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. Such modifications are of a long-lasting duration (i.e., twenty years or
longer) and may include the following examples: extensive stream channel modification
activities permitted under sections 401 and 404 of the act or Chapter 6131. of the Revised
Code, extensive sedimentation resulting from abandoned mine land runoff, and extensive
permanent impoundment of free-flowing water bodies. 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. Attainment of this use designation is based on the criteria in table 7-14 of
this rule. Each water body designated modified warmwater habitat will be listed in the
appropriate use designation rule (rules 3745-1-08 to 3745-1-32 of the Administrative Code) and
will be identified by ecoregion and type of physical habitat modification as listed in table 7-14
of this rule. The modified warmwater habitat designation can be applied only to those waters that
do not attain the warmwater habitat biological criteria in table 7-14 of this rule because of
irretrievable modifications of the physical habitat. All water body segments designated modified
warmwater habitat will be reviewed on a triennial basis (or sooner) to determine whether the use
designation should be changed. 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.
(e) "Seasonal salmonid" - these are rivers, streams and embayments capable of supporting the
passage of salmonids from October to May and are water bodies large enough to support
recreational fishing. This use will be in effect the months of October to May. Another aquatic life
habitat use designation will be enforced the remainder of the year (June to September). 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.
(f) "Coldwater" - these are waters that meet one or both of the characteristics described in
paragraphs (B)(1)(f)0) and (B)(1)(f)(ii) 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,
(i) "Coldwater habitat, inland trout stream s[' -these are waters which support trout stocking and
management under the auspices of thd Ohio department of natural resources, division of
wildlife, excluding waters in lake run stoc :king programs, lake or reservoir stocking programs,
experimental or trial stocking program:, and put and lake programs on waters without, or
without the potential restoration of, natural coldwater attributes of temperature and flow. The
director shall designate these waters in consultation with the director of the Ohio department
of natural resources.
(ii) "Coldwater habitat, native fauna" - these are waters capable of supporting populations of
native coldwater fish and associated vertebrate and invertebrate organisms and plants on
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-52
-------
an annual basis. The director shall designate these waters based upon results of use
attainability analyses.
(g) "Limited resource water" - these are waters that have been the subject of a use attainability
analysis and have been found to lack the potential for any resemblance of any other aquatic life
habitat as determined by the biological criteria in table 7-14 of this rule. The use attainability
analysis must demonstrate that the extant fauna is substantially degraded and that the potential
for recovery of the fauna to the level characteristic of any other aquatic life habitat is realistically
precluded due to natural background conditions or irretrievable human-induced conditions. All
water body segments designated limited resource water will be reviewed on a triennial basis (or
sooner) to determine whether the use designation should be changed. Limited resource waters
are also termed nuisance prevention for some water bodies designated in rules 3745-1-08 to
3745-1-30 of the Administrative Code. 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. Waters designated limited resource water will be assigned one or more
of the following causative factors. These causative factors will be listed as comments in rules
3745-1-08 to 3745-1-30 of the Administrative Code.
(i) "Acid mine drainage" - these are surface waters with sustained pH values below 4.1 s.u. or
with intermittently acidic conditions combined with severe stream bed siltation, and have a
demonstrated biological performance below that of the modified warmwater habitat
biological criteria.
(ii) "Small drainageway maintenance" - these are highly modified surface water drainageways
(usually less than three square miles in drainage area) that do not possess the stream
morphology and habitat characteristics necessary to support any other aquatic life habitat
use. The potential for habitat improvements must be precluded due to regular stream
channel maintenance required for drainage purposes.
(iii) Other specified conditions.
(2) Nuisance prevention This use designation is being replaced by the limited resource water use
designation described in paragraph (A)(1)(g) of this rule. All water body segments currently
designated nuisance prevention in rules 3745-1-08 to 3745-1-30 of the Administrative Code must
meet the limited resource water criteria in this rule. All references to the nuisance prevention use
designation in rules 3745-1-08 to 3745-1-30 of the Administrative Code will be phased out over time
and replaced with limited resource water.
(3) Water supply
(a) "Public" - these are waters that, with conventional treatment, will be suitable for human intake
and meet federal regulations for drinking water. Criteria associated with this use designation
apply within five hundred yards of surface water intakes. Although not necessarily included
in rules 3745-1-08 to 3745-1-30 of the Administrative Code, the bodies of water with one or
more of the following characteristics are designated public water supply: (i) All publicly owned
lakes and reservoirs, with the exception of Piedmont reservoir;
(ii) All privately owned lakes and reservoirs used as a source of public drinking water; (iii) All
surface waters within five hundred yards of an existing public water supply surface water intake;
(iv) All surface waters used as emergency water supplies.
(b) "Agricultural" - these are waters suitable for irrigation and livestock watering without treatment.
(c) "Industrial" - these are waters suitable for commercial and industrial uses, with or without
treatment. Criteria for the support of the industrial water supply use designation will vary with
the type of industry involved.
(4) Recreation. These use designations are in effect only during the recreation season, which is the
period from May first to October fifteenth, for all water bodies except those designated seasonal
salmonid habitat. The recreation season for streams designated seasonal salmonid habitat is June
first to September thirtieth.
(a) "Bathing waters" - these are waters that, during the recreation season are suitable for swimming
where a lifeguard and/or bathhouse facilities are present, and include any additional such areas
where the water quality is approved by the director. Water bodies assigned the bathing waters
use designation are not necessarily indicated in rules 3745-1-08 to 3745-1-30 of the
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-53
-------
Administrative Code but include local areas of those water bodies meeting this definition.
(b) "Primary contact" - these are waters that, during the recreation season, are suitable for full-body
contact recreation such as, but not limited to, swimming, canoeing, and scuba diving with minimal
threat to public health as a result of water qpaiity. In addition to those water body segments
designated in rules 3745-1-08 to 3745-1-32 of the Administrative Code, all lakes and reservoirs,
except upground storage reservoirs and those Idkes and reservoirs meeting the definition of bathing
waters, are designated primary contact recreation.
(c) "Secondary contact" - these are waters that, during the recreation season, are suitable for partial
body contact recreation such as, but not limited to, wading with minimal threat to public health as
a result of water quality.
(C) Protection of aquatic life - whole-effluent approach: Whole-effluent toxicity levels shall be applied in
accordance with rules 3745-2-09 and 3745-33-07 of the Administrative Code.
Table 7-14
Biological criteria for warmwater, exceptional warmwater and modified warmwater habitats. Description and
derivation of indices and ecoregions are contained in "Biological Criteria for the Protection of Aquatic Life:
Volume II, Users Manual for Biological Field Assessment of Ohio Surface Waters" cited in paragraph (B) of
rule 3745-1 -03 of the Administrative Code. These criteria do not apply to the Ohio river, lakes or Lake Erie
river mouths
Index
Sampling Site
Ecoregion1
Modified Warmwater Habitat
Channel
Modif.
Mine
Affected
Impounded
Warmwater
Habitat
Exceptional
Warmwater
Habitat
(A) Index of biotic integrity (fish)
(1) Wading sites"
HELP
IP
EOLP
WAP
ECBP
22
24
24
24
24
-
-
-
24
-
-
-
-
-
-
32
40
38
44
40
50
50
50
50
50
(2) Boat sites2
HELP
IP
EOLP
WAP
ECBP
20
24
24
24
24
-
-
-
24
-
22
30
30
30
30
34
38
40
40
42
48
48
48
48
48
(3) Headwater sltes^
' Sampling methods descriptions are found in the "Manual of Ohio EPA Surveillance Methods and Quality
Assurance Practices," cited in paragraph (B) of rule 3745-1-03 of the Administrative Code.
" Modification of the IBI that applies to sites with drainage areas less than twenty square miles.
Water Quality Standards December 2002
4-54
-------
Index
Sampling Site
Ecoregion1
HELP
IP
EOLP
WAP
ECBP
Modified Warmwater Habitat
Channel
Modif.
20
24
24
24
24
Mine
Affected
-
-
-
24
-
Impounded
-
_
-
-
-
Warmwater
Habitat
28
40
40
44
40
Exceptional
Warmwater
Habitat
50
50
50
50
50
(B) Modified index of well-being (fish)""
(1) Wading sites2
HELP
IP
EOLP
WAP
ECBP
5.6
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.2
—
—
—
5.5
—
—
—
_
—
—
7.3
8.1
7.9
8.4
8.3
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
(2) Boat sites2
HELP
IP
EOLP
WAP
ECBP
5.7
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.8
_
—
—
5.4
—
5.7
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.6
8.6
8.7
8.7
8.6
8.5
9.6
9.6
9.6
9.6
9.6
(C) Invertebrate community index (macroinvertebrates)
(1) Artificial substrate samplers2
HELP
IP
EOLP
WAP
ECBP
22
22
22
22
22
-
-
-
30
-
-
-
-
-
-
34
30
34
36
36
46
46
46
46
46
Oklahoma
"" Does not apply to sites with drainage areas less than twenty square miles.
Water Quality Standards December 2002
4-55
-------
SOURCE: Oklahoma Administrative Code, Title 785, Oklahoma Water Resources Board Rules, Chapter 45
Oklahoma Water Quality Standards, August 13, 2001;
http://www.oklaosf.state.ok.us/~owrb/rules/Chap45.Pdf.1
http://www.oklaosf.state.ok.us/~owrb/rules/Chap46.Pdf and www.state ok. usNowrb
785:45-1-2. Definitions
"Benthic macroinvertebrates" means invertebrate animals that are large enough to be seen by the unaided
eye, can be retained by a U. S. Standard No. 30 sieve, and live at least part of their life cycles within or upon
available substrate in a body of water or water transport system.
"Intolerant climax fish community" means habitat and water quality adequate to support game fishes or
other sensitive species introduced or native to the biotic province or ecological region, which require specific
or narrow ranges of high quality environmental conditiops.
"Sensitive representative species" means Ceriodaphnia dubia, Daphnia magna, Daphnia pulex,
Pimphales promelas (Fathead minnow), Lepomismacrocnirus(Bluegillsunfish), or other sensitive organisms
indigenous to a particular waterbody.
"Warm Water Aquatic Community" means a subcategpry of the beneficial use category "Fish and Wildlife
Propagation" where the water quality and habitat are adequate to support intolerant climax fish communities
and includes an environment suitable for the full range of warm water benthos.
"Water quality" means physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of water which
determine diversity, stability, and productivity of the climax biotic community or affect human
health.
785:45-5-12. Fish and wildlife propagation
(b) Habitat Limited Aquatic Community subcategory.
(1) Habitat limited aquatic community means a subcategory of the beneficial use "Fish and Wildlife
Propagation" where the water chemistry and habitat are not adequate to support a "Warm Water
Aquatic Community" because:
(A) Naturally occurring water chemistry prevents the attainment of the use; or
(B) Naturally occurring ephemeral, intermittent or low flow conditions or water levels prevent the
attainment of the use, unless these conditions may be compensated for by the discharge of a
sufficient volume of effluent to enable uses to be met; or
(C) Human caused conditions or sources of pollution prevent the attainment of the use and cannot
be remedied or would cause more environmiental damage to correct than to leave in place; or
(D) Dams, diversions or other types of hydrologic modifications preclude the attainment of the use,
and it is not feasible to restore the waterbody to its original condition or to operate such
modification in a way that would result in the attainment of the use; or
(E) Physical conditions related to the natural features of the waterbody, such as the lack of a proper
substrate, cover, flow, depth, pools, riffles, and the like, unrelated to water quality, preclude
attainment of the "Warm Water Aquatic Community" beneficial use.
(2) Habitat Limited Aquatic Community may also be designated where controls more stringent than
those required by sections 301 (b) and 306 of the federal Clean Water Act as amended, which would
be necessary to meet standards or criteria associated with the beneficial use subcategories of Cool
Water Aquatic Community or Warm Water Aquatic Community, would result in substantial and
widespread economic and social impact.
(c) Warm Water Aquatic Community subcategory. Warm Water Aquatic Community means a
subcategory of the beneficial use category "Fish and Wildlife Propagation" where the water quality and
habitat are adequate to support climax fish communities.
(d) Cool Water Aquatic Community subcategory. Cool Water Aquatic Community means a subcategory
of the beneficial use category "Fish and Wildlife Propagation" where the water quality, water temperature
and habitat are adequate to support cool water climax fish communities and includes an environment
suitable for the full range of cool water benthos. Typical species may include smallmouth bass, certain
Water Quality Standards December 2002 4-56
-------
darters and stoneflies.
(e) Trout Fishery subcategory. Trout Fishery (Put and Take) means a subcategory of the beneficial use
category "Fish and Wildlife Propagation" where the water quality, water temperature and habitat are
adequate to support a seasonal put and take trout fishery. Typical species may include trout.
(f) Criteria used in protection of fish and wildlife propagation. The narrative and numerical criteria to
maintain and protect the use of "Fish and Wildlife Propagation" and its subcategories shall include...
(5) Biological Criteria.
(A) Aquatic life in all waterbodies designated Fish and Wildlife Propagation (excluding waters
designated "Trout, put-and-take") shall not exhibit degraded conditions as Indicated by one or
both of the following:
(i) comparative regional reference data from a station of reasonably similar watershed size or
flow, habitat type and Fish and Wildlife beneficial use subcategory designation or
(ii) by comparison with historical data from the waterbody being evaluated.
(B) Compliance with the requirements of 785:45-5-12(f){5) shall be based upon measures
including, but not limited to, diversity, similarity, community structure, species tolerance, trophic
structure, dominant species, indices of biotic integrity (IBI's), indices of well being (I WB's), or
other measures.
785:46-15-5. Assessment of Fish and Wildlife Propagation support
(e) Biological criteria.
(1) If data demonstrate that an assemblage of fish or macro invertebrates from a waterbody is
significantly degraded, according to 785:45-5-12(f)(5), from that expected for thesubcategory of Fish and
Wildlife Propagation designated in OAC 785:45 for that waterbody, then that subcategory may be
deemed by the appropriate state environmental agency to be not supported.
(2) All physical assessments and biological collections shall be performed in accordance with the
requirements set forth in OWRB Technical Report No. 99-3 entitled "Standard Operating Procedures for
Stream Assessments and Biological Collections Related to Biological Criteria in Oklahoma".
(3) Evaluation of the biological collections shall include identification of fish samples to species level.
(4) The determination of whether the use of Fish and Wildlife Propagation is supported in wadeable
streams in Oklahoma ecoregions shall be made according to all of the requirements of this subsection
(e), the application of Appendix C of this Chapter, and the special provisions in subsections (g) through
(i), where applicable, of this Section. Streams with undetermined use support status shall be subject to
additional investigation that considers stream order, habitat factors and local reference streams before
the use support determination is made.
(f) Turbidity. The criteria for turbidity stated in 785:45-5-12(f)(7) shall constitute the screening levels for
turbidity. The tests for use support shall follow the default protocol in 785:46-15-4(b).
(g) Special provisions for Ouachita Mountains wadeable streams. The determination of whether the
use of Fish and Wildlife Propagation is supported for wadeable streams located in the Ouachita
Mountains ecoregion shall be made according to the application of Appendix C of this Chapter, together
with this subsection, as follows:
(1) Where designated, the subcategory of Warm Water Aquatic Community shall be deemed fully
supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 35 or more. Such subcategory shall be
deemed not supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 24 or less. If a score is 25
to 34 inclusive, the issue of whether this subcategory is supported shall be deemed undetermined.
(2)Where designated, the subcategory of Habitat Limited Aquatic Community shall be deemed fully
supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 27 or more. Such subcategory shall be
deemed not supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 18 or less. If a score is 19
to 26 inclusive, the issue of whether this subcategory is supported shall be deemed undetermined.
(h) Special provisions for Arkansas Valley wadeable streams. The determination of whether the use of
Fish and Wildlife Propagation is supported for wadeable streams located in the Arkansas Valley
ecoregion shall be made according to the application of Appendix C of this Chapter, together with this
subsection, as follows:
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-57
-------
(1) Where designated, the subcategory of Warm Water Aquatic Community shall be deemed fully
supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 35 or more. Such subcategory shall be
deemed not supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 24 or less. If a score is 25
to 34 inclusive, the issue of whether this subcategqry is supported shall be deemed undetermined.
(2) Where designated, the subcategory of Habitat Limited Aquatic Community shall be deemed fully
supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 27 or more. Such subcategory shall be
deemed not supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 18 or less. If a score is 19
to 26 inclusive, the issue of whether this subcategory is supported shall be deemed undetermined.
(i) Special provisions for Boston Mountains and Ozark Highlands wadeable streams. The
determination of whether the use of Fish and Wildlife Propagation is supported for wadeable streams
located in the Boston Mountains and Ozark Highlands ecoregions shall be made according to the
application of Appendix C of this Chapter, together with this subsection, as follows:
(1) Where designated, the subcategory of Cool Water Aquatic Community shall be deemed fully
supported if the application of Appendix C produces; a score of 37 or more. Such subcategory shall be
deemed not supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 29 or less. If a score is 30
to 36 inclusive, the issue of whether this subcategory is supported shall be deemed undetermined.
(2) Where designated, the subcategory of Warm Water Aquatic Community shall be deemed fully
supported if the application of Appendix C produces, a score of 31 or more. Such subcategory shall be
deemed not supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 22 or less. If a score is 23
to 30 inclusive, the issue of whether this subcategory is supported shall be deemed undetermined.
(j) Special provisions for Central Irregular Plains wadeable streams. The determination of whether the
use of Fish and Wildlife Propagation is supported for wadeable streams located in the Central Irregular
Plains ecoregion shall be made according to the application of Appendix C of this Chapter, together with
this subsection, as follows:
(1) Where designated, the subcategory of Cool Water Aquatic Community shall be deemed fully
supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 35 or more. Such subcategory shall be
deemed not supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 28 or less. If a score is 29
to 34 inclusive, the issue of whether this subcategory is supported shall be deemed undetermined.
(2) Where designated, the subcategory of Warm Water Aquatic Community shall be deemed fully
supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 30 or more. Such subcategory shall be
deemed not supported if the application of Appendix, C produces a score of 22 or less. If a score is 23
to 29 inclusive, the issue of whether this subcategory is supported shall be deemed undetermined.
3) Where designated, the subcategory of Habitat Limited Aquatic Community shall be deemed fully
supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 25 or more. Such subcategory shall be
deemed not supported if the application of Appendix C produces a score of 16 or less. If a score is 17
to 24 inclusive, the issue of whether this subcategory is supported shall be deemed undetermined.
SOURCE: Added at 17 Ok Reg 1775, effective 7/1/2000; Amended at 18 Ok Reg 3379, effective 8/13/2001;
Amended at 19 Ok Reg 2524-2526. eff 7/1/2002
APPENDIX C. INDEX OF BIOLOGICAL INTEGRITY
SCORE
Sample
Composition
Total no. of species
Shannon diversity**
based upon numbers
No. of sunfish species
No. of species
comprising 75% of
sample
See figure 1*
>2.50
>3
>5
2.49-1.50
2-3
4-3
3-5
<1.50
<2
<3
<3
Water Quality Standards
December 20Q2
4-58
-------
No. of intolerant species
<100mi2 area
>100mi2 area
Percentage of tolerant
species
>5
See figure 3*
Fish Condition
Percentage of lithophils
>36
18-36
Percentage of DELT
anomalies***
0.1 -1.3
Fish numbers (total
individuals)
>200
200 - 75
<75
"Figure 2. Number of Intolerant Species and Figure 3. Percent Tolerant Species, (Unofficial) Oklahoma
Administrative Code, Title 785, Oklahoma Water Resources Board Rules, Chapter 46. Implementation of
Oklahoma Water Quality Standards, p. 47, 48.
*DELT = deformities, eroded fins, lesions, tumors
Oregon
SOURCE: Oregon Administrative Rules: Chapter 340 Department of Environmental Quality, Water Pollution,
Division 41 State-Wide Water Quality Management Plan; Beneficial Uses, Policies, Standards, and
Treatment Criteria for Oregon, amended February 15, 2001:
http://arcweb.sos.state.Qr.us/rules/OARS 300/OAR 340/340 041.html and
http://www.deq.state.or.us/lab/biomon/bio-rpt.htm
340-041-0006 Definitions
(32) "Aquatic Species" means any plants or animals which live at least part of their life cycle in waters
of the State.
(33) "Biological Criteria" means numerical values or narrative expressions that describe the biological
integrity of aquatic communities inhabiting waters of a given designated aquatic life use.
(35) "Indigenous" means supported in a reach of water or known to have been supported according to
historical records compiled by State and Federal agencies or published scientific literature.
(36) "Resident Biological Community" means aquatic life expected to exist in a particular habitat when
water quality standards for a specific ecoregion, basin, or water body are met. This shall be
established by accepted biomonitoring techniques.
(37) "Without Detrimental Changes in the Resident Biological Community" means no loss of ecological
integrity when compared to natural conditions at an appropriate reference site or region.
(38) "Ecological Integrity" means the summation of chemical, physical and biological integrity capable
of supporting and maintaining a balanced, integrated, adaptive community of organisms having a
species composition, diversity, and functional organization comparable to that of the natural habitat
of the region.
(39) "Appropriate Reference Site or Region" means a site on the same water body, or within the same
basin or ecoregion that has si m Mar habitat conditions, and represents the water quality and biological
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-59
-------
community attainable within the areas of concern.
(40) "Critical Habitat" means those areas which support rare, threatened or endangered species, or serve
as sensitive spawning and rearing areas for aquatic life.
(41) "High Quality Waters" means those waters which meet or exceed those levels that are necessary
to support the propagation of fish, she! If ish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water, and other
designated beneficial uses.
(42) "Outstanding Resource Waters" means those{ waters designated by the Environmental Quality
Commission where existing high quality waters constitute an outstanding state or national resource
based on their extraordinary water quality or ecological values, or where special water quality
protection is needed to maintain critical habitat areas.
(51) "Cold-Water Aquatic Life" - The aquatic communities that are physiologically restricted to cold
water, composed of one or more species sensitive to reduced oxygen levels. Including but not
limited to Salmonidae and cold-water invertebrates.
(52) "Cool-Water Aquatic Life" - The aquatic communities that are physiologically restricted to cool
waters, composed of one or more species having dissolved oxygen requirements believed similar
to the cold-water communities. Including but not limited to Cottidae, Osmeridae, Acipenseridae, and
sensitive Centrarchidae such as the small-mouth bass.
(53) "Warm-Water Aquatic Life" - The aquatic comm unities that are adapted to warm-water conditions
and do not contain either cold- or cool-water species.
(57) "Ecologically Significant Cold-Water Refuge" exists when all or a portion of a waterbody supports
stenotypic cold-water species (flora or fauna) not otherwise widely supported within the subbasin,
and either:
(a) Maintains cold-water temperatures throughout the year relative to other segments in the
subbasin, providing summertime cold-water holding or rearing habitat that is limited in supply,
or;
(b) Supplies cold water to a receiving stream or downstream reach that supports cold-water biota.
340-041-0027 Biological Criteria
Waters of the state shall be of sufficient quality to support aquatic species without dethmental changes in
the resident biological communities.
Pennsylvania
SOURCE: Pennsylvania Code Chapter 93, Title 25, § 93.3, 93.4, 93.6. General water quality criteria,
amended November 17, 2000: http://www.pacode.eom/secure/data/025/chapter93/s93.3.html.
http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/025/chapter93/s93.l4.html
http://www.pacode.eom/secure/data/025/chapter93/s93.6.html
www.dep.state.pa.us
§ 93.3. Protected water uses.
Water uses which shall be protected, and upon which the development of water quality criteria shall be
based, are set forth, accompanied by their identifying symbols, in Table 1:
Table 1
Symbol Protected Use
Aquatic Life
Water Quality Standards December 2002 4-60
-------
Symbol
CWF
WWF
MF
TSF
Water Supply
AWS
Special Protection
HQ
EV
ProtectedUse
Cold Water Fishes—Maintenance or propagation,
or both, of fish species including the family
Salmonidae and additional flora and fauna which
are indigenous to a cold water habitat.
Warm Water Fishes—Maintenance and
propagation of fish species and additional flora
and fauna which are indigenous to a warm water
habitat.
Migratory Fishes—Passage, maintenance and
propagation of anadromous and catadromous
fishes and other fishes which ascend to flowing
waters to complete their life cycle.
Trout Stocking—Maintenance of stocked trout
from February 15 to July 31 and maintenance
and propagation of fish species and additional
flora and fauna which are indigenous to a warm
water habitat.
Wildlife Water Supply—Use for waterfowl habitat
and for drinking and cleansing by wildlife.
High Quality Waters
Exceptional Value Waters
S 93.4. Statewide water uses.
(a) Statewide water uses. Except when otherwise specified in law or regulation, the uses set forth in
Table 2 apply to all surface waters. These uses shall be protected in accordance with this chapter,
Chapter 96 (relating to water quality standards implementation) and other applicable State and
Federal laws and regulations.
Table 2
Symbol
Aquatic Life
WWF
AWS
Protected Use
Warm Water Fishes
Wildlife Water Supply
§ 93.6. General water quality criteria.
(a) Water may not contain substances attributable to point or nonpoint source discharges in
concentration or amounts sufficient to be inimical or harmful to the water uses to be protected or to
human, animal, plant or aquatic life.
Rhode Island
SOURCE: State of Rhode Island And Providence Plantations Department of Environmental Management
Water Resources, Water Quality Regulations, Regulation EVM 112-88.97-1, amended June 23, 2000:
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/standards/WQSlibrary/ri/ri 1 wqr.pdf. and
http://www.state.ri.us/dem/Dubs/reas/REGS/WATER/QUALREGS.PDF
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-61
-------
Rule 7. - DEFINITIONS
"Outstanding National Resource Waters (ONRW)" means waters of National and State Parks, Wildlife
Refuges, and other such waters designated as having special recreational or ecological value.
"Special Resource Protection Waters (SRPW)" means surface waters identified by the Director as having
significant recreational or ecological uses, and may include but are not limited to: wildlife refuge or
management areas; public drinking water supplies; State and Federal parks; State and Federal designated
Estuarine Sanctuary Areas; waterbodies containing critical habitats, including but not limited to waterbodies
identified by the RIDEM Natural Heritage Program as critical habitat for rare or endangered species; wetland
types or specific wetlands listed as rare, threatened, endangered, of special interest or of special concern
by the Rhode Island Natural Heritage Program; waterbodies identified by the U. S. Department of the Interior
on the Final List of Rivers for potential inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.
"Undesirable or Nuisance Species" means any plant or animal aquatic species which becomes so
numerous due to pollutants or physical or hydrological modifications that it interferes with, or indicates an
impairment of, the designated use(s) of a waterbody.
"Use Attainability Analyses" means a structured scientific assessment of the factors affecting the
attainment of a use which may include physical, chemical, biological, and economic factors. The physical,
chemical and biological factors affecting the attainment of a use shall be evaluated through a waterbody
survey and assessment. Waterbody surveys and assessments shall be sufficiently detailed to evaluate at
a minimum:
a. current aquatic uses achieved in the waterbody;
b. causes of any impairment of the aquatic uses and why the impairment cannot be rectified; and
c. aquatic uses(s) that can be attained based on the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics
of the water body.
Rule 8. - SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
B. Water Use Classification
(1) Freshwater: Class A, Class B, Class B1, and Class C waters are designated... for fish and wildlife
habitat...
(2) Seawater: Class SA, Class SB, Class SB1, and Class SC waters are designated for... fish and
wildlife habitat...
D. Water Quality Criteria - The following physical, chemical and biological criteria are parameters of
minimum water quality necessary to support the surface water use classifications of rule 8.B. and shall
be applicable to all waters of the State.
(1) General Criteria - The following minimum criteria are applicable to all waters of the State, unless
criteria specified for individual classes are more stringent:
(a) At a minimum, all waters shall be free of pollutants in concentrations or combinations or from
anthropogenic activities subject to these regulations that:
i. Adversely affect the composition of fish and wildlife;
ii. Adversely affect the physical, chemical) or biological integrity of the habitat;
iii. Interfere with the propagation of fish and wildlife;
iv. Adversely alter the life cycle functions, uses, processes and activities of fish and wildlife;...
(b) Aesthetics - all waters shall be free from pollutants in concentrations or combinations that:
iv. Result in the dominance of species of ifish and wildlife to such a degree as to create a
nuisance or interfere with the existing or designated uses.
South Carolina
SOURCE: South Carolina Regulation 61-68, Water Classification and Standards, September 28, 2001:
http://www.lpitr.state.sc.us/coderegs/chap61/61 -69.htm. !and
http://www.scstatehouse.net/coderegs/cQ61 c.htm#61^68
Water Quality Standards December 2002 4-62
-------
61-68. Water Classifications and Standards
B. DEFINITIONS.
1. Biological assessment means an evaluation of the biological condition of a waterbody using
biological surveys and other direct measurements of resident biota in surface waters and sediments.
18. Biological criteria, also known as biocriteria, mean narrative expressions or numeric values of the
biological characteristics of aquatic communities based on appropriate reference conditions.
Biological criteria serve as an index of aquatic community health.
F. NARRATIVE BIOLOGICAL CRITERIA.
1. Narrative biological criteria are contained in this regulation and are described throughout the
sections where applicable. The following are general statements regardi ng these narrative biological
criteria.
a. Narrative biological criteria in Section A.4. describe the goals of the Department to maintain and
improve ail surface waters to a level that provides for the survival and propagation of a balanced
indigenous aquatic community of fauna and flora. These narrative criteria are determined by the
Department based on the condition of the waters of the State by measurements of physical,
chemical, and biological characteristics of the waters according to their classified uses.
b. Section C. 10. describes narrative biological criteria relative to surface water mixing zones and
specifies requirements necessary for the protection and propagation of a balanced indigenous
aquatic community.
c. Narrative biological criteria shall be consistent with the objective of maintaining and improving
all surface waters to a level that provides for the survival and propagation of a balanced
indigenous aquatic community of fauna and flora attainable in waters of the State; and in all
cases shall protect against degradation of the highest existing or classified uses or biological
conditions in compliance with the Antidegradation Rules contained in this regulation. Section
D.1.a describes narrative biological criteria relative to activities in Outstanding National
Resource Waters, Outstanding Resource Waters and Shellfish Harvesting Waters.
d. In order to determine the biological quality of the waters of the State, it is necessary that the
biological component be assessed by comparison to a reference condition(s) based upon similar
hydrologic and watershed characteristics that represent the optimum natural condition for that
system. Such reference condition(s) or reaches of waterbodies shall be those observed to support
the greatest variety and abundance of aquatic life in the region as is expected to be or would be with
a minimal amount of disturbance from anthropogenic sources. Impacts from urbanization and
agriculture should be minimal and natural vegetation should dominate the land cover. There should
also be an appropriate diversity of substrate. Reference condition(s) shall be determined by
consistent sampling and reliable measures of selected indicative communities of flora and fauna as
established by the Department and may be used in conjunction with acceptable physical, chemical,
and microbial water quality measurements and records judged to be appropriate for this purpose.
Narrative biological criteria relative to activities in all waters are described in Section E.
e. In the Class Descriptions, Designations, and Specific Standards for Surface Waters Section, all
water use classifications protect for a balanced indigenous aquatic community of fauna and flora.
In addition, Trout Natural and Trout Put, Grow, and Take classifications protect for reproducing trout
populations and stocked trout populations, respectively.
Antidegradation Rules.
8. Trout Waters. The State recognizes three types of trout waters: Natural; Put, Grow, and Take; and
Put and Take.
a. Natural (TN) are freshwaters suitable for supporting reproducing trout populations and a cold
water balanced indigenous aquatic community of fauna and flora. Also suitable for primary and
secondary contact recreation and as a source for drinking water supply after conventional
treatment in accordance with the requirements of the Department. Suitable for fishing and the
survival and propagation of a balanced indigenous aquatic community of fauna and flora.
Suitable also for industrial and agricultural uses.
b. Put, Grow, and Take (TPGT) are freshwaters suitable for supporting growth of stocked trout
populations and a balanced indigenous aquatic community of fauna and flora. Also suitable for
primary and secondary contact recreation and as a source for drinking water supply after
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-63
-------
conventional treatment in accordance with the requirements of the Department. Suitable for
fishing and the survival and propagation of a balanced indigenous aquatic community of fauna
and flora. Suitable also for industrial and agricultural uses.
Put and Take (TPT) are freshwaters suitable for primary and secondary contact recreation and
as a source for drinking water supply after conventional treatment in accordance with the
requirements of the Department. Suitable for fishing and the survival and propagation of a
balanced indigenous aquatic community 6f fauna and flora. Suitable also for industrial and
agricultural uses. The standards of Fresnwjaters classification protect these uses.
South Dakota
SOURCE: Administrative Rules of South Dakota, Article 74:51, Surface Water Quality Standards, effective
January 27, 1999: http://leqis.state.sd.us/rules/rules/7451.htm#74:51:01 and
http://www.state.sd.us/denr/denr.html
74:51:01:01. Definitions.
(4) "Aquatic life," an organism dependent on the water environment to either propagate or survive, or
both;
(5) "Aquatic community," an association of interacting populations and stages of aquatic life in a given
water body or habitat;
(10) "Biological integrity," the ability to support and maintain a balanced, integrated, adaptive community
of organisms having a species composition, diversity, and functional organization comparable to that
of the natural habitat of the region; I
(13) "Coldwater aquatic life," aquatic life including fish of the family Salmonidae, for example, trout and
salmon;
(14) "Coldwater marginal fish life propagation," a beneficial use assigned to surface waters of the state
which support aquatic life and are suitable for stocked catchable-size coldwater fish during portions
of the year, but which, because of critical natural conditions including low flows, siltation, or warm
temperatures, are not suitable for a permanent coldwater ftsh population. Warmwater fish may also
be present;
(15) "Coldwater permanent fish life propagation," a beneficial use assigned to surface waters of the state
which are capable of supporting aquatic life and are suitable for supporting a permanent population
of coldwater fish from natural reproduction or fingerling stocking. Warmwater fish may also be
present;
(27) "High-quality fishery waters," surface waters of the state designated for the beneficial use of
coldwater permanent fish life propagation, coldwater marginal fish life propagation, or warm water
permanent fish life propagation;
(30) "Impairment," a detrimental effect on the aquatic community caused by an impact that prevents
attainment of the designated use;
(57) "Warmwater aquatic life," aquatic life including the Ictaluridae, Centrarchidae, and Cyprinidae
families of fish, for example, catfish, sunfish, and minnows, respectively;
(58) "Warmwater marginal fish life propagation," a beneficial use assigned to surface waters of the state
which will support aquatic life and more tolerant species of warmwater fish naturally or by frequent
stocking and intensive management but which suffer frequent fish kills because of critical natural
conditions;
(59) "Warmwater permanent fish life propagation," a beneficial use assigned to surface waters of the
state which support aquatic life and are suitable for the permanent propagation or maintenance, or
Water Quality Standards December 2002 4-64
-------
both, of warmwater fish;
(60) "Warmwater semipermanent fish life propagation waters," a beneficial use assigned to surface
waters of the state which support aquatic life and are suitable for the propagation or maintenance,
or both, of warmwater fish but which may suffer occasional fish kills because of critical natural
conditions;
62) "Wetlands," those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency
and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions including swamps, marshes, bogs,
and similar areas;
(63) "Fish and wildlife propagation, recreation, and stock watering," a beneficial use classification
assigned to all surface waters of the state which may support recreation in and on the water and fish
and aquatic life, when sufficient quantities of water are present for sufficient duration to support
those uses; provide habitat for aquatic and semi-aquatic wild animals and fowl; provide natural food
chain maintenance; and are of suitable quality for watering domestic and wild animals;
74:51:01:12. Biological integrity of waters.
All waters of the state must be free from substances, whether attributable to human-induced point source
discharges or nonpoint source activities, in concentrations or combinations which will adversely impact the
structure and function of indigenous or intentionally introduced aquatic communities.
Tennessee
SOURCE: Rules of the Tennessee Department of Health and Tennessee Department of Environment and
Conservation, Chapter 1200-4-3 General Water Quality Criteria, revised October 1999:
http://www.state.tn.us/sos/rules/120Q/1200-04/1200-04-03.pdf and www.state.tn.us/environment
1200-4-3-.03 Criteria for Water Uses:
(3) Fish and Aquatic Life.
(j) Biological Integrity - The waters shall not be modified through the addition of pollutants or through
physical alteration to the extent that the diversity and/or productivity of aquatic biota within the
receiving waters are substantially decreased or adversely affected, except as allowed under 1200-4-
3-.06. The condition of biological communities will be measured by use of metrices suggested in
guidance such as Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers {EPA/444/4-89-
001 ) or other scientifically defensible methods. Effects to biological populations will be measured
by comparisons to upstream conditions or to appropriately selected reference sites in the same
ecoregion.
Texas
SOURCE: Texas Administrative Code, Title 30 Environmental Quality, Part 1, Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission, Chapter 307, Texas Surface Water Quality Standards, amended effective August
17, 2000:
http://info.sos.state.tx.us:80/pub/plsql/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac view=4&ti=30&pt=1&ch=307&rNY
Rule 307.3 Definitions and Abbreviations
(a) Definitions
(9) Biological integrity-The species composition, diversity, and functional organization of a
community of organisms in an environment relatively unaffected by pollution.
(27) Incidental fishery-A level of fishery which applies to water bodies that are not considered to
have a sustainable fishery but which have an aquatic life use of limited, intermediate, high, or
Water Quality Standards December 2002 4-65
-------
exceptional.
(45) Seagrass propagation-A water-quality-related existing use which applies to saltwater with
significant stands of submerged seagrass.
(50) Significant aquatic life use~A broad characterization of aquatic life which indicates that a
subcategory of aquatic life use (limited, intermediate, high, or exceptional) is applicable. Some
aquatic life is expected to be present even in water bodies which are not designated for specific
categories of aquatic life use. Some provisions to protect aquatic life applies to any water body
in the state whether an aquatic life use is assigned or not.
Rule 307.7 Site-specific Uses and Criteria
(a) Aquatic life. The establishment of numerical criteria for aquatic life is highly dependent on desired use,
sensitivities of usual aquatic communities, and local physical and chemical characteristics. Five
subcategories of aquatic life use are established, They include limited, intermediate, high, and
exceptional aquatic life and oyster waters. Aquatic life use subcategories designated for segments listed
in Appendix A of §307.10 of thi s title recognize the najtural variabi I ity of aquatic community requirements
and local environmental conditions.
(b) Appropriate uses and criteria for site-specific standards are defined as follows.
(3) Aquatic life. The establishment of numerical criteria for aquatic life is highly dependent on desired
use, sensitivities of usual aquatic communities, arid local physical and chemical characteristics. Five
subcategories of aquatic life use are established. They include limited, intermediate, high, and
exceptional aquatic life and oyster waters. Aquatic life use subcategories designated for segments
listed in Appendix A of §307.10 of this title recognize the natural variability of aquatic community
requirements and local environmental conditions.
(5) Additional uses. Other basic uses, such as navigation, agricultural water supply, industrial water
supply, seagrass propagation, and wetland water quality functions will be maintained and protected
for all water in the state in which these uses car be achieved
Table 4: Aquatic Life Subcategories (Figure: 30 TAG §307.7(b)(3)(A)(t)}
Aquatic Ufa
Uie Subcato-
gory
Exceptional
High
Intermediate
Limited
Dissolved Oxygen, itig/L
FnMmMter
mean/
minimum
6.0/4.0
5.30/3.0
4.03,0
3.0/2.0
Frwhwatef
In Spring
mevn/
minimum
B.o/s.0
5.5/4.5
5.0/4.0
4.00.0
Saltwater
mranf
minimum
5.0/4.0
4.0/3.0
3.0/2.0
Aquatic Life Attributes
Habitat
Characteristics
Outstanding
natural
variability
Highly diverse
Moderately
diverse
Uniform
Species
Assemblage
Exceptional or
unusual
Usual
assoc
region
expect
specie
Some
specie
fltion of
illy
ed
S
expected
s
Most regionally
expected
special* absent
Sensitive
Species
Abundant
Present
Very low in
abundance
Absent
Diversity
Exceptionally
high
High
Moderate
Low
Species
Richness
Exceptionally
high
High
Moderate
Low
Trophic
Structure
Balanced
Balanced to
slightly
im balanced
Moderately
imbalanced
Severely
imbalanced
SOURCE: Title R317. Environmental Quality, Water Quality, R317-1. Definitions and General Requirements
and Rule R317.2 Standards of Quality for Waters of the State, as in effect January 1, 2002:
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-66
-------
http://www.rules.state.ut.us/publicat/code/r31 7/r317-001 .htm#T1 . and
http://www.rules.state.ut. us/publicat/code/r317/r317-002. htm#T7
R317-1-1. Definitions
1.20 "Pollution" means such contamination, or other alteration of the physical, chemical, or biological
properties of any waters of the state, or such di scharge of any liquid, gaseous or solid substance into
any waters of the state as will create a nuisance or render such waters harmful or detrimental or
injurious to public health, safety or welfare, or to domestic, commercial, industrial, agricultural,
recreational, or other legitimate beneficial uses, or to livestock, wild animals, birds, fish or other
aquatic life.
317-2-6. Use Designations
6.3 Class 3 - Protected for use by aquatic wildlife.
(a) Class 3A - Protected for cold water species of game fish and other cold water aquatic life,
including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain.
(b) Class 3B - Protected for warm water species of game fish and other warm water aquatic life,
including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain.
(c) Class 3C - Protected for nongame fish and other aquatic life, including the necessary aquatic
organisms in their food chain.
(d) Class 3D - Protected for waterfowl, shore birds and other water-oriented wildlife not included
in Classes 3A, 3B, or 3C, including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain.
(e) Class 3E - Severely habitat-limited waters. Narrative standards will be applied to protect these
waters for aquatic wildlife.
6.5 Class 5 - The Great Salt Lake. Protected for primary and secondary contact recreation, aquatic
wildlife, and mineral extraction.
Vermorr
SOURCE: Vermont Water Quality Standards, effective July 2, 2000:
http://www.state.vt.us/wtrboard/docs/adoptedwqs.pdf
Section 1-01 B. Applicability and Definitions
5. Aquatic biota means all organisms that, as part of their natural life cycle, live in or on waters.
6. Aquatic habitat means the physical, chemical, and biological components of the water environment.
10. Biological integrity means the ability of an aquatic ecosystem to support and maintain, when consistent
with reference conditions, a community of organisms that is not dominated by any particular species or
functions (balanced), is fully functional (integrated), and is resilient to change or impact (adaptive), and
which has the expected species composition, diversity, and functional organization.
20. Functional component of the aquatic ecosystem means a portion of the aquatic biological community
identified by its role in the processing of energy within the aquatic ecosystem (e.g., primary producers,
predators, detritivores, etc.).
23. Intolerant aquatic organisms means those organisms which are particularly sensitive to, and likely to
be adversely affected by, the stress of pol lution, flow modification or habitat alteration (e.g., mayflies and
stoneflies).
29. Natural condition means the condition representing chemical, physical, and biological characteristics
that occur naturally with only minimal effects from human influences.
39. Reference condition means the range of chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of waters
minimally affected by human influences. In the context of an evaluation of biological indices, or where
necessary to perform other evaluations of water quality, the reference condition establishes attainable
chemical, physical, and biological conditions for specific water body types against which the condition
Water Quality Standards December 2002 4-67
-------
of waters of similar water body type is evaluated. ,
44. Taxonomic component of the aquatic ecosystem means a portion of the biological community
identified by a hierarchical classification system for identifying biological organisms that uses physical
and biological characteristics (e.g., Insecta: Plecoptera: Perlidae: Agnetina capitals).
45. Tolerant aquatic organisms means organisms (e.g., midges and annelids) that, although they may be
affected by the stress of pollution, flow modification or habitat alteration, are less sensitive and less likely
to be adversely affected than are intolerant aquatic organisms.
Section 3-01C. Numeric Biological Criteria
C. Numeric Biological Indices
1. In addition to other applicable provisions of these rules and other appropriate methods of evaluation,
the Secretary may establish and apply numeric biological indices to determine whether there is full
support of aquatic biota and aquatic habitat uses. These numeric biological indices shall be derived
from measures of the biological integrity of the reference condition for different water body types.
In establishing numeric biological indices, the'Secretary shall establish procedures that employ
standard sampling and analytical methods to characterize the biological integrity of the appropriate
reference condition. Characteristic measures df biological integrity include but are not limited to
community level measurement such as: species richness, diversity, relative abundance of tolerant
and intolerant species, density, and functional composition.
2. In addition, the Secretary may determine whether there is full support of aquatic biota and aquatic
habitat uses through other appropriate methods of evaluation, including habitat assessments.
Section 3-02 Class A(1) Ecological Waters
B. Water Quality Criteria for Class A(1) Ecological Waters
3. Aquatic Biota, Wildlife, and Aquatic Habitat - Change from the natural condition limited to minimal
impacts from human activity. Measures of biological integrity for aquatic macroinvertebrates and
fish assemblages are within the range of the natural condition. Uses related to either the physical,
chemical, or biological integrity of the aquatic habitat or the composition or life cycle functions of
aquatic biota or wildlife are fully supported. All life cycle functions, including overwintering and
reproductive requirements are maintained and protected.
Section 3-03. Class A(21 Public Water Supplies
A. Management Objectives. Waters managed for public water supply purposes to achieve and maintain
waters with a uniformly excellent character and a level of water quality that is compatible with the
following designated uses:
1. Aquatic Biota, Wildlife, and Aquatic Habitat - high quality aquatic biota and wildlife sustained by high
quality aquatic habitat necessary to support their life-cycle and reproductive requirements.
B. Water Quality Criteria for Class A(2) Public Water Supplies. The following water quality criteria shall
be achieved in all Class A(2) public water supplies.
3. Aquatic Biota, Wildlife and Aquatic Habitat - Biological integrity is maintained, no change from the
reference condition that would prevent the fulj support of aquatic biota, wildlife or aquatic habitat
uses. Change from the reference condition for aquatic macroinvertebrates and fish assemblages
shall not exceed moderate changes in the relative proportions of taxonomic, functional, tolerant and
intolerant components. All expected functional groups are present in a high quality habitat and none
shall be eliminated. All life cycle functions, including overwintering and reproductive requirements
are maintained and protected. Changes in the aquatic habitat shall not exceed moderate differences
from the reference condition consistent with the full support of all aquatic biota and wildlife uses.
Section 3-04. Class B Waters
A. Management Objectives. Class B waters shall be, managed to achieve and maintain a level of quality
that fully supports the following designated uses:
1. Aquatic Biota, Wildlife, and Aquatic Habitat - aquatic biota and wildlife sustained by high quality
aquatic habitat with additional protection in those waters where these uses are sustainable at a
higher level based on Water Management Type designation.
B. Water Quality Criteria for Class B waters. In addition to the criteria specified in §3-01 of these rules, the
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-68
-------
following criteria shall be met in all Class B waters:
4. Aquatic Biota, Wildlife and Aquatic Habitat - No change from the reference condition that would
prevent the full support of aquatic biota, wildlife, or aquatic habitat uses. Biological integrity is
maintained and all expected functional groups are present in a high quality habitat. Ail life-cycle
functions, including overwintering and reproductive requirements are maintained and protected. In
addition, the following criteria shall be achieved:
a. In Water Management Type One waters - change from the reference condition for aquatic
macroinvertebrate and fish assemblages shall be limited to minor changes in the relative
proportions of taxonomic and functional components; relative proportions of tolerant and
intolerant components are within the range of the reference condition. Changes in the aquatic
habitat shall be limited to minimal differences from the reference condition consistent with the
full support of all aquatic biota and wildlife uses.
b. In Water Management Type Two waters - change from the reference condition for aquatic
macroinvertebrate and fish assemblages shall be limited to moderate changes in the relative
proportions of tolerant, intolerant, taxonomic, and functional components. Changes in the
aquatic habitat shall be limited to minor differences from the reference condition consistent with
the full support of all aquatic biota and wildlife uses.
c. In Water Management Type Three waters - change from the reference condition for aquatic
macroinvertebrate and fish assemblages shall be limited to moderate changes in the relative
proportions of tolerant, intolerant, taxonomic, and functional components. Changes in the
aquatic habitat shall be limited to moderate differences from the reference condition consistent
with the full support of all aquatic biota and wildlife uses. When such habitat changes are a
result of hydrological modification or water level fluctuation, compliance may be determined on
the basis of aquatic habitat studies.
d. In all other Class B waters - no change from reference conditions that would have an undue
adverse effect on the composition of the aquatic biota, the physical or chemical nature of the
substrate or the species composition or propagation of fishes.
Section 3-05 Fish Habitat Designation
To provide for the protection and management of fisheries, the waters of the State are designated in
Appendix A as being either a cold or a warm water fish habitat. Where appropriate, such designations may
be seasonal.
Virgin!
SOURCE: State Water Control Board, Virginia Administrative Code (9 VAC 25-260-5 et seq. Water Quality
Standards). Statutory Authority: § 62.1-44.15(3a) of the Code of Virginia. Effective Date: December 10,
1997: http://www.deq.state.ya.us/wqs/
PARTI
SURFACE WATER STANDARDS WITH GENERAL, STATEWIDE APPLICATION
9 VAC 25-260-10. Designation of uses.
A. All state waters, including wetlands, are designated for the following uses: 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; wildlife; and the production
of edible and marketable natural resources, e.g., fish and shellfish.
9 VAC 25-260-20. General standard.
A. All state waters, including wetlands, shall be free from substances attributable to sewage, industrial
waste, or other waste in concentrations, amounts, or combinations which contravene established
standards or interfere directly or indirectly with designated uses of such water or which are inimical or
harmful to human, animal, plant, or aquatic life.
9 VAC 25-260-370. Classification column.
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-69
-------
B. DGIF trout waters. The Departm ent of Game and Inland Fisheries (DG IF) has established a classification
system for trout waters based on aesthetics, productivity, resident fish population and stream structure.
Classes i through iv rate wild trout habitat; Classes v through vii rate cold water habitat not suitable for
wild trout but adequate for year-round hold-over of stocked trout. The DGIF classification system is
included in this publication with the board's trout water classes (Class V - Stockable trout waters and
Class VI - Natural trout waters) i n the class colum n of the River Basin Section Tables 9 VAC 25-260-390
et seq.
DGIF trout water classifications which are not consistent with board classifications for stockable trout
waters or natural trout waters are shown with a double asterisk (**) i n the class column of the River Basin
Section Tables 9 VAC 25-260-390 et seq. These trout waters have been identified for reevaluation by
the DGIF. Those trout waters which have no DGIF Classification are shown with a triple asterisk (***).
The DGIF classes are described below. Inclusion of these DGIF classes provides additional information
about specific streams for permit writers and other i nterested persons. Trout waters classified as classes
i or ii by the DGIF are also recognized in 9 VAC 25-260-110.
DGIF STREAM CLASS DESCRIPTIONS.
Wild natural trout streams.
Class I. Stream of outstanding natural beauty possess!ng wilderness or at least remote characteristics,
an abundance of large deep pools, and excellent fish cover. Substrate is variable with an
abundance of coarse gravel and rubble. Stream contains a good population of wild trout or has
the potential for such. Would be considered an exceptional wild trout stream.
Class ii. Stream contains a good wild trout population or the potential for one but is lacking in aesthetic
quality, productivity, and/or in some structural characteristic. Stream maintains good water
quality and temperature, maintains at leajst a fair summer flow, and adjacent land is not
extensively developed. Stream would be considered a good wild trout stream and would
represent a major portion of Virginia's wild trout waters.
Class III. Stream which contains a fai r population of wild trout with carrying capacity depressed by natural
factors or more commonly man-related land use practices. Land use activities may result in
heavy siltation of the stream, destruction of banks and fish cover, water quality degradation,
increased water temperature, etc. Most streams would be considered to be in the active state
of degradation or recovery from degradation. Alteration in land use practices would generally
improve carrying capacity of the stream.
Class iv. Stream which contains an adequately reproducing wild trout population but has severely reduced
summer flow characteristics. Fish are trapped in isolated pools where they are highly susceptible
to predators and fishermen. Such streams could quickly be over-exploited and, therefore,
provide difficult management problems.
Stockable trout streams.
Class v. Stream does not contain an adequately reproducing wild trout population nor does it have
the potential for such. However, water quality is adequate, water temperature is good, and
invertebrate productivity is exceptional. Pools are abundant with good size and depth and
fish cover is excellent. Stream would be good for stocked trout but may offer more potential
for a fingerling stocking program.
Class vi. Stream does not contain a significant number of trout nor a significant population of warmwater
gamefish. Water quality is adequate and water temperature good for summer carryover of
stocked trout. Summer flow remains fair and adjacent land is not extensively developed. All
streams in this class would be considered good trout stocking water.
Class vii. Stream does not contain a significant number of trout nor a significant population of warmwater
gamefish. Water quality and temperature are adequate for trout survival but productivity is
marginal as are structural characteristics. Streams in this class could be included in a stocking
program but they would be considered marginal and generally would not be recommended for
stocking.
Class viii. Stream does not contain a significant number of trout nor a significant population of warmwater
gamefish. Water quality and temperature are adequate for trout but summer flows are very poor
(less than 30% of channel). Streams in this class can provide good trout fishing during spring
Water Quality Standards December 2002 4-70
-------
and early summer but would not be recommended for summer or fall stocking.
Other. Remaining streams would be considered unsuitable for any type of trout fishery. Streams would
be considered unsuitable under any of the following conditions:
(a) summer temperatures unsuitable for trout survival;
(b) stream contains a significant population of warmwater gamefish;
(c) insufficient flow; or
(d) intolerable water quality.
Washington
SOURCE: Chapter 173-201A Washington Administrative Code. Water Quality Standards for Surface
Waters of the State of Washington, November 18, 1997: http://www.ecv.wa.gov/pubs/wac173201a.pdf
WAG 173-201A-010 Introduction.
(1) The purpose of this chapter is to establish water quality standards for surface waters of the state of
Washington consistent with public health and public enjoyment thereof, and the propagation and
protection of fish, shellfish, and wildlife, pursuant to the provisions of chapter 90.48 RCW [Revised Code
of Washington] and the policies and purposes thereof.
WAC 173-201A-020 Definitions.
"Biological assessment" is an evaluation of the biological condition of a water body using surveys of aquatic
community structure and function and other direct measurements of resident biota in surface waters.
"Damage to the ecosystem" means any demonstrated or predicted stress to aquatic or terrestrial organisms
or communities of organisms which the department reasonably concludes may interfere in the health or
survival success or natural structure of such populations. This stress may be due to, but is not limited to,
alteration in habitat or changes in water temperature, chemistry, or turbidity, and shall consider the potential
build up of discharge constituents or temporal increases in habitat alteration which may create such stress
in the long term.
"Ecoregions" are defined using EPA's Ecoregions of the Pacific Northwest Document No. 600/3-86/033 July
1986 by Omernik and Gallant.
"Wildlife habitat" means 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.
WAC 173-201A-030 General water use and criteria classes.
The following criteria shall apply to the various classes of surface waters in the state of Washington:
Class AA (extraordinary), Class A (excellent), and Class B (good). Characteristic uses shall include, but not
be limited to, the following:
(iii) Fish and shellfish: Salmonid migration, rearing, spawning, and harvesting. Other fish migration,
rearing, spawning, and harvesting. Clam, oyster, and mussel rearing, spawning, and harvesting.
Crustaceans and other shellfish (crabs, shrimp, crayfish, scallops, etc.) rearing, spawning, and
harvesting.
(iv) Wildlife habitat.
Class C (fair). Characteristic uses shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
(ii) Fish (salmonid and other fish migration).
Lake class. Characteristic uses shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
(iii) Fish and shellfish: Salmonid migration, rearing, spawning, and harvesting. Other fish migration,
rearing, spawning, and harvesting. Clam and mussel rearing, spawning, and harvesting. Crayfish
rearing, spawning, and harvesting.
(iv) Wildlife habitat.
Water Quality Standards December 2002 4-71
-------
West Virginia
SOURCE: Title 46, West Virginia Secretary of State, Code of State Rules (CSR), Legislative Rule,
Environmental Quality Board, Series 1, Requirements Governing Water Quality Standards, effective May
17, 2001: http:/AA>ww.state.wv.us/csr/verifv.asp?TitleSeiiies=46-01
$46-1-3. Conditions Not Allowable In State Waters.
3.2.i. Any other condition, including radiological exposure, which adversely alters the integrity of the
waters of the State including wetlands; no significant adverse impact to the chemical, physical,
hydrologic, or biological components of aquatic ecosystems shall be allowed.
S46-1-6. Water Use Categories.
6.3. Category B - Propagation and maintenance of fish and other aquatic life. - This category includes:
6.3.a. Category B1 - Warm water fishery streams. - Streams or stream segments which contain
populations composed of all warm water aquatic life.
6.3.b. Category B2 - Trout Waters. -- As defined in Section 2.19 (See Appendix A for a
representative list.)
6.3.c. Category B4 - Wetlands. - As defined iri section 2.22; certain numeric stream criteria may
not be appropriate for application to wetlands (see Appendix E).
6.5. Category D. - Agriculture and wildlife uses.
6.5.c. Category D3 - Wildlife. - This category includes all stream segments and wetlands used by
wildlife.
Wisconsin
Source: Wisconsin Administrative Code, Department of Natural Resources, Chapter NR102, Water Quality
Standards for Wisconsin Surface Waters, February 1998: http://www.legis.state.wi.us/rsb/code/nr/nr102.pdf
NR 102.04 Categories of standards.
(3) FISH AND OTHER AQUATIC LIFE USES. The department shall classify all surface waters Into one of
the fish and other aquatic life subcategories described in this subsection. Only those use subcategories
identified in pars, (a) to (c) shall be considered suitable for the protection and propagation of a balanced
fish and other aquatic life community as provided in the federal water pollution control act amendments
of 1972, P.L 92-500; 33 USC 1251 et seq.
(a) Cold water communities. This subcategory includes surface waters capable of supporting a
community of cold water fish and other aquatic life, or serving as a spawning area for cold water ftsh
species. This subcategory includes, but is not Restricted to, surface waters identified as trout water
by the department of natural resources (Wisconsin Trout Streams, publication 6-3600 (80)).
(b) Warm water sport fish communities. This subcategory includes surface waters capable of supporting
a community of warm water sport fish or servipg as a spawning area for warm water sport fish.
(c) Warm water forage fish communities. This subcategory includes surface waters capable of
supporting an abundant diverse community of forage fish and other aquatic life.
(d) Limited forage fish communities. (Intermediate surface waters). This subcategory includes surface
waters of limited capacity and naturally poor water quality or habitat. These surface waters are
capable of supporting only a limited community of forage fish and other aquatic life.
(e) Limited aquatic We. (Marginal surface waters). 1 his sub-category includes surface waters of severely
limited capacity and naturally poor water quality or habitat. These surface waters are capable of
supporting only a limited community of aquatic life.
(7) STANDARDS FOR WILDLIFE. All surface waters shall be classified for wildlife uses and meet the
wildlife criteria specified in or developed pursuant to NR 105.07.
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-72
-------
Wyomin^
SOURCE: Wyoming Rules and Regulations, Water Quality Rules and Regulations: Chapter 1, Quality
Standards for Wyoming Surface Waters Sections 2, 3, and 4, March 7,2000:
http://80Swy.state.wv.us/RULES/3925.Pdf
Section 2. Definitions. The following definitions supplement those definitions contained in section 35-11-
103 of the Wyoming Environmental Quality Act.
(e) "Cold Water Game Fish" means Grayling (Thymallus arcticus), Northern Pike (Esox lucius), Salmon
(Oncorhynchus spp.), Sauger (Stizostedion canadense), Tiger muskie (Esox Masquinongy), Trout
(Salmo, Oncorhynchus, and Salvelinus spp.), Walleye (Stizostedion vitreum), and Whitefish
{Prospium williamsoni).
(p) "Game fish" means Bass (Micropterus spp.), Catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), Crappie (Pomoxis spp.),
Grayling (Thymallus arcticus), Ling (Lota lota), Northern Pike (Esox lucius), Perch (Perca
flavescens), Salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.), Sauger (Stizostedion canadense), Sunfish (Lepomis
spp.), Tiger Muskie (Esox Masquinongy), Trout (Salmo, Oncorhynchus, and Salvelinus spp.),
Walleye (Stizostedion vitreum}, White Bass (Morone chrysops), and Whitefish (Prospium
williamsoni).
(w) "Natural" means that condition which would exist without the measurable effects or measurable
influence of man's activities.
(x) "Natural biotic community" means the population structures which were historically or normally
present under a given set of chemical and physical conditions or which would potentially exist had
not the habitat been degraded.
(y) "Natural water quality" means that quality of water which would exist without the measurable effects
or measurable influence of man's activities.
(II) "Undesirable aquatic life" means organisms generally associated with degraded or eutrophic
conditions. These may include the following organisms where they have replaced members of the
natural biotic community: nongame fish, bluegreen algae, certain diatoms, fungi, tubificid worms,
and certain syrphid flies.
(mm) 'Warm water game fish" means Bass (Micropterus spp.), Catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), Crappie
(Pomoxis spp.), Ling (Lota lota), Perch (Perca flavescens), Sunfish (Lepomis spp.), and White Bass
(Morone Chrysops).
Section 3. Water Uses.
(b) Protection and propagation of fish and wildlife;...and to achieve the goal of the federal act, which is to
achieve, wherever attainable, surface water quality which provides for the protection and propagation
of fish, shellfish, wildlife, and recreation in and on the water.
Section 4. Surface Water Classes and Uses, There are four classes of surface water in Wyoming:
(a) Class 1 - Those surface waters in which no further water quality degradation by point source discharges
other than from dams will be allowed. Nonpoint sources of pollution shall be controlled through
implementation of appropriate best management practices. In designating Class 1 waters, the
Environmental Quality Council shall consider water quality, aesthetic, scenic, recreational, ecological,
agricultural, botanical, zoological, municipal, industrial, historical, geological, cultural, archaeological,
fish and wildlife, the presence of significant quantities of developable water and other values of present
and future benefit to the people.
(b) Class 2 - Those surface waters, other than those classified as Class 1, which are determined to:
(i) Be presently supporting game fish; or
(ii) Have the hydrologic and natural water quality potential to support game fish; or
(iii) Include nursery areas or food sources for game fish.
Water Quality Standards December 2002 4-73
-------
(c) Class 3 - Those surface waters, other than those classified as Class 1, which are determined to:
(i) Be presently supporting nongame fish only; or
(ii) Have the hydrologic and natural water quality p >tential to support nongame fish only; or
(iii) Include nursery areas or food sources for nongame fish only.
(d) Class 4 - Those surface waters, otherthan those classified as Class 1, which are determined to not have
the hydrologic or natural water quality potential to support fish and include all intermittent and ephemeral
streams. Class 4 waters shall receive protection for agriculture uses and wildlife watering.
TERRITORIES
American Samoa
SOURCE: American Samoa Water Quality Standards (1999 Revision provided by ASEPA), Sections
24.0205 and 24.0206:
S24.0205 Water Classifications-Protected and Prohibited Uses
(1) Class 1 Fresh Surface Waters
(A) Class 1 waters are to remain in as near their natural state as possible with a minimum of pollution
from any human activity. Protected uses of these waters are: potable water supplies, support and
propagation indigenous aquatic and terrestrial life and compatible recreation and aesthetic
enjoyment.
(B) Prohibited uses and activities include, but are not limited to:
(i) Point source discharges of pollutants
(ii) Dredging and filling activities
(iii) Bathing, including washing clothes and dishes
(iv) Animal pens over or within 100 feet of the water body
(v) Siting of septic tanks or cesspools within 200 feet of the water body
(vi) Land disturbing (e.g., grading, tillage) activities within 100 feet of the water body
(vii)Wood cutting or clearing within 100 feet of the water body
(2) Class 2 Fresh Surface Waters
(A) Class 2 waters shall be protected for the support and propagation of indigenous aquatic life,
recreation in and on the water, and aesthetic enjoyment.
(B) Prohibited uses and activities include, but are not limited to:
(i) No zones of mixing will be granted
(ii) Dredging or filling activities, except as approved by EQC
(iii) Animal pens over or immediately adjacent to the water body
S24.0206 Standards of Water Quality
(i) There shall be no changes in basin geometry or freshwater inflow that will alter current patterns
in such a way as to adversely affect existing biological populations or sediment distribution. To
protect estuarine organisms, no change in c hannels, basin geometry, or freshwater influx shall
be made which would cause permanent changes in existing isohaline patterns of more than 10
percent.
Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands
Source: http://www.epa.gov/ost/standards/waslibrarv/ and http://www.dea.QOv.mp/
PART 5 CLASSIFICATION OF WATER USES
5.1 Marine Waters
(a) CLASS AA - it is the objective of this class that these waters remain in their natural pristine state as
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-74
-------
nearly as possible with an absolute minimum of pollution or alteration of water quality from any human-
related source or actions. To the extent practicable, the wilderness character of such areas shall be
protected. No zones of mixing shall be permitted. The uses to be protected in this class of waters are
the support and propagation of shellfish and other marine life, conservation of coral reefs and wilderness
areas, oceanographic research, and aesthetic enjoyment and compatible recreation inclusive of whole
body contact and related activities. / The classification of any water area as Class AA shall not preclude
other uses of such waters compatible with these objectives and in conformance with the criteria
applicable to them.
(b) CLASS A - It is the objective of this class of waters that their use for recreational purposes and aesthetic
enjoyment be protected. Any other use shall be allowed as long as it is compatible with the protection
and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife, and with recreation in and on these waters of a limited
body contact nature. Such waters shall be kept clean of solid waste, oil and grease, and shall not act as
receiving waters for any effluent which has not received the best degree of treatment of control
practicable under existing technology and economic conditions and compatible with standards
established for this class. A zone of mixing is [approvable] in such waters.
5.2 Fresh Surface Waters
(a) Class 1 - It is the objective of this class 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 such areas shall be protected. Wastewater discharges and zone of mixing
into these waters are prohibited. The uses to be protected in this class of water are for domestic water
supplies, food processing, the support and propagation of aquatic life, compatible recreation and
aesthetic enjoyment including water contact recreation.
(b) Class 2 - It is the objective of this class of waters that their use for recreational purposes, propagation
of fish and other aquatic life, and agricultural and industrial water supply not be limited in any way. The
uses to be protected in this class of waters are all uses compatible with the protection and propagation
of fish and other aquatic life, and with recreation in and on these waters. Compatible recreation may
include limited body contact activities. Such waters shall not act as receiving waters for any discharge
which has not received the best degree of treatment or control practical under technological and
economic conditions and compatible with the standards established for this class. A zone of mixing is
permissible in these waters.
5.3 Protection of wetlands
Wetlands are waters of the State and are subject to the provisions of this rule. Point or nonpoint sources of
pollution shall not cause destruction or impairment of wetlands. The general application of the Water Quality
Standards shall apply to all wetlands unless replaced by site specific standards for wetlands based on their
function are adopted by the Commonwealth and approved by EPA.
7.6 Salinity
Marine Waters (applicable to Class A, Class AA): No alterations of the marine environment shall occur that
would: (1) alter the salinity of marine or estuarine waters more than 10% of the ambient conditions, or (2)
which would otherwise adversely affect the sedimentary patterns and indigenous biota, except when due to
natural causes.
7.10 Oil and Petroleum Products
The concentration of oil or petroleum products shall not:
(b) Cause tainting of fish or other aquatic life, be injurious to the indigenous biota or cause objectionable
taste in drinking water.
7.12 General Considerations
(d) The health and life history characteristics of aquatic organisms in waters affected by controllable water
quality factors shall not differ substantially from those for the same waters in areas unaffected by
controllable water quality factors. Also, controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental
increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.
Guam
Water Quality Standards December 2002 4-75
-------
This language has not been reviewed for accuracy by state/tribal agency.
SOURCE: Section II, Guam STATEMENT OF POLICY^ amended 1986
http://www.epa.gov/ost/standards/wqslibrary/
It shall be the public policy of the Territory of Guanh to:
1. conserve, protect, maintain, and improve the quality of the Guam's waters for (drinking and food
processing) human consumption, for the growth andpropagation of aquatic life, for marine research and
for the preservation of coral reefs and wilderness areas, and for domestic, agricultural, commercial,
industrial, recreational and other legitimate uses;
4. maintain and improve the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of wetlands water quality as
necessary to meet the Clean Water Act Section 10fl (a), and to protect wetlands...
SECTION I: CATEGORIES OF WATERS
A. MARINE WATERS. This category includes all coastal waters off-shore from the mean high water mark,
including estuarine waters, lagoons and bays, brackish areas, wetlands and other special aquatic sites,
and other inland Waters that are subject to ebb and flow of the tides. Refer to Water Classification Map.
CATEGORY M-1 EXCELLENT: Waters in this category must be of high enough quality to ensure
preservation and protection of marine life, including corals and reef dwelling organisms, fish and related
fisheries resources, and enable the pursuit of marine scientific research as well as aesthetic enjoyment.
This category of water shall remain substantially free from pollution attributed to domestic, commercial
and industrial discharges, shipping and boating, or agriculture, construction and other activities which
can reduce the waters' quality. Furthermore, there shall be no zones of mixing within this category water.
CATEGORY M-2 GOOD: Water in this category must be of sufficient quality to allowforthe propagation
and survival of marine organisms, particularly shellfish, corals and other reef related resources. Other
important and intended uses include mariculture activities, aesthetic enjoyment and compatible
recreation inclusive of whole body contact and related activities.
CATEGORY M-3 FAIR: Water in this category is intended for general, commercial and industrial use.
Specific intended uses include the following: shipping, boating and berthing, industrial cooling water,
marinas, while allowing for protection of aquatic life, aesthetic enjoyment and compatible recreation with
limited body contact.
B. MIXING ZONES IN RECEIVING WATERS. ...The following criteria apply to all mixing zones:
3. Biologically important areas, including spawning and nursery areas, shall be protected.
CHAPTER IV DEFINITIONS
BIOTA: The animal, plant and microbial life of a region.
COMMUNITY: An association of living organisms in a given area or region in which the various species are
more or less interdependent upon each other.
HABITAT: The environment occupied by individuals of a particular species, population or community.
SPECIAL AQUATIC SITES: Sites possessing special ecological characteristics and values including
wetlands, wildlife sanctuaries and refuges, mud flats, vegetated shallows, coral reefs, riffle and pool
complexes.
WETLANDS: Means areas of land where the water table is at, near or above the land surface long enough
each year to result in the formation of characteristically wet (hydric) soil types, and support the growth of
water dependent (hydrophytic) vegetation. Wetlands include, but are not limited to, marshes, swamps,
mangroves, natural ponds, surface springs, estuaries, bogs, and
other such low-lying or similar areas. Inland wetlands will include all wetlands meeting the following
conditions.
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-76
-------
1) Wetlands greater than one hectare in size with less than 0.5% (ocean derived) salinity; and
2) Palustrine, Riverine and Lacustrine wetlands with greater than 30% wetland vegetation cover.
WETLAND FUNCTIONS: The beneficial uses of wetlands which are protected by these Water Quality
Standards including but not limited to graundwater recharge/discharge, flood water retention, sediment
stabilization, nutrient removal/transformation, wildlife diversity/ abundance,
aquatic diversity/abundance, and recreation.
Puerto Rici
SOURCE: Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Office of the Governor, Environmental Quality Board, Puerto
Rico Water Quality Standards, amended November 1987: http://www.epa.qov/ost/standards/wq8librarv/
Article I. Definitions
Benthic Species. Organisms that inhabit on, over, or in the bottom of the water body.;live adhered to the
bottom or crawl over the bottom.
Biota. All living organisms.
Desirable Species. Species indigenous to the area or introduced to the area because of ecological or
commercial value.
Ecological Community. Group of organisms dominated by one species or a specific group of species. The
ecological community derives its name from that of the dominant species, such as coral reefs and
mangroves.
Ecological Value. Refers to the existing interrelations between water body, fauna and flora that result in the
continuity, stability and permanence of the ecological community.
Pelagic Species. Organisms that have the ability of self locomotion and can overcome the currents. These
organisms can be found anywhere in the water column, near the surface, the bottom or at any point between
the surface and the bottom.
Planktonic Species. Marine organisms that mainly inhabit the surface of the receiving body of water. Their
main characteristic is that they cannot overcome the currents even if they have self locomotion.
Propagation and Preservation of Desirable Species. This refers to the reproduction and continuance of flora
and fauna associated with water bodies and which have ecologic importance and/or commercial value,
whether individually or as part of an ecological community.
Wetlands. Areas inundated or saturated by coastal, surface cr ground water at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support a prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.
ARTICLE 2. CLASSIFICATION OF THE WATERS OF PUERTO RICO ACCORDING TO THE
DESIGNATED USES TO BE PROTECTED
3.2 Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards for Specific Classifications:
3.2.1 Class SA:
(A) Usages and Description: Coastal waters and estuarine waters of high quality and/or
exceptional ecological or recreational value whose existing characteristics shall not be
altered, except by natural causes, in order to preserve the existing natural phenomena.
3.2.2 Class SB:
(A) Usages and Description. Coastal waters and estuarine waters for use in primary and
secondary contact recreation, and for propagation and preservation of desirable species.
3.2.3 Class SC:
(A) Usages and Description: Coastal waters intended ...for use in propagation and preservation
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-77
-------
of desirable species.
3.2.4 Class SD:
(A) Usages and Description: Surface waters intended for... propagation and preservation of
desirable species as well as primary and secondary contact recreation...
3.2.5 Class SE: ;
(A) Usages and Description: Surface waters and wetlands of exceptional ecological value,
whose existing characteristics should not be altered in order to preserve the existing natural
phenomena.
U.S. Virgin Islands
SOURCE: T.12 Subchapter 186. Water Quality Standards for Coastal Waters of the Virgin Islands Ch. 7
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL §186-2 -186.4: http:/faww.epa,aov/ost/standards/wQslibrarv
$ 186-2. Class A
(a) Best usage of waters: Preservation of natural phenomena requiring special conditions, such as the
Natural Barrier Reef at Buck Island, St. Croix and the Under Water Trail at Trunk Bay, St. John.
(b) Quality criteria: Existing natural conditions shall not be changed.
S 186-3. Class B
(a) Best usage of waters: For propagation of desirable species of marine life...
S186-4. Class C
(a) Best usage of waters: For the propagation of desirable species of marine life...
TRIBES
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation
SOURCE: Source: 40 CFR 131.35, July 1, 2000 edition:
http://www.epa.gov/ost/standards/wqslibrary/tribes/131.35.pdf
S 131.35
(f) General water use and criteria classes. The following criteria shall apply to the various classes of
surface waters on the Colville Indian Reservation:
(1) Class I (Extraordinary)—(i) Designated uses. The designated uses include, but are not limited to,
the following:
(C) Fish and shellfish: Salmonid migration, rearing, spawning, and harvesting; other fish migration,
rearing, spawning, and harvesting.
(D) Wildlife habitat.
(2) Class II (Excellent)—(i) Designated uses. The designated uses include but are not limited to, the
following:
(C) Fish and shellfish: Salmonid migration, rearing, spawning, and harvesting; other fish migration,
rearing, spawning, and harvesting; crayfish rearing, spawning, and harvesting.
(D) Wildlife habitat.
(3) Class III (Good;—(i) Designated uses. The designated uses include but are not limited to, the
following:
(C) Fish and shellfish: Salmonid migration, rearjng, spawning, and harvesting; other fish migration,
rearing, spawning, and harvesting; crayfish! rearing, spawning, and harvesting.
(D) Wildlife habitat.
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-78
-------
(4) Class IV (Fair)—(i) Designated uses. The designated uses include but are not limited to, the
following:
(C) Fish (salmonid and other fish migration).
Nez Perce Tribe
WQS under development. Currently collecting chemical and physical habitat data to eventually establish
WQS for the reservation area. No website available.
Oneida Nation of Wisconsin
(WQS were federally approved in 1996 and then rescinded after a lawsuit.}
SOURCE: Oneida Nation Water Quality Standards, hard copy provided by contact
Article VII. Narrative Criteria
7-1. Narrative criteria shall be used to guide water management decisions and activities that affect the
Waters of the Reservation, and to protect and enhance water quality. The following narrative criteria
shall apply to all Waters of the Reservations provided, however, where more stringent criteria exist,
the stricter standards shall supersede.
7-2. All Waters of the Reservation shall be free from:
a. pollutants in quantities that, either alone or as a result of interaction with other pollutants, cause
any designated use to become impaired.
b. pollutants in quantities that produce or contribute to the production of nuisance aquatic life.
c. pollutants in quantities that produce objectionable color, odor, taste or turbidity.
d. hazardous substances, toxic corrosive, nonconventional materials concentrations, or other
deleterious substances, chemicals, and materials, which alone or in combination with other
substances or in com bination with other com ponents of discharges, or their breakdown products,
are acutely or chronically toxic, carcinogenic, teratogenic, and injure, or bioaccumulate,
biomagnify, bioconcentrate, or produce adverse physiological responses in human beings and/or
fish and aquatic life, or which interfere directly or indirectly with designated, existing, or other
uses.
e. exotic nuisance species, e.g. purple loosestrife, zebra mussels, etc.
f. toxic pollutants in quantities that result bioaccumulation in aquatic organisms leading to toxicity
to consumers of the aquatic organisms.
g. excess nutrients that may cause a condition harmful to human health, decrease fish habitat,
cause nuisance aquatic growths, or that in any way impair designated uses. Nitrogen and
phosphorous concentrations shall not exceed the levels stated in Article XIII of this document.
h. microorganisms at levels that make recreation in and on Reservation waters unsafe.
i. floating debris, oil, scum and other floating materials as a result of human activity in amounts
sufficient to be unsightly, cause degradation or impair designated uses.
j. materials entering the waters as a result of human activity producing color, odor, taste or other
conditions in amounts sufficient to be unsightly, cause degradation or in any way impair
designated uses.
Water Quality Standards
December 3002
4-79
-------
k. substances other than from natural causes that may settle to form objectionable deposits or
adversely impact designated uses.
I. contaminants, from other than natural causes, that may settle or remain suspended that have
a deleterious effect on the aquatic life or that will significantly alter the physical or chemical
properties of the water body or that in any way impairs designated uses.
7-3. All wetlands shall be protected to maintain and restore their natural physical, biological, and
chemical characteristics, including substrate, vegetative and hydrological conditions necessary to
support natural amounts of native vegetation, maintain natural hydrodynamics and maintain natural
water temperature variations that are necessary to protect and support all existing and designated
uses.
7-4. All naturally occuring biological communities and the habitat needed to support them shall be
maintained and protected in all waters and wetlands of the Reservation at all times.
7-5. Concentrations of radioactive materials shall not exceed concentrations caused by local naturally
occuring materials.
7-6. All Waters of the Reservation shall be free from unauthorized discharges at all places at all times.
7-7. Any activity that allows storm discharges or base flow conditions to significantly degrade stream
morphology or result in a waterway's inability to maintain existing aquatic life shall be prohibited.
Cumulative impacts of any such activity shall be considered.
7-8. Waters contained in intermittent and ephemeral streams shall meet all water quality criteria
applicable to any perennial streams to which they are tributaries.
7-9. All criteria should be met at all times and all locations, including low flow rates. However, allowance
may be made for mixing, on a case by case basis, where compliance with the chronic criteria is not
technically feasible. In such cases mixing zones shall be established consistent with 40 C. F. R. Pt.
132, Appendix F, Procedure 3. In no case will mixing be permitted in biologically or recreationally
sensitive areas. In no case may the acute criteria be exceeded.
7-10. Natural native biological/ecological comm unities associated with Waters of the Reservation and their
biotic and abiotic components and relationships shall be protected.
7-11. Waters of the Reservation shall not be degraded below their present water quality nor shall new or
increased discharges be permitted unless it is determined by the Environmental Department that
the accompanying water quality degradation from such discharges will provide unique benefits in
accordance with Section 6-7 and Section 6-8. All existing and designated uses shall be protected
at all times.
7-12. Any activities that degrade the aesthetic quality, stability and/or ecological integrity of the Waters
of the Reservation shal I be prohibited unless authorized in a manner consistent with the water quality
standards contained herein.
7-13. The discharge of toxicants into the Waters of Reservations that are known or found to be synergistic
with other pollutants shall be addresses on a case by case basis.
7-14. For substances where numeric criteria have not yet been adopted by the Oneida Nation, the numeric
criteria and methodologies in 40 C. F. R. Pt. 132, Appendices A-D shall be used and are
incorporated into these standards by reference.
Article IX. Designated Uses
9-1. All of the following categories of designated uses shall apply to all Waters of the reservation except
where noted.
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-80
-------
9-2. Public Water Supply. Waters specifically designated as suitable or intended to become suitable for
providing an adequate supply of drinking water for the continuation of the health, safety and welfare
of the Nation's members and residents of the Oneida Reservation.
9-3. Wildlife. All surface waters capable of providing a water supply and vegetative habitat for the
support and propagation of all wildlife located within the exterior boundaries of the Oneida Nation
Reservation.
9-4. Aquatic Life. Waters of the Reservation shall be categorized as one the following:
1. Cold Water Ecosystems: Waters of the Reservation where water temperature, habitat and other
characteristics are suitable or intended to be suitable for the support and propagation of cold
water fish and other aquatic life, or serving as a spawning or nursery area for cold water fish
species. Examples of cold water fish include brook trout and rainbow trout. Trout Creek,
Lancaster Brook and associated tributaries are hereby designated as cold water ecosystems.
2. Warm Water Ecosystems: Waters of the Reservation where water temperature, habitat and
other characteristics are suitable or intended to be suitable for support and propagation of warm
water fish and other aquatic life, or serving as a spawning or nursery area for warm water fish
species. Examples of warm water fish species include large mouth bass and bluegills. All
Waters of the Reservation are hereby designated as warm water ecosystems except those
mentioned in Section 9-4(a).
9-5. Subsistence Fishing. Water of the Reservation where spearing, netting or bow fishing is allowed as
stated in the Oneida Conservation Hunting and Fishing Law.
9-6. Cultural. Waters that are suitable or intended to be suitable for traditional, cultural, historic and
modern ceremonial uses which uses which may include, but are not limited to the harvest and use
of medical plants and wildlife associated with aquatic, wetland and riparian habitats; cultural
educational uses including but not limited to ethnohydrological learning experiences that are passed
from one generation to the next regarding the harvest of plants, fish, and animals; subsistence
fishing; and activities that may require the protection of sensitive and valuable aquatic plant and
wildlife, and aquatic, wetland and riparian habitat.
9-7. Recreation.
1. Primary Contact Recreational: Waters that are suitable for activities involving prolonged human
contact where the risk of ingesting small quantities of water is likely; examples of this type of
activity include, but are not limited to, swimming, tubing, rafting, skin diving, etc. The Norbert
Hill Pond is hereby designated as a primary contact recreational area.
2. Secondary Contact Recreational: Waters that are suitable for activities in which human contact
with the water may, but need not occur and in which the probability of ingesting raw water is
unlikely. Examples of this type of activity include, but are not limited to, fishing, wading,
boating, etc. All Waters of the Reservation are hereby designated as secondary contact
recreational areas except for those mentioned in Section 9-5(a).
9-8. Agricultural. Waters that are suitable for crop irrigation and livestock ingestion.
9-9. Navigational. Waters that are suitable for navigation in and on the water.
9-10. Industrial. Waters that are suitable for manufacturing and/or production enterprises.
Passamaquoddy Tribe, Pleasant Point Reservation
[WQS currently awaiting approval by EPA Region 9]
Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-81
-------
[WQS currently awaiting approval by EPA Region 9]
INTERSTATE COMMISSIONS
Delaware River Basin Commission
SOURCE: Delaware River Basin Commission West Trenton, New Jersey. Administrative Manual — Part
III, Water Quality Regulations, Revised to Include Amendments Through October 23,1996, Article 3 Water
Quality Standards for the Delaware River Basin [Comprehensive Plan, Section X]:
http://www.state.ni.us/drbc/regs/wg-regs.pdf
3.10 BASINWIDE SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
3.10.2 Water Uses
B. Uses to be Protected. The quality of Basin waters, except intermittent streams, shall be maintained
in a safe and satisfactory condition of the following uses:
2. wildlife, fish and other aquatic life;
3.10.3 Stream Quality Objectives
A. Antidegradation of Waters
2. Special Protection Waters. It is the policy of the Commission that there be no measurable
change in existing water quality except towards natural conditions in waters considered by the
Commission to have exceptionally high scenic, recreational, ecological, and/or water supply
values. Waters with exceptional values could be classified by the Commission as Outstanding
Basin Waters or Significant Resource Waters.
In determining waters suitable for classification as Special Protection Waters, the Commission
will consider nomination petitions from local, state and federal agencies and governing bodies,
and the public for waters potentially meeting the definition of Outstanding Basin Waters and
Significant Resource Waters as described in 3.10.3A.2 a
The following policies shall apply to waters classified by the Commission as Outstanding Basin
Waters or Significant Resource Waters and their drainage areas:
a. Definitions
1} "Outstanding Basin Waters" are interstate and contiguous intrastate waters that are
contained within the established boundaries of national parks; national wild, scenic and
recreational rivers systems; and/or national wildlife refuges that are classified by the
Commission under Subsection 2.
-------
obtained from sites within the same ecoregion or from best scientific judgment.
4) "Measurable Change" is defined as an actual or estimated change in a mean (annual
or seasonal) i n-stream pol I utant concentration that is outside the range of the two-tailed
upper and lower 95 percent confidence limits that define existing water quality. In the
absence of adequate available data, background concentrations will be assumed to be
zero and "measurable change" will be based on in-stream concentrations greater than
the detection limit for each parameter, based on the lowest limit of the most sensitive
technique specified in 40 CFR Part 136.
Excerpted from Table 1: Definition of Existing Water Quality in the Delaware River Between Hancock, NY
and the Delaware Water Gap:
Part A: Upper Delaware Scenic & Recreational River
Parameter
Biocriteria:
Shannon-Wei ner
Biocriteria:
Equitability
Biocriteria:: EPT
Mean
3.6
0.8
15.5
95 Percent
Confidence Limits
of Mean
3.4 to 3.8
0.7 to 0.9
13.8 to 17.2
10* and 90th
Percentiles
2.7 and 4.3
0.5 and 1.1
8.0 and 24.0
Additional
May - Sept;
reachwide
May - Sept,
reachwide
May - Sept;
reachwide
Part B: Delaware River from Millrift through the Delaware Water Gap Including the Middle Delaware
Scenic and Recreational River
Parameter
Biocriteria:
Shannon-Weiner
Biocriteria:
Equitability
Biocriteria: EPT
Mean
3.6
0.8
13.9
95 Percent
Confidence Limits
of Mean
3.4 to 3.7
0.7 to 0.9
12.8 to 15.1
10" and 90*
Percentiles
3.2and4.1
0.5 and 1.1
8.0 and 20.0
Additional
May - Sept;
reachwide
May - Sept;
reachwide
May - Sept;
reachwide
Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission
SOURCE: Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission Pollution Control Standards for discharges to
the Ohio River, 2000 Revision: http://www.orsanco.org/watqual/standards/PoiIutionControl.pdf and
http ://www. orsanco.org/
II. Definitions
B. "Biological integrity" means the ability of an aquatic ecosystem to support and maintain a balanced,
integrated, adaptive community of organisms having a species com position, diversity, and functional
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-83
-------
organization comparable to those best attainable given ecoregional attributes and the modified
habitat types of the river.
H. "Early Life Stages" of fish means the pre-hatch embryonic period, the post-hatch free embryo or
yolk-sac fry, and the larval period, during which the organism feeds. Juvenile fish, which are
anatomically rather similar to adults, are not considered an early life stage.
R. "Representative Aquatic Species" means those species of aquatic life whose protection and
propagation will assure the sustained presence of a balanced indigenous community. Such species
are representative in the sense that maintenance of suitable water quality conditions will assure the
overall protection and sustain propagation of the balanced, indigenous community.
IV. Water Quality Criteria
B. Aquatic Life Protection. To provide protection of warm water aquatic life habitats, the following
criteria shall be met outside the mixing zone:
1. BIOLOGICAL: The biological integrity of the Ohio River shall be protected and preserved.
Water Quality Standards
December 2002
4-84
-------
5. LIST OF ACRONYMS AND DEFINITION OF TERMS
5.1 Acronyms
AL Aquatic Life
ALL) Aquatic Life Use
ALUS Aquatic Life Use Support
ANOVA Analysis of Variance
BMP Best Management Practice
CALM Consolidated Assessment Listing Methodology
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
CWA Clean Water Act
DO Dissolved Oxygen
DQO Data Quality Objectives
EDAS Ecological Data Application System
EMAP Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
EPT Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera
FTE Full Time Employees
GIS Geographic Information System
GPS Global Positioning System
HBI Hilsenhoff Biotic Index
IBI Index of Biological/Biotic Integrity
MACS Mid-Atlantic Coastal Streams
NAWQA National Water Quality Assessment Program
NCBI North Carolina Biotic index
NHD National Hydrography Database
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPS Nonpoint Source
PAHs Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
PCBs Polychlorinated Biphenyls
POTW Publicly Owned Treatment Works
QA Quality Assurance
List of Acronyms & Definition of Terms
December 2002
5-1
-------
QAPP
QC
QHEI
QMP
RBP
RCRA
REMAP
RIVPACS
RF3
SOP
STORE!
TMDL
UAA
USEPA
USFS
USFWS
USGS
WQ
WQS
WWTP
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Quality Control
Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index
Quality Management Plan
Rapid Bioassessment Protocols
Resource Conservation and R
3covery Act
Regional Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
River Invertebrate Prediction and Classification System
River Reach File 3
Standard Operating Procedures
Data Storage and Retrieval System
Total Maximum Daily Load
Use Attainability Analyses
United States Environmental Protection Agency
United States Forest Service
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
United States Geological Survey
Water Quality
Water Quality Standards
Waste Water Treatment Plant
5.2 Definition of Terms
Accuracy
Ambient Monitoring
Analysis of Variance
Antidegradation Statement
the degree of agreement between an observed value and an
accepted reference value.
sampling and evaluation of receiving waters not necessarily
associated with episodic perturbations.
a general statistical method for comparing the mean
response to different treatments using the ratio of among-
group to between-group variance. The method has also
been applieq to estimating precision and quantifying sources
of variance.
statement that protects existing designated uses and
prevents high-quality waterbodies from deteriorating below
the water quality necessary to maintain existing or
anticipated designated beneficial uses.
List of Acronyms & Definition of Terms
December 2002
6-2
-------
Aquatic Assemblage
Aquatic Community
Aquatic Life Use
Beneficial Uses
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Benthos
Best Management Practice
Bias
Biological Assessment or
Bioassessment
Biological Criteria or Biocriteria
Biological Diversity or Biodiversity
Biological Indicator or Bioindicator
an association of interacting populations of organisms in a
given waterbody, for example, fish assemblage or a benthic
macroiinvertebrate assemblage.
an association of interacting assemblages in a given
waterbody, the biotic component of an ecosystem.
a beneficial use designation in which the waterbody provides
suitable habitat for survival and reproduction of desirable
fish, shellfish, and other aquatic organisms; classifications
specified in state water quality standards relating to the level
of protection afforded to the resident biological community
by the state agency.
desirable uses that water quality should support. Examples
are drinking water supply, primary contact recreation (such
as swimming), and aquatic life support.
animals without backbones, living in or on the sediments, of
a size large enough to be seen by the unaided eye and
which can be retained by a U.S. Standard No. 30 sieve (28
meshes per inch, 0.595 mm openings). Also referred to as
benthos, infauna, ormacrobenthos.
see Benthic Macroinvertebrates.
an engineered structure or management activity, or
combination of these, that eliminates or reduces an adverse
environmental effect of a pollutant.
the systematic or persistent distortion of a measurement
process which deprives the result of representativeness (i.e.,
the expected sample measurement is different than the
sample's true value).
an evaluation of the biological condition of a waterbody
using surveys of the structure and function of the community
of resident biota.
narrative expressions or numerical values that describe the
reference biological condition (structure and function) of
aquatic communities inhabiting waters of a given designated
aquatic life use. Biocriteria are based on the numbers and
kinds of organisms present and are regulatory-based
biological measurements.
refers to the variety and variability among living organisms
and the ecological complexes in which they occur. Diversity
can be defined as the number of different items and their
relative frequencies. For biological diversity, these items are
organized at many levels, ranging from complete
ecosystems to the biochemical structures that are the
molecular basis of heredity. Thus, the term encompasses
different ecosystems, species, and genes.
an organism, species, assemblage, or community
characteristic of a particular habitat, or indicative of a
particular set of environmental conditions.
List of Acronyms & Definition of Terms
December 2002
5-3
-------
Biological Integrity
Biological Monitoring or Biomonitoring
Biological Survey or Biosurvey
Bioregion
Clean Water Act
Clean Water Act 303(d)
Clean Water Act 305(b)
Criteria
Data Quality Objectives
Data Storage and Retrieval System
(STORE!)
the ability of an aquatic ecosystem to support and maintain a
balanced, adaptive community of organisms having a
species composition, diversity, and functional organization
comparable to that of natural habitats within a region.
use of a biological entity as a detector and its response as a
measure to determine environmental conditions. Ambient
biological surveys and toxicity tests are common biological
monitoring methods.
collecting, processing, and analyzing a representative
portion of the resident aquatic community to determine its
structural and/or functional characteristics.
any geographical region characterized by a distinctive flora
and/or fauna.
an act passed by the U.S. Congress to control water
pollution (formerly referred to as the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act of 1972). Public Law 92-500, as amended. 33
U.S.C. 1251 etseq.
This section of the Act requires States, territories, and
authorized tribes to develop lists of impaired waters for
which water quality standards are not being met, even after
point sources of pollution have installed the minimum
required levels of pollution control technology. The law
requires tha|t these jurisdictions establish priority rankings for
waters on the lists and develop TMDLs for these waters.
States, territories, and authorized tribes are to submit their
list of waters on April 1 in every even-numbered year.
biennial reporting requires description of the quality of the
Nation's surface waters, evaluation of progress made in
maintaining and restoring water quality, and description of
the extent of remaining problems.
limits on a particular pollutant or condition of a waterbody
presumed tjo support or protect the designated use or uses of
a waterbody. Criteria may be narrative or numeric.
qualitative and quantitative statements developed by data
users to specify the quality of data needed to support
specific decisions; statements about the level of uncertainty
that a decision maker is willing to accept in data used to
support a particular decision.
EPA's largest computerized environmental data system;
repository for biological, chemical, and physical data used by
state environmental agencies, EPA and other federal
agencies, universities, private citizens, and many others.
List of Acronyms & Definition of Terms
December 2002
5-4
-------
Designated Use
Ecological Data Application System
(EDAS)
Ecological Integrity
Ecoreglon
Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program
Eutrophication
Habitat
Historical Data
Index of Biological/Biotic Integrity
Least Disturbed/Impaired
Macro! nvertebrates
classification specified in water quality standards for each
waterbody or segment describing the level of protection from
perturbation afforded by the regulatory programs. The
designated aquatic life uses established by the state or
authorized tribes set forth the goals for the restoration and/or
baseline conditions for maintenance and prevention from
further degradation of the aquatic life in specific
waterbodies.
relational database system that allows the user to input,
compile, and analyze complex ecological data to make
assessments of ecosystem condition.
the condition of an unimpaired ecosystem as measured by
combined chemical, physical (including habitat), and
biological attributes.
a relatively homogeneous ecological area defined by
similarity of climate, landform, soil, potential natural
vegetation, hydrology, or other ecologically relevant
variables.
a US EPA research program to develop the tools necessary
to monitor and assess the status and trends of national
ecological resources. EMAP's goal is to develop the
scientific understanding for translating environmental
monitoring data from multiple spatial and temporal scales
into assessments of ecological condition and forecasts of the
future risks to the sustainability of our natural resources.
enrichment of a waterbody with nutrients, resulting in high
levels of primary production, often leading to depletion of
dissolved oxygen.
a place where the physical and biological elements of
ecosystems provide a suitable environment including the
food, cover, and space resources needed for plant and
animal livelihood.
data sets from previous studies, which can range from
handwritten field notes to published journal articles.
an integrative expression of site condition across multiple
metrics. An index of biological integrity is often composed
of at least seven metrics.
the physical, chemical and biological conditions of a site,
reach, segment, or water body that has the least amount of
human disturbance in comparison to others within the water
body, class, region, or basin. Least disturbed conditions
change over time as land use and management practices
change and, therefore, are not a "target" or upper bound of
water quality potential (Best available current condition).
see Benthic Macroinvertebrates.
List of Acronyms & Definition of Terms
December 2002
5-5
-------
Macrophytes
Metric
Minimally Disturbed/Impaired
Multimetric Index
Multivariate Analysis
Narrative Biocriteria
Nonpoint Source Pollution
Numeric Biocriteria
Perennial Streams
Periphyton
Point Source
Precision
large aquatic plants that may be rooted, unrooted, vascular,
or algiform (such as kelp); includes submerged aquatic
vegetation, emergent aquatic vegetation, and floating
aquatic vegetation.
a calculated
of biological
term or enumeration representing some aspect
assemblage, function, or other measurable
aspect and is a characteristic of the biota that changes in
some predictable way with increased human influence.
the physical, chemical and biological conditions of a site,
reach, segment, or water body in the absence of significant,
or with minimal, human disturbance. Historical information or
models may be used to help describe the minimally
disturbed condition. Minimally disturbed conditions change
little over time mostly due to natural processes and,
therefore, provide a "target" or upper bound of water quality
potential (Bfst potential condition).
an index thajt combines indicators, or metrics, into a single
index value.] Each metric is tested and calibrated to a scale
and transformed into a unitless score prior to being
aggregated into a multimetric index. Both the index, and
metrics, are useful in assessing and diagnosing ecological
condition. See index of Biotic Integrity.
statistical methods (e.g. ordination or discriminant analysis)
for analyzing physical and biological community data using
multiple variables.
general statements of attainable or attained conditions of
biological integrity and water quality for a given designated
aquatic life i|jse.
pollution that occurs when rainfall, snowmelt, or irrigation
water runs over land or through the ground, picks up
pollutants, and deposits them into rivers, lakes, and coastal
waters or introduces them into ground water.
specific quantitative measures (metrics) of desired level of
biological condition.
permanently inundated surface stream courses. Surface
water flows throughout the year except in years of drought.
a broad organismal assemblage composed of attached
algae, bacteria, their secretions, associated detritus, and
various species of microinvertebrates.
an origin of pollutant discharge that is known and specific,
usually thought of as effluent from the end of a pipe.
the degree of variation among individual measurements of
the same property, usually obtained under similar conditions.
List of Acronyms & Definition of Terms
December 2002
5-6
-------
Quality Assurance
Quality Assurance Plan
Quality Control
Quality Management Plan
Rapid Bioassessment Protocols
Reference Condition
Reference Site
Regional Environmental Monitoring
and Assessment Program
Regional Reference Condition
includes quality control functions and involves a totally
integrated program for ensuring the reliability of monitoring
and measurement data; the process of management review
and oversight at the planning, implementation, and
completion stages of environmental data collection
activities. Its goal is to assure that the data provided are of
the quality needed and claimed.
a written document that describes the quality assurance
procedures, quality control requirements, and other technical
activities that must be implemented to ensure that the
results of the project or task to be performed will meet
project requirements; contains several important guidelines
for a program to follow such as objectives and milestones for
achieving those objectives, lines of responsibility,
accountability of staff for meeting data quality objectives,
and accountability for ensuring precision, accuracy,
completeness of the data collection activities, and
documentation of the sample custody process.
refers to the routine application of procedures for obtaining
prescribed standards of performance in the monitoring and
measurements process; focuses on the detailed technical
activities needed to achieve data of the quality specified by
data quality objectives. Quality control is implemented at
the bench or field level.
a document that describes an organization's quality system.
It identifies the organizational structure, policy and
procedures, functional responsibilities of management and
staff, lines of authority, and its processes for planning,
implementing, documenting, and assessing all activities
conducted under the organization's quality system.
cost-effective techniques used to survey and evaluate the
aquatic community to detect aquatic life impairments and
their relative severity.
the set of selected measurements or conditions of
unimpaired or minimally impaired waterbodies characteristic
of a waterbody type in a region.
a specific locality on a waterbody which is unimpaired or
minimally impaired and is representative of the expected
ecological integrity of other localities on the same waterbody
or nearby waterbodies.
a US EPA program initiated to assess the applicability of the
EMAP approach to answer questions about ecological
conditions at regional and local scales. REMAP conducts
projects at smaller geographic scales and in shorter time
frames than the national EMAP program.
a description of the chemical, physical, or biological
condition based on an aggregation of data from minimally
impaired sites that are representative of a waterbody type in
an ecoregion, subecoregion, watershed, or political unit.
List of Acronyms & Definition of Terms
December 2002
5-7
-------
River Invertebrate Prediction and
Classification System
River Reach File 3
Sensitivity
Standard Operating Procedures
Stressors
Taxa
Total Maximum Daily Load
Use Attainability Analysis
Water Quality Standards
Water Resource Management
(Non-Regulatory)
Zooplankton
a predictive method developed for use in the United
Kingdom to assess water quality using a comparison of
observed biological species distributions to those expected
to occur based on a model derived from reference data.
a national database of 1:100,000 scale Digital Line Graph
(DLG) hydrography data in a processed, edgematched,
hydrologically networked format. RF3 data are a "directed
network" dalaset meaning that all stream segments, or
reaches, are ordered in a uniform direction.
capability of a method or instrument to discriminate between
measurement responses of a variable of interest.
a set of written instructions that document a routine or
repetitive activity. SOPs describe both technical and
administrative operational elements of an organization that
would be managed under a Quality Assurance Project Plan
and under an organization's Quality Management Plan.
physical, chemical, and biological factors that adversely
affect aquatic organisms.
a grouping of organisms given a formal taxonomic name
such as species, genus, family, etc.
calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant a
waterbody can receive and still meet water quality standards
and an allocation of that amount to the pollutant's source.
structured scientific assessment of the physical, chemical,
biological arjd economic factors affecting attainment of the
uses of waterbodies.
a law or regulation that consists of the beneficial designated
use or uses of a waterbody, the narrative or numerical water
quality criteria (including biocriteria) that are necessary to
protect the use or uses of that particular waterbody, and an
antidegradalion statement.
decisions on management activities relevant to a water
resource such as problem identification, need for and
placement of best management practices, pollution
abatement actions, and effectiveness of program activity.
refers to anijnals which are unable to maintain their position
or distribution independent of the movement of water or air.
List of Acronyms & Definition of Terms
December 2002
6-8
-------
6. LITERATURE CITED AND ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
6.1 Literature Cited
Davis, W.S. andT.P. Simon (editors). 1995. Biological assessment and criteria: Tools for water resource
planning and decision making. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida.
Frey, D.G. 1977. Biological integrity of water - an historical approach. Pages 127-140 in R.K. Ballentine
and L.J. Guarraia (editors). The Integrity of Water. Proceedings of a Symposium, March 10-12, 1975.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
Karr, J.R. and D.R. Dudley. 1981. Ecological perspectives on water quality goals. Environmental
Management 5: 55-68.
Karr, J.R., K.D. Fausch, P.L. Angermeier, P.R. Yant, and I.J. Schlosser, 1986. Assessing biological
integrity in running waters: A method and its rationale. Illinois Natural History Survey. Special Publication
5, Champaign, Illinois.
Leopold, Aldo. 1949. A Sand County Almanac and sketches here and there. Oxford University Press,
New York (many editions).
USEPA. 1989. Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and rivers: Benthic macroinvertebrates
and fish. EPA 440-4-89-001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Regulations and
Standards, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1990. Biological criteria: National program guidance for surface waters. EPA-440/5-90-004. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1992. Procedures for initiating narrative biological criteria. EPA 822-B-92-002. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Science and Technology, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1996a. Biological criteria: technical guidance for streams and small rivers. EPA 822-B-96-001.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Science and Technology, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1996b. Summary of state biological assessment programs for streams and rivers. EPA 230-R-
96-007. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation, Washington,
DC.
USEPA. 1998a. Lake and reservoir bioassessment and biocriteria technical guidance document. EPA
841-B-98-007. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1998b. Water quality criteria and standards plan - Priorities for the future. EPA 822-R-98-003.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1999. Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and wadeable rivers: Periphyton,
benthic macroinvertebrates and fish, Second edition. EPA841-B-99-002. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 2000. Estuarine and coastal marine waters: Bioassessment and biocriteria technical guidance.
EPA 822-B-00-024. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 2002. Methods for evaluating wetland condition: Introduction to wetland biological
assessment. EPA-822-R-02-014. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington,
DC.
Literature Cited
December 2002
6-1
-------
Literature Cited
December 2002
e-2
-------
USEPA. 2002. Methods for evaluating wetland condition: Developing metrics and indexes
of biological integrity. EPA-822-R-02-016. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water,
Washington, DC.
USEPA. 2002. Methods for evaluating wetland condition: Wetlands classification. EPA 822-R-02-017.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 2002. Methods for evaluating wetland condition: Developing an invertebrate index of biological
integrity for wetlands. EPA822-R-02-019. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water,
Washington, DC.
USEPA. 2002. Methods for evaluating wetland condition: Using amphibians in bioassesments of
wetlands. EPA 822-R-02-022. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 2002. Methods for evaluating wetland condition: Biological assessment methods for birds. EPA
822-R-02-023. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
U.S. House of Representatives. 1972. House Report 92-911. Washington, Government Printing Office.
Yoder, C.O. and E.T. Rankin. 1995. Biological criteria program development and implementation in
Ohio. In Biological Assessment and Criteria: Tools for Water Resource Planning and Decision Making,
W.S. Davis and T.P. Simon (editors), pp. 109-144. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida.
6.2 Additional Resources
More information and guidance on biological assessments and criteria can be found in the documents
and websites listed below.
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended by the Clean Water Act of 1977: [Commonly Referred
to as Clean Water Act] [Enacted by Public Law 92-500, October 18,1972, 86 Stat. 816; 33 U.S.C. 1251
et seq.; Amended by PL 93-207, December 28, 1973, and PL 93-243, January 2, 1974; PL 93-592,
January 2, 1975; PL 94-238, March 23, 1976; PL 94-273, April 21, 1976; PL 94-558, October 19,1976;
PL 95-217, December 28, 1977; PL 95-576, November 2, 1978; PL 96-148, December 16,1979; PL 96-
478, PL 96-483, October 21, 1980; PL 96-510, December 11,1980; PL 96-561, December 22, 1980; PL
97-35, August 13, 1981; PL 97-117, December 29, 1981; PL 97-164, April 2, 1982; PL 97-440, January
8, 1983; Amended by PL 100-4, February 4, 1987]
Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality [ITFM]. 1995. The strategy for improving
water-quality monitoring in the United States: Final report of the Intergovernmental Task Force on
Monitoring Water Quality. Technical Appendixes. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
USEPA 1983. Technical support manual: Waterbody surveys and assessments for conducting use
attainability analyses. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Regulations and
Standards, Criteria and Standards Division, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1989. Regionalization as a tool for managing environmental resources. EPA/600/3-89/060. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR.
USEPA. 1989. Standard operating procedures for the collection of and laboratory identification of
freshwater benthic macroinvertebrates. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, IL.
USEPA. 1990. Macroinvertebrate field and laboratory methods for evaluating the biological integrity of
surface waters. EPA/600/4-90/030. U.S. Environmental Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1991. Biological criteria: Guide to technical literature. EPA/5-91-004. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
Literature Cited December 2002 6-3
-------
USEPA. 1991. Biological criteria: Research and regulation - Proceedings of a symposium. EPA-44Q/5-
91-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office lot Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1991. Biological criteria: State development and implementation efforts. EPA-440/5-91-003.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1991. Transmittal of Final Policy on Biological Assessments and Criteria (Memorandum). From
Tudor T. Davies, Director, Office of Science and Technology to Waste Management Division Directors,
Regions I-X. June 19,1991. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1994. Water Quality Standards Handbook, Second Edition. EPA 823-B-94-005. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1995. Generic quality assurance project plan guidance for programs using community level
biological assessment in wadeable streams and rivers. EPA 841-B-95-004. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington. DC.
USEPA. 1996. Bioindicators for assessing ecological integrity of prairie wetlands. EPA/600/R-96/082.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR.
USEPA. 1996. Biological assessment methods, biocriteria, and biological indicators. Bibliography of
selected technical, policy, and regulatory literature. EPA 230-B-96-001. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1996. The volunteer monitor's guide to quality assurance project plans. EPA841-B-96-003. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1997. Volunteer stream monitoring: A methods manual. EPA 841-B-97-003. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1998. Development of biological criteria for cotal reef ecosystem assessment U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Science and Technology, Health and Ecological Criteria
Division, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1998. Wetland bbassessment fact sheets. EPA843-F-98-001. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 2000. Stressor identification guidance document. EPA 822-B-00-025. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Offices of Water and Research and Development, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 2002. Biological assessment and criteria: Crucial components of water quality programs. EPA
822-F-02-006. U.S. Environmental Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA Office of Environmental Information, Biological Indicators of Watershed Health website:
http://www.epa.gov/biolndicators/index.html
USEPA Office of Science and Technology, Bioassessment and Biocriteria website:
http://www.epa.gov/ost/biocriteria/index.html
USEPA Office of Water, Monitoring and Assessing Water Quality, Biological Assessment website:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/bioassess.html
Literature Cited December 2002 6-4
-------
APPENDIX A.
BIOASSESSMENT PROGRAMS FOR STREAMS AND
WADEABLE RIVERS (2001)
-------
o
2.
¥
0>
(0
Q)
•o
i
•o
c
CO
(0
(B
CO
CO
s
O)
O
0>
CO
CO
CO
CO
o
m
0)
Q.
Q.
fill
jl
II
*!f!
1M1
j*|
l|
ti
i1
s>
1
spuene* a TM :SUUBUI p»seoo jewj
ABUBniS9 — 3N3 tBJKWU969J ~ S5VJ
|g ou*un^
P OAP^N
DuiMOdaj (q)sos "i (sniV) noddns «fl 9JH opnb\)j
lueuMCaueui ooinos»J JaiB/v|
J8MP = o :uoipun| uognquisip OAge|nuiro s jQd
:s»BUBAp|nuj s An ftuiauininw s nn
JBMP = 0 :siu0!pejD «9uecpn)S!p a 00
:souieui paiBoiOjq = ng :e)BLieAj)|niii a AW
:sVAONV 3 X||BUI!UUJ = an !)ueujBpnl
IBuoissejcud = rd 'osuodsBj juwpejB a ad
leajis peqjnjsjp )>so| = QI Isuoinpuoo pouoisig a o3
jauio.q
:)uauiBpnr puojssajcud = fd :|euoiOej= d
:sp8M«J«»B» P«J«d = AAd Sjjpeds s«t = 5!
-Tssasa5^
MUlO
UQ^XuduOHl
'
1
M«!d!
wmuag
1
(P)CO£JO*P»W|
(q)SOe JO) Bui)ioddn6-uou/X||B|UBd|
M..M-.*.
'
||
i!
i
| STATES
i
5
z
z
5.
>.
0
i
3
K
5
,.
z
>
>
5
I
i
in
«*
0
g
I
,
o
z
HI
z
z
o
>.
MM - 1* quartile
from the 95*
%tile
m
o
2
9
5
z
§
z
J.
10 water-
sheds
0 £
140 water-
sheds
150 water-
sheds
1
>3 million
1
RES (UD)
Z
Q
-z.
>.
if
i
i
2
Q
X.
0
m
z
>
z
V
a
f
1
O
1
1
5
UJ
IT
Z
,.
Z
>.
o
g"8
9
S
a:
Q-O
82"
o
§0
z
z
>
V
1
a
a
245 stream
seamants
CO
Q
i
N-
1
i
LR, LK, ENC
(limited)
Z
,.
a
>
o
i
i
£
9
o
2
§
z
z
z
>.
1
{
j
1
00
i
!
o
CO
s
5"
z
§
z
>_
s
s
i
2
9
2
0
X
5
z
a
v
,_
CO
1
1
a
V
107,403
Colorado
o
D
i
i"
t <
a x
? I
a a.
B <
-------
1
0
]
j
1
i.
I
I
|
1
i
i
]
i
1
a
:
(
!
1m
i
s
il
•*«€
iff
M!
If
\\
if
c
j!
S
'
spuBRaw = ivi 'auueui (Bjseco jeau
/sauemso s ON3 'aioAiesej = S3M
|« og»mnN
|l wpum
Buiuodcu (q)ME w
j.
>
>.
1
in
o>
i
i
i
o
Ul
| Connecticut
§
z
z
>.
st
i
3
of
5
z
z
z
>_
B
Ul
s
|
CO
CM*
i
a;
z
>
>
j.
I
i
I
s
>.
z
J.
,_
C
o>
CO
0
s
1
O)
.
>.
,_
MM - quadra-
section of best
score
8
m
g
K
3"
of
§
>.
>.
z
>.
I
,
I/I
s
10
s.
S!
m
81
GO
CO,
i/)
S
1
a.
—i
z
>
>
>
SS
s >
i
g
Q
a:
0
5
z
z
v
J^
1
R
01
5
(O
1
T-
j
S
o
D
a
V
S
i
i
g
a
a
o
z
z
>.
a
o
o
s
Ol
S
a>
X
LK. RES
z
x
V
>_
it
il
S-o
g"I
o
-5
a.
3
2
of
o
§
z
J.
.„
>.
s
CM
CO*
a>
(M
S
(D
§
i
i
5
z
a
;,
>.
O
s
1°
g'i
-j
a.
9
o
X
o
U)
a>
O
§
z
z
>.
>.
1
I
tn
1
0)
I
s
8"
oi
o
S
1
ui
sc
z
Q
>.
>.
O
u."
a
oo
SS
Is
gl
Q
CL
S
v
v
J.
>.
i
cl
g
o
rt
o
8
1
eo
i
£
^
.1
1 <
• a
? 1
-------
f!m
-
fi
i
!l
ifil
ilii1
|i|i
l|
11
i
-
ji
: :
i :
i
!
spuBRaM • ~w\ 'aujiBUj JBISBOO JBOU
/smieniso = 3^3 :tiKVu«8j = S3U
rswpi = XT !fJW!i »BjB| = m
•3 w aueuniN
• 0
s*
j| £ a/vnuiiBN
Bugjodai (q)soE us (gniv) uoddng Mfl »n o»«nbv
)u«uwfieueui aainosai ja|e/\ft
jeiDO = o 'uo[punj uopnqjj|S{p OApinuino = JQO
:eieueAi)|iULi s AH Supuimnuj = nn
jsqio = o :* luBjpBjfl eouBqjnpp = 90
:s3Ui8iu potBoioiq = na :»«"u«Ai)(nuj = AN
:«VAONV oineuiBJed = yj IsqdnB 9 SBWBI = gx
J8M»0 = 0 'P«V"IS!P <||BUJRJIUJ > an UuauiBpnf
leuoissajoid a pd lacuodsai juaipejB = yg
:e01!8 paqjntsip ^eat =
>-
It
il
i
S8
^'1
3
•^
Q.
of
0
?
z
z
>-
>-
1
o
S
CD
5_
CO
O
CJ
S
(0
UE>
(N
h-
I
£
w"
S
^*
z
>
>-[
>-
s1
i
o
i
?
9
8"
£
m
>
>-
>-
>-
>•
^
1
1
S
a
rt
^
1
*-*
i
l£
_t
Z
>
>
>-
S
It
a*
S~5
i
Q
9"
a:
§
z
>-
>-
>-
§
in
r-"
-10.000
-20,000
-30,000
9
s
z
o
u_~
8
i
m
£o
0
9"
S
2
8
5
z
z
>•
>-
1
1
1
1
*
(D
•
>•
m
?8
— j
a.
8
Si
— j
a.
K
?
z
>•
z
>
tj)
5j
u^
5
U1
S
CO
,
Ol
a"
31,672
1
O
z
UJ
z
9
>-
MM - 10"1 %tile
1°
2S
Si
3
0
o
a
S
>
z
>-
>
178 actual
listings
2.713.4
at
(N
^r
«
cw
^i
V
li
il
i
e
o
_j
of
E8S
S
>-
V
V
>-
u>
S
m
s
0>
s
1
s
T-
h-"
O)
a
ID
«
DC
_l
Z
Z
>
0
s
i
^
1
s
§
z
z
>-
>-
g
to
«
(D
"
^i
e
i:
5^
z
>
>
>
o
s
g
CD
g
O
9
S
of
S
>
z
>-
>-
U)
00
r-.
cv
5
Ul
s
I*-
3
-------
*IBI
.i :
I
II
m
IM«-
H5
il
n
Numbar of mRM MMSsed
using biology
i
i
/sepenise * ON3 :sJ>OAjes»j = saa
:s8i)B| > »1 :»jaAij aSist a y-|
fco ouauinN
| .£ 8AIJBUBN
BupxteJ (q)soe ui (smv) uoddns »sn ajn 3B»nbv
luauwBauBUi aojno»j JSIEM
jsqio = o luojpunj uoiinquisjp aAiiBimuro = JQO
:aieueAi||nui = AH louiatutiiniu = HW
:sVAONV»u»ujBJBd = Vd SiJdejB 5 S8MBJ = Oi
jat)K> = o Ipoqjn^ip Aneuijuui = an l^janiBprif
(Buoisssjcud = fd :«»t>odsaj viaipejS a HO
jaino = 0
:)U9ui6pnf |Buoieeojcjd = pd :|Buoi69j= y
ispaqajeiem pajied =Md ^jpads BUS = SS
jamo = o
:A5o|O4dioujos6ojp
>
B
S
1
S
0
m
z
z
z
>
0
1
S
m
s
S
8"
lO
o
o
S
Mississippi
5
B
5.
>.
;_
MM-
cumulative
score = 81% of
ref. condition
o'»
Q
Q
O
-a
0.
of
CO
en
O
O
CD
Z
z
^
>
o>
i
a"
-c
I
LR. LK, RES
Z
Q
O
x
MM - 75% of
ref. condition
S-o
0?
Q
\
o
§0
>
J.
x
x
S
r-r
s
o
g
3"
176.750
Montana
co
ui
LK
2
_
>.
>.
«
If
i%
0
0
Q
tlf
vi
co
§
Z
z
>
>
o
I
n
_
i
|I
If
en a!
O
o
§
z
Q
z
J.
o
O
0
EM
S
S
143,578
,
.
B
>
>
>
to
1
2
CO*
en
>_
z
>.
>.
o
S
I
S
§
o
1
I
§
SS
z
z
>
x
ii
m
Q
of
§
z
z
,,
>.
I
O)
s
CO
o
New Jersey
of
z
z
j.
>.
jt
!•&
m
.
a!
0
JE
>
>.
>.
>.
D
Z)
in
PS
t
-5.875
i
o"
New Mexico
O M
-------
I'll i
i ;
li
i
i -,r;
li
SH!
life.
Is!1
ii
(i
!'.-:3y.-
I
jf
J IW
] •*
i ;:;;
spuenaM & TM :9uueut piseco jeau
/S8UBn)»e s QM3 :«JiOAJesaj = S3M
!B9)|8| s xn !BjaAU »6jB| s yi
|g OL«HUnN
|j -A^N
Buiuod* (q)soc U| (smv) UOddnS <»n »jn -^bv
lueujoBeuBiu aojnosaj J»]BAA
:aieueAj|)niu s An :oui»iu!nnuj = nn
jaqio = o :sjU8ipej6 eouetpntsp = QQ
loiqauj P3i6opiq = ns :0|eueAi||nui = An
:«VAONV OMJBUiBjed = vd :*MdBj6 y sefqej = 91
jaqio = o tpaqjnisip XHBUIIUUI » an ItusaiBpnf
ieoois»jojd s rd :ssuodsaj juojpejO = as
:s»«s psqjnjsip iseai = on Isuoitipuoo lesuoisjii = OH
:}uaui6pnf (Buoissajoid = rd tieuoioajsc y
tspeqsjeteM pwied =Md Sycwds s«s = 33
jBmo s o
:Afo|ogdJOUK>e6cupAL| s AH :sjueujejnsBem
jaino
uoiAidm
M«U
soniu»g
(p)coe jo* pai*!i
(q)SOC JO' 6uipoddn«-uou/A||BiM*d
(q)90C 'OJ Buiuoddns X||nj
ii]
H
?!
z
1
z
z
V
v
MM - 75" %tile
of all sites
0
m
,
g
z
,_
,.
>
i
g
o
CO
m"
g
(3
CO
|
S
1
WL,«ES
,
j.
x
1
O
i
i
2
9
5
>
>
x
>
3
rt
M"
O
CM
0
ft"
I
i
z
^
J.
>.
o
s
TG, BM, DG
3
a:
CO
z
._
x
,_
i
S
rt
Oi
!
1
»
s
{
en
LU
._
3^
>.
MM - 25"" & 75"1
%tile of ref. pop.
m
0
3
a:
g
z
z
>_
>.
S
°.
S
in
to
A*
to
(O
o>
CN
O
S
Q
>
>
a
.,
o
o
2
i
g
3
o
of
o
z
z
,„.
J.
§
c
o
ri
rt
78, 778
1
O
Z
LU
S
x
>_
j.
LL
8
S'8
gg
i
3
0
2
a:
a
>.
,_
>
V
1
c-j
S"
s
o_
00
ao
i"
1
m
I
c
O
Z
LU
Z
z
,_
>.
s
2
S'8
gg
o
a:
>.
z
j.
>
o
o
CO*
§
s
I
1
s
Pennsylvania
I
z
x
,_
>.
It
il
CD
g
o
o"
I
2
§
x
z
z
X
00
t-
S
CO
GO
ff
en
i
Rhode Island
tt
_t
Z
j.
>.
x
u_
8
s
m
3
5
z
z
z
>_
(0
3
s
i
.
Il
ii
m
D
•3
9
s
2
i
5"
z
x
z
,_
1
f
•0
P-.
r-i
i
0>
CO
8.
.
I
-------
4!f!
Is
il
Mil
in!1
jut
ii
l!
!!
i
i
SpUBROM s TAA -3UUBUJ |B)S8O9 JBail
fsausnxa a 3(1)3 toio/uasaj = ggy
|g 0UBU,nN
S .£ BAIJBJJBN
Buiuodaj (q)soe Ui (smv) VOddng «n am annnbv
jimueB&UBui oounoroj J9WM
j»i|X> = o tuoipunj uoiinqytsp 8Ai)8|nuito = dQO
:apgeAmmii = AW taiaeuiijjmii = wn
J8i|p = Q :siu9ipeJ6 aoueqjnisip = 90
:s3U|»ui |B3i6o{oiq = «g :eieuBAgjnw s AN
:sVAONV ou»iuBJBd = yd :sqdejC 9 caiqei = ox
jaino = o :pBqjn)S!p ^IIBUJiusju = an lluouiBpnf
IBUOssajaid = fd :asuodsaj luwpejB = ao
'cave paqjnisip )se»| s an Suoiupuoa pouoism = OH
jamo = o
:A6opndjoujo«6ojpA4 = AH tsiuauiajnseaui
8Ai)BJ!)UBnb = WO ipsssq pnsw = 9A
j^mo
uoiAuduQj
MS!d
soiriuaa
(P)£0£ JO* t»»!l
(q)SOE JOl BuBJOddns-uouMllBlPBd
(q)SOC Joj Buiuoddns <||nj
Iff
1
II
I
i
o
3
>
>.
>.
MM - 25% of
90"%tileofref.
pop.
la
3
a
?
z
z
z
,_
I
s
O)
to
.
v
it
m
S
o"
Q
a:
0
z
z
j_
3.
t
0
i
01
?
o
CO
v
v
s
s
o's
H- DO
O
Z
O
I
of
00
0
i
z
v
,_
^
g
T
g
T
»
s
O»
§
|C
I
Vermont
z
z
>.
,_
1
,
1
§
z
z
z
v
A
CO
of
CO
Od"
13.321.9
1
1
o>
.15
1
2.
Q
5.
>.
o
it
il
m
g"
§
3
o"
I
—3
o.
0
$
>.
>.
j.
>
O
in
w"
tn
in
rt"
rt
S"
to
»
CO
c
1
1
Z
Z
>.
x
MM-5*%tileof
ref. pop.
i
§
Q.
of
O
s"
z
z
._
>.
m
o>
**»
o
M"
1
m
v>
5
1
West Virginia
(0
_j
z
z
>.
>
It
i!
di
0
-i
a.
a
_t
o:
8'
0
z
>.
,.
,_
I
to
i
a
8
o
g
in
Wisconsin
|
§
,.
v
>,
I
(N
5
O
Q
3
a.
S"
(E
s;
5
Z
a
z
>_
fe
,
Ol
T-
1
§
ss
113,422
,
1
1 <
" .B
1 1
-------
'IH
i
t'-V
IP
*fi
Hi
jfjif
i|
i
i
!
J;;::£;-:
... .;:-»•;
f:'5-
i:r
SPUBIISM s -|M ISUUBUl 18)5800 JB8U
/seuemsa = ON3 IBIKVUMOJ = S3W
!«B)|B| s >jn ISJWVU SBJBI = Ml
•| (O oueujnfj
| .E «A1|BJJBN
Duftjodej (q)soe u; (smv) poddng a»n "n OflBnbv
luaujaaeueuj aojnosoj J»)BM
jai||o s o luoipunj uoi)nqu]Sip aApinwro = XK)
:aieuBAj)|nuj = An Suinujunuu = nn
jaino s 0 'WueiPBJB soueqjn^ip = 50
:SOMWUI poiBopKj = m :«ieue*!)|rHu = AH
*VAONV ouiauiB»d = yd :sqdBjB « SBKJB) = gj.
J»MP = o tpaqjnmp XHBUIJUIUJ a an :)uauiDpnf
leuoisssjojd s pd :a«uodsu luaipsjB = yo
:*»H« psqjnisip ISBSI = en :suoB!puoo pouopm = OH
J8lflO = O
HiMuiDpnf |Buo|ssajojd = pd :|Buoi8eJ= y
IspaysjetBM pajed = Md :ayp»d» B«s = SS
j»M)0 = O
8A!iB|RU»nb = «D 'P»«W1 P»"S« = 8A
JWflO
uo^ydUBd
Msy
Kxouag
(P)GO£Jo;pBjS!i
(q)SOC JOJ 6uivoddn<-uou/A||e{)ied
(q)SO£ JOJ Buiuoddns A||nj
li|
is
£l
i 2
Si
1
&
i
z
z
z
z
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
f
I
1
\
I
\
z
z
z
z
1
s
1
^
i
1
1
\t
1
;l
1
1
1
1
1
Commonwealth of
Northern Mariana
Islands (CNMI)
I
z
z
z
s
s
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
s
1
1
1
o
1
CM
i
in
Puerto Rico
I
z
z
z
z
*
1
1
1
1
1
*
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
U.S. Virgin Islands
TRIBES
i
Z
z
z
z
ra
S
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
S
1
i
i
i
Confederated
Tribes of the
Colville Res.
i
1
1
1
o
u
1
f
s
1
1
1
5
5
5
1
1
1
1
NerPerce Tribe
i
*
5
1
1
*
>
s
i
£
£
a
_«
oZ
a
?
z
z
>-
>-
1
1
1
1
1
S
CM
Oneida Nation of
Wisconsin
ti
o
a
«
I
-------
•
a
1
i
\
I
I
!
j
a
!
i
II
ffi
i
i
II
!fil
jl"
!'!•
if
1
f
S
[ .-
spuBROM s TIV\ IBULBUJ piseco jeau
/seuBnpa = owg :sjioAje«ej = say
:sa>|B| = XT :sj3Au ediei = ai
-S w ouauinN
J .£ SAiWJJeN
Buiuodsj (q)goe ui (smv) yoddns «sn 8jn opnbv
luauwBeuew aainosai JS)BM
J9M1O = o :uoipunj uognquisip aAgeimuro = JQO
laiBueAjunui = AN :ou|auj|Hnui = nifi
jsgio = Q :s)U9!pBj6 aoueqjnisjp = QQ
:soui8Uj |BOi60|Oiq = na :o»BMBA!Nniu = AW
:svAONV oyjsuiBJBd = vd IsydejB 7 *8we» = 91
J9i4)o = o :p»QJn|S!p AKBUJIUIUJ = QW :iuaui6pnt
leuoissajojd = fd :asuodsai ^JOipejB = yo
isajjs peqjnisip |ses| = QI isuojiipuoo |eouo)sm = OH
JBMP = 0
:)U3Ui6pnf puoissejcud = p d lieuoiBeji y
ispaM&ieiBM pejied a Md :3i>pad« «|is = SS
j»MW = 0
aAmnuenb = WQ ipaseq |en«A = a\
J3MIO
uoi/Mduad
MSH
soqwag
(P)EOC -io| paisil
(q)SOC -IOJ 8uilJOddns-uou/<||EiyBd
(q)SOC JOJ Bujjjoddns A||nj
"« el
?lj
•3
?i!
I1
!l
i
^
LU
1
1
1
Z
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
at
c
1
1
I
1
i
i
Passamaquoddy
Tribe. Pleasant
Point Res,
3
Q
S
1
>•
§
Q
3
2
O
— >
DL
S
$
•z.
>-
>-
>-
-f
rt
1
1
Pyramid Lake
Paiute Tribe
1
Z
z
z
z
i
5
1
1
1
to
1
n
1
1
f
f
i
i
i
Seminole Tribe of
Florida
i
S
| INTERSTATE COM
5
>-
>
1
>-
1
i
P
D
_»
O
I
0
of
o
$
§
>
z
>
>-
1
1
1
g
CM
%
£
Of
Q
1
1
*
1
>
S
2
g'o!
g
9"
£
CD
>-
Z
>
>-
1
1
1
1
n
s
CD
5
§
>-
>-
>
£
•&
it
i*
2-5
0.
of
U3
00
O
z
z
>
>
ui
in
l-
5
i
i
i
ORSANCO
5
f
1
>
>-
O
i
£
3
-s
Q.
o:
CD
>
Z
Z
z
>
1
$
m
s
CN
1
n"
1
S
«o
to
S.
fi
1
§
8
1
S
a
o
* ?
c S
ii s.
-------
APPENDIX B.
EPA CONTACTS
-------
Appendix B. EPA CONTACTS
Regional Biocriteria Coordinators
REGION 1
(CT, ME, MA, NH, Passamaquoddy Tribe - Pleasant
Point Reservation, Rl, VT)
Peter Nolan, Regional Biocriteria Coordinator
USEPA New England Regional Laboratory
Office of Environmental Measurement and Evaluation
11 Technology Drive
North Chelmsford, MA 01863-2431
Phone 617/918-8343, Fax 617/918-8397
email: nolan.peter@epa.gov
REGION 2
(DRBC, NJ, NY, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands)
James Kurtenbach, Regional Biocriteria Coordinator
USEPA - Region 2
Facilities - Mail Code MS220
Raritan Depot, 2890 Woodbridge Avenue
Edison, NJ 08837-3679
Phone 732/321-6695, Fax 732/321-6616
email: kurtenbach.james@epa.gov
REGION 3
(DE, DC, ICPRB, MD, PA, SRBC, VA, VW)
Margaret Passmore, Regional Biocriteria Coordinator
USEPA-Region 3
Wheeling Operations Office - Mail Code 3ES31
303 Methodist Building
11m and Chapline Streets
Wheeling, WV 26003
Phone 304/234-0245, Fax 304/234-0259
email: passmore. margaret@epa.gov
REGION 4
(AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, Seminole Tribe. SC, TN)
Jim Harrison, Regional Biocriteria Coordinator
USEPA-Region 4
61 Forsyth Street, S.W.
Atlanta, GA 30303-8960
Phone 404/562-9271
email: harrison.iim@epa.gov
REGION 5
(IL, IN, Ml, MN, OH, ORSANCO, Oneida Nation of
Wisconsin, Wl)
Ed Hammer, Regional Biocriteria Coordinator
USEPA - Region 5
Mail Code WT-15J
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604-3507
Phone 312/886-3019
email: hammer.edward@epa.gov
REGION 6
(AR, LA, NM, OK, TX)
Philip Crocker, Regional Biocriteria Coordinator
USEPA - Region 6
Mail Code 6WQ-EW
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Phone 214/665-6644, Fax 214/665-7373
email: crocker.philip@epa.gov
Charlie Howell, Regional Biocriteria Coordinator
USEPA - Region 6
Mail Code 6WQ-EW
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Phone 214/665-8354, Fax 214/665-7373
email: howell.charlie@epa.gov
REGION?
(IA, KS, MO, NE)
Gary Welker, Regional Biocriteria Coordinator
USEPA - Region 7
Mail Code ENSVEMWC
901 North Fifth Street
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone 913/551-7177, Fax 913/551-9177
email: welker.garv@epa.aov
REGION 8
(CO, MT, ND, SD, UT, WY)
Tina Laidlaw, Regional Biocriteria Coordinator
USEPA - Region 8
Phone 303/312-6880, Fax 303/312-6071
email: laidiaw.tina@epa.gov
Jill Minter, Regional Biocriteria Coordinator
USEPA - Region 8
Phone 303/312-6084, Fax 303/312-6071
email: minter.iill@epa.gov
REGION 9
(American Samoa, AZ, CA, CNMI, HI, NV, Pyramid
Lake Paiute Tribe)
Gary Wolinsky, Regional Biocriteria Coordinator
USEPA - Region 9
Mail Code WTR-5
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone 415/972-3498, Fax 415/947-3545
email: wolinskv.garv@epa.gov
Appendix B
December 2002
B-2
-------
REGION 10
(AK, Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation,
ID, Nez Perce Tribe, OR, WA)
Gretchen Hayslip, Regional Biocriteria Coordinator
USEPA- Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone 206/553-1685
email: havslip.gretchen@epa.gov
EPA Headquarters
Bill Swietlik, Program Manager
USEPA Office of Water
Office of Science and Technology
Health and Ecological Criteria Division (4304T)
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone 202/566-1129, Fax 202/566-1140 or 1139
email: swietlik.william@epa.QOv
Questions regarding a specific entity's program should be directed to the contact(s) listed at the
top of each entity's program summary in Chapter 3.! Questions regarding other sections of this
document may be directed to any of the following USEPA Headquarters contacts:
Wayne Davis
USEPA Office of Environmental Information
Environmental Science Center
701 Mapes Road
Ft. Meade, Man/land 20755-5350
410-305-3030 410-305-3096 (fax)
email: davis.wavne@epa.gov
Beth Jackson
USEPA Office of Environmental Information
Environmental Analysis Division
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue (2842T)
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone 202/566-0626, Fax 202/566-0706
email: iackson.elizabeth@epa.gov
Treda Smith
USEPA Office of Water
Office of Science and Technology
1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW (4304T)
Washington, D.C. 20460-0001
Phone 202/566-1128, Fax 202/566-1139
email: smith.treda@epa gov
Appendix B December 2002 B-3
-------
APPENDIX C.
ORIGINAL CHECKLIST TEMPLATE
-------
Appendix C. ORIGINAL CHECKLISt TEMPLATE
Survey of State/Tribal Water Quality Programs for Protecting Aquatic Life Through the Use of
Bioassessments and Biocriteria
Contact Information:
Form Approved
OMB Control No. 2040-0049
Approval Expiration: 7/31/02
state
name
position
agency/ organization
mailing address
phone
fax
email
website
Briefly describe your professional responsibilities as they relate to water quality standards, conducting
bioassessments, and establishing biocriteria.
For each waterbody type below with biological programs, please provide a contact (if different than
yourself)
non-wadeable rivers
lakes
reservoirs
estuaries/near-coastal marine
wetlands
phone
email
Please attach any ancillary materials that will provide further in insight or background about
your program and/or agency. Examples might include an organizational chart, promotional
materials, etc. THANK YOU!
Appendix C
December 2002
C-2
-------
Appendix C
December 2002
C-3
-------
State/Tribal WateiQuality Supporting Aquatic Life Use
Designations and Biocriteria Development,
1 With respect to your program, which waterbody type
categories apply ("X"), and which is being described
using this checklist ("XX)"?
wadeable streams, creeks, rivers
non-wadeable rivers
lakes
reservoirs
iu r estuaries and near-coastal marine
wetlands
I
2 For lotic systems, how are they defined?
stream order
_ drainage area
other (please describe)
3 With respect to the resource type for this checklist, what is
the percentage of information in your state, tribal land, or
basin, coming from the following entities?
state/tribal water quality agency
__ state fish & game agency
USEPA
other federal agency
consultants
___ volunteer monitoring programs
___ local college or university
___ regulated entities
other (please describe)
4 Do you contract out any or all or your bioassessment
work?
Yes
No
If you answered yes to # 4, please specify the percentage contracted
out to each type of entity for field and lab work.
field lab
5 What is the lead agency USING the bioassessment
information?
consultants
other state agency
volunteer monitoring groups
federal agency
college or university
other ; please describe)
6 In which ways are bioassessments used within the water quality program in your state, tribe, or basin? Please check Yes (Y), No (N), or Unsure
(?) for all that apply.
Y N ?
problem identification (screening)
nonpoint source assessments
monitoring the effectiveness of BMPs
__ aquatic life use determinations/ambient monitoring
promulgated into state WQ standards as biocriteria
support of antidegradation
evaluation of discharge permit conditions
TMDL assessment & monitoring
other (please describe)
7 Which of the following monitoring designs are used (please
check all that apply)?
7a For each monitoring design checked in #7, please indicate how it is
implemented (check all that apply for each design).
special projects specific river basins or comprehensive use
only watersheds throughout jurisdiction
targeted (i.e., sites selected for a specific purpose)
fixed station (i.e., WQ monitoring stations)
probabalistic by stream order/catchment area
probalistic by ecoregton, or statewide
rotating basin
other (please describe)
Appendix C
December 3002
-------
8 Indicate the extent of resources assessed using biology (e.g., 8a
miles, acres, etc.)
extent of resource assessed for biology (total)
__ extent of resource fully supporting for 305b
extent of resource partially supporting/non supporting for 305b
extent of resource listed for 303d
number of sites sampled
extent of resource per site (if predetermined)
Please indicate which of the following units of measure you used to
answer #6
watersheds
acreage
miles
other (please describe)
9 What is the basis for determining the extent of the
resource?
_ |RF3
National Hydrography Database
state based
other (please describe)
10 Please use this space to add any additional information you'd like about programmatic elements.
EPA Headquarter
Appendix C
December 2002
C-5
-------
What are your Aquatic Life Use Support (ALUS) designations Ua How many different aquatic life use designations are
based on? , contained In your water quality standards (WQS)? Please
describe.
Single Aquatic Life Use
Class System (A,B,C)
Fishery Based Uses
Warm Water vs. Cold Water
lib Does your state plan to further refine its AL designated uses
In the next triennial WQS review?
12 If you have narrative biocriteria in your WQS. Is the
attached description accurate?
13 For your narrative biocriteria, do you have formal/Informal
numeric procedures to support your decisions?
12a If you answered no to #12, please correct below
13a If you answered no to #13, do you use a qualitative
and/or narrative scale of condition?
Yes
NO
•If you answered yes to #13, where are these procedures
located (e.g., in the WQS)?
'Where are the scale(s) located?
14 Do you have numeric biocriteria?
,Yes
No
*If you answered yes to #14, where are they located?
14a If you have numeric biocriteria, please describe or
attach separate description.
15 Are bioassessment data used in an Integrated assessment
with other environmental data (e.g., toxitity testing and
chemical specific criteria)? Please check Yes (Y), No (N), or
Unsure (?) for all that apply.
N
ISa For each box you answered yes to in #15, do you use
for assessment of aquatic resources
for cause and effect determinations
for permitted discharges
for monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
for watershed based management
independent application (IA)
welght-of-evldence
combination
other (explain)
Appendix C
December 2002
C-6
-------
16 Do you know where bioassessments/biocriteria have been
used in making management decisions regarding restoration
of the aquatic resources to its designated ALUS?
I6a If you answered yes to #16, please elaborate.
17 How many full time employees were devoted to
developing the bioassessment/biocriteria program
maintaining the bioassessment/biocrtteria program
18 Please use this space to add any additional Information you'd like about your ALUS desclslon making process
Appendix C
December 2002
C-7
-------
Field & Lab Methods for Determining Existing Uses, Designated
Uses & Collecting Data for Biocriteria Development
19 How are your reference sites determined?
How do you define a reference site?
site-specific
paired watersheds
regional (aggregate of sites)
professional judgement
other (please describe)
20 If you use regional reference conditions, how do you
characterize those sites?
19b Do you have reference site criteria?
No
Yes (If so, please describe In space below.)
historical conditions
least-disturbed sites
gradient response
judgement prescription
other (please describe)
21 If you use regional reference sites, how do you characterize
(stratify) your streams?
ecoregions (or some aggregate)
elevation
stream type
multlvariate grouping
iurisdlctlonal (i.e., statewide)
other (please describe)
22 Please indicate how many reference sites you have
by strata
total
23 What are your criteria for defining reference sites and, if
applicable, disturbed sites (e.g., D.O., sulfates, habitat)?
23a Are your reference sites linked to your aquatic life
designated uses?
Yes
No
23b Are your reference sites/conditions identified or
23c Do any of your reference sites represent acceptable man-
referer
ced in your WQS?
Yes (provide citation
No
24 Which of the following assemblages are assessed by your
program? Please check Yes (Y), No (N), or Unsure (?) for
all that apply.
N
24a For each assemblaged assessed In #24, please indicate the
range of samples processesed per year
< too 100-500 > SOP
phytoplankton
periphyton
macrophytes
zooplankton
benthos
fish
amphibians/reptiles
waterfowl
Appendix C
December 2002
C-8
-------
24b For each assemblaged assessed in #24, please indicate the level of rigor by choosing A, B, C, D, or E
phytoplankton A
periphyton B
macrophytes C
zooplantton D
benthos E
fish
amphibians/reptiles
waterfowl
perform habitat assessments at your sites?
Yes
No
single observation (no discrete season), limited sampling (e.g., 1-2 sites)
single season, multiple sites (not at watershed level)
single season, multiple sites (watershed level)
single season, multiple sites (broad coverage)
multiple seasons, multiple sites (broad coverage for watershed level)
25a If you answered yes to #25, how are they conducted?
with bioassessments
independent of bioassessments
25b If you answered yes to #25, what type of habitat assessment is used?
visual based (e.g., QHEI, RBP, etc.)
quantitative measurements (e.g., EMAP)
hydrogeomorphology (e.g., Rosgen)
25c Are these habitat reference conditions cited or mentioned In
your WOS?
Yes (provide citation )
No
26 Do you use biological information to facilitate
participation in setting WQS?
Yes (please describe in space below)
No
| J other quantitative parameters (e.g., pebble counts, sediment
index, etc.) (please describe)
Appendix C
December 2002
C-9
-------
27 Which of the following are part of your quality
assurance (QA) program? Please check Yes (Y), No
(N), or Unsure (?) for all that apply.
Y N 7
standard operating procedures (SOPs)
quality assurance plan (QAP)
periodic meetings, training for biologists
sorting proficiency checks
taxonomic proficiency checks
specimen archival
other (please describe)
28 Do you have a certification program for bioassessment?
If yes, briefly describe:
Questions 29 -33 deal with field issues specific to BENTHOS. Please describe your program by checking all that apply.
your program does not assess this assemblage, please skip thesej questions.
29 Sampling gear-- please check all that apply to your J9a Indicate the mesh size used by your program (in microns)
program
200
Surber
Hess
Stack (0.5 m)
D-frame
dipnet
kick net (1 m)
multiplate
rock baskets
collect by hand
other (please describe)
If
400
500 - 600
> 800
other (please describe)
29b Indicate the area sampled
< 1 m'
1 - 3 m2
3 -6m
other (please describe)
30 Reach length
31 Habitat selection
selected habitat
habitat sequences or cycles
fixed distance
stream width formula
time
other (please describe)
richest habitat
riffle/rur (cobble)
multihabitat
artificial substrate
woody debris
other (please describe)
32 Where are samples processed?
field
lab
32a What is the target subsample size?
33 What level of taxonomy do you use?
order
family
genus
species
combination
other (please describe)
100 count
200 count
300 count
500 count
pro po rtion at/volume
entire sample
other (please describe)
Appendix C
December 2002
C-10
-------
Appendix C
December 2002
C-11
-------
Questions 34 - 38 deal with field issues specific to FISH/AMPHIBIANS. Please describe your program by checking all that
apply. If your program does not assess these assemblages, pleafce skip these questions.
34 Sampling gear- please check all that apply to your
program
34a Seine and/or dlpnet mesh size (in inches)
seine
backpack electrofisher
boat electrofisher
pram unit (tote barge)
other (please describe)
1/8"
3/16"
1/4"
3/8"
1/2"
'
35 Reach length
selected habitat
habitat sequences or cycles
fixed distance
stream width formula
time
other (please describe)
37 Where are the samples processed?
field
lab
37b How are samples subsampled?
selected species
batch
selected size
none
other (please describe)
36 Habitat selection
pool/glide
riffle/run (cobble)
multihabitat
other (please describe)
37a How are the samples processed?
length measurement
biomassHndlvldual
biomass-batch
anomalies
38 What level of taxonomy do you use
species
subspecies
life stage
other (please describe)
Questions 39 -43 deal with field issues specific to PERIPHVTON. Please describe your program by checking all that apply.
If your program does not assess this assemblage, please skip these questions.
39 Sampling gear- natural substrate
39a Sampling gear- artificial substrate
suction device
bar damp sample
brushing/scraping device (razor, toothbrush, etc.)
collect by hand
other (please describe)
periphytometer
microslides or other suitable substratum
collect by hand
other (please describe)
Appendix C
December 2002
C-12
-------
40 Reach length
41 Habitat selection
selected habitat
habitat sequences or cycles
fixed distance
stream width formula
time
other (please describe)
richest habitat
riffle/run (cobble)
multihabitat
artificial substrate
other (please describe)
42 Mow are samples processed?
43 What level of taxonomy do you use?
Chlorophyll a/ phaeophytln
biomass
taxonomic identification
other (please describe)
diatoms only
all algae
division level
genus level
species level
other (please describe)
44 Please use this space to add any additional Information you'd like about your field and lab methods.
Appendix C
December 2002
C-13
-------
Data Analysis and Interpretation for Determining Biological Condition of Aquatic Life
Uses and Deriving Biocriteria
45 which data analysis tools and methods do you use (check
all that apply}?
summary tables, illustrative graphs
parametric ANOVAs
multlvarlate analysis
biological metrics
disturbance gradients
other (please describe)
46 If you use biological gradients, how are the metrics selected
: and tested?
selected by consensus
tested for sensitivity, ecological value
calibrated for natural gradients (and covariates)
46a Please describe your response to *46
47 If you use biological metrics, how Is the threshold
determined for transforming metrics into unltless scores?
25th %tile of reference population
50th %tlle of reference population
75th %tile of reference population
95th %tile of reference population
95th %tile of all sites
cumulative distribution function
other (please describe)
48 If you use biological metrics do you
aggregate metrics into an index
return single metrics (use endpoint for each single
metric)
49 If you use a multimetric index, how do you define the
impairment threshold?
25th %tlle of reference population
50th %tile of reference population
75th %tile of reference population
95th %tile of reference population
95th %tlle of all sites
cumulative distribution function
other (please describe)
50 If you use a multivariate technique, how do you define the
Impairment threshold?
5th %dle of reference population
10th %tile of reference population
Significant departure from mean of reference population
other (please describe)
51 Have you evaluated the performance characteristics of your bloassessment results?
Yes
NO
Sla If you answered yes to #51, please describe. Please check Yes (Y), No (N), or Unsure (?) for all that apply.
_Y N
repeat sampling (please describe)
precision (please describe)
sensitivity (please describe)
bias (please describe)
accuracy (please describe)
52 Please use this space to add any additional information you'd like about your data analysis and interpretation methods.
Appendix C
December 2002
C-14
-------
53 Identify where your biological data are stored. Please check Yes (Y), No (N), or Unsure (?) for all that apply.
STORET
other database (what program/application)
spreadsheets (what program/application)
paper flies only
other (please describe)
54 Please describe how data are retrieved and analyzed. Please check Yes (Y), No (N), or Unsure (?) for all that apply.
Y N ?
SAS
Systat
Statistics
EDAS
other (please describe)
55 Please list any website URLs for all relevant data.
56 Please list all documents and references used to provide this information (e.g., SOPs, 305(b) reports, etc.)any
website URLs for all relevant data.
57 Please use this space to add any additional information you'd like about your information management.
Appendix C
December 2002
C-15
-------
APPENDIX D.
PROGRAM SUMMARY TEMPLATE
-------
Appendix D. PROGRAM SUMMARY TEMPLATE
The numbers of relevant checklist questions (see Appendix C) are colored black and found within each
corresponding program summary section.
ENTITY NAME
Contact Information
Contact name, title
Agency
Street • city/state/zip
Phone • Fax
email:
Program Description
Documentation and Further Information
#55. 56
Appendix D
December 2002
D-2
-------
ENTITY NAME
Contact Information
Contact name, title
Agency
Street« city/state/zip
Phone « Fax
email:
Programmatic Elements
AppluM* monitoring
• tfMlons •
#7, (7a)
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 perrtiit conditions
TMDL 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
rotating basin
other.
Stream Miles
Total miles ^^^
(determined using...g££23)
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
Miles Assessed for Biology
|g fully supporting" for 305(b)
Q "partially/non-supporting" for 30S(b)
Appendix D
December ^002
D-3
-------
Aquatic Life Use (ALU) Designations and Decision-Making
ALU designation liaste^;>. . (SfH
• ALU
¥«ter
.
ttamlartfe
Narrative Bbcriterta in WQ8
NuRMtte Btocrtorta lnWQ9
#72 fo 13a
#14. 14a
HI
with other environmental
(e.g.. toxtdty testing i
chemlcai specific criteria)
assessment of aquatic resources
cause and effect determinations
permitted discharges
monitoring (e.g., improvements after mitigation)
watershed based management
#76. 16a
iraiwgoiTwnt doctolons
regarding restoration of
•qiMtlc resources to~>,/:n
dsslgrisMdALU
Reference Site/Condition Development
RsfsrencssH*
Rsferenc* sits cfftoris
site-specific
paired watershed
regional (aggregate of sites)
professional judgment
other:
historical conditions
least disturbed sites
gradient response
professional judgment
other:
nsIjvferenc«
-
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
Appendix D
December 2002
D-4
-------
Field and Lab Methods
#24. (24,i. 24h)
benthos (# samples/year, level of rigor)
fish
periphyton
other:
gear .
»li|iHi8t selection
-o'^Soi'^iHKs^'f-,./ >;• •" '.",
:5»ffi^plB sb» "
"•>'•, ii'' ,„ -, ' -'
taxortomy
ta^ltS&jKv,-' „ «..
• "ww^tj^^V ;. . ;. „* j,i-o,.l"
j^-,a.*.i-y JB<.it;~"y^.-.j. ?•' • * *• •-' ,""^x)''i :i -/:'
);,. 5.•~Sr^xi;«'is*'x "^"i*•-
v$. >\-3^^t!§Kif,tt^ac' ",-.'-u- -
P«1phyton
I haMat selection
j , ?;si|ite'pro
' taxonomy
natural substrate KSKl; artificial substrate
'25 fo 25c
Data Analysis and Interpretation
summary tables, illustrative graphs
parametric ANOVAs
muitivariate analysis
biological metrics [^^U
disturbance gradients
other:
repeat sampling
precision
sensitivity
bias
accuracy
r.-.W*'!,
Storage
Appendix D
December 2002
D-5
-------
Appendix D
December 2002
D-6
-------
-------
EPA - Current State Biological Assessment Programs
Page 1 of4
Biological Integrity
Indicator Species
Key Concepts
Bioassessment
Programs
Publications
Aquatic Biodiversity
Statistical Primer
Coral Biocriteria
U.S. Environment*! Protection Agency
Biological Indicators of Watershed Health }
Recent Additions | Contact Us | Print Version Search: |
EPA Home > Biological Indicators of Watershed Health > State Programs > Summary of Current State
Biological. Assessment Programs
Chapter 2: Summary of Findings
Table 1. National summary of boassessment programs for stream! and wadeable
rive
PROGRAMMATIC ELEMENT
Ut« of Blea**«« mints
Water resource management
Interpret a qua be life use attainment
Narrative biocntena in VyQS
Narrative biocritena in YVQ§ with quantitative
implementation procedures or translators
Numeric biocrtena in WQS
Asstmblagt Us«d
Fish
Benthic m.a,cr;pjayerte)jral;es.
Algae (penphytpp. diatoms)
More than one assemblage
R«ftr*ne* Condition*
Ecojr.e,fljQn,aj
Site-specrfic
State-wide or basin-specific
Analysis
Biological metrics
Mulflyariafs,
Ass*ssm«nt
Mgtometrjc, index
Habitat assessment)
In-plac*
57
40
29
22
4
41
56
20
45
42
19
7
54
22
41
57 . . .
NUMBER 0
Und«r
d«v*lopm«nt
2
6
11
8
11
0
1
5
5
2
1
1
1
2
3
0
F ENTITIES
Non«
6
13
20
30
45
16
0
32
7
12
37
46
1
32
12
0
Four entities (FL, OH, OK,
DRBC) have numeric
biocriteria incorporated into
their WQS (Figure 2c-
right). And of the 11
entities for which numeric
biocriteria is categorized as
"under development,"
Maine and Wyoming have
developed and
http ://www.epa. gov/bioindicators/html/chapter2_summary 2 .html
7/11/2006
-------
EPA - Current State Biological Assessment Programs
Page 2 of4
incorporated numeric biocriteria into other program documents, such as SOPs and monitc
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 corr
assessment programs are fish, benthic macroinvertebrates, and algae (periphyton). Wlacr
the most common indicator assemblage used by state water quality agencies and are a p
Hawaii's bioassessment program, where it is currently under development (Figure 3a). T
common assemblage monitored is
developing the capability of using
fish, followed by periphyton (Figures 3b and 3c - below
monitor for at least two assembles es, and another five (AK, HI, NV, UT, WY) currently us>
a second (Figure 3d).
Figure 3a. Fish assessment programs
Periphyton assessment
in place
Periphyton assessment
under development
Nora
Figure 3c, Rwiphyton
http://www.epa.gov/bioindicators/html/chapter2 sumdiary2.html
7/11/2006
-------
EPA - Current State Biological Assessment Programs
Page 3 of4
Oneo
bioassessment programs is the establishment of reference conditions to help discern hurt
natural variation. The two types of reference conditions currently used in biological survey
site-specific. The Ecoregion Concept, a common regionalization approach, recognizes ge
similarity among ecosystems and the subsequent distribution of biological communities gi
of environmental variables such as climate, soil type, physiography, and vegetation. Forty
adopted this method of stream stratification/ characterization in developing reference con*
below). Site-specific reference conditions typically consist of condition measurements tak>
point source discharge or from a "paired" watershed. However, their usefulness is limited
site-specific value (USEPA 1999). Only nine entities primarily use this approach to deterrr
conditions.
Ecoregrooai reference conditions
• Eco«egion
Biological mtitimetric ir»
under development
None
http://www.epa.gov/bioindicators/html/chapter2_summary2.html
7/11/2006
-------
EPA - Current State Biological Assessment Programs
Page 4 of4
41 aggregate these metrics
into a multimetric index (such as fish or macroinvertebrate IBIs) to assess biological cond
quality, and to discriminate between impaired andunimpaired conditions (Figure 5). Final);
bioassessment programs also assess the physical habitat quality at their sample sites, us
visual based methods (such as QHEI and RBPs) in combination with other measurement
Next - 2.2 Bioassessment Program Succes
Biological indicatory | Aquatic Biodiversity | Statistical Primer
EPAJHpme I Prifacv and Security Notice | Contact Us
Last updated on Thursday, May 18th, 2006
URL: http://www.epa.gov/bioindicators/html/chapter2_summary2.htm!%23Table1
http://wvw.epa.gov/bioindicators/html/chapter2 surnmary2.html
urnma
7/11/2006
-------
EPA - Current State Biological Assessment Programs
Page 1 of4
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Biological Indicators of Watershed Health ;
Biological Integrity
Indicator Species
Key Concepts
Bioassessment
Programs
Publications
Aquatic Biodiversity
Statistical Primer
Coral Biocriteria
Recent Additions | Contact Us | Print Version Search: |
EPA_HgfTTe > Biological Indicators of Watershed Health > State Programs > Summary _olC..urrent...Sta.te.
Biological Assessment Prog rams
Chapter 2: Summary of Findings
2.2 Bioassessment Program Success from 1989 to 2001
In 1989, when developing the Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Rh
USEPA summarized the bioassessment and biomonitoring capabilities in state regulatory
(USEPA 1989). While the 1989 summary did not determine the actual use of the bioasse:
data for ail states, it did provide an estimate based upon past knowledge of state prograrr
the documentation gathered during its development.
The ._. — . - — - - — - - — . — — — -
Summary of IT]
State
Biological !
Assessment
Programs for
Streams and I
Rivers,
based on
1995 data,
compiled a
more i
comprehensive,
assessment '
of state uses
of
bioassessment^
and
biocriteria in '
water ;
management
programs
{USEPA
1996). The
document
serves as the baseline for determining changes and improvements in bioassessment cap
over the past six years.
Table 2 presents a summary of the 1989 and 1995 results alongside the 2001 data from "
The incremental change (from 1989 to 1995, and 1995 to 2001) appears in parentheses,
additional column indicates the net change from 1 989 to 2001 . For the purposes of compi
Table 2 only contains program information from the original 52 entities surveyed in 1989 i
(50 states, the District of Columbia, and ORSANCO). Refer to Table 1 , Chapter 3, and Ap
for programmatic information on the additional entities surveyed for this document.
be
ex
Prc
the
de
http://wAvw.epa.gov^iomdicators/html/chapter2_sujTunary3.htail
7/11/2006
-------
EPA - Current State Biological Assessment Programs
Page 2 of4
an
biological assessments and criteria as revealed by virtually all measures of the survey as
Table 2. All 52 entities contained in this table have incorporated bioassessment in their w.
resource management programs. This is up over 20% from a count of 41 in 1989.
Although the number of states thai! used bioassessments to determine aquatic life use att
1989 is unknown, these numbers did increase noticeably from 1995 to 2001. And despite
that the number of entities with numeric biocriteria in their WQS has only increased by twi
past 12 years, 18 entities have developed and implemented quantitative procedures or tr<
for use in their water quality management programs (Figure 2b), and sixteen are in the pn
developing narrative and/or numeric biocriteria for their standards.
Since 1989, . - - - - - - - - - — - - -.
the number Q
of entities I
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 £
effectiveness at identifying aquatic life use attainment or nonattainment. Thus, since 199S
has recommended the use of multiple assemblages, especially in larger streams (USER/*
The number of entities using more than one assemblage in 2001 reached 41 (an increase
just five years); and 20 of these 41 entities sample for at least three, and even four, asser
such as phytoplankton, macrophytes and zooplankton (Figure 3d).
One of the major advancements, si nee 1989, and especially since 1995, has been the inci
use of regional reference conditions as a basis for making comparisons and detecting use
impairment. Only four states weire actively using ecoregional reference conditions in 198S
only 15 in 1995. However, by 2001, 39 entities characterized reference conditions using e
composite or aggregation of least or minimally impaired sites within distinct ecoregions (F
And conversely, 11 fewer entities used a site-specific approach alone to determine refere
conditions.
L
http://www.epa.gov/bioindicators/html/chapter2 summary 3.html
7/11/2006
-------
EPA - Current State Biological Assessment Programs
Page 3 of4
in Table 2 have developed biological metrics.
Finally, for the 2001 survey, we narrowed the definition of what constitutes narrative biocr
WQS to exclude general aquatic life statements. We adhered to the definition of narrative
as "narrative expressions that describe biological integrity of aquatic communities inhabit!
of a given classification or designated aquatic life use." We also required entities to clarify
http://www.epa.gov/bioindicators/html/chapter2_sxraimary3.htrnl
7/11/2006
-------
EPA - Current State Biological Assessment Programs
Page 4 of4
criteria were operationally defined in their WQS. This examination yielded a count of 28 e
narrative biocriteria in their WQS, one entity less than was reported in 1995. However, ha
the 1995 definition of narrative biocriteria, these 28 entities would grow to 40, resulting in
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 fc
Chapter 3.
Next - Program S
Biological Indicators | Aquatic Biodiversity | Statistical Primer
EPA Home | Privacy and Security Notice | Contact Us
Last updated on Thursday, May 18th, 2006
URL: http://www.epa.gov/bioindicators/html/chapter2_summary3.html
http://VAVw.epa.gov/bioindicators/html/chapter2 summary 3.html
lumps
7/11/2006
-------
EPA Bioindicators - Bioassessment Programs
Page 1 of2
Biological Integrity
Indicator Species
Key Concepts
Bioassessment
Programs
Publications
Aquatic Biodiversity
Statistical Primer
Coral Biocriteria
t/.S. Environment*! Protection Agency
Biological Indicators of Watershed Health ;
Recent Additions | Contact Us | Print Version Search: |
EPAJiPJBe. > Biological Indicators of Watershed Health > Bioassessment Programs
Bioassessment Programs
Learn About Specific Biological Assessment Programs
Select a state of interest to find details of their biological assessment programs. Informati
available for some Territory, Tribal, and Interstate Programs (see below). The informatior
by EPA in a survey and is published in a document entitled "Summary of Biological Asse
Programs and Biocriteria Development for States, Tribes, Territories, and Interstate Com
Streams and Wadeable Rivers 2002 Update (EPA-822-R-02-048). Please see the on-linj
document!
[Tribal Lands Programs - Select
[Territories and Basin Commissions - Select
For More Information:
• Bioassessment and Biocriteria in State and Tribal Water Quality Programs (OST)
http://www.epa.gov/bioindicators/html/stateprgs.html
7/11/2006
-------
EPA Bioindicators - Bioassessment Programs
Page 2 of 2
Learn About State and Tribal programs (OST)
Biological Indicators | Aquatic Biodiversity | Statistical Primer
EEAJHome | Privacy and Security Notice | Contact Us
t?
-0
------- |