National
Water Quality
Inventory
1982 Report
to Congress
*
-------
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 Ad-
ministrator 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 pre-
ceding year, with appropriate supplemental de-
scriptions as shall be required to take into account
seasonal, tidal, and other variations, correlated
with the quality of water required by the objective
of this Act (as identified by the Administrator pur-
suant to criteria published under section 304(a) of
this Act) and the water quality described in sub-
paragraph (B) of this paragraph,
"(B) an analysis of the extent to which all navi-
gable waters of such State provide for the protec-
tion and propagation of a balanced population of
shellfish, fish, and wildlife, and allow recreational
activities in and on the water;
"(C) an analysis of the extent to which the
elimination of the discharge of pollutants and a
level of water quality which provides for the pro-
tection and propagation of a balanced population
of shellfish, fish, and wildlife and allows recrea-
tional activities in and on the water, have been or
will be achieved by the requirements of this Act,
together with recommendations as to additional
action necessary to achieve such objectives and
for what waters such additional action is neces-
sary;
"(D) an estimate of (i) the environmental im-
pact, (ii) the economic and social costs necessary
to achieve the objective of this Act in such State,
(HI) the economic and social benefits of such
achievement; and (iv) an estimate of the date of
such achievement; and
"(E) a description oHhe nature and extent of
nonpomt sources of pollutants, and recommenda-
tions as to the programs which must be under-
taken to control each category of such sources,
including an estimate of the costs of im-
plementing such programs
"(2) The Administrator shall transmit such State reports,
together with an analysis thereof, to Congress on or be-
fore October 1, 1975, and October 1, 1976, and biennially
thereafter"
-------
United States Washington DC
Environmental Protection 20460
Agency
&EPA
The Administrator
Dear Mr. President:
Dear Mr. Speaker:
'As required by Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act of 1972 (P L. 92-500) and its 1977 amendments,
I am transmitting to the Congress the National Water Quality Inventory Report for 1982. This report is the
third in the series of national inventory reports published since 1976. It is based primarily on reports sub-
mitted by the States in 1982, with additional information from 1980 reports wherever gaps exist in the
1982 submissions. The 1980 and 1982 State reports are being transmitted to the Congress in their
entirety
The 1982 State Section 305(b) reports reveal that water quality is improving in many States. In fact, the
majority of the Nation's waters assessed in 1982 meet the interim Clean Water Act goal Many water
quality improvements can be directly attributed to pollution control programs. For example, 36 States cite
specific improvements resulting from the construction of municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and
20 States report improved water quality due at least in part to pollution controls implemented by industry.
A number of successes in nonpomt source pollution abatement are also reported, although the effects of
nonpomt controls tend to be difficult to quantify
Despite this progress, point and nonpomt sources of pollution, as well as other factors such as natural
variation in stream flow and hydrologic modifications, continue to cause violations of water quality stan-
dards and are limiting water uses in many areas of the country. Two issues of national concern are pollu-
tion resulting from toxic substances, and ground-water contamination and depletion. Thirty States cite
violations of water standards or impairments of water uses due to toxic substances. Ground-water prob-
lems due to contamination or depletion are reported in over half the States.
These results demonstrate that the basic structure of the Clean Water Act is sound That is, the dual
emphasis on technology-based controls—uniform national requirements for point sources—and on water
quality-based controls, which are imposed only where technology-based controls are inadequate, has re-
sulted in dramatic progress EPA's current programs to implement the Clean Water Act focus on two key
objectives'
• Continue to develop and implement technology-based controls. EPA is actively developing the
national regulations to control the industrial discharge of toxic pollutants, and with the States
will move rapidly to clear the backlog of permits which must be issued to implement these
controls
• Strengthen the water quality-based approach so it will be available where needed to control
point sources of pollution in the areas where technology-based controls are not sufficient to
achieve water quality standards.
EPA is also beginning to focus greater attention on nonpomt sources of pollution A national nonpomt
source implementation policy is being developed, and various State and local efforts are already underway
which should increase our understanding of the causes and effects of nonpomt source pollution
The primary sources of information for this report are the water quality monitoring programs operated by
the States. Many of these programs are currently undergoing a transition from traditional chemical water
quality analyses to a more comprehensive combination of biological, physical, and chemical analyses.
Therefore, the conclusions expressed in this report, which still rely heavily on traditional measures of
water pollution, may change in future reports as better information is generated through expanded
monitoring efforts. EPA will continue to work with the States in developing and improving future reports
in this series
Sincerely yours,
William D. Ruckelshaus
Honorable George Bush
President of the Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
Honorable Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr.
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 205I5
-------
Contents
Preface ill
Chapter 1: Introduction and Overview
Background of the Clean Water Act 1
Summary of Progress to Date 2
Problems Which Remain 3
Implications for National Programs 3
National Program Directions 4
Chapter 2: National Program Directions for the 1980s
Technology-Based Approach 5
Water Quality-Based Approach 5
Water Quality Standards 5
Wasteload Allocations 6
Monitoring 6
Permitting and Compliance 7
Nonpoint Source Control 7
Construction Grants 8
Priority Waterbodies 8
Chapter 3: Water Quality Status
Waters Meeting the 1983 Clean Water Act Goal 9
State Water Quality Trends 10
Additional Issues 10
Ground Water 10
Toxic Pollutants 11
Chapter 4: Pollution Sources and Control Programs
Point Sources of Pollution 13
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution 15
Other Factors 17
Chapter 5: Costs and Benefits of Meeting the Clean
Water Act Goal 18
Tables
Table 1: Waters Meeting the 1983 Goal as Estimated in
State Section 305(b) Reports 9
Table 2: Lake Eutrophication 16
Glossary 20
Appendix A: Waters of Concern Identified in 1982 State
Section 305(b) Reports 21
Appendix B: Summary Excerpts of State Section 305(b)
Reports 23
-------
Preface
This document, the third in a series of National
Water Quality Inventory reports published since
1976, is based on water quality reports to the Con-
gress submitted by the States and other jurisdictions
of the United States in 1982. In some cases, State-
reported information is supplemented by Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) data, particularly
where national program issues are discussed Be-
cause no National Water Quality Inventory report
was published in 1980, information from the 1980
State reports is included in this document where
1982 data are lacking.
The State water quality reports, which provide de-
scriptions of the water quality of all navigable waters
in the individual States, are prepared biennially pur-
suant to Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act In
1982, 55 of a total of 58 States and jurisdictions sub-
mitted reports The submissions from the States and
jurisdictions are being transmitted to the Congress in
their entirety with this report A summary of each
State's submission is included in Appendix B
Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act requires
each State to submit a biennial report to the EPA
describing the quality of its navigable waters. This re-
port is to include the following' an analysis of the ex-
tent to which the State's waters provide for healthy
fish, shellfish, and wildlife populations and allow
water-based recreation, an analysis of the extent to
which pollution control actions have achieved this
level of water quality, and recommendations for
needed additional actions; an estimate of the en-
vironmental impacts, economic and social costs and
benefits, and date of achieving this level of water
quality, and a description of the nature and extent of
nonpoint sources of pollution and recommendations
for their control The EPA is required to transmit the
State reports to Congress, along with a summary of
these reports describing the quality of the Nation's
waters.
The State Section 305(b) reports tend to focus pri-
marily on the quality of inland waters and, in particu-
lar, on rivers and streams Some States discuss lake
quality and ground water, and some coastal States
emphasize water quality issues in selected bays or
estuaries. Because such coverage is incomplete in
other States, however, this report does not attempt
to analyze coastal areas, wetlands, ground water,
and lake quality at length
-------
Introduction
and
Overview
Background of the 1972 Clean
Water Act
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amend-
ments of 1972 (the Clean Water Act) were passed at
a time when serious water quality problems existed
in many parts of the country. For example:
• In the 1960s, Ohio's Cuyahoga River and New
York's Buffalo River were so oil-slicked and polluted
they actually caught on fire. The Houston Ship Chan-
nel, the Calumet River, and many other waterways
were plagued by poorly treated or untreated munic-
ipal and industrial wastes.
• In 1968, over 44 million people were served by
municipal wastewater treatment facilities which pro-
vided only primary levels of treatment * Sewage
from over ten million people received no treatment
and was discharged directly into the Nation's waters
• Many States had only limited controls on industrial
discharges, and no uniform, national approach ex-
isted to regulate the quality of industrial discharges.
• Our knowledge of a number of possibly significant
problems, such as the prevalence of toxic sub-
stances in the Nation's waterways and the contribu-
tion of nonpomt sources of pollution to water
degradation, was very limited.
The Congress passed the Clean Water Act in 1972
to deal with these problems. The Act establishes
two types of regulatory requirements: technology-
based guidelines, which set uniform national require-
ments for discharges by industries and sewage
treatment facilities; and water quality-based
standards adopted by the States
The EPA is required to establish uniform national
technology-based requirements which apply to mu-
nicipal and industrial point sources of pollution. For
municipalities, the technology-based standard is
commonly referred to as secondary treatment For
industrial discharges, technology-based requirements
are referred to as best practicable treatment (BPT),
best conventional technology (BCT), and best avail-
able technology (BAT). The primary bases for
adoption of these requirements are available or
demonstrated treatment technologies and costs
These technology requirements are embodied in
federal regulations and are incorporated into National
*See glossary for definition of terms
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permits issued in accordance with Title IV of the
Clean Water Act.
Technology-based guidelines set uniform national
requirements for a specific industrial category These
requirements vary from industry to industry. For ex-
ample, the steel industry is regulated differently than
the textile industry because of the differences in
waste generated by each, and the technologies
which are available to control these wastes. More-
over, different requirements exist even within an in-
dustrial category. The steel industry, for example,
has 52 subcategories, each of which have somewhat
different requirements. Different types of municipal
sewage treatment systems, such as lagoons and
activated sludge treatment plants, also have different
technology requirements.
Every municipal and industrial point source discharg-
er is "required to meet these minimum technology-
based requirements with a few limited exceptions
Permits are issued to the owners or operators of
municipal or industrial facilities which specify dis-
charge limits in terms of a maximum concentration,
mass loadings, or both Discharge of pollutants from
a municipal or industrial facility without a permit or in
violation of any of the conditions of a permit (in-
cluding failure to monitor the discharge and report
such monitoring data to the State or EPA) is a viola-
tion of the Clean Water Act.
Water quality standards are the second regulatory
requirement established by the Act. These standards
have a different focus than the technology-based re-
quirement. Under Section 303 of the Act, States are
required to adopt water quality standards as State
rules or laws. Water quality standards define the
uses to be made of water (such as public water sup-
ply, propagation of fish and wildlife, recreation, agri-
cultural and industrial purposes, and navigation) and
the criteria to protect the uses. Criteria are accept-
able qualitative or quantitative estimates of water
constituents which should ensure that the use is
attained.
Currently, all States and jurisdictions have
approved water quality standards. For most waters,
these standards include a fish and wildlife protection
use, commonly referred to as a "fishable" use. Only
eight States have some waterbodies which are not
assigned "fishable" uses All State standards include
criteria for "traditional" constituents such as tem-
perature, pH, dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform bacte-
ria, and the "free froms." "Free froms" are general
narrative criteria statements directed at controlling
aesthetic qualities such as taste, odor, color, and
other elements including settleable solids, oil, and
toxics.
Water quality standards serve three important
functions under the Clean Water Act. First, they es-
tablish a goal for a particular stream or waterbody.
This goal is expressed as a use which is to be
attained or protected and a level of water quality
which is to be achieved. Second, water quality stan-
dards, through the water quality management proc-
ess, assist the States in making management
decisions for setting priorities, developing and
-------
implementing programs to control nonpoint (diffuse)
sources of pollution, and evaluating the progress of
water pollution control programs Finally, and most
importantly, water quality standards serve as a reg-
ulatory tool. National technology-based standards are
applied regardless of the type of waterbody or the
quality of the water receiving the discharge, there-
fore, the pollution reduction resulting from those
requirements for a particular stream may be in-
adequate to protect designated uses in State water
quality standards. For such cases, permits written on
the basis of water quality standards provide the addi-
tional level of protection needed to protect or restore
the designated use.
To implement these two regulatory requirements,
the Act also establishes several processes including
a discharge permitting program, a program of grants
for the construction of sewage treatment facilities,
and a basic approach encouraging best management
practices for the control of nonpoint source pollution.
Summary of Progress to Date
The data provided by the 1982 State Section 305(b)
reports, together with other EPA information, show
what changes have occurred in water quality and in
abatement and control programs since 1972. This in-
formation indicates that the basic approach to pollu-
tion control envisioned in the Clean Water Act is
working
Pollutant reductions have occurred. Substantial re-
ductions have occurred in the amounts of pollutants
that would otherwise have entered the Nation's wa-
ters:
• Implementation of BPT regulations is estimated to
have reduced industrial discharges of six key pollu-
tants substantially from 1972 to 1977: biochemical
oxygen demand (BOD) by 71 percent, suspended
solids by 80 percent, oil and grease by 71 percent,
dissolved solids by 52 percent, phosphate by 74 per-
cent; and heavy metals by 78 percent.
• Sewage treatment plants are removing about
13,600 tons per day of the two principal conventional
pollutants, BOD and suspended solids. This is an in-
crease of 65 percent over 1973 levels The reason
for the increased pollutant removals is that with the
help of construction grants, increasing numbers of
major municipal treatment plants are achieving sec-
ondary treatment levels In July 1977, 37 percent of
the secondary plants required by the Clean Water
Act had been constructed; by June 1983, that num-
ber had risen to 69 percent.
• The increased treatment levels in municipal
wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) have offset
the increase in pollutant loads that has occurred be-
cause of increasing population, new sewers, and
population shifts. In other words, the total amount of
pollutants entering the Nation's waters from WWTPs
has stayed roughly constant in the last decade, even
though the population served increased by 18 million
and municipal wastewater flow increased by almost
7 billion gallons per day.
Compliance rates are improving. Achieving munic-
ipal and industrial compliance with permit limits is a
central goal of the Clean Water Act and a crucial rea-
son for its success. EPA data show that the percent-
age of major municipal treatment plants in significant
non-compliance with their permits decreased from
27 percent in 1981 to 22 percent by December
1982. Significant progress has been made in the
reissuance of operating permits for municipal plants,
although backlogs continue, in particular for minor
plants The percentage of major industrial plants in
significant non-compliance decreased from 18 per-
cent in 1981 to 15 percent by December 1982. Prog-
ress has been made in the reissuance of industrial
permits, although the current backlog of permits
which must be reissued is expected to grow as
previously-issued permits expire Again, minor dis-
chargers form the bulk of the backlog
Nonpoint source controls are being applied. Prog-
ress has also been made in the application of non-
point source controls Forty-seven States have
approved agricultural nonpoint source programs and
39 States are taking implementation actions. Sixteen
States are implementing regulatory sediment and
erosion control programs to control the runoff of pol-
lutants from construction activities. Thirty-seven
States have silvicultural nonpoint source control pro-
grams, varying in nature from regulatory (including
forest practice acts) to nonregulatory (for example,
education and technical assistance).
Progress is being made in controlling toxic pollu-
tants. EPA studies and sampling efforts show that
current BPT discharge limits and existing BPT per-
mits are removing significant amounts of a number
of toxic organic chemicals and heavy metals from in-
dustrial discharges. Furthermore, a survey of waste-
waters entering and leaving municipal sewage
treatment facilities reveals that well-operated plants
meeting secondary treatment requirements provide
incidental removal of priority pollutants such as
heavy metals and organics. Nevertheless, as will be
discussed below, toxic pollutants continue to cause
water quality problems in many areas
Overall water quality is improving. The State Sec-
tion 305(b) reports indicate that the Nation's water
quality is beginning to show improvements as a re-
sult of the above actions. One of the primary meas-
ures of water quality status is the States' estimate
of progress toward the interim goal of the Clean
Water Act: that, wherever attainable, water of fish-
able and swimmable quality be achieved by 1983. In
1982, a majority of the State waters which were as-
sessed met this interim goal (For State-by-State de-
tails, see Table 1, Chapter 3.)
Trend information from the 1982 State Section
305(b) reports reveals that progress has been made
in the control of water pollution in many States.
Twenty-one of the 35 States reporting overall trend
information cite generally improving water quality
trends. Fourteen States report generally stable
trends; none report Statewide degrading trends
However, 29 States report some degrading trends in
localized areas.
-------
Control programs are producing results. The
States provide many examples of water quality im-
provements that can be attributed directly to point
and nonpoint source control programs For example,
thirty-six States cite improvements in their waters as
a direct result of the construction of wastewater
treatment facilities. Twenty States cite im-
provements in water quality attributed at least in part
to industrial controls. And, although the impacts of
nonpoint source control programs can be difficult to
quantify, some States report successes in nonpoint
source abatement in 1982.
Problems Which Remain
State-reported water quality information, together
with EPA information, indicate that there are a num-
ber of pollution problems which remain to be solved.
For example:
• Municipal and industrial dischargers continue to
cause violations of existing water quality standards in
a variety of areas in almost all States
• Most States are affected to some degree by non-
point sources such as runoff from agricultural op-
erations and acid mine drainage from abandoned
mines. In many cases, these sources contribute sig-
nificantly to the impairment of water uses; in fact, in
about one-fifth of the States, nonpoint sources are
cited as the most important cause of water degrada-
tion.
• Thirty States cite water quality problems due to
toxic substances. These toxic substances can come
from a variety of sources such as industrial op-
erations, agricultural runoff, and solid waste disposal
activities. Because of the tendency of some toxics to
accumulate in fish tissue, fishing bans and fish con-
sumption warnings are in effect in a number of wa-
ters such as New York's Lake Ontario and Upper
Hudson River, and Michigan's Saginaw and Tittaba-
wassee Rivers.
• Ground water problems—due either to contamina-
tion or depletion—are reported in over half the
States. The most commonly reported causes of
ground water problems are waste disposal, landfill
leakage, septic tank discharges, and overdrafting
• States report that excessive nutrient levels are a
widespread problem. High nutrient levels particularly
affect standing waterbodies such as lakes, and can
impair a variety of water uses such as fish propaga-
tion and water-based recreation
• Thirty-seven States report that their waters are
affected to some degree by factors other than point
and nonpoint source discharges. These factors in-
clude flow variations, dam releases, hydrologic mod-
ifications such as channelization of streams, and
natural conditions
Implications for National Programs
Implementation of technology-based controls has im-
proved the quality of many of the Nation's rivers and
streams As mentioned previously, a majority of the
Nation's waters already meet the 1983 goal of
fishable/swimmable quality Further improvements
may be expected as the latest round of BAT regula-
tions are implemented Nevertheless, some of the
Nation's waters will require additional water quality-
based controls. The problems in these waters are
likely to be among the most difficult to address, es-
pecially if they are caused by toxic substances, non-
point sources, or other factors such as low flow
which limit the available capacity of the waterbody to
assimilate pollutants. Future progress will depend to
an increasing degree on development and im-
plementation of water quality-based controls.
The emphasis given in the 1970s to developing
technology-based controls and implementing a per-
mit system meant that EPA placed less emphasis on
water quality standards and the water quality-based
approach. States were not provided adequate guid-
ance for establishing water quality standards and for
applying them in a water quality-based approach to
pollution control. With EPA encouragement, States
used standards as goals and with few exceptions,
set them to reflect the fishable/swimmable 1983
goal of the Act; in many cases there was little anal-
ysis of whether these uses and the criteria for
meeting them were appropriate for a particular body
of water. On the whole, few site-specific analyses
were conducted even though, under the Clean
Water Act, standards were intended to reflect specif-
ic local conditions and priorities. The States were not
provided with much information on implementation
of water quality standards through the permit and
construction grant processes. EPA issued limited
technical guidance on how to calculate and apply
appropriate models to transform water quality stan-
dards into permit limits and design criteria for treat-
ment plants
Thus far, water quality based-limitations have not
been a major component of permits because of
EPA's emphasis on the technology-based municipal
and industrial components Only 10 to 20 percent of
the major industrial and municipal permits issued
have a water quality-based component Many of
these permits were written before the technology-
based requirements were published However, as
the technology-based requirements are completed
and included in permits, greater emphasis will be
placed on including water quality-based components
in permits to meet water quality standards, with a
particular focus on priority pollutants In fiscal year
1984, EPA is scheduled to write a number of major
industrial permits, about forty percent of which will
address significant water quality-based concerns It
is not yet known how many State-issued permits will
have water quality-based components, but the num-
ber is expected to increase each year
-------
National Program Directions
Recognizing the progress which has been made in
implementing the Clean Water Act to date, and the
problems with the water quality-based approach to
pollution control discussed above, EPA is taking the
following approach in its national program directions:
• EPA will continue its emphasis on technology-
based controls. Effluent guidelines to control the in-
dustrial discharge of toxic pollutants will be issued.
EPA, with the States, will move rapidly to clear the
backlog of permits which must be reissued to im-
plement these regulations.
• The water quality-based approach will be strength-
ened. It can then be applied effectively where
needed to control point sources of pollution in the
areas that will not meet the iishable/swimmable goal
with technology-based controls alone. In addition,
EPA will provide the necessary guidance to encour-
age State and local implementation of nonpoint
source controls where needed to achieve or maintain
high levels of water quality
EPA provides national direction for carrying out
water quality programs through its Office of Water
Operating Guidance and Accountability System. This
guidance describes the general approach to be fol-
lowed in developing and implementing each water
program, and outlines an overall management and
program evaluation framework. These program and
management approaches should form the basis for
long term program planning by EPA and State water
pollution control agencies. Chapter 2 discusses
national program directions in more detail.
-------
National
Program
Directions
for the
1980s
This chapter discusses EPA's national program di-
rections for implementation of the Clean Water Act,
which combine continued vigorous implementation
of technology-based controls with an emphasis on
water quality-based controls where necessary to
achieve the fishable/swimmable goal of the Clean
Water Act. These program directions will be dis-
cussed in terms of the technology-based approach
(specifically, effluent guidelines) and major elements
of the water quality-based approach: water quality
standards; monitoring; wasteload allocations; permit-
ting and compliance; nonpomt source control; con-
struction grants; and priority waterbodies.
Technology-Based Approach
EPA is actively developing national regulations, re-
ferred to as "effluent guidelines," to control the in-
dustrial discharge of toxic pollutants. To date, major
strides have been made in the issuance of effluent
guidelines. As of December 1983, EPA had pro-
mulgated final regulations for 20 industry categories
and proposed regulations for 6 others. These guide-
lines, designed to be environmentally sound and
economically achievable, have been proposed and
promulgated on schedule, pursuant to a court ordered
settlement agreement EPA will provide technical
assistance to State permit writers in implementing
the guidelines.
Water Quality-Based Approach
In response to the problems outlined in Chapter 1,
EPA has initiated a number of activities to assist
States in identifying waters which fail to meet stan-
dards after implementation of technology-based con-
trols, and in designing appropriate control measures
to ensure that standards are attained These activi-
ties, which include issuance of revised water quality
standards regulations, regulatory reforms, guidance
documents, and public education, are designed to
fully and effectively implement a water quality-based
approach to pollution control. EPA has systematically
integrated expertise and resources from various
offices to better implement the water quality-based
approach. EPA is also making a broad range of tech-
nical guidance available to the States This technical
guidance covers subjects such as the performance
of wasteload allocations for toxic pollutants and the
analysis of bioassays of complex industrial effluents.
Guidance has also been drafted to assist States in
using scientific and technical analyses for setting
uses and criteria on a site-specific basis.
EPA's primary objective under the water quality-
based approach is to provide the technical support
that States need to write appropriate water quality-
based permits and make nonpomt source man-
agement decisions. EPA will also help the States
correlate water pollution control requirements for all
sources, both point and nonpomt, with actual attain-
ment and restoration of beneficial uses
Related objectives are to encourage and help the
States to:
• assure that limited State and local resources are
directed toward the establishment of water quality-
based controls on a carefully planned, priority basis;
• assure adequate control of toxic pollutants,
• provide for adequate public input/discussion
throughout the planning process, including designa-
tion of beneficial uses to be protected, selection of
numeric criteria to protect the designated uses, and
calculation of pollutant wasteload models;
• assure the availability of adequate site-specific
data for decisionmakmg on designated uses and
narrative/numeric criteria; and
• implement nonpomt source controls where
needed.
State and local agencies will need to concentrate
their efforts on highest priority waterbodies. This will
require close EPA, State, and local coordination. Suc-
cess depends in large measure on whether the
States, on the basis of EPA policies and program/
technical guidance, answer the following basic ques-
tions for water quality-limited waterbodies:
(1) What is the use to be protected?
(2) To what extent does pollution contribute to the
impairment of the use?
(3) What is the level of point source control neces-
sary to restore or enhance the use?
(4) What is the level of nonpomt source control
necessary to restore or enhance the use?
Water Quality
Standards
Section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act provides the
basis for EPA review and approval of State-adopted
or revised water quality standards. Section 303(c) re-
quires States to hold hearings to review these stan-
dards at least once every three years and to revise
standards where necessary, establishes time limits
for various State and federal actions; and provides a
mechanism for federal promulgation if the State's ac-
tion is inconsistent with the requirements of the Act.
EPA assistance to States includes meeting with
State officials before standards revisions are initiated
to mutually agree upon what standards and water-
bodies will be reviewed in detail This agreement
should outline the extent and detail of analyses
-------
needed to support any changes in the standards,
how the analyses will be conducted, who might be
participating in the analyses, the sources of existing
data and information, and a schedule for completion
of the analyses EPA assists in the analyses and re-
commends approaches where needed and re-
quested by the State. This process is designed to
encourage a close working partnership between the
States and EPA, and to assure the involvement of
locally affected parties
EPA carefully reviews State water quality stan-
dards to ensure that the standards meet the require-
ments of the Act. EPA verifies that beneficial uses
have been designated, that the criteria to protect the
designated uses are adequate; that the State has fol-
lowed proper legal procedures in adopting standards;
that standards not meeting the Section 101(a)(2)
goals are scientifically and technically supportable;
and that the State water quality standards include all
necessary requirements. EPA also reviews the ade-
quacy of the analyses in support of any changes in
the standards. Where the analyses are inadequate,
EPA identifies how the analyses should be improved
and suggests the type of information or analyses
needed EPA also looks at whether downstream
standards are protected
Total Maximum
Daily Loads/
Wasteload Allocations
Section 303(d) of the Act requires States to identify
waters requiring more stringent effluent limits and to
set priorities and calculate pollutant loads that will
ensure implementation of water quality standards
This calculation, a total maximum daily load (TMDL),
is expressed as the sum of individual wasteload
allocations (WLAs) for point sources, and load alloca-
tions (LAs) for nonpomt and natural background
sources Section 303(d)(1)(C) provides that TMDLs
be established by the States (with EPA's review and
approval) with seasonal variations and a margin of
safety to take into account any lack of knowledge
concerning the relationship between effluent limita-
tions and water quality.
The results of the TMDL process are adopted in
the water quality management plan for the State or
area in which the stream is located, and WLAs are
included as enforceable effluent limitations in per-
mits issued to dischargers. These permits are part of
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System,
or NPDES, and are the legal basis for requiring dis-
chargers to control the pollutant levels in their
effluents. All permits are to comply with the applica-
ble water quality standards. Under Section 401(a)(1)
of the Act, States certify that the allowable dis-
charges in permits comply with State standards
Almost all States have TMDL/WLA programs for at
least some conventional pollutants Thirty-four States
have programs currently in place that can handle
most major construction grants and major industrial
permits Although these programs are generally lim-
ited to conventional pollutants, about ten States with
the strongest programs are beginning to address tox-
ic pollutants. Either pollutant-specific techniques or
bioassay/biosurvey techniques can be used to es-
tablish levels of pollution control needed in order to
meet the applicable water quality standards
Pollutant-specific techniques address individual pollu-
tants; bioassay/biosurvey techniques measure the
toxicity of total effluents
Monitoring
EPA and the States must ensure that environmental
decisions are based on sound scientific data and in-
formation. The EPA is encouraging States to develop
a coordinated, balanced approach to water quality
monitoring. Water quality data is collected by many
different groups—EPA, the U.S Geological Survey,
State agencies, municipalities, local and areawide
planning agencies, universities, and the regulated
community—for different reasons EPA is assisting
States in establishing a coordinated monitoring pro-
gram which both avoids duplication of effort and fills
in the missing links in our ability to identify and
characterize water quality problems and set priori-
ties.
The EPA is emphasizing a water monitoring pro-
gram which will make more effective use of local,
State, and federal resources for collecting, analyzing,
and interpreting monitoring data This program will
stress: (1) biosurveys and bioassays to facilitate the
analysis of impaired aquatic life uses, (2) local partici-
pation in the design and implementation of
monitoring programs, (3) continued use of intensive
surveys to help analyze the causes and effects of
water quality problems; (4) improved design and op-
eration of monitoring programs and improved data
analysis techniques; and (5) reporting formats that
will meet State needs and also enable status and
trend analysis to be reported on a compatible basis
nationwide.
Currently, the most pressing need the States face
is analyzing use impairments However, the States
have found that it is difficult to identify aquatic life
impairments and threats to human health, and to
evaluate the causes of use impairments in quantita-
tive terms. This is because only about 25 States
have routine biological sampling programs, although
almost all States have at least some biological
monitoring capabilities Many States have been ex-
perimenting with the use of bioassays in the permit-
ting process. Nevertheless, much work remains to
be done to make better use of biological field sur-
veys in evaluating and determining appropriate uses
and criteria, and in evaluating the actual use im-
pairments resulting from toxic pollutants and urban
runoff problems. The States generally agree with
EPA's emphasis on analysis of use impairments
They acknowledge a need to improve in this area
and share a willingness to begin pilot efforts to gain
experience in biological analyses
EPA's Office of Water is currently developing policy
and technical procedures for using biomonitonng and
other techniques in setting water quality-based
effluent limits Biomonitonng includes effluent toxic-
ity tests, bioaccumulation tests, and ecological field
studies. It is an important aspect of EPA's water
-------
program because it can, in many cases, provide in-
formation about water quality impacts which cannot
be obtained using other monitoring techniques In
developing biological procedures and guidelines, EPA
will build upon a scientific base that has advanced
significantly in recent years EPA will work with
State agencies responsible for water quality stan-
dards, planning, and monitoring to assure that max-
imum use is made of available data and resources in
the design and implementation of field studies that
may include biomonitoring.
In addition, the States and EPA are developing im-
proved methods of reporting environmental prog-
ress. States will be placing greater emphasis on the
use of Section 305(b) reports for management pur-
poses The Section 305(b) reports currently are pri-
marily used for public information, emphasizing
chemical trends, criteria violation analyses, and local
"success stories " States will need to focus man-
agement attention on redirecting the reports to place
more emphasis on site-specific cause/effect rela-
tionships and analyses of impaired uses.
The Association of State and Interstate Water
Pollution Control Administrators and EPA are working
on a pilot project to improve the States' ability to de-
scribe their water program activities and results This
project is designed to produce a concise reporting
format that will be used by the States to discuss
their water program achievements since 1972 It
should also result in recommendations for improving
future reporting efforts
Permitting and
Compliance
One of the EPA's primary goals is to increase the
involvement of State and local governments in the
Agency's decisionmaking and program operation for
pollution abatement and control. A major objective of
the NPDES program is to assist in the development
of new State programs for administering the NPDES
program and necessary program modifications by
States already having NPD£S authority. Thirty-seven
States now have NPDES permitting and enforce-
ment authority Direction will be given to State pro-
gram approval efforts through the development of
State-by-State strategies which will identify obstacles
to program approval and present a workplan for over-
coming the obstacles
Municipal compliance will continue as a high prior-
ity Implementation of State municipal compliance
strategies should provide the focus for improving
municipal compliance Compliance activities will also
be directed to maintain and improve the existing
high rate of compliance by nonmunicipal sources
Focus will be on major permittees and their primary
industry discharges, and minor permittees that are
causing water quality or health problems
The pretreatment program controls the indirect
discharge of priority pollutants by industries to pub-
licly owned treatment works Municipalities are re-
quired to develop a program that will assure that
industrial dischargers to municipal wastewater treat-
ment systems will comply with national and industry-
specific standards. The regulations require municipa-
lities to have submitted pretreatment programs to
EPA or the State for approval by July 1, 1983 By the
beginning of FY 1984, 22 percent of a total of 1,675
programs had been approved by EPA and a thousand
additional municipalities had submitted at least sig-
nificant portions of their pretreatment programs. By
the end of FY 1984, 68 percent of pretreatment pro-
grams are expected to be approved EPA's
highest pretreatment program priority in FY 1984 is
completing the review of local pretreatment pro-
grams and incorporating approved pretreatment pro-
grams into municipal permits where appropriate.
The reissuance of industrial permits will also re-
ceive high priority. Priority permitting lists for major
sources, developed in accordance with EPA policy,
will be used where practical. Under this Policy for
the Second Round Issuance of NPDES Permits for
Industrial Sources (June 2, 1982), permits will be
issued to industries on the basis of a priority system
that gives highest priority to facilities where use im-
pairment problems have been identified and where
there is enough information to develop water quality-
based permits, and to permits needed to implement
the new BAT effluent guidelines
Nonpoint
Source Control
Those factors which make nonpomt source pollution
difficult to understand—for example, its diffuse na-
ture, the many sources which can contribute to any
one problem, and its tendency to be associated with
heavy rainfall runoff—also make prevention and con-
trol difficult. Implementation of nonpomt source con-
trol programs is the responsibility of State and local
governments which must weigh the benefits of non-
point source pollution against the benefits of other
services; furthermore, it is often difficult to
demonstrate the effectiveness of nonpomt source
control practices. These challenges do not mean,
however, that nonpomt source pollution is beyond
prevention or control.
Under Section 208 of the Clean Water Act, States
identified nonpomt source problem areas and de-
veloped appropriate solutions Under Section 303(d),
the States must consider nonpomt sources through-
out their TMDL/WLA processes, while identifying
and ranking waterbodies in terms of the severity of
pollution and the importance of designated uses, and
when reviewing water quality standards
EPA recognizes that nonpomt source control pro-
grams can contribute to resolving problems in those
waters where nonpomt sources, either alone or in
combination with point sources, prevent the attain-
ment of designated uses Therefore, EPA is de-
veloping a national nonpomt source policy to assist
all public and private interests in controlling nonpomt
source pollution. In addition, emphasis will be con-
centrated on enhancing our understanding of the
cause-and-effect relationships of nonpomt source
pollution One example of the special tools being de-
veloped to deal with nonpomt source problems is
the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP), de-
signed to assess the nature of urban runoff, its im-
pacts, and the effectiveness of control activities
NURP will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 4.
-------
Construction
Grants
Given the large number of wastewater projects
being considered for funding under the construction
grants program, it is essential that remaining funds
be allocated in a manner which most effectively
ensures environmental cleanup EPA, as part of its
larger effort to assist States in water quality man-
agement activities, is issuing guidance to assist the
States in focusing construction grants program funds
to projects which will result in the greatest water
quality and public health benefits The importance of
these benefits is stressed in the Municipal
Wastewater Treatment Construction Grants Amend-
ments of 1981. These amendments link construction
grant decisions to water quality standards by
requiring that after 1984, no construction grant can
be awarded unless water quality standards for the
water segment in question have been reviewed and
revised as appropriate EPA construction grant reg-
ulations (published interim final on May 12, 1982) are
designed to implement the 1981 Amendments They
require that States establish priority systems which
consider the impairment of water uses resulting
from existing municipal pollutant discharges, and the
extent of use restoration or public health improve-
ment that results from the reduction in pollution.
Priority
Water-bodies
The processes which translate water quality stan-
dards into permits for pollution discharges, and en-
sure that municipal wastewater treatment plants are
built where the greatest benefits will be achieved,
offer substantial potential benefits to State and local
interests in the form of cost-effective, achievable
pollution controls However, it is clear that im-
plementation of this approach will take considerable
time both because of State and local resource limita-
tions and because of the complexity of the de-
cisionmakmg process.
To ensure that water cleanup resources are effi-
ciently managed, EPA's water pollution control effort
calls for the identification of priority waterbodies.
Priority waterbodies are those areas for which pollu-
tion abatement and control decisions are needed to
prevent or reverse the impairment of a designated
use. Factors to be considered in identifying priority
waterbodies include, but are not necessarily limited
to: the use to be protected, including human health;
the severity of the use impairment or the seventy
expected if no actions are taken, and the margin of
environmental benefits expected for the resources
expended. Priority waterbodies need not be con-
strued only as "dirty waters;" maintenance of high
quality waters and existing water uses are as impor-
tant as correcting water quality problems. Once
priority waterbodies are determined, pollution control
actions such as standards setting, wasteload alloca-
tions, permit issuance, and nonpoint source pro-
grams should be identified and scheduled.
In the 1982 Section 305(b) reports, thirty-nine
States and territories provide some information on
their waters of concern, usually including a list of
specific waterbodies; no information is available for
the remaining States This information is summarized
in Appendix A. The results vary considerably from
State to State, in part because States use varying
definitions of "streams," "segments," and "basins."
Many of the States plan to refine and standardize
their selection systems for priority waterbodies and
are in the process of revising their listings Neverthe-
less, it is clear that there are a large number of
specific waterbodies which the States believe should
receive priority attention For instance, 27 States and
territories which use "segments" as the unit of
measure list over 1,500 segments as waters of con-
cern A wide range of pollutant sources—especially
municipal discharges, agricultural and urban runoff,
and combined sewer overflows—are reported to
affect these waters. Of these sources, municipal dis-
charges are the most commonly reported. Bacteria,
dissolved oxygen, nutrients, toxic substances, and
suspended solids are the constituents of highest
concern in these waterbodies
-------
Water
Quality
Status
Waters Meeting the 1983 Clean
Water Act Goal
The interim goal of the 1972 Clean Water Act states
that, wherever attainable, "...water quality which pro-
vides for the protection and propagation of fish,
shellfish, and wildlife, and provides for recreation in
and on the water, be achieved by July 1, 1983." Es-
timates of the progress toward this goal are provided
by 21 States and summarized in Table 1 below
While it is difficult to make a definitive statement
concerning progress toward this goal, the data pro-
vided by States in the 1982 Section 305(b) reports
indicate that the majority of waters meet the interim
goal of the Clean Water Act
Several points should be noted about this informa-
tion. First, these estimates are based largely on 1981
data and thus are not the final figures on waters
meeting the Clean Water Act goal The 1984 Nation-
al Water Quality Inventory will include 1983 data and
hence contain a more accurate estimate of the Na-
tion's progress toward this goal. Second, the States
generally based their estimates on the degree to
which their water quality standards were met As
discussed in Chapter 1, applicable State standards
may involve designated uses either more or less
Table 1 Waters Meeting the 1983 Goal as Estimated in State Section 305(b) Reports
State
Arkansas
California1
Connecticut
Georgia
Kansas
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
New Mexico
North Dakota
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Vermont
(A) Basis for Estimate
6,239 major stream miles
27 major streams
963 major river miles
20,000 total stream miles
62 stream segments
1 13 segments
8,600 miles
2,684 miles
1,611 assessed miles
14,500 miles
3,500 miles
47 segments
3,758 miles assessed
(out of 43,000)
12,962 miles
329 miles
88 segments
13 basins
16,115 miles classified
1,126 miles assessed
Percent of (A) Cur-
rently Meeting Goal
Not reported
85%
70%
95%
97% fishable,
90% swimmable
Not reported
90%
90%
48%
96 5%
90%
Not reported
81%
79%
66%
90%
Not reported
91%
84%
Percent of (A) Ex-
pected to Meet Goal
77%
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
100%
85%
Not reported
90%
Not reported
99%
95%
100%
81%
82%
Not reported
Not reported
46%
97%
100% fishable/
swimmable
"where attainable"
Primary Reason(s) for Nonattainment of
Goal
Nonpomt sources
Nonpomt sources, especially agricultural
return flow
Combined sewer overflows, nonpoint pol-
lution, industrial discharges
Combined sewer overflows, urban and
nonpoint runoff, WWTP discharges
Rural runoff, natural conditions
Pesticides, untreated wastes
Combined sewer overflow and nonpoint
source pollution, also municipal discharges
Suspended solids, nutrients from urban
runoff and agricultural runoff
Nonpoint sources, industrial, municipal,
combined sewer sources
Municipal and industrial waste, combined
sewer overflows, untreated domestic dis-
charges
Point and nonpoint sources
Natural conditions
Point sources and urban nonpoint source
runoff
Abandoned mine discharge
Municipal and industrial sources, com-
bined sewer overflows
Not reported
Point and nonpotnt source pollution, sur-
face mining
Sluggish flows, municipal, industrial waste
Municipal discharges, combined sewer
overflows, nonpoint sources
Virginia1
Washington
27,240 total stream
miles
170 segments
95%
About 60%:
Not reported Kepone from industrial discharger,
mine drainage, abandoned industrial
plant, nonpoint sources, especially agri-
cultural
Not reported Nonpoint sources, natural conditions,
point sources
11980 estimates
includes 39 upstream segments for which definitive information not vet available but which are believed to meet goal
-------
restrictive than the fishable/swimmable goal, and may
not reflect local environmental, technological, and
economic constraints effectively precluding use
attainment. Finally, the States have traditionally as-
sessed their water quality by measuring the frequen-
cy with which the chemical constituents of water,
such as heavy metals or ammonia, violate es-
tablished standards of water quality. States are just
beginning to assess water quality in terms of use im-
pairments and to conduct biological analyses of
water.
Only those States which report on the bases for
their estimates of waters meeting the fishable/
swimmable goal are included in Table 1, these bases
vary widely among States. For example, California
bases its estimate on an assessment of 27 major
streams, while Georgia uses 20,000 stream miles as
the basis for its estimate. Because of these varying
methods of assessing goal attainment and because
the number of stream miles assessed is only a small
fraction of the Nation's total miles of waterways, no
quantitative national conclusions should be drawn
from these assessments. However, Table 1 does
indicate that a majority of the Nation's waters as-
sessed in 1982 meet the interim Clean Water Act
goal. The States cite point sources, nonpoint
sources, and, to a lesser extent, natural conditions
as reasons for nonattainment of the 1983 goal
State Water Quality Trends
Twenty-one of the 35 States providing overall trend
information in the 1982 Section 305(b) reports cite
continuing improvement in water quality For
example, New Hampshire reports that 97 miles
of streams have improved in quality since the 1980
Section 305(b) report and now meet the interim goal
of the Clean Water Act; Mississippi reports that at
31 of 36 trend stations, water quality has either im-
proved or been maintained at good levels, and Wis-
consin notes that improving water quality trends are
now apparent in that State, particularly for total phos-
phorus and suspended solids
Fourteen States report generally stable water qual-
ity trends New Jersey, for example, reports that no
significant improvement or decline in water quality is
noted over the past four or five years; Arkansas
states that its water quality conditions are generally
good and stable; and Oregon reports that its initial
trend evaluations indicate no appreciable change in
water quality between 1976 and 1981
No Statewide trends of degrading water quality
were reported in 1982 However, 29 States report
some degrading trends in localized areas Georgia,
for example, notes a decrease in water quality in the
Satilla and Ochlocknee Rivers below certain cities
Rhode Island states that monitoring of biological
organisms in that State's waters reveals some de-
gradation at selected stations, and in California, 6 of
27 priority streams are reported to show some de-
terioration in 1980-1981.
It should also be emphasized that trend assess-
ments were made by the States using a variety of
methods and for different reporting periods. For ex-
ample, Virginia bases its assessments on trend anal-
ysis of four conventional (i.e , non-toxic) pollutants
over a period of record varying from 5 to 15 years,
North Carolina reports on the reduction in number of
degraded stream segments between 1980 and
1982; Wisconsin compares 1977-1978 pollutant
levels to 1980-1981 levels at 44 sites across the
State; Kansas reports on trend data for nine rivers
gathered since 1967, and in Arkansas, trends are
measured using biological monitoring data gathered
at 44 sites over the past 4 to 5 years
Additional Issues
In addition to describing water quality trends and
conditions, State Section 305(b) reports provide in-
sights into the sources of water pollution and other
water quality issues of concern to States. Informa-
tion concerning the three primary sources of water
degradation traditionally cited by the States—point
source discharges, nonpoint source pollution, and
natural conditions—are described in the following
chapter. Two additional water quality-related issues
most commonly cited by the States—ground water
pollution and toxics—are discussed below. This brief
discussion serves primarily to highlight these special
topics to which many States devoted considerable
attention in their 1982 reports.
Ground water: Ground water contamination and/or
depletion is widely reported in over half the States
Waste disposal, landfill leakage, septic tank dis-
charges, and overdrafting are the most commonly re-
ported causes of ground water problems. Many
States report that ground water quality programs are
underway to identify problem areas and manage ex-
isting supplies. For example:
• In New Mexico, 105 sites with known contamina-
tion problems have been identified, and a monitoring
program has been implemented based on an in-
ventory of major sources of potential contamination
and a Statewide analysis of the vulnerability of aqui-
fers to contamination.
• Wisconsin reports that interagency planning is
underway in the State to halt further ground water
contamination from irrigation and pesticide runoff.
• Oklahoma reports on the development of ground
water quality monitoring programs and a permit
issuance program for users of ground water re-
sources. Several studies are being conducted to de-
lineate ground water characteristics and help develop
overall ground water standards
• Oregon reports that it has developed ground
water protection guidelines which are supplemented
by special control measures in problem areas.
• Washington reports that ground water man-
agement in that State is receiving increased atten-
tion A management plan protecting the Spokane
Valley aquifer has been completed and certified, and
a geohydrologic study has been undertaken for the
10
-------
130 square miles of the Chamber Creek-Clover
Creek aquifer.
• Connecticut reports that it has conducted a
ground water inventory and administers a monitoring
network of nearly 800 community water supply
wells. Ground water sampling is also conducted at
landfills and other potential pollution sources.
Toxic pollutants: Toxic pollutants are generally de-
fined as substances which, by themselves or in com-
bination with other substances, may be harmful to
life. Many chemicals, when manufactured or used
under appropriate conditions, present little risk of
adverse impacts on human health or the environ-
ment. However, other chemicals can cause severe
damage, especially if improperly handled It is often
difficult to quantify adverse impacts on humans and
the environment. Gross impacts such as fish kills are
obvious. More subtle effects can only be measured
using aquatic organisms in acute tests (generally,
where mortality is the end result) and chronic tests
(generally, where sublethal effects such as impacts
on reproduction and growth are the end result) Con-
gress recognized the pervasiveness of toxic sub-
stances in the Clean Water Act when it set as
national policy that the discharge of toxic pollutants
in toxic amounts be prohibited
Toxic pollutants in water, fish tissue, and bottom
sediments can come from a variety of sources in-
cluding industrial and municipal operations, agricul-
tural runoff, spills, and solid waste disposal. In 1982,
thirty States cite standards violations or use impair-
ments due to toxic pollutants
New York reports that fishing bans and consump-
tion limits have been imposed due to chlorinated
organics in Lake Ontario game fish, PCBs in Upper
Hudson River fish, and mercury in Onondaga and
Cranberry Lakes. A central toxics coordinating group
has been established in the State and enforcement
procedures strengthened to deal with the toxics
problem.
Virginia reports on three toxic problem areas in the
State caused by industrial manufacturing operations
which have now been halted. Mercury contamination
affects two sites—81 miles of the North Fork of the
Holston River and 102 miles of the South River/
South Fork of the Shenandoah. The pesticide kepone
affects 113 miles of the James River estuary Some
evidence exists that clean sediment is burying the
old contaminated sediment in the James River, and
a downward trend in kepone levels in some fish spe-
cies is reported.
Michigan reports on health advisories issued by
the State banning the consumption of fish from por-
tions of several rivers due to the accumulation of
toxics in fish tissue. For example, in the Tittabawas-
see River downstream from Midland and in the
Saginaw River, fish consumption bans are in effect
due to the presence of dioxm (TCDD) and polybromm-
ated biphenyls (PBBs).
Louisiana reports that pesticides such as tox-
aphene, DDT, dieldnn, chlordane, endrin, and lindane
are a serious problem in many agricultural areas of
the State. Other examples of toxics contamination
around the country include PCBs in the Indiana Har-
bor Ship Canal; toxic hydrocarbons in the Fort Gib-
son reservoir in Oklahoma, and, in New England,
PCB contamination of the Housatonic River and New
Bedford Harbor.
Toxic pollutants also are an important issue in the
Great Lakes Michigan reports that toxic substances
significantly affect water uses in the Great Lakes.
Wisconsin cites a toxic substances survey conducted
in the Great Lakes area in 1979/80 which showed
excessive levels of PCBs in 30 percent of the fish
samples tested; in 1980/81, a second survey re-
vealed an apparent decreasing trend The study will
continue for a third year to identify sources and ver-
ify the trend information. Illinois reports that a num-
ber of toxic substances have been noted in Lake
Michigan fish at levels above the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration action levels, however, a de-
creasing trend is noted for PCBs and DDT in Lake
Michigan fish. And according to the New York 1982
report, a variety of toxic pollutants including PCBs,
mercury, and mirex have been detected in Lake
Champlam, the St. Lawrence River, Lake Ontario,
and Lake Erie A pattern of declining PCB levels is
noted for most species tested in Lake Ontario,
although more testing is necessary to determine
any clear trends PCB data for Lake Erie and
Lake Champlam do indicate declining levels since
the mid-1970s
Levels of toxic substances appear to be declining
in some State waters due to pesticide bans and
point source controls. For example, declines are re-
ported for chlordane levels in Illinois, copper,
cyanide, and mercury levels in Indiana, and PCB
levels in Arkansas The Ohio River Valley Water
Sanitation Commission reports major improving
trends for cyanide and lead
It has become clear that more information is
needed about toxic pollutants. Over the past five
years, EPA has performed an intensive review of
available information and has conducted limited
amounts of sampling of waterways and effluents to
better understand the toxicity, production and use,
environmental fate and effects, and potential for
human exposure to pollutants in U S waters The re-
sults show that in many cases, well-operated and
maintained biological and physical/chemical waste
treatment systems can remove significant amounts
of these pollutants
• Studies of industrial wastewater samples show
that, although the current BPT discharge limits and
existing BPT permits were aimed at controlling
conventional pollutants, they are at the same time
removing toxic organics and heavy metals to a
significant degree. The BPT controls on 26 different
industries will reduce the direct discharge loading of
seven metals and cyanide between 80 and 93 per-
cent from 1972 levels Zinc, for instance, will be re-
duced 93 percent, lead, 92 percent; copper, 91 per-
cent, and mercury, 90 percent. It is also estimated
that BPT loadings of total phenols from 26 industries
are 94 percent less than in 1972.
• A ten-year study of municipal wastewater treat-
ment plants showed that plants meeting secondary
11
-------
treatment requirements provide incidental removal of
priority pollutants—approximately 67 percent of the
heavy metals; 80 percent of the total volatile orga-
nics; and 70 percent of the total acid-base-neutral
organic pollutants Individually, a reduction of 58 per-
cent in copper, 65 percent in chromium, 38 percent
in cadmium, and 65 percent in zinc is expected
Loadings of total phenols at levels of secondary
treatment are estimated to be 69 percent less today
than they were in 1972
As noted earlier, EPA is currently issuing
technology-based BAT effluent guidelines to control
toxics from both direct and indirect (i e , to municipal
plants) dischargers These requirements will be in-
corporated in permits to be implemented over the
next three to four years However, based upon
EPA's Regulatory Impact Assessments and other
analyses associated with effluent guidelines, it
appears that even with the uniform, national
technology-based controls developed by EPA, there
may continue to be human health and aquatic life
problems from some of these pollutants.
12
-------
Pollution
Sources and
Control
Programs
The 1982 State Section 305(b) reports indicate that
both point sources of of pollution, such as municipal
and industrial discharges, and nonpomt sources of
pollution, such as agricultural and urban runoff, con-
tinue to cause violations of existing water quality
standards in many areas of the country. Some re-
ports, such as those from New Hampshire, Puerto
Rico, and New York, cite point sources as the mam
causes of water pollution Other States, such as
North Dakota, Kansas, and Utah, find that nonpomt
sources are more important contributors of pollution.
Finally, States cite a variety of other factors (e g ,
low flow and background conditions) as reasons why
water segments are not meeting standards
Point Sources of Pollution
Programs to control point sources of pollution in-
clude the construction grants program, industrial dis-
charge controls, and controls on combined sewer
overflows and confined animal feedlots However,
the States do not always attribute water quality im-
provements to only one point source control pro-
gram. For example, five States report in 1982 that
improvements in the quality of their waters are due
to a combination of both municipal and industrial
treatment plant upgrading and construction
In Texas, improved municipal and industrial pro-
grams are reported to have led to better water quali-
ty despite population growth and rising levels of
economic activity in the State. Pennsylvania cites im-
proved municipal and industrial sewage treatment as
the major reason for a net improvement of 136
stream miles in 1981 Georgia reports on strides
made in improved water quality downstream from
major metropolitan areas due to industrial and munic-
ipal controls instituted since 1970, although problems
still exist in these areas. In Mississippi, signifi-
cant water quality improvements are attributed to
the combined effect of construction of new munic-
ipal and industrial wastewater treatment facilities,
and improved operation and maintenance of existing
facilities. New York reports that its water quality has
improved measurably due to municipal and industrial
point source controls. In the Upper Hudson River, for
example, eleven problem discharges have been elim-
inated in recent years due to municipal and industrial
plant construction and upgrading.
The construction grants program, which allocates
federal funds to the States for the building and up-
grading of municipal sewage treatment plants, has
improved the quality of many State waters In 1982,
thirty-six States cite improvements in their waters as
a direct result of construction grants The following
are some examples of water quality improvements
attributed to municipal construction, as reported by
the States in 1982:
• Rhode Island reports significant improvement
along the Blackstone River due to completion of
sewage treatment plant projects in Massachusetts
and Rhode Island
• Connecticut cites an increase in the recreational
use of water and a decreased health risk directly at-
tributed to the construction grants program
• In Maryland, a trend toward decreasing numbers
of acres closed to shellfishmg has been tied to im-
provements in and expansion of waste treatment
facilities
• Alabama reports that construction of 66 new sew-
age treatment plants has resulted in improved water
quality and the elimination of potential health hazards
in a number of areas across the State
• The District of Columbia reports reduced levels of
certain pollutants in the Potomac River due to im-
proved effluent quality from the Blue Plains sewage
treatment plant Restoration of the Potomac Estuary
is beginning, and many sport fish have returned to
the river
• Decreases in the number of fecal cohform viola-
tions in New Mexico over the past two years are at-
tributed to improvements in sewage treatment
plants.
• In the Delaware River Basin, dissolved oxygen and
fecal cohform levels are reported to have improved
below Philadelphia with the completion of
wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) upgrading
• Biological surveys conducted in Illinois' Drummer
Creek have revealed substantial improvement in the
creek after upgrading of the Gibson City WWTP
• California reports that construction of a new
WWTP which limits its discharges to periods of high
flow has been responsible for a significant restora-
tion of water uses on the Russian River
Some figures on recent reductions in pollutant
loadings to streams are available from the 1982 re-
ports. North Carolina notes that in the last thirty
years, the amount of organic waste entering that
State's WWTPs has more than doubled, yet the
amount of organic waste in effluents has been
halved Alabama reports that since the implementa-
tion of the Clean Water Act, discharge of primary
treated wastes in that State dropped from 65 million
gallons per day (MGD) to 10 MGD, and discharge of
raw sewage dropped from 2 5 to 0.15 MGD. EPA
studies of municipal treatment plants show that sec-
ondary treatment plant removal of two principal con-
ventional pollutants, biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD) and suspended solids, increased 65 percent in
13
-------
1980 over 1973 levels of removal. The median toxics
removal rates in a sample of 20 WWTPs studied in
detail range from 76 percent for metals to 70-85 per-
cent for different types of organic chemicals
Increases in the number of secondary WWTPs and
in the total population served by secondary levels of
treatment are major indicators of the success of the
construction grants program. EPA studies show that
increasing numbers of municipal WWTPs are
achieving secondary treatment. In July 1977, 37 per-
cent of the secondary plants required by the Clean
Water Act had been constructed; as of June 1983,
69 percent had been built Some States provide
specific information on these increases. Connecticut
notes that in 1970, 46 percent of its municipal
WWTPs provided secondary treatment, in 1982, that
figure climbed to 95 percent. Georgia reports that
over 35 percent of municipal plants in that State (dis-
charging 65 percent of total flow) received primary
treatment or less in 1968 By 1981, fewer that 5 per-
cent of Georgia's municipal treatment plants were
still discharging primary treated wastes, and these
accounted for only 2 percent of total flow. In Kansas,
all but two WWTPs had achieved secondary treat-
ment levels in 1982 According to the 1981 Michigan
Section 305(b) report, the number of people served
by secondary treatment in Michigan has risen drama-
tically, from 900,000 in 1967 to an anticipated 5 mil-
lion in 1982.
Treatment levels in WWTPs have offset the in-
crease in pollutant loads that have occurred because
of increasing population, new sewers, and population
shifts. The total amount of pollutants entering the
Nation's waters from WWTPs has stayed roughly
constant in the last decade, even though the popula-
tion served increased by 18 million and municipal
flow increased by almost 7 billion gallons per day
The Clean Water Act provides that, if secondary
treatment is not enough to protect water quality and
public health, advanced levels of treatment may be
required In 1979, the Administrator was directed to
review proposed advanced treatment (AT) projects to
determine if AT is required and will definitely result
in water quality and public health improvements
Over half of the AT projects which have been re-
viewed by EPA to date have been modified, or ele-
ments deferred pending further analysis, because
the projects were designed using possibly too con-
servative water quality criteria, modeling assump-
tions, and/or design parameters One result of this
AT process has been the diversion of federal funds
from project components likely to result in relatively
small water quality improvements, to projects more
likely to result in relatively large water quality im-
provements.
The 1982 Section 305(b) reports indicate that in-
dustrial facilities, regulated along with municipal
WWTPs under NPDES permits, have steadily im-
proved their levels of treatment and decreased their
impact on the environment According to EPA stud-
ies, the implementation of BPT regulations is es-
timated to have reduced industrial discharges of six
key pollutants substantially from 1972 to 1977. BOD
by 71 percent, suspended solids by 80 percent, oil
and grease by 71 percent, dissolved solids by 52
percent; phosphate by 74 percent; and heavy metals
by 78 percent. Twenty States cite improvements in
water quality attributed at least in part to industrial
controls Some examples of improvements in levels
of industrial pollution are as follows;
• Vermont states that the majority of its industrial
facilities have achieved best practicable technology
(BPT). A 1979 survey of the State's larger industries
failed to uncover any serious toxic discharge prob-
lems
• Connecticut reports that dramatic gams in water
quality achieved in the late 1970s due to BPT im-
plementation have been maintained
• Florida reports that industrial controls have been
responsible for significant improvements in Escambia
Bay.
• In Mississippi, twenty industrial facilities pre-
viously out of compliance with their permits are re-
ported to have achieved compliance within the past
two years
• Improved cyanide levels in the Ohio River main-
stem are directly attributed to better industrial treat-
ment on the Monongahela River.
• Wisconsin reports that efforts to meet 1977 BPT
discharge limits in the State's 47 pulp and paper
mills have resulted in a 90 percent decrease in
biochemical oxygen demand and a 75 percent de-
crease in suspended solids discharges from these
mills over the past seven years. These reductions in
discharges have resulted in improved water quality in
a number of areas. In the Flambeau River, for ex-
ample, no dissolved oxygen (DO) permit violations
have been noted since 1978 in an area which once
suffered severe DO problems due to paper mill dis-
charges.
In many States, industrial facilities are reported to
have a higher rate of permit compliance than munic-
ipal facilities New York reports that the compliance
rate for industrial facilities in that State is 81 percent,
while only 48 percent of municipal facilities are con-
sistently in compliance. In Wisconsin, over 90 per-
cent of industrial dischargers are reported to be
meeting BPT requirements, while 60 percent of mu-
nicipal dischargers are meeting assigned treatment
levels in mid-1982. In Nebraska, 40 percent of mu-
nicipal wastewater treatment plants are reported to
fully comply with permit requirements, while 60 per-
cent of industrial facilities were in compliance in
1981. Oregon reports that fewer industrial than mu-
nicipal facilities are having trouble meeting permit
limits.
EPA studies show that the percentage of major in-
dustrial plants in significant non-compliance with
their permits decreased from 18 percent in 1981 to
15 percent by December 1982. EPA has placed ma-
jor emphasis on improving the compliance rate of
municipal plants, the percentage of major municipal
plants in significant non-compliance with their per-
mits decreased from 27 percent to 22 percent during
the same period
14
-------
Some improvement in the treatment of combined
sewer overflows has also been noted by the States.
The District of Columbia reports that combined sew-
er overflow volume to the Potomac River was re-
duced by 66 to 70 percent due to simple sewer
maintenance repairs North Dakota states that most
of its sites affected by combined sewer overflows
are currently involved in sewer separation
projects. Nevertheless, combined sewer overflow
problems have not generally received the same level
of control as other point sources, and in some cases
are reported to cause severe degradation.
Some success in the control of runoff from con-
fined animal feedlot operations has been reported by
the States. For example, Missouri reports that its
feedlot management program has significantly re-
duced the amount of animal waste entering Missouri
streams; the waste has been recycled into crop ferti-
lizer valued at 8.6 million dollars North Dakota re-
ports that its program to control runoff from animal
holding or feedlot facilities has prevented a sub-
stantial amount of pollution from entering the State's
waters.
Despite decreases in levels of significant industrial
and municipal non-compliance and many examples
of water quality successes reported as a result of
point source controls, point sources of pollution
continue to cause significant water degradation For
example, Puerto Rico states that high fecal coliform
levels, which indicate the presence of inadequate,
overloaded municipal facilities, are its worst water
pollution problem, Georgia and Mississippi report that
increases in population growth are causing WWTP
overloads and, therefore, a need to continuously
expand existing facilities; and in Illinois, bottom sedi-
ment sampling is reported to reveal a number of
metals and other toxics originating from industrial and
municipal operations in the Chicago area. Combined
sewer overflows are reported to be a major factor in
the chronic water quality problems affecting San
Francisco Bay, and are reported to be one of the
primary reasons for the failure of some Connecticut
waters to meet standards In Rhode Island, combined
sewer overflows are reported to be a major reason
for shellfish bed closures in Narragansett Bay Another
problem mentioned by the States is the possibility of
future increases in water pollution due to intensive
energy development projects such as synfuels pro-
duction and increased oil drilling and coal mining
activities
The most commonly cited reasons for continued
point source pollution problems are resource short-
falls which prevent municipal and industrial waste
treatment plant construction or upgrading; improper
operation and maintenance procedures, especially at
small municipal WWTPs run by part-time operators;
inadequate pretreatment of industrial wastes; and
delays in the facility planning and construction grants
process
Vigorous programs to improve operation and main-
tenance of WWTPs are underway in many States
Most programs involve formal training and manda-
tory certification of operators, coupled with more fre-
quent plant inspections. Many States are directing
resources to priority waterbodies to better manage
their construction grant funds; nevertheless, at least
a quarter of the States report that some water quality
program needs may be affected by scarce re-
sources. The adverse impacts of delays in the con-
struction grants and facility planning process should
be mitigated by the 1981 amendments to the Clean
Water Act, by action being taken by many States to
improve permit compliance among existing municipal
and industrial facilities, and by EPA's recent
streamlining of the construction grants regulations.
Recent progress has been made in 1982 in reissuing
operating permits for municipal and industrial treat-
ment plants. Permitting backlogs continue, however,
especially for minor plants.
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution
As point sources of pollution come under control,
many States are devoting increasing emphasis to
nonpoint sources of pollution. Nonpoint source con-
trol programs are developed and implemented by the
States, with EPA support. However, they have not
been in place as long as have point source controls
and their effects are more difficult to quantify
Nevertheless, a number of successes in nonpoint
source abatement efforts are reported in the 1982
State Section 305(b) reports. For example'
• Connecticut reports that its nonpoint source
program has provided local governments with
assistance in dealing with agricultural waste man-
agement, erosion, aquifer protection, and other non-
point source-related issues.
• In North Carolina, better cooperation on limiting
sediment runoff from construction operations is re-
ported as more people become aware of the prob-
lem and understand ways to limit the transport of
sediment. Education programs are also helping re-
duce agricultural runoff
• Indiana reports that its agricultural conservation
program has been "extremely successful," with four
thousand farms now participating in best man-
agement practices.
• In Kansas, soil conservation practices, now used
on a voluntary basis on many farms throughout the
State, are reported to be effective in reducing soil
erosion and should result in more complete attain-
ment of goals
• Nebraska reports that three cost-sharing programs
have greatly contributed to the reduction of stream
sedimentation in the State.
• North Dakota reports that its nonpoint source
program has been very successful in selected areas,
especially in developing watershed controls and educa-
tional demonstration projects
• Oregon reports that a sediment control project has
demonstrated that cost sharing, loans, and technical
assistance to farmers can be successful ways of
ensuring the implementation of best management
practices.
15
-------
In general, the use of best management practices
to control nonpoint sources of pollution appears to
be increasing. Forty-seven States have approved
agricultural nonpoint source control programs and 39
States are reported to be taking implementation ac-
tions. Sixteen States are implementing regulatory
sediment and erosion control programs to control
the runoff of pollutants from construction activities
Thirty-seven States have forest practices acts, vary-
ing from regulatory to non-regulatory in nature, that
are used to some extent to control nonpoint source
pollutants The States are establishing priorities for
nonpoint source cleanup by ranking watersheds on
the basis of potential public health risks, beneficial
uses, and the solvability of the problem Educational
programs and demonstration projects are widely re-
garded as successful by the States
Nonpoint source pollution, however, is reported
throughout the country. In about a fifth of the States,
nonpoint sources are cited as the most important
cause of water degradation In addition, most States
are affected to some degree by nonpoint sources; in
many cases, these sources contribute significantly to
the impairment of water uses Pennsylvania, West
Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, and the Ohio River
area are reported to be severely affected by acid
mine drainage and coal mine runoff. Indiana reports
that fish kills due to agricultural operations such as
the use of agnchemicals account for an increasing
percentage of total fish kill incidents; and in Illinois,
agricultural operations are said to be responsible for
half of the reported fish kills. In Pennsylvania, where
acid mine drainage in combination with other
sources is responsible for standards violations in
nearly 75 percent of those 2,744 stream miles which
do not meet standards, some progress in mine drain-
age abatement has reportedly been made in the past
few years but is expected to slow due to limited re-
sources. Another problem mentioned by the States
is the sparseness of information on the extent,
causes, and effects of nonpoint source pollution In
the case of Texas, this has prevented the setting of
site-specific controls in most areas of the State.
More information must yel be gathered on a num-
ber of nonpoint source issues such as the specific
cause-and-effect impacts of these pollution sources
on receiving waters. These impacts can be difficult
to determine because nonpoint source pollutants are
usually transported to receiving waters by rainfall
runoff, and hence occur during periods of high
stream flow In addition, they are often attached to
soil particles and may not be in a chemical form that
immediately affects aquatic life
Long term studies of waters suspected to be de-
graded by nonpoint sources are in progress in many
areas of the country, and should provide better in-
formation on which to base abatement measures.
The Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) is
one such effort designed to assess the nature and
impacts of urban runoff, as well as the effectiveness
of various control activities NURP results indicate
that urban runoff can contribute to impairment of
water uses such as shellfishing and water-based rec-
reation. However, the potential for such use im-
pairments has been shown to be heavily influenced
by local climatology and hydrology, and by the type
of waterbody receiving the urban runoff. For in-
stance, the impact of urban runoff has been found to
be greatest in small urban impoundments which re-
ceive no other influent flows, and in small sluggish
streams that originate in urban areas Various urban
runoff control practices such as street sweeping and
the use of detention and recharge basins are being
studied to determine best possible controls.
Nonpoint sources of pollution produce significant
amounts of nutrients which adversely affect many of
the Nation's lakes. Eutrophication is the "aging" of
waterbodies (primarily lakes and other standing
waterbodies) caused by nutrient enrichment. High
nutrient levels can stimulate the growth of unsightly
algae and weeds which, in turn, affect fish pop-
ulations and recreational water uses. Although
eutrophication occurs naturally in lakes over time,
man's activities have in many instances accelerated
the process For example, urban runoff and drainage
from cultivated farmlands are significant sources of
nutrients and sediments; municipal and industrial dis-
charges are also often rich in nutrients such as phos-
phorus and nitrogen.
By 1982, many States were in the process of
classifying their lakes according to trophic status (de-
gree of eutrophication) and establishing priorities for
cleanup. The following table summarizes State-
reported levels of eutrophication Most States have
classified only a portion of their total number of lakes
according to trophic status.
Table 2 Lake Eutrophication
State
Connecticut
Iowa
Kentucky
Minnesota
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Tennessee
Virginia
Washington
Wisconsin
Number of Lakes
Classified
70
107
45
500
119
26
22
112
161
123
1.500
Percent of Classified
Lakes which are
Eutrophic
27
100
64
70
84
81
81
48
35
18
18
16
-------
Other Factors
A variety of factors other than point or nonpomt
source discharges affect the use of the Nation's wa-
ters. The most commonly reported factors include
low flow or stream flow variations, dam releases,
channelization and other hydrologic modifications,
and natural sources of pollution. Thirty-seven States
report that their waters are affected to some degree
by these factors, which are widely found across all
geographic areas. In a number of States, these
factors are reported to cause repeated standards
violations and impairment of designated uses For
example'
• The North Dakota 1982 Section 305(b) report in-
dicates that water quality degradation in the State re-
sults from natural substances occurring in the soils;
this degradation is aggravated by point and nonpomt
sources. Naturally occurring sodium in the Missouri
River Basin impairs irrigation uses; intermittent or
low flow reduces the capacity of some streams to
support fish populations; and steep stream banks,
extreme flow fluctuations, and unstable, silty
riverbeds naturally impair fishing and swimming uses
in some rivers
• In Massachusetts, impoundments on the Ten Mile
River are reported to create conditions leading to eu-
trophication and sedimentation. In addition, reservoir
releases which cause water level fluctuations are
reported to limit populations of bottom-dwelling
aquatic organisms in the Little River.
• New York reports that some streams in that State
have little or no flow in the summer months due to
flow regulation for navigation or power generation
purposes; these "stress segments" cannot ade-
quately dilute discharged wastes In addition,
canalization of the Mohawk River causes nutrient
and sediment traps and encourages the growth of
nuisance aquatic vegetation.
• New Mexico reports that water level fluctuations
are the single most important factor affecting fish
management in mamstem reservoirs. Hydrologic
modification and diversion of stream flow are partial-
ly responsible for one stream's failure to meet stan-
dards. One aspect of normal dam operation—the
release of reservoir bottom waters—is reported to
be responsible for occasional dissolved oxygen and
phosphorus standards violations in three streams.
• In Texas, naturally sluggish stream flow and resul-
tant low assimilative capacities are reported to mag-
nify the effects of point sources and therefore
contribute to a majority of the State's water quality
problems
• Many States report that drought conditions ex-
perienced in 1980 and 1981 led to low flow prob-
lems and concentration of chemical pollutants in
available water.
17
-------
Costs and
Benefits of
Meeting the
Clean Water Act
Goal
In their 1982 Section 305(b) reports, most States
provide some discussion of the costs and benefits of
certain water pollution control programs, although
few States provide actual cost/benefit analyses A
common theme of most discussions is that many of
the benefits of clean water, such as aesthetic enjoy-
ment and increased recreational use, are intangible
and cannot be easily measured in dollars.
As reported by the States, some of the benefits of
cleaner water include increased recreational oppor-
tunities, and hence, more tourist income and income
resulting from the sale of recreational products, in-
creased and improved commercial fishing and shell-
fishing; reduction in waterborne diseases, increased
value of waterfront property; increased agricultural
productivity through the conservation of topsoil; de-
creased cost of water treatment for public water
supplies; and reduced influent or raw water treat-
ment costs for industrial users.
Additional benefits have been reported to result
from the construction grants program, including em-
ployment of construction personnel in the building of
waste treatment plants, relocation of industries to
cities that have upgraded their waste treatment facil-
ities; doubling of crop production where spray irriga-
tion of highly treated effluent is used; use of
stabilization ponds as waterfowl production areas,
and financial savings to homeowners who would
otherwise maintain and operate individual septic
tanks. Few of these benefits can be measured quan-
titatively for use in cost/benefit comparisons.
Many costs are also difficult to assess Besides
the direct cost of financing and maintaining pollution
abatement facilities, indirect costs and impacts can
also be weighed These indirect costs include the
possible closure of older industrial plants which are
not able to afford the cost of retrofitting outmoded
pollution abatement equipment in addition to other
plant modernization costs, and declines in public ser-
vices or increases in taxes as municipalities spend
more money financing waste treatment facilities
Despite the difficulties of calculating these costs
and benefits, some States performed partial cost and
benefit analyses of water pollution control programs,
using best available information Minnesota, for ex-
ample, provides specific information on costs and
benefits in its 1982 report. The cost of achieving
the fishable/swimmable goal in the Mississippi River
near Mmneapohs-St Paul was evaluated, as well as
the amount citizens were willing to pay for cleanup.
This area of the Mississippi is affected by water
quality standard violations for dissolved oxygen,
ammonia, and residual chlorine; contamination with
industrial wastes such as copper, cadmium, and
mercury, and combined sewer overflows (CSOs)
CSOs are the primary obstacle to achieving the
swimmable goal in this section of the river, and
account for 98 percent of the summer loading of
fecal cohform bacteria to the area
A Minnesota CSO study concluded that the prefer-
red solution to the problem would require a combi-
nation of new interceptors, sewer separation, storage
and treatment The estimated capital cost for
such improvements was determined to be 349 mil-
lion dollars, which translates into an annual charge of
$41 per household in the Mmneapohs-St Paul area
A survey conducted for the Metropolitan Waste Con-
trol Commission asked area residents how willing
they were to pay for fishable and swimmable water
in this section of the Mississippi River; it was de-
termined that individual households are willing to pay
between $44 and $67 each per year. The benefits to
local residents of improvement in water quality—
estimated to range between 38 and 57 million
dollars per year—are expected to increase over time
as recreational demands escalate.
Kansas reports that it assessed the cost and bene-
fit implications of water quality management pro-
grams conducted under Section 208 of the Clean
Water Act. Capital, operation and maintenance, and
program administration costs for three different
levels of treatment—existing, intermediate, and
full—were identified. Five benefit categories were
also assessed: agricultural benefits; municipal be-
nefits; industrial benefits, recreational and aesthetic
benefits; and health benefits Benefit-cost ratios
were determined by comparing the present value of
the total benefits to the present value of the cost to
obtain those benefits. Kansas' benefit-cost assess-
ment indicated that full levels of treatment, roughly
equivalent to the concept of "zero discharge of pollu-
tants," would not be environmentally or economically
feasible A water quality management plan incor-
porating elements of the intermediate levels of
treatment program for agricultural runoff and mineral
intrusion, with elements of the existing nonpomt
source control program, was adopted by the State as
a result of this analysis. The 20-year cost of this plan
was estimated at 280 million dollars, with benefits to
the State over this period estimated at 843 million
dollars.
A third partial cost/benefit analysis, conducted as
part of Missouri's water quality management plan, is
reported in 1982 According to the Missouri Section
305(b) report, the expense of soil conservation
measures was assessed against the savings realized
from conserving topsoils and so maintaining agricul-
tural productivity. This study found that the cost of
the program was justified by a reduction in long term
productivity losses only in shallow topsoil areas
where loss of topsoil will become critical in 30 to 60
years In deeper soil areas, reduced productivity los-
ses did not balance erosion control expenditures
18
-------
The Missouri report notes that an incentive program
is necessary to gam widespread farmer participation
in the program, as the short term returns from such
a nonpomt source pollution control program are small
compared to the costs
Cost/benefit analyses are not yet in wide enough
use to permit national assessments of water pollu-
tion control programs From the examples cited
above, it is apparent that the process of assessing
the benefits of clean water needs to be refined, and
that more precise information on costs must still be
gathered before comprehensive conclusions about
the costs and benefits of the wide range of water
cleanup efforts will be possible However, despite
these analytical limitations, the State Section 305(b)
reports clearly show that the Nation's investment
in pollution control has resulted in many highly
valuable, if often intangible, benefits.
19
-------
Glossary
Acute toxicity: Any toxic effect that is produced
within a short period of time, usually within 24-96
hours. Although the effect most frequently consid-
ered is mortality, any harmful biological effect may
be the end result of acute toxicity
Aquifer: Water-bearing geologic formation from
which drinking water supplies are often drawn.
Bioaccumulation: The process by which certain
organisms remove substances, including some tox-
ics, from their environment and store them in their
tissues. The concentration of these substances in-
creases at each higher step in the food chain.
Bioassay: A process for determining the biological
effect of some substance, factor, or condition and
employing living organisms or cells as the indicator
Chronic toxicity: Toxicity marked by long duration
that produces an adverse effect on organisms. The
end result of chronic toxicity can be death, although
the usual effects are sublethal (e.g., reduced growth,
inhibited reproduction).
Combined sewer overflows: Discharges occurring
when excessive rainfall is added to normal sewage
flows in systems where storm and sanitary sewers
are combined.
Effluent: Outflow discharged from an industrial or
municipal wastewater treatment plant into a body of
water such as a river or stream.
Load Allocation: The portion of a receiving water's
loading capacity (defined as the greatest amount of
loading that a water can receive without violating
water quality standards) that is attributed either to
one of its existing or future nonpomt sources of
pollution or to natural background sources.
Minor permittees: Municipal and industrial
wastewater treatment facilities designated under an
EPA priority system as having less impact on
receiving waters (because of less flow, fewer toxic
constituents in effluents, etc.) than other, higher
priority major permittees.
Nonpoint source pollution: Diffused pollution
resulting from water runoff from urban areas, con-
struction sites, agricultural and silvicultural op-
erations, etc.
IMPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System; permit program imposing discharge limita-
tions on point source dischargers based on national
performance standards for new sources, or on water
quality standards.
Point source pollution: Pollution discharged
through a pipe or other discrete source from munic-
ipal wastewater treatment plants, factories, confined
animal feedlots, or combined sewers
Primary treatment: First stage in the basic treat-
ment of sewage that removes settleable or floating
material using screens and settling tanks
Priority pollutants: Toxic pollutants designated for
control under Section 307(a)(1) of the Clean Water
Act because of their suspected high toxicity and per-
sistence in the environment
Secondary treatment: Second stage in wastewater
treatment systems in which bacteria consume the
organic content of wastes in trickling filters or
through the activated sludge process
Total Maximum Daily Load: The sum of the in-
dividual wasteload allocations for point sources and
load allocations for nonpomt sources and natural
background
Wasteload Allocation: The portion of a receiving
water's loading capacity that is allocated to one of its
existing or future point sources of pollution WLAs
constitute a type of water quality-based effluent limi-
tation.
Waters of concern: Waters identified by the States
as actual or potential problem areas that require
management attention
20
-------
Appendix A
Waters of Concern Identified in 1982
State Section 305(b) Reports
State
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Connecticut
District of
Columbia
Florida
State Definition and/or
Methodology for
Selecting Waters
Streams cited in list of
most serious WQ prob-
lems**
Planning segment
ranking*
Identified by WQ data**
Identified by not
meeting WQ stan-
dards**
Major tributary prob-
lems*
Water quality problem
areas*
Number
9 streams
39 segments
58 segments
31 segments
10 segments
23 basins/seg-
ments out of 83
Source of Pollution
Municipal dischargers,
mines, feedlots, NFS
pollution
Not identified
Nonpoint, point
Combined sewer over-
flows, WWTP, industrial
wastes
Storm sewers, dumping
Municipal and industrial
wastes, urban and agncul-
Parameters of Concern
Metals, nitrates, fecal col-
iforms, phosphorus
DO, nutrients, toxics
(metals)
DO, nutrients, toxics,
suspended solids
Not identified
Not identified
DO, nutrients, bacten?
Comments
19 segments are WQL,
39 segments are EL
Georgia
Illinois
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
6 segments
20% of streams
exhibit greater than
moderate or severe
pollution problems
38 segments
New Hampshire
New Jersey
Major problem areas*
Indicated by WQI**
Identified by not
meeting WQ stan-
dards**
Identified as severely
polluted**
Segments not meeting
assigned use classifica-
tions**
Priority segments*
Identified by standards
violations**
Use impairment
regarding fishable/
swimmable goals**
Problem areas*
Identified by not
meeting WQ standards*
Apparent and potential
problem stream seg-
ments**
a Identified by bene-
ficial use evaluation**
b Priority ranking of
potential toxic pollutant
problems**
Problem segments* 60 segments
tural runoff
Municipal wastes, urban
runoff, sewer overflows
Not identified
Point and nonpomt
sources
18 segments
7 segments
19 of about 180
segments
169 segments
Not identified
7 problem areas
About 130 seg-
ments
32 of 216 seg-
ments
11 out of 13 basins
4 out of 13 basins
Priority ranking system
prioritizes State water-
sheds*
29 segments
(watersheds)
Agriculture, industrial and
municipal wastes, urban
runoff, hydrologic mod-
ification, salt water intru-
sion
Municipal, industrial, com-
bined sewer overflow,
stormwater runoff
Municipal wastes, agricul-
ture and urban runoff
Municipal wastes, urban
runoff, sewer overflows
NPS pollution
Municipal wastes, agricul-
tural runoff, industrial
wastes
Municipal wastes, agricul-
tural, mine, and surface
runoff, others
Municipal wastes, agricul-
tural runoff, abandoned
mines, other nonpomt
runoff
Nonpoint runoff, feedlots,
municipal wastes
Municipal and industrial
wastes
Municipal wastes
Not identified
Bacteria, DO
Bacteria, metals, DO
Bacteria, ammonia
DO, bacteria, turbidity,
toxics
Solids, nutrients, DO, fe-
cal coliforms, salinity, pH,
hazardous materials,
metals
Nutrients, suspended
solids, bacteria
DO, bacteria, nutrients
Nutrients, suspended
solids, bacteria
Bacteria, toxics, DO
DO, deposited solids, fe-
cal coliforms, toxics, pH,
others
Metals, suspended and
dissolved solids, nutrients,
others
Bacteria
Toxics (metals and organ-
ics)
DO, bacteria
Bacteria, nutrients, DO,
toxics
24% of over 10,000
observations showed
standards violations
14 segments are EL
4 segments are WQL
19 segments are WQL
and have impaired uses
All segments have some
water use impairment (pri-
marily for aquatic life)
Some degree of aquatic
life impairment in 15 of 32
segments
11 out of 13 basins are
potentially not suited for
assigned use
All 29 segments have
some water use im-
pairment
21
-------
Waters of Concern Identified in 1982 State Section 305(b) Reports (Continued)
State
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
State Definition and/or
Methodology for Selecting
Waters
Identified by significant
standards violations**
Priority basins*
Priority waterbodies*
Identified as having
problems of major
seventy based on chem-
ical evaluation (frequent
effects)**
a Identified as streams
with serious nonpoint
source problems**
b Identified as streams
with point source prob-
lems**
Segment priority cate-
gories (municipal grant
program ranking
system)*
Identified by frequency
of violations of surface
water quality stan-
dards**
Impaired use seg-
ments*
Statewide ranking*
Statewide ranking*
Number
6 of 59 segments
6 basins out of 17,
40% of total area
5 segments
30 segments
Certain streams
within 19 basins
Certain streams
within 10 basins
208 segments
(priority
category 1)
1 region out of 4
18 segments
53 segments
311 segments
Source of Pollution
Municipal wastes, terres-
trial runoff
Municipal and industrial
wastes, combined sewer
overflows, urban runoff,
hazardous wastes
Industrial and municipal
wastes, agricultural runoff
Only potential sources
identified
Erosion and sedimenta-
tion, animal wastes, agri-
culture
Municipal sources
Municipal and industrial
wastes, combined sewer
overflows, urban runoff,
mine drainage
Municipal and industrial
waste, agricultural runoff
Municipal and industrial
wastes, agricultural runoff
Not identified
Municipal and industrial
Parameters of Concern
DO, bacteria, nutrients
Bacteria, nutrients, toxics,
DO, oil/hazardous sub-
stances
Mercury, nutrients
Nutrients, sus-
pended solids, heavy
metals, toxics, dissolved
solids, bacteria
Not identified
Bacteria
BOD/DO, ammonia, sus-
pended solids, phospho-
rus, pH
Bacteria, DO, phosphorus
Bacteria, DO
Metals, bacteria, nutrients
DO
DO, nutrients, bacteria
Comments
7 segments are WQL
Over 800 segments are
WQL
One WQL segment,
eleven "marginal" seg-
ments
1 6% of total stream miles
have impairment of desig-
nated use
69 segments are WQL,
44
wastes
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Priority segments*
21 segments
Agricultural runoff, munic- Nutrients, bacteria, BOD,
ipal wastes, mining activi- phenols, salinity, sus-
ties pended solids
Receive State focus** 124 segments
Water pollution control
priority list*
Toxic substance prob-
lem areas*
Identified as segments
experiencing water qual-
ity problems excluding
those due to natural or
irreversible causes*
Problem areas*
harbors/bays
3 segments
7 high priority, 26
others
Municipal and industrial
wastes, combined sew-
ers, nonpoint sources
Municipal wastes
Bacteria, DO
Bacteria, turbidity
Chemical manufacturers Kepone, mercury
Industrial site drainage. Bacteria, toxics
municipal wastes, sewer
overflows
segments contact recrea-
tion impaired, 4 segments
propagation of fish & wild-
life impaired, 128 seg-
ments domestic raw
water supply impaired,
19 5% of stream miles
not in compliance with
WQ standards
A severity index associ-
ated with impaired uses is
given by stream segments
45 segments are WQL, 79
segments are EL
These segments do not
meet fishable criteria
Priority watershed pro-
gram*
Priority segments*
3 segments
120 out of 330
watersheds
40 segments
Municipal and industrial
wastes, mine drainage
Agricultural runoff
Municipal wastes, natural
runoff, irrigation, agricul-
tural runoff
Phenols, mercury, PCBs,
acid mine drainage
Nutrients, suspended
solids
Nutrients, suspended
solids, bacteria
24 segments are WQL, all
have impairment of desig-
nated uses
Abbreviations
NPS - Nonpoint sources WQL - Water quality limited
WQ - Water quality EL - Effluent limited
WWTP - Wastewater treatment plant DO - Dissolved oxygen
WQI - Water quality index BOD - Biochemical oxygen demand
"Specifically designated by State as problem/priority waterbodies
"Not specifically designated by State as problem/priority waterbodies, however, data indicate likely problem areas
22
-------
Appendix B
Summary Excerpts of
State Section 305(b) Reports
Alabama
For complete copies of the Alabama 305(6) Report,
contact:
Alabama Department of Environmental Management
State Capitol
Montgomery, AL 36104
Summary
The Alabama Water Improvement Commission (AWIC)
maintains a network of ambient monitoring stations to
detect trends in water quality throughout the State. A
total of 57 stations are maintained by the State, of
which 27 belong to the Environmental Protection Agen-
cy's (EPA) national core network of stations.
During the report period (1980-1981), water quality in
the majority of the State's lakes, rivers, and streams
was good to excellent. A discussion and evaluation of
water quality by river basin is included in this report.
Also discussed are the various programs the State util-
izes to gather information and to control pollution from
point and nonpoint sources.
Since enactment of PL 92-500, Alabama has reduced
the discharge of primarily treated waste from 65 mil-
lion gallons per day (MGD) to 10 MGD. The amount of
raw discharge has been reduced from 2.5 MGD to 0.15
MGD and the last raw discharge will be replaced
during 1983. A total of 66 public waste treatment facili-
ties have been constructed during the period. Construc-
tion of these waste treatment facilities has resulted in
improvement in water quality and elimination of poten-
tial health hazards in a number of areas throughout the
State.
The Alabama Water Improvement Commission
issued or re-issued 118 NPDES permits during 1980
and 1981. Many of these permits contained schedules
requiring construction of new facilities and completion
of pretreatment programs. The Commission plans to
issue or re-issue 120 municipal permits during 1982.
During 1980-1981, 14 municipal waste treatment faci-
lities were completed with the assistance of federal
construction grant funds. The total cost of the facilities
was approximately 28 million dollars. Ten of the com-
pleted projects provided for replacement of overloaded
or inadequate facilities; three provided sewer service
where none previously existed; and one provided for
elimination of a raw sewage discharge.
The Commission will continue to assign top priority
to expediting federal grant applications for needed mu-
nicipal construction. A priority list prepared by the
Commission for fiscal year 1982 indicated a need of
100 million dollars for each of the next three to four
years. In fiscal year 1982, 120 million dollars are
needed to cover projects which are ready.to proceed.
Since most industry in Alabama met the 1977 treat-
ment levels, little water quality improvement was
noted in 1980-1981 due to industry upgrading of treat-
ment facilities. Noteworthy, however, is the fact that
further industrial development and mining activity oc-
curred during this period without a decline in water
quality.
As further growth and industrial activity occurs, more
frequent water quality studies and ambient monitoring
will be required as more and more demand is put on
the State's fixed stream capacity. This is particularly
true in light of the new environmental view that main-
taining water quality takes precedence over class im-
position of effluent standards and on the expected
emphasis on toxics control.
Alaska
For complete copies of the Alaska 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
State of Alaska
Department of Environmental Conservation
Pouch 0
Juneau, Alaska 99811
Summary
The following statements summarize the various types
and sources of water pollution in Alaska today. Three
primary concerns are discussed: threats to public
health; damage resulting from natural resource har-
vesting; and nuisance problems.
Health Concerns: The first and most serious priority of
Alaska's Department of Environmental Conservation
(DEC) is protecting human health. Preventing such pub-
lic health problems as contamination of drinking water
supplies by sewage and toxic wastes, and public expo-
sure to untreated wastes from leaking sewers or failing
septic tanks, are the DEC's primary concerns.
Environmental Concerns: Environmental damage in
Alaska results primarily from harvesting of natural
23
-------
resources rather than from discharges from pipes (point
sources of pollution). Resources that are netted, trap-
ped, dredged, sluiced, drilled, dug, felled, and other-
wise harvested are then trimmed and transported out
of Alaska for further refining. Environmental damage
results from the remains of these activities—for ex-
ample, mine tailings, sediments, drilling muds, carcas-
ses, bark, and sawdust—as well as from construction
and use of roads, docks, and airports to move these re-
sources to markets. Erosion from poorly designed
roads dump silt and mud into sensitive streams,
fouling fish spawning areas. Intertidal fills create land
out of water, obliterating bottom-dwelling animals and
eliminating valuable feeding and refuge areas for
migrating salmon fry and other species.
Nuisance Concerns: Stream beds littered with cans and
debris affect water-based recreational activities in Alas-
ka. Although litter is strictly a nuisance matter, Alas-
kans who were recently surveyed overwhelmingly
listed it as Alaska's number one environmental prob-
lem.
Innate uncertainties are involved in predicting Alas-
ka's future water pollution concerns. Resource
harvesting and resultant environmental damages de-
pend on market conditions. For example, mining and
timber harvesting activities are largely based on the
price of metals and logs. Similarly, construction of an
Alaskan natural gas pipeline hinges on the price of gas.
Possibilities also exist for oil spills caused by tanker
accidents or oil well blow-outs.
The following table summarizes in more detail
Alaska's water pollution concerns for 1983.
Scale of Problem
Type of Activity
Significant
Subdivisions
Placer mining
Timber harvest-
ing
Pollution Type
Sewage bacteria
Mud, silt
Bark deposits
Estimated Extent
or Area Affected
Hundreds of households
600 interior streams
About 150 marine sites
Intermediate
Seafood process-
ing
Intertidal,
wetland fills
Streamside
development
Minor
Large sewage
discharges
Pulp mills
Recreational
lakes
Potential
Agriculture
Hardrock mining
Temperature
Fish wastes
Physical burial,
silt from erosion
Runoff, silt
About 100 streams
Several major harbors
and
several smaller harbors
Coastal and wetland
areas (about 500 de-
velopments yearly)
Fifty streams in ten coas-
tal cities
Sewage bacteria Four coastal cities
Suspended solids Two bays in SE Alaska
Residential A dozen or more lakes
sewage,
silt from runoff
Silt
Heavy metals,
tailings, silt
None yet
None yet
American Samoa
For complete copies of the American Samoa 305(b) Re-
port, contact:
Environmental Quality Commission
Office of the Governor
Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799
Summary
There are approximately 120 streams in American
Samoa. The water quality of these streams is in-
fluenced largely by the prevailing weather conditions.
During periods of dry weather, many of the stream
flows diminish significantly; some dry up completely.
Periods of heavy rains and erosion cause large in-
creases in turbidity, suspended solids, and coliform
concentrations.
There are only limited data available that establish
the types and concentrations of nutrients, heavy met-
als, pesticides, or other toxic substances that may be
present in these streams. The Environmental Quality
Commission is continuing its baseline water quality
survey of all public water supplies.
Water supply and wastewater collection and treat-
ment are steadily improving. Through educational pro-
grams, the public is becoming aware of the importance
of proper waste disposal practices and a safe water
supply.
Past problems with the disposal of cannery sludges
in landfills have been solved through a controlled
ocean dumping program.
The sea surrounding these tropical islands is pris-
tine; however, coastal zones are beginning to reflect
the impact of modernization. Road construction is
resulting in erosion and siltation of fragile coral reef
systems along the shore.
The natural wetlands of American Samoa are of two
main types: mangrove forests and coastal marsh.
These wetlands are threatened by development and
agricultural fill operations. Several activities to assure
protection of the Territory's wetlands are planned. In-
cluded among them are careful review and enforce-
ment of permits and projects related to development in
fragile areas; publication of a coastal atlas that con-
tains an inventory of all fragile areas; and development
of specific programs to protect and restore these low-
lands.
As agricultural programs are developing in American
Samoa, pesticides are being more widely used. The
government has set up a certification program for users
which should prevent any major problems from
occurring.
Ground water is the Territory's primary potable
water supply source. The Tafuna-Leone plain supply is
subject to salt water intrusion and is sensitive to con-
tamination by leachate from activities above the water
supply. The supply has been greatly diminished during
periods of drought; however, with proper management
there should be an adequate supply.
24
-------
Arizona
For complete copies of the Arizona 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Environmental Health Services
Bureau of Water Quality Control
1740 W. Adams St.
Phoenix, AZ 85007
Summary
The quality of Arizona's surface water at this writing is
generally good. While new problems have been dis-
covered since 1979, others have been resolved or are
in the process of being resolved. Nonpoint sources
(surface mining and recreation) need to be dealt with
vigorously and systematically before major im-
provements will be seen. Overall, State surface water
quality has neither improved nor declined since 1979.
The 1983 goal under the federal Clean Water Act pro-
motes the attainment of water quality for the protec-
tion of aquatic life and wildlife, and for recreation. In
Arizona, natural conditions preclude many in-stream
uses throughout the year. Precipitation extremes cause
many unregulated streams to be dry or running full
with flood flows. Regulated rivers and streams are
totally diverted for irrigation, municipal, and industrial
water deliveries, except during flood flows. The pres-
ence of flood flows and the absence of perennial base
flows in many of Arizona's watercourses prevent the
use of some surface waters for uses protected under
the 1983 goal.
During water years 1980-1981, several serious water
quality problems were discovered in Arizona. Many
current problems in the State resulted from historic ac-
tivities. While overall surface water quality in the State
remains good in spite of local pollution, ground water
problems now threaten supplies to major metropolitan
areas.
Trichloroethylene (TCE) contamination of ground
water was found in Tucson and the greater Phoenix
area. The Tucson situation is especially severe; the
quantities of TCE in the local aquifer are large, there is
potential for spread of contamination, and Tucson is
currently solely dependent upon ground water for its
municipal supply. Levels of TCE in some Tucson and
Phoenix area wells are above levels that would pose a
chronic health threat if the wells were used as drinking
water supplies.
Severe nitrate contamination was detected in the San
Pedro River near St. David and Palominas in surface
and ground water. Municipal wells in the Phoenix area
have been shut down due to high nitrate levels.
Mine wastes from historic operations release acid
and heavy metals to a number of small Arizona
streams, including Bitter Creek, Harshaw Creek, Lynx
Creek, and Boulder Creek. Mitigation in most cases will
prove difficult, preventing attainment of the 1983 goal
of the Clean Water Act.
Some operating mines have taken action to clean up
previous water quality problems caused by their op-
erations. Such actions have apparently been effective
in restoring stream quality. However, currently op-
erating mines on the Pinal Creek watershed near
Globe-Miami are responsible for severe pollution. Stud-
ies in the area are ongoing.
Recreation and recreation-based development have
caused bacterial contamination and accelerated eu-
trophication of Arizona's waters. Bacterial problems are
especially severe in the Pinetop-Lakeside area, and in
certain low desert impoundments. Accelerated eu-
trophication is taking place in many small lakes in the
White Mountains.
Improper sewage disposal remains a problem in
Nogales and in the Cottonwood-Clarkdale area along
the Verde River. Plans are being drawn to improve ex-
isting facilities in Payson and Summerhaven to allevi-
ate problems in the American Gulch/East Verde River
system and Sabino Creek, respectively.
Continuing water quality impacts from the 1979 re-
leases of radioactive tailings water from the United
Nuclear Mine near Gallup, New Mexico, remain un-
quantified. At last sampling, surface water in the Rio
Puerco contained gross alpha activity levels in excess
of State standards.
Arkansas
For complete copies of the Arkansas 305(b) Report,
contact:
Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology
8001 National Drive
Little Rock, AR 72209
Summary
Of the 6,239 miles of major Arkansas streams, it is pro-
jected that 4,087 miles, or 77 percent, will meet the
1983 goal. Nonpoint source pollution causes the
remaining 23 percent of stream miles to fall short of
the goal.
Reasons for the goal not being attainable are dis-
cussed. Briefly, the Delta streams, including Cache Riv-
er, Bayou DeView, L'Anguille River, St. Francis River,
Little River, Tyronza River, Big Creek, Bayou Two
Prairie, Bayou Meto, LaGrue Bayou, Bayou Barth-
olomew, Boeuf River, Bayou Macon, and virtually all of
their tributaries cannot be expected to meet the 1983
goal due to physical manipulation of the stream en-
vironment: dredging, stream channelization, the clear-
ing of entire watersheds for intensive agriculture, and
the resulting nonpoint source pollution by silt, pesti-
cides, nutrients, and organic material.
In these streams, mean fecal coliform levels almost
invariably exceed the criteria for swimming. This is
true both near sewage discharges which are amenable
to control, and in areas far removed from point sources
of pollution. Turbidity levels also discourage many re-
creational activities.
Generally speaking, the highly agricultural Delta
25
-------
region of Arkansas is heavily influenced by nonpoint
source pollutants, especially those related to agricul-
tural runoff, i.e., turbidity, suspended solids, and nu-
trients. The Ouachita River drainage is showing some
degrading trends for dissolved oxygen, nutrients, and
total dissolved solids. North Arkansas is showing the
effects of current land changes where hardwood
forests are being converted to pasturelands. These
changes are increasing the levels of silts and sus-
pended sediments being measured in surface waters.
The extreme northwest region of the State is ex-
periencing a decline in water quality due to increasing
population and increased land application of animal
waste. The southwest area of Arkansas still exhibits
some signs of past petroleum production.
The poor conditions and degrading trends observed
at some biological monitoring stations were counter-
balanced by good conditions and improving trends at
others. This results in assignments of fair conditions
and stable trends for each of the Arkansas, White,
Ouachita, Red, and St. Francis River Basins. Thus, a
comprehensive examination of the forty-four biological
monitoring stations currently being maintained in the
State indicates that conditions are generally fair and
trends are stable.
Great progress has been made in curtailing residual
toxics in the environment. Some concern exists about
PCBs, which are still being detected in many locations.
This concern is caused, not by new sources of PCBs,
but rather by the residual nature of the compound and
its tendency to magnify in the environment. Chlordane,
another residual compound which is being detected in
fish from the Mississippi River, may prove to be a ma-
jor problem. Currently, an interstate committee is being
formed with Tennessee, Mississippi, Missouri, and
possibly Kentucky to design a program to determine
the extent of this problem.
Arkansas' most pressing water supply need is the
protection of its large regional water supply lakes. A
pilot study is now underway in Beaver Reservoir.
California
For complete copies of the California 305(b) Report,
contact:
California State Water Resources Control Board
Division of Technical Services
Investigation/Program Development Section
Sacramento, CA 95801
Summary
Water quality conditions throughout California *or the
1980 and 1981 biennial reporting period were generally
good. Data summarized from Statewide stream
sampling show that water quality conditions have con
tinued to improve. Twenty of twenty-eight Priority I
streams have water quality classified as good to ex-
cellent. Five streams have medium water quality and
three streams are rated as poor. The Alamo, the New,
and portions of the Middle Santa Ana Rivers do not
meet the fishable/swimmable minimum standards es-
tablished by EPA pursuant to PL 92-500. Results of tox-
ic substances monitoring indicate that some areas have
elevated concentrations of toxic pollutants in surface
waters and in some coastal marine waters. Results of
stream monitoring have indicated numerous short term
water quality standards violations.
There are a number of localized surface water quality
problems, but their solution is possible with already
available best management practices. Some persistent
problems such as mine drainage, surface erosion, and
urban runoff do not have well defined solutions.
Ground water overdraft and toxic pollutant contamina-
tion of municipal ground water supplies are problems
receiving increased attention from State and local
agencies.
Some of the highlighted water quality trends, prob-
lems, and accomplishments detailed in this report are
summarized as follows:
• A major water resource problem facing California in
the 1980s will be the balancing of water quality con-
siderations against water delivery needs as the State's
population continues to increase.
• Efforts over the last decade to correct major point
source pollution and contamination problems have
been very successful, although municipal wastewater
treatment plants in major metropolitan areas such as
Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Sacramento are not
yet completed.
• Nonpoint sources of pollution are generally wide-
spread geographically, and are difficult to identify and
control. Further, they are usually the result of long-held
land use practices. Typical nonpoint source problems
include: ground water pumping overdraft with atten-
dant sea-water intrusion; industrial toxic pollution;
effects from agricultural waste drains, including toxic
pollution; logging and roadbuilding practices; and
drainage from abandoned mines.
• The 28 Priority streams assessed in this report have
a combined length of nearly 4,000 stream miles and
represent a cross section of water quality data
reflecting approximately 80 percent of California's aver-
age annual runoff. Approximately 7 percent of these
stream miles are classified as Water Quality Limited
Segments (they do not meet quality standards suf-
ficient to protect designated beneficial uses).
• A review of Water Quality Index (WQI) data indicates
that the surface water quality conditions Statewide are
generally improving. Most streams meet national
goals. As measured by a composite WQI, the quality of
surface water in California has improved from the
medium to the good to excellent range during this
period.
• California's Mussel Watch marine monitoring pro-
gram reveals some decline in PCB levels. Mussel
26
-------
Watch analyses also show evidence that chronic, low-
level oil pollution may exist along the entire California
coastline.
• Toxic Substances Monitoring Program activity during
water year 1980-81 revealed that sample organisms
from eleven sampling sites contained 28 toxicant con-
centrations that exceeded recommended guidelines for
fish and wildlife protection. A few samples in Northern
California streams have contained pollutant levels ex-
ceeding FDA guidelines for human consumption.
• Within the reporting period, several localized ground
waters were found to contain high levels of industrial
chemicals and pesticides. Extensive sampling, coordi-
nated among several agencies, was designed to more
closely define the sources of the contaminants, the
path of ground water travel, and best corrective meas-
ures. Regional Board enforcement actions have been
initiated, and cleanup and restoration have begun in
several areas.
Colorado 1980
For complete copies of the 1980 Colorado 305(b) Re-
port, contact:
Colorado Department of Health
Water Quality Control Division
4210 E. 11th Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80220
Summary
Because of its geographical location and topographical
features, no significant amount of usable water flows
into the State from outside its boundaries. Colorado
depends on rainfall and snowmelt for all of its surface
and ground water supplies.
Gross stream pollution where the water is unfit for
any beneficial use is very uncommon in Colorado, ex-
cept possibly in some historic metal mining districts
and immediately below some natural mineral springs
or seeps.
Mine drainage from inactive metal mines containing
toxic metals and acidity is the most intractable water
quality problem in the State. The many-faceted nature
of this problem has been detailed in a report prepared
by the Division for the Statewide 208 Water Quality
Plan, entitled Mining and Water Quality in the State of
ColoradoC\978). Current effort in this problem area is
aimed toward establishing the feasibility of
rehabilitating metal mine drainages.
Natural drainage from heavily mineralized areas
across the State is also a major limiting factor con-
straining the uses of Colorado's streams. There are
many documented instances where streams have been
shown to contain fish-toxic levels of heavy metals
which are attributable to natural drainage.
Discharges of treated and untreated minicipal or in-
dustrial wastewater can have a significant influence on
the receiving stream waters. Since point sources of
pollution, for the most part, are controllable, a great
deal of emphasis is placed by the Water Quality Con-
trol Division on controlling such discharges.
Colorado's discharge permit program is now fully
operative, and the majority of the dischargers to State
waters have been issued permits.
Major water quality impacts have been attributed to
agriculture in Colorado. It is important to recognize that
in general, few pollutants are actually introduced to
streams by agricultural activities. The main effect of
using streams for irrigation is to further concentrate
water constituents or parameters already in the water.
However, erosion from fields disturbed by agriculture
can cause significant sedimentation in streams
receiving the runoff. Most farmers use management
practices that minimize erosion.
The greatest effect of agriculture upon streams in
this State is the depletion of flows. Diversions can
completely dry streams or leave so little water that the
aquatic ecosystem is severely reduced and human rec-
reation is impossible. Low summer flows, coupled with
rising water temperatures, reduce the assimilative
capacities of the streams for pollutants. Of course,
municipal and industrial diversions may have the same
flow-reducing effect as agriculture.
Several other important water quality impacts to
streams having a more localized effect are derived
from urban runoff, construction activities, and poorly
executed silvicultural activities.
Connecticut
For complete copies of the Connecticut 305(b) Report,
contact:
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection
Water Compliance Unit
165 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, CT06115
Summary
Since the passage of Connecticut's Clean Water Act in
1967 and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972, there has been a vast im-
provement in water quality due to an aggressive and
well supported State water pollution control program.
The first sources of pollution addressed were severe
contamination problems such as continuous raw or
poorly treated sewage discharges and industrial dis-
charges having little or no treatment. The major thrust
of the Water Quality Management program in the
1970s was to achieve consistent treatment levels for
municipal and industrial wastewater based on reason-
ably available treatment technologies. Achieving this
consistent treatment level was made possible by State
27
-------
and federal sewerage construction grants (approx-
imately $303,500,000 and $473,000,000 respectively)
and by the issuance of State pollution abatement
orders (approximately 2,500). There have also been
substantial expenditures for wastewater treatment by
industry and local municipalities. As a result, there is
greater recreational usage of the State's water re-
sources, decreased health risks, improved aquatic habi-
tats, aesthetic improvements, and generally a higher
appreciation for these most important resources.
Although great progress has been made in im-
proving the quality of the State's waters since the pas-
sage of Connecticut's Clean Water Act in 1967 and the
1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments,
attaining the dual goals of fishable-swimmable surface
water quality and adequate unpolluted ground water
for public consumption will require additional efforts to
regulate, and in some cases eliminate, sources of
pollution.
Existing
Conditions
Since 1978, water quality in approximately 35 miles of
rivers and streams which had previously exhibited
poor water quality improved to the extent that the
water quality goal was met.
Over 90% of the total miles of rivers and streams in
Connecticut meet the criteria of "fishable-swimmable"
water quality. Of the 963 miles of major waterways,
70% meet this goal. Water quality standards have been
attained to a degree in all major river basins, as fol-
lows:
Basin
Percent of Total Stream Percent of Stream Miles
Miles in Connecticut Meeting WQ Standards
Housatonic
Thames
Connecticut
Central Coastal
Western Coastal
Farmington
Eastern Coastal
Pawcatuck
24
21
18
13
10
9
4
1
57
76
53
72
91
83
100
100
Connecticut's surface water quality problems stem
primarily from combined sewer overflows, the need for
municipal sewage treatment beyond secondary levels,
the need for industrial waste treatment beyond BPT
levels, and nonpoint source pollution. A major excep-
tion is the upper Housatonic River, where the water
quality goal is not being met due to sediment con-
tamination with PCBs which precludes eating fish from
the river.
Six of Connecticut's most severely polluted rivers
had an improving trend for at least one measured
water quality parameter. Three other severely polluted
rivers have remained the same or slightly regressed.
Regression analysis also shows that the dramatic gains
in water quality resulting from implementation of BPT
waste treatment in the late 1970s are being maintained.
The vast majority of the State's ground water is suit-
able for drinking without treatment. However, there are
many competing demands placed upon ground water
resources for both water supply and waste disposal.
Lake water quality conditions have benefited from
State management strategies and policies which pre-
vent degradation by point source discharges. The
elimination of federal funding under Section 314 of the
Clean Water Act seriously reduces the ability of the
State to conduct additional studies or implement rec-
ommendations for previously studied lakes. In addition
to Section 314 funded activities, progress is being
made in abating eutrophication of the Housatonic River
impoundments (Lakes Zoar, Lillinonah, and Housaton-
ic) by the implementation of advanced waste treatment
for nutrient removal.
Delaware 1980
For complete copies of the 1980 Delaware 305(b) Re-
port, contact:
Division of Environmental Control
Department of Natural Resources and Environmental
Control
Tatnall Building, Capitol Complex
Dover, DE 19901
Summary
The State of Delaware's surface and sub-surface water
resources are for the most part in good condition.
Moreover, all but two segments, the Broadkill and
Delaware River, are at least partially meeting the 1983
national water quality goal. However, most segments
may have brief periods when critical parameters are of
reduced quality. While the Broadkill River may meet
the 1983 goal, the middle portion of the Delaware River
will certainly require much more time to meet water
quality goals set for 1983.
Since the 1978 inventory, surface waters have shown
some improvement. Dissolved oxygen (DO) and fecal
coliform bacteria levels have improved in most seg-
ments. The overall levels of nutrients improved in 16 of
the State's 20 segments. Ten segments showed im-
provement in DO content. Only one segment (Leipsic
River) showed a distinct deterioration of this factor. All
other segments showed DO values similar to those
measured in 1978 (at already acceptable levels). Only
six of Delaware's streams show an indication of con-
tamination by heavy metals, and none of these are
seriously impacted on a continuous basis. The waters
of Delaware Bay and adjoining ocean are of generally
good to excellent quality.
A new review of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System files indicates that not all stream
segments have experienced a decrease in pollutant
loadings. However, this may be due in part to the ex-
pansion of sewer systems and the cross-basin
pumping of sewage and drinking water. The Statewide
28
-------
total loadings of BODs and total suspended solids have
dropped by 67 and 59 percent, respectively, since 1975
(after cooling water flow is subtracted). Also, the total
amount of wastewater flow has decreased by 15 per-
cent since 1975.
Delaware's ground water is also in good condition.
There have been no new major finds of widespread
contaminated ground water. The designated surface
water drinking supply streams (Christina River, White
Clay, Red Clay, and the Brandywine River) are also
suitable for such usage.
In summary, Delaware's streams have improved
since 1978 and, with the continued and cooperative
efforts of the numerous organizations and individuals
involved in water quality management, this trend will
likely continue.
District of Columbia
For copies of the District of Columbia 305(b) Report,
contact:
D.C. Department of Environmental Services
Bureau of Air and Water Quality
5010 Overlook St. S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20032
Summary
The waters of the District of Columbia have improved
considerably in the last 15 to 20 years, especially in
levels of fecal coliform bacteria and dissolved oxygen.
Over the past five years, improvements have been less
easy to document because of wide variations in stream
flow and weather conditions. This may indicate that the
rate of water quality improvements has slowed relative
to the large monetary expenditures of previous years.
The full impact of the latest advances in wastewater
treatment at the Blue Plains sewage treatment plant
(STP) and reductions of combined sewer overflow dis-
charge volumes will not be evident for several years,
especially because of natural environmental fluctua-
tions. However, careful inspection of the data, taking
into consideration flow and weather conditions, does
reveal improving trends between 1977 and 1981. Since
the last assessment in 1980, water quality has shown
improving trends based on the seven parameters
evaluated in this report.
The following are some general conclusions reached
in this report about water quality in the District of
Columbia:
• The Potomac River has improved over the past five
years, as indicated by decreased violations of fecal col-
iform bacteria, dissolved oxygen, and pH water quality
standards, and by reduced concentrations of total Kjel-
dahl nitrogen and total phosphate.
• The Anacostia River, although showing improve-
ments, still has serious problems with sediments,
fecal coliform bacteria, and dissolved oxygen con-
centrations.
• Wetland areas are extremely limited and probably
adversely affected by sedimentation and public abuse.
• Fishing in the District is improving, as indicated by
the return of many species of sport fish, including
bass.
• Two potential toxic problems exist in waters of the
District of Columbia: lead in Rock Creek and other
small tributaries, and chlorine discharges from Blue
Plains STP.
• Combined sewer overflow volumes have been re-
duced by 66-70%. A final report on the study of further
controls will be completed in the near future.
• The NPDES Program has resulted in water quality
improvements; industry commitments to meet permit
conditions have been promoted; and improvements in
Blue Plains STP facilities and processes have occurred.
• Progress toward attaining the goal of the Clean
Water Act has been made. However, improvement in
the existing quality of the Potomac and other waterbod-
ies in the District, or even simply maintenance of their
current conditions, will continue to require large ex-
penditures of funds.
Florida
For complete copies of the Florida 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation
Bureau of Water Analysis
Division of Environmental Programs
2600 Blair Stone Rd.
Tallahassee, FL 32301
Summary
The primary objective of the report is to evaluate the
quality of navigable waters in light of their designated
uses and to assess progress toward meeting the goal
of the Clean Water Act (i.e., "wherever attainable, an
interim goal of water quality which provides for the
protection and propagation offish, shellfish, and wild-
life and provides for recreation in and on the water be
achieved by July 1, 1983").
In addition to the readily identifiable impacts of point
sources, water quality in Florida's navigable waters is
also affected by nonpoint sources such as agriculture,
urban runoff, mining, silviculture, construction, and
dredge/fill operations. The impacts of nonpoint sources
are a significant cause of the accelerating eutrophica-
tion of many of Florida's lakes and estuaries.
Water quality in many streams or stream segments
does not meet the appropriate stream standards (es-
pecially for dissolved oxygen and pH) because of
29
-------
natural conditions. Florida is richly endowed with many
types of wetlands, and streams draining these wet-
lands generally have low dissolved oxygen and pH,
and high color.
Sources of the data used in this report are STORE!
and the data from intensive surveys performed in con-
junction with the development of wasteload alloca-
tions. STORET data are collected as part of the fixed
station network (107 stations), miscellaneous DER sta-
tions, as well as the data from other agencies using the
STORET system. Over 700 stations are used in this re-
port to assess Florida's water quality.
In addition to analyzing the available data in terms of
compliance/non-compliance with appropriate water
quality standards, the State used a screening technique
to make an overall assessment of water quality.
Twenty-three water quality problem areas in Florida
are discussed. The sources of these problems include
treated effluents from industrial processes, domestic
sewage, and runoff from urban, agricultural, and
mining operations.
Georgia
For complete copies of the Georgia 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division
270 Washington Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30334
Summary
During 1980 and 1981, water quality in Georgia's
streams, lakes, and estuaries was generally good.
Water quality in 95 percent of Georgia's estimated
20,000 total miles of streams was in the "good" or "ex-
cellent" range and was meeting the federal fishable/
swimmable objectives. Additionally, there were other
near natural streams that marginally met the fishable/
swimmable objective during 1980 and 1981, but where
growth and development in the future, without precau-
tion, might obstruct progress toward the goal.
Where the Trend Monitoring Index was in the "fair"
or "poor" range, problems could usually be related to
municipal or industrial wastewater discharges. How-
ever, nonpoint sources of pollution such as urban area
runoff can reduce the index to the "fair" or even
"poor" range for limited periods of time in some areas.
Data from the State's water quality monitoring sta-
tions plus additional information from intensive sur-
veys revealed that most of Georgia's streams met the
applicable water quality criteria. Violations did occur
periodically, mostly for the fecal coliform bacterial
standard. During 1980 and 1981, extremely low flows
in most streams resulting from severe drought caused
an increase in violations, especially in the smaller
streams.
Although many of the State's streams had record
low flows during the period, data from most water
quality monitoring stations revealed no significant
changes in 1980 and 1981. A decrease in water quality
was noted in the Satilla River below Waycross and in
the Ochlockonee River below Moultrie and Thomas-
ville. However, improvement was noted in the Oconee
River below Milledgeville.
The major area of poorer water quality in the State
continues to be the Atlanta metropolitan area.
Although significant improvement has been achieved,
additional efforts are needed, many of which are in
progress. Additional improvement is also needed in the
rivers below other population centers, especially Au-
gusta, Macon, Valdosta, Dalton, and Rome. Each of
these municipalities is in the construction grants pro-
gram and is in need of additional federal funding to
complete current projects.
During 1980 and 1981, construction activities resulted
in the completion of 27 new publicly-owned
wastewater treatment facilities and the elimination of
ten inadequate facilities. There has been increased em-
phasis on compliance of municipal facilities with their
discharge permits over this two-year period. Major per-
mit violations are usually associated with inadequate
plant budgets, poor operator training, hydraulic over-
loading of facilities, and inadequate solids handling
capabilities. During 1980 and 1981, 24 consent orders
or administrative orders were issued to municipalities
for failure to comply with their discharge permit limita-
tions.
During 1980 and 1981, extensive efforts were made
to address nonpoint sources of pollution. A series of
task force reports completed in 1978-1979 addressed
the seven primary areas of concern (agriculture, forest-
ry, mining, construction, hydrologic modification, salt
water intrusion, and residual waste). Of greatest con-
cern are potential problems resulting from agricultural,
forestry, and urban runoff. Twenty-one streams in five
physiographic regions are being investigated to de-
termine the magnitude of their nonpoint source prob-
lems. The stream studies will continue for three years;
once complete, a report will be issued which will guide
the Division in future actions concerning nonpoint
source water pollution abatement.
30
-------
Guam
Hawaii
For complete copies of the Guam 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Guam Environmental Protection Agency
Box 2999
Agana, Guam 96910
Summary
Water quality data have now been collected systemati-
cally on Guam for four years. Analysis of the data in-
dicates that surface water quality, both marine and
fresh, is generally high, and that most areas generally
meet Guam water quality standards.
The water quality of Guam's rivers generally meets
the applicable standards, with some exceptions. During
1978/79, almost all rivers exceeded the established
standard for phosphorus. Since then there have been
only two reported phosphorus exceedences, in the up-
stream areas of the Geus and Ugum Rivers in 1980.
The dissolved oxygen level at the downstream station
on the Fonte River is consistently lower than the stan-
dard, although the level has gradually increased. The
Fonte runs through a highly urbanized area, which un-
doubtedly accounts for the decrease in dissolved ox-
ygen. All of Guam's rivers, whether they flow through
rural or urban areas, contain coliform contamination.
In general, for both marine and river waters, no
beneficial uses are being impaired due to water pollu-
tion. However, fishing and shellfishing in waters con-
taminated with fecal coliform bacteria may lead to
health problems. The Guam Environmental Protection
Agency has an active program of notifying the public
of potential health threats as well as attempting to
eliminate sources of contamination.
In general, the quality of Guam's drinking water has
improved during the past three years. The number of
times the public has had to be notified of drinking
water standards violations has decreased sharply, from
26 times in 1979 to only 5 times in 1981.
There are 17 major wetlands on Guam, as identified
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Most of these
show some evidence of dredge and fill activities,
generally associated with road construction. Several
wetlands in southern Guam are used for agricultural
purposes. Agana Swamp is under heavy development
pressure since it is located adjacent to Guam's major
commercial and governmental center.
Development in wetlands and flood hazard areas is
regulated. In addition, since most large development
projects on Guam receive at least partial federal
funding, federal regulations on development in wet-
lands also apply.
For complete copies of the Hawaii 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Hawaii Department of Health
Environmental Protection and Health Services Division
P.O. Box 3378
Honolulu, HI 96801
Summary
The Hawaii 305(b) report describes the water quality of
coastal areas based on the presence of significant point
or nonpoint sources of pollution. A group of 15 water
bodies identified as water quality priority waters are
covered in the report. Included in the assessment of
water quality in priority waters are the various factors
contributing to the problems of water pollution, as well
as the key parameters exceeding the State's standards.
Hawaii's water quality problems are related to both
man-induced activities and natural factors; the extent
and magnitude of these sources of pollution are de-
scribed in this report. Improvement in sewage treat-
ment and abatement of raw sewage discharge have
shown effects on water quality. The rapid improvement
in water quality since removal of point sources is in-
cluded in the discussion of certain priority waters.
The fifteen waterbodies identified as priority waters
in Hawaii are:
Kahana Bay Nawiliwili Bay
Kaneohe Bay Hanapepe Bay
Pearl Harbor Waimea Bay
Mamala Bay Hilo Bay
(Honolulu Harbor, Kewalo
Basin, Keehi Lagoon, and
Ala Wai Canal) South Molokai
Waialua-Kaiaka Bay
The concept of water quality segments for mainland
river basins is not applicable to Hawaii or the Pacific Is-
lands. Because of Hawaii's unique insular environment,
environmental problems and concerns are different
than those experienced on the mainland.
The Hawaii water quality standards are based on a
variety of factors unique to actual ecosystems in the
State. The standards recognize the variety of water
types and the natural variability within each system.
The standards focus upon water quality as it affects
ecosystem structure and dynamics.
Although the existing water quality in priority waters
supports beneficial uses in general, attainment of the
highest level of desired use is necessarily compro-
mised by conflicting designated or existing uses.
The improvement of sewage treatment and abate-
ment or removal of municipal waste sources have
markedly enhanced Hawaii's water quality (including
recovery of coral reef systems) and have significantly
reduced public health hazards from swimming
beaches.
Nonpoint sources of pollution associated with natural
and man-related activities are the major contributors to
water quality deterioration.
Kahului Bay
31
-------
Idaho
Illinois
For complete copies of the Idaho 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Idaho Department of Health and Welfare
Statehouse
Boise, ID 83720
Summary
Water quality conditions in Idaho vary geographically.
The central and northern regions of the State are char-
acterized by particularly high quality waters. Many
areas within these regions are protected through
wilderness, recreation area, or wild and scenic river de-
signations. Geographic areas which are experiencing
degradation are the southeast, the southwest, and the
Palouse country of the Panhandle region.
Nonpoint source activities—specifically dryland and
irrigated agriculture—account for the majority of pollu-
tion problems in the State. The extent of water quality
impacts due to such activities can be illustrated by
changes observed in the Snake River as it flows across
the State. Water quality is good as the Snake flows into
Idaho from Wyoming. As it flows west, quality pro-
gressively declines, reaching its poorest levels near the
Idaho-Oregon border. The only measured "recovery" in
water quality along the length of the Snake occurs be-
low major impoundments due to settling of sediments
and associated pollutants, and below the aquifer dis-
charge of Thousand Springs at Hagerman. Although
Snake River water quality is also affected by a com-
bination of point and nonpoint sources on tributary
streams, the vast amount of land in agricultural pro-
duction adjacent to the main stem of the Snake is also
a substantial source of water quality degradation.
The extent of point and nonpoint source pollution
problems varies within each major drainage of the
State. The nature and magnitude of water quality prob-
lems by basin are described in the complete report.
The primary tool used in evaluating Idaho's water qual-
ity conditions is the water quality index developed by
EPA Region 10. The basin discussions address water
quality status, trends, the magnitude of point source
versus nonpoint source impacts, and the extent of
those impacts on the beneficial uses of the waters.
For complete copies of the Illinois 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Division of Water Pollution Control
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield, IL 62706
Summary
Analysis of ambient and lake network data for 1979
through 1981 does not indicate any significant overall
change in Illinois' water quality. Approximately 20 per-
cent of the water monitoring stations continue to ex-
hibit severe pollution problems as determined by a
water quality index. There is also no overall change in
lake quality.
Of Illinois' 14 major river basins, the Big Muddy
Basin exhibits the best overall stream quality based on
the percent of stations with minimum or no water qual-
ity problems as determined by use of a water quality
index. The Des Plaines Basin has the most severe
water quality problems. Glacial lakes show the best
overall trophic conditions, whereas artificial lakes
(impoundments) in both the north and south display
better trophic conditions than artificial lakes in south
central Illinois.
Whereas localized water quality improvements have
been documented in Illinois, the apparent lack of recent
overall water quality improvement is not surprising.
Agricultural impacts upon water quality are a signifi-
cant factor, and programs to manage agricultural and
urban runoff, as well as other types of nonpoint source
pollution, are just beginning. Moreover, a significant
number of municipal wastewater treatment projects for
which design or construction has recently started re-
main to be completed. For example, 486 construction
grants were awarded in Illinois from 1974 through May
1981, and approximately 50 percent or 224 projects are
still under construction, in the bidding stage leading to
award of construction, or completing design work.
Given funding commensurate with needs, an overall
improvement due to current pollution control efforts
should be observed Statewide in a few more years.
Violation rates for certain selected parameters during
1978-1981 are summarized below.
ph- Only the Ohio Basin displayed significant pH viola-
tion rates; these ranged from 16 to 33%. The Kaskaskia
Basin had 7% pH violation rates in 1978; all other
basins had less than 4% violations.
Ammonia- Most basins were consistently below the
20% violation rate, except the Des Plaines Basin. There
was an apparent downward tendency in the number of
ammonia violations in the Des Plaines Basin from
1978-1981.
Dissolved Oxygen- Many basins had violation rates be-
low 10%, and nearly all were below 20%. The highest
percentage violations were found in the Big Muddy
and Mississippi South Basin, with 24% and 23% re-
spectively.
32
-------
Fecal Coliform- Fecal coliform violations ranged be-
tween 40 and 80%. The Des Plaines and Mississippi
South Basins had the highest rates, but were showing
general downward trends. The Ohio and Big Muddy
Basins had the lowest violation rates.
Iron- Apparent slight downward trends were seen in
many basins. The violation rate was generally between
40 and 80%, which was not surprising because Illinois
waters are naturally high in iron. The Ohio and Mis-
sissippi South Basins had the highest percent of viola-
tions.
The Ohio Basin also had some violations of cad-
mium, fluoride, and zinc which were not present in the
rest of the basins. Mining activities in the southern part
of the State may contribute to higher violation rates for
several parameters, including pH, sulfate, and man-
ganese.
The greatest percentage of violations were of fecal
coliform and iron standards; some apparent downward
trends were seen in some basins.
All available fish tissue data from 1980 and 1981
have been evaluated for excursions above U.S. Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) action levels for con-
taminants in fish. The only excursions other than diel-
drin and chlordane were two DDT excursions in Lake
Michigan trout. Statewide excursions for dieldrin and
chlordane were 2 percent and 18 percent of samples,
respectively. A notable number of chlordane ex-
cursions (over 30 percent) appear in lake fish samples
from the Sangamon Basin and stream fish samples
from the Wabash Basin.
Lake Michigan is monitored under the terms of a
cooperative agreement between the Illinois Environ-
mental Protection Agency and the city of Chicago. The
bacteriological and chemical data collected during 1980
and 1981, when compared to data of the previous 10
years, illustrate an overall improvement in water quali-
ty for the southwestern portion of the lake.
Indiana
For complete copies of the Indiana 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Planning Section
Division of Water Pollution Control
Indiana State Board of Health
1330 West Michigan Street
Indianapolis, IN 46206
Summary
This report assesses water quality by drainage basin.
Data from each Fixed Water Quality Monitoring Station
along the main stem of primary streams were com-
piled to demonstrate the aggregate improvement or
degradation of each stream.
The following is a general summary of water quality
by basin.
Lake Michigan Basin
Generally, the water quality of Lake Michigan is in
compliance with applicable water quality standards.
Most inland rivers and streams support designated
uses, but in some instances, such as within the Grand
Calumet River, the influx of toxic waste material signifi-
cantly reduces the stream's capacity to attain accept-
able water quality.
Maumee River Basin
Each major river within the Maumee Basin complies
with State water quality standards for fish and aquatic
life with respect to dissolved oxygen. Some other
parameters may have concentrations detrimental to
aquatic life. High concentrations of copper, cyanide,
and mercury have in the past been limiting factors
within this area. Recent improvement has been demon-
strated. In at least two streams, partial-body contact
recreation criteria are met. Standards for whole-body
contact recreation are not always met in the St. Joseph
River.
Wabash River Basin
The water quality of the Wabash River can generally be
described as meeting the State's water quality stan-
dards. Dissolved oxygen concentrations are high
enough to maintain a well-balanced fish community in
most areas of the waterway. Urban discharges within
the upper Basin areas sometimes create slight down-
stream dissolved oxygen sags. The impact of this
pollution is not severe enough to inhibit stream recov-
ery. The bacterial quality improves downstream.
Tributary streams generally comply with water quali-
ty standards. The most severely impacted stream with-
in the Wabash River Basin is Wildcat Creek. As a result
of discharges from the City of Kokomo, Wildcat Creek
shows increases in concentrations of some toxic
parameters. Completion of the City's upgraded
wastewater collection system should result in extensive
water quality improvement in the stream.
Kankakee River Basin
The water quality of the Kankakee River is good. The
river is an excellent habitat for wildlife, fish, and other
aquatic life and is a superior recreational resource. In
the past, the only water quality limiting factor within
this stream has been an unidentified source of mercury
near its headwaters. The extent of this concentration
was not severe enough to cause toxic problems. Data
for 1979 and 1980 do not indicate that a mercury prob-
lem still exists.
Whitewater River Basin
Both branches of the Whitewater River support a di-
versity of fish and other aquatic life. Dissolved oxygen
concentrations fell below minimum levels only once in
the West Fork of the Whitewater River from 1974 to
1980. No chemical constituent concentrations were re-
corded that were toxic to fish and aquatic life. The
bacterial quality is better in the East Fork than in the
West Fork. The West Fork of the Whitewater River does
not regularly comply with the bacteriological standards
for recreational waters.
33
-------
East Fork White River Basin
Data since 1974 indicate that the water quality of the
East Fork White River continues to improve. Sufficient
dissolved oxygen is present to support a diverse aqua-
tic community. Several factors create localized pollu-
tion problems, but these local problems are being
resolved.
West Fork White River Basin
The general water quality of the West Fork White River
is good except for certain reaches downstream of the
metropolitan areas of Muncie, Anderson, and In-
dianapolis. Discharges at Indianapolis affect water
quality to some extent as far downstream as Spencer.
A notable decrease in dissolved oxygen concentrations
and a corresponding increase of coliform bacteria
occur downstream from each of these municipalities.
Concentrations of phenols and mercury still indicate
water quality problems in some areas of the West Fork
of White River.
St. Joseph River Basin
The St. Joseph River has been designated for two dif-
ferent instream uses: aquatic life and recreation. Dis-
solved oxygen concentrations are adequate to maintain
fish and aquatic life. The once-high cyanide levels have
been reduced during this survey period. The St. Joseph
River does have problems maintaining desirable bacte-
rial levels for full recreational benefits from April
through October, inclusive. During the remaining
months, when standards for partial-body contact rec-
reation apply, bacterial concentrations demonstrate
better instream compliance.
The major tributary stream, the Elkhart River, also
maintains sufficient water quality for fish and aquatic
life. As in the St. Joseph River, coliform bacteria con-
centrations periodically rise above State limitations.
Iowa
For complete copies of the Iowa 305(b) Report*, con-
tact:
Iowa Department of Environmental Quality
Henry A. Wallace Building
Des Moines, IA 50319
Summary
The status of water quality in 1979 and 1980 was de-
termined by evaluating water quality impacts and
violations of Iowa's water quality standards. When
possible, 1979 and 1980 data were added to existing
long term water quality information to determine
*Available from the Iowa Department, of Environmental Quali-
ty for $20.50 or from the National Technical Information Ser-
vice (PB83I-00214) for $19.00
trends. Sources of pollution and pollution abatement
activities were considered in attempting to correlate
water quality with factors influencing it. Fish kills,
spills, and accidental discharges that threatened water
quality were also documented.
Statewide, the water quality of 74 streams, 107 lakes,
and four major reservoirs was evaluated. Thirty-seven
of the rivers were found to have water quality prob-
lems at one or more locations. Forty-nine problem
areas were identified. The probable cause of the prob-
lem was identified at 25 locations. Point source dis-
charges are thought to be responsible for water quality
problems at 22 locations. Fifteen of these point sources
have received construction grants funds to improve
their wastewater treatment facilities. Three other point
sources are undergoing remedial action of some kind.
Forty-two streams and four reservoirs were identified
that had no water quality problems and/or showed im-
provements at one or more locations. Of the 10,651
observations made at stream and reservoir locations,
only 2.4%, or 255 values, violated applicable Iowa
Water Quality Standards to protect the stream's bene-
ficial use.
Trend analysis was performed at 41 locations. At 16
locations, concentrations of both BOD and ammonia
remained stable for five or more years. Increasing
trends in ammonia concentrations were observed at
three locations and decreasing trends were found at
eight locations. Increasing trends in BOD con-
centrations were found at two locations and decreasing
levels of BOD were observed at 15 locations. On 13 of
14 streams where biological data were collected, the
results showed healthy diversities of aquatic life. Eval-
uations of discharge monitoring data showed that 68
wastewater treatment facilities were consistently in
violation of their permit limitations and thus posed a
substantial threat to water quality. Twenty-four fish
kills were investigated and 38 spills or accidents
threatened surface waters during the reporting period.
Lake monitoring showed that all studied lakes were
eutrophic. Forty-two percent exhibited thermal
stratification resulting in low dissolved oxygen levels at
lake bottom. Twenty percent of the lakes had one or
more surface locations that exceeded the pH limits
identified in the water quality standards.
Agricultural cropland is a major source of pollutants
to Iowa's surface waters. Sediments, pesticides, and
nutrients all enter surface water as diffuse sources
during runoff periods. The contribution of sediments
causes two types of problems: pollution caused by the
particulate matter itself, and pollution resulting from
contaminants adsorbed onto the sediment particles.
Soil-attached pollutants include phosphorus, heavy
metals, and many pesticides. Other pollutants are
transported dissolved in the runoff. Nitrogen and some
pesticides are delivered to the surface water in the
soluble state.
The quality of ground water in Iowa's surface de-
posits is generally acceptable. While a few problems
are highly localized, other problems such as nitrate
levels and loss of artesian pressure have been identi-
fied over large geographic areas of the State.
34
-------
Kansas
For complete copies of the Kansas 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Kansas Department of Health and Environment
Division of Environment
Forbes Field
Topeka, KS 66620
Summary
Major rivers in Kansas display the following character-
istics: turbidity, moderate mineralization, good
buffering, good oxygen characteristics, low organic
loading, high nutrient levels, and high bacterial levels.
Water quality trends since 1967 for nine major Kansas
rivers indicate that 68 key parametric averages have
shown water quality improvement or no significant
change, and 22 key parametric averages have shown
water quality deterioration. Water quality in Kansas
streams in the last two decades has been primarily in-
fluenced by nonpoint sources, point source con-
tributions having had their greatest impact during the
period of the 1930s through the 1950s. At present, in-
stream quality is determined almost entirely by flow
regime. During low flow periods, the most significant
quality influence is mineral inflow from natural
sources. During high flow periods, most Kansas surface
waters display their poorest quality, with significant
increases in BOD, nutrients, fecal coliform bacteria,
and turbidity from nonpoint source contributions.
Monitoring programs for toxic substances in Kansas
have accelerated in recent years due to increased con-
cern over these substances in our waters. Except for
iron and manganese which are common in major
streams, no significant concentrations of heavy metals
have been found in major Kansas streams or lakes.
Iron, zinc, copper, and lead are found to varying de-
grees in small tributary southeastern Kansas streams
which drain the coal and ore mining areas. No signifi-
cant concentrations occur in mainstem streams. No
significant concentrations of pesticides have been
found in Kansas streams at standard detection levels
during normal surveillance, nor during special studies
of irrigation return flow.
Biological quality in Kansas is monitored through
two programs: the stream biological network with 47
sampling stations, and the lake network at 65 major
lakes. Accounts of the organisms collected at biological
sampling network stations and river basin survey sta-
tions over the five years of program operation indicate
that virtually all streams and rivers in Kansas support
adequate populations of stream-dwelling organisms.
Limiting factors in streams are usually unsuitable sub-
strate or velocity patterns.
Water quality problems associated with advanced eu-
trophication are not common in Kansas lakes. Ex-
cessive growths of aquatic macrophytes are restricted
to a few small lakes; algae blooms and oxygen deple-
tion, when they occur, are ephemeral conditions lasting
only several days in most cases. The major water qual-
ity characteristic of Kansas lakes appears to be general-
ly high levels of inorganic turbidity due to periodic
high suspended silt loads.
Achievement of 1983 Water Quality Goals
It is currently felt that the 1983 national water quality
goals of bio-support and recreation in and on the water
cannot be fully achieved in all Kansas waters. However,
impounded waters, lakes, and reservoirs which have
sufficiently long flow-through time to allow sedimenta-
tion of suspended solids and natural biological activity
are capable of full achievement of the goals. All Class
A waters in the State are currently meeting full bio-
support and body contact recreation requirements.
By 1983, all streams and rivers in the State should be
marginally suitable, from a quality standpoint, for body
contact requirements. Bacterial levels should be low
during low streamflow periods, but it is anticipated that
runoff will cause body contact standards to be ex-
ceeded 30 to 60 percent of the time. Beyond con-
siderations of water quality, many Kansas streams
generally are not suitable for body contact recreation
because of wide, shallow channel geometry and
hazardous flow patterns. Because of the above factors,
the attainable 1983 water quality goals for streams are
currently interpreted as bio-support and secondary
contact recreation. Sixty and 56 segments, respectively,
are currently meeting these goals, and all 62 segments
are expected to meet the goals by 1983.
Kentucky
For complete copies of the Kentucky 305(b) Report,
contact:
Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection
Division of Water
18 Reilly Road
Fort Boone Plaza
Frankfort, KY 40601
Summary
The primary activities affecting water quality in Ken-
tucky are surface coal mining, oil and gas operations,
agriculture, and domestic waste discharges.
The parameters that violate standards most frequent-
ly are fecal coliform bacteria, iron, manganese, and
lead. Other parameters that show occasional violations
are mercury, chromium, and cadmium. These viola-
tions occur randomly throughout the State with no dis-
cernible trends. Chronic pH violations are associated
with streams affected by acid mine drainage, most no-
tably in the Tradewater River and Green River basins.
The Green River basin has the greatest number of
miles of streams affected by acid mine drainage (271
miles), while the Tradewater River basin has the
greatest percentage affected (79%). Data on organic
chemicals in the Commonwealth's waters are very lim-
ited at this time.
Fish kills are reported by the Kentucky Department of
Fish and Wildlife Resources. During the 1980-81
reporting period, 50 fish kills affecting a total of 127
stream miles were investigated.
35
-------
Biological integrity was monitored at seven stations
in four river basins. Conditions are reported as good at
two stations, fair at three stations, and poor at two sta-
tions. The ratings are based on periphyton, macroin-
vertebrate, and fish community structure; stream phys-
ical habitat conditions; and water quality. Additional
information is reported on fish tissue levels of toxic
materials. Four stations had levels of chlordane in fish
tissue which exceeded the FDA action level for this
pesticide.
Under Section 314 of the Clean Water Act, a lake
classification study has been conducted to assess the
general condition of lakes in the State. Forty-five lakes
have been classified to date. Of the 353,353 total sur-
face acres presently classified, 74,204 acres are eu-
trophic, 233,213 acres are mesotrophic, and 45,936 are
oligotrophic. There is documentation of impaired uses
in ten lakes. Symptoms of eutrophication include ex-
cessive algal blooms, extreme oxygen depletion, ex-
cessive aquatic weed growth, turbid water, elevated
iron and manganese levels, and taste and odor prob-
lems.
The severity of generalized impacts on wetlands and
the extent of wetland loss is unknown. The major
threat to Kentucky's wetlands appears to be their de-
struction due to competing land use activities and poor
land management practices.
While ground water does not provide a large portion
of the total water withdrawn in the State, it is an ex-
tremely important local and regional resource because
it is most often used in areas where surface supplies
are not physically or economically available. Approx-
imately one-third of Kentucky's rural population still re-
lies on private wells for domestic or household supply.
A number of earlier studies have pointed out existing
ground water quality problems in the Commonwealth.
The failure of on-site wastewater disposal systems (es-
pecially septic tanks and tile fields) probably represents
the major source of ground water quality degradation.
Other known causes of ground water contamination in-
clude waste landfills, surface disposal lagoons, oil and
gas drilling and reinjection, diminished aquifer
recharge, and nonpoint source pollution.
In 1981, the Division of Water initiated a compre-
hensive Statewide stream use classification and reg-
ulatory designation program. Where current criteria are
found to be inappropriate, site-specific criteria will be
recommended for approval by the State, EPA, and the
public through the State's public hearing process. This
effort will contribute to the mandatory triennial review
and revision of the State's water quality standards, and
will provide a basis for future permitting, compliance
assurance, and enforcement decisions. The ultimate
product will be the promulgation of surface water use
designations and associated criteria for the entire
State.
Louisiana
For complete copies of the Louisiana 305(b) Report,
contact:
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources
Division of Water Pollution Control
P.O. Box 44066
Baton Rouge, LA 70804
Summary
This sixth 305(b) report on water quality will serve as a
continuing review process to monitor, evaluate, and
improve where possible the current water quality con-
ditions of Louisiana's waters.
Information used in this report also represents in-
tensive survey efforts and water quality reports pre-
pared by or for the staff. A water quality index is util-
ized which provides a means of measuring and com-
paring water quality status throughout the State with
respect to fishable/swimmable federal water quality
goals.
General
Conditions
Ninety-two of Louisiana's 113 stream segments are
effluent limited and the remaining 21 segments are
water quality limited. Eighteen segments within the
State are in the severely polluted category and do not
meet federal water quality goals.
Louisiana's water supplies—both ground water and
surface water—are among the most bountiful in the
Nation, but localized problems exist with salt water in-
strusion, residual salt accumulation, petrochemical con-
tamination, and other industrial and human wastes
contamination. Many problems that arise outside the
boundaries of the State are compounded by the large
volumes of water that flow to the Gulf of Mexico.
Water tables tend to be shallow and aquifers are
numerous. The Louisiana Department of Public Works
maintains information on producing water wells.
Oxbow lakes, small freshwater lakes, coastal lakes,
and impoundments are common features within the
State of Louisiana. Generally these waters are mod-
erately hard and highly productive. Cultural eutrophica-
tion of these waters is a serious problem affecting the
biota; the major nutrient additions come from runoff
and municipal wastes.
One area of concern in Louisiana is toxic pollution
caused by agricultural activities. Pesticide pollution is
one of the more serious problems in agricultural areas
of the State. Persistent substances such as toxaphene,
DDT, dieldrin, chlordane, endrin, and lindane continue
to be both health and pollution problems near many
agricultural and urban centers.
36
-------
Maine
For complete copies of the Maine 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Department of Environmental Protection
Bureau of Water Quality Control
Division of Environmental Evaluation and Lake Studies
State House
Augusta, ME 04330
Summary
Over the past ten years, with assistance from federal
and local governments and with the active concern of
its citizenry, the State of Maine has succeeded in
reversing a long period of decline in the quality of its
waters.
Maine's waters are now much cleaner than they
were just a few years ago. Some of the State's most
polluted lakes have shown marked improvement.
Atlantic salmon and other fish have returned to several
Maine rivers. People are beginning to use many pre-
viously polluted streams and rivers for swimming, fish-
ing, and canoeing.
Despite these improvements, a great deal more work
remains to be done not only to make further progress,
but also to maintain the gains made thus far. As the
more severe municipal and industrial pollution sources
have been abated, other previously ignored types of
pollution have become more prominent. Nonpoint
sources continue to degrade the quality of many of
Maine's waters. Acid rain and hazardous wastes, prac-
tically unknown ten years ago, menace Maine's surface
and ground waters. These "newer" forms of pollution
are more insidious in their effect and are more difficult
to treat than the industrial and municipal wastewaters
by which they had previously been overshadowed.
Existing
Conditions
The water quality of Maine's rivers and streams has
continued to improve over the past two years,
although not at the dramatic rate that prevailed over
the preceding fifteen years. The reason for the appar-
ent slower rate of improvement is two fold. First, the
major municipal and industrial discharges are receiving
the equivalent of secondary treatment and thus most
of the major pollution problems have been abated.
Second, the recent reductions in the availability of
federal construction grant program funds have slowed
the rate at which the remaining municipal treatment
needs can be met.
The water quality problem areas that remain are, for
the most part, segments that are affected by combined
sewer overflows from the State's older urban areas
and by agricultural runoff and other nonpoint source
pollution. There also exist several water quality limited
segments that are receiving discharge loadings which,
even after receiving treatment equivalent to the
technology-based standards specified in the Clean
Water Act, exceed the segments' capacity to assimilate
the waste. Wasteload allocation studies are being per-
formed for these rivers on a priority basis.
In addition, the following issues are also of current
concern in Maine: acid rain in lakes and streams; hy-
dropower development; the effects of hazardous wastes
on ground water; lake eutrophication; and protection
of high quality waters.
The percentage of the State's river and stream miles
that are currently meeting the 1983 goal of swimmable-
fishable water varies depending upon the estimate of
river and stream miles that is used. Previous Maine
305(b) Water Quality Status Reports have used a figure
of 3,080 miles of major rivers and streams; recent in-
formation from EPA's River Reach File indicates that
there are approximately 8,600 miles of major rivers and
streams in the State; and the Maine Department of
Inland Fisheries and Wildlife estimates that there are
approximately 32,000 miles of permanent rivers and
streams in the State. These three estimates of river and
stream miles yield estimates of 75, 90, and 97, respec-
tively, for the approximate percentage of waters
meeting the 1983 goal.
There are seven water quality limited segments in
five of Maine's eight major river basin planning areas.
These water quality segments include the main stem of
the Sebasticook River from the Irving Tanning Com-
pany outfall to the confluence with the Kennebec River,
and the East Branch of the Sebasticook River from
Dexter Village to the confluence with the Sebasticook
main stem, both in the Kennebec Basin; the Pre-
sumpscot River from Westbrook to the confluence with
the Atlantic Ocean in the Presumpscot-Cumberland
Basin; the St. Croix River from the Georgia Pacific
Company outfall to head of tide in Calais in the St.
Croix Basin; the Aroostook River from the confluence
of Presque Isle Stream to the Canadian border, in the
St. John Basin; and the Mousam River from the San-
ford Sewage District to head of tide and Goosefare
Brook from the Maremont Company outfall in Saco to
head of tide, both in the Southern Maine Basin.
Some river and stream segments in Maine do not
meet the 1983 goal and are not expected to do so, in
large part because of combined sewer overflows and
nonpoint sources. These failures to meet the goal are
temporary in nature, usually associated with storm
events resulting in levels of fecal coliform bacteria that
exceed the standard for swimming. Because of the ex-
traordinarily high cost of correcting these problems,
the temporary nature of the impact they have, and
their low priority relative to other water quality prob-
lems in the State, these problems will probably not be
addressed in the near future.
37
-------
Maryland
Summary Description of Sub-Basins
For complete copies of the Maryland 305(b) Report,
contact:
Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
Office of Environmental Programs
201 West Preston Street
Baltimore, MD 21201
Summary
Overall, Maryland's waters are judged to be generally
of good quality. Water quality has generally remained
stable, even though many problems still exist.
Maryland identifies its foremost problem to be the in-
creasing accumulation of nutrients in tidal waters and
impoundments. Additional problems include pockets of
dissolved oxygen depletion still remaining in site-
specific, historically documented problem areas (most
now targeted for correction), and extremely difficult-to-
solve, long term abandoned acid mine drainage con-
ditions in the far western portion of the State. Of lesser
severity, but still deserving continuing attention, are
elevated bacteriological densities that are the result of
local conditions found throughout the entire State. The
continuing severe diminuation of highly prized an-
adromous fish species and the almost total loss of sub-
merged aquatic vegetation are other problems which
have yet to be solved.
However, some accomplishments have been made.
Almost all the point source discharges have achieved,
or will soon achieve, levels of treatment determined to
assure acceptable water quality. Many of these facili-
ties, like Back River, Aberdeen, Sod Run, Blue Plains,
and the Northeast Plant, have incorporated into their
treatment processes advanced levels of treatment.
Many facilities will stabilize the oxygen demanding
material prior to discharge and a number will be
removing phosphorus, a key stimulator of algal
growth. Some evidence of these improvements can
already be seen. Already the tidal Potomac—described
as a cesspool of filth in the 1950s—is showing dramatic
improvement. Other nutrient enriched areas like the
Upper Chesapeake Bay and the Patuxent River have
strategies in place to address this problem and are ex-
pected to respond in similar fashion.
A great deal has been done in Maryland to assess
and control the impacts of point source discharges.
The more difficult and subtle area of nonpoint source
assessment and control must now be confronted in the
1980s. Nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus) enrichment
and suspended sediment generation are two of the
more important areas that will have to be addressed.
The biological integrity of Maryland's waters was
evaluated. The evaluation of the benthos populations
(population and diversity of bottom dwelling organ-
isms) concluded that Maryland's waters are main-
taining generally good biological quality.
As indicated in the table below, less than 10 percent
of the waters of the State are violating water quality
standards. Of this 10 percent, approximately 3 percent
is due to long term mine drainage and approximately 2
percent is related to shellfish water closures where no
harvestable bottoms exist.
Description
Chesapeake Bay Area
Ocean/Coastal Basin
Pocomoke River Basin
Nanticoke/Wicomico
Choptank River Basin
Chester River Basin
Elk River Basin
Lower Susquehanna
Bush River Basin
Gunpowder River Basin
Patapsco River Basin
West Chesapeake Basin
Patuxent River Basin
Lower Potomac Basin
Washington Metro Area
Middle Potomac Basin
Upper Potomac Basin
North Branch Potomac
Youghiogheny Basin
TOTALS
Total Main Miles Now Generally Meeting
Stem Miles State WQ Standards
118
81
162
156
123
162
137
83
69
102
132
97
187
249
165
136
271
160
94
2,684
118
75
115
138
111
124
136
82
69
102
112
75
175
242
165
135.5
271
97
82.5
2,425
Although there are numerous shellfish closures
throughout the tidal areas of the State, the general
trend since 1972 has been toward a sharp reduction of
closed harvesting waters. In recent years, this trend
has been leveling off; between 5 and 6 percent of
shellfish waters are generally closed.
The reduction of closed harvesting areas since 1972
is generally attributed to a management strategy which
identifies and eliminates potential pollution sources
during the design and construction phases of abate-
ment, to improvements in and expansion of existing
waste water treatment facilities under the Clean Water
Act, and to improvement in Maryland's Shellfish
Sanitation Program.
Massachusetts
For complete copies of the Massachusetts 305(b) Re-
port, contact:
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Quality Engineering
Division of Water Pollution Control
Westborough, MA
Summary
The quality of the surface water of the Commonwealth
of Massachusetts continues to improve significantly as
48 percent of the total river miles assessed in this 1982
report met their designated water quality classification.
For comparison, the 1977 Section 305(b) Report indicated
38
-------
that 32 percent of the river miles assessed met
their designated classification and only 26 percent ex-
hibited Class B (fishable/swimmable) water quality.
These figures demonstrate the substantial im-
provements which have occurred within the past five
years and amplify the benefits gained from the exten-
sive water pollution control programs of the Com-
monwealth.
The evaluation of the lakes and ponds of the Com-
monwealth has accelerated within the past few years.
To date, 350 lakes and ponds have been sampled and
subsequently classified according to their trophic state.
A diagnostic/feasibility program has been implemented
which has culminated in several restoration projects.
Over the past decade, approximately one billion dol-
lars have been expended through the construction
grants process for the design and construction of
wastewater collection and treatment systems. The
funding for these projects has been provided by the
United States Environmental Protection Agency, the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and individual cities
and towns. This program is responsible for major
water quality improvements in many waters of the
Commonwealth including the Merrimack, Chicopee,
Westfield, Connecticut, Millers, and Charles Rivers. This
improvement is expected to continue in the upcoming
decade as the sources of water pollution are in-
creasingly brought under control.
The future water quality programs of the Department
of Environmental Quality Engineering will focus upon
improving water quality conditions in critical areas and
will include: construction of water pollution abatement
projects within the limitation of available funding; im-
plementation of the most practical control on com-
bined sewer overflows; evaluation of nutrient removal
requirements necessary to retard eutrophication; and
assessment of the effects of toxic substances upon
ambient water quality and indigenous biota.
As the water pollution abatement program continues
to improve the surface waters of Massachusetts, more
attention will be given to the evaluation of both the
quantity and quality of ground water throughout the
Commonwealth. Recent discoveries of contaminated
public water supply wells in a number of muncipalities
in Massachusetts has clearly shown that aquifers are
not immune from pollution problems such as con-
tamination by industrial wastes and salt water intru-
sion. A high priority of the Department in the future is
to protect the quality of ground water.
Michigan 1981
For complete copies of the 1981 Michigan 305(b) Re-
port, contact:
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Bureau of Environmental Protection
Environmental Services Division
Stevens T. Mason Bldg.
Lansing, Ml 48926
Summary
Overall, water quality in Michigan is good. However,
there are water quality problems which need attention.
The control of toxic and hazardous materials is clear-
ly the most pressing issue in environmental protection
today. Health advisories concerning the consumption
offish from certain waters in Michigan remain in
effect. During 1980, Michigan implemented the
Hazardous Waste Management Act, for which adminis-
trative rules were adopted in April of 1981. This law
represents a significant step towards a "cradle-to-
grave" toxic and hazardous waste management pro-
gram.
Fish consumption warnings remain in effect for all
the Great Lakes waters within Michigan's political
boundaries. Lake St. Clair, the St. Clair River, and the
Detroit River. Fish consumption bans remain in effect
on portions or all of seven streams in the State: the
South Branch of the Shiawassee River; Portage Creek;
the Kalamazoo River; the Chippewa River; the Pine
River; the Tittabawassee River; and the Saginaw River.
In December of 1979, the DNR identified sites where
there is known, suspected, or potential ground water
contamination. With help from State agencies and
interested citizen groups, the DNR is developing ways
to approach the investigation and cleanup of these
ground waters. In 1980, ground water rules were
adopted to allow more consistent and complete regula-
tion of Michigan's ground water quality. In 1980, feder-
al "Superfund" legislation was also enacted to provide
money for identifying, investigating, and cleaning up
contaminated sites.
Eutrophication of the Great Lakes has been a water
quality problem for over two decades. Significant pro-
gram efforts have resulted in a decrease in the amount
of nutrients discharged to surface waters. As a result,
significant water quality improvements have been
documented in both Saginaw Bay and Lake Erie.
Significant destruction of wetlands has occurred in
Michigan. In December of 1979, Michigan signed into
law the Wetlands Protection Act. This Act provides for
the preservation, management, protection, and use of
wetlands; requires permits to alter some wetlands; and
prescribes remedies and penalties.
Precipitation in the Great Lakes Basin has become
more acidic in the past 30 years, largely as a result of
fossil fuel combustion. To date, no adverse effects of
acid precipitation have been found in Michigan's sur-
face waters.
39
-------
Minnesota
For complete copies of the Minnesota 305(b) Report,
contact:
Division of Water Quality
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
1935 West Country Rd. B-2
Roseville, MN 55113
Summary
During water years 1980-81, the overall quality of water
in Minnesota was good and had improved over past
years. The quality ranged from excellent in the Lake
Superior Basin to somewhat impaired in the Minnesota
River Basin, where high nutrient, suspended solids,
and fecal coliform levels interfered with achievement of
the fishable-swimmable goal of the Clean Water Act.
Field evaluations were performed on 400 waterways,
and 208 of these waterways were determined to be of
limited resource value, i.e., can never be fishable-
swimmable. No acute or consistently chronic levels of
toxic conditions were recorded at any of the 71 primary
monitoring stations throughout the State. All of these
selected, monitored waters were considered fishable in
1980-81 compared with 89% of the stations in 1975,
88% in 76-77, and 91% in 1978-79. Approximately half
of the stations, 55%, violated the fecal coliform stan-
dard 10% or more of the time. This too was an im-
provement from preceding years where 77% in 1977
and 70% in 78-79 were in violation. Rivers with stations
where the probability of fecal coliform standard viola-
tions are so likely that swimming is not advisable in-
clude: Blue Earth River, Cedar River, Twin Cities Metro-
politan Mississippi River, St. Louis Bay, Whitewater
River, Root River, Red Lake River, Shellrock River, and
Straight River.
Intensive investigations of water quality were con-
ducted at 35 sites to determine appropriate effluent
limits for dischargers. Violations of water quality stan-
dards for ammonia, dissolved oxygen, pH and/or fecal
coliforms were documented at 24 of these locations.
Fifteen fish kills were reported in the State during
these two years with industrial discharges the cause in
27% of the cases, pesticides in 13%, and natural factors
in 40%. No cause was determined in 20% of the cases.
Sampling for contamination by toxics was conducted
in both fish tissues and sediments. Zumbro Lake and
St. Louis Bay continue to occasionally show levels of
mercury near the Food and Drug Administration action
level. PCBs continue to be measured in fish collected
from the Minnesota River, Cedar River, Blue Earth Riv-
er, St. Louis River, Mississippi River, and Zumbro Lake.
Most recent data, consistent with national trends, indi-
cate an average drop in PCBs for all stations on the
Mississippi River of 49%. PCB contamination of the
sediment is a problem in the North Channel of St.
Louis Bay, Austin Mill Pond of Cedar River, and Pipe-
stone Creek below Pipestone. Polynuclear aromatic hy-
drocarbons (PAHs) have now been detected in the sedi-
ments of two river systems, the St. Louis River and
Pipestone Creek. Further testing to determine the ex-
tent of PAH contamination is occurring on the St. Louis
River.
Case studies of pollution control efforts were made
of the Minnesota River, St. Louis Bay, and Mississippi
River. The physical land characteristics of the Minneso-
ta River watershed, combined with agricultural land
use practices, presently dictate the quality of the river
water. Since nonpoint source inputs of nutrients and
suspended solids are so substantial, no immediate im-
provement is projected in the river water quality.
Elimination of several municipal and industrial point
source discharges and construction of a new, sophisti-
cated regional municipal treatment plant at Duluth
have dramatically improved water quality in the St.
Louis Bay. The effectiveness of point source control
here has been demonstrated with improving trends in
total phosphorus, total ammonia, BOD, and dissolved
oxygen.
The costs and benefits of achieving the fishable-
swimmable goal in the Twin Cities Metropolitan area of
the Mississippi River were evaluated. Problems which
continue to plague the river include water quality stan-
dard violations for dissolved oxygen, ammonia, and re-
sidual chlorine; contamination with industrial wastes
such as copper, cadmium, and mercury; and combined
sewer overflows. Combined sewer overflows are the
primary obstacle to achievement of the swimmable
goal in this area.
After sampling and data evaluation, 500 of Minneso-
ta's lakes were categorized: 70% exhibited characteris-
tics of eutrophication, 26% were of transitional quality,
and 4% were of low fertility. Although no lakes in Min-
nesota have been found to be either acidic or acidified,
some 2,500 to 3,700 lakes are potentially sensitive to
acid rain.
Since 1978, the routine ground water monitoring pro-
gram has sampled 318 wells/springs in order to
characterize 12 principal aquifers in the State.
Identification of sites of known ground water pollution
have been made through the efforts of two Agency
teams. The Hazardous Waste Strike Force logged 54
sites Statewide where improper disposal of hazardous
waste has resulted in ground water contamination. The
Emergency Response Unit is monitoring 32 sites con-
taminated by spills and leaks.
Mississippi
For complete copies of the Mississippi 305(b) Report,
contact:
Mississippi Department of Natural Resources
Bureau of Pollution Control
P.O. Box 10385
Jackson, MS 39209
Summary
Current water quality and trends were evaluated for 36
major ambient stream monitoring stations operated in
the State. The Bureau of Pollution Control has
40
-------
documented the maintenance of good water quality or
improvements in water quality at 31 of these 36 sta-
tions. Each stream was evaluated using existing data,
including physical-chemical parameters, fish flesh ana-
lyses, and biological evaluations.
A compilation of all existing water quality data for 28
significant lakes in the Mississippi Delta was completed
as part of the Agricultural Assessment in 208 Planning.
Lakes found to be most heavily polluted by agricultural
nonpoint sources are Swan Lake, Six-Mile Lake,
Horseshoe Lake, Pinchback Lake, Roebuck Lake, Lake
Henry, and Hampton Lake. The lakes most heavily pol-
luted by bacteria from residential areas are Blue Lake,
Moon Lake, and Tchula Lakes. Fish data in the lakes re-
veal significant declines of DDT and its derivatives and
toxaphene since 1976. Additional assessments of lakes
in the State will be completed as part of the Clean
Lakes Program during 1982.
Special
Environmental
Problems
Gulf Coast Bacteria Studies - Since 1973, the Bureau
of Pollution Control has collected fecal coliform data
along the swimming beaches of the Mississippi Gulf
Coast. Significant improvements, especially at Ocean
Springs Harbor, should be realized with implementa-
tion of ongoing facilities planning. A model procedure
is being developed to help track down and correct
sources of bacterial contamination from storm drains.
Chlordane Problem in the Mississippi River - The
Bureau of Pollution Control is currently assisting the
State of Tennessee in assessing an apparent chlordane
problem in fish in the Mississippi River near Memphis.
The State will collect fish at three locations during
1982.
Pollution Problems in Petroleum Producing Areas -
An ongoing study has revealed that oil field activities
in the past have apparently caused pollution problems
in streams and ground water in some sections of the
State. These problems may be due to improper salt
water disposal. Significant improvements in disposal
techniques have been implemented in recent years.
Ground water - An assessment of ground water
pollution problems was made. Problems were found
due to overpumping, oil field contamination, surface
contamination, and natural conditions.
Drinking Water Supplies - Only three cities in Mis-
sissippi use surface water supplies. These are Colum-
bus, Jackson, and Meridian. Each of these cities is ex-
periencing problems caused by increased urban
growth.
The major water pollution problem areas in Mis-
sissippi are the Mississippi Gulf Coast and the Mis-
sissippi Delta. Other problem areas are the Pearl River
below Jackson; the Meridian area; the Tupelo area; the
Escatawpa River; and the Bayou Casotte-Bayou Chico
area.
Environmental
Improvements
Numerous municipalities and industries have contrib-
uted significantly to improved water quality in the
State through new construction and improved opera-
tion and maintenance of existing waste treatment facili-
ties. Thirty-one of 36 major water quality trend stations
have been documented as maintaining good water
quality or showing improvements over the past seven
years. During the past two years, at least 20 industries
have achieved compliance with State and federal laws
where they previously had been out of compliance. Re-
gional facilities in the Jackson and Gulf Coast areas are
progressing rapidly and will be in operation in the near
future. An innovative lagoon treatment system known
as Hydrograph Controlled Release has been developed
by the State and should enable numerous towns to
meet water quality standards. Finally, between 20 and
25 municipal construction grant projects will be com-
pleted this fiscal year. These new treatment and collec-
tion systems should contribute greatly to improving
water quality.
Missouri
For complete copies of the Missouri 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 1368
Jefferson City, MO 65102
Summary
The mandate to protect water quality in Missouri has
been given to the Department of Natural Resources
through both Missouri and federal Clean Water Laws.
The Department recognizes two basic kinds of water
pollution and uses different strategies for their control.
Point source discharges, those that come from a dis-
crete source such as the end of pipe, receive most of
the Department's attention. In the last few years, how-
ever, increasing attention has focused on identifying
nonpoint water pollution sources, primarily surface
runoff from agricultural and mined lands and from
urban areas.
The quality of Missouri streams and lakes is moni-
tored at many locations by various government agen-
cies and certain other organizations. The most com-
prehensive monitoring is done by the U.S. Geologic
Survey (USGS), which maintains 13 stations across the
State that are sampled every 2 months, and by the
Missouri Department of Natural Resources, which
cooperates with USGS in monitoring 15 stations across
the State on a monthly basis.
The Department of Natural Resources issues the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits for Missouri. All point source dis-
chargers are required to obtain a permit that stipulates
the amount and/or the concentration of contaminants
within wastewater that can be discharged. The permit
process allows the State to maintain records of the
41
-------
amounts and kinds of pollutants being discharged, and
the location of the discharge.
As the relationship between point source discharges
and the waters being protected is understood more
clearly, the NPDES permit process should be the most
effective administrative method to match levels of
wastewater treatment with instream water quality
needs.
Section 208 of the federal Clean Water Law amend-
ments, PL 95-217, called for the development of plans
to control all water pollution sources. Three separate
nonpoint planning areas have been designated: the St.
Louis area, the Kansas City area, and the remaining
parts of the State. A summary of the results of 208
planning in Missouri is given.
The first step in the water quality management proc-
ess, and the main purpose of this report, is to identify
water quality problems. General and specific water
quality problems are discussed for each of the eight
major basins in the complete report.
Montana
For complete copies of the Montana 305(b) Report,
contact:
Montana Department of Health and Environmental
Sciences
Water Quality Bureau
Cogswell Building
Helena, MT 59620
Summary
There is a large backlog of water quality problems in
Montana; most of these problems date back to an era
of resource exploitation before laws were enacted to
protect the environment and before the relationship
between a clean environment and human health and
prosperity was understood. Efforts to correct these prob-
lems are shared by many government agencies and
citizen groups, but continue to be hampered by a se-
vere shortage of planning and implementation funds.
Montana's "Big Three" water quality problems are
sediment, salinity and water depletion. These problems
are, for the most part, the consequence of intensive
agricultural practices on an erosive, salt-rich and some-
times water-poor landscape. Collectively, they account
for more than 4,000 miles of degraded streams. They
have been present in Montana for a long time and are
expected to continue as long-term problems.
There are also other major problems. Acid mine
drainage has affected many western mountain streams
since the days Montana first became known as the
"Treasure State." Careless disposal of toxic and
hazardous wastes, much of these from the early
mining industry, threaten water quality and public
health. Historic overcutting and natural deforestation of
some timbered watersheds have caused severe ero-
sion, sedimentation, and hydrologic instability.
The Clean Water Act goal of "fishable and swim-
mable waters" by 1983 will not be met for more than 200
stream segments in Montana. Without an infusion of
implementation funds for correcting existing nonpoint
source pollution problems, the list of problem seg-
ments won't be much shorter when Montana's next
water quality report is written in 1984. But with ade-
quate funding for the pollution control programs de-
scribed in this report, the list should not be longer.
Recent data were available to evaluate problem
severity on 99 of the 216 apparent and potential prob-
lem stream segments in Montana. Of these, 32 prob-
lems were judged to be largely man-caused and im-
provable under the existing regulatory framework and
pollution control programs. Muddy Creek near Great
Falls is Montana's worst documented water quality
problem.
Ground water represents only a small fraction of the
water used in Montana, but it is often the only avail-
able source of potable water. Major categories of
ground water contamination are saline seep, mining,
accidental spills and leakage, septic tank drainfields, oil
and gas exploration and development activity, solid
waste disposal sites, and municipal and industrial
wastewater disposal systems. Although there are many
isolated cases of ground water pollution from surface
activities, no widespread contamination of drinking
water aquifers has occurred.
This report also discusses five water quality issues
which the State believes will be gaining importance in
the future: acid deposition, especially in northwestern
and southcentral Montana; ammonia discharged from
eight community treatment plants which is thought to
affect aquatic life; energy development, which will re-
quire careful planning if surface and ground water
pollution is to be avoided; placer mining, which is dif-
ficult to monitor but causes sedimentation and other
effects; and toxics, which are not currently a problem
but could become so.
Many government agencies and local water quality
improvement projects are chipping away at the backlog
of nonpoint problems. Water pollution control struc-
tures have already been installed along Bluewater
Creek in Carbon County to correct a long-standing
streambank erosion problem. Farmers along Pipestone
in Jefferson County have a plan for managing a similar
problem and will be approaching the 1983 Legislature
for implementation funds. Nevertheless, without a
massive infusion of implementation funds, there is lit-
tle hope for a general improvement in water quality
Statewide.
More success has been achieved in point source
pollution control. Six stream segments listed in the
1976 water quality report as impaired by municipal
wastewater discharges were eliminated as problems
for this year's report either because of improved treat-
ment provided by upgraded facilities, or because of
greater resolution of the instream effects, achieved by
intensive surveys.
42
-------
Nebraska
For complete copies of the Nebraska 305(b) Report,
contact:
Nebraska Department of Environmental Control
Water Pollution Control Division
Water Quality Section
P.O. Box 94653
State House Station
Lincoln, NB 68509
Summary
Stream water quality was assessed in each of Nebras-
ka's 13 major river basins. This appraisal was made
from water quality data collected from the ambient
monitoring network and intensive surveys. The assess-
ment was divided into two phases: 1) historic water
quality, and 2) existing quality (1980-1981).
A brief overview of general water quality trends for
basins of the State, as depicted by Water Quality Index
values, is presented. Generally, data collected over the
previous five to ten years seem to suggest that most
streams in Nebraska possess relatively good water
quality. For the most part, water quality remained un-
changed, with a few instances of improvement (Papil-
lion Creek - Missouri Tributaries River Basin) and de-
gradation (Lodgepole Creek - South Platte River Basin).
Historically, stream water quality in the eastern one-
third of the State appeared to be of a lesser quality
than in the rest of the State. This can be attributed to
the more intensive agriculture practices and the pres-
ence of more urban commmunities in eastern Ne-
braska. The basin in which the greatest water quality
improvement has occurred is the Missouri Tributaries
Basin. The Papillion Creek Watershed, particularly the
West Branch of Big Papillion Creek and Big Papillion
Creek, has exhibited the greatest improvement in water
quality. The reason for this improvement is the com-
pletion and use of an interceptor system to collect sew-
age from the surrounding metro-Omaha area and carry
it to the Papillion Creek Sewage Treatment Plant.
The point sources which most frequently affect Neb-
raska's water quality, or have the potential to do so,
are municipal sewage treatment plants, industries,
livestock confinements, and mining activities. The most
important nonpoint sources are urban stormwater
runoff, livestock grazing, agricultural runoff, and irriga-
tion return flows (physical impact).
The construction grants program has been successful
in improving waste treatment and the subsequent pro-
tection of beneficial uses ascribed to Nebraska waters.
A survey developed by EPA in 1980 estimated that
nearly 362 million dollars would be required by the
year 2000 to meet the needs of system components
eligible for funding in Nebraska. However, future
availability of funds is projected to be less than this
need. Therefore, future funding priorities must focus
on assisting communities located on high priority wa-
ters, where the greatest benefit can be realized.
The table below presents a summary of Nebraska's
water quality for the past five to ten years for 13 river
basins.
River General General Overall General
Basin Overall Water Quality Comments
Water Trends
Quality
Big Blue Fair/ Relatively
Good Unchanged
Elkhorn Fair/ Unchanged
Good
Little Blue Fair/ Unchanged
Good
Loup Very Unchanged
Good
Lower Fair/ Unchanged
Platte Good
Middle Good Unchanged
Platte
Missouri Fair Improved
Tributaries
Nemaha Fair/ Unchanged
Good
Niobrara Very Unchanged
Good
North Very Unchanged
Platte Good
Repub- Good Unchanged
lican
South Good/ Unchanged/
Platte Poor Degraded
White/Hat Very Unchanged
Good
Water quality appeared to
have deteriorated in the upper
reaches of the Big Blue River
Water quality of the Elkhorn
River appeared to have be-
come somewhat degraded in
a downstream direction
Water quality throughout the
basin seemed to exhibit sig-
nificant yearly variation
Streams with very high water
quality are located within the
basin
Water quality in lower
reaches of Salt Creek
appeared to be relatively poor
Water quality in the Platte
River within the basin
appeared quite good
Water quality in the lower
Papillion Creek system was
markedly improved after an
interceptor system was in-
stalled
Water quality throughout the
basin appeared subject to
yearly variation
Water quality of the Niobrara
River appeared to have re-
mained stable and is quite
good
Water quality throughout the
basin appeared to be quite
good
Water quality throughout the
basin is relatively good,
though subject to yearly var-
iation
Water quality in the South
Platte River appeared rela-
tively good. Lodgepole Creek
appeared to have deteriorated
to a poor quality
Water quality of the White
River appeared quite good
43
-------
Nevada 1980
For complete copies of the 1980 Nevada 305(b) Report,
contact:
Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Protection
Capitol Complex
Carson City, Nevada 89710
Summary
The quality of the major water courses of the State of
Nevada—the Colorado, Humboldt, Truckee, Carson and
Walker Rivers—are discussed below.
The Colorado River met water quality standards, pro-
vided for the protection and propagation of fish and
wildlife, and allowed for excellent recreational activities
in and on the water. The high water level in Lake Mead
probably contributed to the conditions by diluting the
high pollutant loads entering Lake Mead via Las Vegas
Wash. The Virgin River, a tributary to Lake Mead, ex-
hibited poor water quality in terms of bacteria, aesthe-
tics, solids, inorganic toxicity, and very minimal fish
life.
The Humboldt River, in general, met water quality
standards except for severe violations of turbidity stan-
dards in the upper reaches and phosphate standards in
almost all reaches. The river has a highly variable flow
with a major irrigation-recreation reservoir on the low-
er end of the system and a terminal sink. High nutrient
loads and ambient air temperatures contribute to aes-
thetically displeasing conditions below the reservoir.
Although the sink is highly saline, it supports a bal-
anced wildlife habitat. The various communities along
the river system have either moved or are moving to
land application as the treatment method for their
wastewater. This will result in reduced organic and nu-
trient loads.
The Truckee River showed improvement in aquatic
life below Reno/Sparks because of control on toxics.
However, there were severe violations of phosphate
standards downstream of Reno/Sparks with resultant
nuisance and aesthetic problems. The lowest control
point on the river experienced temperature, pH, nu-
trients, and inorganic toxicity problems. The river pro-
vides for the protection and propagation of fish and
wildlife and allows for recreational activities in and on
the water. However, due to low flow conditions, de-
nuded banks, channelization, and man-made barriers in
the lower reaches, natural spawning of cutthroat trout
does not occur. The reduction of nutrient loads will im-
prove the conditions for fish in the stream and for fish
and recreation at Lake Lahontan and Pyramid Lake.
The Carson River's water quality standards for nu-
trients were frequently exceeded for all reaches, in-
cluding that point where the river enters the State. The
greatest violations of standards occurred during the
summer months below Carson City, when extreme low
flow occurred and wastewater effluent was the major-
ity of the flow in the stream. An intensive survey con-
ducted in August and September indicated that the
salinity of the river in 1979 was the same as in 1966. At
the time of the survey, irrigation returns were minimal,
only one treatment plant was discharging to the river,
and river flow was very low. The survey also revealed
that all reaches above the treatment plant were of suit-
able quality for all beneficial uses, and that reaches be-
low the treatment plant had high nutrient values which
affected the suitability of the river for aquatic life, aes-
thetics, and recreation. Water quality measurements in
Lake Lahontan also showed high nutrient con-
centrations with large algal blooms which interfered
with aquatic life, aesthetics, and recreation. The
planned upgrading of municipal discharges will begin
to reverse the trend of deterioration which has been
occurring over the last thirteen years.
Walker River water quality data reflected minor viola-
tions of water quality standards for dissolved oxygen,
temperature, nutrients, solids, and aesthetics with no
appreciable effect on aquatic life, recreation, or other
beneficial uses. However, reports were received of
effects on agricultural use because of high sediment
loads being deposited in irrigation ditches and fields.
No municipality in Nevada discharges to the Walker
River.
An evaluation of recreational use impairment of 11
lakes in Nevada by EPA Region 9 indicated that one
lake was severely impaired for swimming and aesthe-
tics; two lakes were moderately impaired for aesthe-
tics; three lakes were moderately impaired for
swimming and boating; and four lakes were mod-
erately impaired for fishing.
The implementation of proposed sewerage projects
through FY 85 totaling approximately $105 million in
estimated EPA assistance, along with implementation
of best management practices for new and existing de-
velopment and on farms and ranches, should result in
improvement of the Truckee, Carson, Humboldt and
Colorado river systems as well as some minor river
systems. Fish propagation and water-related rec-
reational activities will be protected.
Implementation of the proposed sewerage projects is
significant in meeting the 1985 goals of the Clean
Water Act, since the majority of the projects will be
using some form of land application.
Agriculture and rangeland are two nonpoint sources
which contribute large sediment loads to Nevada's wa-
ters. Urban drainage systems contribute nutrients,
heavy metals, and organic loads. Nonpoint source
problems caused by existing on-lot disposal will be re-
solved by implementing sewerage projects which
eliminate on-lot disposal. Strict enforcement of regula-
tions for on-lot disposal and permitting of subsurface
disposal systems will prevent such disposal methods
for new development from causing ground water pollu-
tion or nonpoint source problems.
44
-------
New Hampshire
For complete copies of the New Hampshire 305(b) Re-
port, contact:
New Hampshire Water Supply and Pollution
Control Administration
Hazen Drive
P.O. Box 95
Concord, NH 03301
Summary
This report is intended to provide an assessment of the
status of water pollution control programs in New
Hampshire and to fulfill the requirements of Section
305(b) of the 1977 Clean Water Act (PL 95-217). As such,
it represents an evaluation of progress toward the
attainment of classified water quality and the goal of
fishable/swimmable surface waters set for July I, 1988.
The table below provides a basin-specific summary
of the water quality of New Hampshire streams. Ap-
proximately 507 river miles of the total 14,500 miles of
streams are currently violating water quality standards.
This represents only 3.5% of total stream miles but in-
cludes economically and recreationally important river
segments. About 97 miles of surface waters have im-
proved since the I960 Report to Congress and are now
fishable/swimmable according to New Hampshire
water quality criteria.
Water Quality Summary
River
Basin
Androscoggin
Connecticut
Merrimack
Piscataqua
and Coastal
Saco
TOTAL
Total River Miles
Violating Water
Quality Standards
19.1
273.7
152.3
61.4
0.4
506.9
Total Miles
Not Expected
to Meet Class B
or Better by
July 1, 1988
16.8
20.4
15.0
0
0
52.2
Total Miles
Upgraded
Since 1980
Report to
Congress
2.5
33.3
36.9
24.0
0
96.7
This table notes that aproximately 52 miles of river
are not expected to meet Class B or better by July 1,
1988. This represents less than one half of one percent
of total stream miles. These are legislatively classified
"C" segments that will in most cases attain legal "C"
standards by this date and will, therefore, be fishable.
It is expected that by I988 more than 99 percent of as-
sessed river mileage should meet Class B (fishable and
swimmable) standards or better, based on expected
continuation of the federal construction grants pro-
gram.
Major remaining point source problems involve the
discharge of inadequately treated municipal and in-
dustrial wastes, combined sewage, and untreated
domestic discharges. The resolution of many of these
problems hinges on the construction grants program,
State resources, and local resolve.
Widespread water quality degradation caused by
nonpoint sources of pollution (agricultural runoff.
leachate from landfills, etc.) has not been documented.
Local areas of ground and surface water impacts from
such sources are known but are limited in extent.
Several illegal hazardous waste sites have been dis-
covered over the last two years including the well
documented Sylvester (Gilson Road) site in Nashua.
Significant federal, State, and local resources have
been drawn upon to cope with existing problems.
Recent lake studies have attempted to evaluate prob-
lem lakes as well as clean lakes. One Clean Lakes grant
allowed for the inventory and classification of 171 of
New Hampshire's more than 1,300 lakes and ponds. In-
formation and priority rankings for needed restorative
and protective measures are presented in the New
Hampshire report.
The impact of acid precipitation on New Hampshire
lakes and streams is receiving increasing investigation.
Current information indicates that residual buffering
capacity in at least 23 lakes is nearly or completely de-
pleted. Once the alkalinity is gone, the lake pH drops
and drastic changes in aquatic life occur.
Due to the potential for long and short term impacts
to water quality, fish, other aquatic life, and wildlife
associated with oil spills, New Hampshire has under-
taken comprehensive oil spill control and prevention
programs. Over the past three years, nearly 300 spills
or oil-related complaints have been investigated.
The costs for providing for pollution abatement have
been significant. Construction grants, including State
and federal shares, for publicly-owned wastewater
treatment facilities during 1980 and 1981 totaled 95
million dollars. Future costs for wastewater facilities
and appurtenances to achieve the 1988 goals and use
classifications for New Hampshire streams are pro-
vided based on the 1980 Needs Survey performed
jointly by EPA and the State.
New Jersey
For complete copies of the New Jersey 305(b) Report,
contact:
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
Division of Water Resources
P.O. Box 1390
Trenton, NJ 08625
Summary
Surface
Waters
Surface waters in New Jersey have shown no signifi-
cant improvement or decline in quality over the last 4-5
years based on conventional data collected at the
monitoring stations reviewed in the surface water qual-
ity inventory. Overall, for conventional data reviewed in
the 1982 water quality inventory which can be com-
pared to respective State Surface Water Quality Standards,
45
-------
these standards were exceeded by 45 percent of
the total phosphorous values, 4 percent of the dis-
solved oxygen values, 3 percent of the un-ionized
ammonia values, and 2 percent of total dissolved
solids readings. In addition, the data indicate that wide-
spread fecal coliform contamination exists in the sur-
face waters of the State. The sources of bacteria are,
for the most part, nonpoint in origin (based on the
assumption that point sources of pollution are properly
disinfecting) while the nutrients (phosphorous) origi-
nate from both point source discharges and nonpoint
runoff. Because of the large percentage of samples
containing high total phosphorous concentrations,
most standing waterbodies in the State have excessive
aquatic plant growth and are classified as eutrophic.
Many streams in northeastern New Jersey (Passaic,
Hackensack, and Raritan River basins) experienced sig-
nificantly reduced water quality between the summer
of 1980 and early 1981 because of a severe lack of rain-
fall. The water quality impacts of the drought were
generally reflected in reduced dissolved oxygen (DO)
readings and increased fecal coliform, biochemical ox-
ygen demand, nutrient, and un-ionized ammonia con-
centrations. By the end of the monitoring period used
in this report (mid-1981), waterways had shown gener-
al recovery to pre-drought conditions. Stress to aquatic
life probably occurred during the drought because of
the reduced DO and increases in un-ionized ammonia
concentrations.
The NJ Divison of Fish, Game and Wildlife has found
in studies of coastal bays and estuaries that very low
DO levels often occur in these waters during summer
months. Because of these low DO levels, the coastal
bays and estuaries are very sensitive to oxygen-
demanding pollution loads.
Toxic chemicals (including volatile organics, pesti-
cides, PCBs, and heavy metals) in the water column,
sediments, and fish tissue seem to be fairly widespread
at very low concentrations, depending on the sub-
stance and the medium sampled. Volatile organics
were found at their highest levels in waters adjacent to
or flowing through industrialized urban/suburban cen-
ters. Metals, PCBs, and pesticides were found through-
out the State in fish tissue, but appeared highest in
catadromous and anadromous fish species. A review of
the effects of toxic contaminants on both aquatic and
human health is available from the NJ Division of
Water Resources.
Ground
Waters
The major ground water concerns outlined in this re-
port deal with both quality and quantity. A lowering of
ground water levels in many of the coastal plain
ground water-bearing formations (aquifers) is occuring
due to overpumpage. This is affecting both quality and
quantity of these formations. Overpumping also affects
baseflows to streams in the area since ground water is
a major contributor to stream flows. More efficient use
of the relationship between ground and surface waters
is suggested for the coastal plain region of New
Jersey.
Across the State, ground water quality is generally
suitable for drinking water purposes without treatment.
The common natural quality problems include high
iron, dissolved solids, manganese, and hardness levels
due to the natural quality of rock and sand formations.
Other quality problems are occurring because of local-
ized ground water pollution and salt water intrusion.
Salt water intrusion is occurring at various locations
along the coast of Raritan Bay, the Atlantic Ocean, and
tidal Delaware River as a direct result of excessive
pumping. Ground water pollution occurs from a variety
of sources including landfills, surface impoundments,
accidental spills, on-site waste water disposal systems,
and numerous other sources. Currently, the NJ De-
partment of Environmental Protection has closed 74
public supply wells and 697 non-public supply wells
since 1971. Most of these wells are closed because of
excessive organic and industrial chemicals.
New Mexico
For complete copies of the New Mexico 305(b) Report,
contact:
New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission
P.O. Box 968
Santa Fe, NM 87504-0968
Summary
Ground Water Quality: The New Mexico Environmental
Improvement Division (EID) has identified 105 sites in
New Mexico with known ground water contamination
problems. The nature and extent of the contamination
at these 105 sites vary greatly. Twenty-five of these
sites have been contaminated by organic compounds
such as hydrocarbon fuels and solvents, 47 by brine or
total dissolved solids, 22 by nitrates, 6 by trace metals
and/or radionuclides, and 5, along shallow alluvial
aquifers, by fecal coliform bacteria.
It is estimated that at least 18 percent and possibly
as many as 58 percent of known contamination sites
involve abandoned or currently inactive facilities. For
this reason, and because the State since 1977 has pur-
sued a vigorous program to regulate discharges to
ground water, it should not be assumed that con-
tamination continues at these sites. Nearly all of the in-
stances in New Mexico where water uses have been
affected by contaminated ground water have involved
either regional saline intrusion or relatively small areas
in shallow aquifers. The limited extent of contamina-
tion at most sites has been largely due to complex
natural factors, rather than contaminants in a dis-
charge.
Surface Water Quality: Data from 64 monitoring sta-
tions throughout the State for the period 1976-1981
indicate that stream water quality is good, in general,
when compared to water quality standards. Water
quality is consistent with standards in over 90 percent
of the estimated 3,500 miles of perennial streams in
New Mexico.
46
-------
Significant standards violations, caused by both
point and nonpoint source pollution, were recorded in
an estimated 200 miles of perennial streams distributed
among 6 of the 59 designated stream segments. In
addition, occasional stream standards violations were
recorded in eight stream segments.
In addition to these specific stream segments, more
generalized problems are experienced with both turbid-
ity and fecal coliform bacteria. Eleven monitoring sta-
tions, distributed among eight of the State's 11 water
quality basins, showed between two and 15 instances
of elevated fecal coliform bacteria levels. These are
generally related to summer thunderstorm activity and
are probably caused by nonpoint sources.
Data regarding turbidity, and the associated water
quality problems of suspended sediment and total dis-
solved solids, have been delineated in detail in prior
State water quality reports. Recent data do not provide
the basis for new or more detailed conclusions
regarding the water quality problems associated with
these parameters. Stream turbidity standards were vio-
lated occasionally during the last five years at 13
monitoring stations; only two stations indicated five or
more violations. In those stream segments which have
standards for total dissolved solids, conductivity, chlor-
ides, or sulfates, no standards violations were noted.
Limited monitoring to date in New Mexico has not
demonstrated significant surface water contamination
by heavy metals, trace organics, pesticides or other
toxicants attributable to industrial or agricultural use.
The major improvement noted in stream quality
since the State's 1980 report is in the decrease of stan-
dards violations for fecal coliform bacteria. Data for
three stream segments identified in 1980 as significant-
ly contaminated by bacteria indicate no more than one
standards violation in the last two years. These seg-
ments are the Rio Grande below Las Cruces and below
Espanola, and the San Juan River below Farmington.
The 1980 report did note that improvements in these
municipalities' wastewater treatment had recently elim-
inated their bacterial contamination of these streams.
New York
For complete copies of the New York 305(b) Report,
contact:
Division of Water
New York State Department of Environmental Con-
servation
Albany, NY 12233
Summary
In New York State, the water quality management
problems which most commonly contribute to serious
water pollution and affect the largest percentage of the
State's population are: municipal discharges; industrial
discharges; residual wastes (solids and liquids); com-
bined sewer overflows; urban storm runoff; acid pre-
cipitation; and hydraulic/hydrologic modifications.
By traditional standards used to measure organic
oxygen-consuming wastes and infectious agents, the
overall level of water quality indicates definite im-
proving trends. New York State has made great prog-
ress in controlling point source discharges of raw sew-
age and industrial wastes. Over 90 percent of the
State's 70,000 stream miles are in conformance with
current water quality standards. This is a significant
accomplishment of the State's water management pro-
gram over the past 15 years. About 1,200 miles are
affected by pollution to the degree that water use is
impaired as a water supply source, unsuitable for rec-
reation, or unable to support a balanced biological and
fish population.
The construction of new and upgraded municipal
sewage treatment facilities has drastically reduced the
amount and/or the concentrations of pollutants
entering our surface and ground water systems. The
number of municipal sewage treatment plants has in-
creased from 298 in 1952 to 509 in 1980. More signifi-
cantly, the type of treatment provided by these facili-
ties has improved substantially.
A water quality management problem which is en-
countered frequently in New York State is that of
accidental leakage and spills of oil and other hazardous
substances. Many ground water resources are suf-
ficiently impaired to preclude utilization as drinking
water, and public water supplies have been closed due
to contamination.
Nonpoint sources of pollution also pose potentially
serious water quality management problems through-
out the State. However, the magnitude and severity of
these problems vary widely, depending upon the type
and location of the nonpoint source activity. Agricul-
tural practices, silviculture, construction activities, and
acid precipitation are recurrent problems. A number of
nonpoint source pollutants have been identified; the
extent or degree to which they affect water quality has
not been fully assessed. Appropriate water quality
management programs will be developed to help solve
those problems which may be identified as severe.
New York's most serious current water quality prob-
lems relate to toxic substances in the environment. In
the mid-1970s, attention was directed to a "second
generation" set of problems associated with the dis-
posal of toxic effluents and residual wastes. In an effort
to more closely define the problems asociated with
toxic substances. New York's Division of Water con-
ducted a survey of New York industries to track down
the exact types and amounts of chemicals being used
or manufactured in the State and instituted sampling of
waterways, sediments, and fish flesh to determine
levels of toxic substances in the environment. In some
cases where toxic substances have been identified and
their passage into receiving waters can be traced to
industrial discharges, permit controls have been in-
stituted to control releases. In other cases, it is sus-
pected that some toxics may be transported into
receiving waters through runoff from nonpoint sources.
47
-------
North Carolina
For complete copies of the North Carolina 305(b) Re-
port, contact:
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development
Division of Environmental Management
Raleigh, NC 27611
Summary
North Carolina is divided into three distinct regions,
each of which has its own unique water resource bene-
fits and problems. The mountain region is character-
ized by high mountain peaks, dense woodlands, and
relatively sparse population (15% of the State's popula-
tion). The water quality in this region is good with the
many spring fed mountain streams providing high
quality waters which support many excellent trout
fisheries. While the cold turbulent waters of this region
are capable of assimilating much larger quantities of
oxygen consuming materials than the Piedmont and
Coastal waters, the protection of sensitive fish species
such as trout requires that even slight degradation of
water quality be prevented. It is estimated that rec-
reational fishing across the State generates revenues
of over $300 million annually.
The Piedmont region is characterized by much lower
elevations and gently rolling hills. Since this region is
the most populated (53% of the population) and in-
dustrialized area of the State, a tremendous demand is
placed on water resources. Not only does the Piedmont
region contribute the heaviest waste load to the wa-
ters, but it also has the greatest demand for clean
water for public and industrial consumption and for
recreation. As would be expected, the majority of the
State's water quality problems occur in this region.
The Coastal Plain region is characterized by generally
flat terrain spanning from the higher elevations near
the Piedmont to the low lying swamplands in the east
to the sandy beaches of the coast. The water quality in
this region is generally good except in areas of dense
population (32% of the State's population lives here).
The waters in this region have higher temperatures
and are slow moving and sluggish, thus they can
assimilate much less oxygen demanding substance.
Drainage from the swamplands often causes naturally
occurring low oxygen levels, low pH, and high color in
streams in the area. Since the coastal waters receive
the residues from the interior parts of the State, there
is potential for water quality problems, especially de-
posits of harmful substances and nutrient over-
enrichment, in the bays and sounds inside the Outer
Banks. The protection of fish and shellfish in the coast-
al waters is especially important in this region since
the harvesting of shellfish and commercial sport fish-
ing is a major resource of the area.
Progress has been made in cleaning up pollution on
all fronts. Not only were a few new areas in coastal
waters classified as shellfish waters, but over 100,000
fewer acres of shellfish waters had to be closed be-
cause of pollution. Better cooperation on limiting sedi-
ment from construction operations is being obtained as
more people become aware of the problem and under-
stand ways to limit the transport of sediment. Agricul-
tural activities continue to contribute sediment and nu-
trients to waterways but, again, education is slowly
making a difference.
The number of degraded streams or stream seg-
ments that do not meet the stream standards a signifi-
cant proportion of the time has been reduced from 410
in the last biennium to 259 at the end of 1981. Also, the
number of streams that carry dissolved o-xygen and/or
coliform exceptions to their standards was reduced
from 35 to 27.
Drinking water supplies have continued to meet all
standards with very few exceptions. The focus on triha-
lomethanes (THMS)—carcinogens that are formed
when natural organic constituents of surface waters are
disinfected by using chlorine—has led to modifications
in the treatment process. So far the standards have
been met, though in some cases this was a difficult
task.
North Carolina has a long coastline. Problems arise
in the estuaries from septic tank nitrification line
seepage; nursery areas are affected by fresh water
flushes during wet periods from excessive drainage
from ditched agricultural lands. This problem will re-
quire a solution in the near future if nursery areas are
to be preserved.
Several programs have a large impact on State water
quality. The construction grants program, for which
funding is now being reduced, has made possible the
large increase in the number of treatment plants that
can adequately treat the waste they receive. The North
Carolina Waste Water Treatment Plant Operator
Training and Certification program plays a large part in
making treatment plant operation reliable and in
ensuring that plant effluents meet the criteria for which
the plant was designed. The Environmental Laboratory
not only provides analytical information but also has a
certification program for commercial laboratories.
North Dakota
For complete copies of the North Dakota 305(b) Report,
contact:
North Dakota State Department of Health
Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control
1200 Missouri Ave.
Missouri Office Building
Bismark, ND 58505
Summary
Water quality degradation of the streams located within
North Dakota results primarily from natural sub-
stances occurring in the soils of the State and is aggra-
vated by a number of point and nonpoint sources.
Presently there are no municipal facilities in North
Dakota discharging completely untreated wastes into
the waters of the State. Some, however, provide less
48
-------
than the desired level of treatment for several reasons,
such as a lack of storage capacity or a lack of resources
to provide upgraded treatment. A number of municipa-
lities will need additions, modifications, and completely
new facilities in order to comply with permit require-
ments.
There do not appear to be any significant stream de-
gradation problems from major industrial dischargers.
Major industrial sources include power plants, sugar
beet processing plants, and oil refineries. Minor in-
dustrial sources include potato washing plants, sand
and gravel operations, water treatment plants, and coal
mines. Most industrial and municipal point source dis-
charges are intermittent discharging stabilization ponds
or lagoon systems.
There are a few combined sewer systems located in
the older cities in the State. The major problem with
combined sewers is the overflow discharge of diluted,
untreated wastewater to a stream or other receiving
body as a result of intermittent heavy flows due to
rainstorms or snowmelt. Most of the affected cities are
presently involved in combined sewer separation proj-
ects.
North Dakota's nonpoint source pollution control
programs have achieved significant success in certain
areas during the past years. These programs can be di-
vided into two areas of emphasis: watershed controls
that are an integral part of lake restoration projects,
and demonstration projects which serve education/
research purposes.
Nonpoint pollution sources are responsible for most
of the surface water degradation in North Dakota. The
Department's Surface Water Quality Monitoring Pro-
gram has indicated that the quality of surface waters
has not been enhanced in proportion to the rapid ad-
vances that have been achieved during the past years
by municipalities, industries, and other point sources in
providing adequate treatment of their wastes. Viola-
tions of certain parameters of the State's Water Quality
Standards have been noted at times when records re-
veal there have been no discharges into the stream
from point sources. Nonpoint pollutants include sedi-
ment and plant nutrients, wastes from stock raising
activities, and runoff from croplands, rangelands, pas-
tures, farmsteads, and urban areas containing nu-
trients, pesticides, and other pollutants.
The water quality problems associated with the ma-
jor drainage basins of the State are noted in detail in
the water quality analysis section of the North Dakota
report. Phosphorous is the only parameter which was
found to be a problem in most streams. Agricultural
Best Management Practices which reduce soil loss may
reduce the amounts of phosphorous in runoff to a level
approaching that of natural or baseline conditions. His-
torically, dissolved solids concentrations may reach im-
pairing levels in nearly all streams and rivers in the
State during low flow conditions, which normally occur
in late summer, fall, and winter.
North Dakota has experienced only minor ground
water quality problems. Contamination of aquifers has
been limited to small areas and aquifers of poor quali-
ty, and has been caused by bacteriological contamina-
tion of shallow aquifers by septic tank drainfields,
leachate from solid waste disposal sites entering the
ground water, and natural sources of contamination. A
large portion of the State's ground water resources are
located at a depth which naturally protects them from
manmade sources of pollution. The areas where shal-
low table aquifers exist have experienced very few con-
tamination problems due to the absence of industry
and other detrimental land uses above these aquifers.
Although the State has encountered only minor
ground water contamination incidents, the potential for
future incidents exists. The North Dakota State De-
partment of Health, in conjunction with the North
Dakota Geological Survey, has completed a surface
wastewater impoundment assessment; it indicated that
many surface impoundments are sited in geologically
poor conditions and therefore have high pollution
potentials. Also, potential ground water quality prob-
lems exist in the western part of the State due to
mining, oil and gas exploration, and other energy re-
lated impacts.
Northern Mariana
Islands
For complete copies of the Northern Mariana Islands
305(b) Report contact:
Division of Environmental Quality
Doctor Torres Hospital
Saipan, Mariana Islands 96950
Summary
This is an update of the 305(b) report submitted by the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands to the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1980. Only
those areas with significant changes in status are dis-
cussed in this update.
Tourism remains the major industry in the Common-
wealth, and the same basic problems remain: sewage
disposal, ground water protection, and the preven-
tion of environmental damage from earthmoving activi-
ties. Improvement of the drinking water supply for
Saipan remains a high priority.
In response to the Governor's declaration of a Water
Emergency on Saipan, a new well drilling program was
started in January 1982. This program has con-
centrated on drilling wells in known water-producing
areas. Fifteen wells have been completed to date.
Many of these wells are capable of producing water of
acceptable salinity and will be put into service to re-
place some of the older, brackish water wells.
All of the producing water wells are included in a
monthly monitoring program to determine the fluctua-
tions of water quality with time and pumping rate. The
parameters measured include chloride, alkalinity, dis-
solved solids, conductivity, and pH.
49
-------
Ohio
For complete copies of the Ohio 305(b) Report, contact:
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 118
Columbus, OH 43215
Summary
Approximately nine percent of the 43,900 permanent
stream miles in Ohio have been evaluated in this re-
port; however, 32 percent of the "principal" rivers and
streams in Ohio (all subbasin mainstems plus streams
draining at least 100 square miles) were evaluated. The
quantity of data needed to make an evaluation was not
standardized, but consisted in most cases of at least
four samples per year at one or more stations. Seg-
ment delineation was usually based upon the location
of sampling stations in relation to major point source
dischargers and major tributary streams. Data were not
extrapolated beyond significant point sources or major
tributaries.
The Ohio 305(b) report contains information on ad-
ministrative programs, monitoring programs, intensive
surveys, lakes and reservoirs, wetlands, Lake Erie
beaches, ground water, nonpoint sources, and specific
chemical, physical, and biological evaluations of water
quality. These subbasin evaluations reveal that Ohio's
water quality is generally good. However, some seg-
ments such as lower Swan Creek and the Cuyahoga
River below Akron are not expected to meet water
quality goals. Municipal and industrial point source dis-
charges and nonpoint source runoff are reported as the
most common causes of water quality degradation.
Significant water quality improvements have been
noted in many areas, primarily due to point source
controls such as municipal and industrial treatment
plant upgradings.
The coastal wetlands of Lake Erie are the most exten-
sive in Ohio. The wetlands inventory conducted in I954
estimates that 30,000 acres of wetlands existed adja-
cent to Lake Erie; by I974, only 15,000 acres of wetlands
remained. Destruction of the coastal wetlands is largely
attributable to development. Wetlands have been and
continue to be drained, dredged, or filled for agricul-
tural, industrial, and residential expansion. Those that
survive development are generally degraded.
One hundred and nineteen (54%) of the lakes listed
in Ohio EPA's public lake inventory have been classi-
fied according to trophic status. Of these, 73% were
classified eutrophic, 16% were classified mesotrophic,
and 11% were classified hypereutrophic. Sedimentation
is also a problem in many Ohio lakes. Metal con-
centrations that exceeded Ohio water quality standards
were observed in 34 lakes. Copper was the metal that
most often exceeded Ohio water quality standards. The
use of copper herbicides for the control of algae in the
21 affected lakes could be a contributing factor. The
sanitary water quality of Ohio's lakes was generally
within water quality standards. High fecal coliform and/
or fecal streptococcus bacterial counts were associated
with storm runoff events or increases in lake water
levels.
The State of Ohio has abundant ground water re-
sources due to a rather humid climate and favorable
geologic conditions. Nearly 45% of Ohio's population
use ground water as a drinking water source. Ground
water is also widely used for industrial, agricultural,
and commercial uses. Overall, ground water in Ohio
has not been contaminated to any significant degree,
and for the most part meets all primary drinking water
standards without treatment.
Ohio River Valley
Water Sanitation
Commission
For complete copies of the Ohio River Valley Water
Sanitation Commission 305(b) Report, contact:
Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission
414 Walnut Street
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Summary
This report, prepared by the Ohio River Valley Water
Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO), is an assessment
of the water quality of the Ohio River and the lower
reaches of its major tributaries together with informa-
tion on Commission water pollution control programs
for the years 1980 and 1981. The Commission is an
interstate agency formed in 1948 by eight States signa-
tory to a compact to abate existing and control future
water pollution in the Ohio River Valley. This assess-
ment is based upon data gathered from the Com-
mission's operative monitoring systems.
Fifteen of the 20 substances for which the Commis-
sion has recommended criteria were within acceptable
levels 100 percent of the time during 1980 and 1981. Of
the five remaining—fecal coliform bacteria, phenolics,
cyanide, dissolved oxygen (DO), and mercury—cyanide
levels showed marked decreases from previous years
while the other four continued to present problems.
Fecal coliform bacteria levels, indicators of contamina-
tion from human and animal waste, were improved at
some locations but degraded at others in comparison
to previous years. The number of phenolic detections
increased in the lower river and remained a persistent
problem in the upper river. A phenolics reconaissance
in the upper river was initiated in late 1981 in prepara-
tion for an intensive survey in early 1982. Further in-
tensive surveys for both fecal coliform and phenolics
may be undertaken during 1982.
Dissolved oxygen excursions were most pronounced
in the middle and lower river during August and
50
-------
September 1981, when dry weather and low flows com-
bined to drop the DO level below the Commission rec-
ommended minimum level. However, no fish kills were
reported on the mainstem during this period. The rela-
tively moderate temperatures and gradual decline of
dissolved oxygen may have enabled fish to acclimate
to the river conditions.
The mercury criterion was exceeded most frequently
in the middle river; the 1978-79 Section 305(b) report
noted that values exceeding the criterion were scat-
tered throughout the Valley. However, fish tissue sam-
ples analyzed in 1980 showed no excessive amounts of
mercury.
Lead (found to be a problem in the 1976 and 1977 re-
ports) and cyanide were found in decreasing amounts
in river water during 1980 and 1981, probably due to
the advent of unleaded gasoline and improved in-
dustrial waste treatment, respectively. Increased use of
unleaded gasoline has probably been a major factor in
the decrease in lead levels in urban runoff.
The three largest population centers (Pittsburgh, Cin-
cinnati, and Louisville) all have secondary wastewater
treatment facilities although they are not fully op-
erational at Cincinnati and Louisville. Additionally, four
major publicly-owned wastewater treatment plants are
under construction in the Valley. During 1980-81, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency awarded $39
million in construction grants for secondary treatment
projects on the mainstem. In the same period, munici-
palities and industries in the Valley appeared to be
completing projects at about the same rate that new
project needs were identified. Of the treatment plants
surveyed as having needs, three percent of the munic-
ipal facilities reported completion of construction to
meet those needs during 1980-81, as did 21 percent of
the industrial facilities.
This report serves the combined purpose of in-
dicating water quality improvement, areas requiring
further attention, and programs aimed at resolving
water quality problems. The Ohio River system is ever-
changing; monitoring, surveillance, and analysis pro-
grams must be flexible enough to meet water pollution
control needs as they arise. The uses that the human
population of the Valley puts the rivers to are multi-
purpose and change in emphasis with changing times.
Major new developments, such as synfuels facilities,
coal slurry pipelines, and low-head hydro powerplants
to be installed at the Ohio River dams, as well as the
expansion of already existing uses, all carry with them
the potential for environmental impact. However, with
informed and perceptive management and decision-
making, many of these impacts can be foreseen
and resolved.
Oklahoma
For complete copies of the Oklahoma 305(b) Report,
contact:
Oklahoma State Department of Health
1000 N.E. 10th
Oklahoma City, OK 73152
Summary
The State's major river basins are the Red and Arkan-
sas River Basins. The Red River shows continued en-
richment and mineralization as well as elevated levels
of some metals. The lower Red River below Lake Tex-
oma displays gradual improvement, with decreasing
levels of mineralization and low levels of toxic metals,
but high levels of iron and manganese. Due to these
factors, fish communities show increasing diversity
downstream with improving water quality conditions.
Tributaries in the Red River Basin are, in general, im-
proving or stable. The one exception is the Beaver
Creek watershed, which shows severe degradation pri-
marily from increased enrichment and toxics. The
Arkansas River enters Oklahoma from Kansas with
poor water quality due to enrichment and mineraliza-
tion. Kaw Reservoir acts as a nutrient sink and mineral
assimilator, so that water quality improves down-
stream from the reservoir. There is a major decline in
water quality downstream from Tulsa. The fish species
diversity increases farther downstream as the water
quality improves. Many tributaries in the Arkansas Riv-
er basin show degradation. Much of this degradation is
due to point source discharges from municipalities and
industries. Specific tributaries with major degradation
include portions of the North Canadian River, the Illinois
River, and the Cimarron River. Toxic metals and
organic compounds were detected at various sites in
the Arkansas River basin. Another area of concern is
the Tar Creek watershed, where mine drainage is
causing high levels of metals in the water. A water
quality assessment of Oklahoma streams, by segment,
is included in the report. The matrix rates the scope,
trend, and severity of various chemical parameters and
the biological condition and trend for each stream seg-
ment.
The results of a study of toxics in 48 State reservoirs
show that Oklahoma reservoirs are, in general, free of
dangerous levels of toxic chemicals. Greenleaf and
Lawtonka had no detectable levels of these pollutants.
PCBs are the most common organic toxics found in fish
tissue and were detected in 44 reservoirs. Neverthe-
less, only at Fort Gibson Reservoir were FDA Alert
Limits for PCBs in tissue samples exceeded. Chlordane
was found in 40 reservoirs, with only Lake Hefner and
Northeast (Zoo) Lake showing levels exceeding FDA
Alert Limits. DDT was present in 11 reservoirs, with the
highest level found in Fort Cobb Reservoir. DDT levels
were well within FDA limits. Aldrin, heptachlor, and
toxaphene were present in a few reservoirs, but were
also within FDA limits.
During water years I980-8I, 38 publicly owned water
supplies were in violation of drinking water standards.
51
-------
The parameters violated include nitrate, fluoride, sele-
nium, chromium, barium, trihalomethanes, and bacte-
ria. Due to potentially harmful effects on human health,
limited fishing bans were placed on Fort Gibson Reser-
voir in response to the discovery of PCBs in several
fish species. Similar bans have been applied to Lake
Hefner and Northeast Lake as a result of chlordane
levels exceeding FDA Alert Limits.
Over fifteen months of high-flowing sampling data
has been collected from a network of 106 sites on 48 of
the State's 59 stream segments. This ongoing program
should, eventually, facilitate the detection of nonpoint
source pollution problems and help distinguish be-
tween probable man-induced contributions and natural
background levels.
Municipal point source control is largely accom-
plished through efforts of the Oklahoma State De-
partment of Health, while industrial point source con-
trol is the responsibility of the Oklahoma Water Re-
sources Board (OWRB). The nonpoint sources for the
State are generally placed under the jurisdiction of the
Oklahoma Conservation Commission, with exceptions
in the areas of silviculture under the Oklahoma State
Department of Agriculture and industrial stormwater
runoff under the OWRB.
Oregon
For complete copies of the Oregon 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Water Quality Division
522 S.W. Fifth Avenue
Portland, OR 97204
Summary
Oregon's water quality program emphasis on problem
prevention has enabled the State to maintain relatively
high water quality. Efforts over the last three decades
have been directed toward assuring that necessary
pollution controls were provided prior to approving
new industrial or municipal discharges, and that as
these facilities were expanded, upgraded treatment
capabilities minimized waste load increases.
Whereas several years ago a large share of munici-
pal source control activities could be devoted to long
range needs for timely construction of facilities to avert
pollution problems, much of the program effort today
involves assisting communities in meeting their im-
mediate needs. Postponed and insufficient federal
funding of sewerage works construction has created a
considerable backlog of problems. This is not intended
to suggest that accomplishments in the point source
control program will not continue to be made. How-
ever, expectations have been dampened regarding the
ability of the State to keep pace with a preventive
approach and/or make significant strides in a short
time period where problems do exist. A gradual shift in
the water pollution control program effort away from a
preventive and toward an abatement approach is fore-
seen, if Oregon's poor economic conditions continue
concurrent with reduced federal project funding.
The nonpoint source program has improved water
quality in Oregon. Considerable time and effort have
been spent developing coherent and workable man-
agement plans for solving present nonpoint source
problems and preventing future problems. The major
portion of Oregon's nonpoint source effort has been
funded through federal grants under the Section 208
program. As a result of the nonpoint source program
effort, public awareness of nonpoint source pollution
has been heightened. The implementation of identified
best management practices will take time, but the need
for these improved management approaches has been
demonstrated.
Between 1980 and 1982, significant progress was
made towards reevaluating specific beneficial uses of
many of Oregon's river reaches; rating these river
reaches according to whether high, medium, or low
use is made of each reach; and evaluating their ability
to serve the most sensitive users based on the selected
criteria.
Oregon has some 1,300 named lakes and hundreds
of unnamed lakes, most of which are of very high qual-
ity. For the few lakes where recreational and de-
velopment pressures have led to some degradation in
quality, grant applications to the Clean Lakes program
were made and projects are being undertaken.
The bulk of Oregon's ground water is dependable
and of high quality. In a few areas of the State, ground
water has naturally poor quality due to dissolved met-
als, gases, and minerals, and is not always suitable for
drinking or other uses. Knowledge of human-caused
ground water contamination problems has increased,
and the need to avert the potential for more problems
has resulted in the adoption of a State ground water
protection policy. The policy addresses the need to
protect ground water from the improper storage and
disposal of wastes from industrial, commercial, agricul-
tural, and residential activities and sources.
52
-------
Pennsylvania
For complete copies of the Pennsylvania 305(b) Report,
contact:
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
Bureau of Water Quality Management
P.O. Box 2063
Harrisburg, PA 17120
Summary
Most of the past emphasis in Pennsylvania water quali-
ty management programs, as well in as the rest of the
Nation, has been toward elimination of point source
pollution (sewage and industrial waste discharges).
However, pollution from nonpoint sources such as
abandoned mine drainage, storm water runoff, agricul-
tural and earth-moving operations, oil and gas extrac-
tion activities, and discharges to ground water have
significant adverse impacts in many areas of the State.
Consequently, increasing program emphasis and re-
sources are being committed to nonpoint source pollu-
tion control.
Much has been accomplished in pollution abatement
in the State, and there is a continuing trend of water
quality improvement. However, a number of significant
problems remain, as well as a need for resources to
correct these problems.
In areas with heavy industrial and population con-
centration, sewage and industrial wastes are the major
pollution sources. Storm water runoff and combined
sewer discharges add to the pollution problems. In
western and parts of central Pennsylvania, drainage
from bituminous coal mines (primarily abandoned
mines) creates serious water quality problems. The
same situation exists in the anthracite area of north-
eastern Pennsylvania. Approximately 2,000 miles of
major streams in Pennsylvania are either acidic (low
pH) or iron stained by drainage from abandoned coal
mines.
Other pollution sources in Pennsylvania include oil
and gas well operations in northwestern Pennsylvania,
and construction and other earthmoving operations
which have created serious erosion and sedimentation
problems. A significant number of power plants scat-
tered throughout the State discharge heated water,
also a potential pollutant.
The success of Pennsylvania's water quality man-
agement program can best be measured by the
improvement in quality of previously polluted or de-
graded water and by the degree to which good quality
waters are protected. In 1980, there was a net degrada-
tion of 92 miles of streams. This was mainly due to the
degradation of 69 miles of the North Branch of the
Susquehanna River due to the discharge of oil and
organic substances which had been disposed of in the
Butler Mine Drainage Tunnel. In 1981, a net im-
provement of 136 miles of streams was recorded. Ma-
jor reasons for improvement were improved sewage
and industrial waste treatment and a cleanup of 64
miles of the North Branch Susquehanna River which
had been reported as degraded in 1980 due to the But-
ler Tunnel discharge.
A tabulation of stream quality changes (im-
provements and degradation for the years 1977
through 1981) is summarized in Table 1 (below) by ma-
jor drainage basin.
Table 1 Pennsylvania Stream Quality (1977-1981)
Drainage Basin
Delaware
Susquehanna
Ohio
Lake Erie
Potomac
TOTAL
Miles of Streams
Improved
84
280
223
3
1
591
Miles of Streams
Degraded
19
152
281
3
5
410
Summarized in Table 2 below is a status report by
drainage basin on compliance with water quality stan-
dards. Overall, approximately 79 percent of the State's
major streams comply with water quality standards.
Table 2 Compliance with Water Quality Standards
Drainage Basin
Delaware
Susquehanna
Ohio
Lake Erie
Potomac
TOTAL
Miles of
Major Streams
2,019
6,269
4,151
105
418
12,962
Percent of Major Stream
Miles Meeting Standards
75
81
76
94
99
79
At the present time, 2,744 miles, or approximately
21% of major stream miles in Pennsylvania, fail to
meet water quality standards. Abandoned mine drain-
age, either by itself or in combination with other pollu-
tion sources, is responsible for approximately 2,000 of
the total miles polluted. Water quality projections to
1983 indicate that 2,406 miles of major streams will fail
to meet established "fishable-swimmable" goals.
Drainage from abandoned mines, either by itself or in
combination with other pollution sources, will account
for over 85 percent of the stream miles which are not
expected to meet these goals. In addition, the projected
lack of federal funds for future municipal treatment
projects will hamper clean-up programs.
However, it is apparent from the continuing trend of
water quality improvement that progress in attaining
the 1983 "fishable-swimmable" goals as set forth in
the Clean Water Act is being realized. Improved in-
dustrial waste treatment facilities and construction and
upgrading of municipal facilities continue to result in
improved water quality conditions.
53
-------
Puerto Rico
For complete copies of the Puerto Rico 305(b) Report,
contact:
Environmental Quality Board
1550 Ponce de Leon Avenue
Santurce, PR 00910
Summary
Puerto Rico's worst water quality problem is high fecal
coliform counts in a majority of its waters. This prob-
lem is caused primarily by overloaded waste treatment
facilities combined with poor operation and mainte-
nance of collection, treatment, and disposal facilities.
Other contributing factors include lack of adequate
wastewater treatment and disposal facilities in many
rural communities and for a number of livestock enter-
prises; industrial noncompliance with NPDES permits;
and many illegal dischargers.
Solid waste facilities located near river banks are an-
other problem affecting Puerto Rico's waters. New
approaches, coordinated to include the government, in-
dustry, and the public, are needed for the management
of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes.
A lake study completed under Section 314 of the
Clean Water Act showed that of 22 lakes sampled, 18
were eutrophic and 4 were mesotrophic. Restoration of
the most important lakes is in doubt due to cuts in the
Clean Lakes Program.
In September-October 1981, an islandwide ground
water survey was conducted of 57 wells. Major prob-
lems found were high salinity in coastal aquifers, the
presence of bacteria in water from springs and wells,
and contamination by trace organic compounds at
selected wells. Main sources for high chloride con-
centrations seem to be seawater intrusion, concentra-
tion of salts from irrigation practices, and residual salts
contained in various rock formations.
Rhode Island
For complete copies of the Rhode Island 305(b) Report,
contact:
Division of Water Resources
Department of Environmental Management
75 Davis Street
Providence, Rl 02908
Summary
This report seeks to summarize existing water quality;
current uses of State waters; the difference between
current uses and designated uses; and the program
costs or other impediments associated with meeting
the designated uses. In the discussion of water quality,
the basin approach is taken, incorporating basins es-
tablished for the 303(e) continuing planning process.
As reported in the 1980 305(b) report, significant im-
provements to water quality have occurred along the
Blackstone River with completion of treatment plant
projects in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Within the
next few years, depending upon the availability of
federal construction grants, significant improvements
in water quality will occur along the Pawtuxet River
with the upgrading of the Cranston, Warwick, and West
Warwick wastewater treatment facilities.
As in other States, the problem of hazardous waste
disposal is a major issue in Rhode Island. The De-
partment of Environmental Management and the De-
partment of Health have been working together closely
on this problem to prevent environmental damage and
insure the continuation of safe surface and ground
water supplies.
Existing
Conditions
Existing water quality in Rhode Island is summarized
by basin in the table below. This information differs
from that presented in the past. The major change is
that the concept of use attainability is beginning to
come into play. Where formerly stream segments were
categorized into broad classifications, emphasis is now
shifting to site-specific analysis of uses within classi-
fications. Some uses formerly associated with a
classification may be deleted for a particular segment.
Rhode Island Water Quality Summary
t/
River Basins/ ^ *
-------
velocities, etc.). The Pawcatuck River is by and large
the cleanest of the larger rivers in Rhode Island, but
has the greatest number of miles with an impairment
of a designated use. That use is bathing, and it is im-
paired by high coliform levels as well as by physical
factors. In contrast, the grossly polluted Pawtuxet River
has fewer miles with impairment of designated use,
but the water quality goals for the Pawtuxet River are
lower. Impaired uses of the Pawtuxet River include pro-
tection of aquatic life and prevention of nuisance con-
ditions.
South Carolina
For complete copies of the South Carolina 305(b) Re-
port, contact:
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmen-
tal Control
Office of Environmental Quality Control
J. Marion Sims Building
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, S.C. 29201
Summary
Of the 88 waters examined with the water quality index
(WQI) in this report, six showed 100 percent good qual-
ity, 16 showed a mixture of good and fair quality, 56
showed 100 percent fair quality, one showed a mixture
of fair and poor quality, eight showed 100 percent poor
quality, and one had insufficent data in Water Year
1981. It should be noted that 62 percent of the State's
waters are classified either Class B or Class SC and
therefore are not aimed at meeting the swimmable part
of the fishable-swimmable 1983 federal goal.
Overall trends for Water Years 1979, 1980, and 1981
using the WQI showed three waters improving in quali-
ty, 58 showing no trends in quality, 18 showing a
lowering in water quality, and nine with insufficient
data to detect a trend. For the majority of the waters
(65 percent), the quality appears to be changing little
even with increased point source loads to some of
these areas.
During the past decade, over 390 million dollars in
federal funds were spent in South Carolina for the
planning and construction of municipal wastewater
treatment facilities. It is anticipated that an additional
27 million dollars will be spent in fiscal year 1982. A
sufficient water quality data base for assesment pur-
poses was found for 12 out of the 24 construction
grant projects. Of these, eight had significant beneficial
water quality changes associated with them. The water
quality parameter exhibiting the greatest improvement
was fecal coliform bacteria, followed by biochemical
oxygen demand and dissolved oxygen.
The Clean Lakes Program was established to identify
and classify publicly owned freshwater lakes according
to trophic condition and to choose methods to restore
lakes where use impairment was found. Forty lakes (16
major lakes and 24 minor lakes) were ranked according
to their priority for restoration. Federal funding for
Clean Lakes projects has been discontinued and there
are no federal monies available for lake restoration
efforts. The top five priority major lakes were Lake
Greenwood, Lake Moultrie, Lake Marion, Lake Murray,
and Lake Hartwell. The top five priority minor lakes
were Goose Creek Reservoir, Broadway Lake, Lake
Edgar A. Brown, Lake Edwin Johnson, and Lake War-
ren.
In August 1976, the South Carolina Department of
Health and Environmental Control and EPA jointly re-
leased an advisory against eating fish from Lake Hart-
well and Twelve Mile Creek in Pickens County because
of high levels of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The
primary source of PCBs was found to be an electrical
capacitor manufacturer near Pickens, South Carolina.
The source of the PCB problem has been eliminated.
Subsequent analysis showed that the advisory could
be lifted in certain portions of the lake; it is now only in
effect in the areas above S.C. Highway #24. Since
1976, PCB levels in fish have steadily declined. It is
now believed the levels will fall below the tolerance
limit sooner than peviously expected.
It is recommended that: EPA continue to fund munic-
ipal waste treatment projects which will result in sig-
nificant improvements in water quality problem areas;
EPA expedite the pending BAT/Toxic and BAT/BCT
guidelines so planning for needed treatment facilities
and permitting of discharges under those categories
can proceed; funding to implement the EPA proposed
water quality standards regulations be increased; and
funding be increased through the 106 program to bet-
ter support special studies and trend monitoring activi-
ties.
South Dakota
For complete copies of the South Dakota 305(b) Report,
contact:
South Dakota Department of Water and Natural Re-
sources
Joe Foss Building
Pierre, SD 57501
Summary
Nonpoint source pollution is considered the number
one quality problem in South Dakota. The Department
of Water and Natural Resources (DWNR) has de-
veloped an extensive nonpoint source pollution control
program using EPA 208 and 314 funds. Nonpoint
source pollution has been attacked on several fronts.
At the Statewide level, a nonpoint source pollution
priority list has been developed county by county. This
priority list is based primarily on the personal know-
ledge of local individuals and needs further documen-
tation of the extent, nature, and impact of the prob-
lems. Various State and national agencies and local
55
-------
conservation districts have worked together to develop
an effective nonpoint source pollution control program
which includes public and local governmental informa-
tion dissemination; planning and implementation of
nonpoint source pollution control projects for specific
problem watersheds; development of soil erosion and
sediment control ordinances at the Conservation Dis-
trict level; and an effective tracking program. At pres-
ent, ten problem watersheds are in the implementa-
tion process and four are in the planning stage.
Significant improvements in water quality have been
achieved through the construction of new wastewater
management facilities. However, many needs must still
be addresed. The FY 1980 EPA Needs Survey indicated
that the following categories must still be resolved:
municipal discharges causing water quality problems;
municipal discharges that are causing public health
hazards; and municipal discharges that do not meet
minimum federal requirements.
The degree of impairment of beneficial uses of South
Dakota's streams and rivers due to water pollution
ranges from none to severe. The most severe im-
pairment is occurring in the Whitewood Creek/Belle
Fourche River/Cheyenne River drainage. The sources of
the pollution are mine tailings from more than 100
years of mining activities, current mine discharges, nu-
trients from municipal wastewater discharges, urban
runoff, agricultural runoff, livestock, and wood preser-
vation plants. Severe impairment is also occurring in
the lower reaches of the White River, in the Bad River,
and in Rapid Creek from Rapid City to the Cheyenne
River. The problems in the White River are related pri-
marily to erosion of the Badlands and livestock
watering. Lack of flow, livestock watering, and soil ero-
sion are the primary causes of water quality degrada-
tion in the Bad River. Lower Rapid Creek is degraded
by urban runoff and effluent from the municipal
wastewater treatment plant. Landowners along this
reach report that livestock and wildlife will not drink
the water and that the water causes skin irritation.
These problems have not been documented or a possi-
ble source determined.
In 1981, DWNR examined lake water quality and pro-
duced a priority ranking for lake restoration in South
Dakota. One hundred lakes were ranked so that
restoration monies would be spent on the projects
which would produce the most lake improvement and
benefit the most people. Most South Dakota lakes are
severely affected by runoff which carries silt and nu -
trients.
Ground water accounts for 45% of all water use in
South Dakota. Usage would be higher but is limited by
water quality. Many of the deeper aquifers are unfit for
domestic use or irrigation because of high con-
centrations of dissolved salts. Many of the shallower
aquifers are polluted with high concentrations of ni-
trates. Nitrate contamination is of particular concern in
Brookings, Hamlin, and Gregory counties. The two
largest sources of ground water pollution in South
Dakota are excessive and improper use of agricultural
chemicals, especially nitrogen fertilizers, and the leak-
age of poor quality water from deep aquifers into high-
er quality shallow aquifers from improperly built and
abandoned artesian wells.
In terms of nationwide standards, the water quality
of South Dakota's public drinking water supplies is
poor. Ground water comprises all or part of the supply
for 95% of these facilities. Many of these supplies do
not meet the recommended criteria for dissolved solids
(70%), chloride (6%), sulfate (53%), iron (37%), man-
ganese (51%), fluoride (8%), nitrate (3%), sodium (80%),
and selenium (2%). Trihalomethanes and radiological
parameters are also present in some supplies, but the
extent of the problem is not known.
Tennessee
For complete copies of the Tennessee 305(b) Report,
contact:
Tennessee Department of Public Health
Division of Water Quality Control
621 Cordell Hull Building
Nashville, TN 37219
Summary
An overview of water pollution problems in Tennessee
indicates that, in general, the quality of waters in the
State is very good. There are no gross pollution prob-
lems encompassing lengthy segments of streams;
most of the pollution is confined to short segments of
streams and is the result of one or two point source
discharges. Those areas which suffer pollution from
multiple dischargers are mainly the larger metropolitan
areas of Chattanooga, the Upper Holston River in the
Kingsport area, and to a lesser extent the areas associ-
ated with Memphis, Nashville, and Knoxville.
There is a considerable amount of surface mining
activity in Tennessee, some of which has a very detri-
mental affect on water quality. Most problem areas are
located in the Upper Cumberland River Basin, the
Clinch River Basin, and the Lower Tennessee River
Basin, and are largely the result of surface mining for
coal in highly acidic geologic strata mountainous areas.
Because of the Nation's current energy problems, an
increase in strip mining for coal is likely, with an equal
increase in water quality problems and environmental
degradation. Stronger laws and an expanded enforce-
ment program in this area will be necessary to improve
this situation and to prevent further degradation. An-
other area in the energy field needing increased and
careful scrutiny is that of nuclear power plants. Ther-
mal discharges and accidental losses of radioactive
materials may threaten water quality and public health.
Eutrophication, though not excessive, is beginning to
be a problem at some specific sites across the State.
Out of 112 publicly owned lakes in Tennessee, 54 have
been designated as having problems with eutrophica-
tion.
Evaluation of sampling data from 1980 and 1981
generally shows that there has been little change in
water quality in Tennessee. Some parameters, es-
pecially suspended solids, pH, iron, and manganese.
56
-------
are in consistent violation of State standards in a few
river basins. Many of the watersheds in which viola-
tions are found are also where surface mining occurs.
However, these problems are not as widespread as
that of fecal coliform bacteria. Other parameters
showing occasional violations include mercury, lead,
copper, and phosphorus. These violations are in-
frequent and occur in various locations across the
State, with no specific trends evident. Parameters
which show few, if any, violations are BOD5, dissolved
oxygen, temperature, nitrogen (as nitrates and nitrites)
and chromium. There are very little data on organic
chemicals, but the need for this data is becoming ap-
parent.
Nonpoint source runoff is the major source of agri-
cultural chemicals appearing in streams in the in-
tensive agricultural areas of Western Tennessee. Be-
cause of the erosion of up to one inch of soil per year
in areas of Western Tennessee, chlordane, DDT, DDE,
and other agricultural chemicals are leached from or
are carried with the eroding soil to the State's streams.
Industrial pollution problems have begun to be re-
duced in recent years due to the National Pollutant Dis-
charge Elimination System delegation from EPA giving
the State the authority to permit and require com-
pliance monitoring of industries throughout the State.
However, there are still significant problem areas in
segments of rivers and streams due to past and pres-
ent industrial discharges which cannot be ignored,
such as the Holston River in Upper East Tennesee, the
Wolf River near Memphis, and Chattanooga Creek near
Chattanooga.
The State of Texas is divided into 23 inland and coast-
al basins for water quality management and planning
purposes. The basins are further divided into 311
stream and coastal segments, comprising 16,115
stream miles. Of the 311 segments, the Department
has determined that 242 segments presently comply
with all applicable stream standards, or are projected
to be compliant following incorporation of best practi-
cable treatment by industry and secondary treatment by
municipalities. The remaining 69 segments either do
not presently comply with applicable stream standards
or will be noncompliant with the imposition of best
practicable and secondary treatment facilities. Some of
these 69 segments may be in compliance with stream
standards, or are projected to be brought into com-
pliance as a result of incorporation of advanced waste
treatment/advanced secondary treatment for municipa-
lities or best conventional treatment for industries.
The following table summarizes Texas water quality
by stream mile for the past five years.
Statewide Summary
of Water Quality
1977 1978 1979 1980 1981
Total stream miles 15,565 15,565 16,107 16,107 16,115
Stream miles that are 11,706 13,649 14,598 14,598 14,606
fishable/ swimmable
Additional stream
miles expected to be
fishable/ swimmable
by 1983
Stream miles not
expected to be
fishable/ swimmable*
866 682 992 992 992
2,992 1,234 458 458 458
'Excludes waterway miles not intended to become fishable/swimmable
by I983
Texas
For complete copies of the Texas 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Texas Department of Water Resources
Post Office Box 13087
Austin, TX 78711
Summary
Texas rivers, streams, and lakes are subjected to enor-
mous pressures from industrial, agricultural, and
recreational endeavors, as well as from steadily in-
creasing population. The State's population is expected
to increase by over 5 million by the year 2000. Even
with this growth and increasing water use, the quality
of the State's waters has improved significantly. Much
of this improvement is directly related to improved
wastewater treatment programs by both municipalities
and industries. These improvements have been accom-
panied by significant economic growth activities that
are water resource dependent, demonstrating that high
levels of water quality and economic activity can and
are occurring simultaneously in Texas.
Expanded development of the State's water re-
sources and pressures to satisfy numerous beneficial
purposes have created local, regional, and Statewide
problems of varying intensity. While surface water
quality continues to be a major concern, ground water
overdraft and degradation are particularly troublesome
because of expanding economic activities that are
ground water dependent.
Ground water comprises approximately 70% of the
total water used by Texans for domestic, municipal, in-
dustrial, and agricultural purposes. A ground water
quality monitoring network consisting of some 5,600
observation wells is currently maintained by the De-
partment, with 1,100 wells being sampled annually for
the common constituents of natural ground water. Lo-
cal, regional, and other State and federal agencies are
also involved in additional monitoring of the quantity
and quality of Texas' ground water resources.
57
-------
Trust Territory of the
Pacific Islands
For complete copies of the Trust Territories of the
Pacific Islands 305(b) Report, contact:
Trust Territory Environmental Protection Board
Saipan, Mariana Islands 96950
Summary
The Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (Micronesia)
has a total of 13 identified segments, four of which are
fresh surface waters. The quality of water in these seg-
ments has either improved, due to the elimination of a
number of point and nonpoint sources, or remains in
its previous condition.
Urbanization, rapid population growth, substandard
housing, incomplete sewer and solid waste disposal
systems, nonpoint pollution sources, and a lack of ade-
quate safe drinking water are still serious environmen-
tal pollution problems in Micronesia.
Water pollution from municipal sources results in
water below the level of existing standards in most of
the governmental centers in Micronesia and remains a
major public health problem. Micronesia recognizes
this problem and is continuing to construct sewer treat-
ment facilities, collection systems, and house con-
nections in all major segments.
Rainfall runoff, poor land management practices, and
the prevalence of pit and over-water latrines in urban
and rural areas contribute substantially to the largely
undefined nonpoint source problem. The implementa-
tion and general acceptance of earthmoving permit
regulations has tended to reduce this problem from
construction causes.
Erosion nevertheless threatens the water quality,
ecology, subsistence fishing, and overall productivity of
the many lagoons and reefs fringing Micronesia's high
population centers.
Although there are numerous observed violations of
Trust Territory Water Quality Standards, particularly for
bacterial standards, most of these areas can be
brought within standards by application of appropriate
sewage treatment technology and the necessary sew-
age collection systems.
There are limited areas adjacent to governmental
centers which presently do not support shellfish, fish,
and wildlife populations appropriate to the waters.
These areas have been subjected to nonpoint source
pollution, primarly siltation, resulting from poor con-
struction practices. Recent regulations promulgated by
the Trust Territory Environmental Protection Board are
bringing some degree of control over these sources. In
most instances, natural habitat restoration and
recolonization will restore damaged areas to near origi-
nal productivity and ecological balance.
Utah
For complete copies of the Utah 305(b) Report, contact:
Utah Department of Health
Division of Environmental Health
Bureau of Water Pollution Control
150 West North Temple
P.O. Box 2500
Salt Lake City, UT84110
Summary
Because Utah is the second driest State in the Nation,
it has faced and continues to face unique problems in
pollution control. Most streams in Utah have relatively
low natural streamflow. These flows are often further
reduced by diversions for irrigation, domestic, and in-
dustrial uses, and thus can be significantly affected by
pollution discharges. Population growth and industrial
expansion are placing increasing pressures on water
quality/public health protection technology. Water
pollution controls must become more efficient because
there is increasingly more pollution to control and be-
cause the environment's ability to absorb pollution
does not increase. New kinds of pollution such as
hazardous chemicals, and imminent water quality prob-
lems from industrial development and mining of coal,
oil shale, tar sand, and uranium, must also be dealt
with. However, regardless of the type of pollution, it is
obviously less expensive to prevent problems than to
pay for their solution after they occur.
The Utah Water Pollution Control Committee
(UWPCC) has grouped the waters of the State into
classes to protect their beneficial uses and has es-
tablished numerical standards of water quality param-
eters for each of these uses. In order to monitor for
attainment of these standards, the Bureau of Water
Pollution Control has established over 500 active and
semi-active stream sampling stations. Of these, 170
have been selected for trend analysis to determine
water quality degradation or improvement. This report
discusses the findings from those 170 stations.
Point sources present a geographically limited prob-
lem and are obviously more significant in highly
populated areas. Wastewater treatment facilities con-
centrated in certain drainages seriously affect receiving
streams because of the population loads. The impor-
tant example is the Jordan River, which flows from
south to north through the Salt Lake Valley. Eight mu-
nicipal treatment facilities are currently in operation
treating wastewater from a population of 700,000 and
discharging into the Jordan River.
Most remaining water quality problems in Utah re-
sult from nonpoint sources rather than point source
discharges. Nonpoint sources of pollutants include
runoff from natural geologic formations, agriculture,
urban areas, hydrologic modification, mining, recrea-
tion, construction, and silviculture. Natural sandstone
formations in eastern and southern Utah contribute
significant amounts of sediments through erosion.
Natural deposits of salts, phosphates, fluorides, ni-
trates, and arsenic also contribute to decreasing water
quality in certain areas of the State.
58
-------
The majority of the total water use in Utah is for agri-
culture. As a result, this is one of the primary sources
of man-induced nonpoint pollution. Diversion of waters
for irrigation tends to concentrate salts and solids in
stream channels. Also, return flow discharges add
salts, nutrients, and sediments from croplands into
stream channels. Overland runoff contributes salts and
sediments from non-irrigated croplands and coliform
bacteria from pasture land.
Utah and EPA designated 23 stream segments in
Utah as critical water quality problem areas in fiscal
year 1981. Improved data analysis has allowed an
updating of that priority list in the 305(b) report. The
findings of the two reports complement one another;
however, this 305(b) report represents a continuing
update of the priority stream segments. The Weber River
and its tributaries from the Stoddard diversion to its
headwaters is the most impaired stream for its desig-
nated uses. Recreational developments, agriculture,
and energy exploration in the headwaters of this
stream segment are the primary reasons why it is the
most impaired. Other segments that remain high on
the list (Provo River, Jordan River, Spanish Fork River)
are those which are most affected by high population.
Nonpoint agricultural sources and salinity problems are
the reasons why the other stream segments are on the
priority list.
Salinity will remain a problem in Utah because of
contributions of dissolved solids from natural runoff
and agriculture. The State will continue to pursue salin-
ity control activities in the Colorado River and Sevier
River basins.
Vermont
For complete copies of the Vermont 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Vermont Agency of Environmental Conservation
Department of Water Resources
State Office Building
Montpelier, VT 05602
Summary
Vermont has continued to take positive steps toward
achieving the desirable goal of total fishable/
swimmable waters. The State has for all practical pur-
poses attained total fishable waters. Also, all waters in
the State having a designated water use compatible
with swimming are capable of achieving this goal.
Obviously, the swimmable goal requires a qualifier of
"when and where attainable." The level of coliform
bacteriological organisms in flowing waters has contin-
ued as a basic water quality problem. Nonpoint runoff
originating from agricultural, silvicultural, and urban
areas (stormwater and combined sewer overflows) is
believed to be essentially responsible for the elevated
bacteriological levels. These sources are not currently
economically controllable.
Eighty-four percent of Vermont's segmented river
miles are presently in compliance with all applicable
water quality standards. Waters have been brought in-
to compliance mainly through the upgrading and new
construction of municipal wastewater treatment facili-
ties.
Substantial progress has been made by the State in
cataloging industrial discharges and their impact on
receiving water quality and on municipal treatment
facilities (in the case of pretreatment industries). The
majority of industrial discharges in Vermont presently
employ Best Practicable Treatment Technology.
The water quality of Vermont's streams and lakes
has continued to show notable improvement during
the past two years. This progress is due primarily to
continued wastewater treatment facility upgrading and
construction, and to further implementation of identi-
fied best management practices for construction, silvi-
culture, and agriculture. Implementation of these best
management practices has been to a large degree
voluntary. These voluntary efforts have been com-
mendable, but continued implementation will be neces-
sary for further water quality progress.
It is fully recognized that serious potential problems
still remain and must be addressed if Vermont's high
water quality is to be maintained for future genera-
tions. The majority of these problem areas such as
hydropower development, acid precipitation, protection
of upland streams, and water withdrawals do not have
straightforward solutions and will require new and in-
novative approaches to water quality management. In
the face of increasingly limited financial resources, im-
plementation of viable solutions to these complex
problems will also be more difficult. Vermont is de-
termined to meet this challenge and to protect and
maintain its high quality waters.
Virgin Islands
For complete copies of the 305(b) Report for the Virgin
Islands, contact:
Division of Natural Resources Management
Department of Conservation & Cultural Affairs
Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas VI 00801
Summary
The Virgin Islands are made up of three islands—St.
Thomas, St. John, and St. Croix—and approximately 50
smaller uninhabited islands. Monitoring data collected
over the years have documented the major water
pollution problems in the Territory and the progress
toward meeting the goals of the Clean Water Act, as
follows:
59
-------
St. Thomas
• New desalination units on St. Thomas prevent the
infiltration and contamination problems which plagued
the island's public drinking water supplies before 1981.
• Continuous violations of the territorial and federal
drinking water standards for bacteria and turbidity
have occurred in the drinking water supplied by the
Housing Authority. Plans are underway to install new
water treatment systems, although funds are not yet
available.
• Significant improvements have been made in the op-
eration of three sewage treatment plants (STPs) in the
Turpentine Run watershed during 1980-82. These STPs
had been discharging partially treated sewage into
aquifer recharge areas.
• All open bays have retained their natural water quali-
ty conditions.
• As a result of the completion of the Charlotte Amalie
STP, the water quality of the Charlotte Amalie harbor
has improved since the early 1970s.
• The major water quality problem on St. Thomas is
the steady decline in water quality within the man-
grove lagoon. Reasons for this decline are the dis-
charge of partially treated sewage by various STPs,
and the elimination of large portions of the mangrove
forests because of fill operations and channelization.
St. John
• The ground water resources of this island are con-
sidered adequate to serve public needs.
• Stormwater runoff causes some standards violations
in Cruz Bay.
St. Croix
• New desalination units were installed on St. Croix in
1981. Past problems with infiltration and contamination
have therefore been solved.
• Potential ground water contamination problems exist
due to leaks in sewage interceptors. Hydrological in-
vestigations are underway.
• Water quality in the Christiansted Harbor has im-
proved with the completion of the St. Croix STP.
• The greatest improvement in water quality has oc-
curred along the island's south shore.
• The water quality of the Altoona lagoon and the Salt
River estuary is degraded by sedimentation and
Stormwater runoff.
Program Needs
The current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System sets the same effluent criteria regardless of the
nature of the receiving waters. The practical and cost-
effective approach is to devise different criteria for the
oceans, estuaries, and inland waters in tropical U.S. en-
vironments.
Virginia
For complete copies of the Virginia 305(b) Report, con-
tact:
Virginia State Water Control Board
P.O. Box 11143
Richmond, VA 23230
Summary
Virginia has nine major river basins with over 27,000
miles of perennial streams and 500 square miles of
coastal wetlands and embayments. Water quality is
generally excellent except in a relatively few areas of
the State, reflecting progress made since the inception
of the Virginia Water Control Board in 1946. As a result
of its NPDES permit program controlling discharges to
the State's waters, Virginia has achieved a reduction in
BOD5 of about 54 percent since 1976, despite a growth
in population of about seven percent.
Water Quality Standards Compliance
Virginia has 314 water monitoring stations which are
sampled monthly for major water quality parameters.
Compliance with water quality standards is discussed
for four primary parameters: dissolved oxygen, pH,
temperature, and fecal coliform bacteria. Trend data for
these constituents are also discussed.
During the reporting period, only 14 percent of
monitoring stations had even one monthly sample be-
low the minimum dissolved oxygen standard. The dis-
solved oxygen level at 76 percent of stations was
stable over the last 5-10 years. Stations showing an im-
proving trend outnumbered stations with declining ox-
ygen levels almost two to one.
About half of the stations had at least one pH sample
outside the range allowed by the standard. Most pH
standard violations were due to natural conditions;
only three stations had pH problems directly attribut-
able to pollution. Trend analyses show that pH levels
are stable at most stations, but stations with increasing
pH outnumbered stations with decreasing pH by about
three to one.
Only seven percent of the stations had even one
value above the allowable temperature maximum. All
temperature standard violations were thought to be
natural; none were attributed to point sources.
Fecal coliform bacteria levels exceeded allowable
levels at 71 percent of the stations. Counts remained
stable at 75 percent of the stations, but stations
showing improvement outnumbered stations showing
increasing counts by about three to one.
Toxic Pollutant Problem Areas
The Virginia report highlights three areas where toxic
pollutants are a problem:
• Seasonal commercial fishing restrictions are in effect
for 113 miles of the James River estuary because of
contamination by the pesticide Kepone. Sport fishing is
allowed.
• On the North Fork Holston River, 81 miles are res-
tricted to catch-and-release fishing due to mercury
pollution. Abatement measures are underway.
60
-------
• A fish consumption Health Advisory is in effect for
102 miles of the South River and the South Fork
Shenandoah River due to mercury pollution.
The Virginia State Water Control Board completed an
EPA-funded study of 161 lakes in March 1981. The
lakes were ranked according to trophic status, size,
population served, and other factors.
Virginia has been working jointly with EPA,
Maryland, Pennsylvania, and citizen groups over the
last five years to administer and direct the Chesapeake
Bay Program, a $27 million effort to determine environ-
mental problems in the Bay and recommend strategies
to assure its protection. Comprehensive planning and
coordination are essential to ensure that development
and environmental controls are properly balanced.
Proper planning is vital if the Bay is to remain a viable
resource to be both enjoyed and utilized by future gen-
erations of Virginians.
Washington
For complete copies of the Washington 305(b) Report,
contact:
Washington Department of Ecology
Office of Water Programs
Water Quality Management Division
Mail Stop PV-11
Olympia, WA 98504
Summary
This document presents Washington's water quality
goal, problems, priorities, problem correction/
prevention strategies, and planned water quality man-
agement activities for the coming year and beyond.
A tabulation of the number of river and marine water
segments by water quality status is presented below.
Number of River and Marine Water Segments
by Water Quality Status
Meets Goal
Insufficient Data
Will Meet Goal
Point Source Problems
Nonpoint Source Problems
Will Not Meet Goal
Total
North-
west
21
12
1
2
11
5
52
South-
west
34
21
0
5
10
9
79
Central
8
1
0
0
5
2
16
Eastern
2
5
0
1
4
11
23
Total
State
65
39
1
8
30
27
170
Five rivers and marine segments have been identi-
fied as high priority waters experiencing water quality
problems. These are: the Duwamish Waterway and
River to the limit of tidal influence; Commencement
Bay, including the main and inner bay to the Puyallup
River; the inner and outer areas of Grays Harbor; the
Yakima River from its mouth to its headwaters; and the
Spokane River from its mouth to the Washington/Idaho
border. Swimming and fishing uses are among those
uses impaired in these waters.
Washington has a long history of effectively
regulating point sources of pollution, especially munic-
ipal and industrial discharges. The principal vehicle for
such regulation has been the waste discharge permit
program. Certain financial incentives also have been
provided to encourage compliance with permit require-
ments.
As point source problems have been corrected, more
attention has been shifted to nonpoint source prob-
lems. A subjective evaluation of the relative signifi-
cance of the nonpoint source problems resulted in the
following priorities:
Agriculture
Irrigated Agriculture
Dryland Agriculture
Dairy Waste Management
Silviculture
On-Site Waste Disposal
Urban Runoff
Priorities also have been identified for the control of
point sources. Priorities for regulating municipal and
industrial discharges have been identified through the
waste discharge permit and compliance programs.
Priorities also have been identified for the cleanup of
municipal discharges through the municipal
wastewater facilities construction grants program.
West Virginia
For complete copies of the West Virginia 305(b) Report,
contact:
West Virginia Department of Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
1201 Greenbrier St.
Charleston, WV 25300
Summary
This assessment of the water quality of West Virginia
streams is derived from information collected between
July 1979 and June 1981. It is based upon data
obtained from monitoring stations maintained by the
West Virginia Division of Water Resources and
ORSANCO.
Generally, there have been no changes in water qual-
ity in West Virginia in recent years. The parameters
which were consistently higher than State criteria were
coliform bacteria, iron, and phenols. pH, cadmium, and
manganese were continual problems on specific
streams but were not as ubiquitous as bacteria and
phenols. Heavy metal violations were scattered
throughout the State and the report period. Parameters
which have remained consistently within State criteria
include dissolved oxygen, temperature, and mercury.
61
-------
High phenolic levels have occurred in the Upper
Ohio River during the report period. The water quality
standard has often been exceeded. High concentrations
have resulted in treatment problems at the Wheeling
water treatment plant. Possible sources include facili-
ties in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia whose to-
tal NPDES permit limitations exceed the river's dilution
capability at 7-day, 10-year low flow. Severe problems
have resulted from periodic slugs of unknown origin,
possibly contaminated ground water, runoff from point
and nonpoint sources, spills, dumping, or municipal
discharges. Extensive monitoring efforts involving EPA,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and the City of
Wheeling have failed to identify a single major source
for the problem. It now appears the excessive con-
centrations are the cumulative result of a number of
separate contributions including ground water, active
industrial facilities, publicly owned sewage treatment
works, and others.
This problem's diverse source and interstate nature
make it difficult to address. Some federal oversight is
needed to ensure that all involved States initiate cor-
rective measures. The major contributing industrial
permits in West Virginia are due for reissuance soon
and more stringent effluent restrictions on phenolic
discharges may be necessary. An areawide effort has
been directed towards better "housekeeping" at plant
sites thought to be contributing phenolic materials to
the river or ground water. Several more years of effort
by the involved States will be necessary to develop,
initiate, and obtain significant results from an areawide
management effort.
Acid mine drainage from abandoned sources con-
tinues to be a severe problem in certain areas of the
State. The Divisions of Water Resources and Reclama-
tion are currently working to produce an inventory of
these sources and to estimate their acid production.
Funds have been established by the Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to reclaim aban-
doned mine sites. While water quality improvement is
not the highest priority under the Act, it is hoped that
these funds can eventually be used for this purpose.
The Division of Water Resources has recommended
that the Big Sandy Creek drainage in Preston County
be considered for reclamation when funds are avail-
able.
Wisconsin
For complete copies of the Wisconsin 305(b) Report,
contact:
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Box 7921
Madison, Wl 53707
Summary
The State of Wisconsin contains almost 15,000 lakes
and tens of thousands of river and stream miles. There
are three major river systems: the Wisconsin, the Fox,
and portions of the Mississippi River. Portions of Lakes
Superior and Michigan also fall within Wisconsin's
boundaries. These varied resources are abundant, but
human use has degraded their quality. The Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, as
amended, and associated State statutes have provided
a basis for pollution control programs. Resulting water
quality improvements have been substantial.
The monthly monitoring program at 44 sites around
the State provides a "snapshot" look at the water qual-
ity of rivers over time. The monitoring is not an inten-
sive survey, but documents background water quality
and general trends in water quality improvement or
degradation. Comparison of 1980-1981 data on con-
centrations of total phosphorus and suspended solids
with 1977-78 data shows an average reduction of one-
third. These pollutants typically reflect nonpoint source
pollution and indicate declining amounts of polluted
runoff. The average concentration of biochemical ox-
ygen demand, which commonly indicates water quality
degradation from point sources such as municipalities
and industries, has decreased at 75 percent of the sites.
Wisconsin's lakes are degraded by nutrient enrich-
ment or eutrophication. A 1979 classification of a repre-
sentative sample (1,500) of the lakes showed that over
80 percent have a low to medium degree of eu-
trophication. Another classification of 3,200 lakes is
underway.
Wisconsin's Clean Lakes Program aims to limit de-
gradation of damaged lakes and protect the quality of
others. The program has administered almost 25 lake
rehabilitation projects around the State. Completed
projects have resulted in relatively weed-free open
water and greater public use of the lakes.
Wisconsin's ground water is abundant and pure. In
the center of the State, however, irrigation practices
have resulted in ground water contamination from ni-
trate fertilizers. Also, the pesticide aldicarb has been
detected in 70 of the 383 wells tested in the area. Aldi-
carb levels considered hazardous by EPA were meas-
ured in 20 wells. The State Pesticide Review Board has
prohibited aldicarb use in central Wisconsin in 1982.
Water pollution control programs are the basis for
water quality improvement in surface waters. These
programs carry out Wisconsin's commitment to
achieve the 1983 goal of "fishable and swimmable"
waters. There were 568 municipal dischargers in 1981.
By mid 1982, about 60 percent of these dischargers will
be complying with the requirement for them to meet
an assigned level of wastewater treatment. By July 1,
62
-------
1983, a compliance rate over 80 percent is predicted.
Over 125 municipalities have complied with their re-
quired level of wastewater treatment by upgrading
treatment works under the construction grants pro-
gram. Prior to 1979, all funding was derived from the
federal government. Since 1980, though, the State-
established Wisconsin Fund has been the major source
of fuhding. The Fund has granted or allocated over
$270 million in the past three years. Federal grants
totaled about $65 million during this same time.
Nonpoint source pollution—pollution whose source
cannot be traced to a single point—is a serious prob-
lem in about half of the State. So far, the pollution con-
trol program has centered on critical problem areas in
11 watersheds.
A toxic substances survey of Great Lakes tributaries
in Wisconsin showed that excessive amounts of
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) occurred in southern
Lake Michigan tributaries. Three sources of toxics were
identified.
The State phosphate detergent ban expired on June
30, 1982. Attempts have been made to document re-
ductions in phosphorus in surface waters as a result of
the ban, enacted in 1979, but "the length of the ban was
too short to cause a measurable change in river phos-
phorus levels. The study did show lower levels of
phosphorus in wastewater entering municipal treat-
ment plants.
In 1979, precipitation collected in Wisconsin was
found to be at least ten times more acid than normal.
A research program is being carried out by the State,
public utilities, and others to define the potential im-
pact of acid rain.
Wyoming
For complete copies of the Wyoming 305(b) Report,
contact:
Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality
Water Quality Division
1111 East Lincolnway
Cheyenne, WY 82002
Summary
The Wyoming Statewide Water Quality Assessment
provides a summary of water quality information on
significant stream segments, lakes, and ground water
aquifers in the State.
Water quality data, inventories, indexes, and assess-
ments indicate a generally high quality of water in the
State. For years the State has had a low density pop-
ulation coupled with little industrial development. How-
ever, in recent years, a rapidly growing population
associated with energy and mineral development has
necessitated intensified efforts to protect valuable
water resources.
Through a combination of State and federal water
quality programs, the Water Quality Division has been
able to address and solve a number of water quality
problems. Although the solution of existing problems
is exceedingly important, the Division will continue to
emphasize operation of programs which protect high
quality waters from degradation.
This report provides summary information on 40 sur-
face waterbodies which have been designated by the
Water Quality Division as priorities. In reviewing the 40
priority segments, it is evident that the problems are
diverse, widespread, and in many cases have no sim-
ple solution.
In some cases, such as Goose Creek (priority #2) and
Clear Creek (priority #16), the problems are caused pri-
marily by point sources which are being addressed
through compliance schedules and the construction
grants process. However, a number of problems in
lakes and stream segments are the result of diffuse
nonpoint sources, or combinations of point and non-
point sources. Additionally, a number of federal agencies
may be involved in management of lands in a par-
ticular drainage area. In order to address these types of
problems, the Division cooperates with other State and
federal agencies, and utilizes available resources from
a variety of programs to obtain a comprehensive solu-
tion.
The ambient ground water quality of the State's
aquifers varies tremendously. High concentrations of
flouride appear to be the most widespread problem for
Wyoming's drinking water aquifers. All basins had
some wells showing levels of flouride exceeding pri-
mary standards in at least one major aquifer. Selenium
is also a fairly widespread problem. It should be
emphasized, however, that the problems are local in
nature. The source of the selenium and flouride
appears to be a natural result of host rock properties
and ground water characteristics. Other ground water
pollution problems are surfacing throughout the State,
resulting primarily from past housekeeping procedures
at many industrial facilities.
Overall, however, the State has been fortunate to en-
joy generally high quality water resources. Wyoming
has not had the severe problems faced by many of the
densely populated, heavily industrialized States. It is
the goal of the Division to continue to make all efforts
to reduce or eliminate current pollution problems
where feasible, and to protect high quality waters from
degradation.
63
------- |