Water Quality: Agencies Should Take More Actions to Manage Risks from Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia
Overgrown algae can make toxins and lead to hypoxia (depleted oxygen) in water bodies, harming people and animals. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and EPA lead a federal interagency working group to manage harmful algal blooms and hypoxia.
The working group agencies could do more to meet the goals they set in 2016, e.g., by expanding agency monitoring and forecasting of harmful algal bloom and hypoxia events in inland freshwater bodies.
Also, officials told us that more preventive action is needed—but the group's 2016 strategy doesn't include a prevention goal.
Our recommendations address these and other issues we found.
A harmful algal bloom in Milford Lake, Kansas, made the water appear bright green.
What GAO Found
The Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998, as amended, led to the establishment of a federal interagency working group to help address these environmental issues. The working group is co-chaired by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The working group has developed a national research plan and action strategy, as well as subsequent progress reports and other planning documents to guide its efforts, but it has not implemented a national program under the act. Consistent with leading program management practices, an important next step will be to define what such a program would entail. By doing so, the group would be better positioned to implement the program and enhance federal efforts to manage the risks of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia.
Federal agencies in the working group have taken actions to monitor and forecast harmful algal bloom and hypoxia events in some coastal regions and marine waters of the U.S. but have done less for inland freshwater bodies. NOAA has developed a framework to expand monitoring and forecasting of events in marine waters and the Great Lakes. However, EPA has not done the same for other freshwater bodies, in part because of the large number of inland freshwater bodies that exist. By developing interagency frameworks to expand freshwater monitoring and forecasting, EPA and the working group would be better positioned to manage the risks of such events.
Federal agencies in the working group have taken actions to help state, local, and tribal governments respond to harmful algal bloom and hypoxia events (see fig.). In addition, the working group and others have identified a need for more actions aimed at preventing these events. However, the group does not have a national goal to help focus agencies' efforts on prevention. By developing such a goal, the working group, led by NOAA and EPA, could help to increase federal attention on actions to prevent these events.
Harmful Algal Bloom Advisories Posted by States
Providing guidance to inform decisions on posting public health advisories is one of the ways that federal agencies assist state, local, and tribal governments.
Why GAO Did This Study
Harmful algal blooms—overgrowths of algae in water bodies—can produce toxins that harm humans and animals. These blooms are an environmental problem in all 50 states, according to EPA. Harmful algal blooms are also associated with some occurrences of hypoxia—depleted oxygen levels in a water body in which most animals cannot survive. Hypoxia can harm fisheries and disrupt ecosystems.
Under the act, the interagency working group, with NOAA and EPA leadership, is to maintain and enhance a national harmful algal bloom and hypoxia program, develop a comprehensive research plan and action strategy, and submit various reports to Congress.
GAO was asked to review federal efforts to manage harmful algal bloom and hypoxia risks. This report examines, among other things, (1) working group efforts to implement a national program; (2) agencies' actions to monitor and forecast harmful algal bloom and hypoxia events; and (3) agencies' actions to help state, local, and tribal governments respond to these events. GAO examined agency and working group documents and interviewed federal, state, local, and tribal officials with experience in responding to these events.
Recommendations
GAO is making six recommendations, including that NOAA and EPA define a national program and develop a national goal for prevention actions, and that EPA develop frameworks to expand freshwater monitoring and forecasting. NOAA and EPA agreed with GAO's recommendations.
Recommendations for Executive Action
| Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
|---|---|---|
| National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | The Administrator of NOAA and the Administrator of EPA, in collaboration with the members of the working group, should document and define what a national HAB and hypoxia program would entail, including identifying the program's resource needs. (Recommendation 1) |
NOAA and EPA agreed with this recommendation. In addition, the agencies stated that they will work together to realize a more defined national program, including by defining the scope of the program and its resource needs.
|
| National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | The Administrator of NOAA and the Administrator of EPA, in collaboration with the members of the working group, should develop performance measures to assess the working group's efforts, including the extent to which the recommended goals from the Research Plan and Action Strategy have been achieved. (Recommendation 2) |
NOAA and EPA agreed with this recommendation and stated that they will work together, in collaboration with the working group members, to develop formal performance measures.
|
| Environmental Protection Agency | The Administrator of EPA, working with the other members of the working group, should develop an interagency framework, including prioritizing water bodies and identifying resource needs, to expand monitoring of freshwater HABs and hypoxia. (Recommendation 3) |
EPA agreed with this recommendation. EPA further stated that, in consultation with other working group members, it intends to coordinate the development of a framework and determine the resources needed to prioritize water bodies and expand monitoring for HABs and hypoxia in freshwater systems.
|
| Environmental Protection Agency | The Administrator of EPA, working with the other members of the working group, should develop an interagency framework, including prioritizing water bodies and identifying resource needs, to expand forecasting of freshwater HABs and hypoxia. (Recommendation 4) |
EPA agreed with this recommendation. In addition, EPA stated that it intends to coordinate with other working group members to develop an interagency framework--including identifying resource needs and prioritizing water bodies based on magnitude, spatial extent, and frequency--to expand forecasting of freshwater HABs and hypoxia.
|
| National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | The Administrator of NOAA and the Administrator of EPA, in collaboration with the members of the working group, should develop a national goal for the group focused on efforts to prevent HABs and hypoxia. (Recommendation 5) |
NOAA and EPA agreed with this recommendation and stated that they will work together, in collaboration with the working group members, to develop a national goal focused on prevention.
|
| National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | The Administrator of NOAA and the Administrator of EPA, in collaboration with the members of the working group, should coordinate the development of a more comprehensive body of information on the costs and benefits of mitigation, control, and prevention actions for use by state, local, and tribal governments. (Recommendation 6) |
NOAA and EPA agreed with this recommendation. In addition, the agencies stated that they will work together and in collaboration with the working group members to identify the resources and information needed to determine the costs and benefits of mitigation, control, and prevention actions.
|
| Environmental Protection Agency | The Administrator of NOAA and the Administrator of EPA, in collaboration with the members of the working group, should document and define what a national HAB and hypoxia program would entail, including identifying the program's resource needs. (Recommendation 1) |
NOAA and EPA agreed with this recommendation. In addition, the agencies stated that they will work together to realize a more defined national program, including by defining the scope of the program and its resource needs.
|
| Environmental Protection Agency | The Administrator of NOAA and the Administrator of EPA, in collaboration with the members of the working group, should develop performance measures to assess the working group's efforts, including the extent to which the recommended goals from the Research Plan and Action Strategy have been achieved. (Recommendation 2) |
NOAA and EPA agreed with this recommendation and stated that they will work together, in collaboration with the working group members, to develop formal performance measures.
|
| Environmental Protection Agency | The Administrator of NOAA and the Administrator of EPA, in collaboration with the members of the working group, should develop a national goal for the group focused on efforts to prevent HABs and hypoxia. (Recommendation 5) |
NOAA and EPA agreed with this recommendation and stated that they will work together, in collaboration with the working group members, to develop a national goal focused on prevention.
|
| Environmental Protection Agency | The Administrator of NOAA and the Administrator of EPA, in collaboration with the members of the working group, should coordinate the development of a more comprehensive body of information on the costs and benefits of mitigation, control, and prevention actions for use by state, local, and tribal governments. (Recommendation 6) |
NOAA and EPA agreed with this recommendation. In addition, the agencies stated that they will work together and in collaboration with the working group members to identify the resources and information needed to determine the costs and benefits of mitigation, control, and prevention actions.
|