2, which are next in 

priority for implementation. The Office of Science and Technology (OST) in EPA’s Office of 

Water will work closely with other EPA programs, states, authorized tribes and stakeholders 

to implement the strategy. 

viii Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
Background

The Role of Standards and Crit ds and Criteria

in Water Quality Pr er Quality Programs

C H A P T E R – O N E

Developing the Strategy 

Background 

EPA’s water quality standards and criteria program supports and oversees the efforts of 

states and authorized tribes to set water quality standards for all waters of the United 

States. Water quality standards—consisting of designated uses for waters, water quality criteria 

to protect the uses, and antidegradation policies—serve the dual purposes of establishing 

water quality goals for specific water bodies and providing the regulatory basis for establishing 

certain treatment controls and strategies. EPA provides policy guidance and the latest scientific 

information to help states and tribes adopt standards. The Clean Water Act also requires EPA 

to review new and revised standards, approve or disapprove them, and issue federal 

replacement standards to correct deficiencies where necessary. The Office of Science and 

Technology (OST) in EPA’s Office of Water (OW) is the headquarters office responsible for 

these efforts while the ten EPA regional offices have the lead for working with states and 

authorized tribes. 

The Role of Standards and Criteria 

in Water Quality Programs 

Water quality standards and criteria are undeniably key to protecting the quality of our Nation’s 

waters. Water quality standards establish the environmental baselines used for measuring the 

success of Clean Water Act programs. In an evolving scientific arena, adequate protection of 

fish and wildlife, recreational uses, and sources of drinking water depends on having wellcrafted standards and criteria in place for our waters. Having clear numeric baselines is also 

important for establishing treatment controls; for conducting watershed planning, protection 

and restoration; and for innovations such as market-based incentives and trading. 

Most states developed water quality standards and criteria on a significant scale in the 1970s 

when the water quality problems being addressed were simpler: for example, assuring adequate 

dissolved oxygen for fish and shellfish and installing wastewater treatment systems for basic 

sanitation. These standards and criteria were rarely fine-tuned to address complex issues 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 1 
Partnerships t ships to Improve the Pr e the Program

such as protecting endangered or threatened species, addressing 

sedimentation and flow, addressing pathogens, evaluating site-specific 

attainability, or evaluating cumulative effects from combinations of 

pollutants or stressors. 

For several decades EPA and states focused more on technology-based 

controls than on water quality-based programs such as water quality 

standards. The most recent focus on TMDLs, in some cases under 

challenging deadlines, and on resolving complex NPDES permit issues, 

has heightened the immediate need to strengthen the standards program 

in many areas. With EPA’s assistance, states and authorized tribes have 

reviewed and updated these standards on an ongoing basis; however, 

evolving science, dramatically increasing implementation demands, and 

other circumstances have often significantly outpaced these efforts. 

Examples of evolving science include the need to update criteria based 

on new information, the need to reflect newly-understood local variations 

in pollutant chemistry and biology, the need for clarity in the 

implementation of new and existing criteria, and the desirability of having 

more direct measures of designated use protection through biological 

criteria. 

As the Nation has grown over the past 30 years, so too has the complexity 

of water quality problems. States, tribes, and EPA need a common 

understanding of how to implement standards and criteria provisions 

when monitoring and assessing water quality and developing NPDES 

permits, TMDLs and nonpoint source controls. For example, states, 

tribes and EPA should have similar approaches for determining which 

waters are in attainment, setting designated uses, translating narrative 

criteria into numeric values, establishing mixing zones, or allowing 

variances to standards. 

Given the increasing number and complexity of water quality standards 

issues that must be addressed, EPA, states and tribes need to partner 

strategically to address them in a way that will best resolve the most 

critical issues and ensure the protection and restoration of our waters. 

Partnerships to Improve the Program 

OST met with many partners inside and outside the Agency who depend 

on water quality standards to help identify the key challenges faced by 

the water quality standards and criteria program. We found that all 

partners are facing a daunting and complex workload to meet these 

challenges, and are looking to EPA for leadership. But we also found 

2 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
Scope of This S f This Strategy

How This S w This Strategy Was Developed

that all partners share the desire to improve the program and are willing 

to work with us. We are confident that by working together we can 

address the highest priorities among the growing list of short- and longterm needs and help achieve our goals for safe and clean water. 

Scope of This Strategy 

This strategy focuses on what OST and other EPA offices need to 

accomplish to meet the program needs of EPA, the states and authorized 

tribes. In this document, “states” generally means the state, territorial 

and interstate agencies that have water pollution control responsibilities. 

“Authorized tribes” means federally-recognized Indian tribes for which 

EPA has given approval to administer water quality standards programs. 

For Indian country as a whole, the strategy supplements but does not 

replace the goals and objectives for water quality standards expressed in 

the Agency’s Strategic Plan and in Protecting Public Health and Water 

Resources in Indian Country: A Strategy for EPA/Tribal Partnership, 

EPA Office of Water, October 1998. 

EPA has specific statutory and regulatory obligations under the Clean 

Water Act, including reviewing new and revised standards, approving 

or disapproving them, and issuing federal replacement standards to correct 

deficiencies where necessary. EPA also has obligations under other 

statutes, such as the Endangered Species Act. Additionally, from time to 

time EPA receives judicial mandates, enters into settlement agreements, 

or becomes subject to specific Congressional requirements. EPA takes 

all of these obligations seriously, and carries them out on a daily basis. 

OST did not list these responsibilities as actions under this strategy 

because they are not optional and hence not subject to priority-setting. 

The presence or absence of actions in this strategy should not be 

construed as altering our basic responsibilities. 

How This Strategy Was Developed 

The strategy is the product of a wide-ranging review and analysis of the 

water quality standards and criteria program within the context of all 

clean water programs. It was developed by a work group chaired by 

OST staff. The group first developed a draft list of issues addressing the 

major needs of the standards and criteria program and of programs that 

link to water quality standards, including water quality monitoring and 

assessment programs, the TMDL program, the NPDES permit program, 

the wetlands and dredge and fill permit programs, ocean protection 

EPA IS HELPING MORE 

TRIBES TO RUN WATER 

QUALITY STANDARDS 

PROGRAMS 

The Office of Water’s October 1998 

strategy for Indian country sets a 

goal that “by 2005, 15% of tribes 

will have final water quality 

standards approved by EPA for 

waters under their jurisdiction.” It 

calls for EPA to provide guidance, 

technical assistance, training, 

outreach, and workshops for 

interested tribes to set up and run 

standards programs. 

This work has paid off: since 1998 

the number of tribes with standards 

has increased by 50%, from 14 to 

21, making it the largest non-grant 

tribal program in EPA. 

Nevertheless, it is still only 4% of 

all tribes. Tribes face many 

technical and administrative 

challenges in establishing 

standards. 

OST and EPA’s regional offices are 

continuing to implement the 1998 

strategy to assist tribes, including 

considering the establishment of 

federal water quality standards for 

waters in Indian country that do not 

have standards. 

▼

▼ ▼ 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 3 
HOW THE PRIORITY ACTION 

WILL IMPROVE THE SCIENTIFIC 

BASIS FOR WATER QUALITY 

PROGRAMS 

The National Research Council (NRC) 

recommended that EPA issue new 

guidance on use attainability analyses. 

Highest priority #7 will provide support 

for state and tribal programs to adopt the 

highest attainable designated uses. 

The NRC recommended that all 

chemical and some biological criteria be 

defined in terms of magnitude, frequency 

and duration. Highest priority #8 will 

develop technical support and outreach 

on the duration and frequency 

components of criteria. 

The NRC recommended assigning 

tiered designated uses in setting water 

quality standards, and choosing criteria 

that are logically linked to the designated 

use. Highest priority #7 will support the 

development and application of tiered 

designated uses where appropriate, and 

Highest priority #5 will develop new 

and revised water quality criteria linked 

to designated uses. 

The NRC recommended that water 

quality standards be “measurable by 

reasonably obtainable monitoring data.” 

Highest priority #8 will address 

duration and frequency issues, and Next 

priority #4 will update analytical 

methods to enable reliable quantification 

of pollutants at levels near the criteria 

values. 

The NRC recommended that biological 

criteria be used in conjunction with 

physical and chemical criteria to 

determine whether a water body is 

meeting its designated use. Highest 

priority #4 will continue EPA’s leadership 

role in advancing the development and 

use of biological criteria. 

▼

▼

▼

▼ ▼ 

programs under the Clean Water Act, and the source water protection 

rogram under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The workgroup then 

conducted more than 50 listening sessions with over 350 people during 

April-September 2001. Appendix 3 lists the information sources for this 

strategy, including the groups who participated. The listening sessions 

gave participants an opportunity to identify the most important issues 

for stakeholders and the timing of their needs regarding water quality 

standards. They also helped elucidate barriers and define emerging 

challenges. The workgroup also considered the following: 

•	 Clean Water Act goals, mandates and authorities that pertain to water 

quality standards and criteria, including EPA’s oversight 

responsibilities under section 303(c) of the Act and EPA’s scientific 

information responsibilities under section 304(a) of the Act. 

•	 The strategic goal for safe and clean water, together with objectives 

and subobjectives in EPA’s Strategic Plan. 

•	 Public comments and statements in public meetings in response to 

the 1998 Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the water 

quality standards regulation. 

During this time the National Research Council (NRC) of the National 

Academy of Sciences issued a report, Assessing the TMDL Approach to 

Water Quality Management. It contained several major recommendations 

concerning water quality standards and criteria (see box at left). These 

recommendations played a strong role in shaping this strategy. OST 

also considered recommendations from the General Accounting Office 

and EPA’s Inspector General in separate studies listed in Attachment 1. 

Additionally, this strategy is built upon a long-term vision for the future 

of water quality standards and criteria. This vision statement is the 

essential mission of the water quality standards and criteria program. 

VISION 

All waters of the United States will have water quality 

standards that include the highest attainable uses, combined 

with water quality criteria that reflect the current and evolving 

body of scientific information to protect those uses. Further, 

standards will have well-defined means for implementation 

through Clean Water Act programs. 

States support this long-term vision, and look to EPA to help fulfill it, 

beginning with the strategic actions contained in this strategy. 

4 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
Strategic Them egic Themes

This strategy prioritizes actions that EPA will lead, often in conjunction 

with its implementing partners and affected stakeholders, to improve 

water quality. The strategy contains priority strategic actions that OST 

believes are critical to tackle the most important environmental problems, 

accelerate the adoption and use of appropriate water quality standards, 

reduce the burdens and impediments to program implementation, and 

promote broad participation in activities affecting the Nation’s receiving 

waters. 

The review and analysis provided a fresh look at all aspects of the current 

water quality standards and criteria program. It resulted in ten strategic 

actions representing the highest priority in the strategy, and five strategic 

actions representing the next set of priorities that will guide OST activities 

in the coming years. These actions will help EPA in addressing the 

following major findings: 

• Filling major program gaps to achieve critical environmental results. 

- For example, the water quality standards and criteria program 

needs to help states strengthen water quality criteria for three 

pollutants (sedimentation, pathogens, and nutrients) responsible 

for an estimated 40 percent of water quality impairments 

nationally. 

•	 Clarifying for states how to implement key scientific and technical 

components of standards and criteria when regulating discharges. 

- For example, water quality criteria documents published in the 

1980s contained detailed scientific information used for deriving 

criteria values but little in the way of guidance on how to interpret 

them when assessing attainment. 

•	 Establishing important technical and policy linkages between the 

water quality standards and criteria program and other programs 

such as those that protect drinking water. 

•	 Broadening participation in the water quality standards and criteria 

program with states and other stakeholders. 

•	 Strengthening and maintaining the scientific foundation of water 

quality programs. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 5 
Setting Prioritie tting Prioritie tting Priorities

OST has narrowed the focus of the final strategy to ten highest priorities 

and five next priorities as mentioned above. In setting priorities, OST 

considered such questions as: Would the action provide an important 

link for restoring and maintaining the Nation’s water quality? Would it 

be critical for meeting the Agency’s goals for clean and safe water? 

Would it meet a critical need of states and tribes? Would it meet a critical 

need of a related water quality program such as monitoring, assessment, 

TMDLs, permits, or source water protection? Would the action address 

a major gap or lack of clarity in the existing EPA standards and criteria 

program? Would the action address the increasing scientific and policy 

complexities posed by the accelerating pace of efforts to restore impaired 

water quality? Would it respond to one or more of the five strategic 

themes listed above? 

In the past few months, OST has shared drafts of these priorities with the 

workgroup and other EPA offices and made modifications on an iterative 

basis. We are confident that the final priorities have solid support among 

those who depend on these products the most. 

This strategy does not include a priority strategic action to revise the 

national water quality standards regulation to address any implementation 

issues. OST believes that a revised regulation would not be the best way 

to address most of the issues raised during listening sessions. Most such 

issues derive from lack of clarity for implementing existing requirements, 

not because of defects in the regulatory requirements themselves. During 

listening sessions, participants generally suggested how EPA can address 

important implementation issues with policy and guidance. Specific 

issues may emerge in the future that can best be resolved by establishing 

new or revised national regulatory requirements, but such steps at this 

time are not warranted. Additionally, EPA is currently reviewing petitions 

received from interest groups to revise its regulations in certain areas. 

EPA has not yet completed its review of these petitions. If EPA decides 

revised regulations are necessary, OST will modify this strategy 

accordingly. 

6 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
Highest Priorities Highest Priorities

C H A P T E R – T W O

Priority Strategic Actions 

Highest Priorities 

The ten strategic actions below have the highest priority in this strategy because OST 

believes they will address the most important environmental problems, accelerate the 

adoption and use of appropriate water quality standards, reduce burdens and impediments to 

program implementation, and promote broad participation in activities affecting the Nation’s 

receiving waters. Each action is accompanied by milestones with the quarter and calendar 

year for completion. Work has begun on all of these actions. They have been organized in 

two groups: actions 1 through 6 are criteria-related actions, and actions 7 through 10 are 

standards-related actions, but are not arranged in any particular order. All ten actions are 

equally important; they are not listed in priority order. 

Milestones: 

Publish §136 analytical methods for ambient water (final) ........................... completed, July 2003 

Publish guidance (final) ................................................................................................... 1st Q, 

Publish §136 analytical methods for wastewater (proposed, final) ............ 4th Q, 2004, 4th Q, 2005 

Criteria-Related Actions

ctions

1. tation guidance for the 1986 bacteria criteria for recreation. 

2004 

Issue implemen

This guidance is a major and immediate need due to the number of waters with bacteria 

impairments and the significant gaps in policy and technical guidance for implementing the 

recommended EPA criteria. It focuses on EPA’s bacteria criteria published in 1986 for two 

bacterial indicators: E. coli and enterococcus. The guidance will assist states and authorized 

tribes with such issues as risk levels used in the criteria; implementation in NPDES permits, 

attainment decisions, and monitoring and advisories; and implementation in light of uncertainty 

inherent in the criteria. OST issued a draft of the guidance in 2002, and will publish the final 

guidance in 2004 after completing the review of comments and analysis of scientific 

information. Additionally, the guidance will assist states and authorized tribes that are required 

under the Beach Act of 2000 to adopt bacteriological criteria for coastal recreation waters that 

are as protective as EPA’s criteria recommendations. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 7 
In the next two years OST will also publish approved analytical methods 

under 40 CFR part 136 for E. coli and enterococcus. States requested 

the methods to help measure attainment of the criteria and to support 

issuance of discharge permits. 

2. oduce and implement a strategy for the development of 

pathogen criteria for drinking water and recreational use. 

Milestones: 

Develop a strategy for producing cryptosporidium 

criteria for source waters ......................................................... 4th Q, 

Develop a strategy for revising existing criteria 

for recreational waters ............................................................. 4th Q, 

Develop a strategy for establishing integrated 

microbiological water quality criteria ...................................... 3rd Q, 

Issue revised criteria document for recreational 

waters (draft, final) ............................................. 2nd Q, nd Q, 

Issue cryptosporidium criteria document 

(draft, final) ........................................................... 4th Q, th Q, 

Issue integrated microbiological criteria document ....(to be determined) 

Pr

2003 

2003 

2004 

2005, 2 2006 

2006, 4 2007 

According to the 2002 state section 303(d) listings, pathogens are the 

second most frequent cause of water quality impairments under the Clean 

Water Act. Increasing interactions between humans and domesticated 

and feral animals are increasing the incidence of human microbial disease 

and contributing to the evolution of new human pathogens. Some 

microbes that originally had animal hosts have acquired the ability to 

infect humans. A number of initiatives such as the Interim Enhanced 

Surface Water Treatment Rule and the 2000 Beach Act are important in 

reducing the risk of waterborne microbial disease and will continue. In 

light of emerging risks, OST, along with other participating OW offices, 

is developing a Strategy for Waterborne Microbial Disease Control. The 

microbial strategy will contain ongoing and needed actions selected by 

EPA technical work groups and reviewed by scientists and the public. 

The milestones identified here are a component of the draft strategy for 

Waterborne Microbial Disease Control findings. 

•	 Developing criteria for Cryptosporidiumparvum. At this time we do 

not know if there will be additional microbes regulated under the 

Safe Drinking Water Act that will require ambient water quality criteria 

for drinking water sources. 

8 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
•	 Developing revised criteria for ambient water quality criteria for 

recreational waters, in accordance with the Beach Act of 2000 (which 

requires new or revised criteria by 2005), based on an assessment of 

potential human health risks resulting from exposure to pathogens 

in coastal recreation waters, and development of appropriate and 

effective indicators for the presence of pathogens that are harmful to 

human health. 

•	 Development of water quality criteria that integrates protection against 

harmful exposures to pathogens for drinking sources and recreational 

waters, and will also consider health protection for other ambient 

water uses, e.g., shellfish growing. 

Because of the complexity of the issues involved, the first step shown 

for each of the three needs above is to construct a specific strategy for 

criteria development. The three strategies will review available scientific 

studies and data, and assess various options for developing the criteria. 

3. oduce and implement a strategy for the development of 

suspended and bedded sediment criteria. 

Milestones: 

Consult EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) .......................... 4th Q, 

Issue the suspended and bedded sediment 

criteria strategy ........................................................................ 2nd Q, 

Pr

2003 

2004 

Sedimentation and siltation problems account for more identified water 

quality impairments of U.S. waters than any other pollutant. Developing 

quantifiable water quality criteria for sedimentation will require research 

to identify sedimentation indicators, analytical methods, ecological 

relationships, reference conditions, and waterway classification systems. 

As a first step, OST will develop a strategy in 2003 for how best to 

develop such criteria. The strategy will set the course that will ultimately 

lead to suspended and bedded sediment criteria. OW’s Office of Wetlands, 

Oceans and Watersheds (OWOW) has coordinated the development of 

guidance for TMDLs involving sediment, including an assessment of 

the state of knowledge and innovative guidance on assessing watersheds 

for river stability and sediment supply. Additionally, OST and OWOW 

are working with the Office of Research and Development (ORD) to 

pursue sedimentation research as part of ORD’s aquatic stressors 

framework and implementation plan for effects research. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 9 
4. ovide technical support to states and tribes for 

developing and adopting nutrient criteria and 

biological criteria. 

Milestones: 

Nutrient criteria: 

Assist in review of state plans for criteria development ......... 2003–2004 

Issue methods manual for wetlands ........................................ 4th Q, 2003 

Establish enhanced technical support process ....................... 1st Q, 2004 

Issue criteria document for selected estuary 

and coastal waters ................................................................... 2005–2007 

Issue criteria document for selected wetland regions ............ 2005–2007 

Biological criteria: 

Update survey of state and tribal programs ............................. 2nd Q, 2003 

Issue methods for the use of statistics in bioassessments 

and biocriteria development ..................................................... 4th Q, 2004 

Issue methods for the use of bioassessments to 

refine designated aquatic life uses ....................................(see #7 below) 

Develop the scientific relationships between 

bioassessments, biocriteria, chemical criteria 

and other forms of criteria ......................................................... 4th Q, 2005 

Issue coral reef methods .......................................................... 4th Q, 2006 

Issue large river methods ......................................................... 4th Q, 2007 

Issue stressor identification support system ............................ 4th Q, 2007 

Issue Great Lakes methods ..................................................... 4th Q, 

Support implementation for streams, small rivers, 

and other water bodies ................................................................. Ongoing 

Pr

2008 

Nutrient-related issues also rank among the highest needs for the criteria 

program. Excessive nutrients are among the top four leading causes of 

water quality impairments. Most states recognize the need for such 

criteria, but because of the difficulty and complexity of the task, only 

two states to date have established a complete numeric baseline for nutrient 

problems and even these are specific to lakes only. In 2001–2002 OST 

issued 28 nutrient criteria documents covering all freshwater lake and 

river ecoregions, and guidance recommending that states establish plans 

for developing and adopting criteria. To date, 32 states have submitted 

nutrient criteria plans to EPA for comment and 9 additional states hope 

to submit plans this year. These nutrient criteria plans are expected to be 

10 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
developed in collaboration with EPA and include milestones and


schedules for each state to work on the complex tasks of gathering and AND CRITERIA MEASURE THE


“HEALTH” OFWATERS 

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTS 

analyzing scientific data and adopting criteria into water quality standards. 

When developing nutrient criteria, a state or tribe has the flexibility to 

refine EPA’s recommended approach and criteria to better reflect local 

conditions and data availability. In 2003, OST will work with states and 

tribes to review and revise EPA’s technical support efforts to ensure they 

best support state needs. 

Biological criteria and assessments are taking on increased importance 

in water quality programs. There is a growing recognition of the 

importance of biocriteria and bioassessment techniques in water quality 

protection and measuring the success of clean-up efforts. Biocriteria 

are particularly useful in advancing the scientific basis for designating 

aquatic life uses and can be an important tool for conducting use 

attainability analyses for aquatic life uses. They can also be used as an 

“ecological check” to see whether regulation of individual chemicals is 

achieving expected results. The National Research Council’s 2001 report 

recommended that biological criteria be used in conjunction with physical 

and chemical criteria in Clean Water Act programs. The NRC 

recommends the expanded use of biocriteria because they are directly 

related to aquatic life designated uses, they are waterbody response 

criteria, and they integrate effects of multiple stressors over time and 

space. Biological criteria can also play an essential role in determining 

the highest attainable uses for aquatic life and in conducting more 

scientifically defensible use attainability analyses. 

With active leadership from EPA and states, all states now have 

bioassessment programs for streams and small rivers, and over half the 

states have adopted at least narrative biocriteria into their water quality 

standards. Nevertheless, states and tribes need continued support to 

strengthen the use of biocriteria in water quality standards and to initiate 

the use of biocriteria for other water body types in addition to streams 

and small rivers. The milestones in this priority strategic action are 

designed to provide the products and support states and tribes have 

requested. OST and its partners will continue to provide technical support 

In the early 1970s the academic 

community conceived the idea of 

systematically assessing local 

aquatic biology with field studies 

and quantitative biological criteria. 

Several states (OH, MO, MI, NC, 

ME, NY) began testing and using 

this approach. 

EPA has provided extensive 

technical guidance, policy 

recommendations and technical 

assistance. 

All states have a bioassessment 

program for streams and small 

rivers, and for these waters: 

29 states have adopted narrative 

biocriteria into water quality 

standards 

23 states have quantitative 

translators for narrative 

biocriteria (8 more are under 

development) 

4 states have adopted numeric 

biocriteria into water quality 

standards (9 more are under 

development) 

Source: Summary of Biological 

Assessment Programs and Biocriteria 

Development for States, Tribes, 

Territories and Interstate Commissions: 

Streams and Wadeable Rivers 

(EPA-822-R-02-048) 

DIRECTLY 

▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ 

▼ ▼ ▼ 

and assistance to states and tribes to complete adoption of biocriteria for 

streams and small rivers and to develop and adopt biocriteria for all 

other water body types. OST will continue to work to produce methods 

for developing biocriteria for all remaining water body types for which 

a method is currently not available, including large rivers, great lakes, 

intermittent and ephemeral headwaters and coral reefs. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 11 
So too are the rising costs 

EPA HAS ISSUED NATIONAL 

NUMERIC CRITERIA GUIDANCE 

FOR 165 POLLUTANTS 

Synthetic organic chemicals ......... 106 

Pesticides ......................................... 30 

Metals ............................................... 17 

Inorganic chemicals .......................... 7 

Basic physical/chemical 

properties ........................................... 4 

Bacteria .............................................. 1 

Total ................................................ 165 

Of these, 101 are priority toxic 

pollutants. 

OST agrees with stakeholders that there is an urgent need to develop 

new and updated water quality criteria. 

of emerging contaminants of concern as well as new information on 

familiar constituents is a constant challenge. 

of developing individual criteria documents. 

to prioritize chemicals and develop new and revised criteria as rapidly 

as possible. 

The growing need to keep abreast 

OST will work with partners 

The key to successful use of limited resources is to focus on 

developing those criteria that will have the greatest effect across the 

6. omplete the national consultation with the Federal 

Services on existing aquatic life criteria. 

Milestones: 

Develop methodology for evaluating effects of pollutants 

on endangered and threatened species ................................. 2nd Q, 2004 

Conclude biological evaluation for first batch 

of pollutants ............................................................................... 3rd Q, 2004 

Conclude biological evaluation for subsequent 

batches of pollutants .......................................................... every 6 months 

country, fill critical gaps, and reduce uncertainty in water quality 

management decisions. 

takes these factors into account when selecting criteria for development 

and will then derive new and revised criteria based on this process. 

Protection of threatened and endangered species is important in standards 

development. A, states and tribes have certain obligations under the 

Endangered Species Act to protect threatened and endangered species. 

EPA’s obligations extend to consulting with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 

whenever we approve state- or tribal-adopted water quality standards, 

and when we promulgate federal standards. 

an obligation to consider Endangered Species Act concerns during the 

development of their water quality standards. 

C

OST will establish a systematic process that 

EP

States and tribes also have 

5. velop and apply a systematic selection process to 

produce new and revised water quality criteria for 

chemicals to address emerging needs. 

Milestones: 

Draft criteria selection process ................................................. 1st Q, 2004 

Implement final criteria selection process ............................... 3rd Q, 2004 

De

HALF OF POLLUTANTS CAUSING 

WATER QUALITY PROBLEMS 

CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE 

NATIONAL NUMERIC CRITERIA 

Selected Causes of Water Quality 

Impairments (in %), Jan 2002: 

Sediment/siltation .... 16 

Pathogens ............... 13 

Metals ...................... 12 

Nutrients .................. 11 

Low dis. oxygen ...... 10 

Habitat alterations ..... 5 

pH imbalances .......... 5 

Thermal modific’ns ... 4 

Pesticides ............... 3 

Contaminated fish .. 2 

Ecol. imbalance ...... 4 

Flow alteration ....... 3 

Noxious plants ....... 2 

Ammonia ................ 2 

Priority organics .... 2 

Unknown ................ 1 

Impairments for which EPA national criteria: 

Have been published ................................ 46% 

Incl. pathogens, metals, diss. oxygen, pH, 

fish contaminants, ammonia, priority 

organics 

Are under development in this strategy .. 18% 

Incl. nutrients, pesticides, biological criteria 

Are in a research phase or not planned . 31% 

Incl. sediment/siltation, habitat alterations, 

temperature, flow alteration, noxious 

plants, unknown 

Note: state narrative criteria generally cover all 

impairment categories. 

12 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
The national consultation on 49 aquatic life water quality criteria is a 

key action established in the 2001 memorandum of agreement between 

EPA, the FWS, and the NMFS regarding enhanced coordination under 

the Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act. The consultation is 

particularly important because water quality standards containing these 

criteria are the basis for many TMDLs, permits and other actions. The 

first step in the consultation is for EPA to prepare biological evaluations 

of the degree to which each criterion may affect endangered and 

threatened species. A team of EPA and Service scientists has drafted a 

methodology for these evaluations. It will undergo peer review before 

being finalized and applied to review specific criteria. 

The memorandum of agreement specifies other actions including 

consulting on new and revised standards and on certain NPDES permits, 

conducting cross-training between the agencies, organizing early 

participation of the three agencies in triennial reviews of water quality 

standards, and elevating unresolved issues to management’s attention. 

Most of these activities are currently underway. 

7. ovide technical support, outreach, training and 

workshops to assist states and tribes with 

designated uses, including use attainability analyses 

and tiered aquatic life uses. 

Milestones: 

Develop a plan for providing outreach, training, workshops 

and other support for states and tribes on critical issues 

regarding designating appropriate uses ................................. 2nd Q, 2004 

Issue methods for the use of bioassessments to 

refine designated aquatic life uses .......................................... 4th Q, 2004 

Internet/Web-based clearinghouse operating with information 

supporting establishment of designated uses ......................... 4th Q, 2004 

Standards-Related Actions 

Pr

Clean Water Act regulatory programs, such as discharge permits and 

TMDLs, are geared toward achieving water quality standards. The public 

relies on EPA, the states and authorized tribes to set designated uses that 

reflect the goals of the Clean Water Act. This priority strategic action 

will help clarify states and tribes understanding of how to conduct use 

attainability analyses (UAAs). It will help states and tribes to make 

decisions related to adjustments of uses such as when higher uses can 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 13 
be attained but are not designated in standards or when higher uses have 

been designated that cannot be attained. Additionally, this action will 

help states and tribes decide when use adjustments should not be made, 

such as removing a designated use that is being attained, has been attained 

since 1975, or can be attained. 

Providing this support will fill a major program gap, promote more 

efficient use of resources, and ultimately lead to incorporating the highest 

attainable uses into water quality standards. States consistently rank 

this as the single most urgent need from EPA. Some participants believe 

that lack of clarity from EPA on designated use issues has prolonged 

local debates over the ultimate goals for water bodies and has resulted in 

a stalled clean-up progress in the meantime. OST will work with other 

EPA offices, states, authorized tribes and other partners to help resolve 

use-related issues, such as how natural conditions, or irretrievable humancaused conditions, or economic factors may be considered, and what 

types and quantity of data are needed for use attainability analyses. 

The National Research Council’s 2001 TMDL report said that “assigning 

tiered designated uses is an essential step in setting water quality 

standards.” OST does not agree tiered uses are essential for all situations, 

but does agree that refined uses including biologically “tiered” uses can 

improve the effectiveness and credibility of state and tribal standards in 

many situations. Broad uses such as “Fish and wildlife use” or 

“Recreational use” are fully acceptable under the Clean Water Act, 

although EPA and many states are learning that refined uses offer 

advantages for waters where information is available to develop them. 

For example, they can provide better operational definitions of desired 

outcomes, and can provide flexibility to describe locally-important 

variations that broad uses may not. For aquatic life uses, OST is 

developing methods to show how biological criteria can help inform the 

adoption of highest attainable uses. Further, OST is developing biological 

criteria tools that show how the degree of human disturbances in a 

watershed can affect ecological outcomes. Many states have been using 

biological assessments and biological criteria in their standards to protect 

high quality waters and provide goals for improving degraded waters. 

OST will work with ORD, OWOW and other partners to develop methods 

that will help states and tribes understand the benefits and scientific 

rationale behind bioassessment-supported designated uses for aquatic 

life. 

14 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
8. ovide implementation support concerning technical 

issues affecting permits and TMDLs, beginning with 

technical support and outreach concerning the duration 

and frequency component of existing water quality criteria. 

Milestones: 

Provide support for duration and frequency component 

of existing water quality criteria ................................................ 4th Q, 2005 

Provide support for mixing zone policies ................................. 4th Q, 2005 

Provide support for additional technical issues ........................... Ongoing 

Develop implementation methods for new water 

quality criteria as needed (see #5 above) ...................................Ongoing 

Pr

Water quality standards and criteria provide the environmental baselines 

needed to regulate discharges to water and determine the extent of cleanup actions. New collaboration across programs must occur to solve the 

Nation’s water quality problems. In particular, there must be a common 

understanding of the how standards and criteria will be applied. 

Modifying criteria on a site-specific basis and applying the criteria for 

specific purposes often involve complex assumptions about pollutant 

fate and transport, mixing zones, pollutant sources, fluctuations in 

discharge rates and receiving water flows and chemistry, and biological 

processes. 

The goal of this priority strategic action is to enable states and tribes to 

implement criteria effectively, considering the scientific basis, in 

monitoring design, attainment decisions, TMDL development, sitespecific conditions, and permit issuance. OST and its partners will provide 

technical support, training and outreach for implementing the duration 

and frequency components of existing numeric criteria, and in establishing 

and applying mixing zone policies. Additionally, OST will provide 

technical support, training and outreach on additional implementation 

issues of importance (e.g., wet weather). On an ongoing basis, OST 

with its partners will also develop new implementation support or 

reference appropriate existing implementation guidance when issuing 

new or revised criteria documents. 

Assessing which U.S. waters are 

impaired and not impaired. 

Establishing targets and load 

reductions needed in impaired 

waters through TMDLs. 

Setting limits on pollutants 

discharged through enforceable 

NPDES permits. 

Issuing permits for dredge or fill 

activities. 

Certifying that other federal 

licenses or permits comply with 

standards. 

Establishing applicable or relevant 

and appropriate requirements for 

on-site responses at Superfund 

sites. 

ARE LINKED TO STANDARDS 

▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ 

MANY IMPORTANT ACTIONS


Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 15 
FACILITIES IMPACTED BY


Number of NPDES facilities or 

sources 

1972-1991 100,000 

1992-2001 370,000 

2002-beyond 400,000-500,000+ 

Number of TMDLs 

1990s 50-100 per year 

2000s 2000-2500 per year 

STANDARDS ARE INCREASING 

▼ ▼ 

9. tify any drinking-water source waters whose 

water quality standards do not protect the use, and 

work with regions, states, and tribes to correct 

any deficient standards as soon as possible. 

Milestones: 

Letters to states requesting that they review drinking water 

use protection in their water quality standards ........................ 4th Q, 2003 

Geographically-referenced information available 

to track progress toward this goal ............................................ 4th Q, 2005 

Iden

In September 2000, states reported that there were approximately 180 

million people served by public drinking water systems using surface 

water sources—rivers, streams, lakes and reservoirs. Under the Safe 

Drinking Water Act, states are mandated to assess each of their source 

waters in order to determine the susceptibility of public water systems to 

threats in their watersheds. These assessments will help to protect source 

waters more effectively and prevent pollutants from entering the waters 

in concentrations harmful to human health. The Clean Water Act will 

play a major role in these efforts and includes many regulatory and nonregulatory tools that can protect source waters. Full use of those tools 

can only occur, however, if the water quality standards for those waters 

are fully protective. OST, along with EPA’s Office of Ground Water and 

Drinking Water (OGWDW) and EPA’s regional offices, will work with 

states and authorized tribes to identify and correct any state water quality 

standards that do not provide adequate protection for contaminants of 

concern for drinking water usage. For example, in 2003 we will ask 

states and tribes to work with EPA to identify any drinking water intakes 

located in source waters that have not been designated for public water 

supply uses or do not have equivalent protections in place to protect the 

intakes. OST will also work with other EPA offices to draw on information 

in geographically-referenced databases containing intake locations and 

water quality standards to establish a way of reporting progress to this 

goal by 2005. OST and the regions will address any remaining issues in 

carrying out EPA’s oversight functions. 

16 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
CHALLENGES IN PROTECTING


SURFACE-WATER SOURCES
 10. velop a web-based clearinghouse for exchanging 

information on critical water quality standards issues, 

beginning with antidegradation. 

Milestones: 

Establish a test web site with pages for state and tribal review 

containing sample antidegradation information ...................... 4th Q, 2003 

Clearinghouse operating with information supporting 

development of state and tribal antidegradation programs .... 2nd Q, 2004 

Internet/web-based clearinghouse operating with 

second round of information supporting establishment 

of designated uses .................................................................. 4th Q, 

De

2004 

180 million people use 14,136 

public water systems that are 

supplied by surface water. 

The pesticide atrazine has been 

detected in over 90% of Ohio’s 

public surface water systems and 

in similar percentages elsewhere. 

Concentrated animal feeding 

operations are believed to be 

among the major sources of 

microbial pathogens in drinking 

water. 

Conventional drinking water 

treatment systems are not fully 

effective for all pathogens and are 

ineffective for most pesticides like 

atrazine. 

OF DRINKING WATER 

▼

▼

▼ ▼ 

Several stakeholders suggested during listening sessions that EPA should 

establish a means for sharing information about approaches that have 

worked for some states and tribes and could potentially be applied 

elsewhere. The suggested “clearinghouse” or “resource center” approach 

has been a successful way to share information in other programs. The 

clearinghouse should be accessible to all who could benefit from the 

information. Ideally EPA would play an active role in seeking materials 

and providing assistance in using them. A clearinghouse would be 

particularly useful for emerging issues where a few states or tribes have 

had success in specific areas and where discussions between EPA, other 

states and other tribes could foster creative solutions. 

OST will be developing this clearinghouse with an initial focus on 

antidegradation, since stakeholders indicated the importance of 

addressing antidegradation. EPA’s regulation requires states and 

authorized tribes to adopt antidegradation policies and to identify 

implementation methods for the policies. Antidegradation procedures 

are designed to preserve water quality in outstanding water resources; 

keep clean waters clean where possible, considering important social 

and economic development; and prevent loss of existing uses through 

degradation. Implementing such procedures can prevent further waters 

being added to the list of impaired waters needing TMDLs. Several 

stakeholders and commenters indicated that the most important 

immediate need is for sharing of information about antidegradation 

requirements and implementation methods. In the absence of such a 

central source of information, each state and tribe would need to 

independently develop its own approach without being able to learn 

from the successes and experiences of other states and tribes who have 

already gone through the process. The clearinghouse will also assist 

OST and the regions to provide ongoing technical support and outreach 

on important antidegradation issues. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 17 
Next Priority S t Priority S t Priority Strategic Actions

The five strategic actions below constitute the next set of priorities that 

will continue to guide OST activities presently and in the coming years. 

Many of these “next priority” actions already have activities and 

workplans underway, while others are in the planning stages and do not 

yet have milestones established. The actions identified here are also 

fundamentally important to the advancement of clean water goals. The 

designation as “next priority” reflects OST’s commitment to these priority 

activities which are outstanding needs but will be delivered over a longer 

time. 

1. te the aquatic life methodology for developing 

ambient water quality criteria. 

Upda

Improved methodologies for criteria will enable future criteria to address 

important toxicological endpoints and exposure routes appropriately, 

and will help develop future criteria that can be used with refined 

designated uses. For aquatic life protection, EPA scientists and nonEPA stakeholders agree that EPA’s 1985 guidelines for deriving numeric 

national aquatic life criteria require updates and refinements to reflect 

advances in scientific understanding and the increased complexity of 

water quality problems. The 1985 guidelines are not preventing 

development of scientifically appropriate criteria, but they lack specificity 

to address emerging needs efficiently. OST and ORD, with assistance 

from FWS, will collaborate to update the guidelines in a priority sequence 

with interim products. 

2. ovide technical support, outreach, and training to assist 

states and tribes implementing mercury criteria in 

assessments, TDMLs, and permits. 

Pr

Mercury contamination is the leading cause of public advisories 

concerning allowable quantities of fish to eat. In 2001, EPA published a 

new water quality criterion for methyl mercury in fish tissue for the 

protection of human health. In publishing the criterion, EPA recognized 

that there are important issues relating to implementing the criterion in 

regulatory programs. OST has established an EPA technical workgroup 

to develop information and approaches for states and tribes to implement 

the recommended criterion. This group is exploring options for deriving 

water quality-based effluent limitations and TMDL target values from 

the EPA mercury criterion expressed as fish tissue contamination levels. 

The draft is expected in late 2003. 

18 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
3. ovide technical support, outreach, and training to assist 

states and tribes in refining human health criteria to reflect 

local bioaccumulation and fish consumption patterns. 

Pr

The Methodology for Deriving Ambient Water Quality Criteria for the 

Protection of Human Health, issued by OST in 2000, included improved 

consideration of exposure routes and toxicological endpoints. The 

methodology includes new protocols for fish consumption rates and 

bioaccumulation that can vary considerably depending upon local 

conditions. OST plans to develop a technical support document (TSD) 

entitled Technical Support Document Volume 2: Development of National 

Bioaccumulation Factors. Additionally, OST plans to publish a detailed 

version of the national bioaccumulation methodology included in the 

2000 Methodology and another TSD to provide methods for deriving 

site-specific Bioaccumulation factors (BAFs). OST will work with 

OGWDW to harmonize criteria regarding surface water pollutants that 

are of concern for drinking water supplies. 

4. ovide updated analytical methods for 

new and existing criteria. 

Pr

Initial emphasis will be on methods for measuring metals and other 

pollutants that appear most frequently in NPDES permit limitations. OST 

will develop methods for emerging pollutants on a priority basis as 

needed, including a method for polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs). 

Additionally, OST will promulgate a final rule in 2003 that will make 

available analytical methods for bacteria (E. coli and enterococci) and 

protozoa (Cryptosporidium and Giardia) in ambient water. OST is also 

validating analytical methods for E. coli and enterococci in effluents 

during 2003 to make these methods available for NPDES permits and WATERSHEDS DO NOT TMDL monitoring. OST is also investigating other pathogens and plans 

to validate methods for Cryptosporidium in effluents to be available 

when a Cryptosporidium water quality criteria is issued. 

5. ter broad participation in the setting of water quality 

standards by providing training, outreach, and education, 

including Internet-based distance learning access to the Water 

Quality Standards Academy. 

Fos

As clean water benefits all Americans, water quality standards are essential 

for clean water protection. When standards were first being set decades 

ago, participation centered on EPA and state technical experts and a few 

Of the 2,165 watershed sub-basins 

in the lower 48 states: 

Almost all cross county lines 

667 (31%) contain parts of two or 

more states 

247 (11%) contain Indian 

reservations 

64 (3%) are shared with Canada or 

Mexico 

▼ ▼ 

RECOGNIZE POLITICAL 

BOUNDARIES 

▼ ▼ 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 19 
HIGH DEMAND FOR TRAINING 

AND WORKSHOPS 

Since 1990: 

Over 2,400 professionals have 

been trained in EPA’s Water 

Quality Standards Academies. 

EPA turns away more students 

than it can train in these popular 

and well-regarded classes. 

Over 2,000 people have attended 

national or regional EPA 

workshops on water quality 

standards and criteria. 

▼ ▼ 

interested stakeholders at the state and national level. As water quality 

issues become more prominent, more participants from broad sectors 

are becoming interested and involved in water quality standards issues. 

EPA, states and tribes today increasingly work with other federal, state, 

tribal and regional government agencies, the regulated community, a 

wide variety of economic sectors, water resource agencies, and private 

citizens. Interactions on issues can occur at the statewide or reservationwide scale, as well as locally or watershed-wide. 

To support and encourage these trends, OST will work with other internal


EPA offices, other Federal Agencies and external organizations to better


educate and inform EPA’s partners, stakeholders and the public about


water quality standards and the role these groups can take in the standards


setting process. OST will use printed and visual media, the Internet,


WATERSHED PARTNERS ARE conferences and workshops, and state-of-the-art distance learning


HELPING PLAN WATER	 mechanisms to communicate information and provide a limited number 

of face-to-face training sessions. OST will continue to offer the Water 

Quality Standards Academy to provide training and will upgrade this 

popular training course to a web-based environment to ensure greater 

access to program information. As knowledge about the program 

increases, OST will provide more advanced, in-depth training and will 

expand outreach activities to include broader audiences. It is OST’s 

expectation that better informed and educated citizens will result in 

greater involvement and participation in the water quality standards setting 

process at the local or watershed level. 

EPA’s Adopt Your Watershed 

program (www.epa.gov/adopt) 

and River Network 

(www.rivernetwork.org), a national 

nonprofit organization, both 

recognize over 3,000 local 

watershed groups. Citizens 

participate in these efforts because 

they are increasingly aware of 

watershed health. 

All states provide varied funding 

and technical assistance for 

watershed planning efforts. 

States such as WA, OR, NJ 

encourage watershed planning by 

supporting the establishment of 

local watershed councils. 

EPA’s Volunteer Monitoring 

Program has registered over 800 

local groups who routinely collect 

and analyze water quality and 

biological samples, and provide 

results to states and EPA. 

QUALITY PROTECTION 

▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ 

OST will focus much of this outreach and communication on participants 

in watershed planning and protection. A 2002 OW study, A Review of 

Statewide Watershed Management Approaches, Final Report, found that 

the water quality standards development process is not significantly 

involved in the watershed management approaches of eight states studied, 

but rather occurs primarily on a statewide basis. Several states indicated, 

however, that the statewide watershed approach has indirectly benefitted 

the water quality standards process by improving the level of 

communication about standards among state partners, increasing public 

understanding and enhancing the state’s ability to assess the need for 

revisions. 

20 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
Roles of EPA Offices and K s and Key Partners

During Implemen During Implementation

C H A P T E R – T H R E E

Implementing the Strategy 

Roles of EPA Offices and Key Partners 

During Implementation 

The EPA offices with primary responsibility for the water quality standards and criteria 

program are OST and EPA’s ten regional offices. Other EPA offices play important roles 

in developing and implementing water quality standards, including OW offices responsible 

for monitoring, assessments, TMDLs, permits, wetlands, oceans, and drinking water, as well 

as ORD and the Office of General Counsel. OST will establish additional work groups with 

representatives from the regions and these other offices (as well as the Office of Policy, 

Economics and Innovation, or OPEI) to implement the priority strategic actions in this strategy 

in the timeframes provided, barring any unforeseen events. 

The ten EPA regional offices have an important and special role in the water quality standards 

and criteria program. OST will work with its regional counterparts to develop a collaborative 

system for administering the water quality standards program, including but not limited to the 

priority strategic actions. The system should recognize geographic and ecological differences 

and still maintain minimum requirements and certain levels of consistency nationwide. For 

example, OST staff could generally focus on issues having national significance while EPA 

regional offices could take the lead on local, site-specific issues. Additionally, EPA regional 

offices can help integrate water quality monitoring with water quality standards activities, 

including using environmental information to help target standards actions and assisting in 

correctly interpreting standards when making attainment and permitting decisions. Examples 

of important activities undertaken by EPA regional offices include serving as liaisons to states 

and tribes; helping states and tribes develop additions and revisions to their standards that are 

consistent with federal requirements and address high-priority needs; providing advice where 

needed on specific standards development and implementation issues; developing criteria 

methods for pollutants affecting regionally-important waters; guiding priorities for triennial 

reviews; reviewing and approving new and revised water quality standards; and coordinating 

with the regional and district offices of the FWS and the NMFS regarding endangered and 

threatened species issues. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 21 
Implementing this strategy will also require greater coordination and 

cooperation between EPA and key external partners than in previous 

years. Recent cooperative efforts should continue, adjusting for lessons 

learned in the process. Current efforts include: 

•	 Meeting with states and tribes on a regular basis to oversee the 

directions of the program, through such groups as the State/EPA 

Operating Committee, the Tribal Operations Committee, the State/ 

EPA Workgroup on Water Quality Standards, the Federal/State 

Toxicology and Risk Assessment Committee, and other fora. These 

groups can help EPA review implementation of the strategy and 

provide valuable feedback. 

•	 Obtaining state and tribal input on operational issues before releasing 

important technical support documents. 

•	 Working in watershed-based partnerships to develop and share 

information for developing standards and criteria. For example, a 

broad range of organizations cooperated in efforts to develop regional 

criteria guidance for dissolved oxygen, water clarity and chlorophyll 

for the Chesapeake Bay and its tidal tributaries. 

•	 Using Regional Technical Assistance Groups when developing and 

implementing EPA’s recommended criteria for nutrients. These 

groups, consisting of technical staff from EPA regions and states as 

well as other researchers, work at the regional level to assemble 

environmental data and develop analytical approaches. In the future, 

these groups will become more involved in implementation issues 

as states and authorized tribes develop nutrient criteria plans and 

adopt nutrient criteria. 

•	 Using an EPA technical workgroup to help develop implementation 

methods for EPA’s recommended criteria for methylmercury. This 

group is identifying questions that need answering for deriving water 

quality-based effluent limitations and TMDL target values from the 

EPA mercury criterion expressed as fish tissue contamination levels. 

•	 Using quality-assured data generated by non-governmental parties 

where possible and appropriate for development of water quality 

criteria. EPA works with these groups to ensure that data adhere to 

EPA protocols. Also, EPA retains the governmental responsibility to 

establish the protocols, review the results, conduct peer review, and 

issue the criteria as federal recommendations. 

22 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
Future Strategy Refinemen finements

OST will continue to engage the scientific community and the public in 

criteria and technical support development. Specifically, we will continue 

the practice of notifying the public when starting a new or revised criteria 

or guidance document and of seeking scientific data and information at 

various stages of criteria development. We will also continue to seek 

peer review of resulting criteria and simultaneously make them available 

for further scientific input from the public. This approach will help EPA 

publish water quality criteria reflecting the latest scientific knowledge. 

Additionally, OST will utilize open public processes wherever possible. 

For example, OST may use public symposia, meetings of professional 

societies and other open venues to obtain information and ideas for 

technical support documents. OST will also continue to coordinate EPAsponsored research activities consistent with the priority strategic actions 

in this strategy. 

Future Strategy Refinements 

OST is now working with its partners to implement the priority strategic 

actions in this strategy. When implementing the strategy, OST will stay 

attuned to the needs of its partners. For example, OST will from time to 

time request feedback concerning how well the strategy is succeeding. 

Products will be available on EPA’s web site at http://www.epa.gov/ 

waterscience. As implementation experience grows, OST may revise 

the strategy as determined by need over time (applying the strategic 

themes as issues emerge) to continue the selection of priorities. When 

revising the strategy, OST will again seek input from our many partners 

and the public. Ten items are presented in Attachment 2 that OST and 

subsequent workgroups may decide to designate as priorities at a later 

date. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 23 
Other Ongoing Pr Other Ongoing Pr Other Ongoing Program Activitie ctivitie ctivities

EPA HAS ISSUED Notwithstanding the priority strategic actions in this strategy, OST will 

REPLACEMENT FEDERAL	 continue to perform other core functions in support of water quality 

standards and criteria. Many of these functions are mandated by the 

Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, or other statutes. These 

include: Nutrient criteria and fish 

consumption uses for certain AZ 

waters. 

Antidegradation provisions for PA. 

Provisions to protect bull trout in ID. 

Full standards for the Colville 

Confederated Tribes Indian 

reservation. 

Criteria for selected toxic pollutants 

in RI, VT, NJ, PR, DC, FL, MI, AR, 

KS, CA, NV, AK, WA. 

Salinity and fish migration criteria 

for the San Francisco Bay/Delta. 

The “California Toxics Rule” for CA. 

Selected provisions to protect the 

Great Lakes system in IN, IL, MI, 

OH, NY, WI. 

(From 40 CFR 131, subpart D, July 2002.) 

STANDARDS TO FILL GAPS IN 

STATE OR TRIBAL 

STANDARDS 

▼▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ 

•	 Oversight of national water quality standards actions: overseeing 

water quality standards development, reviewing draft state or tribal 

standards, recommending improvements, reviewing new and revised 

standards, approving or disapproving them, and issuing federal 

replacement standards to correct deficiencies where necessary. 

•	 Endangered Species Act obligations: consulting with the FWS and 

the NMFS on federal actions that may affect endangered and 

threatened species, and carrying out obligations pursuant to biological 

opinions from the Services. 

•	 Coordination with research activities: coordinating with EPA’s ORD 

to ensure that the most evolved and advanced scientific research is 

available to support water quality standards and criteria. 

•	 Technical assistance: providing case-by-case guidance, technical 

assistance, data and information, and referrals to regional, interstate, 

state, tribal and local water quality managers undertaking program 

activities such as standards development, TMDL development, 

permitting, monitoring and modeling, among others. 

•	 Public access: providing electronic access to state, tribal and federal 

water quality standards, including displaying adopted and approved 

designated uses and criteria in nationally comparable tabular and 

map form for all waters of the United States in the Water Quality 

Standards Database at http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/standards/ 

states/. 

•	 Program tracking and reporting: tracking progress made by states 

and tribes in adopting and revising standards. Reporting and 

managing activities under the Government Performance and Results 

Act and the Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act. 

24 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
C H A P T E R – F O U R

Conclusion 

Water quality standards and criteria are the foundation of water quality protection programs 

under the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act. Water quality standards 

and criteria issues impacting the programs such as assessments, TMDLs and permits are 

increasingly complex. The priority strategic actions in this strategy will strengthen the 

foundation of water quality programs, fill critical gaps and implementation needs, help deal 

with uncertainty and complexity, and ultimately assist in attaining clean water goals. 

Carrying out the strategy will require joint efforts among EPA and its partners and will also 

entail creativity and new approaches. Partners will have key roles in developing products 

and implementing the work outlined in the strategy. As implementation continues, OST may 

periodically make mid-course corrections to keep the strategy current and focused. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 25 
26 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
A P P E N D I X – O N E

Acronyms 

ASIWPCA means the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control 

Administrators. 

EPA means the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

FWS means the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in the U.S. Department of the Interior. 

NMFS means the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration of the U.S. Department of Commerce. 

NPDES means the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, established by section 

402 of the Clean Water Act. 

OGWDW means EPA’s Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water. 

ORD means EPA’s Office of Research and Development. 

OST means the Office of Science and Technology in EPA’s Office of Water. 

OW means EPA’s Office of Water. 

OWOW means EPA’s Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds. 

TMDL means total maximum daily load. States develop total maximum daily loads for 

certain water bodies that do not attain applicable water quality standards. See section 303(d) 

of the Clean Water Act. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 27 
28 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
A P P E N D I X – T W O

Acknowledgments 

This strategy was developed by a workgroup consisting of Fred Leutner (workgroup leader), 

EPA Office of Science and Technology, Washington, DC; Heidi Bell, EPA Office of Science 

and Technology, Washington, DC; Libby Chatfield, West Virginia Environmental Quality Board, 

Charleston, WV; Linda Holst, EPA Region 5, Chicago, IL; Catherine Kuhlman, EPA Region 

9, San Francisco, CA; Cara Lalley, EPA Office of Science and Technology, Washington, DC; 

Terry Oda, EPA Region 9, San Francisco, CA; Joseph Piotrowski, EPA Region 3, Philadelphia, 

PA; Deborah Smith, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles, CA; 

Anthony Maciorowski, EPA Office of Science and Technology, Washington, DC; and Scott 

Ireland, EPA Office of Science and Technology, Washington, DC. 

OST wishes to thank the following organizations for participating in the development of the 

strategy: water quality managers and water quality standards experts from the states of Arizona, 

California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South 

Carolina, Texas, Utah, Washington and West Virginia; the Association of State and Interstate 

Water Pollution Control Administrators; Water Division Directors and program staff in EPA 

Regions 1 through 10; EPA headquarters program managers for the NPDES program, TMDL 

program, Safe Drinking Water Act programs, wetlands programs, oceans programs and water 

law counsel; the Federal-State Toxicology and Risk Assessment Committee; the Federal Water 

Quality Coalition; the Water Environment Federation; the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage 

Agencies; the Clean Water Network and its participating members; the Utility Water Act Group; 

and the Electric Power Research Institute. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 29 
30 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
States

EPA

A P P E N D I X – T H R E E

Information Sources 

for this Strategy 

States 

State water quality managers and water quality standards experts, particularly those from the 

states of Arizona, California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, New York, Oklahoma, 

Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Washington and West Virginia. 

EPA 

EPA water program staff, including directors, managers and staff with responsibility for water 

quality standards, water quality monitoring and assessments, TMDLs, NPDES permits 

and drinking water in each of EPA’s ten regional offices. 

EPA Water Quality Standards Coordinators. 

EPA program managers in headquarters for the NPDES program, TMDL program, Safe Drinking 

Water Act programs, wetlands programs, oceans programs and water law counsel. 

Meeting of EPA headquarters and regional TMDL, NPS and assessment/monitoring 

coordinators, Albuquerque, NM, June 4-7, 2001. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 31 
Stakeholder eholders, State Program-Specific Gr am-Specific Groups and Other Input oups and Other Input

References

Stakeholders, State Program-Specific Groups and Other Input 

ASIWPCA TMDL Conference (Regions 5, 6 and 7), Austin TX, April 18–20, 2001. 

Meeting with Federal-State Toxicology and Risk Assessment Committee, May 22, 2001. 

Meeting with Federal Water Quality Coalition, May 30, 2001, June 28, 2001. 

Conference call with State/EPA TMDL Coordinators, July 13, 2001. 

Meeting with Water Environment Federation, July 17, 2001. 

Meeting with Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies, August 23, 2001. 

Meeting with Clean Water Network, August 28, 2001. 

Letter from American Fisheries Society, September 13, 2001. 

Letter from Clean Water Network, September 21, 2001. 

References 

Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators, A State Perspective: 

Future Needs/Directions of the WQS Program. Distributed at the mid-year meeting, March 

22, 2001. 

EPA, Office of Water, Water Quality Criteria and Standards Plan—Priorities for the Future, 

interim final. June 1998, EPA 822-R-98-003. 

EPA, Office of Water, Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Water Quality Standards 

Regulation. July 7, 1998, 63 FR 36741. Includes associated public record of written 

comments, and notes of discussions at public meetings. 

EPA, Office of Water, Protecting Public Health and Water Resources in Indian Country: A 

Strategy for EPA/Tribal Partnership. October, 1998. Strategy for water quality standards 

is addressed on pp. 11–12. 

EPA, Office of Inspector General, Central Audit Division, Proactive Approach Would Improve 

EPA’s Water Quality Standards Program. Report No. 2000-P-001385-00023, September 

29, 2000. 

EPA, Office of Science and Technology, An Assessment of the Water Quality Standards 

Development and Review Process, Final Report, October 2000. 

EPA, Office of Water, A Review of Statewide Watershed Management Approaches, Final Report, 

April 2002. http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/approaches_fr.pdf. 

EPA, Stage 2 Microbial and Disinfection Byproducts Federal Advisory Committee, Agreement 

in Principle, September 2000, as published in 65 FR 83015, December 29, 2000. 

32 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
Other Sour Other Sources of Information:

EPA, Office of Science and Technology, Perceptions on TMDL Technical Support: Input from 

State, EPA, Discharger Organizations, and Clean Water Action Network, December 29, 

2000. 

EPA, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, Memorandum of Agreement 

Between the Environmental Protection Agency, Fish and Wildlife Service and National 

Marine Fisheries Service Regarding Enhanced Coordination Under the Clean Water Act 

and Endangered Species Act. February 22, 2001, 66 FR 11202. 

EPA, Advisory Committee on Water Information, TMDL Science Issues Conference 2001: 

Closing Session Summary, March 7, 2001. 

EPA, Office of Water, Guidance: Coordinating CSO Long-Term Planning with Water Quality 

Standards Reviews, July 31, 2001, EPA-833-R-01-002 

EPA, Office of Water, Developing Strategy for Waterborne Microbial Disease, August 29, 

2001. 

EPA, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, February 2, 2002, A Review of Statewide 

Watershed Management Approaches, executive summary in draft. 

EPA, National Environmental Justice Advisory Committee, Fish Consumption Workgroup, 

draft reports, March 2002. 

General Accounting Office, Water Quality: Improved EPA Guidance and Support Can Help 

States Develop Standards That Better Target Cleanup Efforts, GAO-03-308, February 

2003. 

National Research Council, Water Science and Technology Board, Assessing the TMDL 

Approach to Water Quality Management, June 22, 2001. 

Other Sources of Information: 

Regular meetings of the State/EPA Operations Committee. 

Regular meetings of the workgroup on Water Quality Standards. 

Regular meetings of the EPA Tribal Operations Committee and the Tribal Caucus of the 

committee. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 33 
34 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
A P P E N D I X – F O U R

Strategic Actions to be Considered 

for Future Priority Setting 

•	 Develop default bioaccumulation factors for use in developing water quality criteria for 

the protection of human health. EPA’s Methodology for Deriving Ambient Water Quality 

Criteria for the Protection of Human Health, October 2000, incorporates a number of 

scientific advancements, one of which is the assessment of exposure to humans through 

the food chain pathway. For bioaccumulative chemicals the food chain pathway is more 

important than ingestion of water. To assess exposure to bioaccumulative chemicals, 

EPA’s methodology emphasizes the use of a bioaccumulation factor (BAF), which accounts 

for chemical accumulation in fish and shellfish from all potential exposure routes. EPA is 

currently finalizing a Technical Support Document that presents the technical basis for 

the national approach to developing BAFs. Because of the need for local data, not all 

states and tribes would have the ability to develop BAFs with limited resources. To address 

this concern, EPA could derive national default BAFs for specific bioaccumulative 

pollutants. It is envisioned that states and authorized tribes would use the national default 

BAFs as a starting point in the process of deriving appropriate and applicable water quality 

standards. The supporting literature searches and data analyzed in the process of deriving 

national default BAFs could also serve as a valuable resource for deriving regional or sitespecific BAFs. 

•	 Conduct research on methods to assess risks of multiple stressors to wildlife populations. 

ORD, OST and other EPA offices could pursue research to fill the important need of 

assessing risks to aquatic-dependent and terrestrial wildlife. ORD’s current work in this 

area is outlined in the recently-completed Aquatic Stressors Research Framework. 

•	 Conduct research on chemical-specific criteria for wetlands. ORD, OST and other EPA 

offices could pursue research to fill the important need of assessing effects of contaminants 

on wetlands. ORD’s work in this areas is outlined in a recently-completed Aquatic Stressors 

Research Framework. 

•	 Provide technical support and outreach for making scientifically valid site-specific 

modifications of criteria. Such technical support and outreach, for example, would help 

states and tribes protect endangered and threatened species, and human populations who 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 35 
consume higher quantities of fish and shellfish. Site-specific tools will also assist states 

and tribes in refining criteria at the time they are refining designated uses. 

•	 Promote increased use of ecological criteria and watershed-scale indicators as measures 

of healthy water bodies. Combining elements of chemical, physical and biological criteria 

in ecological risk evaluations can help define “ecological criteria” as measures of healthy 

water bodies. Such criteria and indicators have the potential of estimating the total response 

of a water body to potential alterations and stressors and identifying the appropriate scale 

for remediation, e.g., remediation in the stream along the riparian corridor or watershedwide. Once ecological indicators are established for a water body, landscape-scale stressorresponse relationships can be determined and used as a basis for the development of 

watershed-scale indicators and as predictive tools for watershed management. These 

new scientific tools could help states and tribes make water quality standards more 

ecologically-based and could set the stage for better watershed management. OST could 

focus on the integration of traditional criteria into ecological criteria. ORD could research 

and develop watershed-scale indicators and indices of watershed integrity. As useful 

approaches emerge, OST and ORD would develop case studies to illustrate how ecological 

criteria and watershed indicators work and would develop methods to assist states and 

tribes with their own implementation. 

•	 Provide technical support and outreach to states and tribes on antidegradation 

implementation procedures. Antidegradation procedures are designed to preserve water 

quality in outstanding water resources, keep clean waters clean where possible, and prevent 

loss of existing uses through degradation. Implementing such procedures can prevent 

further waters being added to the list of impaired waters needing TMDLs. Many participants 

identified lack of explicit guidance on antidegradation implementation procedure as a 

major program gap. In the absence of such guidance, each state and tribe must 

independently develop its own approach with little certainty that EPA will approve it. 

OST could begin by improving the distribution of recent policies and state-specific decisions 

affecting antidegradation implementation, and will follow by focusing new technical 

support and outreach on important antidegradation issues. 

•	 Review and update the 1994 WQS Handbook. This update could incorporate new policies 

and technical support issued since the Handbook was last published in 1994. It could 

also include a checklist of required standards elements. The Handbook could be issued 

in CD-ROM and/or online versions with hyperlinks to supporting materials. 

•	 Develop a broad strategy for addressing inter-jurisdictional differences in water quality 

standards on shared waters. Recent listings of impaired waters have highlighted some 

differences in standards and interpretations of standards at state lines. OST could develop 

a strategy to address this issue. OST could work with other EPA offices, states and tribes 

to explore administrative and policy steps that could lead to a more systematic treatment 

of these issues. 

36 Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 
•	 Obtain early EPA, FWS, NMFS involvement in state and tribal reviews of standards. Issues 

concerning endangered and threatened species have often slowed EPA’s review of submitted 

standards. These problems could be minimized if the agencies could agree on the right 

approaches before states and tribes start to review and revise their standards. Under the 

2001 Memorandum of Agreement, the Services agreed to participate in meeting with EPA 

and the states and tribes to discuss the extent of upcoming water quality standards reviews. 

EPA agreed to take the lead to schedule such meetings near the start of the triennial 

review process. OST could work with other EPA offices to help facilitate this early 

involvement, and to guide and support states and authorized tribes in adopting criteria to 

protect listed species. 

•	 Expand on-line services and databases. Participants encouraged OST to develop more 

EPA web sites such as those containing all state and tribal water quality standards effective 

under the Act and those with interactive geographic information systems that link state 

and tribal standards to individual water bodies. 

Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria 37 
United States Office of Water 

Environmental Protection 4305T August 2003 

Agency 

EPA-823-R-03-010