UnllMlStitM
Environmental Protoclkm
Afi«ncy
Summary of Biological
Assessment Programs and
Biocriteria Development for
States, Tribes, Territories, and
Interstate Commissions:
Streams and Wadeable Rivers
            U.S EPA Headquarters Library
               Mai! code 3404T
            1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
             Washington, DC 20460
               202-566-0556

-------
                                                                          EPA-822-R-02-048
                                                                             December 2002
                      Office of Environmental Information & Office of Water
                             U.S. Environmental protection Agency
                                   Washington. DC 20460
Notice
This document has been reviewed and approved in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency policy.  Mention of trade names, products, or services does not convey and should not be
interpreted as conveying, official USEPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation for use.
       Appropriate Citation:

       USEPA. 2002. Summary of Biological Assessment Programs and Biocriteria
       Development for States, Tribes, Territories, and Interstate Commissions: Streams
       and Wadeable Rivers. EPA-822-R-02-048. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Cover Photo by Wayne Davis, USEPA. This document can be downloaded from EPA's website for
Biological Indicators of Environmental Health:

                               http://www.epa.gov/bioindicators/

-------
Pt«aM rnak* all n*e
               • change* on ih* Mow l*b*l,
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency

Office of Environmental Information
and Off ice of Water
Washington, DC  20460

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300

EPA-822-R-02-048
December 2002
dotach or copy, and return to ttw addrea* In th* upper
ten-hand corner.

H you do not with to rec.lv. ttw** report* CHECK HERE D;
detach, or copy the cover, and return to ttw addr*** in
In* upper toft-hand com*r.
                                                                               PRESORTED STANDARD
                                                                                POSTAGE & FEES PAID
                                                                                        EPA
                                                                                  PERMIT No. G-35

-------

-------
Foreword
We are pleased to release the 2002 Summary of Biological Assessment Programs and Biocriteria
Development for States. Tribes, Territories, and Interstate Commissions: Streams and Wadeable
Rivers. This summary, a joint project by the Office of Water and the Office of Environmental
Information, provides an abundance of technical and programmatic information which illustrates the
progress States, Tribes, Territories and Interstate Commissions are making in the utilization of biological
assessments and criteria in their water programs.

Biological assessments and criteria are crucial tools for measuring the health of water bodies and for
protecting aquatic life. Biological assessments evaluate the condition of a water body using surveys and
other direct measurements of aquatic life—aquatic vegetation and algae, fish, insects, crayfish,
salamanders, frogs, worms, snails, mussels, etc.  Biological criteria are numeric or narrative targets that
can be set to define the desired biological condition of a water body and can even be adopted into State
and Tribal water quality standards. In combination with other available water quality tools, such as
chemical pollutant criteria, the use of biological assessments and criteria give States, Tribes and
Interstate Commissions better tools than ever before for restoring and maintaining the quality of our
Nation's water bodies.

The progress made by the States, Tribes and Interstate Commissions as reported in this Summary is
impressive.  Since our previous assessments in 1995 and 1989, significant progress has been made by
virtually every State and an increasing number of Tribes and Interstate Commissions. Biological
assessments and criteria are in the mainstream of water management programs throughout the Country.
More States than ever before are using biological criteria in their water quality programs as definitive
standards.

We encourage you to take time to review this Summary to appreciate the progress that  is being made.
The information in the report is valuable to assess the progress of one program relative to other
programs across the country.  In addition,  it may be possible to learn of new and different ways to
employ biological assessments and criteria by better understanding what others have done.  This
Summary is another example of the value  of public access to information and data.  EPA firmly believes
that analysis of and access to such information is the key to better environmental decision making.  And
lastly, since every State, Tribe and Interstate Commission  reported in the Summary helped assemble the
information, we thank you for your help and participation.
                                                        Elaine Stanley, Director
                                                        Office of Information Analysis and Access
Foreword                                  December 2002

-------

-------
Acknowledgments

Development and production of this document, Summary of Biological Assessment Programs and
Biocriteria Development for States, Tribes, Territories, and Interstate Commissions: Streams and
Wadeable Rivers, was coordinated by USEPA's Office of Environmental Information in partnership with
the Agency's Biocriteria Team, comprised of members from the Office of Water (Office of Science &
Technology, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds) and the Office of Environmental Information.
The goal of the project was to obtain the current status of biological assessment programs and biocriteria
development for streams and wadeable rivers.

The project team for this document was comprised of members from the USEPA offices listed above as
well as members from the Midwest Biodiversity Institute (MB!); the Technology, Planning, and
Management Corporation (TPMC); and Tetra Tech, Inc. (Tt). This work was completed under USEPA
Contract No. 50-CMAA-900065 to Technology Planning and Management Corporation (TPMC).

The project team extends its most sincere appreciation to all of the State, Tribal, Territorial, and Interstate
Basin Commission biological monitoring staffs for their willingness to complete surveys, participate in
follow-up interviews, and review numerous interim drafts. Also, we would like to recognize the numerous
personnel at EPA headquarters and Regional offices for their time in developing the initial survey and
reviewing various drafts. We are particularly grateful to members of EPA's Biocriteria Team, as well as
the EPA Regional Biocriteria Coordinators and Regional Indian Program Coordinators, who provided
guidance on document structure and the process for gathering information. We also acknowledge the
efforts of Brandon Peebles, an EPA intern with the Office of Water's Office of Science and Technology. In
addition, the following Tetra Tech staff were essential in the progress and completion of this document:
Catherine Cresswell, Brenda Decker, and Kristen Pavlik.

Most of all, we would like to recognize the spirit of collaboration evident throughout the development of this
project.
Project team:
Elizabeth Jackson
Wayne Davis
Treda Smith
William Swietlik
James Campbell
Michael Barbour
Abby Markowitz
Margo Andrews
Maggie Craig
Chris Yoder
USEPA Office of Environmental Information; Environmental Analysis Division
USEPA Office of Environmental Information; Environmental Analysis Division
USEPA Office of Water; Office of Science and Technology
USEPA Office of Water; Office of Science and Technology
Technology, Planning, and Management Corporation
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Tetra Tech, inc.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Midwest Biodiversity Institute, Inc.
Acknowledgments
                                        December 2002

-------

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS

           FOREWORD	i
           ACKNOWLEDGMENTS	iii
           TABLE OF CONTENTS 	v
           LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES  	vi

Chapter 1.   INTRODUCTION  	  1-1
              1.1 Bioassessment and Biocriteria in Water Resource Assessment and
                 Management	1-1
              1.2 Introduction to the Process	1-5

Chapter 2.   SUMMARY OF FINDINGS	  2-1
              2.1 Summary of Current Biological Assessment Programs 	2-1
              2.2 Bioassessment Program Success from 1989, to 1995, to 2001	2-3

Chapter 3.   PROGRAM SUMMARIES	  3-1
              States  	3-1
              Territories  	 3-205
              Tribes  	3-215
              Interstate Basin Commissions 	3-231

Chapter 4.   RELEVANT EXCERPTS FROM WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND
           BIOCRITERIA LANGUAGE 	  4-1
              States  	4-1
              Territories  	4-72
              Tribes  	4-76
              Interstate Basin Commissions 	4-80

Chapter 5.   LIST OF ACRONYMS AND DEFINITION OF TERMS	  5-1
              5.1 Acronyms 	5-1
              5.2 Definition of Terms	5-2

Chapter 6.   LITERATURE CITED AND ADDITIONAL RESOURCES	  6-1
              6.1 Literature Cited	6-1
              6.2 Additional Resources 	6-2

Appendix A.  BIOASSESSMENT PROGRAMS FOR STREAMS AND WADEABLE RIVERS
           (2001) 	  A-1
Appendix B.  EPA CONTACTS 	  B-1
Appendix C.  ORIGINAL CHECKLIST TEMPLATE 	C-1
Appendix D.  PROGRAM SUMMARY TEMPLATE 	  D-1
Table of Contents
                                December 2002

-------
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES


TABLES

Table 1       National summary of bioassessment programs for streams and wadeable rivers
             in 2001  	  2-2

Table 2       National summary of bioassessment programs for streams and wadeable rivers
             in 1989, 1995, 2001, and the interim change	  2-4


FIGURES

Figure 1       Use of bioassessments to assess water quality
             Figure 1a. Percent of total stream/river miles assessed in each State using
             bioassessments 	  2-6
             Figure 1b. Use of bioassessment to determine aquatic life use (ALU) for
             305(b) reporting 	  2-6

Figure 2      Biocriteria development
             Figure 2a. Narrative biocriteria development 	  2-7
             Figure 2b. Narrative biocriteria in WQS with quantitative implementation
             procedures  	  2-7
             Figure 2c. Numeric biocriteria development	  2-8

Figure 3      Assemblages assessed
             Figure 3a. Fish 	  2-9
             Figure 3b. Benthic macroinvertebrates	  2-9
             Figure 3c. Periphyton  	  2-10
             Figure 3d. Number of assemblages assessed  	  2-10

Figure 4      Use of ecoregional reference conditions	  2-11

Figure 5      Development of biological multimetric indices  	  2-11
Table of Contents
                                    December 2002

-------
1.     INTRODUCTION


1.1  Bioassessment and Blocriteria In Water Resource Assessment and Management

The Historical Context

During the last half of the 20th century, the terms "environmental protection" and "natural resource
management" underwent a profound evolution both conceptually and as applied to decision-making.
Two landmark pieces of legislation, the 1948 Federal Water Pollution Control Act (WPCA) and its 1972
amendments contained in the Clean Water Act (CWA), stand out as milestones in this process. Until
1948, water quality management decisions were based primarily on society's economic and public health
priorities (Davis 1995).  The passage of the 1948 WPCA marked the first time that the propagation offish
and other aquatic life was articulated as a stand-alone objective of water resource protection.  It was a
significant turning point because federal law recognized the importance of protecting waterbodies and
aquatic life  for their own intrinsic value, not just for their value to human society.

The 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act (the Clean Water Act) set far-reaching ideals for restoring
the health of our Nation's waters, as outlined in Section 101 (a) Declaration of Goals and Policy:

       The objective of this Act is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological
       integrity of the Nation's waters. In order to achieve this objective it is hereby declared
       that, consistent with the provisions of this Act -

               1)      it is the national goal that the discharge of pollutants into the navigable waters
                      be eliminated by 1985;
              2)      it is the national goal that wherever attainable, an interim goal of water quality
                      which provides for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish and wildlife
                      and provides for the recreation in and on the water be achieved by July 1,
                      1983...

Why Bioassessment?

Aquatic life (fish, insects, plants, shellfish, frogs, salamanders, etc.) integrate the cumulative effects of
both point source and nonpoint  source (NPS) pollution's multiple stressors.  Biological assessments, or
bioassessments, consisting of surveys and other direct measures of aquatic life, are the most effective
way to measure the aggregate impact of these stressors on waterbodies. Bioassessments are an
extremely useful tool to evaluate the biological  integrity of a waterbody, commonly defined as

       "the ability  to support and maintain a balanced, integrated, and adaptive community with
       a biological diversity, composition, and functional organization comparable to those of
       natural aquatic ecosystems  in the region" (Frey 1977, Karr and Dudley 1981, and Karr et
       al. 1986).

Because biological communities are affected by all of the environmental factors to which they are
exposed overtime, bioassessments provide information on perturbations not always revealed by water
chemistry measurements or toxicity tests. Thus, they are crucial for determining not only biological
health but the overall health, or ecological integrity, of a waterbody.

In the mid-1980s, a national workgroup of EPA regional and state agency biologists was convened to
provide oversight in the development of technical guidance for biological assessment. The result of the
workgroup was the 1989 publication of EPA's Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (RBPs) (USEPA 1989).
The RBPs provide  a technical framework for using biological assemblage data as a direct indicator of
ecological health. The RBPs synthesized existing methods for monitoring fish and benthic
macroinvertebrates in  streams and wadeable rivers, and presented  some innovative ways to assess the
biological and physical aspects of streams.  The RBP  methods were designed to be cost effective,


Introduction                                 December 2002                                       1-1

-------
reliable, efficient, applicable nationwide, and easily understood by various stakeholders (USEPA1999).
In addition, the 1990 publication of Biological Criteria: National Program Guidance for Surface Waters
provided states with an organized approach for addressing their responsibilities as outlined in the CWA
(USEPA 1990).  In 1992, EPA issued procedures for initiating narrative biological criteria that explained
how states and tribes could adopt narrative biocriteria in their water quality standards (USEPA 1992).

Since the 1989 RBPs were published, the use of bioassessments in water resource programs has
continued to grow.  In 1996, EPA published a guidance document for the development of biocriteria for
streams and small rivers (USEPA 1996a). In 1998, EPA produced bioassessment technical guidance for
lakes and reservoirs (USEPA 1998a), followed by similar guidance for estuarine and coastal marine
waters in 2000 (USEPA 2000) and a series of guidance modules for biological assessments and index
development for wetlands in March 2002 (USEPA 2002).  The increased use of bioassessment in water
monitonng programs nationwide led to the 1999 revision  of the original RBPs for streams and wadeable
rivers (USEPA 1999).  Guidance for large rivers and coral reefs is currently under development.

Over the last 50 years,  the science of environmental protection has come a long way both in theory and
in practice. As a society, the United States has come to understand that protecting aquatic life is a
critical resource management goal in its own right.  We have adopted ecological integrity as a barometer
of waterbody health.  Resource management agencies at the local, state, tribal,  and  national levels have
recognized the importance of biological assessments in the evaluation of water quality and ecological
integrity. This evolution has brought us closer to realizing the CWA's goal  of restoring and maintaining
the physical, chemical,  and biological integrity of the Nation's waters.

Current Legal Authority

The CWA and its amendments through 1987 provide the legal authority for the use of biological
assessments and criteria in state and tribal water quality programs primarily under the provisions of
sections 303 and 304.  Under Section 303(c), states are required to have water quality standards that
consist of designated uses, criteria to protect those uses, and an antidegradation policy. Also under
section 303(c), states are required to review their standards every three years and revise them as
needed to achieve the purposes of the Act, including  the ecological integrity objective.

Section 303(c)(2)(B), enacted in 1987, requires states to  adopt numeric criteria for toxic pollutants for
which EPA has published 304(a)(1) criteria if such pollutants interfere with, or may be expected to
interfere with, attainment of designated uses. The sectipn further requires  that, where numeric 304{a)
criteria are not available, states adopt criteria based on 'biological assessment and monitoring methods
consistent with information published by EPA under 304(a)(8).

Section 304(a)(8) directs EPA to develop and publish information on methods for establishing and
measuring water quality criteria for toxic pollutants on bases other than pollutant-by-pollutant. This
includes biological monitoring and assessment methods that evaluate:

       the effects of pollutants on aquatic community components ("...plankton, fish, shellfish,
       wildlife, plant life...") and community attributes ("...biological community diversity,
       productivity, and stability...");

       factors necessary "...to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological
       integrity of alt navigable waters..." for "...the protection of fish, shellfish,  and  wildlife for
       classes and categories of receiving waters..."

       appropriate "...methods for establishing and measuring water quality criteria  for toxic
       pollutants on other bases than pollutant-by-pollutant criteria, including biological
       monitoring and assessment methods."

The Uses of Bioassessment and Biocriteria in the Clean Water Act
Introduction
                                          December 2002
                                                                                             1-2

-------
Biocriteria, derived from bioassessment data, are narrative descriptions and numeric values that
describe the desired condition for the aquatic life inhabiting waters with a designated aquatic life use.
Biocriteria are an effective tool for addressing water quality problems by providing regulatory
mechanisms to assess and help protect the biological resources at risk from chemical, physical, or
biological impacts.  These narrative and/or numeric biocriteria may be formally adopted into water quality
standards along with an antidegradation policy intended to protect waters from further deterioration.

As required in the Clean Water Act, states, tribes, and territories report on the quality of their waters
through a biennial report referred to as the "305(b) report".  USEPA compiles and analyzes this
information in the National Water Quality Inventory Report to Congress, the primary vehicle for reporting
water quality conditions throughout the  United States. To assess water quality, states and other
jurisdictions compare their monitoring results to the water quality standards they have set for their
waters.

Bioassessments help states, tribes, and other entities develop expectations for acceptable biological
conditions through a technical process of establishing aquatic life goals, referred to as aquatic life uses
(ALUs). Designated uses to support aquatic life can cover a broad range of biological conditions; not
only do they protect intact communities in a waterbody,  but they also can establish restoration goals for
compromised ecosystems.  Using several types, or tiers, of ALUs allows the allocation of limited
resources to waterbodies in proportion to their need for protection.

Although the 305(b) report includes information on the nationwide status of aquatic life use attainment
(i.e., state water quality standards), the results reported  do not consistently present the information
necessary to determine the ecological/biological condition of the Nation's water resources.  As currently
reported in 305(b) water quality assessments, aquatic life use attainment may be determined solely by
chemical parameters and in comparison to chemical water quality criteria.  However, since attainment of
chemical water quality standards alone may not ensure  a healthy biological condition, most states are
working to integrate a greater amount of biological information in their aquatic life use attainment
determinations (Yoder and Rankin  1995).

Under Section 303(d) of the CWA,  a second reporting mechanism requires states, tribes, and territories
to provide lists of all impaired waters. These lists are then used to prioritize restoration activities through
the development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs).  TMDLs are calculations of the amount of a
pollutant that a waterbody can receive and still meet water quality standards.  Bioassessments and
biocriteria play a critical role in enabling states, tribes, and territories to develop and implement
protection and management strategies  needed to fulfill these, and other, requirements of the Clean
Water Act, including:

        -       determining impacts from nonpoint sources [i.e., Section 304(f) "(1) guidelines for
               identifying and evaluating the nature and extent of nonpoint sources of pollutants, and
               (2)  processes, procedures, and methods to control pollution..."];
        »       developing lists of waters unable to support "balanced population(s) of shellfish, fish and
               wildlife..." ({304(1)];
               conducting assessments of lake trophic status and trends, [Sec. 314];
        *       listings of waters that cannot attain designated uses without nonpoint source controls,
               [Sec.  319];
        -       developing management plans and conducting monitoring in estuaries of national
               significance [Sec. 320];
        >       determining the impacts and efficacy of NPDES permit controls [Section 402];

        -       issuing permits for ocean discharges and monitoring ecological effects [Sec. 403(c) and
               301(h)(3)];and,
        »       determining acceptable sites for disposal of dredge and fill material [Sec. 404].
Introduction
                                           December 2002
                                                                                               1-3

-------
The 2001 Bioassessment Summary

During 1994-1995, EPA prepared an inventory of state bioassessment programs for streams and
wadeable rivers, Summary of State Biological Assessment Programs for Streams and Rivers (USEPA
1996b). The purpose of the document was to determine how many states, and in what fashion, were
using biological assessments and criteria in water management programs.  EPA used the information
from that report to evaluate state bioassessment/biocriteria capabilities and their needs for technical
support.

During the second half of the 1990s as additional methods, guidance, and information on the use of
biological  assessments and criteria were issued by EPA, the Office of Water made it  a national priority
for state and tribal water quality standards  programs to adopt biocriteria to better protect aquatic life in all
waters where biological assessments methods were available (USEPA 1998b).  In 1999, EPA's Office of
Water declared the following goals and objectives for the biocriteria program:

               All states/tribes will use bioassessments/biocriteria to evaluate the health of aquatic life
               in all waterbodies.

       ••       Bioassessment data will be used by all states/tribes to better define aquatic life uses.

       •       Numeric biocriteria will be  adopted in all state/tribal water quality standards to protect
               aquatic life uses.
       -       Biocriteria/bioassessments will be used in ongoing regulatory programs.

       -       Biocriteria/bioassessments will be used to assess the effectiveness of water quality
               management efforts.
       -       Bioassessment data and biocriteria will be used to better communicate the health of the
               Nation's waters.

In the late 1990s, momentum to develop and adopt biocriteria grew, and pressures increased from the
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program to have well-established biocriteria in water quality
standards to support listings of impaired waterbodies.  The Office of Water and the Office of
Environmental Information determined it would be valuable to re-assess the progress states were making
in developing and adopting biological assessments andicriteria into their water quality management
programs. In 2001, Geoffrey Grubbs, Director of the Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology,
stated that the  key goal of the biocriteria program should be to accelerate the adoption of biocriteria in
state and tribal water quality standards programs to better support regulatory programs.  Therefore, in
late 2001, the Office of Environmental Information and the Office of Water initiated this effort to update
the 1994-95 survey information. This project was also supported by the Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and
Watersheds and was coordinated through USEPA Regional Offices.

The goal of the 2001 update was to compile a comprehensive re-assessment of state use of
bioassessments and biocriteria for protecting streams and wadeable rivers. The update also illustrates
changes and improvements in bioassessment capabilities over the past six years, and serves as an
important  measure of program advancement and EPA's bioassessment technical transfer efforts. This
documentation will enable USEPA to better focus its water quality standards and criteria development
and implementation strategy for the next several years, target new program priorities, and assess the
present technical support needs of states, tribes, territories, and interstate commissions. EPA will also
use this documentation to prepare a summary report card of national progress in adopting biocriteria into
water quality standards.

As you will see from this report, the use of  biological assessment and criteria for managing the Nation's
waterbodies has progressed significantly in the past six years and is equipping states, tribes, territories,
interstate commissions, and EPA with a more effective set of monitoring and standards tools for
determining and protecting the health of the Nation's waters.

1.2 Introduction to the Process
Introduction
                                          December 2002
                                                                                            1-4

-------
This project was coordinated by EPA's Office of Environmental Information in partnership with the
Agency's Biocriteria Team, composed of members from the Office of Water (Office of Science &
Technology, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds) and the Office of Environmental Information.
The goal of the project was to obtain the current status of biological assessment programs and biocriteria
development for streams and wadeable rivers. The project team also coordinated with EPA Regional
Biocriteria Coordinators and Regional Indian Program Coordinators.  Because identical information
would be solicited from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, US territories, selected tribes, and
selected interstate commissions, this project was covered under the Water Quality Standards Program
Information Collection Request (1CR No. 0988.07) in compliance with the 1995 Paperwork Reduction
Act.

In June 2001, the project team developed a "checklist" of 57 questions covering six different categories
(Appendix C contains a blank copy of the checklist):

               contact information (including points of contact for biological programs for other
               waterbody types - nonwadeable rivers, lakes, reservoirs, estuaries/near coastal marine,
               and wetlands)
               programmatic elements
               ALU decision making process

               field and iab methods
               data analysis and interpretation

        •       information management

Throughout the autumn of 2001, email "packets" were distributed to over 75 points of contact in states,
tribes, territories, and interstate commissions (provided by EPA Regional offices). These packets
consisted of an introductory memo,  the checklist, and relevant excerpts from each entity's water quality
standards (where applicable).  Recipients were asked to complete the checklist and review the standards
excerpts for completeness and accuracy. As completed checklists were returned, members of the
project team followed-up by phone and email with each entity to clarify, verify, and document information
and to fill in gaps where necessary.  Contacts from a total of 65 entities responded and provided the
information included in this document.

As was done for the 1996 document, the project team created a template "program summary" used to
translate and display the information gathered from each entity.  The summary pages for each
responding entity consist of a narrative program description, documentation and further information, as
well as a three page fact sheet. Program summaries for all 65 entities are found in Chapter 3 (there are
only 64 actual  program summaries because Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands are combined into
one).  The information in the program summaries was organized into several sections as shown below
(Appendix D contains a blank program summary coded with the corresponding sections of the original
checklist):


Contact Information

Program Description

Documentation and Further Information

Programmatic elements
               Uses of bioassessment within overall water quality program
               Applicable monitoring designs

Stream Miles
        •       Total miles
        •       Total perennial miles

Introduction                                  December 2002                                       1-5

-------
                Total miles assessed for biology
                       fully supporting for 305(b)
                -       partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
                -       listed for 303(0)
                »       number of sites sampled
                »       number of miles assessed per site

Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision Making
        •        ALU designation basis
                ALU designations in water quality standards
                Narrative Biocriteria in WQS
                Numeric Biocriteria in WQS
        •        Uses of bioassessment data in integrated assessments with other environmental data
                (e.g., toxicity testing and chemical specific criteria)
                Uses of bioassessment/ biocriteria in making management decisions regarding restoration of
                aquatic resources to a designated ALU
Reference Site/Condition Development
        •        Number of reference sites
                Reference site determinations
        •        Reference site criteria
                Characterization of reference sites within a regional context
        •        Stream stratification within regional reference conditions
                Additional information

Field and Lab Methods
                Assemblages assessed (no. of samples/year, level of rigor)
        •        Benthos (sampling gear,  habitat selection, subsample size, taxonomy)
                Fish (sampling gear, habitat selection, sample processing, subsample, taxonomy)
        •        Periphyton (sampling gear, habitat selection, sample processing, taxonomy)
                Habitat assessments
                Quality assurance program elements

Data Analysis and Interpretation
        •        Data analysis tools and methods
                Multimetric thresholds
                •       transforming metrics into unitless scores
                •       defining impairment in a multimetric index
                Multivariate thresholds
                -       defining impairment in a multivariate index
        •        Evaluation of performance characteristics
                Biological data
                »       Storage
                >       Retrieval and analysis

In addition, selected relevant excerpts from state, tribal, territorial and interstate commission water
quality standards excerpts were compiled into a separate chapter for inclusion in the document (see
Chapter 4: Relevant Excerpts from Water Quality Standards and Biocriteria Language).

In April 2002, a preliminary draft of the document containing the Definition of Terms and Acronyms,
Program Summaries, Water Quality Standards and Biocriteria Language, Literature Cited, and List of
Contacts was distributed to the full Biocriteria Team for an editorial and technical review. Individual
program summaries and water quality excerpts were distributed to the relevant EPA Regional  contacts
Introduction
                                             December 2002
                                                                                                   1-6

-------
and the point of contact for each responding entity for review and comment. During the summer of
2002, the project team compiled, organized, and incorporated the feedback received from all reviewers.

This document, Summary of Biological Assessment Programs and Biocriteria Development for States,
Tribes, Territories, and Interstate Commissions: Streams and Wadeable Rivers, represents this project's
final product. The document's value lies not only in the wealth of information it contains but also in the
lessons learned from the process.  In the near future, EPA hopes to initiate similar projects to assess the
status of bioassessment and biocriteria programs for lakes, reservoirs, estuaries, and wetlands. The
effectiveness and efficiency of those efforts will be enhanced by the development of this reference
document.
Introduction                                  December 2002                                       1-7

-------
                           THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT  BLANK
Introduction
                                       December 2002
                                                                                        1-8

-------
2.     SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
2.1 Summary of Current Biological Assessment Programs and Biocriteria Development

This report summarizes the national breadth of biological monitoring and assessment in stream and
wadeable river management programs based on 2001 program information (Table 1). Since this
summary pertains to more than just "states," the term "entity" is used to refer to the combination of states,
tribes, territories, and interstate commissions.  Survey responses were received from 65 entities (50
states. District of Columbia, four territories, six tribes, and four interstate commissions - see Appendix A
for a complete list).

Although ranging across a wide spectrum - from initial pilot studies to comprehensive assessment - 57 of
the 65 entities have bioassessment programs for streams and wadeable rivers, and two (Puerto Rico and
the Nez Perce Tribe) have programs under development.   Nearly 440,000 river and stream miles
nationwide are assessed using biological data (see Figure  1a for state-by-state percentages). More
importantly, as shown in Table 1, 40 entities use bioassessment to help determine aquatic life use support
(ALUS) for their 305(b) reporting (Figure 1b), and six states (AK. CA, HI, MT, NV, OK) are developing
processes for using biological data to interpret ALU.  Thirteen entities, including seven states (AZ, AR,
CO,  DE,  LA, SD, UT) either don't have comprehensive statewide bioassessment programs in place, or
they don't yet use bioassessment data to determine the condition of their waters.

A total of 29 entities have  incorporated narrative biocriteria into their WQS (Figure 2a). The 11 entities
(AZ, CO, HI, IL, IN, IA, MD, MT, NV, WA,  Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe) in a developmental phase of
adopting narrative biocriteria into their WQS are at various stages in this process. While some may have
already developed biocriteria and are working on promulgating the statements into their WQS, others are
awaiting state or federal approval, or are in the earlier stages of developing narrative biocriteria to be
submitted for review. Although 20 entities do not have narrative biocriteria in their WQS, several of these
have incorporated general aquatic life statements.  The following five entities - ICPRB, SRBC, Nez Perce
Tribe, Oneida Nation of Wisconsin  and Passamaquoddy Tribe - Pleasant Point Reservation - do not have
federally approved WQS and are not currently working toward that end. Therefore, these entities are not
included  in any biocriteria counts.1

Of the 29 entities with narrative biocriteria incorporated into their WQS, 22 have also developed
quantitative implementation procedures or translators, and eight are working to develop them  (Figure 2b).
These procedures can be found in various documents including WQS, SOPs, 305(b) guidelines, and other
agency documents.  While numeric procedures are  not numeric biocriteria per se, they do provide a
quantitative basis for assessing attainment of specific designated aquatic life uses and are an important
step in biocriteria development.
        1 While the Oneida Nation does not have federally approved water quality standards, the Tribe is currently
using bioassessments to implement their water quality program under tribal law.  Inclusion of narrative and numeric
biocriteria into the Tribe's WQS is under development.

Summary of Findings                           December 2002                                       2-1

-------
 Table 1. National summary of bioassessment programs for streams and wadeable rivers in 2001
PROGRAMMATIC ELEMENT
NUMBER OF ENTITIES
In-place
Use of Bloassessments
Water resource management
Interpret aquatic life use attainment
Narrative biocrlteria In WQS
Narrative biocriteria in WQS with quantitative
implementation procedures or translators
Numeric biocriteria in WQS
57
Under
development
None


40
29
22
4
Assemblage Used { ;•;:!;
Fish
Benthic macroinvertebrates
Algae (periphyton, diatoms)
More than one assemblage
41

2
6
11
8
11
6
13
20
30
45


56
20
45
Reference Conditions
Ecoregional
Site-specific
State-wide or basin-specific
42
0
1
5
5
16
0
32
7


19
7
Analysis
Biological metrics
Multivariate
54
22
Assessment j
Multimetric index
Habitat assessment
41

2
1
1
12
37
46



1
2
1
32


57
3
0
12
0
Not
applicable

0
62
53
54
54
. : ' .
84
85
85
8s

9s
8"
11°

97
9'

9'
83
         2 DRBC and ICPRB are not regulatory authorities.  Nez Perce Tribe, Oneida Nation of Wisconsin, Passamaquoddy Tribe
- Pleasant Point Reservation, and Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe do not have federally approved WQS.

         J ICPRB, SRBC, Nez Perce Tribe, Oneida Nation of Wisconsin and Passamaquoddy Tribe - Pleasant Point Reservation
do not have federally approved WQS and are not currently working toward that end.

         4 The following entities do not use biological assessment methods as a means to assess stream and river water quality:
American Samoa (AS), Puerto Rico (PR), U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI), Confederated Tribes of the Corville Reservation, Nez Perce
Tribe, Passamaquoddy Tribe - Pleasant Point Reservation, and Seminole Tribe of Florida. The Commonwealth of Northern
Mariana Islands (CNMI) has a bioassessment program for marine systems only; bioassessment for freshwater is not applicable.

         5 Virginia did not provide complete reference condition information. American Samoa. CNMI, Puerto Rico,  U.S. Virgin
Islands, Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, Nez Perce Tribe, Passamaquoddy Tribe - Pleasant Point Reservation,
and Seminole Tribe of Florida do not have bioassessment programs.

         "AS, CNMI, PR, USVI, Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation. Nez Perce Tribe. Passamaquoddy Tribe -
Pleasant Point Reservation, and Seminole Tribe of Florida do not have bioassessment programs.

         7 Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe has not yet analyzed or evaluated their biological data.  AS. CNMI. PR, USVI, Confederated
Tribes of the Colville Reservation, Nez Perce Tribe, Passamaquoddy Tribe - Pleasant Point  Reservation, and Seminole Tribe of
Florida do not have bioassessment programs.
Summary of Findings
December 2002
                                                           2-2

-------
Four entities (FL, OH, OK, DRBC) have numeric biocriteria incorporated into their WQS (Figure 2c).8 And
of the 11 entities for which numeric biocriteria is categorized as "under development," Maine and
Wyoming have developed and incorporated numeric biocriteria into other program documents, such as
SOPs and monitoring guidance manuals, and have been using the numeric limits to maintain designated
uses.

The three major groups of biological organisms or assemblages monitored as part of comprehensive
biological assessment programs are fish, benthic macroinvertebrates, and algae (periphyton).
Macroinvertebrates are the most common indicator assemblage used by state water quality agencies and
are a part of all but Hawai'i's bioassessment program, where it is currently under development (Figure
3a). The second most common assemblage monitored is fish, followed by periphyton (Figures 3b and
3c). Forty-five entities monitor for at least two assemblages, and another five (AK, HI, NV, UT, WY)
currently use one, but are developing the capability of using a second (Figure 3d).

One of the key elements in bioassessment programs is the establishment of reference conditions to help
discern human impacts from natural variation. The two types of reference conditions currently used in
biological surveys are regional and site-specific. The Ecoregion Concept, a common regionalization
approach, recognizes geographic patterns of similarity among ecosystems and the subsequent distribution
of biological communities grouped on the basis of environmental variables such as climate, soil type,
physiography, and vegetation. Forty-two entities have adopted this method of stream stratification/
characterization in developing reference conditions (Figure 4).  Site-specific reference conditions typically
consist of condition measurements taken upstream of a point source discharge or from a "paired"
watershed. However, their usefulness is limited since they have only site-specific value (USEPA 1999).
Only nine entities  primarily use this approach to determine reference conditions.

Biological metrics and multivariate analysis are two types of data analysis tools/methods used to reduce a
wealth of raw data into workable indicators of biological condition. Nearly all of the entities with
bioassessment programs have developed biological  metrics. In addition, just under half use multivariate
analysis (techniques that look at the pattern of relationships among  several variables simultaneously, such
as principal components analysis (PCA) and non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMS)). Of the 54
entities that select and calculate biological metrics, 41 aggregate these metrics into a multimetric index
(such as fish or macroinvertebrate I Bis) to assess biological condition and water  quality, and to
discriminate between impaired and unimpaired conditions (Figure 5).  Finally, all entities with
bioassessment programs also assess the physical habitat quality at their sample sites, usually employing
visual based methods (such as QHEI and RBPs) in combination with other measurements.

2.2 Bioassessment Program Success from 1989 to 2001

In 1989, when developing the Rapid Bioassessment  Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers, USEPA
summarized the bioassessment and biomonitoring capabilities in state regulatory programs (USEPA
1989). While the  1989 summary did not determine the actual use of the bioassessment data for all states,
it did provide an estimate based upon past knowledge of state programs and on the documentation
gathered during its development.

The Summary of State Biological Assessment Programs for Streams and Rivers, based on 1995 data,
compiled a more comprehensive assessment of state uses of bioassessments and biocriteria in water
management programs (USEPA 1996).  The document serves as the baseline for determining changes
and improvements in bioassessment capabilities over the past six years. Table 2 presents a summary of
the 1989 and 1995 results alongside the 2001 data from Table 1. The incremental change (from 1989 to
       * Florida has made substantial progress in developing new multimetric indices for streams (Stream
Condition index and BioRecon), lakes (Lake Condition Index), and wetlands for eventual inclusion in the Florida
Administrative Code. When the new indices are adopted as water quality standards, the role of Shannon-Weaver
diversity as a numeric standard will be re-evaluated.
         Macroinvertebrate biocriteria were developed for DRBC's Special Protection Waters rules issued in 1990,
but the criteria were later found to be based upon inconsistent and non-representative methods and have not been
used as envisioned during development of the Commission's antidegradation policies. Program redesign
recommendations were recently made to improve effectiveness and applicability of the criteria.

Summary of Findings                          December 2002                                       2-3

-------
1995, and 1995 to 2001) appears in parentheses, and an additional column Indicates the net change from
1989 to 2001.  For the purposes of comparison, Table 2 only contains program information from the
original 52 entities surveyed in 1989 and 1996 (50 states, the District of Columbia, and ORSANCO).
Refer to Table 1, Chapter 3, and Appendix A for programmatic information on the additional entities
surveyed for this document.

There has been extensive progress in the development and use of biological assessments and criteria as
revealed by virtually all measures of the survey as shown in Table 2.  All 52 entities contained in this table
have incorporated bioassessment in their water resource management programs. This  is up over 20%
from a count of 41 in 1989. Although the number of states that used bioassessments to determine
aquatic life use attainment in 1989 is unknown, these numbers did increase noticeably from 1995 to 2001.
And despite the fact that the number of entities with numeric biocriteria in their WQS has only increased
by two over the past 12 years, 18  entities have developed and implemented quantitative procedures or
translators for use in their water quality management programs (Figure 2b), and sixteen are in the process
of developing narrative and/or numeric biocriteria for their standards.

Since 1989, the number of entities sampling at least one of the three major assemblages has steadily
grown. Almost every entity surveyed in 1995 now conducts benthic macroinvertebrate assessments
(Figure 3a)  Even periphyton sampling, which declined from 1989 to 1995, rose sharply from 1995 to
2001.  Studies have found that assessing only one assemblage can only achieve roughly 80 to 85%
effectiveness at identifying aquatic life use  attainment or nonattainment. Thus, since 1995, USEPA has
recommended the use of multiple assemblages, especially in larger streams (USEPA 1996).  The number
of entities using more than one assemblage in 2001 reached 41  (an increase of 15 in just five years); and
20 of these 41  entities sample for at least three, and even four, assemblages, such as phytoplankton,
macrophytes and zooplankton (Figure 3d).

One of the major advancements since 1989, and especially since 1995, has been the increased use of
regional reference conditions as a basis for making comparisons and detecting use impairment. Only four
states were actively using ecoregional reference conditions in 1989, and still only 15 in 1995.  However, by
2001, 39 entities characterized reference conditions using a composite or aggregation of least or
minimally impaired sites within distinct ecoregions (Figure 4).  And conversely, 11 fewer entities used a
site-specific approach alone to determine reference conditions.

The number of entities using biological metrics for data analysis increased by eight in 2001, in step with a
sharp increase of 39 between 1989 and 1995. Today, all but two of the surveyed entities contained in
Table 2 have developed biological metrics.

Finally, for the  2001 survey, we narrowed the definition qf what constitutes narrative biocriteria in WQS to
exclude general aquatic life statements.  We adhered to: the definition of narrative biocriteria as "narrative
expressions that describe biological integrity of aquatic communities  inhabiting waters of a given
classification or designated aquatic life use." We also required entities to clarify how the criteria were
operationally defined in their WQS.  This examination yielded a count of 28 entities with  narrative
biocriteria in their WQS, one entity less than was  reported in 1995. However, had we  used the 1995
definition of narrative biocriteria, these 28 entities would grow to 40, resulting in an increase of 11 between
1995 and 2001.

Refer to Appendix A for a summary of pertinent information for each  entity surveyed. This information  is
captured in greater detail and clarity in the  individual program summaries found  in Chapter 3.
Summary of Findings
                                          December 2002
                                                                                             2-4

-------
   4>
   O)
   ra
   •5
   •g
   CB
   O
   CM
   a>
   oo
   a>
   ID
   •
   as
   o>
   "O
   (0
   to
   (0
(O
,2
i
5
P
   in
   u>
   tn
   8
   CD

   I
   CO
   g
   is
   CM
   t)









|
I
&


*~

i


if
o


«*?
-
-

Algae (periphyton, diatoms)
S

^^
r
to

&
to
s
,-



"?
in

to
^>
0

*


t

in"
5

CM
S
s

s
i
^
1
i
































Reference Conditions
CO
"7

o

;:

I
-
5
0


_^^
CM
CM

CM
^
S

CM


in
CO

S
8
	
^2
T—
-

"5
LLJ
JI

^
4-
S

^

1
^



•^
»-


a


c
3


CM
i

£
a>


CO
c

Site-specific
o

~
"•"*
^

(D

1
0



o



a


c
3


O

_
to


to
c

State-wide or basin-specific































1
| Multiple Metrics for Data An
S


*?
-

CO
"
5!?
o



«
»"

ic?

to

-


T

S"
o
in
	

3
CO

1
m
                                                                                                           £•5
Summary of Findings
                                                   December 2002
                                                                                                                  2-5

-------
           B  >SO%            I  10-25%             Unknown
           |  26-50%         El]  <10%
           The use of various monitoring designs, i.e. targeted vs. probabilistic, influences the derivation of these numbers.
           Figure 1a. Percent of total stream/river miles assessed in each state using bioassessments
                                   . Confederated Tribes of r—i
                                    the Colville Reservation
                           ORSANCO
                                                                                 Puerto Rico
                                                                                 U.S. Virgin Islands D
           I  Bioassessment used for ALU
           H  Implementation under development
           [  I  Bioassessment not used for ALU
           Figure 1b. Use of bioassessment to determine aquatic life use (ALU) for 305(b) reporting
        Figure 1. Use of bioassessments to assess water quality
Summary of Findings
December 2002
2-6

-------
           Pyramid
           Lake
           Paiute
           Tribe
. Confederated Tribes of  r-1
 the Colville Reservation
ORSANCOI
                                                                                       American Samoa  O

                                                                                       CNMI           D

                                                                                       Puerto Rico       [H

                                                                                       U.S. Virgin Islands D
            |   Narrative biocriteria adopted into WQS

            H   Narrative biocriteria under development

            I  I   No narrative biocriteria

            Figure 2a Narrative biocriteria development
           Pyramid
           Lake
           Paiute
           Tribe
. Confederated Tribes of r—i
 the Colville Reservation UJ
                                                                                       American Samoa  CD

                                                                                       CNMI           D

                                                                                       Puerto Rico       C3

                                                                                       U.S. Virgin Islands D
            |   Narrative biocriteria in WQS with quantitative implementation procedures or translators

            HJ   Quantitative implementation procedures (for narrative biocriteria in WQS) are under development

            I  I   No quantitative implementation procedures (for narrative biocriteria in WQS)

            Figure 2b Narrative biocriteria in WQS with quantitative implementation procedures
Figure 2. Biocriteria development

Summary of Findings
             December 2002
                                 2-7

-------
           Pyramid
           Lake
           Paiute
           Tribe
. Confederated Tribes of r—i'
 the Colviile Reservation L~',
           ^  Numeric biocriteria adopted into WQS
           (H  Numeric biocriteria under development
           I   I  No numeric biocriteria
           Figure 2c. Numeric biocriteria development
                                                                                    American Samoa
                                                                                    CNMI
                                                                                    Puerto Rico      ED
                                                                                    U.S. Virgin Islands D
                                                                Tribe of Florida
Figure 2 (cont)  Biocriteria development
Summary of Findings
            December 2002
2-8

-------
          Pyramid
          Lake |
          Paiute
          Tribe
                           ORSANCOI
           B  Benthtc macroinvertebrate assessment in place

           |H  Benthic macroinvertebrate assessment under development

           O  None

           Figure 3a  Benthic macroinvertebrates
          Pyramid
          Lake |
          Paiute
          Tribe
                           ORSANCO
           _ Fish assessment in place

           O None


           Figure 3b. Fish
        Figure 3. Assemblages assessed
Summary of Findings
December 2002
                                                         2-9

-------
          Pyramid
          Lake
          Paiute
          Tribe
          |  Periphyton assessment in place

          HH  Periphyton assessment under development

          Q  None

          Figure 3c  Periphyton
          Pyramid
          Lake |
          Paiute
          Tribe
          {~\  Only one assemblage assessed
          tarn
          em  Two assemblages assessed

          |  Three or more assemblages assessed

          Figure 3d. Number of assemblages assessed
Figure 3 (cont). Assemblages assessed
Summary of Findings
December 2002
                                                                                                    2-10

-------
          Pyramid
          Lake |
          Paiute
          Tribe
                           ORSANCO |
                Ecoregional reference conditions

                Ecoregional reference conditions under development

                None (or not applicable for New York, Utah, Virginia)
Figure 4. Use of ecoregional reference conditions
                                                                           ORSANCO
                Biological multimetric indices

                Biological multimetric indices under development

                None
         Figure 5. Development of biological multimetric indices
Summary of Findings
December 2002
2-11

-------
                           THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Summary of Findings                         December 2002                                    2-12

-------
3.   PROGRAM SUMMARIES

-------
                           THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Program Summaries
                                      December 2002

-------
  ALABAMA
  Contact Information

  Fred Leslie, Chief - Aquatic Assessment Unit
  Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM)
  P.O. Box 301463 • Montgomery, AL 36130-1463
  Phone 334/260-2752 • Fax 224/272-8131
  email: fal@adem.state.al.us
  ADEM Water Quality homepage:
  http://www.adem.state.al.us/WatefDiv/Water%20Qualitv%20lnfoAft/QMainlnfo.htm
  Program Description

  In the last five years the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (AOEM) has assessed more than 1,100 river and
  stream locations as a part of six major long-term riverine-focused monitoring programs:
  •    Nonpoint Source Assessment Program
      Source Assessment Program
      Ecoregion Reference Assessment Program
      Upland Alamap Monitoring and Assessment Program
      Clean Water Act §303(d) Support Assessment/Monitoring Program
      Fixed Ambient Trend Monitoring Program

  The Field Operations Division's (FOD) benthic macroinvertebrate assessment program is an integral part of the Department's
  biological monitoring effort.  A Multihabitat Bioassessment Protocol is currently utilized to sample wadeable and nonwadeable
  streams. All methods utilized are documented in  the Department's Standard Operating Procedures and Quality Control
  Assurance Manual, Volume II (ADEM 1999).

  The Department has developed assessment criteria based on a ten-year ecoregional reference database. These assessments
  are then used to determine the Aquatic Life Use Designations. These comparisons have aided the Department in evaluating the
  "best attainable biotic community" within an ecoregion. The Department uses macroinvertebrates and a multi-habitat fish
  community assessment to evaluate water quality. Periphyton bioassessment methods are currently being tested as a more
  direct assessment of nutrient enrichment.

  Biological integrity and water quality are directly affected by physical  habitat.  In addition, the assessment of habitat quality is an
  important step in documenting the adverse impacts of nonpoint source pollution. The Department utilizes the Habitat
  Assessment Matrices developed by EPA (USEPA 1989) and Barbour and Stribling (1994) in conjunction with physical
  characteristics and water quality parameters to evaluate and document the habitat quality of each wadeable bioassessment
  sampling site. More intensive assessment of geomorphological survey methods are currently being implemented 
-------
   ALABAMA
  Contact Information
  Fred Leslie, Chief - Aquatic Assessment Unit
  Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM)
  P.O. Box 301463 • Montgomery, AL 36130-1463
  Phone 334/260-2752 • Fax 224/272-8131
  email: fal@adem.state.al us
  Programmatic Elements
  Uio> of ftlomoiiimnt
  wtttin«vwiRw*t»r quality
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
 ApplcaMe

targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects and specific river basins or watersheds)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (special
protects and comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin (special projects and specific river basins or
watersheds)
other:
  Stream Miles
  Total miles                                      77,274
  Total perennial miles                                 47,077
  Total miles assessed for biology*             7,103.5
      fully supporting for 30S(b)                         5,124.4
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                  1,979.1
      listed for 303(d)                                 1,979.1
      number of sites sampled Con an annual basis)           200
      number of miles assessed per site                       -
                                 7,103.5 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                        "fully supporting" for 305(b)
                                        "partiallyMon-supporting" for 305
-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALL)) Designations and Decision-Making
  ALU Donation taste     :  ' Fishery Based Uses
 ALU
 water
In stat>»
Three designations: Outstanding Alabama Water, Fish & Wildlife,
Limited Warmwater Fishery
  Narrativ«Blocrft«rf«lr,WQS
  Numeric. Bk^rg«ffa;Jrt:*||f:|l none
none - A narrative scale of condition is used to support criteria
decisions. Draft guidelines, based upon ecoregional reference
conditions, are used in the evaluation of aquatic macroinvertebrate
community assessments.
  cr»Trtcal specific
    assessment of aquatic resources
    cause and effect determinations
    permitted discharges
    monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
    watershed based management
  Usaa uf
  btocrtterla In making
  management dacialona
  regarding watonrtton of
  aquatic resources to a
  designated ALU
none
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  NumlM.rofrofaronca.lte8     48 total
                                  site-specific
                                  paired watersheds
                                  regional (aggregate of sites)
                                  professional judgment
                                  other:
  Rafamtca site cirftatia.'S^^T.
Local Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) estimates of
landuse, animal densities, and sedimentation rates, etc. and
departmental databases are used to identify potentially
least-impaired sub-watersheds.
  Characterization of      ,
  rafamic* alias w8Wn a 3
  regional context
    historical conditions
    least disturbed sites
    gradient response
    professional judgment
    other:
  Stream t
  regional referencfS!
  conditlona
    ecoregions (or some aggregate)
    elevation
    stream type
    multivariate grouping
    jurisdictions! (i.e., statewide)
    other:
 Addlflo
    reference sites linked to ALU
    reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
    some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
    conditions
ALABAMA: Program Summary
                  December 2002
                                                                                       3-3

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                    benthos (100-500 samples/year; multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad coverage tor
                                    watershed level)

                                    fish (<100 samples/year; multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad coverage for watershed
                                    level)

                                    periphyton (currently being tested tor assessment of nutrient enrichment)

                                    other: phytoplankton (100-500 samples/year; multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad
                            	coverage tor watershed level)

  *MI^;.yJS|j«i|f|||53
 'l^'JWrn(|lfi0^^|gf3^| wash bucket, dipnet and kick net (1 meter); 500-600 micron mesh
                               multihabitat

                               100 per habitat

 	family and genus	

  Fish •.."••;•-  ,;';;; ;••-.,..;';'-V"''
      sampling gear             backpack electrofisher and seine; 3/16" mesh

  :    habitat selection     .;     pool/glide and riffle/run (cobble)

  '    'sample processing   .     biomass • batch

      subsampte                none

  '.    taxonomy	      species	

  HabRatassessments .  . ....    visual based; performed both with, and independent of. bioassessments

  Quality aesurance program •   standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and training for
  elements               ; •,    biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival


  Data Analysis and Interpretation

  p^anaKj*^teeJfS9d'i;||Rl::; _/_  summary tables, illustrative graphs

  n***0^- •". -:;:W;;'&::SllIf <	  parametric ANOVAs
                                    multivariate analysis

                               /   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index and return single metrics)

                                    disturbance gradients
                                    other:	

  Mummetriethresholds     "  '

      transferring metrics       95* percentile of reference population
      into unfttes* scores • .

      defining Impairment in :     The 2000 305(b) report states that sampling results equal to or less than fair/moderately
  • •   a muMmetrtc index         impaired for the macroinvertebrate index and chemical/physical field data indicate an
              I           •     ' impairment ("excellent, good, fair, poor, very poor" or "unimpaired, slightly impaired,
                      •••-:• moderately impaired, severely impaired")  and will be considered non-support and placed on
  ;        .    :;,.......-,:i.r-:-. '•'•' the303(d)list.	
  Evaluation of perfOfrowic*     
-------
 ALASKA
  Contact Information

  Kent Patrick-Riley, Section Leader - NPS Protection and Impairment
  Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC)
  555 Cordova Street • Anchorage, AK 99501
  Phone 907/269-7554 • Fax 907/269-7508
  email: kent patrick-rilev@envircon.state.ak.us
  ADEC Division of Air and Water Qualify homepage:
  http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ENV.CONSERV/dawg/dec dawq.htm
  Program Description

  The State of Alaska is in the early stages of using bioassessments in water quality management. The lead agency
  funding bioassessment work is the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC); with the bulk of the
  development work done by the University of Alaska (UAA) Environment and Natural Resources Institute (ENRI).
  To date, bioassessments have not been used for biocriteria. Key accomplishments of Alaska's program include:

      method development and testing, resulting in the Alaska Stream Condition index
      successful interagency involvement and supplemental funding
      extensive outreach and educational opportunities
      development of regional reference conditions for the Cook Inlet Ecoregion
  •    stream type differences incorporated into the framework for assessment
  •    index development incorporating multiple community attributes
      water quality assessments for Cook Inlet Ecoregion
      database development compatible with STORET for the water quality information
      relationship between degradation and habitat quality
      nutrient enrichment issues
  •    impervious surface areas influences to water quality
  Documentation and Further Information

  Alaska's bioassessment program is being developed in conjunction with UAA-ENRI. For consistency and to avoid
  duplicate information, refer questions on protocols and reference sites to them. Their web site is:
  http://www.uaa.alaska.edu/enri/bmap

  Alaska Stream Condition Index: Biological Index Development for Cook Inlet, Summary 1997 - 2001, August 2001:
  http://www.uaa.alaska.edu/enri/bmap/pdfs/AK SCI 2001.pdf

  Quality Assurance Project Plan, Alaska Biological Monitoring and Assessment Program, February 2002:
  http://www.uaa.alaska.edu/enri/bmap/Ddfs/ENRI QAPP 2-02.pdf
ALASKA: Program Summary
December 2002
                                                      3-5

-------
 ALASKA
 Contact Information
 Kent Patrick-Riley, Section Leader - NPS Protection and Impairment
 Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC)
 555 Cordova Street • Anchorage, AK 99501
 Phone 907/269-7554 • Fax 907/269-7508
 email: kent patrick-ri lev@envtrcon.state.ak.us
 Programmatic Elements
 wfthln ovtrafl WB&K qtHritty
         '  '  '"'    '
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocn'teria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge penult conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other
                                  targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose)
                                  (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction, special projects
                                  and specific river basins or watersheds)
                                  fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
                                  probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                  probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                                  rotating basin
                                  other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                     >3 million
 (determined using National Hydrography Database)
 Total perennial miles                                   unknown
 Total watersheds assessed for biology               150
     watersheds fully supporting for 305(b)                    140
     watersheds partially/non-supporting for 305(b)               10
     watersheds listed for 303(d)                              10
     number of sites sampled                               300
     number of miles assessed per site*                       10
                                                                    150 Watersheds Assessed for Biology
                                        "fully supporting' for 305(b)
                                        "partiallyMon-supporting" for 305(b)
•For the purposes of decision making, a 100 meter reach represents approximately 10 stream miles.
ALASKA: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                          3-6

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making

  ALUdaalflnattomln
  water quality atandarda
Class system (A.B.CJ-Every AK stream is designated for ALL uses
(including drinking water) unless specifically exempted.
One designation in A: 3) aquaculture; One designation in C: 1)
growth and propagation of fish, shellfish, other aquatic life, and
wildlife
  NarrattvaBlocrtterialnWQS    none
  Numarlc Btocrtterta InWQS    none
  Uaaa of btoaaaaaamant date
  to Integrated aaaaaamante
  with othar anviroMMMitat =
                      l*xi
    assessment of aquatic resources
    cause and effect determinations
    permitted discharges
    monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
    watershed based management
  Wocrttorta In making
  management dacMon*
  regarding rtttoratlon of
  aquatic raaoureaa to a
  daalgnatedALU
Alaska is just beginning to use bioassessment information to help
with assessment/monitoring and in management decisions.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Nunibar of fafaiwica altaa'
43 total
  ltofM«ie«*Na
  datMnrinaoom
  Raforancaaita criteria
  Charactertzatton of  ••..
  rafaranea altea wtthln a
  regional context ;=' <-'.s-i-
  Straam atratlflcatJo
  regional refaranc*:
  condMona
  Additional Information
    site-specific
    paired watersheds
    regional (aggregate of sites)
    professional judgment
    other:
no channelization; no upstream impoundments; no known point-
source discharges; DO > 5 ppm; urban land use <15% in catchment;
mining or logging in <15% of catchment; forest or natural land use
>50% in catchment; riparian buffer width >18m
    historical conditions
    least disturbed sites
    gradient response
    professional judgment
    other: minimally disturbed*
    ecoregions (or some aggregate)
    elevation
    stream type
    multivariate grouping
    jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
    other:
    reference sites linked to ALU
    reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
    some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
    conditions
•Alaska's reference sites are considered "minimally" disturbed; variation in results is due to natural and environmental influences.
ALASKA: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                                                         3-7

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
          B0M
                               UD
                                   benthos (100 to 500 samples/year, single and multiple seasons, multiple sites
                                   - broad coverage)
                                   fish
                                   periphyton
                                   other:
  Benthos
      sampling gear
  ;'•' habitat selection
      subsampto size
  1   taxonomy
                             d-frame; 200 - 400 micron mesh
                             multihabitat
                             300-count target
                             genus level
                              visual based, hydrogeomorphology: performed with bioassessments
;  Quality assurance program '(  standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan (in progress), periodic
 •foments   ; :   ;!:\,  . " >.;   meetings and training for biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks,
;••{-',••:'•'"':    • '  ••''     ;•!'•:-  specimen archival
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Pata analysis tools and
                                  summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                  parametric ANOVAs
                                  multivariate analysis
                                  biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                  disturbance gradients
                                  other
      transforming metrics
      Into unKfas scores
      detwnjj K^afrmen
      a nuUHmetnc hslex
                    tin
95" percentile of all sites

first quartile from the 95" percentile
           of performance
                                 repeat sampling
                                 precision (sampling replicates)
                                 sensitivity
                                 bias
                                 accuracy
      Retriaval and analysis
                             EDAS
                             EDAS
ALASKA: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                              3-8

-------
                                        U.S  EPA Headquarters Library
 ARIZONA
  Contact Information
        Mail code 3404T
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
    Washington, DC  20460
          202-566-0556
  Patti Spindler, Aquatic Geologist
  Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)
  1110 West Washington St. 5415A-1 • Phoenix, AZ 85007
  Phone 602/771-4543 « Fax 602/771-4528
  email: phs@ev.state.az.us
  ADEQ Water Quality Division homepage: http://www adeg state. az. us/en viron/water/index. htm I
  Program Description

  The Biocriteria Program at the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) has been sampling benthic
  macroinvertebrates since 1992.  Data has been collected for bioeriteria standards development and 305(b) assessment
  purposes for the past ten years.  ADEQ has only one dedicated bioeriteria staff person, however six other water quality
  monitoring staff assist in biological data collection during the spring as part of the ambient watershed monitoring program.

  ADEQ does not yet have narrative or numeric bioeriteria.  However, sampling methods and Indexes of Biological Integrity have
  been developed with the assistance of USEPA and contractor support. The cold and warm water Indexes of Biological Integrity
  will be used to support two designated uses, Aquatic and Wildlife (cold water fishery) (A&Wc) and Aquatic and Wildlife (warm
  water fishery) (A&Ww), which are currently listed in Arizona's surface water quality standards.  ADEQ plans to develop a
  narrative biocriterion for the next triennial review of standards and these indexes will serve as the implementation guidance for
  such a standard. ADEQ has also developed an approach to using bioassessments plus habitat assessments to implement the
  narrative bottom deposit standard, which will be proposed during a separate rulemaking on implementation guidance documents
  for all narrative standards during 2002.
  In the water quality standards rules that are currently under review by USEPA, ADEQ has updated definitions for A&Wc and
  A&Ww based upon "macroinvertebrate regions" identified in Spindler 2001. The 5000' elevation contour marks the threshold for
  a change in community type from warm to cold, as determined by statistical analysis of empirically derived statewide biological
  data. These macroinvertebrate regions will be used instead of ecoregions for predicting community types in Arizona. Addition of
  the elevation range in the A&Wc and A&Ww standards definitions allows Arizona to use the elevation model to better predict the
  correct A&W use type. Revisions to the "list of surface waters and designated uses" have correspondingly been made in the
  2001 standards rule.
  ADEQ does not have a bioeriteria standard and has subsequently been unable to assess biological integrity in Arizona's 305(b)
  report or 303(d) list.  As a result of a lawsuit, ADEQ is preparing an "impaired waters rule" this year which will  specifically outline
  assessment and listing procedures.  Rules for conducting bioassessments will also have to be developed as part of this impaired
  waters rule, in addition to the surface water quality standard before bioassessments can be fully implemented in our assessment
  and listing process in Arizona. ADEQ is also partnering with the US Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management to
  standardize macroinvertebrate sample collection and analysis methods in order to share data on this important ecosystem
  indicator.
  Future program directions include refining narrative bottom deposit standard implementation guidance for rule development,
  developing narrative biocriterion, starting a diatom bioassessment pilot project, refining reference condition, and developing
  bioassessments for intermittent streams and large rivers.



  Documentation and  Further Information

  Sfafus of Water Quality In Arizona - Clean Water Act Section 305(b) Report: June 2000:
  http://www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/asses5/305/index.htrnl

  Draft Status of Water Quality in Arizona - 2002. Arizona's Integrated 305(b) Assessment and 303(d) Listing Report
  http://www.adeq .state .az .us/en vi ron/water/assess/hsa. h tml#draft

  WQD Biocriteria Program information: http://www.adea.state.az.us/environ/waler/assess/monit.html

  ADEQ. 2001  DRAFT Quality Assurance Program Plan for the Biocriteria Program. ADEQ, Phoenix, AZ.

  Spindler, P.M. 2001. DRAFT Narrative bottom deposit standard implementation guidelines for Arizona. ADEQ, Phoenix. AZ.

  Spindler. P.M.. 1996.  Using ecoregions for explaining macroinvertebrate community distribution among reference sites in
  Arizona, 1992. ADEQ OFR-95-7. Phoenix, AZ.

  Other accomplishments include macroinvertebrate community distribution among reference sites in AZ (2001). development of
  Arizona EDAS biological database (2001), development and testing  of a biological index for coldwater streams of AZ (2000),
  development and testing of a biological index for warmwater streams of AZ (1998), and Macroinvertebrate Photocatalog on CD
  (1998).
ARIZONA: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                              3-9

-------
 ARIZONA
  Contact Information
  Patti Spindler, Aquatic Ecologist
  Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)
  1110 West Washington St. 5415A-1 • Phoenix, AZ 85007
  Phone 602/771-4543 • Fax 602/771-4528
  email: ohs@ev.sta1e,az.ii5
  Programmatic Elements
 •t|*WOfMOMS***nMltt •
 jdfhlBown! wpt»r quality
                              UD
                              UD
                              UD
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
                                    targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
                                    projects, specific river basins or watersheds)
                                    fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
                                    (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                    probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                    probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                                    rotating basin (specific river basins or watersheds)
                                    other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
      fully supporting for 305(b)*
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)*
      listed for 303(d)"
      number of sites sampled
      number of miles assessed per site
              127,505
                 4,980
                     0
                   n/a
                   n/a
                   n/a
                   324
            site specific
'Arizona does not have formal biocriteria and will not be using bioassessments in the 2002 305(b) or 303(d) reports. However, a
proposal to use bioassessment plus habitat assessment as the implementation procedure for the narrative bottom deposit standard
will be considered during a rulemaking (2002-03), which is separate from the just completed triennial review of standards. The next
305(b) report may include bioassessments in support of the narrative bottom deposit standard, if this implementation procedure is
approved.
ARIZONA: Program Summary
             December 2002
                                                                       3-10

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
                  • ,.     '  '"
                t basts  \ .~ Warm water vs. Cold Water

                      •to",•;,l Aquatic and Wildlife (A&W) cold, A&W warm, A&W-effluent dependent water,
             standards  •''•".'< A&W-ephemeral (AZ has acute and chronic categories for each except ephemeral in
                              which only acute applies.)
 Nwrath* Btocrtterta In WQS
under development - ADEQ has developed a cold water and warm water Index of
Biological Integrity to support these two designated uses, which are currently listed in
the surface water quality standards. However ADEQ does not yet have established
biocriteria. These indexes will become the implementation guidance for proposed
biocriteria in the next triennial review of standards.
  Numeric Biocriteria In WQS    none
    Ironnwntal
 toxhiy tBBtlng and
specific criteria)
                               UD
                              UD
                               UD
      assessment of aquatic resources

      cause and effect determinations

      permitted discharges

      monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

      watershed based management
  Use* of biOMMMnwntf
  UocrjEtsfla inmaking
  maaagwnwit decisions
  regarding restoration of
  aquatic imowoM to •
  designated ALU
none
  Reference Site/Condition Development

  Number of referent* sites     89 total
           '• U\
           Site
  d«torrniflations
    site-specific

    paired watersheds

    regional (aggregate of sites)

    professional judgment

    other:
 • R»feirenc« ste criteria
For initial site selection, the following guidelines were used in the early 1990s: a site
must be accessible (within a 2-hour walk or 3-4 miles from nearest 4-wheel drive road),
> 0.5 km downstream of road crossings, no known discharges upstream, no major
impoundments upstream, no channel alterations at the site, and be only minimally
impacted by land use activities and nonpoint sources. All of the following criteria must
be attained in the field assessment of potential sites for a site to be accepted as
reference:  site should be truly perennial (indicators: fish, univoltine insects, riparian
indicators), site should be free of local land use impacts, site should be free of channel
alterations, no violations of pH or dissolved oxygen water quality standards, and habitat
assessment index score > 14 using ADEQ's 2001
5-parameter habitat index.
  Characterization of
  reference sites within *
  regional context
    historical conditions

    least disturbed sites

    gradient response

    professional judgment

    other: minimally disturbed
 Strewn «t»aflfle«tkMi within
 regional referene*
 condition*
    ecoregions (or some aggregate)

    elevation

    stream type

    multivariate grouping

    jurisdictionat (i.e., statewide)

    other:
 Add(|onal Information
    reference sites linked to ALU

    reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards

    some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced conditions
ARIZONA: Program Summary
                  December 2002
                                                                                                 3-11

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
  Assemblages i
 .[•'•rSSES:'.':
  •r.".v";yy^hyi,/'.. ',".
                                    benthos (<100 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                    fish
                                    periphylon (<1QO samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                    other:
      sampling gear             d-frame net; 500 micron mesh
      habitat selection           riffle/run (cobble)
      Subsampte size            500 - 600 count target
      taxonomy             •    combination level; EPT taxa are identified to genus or species
      nabiatseteaion
      Sample processing
                               natural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.)
                               artificial substrata: microslides or other suitable substratum
                               riffle/run (cobble); artificial substrate
                               taxonomic identification
                               diatoms only; identified at species level
                               visual based, quantitative measurements, hydrogeomorphology; performed with
                               bioassessments
~ Quality msuranc* program
 •laments           :   ;
                               standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings, training for
                               biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, and specimen archival
  Data Analysis and Interpretation
  Dafe analysis toofe and
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
            threshold*
                     -
                               9501 percentile of reference population

                               25" percentile of reference population

chinitttrlitlca''


: j>.V;Vk._ ;. • - • '•'•.: •'••
•. i':-'s;~J:?tA;. -' • . • ::::-i:.

fUftiflMfrii'jtAi* ' • • ••'• •
• ^™fWPF™j. ™*s . . .
/•Storage-



/
'

V


AZ

annually)
precision
sensitivity (standard level of identification used by lab)
bias (ADEQ uses a standard mesh size, the lab locates small
organisms, using a 6-1 2x dissecting microscope and a Caton
tray to randomly obtain fractions of the total sample)
accuracy (any questionable identifications are sent to nationally
recognized taxonomic experts for confirmation and a voucher
specimen collection is maintained)


EDAS
      Retrieval and analysis      Systat, EDAS
Though multiple performance characteristics are evaluated, ADEQ has not incorporated this information into a QA/QC document.
ARIZONA: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                              3-12

-------
 ARKANSAS
 Contact Information

 William Keith, Water Quality Planning Branch Manager
 Jim Wise, Program Manager
 Chris Davidson, Water Quality Specialist
 Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)
 P.O. Box 8913 • Little Rock, AR  72219-8913
 Phone 501/682-0656 • Fax 501/682-0910
 email: Keilh@adeq stale ar,us. Wise@adeq.state.ar,us and Davidson@adeq.state.ar.us
 ADEQ Water Division homepage: http:ffwww.adeq stale,ar, us/water/
  Program Description

  As part of the Water Division of the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), the Water Quality
  Planning Branch has seven biologists/ecologists and two geologists on staff. This branch deals with a variety of
  issues related to water quality monitoring, standards development, and groundwater and wasteload allocations.
  The Branch is responsible for conducting water quality surveys, assessing the State's water quality for surface and
  ground water, and 305(b) reporting. The Branch is also responsible for the development of water quality and
  biological criteria for water quality use attainability analysis and for water quality standards development. In
  addition, the Branch is responsible  for developing TMDLs (303d) for those waters not meeting water quality
  standards.  Finally, the Branch is responsible for the biomonitoring aspect of the NPDES program.

  Biological and habitat monitoring are currently restricted to special project needs associated with synoptic
  watershed surveys or for the development of additional data to support the establishment of biological criteria.
  For the 2000 305(b) report, portions of 106 stream segments from 17 planning segments were assessed for
  aquatic life use support using biological communities. These stream segments were either located above or below
  a point source discharge, or were part of intensive water quality surveys.  Survey objectives were to determine the
  impacts of the discharge, evaluate the biological community in ecoregional reference streams,  determine use
  attainment in previously listed water bodies of concern or those waters not currently meeting all designated uses.
  Macroinvertebrates were collected  and evaluated following  EPA's Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (USEPA1989).
  Habitat considerations were used in the evaluation of the macroinvertebrate communities through percent
  comparability evaluation techniques at all sites. An upstream-downstream comparison of the communities, and a
  comparison of the community to a least disturbed reference stream were also used to make the assessments. Fish
  communities were analyzed following EPA's Technical Support Manual: Waterbody Surveys and Assessments for
  Conducting Use Attainability Analysis (USEPA 1983). Direct comparisons were made with ecoregional fish
  community data outlined in the Department's Physical, Chemical, and Biological Characteristics of Least-Disturbed
  Reference Streams in Arkansas' Ecoregions, 1987. In addition, an upstream-downstream comparison of the
  communities was made and compared to a least-disturbed  reference stream.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Water Quality Inventory Report 2000, 305(b) Report:
  http://www.adeq.state.ar.us/water/pdfs/documents/305(b) 2000.pdf

  2002 Proposed 303(d) List: httD://www.adeq.state.ar.us/water/pdfs/documents/303id) list proposed  020426.pdf

  1998 Arkansas 303(d) List http://www.adea.state.ar.us/water/303drprt.htm

  Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters, effective Feb. 1998, amended January 2001:
  http://www.adea.state.ar.us/reqs/files/req02 final 010917.pdf

  Physical, Chemical, and Biological Characteristics of Least-Disturbed Reference Streams in Arkansas' Ecoregions,
  Volume 1: Data Compilation, and Volume 2: Data Analysis. ADEQ Water Division. 1987.

  Water Quality Planning Branch, list of publications: http://www.adeQ.state.ar.us/water/pdfs/documents/pubilst.pdf
ARKANSAS: Program Summary                    December 2002                                          3-13

-------
  ARKANSAS
  Contact Information

  William Keith, Water Quality Planning Branch Manager
  Jim Wise, Program Manager
  Chris Davidson, Water Quality Specialist
  Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)
  P.O. Box 8913 • Little Rock, AR 72219-8913
  Phone 501/682-0656 • Fax 501/682-0910
  email: Kerth@adeq,slate.ar.us. Wisegjadeg slate.ar.us and Davidson@adeg.state.af.us
  Programmatic Elements
». "••_• •• _.

WttMn own! water quality
•j^- .' ''-' ,
i" -' ', "' '""
''", v ' , ' ! ' -

* , . . , ' "

. ';": i;>. 'I'"-. , '•• •••
'Wij$^- •"
:fc="i.:?:.~:- 	 :•'•••• ' :'• '
ypVyK .<_, '•-.--.
>te->:;x: .--."- ••:.• '.
»|i;iS;^:y:o :i-. • . '"'•
:.=fe- :>"••->: --f;1;-. •-" '- -- -
.•.'-."••; :-•'••*•'"" • •' '"• . ;
j

/
/
/
/
/
/
/

/
"7"



/

Kl -H f« •' -X

nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects and specific river basins or watersheds)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)

probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion. or statewide
rotating basin
other:
 Stream Miles

 Total miles                                        87j617
 (determined using RF3 and the National Hydrography Database)

 Total perennial miles                                    28,408

 Total miles assessed for biology*                     245
                                              •tream segments

     fully supporting for 305(b)                               n/a

     partially/non-supporting for 30S(b)                         n/a

     listed for 303(d)                                       n/a

     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)             -450

     number of miles assessed per site
'Currently, biological monitoring occurs as either 1) part of intensive watershed survey where water quality problems have been
previously identified; 2) part of a site specific survey, wasteload allocation; and 3) most recently as part of expanding ecoregion*
reference stream data. Biological data are not used to list any 303(d) waters.
ARKANSAS: Program Summary
                                              December 2002
                                                                                                      3-14

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
  ALU dmlgnatkm bails
  ALII designation* to state
  water quality standards  ;.
                            Single Aquatic Life Use, Fishery Based Uses and Warm Water vs.
                            Cold Water

                            Two designations: Ecologically sensitive waterbodies protecting
                            endangered, threatened, and endemic aquatic species.  Fisheries
                            are divided into Trout, Lakes and Reservoirs, and Streams (further
                            subdivided by ecoregion).
                              Procedures used to support narrative biocriteria are currently found
                              in the project specific QAPP. Additional methods and SOPs are
                              being developed. NOTE: The development of criteria and standards
                              is ongoing.

                              none
  UMtofMe
  in integrated assessments
  u>Mk ..ill•• • mmittm<1 •>•'•••!••!<•! ~"
  wnn omar snvwonmsniai
  (tati (8.9., toxicity testkw and
  chemical specific criteria)
                                 assessment of aquatic resources

                                 cause and effect determinations

                                 permitted discharges

                                 monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

                                 watershed based management
  UsssofbloassMsmentf
  biocriteria in making ,
  management tfecWom  >
  regarding rWtoratkMipf
  aquatic resource* to i: :
  dMtgnatedALU
                            Currently, baseline data has been collected from numerous locations
                            prior to BMP implementation and NPDES limit changes. Follow-up
                            monitoring has occurred at some locations below point sources. No
                            follow-up monitoring has occurred at nonpoint source locations.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
          ,,.!.-; •,;£.•.-;• i3Kr,:;V.:,J  • •'
  Number o*r*fB»BC«««*«     75 total
  dttMirination*
                                 site-specific

                                 paired watersheds

                                 regional (aggregate of sites)

                                 professional judgment

                                 other: upstream/downstream
                              Water quality and habitat is typical of background ecoregion
                              conditions. Watershed is somewhat undisturbed.
                                  historical conditions

                                  least disturbed sites

                                  gradient response

                                  professional judgment

                                  other:

-------
  Field and  Lab Methods
                                    benthos (100-500 samples/year single season, multiple sites - watershed
                                    level and broad coverage; multiple seasons, multiple sites)
                                    fish (<100 samples/year single season, multiple sites • watershed level and
                                    broad coverage)
                                    periphyton
                                    other:
  Bwrtftor
                               D-frame; 200-400 micron mesh
                               riffle/run (cobble), multihabitat and woody debris
                               100 count
                               combination - family, genus and species
  Fteh
      ramping gear             backpack and boat etectrofisher, pram unit (tote barge) and seine; 3/16" and 1/4"
      -  "- ;.. : : / -•'"•. ." .;   '  mesh
      habitat selection    •       pool/glide, riffle/run (cobble), and multihabitat
      sample processing  :       anomalies
      sutmample ~  ; j;•.'., . ..     whole samples are sorted and identified to species
      taxoft««y:>-: :';]j';-:..  '•'••••     species and life stage	
                       > = p.  .   visual based with limited quantitative measurements and hydrogeomorphology,
                       £:;<£ r.  pebble counts, flows and canopy (over; performed with bioassessments
                               quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and training for biologists, sorting and
                               taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival, and standard operating
                               procedures (in development stage)

  Data Analysis  and Interpretation
  Da
•ty*tott3
land
summary tables, illustrative graphs
parametric ANOVAs
multivariate analysis
biological metrics (aggregate metrics imp an index and return
single metrics - use endpoint for each single metnc)
disturbance gradients
other:
                               As a percent of either the reference site or based on ecoregion data
                               dependent upon standard deviation units
                         9K-.  As a percent of either the reference site or based on ecoregion data
                         :"" K-  dependent upon standard deviation units
      deft^irf^rriwntin
      a (nuttfyafiaie index
                       As a percent of either the reference site or based on ecoregion data
                       dependant upon standard deviation units
 EvBhMtfDII Of p0lf(HUUUIG6
                           repeat sampling
                           precision
                           sensitivity
                           bias
                           accuracy
                               Microsoft databases
                               none
ARKANSAS: Program Summary
                                          December 2002
                                                                                                               3-16

-------
 CALIFORNIA


 Contact Information

 Del Rasmussen, TMDL Section
 California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
 1001 I Street, P.O. Box 944213 • Sacramento, CA 95812
 Phone 916/341-5545 • Fax 916/341-5550
 email: rasmd@dwg .swrcb.ca.gov
 website: htlp://www.swrcb.ca.gov/gualitv.html

 Jim Harrington, State Water Quality Biologist
 California Department of Fish and Game (CA DFG)
 2005 Nimbus Road » Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
 Phone 916/358-2862 • Fax 916/985^301
 email: iharrina@osDr.dfQ.ca.gov
 California Aquatic Bioassessment Workgroup homepage: http://www,dfg.ca.gov/cabw/cabwhome.htmi



 Program Description

 Historically, the use of bioassessment data in California water regulations and decision-making has not been a high priority.
 California's tremendous range of ecological diversity and its equally complex history of land and water  use have confounded
 progress towards implementation of a state-wide bioassessment program. The recent organization of California's Surface Water
 Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) is providing the impetus to implement a better organized and standardized biological
 assessment and monitoring program  throughout the state. Current concerns over hydroaugmentation  and use attainability
 analyses of targeted waterbodies will  foster a greater dependence upon bioassessment information in  making informed decisions
 regarding the protection and restoration of California's streams.

 Nine regional boards are essentially independent regulatory entities within the California State Water Resources Control Board
 (SWRCB).  Not all regional boards are at the same level of development regarding bioassessment One of the first management
 actions advancing bioassessment in CA was in 1993 when the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB 6)
 required the use of EPA's Rapid Bioassessment Protocols in a fish hatchery permit. Since that time, the use of bioassessment in
 water resource decision-making has steadily increased. Presently, bioassessment is used by several  RWQCBs for a variety of
 purposes, including to: assess the impacts  of human activities on the biological integrity of streams and rivers; evaluate the
 effectiveness of restoration efforts, BMP implementation, and permit conditions; develop narrative and numeric biooiteria;
 establish reference conditions; provide baseline data on the benthic macroinvertebrate community in regional streams; determine
 the biological health of streams relative to land use in specific watersheds; help identify aquatic life stressors and associated
 development of ecological indicators  in agriculturally dominated and effluent dominated waterbodies; and as an additional tool to
 NPDES and stormwater permitting to supplement the chemical and lexicological information obtained to address chemical
 standards.

 The California Department of Fish and Game's (CA DFG) Water Pollution Control Laboratory and its Aquatic Biological
 Assessment Laboratory (ABAL) perform macroinvertebrate sampling and identification, fish surveys, physical/habitat surveys,
 toxicity testing, sedimentation studies, and  tissue and water chemistry. Since 1992, the ABAL has conducted projects covering
 many different applications of biological monitoring throughout California. These projects have demonstrated bioassessment and
 promoted the effectiveness of bioassessment in the State.

 In 1993, ABAL distributed a set of standard protocols for assessing biological and physical conditions of wadeable streams. The
 California Stream Bioassessment Procedures (CSBP) are regional adaptations of the national USEPA Rapid Bioassessment
 Protocols. The DFG, in cooperation with the SWRCB and USEPA Region 9, also established the California Aquatic
 Bioassessment Workgroup (CABW) to provide input and guidance for the development of a state-wide bioassessment program.
 The Workgroup was formed in 1994 to coordinate scientific and policy-making efforts towards implementing aquatic
 bioassessment in California. Members of the CABW consist of biologists from universities, consulting firms, industry, and
 representatives of state and federal agencies responsible for assessing, monitoring and protecting the biological integrity of
 surface waters. Through its Steering Committee and annual meetings, CABW participants develop objectives and strategies for
 implementing aquatic bioassessment in California.


 Documentation and  Further Information

 State Water Resources Control Board. October 2000. 2000 California 305(b) Report on Water Quality. Sacramento. CA:
 SWRCB.

 Status of Aquatic Bioassessment in California and the Development of a State-wide Bioassessment Program, prepared by the
 California Department of Fish and Game Aquatic Biological Assessment Laboratory: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/cabw/status.html

 California Stream Bioassessment Procedure (CSBP): hltp ://www. dfg .ca. q ov/ea bw/protocols. htm I



CALIFORNIA: Program Summary                     December 2002                                             3-17

-------
  CALIFORNIA
  Contact Information
  Del Rasmussen. TMOL Section
  California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
  1001 I Street, P.O. Box 944213 • Sacramento, CA 95812
  Phone 916/341-5545 • Fax 916/341-5550
  email: rasmd@dwQ.swrcb.ca.gov
  Jim Harrington, State Water Quality Biologist
  California Department of Fish and Game (CA DFG)
  2005 Nimbus Road  • Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
  Phone 916/358-2862 • Fax 916/985-4301
  email: iharrinQ@ospr.dfa.ca.gov
  Programmatic Elements
                                  problem identification {screening}
                                  nonpoint source assessments
                                  monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                  ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
                                  promulgated into state water quality standards as biocnteria
                                  support of antidegradation
                                  evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                  TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                  other:
  kppBcabto monitoring

targeted (i.e.. sites selected for specific purpose) (specific river
basins or watersheds)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (specific
river basins or watersheds)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area (specific nver
basins or watersheds)
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (specific river basins or
watersheds)
rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
     fully supporting for 305(b)
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
     listed for 303(d)
     number of sites sampled
     number of miles assessed per site
               211,513
                  64,438
              unknown
                unknown
                unknown
                unknown
                unknown
                unknown
    *Due to a comprehensive, statewide overhaul of California's database system, SWRCB was unable to break out numbers for
stream miles assessed using biology.
CALIFORNIA: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                                                        3-18

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making

    J doslgnattwi biwl* , -ft    Fishery Based Uses, Warm Water vs. Cold Water

                             Regional Water Quality Boards have a Basin Planning function.
                             Therefore, water quality standards are regionally specific for
                             establishing functional uses, criteria, and implementation plans.
  Narrative Btocrttwii fn WQS
                           Regional water quality standards contain generic statements for the
                           overarching protection of biological communities with an emphasis
                           on, but not limited to, fisheries. Procedures to support narrative
                           biocriteria are regionally specific.
                             none
  dpmidl spetffic crteria
                               assessment of aquatic resources

                               cause and effect determinations

                               permitted discharges

                               monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

                               watershed based management
Uwwoft
blocrttertotomakli
                             Limited to select studies where biological data are used for
                             management decisions regarding urban development.
         j rMtonriton of
       ; resources to a
  designated ALU


  Reference Site/Condition Development
                             - 200 - 300 total
Rofemncoslte ~~i "-

-.. ~~ ~ / -*?£ ? 5^~ * -^^
Referenc«*rto M»iai>~~ - ~
Ctwractertwtton of ^ -^-ZfCq
repiMtal B8Brtpri;~~ ~_«l"" » *"
•tt. ^r ^
^ "-* .
' * -j_. ,, " -ym^| "**• ;~
roglOftalrataronce ,.' !
COTKittiOM 'j ; ^ 8,
£ 8
3
sr

-, ^ r- . , '
--^-=:r-~ _^



/
^
site -specific
paired watersheds
regional (aggregate of sites)
professional judgment
other: CA DFG is in the process of developing a more
quantitative method of selecting reference sites on a regional
basis using CIS land use analyses and quantitative physical
habitat measures.
under development
~7



—

—
/

/
•^
historical conditions
least disturbed sites
gradient response
professional judgment
other:
ecoregions (or some aggregate)
elevation
stream type
multivariate grouping
jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
other: stream order
reference sites linked to ALL)
reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
(varies by region)
some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
conditions
CALIFORNIA: Program Summary
                                            December 2002
                                                                                                   3-19

-------
Field and Lab Methods
                                 benthos C>500 sampte&yearj vary/rig /evete of rigor)
                                 fish
                                 periphyton
                                 other:
                        I ill  D-frame; 200 - 400 micron mesh ((Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Laboratory),
                        ... ••••.:•  5QO _ 60Q micron mesh (Califomiai Stream Bioassessment Procedure)
                             riffle/run (cobble)
                        ^ II  300 - 500 count (Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Laboratory), 300 count (CSBP)
                             lowest possible, usually genus or pecies
                        s?i  visual based; performed with bioafesessments
                        i;?;S  standard operating procedures, sbrting and taxonomic proficiency checks
Data Analysis and Interpretation
                                 summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                 parametric ANOVAs
                                 multivariate analysis
                                 biological metrics (return angle metrics - use endpoint for each
                                 single metric)
                                 disturbance gradients
                                 other:                                          	
                             bar graph distribution function
        llnaMDainttentin      under development
        ' -[*?*• t-'^: "i._ _i^« ,
                                  repeat sampling
                                  precision
                                  sensitivity
                                  bias
                                  accuracy
                              Central Coast Ambient Monitoring Program (CCAMP) regional
                              database
                              CalEDAS
CALIFORNIA: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                           3-20

-------
 COLORADO
 Contact Information

 Robert McConnell. Monitoring Unit Manager
 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE)
 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South • Denver, CO 80246
 Phone 303/692-3578 » Fax 303/782-0390
 email: robert.mcconnell@state.co-us
 CDPHE Water Quality Control Division website: http://www.cdphejtatexo.us/wq/wahom.asp
  Program Description

  The Monitoring Unit of the Water Quality Control Division, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
  (CDPHE), is responsible for designing studies and collecting chemical, physical, and biological data from a
  statewide network of sampling stations.  Personnel from the Assessment Unit of the Water Quality Control Division
  evaluate this information, along with data from other agencies. Using a watershed-specific approach, the seven
  major watersheds within the State of Colorado are assessed sequentially as part of the triennial review of water
  quality standards and classifications. In addition, specific waterbodies are assessed as part of targeted synoptic
  studies, site-specific studies, and as required for evaluating waterbodies listed on the State of Colorado's 303(d)
  list.

  Most biological assessments are performed to evaluate aquatic life use classifications and to support standards
  development.  Biological assessments have occasionally been used to determine attainment of aquatic life uses or
  attainment of provisional sediment standards. However, chemical information from surface water samples is
  primarily used to assess use support determinations as reported in the State of Colorado's biennial Status of
  Water Quality report. Biologists in the Monitoring Unit are actively developing biocriteria to more effectively utilize
  biological information as part of the State of Colorado's water quality standards program. Initially, biocriteria will be
  developed for benthic macroinvertebrates. Over the last four years, biologists in the Monitoring Unit have collected
  benthic macroinvertebrate samples from approximately 300 potential reference/least impaired sites from all
  dominant ecoregions within the State of Colorado. This data is currently being evaluated. Combined with
  information on physical habitat and water chemistry, this benthic macroinvertebrate data will be used to develop
  provisional region-specific biocriteria.  Once developed, these provisional biocriteria will be evaluated using new
  benthic macroinvertebrate information, and further refined as needed.  It is anticipated that benthic
  macroinvertebrate biocriteria will be used as an assessment tool to support the water quality standards and
  classification programs within the State of Colorado. Biocriteria based on fishery information may be developed in
  the future.
  Documentation and  Further Information

  Colorado's 2002 305(b) report and 1998 303(d) list: http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/opAivqcc/wqresdoc.html

  Draft 2001 Unified Assessment Methodology, Guidance on Data Requirements and Data Interpretation Methods
  Used in Stream Standards and Classification Proceedings, July 1993:
  http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/wq/Assessment/assessment practices and methods.htm

  Water Quality in Colorado 2000: http://www.cdphestate.co.us/wa/waterqualitvbooklet-pdf
COLORADO: Program Summary                    December 2002                                          3-21

-------
  COLORADO
  Contact Information
  Robert McConnell, Monitoring Unit Manager
  Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE)
  4300 Cherry Creek Drive South • Denver, CO 80246
  Phone 303/692-3578 « Fax 303/782-0390
  email: robert.mcconnell@stale.co.us
  Programmatic Elements
                              UD
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALL) determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other: determine attainment of narrative sediment (clean) standard
                                    targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (comprehensive
                                    use throughout jurisdiction, specific river basins or watersheds, and
                                    special projects)
                                    fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (specific river
                                    basins or watersheds)
                                    probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                    probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                                    rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                    other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (determined using RF3)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
     fully supporting for 30S(b)
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
     listed for 303(d)
     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)
     number of miles assessed per site
                    107,403

                      31,415
                         n/a
                         n/a
                         n/a
                        85.1
                    -70-100
•Colorado does not use bioassessment in 305(b) assessments with some exceptions.  Since Colorado's water quality standards are
chemically oriented, the majority of use support determinations are based on chemical data.  Bioassessments are conducted as part
of the Triennial Standards Review process for Colorado's seven major watersheds: a few are used in the determination of aquatic
life use and sediment standards attainment. The majority of CDPHE's work in the field  is spent conducting bioassessments in
preparation for the review process. During the review process, the Water Quality Control Commission uses biological data to
determine the appropriate aquatic life use classification for 636 stream segments. Once classifications are set, all further water
quality monitoring and assessment is chemical.
COLORADO: Program Summary
             December 2002
                                                                                                           3-22

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
 ALU designation basis
                             Class System, Warm Water vs. Cold Water

ALU designations Instate  ." ,  Three classifications: Class 1 Cold Water Aquatic Life, Class 1 Warm Water Aquatic
water quality standards  •      Life, Class 2 Cold and Warm Water Aquatic Life
         >Btocriterfa hi WQS    under development*

  NumwteBkKrttorialnWQS    none*
  Us** of Moa»M*«m«tt data
  hi Integrated a*M**nMQte P~;l
  wtth^Urenvironmeirtal
  d«t* (e.g., toxfcHy
                                 assessment of aquatic resources

                                 cause and effect determinations

                                 permitted discharges

                                 monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

                                 watershed based management
                          IK -i  Bioassessment endpoints are used as targets in the attainment of the sediment
  biocriteria uses In making     standard (e.g. TMDL development).

  regarding restoration of  W:'
  aquatic resources to a
  designated ALU

•ALU classifications are defined in Colorado's water quality standards but are not considered to be formal narrative biocriteria in the CO
regulatory process. Colorado is presently developing biocriteria through a stakeholder workgroup process.


  Reference Site/Condition Development**
  Number of reference site*
                             300 total potential reference/least Impaired sites
RfffVfVftC*) SUB • _ ;'! ,*„""•••',"-;',
owtennbMticnft r ; /•.•.., <.vy;
'"''."•*' «:;0 1 '&?''
' , „ sfe^W?
•.-••' •• - - •.=--;:-; rv':™rr-T<%-
::, ,r .-. <;'x°">s'.'-',;'.
••••'. -• -•-." : \zmmm
',"-: •• ' • -"••^"^r'J™ ',^~
ffntmmm • m'ti '^itW ftmlftji.*itii* "''"'^'" '*?•">
ROnranCW Ww wWQffi^;::^^^
• • .' • ' ' ''"'SrXz&f'xtfszi^z-
•;. . v? ."^'f,'K^f^ss^;
ClwrtctsittiBonrtE'^^lfe'
fBflfontl context' ~ : ~ " •"•"^"^^^••r^
- ' . " -'i • ' '• -"-'"'i-i':":1'
' " , '-:-s *"•"' '~' ' '
Wraam *ti»ttflnHnn wHtibi
regional f*i*ranc* - ,. • •
COIlwDOliS , .,"''-•

MKiKionai inTonnauon u
'• ' • '..'".'.'-'.. ~/~'<~'''' ' -:
•"- ; • '•:. :•-;>£•<--••-••'••
. ' -/a,:":-:'>>-r's,-«.
/


^

site-specific
paired watersheds
regional (aggregate of sites)
professional judgment
other:
The condition of candidate sites is verified through field evaluation using a "checklist"
of stream attributes that include, but are not limited to, measures of riparian condition,
Rosgen channel type, land use, basin characteristics, physical habitat, substrate,
chemistry, geology, vegetation, and climate.
/
/

/
/
UD

/



n/a
n/a
n/a
historical conditions
least disturbed sites
gradient response
professional judgment
other: minimally disturbed"*"
ecoregions (or some aggregate)
elevation
stream type
multivahate grouping
jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
other:
reference sites linked to ALU
reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced conditions
"Reference condition is used on a limited basis in Colorado. Currently, it is used as a key component in determining sediment
deposition impacts to aquatic life and has been used in the first stages of biocriteria development, to locate sampling sites, as part of
various EMAP studies underway in CO, and in the development of regional nutrient criteria. The reference condition approach is not
developed enough to be an established part of biological assessments or the standards setting process in Colorado. Most, if not all,
assessments are conducted on a case-by-case or site-specific basis, and although CO does attempt to characterize the "expected
condition" for a particular waterbody, it is not treated as a formal reference condition.

""Sediment guidance suggests 3 tiers for reference conditions like those described in the 1996 EPA technical guidance for
biological criteria:  1) minimally disturbed, 2) best available (least disturbed), and 3) none acceptable ("hypothetical explanation").
These can be considered individually and in combination.
COLORADO: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
3-23

-------
Field and Lab Method
AMwnM*gttM**M«i *
. :  :•:-;" ; -i n
•' ; • • sample processing ;': [ :. : •*? i«
subsample ; •/ n
taxonomy. s
^fifniyton
sampflnggear n
Habitat sfltecflon r
sample processing c
; taxonomy : a
5*
f benthos (100 - 500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
f fish (< 100 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - not at watershed level)
ID periphylon (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
other:
urber, dipnet; 500 - 600 micron mesh
ffle/run (cobble) or most productive habitat if riffle/run is not available
00 count


ackpack electrofisher
nultihabitat
ingth measurement
one
pecies
atural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc), collect by hand
ffle/run (cobble)
Morophyll al phaeophytin, taxonomic identification
II algae, species level
 ttaMtet
                             visual based, hydrogeomorphology, pebble counts; performed with bioassessments
Quality
                               standard operating procedures, periodic meetings and training for biologists, specimen
                               archival
'Field and lab methods reported are those used by the Monitoring Unit of the CDPHE Water Quality Control Division and are patterned
after the EPA RBP approach. They do not apply to any of the other agencies collecting biological d
                                                                                 I data in Colorado.
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Data analysis tools and y
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (return single metrics)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
      transferring metrics
      .Mo utiHtoss scores-
      defining Impairment in
      amuttneWcindex
             ipaku
             Me to
impairment thresholds determined on case-by-case basis as part of
site-specific analyses
Colorado is currently exploring possible metrics and indices through a
workgroup process.
 EVRllHnlOfI Oi pCffvf flMUCA
                                  repeat sampling
                                  precision (replicate samples collected at 10% of sites)
                                  sensitivity
                                  bias
                                  accuracy
      Retrieval and arutlysto
                             Currently moving all biological and habitat data into EDAS
                        as* EDAS, Excel, Minitab
COLORADO: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                             3-24

-------
 CONNECTICUT


 Contact Information

 Ernest Pizzuto, Jr., Supervising Environmental Analyst
 Guy Hoffman, Environmental Biologist
 Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (CT DEP)
 79 Elm Street • Hartford, CT 06106-5127
 Phone 860/424-3715 • Fax 860/424-4055
 email: ernest.pizzuto@po.slate.ct.us
 CT DEP Bureau of Water Management website: http://dep.state.ct.us/wtr/index.htm


 Program Description

 The Connecticut Ambient Biological Monitoring  Program characterizes water quality by evaluating the biological integrity of
 resident communities of aquatic organisms. This information is used as the primary Indicator to meet reporting requirements for
 assessment of aquatic life use support and impairment under Sections 305(b) and 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. There are
 currently about 3.5 full time employees dedicated to biological assessment of rivers. Biological monitoring has been conducted
 by the CT DEP Bureau of Water Management since the early 1970s and has focused primarily on the benthic invertebrate
 community of wadeable stream segments. Narrative criteria for benthic invertebrates were incorporated into the CT water quality
 standards in 1987. Assessments are based on community structure characteristics using techniques intended to minimize the
 influence of variables such as habitat, seasonally and sampling method.  Since 1989. methodology has followed a modified
 version of the USEPA Rapid Bioassessment Protocol (RBP) III (USEPA 1989).

  A total of 302 sites on 153 rivers have been monitored to date (February 2002). Pursuant to the five-year rotating basin
 monitoring strategy that began in 1996, benthic invertebrate monitoring was conducted at approximately 50 sites each year for
 the five-year period ending in 2000. Since biological monitoring integrates environmental conditions over an extended time
 period, each site was sampled only once, primarily during the fall. Spring sampling is conducted on a limited basis for special
 studies or to supplement fall sampling. Sampling site selection is based on a targeted approach that considers sub-basin size,
 location of wastewater discharges, land use. and resource value. In addition to the rotating basin  schedule, approximately ten
 regional reference sites located across the State are sampled annually, as well as a limited number of sites to support special
 projects.

 The Bureau of Water Management recognizes the need to obtain a broader perspective of biological integrity by incorporation of
 fish community assessment data into the biological monitoring process. This has been accomplished to a limited degree by a
 cooperative working  relationship with the CT DEP Division of Inland Fisheries. Fish sampling information obtained by fisheries
 biologists for purposes consistent with the fisheries management program has been utilized in the form of best professional
 judgment assessments which CT DEP considers to be generally equivalent to USEPA RBP IV (USEPA 1989). Funds obtained
 through an EPA 104(b)(3) grant have supported part of a Fisheries Division staff position since 1999.  This effort has provided for
 approximately 24 fish community surveys, roughly equivalent in effort to annual RBP V assessment. This project is intended to
 support development of fish community structure metrics that will provide  a more quantitative approach to the assessment
 process.

 The CT DEP also  promotes and directs a monitoring program for volunteers from which usable assessment information is
 obtained.  The details of this program, A Tiered Approach to Citizen-Based Monitoring of Wadeable Streams and Rivers, can be
 obtained from the CT DEP Bureau of Water Management or viewed online at htlp://dep.state,d.usAvtr/volunmon/tierapp,pdf

 Section 305(b) of the CWA requires that states provide a description of the water quality of all navigable waters within their
 boundaries. Even with program improvements resulting from the rotating basin approach and incorporation of volunteer data, a
 complete census of State waters is not possible based on this focused approach to monitoring. To accomplish the goal of
 comprehensive monitoring, CT DEP is currently utilizing funds and technical assistance from USEPA to conduct a pilot statewide
 probabilistic monitoring program during 2002-2003. This project will sample the benthic invertebrate, fish, and periphyton
 communities at approximately 60 randomly selected sites. Through probabilistic monitoring, this statistically valid sample of
 wadeable streams in Connecticut will provide an estimate of conditions of all wadeable streams in the State. During this two-
 year period, the rotating basin approach will be suspended. However, limited focused monitoring will continue for reference
 sites, special projects, intensive surveys and to support TMDL development.



 Documentation  and Further Information

 DRAFT 2002 List of Connecticut Waterbodies Not Meeting Water Quality Standards, 303(d) list, May 2002:
 http://dep.state.ct.us/wtr/wq/implist.pdf
 Draft Consolidated Assessment and Listing Methodology for 305(b) and 303(d) Reporting, April 2002:
 http://dep. state .ct.us/wtr/wg/melhod. odf
 Quality Assurance Project Plan for Ambient Biological Monitoring, March 1996. CT DEP Bureau of Water Management,
 Planning and Standards Division, CT06106.
 Beauchene, M. 2002. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Ambient Biological Monitoring - Fish Community Structure. CT DEP
 Bureau of Water Management.
 Ambient Monitoring Strategy for Rivers and Streams, Rotating Basin Approach. CT DEP 1999.
CONNECTICUT: Program Summary                   December 2002                                             3-25

-------
  CONNECTICUT
  Contact Information
  Ernest Pizzuto, Jr., Supervising Environmental Analyst
  Guy Hoffman, Environmental Biologist
  Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (CT DEP)
  79 Elm Street • Hartford. CT 06106-5127
  Phone 860/424-3715 " Fax 860/424-4055
  email: emest.pizzuto@po.state d.us
  Programmatic Elements
  UMS of MMMMMiwnt
  WtthkiovmB water quality
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
                                  targeted (i.e., sites selected for specif c purpose) (special
                                  projects, specific river basins and watersheds, and
                                  comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                  fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (special
                                  projects, specific river basins and watersheds, and
                                  comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                  probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                  probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (comprehensive use
                                  throughout jurisdiction beginning in 2002 and 2003)
                                  rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                  other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (State based determinations)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology
     fully supporting for 305{b)
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
      listed for 303(d)*
      number of sites sampled*
      number of miles assessed per site*
                  5,830

                   5,484
                    961
                    764
                    195
                     n/a
                    311
              site specific
                                 961 Miles Assessed for Biology
"My supporting* for 305(b)
"eatially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
The existing 303(d) doesn't use mileage, although it contains a subset of partially/non-supporting stream miles listed in the 305(b).
These numbers will be the same in the next report. Of the 311 sites sampled, 221 were sampled by the state, 30 by contractors and
60 by volunteers. The number of miles assessed per site is site specific and varies according to land use, geomorphology, etc.
CONNECTICUT: Program Summary
              December 2002
                                                                                                          3-26

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
 ALU designation baaie

 ALU designation* In state
                           Class System (A.B.C)

                           "Fish and Wildlife Habitat" is the only ALU designation, but narrative
•tor quality Standard*        criteria are provided for "benthic invertebrates which inhabit lotic
                           waters" for classifications AA, A, and B while more general descriptive
                           narrative is provided for C and D.
•tan*
jaltty
  Narrative Btocrttarta In WQ8


  Numeric BtocrlUria In WQS    none
                           Procedures used to support narrative biocriteria located in SOPs for
                           ambient biological monitoring
  MWMOfl
  into
 Wfttl Qtnftf AflVlffOfUlMntM
 data te.a, tadcity testing and
 chemical specific criteria)
                               assessment of aquatic resources

                               cause and effect determinations

                               permitted discharges

                               monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

                               watershed based management
  ynoi of bltrtttoiiiTiontf
  biocrjUiSfia in making
  managanwnt decisions
  regarding restoration of
  aquatic resources to a
  designated ALU
                           Bioassessment/biocnteria have been used in specific cases to
                           determine if formerly impaired waters are meeting ALU.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number of reference aKas
                           12 total
  Reference site
  determinations
                               site-specific

                               paired watersheds

                               regional (aggregate of sites)

                               professional judgment
                               other: within major drainage basin
  Reference site criteria
                           Least impacted by human influence. Size: ± one stream order or one
                           order of magnitude in drainage area with similar gradient.
 Characterization of
 reference ettm within a
 PBtt,io$aicontext ...
                               historical conditions

                               least disturbed sites

                               gradient response

                               professional judgment

                               other:
  Stream etntiftcatlon within
  regional reference
  condUona
                               ecoregions (or some aggregate)

                               elevation

                               stream type

                               multivariate grouping

                               jurisdictiona! (i.e.. statewide)

                               other: major drainage basin, gradient
 Additional Information
                               reference sites linked to ALU

                               reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards

                               some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                               conditions
CONNECTICUT: Program Summary
                                             December 2002
                                                                                                 3-27

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                    benthos (<100 samples/year single season, multiple sites - watershed level;
                                    multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad coverage for watershed level)

                                    fish (<100 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)

                                    periphyton (<100 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)


                                    other: phytoplankton and macrophytes (<100 sample/year; single season, multiple
                                    sites - not at watershed level)
      sampling gear
                              Rectangular kick net, 1.5 ft. wide, 800-900 micron mesh. Surber and multiple plate
                              samplers used prior to 1989. Rock baskets used for special projects.

t. •
, 1 ; '
*f






'••}£•
'•,•!'•' •
;-n,v
\X" '
, ;;•£;- ;
• ' t|j^A
habttat selection
sutsampte size
taxonomy :
sampling gaar
habitat selection
ssnipte ptttpsssftg
subsampte
taxonomy

sampling gear
habitat selection
":.r~ ~s '.'.',''
sampte processing
taxonomy ' . •.
ittat ttjMMmMit
richest habitat, riffle/run (cobble)
200 count
benthic identification is primarily to species
backpack electrofisher, pram unit (tote barge)
multihabitat
length measurement, anomalies
none
species

natural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.)
riffle/run (cobble)
chlorophyll at phaeophytin; biomass; taxonomic identification; semi-quantitative field-
; based rapid periphyton survey
all algae, species level if possible
; visual based; performed with bioassessments
 Qttallty tt«ur«nc« program'.
 ''       •    '
                             standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and training
                             for biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
  Data Analysis and Interpretation
 Data an«ly*l* tool* and
 •MtttfajkrftM. '
 MlvvnMw..
                                  summary tables, illustrative graphs

                                  parametric ANOVAs
                                  multivariate analysis

                                  biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)

                                  disturbance gradients

                                  other:
      Into untttesa scorns

      defWng Impairment hi
      a ntuttimcblc indsx
                              Use scoring criteria table from 1989 Rapid Bioassessment Protocol (RBP) guidance
                              (Figure 6.3-4). CT DEP recognizes the need to refine scoring criteria and impairment
                              thresholds.

                              Use biological condition table from 1989 RBP guidance (Figure 6.3-4): >54% of
                              reference score = non-impaired for purposes of 30S(b)/303(d)
EvtfuiHoH of ixifuiiimu <
                                   repeat sampling (duplicate samples at reference sites)

                                   precision

                                   sensitivity

                                   bias

                                   accuracy
      Retrieval and analysis
                              Initial sample data is entered into an Excel spreadsheet then transferred to MS Access.
                              Currently working on migration from MS Access to STORET.

                              Spreadsheet used for metric calculation. Formerly used SAS.  Currently shopping for
                              less expensive statistical package.
CONNECTICUT: Program Summary
                                                December ?002
                                                                                                              3-28

-------
 DELAWARE
 Contact Information

 Ellen Dickey, Environmental Scientist
 Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC)
 89 Kings Highway • Dover. DE 19901
 Phone 302/739-4771
 email: ellen.dickev@state,de.us
 DNREC Surface Water Quality Management homepage:
 http:/Avww.dnrec.5tate.de.us/dnrec2000/Divisions/Water/WaterQualit¥/WQM.htm
 Program Description

 Water quality and biological data for Delaware's surface waters are collected under Delaware's Ambient Surface
 Water Quality Monitoring Program and Biological Monitoring Program within the Delaware Department of Natural
 Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC). Several active citizen monitoring programs have also been
 developed throughout Delaware that augment the data collected by DNREC. The purpose of the Ambient Surface
 Water Quality Monitoring Program is to collect data on the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of
 Delaware's surface waters. The information collected under this program is used to:

 •   Describe general water quality conditions in the State;
 •   Identify long-term trends in water quality;
 *   Determine the suitability of Delaware's waters for water supply, recreation, fish and aquatic life, and other
     uses;
 •   Monitor achievement of water quality standards;
 •   Identify and prioritize high quality and degraded waters;
 •   Support Total Maximum Daily Load Program; and
     Evaluate the overall success of Delaware's water quality management efforts.
 DNREC recognizes the need to use its personnel and financial resources efficiently and effectively. To mat end,
 surface water quality monitoring is conducted in a manner that focuses available resources on the Whole Basin
 Management concept. This program calls for the Department, in partnership with other governmental entities,
 private interests, and all stakeholders,  to focus its resources on specific watersheds and basins (groups of
 watersheds) within specific time frames.  The Whole Basin Management Program in Delaware operates on a 5-
 year rotating basis.  In addition to the planning and preliminary assessment steps, Whole Basin Management will
 include intensive basin monitoring,  comprehensive analyses, management option evaluations, and resource
 protection strategy development. Public participation and ongoing implementation activities will occur throughout
 the Whole Basin Management process. This new approach enables DNREC to comprehensively monitor and
 assess the condition of  the State's environment with due consideration to all facets of the ecosystem.

 Biological assessment monitoring is one of five major components of Delaware's Surface Water Quality Monitoring
 Program.  The biological monitoring program is a major tool used  by the Department to assess the conditions of
 surface waters. It includes the assessment of indigenous biological communities and physical habitats of streams,
 ponds, estuaries and wetlands. The goal of the program is to establish numeric biological criteria in State water
 quality standards to complement both existing chemical criteria and other assessments focused on fish tissue
 monitoring and bioassay testing. Standard methods have been developed and tested for assessing the biological
 community and habitat quality of nontidal streams, and draft numeric criteria are under development. Efforts over
 the next few years will focus on the development of methods for assessing estuaries and ponds and for assessing
 the quality and quantity  of wetlands.


 Documentation and Further Information

 Sfafe of Delaware 2000 Watershed Assessment 305(b) Report and 1998 303(d) List:
 http://www.dnrec.stale.de.usA*>ater2000/Sections/Walershed/TlVIDL/3Q5and303.ritm
 DE Surface Water Quality  Standards: http://www.dnrec.state.de.us/water/wqs1999.pdf
 Sfate of Delaware Fiscal Year 2000 Surface Water Quality Monitoring Plan:
 http://www.dnrec.state.de.us/dnrec2000/Librarv/Water/swmQnpro.pdf
 Division of Water Resources 2000 Annual Report: http://www.dnrec.state.de.usA«ater2000/Public/20QOAnnualReport/index.htm


DELAWARE: Program Summary                    December 2002                                           3-29

-------
  DELAWARE
  Contact Information
  Ellen Dickey, Environmental Scientist
  Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC)
  89 Kings Highway • Dover, DE 19901
  Phone 302/739-4771
  email: ellen.dickev@state.de.us
Programmatic Elements
wtthht owraA water quality
                                  problem identification (screening)
                                  nonpoint source assessments
                                  monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                  ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
                                  promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                  support of antidegradation
                                  evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                  TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                  other:
                                  targeted (i.e., sites selected tor specific purpose) (special
                                  projects only)
                                  fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (specific
                                  riverbssins or watersheds)
                                  probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                  probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                                  rotating basin
                                  other: probabilistic by specific county fused comprehensively
                                  throughout state)
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (determined using RF3)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
      fully supporting for 305(b)*
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b>*
      listed for 303(d)*
      number of sites sampled (1991 - 2001)"
      number of miles assessed per site
                                                   2,506

                                                    1.778
                                                   2,506
                                                     741
                                                    1,765
                                                    1.173
                                                     195
                                                                  2,506 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                                                       "fully supporting" for 305(b)
                                                                       "partially/non-supporting'for 305(b)
*AII of DE's streams were assessed for the 2000 305(b) Report. These numbers represent the miles assessed for aquatic life
support using a combination of physical, chemical, and biological data.
"These sampling stations were EMAP based. Of the 195 total sites sampled, 49 sites have not yet been assessed. Of the 146
sites assessed, 27 are fully supporting and 119 are partially/non-supporting.
DELAWARE: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
3-30

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
 ALU designation baate  7 •     Single Aquatic Life Use and Warm Water vs. Cold Water
                              Two designations: 1) Fish, Aquatic Life, and Wildlife; 2) Cold Water
                              Fish
   I rtMlfimftfMM. In MtittJi-
Numeric Koci^ite-lnjyiiaSS:1"
                              none - Procedures used to support general aquatic life statements in
                              WQS are those developed by the Mid Atlantic Coastal Streams
                              (MACS) Workgroup.
                              Draft numeric criteria are under development.

 data iHllHllllf
 blocrittriai In wwkln^.  ~°
 management ftocMons
 regarding iMtonttoR of
 aquatic nwourcm to a
 designated ALU
                            Some streams have been placed on the State's 303(d) list for poor
                            biology/habitat.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Numlwo110 out of 140, no point
                              source discharge, no known direct discharge from animal feedlots or
                              urban runoff, professional judgment.
 Characterization of
 rafermc* sltet within a
 rtgkmal context
                                 historical conditions
                                 least disturbed sites
                                 gradient response
                                 professional judgment
                                 other:
regional reference

          C -•' " ,' ',"' ';':-/;J ,'*»;; jSi-jJ.V-'



          '   '''"-' •'•' • —:^SH3;iB;l;;,"
                                  ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                  elevation
                                  stream type
                                  multivariate grouping
                                  jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                  other:
 ' Additio
                              S
                                 reference sites linked to ALU
                                 reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                 some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                 conditions
DELAWARE: Program Summary
                                              December 2002
3-31

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (<100 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
                                   fish
                                   periphyton
                                   other:
  Benthos        '• • :
      sampling gear, '.
      habitat setecflon
      taxonomy-
                             D-frame and kick net (1 meter); 500-600 micron mesh
                             riffle/run (cobble) in Piedmont ecoregion, and multihabitat in Coastal Plain
                             ecoregion
                             200 count
                             genus
 HaMMMMMimritt
                             visual based; performed with bioassessments
 Quality assurance program
                             standard operating procedures, periodic meetings and training for biologists,
                             sorting proficiency checks, specimen archival, and a QAPP for biological work is
                             under development
 Data analysis tools and)
 methods    .
Data Analysis and Interpretation
                                 summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                 parametric ANOVAs
                                 multivariate analysis
                                  biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                  disturbance gradients
                                  other:

                              95" percentile of all sites

                                67% of reference is impaired to some degree
 Evaluation of performance
 '''''''  '••••••••:•• ••
                                 repeat sampling (replicate samples are collected at every 10
                                 sites by the same team, at the same reach or an adjacent
                                 reach)
                                 precision
                                 sensitivity
                                 bias
                                 accuracy
 Biological data
      Retrieval and analysis
                             MS Access and Excel
                             Excel
DELAWARE: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                                                           3-32

-------
 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
 Contact Information
 Nicoline Shullerbrandt, Water Quality Division
 Department of Health (DC DOH)
 51 N Street, NE, 5th Floor" Washington, DC 20002
 Phone 202/535-2194 • Fax 202/535-1363
 email: nicoline.shulterbrandt@dc.gov
 DOH Water Quality Division homepage:
 http://dcheaHh.dc.QOv/services/administration offlces/environmental/services2/water division/index.shtm
  Program Description

  The mission of DC's Department of Health (DC DOH), Environmental Health Administration, Water Quality Division
  is to restore and protect the surface and ground waters of the District of Columbia. The program, established under
  the authorities of the DC Water Pollution Control Act and the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), has three principal
  components:

      Water Quality Control
      The Water Quality Control component fulfills the function of policy planning as well as regulatory control. In
      addition, it conducts special studies on pollutant fate and transport to identify probable sources and impacts,
      river/stream sediment and water column quality not covered by ambient monitoring, wet weather nonpoint
      source runoff quantity and quality, and discharge-related facility inspections. It also tracks permit violations.

      Water Quality Monitoring
      Water Quality Monitoring functions encompass waterbody assessment; collection of ambient water quality
      data; periodic fish tissue analysis for parameters of concern such as PCB, chlordane, and DDT; periodic
      submerged aquatic vegetation survey; and bioassessment of wetlands and river fringes.

      Environmental Laboratory
      The Environmental Laboratory is charged with the analysis  of samples for a variety of chemical parameters.
  Documentation and Further Information

  District of Columbia 2000 305(b) Report, Executive Summary.
  http://dchealth dc.gov/services/administration offices/environmental/services2/water division/pdf/00-305bexsumm.
  shtm

  District of Columbia Water Quality Standards:
  http://dchealth.dc.aov/services/administration offices/environmental/services2/water division/pdf/WaterQualitvSta
  ndards.shtm

  District of Columbia Water Quality Monitoring Regulations (Chapter 19 of DC Municipal Regulations):
  http://dchealth.dc.qov/services/administration offices/environmental/services2/water division/pdf/WaterQualltvMon
  itoring.sntm
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Program Summary         December 2002                                         3-33

-------
  DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
  Contact Information
  Nicoline Shulterbrandt, Water Quality Division
  Department of Health (DC DOH)
  51 N Street, NE, 5* Floor" Washington, DC 20002
  Phone 202/535-2194 " Fax 202/535-1363
  email: nicoline.shuiterbrandt@clc.gov
  Programmatic Elements
  llWHI OT PiOttMHH9Sfl98flt'
  within ov.nUlw.torqu.my
  program
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALL) determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
 dMlgm
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects only)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion. or statewide
rotating basin
other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (Heterminact using slate based GIS coverage)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology
     fully supporting for 305(b)
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
     listed for 303(d)
     number of sites sampled
     number of miles assessed per site
                     39


                     39
                      0
                     39
                unknown
                unknown
                unknown
                                 39 Miles Assessed for Biology
-fully supporting" for 305(b)
"partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Program Summary
              December 2002
                               3-34

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
 ALU designation bMto        Single Aquatic Life Use
                             One designation: Protection and propagation offish, shellfish and
                             wildlife
                In ^BmfiL
water quality atandairte
  Narrathw Biocriteria In WQS
                            Formal/informal numeric procedures are used to support narrative
                            biocriteria
  Nunwrte Btocriteria In WQS    none
  HI iHte^HhtM aSSSSainaitte
  with other •iivlronfMntal
  data (e.g., toxWty testing and
  chemical specfffc criteria)
                                assessment of aquatic resources
                                cause and effect determinations
                                permitted discharges
                                monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                watershed based management
  U*«*of btoaMewmentf
  biocriteria In making
          mtdwMora
         j rastonttton of
  aquatic IWOUTCM to a
  designated ALU
                             unknown
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number of reference tltes
                            2 total
  determination*
                                site-specific
                                paired watershed
                                regional (aggregate of sites)
                                professional judgment
                                other:
  Reference site criteria
                            DC DOM does not have reference site criteria.  All streams in DC are
                            contaminated. DC DOH compares streams to reference streams in
                            Prince Georges and Montgomery Counties in Maryland.
  Characterization of
  itfaflvftpa.titea within a.
  regional context
  Information not provided
                                historical conditions
                                least disturbed sites
                                gradient response
                                professional judgment
                                other:
 Stream stratification wKhbi
 rafllonal iviaiwico .
 conditions
                                ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                elevation
                                stream type
                                multivariate grouping
                                jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                other:

                                 reference sites linked to ALL!
                                 reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                 some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                 conditions
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Program Summary
                                             December 2002
                                                                                                     3-35

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (<100 samples/year; single observation, limited sampling)
                                   fish (<100 samples/year, single observation, limited sampling)
                                   periphyton
                                   other: phytoplankton and zooplankton (<100 samples/year; single
                                   observation, limited sampling)
      sampBng gear            D-frame. kick net (1 meter); mesh size information not provided
      habftat selection           riffle/run (cobble)
      subsample size           100 count
      taxonomy                family
 Fish
      sampling gear            backpack electrofisher
      habitat selection           pool/glide, riffle/run (cobble)
      sample processing         length measurement, biomass - individual
      sUbsaiApte               none
      taxonomy                species
                              hydrogeomorphology; performed with bioassessments
 Quality MSuranc* program
 •tetmnts
                              standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
                              training for biologists
 Data Analysis and
; pata analysis tools and
                           Interpretation
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
 PMiitfilWtnC tnflMnOWS
  (::   transforming mettles
  ::    into unHJess scores
     • dsftrifiQ frfipabirant In
                 index
                              Information not provided

                              Information not provided
'  .-.,  deflrilno biKMtfnuent in
     amuWvariatarixlex
                              Infomiation not provided
 £vatoatfonofpnfonnance

 information not provided
                                   repeat sampling
                                   precision
                                   sensitivity
                                   bias
                                   accuracy
      Retrieval and analysis
                              paper files only
                              data retrieved from paper files
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                           3-36

-------
 FLORIDA
 Contact Information

 Russel Frydenborg, Environmental Administrator
 Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP)
 2600 Blair Stone Road « Tallahassee. FL 32399-2400
 Phone 850/921-9821 • Fax 850/922-4614
 email: russel.frvdenborq@dep.state.fl.us
 FDEP 8/oasssssmenf homepage: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/bioassess/index.htrn
 Program Description

 Biological sampling has been one component of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's (FDEP)
 overall monitoring strategy since the early 1970s.  The Bioassessment Program, in its current manifestation, has
 been in existence since 1992, in response to the need for tools that would detect and characterize the nature and
 extent of nonpoint source pollution (sensu the 319 program).  The primary goal of FDEP's bioassessment activities
 are to determine the biological health, or degree of impairment, in the State's surface waters. The biological
 assessment results are heavily utilized by a number of FDEP programs for making  informed environmental
 decisions:
 •   Total Maximum Daily Load (303(d)) program - determining the impairment status of waterbodies for potential
     inclusion on the 303(d) list
     The National  Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program - determining effectiveness of
     discharge permit limits
     Nonpoint Source Program - targeting areas with nonpoint source problems and determining the effectiveness
     of Best Management Practices
     Rotating Basin Assessment program  - overall assessment of all human activities in a watershed
 •   Mine Reclamation program - determining the success of mitigation efforts
     FDEP's Division of Waste Management - ensuring that clean up efforts are sufficient to protect aquatic life
     adjacent to waste clean up sites (e.g., RCRA).

 Biological data are used in Florida's 305(b) report as one of the key pieces of Aquatic Life Use Support (ALUS)
 information for determining if a waterbody meets its designated use. Bioassessment data are also used  for
 establishing the impairment status of a waterbody for 303(d) listing purposes.

 After recalibration of bioassessment metrics and indices (currently underway), it is anticipated that Florida's water
 quality standards (Rule 62.302 Florida Administrative Code) will be revised accordingly. Although the primary
 target community for the bioassessment program is currently benthic macroinvertebrates, Florida is also  working
 on potential assessment methods that use algal and vascular plant assemblages.  While multimetric biological
 indices are currently complete for streams, rivers, and lakes, it is anticipated that ongoing index development for
 wetlands and estuaries will be finalized  over the next several  years.

 The most important recent accomplishment of the Bioassessment Program has been the inclusion of the Stream
 Condition Index, the BioRecon,  and Lake  Condition Index as  impairment indicator tools in Florida's Impaired
 Waters Rule (IWR), Rule 62-303, FAC.  The IWR is a new administrative code that provides detailed  specifications
 for how surface waters are determined to  be impaired for Section 303(d) listing.  Future challenges include
 incorporating the bioassessment tools into a Statewide probabilistic survey design,  as welt as continuing  to meet
 the increasing demands for biological tools and data.
 Documentation and Further Information

 2000 Florida Water Quality Assessment 305(b) Report, http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/305b/index.htm

 Numerous technical reports are available online at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/labs/reports/index.htm
 and http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/bioassess/pubs.htm

 For an online collection of FDEP standard operating procedures, go to: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/labs/qa/sops.htm

 Surface Water Quality Classifications: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/surfacewater/index.htm


FLORIDA: Program Summary                      December 2002                                          3-37

-------
  FLORIDA
  Contact Information
  Russel Frydenborg, Environmental Administrator
  Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP)
  2600 Blair Stone Road • Tallahassee. FL 32399-2400
  Phone 850/921-9821 • Fax 850/922-4614
  email: russel.frvdenborg@dep.state.fl.us
  Programmatic Elements
 within ovml water quality
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALL) determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other: biocriteria development
 AppicaMa monitoring

targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose)
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin (5-year rotation, comprehensive use throughout
jurisdiction)
other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                      51,858
 (determined using walertxxfy identification- segment of stream,
 generally 5 mile increments)
 Total perennial miles                                 22,993
 Total miles assessed for biology                4,795
     fully supporting for 305(b)                           4,365
     partiallymon-supporting for 305(b)                     430
     listed for 303(d)                                    430
     number of sites sampled (over 2 years)                 959
     number of miles assessed per site                       5
                                 4,795 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                       -fully supporting" for 30S(b)
                                       "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
FLORIDA: Program Summary
              Docembor 2002
                                                                                                           3-38

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
                               Single aquatic life use
                               One designation: propagation of a healthy, well balanced fish and
                               wildlife community
                          £!.]  Procedures used to support narrative biocriteria located in FDEP's
                               Standard Operating Procedures
                               Numeric biocriteria located in Rule 62-302 Florida Administrative
       	   , _...    ,	   Code - "Shannon-Weaver diversity shall not be reduced more than
       '' ^'ffir.-.". "-:Klrpi:r::£f:Ryi  25% of background conditions" *
                                   assessment of aquatic resources
                                   cause and effect determinations
                                   permitted discharges
                                   monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                   watershed based management
                               TMDLs, restoration/mitigation studies, BMP effectiveness studies,
                               discharge permit renewal
"Florida has made substantial progress in developing new multimetric indices for streams (Stream Condition Index and BioRecon),
lakes (Lake Condition Index), and wetlands for eventual inclusion in the Florida Administrative Code. When the new indices are
adopted as water quality standards, the role of Shannon-Weaver diversity as a numeric standard will be re-evaluated.

  Reference Site/Condition Development

                               150 total

  Reference yltecrttejt* •
Cruimctertzathmof   ;•"?
rafe«nc«*Jtos within*
 AddWonatlnfo
   f      »   *

                                   site-specific
                                   paired watersheds
                                   regional (aggregate of sites)
                                   professional judgment
                                   other:
                             least impaired by human activities in a region, optimal habitat, benign
                             land use in watershed, uncontaminated water quality, undisturbed
                             hydrology
                                   historical conditions
                                   least disturbed sites
                                   gradient response (for recalibration of existing indexes)
                                   professional judgment
                                   other:
                                   ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                   elevation
                                   stream type
                                   multivariate grouping
                                   jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                   other:
                                 reference sites linked to ALU
                                 reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                 some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                 conditions
FLORIDA: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                                                          3-39

-------
  Field and  Lab Methods
   •• •H'n™1?i—--^-—;-i'—'—'——r_i •" ''<>''' £
                                    benthos (100-500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed
                                    level)                    T
                                    fish
                                    periphyton (100-500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - not at
                                    watershed level)
                                    other: phytoplankton, macrophytes (100-500 samples/year; single
                                    observation, limited sampling)
                               d-frame, dipnet (500-600 micron mesh), multiplate (Hester-Dendys)
                               multihabitat (snags, roots, leaf paflks, aquatic vegetation)
                               100-count target
                               species level (where possible)
                               natural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.), collect by
                               hand artificial substrate: periphyfometer, microslides or other suitable substratum
                               multihabitat
                               chlorophyll a/phaeophytin, taxonomic identification
                               all algae, species level (diatoms to variety level)	
                               visual based; performed with bioafeessments	
                               standard operating procedures, qOality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
                               training for biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen
                               archival, habitat assessment tests[ sampling field audits, sampling variability
                               studies, performance testing program for bioassessment
gMifeMHHMiMml^: ':'••$
                               s
 Data Analysis and Interpretation
                                    summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                    parametric ANOVAs
                                    multivariate analysis
                                    biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                    disturbance gradients
                                    other:
                         ;;     25th percentile of reference population

                       ft)'   ;, quadrasection of best score
                                    repeat sampling (same team, same reach; different teams in
                                    same reach)
                                    precision (coefficient of variation)
                                    sensitivity
                                    bias
                                    accuracy (species accumulation)
                               custom Oracle-based program. "S-BIO"
                               custom Oracle-based program, "S-BIO"
FLORIDA: Program Summary
                                                   December 9002
                                                                                                                3-40

-------
 GEORGIA
 Contact Information

 Kathy Methier, Ambient Monitoring Unit Manager
 Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GA DNR)
 4220 International Partway, Suite 101 • Atlanta, GA 30354
 Phone 404/675-6236 « Fax 404/675-6244
 email: kalhy methier@dnr.state.aa.us
 GA DNR Environmental Protection Division: http://www.dnr.state.ga.us/dnr/environ/
  Program Description

  The Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GA DNR) Environmental Protection Division (EPD) monitoring
  program integrates physical, chemical, and biological monitoring to provide information for water quality, use
  attainment assessments, and basin planning. EPD monitors the surface waters of the state to collect baseline and
  trend data, document existing conditions, study impacts of specific discharges, determine improvements resulting
  from upgraded water pollution control plants, support enforcement actions, establish wasteload allocations for new
  and existing facilities, verify water pollution control plant compliance, document water use impairment and reasons
  for problems causing less than full support of designated water uses, and develop TMDLs. Intensive surveys;
  lake, coastal, biological, fish tissue, toxic substance, and trend monitoring; and facility compliance sampling are the
  major monitoring tools used by EPD.
  Long-term, trend, and ambient monitoring of streams at strategic locations throughout Georgia, was initiated by
  EPD during the late 1960s. This work was and continues to be accomplished to a large extent through cooperative
  agreements with federal, state, and local agencies who collect samples from groups of stations at specific, fixed
  locations throughout the year.
  In 1995, EPD adopted and implemented significant changes to the strategy for trend monitoring in Georgia. The
  changes were implemented to support the River Basin Management Planning program. The number of fixed
  stations statewide was reduced in order to focus resources for sampling and analysis in a particular group of
  basins in any one year in accordance with the basin planning schedule. This approach provides the framework for
  identifying, assessing, and  prioritizing water resource issues, developing implementation strategies, and providing
  opportunities for targeted, cooperative actions to reduce pollution, enhance aquatic habitat, and provide a
  dependable water supply.
  The Watershed Planning and Monitoring Section of the EPD Water Protection Branch performs the following tasks:
  •   Conducts monitoring of Georgia streams, rivers, lakes and estuaries for use with wasteload allocations and to
     determine compliance with water quality standards;
     Develops River Basin Management Plans for river basins in Georgia;
     Conducts water quality modeling for wasteload allocations, water use classifications, and water quality
     standards in Georgia; and
     Collects samples of facility discharges for laboratory testing of samples.
  Currently, reference site selection and biocriteria development are being carried out under contract with Columbus
  State University. The project is in Phase III with projected completion in 2003.  The final phase, Phase IV, is
  projected to be completed in 2004.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Georgia's 2000 305(b) Report, Water Quality in Georgia, 1998-1999; the Final Georgia 2000 305(b}/303(d) List
  Documents, including Summary of Changes from the 2000 to 2002 305(b)/303(d) List, can be found under
  Georgia's Environment. Water Quality in the Table of Contents at the following site:
  http://www.dnr.state.aa.us/dnr/environ/

  2000. DRAFT Standard Operating Procedures for Freshwater Macroinvertebrate Biological Assessment. Georgia
  Department of Natural Resources, Water Protection Branch, Atlanta, GA.
GEORGIA: Program Summary                      December 2002                                          3-41

-------
  GEORGIA
  Contact Information
  Kathy Methier. Ambient Monitoring Unit Manager
  Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GA DNR)
  4220 International Parkway, Suite 101  • Atlanta, GA 30354
  Phone 404/675-6236 • Fax 404/675-6244
  email: kathv methief@dnr.state.ga.us
  Programmatic Elements
  UM» of Mo
 wtth!n overall water quality
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocnteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
 AppBcabtomonKorlne
 design*
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose)
(specific river basins or watersheds)
fixed station (i.e.. water quality monitoring stations) (specific
river basins or watersheds, and comprehensive use throughout
jurisdiction)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (determined uang state based coverage)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
      fully supporting for 305(b)
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
      listed for 303(d)
      number of sites sampled (in 2000)
      number of miles assessed per site
                 70,150

                  44,056
                  1,416
                     477
                     939

                     153
                   varies
                                  1,416 Miles Assessed for Biology
"fully supporting" for 305(b)
"partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
"In 2000, 72 stations were sampled and a total of 477 miles were assessed as fully supporting for 305(b) (6.6 miles
assessed/station); 75 stations were sampled and a total of 799 miles were assessed as partially supporting (10.7 miles
assessed/station); 6 stations were sampled and 140 miles were assessed as not supporting (23.3 miles assessed/station). This
results in a total of 153 stations and 1.416 stream miles assessed in 2000 (9.25 miles assessed/station). The stream miles listed
above are not divided into those monitored for biology versus chemistry because 305(b) reporting requirements use both types of
data. The sampling length per site varies and the length of stream represented  by each sample is determined by the surrounding
hydrography.
GEORGIA: Program Summary
                                                 Decombor2002
                                                                                                            3-42

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALL)) Designations and Decision-Making
 ALU designation basis        Fishery Based Uses
  ALU designations In state
  watsr quality standards
                             Three designations: Coastal fishing; fishing, propagation offish,
                             shellfish, game, and other aquatic life; primary and secondary trout
                             waters
  Narrative Btocrlterta In WQS
  Niinwnc Biocrltetia In WQS ^
                             Procedures used to support narrative biocriteria are located in the
                             Environmental Protection Division's SOPs for macroinvertebrates
                             and DNR/Wildlife Resources Division's IBI protocols for fish
  Usss of bJoasssssment ttta
  w«h<
  data (e.g., loxtafty testing and
         Ispecrftecrtterta)
   I other en vtronrnsntal i
data (e.g.,
chemicals!
assessment of aquatic resources
cause and effect determinations
permitted discharges
monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
watershed based management
  Us** of bloassessment/
  management decisions
  regarding restoration of
  aquatic resources to a
  designated ALU
                             Fish IBI and macroinvertebrate assessments were conducted to
                             evaluate approximately 80 previously 303(d)-listed sites in the last
                             two years. While some sites were removed from the list others,
                             found to be impaired due to (clean) sediment deposition, remained
                             on the list.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number of reference sttas
                             Reference site selection is under development
  Reference site
  determinations
                                 site-specific
                                 paired watersheds
                                 regional (aggregate of sites)
                                 professional judgment
                                 other:
  Reference site criteria
                             Columbus State University is using several criteria for selecting
                             reference sites, including minimum overall habitat score, managed
                             land, urban land, minimum forested riparian zone width, forested
                             riparian zone in catchment, silviculture activity, and point source
                             discharges.  Reference sites would be defined as least-disturbed
                             according to these criteria.
  Characterization of ^
 : reference sites wBttn »
 ••: regional context ::->•
                                 historical conditions
                                 least disturbed sites
                                 gradient response
                                 professional judgment
                                 other
  Strewn stfBtlflcation
  19910110] fSwfSRCS). "'
  conditions    .  - ; •.
                                 ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                 elevation
                                 stream type
                                 multivariate grouping
                                 jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                 other:
  AddHkmallnfb
                                 reference sites linked to ALU
                                 reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                 some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                 conditions
GEORGIA: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                                                           3-43

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                    benthos (100-500 samples/year, single season, multiple sites -
                                    watershed level)
                                    fish (100-500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites -
                                    watershed level)
                                    periphyton
                                    other
  Bentnoe
      sampling gear
      habtat selection
      subsamplestze
      taxonomy
                             collect by hand and D-frame; 500-600 micron mesh
                             multihabitat
                             200 count
                             genus
 n*h
      sampling gear =
     , habitat selection
      sample processing
      subsampte
  >    taxonomy
                             seine, backpack electrofisher, pram unit (tote barge); 3/16" and 1/4" mesh
                             Sample all habitats within a sample reach that is 35X the mean stream width.
                             Habitat assessments are broken out between riffle/run and glide/pool based
                             on the ecoregion in which the sample is located.
                             biomass - batch, anomalies
                             none
                             species
 HniUn asseaatnaflta
                             visual based and zig-zag pebble count; performed with bioassessments
 Quality aaeunmce program
                             standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings
                             and training for biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks
  Data Analysis and Interpretation
               ootoand
 inattioos
                              UD
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other.
 MuWmetitethi
i ]••  : transforming metrics
 <    IntounltfesrscWBs
    ; defining fr
b
                  KfcBf,
                              under development
                             under development
      doftalny liiipainitont in
      amuMivartateWex
                             under development
 Evaluation of iwrfonrane*
                  '      ':
                                   repeat sampling
                                   precision
                                   sensitivity
                                   bias
                                   accuracy
 Biological data
      Storage
      Retrieval and analysis
                             EOAS and Excel
                             EOAS
GEORGIA: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                          3-44

-------
 HA WAN
 Contact Information

 Katina Henderson, Water Quality Management Planner
 Hawai'i State Department of Health (HIDOH)
 919 Ala Moana Boulevard, Room 312 • Honolulu, HI 96814
 Phone 808/587-4337 • Fax 808/587-4370
 email: khenderson@eh a .health .state. hi. us
 HIDOH Environmental Planning Office homepage: http://www.hawaii.gov/tiealth/eh/epo
 Program Description

 The primary objective of the Hawai'i State Department of Health (HIDOH) Bioassessment Program is to augment
 the commonly used physical and chemical water quality assessments performed (during ambient monitoring, use
 attainability studies, and other investigations) for classification, evaluation and regulation of water bodies.  The
 program primarily utilizes the Hawai'i Stream Bioassessment Protocol (HSBP) 3.01 developed by Mike Kido and
 the Hawai'i Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)  Visual Assessment protocol for characterization of
 streams. HIDOH currently uses these protocols in conjunction with water quality data to establish TMDLs in the
 State of Hawai'i. In the future the HSBP and the Hawai'i NRCS protocol will be used in conjunction with physical
 and chemical water quality data to classify streams and determine exceedances of narrative criteria.

 The HSBP includes both habitat and biotic metrics. The general approach of the  HSBP is to compare measures of
 community characteristics and habitat of a study stream to a minimally impacted ecoregional reference condition.
 An Index of Biotic Integrity,  currently focused on fish, composes the biotic portion  of the protocol.  Much of the
 basis for evaluation is the presence or absence of native taxa  and the introduction of non-native species.  Low
 abundance or low diversity of native fauna suggests diminished biological integrity. The habitat portion of the
 HSBP includes standard habitat metrics, including bank stability, embeddedness, canopy cover and presence of
 fine and coarse organic material. The State of Hawai'i will soon be working with USGS to census the
 macroinvertebrate community in Hawai'i and develop metrics  for the Hawai'i Bioassessment Program, which will
 add a component to measure pollution tolerance. The macroinvertebrate community in Hawai'i is quite different
 from that of the mainland United States; therefore, the metric may be quite unlike  that of any other state.

 As a preliminary evaluation of sites and to compliment the HSBP habitat component, the Hawai'i NRCS Visual
 Assessment protocol is applied. This is a modified version of  the national NRCS visual assessment protocol.

 The State Water Quality Management Planner, along with a Stream Bioassessment Intern, primarily perform these
 assessments. Additionally, other scientists from HIDOH,  scientists from other local, state and federal agencies,
 local university students and professors, and skilled community members volunteer their time to help perform
 these protocols. The time demand of each task is dependent  upon the number of aquatic organisms in the
 stream, the size of the stream, and other local conditions. HIDOH currently sponsors training courses in the
 protocols to those with a scientific background on a limited basis.
 Documentation and Further Information

 excerpts from Hawai'i 2000 305(b) Report: http://www.hawaii.gov/health/eh/cwb/2000-305b/index.html

 Proposed 2001 revisions to Hawai'i Water Quality Standards, January 2002 Indicators of Environmental Quality
 Report: http://www.hawaii.aov/health/eh/epo/warev.htm

 Hawai'i Stream Bioassessment Protocol, Michael Kido, Version 3.01, January 2001:
 http://www.state.hi.us/dQh/eh/epo/kawa.pdf
HAWACI: Program Summary                      December 2002                                          3-45

-------
  HAWAN
  Contact Information
  Katina Henderson, Water Quality Management Planner
  Hawai'i State Department of Health (HIOOH)
  919 Ala Moana Boulevard, Room 312 • Honolulu, HI 96814
  Phone 808/587-4337 • Fax 808/587-4370
  email: khenderson@eha. health .stale. hi. us
  Programmatic Elements
  UMSDfMo
wsment
  wiihbi owvhui swrtw 4}iiwlty
                               UD
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambierht monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteha
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
                                    targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
                                    projects only)
                                    fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
                                    probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                    probabilistic by ecoregion, 
-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
                             Class System (A.B.C)
AL.U designations (n state
water quality standards :
                             Two designations: 1) Protection of native breeding stock, and 2)
                             Support and propagation of aquatic life
  Narrative Btocrtterta InWQS   under development
  Numeric Kocriterialn WQSi
                            under development- Hawaii is currently proposing to add numeric
                            biocriteria to WQS
;jUiiw,0f.-_-
 hi Integrated t
 wtth other environ
 datafe.a, toddty testing s
 chemical specific criteria}
                                assessment of aquatic resources
                                cause and effect determinations
                                permitted discharges
                                monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                watershed based management
  Mocrtterfa'ln making'  ,
 management daemon*.
  regarding rMtoration M
  aquatic fMourcm to*
                             none
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Numbar of raftranc* kites
                            3 total
  Raferwicatrto
                                site-specific
                                paired watersheds
                                regional (aggregate of sites)
                                professional judgment
                                other:
  Reference site criteria
                            Minimally impacted and most pristine. Always scores near 100%
                            when using the Hawai'i Stream Bioassessment Protocol no matter
                            when and where sampled.
  Charactertartlon of
                                historical conditions
                                least disturbed sites
                                gradient response
                                professional judgment
                                other:
  Str
         •flflntta
  regional reference
  conditions
ecoregions (or some aggregate) (the entire State of Hawai'i is
one ecoregion)
elevation
stream type
multivariate grouping
jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
other:
                                 reference sites linked to ALU
                                 reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                 some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                 conditions
HAWAI'I: Program Summary
                                             December 2002
                                                                                                     3-47

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                               UD
                                     benthos (Hawai'i will soon be working with USGS to census the
                                     macroinvertebrate community in Hawai'i and develop metrics)
                                     fish (< 100 samples/year: single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                     penphyton
                                     other:
     :. Uuconofiiy.
                               backback electrofisher and snorkel
                               multihabitat
                               length measurement and biomass - individual
                               selected species
                               species
 ' Utftfdflttt AAftAtfftmttHflfe
 :'\".-i' • •.
                               visual based, habitat availability, substrate embedded ness, Fine and Coarse
                               Paniculate Organic Matter (FPOWCPOM) characterization, velocity-depth
                               combinations, channel flow status, channel alteration, bank stability, riparian
                               vegetative zone width, riparian understory coverage, and percent native riparian
                               plant coverage; performed with biqassessments	
! '*" 'ii'ftfciiBi'o ri t^
 Moments
                               standard operating procedures, periodic meetings and training for biologists, and
                               taxonomic proficiency checks
  Data Analysis and Interpretation
  DateanaJysIs tools ami
".'.:]": I's'''  ' ' '       ' „•,"
    'S'>2?"
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
             TO^o metrics

                               under development

                               under development*
                                   repeat sampling
                                   precision
                                   sensitivity
                                   bias
                                   accuracy
 Blologkaldata
4!if;fSitorage '
                               Excel
                               Statistica
'The following are the proposed impairment thresholds:

                    Class 1a (mainly undeveloped, "unimpaired")
                                                                   Class 2a (mainly developed, "unimpaired")
  Habitat
  Biotic integrity
                    greater than or equal to 75% of reference condition    between 50% and 75% of reference condition
                    greater than or equal to 70% of reference condition    between 30% and 70% of reference condition
HAWAI'I: Program Summary
                                                  December 2002
                                                                                                             3-48

-------
 IDAHO
  Contact Information

  Cynthia Grafe, Water Quality Assessment Program Coordinator
  State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ)
  1410 North Milton • Boise, ID 63706
  Phone 208/373-0163 • Fax 208/373-0576
  email: cgrafe@dea.state.id us
  /DEC? Water Quality homepage: http://wvsw2.state.id.us/deqAMater/water1.htm
  Program Description

  The Idaho surface water program uses biological information extensively to determine use support and impairment. In 1993, the
  Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) implemented a rapid bioassessment program aimed at integrating biological
  and chemical monitoring with physical habitat assessment as a way of characterizing water quality and stream integrity.  This
  program, know as the Beneficial Use Reconnaissance Program (BURP), closely follows concepts and methods described in the
  Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers (USEPA 1999). The main purpose of BURP is to provide
  consistency in monitoring, collecting data, and reporting.  Specifically, biological along with physical, chemical, and landscape
  data are used to address the following objectives:

      Determine the degree of beneficial use support of the water body
      Determine the degree of biological integrity using biological information or other measures
  •    Compile descriptive information about the water body and data used in the assessment.

  IDEQ has formal monitoring and assessment methods in place for large rivers and small streams. Methods for lakes and
  reservoirs are in development. For rivers and streams, there are a total of 8 multimetric indices for benthic macroinvertebrates,
  periphyton, fish, habitat, and physicochemical measures.  Indices are integrated into attaining or non-attaining use support
  determinations. The integration uses a weight-of-evidence approach combined with individual minimum benchmarks for each
  assemblage and numeric criteria exceedances

  IDEQ has several plans to improve the current monitoring and assessment program.  A draft statewide monitoring strategy will be
  introduced in July 2002. Future plans include incorporating a probabilistic monitoring design for screening purposes as well as
  adding methods for other water body types (e.g.,  wetlands, intermittent streams, springs, etc.). Implementation of these plans is
  dependent on agency priorities and available resources.


  Documentation  and Further Information

  Idaho's 1998 303(d) List: hltp://www2.sta1e.id.us/deq
-------
  IDAHO
  Contact Information
  Cynthia Grafe, Water Quality Assessment Program Coordinator
  State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
  1410 North Hilton • Boise, ID 83706
  Phone 208/373-0163 • Fax 208/373-0576
  email: carafe@deq.state.id. us
 Programmatic Elements
 AppHciibiv ntonttorbtg
                                   problem identification (screening)
                                   nonpoint source assessments
                                   monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                                           I
                                   ALU determinations/ambient hionitoring
                                   promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                   support of antidegradation
                                   evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                   TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                   other:
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects, specific river basins or watersheds, and
comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (special
projects only)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin
other
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (determined using the National Hydrography Database)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology
     fully supporting for 305(b)
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
     listed for 303(d)
     number of sites sampled
     number of miles assessed per site
                 96,200

                  49,500
                 16,742
                   8,434
                   8.312
                   8,312
                   4,500
                    -3.5
                                  16,742 Miles Assessed for Biology
"fully supporting" for 305(b)
"partially/non-suppotting" for 305(b)
IDAHO: Program Summary
              December 2002
                                                                                                           3-50

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
 ALU designation bwiWS: ':•!";" :   Warm Water vs. Cold Water
ALUdeelgnetton* instate
water quality Standard*
                             Sub-categories are cold water, seasonal cold water, warm water, modified
                             (UAA required), and salmonid spawning.
 ; Narrative BhMitttrta.iii.WP8
         Btociitorta
                           IDEQ's "Waterbody Assessment Guidance" and supporting technical
                           reports are used to interpret and implement WQS, including ALU
                           assessment. Although the term "biocriteria" is not used, functional
                           elements are included in the WQS and in implementing ALU designation
                           and support status guidance. Please see:
                           http://www2.state.id.us/adm/adminrules/rules/IDAPA58/58INDEX.HTM
                             none
 Usei of blomOTiitiont flute
 : in Integrated Mstssiiisiiis
 wWi other envtronrnentel
 data (e.g., totidty testing and
 : chemical specific criteria} x
                               assessment of aquatic resources

                               cause and effect determinations

                               permitted discharges

                               monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

                               watershed based management
 Uses of bioassessmentf
 biocrtterta In making
 management decisions
 regarding, reatoration of
 aquatic resources to a
 designated ALU
                           Used as restoration criteria in CERCLA cleanup monitoring effectiveness
                           plans/consent decrees; bioassessment is required prior to removing 303(d)
                           listed waters

                           Most TMDLs have ALUS biomonitoring as part of implementation; one
                           recent example is the North Fork of the Coeur d'Alene River.
  Reference Site/Condition Development

  Number of mfertnc« sitee      200 total
Reference site :i :; —' ";;::; •
determinations . - :• E:;:;::V
'£?:>:"."• • - -:'- . "isSsrSx;. •
li^*10* *i*i*pillili
;-;«^e>a«eite^nfl1J;;pil%^
^-reStehal cofltexpsss8*-^ •'"
;";^:d-;-r!:.:' .:': = -.i::v-;;,-;;;^;^f5:^;^Ki; •;:
;:= .-:- ;•-- - .•-. 	 '"•"': ""i:'":':i:;~~««i«v""' •'
: ',.:';:-'-: '.. . :. '- •'• :- -'••'' :j;'i;: ;.1:: '-..:•-."

: . ' '" '''•''' :['^S&^ • '

- «int«in«l •^w^ktfMHnA''':~:':'"'''^" ' 	 ^
:': conditions • : ."'-;: :^mK=: .-:•. •
!-'Sm^-- , -;:;:Killlii£i;-;i-::

Addttfonal Information

/
/

site-specific
paired watersheds
regional (aggregate of sites)
professional judgment
other:
Reference site criteria based on nearby road condition, riparian vegetation
complexity, channel morphology and complexity, habitat structure
complexity, evidence of chemical stressors, substrate heterogeneity, and
evidence of point and nonpoint sources. Also, land satellite images are
reviewed for evidence of disturbance in the watershed (see IDAPA
58.01.02,003.85).

/

/
/





/
/

/
historical conditions
least disturbed sites
gradient response
professional judgment
other: mostly least disturbed sites, but also minimally disturbed sites in
some bioregions
ecoregions (or some aggregate)
elevation
stream type
multivariate grouping
jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
other: bioregions based on groupings of ecoregions. Some of the
indices classify by elevation and stream type.
reference sites linked to ALU
reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced conditions
IDAHO: Program Summary
                                            December 2002
3-51

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                    benthos (100-500 samples/yjar; single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
                                    fish (100-500 samples/year: single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
                                    periphyton (100-500 samples/year: single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
                                    other:
  |   subsampte size
 '"•"  taxonomy
                               Surber, Hess, Slack (0.5 meter, in rivers only); 500-600 micron mesh
                               richest habitat
                               500 count
                               species
  Ffch
      sampling gear
      (wbtot setecBon
      taxonomy
                               backpack electrofisher
                               multihabitat
                               length measurement, biomass - individual, biomass - batch and anomalies
                               none; full sample work-up
                               species (count and keep voucher specimens for species that are not identified in the field)
      habitat selection
      sample processsig
                               natural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.)
                               selected near macroinvertebrate sample
                               taxonomic identification
                               species level
                               visual based, canopy closure (denpiometer), Wolman pebble count, pool complexity (width,
                               depth), stream width/depth, large ijvoody debris; performed with bioassessments
                               standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and training for
                               biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
Quality
                   progr
  Data analysis tools and,
  Data Analysis and Interpretation*
                                    summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                    parametric ANOVAs
                                    multivariate analysis
                                    biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                    disturbance gradients
                                    other
            thfmmti ntitm
            inras>noiiip..
:?Hfei="v.jMBj unlfless scorns j;
•feSb'SbV-.
                               Varies by index - a combination of 95* percentile of reference and cumulative distribution
..i,,..  „,	 ___._.,....    function used to scale metrics scores is most frequently used.
Bfc  defining impairoi^nl ijn   " •  25th percentile of reference population"
:|1 p;giuttnrtr¥!ro(^ite'.-.	__	
                                    repeat sampling
                                    precision (variability study of reference conditions)
                                    sensitivity
                                    bias
                                    accuracy
                               MS Access, changing to Oracle/Visual Basic indexed to NHD
                               Custom interface (Biological Assessment Tool) developed to calculate metrics, indices, and
                               physical and biological summary statistics. Systat is also used.
'Formal methods have been developed for non-wadeable rivers and wadeable streams. Lentic methods are under development. A
total of eight multimetric indices for bugs, diatoms, fish, habitat, and physicochemical measures have been developed or adapted for
rivers and streams. Indices are integrated into attaining or non-attaining use support determinations.
**ldaho uses a measure of CONDITION, which aggregates 3 different Indices - Habitat, Benthos and Fish. Each index is compared
to the median of reference condition and is given a score of 1,2 or 3.  All three scores are then combined (averaged). If > or = 2.
then fully supporting; if <2, then not supporting.
IDAHO: Program Summary
                                                  December 2002
                                                                                                               3-52

-------
 ILLINOIS
 Contact Information

 Gregg Good, Manager - Surface Water Section
 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA)
 1021 North Grand Avenue East • Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
 Phone 217/782-3362 • Fax 217/785-122 5
 email: qreqg.good@epa.5tate.il.us
 IEPA Bureau of Water homepage: http://www.epa.state.ii.us/water/
  Program Description

  Illinois EPA (IEPA) conducts intensive hver basin surveys on a five-year rotational basis in cooperation with the
  Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR). These surveys are a major source of information for annual
  305(b) assessments. Illinois has 33 major river basins within its borders. Stations sampled by IEPA and IDNR are
  selected on the basis of where intensive data are currently lacking or historical data need updating. Water
  chemistry and biological (fish and macroinvertebrate) data along with qualitative and quantitative instream habitat
  information, including stream discharge, are collected to characterize stream segments within the basin, identify
  water quality conditions, and evaluate aquatic life use impairment. Fish tissue contaminant and sediment chemistry
  sampling are also conducted to screen for the accumulation of toxic substances.

  Illinois' "biological expectations" are based on a regional reference site approach that enables within-region
  comparisons between the aquatic community at any stream site and the reference expectation. The regional
  reference site approach is a key component of biocriteria.  The approach ensures reasonably attainable biological
  goals that recognize and account for the unique combination of regional land form, land use, and physical habitat
  characteristics,  which influence the distribution of fish, macroinvertebrates and other aquatic organisms. Illinois is
  currently developing this framework, which includes refinement of existing biological assessment tools and, where
  needed, development of new state-of-the-art monitoring approaches.

  Illinois EPA is working with IDNR, USEPA, members of the agricultural, industrial, academic and regulated
  communities, as well as outside contractors, and other interested parties to develop biological criteria for streams
  and rivers. This approach to biocriteria will enable IEPA to better assess the ecological/environmental quality of
  Illinois rivers and streams and should allow the Agency to continue to update and refine the stream use
  designations contained in Illinois' water quality standards.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Illinois Water Quality Report 2002 (CWA Section 305(b) Report). July 2002, IEPA, Bureau of Water:
  http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/water-qualitv/reDOrt-2002/305b-2002.Ddf

  2001 305(b) Summary Report (1999 data). Rivers and Streams:
  http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/water-qualitv/report-2001/re port-2001.pdf

  Condition of Illinois Water Resources - menu of Illinois 305(b) Reports and Assessments, including maps and
  graphs: http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/water-quality/index.html

  Illinois Targeted Watershed Approach: http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/targeted-watershed/index.html

  IEPA Bureau of Water, Surface Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Programs homepage:
  http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/surface-water/index.html

  IEPA Bureau of Water, River and Stream Monitoring Program homepage, with links to biocriteria development and
  other relevant information: http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/surface-water/river-stream-mon.html

  Hite, R.L. and B.A. Bertrand. 1989. Biological Stream Characterization (BSC): A Biological Assessment of Illinois
  Stream Quality, Special Report No.  13 of the Illinois State Water Plan Task Force. Illinois Environmental Protection
  Agency.
ILLINOIS: Program Summary                       December 2002                                          3-53

-------
  ILLINOIS
  Contact Information
  Gregg Good, Manager - Surface Water Section
  Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA)
  1021 North Grand Avenue East • Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
  Phone 217/782-3362 » Fax 217/785-1225
  email: gregg.qood@epa.state il.us
  Programmatic Elements
                ater quality
                               UD
                               /
                              ~7
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
 AppficaM monitoring
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects and specific river basins or watersheds)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
other
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (determined using RF3 and existing maps)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology
      fully supporting for 305(b)
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
      listed for 303(d)*
      number of sites sampled
      number of miles assessed per site**
                86,021

                 30.246
                15,304
                  9,498
                  5,806

                   115
             site specific
                                 15,304 Miles Assessed for Biology
"fully supporting" for 305(b)
"partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
'Total miles listed for 303(d) is a subset of the miles partially/non-supporting for 305(b) and will be determined in the next update.
"10 miles for wadeable sites and 25 miles for non-wadeable sites with some site-specific detailing following the 1997 305(b)
guidance.
ILLINOIS: Program Summary
             December 2002
                                                                                                            3-54

-------
Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making

                            Secondary contact and indigenous aquatic life use waters (IL Title 35,
                            Subtitle C, Chapter I, Part 303.204)         	.
, ,__ ; „ ;™,s _\" •-•<;™;;-;c;r,•fi.j^'jij." ";"V-^;;;;;".~-j *
                             none
                                 assessment of aquatic resources
                                 cause and effect determinations
                                 permitted discharges
                                 monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                 watershed based management


                                                           ndHoo tiers md 10 mum"
                         ll IDNR natural heritage area designations

  Reference Site/Condition Development*
              •C            l
  Marnber of »fiM*nc« »K»»      120 total
                                  site-specific
                                  paired watersheds
                                  regional (aggregate of sites)
                                  professional judgment
                                  other: watershed measures of physical and chemical disturbance
                              Illinois EPA is in the process of formally defining reference criteria.'
                                  historical conditions
                                  least disturbed sites
                                  gradient response
                                  professional judgment
                                  other:	
                                  ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                  elevation
                                  stream type
                                  multivariate grouping
                                  jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                   reference sites linked to ALU
                                   reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                   some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                   conditions
  ,EPA currently does not use "reference^conditions" «^
  jj^^^KTJSS
  quantitative development has been done.
  ILLINOIS: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                          3-55

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                     benthos (100-500 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - not at
                                     watershed level)           I
                                     fish (100-500 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - not at watershed
                                     level)
                                     periphyton
                                     other:
                        -
                        ipi|fi: collect by hand, dipnet; 500-600 Micron mesh
                        Pi|ii| richest habitat, rifle/run (cobble), niultihabitat and woody debris
                        |:|||:| 300 count and entire sample
                        ;g£r:;|? combination - order, family, genus and species
                         lKiS backpack and boat electroflshers, land seine; 1/4" and 3/6" mesh
                        ,,jr;:.r;.:; •:                                •
                        ;rlifsi pool/glide, riffle/run (cobble) and njiultihabitat
                         flllfi length measurement, biomass - individual and batch
                                none
                                species
                        tflfiS visual based and quantitative measurements; performed with bioassessments
                              :  standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
                         •KB!*  training for biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks
  Data Analysis and Interpretation
'*•"?!'- r* " :''"•• •  •  •
                                     summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                     parametric ANOVAs
                                     multivariate analysis
                                     biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                     disturbance gradients
                                     other: nonparametric statistical tests
                           it '  Metric values representing least-d sturbed conditions statewide are
                           '•*%;•  stratified by region; vyithin-region regression of each metric vs.
                            ||.| environmental covariate, e.g., strebm size and slope, defines
                            N: •• benchmark for defining metric-scoring ranges.
                           •*; M  Thresholds are based on the possible index scoring range divided
                            :-•-;  into discrete categories and are nfo driven by reference sites.
                                     repeat sampling
                                     precision
                                     sensitivity
                                     bias
                                     accuracy
'-*-,s.*i PnvPrf
'-!;";;?'-:>:•; ~f~: "•:-••:".'• .-\f<'."f^&~:<, statistical-graphics applications, including MS Access, FoxPro,
•;!,|f, =.= sfsfyi;J-,is1:••,f:!?.vif• ?£-!:i" Excel. QuattroPro. Minitab. and Sibma Plot
ILLINOIS: Program Summary
                                                    December 2002
                                                                                                                   3-56

-------
 INDIANA
 Contact Information

 C. Lee Bridges, Chief- Biological Studies Section
 Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM)
 P.O. Box 6015 • Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015
 Phone 317/308-3183 • Fax 317/308-3219
 email: Ibridqes@dem.state.in.us
 IDEM Office of Water Quality homepage: http://wwwlN.Qov/idem/water/
  Program Description

  The Biological Studies Section (BSS) of IDEM's Office of Water Quality conducts studies offish and
  macroinvertebrate communities, as well as stream habitats.  These data are used to help develop biological
  criteria to which all other streams can be compared in order to identify impaired streams or watersheds. BSS also
  conducts fish tissue and sediment sampling to monitor sources of toxic and bioconcentrating substances too low to
  be detected in other environmental media. Fish tissue data serve as the basis for fish consumption  advisories
  issued to protect the health of people who consume fish caught in Indiana waters. Fish tissue data are also useful
  for wildlife health risk assessments for fish-eating birds and mammals, and for providing the information needed to
  develop models for assessing changes in the quality of Indiana ecosystems.

  The BSS is responsible for determining the biological integrity of aquatic communities of Indiana streams and
  lakes. This is accomplished through a variety of field and laboratory studies that involve several different forms of
  aquatic life. These data are used to determine compliance with the existing narrative biological criteria in Indiana's
  current water quality standards, to determine the use attainability, and to make correlations to physical and/or
  chemical impairments which may exist.

  The BSS participates in the review of requests for site-specific water quality criteria for waters influenced by
  NPDES discharges. In the course of its various monitoring and assessment field activities, the staff finds point and
  nonpoint source-related problems, which are then referred to the appropriate IDEM programs. The  Section also
  cooperates in the monitoring and assessment of the Ohio River in conjunction with the Ohio River Valley Water
  Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO), and other state and federal agencies.

  Lake and reservoir assessments prior to 1989 were conducted by the State and have since been contracted to
  Indiana University, School of Public and Environmental Affairs.  From 1990 through 1995, the State in conjunction
  with USEPA - Region 5, conducted a statewide ecoregion-based fish community study. Indiana has historically
  collected macroinvertebrate community samples at a network of fixed stations. In addition the State has been
  conducting macroinvertebrate community assessments at wadeable stream sites since 1990. Since 1996 the
  biological assessments for fish and invertebrate community assessments have been conducted using probabilistic
  sampling on a rotational watershed basis as per Indiana's Surface Water Quality Monitoring Strategy.  In 2000 the
  State participated in a study to determine if fish and macroinvertebrate indices could be developed  for lakes and
  reservoirs.  Conclusions are still pending.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Indiana 2001 - 2005 Surface Water Quality Monitoring Strategy.
  http://www.in.gov/idem/water/assessbr/016surfwateraualmonstrat.pdf

  Indiana 303(d) List of Impaired Waterbodies, information and links:
  http://www.in.gov/idem/vvater/planbr/wQS/303d.html

  Indiana Water Quality 305(b) Report, general information: http://www.IN.QOV/idem/water/olanbr/wqs/qualitv.html

  Indiana Water Quality Standards: http://www.state.in.us/leqislative/iac/title327.html

  IDEM Office of Water Quality's Assessment Branch - Biological Studies Section homepage, with numerous links to
  relevant fact sheets and reports: http://www. in.gov/idem/water/assessbr/biostud/index. html
INDIANA: Program Summary                       December 2002                                          3-57

-------
  INDIANA
  Contact Information
  C. Lee Bridges, Chief- Biological Studies Section
  Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM)
  P.O. Box 6015 • Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015
  Phone 317/308-3183 • Fax 317/308-3219
  email: lbridges@dem.state.in.us
  Programmatic Elements
  USM of MocMWMmwit. : f.
  within ovvrall water quaMty
  program-'     • ; •-'-;-: , :  -
                              UD
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALL) determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
                                   targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (specific river
                                   basins or watersheds and comprehensive use throughout
                                   jurisdiction)
                                   fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (specific
                                   river basins or watersheds and comprehensive use throughout
                                   jurisdiction)
                                   probabilistic by stream order/catchment area (specific river
                                   basins or watersheds and comprehensive use throughout
                                   jurisdiction)
                                   probabilistic by ecoregion. or statewide (specific river basins or
                                   watersheds and comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                   rotating basin (specific river basins or watersheds and
                                   comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                   other
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                         35,673
 (determined using KF3 and the National Hydrography Database)
 Total perennial miles                                    21,094
 Total miles assessed for biology                  35,430
     fully supporting for 305(b)                            23,000
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                     12,430
     listed for 303(d)                                  unknown
     number of sites sampled for) an annual basis)            < 200
     number of miles assessed per site                 site specific
                                 35,430 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                       'fully supporting" for 305(b)
                                       "partially/non-supporting" for 305
-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
ALU
                  Inatate
  NarrativaBta
 NiinwIcBlocrltofttl
                ntetoWQS
Warm Water vs. Cold Water
Two designations: Well balanced warmwater aquatic community and Cold water
put-and-take trout waters
under development - The narrative biocriteria in Indiana have only been proposed
and are not formal. They are loosely defined by 327 IAC 2-1-3(a)(2), 327 IAC-2-
1-9 (49); and for the Great Lakes waters 327 IAC 2-1 5-5(a)(2) and (3), and 327
IAC 2-1.5-2 (92). IDEM uses informal numeric procedures to support narrative
biocriteria (see http://www.in.gov/IDEMA.vater/planbr/was/aualilv.htmll.
none
In integrated aiaatintanto;:; .
with other environmental *
data (e.g., toxidty testing and
HtBiMbtoi anw>M«> VritateV

/
/

/
/
assessment of aquatic resources
cause and effect determinations
permitted discharges
monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
watershed based management
  Use* of faloaaaeaanientf
 ; biocriteria In making  ;
 : management dectelons
         j reatoration of
 aquatic reaourcea to a
 daaignatedALU
                             Biological assessment data are used for 305(b)/303(d) purposes and was used
                             for the FY 2000 Unified Watershed Assessment (updated 2001), which was used
                             for the Watershed Restoration Action Strategies.
  Reference Site/Condition Development*
  Kumberofrafarancaattil     unknown
 datennlnatlona
  Reference alta criteria
               ^'"
 Additional Information
                                 site-specific
                                 paired watersheds
                                 regional (aggregate of sites)
                                 professional judgment
                                 other:
                             Deviation from central tendencies on multimethc indices and the qualitative
                             habitat evaluation index (QHEI) is also taken into consideration when evaluating
                             impairment. Field chemistry is measured and probabilistic sites are sampled for
                             broad chemical analysis.
                                 historical conditions"
                                 least disturbed sites
                                 gradient response
                                 professional judgment
                                 other: IBI is calibrated on drainage area for headwater streams, wadeable
                                 rivers, large rivers and great rivers
                                   ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                   elevation
                                   stream type
                                   multivariate grouping
                                   jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                   other: 8 digit USGS Hydrologic Unit Codes
                                 reference sites linked to ALU (in a statistical sense)
                                 reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                 some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced conditions
                                 (it is understood that all sites have a human-induced condition)
'IDEM uses a non-typical process for developing reference condition: reference condition is represented by a percentage of the total
population of the sites sampled. The number of reference sites in Indiana is not available at this time.
"Reference condition is defined by a historical cross-section of sample sites representing the full gradient of ecological conditions
as they existed during statewide or ecoregion specific investigation.
INDIANA: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                          3-59

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (<100 samplesfyear\ single season, multiple sffes - broad coverage)
                                   fish (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple s/fes - broad coverage)
                                   periphyton (<100 samples/year; solely through a pilot contract with USGS)
                                   other: phytoplankton and zooplankton (<100 samples/year: single
                                   observation, limited sampling)
      subsampto size
      taxonomy  •   :
    ;   multiplate, dipnet, and kick net (1 meter); 243-600 micron mesh
  115?:  riffle/run (cobble) and artificial subktrate in the absence of riffle/run
     "  100 count and proportional/volume
    -;:  family
 Fteh
      tampHnggear
      haWtatsetectiori
 Habtat
       backpack, boat, longline and pram unit (tote barge) electrofishers; and 1/8" mesh
       seine
       multihabitat
       enumeration, length measurement, biomass - batch, and anomalies
       none
       species	
       visual based; performed with bioassessments
 Qu*Rty tttun
 •tonwrrts
       standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
       training for biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
 Data Analysis and Interpretation
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
: ;|)lu1UiiN)(i1c
   a ::,wo unities* score*
i'M'l : cumulative distribution function

       cumulative distribution function and use various break points for
   :    impairments
  1  .  amuHJvartatefeKJex
                               significant departure from mean of reference population
            ofpwfonmnco
            repeat sampling (watersheds are sampled on 5 yr rotational
            basis)
            precision (Standard Error, 95i% Confidence Interval and
            Relative Percent Difference)
            sensitivity
            bias
            accuracy (10% field duplicates. 10% laboratory duplicates)
                               Assessment Information Management System (AIMS), MS Access
                               based utility, and some historical data still in paper files
     :^Meyrt and anarysls|||::  Statistics and MINITAB for cluster analysis of large matrices
INDIANA: Program Summary
                          December 2002
                                                                                                             3-60

-------
 IOWA
 Contact Information

 Tom Wilton, Water Quality Specialist
 Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR)
 502 East 9" Street • Des Moines, IA 50319-0034
 Phone 515/281-8867 • Fax 515/281-8895
 email: tom.wilton@dnr.state.ia .us
 IDNR Water Quality Bureau: hHp://wvvw.stateJa.us/dnr/oraaniza/ePoVwtra Mrobur.htm
  Program Description

  Since 1994, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) and the University Hygienic Laboratory (DHL) have
  conducted a biological assessment program for Iowa's wadeable streams and rivers.  So far, biological sampling
  has been conducted at 289 stream locations throughout the state.  Biological data are collected for a variety of
  purposes including: ambient monitoring, problem investigation, evaluation of point source and nonpoint source
  pollution control measures, and TMDL development. The IDNR uses bioassessment information to assess the
  status of stream aquatic life designated uses for the Section 305(b) report and the Section 303(d) list of impaired
  waters.

  Benthic macroinvertebrates and fish serve as indicators of stream biological integrity.  Standardized sampling
  procedures are used to collect species composition and proportional abundance data from which a suite of
  biological metrics is calculated. Individual metric values are aggregated to obtain scores for the Benthic
  Macroinvertebrate Index of Biotic Integrity (BMIBI) and the Fish Index of Biotic Integrity (FIBI).  Biological
  impairment thresholds are based on the statistical distribution of biotic index scores obtained from stream
  reference site sampling. Currently, the IDNR has identified 96 reference sites that represent least disturbed
  stream conditions in Iowa's ten ecological regions.

  Until 2002, a targeted approach was used to select sampling locations for Iowa's stream biological assessment
  program.  From 1994 through 1998, the program emphasized candidate reference site and test (impacted) site
  sampling, which provided data for evaluating and calibrating biological data metrics.  From 1999-2001, the
  emphasis shifted toward site-specific problem investigation and follow-up.  Beginning  in 2002, IDNR and UHL are
  initiating a probabilistic survey that will provide an unbiased, statistically powerful assessment of Iowa's perennial
  streams and rivers.  The survey design calls for sampling 56 randomly-selected sites per year through 2005.
  During this period, IDNR and UHL also plan to resample the existing network of reference streams at a rate of 20-
  25 sites per year.

  The IDNR is working toward incorporating narrative and numeric stream biocriteria in  Iowa's water quality
  standards. The bioassessment framework that is currently used for 305(b) assessments can potentially serve as a
  foundation for biocriteria. The 2002-2005 probabilistic survey will provide useful data  from non-wadeable streams
  and rivers for biocriteria development. Biocriteria development for Iowa's lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands has not
  been initiated.
  Documentation and Further information

  Water Quality in Iowa During 1998 and 1999 (Iowa's 2000 Section 305(b) report):
  http://www.state.ia.us/dnr/orqani2a/epd/wtrq/305bOO/index.htm

  Final Approved Iowa 1998 303(d) List, http://www.state.ia.us/dnr/orqaniza/epd/wtresrce/fiies/303dlist.pdf

  Iowa's STORET Database (ambient water quality program dataset): http://wqm.iqsb.uiowa.edu/storet/
IOWA: Program Summary                         December 2002                                          3-61

-------
  IOWA
  Contact Information
  Tom Wilton. Water Quality Specialist
  Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR)
  502 East 9" Street • Des Moines, IA 50319-0034
  Phone 515/281-8867 • Fax 515/281-8895
  email: tom.wiHon@dnr.stale.ia.us
  Programmatic Elements
 UMtof Mo**M*wiMflt
 DvttMn
 prognffl
•ITwmtir quality
                              UD
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessmehts
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambieijit monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
 Applteabto monKortng
                        targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
                        projects, specific river basins or watersheds, comprehensive
                        use throughout jurisdiction)
                        fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (specific
                        river basins or watersheds)
                        probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                        probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (comprehensive use
                        throughout jurisdiction)
                        rotating basin
                        other:
*ln 2002, IDNR will initiate a REMAP probabilistic survey of perennial streams and rivers.
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (Slate based determination)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
      fully supporting for 305(b)
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
      listed for 303(d)
      number of sites sampled
      number of miles assessed per site
                                         71,66$

                                          26,630
                                          2,018
                                           1,418
                                             600
                                             n/a
                                             149
                                        0.1-0.22
                                                         2,018  Miles Assessed for Biology
                                              - -        1tr-!"^Nt
                                             1,418 mites j
                                      •fully supporting" for 305 (b)
                                      "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
'Stream miles reported are based on Iowa's 2000 305(b) assessment. A 303(d) list was not prepared in 2000.
IOWA: Program Summary
                                     December 2002
                                                                                                           3-62

-------
 Aquatic  Life Use (ALL!) Designations and Decision-Making
 ALUdttlgnattoniMwte      -  Class System (A, B. C), Warm Water vs. Cold Water
           wtfbra instate
 water quality ctamtont*
Four designations: B(LR) - limited resource warmwater
streams/rivers; B(WVV) - significant resource warmwater
streams/rivers; B{CW) - coldwater streams; B(LW) - lakes and
wetlands
  Narrative Biocriteria in WQS
under development (Iowa's water quality standards include language
associated with ALUs but It was not intended to be formal narrative
biocriteria. IA is moving toward incorporating narrative biocriteria
into the State's water quality standards.)
;: : : , ; formal numeric biocriteria.)
Ua>t of hioaiaeaamant data :
wtthQth»™nvfrofinwntei
date (e.g., tojddty testing and
chemical specific criteria)
/
/

/
/
assessment of aquatic resources
cause and effect determinations
permitted discharges
monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
watershed based management
  biocriteria to making
  inaitflQanMnt oocMons
  regarding rattoratlon of
  aquatic IMOUPCM to a
  designated ALU
303(d) listing, to address point source impacts, and to support TMDL
development
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number of reference alto*
96 total
  Rvfer»ftC**H»
  d«t0rmlrations
    site-specific
    paired watersheds
    regional (aggregate of sites)
    professional judgment
    other:
  Reference *tte criteria
Regionally representative and least disturbed by human activities,
consider impact of livestock waste, wastewater, channel alterations,
riparian land use, and quality of instream habitat
 CharactorizaMonof
    historical conditions
    least disturbed sites
    gradient response
    professional judgment
    other:
 Stream gratification
 ' ragkmal ref»rtnc« :'; \;-''
 '            '         '  '
    ecoregions (or some aggregate)
    elevation
    stream type
    multivariate grouping
    jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
    other:
 AddWonaJ Information
    reference sites linked to ALL)
    reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
    some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
    conditions
IOWA: Program Summary
                  December 2002
                                                                          3-63

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (100- 500 samples f>er year single season, multiple
                                   sites - broad coverage)
                                   fish (<100 samples per year: single season, multiple sites •
                                   broad coverage)
                                   periphyton
                                   other:
 BmtlM*
      sampHnggear
      habitat selection
  ;    subsampte size
                             Surber, Hess, multiplate, collect by hand; 500 - 600 micron mesh
                             riffle/run (cobble), multihabitat, artificial substrate
                             100 count, entire sample


,,
l"
taxonomy
- sampling gear
;-.' *ubsample
.-, taxonomy
fatifi t ~iannanfa
combination - order, family, genus, species
backpack electrofisher, pram unit (tote barge);
multihabitat
none
species
visual based. Quantitative measurements: nerf

3/16" mesh

armed with
                              bioassessments
 Quality
                             standard operating procedures, periodic meetings/training for
                             biologists, taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
 Data anatMte tool* and
 »*•->•, . j_ T. .
 
-------
 KANSAS
  Contact Information

  Steve Cringan. Environmental Scientist III
  Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE)
  1000 SW Jackson Street, Suite 430 • Topeka, KS 66612-1367
  Phone 78S/296-5571 • Fax 785/291-3266
  email: scnnaan@kdhe state.ks us
  KDHE Bureau of Environmental Filed Services homepage:
  http://www.kdhe.state.Ks.us/befe/index.html

  Kristen Hase, Stream Monitoring Program Coordinator
  Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks (KDWP)
  512 SE 25th Avenue • Pratt, KS 67124
  Phone 620/672-0710 • Fax 620/672-2972
  email:  KristenM@wp.5tate.ks.us
  website: http://www.kdwp.stale.ks.us
  Program Description

  Kansas has maintained a stream biological monitoring program since 1972. Since 1980, the program has remained primarily
  unchanged. Program data are evaluated and incorporated in five year increments into the 305(b) report and 303(d) list. Data is
  used to determine aquatic life use support status in combination with chemical water quality data. Further details may be found in
  the program Quality Management Plan (see documentation below).

  Contemporary Program Objectives
  The stream biological monitoring program endeavors to provide scientifically defensible information on the quality of flowing
  waters in Kansas through the analysis of aquatic macroinvertebrate communities. This information is intended for use in:

      (1)  complying with the water quality monitoring and reporting requirements of 40 CFR 130.4 and sections 106(e)(1),
          303(d) and 305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act;

      (2)  evaluating waterbody compliance with the Kansas surface water quality standards (K.A.R. 28-16-28b et seg.);

      (3)  identifying point and nonpoint sources of pollution contributing most significantly to water use impairments in streams;

      (4)  documenting spatial and temporal trends in surface water quality resulting from changes in land use patterns, resource
          management practices, pollutant loadings, and climatological conditions;

      (5)  developing scientifically defensible environmental standards, wastewater treatment plan permits, and
          waterbody/watershed pollution control plans; and

      (6)  evaluating the efficacy of pollution control efforts and waterbody remediation/restoration initiatives implemented by the
          department and other agencies and organizations.

  The Kansas Department of Health and Environment's (KDHE) Bureau of Environmental Field Services is responsible for
  macroinvertebrate data collection and analysis.  The Bureau also analyzes fish community data that are collected by the Kansas
  Department of Wildlife and Parks (KDWP). KDHE is currently working with the Central Plains Center for BioAssessment (CPCB)
  at the University of Kansas, to develop both a systematic approach to the identification of reference sites and a regionally
  standardized approach to habitat assessment.


  Documentation and Further Information

  Division of Environment Quality Management Plan Part III: Stream Biological Monitoring Program Quality Assurance
  Management Plan, December 2000: http://www.kdhe.state.ks.us/environrnent/gmp 2000/download/SBMP QAMP.pdf

  2002 Kansas Water Quality Assessment (305(b) report), April 2002:
  http://www.kdhe.state.ks.us/befs/305b 2002/ks305b2002f.pdf

  Guidance Document for Use Attainability Analyses, December 2001: http://www.kdhe.stale.ks.us/befs/uaas/UAAGuidance.pdf

  Draft 2002 303(d) Methodology and List: http://www.kdhe.state.ks.us/tmdl/303d.htm

  Kansas State Water Quality Standards: http://www.kdhe.state.ks.us/water/index.html
KANSAS: Program Summary                        December 2002                                             3-65

-------
  KANSAS
  Contact Information
  Steve Cringan, Environmental Scientist III
  Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDME)
  1000 SW Jackson Street, Suite 430 • Topeka, KS 66612-1367
  Phone 785/296-5571 • Fax 785/291-3266
  email: scringan@kdhe,state.ks,us
  Kristen Hase, Stream Monitoring Program Coordinator
  Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks (KDWP)
  512 SE 25th Avenue • Pratt,  KS 67124
  Phone 620/672-0710 • Fax 620/672-2972
  email:  KristenM@wp.state. ks .us
  Programmatic  Elements
  UM*Of
          *nli
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other: trend analysis
 < ippMcflbto inonfltorinQ
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (comprehensive use throughout
jurisdiction)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (comprehensive use throughout
jurisdiction}
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
other: rotational sites, statewide (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
"KDWP uses a combination of probabilistic design, rotating basin, and fixed sites: KDHE relies primarily on a targeted design,
including fixed and rotational sites statewide.
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (determined using RF3)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
     fully supporting for 305(b)
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
     listed for 303(d)
     number of sites sampled
     number of miles assessed per site
                             134,338

                                23,731
                               23,731
                                   n/a
                                   n/a
                                   n/a
        178 targeted over 22 years (KDME);
     several hundred probabalistic (KDWP)
                            site specific
•Because KDWP uses a probabilistic sampling design, it can be said that all 23,731 perennial stream miles in Kansas are being
assessed for biology. KDHE is working with KDWP to incorporate the latter agency's findings into Kansas' 305(b) reports and
303(d) lists. Kansas' 2002 305(b) report is based on four years of ambient stream chemistry data (1998-2001) and only acute
aquatic life use support application.
KANSAS: Program Summary
               December 2002
                                                                                                           3-66

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
  ALU designation basis
     I designations in state
  water quality standards
Class System (A,B,C)

Three designations: special aquatic life use, expected aquatic life use, restricted
aquatic life use
  Narrative BlocittMia In WQS


  Nimwffc Btocrlterla In WQS
Procedures used to support narrative biocriteria are located in the most recent
305(b) reports

none (Numeric biocriteria have not been adopted into the state standards, but are
nevertheless used for diagnostic purposes and in 305(b) assessments.)
Uiflt of bloiiHMiiffMint jfgti
with other environmental
date (e.g., taxtaRy testing and
rhamiMl MMwHIr rH(AfiA\


/
/
/
/

assessment of aquatic resources
cause and effect determinations
permitted discharges
monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
watershed based management
                              Various point source upgrades and TMDL-related applications
  manacwnwnt decisions
  aquatic resource* to •
  designated ALU
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number of reference sites
44 total
  Reference site
  determinations*
    site-specific

    paired watersheds

    regional (aggregate of sites)

    professional judgment

    other:
  Reference site criteria
To date, sites have been selected on the basis of land cover and land use. known
hydrological properties and channel characteristics, general absence of confined
animal feeding operations, point sources and urban areas, and favorable water
quality attributes (low levels of total suspended solids, biochemical oxygen demand,
fecal coliform bacteria, total phosphorus, inorganic nitrogen, herbicides, and other
contaminants). Rare taxa and historically occurring key species are mainly used for
validation purposes.

Reference sites, by definition, should also be minimally impacted by anthropogenic
phenomena and approach the presettlement condition in terms of hydrology, water
quality, available biological habitat, surrounding landscape and watershed attributes,
and historically documented plant and animal communities.
  Characterization of
  reference sites wfthin a
  regional context
    historical conditions

    least disturbed sites

    gradient response

    professional judgment

    other:
  Stream stratification within
  regional reference
  conditions
    ecoregions (or some aggregate)

    elevation

    stream type

    multivariate grouping

    jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)

    other: stream size
 Additional Information
    reference sites linked to ALU

    reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards

    some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced conditions
'Currently working with the Central Plains Center for BioAssessment (CPCB) at the University of Kansas to develop a more
systematic approach to the identification of reference sites.
KANSAS: Program Summary
                   December 2002
3-67

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
  Ass*rnbteg«s assessed
                                    benthos (100- 500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - broad coverage;
                                    multiple seasons, select sites)
                                    fish (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - broad coverage by KDWP only)
                                    periphyton (100 - 500 samples/year; multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad coverage
                                    for watershed level)"
                                    other: phytoplankton
  ;   sampling gear             collect by hand, D-frame; 500 - 600 micron mesh
      habitat selection           richest habitat, riffle/run, multihabitat, woody debris, random sampling by KDWP only
  !   subsarrtpto Size            entire sample, 100 count minimum
      taxonomy	   genus/species where practical	
 FWl
      sampling gear
      habftatsetectJon
      sample processing
      taxonomy
                               seine, backpack electrofisher, pram unit (tote barge); 1/8" and 3/16" mesh
                               multihabitat
                               length measurement, biomass - batch
                               batch (generally do not subsample)
                               species
 Periphyton*
  :    sampling gear
  •habitat selection
  [':••  sample processing
 Habitat.
                ttnta
natural substrate: suction device, bar damp sample; artificial substrate: periphytometer
wadeable area within stream segment that is designated based on other sampled biota
chlorophyll a/phaeophytin, taxonomic identification (limited use)
diatoms only	
visual based (KDHE), quantitative1 measurements (KDWP); performed with bioassessments
 Quality M»ur»rtce program
 •tern*nt«:.   •
                               standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings/training for
                               biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival, replicate sampling,
                               field audits, and staff certification program
•Periphyton sampling is a new venture for the Kansas Biological Survey and the Central Plains Center for BioAssessment. Whole
stream respiration as well as net and gross production via the DO die! icyde method are also determined. Software has been built to
support these calculations using large continuous data sets of several weeks to months.

  Data Analysis and Interpretation
  Data analysis tools and
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (return single metrics)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other: regressions, correlations, trends, and other statistical applications
      transforming metrics
      into unfltess scores
      defining Impairment ki
      arnuWmatrlcindex
                               cumulative distribution function

                               Kansas returns single metrics but is exploring various indices.
  Evaluation of psrfonnanc*
 Hsfcrife
 Plan tor SOPa and
                                   repeat sampling
                                   precision
                                   sensitivity
                                   bias
                                   accuracy
      Storage
      Retrieval and analysis
                               Lotus Notes, Excel
                               Minitab. spreadsheet graphics, ArcView, ArcGIS, GARP (pending)
KANSAS: Program Summary
                                                  December 2002
                                                                                                              3-68

-------
 KENTUCKY
 Contact Information

 Terry P. Anderson, Manager - Water Quality Branch
 Kentucky Division of Water
 14 Reilly Road • Frankfort. KY 40601
 Phone 502/564-3410 • Fax 502-564-0111
 email: terrvp.anderson@rnail.state.kv.us
 KY Division of Water homepage: http://water.nf.stale.kv.us/dow/dwhome.htm
  Program Description

  A 100 point scale multi-metric index is under development in order to give equal weight to the three assemblages
  collected (fish, macroinvertebrates and algae). KY Division  of Water is also working in conjunction with
  USEPA/Cincinnati to develop boatable water collection methods for the larger rivers as a first phase of biocriteria
  and assessment methods for larger rivers. There is a long term goal of establishing response relationships
  between biological indicators and nutrients in wadeable and boatable waters in order to investigate the feasibility of
  establishing nutrient criteria in these waters.

  The Division of Water has shifted to a watershed approach in assessing stream miles. At this time about two fifths
  of the stream miles assessed have been entered in the data base, and data from another two fifths are being
  inputted. The first round of watershed sampling (the last fifth) will be completed in summer 2002. Somewhere
  between 30,000 to 40,000 actual miles will have been assessed by the time this project is completed.

  Probabilistic sampling is also being conducted in all major watersheds. When this is completed, KY  Division of
  Water will be able to estimate the number of stream miles meeting and not meeting designated uses. KY Division
  of Water was able to carry out this expansion thanks to valuable partnerships with Universities and the Kentucky
  Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources. These data are used to assess use support for Kentucky's 305(b)
  Report and for listing streams on the 303(d) list. Biological data can  override chemical data if they are
  contradictory. There is a strong belief that the biological data collected and the collection methods used paint a
  truer picture of use attainment than chemical data.

  Another important application of increased biological knowledge of waters in Kentucky has been the  development
  of biological endpoints for successful stream restoration projects undertaken as a result of environmental damage
  incidents.
  Documentation and Further Information

  2000 Kentucky Report to Congress on Water Quality, 305(b) report:
  http://water.nr.state.kv.us/wQ/305b/2000/2000 305b.htm

  1998 303(d) List of Waters for Kentucky, June 1998: http://water.nr.state.kv.us/303d/

  1998-1999 Monitoring Strategy: Kentucky River Basin Management Unit, March 2000:
  http://www.ukv.edu/WaterResources/Watershed/KRB AR/PDF Files/MonitorinQ%20Report.PDF

  For a list and links to more references and documents, conduct a search on the Kentucky Natural Resources and
  Environmental Protection Cabinet (NREPC) publication site:
  http://www.kvenvironment.orQ/nrepc/publications/publications.asp

  Kentucky Watershed Management Framework

  Other documents include Reference Reach Reports on Algae, Fish and Macroinvertebrates; Division of Water
  SOP manuals; Consultant reports; USFWS surveys; Kentucky State Nature Preserve Commission surveys;
  Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources surveys; Federal Register notices on Federal T&E listings.
KENTUCKY: Program Summary                    December 2002                                         3-69

-------
  KENTUCKY
  Contact Information
  Terry P. Anderson, Manager - Water Quality Branch
  Kentucky Division of Water
  14 Reilly Road • Frankfort, KY 40601
  Phone 502/564-3410 » Fax 502-564-0111
  email: terryp.andefson@mail.state.ky.us
  Programmatic Elements
                                   problem identification (screening)
                                   nonpoint source assessments
                                   monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                   ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
                                   promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                   support of antidegradation
                                   evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                   TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                   other:
                                   targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose)
                                   (special projects only, specific river basins or watersheds, and
                                   comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                   fixed station (i.e., water qualify monitoring stations)
                                   (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                   probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                   probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (specific river basins or
                                   watersheds)
                                   rotating basin (specific river basins or watersheds)
                                   other:
  Stream Miles
  Total miles
  (date/mined using the National Hydrography Database)
  Total perennial miles
  Total miles assessed for biology*
      fully supporting for 305(b)
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
      listed for 303(d)
      number of sites sampled
      number of miles assessed per site
   89,431

    34,334
  -30,000
   -20.000
   -10,000
     7,500
     1,750
                    30,000 Miles Assessed for Biology
                          fully supporting'for 305(b)
                          "partially/non-supporti ng" for 305(b)
•Kentucky has shifted to a basin approach in assessing stream miles.  At this time about 2/5ths of the stream miles assessed have
been entered in the database, which translates to 10,200 actual miles assessed. There is also data from another 2/5ths that is
presently being inputted into the database. The first round of watershed sampling (the last 1/Sth) will be completed this summer.
30,000 to 40,000 actual miles will have been assessed upon completion. Probabilistic sampling is also being conducted in all major
watersheds. The number of stream miles meeting and not meeting designated uses can be estimated when this is completed.
KENTUCKY: Program Summary
Decembor 2002
                                                                                                            3-70

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
                  in •ttte
                            Warm water vs. Cold water
                            Two designations - Warm water and Cold water
                              Numeric procedures used to support narrative biocriteria referenced
                              in KAR 5:030, and in Division publications and SOP manuals.
  Numeric Biocrttarii InWQS    none
with
                       thrti
          r environment*!
 data (e.g.. toxJtity testing and
 chemical specific criteria)
assessment of aquatic resources
cause and effect determinations
permitted discharges
monitoring {e.g., improvements after mitigation)
watershed based management
  Uses of MomsessmenV
  WocrttorM in making
  management, decisions
                            Bioassessments have been used to delist streams from the 303(d)
                            list.
   , .,   i restoration of
  aquatic resources to.*
  designated ALU
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number of reference sites
                            140 total
  Reference site
  determination*
  RBfewneilltecrterta
  Characterization of
  reference sites within •
         COfttSXt'
 Additional infoirration
                                 site-specific
                                 paired watersheds
                                 regional (aggregate of sites)
                                 professional judgment
                                 other:
                            Minimally impacted from point and nonpoint pollution, natural habitat
                            with high forest density relative to other land uses. Other criteria
                            listed in KY's reference reach report on fish communities.  Also
                            depends on ecoregion: habitat score * conductivity (region specific) -
                            nutrients (in some cases).*
                                 historical conditions
                                 least disturbed sites
                                 gradient response
                                 professional judgment
                                 other: minimally impacted*
                                  ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                  elevation
                                  stream type
                                  multivariate grouping
                                  jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                  other:
                                 reference sites linked to ALU
                                 reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                 (found in 401 KAR 5:030 Section 1(1)(t>)4)
                                 some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                 conditions
*KY tries to use minimally impacted reference sites whenever possible, but least disturbed sites are used to set targeted conditions
when there are no minimally impacted sites in a subecoregion.
KENTUCKY: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                        3-71

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                    benthos (< 100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites • broad coverage)
                                    fish (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
                                    periphyton (<100 samples/ydar; single season, multiple sites - broad
                                    coverage)                 \
                                    other:
      sampling gear
      habttatsetecSon
      subsampte size
      taxonomy
      sampling gear
      Wjtltpftt prOCe&Slig
                              D-frams. dipnet. kick net (1 meter), collect by hand; >800 micron mesh
                              multihabitat
                              entire sample
                              combination - family, genus, species
                               seine, backback electrofisher, boat electrofisher, pram unit (tote barge), gill nets,
                               trammel nets; 3/16" mesh
                               multihabitat
                               none
                               none
                               species
                              natural substrate: suction device, brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush,
                              etc.), collect by hand; artificial substrata: periphytometer (in non-wadeable
                              waters)
                              multihabitat
                              taxonomic identification
                              species	
                              visual based; performed with bioassessments
                              standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
                              training for biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Dataantuy*!* toote and
                              /
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
                               95* percentile of all sites-standard] based on a 100 unit scale

                               25th percentile of reference population (100 point scale multi-metric
                               index is under development)
 EwhNttibn
                                  repeat sampling (annual variability)
                                  precision (repeatability)
                                  sensitivity (Box-Whisker distributions)
                                  bias
                                  accuracy (% test sites - nonnference, impaired - validation)
                               EDAS
                               SAS, Systat, EDAS, Excel, MVSP (Multi-Variate Statistical Package),
                               Statigraphics
KENTUCKY: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                               3-72

-------
 LOUISIANA
  Contact Information

  Dugan Sabins, Senior Environmental Scientist - Office of Environmental Assessment
  Jennifer Lindquist, Environmental Scientist III
  Keith Sepulvado, Environmental Scientist III
  Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ)
  P.O. Box 82178 • Baton Rouge, UV 70884-2178
  Phone 225/765-0246 • Fax 225/765-0617
  email: duaan  s@deg.state.la.us
  LDEQ Planning homepage: http://www.deq.slate.la.us/piannina/
  Program Description

  In Louisiana, bioassessments have been used principally to characterize and delineate reference streams.
  Bioassessments have also been used for assessing the biological conditions of waterbodies being evaluated for
  site-specific standards development and use attainability analysis. Bacterial monitoring is conducted for swimming
  use assessment, Periodic toxiclty testing is also conducted. In a very special case, biocriteria were developed for
  specific wetlands to receive treated disinfected wastewater for wetland restoration.

  Further development of bioassessment procedures is dependent on the legal responsibilities and outcome of a
  consent decree on the Louisiana TMDL program. Any additional development will have to be compatible with
  TMDL deadlines and deliverables.  Since Louisiana does not have biocriteria, there is not a great need for LDEQ
  to conduct large scale bioassessments to determine criteria attainment. When the concept of biocriteria is
  adequately thought out and developed for use in state permitting and TMDL programs, then LDEQ will have a
  larger, more inclusive, bioassessment program. The use and revision of chemical/physical criteria, standards, and
  assessment procedures are considered the present priority.

  The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) monitors fishery resources on large rivers and in
  coastal waters of the state for management purposes and for establishing commercial and recreational regulations
  on harvest. However, these assessments are not conducted to determine compliance with the Clean Water Act.
  Environmental agencies are increasing collaboration and coordination with LDWF and are hoping to begin
  combining monitoring efforts and sharing biological data at a future date.
  Documentation and Further Information

  State of Louisiana Water Quality Management Plan Water Quality Inventory Section 305(b) 2000:
  http://www.dea.state.ia.us/planninq/3Q5b/2000/index.htm

  Dewalt, R. E. 1997. Fish and macroinvertebrate taxonomic richness, habitat quality, and in-situ water chemistry of
  ecoregion reference streams in the Western Gulf Coastal Plains and Terrace Upland Ecoregions of Southern
  Louisiana. Prepared for the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality. Baton Rouge, LA. 72 pages.

  Dewalt R. E. 1995. Biological communities of reference streams in the South Central Plains and Upper Mississippi
  Alluvial Plains ecoregions of Louisiana. Prepared for the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality. Baton
  Rouge, LA. 85 pages.
LOUISIANA: Program Summary                    December 2002                                         3-73

-------
  LOUISIANA
  Contact Information
  Dugan Sabins, Senior Environmental Scientist - Office of Environmental Assessment
  Jennifer Lindquist, Environmental Scientist III
  Keith Sepulvado, Environmental Scientist III
  Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ)
  P.O. Box 82178 « Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2178
  Phone 225/765-0246 • Fax 225/765-0617
  email: dugan s@deq,state la.us
  Programmatic Elements
                                   problem identification (screening)
                                   nonpoint source assessments
                                   monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                   ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
                                   promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                   support of antidegradation
                                   evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                   TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                   other: ecoregion reference stream delineation, public education,
                                   bacteria assessment for swirriming use, occasional toxicity
                                   testing, wetlands criteria
                                   targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
                                   projects and specific river basins or watersheds)
                                   fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
                                   probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                   probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                                   rotating basin
                                   other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (Stale based estimation)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
     fully supporting for 305(b)
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
     listed for 303(d)
     number of sites sampled
     number of miles assessed per site
   66,294
       n/a
       n/a
       n/a
•Bioassessments are not used for 305(b)/303(d) reporting purposes or biocriteria development. Louisiana's 2000 305(b) report
listed 7,228 total river and stream miles assessed using chemical/physical criteria for fish and wildlife propagation and limited
aquatic life/wildlife designated uses: 1,118 miles fully supporting and 6,110 miles partially/non-supporting for 305(b).
LOUISIANA: Program Summary
December 2002
                                                                                                            3-74

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making*

  ALU d*.igr*tk>n l»irtfi{||ij Class System (A.B.C)

                             Two designations: 1) Fish and wildlife propagation, 2) Limited
                             aquatic/wildlife (a subcategory of fish and wildlife propagation)
     BthwBiocrHarlainWQS
  Numeric Btocriteria In WOS
                            A qualitative and/or narrative scale of condition that supports
                            narrative biocriteria decisions is found in Louisiana's water quality
                            standards, LAC 33:IX.1111.C and 1113.B.12

                            none
    i «f bioaaaesftnittnft iiatii •-
    R.^^i ,•»»* mmmtf mw*^*w"*rT&&f!!!l':

         •nvironm»ntal
data (e.g., toxtefty testing and !
chemical specific criteria} ;,:: ";
                                 assessment of aquatic resources

                                 cause and effect determinations

                                 permitted discharges

                                 monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

                                 watershed based management
  bfocrttorlabi making
  fltntKwmmtdecMom
  regaralnfl restoration of
 ' • aquatic nwources to a .
  designated ALU    '••'
                            Bioassessments have been used to delineate reference streams,
                            which in turn have been used in management decisions for setting
                            DO criteria across ecoregions.
•Aquatic life use is assessed using chemical/physical numerical and general criteria. Louisiana does have general (narrative)
criteria for biological and aquatic community integrity.


  Reference Site/Condition Development

  Number of reference *ll»f;;; 16 total
Rffwwcealto • vttjl
liliS!';-;;. -' . :'';illllli
QlfG:"-''- •.•^•9t~fi|;
.-.. • ,-> * • :--:-":r:-,-
i-> /;..'
R»ferenc«*lt* criteria ;
raaionftl contort '' - '-'-^Xi-
.-<,*•;;,'" £,'„-' '' ."•~"l~i^-'>:
^&^:&'%"?*' "• • • • <:'-: ~-; 'oThl^'R'i!


rogkmal reference
*- '',,,'- ,-, v ,";;V^ '-
.^piSwhiforma^aiiB
,'£~l~»£~- • • ',.-..", "A~.~f.i;&s
• •:'y;<=:.;;a-:;} -• _ . '•. :iv;?;S§psf;
•' • ''..y}:.
/


/

site-specific
paired watersheds
regional (aggregate of sites)
professional judgment
other:
Least impacted wadeable streams, determined using best
professional judgment ("common sense criteria")
/
/


/
/





/
/
7
historical conditions (when information is available)
least disturbed sites
gradient response
professional judgment
other: wadeable streams
ecoregions (or some aggregate)
elevation
stream type
multivariate grouping
jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
other:
reference sites linked to ALU
reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
(found in LAC 33 33. AT. 1113.B.12)
some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
conditions
LOUISIANA: Program Summary
                                             December 2002
                                                                                                     3-75

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (<100 samples/yean multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad
                                   coverage for watershed level)
                                   fish (<100 samples/year, multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad coverage for
                                   watershed level)
                                   periphyton
                                   other
  Benthos
     ;jfiabHat selection
     rsubsampteslze •
                             collect by hand, dipnet, kick net (1 meter); 500-600 micron mesh
                             multihabitat woody debris, riches^ habitat
                             300 count
                             family and species
     :«afripifcHi0ear
      habitat selection
        mfto processing
                             backpack and boat electrofishers, Rotenone, seine; 1/8" and 1/4" mesh
                             multihabitat
                             length measurement and anomalies
                             none
                             species
                               visual based; performed with bioassessments (habitat reference conditions found
                               in WQS. LAC 33:IX.1113.B.12.)	
                               standard operating procedures and quality assurance plan

Data Analysis and Interpretation
Datearmrystotootearid  ,
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other: nonparametric analysis
            ihfestiolde.
      transforming metrics
     :ririM.tinHles« scores
               '
                             cumulative distribution function, North Carolina Biotic Index (NCBI),
                             EPT. fish richness metrics (USEPA 1989)
                             cumulative distribution function, NCBI, EPT, fish richness metrics
                             (USEPA 1989)*
 fot currently evaluated
                                  repeat sampling
                                  precision
                                  sensitivity
                                  bias
                                  accuracy
              iwtJ ahaiy«te
                             spreadsheets and paper files
                             SAS and Excel
*LDEQ has used biological indices and matrices for evaluating wadeable streams in several ecoregjons and for determining
appropriate reference sites. These indices and matrices have not been adopted into the water quality standards and are not used to
assess impairment for 305(6) or regulatory purposes.
LOUISIANA: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                             3-76

-------
 MAINE


 Contact  Information

 Susan P. Davies, Program Manager, Biologist III
 Maine Department of Environmental Protection (MDEP)
 SHS 17 • Augusta, ME 04333
 Phone 207/287-7778 • Fax 207/287-7191
 email: susan.p.dayiesffiistate.me.us
 MDEP Biomonitoring Program website: http://www.state.me.us/deD/blwa/biohompg.htm
 For General Information, contact: BioME@sta te.me.us



 Program Description

 Biological monitoring is a primary method used by the State of Maine to assess water quality. The Biological Monitoring Program
 is one of five  Sections within the Division of Environmental Assessment. All field, analytical and statistical methods, including the
 resultant numeric biochteria have been designed, developed and tested by the MDEP Biomonitoring Program staff and a
 consulting biostatistician (Dr. Francis Drummond, University of Maine, Orono, Maine). Water quality standards in current use in
 Maine, including tiered aquatic life uses and statutory definitions of biological terms, were drafted by the Biomonitoring Program
 and other staff of the Division of Environmental Assessment.

 The State of Maine began the process of biological criteria development by incorporating explicit narrative standards for aquatic
 life uses in the state water quality classification law.  Each of three classes, ranging from "natural" (Class A) to minimum state
 standards (Class C), contains specific language that defines the allowable biological response, taking into consideration other
 designated uses, and expectations of community response to human activities allowed in that class. The benthic
 macroinvertebrate community is assessed to determine attainment of standards.

 Maine's numeric biological criteria rely  on a three stage decision process. The first stage is a linear discriminant model, utilizing
 nine metrics to assign an initial classification probability for an unknown site.  The second stage linear discriminant model uses
 17 additional  metrics and indicator taxa, along with probabilities derived in the first stage model, to compute final probabilities of
 group membership. The output is expressed as a probability of group membership for each of the four water quality classes. The
 highest class attained, with at least 60% probability, is used as the final model outcome. The third stage uses expert biologist's
 judgement to make a final decision about attainment, based on the outcome of the linear discriminant analysis, with adjustments
 for any known sampling errors, unexplained community structure anomalies or atypical conditions surrounding the sampling
 event.

 The regulatory authority for the Department's numeric biological criteria is derived from the tiered aquatic life use designations that
 are explicitly defined in the water quality standards law (MRSA Title 38 Article 4-A § 464-465). The Department has draft rules in
 support of the numeric biocriteria protocol and is expected to go to rule-making as soon as  a needed electronic database upgrade
 is completed.  The Biological Monitoring Program provides water quality information for a  wide array of programs and initiatives
 including:
 •    evaluation of water quality classification attainment and 303(d) listing;
      evaluation of impacts downstream of discharges;
      general, long-term ambient monitoring and trend assessment;
      evaluation of the effects of management activities
      evaluation of the effects of nonpoint source impacts;
      evaluation of impacts from diffuse toxic contamination through the Surface Water Ambient Toxics Program (MDEP 1993)
      evaluation of the impacts of hydropower activities in fulfillment of requirements for the Clean Water Act SEC. 401 water quality
      certification process.

 In addition, the Program is refining methods and criteria to better assess aquatic biological  impacts of poor land use practices on
 stream and wetland  systems.

 MDEP is funded to do a pilot project using the EPA Stressor Identification protocol applied  to an intensively surveyed 303(d)
 listed urban watershed. To facilitate the development of TMDLs, findings from the SI procedure will be used to better target the
 assessment approach for a set of five other similarly impacted urban streams.


 Documentation and Further  Information

 State of Maine 305(6) Report, Summer 2000

 Biomonitoring Retrospective: Fifteen Year Summary for Maine Rivers and Streams, December 1999:
 http://www.state.me.us/dep/blwa/docmonitQrina/bioloQical/bioreD20QO.hlm

 S.P. Davies & I. Tsomides, (1997) "Methods for Biological Sampling and Analysis of Maine's Inland Waters", MDEP. revised
 June 1997: http://www.state.me.us/dep/biwq/docmonitoring/finlmeth.Ddf

 Relevant biomoniloring materials can be accessed online: http://www.state.me.us/dep/blwa/


MAINE: Program Summary                           December 002                                                3-77

-------
  MAINE
  Contact  Information
  Susan P. Davies, Program Manager, Biologist III
  Maine Department of Environmental Protection (MDEP)
  SHS 17 ' Augusta, ME 04333
  Phone 207/287-7778 • Fax 207/287-7191
  email:  susan p.davies@state.me.us
  For General Information, contact: BioME@state.me.us
  Programmatic Elements
f'Wflfilfl, OVftHMI
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocrileria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMOL assessment and monitoring
other: hydropower dam licensing, uncontrolled hazardous waste
site monitoring
                                   targeted (i.e.. sites selected for specific purpose) (special
                                   projects only)
                                   fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (specific
                                   river basins or watersheds)
                                   probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                   probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                                   rotating basin (5 yr rotation, specific river basins or watersheds)
                                   other: hydropower dam licensing, uncontrolled hazardous waste
                                   site monitoring
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                        31,672
 (determined using slate based local GIS coverage)
 Total perennial miles                                   23.879
 Total miles assessed for biology                1,000*
      fully supporting for 305(b)                            858.$
      partia lly/non-supporting for 305(b)                     141.5
      listed for 303(d)                                    141.5
      number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)              40
      number of miles assessed per site                       ~S
                                   1,000 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                         fully supporting* fof 305(b)
                                         "partially/non-supporting" for 30S(b)
•These miles are based on the last five years of monitoring. Stream and river miles are combined, with streams accounting for
roughly 80% of the total miles assessed. For program-wide estimation purposes, miles are estimated assuming that each monitored
station assesses about 5 miles of river or stream, though this number does vary. The last few years, up to 55 sites have been
sampled, but 40 is the average number.
MAINE: Program Summary
               December D02
                                                                                                            3-78

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
  ALUttmtgiMtiqniMMb
  Narratrvft
 . Nurnerk; P^r&iii in VVQS
                              Class system (AA, A, B, C)

                              Four designations based on a gradient of biological condition: AA- "as naturally
                              occurs", natural flow regime; A- "as naturally occurs", hydro allowed; B- "no
                              detrimental change": C- "maintain structure and function, support for salmonids"

                              Procedures used to support narrative biocriteria located in MDEP WQS.

                              under development - Draft numeric biocriteria rule in internal agency review,
                              due for promulgation in 2002.  (A probabilistic model - linear discriminant
                              analysis - designed using expert judgment and statistical analysis is currently
                              used to determine attainment of conditions described in aquatic life standards.
                              Numeric biocriteria have been used to implement agency policy since 1990.)
 UlOi Of UlQMBMIIIIHHll llBlB
 bi toteg»«t«djw»«wOTwnt»
 with other w*vbtMwnwit«I:-
 0£|A |O>O.« tOXJOBr* IBSttnQ fltfXi
 CfldfTllCS) 8IMKjtiKj CfH^fr8/ • •' •
                                   assessment of aquatic resources

                                   cause and effect determinations

                                   permitted discharges

                                   monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

                                   watershed based management (pertains to "small" watersheds)
 USM of bioaasewmont/
 b»e«r1t»rlal«riniwn8
• managwmrrtiectalofls
' regarding rt*toiit(on of
 aquatic resourcM to ¥  :
 designated ALO
                               Many examples of this have been documented in case studies provided in
                               "Biomonrtoring Retrospective: Fifteen year summary for Maine rivers and
                               streams" available in .pdf on website:
                               http://www.state.me,us/dep/blwq/docmonitorinQ/bioloaical/blorep20QO.htm
Tiered aquatic life uses in Maine Water Quality standards are consistent with the condition gradient describing other applicable WQ
standards (dissolved oxygen, bacteria, toxics) for each class.

  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Hunter of raforeiictf
                              370 total
 f*-tmmm + ,mtit*mlmi*tit'ii£""*ijf •
 VlwF§Ci8nZ8pCfl;IW
 refmonco *&M within •
 r»glofwJ context
 Stream «tnrttfl«HQn wRhta
                                   site-specific

                                   paired watersheds

                                   regional (aggregate of sites)

                                   professional judgment

                                   other:
                               Minimally disturbed reference site standards are defined by the following cntena
                               -Based on ArcView GIS coverages; by percent of watershed upstream of the
                               sampled station: >90% forested; <5% active logging; <1% cropland, residential
                               or urban.
                                   historical conditions

                                   least disturbed sites

                                   gradient response

                                   professional judgment

                                   other: minimally disturbed"
                                  ecoregions (or some aggregate)

                                  elevation

                                  stream type
                                  multivariate grouping (4 multivariate groups)

                                  jurisdictional(i.e., statewide)
                                   reference sites linked to ALU

                                   reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards (State of
                                   Maine. 7985. Maine Laws Ch. 698 §15 - in part. An Act to Amend the
                                   Classification System for Maine Waters)

                                   some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced conditions
"Minimally disturbed characterization is one component of established reference conditions; they are also divided into different
classes and groups with different biological attributes.  Maine has a range of streams, from pristine to severely degraded.
MAINE: Program Summary
                                                 December 002
                                                                                                            3-79

-------
Field and Lab Methods
AMemblagm assessed
                                    benthos (100-500 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - watershed
                                    level and broad coverage)
                                    fish
                                    periphyton (<100 samples/yepr; single season, multiple sites - broad
                                    coverage)                 ••
                                    other:
      sampling gear   •
      rtabflst selection
      sutwamptoslze
      taxonomy
                              rock baskets (500-600 micron mesh)
                              riffle/run (cobble), artificial substrate
                              entire sample (if >500 organisms, subsamples are taken proportionately at 25% of
                              sample, then adjusted back to whole sample counts)
                              genus, species (identified to lowest possible level; adjusted to genus in database)
  '&*•*. :,-^j^a^f-K^JS-iY^sgixij: t
 , ,C : ^^tftt*t#H*«4^&r™ 2?''-" -•=::
  3 •';,. i^WT
                              natural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.)
                              artificial substrata: periphytometer
                              open canopy in riffle/run
                              chlorophyll al phaeophytin; biomass; taxonomic identification
                              all algae; genus level; species levfl
                               visual based; performed with bioaisessments
                               standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings, training
                               for biologists, sorting proficiency checks, taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen
                               archive
 Data Analysis and Interpretation
 Data analysis tools and
                               /
                                  summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                  parametric ANOVAs
                                  multivariate analysis
                                  biological metrics (multiple computed metrics are used as input
                                  variables in probabilistic model)
                                  disturbance gradients
                                  other:
 MU
             fc-'-""!-? '• '•• ?*-»- ~
                               Probabilistic model using a priori sites defined by expert judgement
                                    repeat sampling (long-term annual monitoring sites)
                                    precision (percent accuracy compared to a priori class)
                                    sensitivity
                                    bias (in relation to stream size, latitude/longitude, velocity, eco-
                                    region)
                                    accuracy (percent accuracy compared to a priori class: a priori
                                    reference sites compared to land use - selected reference sites)
                               STORET; Oracle/Visual Basic relational database (with linkage to
                               ARCINFO spatial database with point coverage for all monitoring
                               stations)
                               Core linear discriminant models statistical routines are run and
                               reported from within the Oracle database; spatial analysis in ArcView
                               and ARCINFO; routine queries run in MS Access, Systat or Excel
MAINE: Program Summary
                                                 December 002
                                                                                                                3-80

-------
 MARYLAND
  Contact Information

  Paul Kazyak, Monitoring and Non-Tidal Assessment Division Director
  Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MD DNR)
  Tawes State Office Bldg , C-2 • Annapolis, MD 21401
  Phone 410/260-8607 • Fax 410/260-8620
  email: pkazvak@dnr.state.md.us
  MD DNR Maryland Streams homepage: hltp://www dnr.stale.md us/streams/index.html

  Richard Eskin, PhD, Deputy Director - Technical and Regulatory Services Administration
  Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE)
  1800 Washington Blvd. • Baltimore, MD 21230
  Phone 410/537-3000 " Fax 410/631-3998
  email: reskin@mde.state.md.us
  website: http://www.mde.state.md.us/
  Program Description

  The Maryland Biological Stream Survey (MBSS) is a program of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MD DNR) and
  is intended to provide statistically unbiased estimates of the condition of first through third-order (wadeable) non-tidal streams
  and rivers of Maryland on a local (e.g., drainage basin or county) as well as a statewide scale. The survey is based on a
  probabilistic stream sampling approach where random selections are made from all streams in the state that can physically be
  sampled.  The approach supports statistically valid population estimation of variables of interest (e.g.. largemouth bass densities,
  miles of streams with degraded physical habitat, miles of streams with poor Index of Biotic Integrity scores, etc.).  When
  repeated, the Survey will also provide a basis for assessing future changes in ecological condition of flowing waters of the state.
  At present, plans are to repeat the Survey at regular intervals and expand the approach to larger streams and tidal creeks.

  Benthic macroinvertebrates and water quality samples are collected during the spring index period from March through early
  May, while fish, herpetofauna, in situ stream chemistry, and physical habitat sampling are conducted during the low flow period in
  the summer, from June through September.

  Data collected from each sample site are used to develop statewide and basin-specific estimates of totals, means (or averages),
  proportions, and percentiles for the parameters of interest. The amount of variability (or margin of error) associated with any
  estimate of a total, mean, proportion, or percentile is determined by calculating a standard error, a statistic that measures the
  reliability of an estimate. A standard error also provides a statistical basis for deciding if the observed changes in any parameter
  of interest over time or space are significantly different or simply due to  chance alone.
  Documentation  and  Further Information

  2000 Maryland Section 305(b) Water Quality Report, with Appendix E. Assessment Methodology.
  http.vydrcrweb dnr.statemd.us/download/tavs/MD2QOO 305b.pdf

  DRAFT2002 Integrated 303(0} List, http://www.mde.stale.md.us/tmdl/2002 303dlist/index.html

  From the Mountains to the Sea:  The State of Maryland's Freshwater Streams, December 1999:
  http://www.dnr.state.md.us/streams/pubs/md-strearns.pdf

  Maryland Biological Stream Survey (MBSS) Sampling Manual, February 2000:
  http://www.dnr.state.md.us/stfeams/pubs/2000samp manual.pdf

  MBSS Laboratory Methods for Benthic Macroinvertebrate Processing and Taxonomy. November 2000:
  http://www.dnr.state.md us/streams/pubs/eaOO-6 lab  man.pdf

  Refinement and Validation of a Fish Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) for Maryland Streams, October 2000:
  http://www.dnr.state.md.us/streams/Pubs/eaOO-2 fibi.pdf

  Development of a Benthic Index  of Biological Integrity for Maryland Streams, December 1998:
  http://www.dnr stale. md-US/streams/pubs/1996 Benlhic%20IBI pdf

  For more documents and publications, go to: http://www.dnr.state.md.us/slreams/mbss/mbss pubs html or
  http://www.dnr.state.md.us/streams/pubs/pub list.html
MARYLAND: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
3-81

-------
  MARYLAND
  Contact Information
  Paul Kazyak, Monitoring and Non-Tidal Assessment Division Director
  Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MD DNR)
  Tawes State Office Bldg., C-2 • Annapolis, MD 21401
  Phone 410/260-8607 • Fax 410/260-8620
  email: pkazvaki8idnr.state.md .us
  Richard Eskin. PhD, Deputy Director - Technical and Regulatory Services Administration
  Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE)
  1800 Washington Blvd. • Baltimore, MD 21230
  Phone 410/537-3000 • Fax 410/631-3998
  email: resNJn@mde.state.md us
  Programmatic Elements
  flSttl Of tlloiliioi IfHOflt   '
                  IWB^W
                  iiio'iKi
                               UD
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs (LIMITED)
ALL) determinations/ambient monitoring (LIMITED)
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria (through MDE)
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions (LIMITED)
TMDL assessment and monitoring (MDE using MBSS data)
other: target restoration costs and locations; areas for preservation; track trends in
stream conditions; identify Relationships between stressors and biota; predict future
conditions based on land use changes
               :i''
targeted (small portion - special projects and specific river basins or watersheds)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (sentinel site network, best of the
best streams in the state, comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area (comprehensive use throughout
jurisdiction)
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
other:
The largest portion of sampling effort is for probabilistic sampling with watershed as primary strata.
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                        17,000
 (determined using National Hydrography Database)
 Total perennial miles                                    12,34{3
 Total miles assessed for biology**                6,142
      fully supporting for 305(b)                           3,429.0
      partially/non-supporting for 30S(b)                   2,713.4
      listed for 303(d)"                         178 actual listings
      number of sites sampled (from 1995-1997)              1,000
      number of miles assessed per site
                                 6,142 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                       fully supporting' for 305(b)
                                       "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
•The miles listed above were extracted from Maryland's 2000 305(b)
Report, which stated. The assessment of non-tidal rivers and streams is based on monitoring data, including ambient water quality
monitoring programs and other water quality data collected by [various agencies and programs].* The above miles are categorized
as "monitored* in the 2000 305(b). However, the MBSS method only applies to wadeable nontidal streams, thus some portion of the
total assessed stream and river miles listed above were not assessed using this method.  The 178 sites listed for 303(d) were pulled
from the DRAFT 2002 303(d) Report. These miles do not include streams larger than 4th order or with tidal flow.
MARYLAND: Program Summary
             December 2002
3-82

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and  Dec is ion-Making

        •ten
   •torqiNMyita
                Instate
Single Aquatic Life Use, Fishery Based Uses, Warm Water vs. Cold Water
Seven uses: I: support offish & aquatic life and recreation; I-P: adds drinking water supply
to Use I; II: shellfish harvesting; III: natural trout; III-P: adds drinking water supply; IV:
recreational trout (put and take); IV-P: adds drinking water.
  Narrative Btocriterta In WQS

  Numeric Btocrtterfa In WQS
                             Narrative regulations and formal/informal numeric procedures specifically addressing
                             biocriteria applications are under development.
                             none - documented quantitative method applied
  Uaea of hlnMiMltrnttnt rtirtti
  **^w

(Htonnliiatioita site-specific paired watersheds regional (aggregate of sites) professional judgment other: use combination of a priori physical and chemical criteria applied to randomly selected sites - these represent the best remaining sites in Maryland Reference »lt»crit*rt« : ' ' : ' ' •'"'•":"1" Must meet a priori chemical and physical criteria (criteria found in MBSS IBI documents for fish and benthos) regional context" 5-J: if II historical conditions least disturbed sites gradient response professional judgment other: Stream •tratfficatton withta raQlorol Nn condition* ecoregions (or some aggregate) elevation stream type multivariate grouping jurisdictional (i.e., statewide) other: reference sites stratified by stream order Additional Information reference sites linked to ALU reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced conditions MARYLAND: Program Summary December 2002 3-83


-------
  Field and Lab Methods
  AuwnbtaciM ttMssod
                                 benthos (100-500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                 fish (100-500 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                 periphylon
                                 other: macrophytes and amphibians/reptiles (presence/absence only) (100-500
                                 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
  BmthM
      sampling gear
  j    habitat selection
  l    sutosampte siza
  ::   taxonomy  .-^
                             D-frame; 500-600 micron mesh
                             multiriabitat, focus on most productive habitat - riffles
                             100 count
                             genus (family level taxonomy for volunteer Stream Waders Program)
 fteh
      sampling gear
                             backpack electrofisher, barge shocker sometimes used on larger streams, herpetile search
                             also conducted by hand; 1/4" mesh
;i? ,;: habitat setectfon ;   .;.; •<  :  whatever is in the 75 meter segment
:•:".'  sample processing   :      length measurement and biomass- batch (gamefish only); anomalies (unusual types or
     '        '         ,  ;    prevalence noted)
    subsampte      •          none
:    taxonomy      	species	
                             visual based, quantitative measurements, buffer width and vegetation size category, linear
                             and areal extent of eroded banks; performed with reassessments	
                             standard operating procedures; quality assurance plan: periodic meetings/ training for
                             biologists; sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks; specimen archival; double entry of data;
                             range checks; peer review of reports; certification program for reassessment
 Quality •Muranc* proflfam
 Data Analysis and Interpretation
 Data MMiyste tools aiKi :.~
                                 summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                 parametric ANOVAs
                                 multivariate analysis
                                 biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                 disturbance gradients
                                 other: various, depending on needs
                 nwlrlcs
      Into unlfless scores
                 irmertin
                             50" percentile of reference population

                             10th percentile used as threshold between metric scores of 3 and 1; confidence intervals used
                             to evaluate sample results for attainment decisions
      defining impairment in      For development of IBI; not current analysis
CVmlMttOI) 0f MnOfllUinM
JbltApM^lHaCMM^A ' "'
.' -i '•
. :K
T'
Bta
i'
'\
'> :'-'-v >"'^ ;---°:'LM"=;l:
ibjjuMiteti:^;^^^ ;Sis
;' v -. ; -„ >f , ' , - - * ^ ? .¥

Retrieval and analysts
/
/
/

/
/
repeat sampling (see IBI documents plus interim biocriteria document produced by
MDE)
precision (replicate sample/same team, same reach)
sensitivity (classification efficiency)
bias
accuracy (classification efficiency)
other: re-sort in laboratory
MS Access, SAS primarily, but also use spreadsheets for some applications (data
dictionaries are produced for external users - see MBSS publications page)
SAS. Excel, Quattro pro, ARC View
•Fish and Benthic IBIs are also combined into a "Combined Biological Index."
MARYLAND: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                             3-84

-------
 MASSACHUSETTS
  Contact Information

  Arthur S, Johnson, Environmental Monitoring Coordinator
  Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP)
  627 Main Street • Worcester, MA 01608
  Phone 508/767-2873 • Fax 508/791-4131
  email: arthur.johnson@state.ma.us
  website: http://www.state.ma.us/dep/
  Program  Description

  Biological monitoring techniques are an important component of the watershed-based surface water quality monitoring and
  assessment program administered by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP).  The goals of this
  program are to assess whether the surface waters of Massachusetts are of sufficient quality and quantity to support their multiple
  uses, and to report those findings in watershed assessment reports, the 305{b) Summary of Water Quality Report and the 303(d)
  List of Impaired Waters, Monitoring is also used to identify causes and sources of water use impairments as the first step toward
  developing water quality and quantity management strategies.

  MADEP biologists assess the condition of resident macroinvertebrate, fish and algal communities in streams to provide a direct
  measure of the ecological response to the cumulative effects of pollutant loadings and habitat degradation. These
  bioassessments, coupled with water quality data and other relevant information, form the basis for determining the aquatic life
  use-support status, as defined in the Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards.

  Rapid bioassessment protocols (RBPs), based on those developed by the USEPA, are used to monitor the integrity of the benthic
  macroinvertebrate community. A targeted sampling design is employed  whereby sites are selected for upstream/downstream
  comparisons, comparisons against a regional or surrogate reference, or for long-term trend monitoring. Based on scoring of several
  metrics, four categories of impairment are discerned by the RBP analysis (non-impaired, slightly impaired,  moderately impaired,
  and severely impaired). Approximately 50-75 sites are assessed each year in accordance with a rotating watershed monitoring
  scheme.

  The analysis of the structure of the finfish community as a measure of biological integrity is another component of the water quality
  monitoring program.  MADEP utilizes  a standardized method based on RBP V (USEPA 1989) to improve data comparability among
  wadeable sampling sites. The fish collection procedures involve sampling habitats in relative proportion to their local availability. A
  representative  100-meter stream reach is selected to include the primary physical habitat characteristics of the stream (i.e., riffle, run,
  and pool habitats). Electrofishing is the preferred method for obtaining a representative sample of the fish community at each
  sampling site. Pish (except young-of-the-year) collected within the study reach are identified to species, counted, and examined for
  external anomalies, (i.e., deformities, eroded fins, lesions, and tumors). Aquatic life use-support status is derived from a knowledge of
  the environmental requirements (e.g., water temperature  and darity, dissolved oxygen content) and relative tolerance to water
  pollution of the  species collected.

  Algae represent a third community that may be assessed. The analysis  of the attached algae or periphyton  community in shallow
  streams, or the phytoplankton in deeper rivers and lakes employs an indicator species approach whereby inferences on water quality
  conditions are drawn from an understanding of the environmental preferences and tolerances of the species present. Because the
  algal community typically exhibits dramatic temporal shifts in species composition throughout a single growing season, results from a
  single sampling event are generally not indicative of historical conditions. For this reason the information gained from the algal
  community assessment is more useful as a supplement to the assessments of other communities that serve to integrate conditions
  over a longer time period.

  In addition to the community analyses described above, MADEP also collects some fish to be assayed for the presence of toxic
  contaminants in their tissues. The goal of this monitoring element is primarily to provide data for the assessment of the risk to human
  consumers associated with the consumption of freshwater finfish. In the past fish collection efforts were generally restricted to
  waterbodies where wastewater discharge data or previous water quality studies indicated potential toxic contamination problems.
  More recently, concerns about mercury contamination from both local and far-field sources have led to a broader survey of
  waterbodies throughout Massachusetts. In both cases, nonetheless, the analyses have been restricted to edible fish fillets.


  Documentation  and Further Information

  Commonwealth of Massachusetts Summary of Water Quality 2000

  Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards. May 1997: http://www.state.ma.us/dep/bwp/iww/files/31'4004.pdf

  For a list of online resources, go to: http://wwwstalema.us/deD/brp/wm/wmpubs.htrrrfother

  Jessup, B.K., J. Gerritsen, M.T. Barbour. and R. Haynes. 2001.  Analysis and Interpretation of Pilot Study Data as an Initial Step
  in the Development of Biological Criteria for Streams and Small Rivers in Massachusetts. Prepared by Tetra Tech, Inc., for
  Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Worcester, MA.
MASSACHUSETTS: Program Summary
December 2002
3-85

-------
  MASSACHUSETTS
  Contact Information
  Arthur S. Johnson, Environmental Monitoring Coordinator
  Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP)
  627 Main Street • Worcester, MA 01608
  Phone 508/767-2873 • Fax 508/791-4131
  email: arthur.iohnson@s tate. ma. us
Programmatic Elements
                Mitt
                r quality
 tfeilgns
                                 problem identification (screening)
                                 nonpoint source assessments
                                 monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                 ALL) determinations, ambient monitoring
                                 promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                 support of antidegradation
                                 evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                 TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                 other: development of numeric biocriteria
                               targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (specific river
                               basins or watersheds)
                               fixed station (i.e.. water quality monitoring stations)
                               probabilistic by stream orderfcatchment area
                               probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                               rotating basin (specific river basins or watersheds)
                               other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                     8,229
 (determined using a stale based program)
 Total perennial miles                                 7.133
 Total miles assessed for biology               1,344J
     fully supporting for 305(b)                           649
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                    695
     listed for 303(d)                                   695
     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)"         -100
     number of miles assessed per site*            site specific
                                                                1,344 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                                                      "fully supporting" for 305(b)
                                                                      "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
The number of sites sampled varies annually, as does the number of miles assessed per site.
MASSACHUSETTS: Program Summary
                                             December 2002
                                                                                                     3-86

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
    JHiJasignations In state
 water quality: '   '  '
Warm water vs. Cold water

Three designations:
1. General Aquatic Life Support 2. Cold Water/Warm Water Fishery
3. Shellfish Harvesting
 Narrative Btocritaria In WQS    none - General aquatic life statement found in WQS; informal process
  .  "   .                      in place to translate RBP metrics to level of use support.

 Numeric Btocritarfa in WQS    none
 Usesr.of btoassessment data
 lnlntoflratodMWMnv.nl.
    assessment of aquatic resources

    cause and effect determinations

    permitted discharges

    monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

    watershed based management
 Uses of bJosssessmentf
 btocfitstia in meJcbiQ
 mwiimoRMnt decisions
 1991141119 restoration of
 aquatic resources to a
 designated ALU
Information discussed in water quality assessment reports along with
recommendations for management, restoration and further monitoring.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
Numterof reference ettas 5-10 total Con an annual baas/
R»feren«.lto • • :^;7J?
dotsfiitiiiations ' . :
• '- :;:-;;:S:;:';-y '-•••- •'. . ' ': ;--:-;--.
• ;:;?; ;';;•;-:-; . • • . . '•]'•,• •'•;
^fl&lSWW'' •-: ••• - -:^KW
;;:::|31I1K •:;'/; ./'• ' ";'. '' 1'i^"
: : ;:Rsf|i|ce:;«)te criteria siilfl
IffliiHy:-".:-- ••:-::;?;l|||
'"•MK^- '":''' '.;.. /tl'^
Characterization of
fofonincA sites wtthln a ~ '
regional context '• ;' •'••^£^

Streart»il««WcationwlthW
regional reference ••;' ":::M^
conditions
- ;;: i :- ,. - . • • ; •:..' .'
:X-".'-:.- '••" : • • ' • '" ':-\ ':'-^'
i:^«:i^:li^nnation:::;::;|i5:i:i!
li|P:r':'fili
/
/
"7"
/

site-specific
paired watersheds
regional (aggregate of sites)
professional judgment
other:
Least impacted by known point discharges; least impacted by riparian
zone land uses; habitat qualities comparable to test sites. For regional
reference sites MADEP attempts to locate the least-disturbed sites by
conducting extensive reconnaissance throughout the watershed and
selecting sites that do not appear to have point or nonpoint sources of
pollution upstream from them. Reference sites that represent the
various sub-ecoregions that exist in Massachusetts are gradually being
identified. This process is not yet complete, however.

/



/

—
/


/
historical conditions
least disturbed sites
gradient response
professional judgment
other:
ecoregions (or some aggregate)
elevation
stream type
multivariate grouping
jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
other: MADEP is working on identifying reference sites to
represent various sub-ecoregions
reference sites linked to ALU
reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
conditions
*MADEP does not have a fixed set of reference stations situated throughout the state. Rather, during the rotating basin schedule
MADEP reconnaissances new reference sites depending upon where the sampling will take place. Therefore the number of
reference sites may vary from year to year.
MASSACHUSETTS: Program Summary
                 December 2002
                                                                                                     3-87

-------
 Field and Lab Methods
;;||iffi§|^w^Mse*Md.;: J

                                    benthos (<100 samples/year: single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                    fish (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                    periphyton (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - some at watershed level)
                                    other: macrophytes (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - not at watershed
                                    level)
      sampling gear
      habitat selection
     flwpijoniy
                               multi-plate, rock baskets, collect by hand, single-pole Kick-net (45 cm, rectangular, 500-600
                               micron mesh)
                               riffle/run (cobble)
                               100 count
                               combination-genus, species
      sampling gear
      sample processing
      subsampte
      taxonomy
                               backpack electrofisher, boat electrofisher, seine; 1/8", 3/16" and 1/4" mesh
                               multihabitat
                               length measurement, biomass - individual, anomalies
                               all species, 25 individuals of each
                               sub-species
            (processing
     /.taxonomy
                               natural substrate: suction device, brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.), collect
                               by hand; artificial substrate: midroslides or other suitable substratum
                               richest habitat, riffle/run (cobble), multihabitat, artificial substrate
                               chlorophyll at phaeophytin, biomass, taxonomic identification
                               genus level for soft-bodied algae when possible; diatoms are not cleared
  Habitat
                               visual based; performed with bioassessments
 Quality assume* prograi
 .QMIIISIilSi'  '
                               standard operating procedures; quality assurance plan; periodic meetings, training for
                               biologists; limited taxonomic proficiency checks; specimen archival
 Data Analysis and Interpretation
 Data analy.to tool, and
                                    summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                    parametric ANOVAs
                                    multivariate analysis
                                    biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                    disturbance gradients
                                    other:
                               Follow 1989 EPA RBP guidelines (Figure 6.3-4)

                               Follow 1989 EPA RBP guidelines: anything <83% of reference is
                               impaired/impacted
                                    repeat sampling

                                    precision (duplicate sampling)
                                    sensitivity
                                    bias
                                    accuracy
                               MS Access 2000
                               MS Access 2000 - benthos database customized from EDAS
'Everything is determined relative to the reference sites; however some parts of this have been refined, including the similarity index
thresholds, and MADEP hopes to use biocriteria data to further modify thresholds.  MADEP has also evaluated a model community
at order level as a substitute for similarity indices (see Novak & Bode, 1992).
MASSACHUSETTS: Program Summary
                                                  December 2002
                                                                                                              3-88

-------
 MICHIGAN


 Contact Information

 William Creal, Environmental Manager
 Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ)
 P.O. Box 30273 • Lansing, Ml 48909
 Phone 517/335-4181  • Fax 517/241-8133
 email: crealw@michigan ,gov
 MDEQ Water homepage: http://www.michiaan.QOv/dea/1.1607.7-135-3313-.OO.html



 Program  Description

 In 1997, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) completed a report entitled, A Strategic Environmental
 Quality Monitoring Program for Michigan's Surface Waters (Strategy). This Strategy describes the monitoring activities necessary
 for a comprehensive assessment of water quality in Michigan's surface waters. One component of the Strategy is expanded and
 improved monitoring of biological integrity and physical habitat.

 This program element includes all monitoring conducted for fish and benthic invertebrate community structure, nuisance aquatic
 plants, algae, and slimes, and assessment of physical habitat. The MDEQ's goal in conducting watershed surveys is to assess
 80 percent of the stream and river miles in Michigan over a five-year period.

 Enhanced biological integrity and physical habitat monitoring is consistent with existing MDEQ programs and activities.  MDEQ
 uses the existing five-year basin units defined by the NPDES permitting program, which includes 45 watershed units based on
 drainage to the four Great Lakes. Monitoring activities in each watershed include not only biological integrity, but also fish and
 wildlife contaminant studies, water chemistry, and sediment chemistry. Integrating the enhanced biological monitoring with the
 other activities, within the framework of the five-year permitting cycle, will ensure that the monitoring is closely linked with other
 MDEQ programs and contributes to resource management decisions. Specific objectives of biological Integrity and physical
 habitat monitoring are to:
      1.   Determine whether waters of the state are attaining standards for aquatic life.
      2.   Assess the biological integrity of the waters of the state.
      3.   Determine the extent to which sedimentation in surface waters is impacting indigenous aquatic life.
      4.   Determine whether the biological integrity of surface waters is changing with time.
      5.   Assess the effectiveness of BMPs and other restoration efforts in protecting and/or restoring biological integrity and
          physical habitat.
      6.   Evaluate the overall effectiveness of MDEQ programs in protecting the biological integrity of surface waters.
      7.   Identify waters that are high quality, as well as those that are not  meeting standards.
      8.   Identify the waters of the state that are impacted by nuisance aquatic plants, algae, and bacterial slimes.

 Rapid, qualitative biological assessments of wadeable streams and rivers are conducted using the Great Lakes and
 Environmental Assessment Section Procedure 51. which compares fish and benthic invertebrate communities at a site to the
 communities that are expected at an un-impacted, or reference, site. This is a key tool used by MDEQ to determine whether
 waterbodies are attaining Michigan WQS. Because Procedure 51 is meant to be a qualitative, rapid assessment tool, the MDEQ
 established a contract with the Great Lakes Environmental Center to develop a statistically valid sample design  and procedure
 for detection of trends using benthic macroinvertebrates. This project is scheduled for completion in January 2003.

 All biological community data are entered into MDEQ's MS Access database.  Biological and habitat data collected as part of the
 five-year watershed surveys are summarized in watershed reports. The list  of these reports is stored in a database that will be
 accessible to the public via the MDEQ Surface Water Quality Division's website.



 Documentation  and Further Information

 Michigan Water Quality Report (Year 2000 305(b) Report):
 http:/Avww.michiaan.gov/deQ/1.1607.7-135-3313  3686 3728-12711-.QQ.html

 CWA Section 303(d) List Michigan Submittal for Year 2002:
 http://www.deq.state.mi.us/documents/deQ-swQ-gleas-303 d Rpt2002b.pdf

 Michigan's WQS, revised April 1999: http://www.dea.state.mi.us/documents/deq-swq-gleas-305b2002Appl.doc

 MDEQ Biosurveys website:
 http://www.michiQan.Qov/deq/0.1607.7-135-3313  3686 3728-32369-.OO.html


MICHIGAN: Program Summary                       December 2002                                              3-89

-------
  MICHIGAN
  Contact Information
  William Creal, Environmental Manager
  Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ)
  P.O. Box 30273 • Lansing, Ml 48909
  Phone 517/335-4181 • Fax 517/241-8133
  email: crealw@michigan.gov
 Programmatic Elements
t*M#rbjOMMWIIWflt
*rKhtn ovaraH water quality •
5;.^vlSS;,; / :•*:?<•' '
i - ' ' ' - -

.•i'jiilK^^'-lxisllisr
.';,'':*|l|i'; % ' ^fftE';-
:_•-: v='- ' , ' *~~ • '---;

•'**•• '&i~ • • - ... v
'«'"'' "!•»'' tft •! " 	 :
38HB*>::--;lwPii
" ; /;"""^;"; »
•1 -";•'
: . ;'<•• ' •
- , 4^4^-A-' " = ?<"~j? '
.- - " " '-"''-S ~ ~.
/
/
/
/

/
/
J







/

problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness bf BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions


other:
. . ._ .
(special projects only)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin (specific river Basins or watersheds and
comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (determined using RF3)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology
     fully supporting for 305(b)
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
     listed for 303(d)
     number of sites sampled
     number of miles assessed per site
  49,141

    27,873
  21,469
    15,469
    6.000
    2,600
    3,500
                  21,469 Miles Assessed for Biology
                        "fully supporting" for 30S(b)
                        "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
MICHIGAN: Program Summary
December 2D02
3-90

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making

                          rf Warm Water vs. ColdWater

                             Three designations: coldwater fisheries, warmwater fisheries, and
                             other indigenous aquatic life and wildlife (per Rule 100 of Michigan's
                             WQS). Coldwater fishery includes any of the following: trout,
                          .   salmon, whitefish, Cisco. Warmwater fishery includes fish species
                             that thrive in relatively warmwater, including any of the following:
                          -. bass, pike, walleye, panfish.
ALUdMionattom
water quality clam
^Tifti'ipuyv BiocriiaiiHjKiMCcSI:

 Numortc Bfocrto
                             none*
 UM* of MoawMinwti (£&
 HI iittttflfafead aMOMnMiiilr'
 wWl othar anvhonmentaJ
                        :;x :;].-;£
                          HS  none
 data (e.g.. taxWty testing and
     cal specific criteria)
                                  assessment of aquatic resources

                                  cause and effect determinations

                                  permitted discharges

                                  monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

                                  watershed based management
 UMtofbtoau
 biocritorta in making
; management dacMirii-
                anmfflP^-  TMDL listing and delisting decisions
                ln«.:'V";K;S '•
                     -;:x:j;:;; „-.
          restoration of
      tlcr**ourc««toa -./
 dmigiMtedALU

'Michigan does not have narrative biocriteria, per se. However, Ml does have tiered ALU designations and numeric procedures (the
Gleas Procedure #51) to implement WQS, evaluate nonpoint source impacts, and assess designated uses. According to MDEQ's
Qualitative and Biological Biological Survey Protocols for Wadeable Streams and Rivers (Procedure #51), "The development of
these biological and habitat survey protocols was a result of the increasing demand for a more vigorous and standardized evaluation
of nonpoint source impacts. The nature and diversity of the causes of nonpoint pollution created a need for greater refinement and
sophistication of the Surface Water Quality Division's standard biological survey procedures in order to assess the degree and
causes of these biological impacts."


  Reference Site/Condition Development
 Nwnbw of raferenctt »ttM
                             200 total

-;-V'.;' ", ' ' - J ' I, 'J'^C-^,)-,',
"""*?','<','* 'f" '"C '•;-",,;*• 2i®^""-'

' DA§MMMMHIM Jb«h -M.JJJ- Aa4l^*C«k-' '';"'''V,"'»'\
NBTOIVilCV VIEP ClUPflli --"--v%; :
CharacUrizatfonof
refifofuM context : .:
'^•^•:^.:^'f^' \'' ' ,, , ',".>^-fg|si;i§;:':f
. 'v/^l^-'^r-
/




site-specific
paired watersheds
regional (aggregate of sites)
professional judgment
other:
excellent biota present





S





	
'
historical conditions
least disturbed sites
gradient response
professional judgment
other:
ecoregions (or some aggregate)
elevation
stream type
multivariate grouping
jurisdictionai (i.e., statewide)
other:
reference sites linked to ALU
reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
conditions
MICHIGAN: Program Summary
                                              December 2002
                                                                                                        3-91

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (>500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                   fish (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                   periphylon
                                   other:
  Benthos
.  •.:   sampling gear
|  shabftat selection
P§ v;*ui»a.mple size
      texonomy    '.
                              D-frame and dipnet; 800-900 micron mesh
                              multihabitat
                              100 count
                              combination - family, genus
 .-?*•
      sampling gear
      habitat setection
      MHTtpte processing
     » SUbsampfe    -
                              backpack electrofisher and pram unit (tote barge)
                              multihabitat
                              length measurement and anomalies
                              none
                              species
                              visual based; performed with bioassessments
 Quality
 oloinents
                 program
standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
training for biologists, specimen archival
  Data Analysis and Interpretation
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
• jpfeuQHWUiC UIIWnOldB •
     tansformlno. mettcS;
                              Two standard deviations from excellent condition

                              TWO standard deviations from excellent condition
  EinriiMttofl of pMfonnance
•  0tt'm^mr,t ant • Una •  • •   '••••"'
  dMtnCIMMUC* .   •- •   •„.• :
                                  repeat sampling
                                  precision (repeat sampling by teams during round robins over
                                  the years)
                                  sensitivity
                                  bias
                                  accuracy
      Retrieval and analyste
                              MS Access database, spreadsheets
                              SAS, Systat and Statistics
MICHIGAN: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                           3-92

-------
 MINNESOTA
 Contact Information

 Scott Niemela, Research Scientist
 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
 520 Lafayette Road • St. Paul, MN 55155
 Phone 651/296-8878 • Fax 651/297-8324
 email: 5cott.niemela@pca.state.mn .us
 MPCA Water homepage: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/index.html
 Program Description

 The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Biological Assessment Unit, located in the Environmental
 Standards and Analysts Section, performs many functions integral to water quality decision-making. Among these,
 the Unit:

     Develops biological measures of ecological integrity for streams and wetlands.
     Collects and analyzes biological monitoring data.
     Builds a biological monitoring system that includes streams in the 10 major river basins.
     Lays the groundwork for the development of biological indicators for lakes and large rivers.
     Determines biological impairments of rivers and streams for use in TMDL studies
     Coordinates creation of TMDL listing.
  Documentation and Further Information

  2000 Minnesota Water Quality: Surface Water Section, Years 1998 -1999 305(b) Report:
  http://www.pca.state.mn.us/publications/reDOrts/305bfinalreport-20QO.pdf

  Stream Assessment Methods for Use Support, http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/basins/method98.pdf

  MPCA Water Quality Criteria - Aquatic Life Use Support in Rivers and Streams'.
  http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/basins/rivkev98.pdf

  Minnesota Lake Water Quality Assessment Data: 2000. http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/pubs/lwqar.pdf

  MPCA Environmental Outcomes Division website: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/about/eod.html
MINNESOTA: Program Summary                   December 2002                                        3-93

-------
  MINNESOTA
  Contact Information

  Scott Niemeta, Research Scientist
  Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
  520 Lafayette Road • St. Paul, MN 55155
  Phone 651/296-8878 • Fax 651/297-8324
  email: scott.niemela@pca.state.mn.us
  Programmatic Elements
U»«of Wowwwment
/ jpppjiiuii ,'; !?c£«i8r? " ' •" • ";sj"; M '
' k " - , '-.', , :' ' •

;!MV;1'"' ''.". •'' r'l">f*>2* , .. ''i&'lr
•Jfe :" * " --^pri^;; """^TM *-
'"I"," " " - ' -" '--'"'" - •'•'"'"; •'-
-h- .' ' _ '' " :' ' ;
I.^F:., 1 ',','- ?;',^,1, • • '• ','Tr-;;-;::^
;=|f::- ->:: |||K:: .;-:::;;f|p;
.•— _|_-L_ ,';':' ;
=:llf';- " -fe-" .- '•- '•'•?'.':"

'-iV-;' . ' -....



/
/

/
/

/
/

/





/
problem identification (screening)
nonpoinl source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state watef quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (in specific
river basins or watersheds for biocriteria development, problem
investigation, and effectiveness monitoring)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
.
rotating basin (in specific river basins or watersheds for
condition monitoring and biocriteria development)
other: probabilistic by major basin
 Stream Miles

 Total miles                                       91,944
 (determined using National Hydrography Database}

 Total perennial miles                                  32,985

 Total miles assessed for biology*                  2.047

     fully supporting for 305(b)                          1,575

     partially/non-supporting for 305{b)                      472

     listed for 303(d)                                    785

     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)            100

     number of miles assessed per site                depends on
                                             segment length
                      2,047 Miles Assessed for Biology
                      |g 'fully supporting" (or 305(b)

                      Q "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
The discrepancy between 305(b) and 303(d) miles is due to a change in methods related to the threshold level of impairment. The
numbers for 303(d) reflect the information from the latest proposed 3D3(d) list using the new threshold levels. The 305(b) miles will
reflect the old threshold levels until the next 305(b) assessments occur.
MINNESOTA: Program Summary
December 2002
                                                                                                     3-94

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
 ALU designation bMl*   •
  Narratfw Btoofterfa to WQS
                              Class System (1,2.3), Fishery Based Uses and Warm Water vs. Cold Water
                              Aquatic life and recreation. Class 2. 4 subclasses: 2A, cold water (saimonid)
                              fishery; 26 cool & warm water fishery; 2C, "indigenous" fishery; 2D, wetlands
                              Numeric procedures to implement narrative biocriteria are in separate
                              Guidance documents, not part of the water quality standards.
• with other environmental
.**$&——
                                   assessment of aquatic resources
                                   cause and effect determinations
                                   permitted discharges
                                   monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                   watershed based management
  1 iaiaaA 4kff
  btocriterta in mating
  management decisions
  regarding reBtOratfOlt Of•'
  aquatic resources to a
  designated ALU
                              Bloassessment information is being used in the TMDL process and to support
                              decisions regarding permitted discharges.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number of reference sites
                              35 total
 Charactartaattonof  r
 reference .It* wttMn i
 regional context
  Stream stratfficatton wRhfci
 AddKlonall
                                   site-specific
                                   paired watersheds
                                   regional (aggregate of sites)
                                   professional judgment
                                   other:
                               Reference sites are defined as minimally disturbed reaches/areas within a
                               specific geographic region, within a given aquatic classification framework.
                               The criteria used to define reference sites are based on biology, landuse, and
                               habitat and are adjusted by region (basin, ecoregion, etc).
                                   historical conditions
                                   least disturbed sites
                                   gradient response
                                   professional judgment
                                   other:"
                                  ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                  elevation
                                  stream type
                                  multivariate grouping
                                  jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                  other: At this time MPCA is using major river basin as a framework. This
                                  could change once a statewide database is developed.
                                  reference sites linked to ALU
                                  reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                  some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced conditions
'Candidate reference sites are initially selected using GIS coverages including landuse. point source, ditching, and feedlot. After the
biological sampling has occurred, reference sites are chosen using the biological, habitat, and GIS based information.
"There are regions within Minnesota where minimally impacted reference sites will eventually be identified. MPCA has not had the
opportunity to develop biological criteria for these areas yet, but is planning to do so within the next five to ten years.
MINNESOTA: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
3-95

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (100-500 samples/year: single season, multiple sites - watershed
                                   level)
                                   fish (100-500 ssmp/e&Vear; single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                   periphyton
                                   other: macrophytes (< 100 samples/year; single season multiple sites - not at
                                   watershed level)
      habitat selection
      subsampte size
      taxonomy   ; =: ;
                              D-frame; 500-600 micron mesh
                              multihabitat
                              300 count
                              genus
 Ftah
      sampling gear- '  .     .    backpack and boat electrofishers, and pram unit (tote barge)
      habitat selection            multihabitat
      sample processing       ,  length measurement, biornass - batch and anomalies
      SubUffipte                none
      taxonomy     •            species
 HabttatMttMmonte
                              quantitative measurements; performed with bioassessments
 Quality assuranc
                              standard operating procedures, periodic meetings and training for biologists,
                              sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
 Data Analysis and Interpretation
. Data ai»Jy»ls tools «iwt
- .i^«*™*^.',T .' "^rr- -•;:,? ;v-'-~ Vr?
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
      transforming metrics
 I     Mo unWess scores
 !.   defining in$airment to
 \-,   amuWr       '
                               95" percentile of all sites
                               The percentile of the reference population will vary by major basin
                               because of wide variability between basins regarding the level of
                               human disturbance.
 EvuuBBon, off
                                   repeat sampling (10% of all sites are repeated during a season)
                                   precision (A multiyeer study, currently 5 years long, is being
                                   conducted to evaluate the precision of IBI scores over a long
                                   term period. This work is taking place at reference sites and
                                   degraded sites - ten sites total)
                                       iitivity (sensitivity has been examined by evaluating IBI
                                   scores against gradients of disturbance)
                                   bias
                                   accuracy (accuracy has been informally examined by
                                   comparison of IBI scores to expected results from a
                                   landuse/habitat rating score)
 Hotoplcaldate
     •Ofck*AJhK
     tnorego
     Rettftval and analysis
                              database (details not provided)
                              Systat
MINNESOTA: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
3-96

-------
 MISSISSIPPI
 Contact Information

 Randy Reed, Chief, Water Quality Assessment Branch
 Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ)
 P.O. Box 10385 • Jackson, MS 39289-0385
 Phone 601/961-5158 • Fax 601/961-5357
 email: randy reed@dea.state.ms.us
 MDEQ homepage:
 http://www.deg.state.ms.us
 Program Description

 The Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) has a Surface Water Monitoring Program (SWMP),
 which:

     Meets the requirements of Section 106 of CWA,
     Monitors, assesses and reports overall status and trends of surface water quality state-wide,
     Identifies impaired waterbodies and determines causes and sources of impairment,
     Determines effectiveness and supports monitoring and assessment activities of other Surface Water Division
     (SWD) Programs,
     Addresses surface water quality issues and economic development interests of public concern, and
     Determines better ways of monitoring and assessing surface waters.

 Biological data collection, assessment and reporting are an integral component of MDEQ's SWMP and have been
 for many years. In addition, biological data are a primary assessment component of MDEQ's 305(b) and 303(d)
 reporting processes. Specifically, macroinvertebrate assessment results are used in the process of determining
 aquatic life use support and for identifying impaired waterbodies. Macroinvertebrate data are also used to
 complement other environmental data throughout the TMOL process, including stressor identification and TMDL
 implementation monitoring. A probabilistic survey design is planned for incorporation into MDEQ's ongoing
 ambient monitoring network in the future. This approach is intended to produce a more accurate, scientifically
 defensible and comprehensive assessment of biological condition throughout the state. This will result in
 collection of biological data at a combination of fixed and random stations each year in conjunction with MS DEQ's
 Basin Management Approach.

 In 2001, MDEQ redesigned its biological monitoring and assessment program to include more rigorous training;
 field sampling; laboratory sorting, subsampling, and taxonomy; analytical methods; and documentation. It included
 a comprehensive QA Project Plan with detailed standard operating procedures (SOPs), revision of data entry and
 database management procedures, and documentation  of data quality characteristics throughout the entire
 assessment process. Approximately 450 wadeable stream sites were sampled statewide with the exception of the
 MS River Alluvial Plain during a winter index period for benthic macroinvertebrates, physical habitat quality,
 substrate particle size distribution, and selected field and analytical chemistry.  Using CIS, the drainage area for
 the each site was delineated and land use characterized. For five bioregions, reference conditions were
 developed based on the concept of "best attainable" conditions, and a multimetric index of biological integrity
 calibrated, the Mississippi Benthic Index of Stream Quality (M-B1SQ).
 Documentation and Further Information

 State of Mississippi Water Quality Assessment 2002 Section 305(b) Report, Big Black River Basin Supplement
 http://www.deQ.state.ms.us Click: OPC then Surface Water then 305(b)

 State of Mississippi 2002 List of Waterbodies, 303(d) Report: http://www.dea.state.ms.us Click: TMDLs

 State of Mississippi Water Quality Criteria for Intrastate, Interstate and Coastal Waters, October 2002:
 http://www.deQ.state.ms.us Click: MDEQ Regulations then By Type then Water then WPC-1

 Quality Assurance Project Plan for 303(d) List Assessment and Calibration of the Index of Biological Integrity for
 Wadeable Streams in Mississippi.

 Development and Application of the Mississippi Benthic Index of Stream Quality (M-BISQ).


MISSISSIPPI: Program Summary                   December 2002                                         3-97

-------
 MISSISSIPPI
 Contact Information
 Randy Reed, Chief, Water Quality Assessment Branch
 Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ)
 P.O. Box 10385 « Jackson, MS 39289-0385
 Phone 601/961-5158 • Fax 601/961-5357
 email: randy reed@deq.state.ms.us
   •,"?iV-' "   , *•"„  ^    ,;•>=-
 UMtof btoMttttnwnt ;
 WWrtnowraHwnterquaitty
            '
Programmatic Elements
                              problem identification (screening)
                              nonpoint source assessments
                              monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                              ALL! determinations/ambient monitoring
                              promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                              support of antidegradation
                              evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                              TMDL assessment and monitoring
                              other:



                                targeted (i.e., sites selected'for specific purpose)
                                (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
                                (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                                rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (Oetarmned using RF3)
 Total perennial miles
 Total mites assessed for biology
     fully attaining ALUS for 305(b)
     not fully attaining ALUS for 305(b)
     listed for 303(d)
     number of sites sampled
     number of miles assessed per site
                                             84,003
                                               26,454
                                              5,458
                                                2,410
                                                3,046
                                                3,048
                                                 455
                                                 -12
                                                             5,458 Miles Assessed for Biology
"fully supporting' for 305(b)
"partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
*MDEQ Implemented a new biological assessment program (started in fall, 2001). Miles assessed for biology and 305(b)/303(d)
numbers reflect this change and vary significantly from previous assessments.
NOTE: All information contained in this summary refers to procedures adopted under the new bioassessment program.
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
MISSISSIPPI: Program Summary
                                           December 2002
                                                                                                   3-98

-------
 ALU d**l0nitiOfls in state
 water quality stsntfanis•>•
                              Single Aquatic Life Use
                              One designation: Fish and Wildlife (biological data are only
                              assessed for fish and wildlife classification)
 N*n*Hv*BiocrftMi» to WQS
 Numeric Btocrftorta In WQ8
                              Presently, there are no written informal/formal numeric procedures to
                              support narrative biocriteria decisions. Available procedures support
                              a general aquatic life standard.
                              none
 Us** of
*  -
i-Wlti)
     i (6.9; toxfctty testing and
 chemical spedftc criteria)
                                  assessment of aquatic resources
                                  cause and effect determinations
                                  permitted discharges
                                  monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                  watershed based management
^uswofrr^"'1''
 Diocntefw
    Mg«nentd«cislotw
                              none
 aquatic rasourcos tQ »
 designated ALU
  Reference Site/Condition Development
 Number of rofenHics sites
                              83 total
 fteforwcesite
                                  site-specific
                                  paired watersheds
                                  regional (aggregate of sites)
                                  professional judgment
                                  other:
                              Surrounding landuse, physical habitat, substrate particle size, water
                              chemistry, biology, and historical information.
 Characterization of
                                  historical conditions
                                  least disturbed sites
                                  gradient response
                                  professional judgment
                                  other:
 Stiwmstt»tiflcatl0irw|lthlri
 ragtonal tMtrwie*  :~^:
 condition*          ~
                                  ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                  elevation
                                  stream type
                                  multivariate grouping
                                  jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                  other: bioregion
 AdditionaltefoimatJon
                                  reference sites linked to ALU
                                  reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                  some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                  conditions
MISSISSIPPI: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
3-99

-------
  Field and  Lab Methods

                                    benthos (100-500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - broad
                                    coverage)

                                    fish

                                    periphyton

                                    other;
  Benthos  .
      subsample size
      taxonomy
                          D-frame net (800 x 900 micron mesh) for wadeable streams

                          multihabitat
                          200 count

                          genus
                                visual based habitat assessment $nd modified Wolman Pebble Count; performed
                                with bioassessments	

                                standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
                                training for biologists, field and laboratory performance audits, sorting and
                                taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
  Data Analysis and Interpretation

:VQat« «ntty»J« tool* and
jstKj- .*•- ~j» -:-.,sr;'.'xJ  ,- ';-;,«;«txt'
                               /
                               /
                              summary tables, illustrative graphs

                              parametric ANOVAs

                              muttivariate analysis*

                              biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)

                              disturbance gradients

                              other
      trarSfoirrtng metrics
      in to unittew scores
                     mtin
deflhinglir
                  Index
95" percentile of all sites


25" percentile of reference condition
                                    repeat sampling ((efferent te,am, same reach: same team,
                                    adjacent reach)
                                    precision (repeat & duplicate field samples, repeat sorting,
                                    taxonomic & data checks)

                                    sensitivity (disturbance gradient for reference & degraded
                                    streams)

                                    bias (repeat, duplicate samples)

                                    accuracy (discrimination efficiency)
                                EDAS

                                Systat. Statistics and EDAS


* Multivariate analysis Is being used to develop the new index, but trie subsequent analysis of biological data will be multimetric.
"Additional evaluation procedures of performance characteristics Include: field (biological, habitat and chemistry repeats), lab
(pickate rechecks, QC checks), taxonomy (two taxonomlsts and a thrd party for precision; reference collection), data entry QC, and
metric calculation QC checks.
MISSISSIPPI: Program Summary
                                             December 2002
                                                                               3-100

-------
 MISSOURI
 Contact Information

 Randy Sarver, Aquatic Bioassessment Unit Supervisor
 Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR)
 P.O. Box 176 » Jefferson City, MO 65102
 Phone 573/526-3365 • Fax 573/526-3350
 email: nrsarvr@mail.dnr.stale .mo.us
 website: http://www.dnr.state.mo.us/watef.htm

 Steve Fischer, Fisheries Research Biologist
 Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC)
 1110 South College Avenue • Columbia, MO 65201
 Phone 573/882-9880 X3271 "  Fax 573/882-4517
 email: fischsa@mail.conservation,state.mo.us
 website: http://www.conservation.state.mo.us/
  Program Description

  The overall aquatic biological assessment program for Missouri streams and wadeable rivers is a multi-agency collaborative
  effort between the Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC), the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). The
  University of Missouri-Columbia, and the USEPA. The overall program involves a Resource Assessment and Monitoring
  Program, biological criteria development, monitoring of targeted sites to determine compliance with the designated use of aquatic
  life protection in the standards, monitoring for 303(d) purposes, and the development of a stream classification system
  framework.

  The Resource Assessment and Monitoring Program is committed to sampling 120 sites per year beginning in 2002. These sites
  are a combination of targeted reference sites and randomly selected sites. The MDC is responsible for fish sampling, physical
  habitat assessment, and water quality contaminant sampling (to be analyzed by the USEPA). The MDNR is responsible for
  sampling macroinvertebrates at 30% of the sites. For the remainder of the sites, samples are collected by MDC and analyzed by
  the University of Missouri-Columbia. The Resource Assessment and Monitoring Program operates on a five year cycle with
  statewide random sites collected for one year and random sites in priority watersheds collected for four years. Data will be used
  to report on the status of Missouri's streams  and wadeable rivers.

  The MDNR initiated biological criteria development for wadeable, perennial streams in 1992. Numeric biocriteria for one trophic
  level (macroinvertebrate communities) were  completed in February 2002. This effort also involved the cooperation of the
  University of Missouri-Columbia, School of Natural Resources and the Missouri Resource Assessment Partnership. Future
  biological criteria efforts will add an additional trophic level (fish communities) to wadeable, perennial streams and will initiate a
  low level effort to develop numeric criteria for other size ranges of streams and rivers. The numeric criteria and associated
  components have been used to evaluate compliance with the designated use of aquatic life protection as well as in the
  assessment of biological communities for 303(d) purposes.

  The Missouri Resource Assessment Partnership is an interagency partnership that provides expertise in geographic information
  systems, remote sensing, and natural resource management.  Since 1997, the Missouri Resource Assessment Partnership has
  been in the process of developing a hierarchical classification framework for Missouri's stream resources. This framework is
  expected to provide the foundation for biological study designs in the Resource Assessment and Monitoring Program, biological
  criteria, and targeted studies concerning the designated use of aquatic life protection and 303(d) purposes.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Methodology for the 2002 303(d) list, 1998 303(d) list, and Missouri's Water Quality Standards and criteria are all available on
  the MDNR Water Pollution Control Program homepage: http://www.dnr.state.mo.us/deg/wpcp/homewpcp.htm

  Fischer, S.A.  2002. Resource Assessment ana Monitoring Program: Standard Operating Procedures-fish sampling. Missouri
  Department of Conservation, Columbia, MO.

  Sarver, R., S. Marian, C. Rabeni. and S. Sowa. 2001. Draft Report - Biological Criteria for Wadeable/Perennial Streams of
  Missouri, Prepared by Missouri Department of Natural Resources. Air and Land Protection Division, Environmental Services
  Program.

  Also available through MDNR: Semi-quantitative Macroinvertebrate Stream Bioassessment Project Procedure (2001); Stream
  Habitat Assessment Project Procedure (2000); Macroinvertebrate Levels of Taxonomy SOP/FSS/209 (1998); Biological Criteria
  tor Streams of Missouri - A Final Report to the MO Department of Natural Resources, University of Missouri, Cooperative Fish
  and Wildlife Unit; Quality Control Procedures for Data Processing (2001) MDNR/WQMS/214.
MISSOURI: Program Summary                      December 2002                                            3-101

-------
  MISSOURI
  Contact Information

  Randy Sarver. Aquatic Bioassessment Unit Supervisor
  Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR)
  P.O. Box 176 • Jefferson City, MO 65102
  Phone 573/526-3365 • Fax 573/526-3350
  email: nrsarvr@mail.dnr.state.mo.us

  Steve Fischer, Fisheries Research Biologist
  Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC)
  1110 South College Avenue " Columbia, MO $5201
  Phone 573/882-9880 x3271 • Fax 573/882-4517
  email: fischsagjjmaii .conservati on .stale. mo. us
Programmatic Elements

within ov«r«B water quality
                                   problem identification (screening)

                                   nonpoint source assessments

                                   monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs

                                   ALU determinations/ambient monitoring

                                   promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria

                                   support of antidegradation

                                   evaluation of discharge permit conditions (MDNR only)

                                   TMDL assessment and monitoring

                                   other:
           HKHiiu)flfl0 •
                                 targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (comprehensive use
                                 throughout jurisdiction by MDNR)

                                 fixed station (i.e., waterquaity monitoring stations)

                                 probabilistic by stream order/catchment area (comprehensive use
                                 throughout jurisdiction and in specific river basins or watersheds by MDC)

                                 probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (comprehensive use throughout
                                 jurisdiction and in specific river basins or watersheds by MDC)

                                 rotating basin fused in specific rivers basins or watersheds by MDNR)

                                 other: reference site monitoring
 Stream Miles

 Total miles                                            52,194
 (estimated using National Hydrography Database}

 Total perennial miles                                       22,194

 Total miles assessed for biology*                    21,996

     fully supporting for 305(b)                                11,519

     partially/non-supporti ng for 305(b)                         10,477

     listed for 303(d)                                           n/a

     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)                  200

     number of miles assessed per site              site specific (MDC)
                                                     0.25 (MDNR)
                                                                       21,996 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                                                             "fully supporting" for 305(6)
                                                                             "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
'Miles assessed for aquatic life as reported in Missouri's draft 2002 305(b) Water
Quality Report are based on biological, chemical, physical and toxiccMogical data. The status and number of stream miles assessed
exclusively for biology is not readily available.
MISSOURI: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                                                          3-102

-------
                                                                                                                                    I
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
         K0IU
                              Warm Water vs. Cold Water

                              Four designations: General Warm Water Aquatic Life, Limited Warm Water
	-   Aquatic Life. Cool Water Fisheries, and Cold Water Fisheries

 Narrative BtocritSfia in WQS    Procedures used to support narrative biocriteria located in SOPs and draft
        .„;•      ,;.,     • •••.",,.   biocriteria document for wadeable/perennial streams housed at MDNR/Air
"VI ,•  •  -'A-.    hi     '!TfA"   and Land Protection Division, Environmental Services Program
 Nunwto BtocritMta in WQS
                              under development (Numeric biocriteria for macroinvertebrate communities
                              in wadeable, perennial streams will be completed sometime in 2002.
                              These criteria are intended for inclusion in the water quality standards
                              during the next triennial WQS review.)
                                  assessment of aquatic resources
                                  cause and effect determinations
                                  permitted discharges
                                  monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                  watershed based management
 Usos of btoassmsmentf
 blocrtterta In making
                              none
      ding restoration of
 aquatic resources to a
 designated ALU

  Reference Site/Condition Development
                              62 total
                                  site-specific (MDC)

                                  paired watersheds

                                  regional (aggregate of sites)

                                  professional judgment (MDC)

                                  other: Missouri Ecologic Drainage Units/VST layer (MDC)
                              Representative of ecoregion and stream size, and in natural condition with
                              respect to habitat, water quality, biological integrity and diversity, watershed
                              land use and riparian conditions
                              Disturbed habitat = <75% comparable to reference (MDNR)

                              MDC uses R-EMAP terminology: perennial flow, relatively high
                              heterogeneity of substrate materials, natural channel morphology, natural
                              hydrograph, natural water color
 Characterization of
 fViaMMICt 
-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (100 - 500 samples per year; single season, multiple sites - broad
                                   coverage by MDC; multiple seasons, multiple s/fes - broad coverage for
                                   watershed level by MDNR)

                                   fish (100- 500 samples per jfear; single season, multiple sites • broad
                                   coverage by MDC only)

                                   periphyton

                                   other:
                              kick net, 500 micron mesh nitex bag
                              multihabitat
                              900 for glide/pool streams, 1200 for riffle/pool streams
                              genus, species
 fish
      habAat selection
 f.    subsampte
      taxonomy
                              backpack electrofisher, pram unit (tote barge), and seines;
                              3/16" mesh for 12' net and 1/4" mfesh for 30' net

                              multihabitat

                              biomass - batch
                              batch

                              species
                              visual based, quantitative measurements (MDC), stream width and discharge
                              (MDNR); performed with bioassessments
   imltty assurance program
                              standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
                              training for biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival,
                              MDNR data entry QC, certification program for bioassessment within MDC
 Data Analysis and Interpretation
 Dat* analysis tools and

*'-
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs

                                   parametric ANOVAs

                                   multivariate analysis

                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into index)

                                   disturbance gradients

                                   other:
           : thresholds
                 metric*
      Into unlfless scores
      defining Impairment Iff
      a muWmetrkMrxtex
              ipatm
              Me ire
25" percentile of reference population (MDNR); some based on log
10 mean wetted width, mean proportion of reference sites, or specific
percentiles (MDC)

cumulative score equivalent to 81 % of reference condition (MDNR)
                              significant departure from mean of reference population (MDC),
                              threshold not used by MDNR for criteria but as supporting
                              information only
                                   repeat sampling (multiple seasons and years by MDNR, annual
                                   revisits by MDC)

                                   precision (10% duplicates within reach by MDNR)

                                   sensitivity (evaluated in MDNR pilot project)

                                   bias (MDNR eliminated redundant metrics during pilot project,
                                   multiple techniques used by MDC)

                                   accuracy
                              STORET (MDC), MS Access

                              SAS (MDC), Programming in Visual Basics for MS Access and
                              Sigmastat (MDNR)
MISSOURI: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                          3-104

-------
 MONTANA


 Contact Information

 Rosie Sada de Suplee, Aquatic Microbiologist
 Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
 1520 East 6" Avenue • Helena, MT 59620
 Phone 406/444-6764 • Fax 406/444-6836
 email: rsada@state.mt.us
 DEQ Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment homepage:
 http://www.deq.state.mt.us/wqinfo/MDIv1A/VQMonitoring Assessment.asp      I

 Randy Apfelbeck, Water Quality Specialist
 Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
 2209 Phoenix Avenue • Helena, MT 59601
 Phone 406/444-2709 • Fax 406/444-5275
 email: rapfeibeck@state.mt.us
 DEQ Water Quality Information homepage: http://www.deq.slate,mlus/wqinfo/Index,asp



 Program Description

 The Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) strongly encourages the use of biological data for
 making ALUS determinations (more than 90% of MT's 303(d) assessments include biological data). It is very
 difficult to acquire sufficient credible data in Montana without having biological data; thus the incorporation of
 bioassessment in  DEQ's monitoring program is very important,

 DEQ is in the second year of collecting macroinvertebrate and periphyton data from fixed station sites that are
 located on major streams throughout Montana. The primary objective is to determine status and trends. In 2002,
 the Department initiated an effort to develop vegetation assessment tools for assessing the biological conditions of
 riparian areas and wetlands and is also looking at amphibians.  In the past, wetland macroinvertebrate and diatom
 communities have been assessed.

 DEQ collaborates with a number of agencies and organizations. The Montana Bureau of Land Management has
 helped fund  DEQ's statewide biological monitoring efforts. USGS is collecting chemistry data at most fixed station
 sites. The Department is also working closely with the wetlands program,  universities and the Montana Natural
 Heritage Program to assess riparian zones.  For 303(d) purposes DEQ has collaborated with conservation
 districts, the Natural Resource Conservation Service, USFS, and USEPA, among others,

 In 2000 DEQ developed a new listing methodology that strongly encourages the use of biological data to assess
 waters for 303(d) purposes.  The Department was required to use this methodology for all waters that were
 previously listed as impaired, but were unfortunately not required to use the new listing methodology for streams
 that were previously listed as fully supporting ALU. Montana DEQ is also currently forming workgroups to begin the
 process of developing a state-wide  water quality database that can be accessed by federal and state agencies in
 Montana.

 Some challenges  include achieving access to private lands and assessing prairie  streams that are located in
 eastern Montana.  In the future DEQ intends to develop and implement a random study  design to assess the
 biological condition of smaller order streams.



 Documentation and Further Information

 Year 2001 305(b) Report Database and Year 2000 303(d) List Database:
 http://nris.state.mt.us/scripts/esrimap.dll?name=TMDL&Cmd=INST

 DRAFT 2002 Montana 303(d) List:  http://nris.state.mt.us/scripjs/esrimap.dll?name=TMDL2002&Cmd=INST

 Montana's Water Quality Standards and Classifications: http://www.deq.state.mt.us/wqinfo/Standards/lndex.asD

 Water Quality Monitoring Standard  Operating Procedures: http://wwvv.deQ.state.mt.us/ppa/mdm/SOP/soD.asD

 Montana Natural Heritage Program homepage: http://nhp.nris.state.mt.us/

MONTANA: Program Summary                    December 2002                                         3-105

-------
  MONTANA
  Contact Information

  Rosie Sada de Suplee. Aquatic Microbiologist
  Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
  1520 East 6"1 Avenue • Helena, MT 59620
  Phone 406/444-6764 • Fax 406/444-6836
  email: rsada@state.mt,us

  Randy Apfelbeck, Water Quality Specialist    ,
  Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
  2209 Phoenix Avenue • Helena, MT 59601
  Phone 406/444-2709 • Fax 406/444-5275
  email: rapfeibeck@state.mt.us
  Programmatic Elements
                              UD
problem identification (screening)

nonpoint source assessments

monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs

ALU determinations/ambient monitoring

promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria

support of antidegradation

evaluation of discharge permit conditions

TMDL assessment and monitoring

other:
                                    targeted (i.e.. sites selected for specific purpose) (special projects only)

                                    fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (comprehensive
                                    throughout jurisdiction)

                                    probabilistic by stream order/catchment area (special projects only)

                                    probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (special projects only)

                                    rotating basin

                                    other
 Stream Miles

 Total miles
 (determinaij using RF3)

 Total perennial miles

 Total miles assessed for biology*

      fully supporting for 305(b)"

      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)"

      listed for 303(d)

      number of sites sampled (USGS sites)

      number of miles assessed per site
              176,750


                 53,221

                 9,076

                  1,340

                  7,736

                  7,736

                   -40
                                  9,076 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                         "My supporting' for 305(b)
                                         "partially/non-supporting" faf 305(b)
*MT DEQ collects biological data as part of a joint project with USGS to assess 38 sites that are located near the mouth of major
streams and rivers. Aside from this, Montana does not have a state biological monitoring program but it is currently under
development.

"71 % of the waters that were assessed as fully supporting ALU used biological data; 94% of the waters where ALUS was
determined to be impaired used biological data.
MONTANA: Program Summary
             December 2002
3-106

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
                            "! Class System (A,B,C). Warm Water vs. Cold Water
AUJ 
-------
  Field and Lab Methods
  Astmblage* a**«
        benthos (100 - 500 samples per year; single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
        fish C< 100 samples per year, single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
        periphyton (100 - 500 samples per year; single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
        other: macrophytes (<100 samples per year; single season, multiple sites - watershed
        level)
 . fllijjljtfiOS ;-
  !°;::-"xMin
      haWtatsetecBon
  wprsubsample
  :  "  taxonomy
  •  Hess, D-frame, kick net (1 m); 500 • 600 and >800 micron mesh sizes
    richest habitat, riffte/run (cobble), multihabitat, woody debris
;cj  300-500 count
  I  combination - lowest feasible
                            '1  backpack and boat electrofishers, seine; 1/4" mesh
                             •  multihabitat
                           •:.;j  length measurement, anomalies
                            : i  none
                             .  species
      sampling gear
      taxonomy
   natural substrate: suction device, brushing/scraping device
   riffle/run (cobble), multihabitat
   chlorophyll a / phaeophytin, biomass, taxonomic identification
   diatoms (mainly species level), al algae (genus and species)
 Habi
 •tetmnta
:f visual based, quantitative measurements, hydrogeomorphology, pebble counts; performed
:| with and independent of bioassessments
 I standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and training for
 •| biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
  Data Analysis and Interpretation
tote analysitooto and -[
^v'' .'•'•"'- '-';!':' ' :f
->§!?•; ..-;-:p" -&&- . ••••:
lAat&fav^rfvftf* Cht^Mlft4k^lB
= transfwinhw mettles " v|:
fapinto;«|p8K|dpfj . ;-f

MuWvariatetftrMhotd* ;
: a muByartate Jrxtex • :f:
tuatoaltoii Sri*»rfoiiHiiKi« 'f
ctanwtHlMcs T
:^- : ;.^.'. ;,>;g!f .' '|
:^.;..^ -r . ;[•
/
/
/
/
/

summary tables, illustrative graphs
parametric ANOVAs
multivariate analysis
biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index and return single metrics)
disturbance gradients
other:
cumulative distribution function
75% of reference condition
significant departure from mean of reference population
/
/

/

repeat sampling (duplicates)
precision (splits with USGS and EMAP for bioassessments)
sensitivity
bias (comparison of different methods)
accuracy
      Retrieval and analysis
   developing use of MS Access and Excel
   Systat, Statmost
MONTANA: Program Summary
                      December 2002
3-108

-------
 NEBRASKA
 Contact Information

 Ken Bazata, Program Specialist - Surface Water Section
 Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (NDEQ)
 1200 "N" Street, Suite 400 • Lincoln, NE 68509-8922
 Phone 402/471-2192" Fax 402/471-2909
 email: ken .bazata@ndeq .state, ne. us
 website: www.ndeg.state.ne.us
 Program Description

 Nebraska's biological monitoring program was started in 1985 with semi-quantitative methods for collecting fish
 and macroinvertebrates. The original purpose was to determine naturally occurring biological delineations within
 the state and to classify streams based on biological characteristics.  In 1997, collection methods were changed to
 the REMAP methodology because the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (NDEQ) felt that more
 quantitative approaches were needed to summarize the data.

 NDEQ's program for adapting the metrics to the standards and fine tuning the metrics has been slowed by data
 management and computer programming problems.  NDEQ has a small staff and time constraints have affected
 this program. NDEQ is experiencing problems with the reference site concept.  Since many of the streams have a
 "sameness" throughout a large area of the state, Nebraska lacks solid reference sites for the ecoregions and
 stream classes. Except for a few places, it seems most streams are heavily affected by agricultural use.  NDEQ
 has a lot of data, but is having trouble analyzing it.

 Due to concerns about the accuracy of the existing biological indices, NDEQ has chosen to reassess past
 biological data and redefine its indices. Five streams are currently listed on Nebraska's 303(d) list due to
 biodiversity impacts.  Only about 20% of Nebraska's total stream miles are currently assessed for biology in the
 305{b) report. These streams are known to be fully supporting (17%) or not supporting (3%).

 Nebraska agrees with the reference site concept but needs to determine if appropriate reference  sites exist in
 Nebraska.  NDEQ is currently evaluating macroinvertebrate and fish data to locate both excellent and severely
 impaired sites in order to determine the appropriate habitat conditions that correspond  to both extremes.
 Reference site criteria have not yet been finalized.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Nebraska DRAFT 2000 305(b) report

  DRAFT 2002 303{d) report, 2001, Comprehensive Study of Water Quality Monitoring, and Title 117 - Nebraska's
  Surface Water Quality Standards are available online at http://www.ndeq.state.ne.us
NEBRASKA: Program Summary
                                            December 2002
3-109

-------
 NEBRASKA
  Contact Information
  Ken Bazata, Program Specialist - Surface Water Section
  Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (NDEQ)
  1200 "N" Street, Suite 400 • Lincoln, NE 68509-8922
  Phone 402/471-2192 • Fax 402/471-2909
  email: ken.bazata@ndeg.stale.ne,us
  Programmatic Elements
  mm
^1» i>jyj'rt!•••*• •••A
MOBMDMinBfll
vtrafl water quality
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALL) determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and moniitoring
other
                                  targeted (i.e., sites selected ifor specific purpose) (specific river
                                  basins or watersheds)
                                  fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
                                  (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                  probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                  probabilistic by ecoregbn, or statewide (comprehensive use
                                  throughout jurisdiction)
                                  rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                  other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                     81,573
 (determined using RF3)
 Total perennial miles                                  16,090
 Total miles assessed for biology*              16,314
     fully supporting for 305(b)                          13,867
     non-supporting for 305(b)                          2.447
     listed for 303(d)                                      0
     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)            40
     number of miles assessed per site              site specific
                                                          16,314 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                                                  miles "fully supporting" for 3D5(b)
                                                                  miles "nonsupporting" for 305(b)
The 16,314 stream miles assessed for biology are the streams known to be only very high fully supporting (13,867) and very low
non-supporting (2,447).
NEBRASKA: Program Summary
                                       December 2002
                                                                                               3-110

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
  AliU designation baaite  : ''•& Class system (A, B, C), Fishery Based Uses, Warm Water vs. Cold
  y|:,:-,:  ^..LS---;   -jpx,, •.;: Wa,er
                  In state
                   Four designations: Warmwater A, Warmwater B, Coklwater A,
                   Coldwater B
  NairctlwBibcrttMtafiiWQS
                   Procedures used to support narrative biocriteria located in various
                   reports, e.g., biological classification, 305(b), bioassessment
                   procedures
  Nurnaric Btocitorto In WQS    none
        f UluMiMinmit U>1>

  data g.o.,to)ddty testing and
     rtesBngt
     criteria)
assessment of aquatic resources
cause and effect determinations
permitted discharges
monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
watershed based management
  Uioi of bloaiisainnntf
  Mocrttarta to making  .
  management declalon*
  regarding restoration of
  aquatic resources to a
  designated AIU
  Reference Site/Condition Development*
  Numb«of»fw»n«»»ito«     38 total
  Rsfjarsiice site
  Rofermc* Site Criteria
  reiarvnc* sites wtthina
  regkinalcointftxt  :^mfy
  Str
      wal raf
imcattoflwKhin
                 *
                   '
 AcMittoMl information
                       site-specific
                       paired watersheds
                       regional (aggregate of sites)
                       professional judgment
                       other:
                   No waste water treatment plants, other point sources, or
                   concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs); good instream
                   habitat, riparian habitat, land use and cover, physical and chemical
                   parameters, biological metrics, and faunal assemblages; no altered
                   hydrologic regimes; representativeness.
                   At a minumum,  sites need to be in the top 10 to 20 percent of all
                   sites sampled in the ecoregion, with little disturbance and no spills or
                   discharges within sites area.                       	
                       historical conditions
                       least disturbed sites
                       gradient response
                       professional judgment
                       other: regionally representative, reasonably attainable
ecoregions (or some aggregate) (thens are three ecoregions
and six strata with roughly five reference sites in each)
elevation
stream type
multivariate grouping
jurisdictional (i.e.. statewide)
other:
                       reference sites linked to ALU
                       reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                       some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                       conditions
'Reference site criteria have not been finalized.  These responses are based on NDEQ's current efforts to evaluate reference sites
and condition.
NEBRASKA: Program Summary
                                     December 2002
                                                                                                         3-111

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                    benthos (<100 samples/year,; single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
                                    fish (< 100 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
                                    periphyton
                                    other:
  Bentho*

                               surber, multiplate, collect by hand, D-frame, dipnet; 200 - 400 micron mesh
                               multihabitat, artificial substrate, woody debris
                               300 count, entire sample
                               genus, species
  tm
      sampling gear
 HaWW
                              backpack electrofisher, boat electrofisher, pram unit (tote barge), seine; 1/4" mesh
                              pool/glide, riffle/run (cobble), multjhabitat
                              length measurement (gamefish only), anomalies
                              batch
                              species
                              visual based, quantitative measurements; performed with bioassessments
                             j  standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, taxonomic proficiency
                             i  checks and specimen archival
  Data Analysis and Interpretation*
D*ta analyste tooto and
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   Other:
      ttrarwforinfng metrics  .   j  95th percentile of reference population, dependent upon approach
      :into ttfdHess scores^'' •   j
                lakment hi      25th percentile of reference population
     '., <-*.    . *3Zl
     •Storage
      ReWevaJandanatvsb
                                   repeat sampling (revisit sites)
                                   precision
                                   sensitivity
                                   bias
                                   accuracy
                              STORET, Excel and MS Access spreadsheets
                              SAS, Minitab
*NDEQ is testing different indices for validity and, as mentioned earlier, is still exploring reference criteria.  Responses are based on
NDEQ's current evaluation efforts, which include several changes in the way past biological data were evaluated. Data analysis
procedures may change before metrics, indices, and reference sites are finalized.
NEBRASKA: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
3-112

-------
                                                                                                                            1
 NEVADA
 Contact Information

 Karen Vargas, Bioassessment Coordinator/Environmental Scientist II
 Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP)
 123 West Nye Lane, Suite 138 • Carson City, NV 89706-0851
 Phone 775/687-9444 • Fax 775/687-5856
 email: kvargas@ndep.stale,nv,us
 NDEP Bureau of Water Quality Planning homepage: http://ndep.state.nv.us/bwQp/
  Program Description

  Nevada began its Bioassessment Program in the year 2000 and has continued to collect biological information on
  an annual basis.  Although the program is in its infancy, the State plans to continue collecting biological data for
  ambient monitoring and to assist in defining reference conditions and sites. There are seven primary water basins
  in Nevada and the State has collected biological data annually on four of these basins covering approximately 600
  river miles. It is expected the State will continue to collect at these river basins, in addition to new basins and
  several lakes, until a valid biological baseline has been established over the next four to five years.  After such
  time, the State is expected to switch to an alternating site or basin ambient bioassessment monitoring program.

  The program primarily consists of macroinvertebrate collection, physical habitat evaluations, and physical
  measurements of slope, velocity, flow, dissolved oxygen, specific conductivity, pH, temperature, substrate
  composition, canopy cover, and width and depth of the sampling area.  Periphyton, plankton, and/or chlorophyll
  sampling is conducted when necessary to assist in defining problem areas. Water chemistry data is collected at
  sites where the water chemistry is currently unknown. The data will eventually be used in 305(b) and 303(d)
  reports in addition to basin assessments of stream health. Some NPDES dischargers in the State are voluntarily
  collecting macroinvertebrates to assess impact to the aquatic environment.

  Reference site criteria are currently being defined based on available information.  The State expects to use
  chemical data, habitat assessments, physical measurements, professional knowledge and degrees of human
  impact to define the conditions and sites. Where reference sites are  unavailable, the State expects to use
  modeling and/or least disturbed sites to evaluate conditions. It  is anticipated to take several years for reference
  sites to be selected.

  An independent biological laboratory conducts identification of macroinvertebrates. QA/QC of macroinvertebrate
  identification consists of approximately 15% of the samples being analyzed by two distinct biological laboratories.
  Data collected will be stored annually in the Ecological  Data Application System (EGAS). Analysis and evaluation
  of the bioassessment data will be developed as the  program progresses and based on the most accurate
  methods.  Reference sites, where appropriate, will be used as a baseline for analysis.

  Nevada recently hosted  its first bioassessment conference in the State. The conference resulted in the formation
  of a State Bioassessment Committee consisting of agencies, tribes, and industry. The primary goal  of the
  committee is to evaluate and coordinate protocols, methodologies and sampling in the State. Nevada also
  participates in the National Aquatic Life Use (ALUS) work group based out of USEPA Headquarters In
  Washington, D.C. The State is also planning to host an Arid West Aquatic Life Use Workgroup in conjunction with
  other arid states, tribal entities and USEPA in the next year.


  Documentation and Further Information

  Nevada's 305(b) report,  September 2000: httD://ndep.state.nv.us/bwaD/305b1998.Ddf

  DRAFT Nevada's 2002 303(d) Impaired Waters List, June 2002: http://ndep.state.nv.us/bwqp/3Q3list.pdf

  Nevada's 1998303(d) List. April 1998: http://ndep.state.nv.us/bwQp/nv303d98.pdf

  Draft Continuing Planning Process, December 2001: http://ndep.state.nv.us/bwgp/cppdraft.pdf

  Water  Quality Standards, narrative and numeric: http://ndep.state.nv.us/bwgp/stdsw.htm
NEVADA: Program Summary
                                              December 2002
                                                                                                    3-113

-------
  NEVADA
  Contact Information
  Karen Vargas, Bioassessment Coordinator/Environmental Scientist I'l
  Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP)
  123 West Nye Lane, Suite 138 • Carson City, NV 89706-0851
  Phone 775/687-9444 • Fax 775/687-5856
  email: kvargas@ndep.state.nv.us
                                                                                _V
Programmatic Elements
Uioi of btonioiinionl
           HMJMMpfiHfi
                             /
                                   problem identification (screening)
                                   nonpoint source assessments
                                   monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                   ALL! determinations/ambient monitoring
                                   promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                   support of antidegradation
                                   evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                   TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                   other:
                                 targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
                                 projects, specific river basics or watersheds, and
                                 comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                 fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (special
                                 projects, specific river basins or watersheds, and
                                 comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                 probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                 probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                                 rotating basin (specific river basins or watersheds and
                                 comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                 other:
'Bioassessment information will eventually be used in 303(d) and 305(b) reports.
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                      143,576
 (determined using River Reaches art) calculated using GIS
 coverages.)
 Total perennial miles                                  14,988
 Total miles assessed for biology**                602
      fully supporting for 305(b)                              0
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                       0
      listed for 303(d)                                      0
      number of sites sampled                            50-60
      number of miles assessed per site                      -
"602 miles were assessed per year for 2000 and 2001 by the state (NDEP) and 97 miles were also assessed by others
(Dischargers). The state estimates 900 river miles to be assessed )n 2002. Since mileage is estimated and Nevada's 2001 data set
has not been analyzed, the State has not used biology for 305(b)/303(d); therefore "0" is reported. However, it will be used in the
future.
NEVADA: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
3-114

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Dec is ion-Making
                             Class System (A,B,C), Fishery Based Uses and Warm Water vs.
                             Cold Water
                             Propagation of aquatic life and the levels of warm water and cold
                             water fisheries.
  NuntfvtBiocrttnrtelnWQS   under development
  NumatteBtocrtotelnWOS    none	
 . UM* fit bfoininiiiTinnt rjita •
  WlUk 0ln#F flJI
    assessment of aquatic resources
    cause and effect determinations
    permitted discharges
    monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
    watershed based management
  Mocrftorto hi making
       *ment decision*
 aqtiatteraaourcmtoa
 designated ALU
  Reference Site/Condition Development*
.  Number orifereneeilteli ^ 'S; 0 total
Truckee River Restoration projects include the lahontan cutthroat
trout.
  Reference cite crtteri
  Charmctorizaflon of
  MftiMo «te« wttMn a
  ragkMMl context   r ;
  ;";    •  "         "
 Str
  regional reference
  condWora
                                 site-specific
                                 paired watersheds
                                 regional (aggregate of sites)
                                 professional judgment
                                 other:
This is under development. NDEP expects to use chemical, habitat,
physical measurements and least human impact. Where reference
sites are unavailable modeling and/or metrics will be used to
evaluate conditions.
    historical conditions
    least disturbed sites
    gradient response
    professional judgment
    other
    ecoregions (or some aggregate)
    elevation
    stream type
    multivariate grouping
    jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
    other:
                                 reference sites linked to ALU
                                 reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                 some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                 conditions (for fishery based uses)
'Nevada is in the process of developing reference sites. This section has been completed based on the criteria that will be considered
during development.
NEVADA: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                                                      3-115

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                               UD
                                     benthos (<100 samples/yeqr, single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
                                     fish
                                     pei
                                     tev
        iriphyton (<100 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - watershed
        vel)
      other:
      IwbHat setectton
kick net (1 m); 500-600 micron mesh
riffle/run (cobble) (when unavailable, use vegetation ar.d sediment)
500 count
combination-family, genus, species
                               natural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.)
                               Periphyton will be routinely collected and analyzed by a professional lab beginning in
                               2002. Chlorophyll analysis is performed at some stations.
                               n/a
                               chlorophyll a/ phaeophytin and taxonomic identification
                               genus level for soft-bodied algae when possible; diatoms are not cleared
                               quantitative measurements (some sites) and visual based: performed with
                               bioassessments; riffle slope, flowj average width and depth of flow, riffle velocity,
                               canopy cover, some vegetation (grass, scrubs, trees) coverage along riparian zone,
                               reach length, conductivity, temperature and dissolved oxygen
  Quality assurance program
  •temefrt.   fiv-    f~;;;.
Quality assurance program elements are currently being developed (i.e., standard
operating procedures, quality assurance plan, taxonomic proficiency checks,
specimen archival).
  Data Analysis and  Interpretation
  Data analysis toots and)
                               UD
      summary tables, illustrative graphs
      parametric ANOVAs
      multivariate analysis
      biological metrics (NDEP has not yet developed metrics but
      analysis tools and method? will be developed based on the
      most accurate method)
      disturbance gradients
      other
                                     repeat sampling (ideally, 5 years worth of data will be collected
                                     at each site to determine the variability)
                                     precision
                                     sensitivity
                                     bias
                                     accuracy
      Storage        .          EDAS (being developed)
                               EDAS (being developed)

•Analysis tools and methods will be developed more fully in the future.
NEVADA: Program Summary
                   December 2002
3-116

-------
 NEW HAMPSHIRE
 Contact Information

 David Neils, Biomonitoring Program Coordinator
 New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NHDES)
 6 Hazen Drive " Concord, NH 03302-0095
 Phone 603/271-8865 • Fax 603/271-7894
 email: dneils@des.state.nh.ijs
 NHDES Watershed Management Bureau, Biomonitoring Program:
 http ://www des .state, nh. us/wmb/biomoniloring/
 Program Description

 The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NHDES) has been gathering biological data in
 wadeable streams and rivers since 1995. The primary goal of this effort is the development of numeric biological
 criteria in support of the current narrative standard. Biological communities assessed for this purpose are fish and
 macroinvertebrates. Since the program's inception, the protocols for collecting data have remained fairly
 consistent. The fish are collected with a backpack electro-shocker for 150 meters, with efforts to include all
 habitats typical of the stream type. Macroinvertebrate sampling is done by rock baskets deployed for 8 weeks and
 retrieved in the fall. A visual habitat assessment is also conducted at each station using USEPA's Rapid
 Bioassessment Protocols for high or low gradient streams, whichever is appropriate.

 Since the program's beginnings, over 200 stations have been assessed. These stations are captured in an
 ArcView coverage that includes watershed delineations specific to the biological sampling station. Efforts are
 currently underway to determine the degree of human activity in each of the watersheds by evaluating parameters
 such as land use, population, hazardous waste sites and road density. This type of scoring will help to determine
 reference quality/least impacted sites.

 The Biomonitoring Program is also investigating the need to classify the wadeable streams in New Hampshire. The
 state is small but very diverse, with low coastal systems and high mountainous regions. It is not yet clear whether it
 will be necessary to establish unique biological criteria for different regions of the state.

 In the past, biomonitoring information has been used for 305(b) reporting and also for 303(d) listing. The
 Watershed Management Bureau, which is responsible for producing these reports, is currently evaluating the
 assessment and listing methodologies, using USEPA's CALM guidance. In 2002-2003 the Biomonitoring Program
 will be testing a probabilistic sampling design for site selection. This type of sampling will allow for greater
 confidence in statements of statewide water quality, and continue to provide useful data for biocriteria
 development.

 Information about New Hampshire's Biomonitoring Program, including sampling protocols, can be found at
 http://www.des.state.nh.us/wmb/biomonitorina/.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Sfate of New Hampshire 2000 Section 305(b) Water Quality Report:
  http://www.des.state.nh.us/wmb/2000-305b.pdf

  NHDES Biomonitoring Program Protocols, January 2002:
  http://www.des.state.nh.us/wmb/biomonitoring/protocols.pdf

  New Hampshire Biomonitoring Program general information: httD://www.des.state.nh.us/wmb/biomonitoring/sites
NEW HAMPSHIRE: Program Summary              December 2002                                        3-117

-------
  NEW HAMPSHIRE
  Contact Information

  David Neils, Biomonitoring Program Coordinator
  New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NHDES)
  6 Hazen Drive • Concord, NH 03302-0095
  Phone 603/271-8865 • Fax 603/271-7894
  email: dneils@des.state.nh,us
Programmatic Elemi
lit* ofbjkNMMMMtMt ;
^^^ ;l- •'.,- ',
• ;?t. .if; '&' •% i ' ;
Xv -", "SK, '™\- . .
• .,.;••. ,;,*,i,r <>"£ ;vk. ' '.• ,.
, •-.,, P!:-' M;,f ;£x^ ,""'•;- -j:.7*" •
K voeV*-- "0^', ,ri'^;-" ' -'1^"i : '"^'f;-" i
1- -' - ' - • /•'- , , \
-r^tfe -j'lft 'd^- ' fc ' ;Mt' ",

" iifcaJraaBdi'-'"" -^;)" • ' ""-'^ •*:**"
- o0siflmf ' - .
,.'.'i ^-, ,«. .»,. .,, j.
ents
/
/
/
/
/

/

/
/
/




problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness, of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other: Ecological Risk Assessments
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects and specific river basins or watersheds)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (special
projects only)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin
other:
 Stream Miles

 Total miles                                    10,881
 (State based determination)

 Total perennial miles                                8,636

 Total miles assessed for biology                 400

     fully supporting for 305(b)                           339

     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                     11

     listed for 303(d)                                   0

     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)           130

     number of miles assessed per site*                    - 3
                    400 Miles Assessed for Biology
                         fully supporting' for 30S(b)

                         "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
•NHDES will be doing random sampling in the future.  For now, 150 meters are assessed and extrapolated to a broader area,
roughly three miles per site, though this number does vary.
NEW HAMPSHIRE: Program Summary
December 2002
                                                      3-118

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
 ALU«te»l(jn«tfon tMWte        Class system (A, B, C)
    •?R*F"  ., -••ats^v, .Hpfer: •
 AU}tolgnaticr1tort.lnWQS
                             There aren't any written formal/informal numeric procedures to
                             support narrative biocriteria decisions yet because they are very
                             subjective. Presently, data is being analyzed using New York's
                             metrics.
                             under development         _
                    reW
                                assessment of aquatic resources
                                cause and effect determinations
                                permitted discharges
                                monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                watershed based management
 UMs of biowtitsinentt
 Wocrftorta In nwklno
 management decision*
                            none
       ling restoration of
 aquatic resource* to •
  Reference Site/Condition Development
 Number of reference sKM •
                            40 total
                                  site-specific
                                  paired watersheds
                                  regional (aggregate of sites)
                                  professional judgment
                                  other:
  Rufaranc* site criteria
                            Generally use best professional judgment. Least disturbed sites are
                            determined following some stratification of characteristics (ArcView
                            coverage, hazardous waste sites, etc.) - it is very visual.
 ChanctMttMoii of
 refevQiiCt •ItiHi.-Vfttbl
 regkHtal conteict
                                historical conditions
                                least disturbed sites
                                gradient response
                                professional judgment
                                other
  Stream »tretffliy»aoni
  fV{|fDiS8l remlttllCift
  cotklltlom
                                ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                elevation
                                stream type
                                multivariate grouping
                                jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                other
 Additional ^formation
                                reference sites linked to ALU
                                reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                conditions
'Regional reference sites not used.
NEW HAMPSHIRE: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                                                      3-119

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
          igM M«»ii«d  :;   [ 
-------
 NEW MEXICO
 Contact Information

 Seva J. Joseph, Environmental Specialist
 New Mexico Environment Department (NMED)
 1190 Saint Francis Drive • Santa Fe, NM 87502-0110
 Phone 505/827-0573 « Fax 505/827-0160
 email: seva ioseph@nmenv.state.nm.us
 NMED Surface Water Quality Bureau: hHp:/Avww.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/swqb.hlml
 Program Description

 Starting in 1998 the New Mexico Environment Department's (NMED) Surface Water Quality Bureau (SWQB) had a
 goal of monitoring all watersheds in the state on a 5-year cycle. NMED has recently begun to survey fish
 populations to supplement the data from the NM Department of Game and Fish. NMED uses RBP collection
 methods and is currently working on assessment methods suitable for the depauperate fish population of New
 Mexico. The SWQB coordinates with the NM Department of Game and Fish to obtain the most current fishery
 assessments in the watersheds.

 The benefits of this approach are:
      It provides a  systematic, detailed review of water quality data and allows for a more efficient use of valuable
      monitoring resources;
      It provides information at a scale where implementation of corrective activities is feasible;
      With an established order of rotation and predictable sampling in each basin, it is easier to coordinate efforts
      with other programs and water quality entities, and program efficiency is enhanced and the basis for
      management decisions is improved.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Water Quality and Water Pollution Control in New Mexico, 2000 305(b):
  http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swcib/305b 2000.htm!

  State of New Mexico Standards for Interstate and Intrastate Surface Waters, December 16, 2001:
  http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/NMED regs/swab/20 6 4 nmac.html

  Surface Water Quality Bureau Library. http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/links.htmltfWPS Library

  For a list of and links to Reports and Publications, go to:
  http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/Qwb/Technical%20resourcesn'SS.html#ReDorts

  For a Table of Contents containing ALL Technical Reports and other information, go to:
  http'.//www.nmenv.state.nm.us/qwb/Technical%20resources/TSS.htmi

  For a list of and links to Biological Databases, go to:
  httD://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/Qwb/Technicai%20resources/TSS.html#Bioloaical
NEW MEXICO: Program Summary                  December 2002                                        3-125

-------
 NEW MEXICO
  Contact Information
  Seva J. Joseph, Environmental Specialist
  New Mexico Environment Department (NMED)
  1190 Saint Francis Drive • Santa Fe, NM 87502-0110
  Phone 505/827-0573 • Fax 505/827-0160
  email: seva ioseph@nmenv.slate.nm.us
  Programmatic Elements
  wttMn ov*faH waterpallty

problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALL) determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocnteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
                                  targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
                                  projects only)
                                  fixed station (i.e., water quaity monitoring stations)
                                  (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                  probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                  probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (special projects only)
                                  rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                  other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                    110,741
 (Slate based determination)
 Total perennial miles                                  8,682
 Total miles assessed for biology                5,875
     fully supporting for 305(b)                          3,200
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)*                   2,675
     listed for 303(d)*
     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)            30
     number of miles assessed per site
                                  5,875 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                        "fully supporting* for 305(b)
                                        "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
*A total of 3,080 miles are partially/non-supporting when miles with "impacts observed" are included. NMED is currently working on
a 303(d) list.
NEW MEXICO: Program Summary
              December 2002
                                                                      3-126

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
                             Fishery Based Uses and Warm Water vs. Cold Water
                             Five designations: Coldwater Fishery, High Quality Coldwater
                             Fishery, Limited Warmwater Fishery, Marginal Coldwater Fishery,
                             and Warmwater Fishery
         >8locrttofttlnWQS   none
         ^•i-_m^f--:-:smm
numeric (MQcnuMlB in nua none
ISjjpS^^
jl •< jj '-yiiji "s* " ' 'tjivi/'llij 'ijjiirtfiJi MW!^ '•="

. : ma's j :;. . . '-fj!~«^ : , • -HSriA



aquatic resources to a !{;.::;::
/
/
/
/
assessment of aquatic resources
cause and effect determinations
permitted discharges
monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
watershed based management
none
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number of reference sites
200 total
 determination*
    site-specific
    paired watersheds
    regional (aggregate of sites)
    professional judgment
    other
  Reference site Ctnvtwi
The least disturbed sites are picked according to best professional
judgment (based on chemistry, quantitative habitat measurements,
visual indicators, etc). There are plans to shift to RIVPACS as
biocriteria are developed during the next few years.
  Chaiactertefttionof
    historical conditions
    least disturbed sites
    gradient response
    professional judgment
    other:
f atwarn st»«lc«iOT wtthhiB;
 regional referent*      -'•-•;'-:'-
 conditions     :
    ecoregions (or some aggregate)
    elevation (preliminary ecoregions are based on elevation and
    other habitat parameters)
    stream type
    multivariate grouping
    jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
    other:
 AdditionalInformation

    reference sites linked to ALU
    reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
    some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
    conditions
NEW MEXICO: Program Summary
                  December 2002
3-127

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (30 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                   fish (30 samples/year: single ^season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                   periphyton* (9 samples/year, single observation, limited sampling)
                                   other: phytoplankton (9 samples/year; single observation, limited sampling)
 -    sampling gear         .    Hess, D-frame, kick net (1 meter); 500-600 micron mesh
     habitat selection            riffle/run (cobble)
 ,    subsampte stee      .  ,J  300count
 .    te^jJTomy'• yjp'-;      !:P  combination (it depends on the family-some to genus, some to species level)
Fish


 : .   sample processing
                               backpack and bank electrofisher; 1/4" mesh
                         •'•"£?,  multihabitat
                            '   length measurement and anomalies
                           ..„:.  batch
              f-frijP'-  :.'3fl|  species	
                               natural substrate: collect by hand; artificial substrate: periphytometer
                               richest habitat and multihabitat
                               taxonomic identification
                               diatoms only
                            •;4  visual based, hydrogeomorphology; and the RBP assessment is conducted with the
                            ' 1  bioassessment. NMDE may also conduct a Rosgen type hydrogeomorphological
                            j  assessment, including pebble counts, independently of the bioassessment.	
                            ,|  standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, sorting proficiency checks
                            'it  and specimen archival
QiMtifyjMB>unuic9 proQnun ^
•Penphyton is collected primarily from lakes. It is only collected from streams in response to a specific problem or when looking at a
certain impairment - sampling is very minimal (<10).
"Up to this point bioassessments have been conducted as described in the EPA's RBP These methods are just now starting to be
refined for regional applicability.

  Data Analysis and Interpretation
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
      transformine metrics   ' v[  95th percentile of reference population
      into unWess score*
                           . j  95th percentile of reference population
                                   repeat sampling
                                   precision
                                   sensitivity
                                   bias
                                   accuracy
                               just recently started using MS Access. All historic data (1977 -1999) are in STORE!
      Retrieval and analysis .   T  In the process of moving from STORET to MS Access; some data are also in Excel
NEW MEXICO: Program Summary
                                                  December 2002
                                                                                                           3-128

-------
                                                                                                                       1
 NEW MEXICO
 Contact Information

 Seva J. Joseph, Environmental Specialist
 New Mexico Environment Department (NMED)
 1190 Saint Francis Drive • Santa Fe, NM 87502-0110
 Phone 505/827-0573 • Fax 505/827-0160
 email: sevaioseph@nmenv.state.nm.us
 NMED Surface Water Quality Bureau: http://www.nmenv.state.nm.u5/swqb/swqb.html
 Program Description

 Starting in 1998 the New Mexico Environment Department's (NMED) Surface Water Quality Bureau (SWQB) had a
 goal of monitoring all watersheds in the state on a 5-year cycle. NMED has recently begun to survey fish
 populations to supplement the data from the NM Department of Game and Fish. NMED uses RBP collection
 methods and is currently working on assessment methods suitable for the depauperate fish population of New
 Mexico. The SWQB coordinates with the NM Department of Game and Fish to obtain the most current fishery
 assessments in the watersheds.

 The benefits of this approach are:
 *    It provides a systematic, detailed review of water quality data and allows for a more efficient use of valuable
      monitoring resources;
      It provides information at a scale where implementation of corrective activities is feasible;
      With an established order of rotation and predictable sampling in each basin, it is easier to coordinate efforts
      with other programs and water quality entities, and program efficiency is enhanced and the basis  for
      management decisions is improved.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Water Quality and Water Pollution Control in New Mexico, 2000 305(b):
  http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/305b 200Q.html

  State of New Mexico Standards for Interstate and Intrastate Surface Waters, December 16, 2001:
  http://www.nmertv.state.nm.us/NMED reQS/swab/20  6 4 nmac.html

  Surface Water Quality Bureau Library. http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/links.htmltfWPS  Library

  For a list of and links to Reports and Publications, go to:
  http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/gwb/Technical%20resources/TSS.htmWReoorts

  For a Table of Contents containing ALL Technical Reports and other information, go to:
  http://www.nmenv.state.nm,us/Qwbn'echnical%20resources/TSS.htmi

  For a list of and links to Biological Databases, go to:
  http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/awb/Technical%20resources/TSS.htmtfBiolootcal
NEW MEXICO: Program Summary
December 2002
                                                                                                3-125

-------
 NEW MEXICO
  Contact Information
  Seva J. Joseph, Environmental Specialist
  New Mexico Environment Department (NMED)
  1190 Saint Francis Drive • Santa Fe, NM 87502-0110
  Phone 505/827-0573 » Fax 505/827-0160
  email: seva ioseDh@nmenv.stale.nm.us
  Programmatic Elements
LlB^Bof bloaBMttfMnt '••
n---S:-fr «/••? .t.rvj
•(". 'J^' ' -i?"! " '-^S . 'iff' • ' ,.
»->••-&:=•=%£ .==!«<:,. -S&;. '_•;• ;R:.
;.' •" ^ ' •J' . **
:-j~- ,:-;••:• :.%• ;ia- / •„•-.. ',~ •••'•

ijs- i;:, .':jfjp •;p^-!-.^. -.^v 4;:
d;- $&.-• .:-fe A' .af. .;k *.-.
ApplteaU* monitoring
-•• A -yr. ;f: •/ .- ;. j
=---..y>:% -I-;.:*- ?! -v;J
;R -ic "ft if . i- V-, -ij
a- '?. ,-:,i. 4 -,. : ,J
1 ...... 1
y
~7"
~7
~7
~7



/

/
/

/
/


nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness; of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation

evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects only)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (special projects only)
rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                   110,741
 (State based determination)
 Total perennial miles                                8,682
 Total miles assessed for biology               5,875
     fully supporting for 305(b)                         3,200
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)*                  2,675
     listed for 303(d)*
     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)           30
     number of miles assessed per site
                   5,875 Mites Assessed for Biology
                         "fully supporting" for 305(b)
                         "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
*A total of 3,080 miles are partially/non-supporting when miles with "impacts observed" are included. NMED is currently working on
a 303(d) list.
NEW MEXICO: Program Summary
December 2002
3-126

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Dec is ion-Making
 ALUiiiMianatiOfl .
 ALU yfi^gnattons In state
 wat«f|uBN$ standards •'
Fishery Based Uses and Warm Water vs. Cold Water
Five designations: Coldwater Fishery, High Quality Coldwater
Fishery, Limited Warmwater Fishery, Marginal Coldwater Fishery.
and Warmwater Fishery
 NarrativeBtocrtterta In WQ8   none
 Numeric Blocrtterta In WQ8    none
  In In
 chemical spaciflc aMorfa)
    assessment of aquatic resources
    cause and effect determinations
    permitted discharges
    monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
    watershed based management
                             none
            t decisions
 regarding restoration of
 aquatic resources to a
 designated ALU
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number of reference sites
200 total
                                 site-specific
                                 paired watersheds
                                 regional (aggregate of sites)
                                 professional judgment
                                 other:
  Rofsfoiwe site cnMna
The least disturbed sites are picked according to best professional
judgment (based on chemistry, quantitative habitat measurements.
visual indicators, etc).  There are plans to shift to RIVPACS as
biocriteria are developed during the next few years.
 Ctiawctertattonof
 refOfWtOft JMwNI WlUttll 41
         ""   '  '
    historical conditions
    least disturbed sites
    gradient response
    professional judgment
    other:
 StrwristratWcaflonwtthin
  conditions
    ecoregions (or some aggregate)
    elevation (preliminary ecoregions are based on elevation and
    other habitat parameters)
    stream type
    multivariate grouping
    jurisdictional (i.e.. statewide)
    other:
 Additional Mormatktn
    reference sites linked to ALU
    reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
    some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
    conditions
NEW MEXICO: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                                                      3-127

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (30 samples/year: single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                   fish (30 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                   periphyton* (9 samples/year; single observation, limited sampling)
                                   other: phytoplankton (9 samples/year; single observation, limited sampling)
      sampling gear
      .hfibftflt-SfitOdiOfl
      suDsamote size
                               Hess, D-frame, kick net (1 meter); 500-600 micron mesh
                               riffle/run (cobble)
                               300 count
                               combination (it depends on the family-some to genus, some to species level)
      taxonomy
                               backpack and bank electrofisher; 1/4" mesh
                               multihabitat
                               length measurement and anomalies
                               batch
                               species
 •:**ipi
 •:^-:^g.jji
 •:    haWtatseJecSon
                               natural substrate: collect by hand; artificial substrate: periphytometer
                               richest habitat and multihabitat
                               taxonomic identification
                               diatoms only
                              visual based, hydrogeomorphology; and the RBP assessment is conducted with the
                              bioassessment. NMDE may alsolconduct a Rosgen type hydrogeomorphological
                              assessment, including pebble counts, independently of the bioassessment.
                               standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, sorting proficiency checks
                               and specimen archival
•Periphyton is collected primarily from lakes.  It is only collected from streams in response to a specific problem or when looking at a
certain impairment - sampling is very minimal (<10).
"Up to this point bioassessments have been conducted as described in the EPA's RBP.  These methods are just now starting to be
refined for regional applicability.

  Data  Analysis and Interpretation
  Data ai^fe tool* and
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other
      Iransfotming metrics
      Mo unNtess scores
                             :  95" percentile of reference population

                       In     i  95" percentile of reference population
                                   repeat sampling
                                   precision
                                   sensitivity
                                   bias
                                   accuracy
                  :          !  Just recently started using MS Access. All historic data (1977 -1999) are in STORET
      Retrieval and analysis      In the process of moving from STORET to MS Access; some data are also in Excel
NEW MEXICO: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                           3-128

-------
 NEW YORK
 Contact Information

 Robert W. Bode, Research Scientist III
 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC)
 625 Broadway • Albany, NY 12233-3502
 Phone 518/285-5682 • Fax 518/285-5601
 email: rwbode@gw.dec.state.ny.us
 NYSDEC homepage: www.dec.slate.ny.us/websHe/dow/index.html
  Program Description

  The Stream Biomonitoring Unit of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) was
  formed in 1972. The primary objective of the Unit is to assess the water quality of streams and rivers in New York
  State using aquatic invertebrate communities. Secondary objectives include taxonomic investigations, invertebrate
  tissue analysis, and  public outreach. The unit presently consists of five biologists: Robert Bode, Margaret Novak,
  Lawrence Abele, Diana Heitzman, and Alexander Smith.
  The Stream Biomonitoring Unit is part of the ambient surface water monitoring team at NYSDEC. Water quality is
  assessed to determine the level of designated use support and the primary factors causing the impacts.  In
  addition to community assessments, invertebrates are collected for tissue analysis to determine if elevated levels
  exist for metals, pesticides, PCBs, or PAHs. Biological monitoring using benthic invertebrate communities is the
  primary monitoring tool for the initial screening phase within the watersheds, providing a coverage of 150-200
  streams each year.  Additionally, biomonitoring is used to conduct multi-site intensive surveys on approximately 10
  streams each year to provide baseline data and trend monitoring data or to trackdown sources of xenobiotic
  substances.
  Assessments based on macroinvertebrate sampling are used extensively in 305(b) reports and the Priority Water
  List, and to a lesser  extent in 303(d) reports.  Assessments generally do not directly address the designated uses
  of drinking, swimming, or fishing, contained in the State water quality standards, although they provide sound basis
  for determination of aquatic life support (reported in 305b) and relate secondarily to the designated use of fish
  propagation and survival. Biocriteria are addressed by the Biological Impairment Criteria, which are used to define
  impairment by exceedances of metrics measured upstream and downstream of a discharge. The primary
  assessment method using benthic macroinvertebrates is based on a multimetric scale divided into four levels of
  impairment, ranging from non-impacted to severely impacted. Although nearly all the collection of biological data
  remains within the Unit, many studies are conducted in cooperation with other New York State agencies (NYS
  Museum), federal agencies (USGS, USEPA), neighboring states (Vermont, Massachusetts, New Jersey), and non-
  governmental organizations (Hudson Basin River Watch, Trout Unlimited, Nature Conservancy).

  Accomplishments
     publication of a  manual for the identification  of larvae of Chironomidae (1980)
     development of methods for the Rapid Biological Assessment of streams (1983)
     establishment of biological impairment criteria (1990)
     publication of Percent Model Affinity, a community analysis technique (1992)
     documentation of 20-year trends in water quality in New York State (1993)
     development of Impact Source Determination, a pollution identification method (1995)

  Future program directions and challenges
     continuing long-term trend monitoring
     providing maximum biomonitoring coverage of streams  in New York State
     integrating more assessments with diatom and fish data
     developing invertebrate identification aids using digital photography and the NYSDEC website
     capturing biodiversity information outside of the subsampling process
  Documentation and Further Information

  New York State Water Quality 2000, 305(b) Report, October 2000: http://www.dec.state.nv.u5/website/dow/305bOO.pdf

  Draft 2002 Section 303(d) list: http://www.dec.slate.ny.us/website/dow/303dcalm.pdf

  Bode. R. W.. M.A. Novak, and I.E. Abele, 1996. Quality assurance work plan for biological stream monitoring in New York
  State. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Technical Report, 89 pages.


NEW YORK: Program Summary                    December 2002                                         3-129

-------
  NEW YORK
  Contact information
  Robert W. Bode, Research Scientist III
  New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDBC)
  625 Broadway • Albany, NY 12233-3502
  Phone 518/285-5682 • Fax 518/285-5601
  email; rwbode@gw.dec.state.ny.us
 Programmatic Elements
•'few*
                  rquallty
                                   problem identification (screening)
                                   nonpoint source assessments
                                   monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                   ALL) determinations/ambient monitoring
                                   promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                   support of antidegradation
                                   evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                   TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                   other:
                                   targeted (i.e.. sites selected for specific purpose)
                                   (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                   fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
                                   (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                   probabilistic by stream order/catchment area (special projects
                                   only)
                                   probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                                   rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                   other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (determined using a state based program)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
      fully supporting for 305(b)
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
      listed for 303(d)
      number of sites sampled
      number of miles assessed per site
                                                   52,337

                                                    46,266
                                                   16,000
                                                    15,430
                                                      570
                                                      484
                                                      800
                                                       20
                                                                    16,000 Miles Assessed for Biology
"fully supporting" for 305(b)
"partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
These numbers represent primarily stream miles (roughly 85-90%), but there are some river miles included due to program overlap
in metrics, etc. It would be very difficult to separate the data for these two waterbody types. Also, there is a discrepancy between
305(b) partially/non-supporting and 303(d) stream mites because the 1998 303(d) list did not include all impaired waters, just
impaired waters suitable for TMDLs. Also, the 305(b) and 303(d) lists, up until now, have been developed independent of each
other.
NEW YORK: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                         3-130

-------
                                                                                                                                  1
 Aquatic Life  Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making

       eJgnaflora In state
       uaHtystanda
                 dards
                              Fishery Based Uses
                              One designation: Fish propagation and survival
                  i In WQS
                              none - New York does have biological impairment criteria (see
                              footnote), but these are not found in the water quality standards.
                  i In WQS
                              none
  U*e*of btomseeiment date
  In Integrated attmmoirtt
  wltti other any!
  d«ta(e.a.. toxidtyte«Ung and ;
                                 assessment of aquatic resources
                                 cause and effect determinations
                                 permitted discharges
                                 monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                 watershed based management
 Usesof bloasseMmefig
 Moofterfa In making   ;
' regafylltg liBirtOfaflOn Cff~" '
 aquatic resource* to their
 designated ALU ,
                              none
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number of reference sitis • *?  not applicable*
;JRef*i»nce.,ilte-
                                 site-specific
                                 paired watersheds
                                 regional (aggregate of sites)
                                 professional judgment
                                 other:
  Reference site criteria
                             For application of biological impairment criteria, reference sites are
                             control sites located upstream of a suspected source of impairment.
  reference sites within
                                 historical conditions
                                 least disturbed sites
                                 gradient response
                                 professional judgment
                                 other:
 ; StrelfH stwiflcirtlonwWiln
 regkxuil reference
                                 ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                 elevation
                                 stream type
                                 multivariate grouping
                                 jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                 other:
 Additional information  I
                                  reference sites linked to ALU
                                  reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                  some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                  conditions
•Reference sites are used in the following manner only: NYSDEC's reference sites are merely site-specific "control" sites, used
strictly used for rating the water quality near a suspected source of impairment. This is done by collecting water samples at the
source of impairment and upstream of the source, and then biological impairment criteria are applied for rating purposes. For
example, if more than eight species are lost between the two samples, then the impairment criteria have been exceeded and the
stream section would be considered significantly impaired.  Thus the biological impairment criteria define how much change is
allowed from upstream to downstream.
NEW YORK: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                                                         3-131

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
slw^ll •''•«=  ., 3,:
:v!-"  sampling gear
  .1:   4iAI»H A* rii»li»i>rti»i»
!:«r-  , naDrtat SewCoOri
  ;    subsampte size
H5j-  tbionorty.. Sf:
                                    benthos (100-500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                    fish (<100 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - not at watershed level)
                                    periphyton (<100 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - not at watershed level)
                                    other:
                               multiplate, Ponar grab sampler, dipnet; >800 micron mesh
                               riffle/run (cobble)
                               100 count
                               genus, species, combination
'.,«••>..-.     .;    "'
4|$ .: 'jtfeplKfffliiaj^1;  '• :?:K

 S;   sarripte processing  ;

*^''?$iut^''-"*&  'rf:
                               backpack electrofisher, 1/4" mesh
                               pool/glide, riffle/run (cobble)
                               counts only
                               100 count
                               species
  Ptripiiyton
 ^•~'- £-=.$£** .*•*
      sampte processing
 ttabttitsM
                               natural substrate: suction device, brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.), from
                               macrophyte surfaces; artificial substrate: collect by hand (multihabitat) using a knife blade
                               and eyedropper
                               multihabitat
                               taxonomic identification
                               diatoms only, species
                               quantitative measurements; performed with bioassessments
        ^Msuntncft program
                       , a-      standard operating procedures; duality assurance plan; periodic meetings, training for
                             <  biologists; sorting proficiency checks; taxonomic proficiency checks; specimen archival
'Water quality assessments using benthos are based on a multimetric scale divided into 4 levels of impairment ranging from
non-impacted to severely impacted (see below).  NYSDEC's bioassessment program had periphyton monitoring capabilities in 1999
and 2000, but this has since been dropped and it is not dear if the sampling will be continued. Fish sampling is conducted by
another Division within NYSDEC for a limited number of sites per year.
  Data amfyito toofe i
 Data Analysis and Interpretation
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   para metric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index and return single metrics)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other: impact Source Determination using cluster analysis
          ,    »   •-   ••
      baflSforinlng metrics    '   transformed into 4 impact categories, using approximately 25*. 50*, and 75* percentiles of
      tntounffless scores     :   database
     •',i-.^i->' •'-. ,;i|jC:-   ',";,ff. •   .'T.":   'H •"
      defWng irnpaftnent in   !   transformed into 4 impact categories using approximately 25th, 50th, and 75* percentiles"
      arnuWmeWcindex
  E«aw«onofp#fform.nc»
                                   repeat sampling (sampling 'same site in different flow regime years)
                                   precision (QA checks on subsampling)
                                   sensitivity (comparisons with diatom sampling, fish sampling)
                                   bias (replicate sampling to test for sampler differences)
                                   accuracy (comparisons with toxidty testing, chemical sampling)
                               data are entered in Excel spreadsheets, then transferred to FoxPro
                             | In-house programs in FoxPro
"The impairment threshold is not defined using reference sites. Instead, NYSDEC creates impact categories using all of the data
from the sites: everything >75n percentile is considered non-impacted/good.
NEW YORK: Program Summary
                                                  December 2002
3-132

-------
 NORTH  CAROLINA


 Contact Information

 Irish MacPherson, Environmental Biology Supervisor II
 North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources (NCDENR)
 1621 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
 Phone 919/733-6946 • Fax 919/733-9959
 email: trish. macoherson@ncmail .net
 WC Environmental Sciences Branch homepage: http://www.65b.enr.slate.nc.u5/


 Program Description

 Benthic Macrolnvertebrates
 The Biological Assessment Unit of NCDENR uses aquatic macroinvertebrates as one type of indicator of biological integrity in
 streams and rivers.  A swamp-sampling method is under development with sampling occurring in winter/early spring. North
 Carolina biologists first began collecting data in the late 1970s, and began using consistent sampling in 1983. Collection
 methods include a standard qualitative method (applicable for most between-site and/or between-date comparisons and used for
 all evaluations of impaired streams - those on the state 303(d) list), and the EPT method (an abbreviated version of the regular
 qualitative technique used to  quickly determine between-site differences in water quality). Benthic samples are processed on site
 at each location.  Another collection method is used for swamp streams.  The boat sampling technique for nonwadeable
 freshwater rivers  is an adaptation of the standard qualitative method.

 Bioclassification criteria have been developed that are based on the number of intolerant EPT taxa present and the relative
 pollution tolerance of each taxa, as summarized in a Biotic Index for standard evaluation (EPT uses taxa richness only). Stream
 and river reaches are then given a final bioclassification  of either Excellent, Good, Good/Fair, Fair or Poor. These
 bioclassifications, which have been developed for major ecoregions, are used to assess the various impacts of both point source
 discharges and nonpoint source runoff.

 Beginning in 1991, the benthos summer sampling effort was directed toward specific river basins in given years based on the
 NPDES permitting schedule.  This basin-wide monitoring is generally conducted three years prior to the year of permit renewal
 for the basin.  This allows biological data to be incorporated in basin assessment, and subsequently into the management plan
 for each basin. Benthos data, by sub-basin, is incorporated into an Environmental Sciences Branch assessment report that also
 includes a review of pertinent data and information from  other sources.

 Between 110 and 130 wadeable sites are sampled for benthos each year during basinwide monitoring, and additional sites are
 sampled for special studies. The resulting information is used to document both spatial and temporal changes in water quality
 and to complement water chemistry analyses, fish community data, and habitat evaluations.  In addition to assessing the effects
 of water pollution, biological information is also used to define High Quality or Outstanding Resource Waters, support
 enforcement of stream standards, and measure improvements associated with management actions. The results of biological
 investigations have been an integral part of North Carolina's basinwide monitoring program. Benthos data is the  primary source
 for use support determinations.

 Fish Community
 To the public, the condition of the fishery is one of the most meaningful indicators of ecological integrity. Fish occupy the upper
 levels of the aquatic food web and are both directly and indirectly affected by chemical and physical changes in the environment.
 The Biological Assessment Unit employs a  standard method for assessing streams' biological integrity by examining the
 structure and health of fish communities. This assessment incorporates information about species richness  and composition,
 trophic composition, fish abundance, and fish condition.  Criteria for the 12 metrics used in the North Carolina Index of Biological
 Integrity (NCIBI) are based on reference site data collected from groupings of river basins with similar fauna. The reference site
 sampling began in 1999, and fish community samples are now given a bioclassification similar to the benthos sites.
 Approximately 90 basinwide fish sites are sampled annually. Fish community data are used in the same ways as benthos data.

 Use Support
 North Carolina has moved toward assessing use support for each use class.  Benthos and fish data are used for the evaluation
 of aquatic life  standards.  Biological data are typically  given more weight than chemical data for use support. Sites with data
 from more than one trophic level are evaluated on a site specific basis for use support.


 Documentation  and Further Information

 North Carolina 2000 305(b) Report: http://h2o.enr.state nc.us/bepu/download.html

 SOPs Biological Monitoring, Stream Fish Community Assessment & Fish Tissue:
 http://www.esb.enr.slate.nc.us/BAUwww/IBI%20Methods%202001.pdf

 SOPs for Benthic Macroinvertebrates:  hHp://www.esb.enr.state.nc.u5/BAUwww/benthossop.Pdf

 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling and Narrative Criteria: http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/BAUwww/benthosdata.pdf
NORTH CAROLINA: Program Summary                December 2002                                             3-133

-------
  NORTH CAROLINA
  Contact Information
  Trish MacPherson, Environmental Biology Supervisor II
  North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources (NCDENR)
  1621 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
  Phone 919/733-6946 • Fax 919/733-9959
  email: trish.macpherson@ncfnail.net
  Programmatic Elements
                                   problem identification (screening)
                                   nonpoint source assessments
                                   monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                   ALL) determinations/ambient monitoring
                                   promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                   support of antidegradation
                                   evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                   TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                   other: 303(d) listing
 Apptkabto monitoring
 ctolgmi    "-.=?;•
targeted (i.e., sites selected Ifor specific purpose)
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
fixed station (i.e., water quaity monitoring stations)
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                      37,672
 (State based determinations)
 Total perennial miles                                      -
 Total miles assessed for biology*              32,072
     fully supporting for 305(b)                          29,929
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                    2,143
      listed for 303(d)                                   2,143
      number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)"          350
      number of miles assessed per site                     91.6
                                 32,072  Miles Assessed for Biology
                                        fully supporting" for 305(b)
                                        "partially/non-supporting' for 305{b)
•Presently, biological sites are not separated from chemical for reporting purposes. However, Aquatic Life usages will be based
primarily on biological assessment in the future. The 303(d) list is due before all assessments were completed (roughly 99% of
partially/non supporting waters for 305(b) list).  Thus, the number of miles assessed using biological data can't be confirmed
because so many sources of information are used to make use support assessments. It can be assumed that using the current
methodology of breaking out use support ratings by category (i.e., aquatic life), all the waters assessed in this category could be
added up into miles. However, this method has only been applied to 6 of the 17 basins in North Carolina. NCDENR may have
these numbers in the next few years.
"Best professional estimate of the number of sites sampled since the program's inception is 5000 benthos, 600 fish and 4000
phytoplankton samples (this is very good coverage of sites within river basins for mainstem and major tributaries).
NORTH CAROLINA: Program Summary
              December 2002
                                                                       3-134

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Dec is ion-Making
 ALU designation basis        Class System (A.B.C)
                              "Aquatic life propagation and maintenance of biological integrity..."
                              applies as a best usage for Class C and Class WS-I waters.
 Narrative Biocrtterfa In WQS
                              Procedures used to support narrative biocriteria located in SOPs for
                              biological assessment
 Numeite Blocriteria fn VK)3    none (Located in SOPs for biological assessment but not in water
 •iV5vr- ;;HipiB^--nS|||iHh - 1uali*y standards.)	
 •I MlQ
         """ ......  "•""
                                  assessment of aquatic resources
                                  cause and effect determinations
                                  permitted discharges
                                  monitoring (e.g.. improvements after mitigation)
                                  watershed based management
 UseaofbioassessmemV  .
 biocriteria In making;   :
 management decisions.
 regarding restoration of
 aquatic resource* to a
 designated ALU
                              Biological data have been used to pinpoint degraded areas and to
                              validate improvement after management activities have been
                              completed.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number qf referenci Jltes  •  : 300 total	
'' NBlVIWRfinKi'VIHI •
 {MwfUntfljQOItS
                                   site-specific
                                   paired watersheds
                                   regional (aggregate of sites)
                                   professional judgment
                                   other:
                              Must achieve an excellent bioclassification or meet certain land use
                              criteria (percent forest, no major dischargers, etc). Benthos
                              reference sites: EPT criteria and biotic index criteria; fish reference
                              sites: IBI criteria.
 CtWBCtBftzVttOII Of:: r-;i :>N:•:
' reference sKeswWUn a
^.^ilft^MSil0* !;:|iiil?:.
 •'   •  '•^!pfe-;-;-;-'- ' ': ~fis-y:~'
                                   historical conditions
                                   least disturbed sites
                                   gradient response
                                   professional judgment
                                   other:
i Stream;!
 regional..,.
 conditions
                                   ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                   elevation
                                   stream type
                                   multivariate grouping
                                   jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                   other:
 Additional. Infofwalloii •
                                  reference sites linked to ALU
                                  reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                  some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                  conditions
NORTH CAROLINA: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                          3-135

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                    benthos (100-500 samples/year; multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad coverage for
                                    watershed level)
                                    fish (<100 samples/year, multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad coverage for
                                    watershed level)          ;
                                    periphyton, (<100 samples/year; single observation, limited sampling)
                                    other: phytoplankton (>500 samples/year, multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad
                                    coverage for watershed leveli and macrophytes (<100 samples/year single
                                    observation, limited sampling)
      sampling-gear
      subsampte size
      taxonomy
                              collect by hand, sandbag, fine-mesh samplers made with net between PVC pipe joins,
                              dipnet, kick net (1 meter); 200400 micron mesh
                              multihabitat
                              entire sample, aimed at >10 organisms/taxon (from qualitative field picking)
                              genus, species
      saffipfWQ gear
      sample processing
                              backpack electrofisher, boat electrofisher, seine; 1/8" mesh
                              multihabitat
                              length measurement, anomalies
                              none
                              species, subspecies
 Pwrlphyton  :
:jj>v sampling gear
      sampte processing
      taxonotfly.     ;  ;..j
                              natural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.), collect by hand;
                              artificial substrate: collect by hand, bring rock back to lab
                              richest habitat
                              taxonomic identification
                            j  diatoms only, species level
 Habitat M»«««m«nt
                              visual based, performed with bioassessments
Quality awuranc* prog
                             I  standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and training for
                             i  biologists, taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival, certification program for
                             !  bioassessment
  Data Analysis and  Interpretation
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                    biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index and return single metrics - use
                                    endpoint for each single metric)
                                    disturbance gradients
                                    other:
     transforming metrics
    • Irteiuiiil^scoresl
    definingftnpalrmentin
jjjjnroair
HMnnC •
                               reference data set used to set bounds for metrics - percent will vary with metric

                               reference data set used to set bounds for metrics - percent will van/ with metric
                                   repeat sampling (seasonal, multiyear data)
                                   precision (to look for subtle differences in water quality)
                                   sensitivity (different teams sample the same site)
                                   bias (overlap sites with different crews)
                                   accuracy (compare bioassessments with chemical & toxicity data)
      RaWevat and analysis
                              Fourth Dimension used for benthos data, MS Access used for fish and phytoplankton data
                              In house database
NORTH CAROLINA. Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                             3-136

-------
                                   JJ
.8 EPA Headquarters Library
                                           Mail code 3404T
 NORTH DAKOTA      1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
                                       Washington, DC 20460
 Contact Information                  202-566 0556

 Michael J. Ell, Environmental Scientist
 North Dakota Department of Health (NDHD)
 1200 Missouri Avenue, P.O. Box 5520 • Bismarck, ND 58506
 Phone 701/328-5214 • Fax 701/328-5200
 email: mell@state.nd.us
 NDHD Division of Water Quality homepage: http:tfwww.health.stale.nd.us/ndhd/environ/wq/ -
 Program Description

 The primary goal of North Dakota's biological monitoring and assessment program is to develop a set of
 scientifically defensible ecological indicators that can be used to assess the extent to which the state's rivers and
 streams are meeting their designated aquatic life uses. Once developed, these indicators can also be used to set
 restoration goals when developing total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) and/or Section 319 nonpoint source
 pollution project implementation plans.

 The North Dakota Department of Health (NDHD) initiated its biological monitoring and assessment program in
 1993 and 1994 as part of an interagency project to develop a multimetric index of biological integrity (IBI) for fish in
 the Lake Agassiz Plain ecoregion,  Red River of the North Basin.  In addition to the Department of Health, other
 agencies involved in the project were the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural
 Resources, EPA Region V, and the USGS - Red River National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) project
 team. The  project resulted in  a 12 metric IBI for fish which distinguished among headwater, moderate, and large
 sized rivers.

 Since 1995, NDHD  has conducted biological monitoring in each of the state's four major river basins. The
 Department's biological monitoring and assessment efforts continued in the Red River of the North Basin in 1995
 and 1996.  In addition to fish, the Department began sampling macroinvertebrates in 1995. In 1997 and 1998,
 monitoring and assessment efforts were expanded to the Souris River and James River basins, respectively, and
 in 1999 and 2000 the Department sampled the Missouri River Basin. In addition to fish and macroinvertebrate
 samples collected at each site, NDHD also conducted a habitat assessment following EPA's  Rapid Bioassessment
 Protocol.

 Preliminary multimetric IBIs have been developed for fish and macroinvertebrates in the Red River Basin and for
 fish in the Souris River Basin.  These IBIs have been used to assess aquatic life use support for the 2000 Section
 305(b) report. As these IBIs are refined and as additional IBIs are developed for the remaining river basins, it is
 the Department's intent to include these biological assessments in future Section 305(b) reports as well as in the
 development of Section 303{d) TMDL lists.

 NDHD is currently collaborating with North Dakota State University and EPA Region VIII in a two year pilot project
 to evaluate the response of the benthic periphyton community to varying summer growing season nutrient levels
 with the goal of developing regional nutrient criteria. Based on the results of this pilot project, NDHD may include
 periphyton in future biological  monitoring and assessment activities,  especially in relation to nutrient enrichment
 and eutrophication.

 The Department is also a collaborator with EPA  in the EMAP Western Pilot Project. The EMAP Western Pilot is
 currently in the third year of a  four year project.  By collaborating in this 12 state project, the Department hopes to
 integrate EMAP sampling design as well as EMAP sampling protocols into future biological monitoring and
 assessment projects. When NDHD's commitment to this project is completed in 2004, it's the Department's plan
 to begin its rotating  basin monitoring program with the Red River Basin.


 Documentation and Further Information

 North Dakota Water Quality Assessment 1998 -1999, 2000 305(b) Report:
 http://www.health.state.nd.us/ndhd/environ/wQ/2000 305b/2000 305b.pdf

 For links to numerous NDHD surface water quality/management publications, including Standards of Quality for
 Waters of the State, Chapter 33-16-02 and North Dakota Unified Watershed Assessment, FY1999, go to:
 http://www.health.state.nd.us/ndhd/environ/wq/
NORTH DAKOTA: Program Summary                December 2002                                         3-137

-------
  NORTH  DAKOTA
  Contact Information
  Michael J. Ell, Environmental Scientist
  North Dakota Department of Health (NDHO)
  1200 Missouri Avenue, P.O. Box 5520 • Bismarck, NO 58506
  Phone 701/328-5214 • Fax 701/328-5200
  email: mell@state.nd.us
  Programmatic Elements
  U~.ofbio
  within overall wtttr quality
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness,of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocnteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
 AppHMCii monttorfctg

targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects only)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion. or statewide
rotating basin (specific river basins or watersheds)
other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                      54,427
 (determined using RF3)
 Total perennial miles                                unknown
 Total miles assessed for biology*              14,426
      fully supporting for 305(b)                          9,923
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                   4,503
      listed for 303(d)
      number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)"          150
      number of miles assessed per site
                                 14,426 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                        'fully supporting" for 305(b)
                                        "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
•Both stream and river miles were assessed for biological, chemical and physical effects. As reported in ND's 2000 305(b) report,
approximately 68.8 percent (9,923 miles) of rivers and streams assessed for this report fully support the beneficial use designated
as aquatic life. The remaining 31.2 percent of rivers and streams (4,503 miles) either partially supporting or did not support their
aquatic life uses.
"According to ND's 2000 305(b) report, "In 1997,1998, and 1999, the department focused its intensive basin survey efforts on the
Souris River Basin, the James River Basin, and the Lake Sakakawe4 subbasin, respectively. In addition to chemical monitoring,
biological monitoring was conducted at approximately 50 sites in each basin each year."
NORTH DAKOTA: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                       3-138

-------
ALU
                 In state >
Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
                            Single Aquatic Life Use
                            North Dakota has several classes described (Class I, la, II, and III)
                            but the ALU is basically the same for all classes.
                            A narrative biological goal is contained in NO's water quality
                            standards. There are no formal/informal numeric procedures used to
                            support narrative biocriteria.
                            none
 Narrative Btocrttori. In WQS
 Nurowte Btocriteria In WQ8
 Use* of bfc
 fa Inte
 with other environmental data
 (e.8.,toxWty testing and
 chemical specific criteria)
                                assessment of aquatic resources
                                cause and effect determinations
                                permitted discharges
                                monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                watershed based management
 UM& off
 btocriterta In making
 manaownent decisions :  .
 regarding restoration of K:
 aquatic reaourcM to • ' -;r:v
                            Nonpoint source project implementation plans
 Reference Site/Condition Development
 Number of rofWwtc* sites
                            -75 total
 R»ter»nc*slte
                                site-specific
                                paired watersheds
                                regional (aggregate of sites)
                                professional judgment
                                other:
                             Reference sites are the best sites of the whole population sampled,
                             determined by habitat condition of sites and fish IBI.
 Characterization of
 reference sites within M|
            '    '
                                historical conditions
                                least disturbed sites
                                gradient response
                                professional judgment
                                other:
 Stream straaflcatlon wW*i
 mgional relMwic« • "fiif-f.
 condrtlora    '     •
-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (100 - 500 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - watershed
                                   level)
                                   fish (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                   periphyton (<100 samples/year: multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad
                                   coverage for watershed level}
                                   other:
      habitat setetfion
      subsamptesiie
      taxonomy
                              D-frame; 500-600 micron mesh
                              multihabitat
                              300 count
                              lowest practical, usually genus
. ].'?' ~:" taxonomy
                              boat and longline electrofishers, pram unit (tote barge)
                              multihabitat
                              length measurement, biomass - batch, anomalies
                              none
                              species
      taxonomy;
                              natural substrate: suction device
                              riffle/run (cobble)
                              taxonomic identification
                              diatoms only
 Ijlabtert a»««i«ment»
                             visual based and hydrogeomorphplogy: performed with bioassessments
                    ogram
                              standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan and specimen archival
  Data Analysis and
 IMa analysis tools and
                          Interpretation
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (multimetric index under development)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
 Purftmtrte thrwhokta
?ssi:»i:i '•••'., -' ;:'~ite-''?   "
                       '. *•• '.':•  I
                              95th percentile of all sites

                              "power analysis"
                                    repeat sampling (replicate sampling within and among years)
                                    precision
                                    sensitivity
                                    bias
                                    accuracy
 Btotoglcti data
                              Fish and habitat assessment data are in an MS Access 97 database
                              maintained by the Department. Ijriacroinvertebrate data are in EDAS.
                              Macroinvertebrate data are analyzed by EDAS, and plots generated
                            I  by SAS. Fish data are analyzed with queries developed in-house.
NORTH DAKOTA: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                          3-140

-------
                                                                                                                                         I
 OHIO
  Contact Information

  Jeffrey E. DeShon, Acting Manager - Ecological Assessment Section
  Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OHEPA)
  4675 Homer Ohio Lane • Graveport, OH 43125
  Phone 614/836-8780  • Fax 614/836-8795
  email: Jeff.deshon@epa.state.oh.us
  OHEPA Division of Surface Water,Statewide Biological and Water Quality Monitoring
  and Assessment homepage: http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/bioassess/ohstrat.html
  Program  Description

  The Ohio EPA has been sampling biological communities in Ohio streams and rivers with standardized sampling protocols since
  the mid 1970s.  Biological criteria was incorporated into the Ohio water quality standards (WQS; Ohio Administrative Code 3745-
  1) regulations in February 1990 (effective May 1990).  These criteria consist of numeric values for the Index of Biotic Integrity
  (IBI) and Modified Index of Weil-Being (Mlwb), both of which are based on fish assemblage data, and the Invertebrate
  Community Index (ICI), which is based on macroinvertebrate assemblage data. Criteria for each index are specified for each of
  Ohio's five ecoregions (as described by Omemik 1987), and are further organized by organism group, index, site type, and
  aquatic life use designation.  These criteria, along with the existing chemical and whole effluent toxicity evaluation methods and
  criteria, figure prominently in the monitoring and assessment of Ohio's surface water resources.

  Ohio EPA employs biological, chemical, and physical monitoring and assessment techniques in biosurveys in order to meet three
  major objectives: 1) determine the extent to which use designations assigned in the Ohio WQS are either attained or not
  attained; 2} determine if use designations assigned to a given waterbody are appropriate and attainable; and 3} determine if any
  changes in key ambient biological, chemical, or physical indicators have taken place over time, particularly before and after the
  implementation of point source pollution controls or best management practices. Biosurvey data are processed, evaluated, and
  synthesized in a biological and water quality report. Each biological and water quality study contains a summary of major
  findings and recommendations for revisions to WQS, future monitoring needs, or other actions that may be needed to resolve
  existing impairment of designated uses. While the principal focus of a biosurvey is on the status of aquatic life uses, the status
  of other uses such as recreation and water supply, as well as human health concerns, are also addressed.



  Documentation and Further Information

  Year 2000 Ohio Water Resource Inventory, 305(b) Report: http VAvww.epa.stale oh.us/dsw/documenls/Ohio305B200Q.pdf
  FWPCA Section 303(d) TMDL Priority List forFFYt 999-2000: htlp:/A»ww.epa.state.oh.us/d5w/tmdl/303dnotc.html

  The State of the Aquatic Ecosystem: Ohio Rivers and Streams, 1998 Status:
  http ://www .epa .state .oh. us/dsw/d ocuments/fs8mas98. pdf
  The Role of Biological Criteria in Water Quality Monitoring, Assessment, and Regulation. 1995:
  http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/documents/instbusi.pdf
  Using Biological Criteria to Validate Applications of Water Quality Criteria Dissolved and Total Recoverable Metals,    February
  1997: http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/documents/gli  bio.pdf
  Rankin, E.T. 1989. The qualitative habitat evaluation index (QHEI): rationale, methods, and application.  Division of Water
  Quality Planning & Assessment, Ecological Assessment Section, Columbus, Ohio.
  Biological and Water Quality Reports, list of documents: http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/document index/psdlndx.html
  Biocrtteria manuals are currently only available as hard copies upon emailed or written request. Information on obtaining copies
  can be found at http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/document index/orintdoc.html. The  biocriteria manuals are titled as follows:
      Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. 1987a.  Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life: Volume I. The role of
      biological data in water quality assessment. Division of Water Quality Monitoring & Assessment. Surface Water Section,
      Columbus, Ohio.

      Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. 1987b.  Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life: Volume II.  Users manual
      for biological field assessment of Ohio surface waters. Division  of Water Quality Monitoring & Assessment, Surface Water
      Section. Columbus, Ohio.

      Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. 1989b.  Addendum to Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life:  Volume II.
      Users manual for biological field assessment of Ohio surface waters.   Division of Water Quality Planning & Assessment,
      Ecological Assessment Section, Columbus, Ohio.

      Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. 1989c,  Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life: Volume III.
      Standarfiz&J biological field sampling and laboratory methods for assessing fish and macromvertebrate communities.
      Division of Water Quality Planning & Assessment. Ecological Assessment Section, Columbus, Ohio.
OHIO: Program Summary
                                                  December 2002
                                                                                                              3-141

-------
  OHIO
  Contact Information
  Jeffrey E. DeShon, Acting Manager - Ecological Assessment Section
  Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OHEPA)
  4675 Homer Ohio Lane • Graveport, OH 43125
  Phone 614/836-8780 • Fax 614/836-8795
  email: Jeff deshon@epa state oh.us
  Programmatic Elements
  UMft Of mOJMMllHOTit
  wtthin owraflwater quality
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALUS determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
            rriiMtorH
targeted (i.e., Sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects, specific river basins or watersheds, and
comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (specific
river basins or watersheds)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin (special projects, specific river basins or
watersheds, and comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
other: geometric design (specific river basins or watersheds and
comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
  Stream Miles
  Total miles                                           29,113
  (based on the USEPA RP3 map ofpeiennial stream miles as
  determined for Ohio)
  Total perennial miles                                      29,113
  Total miles assessed for biology                    9^535
      fully supporting for 305(b)                              5,204
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                       4,331
      listed for 303(d)*                                      2,052
      number of sites sampled (1999-2000)                    1,100
      number of miles assessed per site (1999-2000)              2.5
                                    9,535 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                          fully supporting' for 305(b)
                                          "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
•The 2,052 miles are from Ohio's 1998 303(d) list, which is based on the 1996 305(b) statistics and includes data collected through
1994. OHEPA has recently taken a different approach to assessment and listing that will be reflected in upcoming 303(d) Nstings.
The Agency now discourages the use of attainment statistics based ,on monitored stream miles in favor of a watershed level
approach that provides an indication of the attainment status of watersheds in total (in essence, a measure of square miles of
watersheds fully, partially, or not supporting ALU).
OHIO: Program Summary
              December 2002
                                                                         3-142

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
                               Class System (A.B.C) - Tiered
                               Seven designations: Warmwater Habitat, Exceptional Warmwater
                               Habitat, Coldwater Habitat, Modified Warmwater Habitat, Seasonal
                               Salmonid, Limited Warmwater Habitat (being phased out), Limited
                               Resource Water
  Narrative Btocrttert* In WQS    Procedures used to support narrative biocriteria located in Ohio
  s        -h '•••       •>: -2f.       WQS, http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/rules/3745-1.html
 ;" Numeric  toirt&rta iw
Also found in Ohio WQS, see above link
  In integrated
  cherntealspeciflccriterls)
    assessment of aquatic resources
    cause and effect determinations
    permitted discharges
    monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
    watershed based management
  Uses of bl
  biocriteria in
  management declsibrts
           restoration of
  caustic resources to a
 designated ALU   ;|;;i->;
There are many instances where bioassessments documented
before and after conditions based on POTW improvements.
Biosurvey data and biocriteria thresholds are the primary arbiters in
the determination of aquatic life use attainment status: results are
used to determine 305(b) aquatic life use attainment statistics and to
drive the 303(d) listing/delisting and TMDL development process.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Numbwof rsferancttl)tM      500 total (including modified reference sites)
  Reference site
            '
:  Refertnciilte critorta?
  Strwm .trattflcwion within
  AddKkmallnfomwtlon
    site-specific
    paired watersheds
    regional (aggregate of sites)
    professional judgment
    other:
Representative of best watershed conditions within an ecoregion
given the background activities prevalent in society.
                                   historical conditions
                                   least disturbed sites
                                   gradient response
                                   professional judgment
                                   other:
    ecoregions (or some aggregate)
    elevation
    stream type
    multivariate grouping
    jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
    other:
    reference sites linked to ALU
    reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
    (fisfed in Biocriteria Manuals, which are referenced in WQS)
    some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
    conditions
"All reference sites were originally screened to eliminate sites with evidence of substantial human disturbance. This was
accomplished by examining maps of human population density and current and past land uses, compiling a watershed disturbance
ranking, and noting the size and location of point source discharges. Additional site-specific factors considered in the selection of a
reference site included (1) the amount, if any, of stream channel modification, (2) the condition of the vegetative riparian buffer zone,
(3) water volume, (4) channel morphology characteristics, (5) substrate character and condition, (6) presence of obvious color/odor
problems, (7) amount of instream woody debris, and (8) the general representativeness of the site within the ecoregion.
OHIO: Program Summary
                   December 2002
3-143

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
/
                                    benthos (100-500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - broad
                                    coverage)
                                    fish (100-500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
                                    periphyton
                                    other:
      h&bttst detection
      subsamptesize
      taxonomy
collect by hand, multiplate: 200-4(|)0 micron mesh
multihabitat and artificial substrate
entire sample (presort with subsampling)
combination (lowest practical with current knowledge)
      sampling gear
      saiipteprooesstag
      subsampte
      taxonomy
backpack electrofisher (in small streams only), boat electrofisher, pram unit (tote
barge), and longline method using electrofishing unit and 100 meter line
multihabitat
biomass - individual and batch, anomalies
batch (for weight only)
species
                               visual based: performed with bioajsessments
 Quality atturartc* program  !  standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
   "'     "                     i  training for biologists, taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival, and a
                               certification program for bioassessment has been developed for the OHEPA
                               Voluntary Action Program (i.e., Bfownfields Redevelopment)
  Data Analysis and  Interpretation
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
 UMMhta*J*fc« **	•—•'-«-*.
 jKiiuiiNnnc tin unom

                               95" percentile of reference population

                               25th percentile of reference population (ecoregion Warmwater Habitat
                               and Modified Warmwater Habitat);
                               75th percentile of reference population (statewide Exceptional
SlY..; :--yj&&. • ••:'--K: .. '
;-"vHiLr -. . - . jg~™?£jx~ -, • --f rirjiiii~'"" ; ' '
•&•'": x' , :f',;T£:''^ • :s;S!i3-V
=D--:f ^ • ^"l^l^:--/ = ' " ::!J^::'^' '
%>\, • - :-;i":5;:S» >• • ' •"•T=»!s":''
BlbkMlttlttata • ' '
Warmwater Habitat); EPA RBP guidelines
/
/
/


repeat sampling (many sites - including reference sites - with
multiple-year collections to track temporal variability)
precision (multiple samples occasionally collected from the same
site on the same date, especially at potential litigation sites)
sensitivity (studies have been done to determine the possible
range of variation in index scores at a given sampling location on
a given sampling date)
bias
accuracy

      Retrieval and analysis
      •••
In initial stages of modernization and migration to MS Access
Custom programs to calculate indices, other summarized data, 305(b)
statistics, etc.
OHIO: Program Summary
                   December 2002
                                                                                                             3-144

-------
 OKLAHOMA
  Contact Information

  Charles Potts, Senior Environmental Specialist
  Oklahoma Water Resources Board (OWRB)
  3800 North Classen • Oklahoma City, OK 73118
  Phone 405/530-8800 • Fax 405/530-8900
  email: capotts@owrb.state.ok.us
  OWRB homepage: http://www.owrb.state.ok.us/
  Program Description

  The Oklahoma Water Resources Board (OWRB) has many monitoring programs. In 1998, the State Legislature
  directed the OWRB to oversee certain state water quality monitoring activities to determine compliance with
  Oklahoma's Water Quality Standards (OWQS). Specifically, the OWRB was charged with coordinating all
  monitoring under a standing cooperative agreement with the USGS, conducting a Comprehensive Beneficial Use
  Monitoring Program (BUMP), and developing Use Support Assessment Protocols (USAPS) to ensure the
  consistent data interpretation of beneficial use support. The overall goal of BUMP is to document beneficial use
  impairments, identify impairment sources (if possible), detect water quality trends, provide needed information for
  the OWQS and facilitate the prioritization of pollution control activities. River and stream monitoring is one of five
  key elements of BUMP.

  So far, OWRB's biological monitoring is related only to special projects, such as biocriteria development or the
  occasional fish tissue study.  However, BUMP is a developing  program and there is intent to expand biological
  monitoring in the near future.  Presently, there are fixed and rotating stations at which chemistry and flow
  information may be collected. The OWRB is currently monitoring almost 200 sites on a monthly basis. These sites
  are segregated into two discrete types of monitoring activities.  The first monitoring activity is focuses on fixed
  station monitoring on rivers and streams. In general, at least one sample station is located in each of 67
  watersheds. Following consultation with other appropriate state environmental agencies, the OWRB originally
  identified 84 fixed sites; that number has now grown to 100. The second component of river and stream monitoring
  focuses on water quality sampling stations whose location will  rotate on an annual basis. Stations and identified
  monitoring parameters were based upon Oklahoma's 303(d) list and the monitoring requirements of other state
  environmental agencies. Monitoring parameters are specific for each stream segment.

  Oklahoma DEQ's fish monitoring program has been discontinued but provided a wealth of information concerning
  statewide fish distribution. Improvements in Oklahoma's water quality monitoring programs are being developed
  and implemented in order to provide more consistent and reliable information related to the condition of aquatic
  resources (including quality habitat alteration, and impacts of polluted runoff and point source discharges).
  Unfortunately, much of the monitoring information in Oklahoma is fragmentary and incompatible because it is
  collected through programs that are designed and conducted for differing objectives.
  Documentation and Further Information

  The State of Oklahoma Water Quality Assessment Report, 2000 Edition, November 2000:
  http://www.deg.state.ok.u5/WQDnew/305b 303d/2000 305b Report Final.pdf

  Status of Water Quality Monitoring in Oklahoma, 2000 Final Report to the Oklahoma Legislature:
  wwwowrt).state.ok.us/report5/OkWqSlatus2000.pdf

  Oklahoma Water Resources Board, Chapter 46 of Implementation of Oklahoma's WQS, effective August 2001:
  htto: tfwww .owrb .state. ok. us/rules/Chao46. pdf

  SOP for Field Sampling Efforts of the OK Water Resources Board Beneficial Use Monitoring Program, June 2001:
  http:ffwww.owrb.state.ok.us/feDorts/BUMP SOPFY-01 .pdf

  Oklahoma's Nonpoint Source Management Program and Nonpoint Source Assessment Report, FINAL DRAFT:
  http://www.okcc.stale.ok.us/Divisions/Water Qualitv/Reports/REPORT078.pdf

  Conduct your own "Biological Monitoring" search for additional documents using: http://www.soonersearch.odi.state.ok.us/



OKLAHOMA: Program Summary                    December 2002                                          3-145

-------
  OKLAHOMA

  Contact Information
  Charles Potts, Senior Environmental Specialist
  Oklahoma Water Resources Board (OWRB)
  3800 North Classen • Oklahoma City, OK 73118
  Phone 405/530-8800 • Fax 405/530-8900
  email: capotts@owrfe.stale ok us
  Programmatic Elements
  U*4»0f
  wWMo
      «M.monrtormg  ;;;j-:|
      jliif'£ ':;li»>'--  --ffU
                                  problem identification (screening)
                                  nonpoint source assessments
                                  monitoring the effectiveness |of BMPs
                                  ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
                                  promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                  support of antidegradation
                                  evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                  TMOL assessment and monitoring
                                  other:
                                  targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose)
                                  fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
                                  probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                  probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (comprehensive use
                                  throughout jurisdiction)
                                  rotating basin
                                  other:
'Several possibilities exist, but currently only use-support decisions and use assignments are done with reassessments.
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                      78,778
 (State based determination • waterbody identifications)
 Total perennial miles                                 22,386
 Total miles assessed for biology               13,313
     fully supporting for 305(b)**
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)**
      listed for 303(d)"
      number of sites sampled                           3,391
      number of miles assessed per site          -4 (site specific)
"Much of Oklahoma's efforts are still in the development stages. The new 305(b) and 303(d) are not complete and there have been
significant changes in protocol since last completed; thus the data from past reports are no longer relevant. The new 305(b) and
303(d) reports should be complete sometime in 2002.
OKLAHOMA: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
3-146

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
 ALU designation baste  :      ALU subcategories
ALU designations to state
         ~ f standards
                              Habitat Limited Aquatic Community (least restrictive). Warm Water
                              A.C., Cool Water A.C. (most restrictive), Trout Fishery
                              (anti-degradation limitation)
  Numeric Btocrtterfa In WQ8
                            Formal/informal numeric procedures used to support narrative
                            biocriteria exist for specific ecoregions only.
                            Only for specific ecoregions; biological use-support thresholds found
                            in 785:46-15 (WQS implementation).
                                  assessment of aquatic resources
                                  cause and effect determinations
                                  permitted discharges
                                  monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                  watershed based management
  Uaa* of Moa*Mssnwntf
  biociltafta iit iftajkinjg
      aement decision*
                            none
  manage
  regarali
     ling restoration of
aquatic resources to *
                -
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Nurnbar of rofemhc* »KM
                            66 • 132 total (will increase as number of ecoregions are completed)
                                  site-specific
                                  paired watersheds
                                  regional (aggregate of sites)
                                  professional judgment
                                  other least impacted, no point sources
  R«f*»nc«sit» criteria
                            Reference sites are defined by the least impacted version of a
                            stream type in a particular ecoregion. Specific criteria is under
                            development.
  Characterizctiditof
                                historical conditions
                                least disturbed sites
                                gradient response
                                professional judgment
                                other:
  Stream
  wgkma
 • • colidifl0Bi''
                  Within
ecoregions (or some aggregate)
elevation
stream type
multivariate grouping
jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
other:
 Additional Infonnation
   "'
                                 reference sites linked to ALU
                                 reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                 some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                 conditions
OKLAHOMA: Program Summary
                                              December 2002
                                                                      3-147

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
  AMwnbtages assesMd
                                   benthos (<100 samples/year, single observation, limited sampling)
                                   fish (<100 samples/year; single observation, limited sampling)
                                   periphyton
                                   other:
  T   samplloggear
      habitat selection
      subsampte size
      taxonomy
                              dipnet, kick net (1 meter); 500-600 micron mesh
                              riffle/run (cobble) and woody debris
                              100 count
                              genus
      subsamote
                              backpack electrofisher, seine; 1/41' mesh
                              all habitats contained within the "representative" reach of 200 - 400 meters
                              anomalies and taxonomic identification
                              none
                              species
                  program
                            ... quantitative measurements; performed independent of bioassessments (see
                             j Oklahoma Water Resource Boarq Technical Report 99-3 for more information)
                             i standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, taxonomic proficiency
                             | checks and specimen archival
 Data Analysis and Interpretation
 B*1a
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
: f .•  •'• transfofwiw metrics
 I    Into unfflecs scores
'[•   d«rtln^ Impairment hi
                               cumulative distribution function (ecoregion dependent)

                               cumulative distribution function (ecoregion dependent)
                ffonn
 "Y-"" '' •':-''""' %  =.:^S^"«;P:T>.:
                                   repeat sampling (site validation collections and habitat assessments)
                                   precision
                                   sensitivity
                                   bias
                                   accuracy
 BMogtcricteta
                               MS Access and/or Excel formats
                               application dependent, spreadsheet driven (no large statistical treatment
                               yet); in the process of pulling existing data from other agencies to help
                               develop a program
OKLAHOMA: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                           3-148

-------
 OREGON
 Contact Information

 Rick Hafele, Manager - Biomonitoring Section
 Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ORDEQ)
 2020 SW4th Avenue, Suite 400 • Portland, OR 97201
 Phone 503/229-5349 • Fax 503/229-6957
 email: hafele.rick@deQ.state-or.us
 ORDEQ Water Quality Program homepage: http://www.dea.stale.or.us/wg/
  Program Description

  Oregon DEQ (ORDEQ) has a history of using biological data in water quality assessments. Since the early 1990's
  the biomonitoring program has grown from two full time staff to nine current permanent staff, and over 15 during
  the summer field season. The principle objectives of the biomonitoring program are to:

  *   Assess the status of stream conditions and fish and macroinvertebrate assemblages across the state,
  •   Identify trends in stream conditions and biological assemblages,
     Identify the primary chemical and physical parameters impairing biological assemblages,
     Assess the effectiveness of restoration projects and management activities designed to improve stream
     conditions, and
     Help standardize protocols for biological assessments throughout the state and region

  Increased concern over nonpoint sources of pollution and the listing of numerous salmon species as threatened or
  endangered has focused more attention on the importance of biological information in the State.  In 1991 Oregon
  DEQ adopted narrative biocriteria into state water quality standards. ORDEQ is currently developing numeric
  biocriteria and  expects to have numeric standards adopted by 2004.

  Most biological data  are collected using a probabilistic sampling design.  A reference site network is also being
  developed and sampled.  ORDEQ has worked closely with EPA and other state agencies in developing its
  monitoring strategy.  Over 400 sites have been sampled for biological, chemical and physical parameters
  (approximately 150 sites per year). Currently biological data are incorporated into the State's 305(b) report and
  303(d) list. Other biological data are used in NPDES permit assessments,  CWA Section 401 permit applications,
  and beneficial  use assessments.

  Maintaining a commitment to long-term funding is one of the primary challenges of any state monitoring effort.
  Data management and data quality are also key issues that require ongoing efforts to maintain an effective
  program.  Finally, integrating biological data into the overall water quality program (i.e. TMDLs) is an ongoing
  challenge and  an area for improvement in the future. To view current ORDEQ biomonitoring technical reports, go
  to:  http://www.deq.state.or.us/lab/Biomon/bio rpt.htm
  Documentation and Further Information

  Oregon's 2000 Water Quality Status Assessment Report, Section 305(b) Report.
  http://www.dea.state.or.us/wg/305bRpt/305bReportOOa.Pdf

  ORDEQ Water Quality Limited Streams 303(d) List information (including Listing Criteria, etc.):
  http://www.dea.state.or.us/wq/303dlist/303dpage.htm

  Oregon Water Quality Standards homepage: http://www.dea.state.or.us/wq/standards/wastdshome.htm

  Quality Assurance Guidelines:
  http://www.deq.state.or.us/lab/aa/NPDES%20and%20WPCF%20Self-MonitorinQ%20Laboratories.pdf

  Mrazik, S.  1999. Reference site selection: a six step approach for selecting reference sites for biomonitoring and
  stream evaluation studies.  Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Biomonitoring Section.
OREGON: Program Summary
December 2002
                                                     3-149

-------
  OREGON
  Contact Information
  Rick Hafele, Manager - Biomonitoring Section
  Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ORDEQ)
  2020 SW4th Avenue, Suite 400 • Portland, OR 97201
  Phone 503/229-5349 « Fax 503/229-6957
  email: hafele.rick@deg .state .or.us
  Programmatic Elements
                                   problem identification (screening)
                                   nonpoint source assessments
                                   monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                   ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
                                   promulgated into state water [quality standards as biocriteria
                                   support of antidegradation
                                   evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                   TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                   other: 401 permits and restoration effectiveness monitoring
 ApplcabtomonitorfRfl
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects only)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area (specific river
basins or watersheds)
probabilistic by ecoregion. or statewide (comprehensive use
throughout jurisdiction)
rotating basin
other:
  Stream Miles
  Total miles                                     114,823
  (determined using RF3 and National Hydrography Database)
  Total perennial miles                                  51,695
  Total miles assessed for biology*               40,188
      fully supporting for 305(b)                         12.056.4
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                  28,131.6
      listed for 303(d)**                               unknown
      number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)""        150+
      number of miles assessed per site
                                  40,188 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                         fully supporting* for 305(b)
                                         "partiallytoon-supporting" for 305
-------
Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
ALU designation baste        Fishery Based Uses
            ittonslnit!
            r standard*
                               Four designations:  Salmonid Passage; Salmonid rearing; Salmonid
                               spawning; Protection of resident fish and aquatic life
  Narrative BtocrftMfe In WQS
                             applied using a numeric approach found in 303(d) listing criteria.
                             http://www.deq.stale.or.us/wq/303dlist/303tlpage.htm
                             under development
  wttttottMf MtvironnMntal
        g,, tewdcfty testingand
                                  assessment of aquatic resources
                                  cause and effect determinations
                                  permitted discharges
                                  monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                  watershed based management
  UM«Qfl*MM*M«nimtf
  regarding restoration of
  aquatic iMourcM to a
  designated ALU
                             The best example is a stream restoration project in Eastern Oregon
                             that is trying to restore habitat and water quality to support salmonid
                             spawning and rearing. Bioassessment data have been an ongoing
                             part of this project's evaluation.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number ol reference ittw  '  ..  200 total
  Rtfmnef t M» criteria
 • "  ,,      "'*x"< ""'• -   . "  "SJ:JL'.
 ' CiMraciarfzation of ' ;!; •; :-:
  raffmnc^. sitM wlUiin it
Sin
PHaaTmWMll.

Additional Infomwtlfl
                                   site-specific
                                   paired watersheds
                                   regional (aggregate of sites)
                                   professional judgment
                                   other: see criteria below
                             Reference sites must fall into the lowest level of human disturbance
                             based on a set of GIS information and field results including land
                             use, road density and habitat (GIS data and best professional
                             judgment are used to identify 5* field watersheds with minimal
                             human disturbance). Once potential watersheds have been
                             identified, stream monitoring sites are randomly selected from within
                             those watersheds. Field reconnaissance confirms if they are suitable
                             reference sites.
                                  historical conditions
                                  least disturbed sites
                                  gradient response
                                  professional judgment
                                  other: minimally disturbed*
                                   ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                   elevation
                                   stream type
                                   multivariate grouping
                                   jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                   other: gradient; latitude and longitude; conductivity; watershed
                                   area
                                   reference sites linked to ALU
                                   reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                   some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                   conditions
'Oregon has three classes of reference sites: A - Sites with no human disturbance. These sites represent "natural" conditions and
are generally found in wilderness areas or very remote regions of the state, B - Sites with minimal human disturbance. These sites
represent conditions expected to occur without or with very minimal human activity, and C - Sites with human disturbance that
measurably alters stream conditions. These are the best available (least disturbed) sites.
OREGON: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                            3-151

-------
 Field and Lab Methods
                                  benthos (700-500 samples/year: single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
                                  fish C100-500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites  - broad coverage)
                                  periphyton (<100 samples/yep; single season, multiple sites - watershed level)
                                  NOTE: ORDEQ samples periphyton lor some projects, but not at the majority of sites.
                                  other: amphibians and reptiles (100-500 samples/year: single season, multiple sites  -
                                  broad coverage)
"i   sampling gear
     habitat selection
     habttaJselecUon
     sampte processing
Peripttyton
                       ; D-frame; 500-600 micron mesh
                       ' riffle/run (cobble)
                       i
                       j 500 count
                        combination - typically genus/species. A regional (multistate) taxonomy workgroup meets to
                        set taxonomic level standards.
                      :  backpack electrofisher
                        multthabitat
                        length measurement and anomalies
                        none
                        species	

                        natural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor/toothbrush, etc.)
                      . riffle/run (cobble)
                      ' taxonomic identification
                        all algae
                             :. quantitative measurements;
                                                performed
with bioassessments
                             . standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and training for
                              biologists, and specimen archival
  Data Analysis and Interpretation
  Data analysis toote and
                             summary tables, illustrative graphs
                             parametric ANOVAs
                             multivariate analysis
                             biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                             disturbance gradients
                             other:
trans^mlng metrics
into unMess scows
                               25" percentile of reference population

                               Cumulative distribution function
                               Significant departure from mean of reference population
 EvamattonofparformanM
 '
                             repeat sampling (a minimum of 10% of sites are sampled twice each field season)
                             precision (Signal-to-noise analysis)
                             sensitivity (Multivariate model sensitivity checked by rerunning model on subset of
                             reference sites)
                             bias
                             accuracy		
 WotoflteaJdata
      Retrievai and analysis
                         Data are stored in an agency database using MS Access. Macroinvertebrate data are
                         also being stored in a regional database (multi-agency and multi-state).
                         SAS and Statistica
OREGON: Program Summary
                                           December 2002
                                                                                                            3-152

-------
 PENNSYLVANIA
  Contact Information

  Daniel Bogar, Water Pollution Biologist II
  Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP)
  P.O. Box 8467 • Harrisburg, PA 17105-8467
  Phone 717/787-9637 • Fax 717/772-3249
  email: dbogar@state.pa.us
  PA DEP Office of Water Management homepage:
  http://www.dep.stal6.pa.us/dep/deputateAvatermqt/watermQt.rilm
  Program Description

  The basics of Pennsylvania's current water quality monitoring program began in the late 1960s and has included elements of
  bioassessment in some form since its inception. The primary objectives of the water quality monitoring program are to define
  surface water quality status and trends and to evaluate compliance with discharge permit limits.
  The State of Pennsylvania uses biological assessments in several program areas. The Statewide Surface Water Assessment
  Program (SSWAP), started in 1997,  was developed to assess all 83,000 miles of streams in the state.  The first comprehensive
  statewide assessment is scheduled for completion by 2007. After five seasons, approximately two thirds of Pennsylvania's
  surface waters have been assessed. Assessments are based on an evaluation of the instream habitat and macroinvertebrate
  community composition. All assessed streams are determined to be either impaired or unimpaired and a source and cause is
  listed for the former. These data are compiled into an MS Access database and GIS stream layer that  is updated yearly and
  submitted to USEPA as part of the 305(b) report. Impaired reaches are placed on the 303(d) list and scheduled for follow-up
  TMDLs.  Due to increasing complexities in the TMDL program, the assessment field methodology will be refined and enhanced
  in order to satisfy data needs for TMDL development.
  Pennsylvania's Antidegradation Program also uses biological assessments based on a modified version of USEPA's Rapid
  Bioassessment Protocols (RBP) methodology to define aquatic life use designations of candidate streams. Biological samples
  are collected, subsampled, identified, and selected metrics are generated and analyzed.  Candidate streams are compared to
  reference streams to determine if they qualify for designation as High Quality or Exceptional Value Waters. To alleviate the
  problem of site-specific reference site variability, staff biologists are currently working to develop a set of regionalized Reference
  Condition scores that can be compared to candidate streams.
  Biological assessments are also an important component of the Surface Water Quality Monitoring Network (WON).  Biological
  samples are collected at 26 fixed stations three times per year (spring, summer, and fall) and once a year (summer) at 123
  additional stations using the same RBP methodology referenced above. These data, in conjunction with bimonthly water
  chemistry samples,  are used to monitor long-term trends in water quality on the major streams in the Commonwealth.
  Fish are collected at approximately 35 WQN stations each year.  Fillets from these fish are analyzed for contaminants such as
  heavy metals and pesticides. This tissue analysis is used to generate consumption advisories for fish living in any contaminated
  surface waters.
  In order to more effectively meet its water quality objectives. Pennsylvania has fostered several cooperative bioassessment
  partnerships. Through contracts with the PA DEP, the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC), Susquehanna River
  Basin Commission (SRBC), and Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB) assist with SSWAP assessments.
  The Department plans to contract with the USGS to collect WQN samples. There  are also cooperative  efforts with citizen
  monitoring groups for water quality monitoring data collection and 305(b) reporting purposes.
  While Pennsylvania's bioassessment efforts have increased in recent years (Statewide Surface Waters Assessment program),
  additional bioassessment challenges are being tackled.  Department biologists are currently working to develop fish-based
  bioassessment methodologies for larger streams, refine lake assessments for 303(d) reporting purposes, and bioassessments of
  specialized habitats; such as limestone, glide/pool dominated, and non-wadeable waters.



  Documentation and Further Information

  Commonwealth  of Pennsylvania 2000 Water Quality Assessment 305(b) Report.
  http://www.deD.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/watermgt/WaD/WQStandards/305 wg2000 narr.htm

  Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 2001 305(b) UPDATE:
  http://www.deD.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/watermgtA/VgpA/VQStandards/305 wg20Q1 narr.htm

  DRAFT 2002 Section 303(d) Report, List of Impaired Waterbodies, June 2002:
  http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/depulate/watermgl/Wgp/WQStarKiards/303d-Report.htm

  Pennsylvania's Surface Water Quality Monitoring Network (WQN). revised 2001:
  http://www.dep.state.ca.us/dep/deputate/watermgl/wgp/wQstandards/Facts/BK0636-1.pdf

  Water Quality Assessment and Standards Fact Sheets:
  http://www.dep.slate.pa.us/dep/deputate/watermgi/wgp/wqstandards/Facts/Pubs-c.htm
PENNSYLVANIA: Program Summary
December 2002
                                                          3-153

-------
  PENNSYLVANIA
  Contact Information
  Daniel Bogar, Water Pollution Biologist II
  Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP)
  P.O. Box 8467 • Harrisburg, PA 17105-8467
  Phone 717/787-9637 • Fax 717/772-3249
  email: dbogar@state.pa.us
  Programmatic Elements
                                  problem identification (screening)
                                  nonpoint source assessments
                                  monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                  ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
                                  promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                  support of antidegradation
                                  evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                  TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                  other:
 ;dMlgm
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects only)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin (special projects only)
other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (determined using 1/24,000 scale streams GIS coverage)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology
     fully supporting for 305(b)
     partially/non-supporting for 30S(b)
     listed  for 303(d)
     number of sites sampled
     number of miles assessed per site*
                83,000


                45,000
                  36,900
                   8.100
                   8,100
                   7,435
                                 45,000 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                        "fully supporting" for 305(b)
                                        "partially/non-supporting" tor 305(b)
•Stations are placed at the mouths of major tributaries and on mainstems; towns are bracketed (upstream/downstream) depending
on landuse observed while in field.
PENNSYLVANIA: Program Summary
              December 2002
3-154

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making

 ALUdeelgnationbaete         Fishery Based Uses

             Boat In slate .     Four designations: Cold water fishes, Warm water fishes, Migratory
             rtpndarde	fishes, Trout stocking	

 	,    crtteltlIn WQS •   none - Antidegradation protocols used to support general aquatic life
      '•  • :^Sfi4K;*.. : - •-    standard are under development, not statutory - found in Chapter 93
            • :'"yg:yy:  ""    • ;  of Statutory Code.

 NumericBiocrtterte In VWJS     none
  In Integrated a*»ee«mente
  wrtt other envta
    assessment of aquatic resources

    cause and effect determinations

    permitted discharges

    monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

    watershed based management
  Ueea Of MOMMMOWltf
                              none
  management decMom
  regarding restoration of
  aquatic resourcM to a
  de»Ign«tedALU
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number of reference eite*
-100 total
                                  site-specific

                                  paired watersheds

                                  regional (aggregate of sites)

                                  professional judgment
                                  other:
  Reference eite crRerta
Based on stream classification in the antidegradation program, land
use, and habitat: primarily forested, no water quality criteria
violations, excellent habitat, and minimal siltation.
 region*]
                      .
                  ilna
    historical conditions

    least disturbed sites

    gradient response

    professional judgment

    other: minimally disturbed
 Stream stratlfteaaon within
                  "'
    ecoregions (or some aggregate)

    elevation

    stream type

    multivan'ate grouping

    jurisdictional(i.e., statewide)

    other: drainage area, land use, use designations, gradient, size
    and other regionalization other than ecoregion
 Addrtlon«lliif|i«on
    reference sites linked to ALU

    reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards

    some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
    conditions
PENNSYLVANIA: Program Summary
                  December 2002
                                                                                                        3-155

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                    benthos (100-500 samples/year, multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad
                                    coverage for watershed level)

                                    fish* (<100 samplas/year, single season, multiple sites • not at watershed
                                    level)

                                    periphyton

                                    other: phytoplankton (<100 Samples/year; single season, multiple sites - not
                                    at watershed level)
      sampBnogew
      habitat setectten
    multiplate, D-frame and kick net (1 meter); >800 micron mesh

    riffle/run (cobble)

    100 count

    genus
      sampllnojjear
    backpack and boat electrofishers

    multihabitat

    length measurement and anomalies

    none

    species
                               visual based; performed with bioassessments
            iiranc* program    standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
              ,•-."•' •              training for biologists, taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival

•Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission provides fish data to PA DEP.  For more information, contact Rick Spear, PA Fish & Boat
Commission, 450 Robinson Lane, Bellefonte, PA 16823, Phone: 814/359-5233. e-mail: r8oear@state.pa.us.
  Data Analysis  and
  Data analysis toofe and
Interpretation

        summary tables, illustrative graphs
        parametric ANOVAs
        multivariate analysis
                                    biological metrics (return single metrics - use endpoint for each
                                    single metric)

                                    disturbance gradients

                                    other:
      transforming nwttca
      Intn. '< irtllltfhaf A "n rtrt'Mi »'
    Still in the process of evaluating the best approach (considering 75"
    and 95* percentile of reference population and cumulative
    distribution function)

    Still in the process of evaluating the best approach {considering 75"
    and 95" percentile of reference population and cumulative
    distribution function)
 • •frllliiumliWkL ftiiB'liWriijiM

      (tefinfr^ bnj>aSrroert In
    In the process of evaluating the best approach
                                    repeat sampling (two or three, separate samples in the same
                                    riffle)
                                    precision

                                    sensitivity

                                    bias

                                    accuracy
 Bktlofllcaldate
 "  ""   '  ' '"  ''
      Rett(^ and analysis •
    MS Access

    SAS
PENNSYLVANIA: Program Summary
                      December 2002
                                                                                                             3-156

-------
 RHODE ISLAND
 Contact Information

 Robert Richardson, Senior Environmental Scientist
 Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM)
 235 Promenade Street • Providence, Rl 02908-5767
 Phone 401/222-4700 X7240 • Fax 401/222-3564
 email: rrichard@doa.state.ri.us
 RIDEM Office of Water Resources homepage:
 http://www.state.ri.us/dem/proarams/benviron/water/index.htm
 Program Description

 The importance of biological assessments in the evaluation of water quality has long been recognized in Rhode
 Island. Biological assessments are used to supplement physical and chemical water quality monitoring data. More
 specifically, the biological data can be used to identify long-term trends in water quality which reflect water pollution
 abatement efforts and/or needs.  The Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM), Office of
 Water Resources (OWR) has two types of biological monitoring programs. Multiple plate artificial substrates have
 been  used to evaluate the biological community in deep rivers since 1974. In addition, EPA's Rapid
 Bioassessment Protocol (RBP) (USEPA 1989) has been used since 1991 for the assessment of the biological
 integrity of various shallow river sites in the state.

 Artificial Substrate Monitoring
 The Fullner multiple-plate artificial substrate with 14 plates has been used by the Office of Water Resources for
 over 20 years to assess instream biological communities. Stations selected for this biological monitoring include
 those used for USGS trend chemical sampling to more closely relate chemical and biological data. This method
 has the advantage of providing a uniform sampling habitat for each station, thus reducing the problem caused by
 varying types of river bottom and depth. Macroinvertebrates collected on the artificial substrates are classified
 according to their tolerance of pollutants.

 Rapid Bioassessment Protocol Monitoring
 RBP monitoring involves an integrated assessment, comparing habitat (physical structure, flow regime) and
 biological  measures with defined reference site conditions. Since 1992, a network of 45 stream riffle-area sites
 have been surveyed by Roger Williams University in cooperation with and contracted by RIDEM. Each site is
 visited during the  spring-summer season and macroinvertebrates are sampled (minimum 100 organisms per site
 visit where feasible). Data are analyzed using RBP I and II protocols, which include varying degrees of field and
 laboratory organism identification.

 The streams sampled within the state range from first order to fifth order. Eight of the streams are considered to be
 first order, eighteen second order, twelve third order,  four fourth order and three are of the fifth order. Lower order
 streams are quite dependent upon the immediate characteristics of the watershed. In other words, runoff is a
 direct-affect component versus one of many components within a higher order stream. It is important to note that
 the 1993,1995 and 1997 sampling events took place during drought conditions, which may have resulted in fewer
 riffles, lower dilution and lack of runoff. This probably affected the types of organisms collected and resulted in art
 altered picture of the stations based from that seen in other years. This information was taken into account during
 the evaluation of the biological assessments.

 Initial bioassessment work involved establishing and field testing the RBPs in Rhode Island streams and rivers. In
 addition, refinement of the protocol over the past 4 years has established the presence of two sub-ecoregions
 within the  state: coastal areas and inland areas. Incorporation of the presence of these two sub-ecoregions into
 selection of reference sites and application of the protocols will continue. The habitat/physical parameters and
 biological  metrics of each station were compared to those of the selected reference station and given an overall
 bioassessment score.


 Documentation and Further Information

 The State of the State's Waters Rhode Island Section 305(b) Report, September 2000:
 http://www.state.ri us/dem/Dubs/305b/index.htm

 Sfafe of Rhode Island 2000 303{d) List of Impaired Waters,  November 2000: http://www.state.ri.us/dem/pubs/303d/303dOO.pdf

 Water Quality Regulations (including WQS), amended June 2000:
 http://www.state.ri.us/dem/pubs/reQS/REGS/WATER/ri 20gltv.pdf
RHODE ISLAND: Program Summary
                                              December 2002
                                                                                                    3-157

-------
  RHODE  ISLAND
  Contact Information
  Robert Richardson, Senior Environmental Scientist
  Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM)
  235 Promenade Street • Providence, Rl 02908-5767
  Phone 401/222-4700x7240 • Fax 401/222-3564
  email: rricriard@doa. state.ri.us
Programmatic Elements
                    •Jlty
vNMn
            H water qi
      !-,
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALL! determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water] quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge pernjiit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
           JIKMlllOfifiQ
                                targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (specific river
                                basins or watersheds and comprehensive use throughout
                                jurisdiction)
                                fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (specific
                                river basins or watersheds and comprehensive use throughout
                                jurisdiction)
                                probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (comprehensive use
                                throughout jurisdiction)
                                rotating basin
                                other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                         1,498
 (determined using state based GIS coverage)
 Total perennial miles                                     979
 Total miles assessed for biology*                 272.8
     fully supporting for 305(b)*                           188.1
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b>*                      84.7
     listed for 303(d)*                                     78.5
     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)"           -62
     number of miles assessed per site                site specific
                                                                  272.8 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                                                        "fully supporting* for 305(b)
                                                                        "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
*These numbers represent the miles assessed for ALUS using biology or a combination of biological and chemical data. The miles
listed for 303(d) were taken from the Rl draft 2002 303(d) list for biodiversity impairments.
"Roughly 62 sites are monitored on an annual basis, though this number does vary (10 - artificial substrate; 45 - 50 = RBP),
Fifty-five additional sites were sampled in 2000 as part of a random sampling design for the EPA.
RHODE ISLAND: Program Summary
                                              December 2002
                                                                                                         3-158

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALL)) Designations and Decision-Making
 ALU designation basis
 ALU designation* In state
 water quaity standards
                            Single Aquatic Life Use and Class System (A.B.C)
                            One designation: fish and wildlife habitat
NaiTattY«:poMterfa In VVQS
   •   • 'i:;tftSS;p;i.;\ s- 1!!: ;-.-
                              No formal/informal numeric procedures are used to support narrative
                              biocriteria; however, there is a qualitative and/or narrative scale of
                              condition.
  NumerfcBkwriterialnWQS    none
hi Integrated assessments
wHh other environmental : ••'>.
^-tftimtmto**s
                                  assessment of aquatic resources
                                  cause and effect determinations
                                  permitted discharges
                                  monitoring (e.g.. improvements after mitigation)
                                  watershed based management
  Uses/ of
  biocriteria In making
  management decisions
  regarding restoration of
  aquatic resources to a
  designated ALU
                            Super-fund sites and Rhode Island Pollutant Elimination Discharge
                            System (RIPDES) permit toxic elimination
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number of riference alter
                            2 total
 determinations
Characterization of
reference sites wttMn a
regional context
 conditions
                                 site-specific
                                 paired watersheds
                                 regional {aggregate of sites)
                                 professional judgment
                                 other:
                              Minimally impaired/disturbed (best reference site in New England) -
                              natural conditions, bank erosion, land use, etc. High Quality
                              unimpaired condition for RBP or site-specific for special site studies.
                                  historical conditions
                                  least disturbed sites
                                  gradient response
                                  professional judgment
                                  other: minimally disturbed*
                                 ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                 elevation
                                 stream type
                                 multivariate grouping
                                 jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                 other:
 AddMonaJtaforrnadon    ".= I  / I  reference sites linked to ALU
                                  reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                  some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                  conditions
•Rhode Island's reference sites are considered minimally disturbed. The Wood River reference site (most widely used) will likely
remain minimally disturbed because its watershed is largely contained within State Park boundaries. Rl allows for about a 20%
variation from that target for compliance. However, special watershed projects may be asking an upstream or downstream question
and, therefore, may be required to find a least disturbed site within the unique segment for comparison.
RHODE ISLAND: Program Summary
                                              December 2002
3-159

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                  benthos (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
                                  fish (sampled once in conjunction with USEPA: < 100 samples' single
                                  observation)
                                  periphyton
                                  other: macrophytes (<100 samples/year, single season, multiple sites - broad
                                  coverage)
 BenOMM
      sampling gear
 .    habitat «^«Son
                              collect by hand, multiplate, D-frame; 200-400 micron mesh
                              riffle/run (cobble), artificial substrate
                              100 count
                              combination
                              visual based; performed with bioassessments
 Quality
                              standard operating procedures, periodic meetings and training for biologists.
                              taxonomic proficiency checks, and specimen archival
 Data Analysis and Interpretation
 Date anatyttte tool* and
                                  summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                  parametric ANOVAs
                                  multivariate analysis
                                  biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                  disturbance gradients
                                  other:
      trawfocmlng metrics
      into urtBess SCOTM
                              25" percentile of reference population

                              75* percentile of reference population - standard random sampling
                              design, EPT index, RBPs
                                  repeat sampling
                                  precision
                                  sensitivity
                                  bias
                                  accuracy
; IMOtoa^ffp:.;;:;; ;
:'>-;;:^t^||P"-
  :   Retrieval ai* analyst*
                              databases, spreadsheets
                              EDAS
RHODE ISLAND: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
3-160

-------
 SOUTH CAROLINA
 Contact Information

 James Glover, PhD, Aquatic Biologist
 South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC)
 2600 Bull Street • Columbia, SC 26201
 Phone 803/898-4081 • Fax 803/898-4200
 email: GloverJB@columb32.DHEC.state.sc.us
 SC DHEC Bureau of Water homepage: http://www.scdhec.nel/water/
  Program Description

  Biologists at the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control use aquatic macroinvertebrates
  as bioindicators to make assessments of water quality. The program began in the early 1970s with the first
  technical report printed in 1972. Currently, flowing streams and rivers are the primary waterbodies that are
  assessed. South Carolina's monitoring efforts can be divided into two categories: ambient monitoring and special
  studies.  Both fixed sites and randomly selected sites are chosen each year for the ambient monitoring work.
  Fixed sites are sampled once every five years on a rotating basin schedule. Special studies usually involve a point
  source discharge or a nonpoint source perturbation such as a logging operation. Upstream and downstream sites
  are selected for sampling when conducting special studies. Agency staff may carry out the special studies or they
  may be required by the industry as part of a permit or consent order.  In the latter case, state certified consultants
  conduct the studies with the resulting reports reviewed by agency scientists.

  South Carolina's program is modeled after that of North Carolina's, which was developed in the 1970s and 1980s.
  A timed qualitative multihabitat approach is taken for sampling macroinvertebrates. Organisms are picked in the
  field and returned to the laboratory for identification to the lowest practical taxonomic level - usually genus or
  species.  Two metrics are calculated to produce an assessment: the EPT Index, and the NC Biotic Index. These
  two metrics are standardized on a scale of 1 to 5 and averaged to produce a final score.  The Bioclassification of
  the stream is based on this score. The numeric criteria developed in SC are dependant on the ecoregion within
  which the stream is located. There are separate criteria for the mountains, piedmont, and coastal plain regions of
  the state. For special studies, impact is determined by the change in the bioclassification score from the upstream
  control site to the downstream test site.  A rigorous quality control/quality assurance program has been developed
  and implemented for sampling, identification of organisms, and data entry.
  Documentation and Further Information

  The 2002 Section 305(b) Water Quality Assessment Report for South Carolina, March 2000:
  http://www.scdhec.net/eqc/water/pubs/305b.pdf
  State of South Carolina 303{d) List for 2000, EPA approved in May 2000:
  http://www.scdhec.net/eqc/water/pubs/303d2000.pdf (for the DRAFT 2002 303(d) List and 1998 303(d) List, go to
  http://www.scdhec.net/eoc/water/html/tmdl. html#303d )
  The Environmental Investigations Standard Operating Procedures and Quality Assurance Manual. 2001. SC
  DHEC.
  State of South Carolina Monitoring Strategy for Calendar Year 2002, January 2002:
  http://www.scdhec.net/eac/water/pubs/strategy.pdf
  Antidegradation Implementation for Water Quality in South Carolina, July 1998:
  http: //www. sod hec. net/eg c/wate r/pu bs/a ntideo. odf
  Watershed Water Quality Management Strategy Program Description: http://www.scdhec.net/water/shed/prog.html


  For a list of and links to additional SC DHEC Bureau of Water water quality publications, go to
  http://www.scdhec.net/eqc/adnnin/html/eacpubs.htmitfwareport5
  DRAFT July 1998. Standard Operating Procedures and Quality Control Procedures for Macroinvertebrate
  Sampling. Technical  Report No. 004-98.  Prepared by South Carolina Bureau of Water, Division of Water
  Monitoring, Assessment and Protection, Aquatic Biology Section.


SOUTH CAROLINA: Program Summary              December 2002                                        3-161

-------
  SOUTH CAROLINA
  Contact Information
  James Glover, PhD, Aquatic Biologist
  South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (Sp DHEC)
  2600 Bull Street • Columbia, SC 29201
  Phone 803/898-4081 • Fax 803/898-4200
  email: GloverJB@columb32.DHEC.state.sc.us
  Programmatic Elements
                   h «i •• >   "
                   Mnf  ' /
                   
-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
ALU
Jt I 11 rf^^ti*a'a'i*M»%J%s* IM s%6*f^ *
water quality standards  •:-.
                               Class System (A.B.C) and Warm Water vs. Cold Water
                               Three designations: Freshwater, Trout - 3 types, Saltwater
  Narrative Wwsrfterfa to WcjS
                             Procedures used to support narrative biocriteria are not included in
                             SC water quality standards, but are available in the monitoring
                             program SOP.
                             none (South Carolina has limited numeric biociteria/indices used to
                             evaluate ALU, which are not included in state water quality standards
                             - see monitoring program SOP.)
                                   assessment of aquatic resources
                                   cause and effect determinations
                                   permitted discharges
                                   monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                   watershed based management
  Utw of bk>
  biocriteria bi i
  management decisions
                             Biocriteria can affect permitting decisions if a watershed is listed on
                             the 303(d) list for biological impacts.
    _
  aquatic resources to a
  dMfgnatadALU
  Reference Site/Condition Development
                              30 total
                                   site-specific
                                   paired watersheds
                                   regional (aggregate of sites)
                                   professional judgment
                                   other:
  Rsfsf*nc«sJto criteria
                             The best sites are selected from a habitat and organismal point of
                             view. Fauna! characteristics and land use data from GIS are also
                             considered (see newly-amended R 61-68. F.l.d for more information).
ChaiaclsilfiAiloit of-~. -
reference sites wttMn a
regional contend:,;.-;   -,
                                   historical conditions
                                   least disturbed sites
                                   gradient response
                                   professional judgment
                                   other:
  Sir
irflcattonwttl
EttMkMAAI-'t^^^u^
  regional wfcrtHici
  coiKHttons   -
                                 ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                 elevation
                                 stream type
                                 multivariate grouping
                                 jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                 other:
  Additfoiwl
                                 reference sites linked to ALU
                                 reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                 (found in R61-68.F.l.d.)
                                 some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                 conditions
SOUTH CAROLINA: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                                              3-163

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (100-500 samples/year; multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad
                                   coverage for watershed level)
                                   fish
                                   periphyton
                                   other:
    sampling 8«aj;':,:;;;:;:> y:]::j;:^5 collect by hand, brass sieve, D-frame, kick net (1 meter); 500-600 micron mesh
                  lP

   • taxonomy ..
                              multihabitat
                              entire sample
                              combination and species when possible
                              visual based; performed with bioajssessments
 QualRy 8**unMic* program •
                             standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
                             training for biologists, taxonomic and sampling proficiency checks, specimen
                             archival, data entry checks, certification program for bioassessment
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Data analyalstoote and
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
 Multmwtrfc thrwhoW.
     . transformfrtg rfleirics;fi=T: ;;
      into unWesa scores ,;^: ;•
    defWno i
    amuttnettcWJex
                    ent in
cumulative distribution function

cumulative distribution function - follow guidelines outlined in
following document: Lenat. 1993. A biotic index for the southeastern
United States, derivation and list of tolerance values, with criteria for
assigning water quality ratings. Journal of the North American
Benthological Society. 12:279-290
  ivkkwtlon of nrfbnmnc*
 Charactortottes
                                 repeat sampling
                                 precision (replicate sampling of same stream, 10% each year)
                                 sensitivity
                                 bias
                                 accuracy (compare faunal results with land use data and
                                 discharge presence or absence)
                              MS FoxPro for Windows and Excel
                              FoxPro
SOUTH CAROLINA: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                           3-164

-------
 SOUTH DAKOTA
 Contact Information

 Gene Stueven, Environmental Senior Scientist
 South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (SD DENR)
 Joe Foss Buildings 523 East Capitol • Pierre, SD 57501
 Phone 605/773-4254 « Fax 605/773-4068
 email: gene.stueven@state.sd.us
 SD DENR Surface Water Quality website:
 http: tfwww .state .sd .us/denr/DE S/Surfacewater/surlwprg. htm
 Program Description

 Currently, the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (SD DENR) Water Resources
 Assistance Program (WRAP) collects biological data in addition to chemical and physical parameters for TMDL
 assessments. These reassessments are useful in determining the impact of contaminants as well as detecting
 chronic water quality impairments that may not be discovered by ambient chemical and physical grab samples. Of
 the 9,937 total stream miles, approximately 4 miles have been biologically assessed (60 sites assessed; 150
 meters per site). SD DENR has not yet established biological criteria for use in water quality standards.

 The Water Resource Assistance Program evaluates benthic macroinvertebrate community structure in streams
 using both the EMAP protocol and USEPA's Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (RBPs) in conjunction with
 assessments of stream habitats. All biological samples are identified to the lowest possible level of taxonomic
 resolution. Biological data are entered into the STORE! database and are summarized using multimetric indices
 and descriptive statistics. SD DENR intends to use the biological data to identify potential reference sites for
 determining the condition of water quality and the integrity of the biological community.  WRAP is beginning to
 sample periphyton communities to determine if they are a better biological indicator of water quality.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Stueven, E., A. Wittmuss, and R.L. Smith. 2000. Standard Operating Procedures for Field Samplers. Revision
  4,0, January 2000.  South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Water Resource
  Assistance Program. Pierre, SD.

  Ecoregion Targeting of Impaired Lakes in South Dakota (May 2000)

  The 2000 South Dakota Report to Congress, 305(b) Water Quality Assessment,
  http://www.state.sd.us/denr/Documents/SD 2000 305b.pdf

  The 1998 South Dakota 303(d) Waterbody List and Supporting Documentation,
  http://www.state.sd.us/denr/303(dV98sd303d.pdf

  South Dakota Surface Water Quality Standards, http://legis.state.sd.us/rules/rules/7451.htm
SOUTH DAKOTA: Program Summary               December 2002                                        3-165

-------
 SOUTH DAKOTA
  Contact Information
  Gene Stueven, Environmental Senior Scientist
  South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (So DENR)
  Joe Foss Buildings 523 East Capitol • Pierre, SD 57501
  Phone 605/773-4254 • Fax 605/773^068
  email: gene. stue ven@state sd us
Programmatic Elements
   MO
   W*

                                  problem identification (screening)
                                  nonpoint source assessments
                                  monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                  ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
                                  promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                  support of antidegradation
                                  evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                  TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                  other:
                                  targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
                                  projects, specific river basins or watersheds)
                                  fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
                                  probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                  probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                                  rotating basin
                                  other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (determined using RF3, National Hy&ogmphy Database,
 and slate based determination)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
     fully supporting for 305(b)
     partially/non-supporttng for 305(b)
     listed for 303(d)
     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)
     number of miles assessed per site
                                                          9,937

                                                            1,932
                                                            3.73
                                                              n/a
                                                              n/a
                                                              n/a
                                                             -60
                                                            -.093
                                                      (150 meters)
•South Dakota reports only chemical data in 305(b) reports and 303(d) listings. Currently, biological data is only collected during
TMDL assessments. South Dakota's DENR plans to use the biological data to locate reference sites and conditions based on
ecoregions as well as to establish biocriteria.
SOUTH DAKOTA: Program Summary
                                              December 2002
                                                                                                         3-166

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
 ALU dMlgiiiftw feMto .';';.'.   Warm Water vs. Cold Water
                             Five designations: Cold Water Permanent, Cold Water Marginal,
                             Warm Water Permanent, Warm Water Semi-Permanent, Warm
                             Water Marginal
   ,.,		^., .„.„„,.   JT No formal/informal numeric procedures exist to support narrative
   " ''"i^Syy^^^ssA^!^f: biocriteria
                ifMlnWQS    none
  in Integrated i
  wKh other environmental
  datafe
          pecffic criteria)
                     and
assessment of aquatic resources
cause and effect determinations
permitted discharges
monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
watershed based management
  UMS of
  blocrtterfa to making
             decisions
                            none
  Reference Site/Condition Development*
  Numotir of raforoiico sftM =•
                           -31 total
  detmntnations,
  Under development
Strewn
regional reference • •
CORQltiOIIS ^ ..--'.:
Under development
                                site-specific
                                paired watersheds
                                regional (aggregate of sites)
                                professional judgment
                                other:
                             Under development. Criteria used for defining reference sites include:
                             EMAP protocol, habitat, chemical, and aquatic life.
                                  historical conditions
                                  least disturbed sites
                                  gradient response
                                  professional judgment
                                  other:
                                  ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                  elevation
                                  stream type
                                  multivariate grouping
                                  jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                  other:
                                  reference sites linked to ALU
                                  reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                  some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                  conditions
'The responses above characterize how reference sites will most likely be determined in the future. Twenty-seven sites have been
assessed in South Dakota as reference for the EMAP data set. South Dakota's OENR samples -4 sites as reference and will be
working on establishing formal reference sites and criteria for streams and rivers.  Lake reference sites and criteria have already
been developed.
SOUTH DAKOTA: Program Summary
                                              December 2002
                                                                                                      3-167

-------
Field and Lab Methods

                                 benthos (100 - 500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - not at
                                 watershed level)
                                 fish
                                 periphyton (<100 samplestyQar, single season, multiple sites - not at
                                 watershed level)          !
                                 other:
    subsampte size
   '•-toxow^^^
                            | D-frame, multiplate, rock baskets; 500 - 600 micron mesh
                            I multihabitat
                           • \
                            j 300 count
                            ; combination
Pw^iliyton
•M IlSiiiiiiiiiil
                             natural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.)
                             artificial substrate: microslides or other suitable substratum
                             multihabitat
                             chlorophyll a / phaeophytin, taxonomic identification
                             species level
                             visual based, quantitative measurements, hydrogeomorphology; performed with
                             bioassessments
                             standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
                             training for biologists, taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
Data analysis toots and
i— _di, „ ,i_ - •   ,^
IIMUHNIS ,-  - x,~, .
 Data Analysis and Interpretation
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (muttimetnc index under development)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
 fevahntfon of jMffonnaiiC*
 JKltalfMi*^BWiA((fiS

• Not cumottyevafciated
                              25th percentile of reference population, natural breaks

                              25" percentile of reference population
                                    repeat sampling
                                    precision
                                    sensitivity
                                    bias
                                    accuracy
                              STORET
                              Statistics, EDAS
SOUTH DAKOTA: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                           3-168

-------
 TENNESSEE
  Contact Information

  Gregory M. Denton, Manager - Planning and Standards
  Tennessee Department of Environment & Conservation (TDEC)
  7th Floor L&C Annex, 401 Church Street • Nashville, TN 37243-1534
  Phone 615/532-0699 • Fax 615/532-0046
  email: gregorv.denton@state.tn.us
  TDEC Division of Water Pollution Control: http://www.state.tn.U5/environment/wpc/index.htmt
  Program Description

  The Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation's (TDEC) Division of Water Pollution Control (WPC), has an
  extensive bioassessment program.  Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys are one of the primary tools used in assessing surface
  waters in the state. Biological data are instrumental in determining use-support and generating both the 30S(b) and 303(d)
  reports. In-stream macroinvertebrate monitoring is included in many NPDES permits. Bioassessments are also used in the anti-
  degradation evaluation process. Biological data are used to measure improvements in water quality resulting from clean-up and
  habitat restoration efforts.  Over 2,100 macroinvertebrate surveys have been conducted by TDEC since 1996.
  TDEC has eight field offices each with at least two benthic biologist positions. In addition, there is a central laboratory facility in
  the Department of Health with seven aquatic biologists under contract to TDEC. These nine offices conduct the majority of
  macroinvertebrate stream surveys.  Data from other agencies including the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), US Army Corps of
  Engineers (USAGE), and USGS are also incorporated into the program.
  In 1995, TDEC initiated an ecoregion delineation project resulting in the identification of 25 ecological subregions. Ninety-eight
  reference streams were targeted for monitoring. The  macroinvertebrate community in these streams was sampled seasonally for
  three years and on a five-year cycle by watershed starting in 1999. These data were used to develop regional numeric biocriteria
  that have been proposed for inclusion in the 2002 triennial review of water quality standards. The proposed numeric criteria are
  already being used to help interpret narrative criteria.  In addition, reference stream data were used to develop guidelines for
  biological reconnaissance as a screening tool during watershed assessments.
  Future goals of the bioassessment program include:
      Continue to monitor ecoregional reference streams and locate additional streams to further refine  biocriteria and better
      identify reference condition.
  •    Conduct additional bioassessments as means to increase TDEC's percentage of assessed streams for national reporting
      purposes.
      Develop a macroinvertebrate tolerance index specific to Tennessee.
      Develop biocriteria for large rivers, wetlands and reservoirs.
      Continue to use benthic data as a measure of improvement in water quality.


  Documentation  and Further Information

  Arnwine, D.H. and G. M. Denton. 2001. Development of Regionally-Based Interpretations of Tennessee's Existing Biological
  Integrity Criteria. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Pollution Control. Nashville. TN
  Amwine D.H. and G. M. Denton. 2001. Habitat of Least Impacted Streams in Tennessee, Tennessee Department of Environment
  and Conservation, Division of Water Pollution Control, Nashville, TN
  Arnwine, D.H., J.I. Broach, L.K. Cartwright and G.M. Denton. 2000. Tennessee Ecoregion Project. Tennessee Department of
  Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Pollution  Control. Nashville, TN.
  Denton. G.M., A.D. Vann, and S.H. Wang. 2000.Tfiesfa(os of Water Quality in Tennessee: Year 2000 305(b) Report. Tennessee
  Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Pollution Control. Nashville, TN.
  Griffith, G.E., J.M.  Omemik and S. Azevedo. 1997. Eco/ieovons of Tennessee. EPA/600/R-97/022. NHREEL, Western Ecological
  Division,  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Corvalis, Oregon.
  Quality System Standard Operating Procedure for Macroinvertebrate Stream Surveys. 2002. Tennessee Department of
  Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Pollution  Control. Nashville. TN.
  DRAFT Year 2002 303(d) List, July 2002: http://www.state.tn.u5/enyirgnment/wpc/2Q02303ddraft,Bdf
  TDEC General Water Quality Criteria, rev. October 1999: http://www.state.tn.us/sos/rules/1200/1200-04/1200-04-03.pdf
  TDEC Use Classifications for Surface Waters, rev. October 1999: http://www.state.tn.us/sos/rules/1200/l200-04/l200-04-Q4.pdf
  2001 Triennial Review of Water Quality Standards, Staff Proposal: http://www.state.tn.us/environment/wpc/tr wqs.pdf
  Other TDEC publications, including 305(b) reports, can be found online at: http://www.state.tn.us/environmentAvpc/publicat.htm
TENNESSEE: Program Summary                     December 2002                                            3-169

-------
  TENNESSEE
  Contact Information
  Gregory M. Den ton, Manager - Planning and Standards
  Tennessee Department of Environment & Conservation (TDEC)
  7th Floor L&C Annex, 401 Church Street • Nashville, TN 37243-1534
  Phone 615/532-0699 • Fax 615/532-0046
  email: gr6qorv.denton@state.ln.us
  Programmatic Elements
                                  problem identification (screening)
                                  nonpoint source assessments
                                  monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                  ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
                                  promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                  support of antidegradation
                                  evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                  TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                  other:
                                  targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose)
                                  (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                  fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
                                  (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                  probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                  probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (special projects only)
                                  rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                  other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (Determined using RF3)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology
     fully supporting for 305(b)
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)*
     listed for 303{d)*
     number of sites sampled
     number of miles assessed per site
   60,187


   24,233
    16,693
     7,540
    14,33b
     2,202
                    24,233 Miles Assessed for Biology
                          fully supporting* for 305(b)
                          "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
The stream miles "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b) are significantly less than the stream miles listed for 303(d) because the last
303(d) list was revised in 1998 while the 305(b) reflects assessments through 2000. The 2002 draft 303(d) and 305(b) reports are in
agreement.
TENNESSEE: Program Summary
December 2002
                                                         3-170

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
                            Siir
                            i|| Single Aquatic Life Use
                           |i|j One designation: Fish and Aquatic Life
                            i Formal/informal numeric procedures used to support narrative biocriteria are found in the
                               Development of Regionally-Based Numeric Interpretations of Tennessee's Narrative Biological
 . :,.„,.„.„„,.,.„.....,.,		,	Jllliliii  Integrity Criterion (see documentation).
 :L^;^plillǤ^NPPP^P^i^PPlfP^
 ::;wiin«,rir.Kisi«Srf»irfii=i^:iSirt*;i':g  under development (Tennessee water quality standards will be changed in 2002 to reflect
                            f proposed numeric criteria for 15 bioregions. Numeric biocriteria, proposed for inclusion in the
                            *'• new WQS are as follows, "Multimetric index using 7 metrics - TR, EPT, %EPT, %OC, NCBI,
                               %DOM and % Clingers*.  Scoring criteria is based on 25% of reference condition. Reference
                          ||ii condition is based on ecoregion reference data at the 90* percentile. Ecoregions have been
                          j=i = grouped into 15 bioregions. Expected index score is calibrated to each bioregion and by
                               season where appropriate,")	
                                    assessment of aquatic resources
                                    cause and effect determinations
                                    permitted discharges
                                    monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                    watershed based management	
                               Nonpoint source sectioni fje|d ^^5. ^,2, by office usei not systematic/statewide use
 ^itffiiiiiifiiliaiiiiiiilgiiHl
*TR = total richness; EPT = Ephemeroptera (mayflies), Plecoptera (stoneflies), Trichoptera (caddisflies); OC = Orthocladiinae of
Chironomidae; NCBI = North Carolina Biotic Index; DOM = dominant taxa.

  Reference Site/Condition Development
                               98 total
                                     site-specific
                                     paired watersheds
                                     regional (aggregate of sites)
                                     professional judgment
                                     other:

                               Reference database of chemical, habitat and biometrics based on monitoring of regional
                               reference sites since 1996. Reference sites must fall within 90th percentile for chemical,
                               biological and habitat parameters compared to existing reference database. Disturbed sites
                               are those under 75% comparable to reference condition for biological and habitat, above the
                               90" percentile (reference) for nutrients (and show impaired biology), or exceed numeric criteria
                               for other specified parameters.
                    —\, -^f™,™ ^
                       "
historical conditions
least disturbed sites
gradient response
professional judgment
other

                                     ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                     elevation
                                     stream type
                                     multivariate grouping
                                     jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                     other:
  AddWoaalihfbnnajBon
                               UD
reference sites linked to ALU
reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards (WQS under revision)
some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced conditions
TENNESSEE: Program Summary
             December 2002
                                                                       3-171

-------
Field and Lab Methods

                                  benthos (100-500 samplesfybar; single season, multiple sites - watershed
                                  level)                    •
                                  fish

                                  periphyton

                                  other:
                              dipnet and kick net (1 meter); 500j- 600 micron mesh

                              riffle/run used for biocriteria in higii gradient streams; rooted bank used for
                              biocriteria in low gradient streams (Note that four jab multihabitat
                              bioreconnaissances are used for general water quality assessments, not
                              comparable to biocriteria)

                              200 count
                              genus
                              visual based; performed with bioa isessments
                              standard operating procedures, q1
                              training for biologists, sorting and
                                                          jality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
                                                          axonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
Data Analysis and Interpretation
                                  summary tables, illustrative graphs
                             /
                                  parametric ANOVAs

                                  multivariate analysis

                                  biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)

                                  disturbance gradients

                                  other:
lfuWrt»triethi*«holS*
                              90* or 10th percentile of reference; population depending on direction
                              of metric

                              25% of 90* (or 10*1) percentile of Deference population
                        E
                 inerttta
                              Used for development of initial criteria, not for current assessments
                                   repeat sampling (replicate samples at 10% of reference sites by
                                   different teams)           •
                                   precision (two samples collected at 10% of sites by two teams)

                                   sensitivity (standard level of Identification: compare metric
                                   scores to known impacts)

                                   bias (compared different sample/habitat types)

                                   accuracy (10% of samples CJC for taxonomy and sorting
                                   efficiency)                              	
Evaluation of p«rf<
    JKftolMe*'

     Retrieval and analysis
                              MS Access; semi-quantitative samples (taxa lists and metric scores)
                              are stored in EDAS database and bioreconnaissance results are
                              stored in Water Quality Database (taxa lists are in paper files). The
                              eventual goal is for data to be ser t to STORET. Assessment results
                              are stored in an Assessment Database.

                              EDAS, Statview, and multivariate
-------
 TEXAS


 Contact Information

 Charles Bayer, Aquatic Scientist
 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)*
 P.O. Box 13087 • Austin. Texas 78711-3087
 Phone 512/239-4583 • Fax 512/239-4420
 email: cbaver@tnrcc.state.tx.us
 website: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/

 Roy Kleinsasser, River Studies Program Leader
 Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD)
 505 Staples Road • San Marcos, TX 78666
 Phone 512/353-3480
 email: leroy.klelnsasser@tpwd .state.tx.us
 website: http://www.tpwd.state[..faujs


 Program Description

 Since the late 1980s, biological assessments have been employed for use attainability analyses (UAAs) and the
 development of an index of biological integrity (IBI) for rivers and streams. A tidal streams IBI is in the preliminary
 stages of development. Recently, a new emphasis has been placed on bioassessments relative to 303(d) listed
 waterbodies. For the most part, the new data have not been fully evaluated and work is continuing to expand in
 this area.  Also, for the first time, the draft 2002 Water Quality Inventory includes bioassessments to determine the
 support of aquatic life uses.

 The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) has  been a major provider of fish community data for many of
 the UAAs and the development of the IBI. Other providers include various river authorities in the state.

 'NOTE: On September 1, 2002, the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission (TNRCC) formally
 changed its name and began doing business as the Texas Commission on Environmental  Quality (TCEQ).
  Documentation and Further Information

  Draft 2002 Texas Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report (Integrated 305(b) report and 303(d) list):
  http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/water/qualitv/02  twqmar/index.html

  Texas Water Quality Inventory (SFR-050/00), includes Volume I: Surface Water, Groundwater and Finished
  Drinking Water Assessments and Water Quality Management Programs:
  http://www.trjrcc.state.tx.us/admin/toDdoc/sfr/050  00/050 O0.htm|#1

  Revisions to the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards and implementation Procedures:
  http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/permitting/waterperTn/wqstand/revisions.html

  Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures Manual (Chapter 7: Biological Sampling Procedures and Chapter 8:
  Stream Habitat Assessment Procedures), August 1999, GI-252:
  http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/admin/topdoc/Qi/252.html

  Monitoring and Receiving Water Assessment Procedures Manuals.
  http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/water/qualitv/data/wqm/index.htmltfmanuals

  Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program information:
  http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/water/auaiitv/data/wqm/index.html

  Leppo, E.W., M.T. Barbour, and J. Gerritsen. 2001. An  evaluation of the stream habitat assessment approach
  used by TNRCC. Prepared for: Texas Natural Resource and Conservation Commission, Austin, Texas and
  USEPA Region 6, Dallas, Texas.
TEXAS: Program Summary                        December 2002                                        3-173

-------
  TEXAS
  Contact Information

  Charles Bayer, Aquatic Scientist
  Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
  P.O. Box 13087 • Austin, Texas 78711-3087
  Phone 512/239-4583 • Fax 512/239-4420
  email: coaver@tnrcc.state.tx. us

  Roy Kleinsasser, River Studies Program Leader
  Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD)
  505 Staples Road • San Marcos, TX 78666
  Phone 512/353-3480
  email: leroy.kleinsasser@tpwd.state.tx.us
Programmatic Elements
U*e*of

il:
pipped
• JflMlflM
l&:
w-
r; •
•&'.••• , -'
•Ik^? '
IjSrr- •
[;"•" '


L ; '•i;",??-*'"; • ' --•- •'
'V - :
X,.~Sfifc;- ' • :•'&•:,..
;i';. "fssj: ' :'\;^p'
' . ;.~- . -< ,: i 1
' "'/jJ'gH:-" ~ ™°';' y '
/


/
/

/
/

/
/

/

problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects, specific river basins or watersheds, and
comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (specific
river basins or watersheds and comprehensive use throughout
jurisdiction)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (special projects only)
rotating basin
other:
 Stream Miles

 Total miles                                    191,228
 (Stale based determination)

 Total perennial miles                                 40,194

 Total miles assessed for biology*               266.9

     fully supporting for 30S(b)                           196.1

     partially/nan-supporting for 305(b)                    70.0

     listed for 303(d)

     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)'           30

     number of miles assessed per site                       -
                    266.9 Miles Assessed for Biology
                          "hilly support! ng" for 305(b)
                          "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
'68,611.78 total miles were surveyed and 63,102.68 total miles were assessed. Of these, 266 9 miles were assessed using biology.
30 sites were surveyed and 16 sites were assessed.
TEXAS: Program Summary
December 2002
3-174

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making

 ALU designation ba*te;;,:^L;.;'  Class System (A.B.C)

                            Five designations: Exceptional, High, Intermediate, Limited, and
                          •  Oyster waters
 Narrative Btocrrterta hi WQS
Procedures used to support narrative biocriteria located in the Water
Quality Standards Implementation Procedures Receiving Water
Assessment Procedures Manual (see documentation)
 Numeric Btecriterta in WQ8  •  none
 data (e.g., taddty testing arid
        Tspedfic criteria)
    assessment of aquatic resources

    cause and effect determinations

    permitted discharges

    monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

    watershed based management
  UM* of bioataeaamentri
  WoerltertB hi making   ;;

  regarding rartomtkm of
  aquatic rwoiircaa to a  :
  designated ALU
Trinity River Segment 0805 was elevated from a limited aquatic life
use to a high aquatic life use designation. EPA Region 6 considers
Texas' high and exceptional aquatic life use designations as meeting
the 101 (a) goals of the Clean Water Act.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
 Nwmbw of iww^Hc0 ^HM
72 total
Reference site : ,'^M^,
determinations , • <; \:^JSm
. .- ';."•;• •" , ' :&&?• :.
•'•- '•• •:
Reference site crtterta::; !:5i::| •;
,:;""!-Sj>i:, B. ~- .- .;.c;:™g«r£-
CharaCterfeation ofrffUBl ^
reference attaa within a '
regional context '' > • ~ '*,
• :;/';:'^::£:.';;. ." "-"^J^r.i^ '
Stream itrattflcatlon wiii ?'
regional reference : : ; "
conditions
. - -'-d-^r-'-- - ". . :':»l=^ji."::'
.•~-;^c • •.•:.~.~f~-.-
AoCtltfOlltH illfOfflUnSOD ' fv '
/
/
/
/

site-specific
paired watersheds
regional (aggregate of sites)
professional judgment
other:
no point source discharge, land use patterns, limited human impact,
least disturbed sites determined using best professional judgment
~7"


/





/

/
historical conditions
least disturbed sites
gradient response
professional judgment
other:
ecoregions (or some aggregate)
elevation
stream type
multivariate grouping
jurisdictions 1 (i.e., statewide)
other:
reference sites linked to ALU
reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
conditions
TEXAS: Program Summary
                 December 2002
3-175

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (<100 samples/year, multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad
                                   coverage for watershed level)
                                   fish (<100 samples/year; multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad coverage for
                                   watershed level)
                                   periphyton
                                   other:
  Bentho*
:,  i«iipng$»a.r ,,.  i;;§| f:..  surber, multiplate, lopping shears;for collecting woody debris, D-frame, kick net;
;':sSifftite;^f ''^^SlsSf  500-600 micron mesh          '
;-.  • habitat selection   :, --.	~~	"
i    Sutosampteslze
                               riffle/run (cobble), artificial substrate and woody debris
                               100 count and entire sample
                               combination
      habitat setecflon
      sample processing
                             backpack and boat electrofisher, (rawl and gill net (particularly for tidal streams),
                             seine; 1/8", 3/16" and 1/4" mesh
                            • multihabitat
                            = length measurement, batch, anomalies
                            i none
                             species
                               quantitative measurements; performed with bioassessments
                               standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
                             :  training for biologists, taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Data analysis tools and  ::
                             /
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
 ••• illtiiiii •fojtf,' ill ', ii*- -*.«-. ,
 •niTOnssnc Dinwnoias
      transfDm^metrtcs     i  95th percentile of reference population
      Into unBfess scores
 i  ' '• ;::'^::;:Vi3'c:\o^ ; '     •   ^;,1'- •
 :;  UO^(<|j^^l^lnTierili^§l     50n percentile of reference population (follow EPA RBP guidelines)
Enh^rtipiaori

Notcumntlytvaluatod
                                   repeat sampling
                                   precision
                                   sensitivity
                                   bias
                                   accuracy
 BtolOfl*ei!«Jata
 i.  ">'*&:^
                             TCEQ's TRACS database and hard copies; STORET is under
                             development
                             At this time, the hard copies are primarily used for evaluation of
                             biological data. Spreadsheets are also used.
TEXAS: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                            3-176

-------
 UTAH
  Contact Information

  Thomas W. Toole, Environmental Scientist
  Richard Denton, Manager
  Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ)
  288 N. 1460 W., P.O. Box 144870 • Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4870
  Phone 801/538-6146 • Fax 801/538-6016
  email: ttoole@utah.gov and rdenton@utah.qov
  UDEQ Division of Water Qualify homepage: http://watergualitv.ulah.gpv/
  Program Description

  Prior to 2001, The Utah Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Biological Assessment program was limited to benthic
  macroinvertebrate data collected at  18 long-term monitoring sites. They have been sampled since 1978 with the exception of
  about five years In which the allocation of the 18 samples were used to supplement water chemistry and physical data collected
  in the five-year basin rotation monitoring plan. These samples were collected to ascertain long-term water quality and to be
  used in determining trends.  In addition, benthic macroinvertebrate samples were collected at 16 Nonpoint Source Project sites
  to assess the effects of BMP implementation. These data have been incorporated into several NPS reports to determine what
  improvements in water quality have occurred. Data collected from the 18 long-term monitoring sites and the NPS projects have
  been used in making beneficial use assessments (305(b)) and listing waters on the 303(d) list.

  In 2001, the DWQ reviewed its bio-monitoring program and decided that a major effort was needed to improve and develop new
  components of its water quality assessment program. During this review, an inventory of benthic macroinvertebrate data
  collected by DWQ. the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) was completed. Upon
  completion of this review, the DWQ contacted the BLM and USFS and requested all of the benthic macroinvertebrate data that
  they had collected from 1990 through 1997 be sent to DWQ for entering into STORED. These data, along with DWQ's, were
  entered into STORET. Data collected since 1997 have been stored electronically and a program to electronically transfer these
  data into STORET is being developed. These data will be evaluated as to their usefulness in establishing reference sites and
  the development of metrics to be used in assessing beneficial use support.

  In 2001, the DWQ negotiated an agreement to complete the E-MAP sampling for EPA within the State. Experience obtained
  from this work would allow environmental scientists (field and staff) to leam and evaluate the methods used in the E-MAP
  protocol. This experience could then be used to develop a bioassessment protocol for assessing waters within the State.

  Concurrent with doing the E-MAP work, the Division decided to commit additional resources to develop reference sites for
  bioassess-ment work.  It was decided that the DWQ would select and try to sample up to 60 potential reference sites during the
  next 2-3 years.  Water chemistry, fish, benthic macroinvertebrate, periphyton, and physical habitat data will be collected at these
  sites. The selection of sites were based upon the different ecoregions within the state and the need for low elevation, low-
  gradient stream reference sites.

  DWQ is also assisting the EPA Corvailis Lab in reviewing and selecting reference sites that were initially selected using CIS
  techniques. Approximately 100 sites were initially selected and the number has been reduced to 20 sites.  The DWQ is assisting
  in sampling these sites. Information obtained from  this program will be evaluated and possibly  incorporated into the Division's
  bio-assessment program.

  The DWQ has committed to developing a set of reference sites and metrics that can be used to ensure that the waters of the
  State are assessed in a scientifically sound and standard method.  Work is also going on to evaluate other assessment methods
  such as RIVPACS in assessing beneficial use support.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Utah Water Quality Assessment Report to Congress, September 2000 and Year 2000 Water Quality inventory, 305(b)
  Assessment: http://wwwwaterauaNtv.utah.gov/2000 305b fact.pdf

  Utah Division of Water Quality's 2000 Water Quality Monitoring Program::
  http://www.wateraualitv.utah.gov/monitoring/complete  monitor plan  2000.pdf

  Utah's 2000 303(d) List of Waters. October 2000: http://www.waterquality.utah.gov/documents/aporoved  2000 303d.pdf

  DRAFT, Utah's 2002 303fd) List of Waters: hHp://www.wateroualitv.ulah.QOV/documents/2002303dinternet.odf

  Quality Assurance and Standard Operating Procedures Manual. Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water
  Quality. 1993.  Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Salt Lake City, UT.


UTAH: Program Summary                           December 2002                                             3-177

-------
  UTAH
  Contact Information
  Thomas W. Toole, Environmental Scientist
  Richard Denton, Manager
  Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ)
  288 N. 1460 W., P.O. Box 144870 • Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4870
  Phone 801/538-6859 or -6055 • Fax 801/538-6016
  email: ttoole@deq.state.ut.us and fdenton@deo.state.ut.us
  Programmatic Elements
                                   problem identification (screening)
                                   nonpoint source assessments
                                   monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                   ALL) determinations/ambient monitoring
                                   promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                   support of antidegradation
                                   evaluation of discharge perrjnit conditions
                                   TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                   other
                                   targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
                                   projects, specific river basin's or watersheds and
                                   comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                   fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (special
                                   projects, specific river basins or watersheds and
                                   comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                   probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                   probabilistic by ecoregion, Or statewide
                                   rotating basin (specific river basins or watersheds and
                                   comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                   other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles                                       85,916
 (determined using tfw National Hydrography database and state
 based determination)
 Total perennial miles                                 14,000*
 Total miles assessed for biology*                  705
      fully supporting for 305(b)                             75
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                     630
      listed for 303(d)                                     300
      number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)           - 56
      number of miles assessed per site                     12.6
                   705 Miles Assessed for Biology
                         "fully supporting" for 305{b)
                         "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
"Biological data were used along with water chemistry data to assess the above listed miles.  The biological assessment was done
using benthic macroinvertebrates and used a weight-of-evidence assessment because reference sites were not used. Diversity
Indices, the Biotic Condition Index, and the number of sediment and nutrient tolerant taxa were used to determine beneficial use
support when the pollution indicator value for total phosphorus was exceeded.
UTAH: Program Summary
December 2002
3-178

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making

 ALU designation basis  ;.'     Class System (A.B.C)

                             Five designations*
  Narrative Bteritarit in WQS
            none - Procedures used to support general aquatic life statement in
            WQS are not standardized, but are primarily based on best
            professional judgment using some metrics.
                             none
  In Integrated aaaManwnto
                assessment of aquatic resources

                cause and effect determinations

                permitted discharges

                monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

                watershed based management
  Uaaa of
.: blocrttorta In maklno
  manag«fneht (foclalonr
  regarding ractoration of
            Used primarily in assessing 319 nonpoint source projects including
            assessment, implementation of BMPs, and evaluation of water
            quality
 tfeaignatKlALU
             ircMtoa
*The designations are as follows: 3A - cold water species of game fish and other cold water aquatic life, including the necessary
aquatic organisms in their food web. 36 - warm water species of game fish and other warm water aquatic life, including the
necessary aquatic organisms in their food web. 3C - Nongame fish and other aquatic life including the necessary aquatic organisms
in their food chain. 3D - Waterfowl, shore birds and other water-oriented wildlife not included in Classes 3A, 38, or 3C, including the
necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain. 3E - Severely habitat-limited waters.


  Reference Site/Condition Development*4
icasitoi;:
                             not applicable
R.rtr.nce.rto
dtttoffl^BUKUtt ., . •-;;

'•••:.:• •:'•>&&&•• ••$•!&;'•.. .-

Rafmnce ate criteria
1- GiiaiaC$tllJGpUOII Of ::»-i:£jirttiitt«'urittiii£'ji'*^~''* '
' regional context '--fK? "

'.• •<,:;>-•; ' '-'vijjf^
£*:: ---/-
• fn.. ...i ^ij.iin.-
-------
  Field and  Lab Methods
                                UD
                                    benthos (<100 samples/year; multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad
                                    coverage for watershed level)
                                    fish
                                                           !
                                    periphyton (A periphyton program is under development and will be used
                                    primarily in nutrient-impacted streams. Dr. Sam Rushforth, at Utah Valley
                                    State College, is assisting In the development of this program.)
                                    other:
      "*• .••'••$jrzi-.-    -.
                              rock baskets and Hess; 200-400 micron mesh
                              riffle/run (cobble) and artificial substrate
                              300 count
                              combination
                               quantitative measurements, and a few nonpoint source project sites have pebble
                               counts, channel profiles and riparian condition evaluated on a very limited basis;
                               performed with bioassessmenis j
                               standard operating procedures and quality assurance plan
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Data analx*lrt toote and
                                    summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                    parametric ANOVAs
                                    multivariate analysis
                                    biological metrics (return single metrics - use endpoint for each
                                    single metric)
                                    disturbance gradients
                                    other: some tolerance information is used in the evaluation
      transforming metrics
.;:|~;. intot^MgsB acofes
                              BCI Methods described by USFS are used to differentiate higher
                              quality waters, less discriminating in impaired waters.	
 ehametwtrtfc*
                                  repeat sampling
                                  precision
                                  sensitivity
                                  bias
                                  accuracy
  Biologic*! data**

      Retrieva) and analysis
                              Data are currently being loaded into STORET
                              SAS (metrics are calculated by trie contracting laboratory using
                              spreadsheets or another computer program-language not known)
*EPA is currently having a contractor review benthic macroinvertebrate data to determine what metrics might apply to various
regions of the State.  Any metrics presently being used are those propuced by the contracting laboratory and best professional
judgement is used in the interpretation. No metric sensitivity analyses, regional biases, or other evaluations have been done to this
point.
"EPA's Assessment Database is being used to store and retrieve assessment information for Utah's 305(b) report. Some indexing
of waterbodies still needs to be done, but this should be completed during fiscal year 2002.
UTAH: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                             3-180

-------
 VERMONT


 Contact Information

 Doug Bumham, Biomonitoring and Aquatic Studies Section Chief
 Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VTDEC)
 103 South Main Street-10N • Waterbury, VT 05671
 Phone 802/241-3784 • Fax 802/241-3008
 email: dougb@dec.anr.state.vt.us
 VTDEC Water Quality Division  website: http:/AOTvw.anr.state.vt.us/dec/walerg/wodhome.htm



 Program Description

 The Water Quality Division of the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VTDEC) has been conducting aquatic
 biological health assessments since the early 1970's. In 1982, the Biomonitoring and Aquatic Studies Section (BASS) was
 created with a focus on river and stream biological monitoring. BASS is currently staffed by five full-time aquatic biologists who
 participate in VTDEC water quality management programs at all levels. This "top to bottom" involvement by biologists has been
 critical to the extensive acceptance and use of biological assessment data within a wide variety of Departmental programs. The
 primary objectives of ambient monitoring activities are: 1) monitor long-term trends in water quality as revealed in changes over
 time to ambient aquatic biological communities; 2) evaluate potential impacts from point and nonpoint permitted direct and
 indirect discharges, development projects, nonpoint sources, and spills on aquatic biological communities; 3) establish a
 reference database that would facilitate the generation of Vermont-specific biological criteria for water quality classification and
 use attainment determinations; 4) support VTDEC permitting and water quality management programs requiring biological
 assessment data; 5) conduct special studies to assess emerging water quality and environmental management issues. Further
 information about VTDEC BASS is available at: httD://www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/waterq/bass.htm.

 Since 1985, the Department has used standardized methods for sampling fish and macroinvertebrate communities, evaluating
 physical habitat, processing samples, and analyzing and evaluating data. The program has led to the development of two
 Vermont-specific fish community Indexes of Biotic Integrity (IBI) and selected macroinvertebrate metrics. Guidelines have been
 developed for determining water quality classification attainment by using both macroinvertebrate community biological integrity
 metrics and the fish community IBI. Approximately 75-125 sites per year are assessed using fish and/or macroinvertebrate
 assemblages. Alkalinity, pH, conductivity, temperature and such measurements as substrate composition (pebble counts),
 embeddedness, canopy cover, percent and type of periphyton cover, and approximate velocity are routinely monitored. From
 1985 to 2001, approximately 1,500 stream assessments were completed using macroinvertebrate and/or fish from more than
 900 wadeable stream reaches. This monitoring effort is subject to a USEPA-approved quality assurance project plan. Data from
 the project are summarized and stored in an electronic database.

 Biological data are used extensively to determine aquatic life use support and impairment. A significant proportion of Vermont's
 303(d) list is made up of reaches with impaired aquatic life use determined through bioassessment. The development of
 biological criteria supported by the Vermont Water Quality Standards has provided a vehicle for enforceable implementation of
 biocriteria. Biological assessment data are used  extensively in virtually all VTDEC water quality management programs,
 including RCRA, NPDES. CERCLA, watershed planning, 401 certification, aquatic nuisance control permitting, and 305(b). In
 addition to wadeable stream monitoring, BASS conducts a variety of special studies and assessment in other aquatic habitats,
 and is in the process of evaluating biocriteria for vernal pools and ponded waters.

 VTDEC participates in  collaborations with other agencies and organizations including: USEPA; USFWS; USFS: USGS;
 academic institutions; neighboring states; private consultants; special interest groups; and volunteer monitors. Staff also
 participate in public outreach activities as resources allow.

 Biological criteria are the current performance standards for a large number of 303(d) waterbodies throughout the state. Future
 demand for biological assessments from VTDEC management programs will increase as the 303(d)/TMDL process advances
 and watershed planning initiatives expand statewide. The greatest challenge facing the biomonitoring program will be
 maintaining adequate staff resources to continue assessing  303(d) restoration management actions, providing support to
 watershed plan  development, and providing support to various management programs within VTDEC and the Agency of Natural
 Resources.


 Documentation  and  Further Information

 Vermont 2000 Water Quality and Assessment, 305(b) Report

 Vermont Water Quality Methodology, April 2001
 Wadeable Stream Biocriteria Development for Fish and Macroinvertebrate Assemblages in Vermont Streams and Rivers

 July 2, 2000 Vermont Water Quality Standards: http://www.state.vt.us/wtrfaoard/iulv2000wqs.htm

 Fish Sampling and Metrics homepage: http://www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/waterq/bassfish.htm

 Macroinvertebrate Sampling, Processing and Metrics homepage: http://www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/waterq/bassmacro.htm


VERMONT: Program Summary                       December 2002                                             3-181

-------
 VERMONT
  Contact Information

  Doug Bumham, Biomonitoring and Aquatic Studies Section Chief
  Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VTDEC)
  103 South Main StreeMON • Waterbury. VT 05671
  Phone 802/241-3784 • Fax 802/241-3008
  email: dougb@dec.anr.state.vt.us
  Programmatic Elements
Iteesof.Moara*
wtthlnowraflw)
profliwn
r -.^isi? ';;•
fSll t
• "';:;-;-g
- ' i";-'Dx"-


ty|HKfpi)aWlilOlil
,r - %TOg£c;>!,
:• '^-^l^MP'tX;'
• -:•,' •"• sSS-?,'"', ' '
• <>:M • V
. /"-•}'. Y;; '" '
.; ...T'/fSiy/-:, ••
: -.'>!} :^Ji|"i: '^::j' '• •
MlMnt
iterqualHy
" :;,: ..:..-
,. • , ,*:;{••;«. ,
, ; * ^K""'^ :

;i
: :^3lr:

torfng ';*
'-: :, ^ipJ-;M^^


';' [- ^", "I .
; i:-f! i i;
/
/
~7
/
~
y
/
/
/
/
/
/

/

problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALL! determtnations/ambienl monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocnteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other: bioassessments used for all aquatic life use support
evaluations
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose)
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
fixed station (i.e., water quaity monitoring stations)
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area (special projects
only)
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin (specific river basins or watersheds)
other:
The majority of biological sampling conducted by VTDEC is targeted and in the context of rotating basin elements. Fixed station
and special projects are also significant elements. Some monitoring required by discharge permits or basin plans related to TMDL's
is done by consultants. Consultants generating biological monitoring data for aquatic life use support determinations consistent with
Vermont Water Quality Standards or for compliance with discharge permit limitations are required to meet QA/QC requirements and
submit to QA oversight by VTDEC biologists.
 Stream Miles

 Total miles                                       7,099
 (State based determination)

 Total perennial miles                                  7,099

 Total miles assessed for biology*                -800

     fully supporting for 305(b)                           -650

      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                    -150

      listed for 303(d)                                   -150

      number of sites sampled (total number with            1,193
      available biological monitoring data)

      number of miles assessed per site
                     800 Miles Assessed for Biology
                          fully supporting" lor 305(b)
                          "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
The latest 305(b) report was used to estimate some of these numbers. 305(b) reports total stream miles assessed by "evaluation"
and "monitoring". The majority of VTDEC sites that are "monitored" are monitored for biology. The total miles reported as assessed
in the last "statewide" assessment report in 2000 was 5,261, with 4,411 miles "evaluated" and 850 miles "monitored". Roughly 800
of the 850 miles "monitored" were monitored using biology (similarly with use support categories).
VERMONT: Program Summary
December 2002
3-182

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
                              Class System (A,B,C)
                  :."":!?8
                              Three designations related to changes from reference condition:
                              minimal, minor, and moderate change from the reference condition.
  Narratfv* BiocrttMf* hi WQS   VTDEC procedures used to support narrative biocriteria are
                              independent of WQS.
  Nume^ Hocritftrta InWCM*    none (Numeric biocriteria are currently found in VTDEC procedural
     ~.l-ifc'&i~'• ~~.    .•'^ilfllF/:  documents.)
  In
  with
MaSMSOTW^
IVIPOflflMitiS* ~
  chemical specfflc criteria) j.
    assessment of aquatic resources
    cause and effect determinations
    permitted discharges
    monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
    watershed based management
  blocntefta fai inakfofp
  ituuiaQOHMnt docfalom
  regarding restoration of
  aquatic re»ourcm to a .;-,
  dealgnatedALU   :m
Used extensively throughout management programs including:
NPDES, 305(b), 303(d), basin planning, point and nonpoint source
management, aquatic nuisance control, RCRA, CERCLA
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  NumlwofrBf»ranctite»     1 SO total	
  R»tarep* site cttonm
  comHUon*
  Addft^rpllntormatkW
                                  site-specific
                                  paired watersheds
                                  regional (aggregate of sites)
                                  professional judgment
                                  other:
Reference sites are defined using the best professional judgment of
biologists based on the level of human activity and potential for that
activity to affect the aquatic resource. There are no quantitative
criteria, but general considerations may include: very good riparian
condition at site; predominantly forested watershed; outside the
influence of assessed activity; least disturbed condition.
                                   historical conditions
                                   least disturbed sites
                                   gradient response
                                   professional judgment
                                   other: minimally disturbed*
    ecoregions (or some aggregate)
    elevation
    stream type
    muttivariate grouping
    jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
    other:
    reference sites linked to ALU
    reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
    some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
    conditions
•This language is included in the definition of reference condition in the Vermont Water Quality Standards, effective July 2,2000.
VERMONT: Program Summary
                  December 2002
                                                                                            3-183

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                /
                                    benthos (100-500 samples/year: single season, rrultiple sites - broad coverage)

                                    fish (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)

                                    periphyton (Pariphyton and dlgae in rivers and streams are sampled qualitatively tor
                                    descriptive purposes only. Some indirect discharge permits require quantitative
                                    periphyton and macroinvertebrate sampling with artificial substrates in order to determine
                                    compliance with permit conditions. Compliance criteria are independent of WQS.)
      sufcsamptestoe
      taxonomy
                rock baskets, kick net (18x9 rectangular net, 500 micron mesh)
                riffle/run (cobble) and woody debris (varies according to stream category)
                must be minimum 300 animals AND 25% of sample.
                lowest possible taxon - genus, species and  combination (specified level in SOPs and C18S)
      sarnpte processing
      sutwampte
                backpack electrofisher

                multihabitat
                length measurement and anomalies
                none
                species
                               visual based and hydrogeomorphplogy - performed with and independent of bioassessments;
                               pebble counts currently implemented quite extensively in conjunction with bioassessments
 Qtirtttyai
tctprognu
standard operating procedures; quality assurance plan; periodic meetings and training for
biologists; sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks; specimen archival; sending voucher
specimens to experts for identification confirmation
  Data Analysis and  Interpretation
   »and
                                    summary tables, illustrative graphs

                                    parametric ANOVAs

                                    multivariate analysis

                                    biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index and return single metrics - use
                                    endpoint for each single metric)

                                    disturbance gradients
                                    other:
     ym&omfaQ metricsl
      Igo unittess scoresiSV'
                Combination of reference distribijtion, impaired site distribution, and best professional
                judgement; do not use unitless scores.
amnng HiHMfrmamvi

MllHiu»M«

nmuib niuex
thrmjrmlrt*'
' ;• ,. : -.,•: '

uumuiaiive oisinoution runcnon
Significant departure from mean pf reference population
           l vartate (ndex"":;
                                    repeat sampling (long term fixed station sampling)

                                    precision (field replication)

                                    sensitivity

                                    bias

                                    accuracy (sample processing and analysis QA)
 BtotogfciKiat*

                               Data are stored and managed in MS Access data base. Various programs used to analyze
                               sub-sets include: Excel, Sigma-Plot/Stat and PC-ORD

                               MS Access database calculates metrics and generates event summary reports. Data can be
                               moved from Access to other programs for project-specific analyses. Commonly used programs
                               include: Excel, Sigma-Plot/Stat, PC-ORD

•Benthos data are used to generate individual metrics, which are considered individually. Fish assemblage data are used to
generate metrics for a multimetric Index of Biotic Integrity.  Water Quality Standard thresholds (deviations from the reference
condition) are based on BPJ evaluations of metric distribution patterns in both reference and non-reference sites.
VERMONT: Program Summary
                                                  December 2002
                                                                                                             3-184

-------
 VIRGINIA
 Contact Information

 Alex M. Barren, Environmental Program Planner
 Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
 P.O. Box 10009 « Richmond, VA 23240
 Phone 804/698-4119 « Fax 804/698-4116
 email: ambarron@dea.state.va.us
 DEQ Water Programs homepage: http://www.deg.state.va.us/watef/
  Program Description

  The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Biological Monitoring Program (BMP) utilizes the study of
  bottom dwelling macroinvertebrate communities to determine overall water quality. Changes in water quality
  generally alter the kinds and numbers of these animals living in streams or other waterbodies. Like physical and
  chemical water quality monitoring data, biological monitoring data are used to assess water quality for support of
  aquatic life designated use and the Clean Water Act "fishable and swimmable" goals.

  The BMP is composed of 150 to 170 stations that are examined annually during the spring and fall. Qualitative and
  semiquantitative biological monitoring has been conducted by the agency since the early 1970s. The USEPA
  Rapid Bioassessment Protocol (RBP) II was employed beginning in the fall of 1990 to utilize standardized and
  repeatable methodology. The RBPs produce water quality ratings of nonimpaired, slightly impaired, moderately
  impaired and severely impaired instead of the former ratings of good, fair and poor.

  Currently, there are approximately 70 organizations throughout the Commonwealth with active citizen water quality
  monitoring programs. Biological parameters measured by citizen monitors often include benthic
  macroinvertebrates, fecal coliform bacteria,  and/or chlorophyll a.  A statewide organization, the Izaak Walton
  League of America Virginia Save Our Streams Program (IWLA VA SOS), took the lead in establishing relations
  with DEQ and the Department of Conservation and Recreation (OCR) to develop a statewide citizen monitoring
  program. IWLA VA SOS has a benthic macroinvertebrate citizen monitoring protocol that is widely used by many
  affiliate organizations. In 2000, VA SOS completed a two-year study, funded by DEQ, evaluating this protocol and
  developing a new protocol to more closely correlate with professional methods developed by EPA and used by
  DEQ.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Wafer Quality Assessment and impaired Waters Report (combined 2002 305b and 303d), July 2002:
  http: //www. deq. state. va. us/water/305b. htm I

  2000 Water Quality Assessment 305(b) Report, http://www.deq.state.va.us/water/00-305b.html

  Water Quality Assessment Guidance Manual for 2002, 305(b)and 303(d) reports. July 2002:
  http://www.deq.state.va.us/pdf/water/wqassessguide.pdf

  2007 Ambient Water Quality Monitoring Plan:
  http://www.deq.state.va.us/water/mv01rpt.html

  Watershed Maps of Virginia Impaired Water Segments, 303(d) TMDL Priority List.
  http://www.deq.state.va.us/watermaps/
VIRGINIA: Program Summary                      December 2002                                         3-185

-------
 VIRGINIA
  Contact Information

  Alex M. Barren, Environmental Program Planner
  Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
  P.O. Box 10009 • Richmond, VA 23240
  Phone 804/698-4119 • Fax 804/698-4116
  email: ambarron@deg.state.va.us
  Programmatic Elements
'"-,£&""• ' ' '_&•""; ''™ '- "
pfofifttfit • ; -. • \ ,


:;&'. -.-.m. '•&&-'.:•
\-,|" • ."•;; . ' ;
-..£-,, ^- .'••,...•..
j:,;;ya^ • ' ";•?£>.; ! -"•=*; :.v" '
-•y . ,-•.,-.

)M||jii>:.^: !:^
iife.^,-,,:^. ,
'•<-'"Sf:::. '/'.:'¥-";:"' T-'E~ c ' '
•-•-•..-.-. • , -• ,
}--llp-' ?ll:v •";;:?;£^ •
- -f-.. <»;/ •:.-
'" C V ' "-"" . ?'
/
/

/

/
/
/

/•

/

/


problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness'of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water, quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other

projects only)
fixed station (i.e., water quaity monitoring stations)
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide (comprehensive use
throughout jurisdiction)
rotating basin
other:
  Stream Miles

  Total miles                                      50,329
  (determined using the National Hydrography Database)

  Total perennial miles                                 50,329

  Total miles assessed for biology*             15,540.4

     fully supporting for 305(b)'                        13,321.9

     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)*                  2,216.5

     listed for 303
-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and  Dec is ion-Making
  Aiiu dMtginMion ball*'  - "*'  Single Aquatic Life Use
 ALU designations In state
             standard*
Three designations (apply to all State waters): recreational uses,
e.g., swimming and boating; the propagation and growth of a
balanced, indigenous population of aquatic life, including game fish,
which might reasonably be expected to inhabit them; and the
production of marketable resources, e.g. fish and shellfish.
  Narrative Btocrtttrlii in WQ8;   none - Virginia has no formal/informal numeric procedures to support
  -=' • '     •'•' '      ~;     """'  general aquatic life statement found in WQS
  Numtric Bfocritmtolii WQ8,
none
  to In
 wft otiwr •nvtrorarmrtal
 data, (e.g., jEoxicity t
 c^rnical spocific
 In formation not prwMed
    assessment of aquatic resources
    cause and effect determinations
    permitted discharges
    monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
    watershed based management
  Us*S Of
  blocriteria in making
  manaoHnent decision*
  regarding restoratlofl of
 : aquatic resource* to a
  designated ALU
Several TMDLs are addressing ALUS restoration because of poor
bioassessment scores.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
                              information not provided
  Reference «H»
  Uvtvnninatlons
    site-specific
    paired watersheds
    regional (aggregate of sites)
    professional judgment
    other:
                              No reference site criteria.  Reference sites are defined as best
                              available, least impaired.
                                  historical conditions
                                  least disturbed sites
                                  gradient response
                                  professional judgment
                                  other:
  Sttwam stratification within
  roglorwl reference!    •>•;.,
 ~--  '-     "
    ecoregions (or some aggregate)
    elevation
    stream type
    multivariate grouping
    jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
    other:
 Additional Informaton
    reference sites linked to ALU
    reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
    some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
    conditions
VIRGINIA: Program Summary
                  December 2002
                                                                          3-187

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                  benthos (300-400 samples/y^ar; multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad
                                  coverage for watershed level)
                                  fish
                                  periphyton
                                  other:
      habitat seteOHon
      tt**a^es^1
    '  taxonomy     •:
                            D-frame, kick net (1 meter); 500-600 micron mesh
                            richest habitat and riffle/run (cobble)
                            100 count
                            family
                              visual
                                 based: performed with bioqssessments
feiimyMiiin
                              standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
                              training for biologists, specimen archival
 Data Analysis and Interpretation
                                  summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                  parametric ANOVAs
                                  multivariate analysis
                                  biological metrics
                                  disturbance gradients
                                  other:

                                  repeat sampling
                                  precision
                                  sensitivity
                                  bias
                                  accuracy
     Retrieval and analysis
                            EDAS
                            EDAS
VIRGINIA: Program Summary
                                              December 2002
                                                                                                       3-188

-------
 WASHINGTON
  Contact Information

  Robert W. Plotnikoff, Freshwater Monitoring Unit Supervisor
  Washington State Department of Ecology
  P.O. Box 47710, 300 Desmond Drive • Olympia, WA 98504-7710
  Phone 360/407-6687 • Fax 360/407-6884
  email: rplo461 @ecy. wa.gov
  Stream Biological Monitoring website:
  http://www.eev.wa.gov/programs/eap/fw benth/fwb  intr.hlml
  Program  Description

  Washington State's Biological Monitoring Program has been operated by the Washington Department of Ecology since 1993.
  The program has served as a focal point for technical assistance and as a reference for data comparison. Its primary objectives
  are: 1) to continually describe the spatial and temporal features of biotic communities in wadeable streams, 2) describe and then
  validate biological expectations for appropriate spatial classifications (e.g., ecoregions), 3) develop guidance and criteria that
  evaluate human-induced disturbance in biological communities, and 4) expand where biological information is used in water
  quality and resource management. Although field data collection methodology has remained consistent, data storage and
  analytical products have improved in their capacity and sophistication.
  The Freshwater Monitoring Unit within the Department of Ecology has engaged in biological monitoring activities for more than
  twelve years and has made Its information available online for public use.  The primary objectives in continuing to develop this
  program are to: 1) proceed with calibration often biometrics that will be based on reference conditions within each of eight
  ecoregions, 2) continue assistance in development of RIVPACS (River Invertebrate Prediction and Classification System)
  models for western and eastern Washington streams with researchers at Utah  State University (Dr. C. Hawkins), and 3) locate
  and visit additional reference sites outside of the ranges  currently being monitored.
  Interpretive tools developed from these efforts are being  placed into the ALUS framework under development by the USEPA
  (contact Susan Jackson).  WA is able to use the knowledge and tools developed through former biological monitoring efforts to
  create a meaningful matrix of expectations as diagramed by ALUS so that incremental improvements in stream quality, based on
  biological signatures, can be tracked. The first step toward adoption of biocriteria will be the construction of a guidance that
  outlines analytical products and biological expectations for streams within each ecoregion of Washington State. Biological
  evaluation tools such as RIVPACS scores, biometric scores, index scores, and indicator taxa are currently being assembled for
  inclusion in the guidance.
  Biological information is currently being included in the 303(d) listing process to directly evaluate impairment. WA has amassed
  an adequate data bank for describing reference conditions that serves as an effective and defensible means for comparison.
  The Freshwater Monitoring Unit issued a report titled "Condition of Freshwaters in Washington State for the Year 2000" that
  evaluates data from water quality monitoring, biological monitoring, lakes monitoring, and nuisance aquatic plant monitoring.
  This report was intended as a template for future reviews of environmental information, like the 30S(b) report, and will eventually
  satisfy reporting content of the current required data summaries as well as new guidance like CALM (Consolidated Assessment
  and Listing Methodology).
  Many of the water quality problems of interest to the Department of Ecology's Regional Offices are related to habitat destruction
  due to human influence. This is one of the areas in which collaborative work with volunteer monitoring groups, local
  governments, state agencies, tribes,  and other federal agencies is promoted.
  One important partnership has been  with the USEPA and the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP).  The
  Department of Ecology has engaged both EMAP and R-EMAP (Regional Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program)
  since 1994. The acquisition of both knowledge and equipment in operating this program has provided impetus to implement the
  probabilistic monitoring design in the Ambient River and  Stream Water Quality Monitoring Program. WA is working with the
  Colville Tribe in expanding the description of reference conditions for northeastern Washington and with the Yakima Tribe,
  county, and federal agencies in evaluating the effects of  floodplain gravel mining along the Yakima River. WA is especially
  encouraged by several volunteer monitoring groups, like  Streamkeepers of Clallam County, whose organizers have assembled
  teams of personnel that generate useful biological, chemical,  and flow data.


  Documentation and  Further Information

  2000 Washington State Water Quality Assessment - Section 305(b) Report: http://www.ecv.wa.gov/pubs/OCi1Q058.pdf

  DRAFT 2002 303(d) List of Impaired and Threatened Waters, May 2002:
  http:tfwww .ecYwa.gov/programs/wg/303d/2002-revised/listpolicvdraftfinal7.Ddf

  Condition of Freshwaters in Washington State for the Year 2000: http://www.ecv.wa.gov/pubs/0103025.pdf

  Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters of the State of Washington: http://www.ecv.wa.qov/pubs/wacl 73201 a.pdf

  For a comprehensive list of Stream Biological Monitoring Publications available online and/or by mail, go to:
  http://www.ecv wagov/programs/eap/fw benth/fwb  pubs html


WASHINGTON: Program Summary                    December 2002                                              3-189

-------
 WASHINGTON
  Contact Information
  Robert W. Plotnikoff, Freshwater Monitoring Unit Supervisor
  Washington State Department of Ecology
  P.O. 80x47710, 300 Desmond Drive • Olympia. WA 98604-7710
  Phone 360/407-6687 • Fax 360/407-6884
  email: rplo461@ecv.wa.gov
  Programmatic Elements
' U*M Of blORIIBIIMKIlll
 "      " _lin.
                                    problem identification (screening)
                                    nonpoint source assessments
                                    monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                    ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
                                    promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
                                    support of antidegradation
                                    evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                    TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                    other:
                                    targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (specific river
                                    basins or watersheds)
                                    fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
                                    (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                    probabilistic by stream order/catchment area (stream order as
                                    subset ofecoregion sampling)
                                    probabilistic by ecoregion. or statewide (special projects and
                                    comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                    rotating basin (specific river basins or watersheds)
                                    other
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (State based determination)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
     fully supporting for 305(b)"
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)**
     listed for 303(d)
     number of sites sampled
     number of miles assessed per site
                                                   73,886

                                                    39,483
                                                    3,275
                                                     982.5
                                                   2,292.5
                                                        0
                                                      695
                                                        5
                                                                    3,275 Miles Assessed for Biology
"fully supporting" for 305{b)
"parially/non-suppoiting" for 305(b)
'Approximately 10% of the State's perennial streams are assessed for biology. The 3,275 total miles assessed for biology is an
estimate derived from multiplying 655 sites by the 5 miles assessed per site.
"The "fully supporting" and "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b} stream mile estimates are based on an old assessment policy
estimation process. WA most recently used EPA's National Hydrography Data Layer to create the stream segment breaks but the
new data has not been generated yet.
WASHINGTON: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                         3-190

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
ALUdaaignatloftainatat*
                              Class System (A.B.C)
                              The Water Class system currently in use contains four categories:
                              Class AA, Class A, Class B, and Class C.  Class AA (extraordinary)
                              freshwaters shall markedly and uniformly exceed the requirements
                              for all or substantially all uses.  Class A (excellent) freshwaters shall
                              meet or exceed the requirements for all or substantially all uses.
                              Class B (good) freshwaters shall meet or exceed requirements for
                              most uses. Class C (fair) freshwaters shall meet or exceed the
                              requirements of selected and essential uses.
 wiwr ;:^i  'vSc-V-^S':
 NuMrteOocr«wilnwi§
                              under development
                              none

  data (e.g., fodcfty testing and
  crwfflical specific criteria) je
                                 assessment of aquatic resources
                                 cause and effect determinations
                                 permitted discharges
                                 monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                 watershed based management
UMs of bloasMttimnt/
bfo£iftarta I
                              none
                         .,
 aquatic iwoumw to a
 designated ALU
*Water Classes AA, A, and B include a characteristic use designation called "Wildlife Habitat." This characteristic use designates
waters of the state used by, or that directly or indirectly provide food support to fish, other aquatic life, and wildlife for any life history
stage or activity. The term "biological assessment" is defined in Washington's water quality standards and is intended to be used to
evaluate the condition of "Wildlife Habitat."
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Nunil»fofrof«rMiC«arte||    187 total	

                                   site-specific
                                   paired watersheds
                                   regional (aggregate of sites)
                                   professional judgment
                                   other:
  R»foranc« pite ct**ri*
                             1) Least-disturbed sites that show little or no signs of human impact,
                             2) Relatively-unimpacted sites that show some signs of historical
                             human influence but are at an advanced successional stage
  Characterization of
  wfc«nc*»tto» wt^!»n
  regional context • '• ~ •
                                 historical conditions
                                 least disturbed sites
                                 gradient response
                                 professional judgment
                                 other: minimally disturbed (see "relatively-unimpacted"
                                 reference site criteria)
  Str
       iteitlflcattonwttlitt
ecoregions (or some aggregate)
elevation
stream type
multivariate grouping
jurisdictions! (i.e., statewide)
other
 AddWonai information
                                 reference sites linked to ALU
                                 reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                 some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                 conditions
WASHINGTON: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
                                                                       3-191

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
  AnfftfHtrtaflm awMMtMd  -^ =
   . -r;-S>   M"f. V   "^%--   '• '•'yl'c"
                                  benthos (100-500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed level and
                                  broad coverage)           \
                                  fish (100-500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - watershed level and broad
                                  coverage)
                                  periphyton (<100 samplesfyAar; single season, multiple sites - watershed level and broad
                                  coverage)
                                  other: macraphytes and waterfowl (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites -
                                  watershed level and bmad coverage)
  :    habitat wtecftm
  T   subtarripte sizs
                              Suiter, D-frame; 500-600 micron'mesh
                              riffle/run (cobble); pool habitat may also be assessed if physical and/or chemical degradation
                        fp:  |  has occurred and can be detected through a biotic response
                        "•':•  !  500 count
                              family, genus, and species
      sampte processing
                              backpack electrofisher; 1 millimeter mesh
                              multihabitat
                              length measurement, anomalies
                              none - all specimens are examined and counted
                              species, life stage
      sampling o«»
                              natural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.); artificial substrate:
                              collect by hand
                              multihabitat
                              taxonomic identification
                              genus
                             :  visual based, quantitative measurements and hydrogeomorphology; performed with
                               bioassessments
QuaWw
                »JHWfl«i
                               standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and training for
                               biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
  Data Analysis and  Interpretation
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
                                   disturbance gradients
                               25" percentile of reference population

                               25" percentile of reference population
                               Significant departure from mean of reference population
 <&&£.
          -i.
                                   repeat sampling (multi-year sampling at gradient of sites)
                                   precision (multi-year sampling at reference sites)
                                   sensitivity
                                   bias
                                   accuracy
Blofefllcafdata •*-'-•   '^'~

 »i|;;Retrie'wit and|!analv«fe
                               All biological (including habitat and chemistry) information is stored in MS Access
                               SAS, Systat, CANOCO, Primer,i Cornell Ecology Programs, and Calibrate
WASHINGTON: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
3-192

-------
 WEST VIRGINIA
 Contact Information

 John Wirts, Program Manager
 West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WV DEP)
 1201 Greenbrier Street • Charleston. WV 25311
 Phone 304/558-2108 « Fax 304/558-2780
 email:  lwirts@mail.dep.state.wv.us
 WVDEP Division of Water Resources homepage: http://www.dep.state.wv.us/item.cfrn?ssid=11

 Dan Cincotta, Fisheries Biologist
 West Virginia Division of Natural Resources (WV DNR)
 P.O. Box 67 • Elkins, WV 26241
 Phone 304/637-0245 • Fax 304/637-0250
 email: dcincotta@dnr.state.wv.us
 WVDNR Wildlife Resources Section homepage: http://www.dnr.state.wv.us/vm/ildlife/default.htm


 Program Description

 The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WV DEP) implemented the Watershed Assessment Program in
 1996. This program was designed to systematically measure the water quality and biological health of the state's rivers and
 streams. The program has four major components: 1) Random or Probabilistic Sampling; 2) Pre-TMDL sampling; 3) Ambient
 WQ Monitoring; and 4) "Regular Assessments."

 Benthic macroinvertebrates are collected at the "random sites," regular WAP (Watershed Assessment Program) sites, and
 selected Pre-TMDL sites. The program utilizes a rectangular dip net, compositing samples from two square meters and
 identifying a 200 organism sub-sample. WV DEP identified the "bugs" in-house to family level the first three years of the
 program. In 1999, WV DEP contracted out the identification work and switched to genus level identification. In 2000, a
 macroinvertebrate index was developed for West Virginia with support from EPA's biocriteria development program.  This index
 provides a means to establish an impairment threshold that is based on a set of minimally disturbed reference sites.

 The "Regular Assessments" were the majority of WV DEP's workload in the program's first year and continue to be a major
 portion of efforts. These consisted of sampling as many streams as possible (considering personnel limitations) in watersheds
 that were scheduled for assessment according to a 5 year cycle (5-7 watersheds per year). These assessments included the
 collection of water quality, habitat and macroinvertebrate data. All streams previously listed as impaired were targeted for
 assessment, as were a portion of all "unassessed" and "partially impaired" streams.

 In 1997, the Watershed Assessment Program added a probabilistic sampling component.  The first 5-year cycle was completed
 in 2001. The first cycle consisted of sampling 30-35 sites in each of the major watersheds (8-digit HUCs) in the state, sampling
 all sites in a watershed in a single year. The next 5 year cycle begins in 2002 and will have a different sampling strategy. The
 same effort, 150 sites, will be spread across the state each year instead of just the 5-7 watersheds being assessed that year.
 This will allow a summary of the condition of the state's streams to be completed every year instead of having to wait for the end
 of the 5-year cycle. This strategy also eliminates the problem of comparing watersheds  sampled in different years that may have
 had drastically different climactic conditions (i.e. drought versus flood).

 Periphyton will be collected at all of the random sites starting in 2002. The results of these collections will hopefully aid in the
 development of nutrient criteria. Streams with known eutrification problems and some of WV DEP's established reference sites
 may be sampled as well.

 The Division of Natural Resources (DNR) is the fish and game agency of West Virginia.  As part of its duties, statewide fishery
 surveys are conducted annually to monitor game and nongame fish populations.  These surveys are not probability based as
 they are usually performed on target streams with ongoing programs (e.g., stockings) or due to crisis management reasons.  The
 WV DNR has no regulatory authority relative to the state's water quality standards, but we  are sometimes involved in a fish
 advisory capacity. The WV DNR is developing a fish Index of Biotic Integrity via a cooperative agreement with the USEPA.  The
 IBI is being developed somewhat independently from the WQS that are utilized by WV DEP. Someday it may be used in the
 305(b) program by a collaboration of agencies.


 Documentation and Further Information

 WV DEP Division of Water Resources list of publications, including direct links to West Virginia Water Quality Status
 Assessment 305(b) Report 2000 and other 305(b) reports, multiple 303(d) listings, West Virginia's Monitoring Strategy, and A
 Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams, 2000: http://www.dep,state.wv.us/item.cfm?ssid=11&ssl id=192

 Smithson, J. 2001. Watershed assessment program. SOP.  WV DEP Division of Water Resources.
WEST VIRGINIA: Program Summary                  December 2002                                            3-193

-------
 WEST VIRGINIA
  Contact Information

  John Wirts, Program Manager
  West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WV DEP)
  1201 Greenbrier Street • Charleston. WV 25311
  Phone 304/558-2108 • Fax 304/558-2780
  email: iwirts@mail.dep.state.wv.us

  Dan Cincotta, Fisheries Biologist
  West Virginia Division of Natural Resources (WV DNR)
  P.O. Box 67 • Elkins, WV 26241
  Phone 304/637-0245 • Fax 304/637-0250
  email: dcincotta@dnr.slate.wv.us
 Programmatic Elements
I '"'''-fci'iTi: • " " >*""'

':':;••;; vf^gg^§*^ '- '"'^"i-'-Z' • -~ -'
- . '" \
= ]- .-:.:£. 	 , . |
"•'T" /.•-•'' ~:J^" >',' '",' Js-^'-" -
' -
,-;s .' \J|;-.:. ;Jj;- = " ' - ' i
| .• ;.~rj};.'. . ^v •:;
:AppicaUamonltorfcig . j
| :|;p^,: -p.:,.
•j. -:, '4,; - -•"-
"•'•;•,"" :'. ,"* *.tS:wE;': ;'* 1 ' '" ",Ir5y-*c --" .• '
jfij "•"' ','",;'i;f'': • , ' ' ^ . {*,"*'
?" . - ;?*'. . . "•
.^x"-, v .;<-"t;!r|g;c-«- . , 'jt V^j-y . "
/
/
/
/

/
/
/

/
/

s
/

problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose)
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, qr statewide (comprehensive use
throughout jurisdiction)
rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
other:
 Stream Miles

 Total miles                                     32,276
 (determined using RF3 augmented with all named streams on
 1:24,000 topographic map)

 Total perennial miles                                21,114

 Total miles assessed for biology                5,745

     fully supporting for 305(b)                         3.706

     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                   2,039

     listed for 303
-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
    ,. ™,,,  .  .
 ALU :;".'
Watershed restoration action strategies as part of the 319 grant program.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
                              -105 total
                                  site-specific
                                  paired watersheds
                                  regional (aggregate of sites)
                                  professional judgment
                                  other:
                              The following selection criteria are used to select reference sites:
                              (* Indicates criterion that can be determined in the field.)
                              1.D.O. >5.0mg/l* 2. pH between 6.0 and 9.0* 3. Conductivity < 500 uS /cm*  4.
                              Fecal conform < 800 colony/100ml   5. No violations of State WQ Standards  6. No
                              obvious sources of nonpoint pollution*  7. Epifaunal substrate / available cover score
                              >10*  8. Channel alteration score >10*  9. Sediment deposition score >10 *  10. Bank
                              vegetative protection score >5*  11. Undisturbed vegetation zone width score >5*   12.
                              Total habitat score > or = 130 points* 13. Evaluation of anthropogenic activities and
                              disturbances*  14. No known point source discharges upstream and within view of
                              assessment site (completed after 1-13 are met)
  raferenc* »Ke* within •
  regional context ''. *•"
    historical conditions
    least disturbed sites
    gradient response
    professional judgment
    other: minimally disturbed**
  Strtimstnrtifk^rtwtthln
  regional raferanc*
  cofldttons "     • -•;;;  .'
    ecoregions (or some aggregate)
    elevation
    stream type
    multivariate grouping
    jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
    other:
                                  reference sites linked to ALU
                                  reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                  some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced conditions (minimal)

**WV reference sites are best described as minimally disturbed sites. They have to meet each of the 14 criteria mentioned above;
thus there are some areas with no sites that WV DEP is comfortable calling  reference.
WEST VIRGINIA: Program Summary
                  December 2002
                                                                                                          3-195

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (>500 samplesfyearl single season, multiple sites - watershed level)

                                   fish* (<100 samples/year; single observation, limited sampling)

                                   periphyton

                                   other
      subsampte size

      taxonomy
                          D-frame, dipnet, collect by hand; 600-600 micron mesh

                          riffle/run (cobble)

                          200 count

                          family, genus

                               seine, backpack and boat electrofishers. electric seine; 1/8" and 3/16" mesh

                             \  multihabitat
                             :
                             j  length measurement, blomass - individual

                               none

                               species
 HatttatMMMmeflt*
                          visual based, quantitative measurements, riffle stability index; performed with
                          bioassessments
 QoaMy as»uiVK« program     standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings, training
 :"it"=i"Ji          "" "           for biologists, sorting proficiency checks, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks,
                               specimen archival
*West Virginia Division of Natural Resources is the fish and game agency of West Virginia. WV DNR duties include statewide
annual fishery surveys to monitor game and nongame fish populations. These surveys are not probability based as they are
ususally performed on target streams due to ongoing programs (eg. stockings) or crisis management reasons. The WV DNR has no
regulatory authority relative to the state's water quality standards, but are sometimes involved in a fish advisory capacity. The WV
DNR is developing a fish Index of Biotic Integrity via a cooperative agreement with the USEPA.  It is being developed somewhat
independently from the quality standards that are utilized by WV DER, and may someday be used in  the 305(b) program by a
collaboration of agencies.



  Data Analysis and Interpretation

  Dates
                              summary tables, illustrative graphs

                              parametric ANOVAs

                              multivariate analysis

                              biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)

                              disturbance gradients

                              other:
      into unWws scores
                            :   95" percentile of total population
                            >•  5th percentile of reference sites
' -• ii'ktfM ft In gt*tf n ••**
 CIWVCWIIWIM
                              repeat sampling

                              precision

                              sensitivity

                              bias

                              accuracy
 Btot6flk*i
-------
 WISCONSIN
  Contact Information

  Mike Talbot, Chief - Monitoring Section, Bureau of Fisheries and Habitat Protection
  Bob Masnado. Chief - Water Quality Standards Section, Bureau of Watershed Management
  Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR)
  P.O. Box 7921 • Madison, Wisconsin 53707
  Phone 608/266-0832 • Fax 608/266-2244
  Phone 608/267-7662 • Fax 608/267-2800
  email: talbom@dnr.state.wi.us and masnar@drir.state.wi .us
  Wl DNR Division of Water homepage: http://www.dnrstale.wi.us/environmentprolectAvater.html
  Program  Description

  Historically, much of the water resource assessment work done by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) has
  focused on the evaluation of degraded watersheds or water resources with high public profile. As a result, there is a lack of data
  on the overall quality of Wisconsin's water resources. In addition, monitoring techniques often varied among assessment sites
  and over time thus making it difficult to compare data across the state or from different time periods. To address these concerns,
  WDNR initiated a new program in 1999, called Baseline Monitoring. Standardized assessment techniques for aquatic habitat,
  macroinvertebrates and fish have been developed and are being applied throughout the state. The elements of this new program
  are contained in a draft report on Wisconsin's Surface Water Monitoring Strategy.

  The overall goals of the baseline monitoring strategy are to answer the following questions:
  1.  What are the use expectations for Wisconsin's water resources?
  2.  Are the state's waters meeting their use potential?
  3.  What factors are preventing the state's water resources from meeting their potential?
  4.  What are the statewide status and trends in the quality of Wisconsin's surface waters?

  To achieve the goals of the program, the following specific set of monitoring objectives were established:
      Determine the designated attainable uses of each waterbody. Stream and lake habitat information and fisheries data
      collected during baseline assessments will be compared with biological criteria obtained from "least-impacted" regional
      reference waters to determine the water's use classification.
      Determine the level of use attainment of each waterbody. Stream habitat and fisheries data collected during baseline
      assessment monitoring will allow the WDNR to determine if designated uses are being attained. More emphasis is being
      placed on biological monitoring to determine if designated uses are being met.
  •    Determine why some waterbodies are not attaining their designated uses. Physical, chemical and biological data collected
      during baseline assessment monitoring will provide at least some of the information required to achieve this objective.

  For stream biological monitoring, WDNR collects information on riparian and tn-stream habitat data, aquatic insects and fish
  species. The aquatic insects are identified and the numbers offish are determined using standardized collection protocols. Lake
  monitoring involves collecting trophic state data and fish community data using the standardized protocols.

  WDNR will begin using a stratified-random sampling approach to achieve adequate coverage of the state's 55,000 miles of
  streams. This sampling design allows the WDNR to sample a variety of streams and lakes across the state and also provides the
  Department with the ability to evaluate the quality of water resources that have not been sampled.  The WDNR collects over 400
  aquatic invertebrate samples per year. However, under the baseline monitoring that was initiated last year, the WDNR is now
  annually assessing about 600 stream sites. In the future, maps showing the location of biological sampling sites will be available.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Wisconsin Water Quality Report to Congress. 2000 305(b): htlp://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/water/wm/watersummary/WQ.pdf

  Wisconsin's Unified Watershed Assessment: http://www.dnr.stale.wi.us/orq/water/wm/walersummarv/uwa/indexhtmjitintro

  Water Quality Standards for Wisconsin Surface Waters, revised February 1998:
  http://www.leqis.state wi us/rsb/code/nr/nM 02.pdf

  Wisconsin DNR Fisheries and Habitat Biological Database: hltp:/tinfotrek.er.usgs.qov/wdnr  bio/
WISCONSIN: Program Summary
                                                  December 2002
                                                                                                             3-197

-------
 WISCONSIN
  Contact Information
  Mike Talbot, Chief- Monitoring Section, Bureau of Fisheries and Habitat Protection
  Bob Masnado, Chief - Water Quality Standards Section, Bureau of Watershed Management
  Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR)
  P.O. Box 7921 • Madison, Wisconsin 53707
  Phone 608/266-0832 • Fax  608/266-2244
  Phone 608/267-7662 « Fax  608/267-2800
  email: talbom@dnr.state.wi.us and masnar@dnr.state.wi.us
  Programmatic  Elements
                    wit
              water quality
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALL) determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other: fishery assessments, FERC re-licensing, decisions, etc.
           IftDltftQnltQ
targeted (i.e., sites selected;for specific purpose)
(special projects only)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
(specific river basins or watersheds)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregbn, or statewide
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
rotating basin
other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles*                                     55,000
 Total perennial miles                                 32,000
 Total miles assessed for biology**             24,422
      fully supporting for 305(b)                          7,989
      partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                  12,028
      listed for 303(d)
      number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)           600
      number of miles assessed per site**                     5
                                 24,422 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                        "fully supporting* for 305(b)
                                        "partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
•Surface water resources for Wisconsin have been quantified using SIS. A 1:24,000 scale hydrography GIS database was
developed by digitizing surface waters shown on USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle maps.
"The miles assessed for biology include fish consumption and aquatic life use.  Of the 12,394 miles fully supporting for 305(b),
4,405 miles are threatened. Each site sampled represents 5 miles of stream for baseline surveys, based on research conducted by
WDNR.
WISCONSIN: Program Summary
              December 2002
3-198

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making

  ALU designation biM»fJ-'i'     Fishery Based Uses and Warm Water vs. Coldwater

  ALU designations Instate      Five designations: 1) Coldwater - Salmonids & some sculpin species,
  water quality standards        2) Warm Water Fish & Aquatic Life - game fish and some important forage
                      •  •       species, 3) Warm Water Forage Fish - forage fish communities intolerant to
                   .     :       low dissolved oxygen, 4) Limited Forage Fish - forage fish communities
,  . .  - '             ,  I:/', ;     tolerant of low dissolved oxygen, 5) Limited Aquatic Life - communities with
; ,,:,,  .          ;  .^alj-fc •-.   non-fish species (invertebrates, etc.) that are tolerant of low dissolved oxygen.

  Narrative Blocrttertllf ITOSr;:  Wisconsin does not have narrative biocriteria per se. It does have narrative
                               criteria that are applied to protect against harm to human, wildlife and fish and
                               aquatic life communities. Please see below.*
  NumwfcBtocr
I In WQS    none
in Integrated assessments
with other environmental
 ' '  '  ].,toxtdty testing and
       I specific criteria)
  data
                assessment of aquatic resources

                cause and effect determinations

                permitted discharges

                monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

                watershed based management
  Uses of bioassMsmentf
  biocriteria in making
  tiMUUKienient decisions
  regarding restoration of
  aquatic resources to a
  designated ALU
            Wisconsin's bioassessment program is still evolving, but has been used
            regularly to make water quality management decisions that range from fishery
            management issues (bag limits, habitat restoration projects) to FERC license
            operating conditions to assessing potential vs. actual fish & aquatic life uses of
            surface waters.
"Acute Narrative Criterion: NR 102.04(1 )(d) (d) Substances in concentrations or combinations which are toxic or harmful to
humans shall not be present in amounts found to be of public health significance, nor shall substances be present in amounts which
are acutely harmful to animal, plant or aquatic life.
Chronic Narrative Criterion: NR 102.04(4)(d)  (d) Other substances. Unauthorized concentrations of substances are not permitted
that alone or in combination with other materials present are toxic to fish or other aquatic life. Surface waters shall meet the acute
and chronic criteria as set forth in or developed pursuant to ss. NR 105.05 and 105.06. Surface waters shall meet the criteria which
correspond to the appropriate fish and aquatic life subcategory for the surface water, except as provided in s. NR 104.02(3).


  Reference Site/Condition Development

                            '.I  100 total
  determinations
  fefermce site criteria
  Characterization of •:• W•
  reference steal within 9'.
  regional context   >::
  Additional Information    y
                site-specific

                paired watershed

                regional (aggregate of sites)

                professional judgment

                other:
            Reference sites are defined by 1) BPJ using biota, 2) Upper quartile of biota
            index scores within two years, and 3) will eventually be supplemented with  a
            priori land use.  Also, a fish IBI is currently used, and habitat, water chemistry
            and macroinvertebrates will be incorporated within two years.
                historical conditions

                least disturted sites

                gradient response

                professional judgment

                other: will eventually use a priori GIS land use data
                                   ecoregions (or some aggregate)

                                   elevation

                                   stream type (temperature, gradient, stream order)

                                   multivariate grouping

                                   jurisdictional (i.e.. statewide)

                                   other: will assess strata with multivariate analysis
                reference sites linked to ALU

                reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards

                some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced conditions
WISCONSIN: Program Summary
                               December 2002
                                                                                                          3-199

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (>500 samples/year: single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
                                   fish <>500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)
                                   oeriphyton (<100 samples/year; single observation, limited sampling)
                                   other
      sulwampto 8t»
      taxonomy
Surber, Hess, D-frame (all limited! use': 50° ~ ^00 rn»cron mesh
riffle/run (cobble)
minimum of 125, but typically 200 - 300 organisms
lowest taxa-level possible - usually genus, sometimes combination
 ::   sampling sear           :  backpack and boat electrofisher, pram unit (tote barge); 1/4' mesh
J^j-hlWWrtedK^li;..?. .;    ;  multihabitat
|IS: ^ sample prooesihg       i  length measurement, biomass- individual (gamefish), biomass- batch (non-game), anomalies
lliSw^rfple?; :iW|=li: '-\  selected species
ffff taxonomy  : • •?•. ;T>:>;: f!-;•j -   species
     phyton~
      sampling gear '  •          natural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.)
                               artificial substrate: rock, rip-rap, bridge concrete
      habttat setectton ,          richest habitat
      sample processing     ;    chlorophyll a/phaeophytin and taxonomic identification
                               diatoms only	
                               quantitative measurements; performed with bioassessments
                       ram   \  standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings, training for
                               biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival

  Data Analysis and Interpretation
 ^Pataanarysls tools and  ,  ,   /   summary tables, illustrative graphs
         '                     "7"  parametric ANOVAs
                              _^
                               •/   multivariate analysis
                               /   biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)'
                               •/   disturbance gradients
                                   other:

 ;     fransformirjg metrics  .     25" percentile of reference population
I£;|rite.uns»oai4;.; ,= ,
                               2sn percentile of reference population

                               /   repeat sampling
                                   precision (repeat sampling of assessment sites is conducted)
                               /   sensitivity (multiple streams along various stressor gradients have been assessed to
                                   document metric sensitivity to the stressor of concern)
                                   b\a& (Stream habitat assessment crews assess the same site to document crew
                                   experience bias. Least-impacted streams of differing size/stream order are sampled to
           .  . .                     document macroinvertebrate metric bias among streams of varying order)
               ''      'accuracy (multiple least-impacted streams are sampled to document metric accuracy)
 Btotogteal data
      Storage         .         A database has been developed in concert with USGS.  It is not currently compatible with
                               STORET. The database can be viewed at httD://www.infotrek.er.usqs.aovAvdnr bio/
      Retreval and analysis .     SAS. Systat. and Statistics Also, an ORACLE-based data management system is being
i     .   ' '   '        r~; •• '  \  developed to store data and provide routine report summaries and metric calculations.
'Multimetric indexes for habitat and fish have been developed, and a multimetric index for macroinvertebrates is being developed.
WISCONSIN: Program Summary
                                                  December 2002
                                                                             3-200

-------
 WYOMING
Contact Information

Jeremy ZumBerge, Monitoring Program Supervisor
Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (WYDEQ)
1043 Coffeen Avenue. Suite D • Sheridan. WY  82801
Phone 307/672-6457 • Fax 307/674-6050
email: izumbe@slate.wv.us
WYDEQ Water Quality Division website: http://deq.state.wv-us/wgd/index a5D?paaeid-5



Program Description

The primary objective of bioassessments conducted by the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (WYDEQ) is to assess
the support of aquatic life for 303(d) listing and 305(b) reporting, using macroinvertebrates as the primary indicator. The program
has been in existence since 1993, when it was initiated in the form of the Reference Stream Project (RSP). The primary goal of the
RSP was to collect baseline biological data at least-impacted (reference) streams in each ecoregion of Wyoming as a benchmark for
assessing biological and water quality conditions of other streams across the State. In 1998, the focus shifted from collecting
reference stream data to using RSP data as a benchmark to assess biological conditions of other Wyoming streams as part of the
Beneficial Use Reconnaissance Program (BURP). BURP uses a comprehensive approach (chemical, physical, and biological
components) to assess water quality conditions of Wyoming streams. Today, the RSP is still ongoing, but at a much smaller scale.

Several other organizations have been or will be important sources of bioassessment data in Wyoming.  The Wyoming Association
of Conservation Districts (WACD) has been very involved in collecting biological data at streams across Wyoming. With proper
guidance, local Conservation Districts (CDs) can elect to assume some of WYDEQ's bioassessment responsibilities, with the data
being used for 303(d) and 305(b). Many CDs have welcomed the opportunity to collect bioassessment data.

The USGS also has been a very important source of biological data. Wyoming has contracted the USGS-Wyoming District to carry
out the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) monitoring in Wyoming. Approximately SO randomly selected
sites will be assessed over the four year contract, with the end goal being an unbiased estimate of water quality conditions in  the
State. The USGS also conducted an assessment of the Yellowstone River Basin of Wyoming and Montana as part of the National
Water-Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA).  The considerable amount of biological data generated from these studies is being
evaluated for comparability with WYDEQ data to explore the usefulness of these data for 305(b) purposes. In addition, joint-funding
agreements are in place with the USGS that allow for enhanced biological monitoring of streams  in areas affected by coal bed
methane development.

The Wyoming Game and Pish Department (WGFD) is an important source of fish data. WYDEQ has chosen not to sample fish
communities as part of bioassessments, but uses WGFD data for determining support of fisheries uses, as well as in classifying
streams for assignment of uses and designating appropriate water quality standards associated with those uses.

Wyoming has made significant strides in recent years in the development of multimetric biocriteria. Work will continue toward
refining the existing numeric criteria and narrative aquatic life standard, and toward the eventual implementation of numeric aquatic
life standards. Implementation of numeric standards is sure to be a challenging effort. The physical heterogeneity of Wyoming (e.g.,
climate,  landscape, land use, and geology) poses significant scientific challenges. Political considerations are also likely to pose
challenges.

Currently, WY is exploring the use of predictive models for assessing biological conditions of streams, as well as the addition  of
periphyton as an additional biological indicator to supplement macroinvertebrate data and WGFD fish data used in bioassessments.
Periphyton samples have been collected at a limited number of long-term reference stations in the past, and the use of periphyton
data will expand in coming years.


  Documentation and  Further Information

  Wyoming's 2000 305(b)  State Water Quality Assessment Report and 2000 303(d) Report.
  http://deg.slate.wv.usAvgdAvalershed/01452-doc.pdf

  Wyoming Surface Water Quality Sfandartfs: http://deq.state.wv.us/wqd/index.asp7pag. eid=52*Stand

  Manual of SOPs for Sample Collection and Analysis: hltp://deg .state.wy.us/wqd/watershed/10574-doc.pdf

  WYDEQ Water Quality Division Five-Year Comprehensive Monitoring Plan, 2001 Update, October 2001:
  http://deq.5tate.wy.us/wadAfyatershed/l2606-doc.pdf

  Jessup, B.K. and J.B. Stribling. 2000.  Testing the Wyoming stream integrity index.  Prepared by Tetra Tech, Inc., Owings Mills,
  Maryland, for USEPA Region 8, Denver, CO.

  Gem'tsen, J; Jessup, B.K.; King, K; Smith, J. and Stribling, J.B. 2000. Development of Biological Criteria for Wyoming Streams
  and their Use in the TMDL Process. Prepared by Tetra Tech, Inc., Owings Mills, Maryland, for USEPA Region 8, Denver, CO.

  Data can be found online at http://wv.water.usqs.oov/ and http://www.wrd5.uwvo.edu/
WYOMING: Program Summary                       December 2002                                             3-201

-------
 WYOMING
  Contact Information
  Jeremy ZumBerge, Monitoring Program Supervisor
  Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (WYDEQ)
  1043 Coffeen Avenue. Suite D • Sheridan, VW 82801
  Phone 307/672-6457 • Fax 307/674-6050
  email: izumbe@stale.wv.us
  Programmatic Elements
 w«hfn ov*ra« water quality
 Appicabto monitoring
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessmenjs
monitoring the effectivenessj of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other: UAAs and site-specific standards
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) {specific river
basins or watersheds)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (specific
river basins or watersheds)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin (specific river basins or watersheds)
other
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (determined using RF3, 2000 and National Hydrography
 Database, 2001)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
     fully supporting for 305(b)
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
     listed  for 303(d)
     extent fully supporting, but threatened
     number of sites sampled
     number of miles assessed per site
               113,422

                  32,524
                  2,639
                   2.124
                    177
                    177
                    388
                   700+
                   3.25
2,639 Miles Assessed for Biology
      "Mly supporting" for 305(b)
      'partially/non-supporting" for 305{b)
'Since a Weight-of-Evidence approach is used in use support decisions, the numbers provided reflect waterbody reach extent where
some type of biological data were used in the assessment.
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
WYOMING: Program Summary                      December^ 2002
                                                                     3-202

-------
                          Class System (A.B.C), Fishery Based Uses and Warm Water vs.
                          Cold Water
                          Game Fish (Warm Water and Cold Water Game Fish), Non-game
                          Fish and Aquatic Life Other than Fish
NamthwBlocfttMfalnWQS
• Numeric Btofeilnto
         rwrtonrttoft of
 aquatic retources to a
Formal/informal numeric procedures exist to support ALU decisions.
under development (Numeric biocriteria are in use but are still being
refined and are not yet incorporated in WVs water quality
standards.)	
    assessment of aquatic resources
    cause and effect determinations
    permitted discharges
    monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
    watershed based management
__^_^^^^^^^^—   j,,,,,,,,,,,^^    	
Trend analysis in watershed improvement projectss ancI following
degradation resulting from construction projects and spills.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  H^«i^:'.;' iaasisg^^
                               site-specific
                               paired watersheds
                               regional (aggregate of sites)

                               chemical and physical filters)
                               Other:		
                               is identified by the field investigation to be "reference quality"
                               Jd%ras^
                                ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                elevation
                                stream type
                                multivariate grouping
                                jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                other:
                                reference sites linked to ALU
                                reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                conditions
  WYOMING: Program Summary
                                              December 2002
                                                                                                 3-203

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                               UD
        benthos (100-500 samples/year; single season, multiple sites-not at
        watershed level)
        fish
        periphyton
        other:
  ftmaillt M*
 ' UVIIUHM
                            : |i  Surber, dipnet; 500-600 micron mesh
                               riffle/run (cobble)
                            •  500 count
                            ",  combination-genus, species
  Parlphyton

  ;'.   habitat twiocflon
  natural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.)
J  riffle/run (cobble)
3S...  «abpte processing < <    I  WYDEQ's periphyton program is under development. Samples have been collected,
?T; ' i'"e?isl' 'f!^.  .'.',;'! J_'!'  ' '\  but analysis protocols are yet to be developed.
,:l    taxonomy    '     	;  under development	
l^ibMKiinciimntS  = ?'..-  -i  visual based, quantitative measurements, hydrogeomorphology, pebble counts
M;   '('"->"."  ",:.?£    ;•"::-     1  (Wolman), streambank stability (Bauer and Burton - EPA910/R-93-017), pool quality
                             j  (Bauer and Burton); performed with bioassessments	
                            :j  standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
                             j  training for biologists, taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
  Data Analysis and Interpretation
             i tools and   ,.
                               UD
        summary tables, illustrative graphs
        para metric ANOVAs
        multivariate analysis
        biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)
        disturbance gradients
        other:
                               95" percentile of reference population
j|    dg8^|nyajfment>i .  '•   25* percentile of reference population
                                     repeat sampling (select sites ere sampled annually to
                                     document annual variability)
                                     precision (side^by-side sampling at 10% of stations; Data
                                     Quality Objectives for density and number of taxa)
                                     sensitivity
                                     bias
                                     accuracy
      Storage                '   STORET, EDAS, and internal spreadsheets
      R^val and analysis •  |;  EGAS
WYOMING: Program Summary
                    December 2002
3-204

-------
 AMERICAN SAMOA
 Contact Information

 Edna Buchan, Water Program Manager
 American Samoa Environmental Protection Agency (ASEPA)
 Executive Office Building • Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799
 Phone 684/633-2304 • Fax 684/633-5801
 email: ednabuchan@hotmail.com
 website: http://www.asg-Qov.com/aQencies/epa.asg htm
 Program Description

 American (Amerika) Samoa is a group of six Polynesian islands in the South Pacific. Located fourteen degrees
 below the equator, it is the United States' southern-most territory.

 The American Samoa Environmental Protection Agency (ASEPA) develops and implements programs that protect
 environmental and public health from harmful impacts on air and water quality. USEPA works in partnership with
 ASEPA and provides funding and technical assistance to carry out environmental programs.  ASEPA activities
 include water quality monitoring, inspecting facilities and new developments for compliance with environmental
 regulations, preparing responses to hazardous material releases, advocating practices that decrease and prevent
 pollution, and educating the public on environmental issues and practices.

 American Samoa does not have a biological assessment program in place, and has no immediate plans for
 implementing a reassessment program. The American Samoa Water Quality Standards contain no numeric
 biocriteria. Wording in standards that states that Fresh Surface Water and Wetlands "shall be protected to support
 the propagation of indigenous aquatic and terrestrial life" may be considered narrative criteria.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Personal communication (email), Edna Buchan, 11/26/2001.
AMERICAN SAMOA: Program Summary             December 2002                                       3*205

-------
                           THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
AMERICAN SAMOA: Program Summary
December 2002
3-206

-------
                                                                                                                                    I
 Commonwealth of Northern

 Mariana Islands (CNMI)


 Contact Information
 Peter C. Houk, Marine Biologist
 CNMI Division of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
 P.O. Box 501304 • Saipan, MP 96950
 Phone 670/664-8505 • Fax 670/664-8540
 email: peter.houk@saipan.com
 website: http://www.deQ.gov.mp/
  Program Description

  NOTE: Since few freshwater sources exist on the Islands, all information In this program summary refers to CNMI's
  marine environments (CNMI has only  two or three, very small, perennial streams. CNMI's dynamic tropical marine
  system requires different approaches and techniques than are used by the states to develop blocrlteria.)

  The objective of CNMI's Marine Monitoring Program is to monitor CNMI's reefs, lagoon, and reef flats with regards to benthic
  communities, macroinvertebrate and fish abundances, and water quality. In addition, CNMI has a biodiversity list of all
  organisms encountered in CNMI and a reference collection. CNMI Water Quality Standards clearly state that benthic
  communities can not be altered due to a discharge (Section 7.12 (d)). Any significant changes would be changes from 1)
  previous conditions at the same site or 2) changes from a similar reference site. The goal is to gather as much baseline data in
  as many different areas as possible to use for comparisons. Last year, a "State of the Reef Report" was completed which
  comprises all of the results from monitoring efforts.

  In 2001, the focus was on assessments of nearshore coral reef systems surrounding Saipan and Rota. The 2000/2001 State of
  the Reef Reports were produced summarizing past and present coral reef data for Saipan and Rota. Though it would be
  impossible to survey the entire coral reef system around CNMI with current resources, there are approximately 20 sites
  established for intensive data collection on a yearly basis. The goal is to continue to enhance CNMI's inleragency marine
  monitoring group composed  of Coastal Resources Management, Division of Fish and Wildlife, and Division of Environmental
  Quality. Assessments of existing and additional sites on  Rota, Saipan, Tinian, and other Northern Islands will be conducted and
  included in the next Reef Report (2002). Data will be used for future assessments of natural disasters, potential anthropogenic
  disturbances/development, and overall biological health.

  In 2002, the entire  Saipan Lagoon, covering several watersheds, will also be surveyed to assess and understand how upland
  runoff (nonpoint source pollution) may be affecting this valuable resource. The entire lagoon will be divided into habitats and
  quantitative and qualitative data from each habitat will be gathered. Once completed, existing aerial photographs will be
  scanned and remote sensing techniques will delineate the habitats found. The end result will be used to examine correlations
  between water quality, drainage areas, other areas of concern, and the lagoon habitat. This project is also required by the Army
  Corps of Engineers in order to proceed with a master drainage plan for areas associated with Saipan's Lagoon.  Lagoon survey
  work is currently a joint project between NOAA's Coastal Resource Management Program and DEQ. Hopefully, the Division of
  Fish and Wildlife will be involved in this project in 2002 as well.

  CNMI's reef monitoring program is based on site selection.  Sites that have "concerns" or "disturbances" are selected, as well as
  several reference sites. There are many more habitats in the nearshore coral reef communities around CNMI than are found in
  the Saipan Lagoon, hence the difference in methods.  Also, weather conditions prohibit surveys on windward sides of the islands
  most of the year. All of this data is very useful for  understanding baseline water quality conditions, and these data are used for
  assessment when and if projects are proposed that involve a discharge.

  CNMI's program can not follow the same type of biocriteria monitoring program implemented in any of the U.S. states. There is a
  very dynamic tropical marine system surrounding CNMI which warrants the use of techniques different than those used by our
  State counterparts.
  Documentation and Further information

  Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands Water Quality Assessment Report 305(b), April 2000

  Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands Water Quality Assessment Report 305(6;, 2002
  (Interested parties can contact Peter Houk, CNMI DEQ. or EPA Region 9 for a copy of either report)

  CNMI State of the Reef Report. 2000

  CNMI Nonpoint Source and Marine Monitoring Program information: http://www.deq.gov.mp/NPS/default.htm

CNMI: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                          3-207

-------
  Commonwealth  of Northern
  Mariana Islands

  Contact Information
  Peter C. Houk, Marine Biologist
  CNMI Division of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
  P.O. Box 501304 • Saipan, MP 96950
  Phone 670/664-8505 • Fax 670/664-8540
  email: peter.houk@saipan.com
  Programmatic Elements
              water qualtty
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other: public information and awareness
 AppteaM* moaJtorfnfl
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose)
(special projects only)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
(comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin
other
 Stream  Miles* (pertains to coral reef monitoring)
 Total miles
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology                           n/a
     fully supporting for 305(b)                                     n/a
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                              n/a
     listed for 303(d)                                             n/a
     number of sites sampled on the reef (on an annual basis)            20
     number of miles assessed per site                       site specific
The above section is not applicable to CNMI's monitoring program since no stream monitoring is conducted. For lagoon surveys.
CNMI plans to intensively survey and create habitat maps for the entire Saipan Lagoon system.  This covers several watersheds.
CNMI's outer reef monitoring program is based on site selection - sites that have "concerns" or "disturbances," as welt as several
reference sites.  There are many more habitats in the nearshore coral reef communities around CNMI than are found in the Saipan
Lagoon, hence the difference in methods.  Also, weather conditions prohibit surveys on windward sides of the islands most of the
year. All of these data are very useful for understanding baseline waler quality conditions, and these data are used for assessment
when and if projects are proposed that involve a discharge.
CNMI: Program Summary
              December 2002
                                                                     3-208

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
                              Class System (A,B,C)

                              AA - top quality marine, A - marine non-recreational
                              1 - surface water (runoff mainly, no rivers) highest quality,
                              2 - surface water non-recreational
Namttv* Btocttterla In WQS


Numeric Btocriterfa In WQS
                              Formal/informal numeric procedures used to support narrative
                              biocriteria are determined by the best available data.

                              none (Numeric biocriteria are located in yearly reports on monitoring
                              activities. Each site differs with respect to benthic communities and
                              CNMI's WQS uses the term "shall not differ substantially from those
                              where similar conditions exist")

  data   fl-.toxicttytesttng and
  chernicalspecfflc criteria)
                                 assessment of aquatic resources
                                 cause and effect determinations
                                 permitted discharges
                                 monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

                                 watershed based management
  1 In fiii nf t%lrt n > «mtTti>rrt'/
  Wocrtterto In maWna
  management decMora
  regarding restoration of
  aquatic resources to a
  designated ALU
                             A ponding basin was established on Rota Island in response to
                             CNMI DEQ's monitoring results.  There are also other small projects
                             similar to this. DEQ is collecting baseline data with the intention of
                             using it to assess BMPs and aid future decision-making.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
  Number of reference site*
                             5 total
  Reference •«•
  determinations
  Reference site criteria
 CfMncteftuUlon of
 reference sites wttUn a

 Stream «tratif)c«tion within  „
 ' region*! reference -;     :
 AtWMJOnal Information
                                 site-specific

                                 paired watersheds

                                 regional (aggregate of sites)

                                 professional judgment

                                 other: based on benthic community composition
                             Reference sites are chosen based on similar geological/physical
                             features (slope, substrate, etc.). They are sites similar in community
                             composition that are not subjected to the discharge in question.
                             There are usually several on each island in CNMI.
                                 historical conditions
                                 least disturbed sites

                                 gradient response

                                 professional judgment

                                 other:
                                 ecoregions (or some aggregate)

                                 elevation

                                 stream type

                                 multivariate grouping

                                 jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)

                                 other:
                                 reference sites linked to ALU (in some cases)

                                 reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards

                                 some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                 conditions (in some cases)
•Characterization of reference sites does not apply because CNMI uses a degree of community change based on reference versus
test sites.
CNMI: Program Summary
                                               December 2002
3-209

-------
  Field  and  Lab Methods*
                                    benthos (<100 samples/yea/i single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)

                                    fish (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites - broad coverage)

                                    periphyton

                                    other: waterfowl (100-500 samples/year; multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad
                                    coverage for watershed level)
  BwrthM*
  ,    sampling gear
                               Transect lines, underwater photo equipment, hammer, measuring tapes, diving gear.
                               underwater slates/pencils
                               genus and species
                               speargun, reference books
                               species
 Ouattyasi
                              1 quantitative measurements, benthic coverage estimates of major benthos, basic water quality
                               parameter measurements, abundances offish and macroinvertebrates, and biodiversity of all
                       	; organisms present; performed wilrt bioassessments	

                       ram   : standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and training for
                           :   ; biologists, and specimen archival

•Following is a summary of biological sampling methods used in the reef - see CNMI's State of the Reef Report for details
    Three 50 meter transect lines are secured parallel to the shorelirje (laid end-to-end, 150m total length), and marked with a
    sediment trap holder and re-bar driven securely into the reef.   '
    For benthics, an underwater camera is used to take still photographs of .5-m quadrats placed at all even numbers along the
    transect line. For each photo the bottom right comer of the quadrat is aligned with the corresponding transect line distance.
•   Coral communities are examined using the point-quarter method described by Randall et al., (1988). A dive  knife is
    haphazardly tossed 16 times along the three transects. For each toss the distance to the nearest living coral colony is noted
    for each of four quadrants, as well as the diameter and taxonomic name.
•   Fish abundance is determined by a single observer swimming along the transect lines recording data.  Counts of all fishes
    within 5 meters of each side of the transect line are recorded. Fishes are identified to the family level.
    All macroinvertebrates within 2 meters of each  side of the transect line are counted. These data were presented as
    abundances per (100-m"2) of reef on each of three transects. Macroinvertebrates are either identified to genus or grouped by
    life form, depending on abundances.
    Sediment traps provide sedimentation rate data from sites where, sedimentation is a concern.
    Water samples are taken for chemistry.
 Data Analysis and Interpretation
 Data analysts tooto and
                                    summary tables, illustrative graphs

                                    parametric ANOVAs

                                    multivariate analysis

                                    biological metrics

                                    disturbance gradients
                                    other distribution analysis apd cluster analysis
             thtvahoM*
              Tipalrmentln
      amuWvarlatelndox
                               5* percentile of reference population (Rvalue of .05 is cut off)
 ^EvwuaaOli (if paffoi'ilMUN
                                    repeat sampling

                                    precision

                                    sensitivity

                                    bias

                                    accuracy
      Retrieval and analysis
                               MS Access, Excel, Word, Arcview CIS and Photo documentation

                               Excel
CNMI: Program Summary
                                                  December 2002
                                                                                                              3-210

-------
 PUERTO RICO and the

 U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS


 Contact Information
 James Kurtenbach, Aquatic Biologist
 USEPA - Region II, Division of Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
 2890 Woodbridge Avenue, Bldg, 209 » Edison, NJ 08837
 Phone 732/321-6695 » Fax 732/321-6616
 email: kurtenbach .iames@epa.gov
 Program Description

 Puerto Rico is presently evaluating Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (RBPs) for mountain streams. According to
 the Water Monitoring Plan for fiscal year 2002, the Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board (PREQB), in
 coordination with EPA Region II, will continue to work on the development of biological indicators for stream
 monitoring.  PREQB is responsible for current monitoring activities which include ambient water quality monitoring,
 intensive water quality studies, and 305(b) reporting. The 2000 Cycle 305(b) Report doesn't include any biological
 information (aside from limited wetland loss data). The EPA (ORD Coastal 2000 Program) conducted an EMAP
 study on the estuaries of Puerto Rico, which included benthic macrainvertebrate sampling.

 The U.S. Virgin Islands 2000 Water Quality Assessment reported that there are "no perennial streams on any of
 the islands;  intermittent streams can only be seen after heavy rainfall. The absence of large freshwater resources
 and perennial streams means that guts (watercourses) form the basis for watershed management in the territory."
 Also, the Virgin Islands primarily assess coastal waters and estuaries, but "no monitoring for biological effects is
 conducted for lack of baseline standards for Virgin Islands conditions. According to the Virgin Islands multi-year
 monitoring strategy, the Department of Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR) will explore options for
 implementing a biological component of the Ambient Monitoring Program. This may include developing a
 partnership with NOAA or another agency with similar monitoring objectives."
 Documentation and Further Information

 Goals and Progress of Statewide Water Quality Management Planning: Puerto Rico 1998-1999,2000 Cycle
 305(b) Report. Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board. November 2000.

 2000 Water Quality Assessment for the United States Virgin Islands, 2000 305(b) Report. Department of Planning
 and Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Protection (DPNR/DEP). April 2001.
PUERTO RICO and the
U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS: Program Summary            December 2002                                       3-211

-------
  PUERTO RICO and the
  U.S.  VIRGIN ISLANDS

  Contact Information
  James Kurtenbach. Aquatic Biologist
  USEPA - Region II, Division of Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
  2890 Woodbridge Avenue, Bldg. 209 • Edison, NJ 08837
  Phone 732/321-6695 • Fax 732/321-6616
  email: kurtenbach .ja mesgfeepa.gpy
 Programmatic Elements

 wtthln ov*reil Water qurtfe
- k.-.i=>:cl -l.•  .->^'-'        ^Ty" -t
 program
 Not currently used
                                  problem identification (screening)
                                  nonpoint source assessments
                                  monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
                                  ALL! determinations/ambient monitoring
                                  promulgated into state watef quality standards as biocriteria
                                  support of antidegradation
                                  evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                                  TMDL assessment and monitoring
                                  other
  Appl
                                 targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
                                 projects only)
                                 fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (special
                                 projects only)
                                 probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                 probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                                 rotating basin
                                 other:
  Stream Miles
  NOTE: These stream and river miles apply only to Puerto Rico.
  The U.S. Virgin Islands reports no stream miles.
 Total miles
 (determined using RF3)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
     fully supporting for 305(b)
     partiaiiy/non-supporting for 305(b)
     listed for 303(d)
     number of sites sampled
     number of miles assessed per site
                                                 5,394.2

                                                      0
                                                     n/p
                                                     n/a
                                                     n/a
                                                     n/a
                                                     n/a
'Specific biological studies have been conducted, but there are no ongoing projects. However. Puerto Rico does conduct other
regular chemical and physical monitoring. According to PR's 2000 305(b) report, during the 1998 -1999 monitoring cycle there were
5,394 total assessed miles; 4,297 evaluated segments; and 1,096 monitored segments. Of the 1,096.7 river miles monitored for
Aquatic Life Use, 222.4 miles were determined to be fully supporting! 16.8 miles were partially supporting, and 857.5 miles were
non-supporting.
PUERTO RICO and the
U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS: Program Summary
                                              December 2002
                                                                                                      3-212

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and  Decision-Making

.  ALU daalgnatJon baato •V;' >.  Class System (A,B,C)

                (In atate
  Narrative Btocriteria In WQS
              to* In WQS
                           Standards list definitions for the following: pelagic and ptanktonic
                           species, propagation and preservation of desirable species.

                           none (Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands have no biocriteria.
                           According to Puerto Rico's 2000 30S(b) report, there were
                           expectations of achieving/developing some, but no monitoring
                           strategy has been submitted as of yet.)

                           none
UM* of blomanrnatrt data

With othar •RVBonmantfll
data (
chemi

Not currently used
  data (e.g., toxidty testing and
    mical specific criteria)
assessment of aquatic resources

cause and effect determinations

permitted discharges

monitoring (e.g.. improvements after mitigation)

watershed based management
  Uaaa of
  Mocrttarta In making
  management dacWona
  regarding restoration of
  aquatic resouroM to a
  deaignated ALU
                             none
  Reference Site/Condition Development*
  Number of reforenca altaa
                             none
Referenceslte
. •> f
R«f»renceaita criteria

•WfamiK** Alteft uriHiIn m '
rofcionai context \ i .< ,./ \ / -


-,' ,,vVV • ' '--'- '- ; , v. ,; C:V ';
AddWof«llnfonTiatton





site-specific
paired watersheds
regional (aggregate of sites)
professional judgment
other:










—
historical conditions
least disturbed sites
gradient response
professional judgment
other:
ecoregions (or some aggregate)
elevation
stream type
multivariate grouping
jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
other:
reference sites linked to ALU
reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
conditions
•This section is not applicable - no biological monitoring is conducted in Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands, thus neither territory
has reference sites.
PUERTO RICO and the
U.S. VIRGIN (SUNOS: Program Summary
                                            December 2002
                                                                   3-213

-------
  Field and Lab Methods*
^•••unhfan.a mmmmmmmit
:• • , . • :\






benthos
fish
penphyton
other:
not applicable
Qrafltv ttsumnc* araamn i not aoolicable
  Data Analysis and Interpretation*
  Dalaatwiytto took and
summary tables, illustrative graphs
parametric ANOVAs
multivariate analysis
biological metrics
disturbance gradients
other:
                                 repeat sampling
                                 precision
                                 sensitivity
                                 bias
                                 accuracy
                             Inot applicable
                             not applicable

These sections are not applicable since no biological monitoring is conducted in Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands.
PUERTO RICO and the
U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS: Program Summary
             Decembor 2002
3-214

-------
 CONFEDERATED  TRIBES

 OF THE COLVILLE RESERVATION


 Contact Information
 Gary Passmore, Office of Environmental Trust
 Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation
 P.O. Box 150 • Nespelem, WA 99155
 Phone 509/634-2200 • Fax 509/634-4116
 email: ga rv.pa ssmoreiBJcolvilletribes.com
 website: http://www.colvilletribes.com/
 Program Description

 The Colville Indian Reservation land base covers 1.4 million acres or 2,100 square acres located in North Central
 Washington, primarily in Okanogan and Ferry counties. The Reservation consists of tribally owned lands held in
 federal trust status for the Confederated Tribes, land owned by individual Colville tribal members (most of which is
 held in federal trust status), and land owned by others (described as fee property and taxable by counties).
 Colville Reservation lands are diverse with natural resources including standing timber, streams, rivers, lakes,
 minerals, varied terrain, native plants and wildlife.

 Although the Confederated  Tribes of the Colville Reservation do have federally approved water quality standards,
 the Tribes' Office of Environmental Trust doesn't use biological assessment methods as a  means to assess water
 quality. In 2001, the Tribes gave permission to the State of Washington Department of Ecology to conduct some
 biological assessments on the reservation, but the results of those surveys are not yet complete. The primary
 obstacle to conducting bioassessment has been cost. The water quality monitoring program is reevaluated every
 year, and it is possible the Tribes may implement biological monitoring in the future.
 Documentation and Further Information

 Personal Communication (email), Gary Passmore, 11/28/2001.
COLVILLE RESERVATION: Program Summary
                                         December 2002
3-215

-------
                           THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
COLVILLE RESERVATION. Program Summary
December 2002
                                              3-216

-------
 NEZ PERCE  TRIBE
 Contact Information

 Ann Stoirar, Water Planner
 Nez Perce Tribe Department of Natural Resources
 P.O. Box 365 • Lapwai. Idaho 83540
 Phone 208/843-7368 • Fax 208/843-7371
 email: anns@nezperce.org
 website: http://www.nezperce.org/
 Program Description

 The Nez Perce Reservation is located in North Central Idaho. The Tribal Department of Natural Resources
 consists of the Land Services, Cultural Resources, Wildlife Resources, Forest Resources, Water Resources, and
 Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Programs. These programs focus on delivering resource
 management services on the Reservation and participating in the planning and decisions of land management
 activities affecting the Nez Perce Treaty area. The programs provide protection of reserved treaty-rights in all
 areas to their best abilities. Department administration is structured to facilitate an interdisciplinary approach in
 meeting these needs.

 Currently the Tribe is collecting baseline chemical and physical habitat data on Reservation waterbodies and will,
 eventually, be establishing its own water quality standards for the reservation area. The Nez Perce Tribe may
 soon promulgate the standards USEPA is developing for Indian country, with the idea of refining them from
 narrative standards to both chemical and biological criteria. The Tribe has used the State of Idaho Beneficial Use
 Assessment Procedure (BURP) for reservation water bodies in 1997, 1998 and 1999 and would like to adopt its
 own protocols for beneficial use assessment.

 The Tribe recently obtained funds to begin the EMAP bioassessment procedure for the reservation. This will be
 accomplished through participation in the EMAP Western Pilot and methods will be developed based on EMAP
 protocols.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Personal Communication (email), Ann Storrar, 10/01/2001.
NEZ PERCE TRIBE: Program Summary
                                            December 2002
                                                                                                3-217

-------
                           THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
NEZ PERCE TRIBE: Program Summary
December 2002
                                              3-218

-------
 ONEIDA NATION OF WISCONSIN
 Contact Information

 James L. Snitgen, Water Resources Team Leader
 Oneida Nation of Wisconsin, Environmental, Health and Safety Department
 P.O. Box 365, 3759 W. Mason Street « Oneida, Wl 64155
 Phone 920/497-5812 • Fax 920/496-7883
 email: isnitgen@oneidanation.org
 website: http://www.oneidanation.org
 Program Description
 Objectives
 The Oneida Tribe's current and future uses of information gathered using bioassessment include protection, restoration,
 assessing impacts, monitoring changes, as well as driving policy and promoting knowledge and appreciation of aquatic
 resources.
 Background
 Although there had been some invertebrate and fish surveys performed on the Reservation over the last twenty years or so, the
 development of a formal biological monitoring program was initiated in 2000. Tri-annual fishery surveys at established monitoring
 sites have been performed since 1997. In 1999, the Tribe began sampling invertebrate communities and immediately began
 using the findings as tools. An onsite aquatic invertebrate taxonomy laboratory was also established in 1999 and equipped with
 scopes, literature, drying oven, hood, etc.  In 2000, qualitative sampling of invertebrates was performed at five stream sites and a
 quantitative study of one lake was initiated to determine the effectiveness of BMPs in the surrounding basin. In the meantime.
 SOPs were developed for qualitative and quantitative methods for lakes and wadeable streams and metrics were researched and
 tested. Contracts were set up for the picking and sorting of invertebrate samples (UW-Superior) and for toxicity testing
 (Environmental Consulting and Testing) of certain waterbodies. In 2001, quantitative samples were collected at three stream
 sites and the lake, as well as three more sites being sampled qualitatively. Stream types have not been formalized, but four
 reference sites have been established:
 1.  Thomberry Creek (at forest Drive), a first order cold water system,  exhibiting "pristine" conditions during 1999 and 2000.
 2.  Trout Creek (at County FF), a 3" order cold water system, exhibiting "good" to "very good" conditions.
 3.  Oneida Creek (at VanBoxtel Road), a 3'" order cool water system, exhibiting "good" conditions in 2000.  A very rare fingernet
 caddisfly. Wormatdia moesta, known to occur only in "small, cold, rapid streams" has been collected at this site.
 4.  Duck Creek (at Seminary Road), a 4* order warm water system, the largest stream on the Reservation. The water quality
 and invertebrate community represent "good" conditions.  The same stream is in "poor" condition before entering tiie Reservation
 from the south near the Town of Freedom.
 The streams at these sites represent the reference conditions for all stream types on the Reservation. In 2002, qualitative or
 quantitative sampling will be conducted at approximately 30 invertebrate sites and mid-summer fish IBIs will be conducted at
 eleven sites.

 Setting/Land Use
 The entire Reservation, covering approximately 64,500 acres, is in the  Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains ecoregion (Omernick
 1987). At this time, the main sources of impairment are sedimentation  (construction and agriculture) and nutrients (agriculture,
 suburban lawns, golf courses). The Reservation straddles the boundary of Brown and Outagamie Counties and includes all or
 portions of the City of Green Bay, Villages of Ashwaubenon and Howard, and the Towns of Hobart, Oneida and Pittsfield.  Eleven
 additional municipalities rest within the watersheds flowing through the  Reservation.  All surface waters within the Oneida
 Reservation drain to the Great Lakes Basin (Lake Michigan).  There are four separate surface water drainages, bearing
 numerous tributaries:
 1)  Duck Creek River - Fish Creek, Oneida Creek, Trout Creek, Lancaster Brook, Beaver Dam Creek. Silver Creek (Lower Green
            2) South Branch of the Suamico River (Upper Green Bay Basin); 3) Ashwaubenon Creek - North Branch, South
Bay Basin);;	..            .      .	
Branch, Hemlock Creeks (Fox River Basin); and 4) Dutchman Creek (Fox River Basin)

Land use percentages surrounding the sites will be mapped this summer (2002), and the first formal biomonitoring report is being
produced.
Metrics and Biocriteria Development
While the Oneida Nation does not have federally approved water quality standards, the Tribe is implementing a water quality
program with bioassessment surveys under tribal law. The inclusion of biocriteria into the Tribe's WQS has been delayed due to
urgent water resource issues that have come up, rather than lack of information. The appropriate metrics to accurately predict
responses in benthic invertebrate communities for the area are fairly well proven at this time. The metrics currently being used
(for streams) are the Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI), Taxa Richness, dominance, percent clingers and in some cases
Ephemeroptera. Plecoptera and Trichoptera (EPT) and E, P and T taken separately.  The most common impacts are due to
sedimentation and organic loading. Because of the limited number and type of streams within the Reservation, it is believed that
the appropriate reference sites to represent all of the stream types have  been selected.  A final designation of these has not been
made, nor are biocriteria being submitted for inclusion in the WQS until there is a chance to conduct more sampling  of test sites
to compare with the reference sites.
  Documentation and  Further Information

  Personal communication (letter), James L. Snitgen, 1/2002.
  Hard copies of documents including the Oneida Nation's WQS; SOPs for the Qualitative Sampling (#BI002) and Quantitative
  Sampling (#BI003) of Streams for Benthic Invertebrates: Annual Water Resources Report (future reports will contain fish and
  macroinvertebrate data)
ONEIDA NATION: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                            3-219

-------
 ONEIDA NATION OF WISCONSIN
  Contact Information
  James Snitgen, Water Resources Team Leader
  Oneida Nation of Wisconsin, Environmental, Health and Safety Department
  P.O. Box 365, 3759 W. Mason Street • Oneida, Wl 54155
  Phone 920/497-5812 • Fax 920/496-7883
  email: isnilgen@oneiclanalion.org
 Programmatic Elements
   iilbloWMwrnent   .
            liMtol'quality
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALL) determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other
          monitoring
targeted (i.e., sites selected Ifor specific purpose)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin
other
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology
     fully supporting for 305(b)
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
     listed for 303(d)
     number of sites sampled (in summer 2002)
     number of miles assessed per site
                   233
                    n/a
                    n/a
                    n/a
                     41
              -0.02 miles
              (25 meterls)
ONEIDA NATION: Program Summary
             December 2002
                                                                 3-220

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making*
 ALUdMlgnation bails;;!?;~>'-' Warm Water vs. Cold Water
 AtU dMignattons In Mat*!.     Two designations: cold water ecosystems, warm water ecosystems
 watef quality atandatfs  J.
  NairaUvaBtocrtterialnWQS
  NuWsrtc Biocriteria j
                              Inclusion of narrative and numeric biocriteria into the Tribe's WQS is
                              under development, as is nutrient criteria. Tribal WQS include
                              biological and water quality language but this does not constitute
                              formal biocriteria.
                              see above
• lii M^Btetf MMMnwiiJEfl^
 data {e.g., toxfdtytesting and
 chemical specific criteria)
                                  assessment of aquatic resources
                                  cause and effect determinations
                                  permitted discharges
                                  monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
                                  watershed based management
        f blrjaaaaaaniaiitf ~
  blocrftaria In making  ..';;'<
  management dectelonc
  aquatic raaourcM to ai
  designated AtU
                              Macroinvertebrate community data were used to designate one
                              stream as a cold water resource.  RBPs were conducted following a
                              stormwater spill.
*Water quality standards were federally approved in 1996 and then rescinded following a lawsuit.

  Reference Site/Condition Development
  d*t»nnliiatlon*
                                  site-specific
                                  paired watershed
                                  regional (aggregate of sites)
                                  professional judgment (Qualitative data gathered initially on
                                  candidate reference sites. Most "pristine" of each stream type
                                  used as reference-stilt in early stages of determining all
                                  necessary reference sites)
                                  other:
  Refar«n«.rucrtt«ria
                             water quality, benthic invertebrate community (Hilsenhoff Biotic Index),
                             land use, physical habitat, geomorphology, qualitative benthos
                             investigations                               	
  refemic* aitea wWiln ia^K
 Tsgional context       VL:
                                  historical conditions
                                  least disturbed sites
                                  gradient response
                                  professional judgment
                                  other:
                                  ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                  elevation
                                  stream type (all within Reservation/all in same ecoregion)
                                  multivariate grouping
                                  jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                  other:
Additional Information > :L;;
                             UD
                             U£
                             7~
                                  reference sites linked to ALU
                                  reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                  some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                  conditions
ONEIDA NATION: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                        3-221

-------
  Field and Lab Methods*
                                   benthos (<100 samples per year; single season, multiple sites - broad
                                   coverage)
                                   fish (<100 samples per year; multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad
                                   coverage for watershed level)
                                   periphyton
                                   other:
'lll;i;|lwbftats«tecflonj

 *   taxonomy
                               Surber, D-frame. collect by hand;, 500 micron mesh
                               riffle/run (cobble)
                               300 count
                               species
FWi
san^Hnggear
)K _ ; ..; habitat selection '.!.'; h-: '"
-,^pH"«^-'r^ ' , •' ' ., -'%'is'~ •- !^ § '•
^IpSI^^-Pf0^**-'*!:?.; :•;
MiiiWiaimple • ; '^W-
4;:f:"5"^WfH»ny.: ' '''^::?ti!'"

Qu.my«.ur«nc« program
4NfltllMV
backpack electrofisher; 1/4" mesh
previously established monitoring sites and/or sites suitable for long term
monitoring
none
species
visual based, quantitative measurements; performed with bioassessments
standard operating procedures, periodic meetings and training for biologists,
sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
The Oneida Nation has sampled fish for four years and began a maoroinvertebrate program in 2001 using the RBP habitat rating
score sheet. The Tribe's first herpetile survey Is planned for summer 2002 to collect baseline data on two riverways and three
wetlands. Oneida also plans to begin using macrophytes as indicator^ in wetlands.

  Data Analysis and Interpretation
Data anaiyaia tools and
iHQtliOQB
JY. " 1
,- ;> -', - ' . : - /-'•'•
•pi:.'.- - .->.-~~^-.
JlillikV .,••- MKXii.'-'.
Sill!.?':'-;-'-- - • I.'"? "if flip"
MurUmetrtcthiwihokU -'
/
/

/




summary tables, illustrative graphs
parametric ANOVAs
multivariate analysis
biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index and return
single metrics)
disturbance gradients
other:

      uflMws acores
                             :  information not provided
 k  - definingfcnpaimwntha'. \   information not provided
: ,iy •   rnultlnielrtc index   '  .
                                   repeat sampling
                                   precision (replicates)
                                   sensitivity
                                   bias
                                   accuracy
  Biological data
 V:   Storage   •   '
 |   Re*teval and analysis
                              Macroinvertebrate data in Corel Quattro Pro; fish data in MS Access
                              information not provided
ONEIDA NATION: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                           3-222

-------
 PASSAMAQUODDY TRIBE,
 PLEASANT POINT RESERVATION

 Contact Information
 Deirdre Whitehead
 Passamaquoddy Tribe at Pleasant Point
 P.O. Box 343 • Perty, Maine 04667
 Phone 207/853-2600
 email: deirdre@wabanaki.com
 website: http://www.wabanaki.com
 Program Description

 The Passamaquoddy Tribe at Pleasant Point is located in coastal Maine, near the border of New Brunswick. The
 Tribe's Environmental Department is responsible for the health of the natural resources under Tribal Management.
 This responsibility begins by assessing and mapping these resources and related risks, then developing programs
 to insure that these natural resources are protected. While the Passamaquoddy Tribe does not have federally
 approved water quality standards, it is implementing a water quality program with limited bioassessment surveys
 under tribal law. Current water quality work includes testing salt water for fecal coliform and phytoplankton in a
 cooperative arrangement with the Maine Department of Marine Resources (DMR) and the Cobscook Bay
 Resource Center. This work provides the DMR with information to manage closure of clam flats.
 Documentation and Further Information

 Personal communication (email), Deirdre Whitehead, 11/30/2001.
PASSAMAQUODDY TRIBE: Program Summary
December 2002
3-223

-------
                           THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PASSAMAQUODDY TRIBE: Program Summary
                                      December 2002
                                                                                    3-224

-------
 PYRAMID LAKE PAIUTE TRIBE
 Contact Information

 Dan Mosley, Environmental Specialist
 Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe, Environmental Department
 P.O. Box 256 • Nixon, NV 89424
 Phone 775/574-0101 • Fax 775/574-1025
 email: dmosle¥@powernet.net
 website: http://plpt.nsn.us/
 Program Description

 The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe's Reservation is located thirty five miles northeast of Reno, Nevada in a remote
 desert area situated in the counties of Washoe, Lyon, and Storey. The area of the reservation contains 475,000
 acres or 742.2 square miles.

 The Environmental Department of the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe (PLPT) has been conducting bioassessments on
 waterbodies within the reservation border since 1975. An ecological study on Pyramid Lake was conducted from
 1975 through 1977. A comprehensive bioassessment study was conducted on the lower Truckee River during the
 summer of 1981. In 1989, a regular Rapid Bioassessment (RBA) program was established for the Truckee River,
 following the first EPA bioassessment training in Reno, Nevada.

 PLPT is in the process of establishing standardized protocols for assessing the biological and physical conditions
 of wadeable streams within the exterior boundaries of the Pyramid Lake  Paiute Indian Reservation. The Tribe will
 use protocols outlined in EPA's Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (USEPA 1989).  There are plans to incorporate
 the bench sheets and protocols as outlined by the California Department of Fish and Game (CA DFG) Water
 Pollution Control Laboratory in their California Stream Bioassessment Procedure (May 1999). These technical
 documents describe RBA in more detail. Updating and developing aquatic/riparian RBA techniques is an ongoing
 process.

 The PLPT RBA program will ensure that the information generated can be compatible with the National or State
 EPA bioassessment program, to produce high quality and reliable assessments of stream habitat and water
 quality. A professional aquatic biologist/entomologist will act as the project team leader, backed by an
 interdisciplinary team of two to four biologists and/or technicians.

 Fish and benthic macroinvertebrates  (BMIs) will be identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible
 (genus/species).  The presence or absence of fish and BMIs are proven  indicators of an impaired or healthy
 aquatic system.  Bioassessments can be used to detect impairments to aquatic communities from point and
 nonpoint sources of pollution and for  assessing ambient biological condition. The upper third of riffles will be
 targeted for collecting biological samples because they are the richest habitat for BMIs in wadeable streams.  The
 Tribe's goal is to protect an endangered lake sucker called a "Cui-ui" (Chasmistes cujus}, and the threatened
 Lahontan Cutthroat Trout.

 In summer 2001, the Tribe initiated a RBA program for springs and wetlands. A wetland specialist will act as team
 leader, looking at amphibians, wildlife, BMIs, birds, plants, and water chemistry for each waterbody as indicators of
 an impaired or healthy aquatic system.

 in the future, PLPT plans to explore numeric biocriteria for BMIs on the Truckee River. The Tribe will also begin
 gathering baseline data on the five streams that surround Pyramid Lake. The Tribe's water quality standards are
 currently undergoing review by EPA.
 Documentation and Further Information

 Personal communication (letter), Dan Mosely, 2001.

 The following PLPT department homepages are under development (July 2002):
 Environmental Department http://plpt.nsn.us/modules.php?name=Sections&soD=listarticles&secid=21
 Water Resources Department: http://plpt.nsn.us/modules.php?name=Sections&sop=listarticles&secid=20

PYRAMID LAKE PAIUTE TRIBE: Program Summary    December 2002
3-225

-------
  PYRAMID LAKE PAIUTE TRIBE
  Contact Information
  Dan Mosley, Environmental Specialist
  Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe, Environmental Department
  P.O. Box 256 • Nixon, NV 89424
  Phone 775/574-0101 • Fax 775/574-1025
  email: dmoslev@powernet.net
  Programmatic Elements
                 IjitiK'
                 rqualKy
                           UD
                           UD
                           UD
                           UD
                           UD
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring (to be developed)
promulgated into tribal watdr quality standards as narrative
biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
                      i
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
 AppBcabtonxmtormo
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (specific river
basins or watersheds)
fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin
other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology
     fully supporting for 305(b)
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)
     listed for 303{d)
     number of sites sampled*
     number of miles assessed per site
                  31 +
                13 to 15
•Eight to ten sites are sampled on the Truckee River, covering 31 miles. Five sites on five streams surrounding Pyramid Lake are
also sampled.
PYRAMID LAKE PAIUTE TRIBE: Program Summary    December 2002
                                                                                                   3-226

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
 ALU designation basis
 ALU doilfjniHont 111 state '•
 water quality standards
Fishery Based Uses
under development
  Narrative BkMriteria In WQS
  Numeric BtOcrMsrta In WQS
under development (Narrative biocriteria are incorporated into Pyramid
Lake's water quality standards, but are currently awaiting approval by
EPA Region 9. No formal/informal numeric procedures are used to
support narrative biocriteria.)
under development (The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe will be developing
"scientifically defensible" numeric biocriteria for the Lower Truckee
River over the next several years.)
UMV of IMoftssftMHiiwit ifata
InMsgoMttsssmwnta
wMh other environmental
data (e.g., txndcfty testing and
chemical specific criteria)
biocrtterta In making
management decisions
regarding restoration of
designated ALU
/
UD
UD
UD
UO
assessment of aquatic resources
cause and effect determinations
permitted discharges
monitoring (e.g.. improvements after mitigation)
watershed based management
presently none - to be developed
  Reference Site/Condition Development*
  Number of reference sites
under development
  Reference site
  detarmJnatkMia
      site-specific
      paired watersheds
      regional (aggregate of sites)
      professional judgment
      other:
  Reference site criteria
Based on historical data, what the best conditions should be for that
site. On Truckee River, the Tribe has been using reference
"conditions" based on bioassessment data from 1981 to present.
 Charactertartlon of    ;;:
 reference srteswlthtn a ;$
      historical conditions
      least disturbed sites
      gradient response
      professional judgment
      other:
 Stream stW^crto
 regional reference
 condition*   •:,;' ;•"
      ecoregions (or some aggregate)
      elevation
      stream type
      multivariate grouping
      jurisdictional (within Tribe's boundaries)
      other:
ItfOlTOtflOfl:.':
                              UD
      reference sites linked to ALU
      reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
      some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
      conditions
'Reference site use is currently under development.
PYRAMID LAKE PAIUTE TRIBE: Program Summary    December 2002
                                                                          3-227

-------
  Field and  Lab Methods


;,-'"''
sampling gear
taxonomy
Fish
sampling gear
• habttat selection
; subsampte
taxonomy
!f* «f fc*«fc*
! habitat selection
-.].' sampte processing
jr' , taxonomy
paMt»iM««ssfmnts


'
/
/

benthos (<100 samples/year (3 replicates per riffle site]; single season,
multiple sites - not at watershed level)
fish
periphyton
other:
surber (used 1981 through 2000), kicknet (started in 2001) - 9" x 18" rectangle 500
micron mesh
richest habitat - upper third of riffle
entire sample
genus and species
seine (multiple gill nets), backpack and boat electrofisher
pool/glide
length measurement, biomass - individual, anomalies
study specific
species
natural substrate: brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.)
artificial substrate: collect by hand
multihabitat
chlorophyll a/ phaeophytin, biomass, taxonomic identification
all algae; species level; genus level for soft-bodied algae when possible; diatoms
are not cleared
visual based and quantitative measurements; performed with bioassessments
standard operating procedures, Quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
training for biologist, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival
'Tribal Fisheries conducts fish bioassessments and a Tribal Wetlands staff member conducts amphibian biostudies. Periphyton
sampling is conducted on tribal land by the Desert Research Institute.

 Data Analysis and Interpretation**
                                 summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                 parametric ANOVAs
                                 multivariate analysis
                                 biological metrics
                                 disturbance gradients
                                 other:
                                 repeat sampling
                                 precision
                                 sensitivity
                                 bias
                                 accuracy

                             Quattro Pro and paper files
                             EDAS (under development)
"Data have not yet been analyzed or evaluated. Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe is just beginning to sort/identify the 2001 benthic
macroinvertebrate collections.
PYRAMID LAKE PAIUTE TRIBE: Program Summary    December 2002
                                                                                                       3-228

-------
 SEMINOLE  TRIBE of FLORIDA
 Contact Information

 Bill Dunson, Environmental Scientist
 The Seminole Tribe of Florida, Water Resource Management Department
 6300 Stirling Road • Hollywood, Florida 33024
 Phone 863/902-3200
 email:  Bdunson@semtnbe.com
 website: htlp://www.seminoletribe.com/
 Program Description

 The reservations that comprise the Seminole Tribe of Florida begin around Tampa and extend into the southern tip
 of the state. The Tribe's Water Resource Management Department is responsible for protecting the land and
 water systems within the Reservation while ensuring a sustainable economic and cultural future for the Tribe.
 USEPA has delegated to the Tribe the authority to implement the Clean Water Act within the Tribe's jurisdiction.
 As part of that program, the Tribe implemented a sophisticated monitoring program, adopted federally approved
 water quality standards for the Big Cypress reservation, and is developing standards for the other reservations.

 The Tribe has developed other programs, as well, including spill prevention plans for above ground storage tanks
 and removal programs for underground storage tank facilities. The Tribe actively participates in a number of task
 forces, working groups, and commissions regarding the restoration of the South Florida ecosystem. The Tribe
 spends considerable resources supporting the overall design and implementation of South Florida's environmental
 restoration.

 Currently the Tribe does not use biocriteria in any of its water quality monitoring programs. However, the Tribe is
 involved in a research project conducted by Florida Atlantic University that  includes development of biocriteria
 (primarily for variations in hydroperiod and the effects of restoration), using vegetation and fish as bioindicators.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Personal communication (email), Bill Dunson, 12/4/2001.

  Working Drafts - Bioindicators for wetland change; Presentation on use of data in conducting rapid wetland
  assessments
SEMINOLE TRIBE: Program Summary
December 2002
                                                                                               3-229

-------
                            THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
SEMINOLE TRIBE: Program Summary             December 2002
3-230

-------
 Delaware River  Basin Commission (DRBC)
 Interstate compact: PA, NJ, NY, DE

 Contact Information
  Robert I Limbeck, Watershed Scientist
  Edward Santoro, Monitoring Coordinator
  Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC)
  P.O. Box 7360 • West Trenton. NJ 08628
  Phone 609/883-9500 • Fax 609/883-9522
  email: rlimbeck@drbc.5tate.ni.us
  website: http://www.state.ni.us/drbc/
  Program Description
  The objectives of the Commission's biological monitoring program are presently focused upon the 200-mile long non-tidal
  Delaware River corridor:

      1.   Protection of high quality aquatic life uses in Water Quality Zones 1A through 1E of the Delaware River, from Hancock,
          New York to Trenton, New Jersey
      2.   Development of anti-degradation biological criteria based upon existing water quality
      3.   Definition of longitudinal changes in benthic community structure along the Delaware River corridor, to support
          decisions to maintain or improve water quality where necessary

  DRBC and the National Park Service (NPS) have operated the Scenic Rivers Monitoring Program since the early 1980s. The
  Commission has never used biological criteria for 305(b) assessments or determinations of impairment, other than reports
  arising from fish-tissue toxics analysis and inference of aquatic life use attainment based upon water chemistry.
  Macroinvertebrate biocriteria were developed for DRBC's Special Protection Waters rules issued in 1990, but the criteria were
  later found to be based upon inconsistent and non-representative methods, and have not been used as envisioned during
  development of the Commission's anti-degradation policies.

  With the launch of DRBC's Lower Delaware Monitoring Program in 1999, declaration of most of the non-tidal  Delaware River as
  Wild and Scenic in 2000, and major efforts to update DRBC's comprehensive plan and water quality standards (applicable to
  most of the Delaware River), interest in DRBC's biomonitoring program was renewed.  Meetings with state and local partners
  resulted in the decision that the Commission would bear the primary responsibility for biological monitoring of the Delaware
  River, while each state would regulate and monitor tributaries. With technical support and advice from NJDEP, PADEP, USGS,
  USEPA Region 3, NPS, and the Academy of Natural Sciences. DRBC set out to define goals, objectives, and methods for
  improving its biological assessment program for the river.
  DRBC investigated large-river bioassessment methods and decided to wait for issuance of EPA's large-rivers guidance before
  launching large-scale monitoring in difficult habitats such as pools, rapids, and upper-estuarine reaches. In 2001, DRBC initiated
  an annual benthic survey in 2001 of wadeable riffle, run, and island margin habitats, to develop a benthic index of biological
  integrity for the non-tidal river.  The annual August/September low-flow survey is narrowly defined to eliminate spatial and
  temporal variability, enabling site-to-site, reach-to-reach, and year-to-year comparison of results.  By 2005, DRBC hopes to have
  enough data to create a low-flow benthic IBI  (B-IBI) for wadeable portions of the Delaware River,  and to apply the B-IBI to future
  305(b) assessments and protection of existing water quality.

  The Commission would like to monitor other assemblages in order to gain a more complete picture of the ecological integrity of
  the Delaware River, and to measure progress toward objectives defined by the Commission's comprehensive plan. DRBC is
  investigating methods to assess submerged  aquatic vegetation, periphyton, fish, mussels, plankton, invasive exotic species, and
  ecological characterization of over 50 unique microhabitats observed in the river. These investigations have  been scheduled on
  a rotating basis as special studies,  though they are not used in use support and/or impairment determinations.

  Within the next year, DRBC and the NPS will begin planning for tributary Boundary Control Point  biomonitoring. DRBC will
  establish locations and methods to define existing water quality and create biological targets at each location for antidegradation
  purposes.  With the river survey in progress,  this is an appropriate next step in improving biomonitoring coverage and
  implementing antidegradation policies. DRBC is also moving away from doing  taxonomy in-house due to a lack of both time and
  work space.  The identification work from the annual river survey will likely be contracted out sometime in the near future.



  Documentation and Further Information

  Delaware River & Bay Water Quality Assessment, 2000 305(b) report. http://www.state.ni.us/drbc/2K305b  text.PDF
  DRBC Annual Report 2000: http://www.state.ni.us/ditc/ar20QO.htm
  DRBC Quality Assurance Project Plan 2001  Update: http://www.slate.ni.us/drbc/QADlanLDEL01.PDF
  DRBC Publications homepage: http:/Avww.state.ni.us/drbc/public.htm
  2001  Biomonitoring Work Plan (contains numerous citations, including three reports on DRBC's 3-year bioassessment study,
  issued by the Academy of Natural Sciences,  Patrick Environmental Research Center with recommendations on how best to
  proceed with update of biocriteria and implementation of antidegradation as mandated in DRBC's Water Quality Standards)
DRBC: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                           3-231

-------
  Delaware  River Basin  Commission (DRBC)
  Interstate compact: PA, NJ, NY, DE
  Contact Information
  Robert L. Limbeck, Watershed Scientist
  Edward Santoro, Monitoring Coordinator
  Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC)
  PO Box 7360 » West Trenton, NJ 08628
  Phone 609/883-9500 • Fax 609/883-9522
  email: rlimbeck@drbc.stale.nl.us
  Programmatic Elements
 llMV Of
 JwWito ovmH w*tor quality
 dwlgns
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness; of BMPs
ALL) determinations/ambienf monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects and specific river basins or watersheds)
fixed station (i.e., water qualty monitoring stations) (specific
river basins or watersheds)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoreglon, or statewide
rotating basin
other
 Stream Miles
 Total miles*                                                     200
 (total miles ofmainstem segment only, not including tributaries; determined using
 RF3 - Interstate river corridor is well-defined by river reaches, not watershed
 based)
 Total perennial miles                                              unknown
 Total miles assessed for biology                                200
     fully supporting for 305(b)"                                         n/a
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)**                                  n/a
     listed for 303(d)"                                                 n/a
     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)                          23
     number of miles assessed per site***                                -8.7
*DRBC is an Interstate Compact encompassing river miles in four states: Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York and Delaware, and
has not determined the number of total stream miles in the Basin. The Delaware River Basin watershed encompasses 13,539
square miles. Bioassessment and biocriteria activities are concentrated on a 200-mile non-tidal segment of the Delaware River and
tributary boundary control points.
"Biocriteria are not currently used for the 305(b) report.  Biocriteria were developed years ago, but the extent of their application is
unknown.
"The number of miles assessed per site (-8.7) is very rough.  DRBC's goal is to sample approximately 10 additional sites, thus
reducing this number.
DRBC: Program Summary
              December 2002
                                                                                                       3-232

-------
  Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making*
 '""-'''-•ISUi^gg^ (htfJlyifflpj Single Aquatic Life Use and Fishery Based Uses
             ions in state ,
             standard*
   .terqi
        sign
        ualit
Two designations:  The fishery-based designation is general, narrative, and defined by river
zone. The single aquatic life use designation is macroinvertebrate criteria within DRBC's
Special Protection Waters areas, and is defined for antidegradation purposes.
  Narrative Btocrtterla In WQS


  Numeric Btocrttorta In WQS
                              See definition of Existing Water Quality in Special Protection Waters (found in the 2001
                              workplan) for procedures used to support narrative biocriteria."

                              See DRBC's Administrate Manual-Part til, Water Quality Regulations, Section 3.10.3
                              Stream Quality Objectives, Section A. Antidegradation of Waters, Table 1.*
                                    assessment of aquatic resources

                                    cause and effect determinations

                                    permitted discharges

                                    monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)

                                    watershed based management
  Usesofbloassessment/
  Moeritoria In making
  management decisions
  regarding restoration of:;
  aquaticresources to a =".;•
  designated ALU
                              DRBC/NPS attempted to use existing criteria to define perceived problem areas. The existing
                              criteria, as defined, could not distinguish anthropogenic versus natural measurable change.
                              Program redesign is necessary.
•Application of the existing system has been unsuccessful thus far due to the low priority given to biomonitoring. Program redesign
recommendations were recently made to improve effectiveness and applicability of the criteria. Criteria for the entire non-tidal river
are currently being updated, and a best-habitat based benthic IBI that might eventually be applied to future 305(b) assessments and
the protection of existing water quality is under development. Additional data will be required, as well as a clear definition of how the
criteria will be applied to the 305(b) process. Separate criteria will be required for the river, the tributaries, and for different levels of
application and interpretation.

  Reference Site/Condition Development

                               23 total
~'^KBilWMISlte '    " 7V;^£§rff£"
                                    site-specific

                                    paired watersheds

                                    regional (aggregate of sites)

                                    professional judgment

                                    other: aggregate sites in each river reach were used to define existing water quality for
                                    antidegradation purposes.**
  Reference site criteria
                              In known high-quality waters numeric definition of Existing Water Quality provides a reference
                              for comparison. Measurable Change determines departure from the reference condition.
  Characterization of
  reference sites within a
  regional context   • ^§
                                   historical conditions

                                   least disturbed sites

                                   gradient response

                                   professional judgment

                                   other:
 Stream stratification within  •
 regJonalreference    '•    ::.
 conditions     .    :  •: :y-:,

 fV/S 1= (Ul«.rfnW== «« »»«»^iuvv:i=:i:

                     _2k
                ! .."^ -JSxf-"
                                    ecoregions (or some aggregate)

                                    elevation

                                    stream type

                                    multivariate grouping

                                    jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)

                                    other:
  Additional Information
                                   reference sites linked to ALU (not well linked)

                                   reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards (found in water quality
                                   standards)

                                   some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced conditions (exceptional water
                                   quality was defined under 1980's New York City reservoir operations & dischargers)
"The program's purpose is to protect the high quality of the river; therefore all sites sampled could be theoretically considered
reference sites (the same sites are continually sampled each year and findings are compared to the original samples' data to
determine if the quality has changed).
DRBC: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                              3-233

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
  AisemblagM tt**s*«i
                                   benthos (<100 samples/yea^, single season, multiple sites)
                                   fish* (<100 samples/year; sitigle season, multiple sites)
                                   periphyton
                                   other: macrophytes (<100 samples/year; single season, multiple sites)
  DOJltlMM
  ••'••   sampling gear
                               Surber. Hess, D-frame (500 - 600 micron mesh), BFN = Big-River Frame Net
                               (custom rectangular net, bottom frame area .37 square meters, for Delaware River
                               to 3ft deep, 4 fps, 500 micron mesh)
                               richest habitat, riffle/run (cobble), jmultihabitat
                               tributaries - entire sample; river - £00 count
                               tributaries - family; river - genus
                               visual based, hydrogeomorphology. pebble counts, Pfankuch Flow
                               characterization, Simon Channel Evolution Status; mostly performed with
                               bioassessments, some performed independent of bioassessments
 QuaMy
             iwtc* pragnun,  ;  standard operating procedures, quality assurance plan, periodic meetings and
                   ;      '  i.',  training for biologists, sorting and taxonomic proficiency checks, specimen archival

•Some fish tissue data are collected as part of DRBC's monitoring program, but the work is contracted out to NJDEP and the
Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia. DRBC also makes use| of PADEP, PA Fish and Boat Commission, and USGS
NAWQA study data in water quality assessments.
The Delaware Estuary Program recently assembled an interstate committee to standardize fish advisories in interstate waters.
DRBC has had trouble in the past with making use attainment calls based upon state fish advisories. Each state sampled different
areas, species, and used different criteria. Conflicts among the different states' data arose when DRBC tried to pull everything
together for the Delaware River assessment. DRBC's focus upon interstate coordination and cooperation to improve the process
has subsequently increased.

  Data Analysis and Interpretation
:  Date analysis tool* and
: >,-i"-,'.i;>" ~*>:•*      . .   .
                                   summary tables, illustrative graphs
                                   parametric ANOVAs
                                   multivariate analysis
                                   biological metrics (return single metrics - use endpoint for each
                                   single metric)
                                   disturbance gradients
                                   other:
 MuHhiMMC thresholds
                               95" percentile of all sites
                                   repeat sampling
                                   precision
                                   sensitivity
                                   bias
                                   accuracy
                               STORET, SAS, MS Access and Excel
                               SAS
"See reports issued by the Academy of Natural Sciences (ANS) for an evaluation. ANS identified problems with performance
characteristics depending on the level of data interpretation. A redesign of the program is necessary, including refinement of the
biocriterra, and field and laboratory practices.
DRBC: Program Summary
                                                  December 2002
3-234

-------
 Interstate Commission  on the

 Potomac River Basin (ICPRB)
 Interstate compact: VA, WV, MD, PA, DC


 Contact Information
 James O. Cummins, Associate Director for the Living Resources Section
 Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB)
 6110 Executive Boulevard, Suite 300 • Rockville, MD 20852
 Phone 301/984-1908 • Fax 301/984-5841
 email: icummins@potomac-commission.org
 website: http://www.potomacriver.org/
  Program Description

  ICPRB has no water/land ownership, management or regulatory authority, and therefore has set no water quality
  standards.  However, since the Commission's creation in 1940, ICPRB often assists the basin states (Virginia,
  Maryland, West Virginia and Pennsylvania), the District of Columbia, and the federal government on such
  formulations. As part of this assistance, ICPRB conducts stream bioassessments, both fish and benthic, consults
  with the jurisdictions regarding current and proposed biocriteria and water quality standards, and works with the
  jurisdictions' data to better understand and characterize the environmental conditions of the Potomac River
  watershed and associated land usages.

  ICPRB is currently working to integrate data from many sources (Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia, Pennsylvania,
  the District of Columbia, various federal and local governments, and nongovernmental sources) into a single
  reference watershed analysis.  In addition to benthic and fish monitoring in streams and wadeable rivers, ICPRB is
  doing shad and herring restoration work in non-wadeable rivers. The stream data collected downstream of
  reservoirs, influences reservoir management decisions. The Commission also analyzes estuary data collected by
  other entities and works on Chesapeake Bay water quality issues.
  Documentation and Further Information

  Potomac Basin Water Quality Assessment home (with links to District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania,
  Virginia and West Virginia 305(b) and 303(d) information): http://www.potomacriver.org/wqassess.htm

  Map of 3Q3(d)-Listed Waters in the Potomac Basin: http://www.potomacriver. org/wg303d. htm

  Virginia DEQ Water Quality Assessment Guidance Manual for 2002,  305(b) Water Quality Report and 303(d)
  Impaired Waters List, amended July 2002: http://www.deg.state.va.us/pdf/water/wqassessgulde.pdf

  2000 Maryland Section 305(b) Water Quality Report, with Appendix E, Assessment Methodology, August 2000:
  http://dnrweb.dnr.state.md.us/download/bavs/lv1D2000 305b.pdf

  Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 2000 Water Quality Assessment 305(b) Report.
  http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/watenngt/vVgp/WQStandards/305 wg2000  narr.htm

  For a link to West Virginia Water Quality Status Assessment 2000 305(b) Report for the period 1997-1999, go to:
  http://www.dep.state.wv.us/item.cfm?ssid=11&ss1id=192

  For a list of ICPRB publications and ordering information, go to: http://www.potomacriver.org/Dublications.htm
ICPRB: Program Summary                       December 2002                                       3-235

-------
  Interstate Commission on the

  Potomac River Basin (ICPRB)    ,
  Interstate compact: VA, VW, MD, PA, DC

  Contact Information
  James D. Cummins. Associate Director for the Living Resources Section
  Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB)
  6110 Executive Boulevard, Suite 300 • Rockville, MD 20052
  Phone 301/984-1908 • Fax 301/984-5841
  email: jcumm irts@potomac-commission. org
Programmatic Elemi
U^lirixf IlifMfl^AAftflMflt '

-•IS:! '.: :.-'.-
i'^Ster-; - ,Si«F-. : ** :
'.-,'..

ABOiKmBm inwniufcHifl -,
rinalJJnM '- ' ' -,-;'-" ' '
^^^^sJpM* , • ;•*.'• ".
fr^Kfe' ' '' ' WS-'V '
• !/:• "";?'?-' ' - ,-j; ' : •
;- ' .-1 ^ "'
ants
/
s
s
s



/

'



•"

problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other
targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
projects and specific river basins or watersheds)
fixed station (i.e., water quatty monitoring stations)
probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
rotating basin (special projects and specific river basins or
watersheds)
other:
 Stream Miles

 Total miles*                                     383
 (total miles of Potomac River mainstom, not including tributaries)
 Total perennial miles                                    -

 Total miles assessed for biology*                n/a

     fully supporting for 305(b)                          n/a
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)                    n/a

     listed for 303(d)                                  n/a

     number of sites sam pled*                       -1,300

     number of miles assessed per site
The Potomac River drainage area includes 14,670 square miles in the following jurisdictions: Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia,
Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia.

"ICPRB is not a regulatory authority, but assists the states in the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB doesn't develop own criteria, etc.).
The Commission looks at the basin as a whole, across state lines, artd thus has no way of producing an accurate estimate of miles
assessed. Although ICPRB works with the data from roughly 1.300 sampling stations, sampling is only conducted at several
hundred of those stations - these include the samples collected and provided to Pennsylvania's Potomac Watershed Program. The
rest of the stations are sampled by various state agencies who supply ICPRB with data to analyze and use for management
decisions.
ICPRB: Program Summary
December 2002
                                                                                                  3-236

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making*
 ALU designation baaks   >.''.   n/a
 ALU designations fa state     n/a
 water quality standards      	
 Narrative BtocrtterialnWQS   n/a
 Nil
      ricBtocriteftalnWQS   n/a
  U««» of btoassessment data
   wltnottierenviroffinenta]
  data (a-g., toxWty testing and
    chemical specific criteria)
                                  assessment of aquatic resources
                                  cause and effect determinations
                                  permitted discharges
                                  monitoring (e.g.. improvements after mitigation)
                                  watershed based management
                             Not applicable for ICPRB, but member jurisdictions in the Potomac
                             basin use data in various ways.
 btocrttaria M making
 immaBaniuiit dactelona.
 recanting rastoratloit of
 aquatic resource* to a
 designated ALU
•ICPRB does not define aquatic life uses, but uses those designated by member jurisdictions: Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia,
Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia.
  Reference Site/Condition Development*
  Number of reference sites     under development
 Reference site criteria
         reference
            "  ""'
                   j.-: -„—
 Adopohal tefomwtfon
                                  site-specific
                                  paired watersheds
                                  regional (aggregate of sites)
                                  professional judgment
                                  other:
                             Under development. Each member jurisdiction has its own reference
                             site criteria.  ICPRB is working to establish regional reference sites
                             using the "common elements" of the various jurisdictions' habitat
                             evaluations and water quality information. The criteria will be based
                             on water quality data and habitat parameters, and possibly
                             macroinvertebrate data as well. The reference sites will be the least
                             disturbed sites based on these parameters.
                                  historical conditions
                                  least disturbed sites
                                  gradient response
                                  professional judgment
                                  other:
                                  ecoregions (or some aggregate)
                                  elevation
                                  stream type
                                  multivariate grouping
                                  jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
                                  other:
                                  reference sites linked to ALU
                                  reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                  some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                  conditions
"Reference sites are presently defined by statistical category (example: 95" percentile), but ICPRB would prefer to establish
hypothetical reference conditions.
ICPRB: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                         3-237

-------
  Field and  Lab Methods
                                    benthos (<100 samples/yeaK multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad
                                    coverage tor watershed level)

                                    fish (<100 samples/year; multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad coverage
                                    for watershed level)

                                    periphylon

                                    other: phytoplankton and zooplankton (<100 samples/year, multiple seasons,
                                    multiple sites - broad coverage for watershed level)
  Bmthot
  ,    sampling gear
      habitat setectfon
      subsample size
      taxonomy
kick net (1 meter); 200-400 micron mesh

riffle/run (cobble)

entire sample

family
  Fteh
      sampinggear           I  backpack electrofisher, seine; 1/4" mesh
      habitat selection         !  multihabitat
      sample processing         length measurement and anomalies
      sufasampte                selected species, batch
      taxonomy	<  species
                               visual based; performed with bioassessments
 QualHy assurance progtwn
ICPRB follows QA protocols according to each state's requirements. Elements
include periodic meetings and training for biologists, taxonomic proficiency checks,
and a certification program for bioassessment.
  Data Analysis  and Interpretation*
 Data analysis toots and
     summary tables, illustrative graphs

     parametric ANOVAs

     multivariate analysis

     biological metrics (aggregate metrics into an index)

     disturbance gradients
     other:
                               Current emphasis is on the 95*
                               a quadrisection of the range. Presently testing
                            pprcentile of all sites (reference and stressed) and
                                         various published methods of
                               establishing scoring thresholds in each jurisdiction

                               Consistent thresholds are current y being assembled from impairment criteria
                               applied by member states.
                                    repeat sampling

                                    precision

                                    sensitivity

                                    bias

                                    accuracy
      Retrieval and analysis'
Raw data and documentation are obtained from state and federal agencies in
varying formats (hardcopy, disc, downloadable ftp files). Data are stored and
analyzed using a custom-developed MS Access database similar to EDAS.

Various statistical software applications are being evaluated; i.e. S-PLUS, Total
Access Statistics, et at.
The objective of the Basinwide Assessments program is to integrate and analyze monitoring data from member states' nontidal
rivers and streams.  While states' data cannot be compared directly, most apply a similar data analysis approach.  ICPRB is
adapting this analysis framework by selecting and normalizing consistent criteria from the various approaches to define reference
and stressed conditions. Invertebrate communities at these sites will be measured and compared. Candidate metrics are also
being screened for assessment accuracy and redundancy to select core metrics.
ICPRB: Program Summary
                   December 2002
                                                                                                             3-238

-------
 Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation

 Commission (ORSANCO)
 Interstate compact: NY, VA, PA, WV, OH, KY, IN, IL

 Contact Information
 Erich Emery, Senior Biologist
 Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO)
 5735 Kellogg Avenue • Cincinnati, OH 45228
 Phone 513/231-7719 • Fax 513/231-7761
 email: emerv@orsanco.org
 website: http://www.orsanco.ora/
  Program Description

  The strategic objective of ORSANCO's Biological Program is to conduct biological monitoring of the Ohio River in
  order to determine the extent to which the objective of Article 1 of the Compact "..that the Ohio River be capable of
  maintaining fish and other aquatic life" is met. Tasks conducted in support of this strategic objective include: 1)
  Developing techniques for biological monitoring of large rivers in general, and the Ohio River in particular, and 2}
  Utilizing biological monitoring, assessment, and criteria to characterize the condition of the river.  ORSANCO is
  currently developing numeric biological criteria and plans to integrate biological methods into overall monitoring
  and assessment efforts.

  ORSANCO has been collecting biological data from the Ohio River since 1957 with the initiation of a lockchamber
  rotenone sampling program, which continues to this day. This method has provided the Commission with a 45-year
  look at fish community changes within the Ohio River.

  ORSANCO is collecting biological data from the Ohio River on behalf of the eight states of the Commission (NY,
  VA, PA, WV, OH, KY, IN, and IL). These states rely on the Commission to develop appropriate methods, conduct
  sampling, develop assessment indices and eventually incorporate biological information into ail assessment
  strategies. The states are also relying on ORSANCO to assist them in conducting similar programs on the large
  Ohio River tributaries within each state.

  The Commission uses biological data in a report to each of the states which the states then use for their 305(b)
  report and 303{d) listings. The Commission is currently in the process of developing numeric biological criteria.
  Discussions are underway to determine whether the Commission should proceed with referencing biological
  criteria in Pollution Control Standards for the Ohio River, or incorporating said criteria as 'hart numbers' or codified
  criteria. ORSANCO will proceed at the recommendation of the states.

  ORSANCO is also expanding its programs, including biological efforts, into the tributaries and reaches of the
  basin. In the very near future, ORSANCO will be working with the states to conduct biological sampling on larger,
  navigable, tributaries to test methods, develop indices, and eventually expand the coverage of biocriteria. The
  tributary work will be important in determining how to transition from great rivers to large rivers, in terms of
  monitoring and assessment, and will  enable researchers to make that transition seamlessly.
  Documentation and Further Information

  ORSANCO 1998 305(t}) Fact Sheet for the Ohio River

  ORSANCO Water Quality Protection, Biological Program homepage: htlp://www.orsanco.org/watgual/aauatic/biologicai.htrTi

  2000 Kentucky Report to Congress on Water Quality, 305(b) report, November 2000:
  http://water.nr.state-kv.us/wg/305b/2000/2000  305b.htm

  1998 Kentucky Report to Congress on Water Quality, 305(b) report, January 1999 (sites sampled by ORSANCO found in  Table
  2): http://water.nr.state.ky.u5/3Q5b/

  For a list of publications (including QA/QC documents, monitoring and assessment strategies, data summaries, etc.), go to:
  http://www.orsanco.org/fivinfo/pubs/pubs.htm
ORSANCO: Program Summary                     December 2002                                        3-239

-------
 Ohio  River Valley Water Sanitation
 Commission  (ORSANCO)
 Interstate compact: NY, VA, PA, WV, OH, KY, IN, ILi
  Contact Information
  Erich Emery, Senior Biologist
  Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO)
  5735 Kellogg Avenue • Cincinnati, OH 45228
  Phone 513/231-7719 • Fax 513/231-7761
  email: emerv@orsanco.org
                             /
 Programmatic  Elements
   ,,'_•;;?;-  =   , • - .-;•-•       ,- T|
 wttMnovmR water quality  (
.jPW^w**;=.  .-./I)   .   ';,H
                             UD
                             UD
                             UD
                             UD
                             UD
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALU determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradatiorl
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
 AppMeg
                             UD
                             UD
                                 targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
                                 projects only)
                                 fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (special
                                 projects only)
                                 probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                 probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                                 rotating basin
                                 other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles
 (total mites ofmainstem only, not including tributaries)
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology*
    fully supporting for 305(b)*
    partially/non-supporting for 305(b)*
    listed for 303(d>*
    number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)
    number of miles assessed per site
                                                   981
                                                    974
                                                      7
                                                     55
                                                  >1 ,000
                                                    Or5
                                                                  981 Mites Assessed for Biology
                                     -fully supporting1 for 305(b)
                                     "partally/non-supporting" for 305(b)
The Ohio River flows through or borders six states: Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. It
encompasses 203,940 square miles, but ORSANCO only conducts biological monitoring on the mainstem of the Ohio River, which
is 981 miles long. ORSANCO produces a 305(b) report exclusively for the Ohio River, and this document is referenced by different
states for use in their own 305(b) reports.  Fifty-five Ohio River miles are listed on Kentucky's 303(d) list, but this number is based on
a past report and the Kentucky Division of Water feels that there is not enough biological data to delist those miles quite yet.
ORSANCO: Program Summary
                                             December 2002
                                                                                                    3-240

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making*
                              Single Aquatic Life Use
       __                     One designation: Warmwater Aquatic Life - other categories are
 water guilty standards ,'•'  '  under development
  Nan«fv»BtocrawialnWQ8*

  KumsficBtocritoiialnWQS*
                    Formal/informal numeric procedures used to support narrative
                    biocriten'a are under development.
                    under development (to be included or referenced by standards)
UsMof bloiiiMinwrrtdata
hi Inte
Wlfll
data
taddty
                       arid
                              /
assessment of aquatic resources
cause and effect determinations
permitted discharges
monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
watershed based management
  „„-.,..-.--....„..,    ";  This is currently unknown because numeric biocriteria are just being
  blocrtterta in making       ''"  proposed for the water quality standards.
  fnmwflOTnant decisions
  regarding restoration of
  aquatic resources to a
  designated ALU
'ORSANCO's water quality standards are the adopted standards that serve as recommendations to states for incorporation into their
own standards. ORSANCO is entering review this year (starting with a fish biocriteria proposal); ALU designations and numeric
biocriteria are expected to be completed sometime before 2004.

  Reference Site/Condition Development

                           £'  400 total
  d*termlhations
  Crwrat-terizatkmofraferwica
  altaBwtthlna •  • •      •    :
    "	I context        »'  •'
 8tr
 »tffle
                   wlthta
  regkmai mfMvnc*
   ''"-*" '' ' '
                        site-specific
                        paired watersheds
                        regional (aggregate of sites)
                        professional judgment
                        other:
                              Least impacted sites are sites out of the immediate influence of
                              human impact. Specifically, one kilometer below discharges or major
                              tributaries as well as free from other obvious disturbance. Least
                              impacted sites are used as a surrogate for reference sites.
                        historical conditions
                        least disturbed sites
                        gradient response
                        professional judgment
                        other:
ecoregions (or some aggregate)*
elevation
stream type
multivariate grouping
jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
other:
                                  reference sites linked to ALU
                                  reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
                                  some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
                                  conditions
"Plans are underway to develop a tiered aquatic life use approach with expectations based on river reach (ecoregion surrogate)
and habitat type.
ORSANCO: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                              3-241

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
                                   benthos (100-500 ssmples/ybar; multiple seasons, multiple sites - broad
                                   coverage for watershed level)
                                   fish (100-500 samples/year; tmittiple seasons, multiple sites - broad coverage
                                   for watershed level)
                                   perjphyton
                                   other:
      sampling gear
                             multiplate; standard #30 sieve
                             multiriabitat
                             entire sample
                             lowest possible level
- .-.;  .
      habitat se)«clkxi
  ''         "''"
      sample processing
                             boat electrofisher; 1/4" mesh
                             multihabitat
                             length measurement, biomass - individual, anomalies
                             none
                             species and subspecies
                               ORSANCO has developed a habitat assessment approach and habitat index for
                               the Ohio River. The index is based on substrate composition (broad categories),
                               depth and cover estimates; these are performed with bioassessments.
                               standard operating procedures, periodic meetings and training for biologists,
                               sorting and taxonomic proficiency! checks, specimen archival. There are plans to
                               develop a certification program for bioassessment.
 8ata*miy»bi tooto and
 nwtli
-------
 Susquehanna River Basin
 Commission  (SRBC)
 Interstate compact: NY, PA, MD
  Contact Information

  Jennifer L. R Hoffman, Aquatic Ecologist
  Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC)
  1721 North Front Street • Harrisburg, PA 17102
  Phone 717/238-0426 • Fax 717/238-2436
  email: ihoffmanta?srbc.net
  website: http://www.srbc.net/
  Program Description
U.S  EPA Headquarters Library
        Mail code 3404T
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
    Washington, DC 20460
         202-566-0556
 The Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC) is the governing agency established to protect and wisely manage the water
 resources of the Susquehanna River Basin. The Susquehanna River starts in Cooperstown, NY and flows 444 miles to Havre de
 Grace, MD, where the river meets the Chesapeake Bay. The watershed encompasses parts of New York, Pennsylvania, and
 Maryland. Currently, SRBC implements several programs assessing the biological condition of streams and rivers, including the
 Subbasin Survey and Interstate Water Quality Monitoring Network (ISWQN) Programs.

 Six subbasins exist in the Susquehanna River Basin: the Chemung, Upper Susquehanna, Middle Susquehanna, West Branch
 Susquehanna, Juniata, and Lower Susquehanna.  SRBC samples each subbasin on a rotating schedule, assessing each
 approximately every ten years. The assessment evaluates the chemical, biological, and habitat conditions of streams, identifies
 major sources of pollution, documents changes in stream quality over time, and identifies areas for more intensive study. This
 program was initiated in 1982 and was refined in 1998 to include a more intensive second year of sampling to address specific
 local concerns, such as restoration and protection. Year 1 includes  collection of macroinvertebrate samples and physical habitat
 information using Rapid Bioassessment Protocol (RBP) III, water quality collection, and flow measurement in a single-sampling
 event during baseflow conditions. Year 2 of the program can include a variety of projects, such as more intensive bimonthly
 water quality sampling to provide information to watershed groups for protection and restoration efforts. All data collected during
 SRBC's subbasin surveys are used in reporting to the USEPA under Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act.

 The ISWQN program, initiated in 1986.  includes periodic collection of water quality and biological samples, as well as physical
 habitat assessments of interstate streams.  Water quality data are collected quarterly and are used to assess compliance with
 water quality standards, characterize stream quality and seasonal variations, build a database for assessing water quality trends,
 and identify areas for restoration and protection. SRBC staff collect macroinvertebrate and physical habitat information annually
 from 51 sites on interstate streams along the New York-Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania-Maryland borders using RBP III
 methods. Water samples and flow information are collected at 19 sites quarterly and 30 sites yearly.  Water quality data also are
 used to determine the existence and magnitude of trends for selected parameters. All data collected during SRBC's interstate
 streams surveys are used  in 305(b) reporting to USEPA.

 Currently, SRBC is initiating a pilot project to determine proper methods of assessing the biological conditions, using benthic
 macroinvertebrate populations, of the large rivers in the Susquehanna River Basin. The pilot project will take place on the
 Susquehanna River between Windsor, NY and Sayre. PA, during late summer 2002. Three separate methodologies will  be
 tested: RBP III, artificial substrate samplers, and a diver operated dome (suction) sampler. A habitat assessment will be
 performed and water quality samples will also be taken at each site.  Data will be used to select and calculate metrics for a
 benthic Index of Biotic Integrity to assess the biological conditions of the large rivers in the Susquehanna  River Basin and will be
 included in 305(b) reporting.



 Documentation and  Further Information

 2000 Susquehanna River Basin Commission 305(b) Narrative

 The 1998 Susquehanna River Basin Water Quality Assessment 305(b) Report. http://www.srbc.net/docs/305bReport 201 .pdf

 Report Announcement - 2002 Susquehanna River Basin Water Quality Assessment 305(b) Report, Publication No. 220:
 http://www.srbc.net/docs/summarv mav02.PDF

 Report Announcement - Water Quality of Interstate Streams in the Susquehanna River Basin, Publication No. 211:
 http://www.srbc.net/pub211 summary.pdf

 Assessment of Interstate Streams in the Susquehanna River Basin: 1997-1998, Monitoring Report #12, June 1999:
 http: //www .s rbc. net/docs/iswq97-98. pdf

 Upper Susquehanna Subbasin: A Water Quality and Biological Assessment, 1999: httD://www.srbc.net/docs/pub203.pdf
SRBC: Program Summary
                                                December 2002
                                                                                                         3-243

-------
 Susquehanna  River Basin
 Commission  (SRBC)
 Interstate compact: NY, PA, MD
 Contact Information
 Jennifer L. R. Hoffman, Aquatic Ecologist
 Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC)
 1721 North Front Street • Harrisburg, PA 17102
 Phone 717/238-0426 • Fax 717/238-2436
 email: ihoffrnan@srbc.net
  Programmatic Elements
 pragma
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
ALL) determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state water quality standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradalion
evaluation of discharge pempit conditions
TMDL assessment and monitoring
other:
                                 targeted (i.e., sites selected for specific purpose) (special
                                 projects only)
                                 fixed station (i.e., water quality monitoring stations) (specific
                                 river basins or watersheds)
                                 probabilistic by stream order/catchment area
                                 probabilistic by ecoregion, or statewide
                                 rotating basin (comprehensive use throughout jurisdiction)
                                 other:
 Stream Miles
 Total miles*                                    31,193
 Total perennial miles
 Total miles assessed for biology                3,520
     fully supporting for 305(b)**                        2.525
     partially/non-supporting for 305(b)"                  995
     listed for 303(d)                                  n/a
     number of sites sampled (on an annual basis)           317
     number of miles assessed per site                     11
                                 3,520 Miles Assessed for Biology
                                      "tolly supporting' for 305(b)
                                      •partially/non-supporting" for 305(b)
•Stream mile estimate is based on the 1993 EPA document, Total Waters
Estimates for United States Streams and Lakes: Total Waters Database and Reporting Program. Monitoring Branch Assessment
and Watershed Protection Division, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and {Watersheds, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.
**305(b) reporting is for SRBC benefit, USEPA requirements (contradts), and to provide more samples for states to use in their
official 30S(b) and 303(d) listings.
SRBC: Program Summary
             December 2002
                                                                                                    3-244

-------
 Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making*
 ALU designation* Instate
' \jtftitnr- 'A^-•
 Maffatlw BiociHailfl in WCkS
 with otMf MvlraflnMntal: i f
 data (e.o., toxkty testing are*
 chemraspedlte criteria)
assessment of aquatic resources
cause and effect determinations
permitted discharges
monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
watershed based management
•This section is not applicable to SRBC's biological monitoring program.  SRBC does not define aquatic life uses, but utilizes those
designated by member jurisdictions: Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania.
  Reference Site/Condition Development
                      .„,....;  total number varies according to project
-."i". ':''&-': ''-Si' , ~S£=
„!.',! ' •iwy,',-._ -_ '-liia:'- ''.fSfgi:
.If^lf96!!!1 .jj.



""'— ,^,,;,^" . , /...-:•!-« •./••^•f, -
Stream stratiflcatton wWilit
regional refertnc* ;
Conditions . • ."..»,: '-.-:•;;«..:
-. £;;..; . - -Og^ , -i..~g ^;-, :a|;:.:
??«•: ' ip"; J~ffi-. :,=ii;-
Addltkmal mformatton ;
• {kj!:.. . --gpS;:'.;. , ^FifS:;.:-'


/
/

site-specific
paired watersheds
regional (aggregate of sites)
professional judgment
other:
Habitat disturbance, best available conditions of the biological and
chemical components

/



/







/
historical conditions
least disturbed sites
gradient response
professional judgment
other:
ecoregions (or some aggregate)
elevation
stream type
multivariate grouping
jurisdictional (i.e., statewide)
other:
reference sites linked to ALU
reference sites/condition referenced in water quality standards
some reference sites represent acceptable human-induced
conditions
SRBC: Program Summary
                                            December 2002
                                                                 3-245

-------
  Field and Lab Methods
MMrniliig«a assessed ' W /

<:;V -la; :"•••- ' V"

benthos (100-500 samptes/ykar; single season,
coverage)
fish
periphyton
other:
3j$MlMM|81% non impaired, though this
                             could vary slightly depending on (he project
EvakMflon of (Mrformanc*
                                   repeat sampling

                                   precision

                                   sensitivity

                                   bias

                                   accuracy
 Biological data
      Retrieval and analysis:
                             Excel spreadsheets for internal projects; SRBC is currently working
                             on entering data into STORET.

                             Excel spreadsheets for internal projects; working on finding a good
                             statistical package that fits needs
SRBC: Program Summary
                                                 December 2002
                                                                                                           3-246

-------
4.     RELEVANT EXCERPTS FROM WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
       AND  BIOCRITERIA LANGUAGE
This section of the report contains excerpts from the approved water quality standards of states, tribes,
territories, and interstate commissions.  These excerpts may contain any or all of the following:
designated uses as related to aquatic life uses, narrative and/or numeric biocriteria, and any other
specific sections that are relevant to the entity's protection and propagation of aquatic life.  It is important
to note that this chapter is not intended to be a compendium of the entire water quality standard for each
state, tribe and territory, but rather to highlight specific language within the standard that describes the
use of biology and biological assessments to develop relevant criteria that assess water quality and
protect aquatic life.

STATES
Alabama
SOURCE: Alabama Department of Environmental Management, Water Division - Water Quality
Program, Chapter 335, Division 6, Volume 1, Chapter 10, Water Quality Criteria: September 7, 2000.
http://www.adem.state.al.us/Regulations/Regulations/regulations.htm

335-6-10-.03 Water Use Classifications.
    1. Outstanding Alabama Water
    3. Swimming and Other Whole Body Water-Contact Sports
    5. Fish and Wildlife
    6. Limited Warmwater Fishery
    7. Agricultural and Industrial Water Supply

335-6-10-.04 Antideqradation Policy.
    (1) The purpose and intent of the water quality standards is to conserve the waters of the State of
       Alabama and to protect, maintain and improve the quality thereof for public water supplies, for
       the propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and for domestic, agricultural, industrial,
       recreational and other legitimate beneficial uses; and to provide for the prevention, abatement
       and control of new or existing water pollution.

    (4) Where high quality waters constitute an outstanding National resource, such as waters of
       national and state parks and wildlife refuges and waters of exceptional recreational or ecological
       significance, that water quality shall be maintained and protected.

    (5) Developments constituting a  new or increased source of thermal pollution shall assure that such
       release will not impair the propagation of a balanced indigenous population of fish and aquatic
       life.

335-6-10-.06 Minimum Conditions Applicable to All State Waters. The following minimum conditions
are applicable to all State waters, at ali places and at all times, regardless of their uses:
       (c) State waters shall be free from substances attributable to sewage, industrial wastes or other
          wastes in concentrations  or combinations which are toxic or harmful to human, animal or
          aquatic life to the extent commensurate with the designated usage of such waters.

33S-6-10-.09 Specific Water Quality Criteria.
    (1) OUTSTANDING ALABAMA WATER
       (a) Best usage of waters: activities consistent with the natural characteristics of the waters.
       (b) Conditions related to best usage:
          1.  High quality waters that constitute an outstanding Alabama resource, such as waters of
              state parks and wildlife refuges  and waters of exceptional recreational or ecological

Water Quality Standards                        December 2002                                      4-1

-------
               significance, may be considered for classification as an Outstanding Alabama Water
               (OAW).

    {3} SWIMMING AND OTHER WHOLE BODY WATER-CONTACT SPORTS
       (b) Conditions related to best usage:... The quality of waters will also be suitable for the
           propagation of fish, wildlife and aquatic life. The quality of salt waters and estuarine waters
           to which this classification is assigned will be suitable for the propagation and harvesting of
           shrimp and crabs.

    (5) FISH AND WILDLIFE
       (a) Best usage of waters: fishing, propagation of fish, aquatic life, and wildlife...
       (b) Conditions related to best usage: the waters will be suitable for fish, aquatic life and wildlife
           propagation. The quality of salt and estuaripe waters to which this classification is assigned
           will also be suitable for the propagation of Shrimp and crabs.
       (e) Specific criteria:

           3.  Temperature:

               (ii) The  maximum temperature in streams, lakes, and reservoirs in the Tennessee and
               Cahaba River Basins, and for that portion of the Tallapoosa River Basin from the tailrace
               of Thurlow Dam at Tallassee downstream to the junction of the Coosa and Tallapoosa
               Rivers which has been designated by the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural
               Resources as supporting smallmouth  bass, sauger, or walleye, shall not exceed 86° F.

               (vi) In all waters the normal daily and seasonal temperature variations that were present
               before the addition of artificial heat shall be maintained, and there shall be no thermal block
               to the migration of aquatic organisms.

               (vii)Thermal permit limitations in NPDES permits may be less stringent than those required
               by subparagraphs (i)-(iv) hereof when ai showing by the discharger has been made pursuant
               to Section 316 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), 33 U.S.C. §1251 et
               seq. or pursuant to a study of an equal or more stringent nature required by the State of
               Alabama authorized by Title 22. Section 22-22-9(c), Code of Alabama,  1975,  that such
               limitations will assure the protection and propagation of a balanced, indigenous population
               of shellfish, fish and wildlife, in and on the body of water to which the discharge is made.
               Any such demonstration shall take into account the interaction of the thermal discharge
               component with  other pollutants discharged.

           4.  Dissolved oxygen:

               (i)  For a diversified warm water biota, including game fish, daily dissolved oxygen
               concentrations shall not be less than 5 mg/l at all times; except under extreme conditions
               due to natural causes, it may range between 5 mg/l and 4 mg/l, provided that  the water
               quality is favorable in all other parameters. The normal seasonal and daily fluctuations shall
               be maintained above these levels. In no event shall the dissolved oxygen level be less than
               4 mg/l due to discharges from existing hydroelectric generation impoundments. All new
               hydroelectric generation impoundments, including addition of new hydroelectric generation
               units to existing impoundments, shall be designed so that the discharge will contain at least
               5 mg/l dissolved oxygen where practicable and technologically possible. The Environmental
               Protection Agency,  in cooperation with the State of Alabama and parties responsible for
               impoundments, shall develop a program to improve the design of existing facilities.

               (iv) In the application of dissolved oxygen criteria referred to above, dissolved oxygen shall
               be measured at a depth of 5 feet in waters 10 feet or greater in depth; and for those waters
               less than 10 feet in  depth, dissolved oxygen criteria will be applied at mid-depth.

           5.  Toxic substances attributable to sewage, industrial wastes, or  other wastes: only  such
Water Quality Standards
                                          December 2002
                                                                                            4-2

-------
           amounts, whether alone or in combination with other substances, as will not exhibit acute toxicity
           or chronic toxicity, as demonstrated by effluent toxicity testing or  by  application of numeric
           criteria given in Rule 335-6-10-.07, to fish and aquatic life,  including  shrimp and crabs in
           estuarine or salt waters or the propagation thereof.

           6.  Taste, odor, and color-producing substances attributable to sewage, industrial wastes, or
           other wastes: only such amounts, whether alone or in combination with other substances, as will
           not exhibit acute toxicity or chronic toxicity, as demonstrated by effluent toxicity testing or by
           application of numeric criteria given in Rule 335-6-10-.07, to  fish  and aquatic life, including
           shrimp and crabs in estuarine and salt waters or adversely affect the propagation thereof; impair
           the palatability or marketability of fish and wildlife or shrimp and crabs in estuarine and salt
           waters; or unreasonably affect the aesthetic value of waters for any use under this classification.

    (6) LIMITED WARMWATER FISHERY
       (a) The (a) The provisions of the Fish and Wildlife water use classification at  Rule 335-6-10-.09(5)
           shall apply to the Limited Warmwater Fishery water use classification, except as noted below.
           Unless alternative criteria for a given parameter are provided in paragraph (e) below, the
           applicable Fish and Wildlife criteria at paragraph 10-.09(5)(e) shall apply year-round. At the time
           the Department proposes to assign the Limited Warmwater Fishery classification to a specific
           waterbody, the Department may apply criteria from other classifications  within this chapter if
           necessary to protect a documented, legitimate existing use.

    (7) AGRICULTURAL AND INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLY
       (b) Conditions related to best usage:
           (i) The waters, except for natural impurities which may be present therein, will be suitable for
               ... fish survival...

335-6-10-. 10 Special Designations.
    (1) OUTSTANDING NATIONAL RESOURCE WATER
       (a) Designation:
           1.  High quality waters that constitute an outstanding National resource, such as waters of
               national and state parks  and  wildlife refuges and waters  of exceptional recreational or
               ecological  significance, may be considered for designation as an Outstanding  National
               Resource Water (ONRW). For waters designated as ONRW, existing water quality shall be
               maintained and protected.
Alaska
SOURCE:   Alaska  Administrative  Code:  Chapter 70, Title  18,  amended  as of May 27,  1999:
http://www.state.ak.us/local/akDaQes/ENV.CONSERV/titie18/70wQS.Pdf

    18 AAC 70.020.  PROTECTED WATER USE CLASSES AND SUBCLASSES: WATER QUALITY
    CRITERIA: WATER QUALITY STANDARDS TABLE.
    (a) Classes and subclasses of use of the state's water protected by criteria set out under (b) of this
       section are:
       (1) freshwater
           (A) aquaculture
           (C) growth and propagation of fish, shellfish, other aquatic life, and wildlife; and
       (2) marine water
           (C) growth and propagation of fish, shellfish, other aquatic life, and wildlife; and
           (D) harvesting for consumption of raw mollusks or other raw aquatic life.
Water Quality Standards                        December 2002                                       4-3

-------
Arizona
SOURCE: Arizona Administrative Code, Title 18, Environmental Quality, Chapter 11. Department of
Environmental Quality, Article 1. Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters, amended effective March
8, 2002: http://www.sosaz.com/pubtic services/Title 18/18-11.htm
R18-11-101. Definitions
The terms of this Article shall have the following meanings:
    7.  "Aquatic and wildlife (cold water)" means the use of a surface water by animals, plants, or other
       cold-water organisms, generally occurring at elevations greater than  5000 feet, for habitation,
       growth, or propagation.

    8.  "Aquatic and wildlife (effluent dependent water)r means the use of an effluent dependent water by
       animals, plants, or other organisms for habitation, growth, or propagation.

    9.  "Aquatic and wildlife (ephemeral)" means the use of an ephemeral water by animals, plants, or other
       organisms, excluding fish, for habitation, growth, or propagation.

    10. "Aquatic and wildlife (warm water)" means the use of a surface water by animals, plants, or other
       warm-water organisms, generally occurring at elevations less than 5000 feet, for habitation, growth,
       or propagation.

    22. "Ephemeral water" means a surface water that has a channel that is at  all times above the water
       table and  that flows only in direct response to precipitation.

    26. "Fish consumption" means the use of a surface water by humans for harvesting aquatic organisms
       for consumption. Harvestable aquatic organisms include, but are not limited to, fish, clams, turtles,
       crayfish, and frogs.

    44. "Unique water" means a surface water which has been classified as an outstanding state resource
       water by the Director under R18-11-112.

R18-11-108. Narrative Water Quality Standards
    A.  A surface water shall be free from pollutants in amounts or combinations that:
       1.   Settle to form bottom deposits that inhibit or prohibit the habitation,  growth, or propagation of
           aquatic life or that impair recreational uses;
       5.   Are toxic to humans, animals, plants, or other organisms;
       6.   Cause the growth of algae or aquatic plarjts that inhibit or prohibit the habitation, growth, or
           propagation of other aquatic life or that impair recreational uses;

R18-11-112. Unique Waters
    D.  The Director may classify a surface water as a unique water upon finding that the surface water is
       an outstanding state resource water based upon the following criteria:
           a.   The surface water is a perennial water;
           b.   The surface water is in a free-flowing cpndition. For purposes of this subsection, "in a free-
               flowing condition"  means that a surface water does not have an impoundment, diversion,
               channelization, rip-rapping or other bank armor, or another hydrological modification within
               the reach nominated for unique water |dassification;
           c.   The surface water has good water quality.  For purposes of this subsection, "good water
               quality" means that the surface water  has water quality that  meets or exceeds applicable
               surface water quality standards. A surface water that is listed as impaired under § 303(d)
               of the Clean Water Act [33 U.S.C. § 13,13] is ineligible for unique waters classification; and
           d.   The surface water meets one or both of the following conditions:
           e.   The surface water is of exceptional recreational or ecological significance because of
               its unique attributes, including but not limited to, attributes related to the geology, flora,
               fauna, water quality, aesthetic values,  or the wilderness characteristics of the surface
               water.
Water Quality Standards
December 2002

-------
           f.  Threatened or endangered species are known to be associated with the surface water
              and the existing water quality is essential to the maintenance and propagation of a
              threatened or endangered species or the surface water provides critical habitat for a
              threatened or endangered species. Endangered or threatened species are identified in
              "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants,"  50 CFR § 17.11  and § 17.12  (
              revised as of October 1,2000) which is incorporated by reference and on file with the
              Department and the Office of the Secretary of State. This incorporation by reference
              contains no future editions or amendments.
Arkansas
SOURCE: Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission Regulation 2, Regulation Establishing Water
Quality Standards for Surface Waters of the State of Arkansas, October 28, 2002, Chapter 3 Water Body
Uses, http://www.adeQ.state.ar.us/regs/files/reg02 final 021028.pdf

Section 2.302 Designated Uses
The designated uses are defined as follows:
   A. Extraordinary Resource Waters - This beneficial use is a combination of the chemical, physical
       and biological characteristics of a waterbody and its watershed which is characterized by scenic
       beauty, aesthetics, scientific values, broad scope recreation potential and intangible social values.
   B. Ecologically Sensitive Waterbody - This beneficial use identifies segments known to provide
       habitat within the existing range of threatened, endangered or endemic species of aquatic or semi-
       aquatic life forms.
   C. Natural and  Scenic Waterways -  This beneficial use identifies segments which have been
       legislatively adopted into a state or federal system.
   F. Fisheries - This beneficial use provides for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish and
       other forms of aquatic life. It is further subdivided into the following subcategories:
           (1) Trout - water which is suitable for the growth and survival of trout (Family:  Salmonidae).
           (2) Lakes and Reservoirs - water which is suitable for the protection and propagation of fish
               and other forms of aquatic life adapted to impounded waters. Generally characterized by
               a dominance of sunfishes such as bluegill or similar species, black basses and crappie. May
               include substantial populations of catfishes such as channel, blue and flathead catfish and
               commercial fishes including carp, buffalo and suckers. Forage fishes are normally shad or
               various species of minnows.  Unique populations of walleye, striped bass and/or trout may
               also exist.
           (3) Streams - water which is suitable for the protection and propagation of fish and other forms
               of aquatic life adapted to flowing water systems whether or not the flow is perennial.
               (a) Ozark Highlands Ecoregion - Streams supporting diverse communities of indigenous
                  or adapted species of fish and other forms of aquatic life. Fish communities are
                  characterized by a preponderance of sensitive species and normally dominated by a
                  diverse minnow community followed by sunfishes and darters. The community may be
                  generally characterized by the following fishes:


                    Key Species                               Indicator Species

                    Duskystripe shiner                          Banded  sculpin
                    Northern hogsucker                         Ozark madtom

                    Slender madtom                            Southern redbelly dace
                    "Rock" basses                              Whitetail shiner

                    Rainbow and/or Orangethroat darters          Ozark minnow
                    Smallmouth bass

               (b) Boston Mountains Ecoregion - Streams supporting diverse communities of indigenous

Water Quality Standards                        December 2002                                       4-5

-------
                  or adapted species of fish and other forms of aquatic life. Fish communities are
                  characterized by a major proportion of sensitive species;  a diverse, often darter-
                  dominated  community exists but  with nearly equal proportions of minnows and
                  sunfishes. The community may be generally characterized by the following fishes:
                    Key Species
                    Bigeye shiner

                    Black redhorse
                    Slender madtom

                    Longear sunfish

                    Greenside darter
                    Smallmouth bass
                                          Indicator Species

                                          Shadow bass

                                          Wedgespot shiner

                                          Longnose darter

                                          Fantail darter
              (c) Arkansas River Valley Ecoregiort - Streams supporting diverse communities of
                  indigenous or adapted species of fish and other forms of aquatic life. Fish communities
                  are characterized by a substantial proportion of sensitive species; a sunfish- and
                  minnow-dominated community exists but with substantial proportions of darters and
                  catfishes (particularly madtoms). The community may be generally characterized by the
                  following fishes:
                                                              indicator Species

                                                              Orangespotted sunfish
                                                              Blacksidedarter

                                                              Madtoms
Key Species

Bluntnose minnow

Golden redhorse

Yellow bullhead

Longear sunfish

Redfin darter

Spotted bass
              (d) Ouachita Mountains Ecoregion - Streams supporting diverse communities of indigenous
                  or adapted species of fish and other forms of aquatic life. The fish community is
                  characterized by a major proportion of sensitive species; a minnow-sunfish-dominated
                  community exists, followed by darters. The community may be generally characterized
                  by the following fishes:
                    Key Species

                    Bigeye shiner

                    Northern hogsucker

                    Freckled madtom

                    Longear sunfish

                    Orangebelly darter

                    Smallmouth bass
                                          Indicator Species

                                          Shadow bass
                                          Gravel chub
                                          Northern studfish

                                          Striped shiner
           (e) Typical Gulf Coastal Ecoregion - Streams supporting diverse communities of indigenous or
              adapted species of fish and other forms of aquatic life. Fish communities are characterized
              by a limited proportion of sensitive species; sunfishes are distinctly dominant followed by
              darters and minnows. The community may be generally characterized by the following
Water Quality Standards
                     December 2002
                                                                                           4-6

-------
              fishes:

                    Kev Species                                Indicator Species
                    Redfin shiner                               Pirate perch
                    Spotted sucker                              Warmouth
                    Yellow bullhead                             Spotted sunfish
                    Flier                                       Dusky darter
                    Slough darter                               Creek chubsucker
                    Grass pickerel                              Banded pygmy sunfish

           (f) Springwater-influenced Gulf Coastal Ecoregion -Streams supporting diverse communities
              of indigenous or adapted species of fish and other forms of aquatic life. Fish communities
              are characterized by a substantial proportion of sensitive species; sunfishes normally
              dominate the community and are followed by darters and minnows. The community may
              be generally characterized by the following fishes:

                    Kev Species                                Indicator Species
                    Redfin shiner                               Pirate perch
                    Blacktail redhorse                           Golden redhorse
                    Freckled madtom                           Spotted bass
                    Longear sunfish                             Scaly sand darter
                    Creole darter                               Striped shiner
                    Grass pickerel                              Banded pygmy sunfish

           (g) Least-altered Delta Ecoregion - Streams supporting diverse communities of indigenous or
              adapted species of fish and other forms of aquatic life. Fish communities are characterized
              by an insignificant proportion of sensitive species; sunfishes are distinctly dominant followed
              by minnows. The community may be generally characterized by the following fishes:

                    Key Species                                Indicator Species
                    Ribbon shiner                              Pugnose minnow
                    Smallmouth buffalo                         Mosquitofish
                    Yellow bull head                             Pi rate perch
                    Bluegill                                    Tadpole madtom
                    Bluntnose darter                            Banded pygmy sunfish
                    Largemouth bass

           (h) Channel-altered Delta Ecoregion- Streams supporting diverse communities of indigenous
              or adapted  species of fish and  other forms of aquatic life. Fish communities  are
              characterized by an absence of sensitive species; sunfishes and minnows dominate the
              population followed by catfishes. The community may be generally characterized by the
              following fishes:

                    Kev Species                                Indicator Species
                    Blacktail shiner	Mosquitofish	
Water Quality Standards                        December 2002                                       4-7

-------
                    Key Species
                    Drum

                    Carp
                    Channel catfish
                    Green sunfish
                    Spotted gar
                     Indicator Species
                     Gizzard shad

                     Emerald shiner
California'
•This language has not been reviewed for accuracy by state/tribal agency.

SOURCE: California Ocean Plan, Water Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters of California, State Water
Resources Control Resolution No. 90-27, Approval of the Amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan For
Ocean Waters of California, effective March 22,1990.
http://www-epa.gov/ost/standards/wqslibrary

Chapter II WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES
    E. Biological Characteristics
       1.   Marine communities,  including vertebrate, invertebrate, and  plant species, shall  not be
           degraded.

Chapter III GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR  MANAGEMENT OF WASTE* DISCHARGE TO  THE
OCEAN*
    A.  Waste management systems that discharge to the ocean must be designed and operated in a
       manner that will maintain the indigenous marine life and a healthy and diverse marine community.
    B.  Waste discharged to the ocean must be essentially free of:
       2.   Settleable  material or substances that may form  sediments which will degrade benthic
           communities or other aquatic life.
       3.   Substances which will accumulate to toxic levels in marine waters, sediments or biota.
       4.   Substances that significantly decrease the Natural light to benthic communities and other marine
           life.
    D.  Location of waste discharges must be determined  after a detailed assessment of the
    oceanographic characteristics and current patterns to  assure that:
       2.   Natural water quality conditions are not altered in areas designated as being of special biological
           significance or areas that existing  marine laboratories use as a source of seawater.

Chapter V DISCHARGE PROHIBITIONS
    B.  Areas of Special Biological Significance-Waste shall not be discharged to areas designated as
       being of special biological significance. Discharges shall be located a sufficient distance from such
       designated areas to assure maintenance or natural water quality conditions in these areas.

Region I (North Coast)
Source: Water Quality Control Plan for the North Coast Region, North Coast Regional Water Quality Control
Board,  Section  6  -  Surveillance  and  Monitoring,  Section  6-1.00,  amended  May  23,  1996.
http://www.epa.gov/osVstandards/wqslibrary/ca/ca  9 north coast.pdf

STATEWIDE MONITORING PROGRAMS
State Mussel Watch Program
The California State Mussel Watch (SMW) Program is a long-term monitoring program administered by the
State Water Board. Actual sampling and analysis are performed by the Department of Fish and Game.
SMW provides the State Water Board and the six qoastal  regional water boards with an indication of
geographical and temporal (year-to-year) trends in toxic pollutants along the California coast. Mussels (the
common bay mussel, Myilus edulis. and the California mussel, M. californianus) have been shown to be
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
                                                 4-8

-------
efficient bioaccurnulators of many toxic substances in their water environment. Further, the sedentary nature
of mussels, whether native or transplanted, permits a time integrated sampling of toxic pollutants at one
location. The merits of employing mussels as water quality indicators are well established in the scientific
literature, previous SMW reports, and other scientific publications. The North Coast Region will continue to
participate in existing SMW monitoring and the development of freshwater applications. The North Coast
Region has been involved in developing freshwater applications of SMW methodology, using freshwater
clams, Corbicula sp. The North Coast Region has required that some discharges be monitored using these
techniques.  There are current plans to expand the use of these organisms as indicators in sensitive areas.
In the North Coast Region sampling under the  SMW program has  led to the detection and mitigation of
controllable  releases of toxic substances. Sampling priorities are  directed toward areas  of immediate
concern.

Region II (San Francisco Bay Basin)
Source: Chapter 2, Beneficial Uses, Water Quality Control Plan, Region 2,  California Regional Water
Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region, June 21,1995:
http://www.epa.oov/ost/standards/waslibrarv/ca/ca 9 san  francisco.pdf

Definitions of Beneficial Uses
(ASBS) Areas of Special Biological  Significance
Areas designated by the State Water Resources Control Board.
These include marine life refuges, ecological reserves, and designated areas where the preservation and
enhancement of natural  resources requires special protection, in these areas, alteration of natural water
quality is undesirable.  The areas that have been designated as ASBS in this region are depicted in Figure
2-1. The State Ocean Plan (see Chapter 5) requires wastes to be discharged at a suffitionfor cient distance
from these areas to assure maintenance of natural water quality conditions

(COLD) COLD FRESHWATER HABITAT
Uses ofwaterthat support cold water ecosystems, including, but not limited to preservation or enhancement
of aquatic habitats, vegetation, fish,  or wildlife, including invertebrates.

Cold freshwater habitats generally support trout and may support the anadromous salmon and steel head
fisheries as well. Cold water habitats are commonly well-oxygenated.  Life within these waters is relatively
intolerant to environmental stresses. Often,  soft waters feed cold water habitat These waters render fish
more susceptible to toxic metals, such as copper, because of their lower buffering capacity.

(EST) ESTUARINE HABITAT
Uses of water that support estuarine ecosystems, including, but not limited to, preservation or enhancement
ofestuarine habitats, vegetation, fish, shellfish, orwildlife (e.g., estuarine mammals, waterfowl, shorebirds),
and the propagation, sustenance, and migration ofestuarine organisms.

Estuarine habitat provides an essential and unique habitat that serves to acclimate anadromous fishes
(salmon, striped bass) migrating into fresh or marine water conditions. The protection of estuarine habitat
is contingent upon (1) the maintenance of adequate Delta outflow to provide mixing and salinity control; and
(2) provisions to protect wildlife habitat associated with marshlands and essential to the Bay periphery (i.e.,
prevention of fill activities). Estuarine habitat is generally associated with moderate seasonal fluctuations
in dissolved  oxygen, pH, and temperature  and with  a wide range in turbidity.

(MAR) MARINE HABITAT
Uses of water that support marine ecosystems,  including, but not limited to, preservation or enhancement
of marine habitats, vegetation such as kelp, fish, shellfish, orwildlife (e.g., marine mammals, shorebirds).

In many cases, the protection of marine habitat will be accomplished by measures that protect wildlife habitat
generally, but more stringent criteria may  be necessary for waterfowl marshes and other habitat, such as
those for shellfish and marine fishes.  Some marine habitats, such as important intertidal zones and kelp
beds, may require special protection.

(MIGR) FISH MIGRATION

Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                        4-9

-------
Uses of water that support habitats necessary for migration, acclimatization between fresh water and salt
water, and protection of aquatic organisms that are temporary inhabitants of waters within the region.

The water quality provisions acceptable to cold water fish generally protect anadromous fisA as well.
However, particular attention must be paid to maintaining zones of passage. Any barrier to migration or free
movement of migratory fish is harmful. Natural tidal movement in estuaries and unimpeded river flows are
necessary to sustain migratory fish and their offspring. A water quality barrier, whether thermal, physical,
or chemical, can destroy the integrity of the migration mute and lead to the rapid decline of dependent
fisheries.  Water quality may vary through  a zone of passage as a result of natural or human-induced
activities. Fresh water entering estuaries may float on th|e surface of the denser salt water or hug one shore
as a result of density differences related to water temperature, salinity, or suspended matter.

(RARE) PRESERVATION OF RARE AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
Uses of waters that support habitats necessary for the survival and successful maintenance
of plant or animal species established under state and/or federal law as rare, threatened, or endangered.

The water quality criteria to be achieved that would encourage development and protection of rare and
endangered species should be the same as those  for protection of fish and wildlife habitats generally.
However, where rare or endangered species exist, special control requirements may be necessary to assure
attainment and maintenance of particular quality criteria, which may vary slightly with the environmental
needs of each particular species.  Criteria for species using areas of special biological significance should
likewise be derived from the general  criteria for the habitat types involved, with special management
diligence given where required.

(SPWN) FISH SPAWNING
Uses of water that support high quality aquatic habitats suitable for reproduction and early deteiopment of
fish.

Dissolved oxygen levels in spawning areas should ideally approach saturation levels. Free movement of
water is essential to maintain well-oxygenated conditions around eggs deposited in sediments. Water
temperature, size distribution and organic content of sediments, water depth, and current velocity are also
important determinants of spawning area adequacy.

(WARM) WARM FRESHWATER HABITAT
Uses of water that support warm waterecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation or enhancement
of aquatic habitats, vegetation, fish, or wildlife, including invertebrates.

The warm freshwater habitats supporting bass,  bluegiljl, perch, and other panfish are  generally lakes and
reservoirs, although some minor streams will serve this purpose where stream flow is sufficient to sustain
the fishery. The habitat is also important to a variety of nonfish species, such as flogs, crayfish, and insects,
which provide food for fish and small mammals. This habitat is less sensitive to environmental changes,
but more diverse than the cold freshwater habitat and natural fluctuations in temperature, dissolved oxygen,
pH, and turbidity are usually greater.

WILD) WILDLIFE HABITAT
Uses of waters that support wildllife habitats, including, but not limited to, the preservation and enhancement
of vegetation and prey species used by wildlife, such as waterfowl.

The two most important types of wildlife habitat are  riparian and wetland habitats. These habitats can be
threatened by development, erosion, and sedimentation, as well as by poor water quality. The water quality
requirements of wildlife pertain to the water directly ingested, the aquatic habitat itself, and the effect of water
quality on the production of food materials. Waterfowl habitat is particularly sensitive to changes in water
quality. Dissolved oxygen, pH, alkalinity, salinity, turbidity, settleable matter, oil, toxicants, and specific
disease organisms are water quality characteristics particularly important to waterfowl habitat. Dissolved
oxygen is needed in waterfowl habitats to suppress development of botulism  organisms; botulism has killed
millions of waterfowl. It is particularly important to  maiforain adequate circulation and aerobic conditions in
shallow fringe areas of ponds or reservoirs where botulism has caused problems.
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
                                                  4-10

-------
Region III (Central Coast)
Source: Water Quality Control Plan -Regional Water Quality Control Board 3 (Central Coast), California
Regional Water Quality Control Board, Chapters: Surveillance And Monitoring, pg. VI-2, Septembers, 1991:
http://www.epa.gov/ost/standards/wqslibrarv/ca/ca 9 wacp.pdf

IIIA1. TOXIC SUBSTANCE MONITORING
The Toxic Substances Monitoring (TSM) portion of the Primary Network has been integrated with other
Primary Network Monitoring. Streams and lakes were ranked according to various criteria established to
indicate their importance to the State in terms of water quality. From this process, the water bodies ranked
Priority 1, or highest priority, were included in the Primary Network; routine chemical and biological water
monitoring is performed by DWR and/or the USGS; and toxic substances monitoring of resident organisms
is performed by the Department of Fish and Game. The objectives of the Primary Network TSM program
are:
    1.  To develop statewide baseline data and to demonstrate trends in the occurrence of toxic elements
       and organic substances in the aquatic biota,

Region IV (Los Angeles)
Source: Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles - Region Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los
Angeles and Ventura Counties, Chapter 6: Surveillance And  Monitoring, approved February 23, 1995:
http://www.epa.gov/ost/standards/wqslibrarv/ca/ca 9 los anqeles.pdf

Biological Criteria
Biological criteria are narrative (and sometimes numeric) expressions that describe the biological  integrity
of aquatic communities (EPA,  1991). Biological criteria supplement other water quality objectives (physical,
chemical, toxicity) by providing a direct measure of aquatic communities at risk from human activities. These
criteria can also provide evidence of streams with exceptional water quality. Baseline data must be collected
from both reference and impacted streams in the Region.  Regular monitoring of these areas can then
provide a continual assessment  of instream impacts. Over  30 of the 50 states have developed, or are
developing, biological criteria programs. Although there is not a current biological criteria program in the
Region, Regional Board staff are planning to begin conducting baseline surveys in the coming years.
Although there is not a current biological criteria program in the Region, Regional Board staff are planning
to begin conducting baseline surveys in the coming years.
Coloradr
SOURCE: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Department Regulations, Water Quality
Control Commission, Surface Water Quality Classifications & Standards, Regulation 31- Basic Standards
& Methodologies for Surface Water, amended effective October 30, 2001:
http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/op/regs/100231.pdf and http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/wQ/wqhom.html

31.5 DEFINITIONS
    (8) "COLD WATER BIOTA" means aquatic life,  including trout, normally found in waters where the
       summer temperature does not often exceed 20° C.

    (32)"WARM WATER BIOTA"  means aquatic life  normally found in waters where the summer
       temperature frequently exceeds 20° C.

31.11 BASIC STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO SURFACE WATERS OF THE STATE
All surface waters of the state are subject to the following basic standards; however, discharge of substances
regulated  by permits which are within those permit limitations shall  not be a basis for enforcement
proceedings under these basic standards:

(1)  Except where authorized by permits, BMP's, 401 certifications, or plans of operation approved by the
    Division or other applicable agencies, state surface waters shall be free from substances attributable to
    human-caused point source or nonpoint source discharge in amounts, concentrations or combinations
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
                                                                                         4-11

-------
    which:

    (a)  for ail surface waters of the state except wetlands;
        (v) are harmful to the beneficial uses or toxic t humans, animals, plants, or aquatic life; or
        (vi) produce a predominance of undesirable aquatic life;

    (b)  for surface waters in wetlands;
        (ii) are toxic to humans, animals, plants, or aquatic life of the wetland.

31.13 STATE USE CLASSIFICATIONS
    (c)  Aquatic Life
        These surface waters presently support aquatip life uses as described below, or such uses may
        reasonably be expected in the future due to the suitability of present conditions, or the waters are
        intended to become suitable for such uses as a goal:
        (i)  Class I - Cold Water Aquatic Life
           These are waters that (1) currently are capable of sustaining a wide variety of cold water biota,
           including sensitive species, or (2) could sustain such biota but for correctable water quality
           conditions. Waters shall be considered capable of sustaining such biota where physical habitat,
           water flows or levels, and water quality conditions result in  no substantial impairment of the
           abundance and diversity of species.
        (ii) Class 1  - Warm Water Aquatic Life
           These are waters that (1) currently are capable of sustaining a wide variety of warm water biota,
           including sensitive species, or (2) couid sustain such biota but for correctable water quality
           conditions. Waters shall be considered capable of sustaining such biota where physical habitat,
           water flows or levels, and water quality conditions result in  no substantial impairment of the
           abundance and diversity of species.
        (iii) Class 2- Cold and Warm Water Aquatic Life
           These are waters that are not capable of sustaining a wide variety of cold or warm water biota,
           including sensitive species, due to physical habitat,  water flows or levels, or uncorrectable water
           quality conditions that result in substantial im pairment of the abundance and diversity of species.

    (e)  Wetlands
        (v) The Commission may adopt a "wetlands" classification based on the functions of the wetlands
           in question. Wetland functions that may warrant site-specific protection include ground water
           recharge or discharge, flood flow alteration, sediment stabilization, sediment or other pollutant
           retention, nutrient removal or transformation, biological diversity or uniqueness, wildlife diversity
           or abundance, aquatic life diversity or abundance,  and recreation.
Connecticu
SOURCE: Connecticut Water Quality Standards Sections II and III, effective April 9,1997:
http://dep.state.ct.us/wtr/wqsinfo.htm and http://dep.sta;te.et.us/wtr/wqs.pdf

NARRATIVE BIOCRITERIA
Surface waters and sediments shall be free from chemical constituents in concentrations or combinations
which will or can reasonably be expected to result in acifte or chronic toxicity to aquatic organisms or impair
the biological integrity of aquatic or marine ecosystems outside of any allocated zone of influence or which
will or can reasonably be expected to bioconcentrate or bioaccumulate in tissues of fish, shellfish and other
aquatic organisms to levels which will  impair the health of  aquatic organisms or wildlife or result in
unacceptable tastes, odors or health risks to human consumers of aquatic life. In determining consistency
with this Standard, the Commissioner shall at a minimum consider the specific number criteria listed in
Appendix D and any other information she  or he deems relevant.

Benthic invertebrate criteria may be utilized where appropriate for assessment of biological integrity of
surface waters. The criteria apply to the fauna of erosional or riffle habitats in flowing waters which are not
subject to tidal influences.
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
                                                   4-12

-------
III. SURFACE WATER CLASSIFICATIONS
INLAND SURFACE WATERS
CLASS AA
Designated Use - Existing or proposed drinking water supply; fish and wildlife habitat; recreational use;
agricultural, industrial supply and other purposes, (recreational uses may be restricted).

CRITERIA

Parameter              Standard

13. Benthic Invertebrates A wide variety of macro!invertebrate taxa should normally be present and all
which inhabit lotic waters functional feeding groups should normally be well represented. Presence and
                        productivity of aquatic species is not limited except by natural conditions,
                        permitted flow regulation or irreversible cultural impacts. Water quality shall
                        be sufficient to sustain a diverse macroinvertebrate community of indigenous
                        species. Taxa within the Orders Plecoptera (stoneflies),  Ephemeroptera
                        (mayflies), Coleoptera (beetles) and Trichoptera (caddisflies) should be well
                        represented.

INLAND SURFACE WATERS
CLASS A
Designated Uses - Potential drinking water supply; fish and wildlife habitat; recreational use; agricultural,
industrial supply and other legitimate uses, including navigation.

CRITERIA

Parameter              Standard

13. Benthic Invertebrates A wide variety of macroinvertebrate taxa should normally be present and all
which inhabit lotic waters functional feeding groups should normally be well represented. Presence and
                        productivity of aquatic species is not limited except by natural conditions,
                        permitted flow regulation or irreversible cultural impacts. Water quality shall
                        be sufficient to sustain a diverse macroinvertebrate community of indigenous
                        species. Taxa within the Orders Plecoptera (stoneflies),  Ephemeroptera
                        (mayflies), Coleoptera (beetles) and Trichoptera (caddisflies) should be well
                        represented.

INLAND SURFACE WATERS
CLASSB
Designated Use - Recreational use; fish and wildlife habitat; agricultural and industrial supply and other
legitimate uses including navigation.

CRITERIA

Parameter              Standard
13. Benthic Invertebrates Water quality shall be sufficient to sustain a diverse macroinvertebrate
which inhabit lotic waters community of indigenous species. All functional feeding groups and a wide
                        variety of macroinvertebrate taxa shall be present, however one or more may
                        be disproportionate in abundance. Waters which currently support a high
                        quality aquatic community shall be maintained at that high quality. Presence
                        and productivity of taxa within the Orders Plecoptera (stoneflies),
                        Ephemeroptera (mayflies); and pollution intolerant Coleoptera (beetles) and
                        Trichoptera (caddis-flies) may be limited due to cultural  activities.
                        Macroinvertebrate communities in waters impaired by cultural activities shall
                        be restored to the extent practical through implementation of the department's
                        procedures for control of pollutant discharges to surface waters and through
                        Best Management Practices for non-point sources of pollution.
Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                       4-13

-------
INLAND SURFACE WATERS
CLASS C
Present water quality conditions preclude the full attainment of one or more designated uses for Class B
waters some or all  of the time. One or  more Water Quality Criteria for Class B waters are not being
consistently achieved. Class C waters may be suitable for certain fish and wildl if e habitat, certain recreational
activities, industrial use and other legitimate uses, including navigation.

INLAND SURFACE WATERS
CLASS D
Present water quality conditions persistently preclude the attainment of one or more designated uses for
Class B waters. One or more Water Quality Criteria for I Class B waters are not being achieved most or all
of the time. Class D waters may be suitable for bathing or other recreational purposes, certain fish and
wildlife habitat, industrial or other legitimate uses, including navigation.
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
                                                  4-14

-------
Delaware
SOURCE: State of Delaware Surface Water Quality Standards as amended, August 11,1999, Department
of Natural Resources and Environmental Control: http.V/www.dnrec state.de us/water/was1999.pdf

Section 1: Intent
1.1.    It is the policy of the Department to maintain within its jurisdiction surface waters of the State of
       satisfactory quality consistent with public health and public recreation purposes, the propagation and
       protection of fish and aquatic life, and other beneficial uses of the water.

Section 2: Definitions
Cold water fish use: Protection of fish species (such as from the family Salmonidae) and other flora and
fauna indigenous to a cold water habitat.

Fish, aquatic life and wildlife: All animal and plant life found in Delaware, either indigenous or migratory,
regardless of life stage or economic importance.

Section 3: Antidegradation Policy
3.1. Existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing uses shall
    be maintained and protected. Degradation of water quality in such a manner that results in reduced
    number, quality, or river or stream mileage of existing uses shall be prohibited. Degradation shall be
    defined for the purposes of this section as a statistically significant reduction, accounting for natural
    variations, in biological, chemical, or habitat  quality as measured  or predicted using appropriate
    assessment protocols.
3.2. Where the quality of the waters exceeds levels necessary to support propagation of fish, shellfish, and
    wildlife and recreation in and on the water, that quality shall be maintained and protected. In the case
    of waters of exceptional recreational or ecological significance, existing quality shall be maintained or
    enhanced...
3.3. Where high quality waters constitute an outstandi ng National resource, such as waters of National parks
    and wildlife refuges, existing quality shall be maintained and protected.

Section 4: General Stream Criteria
4.1. Ail surface waters of the State (except as detailed in  Sections 8 and 12) shall meet the following
    minimum criteria:
    (a) Waters shall be free from  substances that are attributable to wastes of industrial,  municipal,
       agricultural or other human-induced origin. Examples include but are not limited to the following:

       (ill) Any pollutants, including those of a thermal, toxic, corrosive, bacteriological, radiological, or
           other nature, that may interfere with  attainment and maintenance of  designated uses of the
           water,  may impart  undesirable odors,  tastes, or colors to the water or to aquatic life found
           therein, may endanger public health, or may result in dominance of nuisance species.
District of Columbia
This language has not been reviewed for accuracy by state/tribal agency.

SOURCE: Chapter 11, Water Quality Standards of Title 21 of the District of Columbia Municipal
Regulations (Notice of Final Rulemaking, January 21, 2000):
http://dchealth.dc.gov/services/administration offices/environmental/services2/water  dlvision/pdf/Water
QualitvStandards.shtm

1101.1  For the purposes of water quality standards, the surface waters of the District shall be classified on
        the basis of their (i) current uses, and (ii) future uses to which the waters will be restored. The
        categories of beneficial uses for the surface waters of the District shall be as follows:
Water Quality Standards                          December 2002                                       4-13

-------
 Categories of Uses Which Determine Water Quality
 Standards

 Protection & propagation of fish, shellfish and wildlife
                  Classes of Water


                  ...C...
1102.3 TIER III: Where High Quality Waters constitute,an outstanding National resource, such as waters
       of the National and District parks and wildlife [efuges and waters of exceptional recreational or
       ecological significance, those waters shall be designated Outstanding National Resource Waters
       (ONRW) and the water quality in the ONRW shall be maintained, protected and designated as
       below;
       (ay New point and nonpoint source discharges, treated or otherwise, shall be prohibited in these
           segments;
       (b) Increases in loadings or new pollutants from 'existing point and nonpoint source discharges shall
           be prohibited in these segments;
       (c) Short-term degradation of the water quality shall be allowed after opportunity for  public
           participation and addressing their comments, if any. However, ail practical means of minimizing
           such degradation shall be implemented; and
       (d) Designation  of ONRWs shall be  adopted after full satisfaction of the intergovernmental
           coordination  of the District's agencies and public participation.

1102.4 SPECIAL WATERS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (SWDC): Any segment or segments of the
       surface waters of the District which are of water quality better than needed for the current use or
       have scenic or aesthetic importance shall bel designated as Special Waters of the District of
       Columbia (SWDC)...

1103   WETLANDS

1103.1 In a wetland, the  numerical and the narrative criteria shall be applied to the column of water above
       the wetland in accordance with  the designated use.

1103.2 Wetlands with rooted vascular aquatic vegetation, except those specifically constructed or created
       as waste water treatment devices and except as provided in D. C. Code subsection 6-923(d) and
       subsection  6-926(a)(3),  shall be protected  from significant adverse hydrologic modifications,
       excessive sedimentation, deposition of toxic substances in toxic amounts, nutrient imbalances, and
       other adverse anthropogenic impacts.

1104   STANDARDS

1104.1 The surface waters of the District shall be free from substances in amounts or combinations that do
       any of one the following:

       (d) cause injury to, are toxic to, or produce adverse physiological or behavioral changes in humans,
       plants or animals
       (e) Produce undesirable or nuisance aquatic life or result in the dominance of nuisance species; or
       (f) Impair the biological community that naturally occurs in the waters or depends on the waters for
       its survival and propagation

1104.5 Class C streams shall  be maintained to support aquatic life and shall not be placed in pipes.
Florida
SOURCE: Florida Administrative  Code, Chapter 62*302 Surface Water Quality Standards, effective
December 26, 1996: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/sjjrfacewater/rules.htm and
http://www8.mvflorida.com/environment/learn/science/laboratories/index.html
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-16

-------
62-302.200 Definitions.
(10)"Exceptional Ecological Significance" shall mean that a water body is a part of an ecosystem of unusual
    value. The exceptional significance may be in unusual species, productivity, diversity, ecological
    relationships, ambient water quality,  scientific or educational interest,  or in other aspects of the
    ecosystem's setting or processes.

(15)"Nuisance Species" shall mean species of flora or fauna whose noxious characteristics or presence in
    sufficient number, biomass, or area! extent may reasonably be expected  to prevent, or unreasonably
    interfere with, a designated use of those waters.

(16)"Nursery Area of Indigenous Aquatic Life" shall mean any bed of the following aquatic plants, either in
    monoculture or mixed: Halodule wrightii, Halophila  spp., Potamogeton spp. (pondweed), Ruppia
    maritima (widgeon-grass), Sagittaria spp. (arrowhead), Syringodium filiforme (manatee-grass), Thalassia
    testudinum (turtle grass), or Vallisneria spp. (eel-grass), or any area used by the early-life stages, larvae
    and post-larvae, of aquatic life during the period of rapid growth and development into the juvenile
    states.

(17)"Outstanding Florida Waters"  shall  mean  waters designated  by the  Environmental  Regulation
    Commission as worthy of special protection because of their natural attributes.

(18)"0utstanding National  Resource Waters" shall  mean  waters  designated by the   Environmental
    Regulation Commission that are of such exceptional recreational or ecological significance that water
    quality should be maintained and protected under all circumstances, other than temporary lowering and
    the lowering allowed under Section 316 of the Federal Clean Water Act.

(22}"Propagation" shall mean reproduction sufficient to maintain the species' role in its respective ecological
    community.

(24)"Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index" shall mean: negative summation (from i=1 to s) of (n i /N) log 2 (n
    i /N) where s is the number of species in a sample,  N is the total number of individuals in a sample, and
    n i is the total number of individuals in species i.

(25)"Special Waters" shall mean water bodies designated in accordance with Section 62-302.700, F.A.C.,
    by the Environmental  Regulation  Commission for inclusion in  the  Special  Waters Category of
    Outstanding Florida Waters, as contained in Section 62-302.700, F.A.C. A Special Water may include
    all or part of any water body.

62-302.400 Classification of Surface Waters. Usage. Reclassification. Classified Waters.
(1)  All surface waters of the State have been classified according to designated uses as follows:
    CLASS III  Recreation, Propagation and Maintenance of a Healthy, Well-Balanced Population of Fish
               and Wildlife
(4)  Water quality classifications are arranged i n order of the degree of protection required, with Class I water
    having generally the most stringent water quality criteria and Class V the least. However, Class I, II, and
    III surface waters share water quality criteria established to protect recreation and the propagation and
    maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlife.
Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                      4-17

-------
Excerpt from 62-302.530. Criteria for Surface Water Quality Classifications

Parameter





11)
Biological
Integrity

























Units





Percent
reduction of
Shannon-
Weaver
Diversity
Index






















Cl»* I:
Potable Water
Supply



The index for
benthic macro-
invertebrates
shall not be
reduced less
than 75% of
background
levels measured
using
organisms
retained by a
U. S. Standard
No. 30 sieve
and collected
and composited
from a minimum
of three Hester-
Dendy type
artificial
substrate
samplers of
0,10 to 0.15 m2
area each.
incubated for a
period of four
weeks.


Class II:
Shellfish
Propagation or
Harvesting


The Index for
benthic macro-
invertebrates
shall not be
reduced to
less than 75%
of established
background
levels as
measured using
organisms
retained by a
U. S. Standard
No. 30 sieve
and collected
and composited
from a minimum
of three natural
substrate
samples, taken
with Ponar type
samplers with
minimum
sampling area
Of225cm2.


Class III: Recreation, Propagation
and Maintenance of a Health, Well-
balanced Population of Fish and
Wildlife

Predominantly
Fresh Waters
The Index for
benthic macro-
inverteBrates
shall not be
reduced to
lejss than 75%
ol established
background
levels as
measured using
organisms
retained by a
U. S. Standard
No. 30 sieve
and collected
and composited
frbm a minimum
of three Hester-
Dendytype
artificial
substrate
samplers of
Oi10to0.15m2
area each,
incubated for a
period of four
weeks.

Predominantly
Marine Waters
The Index for
benthic macro-
invenebrates
shall not be
reduced to less
than 75% of
established
background
levels as
measured using
organisms
retained by a
U. S. Standard
No. 30 sieve and
collected
and composited
from a minimum
of thiee natural
substrate
samples, taken
with Ponar type
samplers with
minimum
sampling area of
225 cm2



Class IV:
Agricultural
Water
Supplies






























Class V:
Navigation
. Utility,
and
Industrial
Use



























62-302.800 Site Specific Alternative Criteria.
(2) The affirmative demonstration required by this section shall mean a documented showing that the
    proposed alternative criteria would exist due to natural background conditions or man-induced conditions
    which cannot be controlled or abated. Such demonstration shall be based upon relevant factors which
    include:
    (c) A description of the historical and existing biology, including variations, which may be affected by
       the parameter of concern. Conditions in similar water bodies may be used for comparison.
Georgia
SOURCE: Rules of Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division, Chapter
391-3-6, Water Quality Control, revised October 2001:
http://www.dnr.state.ga.us/dnr/envirort/rutes  files/exist files/391-3-6.pdf and
http://www.dnr.state.ga.us/dnr/environ

(2) Water Quality Enhancement:
    (a)  The purposes and  intent of the State in establishing Water Quality  Standards are to provide
        enhancement of water quality and prevention of pollution; to protect the public health or welfare in
        accordance with the public interest for drinking water supplies, conservation offish, wildlife and other
        beneficial aquatic life, and agricultural, industrial, recreational, and other reasonable and necessary
        uses and to maintain and improve the biological integrity of the waters  of the State.

391-3-6.03 Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards
(3) Definitions:
    (b)  "Biological integrity" is functionally defined as thie condition of the aquatic community inhabiting least
        impaired waterbodies of a specified habitat measured by community structure and function.
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
                                                  4-18

-------
(4) Water Use Classifications. Water use classifications for which the criteria of this Paragraph are
    applicable are as follows:
    (c)  Fishing, Propagation of Fish, Shellfish, Game and Other Aquatic Life
    (d)  Wild River
    (e)  Scenic River
    (f)  Coastal Fishing

(6) Specific Criteria for Classified Water Usage. In addition to the general criteria, the following criteria are
    deemed necessary and shall be required for the specific water usage as shown:
    (a)  Drinking Water Supplies: Those waters approved as  a source for public drinking water systems
        permitted or to be permitted by the Environmental Protection Division. Waters classified for drinking
        water supplies will also support the fishing use and any other use requiring water of a lower quality.
    (c)  Fishing: Propagation of Fish, Shellfish, Game and Other Aquatic Life; secondary contact recreation
        in and on the water; or for any other use requiring water of a lower quality.
    (d)  Wild River: For all waters designated in 391-3-6-.03(13) as "Wild River,' there shall be no alteration
        of natural water quality from any source.
    (e)  Scenic River: For all waters designated in 391-3-6-.03(13) as "Scenic River," there shall be no
        alteration of natural water quality from any source.
    (f)  Coastal Fishing: This classification will be applicable to specific sites when so designated by the
        Environmental Protection Division. For waters designated as "Coastal Fishing", site specific criteria
        for dissolved oxygen will be assigned and detailed by footnote in Section 391-3-6.03(13), "Specific
        Water Use Classifications."  All other criteria and uses for the fishing use classification will apply for
        coastal fishing.

(15)Trout Streams. Streams designated as Primary Trout Waters are waters supporting a self-sustaining
    population of Rainbow, Brown or Brook Trout.  Streams designated as Secondary Trout Streams are
    those with no evidence of natural trout reproduction, but are capable of supporting trout throughout the
    year...
 Hawau
SOURCE: Source: Hawai'i Administrative Rules Title 11, Department of Health Chapter 54, Water Quality
Standards, April 17, 2000:
http://www.hawaii.goV/health/rules/11-54.pdf and
http://www.epa.aov/waterscience/standards/waslibrary/hi/hawaii  9  was.pdf

§11-54-01 Definitions. As used in this chapter:
•   "Amphidromous" means aquatic life that migrate to and from the sea, but not specifically for reproductive
    purposes. Amphidromous aquatic life in  Hawai'ian streams are confined to fresh waters as adults, but
    their larval stages are partially or entirely spent in the ocean as part of the zooplankton.
    "Anchialine pools" means coastal bodies of standing waters that have no surface connections to the
    ocean but display both tidal fluctuations and salinity ranges characteristic of fresh and brackish waters,
    indicating the presence of subsurface connections to the watertable and ocean. Anchialine pools are
    located in porous substrata (recent lava or limestone) and often contain a distinctive assemblage of
    native aquatic life. Deeper anchialine pools may  display  salinity stratification, and some shallow pools
    may contain standing water only on the highest tides.
    "Aquatic life" means "any type or species of mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, mollusk, crustacean,
    arthropod, invertebrate, coral, or other animal that inhabits the freshwater or marine environment and
    includes any part, product, egg, or offspring thereof; or freshwater or marine plants, including,  seeds,
    roots, products, and other parts thereof".
    "Estuaries" means characteristically brackish coastal waters in well-defined basins with a continuous or
    seasonal surface connection to the ocean that allows entry of marine fauna. Estuaries may be either
    natural or developed.
•   "Introduced aquatic life" means those species of  aquatic organisms that are not native to a given area
    or water body and whose populations were established (deliberately or accidentally) by human activity.

Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                        4-19

-------
    "Introduced" organisms are also referred to as "alierV1 or "exotic".
    "Low wetlands" means freshwater wetlands located below 100 m (330 ft) elevation that may be natural
    or artificial in origin and are usually found near coasts or in valley termini. Low wetlands are maintained
    by either stream, well, or ditch influent water, or by exposure of the natural water table. Low wetlands
    include, but are not limited to, natural lowland marjshes, riparian 'wetlands, littoral zones of standing
    waters (including lakes, reservoirs, ponds and fishponds) and agricultural wetlands such as taro lo'i.
•   "Native aquatic life" means those species or higher taxa of aquatic organisms that occur naturally in a
    given area or water body and whose populations were not established as a result of human activity.
    "Natural estuaries" means volumes of brackish coastal waters in well-defined basins of natural origin,
    found mainly at the mouths of streams or rivers. Natural estuaries can be either stream-fed (drowned
    stream mouths fed by perennial stream runoff)   or spring-fed (nearshore basins with subterranean fresh
    water sources). Stream-fed estuaries serve as important  migratory pathways for larval and juvenile
    amphidromous stream fauna.                    ,
    "Natural freshwater lakes" means standing water that is always fresh, in well-defined natural basins, with
    a surface area usually greater than 0.1 ha (0.25 acres), and  in which rooted emergent hydrophytes, if
    present, occupy no more than 30% of the surface area. Natural freshwater lakes in Hawai'i occur at high,
    intermediate, and low elevations. Lowland freshwater  lakes characteristically lack a natural oceanic
    connection  (surface or subsurface) of a magnitude sufficient to cause demonstrable tidal fluctuations.

§11-54-03 Classification of water uses.
(a)  The following use categories classify inland and marine waters for purposes of   applying the standards
    set forth in this chapter, and for the selection or definition  of appropriate quality parameters and uses
    to be protected in these waters. Storm water discharge into  State waters shall be allowed provided it
    meets the requirements specified in this section and the basic water quality criteria specified in section
    11-54-04.

(b)  Inland waters.
    (1)  Class 1. It is the objective of class 1 waters that these waters remain in their natural state as nearly
        as possible with an absolute minimum of pollution from any human-caused source. To the extent
        possible, the wilderness character of  these arejas shall be protected. Waste discharge into these
       waters is prohibited. Any conduct which results in a demonstrable increase in levels of point or
        nonpoint source contamination in class 1 waters is prohibited.
        (a) Class 1 .a. The uses to be protected in class 1 .a waters are scientific and educational purposes,
           protection of native breeding stock, baseline references from which human-caused changes can
           be measured, compatible recreation, aesthetic enjoyment, and   other nondegrading uses which
           are compatible with the protection of the ecosystems associated with waters of this class;
        (b) Class  1.b.  The uses to be protected in class  1.b waters are domestic water supplies, food
           processing, protection of native breeding sjtock, the support and propagation of aquatic life...

    (2)  Class 2. The objective of class 2 waters is to protect their use for recreational purposes, the support
        and propagation of aquatic life, agricultural and industrial water supplies, shipping, and navigation.
        The uses to be protected in this  class of waters are all  uses compatible with the protection and
        propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife, and vrith recreation in and on these waters. These waters
        shall not act as receiving waters for any discharge which has  not received the best degree of
        treatment or control compatible with the criteria established for this class...

(c) Marine waters.
    (1)  Class AA. It is the objective of class AA waters that these waters remain in their natural  pristine
        state as nearly as possible with an absolute minimum of pollution or alteration of water quality from
        any human-caused source or actions. To the extent practicable, the wilderness character of these
        areas shall be protected.  No zones of mixing shall be permitted in this class:
        (a) Within a defined reef area, in waters of a depth less than 18 meters (ten fathoms); or
        (b) In waters up to a distance of 300 meters (one thousand feet) off shore if there is no defined reef
           area and if the depth is greater than 18 meters (ten fathoms). The uses to be protected in this
           class of waters are oceanographic research, the support and propagation of shellfish and other
           marine life, conservation of coral reefs  and  wilderness areas, compatible recreation,  and
           aesthetic enjoyment. The classification of any water area as Class AA shall not preclude other
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-20

-------
           uses of the waters compatible with these objectives and in conformance with the criteria
           applicable to them;

    (2)  Class A.  It is the objective of class A waters that their use for recreational purposes and aesthetic
        enjoyment be protected. Any  other use shall be permitted as long as it  is compatible with the
        protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife, and with recreation in and on these waters.
        These waters shall not act as receiving waters for any discharge which has not received the best
        degree of treatment or control  compatible with the criteria established for this class.

(d) Marine bottom ecosystems.
    (1)  Class I.  It is the objective of class  I marine  bottom ecosystems that they remain  as nearly as
        possible in their natural pristine state with an absolute minimum of pollution from  any human-
        induced source. Uses of marine bottom ecosystems in this class are passive human uses without
        intervention or alteration, allowing the perpetuation and preservation of the marine bottom in a most
        natural  state, such as for nonconsumptive scientific research (demonstration, observation or
        monitoring  only),  nonconsumptive  education,  aesthetic enjoyment,  passive activities, and
        preservation;
    (2)  Class il.  It is the objective of class II marine  bottom ecosystems that their use for protection
        including propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife, and for recreational purposes not be limited in
        any way. The uses to be protected in this class of marine bottom ecosystems are all uses compatible
        with the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife, and with recreation.

S11-54-05.2 Inland water criteria.
(b) Specific criteria for streams.
    (2)  Bottom criteria for streams:
        (e) The director shall prescribe the appropriate parameters, measures, and criteria for monitoring
           stream bottom biological  communities including their habitat, which  may be  affected  by
           proposed actions. Permanent benchmark  stations  may be  required where necessary for
           monitoring purposes. The water quality criteria for this subsection shall be deemed to be met
           if time series surveys of benchmark  stations indicate  no relative  changes in  the relevant
           biological communities, as noted by biological community indicators or by indicator organisms
           which may be applicable to the specific site.
SOURCE: Source: Rules of the Department of Environmental Quality, IDAPA 58.01.02, Water Quality
Standards and Wastewater Treatment Requirements, amended April 5, 2000:
http://www2.state.id.us/adm/adminrules/ailes/idapa58/Q102.pdf and
http://www2.state.id.us/adm/adminrules/rules/idapa58/58index.htm

3.  Definitions

    04. Beneficial Use. Any of the various uses which may be made of the water of Idaho, including, but
    not limited to, domestic water supplies, industrial water supplies, agricultural water supplies, navigation,
    recreation in and on the water, wildlife habitat, and aesthetics. The beneficial use is dependent upon
    actual use,  the ability of the water to support a non-existing use either now or in the future, and its
    likelihood of being used in a given manner. The use of water for the purpose of wastewater dilution or
    as a receiving water for a waste treatment facility effluent is not a beneficial use. (8-24-94)

    05. Aquatic Species. Any plant or animal that lives at least part of its life in the water column or benthic
    portion of waters of the state. (8-24-94)

    11. Biological Monitoring or Biomonitoring. The  use of a biological entity  as a detector and its
    response as a measure to determine environmental conditions. Toxicity tests and biological surveys,
    including habitat monitoring, are common biomonitoring methods.


Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                       4-21

-------
    23. Desirable Species. Species indigenous to the area or those introduced by the Idaho Department
    of Fish and Game.

    71. Outstanding Resource Water (ORW). A high quality water, such as water of national and state
    parks and wildlife refuges and water of exceptional recreational or ecological significance, which has
    been designated by the  legislature  and subsequently listed  in this chapter.  ORW constitutes an
    outstanding national or state resource that requires protection from point and nonpoint source activities
    that may lower water quality. (3-20-97)

    85. Reference Stream Or Condition. A water body which represents the minimum conditions necessary
    to fully support the applicable designated beneficial uses as further specified in these rules, or natural
    conditions with few impacts from human activities ajnd which are representative of the highest level of
    support attainable in the basin. In highly mineralized areas or in the absence of such reference streams
    or water bodies, the Director, in consultation with the basin advisory group and the technical advisors
    to it, may define appropriate hypothetical reference, conditions or may use monitoring data specific to
    the site in question  to determine conditions in which the beneficial  uses are fully supported.

    87. Resident Species. Those species that commonly occur in a site including those that occur only
    seasonally or intermittently. This includes the species, genera, families, orders, classes, and phyla that:
    (8-24-94)
    a.  Are usually present at the site; (8-24-94)
    b.  Are present only seasonally due to migration; (8-24-94)
    c.  Are present intermittently because they periodically return or extend their ranges into the site; (8-24-
       94)
    d.  Were present at the site in the past but are not currently due to degraded conditions, and are
       expected to be  present at the site when conditions improve; and (8-24-94)
    e.  Are present in  nearby bodies of water but are not currently present at the site due to degraded
       conditions, and are expected to be present at the site when conditions improve. (8-24-94)

    111. Unique Ecological Significance. The attribute of any stream or water body which is inhabited or
    supports an endangered or threatened  species of plant or animal or a species of special  concern
    identified by the Idaho Department of Fish and  Game, which provides anadromous fish passage, or
    which provides spawning or rearing habitat for anadromous or desirable species of lake dwelling fishes.

53. BENEFICIAL USE  SUPPORT STATUS.
In determining whether a water body fully supports designated and existing beneficial uses, the Department
shall determine whether all of the applicable water  quality standards are being achieved, including any
criteria developed pursuant to these rules, and whether a healthy, balanced biological community is present.
The Department shall utilize biological and aquatic habitat parameters listed below and in the current version
of the "Water Body Assessment Guidance", as publ ishecj by the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality,
as a guide to assist in the assessment of beneficial use status. Revisions to this guidance will made after
notice and  an opportunity for public comment. These parameters are  not to be considered or treated as
individual water quality  criteria or otherwise interpreted or applied as water quality standards. (4-5-00)

    01. Aquatic Habitat Parameters. These parameters may include, but are not limited to, stream width,
    stream depth, stream shade, measurements of sediment impacts, bank stability, water flows, and other
    physical characteristics of the stream that affect habitat for fish, macroinvertebrates or other aquatic life;
    and (3-20-97)

    02. Biological Parameters. These parameters may include, but are not limited to, evaluation of aquatic
    macroinvertebrates including Ephemeroptera, Plecpptera and Trichoptera (EPT), Hilsenhoff Biotic Index,
    measures of functional feeding groups,  and the variety and number of fish or other aquatic life to
    determine biologicalcommunity diversity and functionality.

100.   SURFACE WATER USE DESIGNATIONS.
    01. Aquatic Life. (7-1-93)

Water Quality Standards
December 2002
                                                  4-22

-------
    a.   Cold water (COLD): water quality appropriate for the protection and maintenance of a viable aquatic
        life community for cold water species. (4-5-00)
    b.   Salmonid spawning: waters which provide or could provide a habitat for active self-propagating
        populations of salmonid fishes. (7-1-93)
    c.   Seasonal cold water (SC): water quality appropriate for the protection and maintenance of a viable
        aquatic life community of cool and cold water species, where cold water aquatic life may be absent
        during, or tolerant of, seasonally warm temperatures.  (4-5-00)
    d.   Warm water (WARM): water quality appropriate for the protection and maintenance of a viable
        aquatic life community for warm water species. (4-5-00)
    e.   Modified (MOD): water quality appropriate for an aquatic life community that is limited due to one
        (1) or more conditions set forth in 40 CFR131.10(g) which preclude attainment of reference streams
        or conditions.

    04. Wildlife Habitats. Water quality appropriate for wildlife habitats. This use applies to all surface
    waters of the state. (4-5-00)
Illinois
SOURCE: Title 35: Environmental Protection, Subtitle C: Water Pollution, Chapter I: Pollution Control Board,
Part 302 and 303 Water Quality Standards, amended August 26, 1999:
http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/Title 35/Subtitles/C/302.pdf and
http://www.ipcb.state,il.usrritle 35/Subtitles/C/303.pdf

Section 302.102 Allowed Mixing. Mixing Zones and ZIDs
(b) The portion, volume and area of any receiving waters within which mixing  is allowed pursuant to
    subsection (a) shall be limited by the following:
    2)  Mixing is not allowed in waters which include a tributary stream entrance if such mixing occludes the
        tributary mouth or otherwise restricts the movement of aquatic life into or out of the tributary.
    3)  Mixing is not allowed in waters containing mussel beds, endangered species habitat, fish spawning
        areas, areas of important aquatic life habitat, or any other natural features vital to the well being of
        aquatic life in such a manner that the maintenance of aquatic life in the body of water as a whole
        would be adversely affected.
    6)  Mixing must allow for a zone of passage for aquatic life in which water quality standards are met.

SUBPART E:
Section 302.501 Scope. Applicability,  and Definitions
"Resident or indigenous  species" means species that currently live a substantial portion of their life cycle,
or reproduce, in  a given body of water, or that are native species whose historical  range includes  a given
body of water.

"Target species" is a species to be protected by the criterion.

"Target species value" is the criterion value for the target species.

"Trophic level" means a functional classification of taxa within a community that is based on  feeding
relationships. For example, aquatic green plants and herbivores comprise the first and second trophic levels
in a food chain.

SUBPART B: Nonspecific Water Use Designations:
Section 303.204 Secondary Contact and Indigenous Aquatic Life Waters
Waters which are required to meet the secondary contact and indigenous aquatic life standards of Subpart
D, Part 302, are not required to meet  the general use standards or the public and  food processing water
supply standards of Subparts B and C, Part 302.
Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                       4-23

-------
 Indiana
SOURCE: Indiana Administrative Code, Title  327 Water Pollution Control Board, Article 2: Water Quality
Standards, Updated April 1, 2002: http://www.ai.org/leqislative/iac/title327.html
Indiana Water Quality Standards for the Non-Great Lakes Basin Portions of Indiana
327 IAC 2-1-3 Surface water use designations: multiple uses
    Sec. 3. (a) The following water uses are designated by the water pollution control board:
    (1 ) Surface waters of the state are designated for ful (-body contact recreation as provided in section 6(d)
       of this rule.
    (2) All waters, except as described in subdivision (5), will be capable of supporting a well-balanced,
       warm water aquatic community and, where natural temperatures will  permit, will be capable of
       supporting put-and-take trout fishing.  All waters capable of supporting the natural reproduction of
       trout as of February 17, 1977, shall be so maintained.
    (3) All waters which are used for public or industrial water supply must meet the standards for those
       uses at the points where the water is withdrawn. This use designation and its corresponding water
       quality standards are not to be construed as imposing a user restriction on those exercising or
       desiring to exercise the use.
    (4) All waters which are used for agricultural purposes must, as a minimum, meet the standards
       established in section 6{a) of this  rule.
    (5) All waters in which naturally poor physical characteristics (including lack of sufficient flow), naturally
       poor chemical quality, or irreversible man-induced conditions, which came into existence prior to
       January 1 , 1983, and having been established by use attainability analysis, public comment period,
       and hearing may qualify to be classified for limited use and must be evaluated for restoration and
       upgrading at teach triennial review of this rule.  Specific waters of the state designated for limited
       use are listed in section 1 1 (a) of this rule.
    (6) All waters which provide unusual aquatic habitat, which are an  integral feature of  an area of
       exceptional natural beauty or character, or whiclji support unique assemblages of aquatic organisms
       may be classified for exceptional use. Specific waters of the state designated for exceptional use
       are listed in section 1 1(b) of this rule.
       (b) Where multiple uses have been designated for a body  of water,  the  most protective of all
            simultaneously applicable standards will apply. (Water Pollution Control Board; 327 IAC 2-1-3-
            filed Sep 24, 1987, 3:00 p.m.: 11 IR 580; filbdFeb 1, 1990, 4:30 p.m.: 13 IR 1019; filed Jan 14,
            1997, 12:00 p.m.: 20 IR 1348)
327 IAC 2-1-6 Minimum surface water quality standards
    Sec. 6. (a) The following are minimum water quality conditions:
    (1) All waters at all times and at all places, including the mixing zone, shall meet the minimum
       conditions of being free from  substances, materials, floating debris, oil, or scum attributable to
       municipal, industrial, agricultural, and other land use practices, or other discharges:
       (A) that will settle to form  putrescent or otherwise objectionable deposits;
       (B) that are in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious;
       (C) that produce color, visible oil sheen, odor,  or other conditions in such degree as to create a
           nuisance;
       (D) which are in amounts sufficient to be acutely toxic to, or to otherwise severely injure or kill
           aquatic life, other animals, plants, or humans:
           (i)  to assure protection of aquatic life, concentrations of toxic substances shall not exceed the
               final acute value (FAV = 2 (AAC)) in the undiluted discharge or the acute aquatic criterion
               (AAC) outside the zone of initial dilution or, if applicable, the zone of discharge-induced
               mixing:
                  (AA) for certain substances, the AAC are established and set forth in Table 1 (which
                      table4 incorporates Table 2); and (BB) for substances for which an AAC is not
                      specified in Table 1, or if a different AAC can be scientifically justified based on
                      new toxicologies! data  or site-specific conditions concerning  water quality
                      characteristics or species present, an AAC can be calculated by the commissioner
                      using the procedures in sectioh  8.2 of this rule; and
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
                                                   4-24

-------
           (ii)  this clause shall not apply to the chemical control of plants and animals when that control
               is performed in compliance with approval conditions specified by the Indiana Department
               of Natural Resources as provided by 1C 14-2-1; and
       (E) which are in concentrations or com binations that wil I cause or contribute to the growth of aquatic
           plants or algae to such degree as to create a nuisance, be unsightly, or otherwise impair the
           designated uses.

    (2) At all times, all waters outside of mixing zones shall be free of substances in concentrations which
       on the basis of available scientific data are believed to be sufficient to injure,  be chronically toxic
       to, or be carcinogenic, mutagenic,  or teratogenic to humans, animals, aquatic life, or plants.  To
       assure protection against  the  adverse  effects identified  in this  subdivision,  the  following
       requirements are established:

The Great Lakes Basin is covered by its own regulation which follows:
327IAC 2-1.5-5: GLI Water Use Designations
327IAC 2-1.5-5 Surface water use designations: multiple uses
    Sec. 5. (a) The following water uses  are designated by the board:
    (1) Alt surface waters of the state within the Great Lakes system are designated for full-body contact
       recreation.

    (2) All surface waters, except as described  in subdivision (7), shall be capable of supporting a well-
       balanced, warm water aquatic community.

    (3) Where natural temperatures will permit, surface waters shall be capable of supporting put-and-take
       trout fishing. All waters capable  of supporting the natural reproduction of trout shall be so
       maintained. The following waters  are designated  as salmonid waters and shall be capable of
       supporting a salmonid fishery:
       (A) Trail Creek and its tributaries downstream to Lake Michigan.
       (B) East Branch of the Little Calumet River and its tributaries downstream to Lake Michigan via
           Burns Ditch.
       (C) Salt Creek above its confluence with the Little Calumet River.
       (D) Kintzele Ditch (Black Ditch) from Beverly Drive downstream to Lake Michigan.
       (E) The Galena River and its tributaries in LaPorte County.
       (F) The St. Joseph  River and its tributaries in St.  Joseph County from the Twin Branch Dam in
           Mishawaka downstream to the Indiana/Michigan state line.
       (G) The Indiana portion of the open waters of Lake Michigan.
       (H) Those waters designated by the Indiana department of natural resources for put-and-take trout
           fishing.

    (4) All surface waters used for public water  supply are designated as a public water supply. This use
       designation and its corresponding water quality criteria are not to be construed as imposing a user
       restriction on those exercising or desiring to exercise the use.

    (5) All surface waters used for industrial water supply are designated as an industrial water supply. This
       use designation and its corresponding water quality criteria are  not to be construed as imposing a
       user restriction on those exercising or desiring to exercise the use.

    (6) All surface waters used for agricultural purposes are designated as an agricultural use water.

    (7) Limited use waters are designated under section 19(a) of this rule pursuant to section 18 of this rule.
       All  waters that are designated as a limited use water under section 19(a) of  this rule must be
       evaluated for restoration and upgrading at each triennial review of this rule.
    (8) Outstanding state resource waters are designated under section 19(b) of thisrule pursuant to section
       18 of this rule.
       (b) Where multiple uses have been designated for a  body of water, the most protective of all
       simultaneously applicable standards will apply. (Water Pollution Control Board; 327 IAC 2-1.5-5;
       filed Jan 14, 1997, 12:00 p.m.: 20 IR 1369)

Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                       4-25

-------
327IAC 2-1.5-8Minimum surface water quality criteri
    Sec. 8. (a) All surface water quality criteria in this section, except those provided in subsection (b)(1),
    will cease to be applicable when the stream flows are less than the applicable stream design flow for the
    particular criterion as determined under 327 IAC 5-2*11.4.  (b) The following are minimum water quality
    conditions:
    (1)  All waters within the Great Lakes system at all limes and at all places, including waters within the
        mixing zone, shall meet the minimum condition^ of being free from substances, materials, floating
        debris, oil, or scum attributable to municipal, industrial, agricultural, and other land use practices,
        or other discharges that do any of the following:
        (A) Will settle to form putrescent or otherwise objectionable deposits.
        (B) Are in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or (deleterious.
        (C) Produce color, visible oil  sheen, odor, or  other conditions in such degree  as to  create a
           nuisance.
        (D) Are in concentrations or combinations that will cause or contribute to the growth of aquatic plants
           or algae to such degree as to create a nuisanpe, be unsightly, or otherwise impair the designated
           uses.
        (E) Are in amounts sufficient to be acutely toxic to, or to otherwise severely injure or kill aquatic life,
           other animals, plants, or humans. To assure protection of aquatic life, the waters shall  meet the
           following requirements:
           (i)  Concentrations of toxic substances shall not exceed the CMC outside the zone of initial
               dilution or the final acute value (FAV -  2 (CMC)} in the undiluted discharge unless, for a
               discharge to a receiving stream or Lake Michigan, an alternate mixing zone demonstration
               is conducted and approved  in accordance with 327 IAC 5-2-11.4(b)(4), in which case, the
               CMC shall be met outside the discharge-induced mixing zone:

    (2) At all times, all waters outside  of the applicable mixing zones determined in accordance with 327
        IAC 5-2-11.4(c) through 327  IAC 5-2-11.4(f) shall be free of substances in concentrations, that, on
       the basis of available scientific data, are believed to be sufficient to injure, be chronically toxic to,
        or be carcinogenic, mutagenic...
SOURCE:  Iowa Administrative Code, Environmental  Protection Rule 567, Chapter 61, Water Quality
Standards,  October 18, 2000:
http://www.state.ia.us/government/dnr/orqaniza/epd/prgrmdsc/wtrqual/spqLial.htm
http://www.state.ia.us/epd/prgrmdsc/wtrQual/sum.htm and
http://www.state.ia.us/dnr/orqaniza/epd/wtra/wtrgbor.htipn

Class "B" Waters: Waters which are designated as Class "B" are to be protected for wildlife, fish, aquatic
and semi-aquatic life and secondary contact water uses.  Class "B" waters are divided into the following
categories:

       Class "B" (CW) (cold water aquatic life): streams or lakes that support trout and associated aquatic
       communities
       Class "B" (WW) (significant resource warm water): lakes or rivers which support warm water game
       fish and associated aquatic communities, including sensitive species
    •   Class "B" (LR) (limited resource warm water): streams which support limited aquatic life populations
       primarily composed of minnows and other nongame fish species
    •   Class "B" (LW) (lakes and wetlands): artificial impoundments and natural lakes with lake-like
       conditions that support warm water game fish and associated aquatic communities

High Quality (HQ) waters: Waters with exceptionally  better quality than specified by Iowa water quality
criteria and with exceptional recreational and ecological importance.  Special protection is warranted to
maintain the unusual, unique or outstanding physical, chemical, or biological characteristics that these waters
possess.
Water Quality Standards
                                          December 2002
                                                                                             4-26

-------
High Quality Resource (HQR) waters: Waters of substantial recreational or ecological significance that
possess unusual, outstanding or unique physical, chemical or biological characteristics that enhance the
beneficial uses and warrant special protection.
Kansas
SOURCE: Kansas Register, Notice/Regulations, Administrative Regulations, Kansas Department of Health
and Environment, Water Pollution Control, Chapter 28-1, Volume 20, Number 33, August 16, 2001:
http://www.kdhe.state.ks.us/water/index.htmlffProposed%20Regulations%20and%20and
http://www.kdhe.state.ks.us/environment/qmp 200Q/SBMP QAMP.pdf

Article 16.  Surface Water Quality Standards

28-16-28b. Definitions.
(h)     "Bioassessment methods and procedures"  means the use of biological  methods  of assessing
       surface water quality including, but not limited to, field investigations of aquatic organisms and
       laboratory or field aquatic toxicity tests.
(k)     "Biota" means the animal and plant life  of a given geographical region.
(v)     "Ecological integrity" means the natural or unimpaired structure and functioning of an aquatic or
       terrestrial ecosystem.
(oo)    "Outstanding natural resource water" means any of the surface waters or surface water segments
       of exceptional recreational  or ecological significance identified in the surface water register, as
       defined in K.A.R. 28-16-28b(uu), and afforded the highest level of water quality protection under the
       antidegradation provisions of K.A.R. 28-16-28c(a) and the mixing zone provisions of KAR. 28-16-
       28c(b).
(ddd)  "Surface waters" means all  of the following:
       (1) Streams, including rivers,  creeks, brooks, sloughs, draws, arroyos, canals, springs, seeps, and
           cavern streams, and any alluvial aquifers associated with these surface waters;
       (2) lakes, including oxbow lakes and other natural lakes and man-made reservoirs,  lakes, and
           ponds;  and
       (3) wetlands, including water bodies meeting the technical definition for jurisdictional wetlands given
           in the corps of engineers wetlands delineation manual," as published in January 1987, which
           is hereby adopted by reference.

28-16-28d. Surface water use designation and classification.
(a)  Designated uses of surface waters are defined as follows.
    (2) "Aquatic life support use" means the use of surface  water for the maintenance of the ecological
       integrity of streams, lakes and wetlands, including the sustained growth and propagation of native
       aquatic life, indigenous or  migratory semi-aquatic life, or terrestrial wildlife directly or indirectly
       dependent on surface water for survival.
       (A) "Special  aquatic life  use waters" means either surface waters that contain combinations of
           habitat types and indigenous biota  not found commonly in the state or surface waters that
           contain representative populations of threatened  or endangered species.
       (B) "Expected aquatic life use  waters"  means surface waters containing habitat  types and
           indigenous biota commonly found or expected in the state.
       (C) "Restricted aquatic life use waters"  means surface waters containing indigenous biota limited
           in abundance diversity by the physical quality or  availability of habitat, due  to  natural
           deficiencies or artificial  modifications, compared  to more suitable habitats in adjacent waters.

28-16-286. Surface water quality criteria.
(a)  Criteria development guidance. The development of surface water quality criteria for substances not
    listed in these  standards shall be guided by water quality criteria published by the United States
    environmental protection agency. If the department finds that the criteria listed in this regulation are
    underprotective or overprotective for given surface water segment, appropriate site-specific criteria may
    be developed  and applied  by  the department,  in  accordance with K.A.R.  28-16-28f(f),  using
    bioassessment methods or other related scientific procedures...

Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                       4-27

-------
(c) Criteria for designated uses of surface waters. The numeric criteria i n tables 1 a, 1 b, 1 c, 1 d, and 1 e shall
    not apply if the critical low flow is less than 0.03 cubic meters per second for waters designated as
    expected aquatic life use waters and restricted aquatic life use waters, unless studies conducted or
    approved by the department show that water present during periods of no flow, or flow below critical low
    flow, provides important refuges for aquatic life and permits biological recolonization of intermittently
    flowing segments. The numeric criteria in tables 1 a, 1 b, 1 c, 1 d, and 1 e shall not apply if the critical low
    flow is less than 0.003 cubic meters per second for waters designated as special aquatic life use waters,
    unless studies conducted or approved by the department show that water present during periods of no
    flow, or flow below critical low flow, provides important refuges for aquatic life and permits biological
    recolonization of intermittently  flowing  segments.  The following critieria shall apply to all classified
    surface waters for the indicated designated uses.
Kentuck'
SOURCE: Title 401, Chapter 5, Kentucky Administrative Regulations (KAR), effective December 8,1999:
http://www.lrc.state.kv.us/kar/40j/005/026.htm

401 KAR 5:002.  Definitions for 401 KAR Chapter 5.
Section 1. Definitions.
(8)     "Adversely affect" or "adversely change" means, for purposes of 401 KAR 5:026 through 5:031, to
       alter or change the community structure or function, to reduce the number or proportion of sensitive
       species, or to increase the number or proportion of pollution tolerant aquatic species so that aquatic
       life use support or aquatic habitat is impaired.

(54)    "Cold water aquatic habitat" or "CAM"  means surface waters and associated substrate that will
       support indigenous aquatic life  or self-sustaining or  reproducing trout populations on a year-round
       basis.

(124)  "Impairment" means, for the purpose of 401 KAR 5:026 through 5:031, a detrimental impact to a
       surface water that prevents attainment of a designated use.

(127)  "Indigenous aquatic life" means naturally occurring  aquatic organisms including but not limited to
       bacteria, fungi, algae, aquatic insects, other aquatic invertebrates, reptiles, amphibians, and fishes.
       Under some natural conditions one (1) or more of the above groups may be absent from a surface
       water.

(233)  "Productive  aquatic community"  means an assemblage of indigenous  aquatic life capable  of
       reproduction and growth.

(236)  "Propagation" means the continuance of a species by successful  spawning, hatching,  and
       development or natural generation in the natural environment, as opposed to the maintenance of
       the species by artificial culture and stocking.

(250)  "Representative important species" means species which are representative, in terms of their
       biological needs, of a balanced, indigenous community of shellfish, fish, and wildlife in the body of
       water into which a discharge of heat is made.

(317)  "Warm water aquatic habitat" or "WAH" means any surface water and associated substrate capable
       of supporting indigenous warm  water aquatic life.

401 KAR 5:026.    Designation of uses of surface waters.
Section 1. Scope of Designation.
(2)     Designated uses are:
       (a)  Warm water aquatic habitat;
       (b)  Cold water aquatic habitat;
Water Quality Standards
Decanter 2002
4-28

-------
       (f)  Outstanding state resource water.

(4)     Outstanding state resource waters may have unique water quality characteristics that shall be
       protected by additional criteria established in 401 KAR 5:031, Section 7.

401 KAR 5:029.    General provisions.
Section 3.  Documentation for Redesignations.
(3)     Documentation to support the redesignation of a surface water of the Commonwealth shall be:
       (g) An assessment of the existing and potential aquatic life habitat in the surface waters under
           consideration and the adjacent upstream surface waters. The existing aquatic life shall be
           documented and livestock and natural wildlife dependence on the surface water shall be
           assessed. The occurrence of individuals or populations, indices of diversity and well-being, and
           abundance of species of any unique native biota shall be documented;

401 KAR 5:030. Antidegradation policy implementation methodology.
Section 1.  Implementation of Antidegradation Policy..
(1)     Categorization. Surface waters shall be placed into one (1) of three (3) categories:
       (a) Outstanding national resource waters:
       (b) Exceptional waters:
           1.  Surface water designated as a  Kentucky Wild River, unless it is categorized as an
               outstanding national resource water;
           2.  Outstanding state resource water  that does  not  support a  federally  threatened  or
               endangered aquatic species;
           3.  Surface water that fully supports all applicable designated uses and contains:
               a.  A fish community  that is rated "excellent" by the use of the Index of Biotic Integrity
                   included in "Methods for Assessing Biological Integrity of Surface Waters", incorporated
                   by reference in Section 4 of this administration regulation; or
               b.  A macroinvertebrate community that is rated "excellent" by the Macroinvertebrate
                   Bioassessment Index  included  in "A Macroinvertebrate Bioassessment Index for
                   Streams of the Interior Plateau Ecoregion in  Kentucky", incorporated by reference in
                   Section 4 of this administrative regulation; and
           4.  Water in the cabinet's  reference reach network.

401 KAR 5:031.    Surface water standards.
Section 2.  Minimum Criteria Applicable to All Surface Waters.
(1)     The following  minimum water quality criteria are applicable to all surface waters including mixing
       zones, with the exception that toxicity to aquatic life in mixing zones shall  be  subject to the
       provisions of 401 KAR 5:029,  Section  4. Surface waters shall not be aesthetically or otherwise
       degraded by substances that:
       (d) Injure, are chronically or  acutely toxic  to or produce adverse physiological or behavioral
           responses in humans, animals, fish and other aquatic life;
       (e) Produce undesirable aquatic life or result in the dominance of nuisance species;

Section 4. Aquatic Life.
(1)     Warm water aquatic habitat. The following parameters and associated criteria  shall apply for the
       protection of productive warm water aquatic communities, fowl, animal wildlife,  arboreous growth,
       agricultural, and industrial uses:
       (a) Natural alkalinity as CaCO3 shall not be reduced by more than twenty-five (25) percent. If
           natural alkalinity is below twenty (20) mg/l CaC03, there shall not be a reduction below the
           natural level. Alkalinity shall not be reduced or increased to a degree which may adversely affect
           the aquatic community.
       (c) Flow shall not be altered to a degree which will adversely affect the aquatic community.
       (d) Temperature shall not exceed thirty-one and seven-tenths (31.7) degrees Celsius (eighty-nine
           (89) degrees Fahrenheit).
           2.  The cabinet may determine allowable surface water temperatures on a site-specific basis
               utilizing available data which shall be based  on the effects of temperature on the aquatic
               biota which util ize specific surface waters of the Commonwealth and which may be affected

Water Quality Standards                        December 2002                                       4-29

-------
               by person-induced temperature charjges.  Effects on  downstream uses will  also  be
               considered in determining site-specific temperatures..
           3.  A successful demonstration concerning thermal discharge limits carried out under Section
               316(a) of  the  Clean Water Act  shall constitute compliance with the temperature
               requirements of this subsection. A successful demonstration assures the protection and
               propagation of a balanced indigenous population of shellfish, fish and wildlife in or on the
               water into which the discharge is made.
        (f) Solids.
           1.  Total dissolved solids. Total dissolved! solids shall not be changed to the extent that the
               indigenous aquatic community is adversely affected.
           2.  Total suspended solids. Totaf suspended solids shall not be changed to the extent that the
               indigenous aquatic community is adversely affected.
           3.  Settleable solids. The addition of settlejable solids that may alter the stream bottom so as
               to adversely affect productive aquatic communities is prohibited.
Louisiana
SOURCE: Louisiana Administrative Code, Title 33: Environmental Regulatory Code, Part IX, Water Quality,
March 20, 2001: http://www.deq.state.la.us/planning/reps/title33/33vD9.pdf

Chapter 11. Surface Water Quality Standards
§1101. Introduction
A.  The purpose of this Chapter is to establish surface water quality standards which will.
    1.  provide for the protection and preservation of the abundant natural resources of Louisiana's many
       and varied aquatic ecosystems;

§1105. Definitions
Biological and Aquatic Community Integrity—the condition of the aquatic community inhabiting a specified
habitat as measured by community structure and function.

Biological Succession—the gradual and orderly process of ecosystem or community development brought
about by changes in species populations that culminates in the production of a climax characteristic of a
particular geographic region.

Fresh Warmwater Biota—those aquatic life species whose populations typically inhabit waters with warm
temperatures (seasonal averages above 20 o C, 68 o F) and low salinities (less
than 2 parts per thousand,%o), including but not limited [to, black basses and freshwater sunfish and catfish
and characteristic freshwater aquatic invertebrates and wildlife.

Marine Water Biota—those aquatic life species whose populations typically inhabit waters with salinities
equal to or greater than 2 parts per thousand (%o) .including but not limited to characteristic fishes,
invertebrates and wildlife of coastal waters and the Gulf of Mexico.

S1109. Policy
B.  Water Use
    1.  It is the policy of the state of Louisiana that all slate waters should be protected for recreational uses
       and for the preservation and propagation of desirable species of aquatic biota and indigenous
       species of wildlife...
    2.  In applying this policy, the terms "recreational uses" and "desirable species of aquatic biota" will be
       given common sense applications. Recreational  uses will be classified as either "primary contact"
       or "secondary contact." "Desirable species of  aquatic biota" refers to a diverse and naturally
       occurring range of aquatic biota and not to  species that exist in the area in question in
       disproportionate numbers as a result of wastewater discharges. Desirable species of fish, shellfish
       and other invertebrates, wildlife, and other  aquatic biota will be specified as "fresh warmwater" or
       "marine water" species. All future designations of water uses and their associated criteria must, at
       a minimum, adhere to these classifications, except as provided in LAC 33:IX 1109.B.3 and C. will
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-30

-------
       be viewed as a problem  to be solved, not as an impediment to categorizing water bodies or
       assigning designated uses...

§1111. Water Use Designations
C. Fish and Wildlife Propagation .Fish and wildlife propagation includes the use of water for aquatic habitat,
   food, resting, reproduction, cover, and/or travel corridors for any indigenous wildlife and aquatic life
   species associated with the aquatic environment.  This use also includes the maintenance of water
   quality at a level that prevents damage to indigenous wildlife and aquatic life species associated with
   the aquatic environment and contamination of aquatic biota consumed by humans. The subcategory of
   "limited aquatic life and wildlife use" recognizes the natural variability of aquatic habitats, community
   requirements,  and local environmental  conditions. Limited aquatic life and wildlife use may be
   designated for water bodies having habitat that is uniform in structure and morphology with most of the
   regionally expected aquatic species  absent, low species diversity and richness, and/or a severely
   imbalanced trophic structure. Aquatic life able to survive and/or propagate in such water bodies include
   species tolerant of severe or variable environmental conditions. Water bodies that might qualify for the
   limited aquatic life and wildlife use subcategory include intermittent streams and man-made water bodies
   with characteristics including, but not limited to,  irreversible hydrologic modification, anthropogenically
   and irreversibly degraded water quality, uniform channel morphology, lack of channel structure, uniform
   substrate, lack of riparian structure, and similar characteristics making the available habitat for aquatic
   life and wildlife suboptimal.   Limited aquatic life  and wildlife  use will  be denoted in Table 3  (LAC
   33:IX. 1123) as an I."

E. Oyster Propagation. Oyster propagation is the use of water to maintain biological systems that support
   economically important species of oysters, clams, mussels, or other mollusks so that their productivity
   is preserved and the health of human consumers of these species is protected.
   This use shall apply only to those water bodies named in the Numerical  Criteria and Designated Uses
   Table and not to their tributaries or distributaries unless so specified.

G. Outstanding Natural  Resource Waters.  Outstanding  natural resource  waters include water bodies
   designated for preservation, protection, reclamation, or enhancement of wilderness, aesthetic qualities,
   and ecological regimes, such as those designated under the  Louisiana Natural and Scenic Rivers
   System or those designated by the department as waters of ecological significance. Characteristics of
   outstanding  natural resource waters include,  but are not limited to, highly diverse or unique instream
   and/or riparian habitat, high species diversity,  balanced trophic structure, unique species,  or similar
   qualities. This use designation applies only to the water bodies specifically identified in Table 3 (LAC
    33:IX. 1123) and not to their tributaries or distributaries unless so specified.

(51113. Criteria
B. General Criteria.
    12. Biological and Aquatic Community Integrity. The biological  and community structure and function
       in state waters shall be maintained, protected, and restored except where not attainable and feasible
       as defined in LAC 33:IX.1109.B.3. This is the ideal condition of the  aquatic community  inhabiting
       the unimpaired water bodies of a specified habitat and region as measured by community structure
       and function.  The  biological integrity will  be  guided by the fish  and  wildlife propagation use
       designated for that particular water body. Fish and wildlife  propagation uses are defined in LAC
       33:IX.1111 .C. The condition of these aquatic communities shall be determined from the  measures
       of physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of each surface  water body type, according to
       its designated use (LAC 33MX.1123). Reference site conditions will  represent naturally  attainable
       conditions.  These sites should be the least impacted and most representative of water body types.
       Such reference sites or segments of water bodies shall be those observed to support the greatest
       variety and abundance of aquatic life in the region as is expected to be or  has been recorded during
       past  surveys  in natural  settings essentially undisturbed by  human impacts,  development, or
       discharges. This condition shall be determined by consistent sampling  and reliable measures of
       selected, indicative communities of animals and/or invertebrates as established by the department
       and may be used in conjunction with acceptable chemical, physical, and microbial water quality
       measurements and records as deemed for this purpose.
Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                       4-31

-------
 Maine
SOURCE: Title 38, Section 464, Maine Revised Statutes, 1999:
http://ianus.state.me.us/legis/statutes/38/title38sec464.ljitml and http://www.state.me.us/dep/blwq

38 MRSA Section 464. Classification of Maine waters:
1.  Findings; objectives; purpose.. ..The Legislature declares that it is the State's objective to restore and
    maintain the chemical, physical and biological  integrity of the State's waters and to preserve certain
    pristine state waters. The Legislature further declares that in order to achieve this objective the State's
    goals are:
    C.  That water quality be sufficient to provide for ttje protection and propagation of fish, shellfish and
        wildlife and provide for recreation in and on the1 water.
4.  General provisions. The classification system for surface waters established by this article shall be
    subject to the following provisions.
    F.  The antidegradation policy of the State is governed by the following provisions.
        (1)     ...Determinations of what constitutes art existing in-stream water use on a particular water
               body must be made on a case-by-case basis by the department. In making its determination
               of uses to be protected and  maintained] the department shall consider designated uses for
               that water body and:
               (a) Aquatic, estuarine and marine life present in the water body;
               (b) Wildlife that utilize the water body;
               (c) Habitat, including  significant  wetlands, within a  water body supporting existing
                   populations of wildlife or aquatic, estuarine or marine life, or plant life that is maintained
                   by the water body;
               (d) Any other evidence that,  for divisions (a),  (b) and (c), demonstrates their ecological
                   significance because of their role or importance in the functioning of the ecosystem or
                   their rarity and, for division (d), demonstrates its historical or social significance.
        (1-A)   The department may only issue a waste discharge license pursuant to section 414-A, or
               approve a water quality certification pursuant to the United States Clean Water Act, Section
               401, Public Law 92-500, as amended, 'when the department finds that:
               (a) The existing in-stream use involves use of the water body by a population of plant life,
                   wildlife, or aquatic, estuarine or marine life, or as aquatic, estuarine, marine, wildlife,
                   or plant habitat, and the applicant has demonstrated that the proposed activity would
                   not have a significant impact on the existing use. For purpose of this division, significant
                   impact means:
                   (i)  Impairing the viability of the existing population, including significant impairment to
                       growth and reproduction or an alteration of the habitat which impairs viability of the
                       existing population; or

               The department shall determi ne what constitutes a population of a particular species based
               upon the degree of geographic and reproductive isolation from other individuals of the same
               species.

6.  Implementation of biological water quality criteria. The  implementation of water quality criteria
    pertaining to the protection of the resident  biological community shall be governed  by the provisions of
    this subsection.
    A.  At any time during the term of a valid wastewater discharge license that was issued prior to the
        effective date of this article, the board may modify that license in accordance with section 341-D,
        subsection 3 if the discharger is not in compliance with the water quality criteria pertaining to the
        protection  of the resident biological community. When a discharge license is  modified under this
        subsection, the board shall establish a reasonable schedule to bring the discharge into compliance
        with the water quality criteria pertaining to the protection of the resident biological community.
    B.  When a discharge license is issued after the effective date of this article and before the effective
        date of the rules adopted pursuant to subsection 5, the department shall establish a reasonable
        schedule to bring the discharge into  compliance with the water quality criteria pertaining to the
        protection  of the resident biological community!.
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
                                                   4-32

-------
38 MRSA § 465. Standards for classification of fresh surface waters
The department shall have 4 standards for the classification of fresh surface waters which are not classified
as great ponds.
1.   Class AA waters. Class AA shall be the highest classification and shall be applied to waters which are
    outstanding natural resources and which should be preserved because of their ecological,  social, scenic
    or recreational importance.
    A. Class AA waters shall be of such quality that they are suitable... as habitat for fish and other aquatic
       life. The habitat shall be characterized as free flowing and natural.
    B. The aquatic life, dissolved oxygen and bacteria content of Class AA waters shall be as  naturally
       occurs.

2.   Class A waters. Class A shall be the 2nd highest classification.
    A. Class A waters shall be of such quality that they are suitable...as habitat for fish and  other aquatic
       life. The habitat shall be characterized as natural.
    B. ...The aquatic life and bacteria content of Class A waters shall be as naturally occurs.

3.   Class B waters. Class B shall be the 3rd highest classification.
    A. Class B waters shall be of such quality that they are suitable... as habitat for fish and other aquatic
       life. The habitat shall be characterized as unimpaired.
    B. The dissolved oxygen content of Class B waters shall be not less than 7 parts per million or 75% of
       saturation, whichever is higher, except that for the period from October 1 st to May 14th, in order to
       ensure spawning and egg incubation of indigenous fish  species...
    C. Discharges to Class B waters shall not cause adverse impact to aquatic life in that  the receiving
       waters shall be of sufficient quality to support all aquatic species indigenous to the receiving water
       without detrimental changes in the resident biological community.

4.   Class C waters. Class C shall be the 4th highest classification.
    A. Class C waters shall be of such quality that they are suitable.. .as a habitat for fish and other aquatic
       life.
    B. The dissolved oxygen content of Class C water may be  not less than 5 parts per million or 60% of
       saturation, whichever is higher, except that in identified salmonid spawning areas where water
       quality is sufficient to ensure spawning, egg incubation and survival of early life stages, that water
       quality sufficient for these purposes must be maintained...
    C. Discharges to Class C waters may cause some changes to aquatic life, provided that the receiving
       waters shall be of sufficient quality to support all species of fish indigenous to the receiving waters
       and maintain the structure and function of the resident biological community.

38 MRSA § 466. Definitions: http://ianus.state.me.us/leqis/statutes/38/title38sec466.html
1.   Aquatic life. "Aquatic life" means any plants or animals which live at least part of their life cycle in fresh
    water.

2.   As naturally occurs. "As naturally occurs" means conditions  with essentially  the same  physical,
    chemical and biological characteristics as found in situations with similar habitats free of measurable
    effects of human activity.

3.   Community function. "Community function" means mechanisms of uptake, storage and transfer of
    life-sustaining materials available to a biological community which determines the efficiency of use and
    the amount of export of the materials from the community.

4.   Community structure. "Community structure" means the organization of a biological community based
    on numbers of individuals within different taxonomic groups and the proportion each taxonomic group
    represents of the total community.

10. Resident biological community. "Resident biological community" means aquatic life expected to exist
    in a habitat which is free from the influence of the discharge of any pollutant. This shall be established
    by accepted biomonitoring techniques.
Water Quality Standards                          December 2002                                       4-33

-------
 11. Unimpaired. "Unimpaired" means without a diminished capacity to support aquatic life.

 12. Without detrimental changes in the resident biological community. "Without detrimental changes
    in the resident biological community" means no significant loss of species or excessive dominance by
    any species or group of species attributable to human activity.
Maryland
SOURCE: Code of Maryland Regulations, Title 26, Department of the Environment, Subtitle 08 Water
Pollution, Subpart 26.0.02, November 6,1995: COMAR 26.08.02.01, Surface Water Quality Protection and
26.08.02.02, Designated Uses: https://constmail.gov.state.md.us/comar/26/26.08.02.01.htm and
https://constmail .gov .state.md. us/comar/26/26.08.02.02. htm

.01 Surface Water Quality Protection
A.  Purpose. To protect surface water quality, this State shall adopt water quality standards to:
    (1)  Protect public health or welfare;
    (2)  Enhance the quality of water;
    (3)  Protect aquatic resources; and
    (4)  Serve the purposes of the Federal Act.

B.  Water Quality Standards.
    (2)  Water quality standards shall, wherever attainable, provide water quality for the designated uses of:
        (b) Fishing;
        (c) Propagation of fish,  other aquatic life, and wildlife...

.02 Designated Uses
A.  General.
    (1)  Waters of this State shall, wherever attainable, be protected for the basic uses of water contact
        recreation, fishing, protection of aquatic life and, wildlife, and agricultural and industrial water supply
        as identified in Use I.

B. Specific Designated Uses.
    (1)  Use I: Water Contact Recreation,  and Protection of Aquatic Life. This use designation includes
        waters which are suitable for:
        (c) Fishing;
        (d) The growth and propagation of fish (other than trout), other aquatic life, and wildlife;

    (2)  Use I-P: Water Contact Recreation, Protection of Aquatic Life, and Public Water Supply. This use
        designation includes:
        (a) All uses identified for Use I....

    (3)  Use II: Shellfish Harvesting Waters. This use designation includes waters where:
        (a) Shellfish are propagated, stored, or gathered for marketing purposes; and
        (b) There are actual or potential areas for the harvesting of oysters, softshell clams, hardshell
           clams, and brackish water clams.

    (4)  Use III: Natural Trout Waters. This use designation includes waters which have the potential for or
        are:
        (a) Suitable for the growth and propagation of trout; and
        (b) Capable of supporting self-sustaining trout populations and their associated food organisms.

    (5)  Use III-P: Natural Trout Waters and Public Water Supply. This use designation includes:
        (a) All uses identified for Use III waters; and...

    (6)  Use IV: Recreational Trout Waters. This use designation includes cold or warm waters which have
        the potential for or are:
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
                                                  4-34

-------
       (a) Capable of holding or supporting adult trout for put-and-take fishing; and
       (b) Managed as a special fishery by periodic stocking and seasonal catching.

    (7) Use IV-P: Recreational Trout Waters and Public Water Supply. This use designation includes:
       (a) All uses identified for Use IV waters; and...
Massachusetts
SOURCE: 314 CMR 4.00: Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards, effective May 12, 2000:
http://www.state.ma.us/dep/bwp/iww/files/314cmr4.htrn

4.02: Definitions
Aquatic Life - A native, naturally diverse, community of aquatic flora and fauna.

Cold Water Fishery - Waters in which the maximum mean monthly temperature generally does not exceed
68 F (20 C) and, when other ecological factors are favorable (such as habitat), are capable of supporting a
year-round population of cold water stenothermal aquatic life such as trout (salmonidae).

Vernal Pool - A waterbody that has been certified by the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife
as a vernal pool.

Warm  Water Fishery - Waters in which the maximum mean monthly temperature generally exceeds 68 F
(20°C) during the summer months and are  not capable of sustaining a year-round population of cold water
stenothermal aquatic life.

4.05 Classes and Criteria
(3)  Inland Water Classes:
    (a)  Class A - These waters are designated as a source of public water supply. To the extent compatible
        with this use they shall be an excellent habitat for fish, other aquatic life and wildlife, and suitable
        for primary secondary contact recreation. These waters shall have excellent aesthetic value. These
        waters are designated for protection as Outstanding Resource Waters under 314  CMR 4.04(3).
        1.  Dissolved Oxygen-
           a.  Shall not be less than six mg/l unless background conditions are lower;
           b.  natural seasonal and daily variations above this level shall be maintained; levels shall not
               be lowered below 75% of saturation due to a discharge; and
           c.  site-specific criteria may apply where back-ground levels are lower than specified levels or
               to the hypolimnion of stratified lakes where the Department determines that designated uses
               are not impaired.
        2. Temperature -
           a.  Shall not exceed  68T  (20'C) in cold water fisheries, nor  83'F (28.3'C) in warm water
               fisheries, and the hse in temperature due  to a discharge shall not exceed 1,5'F (0.8'C); and
           b.  natural seasonal and daily variations shall be maintained. There shall be no changes from
               background conditions that would  impair any use  assigned  to  this Class,  including
               site-specific limits necessary to protect  normal  species diversity,  successful  migration,
               reproductive functions or growth of aquatic organisms.
        5.  Solids - These waters shall  be free from floating, suspended and settleable  solids in
           concentrations or  combinations that would impair any use assigned to  this class, that would
           cause aesthetically objectionable conditions,  or that would  impair the benthic biota or degrade
           the chemical composition of the bottom.

    (b)  Class B - These waters are designated as a habitat for fish, other aquatic life, and wildlife, and for
        primary and secondary contact recreation. Where designated they shall be suitable as a source of
        public water supply with appropriate treatment. They shall be suitable for irrigation and other
        agricultural uses and for compatible industrial cooling and process uses.  These waters shall have
        consistently good aesthetic value.
        1.  Dissolved Oxygen

Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                       4-35

-------
           a.  Shall not be less than 6.0 mg/l in cold water fisheries nor less than 5.0 mg/l in warm water
               fisheries unless background conditions are lower;
           b.  natural seasonal and daily variations above these levels shall be maintained; levels shall
               not be lowered below 75% of saturation in cold water fisheries nor 60% of saturation in
               warm  water fisheries due to a discharge; and
           c.  site-specific criteria may apply where background levels are lower than specified levels, to
               the hypolim nion of stratified lakes or whejre the Departm ent determines that designated uses
               are not impaired.
        2.  Temperature -
           a.  Shall  not exceed 68T  (20*C) in cold water fisheries  nor 83*F (28.3'C) in warm water
               fisheries, and the rise in temperature  <(lue to a discharge shall not exceed 3'F (1.7'C) in
               rivers and streams designated as cold water fisheries nor 5'F (2.8'C) in rivers and streams
               designated as warm water fisheries (based on the minimum expected flow for the month);
               in lakes and ponds the  rise shall not exceed 3"F (1.7'C) in the epilimnion (based on the
               monthly average of maximum daily temperature); and
           b.  natural seasonal and daily variations shall be maintained. There shall be no changes from
               background  conditions that would impair any  use assigned to this  Class, including
               site-specific  limits necessary to protect normal species diversity, successful  migration,
               reproductive functions or growth of aquatic organisms.
        5.  Solids -  These  waters  shall  be free  from floating,  suspended  and settleable solids in
           concentrations and combinations that would impair any use assigned to this Class, that would
           cause aesthetically objectionable condition^, or that would impair the benthic biota or degrade
           the chemical composition of the bottom.

    (c)  Class C - These waters are designated as a habitat for fish, other aquatic life and wildlife, and for
        secondary contact recreation. These waters sfyall be suitable for the irrigation of crops used for
        consumption after cooking and for compatible industrial cooling and process uses. These waters
        shall have good aesthetic value.
        1.  Dissolved Oxygen -
           a.  Shall not be less than 5.0 mg/l at least 16 hours of any 24-hour period and not less than 3.0
               mg/l at any time unless  background conditions are lower;
           b.  natural seasonal and daily variations above these levels shall be maintained; levels shall
               not be lowered below 50% of saturation due to a discharge; and (c) site-specific criteria may
               apply where background levels are lower than specified levels, or to the hypolimnion of
               stratified takes where the Department determines that designated uses are not  impaired.
        2.  Temperature -
           a.  Shall not exceed 85'F (29.4'C) nor shall the rise due to a discharge exceed 5F (2.8'C); and
           b.  Natural seasonal and daily variations snail be maintained. There shall be no changes from
               background conditions that would impair any use  assigned to this Class, including the
               site-specific  limits necessary to protect normal species diversity, successful  migration,
               reproductive functions or growth of aquatic organisms.
        5.  Solids -  These  waters  shall be free from  floating,  suspended  and settleable solids in
           concentrations and combinations that would impair any use assigned to this Class, that would
           cause aesthetically objectionable conditions, or that would impair the benthic biota or degrade
           the chemical composition of the bottom.
Michigan
This language has not been reviewed for accuracy by state/tribal agency.

SOURCE: Department of Environmental Quality Environmental Response Division General Rules, Part 4.
Water Quality Standards: http://www.deq.state.mi.us/dpcuments/dea-swa-qleas-305b2002Appl.doc

R 323.1043 Definitions: A to L
Rule 43
(b)  "Acceptable wildlife endpoints" means subchronia and chronic endpoints that affect reproductive or
    developmental success, organismal viability, or growth or any other endpoint that is, or is directly related

Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                       4-36

-------
    to, a parameter that influences population dynamics.
(d) "Adverse effect" means any deleterious effect to organisms due to exposure to a substance. The term
    includes effects that are or may become debilitating, harmful, or toxic to the normal functions of the
    organism.  The term does not include nonharmful effects such as tissue discoloration alone or the
    induction of enzymes involved in the metabolism of the substance.
(f)  "Anadromous salmonids" means trout and salmon that ascend streams to spawn.
(r)  "Coldwater fishery" means waterbodies that contain fish species which thrive in relatively cold water,
    including any of the following:
    (i)  Trout.
    (ii)  Salmon.
    (iii) Whitefish.
    (iv) Cisco.
(x) "Designated use" means a use of the surface waters of the state as established by these rules, including
    use for any of the following:
    (i)  Industrial, agricultural, and public water supply.
    (ii)  Recreation.
    (iii) Warmwater and coldwater fisheries, other aquatic life, and wildlife.
    (iv) Navigation.
(hh)"Fisheries, other aquatic life, and wildlife use" means the use of the surface waters of the state by fish,
    other aquatic life,  and wildlife for any life history stage or activity and the protection of fish for human
    consumption.

R 323.1044 Definitions: M to W.
Rule 44.
(c) "Natural water temperature" means the temperature of a body of water without an influence from an
    artificial source or a temperature as otherwise determined by the department.
(dd)"Warmwater fishery" meansa waterbody that contains fish species which thrive in relatively warm water,
    including any of the following:
    (i)  Bass.
    (ii)  Pike.
    (iii) Walleye.
    (iv) Panfish.
 Minnesota
SOURCE: Minnesota Rules, Chapter 7050, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Waters of the State, October
11, 2000: http://www.revisor.lea.state.mn.us/arule/7050/

7050.0150 Determination of Water Quality Condition and Compliance.
The intent of the state is to protect and maintain surface waters in a condition which allows for the
maintenance of all existing beneficial uses.  The condition of a surface water body is determined by its
physical, chemical, and biological qualities.

The biological quality of any given surface water body shall be assessed by comparison to the biological
integrity of a reference condition or conditions which best represents the most natural condition for that
surface water body type within a geographic region. The biological quality shall be determined by reliable
measures of indicative communities of fauna and flora.

7050.0200 Water Use Classifications for Waters of the State:
Subpart. 3. Class 2 waters, aquatic life and recreation.  Aquatic life and recreation includes all waters
of the state which do or may support fish, other aquatic life, bathing, boating, or other recreational purposes,
and where quality control is or may be necessary to protect aquatic or terrestrial life or their habitats, or the
public health, safety, or welfare.

Subp. 5. Class 4 waters, agriculture and wildlife. Agriculture and wildlife includes all waters of the state
which are or may be used for any agriculture purposes, including stock watering and irrigation, or by

Water Quality Standards                          December 2002                                        4-3?


-------
waterfowl or other wildlife, and for which quality control is or may be necessary to protect terrestrial life and
its habitat or the public health, safety, or welfare.

Subp. 8. Class 7 waters, limited resource value waters.  Limited resource value waters include surface
waters of the state which have been subject to a use attainability analysis and have been found to have
limited value as a water resource...  The agency, in cooperation and agreement with the Department of
Natural Resources with respect to determination of fisheries values and potential, shall use this information
to determine the extent to which the waters of the state [demonstrate:
    A. the existing and potential faunal and floral communities are severely limited by natural conditions
       as exhibited by poor water quality characteristics, lack of habitat, or lack of water; or
    B. the  quality of the  resource  has  been significantly altered by human  activity and the effect is
       essentially  irreversible; and
    C. there are limited recreational opportunities (such as fishing, swimming, wading, or boating) in and
       on the water resource...
7050.0222 SPECIFIC STANDARDS OF QUALITY AND PURITY FOR CLASS 2 WATERS OF THE STATE:
AQUATIC LIFE AND RECREATION.
Subp. 2. Class 2A waters; aquatic life and recreation.  The quality of Class 2A surface waters shall be
such as to permit the propagation and  maintenance, of a healthy  community of  cold water sport or
commercial fish and associated aquatic life, and their habitats. These waters shall be suitable for aquatic
recreation of all kinds, including bathing, for which the waters may be  usable.  This class of surface waters
is also protected  as a source of drinking water...

Subp. 3.  Class 2Bd waters.  The quality of Class 2Bd  surface waters shall be such as to permit the
propagation and  maintenance of a healthy community of cool or warm water sport or commercial fish and
associated aquatic life and their habitats.  These waters' shall be suitable for aquatic recreation of all kinds,
including bathing, for which the waters may be usable. This class of surface waters are also protected as
a source of drinking water...

Subp. 4.  Class 2B waters.  The quality of Class 2B  surface  waters  shall  be  such as to permit the
propagation and  maintenance of a healthy community pf cool or warm water sport or commercial fish and
associated aquatic life, and their habitats. These wateri shall be suitable for aquatic recreation of all kinds,
including bathing, for which the waters may be  usable.  This class of surface water is not protected as a
source of drinking water...

Subp. 5.  Class 2C waters.  The quality of Class 2C  surface  waters  shall  be  such as to permit the
propagation and  maintenance of a healthy community of indigenous fish and associated aquatic life, and
their habitats. These waters shall  be suitable for boating and other forms of aquatic recreation for which
the waters may be usable...

Subp. 6. Class 2D waters. The quality of Class 2D wetlands shall be such as to permit  the propagation
and  maintenance of a healthy community of aquatic and terrestrial  species indigenous to wetlands, and
their habitats. Wetlands  also add to the biological diversity of the  landscape. These  waters shall be
suitable for boating and other forms of aquatic recreation for which the wetland may be usable...
Mississippi
SOURCE: State of Mississippi Water Quality Criteria for Intrastate, Interstate and Coastal Waters, Adopted
November 16,1995:http:/Awflw.dea.state.ms.us/newweb/op<^ome.nsf/paaes/SurfaceWaterfiles/$file/wqc.pdf
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-38

-------
SECTION HI. SPECIFIC WATER QUALITY CRITERIA

4.  FISH AND WILDLIFE:
Waters in this classification are intended for fishing and for propagation of fish, aquatic life, and wildlife.
Waters that meet the Fish and Wildlife Criteria shall also be suitable for secondary contact recreation.
Secondary contact recreation is def i ned as incidental contact with the water, including wading and occasional
swimming.

5.  EPHEMERAL STREAM:
Waters in this classification do not support a fisheries resource and are not usable for human consumption
or aquatic life. Ephemeral streams normally are natural watercourses, including natural watercourses that
have been modified by channelization or manmade drainage ditches, that without the influent of point source
discharges flow only in direct response to precipitation or irrigation return-water discharge in the immediate
vicinity and whose channels are normally above the groundwater table. These streams may contain a
transient population of aquatic life during the portion of the  year when there is suitable habitat for fish
survival. Normally, aquatic habitat in these streams is not adequate to support a reproductive cycle for fish
and other aquatic life. Wetlands are excluded from this classification.

Waters in this classification shall be protective of wildlife and humans which may come in contact with the
waters. Waters contained in ephemeral streams shall also allow maintenance of the standards applicable
to all downstream waters.
 Missouri
SOURCE: Missouri Rules of Department of Natural Resources Division 20—Clean Water Commission
Chapter 7—Water Quality, August 31,2000:
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/standards/waslibrary/mo/mo 7 wqs.pdf:
http://mosl.sos.state.mo.us/csr/10csr/10c20-7a.pdfandwww.dnr.state.mo.us/water

10 CSR 20-7.031 Water Quality Standards:
(1) Definitions.
    (C) Beneficial water uses...
        2.  Livestock and wildlife watering—Maintenance of conditions to support health in livestock and
           wildlife.
        3.  Cold-water fishery—Waters in which naturally occurring water quality and habitat conditions
           allow the maintenance of a naturally reproducing or stocked trout fishery and other naturally
           reproducing populations of recreationally important fish species.
        4.  Cool-water fishery—Waters in which naturally occurring water quality and habitat    certiticns
           allow the maintenance of a sensitive, high-quality sport fishery (including smallmouth bass and
           rock bass) and other naturally reproducing populations of recreationally important fish species.
        5.  Protection of aquatic life (General warm-water fishery)—Waters in which naturally occurring
           water quality and habitat conditions allow the maintenance of a wide variety of warm-water
           biota, including naturally reproducing populations of recreationally important fish species...
        6.  Protection of aquatic life (Limited warm-water fishery)—Waters in which natural water quality
           and/or habitat conditions prevent the maintenance of naturally reproducing  populations of
           recreationally important fish species.
        13. Habitat for  resident  and  migratory  wildlife  species,  including  rare  and endangered
           species—Waters that provide essential breeding, nesting, feeding and predator escape habitats
           for wildlife including water-fowl,  birds, mammals, fish,  amphibians and reptiles.

    (D) Biocriteria—Numeric values or narrative expressions that describe the reference biological integrity
        of aquatic communities inhabiting waters that have been designated for aquatic-life protection.

    (G) Ecoregion—A major region within the logical, hydrological, chemical and biological
        characteristics.

    (O) Outstanding national resource waters—Waters which have outstanding national recreational and

Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                      4-39

-------
        ecological significance.

    (R) Reference stream reaches—Stream reaches de^erm ined by the department to be the best available
        representatives of ecoregion waters in a natural condition, with respect to habitat, water quality,
        biological integrity and diversity, watershed land use and riparian conditions.

(4) Specific Criteria
    (Q) Biocriteria. The biological integrity of waters, as measured by lists or numeric diversity indices of
        benthic invertebrates, fish, algae or other appropriate biological indicators, shall not be significantly
        different from reference waters. Waters shall bje compared with reference waters of similar size
        within an ecoregion.
Montana
SOURCE: Administrative Rules of Montana, Rule 17, Chapter 30, Water Quality, Subchapter 6, Surface
Water Quality Standards and Procedures, June 30,19&>:
http://www.deq.state.mt.us/dir/Legal/Chapters/CH30-06.pdfandwww.deq.state.mt.Lis

17.30.601 POLICY
(1)  The following standards are adopted to conserve water by protecting, maintaining, and improving the
    quality and potability of water for public water supplies, wildlife, fish and aquatic life, agriculture, industry,
    recreation, and other beneficial uses.

17.30.602 DEFINITIONS
(10)"Ephemeral stream" means  a stream or part of a stream which flows only in direct response to
    precipitation in the immediate watershed or in resppnse to the melting of a cover of snow and ice and
    whose channel bottom is always above the local water table.
(13)"lntermittent stream" means a stream or reach of a stream that is below the local water table for at least
    some part of the year, and obtains its flow from both surface runoff and groundwater discharge.
(17)"Naturally occurring" means conditions or material present from runoff or percolation over which man
    has no control or from developed land where all reasonable land, soil and water conservation practices
    have been applied. Conditions resulting from the reasonable operation of dams in existence as of July
    1,1971 are natural.

17.30.621 A-CLOSED CLASSIFICATION STANDARDS
(1)  Waters classified A-Closed are suitable for drinking, culinary, and food processing purposes after simple
    disinfection. Water quality is suitable for swimming, recreation, growth, and propagation of fishes and
    associated aquatic life...
(3)  No person may violate the following specific water quality standards for waters classified A-Closed:
    (f) No increases are allowed above naturally occurring concentrations of sediment, settleable solids,
       oils, or floating solids, which will or are likely to create a nuisance or render the waters harmful,
       detrimental, or injurious to public health, recreation, safety, welfare, livestock, wild animals, birds,
       fish, or other wildlife.

17.30.622-17.30.627 CLASSIFICATION STANDARDS
A-1, B-1, B-2, 8-3, C-1, and C-2 classification standards state that water quality must be suitable for...growth
and propagation of salmonid fishes and associated aquatic life, waterfowl and furbearers... .[and other uses
as assigned for each class]. [ The following condition applies to these classifications:]

(3)  No person may violate the following specific water quality standards for waters classified A-1:
    (f) No increases are allowed above naturally occurring concentrations of sediment, settleable solids,
       oils, or floating solids, which will or are likely to create a nuisance or render the waters harmful,
       detrimental, or injurious to public health, recreation, safety, welfare, livestock, wild animals, birds,
       fish, or other wildlife.
17.30.628 I CLASSIFICATION STANDARDS

Water Quality Standards                         December 2002
4-40

-------
(1) The goal of the state of Montana is to have these waters fully support the following uses: drinking,
   culinary, and food processing purposes after conventional treatment; bathing, swimming, and recreation;
   growth and propagation of fishes and associated aquatic life, waterfowl, and furbearers, and agricultural
   and industrial water supply...

17.30.629 C-3 CLASSIFICATION STANDARDS
(1) Waters classified C-3 are suitable for bathing, swimming and recreation, growth and propagation of non-
   salmonid fishes and associated aquatic life, waterfowl and furbearers...
Nebraska
SOURCE: Title 117 - Nebraska Surface Water Quality Standards, Nebraska Department of Environmental
Quality, Chapter 4: Standards for Water Quality, August 22, 2000:  http://www.deq.state.ne.us/

001 It is the public policy of the State of Nebraska to protect and improve the quality of surface water for
human consumption, wildlife, fish and other aquatic life, industry, recreation, and other productive, beneficial
uses.

The beneficial uses defined by these standards are:
   Aquatic Life
       Coldwater (Class A and B)
       Warmwater (Class A and B)

   003.01 G Biological Criteria. Any human activity causing water pollution which would significantly
   degrade the biological integrity of a body of water or significantly impact or displace an identified "key
   species" shall not be allowed except as specified in Chapter 2.

       003.01G1 Key Species.  Key species are identified endangered, threatened, sensitive, or
       recreationally-important aquatic species. Key species are designated by stream segment (Chapter
       5). The following list defines the aquatic species considered by the Department to be key species.
 COMMON NAME

 Endangered Species:
 Pallid sturgeon
 Topeka shiner

 Threatened Species:
 Lake sturgeon
 Northern redbelly dace
 Pearl dace
 Finescale dace
 Blacknose shiner

 Sensitive Species:
 Lake chub
 Brook stickleback
 Iowa darter
 Johnny darter
 Orangethroat darter
 Blacknose dace
 Grass pickerel
 Pumpkinseed
 Golden shiner
 Common shiner
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Scaphirhynchus albus
Notropis topeka


Acipenser fulvescens
Phoxinus eos
Semotilus margarita
Phoxinus neogaeus
Notropis heterolepis


Couesius plumbeus
Culea inconstans
Etheostoma exile
Etheostoma nigrum
Etheostoma spectabile
Rhinichthys atratulus
Esox americanus
Lepomis gibbosus
Notemigonus crysoleucas
Notropis comutus
Water Quality Standards
                                         December 2002
                                                                                          4-41

-------
 COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
 Recreational ly-lmportant Species:
 Shovelnose sturgeon
 Paddlefish
 Brook trout
 Brown trout
 Rainbow trout
 Northern pike
 Muskeilunge
 Blue catfish
 Channel catfish
 Flathead catfish
 Striped  bass
 White bass
 Rock bass
 Largemouth bass
 Smallmouth bass
 Spotted bass
 Redear sunfish
 Bluegill
 Black crappie
 White crappie
 Yellow perch
 Sauger
 Walleye
Scaphirhynchus platorynchus
Polyodon spathula
Salvelinus fontinalis
Salmo tnitia
Qncorhynchus mykiss
£$ox lucius
Esox masquinongy
Ictalurvs furcatus
Ictalurus punctatus
Rylodictis olivaris
Morone saxatilis
Morone chrysops
Ambloplftes ntpestris
Micropterus salmoides
Micropterus dolomieui
Micropterus punctulatus
Lepomis microlophus
Lepomis macrochirus
Pomoxis nigromaculatus
Pomoxis annularis
Rerca flavescens
Stizostedion canadense
Stizostedion vitreum vitreum
1 Endangered, threatened, and recreationally-important aquatic species are not included.

003.02 Site-Specific Criteria for Aquatic Life.
    003.02A1 The following are acceptable conditions for developing site-specific criteria.
       003.02A1a Resident species of a water body are more or tess sensitive than those species used to
       develop a water quality criterion.
           003.02A1a(1) Natural adaptive processes have enabled a viable, balanced aquatic community
           to exist in waters where natural background levels of a chemical exceed the criterion (e.g.,
           resident species have evolved a genetically-based greater resistance to high concentrations of
           a chemical).

           003.02A1a(2) The composition of aquatic species in a water body is different from those used
           in deriving a criterion (e.g., most of the species considered among the most sensitive, such as
           salmonids or the cladoceran, Daphnia magna, which were used in developing a criterion, are
           absent from a water body).

    003.02A3 Site-specific criteria shall protect all life stages of resident species year-round (or seasonally
    for seasonally dependent criteria) and  prevent acute and chronic toxicity in all parts of a water body...
Nevada
SOURCE: Nevada Administrative Code, Chapter 445A, Standards for Water Quality, September 2000:
http://www.ndep.state.nv.us/nac/445a1l9.pdf

NAC 445A. 119 Criteria for water quality for designated beneficial uses. The water quality criteria for
designated beneficial uses for the various waters of the state are in the following table.

[NOTE: In this section of NV's standards, the table titled Water Quality Criteria for Designated Beneficial

Water Quality Standards                        December 2002                                      4-42

-------
Uses  includes Aquatic Life with the following levels:  Warmwater: propagation and put and take and
Coldwater: propagation and put and take.]

NAC 445A. 122 Standards applicable to beneficial uses.
1.   The following standards are intended to protect both existing and designated beneficial uses and must
    not be used to prohibit the use of the water as authorized under Title 48 of NRS:
    (c) Aquatic life. The water must be suitable as a habitat for fish and other aquatic life existing in a body
       of water. This does not preclude the reestablishment of other fish or aquatic life.
    (h) Propagation of wildlife. The water must be suitable for the propagation of wildlife and   waterfaM
       without treatment.
    (i) Waters of extraordinary ecological  or aesthetic  value. The unique ecological or aesthetic value of
       the water must be maintained.

 NAC 445A.124 Class A waters: Description: beneficial uses: quality standards.
1.   Class A  waters include waters or portions of waters located in areas of little human habitation, no
    industrial development or intensive agriculture  and where the watershed is relatively undisturbed by
    man's activity.
2.   The beneficial uses of class A waters are... aquatic life, propagation of wildlife, irrigation, watering of
    livestock, recreation including contact with the water and recreation not involving contact with the water.

 NAC 44SA.125 Class B waters: Description: beneficial uses: quality standards.
1.   Class B  waters include waters or portions of waters which are  located in areas of light or moderate
    human habitation,  little industrial development, light-to-moderate agricultural development and where
    the watershed is only moderately influenced by man's activity.
2.   The beneficial uses of class B water are ...aquatic life and propagation of wildlife,  recreation involving
    contact with the water...

NAC 445A. 126 Class C waters: Description: beneficial uses: quality standards.
1.   Class C  waters include waters or portions of waters which are located in areas of moderate-to-urban
    human habitation, where industrial development is present in moderate amounts, agricultural practices
    are intensive and where the watershed is considerably altered by man's activity.
2.   The beneficial uses of class C water are ... aquatic  life, propagation of wildlife...

NAC 445A. 127 Class D waters: Description: beneficial uses: quality standards.
1.   Class D waters include waters or portions of waters located in areas of urban development, highly
    industrialized or intensively used for agriculture or  a combination of all the above and where effluent
    sources  include a multiplicity of waste discharges from the highly altered watershed.
2.   The beneficial uses of class D waters are ...  aquatic life, propagation of wildlife...
New Hampshire
SOURCE: New Hampshire Code of Administrative Rules Chapter Env-Ws 1700 Surface Water Quality
Regulations, December 10, 1999: http://www.des.state.nh.usAivmb/Env-Ws1700.pdf

PART Env-Ws 1702 DEFINITIONS
Env-Ws 1702.04 "Benthic community" mean the community of plants and animals that live on, over, or in
the substrate of the surface water.

Env-Ws 1702.07 "Biological integrity" means the ability of an aquatic ecosystem to support and maintain a
balanced, integrated, adaptive community of organisms having a species composition, diversity,  and
functional organization comparable to that of similar natural habitats of a region.

Env-Ws 1702.08 "Biota" means species of plants or animals occurring in surface waters.

PART Env-Ws 1703 WATER QUALITY STANDARDS


Water Quality Standards                        December 2002                                      4-43

-------
Env-Ws 1703.01 Water Use Classifications.
    (b)  All surface waters shall be  restored to meet  the  water  quality criteria for  their designated
        classification including existing and designated uses,  and to maintain the chemical, physical, and
        biological integrity of surface waters.
    (c)  All surface waters shall  provide, wherever attainable, for the protection and propagation of fish,
        shellfish and wildlife, and for recreation in and on the surface waters.

Env-Ws 1703.19 Biological and Aquatic Community Integrity.
    (a)  The surface waters shall support and maintain a| balanced, integrated, and adaptive community of
        organisms having a species composition, diversity, and functional organization comparable to that
        of similar natural habitats of a region.
    (b)  Differences from naturally occurring conditions shall  be limited to  non-detrimental differences in
        community structure and function.

PART Env-Ws 1707 MIXING ZONES
Env-Ws 1707.02 Minimum Criteria. Mixing zones shall be subject to site specific criteria that, as a minimum:
    (b)  Do not interfere with biological communities or populations of indigenous species;
    (f)  Do not impinge upon spawning grounds and/or nursery areas of any indigenous aquatic species;
    (g)  Do not result in the mortality of any plants, aninfials, humans, or aquatic life within the    mixing
        zone.
New Jerse-
SOURCE: New Jersey Administrative Code  7:9-6 (Chapter 9B. Surface Water Quality Standards), as
amended May 18, 1998: http://www. state. njLus/depAvatershedmgt/swqs/98swqs web.pdf

7:9B-1.4 Definitions
"Anadromous fish" means fish that spend most of their life in saline waters and migrate to fresh waters to
spawn.

"Aquatic substrata" means soil material and associated biota underlying the water.

"Biota" means the animal and plant life of an ecosystem; flora and fauna collectively.

"Diadromous fish" means fish that spend most of their life in one type of water, either fresh or saline, and
migrate to the  other type to spawn.

"FW1" means those fresh waters, as designated in N.J.A.C. 7:9B-1.15{h) Table 6, that are to be maintained
in their natural state of quality (set aside for posterity} and not subjected to any man-made wastewater
discharges or increases in runoff from anthropogenic activities. These waters are set  aside for posterity
because of their clarity, color, scenic setting, other characteristic of aesthetic value,  unique ecological
significance, exceptional recreational significance, exceptional water supply significance, or exceptional
fisheries resource(s).

"FW2" means the general surface water classification applied to those fresh waters that are not designated
as FW1 or Pinelands Waters.

"Important species" means species that are commercialty valuable (for example, within  the top 10 species
landed, by dollar value); recreationally valuable; threatened or endangered; critical to the organization and/or
maintenance of the ecosystem; or other species necessary in the food web for the well-being of the species
identified in this definition.

"Measurable changes" means changes measured or determined by a biological, chemical, physical, or
analytical method, conducted in accordance with USEPA approved methods as identified in 40 C.F.R. 136
or other analytical methods  (for  example, mathematical models, ecological indices) approved by the
Department, that might adversely impact a water use (including, but not limited to, aesthetics).
Water Quality Standards
December 2002

-------
"Natural water quality" means the water quality that would exist in a waterway or a waterbody without the
addition of water or waterborne substances from artificial origin.

"Outstanding National Resource Waters" means high quality waters that constitute an outstanding national
resource (for example, waters  of National/State Parks and Wildlife Refuges and waters of exceptional
recreational or ecological significance) as designated in N.J.A.C. 7:9B-1.15(i).

"SC" means the general surface water classification applied to coastal saline waters.

"SE" means the general surface water classification applied to saline waters of estuaries.

"Trout maintenance waters" means waters designated at N.J.A.C. 7:9B-1.15(b) through (g) for the support
of trout throughout the year.

"Trout production waters" means waters designated at N.J.A.C. 7:9B-1.15(b) through (g) for use by trout for
spawning or nursery purposes during their first summer.

7:9B-1.S Statements of policy
(a) General policies are as follows:
    2.   Water is vital to life and comprises an invaluable natural resource which is not to be abused by any
        segment of the State's population or economy. It is the policy of the State to restore, maintain and
        enhance the chemical, physical and biological integrity of its waters, to protect the public health, to
        safeguard the aquatic biota, protect scenic and ecological values, and to enhance the domestic,
        municipal, recreational, industrial,  agricultural and other reasonable uses of the State's waters.
    3.   Toxic substances in waters of the State shall not be at levels that are toxic to humans or the aquatic
        biota, or that bioaccumulate in the aquatic biota so as to render them unfit for human consumption.

(f)  Bioassay and biomonitohng policies are as follows:
    1.   Bioassay test species selection criteria follow:
        i.  The objective of the Department  is to use test species for toxicity testing bioassays that are
           representative of the m ore sensitive aquatic biota from the different trophic levels of the waters
           in question.
           Test species need not be indigenous to, nor occur in the waters in question.
           When the bioassay test protocol being utilized falls under the  scope of N.J.A.C, 7:18 the
           Department shall designate the approved representative species considered to be the most
           sensitive to the discharge.

    2.   Acute definitive bioassay tests, in accordance with N.J.A.C. 7:18,  will  normally be  utilized in
        determining the toxicity of a discharge to the aquatic biota.
    3.   The Department, in order to further characterize the toxicity of a discharge, may allow or require the
        use of other procedures including, but not limited to:
        iii.  Measures of the structure and function  of the aquatic community  in the receiving waters.

7:9B-1.12 Designated uses of FW1. PL.  FW2. SE1. SE2. SE3. and SC waters
(a) In  all FW1 waters the designated uses are:
    1.   Set aside for posterity to represent the natural aquatic environment and its associated biota;
    3.   Maintenance, migration and propagation of the natural  and established aquatic biota...

(b) In  all PL waters the designated uses are:
    2.   Maintenance, migration and propagation of the natural and established biota indigenous to this
        unique ecological  system;...

(c) In  all FW2 waters the designated uses are:
    1.   Maintenance, migration and propagation of the natural  and established biota...

(d) In  alt SE1 waters the designated uses are:
    2.   Maintenance, migration and propagation of the natural  and established biota....

Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                        4-45

-------
(e) In all SE2 waters the designated uses are:
    1.  Maintenance, migration and propagation of the natural and established biota;
    2.  Migration of diadromous fish;
    3.  Maintenance of wildlife;...

(f)  In all SE3 waters the designated uses are:
    2.  Maintenance and migration of fish populations;
    3.  Migration of diadromous fish;
    4.  Maintenance of wildlife;...

(g) in all SC waters the designated uses are:
    1.  Maintenance, migration and propagation of the natural and established biota;
New Mexico
SOURCE: State of New Mexico Standards For Interstate And Intrastale
Surface Waters, Title 20 Environmental Protection, Chapter 6 Water Quality, Standards For Interstate And
Intrastate Surface Waters (20.6.4.12 New Mexico Administrative Code), New Mexico Water Quality Control
Commission, December 16,2001: http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/NMED regs/swqb/20 6  4 nmac.htm|#12
and http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us

20.6.4.7 DEFINITIONS:
I.      "Coldwater fishery" means a surface water of the State where the water temperature and other
       characteristics are suitable for the support or propagation or both of coldwater fishes.

U.     "High quality coldwater fishery" means a perennial surface water of the State in a minimally
       disturbed condition which  has considerable aesthetic value and is a superior coldwater fishery
       habitat. A surface water of the State to be so categorized must have water quality, stream bed
       characteristics, and other attributes of habitat sufficient to protect and  maintain a propagating
       coldwater fishery.

B6.    "Limited warmwater fishery" means a surface water of the  State where intermittent flow may
       severely limit the ability of the reach to sustain a natural fish population  on a continuous annual
       basis; or a surface water of the State where historical data indicate that water temperature may
       routinely exceed 32.2'C (90'F).

DD.    "Marginal coldwater fishery" means a surface water of the State known to support a coldwater fish
       population during at least some portion of the year, even though historical data indicate that the
       maximum temperature in the surface water of the State may exceed 20'C (68'F).

XX.    "Warmwater fishery" means a surface water of the State where the water temperature and other
       characteristics are suitable for the support or propagation or both of warmwater fishes.

CCC.  "Wetlands" means those areas which are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a
       frequency and duration  sufficient to  support, and under normal circumstances do support, a
       prevalence of vegetation typically adapted fqr life in saturated soft conditions in New Mexico.
       Constructed wetlands used for wastewater treatment  purposes are not included in this definition.

ODD.  "Wildlife habitat" means a surface water of the State used by plants and animals not considered as
       pathogens, vectors for pathogens or intermediate hosts for pathogens for humans or domesticated
       livestock and plants.

20.6.4.12. GENERAL STANDARDS.
A.  Bottom Deposits: Surface waters of the State shall be free of water contaminants from other than natural
    causes that will settle and damage or impair the normal growth, function, or reproduction of aquatic life
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
                                                                                          4-46

-------
    or significantly alter the physical or chemical properties of the bottom.


20.6.4.14. USE ATTAINABILITY ANALYSIS.
D.  Physical, chemical and biological evaluations of surface waters of the State other than lakes and
    reservoirs for purposes of use attainability analyses or equivalent studies shall be conducted according
    to the procedures outlined in the "Technical Support Manual: Waterbody Surveys and Assessments for
    Conducting Use Attainability Analyses,"...
E.  Physical, chemical and biological evaluations of lakes and reservoirs for purposes of use attainability
    analyses or equivalent studies shall be conducted according to the procedures outlined in the "Technical
    Support Manual1 Waterbody Surveys and Assessments for Conducting Use Attainability Analyses,
    Volume III:  Lake Systems,"...
F.  A use attainability analysis or equivalent study should include any applicable information concerning the
    following:
    5.  A physical and biological evaluation of the surface water of the State to be reviewed to identify any
        factors unrelated to water quality which impair attainment of designated uses and to determine which
        designated uses are  feasible to  attain in such surface water of the State given existing physical
        limitations,
    7.  An evaluation of the aquatic and terrestrial biota utilizing the surface water of the State to determine
        resident species and which species could potentially exist in such water if physical and chemical
        factors  impairing a designated use are corrected.
 New York
SOURCE: Official Compilation of Codes,  Rules, and Regulations of the State of New York,  Title 6,
Environmental Conservation Rules and Regulations, Chapter X, Division of Water Resources, Part 701,
Classifications-Surface Waters and Groundwaters. amended March 1998:
http://www.dec.state. ny.us/website/regs/701 .htm

§ 701.2 Class N fresh surface waters.
(a) The best usages of Class N waters are the enjoyment  of water in its natural condition and, where
    compatible, as a source of water for drinking or culinary purposes, bathing, fishing, fish propagation, and
    recreation.

S 701.3 Class AA-Special (AA-S1 fresh surface waters.
(a) The best usages of Class AA-S waters are: a source of water supply for drinking, culinary or food
    processing purposes; primary and secondary contact recreation; and fishing. The waters shall be suitable
    for fish propagation and survival.

S 701.4 Class A-Special (A-S) fresh surface waters.
(a) The best usages of Class A-S waters are: a source of water supply for drinking, culinary or food
    processing purposes; primary and secondary contact recreation; and fishing. The waters shall be suitable
    for fish propagation and survival.

S 701.5 Class AA fresh surface waters.
(a) The best usages of Class AA waters are: a source of water supply for drinking, culinary or food
    processing purposes; primary and secondary contact recreation; and fishing. The waters shall be suitable
    for fish propagation and survival.

S 701.6 Ctass A fresh surface waters.
(a) The best usages of Class A waters are: a source of water supply for dri nking, culinary or food processing
    purposes; primary and secondary contact recreation; and fishing. The waters shall be suitable for fish
    propagation and survival.

S 701.7 Pass B fresh surface waters.
The best usages of Class B waters are primary and secondary contact recreation and fishing. These waters

Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                      4-47

-------
shall be suitable for fish propagation and survival.


S 701.8 Class C fresh surface waters.              ,
The best usage of Class C waters is fishing. These waters shall be suitable for fish propagation and survival.
The water quality shall be suitable for primary and secondary contact recreation, although other factors may
limit the use for these purposes.

S 701.9 Class D fresh surface waters.
The best usage of Class D waters is fishing. Due to such natural conditions as intermittency of flow, water
conditions  not conducive to propagation of game fishery, or stream bed conditions, the waters will not
support fish propagation. These waters shall be suitable |for fish survival. The water quality shall be suitable
for primary  and secondary contact recreation, although other factors may limit the use for these purposes.
North Carolina
SOURCE: North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 15A Environment and Natural Resources, Subchapter
28 Surface Water Standards: Monitoring, January 1, 2(j)02:
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/rules/rbQ1Q102.pdf and www.esb.enr state.nc,us

1SA NCAC 02B .0101 General Procedures
(e)  The following are supplemental classifications:
    (1) Trout waters (Tr): freshwaters protected for natural trout propagation and survival of stocked trout.
    (2) Swamp waters (Sw): waters which have low velocities and other natural characteristics which are
       different from adjacent streams.
    (4) Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW): unique end special waters of exceptional state or national
       recreational or ecological significance which  require special protection to maintain existing uses.
    (5) High  Quality Waters  (HQW): waters which are rated  as excellent based on biological and
       physical/chemical characteristics through Division monitoring or special studies, native and special
       native trout waters (and their tributaries) designated by the Wildlife Resources Commission, primary
       nursery areas (PNA) designated by the Marine Fisheries Commission and other functional nursery
       areas designated by the Marine Fisheries Commission, all water supply watersheds which are either
       classified as WS-I or WS-II or those for which a formal petition for reclassification as WS-I  or WS-II
       has been received from the appropriate local government and accepted by the Division of Water
       Quality and all Class SA waters.
    (7) Unique wetland  (UWL): wetlands of exceptional state  or national ecological significance  which
       require special protection to maintain existing uses. These wetlands may include wetlands that have
       been documented to the satisfaction of the Commission as habitat essential for the conservation of
       state or federally listed threatened or endangered species.

1SA NCAC 02B.0202  Definitions

    (11)Biological integrity means the ability of an aquatic ecosystem to support and maintain a balanced
       andindigenous community of organism shaving species composition, diversity, population densities
       and functional organization similar to that of  reference conditions.

1SA NCAC 02B .0211 Fresh Surface Water Quality Standards for Class C Waters
    (1) Best Usage of Waters. Aquatic life propagation  and maintenance of biological integrity (including
       fishing, and fish), wildlife, secondary recreation, agriculture and any other usage except for primary
       recreation or as a source of water supply for  drinking, culinary or food processing purposes;
    (2) Conditions Related to Best Usage. The waters  shall  be suitable for aquatic life propagation and
       maintenance of biological integrity, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture; sources of water
       pollution which preclude any of these uses on either  a short-term or long-term basis  shall be
       considered to be violating a water quality standard;

"ISA NCAC02B .0212. .0214-.0216. .0218-.0219 Fresh Surface Water Quality Standards for Class WS-I

Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                      •*-*«

-------
-WS-V and Class B Waters
.. .Water quality standards applicable to Class C waters as described in Rule .0211 of this Section also apply
to Class WS-l waters [and other uses as assigned for each class].

15A NCAC 02B .0220 TIDAL SALT WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CLASS SC WATERS
General. The water quality standards for all tidal salt waters are the basic standards applicable to Class SC
waters. Additional and more stringent standards applicable to other specific tidal salt water classifications
are specified in Rules .0221 and .0222 of this Section.
    (1) Best Usage of Waters. Aquatic life propagation and maintenance of biological integrity (including
       fishing, fish and functioning PNAs [Primary Nursery Areas]}, wildlife, secondary recreation, and any
       other usage except primary recreation or shellfishing for market purposes.
    (2) Conditions Related to Best Usage. The waters shall be suitable for aquatic life propagation and
       maintenance of biological integrity, wildlife, and secondary recreation; Any source of water pollution
       which precludes any of these uses, including their functioning as PNAs, on either a short-term or a
       long-term basis shall be considered to be violating a water quality standard.

1SA NCAC 02B .0221 Tidal Salt Water Quality Standards for Class SA Waters
The following water quality standards apply to surface waters that are used for shellfishing for market
purposes and are classified SA. Water quality standards applicable to Class SC waters as described in Rule
.0220 of this Section also apply to Class SA waters.
    (1) Best Usage of Waters. Shellfishing for market purposes and any other usage specified by the "SB"
       or "SC" classification...

1SA NCAC 02B .0222 Tidal Salt Water Quality Standards for Class SB Waters
The following water quality standards apply to surface waters that are used for primary recreation, including
frequent or organized swimming, and are classified SB. Water quality standards applicable to Class SC
waters [as] described in Rule .0220 of this Section also apply to SB waters...

1SA NCAC 02B .0225 Outstanding Resource Waters
(a)  General In addition to the existing classifications, the Commission may classify unique and special
    surface waters of the state as outstanding resource waters (ORW) upon finding that such waters are of
    exceptional state or national recreational or ecological significance and that the waters have exceptional
    water quality while meeting the following conditions:
    (1) that the water quality is rated as excellent based on physical, chemical or biological information...
(b)  Outstanding Resource Values. In order to be classified as ORW, a water body must exhibit one or more
    of the following values or uses to demonstrate it is of exceptional state or national recreational or
    ecological significance:
    (1) there are outstanding fish (or commercially important aquatic species) habitat and fisheries;
    (5) the waters are of special ecological or scientific significance such as habitat for rare or endangered
       species or as areas for research and education.
North Dakota
SOURCE: Standards of Water Quality for State of North Dakota, Rule 33-16-02, North Dakota State
Department of Health and Consolidated Laboratories, June 1, 2001:
http://www.epa. qov/ost/standards/wgsl i brarv/

33-16-02-08. General water quality standards.
2.  Narrative Biological Goal
    a. Goal. The biological condition of surface waters shall be similar to that of sites or waterbodies
    determined by the department to be regional reference sites.
    b.   Definitions:
        (1) "Assemblage" means an association of aquatic organisms of similar taxonomic classification
           living in  the same area. Examples of assemblages include,  but are not limited to, fish,
           macroinvertebrates, algae, and vascular plants.
        (2)  "Aquatic organisrrfmeans any plant or animal which lives at least part of its life cycle in water.

Water Quality Standards                         December 2002                                      4-49

-------
        (3) 'Biological condition" means the taxonomic composition, richness, and functional organization
           of an assemblage of aquatic organisms at a site or within a water body.
        (4) "Functional organization" means the number of species or abundance of organisms within an
           assemblage which perform the same or similar ecological functions.
        (5) "Metric" means an expression of biological community composition, richness, or function which
           displays a predictable, measurable change in value along a gradient of pollution or other
           anthropogenic disturbance.
        (6) "Regional reference sites" are sites or wateribodies which are determined by the department to
           be representative of sites or water bodies of si m ilar type (e.g., hydrology and ecoregion) and are
           least impaired with respect to habitat, wafer  quality, watershed land  use, and riparian and
           biological  condition.
        (7) "Richness" means the absolute number of taxa in an assemblage at a site or within a water
           body.
        (8) "Taxonomic composition" means the identity and abundance of species or taxonomic groupings
           within an assemblage at a site or within a water body.
    c.   Implementation. The intent of the state in adopting a narrative biological goal is solely to provide an
        additional assessment method that can  be used to identify impaired surface waters. Regulatory or
        enforcement actions based solely on a narrative biological goal, such as the development and
        enforcement of North  Dakota  pollutant  discharge elimination  system  permit  limits,  are not
        authorized.  However, adequate and representative biological assessment information may be used
        in combination with other information to  assist in determining whether designated uses are attained
        and to assist in determining  whether new or revised chemical-specific permit  limitations may be
        needed. Implementation will be based on thei comparison of current biological  conditions at a
        particular site to the biological conditions deemed attainable based on  regional reference sites. In
        implementing  a narrative biological goal, biological condition may  be expressed through an index
        composed of multiple metrics or through appropriate statistical procedures.

33-20-02-09. Surface water classifications, mixing zjones. and numeric standards.
1. Classifications...
    a.   Class I streams. The quality of the waters in this class  shall be suitable for the  propagation and/or
        protection of resident fish species  and  other Aquatic biota and for swimming,  boating, and other
        water recreation. The quality of the waters shall be for irrigation, stock watering,  and wildlife without
        injurious effects. After treatment consisting of .coagulation, settling, filtration, and chlorination,  or
        equivalent treatment processes, the water quality shall meet  the bacteriological, physical, and
        chemical requirements of the department for municipal or domestic use.
    b.   Class IA streams. The quality of the waters in this class shall be the same as the quality of class I
        streams, except that  treatment for municipal  use  may  also require softening to  meet the
        requirements of the department.
    c.   Class II streams. The quality of the waters in this class shall be the same as the quality of class I
        streams, except that additional treatment may be required to meet the drinking water requirements
        of the department.  Streams in this classification may  be intermittent in nature  which would make
        these waters of limited value for beneficial  uses such as municipal water, fish life, or irrigation.
    d.   Class  III streams. The quality of the waters in this class shall be  suitable for agricultural and
        industrial uses such as stock watering,  irrigation, washing, and cooling. These streams have low
        average flows and, generally, prolonged periods of no flow. They are of limited seasonal value for
        immersion recreation, fish life, and aquatic biqta. The quality of these waters must be maintained
        to protect recreation, fish, and aquatic biota.
SOURCE: Ohio Administrative Code, Chapter 3745-1-07 Water use designations and statewide criteria,
February 22, 2002: http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/rules/01-07pdf

(A) Water quality standards contain two distinct elements: designated uses; and numerical or narrative
    criteria designed to protect and measure attainment of the uses.
    (1) Each water body in the state is assigned one or more aquatic life habitat use designations. Each
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
                                                  4-50

-------
       water body may be assigned one or more water supply use designations and/or one recreational use
       designation. These  use designations are defined in paragraph (B) of this rule. Water bodies are
       assigned use designations in rules 3745-1 -08 to 3745-1-32 of the Administrative Code. In addition,
       a water body may be assigned designations as described in the antidegradation rule (rule 3745-1-05
       of the Administrative Code).
    (6) Biological criteria presented in table 7-14 of this rule provide a direct measure of attainment of the
       warmwater habitat, exceptional warmwater habitat and modified warm water habitat aquatic life uses.
       Biological criteria and the exceptions to chemical-specific or whole-effluent criteria allowed by this
       paragraph do not apply to any other use designations.
       (a) Demonstrated attainment of the applicable biological criteria in a water body will  take
           precedence over the application of selected chemical-specific aquatic life or whole-effluent
           criteria associated with these uses when the director, upon considering appropriately detailed
           chemical, physical and biological data,  finds that one or more chemical-specific or whole-
           effluent criteria  are inappropriate. In such cases the options which exist include:
           (i)  The director  may develop, or  a discharger may provide for the director's approval, a
               justification for a site-specific water quality criterion according to methods described in
               "Water Quality Standards Handbook, 1983, U.S. EPA Office of Water";
           (ii)  The director may proceed with establishing waterquality based effluent limits consistent with
               attainment of the designated use.
       (b) Demonstrated  nonattainment of the applicable  biological  criteria in  a  water body  with
           concomitant evidence  that the  associated chemical-specific aquatic life criteria and whole-
           effluent criteria are met will cause the  director to seek and establish, if possible, the cause of
           the nonattainment of the designated use. The director shall evaluate the existing designated use
           and, where not attainable, propose to change the designated use. Where the designated use is
           attainable and the cause of the nonattainment has been established, the director shall, wherever
           necessary and  appropriate, implement regulatory controls or make other recommendations
           regarding water resource management to restore the designated use...

(B) Use designations are defined as follows:
    (1) Aquatic life habitat
       (a) "Warmwater" - these are waters capable of supporting and maintaining a balanced, integrated,
           adaptive community of warmwater aquatic organisms having a species composition, diversity,
           and functional organization comparable to the twenty-fifth percentile of the identified reference
           sites within each of the following ecoregions: the interior plateau ecoregion, the Erie/Ontario lake
           plains ecoregion, the western Allegheny plateau ecoregion and the eastern corn belt plains
           ecoregion.  For  the Huron/Erie lake plains ecoregion, the comparable species composition,
           diversity and functional organization are based upon the ninetieth percentile of all sites within
           the ecoregion. For all ecoregions, the attributes of species composition, diversity and functional
           organization will be measured using the index of biotic integrity, the modified index of well-being
           and the invertebrate community index as defined in "Biological Criteria for the Protection of
           Aquatic Life: Volume II, Users Manual for Biological Field Assessment of Ohio Surface Waters,"
           as cited in paragraph (B) of rule 3745-1-03 of the Administrative Code. In addition to those water
           body  segments designated in rules 3745-1-08 to 3745-1-32  of the Administrative Code, all
           upground storage reservoirs are designated warmwater  habitats. Attainment of this use
           designation (except for upground storage reservoirs) is based on the criteria in table 7-14 of this
           rule. A temporary variance to the criteria associated with this use designation may be granted
           as described in paragraph (F) of rule 3745-1-01 of the Administrative Code.
       (b) "Limited warmwater" -  these are waters that were temporarily designated in the 1978 water
           quality standards as not meeting specific warmwater habitat criteria. Criteria for the support of
           this use  designation are the same as the criteria for the support of  the use designation
           warmwater  habitat. However, individual criteria are varied on a case-by-case basis  and
           supersede the criteria for warmwater habitat where applicable. Any exceptions from warmwater
           habitat criteria apply only to specific criteria during specified time periods and/or flow conditions.
           The adjusted criteria and conditions for specified stream segments are denoted as comments
           in rules 3745-1-08 to 3745-1-30 of the Administrative Code.  Stream  segments currently
           designated  limited warmwater  habitats  will  undergo use attainability analyses and will be
           redesignated other aquatic life  habitats. No additional stream segments will be designated

Water Quality Standards                        December 2002                                       4-51

-------
           limited warmwater habitats.
        (c) "Exceptional  warmwater"  - these are waters capable of supporting  and maintaining an
           exceptional  or unusual community  of warmwater aquatic  organisms  having a species
           composition, diversity, and functional organization comparable to the seventy-fifth percentile
           of the identified reference sites on a statewide basis. The attributes of species composition,
           diversity and functional organization will be, measured using the index of biotic integrity, the
           modified index of well-being and the  invertebrate community index as defined in "Biological
           Criteria for the Protection of Aquatic  Life: Volume II, Users Manual for Biological Field
           Assessment of Ohio Surface Waters," as cited in  paragraph (B) of rule 3745-1-03 of the
           Administrative Code. In addition to those water body segments designated in rules 3745-1-08
           to 3745-1-32 of the Administrative Code, «ill lakes and reservoirs, except upground storage
           reservoirs, are designated exceptional warmwater habitats. Attainment of this use designation
           (except for lakes and reservoirs) is based on the criteria in table 7-14 of this rule. A temporary
           variance to the criteria associated with thii use designation may be granted as  described in
           paragraph (F) of rule 3745-1-01 of the Administrative Code.
        (d) "Modified warmwater" - these are waters that have been the subject of a use attainability
           analysis and have been found to be incapable of supporting and maintaining  a balanced,
           integrated, adaptive community of warmwater  organisms due to irretrievable modifications of
           the physical habitat. S