-PA
.C41/A-95-002 UnttedStates OfficeofWater December1995
Environmental Protection Washington, D.C.20460
Agency
v>EPA National Water Quality Inventory
1 994 Report to Congress
Individual State and Territorial
Summaries
-------
-------
Individual State and Territorial
Summaries
This section provides individual
summaries of the water quality
survey data reported by the States
and Territories in their 1994 Section
305(b) reports. The summaries
provide a general overview of water
quality conditions and the most
frequently identified water quality
problems in each State and Terri-
tory. However, the use support data
contained in these summaries are
not comparable because the States
and Territories do not use compa-
rable criteria and monitoring strate-
gies to measure their water quality.
States and Territories with strict
criteria for defining healthy Waters
are more likely to report that a high
percentage of their waters are in
poor condition. Similarly, States
with progressive monitoring pro-
grams are more likely to identify
water quality problems and to re-
port that a high percentage of their
waters do not fully support desig-
nated uses. As a result, one cannot
assume that water quality is" worse
in those States and Territories that
report a high percentage of im-
pacted waters in the following
summaries. '"'*.;. ,,
r-
O
V)
-------
-------
-------
-------
Alabama
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Alabama 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Michael J. Rief
Alabama Department of
Environmental Management
Water Quality Branch
P.O. Box 301463
Montgomery, AL 36130-1463
(334)271-7829
Surface Water Quality
Since enactment of the Clean
Water Act of 1972, water quality
has substantially improved near
industrial and municipal facilities.
However, pollution still prevents
about 29% of the surveyed stream
miles, 15% of the surveyed lake
acres, and 20% of the surveyed
estuaries from fully supporting
aquatic life use. Oxygen-depleting
wastes and nutrients are the most
common pollutants impacting rivers
and coastal waters. The leading
sources of river pollution include
agriculture, municipal wastewater
treatment plants, and resource
extraction. In coastal waters, the
leading sources of pollution are
urban runoff and storm sewers,
municipal sewage treatment plants,
and combined sewer overflows.
Toxic priority organic chemicals
impact the most lake acres, usually
in the form of a fish consumption
advisory. These pollutants may
accumulate in fish tissue at a
concentration that greatly exceeds
the concentration in the surround-
ing water. Unknown sources and
industrial dischargers are responsible
for the greatest acreage of impaired
lake waters.
Special State concerns include
impacts from the poultry broiler
industry, forestry activities, animal
waste runoff, and hydroelectric
generating facilities.
Ground Water Quality
The Geological Survey of
Alabama monitoring well network
indicates relatively good ground
water quality. However, the number
of ground water contamination
incidents has increased significantly
in the past few years due to better
reporting under the Underground
Storage Tank Program and
increased public awareness of
ground water issues. Alabama has
established pesticide monitoring
and a Wellhead Protection Program
to identify nonpoint sources of
ground water contamination and
further protect public water
supplies.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
In 1992, the Alabama Depart-
ment of Environmental Manage-
ment (ADEM) initiated the Flint
Creek watershed project to
simultaneously manage the many
sources degrading Flint Creek,
including intensive livestock and
poultry operations, crop production,
municipal dischargers, household
septic systems, widespread littering,
and urban runoff. Numerous Fed-
eral, State, and local agencies play a
role in the watershed project, which
includes data collection activities,
public education and outreach, and
development of a total maximum
daily load (TMDL) model for the
watershed. The model output will
show the mix of point and
nonpoint loadings that can be
permitted without violating instream
water quality standards. ADEM
expects to increase use of the
watershed protection approach.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Alabama's surface water moni-
toring program includes a fixed
station ambient network, reservoir
sampling, fish tissue sampling,
intensive wasteload allocation
surveys, water quality demonstration
surveys, and compliance monitoring
of point source discharges. As a first
step in establishing biological crite-
ria, ADEM is assessing the habitats
and corresponding resident biota at
several candidate reference streams.
aA subset of Alabama's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in Alabama
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully Good (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=77,274)b
Total Miles
Surveyed
70
(Total Acres = 490,472)
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 610)
Total Square 80
Miles Surveyed
-------
Alaska
> Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For information about water quality
in Alaska, contact:
Eric Decker
Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation
410 Willoughby Street - Suite 105
Juneau, AK 99801-1795
(907) 465-5328
The State of Alaska did not
submit a 305(b) report to EPA in
1994.
-------
Overall3 Use Support in Alaska (1992)
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully Good (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles = 305,000)
32
39
Lakes (Total Acres = 12,787,200)
Estuaries {Total Square MHes-Unknown)
Total Square
Miles Surveyed
"Overall use support data from 1992 are presented because Alaska did not submit a 305(b)
report to EPA in 1994.
-------
Arizona
Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Arizona 1994
305 (b) report, contact
Diana Marsh
Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality
3033 North Central Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85012
(602) 207-4545
Surface Water Quality
Good water quality fully
supports swimming uses in 59% of
Arizona's surveyed river miles and
94% of their surveyed lake acres.
However, Arizona reported that 51%
of their surveyed stream miles and
28% of their surveyed lake acres do
not fully support aquatic life uses.
Arizona reported that metals, turbid-
ity, salinity, and suspended solids
were the stressors most frequently
identified in streams. The leading
stressors in lakes were salinity,
metals, inorganics, and low dissolved
oxygen. Natural sources, agriculture,
and hydrologic modification (stream
bank destabilization, channelization,
dam construction, flow regulation,
and removal of shoreline vegeta-
tion) were the most common
sources of stressors in both streams
and lakes, followed by resource
extraction (mining) in streams and
urban runoff in lakes. Nonpoint
sources played a role in degrading
96% of the impaired river miles and
93% of the impaired lake acres.
Ground Water Quality
Arizona is gradually establishing
a network of water quality index
wells in principal aquifers to
measure ground water quality
conditions and document future
trends. Existing data indicate that
ground water generally supports
drinking water uses, but nitrates,
petroleum products, volatile organic
chemicals, heavy metals, pesticides,
radioactive elements, and bacteria
cause localized contamination in
Arizona. Both natural sources and
human sources (including agricul-
ture, leaking underground storage
tanks, and septic tanks) generate
these contaminants.
The State has established 50
ground water basin boundaries, four
of which are designated Active
Management Areas because they
encompass the largest population
centers with the greatest ground
water demands. A Comprehensive
State Croundwater Protection
Program has been initiated as a
demonstration project in Tucson.
Under this program, the State will
work with all interested parties to
set priorities for ground water
management and mitigate existing
water quality problems.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Arizona's nonpoint source con-
trol program integrates regulatory
controls with nonregulatory educa-
tion and demonstration projects.
Regulatory programs include the
Aquifer Protection Permit Program,
the Pesticide Contamination
Program, and best management
requirements for controlling nitro-
gen at concentrated animal feeding
operations. The State is also devel-
oping best management practices
for timber activities, grazing activi-
ties, urban runoff, and sand and
gravel operations. Arizona's point
source control program encom-
passes planning, facility construction
loans, permits, pretreatment,
inspections, permit compliance,
and enforcement.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Recently, Federal and State
agencies increased efforts to coordi-
nate monitoring, provide more
consistent monitoring protocols,
and provide mechanisms to share
data, spurred by tightened budgets.
Monitoring programs in Arizona
include a fixed station network,
complaint investigations and special
studies, priority pollutant monitor-
ing, and monitoring to support
biocriteria development. ADEQ will
develop narrative biological criteria
with biological, physical, and chemi-
cal data collected at over 100
biological reference sites in 1992,
1993, and 1994.
Individual Use Support in Arizona
Percent
Designated Use3
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully Good (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles = 104,200)"
Total Miles
Surveyed
26
25
Lakes (Total Acres = 302,000)
aA subset of Arizona's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b) report
for a full description of the State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Arkansas
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Arkansas 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Bill Keith
Arkansas Department of Pollution
Control and Ecology
P.O. Box 8913
Little Rock, AR 72219-8913
(501)562-7444
Surface Water Quality
The Arkansas Department of
Pollution Control and Ecology
(DPCE) reported that 56% of their
surveyed rivers and streams and
100% of their surveyed lake acres
have good water quality that fully
supports aquatic life uses. Good
water quality also fully supports
swimming use in 81 % of the
'surveyed river miles and 100% of
the surveyed lake acres. Siltation and
turbidity are the most frequently
identified pollutants impairing
Arkansas' rivers and streams, fol-
lowed by bacteria and nutrients.
Agriculture is the leading source of
pollution in the State's rivers and
streams and has been identified as a
source of pollution in four lakes.
Municipal wastewater treatment
plants, mining, and forestry also
impact rivers and streams. Arkansas
has limited data on the extent of
pollution in lakes.
Special State concerns include
the protection of natural wetlands
by mechanisms other than dis-
charge permits and the develop-
ment of more.effective methods to
identify nonpoint source impacts.
Arkansas is also concerned about
impacts from the expansion of con-
fined animal production operations
and major sources of turbidity and
silt including road construction,
road maintenance, riparian land
clearing, streambed gravel removal,
and urban construction.
Ground Water Quality
Nitrate contamination was
detected in some domestic wells
sampled in portions of the State
undergoing rapid expansion of
poultry and livestock operations,
including northwest Arkansas, the
Arkansas River Valley, and southwest
Arkansas. In northwest Arkansas,
nitrate contamination was docu-
mented in 5% to 7% of the domes-
tic wells sampled. Wells sampled in
pristine areas of northwest Arkansas
were not contaminated.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Arkansas has focused nonpoint
source management efforts on con-
trolling waste from confined animal
production operations. Arkansas
utilizes education, technical
assistance, financial assistance, and
voluntary and regulatory activities to
control nonpoint source pollution
from poultry, swine, and dairy
operations. Liquid waste systems are
regulated by permit and dry waste
systems are controlled by voluntary
implementation of BMPs in targeted
watersheds. Water quality is moni-
tored during watershed projects to
evaluate the effectiveness of the
BMPs.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Arkansas classifies its water
resources by ecoregion with similar
physical, chemical, and biological
characteristics. There are seven
ecoregions including the Delta, Gulf
Coastal, Ouchita Mountain, Arkan-
sas River Valley, Boston Mountain,
and Ozark Mountain Regions. By
classifying water resources in this
manner, Arkansas can identify the
most common land uses within
each region and address the issues
that threaten the water quality.
The State has increased surface
water and ground water monitoring
to determine the fate of animal
waste applied to pastures. Arkansas
also conducted 10 water quality
surveys in watersheds throughout
the State to determine point and
nonpoint sources of pollution
impacting water quality.
Individual Use Support in Arkansas
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully Good (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total MHes = 87,6i7)b
Total Miles
Surveyed
56
32
12
Lakes (Total Acres = 514,245)
aA subset of Arkansas' designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b) report
for a full description of the State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
California
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the California 1994
305(b) report, contact
Nancy Richard
California State Water Resources
Control Board, M&A
Division of Water Quality
P.O. Box 944213
Sacramento, CA 94244-2130
(916)657-0642
Surface Water Quality
Siltation, pesticides, nutrients,
and bacteria impair the most river
miles in California. The leading
sources of degradation in
California's rivers and streams are
agriculture, unspecified nonpoint
sources, forestry activities, urban
runoff and storm sewers, and re-
source extraction. In lakes, siltation,
metals, and nutrients are the most
common pollutants. Construction
and land development pose the
greatest threat to lake water quality,
followed by urban runoff and storm
sewers, forestry, and land disposal
of wastes.
Metals, pesticides, trace ele-
ments, and unknown toxic contami-
nants are the most frequently identi-
fied pollutants in estuaries, harbors,
and bays. Urban runoff and storm
sewers are the leading source of
pollution in California's coastal
waters, followed by municipal sew-
age treatment plants, agriculture,
hydrologic and habitat modifica-
tions, resource extraction, and
industrial dischargers. Oceans and
open bays are degraded by urban
runoff and storm sewers, agricul-
ture, and atmospheric deposition.
Ground Water Quality
California assigns beneficial uses
to its ground water. Salinity, total
dissolved solids, and chlorides are
the most frequently identified pol-
lutants impairing use of ground
water in California. The State also
reports that trace inorganic ele-
ments, flow alterations, and nitrates
degrade over 1,000 square miles of
ground water aquifers.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
No information was provided in
the 1994 305(b) report.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
No information was provided in
the 1994 305(b) report.
aA subset of California's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in California
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully Good (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivets and Streams (total Miles=211,513)"
Total Miles
70
Lakes (Tola! Acres = 1,672,684)
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 731.1)
-------
Colorado
Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Colorado 1994
305(b) report, contact:
John Farrow
Colorado Department of Public
Health and Environment
Water Quality Control Division
4300 Cherry Creek Drive, South
Denver, CO 80222-1530
(303) 692-3575
Surface Water Quality
Colorado reports that 89% of its
surveyed river miles and 91 % of its
surveyed lake acres have good water
quality that fully supports designated
uses. Metals are the most frequently
identified pollutant in rivers and
lakes. High nutrient concentrations
also degrade many lake acres. Agri-
culture and mining are the leading
sources of pollution in rivers.
Agriculture, construction, urban
runoff, and municipal sewage treat-
ment plants are the leading sources
of pollution in lakes.
Ground Water Quality
Ground water quality in Colo-
rado ranges from excellent in
mountain areas where snow fall is
heavy, to poor in alluvial aquifers of
major rivers. Naturally occurring
soluble minerals along with human
activities are responsible for signifi-
cant degradation of some aquifers.
Nitrates and salts from agricultural
activities have contaminated many
of Colorado's shallow aquifers. In
mining areas, acidic water and
metals contaminate aquifers. Colo-
rado protects ground water quality
with statewide numeric criteria for
organic chemicals, a narrative stan-
dard to maintain ambient condi-
tions or Maximum Contaminant
Levels of inorganic chemicals and
metals, and specific use classifica-
tions and standards for ground
water areas. Colorado also regulates
discharges to ground water from
wastewater treatment impound-
ments and land application systems
with a permit system.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Colorado's nonpoint source
program supports a wide range of
projects. Ten projects were funded
to identify appropriate treatment
-------
options for waters polluted by aban-
doned mines. Several projects iden-
tified and funded implementation of
good management practices for
riparian (streamside) areas. Under
another project, Colorado devel-
oped agreements with the U.S.
Bureau of Land Management and
the U.S. Forest Service to ensure
that these agencies apply effective
best management practices to con-
trol nonpoint runoff from grazing,
timber harvesting, and road
construction activities on Federal
lands.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
During the 1994 305(b) report-
ing cycle, Colorado switched over
from a statewide monitoring pro-
gram to a basinwide monitoring
strategy. The basinwide monitoring
strategy allows that State to inten-
sify monitoring in one basin per
year, rather than perform infrequent
sampling statewide. Colorado
retained some of the old fixed-
station sampling sites to monitor
statewide trends in water quality
conditions.
Overall3 Use Support in Colorado
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivets and Streams (Total Mites=i05,58i)b
Lakes (Total Acres=143,019)
- Not reported.
"Overall use support is presented because Colorado did not report individual use support in
their 1994 Section 305(b) report.
-------
Connecticut
1 Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Connecticut 1994
305(b) report, contact
Donald Gonyea
Bureau of Water Management, PERD
Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection
79 Elm Street
Hartford, CT 06106-5127
(860) 424-3827 or (860) 424-3020
Surface Water Quality
Connecticut has restored over
300 miles of large rivers since enact-
ment of Connecticut's State Clean
Water Act in 1967. Back in 1967,
about 663 river miles (or 74% of
the State's 893 miles of large rivers
and streams) were unfit for fishing
and swimming. In 1994, Connecti-
cut reported that 222 river miles
(25%) do not fully support aquatic
life uses and 248 miles (28%) do
not support swimming due to
bacteria, PCBs, metals, oxygen-
demanding wastes, ammonia,
nutrients, and habitat alteration.
Sources of these pollutants include
urban runoff and storm sewers,
industrial dischargers, municipal
sewage treatment plants, and in-
place contaminants. Threats to
Connecticut's reservoir and lake
quality include failing septic systems,
erosion and sedimentation from
construction and agriculture, agri-
cultural wastes, fertilizers, and
stormwater runoff.
Hypoxia (low dissolved oxygen)
is the most widespread problem in
Connecticut's estuarine waters in
Long Island Sound. Bacteria also
prevent shellfish harvesting and an
advisory restricts consumption of
bluefish and striped bass contami-
nated with PCBs. Connecticut's
estuarine waters are impacted by
municipal sewage treatment plants,
combined sewer overflows, indus-
trial discharges and runoff, failing
septic systems, urban runoff, and
atmospheric deposition. Historic
waste disposal practices also con-
taminated sediments in Connecti-
cut's harbors and bays.
Ground Water Quality
The State and USGS have iden-
tified about 1,600 contaminated
public and private wells since the
Connecticut Department of Environ-
mental Protection (DEP) began
keeping records in 1980. Connecti-
cut's Wellhead Protection Program
incorporates water supply planning,
discharge permitting, water diver-
sion, site remediation, prohibited
activities, and numerous nonpoint
source controls.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Ensuring that all citizens can
share in the benefits of clean water
will require continued permit
enforcement, additional advanced
wastewater treatment, combined
sewer separation, continued aquatic
toxicity control, and resolution of
nonpoint source issues. To date,
14 sewage treatment facilities have
installed advanced treatment to
remove nutrients. Nonpoint source
management includes education
projects and a permitting program
for land application of sewage, agri-
cultural sources, and solid waste
management facilities.
Wetlands are protected by the
State's Clean Water Act and Stan-
dards of Water Quality. Each
municipality has an Inland Wetlands
Agency that regulates filling and
establishes regulated buffer areas
with DEP training and oversight.
Connecticut's courts have strongly
upheld enforcement of the wetlands
acts and supported regulation of
buffer areas to protect wetlands.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Connecticut samples physical
and chemical parameters at 27 fixed
stream sites and biological param-
eters at 47 stream sites. Other
activities include intensive biological
surveys, toxicity testing, and fish
and shellfish tissue sampling for
accumulation of toxic chemicals.
- Not reported
aA subset of Connecticut's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
"Includes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in Connecticut
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles = 5,830}b
Total Miles
Surveyed
69
Lakes (Total Acres = 64,973)
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 600)
-------
Delaware
Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydroiogic Unit)
For a copy of the Delaware 1994
305(b) report, contact
Sergio Huerta
Delaware Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental
Control
Division of Water Resources
P.O. Box 1401
Dover, DE 19903
(302) 739-4590
Surface Water Quality
Delaware's rivers and streams
generally meet standards for aquatic
life uses, but 93% of the surveyed
stream miles and 76% of the sur-
veyed lake acres do not meet bacte-
ria criteria for swimming. Bacteria
are the most widespread contami-
nant in Delaware's surface waters,
but nutrients and toxics pose the
most serious threats to aquatic life
and human health. Excessive nutri-
ents stimulate algal blooms and
growth of aquatic weeds. Toxics
result in six fish consumption restric-
tions in three basins, including Red
Clay Creek, Red Lion Creek, the St.
Jones River, and the Delaware Estu-
ary. Agricultural runoff, septic sys-
tems, urban runoff, municipal sew-
age treatment plants, and industrial
dischargers are the primary sources
of nutrients and toxics in Delaware's
surface waters.
Ground Water Quality
High-quality ground water
provides two-thirds of Delaware's
domestic water supply. However,
nitrates, synthetic organic chemicals,
saltwater, and iron contaminate
isolated wells in some areas. In the
agricultural areas of Kent and Sussex
counties, nitrates in ground water
are a potential health concern and
a potential source of nutrient
contamination in surface waters.
Synthetic organic chemicals have
entered some ground waters from
leaking industrial underground
storage tanks, landfills, abandoned
hazardous waste sites, chemical
spills and leaks, septic systems, and
agricultural activities.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
The Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental Con-
trol (DNREC) adopted a watershed
-------
approach to determine the most
effective and efficient methods for
protecting water quality or abating
existing problems. Under the water-
shed approach, DNREC will evaluate
all sources of pollution that may
impact a waterway and target the
most significant sources for manage-
ment The Appoquinimink River
subbasin, the Nanticoke River
subbasin, the Delaware's Inland Bays
subbasin, and the Christina River
subbasin are priority watersheds
targeted for development of inte-
grated pollution control strategies.
Delaware's Wellhead Protection
Program establishes cooperative
arrangements with local govern-
ments to manage sources of ground
water contamination. The State may
assist local governments in enacting
zoning ordinances, site plan reviews,
operating standards, source prohibi-
tions, public education, and ground
water monitoring.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Delaware's Ambient Surface
Water Quality Program includes
fixed-station monitoring and bio-
logical surveys employing rapid
bioassessment protocols. Delaware is
developing and testing new proto-
cols for sampling biological data in
order to determine whether specific
biological criteria can be developed
to determine support of designated
uses.
- Not reported.
aA subset of Delaware's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
c Excludes waters under jurisdiction of the
Delaware River Basin Commission.
Individual Use Support in Delaware
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully Good (Partially (fort (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=3,158)b
Total Miles 80
Surveyed
Lakes (Total Acres = 4,499}
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 29)ฐ
-------
District of Columbia
Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the District of
Columbia 1994 305(b) report,
contact:
Dr. Hamid Karimi
Department of Consumer
and Regulatory Affairs
Environmental Regulation
Administration
Water Quality Monitoring Branch
2100 Martin Luther King |r.
Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20020
(202) 645-6601
Surface Water Quality
Poor water quality still character-
izes the District's surface waters, but
water quality has stabilized and is
improving in some areas. The recov-
ery of submerged aquatic vegetation
and fish communities in the Anacos-
tia and Potomac Rivers provides
qualitative evidence that water qual-
ity is improving. However, a fish
consumption advisory and a
swimming ban remain in effect for
all District surface waters, and sedi-
ment contamination degrades
aquatic life on the Anacostia River.
Combined sewer overflows are the
main source of bacterial pollution
that causes unsafe swimming condi-
tions. Urban runoff may be the
source of high concentrations of
cadmium, mercury, lead, PCBs,
PAHs, and DDT found in sediment
samples.
Ground Water Quality
During the 1994 305(b) assess-
ment period, the District initiated
ground water monitoring. The first
round of sampling revealed that the
ground water is potable. Some
pollutants were detected at low
concentrations in isolated cases.
Ground water is not a public drink-
ing water source in the District, but
the District has a comprehensive
State ground water protection
program to assess and manage the
resource. The program includes an
ambient ground water sampling
network, ground water quality regu-
lations (including numerical and
narrative criteria), and guidelines for
preventing and remediating ground
water quality degradation.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
The District is implementing
innovative stormwater runoff con-
trols for urban areas and promoting
the watershed protection approach
to clean up waterbodies that cross
political boundaries, such as the
Anacostia River. The District needs
Maryland's cooperation to control
pollution entering upstream tributar-
ies located in Maryland. Additional
funds will be needed to implement
urban stormwater retrofits, CSO
controls, and revegetation projects
in both the District and Maryland
to improve water quality in the
Anacostia River.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
The District performs monthly
physical and chemical sampling at
80 fixed stations on the Potomac
River, the Anacostia River, and their
tributaries. The District samples
phytoplankton (microscopic plants)
monthly at 15 stations and zoo-
plankton at 3 stations. The District
samples metals in the water column
four times a year and analyzes toxic
pollutants in fish tissue once a year.
In 1992 and 1993, the District
conducted rapid bioassessments on
29 waterbodies.
Individual Use Support in District of Columbia
aA subset of District of Columbia's desig-
nated uses appear in this figure. Refer to
the District's 305(b) report for a full
description of the District's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully Good (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles = 39)b
Total Miles
Surveyed
62
Lakes (Total Acres = 251)
Total Acres
Surveyed 57
Estuaries (Total Square Miles=5.8)
Total Square ฐ"
Miles Surveyed
-------
Florida
Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Florida 1994
305(b) report, contact:
V
joe Hand
Florida Dept. of Environmental
Regulation
Twin Towers Building
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400
(904)921-9926
Surface Water Quality
Overall, the majority of Florida's
surface waters are of good quality,
but problems exist around densely
populated urban areas, primarily in
central and southern Florida. In
rivers, nutrient enrichment, low
dissolved oxygen, high bacteria
counts, turbidity, and suspended
solids degrade water quality. In
lakes, the leading problems include
algal blooms, turbidity, and nutrient
enrichment In estuaries, algal
blooms, nutrient enrichment, low
dissolved oxygen, and turbidity
degrade quality. Urban stormwater,
agricultural runoff, domestic waste-
water, industrial wastewater, and
hydrologic modifications are the
major sources of water pollution in
Florida.
Special State concerns include
massive fish kills (as much as 20
tons of fish) in the Pensacola Bay
system, widespread toxic contami-
nation in sediments, widespread
mercury contamination in fish,
bacterial contamination in the
Miami River, and algal blooms and
extensive die-off of mangroves and
seagrasses in Florida Bay.
Ground Water Quality
Data from 1,919 wells in
Florida's ambient monitoring
network indicate generally good
water quality, but local ground
water contamination problems exist.
Agricultural chemicals, including
aldicarb, alachlor, bromacil,
simazine, and ethylene dibromide
(EDB) have caused local and
regional (in the case of EDB) prob-
lems. Other threats include petro-
leum products from leaking under-
ground storage tanks, nitrates from
dairy and other livestock operations,
fertilizers and pesticides in storm-
water runoff, and toxic chemicals in
leachate from hazardous waste sites.
The State requires periodic testing
of all community water systems for
118 toxic organic chemicals.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Florida controls point source
pollution with its own discharge
permitting process similar to the
NPDES program. The State permits
-------
about 4,600 ground water and
surface water discharge facilities.
The State also encourages reuse of
treated wastewater (primarily for
irrigation) and discharge into
constructed wetlands as an alterna-
tive to direct discharge into natural
surface waters and ground water.
Florida's Stormwater Rule and
implementing regulations are the
core of the State's nonpoint source
program. These regulations require
all new developments to retain the
first inch of runoff water in ponds
to settle out sediment and other
pollutants. Ongoing contracts focus
on best management practices for
other nonpoint sources, including
agriculture, septic tanks, landfills,
mining, and hydrologic modifica-
tion.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Florida's Surface Water Assess-
ment Program (SWAMP) will iden-
tify ecoregion subregions and
develop community bioassessment
protocols; develop and implement a
sampling network to monitor water
quality trends and determine
current conditions; and perform
special water quality assessments if
funds are available. The State
defined 13 ecological subregions for
the State and has established 66
reference stream sites for developing
bioassessment protocols.
- Florida does not designate waterbodies for
this use.
3 A subset of Florida's designated uses appear
in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b)
report for a full description of the State's
uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in Florida
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams {Total Miles = si,858)b
Total Miles
Assessed
27
Lakes (Total Acres = 2,085,120)
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 4,298)
Total Square
Miles Assessed 52
-------
Georgia
> Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Georgia 1994
305(b) report, conta*ct:
W.M. Winn, III
Georgia Environmental Protection
Division
Water Quality Management Program
Floyd Towers, East
205 Butler Street, SE
Atlanta, GA 30334
(404) 656-4905
Surface Water Quality
Improvements in wastewater
treatment by industries and munici-
palities have made it possible for
Georgians to fish and swim in areas
where water quality conditions were
unacceptable for decades. Water
quality in Georgia streams, lakes,
and estuaries during 1992 and 1993
was good, but the number of
stream miles and lake acres not fully
supporting designated uses
increased. The number of fish advi-
sories also grew from four to nine
during 1992-1994. However, this is
a result of more stringent stream
standards, increased sampling, and
access to additional data. Persistent
problems include mud, litter, bacte-
ria, pesticides, fertilizers, metals, oils,
suds, and other pollutants washed
into rivers and lakes by stormwater.
Ground Water Quality
Georgia's ambient Ground
Water Monitoring Network consists
of 150 wells sampled periodically.
To date, increasing nitrate concen-
trations in the Coastal Plain are the
only adverse trend detected by the
monitoring network, but nitrate
concentrations are still well below
harmful levels in most wells. Addi-
tional nitrate sampling in 500 wells
revealed that nitrate concentrations
exceeded EPA's Maximum Contami-
nant Level (MCL) in less than 1 % of
the tested wells. Pesticide monitor-
ing indicates that pesticides do not
threaten Georgia's drinking water
aquifers at this time.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Comprehensive river basin
management planning will provide
a basis for integrating point and
nonpoint source water protection
efforts within the State and with
neighboring States. In 1992, the
Georgia General Assembly passed
Senate Bill 637, which requires the
-------
Department of Natural Resources to
develop management plans for each
river basin in the State. The State
began developing comprehensive
plans for the Chattahoochee and
Flint River Basins in 1992 and the
Oconee and Coosa River Basins in
1993. Georgia is also participating
in a Tri-State Comprehensive Study
with the Corps of Engineers,
Alabama, and Florida to develop
interstate agreements for maintain-
ing flow and allocating assimilative
capacity. Other interstate basin
projects include the Savannah
Watershed Project with South Caro-
lina and the Suwannee River Basin
Planning Project with the Georgia
and Florida Soil Conservation
Services.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Georgia continued sampling at
145 fixed monitoring stations, con-
ducted 14 intensive surveys, and
performed over 600 compliance
sampling inspections during 1992
and 1993. Georgia also sampled
toxic substances in effluent from
point source dischargers, streams,
sediment, and fish tissues at
selected sites throughout the State.
The State assessed the overall toxic-
ity in wastewater effluent with both
acute and chronic aquatic toxicity
tests.
Individual Use Support in Georgia
Percent
- Not reported.
aA subset of Georgia's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully Good (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=70,i50)b
Lakes (Total Acres = 425,382)
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 854}
Total Square 88
Miles Surveyed
-------
Hawaii
Kauai
Oahu
> Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Hawaii 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Eugene Akazawa, Monitoring
Supervisor
Hawaii Department of Health
Clean Water Branch
919 Ala Moana Blvd.
Honolulu, HI 96814
(808) 586-4309
Molokai
Maui
Surface Water Quality
Most of Hawaii's waterbodies
have variable water quality due to
stormwater runoff. During dry
weather, most streams and estuaries
have good water quality that fully
supports beneficial uses, but the
quality declines when stormwater
runoff carries pollutants into surface
waters. The most significant pollu-
tion problems in Hawaii are siltation
and turbidity, nutrients, fertilizers,
toxics, pathogens, and pH from
nonpoint sources, including agricul-
ture and urban runoff. Very few
point sources discharge into
Hawaii's streams; most industrial
facilities and wastewater treatment
plants discharge into coastal waters.
Other concerns include explosive
algae growth in West Maui and
Kahului Bay, a fish consumption
advisory for lead in talipia caught in
Manoa Stream, and sediment
contamination from discontinued
wastewater discharges at Wailoa
Pond and Hilo Bay.
Ground Water Quality
Compared to mainland States,
Hawaii has very few ground water
problems due to a long history of
land use controls for ground water
protection. Prior to 1961, the State
designated watershed reserves to
protect the purity of rainfall recharg-
ing ground water. The Under-
ground Injection Control Program
also prohibits wastewater injection
in areas surrounded by "no-pass"
lines. However, aquifers outside of
reserves and no-pass lines may be
impacted by injection wells, house-
hold wastewater disposal systems,
such as seepage pits and cesspools,
landfills, leaking underground
storage tanks, and agricultural
return flows.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
County governments are
required to set erosion control stan-
dards for various types of soil and
-------
land uses. These standards include
criteria, techniques, and methods
for controlling sediment erosion
from land-disturbing activities. The
State would like to enact ordinances
that require the rating of pesticides
on their potential to migrate
through soil into ground water. The
State would regulate the use of
pesticides that pose a threat to
ground water. Until more stringent
ordinances can be enacted, the
State recommends using alternatives
to pesticides, such as natural preda-
tors and other biological controls.
The State also encourages the use
of low-toxicity, degradable chemi-
cals for home gardens, landscaping,
and golf courses.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Hawaii has scaled back its water
quality monitoring program because
of budgetary constraints. The State
has halted toxics monitoring, fish
tissue contamination monitoring,
and biological monitoring and elimi-
nated sampling at numerous fixed
monitoring stations. The State also
reduced the frequency of bacterial
monitoring at coastal beaches. The
State does not expect conditions to
change in the near future.
Overall3 Use Support in Hawaii
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=249}b
Total Miles
Surveyed
77
Lakes (Total Acres = 2,168)
Total Acres
Surveyed
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 380)
;r;; Miles Surveyed
Oceans (Total Miles ป 1,053)
Total Square
Miles Surveyed
- Not reported.
a Overall use support is presented because Hawaii did not report individual use support in their
1994 Section 305(b) report.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Idaho
> Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Idaho 1994
305 (b) report, contact:
Don Zaroban
Idaho Department of Health
and Welfare
Division of Environmental Quality
1410 North Hilton
Statehouse Mall
Boise, ID 83720
(208) 334-5860
Surface Water Quality
Idaho omitted its water quality
assessment for surface waters in
their 1994 305(b) report because
the State is in the middle of a major
overhaul of its water quality man-
agement program. Idaho is restruc-
turing its program around the
watershed protection approach.
As a first step, Idaho is redesignating
its waterbodies and expanding its
assessment database to include
smaller streams that previously were
not assessed. The State postponed
its water quality assessment until all
surface waters are designated and
classified under a consistent system.
Idaho's Department of Environ-
mental Quality (DEQ) identified
several waterbodies with significant
problems. Heavy metals and nutri-
ents impact the Coeur d'Alene River
drainage, while nutrients and sedi-
ment impact Henry's Fork. The
middle Snake River exhibits severe
eutrophication from nutrient enrich-
ment Mercury contaminates fish
tissue in Brownlee Reservoir, and the
Cascade Reservoir does not support
agricultural uses due to overenrich-
ment with nutrients.
Ground Water Quality
The Idaho Statewide Monitoring
Program for Ground Water samples
over 800 wells. This program and
other specific projects have indi-
cated that nitrates, petroleum
products, solvents, and pesticides
are the most prevalent pollutants in
ground water. The Idaho Legislature
adopted the Ground Water Quality
Plan in 1992. This plan sets four
priority issues: (1) evaluation of
existing ground water programs,
(2) development of State ground
water standards, (3) development
of a State wellhead protection
program, and (4) classification of
Idaho's aquifers. Ground water qual-
ity protection programs in Idaho
include underground injection
control, ground water vulnerability
mapping, and management for
animal waste, landfills, pesticides
application, underground storage
tanks, and sewage disposal.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
EPA has primary responsibility
for issuing NPDES permits in Idaho.
Idaho's DEQ is concerned that EPA
is not issuing permits for minor
point source dischargers, and
inspections of permitted and
unpermitted dischargers are rare.
Neither DEQ or EPA have sufficient
staff to conduct compliance inspec-
tions. Without oversight, there are
no assurances that these facilities are
being properly operated and meet
water quality standards.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
DEQ operates a water quality
monitoring program that measures
biological, physical, and chemical
parameters. Data collection varies in
intensity, from desktop reviews of
existing data (Basic or Level I),
through qualitative surveys and
inventories that cannot be repeated
with confidence (Reconnaissance or
Level II), to quantitative measure-
ments that can be repeated and
yield data suitable for statistical
analysis (Intensive or Level III).
Individual Use Support in Idaho
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Designated Use3 Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting)
Attainable)
Ri vers and Streams (Total Mies =11 5,595)b
fUj
Total Miles
Surveyed
(Total Acres = 700,000)
- Not reported.
a A subset of Idaho's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b) report for
a full description of the State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Illinois
Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Illinois 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Mike Branham
Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency
Division of Water Pollution Control
P.O. Box19276
Springfield, IL 62794-9276
(217) 782-3362
Surface Water Quality
Overall water quality has
steadily improved over the past 24
years since enactment of the Illinois
Environmental Protection Act.
Trend analysis generally indicates
stable or improving trends in stream
concentrations of dissolved oxygen,
oxygen-depleting wastes, and am-
monia consistent with the contin-
ued decline in point source impacts.
However, dissolved oxygen deple-
tion and ammonia still impair
streams, as do nutrients, siltation,
habitat/flow alterations, metals, and
suspended solids. The State is also
concerned about upward trends in
nutrient concentrations detected in
several basins that probably result
from nonpoint sources. Other ma-
jor sources of river pollution include
persistent point sources, hydrologic/
habitat modification, urban runoff,
and resource extraction.
Trend analysis also indicates
improving water quality in lakes.
The most prevalent causes of re-
maining pollution in lakes include
nutrients, suspended solids, and
siltation. The most prevalent sources
of pollution in lakes include con-
taminated sediments, agriculture,
and hydrologic/habitat alterations.
Water quality also continues to
improve in the Illinois portion of
Lake Michigan. Trophic status im-
proved from mesotrophic/eutrophic
conditions in the 1970s to oligo-
trophic conditions today.
Ground Water Quality
Ground water quality is gener-
ally good, but past and present
activities contaminate ground water
in isolated areas. Ground water is
contaminated around leaking under-
ground gasoline storage tanks, large
aboveground petroleum storage
facilities, agricultural chemical opera-
tions, salt piles, landfills, and waste
treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
The Illinois Environmental Pro-
tection Agency (IEPA), Bureau of
Water, is committed to implement-
ing a Targeted Watershed Approach
in which high-risk watersheds are
identified, prioritized, and selected
for integrated and cooperative
assessment and protection. This
approach represents an expansion
-------
and evolution of their previous
efforts in geographic targeting.
Current nonpoint source program
activities focus on improving public
awareness and adding land use data
to the nonpoint source database
available statewide.
Illinois established a Great Lakes
Program Office in FY93 to oversee
all Lake Michigan programs on a
multimedia basis. Activities include
promotion of pollution prevention
for all sources of toxics in all media
(such as air and water).
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
The Division of Water Pollution
Control spent $5.5 million on a
diverse set of monitoring programs
during 1992 and 1993. These pro-
grams include ambient and toxicity
monitoring, pesticide monitoring,
intensive river basin surveys, fish
contaminant monitoring, and volun-
teer lake monitoring. These pro-
grams generate a rich inventory of
monitoring data for assessing water
quality conditions across the State.
IEPA based their 1994 assessments
on data from nearly 3,500 stations.
Individual Use Support in Illinois
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Designated Use Supporting) Threatened Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=32,t90)b
Total Miles
Surveyed 47
Lakes (Total Acres = 309,340)
Great Lakes (Total Shore Miles = 63)
aA subset of Illinois' designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b) report for
a full description of the State's uses.
"Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Indiana
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Indiana 1994
305(b) report, contact
Dennis Clark
Indiana Department of Environ-
mental Management
Office of Water Management
P.O. Box 6015
Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015
(317) 243-5037
Surface Water Quality
Over 99% of the surveyed lake
acres and 79% of the surveyed river
miles have good water quality that
fully supports aquatic life. However,
only 18% of the surveyed river miles
support swimming due to high
bacteria concentrations. A fish con-
sumption advisory impairs all of
Indiana's Lake Michigan shoreline.
The pollutants most frequently iden-
tified in Indiana waters include
bacteria, priority organic
compounds, oxygen-depleting
wastes, pesticides, metals, cyanide,
and ammonia. The sources of these
pollutants include industrial facilities,
municipal/semipublic wastewater
systems, combined sewer overflows,
and agricultural nonpoint sources.
Indiana identified elevated
concentrations of toxic substances
in about 8% of the river miles
monitored for toxics. High concen-
trations of PCBs, pesticides, and
metals were most common in sedi-
ment samples and in fish tissue
samples. Less than 1 % of the sur-
veyed lake acres contained elevated
concentrations of toxic substances
in their sediment.
Ground Water Quality
Indiana has a plentiful ground
water resource serving 60% of its
population for drinking water and
filling many of the water needs of
business, industry, and agriculture.
Although most of Indiana's ground
water has not been shown to be
adversely impacted by human activi-
ties, the State has documented over
863 sites of ground water contami-
nation. Nitrates are the most com-
mon pollutant detected in wells,
followed by volatile organic chemi-
cals and heavy metals. In agricul-
tural regions, data indicate that
7% to 10% of the rural drinking
water wells contain unacceptable
nitrate concentrations and some
detectable quantity of pesticides.
Heavy metal contamination is asso-
ciated with waste disposal sites.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Since 1972, Indiana has spent
over $1.4 billion in Federal construc-
tion grants, $207 million in State
funds, and $190 million in match-
ing local funds to construct or
upgrade sewage treatment facilities.
As a result of these expenditures,
53% of Indiana's population is now
served by advanced sewage treat-
ment The State issues NPDES per-
mits to ensure that these new and
improved facilities control pollution.
Indiana is increasing enforcement
activities to ensure compliance with
permit requirements.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Indiana initiated a 5-year
baseline biological sampling pro-
gram in 1989. As of 1994, the State
had collected 2,000 aquatic insect
samples at 439 sites representing
81 % of the State's geographical
area. In the future, the State will be
able to detect deviations from the
baseline dataset. Indiana and EPA
Region 5 are also developing fish
community measurements for evalu-
ating biological integrity in Indiana's
rivers and streams.
Individual Use Support in Indiana
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Designated Use8 Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=35,673)b
Total Miles
Surveyed
71
16
Lakes (Total Acres = 142,871)
Great Lakes (Total Miles =43)
aA subset of Indiana's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b) report
for a full description of the State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Iowa
> Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Iowa 1994 305(b)
report, contact
John Olson
Iowa Department of Natural
Resources
Water Resources Section
900 East Grand Avenue
Wallace State Office Building
Des Moines, IA 50319
(515)281-8905
Surface Water Quality
Sediment and plant nutrients
from agricultural sources, modifica-
tions to stream habitat and hydrol-
ogy, and natural conditions (such as
shallowness in lakes) impair aquatic
life uses in 48% of the surveyed
rivers, 35% of the surveyed lakes,
and 33% of the surveyed flood
control reservoirs. Swimming use is
impaired in 92% of the 556 sur-
veyed river miles and 27% of the
surveyed lakes, ponds, and reser-
voirs. Saylorville, Coralville, and
Rathburn Reservoirs have good
water quality that fully supports all
designated uses, but siltation
severely impacts Red Rock Reservoir.
Point sources still pollute about 5%
of the surveyed stream miles and
one lake.
Ground Water Quality
Ground water supplies about
80% of all Iowa's drinking water.
Agricultural chemicals, underground
storage tanks, agricultural drainage
wells, livestock wastes, and
improper management of hazardous
substances all contribute to some
degree to ground water contamina-
tion in Iowa. Nitrate concentrations
exceed the EPA's Maximum Con-
taminant Level in 10 of the State's
1,140 public ground water supplies.
Several studies have detected low
levels of common agricultural pesti-
cides and synthetic organic com-
pounds, such as solvents and
degreasers, in both untreated and
treated ground water. In most
cases, the contaminants appear in
small concentrations thought to
pose no immediate threat to public
health, but little is known about the
health effects of long-term exposure
to low concentrations of these
chemicals.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
In 1979, Iowa began imple-
menting its agricultural nonpoint
control strategy with education
projects and cost-share programs to
control sediment, the greatest
pollutant, by volume, in the State.
Later, Iowa adopted rules that
require that land disposal of animal
wastes not contaminate surface and
ground waters. Landfill rules estab-
lish specific siting, design, operation,
and monitoring criteria, and require
annual inspections and permit
-------
renewals every 3 years. Iowa also
regulates construction in floodplains
to limit soil erosion and impacts on
aquatic life.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Iowa's DNR maintains a fixed
sampling network and conducts
special intensive studies at selected
sites. The State routinely monitors
metals, ammonia, and residual chlo-
rine at the fixed sampling sites, but
not pesticides. However, pesticides
were monitored for special studies
examining the fate of pesticides in
Iowa rivers and levels of pesticides
in water supply reservoirs. Limited
monitoring for toxics in sediment
was conducted as part of a special
study in 1992 and 1993. Routine
sampling has not included biological
sampling in the past, but the role of
biological sampling continues to
grow. In 1994, Iowa initiated a pilot
study to establish biologically based
water quality criteria for wadeable
streams in each ecoregion.
Individual Use Support in Iowa
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully Good (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Mites=n ,665}*
Total Miles
Surveyed
52
47
Lakes {Total Acres=129,666)
Flood Control Reservoirs (Total Acres = 31,700)
aA subset of Iowa's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b) report for
a full description of the State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
c Excludes flood control reservoirs.
-------
Kansas
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Kansas 1994
305(b) report, contact
Mike Butler
Kansas Department of Health
and Environment
Office of Science and Support
Forbes Field, Building 740
Topeka, KS 66620
(913)296-5580
Surface Water Quality
Suspended solids and dissolved
solids impair aquatic life uses in
93% of Kansas' surveyed streams.
Bacteria also prevent 95% of the
surveyed streams from fully support-
ing swimming uses. Runoff from
feedlots, animal holding areas, and
pastureland introduce pathogen
bacteria into rivers and streams.
Discharges of undertreated or .
untreated wastewater from sewage
treatment plants also elevate patho-
gen bacteria levels in Kansas waters.
Erosion of farmland soils and urban
runoff are the principal sources of
suspended solids. Irrigation return
flows, oil and natural gas extraction
activities, and natural sources intro-
duce dissolved solids.
Cultural eutrophication is
responsible for 34% of poor water
quality conditions in Kansas' sur-
veyed lakes, and pesticides impair
an additional 23% of the surveyed
lakes. Overall, agricultural activities
are responsible for almost half of the
pollution in the State's lakes. Agri-
cultural activities and hydromodifi-
cation are the major sources of
impacts in wetlands.
Ground Water Quality
The Kansas Department of
Health and Environment (DHE) has
documented ground water contami-
nation from human activities at
nearly 350 sites in the State. Under-
ground storage tanks, oil and natu-
ral gas operations, and agriculture
are the most significant sources of
ground water contamination in
Kansas. Kansas maintains a ground
water monitoring network of 242
wells. During 1990-1993, nitrate
concentrations exceeded EPA's
Maximum Contaminant Level in
11 % of 618 ground water samples.
A State Wellhead Protection Pro-
gram is still under development,
and several Kansas communities are
developing local plans.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Kansas requires permits for live-
stock operations that utilize waste-
water control facilities (such as
manure pits, ponds, or lagoons);
confine 300 or more head of cattle,
hogs, sheep, or a combination of all
three; or house a commercial
poultry flock of 1,000 or more birds.
DHE may also require permits for
other livestock operations that have
the potential to create pollution
problems, such as open lots located
adjacent to creeks or operations
with a history of improper waste-
water disposal practices. The major
elements of the Kansas Nonpoint
Source Pollution Control Program
include interagency coordination,
information and education, techni-
cal assistance, enforcement, and
water quality certification.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Every year, DHE collects and
analyzes about 1,500 surface water
samples, 50 aquatic insect samples,
and 40 composite fish tissue
samples from stations located
throughout the State. Wastewater
samples are collected at about 50
municipal sewage treatment plants,
20 industrial facilities, and 3 Federal
facilities to evaluate compliance with
discharge permit requirements. DHE
also conducts special studies and
prepares about 100 site-specific
water quality summaries at the
request of private citizens or other
interested parties.
Individual Use Support in Kansas
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Designated Use* Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=i34,338)b
Lakes; (Total Acres = 173,801)
- Not reported.
aA subset of Kansas' designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b) report
for a full description of the State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Kentucky
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Kentucky 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Tom VanArsdall
Department for Environmental
Protection
Division of Water
14 Reilly Road
Frankfort Office Park
Frankfort, KY 40601
(502)564-3410
Surface Water Quality
About 83% of Kentucky's
surveyed rivers (including the Ohio
River) and 95% of surveyed lake
acres have good water quality that
fully supports aquatic life. Swim-
ming use is fully supported in 100%
of the surveyed lake acres, but 52%
of the surveyed river miles do not
fully support swimming due to ele-
vated bacteria levels. Fecal coliform
bacteria, siltation, and oxygen-
depleting substances are the most
common pollutants in Kentucky
rivers. Sewage treatment facilities
are still a leading source of fecal
coliform bacteria and oxygen-
depleting substances, followed by
agricultural runoff, septic tanks, and
straight pipe discharges. Surface
mining and agriculture are the ma-
jor sources of siltation. Nutrients
from agricultural runoff and septic
tanks have the most widespread
impacts on lakes.
Declining trends in chloride
concentrations and nutrients pro-
vide evidence of improving water
quality in Kentucky's rivers and
streams. The State also lifted a
swimming advisory on 76 miles of
the North Fork Kentucky River,
although the advisory remains in
effect on 86 miles. Fish consump-
tion advisories remain posted on
three creeks for PCBs and on the
Ohio River for PCBs and chlordane.
The State issued new advisories for
the Green River Lake because of
PCB spills from a gas pipeline com-
pressor station and for five ponds
on the West Kentucky Wildlife Man-
agement Area because of mercury
contamination from unknown
sources.
Ground Water Quality
Underground storage tanks,
septic tanks, abandoned hazardous
waste sites, agricultural activities,
and landfills are estimated to be the
top five sources of ground water
contamination in Kentucky. Bacteria
is the major pollutant in ground
water. The State is concerned about
the lack of ground water data,
absence of ground water regula-
tions, and the potential for ground
water pollution in karst regions of
the State.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Kentucky's revolving fund pro-
gram supported 26 wastewater
treatment projects completed in
1992-93 and another 25 ongoing
projects. These projects either
replaced outdated or inadequate
treatment facilities or provided cen-
tralized treatment for the first time.
Kentucky requires toxicity testing of
point source discharges and permits
for stormwater outfalls and
combined sewer overflows. The
nonpoint source program oversees
projects addressing watershed
remediation, education, training,
technical assistance, and evaluation
of best management practices.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Kentucky sampled 44 ambient
monitoring stations characterizing
about 1,432 stream miles during
the reporting period. The State
performed biological sampling at
24 of these stations. Seven lakes
were sampled to detect eutrophica-
tion trends and 2 lakes were
sampled to analyze the impact of
suspended solids on recreational
activities. The State also performed
five intensive studies to evaluate
point source and nonpoint source
impacts, establish baseline water
quality measurements, and reevalu-
ate water quality in several streams.
Individual Use Support in Kentucky
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Designated Use8 Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=89,43i)b
10
Lakes {Total Acres=228,385)
aA subset of Kentucky's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b) report
for a full description of the State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Louisiana
> Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Louisiana 1994
305(b) report, contact
Albert E. Hindrichs
Louisiana Department of Environ-
mental Quality .'
Office of Water Resources
Water Quality Management Division
P.O. Box 82215
Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2215
(504) 765-0511
Surface Water Quality
About 49% of the surveyed
stream miles, 40% of the surveyed
lake acres, and 70% of the surveyed
estuarine waters have good water
quality that fully supports aquatic
life. Fecal coliform bacteria continue
to be the most common pollutant
in Louisiana's rivers and streams,
followed by low dissolved oxygen
concentrations and nutrients. As a
result of violation of fecal coliform
bacteria standards, 55% of the sur-
veyed river miles do not fully sup-
port swimming and other contact
recreational activities. Thirty-six per-
cent of the surveyed lake acres and
28% of the surveyed estuarine
waters also do not fully support
swimming. Sources of bacteria
include sewage discharges from
municipal treatment plants, subdivi-
sions, trailer parks, and apartment
complexes. Septic tanks, sewage/
stormwater overflows, pastures, and
rangeland also generate bacterial
pollution. Agricultural runoff gener-
ates oxygen-depleting substances
and nutrients.
In lakes, noxious aquatic plants
(which result from high nutrient
loads) are the most common prob-
lem, followed by bacteria, low
dissolved oxygen, nutrients, and oil
and grease. Upstream sources of
pollutants impact the most lake
acres (primarily in Lake Pontchar-
train), followed by municipal point
sources, industrial point sources,
and petroleum extraction activities.
In estuaries, oil and grease, nutri-
ents, and bacteria are the most
common pollutants. Upstream
sources of contamination, petroleum
extraction activities, municipal dis-
charges, sewer/stormwater overflow,
and septic tanks are the leading
sources of pollution in estuaries.
Hydrologic modification impacts
one surveyed wetland.
Ground Water Quality
The quality of water in the
State's major aquifer systems
remains excellent. Of special con-
cern, however, are the shallow aqui-
fers and the water-bearing zones
that are not used as major sources
of water. These strata contribute
significantly to the water balance of
the deeper aquifers, but the shallow
aquifers are increasingly threatened.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Currently, most reductions in
nonpoint source pollution result
from cooperative demonstration
projects due to a lack of regulatory
authority in Louisiana to control
nonpoint source pollution. These
projects have demonstrated alterna-
tive rice farming management prac-
tices to reduce sediment and nutri-
ents in the Mermentau River Basin,
advocated lawn care management
to reduce erosion and runoff in the
Bayou Vermilion watershed, and
reduced fecal coliform concentra-
tions in the Tangipahoa River by
implementing septic tank and dairy
waste lagoon education programs
and upgrading municipal waste-
water treatment systems.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
The surface water monitoring
program consists of a fixed-station
monitoring network, intensive
surveys, special studies, and waste-
water discharge compliance sam-
pling. The fixed network includes at
least one long-term trend analysis
station on the major stream in each
basin of the State. The State posi-
tioned other fixed sampling sites- to
monitor targeted sources of pollu-
tion or waterbodies. Louisiana does
not maintain a regular fish tissue
sampling program.
- Not reported.
aA subset of Louisiana's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in Louisiana
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=66,294)b
Total Miles
29
22
Lakes {Total Acres = 1,078,031)
EstiianeS (Total Square Miles=7,656}
Total Square __
Miles Assessed
-------
Maine
< Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Maine 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Phil Carwood
Maine Department of Environ-
mental Protection
Bureau of Water Quality Control
State House Station 17
Augusta, ME 04333
(207) 287-7695
Surface Water Quality
Maine's water quality has sig-
nificantly improved since enactment
of the Clean Water Act in 1972.
Atlantic salmon and other fish now
return to Maine's rivers, and waters
that were once open sewers are
now clean enough to swim in.
Ninety-nine percent of the State's
river miles, 81% of the lake acres,
and 90% of the estuarine waters
have good water quality that fully
supports aquatic life uses. Dioxin in
fish tissue is the most significant
problem in major rivers. Oxygen-
depleting substances from nonpoint
sources and bacteria from inade-
quate sewage treatment are the
most significant problem in smaller
rivers and streams. Lakes are
impacted by oxygen-depleting
substances from nonpoint sources,
including urban runoff, agriculture,
and forestry activities. Bacteria from
municipal treatment plants and
small dischargers contaminate shell-
fish beds in estuarine waters.
Ground Water Quality
The most significant ground
water impacts include petroleum
compounds from leaking under-
ground and aboveground storage
tanks, other organic chemicals from
leaking storage facilities or disposal
practices, and bacteria from surface
disposal systems or other sources.
Maine requires that all underground
tanks be registered and that inad-
equate tanks be removed. About
23,000 tanks have been removed
since 1986. Maine also regulates
installation of underground storage
tanks and closure of landfills to
protect ground water resources
from future leaks.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Maine restored designated uses
in 20 miles of rivers by working
with Kraft pulp and paper mills to
reduce the levels of dioxin in their
discharges. Construction of small
-------
wastewater treatment systems also
eliminated some bacteria problems
and dissolved oxygen problems on
small streams. However, as the State
makes progress in restoring waters
impacted by point sources, new
water quality problems emerge
from nonpoint sources. Therefore,
the most important water quality
initiatives for the future include
implementing pollution prevention,
nonpoint source management,
watershed-based planning, coordi-
nated land use management, and
water quality monitoring. The State
is linking pollution prevention with
the watershed protection approach
in a pilot project within the Andro-
scoggin River basin. The State is
providing local officials and citizen
groups with technical assistance to
identify problem areas and develop
local solutions for reducing pollution
generation throughout the water-
shed.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Maine's surface water monitor-
ing program includes ambient water
quality monitoring, assimilative
capacity and wasteload allocation
studies, diagnostic studies, treat-
ment plant compliance monitoring,
and special investigations. Due to
budgetary constraints, some of
these activities are much more
limited in scope than is desirable for
accurately characterizing water
quality conditions in Maine.
- Not reported.
"A subset of Maine's designated uses appear
in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b)
report for a full description of the State's
uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in Maine
Percent
Designated Use3
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=31,672)b
Lakes (Total Acres = 986,776)
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 1,633)
-------
Maryland
> Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Maryland 1994
305 (b) report, contact:
Sherm Garrison
Maryland Department of Natural
Resources
Chesapeake Bay and Watershed
Program
Tawes State Office Building
Annapolis, MD 21401
(410)631-3681
Surface Water Quality
Overall, Maryland's surface
waters have good quality, but excess
nutrients, suspended sediments,
bacteria, toxic materials, or stream
acidity impact some waters. The
most serious water quality problem
in Maryland is the continuing accu-
mulation of nutrients in estuaries
and lakes from agricultural runoff,
urban runoff, natural nonpoint
source runoff, and point source dis-
charges. Excess nutrients stimulate
algal blooms and low dissolved oxy-
gen levels that adversely impact
water supplies and aquatic life.
Sources of sediment include
agricultural runoff, urban runoff,
construction activities, natural ero-
sion, dredging, forestry, and mining
operations. In western Maryland,
abandoned coal mines release acidic
waters that severely impact some
streams. Agricultural runoff, urban
runoff, natural runoff, and failing
septic systems elevate bacteria con-
centrations and cause continuous
shellfish harvesting restrictions in
about 104 square miles of estuarine
waters and cause temporary restric-
tions in another 72.3 square miles
after major rainstorms.
Ground Water Quality
Maryland's ground water
resource is of generally good
quality. Localized problems include
excess nutrients (nitrates) from fertil-
izers and septic systems; bacteria
from septic systems and surface
contamination; saline water intru-
sion aggravated by ground water
withdrawals in the coastal plain;
toxic compounds from septic tanks,
landfills, and spills; petroleum prod-
ucts from leaking storage facilities;
and acidic conditions and metals
from abandoned coal mine drainage
in western Maryland. Control efforts
are limited to implementing agricul-
tural best management practices
and enforcing regulations for septic
tanks, underground storage tanks,
land disposal practices, and well
construction.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Maryland manages nonpoint
sources with individual programs for
-------
each individual nonpoint source
category. Urban runoff is addressed
through stormwater and sediment
control laws that require develop-
ment projects to maintain predevel-
opment runoff patterns through
implementation of best manage-
ment practices (BMPs), such as
detention ponds or vegetated
swales. The Agricultural Water Qual-
ity Management Program supports
many approaches, including Soil
Conservation and Water Quality
Plans, implementation of BMPs, and
education. The Agricultural Cost
Share Program has provided State,
and some Federal, funds to help
offset the costs of implementing
almost 8,000 agricultural BMPs
since 1983. An Animal Waste Permit
Program requires discharge permits
for facilities that will have a defin-
able discharge to waters of the
State.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Maryland's monitoring program
includes a fixed-station network,
compliance sampling at point
source discharges, bioassay tests of
effluent toxicity, special intensive
sampling programs on the Potomac
and Patuxent Rivers, acid deposition
monitoring, fish tissue and shellstock
sampling, bacterial sampling in
shellfish waters, phytoplankton
sampling, biological monitoring,
and habitat assessments.
"A subset of Maryland's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in Maryland
Percent
Designated Use3
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully UOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Mites=17,000)"
Total Miles
69
Lakes {Total Acres = 77,965)
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 2,522}
-------
Massachusetts
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Massachusetts
1994 305(b) report, contact
Warren Kimball
Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Protection
Office of Watershed Management
40 Institute Road
North Crafton, MA 01536
(508) 792-7470
Surface Water Quality
The 1994 report does not reflect
the progress made in cleaning up
Massachusetts' rivers and lakes
because reporting total miles free of
all contaminants obscures progress
in removing some contaminants
from many waters. The method of
reporting survey results obscures the
statewide reduction in oxygen-
depleting wastes because bacteria,
nutrients, toxic pollutants, ammonia,
and acidity still impact about half of
the surveyed river miles, lake acres,
and estuarine waters in the State.
The leading sources of contamina-
tion in Massachusetts' surface waters
are stormwater runoff, combined
sewer overflows, and municipal
sewage treatment plants.
Quabbin Reservoir's 25,000
acres support swimming and
aquatic life, but high levels of
mercury in sport fish restrict fish
consumption. Unlike other water-
body types, coastal water bacterial
quality has deteriorated over the
past 10 years, especially in areas
such as Cape Cod where nonpoint
source pollution has resulted in a
tenfold increase in shellfish bed
closures.
Ground Water Quality
Contaminants have been
detected in at least 206 ground
water suppy wells in 87 municipali-
ties. Organic chemicals (especially
TCE) contaminate 60% of these
wells. Other contaminants include
metals, chlorides, bacteria, inorganic
chemicals, radiation, nutrients, tur-
bidity, and pesticides. Since 1983,
Massachusetts has required permits
for all industrial discharges into
ground waters and sanitary waste-
water discharges of 15,000 gallons
or more per day. The permits
require varying degrees of waste-
water treatment based on the qual-
ity and use of the receiving ground
water. Additional controls are
needed to eliminate contamination
from septic systems and sludge
disposal.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Wastewater treatment plant
construction has resulted in signifi-
cant improvements in water quality,
but $7 billion of unfunded waste-
water needs remain. The Nonpoint
Source Control Program has imple-
mented 35 projects to provide tech-
nical assistance, implement best
management practices, and educate
the public. The State has also
adopted a combined sewer overflow
policy that provides engineering
targets for cleanup and is presently
addressing several CSO abatement
projects.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
The Department of Environ-
mental Protection (DEP) adopted a
watershed planning approach to
coordinate stream monitoring with
wastewater discharge permitting,
water withdrawal permitting, and
nonpoint source control on a 5-year
rotating schedule. The DEP is also
adapting its monitoring strategies to
provide information on nonpoint
source pollution. For example, DEP
will focus more on wet-weather
sampling and biological monitoring
and less on chemical monitoring
during dry periods in order to gain
a more complete understanding of
the integrity of water resources.
aA subset of Massachusetts'* designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
c Excluding Quabbin Reservoir.
Individual Use Support in Massachusetts
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=8,229)b
Total Miles
Surveyed
60
16
(Total Acres = 151,173)
Estuaries fRital Square Miles = 223)
Total Square
Miles Surveyed 54
-------
Michigan
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Michigan 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Greg Goudy
Michigan Department of Natural
Resources
Surface Water Quality Division
P.O. Box 30028
Lansing, Ml 48909-7528
(517)335-3310
Surface Water Quality
Ninety-eight percent of
Michigan's surveyed river miles and
99% of Michigan's surveyed lake
acres fully support aquatic life uses.
Swimming use is also fully supported
in 98% of the surveyed rivers and all
of the surveyed lake acres. Priority
organic chemicals (in fish) are the
major cause of nonsupport in more
river miles than any other pollutant,
followed by siltation and sedimenta-
tion, metals, and bacteria. Leading
sources of pollution in Michigan
include unspecified nonpoint
sources, agriculture, municipal and
industrial discharges, combined
sewers, and atmospheric deposition.
Very few lakes in Michigan
completely fail to support fishing
and swimming, but there is no
doubt that both point and nonpoint
sources have increased the rate of
eutrophication (overenrichment),
altered biological communities, and
degraded the overall aesthetic and
recreational quality of a great
number of Michigan's fragile lake
resources. Many more lakes are
threatened by long-term, cumula-
tive pollutant loads, especially in the
rapidly growing communities on
northern lower Michigan.
Four of the five Great Lakes
border Michigan. The open waters
of Lakes Superior, Michigan, and
Huron have good quality. Poor
water quality is restricted to a few
degraded locations near shore. Lake
Erie's water quality has improved
dramatically in the last two decades.
Once declared dead, Lake Erie now
supports the largest walleye sport
fishery on the Great Lakes. The dra-
matic improvements are due prima-
rily to nutrient controls applied to
sewage treatment plants, particu-
larly in the Detroit area.
Ground Water Quality
Most of the ground water
resource is of excellent quality, but
certain aquifers have been contami-
nated with toxic materials leaking
from waste disposal sites, busi-
nesses, or government facilities. The
Michigan Ground Water Protection
Strategy and Implementation Plan
identifies specific program initiatives,
-------
schedules, and agency responsibili-
ties for protecting the State's
ground water resources.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Major point source reductions
in phosphorus and organic material
loads have reduced or eliminated
water quality problems in many
Michigan waters. However,
expanded efforts are needed to
control nonpoint source pollution,
eliminate combined sewer over-
flows, and reduce toxic contamina-
tion. Michigan has implemented an
industrial pretreatment program,
promulgated rules on the discharge
of toxic substances, and regulated
hazardous waste disposal facilities,
but many toxicity problems are due
to past activities that contaminated
sediments.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Between 1989 and 1993, the
Department of Natural Resources
devoted a significant amount of
staff time to documenting water
quality impacts from nonpoint
sources of pollution and verifying
information in the Michigan
Nonpoint Source Assessment.
Chemical, biological, and physical
surveys were conducted to identify
water quality standards violations
and degraded biological communi-
ties in numerous watersheds.
aA subset of Michigan's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in Michigan
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=51,438}*
Lakes (Total Acres = 887,019)
Great takes (Total Miles=3,288)
-------
Minnesota
> Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Minnesota 1994
305(b) report, contact
Elizabeth Brinsmade
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Water Quality Division
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, MN 55155
(612)296-8861
Surface Water Quality
About 73% of the surveyed river
miles have good quality that fully
supports aquatic life uses and 39%
of the surveyed rivers fully support
swimming. Seventy-nine percent of
the surveyed lake acres fully support
swimming. The most common pol-
lutants identified in rivers were bac-
teria, oxygen-depleting substances,
pH (acidity), salinity/total dissolved
solids/chlorides, and metals. Non-
point sources generate most of the
pollution in rivers. Minnesota's 272
miles of Lake Superior shoreline have
fish consumption advisories. These
advisories recommend some limits
on fish meals consumed for certain
species and size classes. Most of the
pollution originated from point
sources has been controlled, but
runoff (especially in agricultural
regions) still degrades water quality.
Ground Water Quality
The State maintains a Ground
Water Monitoring and Assessment
Program to evaluate the quality of
ground waters that supply domestic
water to 70% of Minnesota's popu-
lation. The Program sampled 368
wells in the southeastern and south-
western regions of the State during
1992 and 1993. The samples were
analyzed for 43 inorganic param-
eters and 68 volatile organic
compounds. Monitoring detected
nitrates in 62% of the wells and low
levels of VOCs in 41 wells. Seven
percent of the sampled wells
contained nitrate concentrations
exceeding EPA's Maximum Con-
taminant Level. Natural sources of
manganese, iron, and arsenic also
interfere with uses of ground water.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
During the 1994 reporting
cycle, Minnesota revised its
Nonpoint Source (NPS) Manage-
ment Program with new strategies
for addressing agricultural sources,
forestry, urban runoff, contaminated
sediments, feedlots, mining, and
septic systems. The State also
revised strategies for monitoring and
assessing NPS impacts, educating
the public, implementing BMPs, and
applying the watershed protection
approach to NPS management.
-------
Minnesota adopted rules to
implement the State's Wetlands
Conservation Act and developed
wetlands water quality standards
during 1992 and 1993. The Wet-
land Conservation Act rules require
that local governments regulate
drain and fill activities in wetlands
that are not designated public
waters wetlands, which are listed on
the Protected Waters Inventory. The
rules allow the local governments to
grant one or more of 25 exemp-
tions for proposed activities on
smaller wetlands with less inunda-
tion.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Minnesota maintains an Ambi-
ent Stream Monitoring Program
with 78 sampling stations. The State
also performs fish tissue sampling,
sediment monitoring, intensive sur-
veys, biological surveys, and lake
assessments and supports a citizen
lake monitoring program. In 1994,
the State completed the Minnesota
River Assessment Project, a compre-
hensive study involving over 30
Federal, State, and local agencies.
The project incorporated intensive
biological monitoring and habitat
assessments with traditional chemi-
cal monitoring to identify multiple
sources and their impacts. A pilot
use support methodology was used
for rivers in the Minnesota River
basin that reflected this comprehen-
sive monitoring.
- Not reported.
"A subset of Minnesota's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses. '
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in Minnesota
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully QOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Designated Usea Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=91,944)b :',- ; ;
Total Miles
Surveyed
46
17
Lakes (Total Acres = 3,290,101)
Great Lakes (Toted Miles
-------
Mississippi
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Mississippi 1994
305 (b) report, contact
Randy Reed
Mississippi Department of
Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 10385
Jackson, MS 39289-0385
(601)961-5158
Surface Water Quality
Mississippi reported that 81% of
its surveyed rivers have fair water
quality that periodically does not
support aquatic life uses and
another 5% have poor water quality
that does not support aquatic life
uses. About 35% of the surveyed
rivers do not fully support swim-
ming. The most common pollutants
identified in Mississippi's rivers
include nutrients, pesticides, silta-
tion, oxygen-depleting substances,
and bacteria. Agriculture is the most
common source of pollution in
rivers, followed by municipal
sewage treatment plants.
About 65% of the surveyed lake
acres have good water quality that
fully supports aquatic life uses and
97% of the surveyed lake acres fully
support swimming. Nutrients, silt-
ation, pesticides, and oxygen-
depleting substances are the most
common pollutants in Mississippi
lakes. Agriculture is also the domi-
nant source of pollution in
Mississippi's lakes.
In estuaries, 74% of the sur-
veyed waters have good quality that
fully supports aquatic life uses, but
shellfishing activities are impaired in
all of the surveyed estuarine waters.
Bacteria and metals cause most of
the impacts observed in estuaries.
High bacteria levels are associated
with shellfish harvesting restrictions.
The State attributes impacts in
estuarine waters to urban runoff/
storm sewers, septic systems, and
land disposal activities.
The State has posted six fish
consumption advisories, including
three commercial fishing bans due
to elevated concentrations of PCBs,
PCP, and dioxins detected in fish
tissues.
Ground Water Quality
Extensive contamination of
drinking water aquifers and public
water supplies remains uncommon
in Mississippi although localized
ground water contamination has
been detected at various facilities
across the State. The most fre-
quently identified sources of con-
tamination are leaky underground
storage tanks and faulty septic sys-
tems. Brine contamination is also a
problem near oil fields. Little data
exist for domestic wells that are
seldom sampled. Ground water
protection programs include the
Pesticide Container Recycling Pro-
gram, the Underground Storage
Tank Program, the Underground
Injection Control Program, the
Agrichemical Ground Water
-------
Monitoring Program, and the Well-
head Protection Program (approved
by EPA in 1993).
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
During 1993 and 1994, Missis-
sippi developed regulations for con-
ducting Section 401 Water Quality
Certifications. The regulations
enable the State to review Federal
licenses and permits for compliance
with State water quality standards.
The comprehensive regulations
went through public review and
were adopted in February 1994.
Mississippi also expanded its defini-
tion of waters of the State to
include wetlands and ground
waters.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Each year, the State samples
about 25 of their 57 historical fixed
monitoring stations on a rotating
schedule. The State monitors physi-
cal and chemical parameters
bimonthly, metals in the water col-
umn twice a year, and biological
parameters once a year. The devel-
opment and implementation of a
rapid bioassessment methodology
has significantly increased coverage
of State waters beyond the historic
fixed stations. Several stations are
also sampled annually for metals
and pesticides in fish tissues. The
State monitoring program is supple-
mented by a network of 27 stations
operated by the USCS.
- Not reported.
aA subset of Mississippi's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in Mississippi
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=84,oo3)b
Lakes (Total Acres - 500,000)
Estuaries (Total Square Mites a 133)
-------
Missouri
' Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Missouri 1994
305(b) report, contact:
John Ford
Missouri Department of Natural
Resources
Water Pollution Control Program
P.O. Box 176
Jefferson City, MO 65102-0176
(314) 751-7024
Surface Water Quality
Almost half of Missouri's rivers
and streams have impaired aquatic
habitat due to a combination of
factors, including natural geology,
climate, and agricultural land use.
As a result of these factors, many
streams suffer from low water
volume, low dissolved oxygen
concentrations, high water
temperatures, and excessive silt-
ation. In lakes, low dissolved oxygen
from upstream dam releases, taste
and odor problems, and pesticides
are the most common ailments.
Agriculture, urban runoff, and reser-
voir releases are the leading sources
of lake degradation.
The Missouri Department of
Health advises that the public
restrict consumption of bottom-
feeding fish (such as catfish, carp,
and suckers) from non-Ozark
streams or lakes to 1 pound per
week due to high concentrations of
chlordane, PCBs, and other con-
' taminants in these fish.
Ground Water Quality
In general, ground water quan-
tity and quality increases from north
to south and west to east. Deep
ground water aquifers in northern
and western Missouri are not
suitable for drinking water due to
high concentrations of natural min-
erals. Nitrates and, to a much lesser
extent, pesticides also contaminate
wells in this region. About one-third
of the private wells exceed drinking
water standards for nitrates, and
about 2% of private wells exceed
drinking water standards for either
atrazine or alachlor. Statewide, the
highest priority concerns include
ground water contamination from
septic tanks, feedlots and pasture-
land, and underground storage
tanks.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Sewage treatment plant con-
struction has restored many surface
waters in Missouri, but overloaded
older facilities still impact about
62 stream miles. Nonpoint source
efforts have been less successful at
restoring water quality. To date, the
most successful activity has been the
reclamation of abandoned coal
mine lands, which is funded by a
tax on coal that generates $1 mil-
lion to $2 million annually. Stream
miles impacted by abandoned coal
mines fell from 100 miles to 42
miles as a result of reclamation
projects.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Missouri's water quality moni-
toring strategy features fixed-station
chemical sampling, short-term
intensive chemical surveys, rapid
visual/bioassessments, and detailed
biological monitoring to advance
the development of biological crite-
ria. The State also conducts toxicity
testing and samples fish tissues for
toxic chemicals. During 1992-94,
four watershed projects featured
concentrated monitoring activities
designed to answer specific ques-
tions about animal waste manage-
ment and farm chemical reduction
options.
Individual Use Support in Missouri
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully Good (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=51.015)b
53
46
Lakes (Total Acres = 288,315)
aA subset of Missouri's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b) report
for a full description of the State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Montana
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Montana 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Christian ]. Levine
Montana Department of Health
and Environmental Science
Water Quality Bureau
Cogswell Building
1400 Broadway
Helena, MT 59620
(406) 444-5342
Surface Water Quality
Most of Montana's rivers and
streams (74%) have fair water qual-
ity that periodically fails to support
aquatic life uses. Another 5% have
poor water quality that consistently
fails to support aquatic life uses.
About 14% of the surveyed lake
acres have good water quality that
fully supports fish and aquatic life,
57% fully support swimming, and
62% fully support drinking water
use. Agriculture (especially irrigated
crop production and rangeland)
impairs 60% of the surveyed stream
miles and 45% of the surveyed lake
acres. In general, nonpoint sources
are a factor in 90% of the impaired
rivers and 80% of the impaired
lakes. Resource extraction, forestry,
and municipal sewage treatment
plants have less widespread impacts
on water quality.
Ground Water Quality
More than 50% of Montanans
get their domestic water supply
from ground water sources. Ground
water is plentiful and the quality is
generally excellent, but Montana's
aquifers are very vulnerable to pollu-
tion from human activities that will
expand as the population expands
throughout the river valleys. The
Department of Health and Environ-
mental Sciences and the Depart-
ment of Natural Resources and
Conservation are jointly preparing a
Comprehensive Ground Water
Protection Plan to protect ground
water quality and quantity.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Montana is actively pursuing
interagency/interdisciplinary water-
shed planning and management
Currently, five large watershed
-------
projects are under way in Montana:
the Flathead Lake Watershed Man-
agement Plan, the Blackfoot River
Watershed Management Project, the
Grassroots Planning Process for the
Upper Clark Fork Basin, the Tri-State
Clark Fork Pend Oreille Watershed
Management Plan, and the
Kootenai River Basin Program. Each
program advocates collaboration
by all interested parties to devise
comprehensive management
options that simultaneously address
all major factors threatening or
degrading water quality.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Montana will need to expand
its monitoring and assessment pro-
gram to adequately measure the
effectiveness of the State's nonpoint
source control program and other
watershed management programs.
To date, only 10% of the State's
stream miles and 2% of the lakes
have been assessed. Fixed-station
monitoring is limited to three of the
State's 16 river basins: the Flathead
and upper and lower Clark Fork
basins. The Department will ask the
State Legislature to fund additional
staff and operating expenses to
expand ambient monitoring in the
State. The State is also concerned
that the U.S. Geological Survey may
discontinue trend monitoring in
Montana.
Individual Use Support in Montana
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles = 176,750)b
74
Lakes (Total Acres = 844,802)
- Not reported.
aA subset of Montana's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b) report
for a full description of the State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Nebraska
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Nebraska 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Steven Walker
Nebraska Department of
Environmental Quality
Water Quality Division,
Surface Water Section
P.O. Box 98922, State House Station
Lincoln, NE 68509-8922
(402)471-2875
Surface Water Quality
Agriculture is the most wide-
spread source of water quality prob-
lems in Nebraska, but urban runoff
also impacts the State's rivers and
streams. Agricultural runoff intro-
duces excess silt, bacteria, sus-
pended solids, pesticides, and nutri-
ents into surface waters. Municipal
and industrial facilities may contrib-
ute ammonia, bacteria, and mefals.
Channelization and hydrologic
modifications have impacted aquatic
life in Nebraska streams by reducing
the diversity and availability of habi-
tat.
Elevated concentrations of
metals, primarily arsenic, were the
most common water quality prob-
lem identified in lakes, followed by
siltation, low dissolved oxygen, and
nutrients. Pesticides, primarily
atrazine, also degraded 18 lakes.
Nebraska applies more atrazine to
crops than any other State in the
United States. Sources of pollution
in lakes include municipal sewage
treatment plants, agriculture, con-
struction, urban runoff, and hydro-
logic habitat modifications.
Ground Water Quality
Although natural ground water
quality in Nebraska is good, hun-
dreds of individual cases of ground
water contamination have been
documented in Nebraska and the
number of contaminated wells
increases every year. Major sources
of ground water contamination
include agricultural activities, indus-
trial facilities, leaking underground
storage tanks, oil or hazardous sub-
stance spills, solid waste landfills,
wastewater lagoons, brine disposal
pits, and septic systems.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Until recently, Nebraska's
Nonpoint Source (NPS) Manage-
ment Program concentrated on
protecting ground water resources.
Surface water protection efforts
-------
consisted primarily of two federally
funded demonstration projects on
Long Pine Creek and Maple Creek.
Now, Nebraska is evaluating the
role of NPS pollution statewide. In
1994, Nebraska supported 35 NPS
projects throughout the State.
Nebraska recently revised
wetlands water quality standards to
protect beneficial uses of aquatic
life, aesthetics, wildlife, and agricul-
tural water supply. The State also
protects wetlands with the water
quality certification program, permit
requirements for underground injec-
tion activities and mineral explora-
tion, and water quality monitoring.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
The State's Nonpoint Source
Management Program cannot be
effective without monitoring infor-
mation to identify and prioritize
waters impacted by NPS, develop
NPS control plans, and evaluate the
effectiveness of implemented best
management practices. In response
to this need, Nebraska developed
an NPS surface water quality moni-
toring strategy to guide NPS moni-
toring projects. During 1992 and
1993, the State conducted 100 NPS
screening assessments; 2 followup
intensive NPS watershed assess-
ments; BMP effectiveness studies in
10 watersheds; and a pesticide
reconnaissance survey in the Big
and Little Blue River Basin. _
Individual Use Support in Nebraska
Percent
Designated Use9
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams {fot^Mttes=8t,573f
Total Miles
Surveyed
55
Lakes (Total Acres = 280,000}
aA subset of Nebraska's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b) report
for a full description of the State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Nevada
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Nevada 1994
305 (b) report, contact:
Glen Gentry
Bureau of Water Quality Planning
Division of Environmental Protection
123 West Nye Lane
Carson City, NV 89710
(702) 687-4670
Surface Water Quality
Only 10% (about 15,000 miles)
of Nevada's rivers and streams flow
year round, and most of these
waters are inaccessible. For this
reporting period, Nevada surveyed
1,440 miles of the 3,000 miles of
accessible perennial streams with
designated beneficial uses. Thirty
percent of the surveyed stream
miles have good water quality that
fully supports aquatic life uses; 18%
have fair water quality that some-
times does not support aquatic life
uses; and 52% have poor water
quality that does not support
aquatic life uses. Thirty-eight per-
cent of the surveyed streams fully
support swimming and 62% do not
fully support swimming. In lakes,
29% of the surveyed acres fully
support aquatic life and swimming,
and 71 % partially support these
uses.
Agricultural practices (irrigation,
grazing, and flow regulation) have
the greatest impact on Nevada's
water resources. Agricultural sources
generate large sediment and nutri-
ent loads. Urban drainage systems
contribute nutrients, heavy metals,
and organic substances that deplete
oxygen. Flow reductions also have a
great impact on streams, limiting
dilution of salts, minerals, and
pollutants.
Ground Water Quality
Nevada lacks comprehensive
ground water protection legislation,
but the State does have statutes
that control individual sources of
contamination, including mining,
underground storage tanks, septic
systems, handling of hazardous
materials and waste, solid waste
disposal, underground injection
wells, agricultural practices, and
wastewater disposal. Land use
statutes also enable local authorities
to implement Wellhead Protection
Plans by adopting zoning ordi-
nances, subdivision regulations, and
site plan review procedures. Local
authorities can implement certain
source control programs at the local
level.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Nevada's Nonpoint Source
Management Plan aims to reduce
NFS pollution with interagency
coordination, education programs,
and incentives that encourage vol-
untary installation of best manage-
ment practices. During 1992-1994,
the State continued updating the
Handbook of Best Management Prac-
tices and supported NPS assessment
activities in each of the State's six
major river basins. The State also
completed a Wellhead Protection
Plan for the State and began devel-
oping a State Ground Water Protec-
tion Policy.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Several State, Federal, and local
agencies regularly sample chemical
and physical parameters at over
100 sites in the 14 hydrologic
regions of the State. Nevada hopes
to add biological monitoring at
several routine sampling sites after
the State adapts rapid bioassess-
ment protocols to the arid condi-
tions in Nevada. The State also
coordinates intensive field studies on
Nevada's major river systems, the
Truckee River Basin, Carson River
Basin, Walker River Basin, and the
Humboldt River Basin. The State
also monitors a number of lakes and
reservoirs in conjunction with the
Section 314 Clean Lakes Program.
Individual Use Support in Nevada
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Designated Usea Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Mifea* 143,578}"
Total Miles
Surveyed
47
Lakes (Total Acres = 533,239)
- Not reported.
aA subset of Nevada's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b) report
for a full description of the State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
New Hampshire
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the New Hampshire
1994 305(b) report, contact
Gregg Comstock
State of New Hampshire
Department of Environmental
Services
Water Supply & Pollution Control
Division
64 North Main Street
Concord, NH 03301
(603)271-2457
Surface Water Quality
Overall, the quality of New
Hampshire's surface waters is excel-
lent." Over 99% of the State's river
miles and 95% of the lake acres
have excellent or good water quality
that fully supports aquatic life uses
and swimming. Poor water quality
conditions are more widespread in
estuaries; high bacterial levels inter-
fere with shellfish harvesting in 66%
of the estuarine waters. Bacteria is
also the leading cause of impair-
ment in rivers where high bacteria
levels indicate unsafe swimming
conditions. Nutrients are the major
cause of impairment in lakes and
ponds. The State suspects that
nonpoint sources are responsible for
most of the pollution entering the
State's waters.
New Hampshire advises the
public to restrict consumption of
fish caught in the Androscoggin
River below Berlin, the Connecticut
River, Horseshoe Pond, and the
Great Bay Estuary. One fish con-
sumption advisory is posted on the
Androscoggin River below Berlin
due to elevated concentrations of
dioxins in fish tissue. The James
River Corporation paper mill in Ber-
lin is the suspected source of the
dioxins.
Ground Water Quality
New Hampshire's overall
ground water quality is very good.
in some localized areas, naturally
occurring arsenic, fluoride, and
radionuclides (principally radon)
exceed drinking water standards.
Releases from petroleum facilities,
industrial operations, and landfills
have contaminated isolated areas
with petroleum or volatile organic
compounds. Sodium is the only
contaminant that has exhibited an
increasing presence in ground water
due to the widespread application
of road salts in winter. New Hamp-
shire is developing a Comprehensive
State Ground Water Protection Pro-
gram to coordinate their various
ground water assessment, preven-
tion, and restoration programs.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Over the past 20 years, New
Hampshire has eliminated or abated
all significant untreated municipal
and industrial wastewater discharges
in State waters. Recently, the
Department of Environmental Ser-
vices (DES) initiated a watershed
protection approach to identify and
resolve remaining pollution prob-
lems. DES will compile watershed
maps and land use data, identify
major sources of pollution, model
total maximum daily loads for pol-
lutants, and revise discharge permits
as needed in the State's five basins.
DES estimates that each basin
assessment will require 2 years to
complete at current funding levels.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
DES implemented a rotating
watershed monitoring program in
1989. In 1993, the rotation was
temporarily halted so that the State
could intensify monitoring at sites
violating standards. During 1994
and 1995, DES will investigate
sources of violations confirmed by
the 1993 data.
Individual Use Support in New Hampshire
Percent
- Not reported.
"A subset of New Hampshire's designated
uses appear in this figure. Refer to the
State's 305(b) report for a full description of
the State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Designated Use3
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=10,881 )b
Lakes (Total Acres = 163,012)
Estuaries {Total Square MHes,= 28)
-------
New Jersey
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydralogic Unit)
For a copy of the New Jersey 1994
305(b) report, contact
Kevin Berry
N] DEP
Office of Environmental Planning
401 East State St.
Trenton, NJ 08625
(609) 633-1179
Surface Water Quality
Sixty-eight percent of the 1,617
surveyed stream miles have good
water quality that fully supports
aquatic life, but New jersey's high
population density threatens these
waters. Bacteria (which indicates
unsafe swimming conditions) and
nutrients are the most common
pollutants in rivers and streams. All
of the State's lakes are believed to
be threatened or actively deteriorat-
ing. Bacterial contamination is the
most widespread problem in estuar-
ies, impairing both shellfish harvest-
ing and swimming. Other problems
include nutrients, low dissolved
oxygen concentrations, pesticides,
and priority organic chemicals. Ma-
jor sources impacting New Jersey's
waters include municipal treatment
plants, industrial facilities, combined
sewers, urban runoff, construction,
agriculture, and land disposal of
wastes (including septic tanks).
Ground Water Quality
There are currently over 6,000
ground water pollution investiga-
tions under way in New jersey. The
most common pollutants found in
ground water are volatile organic
compounds, metals, base neutral
chemicals, acid-extractable chemi-
cals, PCBs, and pesticides. Under-
ground storage tanks are the most
common source of ground water
contamination, followed by landfills,
surface spills, and industrial/com-
mercial septic systems. New jersey
adopted new ground water quality
standards in 1993 that revise the
ground water classification system
and establish numerical criteria for
many pollutants. The standards also
protect good ground water quality
from degradation by future
activities.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
New jersey's Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP) is
adopting a watershed approach to
water quality and quantity manage-
ment. The watershed approach
coordinates monitoring, modeling,
planning, permitting, and
enforcement activities within a
geographic area that drains into a
-------
major river, lake, or estuary. The
watershed approach allows all inter-
ested parties to participate in the
development of consensus-based
management options. DEP is
currently conducting a watershed
protection pilot project in the
Whippany River watershed with
local governments, permittees,
regional interest groups, and private
citizens.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
DEP's current monitoring pro-
gram is centered around physical
and chemical sampling at fixed
stations designed to monitor long-
term trends. Unfortunately, the
fixed-station network cannot pro-
vide data to address other manage-
ment needs, such as identifying
specific sources of pollution and
measuring the effectiveness of spe-
cific pollution control actions. There-
fore, DEP recommends supplement-
ing the fixed-station monitoring
program with intensive watershed
surveys to support watershed pro-
tection management projects. Inten-
sive surveys would collect data to
profile water quality over 24-hour
periods, identify pollution' sources,
quantify pollution impacts, compare
water quality data to flow condi-
tions, model wasteload allocations,
and determine assimilative capacity
of waterbodies.
aA subset of New Jersey's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
c Includes tidal portions of coastal rivers.
Individual Use Support in New Jersey
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Designated Use3 Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=6,450)b
Total Miles
Assessed
68
Lakes (Total Acres = 24,000)
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 420)
-------
New Mexico
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the New Mexico 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Erik Galloway
New Mexico Environment
Department
Surface Water Quality Bureau
Evaluation and Planning Section
P.O. Box26110
Santa Fe, NM 87502-6110
(505) 827-2923
Surface Water Quality
About 93% of New Mexico's
surveyed stream miles have good
water quality that fully supports
aquatic life uses. Ninety-nine percent
of the surveyed river miles fully sup-
port swimming. The leading prob-
lems in streams include habitat alter-
ations (such as removal of stream-
side vegetation), siltation, metals,
and nutrients. Nonpoint sources are
responsible for over 93% of the
degradation in New Mexico's 3,255
impaired stream miles. Municipal
wastewater treatment plants impair
about 4% of the degraded waters
(124 stream miles).
Agriculture and recreational
activities are the primary sources of
nutrients, siltation, reduced shore-
line vegetation, and bank destabili-
zation that impairs aquatic life use
in 91 % of New Mexico's surveyed
lake acres. Mercury contamination
from unknown sources appears in
fish caught at 22 reservoirs. How-
ever, water and sediment samples
from surveyed lakes and reservoirs
have not detected high concentra-
tions of mercury. Fish may contain
high concentrations of mercury in
waters with minute quantities of
mercury because the process of
biomagnification concentrates
mercury in fish tissue.
Ground Water Quality
About 88% of the population of
New Mexico depends on ground
water for drinking water. The Envi-
ronment Department has identified
at least 1,745 cases of ground water
contamination since 1927. The
most common source of ground
water contamination is small house-
hold septic tanks and cesspools.
Leaking underground storage tanks,
injection wells, landfills, surface
impoundments, oil and gas produc-
tion, mining and milling, dairies,
and miscellaneous industrial sources
also contaminate ground water in
New Mexico. New Mexico operates
a ground water discharger permit
program that includes ground water
standards for intentional discharges
and a spill cleanup provision for
other discharges.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
New Mexico's Nonpoint Source
Management Program contains a
series of implementation milestones
that were designed to establish
goals while providing a method to
measure progress and success of the
program. Implementation consists
of the coordination of efforts among
NFS management agencies, promo-
tion and implementation of best
management practices, coordination
of watershed projects, inspection
and enforcement activities, consis-
tency reviews, and education and
outreach activities.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
New Mexico relies heavily on
chemical and physical data to assess
water quality. Fish tissue data
became available in 1991, and data
from biological surveys and bioassay
tests were incorporated into the
1994 assessments where possible.
The State also conducts extensive
monitoring to determine the
effectiveness of best management
practices implemented under the
Nonpoint Source Management
Program. During the current 305(b)
reporting cycle, New Mexico com-
pleted two special water quality
surveys along the Rio Hondo and
the Red River in Taos County.
Individual Use Support in New Mexico
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Designated Use3 Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=ito,74Db .
Lakes (Total Acres = 151,320)
aA subset of New Mexico's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b)
report for a full description of the State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
New York
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the New York 1994
305(b) report, contact:
George K. Hansen, P.E.
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
Bureau of Monitoring and
Assessment
50 Wolf Road
Albany, NY 12233
(518)457-8819
Surface Water Quality
ป
Ninety-one percent of New
York's rivers and streams, 74% of
the State's lake acres, 97% of the
State's Great Lakes shoreline, and
99% of the bays and tidal waters
have good water quality that fully
supports aquatic life uses. Swimming
is fully supported in 99% of the
surveyed rivers, 78% of the surveyed
lakes, 80% of the Great Lakes shore-
line, and 93% of the surveyed estua-
rine waters. Eighty-five percent of
New York's Great Lake's shoreline
does not fully support fish con-
sumption use because of a fish
consumption advisory.
Agriculture is a major source of
nutrients and silt that impair New
York's rivers, lakes, and reservoirs.
Hydrologic modification and habitat
modification are also a major source
of water quality impairment in rivers
and lakes. Urban runoff is a major
source of pollution in the State's
estuaries. Bacteria from urban runoff
and other sources close about
200,000 acres (16%) of potential
shellfishing beds.
Contaminated sediments are
the primary source of 7% of the
impaired rivers and lakes, 76% of
the impaired Great Lake's shoreline,
and 27% of the impaired estuarine
waters in New York State. Sedi-
ments are contaminated with PCBs,
chlorinated organic pesticides, mer-
cury, cadmium, mirex, and dioxins
that bioconcentrate in the food
chain and result in fish consumption
advisories.
Sewage treatment plant con-
struction and upgrades have had a
significant impact on water quality.
Since 1972, the size of rivers
impacted by municipal sewage
treatment facilities has declined
from about 2,000 miles to 300
miles.
Ground Water Quality
About 3% of the State's public
water supply system wells (160
wells) are closed or abandoned due
to contamination from organic
chemicals. The most common
contaminants are synthetic solvents
-------
and degreasers, gasoline and other
petroleum products, and agricultural
pesticides and herbicides (primarily
aldicarb and carbofuran). The most
common sources of organic solvents
in ground water are spills, leaks, and
improper handling at industrial and
commercial facilities.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Virtually every county of the
State has a county water quality
coordinating committee composed
of local agencies (such as Cornell
Cooperative Extension and soil and
water conservation districts), local
representatives from State and
Federal agencies, and public interest
groups. The county committees
meet regularly to discuss local priori-
ties and fashion local strategies to
address nonpoint source pollution.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
In 1987, New York State imple-
mented the Rotating Intensive Basin
Studies (RIBS), an ambient monitor-
ing program that concentrates
monitoring activities on one-third
of the State's hydrologic basins for
2-year periods. The DEC monitors
the entire State every 6 years.
Intensive monitoring clarifies cause-
and-effect relationships between
pollutants and water quality,
measures the effectiveness of imple-
mented pollution controls, and
supports regulatory decisions.
"A subset of New York's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in New York
Percent
Designated Use*
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Analnabto)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles52,337)"
Lakes (Total Acres = 790,782)
Great Lakes (Tow Mites ซS77)
Estuaries (Total square Mitas=1,530)
-------
North Carolina
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the North Carolina
1994 305(b) report, contact:
Carol Metz
NC DEHNR
Division of Environmental
Management
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
(919) 733-5083
Surface Water Quality
About 70% of the State's sur-
veyed freshwater rivers and streams
have good water quality that fully
supports aquatic life uses, 25% have
fair water quality that partially sup-
ports aquatic life uses, and 5% have
poor water quality that does not
support aquatic life uses. Eighteen
percent of the surveyed rivers do
not fully support swimming. The
major sources of impairment are
agriculture (responsible for 56% of
the impaired river miles), urban
runoff (responsible for 13%), point
sources (responsible for 12%), and
construction (responsible for 11 %).
These sources generate siltation,
bacteria, and organic wastes that
deplete dissolved oxygen.
Only 3% of the surveyed lakes
in North Carolina are impaired for
swimming and aquatic life uses. A
few lakes are impacted by dioxin,
metals, and excessive nutrient
enrichment. The Champion Paper
mill on the Pigeon River is the
source of dioxin contamination in
Waterville Lake. The State and the
mill implemented a dioxin minimi-
zation program in the mid-1980s
and completed a modernization
program in 1993 that will reduce
water usage and discharges.
About 93% of the estuaries and
sounds in North Carolina fully sup-
port designated uses. Agriculture,
urban runoff, septic tanks, and point
source discharges are the leading
sources of nutrients, bacteria, and
low dissolved oxygen that degrade
estuaries.
Ground Water Quality
About half of the people in
North Carolina use ground water as
their primary supply of drinking
water. Ground water quality is
generally good, but new cases of
ground water contamination
affected 276 public water supplies
during 1992-1993. The leading
source of ground water contamina-
tion is leaking underground storage
tanks, which contaminate ground
water with gasoline, diesel fuel, and
heating oil. During 1992 and 1993,
North Carolina adopted new regula-
tions for administering Leaking
Underground Storage Tank funds
and amended ground water
standards.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
In 1992-1993, North Carolina
continued its aggressive program to
control nonpoint source pollution.
North Carolina adopted a
nondischarge rule for animal waste
management, implemented an
innovative nutrient trading program
between point and nonpoint
sources in the Tar-Pamlico river
basin, signed 2,500 new contracts
under the Agricultural Cost Share
Program to implement best man-
agement practices, and reclassified
about 200 water supply watersheds
for special protection.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Surface water quality in North
Carolina was primarily evaluated
using physical and chemical data
collected by the Division of Environ-
mental Management (DEM) from a
statewide fixed-station network and
biological assessments. These
include macroinvertebrate (aquatic
insect) community surveys, fish
community structure analyses,
phytoplankton analyses, bioassays,
and limnological review of lakes and
watersheds. Other sources of infor-
mation were point source monitor-
ing data, shellfish closure reports,
lake trophic state studies, and
reports prepared by other local,
State, and Federal agencies.
aA subset of North Carolina's designated
uses appear in this figure. Refer to the
State's 305(b) report for a full description of
the State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in North Carolina
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully Good (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Ri vers and Streams (Total Miles =37,6QO)b
Total Miles
Surveyed
33
25
(Total Acres ซ 306,584)
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 3,122)
-------
North Dakota
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydro.logic Unit)
For a copy of the North Dakota
1994 305(b) report, contact
Michael Ell
North Dakota Department of Health
Division of Water Quality
P.O. Box 5520
Bismark, ND 58502
(701)328-5210
Surface Water Quality
North Dakota reports that 78%
of its surveyed rivers and streams
have good water quality that fully
supports aquatic life uses now, but
good conditions are threatened in
most of these streams. Eighty-nine
percent of the surveyed streams
fully support swimming. Elevated
siltation, nutrients, ammonia, patho-
gens, oxygen-depleting wastes, and
habitat alterations impair aquatic life
use support in 22% of the surveyed
rivers and impair swimming in 11 %
of the surveyed rivers. The leading
sources of contamination are agri-
culture, removal of streamside veg-
etation, municipal sewage treatment
plants, and other habitat alterations.
Natural conditions, such as low
flows, also contribute to violations
of standards.
In lakes, 95% of the surveyed
acres have good water quality that
fully supports aquatic life uses, and
98% of the surveyed acres fully
support swimming. Siltation, nutri-
ents, oxygen-depleting substances,
and suspended solids are the most
widespread pollutants in North
Dakota's lakes. The leading sources
of pollution in lakes are agricultural
activities (including nonirrigated
crop production, pasture land, irri-
gated crop production, and feed-
lots), municipal sewage treatment
plants, and urban runoff/storm sew-
ers. Natural conditions also prevent
some waters from fully supporting
designated uses.
Ground Water Quality
North Dakota has not identified
widespread ground water contami-
nation, although some naturally
occurring compounds may make
the quality of ground water undesir-
able in a few aquifers. Where
human-induced ground water con-
tamination has occurred, the
impacts have been attributed prima-
rily to petroleum storage facilities,
agricultural storage facilities,
feedlots, poorly designed wells,
abandoned wells, wastewater
treatment lagoons, landfills, septic
systems, and the underground
injection of waste. Assessment and
'protection of ground water
-------
continue through ambient ground
water quality monitoring activities,
the implementation of wellhead
protection projects, the Compre-
hensive Ground Water Protection
Program, and the development of a
State Management Plan for Pesti-
cides.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
North Dakota's Nonpoint
Source Pollution Management Pro-
gram has provided financial support
to 26 projects over the past 4 years.
Although the size, type, and target
audience of these projects vary, the
projects share the same basic goals:
(1) increase public awareness
of nonpoint source pollution,
(2) reduce or prevent the delivery
of NPS pollutants to waters of the
State, and (3) disseminate informa-
tion on effective solutions to NPS
pollution.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
The North Dakota Department
of Health monitors physical and
chemical parameters (such as dis-
solved oxygen, pH, total dissolved
solids, and nutrients), toxic contami-
nants in fish, whole effluent toxicity,
and fish community structure.
North Dakota's ambient water qual-
ity monitoring network consists of
61 sampling sites on 31 rivers and
streams.
Individual Use Support in North Dakota
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Designated Use8 Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (TotarMiies=ii,868>b
Lakes (Total Acres = 632,616)
aA subset of North Dakota's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b)
report for a full description of the State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Ohio
> Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Ohio 1994 305(b)
report, contact
Ed Rankin
Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency
Division of Surface Water
1685 Westbelt Drive
Columbus, OH 43228
(614)728-3377
Surface Water Quality
Ohio based their 1994 assess-
ments on data collected between
1988 and 1994. Ohio's assessment
methods compare observed eco-
logical characteristics (including
data on aquatic insects, fish species,
habitat, and streamside vegetation)
with background conditions found
at least-impacted reference sites for
a given ecoregion and stream type.
Ohio identified ecological
impacts from organic enrichment
and low dissolved oxygen concen-
trations, siltation, habitat modifica-
tion, metals, ammonia, and flow
alterations. Fecal coliform bacteria
indicate impaired swimming condi-
tions in 9% of the surveyed river
miles. These impacts stem from
municipal discharges, runoff from
agriculture, hydromodification,
industrial discharges, mining, urban
runoff, and combined sewer over-
flows.
Ohio estimates that wastewater
treatment plant construction and
upgrades have restored aquatic life
to about 1,000 river miles since the
1970s. Since 1988, the percentage
of surveyed river miles fully fit for
swimming also grew from 49% to
60%. However, increasing threats
from nonpoint sources could erode
gains made with point source
controls and slow the rate of
restoration.
The most common impacts on
Ohio lakes include nutrients, volume
loss due to sedimentation, organic
enrichment, and habitat alterations.
Nonpoint sources, including agricul-
ture, urban runoff, and septic
systems, generate most of these
impacts. However, municipal point
sources still affect 63% of the sur-
veyed lake acres.
Most of the Lake Erie shoreline
is fit for recreational use, but a fish
consumption advisory for channel
catfish and carp remains in effect
along the entire shoreline. Ohio also
issued fish consumption advisories
for all species of fish caught on 137
river miles and documented
elevated levels of PCBs in fish
caught at two small lakes.
-------
Ground Water Quality
About 4.5 million Ohio residents
depend upon wells for domestic
water. Waste disposal activities,
underground storage tank leaks,
and spills are the dominant sources
of ground water contamination in
Ohio.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
To fully restore water quality,
Ohio EPA advocates an ecosystem
approach that confronts degrada-
tion on shore as well as in the
water. Ohio's programs aim to cor-
rect nonchemical impacts, such as
channel modification and the
destruction of shoreline vegetation.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Ohio pioneered the integration
of biosurvey data, physical habitat
data, and bioassays with water
chemistry data to measure the over-
all integrity of water resources. Bio-
logical monitoring provides the
foundation of Ohio's water pro-
grams because traditional chemical
monitoring alone may not detect
episodic pollution events or non-
chemical impacts. Ohio EPA found
that biosurvey data can increase the
detection of aquatic life use impair-
ment by about 35% to 50%.
Individual Use Support in Ohio
aA subset of Ohio's designated uses appear
in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b)
report for a full description of the State's
uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total uifes=55,059)"
37
Lakes (Total Acres = 240,378)
Great takes (Total Miles
-------
Oklahoma
Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Oklahoma 1994
305(b) report, contact:
John Dyer
Oklahoma Department of
Environmental Quality
Water Quality Division
1000 NETOth Street
Oklahoma City, OK 73117-1212
(405)271-5205
Surface Water Quality
Fifty-eight percent of the sur-
veyed river miles have good water
quality that fully supports aquatic
life uses and 65% fully support
swimming. The most common pol-
lutants found in Oklahoma rivers are
siltation, pesticides, nutrients, and
suspended solids. Agriculture is the
leading source of pollution in the
State's rivers and streams, followed
by petroleum extraction and hydro-
logic/habitat modifications.
Fifty-seven percent of the
surveyed lake acres fully support
aquatic life uses and 60% fully sup-
port swimming. The most wide-
spread pollutants in Oklahoma's
lakes are siltation, nutrients, sus-
pended solids, and oxygen-deplet-
ing substances. Agriculture is also
the most common source of pollu-
tion in lakes, followed by contami-
nated sediments and flow regula-
tion. Several lakes are impacted by
acid mine drainage, including the
Gaines Creek arm of Lake Eufaula
and the Lake O' the Cherokees.
Ground Water Quality
Ambient ground water monitor-
ing has detected elevated nitrate
concentrations in monitoring wells
scattered across the State. Monitor-
ing has also detected isolated cases
of hydrocarbon contamination,
elevated selenium and fluoride con-
centrations (probably due to natural
sources), chloride contamination
from discontinued oil field activities,
metals from past mining operations,
and gross alpha activity above maxi-
mum allowable limits. Industrial
solvents contaminate a few sites
near landfills, storage pits, and
Tinker Air Force Base. The State
rates agriculture, injection wells,
septic tanks, surface impoundments,
and industrial spills as the highest
priority sources of ground water
contamination.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Oklahoma's nonpoint source
control program is a cooperative
effort of State, Federal, and local
agencies that sponsors demonstra-
tion projects. The demonstration
projects feature implementation of
agricultural best management prac-
tices, water quality monitoring
before and after BMP implementa-
tion, technical assistance, education,
and development of comprehensive
watershed management plans. Cur-
rently, Oklahoma is conducting five
NFS projects in Comanche County,
Greer and Beckham Counties,
Custer County, Tillman County,
and the Illinois River Basin.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Oklahoma's Conservation Com-
mission is conducting five large
watershed studies in the Illinois River
Basin, the Little River Basin, the
Neosho (Grand) River Basin, the
Southeast Oklahoma Multiple Basin,
and the Poteau Rh/er/Wister Lake
Project (a cooperative effort with
the LeFlore Conservation District,
the Water Board, and the USGS). All
together, 385 sites will be sampled
for chemical parameters and one-
third of these sites will also be
sampled for biological integrity.
Individual Use Support in Oklahoma
Percent
Designated Use*
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=7B,778)b
49
32
10
(Total Acres = 1,041,884)
- Not reported.
"A subset of Oklahoma's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b)
report for a full description of the State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Oregon
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Oregon 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Robert Baumgartner
Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality
Water Quality Division
811 SW Sixth Avenue
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 229-6962
Surface Water Quality
Forty-three percent of Oregon's
surveyed rivers have good water
quality that fully supports desig-
nated uses, 30% have fair water
quality that partially supports uses,
and 27% have poor water quality
that does not support uses. The
most widespread problems in
Oregon's streams are habitat alter-
ations, high temperatures, and silt-
ation from grazing, other agricul-
tural activities, forestry, and recre-
ation.
In lakes, 74% of the surveyed
acres fully support uses, 12%
partially support uses, and 14% do
not support uses. The most com-
mon problems in Oregon's lakes are
excess nutrients, pH (acidity), and
low dissolved oxygen. DEQ suspects
that agriculture and natural condi-
tions (including shallow depth and
high evaporation rates) are the most
significant sources of lake problems.
Six percent of Oregon's estua-
rine waters have good quality and
94% have fair water quality due to
periodic violations of bacteria stan-
dards. High concentrations of fecal
bacteria usually result from bypasses
at municipal wastewater treatment
plants during rainfall events or
improper management of animal
wastes.
Ground Water Quality
Monitoring has detected
nitrates, benzene, other volatile
organic compounds, bacteria, herbi-
cides, and pesticides in ground
water. Suspected sources include
septic systems, agriculture, highway
maintenance, industry, and com-
merce. During 1992 and 1993,
DEQ conducted statewide ground
water monitoring, developed a
ground water data management
system, and issued 16 grants for
research and education projects
designed to protect ground water
from nonpoint sources of pollution.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Oregon recently initiated a
Watershed Health Program to
encourage public/private partner-
ships for managing water quality
and ecosystem enhancement. Under
-------
the Watershed Health Program,
field-based technical teams work
closely with watershed councils
composed of local residents and
stakeholders to set priorities and
fund projects. DEQ and other State
agencies targeted the Grand Ronde
Basin and the combined South
Coast and Rogue Basins to begin
implementing the Watershed Health
Program with $10 million in State
funds for 1994 and 1995. These
basins were selected because of
existing Total Maximum Daily Load
programs.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
DEQ routinely monitors about
3,500 miles of streams in its ambi-
ent river monitoring program. These
streams receive about 90% of the
wastewater discharged by point
sources throughout the State. Dur-
ing 1992 and 1993, DEQ increased
the number of ambient river moni-
toring stations and expanded other
monitoring programs, including
ground water studies, continuous
monitoring, mixing zone studies,
and,bioassessments. Recently,
Oregon also initiated the Coos Bay
toxics study, the Tillamook Bay
National Estuary Program, and the
Lower Columbia River Bi-State Pro-
gram to provide more information
on estuarine water quality.
Overall3 Use Support in Oregon
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=H4,823)b
30
27
Lakes; (Total Acres = 618,934)
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 206)
- Not reported.
"Overall use support is presented in this figure because Oregon did not report individual use
support in their 1994 Section 305(b) report.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Pennsylvania
> Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Pennsylvania 1994
305 (b) report, contact:
Robert Frey
Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Resources
Bureau of Water Quality
Management
Division of Assessment and
Standards
P.O Box 8465
Harrisburg, PA 17105-8465
(717) 783-3638
Surface Water Quality
Over 81% of the surveyed river
miles have good water quality that
fully supports aquatic life uses and
swimming. About 8% have fair
water quality that partially supports
these uses, and 11 % have poor
water quality that does not support
aquatic life uses and swimming. The
most widespread pollutants are
metals, which impact over 2,092
miles. Pollutants identified less
frequently include suspended solids
(impacting 603 miles), nutrients
(impacting 586 miles), and pH
(impacting 273 miles).
Abandoned mine drainage is
the most significant source of
surface water quality degradation in
Pennsylvania. Drainage from mining
sites pollutes at least 2,404 miles of
streams representing 52% of all
degraded streams in the Common-
wealth. Other sources of degrada-
tion include agriculture (impacting
694 miles), municipal sewage treat-
ment plants (impacting 241 miles),
and industrial point sources (impact-
ing 206 miles).
Pennsylvania has issued fish
consumption advisories on 23
waterbodies. Most of the advisories
are due to elevated concentrations
of PCBs and chlordane in fish tissue,
but a few advisories have been
issued for mirex and mercury. In
1994, the State deactivated two
advisories for dioxins on Codurus
Creek and the South Branch of
Codurus Creek as well as one advis-
ory for chlordane on the Delaware
River.
Ground Water Quality
Major sources of ground water
contamination in Pennsylvania
include leaking underground stor-
age tanks, containers from hazard-
ous materials facilities, and improper
handling or overuse of fertilizer.
Petroleum and petroleum byprod-
ucts are the most common pollut-
ants in ground water. Coal mining
and oil and gas production have
also elevated concentrations of sev-
eral elements (including chlorides,
iron, barium, and strontium) in
some regions of the Common-
wealth. A Ground Water Quality
Protection Strategy was adopted
and released to the public in Febru-
ary 1992, and an Implementation
Task Force was formed in August
1992. The Task Force reviewed all
program regulations and scheduled
-------
revisions that will advance the Strat-
egy goal of nondegradation of
ground water quality.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Eliminating acid mine drainage
from abandoned mines will require
up to $5 billion. The cost, difficulty,
magnitude, and extent of the prob-
lem have hampered progress. To
date, the Commonwealth has
funded studies to determine the
effectiveness of alternative tech-
niques for treating mine drainage
and preventing contamination. The
U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) Natural Resources Conserva-
tion Service's Rural Abandoned
Mines Program also reconstructs
abandoned mine sites in Pennsyl-
vania.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
The Water Quality Network
monitors chemical and physical
parameters almost monthly and
biological parameters annually at
168 fixed stations on rivers, streams,
and Lake Erie. In 1991, Pennsylvania
began annual sampling at 15 to 20
lakes for 5 years. After 5 years,
another set of lakes will be sampled
annually for 5 years until 90 lakes
have been monitored. The Com-
monwealth also conducts ambient
ground water monitoring at 537
monitoring sites.
Individual Use Support in Pennsylvania
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=53,962)l)
11
Lakes {rota i Acres = 161,445)
- Not reported.
aA subset of Pennsylvania's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b)
report for a full description of the State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Puerto Rico
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Puerto Rico 1994
305(b) report, contact
Eric H. Morales
Puerto Rico Environmental Quality
Board
Water Quality Area
Box 11488
Santurce, PR 00910
(809) 751-5548
Surface Water Quality
In rivers and streams, 17% of
the surveyed miles have good water
quality that fully supports aquatic life
uses, 32% partially support aquatic
life uses, and 51% do not support
aquatic life uses. Swimming is
impaired in 79% of the surveyed
rivers and streams. Low dissolved
oxygen, pesticides, flow alteration,
bacteria, and nutrients are the most
widespread problems in rivers and
streams. In lakes, 30% of the sur-
veyed acres fully support aquatic life
uses, 19% partially support these
uses, and 51% do not support
aquatic life uses. Swimming is
impaired in 55% of the surveyed
lake acres. Uses are impaired by
inorganic chemicals, low dissolved
oxygen concentrations, bacteria,
priority organic chemicals, metals,
and pesticides.
Only 16% of the assessed estua-
rine waters fully support aquatic life
uses and only 17% fully support
swimming due to oxygen-depleting
organic substances, bacteria, and
habitat alterations. Land disposal of
wastes, urban runoff, agriculture,
municipal sewage treatment plants,
and natural conditions are the most
common sources of water quality
degradation in rivers, lakes, and
estuaries. Industrial and municipal
discharges also pollute beaches.
Ground Water Quality
Organic compounds, including
dichloromethane, 1,1,2-trichloro-
ethane, and toluene were detected
below maximum contaminant levels
in several wells. Four wells were
closed due to bacterial contamina-
tion and high turbidity and two
wells were shut down due to con-
tamination from volatile organic
compounds. The major sources of
ground water contamination are
septic tanks, livestock operations,
agriculture, storage tanks, and land-
fills. Puerto Rico adopted ground
water use classifications and water
quality standards in 1990. In 1993,
the Environmental Quality Board
completed the ground water prior-
ity list that ranks critical areas for
remediation and protection
activities.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Puerto Rico requires permits or
certificates for ground water and
surface water discharges, under-
ground storage tanks, and livestock
operations. Certificates require live-
stock operations to implement ani-
mal waste management systems
and other best management prac-
tices. During the 1992-1993 report-
ing period, Puerto Rico issued 194
certificates for livestock operations;
inspected 427 livestock operations;
implemented 77 BMPs in priority
watersheds; offered 15 conferences
to educate the public about
nonpoint source pollution and con-
trols; and monitored the effective-
ness of BMPs implemented at poul-
try, dairy, and hog farms.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Under a cooperative agreement
with the government of Puerto Rico,
the USGS collects bimonthly
samples at 57 fixed surface water
monitoring stations. The samples
are analyzed for dissolved oxygen,
nutrients, bacteria, and conventional
parameters. Twice a year, the
samples are analyzed for metals and
several toxic substances. Puerto Rico
also maintains a Permanent Coastal
Water Quality Network of 88 sta-
tions and the San Juan Beachfront
Special Monitoring Network of 22
stations sampled monthly for bacte-
rial contamination.
-Not reported.
aA subset of Puerto Rico's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the
Commonwealth's 305(b) report for a full
description of the Commonwealth's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in Puerto Rico
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=5,385)b
Total Miles
Surveyed
51
Lakes {Total Acres=10,887}
Estuaries (Total Miles = 175)
-------
Rhode Island
> Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Rhode Island 1994
305(b) report, contact
Connie Carey
Rhode Island Department of
Environmental Management
Division of Water Resources
291 Promenade St.
Providence, Rl 02908-5767
(401)277-6519
Surface Water Quality
Eighty-four percent of Rhode
Island's rivers, 81 % of lakes, and
96% of estuarine waters support
aquatic life uses. However, many of
these waters are considered threat-
ened. About 80% of rivers, 94% of
lakes, and 93% of estuaries fully
support swimming. The most signifi-
cant pollutants in Rhode Island's
waters are heavy metals (especially
copper and lead), priority organic
chemicals (PCBs), bacteria, low dis-
solved oxygen, excess nutrients, and
low pH/low buffering capacity.
Recurring algae blooms, high nutri-
ents, and high turbidity threaten the
use of several surface waters for
drinking water supplies.
Rivers and estuaries are
impacted by industrial and munici-
pal discharges, combined sewer
overflows, urban runoff, highway
runoff, failed septic systems, and
contaminated sediments. Lakes are,
primarily impacted by nonpoint
sources, including septic systems,
atmospheric deposition, and land
and road runoff.
Ground Water Quality
About 24% of the State's popu-
lation is supplied with drinking
water from public and private wells.
Overall, Rhode Island's ground
water has good to excellent quality,
but over 100 contaminants have
been detected in localized areas.
Twenty-one community and eight
noncommunity wells have been
closed and 400 private wells have
required treatment due to contami-
nation. The most common pollut-
ants are petroleum products, certain
organic solvents, and nitrates. Sig-
nificant pollution sources include
leaking underground storage tanks,
hazardous and industrial waste dis-
posal sites, illegal or improper waste
disposal, chemical and oil spills,
landfills, septic systems, road salt
storage and application, and fertil-
izer application.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Rhode Island's Nonpoint Source
Management Program sponsored
the following activities during 1992-
1993: (1) preparation of NPS man-
agement plans for 10 surface water
-------
supply watersheds; (2) development
of a Community NPS Management
Guide; (3) development of a
Stormwater Design and Installation
Manual; (4) preparation of a manual
for selecting best management
practices for marinas; (5) develop-
ment of a Community Wastewater
Management Guidance Manual;
(6) mitigation projects at Greenwich
Bay, including septic system inspec-
tions and replacements; (7) techni-
cal assistance to communities devel-
oping zoning or NPS control ordi-
nances; and (8) revising and updat-
ing the Rhode Island NPS Manage-
ment Plan.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Rhode Island's monitoring
program consists of: (1) discharge
effluent monitoring, (2) the Beach
Monitoring Program, (3) the Shell-
fish Growing Area Monitoring
Program, (4) USGS Water Quality
Trend Monitoring Fixed Stations,
(5) supplemental monitoring sta-
tions sampled by the Rhode Island
Department of Environmental Man-
agement, (6) biological monitoring,
and (7) limited expansion of ambi-
ent water quality stream biological
and chemical monitoring. During
the 1992-1993 reporting cycle,
Rhode Island added 25 toxics moni-
toring stations to previously
unmonitored streams.
- Not reported.
aA subset of Rhode Island's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
c Includes ocean waters^
Individual Use Support in Rhode Island
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streamฎ (Total Miles =i,io6)b ;
Total Miles
Surveyed
37
Lakes (Total Acres = 17,328)
Surveyed
17,328
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 139}
Total Square
Miles Surveyed0
-------
South Carolina
Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the South Carolina
1994 305(b) report, contact:
Gina Lowman
South Carolina Department of
Health and Environmental Control
Bureau of Water Pollution Control
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, SC 29201
(813)734-5153
Surface Water Quality
Ninety-one percent of surveyed
rivers, 99% of surveyed lakes, and
75% of estuaries have good water
quality that fully supports aquatic
life uses. Sixty-three percent of
rivers, 99% of lakes, and 86% of
estuaries fully support swimming.
Unsuitable water quality is respon-
sible for shellfish harvesting prohibi-
tions in only 2% of the State's
coastal shellfish waters. Another
11 % of shellfish waters are closed as
a precaution due to potential pollu-
tion from nearby marinas or point
source discharges.
Bacteria are the most frequent
cause of impairment (i.e., partial or
nonsupport of designated uses) in
rivers and streams; metals are the
most frequent cause of impairment
in lakes, but only 1% of lakes do
not fully support uses; and low dis-
solved oxygen is the most frequent
cause of impairment in estuaries.
Toxic contaminants do not appear
to be a widespread problem in
South Carolina surface waters. Of all
waters assessed, only 5% had ele-
vated levels of metals and only 3%
had concentrations of PCBs, pesti-
cides, and organics above the
assessment criteria.
Ground Water Quality
Overall ground water quality
remains excellent, although the
number of reported ground water
contamination cases rose from 60
cases in 1980 to 2,207 cases in
1993. The increase in the number
of contaminated sites is primarily
due to expanded monitoring at
underground storage tank sites.
Leaking underground storage tanks
are the most common source of
contamination, impacting 1,741
sites, followed by leaking pits,
ponds, and lagoons.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
The South Carolina Department
of Health and Environmental Con-
trol (DHEC) initiated a Watershed
-------
Water Quality Management Strat-
egy (WWQMS) to integrate moni-
toring, assessment, problem identifi-
cation and prioritization, water qual-
ity modeling, planning, permitting,
and other management activities by
river drainage basins. DHEC has
delineated five major drainage
basins encompassing 280 minor
watersheds. Every year, DHEC will
develop or revise a management
plan and implementation strategy
for one basin. It will take 5 years to
assess all basins in the State. The
basin strategies will refocus water
quality protection and restoration
priorities for allocation of limited
resources.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Year round, DHEC samples
chemical and physical parameters
monthly at fixed primary stations
located in or near high-use waters.
DHEC samples secondary stations
(near discharges and areas with a
history of water quality problems)
monthly from May through October
for fewer parameters. Each year,
DHEC adds new watershed stations
within the specific basin under
investigation. Watershed stations are
sampled monthly for 1 year
corresponding with the WWQMS
schedule.
Individual Use Support in South Carolina
Percent
- Not reported.
aA subset of South Carolina's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Designated Use9
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (total imies*=35,46i)b
Lakes {Total Acres = 525,000)
Estuaries {Total Square Miles=945)
-------
South Dakota
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit modified by South Dakota)
For a copy of the South Dakota
1994 305(b) report, contact
Andrew Repsys
South Dakota Department of
Environment and Natural
Resources
Division of Water Resources
Management
523 East Capitol, Joe Foss Building
Pierre, SD 57501-3181
(605) 773-3882
Surface Water Quality
Seventeen percent of South
Dakota's surveyed rivers and streams
fully support aquatic life uses and
83% do not fully support aquatic
life uses. Thirty-five percent of the
surveyed rivers also support swim-
ming, and 65% of the surveyed
rivers do not fully support swim-
ming. The most common pollutants
impacting South Dakota streams are
suspended solids due to water ero-
sion from croplands, gully erosion
from rangelands, streambank
erosion, and other natural forms of
erosion. Ninety-eight percent of
South Dakota's surveyed lake acres
fully support aquatic life uses now,
but the quality of these lakes is
threatened. Similarly, 100% of the
surveyed lake acres fully support
swimming, but these waters are
threatened. The most common
pollutants in lakes are nutrients and
sediments from agricultural runoff.
The high water conditions that
prevailed in South Dakota for most
of this reporting period greatly
increased watershed erosion and
sedimentation in lakes and streams.
Suspended solids criteria were
severely violated in many rivers and
streams, and there was an increase
in the incidence of fecal coliform
bacteria in swimming areas at lakes.
However, water quality improved in
some lakes that experienced low
water levels during the late 1980s,
and high flows diluted bacteria in
rivers and streams.
Ground Water Quality
Nitrates exceed EPA Maximum
Contaminant Levels in more wells
than any other pollutant About
15% of the samples collected at
three eastern State aquifers during
1988-1993 had nitrate concentra-
tions that exceeded the State crite-
ria of 10 mg/L. More than 7% of
the samples collected from the Big
Sioux aquifer consistently exceeded
the nitrate standard. Potential
sources of nitrate include commer-
cial fertilizer use and manure appli-
cations. There were no violations of
drinking water standards for
-------
petroleum products reported during
1992-1993, but petroleum products
were involved in 81% of the spills
reported during the period.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Compliance with municipal
wastewater discharge permit
requirements has steadily risen from
37% in 1979 to 75% statewide in
1993 following construction of 162
wastewater treatment facilities.
Compliance is even higher (97%)
among the plants completed with
EPA Construction Grants. South
Dakota relies primarily on voluntary
implementation of best manage-
ment practices to control pollution
from nonpoint sources, such as
agricultural activities, forestry opera-
tions, and mining. The State has
initiated over 50 BMP development
and implementation projects.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
South Dakota conducts ambient
water quality monitoring at estab-
lished stations, special intensive
surveys, intensive fish surveys,
wasteload allocation surveys, and
individual nonpoint source projects.
The USCS, Corps of Engineers, and
U.S. Forest Service also conduct
routine monitoring throughout the
State. Water samples are analyzed
for chemical, physical, biological,
and bacteriological parameters.
Individual Use Support in South Dakota
Percent
Designated Use"
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=9,937)
Total Miles
Surveyed
69
Lakes; (Total Acres=750,000)
- Not reported.
aA subset of South Dakota's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b)
report for a full description of the State's uses.
-------
Tennessee
> Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Tennessee 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Greg Denton
Tennessee Department of
Environment and Conservation
Division of Water Pollution Control
401 Church Street, L&C Annex
Nashville, TN 37243-1534
(615)532-0699
Surface Water Quality
Sixty-five percent of surveyed
rivers and streams fully support
aquatic life uses, 25% partially sup-
port these uses, and 10% are not
supporting aquatic life uses due to
severe pollution. Conventional pol-
lutants (such as siltation, suspended
solids, nutrients, and oxygen-deplet-
ing substances) affect the most river
miles. Toxic materials, bacteria, and
flow alterations impact rivers to a
lesser extent. Major sources of
pollutants include agriculture,
hydromodification, and municipal
point sources. Intense impacts from
mining occur in the Cumberland
Plateau region, and poor quality
water discharged from dams
impacts streams in east and middle
Tennessee.
In lakes, 421,407 acres (78%)
fully support aquatic life uses, 2,668
acres (less than 1 %) are threatened,
27,987 acres (5%) partially support
aquatic life uses, and 87,126 acres
(16%) do not support these uses
due to severe pollution. The most
widespread problems in lakes in-
clude nutrients, low dissolved oxy-
gen, siltation, and priority organics.
Major sources of these pollutants
are agriculture, municipal waste-
water treatment plants, stream im-
poundments, hydrologic modifica-
tion, mining, and nutrient addition.
Fish consumption advisories are
posted on 142 miles of rivers and
strearps and over 84,000 acres of
lakes due to elevated concentrations
of chlordane, PCBs, dioxins, mer-
cury, and other toxics in fish tissue
samples. Swimming and wading are
restricted in Chattanooga Creek and
East Fork Poplar Creek due to toxic
contamination from discontinued
waste disposal practices.
Ground Water Quality
Ground water quality is gener-
ally good, but pollutants contami-
nate (or are thought to contami-
nate) the resource in localized areas.
These pollutants include, but are
not limited to, volaule and
-------
semivolatile organic chemicals, bac-
teria, metals, petroleum products,
pesticides, and radioactive materials.
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Tennessee is considering issuing
discharge permits on a rotating
basis for each of the State's major
river basins and is studying region-
alized standards that take into
account natural background condi-
tions. The permits in each basin
would be evaluated and reissued
together on a 5-year cycle. Tennes-
see is also conducting several Total
Maximum Daily Load studies that
use a watershed approach to allo-
cate maximum pollutant loading
among all the point sources dis-
charging into a stream or its tribu-
taries.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Tennessee's ambient monitoring
network consists of 156 active sta-
tions sampled quarterly for conven-
tional pollutants (such as dissolved
oxygen, bacteria, and suspended
solids), nutrients, and selected met-
als. The State also performs inten-
sive surveys at streams where State
personnel suspect that human
activities are degrading stream qual-
ity. Intensive surveys often include
biological monitoring. The State
samples toxic chemicals in fish and
sediment at sites with suspected
toxicity problems.
Individual Use Support in Tennessee
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Mites=mi24)b
Lakes (Total Acres = 539,188)
Total Acres 73
Surveyed
aA subset of Tennessee's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b)
report for a full description of the State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Texas
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Texas 1994 305(b)
report, contact:
Steve Twidwell
Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Commission
P.O. Box 13087
Austin, TX 78711-3087
(512)908-1000
Surface Water Quality
About 89% of the surveyed
stream miles fully support aquatic
life uses, 4% partially support these
uses, and 6% do not support
aquatic life uses. Swimming is
impaired in 27% of the surveyed
rivers and streams. The most com-
mon pollutants degrading rivers and
streams are bacteria, metals, and
oxygen-depleting substances. Major
sources of pollution include munici-
pal sewage treatment plants,
unknown sources, pasture land
runoff, and urban runoff.
In reservoirs, 98% of the sur-
veyed surface acres fully support
aquatic life uses and 2% partially
support these uses. Less than 1 % do
not support aquatic life uses.
Ninety-nine percent of the surveyed
lake acres fully support swimming.
The most common problems in
reservoirs are low dissolved oxygen
and elevated bacteria concentra-
tions. Major sources that contrib-
uted to nonsupport of uses include
unknown sources, natural sources
(such as high temperature and shal-
low conditions), municipal sewage
treatment plants, and industrial
point sources.
The leading problem in estuar-
ies is bacteria from unknown
sources that contaminate shellfish
beds. Fifty-nine percent of the sur-
veyed estuarine waters fully support
shellfishing use, 8% partially support
this use, and 33% do not support
shellfishing.
Ground Water Quality
About 44% of the municipal
water is obtained from ground
water in Texas. Natural contamina-
tion affects the quality of more
ground water in the State than all
other sources of contamination
combined. Natural leaching from
the aquifer matrix can elevate min-
erals, metals, and radioactive sub-
stances in ground water. The most
common ground water contami-
nants from human activities are
gasoline, diesel, and other petro-
leum products. Less common con-
taminants include volatile organic
compounds and pesticides.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
The Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission (TNRCC)
launched a basin approach to water
resource management with the
Clean Rivers Program (CRP). The
CRP is a first step in the develop-
ment of a long-term, comprehen-
sive and integrated geographic
management approach aimed at
improving coordination of natural
resource functions in the agency.
The basin approach will provide a
framework for identifying problems,
involving stakeholders, and integrat-
ing actions. The basin approach also
allows for the use of risk-based tar-
geting to prioritize issues and better
allocate finite public resources.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
The TNRCC samples about 700
fixed stations as part of its Surface
Water Quality Monitoring Program
(SWQMP). The TNRCC samples
different parameters and varies the
frequency of sampling at each site
to satisfy different needs. The
TNRCC also conducts intensive
surveys to evaluate potential
impacts from point source discharg-
ers during low flow conditions and
special studies to investigate specific
sources and pollutants. About 3,000
citizens also perform volunteer envi-
ronmental monitoring in the Texas
Watch Program.
aA subset of Texas' designated uses appear
in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b)
report for a full description of the State's
uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Individual Use Support in Texas
Percent
Designated Use"
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=
-------
Utah
Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Utah 1994 305(b)
report, contact:
Thomas W. Toole
Utah Department of Environmental
Quality
Division of Water Quality
P.O. Box 144870
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4870
(801)538-6859
Surface Water Quality
Of the 5,726 river miles sur-
veyed, 75% fully support aquatic life
uses, 20% partially support these
uses, and 5% are not supporting
aquatic life uses. The most common
pollutants impacting rivers and
streams are siltation and sediments,
total dissolved solids, nutrients, and
metals. Agricultural practices, such
as grazing and irrigation, elevate
nutrient and sediment loading into
streams. Point sources also contrib-
ute to nutrient loads, while natural
conditions introduce metals and
sediments to streams in some areas.
Resource extraction and associated
activities, such as road construction,
also impact Utah's rivers and
streams.
About 61 % of the surveyed lake
acres fully support aquatic life uses,
32% partially support these uses,
and 7% do not support aquatic life
uses. The leading problems in lakes
include nutrients, siltation, low dis-
solved oxygen, suspended solids,
organic enrichment, noxious aquatic
plants, and violations of pH criteria.
The major sources of pollutants are
grazing and irrigation, industrial and
municipal point sources, drawdown
of reservoirs, and natural conditions.
Fish and wildlife consumption
advisories are posted on the lower
portion of Ashley Creek drainage
and Stewart Lake in Uintah County
due to elevated levels of selenium
found in fish, ducks, and American
coots.
Ground Water Quality
In general, the quality of
ground water in Utah has remained
relatively good throughout the
State, although some ground water
degradation occurs in south central
Utah in the metropolitan area of
Salt Lake City and along the
Wasatch Front area from Payson
north to Brigham City. Sources of
ground water degradation include
irrigation, urbanization, landfills,
mining and mine tailings, and draw-
down. In 1994, new ground water
regulations went into effect.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
The State's Nonpoint Source
Task Force is responsible for coordi-
nating nonpoint source programs in
Utah. The Task Force is a broad-
based group with representatives
from Federal, State, and local agen-
cies; local governments; agricultural
groups; conservation organizations;
and wildlife advocates. The Task
Force helped State water quality
and agricultural agencies prioritize
watersheds in need of NPS pollution
controls. As best management prac-
tices are implemented, the Task
Force will update and revise the
priority list.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
In 1993, Utah adopted a
basinwide water quality monitoring
approach. Utah initiated basinwide
intensive studies in the Weber River
Basin in 1993 and the Utah Lake-
Jordan River Basin in 1994. A fixed-
station network was also developed
to evaluate general water quality
across the State. Utah's surface
water quality monitoring program
consists of about 200 ambient sta-
tions, 7 salinity monitoring stations,
and 30 biological monitoring sites.
In addition, 135 industrial and
municipal sites were monitored.
Individual Use Support in Utah
Percent
Designated Use9
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=85,916)b
Total Miles
Surveyed
75
20
Lakes (Total Acres ซ 481,638)
Total Acres
Surveyed 61
aA subset of Utah's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b) report for
a full description of the State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Vermont
> Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
impoundments, flow regulation, and
land development
Sixty-four percent of the sur-
veyed lake acres (excluding Lake
Champlain) fully support aquatic life
uses, 27% partially support these
uses, and 9% do'not support
aquatic life uses. The most common
problems in lakes include fluctuating
water levels, nutrient enrichment,
algal blooms, organic enrichment
and low dissolved oxygen, siltation,
and aquatic weeds. Eurasian
watermilfoil, an aquatic weed,
infests 13% of the State's lakes that
are 20 acres or larger. Runoff from
agricultural lands, roads, and
streambank erosion are the most
frequently identified sources of lake
problems.
In Lake Champlain, nutrients are
the major cause of impairment,
followed by fish consumption advi-
sories posted for trout contaminated
with PCBs and walleye contami-
nated with mercury. Discovery of
the zebra mussel in 1993 threatens
all uses.
For a copy of the Vermont 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Jerome J. McArdle
Vermont Agency of Natural
Resources
Dept. of Environmental Conservation
Water Quality Division
103 South Main Street,
Building 10 North
Waterbury, VT 05671-0408
(802) 244-6951
Surface Water Quality Ground Water Quality
Of the 5,264 miles of surveyed
rivers and streams, 81 % fully sup-
port aquatic life uses, 15% partially
support these uses, and 4% do not
support aquatic life uses. Ten per-
cent of the surveyed rivers and
streams do not fully support swim-
ming. The most widespread impacts
include siltation, thermal modifica-
tions, organic enrichment and low
dissolved oxygen, nutrients, patho-
gens, and other habitat alterations.
The principal sources of impacts are
agricultural runoff, streambank
destabilization and erosion, removal
of streamside vegetation, upstream
The quality of Vermont's
ground waters is not well under-
stood due to a lack of resources
required to gather and assess
ground water data. Ground water
contamination has been detected at
hazardous waste sites. Other sources
of concern include failing septic
systems, old solid waste disposal
sites, agriculture, road salt, leaking
underground storage tanks, and
landfills. The State needs to imple-
ment a Comprehensive Ground
Water Protection Program, but lacks
the financial and technical resources
to do so.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
During the reporting period,
Vermont implemented dechlorina-
tion at 18 publicly owned sewage
treatment plants, which improved
water quality in about 47 miles of
rivers and streams. The State also
completed construction of the last
two planned sewage treatment
plants and upgraded four other
plants. To prevent habitat modifica-
tions, the State used the Section
401 water quality certification pro-
cess to require minimum stream
flows at four hydroelectric facilities.
The stream flow requirements
should improve water quality on
11 miles of streams.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Vermont's monitoring activities
balance short-term intensive and
long-term trend monitoring.
Notable monitoring activities
include fixed-station monitoring on
lakes and ponds, citizen monitoring,
long-term acid rain lake monitoring,
compliance monitoring for permit-
ted dischargers, toxic discharge
monitoring, fish contamination
monitoring, and ambient biomoni-
toring of aquatic insects and fish.
Individual Use Support in Vermont
a A subset of Vermont's designated uses.
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
blncludes perennial streams only.
c Excluding Lake Champlain.
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully Good (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles - 5,264)b
Lakes (Total Acres - 54,208)ฐ
Lake Champlain (Total Acres = 174,175)
-------
Virginia
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Virginia 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Carrie Gorsuch
Department of Environmental
Quality
Water Division
Office of Water Resources
Management
P.O. Boxl0009
Richmond, VA 23240-0009
(804) 762-4290
Surface Water Quality
Of the 34,575 river miles sur-
veyed, 90% fully support aquatic life
use, another 5% fully support this
use now but are threatened, and
5% do not fully support this use. As
in past years, fecal coliform bacteria
are the most widespread problem in
rivers and streams. Agriculture and
pasture land contribute much of the
fecal coliform bacteria in Virginia's
waters. Urban runoff also is a signifi-
cant source of impacts in both rivers
and estuaries.
Ninety-nine percent of Virginia's
publicly owned lakes fully support
their designated uses, and about
1 % do not fully support uses. The
most common problems in lakes
include dissolved oxygen depletion,
coliform bacteria, pH, and tempera-
ture, primarily from nonpoint
sources.
In estuaries, 31% of the sur-
veyed waters fully support aquatic
life use, 64% support this use but
are threatened, and 5% partially
support this use. Nutrients are the
most common problem in Virginia's
estuarine waters, followed by or-
ganic enrichment and low dissolved
oxygen concentrations. All of
Virginia's Atlantic Ocean shoreline
fully supports designated uses.
Six advisories limit fish con-
sumption on 369 miles of Virginia's
rivers and an undetermined number
of miles of tidal tributaries to the
James River. The Commonwealth
lifted one advisory that had
restricted fish consumption on the
Jackson River and the Upper James
River.
Ground Water Quality
Sampling by the Virginia
Department of Health detected
bacterial concentrations exceeding
Maximum Contaminant Levels at
133 ground-water-based commu-
nity public water systems in 1993.
Nitrates and pesticides were also
detected in a small percentage of
the private wells sampled in a pilot
study in Northampton County. Vir-
ginia revised ground water protec-
tion rules with the Ground Water
Management Act of 1992.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Virginia's Department of Envi-
ronmental Quality recommends
control measures for water quality
problems identified in the 305(b)
report in their Water Quality Man-
agement Plans (WQMPs). WQMPs
establish a strategy for bringing
impaired waters up to water quality
standards and preventing the degra-
dation of high-quality waters. Con-
trol measures are implemented
through Virginia's point source per-
mit program and application of best
management practices for nonpoint
sources.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
The Ambient Water Quality
Monitoring Program grew to 896
monitoring stations, a 26% increase
since the previous reporting period.
These stations are sampled for
chemical and physical parameters
on a variable schedule. The Core
Monitoring Program consists of a
subset of 51 stations that are
sampled for pesticides, metals, and
organic chemicals in fish and sedi-
ment on a 3-year cycle. About
150 biological stations were also
sampled during the 1992-1993
reporting cycle.
Individual Use Support in Virginia
Percent
-Not reported.
a A subset of Virginia's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
c Size of significant publicly owned lakes,
a subset of all lakes in Virginia.
Designated Use*
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=44,852)*
Lakes (Total Acres = 161,888)c
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 2,500)
-------
Virgin Islands
\
St. Thomas St. John
St. Croix
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Virgin Islands 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Anne Hanley
U.S. Virgin Islands Department of
Planning and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Protection
P.O. Box 4340
St. Thomas, VI 00801
(809) 773-0565
Surface Water Quality
The U.S. Virgin Islands consist
of three main islands (St. Croix, St
Thomas, and St. John) and over 50
smaller islands and cays located in
the Caribbean Sea. The islands lack
perennial streams or large fresh-
water lakes or ponds. Water quality
in the U.S. Virgin Islands is generally
good but declining due to an
increase in point source discharges
and nonpoint source pollution
entering the marine environment
The Virgin Islands municipal
sewage treatment plants, operated
by the Virgin Islands Department of
Public Works, are the major source
of water quality violations in the
Territory. Neglect, combined with a
lack of qualified operators and
maintenance staff, results in fre-
quent breakdowns of lift stations,
pump stations, and pipelines.
Clogged and collapsed lines fre-
quently cause unpermitted dis-
charges into surface waters. Storm-
water also overwhelms sewage
treatment facilities and results in
bypasses of raw or undertreated
sewage into bays and lagoons.
Other water quality problems
result from unpermitted discharges,
permit violations by private indus-
trial dischargers, oil spills, and
unpermitted filling activities in man-
grove swamps. Nonpoint sources of
concern include failing septic sys-
tems, erosion from development,
urban runoff, waste disposal from
vessels, and spills.
Ground Water Quality
The Virgin Islands' ground water
is contaminated with bacteria, salt-
water, and volatile organic com-
pounds. Septic tanks, leaking
municipal sewer lines, and sewage
bypasses contaminate ground water
with bacteria. Overpumping of aqui-
fers causes saltwater intrusion. VOC
contamination is due to under-
ground storage tanks and indis-
criminate discharges of waste oil.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
The Territorial Pollution Dis-
charge Elimination System (TPDES)
requires permits for all point source
discharges, but not all permitted
facilities are in compliance with their
permit requirements. During the
1992-1993 reporting period, the
Division of Environmental Protection
brought four major violators into
compliance. The Virgin Islands is
also developing new regulations for
citing and constructing onsite
sewage disposal systems and advo-
cating best management practices
in the Revised Handbook for
Homebuilders and Developers.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
The Ambient Monitoring Pro-
gram performs quarterly sampling
at 64 fixed stations around St.
Croix, 57 stations around St. Tho-
mas, and 19 stations around St.
John. Samples are analyzed for fecal
coliforms, turbidity, dissolved oxy-
gen, and temperature. Twenty sta-
tions on St Croix were also sampled
for phosphorus, nitrogen, and sus-
pended solids. Intensive studies,
which include biological sampling,
are conducted at selected sites that
may be affected by coastal develop-
ment. The Virgin Islands does not
monitor bacteria in shellfish waters
or toxics in fish, water, or sediment.
Overall3 Use Support in Virgin Islands
Percent
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 5.9)
Total Square
Miles Surveyed
62
11
Ocean Shoreline (Total Miles = 173)
Total Miles
Surveyed
15
a Overall use support is presented in this figure because the Virgin Islands did not report indi-
vidual use support in their 1994 Section 305(b) report.
Note: The Virgin Islands report that there are no perennial streams or significant lakes under
their jurisdiction.
-------
Washington
> Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Washington 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Steve Butkus
Washington Department of Ecology
P.O. Box 47600
Olympia, WA 98504-7600
(360) 407-6482
Surface Water Quality
Washington reports that 18% of
their surveyed river miles fully sup-
port aquatic life uses, 22% partially
support these uses, and 60% do not
support aquatic life uses. In lakes,
35% of the surveyed acres fully
support aquatic life uses, and 65%
do not support aquatic life uses.
Thirty-two percent of the surveyed
estuarine waters fully support
aquatic life uses, 24% partially sup-
port these uses, and 44% do not
support aquatic life uses.
Low levels of dissolved oxygen,
often naturally occurring, are the
major cause of impairment of desig-
nated uses in estuaries. Bacterial
contamination, primarily from agri-
cultural runoff, onsite wastewater
disposal, and municipal wastewater
treatment plants also causes impair-
ment in estuaries. Major causes of
impairment in lakes include nutri-
ents, pesticides, siltation, flow alter-
ation, and low dissolved oxygen.
Agricultural production is the pre-
dominant source of impairment in
lakes. Other sources include urban
runoff, fand disposal, septic tanks,
and natural sources. In rivers and
streams, agriculture is the major
source of water quality degradation,
followed by industrial point sources
and hydro-habitat modification.
Causes of water quality impairment
from these sources include thermal
modification, pathogen indicators,
and ammonia.
Ground Water Quality
The highest priority ground
water issues in Washington are
nitrates, pesticides, and other agri-
cultural chemicals from fertilizer
applications, pesticide applications,
and septic tanks.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Washington provides financial
incentives to encourage compliance
with permit requirements, the prin-
cipal vehicle for regulating point
source discharges. The State also
has extensive experience develop-
ing, funding, and implementing
nonpoint source pollution preven-
tion and control programs since the
early 1970s. The State has devel-
oped nonpoint source control plans
with best management practices
for forest practices, dairy waste,
irrigated agriculture, dryland agricul-
ture, and urban stormwater. The
State is now focusing attention on
watershed planning. Efforts a[e cur-
rently geared toward prioritizing
watersheds and developing compre-
hensive plans for the priority water-
sheds.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Washington implements an
aggressive program to monitor the
quality of lakes, estuaries, and rivers
and streams. The program makes
use of fixed-station monitoring to
track spatial and temporal water
quality changes so as to ascertain
the effectiveness of various water
quality programs and be able to
identify desirable adjustments to the
programs.
Individual Use Support in Washington
aA subset of Washington's designated uses
appear in this figure. Refer to the State's
305(b) report for a full description of the
State's uses.
blnciudes nonperennial streams that dry up
and do not flow all year.
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Mites=73,886}
Total Miles
Surveyed
60
(Total Acres = 466,296)
Estuaries (Total Square Miles = 2,943)
-------
West Virginia
Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydralogic Unit)
For information about water quality
in West Virginia, contact:
Mike Arcuri
West Virginia Division of
Environmental Protection
Office of Water Resources
1201 Green brier Street
Charleston, WV 25311
(304)558-2108
Surface Water Quality
West Virginia reported that 42%
of their surveyed river and stream
miles have good water quality that
fully supports aquatic life uses, and
75% fully support swimming. In
lakes, 32% of the surveyed acres
have good water quality that fully
supports aquatic life uses and 100%
fully support swimming.
Metals and siltation are the
most common water quality
problems in West Virginia's rivers
and lakes. Fecal coliforms and acid-
ity also impair a large number of
river miles. In lakes, oxygen-
depleting substances, acidity, nutri-
ents, and algal blooms also impair a
significant number of acres. Coal
mining impaired the most stream
miles, followed by municipal point
sources and agriculture. Coal min-
ing was also the leading source of
degraded water quality in lakes,
followed by forestry and agriculture.
West Virginia reported that fish
consumption advisories are posted
for the Kanawha River, Pocatalico
River, Armour Creek, Ohio River,
Shenandoah River, North Branch of
the Potomac River, the Potomac
River, and Flat Fork Creek. Five of
the advisories were issued because
of elevated dioxin concentrations in
bottom feeders. The other advisories
address PCBs and chlordane in suck-
ers, carp, and channel catfish.
Ground Water Quality
West Virginia ranked mining
and mine drainage as the highest
priority source of ground water
contamination in the State, followed
by municipal landfills, surface water
impoundments (including oil and
gas brine pits), abandoned hazard-
ous waste sites, and industrial land-
fills. West Virginia has documented
or suspects that ground water has
been contaminated by pesticides,
petroleum compounds, other or-
ganic chemicals, bacteria, nitrates,
brine/salinity, arsenic, and other
metals.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
No information was available
from the State.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
No information was available
from the State.
Individual Use Support in West Virginia
Percent
Designated Use3
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=32,278}
Total Miles
Surveyed
49
aA subset of West Virginia's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b)
report for a full description of the State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Wisconsin
Basin Boundaries
(USGS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Wisconsin 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Meg Turville-Heitz
Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources
P.O. Box 7921
Madison, Wl 53707
(608)266-0152
Surface Water Quality
The Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources (WDNR) found
that 78% of the surveyed river miles
fully support aquatic life uses, 2%
support these uses now but are
threatened, 14% partially support
aquatic life uses, and 6% do not
support aquatic life uses. WDNR
believes that the survey process
underestimated the number of
threatened river miles. The most
prevalent problems in rivers are
habitat and flow alterations,
siltation, excessive nutrients, and
oxygen-depleting substances. The
sources of these problems are often
polluted runoff, especially in agricul-
tural areas, and river modifications,
such as ditching, straightening, and
the loss of wetlands alongside
streams. Wastewater discharges also
moderately impair more than 1,000
miles of streams.
About 57% of the surveyed lake
acres fully support aquatic life uses,
3% support these uses but are
threatened, 15% partially support
these uses, and 25% do not support
aquatic life uses. The primary source
of lake degradation is deposition of
airborne pollutants, especially mer-
cury, and polluted runoff. All of
Wisconsin's Great Lakes' shoreline
partially supports fish consumption
use due to fish consumption adviso-
ries posted throughout the Great
Lakes. Bacteria from urban runoff
also impair swimming along 60
miles of shoreline.
Ground Water Quality
The primary sources of ground
water contamination in Wisconsin
are agricultural activities, municipal
landfills, leaking underground stor-
age tanks, abandoned hazardous
waste sites, and spills. Other sources
include septic tanks and land appli-
cation of wastewater. Nitrate-
nitrogen is the most common
ground water contaminant Nitrates
come from fertilizers, animal waste
storage sites and feedlots, municipal
and industrial wastewater and
sludge disposal, refuse disposal
areas, and leaking septic systems.-
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
WDNR is integrating multiple
agencies, programs, interests, and
jurisdictions in an "ecosystem
approach" that looks at all parts of
the ecosystem when addressing
water qualitythe land that drains
to the waterbody, the air above it,
the plants, animals, and people
using it. Since the 1970s, WDNR
has prepared water quality manage-
ment plans for each of the State's
river basins that summarize the
condition of waters in each basin,
identify improvements and needs,
and make recommendations for
cleanup or protection. WDNR up-
dates the plans every 5 years and
uses the plans to rank watersheds
for priority projects under the Wis-
consin Nonpoint Source Water Pol-
lution Abatement Program and to
address wastewater discharge con-
cerns.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
In 1992, Wisconsin imple-
mented a surface water monitoring
strategy to support river basin plan-
ning. The strategy integrates moni-
toring and management activities in
each of the State's river basins on
the 5-year basin planning schedule.
In recent years, Wisconsin has
placed more emphasis on monitor-
ing polluted runoff and toxic sub-
stances in bottom sediments and
tissues of fish and wildlife.
Individual Use Support in Wisconsin
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOd (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Miles=57,698)b
Total Miles 78
Surveyed
14
<1
NA NA NA
Lakes (Total Acres=982,163f
NA = Not applicable because use is not designated in State standards.
aA subset of Wisconsin's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b)
report for a full description of the State's uses.
b Includes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
-------
Wyoming
Basin Boundaries
(USCS 6-Digit Hydrologic Unit)
For a copy of the Wyoming 1994
305(b) report, contact:
Beth Pratt
Wyoming Department of
Environmental Quality
Water Quality Division
Herschler Building
122 West 25th Street
Cheyenne, WY 82002
(307) 777-7099
Surface Water Quality
Of the 6,091 river miles sur-
veyed, 13% fully support aquatic life
uses, 22% fully support these uses
now but are threatened, 63% par-
tially support aquatic life uses, and
2% do not support aquatic life uses.
The most widespread problems in
rivers and streams are siltation and
sediment, nutrients, total dissolved
solids and salinity, flow alterations,
and habitat alterations. The most
prevalent sources of water quality
problems in rivers and streams are
rangeland, natural sources, irrigated
cropland, pasture land, and con-
struction of highways, roads, and
bridges.
In lakes, 31 % of the surveyed
acres fully support aquatic life uses,
47% partially support these uses,
and 22% do not support aquatic life
uses. The leading problems in lakes
are low dissolved oxygen concentra-
tions and organic enrichment, nutri-
ents, sediment and siltation, other
inorganic substances, and metals.
The most prevalent sources of water
quality problems in lakes are natural
sources, rangeland, irrigated crop-
land, flow regulation, and municipal
sewage treatment plants.
The State's water quality survey
is designed to identify water quality
problems, so it is reasonable to
assume that most of the unassessed
waters are not impacted. However,
the State lacks definitive information
to that effect.
Ground Water Quality
Some aquifers in Wyoming have
naturally high levels of fluoride,
selenium, and radionuclides. Petro-
leum products and nitrates are the
most common pollutants in Wyo-
ming's ground water, and leaking
underground storage tanks are the
most numerous source of contami-
nation. Other sources include
uranium and trona mineral mining,
agricultural activities, mill tailings,
spills, landfills, commercial and
industrial sumps, septic tank
leachfields, wastewater disposal
ponds at coal-fired power plants
and other industrial sites, and com-
mercial oilfield disposal pits.
-------
Programs to Restore
Water Quality
Wyoming requires discharger
permits and construction permits for
all wastewater treatment facilities.
The Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ) reviews proposed
plans and specifications to ensure
that plants meet minimum design
criteria. Wyoming's nonpoint source
program is a nonregulatory pro-
gram that promotes better manage-
ment practices for all land use activi-
ties, including grazing, timber har-
vesting, and hydrologic modifica-
tions.
Programs to Assess
Water Quality
Wyoming is currently monitor-
ing reference stream sites around
the State in order to define charac-
teristics of relatively undisturbed
streams in each ecoregion. The
State is sampling chemical and bio-
logical parameters, such as dissolved
oxygen, nutrients, aquatic insect
species composition, species abun-
dance, and habitat conditions at the
candidate reference stream sites.
Once established, the reference site
conditions will serve as the basis for
assessing other streams in the same
ecoregion or subecoregion.
Wyoming will use the reference
conditions to establish a volunteer
biological monitoring program.
Individual Use Support in Wyoming
Percent
Designated Use8
Good Fair Poor Poor
(Fully GOOD (Partially (Not (Not
Supporting) (Threatened) Supporting) Supporting) Attainable)
Rivers and Streams (Total Mites a ns,422)b
Total Miles
Surveyed
63
(Total Acres = 372,309)
- Not reported.
aA subset of Wyoming's designated uses appear in this figure. Refer to the State's 305(b)
report for a full description of the State's uses.
blncludes nonperennial streams that dry up and do not flow all year.
------- |