•$* • w"*edl
^"ff . sJie / '' v "• "j^v' k* Environmental Protection
, ' • , ' ' "•» Agency
Office pf Water
Washington DC 20460
EPA841-R-95-006
December 1995
vvEPA
-------
Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act
This report was prepared pursuant to Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act, which states:
(b)(1) Each State shall prepare and submit to the Administrator by April 1,1975,
and shall bring up to date by April 1,1976, and biennially thereafter, a
report which shall include—
(A) a description of the water quality of all navigable waters in such State
during the preceding year, with appropriate supplemental descriptions
as shall be required to take into account seasonal, tidal, and other varia-
tions, correlated with the quality of water required by the objective of
this Act (as identified by the Administrator pursuant to criteria published
under section 304(a) of this Act) and the water quality described in
subparagraph (B) of this paragraph;
(B) an analysis of the extent to which all navigable waters of such State
provide for the protection and propagation of a balanced population
of shellfish, fish, and wildlife, and allow recreational activities in and on
the water;
(Q an analysis of the extent to which the elimination of the discharge of
pollutants and a level of water quality which provides for the protection
and propagation of a balanced population of shellfish, fish, and wildlife
and allows recreational activities in and on the water, have been or will
be achieved by the requirements of this Act, together with recommenda-
tions as to additional action necessary to achieve such objectives and for
what waters such additional action is necessary;
(D) an estimate of (i) the environmental impact, (ii) the economic and social
costs necessary to achieve the objective of this Act in such State, (iii) the
economic and social benefits of such achievement; and (iv) an estimate
of the date of such achievement; and
(E) a description of the nature and extent of nonpoint sources of pollutants,
and recommendations as to the programs which must be undertaken to
control each category of such sources, including an estimate of the costs
of implementing such programs.
(2) The Administrator shall transmit such State reports, together with an analysis
thereof, to Congress on or before October 1,1975, and October 1, 1976,
and biennially thereafter.
Cover photo of the California coast by Paul Goetz
-------
Acknowledgments
This report is based primarily on water quality assessments submitted to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency by the States, Territories, American Indian Tribes, the District of Columbia, and
Interstate Commissions of the United States. The EPA wishes to thank the authors of these
assessments for the time and effort spent in preparing these reports and reviewing the draft of this
national assessment Additional thanks go to the water quality assessment coordinators from all 1 0
EPA Regions who work with the States, Tribes, and other jurisdictions; Wayne Davis, Office of Policy,
Planning, and Evaluation; and joe Hall, Oceans and Coastal Protection Division.
project manager and editor of this document was Barry Burgan of the Monitoring Branch,
Assessment and Watershed Protection Division, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds.
Contractor support was provided under Contract 68-C3-0303 with Tetra Tech, Inc. Subcontractor
Research Triangle Institute (RTI) provided data analysis, technical assistance, editorial support,
design, typesetting, and graphics.
-------
§
'.•i'Ll
for more jnforrnatiqn^aBpuHfieRl^^wl
Report, the companion
presentation, contact:
Barry Burgan
National 305(b) Coordinator
""I, , lh I , ; ; ; A MI ',,' " i,' lil lit „!, II i, II ' j '"» »' "V " i
.<£ ;,;!; vi '(i1! U.S. Environmental Protectioi
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Burgan.Barry@EPAMAlL.EPA.GOV
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW
(202)260-7060
(202) 260-1977 '(faxj
I "1 j IT' (|i | ^
For additional copies of these appendixes, the National Wafer
Quality Inventory Report, the companion summary document,
or other water quality assessment materials, please see the wrier
form at the back of this report. "" " ~""" i——.. --•
,|i
-------
Contents
A j- Pa9e
Appendixes
Appendix A: Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes,
Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-l
Appendix B: Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes,
Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-1
Appendix C: Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes,
Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Coastal Waters C-1
Appendix D: Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes,
Territories, and Commissions - Wetlands D-1
Appendix E: Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes,
Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and
Aquatic Life Concerns E_1
Appendix F: Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes,
Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes F-1
Appendix G: Summary of State Bioassessment Programs G-1
Appendix H: Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes,
Territories, and Commissions - Section 314 Clean Lakes Data H-1
Appendix I: Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes,
Territories, and Commissions - Ground Water Protection
Programs |-i
Note: The appendixes contained in this document are referenced in the National Water Quality
Inventory: 1994 Report to Congress (EPA841 -R-95-005).
Ill
-------
Tables
No.
Page
A-1 Total Miles of Rivers and Streams in the Nation A-2
A-2 Overall Use Support in Surveyed Rivers and Streams (miles) A-4
A-3a Aquatic Life Use Support in Surveyed Rivers
and Streams (miles) A-8
A-3b Fish Consumption Use Support in Surveyed Rivers
and Streams (miles) A-9
A-3c Swimming Use Support in Surveyed Rivers
and Streams (miles) A-"1 °
A-3d Secondary Contact Recreation Use Support in Surveyed
Rivers and Streams (miles) A-11
A-3e Drinking Water Supply Use Support in Surveyed Rivers
and Streams (miles) A-12
A-3f Agriculture Use Support in Surveyed Rivers
and Streams (miles) A-13
A-4 Leading Pollutants and Processes Impairing Surveyed Rivers
and Streams A-14
A-5 Leading Sources of Pollution Impairing Surveyed Rivers
and Streams A-22
A-6 Agricultural Sources of Pollution in Surveyed Rivers
and Streams • A-30
B-1 Total Lake Waters Reported by the States, Territories,
and Commissions . B-2
B-2 Overall Use Support in Surveyed Lakes, Reservoirs,
and Ponds (acres) B'4
B-3a Aquatic Life Use Support in Surveyed Lakes, Reservoirs,
and Ponds (acres) B~8
B-3b Fish Consumption Use Support in Surveyed Lakes, Reservoirs,
and Ponds (acres) B'9
B-3c Swimming Use Support in Surveyed Lakes, Reservoirs,
and Ponds (acres) B"1 °
B-3d Secondary Contact Recreation Use Support in Surveyed
Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds (acres) S-11
B-3e Drinking Water Supply Use Support in Surveyed Lakes,
Reservoirs, and Ponds (acres) B~12
B-3f Agriculture Use Support in Surveyed Lakes, Reservoirs,
and Ponds (acres) B-! 3
B-4 Leading Pollutants and Processes Impairing Surveyed Lakes,
Reservoirs, and Ponds (acres) B-14
B-5 Leading Sources of Pollution impairing Surveyed Lakes,
Reservoirs, and Ponds (acres) B-22
iv
-------
Page
C-1 Total Estuarine and Ocean Shoreline Waters in the Nation .... C-2
C-2 Overall Use Support in Estuaries (square miles) C-4
C-3a Aquatic Life Use Support in Surveyed Estuaries (square miles) . C-8
C-3b Fish Consumption Use Support in Surveyed Estuaries
(square miles) C-9
C-3c Shellfishing Use Support in Surveyed Estuaries (square miles).. C-10
C-3d Swimming Use Support in Surveyed Estuaries (square miles) .. C-11
C-3e Secondary Contact Recreation Use Support in Surveyed
Estuaries (square miles) C-12
C-4 Leading Pollutants and Processes Impairing Surveyed Estuaries
(square miles) C-14
C-5 Leading Sources of Pollution Impairing Surveyed Estuaries .... C-22
C-6 Overall Use Support in Surveyed Ocean Shoreline Waters
(shore miles) C-30
C-7a Aquatic Life Use Support in Surveyed Ocean Shoreline
Waters (shore miles) C-34
C-7b Fish Consumption Use Support in Surveyed Ocean Shoreline
Waters (shore miles) C-35
C-7c Shellfishing Use Support in Surveyed Ocean Shoreline
Waters (shore miles) C-36
C-7d Swimming Use Support in Surveyed Ocean Shoreline
Waters (shore miles) C-37
C-7e Secondary Contact Recreation Use Support in Surveyed
Ocean Shoreline Waters (shore miles) C-38
C-8 Leading Pollutants and Processes Impairing Surveyed
Ocean Shoreline Waters (shore miles) C-40
C-9 Leading Sources of Pollution Impairing Surveyed Ocean
Shoreline Waters (shore miles) C-46
C-10 Characteristics of National Estuary Program (NEP) Sites C-52
C-11 Point Source Problems at National Estuary Program Sites C-54
C-12 Nonpoint Source Problems at National Estuary Program Sites . C-55
C-13 Other Sources of Problems at National Estuary Program Sites. . C-56
D-1 Overall Use Support in Wetlands D-2
D-2 Pollutants and Processes Degrading Wetlands Integrity D-6
D-3 Sources of Integrity Degradation in Wetlands D-8
D-4 Sources of Recent Wetlands Losses D-10
D-5 Development of Wetlands Water Quality Standards by
States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions D-12
-------
Page
E-1 Number of Fish Consumption Advisories E-2
E-2 Number of Fish Advisories Caused by Individual Pollutants ... E-3
E-3 Shellfish Harvesting Restrictions Reported by.the States,
Tribes, Territories, and Commissions E-4
E-4 Sources Associated with Shellfish Harvesting Restrictions ..... E-6
E-5 Surface Drinking Water Restrictions Reported by the
States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions E-8
E-6 Contact Recreation Restrictions Reported by the
States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions E-10
E-7a Fish Kills Reported by the .States, Tribes, Territories,
and Commissions E-12
E-7b Cause of Fish Kills in States, Tribes, Territories,
and Commissions Reporting Total Number of Kills E-14
E-8a Number of Fish Kills Caused by Oxygen-Depleting
Substances and Related Pollutants E-15
E-8b Toxic Pollutants Causing Fish Kills . E-16
E-8c Other Pollutants and Processes Causing Fish Kills E-17
E-9 Sources of Pollutants Causing Fish Kills E-18
E-10 Sediment Contamination Reported by the States,
Tribes, Territories, and Commissions E-20
E-11 Size of Waters Affected by Toxic Substances E-24
F-1 Total Miles of Great Lakes Shoreline in the Nation F-2
F-2 Overall Use Support in the Great Lakes (shore miles) ...... F-4
F-3a Aquatic Life Use Support in the Great Lakes .. .. F-8
F-3b Fish Consumption Use Support in the Great Lakes ........ F-8
F-3c Swimming Use Support in the Great Lakes F-8
F-3d Secondary Contact Recreation Use Support in the
Great Lakes F-9
F-3e Drinking Water Supply Use Support in the Great Lakes .... F-9
F-3f Agriculture Use Support in the Great Lakes F-9
F-4 Leading Pollutants and Processes Impairing the
Great Lakes Shoreline Waters F-10
F-5 Leading Sources of Pollution Impairing the Great Lakes
Shoreline Waters F-16
G-1 Summary of State Bioassessment Programs
(includes 50 States, the Ohio River Valley Sanitation
Commission, and District of Columbia) G-3
H-1 Trophic Status of Significant Publicly Owned Lakes H-2
H-2 Acidity in Significant Publicly Owned Lakes . H-4
H-3 Sources of High Acidity in Lakes H-6
H-4 Trends in Significant Publicly Owned Lakes „ H-8
H-5 Clean Lakes Program Projects H-10
1-1 Ground Water Source Used for Drinking Water I-2
I-2 Summary of State Ground Water Protection Programs ..... I-4
vi
-------
Appendix A
Data Reported by Individual
States, Tribes, Territories,
and Commissions
Rivers and Streams
-------
A-2 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Table ^-1. Total jvliies of Rivers and Streams in the relation : || ; J |
State, Tribe, Tcrritoiy/
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Mamas
California
Compo IntKon R&eivalton
Colorado
Connecticut
'ayote Tribe
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
GHa River Indian Community
tawaH
toopo Tribe
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Minds
ndiana
owa
(ansas
Ccntucky
Loulshna
Maine
Vlarylandb
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
fvtiSSiSSippl
WtMoori
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
NewYork
North Oirofina
North Dakota
Onto
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rko
Rhode bland
Sotxbafond
South GuoEna
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Wginl&nds
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Total
Percent
Rivers
Total
Miles
77,274
365,000 »
1 04,200 c
87,61 7 d
211,513
31
105,581
5,830
0.56
3,158
206
39
51,858
70,150
196
249
133
280
115,595
32,190
35,673 '
71,665
134,338
89,431
66,294
31,672
17,000
8,229
51,438
91,944
84,003
51,015 h
176,750
81,573
143,578
10,881
6,450
110,741
52,337
37,536
11,868"
29,113
981
78,778
114,823'
53,962
5,385
1,106
7.40
35,461
9,937
19,124
191,228
85,916
5,264
44,852
NA'
73,886
32,278
57,698 k
113,422"
3,548,738
Perennial
Streams
47,077
3,300
28,408
64,438
1 8,892 e
5,484
0.33
2,427
206
22,993
44,056
0
249
105
0
54,948
31,156
21,094 ;
26,630
23,731
34,334 b
32,955
23,879 b
12,343
7,1 33 b
29,033
32,985 b
26,454
21,015h
53,221
16,090
14,988
8,636
7,896 b
8,682
46,266 b
47,392 b
9,840 b
27,825 b
981
22,386
51,695
39,510
4,539
979
0
25,729 b
1,932
54,798 b
40,194
16,457
7,099 b
44,852
NA'
39,483
21,114
32,010
32,520
1,292,439
Nonperennial
Streams
28,479
100,100
53,465
124,615
344
0.20
405
2,956
23,906
112
28
280
52,704
8,429
42,957
110,225
20,667
2,104
19,600
54,862
116,608
62,958
126,257
2,238
99,332
0
55,413
59,299
14,116
854
127
7.40
8,005
144,603
65,442
0
NA
31,592
11,164
23,777
1,468,031
Canals
and Ditches
3,000
5,251
22,059
9,000
2
0.00
326
25,909
603
82
0
0
7,944
1,034
6,149
1,418
382
12,672
161
2,455
2,687
6,921
2,517
1,782
2,727
0
175
3,829
89
167
3
424
6,431
4,017
0
NA
2,811
18
814
Miles
Surveyed
4,054
5,619
7,264
11,775
35,112
8.93
0,52
7'40
207
37
11,881
6,242
196
77
;!80
14,160
7,:!39
5,721
16,1539
15,1228
9,164
31,672
6,000
1,425
20,575
3,444
8,995
21,014
17,680
8,540
1,350
10,881
1,617
3,900
52,337
34,533
7,120
8,337
981
7,045
29,109
24,908
5,385
666
7.40
26,313
3,601
10,909
14,359
5,726
5,264
34,554
NA
7,435
6,370
21,247
6,091
17%
•. ,. ,, . -.. .;
Percent
Surveyed
5%
8%
6%
71%
33%
15%
93%
23%
100%
95%
23%
9%
100%
58%
100%
44%
21%
8%
13%
17%
14%
100%
35%
17%
40%
4%
11%
41%
10%
10%
1%
100%
25%
4%
100%
92%
29% <-
100%
9%
25%
100%
60%
100%
74%
57%
8%
7%
100%
77%
NA
10%
37%
5%
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes/Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-3
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
NA = Not applicable because boundaries of the State, Territory, Tribe, or Commission do not encompass rivers and streams.
^Entered data from State's 1992 305(b) report because State did not report data in'1994.
b Entered data from EPA's Total Waters Database because the State did not report an estimate of their total perennial streams in 1994.
^Arizona does not include river miles on Indian lands in their estimate of total river miles.
"Arkansas reports the RF3 estimates of total river miles in their atlas, but the State uses the RF1 estimate of 11,859 river miles.
" Colorado reports miles classified for Class 1 aquatic life use as perennial streams.
Indiana reports the RF3 values of 35,673 river miles but prefers their own estimate of 90,000 river miles.
•> Missouri uses the 21,015 miles of classified perennial streams to determine percentage of rivers assessed.
h North Dakota's estimate of river miles is derived from RF2.
Oregon reports the RF3 value of 114,823 river miles, but the State uses an estimate of 90,000 river miles to determine percentage of rivers assessed.
I The Virgin Islands report that there are no perennial streams on any of the islands.
* Wisconsin uses their own estimate of 26,065 perennial stream miles to determine percentage of rivers assessed.
Wyoming reports the RF3 value of 113,422 river miles, but prefers the RF2 estimate of 23,557 river miles.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions, in conjunction with the EPA Total Waters Database.
-------
A-4 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Table A-2. Overall Use Support in Surveyed Rivers a^ Streams (miles)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Fully Supporting
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
:rcent
Threatened
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
Alabama
Alaska*
Arizona
Arkansas
California41
8,136
0
1,145
1,996
344
1,165
235
1,218
0
0
0
0
2,569
8,480
1,165
1,380
3,214
2,569
163
339
2
155
165
494
706
0~
706
0~
Campo InsGon Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Thfce
Delaware
0
21,402
235
0
37
0
6,651
191
0
59
0
28,053
426
0
96
0%
0
2,607
91
0
0
0
555
75
0
0
3,162
166
0
0
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
GHa Klver Indian Community
0
0
1,116
7
0
167
0
4,378
2,210
0
167
0
5,494
2,217
0
0
0
2,259
30
0
0
30
0
2,259
Hawaii
(foopo Tribe
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
0
0
251
2,552
0
0
14
4,099
0
0
265
6,651
54
198
252
624
Indiana"
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
947
0
0
8,033
4,198
4,289
0
139
3,234
971
5,236
0
139
11,267
5,169
347
0
277
2,440
148
2,440
148
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
24,930
1,761
141
0
0
6,319
2,373
183
19,159
750
31,249
4,134
:324
19,159
750
0
0
27
0
0
100
602
0
0
127
602
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana1*
Nebraska
Nevada
369
8,273
2,718
1,578
191
2,947
807
622
0
0
0
0
459
560
11,220
3,525
2,200
459
193
0
78
145
550
0
115
86
743
0
193
231
0
New Hampshire
New Jersey"
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
1,990
95
8,971
8,721
189
4,724
0
0
0
47,552
0
10,711
0
284
47,552
13,695
109
9,122
252
2,337
1,101
0
1,29.2
0
1,101
361
1,292
11,459
K
North Dakota
Onto"
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma*
Oregon
180
0
537
12,330
0
0
37
322
0
2,816
0
0
0
180
2,816
0
574
12,652
3,790
3,136
1,550
385
0
617
5,340
617
3,521
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode island
SoboboBond
South Carolina
12,697
217
21
7.40
7,604
0
154
0
0
0
0
0
15,779
20,301
217
175
'7.40
15,779
367
81
0
0
256
0
367
337
0
0
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
66
3,107
0
1,279
2,765
458
2,802
9,495
2,176
307
524
5,909
9,495
3,455
3,072
443
0
1,057
739
0
125
1,182
0
1,182
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin*
Wyoming
5,929 24,107
85
13,017
20
1,442
3,763
715
0
784
0
0
0
30,036
784
1,527
16,780
735
286
35
293
826
1,910
398
152
444
2,196
433
445
1,270
Tout
Percent
153,138
43%
129,731
37%
69,959
20%
352,828
57%
25,848
13,890
32%
3,716
9%
43,454
7%
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
• Entered 1992 data because the State did not submit a 1994 Section 305(b) report. There is no basis to believe that the extent and severity of water quality changed substantially
from! 992 to 1994.
b Entered aquatic life use support data because the State did not report overall use support data.
'Oklahoma Includes threatened waters in their estimate of impaired waters. .
d Wisconsin's data underestimate the size of threatened rivers because some assessments were made before the State adopted criteria to define threatened waters, and the criteria
are not applied or interpreted consistently.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-5
Table A-2. (continued)
^Partially Supporting
i Not Supporting
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
2,405
251
1,416
1,167
796
1,040
786
851
0
0
0
0
8,217-
3,201
1,291
2,202
2,018
8,217
1,228
168
931
955
459
1,430
612
1,077
0
0
0
0
283
1,687
1,598
1,543
2,032
283
22
2,524
23
0.40
16
0
522
183
0.12
93
0
0
0
0.00
0
22
3,046
206
0.52
109
0
267
6
0
187
0
584
86
0
348
0
851
92
0
535
0
0
1,139
298
2
4
1.80
2,093
1,730
59
4
1.80
3,232
2,028
61
0
0
342
199
135
6
35.30
554
1,798
0
6
35.30
896
1,997
135
22
22
0
2,198
0
46
15
4,882
22
68
15
7,080
0
0
0
52
8
0
0
125
8
0
0
177
123
0
0
325
2,706
180
3,230
288
732
0
303
3,230
288
1,057
2,706
59
0
0
992
331
1,117
51
16,412
1,764
958
0
454
80
29
1,312
181
705
11
97
240
0
0
383
3
473
1,416
1,320
5,661
6,800
9,267
2,857
1,573
2,896
3,770
1,033
0
0
0
0
277
24
16
668
1,624
434
82
257
595
0
0
0
0
614
442
5,477
83
2,516
2,418
0
306
0
3,189
0
91
306
2,958
3,189
7,895
72
940
75
225
544
0
210
0
304
0
79
210
297
304
1,484
1,010
0
0
7,381
590
800
2,175
1,321
0
1,854
0
0
0
1,600
1,854
800
2,175
8,702
»fr~
0
0
7
4,926
0
181
768
2,829
0
3,050
0
0
0
0
3,050
181
775
7,755
363
949
19
0
1,553
14
27
0
0
0
0
0
4,039
173
2,766
2
0
2,518
1,072
106
0
0
0
0
0
6,495
2,691
3,838
108
0
6,495
470
673
0
609
730
507
2,102
2,200
764
84
977
2,775
2,200
1,373
814
165
269
0
71
156
1,935
774
2,631
827
40
2,100
1,043
2,631
898
196
158
152
1,973
2,280
62,472
,46%
1,621
3,669
1,136
1,318
0
1,396
0
0
0
53,929
19,278
14%
100
629
0
543
489
284
488
0
5,255
0
0
0
135,679
22%
18,812
22%
48,716
58%
16,211
19%
83,739
14%
-------
A-6 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Table 4=2. (conlljmed) - , !; ! - ].-'-'_ " :i - " ; - |; : |, 1 1 -. ', |
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska"
Arizona
Arkansas
California"
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Dc!»v,'jrc River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Ccorgta
Clla Mvtr Indian Community
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hop/ Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana"
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana"
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
NewteKey*
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
OWob
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma'
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
SobobaBond
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
VkgWa
Washington
WcstVfegJnia
Wisconsin"1
Wyoming
Total
Percent
Not Attainable
Eval- Monl- Not tf'f!:11
uated tored Specified Total Bfifcent
— — — — Ijlliig
1 0 0 13 IBl
0 0 0 0 JP%:;t:i
-. -. -. I p
0202 JPSL,
0 0 .0 0
0 67 0 67
0000
0 000
o o o o pPftfc.
E E E E fi
oooo BUSH*
o o o '0. inP?
— — o 'o mS£&-
o o o o it ST
0 33 0 33 •EL.
oooo Rpli-
o o o 'o Biift:
3 102 0 105 ilfcjit
3% 97% 0% <1% Kfl'*£i
Total Surveyed
Eval- Monl- Not
uated tored Specified Total
11,932 1,601 0 13,533
419 3,635 0 4,054
3,831 1,788 0 5,619
4,118 3,146 0 7,264
0 0 11,775 11,775
22 0 0 22
26,800 8,312 0 35,112
358 535 0 893
0.40 0.12 0 0.52
240 500 0 740
0 207 0 207
0 37.10 0 37
4,856 7,025 0 11,881
504 5,738 0 6,242
137 59 0 196
22 10 0 32
22 55 0 77
251 29 0 280
4,856 9,304 0 14,160
1,476 5,863 0 7,339
0 5,721 0 5,721
0 16,839 0 16,839
9,350 5,878 0 15,228
7,235 1,929 0 9,164
24,941 6,731 0 31,672
2,312 3,688 0 6,000
488 937 0 1,425
0 20,575 0 20,575
0 3,444 0 3,444
6,247 2,748 0 8,995
15,089 5,925 0 21,014
12,731 4,949 0 17,680
6,204 2,336 0 8,540
0 0 1,350 1,350
2,002 8,879 0 10,881
0 0 1,617 1,617
718 3,182 0 3,900
— — 52,337 52,337
24,510 10,023 0 34,533
4,980 2,140 0 7,120
0 0 8,337 8,337
0 981 0 981
3,680 3,365 0 7,045
24,637 4,472 0 29,109
13,233 11,675 0 24,908
4,299 1,086 0 5,385
123 543 0 666
7.40 0 0 7.40
0 0 26,313 26,313
701 2,900 0 3,601
4,492 6,417 0 10,909
0 14,359 0 14,359
1,959 3,767 0 5,726
4,708 556 0 5,264
6,373 28,181 0 34,554
0 0 7,435 7,435
372 5,998 0 6,370
15,912 5,335 0 21,247
3,126 2,965 0 6,091
260,274 246,368 109,164 615,806
42% 40% 18%
Total Impaired
(Partial*
Not Supporting)
4,il88
2,W9
— *»"-
'.. $!rjo". ,;
:J22 "]
3,,«97;, ,, !
•101
0,52
<>44
JO
37,10
4/128
4,025
196 '
'11:::::
?15
7,1257' .
1,479
3,281
16,700
•3,613"' -'
3,995
423
. 1,866
974
_:14!_
2-^ : ,
7,692 :
9,794
13,962 ".
6,109
891 -
170
516
3,256
' 4,785 ,,;
-— T.T9,579. '.... ,
1,600
•„ . 4,904 . .
. 981
..;-. , 4471 ;
16,457
4,607
4,801
154. '!
0
10,534
3,077
3,818
: 4,831 . .; :
2,271
1,010
2,322 ' :
6,651
4,410
4,022 ;
4,086
224,236 :
. . .. 36% V
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-7
-------
A-8 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Table A-3a. Aqiiatic Life Use Supportjin Surveyed fivers and Streams (miles)
Stale, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona*
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Gtfo Rhtr Indian Community
Hawaii
lioopa Tribe
Hopi Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
Newjcfsey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Onto R,Vcr Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
SoboboBomf
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Wglni.1
Washington6
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming"5
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
8,279
1,829
4,032
2,569
0
612
0
712
177
14
5,495
—
0
—
14
6,650
5,236
0
1,176
12,377
4,443
31,508
4,135
821
20,132
933
757
11,218
3,526
1,919
387
10,806
0
4,006
45,701
9,595
180
2,816
377
607
—
20,301
438
315
3
24,039
582
6,648
12,779
4,296
3,122
31,060
1,273
2,191
16,743
534
327,363
62%
Threatened
126
852
—
706
0
56
0.12
2
30
0
2,258
0
—
9
0
252
624
2,957
—
135
0
0
177
1,587
521
0
193
775
40
1,101
15
2,250
8,726
5,340
617
3,273
—
507
246
0
0
443
0
1,144
1,705
471
458
942
38,538
7%
Partially
Supporting
1,855
1,399
2,349
8,217
22
,
197
0.40
80
0
0
3,232
61
—
68
15
7,080
303
2,705
1,494
1,003
2,687
0
1,768
151
267
7,228
9,670
13,037
4,053
257
67
306
41
4,140
6,455
1,600
1,854
604
2,139
—
1,956
1,714
48
0
1,078
469
2,774
589
1,130
810
1,421
1,527
3,112
2,941
2,704
108,677
21%
Not
Supporting
1,238
1,392
850
283
0
25
0
100
0
23
895
135
—
0
177
1,176
40
14,157
1,421
2,034
148
97
211
443
586
352
117
924
701
678
8
210
248
246
1,287
0
3,050
0
699
2,691
2,725
58
0
1,197
2,301
1,042
923
300
188
389
4,221
560
1,215
104
10%
Not
Attainable
;S75
—
0
—
0
3
0
0
0
—
0
—
22
—
0
—
0
0
0
0
0
67
116
0
0
0 .
78
0
0
,'
—
• —
0
0
0
0
0
33
—
—
0
0
54
—
<1%
••
Total
Surveyed
5,472
7,231 .
11,775
22
893
0.52
894
207
11,880,
196
51
14,159
7,416
5,702
1 6,827
14,936
9,164
31,656
6,000
1,360
20,575
3,440
8,974
21,005
17,680
7,448
1,440
10,881
1,617
4,310
52,337
26,063
7,120
8,337
981
6,718
24,948
5,384.
667
3
26,314
3,352
10,907
14,324
5,726
5,264
34,575
7,021
6,334
21,411 ,
4,284
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified. , ,
* Entered warmwater aquatic and wildlife use support status.
b Entered wWflfe habitat use because Tribe did not report aquatic life use support
e Entered salmonld spawning use support status because State did not report aquatic life use support status, in general.
a Entered coW water fishery use support status.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-9.
Table A-3b. Fish Consumption Use Support in Surveyed Rivers and Streams (miles) :
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama '.'•'•., . ; '.'••'
Alaska- .-
Arizona
Arkansas
. California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Gilo River Indian Community
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
NewYork
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
Soboba Band
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming ,.' ,\ >••••'/."
Total . ' ,. ,
Percent
Fully
Supporting
2,555
6,799
2,686
<1
0
201
0
77
2,326
35,358
585
14,812
31,461
6,000
402
19,870
20,981
348
10,868
0
52,014
0
0
20,301
10,765
14,103
4,956
33,098
0
155
1.,784
. 292,505
94%
Threatened
490
230
0
0.12
, 0
0 •
0
0
171
0
0
0
8
0
81
0
0
0
—
83
1,149
156
2,368
1%
Partially
Supporting
1,302
369
1,133
0
0.40
0
32
0
0
0
0
236
0
0
0
169
13
93
279
510
981
1,956
0
63
8
297
210
500
403
8,554
3%
Not
Supporting
43
95
66
190
0
0
19
6
0
507
315
11
125
0
0
315
705
34
472
0
0
44
0
0
2,691
142
193
16
16
100
341
4
113
6,563
2%
Not
Attainable
0
0
0
—
22
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
—
0
0
0
0
0
22
<1%
Total
Surveyed
43
4,442
7,234
4,239
<1
0.52
19
207
32
77
22
2,833
35,673
767
14,937
31,697
6,000
725
20,575
21,015
1,070
10,881
93
52,337
510
981
24,948
10,907
14,359
16
5,063
34,644
551
659
2,456
310,013
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
A-10 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Table A-3c. Swimming Use Support ip Surveyed Rivers and Streams (miles) t I , , I
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Gita Rhvr Indian Community
Hawaii
Hoopo Tribe
Hopi Tribe
Idaho
Moots
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Man/land
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rko
Rhode Wand
SobabaBond
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
2,643
2,450
5,268
3,045
0
571
0
59
203
1
5,495
0
77
788
934
9
865
2,178
4,094
31,597
5,998
540
20,189
1,081
5,521
5,370
12,098
546
455
10,775
0
4,329
51,686
724
180
3,059
0
949
20,301
731
369
16,672
10,798
10,269
245
4,025
33,711
1,307
4,789
NA
3,833
290,827
74%
Threatened
0
398
62
0
74
0.00
0
0
2,258
0
0
0
37
0
0
0
113
0
259
0
46
0
40
80
0
251
325
3,985
2,354
388
166
0
0
674
0
18
NA
114
11,642
3%
Partially
Supporting
566
1,239
72
2,230
16
160
0.00
119
4
0
3,232
61
554
159
510
2,782
457
2,571
0
0
318
583
2,356
0
5,049
479
150
32
40
16
374
201
525
406
800
1,128
1,956
1,537
10
4,133
0
2,212
0
427
546
485
1,044
NA
99
39,638
10%
Not
Supporting
155
731
1,157
112
0
85
0
624
0
26
895
135
1,565
3,979
o.
13,196
1,929
2,500
94
2
366
386
1,014
743
0
499
1,338
629
74
405
15
26
30
0
2,048
181
656
2,691
2,725
31
5,509
109
1,771
40
106
205
2,675
506
NA
82
52,045
13%
Not
Attainable
0
0
3
0
34
0
0
0
—
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
67
116
0
0
44
0
0
91
0
0
20
0
0
NA
375
<1%
. Total
Surveyed
3,364 .
4,818
6,497
5,449
16
893
0.52
836
207
27
11,880
196
77
2,907
5,072
556
16,843
4,564
9,165
31,691
6,000
1,337
20,575
2,745
8,995
5,370
17,692
2,363
1,318
10,881
525
4,360
52,337
1,280
4,690
5,513
981
5,087
24,948
5,381
667
26,314
10,907
14,272
285
5,232
34,462
4,467
6,357
NA
4,128'
394,528 , ,
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
NA- Not applicable because the use Is not designated or codified in State standards.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-11
!
Table A-3d. Secondary Contact Recreation Use Support in Surveyed Rivers and Streams (miles) ;
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Gila River Indian Community
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hopi Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island ,
Soboba Band
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total .
Percent
Fully
Supporting
8,279
218
7,232
3,270
0
846
0
894
207
10
61
77
24
9,303
5,473
31,597
1,009
20,189 .
682
10,881
3,620
50,716
180
20,301
1,033
3
10,798
54
245
4,701
2,117
4
NA
169
194,193
85%
Threatened
111
59
0
0
0
0.00
0
0
0
—
—
0
34
0
20
512
3,985
24
358
0
0
187
0
NA
20
5,310
2%
Partially
Supporting
1,855
152
0
65
16
38
0.00
0
6
0
—
4;976
2,478
0
173
135
0
51
1,016
525
1,956
2,054
0
0
3
0
224
273
0
NA
0
15,996
7%
Not
Supporting
1,238
224
0
67
0
0
0
0
12
0
—
2,657
1,214
94
120
386
549
0
32
93
0
2,691
1,937
0
109
0
40
121
1,351
0
NA
0
12,935
6%
Not-
Attainable
375
0
0 ,
3
0
0
0
—
— '
0
0
0
0
0
0
709 ;
0
0
0
0
NA
1,087
<1% ,
Total
Surveyed
11,858
653
7,232
3,402
16
887
0.52
894
207
28
61
77
24
16,93,6
9,165
31,691
1,336
20,575
1,366
10,881
3,723
52,337
4,690
733
24,948
5,382
3
10,907
57
285
5,233
3,741
4
NA
, 189
229,522
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
NA = Not applicable because the use is not designated or codified in State standards.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
A-12 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Table A-3e. Drinking Water Supply USe Support in iuryeyed Rivers and Streams (miles!) J| ; : •
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Abba ma
Alaska
Arizona
Artansas
California
Corr.po Indan Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tiibe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Gifa River Indian Community
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hop; Tribe
Idaho
IBrwis
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mkhigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
N«w)cfs«y
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
OWoRJvcrVallcy
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
SoboboBond
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
818
589
6,369
2,809
69
177
124
0
29
603
69
7,151
40
20,575
0
3,160
9,184
140
532
749
1,343
4,173
3,370
180
532
443
20,301
460
26,313
3,940
8,838
2,942
4,786
20,945
2,119
NA
153,872
80%
Threatened
0
64
22
13
30
22
0
9
0
0
37
0
82
0
1,206
0
0
20
135
2,406
0
50
516
0
0
302
0
0
NA
159
5,073
3%
Partially
Supporting
0
829
0
477
—
0
182
0
68
0
219
45
1,085
0
0
0
6,076
0
135
• ' . 0
206
297
1,238
430
449
71
1,956
1,680
0
0
0
0
122
123
20
NA
210
15,918
8%
Not
Supporting
0
184
862
0
6
0
23
196
0
0
0
8,595
11 '
0
0
0
1,168
0
603
0
4
0
168
0
0
53
2,691
2,730
0
0
0
0
54
89
227
NA
39
17,703
9%
Not
Attainable
0
0
—
0
0
0
22
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
72
NA
94
<1%
Total
Surveyed
818
1,666
7,231
3,308
88
207
351
196
77
51
822
151
16,831
51
20,575
82
3,160
17,634
140
1,270
749
1,573
4,605
7,182
610
981
617
24,948
5,386
26,313
3,940
8,838
2,942
5,264
21,157
2,438
NA
408
192,660
—• Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
NA » Not applicable because the use is not designated or codified in State standards.
Source: 1994 Section 30S(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-13
Table A-3f. Agriculture Use Support in Surveyed Rivers and Streams (miles)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
G/fcr River Indian Community
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico3
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
Soboba Band
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming*1
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
144
3,968
7,064
2,783
22
826
0 -
838
207
50
196
68
280
35,673
7,363
31,672
6,000
20,575
2,431
11,244
2,170
1,160
10,881
3,588
52,014
7,120
534
20,301
26,313
10,907
NA
4,738
5,057
NA
4,291
280,478
91%
Threatened
0
285
0
0
5
0.00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
351
0
0
32
0
0
89
0
NA
0
119
NA
618
1,499
<1% .
Partially
Supporting
182
312
0
71
0
2
0.00
0
6
0
0
0
1,152
0
0
448
4,996
0
54
0
301
279
0
83
1,956
0
0
NA
273
50
NA
851
11,016
4%
Not
Supporting
137
565
168
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
8,316
0
0
0 .
296
356
0
204
0
31
44
0
9
2,691
0
0
NA
715
38
NA
186
1 3,763
4% .
Not
Attainable
0
0
0
0
1
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NA
NA
7
<1%
Total
Surveyed
463
5,130
7,232
2,854
22
833
0.52
851
207
56
196
68
280
35,673
16,831
31,672
6,000
20,575
3,175
16,947
2,170
1,418
10,881
3,952
52,337
7,120
715
24,948
26,313
10,907
NA
5,726
5,264
NA
5,946
306,763
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
NA = Not applicable because the use is not designated or codified in State standards.
a Entered irrigation use support status data.
"Entered livestock and wildlife watering use support status.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
A-14 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Table /M, Leadiijig Pollutants and Processes Impairing Surveyed Rivers and Streams ; | |
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alask*
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
CHa Mm Indian Communlt/1
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hop/ Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana*
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
Newjeney'1
New Mexico
NcwYork
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma**
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rko
Rhode bland
SoboboBand
South Carolina
South Dakota'
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin'-*
Wyoming
Total River Miles
% of Impaired River Miles
% of Surveyed River Miles
% of Total River Miles
Total Surveyed Total Impaired*
Miles Miles
13,533 4,888
4,054 2,889
5,619 3,745
7,264 4,050
11,775 8,500
22 22
35,112 3,897
893 301
0.52 0.52
740 644
207 10
37 37
11,881 4,128
6,242 4,025
196 196
32 30
77 68
280 15
14,160 7,257
7,339 1,479
5,721 3,281
16,839 16,700
15,228 3,813
9,164 3,995
31,672 423
6,000 1,866
1,425 974
20,575 1,416
3,444 2,025
8,995 7,692
21,014 9,794
17,680 13,962
8,540 6,109
1,350 891
10,881 170
590 —
3,900 3,256
52,337 4,785
34,533 9,379
7,120 1,600
8,337 4,904
981 981
7,045 6,471
29,109 16,457
24,908 4,607
5,385 4,801
666 154
7 0
26,313 10,534
3,601 3,077
10,909 3,818
14,359 4,831
5,726 2,271
5,264 1,010
34,554 2,322
7,435 6,651
6,370 4,410
21,247 4,022
6,091 4,086
614,779 223,720
Bacteria (1)
Mod/ Not jftirit
Major Mln Specified | Total
205 257 0 I
— — 440 1
653 262 0 1
1,649 360 0 1
0 22 0 j
30 25 01
94 32 01
0.12 0 0 I
669 37 0 j
0 401
20 301
0 558 01
:2,060 242 — j
0 26 ° !
0 46 0 1
90 97 0 j
4,066 260 0 I
510 00
13,466 2,560 0
1,835 170 0
1,122 1,801 0 j
BE
fe
pUfi.
EZ91'
R302,
fe^1,"
Si,2,6.
in 87,
1,826
feoos
to;
si is o By&i
2 1,461 0 *&$•'•
371 313 o IT $4:
229 156 0 •SagS,
598 1,024 0 |p,622
428 2,293 0
8 1,597 0
1,816 0 0
101 0 0 I
81 00
43 333 0
230 1,266 0
545 0 0 I
0 00
4 25 0
181 800 0
151 200 0
— — 885
— — 130
1,984 1,062 0
56 2 0
0 00
— — 9,511
100 1,701 0
481 734 0
1,405 1,977 0
27 12 0
54 387 0
792 134 0
_ _ 4374
710 804 0
138 706 0
— — 205
|2,721
!i8J<5,
£***»
12101
|f
Jt?" Q
|i 29
» 981
« 351
' . 885
g046
1&511
1.1 ,801
r3'382
SSvifl
it" 926
-4,374
,1/514
S-844
37,085 23,767 15,545 I&397
17% 11% 7% ifeS^o
6% 4% 3%
1% 1% 0%
|fel2%
&2%
S,lltatlon (2) >
Mod/ Not 1
Major Mln Specified |
501 !>45 0 I
2,465 290 0 1
1,621 2,:>46 0 1
0 35 0 1
0.52 0 0 I
0 1 Of
11
i
IBS"-
lit:
0 95 0 Bt':*93
HliSSSa
0 28 Of
68 0 0 I
269 5,748 0 (
96 2,259 0 i
1,306 72 01
71 582 0 i
484 576 0 I
7 22 0 1
294 132 0 I
0 141 0 1
316 6,009 0 1
4 7,166 0 §
421 6,549 0 1
225 259 0 i
601 1,588 0 I
2,355 1,305 0 i
3,802 0 0 1
1,600 0 0
832 1,053 0
725 2,575 0
— — 1,260
080
0 0 0
— — —
160 345 0
1,546 1,248 0
118 1,204 0
495 380 0
121 122 0
_. _ 91
1,080 1,800 0
810 3,995 0
— — 3,269
||
p*.
j&box)1
r '"29,,
11326
KM.
1
ITS?
ip66
SI
m*v» i i' 'i rii1i"
1
-f*'243
22,394 48,778 4,620 W&3&
10% . 22% • 2% 1I1S?§,
4% 8% 1% PI,I2S'o.
1% 1% 0% |U'2"6/o
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
* Impaired •> River miles partially supporting + not supporting designated uses.
bThe Oila River Indian Communi^ reports that sediment, salinity/total dissolved solids/chlorides, and metals impair their rivers and streams, but there are no data to quantify
the extent of impairment from each cause.
'When tabulating the size of waters affected by a cause, the State includes waters where pollutants are present in small quantities that do not impair a designated use.
Therefore, the State may report more river miles affected by a pollutant than total polluted river miles.
dNcw Jersey reports the river miles surveyed for the presence of pollutants rather than the river miles surveyed for use support status.
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-15
Table A-4. (continued)
Major
563
182
455
0
10
410
450
10
0
326
197
0
9
20
682
4
104
6
384
81
0
579
1,600
105
147
614
12
0
275
19
320
210
120
297
560
Nutrients (3)
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
4%
1%
0%
1,125
670
2,000
22
47
208
809
30
6,375
150
35
110
1,376
1,423
254
68
6,397
0
6,056
4
68
0
999
2,383
0
257
2,530
726
49
0
988
20
495
232
26
655
2,792
0
353
0
0
0
0
0
745
Sjpte*'
IS
ii
I £30
6,8.25
16,0
586
0
0
0
45
0
10
0
0
1,054
JSK
8,751 39,379
2,793
18%
1%
6%
0%
1%
o%
Oxygen-Depleting Substances (4)
Major
Mod/
Not
Mln Specified
potjl
685
10
171
1,109
81
185
463
0
0
5
45
69
25
52
80
k"
9
0
305
14
871
22
f&.tt
15
145
1,454
F1 15
"1,599
381
1,639
592
754
220
1,880
43
1,669
87
19
34
203
173
21
888
228
144
324
135
120
47
11
5,459
34
852
0
18
11
5
131
427
15
0
92
1,022
0
35
2,217
128
0
810
915
0
0
0
603
E.-3.0.
561
22
0
674
10
0
198
460
83
85
105
582
1,159
368
24
348
45
174
465
20
392
1,519
10,824 23,605
6,945
5%
11%
3%
2%
4%
0%
1%
0%
Metals (5)
Major
Mod/
Mln
Not
Specified
269
228
623
283
95
702
2,193
0
0
873
70
34
705
47
28
5
1,493
17
33
94
1,097
250
8,192
256
214
55
0
35
231
54
248
52
165
162
41
167
20
923
123
200
43
4,001
0
22
0
200
33
268
6
1
817
274
0
0
495
604
73
345
538
0
812
300
91
0
298
17
0
2,093
0
0
0
1,734
18
68
507
137
10
0
613
159
121
73
130
1,007
98
99
1,424
103
0
255
0
0
374
18,252 13,651
6,649
3%
3%
2%
1%
1%
" Impaired = River miles threatened + partially supporting + not supporting designated uses.
Wisconsin reports that river miles impaired by pollutants may exceed the total polluted river miles due to
inaccuracies in the way threatened waters were addressed in the water quality management plan and the
judgment used to determine the degree of impairment.
9Wisconsin reports that exotic species, such as zebra mussels and ruffe, are present in rivers and streams,
but data are not available to measure impairment at this time.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by the States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
P--62
i;l9f
(continued)
Impaired River Miles: 223,720 mi
Total Surveyed River Miles: , 614,779 mi
Estimate of Total River Miles in the Nation: 3,548,738 mi
-------
A-16 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Table'A-4. (continued)
low Alterations (8)
Suspended Solids (7)
General Habitat Alterations (6)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Mod/ Not \
Min Specified
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
ArUona
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Resetv.
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
Dbtrfet of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
GXa River Indian Comm.6
Hoopo Tribe
Hop! Trite
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana*
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Man/land
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey"
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Onto
Ohio River Valfcy
Oklahoma'*
Oregon
154 0
— 1,355
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rfco
Rhode Island
SobobaBond
South Carolina
South Dakota'
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin'*
Wyomfcig
— 4,703
27 0
2,163 0
— 854
% of Impaired River Miles
36 of Surveyed River Miles
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-17
Table A-4. (continued)
Saiinity/TDS/Chlorides (9) : i; :
Pesticides (10)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
195
— 1,187
524 0
59
2,029
190
437
0
118
0
295
16
1,196 0
— 401
60 0
14
11
0.40
7
0
0
23
6
194
1
35
192
0
18
37
136
16
8,568
160
101
0
821
20
810
279
4,939
0
91
0
1,138
1,431
412
0
0
0
145
18
1
504
0
10
1
131
23
158
0
491
97
465
13
357
8
259
4,841
0
362
11
584
6,064
22
8
22
36
144
299
8
689
65
27
160
528
0
3
36
3
5
1,003
0
26
80
107
8
136
61
0
175
40
415
430
24
880
45
403
271
87
578
2,614
0
0
0
52
318
6
19
488
0
455
25
0
0
477
0
364
0
109
0
0
96
273
0
0
13
160
24
846
747
31
117
26
63
225
61
148
275
18
21
0
13
35
0
0
0
883
277
99
0
173
388
0
0
273
92
611
12
529
0
3,664
0
— 516
11,228 10,960 2,095
9,980 13,102
1,036
• 4,141
5,363 5,322
5%
5%
1%
4%
6%
2%
2%
2%
2%
0%
2%
2%
0%
1%
1%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
(continued)
-------
A-18 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Tabld A-4. (continued)
SUte, Tribe, Tcirltoiy,
or Commission
Thermal Modifications (12)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
."fetal
Turbidity (13)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
btal
Other Inorganics (14)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
CaRfomSa
17
302
67
¥302
55
2,465
— 1,743
290 0
37
335
1,300
0
0
— 763
8 0
883 0
Oimpo Indian Reseiv.
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Frite
Delaware
0.40
0
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Cto River Indian Conun.
358
11
53
Hawafl
tfoopa Tribe
Hopl Tribe
Idaho
MnoU
16
0
27
20
0
374
ill
Indiana'
Iowa
Kansas
Kentudy
Louisiana
234
774
0
625
0
3,951
0
48
0
33
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
0
165
8
18
2
34
324
0
28
1
29
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
0
4
81
76
0
0
10
2,508
0
155
0
38
292
ess,
42:92
0
283
0
3,643
New Hampshire
New Jersey1
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
0
60
349
27
13
442
1,198
0
151
248
873
0
o
86
- 3
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma'1*
Oregon
0
24
35
47
14
,..,14
42
6
55
87
— 1,320
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
SoboboBond
South Carolina
18
0
40
0
19 0
4 0
0 0
— 1,399
114
0
74
0
t,39S
115
0
BL188
E: r-
South Dakotae
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
5
37
37
105
162
79
31
356
W.
as,
20
53
9
10
0
101
'55
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wlseonsin1-'
Wyoming
9
128
25
870
5,694
0
0
117
356
271
181
1,518
42
0
0
476
"'537
789
50
35
0
12
Total River Mites
1,281
6,237
4,569
4,663, 3,660
% of Impaired River Mites
1%
3%
2%
2%
5,512
890
% of Surveyed River Mile
0%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
0%
% of Total River Miles
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
ff 0%
0%
0%
0%
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-19
Table A-4. (continued)
Ammonia (15) ?•'
'• Priorliy,T6xic Organi<;iCHen)icais 06) •:••
'•:]-'" Biodiversity Impacts (17)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
220
20
135
300
0
19
128
0
0
80
70
85
10
0 '
187
0
46
28
24
66
13
24
31
31
376
127
282
45
247
0
63
0
107
433
11
144
108
0
0
0
621
24
253
236
107
515
159
97
0
14
46
737
65
10
330
0
191
0
0
504
160
23
52
0
3,423
732
0
12
1
70
14
321
169
0
12
0
509
126
222
0
35
472
11
0
326
36
104
0
16
129
.981
71
4
13
0
139
26
0
84
24
0
183
0
0
0
73
0
88
0
1
546
279
7
10
129
95
••I
334
50
48
6
26
10
213
0
3,224
0
0
116
34
442
95
79
0
66
0
379
0
0
2,263
3,548
3,468
4,417
3,744
635
3,423
732
1%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
0%
0%
1%
1%
1%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
(continued)
-------
A-20 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Tablet A=4. (continued)
SUtc, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Unknown Toxlclty (18)
Major
Mod/ Not
Win Specified
Oil and Grease (19)
Major
Mod/
Mln
Not
Specified
ttal
Debris (20)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
744
30
12
57
65
1,175
61
Compo Indian Risen.
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
40
0
1:1
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Cta Km Indian Corwn.6
2
61
3
12
1
56
Ham!!
Hoopo Tribe
HepiTribe
Idaho
Kinds
222
Indiana'
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
37
113
37
65
0
17
0
0
0
76
12
36
63
0
1,200
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
10
1
33
55
0
14
25
0
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
0
1
14
234
0
26
New Hampshire
New Jersey*
New Mexico
NewYork
North Carolina
0
86
9
277
14
196
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma"*
Oregon
150
673
43
263
54
322
0
25
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
SobobaBand
South Carolina
106
0
175
0
23
0
25
0
South Dakota'
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
60
116
17
42
20
Virginia
Washington
WestWginla
Wisconsin'''
Wyoming
16
33
0
14
Total River Miles
1,531
1,768
477
571
2,270
158
1,175
61
0_
0%
% of Impaired River Miles
1%
1%
1%
te.2%
1%
JBJJBBfe'v
% of Surveyed River Mite
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
% of Total River Miles
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-21
-------
A-22 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Tabled AS. Leading Sources of Pollution Impairing Surveyed Rivers and Streams
Agriculture (total) (1)
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
Total Surveyed Total Impaired"
Miles Miles
SUte, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
4,888
2,889
3,745
4,050
8,500
13,533
4,054
5,619
7,264
11,775
Alabama
Alutu
Arizona
Arkansas
CaEfomla
22
35,112
893
0.52
740
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut*
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
207
37
11,881
6,242
196
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
CHa Rtotrladton Community
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hop!Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
IrtdSn?
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
250
1,092
13,609
1,027
1,214
466
2,126
2,579
1,078
2,589
1,479
3,281
16,700
3,813
3.995
7,339
5,721
16,839
15,228
9,164
423
1,866
974
1,416
2,025
31,672
6,000
1,425
20,575
3.444
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
655
7,100
9,940
1,743
60
8,995
21,014
17,680
8,540
1.350
7,692
9,794
13,962
6,109
891
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
170
516
3,256
4,785
9.379
10,881
1,617
3,900
52,337
34.533
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
NcwYork
North Carolina
1,600
4,904
981
6,471
16,457
7,120
8,337
981
7,045
29.109
North Dakota
Ohio
Onto River Valley
Oklahoma1*
Oregon
4,607
4,801
154
0
10,534
24,908
5,385
666
7
26.313
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
Sobeba Bund
outh Carolina
1,080
904
244
704
153
South Dakota5
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virmont
1,369
1,778
85
1,004
254
1,708
1,684
421
587
220
3,077
3,818
4,831
2,271
1.010
3,601
10,909
14,359
5,726
264
2,322
6,651
4,410
4,022
4,086
34,554
7,435
6,370
21,247
6,091
VkgWa
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin*
Wyoming
% of Surveyed River Miles
% of Total River Miles
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
•lmoalred» River miles partially supporting* not supporting designated uses.
bWhen tabulating the size of waters affected by a source, the State includes waters where sources contribute pollutants but designated uses are still fully supported.
Therefore, the State may report more river miles affected by a source than total polluted river miles. .... . .
'The Gila River Indian Community reports that agricultural return flows, flow reductions, rangeland use, and mineral extraction activities impair their rivers and streams,
but there are no data to quantify the extent of pollution from each source.
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-23
Table A-5. (continued)
Municipal Point Sources (3)
Major
284
131
193
0
113
0
0.90
0
679
322
170
39
2,971
1,458
94
16
7
40
277
0
159
31
46
592
26
244
35
1,508
126
14
0
0
401
720
6
31
65
192
242
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
457
228
300
557
0
0
0%
96
64
168
4
0.00
586
109
0
0.00
0
2,038
618
442
878
71
4,163
;Totai
574
* 557
jr-359
I&.493
M77
IP*
Hi
8
247
301
105
142
872
28
1,347
1,854
99
1,198
180
718
121
17
0
241
0
0
0
2,405
33
915
1,097
98
84
13 0
— 546
997 —
1,106 0
— 645
1,244 21,805 4,394
10%
2%
4%
1%
1%
0%
Hydro/Habitat Modification (total) (4)
Major
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
81
392
370
461
0
1,900
0
0.52
0
16
0
20
Hr
0
47
1,717
16
256
44
2,822
31
1,924
82
202
764
69
580
2
40
2
76
0
0
31
2
0
28
19
94
764
0
17
3,801
245
80
682
1,180
370
1
1,774
2,284
0
817
293
921
709
15
0
724
40
109
1,007
8
101
16
7
164
36
1,863
8,448 19,773
4%
9%
1%
3%
0%
1%
0%
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers (5)
Major
Mod/
Mln
Not
Specified
92
21
260
171 0
— 176
66 0
833 0
132
380
0
14.60
0
1,517
4
21.00
2,028
120
0
0.00
0
0
31
24
1,178
80
0
2,212
567
337
5
48
0
91
1,453
16
923
101
52
0
519
556
82
118
11
0
53
322
23
83
22
0
294
1,129
101
1,378
0
0
184
0
562
56
0
0
0
1,675
506
16
0
104
106
0
53
0
0
0
1,684
0
228
42
0
70
150
667
319
100
91
305
460
105
365
311
162
0
685
0
0
210
9,746
12,633
4,483
4%
6%
2%
2%
2%
1%
0%
0%
0%
Impaired = River miles threatened + partially supporting + not supporting designated uses.
e Wisconsin reports that river miles polluted by sources may exceed the total miles polluted due to
ee e oa mes poue ue to
inaccuracies in the way threatened waters were addressed in the water quality management plan and the
judgment used to determine the degree of impairment.
Source: 1 994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by the States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
Total
263
si
p3?
1,093
(continued)
Impaired River Miles::
Total Surveyed Rive
>:2'24,23(5:n5i-
; 615,806 rni
'
-------
A-24 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Table A-5. (continued)
Removal of Riparian Vegetation (7)
Resource Extraction (total) (6)
Mod/ Not
"Win Specified FTotal
tato, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
— 110
251 0
100 0
"txnpo Indian teeiv
Colorado
Connecticut11
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Clfa River Indian Comm e
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
H«pl Tribe
Idaho
Indiana11
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
Ncwjcfsey
New Mcxko
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
OWo River Valley
Oklahoma*11
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rfco
Rhode Island
$06060 Bond
Duth Carolina
South DakoU"
Termessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin*
WVomlng
2,970
272 0
1,022 0
— 229
— 1,882
14 0
794 0
— 970
% of Surveyed River Mil
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-25
Table A-5. (continued)
Industrial Point Sources (9)
Other/Unspecified NPS 00)
Streambank Destabilization (11)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Gttb
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Mod/ Not i-v^ _,
Major Min Specified i Tola
89
111
121
320
44
191
0
270
0
0
1,288
106
117
70
16
40
110
23
43
!$>*"<
,'K-t,
0.90 0.00
0 546
135 —
0.00
0
0
2,061
65
0.00
3.10 0.00
—' #»*»*-
24
~94~
594
54
377
112
691
159
346
18
29
100
25
2,140
242 1,352
52
122
233
12
8
129
0
37
17
191
180
14
246 143
1,425 192
54
18
—
176
2
0
291
801
1
339
69
19
94
340
3,801
229
o
71
0
323
36
222
1,148
423
359
0
621
741
1,605
1,627
0
• 0
0
618
0
394
0
138
294
—
95
0
0
99
29
0
206
0
0
0
2,017
226
0
235
0
361
17
23
157
21
305
27
92
176
287
291
33
241
138
397
1,060
0
556
0
0
342
873
4,682
683
0
55
58
— 150
130 0
580 0
— , 994
4,386
8,571
3,391
7,726
7,683
909
2,494
9,410
1,144
4%
2%
3%
3%
1%
4%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
0%
0%
2%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
(continued)
-------
A-26 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Table'A-S. (continued)
aJnstructior»(T4)
Petroleum Activities (13)
Channelization (12)
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
sMomis
Ccmpo Indian Refetv.
Colorado
Connecticut11
Coyote TiSx
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
CSo Kivtf Indian Comm.c
Hawaii
Hoopo Tribe
Hopi Tribe
Idaho
Indiana6
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
NevaAi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
NcwYork
North Carotins
North Dakota
Onto
Ohto River VaRcy
Oklahoma*11
0
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
SobobaBand
South Carolina
South Dakota"
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermonl
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin*
Wyoming
% of Impaired River Mile
% of Surveyed River Miles
% of Total River Miles
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-27
Table A-5. (continued)
land Disposal (total) (15)
Recreational Activities (16)
Flow Regulation (17)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not C|-"I
Specified ffo
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified gfota
78
25
61
60
175
0.12
11
0.00 6.50
0 1,914
0.00
0
14
~20~
34
11
322
552
229
214
2,032
205
0
237
56
263
3
81
10
163
6
37
30
0
0
1
57
145
103
1,673
10
13
86
434
40
859
0
55
620
139
435
32
31
0
6,005
55
110
51
0
68
274
804
3
0
1,098
9
0
'
0
41
245
183
60
2
4
32
0
12
97
171
53
79
31
0
49
35
0
164
0
0
95
0
0
486
— 1,074
20 0
— 786
2,587
7,609
164
103
932
6,761
1,013
2,826
1,860
1%
3%
3%
1%
1%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0B1
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
(continued)
-------
A-28 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Talile A-5. (continued)
Leind Development (20)
Highway Maintenance/Runoff (19)
Onstte Wastewater Systems (18)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Mod/ Not
Major Mln Specified
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
Slate, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
CampolruanRt
Colorado
Connecticut?
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Cfo River Indian Ctmm e
0.00 1.20 0.00
Hawaii
Hoopo Tribe
Hopl Tribe
Idaho
Ilinois
Indiana"
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
0 412 0 Bs.412
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
N
0 148 0
New Hampshire
New jersey
New Mexico
NewYork
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohto River Valley
Oktohomaw
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
SobobaBand
South Carolina
South Dakota"
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vemwmt
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin"
Wyoming
— 325
125 0
% o( Impaired River Mite
% of Surveyed River Miles
% of Total River Mites
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-29
-------
A-30 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Table A-6. Agricultural Sources of Pollution in Surveyed Rivers and Streams , ; || ! j. ' : ;\ [!|
State, Tribe, Terrltoiy,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Cotowdo
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
G8a River Indian Corran.
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hoof Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma"
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
Sotxta Band
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total River Miles
% of Total River Mites
Impaired by Agriculture
% of Surveyed River Miles
% of Total River Miles
Total Miles River Miles Impaired
Surveyed by Agriculture
13,533 1,187
4,054 —
5,619 2,295
7,264 3,220
11,775 4,184
22 22
35,112 2,087
893 46
0.52 0.40
740 682
207 —
37 —
11,881 2,419
6,242 —
196 —
32 10
77 16
280 —
14,160 6,400
7,339 716
5,721 3,218
16,839 16,188
15,228 2,105
9,164 3,803
31,672 68
6,000 947
1,425 80
20,575 314
3,444 468
8,995 6,885
21,014 7,188
17,680 10,535
8,540 5,393
1,350 60
10,881 2
1,617 —
3,900 2,957
52,337 2,724
34,533 5,156
7,120 1,600
8,337 2,133
981 —
7,045 3,769
29,109 7,605
24,908 694
5,385 1,107
666 12
7 0
26,313 2,319
3,601 3,077
10,909 3,462
14,359 506
5,726 1,591
5,264 474
34,554 793
7,435 6,239
6,370 1,061
21,247 3,845
6,091 2,895
615,806 134,557
Nonirrigated Crop Production
Mod/ Not f-
Major Min Specified * Total
— — —
— — —
— — —
0 20
325 3,482 0
10,612 1,126 0
736 662 0
irt-
W '] -
i —
m
f ~
t, ' —
jB" ~~
t 2
13807
f^_
5T™
iii '-J
« 1,398
= - - t -
20 150 0 t-. 170
2,027 1,680 0 fJ/707
6 1,941 0 jEl/947
— — —
1,520 80 0
318 946 0
510 3,259 . 0
000
az:
npfti n pp
urn "I i
MAMf
ffifefc
y,<5oo
fl,264
MM
j&&
ST.]::!:. ft
479 265 0 pf3ftf
272 434 0 jip'PS
140 618 0 JlpS
16,965 14,645 514 P2,l£4
13% 11% <1% ps 24%
3% 2% 0% |E:, 5%
0% 0% 0%
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified. 1
"Impaired miles includes river miles threatened by agriculture. 1
Source; 1994 Section 30S(b) reports submitted by the States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions. '
Irrigated Crop Production
Mod/ Not tu. .
Major Min Specified pilota!
\ \ m
— — — |», , .-**.
,o s o lrtV',8
•M \M
o 10 o p&fdu.
_ _ — p;w.—.
— — — •ps.s.'. ,•.;•
~~ WWSiW^Fr^ '
0 2 0 gSSX
— — ftl^cct=i
11,381 943 0 !fe24
283 489 _ 0
— — — P**':""
8 44 0 fe£". 52
- — - PW,:^,
2,423 320 0 pg2,743,
349 6,973 0 ^ffiSM.
,— ,.,—,, jjpw^,:
^£r— '.
- fe--;
- - -
30 15 0 ET^S.
30 is o |gr:3S
471 1,834 0 B3°5:
ooo plii'o
;„.-"-"-':''"''
~0 151 0 feii!
— — 1,412 E3l'I
Q'286 0 lli;286
— — 1,807 1U,807
11% : 8% 2%
iii, J'V
2% 2% 1% gfislK
0% 0% 0% jlStlfo,
btal River Miles Impaired by Agriculture:. 1 34,557 mi
Fotal River Miles Surveyed: 61 5,806 mi
:stimate of Total River Miles in the Nation: 3,548,738.mi
-------
Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams A-31
Table A-6. (continued)
12
0
0
103
0
2,321
147
112
Rangeland
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
-
135
0
6,162
170
581
1,600
372 3,261 0
— — 9,305
266
216
— 2,464
3,067 12,400 11,769
2%
IP!
0%
2%
feedlots:
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified Qstal
21
61
13,609 2,579
10 63
14
1
134
0
1,787
89
160
0
208
1,440
67
808
14,156 6,902
11%
5%
1%
0
_o
209
214
'continued)
NOTE: River miles impacted by individual agricultural activities do not add up to the total river miles impaired by agriculture in general for the following reasons:
- Less than half of the 49 States, Tribes, and Territories that reported impacts from agriculture, in general, identified specific agricultural activities contributing to water quality
- The 21 States that did provide more detailed information could not identify specific agricultural activities causing impacts in all waterbodies impacted by agriculture, in general.
- The river miles impacted by individual agricultural activities are not additive because more than one agricultural activity may impact a single river or stream segment and EPA
tabulates the miles impacted by each activity separately.
-------
A-32 Appendix A Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Rivers and Streams
Table A-6. (continued)
Animal Holding Areas
Mod/ Not
M!n Specified
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Major Mln Specified
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Alkansas
California
Compo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
do fiMir Indian Comm.
Hawaii
IhopaTribe
HcpiTiibc
Idaho
Knois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma1
Oregon
29 3
282 1,006
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rko
Rhode Island
SoboboBand
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
246 209
32 0
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wvomlna
% of Total River Miles
Polluted by Agriculture
% of Surveyed River Miles
-------
Appendix B
Data Reported by Individual
States, Tribes, Territories,
and Commissions
Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
-------
B-2 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
Table B-1. Total Lake Waters Reported by the Stat4s, Territories, and Commissions ; ;
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Cifa RMy Indian Community
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hop/ Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Onto RSvor Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
SobobaBand
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent
Lakes
Total
Acres
490,472
1 2,787,200 a
302,000
514,245
1,672,684
3.50
143,019
64,973
NA
4,499
NA
251
2,085,120
425,382
153
2,168
NA
70
700,000
309,340
142,871
161,366
173,801
228,385
1,078,031
986,776
77,965
151,173 c
887,019
3,290,101
500,000
288,315
844,802
280,000
533,239
163,012
24,000
151, 320 d
790,782
306,584
632,016
188,461
NA
1,041,884
618,934
161,445
10,887
17,328
NA
525,000
750,000
539,188
3,065,600
481,638
228,383
161,888d
NAe
466,296
21,522 d
982,163
372,309
40,826,064
Significant
Public Acres
380,939
1 28,436 b
356,254
3
24,941
NA
1,690
NA
380,665
0
NA
70
172,543
106,203
41,190
173,801
474,506
958,886
21,010
489,825
325,637
288,315
833,964
152,589
362,331
154,694
24,000
151,320
461,475
306,584
632,016
118,801
NA
645,286
94,520
6,678
7,280
NA
476,001
538,448
1,505,059
228,383
161,888
NA
21,522
982,163
12,189,916
Number of
Significant
43
235
80
2
105
NA
33
NA
7,712
27
0
NA
4
1,170
575
115
279
62
2,314
58
709
102
358
7,004
514
21
606
380
167
1,964
152
217
447
NA
2,337
156
18
57
NA
43
565
125
98
809
251
NA
93
14,973
44,980
Acres
Surveyed
465,316
55,109
356,254
454,699
144,281
24,941
NA
2,804
NA
239
1,241,600
380,665
153
NA
70
187,742
106,203
73,546
173,801
21 7,250
602,170
958,776
21,010
47,295
489,825
1,751,205
326,843
288,315
797,190
133,867
143,175
154,694
143,718
790,782
306,584
623,667
54,905
NA
605,892
504,928
10,887
1 7,328
NA
211,244
685,071
539,188
1,505,059
460,580
226,984
161,364
NA
239,063
21,522
300,927
125,422
17,134,153
42%
Percent
Surveyed
95%
18%
69%
27%
101%
38%
NA
62%
NA
95%
60%
89%
100%
NA
100%
61%
74%
46%
100%
95%
56%
97%
27%
31%
55%
53%
65%
100%
94%
48%
27%
95%
95%
100%
100%
99% ;!
29% i
NA
58%
82%
100%
100%
NA
40%
91%
1 00%
49%
96%
99%
1 00%
NA
51%
1 00%
31%
34%
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
NA « Nat applicable because boundaries of the State, Territory, Tribe,
or Commission do not encompass lakes, ponds, or reservoirs.
• Source: 1986 Report to Congress.
bArizona reports a subset of their significant public lakes that are entered into
the Waterbody System.
e Massachusetts reported total lake acres assessed excluding Quabbin Reservoir.
d Entered size of significant public lakes, a subset total lake acreage,
because the State did not report total lake acreage.
eThe Virgin Islands report that there are no large fresh water lakes or
ponds on any of the islands.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes,
Territories, and Commission, in conjunction with the EPA Total
Waters Database.
-------
Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-3
-------
B-4 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
Table (3 2. Overall Use Support in Surveyed Lakes, Rjeservoirs, and Ponds (acres)
Slate, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Fully Supporting
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
Threatened
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California1
259,693 58,865
79
0
0
335,704
0
0
94,066
318,558
79
335,704
94,066
20,200
977
0
0
25,749
20,200
977
25,749
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
91,737
6,119
310
0
17,132
12,253
397
0
108,869
18,372
707
0
2,160
2,244
52
0
7,291
1,182
0
0
9,451
3,426
52
0
Florida
Georgia
C9a Ktftr Indian Comm.
Hawaii
Hopl Tribe
136,320
0
70
316,160
188,706
0
452,480
188,706
0
70
64,000
0
0
64,000
0
0
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa (takes)
Iowa (flood control reserv.)
1,948
87,734
0
0
3,873
18,280
9,538
0
5,821
106,014
9,538
0
3,192
0
0
48,864
17,115
21,300
52,056
17,115
21,300
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
0
0
342,848
140,881
0
0
98,585
37,779
533,070
9,192
0
98,585
380,627
673,951
9,192
2,551
0
9,566
0
4,049
94,839
41,540
8,021
6,600
94,839
51,106
8,021
Massachusetts"
M*sj.-Quabb)n Reservoir
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
2,851
1,551
449,655
12,230
1,568
319,347
654,514
140,599
4,419
0
320,898
1,104,169
152,829
4,255
724
37,935
469
2,108
118,559
250,883
58,764
6,363
119,283
288,818
59,233
Missouri
Montana*
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
14,450
178
61,680
158,755
40
59,639
0
113,964
0
39,692
0
113,964
218
39,692
121,319
EZ8&"
8,918
1,636
15,202
102,097
0
2,646
0 111,015
1,636
0
17,848
f"
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
85
62
7,648
62
214,582
1,269
0
335,930
0
0
147
335,930
214,644
8,917
45
0
119,871
13,390
81,146
61,260
0
34,527
0
0
13,435
34,527
81,146
181,131
Ohio'
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
8,684
374,303
723
90,363
0
333
271
0
0
0
271
99,047
374,303
1,056
isa,
33,587 197,276
2,191
10,911
0
10,911
230,863
2,191
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
804
0
2,945
0
790
0
418,462
1,475,036
0
208,596
0
0
0
1J594
208,596
0
421,407
1,475,036
6,809
5,127
6 559,843
817 1,851
11,936
559,849
2,668
Utah
Vermont*
Vermont - Lake Champlaln
Virginia
0
1,642
0
88,022
287,364
16,324
0
53,973
287,364
17,966
0
141,995
0
1,293
0
0
0
15,208
0
0
0 0
0 16,501
0 0
I) 0
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
3
3,876
0
2,279
50,637
32,169
89,314
0
0
0
89.314
2,282
54,513
32,169
0
9,387
1,409
4,504
44,648
4
0 4,504
0 54,035
0 1,413
ToUl
Percent
2,099,131
24%
5,617,639
65%
881,833
10%
8,598,603
50%
349,496
1,763,515
81%
71,187 2,184,198
3% 13%
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
* Entered aquatic life use support data because the State did not report overall use support data.
b Does not include Quabbin Reservoir. • , '
e Does not Include Lake Champlain.
d The toUl estimate of impaired lake acres does not necessarily equal the sum of river miles partially supporting and not supporting designated uses because some States include
threatened waters in their estimates of impaired waters.
NOTE: The Coyote Tribe, Hoopa Tribe, Soboba Band, Delaware River Basin Commission, ORSANCO, and the Virgin Islands are not included in this table because their lands do not
Include lake waters.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-5
Table B-2. (continued)
Partially Supporting
Not Supporting
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
112,878
21,883
0
1,200
114,078
31,738 0 53,621
20,550 0 20,550
— 334,884 334,884
12,380
12
0
100
420
0
12,480
432
0
0
13,995
3,070
174
0
11,626
73
805
0
25,621
3,143
979
0
40
0
211
103
300
0
855
136
340
0
1,066
239
33,920
114
28
456,960
88,316
0
490,880
88,430
28
0 I
21,760 212,480
— 103,529
125 0
0 0
234,240
103,529
125
29,795
88
0
10,400
84,152
0
10,879
0
113,947
88
10,879
10,400
13,388
101
0
0
2,530
0
4,314
0
15,918
101
4,314
0
958
0
27,507
26,748
0
24,130
20,510
184,704
206,971
3,791
25,088
20,510
212,211
233,719
3,791
1,270
0
84
0
0
140,843
3,316
9,248
0
6
142,113
3,316
9,332
0
5,800
45,392
8,232
4,011
109,751
106,421
9,811
0
155,143
114,653
1,404
282
0 49,644
52,279 150,796
46 82
0
25,000
0
0
0
1,686
25,000
49,644
203,075
128
0
59
5,767
3,264
317
2,912
0
683,226
0
103,433
0
3,264
683,226
376
103,433
8,679
72%
70 761
1,299 130,338
4,244 2,604
0
0
0
50
0
831
0
131,637
50
6,848
40,273
0
15,008
89,839
10,025
418,611
0
401,314
0
0
130,112
401,314
10,025
433,619
19
769
0
0
19,011
0
0
24
19,011
769
0
25,120
43,902
2,066
216,522
15,016
41,110
0
0
41,110
241,642
58,918
2,066
0
9,679
608
34,340
62,028
4,966
2,613
0
0
2,613
34,340
71,707
5,574
1,110
19,997
920
0
2,083
6,800
27,067
25,933
0
1,008
0
0
0
3,193
1,008
26,797
27,987
25,933
362
5,274
382
0
243
93,151
86,744
4,090
0
1,640
0
0
0
605
1,640
98,425
87,126
4,090
0
125
0
12,688
169,239
11,735
156,380
6,629
169,239
11,860
156,380
19,317
0
86
0
52
3,977
6,396
17,795
0
3,977
6,482
17,795
52
2
14,859
29,538
13,004
82,457
33,822
69,756
0
0
0
69,756
13,006
97,316
63,360
0
31,672
0
1,730
63,391
28,480
79,993
0
0
0
79,993
1,730
95,063
28,480
552,416
11%
2,658,243
55%
1,634,731
34%
4,845,390
28%
156,936
10%
1,220,703
128,307
1,505,946
9%
-------
B-6 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
•m^Ujj^Bj||C|^^A3|M4UM{
State, Tiibc, Territory,
or Commission
Abbama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
CofTpo ImKon Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
CHa River Indion Comm.
Hawaii
Hop* Trite
Idaho
tfitnots
Indiana
Iowa (lakes)
Iowa (flood control rescrv.)
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts5
Mass, -QuJbbin Reservoir
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana9
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
OhW
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rko
Rhode Wand
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont*
Vermont- Lake Champlain
Virginia
Washington
WestVfiginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent
Not Attainable
Eval- Moni- Not 1
uated tored Specified Total £
— — — ~ I
'
""""*
0 0 0 0
0000
_ _ — —
— — — —
16 0 0 16
0 0 0 0
_ _ — , —
0 0
— — — —
0 00 0 j
— — — — !
0000
0000
0000
___
0000
0 0 0,0
16 0 0 • 16
100% 0% 0% <1%
j^
IISI:
f'^'rr
ill, „ „!,.,,
nllli'HMgjr'll.nf
liLlaiuiiB!!'
iiiiliS
•is:::
i
;t^::
rjws
;;:ȣ
I'"''"§T-
|:5Si™
ll?
fesi
Si;
j||:
III
^L,
ft
,1!,' "!' ';,;'
Total Surveyed
Eval- Moni- Not
uated tored Specified Total
405,151 60,165 0 465,316
22,951 32,158 0 55,109
0 356,254 0 356,254
0 0 454,699 454,699
107,932 36,349 0 144,281
11,433 13,508 0 24,941
747 2,057 0 2,804
103 136 0 239
256,000 985,600 0 1,241,600
114 380,551 0 380,665
153 0 0 153
70 0 0 70
48,323 139,419 0 187,742
87,923 18,280 0 106,203
0 41,846 0 ' 41,846
10,400 21,300 0 31,700
4,779 169,022 0 173,801
0 217,250 0 217,250
370,439 231,731 0 602,170
177,195 781,581 0 958,776
0 21,010 0 21,010
14,326 7,969 0 22,295
0 0 25,000 25,000
2,275 487,550 0 489,825
585,261 1,165,944 0 1,751,205
20,977 305,866 0 326,843
23,438 264,877 0 288,315
0 0 797,190 797,190
3,172 130,695 0 133,867
0 0 143,175 143,175
86,893 67,801 0 154,694
40,408 103,310 0 143,718
_ _ 790,782 790,782
62 306,522 0 306,584
142,527 481,140 0 623,667
0 0 54,905 54,905
67,391 538,501 0 605,892
427,884 77,044 0 504,928
5,588 5,299 0 10,887
9,085 8,243 0 17,328
0 0 211,244 211,244
25 277 659 794 0 685,071
5,064 534,124 0 539,188
0 1,505,059 0 1,505,059
0 460,580 0 460,580
3,146 49,663 0 52,809
0 174,175 0 174,175
100,762 60,602 0 161,364
0 0 239,063 239,063
5 21,517 0 21,522
59,794 241,133 0 300,927
30,947 94,475 0 125,422
3,157,995 11,260,100 2,716,058 17,134,153
18% 66% 16%
Total Impaired6
(Partial +
Not Supporting)
126,558 .
54,053
20,550
334,884
25,961
3,143
2,045
239
72i,120
191,959
153
0
129,865
189
15,193
10,400
167,201
23,826
221,543. ,
233,719
3,798
11,497
25,000
49,644
358,218
114,781
4,095
683,226
132,013
103,483
15,527
1 30,1 36
420,325
10,794 S
433,619
43,723
606,845
130,625
7,640
3,798
2,648
125,222
115,113
30,023 :
173,216
18,342
19,369
149,749
14,736
192,379
91,840
-------
Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-7
-------
B-8 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
! 1 * ' ° • ' '" ° i ' \\ - ' 1
Table B-3a. Aquatic Life Use Suppoi-t in Surveyed; Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds (acres) ; •, J ' ' ' j |
State, Tribe, Territoiy,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
da firVcr Indian Community
Hawaii
HopfTrifce
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Iowa (flood control reservoir)
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Ma!n«
Maryland
Massachusetts
Ma$$,-Quabbin Reservoir
Mkhlgan
Minnesota
Missbslppl
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexko
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Vermont - Lake Champlain
Virginia
Washington1
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
356,851
11,731
356,254
94,066
23,691
2,205
136
452,480
188,706
0
133,356
106,014
9,538
11,000
28,403
157,084
240,109
723,112
17,352
6,566
25,000
484,747
152,829
174,644
113,964
178
36,812
138,598
674
444,458
214,270
496,376
271
129,816
1,056
11,342
209,005
0
421,456
1,477,871
274,083
16,741
27,043
149,956
22,130
2,284
166,620
34,919
8,145,797
56%
Threatened
40,200
27,908
0
25,749
275
23
0
64,000
0
16,487
0
17,140
10,300
49,239
57,589
0
5,344
0
4,286
59,233
110,752
1,614
0
8,820
12,909
137,715
81,520
90,320
10,911
224,393
2,191
2,692
670,071
2,619
0
17,209
118,645
4,504
9,203
0
1,883,861
13%
Partially
Supporting
68,265
15,038
0
334,884
975
208
0
490,240
88,430
28
32,883
88
11,373
10,400
33,766
7,885
151,833
178,075
3,651
3,993
0
114,654
2,144
683,226
292
92,033
4,211
130,112
191,292
10,025
31,333
41,110
232,611
2,066
2,732
726
15,000
27,987
23,098
142,417
14,200
23,563
1,115
66
13,005
45,559
53,500
3,330,092
23%
Not
Supporting
0
432
0
0
0
169
103
234,240
103,529
125
5,016
101
3,067
0
111,632
3,042
210,228
0
6
577
0
792
128
775
0
112,856
100
3,064 '
23
17,317
769
1,324
2,613
33,014
5,574
562
1,513
0
87,126
4,090
33,578
4,620
4,924
41,141
1,730
73,097
25,730
1,128,727
8%
Not
Attainable
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
—
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
<1%
Total
Suiveyed
465,31 6
55,109
356,254
454,699
24,941
2,605
239
1,240,960
380,665
153
187,742
106,203
41,118
31,700
1 73,801
217,250
602,170
958,776
21,009
16,480
25,000
489,825
326,844
288,315
797,190
114,940
128,945
154,693
143,718
790,782
306,584
619,368
54,905
619,834
10,887
1 7,328
211,244
685,071
539,188
1,505,059
450,078
52,770
174,175
151,071
63,337
21,523
294,479
114,149
14,488,492
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
• Entered salmonid spawning use support status because Washington did not report general aquatic life use support status.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-9
| Table B-3b. Fish Consumption Use Support in Surveyed Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds (acres)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Gila River Indian Community
Hawaii
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Iowa (flood control reservoir)
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mass.-Quabbin Reservoir
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Vermont - Lake Champlain
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Percent
Fully
Supporting
18,369
335,704
63,143
21,385
42
0
288,897
0
98,500
106,191
17,749
31,700
209,040
958,776
20,910
1,352
0
0
287,793
68,734
160,952
0
647,1 30
298,424
181,562
23,499
458,998
1,504,559
46,596
0
91
92,122
6,298,559
76%
Threatened
17,584
0
25,450
33
0
0
0
0
1,075
0
0
0
0
268
0
466,008
0
858
0
0
0
1,168
0
—
—
0
0
536,944
6%
Partially
Supporting
56,698
8,728
20,550
147,280
2,875
211
0
17,685
0
0
0
8,210
0
100
0
0
0
11,578
119,391
140,706
7,820
407,858
180
500
174,175
0
0
45,009
1,169,554
14%
Not
Supporting ,
12,480
200
0
0
0
185
0
83,011
153
11,629
12
14
0
0
0
0
672
25,000
23,81 7
522
41,455
0
2,946
340
0
0
80,190
0 .
279
5
18,472
0
21,499
322,881
4%
Not
Attainable
0
0
0
0
0
0,
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
18
— •
0
0
0
0 ,
, '18 -;:.
' <1%
Total
Surveyed
450,019
44,881
356,254
235,873
24,293
227
211'
371,908
153
127,814
106,203
18,838
31,700
217,250
958,776
21,010
2,292
25,000
489,825.
288,315
122,625
:-'" 160,952 ,""
119,391
790,782
306,584'
590,606
23,679
539,188
1,505,059
279
46,601
174,175
18,472
91
158,630
"8,327,956 v .
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
B-10 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
Table: B-3c. Swijnrhing Use 'Support ih Surveyed Lajkej, Reservoirs, arid Pfen$s (acfe^r;j||»: ,,,,. JHj':}''^];;,, ' .' .: . j ^J, •' |
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Atkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Gifa River Indian Community
Hawaii
Hop/Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Iowa (Wood control reservoir)
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mass. - Quabbin Reservoir
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Vermont - Lake Champlaln
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
257,776
28,601
356,254
114,096
15,717
631
0
452,480
367,307
0
28,603
106,026
9,621
20,700
124,168
217,031
384,083
807,399
5,687
8,042
25,000
489,825
1,104,169
317,880
163,240
457,556
131,277
37,740
135,751
574,769
204,145
595,450
1,864
49,587
3,634
14,930
210,492
0
539,188
1,498,724
26,834
160,197
34,004
18,822
NA
99,469
10,198,769
69%
Threatened
59,019
23,204
0
1,120
8,956
0
64,000
0
12,371
0
18,347
11,000
0
99,871
0
5,232
0
0
288,818
1,594
97,980
1,885
0
9,631
37,530
0
11,637
655
284,700 ,
1,355
1,304
685,071
14,295
12,360
2,700
NA
0
1,754,635
12%
Partially
Supporting
1,500
3,210
0
21 3,266
268
966
0
490,240
1,358
28
87,005
88
8,940
0
24,685
219
207,795
51,506
0
7,871
0
155,143
7,323
0
337,228
250
91,205
4,989
1 73,698
0
5,473
23,957
192,351
3,228
365
626
0
6,335
5,176
144,020
1,115
1,352
0
NA
0
2,252,779
15%
Not
Supporting
0
50
0
0
0
1,008
238
234,240
12,000
125
59,763
89
1,286
0
12,615
0
10,292
0
0
1,012
0
0
203,075
46
7
3,800
0
0
3,794
4,785
0
5,975
28,651
32,916
2,670
328
127
0
0
1,000
6,01 3
1 7,795
52
1,564
0
NA
0
645,316
4%
Not
Attainable
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
41
—
401
0
0
0
0
0
NA
<1%
Total
Surveyed
55,065
356,254
328,482
24,941
2,605
238
1,240,960
380,665
153
187,742
106,203
38,194
31,700
161,468
217,250
602,1 70
958,776
5,687
22,157
25,000
489,825
1,751,205
326,843
261,227
,798,584
133,412
12X945
154,165
790,782
204,145
618,576
55,127
559,554
10,887
17,328
211,245
685,071
539,188
1,505,059
1,000
52,318
174,175
161,364
36,920
21,522
NA
99,469
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
NA « Not applicable because the use is not designated or codified in State standards.
Source: 1994 Section 305{b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-1 1
1 Table B-3d. Secondary Contact Recreation Use Support in Surveyed Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds (acres)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Cila River Indian Community
Hawaii
Hopi Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Iowa (flood control reservoir)
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mass. - Quabbin Reservoir
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada •
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Vermont- Lake Champlain
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
257,776
14
356,254
119,450
16,418
1,237
108
380,665
0
11,201
145,940
119,528
355,674
958,776
8,791
25,000
489,825
128,117
160,952
0
562,015
214,270
623,1 76
6,508
539,188
20,965
18,775
31,321
5,551,944
80%
Threatened
59,019
6
0
0
7,353
309
0
153
6,600
93,700
0
6,063
0
0
0
171
48,440
81,520
0
620
—
13,193
2,700
72,147
391,994
6%
Partially
Supporting
1,500
12
0
25
1,170
967
27
0
110,751
24,734
4,022
237,164
0
6,1,93
0
0
137
178,143
10,025
0
2,630
—
12,191
168,851
0
108,443
866,985
13%
Not
Supporting
0
12
0
0
0
92
103
0
59,190
3,127
0
9,332
0
263
0
0
0
13
2,184
769
0
1,129
—
1,000
6,020
5,324
0
1,523
90,081
1%
Not
Attainable
0
0
0
0
—
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0%
Total
Surveyed
318,295
44
356,254
119,475
24,941
2,605
238
380,665
153
187,742
173,801
217,250
602,170
958,776
21,310
25,000
489,825
128,117
1 60,952
321
790,782
306,584
623,176
10,887
539,188
1,000
52,369
174,175
21,475
21 3,434
6,901,004
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
B-12 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
Table- B-3e. Drinking Water Supply Use Support in [Surveyed Lakes, Reservoirs, and Pojnds (JKJres) |
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
GHa Rtvtr Indian Community
Hawaii
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Iowa (flood control reservoir)
Kansas
Kenluety
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mass. - Qiwbbin Reservoir
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Vermont - Lake Champlain
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
35,593
7,542
356,254
1,835
296
40,960
380,665
0
75,595
32,000
10,516
0
18,270
186,757
958,590
0
489,825
84,200
262
463,563
126,912
270,971
171,177
370,208
321
56,171
2,358
211,244
508,833
1,485,040
450,078
48,189
111,844
5,037
6,961,106
82%
Threatened
34,586
56
0
118,932
—
6,400
0
0
0
826
11,000
0
0
10,740
0
0
95,029
62,223
0
0
7,867
6,306
1,491
5,793
0
1,133
62,331
1,750
426,463
5%
Partially
Supporting
0
37,823
0
32,934
—
255,360
0
8,439
0
337
0
57,172
1,572
0
0
0
3,208
18,195
1,205
84,793
0
0
42,106
8,800
1,008
253
0
0
0
276
0
553,481
7%
Not
Supporting
0
0
0
0
—
121,600
153
0
0
50
0
96,871
0
76
0
0
0
354
315,428
0
0
140
0
4,832
0
1,821
0
0
0
0
11
0
541,336
6%
Not
Attainable
0
0
—
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
—
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0%
Total
Surveyed
70,179
45,421
356,254
153,701
296
424,320
380,665
153
84,034
32,000
11,729
11,000
172,313
188,329
958,666
10,740
489,825
84,200
98,853
797,186
128,117
417,987
171,317
370,208
55,126
71,277
6,678
6,046
211,244
508,833
1,485,040
450,078
49,609
, 174,175
6,787
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-13
1 Table B-3f. Agriculture Use Support in Surveyed Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds (acres) :
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Cila River Indian Community
Hawaii
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Iowa (flood control reservoir)
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mass.-Quabbin Reservoir
. Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Vermont -Lake Champlain
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Percent
Fully
Supporting
—
47,848
356,254
105,876
—
2,600
380,665
28
70
—
106,203
—
42,589
958,776
21,010
—
489,825
—
733,897
90,422
126,912
160,952
647,130
611,875
57,347
—
211,244
539,188
450,078
—
97,839
93%
Threatened
—
425
0
0
—
0
0
—
0
— '
—
o •
0
—
0
—
0
• o
5,200
0
5,637
236
—
—
—
0
60,052
0
71,550
1%
Partially
Supporting
—
1,040
0
0
5
0
0
—
0
—
126,451
0
0
—
—
— •
3,995
41,586
1,205
49,650
140,706
0
0
—
0
~
0
—
0
364,638
5%
Not
Supporting
—
12
0
0
—
0
0
—
0
—
3,273
0
0
—
0
12,900
0
0
2,946
0
0
0
— '
0
— -
0
19,131
0%
Not
Attainable
— -
0
—
125
0
—
0
—
0
0
—
0
0
0
0
0
—
0
0
0
—
125
Total
Surveyed
—
49,325
356,254
105,876
—
2,605
380,665
153
70
—
106,203
~
172,313
958,776
21,010
—
489,825
~
750,792
132,008
128,117
160,952
54,850
790,782
617,512
57,583
211,244
539,188
450,078
60,052
—
97839
6,694,072
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
B-14 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
Tabl4 B-4. Leading Pollutants and Processes Impairing Surveyed Lakes, Reservoirs,
(acres)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Total Acres
Surveyed
Total Acres
Impaired"
Nutrients (1)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
otal
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
Caftfomta
465,316
55,109
356,254
454,699
126,558
54,053
20,550
334,884
149,805
Cacnpo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connector
Delaware
District of Columbia
144,281
24,941
2,804
239
25,961
3,143
2,045
239
0 7,952
3,856 2,095
580 1,286
Florida
Georgia
GffaKlwr Indian Community
Hawaii
/topi Tribe
1,241,600
380,665
153
70
725,120
191,959
153
0
0 131,840
Idaho
Knois
Indiana
Iowa
towa (flood <
olrs)
187,742
106,203
41,846
31,700
129,865
189
15,193
10,400
41,875
122
652
83,590
12
3,362
63,848
0
1,972
10,400
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
173,801
217,250
602,170
958,776
21,010
167,201
23,826
221,543
233,719
3,798
18,152
9,881
26,080
2,463
2,714
135,857
0
84
63,564
131
13,707
11,360
0
31
Massachusetk
Mass - Quabbin Reservoir
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
22,295
25,000
489,825
1,751,205
326,843
11,497
25,000
49,644
358,218
114,781
2,950
7,853
7,063
3,147
17,353
107,672
8
22
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
288,315
797,190
133,867
143,175
154,694
4,095
683,226
132,013
103,483
15,527
363
0
0
13,598
0
446,111
12,211
872
70
0
1,526
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
143,718
790,782
306,584
623,667
130,136
420,325
10,794
433,619
244
167,436
2,270
31,351
4,702 0
139,408 0
90 0
0 0
58
12,506
574
31,333
15,444
4,865
204,905
540
0
Onto
Oklahoma^
Oregon
Pcnnsyhanta
Puerto Rico
54,905
605,892
504,928
10,887
43,723
606,845
130,625
7,640
16,631
26,799
95
6,716 0
229,382 0
— 115,965
523 0
74,729
4,626 0
313,783 0
— 15,594
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
17,328
211,244
685,071
539,188
1,505,059
3,798
2,648
125,222
115,113
30,023
267
98,659
35,250
769
19,554
16,633
109
78,116
21,035
47,106
23,112
Uuh
Vermont
Vermont- Lake Champlaln
Virginia
460,580
52,809
174,175
161,364
173,216
18,342
174,175
19,369
83,163 73,461
6,578 1,087
74,069 100,106
119,450
1,389
3,029
8,197
2,432
13,506
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Vtyomlng
239,063
21,522
300,927
125,422
149,749
14,736
192,379
91,840
— 111,717 »11,71
2,842 0
— 1.14,097 tl 14,09!
— 40,618 |plO,618
1,840
8,957 • 0
— 31,964
— 33,743
Total Lake Acres
17,134,153
6,682,200
830,819 1,634,286 382,968
586,571 1,188,051 81,301
% of Impaired Lake Acres
12%
24%
6%
9%
18%
1%
% of Surveyed Lake Acres
5%
10%
2%
3%
0%
0%
% of Total Lake Acres
2%
4%
1%
1%
—Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
•Impaired-lake acres partially supporting + not supporting designated uses.
bThe State Includes waters affected but still fully supporting uses in the estimate of lake acres impaired by individual pollutants.
Therefore, the State may report more lake acres affected by a pollutant than total lake acres impaired.
e Impaired »lake acres threatened +• partially supporting + not supporting designated uses.
-------
Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-15
Table B-4. (continued)
Oxygen-Depleting Substances (3)
Major
0
45
74,524
59
9,109
2,242
14,304
133,096
6
0
25,206
1,730
0
0
100
3,702
0
5,275
100
6,559
8,739
29,300
1,040
545
497
34,687
4,090
156,859
2,530
0
0
3,628
1%
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
1,280
42,191
63
1,645
0
14,804
58,604
206
163
0
104,357
0
259,353
7,994
0
219
506
108,205
0
0
3,055 0
156,514 0
— 69,147
1,091 0
295
2,362
57,068
23,098
0
823
0
0
0
8,728
1,374
10,734
7,407
74 0
— 10,964
— 55,259
IIS
Lift
534,877 919,896 142,299
14%
5%
2%
Metals (4)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Total
— — 12,788
247,862 24,810 0
342 9,384
189
0
56
103
92,078
1,300
4,300 17,053
0 45
9,400
452
60
76,387
0
0
572
10,481
0
0
7,060
0
19,349 302,175
4,626 74,680
0 65,700
16,645 102,399
9,534 0
35 2,513
5,813 90,843
654
361
605
92
22,667
0 1,257
0 0
0 84,577
0 9,399
6,372 3,284 0 .. .
- - 66,508
- - 25,730
429,369 896,145 106,442
6%
13%
1%
0%
Suspended Solids (5)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
— 1,341
86
0
0
103
67,200
72,604 54,118
3,040
2,112
0
960
74
22
22
310,530
16,123
220
0
68,874
400
3,640
183,418
75
3,181
390
26
29,133
16,961
97,232
0
21
300
Hist.
248,167 682,704 1,341
4%
10%
1%
4%
1%
2%
0%
NOTE: The Coyote Tribe, Hoopa Tribe, Soboba Band, Delaware River Basin Commission, ORSANCO, and the Virgin Islands are not
included in this table because their lands do not include lake waters.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by the States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
'220
0
0 165,27292
—
IV*B""W~^
0 gfefc.475
(continued)
Total IrtibairedLake Acres: 6,682,200 acres
Total Lake Acres^Stirveyed: 17,134,153 acres
Estimate of Total Lake Acres in the Nation 40,826,064 acres
-------
B-16 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
Tabte B-4. (coritinued)
SUle, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Pesticides (6)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Priority Toxic Organic Chemicals (7)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
fltal
Algae (8)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
4,480
601
0 0
— 370
490 0
1:4,480,
' Izo,
64,698
50
1,698
.50
Campo IntSan Resetv.
Colorado
Connecticut6
Delaware
District of Columbia
103
160
2,875
158
0
0
0
0
103
!,87S
riles
Florida
Georgia
Cih Khvr Indian Camm.
HawaH
HtpiTiibe
2,150 24,911
56,600
3,100'
0 220,800
SPo¥
Idaho
Blinols
Indian*
Iowa
Iowa (flood control rescrv.)
13,288
12
387
260
0
0
2,041
12
1,441
0
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
27,692
0
100
79,091
2,196
0
8,210
84
0
9,280
Massachusetts
Mass.-Quabbin Reservoir
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
0
2,571
5,961
2
4,865
106,782
0
8,056
46
2
415
0
MZl
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
759
3,365
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
0
25,657
326
177,466
0
102,125
340
1,240
19,770
0
Onto
Oklahoma"*
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
57
0
257
4,894
215,663
281
|;4,95i
4538
0
11,805
487
2,044
22,468
ill
its
— 106,774
VM7
Rhode bland
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
— 1,285
0 0
24,198 70,277
97,888 20,325
Utah
Vermont
Vermont - Lake Champlain
Virginia
27
0
84,577
li577
- :
3,419
11,697
2,734
840
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
— 52,709
— 33,863
968
2,630
Total Lake Acres
87,844 617,357 54,364 fc|9,56S
281,895 211,667 33,863
113,972 247,329 106,774
% of Impaired Lake Acres
1%
9%
1%
'11%
4%
3%
1%
2%
4%
2%
% of Surveyed Lake Acre:
1%
4%
0%
2%
1%
0%
1%
1%
1%
0%
%of Total Lake Acres
0%
2%
0%
1%
1%
0%
0%
-------
Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-17
Table B-4. (continued)
Salinlty/TDS/Chlorides (9)
Bacteria (TO)
Noxious Aquatic Plants (11)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
— — 43,193
0 121,234 0
1,380
1,500
7,634
45,000
2,970
740
0
1,212
103
462
136
3,430
781
622
868
0
21,876
17,280
1,800 1,641
45 77
0 112
28,017
5,940
67,071
1,664
9,040 16,206
0 11,839
10,208 26,112
0 214
962
24,435
234
1,200
4,105
7,369
3,570
0
12,900
0
13,875
47
2 0
0 13,312
0 38,733
156
45
0
776
0
43,268
140
0
0
28,325
0
0
23,825 182,766
1,959
805
0
29,290
106
40,110
300
0
1,912
2,344 0
1,820 0
— 13,248
2,429 0
343
5,680
2,321
18,002
0
0
9,191
34
412
4,992
0
585
167
25,518
6,335
332
158
its
4,550 39,005
96,980
1,000 0
41 10
700 100
52 1,115
2,826 100,154
962 1,196
530 2,696
2,630
— 28,088
57
0 0
— 43,170
94,672 326,117 43,293 Ii},"082
65,197 349,070 42,219
119,223 269,468
53,101
1%
5%
1%
1%
5%
1%
2%
4%
0%
1%
2%
0%
1%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
1%
(continued)
-------
B-18 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
Tobfe B-A. (continued)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
• ; ;„; , ; ; pH(12)
Major
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
Lake Level Fluctuations (13)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified ^ Total
Turbidity (14)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Camfa Indhm Resav.
Colorado
Connecticut?
Delaware
District of Columbia
— 3,540
115
215
219
Florida
Georgia
GSo Kver Indian Comm.
Hawaii
HoplTribe
0
39,712
43,520
8,707
0 208,000
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
tova (flood control reserv.)
0
30
3,254
1,550
0
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
0
219
0
952
43
0
14,720
117
3,072
0
14,720
110
Massachusetts
Mass.-Quabbin Reswvolr
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
418
0
374
3,661
ti;',792
385
22
66
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
5,600
0
0
3,056
0
1,974
100
586
1-1,974
iiiiiilOO
mm,
0 346,390 0 B46,390
Ncwjeiscy
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
0
16,462
226
7,310
2,429
Ohio
Oklahoma"*6
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
83
0
1,190 0
72,116 0
— 81,365
T,1,273
72,116
,81,365
15,629
5,251
108
&?,Pf,880
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Totat
1,140
0
11,847
1,140
81
287 0
— 146
Utah
Vermont
Vermont- Lake Charnplaln
Virginia
715
288
15,850
0
8,537
A537,
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
1,791
— 59,169
1,200 0
— 100
30
217 0
— - 15,208
Total Lake Acres
70,471 195,329 141,948 ij|7,748
346,390
22,688 232,957 , 18,894 JIZ4./-S-39
% of Impaired Lake Acres
1%
3%
2%
0%
5%
0% If" 5%
3%
% of Surveyed Lake Acres
0%
1%
1%
0%
2% 0%
v 2%
0%
0%
% of Total Lake Acres
0%
0%
0%
*•],%
0%
1% 0%
0%
-------
Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-19
Table B-4. (continued)
Flow Alterations (15)
Other Inorganics (16)
Oil and Grease (17)
Mod/ Not
Major Mln Specified fProtal.
640
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
— — 10,490
0 123,138 0
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
5,640
103
10
o
621
200
548
3,872 7,807
2,112
0
84
30
11
135
0
75
0
60
60 24,984
3,996
40,056
0
18,486
1,889
0
400
362
0
640
0
40,116
736
42,063
3,197
0 15,481
16,667 61,214
0
11,805
2,547
17,609
152
113
0
7,482 4,771
98,057
0
2,630
— 9,420
— 28,480
110,955 152,561
9,420
131,341 38,970
12,070 152,910
2%
<1%
2%
1%
1%
1%
0%
1%
2%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
(continued)
-------
B-20 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
Table B-4. (continued)
Slate, Trfbe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Other Habitat Alterations (18)
Major
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
— 200
Thermal Modifications (19)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Total'
54
Taste and Odor (20)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
2,000
Compo Indian Reserv.
Colorado
Connecticut11
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
CBa fifVer Indian Comm.
Hawaii
Hop/Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Iowa (flood control reserv.)
1,600
650
8,869
12
49,849
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
0
26,748
0
1,479
7,865
1,206
60
0
0
3,845
Massachusetts
Mass.-Quabbin Reservoir
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana;
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
5,549
5,549
25,918
New jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
0
67
29,893
0
660
2,760
343
Ohio
Oklahoma*-'
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
12,700
17,916
130
887
29,780
754
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
12
11,360
0 40
8,430 ,20,102
5,690
287
0
0
118
Utah
Vermont
Vermont- Lake Champlain
Virginia
2,774
109
4,612
0
79 11,147
7 0
0 1,229
16
10,497
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
10
1,200
Tolal Lake Acres
62,044 82,025
210
31,909 67,382
31
"322
11,897 84,479
% of Impaired Lake Acres
1%
1%
-2%
1%
1%
%ofS
i Acres
0%
0%
0%
•EH
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
% of Tout Lake Acres
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
-------
Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-21
-------
B-22 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
Tabl<* B-S. Leading Sources of Pollution Impairing isurveyed Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ppnds OJ>
-------
Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-23
Table B-5. (continued)
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers (3)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
0 1,300 0
— — 10,311
123,536 5,410 0
0
103
2,281
35
329
189
1,068
22
407
100
909
740
0
299
171
90
0
500
12
2%
1%
144
136
0 254,080
43,908 48
36,159
22
1,288
5,268
18,583 2,136
35,105 102,663
135 2,644
753
1,200
1,120
400
0
5 0
20,931 115,073
715 90
22 0
20,872 - 0
69,313 0
— 10,866
762 0
— 1,985
0 0
19,088 0
0 0
46,953 0
1 177
0 174,175
52 4,883
— 40,253
0 0
— 18,055
— 1,434
297,201 820,103 82,904
12%
1%
0%
,-..
iB(),866
; Unspecified NPS (4)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
28,810 6,701
91,307 25,573
263,396 94,822
126,633 123,101
440 0
39
7,458
171,643
553
2,532
— 37,377
— 8,329
»^S*>^: *-•.:;
~~
689,687 253,321 45,706
10%
2%
1%
Natural (5)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
32,970
— 50,441
8,926 0
189
395
0
11,363
2,407
3,514
19,281
4,125
14,720
26
64,751
0
0
2,750
2
24,949
1,210
0
31 3,664
429
3,200
109
12,055
173
29,721 0
6,654 0
— 111,231
_ : _
856 0
1,489
11,674
71
0
5,398
15,658
8,960
372
0
283
5,388
61
— 131,147
0 0
— 64,515
138,039 469,754 357,334
2%
7%
5%
1%
3%
2%
1%
f Wisconsin reports more lake acres impaired by atmospheric deposition (196,703 acres) than total
impaired (192,379 acres) because the atmospheric deposition data were derived from a statewide fish
tissue sampling program and the total impaired estimate was based on data from 10 of the States
23 basins.
NOTE: The Coyote Tribe, Hoopa Tribe, Soboba Band, Delaware River Basin Commission, ORSANCO, and
the Virgin Islands are not included in this table because their lands do not include lake waters.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by the States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
K31/W7.
(continued)
Total Impaired Lake Acres: ••_, .''.'.-''. 6,682,200 acres
Tdtai;Lake.Acres Surveyed: •'. ;;: , 17,134/153 acres
Estimate of Total lakeAcres in the Nation: : 40^826,064 acres
-------
B-24 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
Tabje B-5. (continued)
land Disposal (total) (8)
Hydro/Habitat Modification (total) (6)
Industrial Point Sources (7)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Cowpo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut11
Delaware
District of Columbia
0 91,520 0
Florida
Georgia
Cto River Indian Comm.
Hawaii
Hopi Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Iowa (flood control rescrv.)
4,966 23,245
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Marytond
8,210 0
9,272 34,208
0 4,288
Massachusetts
Mass. - Quabbin Reservoir
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire1
New Jersey
New Mexico
NewYotk
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohto
Oklahoma'*'
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont*
Vermont- Lake Champiain
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin1
295,740 460,900
Total Lake Acres Impaired
% of Impaired Lake Acres
% of Surveyed Lake Acres
% of Total Lake Acres
-------
Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-25
Table B-5. (continued)
Construction (9)
Flow Regulation (10)
Highway Maintenance and Runoff (11)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
4,480
145,640 3,144
W84
1,760 5,530
0 49,280
972 9,654
8,154
0
32
0
24
1,344
2,687
60
435
0 1
46
272
100
0
1,764
500
136
135,265
0
0 270,779
80
2,390
175,580
677
0
202
16,418
55,833
0 2,637
46,019 46,013
23
30,995
4,557
1,090
167 30,100
2,826
0
0
0
590
6
174,175
875
106
7,834 4,138
— 44,938
573
2,499
1,052
164,039
48
159,277 459,618
6,006
54,160 354,102 44,938
42,044 383,371
2%
7%
1%
3%
2%
1%
6%
0%
2%
0%
0%
1%
0%
1%
0%
(continued)
-------
B-26 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
Tabte B-5. (continued)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Conncetfcutb
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Clh River Indian Oman.
Hawaii
HoplTribe
Idaho
linois
Indiana
Iowa
Iowa (flood control reserv.)
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mass. - Quabbin Reservoir
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire*
New Jersey
New Mexko
NewYorfc
North Carolina
North Dakota
ohto „.,
Oklahoma1'''1
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont?1
Vermont - Lake Champlaln
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin'
Wyoming
Total lake Acres Impaired
% of Impaired Lake Acres
% of Surveyed Lake Acres
%of Total Lake Acres
-------
Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds B-27
Table B-5. (continued)
Resource Extraction (total) (16)
, Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified JUTota
(continued)
-------
B-28 Appendix B Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
Tab(e B-5. (continued)
Recreational Activities (19)
Land Development (18)
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Conwa Wan Reservation
Colorado
Connt€tfculb
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Cih Rtftr Indian Comm.
Hawaii
Hop!Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Iowa (llood control reserv.)
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
14,720 0
Massachusetts
Mass.-Quabbin Reservoir
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire0
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma^
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont*
Vermont - Lake Champlaln
Virginia
Washington
WcstVlrgJnla
Wisconsin'
Wyoming
Total Lake Acres Impaired
25,575 161,051
% of Impaired Lake Acres
% of Surveyed Lake Acres
% of Total Lake Acres
-------
Appendix C
Data Reported by Individual
States, Tribes, Territories,
and Commissions
Estuaries and
Ocean Shoreline Waters
-------
C-2 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table C-1. Total Estuarine and Oceah Shoreline Wjaters in the Nation : j : ; ; , :
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
Calif ornla
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Cth Rh'er Indian Community
Hawaii
Hocpa Tribe
Hop/ Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
PenraySvanla
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
SobobaBond
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Vtyomlng
ToUI
Percent
Estuaries
Total
Square Miles
610.00
NA
NA
731.10
NA
NA
600.00
NA
29.00b
866.00
5.80
4,298.00
854.00
NA
380.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
7,656.00
1,633.00
2,522.40
223.08
NA
NA
133.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
28.20
420.00
NA
1,530.00
3,122.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
206.00
17.009
h
138.80
NA
945.00
NA
NA
1,990.70
NA
NA
2,500.00
5.90
2,943.00
NA
NA"
NA
34,387.98
Square Miles
Surveyed
610.00
NA
NA
476.34
NA
NA
600.00
NA
28.95
216.00
5.80
3,712.00
854.00
NA
76.44
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4,942.00
1,633.00
2,522.40
220.06
NA
NA
18.18
NA
NA
NA
NA
28.20
614.00'
NA
1,530.00
3,121.51
NA
NA
NA
NA
60.10
0.00
h
192.941
NA
342.54
NA
NA
1,990.70
NA
NA
2,469.91
5.63
576.60
NA
NA
NA ,
26,847.30
78%
Percent
Surveyed
100%
NA
NA
65%
NA
NA
100%
NA
100%
25%
100%
86%
100%
NA
20%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
65%
100%
100%
99%
NA
NA
14%
NA
NA
NA
NA
100%
146%
NA
100%
100%
NA
NA
NA
NA
29%
0%
139%
NA
36%
NA
NA
100%
NA
NA
99%
95%
20%
NA
NA
NA
Ocean Shore Waters
Total
Shore Miles
337
36,000a
NA
NA
1,609
NA
NA
380
NA
25
NA
NA
8,460
100
NA
1,052C
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
397d
5,249"
32
1,519
NA
NA
81
NA
NA
NA
NA
18
120
NA
120
320
NA
NA
NA
NA
362
NA
550
420
NA
190
NA
NA
624
NA
NA
120i
173
163
NA
NA
NA
58,421
Shore Miles
Surveyed
NA
NA
1,652
NA
NA
NA
25
NA
NA
902
NA
943
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
32
NA
NA
81
NA
NA
NA
NA
18
127
NA
120
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
551
NA
NA
NA
624
NA
NA
120
13
0%
NA
NA
NA
5,208
9%
Percent
Surveyed
NA
NA
103%
NA
NA
NA
100%
' NA
NA
11%
NA
90%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
100%
NA
100%
NA
NA
NA
NA
100%
106%
NA
100%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
100%
NA
NA
NA
100%
NA
NA
100%
8%
0%
NA
NA
NA
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-3
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
NA = Not applicable because the State, Territory, Tribe, or Commission does not border the oceans or the Gulf of Mexico.
a Source: Alaska's 1992 Section 30S(b) report. Alaska did not submit a 30S(b) report in 1994.
b Delaware excludes Delaware River and Bay from the State estimate of estuarine waters because the Delaware River Basin Commission reports the size of these waters.
c Hawaii replaced their prior estimate of 750 general coastline miles with a more detailed estimate of 1,052 tidal shoreline miles.
d Louisiana does not include shore of islands, bays, rivers, and bayous in estimates of coastal shore miles. Total estuarine and tidal shoreline = 7,721 miles.
e Maine includes coastal island shorelines in their estimate of ocean shore miles.
' New Jersey assessed tidal coastal rivers in addition to estuaries.
9 Pennsylvania reports 17 sq. miles of Delaware Estuary and 6 sq. miles of Presque Isle Bay in the Great Lakes.
h Puerto Rico assessed use support in units of linear miles rather than square miles.
' Rhode Island included ocean waters in their assessment of estuarine waters.
I Virginia does not include Chesapeake Bay shore in their estimate of ocean shore miles. Total estuarine and tidal shoreline = 3,315 miles.
k Wisconsin reports 1,751 square miles of freshwater estuaries adjacent to the Great Lakes.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
C-4 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table C-2. Overall Use Support in Estuaries (square miles) h i; M
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California*
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey*
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Ricoe
Rhode Island11
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
Total
Percent
Fully Supporting
Eval- Moni- Not jfe=™
uated tored Specified Total - RiHSSl'
0.00 346.00 0.00 346.00
— — 20.77 20.77
7.50 354.10 0.00 361.60
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 139.00 0.00 139.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
501.00 1,427.00 0.00 1,928.00
447.00 10.00 — 457.00
0.04 27.31 0.00 27.35
2,978.00 594.00 0.00 3,572.00
1,423.10 50.00 0.00 1,473.10
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
58.41 1.02 0.00 59.43
0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50
0.00 9.50 0.00 ,9.50
— — 450.00 450.00
0.00 797.00 0.00 797.00
— — 2,812.00 2,812.00
0.00 3.59 0.00 3.59
P7%
fS>%
Sw"*1
HE:
i72^
|pM>-
Srtj%
=27%'"
*-3%
SF
as,
50.92 90.14 0.00 141.06 Bps*
— — 241.54 241.54 •pft&"
— — 1,157.00 1,157.00 Ipj5'8%
163.26 997.85 0.00 1,161.11 p8&»'.'.
— — 3.49 3.49 Bpgjf
— — 264.90 264.90 MiM-
5,629.23 4,501.01 4,949.70 15,425.94 IjiS-'g
36% 29% 32% '57% wE^I
Threats ned
Eval- Moni- Not t'k
uated tored Specified Total ffercent
* WSS-t js'jr^f
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
— — 15.35 15.35
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
o.oo • o.oo o.oo o.oo
402.00 0.00 0.00 402.00
0.00 1.10 0.00 1.10
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
86.90 0.00 0.00 86.90
1.19 0.63 0.00 1.82
0.00 12.93 0.00 12.93
0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00
— — 102.152 102.62
0.00 11.23 0.00 11.23
12.34 1,001.50 0.1)0 1,013.84
— — 0.95 0.95
502.43 1,029.39 118.IJ2 1,650.74
30% 62% 7% 6%
liiF
f o%
Pfo%:
p*o%
12%
tft%~
fti%
Po%-
|I3%
ife
|f^
fcs§ -
svjw — »>*•$»
£r~
|tr°/o
|T7%_
^j^.-^-
tajfSSs-ttja**,
P, '
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
1 Entered aquatic life use support data in lieu of overall use support data.
° Entered sneKfishing use support data in lieu of overall use support data.
* Puerto Rico reported linear miles of estuarine impairments rather than square miles. ,
d Rhode Wand Includes some ocean waters in its survey of estuarine waters.
' The total estimate of Impaired estuarine square miles does not necessarily equal the sum of estuarine waters partially supporting and not supporting designated uses because
some States include threatened waters in their estimates of impaired waters.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-5
Table C-2. (continued)
Partially Supporting
Not Supporting
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
0.00
14.30
0.00
117.00
220.30
0.00
0.00
439.99
0.00
0.00
117.00
439.99
234.60
0.00
39.00
0.00
0.00
108.00
3.80
28.95
0.00
0.23
0.00
0.00
147.00
0.23
3.80
28.95
0.00
0.00
358.00
0.90
14.00
0.00
857.00
4.00
21.62
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
14.00
0.00
1,215.00
4.00
22.52
0.00
0.00
28.00
176.00
0.00
63.00
5.80
139.00
217.00
25.47
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,370.00
0.00
157.00
32.52
0.00
35.70
2,174.10
5.06
4.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,370.00
35.70
2,331.10
37.58
4.75
6.70
8.50
46.01
0.00
117.50
95.90
75.22
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
63.00
5.80
167.00
393.00
25.47
0.00
124.20
104.40
121.23
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
469.00
56.51
0.00
120.00
0.00
206.89
0.00
0.00
120.00
469.00
206.89
56.51
3.10
0.00
0.00
15.60
262.00
0.00
0.00
44.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
18.70
44.00
262.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
36.01
20.04
234.30
0.00
48.60
161.20
0.00
20.04
48.60
161.20
270.31
0.00
5.07
20.61
19.58
0.00
52.40
601.70
0.00
20.61
52.40
601.70
24.65
0.54
82.00
0.65
229.70
0.65
229.70
1,968.73
27%
4,116.38
57%
1,059.22
15%
7,261.33
27%
273.38
11%
1,089.43
45%
928.68
2,438.49
9%
(continued)
-------
C-6 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table jC-2. (continued) ; 1 i M
SUto, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
CaWoml*"
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
Districted Columbia
Florida
Georgia
HawaH
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey11
NewYoris
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rfco*
Rhode Island"1
South Carolina
Texas
WgJnla
Virgin Islands
Washington
Total
Percent
;•, • ; Not Attainable ,
Eval- Monl- Not ESJ
uated tored Specified Total ^Percent
_ _ _ _ I
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
— — — —
— — — —
ESSl
B?5iiSM
my/jam
•Ssasi
fatf*
,0% ',
LS>
ife
pitHE
M 1- yi.ll, ..I;,,!
FBilJgi!
ififlB^
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 lp^Ti
— — 70.80 70.80 •$$£""
o.oo o.oo o.oo o.oo IpSTT
— — 0.00 0.00 I
0.00 0.00 70.80 70.80 I
0% 0% 100% 0% 1
L9l,_
537,,;
Total Assessed '
Eval- Monl- Not
uated tored Specified Total
39.00 571.00 0.00 610.00
0.00 0.00 476.34 476.34
21.80 578.20 0.00 600.00
0.00 28.95 0.00 28.95
0.00 216.00 0.00 216.00
0.00 5.80 0.00 5.80
1,289.00 2,423.00 0.00 3,712.00
623.00 231.00 0.00 854.00
0.94 75.50 0.00 76.44
4,348.00 594.00 0.00 4,942.00
1,429.80 203.20 0.00 1,633.00
252.40 2,270.00 0.00 2,522.40
138.13 81.93 0.00 220.06
0.00 18.18 0.00 18.18
3.10 25.10 0.00 28.20
0.00 0.00 614.00 614.00
0.00 1,530.00 0.00 1,530.00
0.00 0.00 3,121.51 3,121.51
0.00 60.10 0.00 ! 60.10
50.92 142.02 0.00 192.94
0.00 0.00 342.54 342.54
0.00 0.00 1,990.70 1,990.70
216.68 2,253.23 0.00 2,469.91
0.00 0.00 5.63 5.63
0.00 0.00 576.60 576.60
8,412.77 11,307.21 7,127.32 26,847.30
31% 42% 27%
Total Impaired
(Partial +
Not Supporting)6
264.00
440.22
238.40
28.95
77.00
5.80
1,382.00
397.00 .'..,
47,99
. 1,370.00
159.90
2,435.50
158.81
4.75.
18.70
164.00 ..
731.00
206.89
56.51
40.65
101.00
762.90 i
294.96
1.19
311.70
9,699,82
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-7
-------
C-8 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table C-3a. Aquatic Life Use Support jn Surveyed Estuaries (square miles)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware' River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington"
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
486.00
20.77
375.20
185.00
5.00
1,928.00
754.00
3,481.00
1,475.00
0.00
107.30
0.50
27.80
484.00
1,513.00
177.92
255.29
1,956.90
770.29
45.10
14,048.07
61%
Threatened
0.00
15.35
0.00
17.00
0.00
402.00
0.00
86.90
1.47
12.93
1.00
8.13
1,579.63
2,124.41
9%
Partially
Supporting
119.00
439.99
222.60
14.00
0.50
1,209.00
4.00
1,461.00
36.00
2,435.50
25.65
4.75
0.40
1 30.00
15.00
0.00
41.37
33.10
119.91
34.40
6,346.17
27%
Not
Supporting
1.00
0.23
2.20
28.95
0.00
0.30
167.00
96.00
122.00
0.00
63.37
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
6.89
45.88
0.70
0.08
63.20
598.80
3%
Mot
Attainable
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0%
Total
Surveyed
606.00
476.34
600.00
28.95
216.00
' 5.80
3,706.00
854.00
4,942.00
1,633.00
2,522.40
197.79
18.18
28.20
614.00
1,530.00
192.94
342.54
1,990.70
2,469.91
142.70
23,117.45
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
'Entered "Rearing, harvesting, and other fish spawning" use status because Washington did not report aquatic life use support status.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-9
Table C-3b. Fish Consumption Use Support in Surveyed Estuaries (square miles) j
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maiyland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
604.00
35.47
599.80
191.00
0.00
2,502.50
8.80
28.20
1,347.00
1,911.00
2,234.51
0.00
9,462.28
90%
Threatened
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
220.39
220.39
2%
Partially
Supporting
0.00
426.17
0.20
0.00
5.80
19.90
0.00
0.00
167.00
0.00
14.51
0.00
633.58
6%
Not
Supporting
2.00
0.23
0.00
25.00
0.00
2.00
0.00
45.45
0.00
16.00
79.70
0.50
6.60
1 77.48
2%
Not
Attainable
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
—
0.00
0%
Total
Surveyed
606.00
461.87
600.00
216.00
5.80
' 2.00
2,522.40
54.25
28.20
1,530.00
1,990.70
2,469.91
6.60
10,493.73
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
C-10 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
1 i ) I ' '," • • ! - 1 i .
Table;C-3c. ShellfiShing Use Support jn Surveyed E$tuaries (square miles) I I : i
Sttte, Tribe, Territory,
or CommlHlon
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington*
ToUl
Percent
Fully
Supporting
305.00
31.64
483.40
6.50
94.00
1,020.00
281.25
1,651.60
72.61
0.00
9.50
450.00
1,327.00
1,168.00
2,181.45
265.60
9,347.55
73%
Threatened
0.00 ,
0.00
0.00
0.00
161.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
0.00
163.00
1%
Partially
Supporting
0.00 "
383.94
0.00
9.60
0.00
508.00
3.12
72.30
23.24
4.93
0.00
120.00
5.00
166.60
160.38
82.20
1,539.31
12%
Not
Supporting
144.00
0.00
116.60
6.50
38.00
28.00
139.06
104.00
30.07
4.00
18.70
44.00
196.00
565.40
24.07
220.60
1,679.00
13%
Mot
Attainable
0.00
0.00
2.40
0.00
0.00
10.94
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
70.80
0.00
—
134.14
1%
Total
Surveyed
449.00
415.58
600.00
25.00
132.00
1,717.00'
434.37
1,827.90
125.92
8.93
28.20
614.00
1,530.00
1,970.80
2,365.90
568.40
12,813.00
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
'Entered "Clam, oyster, and mussel harvesting" use support status because Washington did not report simple shellfishing use support status,
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-11
Table C-3d. Swimming Use Support in Surveyed Estuaries (square miles)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
577.00
30.63
537.70
13.00
205.00
0.00
1,928.00
850.00
3,551.00
1,631.00
2,520.60
97.70
6.00
28.20
1,419.00
—
164.88
295.50
1,974.70
2,469.91
117.30
18,417.12
83%
Threatened
0.00
5.43
0.90
0.00
0.00
402.00
0.00
0.00
0.10
4.93 ,
10.00
—
15.00
0.00
—
438.36
2%
Partially
Supporting
0.00
82.60
58.80
12.00
0.00
0.00
1,209.00
4.00
1,391.00
0.00
0.20
94.32
7.00
0.00
28.00
—
2.71
19.79
4.10
0.00
4.40
2,917.92
13%
Not
Supporting
2.00
0.23
2.60
3.95
0.00
5.80
167.00
3.00
1.60
21.72
0.25'
0.00
73.00
— '
3.40
27.25
8.20
0.00
18.00
338.00
2%
Not
Attainable
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
—
6.95
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.95
<1%
Total
Surveyed
579.00
118.89
600.00
28.95
205.00
5.80
3,706.00
854.00
4,942.00
1,634.00
2,522.40
21 3.84
18.18
28.20
1,530.00
—
192.94
342.54
1,987.00
2,469.91
139.70
22,118.35
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes/Territories, and Commissions.
-------
C-12 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table |C-3e. Secondary Contact Recreation Use Support in Surveyed Estuaries (square rjniles)! I • ! |j
State, Tribe, Territory,
of Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode bland
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin (stands
Washington
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
604.00
36.12
537.70
28.95
11.00
0.00
854.00
3,489.00
185.22 .
28.20
1,513.00
2.80
138.70.
7,428.69
83%
Threatened
0.00
0.00
0.90
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
—
—
1.90
0%
Partially
Supporting
0.00
0.00
58.80
0.00
5.00
1,453.00
11.00
0.00
15.00
0.90
0.40
1,544.10
17%
Not
Supporting
2.00
0.23
2.60
0.00
0.80
11.59
0.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
19.22
<1%
Not
Attainable
0.00
0.00
0.00
—
0.00
0.00
—
0.00
0%
Total
Surveyed
606.00
36.35
600.00
28.95
11.00
5.80
854.00
4,942.00
207.81
28.20
1,530.00
3.70
140.10
8,993.91
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-13
-------
C-14 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
TablelC-4. Leadjnq Pollutants and Processes Impairing (Surveyed Estuaries
SUtc, Tribe, Tcrrltoiy,
or Commission
Total Sq. Miles
Surveyed
Total Sq. Miles
Impaired9
Nutrients (1)
Major
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
Bacteria (2)
Major
Mod/
Mln
Not
Specified
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connect»cutb
Delaware
610.00
476.34
600.00
28.95
264.00
440.22
238.40
28.95
3.75
235.60
26.00
50.87
14.90
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
107.00
30.33
13.40
14.00
0.00
S6.53
1;!5.20
15.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
216.00
5.80
3,712.00
854.00
76.44
77.00
5.80
1,382.00
397.00
47.99
0.00
0.00
0.57
1.30
244.00
27.56
0.00
0.00
0.00
38.00
0.80
0.00
49.00
0.00
0.00
5.00
19.00
348.00
15.44
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
4,942.00
1,633.00
2,522.40
220.06
18.18
1,370.00
159.90
2,435.50
158.81
4.75
150.00 1,136.90 0.00
2,106.30
0.00
0.00
329.00
24.53
0.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
38.00
67.40
74.93
0.00
1,096.00
0.00
336.70
74.89
4.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
28.20
614.00
1,530.00
3,121.51
60.10
18.70
164.00
731.00
206.89
56.51
70.00
0.00
0.00
102.66
0.00
0.00
18.70
142.00
277.70
61.94
0.00
0.00
126.16
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
56.51
as,
Puerto Rico*
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia'1
192.94
342.54
1,990.70
2,469.91
40.65
101.00
762.90
294.96
0.00
1.15
17.91
1.35
0.00
0.00
31.44
0.00
96.56
3.40 0.00
— 45.21
710.00 0.00
63.56 0.00
Virgin Islands
Washmston
5.63
576.60
1.19
311.70
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.21
0.02 0.00
— 286.70
Total Estuarine Area
26,847.30
9,699.82
2,593.39 1,954.73
0.00
1,061.41 3,029.65 388.42
% of Impaired Estuaries
27%
20%
0%
11%
31%
4%
% of Surveyed Estuaries
10%
7%
0%
4%
11%
9%
1%
% of Total Estuaries
8%
6%
0%
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
* Impaired « Square miles partially supporting + not supporb'ng designated uses.
bWhcn tabulating the size of waters affected by a cause, the State includes waters
where pollutant causes are present in small quantities that do not impair a designated
use. Therefore, the State may report more square miles affected by a pollutant cause
than total square mites impaired.
* Puerto Rico reported linear miles of estuarine impairments rather than square miles.
d Virginia reports that nutrients also threaten 1,466 square miles of the Chesapeake Bay.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by the States, Tribes, Territories, and
Commissions.
Total Impaired Estuarine Square Miles: 9,700 sq. tfii.
Total Surveyed Estuarine Square Miles: j 26^,847 sq. mi.
Estimate of Total Estuarine Square Miles iivtne Nation: 34,'388 sq. ml.
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-15
Table C-4. (continued)
Oxygen-Depleting Substances (3)
Habitat Alterations (4)
Oil and Grease (5)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
fe^"
120.00
2.34
7.00
13.00
0.00
0.48
19.00
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.53 0.00 0.00
3.29
0.80
2.38
0.00
0.00
0.00
14.00
0.80
0.00
29.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
45.00
66.00
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
1.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
1:00
69.50
0.00
0.00
561.90
0.00
1,537.10
51.58
0.25
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
— 1,562.10 0,00
0.00 0.00 0.00
— 1,307.90
0.00
0.00
8.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
14.63
31.98
94.87 0.00
— 0.00
0.00
20.38
0.00
0.00
0.00
203.00
7.62 0.00
— 65.57
22.90 0.00
0.25 0.00
— 145.90
0.19
0.00
0.00
506.25 2,409.65
211.47
1.72 1,562.10
0.00
4.09 1,339.86
0.00
5%
25%
2%
16%
14%
0%
2%
1%
9%
1%
0%
6%
5%
0%
7%
1%
0%
5%
0%
4%
0%
(continued)
-------
C-16 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table C-4. (continued)
Slate, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Priority Toxic Organic Chemicals (6)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Major
Metals (7)
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Suspended Solids (8)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connect!cutb
Delaware
18.41
0.80
4.97
19.60
313.37
3.30
1.00
0.00
12.00
0.00
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii ,
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
0.00
0.00
1.00
25.00
0.80
5.50
4.18
0.00
0.00
0.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
472.00.
16.45
0.00
— 542.90
3.00 0.00
0.00
0.50
40.95
0.00
270.90
42.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
21.20
0.00
372.60
0.00
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
70.00
116.78
0.00
69.69
0.40
33.12
0.00
0.00
0.00
Puerto 8koe
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia"1
0.00
2.68
6.60
0.50
6.60
0.00
3.47
0.00
0.00
0.00
Virgin islands
Washington
0.19
0.00
o.oo
— 13.70
— 6.90
Total Estuarine Area
213.17 711.01 13.70 B7-ȤS
683.86
6.90
|K
22.19
873.05
0.00
% of Impaired Estuaries
2%
7%
7%
9%
0%
%of!
id Estuarfe
1%
3%
0%
1%
3%
0%
0%
3%
0%
% of Total Estuaries
1%
2%
0%
1%
2%
0%
0%
3%
0%
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and,Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-17
Table C-4. (continued)
Saiinity/TDS/Chlorides (9)
Radiation (10)
Siltation(H)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
iTbtal
0.04 0.00 0.00
8.09 3.95 0.00
0.80
0.00
1.38
0.00
7.00
25.27
0.00
0.00
0.00
— 850.90 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
— 672.90 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
4.20
0.00
336.10
0.25
0.00
0.00
*&&&$ f~~sr
0.04 0.00 0.00
0.00
0.14
140.00
26.62
0.00
0.00
1.15
0.00
— <*!• —
^i*«*is=?
0.00 15
0.19
0.00
0.00
'oTT
0.08
850.90
0.00
0.00
672.90 0.00
15.95
539.19
0.00
'1%
9%
0%
0%
7%
0%
0%
6%
"096
0%
3%
0%
0%
3%
0%
0%
2%
0%
0%
2%
0%
0%
2%
0%
2%
0%
(continued)
-------
C-18 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table C-4. (continued)
Slate, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Pesticides (12)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Sii
PH (13)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified [jTotal
Other Inorganics (14)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified ETptal
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut1
Delaware
122.36 170.34
0.00
0.02 0.00 0.00 E-0,02
Ife «, «3k
0.00 1.00 0.00 pii.1.00
0.50 196.54 0.00
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
HawaS
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00 0.00
0.80 0.00
1.42 0.00
EM9
0.80
0.00
0.00 0.00 PI 0,00
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
0.00
19.90
0.00
0.00
0.00
— 103.60 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
l^*dtfs?v
BM.
N«w Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
70.00
0.00
0.00
0.55
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.55 0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
wipl^"
pl^f
Puerto RIcoe
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
— 0.05
Virgin Islands
Washington
— 1.40
— 163.50
Total Btuarfne Area
192.36 218.01
1.40
0.02
105.15 163.55
0.50
196.54
0.00
0%
% of Impaired Estuaries
2%
2%
1%
2%
d%
% of Surveyed Estuaries
1%
0%
m
% of Total Estuaries
1%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-19
Table C-4. (continued)
Flow Alterations (15)
Thermal Modifications (16)
Chlorophyl-a (17)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
0.51 2.34
0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.04
0.00
0.00 0.05
0.00
20.00 151.90 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.63
0.00
0.00
3.59
0.00 1
112.93
0.00
0.10
0.00
— 163.50
20.51 155.87
0.00
3.78 163.50.
112.93
2%
0%
0%
1%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
(continued)
-------
C-20 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table C-4. (continued)
State, Tf ibc. Territory,
or Commission
Unknown Toxidty (18)
Major
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
!tal
Turbidity (19)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Ammonia (20)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut!"
Delaware
85.52
0.00
0.00
18.80
0.00
0.00
•fen-
sis!
0.98
0.00 0.00
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
0.30
0.00
2.70
0.50
32.00
23.63
0.00
0.00
0.00
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
0.00
0.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
9.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
57.47
0.00
0.00
0.00
New Hampshire
Newjefiey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
0.00
3.82
0.00
MM,
0.00
0.00 0.00
Puerto Rfcoe
Rhode bland
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia11
Virgin Islands
Washington
24.95
<1
Total Estuarine Area
85.52
23.37
0.00
08.89
3.00
65.23
24.95
% of Impaired Estuaries
1%
0%
1%
0.98
57.47
0.00
1%
0%
% of Surveyed Estuaries
0%
0%
0%
o%
o%
0%
0%
0%
0%
% of Total Estuaries
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-21
-------
C-22 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table C-S. Leading Sources of Pollution Impairing; Surveyed Estuaries ' l
SUte, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut1"
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
NcwYofk
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico0
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia11
Virgin Islands
Total Estuarine Area
W of Impaired Estuaries
% of Surveyed Estuaries
% of Total Estuaries
— Not reported in a quantifiable
* Impaired - Square mites partial!)
b When tabulating the size of wat
where sources generate polluter
designated uses. Therefore, the
source than total square miles in
c Puerto Rko reported linear mile
dV!rg!nI* reports that Industrial at
urban runoff/storm sewers also
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) rep
Commissions.
Total Sq. Miles Total Sq. Miles
Surveyed Impaired3
610.00 264.00
476.34 440.22
600.00 238.40
28.95 28.95
216.00 77.00
5.80 5.80
3,712.00 1,382.00
854.00 397.00
76.44 47.99
4,942.00 1,370.00
1,633.00 159.90
2,522.40 2,435.50
220.06 158.81
18.18 4.75
28.20 18.70
614.00 164.00
1,530.00 731.00
3,121.51 206.89
60.10 56.51
192.94 40.65
342.54 101.00
1,990.70 762.90
2,469.91 294.96
5.63 1.19
576.60 311.70
26,847.30 9,699.82
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers (1)
Mod/
Major Min
2.00 105.00
109.71 159.50
0.00 340.20
0.00 29.00
0.80 0.20
0.00 857.00
36.00 66.00
0.20 27.96
Not iSl::;^,
Specified JL .Total
ifi
0.00
o.oo BSSZap
- Iptob
0.00 |||28,16_
0.00 314.00 0.00 IBXPO
— — — •«£*•,,!&
74.10 1,734.30 0.00 K808.40
1.10 105.08 0.00 Ki'QoMB
0.00 4.75 0.00 |p=4.7S
140.00 0.00 0.00 K\40.bO
131.21 72.72 0.00 jpJ§.93
— — 144.81 |p4J.81
5.95 29.64 0.00 B^S?
0.00 0.00 14.25 jlfji^S
1.15 0.00 0.00
0.19 0 0
502.41 3,845.35 160.16 gSSZlI
5% 40% 2% KP$$L
2% 14% 1%
1% 11% 0% |pai3%
format or not specified.
f supporting + not supporting designated uses.
ers affected by a source, the State includes waters
ts but the waterbody still fully supports its
State may report more square miles affected by a
npaired.
; of estuarine impairments rather than square miles.
id municipal point sources, CSOs, agriculture, and
threaten 1,466 square miles of the Cheaspeake Bay.
orts submitted by the States, Tribes, Territories, and
Municipal Point Sources (2) •'] :
Mod/ Not I
Major Min Specified J
0.00 105.00 0.00 I
117.57 38.28 0.00 |
263.10 182.30 0.00 1
0.00 25.00 0.00 1
0.00 77.00 0.00 |
0.00 1.30 0.00 1
0.00 386.00 0.00 1
42.00 68.00 — I
0.00 491.00 0.00 1
117.00 6.20 0.00 I
22.60 1,235.40 0.00 |
0.00 77.69 0.00 1
0.00 0.75 0.00 1
140.00 0.00 0.00
58.04 193.68 0.00
— — 35.46
6.60 23.83 0.00
0.00 0.00 14.25 1
0.00 22.90 0.00 1
1.65 1.16 0.00 1
fit
IJS>4ft,
L258.00
is
a
m
HslwL
0.02 0.00 0.00
- - 73.00
768.58 2,935.49 122.71 KHS2I,
8% 30% 1% |piS9%";
3% 11% o% ;
2% 9% , 0%
Total Impaired Estuarine Square Miles: ;J '. '." 9,700 sq. mi.
Total Surveyed Estuarine Square Miles; :;:/•;. . 26,847 sq. mi. :
Estimate of Total Estuarine Square Miles in, trie Nation: 34,388 sq. ml.
:![:? ,iii..'' i- . w1 X'TwnWM
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-23
Table C-5. (continued)
Agriculture (total) (3)
Natural (4)
Industrial Point Sources (5)
Major
Mod/
Min
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
370.10 1,761.10
0.00 3.14
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.90
391.10 2,038.30
0.00 0.25
270.90
423.00
— 1,239.90
0.00 10.99
0.50 0.50
70.00
0.00
0.00
16.62
0.00
0.00
150.62
0.81
20.87 0.00
— 3.03
0.00
0.00
0.00 107.39
0.00
23.43
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
16.00
0.00
13.17
0.00
0.38
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.00
21.10
— 247.70
— 16.80
562.70 2,563.52
396.53 2,304.66
247.70
435.27 2,153.80 20.21
6%
26%
2%
24%
4%
22%
2%
10%
1%
1%
9%
1%
2%
7%
1%
1%
7%
1%
1%
6%
(continued)
-------
C-24 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Tabje C-5. (continued)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut15
Delaware
Petroleum Activities (6)
Major
Mod/ Not
MIn Specified
Construction (7)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
3.49 0.98
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
0.00
0.80
0.00
0.00 985.00
0.00 10.33
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
522.90 785.00
0.00
— 113.00
140.00 0.00
0.06 0.55
Puerto Rico*
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia*1
Virgin Islands
Washington
Total Estuarine Area
522.90 785.80
0.00 KJ08..ZO
143.55 1,109.86
% of impaired Estuaries
5%
8%
% of Surveyed Estuaries
2%
3%
% of Total Estuaries
2%
2%
1%
11%
1%
4%
0%
3%
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories,.and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-25
Table C-5. (continued)
Upstream Sources (9)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
0.00 1,079.00
0%
11%
0%
4%
0%
3%
— 1,079.00 0.00
0%
0%
Unspecified/Other NFS (10)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
28.91 1.30
0.00
0.00 77.00
— 314.00
0.00
— 62.00
1.40 187.97
— 318.30
30.31 642.27 318.30
0%
2%
2%
1%
Spills (11)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
0.00
0.80 ,0.00
0.00
0.00
0.80
0.52
0.00
0.00
522.90 226.00
0.00
522.90 228.12
0.00
5%
2%
0%
2%
1%
1%
0%
(continued)
-------
C-26 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table-C-5. (continued)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
CSOs (12)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
I
Total
Resource Extraction (total) (13)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified ipoia
Contaminated Sediments (14)
Major
'
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
"
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut11
Delaware
0.00
19.60
105.00
102.30
0.00
0.00
.QO
75.08 0.63 0.00
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
3.80
0.40
0.00
0.80
0.00
0.00
436.00
0.00
0.00
Louisiana
Maine
Man/land
Massachusetts
Mississippi
0.00
—
13.31
0.50
13.50
58.21
0.00
0.00
0.00
— 170.00
0.00
1.50
0.00
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
107.57
71.48
0.00
116.78
101.51
0.00
Puerto Rkoc
Rhode bland
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia11
23.15
1.15
6.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.60
0.00
Virgin Islands
Washington
0.19
0.00
0.00
Total Estuarine Area
168.77 357.99
0.00
75.88 438.13
0.00
116.78
278.11
0.00
% of Impaired Estuaries
2%
4%
0%
1%
5%
0%
1%
3%
0%
% of Surveyed Estuaries
1%
1%
0%
0%
2%
0%
0%
1%
0%
% of Total Estuaries
0%
1%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
1%
0%
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-27
Table C-5. (continued)
Marinas (IS)
Onsite Wastewater Systems (16)
Wastewater Lagoon (17)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified KTptal
3.36 0.82
4.60
0.00
8.70
29.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
0.00 41.43
0.00
— 92.00
0.00 4.50
0.00
0.00
252.00 0.00
— 101.46
2.55 50.20
0.00 0.00 11.77
0.00 153.46 0.00
3.90 9.27
0.00
0.00 10.58
— 29.70
5.36 195.71 113.23
1%
2%
11.05 193.67 66.76 |2Tl 48
0.00 252.00 10.58
2%
3%
0%
1%
1% 0%
1%
0%
1%
o%
1% 0%
(continued)
-------
C-28 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries arid Ocean Shoreline Waters
Tablb C-5. (continued)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Atmospheric Deposition (18)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Silviculture (19)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Recreational Activities (20)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Alabama
Alaska
California
Conrtectkulb
Delaware
0.00
0
5.62
230.00
0.00
0
0.08
0.00
0.00
149.00
13.00
0.00
0.00
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
0.00
235.00
0.00
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico*
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
2.26
2.42
0.00
Virgin Islands
Washington
— 13.80
Total Estuarine Area
0.00 235.62
0% 2%~
0.00
0%
0.08 235.00
0% 5%
0.00
% of Impaired Estuaries
0%
% of Surveyed Estuaries
0%
1%
0%
0%
2%
0%
0%
1%
0%
% of Total Estuaries
0%
1%
0%
1%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-29
-------
C-30 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table C-6. Overall Use Support in Surveyed Oceaiji Shoreline Waters (shore miles)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Fully Supporting
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
'ercent
Threatianed
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
Alabama
AUska
California'
Connecticut
Delaware
25
1,603
0
1,603
25
13
0
13
0
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
609
691
245
138
854
829
0
14
0
19
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
31
0
31
0
0
10
1
10
New Hampshire
Newl«rseyb
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
18
117
0
97
0
18
97
117
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
193
0
120
88
624
0
281
624
120
120
60
180
Virgin Islands
Washington
10
10
£77%
us
Total
Percent
1,669
36%
1,230
27%
1,710
37%
4,609
88%
135
60%
75
33%
15
7%
225
4%
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
* Entered aquatic life use support data because State did not report overall use support data.
b Entered shellfishing use data because State did not submit overall use support data.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-31
Table C-6.; (continued)
Eval-
uated
Partially Supporting
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
Not Supporting .'".• • •"'.:'
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
26
0
26
0
10
0
19
7
17
59
36
66
12
0
0
29
12
29
0
71
0
30
0
0
30
3
32
25
57
30
33
58
23%
172
67%
26
10%
256
15
13%
62
53%
41
35%
118
2%
(continued)
-------
C-32 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Tabl4 C-6. (continued) ! | : ,
i : • * i
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alula
California1
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
Ncwjeiseyb
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
Total
Percent
Not Attainable
Eval- Monl- Not Ip::;:; 1
uated tored Specified Total ggrcent
I ll Ml
0000 Bjj$
I 11 1 B
\ i i i n
oooo IlSC
0000 KM",,
— — 0 0 Ijljffi,,,
0 0 0 '0 Ifcs,,.—
0% 0% 0% 0% BJ~:'«
Total Assessed
- ' • ' .. ' .' ' • :•••'"
Eval- Monl- Not
uated tored Specified Total
0 0 1,652
25 0 0
640 262 0
712 231 0
32 0 0
0 81 0
0 18 0
— — 127
0 120 0
348 203 0
0 624 0
120 0 0
0 0 13
1,652
25
902
943
32
81
18
127
120
551
624
120
13
1,877 1,539 1,792, 5,208
36% 30% 34%
Total impaired J
: (Partial +
Not Supporting)
_
36-
0
48
95
0
71
0
30
3
90
0
0
1
374
7%
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
* Entered aquatic life use support data because State did not report overall use support data.
b Entered shelHUhlng use data because State did not submit overall use support data.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-33
-------
C-34 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table C-7a. Aquatic Life Use Support in Surveyed pcean Shoreline Waters (shore mil^s) i
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Mainland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
1,603
25
855
32
10
18
120
120
446
624
3,853
93%
Threatened
13
0
0
0
0
0
65
0
78
2%
Partially
Supporting
26
35
0
71
0
0
0
21
0
—
153
4%
Not
Supporting
10
12
0
0
0
0
0
19
0
—
41
1%
Not
Attainable
—
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
—
0
0%
Total
Surveyed
1,652
25
902
32
81
18
120
120
551
624
—
4,125
—Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-35
Table C-7b. Fish Consumption Use Support in Surveyed Ocean Shoreline Waters (shore miles) ;
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia S
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
1,418
—
32
18
72
120
624
—
2,284
96%
Threatened
0
—
0
0
0
0
—
0
0%
Partially
Supporting
35
—
0
0
48
0
0
—
83
4%
Not
Supporting
0
—
0
0
• o
0
0
—
0
0%
Not
Attainable
—
—
0
0
0
0
—
0
0%
Total
Surveyed
1,453
—
32
18
120
120
624
—
2,367
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
C-36 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries arid Ocean Shoreline Waters
Tables C-7c. Shellflshing Use Support in Surveyed Qcean Shoreline Waters (shore milei) i i
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
AJjboma
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
1,550
70
31
0
18
97
117
624
2,507
95%
Threatened
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
<1%
Partially
Supporting
35
0
0
60
0
0
0
0
—
95
4%
Not
Supporting
0
0
0
0
0
30
3
0
—
33
1%
Not
Attainable
—
0
0
0
0
0
0
—
0
0%
Total
Surveyed ,
1,585
0
70
32
60
18
127
120
624
—
2,636
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-37
;
Table C-7d. Swimming Use Support in Surveyed Ocean Shoreline Waters (shore miles) !
• -" i
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
572
25
855
32
10
18
0
120
377
624
—
2,633
64%
Threatened
1,030
0
0
0
120
0
115
0
_
1,265
31%
Partially
Supporting
30
35
0
71
0
0
0
27
0
—
163
4%
Not
Supporting
10
12
0
0
0
0
0
31
0
—
53
1%
Not
Attainable
—
0
0
0
0
0
0
—
0
0%
Total
Surveyed
1,642
25
902
32
81
18
120
120
550
624
—
4,114
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
C-38 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries arid Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table? C-7e. Secpntfary Contact Recreation Use Support in Surveyed Ocean Shoreline Waters ($hor^ miles)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Wand
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
1,602
25
—
—
18
120
513
—
2,278
98%
Threatened
0
—
—
0
16
—
16
1%
Partially
Supporting
0
—
—
0
0
8
—
8
<1%
Not
Supporting
0
—
—
0
0
13
—
13
1%
Not
Attainable
—
—
—
0
—
—
0
0%
Total
Surveyed
1,602
25
—
—
• 18
120
550
—
2,315
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-39
-------
C-40 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table jC-8. Leading Pollutants and Processes Impairing Surveyed Ocean Shoreline Waters (srnrJrjs miles)
State, Tribe, Terrltoiy,
or Commission
Total Shore Miles Total Shore Miles
Surveyed Impaired
Bacteria (1)
Major
Mod/ Not
Mm Specified
Metals (2)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Alabama
Alaska
Oilifomu
Connecticut
Odaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
1,652
25
902
943
36
0
38
48
95
54
. 0
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
32
81
0
71
41
30
30
41
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North CatoUrta
Oregon
18
127
120
0
30
3
0
Puerto Rieo
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
551
624
120
90
33
10
.
Virgin Islands
Washington
13
Total Shoreline Area
5,208
374
116
99
51
45
% of Impaired Shoreline Mite;
31%
27%
0%
14%
12%
% of Surveyed Shoreline Miles
% of Total Shoreline Miles
2%
2%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
—Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
* Does not Include the Alaska coastline.
Source: 1994 Section 30S(b) reports submitted by the States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
Total Impair ..
Total Surveyed Oceari Shoreline Miles:
Total Ocean Shoreline Miles in trie Nation:
S,,208rni
22,421 mi*
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-41
Table C-8. (continued)
: vNutr!ents(3)
• v ; Turbidity (4)
Siltatfon (5)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
17
43
53
41
43
53
41
5%
11%
0%
1% 14%
11%
0%
1%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
1% 0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0% 0%
(continued)
-------
C-42 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
•JWeC-8. (cohtinued)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Pesticides (6)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Unknown Toxtcity (7)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Suspended Solids (8)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
10
27
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
18
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
30
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
.
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
!sa
Total Shoreline Area
10
27
|ti,37,
% of Impaired Ocean
Shoreline Mites
3%
7%
0%
<1%
8%
0%
0%
0%
S—i
% of Surveyed Ocean
Shoreline Miles
o%
1%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
o%
o%
0%
0%
% of Total Ocean
Shoreline Miles
o%
o%
o%
0%
0%
0%
0%
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-43
Table C-8. (continued)
Priority Organic Toxic Chemicals (9)
Other Inorganic Chemicals (10)
Oxygen-Depleting Substances (11)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
12
11
0
0
13
12
1%
3%
0%
3%
0%
2%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
(continued)
-------
C-44 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table C-8. (continued)
Nonpriority Organic Chemicals (14)
Oil and Crease (12)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
0
Puerto Rico
Rhode (stand
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washfrmtor
ToUl Shoreline Area
% of Impaired Ocean
Shoreline Miles
% of Surveyed Ocean
Shoreline Miles
% of Total Ocean
Shoreline Mile
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-45
Table C-8. (continued)
Chlorine (15)
Thermal Modifications (16)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
0%
0%
0%
p%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
,0%
0%
-------
C-46 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table'C-9. Leading Sources of Pollution Impairing Surveyed Ocean Shoreline Waters (shore rmijes)
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Total Shore Miles Total Shore Miles
Surveyed Impaired
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers (1)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Industrial Point Sources (2)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Alabama
Alaska
Califomia
Connecticut
Delaware
1,652
25
36
0
35
0
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
902
943
48
95
25
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
Newiersey
NewYotk
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
32
81
18
127
120
551
624
120
0
71
0
71
0
11
0
30
3
0
0
40
0
0
0
90
0
0
90
19
Virgin Islands
Washington
Total Shore Miles Impaired
13
5,208
1.00
374
38
141
19
107
29%
aired Shi
;M
38%
0%
% of Surveyed Shoreline Mites
1%
3%
0%
0%
0%
2%
0%
% of Total Shoreline Mites
0%
1%
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
• Docs not Include the Alaska shoreline.
Source: 1994 Section 30S(b) reports submitted by the States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
Impaired Ocean Shoreline Miles: "..'•;"•'" " 3>4mi;
jTotal,Surveyed Oceani Shoreline Miles:. ' '.. 5,208 mi
Jlptal Qcean 5hprglih
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-47
Table C-9. (continued)
Natural (3)
Land Disposal (total) (4)
Onsite Wastewater Systems (5)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
16
0
75
16
0
71
0
71
15
19
75
15
77
87
5%
20%
0%
4%
21%
0%
23%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
2%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
(continued)
-------
C-48 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Tabl6C-9. (continued)
Agriculture (total) (6)
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Major Min Specified
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
NcwYcxk
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
% of Impaired Ocean
Shoreline Miles
% of Surveyed Ocean
Shoreline Miles
% of Total Ocean
Shoreline Miles
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-49
Table C-9. (continued)
Recreational Activities (9)
Municipal Point Sources (10)
Atmospheric Deposition (11)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
12
0
10
0
30
0
11
40
20
12
0%
11%
0%
2%
5%
0%
3%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
(continued)
-------
C-50 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Table C-9. (continued)
Stale, THbo, Tcrritoiy,
or Commission
Spills (12)
Major
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
Ground Water Loading (13)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
otal
Land Development (14)
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
11
11
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
Total Shore M3es Impalrec
11
11
jits!
% of Impaired Ocean
Shoreline Miles
0%
3%
0%
0%
3%
0%
0%
2%
0%
% of Surveyed Ocean
ShorcHflc Miles
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
% of Total Ocean
Shoreline Miles
0%
0%
0%
0%
o%
o%
0%
0%
o%
o%
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-51
-------
C-52 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-53
E
I
8.
a
D.
I
1
O
"fe
£
•s
<-n
.>>
11
I!
<5
I—
"2
-a
frS
§•§
2-i
"^z •
go
uj 2
E
_3
f- "O
.01^ 5
n ii — '
11 4 n
-T- ^
r> "i
E ±a
s-^l
!CS.u
^.E c
^"ES
CQ ra o>
B°t
O>
«=!
U~^
|8|
-2 g S
£OO
.•uj
C;
3
i
"fe
8
"CO
O O\
5 ^^
^
-------
C-54 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters
Cause
Toxicants
Pathogens
Eutrophication
Habitat Loss/
Modification
Changes
in Living
Resources
Industrial
Discharges -
Direct
AP, C, CCB,
D, G, LIS, M,
N, NY, PS,
SF, SJB, SMB
AP,T
AP, G, M,
SF,T
AP, C, D,
US, M, N,
NY, PS,
SF,SJB,T
Industrial
Discharges -
Indirect
BT, C, D,
G, LIS, M,
N, NY, PS,
SF, SJB, SMB
T
G,SF,T
D, US, M,
N, NY, PS,
SF,T
Sewage
Treatment
Plants
G, M, N,
PS, SF
B, D, G,
LIS, M, N,
PEC, PS,
SMB
AP, BT, C,
G, 1, US, M,
NY, PEC,PS,
S, SMB
AP, G, 1,
M,SF
AP, D, G,
1, LIS, M,
N, NY, SMB
Combined
Sewer
Overflows
B, D, LIS,
N,NY,
PS, SF
AP, C, D,
LIS, M, N,
NY, PS, S
SJB
LIS, M, N,
NY, S, SJB
AP, M, SF
SJB
D, LIS, M,
N,NY,
PS, SF, SJB
Stormwater
C, D, G, N,
PS, SF,
SJB, SMB
AP, B, C, D,
DIB, 1, LIS,
M, N, PEC, PS,
SMB
BT, DIB, 1,
PEQT
AP,G,I,SF,
T
D, DIB, G, 1,
M, PS, S,
SF,T
Animal
Feedlots
AP,TB
AP, CCB,
DIB, G,
PS,TB
DIB, TB
TB
DIB
AP=Albemarle-Pamlico Sound
B = Buzzards Bay
BT= Barataria-Terrebonne Estuary
C s Casco Bay
CCB = Corpus Christ! Bay
D = Delaware Estuary
DIB = Delaware Inland Bays
G = Galveston Bay
I = Indian River Lagoon
LIS = Long Island Sound
M = Massachusetts Bay
N = Narragansett Bay
NY = New York-New Jersey Harbor
PEC = Peconic Bay
PS = Puget Sound
S = Sarasota Bay
SF = San Francisco Bay
SJB = San Juan Bay Bay
SMB = Santa Monica
T = Tampa Bay
TB = Tillimook Bay
Source: NOAA, Estuaries of the United States: Vital Statistics of a National Resource Base. A Special 20th Anniversary
Report U.S. Department of Commerce. October 1990.
-------
Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries and Ocean Shoreline Waters C-55
•= c
01 O
is- *
3!Q 8:
l
*££$
•= on~
< U —-o.
Q ^ D. (X)
r- idssse;
n _i Z <7T
. CQ
ZS
»oo
^ a
•§.
U
I--SS,
ca oo
fcf
^
•g
8.
QJ
Q
i/j
d
t
43
_ o "- —'.
g1™ c i'
S&8^
n <" N II i
a
-------
C-56 Appendix C Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Estuaries arid Ocean Shoreline Waters
TableC-13. Other Sources of Problems at National Estuary Program Sites 111 ' M
i ! ,:::•-•". I . .11- i • : : 1
Cause
Toxicants
Pathogens
Eutrophication
Habitat Loss/
Modification
Changes
in Living
Resources
Shipping
Marinas
C, CCB, D,
DIB, G, 1,
M, PS, S|B,
SMB,T
C, DIB,
G, US, M
C, DIB, G
BT, C, G,
1, M, PS,
S,S]B,T
QD,
DIB, 1,
SF,T
Dredging
G,M,
NY, SF,
TB
G,T
AP, C,
DIB, G, 1,
M, PS, S,
SF,SJB,T
AP, DIB,
G, M, S,
SF,S]B,T
Shoreline
Development
B, DIB,
M, PEC, S
CCB, DIB, M,
PEC, N
AP, B, C, D,
DIB, G, 1, N,
NY, LIS, M,
PEC, PS, S,
SF,T
B, D, DIB,
G, 1, N, US,
M, S, SF, T
Freshwater
Inflow
BT, M, SF
PEC
1, PEC
AP, BT, CCB,
G,I,SF,T
BT, CCB, G,
SF,T
Sealevel
Rise
Other
SMB-
ocean
dump
site .
SMB-
301
AP = Albemarle-Pamlico Sound
B = Buzzards Bay
BT= Barataria-Terrebonne Estuary
C «= Casco Bay
CCB = Corpus Christ! Bay
D = Delaware Estuary
DIB = Delaware Inland Bays
G = Galveston Bay
I = Indian River Lagoon
LIS = Long Island Sound
M = Massachusetts Bay
N = Narragansett Bay
NY = New York-New Jersey Harbor
PEC = Peconic Bay
PS = Puget Sound
S = Sarasota Bay
SF = San Francisco Bay
SJB = San Juan Bay
SMB = Santa Monica Bay
T = Tampa Bay
TB = Tillimook Bay
Source: NOAA, Estuaries of the United States: Vital Statistics of a National Resource Base. A Special 20th
Anniversary Report. U.S. Department of Commerce. October 1990.
-------
Appendix D
Data Reported by Individual
States, Tribes, Territories,
and Commissions
Wetlands
-------
D-2 Appendix D Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Wetlands
Table b-1. Overall Use Support in Surveyed Wetlands ;, . i Ml i 1
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California*
Cctnpo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote TMbe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
CSa RAW Indian Comm.
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hopf Trite
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
towa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
NcwYwk
North QroKnab
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
SobobaBand
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent
Fully Supporting
Eval- Moni- Not • feE:I!E;
uated tored Specified Total ||>e"ccjent
_ ^— - - — fiiLiu—SmB*
HliOliliBBE
_ _ 14,940 14,940 ^2%^
00 00 ii.6%
IB: ' >i
- - - ^|
0 0 00 ^ 0%
|l| jihllfiSi**!
~~ ~~^ KII'I™ uirsris '
748 0 0 748 lOll
866560 0 866,560 E91%
E E E E Jj
= E ] ] p
_ _ 4,706,000 4,706,000 Iplfc
~o o oo P'o^"'1
- - - -
- - ii pig
EE E
E E E ',E"||
E E E .
867,308 0 4,720,940 5,588,248 •jSIOffi
16% 0% 84% 63% PSS
Threatened
Eval- Moni- Not KjjSSSi
uated tored Specified Total BfSeflt
_ — 33
00 00
_
— — — —
00 00
8,215 0 0 8,215
— — . 5,000 5,000
00 '00
_ _ 0 0
— — 481,900 481,900
120 0 0 120
"
E E E E
ii ii
i ii i
fte«»-i
BSf^'
Ifeltj1-
161
fesii
£
m^&S^f-
m®z~!*^ ^
M^a 3^
Nr *~
ifr^
P:
2% 0% 98% 6%
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
•Entered aquatic life use support data in lieu of overall use support data.
b North Carolina's use support information is not based on water quality information. Instead, North Carolina assumed that wetlands converted to pine forests were partially
supporting uses, wetlands converted to agriculture and urban development were not supporting uses, and all other wetlands were fully supporting uses.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix D Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Wetlands D-3
Table D-1. (continued)
Partially Supporting
Not Supporting
Eval- Moni- Not
uated tored Specified Total
S3T
=j^>t
ent
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
..
106,957 106,957
1.60
1.60
3,200
3,200
13,479
86,400
0
13,934
13,479
13,934
86,400
3,640
0
6,205
3,640
6,205
0
10,000
0
10,000
0 00
— 24,169 24,169
926,000 926,000
1,543,000 1,543,000
103,081
0
0%
1,056,891 1,159,972
91% 13%
3,640
0%
1,573,374 1,577,014
100% 18%
(continued)
-------
D-4 Appendix D Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Wetlands
Tabl^D-1. (continued) ; 'i l; M :
SUtc, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
CaGfomla1
(Tempo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Gtia fflver Indian Corrnn.
Hawaii
HoopoMw
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
losva
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina11
North Dakota
Ohio
Onto River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
SobobaBand
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent
;}: : : ;.,,.":.:,;;. ';. ;/ Not Attainable
Eval- Monl- Not BS
uated tored Specified Total ^Percent
__ B||N.U IIII.IN*! u
— — — — HESEBSSK !
1 I I E H
~~ ~~~ " ICETTTB..!-
roiip'iii
— — — • —
4M*^I^>
— iiiB(ni
— — — , . — *j».;i".
'*ss »
oooo 3%""
- - 2,000 2,000 a»;;_
i 11 \ E:
~~* "~" ~~ ^Biiiiiiii '
o o o o Elf*'
— — — — IBBiT7fi"f'
— — — • — ips:::
- - - ~ m®''
~~ ~~ ~~~ IljJi'iiiiillilii'!" '
= III p;
I I E E B
E E E E H
0 ' 0 2,000 2,000 ItiifR '
0% 0% <1% <1% Hiiil ;
Total Surveyed
Eval- Moni- Not
uated tored Specified Total
0 0 121,900 121,900
1.60 0 0 1.60
— — — —
3,200 0 0 3,200
26,082 0 0 26,082
0 0 25,139' 25,139
952,960 0 0 952,960
— — — —
00 00
0 0 36,169 36,169
_ _ 481,900 481,900
0 0 7,175,000 7,175,000
120 0 0- 120
_ _ _. _
— — — —
— — — —
— — — —
982,364 0 7,840,108; 8,822,472
11% 0% 89%
Total Impaired
(Partial +
Not Supporting)
.106,957.
_I'6?
. . .• .. :.... ;. _ .
' 3,200
17,119
20,139 .
86,400 .
•• .• — ': -/
"•••••• o ..
34,169
0 . '
2,469,000
120
. _ • . .
•; ; -': v.';— •- •
. ' . . _.: :
_. '...'....%•'.- '.-.". ••'.'.-:'-.-.'
'"-. ^2,737,106 . .
-------
Appendix D Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Wetlands D-5
-------
D-6 Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Wetlands
Tabl4 D-2. Pollutants and Processes Degrading Wetlands Integrity j
Stole, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Cita River Indian Convn.
Hawaii
HoopaTWfre
HopiTitoc
Idaho
Illinois
Indians
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Matytand
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohto River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rfco
Rhode Island
SobobaBand
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Sediment/
Slitatlon
X
X
X
—
—
X
X
X
—
—
—
—
X
—
X
__
8
Flow
Alterations
X
X
—
X
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
"^
5
Habitat
Alterations
—
X
X
—
X
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
s
Filling
and
Draining
—
X
—
X
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
5
Pesticides
X
—
—
—
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
E
3
Nutrients
X
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
2
Pathogens
X
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
2
Metals
X
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
• —
—
2
H
Unknown
Toxlclty
X
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
'. ' —
—
2
•1
Salinity/
TSS
Chlorides
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
X • The State, Tribe, Territory, or Commission reported that the pollutant or process degrades wetlands integrity.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix D Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Wetlands D-7
Table D-2. (continued)
Low DO
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
E
1
Ammonia
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
Oil
and
Grease
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
"~~
1
Water
Diversions
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
Salt/Fresh
Water
Balance
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
Weeds
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
Natural
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
-------
D-8 Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Wetlands
Tabl0 D-3. Sources of Integrity Degradation in Wetlands ill.
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
GHa River tndhm Conrn.
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Onto
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto RJco
Rhode Island
SobobaBand
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Agriculture
X
—
—
X
X
X
X
X
—
—
—
X
—
X
^~
8
Urban
Runoff
X
—
—
—
X
X
X
—
—
—
X
—
X
^~
6
Hydrologlc
Modification
X
—
—
X
X
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
— -
—
5
Natural
X
X
—
—
X
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
5
Municipal
Point
Source
X
X
—
—
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
- —
E
4
Construc-
tion
X
X
—
X
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
4
Road
Construc-
tion
—
X
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
X
—
X
—
4
Land
Disposal
X
—
. —
—
X
X
, X
—
—
—
—
—
• —
—
4
Develop-
ment
(general)
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
t- •
—
X
—
X
—
3
Commercial
Develop-
ment
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
X
—
3
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
X » The State, Tribe, Territory, or Commission reported that the source degrades wetlands integrity.
Source: 1994 Section 30S(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix D Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and'Commissions - Wetlands D-9
Table D-3. (continued) .
Silvi-
culture
X
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
,3
Dredging
—
—
—
—
X
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
3
Channel-
ization
—
—
—
—
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
2
Filling
and
Draining
—
—
—
—
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
— •
—
2
Industrial
Runoff
—
X
—
• — '.
—
X
—
—
— •
—
—
—
—
2
Recre-
ation
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
' —
— •
—
1
Port
Construc-
tion
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— .
—
X
—
—
— •
1
Public
Projects
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
1
Resource
Extraction
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
' — -
E
, i
Landfills
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
— •
—
—
—
—
1
Livestock
Crazing
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
-------
D-10 Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Wetlands
I ' ! ' - ' i - , ' 1 ' • ! '
Table D-4. Sources of Recent Wetlartds Losses ] I h !
i , i . , i '• .- . ; 1 i - i .
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reserv.
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District o( Columbia
Florida
Georgia
CHa RHvrlndfon Comm,
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hopi Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
SobobaBand
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin (stands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Residential
Development
and Urban
Growth
—
X
X
—
—
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
—
X
X
X
X
X
X
—
15
Commercial
Develop-
ment
X
X
—
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
—
X
X
X
X
—
13
Road/
Highway/
Bridge
Construction
X
X
X
—
X
X
X
X
X
X
—
X
X
X
—
12
Agri-
culture
—
—
—
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
—
X
—
X
—
10
Industrial
Develop-
ment
—
X
—
—
X
—
—
X
—
X
X
X
X
E
7
Filling
and/or
Draining
X
—
—
X
X
X
—
X
—
X
X
—
-_
7
Impound-
ments
X
—
—
—
—
X
X
—
—
—
X
X
X
• —
6
Channel-
ization
X
. —
—
—
X
X
—
—
—
X
X
—
—
5
Dredging
. —
—
—
X
X
X
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
4
Construc-
tion
(general)
—
—
—
—
X
X
X
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
4
Public
Projects
—
X
—
—
—
—
X
X
—
—
—
X
—
4
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
X <* The Stale, Tribe, Territory, or Commission reported that the source degrades wetlands integrity.
Source: 1994 Section 30S(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix D Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Wetlands D-11
Table D-4. (continued)
Silvi-
culture
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
X
X
—
3
Construction
of Wharves,
Piers,
Bulkheads
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
2
Resource
Extrac-
tion
X
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
E
2
Marina
Develop-
ment
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
Utilities
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
1
Peat
Mining
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
Oilfield
Activities
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
_
Land
Disposal
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
• —
—
—
—
—
1
Landfills
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
Hydro-
logic
Modifi-
cation
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
Flooding
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
Mosquito
Control
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
E
i
Recrea-
tion
(camp-
grounds)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
1
-------
D-12 Appendix D Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Wetlands
Tables D-5. Development of Wetlands' Water Quality Standards by States, Tribes, Territories, and Cornmissions ,
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Resetv.
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
CKa ftvtr Indian Comm.
HawaH
IhopaTnbe
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Knots
Irxlbna
towa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
NewMexko
NcwYork
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rito
Rhode lsl.ind
SoMaBond
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
In Place
Use
Classifi-
cation
—
—
X
—
X
X
X
X
X
—
—
X
X
—
—
8
Narra-
tive
Criteria
—
X
—
—
X
X
X
—
—
—
X
—
—
X
6
Numeric
Critierla
—
X
—
—
X
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
4
Narra-
tive
Blocriteria
—
—
Xa
—
X
X
—
X
—
—
X
X
—
X
7
Numeric
Biocriteria
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
-r-
'—
0
Anti-
degra-
dation
—
X
X
X
—
X
X
X
X
X
—
xa
X
X
X
X
X
—
X
X
16
Under Development
Use
classifi-
cation
—
X
X
X
X
—
X
X
—
—
—
—
X
X
—
X
—
—
9
Narra-
tive
Criteria
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
3
Numeric
Criteria
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
' —
1
Narra-
tive
Biocriteria
—
X
X
—
—
X
X
—
—
X
X
—
X
.—
X
8
Numeric
Biocriteria
—
X
X
—
—
X
X
X
—
X
—
X
—
X
8
Anti-
degra-
dation
—
X
—
—
—
X
X
—
— '
X
—
X
—
—
5
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
X • State, Tribe, Territory, or Commission reported program status.
'In place but revisions under development. Revisions include expanding coverage.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix D Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Wetlands D-13
Table D-5. (continued) j
•'>'----'1';'-:;.--->-':''.,-:;; '.:. proposed
Use
Classifi-
cation
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
3
Narra-
tive
Criteria
—
—
—
—
—
—
. ,—
—
—
—
—
—
—
0
Numeric
Criteria
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
• —
—
—
—
—
—
0
Narra-
tive
Biocriteria
—
X
X
X
—
—
X
—
—
—
— -
—
—
4
Numeric
Biocriteria
—
—
—
—
X
—
X
—
X
—
—
—
—
3
Anti-
degra-
dation
—
X
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
3
Implementation Process
Waters in wetlands are waters of the State, but wetlands are not defined for inherent values, e.g., habitat.
Waters of the State, protected by standards for adjacent waters only.
Arkansas does not have a definition of wetlands, standards for wetlands, or legislation to protect them.
Developed draft "State" Wetland Conservation Plan.
No information.
Municipal jurisdiction
Some uses defined, but incomplete. Narrative biocritieria will be developed as funding permits.
Wetlands are waters of the State; now developing criteria and uses for wetlands.
District does not identify wetlands as waters of the District, but has narrative standards for wetlands?
Wetlands are waters of the State, regulated using the same standards as other waterbodies.
Include wetlands as waters of the State.
Some uses defined, but incomplete. Narrative biocritieria will be developed as funding permits.
Wetlands are waters of the State so standards apply to wetlands.
Section 401 , wasteload allocations, specific wetlands identified in State standards.
Waters of the State, minimum designations for noncontact recreation and aquatic life support.
Wetlands are waters of the State, but standards do not have specific wetlands criteria.
No regs for implementing Section 401 . i
Will consider specific definition of wetlands as waters of the State in next triennial review.
Numeric criteria in place but their interpretation and implementation is under development.
Wetlands-specific standards under consideration.
Wetlands not defined in State standards.
Standards for lakes and rivers apply to wetlands, but may not be technically appropriate.
Specific wetlands standards in 1 993, including designated uses, narrative criteria, numeric toxics criteria.
No information
Wetlands are waters of the State but criteria have not been defined for wetlands.
Wetlands are waters of the State; in the near future, New Jersey will develop standards for wetlands.
Wetlands are waters of the State, designated for livestock and wildlife use. Specific standards in 1 996-97.
Developing wetlands-specific criteria.
Currently, there are no specific water quality standards for wetlands.
Existing surface water standards apply to wetlands, but may not protect special wetlands functions.
Waters of the Commonwealth, but no specific standards for wetlands until EPA provides guidance.
No standards or designated uses for wetlands, but antidegradation applies to wetlands.
State Section 401 Water Quality Certification and wetlands are waters of the State.
Wetlands assume standards of adjacent waterbodies; SC is considering wetlands-specific standards.
Wetlands are waters of the State, designated for wildlife propagation and stock watering.
Waters of the State; considering wetlands standards and clarifying general criteria applied to wetlands.
Antidegradation applies to wetlands, waters of the State.
Include wetlands as waters of the State; will consider including wetlands in narrative standards next rev.
Program and criteria in place.
Waters in wetlands defined as waters of the State, so wetlands quality is protected but not their
existence.
-------
-------
Appendix E
Data Reported by Individual
States, Tribes, Territories,
and Commissions
Public Health and Aquatic Life
Concerns
-------
E-2 Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life
TabIe;E-1. Number of Fish Consumption Advisories; t j i: 1
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Cfto River Indian Community
HawaH
Hoopa Tribe
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maiyland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode bland
SobobaBand
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Vkglnia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent
Rivers
7
3
11
4
2
2
1
30
5
1
0
5
23
1
10
4
2
3
0
13
37
63
4
1
3
9
1
2
8
3
25
6
2
16
1
1
19
15
7
7
1
1
6
1
6
72
444
29%
Lakes,
Reservoirs,
Ponds
3
7
11
10
2
1
45
4
0
1
11
1
1
1
1
4
0
1
31
21
501
2
0
19 •
5
1
1
4
22
32
7
21
2
1
4
2
10
10
8
1
1
1
186
997
65%
Great
Lakes
NA
NA
NA ,
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
7
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3
NA
NA
2
NA
NA
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2
NA •:
19
1%
Estuaries
1
NA
0
NA
NA
1
NA
3
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3
2
2
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1
6
NA
1
1
NA
NA
NA
2
NA
NA
NA
NA
2
NA
NA
NA
NA
• NA
25
2%
Bayous
2
—
—
—
2
—
. . — .
—
—
—
—
— "
4
<1%
Coastal
NA
NA
11
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA,
,NA , '
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
11
1%
Multi-
class;
Waters
2
—
13
—
1
—
1
1
1
1
1
—
21
1%
State-
wide
Advisory
—
—
1
—
—
2
1
1
2
1
1
—
1
—
— ,
10
1%
Total
Advis-
ories
10
0
1
3
22
26
0
10
5
0
6
1
89
9
0
1
0
0
1
18
25
2
11
6
11
5
3
47
66
565
6
4
22
14
2
4
19
25
62
15
23
20
2
7
23
0
1
0
26
0
18
17
2
2
6
. 0
2
6
260
0
1,531
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
NA-Not applicable.
NOTE: Pennsylvania and New Jersey report advisories for the Delaware River Basin Commission.
Source: EPA National Listing of Fish Consumption Advisories, September 1994.
-------
Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life E-3
Table E-2. Number of Fish Advisories Caused by Individual Pollutants ',
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Gila River Indian Community
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
Soboba Band
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percentb
Mercury
2
1
3
18
11
5
1
88a
4
1
1
1
1a
27
27a
557
2
21
2
2
1
25
14
8
23
1
4
1
24
2
2
1
3
236
1,120
73%
PCBs
2 .
1
1
11
4
5
1
3
7
22
2
5
4
15
43
96
5
1"
4
10
2
19a
40a
17
1
1
17
1
3
12
5
2
1
3
25
391
26%
Chlordane
3
3
1
1
3
9
3
1
11
1
3
9
1a
19a
8
3
18
—
6
4
1
7
115
8%
Dioxins
3
1
1
1
—
3
4a
1
9
3
2
1
2
8
5
—
—
1
3
1
1
3
1
54
4%
DDT, DDE,
DDD
5
1
3
11
1
—
—
1
—
3
—
—
—
1
26
2%
Pesticides
(Unspecified)
—
3
—
—
—
3
—
—
—
—
1
17
24
2%
Selenium
. —
4
1
—
—
—
—
—
2
—
—
3
2
—
12
1%
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
a A statewide advisory for the pollutant is in effect.
b Percentage of 1,531 total fish advisories in effect.
NOTE: Pennsylvania and New Jersey report advisories for the Delaware River Basin Commission.
Source: EPA National Listing of Fish Consumption Advisories, September 1994.
-------
E-4 Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life
> •• i 1 1 h '- : i • r i • ' : '
Table! E-3. Shellfish Harvesting Restrictions Reported by the States, Tribes, Territories, land CArnmissions ;
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia'
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virgin (stands
Virginia
Washington
Total
Number of
Waterbodies
with
Restrictions
3
1
51
0
26
238
11
67
20
99
25
192
733
Approved
(sq. miles)
—
374.22
268.75
335.00
1,662.15
1,314.80
9.50
449.60
1,550.80
3.59
146.39
664.00
1,168.00
—
7,946.80
Conditionally
Approved
(sq. miles)
—
4.00
1,238.63
0.00
72.27
34.84
16.13
17.20
2.00
166.60
—
1,551.67
Restricted
(sq. miles)
—
209.49
143.75
0.00
104.04
18.70
85.59
0.00
191.00
61 7.40
—
1,369.97
Prohibited
(sq. miles)
—
29.25
737.99
362.50
0.00
NA
151.69
43.74
290.34
36.40
1 30.00
18.80
—
1,800.71
Management
Closures3
—
0.00
409.49
—
107.00
516.49
Total Area
Affected
(sq. miles)b
533.00
33.25
2,186.11
506.25
0.00
170.00
176.31
561.18
18.70
164.17
306.47
56.51
53.60
323.60
802.80
160.48
6,052.43
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
NA-Not applicable.
" Preventive closures due to a lack of data or proximity to point sources or marinas.
b Includes waters that are classified as conditionally approved, restricted, prohibited, and management closures. Conditionally approved waters do not always meet criteria
(or harvesting shellfish but may be harvested when criteria are met Restricted waters may be harvested if the shellfish are purified with clean water following harvest.
Shellfish may not be harvested in prohibited waters.
e The District of Columbia prohibits commercial harvest of shellfish in all its waters.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life E-,5
-------
E-6 Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life
Table! E-4. Sources Associated with Shellfish Harvesting Restrictions ! - . " 1 i - ' !
i i .*:-;; i , \\ i i i il
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts:
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Oregon6
Puerto Rko
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
Total
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Number of
Restrictions
—
0
6
—
24
r....
30
Square
Miles
—
0
—
—
53.62
400.00
—
453.62
Municipal Discharges3
Number of
Restrictions
—
2
0
0
—
17
—
19
Square
Miles
—
11.60
0
—
—
30.12
400.00
—
441.72
NPS (general)
Number of
Restrictions
—
0
33
—
23
65
—
121
Square
Miles
—
33.25
0
—
—
50.55
220.80
—
304.6
Point Sources (general)
Number of
Restrictions
—
0
—
—
30
~~
30
Square
Miles
—
33.25
0
—
—
113.50
—
146.75
— Not reported In a quantifiable format, zero, or unknown.
* Includes preventauVe automatic closures in the vicinity of facilities.
b Oregon reports that agriculture, septic systems, municipal and industrial point sources, and urban runoff are suspected sources of bacteria in shellfish waters.
Oregon did not report the size of waters Impacted by these sources.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life E-7
Table E-4. (continued)
; Industrial Discharges
Number of
Restrictions
—
2
0
3
—
9
— '
14
Square
Miles
—
71.30
0
—
—
23.82
—
95.12
Marinas3
Number of
Restrictions
—
0
9
—
19
18
. —
46
Square
Miles
—
0
—
—
31.22
12.40
— '
43.62
CSOs
Number of
Restrictions
—
0
1
—
5
. —
6
Square
Miles
, — '
0
—
—
11.08
—
11.08
Septic Tanks
Number of
Restrictions
—
0
—
—
9
• — •
9
Square
Miles
—
0
—
—
6.86
I
6.86
-------
E-8 Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life
Table iE-5. Surface Drinking Water Restrictions Reported, by the States, Tribes, Territories, aijicjj Commissions 1
State, Tiibc, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Bastn
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Cfto River Indian Community
Hawaii
Hoopo Tribe
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
Number of
Closures
—
—
0
—
—
—
—
4
—
—
—
0
0
2
NA
—
0
0
—
—
—
1
—
—
—
—
—
v —
0
—
0
—
—
0
—
0
—
0
—
—
Number of
Advisories
—
—
0
—
—
—
—
0
—
—
—
0
0
0
NA
—
0
0
—
—
—
1
—
—
—
—
—
—
3
—
0
—
3
0
—
0
—
0
—
—
Reasons for Closures and Advisories
A drinking water health advisory was issued for one public; water supply (apparently
fed by ground water) due to vandalism of a storage tank.
Elevated color, turbidity, iron, and manganese caused by natural stratification and
oxygen depletion; illegal disposal of chemical and paint containers on watershed
property; algal bloom clogged filter plant.
Surface water in the reservation is not used for drinking water, but coliform levels in
the Russian River exceed drinking water criteria.
No surface waters are classified for raw water source in the District.
Two water systems shut down due to new regulations that required tougher
disinfection.
Surface waters are not used for drinking water supply.
Information not available to agency preparing the 30S(b) report.
No drinking restrictions issued although fecal coliforms were detected in surface water
supplies.
No official advisories have been posted, but high nitrate concentrations in many springs
warrant an advisory to avoid drinking water from these springs.
A few flow withdrawal facilities were shut down while potential contaminants from
upstream spills passed the intakes.
One-day advisory for nitrates from agricultural and natural sources.
Public education advisories due to CSOs, failing sewage systems, and taste and odor
problems from algae blooms.
Boil water orders for City of Anaconda, East Glacier, and Butte due to inadequate
chlorine contact time. Turbidity also a problem at East Glacier. Filtration plants under
construction in Butte will meet treatment standards in 1995.
(continued)
-------
Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life E-9
Table E-5. (continued) 1
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
Soboba Band
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Number of
Closures
—
—
—
0
—
• —
—
0
—
0
0
—
0
—
0
3
—
—
29
1
—
40
Number of
Advisories
—
—
—
0
—
—
—
1
—
—
0
—
0
—
11
—
—
—
2
1
—
22
Reasons for Closures and Advisories
Puerto Rico reported four waterbome disease outbreaks that affected 1 1 7 individuals.
Turbidity violation lasting 2.5 days.
Eleven advisories to boil water were issued for seven water systems.
A diesel fuel spill, a home heating oil spill, and illegal dumping of oil temporarily shut
down three public water supplies.
Ten water supplies experienced closures due primarily to diesel fuel spills resulting
from truck accidents, a barge spill, and other minor spills. Other advisories resulted
from raw sewage released by treatment plants and CSOs.
Contamination of Milwaukee's water supply with Crytosporidium, a parasitic
protozoan that causes illness in humans; source unknown. Boil water notice for
Sheboygan.
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
NOTE: Most States do not have a centralized system for tracking drinking water advisories. These data are incomplete at best.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
E-10 Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life
Table} E-6. Contact Recreation Restrictions Reported by the States, Tribes, Territories,
-------
Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life E-l 1
Table E-6. (continued) :
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Nevada
New Hampshire"
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
Soboba Band
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin13
Wyoming
Total
Contact
Recreation
Restrictions
—
1
—
0
76
—
—
—
—
0
—
45
—
1
—
30
55
51
—
—
3
—
0
—
—
29
0
503
Number
of Sites
Affected
—
1
—
0
52
—
—
7
—
0
—
.20
—
1
—
15 .
25
51
—
—
2
—
0
—
—
12
0
374
Reasons for Restrictions
The beach on Shadow Lake was temporarily closed due to high bacterial levels from a failed septic
system.
Closures due to sewage overflows or spills (1 0), bacteria following rainfall (1 9), storm runoff (21 ),
surface runoff and/or sewage overflow (5), diesel fuel spill (1 ), high coliforms (8). Swimming
prohibited at 1 2 sites around New York City.
Elevated fecal coliform concentrations.
-
Fecal coliforms in State Park lakes. Data on other closures were not available.
Bathing activity was restricted at Woonsocket WWII Memorial Park due to a shutdown of the
aeration system.
Fecal coliforms from unknown sources. '
Elevated fecal coliforms from runoff caused by above-average rainfall.
Bacterial contamination from sewage treatment plant bypasses; collection systems, septic tank
failures, and urban runoff impact 50 sites. Two sites are posted due to toxic contamination by
mercury, metals, and organic chemicals.
High E. coli counts
Wisconsin relies on counties and local agencies to report beach closures. The reported data do not
account for closures in counties that did not monitor or report beach closures.
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
" New Hampshire reports the number of beach closures, which does not include sites posted with caution signs due to occasional bacteria criteria exceedences
° Excludes beach closures due to high water during floods of 1 993.
Source: 1 994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
E-12 Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life
Table;E-7a. FisH Kills Reported by the! States, Tribes;, Territories, and Commissions ] : |
State, Tribe, Territory,
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
G
-------
Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life E-13
1 Table E-7a. (continued)
From
Hydromodificationb
No. of Kills
Reported
0
0
0
0
—
—
— .
—
0
6
0
1
1
—
6
3
I
1
6
—
1
1
26
No. of Fish
Killed
—
—
~~"
0
0
—
—
—
0
—
—
—
—
—
200,500
—
—
—
110,320
50,827
—
200
899,977
—
—
300
1,262,124
From
Dumping Dead Fish
No. of Kills
Reported
—
—
1
0
0
—
3
0
—
0
—
13
1
3
0
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— •
0
3
24
No. of Fish
Killed
—
—
—
0
0
—
0
0
—
—
—
—
0
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
0
27,006
~~
27,006
From
Unknown Causes
No. of Kills
Reported
12
1
6
0
0
10
7
6
0
4
4
3
12
53
4
7
2
5
2
15
3
2
—
4
48
2
0
39
2
4
257
No. of Fish
Killed
—
542
750
0
* ~0
5,900
9,319
_
0
356,868
2,300
25,478
—
—
—
•
13,350
—
1,245
615
—
E
3,228,456
740
0
33,919
1,418
3,680,900
-------
E-14 Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life
Table E-7b. Cause of Fish Kills in States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions Reporting Tolja ; 1
[ Number of Kills I i 1 i : il
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Ateka
Wzona
\ilansas
California
Ccmpo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
CSa River Indian Comm.
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
HopfWb*
Idaho
linnols
Indiana
towa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland"1
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevad«
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York6
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Onto River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rko
Rhode Island
SobobaBand
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Total
Pccent
Total No.
of Kills
Reported
43
2
28
0
0
83
55
14
0
12
17
21
176
181
97
27
8
51
9
173
86
15
5
9
88
8
108
10
4
103
1
20
1,454
From
Pollution
24
c
1
c
c
c
c
3
0
c
0
50
40
c
4
0
c
8
c
6
c
17
52
c
35
10
c
c
7
c
A
16
c
c
c
2
40
c
c
c
69
9
c
2
1
c
24
1
c
40
7
2
44
c
c
6
c
524
36%
From
Natural
Causes
7
c
c
c
c
c
1
0
c
0
c
0
c
c
7
c
1
94
c
75
3
c
c
11
c
29
c
c
c
c
c
c
17
c
6
c
3
c
4
1
1
1
1
c
c
1
c
263
18%
From
Ambiguous
Causes3
c
c
c
c
c
17
0
c
0
•1
c
1
0
c
c
c
5
c
17
71
c
c
2
c
1
c
c
c
5
c
c
c
43
c
1
1
c
c
10
0
15
c
c
9
c
229
16%
From
Hydromodificationb
c
c
c
c
c
0
c
0
c
0
0
c
c
c
c
0
6
c
c
0
c
1
1
c
c
' C
c
c
c
6
3
c
1
c
c
6
1
1
c
c
c
26
2%
From
Dumping
c
c
c
c
c
1
0
c
0
c
3
0
c
c
0
c
13
c
1
3
c
c
0
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
0
3
c
c
c
24
2%
From
Unknown
Causes
12
C
1
c
c
c
c
6
0
c
0
10
7
c
6
0
c
4
c
4
c
3
12
53
4
c
c
7
C
2
5
c
c
c
2
c
c
c
15
3
c
2
c
4
c
48
2
0
39
c
c
4
c
18%
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
1 Ambiguous causes include low dissolved oxygen, algae blooms, red tides,
disease, and thermal shock.
b Hydromodification Includes dam releases and dewatering.
e State or other jurisdiction did not report the total number of kills, overall,
so their other data are excluded from this analysis.
d State includes fish kills that occurred in 1991 in addition to 1992
and 1993.
e New York reports most recent fish kill data available from 1991
and 1992.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes,
Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life E-15
| Table E-8a. Number of Fish Kills Caused by Oxygen-Depleting Substances and Related Pollutants
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Gila River Indian Comm.
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
NewYorkc
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
Soboba Band
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Percent of Total Kills
From Pollution
Total Number of
Kills from Pollution
24
1
16
3
0
0
50
40
4
0
8
6
42
17
52
2
35
10
9
2
7
4
16
0
2
40
69
9
121
2
1
24
1
40
7
2
44
21
6
737
Low D.O. from
Pollution (total)3
5
1
1
b
0
0
22
16
1
0
4
3
22
0
b
1
0
0
0
b
1
0
b
0
33
0
2
1
0
0
0
31
0
0
1
1
1
147
20%
Sewage
2
0
2
0
0
0
3
8
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
4
0
0
10
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
35
5%
Animal and
Poultry Manure
. 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
14
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
5
•1 .'
32
4%
Fertilizer
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
0
7
1%
Nutrients
0
1
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
1%
Algal
Blooms
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 •
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
' . 0
6
1%
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
* Low dissolved oxygen concentrations due to organic pollutants, including bad milk, food processing wastes, and industrial wastes.
° State reported kills due to low dissolved oxygen but did not specify that pollution depleted the oxygen.
c New York reports most recent fish kill data available from 1991 and 1992.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
E-16 Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life
Toblb E=8b. To:xic Pollutants Causing Fish Kills j: ; ; ; |
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Cta Rlvtr Indian Comm,
HawaH
Hovpa Tribe
Hop/ tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
NewYork'
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Onto River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
SobobaBand
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent of all Toxic Kills
No. of Kills
from
Pollution
24
1
16
3
0
0
50
40
4
0
8
6
42
17
52
2
35
10
9
2
7
4
16
0
2
40
69
9
121
2
1
24
1
40
7
2
44
21
6
737
Pesticides
5
2
1
0
0
0
3
4
0
0
1
21
18
1
2
1
6
3
0
1
5
3
3
1
6
1
3
4
3
1
99
25%
Herbi-
cides
3
0
0
'0
5
1
1
0
—
0
—
0
1
—
1
5
2
1
2
E
22
5%
Alglcldes
—
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
—
0
—
0
1
—
1
2
1
—
—
7
2%
Oil, Diesel,
|et Fuel,
Gasoline
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
5
5
0
5
1
1
0
3
13
2
12
1
3
2
3
2
62
15%
Chlorine
1
1
0
0
0
6
1
0
3
2
0
9
3
1
0
8
2
1
1
1
4
4
1
49
12%
Ammonia
0
0
0
1
0
0
4
7
1
0
7
0
3
1
1
2
1
1
32
8%
Metals
1
0
—
0
0
2
0
—
0
1
—
4
1
—
—
—
2%
Other Toxic
Substances"
2
1
0
0
0
3
6
1
0
4
12
1
3
1
0
1
9
2
37
1
1
16
2
1
5
11
2
31%
Total Due
to Toxlcsb
0
1
6
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
12
20
0
3
0
0
0
0
5
42
8
30
2
19
0
4
1
6
0
2
11
0
0
0
2
26
0
0
0
0
21
7
56
0
1
8
17
2
0
30
3
1
19
0
0
17
4
0
55%
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
' Includes unspecified or less common toxic chemicals, such as disinfectants, road tar, deiclng chemicals, and aromatic hydrocarbons.
b The total number of kills due to toxics may be less than the sum of the toxic categories because multiple toxics may cause a single kill.
e New York reports most recent fish kill data available from 1991 and 1992.
Source: 1994 Section 305
-------
Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life E-17
Table E-8c. Other Pollutants and Processes Causing Fish Kills
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
C/fa River Indian Comm.
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York3
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
Soboba Band
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent of Total
Kills From Pollution
No. of Kills
from
Pollution
24
1
16
3
0
0
SO
40
4
0
8
6
42
17
52
2
35
10
9
2
7
4
16
0
2
40
69
9
121
2
1
24
1
40
7
2
44
21
6
737
Siltation
and
Sediment
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
3
0
1
0
12
2%
Turbidity
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
<1%
Cement
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
1
0
5
1%
pH
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
1
0
13
2%
Lime
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
6
1%
Thermal
Stress
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
0
1
14
2%
Flow
Alteration
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
7
1%
— The State did not report fish kills caused by the pollutant or process,
a New York reports most recent fish kill data available from 1991 and 1992.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
E-18 Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life
1 — : ! : !• ,...;-;:, - -! ' - . h • t 1
Tabl&E-9. Sources of Pollutants Causing Fish Kills ; ! 1 . i 1
State, Tribe, Tcrritoiy,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
G/to River Indian Community
Hawaii
Hoopa Tribe
Hopl Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
Now York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
ORSANCO
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
Sobobatland
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Agri-
culture
A
0
0
4
0
0
0
16
S
0
0
7
0
S
14
2
18
4
0
1
3
0
13
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
4
0
17
0
0
1
0
5
0
0
8
0
0
0
2
139
Sewage
Treatment
Plants
3
0
1
2
0
0
0
1
10
0
0
0
0
0
8
2
13
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
6
0
0
0
9
0
7
1
0
1
0
17
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
86
Industry
4
0
1
1
0
0
0
2
7
0
0
1
0
0
6
0
8
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
14
0
0
0
4
0
1
0
1
2
0
12
0
0
4
0
0
6
1
76
Spills
S
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
12
5
2
2
0
0
1
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
2
0
11
0
0
5
0
0
2
2
69
Runoff
(general)
5
0
12
1
0
1
—
3
—
—
8
4
2
—
36
Other
Pesticide
Applications3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
6
0
2
1
0
4
0
0
1
1
28
Drinking
Water
Systems
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
20
Deliberate
Dumping/
Disposal
1
0
—
0
13
—
—
—
.
1
1
1
2
—
19
Swimming
Pools
—
0
3
0
—
5
—
—
—
3
—
5
16
— The State did not report fish kills caused by the pollutant or process.
* Other pesticide applications include herbicide spraying under power lines.
b Impoundments cause fish kills when flushing releases sediments or changes flow. In Utah, dam maintenance introduced cement.
e Commercial sources include fish hatcheries and small businesses.
Source: 1994 Section 30S(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life E-19
1 Table E-9. (continued)
Resource
Extraction
0
1
0
2
—
—
1
—
—
3
—
—
—
—
8
15
Urban
Runoff
—
0
4
—
0
1
—
—
—
—
7
—
—
—
—
—
12
Petroleum
Activities
—
—
—
0
—
—
— •
—
—
11
—
E
—
—
—
1
12
Impound-
ments'3
—
0
E
2
0
—
—
1
—
—
—
—
—
1
1
1
—
6
Hydro-
modifi-
cation
—
—
—
:
—
—
—
—
—
—
5
—
—
—
. .
—
E
5
Land/
Sludge
Disposal
—
—
E
—
—
—
—
~ -
—
5
—
—
—
—
E
5
Busi-
ness0
—
0
—
0
—
—
—
—
2
—
—
—
—
1
1
4
Construc-
tion
—
0
1
0
—
1
-- -
—
—
—
—
—
—
1
—
3
Airport
Opera-
tions
—
0
—
I
0
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
3
—
—
—
3
Road/
Bridge
Construction
1
0
1
0
—
—
—
—
- —
—
—
—
E
i
3
Dredging
—
0
—
—
0
—
—
—
—
—
1
—
—
—
1
"~~
2
Storm-
water
Discharge
—
0
—
1
0
—
—
—
—
, —
—
—
—
—
1
Super-
fund
Site
1
0
—
—
0
—
—
—
— •
—
— .
—
—
—
—
1
-------
E-20 Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life
Tabl([ E-10. Seciiment Contamination1 Reported by 'the States, Tribes, Territories, and torhrjijjssions 1
State, Trtbe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Tribe
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Cifa River Indian Community
Hawaii
lloopo Tribe
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indian*"
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Number of
Sites Assessed
—
—
94
—
—
—
—
0
—
12
—
775
—
—
—
—
—
—
6
—
—
—
—
41
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
22
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Number of
Sites with Toxics
—
—
58
—
—
—
—
0
—
12
—
—
—
—
1
—
—
—
6
2
—
—
11
8
41
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Number of
Sites of Concern
5
—
43
22
—
—
—
12
0
—
12
5
69
—
—
1
—
—
—
2
—
— -
7
8
2
18
—
—
—
150
—
—
—
0
—
—
32
—
—
127
—
—
—
—
—
—
Contaminants detected
Lead, beryllium, arsenic, molybdenum, selenium, zinc, chromium,
aluminum, silver, antimony, cyanide, copper, mercury, manganese,
DDT metabolites, toxaphene, dieldrin, chlordane. ,
Atrazine, chlordane, ODD, DDE, Delta BHC, PCBs, propanil, arsenic,
cadmium, mercury, PAHs.
—
Metals, PAHs, chlorinated pesticides.
Cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, PAHs, PCBs, chlordane, and DDT.
Cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, zinc, PAHs, PCBs, pesticides.
—
—
—
—
Antimony, cadmium, lead, chromium, copper, mercury, nickel, selenium,
silver, zinc, DDT, DDE, ODD, lindane, chlordane, nonachlor, HCB,
endosulfan, PCBs, carbon disulfide, tetrachloroethylene, benzene,
phthalates, xylene, dichloromethane, phenols, organics.
PCBs and unknown toxics.
Priority organics.
PCBs, dioxin, dimethyl formamide, toluene, TCE, Tris and other
organics, chlorinated solvents, cadmium, copper.
DDT and metabolites, PCB congeners, alachlor, chlordane, carbofuran,
chlorpyrifos, cyanazine, lindane, metolachlor, permethrin, simazine,
PAH, chromium, lead, zinc.
Arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, zinc
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
* Indiana has collected sediment data from over 700 sites but only reported results from data collected at 6 lake sites.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life E-21
Table E-10. (continued) ; '; '
Contaminants of Concern
Metals, oil, and grease
Lead, beryllium, arsenic, molybdenum, selenium, zinc, chromium, aluminum,
silver, antimony, cyanide, copper, mercury, manganese, DDT metabolites,
toxaphene, dieldrin, chlordane.
Atrazine, PCBs, mercury, cadmium, PAHs.
Lead, cadmium, mercury, heavy metals, PCBs, PAHs.
—
Copper, lead, zinc, chromium, dieldrin, PAHs, DDT and its metabolites.
Toxics
Cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, zinc, PAHs, PCBs, pesticides.
— -
Arsenic
—
—
Zinc, cadmium, copper, lead, chlordane, dieldrin, PCBs, and DDT.
PCBs and unknown toxics.
HCB, HCBD, creosote, metals, PCBs, dioxins.
PCBs, dioxin, dimethyl formamide, toluene, TCE, Tris and other organics,
chlorinated solvents, cadmium, copper.
PCBs, PAHs, dioxin, oil and grease, mercury, lead, metals, priority organics,
pesticides.
Chlordane, dieldrin, PCBs, cadmium, lead, zinc.
—
Priority organics, metals, and pesticides.
Arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, zinc.
Sources of Contaminants
Point and nonpoint sources.
Mining sources of metals; natural sources of beryllium and arsenic; agriculture and
rural runoff sources of pesticides; point sources may be source of mercury; smelters
may be source of mercury and arsenic; solid waste disposal may be source of
cadmium and lead.
Not reported.
Historical discharges from municipal and industrial discharges, including a battery.
—
Point and nonpoint sources.
Not identified.
—
Discontinued discharge from the Pioneer Flintkote Canec Plant contained arsenic
trioxide, which had been used to treat termites.
—
—
Municipal and industrial discharges, and urban runoff.
Industry and unknown.
Landfill leachate, industrial point sources, surface runoff, abandoned creosote facility,
abandoned hazardous waste site.
Hazardous waste landfill, salvage yard, metal finishing and plating facility, textile mill,
Superfund "recycling" site, copper sulfate algicide applications, bleached Kraft mills.
Agricultural and urban runoff, mine tailings.
—
(continued)
-------
E-22 Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life
Table E-10. (continued) \ :i
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
SobobaBand
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tcnrtesj«e
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Number of
Sites Assessed
—
—
1
—
190
—
—
13
—
—
—
41
—
1,195
Number of
Sites with Toxics
—
—
1
—
~
—
2
—
—
—
—
23
—
165
Number of
Sites of Concern
—
—
1
—
96
—
2
1
3
—
—
23
—
641
Contaminants detected
Arsenic, other metals.
PCBs, PAHs, silver, arsenic
—
PCBs, dioxin, PCP, PAHs, pesticides, creosote, petroleum hydrocarbons,
arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, chromium, zinc.
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life E-23
Table E-10. (continued)
Contaminants of Concern
Arsenic
Arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, manganese, mercury,
nickel, selenium, silver, zinc, DNB, DNBPthal, B2EthhxPhtalEP, diazinon, DDT,
DDE, ODD, PCBs, HCB, PCP, chlordane, heptachlor, lindane, dieldrin
PCBs, PAHs, silver, arsenic
Nickel
Arsenic, beryllium, copper, cadmium, lead, silver, zinc.
PCBs, dioxin, PCP, PAHs, pesticides, creosote, petroleum hydrocarbons, arsenic,
cadmium, lead, mercury, chromium, zinc.
i
Sources of Contaminants
Arsenic contamination at Annie Creek Superfund site, but no adverse impact on
aquatic or terrestrial organisms.
Point sources, nonpoint sources, and natural sources.
Nickel exceeded NOAA's ER-M value at a control site in the New River below a newly
constructed bridge. Additional samples downstream did not exceed the ER-M value.
Industry, agricultural runoff, landfills, discontinued discharges, contaminated
ground water, appliance recycling runoff, coal gasification, discontinued wood
treatment.
-------
E-24 Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life
Table E-l 1. Siz4 of Waters Affected b[y Toxic Substances i N 1
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reservation
Colorado
Connecticut
Coyote Trite
Delaware
Delaware River Basin
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
CHa fifttr Indian Conm.
Hawaii
Hoopo Tribe
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina*
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio River Valley
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rko
Rhode Island
SobobaBond
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent
Rivers and Streams
Total
Miles
77,274
365,000
104,200
87,617
211,513
31
105,581
5,830
0.56
3,158
206
39
51,858
70,150
196
249
133
280
115,595
32,190
35,673
71,665
134,338
89,431
66,294
31,672
17,000
8,229
51,438
91,944
84,003
51,015
176,750
81,573
143,578
10,881
6,450
110,741
52,337
37,536
11,868
29,113
981
78,778
114,823
53,962
5,385
1,106
7
35,461
9,937
19,124
191,228
85,916
5,264
44,852
NA
73,886
32,278
57,698
113,422
3,548,738
Miles
Surveyed
for Toxics
2,885
2,009
22
8,414
510
231
0
38
2,496
0
0
46
19
7,339
886
16,732
865
1,913
5,555
3,679
7,660
2,451
1,154
9,046
3,400
5,825
8,337
448
7,012
1,060
21,157
3,080
10,907
6,943
3,767
9,246
NA
1,751
1,339
2,113
160,335
5%
Miles with
Elevated
Toxics
1,618
393
0
1,115
168
99
18
1,287
1,637
0
19
618
49
11,762
49
223
1,121
58
4,923
591
0
48
1,040
494
678
1,239
41
2,385
986
1,086
163
1,627
867
265
499
NA
2,144
703
595
40,608
25%
Lakes and Reservoirs
Total
Acres
490,472
12,787,200
302,000
514,245
1,672,684
3.50
143,019
64,973
NA
4,499
NA
251
2,085,120
425,382
153
2,168
NA
70
700,000
309,340
142,871
161,366
173,801
228,385
1,078,031
986,776
77,965
151,173
887,019
3,290,101
500,000
288,315
844,802
280,000
533,239
163,012
24,000
151,320
790,782
306,584
632,016
188,461
NA
1,041,884
618,934
161,445
10,887
17,328
NA
525,000
750,000
539,188
3,065,600
481,638
228,383
161,888
NA
466,296
21,522
982,163
372,309
40,826,064
Acres
Assessed
for Toxics
469,749
52,120
352,366
0
10,355
3,440
NA
620
NA
238
1,015
0
0
NA
0
150,660
1,649
60,365
169,022
38,106
17,920
299,466
234,060
374,514
55,090
74,183
5,698
668,000
204,283
472,391
39,974
NA
400,024
3,616
208,951
548,000
538,448
929,642
460,580
NA
14,986
609,185
70,069
7,538,785
18%
Acres with
Elevated
Toxics
61,378
23,323
50,113
9,686
2,875
NA
403
NA
103
597
93,444
NA
75,254
12
1,001
95,484
49,884
400
100
24,956
218,822
810
321,524
53,701
100
133
67,266
145,000
8,160
472,391
1 3,246
NA
84,849
3,015
140
1,416
0
111,452
0
1,279
9,425
NA
7,810
196,703
2,750
2,209,005
29%
Great Lakes ; r
Total
Miles
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ZZZZZ
>» »
NA
NA
NA
NA
63
43
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3,288
272
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
577
NA
NA
236
NA
NA
NA
63
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1,017
NA
5,559
Miles
Surveyed
for Toxics
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
43
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3,288
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
577
NA
NA
236
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1,017
NA
5,161
93%
Miles with
Elevated
Toxics
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
43
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3,288
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
492
NA
NA
236
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA '
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1,017
NA
5,076
98%
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
NA-Not applicable.
* North Carolina monitors toxics at 350 ambient monitoring sites, but the State does not relate the data to waterbody sizes.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix E Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Public Health and Aquatic Life E-25
Table E-11. (continued)
Estuaries
Total
Square
Miles
610.00
NA
NA
731.10
NA
NA
600.00
NA
29.00
866.00
5.80
4,298.00
854.00
NA
380.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
7,656.00
1,633.00
2,522.40
223.08
NA
NA
133.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
28.20
420.00
NA
1,530.00
3,122.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
206.00
17.00
138.80
NA
945.00
NA
NA
1,990.70
NA
NA
2,500.00
5.90
2,943.00
NA
NA
NA
34,387.98
Assessed
for Toxics
610.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
543.00
NA
14.00
866.00
5.80
785.00
12.00
NA
379.86
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10.00
283.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.40
NA
1,530.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
245.00
NA
NA
1,971.10
NA
NA
607.00
2.57
NA
NA
NA
7,864.73
23%
Square Miles
with Elevated
Toxics
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
30.00
NA
1.00
866.00
3.30
448.00
NA
12.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1 76.00
10.00
19.90
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.40
NA
280.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
80.40
NA
NA
122.00
1.01
NA
NA
NA
2,050.01
26%
: : •/•'Oceans^'. ...:J:: :/;;/:.
Total
Miles
337
36,000
NA
NA
1,609
NA
NA
380
NA
25
NA
NA
8,460
100
NA
1,052
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
397
5,249
32
1,519
NA
NA
81
NA
NA
NA
NA
18
120
NA
120
320
NA
NA
NA
NA
362
NA
550
420
NA
190
NA
NA
624
NA
NA
120
173
163
NA
NA
NA
58,421
Assessed
for Toxics
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
25
NA
NA
NA
8
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
171
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.37
NA
NA
NA
205
<1%
Miles with
Elevated
Toxics
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
29
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.51
NA
NA
NA
30
14%
-------
-------
Appendix F
Data Reported by Individual
States, Tribes, Territories,
and Commissions
Great Lakes
-------
F-2 Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes
Table1 F-T. Total! Miles of Great Lakes jshoreline in the Nation
i . i i- - ' i i
State
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
New York
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Total
Total
Miles
63
43
3,288
272
577
236
63
1,017
5,559
Miles
Surveyed
63
43
3,288
577
236
1,017
5,224
Percent
Surveyed
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
94%
—Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305{b) reports submitted by States.
-------
Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes F-3
-------
F-4 Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lake:;
Tabl^ F-2. Overall Use Support in th
-------
Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes F-5
Table F-2. (continued)
'. •'"•• Partially Supporting
Not Supporting
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
Eval-
uated
Moni-
tored
Not
Specified
Total
0
43
0
43
0
0
3,288
0
0
3,288
707
493
310
236
0
493
236
1,017
707
846
236
1,789
3,288
3,288
40%
47%
13%
34%
0%
100%
63%
(continued)
-------
F-6 Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes
TablGjF-2. (contnued) ' ' • " '\''\ \ - :i '' • :\ ! ;- '
Sute
Illinois
Indiana*
Michigan15
Minnesota
New York
Onto*
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin'
Total
Percentage
Not Attainable
, ,'
Eval- MonI- ' Not fij!™1!!?.*
uated tored Specified Total iPercent
E = i = H
o o o o Ir o4
0000 ILj i
0% 0% 0% 0% If"""'" I
Total Surveyed
Eval- MonI- Not
uated tored Specified Total
0 63 0 63
0 43 0 43
0 3,288 0 3,288
0 577 — 577
0 0 236 236
707 310 0 1,017
707 4,281 236 5,224
14% 82% 5% 94%
Total Impaired
(Partial +
Not Supporting)
'0-
43
3,288
493
236
1,017
S,077
97%'
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
'Entered aquatic life use support data because the State did not report overall use support data.
bMkhk)an classifies all of its waters as either fully supporting or not supporting designated uses.
e Derived from narrative sources.
Source: 1994 Section 305 (b) reports submitted by States.
-------
Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes F-7
-------
F-8 Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes
Table; F-3a. Aquatic Life Use Support'in the Surveyed Great Lakes | ; \
State
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
New York
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
(miles)
0
0
0
557
0
0
557
11%
Threatened
(miles)
63
0
807
870
17%
Partially
Supporting
(miles)
0
43
20
236
210
509
10%
Not
Supporting
(miles)
0
0
3,288
0
0
0
3,288
63%
Not
Attainable
(miles)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0%
Total
Assessed
(miles)
63
43
3,288
577
236
1,017
5,224
— Not reported In quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States.
Table F-3b. Fish Consumption Use Support in the Surveyed Great Lakes j | j
State
Iliinots
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
New York
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
(miles)
0
0
0
85
0
0
85
2%
Threatened
(miles)
0
0
0
0
0%
Partially
Supporting
(miles)
0
43
492
236
1,017
1,788
34%
Not
Supporting
(miles)
63
0
3,288
0
0
0
3,351
64%
Not
Attainable
(miles)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0%
Total
Assessed
(miles)
63
43
3,288
577
236
1,017
5,224
— Not reported In quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 30S(b) reports submitted by States.
Tabli F-3c. Swimrning Use Support irvthe Surveyed Great Lakes | ; ' ; \
state
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
New York
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
(miles)
50
43
3,287
464
231
917
4,992
96%
Threatened
(miles)
0
0
40
40
1%
Partially
Supporting
(miles)
13
0
113
5
40
171
3%
Not
Supporting
(miles)
0
0
1
0
0
20
21
0.40%
Not
Attainable
(miles)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0%
Total
Assessed
(miles)
63
43
3,288
577
236
1,017
5,224
— Not reported in quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States.
-------
Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes F-9
Table F-3d. Secondary Contact Recreation Use Support in the Surveyed Great Lakes !
.
State
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
New York
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
(miles)
3,288
454
952
4,694
96%
Threatened
(miles)
—
5
5
<1%
Partially
Supporting
(miles)
—
123
60
183
4%
Not
Supporting
(miles)
0
0
0
0
0%
Not
Attainable
(miles)
0
0
0
0
0%
Total
Assessed
(miles)
3,288
577
1,017
4,882
— Not reported in quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States.
Table F-3e. Drinking Water Supply Use Support in the Surveyed Great Lakes I
State
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
New York
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
(miles)
63
43
3,208
576
977
4,867
98%
Threatened
(miles)
0
0
20
20
<1%
Partially
Supporting
(miles)
0
0
1
20
21
<1%
Not
Supporting
(miles)
0
0
80
0
0
80
2%
Not
Attainable
(miles)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0%
Total
Assessed
(miles)
63
43
3,288
577
1,017
4,988
— Not reported in quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States.
Table F-3f. Agriculture Use Support in the Surveyed Great Lakes
state
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
New York
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Total
Percent
Fully
Supporting
(miles)
43
3,288
85
977
4,393
89%
Threatened
(miles)
0
0
0
0%
Partially
Supporting
(miles)
0
492
40
532
11%
Not
Supporting
(miles)
0
0
0
0
0
0%
Not
Attainable
(miles)
0
0
0
0
0
0%
Total
Assessed
(miles)
43
3,288
577
1,017
4,925
— Not reported in quantifiable format or not specified.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States.
-------
F-10 Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes
Tabl4 F-4. Leacjing Pollutants and Prpcessesjmpajring the Great Lakes Shoreline Waters ! - | j ; ! j" , ; jj
sute
Illinois*
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
New York
Ohto
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Total Shoreline Miles Impaired
% of Impaired Shoreline Miles
% of Surveyed Shoreline Miles
% of Tout Shoreline Miles
Total Miles Total Miles
Surveyed Impaired
63 0
43 43
3,288 3,288
577 493
236 236
1,017 1,017
5,224 5,077
Priority Toxic Organic Chemicals (1)
Mod/ Not |**~
Major Min Specified {Total
0 43 0
- - 3,288
374 42 0
4 186 0
1,017 0 0
fe
1,288
ET"—
feile
£,•190
few-
fc
1,395 271 3,288 Hp?54
27% 5% 65%
27% 5% 63%
25% 5% 59%
, Pesticides (2)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
0 43 0
— — —
0 23 0
0 1,017 0
0 1,083 0
0% 21% 0%
Itotal. ,
fess
lupil^i^
tB¥SK3*i
mL.->
Bai,^.
E|§:..
0% 21% 0% liSiiLnr
0% 19% 0% IBS*?'-
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
" Illinois reports that all 63 miles of its Great Lakes shoreline are threatened by priority oganic chemicals.
Source: 1994 Section 30S(b) reports submitted by the States.
Toul Impaired Great Lakes Shoreline Mites: 5,077 miles
Tot«( Surveyed Great Lakes Shoreline Miles: 5,224 miles
Total Cnut Lakes Shorelines Miles in the Nation: 5,559 miles
-------
Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes F-11
Table F-4. (continued)
Nonpriority Organic Chemicals (3)
Nutrients (4)
Metals (5)
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
1,017
90
0
75
28
35
100
0
86
0
129
100
1,017
f!oTf
165
163
86
229
0%
20%
0%
3%
2%
5%
0%
0%
19%
0%
0%
4%
0%
0%
18%
0%
3%
0%
(continued)
-------
F-12 Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes
Tablet F-4. (continued)
Oxygen-Depleting Substances (6)
New York
Ohio
Pennsylvania
WUconsin
-------
Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes F-13
Table F-4. (continued)
Taste and Odor (9)
Noxious Aquatic Plants (10)
Oil and Crease (11)
Mod/ Not __ ^
Major Min Specified Ijofaf
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
80
40
75
60
40
80
75
60
0%
1%
0%
0%
1% 0%
1%
2%
1%
0%
0%
1%
0%
1%
1%
1%
0%
0%
(continued)
-------
F-14 Appendix F Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes
Table F-4. (continued)
State
Habitat Alterations (12)
Major
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
Unknown Toxlclty (13)
Mod/ Not
Major Mln Specified
Suspended Solids (14)
Mod/ Not
Major Mln Specified
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
New York
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Total Shoreline Miles
Impaired
21
40
40
21
20
20
% of Impaired
Shoreline Miles
% of Surveyed
Shoreline Miles
% of Total Shoreline
Miles
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
-------
Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes F-15
Table F-4. (continued) ,
Ammonia (IS)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
_ _ _
000
0 20 0
0 20 0
0% <1% 0%
0% 0% 0%
0% 0% 0%
otal
fe-
1=H'_p_
C1
fea>
!£
t f
m%
if
"W
* ^
«_
1?
Chlorine (16)
Mod/ Not
Major Mln Specified
0% 0% 0%
0% 0% 0%
Salinity/TDS/Chlorldes (17)
Mod/ Not
Major Mln Specified
_ _ _
0 13 0
— — —
0 13 0
0% <1% 0%
0% 0% 0%
0% 0% 0%
p™-
Hai.
K —
fr-
ffc^
tesis
CT-,
fe-
fr" —
i33-
i
p%"
sL
p3%
fe-~
|o%
-------
F-16 Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes
Tabl4 F-5. Leading Sources of Pollution Impairing the Great Lakes Shoreline Waters if!
State
Winds"
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
New York
Ohio
Penray}van!a
Wisconsin
Total Shoreline Mites Impaired
% of Impaired Shoreline Miles
% of Sun/eyed Shoreline Miles
% of Total Shoreline Miles
Total Miles Total Miles
Surveyed Impaired
63 0
43 43
3,288 3,288
577 493
236 236
1,017 1,017
5,224 5,077
Atmospheric Deposition (1)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
0 43 0
0 8 0
0 1,017 0
0 1,068 0
itrjir
fA*
"-T
3f~
I""
» 8
Ssfe^Wn.
37
^68
0% 21% 0% ifel%
0% 20% 0% iip%
0% 19% 0% jp9%
Discontinued Discharges (2)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
_ — —
000
1,017 0 0
^M?^9*:
Eft
1,017; 0 0
20% 0% 0%
19% 0% 0%
18% 0% 0%
— Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
* Hfinots reports that industrial point sources threaten 10 miles of its Great Lakes shoreline, CSOs threaten 10 miles, urban runoff/storm sewers threaten 63 miles, atmospheric
deposition threatens 63 miles, and contaminated sediments threaten 63 miles.
Source: 1934 Section 30S(b) reports submitted by the States.
total Impaired Great Lskes Shoreline Miles: 5,077 miles
Totil Surveyed Great Lakes Shoreline Miles: 5,224 miles
Total G«*t Lakes Shorelines Miles in the Nation: 5,559 miles
-------
Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes F-17
Table F-5. (continued)
Contaminated Sediment (3)
land Disposal (total) (4)
Unspecified NPS {5):
Major
Mod/
Min
Not
Specified
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified SStaL
374
310
65
0
20
374
4
60
40
60
684
65
20
438
196
100
13%
1%
9%
4%
2%
13%
1%
0%
4%
2%
12%
1%
0%
0%
8%
0%
4%
2%
(continued)
-------
F-18 Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes
Table F-5. (continued) . ; ! ' : !l ' : •...-.•-. i "! 'I'"', , i \
State
Hfinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
New York
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Total Shoreline Miles
Impaired
% of Impaired
Shoreline Miles
% of Surveyed
Shoreline Miles
% of Total Shoreline
Mites
Agriculture (total) (6)
Mod/ Not 1
Major Min Specified |
0 43 °
8 55 0 1
0 120 0
8 218 0
<1% 4% 0%
Jotal
i,?
•ft
p,,S
(ii'201
* 226,
"" 4%
liiiiiiiiiiiiliiiii
0% 4% 0% |P^
0% 4% 0%
P
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers (7)
Mod/ Not t
Major Min Specified | Total
15 69 0 ji-84
0 120 0
15 189 0 Kffii
<1% 4% 0%
0% 4% 0% Ep4% '
0% 3% 0% 1*4%
Industrial Point Sources (8)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
0 43 0
0 21 0
0 140 0 |
6
0 204 0
0% ' 4% 0%
0% 4% 0%
0% 4% 0%
-------
Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes F-19
Table F-5. (continued)
Municipal Point Sources (9)
CSOs (10)
Onsite Wastewater Systems (11)
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
Total
Major
Mod/ Not
Min Specified
43
43
28
120
21
28
80
69
27
191
21
151
69
27
0%
1%
0%
0%
3%
1%
1% 0%
0%
0%
3%
1%
0% 0%
(continued)
-------
F-20 Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes
Table F-5. (continued) : 1j . ; 1 M i ! ' 1
State
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
New York
Onto
Pennsylvania
Total Shoreline Miles
Impaired
% of Impaired
Shoreline Miles
% of Surveyed
Shoreline Miles
% of Total Shoreline
Miles
Spills and Illegal Dumping (12)
Mod/ Not HI ti| !
Major Mln Specified pltal.
_ _ _ j^.
MLJII , ___ iipiji's~~is'™
IJLir ^i
35::. -'..
— — )lE"ILaiJhl
0 44 0 fcdi
0 40 0 ifc;4fl,
0 84 0 t- 84
0% 2% 0% BSP
K i
0% 2% 0% j|2Jl
0% 2% 0% jpij,
Streambank Destabilization (13)
Mod/ Not I
Major Min Specified |
— — —
0 59 0
0 59 0
0% 1% 0%
0% 1% 0%
0% 1% 0%
Total
test
srt
riy
~15iir
t59
t-l%
'»
s^
'»
* ^
Construction (14) ,
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified potal
•= E = d
6 42 0
° R
<1% 1% 0%
0% 1% 0%
0% 1% 0%
-------
Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes F-21
Table F-5. (continued)
In-Place Contamination (15)
Contaminated Ground Water (16)
Mod/ Not __
Major Min Specified
Mod/ Not
Major Min Specified
33
20
33
0 20
1% 0%
0%
0% 0%
0%
0% 1% 0%
(continued)
-------
F-22 Appendix F Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Great Lakes
(continued)
Highway Maintenance/Runoff (17)
Hydra/Habitat Modification (total) (18)
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
Mod/ Not
Mln Specified
Illinois
Ind'ana
Michigan
Minnesota
New York
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Total Shoreline Miles
Impaired
% of Impaired
Shoreline Miles
% of Surveyed
Shoreline Miles
% of Total Shoreline
Miles
-------
Appendix G
Summary of State Bioassessment
Programs
-------
-------
Appendix G State Bioassessment Programs C-3
Table G-1 . Summary of State Bioassessment Programs (includes 50 States, the Ohio River Valley
Sanitation Commission, and District of Columbia) ' :
State Capability
Use of Bioassessments
Water Resource Management
(Nonregulatory)
Interpret Aquatic Life Use
Attainment
Narrative Water Quality Standard
Numeric Water Quality Standard
Organism Croup Used
Fish
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Algae (Periphyton, Diatoms)
Reference Conditions
Ecoregional
Site-specific
Statewide, or Basin-Specific
Using Multiple Metrics
for Data Analysis
Biology
Habitat
Number of States
with Program
in Place
41
31
29
2
30
44
4
15
31
6
42
33
Number of States
with Program
Under Development
8
8
11
15
5
5
3
26
0
0
6
6
Number of States
Without
Program
3
13
12
35
17
3
45
11
21
— .
4
13
— Unknown
Source: U.S. EPA Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation.
-------
-------
I Data Reported by Individual
States, Tribes, Territories,
and Commissions
Section 314 Clean Lakes Data
Appendix H
-------
H-2 Appendix H Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Section 314 Clean Lakes Data
Tabl0H-1. Trophic Status of Significant Publicly O^med 1 Lakes i ! I ! ! I- 1
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama*
Alaska
Arizona*
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Rcserv.
Colorado
Connecticut1
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Gfto RrVer Indian Commf
Hawan
Hop; Tribe
Idaho
Illinois*
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina4
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas"
Utah
Vermont*
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Tout
Percent
Total
Number of Acreage of
Significant Significant
Public Lakes Public Lakes
43 380,939
235 128,436
80 356,254
2 3
105 24,941
33 1,690
7,712 —
27 380,665
0 0
4 70
1,170 172,543
575 106,203
115 41,190
279 173,801
62 474,506
2,314 958,886
58 21,010
709 489,825
102 325,637
358 288,315
7,004 833,964
514 152,589
21 362,331
606 154,694
380 24,000
167 151,320
1,964 461,475
152 306,584
217 632,016
447 118,801
2,337 645,286
156 94,520
18 6,678
57 7,280
43 476,001
565 —
125 538,448
98 1,505,059
809 228,383
251 161,888
14,973 982,163
44,887 12,168,394
Surveyed
Number of Acreage of
Significant Significant
Public Lakes Public Lakes
31 276,436
0 0
33 35,500
0 0
0 0
6 1.48
41 55,604
220 37,954
33 1,690
0 0
356 1,178,880
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
505 187,742
445 115,526
113 41,067
192 171,173
103 217,250
0 0
1,733 926,878
58 21,010
210 46,759
709 489,825
0 0
33 248,602
111 261,521
177 797,185
86 128,879
10 305,775
570 154,164
126 11,172
65 146,098
1,123 333,984
152 306,584
144 622,934
159 103,156
195 , 604,256
202 19,737
57 59,949
18 6,678
57 7,280
0 0
134 690,294
123 539,188
109 1,445,821
70 259,219
194 41,294
224 161,142
0, 0
0 0
718 192,758
90 195,028
9,735 11,445,993
Oligotrophic
Number of Acreage of
Significant Significant
Public Lakes Public Lakes
2 44,885
2 140
0 0
5 4,015
37 4,628
258 455,680
8 297
124 59,833
0 0
8 60,268
142 121,801
1 27
4 25,313
110 174,008
3 338
49 289,569
0 0
2 126,812
173 111,382
0 0
6 6,125
439 69,531
37 99,803
0 0
8 559
5 475
59 1,156
0 0
3 1,441
13 1,545
2 1,199
21 97,068
10 96,852
25 121,155
29 9,623
20 5,856
85 24,685
54 58,159
1,744 . 2,074,228
18% 18%
: Mesotrophic
Number of Acreage of
Significant Significant
Public Lakes Public Lakes
10 46,333
14 27,474
0 0
10 28,181
117 22,974
55 488,960
53 8,087
212 41,999
43 82,587
34 47,721
989 625,616
14 14,830
56 8,027
367 1 76,976
28 82,315
71 425,599
6 68,000
5 118,963
260 34,841
0 0
25 74,654
391 211,594
35 70,663
29 504,229
33 12,101
80 142,627
72 2,142
13 10,547
3 981
32 4,682
13 565,844
36 138,929
51 844,607
34 17,809
119 24,732
63 48,000
245 51,597
9 33,956
3,627 5,109,177
37% 45%
—Not reported in a quantifiable format or not specified.
NA-Not applicable.
*The State or Tribe did not limit trophic status assessment to significant publicly owned lakes.
b Arizona reports the number and acreage of significant public lakes entered in the Waterbody System.
The total number and acreage of significant public lakes in Arizona is unknown.
-------
Appendix H Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Section 314 Clean Lakes Data H-3
Table H-1.
(continued)
Eutrophic
Number of
Significant
Public Lakes
19
16
5
18
50
33
43
282
64
113
100
58
602
43
108
199
33
77
46
52
2
137
126 •
33
293
62
55
90
75
61
44
12
12
32
44
47
7
32
140
156
27
3,448
36%
Acreage of
Significant
Public Lakes
185,218
7,71 6
1.14
17,562
9,026
1,690
234,240
108,966
12,064
41,067
85,884
109,133
179,461
6,153
10,729
119,689
248,602
178,242
81,495
51,485
53,600
7,941
11,172
65,314
52,859
118,588
35,386
61,174
272,409
5,801
49,402
4,256
1,053
19,603
258,022
503,844
22,436
6,571
104,088
83,343
102,913
3,528,198
31%
Hypereutrophic
Number of
Significant
Public Lakes
0
1
1
8
16
Acreage of
Significant
Public Lakes
0
170
0.34
5,846
1,326
— —
162
0
49
3
0
0
42
33
3
1
28
1
0
0
0
6
60
28
35
10
0
0
0
87
22
1
4
0
11
0
612
70,392
0
2,702
128
0
0
2,690
19,152
626
500
9,394
6,400
0
0
0
1,004
83,319
29,322
188,745
10,638
0
0
0
103,648
45,169
518
97,819
• o
1,523 .
0
681,031
6% 6%
Dystrophic
Number of
Significant
Public Lakes
0
0
0
Acreage of
Significant
Public Lakes
0
0
0
— —
0
45
0
0
MA
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
1
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
1
221
. 0
304
0
1,630
0
0
NA
0
0
0
0
22
0
0
0
0
5
16,526
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
368
3,198
31,610
o
53,359
3% <1%
c Gila River Indian Community has no lake trophic data.
d South Carolina reports its own trophic classifications because most southeastern lakes are naturally eutrophic.
South Carolina's classifications indicate the degree of nutrient enhancement above normal conditions.
e Vermont includes some private lakes in their estimate of significant public lakes acreage.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
H-4 Appendix H Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Section 3'I4 Clean Lakes Data
j i * s ' . • ' - |i I i
Ttibjc H=2. Acijclily in Significant Publicly Owned Lakes i i
State, Tribe, Terrltoty,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian RKOV.
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Crto River Indian Convn.
Hawaii
Hopl Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine"
Man/land
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin'
Wyoming
Total
Number of Lakes
Surveyed for
Acid Sensitivity
39
77
7
105
338
0
0
0
21
208
1,005
1
27
1,113
111
200
0
18
606
1,527
22
40
110
125
4
229
5,933
Lake Acres
Surveyed for
Acid Sensitivity
485,046
0.50
24,941
1,160,000
0
0
0
4,985
170,222
713,397
4,500
264,877
1,000
0
154,694
99,194
57,315
474,651
131,941
538,448
38,840
161,338
4,485,390
Number of
Lakes Exhibiting
Acidity
1
0
0
3
—
1
0
7
60
0
6
4
0
0
1
0
0
48
0
360
0
10
0
2
0
6
0
15
2
526
Lake Acres
Exhibiting
Acidity
1,850
0
0
160
—
45
0
43
707
0
792
0
75
0
0
3,327
0
7,155
0
23,163
0
420
0
12,890
0
288
26
50,941
Number of Lakes
Threatened0
by Acidity
6
8
0
12
28
0
200
1
11
17
200
11
0
0
3
282
3
12
—
0
2
0
127
—
923
Lake Acres
Threatened9
by Acidity
32,930
0
1,828
19,584
0
1,500
952
4,289
1,454
0
0
12
16,307
34,152
—
0
142
0
12,397
—
125,547
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
* Includes lakes threatened by high acidity (i.e., low pH) due to natural causes.
bState Included lakes in assessment that are not classified as "significant"
'State provides narrative information about acidity in lakes that could not be quantified in this table.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix H Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Section 314 Clean Lakes Data H-5
-------
H-6 Appendix H Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Section 314 Clean Lakes Data
Tabl6H-3. Sources of High Acidity irj Lakes ! i ;
Stole, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Campo Indian Reseiv.
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
CHo Rner Indian Comni.
Hawaii
Hopi Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine"
Man/land
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mcxko
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin11
Wyoming
Total
Total
Number of Acreage of
Lakes Lakes
Impacted Impacted
1 1,850
0 0
0 0
3 160
— —
1 45
0 0
7 43
60 707
0 0
6 —
4 792
0 —
0 0
1 75
0 0
0 0
48 3,327
0 0
360 7,155
0 0
10 23,163
0 0
2 420
0 0
6 12,890
0 0
15 288
2 26
526 50,941
Number of Acreage of
Lakes Lakes
Threatened Threatened
6 32,930
8 —
0 0
12 1,828
28 19,584
0 0
200 1,500
1 952
11 —
17 4,289
200 —
11 1,454
0 0
0 0
3 12
282 16,307
3 —
12 34,152
— —
0 0
2 142
0 0
127 12,397
— —
923 125,547
Acid Deposition
Number of Acreage of
Lakes Lakes
Impacted Impacted
0 0
0 0
— —
0 0
0 0
36 —
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
24 1,726
0 0
0 0
. 0 0
0 0
0 0
— —
60 1,726
Number of Acreage of
Lakes Lakes
Threatened Threatened
— —
0 0
— —
0 0
0 0
— —
0.0
— —
— —
0 0
0 0
— —
0 0
Acid Mine Drainage
Number of Acreage of
Lakes Lakes
Impacted Impacted
1 1,850
0 0
— —
0 0
7 43
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 75
0 0
0 0
0 0
i
21 57,167
0 0
5 1,940
0 0
— —
35 61,075
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
* "Other Sources" refers to a combination of natural sources of acidity and atmospheric deposition.
''State reports narrative Information about acidity in lakes, but the information cannot be quantified at this time.
Source: 1994 Section 305(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix H Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Section 314 Clean Lakes Data H-7
Table H-3. (continued) j
Acid Mine Drainage (cont.)
Number of Acreage of
Lakes Lakes
Threatened Threatened
— —
0 0
— —
0 0
1 952
— —
0 0
— —
— —
2 142
0 0
— —
3 1,094
Natural Conditions
Number of Acreage of
Lakes Lakes
Impacted Impacted
0 0
0 0
3 160
— —
0 0
0 0
18 —
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
24 1,601
0 0
1 148
0 0
2 420
1 10,950
0 0
— —
49 1 3,279
Number of Acreage of
Lakes Lakes
Threatened Threatened
— —
0 0
— —
0 0
0 0
200 —
0 0
— —
— —
0 0
0 0
— —
200 0
Other
Number of Acreage of
Lakes Lakes
Impacted Impacted
0 0
0 0
— —
0 0
0 0
6 —
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 .
0 0 .
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
— —
6 0
Number of Acreage of
Lakes Lakes
Threatened Threatened
— —
0 0
— .—
0 0
0 0
— —
0 0
— —
— —
0 0
o . o
— —
0 0
-------
H-8 Appendix H Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Section 314 Clean Lakes Data
Table H-4. Trehds in Significant Publicly Owned iJikes ; ' i | : !
State, Tribe, Territory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Compo Indian Resetv.
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
G8o River Indian Comm.
Hawaii
Hop! Tribe
Idaho
Winds
Indiana
towa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico*
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
WestVfcglnla
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Percent
Total
Number of Acreage of
Significant Significant
Public Lakes Public Lakes
43 380,939
235 128,436
80 356,254
2 3
105 24,941
33 1,690
7,712 —
27 380,665
0 0
4 70
1,170 172,543
575 106,203
115 41,190
279 173,801
62 474,506
2,314 958,886
58 21,010
709 489,825
102 325,637
358 288,315
7,004 833,964
514 152,589
21 362,331
606 154,694
380 24,000
167 151,320
1,964 461,475
152 306,584
217 632,016
447 118,801
2,337 645,286
156 94,520
18 6,678
57 7,280
43 476,001
565 —
125 538,448
98 1,505,059
809 228,383
251 161,888
14,973 982,163
44,887 12,168,394
Surveyed
Number of Acreage of
Significant Significant
Public Lakes Public Lakes
27 257,571
0 0
10 167,550
0 0
0 0
7 9,227
105 24,941
0 0
0 0
86 602,240
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
94 56,681
0 0
113 41,068
103 166,645
13 2,627
0 0
289 449,598
0 0
0 0
48 75,283
161 0
0 0
0 0
1 126,000
12 34,499
14 325,207
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
15 293,561
109 597,919
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
6 3,348
0 0
40 474,651
105 130,127
113 673,919
0 0
96 397,259
0 0
221 159,308
0 0
0 0
40 19,985
0 0
1,828 5,089,214
4% 42%
Improving
Number of Acreage of
Significant Significant
Public Lakes Public Lakes
1 2,300
10 10,519
21 106,240
26 23,212
7 3,517
9 686
4 345
24 19,148
14 36,960
44 —
2 948
1 100
5 25,022
1 324
3 1,527
12 230,348
17 20,630
14 83,632
24 1 77,785
6 383
16 7,9(51
261 751,587
14% 15%
j Stable
Number of Acreage of
Significant Significant
Public Lakes Public Lakes
26 255,271
10 167,550
7 9,227
89 13,610
62 458,240
32 15,115
96 36,262
45 75,678
1 137
241 418,587
30 34,644
104 —
9 33,491
11 249,495
— 257,385
65 520,146
2 1,108
28 244,303
39 48,370
85 493,355
49 204,223
182 149,777
18 9,937
1,231 . 3,695,911
68% 73%
—Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
'Puerto Rico reported trends in several parameters. Trends In phosphorus data are presented In this table.
Source: 1994 Section 30S(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix H Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Section 314 Clean Lakes Data H-9
Table H-4. (continued)
• :: .•' ;.... ^'/IJegradlng',;,';;;;.;;-;";;;;
Number of
Significant
Public Lakes
0
6
3
36
10
49
8
24
4
13
1
1
2
10
43
1
0
49
14
23
33
6
336
18%
Acreage of
Significant
Public Lakes
0
812
37,760
18,354
1,289
90,281
2,145
11,863
3,679
—
126,000
60
75,612
11,154
77,449
713
0
61,127
96,932
15,251
9,148
2,087
641,716
13%
-------
H-10 Appendix H Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Section 314 Clean Lakes Data
1 liable H-5. JGIean Lakes Program projects 1 ii 1
State> Tribe, Ten itory,
or Commission
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Cumpo Indian Reservation'
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
CHa ffiver Indian Comm.
Hawaii
Hopi Tribe
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming'
Total
Phase 1 Projects
Number of Number of
Ongoing Projects
Projects Completed
4 0
1 2
1 1
0 0
0 8
1 2
5 1
0 0
4 —
7 -3 ,.. .
3 '0
1 1
2 7
— 2
1 0
3 4
2 7
1 1
4 4
1 0
3 7
1 1
3 0
1 1
3 0
4 3
0 2
1 2
1 5
1 0
2 1
12 0
2 0
3 1
0 0
78 66
Phase 2 Projects
Number of Number of
Ongoing Projects
Projects Completed
0 0 '
0 0
i 'o ;
0 0
0 3
0 0
0 V o
0 0
2 —
, 5 3
0 0
2 3
2 0
2 1
3 0
4 0
1
1 3
0 0
2 0
0 0
1 1
12 0
3 0
3 0
2 0
0 2
0 0
0 0
3 6
0 ' 0
1 0
4 0
2 1
3 —
0 0
59 23
Phase 3 Projects
Number of Number of
Ongoing Projects
Projects Completed
0 , • 0 :
0 - 0
' 0 ' 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 , 0
0 0
0 0
1 1 .
0 ' 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
7 1
LWQA Annual Grants
Number of Number of
Ongoing Projects
Projects Completed
. . ' ~ . • — ., '
0 0
2 3
1 —
0 0
1 ., ' 0
0 0
2 ' ' —
2 0
'0 0 '
0 1
1 1
2 0
1 —
2 1
3 2
0 0
3 1
1 1
1 1
0 1
1 0
3 1
0 0
1 2
1 1
3 0
0 0
1 1
0 0
32 17
— Not reported In a quantifiable format or not specified.
"State docs not participate in Clean Lakes Program at this time.
Source: 1994 Section 30S(b) reports submitted by States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions.
-------
Appendix I
Data Reported by Individual
States, Tribes, Territories,
and Commissions
Ground Water Protection
Programs
-------
1-2 Appendix I Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Ground Water
Table JM. Grourtd Water Source Used ]for Drinking .Water1 ! ! J III1 '';. i
1 i i i (
' State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts, '
Michigan /}
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri-*—'"
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tenncssac
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
Total U.S.
Ground Water for Public
Water Supply -1970-1990
MGD1990
224
34
401
119
3,260
83
73
33
1,700
234
221
173
444
274
234
176
55
275
21
76
179
261
290
282
185
51
235
104
34
396
241
550
137
32
396
80
105
427
13
79
52
269
1,270
305
19
69
434
43
294
41
80
1
15,000
% Increase
1970-1990
124
42
111
68
104
5
(15)
10
124
23
84
80
(38)
30
30
35
129
96
5
81
5
13
81
76
101
96
57
28
6
16
85
20
71
33
24
11
57
71
(28)
44
24
68
84
103
36
(7)
50
19
34
71
135
61
Ground Water to Surface
Water Ratio for Marginal
Change in Public Supplied
Water -1980-1990
2.8
0.4
2.2
0.2
3.8
1.3
18
0.8
10.9
0.02
20.5
1.9
<0
0.5
1.0
0.8
0.1
1.3
1.0
0.1
<0
0.3
4.0
>32
725
>1
2.5
0.1
<0
<0
4.6
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.1
0.03
0.2
>187
<0
0.3
0
0.6
>340
0
>2
<0
>134
0
0.2
>14
0.2
2.1
2.1
I ' ' '
Population Supplied
by Ground Water for
Drinking Water -1990
Population
(thousands)
1,819
282
2,457
1,451
16,453
670
1,130
435
11,710
2,880
1,076
864
4,650
3,510
2,142
1,290
1,341
2,447
701
4,781
6,016
9,395
4,375
2,573
5,117
799
1,578
1,202
1,109
7,773
1,517
17,990
6,629
639
10,847
3,146
2,842
11,882
1,003
2,055
545
2,498
8,047
1,723
563
6,187
4,867
1,793
4,892
454
3,522
101
128,902
'%
45
51
67
62
55
20
34
65
91
44
97
86
41
63
77
52
36
58
57
31
42
35
79
93
49
52
86
33
64
47
90
36
43
61
45
39
37
50
19
59
78
51
47
58
72
34
60
S1
69
59
25
14
51
% of Ground
Water Supplied
to Population
by Private
Wells -TWO '
20
55
12
39
17
37
55
32
15
46
4
28
29
44
32
19
75
25
77
57
25
51
42
28
41
47
28
20
58
25
23
32
66
40
36
40
52
46
37
67
26
36
11
5
57
70
31
65
44
41
48
32
Source: Geological Survey: Estimated Use of Water in the United States in 1971, 1975, 1980, 1985, and 1990; Circular 676, 1972; Circular 765, 1977; Circular 1001,
1983; Circular 1004, 1988; Circular 1081, 1993.
-------
Appendix I Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Ground Water 1-3
-------
1-4 Appendix I Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Ground Water
liable 1-2, Summary of State Ground Water Protection Programs
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Indicator Parameters"
Administrative
/*
/*
/
(pesticide
residues)
/
(pesticides,
VOCs, metals,
nitrates,
trihalomethanes)
/
(land use)
/*
/*
/*
Constituent
• /
(pesticides, VOCs,
ions, metals,
hydrocarbons,
radionuclides,
bacteria)
/
/
(pH, nitrate,
specific
conductivity,
inorganics)
/
(organics,
chlorides)
/
(radionuclides,
pesticides, ions,
bacteria, VOCs)
/
(bacteria)
/
(color, pH,
alkalinity, ions,
specific
conductivity)
Monitoring"
Ambient
/
/
/
/
/d
/
/
/
/
periodic
/"
/
/d
/"
/
Compliance
/
,/•
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
Federal
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
Classification
Classification
Levels
under development0
noneb
2
3
systems are regional —
use categories include:
domestic, agricultural,
industrial service, and
industrial process6
5
4
no forma] system — goal of
protection of all water for
beneficial useb
4
no formal system —
variable protection based
on ground water value,
vulnerability, existing quality,
current use, and potential
future use"
3
3
4
none
noneb'c
3
none
domestic use
2
3
Basis'1
use
relationship to ecologically sensitive
ecosystems and potential use
as drinking water source
beneficial use
use
use and water quality (suitability
for use as a drinking water
source without treatment)
use, total dissolved solids,
ambient water quality, and
level of natural protection
antidegradation goal
hydrogeology, geology, 1
existing use, salinity,
total dissolved solids,
replaceability, vulnerability
to contamination,
and ecological importance
ecological sensitivity,
use as drinking water source1
beneficial use
natural mineral quality
use
regulation, hydrogeology,
water quality
•Indicators suggested by EPA in the guidance document for the 305(b) report.
Sources: • "Summary Table of Current State Ground Water Monitoring and Use of Ground Water Quality Indicators," January 1994.
bBenjamin, S., and Belluck, D., State Groundwater Regulation: Guide to Laws, Standards, and Risk Assessment, The Bureau of National Affairs, Washington, DC, 1994.
e "Summary of State Ground Water Classification Systems," December 1992.
dState 305(b) Reports.
-------
Appendix I Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commission's - Ground Water 1-5
Table 1-2. (continued)
v Classification (continued)
• • • -• ,-. • • '•'. . v '•:•'- '•-• '•.' :•'.. ••- .•••••-. -'.•.-...- .•• : •
Used in
Permitting1
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/b
/
/
/
/
Restricted Activitie^
Certain industries must have Aquifer Protection Permits, which control and limit discharges
Activities that may affect water quality: restrictions vary across the State
No discharge of wastewater other than domestic sewage or animal wastes in areas containing the two highest classes
of ground water; only areas containing the lowest class of ground water (unsuitable for development of a public water
supply) may be used for waste treatment processes
Permitting based on nondegradation policy— polluting activities can be prohibited
Activities restricted in areas vulnerable to ground water contamination— all potentially polluting activities are controlled
Regulation of activities threatening ground water quality
'
Wastewater discharges regulated through permitting
(continued)
-------
1-6 Appendix I Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Ground Water
Table 1-2. (continued) | 'M : ; ! i 1
State
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexko
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Indicator Parameters"
Administrative
V*
/*
/*
/
(public supply
vulnerability)
/
(Maximum
Allowable Limit
(MAL) violations)
/*
/*
Constituent
/
(specific
conductivity,
TOC, COD, ionic
balance)
/
(nitrate)
/
(pesticides,
nitrate)
/
(alpha particle
activity)
/
/
(bacteria)
/
Monitoring"
Ambient
/d
/
/«
/d
/d
/d
proposed
/d
/d
/
/
/
/
/d
/
/"
/
developing"
Compliance
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
Federal
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
Classification
Classification
Levels
3
none — believe all aquifers
should have equal protection11
none — nondegradation goal
for all ground water1"
none— goal of preservation
for domestic useb
no formal system —
antidegradation policy for
all usable ground water;
classes can be assigned by
regulation and water quality13
4
3
none — antidegradation policy
for all ground water
4
3
2b
3
3
2
none — no differential
protection of aquifers
3 (proposed)
none— antidegradation
policy for all ground water
none— nondegradation
goal for all ground water
4
3
2
under development
4
7
4
Basisb
most sensitive use
specific conductance
regulation
potential as a drinking
water source
hydrogeologic characteristics
and designated uses
total dissolved solids
total dissolved
solids and salinity
use and mineral content
total dissolved solids and
regulation under the State
UIC program
ecological sensitivity,
hydrogeologic characteristics,
total dissolved solids,
and potential use
potential use and water quality
(e.g., suitability for drinking water
use without treatment)
hydrogeologic characteristics
and potential use
total dissolved solids
total dissolved solids
ecological Importance,
presence of contaminants,
total dissolved solids,
and potential use
potential use and exposure
to risk of contamination
-------
Appendix I Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Ground Water 1-7
Table 1-2. (continued) :
Classification .(continued)
Used in
Permitting'
/
/
/
/
/
J
/
v'
/
/
/
/
/
S
/
S
/
/
/
/
Restricted Activities1'
Antidegradation policy, especially in areas of high water quality. Regulated contaminant sources include chemical and fuel storage,
agricultural chemical use, waste treatment and disposal areas, water wells and unrestricted test holes, industrial facilities, and
hazardous material transportation spills and leaks
Local protection and State corrective and prevention efforts targeted in top two tiers of classification system
Discharge permits are required — designed to protect Class 1 ground waters
Standards regulate discharges to each class of ground water
Sewage, industrial, or other wastes cannot be placed where they may cause pollution to any source of ground water
Human activities are regulated and/or prohibited within vulnerable ground water areas
(continued)
-------
1-8 Appendix I Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Ground Water
j T— i !•-.;• ' ! i 1 11 I- ' ' hi
Table1 1-2. (continued) j , i. 1 i HI ; : ill
State
Wglnia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Indicator Parameters"
Administrative
/*
/*
/*
Constituent
/
(specific
conductivity,
gross alpha,
nitrate, pesticides)
/
Monitoring3
Ambient
/
proposed
/
/
Compliance
/
/
/
Federal
/
/
Classification
Classification
Levels
none — antidegration policy
for all ground water13
none— antidegradation policy
for all ground water
none — preservation of all
ground water for beneficial use
none— antidegradation goal
for all aquifers; preserve all
as drinking water sources'1
9 (including subclasses)
Basis'1
regulation, existing use,
total dissolved solids,
ambient water quality
-------
Appendix I Data Reported by Individual States, Tribes, Territories, and Commissions - Ground Water 1-9
Table 1-2. (continued)
Classification (continued)
Used in
Permitting1
/
/
/
/
/
Restricted Activities'3
No discharge unless all known, available, and reasonable methods of treatment have been applied
No discharge unless all known, available, and reasonable methods of treatment have been applied
No discharges to first five classes that impair ambient ground water quality; no discharges to classes 6 and 7 that impair water
for use suitability; no substances released to any class in excess of standards or that contribute to any hazardous effect on natural
biota
•& U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1996 409-823/50253
-------
-------
Order Form
Additional copies of this report and related water quality assessment documents can be ordered from the
National Center for Environmental Publication and Information (NCEPI) or accessed electronically on the
Internet through EPA's Water Information Network (see page 380 of The National Water Quality Inventory:
1994 Report to Congress for instructions). To order hard copies, please check the boxes beside the documents
that you would like to order and return this form to the address on the reverse, or fax this form to NCEPI at
(513) 891 -6685. Due to limited supply, we can send you only one copy of each publication. Allow 2 to 3 weeks
for delivery.
Q] The National Water Quality Inventory: 1994 Report to Congress. EPA841 -R-95-005. December 1995.
The complete report containing discussions of water quality information submitted by States, Tribes,
and other jurisdictions as well as full descriptions of EPA programs to maintain and restore water quality.
(572 pages)
Q The National Water Quality Inventory: 1994 Report to Congress - Appendixes. EPA841 -R-95-006.
December 1995. This document contains the data tables used to generate the information presented in
the 1994 Report to Congress.
(216 pages)
rn The Quality of Our Nation's Water: 1994, Executive Summary of the National Water Qualify
Inventory: 1994 Report to Congress. EPA841 -S-95-004. December 1995. A summary of the complete
Report to Congress, including individual summaries of the Section 305(b) reports submitted by the States,
Tribes, and other jurisdictions.
(200 pages)
Q] Fact Sheet: National Water Quality Inventory: 1994 Report to Congress. EPA841 -F-95-011. December
1995. Brief synopsis of the water quality data submitted by the States, Tribes, and other jurisdictions in
their 1994 Section 305(b) reports.
(12 pages)
r~j Water Quality Conditions in the United States. EPA841 -F-95-010. December 1995. A short profile of the
National Water Quality Inventory: 1994 Report to Congress.
(2 pages)
I 1 Guidelines for Preparation of the 1994 State Water Quality Assessments (305(b) Reports).
EPA841-B-93-004. May 1993.
(300 pages)
I 1 Guidelines for Preparation of the 1996 State Water Quality Assessments (305(b) Reports).
L-J EPA841 -B-95-001. May 1995.
(350 pages)
r~] Knowing Our Waters: Tribal Reporting Under Section 305(b). EPA841 -B-95-003. May 1995.
(17 pages)
Ship to:
Address:
City, State, ZIP:
Daytime Phone:
(Please include area code)
-------
• fold
NCEPI
11029 Kenwood Road, Building 5
Cincinnati, OH 45242
• fold
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Regional Offices
For additional information about water quality in your Region, please contact your EPA
Regional Section 305(b) Coordinator listed below:
Diane Switzer
EPA Region 1 (EMS-LEX)
60 Westview Street
Lexington, MA 02173
(617) 860-4377
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine,
New Hampshire,
Rhode Island, Vermont
Jane Leu
EPA Region 2 (SWQB)
290 Broadway, 25th Floor
New York, NY 10007-1866
(212)637-3741
New Jersey, New York,
Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands
Margaret Passmore
EPA Region 3 (3ES11)
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215)597-6149
Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania,
Virginia, West Virginia, District of
Columbia
David Melgaard
EPA Region 4
Water Management Division
345 Courtland Street, NE
Atlanta, GA 30365
(404)347-2126
Alabama, Florida, Georgia,
Kentucky, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina,
Tennessee
Dave Stoltenberg
EPA Region 5 (SQ-14J)
77 West Jackson Street
Chicago, IL 60604
(312)353-5784
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,
Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin
Russell Nelson
EPA Region 6 (6W-QT)
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, TX 75202
(214)665-6646
Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico,
Oklahoma, Texas
Robert Steiert
EPA Region 7
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
(913)551-7433
Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska
Phil Johnson
EPA Region 8 (8WM-WQ)
One Denver Place
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202
(303)312-6275
Colorado, Montana, North Dakota,
South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming
Janet Hashimoto
EPA Region 9
75 Hawthorne St.
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415)744-1933
Arizona, California, Hawaii,
Nevada, American Samoa, Guam
Curry Jones
EPA Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue '
Seattle, WA 98101
(206)553-6912
Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington
U.S. EPA Regions
Virgin Islands
CZ3 Puerto Rico
-------
------- |