EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 7
25 Funston Rd.
Kansas City. Kansas 66115
EPA 907/9-85-003
April, 1985
Environmental Services Division
Evaluation Of Ambient
Surface Water Quality
In The State Of Iowa
Based on Monitoring Data From Water
Years 1982-1984
-------
EVALUATION OF AMBIENT SURFACE WATER
QUALITY IN THE STATE OF IOWA
Prepared by
Thomas T. Holloway, Ph.D.
Environmental Monitoring & Compliance Branch
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Environmental Services Division
25 Funston Road
Kansas-City, Kansas 66115
913-236-3884
FTS 926-3884
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents an evaluation of recent ambient surface water quality
in Iowa. It includes fixed station ambient water monitoring data collected
within and bordering Iowa between October 1, 1981 and September 30, 1984.
Also included are the results of an intensive survey conducted by EPA
Region VII, two rural clean water project monitoring studies, and fourteen
(14) intensive surveys planned by the Iowa Department of Water, Air and
Waste Management (IDWAWM) and conducted by the Univeristy Hygienic Laboratory
during that time period. The overall goal is to provide state and federal
water quality managers with an independent summary of the current quality
of surface waters in Iowa, with adequate time to review and respond
during preparation of the FY-86 305(b) Water Quality Evaluation Report.
This report will also be used as a basis for critique of that 305(b)
report. The specific technical objectives of this report are to:
0 Evaluate the water quality data from water years 1982, 1983, and
1984, relative to applicable standards and national criteria.
0 Evaluate the adequacy of state monitoring activities relative to
the data needed to define ambient water quality.
0 Identify water quality problem areas and evaluate possible causes
of those problems.
0 Evaluate water quality trends.
The report presents the following types of information, both in tabular
form, and in graphical form as maps:
0 Fixed station monitor locations
0 Major point sources
0 Surface drinking water intakes
0 Hazardous waste sites
0 Exceedances of state water quality standards and National Water
Quality Criteria
The maps and tables provide a useful quick reference for a variety of
information which affects water quality.
The findings and recommendations are summarized in three categories:
Potential Problem Areas, Trends, and Adequacy of Monitoring.
A. Potential Problem Areas
Violations of State Water Quality Standards were observed in the following
areas. The pollution severity, as defined by the evaluation criteria in
the 305(b) guidance, was "Major" (over 25% of the observations exceeded
the standard, or the average concentration exceeded the standard and over
10% of the observations exceeded the standard). A data completeness
requirement of at least 9 quarterly samples or at least five exceedances
was imposed in order for an area to be listed here.
-------
In each case, the cause appears to be non-point source pollution.
Continuation of the efforts of IDWAWM to address non-point sources is
recommended.
0 Des Moines River-Des Moines Nitrates, Mercury
0 Raccoon River-Des Moines Nitrates, Mercury
0 Most locations in the state Fecal coliform bacteria
In the following locations, heavy metals (mercury and/or copper) exceeded
the state standards, but the number of samples was smaller than the data
completeness criteria. Therefore, the pollution severity is listed as
"Unknown" and additional monitoring is recommended to determine whether
or not there is a long-term problem.
0 Missouri River (entire Iowa extent)
0 Walnut Creek-Freemont County
0 Nishnabotna River
0 Iowa River around Wapello
0 Cedar River (northern half)
0 Little Sioux River
0 Boyer River
0 Skunk River (including North Skunk and South Skunk branches)
0 Mississippi River
0 Big Sioux River
0 Des Moines River (various locations)
0 Floyd River
0 Maquoketa River
0 Wapsipinicon River
Thompson River
o
Exceedances of national aquatic life criteria occurred at the following
locations, with pollution severity of "Major."
0 Big Sioux River (entire Iowa extent) Total alkalinity
(Exceedances occurred before July 1984. Continued monitoring is
recommended to verify that the problem has been resolved.)
0 Cedar River-Cedar Rapids Zinc, Iron
0 Mississippi River-Clinton and Keokuk Iron, Cadmium
0 Nishnabotna River Iron
0 Des Moines River-Des Moines Chlorine Residual, Cadmium
0 Missouri River Cadmium, Lead
0 Mississippi River - Davenport Ammonia
The national criteria for the metals are considerably lower than the
state standards. Re-evaluation of the state standards for the metals is
recommended to determine whether or not an iron standard should be adopted
and whether or not the lead and cadmium standards are still appropriate.
Exceedances of the Human Health criteria or the 10~5 risk levels occurred
in the following areas, with a pollution severity of "Major":
-------
0 Floyd River-Sioux City Nitrates
0 Boyer River-Missouri City Nitrates
0 Iowa River-Marshall town Nitrates
0 Most locations in the state Arsenic
Those criteria are based on a drinking water use, and on the non-threshold
theory of carcinogenesis. Again, continuation of the State's efforts to
address non-point source pollution is recommended for these areas.
Metals concentrations (iron, zinc, cadmium and/or lead) exceeded the
National Criteria in several locations where the number of samples was
small. Continued monitoring for those metals is recommended in the same
locations specified earlier for continued mercury and copper monitoring.
Localized problem areas due to point sources were documented by means of
intensive surveys in the following locations:
Calmus Creek - Parameters associated with cement plants
Rock Creek - Organics in ground water
Floyd River - Dissolved oxygen and ammonia
Continuation of the state's efforts to abate pollution from the respective
point sources is recommended.
B. Trends
Trend evaluations were performed for pH, ammonia, nitrates, dissolved
oxygen phenols and zinc. Trend evaluations for other parameters (especially
metals) were found to be infeasible because many data points were reported
as less than the detection limit, and for many of the metals, the detection
limits changed over time. Because most stations were limited to quarterly
data collection, there is some uncertainty in the trend identification at
any given site. However, the composite trend information for all sites
leads to some useful observations.
0 Nitrate concentrations show increasing trends at many sites in the
state. No sites show confirmed decreasing trends.
0 pH levels show a trend to more acidic conditions at many sites in the
state. Two sites show possible trends to more alkaline conditions.
0 Trends in dissolved oxygen concentration show increases (improvement)
at some sites, but decreases at more sites.
0 Trends in ammonia concentrations show increases (deterioration) at a
few sites, but improvement at more sites.
C. Adequacy of Monitoring
Given the current level of monitoring resources, the state monitoring
program generally includes the most important types of information needed
-------
to determine water quality in the state. The planning process is conducted
by conscientious professionals dedicated to making optimum use of the
monitoring resources. The following observations and recommendations
would improve an already good monitoring program.
0 The fixed station network, including stations operated by the University
of Iowa (UI) and by Iowa State University (ISU) includes monitoring upstream
and downstream of all municipalities with populations over 50,000, except
for Dubuque. We recommend that the state consider adding stations
there.
0 The fixed station network does not include any monitors in cold water
fisheries. Addition of at least one such station is recommended.
0 Although the state Class B standards include a total cyanide standard,
analyses for that parameter are not performed at the UHL stations.
Addition of that parameter is recommended.
0 The state has recently proposed a Class B standard for Total Chlorine
Residual (TCR). However, analyses for TCR are not performed at most
UHL stations. Addition of that parameter is likewise recommended.
0 Continued monitoring for metals was recommended in Section A above at
a number of stations where the state standards and/or National criteria
were exceeded. For comparison, the concentrations of metals observed
at sites which monitor "background" water quality would provide useful
information. Addition of metals monitoring is recommended at two
such sites - N. Raccoon River at Sac City (423014) and Upper Iowa
River at Dorchester (821131).
0 Use of different analytical procedures for metals by different agencies
raises questions about data comparability for those metals. We
recommend that WAWM and UHL examine these data comparability questions,
and consider changing the UHL undigested metals data to a different
STORET parameter code, which would specify undigested analyses.
0 Neither the Iowa Class B standards nor the parameter list for UHL
stations include iron. We recommend that the state consider including
iron monitoring in the fixed station network, and collect enough data
to determine whether or not a state standard for iron should be developed
for protection of freshwater invertebrates.
0 The detection limit for most arsenic analyses performed by the UHL is
10 g/1, while the 10~5 risk level is .022 ug/1. A lower detection
limit is needed if a thorough assessment of arsenic data relative to
that evaluation criterion are to be performed. We recommend that the
UHL consider lowering that detection limit.
0 The network design, as implemented, represents a reasoned approach for
assessing water quality under very stringent resource constraints.
Monthly sampling at more stations is recommended in order to give a more
complete picture of water quality as a function of time, and for more
refined trend analyses.
-------
IDWAWM makes extensive use of cooperative efforts with a USGS, UI, and ISU
in order to avoid duplication of effort. Formal cooperative agreements are
recommended to ensure that those stations will provide the sampling
frequency, parameter coverage, and quality assurance documentation
needed to define water quality in the state.
The downstream station on the Missouri River at Council Bluffs is
upstream of several major discharges on both the Iowa and Nebraska sides
of the river. A cooperative agreement with Nebraska, to relocate that
station and/or to add another downstream station, is recommended because
it could be beneficial to both states.
The states are responsible for determining water quality for each
water body. The current network design includes stations upstream and
downstream of major cities, upstream and downstream of major impoundments,
on large and small streams, upstream and downstream of specific point
sources, in areas unaffected by point sources, and at the mouths of
tributaries to the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers. Long segments of
interior streams are not covered directly by fixed station monitoring.
If water quality on those stream segments is assessed, such assessment would
rely on extrapolation of data from other locations, on use of intensive
survey data, or on some qualitative assessment technique (e.g., a
"windshield survey"). We recommend that IDWAWM review the network to
determine whether or not they are satisfied that all water bodies are
adequately addressed.
Intensive surveys cover a wide range of environmental issues and
address the most important issues at each survey site.
The fish monitoring program has been refined over its first few years
to eliminate variability due to species and age/size differences. As
a result, the data base for the single selected species (carp) is
still quite small. Since duplicate samples were not collected prior
to 1984 (and only a few in 1984), the variability of fish data at a
given site is unknown. Since duplicate samples will be collected at
all sites in 1985, information on that variability will become
available. Continued monitoring is needed at all fish collection
sites.
Concentrations of chromium in fish tissue exceeded an arbitrary cut-point
(defined by the mean plus one standard deviation for all fish samples
collected in Iowa) near Des Moines in more than one year of sampling.
More intensive water monitoring is recommended for chromium at two
stations (21 Iowa station 420780 and 1117MBR station 005686).
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Table of Contents
I. Introduction 1
II. Basin Identification 1
III. Standards and Criteria Description 4
IV. Data Description 19
A. Water Quality Monitoring Data
B. Data Completeness and Accuracy
C. Water Uses
D. Potential Sources of Pollution
V. State-wide Observations 23
VI. Basin Descriptions 24
A. Format Overview for Basin Tables and Maps
B. Northeastern Iowa River Basins
C. Iowa-Cedar River Basins
D. Skunk River Basin
E. Des Moines Basin
F. Southern Iowa River Basins
G. Western Iowa River Basins
VII. Intensive Surveys 147
VIII. Overview of Fish Data 156
IX. Trends 169
X. Adequacy of Monitoring Efforts to Define Water Quality 183
XI. Conclusions and Recommendations 185
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
The goals of the Clean Water Act, as described in Section 101 of the 1972
Amendments of Public Law 92-500, included elimination of the discharge of
pollutants into navigable waters by 1985 and the attainment of water quality
which provides for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish and
wildlife, wherever possible. The act also provided that, by 1983, water
should be of high enough quality to al.low recreational uses, and that the
discharge of toxic pollutants in harmful quantities should be prohibited.
Section 106 of the same act authorized the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to provide grants to the States to assist them in
administering the program. The states in turn were required to establish
and operate "appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary
to monitor, and to compile and analyze data on the quality of navigable
waters, including biological monitoring. The data must be updated and
evaluated biennially and summarized in the 305(b) water quality reports to
Congress.
This report summarizes fixed station monitoring data stored in STORET,
generated between October 1, 1981, and September 30, 1984, by various
agencies. Those stations are shown in Figure 1. Also included are the
results of an intensive survey conducted by EPA Region VII, two rural clean
water project monitoring studies, and fourteen (14) intensive surveys
conducted by the University Hygienic Laboratory during that time period.
The overall goal is to provide State and Federal water quality managers
with an independent, objective summary of the current quality of surface
waters in Iowa, with adequate time to review and respond during preparation
of the FY-86 305(b) Water Quality Evaluation Report. This report will also
be used as a basis for identifying problem areas and parameters which
should be included in the 305(b) report. The specific technical objectives
of this report are to:
1. Evaluate the water quality data from water years 1982, 1983 and 1984,
relative to applicable standards and national criteria.
2. Evaluate the adequacy of state and EPA monitoring activities relative
to the data needed to define ambient water quality.
3. Identify water quality problem areas and evaluate possible causes of
those problems.
4. Evaluate water quality trends.
II. BASIN IDENTIFICATION
The Iowa water quality regulations classify the surface water of Iowa in
six basins (the Western Iowa, Southern Iowa, Des Moines, Iowa-Cedar,
Skunk and Northeastern Iowa River basins). This report uses the same
basin classification for consistency with the State 305(b) report. The
six basins are shown in Figure 2.
-------
Figure 1-. ROUTINE MONITORING LOCATIONS
-------
FIGURE 2, RIVER BflSIN IDENTIPICflTION
+-964200
434858
WESTERN BflSIN
SOUTHERN BflSIN
} +395945
N
MILES
0 46 92
-880000+
-------
III. DESCRIPTION OF STATE STANDARDS AND NATIONAL CRITERIA
A. State Water Quality Standards
Each state is required by Section 303 of the Clean Water Act to develop
water quality standards. Iowa has adopted standards which include general
water quality criteria applicable to all surface waters in the state. In
addition, some water bodies are designated as class "A", "B" or "C" waters,
to which numerical criteria apply for specific parameters. Class "A"
waters are to be protected for primary contact water use; Class "B"
waters for wildlife, fish, aquatic and semi-aquatic life and secondary
contact water uses; Class "C" waters as raw water sources of drinking
water supply. The general water quality criteria are quoted from the
state regulations below. The specific criteria for designated water uses
are shown in Table 1.
61.3(1) General Water Quality Criteria: The following criteria are appli-
cable to all surface waters including those which have been designated as
class "A", "B", or "C" waters, at all places and at all times to protect
livestock and wildlife watering, aquatic life, noncontact recreation,
crop irrigation, and industrial, domestic, agricultural and other incidental
water withdrawal uses not protected by class A, B or C criteria in this rule.
a. Such waters shall be free from substances attributable to point
source wastewater discharges that will settle to form sludge deposits.
b. Such waters shall be free from floating debris, oil, grease,
scum and other floating materials attributable to wastewater discharges
or agricultural practices in amounts sufficient to create a nuisance.
c. Such waters shall be free from materials attributable to wastewater
discharges or agricultural practices producing objectionable color, odor
or other aesthetically objectionable conditions.
d. Such waters shall be free from substances attributable to
wastewater discharges or agricultural practices in concentrations or
combinations which are toxic or harmful to human, animal, or plant life.
e. Such waters shall be free from substances, attributable to
wastewater discharges or agricultural practices, in quantities which
would produce undesirable or nuisance aquatic life.
f. The turbidity of the receiving water shall not be increased by
more than 25 Nephelometric turbidity units by any point source discharge,
g. Total dissolved solids shall not exceed 750 mg/1 in any lake or
impoundment or in any stream with a flow rate equal to or greater than
three times the flow rate of upstream point sources discharges. [1]
-------
TABLE 1
IOWA WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
BY WATER CLASSIFICATION
Class A
Primary
Contact
fecal col i form (April 1-Oct. 31) 200/1 00ml
pH 6.5 to 9.0
dissolved oxygen (any time)
(warm water) (» 16/24 hr)
dissolved oxygen (any time)
(cold water) (» 16/24 hr)
Ammonia nitrogen (N)(Nov. 1-March 31)
(warm water) (April 1-Oct. 31)
Ammonia nitrogen (N)(Nov. 1-March 31)
(cold water) (Nov. 1-Oct. 31)
arsenic (total)
barium (total )
cadmium (total) (warm-water)
cadmium (total) (cold-water)
chromium (total hexavalent)
copper (total)
cyanide
lead (total)
mercury (total )
phenol
selenium
zinc
temperature (warm-water)
temperature (cold-water)
Class B
Wildlife &
Aquatic Life
2000/1 00ml
6.5 to 9.0
4.0 mg/1
5.0 mg/1 .
5.0 mg/1
7.0 mg/1
5.0 mg/1
2.0 mg/1
2.5 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
0.0012 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
0.005 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
0.05 ug/1
0.05 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
32°C*
20°C*
Class C
Water
Supply
6.5 to 9.0
0.05 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
0.002 mg/1
.05 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
mg/1 - milligrams per liter
ug/1 - micrograms per liter
pc/1 - pico curie per liter
1 milligram = 1,000 micrograms
*Additional restrictions apply to the
extent and rate of heating.
-------
TABLE 1 continued
IOWA WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
BY WATER CLASSIFICATION
chloride
Class A
Primary
Contact
Class B
Wildlife &
Aquatic Life
Class C
Water
Supply
250 mg/1
fluoride
2 mg/1
nitrate (as
45 mg/1
silver
0.05 mg/1
combination of radium-226 and radium-228
5 DC/1
gross alpha
15 pc/1
beta particle and photon radioactivity
4 millirem/yr.
tritium (annual average)
20.000 pc/1
strontium-90 (annual average)
8 pc/1
-------
TABLE 2
National Water Quality Criteria *
(units are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted)
Page 1
Parameter
METALS
Antimony
Arsenic
Arsenic, total recoverable trivalent
inorganic
Barium
Beryl lium
Cadmium
Chromium.hexavalent
Chromium, trivalent
Copper
Iron
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenite, total recoverable inorganic
Selenium
Silver
Aquatic Life
24-hour
average
A
.29
5.6
E
0.20
G
35
At any
time
440
B
21
C
D
1000 3
F
4.1
H
260
I
Human Health
carcinogen! city
(non-threshhold) 2
based
0(.022)
0(.068)
toxicity
(threshhold)
based
146
1000 3
10
50
170000
50
.144
13.4
10
50
Chemical
Abstract
System (CAS
7440360
7440382
1327533
7440417
7440439
18540299
7440508
7439921
7439976
7440020
7782492
7440224
STORET
Parameter Code(s)
01097
00978,01002
01009,01007
00998,01012
01113,01027
01032
01033,01118 4,010
01119,01042
00980,01045,71885
74010
01114,01051
71901,71900
01074,01067
00981,01147
01079,01077
-------
TABLE 2
National Water Quality Criteria *
(units are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted)
Page 2
Parameter
Thallium
Zinc
PESTICIDES/PCBs
Aldrin
Chlordane, technical mixture
2,4-D
ODD
DDE
DDT
Demeton
Dieldrin
Endosulfan
alpha Endosulfan
beta Endosulfan
Endrin
Guthion
Heptachlor
Aquatic Life
24-hour
average
47
.0043
.0010
.0010
.0010
.0019
.056
.056
.056
.0023
.0038
At any .
time
J
3.0
2.4
1.1
1.1
1.1
.1 3
2.5
.22
.22
.22
.18
.01 3
.52
Human Health
carcinogenicity
(non-threshhold) 2
based
0(. 00074)
0(.0046)
0(. 00024)
0(. 00071)
0(. 00278)
toxicity
(threshhold)
based
13
100 3
74
74
74
1.0
CAS
7440280
7440666
309002
57749
94757
72548
72559
50293
8065483
60571
115297
959988
33213659
72208
86500
76448
STORET
Parameter Code(s)
00982,01059
01094,01092
39330
39350
39730
39360,39310
39365,39320
39370,39300
39560
39380
39388
34361
34356
39390
39580
39410
-------
TABLE 2
National Water Quality Criteria 1
(units are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted)
Page 3
Parameter
Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH)
alpha HCH (alpha BHC)
beta HCH (beta BCH)
gamma HCH (gamma BHC.l indane)
Malathion
Methoxychlor
Mirex
Parathion
2,4,5-TP (silvex)
Toxaphene
PCBs
AROCLOR-1016
AROCLOR-1221
AROCLOR-1232
AROCLOR-1242
AROCLOR-1248
AROCLOR-1254
Aquatic Life
24-hour
average
.080
.013
.014
.014
.014
.014
.014
.014
.014
At any
time
2.0
.1 3
.03 3
.001 3
.04 3
1.6
Human Health
carcinogenicitv
(non-threshhold) 2
based
0(.123)
0(.092)
0(.163)
0(.186)
0(.0071)
0(. 00079)
0(. 00079)
0(. 00079)
0(. 00079)
0(. 00079)
0(. 00079)
0(. 00079)
toxicity
(threshhold)
based
10 3
CAS
608731
319846
319857
58899
121755
72435
2385855
56382
.93721
8001352
12674112
11104282
11141165
53469219
12672296
11097691
STORET
Parameter Code(s)
77835
39337
39338
39340,39782
39530
39480
39755
39540
39760
39400
39516
34671
39488
39492
39496
39500
39504
-------
TABLE 2
National Water Quality Criteria l
(units are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted)
Page 4
Parameter
AROCLOR-1260
PHENOLS
Phenol
2,4-Dichlorophenol
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Pentachl orophenol
2,4-Dinitrophenol
2,4-Dinitro-o-cresol
HALOGENATED ALIPHATICS
Bromomethane (methyl bromide)
Chloromethane (methyl chloride)
Dichloromethane (methyl ene chloride)
Chi orodi bromome thane
Di chl orobromomethane
Tribromomethane (bromoform)
Aquatic Life
24-hour
average
.014
At any
time
Human Health
carcinogenicity
(non-threshhold) 2
based
0(. 00079)
0(12)
0(1.9)
0(1.9)
0(1.9)
0(1.9)
0(1.9)
toxicity
(threshhold)
based
3500
3090
2600
1010
70
13.4
100 5
CAS
11096825
108952
120832
95954
88062
87865
51825
534521
74839
74873
75092
124481
75274
75252
STORE!
Parameter Code(s)
39508
34694
34601
39740
34621
39032
34616
78208
34413
34418
34423
32105
32101
32104
-------
TABLE 2
National Water Quality Criteria 1
(units are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted)
Page 5
Parameter
Trichloromethane (chloroform)
Tetrachl oromethane
(carbon tetrachloride)
Tr ichl orof 1 uoromethane
Di chl orodi f 1 uoromethane
1,2-Dichloroethane
1 , 1 , 1-Trichl oroethane
1,1,2-Trichl oroethane
1,1, 2 ,2-Tetrachl oroethane
Hexachl oroethane
Vinyl chloride
1,1-Dichloroethene
(1 ,1-dichloroethylene)
1,1,2-Trichloroethene
(trichloroethylene)
1,1, 2 ,2-Tetrachl oroethene
(tetrachl oroethyl ene)
cis 1,3-Dichloropropene
trans 1,3-Dichloropropene
Aquatic Life
24-hour
average
At any
time
Human Health
carcinogenic! tv
(non-threshhold) 2
based
0(1.9)
0(4.0)
0(1.9)
0(1.9)
0(9.4)
0(6.0)
0(1.7)
0(19)
0(20)
0(0.33)
0(27)
0(8.0)
toxicity
(threshhold)
based
18400
87
87
CAS
67663
56235
75694
75718
107062
71556
79005
79345
67721
75014
75354
79016
127184
10061015
10061026
STORET
Parameter Code(s)
32106
32102
34488
34668
32103
34506
34511
34516
34396
39175
34501
39180
34475
34704
34699
-------
TABLE 2
National Water Quality Criteria 1
(units are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted)
Page 6
Parameter
Hexachlorobutodiene
Hexachl orocycl opentadi ene
. ETHERS
bis (Chloromethyl ) ether
bis (2 Chloroethyl) ether
bis (2 Chloroisopropyl ) ether
MONOCYCLIC AROMATICS
(excl udi ng phenol s ,cresol s , phthal ates)
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
1 , 2-D i chl orobenzene
1, 3-D i chl orobenzene
1 , 4-D i chl orobenzene
1,2,4, 5-Tetrachl orobenzene
Pentachl orobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
Aquatic Life
24-hour
average
At any
time
Human Health
c arc inogeni city
(non-threshhold)2
based
0(4.47)
0(. 000038)
0(.30)
0(6.6)
0(.0072)
toxicity
(threshhold)
based
206
34.7
488
400
400
400
38
74
CAS
87683
77474
542881
111444
108601
71432
108907
95501
541731
106467
95943
608935
118741
STORET
Parameter Code(s)
39702,34391
34386
34268
34273
34283
34030
34301
34536
34566
34571
77734
77793
39700
-------
TABLE 2
National Water Quality Criteria 1
(units are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted)
Page 7
Parameter
Methyl benzene (toluene)
Ethyl benzene
Nitrobenzene
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Dimethyl phthalate
Di ethyl phthalate
Di butyl phthalate
bis (2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate
POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC
HYDROCARBONS
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzo (a) anthracene
Benzo (b) fluoranthene
Aquatic Life
24-hour
average
At any
time
Human Health
carcinogeni city
(non-threshhold) 2
based
0(1.1)
0(.028) 6
0(.028)
0(.028)
0(.028)
0(.028)
toxicity
(threshhold)
based
14,300
1,400
19,800
313,000
350,000
34,000
15,000
CAS
108883
100414
98953
121142
131113
84662
84742
117817
83329
208968
120127
56553
205992
STORET
Parameter Code(s)
34010
34371
34447
34611
34341
34336
39110
39100
34205
34200
34220
34526
34230
-------
TABLE 2
National Water Quality Criteria *
(units are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted)
Page 8
Parameter
Benzo (k) fluoranthene
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Chrysene
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
NITROSAMINES AND OTHER
NITROGEN CONTAINING COMPOUNDS
Ni trosodi butyl ami ne
Ni trosodi ethyl ami ne
Ni trosodimethyl ami ne
Ni trosodi phenyl amine
Nitrosopyrrolidine
Aquatic Life
24-hour
average
At any
time
Human Health
carcinogenicity
(non-threshhold) 2
based
0(.028)
0(.028)
0(.028)
0(.028)
0(.028)
0(.028) 7
0(.028)
0(.028)
0(.028)
0(.028)
0(.064)
0(.008)
0(.014)
0(49)
0(.160)
toxicity
(threshhold)
based
42
CAS
207089
191242
50328
218019
53703
206440
86737
193395
85018
129000
924163
55185
62759
86306
930552
STORET
Parameter Code(s)
34242
34521
34247
34320
34556
34376
34381
34403
34461
34469
78207
78200
34438
34433
78206
-------
TABLE 2
National Water Quality Criteria *
(units are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted)
Page 9
Parameter
Benzidine
3 , 3 ' -D i ch 1 orobenz i di ne
1 , 2-D i pheny 1 hydraz i ne
Acrylonitrile
OTHERS
2-Propenal (acrolein)
Alkalinity, total
Ammonia
Asbestos
Chlorine, total residual
Cyanide, free
Cyanide, total
Fecal coliform
Hydrogen sulfide
Methyl isobutyl ketone (isophorone)
Nitrate nitrogen
Oxygen, dissolved
Aquatic Life
24-hour
average
>20mg/l 3
.02mg/l 3
.0035mg/l
5.0mg/l 3
At any
time
.052mg/l
Human Health
carcinogenicitv
(non-threshhold) 2
based
0(.0012)
0(.103)
0(.422)
0(.58)
0(300,000)
toxicity
(threshhold)
based
320
.0100mg/l 3
.200 mg/1
200 3
.002 mg/1 3
5200
10 mg/1 3
CAS
92875
91941
122667
107131
107028
7664417
74908
7783064
78591
7782447
STORET
Parameter Code(s)
39120
34631
34346
34215
34210
00410,00411,00431
00612,00619
00948,00976,34225
50060
00722
00720
31613,31616,31625
71875
34408
00620,71887
00299,00300
-------
TABLE 2
National Water Quality Criteria 1
(units are in micrograms per liter unless otherwise noted)
Page 10
Parameter
pH
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
Aquatic Life
24-hour
average
6.5 to 9
standard
units ^
At any
time
Human Health
carcinogenicity
(non-threshhold) 2
based
0(. 00000013) 8
toxicity
(threshhold)
based
CAS
1746016
STORET
Parameter Code(s)
00400,00403
34675
-------
FOOTNOTES TO TABLE 2 (NUMERICAL)
1. Most of the values listed in Table 2 are derived from the 1980 ambient
water quality criteria documents (EPA 440/5-80-015 through -079). Values
derived from other sources are duly noted.
2. For the maximum protection of human health, the concentration of sub-
stances under this heading should be zero. This is based on the non-
threshold assumption for carcinogens. The number in parentheses beside
the zero is an estimation of the concentration that would result in one
additional case of cancer in 100,000, assuming an average daily consumption
of both water and aquatic organisms from that water over the lifetime of
that individual. The risk estimate concentration is presented for
information purposes and does not represent an Agency judgement on an
"acceptable" risk level.
3. Quality Criteria for Water - 1976. U. S. EPA, Washington, D.C. 20460
(the red book).
4. The document Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Chromium (EPA 440/5-
80-035) provides aquatic life criteria for the hexavalent (01032) and the
trivalent.(01033) forms of the metal but not for total chromium (01118,
01034). However, trivalent chromium and total chromium are both included
since virtually all of the chromium in ambient waters is in, or is rapidly
converted to, the trivalent state.
5. Code of Federal Regulations. Title 40 (Protection of Environment).
Sub-part 13, Section 141.11.
6. The document Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Acenaphthene (EPA
440/5-80-015) does not provide a human health criterion for this compound.
Acenaphthene however, is a polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH). The
Ambient Water Quality Criteria for PAHs (EPA 440/5-80-069) states that
for the maximum protection of human health the concentration of PAHs, as
a class of compounds, should be zero, and cites a 10~5 lifetime cancer
risk level of .028 ug/1.
7. The document Ambient Water Wuality Criteria for Fluoranthene (EPA
440/5-80-049) states that to protect human health from the toxic properties
of fluoranthene, the concentration should be no more than 42 ug/1.
Fluoranthene however, is a polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH). The
Ambient Water Quality Criteria for PAHs (EPA 440/5-80-069) states that
for the maximum protection of human health, the concentration of PAHs as
a class of compounds, should be zero, and cites a 10'5 lifetime cancer
risk level of .028 ug/1.
8. Ambient Water Quality Criteria for 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzp-p-dioxin
1984"Office of Water Regulations and Standards. U.S. EPA, Washington,
D.C. 20460 (EPA 440/5-84-007).
17
-------
FOOTNOTES TO TABLE 2 (alphabetical)
A. e U-05 Cln (total hardness)] - 8.53)
B. e U-05 Cln (total hardness)] - 3.73)
C. e U-08 Cln (total hardness)] + 3.48)
D. e (°'94 Cln (total hardness)] - 1.23)
E. e (2-35 Cln (total hardness)] - 9.48)
F. e U'22 Cln (total hardness)] - 0.47)
G. e (0.76 [In (total hardness)] + 1.06)
H. e (°«76 Cln (total hardness)] + 4.02)
I. e U-72 C1" (total hardness)] - 6.52)
J. e ( «83 Cln (total hardness)] + 1.95)
18
-------
B. National Water Quality Criteria
National water quality criteria have been established for approximately
135 different chemical species. Establishment of national aquatic life
criteria for a pollutant requires extensfvV testing of the effects of
the pollutant on a diversity of species, using well-defined evaluation
protocols. The results of the scientific studjies are usually compiled
and evaluated in a Criteria Document for each pollutant or group of
pollutants. Each criteria document summarizes^separately the available
data showing effects on aquatic life and data showing effects on human
health. Where sufficient data exist to satisfy the evaluation protocols,
specific criteria are established. Where the data are limited, the
documents indicate the lowest concentrations at which effects were noted,
and provide additional guidance which may be useful in data interpretation.
For some pollutants, significant effects are noted on aquatic life but
not on human health (and vice versa). For other pollutants, data are
sufficient for establishing criteria for either aquatic life or human
health, but not both. Therefore, not all pollutants have criteria covering
all water uses.
A summary of the Criteria Documents for 64 toxic pollutants or groups of
pollutants was published in the Federal Register [2] in 1980 That Federal
Register notice also contained a description of the evaluation protocols.
Criteria for other pollutants, including conventionals (BOD, pH, etc.), had
been published previously in Quality Criteria for Water, [3] in 1976.
Table 2 summarizes national criteria.
The national criteria are advisory in nature, and represent a broad-based
review of the scientific basis which should be considered in setting
water quality standards.
In some situations, local conditions differ from those for which the
national criteria were designed. The states may take those local conditions
into account in setting the state standards (which are regulatory), so
that local needs will be met.
IV. DATA DESCRIPTION
A. Water Quality Monitoring Data
Most of the water quality data used in this report were obtained from
STORET, a computerized data base maintained by the EPA for the storage
and retrieval of parametric data relating to the quality of the
waterways of the United States. The STORET data used in this report
represent samples collected between October 1, 1981, and September 30, 1984
Much of the data for this report were collected at 76 stations where on-
going monitoring is conducted. Frequency of sample collection varies
from bi-weekly to annual, depending on the location, collecting agency,
and parameter. The network includes stations operated by the University
Hygienic Laboratory (UHL), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Minnesota
19
-------
Pollution Control Agency, the South Dakota Department of Water and Natural
Resources, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, the Iowa State
University, and the University of Iowa. An overview of the monitoring
locations is shown in Figure 1. Tables in the individual basin descriptions
(Section VII) summarize the locations, parameter coverage, sampling
frequency and STORE! identification numbers for the stations. Detailed
lists of parameter coverage for stations operated by the UHL and by the USGS
are included as Appendix A.
Also included in the report are summaries of special studies conducted by
the University Hygienic Laboratory. These studies were conducted during
the period October 1, 1981, through September 30, 1984. In each case,
the most recent data available were used in order to describe water
quality in a given stream segment.
For data collected by the UHL, quality assurance requirements are included
in the IDWAWM contract with the UHL. For data collected by the other
agencies, quality control limits for the data are not supplied to the
IDWAWM. Therefore, the precision and accuracy of those data is unknown.
B. Data Completeness and Accuracy
If monitoring data for a station are incomplete, they may give a distorted
view of water quality. Samples collected in one season may be unrepresentative
of water quality during other seasons. In the discussion of water quality
for each river basin, tabular summaries are provided, showing the percentage
of samples which exceeded the state standards or the national criteria
for each parameter. If the sampling data are incomplete, that percentage
may be misleading. For example, if only one sample was collected, and it
exceeded a standard, 100 percent of the samples collected at that station
exceeded that standard. However, one sample is insufficient to determine
whether, on a long-term basis, the pollution severity at that station is
major or minor.
The tabular summaries include all exceedances and show the number of
observations, the number of exceedances, the percentage of exceedances,
the criteria, the minimum exceedance, the mean exceedance, and the
minimum, mean and maximum values observed. The pollution severity is
evaluated as major, minor, none or unknown, using the chemical infor-
mation column of the "Criteria for Evaluating the Support of a Designated
Use" from the EPA Guidance for State Section 305(b) Reports. The results
of that evaluation are shown on maps in the individual basin sections.
A copy of those criteria is reproduced as Table 3. Since those criteria
do not define minimum data completeness requirements, the following
criteria were selected:
20
-------
TABLE 3.
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING THE
CRT OF A DESIGNATED USE
SUPPORT OF
DESIGNATED USE
CHEMICAL INFORMATION
BIOLOGICAL INFORMATION
DIRECT OBSERVATION/
PROFESSIONAL JUDGEMENT
Waters vsupport
designated use
Standard is exceeded In 0
10% of the' analyses and
the mean measured value Is
less than the standard.
Pollution severity: none.
Data show that the waterbody
Is fully supporting the
designated aquatic life
community*
Direct observation shows
that the designated use
Is supported, or profes-
sional judgement indicates
that there is no reason
for the use not to be
supported.
Haters partially
support designated
use
Standard Is exceeded In 11
- 254 of the analyses and
the mean measured value 1s
less than the standard; or
standard is exceeded In 0
- 10% of analyses and mean
measured value exceeds the
standard.
Pollution severity: minor.
After evaluating data.
there Is some uncertainty
as to whether or not a
balanced aquatic life
community is fully suppor-
ted. For Instance, some
species may not be able to
propagate In the stream,
although a put-and-take
fishery may exist.
Direct observation shows
that the use wxists in the
waterbody but profession-
al Judgement suggests that
the use Is not supported
a maximum level (e.g. cit-
izen complaints on record,
fisherman success rates
. declining).
Waters do not
support designated
use
Standard Is exceeded in
more than 25% of analyses
and mean measured'value is
less than the standard; or
standard is exceeded in 11
-24% of analyses and mean
measured value exceeds the
standard.
Pollution severity: major.
Data show that the water-
body does not support the
designated aquatic com-
munity. For example, the
aquatic community Is
definitely imbalanced and/
or severely stressed; few
or none of the expected
species exist In the
waterbody.
Direct observations show
overt signs of obvious use
impairment (e.g. severe or
frequent fish kills), or
provide no evidence that
the use exists. Profes-
sional judgment suggests
that the use can not be
supported due to known or
suspected water quality
impacts.
Unknown
No representative data are
available for assessment.
Limited or no data are
available.
Limited or no direct obser-
vations.
-------
1. For pollutants scheduled to be sampled quarterly or more
frequently (water samples) the pollution severity is labeled "unknown"
if fewer than nine observations were present and fewer than five of
those observations exceeded the standard or criterion. The nine obser-
vations correspond to 75% of the expected samples for quarterly samp-
ling. Pollutants with five or more exceedances in 5, 6, 7 or 8 ob-
servations are assigned a pollution severity of "major."
2. For pollutants scheduled to be sampled annually, data from all
scheduled samples must be present.
3. Data from intensive surveys are addressed separately from fixed-
station monitoring data, since those data represent a "snap shot" of water
quality, rather than a long-term average.
Each agency which generates monitoring data assumes responsiblity for the
validity of the data. A further data validation effort was undertaken
during the preparation of this report. When exceedances were identified,
the agency which generated the data was asked to verify those data points.
For any data found to be inconsistent with the laboratory records,
including quality control records, the agency was asked to submit the
appropriate corrections to STORET. That procedure helps to ensure the
accuracy of the high concentrations included in this report. However, it
does not verify low values.
C. Water Uses
The designations of water bodies as "Class A", "Class B" or "Class C"
waters were obtained from the Iowa Code of State Regulations [4]. Infor-
mation on the location of drinking water intakes was obtained from the
Field Services Divison of IDWAWM. Appendix B contains the list of surface
drinking water intakes.
D. Potential Sources of Pollution
The requests for information on potential pollution sources were coordinated
with the respective state programs, in order to ensure that the data used
were the most reliable data available.
The list of major point source dischargers (both municipal and industrial)
was obtained from the EPA Region VII Water Compliance Branch. Their data
source was the Permit Compliance System (PCS). Latitudes and longitudes
for those point sources were obtained from a Master City File Directory,
which lists the latitudes and longitudes of cities in Iowa, or where
available, from more precise plant locations stored in the EPA Industrial
Facilities Discharge file.
A list of hazardous waste sites was obtained from the EPA Region VII
Waste Management Branch. Their data source was the Emergency Response
and Remedial Information System (ERRIS). It includes all sites considered
to be active by the Superfund Section of that Branch.
22
-------
Appendix B of this report includes lists of major point sources and
hazardous waste sites.
V. STATE-WIDE OBSERVATIONS
A. Cyanide Monitoring
Comparison of the state water quality standards with the lists of pol-
lutants for which analyses were performed shows one discrepancy. Although
there is a Class B standard for total cyanide, that parameter is not
included in the fixed station monitoring. We recommend that, in order for
the standard to be meaningful, the state develop a means of monitoring
compliance with the standard.
B. Overall Monitoring Network Coverage
Review of the monitoring network (Tables DM-1, IC-1, etc. in the next
section) shows that the fixed station network includes areas designated
as Class A, Class B(W) and Class C, but does not include any cold water
fisheries. We recommend that the state consider adding at least one
station in such an area in order to verify, on a routine basis, that
those standards are being met.
C. Mercury
The tables of state standard violations in the following section show
mercury concentrations exceeding the Class B standard at various stations
operated by various agencies. The question of the extent of the presence
of mercury in the state (in terms of both geography and concentration
levels) is compounded by the fact that the standard is below the detection
limit for many of the analyses reported, and many of those analyses
reported concentrations "less than" the detection limit. There is no
definitive answer to the question; "Does a value reported as 'less than
1.0 ug/1' exceed .05 ug/1?" Therefore, the full extent of mercury contam-
ination is unknown.
The IDWAWM is examining the current and historical mercury data, including
detection limits, in order to assess the extent of the possible problem.
Most mercury data reported by the UHL through 1983 had a detection limit
of 1.0 ug/1. Beginning in 1984, the detection limit was lowered to the
level of the standard, 0.05 ug/1. That lower detection limit is an
essential step in resolving the questions.
D. Bacteriological Monitoring
Fecal coliform concentrations state-wide exceed the Iowa Class A and
Class B standards on a routine basis. Since those exceedances occurred
both upstream and downstream of wastewater treatment plants and in
isolated areas, the concentrations are caused by both point sources and
non-point sources. With the predominance of agriculture in the State,
agricultural non-point source pollution is an area of continuing concern.
23
-------
E. Nitrates
Nitrate concentrations above the Iowa Class C standard of 10 mg/1 as
nitrogen have been observed over large areas, especially in the Des
Moines and Iowa-Cedar River Basins. The source of the nitrate is
primarily agricultural. Given the large geographical extent of the
problem and the increasing trends in observed concentrations, nitrates
pose a source of continuing concern in Iowa.
F. Metals Data Comparability
Metals data from different agencies in Iowa are produced by different
analytical procedures. The USGS reports both "dissolved" metals and "total"
metals. Their procedure for "total" metals includes acid digestion as the
first step, which is consistent with the EPA approved methods.
The state standards, as found in the State Regulations [1] do not specify
an analytical procedure, but are interpreted by WAWM to refer to "total"
metals. The national criteria are based on total recoverable metals
concentrations, which include a digestion step.
In the comparisons of the USGS data with the state standards and national
criteria, both dissolved and total concentrations were included, for the
following reason. The "dissolved" concentration is, by definition, less
than or equal to the "total" concentration. Therefore, if the "dissolved"
concentration exceeds a standard or criterion which is based on "total"
concentration, an exceedance of the standard or criterion is confirmed.
Metals data produced by the UHL and reported to STORET by WAWM do not
include a digestion step. However, the data are reported as "total" metals
under the same STORET parameter codes as the digested data from other
agencies. WAWM's rationale for using the undigested procedure is that it
would better approximate the biologically available metals than would the
digested procedure.
However, since the national criteria, the data from other agencies and
(possibly) the state standards are based on the digested procedure, data
comparability for metals bears examination. As part of that examination,
WAWM should consider storing the metals data under a parameter code which
specifies undigested analyses.
VI. Basin Descriptions
A. Format Overview for Basin Tables and Maps
A consistent format is used for presentation of information on monitor
locations, point sources, drinking water intakes, hazardous waste sites,
and locations where water quality standards or criteria were exceeded.
In each basin, the first figure (Figure DM-1, Figure IC-1, etc.) shows
the locations of fixed station monitors. The symbols on those maps
are keyed to map numbers shown in the first table (Table DM-1, Table
24
-------
IC-1, Table SK-1, etc.). Those tables also include the STORE! station
number, location, parameter coverage, sampling frequency, and purpose
for each station. While the tables include USGS Fluvial Sediment
stations (for completeness of flow information), those stations are
not shown on the maps because they provide no chemical or biological
data.
The second figure for each basin (Figure DM-2, IC-2, etc) shows major
point sources, keyed to the point source table of Appendix B. Drinking
Water Intakes are shown in the third figure (DM-3, etc) and are keyed to
the list of surface water supplies in Appendix B. Hazardous waste disposal
sites are shown in the fourth table (DM-4, etc) and are keyed to the
hazardous waste site list in Appendix B.
The next three tables in each basin (Tables DM-2, DM-3 and DM-4, etc)
list the violations of state Class A, Class B and Class C standards,
respectively, observed at the fixed station monitoring network sites.
The next three figures (DM-5, DM-6 and DM-7, etc) display the locations
and the pollutants for which the pollution severity was evaluated as
major, minor and unknown, respectively, relative to those state standards.
The final two tables for each basin (Table DM-5 and DM-6, etc) list the
exceedances of the lowest aquatic life criteria and the lowest health
criteria, respectively. As noted in section III.B above, evaluation of the
data relative to these national criteria is include here as a way to estimate
conditions in Iowa relative to the "Fishable, Swimmable" goals of the Clean
Water Act.
The final three figures for each basin (Figures DM-8, DM-9 and DM-10,
etc.), display the pollutants which exceeded the lowest national criteria
with pollution seventies of major, minor and unknown, respectively.
To determine the "Lowest Aquatic Life Criteria", three possible criteria
were compared, and the lowest selected.
°The Aquatic Life 24-hour Average criteria from the criteria documents
(White Books),[5]
°The Aquatic Life Anytime Criteria from those same documents,
°Any Aquatic Life Criteria from the 1976 publication "Quality Criteria
for Water" [3] which have not been superceeded by more recent criteria.
In most cases, the Aquatic Life 24-hour Average Criteria were the lowest.
Tables DM-5, IC-5, etc. show a number of exceedances of those criteria.
For comparison, the data were also compared with the Aquatic Life-Anytime
criteria, and very few samples state-wide were found to exceed those
criteria. Since all of the fixed monitoring station data were grab
samples, comparison with those "Anytime" criteria might seem more
appropriate than using the "24-hour Average" criteria. However, since
the sampling frequency for most stations is monthly or quarterly, the
implicit assumption of the network design is that each grab sample
represents a long period of time. Therefore, the comparison with the
longer-term average criteria is presented.
25
-------
To determine the "Lowest Health Criteria", the following criteria were
compared, and the lowest selected:
0 Human Health Criteria (White Book) for non-carcinogens
0 Human Health 10"53 risk levels (White Book) for carcinogens, based on
consumption of both fish and water
0 Human Health Red Book criteria which have not been superceeded
0 Primary Drinking Water Standards
The comparison with these lowest aquatic life and lowest health criteria
addresses the question: "What is the status of water quality relative
to "pristine water" or "would water quality fully support the fishable
and swimmable goals of the Clean Water Act?" By contrast, the com-
parison with State Standards addressed the question "Does the water
quality support the water uses designated by the State?" As a result,
there are more exceedances of the national criteria than of the State
standards. The differences are discussed in the observations below.
0 Arsenic - The national evaluation criterion (0.22 ug/1) is based
on the 10-5 risk level, assuming the non-threshold theory of carcinogenesis
By contrast, the State Class B and C standards (100 ug/1 and 50 ug/1,
respectively), are based on thresholds of acute and chronic toxicity for
arsenic.
0 Un-ionized ammonia - While the State ammonia standards are based
on total ammonia, and vary according to the time of year and the type of
fishery, (warm water or cold water), the national criterion is based on
the un-ionized ammonia concentration, and is calculated from the pH,
the temperature and the total ammonia concentration for each sample.
0 Cadmium - The national aquatic life criterion for cadmium, based
on a 24-hour coverage, is given by the formula el-1-05 IrnhardnessJ-S.SS].
At hardness values of 100 mg/1 and 200 mg/1, respectively, the corres-
ponding criteria are .025 ug/1 and .051 ug/1. By contrast, the Class B
State standard is 10 mg/1 in warm-water fisheries, and 1.2 ug/1 in
cold-water fisheries. As noted above, the fixed station monitoring
network includes no stations in cold-water fisheries.
0 Total Chlorine Residual - The National Aquatic Life Criterion
(Red Book) is currently .01 mg/1 (10 ug/1). The September 1983 draft
Section 304 criteria document for chlorine recommended a total residual
chlorine (TRC) criterion of 8.3 ug/1, 30-day average, to protect
freshwater aquatic life. Therefore, all chlorine exceedances shown in
tables, and possibly other measured concentrations, would also exceed the
new criterion. The current criterion was exceeded at each station which
includes TRC monitoring. Pollution severity was evaluated as "major" at
both stations which meet the data completeness criteria. The issue of
the significance of those exceedances is clouded by the methodology used
to measure chlorine concentrations. The analyses were performed using a
field kit, which is usually not calibrated by the laboratory prior to
use. Therefore, the significance is not known. The DHL is researching
methods which might reliably measure TRC concentrations at or below the
criterion.
26
-------
B. NORTHEASTERN IOWA RIVER BASINS
Much of the northeastern basin is characterized by Karst topography.
Because of that geology, there is extensive and rapid contact between
ground water and surface water. All of the major cities in the basin are
located on the Mississippi River. Land use in the basin is primarily
agricultural, and no major reservoirs have been constructed.
The basin includes a large number of cold water fisheries. The Mississippi
River and the larger interior rivers (the Turkey River and the Maquoketa
River) are designated for full body contact recreation. The only drinking
water intake on a river in the basin is on the Mississippi River at
Davenport.
The maps and tables provide information on monitoring data, drinking
water intakes and potential sources of pollution.
The following observations further summarize that information:
0 The Class A and Class B fecal coliform standards were exceeded at all
stations where microbiological monitoring was performed. The mean
concentrations and the percentage of exceedances were highest at two
stations - the Mississippi River downstream of Davenport and the Maquoketa
River at Maquoketa. The large difference between the upstream and
downstream stations at Davenport highlights the impact of the city on
bacterial levels in the river. The probable cause of the elevated
concentrations is the Davenport wastewater treatment plant, which has
experienced problems with its wastewater disinfection equipment. At
Maquoketa, the cause of the high concentrations could be either the
Maquoketa STP (which is classed as a minor discharger) or non-point-source
pollution.
0 Mercury concentrations in two locations (Maquoketa R-Maquoketa and
Wapsipinicon R-DeWitt) exceeded the Class B standard more than once.
Because the total number of samples was less than the number of samples
necessary to meet the data completeness requirement, the pollution severity
is unknown. Continued sampling for mercury should be given high priority,
and mercury concentrations should be re-evaluated when the larger data
base is available.
0 Total cyanide concentrations exceeded the Class B standard at the one
location in the basin which includes cyanide monitoring (Mississippi
River at Clinton). Because the number of samples collected was small,
the pollution severity is unknown.
0 Concentrations of copper, cadmium, and iron exceeded the lowest aquatic
life criteria in 40 to 90% of the samples taken in the Mississippi River
at Clinton. The cadmium and iron concentrations exceeded the aquatic
life anytime criteria. Upstream, at Winona, MN, the copper concentrations
exceeded the 24-hour average criteria. While non-point or natural sources
probably account for most of the observed metals concentrations, there
may be some point source contribution at Clinton.
27
-------
0 Un-ionized ammonia concentrations downstream of Davenport exceeded the
aquatic life 24-hour average criterion in 30% of the samples collected.
The wastewater treatment plant is the probable source.
0 Arsenic concentrations exceeded the Human Health 10~5 risk level in
most samples collected at the two locations where arsenic monitoring is
performed-the Mississippi River at Winona, MN and at Clinton. Similar
concentrations are observed in other basins and are likely due to
argicultural pesticides or to natural occurrence in soils.
28
-------
TABLE NE-1. WATER QUALITY MONITORING FIXED STATION NETWORK
NORTHEASTERN BASIN
ro
10
MAP~1
NO.
1
2 ^
T~
T~
5
IT
7"
F~
9
TO"
19
AGENCY
uses
UHL
USGS
UHL
UHL
USGS
ILL. EPA
UHL
UHL
UHL
UHL
STORET NO.
05378500
821131
05389500
250221
290200
05420500
M04 .<
443023
140690
100531
443704
LOCATION
Mississippi R - Wlnona, Minn.
Upper Iowa R - Dorchester
Mississippi R - McGregor
Turkey R - Garber
Maquoketa R - Maquoketa
Mississippi R - Clinton
Mississippi R - Clinton
Wapsipinlcon R - De Witt
Mississippi R - Upstream Davenport
Mississippi R - Downstream Davenport
Wapsiplnicon R - Independence
PURPOSE*
WES
BG, MMS
FS
MMS
MMS
DM
UM
MMS
UM, US
DM
BG
FLOW
MEASUREMENTS
Y
Y
V
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
FREQUENCY
Quarterly
Monthly
Annual
Daily
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Every 6 wks.
Every 6 mos.
Annual
Annual
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
PARAMETERS **
C N Me Ml
C N Mb Mi 0
Me 0 P (Fish
Flesh)
S
C N Mb Me Mi 0 '
Me Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0 '
Me Mi
C N Me Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0
0 P
B
C N Me Mi 0 P
(Sediment)
0 P (Fish)
C N Mb Me Mi 0 '
Me Mi
C N Mb Me Ml 0
Me Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0 "
Me Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
DESIGNATED
WATER USES***
A. B(W)
A. B(W)
A. B(W)
B(W)
A. B(W)
A. B(W)
A. B(W)
B(WJ
A, B(W), C
A, B(W)
B(W)
* Purposes
UM Upstream of Municipality
DM Downstream of Municipality
UI Upstream of Impoundment
DI Downstream of Impoundment
L In-Lake Water Quality
BG Background "Natural" Water
Quality
WS Water Quality at Water
Supply Intake
R Recovery from Major Discharge
** Parameters *** Water Use Classifications
UD Upstream of Major Discharges
DD Downstream of Major Discharges'
UPP Upstream of Power Plant
DPP Downstream of Power Plant
MMS Mouth of Major Stream
WES Water Quality Entering the State
WLS Water Quality Leaving the State
FS Fluvial Sediment
B Biological
C Conventional
N Nutrients
Mb Microbiological
Me Metals
Mi Minerals/Physical
Analyses
0 Organics (other than
pesticides)
P Pesticides A Primary Contact
R Radiochemical B(W) Wildlife A Aquatic Life
S Sediment and . warm Water
Conductance B(C) Wildlife A Aquatic Life
- Cold Water
C Water Supply
-------
PJ96 No.
09/19/85
HAP STORE!
HO. NO.
2 821131
5 290200
6 05420500
9 140690
10 100531
1
AGCY
UHL
UHL
USG8
UHL
UHL
TABLE NE-2 SUMMARY OF EXCEEOANCES OF IOUA CLASS A STANDARDS
NORTHEASTERN IOUA RIVER BASINS
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/84
LOCATION
UPPER IOUA R - DORCHESTER
HAOUOKETA R - MAQUOKETA
MISSISSIPPI R - CLINTON
MISSISSIPPI R-UPSTH DAVENPORT
HISS. R - OUNSTRH DAVENPORT
PARA-
METER
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
NO.
OBS
20
8
3
9
8
NO,
EXC
11
7
1
5
8
PCI
EXC
55
88
33
56
100
CRIT-
ERIA
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
MIN
EXC
MEAN
EXC
260.000 2190.000
380.000 13644.300
6300.000 6300.000
270.000 3370.000
260.000 21370.000
HIN
OBS
MEAN
OBS
0.000 1258.900
0.000 11953.700
0.000 2118.000
0.000 1916.700
260.000 21370.000
MAX SEV-
OBS ERItr
6400.000 MAJOR
37000.000 MAJOR
6300.000 UNKNOWN
14000.000 MAJOR
50000.000 MAJOR
CO
O
-------
Page No.
09/19/85
HAP STORE!
NO. NO.
TABLE NE-3 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANGES OF IOHA CLASS B STANDARDS
NORTHEASTERN IOUA RIUER BASINS
REPORTING PERIOD: IO/OI/BI THROUGH 09/30/84
AGCY
LOCATION
1 OS37BSOO USGS MISSISSIPPI R - UINONA, MINN.
2 821131 UHL UPPER IOUA R - DORCHESTER
4 250221
5 290200
6 05420500
443023
140690
10 100531
19 443704
UHL TURKEY R - GARBER
UHL HAOUOKETA R - HAOUOKETA
USGS MISSISSIPPI R - CLINTON
UHL HAPSIPINICON R - DE UITT
UHL MISSISSIPPI R-UPSTRH DAVENPORT
UHL HISS. R - DUNSTRH DAVENPORT
UHL UAPSIPINICON R - INDEPENDENCE
PARA-
METER
CU
NH3
FCOLI
PH,F
FCOLI
FCOLI
HG
IOTCN
DISCD
CD
FCOLI
FCOLI
HG
FCOLI
HG
FCOLI
FCOLI
NO.
DBS
4
20
20
10
7
8
8
5
15
10
3
9
7
9
7
8
8
NO. PCT
EXC EXC
1 29
1 5
3 15
1 10
5 71
3 37
2 25
2 40
1 7
1 10
1 33
1 11
2 29
1 11
1 14
5 63
2 25
CRIT-
ERIA
20.000
2.000
2000.000
6.500
2000.000
2000.000
0.050
0.005
10.000
10.000
2000.000
2000.000
0.050
2000.000
0.050
2000.000
2000.000
HIN
EXC
23.000
2.800
4500.000
6.000
4400.000
22000.000
0.140
0.010
14.000
20.000
6300.000
2100.000
0.060
14000.000
0.090
6700.000
12000.000
23
2
5700
6
34354
30667
0
0
14
20
6300
2100
0
14000
0
31340
30000
MEAN
EXC
.000
.800
.000
.000
.000
.000
.495
.010
.000
.000
.000
.000
.110
.000
.090
.000
.000
HIN
DBS
6.000
0.000
0.000
6.000
280 .,000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
260.000
0.000
HEAN
DBS
11.500
0.183
1243.900
7.790
26037.143
11953.700
0.124
0.004
1.067
4.400
2100.000
474.444
0.031
1913.333
0.013
21370.000
7713.000
23
2
6400
8
150000
37000
0
0
14
20
6300
2100
0
14000
0
50000
48000
MAX
OBS
.000
.800
.000
.750
.000
.000
.850
.010
.000
.000
.000
.000
.160
.000
.090
.000
.000
SEV-
ERITY
UNKNOWN
HIHOR
H1NOR
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MINOR
UNKNOUN
HINOR
UNKNOUN1
MAJOR :
UNKNOUN1
-------
Page No. 1
09/19/85
TABLE NE-4 SUHHARY OF EXCECDANCES OF IQUA CLASS C STANDARDS
NORTHEASTERN IOUA RIVER BASINS
REPORTING PERIOD: lo/oi/ai THROUGH 09/30/34
HAP STORET AGCY LOCATION PARA- NO. NO. PCT CRIT- HIN HEAN HIN MEAN HAX SEV-
NO. NO. METER OBS EXC EXC ERIA EXC EXC DBS OBS DBS ERIIY
CO
ro
-------
GO
U)
Page No.
09/19/85
HAP STORE!
NO. NO.
TABLE NE-5 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF LOWEST HEALTH CRITERIA
NORTHEASTERN BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/84
AGCY
LOCATION
1 05378500 USGS MISSISSIPPI R - UINONA, NINN.
2 821131
4 250221
5 290200
UHL
UHL
UPPER IOUA R - DORCHESTER
TURKEY R - GARBER
UHL HAOUOKEIA R - MAQUOKETA
6 05420500 USGS MISSISSIPPI R - CLINTON
8 443023 UHL UAPSIPINICON R - OE UIIT
9 140690 UHL MISSISSIPPI R-UPSTH DAVENPORT
10 100531 UHL MISS. R - DUNSTRH DAVENPORT
19 443704 UHL UAPSIPINICON R - INDEPENDENCE
PARA-
MEIER
DISAS
AS
FCOLI
FCOLI
HI
FCOLI
AS
HG
FCOLI
HG
DISAS
AS
OISCD
BE
CD
FCOLI
FCOLI
DIS8E
N03
HG
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
NO.
DBS
12
4
10
35
2
11
e
8
14
8
10
9
IS
6
10
4
10
11
13
7
13
11
11
15
IS
NO.
EXC
12
4
1
19
1
11
1
1
11
1
7
6
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
8
7
10
1
4
PCI
EXC
100
100
10
54
SO
100
13
13
79
13
70
67
7
17
10
50
10
9
IS
14
62
64
91
7
27
CRII-
ERIA
0.022
0.022
200.000
200.000
13.400
200.000
0.022
0.144
aoo.ooo
0.144
0.022
0.022
10.000
0.068
10.000
200.000
200.000
0.068
10.000
0.144
200.000
200.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
MIN
EXC
1.000
1.000
740.000
240.000
100.000
280.000
10.000
0.850
340.000
O.B50
1.000
1.000
14.000
2.000
20.000
420.000
720.000
3.000
11.000
0.160
220.000
270.000
260.000
11.000
900.000
MEAN
EXC
1.583
1.75.0
740.000
1764.000
100.000
16774.545
10.000
O.B50
5820.000
0.850
1.429
1.667
14.000
2.000
20.000
3360.000
720.000
3.000
11.500
0.160
720.000
4192.000
27196.000
11.000
15576.000
HIM
OBS
1.000
1.000
0.000
0.000
O^OOO
280.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
o.ooo
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.800
0.000
1
1
115
9B8
so
16774
1
0
4582
0
1
1
1
0
4
1680
87
0
6
0
466
2701
24723
5
4211
HEAN
DBS
.583
.750
.900
.171
.000
.545
.250
.124
.143
.124
.000
.111
.067
.333
.400
.000
.000
.273
.069
.031
.154
.818
.636
.160
.333
MAX
OBS
3.000
3.000
740.000
6400.000
100.000
150000.000
10.000
0.850
37000.000
0.850
3.000
2.000
14.000
2.000
20.000
6300.000
720.000
3.000
12.000
0.160
2100.000
14000.000
S6000.000
11.000
48000.000
SEV-
ERITY
MAJOR
UNKNOWN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MINOR
MINOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
-------
CO
Page No.
09/19/85
MAP SIOREI
NO. NO.
TABLE NE-6 SUMMARY Of EXCEEDANCES OF LOWEST AQUATIC LIFE
CRITERIA - NORTHEASTERN BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/84
(A INDICATES AVERAGE OF CALCULATED HARDNESS-DEPENDENT CDII)
AGCY
LOCATION
1 05378500 USGS MISSISSIPPI R - UINONA, HINN. DISCO
4 250221 UHL TURKEY R - GARBER
290200
UHL NAOUOKETA R - HAOUOKETA
6 05420500 USGS MISSISSIPPI R - CLINTON
8 443023 UHL UAPSIPINICON R - DE Will
10 100531 UHL MISS. R - DUNSIRM DAVENPORT U-NH3
19 443704 UHL UAPSIPINICON R - INDEPENDENCE U-NH3
PARA-
METER
DISCO
CD
OISCU
CU
PB
PH,F
U-NH3
ZN
U-NH3
CU
ZN
HO
DISCO
CO
CU
IRON
PB
CU
U-NH3
ZN
TCL K
U-NH3
ZN
NO.
DBS
12
4
11
4
4
10
11
11
13
8
14
8
IS
10
10
10
10
7
10
10
1
14
14
NO.
EXC
1
2
2
2
2
3
1
2
6
4
9
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
PCI
EXC
8
SO
36
100
25
10
9
18
IS
25
21
13
13
60
40
90
10
14
30
10
100
7
7
CRIT-
ERIA
0.04 A
0.04 A
5.60
5.60
12.58 A
6.50
0.02
47.00
0.02
5.60
47.00
0.20
0.04 A
0.04 A
S.60
1000.00
12.69 A
5.60
0.02
47.00
0.01
0.02
47.00
HIN
EXC
1.000
1.000
6.000
6.000
25.000
6.000
0.021
50.000
0.025
10.000
50.000
0.850
2.000
2.000
7.000
1026.000
13.000
10.000
0.033
60.000
0.100
0.025
60.000
MEAN
EXC
1.000
1.026
8.000
11.500
25.000
6.000
0.021
49.800
0.064
15.000
53.100
0.850
7.225
7.386
7.500
2600.000
13.000
10.000
0.057
60.000
0.100
0.025
60.000
HIN
DBS
0.000
0.000
1.000
6.000
6.000
6.600
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
880.000
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.100
0.000
0.000
0
0
4
11
12
7
0
- 20
0
3
26
0
1
4
4
2430
2
1
0
10
0
0
17
HEAN
DBS
.083
.500
.182
.500
.750
.790
.004
.909
.011
.750
.429
.124
.067
.400
.600
.100
.700
.429
.020
.000
.100
.003
.114
MAX
DBS
1.000
1.000
11.000
23.000
25.000
8.750
0.021
50.000
0.103
20.000
60.000
0.850
14.000
20.000
8.000
7242.000
13.000
10.000
0.103
60.000
0.100
0.025
60.000
SEV-
ERITY
MINOR
UNKNOt»
MAJOR
UNKNQUf
UNKNOUt
N1NOR
MINOR
MINOR
UNKNOUt
MINOR
UNKNOUh
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
UNKNOUC
MAJOR
UNKNOUt
-------
i
IGURE NE-1. FIXED STflTION MONITORING NETWORK
NORTHERSTERN RIVER BflSIN
-925200
410300
LEGEND
O UHL
AUSGS
-H OTHER
440200 +
Clinton
Davenport
-893800.*.
N
0
MILES
22
44
-------
rIGURE NE-2. MflJOR POINT SOURCES - NORTH ERSTERN BRSIN
I
+-925200
410300
LEGEND
1 MRJOR INDUSTRIRLS
y MflJOR MUNICIPflLS
N
MILES
I
0
I J
440200 + I
893800+
22
44
-------
HGURE NE-3. DRINKING WflTER INTflKES
NORTHERSTERN BRSIN
-325200
440200 +
+ 410300
-893800+
MILES
0
22
N
44
-------
r
HGURE NE-4. HflZflRDQUS NRSTE SITES - NORTHERSTERN BflSIN
i
+-925200
+410300
IP
440200
Clinton
Davenport
-893800
N
MILES
0
22
-------
I
FIGURE NE-4R. HflZRRDOUS WflSTE SITES INSET
CLINTON - DflVENPORT RREfl
-903800
L/L.
H
31
L39
}'
I
//
415500
^
\
H
60
N.
+44800
-900000+
0
MILES
N
10
-------
FIGURE NE-5. VIOLflTIONS OF IONR STRTE NRTER QUflLITY
STRNDRRDS - NORTHERSTERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MRJOR
-925200 440200
1
+ 410300
-893800+
N
3
a
§
MILES
0 22
t
44
-------
^IGURE NE-6. VIOLflTIONS OF IONR STRTE NflTER QUflLITY
STRNDRRDS - NORTHERSTERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MINOR
-925200 440200
+410300
MILES
893800+
N
0
22
44
-------
f
I
rIGURE NE-7. VIOLRTIONS OF IOWR STRTE WRTER QURLITY
STRNDRRDS - NORTHERSTERN RIVER BRSIM
POLLUTION SEVERITY: UNKNOWN
-925200 440200 +
410300
-893800
4- i
10
MILES
0
22
N
44
[
-------
FIGURE NE-S. EXCEDRNCES OF LOWEST NRTIONRL WRTER
QURLITY CRITERIR - NORTHERSTERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MRJOR
-925200 440200 .,
RS,CU
i
₯
8
+410300
-893800+
N
MILES
0
22
44
-------
PJ
O)
I
2
rIGURE NE-9. EXCEDRNCES OF LONE5T NflTIONflL NflTER
QUnLITY CRITERIR - NORTHEflSTERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MINOR
925200 440200
+410300
-893800+
N
MILES
0
22
-------
I
nIGURE NE-10. EXCEDRNCES OF LONEST NflTIONRl WRTER
QURLITY CRITERIR - NORTHERSTERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: UNKNOWN
+-925200 440200 +
+410300
-893800+
MILES
N
A
0
22
-------
C. IOWA-CEDAR RIVER BASINS
The Iowa-Cedar River Basins are located in east-central Iowa. While most
of the land use is agricultural, the basin includes three cities with
populations over 50,000 (Cedar Rapids, Waterloo and Iowa City) and a
major reservoir (Coralvilie).
Designated water uses include cold-water fisheries on some of the smaller
northern streams, warm-water fisheries throughout the rest of the basin,
primary contact recreation in impoundments in the northern two-thirds of
the basin, and drinking water intakes for Iowa City, Cedar Rapids, and
Burlington.
The tables and figures summarize information on monitoring data, water
uses, and potential pollution sources. The following observations further
summarize that information.
0 Fecal coliform observations exceeded the Class A and Class B standards
at diverse locations in the basin. At most monitoring stations in Class A
waters, the standards were exceeded in over half of the observations.
0 Nitrate observations exceeded the Class C standard at each of the
stations in Class C waters. Comparison with lowest national health
criteria for nitrates showed exceedances throughout the basin. While the
pollution severity, determined from the 305(b) guidance, is "minor" in
most locations, the issue of nitrate concentrations is one of concern
because of the increasing trend in those levels in recent years. Upstream
and downstream of Marshalltown, the average concentrations were
close to the national health criterion.
0 Ammonia concentrations on the Shell rock River entering Iowa exceeded
the Iowa Class B standards in three samples. Calculated concentrations
for the un-ionized form of ammonia exceeded the national aquatic life
criteria in thirteen samples. The cause of those concentrations was
discharge of inadequately treated effluent into Albert Lea Lake from the
Albert Lea, Minnesota, wastewater treatment plant. Only one of those
exceedances occurred in 1984, after a new WWTP was completed. The states
of Iowa and Minnesota, in conjunction with EPA, Regions 5 and 7, are
documenting conditions before and after the new WWTP by means of intensive
surveys.
0 Exceedances of the pH standard were observed in one sample at each of
three locations (Cedar River upstream of Cedar Falls, Cedar River at
Gilbertville, and Iowa River upstream of Coralvilie Reservoir.)
0 Concentrations of copper and mercury exceeded the Class B standard in
some samples in the upper portion of the basin. (Iowa River at Wapello;
Cedar River at Austin, MN; and Cedar River upstream of Cedar Falls.)
The pollution severity is unknown because the total number of samples
analyzed for those metals was small. Continued sampling is needed so
that further evaluation of those metals concentrations can be performed
with a larger data base.
46
-------
0 Comparison of data for iron with the aquatic life anytime criterion,
and comparison of data for zinc with the aquatic life 24-hour average
criterion show numerous exceedances between Waterloo and Cedar Rapids.
The wide-spread occurrence of those concentrations would indicate an area
source or a naturally-occurring soil component.
0 Arsenic concentrations at six sites exceeded the Human Health 10~5 risk
level. While those exceedances occurred in diverse locations, a striking
increase in average concentrations (.54 to 14 ug/1) is noted going from
upstream to downstream of Charles City. That increase has been attributed
to disposal of large quantities of arsenic in a landfill on the banks of
the Cedar River.
47
-------
EABUB IC-1. WATER QUALITY MONITORING FIXED STATION NETWORK
IOWA - CEDAR RIVER BASIN
MAP
NO.
11
12
~ZO
s.
o
22
23
24
25
AGENCY
UHL
USGS
MPCA
UHL
UHL
UHL
UHL
EA.Inc.
STORET NO.
320350
05465500
CD- 10
325091
325079
32505A
324097
324015
LOCATION
Iowa R - Wapello
Iowa R - Wapello
Cedar R - Austin, Minnesota
Cedar R - Upstream Charles City
Cedar R - Downstream Charles City
Cedar R - Upstream Cedar Falls
Cedar R - Gilbertville
Cedar R -Upstreamm DAEC
PURPOSE*
UM
DM.FS.MMS
WES, DM
UM.UD
DM. DO
UM
DM
UPP
FLOW
MEASUREMENTS
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
FREQUENCY
Quarterly
Annual
Bi -Monthly
Quarterly
Daily
Monthly (Ex-
cept Nov.
Dec, Feb)
Monthly
Annual
Monthly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
2 per month
3 per year
2 per summer
PARAMETERS**
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
C N Mi
C N Me Mi
S
C N Kb Mi
C N Kb Ml 0 As
Me 0 P (Fish)
C N Mb Mi 0 As
As
Me 0 P (Fish)
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
C N Kb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0
B C N Mb Me Mi 0
(more extensive)
Diurnal DO
DESIGNATED
WATER USES***
B(W)
B(W)
B(W)
A. B(W)
B(W)
B(W)
B(W)
A. B(W)
* Purposes
UM Upstream of Municipality
DM Downstream of Municipality
UI Upstream of Impoundment
DI Downstream of Impoundment
L In-Lake Water Quality
BG Background "Natural" Water
Quality
WS Water Quality at Water
Supply Intake
R Recovery from Major Discharge
UD Upstream of Major Discharges
DD Downstream of Major Discharges
UPP Upstream of Power Plant
DPP Downstream of Power Plant
MMS Mouth of Major Stream
WES Water Quality Entering the State
WLS Water Quality Leaving the State
FS Fluvial Sediment
B Biological P
C Conventional R
N Nutrients S
Mb Microbiological
Me Metals As
Mi Minerals/Physical
Analyses
other than
Parameters *** Water Use Classifications
Pesticides A Primary Contact
Radiochemical B(W) Wildlife & Aquatic Life
Sediment and - Warm Water
Conductance B(C) Wildlife & Aquatic Life
Arsenic - Cold Water
C Water Supply
-------
WATER QUALITY MONITORING FIXED STATION NETWORK
IOWA - CEDAR RIVER BASIN (cont.)
IO
MAP
NO.
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
AGENCY
EA.Inc.
EA.Inc.
EA.Inc.
UHL
MPCA
UHL
UHL
UHL
UHL
STORET NO.
324028
324030
324035
324042
SR-1.5
32540W
350961
340450
340520
LOCATION
Cedar R - Upstream DAEC discharge
Cedar R - Downstream DAEC discharge
Cedar R - Upstream Cedar Rapids
Cedar R - Downstream Cedar Rapids
Shellrock R - Gordonville, Minnesota
Shell rock R - Upstream Northwood
Iowa R - Belmond
Iowa R - Upstream Marshal Itown
Iowa R - Downstream Marshal Itown
PURPOSE*
UPP
DPP
DPP.UM
DM
UD
WES.OD
BG
UM
DM
FLOW
MEASUREMENTS
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
FREQUENCY
2 per month
3 per year
2 per summer
2 per month
3 per year
2 per summer
2 per month
3 per year
2 per summer
Quarterly
Annual
Monthly (Ex-
cept Nov,
Dec, Feb)
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
PARAMETERS**
C N Mb Me Mi 0
B C N Mb Me Mi 0
(more extensive)
Diurnal DO
C N Mb Me Mi 0
B C N Mb Me Mi 0
(more extensive)
Diurnal DO
C N Mb Me Mi 0
B C N Mb Me Mi 0
(more extensive)
Diurnal DO
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
C N Mb Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
DESIGNATED
WATER USES***
A B(W)
A, B(W)
A, B(W), C
B(W), C
A, B(W)
A, B(W)
B(W)
B(W)
B(W)
* Purposes
UM Upstream of Municipality
DM Downstream of Municipality
Ul Upstream of Impoundment
DI Downstream of Impoundment
L In-Lake Water Quality
BG Background "Natural" Water
Quality
WS Water Quality at Water
Supply Intake
R Recovery from Major Discharge
** Parameters
UD Upstream of Major Discharges
DD Downstream of Major Discharges
UPP Upstream of Power Plant
DPP Downstream of Power Plant
MMS Mouth of Major Stream
WES Water Quality Entering the State
WLS Water Quality Leaving the State
FS Fluvial Sediment
B Biological
C Conventional
N Nutrients
Mb Microbiological
Me Metals
Mi Minerals/Physical
Analyses
0 Orgaoics (other than
pesticides)
P
R
S
Pesticides
Radiochemical
Sediment and
Conductance
*** Water Use Classifications
A Primary Contact
B(W) Wildlife « Aquatic Life
- Warm Water
B(C) Wildlife * Aquatic Life
- Cold Water
C Water Supply
-------
WATER QUALITY MONITORING FIXED STATION NETWORK
IOWA - CEDAR RIVER BASIN (cont.)
01
o
MAP
NO.
35
36
37
38
39
~TO~
Tl
AGENCY
UI
UI
UI
UI
uses
uses
UHL
STORET NO.
330615
L00432
330270
330100
05454500
05455000
320847
LOCATION
Iowa R - Upstream Coralvllle Res.
Coralvllle Reservlor - Inlake
Iowa R - Downstream Dam
Iowa R - Iowa City
Iowa R - Iowa City
Ralston Cr - Iowa City
Iowa R - Lone Tree
PURPOSE*
UI
L
DI.UM
DO
FS
FS
DM
FLOW
MEASUREMENTS
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
FREQUENCY
Monthly
(More often
Apr-Sept)
Annual
Monthly
(More often
Apr-Sept)
Annual
Monthly
(More often
Apr-Sept)
Annual
Monthly
(More often
Apr-Sept)
Annual
Daily
Daily
Quarterly
Annual
PARAMETERS**
B C N Mb Mi
0 P (Fish)
B C N M
0 P (Fish)
B C N Mb Mi
0 P (Fish)
B C N Mb Mi
0 P (Fish)
S
S
C N Mb He Ml 0
Me Mi
DESIGNATED
WATER USES***
B(W)
A, B(W)
B(W)
B(W), C
B((W), C
B(W)
* Purposes
UM Upstream of Municipality
DM Downstream of Municipality
UI Upstream of Impoundment
DI Downstream of Impoundment
L In-Lake Water Quality
BG Background "Natural" Water
Quality
WS Water Quality at Water
Supply Intake
R Recovery from Major Discharge
** Parameters *** Water Use Classifications
UD Upstream of Major Discharges
DD Downstream of Major Discharges
UPP Upstream of Power Plant
DPP Downstream of Power Plant
MMS Mouth of Major Stream
WES Water Quality Entering the State
WLS Water Quality Leaving the State
FS Fluvial Sediment
B Biological
C Conventional
N Nutrients
Mb Microbiological
Me Metals
Mi Minerals/Physical
Analyses
0 Organics (other than
pesticides)
P Pesticides A Primary Contact
R Radiochemical B(W) Wildlife & Aquatic Life
S Sediment and - Warm Water
Conductance B(C) Wildlife * Aquatic Life
- Cold Water
C Water Supply
-------
Page No.
09/19/85
HAP STORE!
HO. NO.
21 325091
25 324015
26 324028
27 324030
28 324035
30 SR-1.5
31 32540U
36 L00432
TABLE IC-2 SUHMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF IOUA CLASS A STANDARDS
IOUA - CEDAI RIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: lo/oi/ai THROUGH 09/30/34
AGCY LOCATION
UHL CEDAR R-UPSTREAH CHARLES CITY
EAINC CEDAR R - UPSTREAH DAEC
EAINC CEDAR R - UPSTREAH DAEC DISCHG
EAINC CEDAR R-DOUNSTREAH DAEC DISCHG
EAINC CEDAR R-UPSTREAH CEDAR RAPIDS
HPCA SHELLROCK R-GORDONVILLE, HINN.
UHL SHELLROCK R-UPSIREAH NORTHUOOD
UI CORALVILLE RESERVIOR - INLAKE
PARA-
MEIER
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
NO.
DBS
20
12
12
12
11
21
7
49
NO.
EXC
11
6
6
8
4
12
5
13
PCT
EXC
55
50
50
67
36
57
71
27
CRIT-
ERIA
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
HIM
EXC
260.000
360.000
240.000
. 220.000
400.000
230.000
230.000
246.000
HCAN
EXC
1028.000
2310.000
1773.300
1615.000
2400.000
1315.000
688.000
1044.300
HIM
DBS
0.000
10.000
0.000
0.000
28.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
704
1203
925
1105
929
776
537
300
HEAN
DBS
.300
.800
.500
.000
.500
.200
.100
.600
HAX
DBS
4600.000
4900.000
5300.000
4500.000
4600.000
9200.000
2200.000
3400.000
SEV-
ERITY
HAJOR
MAJOR
HAJOR
MAJOR
HAJOR
HAJOR
HAJOR
HAJOR
-------
No.
09/19/85
en
rv>
TABLE IC-3 SUHMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF IOUA CLASS B STANDARDS
IOUA - CEDAR RIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/84
HAP STORE! AGCY LOCATION
NO. NO.
11 3203SO UHL IOUA R - UAPELLO
12 OS46SSOO USGS IOUA R - UAPELLO
20 CD-10 HPCA CEDAR R - AUSTIN, MINNESOTA
21 325091 UHL CEDAR R-UPSTREAH CHARLES CITY
22 325079 UHL CEDAR R-DUNSTREAH CHARLES CITY
23 32505A UHL CEDAR R - UPSTREAM CEDAR FALLS
24 324097 UHL CEDAR R - GILBERTSILLE
25 324015 EAINC CEDAR R - UPSTREAM DAEC
26 324028 EAINC CEDAR R - UPSTREAM DAEC DISCHG
27 324030 EAINC CEDAR R-DOUNSTREAH DAEC DISCHG
28 324035 EAINC CEDAR R-UPSTREAH CEDAR RAPIDS
29 324042 UHL CEDAR R-DUNSIREAH CEDAR RAPIDS
30 SR-1.5 HPCA SHELLROCK R-GORDONVILLE, HINN.
31 32540U UHL SHELLROCK R-UPSTREAN NORIHUOOD
J4 340520 UHL IOUA R-DOUNSTREAH MARSHALLIOUN
35 330615 UI IOUA R-UPSTREAH CORALVILLE RES
36 L00432 UI CORALVILLE RESERVIOR - INLAKE
37 330270 UI IOUA R-DOUNSTREAM DAH
38 330100 UI IOUA R - IOUA CITY
41 320897 UHL IOUA R - LONE TREE
PARA-
METER
HG
CU
DO
FCOLI
HG
FCOLI
FCOLI
PH.E
FCOLI
HG
PH,F
FCOLI
HG
FCOLI
FCOLI
NH3
FCOLI
FCOLI
DO
DO
NH3
NH3
FCOLI
DO
NH3
FCOLI
DO
PH,F
FCOLI
DO
FCOLI
FCOLI
DO
FCOLI
FCOLI
NO.
DBS
6
4
27
21
2
20
22
9
5
5
10
6
6
12
12
28
12
11
10
27
21
6
21
10
5
6
71
9
51
68
49
47
73
54
9
NO.
EXC
1
1
1
4
1
2
5
1
1
2
1
2
2
3
2
1
3
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
8
1
2
3
1
7
1
PCI
EXC
17
25
4
19
50
10
23
11
20
40
10
33
33
25
17
4
25
18
10
7
5
18
5
10
20
33
1
11
16
1
4
6
1
13
11
CRIT-
ERIA
0.05
20.00
4.00
2000.00
0.05
2000.00
2000.00
9.00
2000.00
0.05
6.50
2000.00
0.05
2000.00
2000.00
5.00
2000.00
2000.00
4.00
4.00
2.00
5.00
2000.00
4.00
5.00
2000.00
4.00
6.50
2000.00
4.00
2000.00
2000.00
4.00
2000.00
2000.00
HIN
EXC
0.180
24.000
3.100
2200.000
0.370
3500.000
2200.000
9.450
7200.000
0.060
9.150
2900.000
0.060
2500.000
2400.000
7.500
2200.000
3000.000
2.000
0.700
2.580
12.000
9200.000
1.800
5.100
2600.000
3.704
3.000
2100.000
3.700
3000.000
2300.000
3.000
2400.000
4100.000
MEAN
EXC
0.180
24.000
3.100
8460.000
0.370
4060.000
2960.000
9.450
7200.000
0.070
9.150
3940.000
0.080
3640.000
3840.000
7.500
3540.000
3800.000
2.000
1.000
. 2.580
12.000
9200.000
1.800
5.100
28800.000
3.704
3.000
7260.000
3.700
3200.000
3860.000
3.000
10740.000
4100.000
HIN
DBS
0.000
14.000
3.100
70.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
6.500
0.000
0.000
6.500
0.000
0.000
10.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
28.000
2.000
0.700
0.100
0.000
20.000
1.800
0.000
210.000
3.700
3.000
0.000
3.700
0.000
0.000
3.000
0.000
0.000
HEAN
OBS
0.030
19.500
8.463
1862.857
0.185
704.300
1162.273
8.189
1808.000
0.028
8.100
1578.333
0.027
1203.833
908.833
0.507
1096.667
929.455
10.600
9.078
0.530
'3.372
776.190
11.040
1.474
9881.667
8.639
7.589
1456.608
8.875
298.163
353.277
9.451
1544.796
1136.667
0.
24.
12.
17000.
0.
4600.
4300.
9.
7200.
0.
9.
5000.
0.
4900.
5300.
7.
4500.
4600.
17.
14.
2.
12.
9200.
14.
5.
55000.
16.
8.
16640.
16.
3400.
7000.
IS.
40000.
4100.
HAX
OBS
180
000
900
000
370
000
000
450
000
080
150
000
100
000
000
500
000
000
000
900
580
000
000
600
100
000
800
500
000
700
000
000
300
000
000
SEV-
ERITY
UNKNOUN
UNKNOWN
MINOR
UNKNOUN
HINOR
MINOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNQUN
HINOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
HINOR
HINOR
HINOR
HINOR
UNKNOUN
.
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
HINOR ;
HINOR
HINOR
-------
Pa-je No. 1
09/19/85
TABLE IC-4 SUMMARY OF EXCEEOANCES OF IOUA CLASS C STANDARDS
IOUA - CEDAR RIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/31 THROUGH 09/30/84
HAP STORE! AGCY LOCATION PARA- NO. NO. PCI CRII- HIM HEAN HIN MEAN HAX SEV-
NO. NO. HETER OBS EXC EXC ERIA EXC EXC DBS DBS OBS ERIIY
28 324035 EAINC CEDAR R-UPSTREAH CEDAR RAPIDS N03 60 8 13 10.16 10.300 13.100 2.100 7.68S 18.000 HINOR
29 324042 UHL CEDAR R-DUNSTREAH CEDAR RAPIDS N03 12 1 8 10.16 12.000 12.000 1.700 6.583 12.000
38 330100 UI IOUA R - IOWA CITY N03 63 5 8 10.16 10.200 11.500 1.700 6.569 15.000
en
CO
-------
Ul
-p.
Page No.
09/19/85
HAP STOREI
NO. NO.
11 320350
12 05465500
20 CD-10
21 325091
22 325079
23 32505A
24 324097
25 324015
26 324028
27 324030
28 324035
29 324042
30 SR-1.5
31 32540U
32 350961
33 340450
34 340520
35 330615
36 L00432
37 330270
^^^330100
^^20897
TABLE IC-5 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF LOUESI HEALTH CRITERIA
IOUA - CEDAR RIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/34
AGCY
LOCATION
UHL IOUA R - UAPELLO
USGS IOUA R - UAPELLO
HPCA CEDAR R - AUSTIN, MINNESOTA
UHL CEDAR R-UPSTREAM CHARLES CITY
UHL CEDAR R-DOUNSTREAM CHARLES CIV
UHL CEDAR R - UPSTREAM CEDAR FALLS
UHL CEDAR R - GILBERIVILLE
EAINC CEDAR R - UPSTREAM DAEC
EAINC CEDAR R - UPSTREAM DAEC DISCHG
EAINC CEDAR R-DOUNSTREAM DAEC DISCHO
EAINC CEDAR R-UPSTREAM CEDAR RAPIDS
UHL CEDAR R-DUNSTREAH CEDAR RAPIDS
MPCA SHELLROCK R-GORDONVILLE, MINN.
UHL SHELLROCK R-UPSIREAM NORTHUOOD
UHL IOUA R - BELHOND
UHL IOUA R - UPSTREAM HARSHALLTOUN
UHL IOUA R-DOUNSTREAN MARSHALLIOUN
UI IOUA R-UPSTREAM CORALVILLE RES
Ul CORALVILLE RESERVIOR - INLAKE
UI IOUA R-DOUNSTREAN DAM
UI IOUA R - IOUA CITY
UHL IOUA R - LONE TREE
PARA-
METER
FCOLI
HG
DISAS
AS
OISBE
NI
FCOLI
AS
FCOLI
HG
AS
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
AS
PH.F
FCOLI
PH,F
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
N02I3
AS
FCOLI
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
PH,F
(403
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
FCOLI
NO.
DBS
13
6
7
4
3
4
10
2
27
2
37
36
36
36
37
9
9
10
11
63
18
61
18
62
IB
60
IS
12
12
27
2
27
11
7
7
13
13
12
12
9
61
62
57
59
55
58
63
65
13
NO.
EXC
7
1
7
4
1
1
7
2
19
1
2
15
2
30
26
1
4
1
a
12
10
14
11
11
12
8
6
1
7
1
2
13
3
3
5
6
8
4
11
1
11
38
5
18
4
10
PCI
EXC
54
17
100
100
33
25
70
100
70
SO
5
42
6
83
70
11
44
10
73
19
56
23
61
18
67
13
40
8
58
4
100
48
27
43
71
46
62
33
92
11
18
61
9
31
7
17
1
CRIT-
ERIA
200.000
0.144
0.022
0.022
0.068
13.400
200.000
0.022
200.000
0.144
0.022
200.000
10.000
200.000
0.022
9.000
200.000
9.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
10.000
0.022
200.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
5.000
10.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
200.000
HIN
EXC
250.000
0.180
1.000
2.000
0.500
14.000
420.000
1.500
220.000
0.370
10.000
260.000
11.000
280.000.
10.000
9.450
670.000
9.150
300.000
10.600
310.000
10.200
220.000
10.200
210.000
10.300
390.000
12.000
260.000
12.000
2.600
230.000
250.000
12.000
240.000
11.000
230.000
11.000
210.000
3.000
10.100
210.000
10.500
210.000
10.200
300.000
10.200
240.000
230.000
MEAN
EXC
1204.000
0.180
1.857
4.500
0.500
14.000
1286.000
1.600
3384.000
0.370
10.000
1028.000
11.000
1794.000
20.000
9.450
3518.000
9.150
2812.000
12.700
1576.000
12.000
1196.000
12.300
1222.000
13.100
1732.000
12.000
1098.000
12.000
2.650
1238.000
336.000
12.300
810.000
12.500
1266.000
12.500
6734.000
3.000
10.700
2638.000
11.200
878.000
10.700
1582.000
11.500
3488.000
1560.000
HIN
OBS
0.000
0.000
1.000
2.000
0.000
4.000
0.000
1.500
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
2.900
0.000
0.000
6.500
0.000
6.500
0.000
2.500
10.000
2.200
0.000
2.500
0.000
2.100
28.000
1.700
0.000
0.080
2.600
0.000
0.000
3.900
50.000
5.800
100.000
5.900
120.000
3.000
0.720
0.000
1.100
0.000
1.500
0.000
1.700
0.000
0.000
MEAN
OBS
699.231
0.030
1.857
4.500
0.167
8.250
913.000
1.600
2411.481
0.185
0.541
465.500
6.739
1499.722
14.055
8.189
1583.333
8.100
2051.818
7.903
923.000
7.726
748.778
7.890
841.667
7.685
755.600
6.583
655.000
4.409
2.650
621.111
132.727
8.529
614.286
9.654
841.538
9.167
6183.333
7.589
6.967
1651.984
6.536
292.678
6.725
322.259
6.569
1335.831
1326.923
4200
0
2
8
0
14
2700
1
17000
0
10
4600
11
4700
50
9
7200
9
5000
24
4900
19
5300
19
4500
18
4600
12
3500
12
2
9200
470
13
2000
14
6100
14
55000
8
12
16640
12
3400
10
7000
15
40000
4300
MAX
OBS
.000
.180
.000
.000
.500
.000
.000
.700
.000
.370
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.450
.000
.150
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.700
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.500
.000
.000
.700
.000
.900
.000
.000
.000
.000
SEV-
ERITY
MAJOR
UNKNOWN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MINOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MINOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MINOR
MAJOR
MINOR
MAJOR
MINOR
MAJOR
MINOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MINOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
-------
Page No.
09/19/85
TABLE IC-6 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF LOUESI AQUATIC LIFE CRI
IOUA - CEDAR RIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/64
(A INDICATES AVERAGE OF CALCULATED HARDNESS DEPENDENT CRIT)
en
en
HAP SIOREI
NO. NO.
II 320350
12 05465500
20 CD-10
23 32505A
24 324097
25 324015
26 324028
27 324030
28 324035
29 324042
30 SR-1.5
Jl 32540U
34 340520
35 330615
36 L00432
37 330270
38 330100
41 320897
AGCY LOCATION
UHL IOUA R - UAPELLO
USGS IOUA R - UAPELLO
HPCA CEDAR R - AUSTIN, MINNESOTA
UHL CEDAR R - UPSTREAM CEDAR FALLS
UHL CEDAR R - GUBERIVILLE
EAINC CEDAR R - UPSTREAM DAEC
EAINC CEDAR R - UPSTREAM DAEC DISCHG
EAINC CEDAR R-DOUNSTREAH DAEC DISCHG
EAINC CEDAR R-UPSIREAH CEDAR RAPIDS
UHL CEDAR R-DUNSTREAH CEDAR RAPIDS
MPCA SHELLROCK R-GORDONVILLE, MINN.
UHL SHELLROCK R-UPSIREAH NORIHUOOD
UHL IOUA R-DOUNSTREAH HARSHALLTOUN
UI IOUA R-UPSTREAH CORALVILLE RES
UI CORALVILLE RESERVIOR - INLAKE
UI IOUA R-DOUNSTREAH DAH
UI IOUA R - IOUA CITY
UHL IOUA R - LONE TREE
PARA-
METER
CU
CD
CU
IRON
ZN
DO
U-NH3
HG
PH,F
U-NH3
CU
ZN
PH,F
U-NH3
CU
ZN
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
DO
CU
ZN
00
U-NH3
DO
U-NH3
CU
CU
DO
PH,F
U-NH3
00
U-NH3
U-NH3
DO
U-NH3
DO
CU
NO.
DBS
6
4
4
4
4
27
27
2
9
9
5
10
10
11
6
12
70
69
66
64
10
7
12
27
27
10
11
6
8
71
9
70
68
68
66
73
73
11
6
NO.
EXC
7
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
5
23
27
26
23
1
2
4
2
12
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
3
4
3
1
1
1
1
PCI
EXC
17
25
100
100
25
4
26
50
11
11
40
10
10
18
33
42
33
39
39
36
10
29
33
7
44
10
9
17
13
4
11
1
4
6
5
1
1
9
17
CRIT-
ERIA
5.60
0.06
S.60
1000.00
47.00
5.00
0.02
0.20
9.00
0.02
5.60
47.00
6.50
0.02
5.60
47.00
1000.00
1000.00
1000.00
1000.00
5.00
5.60
47.00
5.00
0.02
5.00
0.02
5.60
5.60
5.00
6.50
0.02
5.00
0.02
0.02
5.00
0.02
5.00
5.60
10.
1.
HIN
EXC
000
000
14.000
1300.
70.
3.
0.
0.
9.
0.
10.
60.
9.
0.
10.
SO.
1100.
1100.
1070.
1010.
2.
10.
60.
0.
0.
1.
0.
10.
10.
3.
3.
0.
3.
0.
0.
3.
0.
4.
20.
000
000
100
023
370
450
030
000
000
150
022
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
700
020
800
028
000
000
700
000
022
700
029
020
000
028
505
000
HEAN
10,
1,
19,
5425,
70.
3,
0,
0,
9.
0,
10,
60,
9,
0.
10,
70.
2580,
2260,
2830.
.2930.
2.
15.
145.
1.
0.
1.
0.
10.
10.
4.
3.
0.
4.
0.
2.
3.
0.
4.
20.
EXC
.000
.000
.500
.000
.000
.100
,041
.370
.450
.030
.000
.000
.150
,034
,000
.000
.000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,200
,000
,039
,800
,028
,000
,000
,367
,000
,022
,467
,069
,420
,000
028
,505
,000
0
0
14
1300
20
3
0
0
6
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
3
0
3
0
0
3
0
4
0
.
.
.
.
.
t
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
MIN
DBS
000
000
000
000
000
100
002
000
500
000
000
000
500
000
000
000
000
380
000
000
000
000
000
700
002
800
002
000
000
700
000
000
700
001
000
000
000
500
000
1
0
19
5425
40
8
0
0
8
0
4
22
8
0
3
37
1106
1154
1386
1315
10
4
59
9
0
11
0
1
1
8
7
0
8
0
0
9
0
8
3
HEAN
DBS
.667
.250
.500
.000
.000
.463
.015
.185
.189
.006
.000
.000
.100
.009
.333
.500
.139
.360
.369
.813
.600
.286
.167
.078
.019
.040
.005
.667
.250
.639
.589
.002
.875
.007
.004
.451
.003
.845
.333
10
1
24
14000
70
12
0
0
9
0
10
60
9
0
10
100
8950
8600
11200
11400
17
20
280
14
0
14
0
10
10
16
8
0
16
0
0
15
0
12
20
MAX
DBS
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.900
.071
.370
.450
.030
.000
.000
.150
.046
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.900
.065
.600
.028
.000
.000
.800
.500
.022
.700
.146
.026
.300
.028
.400
.000
SEV-
ERITY
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MINOR
MINOR
UNKNOUN
MINOR
MINOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
-------
HGURE IC-1. FIXED STRTION MONITORING NETWORK
IOWR-CEDRR RIVER BflSIN
-935600
435800
r*
!o»
I
in
e
;a
+401600
OUHL
A US6S
4- OTHER
-895300+
N
MILES
0
28
56
-------
IGURE IC-2. MflJOR POINT SOURCES - IOWR CEDRR BRSIN
-935600
435800
+401600
-895300+
I .MflJOR INDUSTRIflLS
M MflJOR MUNICIPflLS
N
0
MILES
28
56
-------
FIGURE ic-3. DRINKING WRTER INTRKES
IOWR CEDRR BRSIN
-935600
135800
N
. + 401600
-895300+
0
MILES
28
N
A
56
-------
rIGURE IC-4. HRZRRDOUS HRSTE SITES - IONR CEDRR BRSIN
-935600
435800 +
.
s
B
_^c?
n>vA&-
Waterloo
Cedar Rapids
Iowa City
. + 401600
-895300,.
N
0
MILES
28
56
-------
r
FIGURE IC-4R. HnZRRDOUS WRSTE SITES INSET
NRTERLOO-- CEDRR FRLLS RRER
-923500
IO
MILES
L
0
N
424400 +
I
/
-92(j)300+
8
-------
FIGURE IC-4B. HflZflRDOUS WRSTE SITES INSET
CEDRR RRPIDS - IQWfl CITY RRER
-915500
H180,181
H67
I
a
I
413000
N
MILES
420900
/-910200+
0
12
-------
"1
IGURE IC-5. VIOLRTIONS OP IOWR STRTE WflTEIR QUflLITY
IQNfl CEDRR RIVER BR5IM
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MRJOR
5TRNDRRDS -
. -935600
435800
+ 401600
-895300+ ;
"IILES
i I
l j
0 28
N
56
-------
FIGURE IC-6. VIOLRTIONS OP IQWfl STRTE NflTER QUflLITY
STRNDRRDS - IONR CEDRR RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MINOR
-935600
+ 401600
i
N
MILES
435800
-895300+
0
28
56
-------
FIGURE IC-7. VIOLRTIONS OF IONR STRTE NRTER QURLITY
STRNDRRDS - IONR CEDRR RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: UNKNONN
+-935600 435800 .,
+401600
N
MILES
-895300+
0
28
56
-------
I
I
c;
.a
^
-«
il
8
9
rIGURE IC-8. EXCEDRNCE5 OF LONEST NRTIONRL WRIER
QURLITY CRITERIR - IQWR CEDRR RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MflJOR
-935600 o° 435900 +
"V
-895300,
0
28
-------
FIGURE IC-9. EXCEDRNCES OF LONEST NflTIONRL NRTER
QURLITY CRITERIR - IONR CEDRR RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MINOR
+-935600 435800 +
01
I CD
1
i
+401600
IS
f
N
0
MILES
28
-895300+
56
-------
I
HGURE 1C-10. EXCEDRNCES OF LOWEST NRTIONRL WHTER ;
QURLITY CRITERIR - IONR CEDRR RIVER BBS IN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: UNKNOWN
-935600
435800 ,.
r: +10 looo
-895300
i *
,:n
I
i
L.
o
MILES
28
N
56
-------
D. SKUNK RIVER BASIN
The Skunk River Basin lies between the Iowa-Cedar and Des Moines basins
in south-central Iowa. The principal land use in the basin is agricultural.
Designated water uses in the basin are primarily for protection of fish,
aquatic life and secondary contact recreation (Class B, warm-water
fisheries). Full-body contact (Class A) is designated only on the
Mississippi River and in the Oakland Mills Impoundment in Henry County.
Four municipalities depend on river water as a drinking water source:
Keokuk and Ft. Madison on the Mississippi River, Mt. Pleasant on the
Skunk River, and Oskaloosa on the South Skunk River.
The maps and tables give information on monitoring data, drinking water
intakes and potential sources of pollution. That information is further
summarized in the following observations.:
0 Bacteriological observations exceeded the fecal coliform Class A
standard at the one station in a.Class A area (Keokuk) and the Class B
standard at four other locations (Skunk River at Augusta, South Skunk
River upstream and downstream of Ames, and North Skunk River at Sigourney).
The highest average concentration occurred downstream of Ames. Comparison
with the lowest health criteria shows exceedances of the fecal coliform
criterion at all stations in the basin.
0 Exceedances of the mercury and copper Class B standards occured at
various locations in the basin. Data completeness was not sufficient to
determine the severity of pollution at most of those locations. Continued
monitoring for those metals is needed in order to base conclusions on an
adequate data base. *"
0 One exceedance of the Iowa Class B standard for ammonia was observed
downstream of Ames. When the un-ionized ammonia concentrations were
compared with the lowest aquatic life criteria, four exceedances were
recorded in the entire basin. The largest average concentration occurred
downstream of Ames, and that average concentration increased from .008
mg/1 to .016 mg/1 going from upstream to downstream of Ames. Using the
evaluation criteria from the 305(b) guidance, the severity of ammonia
pollution is classed as "None" upstream and "Minor" downstream.
0 Nitrate concentrations exceeded the lowest health criterion of 10 mg/1
both upstream and downstream of Ames. Since the concentrations were
higher upstream than downstream, and given the predominantly agricultural
land use in the area, non-point sources are the probable cause of the high
concentrations.
0 Arsenic concentrations exceeded the Human Health 10~5 risk level at
two locations (Skunk River-Augusta and Mississippi River at Keokuk). Non-
point or natural sources are the probable cause of those concentrations.
0 The Mississippi River at Keokuk station showed exceedances of the
lowest National criteria for copper, iron and cadmium (with a pollution
severity of "major") and for beryllium, nickel and zinc (with a pollution
severity of "minor"). Those pollution severities were determined from
the 305(b) guidance. The first three metals were noted above as exceeding
the lowest National criteria upstream at Clinton.
68
-------
0 The Skunk River at Augusta station showed exceedances of the lowest
National criteria for iron, lead, nickel, and zinc, but with an unknown
pollution severity because of the small number of samples.
69
-------
TABLE SK-1. WATER QUALITY MONITORING FIXED STATION NETWORK
SKUNK RIVER BASIN
MAP
NO.
14
15
17
42
~4~3~|
44
AGENCY
UHL
USGS
USGS
UHL
UHL
UHL
STORET NO.
78705l'
05474000
05474500
784043
390553
8Z114Z
LOCATION
Skunk R - Augusta
Skunk R - Augusta
Mississippi R - Keokuk
S. Skunk R - Upstream Ames
S. Skunk R - Downstream Ames
N. Skunk R - Sigourney
PURPOSE*
MMS
FS.MHS"
WLS
UM
DM
BG
FLOW
MEASUREMENTS
Y
V
Y
Y
Y
Y
FREQUENCY
Quarterly
Annual
B1 -Monthly
Quarterly
Dally
Quarterly
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
PARAMETERS**
C N Mb Me Ml 0
Me Ml
C »TM1
C N Me M1
S
C N Me Ml
C N Mb Me Ml 0
Me Ml
C N Mb Me Ml 0 '
Me Ml
C N Mb Me Ml 0
Me Ml
DESIGNATED
WATER USES***
d(U)
B(U)
A. B(W). C
B(U)
B(UJ
B(W)
* Purposes
UM Upstream of Municipality
DM Downstream of Municipality
UI Upstream of Impoundment
DI Downstream of Impoundment
L In-Lake Water Quality
BG Background "Natural" Water
Quality
WS Water Quality at Water
Supply Intake
R Recovery from Major Discharge
Parameters *** Water Use Classifications
UD Upstream of Major Discharges
DD Downstream of Major Discharges
UPP Upstream of Power Plant
DPP Downstream of Power Plant
MMS Mouth of Major Stream
WES Water Quality Entering the State
WLS Water Quality Leaving the State
FS Fluvial Sediment
B Biological
C Conventional
N Nutrients
Mb Microbiological
Me Metals
Minerals/Physical
Analyses
Organlcs (other than
pesticides)
Mi
P Pesticides A Primary Contact
R Radlochemical B(W) Wildlife & Aquatic Life
S Sediment and . warm Water
Conductance B(C) Wildlife & Aquatic Life
- Cold Water
C Water Supply
-------
i *te No. I
09/19/85
HAP SIORET AGCY
NO. NO.
TABLE SK-2 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF CLASS A STANDARDS
SKUNK RIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: to/oi/ai THROUGH 09/30/94
LOCATION
PARA- NO. NO. PCT
MEIER DBS EXC EXC
CRIT-
ERIA
HIM
EXC
HEAN
EXC
HIM
DBS
HEAN
DBS
MAX SEV-
OBS ERITY
17 05474500 USGS MISSISSIPPI R - KEOKUK
FCOLI
2 50 200.00 500.000 700.000
0.000 385.000 900.000 UNKNOWN
-------
Pjge No.
09/19/85
HAP STOREI
NO. NO.
14 7870S1
15 05474000
17 05474500
42 784043
43 390553
44 821142
1
AGCY
UHL
USQS
USGS
UHL
UHL
UHL
TABLE
LOCATION
SKUNK R - AUGUSTA
SKUNK R - AUGUSTA
MISSISSIPPI R - KEOKUK
S. SKUNK R - UPSTREAM AHES
S. SKUNK R - DOWNSTREAM AMI
N. SKUNK R - 9IQOURNEY
TABLE SK-3 SUMMARY OF EXCEEOANCES OF CLASS B STANDARDS
SKUNK RIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: IO/OI/BI THROUGH 09/30/84
PARA-
METER
FCOLI
HG
PH,L
CU
CU
00
FCOLI
HG
NH3
FCOLI
CU
FCOLI
HG
NO.
OBS
8
7
12
5
10
10
7
5
6
6
8
8
7
NO.
EXC
1
1
1
3
1
1
3
1
1
4
1
1
1
PCI
EXC
13
14
8
60
10
10
43
20
17
67
13
13
14
CRIT-
ERIA
2000.00
0.05
9.00
20.00
20.00
4.00
2000.00
0.05
2.00
2000.00
20.00
2000.00
0.05
HIN
EXC
2200.000
0.440
9.100
0.000
26.000
3.604
0.000
0.110
6.300
0.000
40.000
2500.000
0.060
2200
0
9
33
26
3
2940
0
6
23560
40
2500
0
MEAN
EXC
.000
.440
.100
.400
.000
.604
.000
.110
.300
.000
.000
.000
.060
HIN
OBS
0.000
0.000
7.200
7.000
o.ooo-
3.600
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
HEAN
OBS
637.500
0.063
8.067
25.400
5.500
9.760
1628.571
0.022
1.143
16033.333
5.000
736.250
0.009
HAX
OBS
2200.000
0.440
9.100
48.000
26.000
14.000
3600.000
0.110
6.300
83000.000
40.000
2500.000
0.060
SEV-
ERITY
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
ro
-------
Page No. 1
09/19/85
TABLE SK-4 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF CLASS C STANDARDS
SKUNK RIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/64
HAP STOREI AGCY LOCATION PARA- NO. NO. PCI CRIT- (UN HEAN HIN HEAN HAX SEV-
NO. NO. HETER DBS EXC EXC ERIA EXC EXC DBS DBS DBS ERIIY
-------
--J
-p.
Page No.
09/19/85
MAP STORET
NO. NO.
14 787051
TABLE SK-5 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF LOUESI HEALTH CRITERIA
SKUNK RIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: io/oi/8i THROUGH 09/30/34
AGCY
LOCATION
UHL SKUNK R - AUGUSTA
15 05474000 USGS SKUNK R - AUGUSTA
17 05474500 USGS MISSISSIPPI R - KEOKUK
- UPSTREAM AMES
- DOWNSTREAM AMES
- SIGOURNEY
42 784043
43 390553
44 821142
UHL
UHL
UHL
S. SKUNK R
S. SKUNK R
N. SKUNK R
PARA-
METER
N03
FCOLI
PH.L
DISAS
AS
NI
FCOLI
OI5AS
AS
DISBE
NI
FCOLI
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
NO.
DBS
12
12
12
8
4
5
10
B
10
10
10
7
11
12
12
12
12
14
14
NO.
EXC
1
e
1
e
4
2
6
7
10
1
2
2
6
6
9
6
11
1
11
PCT
EXC
8
67
8
100
100
40
60
88
100
10
20
29
55
50
75
50
92
7
79
CRIT-
ERIA
10.000
200.000
9.000
0.022
0.022
13.400
200.000
0.022
0.022
0.068
13.400
200.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
HIN
EXC
13.000
290.000
9.100
1.000
2.000
17.000
420.000
1.000
1.000
0.900
14.000
210.000
250.000
13.000
810.000
11.000
1100.000
11.000
240.000
13
1652
9
1
6
30
7270
1
1
0
17
556
690
14
2146
13
11528
11
806
MEAN
EXC
.000
.000
.100
.750
.750
.000
.000
.286
.900
.900
.600
.000
.000
.800
.000
.200
.000
.000
.000
HIN
DBS
2.300
0.000
7.200
1.000
2.000
6.000
0.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
0.200
0.000
1.900
0.000
NEAN
OBS
6.808
1121.667
8.067
1.750
6.750
18.200
4362.000
1.125
1.900
0.090
5.500
158.571
376.364
10.925
1625.833
10.008
10566.667
7.043
657.857
MAX
OBS
13.000
6000.000
9.100
3.000
18.000
43.000
22000.000
2.000
3.000
0.900
21.000
900.000
1300.000
18.000
3600.000
15.000
83000.000
11.000
2500.000
SEV-
ERITY
MAJOR
MAJOR
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MINOR
MINOR ;
UNKNOWN ;
MAJOR I
MAJOR '
MAJOR 1
MAJOR i
MAJOR i
i
MAJOR !
-------
en
No. 1
09/19/85
TABLE SK-6 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF LOUESI AQUATIC LIFE
CRITERIA - SKUNK RIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/34
(A INDICATES AVERAGE OF CALCULATED HARDNESS DEPENDENT CRII)
MAP STORE!
NO. NO.
14 787051
AGCY
LOCATION
UHL SKUNK R - AUGUSTA
15 05474000 USGS SKUNK R - AUGUSTA
17 05474500 USGS MISSISSIPPI R - KEOKUK
42 784043
43 390553
44 821142
UHL S. SKUNK R - UPSTREAM AMES
UHL
UHL
SKUNK
SKUNK
i
R - DOUNSTREAN AMES
R - SIGOURNEY
PARA-
MEIER
CU
ZN
HG
PH,L
CO
DISCU
CU
[RON
DISPB
PB
ZN
U-NH3
CD
OISCU
CU
[RON
OISFE
AG
DISZN
ZN
DO
U-NH3
CU
U-NH3
CU
ZN
NO.
DBS
7
12
7
12
5
8
5
5
8
5
5
6
10
13
10
10
13
10
11
10
10
11
S
13
8
14
NO.
EXC
2
1
1
1
1
1
5
4
1
2
3
1
3
1
4
S
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
PCI
EXC
29
8
14
8
20
13
100
80
13
40
60
17
30
8
40
SO
8
10
18
10
10
9
40
IS
13
7
CRIT-
ERIA
S.60
47.00
0.20
9.00
0.04 A
5.60
3.60
1000.00
21.32 A
15. 63 A
47.00
0.02
0.03 A
5.60
5.60
1000.00
1000.00
4.10
47.00
47.00
S.OO
0.02
5.60
0.02
5.60
47.00
HIN
EXC
10.000
110.000
0.440
9.100
1.000
6.000
7.000
3287.000
5.000
32.000
60.000
0.024
1.000
18.000
8.000
1188.000
1357.000
13.000
62.000
50.000
3.600
0.070
10.000
0.040
40.000
60.000
13
110
0
9
1
6
23
13270
5
116
108
0
1
18
12
4200
1357
13
101
30
3
0
10
0
40
60
NEAN
EXC
.000
.000
.440
.100
.000
.000
.400
.000
.000
.000
.100
.024
.000
.000
.800
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.600
.070
.000
.095
.000
.000
HIN
DBS
0.000
0.000
0.000
7.200
0.000
0.000
7.000
610.000
0.000
0.000
40.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
180.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
3.600
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
HEAN
DBS
4.286
15.833
0.063
8.067
0.200
3.375
25.400
12339.400
1.125
16.800
81.000
0.004
0.300
3.077
5.500
2422.300
130.000
1.400
24.000
8.000
9.760
0.008
4.000
0.016
S.OOO
14.286
NAX
DBS
20.000
110.000
0.440
9.100
1.000
6.000
48.000
40000.000
S.OOO
36.000
140.000
0.024
1.000
18.000
26.000
6798.000
1357.000
13.000
140.000
50.000
14.000
0.070
10.000
0.151
40.000
60.000
SEV-
ERITY
UNKNOWN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
HINOR
UNKNOUN
MINOR
UNKNOUN
-------
FIGURE SK-1. FIXED STRTION MONITORING NETWORK
SKUNK RIVER BflSIN
-935900
O UHL
A US6S
-f OTHER
N
MILES
0
28
56
423500
895300+
-------
rIGURE SK-2. MflJOR POINT SOURCES - SKUNK BflSIN
-935900
423500
i
i
il
+401600
-895300+
I MflJOR INDUSTRIflLS
jl
is
'Q
fe
M MflJOR MUNICIPflLS
1
o
MILES
1 1
28
N
56
-------
FIGURE SK-3. DRINKING NflTER INTflKES
SKUNK BflSIN
-935900
I
i»
+ 401600
MILES
0
28
N
56
423500
-895300
-------
HGURE SK-4. HRZRROOUS WflSTE SITES - SKUNK RIVER BRSIN
+-935900
423500 +
I
V
i
Keokuk
+ 401600
-895300+
N
MILES
0
28
56
-------
FIGURE SK-^R. HRZRRDOUS WRSTE SITES INSET
BURLINGTON, FT. MRDISON, KEOKUK flREfl
t-913300
\
\
+401900
MILES
\
N
404000
-905100+
0
10
-------
:S
I
FIGURE SK-5. VIOLflTIONS OF IONR STflTE WflTER QURLITY
STflNDRRDS - SKUNKJJMER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MflJOR
935900 423500 +
+401600
-895300+
N
MILES
0
28
56
-------
Figure SK-6 is omitted because there were no violations of State Water
Quality Standards in the basin with minor pollution severity.
81
-------
FIGURE SK-7. VIOLRTIONS OF IONR STRTE NRTER OURLITY
STflNDRRDS - SKUNK RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: UNKNONN
.,-935900 423500
U
+401600
-895300+
N
0
MILES
28
56
-------
8
01
I
FIGURE SK-8. EXCEDRNCES OF LONE5T NRTIONRL WRTER
QURLITY CRITERIR - SKUNK RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MRJOR
+-935900 % 423500 +
+401600
-895300+
N
MILES
28
56
-------
FIGURE SK-9. EXCEDflNCES OF LOWEST NflTIONflL WflTER
QUflLITY CRITERIfl - SKUNK RIVER BflSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MINOR
+-935900 . 423500
+ 401600
7 BE,N!,ZN
-895300+
N
MILES
0
28
56
-------
FIGURE SK-10. EXCEDRNCES OF LONEST NRTIONRL WRTER
QURLITY CRITERIR - SKUNK RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: UNKNONN
-935900 . 423500 ,
I
401600
7 NH3
-895300+
N
MILES
0
28
56
-------
E. DES MOINES BASIN
The Des Moines River Basin, located in west-central Iowa, is often sub-
divided into three sub-basins.
- Upper Des Moines sub-basin
- Lower Des Moines sub-basin
- Raccoon River sub-basin
Most of the land use in the basin is agricultural.' However, the basin
contains the largest city in the state (Des Moines), and two major flood
control reservoirs (Saylorville and Red Rock) are located close to Des
Moines. As the largest population center in the state, Des Moines has a
a concomitant potential for water pollution. The nearness of the reservoirs
to the city highlights the importance of the recreational uses which
those water resources support. Given the combination of high population
and high water resource use, the Des Moines Basin, especially near Des
Moines, is of central importance to Iowa water quality.
The Des Moines and Raccoon Rivers are designated for protection of fish
and aquatic life throughout the basin. Body contact recreation is
designated from the Red Rock Reservoir to the Mississippi River. Upstream
of Des Moines, body contact is designated in Saylorville Reservoir, and
in three impoundments or lakes further north. Three cities (Des Moines,
Ottumwa and Panora) depend on river water as a drinking water source.
The tables and figures summarize information on monitoring data, water
uses, and potential pollution sources. The following observations further
summarize the information from those tables and maps.
0 Fecal coliform observations exceeded the Class B standard at various
locations in the basin, with violation frequencies ranging up to 70
percent of the samples collected. Fecal coliforms showed major violations
of the Class A standard at one station designated for body-contact
recreation (upstream of Ft. Dodge).
0 Mercury concentrations exceeded the Class B standard at six stations
operated by ISU and at three UHL stations. At the UHL stations, the
exceedances appeared only when the detection limit was lowered from 1
ug/1 to .05 ug/1. Therefore, the percent exceedances for those stations
may be larger than those shown in Table DM-3. The widespread nature of
those exceedandces indicates natural or non-point sources as the probable
cause..
0 Although there were occasional violations of the state standards for
dissolved oxygen, temperature and cadmium, the pollution severity, as
determined from the 305(b) guidance, was "none."
0 Nitrate observations exceeded the Iowa Class C (Drinking Water) standard
at the one station in the basin close to and upstream from a drinking
water intake (Raccoon River at Van Meter). All of the Iowa stations in
the basin showed exceedances of the national criteria for nitrates in
drinking water. The frequency of exceedance ranged from 9 to 56 percent
87
-------
of the samples collected. Those observations are not violations of a
regulatory standard, since the stream segments are not designated as
Class C waters. However, the widespread occurrence of those concentrations
is a potential cause for concern, and indicates non-point pollution as
the probable source of the high concentrations.
0 Total residual chlorine concentrations exceeded the national aquatic
life criterion at the three stations in the basin which include chlorine
residual analyses. Pollution severities, evaluated according to the
305(b) guidance, were "major" at two stations and "unknown" at the third.
The highest average concentrations occurred downstream of Des Moines.
The analyses were performed using a field kit method which is usually not
calibrated before field use. Therefore, the significance of the apparent
chlorine exceedances is not known.
88
-------
TABLE DM-1. WATER QUALITY MONITORING FIXED STATION NETWORK
DES MOINES RIVER BASIN
MAP
NO.
18
45
46
47
ID
49
50
~5~1
52
AGENCY
UHL
MFC A
MPCA
UHL
UHL
ISU
ISU
ISU
USGS
STORET NO.
410085
EDM-6
WDM-3
444064
444066
430380
L00491
430051
05481650
LOCATION
Des Molnes R - Keokuk
E. FK. Des Molnes R - Ceylon
U. FK. Des Molnes R - near Iowa/Minn
border
Des Molnes R - Upstream Ft. Dodge
Des Molnes R - Downstream Ft. Dodge
Des Molnes R - Boone
Saylorville Res. - Inlake
Des Molnes R - Downstream Saylorvill
Dam
Des Moines R - Downstream Saylorvilli
Dam
PURPOSE*
MMS
WES
WES
UM
DM
UI
L
> 01. UM
> FS
f tow
MEASUREMENTS
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
FREQUENCY
Quarterly
Annual
Monthly (Ex-
cept Nov. ,
Dec. Feb.)
Monthly (Ex-
cept Nov. ,
Dec.. Feb.)
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
Monthly
(More often
Apr. -Sept.)
Monthly
(More often
Apr. -Sept.)
Annual
Monthly
(More often
Apr. -Sept.)
Daily
PARAMETERS**
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
C N Mb Mi
C N Mb Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
C N Mb Me Mi
C N Mb Mi
0 P (Fish)
C N Mb Me Ml
S
DESIGNATED
WATER USES***
A. B(W)
B(W)
B(U)
A. B(W)
B(W)
B(W)
A, B(W)
B(W)
B(W)
* Purposes
UM Upstream of Municipality
DM Downstream of Municipality
UI Upstream of Impoundment
DI Downstream of Impoundment
L In-Lake Water Quality
BG Background "Natural" Water
Quality
WS Water Quality at Water
Supply Intake
R Recovery from Major Discharge
** Parameters
UD Upstream of Major Discharges
DD Downstream of Major Discharges
UPP Upstream of Power Plant
DPP Downstream of Power Plant
MMS Mouth of Major Stream'
WES Water Quality Entering the State
ULS Water Quality Leaving the State
FS Fluvial Sediment
B Biological
C Conventional
N Nutrients
Mb Microbiological
Me Metals
Mi Minerals/Physical
Analyses
0 Orgaoics (other than
P
R
S
Pesticides
Radlochemlcal
Sediment and
Conductance
*** Water Use Classifications
A Primary Contact
B(W) Wildlife & Aquatic Life
- Warm Water
B(C) Wildlife A Aquatic Life
- Cold Water
C Water Supply
-------
WATER QUALITY MONITORING
DES MOINES RIVER
FIXED STATION NETWORK
BASIN (cont.)
MAP
NO.
53
54
55
U3
0 56
57
58
59
60
AGENCY
ISU
ISU
ISU
ISU
ISU
UHL
USGS
USGS
STORET NO.
420780
4295RA
420660
L 00480
4Z0150
423014
05483450
05483600
LOCATION
Des Molnes R - Downstream Des Moines
Racoon R - Van Meter
Des Moines R - Runnels
Red Rock Res. - Inlake
Des Moines R - Downstream Red Rock
Dam
N. Raccoon R - Sac City
Middle Racoon R - Bayard
Middle Racoon R - Panora
PURPOSE*
DM
UM.UI.WS,
MMS
UI
L
DI
BG
FS
FS
FLOW
MEASUREMENTS
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
FREQUENCY
Monthly
(More often
Apr. -Sept.)
Monthly
(More often
Apr. -Sept.)
Monthly
(More often
Apr. -Sept.)
Monthly
(More often
Apr. -Sept.)
Annual
Monthly
(More often
Apr. -Sept. )^
Monthly
Annual
Daily
Daily
PARAMETERS**
C N Mb Me Ml
C N Mb Me Mi
C N Mb Me Mi
C N Mb Mi
0 P (Fish)
C N Mb Me Mi
C N Mb Mi 0
Me 0 P (Fish)
S
S
DESIGNATED
WATER USES***
B(W)
B(W) C+
B(W)
A, B(W)
A, B(W)
B(W)
B(W)
B(W), C
* Purposes
UM Upstream of Municipality
DM Downstream of Municipality
UI Upstream of Impoundment
DI Downstream of Impoundment
L In-Lake Water Quality
BG Background "Natural" Water
Quality
WS Water Quality at Water
Supply Intake
R Recovery from Major Discharge
Parameters *** Water Use Classifications
UD Upstream of Major Discharges
DO Downstream of Major Discharges
UPP Upstream of Power Plant
DPP Downstream of Power Plant
MMS Mouth of Major Stream
WES Water Quality Entering the State
WLS Water Quality Leaving the State
FS Fluvial Sediment
B Biological
C Conventional
N Nutrients
Mb Microbiological
Me Metals
Minerals/Physical
Analyses
Organics (other than
pesticides)
Mi
0
P Pesticides A Primary Contact
R Radiochemical B(W) Wildlife & Aquatic Life
S Sediment and - Warm Water
Conductance B(C) Wildlife 8 Aquatic Life
- Cold Water
C Water Supply
+ Closet Station upstream
of water supply intake
-------
to.
09/19/85
HAP STORE!
NO. NO.
IB 410085
47 444064
SO L00491
56 L00480
57 420150
TABLE DN-2 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF IOWA CLASS A STANDARDS
DES HOINES RIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: .10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/84
AGCY LOCATION
DHL DES HOINES R. - KEOKUK
UHL 0. H. RIVER UPSTREAH FT. DODGE FCOLI
ISU SATLORVILLE RES. - INLAKE
ISU RED ROCK RES. - INLAKE
ISU OH RIV. DS RED ROCK DAN
PARA-
HEIER
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
PH
FCOLI
FCOLI
NO. NO.
OBS EXC
7
7
55
58
60
61
3
5
1
1
4
5
PCI
EXC
43
71
2
2
7
8
CRIT-
ERIA
200
200
200
9
200
200
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
230.
240.
860.
9.
210.
340.
HIM
EXC
000
000
000
100
000
000
1243
524
860
9
315
778
HEAN
EXC
.000
.000
.000
.100
.000
.000
HIN HEAN HAX SEM-
OBS OBS OBS ERITY
0.000 555.700 3200.000 UNKNOWN
0.000 374.286 1000.000 HAJOR
0.000 22.000 860.000
7.700 8.222 9.100
0.000 37.700 550.000
0.000 101.600 1500.000
-------
UD
ro
o.
9/85
HAP STORET
NO. NO.
18 410085
45 EDM-6
47 444064
48 444066
49 430380
51 430051
53 420780
54 4295RA
55 420660
56 L00480
57 420150
58 423014
TABLE DM-3 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF tOUA CLASS B STANDARDS
DES NOINES IIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/84
AGCY LOCATION
UHL DES HOINES R. - KEOKUK
HPCA E. FK. DES MOINES R. - CEYLON
UHL D. H. RIVER UPSTREAM FT. DODGE
UHL D. H. RIV. DUNSIREAH FT. DODGE
ISU DES HOINES R. - BOONE
ISU D. H. R. DS. SAYLORVILLE DAM
ISU DM RIV. DOUNSTR. DES MOINES
ISU RACCOON R. -VAN METER
ISU DES HOINES R. - RUNNELS
ISU RED ROCK RES. - INLAKE
ISU DH RIV. DS RED ROCK DAM
UHL N. RACCOON R. - SAC CITY
PARA-
METER
HG
FCOLI
HG
FCOLI
HG
FCOLI
D HG
D HG
FCOLI
D HG
FCOLI
D HG
FCOLI
DO
D HG
UTEHP
DO
PH,L
D HG
FCOLI
NO.
DBS
6
7
7
B
8
56
B
9
64
9
64
12
63
84
1
64
65
58
9
20
NO.
EXC
1
1
1
2
1
12
7
5
44
8
14
12
24
2
1
1
1
1
6
4
PCT
EXC
17
14
14
25
13
21
88
56
69
89
22
100
38
2
100
2
2
2
67
20
CRIT-
ERIA
0.05
2000.00
0.05
2000.00
0.05
2000.00
0.05
0.05
2000.00
0.05
2000.00
0.05
2000.00
4.00
0.05
32.00
4.00
9.00
0.05
2000.00
HIN
EXC
0.430
4900.000
0.150
4000.000
0.140
2200.000
0.100
0.100
2100.000
0.100
2300.000
0.100
2200.000
3.000
0.200
32.500
3.600
9.100
0.100
3000.000
HEAN
EXC
0.430
4900.000
0.150
4900,000
0.140
6860.000
0.343
0.380
9970.000
0.337
25900.000
0.400
23840.000
3.400
0.200
32.500
3.600
9.100
0.351
15060.000
HIN
DBS
0.000
40.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.100
97.000
0.100
0.000
3.000
0.200
0.000
3.600
7.700
0.000
70.000
HEAN
DBS
0.072
994.286
0.021
1788.750
0.018
1738.625
: 0.300
0.212
7440.469
0.300
8877.141
0.400
9431.444
9.575
0.200
20.213
9.532
B.222
0.233
3533.500
0.
4900.
0.
5800.
0.
16000.
0.
0.
83000.
0.
93000.
1.
190000.
15.
0.
32.
21.
9.
0.
47000.
HAX
OBS
430
000
ISO
000
140
000
600
600
000
BOO
000
200
000
300
200
500
600
100
600
000
SEV-
ERITY
UNKNOWN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
HINOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
MAJOR
-------
PI
097
TABLE DM-4 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF IOUA CLASS C STANDARDS
DES NOINES RIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: IO/OI/BI THROUGH 09/30/34
MAP STORE! AGCY LOCATION PARA- NO. NO. PCT CRIT- HIN MEAN HIN MEAN MAX SEV-
NO. NO. MEIER DBS EXC EXC ERIA EXC EXC DBS DBS DBS ERIIY
54 4295RA ISU RACCOON R - VAN MEIER N03 70 31 44 10.16 10.200 13.000 O.SBO 9.322 17.000 MAJOR
N02I3 IS 7 47 10.16 10.400 11.300 l.SOO 9.035 13.000 MAJOR
DISPB 16 1 6 50.00 100.000 100.000 5.000 22.688 100.000
id
CO
-------
o.
/85
HAP STORET
NO. NO.
18 410085
45 EDH-6
46 UDH-3
47 444064
TABLE DH-5 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF LOUEST HEALTH CRITERIA
DES MOINES RIVER BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/84
AGCY
48
49
50
51
444066
430380
L00491
430051
UHL
ISU
ISU
ISU
53 420780
54 4295RA
55 420660
56 L00480
57 420150
58 423014
LOCATION
UHL DES MOINES R. - KEOKUK
HPCA E. FK. DES MOINES R. - CEYLON
MPCA U. FK. 0. M. RIV. NEAR BORDER
UHL 0. M. RIVER UPSTREAM FT. DODGE
D. M. RIV. DUNSTREAH FT. DODGE
DES MOINES R. - BOONE
SAYLORVULE RES. - INLAKE
D. H. R. OS. SAYLORVILLE DAM
ISU DM RIV. DOUNSIR. DES MOINES
ISU RACCOON R. -VAN METER
ISU DES HOINES R. - RUNNELS
ISU RED ROCK RES. - INLAKE
ISU DM RIV. OS RED ROCK DAM
UHL N. RACCOON R. - SAC CITY
PARA-
HETEB
N03
FCOLI
HG
N03
FCOLI
AS
AS
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
HG
N03
FCOLI
N03
HQ
AS
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
N03
HG
FCOLI
AS
PB
N03
HG
FCOLI
AS
N03
HG
AS
FCOLI
N03
HG
FCOLI
AS
PH
FCOLI
N03
N03
HG
FCOLI
AS
N03
FCOLI
NO.
DBS
11
11
6
9
9
1
1
9
13
12
7
14
14
69
8
19
70
54
60
70
9
76
18
18
70
9
76
18
70
12
18
77
69
1
75
1
58
63
53
65
9
72
18
34
34
NO.
EXC
1
4
1
5
5
1
1
5
2
7
1
2
12
21
6
19
50
14
2
20
5
6
18
1
25
5
75
18
33
9
18
66
15
1
59
1
1
6
5
9
3
13
18
17
29
PCT
EXC
9
36
17
56
56
100
100
56
15
58
14
14
86
30
75
100
71
26
3
29
56
8
100
6
36
56
99
100
47
75
100
86
22
100
79
100
2
10
9
14
33
18
100
50
85
CRIT-
ERIA
10.000
200.000
0.144
10.000
200.000
0.022
0.022
200.000
10.000
200.000
0.144
10.000
200.000
10.000
0.144
0.022
200.000
10.000
200.000
10.000
0.144
200.000
0.022
50.000
10.000
0.144
200.000
0.022
10.000
0.144
0.022
200.000
10.000
0.144
200.000
0.022
9.000
200.000
10.000
10.000
0.144
200.000
0.022
10.000
200.000
HIN
EXC
12.000
230.000
0.430
13.000
230.000
1.800
3.500
230.000
12.000
240.000
0.150
12.000
410.000
10.100
0.200
1.700
210.000
10.600
210.000
10.400
0.200
210.000
2.100
96.000
10.100
0.200
210.000
2.000
10.100
0.200
1.800
230.000
10.100
0.200
210.000
2.000
9.100
210.000
10.400
10.300
0.200
310.000
1.500
11.000
210.000
HEAN
EXC
12.000
1646.000
0.430
14.800
1378.000
1.800
3.500
698.000
12.500
14424.000
0.150
12.000
14760.000
12.500
0.383
2.400
2134.000
12.400
534.000
12.300
0.400
548.000
2.712
96.000
11.700
0.480
7878.000
2.667
12.800
0.500
2.739
8914.000
12.100
0.200
12824.000
2.000
9.100
718.000
12.000
11.700
0.567
714.000
2.461
12.600
3018.000
HIN
DBS
1.400
0.000
0.000
0.310
40.000
1.800
3.500
0.000
0.300
0.000
0.000
0.300
0.000
0.010
0.000
1.700
0.000
1.380
0.000
1.540
0.000
0.000
2.100
10.000
1.330
0.100
0.000
2.000
0.580
0.100
1.800
97.000
1.420
0.200
0.000
2.000
7.700
0.000
2.080
0.540
0.000
0.000
1.500
1.100
60.000
MEAN
DBS
6.000
625.455
0.072
10.734
822.222
1.800
.3.500
407.778
6.838
8434.167
0.021
7.821
12662.857
8.014
0.300
2.400
1551.329
8.128
24.117
8.500
0.256
74.566
2.712
23.167
8.369
0.310
7774.868
2.667
9.322
0.400
2.739
7662.558
7.663
0.200
10109.000
2.000
8.222
85.635
6.971
6.944
0.233
163.736
2.461
10.110
2592.353
MAX
DBS
SEV-
ERITY
12.000
5500
0
16
4900
1
3
1300
13
98000
0
12
160000
15
0
4
16000
14
860
16
0
1500
3
96
14
0
83000
3
17
1
4
93000
14
0
190000
2
9
2800
13
12
0
2000
3
15
47000
.000
.430
.000
.000
.800
.500
.000
.000
.000
.150
.000
.000
.400
.600
.300
.000
.700
.000
.000
.600
.000
.900
.000
.900
.800
.000
.700
.000
.200
.000
.000
.500
.200
.000
.000
.100
.000
.100
.900
.600
.000
.800
.000
.000
MAJOR
UNKNOWN
MAJOR
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
MINOR
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MINOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MINOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MINOR
MAJOR
MINOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
-------
HAP STOKEI
NO. NO.
18 410085
45 EDH-6
46 UDH-3
47 444064
48 444066
49 430380
50 L00491
51 430051
53 420780
54 4295RA
55 420660
56 L00480
57 42015^
TABLE DM-6. SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF LOUEST AQUATIC LIFE
CRITERIA - DES KOINES BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: io/oi/8i THROUGH 09/30/84
(A INDICATES AVERAGE OF CALCULATED HARDNESS DEPENDENT CRIT)
AGCY LOCATION
UHL DES HOINES R. - KEOKUK
HPCA E. FK. DES HOINES R. - CEYLON
MPCA U. FK. D. H. RIV. NEAR BORDER
UHL D. H. RIVER UPSTREAM FT. DODGE
UHL D. H. RIV. DUNSTREAH FT. DODGE
ISU DES NOINES R. - BOONE
ISU SAYLORVILLE RES. - INLAKE
ISU D. H. R. OS. SAYLORVILLE DAH
ISU DN RIU. DOUNSTR. DES HOINES
ISU RACCOON R. -VAN HETER
ISU DES HOINES R. - RUNNELS
ISU RED ROCK RES. - INLAKE
ISU OH RIV. DS RED ROCK DAH
PARA-
METER
DO
CU
ZN
HG
U-NH3
U-NH3
CU
CU
U-NH3
CD
ZN
HG
DO
U-NH3
U-NH3
CD
PB
CL RES
HG
U-NH3
CD
ZN
CL RES
HG
U-NH3
CD
HG
DO
U-NH3
CD
CL RES
DO
PH
U-NH3
DO
U-NH3
CD
PB
ZN
HG
NO.
DBS
10
6
11
6
9
9
7
8
78
14
6
a
64
55
85
16
18
9
9
66
13
5
5
9
69
14
12
84
68
1
10
65
58
54
78
63
13
16
6
9
NO.
EXC
1
1
2
1
14
2
3
2
9
4
16
1
1
4
12
13
1
4
4
8
14
5
5
8
1
6
2
1
11
1
1
13
3
1
3
PCI
EXC
10
17
9
17
11
11
14
25
1
100
33
38
3
15
5
100
6
11
44
18
100
20
80
44
12
100
42
6
12
100
60
3
2
20
1
2
100
19
17
33
CRIT-
ERIA
5.000
5.600
47.000
0.200
0.020
0.020
5.600
5.600
0.020
0.110 A
47.000
0.200
5.000
0.020
0.020
0.100 A
89.490 A
0.010
0.200
0.020
0.090 A
47.000
0.010
0.200
0.020
0.100 A
0.200
5.000
0.020
0.080 A
0.010
5.000
9.000
0.020
5.000
0.020
0.060 A
47.870 A
47.000
0.200
HIN
EXC
4.900
10.000
90.000
0.430
0.027
0.047
10.000
10.000
0.021
1.000
49.000
0.500
4.500
0.020
0.021
1.000
96.000
0.100
0.300
0.023
0.700
52.000
0.100
0.300
0.022
0.900
0.500
3.000
0.021
1.000
0.100
3.600
9.100
0.023
4.800
0.024
1.000
19.000
61.000
0.500
4
10
90
0
0
0
10
10
0
1
56
0
4
0
0
2
96
0
0
0
1
52
0
0
0
2
0
4
0
1
0
3
9
0
4
0
1
23
61
0
HEAN
EXC
.900
.000
.000
.430
.027
.047
.000
.000
.021
.864
.400
.566
.717
.028
.025
.220
.000
.100
.450
.035
.930
.000
.115
.550
.027
.000
.740
.060
.024
.000
.110
.850
.100
.045
.800
.024
.777
.666
.000
.567
HIN
DBS
4.900
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.002
o.'ooo
0.000
0.000
1.000
6.000
0.000
4.500
0.001
0.001
1.000
10.000
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.700
12.000
0.000
0.100
0.001
0.900
0.100
3.000
0.001
1.000
0.000
3.600
7.700
0.003
4.800
0.001
1.000
2.200
1.000
0.000
HEAN
DBS
10.300
1.667
11.820
0.072
0.006
0.012
1.429
2.500
0.003
1.864
30.667
0.300
9.317
0.012
0.005
2.220
23.170
0.011
0.256
0.014
1.930
25.800
0.092
0.311
0.010
2.000
0.400
9.575
0.010
1.000
0.066
9.532
8.220
0.013
10.640
0.008
1.777
16.825
20.167
0.233
HAX
OBS
14.000
10.000
90.000
0.430
0.027
0.047
10.000
10.000
0.021
5.000
64.000
0.600
14.800
0.053
0.031
6.000
96.000
0.100
0.600
0.053
4.000
52.000
0.120
0.800
0.097
4.000
1.200
15.300
0.029
1.000
0.120
21.600
9.100
0.045
17.600
0.024
3.200
33.000
61.000
0.600
SEV-
ERITY
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
HINOR
HINOR
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
HAJOR
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
HINOR
MAJOR
HAJOR
MAJOR
HINOR
MAJOR
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
HAJOR
HINOR
HAJOR
HAJOR
HINOR
UNKNOWN
HAJOR
HINOR
HAJOR
HINOR
UNKNOWN
HAJOR
-------
IGURE DM-1. FIXED STflTION MONITORING NETNORK
DES MOINES RIVER BRSIN
-951600
441500
+401600
O UHL
A USGS
7- OTHER
MILES
-911900+
N
0
27
54
-------
FIGURE DM-2. MflJOR POINT SOURCES - DES MOINES BflSIN
+-951600
+ 401600
9
I MRJOR INDUSTRIflLS
M MflJOR MUNICIPflLS
MILES
0 27
441500
N
!
-------
HGURE DM-3. DRINKING WRTER INTRKES
DES MOINES BRSIN
-951600
^-T\», ..
I
i
i"
\f
+401600
JR
J9
i
N
MILES
i-
0
27
-------
'IGURE DM-4. HflZRRDOUS HRSTE SITES - DES MOINES BflSIN
+-951600
-------
HGURE QM-4R. HRZRRDOUS NfiSTE SITES - INSET
DES MOINES RRER
-935000
415600 +
»?
t
H
,37
CO
\
H2,48,Vi9,61,135 \
\
H
190
H^5,51,79,102vl39vl86,202,
A
\
-931100+ =
N
MILES
0
10
i
-------
FIGURE DM-4B. HflZflRDOUS WflSTE SITES - INSET
FT. DODGE RND WEBSTER CITY
942100
I
H
59
i
2
'f
'a
422100
U46-167
H
\
\
o
N
MILES
12
423900 +
-933200+
_j
-------
^IGURE DM-4C. HRZRRDOUS WflSTE SITES - INSET
OTTUMHfl flREfl
-923200
H63
H141,142
H
187
+405400
i
N
MILES
0
6
411500
-921100+
-------
I
FIGURE DM-5. VIOLflTIONS OF IONR STflTE NflTER QURLITY
STflNDflRDS - DES MOINES RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MflJOR
951600 441500 +
+401600
N
MILES
0
27
54
-------
f
FIGURE DM-6. VIOLflTIONS OF IONR STRTE HRTER QURLITY
STRNDRRDS - DES MOINES RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MINOR
-951600
441500
C
+401600
N
MILES
0
27
-------
FIGURE DM-7. VIOLflTIONS OP JONfl STflTE NRTER QUflLITY
STflNDflRDS - DES MOINES RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: UNKNOWN
+-951600 441500
I
r»
S
+401600
MILES
N
-911900+
0
27
-------
S
l
FIGURE DM-8. EXCEDRNCES OF LONEST NflTIONRL NRTER
QURLITY CRITERIR - DES MOINES RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MRJOR
+-951600 441500 H
j-^^-X&Sk^^c
- >x_ '- ~£--&'£2'~
+401600
MILES
N
t
O
-91
0
27
54
-------
FIGURE DM-9. EXCEDflNCES OF LOWEST NflTIONflL WflTER
QUflLITY CRITERIfl - DES MOINES RIVER BflSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MINOR
-951600 441500 +
S^:
^.-r^$
:^-
-c_
X~) ^
\ / <^~^ -
V / '\^.
, -^^^
( (\
~~^>
^Tr,
^' ,
-»^
I
r^
2
+401600
-9119JQO+
N
0
MILES
27
54
-------
FIGURE DM-10. EXCEDRNCES OF LONEST NRTIONRL NRTER
QURLITY CRITERIR - DES MOINES RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: UNKNONN
-951600 441500 +
«
<$'L
ZN,HG
^ \
\
i
} +401600
N
MILES
0
27
CD
CJ
-91
-------
F. SOUTHERN IOWA RIVER BASINS
The Southern Iowa River Basins include one major reservoir (Rathbun), and
no large cities. As with other basins, most of the land use is agricultural.
Designated water uses include no full body contact recreation except in
Rathbun Reservoir. Three water supplies (Rathun Regional Water Company,
Bedford, and Clarinda) use river or reservoir water as the drinking water
source.
The maps and tables show the usual information on monitoring data, drinking
water intakes and potential pollution sources.
The following observations further summarize that information:
0 Fecal coliform observations exceeded state standards and National
criteria at most stations in the basin. Pollution severity, as evaluated
from the 305(b) guidance, was "major."
0 Concentrations of four metals (copper, mercury, barium, and chromium)
exceeded the respective state standards in Freemont County. The pollution
severity is unknown because the number of samples was small. Comparison
with National criteria showed exceedances for five additional metals (arsenic,
nickel, cadmium, zinc and iron). Pollution severities, as determined
from the 305(b) guidance, were "unknown" or "major" depending on data
completeness. Continued monitoring and re-evaluation with a larger data
base are recommended.
0 Acidic conditions were encountered in the Thompson River at Davis City
on two occasions. Using the 305(b) evaluation criteria, that corresponds
to a pollution severity of "minor." That same station showed mercury
concentrations above the Class B standard, as well as copper, lead,
mercury, and zinc concentrations above the lowest aquatic life criteria.
Non-point or national sources are the probable cause of those concentrations.
Since the pollution severity, as determined from the 305 (b) guidance is
minor or unknown for those exceedances, the situation bears continued
monitoring, but may not be urgent.
0 Dissolved oxygen levels in the Chariton River at Chariton were below
the state standard of 5 mg/1 (minimum concentration for 16 of 24 hours)
on four monitored occasions. The pollution severity determined from the
305(b) guidance is "minor." If the grab sample data are compared with the
State Standard of 4 mg/1 (minimum concentration at any time), only two
samples were below the minimum standard, resulting in a pollution severity
of "none."
109
-------
TABLE SO-1. WATER QUALITY MONITORING FIXED STATION NETWORK
SOUTHERN BASIN
MAP
NO.
61
62
79
80
81
82
-l
3 83
84
85
AGENCY
UHL
UHL
UHL
UHL
USGS
USGS
UHL
USGS
UHL
STORET NO.
610350
822502
821105
820700
06810000
06817000
784001
06897950
784089
LOCATION
Charlton R - Chariton
Chariton R - Centervllle
Walnut Cr - Fremont Co.
Nlsnabotna R - Hamburg
Nisnabotna R - Hamburg
Nodaway R - Clarinda
Nodaway R - Shambaugh
Elk Cr - Decatur City
Thompson R (aka Grand R) - Davis CH;
PURPOSE*
UI
DI
BG, MMS
DM. WLS
UM. WLS
FS
BG. WLS
BG
1 BG. WLS
FLOW
MEASUREMENTS
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
FREQUENCY
Monthly
Annual
Monthly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Dally
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
Occasional
Quarterly
Annual
PARAMETERS**
C N Mb Ml 0 Zn
Me 0 P (Fish)
C N Mb Mi 0
Me 0 P (Fish)
C N Mb Me Ml 0
Me Mi
C N Mb Me Ml 0
Me Ml
C N Me Ml
S
C N Mb Me Ml 0
Me Mi
C N Mb Me M1
Me 0 P R
B
C N Mb Me Ml 0
Me Mi
DESIGNATED
WATER USES***
B(W)
B(W)
B(W)
B(W)
B(W)
B(W). C
B(W)
B(W)
* Purposes
UM Upstream of Municipality
DM Downstream of Municipality
UI Upstream of Impoundment
DI Downstream of Impoundment
L In-Lake Water Quality
BG Background "Natural* Water
Quality
WS Water Quality at Water
Supply Intake
R Recovery from Major Discharge
Parameters
UD Upstream of Major Discharges
DD Downstream of Major Discharges
UPP Upstream of Power Plant
DPP Downstream of Power Plant
MMS Mouth of Major Stream
WES Water Quality Entering the State
WLS Water Quality Leaving the State
FS Fluvial Sediment
B Biological
C Conventional
N Nutrients
Mb Microbiological
Me Metals
Mi Minerals/Physical
Analyses
0 Organic* (other than
pesticides)
P Pesticides
R Radiochemlcal
S Sediment and
Conductance
Zn Zinc
*** Water Use Classifications
A Primary Contact
B(W) Wildlife & Aquatic Life
- Warm Water
B(C) Wildlife S Aquatic Life
- Cold Water
C Water Supply
-------
TABLE SO-2 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDAHCES OF IOUA CLASS A STANDARDS
SOUTHERN IOUA RIVER BASINS
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/84
NAP STOREI AGCY LOCATION PARA- NO. NO. PCI CRIT- HIN HEAN HIN MEAN MAX SEV-
NO. NO. METER DBS EXC EXC ERIA EXC EXC DBS OBS DBS ERITY
-------
MAP SIORCI
NO. NO.
61 610350
62 822502
79 821105
80 820700
TABLE SO-3 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF IOUA CLASS B STANDARDS
SOUTHERN IOUA RIVER BASINS
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/84
AGCY
LOCATION
UHL CHARITON R - CHARIION
UHL CHARIION R
UHL UALNUT CR
- CENTERVILLE
FREMONT CO
UHL NISNABOINA R - HAHBUR6
81 06810000 USGS NISNABOTNA R - HAMBURG
83 784001
85 784089
UHL NODAUAY R
UHL THOMPSON R
SHAHBAUGH
(GRAND R) DAVIS
PARA-
MEIER
00
FCOLI
rcoii
CU
FCOLI
HG
BA
HG
FCOLI
CU
BA
CR
CU
FCOLI
CTY PH,E
FCOLI
HG
NO.
DBS
32
20
21
5
7
S
5
S
7
S
4
4
4
7
12
8
6
NO.
EXC
2
3
2
1
2
2
1
2
S
2
1
1
3
3
2
3
3
PCI
EXC
6
15
10
20
29
40
20
40
71
25
25
25
75
43
17
38
SO
CRIT-
ERIA
4.00
2000.00
2000.00
20.00
2000.00
0.05
1000.00
0.05
2000.00
20.00
1000.00
50.00
20.00
2000.00
6.50
2000.00
0.05
HIN
EXC
3.400
2100.000
2100.000
40.000
2700.000
0.100
1200/000
0.160
2200.000
90.000
1100.000
90.000
26.000
2300.000
6.200
2400.000
0.150
NEAN
EXC
3.550
2460.000
4700.000
40.000
3300.000
0.350
1200.000
0.230
6840.000
60.000
1100.000
90.000
59.000
3360.000
6.250
2700.000
0.397
HIN
DBS
0.000
10.000
0.000
0.000
100.000
0.000
200.000
0.006
0.000
0.000
200.000
0.000
8.000
410.000
6.200
80.000
0.000
NEAN
OBS
11.667
864.500
S67.619
10.000
1630.000
0.140
400.000
0.092
.4934.286
20.000
475.000
22.500
46.250
1970.000
7.346
1340.000
0.198
28
2900
7300
40
3900
0
1200
0
21000
90
1100
90
120
5000
a
3200
0
MAX
OBS
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.600
.000
.300
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.150
.000
.850
SEV-
ERITY
MINOR
ONKNOUH
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
-------
TABLE SO-4 SUHMARY OE EXCEEDANCES OF IOUA CLASS C STANDARDS
SOUTHERN IOUA RIVER BASINS
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/91 THROUGH 09/30/84
HAP STORCI
NO. NO.
AGCY
LOCATION
PARA-
METER
NO. NO. PCI
DBS EXC EXC
CRIT-
ERIA
HIM
EXC
HEAN
EXC
HIM
DBS
HEAN
DBS
HAX SEV-
OBS ERIIY
-------
TABLE SO-S SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF LOWEST HEALTH CRITERIA
SOUTHERN RIVER BASINS
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/94
HAP STORET
NO. NO.
61 6103SO
62 822S02
79 821105
BO B20700
AQCY
LOCATION
UHL CHARIION R - CHARITON
UHL CHARITON R - CENIERVILLE
UHL UALNUI CR - FREMONT CO
UHL NISNABOTNA R - HAMBURG
81 06B10000 USGS NISNABOTNA R - HAMBURG
83 784001 UHL NODAWAY R - SHAH8AUGH
84 06897950 USGS ELK CR - OECATUR CITY
BS 784089 UHL THOHPSON R (GRAND R) DAVIS
PARA-
METER
FCOLI
FCOLI
N03
FCOLI
HG
AS
NI
BA
HG
FCOLI
DISAS
NI
AS
FCOLI
BA
CR
FCOLI
DISAS
AS
FCOLI
CTY FCOLI
HG
NO.
DBS
35
36
11
11
5
5
3
5
5
11
9
4
4
9
4
4
11
4
2
6
13
6
NO.
EXC
22
9
2
9
1
2
1
1
2
10
9
3
4
7
1
1
11
4
2
4
10
3
PCT
EXC
63
25
IB
82
20
40
33
20
40
91
100
75
100
78
25
25
100
100
100
67
77
50
CRIT-
ERIA
200.000
200.000
10.000
200.000
0.144
0.022
13.400
1000.000
0.144
200.000
0.022
13.400
0.022
200.000
1000.000
50.000
200.000
0.022
0.022
200.000
200.000
0.144
M1N
EXC
210.000
300.000
11.000
810.000
0.600
10.000
200.000
1200.000
0.160
340.000
2.000
14.000
5.000
1200.000
1100.000
90.000
410.000
1.000
1.000
260.000
300.000
0.150
2110
2806
11
2202
0
20
200
1200
0
5284
2
22
10
13286
1100
90
2480
1
4
2006
3646
0
MEAN
EXC
.000
.000
.000
.000
.600
.000
.000
.000
.230
.000
.667
.400
.750
.000
.000
.000
.909
.500
.500
.000
.000
.397
HIN
DBS
10.000
0.000
0.800
20.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
200.000
0.000
0.000
2.000
6.000
5.000
0.000
200.000
0.000
410.000
1.000
1.000
0.000
10.000
0.000
MEAN
DBS
1356.571
725.833
7.164
1811.818
0.140
8.000
66.667
400.000
0.092
4803.636
2.667
18.250
10.750
1033.3.333
475.000
22.500
2480.909
1.500
4.500
1336.667
2825.385
0.198
MAX
DBS
8300.000
7300.000
11.000
4900.000
0.600
30.000
200.000
1200.000
0.300
21000.000
4.000
32.000
22.000
55000.000
1100.000
90.000
7000.000
2.000
8.000
3800.000
22000.000
0.850
SEV-
ERITY
MAJOR
MAJOR
MINOR
MAJOR
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
MAJOR
MAJOR
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
MAJOR
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
MAJOR
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
MAJOR
UNKNOWN
-------
09
TABLE SQ-6 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF LOWEST AQUATIC LIFE
CRITERIA - SOUTHERN RIVER BASINS
REPORTING PERIOD: IO/OI/BI THROUGH 09/30/34
(A INDICATES AVERAGE OF CALCULATED HARDNESS DEPENDENT CRIT)
HAP STORE!
NO. NO.
61 6103SO
79 821105
80 820700
AGCY
LOCATION
UHL CHARITQN R - CHARITON
UHL WALNUT CR - FREMONT CO
UHL NISNABOTNA R - HAMBURG
81 06810000 USGS NISNABOTNA R - HAMBURG
83 784001 UHL NODAUAY R - SHAHBAUGH
84 06897950 USGS ELK CR - DECATUR CITY
85 784089 UHL THOMPSON R (GRAND R) DAVIS
PARA-
METER
DO
ZN
CU
ZN
HG
CU
ZN
HG
DISCO
CD
DI5CU
CU
IRON
OISZN
ZN
CU
ZN
CU
IRON
DI5ZN
CTY PH,F
U-NH3
CU
PB
ZN
HG
NO.
DBS
33
22
5
11
5
8
11
5
9
4
9
4
4
9
4
8
11
2
2
4
13
13
6
6
13
6
NO.
EXC
4
3
2
1
1
4
3
1
1
2
5
4
4
1
4
3
1
2
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
PCI
EXC
12
14
40
9
20
50
27
20
11
50
56
100
100
11
100
38
9
100
100
25
15
8
33
17
15
17
CRIT-
ERIA
5.00
47.00
5.60
47.00
0.20
5.60
47.00
0.20
0.06 A
0.06 A
5.60
5.60
1000.00
47.00
47.00
5.60
47.00
5.60
1000.00
47.00
6.50
0.02
5.60
6.47 A
47.00
0.20
MIN
EXC
3.400
50.000
10.000
140.000
0.600
20.000
80.000
0.300
1.000
1.000
6.000
8.000
1900.000
60.000
80.000
10.000
80.000
7.000
4900.000
130.000
6.200
0.033
10.000
10.000
50.000
0.850
4
60
25
140
0
40
173
0
1
1
7
46
28800
60
200
13
80
13
6650
130
6
0
10
10
SO
0
MEAN
EXC
.065
.200
.000
.000
.600
.000
.400
.300
.000
.000
.400
.250
.000
.000
.000
.300
.000
.000
.000
.000
.250
.033
.000
.000
.000
.850
MIN
DBS
3.400
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
o.odo
0.000
0.000
4.000
8.000
1900.000
0.000
80.000
0.000
0.000
7.000
4900.000
0.000
6.200
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
HEAN
DBS
8.527
18.182
10.000
' 21.818
0.140
20.000
60.000
0.092
0.111
0.500
6.222
46.250
28800.000
17.222
200.000
5.000
15.455
13.000
6650.000
43.750
7.396
0.003
3.333
1.667
20.000
0.198
MAX
OBS
12.700
70.000
40.000
140.000
0.600
90.000
350.000
0.300
1.000
1.000
9.000
120.000
88000.000
60.000
400.000
20.000
80.000
19.000
8400.000
130.000
8.150
0.033
10.000
10.000
50.000
0.850
SEV-
ERITY
MINOR
MINOR
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOHN
MINOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOWN
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MINOR
UNKNOUN
-------
FIGURE 50-1. FIXED STRTION MONITORING NETWORK
SOUTHERN .RIVER BflSIN
-955000
0 UHL
Ji USGS
-f OTHER
N
MILES
0
33
66
420500
-------
f
FIGURE SO-2. MflJOR POINT SOURCES - SOUTHERN BRSIN
+-955000
s
R
1 MflJOR INDUSTRIES
M MRJOR MUNICIPflLS
N
0
MILES
33
66
420500 +
f
V-910000+
-------
I
FIGURE so-3. DRINKING WRTER INTRKES
SOUTHERN BRSIN
-955000
420500
°!
o>
mrmmm
8
.5
MILES
-9^0000+
N
0
33
66
-------
FIGURE SO-4. HRZflRDOUS NRSTE SITES - SOUTHERN RIVER BRSIN
-955000
420500 +
I +
«
I
u»
N
0
MILES
I
33
66
-------
E
FIGURE so-s. VIOLRTIONS or IONR STRTE NRTER QURLITY
i STRNDRRDS - SOUTHERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MRJOR
+-955000 420500 +
N
MILES
I
0
33
66
-------
f
M
en
FIGURE SO-6. VIOLRTIONS OP IONR STRTE NflTER QURLITY
STRNDRRDS - SOUTHERN RIVER BR5IN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MINOR
+-955000 420500
i
i
-Q\
9^10000+
N
MILES
0
33
66
-------
i
IB
FIGURE so-7. vioiniiONS OF LONEST NRTIONRL NRTER
QURLITY STflNDRRDS - SOUTHERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: UNKNONN
955000 420500
(
I
N
0
MILES
33
66
-------
I
3
sa
FIGURE so-8. EXCEDRNCES OF LONEST NRTIONRL WRTER
QURLITY CRITERIR - SOUTHERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MRJOR
955000 420500
,^v/
l>tfl FC
/'-i
r
J #HC
c/!^\/:
? ~"\
A /
\ -->x
A V\\
\
1 / 1 n! KM/1 1 i\ A i
5 / \l )\l\l I //.-v/l il y A ..i ,? \
\ \
N
0
MILES
33
A
66
r 9^0000+ i
-------
FIGURE SO-9. EXCEDRNCES OF LONE5T NflTIONflL HRTER
QURLITY CRITERIR - SOUTHERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MINOR
+-955000 420500
8 V V /
:. + 4
-------
I
a
s
19
HGURE 50-10. EXCEDflNCES OF LOWEST NRTIONRL NRTER
QUflLITY CRITERIR - SOUTHERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: UNKNOWN
+-955000 420500 +
K,0:
i
/'\ \ 1 K-1 ^ -AVNAX S
u\ \r\ \ \ r^\\\\\\ \-
N
0
MILES
33
66
-------
G. WESTERN IOWA RIVER BASINS
The Western Iowa River Basins include a diversity of water resources -
large rivers (the Missouri and the Big Sioux), numerous smaller rivers and
streams, and the Iowa Great Lakes. Land use in the basin is principally
agricultural, but two major metropolitan areas (Sioux City and Omaha-
Council Bluffs) are located on the Iowa portion of the Big Sioux-Missouri
River system. In addition, Sioux Falls, South Dakota is located on the
Big Sioux, close to the Iowa border.
Designated water uses include primary contact recreation on the entire
extent of the Big Sioux and the Missouri Rivers, drinking water intakes
on the Missouri River at Council Bluffs and in the Iowa Great Lakes, and
warm-water fisheries and secondary contact recreation throughout the basin.
The maps and Tables summarize information on monitoring, drinking water
intakes, and potential sources of pollution. That information is further
summarized in the following comments:
0 Bacteriological observations exceeded the fecal coliform standards and
the lowest National criteria at most stations in the basin.
0 Concentrations of copper and mercury exceeded the state standards and
lowest aquatic life criteria at several locations in the basin, .including
the far upstream station on the Little Sioux River as well as points on
the Missouri River and near the mouths of major tributaries to the Missouri.
The number of samples was limited, however, so the pollution severity,
as determined from the 305(b) guidance, is "unknown." The widespread
occurrence of these exceedances and the absence of point sources upstream
indicate non-point or natural sources as the probable cause.
0 Occasional exceedances of the standards for dissolved oxygen and pH
occurred on tributaries to the Big Sioux (Rock River in Sioux County)
and to the Missouri (Little Sioux River-Onawa). The pollution severity,
as determined from the 305(b) guidance, is "minor."
0 Total alkalinity observations were below the minimum National Aquatic
Life criterion of 20 mg/1 at each of the South Dakota stations. All of
those exceedances occurred prior to July 1984. Since that time, alkalinities
of 200-250 mg/1 have been observed. Continued monitoring is needed to
verify that low alkalinity is no longer a problem.
0 Nitrate concentrations exceeded the Lowest Health Criteria (with
pollution severities of "major" or "minor") at two stations on tributaries
to the Missouri River (Floyd River at Sioux City and Boyer River at
Missouri Valley). The probable cause of those concentrations is agricultural
use of fertilizers.
0 Zinc concentrations exceeded the aquatic life 24-hour average criterion
at several locations in the basin. Where the data met the completeness
criteria, the pollution severity, as determined from the 305(b) guidance,
was "minor." Non-point or natural sources are the probable cause of
those concentrations.
126
-------
o
Concentrations of other metals (nickel, iron, lead, chromium, and cadmium)
exceeded the lowest national criteria at various monitoring sites. Lack
of sufficient data precludes evaluation of pollution severity at most
sites. However, at one site (Missouri River upstream of Omaha), the
pollution severity as determined by the 305(b) guidance, was "major" for
cadmium and chromium. Since no major discharges are located upstream and
nearby, non-point or natural sources are the probable cause of the
exceedances.
0 Arsenic concentrations, where monitored routinely, exceeded the Human
Health 10-5 ris|< ievei Of .022 ug/1. Since the .detection limit for most
of the UHL arsenic analyses is 10 ug/1, and since many samples were
reported as less than the detection limit, the actual number of exceedances
of the 10~5 risk level concentration may be larger than that shown in the
tables. Again, non-point or natural sources are the probable cause.
127
-------
TABLE WE-1. WATER QUALITY
MONITORING FIXED STATION NETWORK
WESTERN BASIN
PO
00
MAP
NO.
63
64
~6~5~
66
67
~6~8~
69
~7d~
/I
72
73
74
AGENCY
UHL
uses
DWNR
DWNR
DWNR
DWNR
DWNR
UHL
DWNR
USGS
USGS
UHL
STORET NO.
920450
06482020
460703
460831
460665
460666
460832
975005
460667
06485500
06486000
950110
LOCATION
Little Sioux R - Mllford
Big Sioux R - Sioux Falls, S.D.
Big Sioux R - Sioux Falls, S.D.
Big Sioux R - Brandon. S.D.
Big Sioux R - Canton. S.D.
Big Sioux R - Hudson. S.D.
Big Sioux R - Rlchland. S.D.
Rock R - Sioux Co.
Big Sioux R - Alcester. S.D.
Big Sioux R - Akron
Missouri R - Sioux City
Floyd R - Sioux City
PURPOSE*
BG
Flow
Gauging
UM, UD
UM. DD
R
R
R
BG. MMS
DD, R
BG. R
DM
MMS
FLOW
MEASUREMENTS
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
FREQUENCY
Quarterly
Annual
Bi -Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Quarterly
Annual
Monthly
Quarterly
BI -Monthly
Quarterly
uarterly
Annual
PARAMETERS**
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
Temp .Conductance
C N Mb Ml
C N Kb Mi
C N Mb Mi
C N Mb Mi
C N Mb Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
C N Mb Ml
C N Me Ml
C N Mi
C N Me Ml
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
DESIGNATED
WATER USES***
B(W)
A. B(W)
A. B(W)
A. B(W)
A. B(W)
A. B(W)
A. B(W)
B(W)
A, B(W)
A. B(W)
A, B(W)
B(W)
* Purposes
UM Upstream of Municipality
DM Downstream of Municipality
UI Upstream of Impoundment
DI Downstream of Impoundment
L In-Lake Water Quality
BG Background "Natural" Water
Quality
WS Water Quality at Water
Supply Intake
R Recovery from Major Discharge
** Parameters *** Water Use Classifications
UD Upstream of Major Discharges
DD Downstream of Major Discharges
UPP Upstream of Power Plant
DPP Downstream of Power Plant
MMS Mouth of Major Stream
WES Water Quality Entering the State
WLS Water Quality Leaving the State
FS Fluvial Sediment
B Biological
C Conventional
N Nutrients
Mb Microbiological
Me Metals
Mi Minerals/Physical
Analyses
0 Orgapics. (other than
P Pesticides A Primary Contact
R Radiochemical B(W) Wildlife i Aquatic Life
S Sediment and - Warm Water
Conductance B(C) Wildlife & Aquatic Life
- Cold Water
C Water Supply
-------
WATER QUALITY MONITORING FIXED STATION NETWORK
WESTERN BASIN (cont.)
ro
10
MAP
NO.
75
~76~
77
78
AGENCY
UHL
UHL
uses
UHL
STORET NO.
910180
822304
06610000
100533
LOCATION
Little Sioux R - Onawa (Turin)
Boyer R - Missouri Valley
Missouri R - Upstream Omaha, Neb.
Missouri R - Downstream Omaha, Neb.
PURPOSE*
MMS
BG, MMS
UM
DM
FLOW
MEASUREMENTS
Y
Y
Y
Y
FREQUENCY
Quarterly
Annual
Quarterly
Annual
Bi -Monthly
Quarterly
Quarterly
Annual
PARAMETERS**
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0 '
Me Mi
C N Mi
C N Me Mi
C N Mb Me Mi 0
Me Mi
DESIGNATED
WATER USES***
B(W)
B(W)
A, B(W), C+
A, B(W)
* Purposes
UM Upstream of Municipality
DM Downstream of Municipality
UI Upstream of Impoundment
DI Downstream of Impoundment
L In-Lake Water Quality
BG Background "Natural" Water
, Quality
WS Water Quality at Water
Supply Intake
Major Discharge
UD Upstream of Major Discharges
DO Downstream of Major Discharges
UPP Upstream of Power Plant
DPP Downstream of Power Plant
MMS Mouth of Major Stream
WES Water Quality Entering the State
WLS Water Quality Leaving the State
FS Fluvial Sediment
B Biological
C Conventional
N Nutrients
Mb Microbiological
Me Metals
Mi Minerals/Physical
Analyses
0 Organlcs (other than
pesticides)
Parameters *** Water Use Classifications
P Pesticides A Primary Contact
R Radiochemlcal B(W) Wildlife * Aquatic Life
S Sediment and - Warm Water
Conductance B(C) Wildlife * Aquatic Life
- Cold Water
C Water Supply
+ This Is the closest fixed
monitoring station upstream
of the water supply intake
-------
09/19/85
TABLE UE-2 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF IOUA CLASS A STANDARDS
UESTERN IOUA RIVER BASINS
REPORTING PERIOD: 10/01/81 THROUGH 09/30/94
HAP
NO.
65
66
67
68
69
71
78
STORET
NO.
460703
460831
460665
460666
460832
460667
100533
AGCY
DUNR
DUNR
DUNR
DUNR
DUNR
DUNR
UHL
BIG
BIG
BIG
BIG
BIG
BIG
LOCATION
SIOUX
SIOUX
SIOUX
SIOUX
SIOUX
SIOUX
-SIOUX FALLS, S.D.
- BRANDON, S.D.
- CANTON, S.D.
- HUDSON, S.D.
- RICHLAND, S.D.
- ALCESTER, S.D.
MISSOURI R-DUNSTREH OMAHA, NE
PARA-
METER
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
NO.
OBS
IS
13
13
13
11
1?
9
NO. PCI
EXC EXC
5 33
10 77
6 46
4 31
4 36
5 38
7 78
CRIT-
ERIA
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
HIN
EXC
230.000
340.000
210.000
280.000
310.000
320.000
300.000
MEAN
EXC
614.000
1016.000
6121.700
22032.500
13605.000
13462.000
7062.900
0
40
5
0
3
0
90
HIN
OBS
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
HEAN
OBS
260.700
817.700
2871.900
6829.900
3005.700
5223.800
.5516.700
1000
2900
33000
87000
52000
64000
41000
HAX
OBS
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
SEV-
ERITY
HAJOR
MAJOR
HAJOR
MAJOR
HAJOR
HAJOR
HAJOR
CO
cp
-------
09/19/85
HAP
NO.
63
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
STOREI
NO.
920450
460831
460665
460666
460832
975005
460667
06485500
06486000
950110
AGCY
UHL
DUNR
DUNR
DUNR
DUNR
UHL
DUNR
USGS
USGS
UHL
75 910180
76 822304
77 06610000
78 100533
TABLE UE-3 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF IOUA CLASS B STANDARDS
UESTERN IOUA RIVER BASINS
REPORTING PERIOD: lo/oi/ai THROUGH 09/30/34
LOCATION
LITTLE SIOUX R - HILFORD
BIG SIOUX R - BRANDON, S.D.
BIG SIOUX R - CANTON, S.D.
BIG SIOUX R - HUDSON, S.D.
BIG SIOUX R - RICHLAND, S.D.
ROCK R - SIOUX CO.
BIG SIOUX R - ALCESTER, S.D.
BIG SIOUX R - AKRON
MISSOURI R - SIOUX CITY
FLOYD R - SIOUX CITY
UHL LITTLE SIOUX R - ONAUA (TURIN)
UHL BOYER R - MISSOURI VALLEY
USGS MISSOURI R-UPSTREAM OMAHA, NE
UHL MISSOURI R-DUNSTRH OMAHA, NE
PARA-
METER
FCOLI
HG
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
DO
PH.F
FCOLI
FCOLI
CU
CU
DO
FCOLI
HG
DO
CU
FCOLI
HG
CU
FCOLI
HG
NH3
CR
UIEMP
CU
FCOLI
NO.
DBS
7
7
13
13
13
11
8
9
7
13
2
4
11
8
8
9
6
8
6
5
7
5
4
4
99
4
9
NO.
EXC
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
I
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
3
1
1
1
1
3
3
PCI
EXC
29
14
15
8
8
9
13
11
29
B
50
50
9
13
25
11
17
25
33
20
43
20
25
25
1
75
33
CRIT-
ERIA
2000.00
0.05
2000.00
2000.00
2000.00
2000.00
4.00
9.00
2000.00
2000.00
20.00
20.00
4.00
2000.00
0.05
4.00
20.00
2000.00
0.05
20.00
2000.00
0.05
5.00
50.00
32.00
20.00
2000.00
MIN
EXC
0.000
0.110
0.000
33000.000
87000.000
52000.000
3.390
9.100
0.000
64000.000
23.000
0.000
3.200
5200.000
0.000
3.883
40.000
0.000
0.000
30.000
0.000
0.620
6.300
60.000
45.000
0.000
0.000
MEAN
EXC
7060.000
0.110
2760.000
33000.000
87000.000
52000.000
3.390
9.100
29100.000
64000.000
23.000
28.400
3.200
5200.000
0.150
3.883
40.000
14660.000
0.285
30.000
66100.000
0.620
6.300
60.000
45.000
61.600
15600.000
MIN
OBS
0.000
0.000
120.000
0.000
0.000
3.000
3.400
7.500
0.000
0.000
5.000
13.000
3.200
0.000
0.000
3.900
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
140.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
12.000
90.000
MEAN
OBS
2151.429
0.016
817.692
2871.923
6829.692
5005.727
9.175
8.072
8382.857
5223.077
14.000
21.500
8.709
803.750
0.038
8.333
8.333
3893.750
0.098
10.000
28588.571
0.124
1.690
22.500
54.742
49.250
5516.667
11000
0
2900
33000
87000
52000
13
9
53000
64000
23
29
-~ 11
5200
0
11
40
27000
0
30
190000
0
6
60
45
120
41000
MAX
OBS
.000
.110
.000
.000
.000
.000
.100
.050
.000
.000
.000
.000
.600
.000
.160
.500
.000
.000
.430
.000
.000
.620
.300
.000
.000
.000
.000
SEV-
ERITY
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MINOR
MINOR
MINOR
MINOR
UNKNOUN
MINOR
UNKNOUN
MINOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MINOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MINOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
-------
CO
no
No. 1
09/19/85
HAP STOREI AGCY
NO. NO.
TABLE UE-4 SUMHARY Of EXCEEDANCES OF IOUA CLASS C STANDARDS
WESTERN IOUA RIVER BASINS
REPORTING PERIOD: IO/OI/BI THROUGH 09/30/34
LOCATION
PARA- NO. NO. PCT
METER OBS EXC EXC
CRIT-
ERIA
HIN
EXC
HEAN
EXC
HIN HEAN
OBS OBS
HAX SEV-
OBS ERIIY
77 06610000 USGS HISSOURI R-UPSIREAH OMAHA, NE CR
1 25 50.00 60.000 60.000
0.000 22.500
60.000 UNKNOWN
-------
Page No.
09/19/85
HAP STORE!
NO. NO.
63 920450
65 460703
66 460B31
67 460665
68 460666
69 460832
70 975005
71 460667
72 06485500
TABLE UE-5 SUHHARY OF EXCEEOANCES OF LOUESI HEALTH CRITERIA
WESTERN lOUfl BASINS
REPORTING PERIOD: lo/oi/ai THROUGH 09/30/34
AGCY
LOCATION
UHL LITTLE SIOUX R - NILFORD
DUNR
DUNR
DUNR
DUNR
DUNR
UHL
DUNR
USGS
BIG SIOUX
BIG SIOUX
BIG SIOUX
BIG SIOUX
BIG SIOUX
-SIOUX FALLS, S.D.
- BRANDON, S.D.
- CANTON, S.D.
- HUDSON, S.D.
- RICHLAND, S.D.
ROCK R - SIOUX CO.
BIG SIOUX R - ALCESIER, S.D.
BIG SIOUX R - AKRON
73 06486000 USGS MISSOURI R - SIOUX CITY
74 950110 UHL FLOYD R - SIOUX CITY
75 910180 UHL LITTLE SIOUX R - ONAUA (TURIN)
76 822304 UHL BOYER R - MISSOURI VALLEY
77 06610000 USGS MISSOURI R-UPSTREAH OMAHA, HE
78 100533
UHL MISSOURI R-DUNSTREN OMAHA, HE
PARA-
METER
N03
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
FCOLI
PH.F
N03
FCOLI
FCOLI
BISAS
NI
AS
FCOLI
AS
OISBE
FCOLI
OISAS
N03
FCOLI
HG
N03
FCOLI
HG
N03
HG
FCOLI
AS
CR
NI
FCOLI
DISBE
DISAS
AS
FCOLI
NO.
DBS
13
13
19
16
16
16
16
9
12
12
17
6
2
2
4
4
4
9
8
16
16
8
12
12
6
11
5
11
5
4
4
9
5
9
4
14
NO.
EXC
1
7
7
11
7
6
9
1
1
8
8
6
1
2
2
4
1
2
8
9
12
1
1
7
1
2
1
9
1
1
2
6
2
9
4
10
PCI
EXC
8
54
37
69
44
38
56
11
8
67
47
100
50
100
50
100
25
22
100
56
75
13
8
58
17
18
20
82
20
25
50
67
40
100
100
71
CRIT-
ERIA
10.000
200.000
200.000
200.000
200.000
200.000
200.000
9.000
10.000
200.000
200.000
0.022
13.400
0.022
200.000
0.022
0.068
200.000
0.022
10.000
200.000
0.144
10.000
200.000
0.144
10.000
0.144
200.000
0.022
50.000
13.400
200.000
0.068
0.022
0.022
200.000
HIN
EXC
12.000
220.000
230.000
340.000
210.000
240.000
210.000
9.050
12.000
250.000
320.000
1.000
24.000
3.000
570.000
3.000
0.500
460.000
1.000
12.000
240.000
0.160
12.000
350.000
0.430
11.000
0.620
240.000
10.000
60.000
20.000
350.000
0.500
1.000
4.000
260.000
MEAN
EXC
12.000
2368.000
558.000
1060.000
7590.000
15162.000
6618.000
9.050
12.000
8096.000
9088.000
3.833
24.000
5.000
2786.000
3.500
0.500
550.000
2.000
14.900
1792.000
0.160
12.000
4576.000
0.430
11.000
0.620
22574.000
10.000
60.000
75.000
12204.000
0.750
2.222
8.250
5144.000
MIN
OBS
2.300
0.000
0.000
40.000
5.000
0.000
3.000
7.500
1.300
0.000
0.000
1.000
3.000
3.000
0.000
3.000
0.000
0.000
1.000
2.100
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.900
0.000
80.000
0.000
0.000
7.000
0.000
0.000
'1.000
4.000
90.000
MEAN
OBS
5.254
1306.923
255.263
770.625
2494.063
5731.000
3763.313
8.072
5.858
5409.167
4320.588
3.833
13.500
5.000
1437.500
3.500
0.125
146.333
2.000
11.063
1345.000
0.038
6.258
2695.833
0.098
7.255
0.124
18489.091
2.000
22.500
42.000
8157.778
0.300
2.222
8.250
3708.571
12
11000
1000
2900
33000
87000
52000
9
12
53000
64000
6
24
7
5000
4
0
640
4
19
3500
0
12
27000
0
11
0
190000
10
60
130
46000
1
4
18
41000
MAX
OBS
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.050
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.500
.000
.000
.000
.000
.160
.000
.000
.430
.000
.620
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
SEV-
ERITY
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MINOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MINOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MINOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
-------
No.
09/19/85
TABLE UE-6 SUHHARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF LQUESI AQUATIC LIFE
CRITERIA - UESTERN BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: lo/oi/ei THROUGH 09/30/34
HAP STORE!
NO. NO.
63
65
66
67
68
69
70
920450
460703
460831
460663
460666
460832
975005
UHL
DUNR
DUNR
DUNR
DUNR
DUNR
UHL
71 460667
72 06485500
AQCt LOCATION
LITTLE SIOUX R - MILFORD
BIG SIOUX R-SIOUX FALLS, S.D.
BIG SIOUX R - BRANDON, S.D.
BIG SIOUX R - CANTON, S.D.
BIG SIOUX R - HUDSON, S.D.
BIG SIOUX R - RICHLAND, S.D.
ROCK R - SIOUX CO.
DUNR BIG SIOUX R - ALCESTER, S.D.
USGS BIG SIOUX R - AKRON
73 06486000 USGS MISSOURI R - SIOUX CITY
74 950110 UHL FLOYD R - SIOUX CITY
75 910180 UHL LITTLE SIOUX R - ONAUA (TURIN)
76 822304 UHL BOYER R - HISSOURI VALLEY
77 06610000 USGS HISSOURI R-UPSTREAH OHAHA, NE
PARA-
HETER
CU
00
ALKAL
ALKAL
ALKAL
ALKAL
ALKAL
DO
PH,F
U-NH3
CU
ZN
ALKAL
DISCU
CU
IRON
DISPB
P8
ZN
DISCD
CD
DISCU
CU
IRON
DISPB
PB
ZN
DO
U-NH3
CD
CU
ZN
DO
CU
ZN
HG
DO
U-NH3
CU
ZN
HG
DISCD
CD
DISCU
CU
IRON
OISPB
PB
NI
NO.
DBS
7
21
7
10
8
8
9
8
9
11
6
12
8
6
2
2
6
2
2
8
4
8
4
4
8
4
4
11
16
8
8
16
9
6
12
6
7
10
S
11
S
9
4
9
4
4
9
4
4
NO.
EXC
2
1
4
3
S
S
6
1
1
1
1
3
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
4
4
4
2
2
1
1
1
3
3
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
4
3
6
4
4
3
3
1
PCI
EXC
29
S
37
30
63
63
67
13
11
9
17
23
63
33
SO
SO
17
SO
50
38
75
SO
100
100
23
50
25
9
6
38
38
13
11
33
17
17
14
10
40
18
20
44
75
67
100
100
33
75
25
CRIT-
ERIA
3.60
5.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
3.00
9.00
0.02
5.60
47.00
20.00
5.60
3.60
1000.00
3.80
3.80
47.00
0.03
0.03
5.60
5.60
1000.00
3.80
3.80
47.00
5.00
0.02
0.03
5.60
47.00
S.OO
5.60
47.00
0.20
5.00
0.02
5.60
47.00
0.20
0.03
0.03
5.60
5.60
1000.00
3.80
3. BO
96.00
HIN
EXC
10.000
4.900
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
3.400
9.050
0.086
10.000
50.000
0.000
7.000
23.000
13000.000
5.000
8.000
70.000
1.000
1.000
6.000
13.000
1400.000
4.000
8.000
60.000
3.200
0.061
1.000
10.000
100.000
3.900
10.000
60.000
0.430
4.100
0.021
20.000
110.000
0.620
1.000
1.000
6.000
12.000
3700.000
4.000
11.000
130.000
MEAN
10.
4.
2.
7.
6.
7.
1.
3.
9.
0.
10.
S3.
2.
8.
23.
13000.
5.
8.
70.
1.
. 1.
7.
21.
2325.
4.
10.
60.
3.
0.
1.
10.
110.
3.
25.
105.
0.
4.
0.
25.
130.
0.
1.
1.
10.
49.
25100.
6.
24.
130.
EXC
000
902
750
000
800
000
000
400
050
086
000
100
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
333
333
000
500
000
000
000
000
205
061
000
000
000
900
000
000
430
100
021
000
200
620
750
333
400
250
000
700
700
000
HIN
DBS
0.000
4.900
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
3.400
7.500
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
5.000
510.000
0.000
0.000
20.000
0.000
0.000
4.000
13.000
1400.000
0.000
0.000
20.000
3.200
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
3.900
0.000
0 . 000
0.000
4.100
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
3.000
12.000
3700.000
0.000
0..000
7.000
HEAN
DBS
2.857
9.748
102.857
163.300
95.875
94.625
73.333
9.175
8.072
0.009
1.667
19.167
87.875
3.667
14.000
6755.000
1.167
4.000
45.000
0.300
1.000
5.750
21.500
2325.000
2.125
5.750
35.000
8.709
0.003
0.375
3.750
23.750
8.333
8.333
30.000
0.098
9.086
0.003
10.000
31.818
0.124
0.778
1.000
8.222
49.250
25100.000
3.111
18.300
42.000
HAX
DBS
10.000
13.300
273.000
273.000
267.000
270.000
267.000
13.100
9.030
0.086
10.000
60.000
266.000
9.000
23.000
13000.000
5.000
8.000
70.000
2.000
2.000
9.000
29.000
3600.000
4.000
12.000
60.000
11.600
0.061
1.000
10.000
120.000
11.500
40.000
150.000
0.430
11.000
0.021
30.000
150.000
0.620
2.000
2.000
16.000
120.000
77000.000
12.000
48.000
130.000
SEV-
ERITY
UNKNOWN
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
MAJOR
HAJOR
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
HINOR
UNKNOUN
HINOR
HAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
HINOR
HINOR
UNKNOUN
HINOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
MINOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
MAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
HAJOR
UNKNOUN
UNKNOUN
-------
No.
09/19/85
NAP STOREI
NO. NO.
TABLE UE-6 SUMMARY OF EXCEEDANCES OF LOWEST AQUATIC LIFE
CRITERIA - WESTERN BASIN
REPORTING PERIOD: io/oi/8i THROUGH 09/30/94
AGCY
LOCATION
PARA- NO. NO. PCT
METES DBS EXC EXC
CRIT-
ERIA
HIN
EXC
NEAN
EXC
HIN
OBS
NEAN
OBS
HAX SEU-
OBS ERITY
DISZN 9 1 11 47.00
ZN 44 100 47.00
76 100533 UHL MISSOURI R - DUNSTRH OMAHA, NE CU 72 29 5.60
ZN 14 3 21 47.00
220.000 220.000
60.000 147.500
10.000 10.000
60.000 66.700
5.000 40.667
60.000 147.500
0.000 2.857
0.000 18.571
220.000 HINOR
370.000 UNKNOWN
10.000 UNKNOWN
70.000 NINOR
OJ
or
-------
FIGURE NE-1. FIXED STflTION MONITORING NETNORK
NESTERN RIVER BflSIN
-971600
I
+ 402200 LEGEND
. o UHL
A uses
-r OTHER
442000
-944600+
N
MILES
0 17
34
-------
FIGURE WE-2. MRJOR POINT SOURCES - NESTERN BRSIN
-971600
442000
+ 402200
LEGEND
I MflJOR INDUSTRIES
M MflJOR MUNICIPflLS
N
MILES
0
17
34
-------
FIGURE WE-3. DRINKING NRTER INTRKES
NESTERN BRSIN
-971600
1
+402200
N
MILES
0 17
442000
-944600+
34
-------
171 CURE WE-4. HflZHRDOUS HRSTE SITES - NESTERN RIVER BRSIN
+ "371 SCO
n
ten'
+402200
442000 +
.^£^
-944600^.
N
MILES i
_l i
0
17
34
-------
FIGURE NE-4R. HRZRRDOUS WRSTE SITES - INSET
COUNCIL BLUFFS RRER
-960000
M
en
410200
412700
/
-953900+
MILES
0
N
-------
FIGURE WE-5. VIOLflTIONS OP IONR STRTE NflTER QUflLITY
STRNDRRDS - NESTERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MRJOR
971600 442000
I
: +402200
0
MILES
17
N
-944600^
34
-------
IOLRTIONS OF lOWfl STRTE WRTER QURLITY
iRRDS - NESTERN RIVER BRSIN
1LLUTION SEVERITY: MINOR
442000 +
N
MILES
R STRTE NRTER QURLI.
^IVER BRSIN
: UNKNOWN
4420C
N
-944E
0
17
34
34
-------
FIGURE HE-8. EXCEDRNCES OF LONEST NflTIONRL WRTER
QURLITY CRITERIR - WESTERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MRJOR
971600 . 442000
i
f +402200
f
N
0
MILES
17
-944600+
34
-------
FIGURE WE-9. EXCEDRNCES OF LONEST NRTIONflL WRTER
QURLITY CRITERIR - NESTERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: MINOR
+-971600 442000
4
S
+ 402200
s
f
N
MILES
-944600+
0
17
34
-------
FIGURE HE-10. EXCEDflNCES OP LONEST NRTIONRL WRTER
QURLITY CRITERIR - NESTERN RIVER BRSIN
POLLUTION SEVERITY: UNKNONN
971600 442000
+402200
N
0
MILES
17
-944600+
34
-------
VII. INTENSIVE SURVEYS
Each year, IDWAWM determines locations where intensive surveys will be
performed, subject to suitable hydrologic conditions. Those studies
are generally designed to measure "worst case" conditions, and usually
cover a time period of less than one week. If the existing flow conditions
are different from those for which the study was designed, the study may
be posponed or cancelled. Because of the limited time frame, intensive
surveys provide a "snapshot" of instantaneous water quality, rather than
a record of water quality over a period of time. Therefore, conclusions
drawn from these surveys should be viewed in light of the conditions
which the survey was conducted. These conditions include weather, stream
flow, point source discharges, agricultural practices, etc.
The following summarizes the locations, dates, and principal findings of
the intensive surveys conducted in water years 1982-84.
South Skunk River - Story City September 6 and 20, 1984
The study was designed to assess the effect of the Story City WWTP on
water quality. Since stream flows encountered were 10 to 40 times greater
than the 7Q10 flow, the WWTP impact could not be fully assessed. The
Iowa Class B fecal coliform standard was exceeded downstream of the WWTP
discharge for a distance of less than 3.1 miles. No other state standards
were exceeded.[6]
South Skunk River - Ames September 5 and 19, 1984
The study was designed to assess the effect of the Ames WWTP on water
quality. The stream flows encountered were 3 to 7 times the established
protected flow of 2 CFS. The Iowa Class B standards for fecal coliform
bacteria and for ammonia nitrogen were exceeded downstream of the WWTP
discharge for a distance of 5 to 6 miles. [6]
Indian Creek - Nevada September 13 and 24, 1984
The study was designed to assess the impact of the Nevada WWTP on water
quality. The stream flows exceeded the protected flow of 0.2 CFS on
September 13,. but were lower than the protected flow on September 24.
Poor water quality due to elevated ammonia nitrogen, total suspended
solids, phosphorous and BOD was observed 1.2 miles downstream of the
WWTP discharge. That impact was largely dissipated 4.4 miles downstream
of the discharge. [6]
Paint Creek - Waukon September 11 and 26, 1984
The study was designed to assess the impact of the Waukon WWTP on water
quality. The WWTP discharge comprised most of the flow on one fork of
Paint Creek. Water quality in that fork was poor, due to elevated ammonia
nitrogen, BOD, fecal coliforms and phosphorous. Water quality improved
downstream as these pollutants were diluted by flow from other forks of
the creek. The resulting flows were 7 to 8 times the 70,]^ flow of less
than U.I CFS. [6]
147
-------
Calmus Creek Water Quality Study May 21 and August 6. 1984
The study included chemical, fish, periphyton and benthos analyses. The
geographical scope included Calmus Creek, the Winnebago River upstream
and downstream of the confluence of Calmus Creek, and Spring Creek (for
comparison of water quality and biological populations in a creek nearby
with similar physical characteristics).
Two cement plant discharges resulted in degraded water quality, as evidenced
by high pH (10.2), which exceeds the Iowa Water Quality Standards); by
increased sulfate, sodium, potassium, and solids levels; by absence of
benthos; by reduced fish populations and diversity; and by lack of fish
spawning in Calmus Creek. [7]
The study is an early (and very successful) attempt to expand the range
of parameters examined in intensive surveys, in order to monitor the full
range of factors which affect water quality.
Bacteriological Investigation of Selected
Primary Contact Recreational Water?August and September 1984
As noted before, fecal coliform observations exceed State standards in
many Iowa locations. IDWAWM and UHL have undertaken conscientious evaluations
of bacteriological levels for the purpose of determining the importance
of such contamination to local water uses. Quoting from the abstract of
the study report:
"A bacterial study of North Twin Lake, Saylorville Reservoir, Lake
Ahquabi and a reach of the Des Moines River was conducted during
August and September 1984. The objectives of the study were to
determine (1) the levels of fecal coliform, E.. coli, and enterococci
in water typically used for primary contact recreation; (2) the
extent of contamination resulting from point sources, agricultural
runoff, urban runoff, combined sewers and septic tank leachate; and,
(3) the reduction of these bacterial indicator organisms resulting
from effluent disinfection. Water sampling was conducted twice
during non-rainfall runoff conditions and three times after a 0.5
inch or greater rainfall. Results of the study indicated bacterial
levels in lakes were generally low ranging from <2 to 5200 organisms
per 100 ml for fecal coliform, <2 to 730 organisms for £. coli, and
<2 to 190 organisms per 100 ml for enterococci. Rainfall runoff in
the lake watersheds did not increase lake bacterial levels substantially.
Eight percent of the lake samples exceeded the three recommended
bacterial criteria during nonrunoff conditions as compared to 18%
for the lake samples collected during runoff conditions. Compared
to the lakes, the Des Moines River reach segment had much higher
bacterial levels, reflecting input from tributary streams, a combined
sewer discharge and wastewater treatment plant discharge. Bacterial
values found in the Des Moines River ranged from 4 to 35,500 per 100
ml for fecal coliform, <4 to 30,000 per 100 ml for E_. coli and <4 to
700 per 100 ml for enterococci. Des Moines River enterococci values
exceeded the recommended criteria on 77% of the samples, E_. col i on
63% and fecal coliform on 60%. Although chlorination of the Des Moines
148
-------
Wastewater Treatment Plant's final effluent effected a 90% or greater
reduction in bacterial numbers, the concentrations of bacteria in
the final effluent were still greater than expected for proper
chlorine disinfection and increased in-stream bacterial levels
* considerably." [8]
The discussion of the Des Moines Basin (Section VI. E, above) highlighted
the key importance of the Des Moines area because of the combination of
high population, industrial concentration, and major recreational water
uses. The results of this bacteriological study further highlight the
importance of effective pollution control in that area.
Rock Creek - Clinton-Camanche November 15-17, 1983
An issue of growing concern, especially in the Karst Region of Iowa, is
groundwater contamination. The Rock Creek study explored that issue in
an area where the water table is high. Quoting from the abstract of the
study report:
"The purpose of the study was to determine if any long-term impacts
existed in the watershed as a result of industrial and disposal
activities. Three industrial monitoring wells and four private
drinking water wells were sampled for organic chemicals. In addition,
sediment, benthos and fish from Rock Creek and surrounding environs
were collected and analyzed for organic contaminants. Results of
the study indicate several organic chemicals present in the industrial
monitoring wells with some of these being found in the private
drinking water wells at trace levels. Samples of sediment, benthos
and fish indicated very little, if any, bioaccumulation of organic
chemicals from industrial and disposal activities. The study
demonstrates a possible long-term impact on the ground water quality
may exist in the Rock Creek watershed. Development of an organic
chemical monitoring program for the industrial and private drinking
wells is recommended." [9]
Wapsipinicon River - Stanwood Area August 23, 1983
The study was designed primarily to determine baseline water quality and
biological conditions in. the vicinity of a proposed industrial discharge
(Iowa Beef Processors treatment facility) and, secondarily, to assess the
influences of Mill Creek and of the Clarence WWTP on water qulaity.
Water quality was found to be good, and no violations of state standards
were observed. The principal factor affecting the biological community
was lack of suitable physical habitat for colonizing benthic organisms.[10]
Mississippi River - Davenport August 23, 1983
As was noted in Section VLB, bacteriological contamination is evident
downstream of Davenport. This intensive survey documented the effect of
the non-disinfected municipal wastewater from the Davenport WWTP on water
quality in the Mississippi River. The results were summarized as follows
in the study report abstract:
149
-------
"The effluent plume created by the Davenport wastewater treatment
plant discharge was relatively narrow and hugged the Iowa shore of
the Mississippi River. Specific conductance was high in the effluent
area and declined to background levels within the first river mile
downstream. Fecal coliform values were also high near the discharge
but did not decline as rapidly as conductance. As a result of the
high coliform levels in the discharge, the Iowa Water Quality
Standards for primary and secondary contact recreation were violated
throughout the sampling reach. Total suspended solids and dissolved
oxygen levels were not affected by the wastewater treatment plant
discharge. Low levels of total residual chlorine were found in all
samples collected and most likely represents low level background
matrix interference." [11]
Four-mile Creek - Ankeny August 15. 16, 18, 1983
The study was designed to obtain effluent and stream data for calibrating
the IDWAWM Wasteload Allocation Model, and to determine the impact of
disinfected wastewater on stream quality. That second part of the study
provided background information which was considered in IDWAWM's recent
proposal to change the State policy of requiring chlorination of
wastewater treatment plant effluents.
The study compared total residual chlorine (TRC) and fecal coliform levels
downstream of the Ankeny WWTP under two conditions: with chlorination and
without. As expected, non-disinfected effluents produced high bacterial
levels downstream. When the effluent was chlorinated, TRC levels were
high enough to disinfect all of the downstream portion of the creek which
was sampled (approximately 5 miles). [12]
Skillet Creek August 9-10, 1983
IDWAWM and DHL design studies to meet multiple objectives in order to
optimize resources. This study had a three-fold purpose:
0 To determine the impact of the Dayton WWTP on the water quality and
the biological quality of Skillet Creek,
0 To determine if previously observed elevated levels of BOD, TSS, NH3,
and fecal coliforms still exist, and
0 To evaluate the effectiveness, in terms of environmental improvement,
of efforts to improve the Dayton WWTP effluent quality.
The results of the survey were summarized as follows in the abstract of
the study report:
"The chemical, bacteriological and biological data all indicated a
deterioration in water quality below the Dayton WWTP. Station 4,
located 20U meters downstream from the WWTP discharge had the highest
concentrations of fecal coliforms, specific conductance, organic
nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, BOD, filtrable phosphate and the lowest
150
-------
concentration of dissolved oxygen found during the survey. Violations
of the Iowa Water Quality Standards were observed at stations 3 and
4 (20 meters and 200 meters downstream from Dayton WWTP discharge).
The fecal coliform standard was violated at stations 3 and 4 and the
ammonia nitrogen standard was violated at station 4. The aquatic
insect population of mayflies also indicated this deterioration in
water quality with a high population density above the discharge and
low population density below the discharge. By Stations b and 6, (2
km and 8 km downstream from the WWTP discharge respectively) the
concentrations of most parameters had returned to "background levels"
and the mayfly population had increased compared to station 3 and 4.
Comparison to the previous survey showed an improvement in the water
quality of both Skillet Creek and the effluent quality from the
Dayton WWTP."[13]
Yellow River (Northeast Iowa) Summer and Fall 1982
The Yellow River study was likewise designed to meet multiple objectives:
0 To evaluate the effects of rainfall runoff in the planting season
0 To evaluate the effects of rainfall runoff during high recreational use
0 To evaluate the effects of point source discharges during summer low
flow conditions.
The primary findings were:
0 Rainfall runoff produced large increases in total solids and associated
parameters (organic nitrogen, total phosphate, BOD, metals and pesticides),
but much smaller increases in water-soluble parameters (e.g. ammonia
nitrogen, soluble phosphate,etc.)
0 Pesticide concentrations were greatest shortly after spring planting,
and were well below acute toxic levels.
0 Total loads were related to flows, with the highest flows producing
the largest total loadings.
0 Water quality during non-runoff conditions was very good throughout
the entire reach.
0 The Postville WWTP discharge had a short-distance impact on water
quality in Williams Creek. However, the ammonia, BOD and dissolved oxygen
levels returned to approximately background levels before the confluence
with the Yellow River.
0 Evaluation of benthic macroinvertebrate data indicated good water
quality. [14]
151
-------
Storm Lake October 1981; April 1982; June 1982
The abstract of the study report summarizes the study succinctly:
"Water, fish, and benthic samples were collected from Storm Lake
during the fall of 1981, and the spring and summer of 1982. The
purpose of the sampling was to provide background water and biological
data for use in a preliminary evaluation of a request to discharge
municipal wastewater into the lake. Water sample data indicated
good water quality with adequate dissolved oxygen and relatively low
nutrient availability. Pesticide analysis of fish tissue indicates
very low pesticide levels and present no hazard to the consumer.
Although the diversity of the benthic community was small its high.
density reflected good water quality." [15]
Floyd River February 2-3, 1982
The study was designed to evaluate water quality changes resulting from
upgrading two WWTP's (Sheldon and LeMars). The results were summarized
in the study report abstract, as follows:
"Although overall stream water quality has improved compared to a
1977 winter study, certain reaches of the Floyd continue to exhibit
poor water quality as a result of point source waste discharges.
Results of the survey indicated (1) water quality downstream from
Sheldon has improved substantially since 1977; (2) compared to the
1977 study, water quality downstream of LeMars has shown only minor
improvements; (3) during the study, the municipalities of Orange
City and Remsen exceeded both their daily average and maximum effluent
limitations for BOD and total suspended solids; (4) violations of
the Iowa water quality standards for ammonia and dissolved oxygen
occurred downstream of Orange City and for dissolved oxygen downstream
of LeMars." [16]
Prairie Rose Rural Clean Water Project 1981-84
The Prairie Rose monitoring studies( ^designed to document the results
of watershed pollution control pract^, ^ which were implemented, beginning
in 1981. Those practices were necessary because sedimentation caused
loss of lake volume, because dissolved oxygen concentrations had decreased,
because clarity (as measured by Secchi transparency) had decreased, and
because sedimentation and turbidity had produced a dramatic shift in the
fish population composition of the lake. [17]
The control practices implemented through 1984 have reduced soil loss by
55%. "As a result of reducing soil erosion, a parallel reduction in
sediment associated nutrients and pesticides has also been achieved. The
implementation of the nutrients and integrated pesticide management
programs should reduce pollutant loads even further." [18]
152
-------
Green Valley Lake Restoration Project 1981-84
"In the summar of 1980, funds were made available for Phase II restoration
measures of Green Valley Lake, with implementation of watershed controls
beginning in 1981. The funds for restoring Green Valley Lake were provided
through a cooperative agreement from the Environmental Protection Agency's
(EPA) Clean Lakes Program." The first two years of the program resulted
in only 15% completion of "best management practices" in the watershed,
with little or no observed change in water quality. [19]
Through 1984, 25-30% of planned management practices of grade stabilization
structures, sediment and water control basins, and terraces have been
completed. A sediment/nutrient retention dike has been fully completed.
The 1984 monitoring found better water quality below the dike than above
for nine water quality parameters. Results for two such parameters were
significant at a 95% statistical confidence level. Confidence levels for
other parameters were lower. Fish population studies show that populations
of crappie, bluegill and bass were deteriorating after stocking efforts
in earlier years. Additional bass were stocked in the fall of 1984.
"Problems at Green Valley Lake still center around the poor water quality,
due to intense blue-green algae blooms. A silt and nutrient trap structure
was constructed in the upper reaches of the west arm of the lake during
1984-1984. Continued soil conservation work and a silt and nutrient trap
for the east arm of the lake are scheduled for 1985-1986. Experimentation
is also underway, evaluating various phosphorus reducing techniques. The
silt and nutrient dike also serves as an excellent fishing jetty and has
greatly increased angler access to the lake. The rocks also serve as
significant fish attractors.
Improvement of the water quality is the primary solution to an improved
fish population and increased water oriented recreational activity." [20]
In addition to above state invensive surveys, the following major intensive
survey was completed by EPA Region VII.
Missouri River at Omaha/Council Bluffs March 14-16. 1984
The study was summarized as follows in the Executive Summary of the study
report:
"In 1983, the Nebraska Department of Environmental Control (NDEC)
and the Iowa Department of Water, Air and Waste Management (IDWAWM)
requested that the Environmental Protection Agency conduct a survey
of the Missouri River and its tributaries in the vicinity of Omaha,
Nebraska/Council Bluffs, Iowa. The objectives of the requested
study were to 1) determined if toxic pollutants were present in the
river and, if present, what were their concentrations and their
relative distribution; and 2) determine if point source discharges
are affecting the water quality of the river.
On March 14-16, 1984, a study was conducted to meet these objectives.
153
-------
With respect to toxic pollutants relatively few water quality problems
were noted. Toxic organics and pesticides were not detected in any
of the ambient water or sediment samples which were collected.
Several organics pollutants and pesticides were detected in the
wastestreams from municipal wastewater treatment facilities but they
did not occur in high enough concentrations to be detectable in
ambient water or sediments. The lack of data on the concentrations
of these pollutants in fish tissue precludes a definitive statement
on the impact of these discharges on the Missouri River.
Toxic metals in excess of Iowa water quality standards and/or EPA
criteria were observed in the Missouri River Stations. However,
these exceedances only occurred in samples collected on March 16,
1984, when the Missouri River was characterized by markedly elevated
flow and suspended solids concentrations.
Ambient water samples from the Iowa tributaries of Pigeon and Mosquito
Creek were found to have concentrations of copper, zinc, and nickel
which exceeded EPA criteria and Iowa water quality standards. The
Nebraska tributary, Papillion Creek, was found to contain concentrations
of cadmium which exceeded both the acute and chronic criteria for
the protection of aquatic life. Unlike the Missouri River Stations,
exceedances in these tributaries did not appear to be a function Of
increased flow and suspended solid concentration.
Nebraska's criterion for pH was exceeded on samples collected from
the Missouri River on March 16. This was the only criterion for a
conventional pollutant which was exceeded.
Sediment samples indicated that toxic metals were not present in
levels which would be considered of concern and that sediments
downstream of the Omaha/Council Bluffs area were not being enhanced
by upstream discharges.
Analyses of variance indicated that nearly all parameters exhibited
statistically significant variation due only to the date the samples
were collected. This significant variation suggests a relationship
of parameter values with flow and/or suspended solids concentration.
The execeptions were dissolved oxygen which exhibited no statistically
significant variation and total dissolved phosphorus and ammonia
which also exhibited significant variation due to sampling location
and/or cross-section position. These analyses confirmed the presence
of a plume of both total dissolved phosphorus and ammonia which
developed below the Omaha-Missouri River STP and extended down the
left ascending bank to the downstream most sampling station.
In addition to the Omaha-Missouri River STP, four other discharges,
Councicl Bluffs STP, Bellevue STP, Omaha-Papillion Creek, and Allied
Chemical, are believed to be the cause of the plume. However, these
discharges did not result in either Nebraska's unionized or Iowa's total
ammonia criteria being exceeded.
154
-------
Additional sampling is warranted as a result of this survey. It is
suggested that:
1. The exceedances of EPA's copper, zinc, and cadimum criteria
in tributary streams be evaluated to determine if beneficial
uses are being impaired.
2. Summer cross-sectional sampling for ammonia below Omaha/
Council Bluffs is warranted to determine if increased
ambient water temperatures result in exceedances of ammonia
standards in the effluent plume.
3. Fish collection activities should be repeated in order to
determine if any or all of the organic pollutant and pest-
icides which were detected in municipal discharges are
being accumulated in Missouri River fish." [21]
As is evident from the above summaries, intensive surveys in Iowa
address a wide variety of water quality concerns. The surveys are
part of the routine planning process for water quality monitoring.
Each survey is designed to address the most significant issues in
the area, and represents a carefully planned effort to allocate
monitoring resources according to environmental priorities.
155
-------
VIII. OVERVIEW OF FISH DATA
Over the past five years, the State of Iowa and EPA Region VII have
cooperated in.a fish tissue monitoring program. Fish have been collected
at some 31 sites. Those sampling locations are presented in Table F-l
and are displayed in Figure F-l. Included are stations in the Regional
Ambient Fish Tissue Monitoring Program (RAFTMP) and stations in the Des
Moines Dilution Study.
For each location, analyses for the priority pollutants were performed on
composite whole-fish samples. For the majority of those pollutants, the
concentrations in fish were below the analytical detection limits. Where
pollutant concentrations were above detection limits and indicated possible
problems, the state followed up with analyses of fish fillets. The
STORET data for those pollutants which were detected have been reviewed,
and basic statistical summaries have been performed. The data in STORET
include fish analyses through 1983. Entry of the 1984 data were not
completed in time for inclusion in this report.
In the early years of the fish sampling program, fish of any species, any
age, and any size were collected. Evaluation of the early data indicated
that different species of fish concentrate pollutants to different extents.
Therefore, a single species, carp, was selected for the sampling and
analyses in recent years. The age or size variable was also controlled
during recent sample collection. In the statistical summaries, only
whole carp data have been included.
Through 1983, no duplicate samples were taken. Rather, each sample
consisted of one composite of three to five fish. Beginning in 1984,
some duplicate samples were collected, but the number of duplicates to
date is small. Therefore, the precision of the fish data is unknown.
Data evaluation criteria for whole fish are scarce. The National Academy
of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering jointly developed
guidelines for pesticides, DDT, PCB's, and mercury concentrations in fish in
1972. Those guidelines are shown in Table F-2 and involve summing up the
concentrations of several pollutants. Many of these fish data parameters
were reported as less than the detection limits, making comparison with
the guidelines uncertain. Confirmed exceedances were noted in eleven
samples (where one or more parameters had measured concentrations above the
detection limits, and where those concentrations added up to more than
the guideline number). The locations of those exceedances are -shown in
Figure F-2. Other exceedances may have occurred but cannot be proven
from the "less than detection limits" data.
For other pollutants, which have no published data evaluation criteria,
the means and standard deviations of pollutant concentrations were
calculated for all fish collected in Iowa. Those statistics are shown in
Table F-3. In performing those calculations, data reported as "less than
the detection limit" were taken as equal to the detection limit. In order
to identify "high concentrations," a cut-point equal to the mean plus one
standard deviation was selected, and concentrations above that limit were
flagged. Those data points are shown in Table F-4.
156
-------
Figure F-3 displays the information from that table, showing the map
number and the pollutants whose concentrations were high. The number of
years those high concentrations were observed is shown in parenthesis if
that number is more than one.
The rationale for fish sampling is that fish will concentrate pollutants
which may not be detected in water because the concentrations are low.
When pollutants are found in fish, then more sensitive monitoring for
those pollutants in water is indicated in that same general area. In
examining the data to determine potential problem areas, we would expect
to see high concentrations occurring in more than one year in those areas.
Figure F-3 shows that high concentrations of the same pollutant occurred
in multiple years at sampling stations within a five mile radius of each
other only for chromium near Des Moines. However, from Figure F-l, we
should note that most locations had only one year of data for whole carp
samples.
Two conclusions are drawn from these fish data. First, the data base for
whole carp is still quite small. Continued monitoring is recommended at
all locations. Second, more intensive water monitoring is recommended
for chromium at the fixed stations below and above Des Moines. (Iowa
station number 420780 and EPA station number 005686, respectively.)
157
-------
Page No. 1
09/20/35
TABLE F-l. FISH MONITORING LOCATIONS
1980-83
MAP STATION LOCATION YEARS OF
NO. NO. CARP DATA
Fl 476 MISSOURI RIVER AT SIOUX CITY 1
F2 479 RACCOON RIVER AT VAN METER 1
F3 481 CEDAR RIVER AT PALO 1
F4 482 CEDAR RIVER AT GILBERTVILLE 1
F5 5683 IOWA RIVER DWNST OF MARSHALLTOWN 1
F6 5685 SHELLROCK R. UPSTREAM OF NORTHWOOD 2
F7 5686 DES MOINES R. AT EUCLID AVE BRIDGE 2
F8 5687 DES MOINES R. 5) HWY 46 BRIDGE, DWSTR STP 3
F9 5980 KEOKUK, IOWA 1
F10 6460 MISSOURI R. BELOW SIOUX CITY STP OUTFALL 1
Fll 6486 SKUNK RIVER AT AUGUSTA 2
F12 6487 SHELL ROCK R. 1.5 MI. SOUTH OF NORTHWOOD 1
F13 6490 IOWA R. 1 MI. DWNST OW IOWA 99 BRIDGE 1
F14 6493 CHARITON R. AT COUNTY ROAD S50 BRIDGE 1
F15 6494 NODAWAY R. 2.5 MI. SOUTH OF SHAMBAUGH 1
F16 6495 NISHNABOTNA RIVER EAST OF HAMBURG 2
F17 6635 SOUTH SKUNK R. o> IOWA HWY 221 BRIDGE 1
F18 6636 SOUTH SKUNK R. 5.3 MI. BELOW US 30 BRDG 1
F19 6651 DES MOINES R. 3 THE 66 AVE BRIDGE 2
F20 6652 DES MOINES R. 5.1 R.M. DWSTR ST. HWY 316 1
F21 6653 RACCOON R. 3.7 MI. BELOW 63 ST BRIDGE 1
F22 6654 DES MOINES R. BELOW SCOTT ST DAM. 1
F23 6663 MISSISSIPPI R. JUST BELOW LOCK & DAM #14 1
F24 6667 LITTLE SIOUX R. JUST BLW DAM S> LINN GROV 1
F25 6670 IOWA R. S> IOWA HWY 99 BRIDGE AT WAPELLO 1
F26 6489 IOWA R. 2.6 MI. DWNST OF IOWA 14 BRIDGE 1
F27 5681 DOWNSTREAM SIDE HWY 280 BR - SCOTT CO. 2
F28 5978 GREEN VALLEY LAKE 3
F29 5977 PRAIRIE ROSE LAKE 1
F30 6001 EASTER L. ON YEADER CR. SE OF DES MOINES 1
F31 5684 IOWA RIVER AT MARSHALLTOWN WTP 2
158
-------
TABLE F-2. NAS/NAE GUIDELINES FOR MAXIMUM POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS
IN WHOLE FISH
PARAMETER
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Endn'n
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Chlordane
gamma-BHC (Lindane)
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
delta-BHC
Toxaphene
Endosulfan, alpha
Endosulfan, beta
o,p'-DDT
p,p'-DDT
o,p'-DDD
p.p'-DDD
o.p'-DDE
p,p'-DDE
AROCLOR 1016
AROCLOR 1221
AROCLOR 1232
AROCLOR 1242
AROCLOR 1248
AROCLOR 1254
AROCLOR 1260
Mercury
NAS/NAE GUIDELINE
0.1 mg/kg
1.0 mg/kg
J
0.5 mg/kg
0.5 mg/kg
159
-------
TABLE F-3
CAHP nATA. RK'«APKHl DATA TAKK'I AT MCF VAI.Ijr
Cft
o
VARlAiitK
CR
CU
"I
SE
7H
CD
AS
HG
PB
sa
RE
17
17
17
26
17
17
76
19
17
17
17
19
MPAN
0.47)77024
1.10467*5?
0.406l«9|4
0.64157*89
>l.;j7972)9ft
0.09077025
0.0*>)5<|B46
o.oimiM
0.)854*>945
0.47567568
0.05oOoOufl
0.2084)SH7
STAMUAHO
UK VI AT ION
O.I27U1776
1. Ob4)42<>7
0.11416)99
0.70715441
17.54547065
0.11647619
' 0.01450)05
0.0175127)
0.17570203
0.11584)10
o.oooooooo
0.2409)712
HTNTMIIM
VAMIF
0.27800000
o.iisooooo
0.09994996
0.1|<>99999
)R. 09999084
o.nsoooooo
o.nboooooo
o.oinooooo
0.05000000
o.25oonooo
o.osoooono
O.OOSOOQOO
HAXTMIIH
VAI.UF
0.79099995
6.80999<<47
1.76999950
1.0999994)
102.000QOOOQ
0.75999909
O.I2I9999H
0.09999996
0.50899994
0.50000000
0.05000000
1.0999994)
5TD tPRHH
OF MF.AM
0.02006280
0. 17497091
0.05164874
0.04067612
7.06746267
0.01914857
0.00784478
0.00780748
0.02«88574
0.019Q4452
O.OoOQOOOO
0.03858Q82
SUN
15.6609988
40.8779944
15.0789981
16.6809992
3265.4997864
3.3399994
1.3919999
1.2929999
14.2619995
15.7500000
1.8499999
8.1289988
VARIANCE
0.01489)09
1.I32875V7
0.098699"!
0.0479I2V5
157.38881)92
0.01)56670
0.000210)4
0.000)0740
0.0)087170
0.01)41967
0.00000000
0.05805070
28.812
96.149
77.J44
32.288
20.489
129.031
27.089
52.88)
45.982
27.214
0.000
115.591
-------
hHOLL CAHP DATA, RRMARKKH DATA TAKF.N AT FACK VALUE
VARIABLE
CCLON
TCLON
TNON
HEPE
»LD
DIfcLD
DOT
ODD
DDE -
PCB4
PCBO
AENO
n
15
35
35
38
19
*9
39
39
19"
39
39
39
MEAN
0.0414!>714
0.04297142
0.0378u57l
0.0705B157
0.0292B205
0.17917947
0.07989743
0.05528204
"O.OB710255
0.4I05J278
0.27251280
0.02997436
STANDARD
DEVIATION
0.019U32I5
0.02251860
0.02278127
0.05701126
0.02882063
0.18475658
0.08210256
0.05749413
0.07634884
0.31095753
0.322399U
0.03153401
MNTMHM
VAt UK
0.01000000
0.01000000
0.00800000
0.00200000
0.00200000
0.00300000
0.01000000
0.00600000
0.00400000
0.03600000
0.05000000
0.00300000
MAXIMUM
VALUE
0.11999995
0.13000000
0.11999995
0,19999999
0.17999995
0.7099999fl
0.51999998
0,34999996
0.39999998
1.59999943
2.00000000
0.19999999
STD KMBOR
OF Hf.AN
0.00335224
0.00980634
0.00385074
0.00924845
0.00461499
0.02958473
0.01314693
0.00920643
0.01222560
0.04979306
0.05162518
0.00504948
SUM
1.45099986
1.50399986
1.32599986
2.68209957
1.14199991
6.98799924
3.11599969
2.15599956
3.39699935
16.00999839
10.62799937
1,16899993
VARIANCE
0.000393J1
0,00050709
0.00051R99
0.00325028
0.0008300J
0.03413499
0.006740H3
0,00330558
0,00582915
0,09669459
0.10394121
0,00099439
c.v.
47,838
52.404
60.132
80.774
98,424
103,119
102,760
104.001
87.654
75.749
118.306
105.201
-------
TABLE F-4
CARP PATA (MICH SAMPljKS ONLY) >HCAN 1 STU UFV
YEAH
CP
cu
en
fV)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
ft
4
10
11
14
15
1*
17
20
21
2?
23
24
000481
Q0048?
005684
005684
005^,87
006486
006486
0064V5
006495
006*35
006651
006651
006652
006*54
006*63
006*67
006*70
8?
82
80
81
80
81
80
82
83
81
82
83
02
82
81
81
83
82
83
83
83
83
83
83
0 791
0 607
0 737
0 616
0 554
6.81
3.36
0.927
lino
U270
0.9BJ
O.HB
1.04
1.04
1.10
ZN
74.-i
75.0
74^0
102.0
AS
74.7
HG
,10
PB
SB
PE
CLPN
,10
0.070
o!l22
,06
,3
,71
-------
GO
ObS
STATION
YEAH
WHULI-: CARP DATA (HIGH'SAMPLES ONLY) >NEAN * 1 STD
CIS
THLO
DANE
TRANS
CHLOR
PANE
1
- 2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
000461
000482
005681
005687
006460
006486
006490
006493
006494
006495
006652
006654
82
82
81
82
82
82
82
82 0
82
82
83
83
12
130
087
TRANS
NONA
CHLOR
0.080
0.065
0.081
0.120
HEPTA
CHLOR
EPOX
AI.D
KIN
13
20
DICI,
DRIN
0.51
0.48
0.46
0.59
0.51
0.44
not
DOP
12
12
ODE
0.180
0.400
0.207
0.170
o|l90
PCB PCR ALPHA
1254 1260 UNDO
6ULFAN
-------
FIGURE F-I. FISH MONITORING LOCRTIONS
1980-83
-964200
434858
F9
395945
LEGEND
O 1 YR OF CRRP DflTfl
A 2 YR OP CRRP DRTR
-t- 3 YR OF CRRP DRTR
-880000+
N
MILES
0
46
92
-------
FIGURE F-lfl. FISH MONITORING LOCRTIONS INSET
DES MOINES flREfl
1980-83
+-940000
\
\
4H500 +
N
)
cf/>2
\-,
\ \
\ \
- LEQEMD
O 1 YR OF CRRP DRTR
A 2 YR OF CRRP DRTR
+ 3 YR OF CRRP DRTR
MILES
N
0
12
-------
FIGURE F-2. CONFIRMED EXCEDflNCES OF NRS/NflE GUIDELINES
1980-83
-964200
434858
PEST,PCB
cf 5 PEST cf 3 PEST
cf8 PEST
cf28 PEST
+395945
-880000+
MILES
0 46
N
92
-------
FIGURE F-3. STflTIONS WHERE HIGH PISH CONCENTRflTIONS
( > MERN + 1 STRNDRRD DEVIRTION) NERE OBSERVED 1980-83
-964200
434858
10 CLDN
CLDN,DI
cgl5_DIELD
395945
-900000
n
N
MILES
-------
FIGURE F-3R. STRTIONS NHERE HIGH FISH CONCENTRRTIONS
( > MERN + 1 STRNDRRD DEVIRTION) WERE OBSERVED 1980-83
DES MOINES RRER
-934200
-------
IX. TRENDS
One of the stated purposes of the fixed station monitoring network is to
determine water quality trends. Various statistical procedures have been
proposed for determining such trends from the environmental data. The
preferred technique is a non-parametric statistic developed by Dr. Pranab
Kumar Sen. The advantages of that technique are that it accounts for
seasonality, it does not assume that the data are normally distributed,
and it identifies continuing trends, even if there is some oscillation
around the trend line. The technique was recommended in a draft report [22]
by Vector Research, Inc. for identifying trends in various environmental
media. The Sen technique, however, requires that data be collected at
least monthly. Since the majority of the Iowa stations report data only
quarterly, the Sen statistic was not used.
The trend evaluation was performed by applying the Spearman rank-correlation
procedure to data from water years 1980-1984. Before the ranking process
was performed, the data were deseasonalized by subtracting from each data
point the corresponding average concentration for that season. Minimal
data coverage requirements were specified as follows in order for the
calculation to be performed:
0 At least 50% of the calendar quarters must have data for the entire
five-year time period.
0 At least 75% of the calendar quarters in a year must have data if that
year is to be used in the calculation.
The result of the statistical calculation is a percent probability that
an apparent trend in the data is real, and is not due to random variation
in data which have no underlying trend. For example, if the result is
95%, then there is a 5% chance that the apparent trend merely reflects
random variability in the environmental measurements. Based on those
probability results, five categories were established.
UP - Probable increasing trend (P _> 90%, data increasing)
UP?- Possible increasing trend (80% _< P < 90%, data increasing)
- - No apparent trend (0 _< P < 80%)
DN?- Possible decreasing trend (80% _< P < 90%, data decreasing)
ON - Probable decreasing trend (P _> 90%, data decreasing)
"Increasing" or "decreasing" refer to the concentrations of the parameter
measured.
Because the data are limited, only the most apparent trends will be
flagged by this procedure. Subtle trends will go undetected unless more
169
-------
data are collected. The trend data were calculated for dissolved oxygen,
nitrate (NO.2 + N0_3), pH, ammonia, zinc and phenols at each station
which met the data completeness criteria. Trend evaluation results are
presented in three formats. Results of trend calculations for other
parameters are not shown because the data completeness criteria were not
met. Still other parameters (e.g. mercury) had enough observations, but
most data were recorded as less than the detection limit. Furthermore,
some detection limits changed over the five year period. Table T-l
shows the map number, the station number, the location, the trend category
(UP, UP?, DN? or DN) and the percent probability for each parameter which
showed a possible or probable trend. Table T-2 summarizes that information,
showing the number of monitoring stations with probable improving, possible
improving, possible declining and probable declining trends for each of
the six aforementioned parameters.
Figures T-l and T-2 highlight, respectively, the sites showing probable
improving trends and probable declining trends. Those figures also
show the respective parameters.
In order to put trend information in its proper perspective, however,
additional information is needed on the magnitude of change and the
relationship of the observed concentrations to the respective water
quality standards or criteria. That information highlights two major
points.
First, the statistical trend evaluation procedure emphasizes the consistency
of the direction of change more than the magnitude of that change. That
fact is illustrated by trend plots for three different parameters. Figure
T-3 shows nitrate concentrations over time. The statistical evaluation
concludes that there is an apparent (or probable) increasing trend, and
the magnitude of change is large. Figure T-4 shows ammonia concentrations
vs time. While the statistical procedure again concludes that there is
an apparent trend, the magnitude of change is much smaller than in Figure
T-3. Figure T-5 shows pH vs time. The statistical procedure concludes
that there is a possible trend, and the magnitude of change is extremely
small.
Second, concentrations which exceed water quality standards are a more
urgent concern than those which have not yet exceeded a standard. Both
the magnitude of change and the relationship of observed concentrations
to the standard should be considered in determining urgency. Figure T-6
shows nitrate concentrations, increasing rapidly over time, which have
already exceeded the drinking water standard of 10 mg/1. Figure T-7
shows dissolved oxygen concentrations decreasing more slowly, which have
not yet fallen below the minimum criterion of 5 mg/1. Clearly, the
situation shown in Figure T-6 is more urgent than that shown in Figure T-7.
170
-------
While trend observations at any specific site may be inaccurate due to
the limited database for that site, some useful general observations can
be drawn from the trend information as a whole.
0 Nitrate concentrations are generally increasing rapidly in wide areas
of the state. In some areas, those concentrations have exceeded the
drinking water standard. Therefore, nitrate trends highlight an urgent
environmental problem.
0 pH observations show decreases (i.e., a trend toward more acidic
waters) in a large number of locations. The magnitude of change is
quite small, and no low-end violations of the pH standards have
been observed at ambient stations.
0 Dissolved oxygen concentrations show increases (improvement) in some
locations, but slow decreases (declining quality) in more locations.
0 More locations show decreasing ammonia concentrations (improvements)
than increasing concentrations.
171
-------
Page No.
TABLE T-l. TREND EVALUATIONS
MAP STATION
NO. NO.
LOCATION
PARAMETER TREND PERCENT
GATE- PROBA-
BORY BILITY
2 821131 UPPER IOWA R - DORCHESTER
4 250221 TURKEY R - CAREER
290200 MAQUOKETA R. - MAQUOKETA
05420500 MISSISSIPPI R. - CLINTON
8 443023
9 140690
10 100531
11 320350
14 787051
17 05474500
18 410085
19 443704
21 325091
22 325079
23 32505A
24 324097
25 324015
26 324028
27 324030
28 324035
WAPSIPINICON R - DEWITT
MISS. R. U/S DAVENPORT
MISS. R. D/S DAVENPORT
IOWA R. - WAPELLO
SKUNK R. - AUGUSTA
MISSISSIPPI R. - KEOKUK
DES MOINES R. - KEOKUK
WAPSIPINICON-INDEPENDENCE
CEDAR R. U/S CHARLES CITY
CEDAR R. D/S CHARLES CITY
CEDAR R. U/S CEDAR FALLS
CEDAR R. GILBERTVILLE
CEDAR R. U/S DAEC
CEDAR R. U/S DAEC DISCHG.
CEDAR R. D/S DAEC DISCHG
CEDAR R. U/S CEDAR RAPIDS
29 324042 CEDAR R. D/S CEDAR RAPIDS
30 SR-5
31 32540W
32 350961
33 340450
34 340520
SHELLROCK R. GORDONVILLE
SHELLROCK R U/S NORTHWOOD
IOWA R. BELMOND
IOWA R. U/S MARSHALLTOWN
IOWA R. D/S MARSHALLTOWN
N02 + N03
DO
PH
N02 + N03
PHENOL
DO
ZN
NH3
DO
ZN
N02 + N03
N02 + N03
DO
NH3
PH
PH
PH
NO2 ( N03
DO
PH
PHENOL
DISZN
DO
PH
DO
NH3
N02 + N03
N02 + N03
PH
PHENOLS
ZN
ZN
N02 + N03
DO
N02 + NO3
N02 + NO3
DO
N02 + N03
PH
ZN
NH3
N02 + N03
N02 + N03
ZN
PHENOL
ZN
DO
ZN
DO
ZN
UP
UP?
DN?
UP
DN
UP?
UP
UP
UP?
UP
UP?
UP?
DN?
UP?
DN?
DN?
DN
UP
DN
DN
UP?
UP
DN
DN
UP
DN
UP?
UP?
DN?
UP
UP
UP
UP
DN?
UP
UP
DN?
UP
DN?
UP
DN
UP?
UP
UP
DN?
DN
DN
DN
DN?
DN
99.8
86.2
87.2
92.9
99.1
87. 0
98.9
91.3
80.3
91.3
86.2
81.2
85.6
89.7
85.3
84.2
94.0
90.6
99.2
98.1
87.8
93.9
98.3
99.9
90.1
94.6
88.4
89.7
85.8
93.0
99.1
99.5
99.4
82.3
99.6
99.6
89.9
99.5
85.8
99.9
96.1
87.3
99.8
99.0
89.4
97.6
91. Q
94.1
85.0
95.9
172
-------
Page No.
MAP STATION
NO. NO.
TABLE T-l. TREND EVALUATIONS
LOCATION
PARAMETER TREND PERCENT
CATE- PROBA-
60RY BILITY
35 330615 IOWA R U/S CORALVILLE RES
38 330100 IOWA R. - IOWA CITY
41 320897 IOWA R. - LONE TREE
42 784043 S. SKUNK R. U/S AMES
43 390553 S. SKUNK R. D/S AMES
44 821142
47 444064
48 444066
49 430380
51 430051
N. SKUNK R. - SIBOURNEY
DES MOINES R U/S FT DODGE
DES MOINES R D/S FT DODGE
DES MOINES R. - BOONE
D M R D/S SAYLORVILLE DAM
53 420780 D M R D/S DES MOINES
54 4295RA RACOON R. - VAN METER
55 420660
57 420150
58 423014
61 610350
62 822502
63 920450
66 460831
67 460665
68 460666
70 975005
DES MOINES R. - RUNNELS
D M R D/S RED ROCK DAM
N RACCOON R. - SAC CITY
CHARITON R. - CHARITON
CHARITON R. - CENTERVILLE
LITTLE SIOUX R. - MILFORD
BIG SIOUX R. - BRANDON,SD
BIG SIOUX R. - CANTON, SD
BIG SIOUX R. - HUDSON, SD
ROCK R. - SIOUX COUNTY
N02 + N03
DO
PH
N02 + N03
NH3
PH
NH3
N02 > N03
DO
PH
N02 + N03
DO
ZN
PH
N02 + N03
PHENOL
N02 ( N03
ZN
N02 + N03
PHENOL
PHENOL
ZN
DO
DO
N02 + N03
PH
PH
N02 + N03
NH3
DO
PH
N03
PH
PH
DO
NH3
PH
NH3
N02 + NO3
PH
N02 + NO3
NH3
PH
ZN
DO
PH
NH3
NH3
NH3
PH
UP?
DN?
DN?
UP
DN
DN?
DN
UP
UP.
DN
UP
DN?
DN
DN
UP
DN
UP
DN
UP
DN
DN?
DN?
DN
UP?
UP?
DN?
DN?
UP?
DN?
DN
DN
UP
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN?
UP
UP?
UP
DN?
DN
DN
UP
UP?
DN?
DN?
DN
DN
89.5
89.0
89.6
98.3
97.0
88.3
93.0
99.3
99.5
99.4
91.2
85.9
94.7
95.0
97.0
92.0
91.2
96.1
99.5
91.7
88.1
89.5
95.4
81.5
82.1
82.1
91.9
88.6
84.7
97.7
97.5
93.7
91.0
91.3
93.2
97.4
98.7
84.8
92.2
80.7
90.1
87.1
97.8
91.3
99.1
84.3
83.0
85.7
94.6
98.1
173
-------
Page No.
MAP STATION
NO. NO.
TABLE T-l. TREND EVALUATIONS
LOCATION
PARAMETER TREND PERCENT
CATE- PROBA-
BORY BILITY
71 460667
72 06485500
73 06486000
75 910180
76 822304
77 06610000
79 821105
BIG SIOUX R.-ALCESTER, 3D
BIG SIOUX R. - AKRON
MISSOURI R. - SIOUX CITY
LIT. SIOUX R-ONAWACTURIN)
BOYER R. -MISSOURI VALLEY
MISSOURI R. U/S OMAHA
WALNUT CREEK - FREMONT CO
80 820700 NISHNABOTNA R. - HAMBURG
83 784001 NODAWAY R. - SHAMBAUGH
85 784089 THOMPSON R. - DAVIS CITY
NH3 UP? 86.6
NH3 DN? 89.7
ZN UP? 87.0
DISZN UP 97.9
DO DN? 88.9
PH DN? 88.5
N02 + N03 UP? 81.6
PHENOL DN 93.2
DO DN 99.7
ZN UP 92.6
DO DN? 84.9
N02 + NO3 UP 95.4
PHENOL DN? 88.4
DO DN 96.0
N02 + N03 UP? 85.3
ZN UP? 84.0
DO DN 97.0
NH3 DN? 80.6
N02 + N03 UP 96.6
NH3 UP? 83.0
N02 + NO3 UP 97.9
174
-------
Dissolved Oxygen
Nitrates
PH
Ammonia
Zinc
Phenols
TABLE T-2. SUMMARY OF TREND EVALUATIONS
NUMBER OF STATIONS
Probable
Improving
Trend
3
0
0
6
6
4
Possible
Improving
Trend
4
0
2
7
1
3
No
Apparent
Trend
44
26
43
46
26
29
Possible
Declining
Trend
9
10
9
3
2
1
Probable
Declini
Trend
9
20
12
1
9
1
ng
175
-------
FIGURE T-l. PROBRBLE IMPROVING TRENDS IN WflTER QURLITY
+-964200
434858
ee-
58 NH3
ZN
NH3
ZN
PHENOL
NH3
ol9 DO
M
01
in
M*
a
§
+395945
-900000+
N
MILES
0
46
92
-------
FIGURE T-2. PROBRBLE DECLINING TRENDS IN NRTER QURLITY
+-964200
434858
N03
ro
-------
« M * * '* ttClL, It -#
Figure T
TRKNI) PLOT 0
STATION! 324035
10.00
R OUALITY DATA
54 jbHN"C6MP~FARH" iSM'DNS"
8.00
N
U
2
t.
3
M
G 4.00
/
L
2.00
0
0
13
20~~
79/10
TIME CELLS (QUARTERS)
84/ 9
o - uHSEKVtD CELL (QUARTEKS) AVERAGE DATA
X - LIN HfcG LINE OF PESEAS OATA
DATA COVERAGES 100% OVERALL/100% YR8 USED
RHOI t 99.5% (APPARENT INCREASING TREND)
LlNRtG= .5944 CHG/YR (STOERRs 2.7585)
-------
4.00
3.20
u
H
3
j
.ID
G 1.60
.80
Figure lj|
THENli PLOT OH
STATION: 324042
QUALITY DATA
HWY 30 BH WEST ftAMK
tr
I
I
T~
n
10
0 t--«-»«--+-«--+--+----+--.+--++»----0"--"0---"+"»-»0»"--0""-"-0+»""+-"«"+"««»**+"+"+""+
0 - ' ' 7 - 13 ~" " 20'
79/10 TIME CELLS (QUARTERS) 84X 9
0 = OBSERVED CELL (QUARTERS) AVERAGE DATA
K - LIN KEG LINE Of OESEAS DATA
DATA COVERAGE! 90« OVERALL/ 90% YRS U8ED
RHOf 96.1% (APPARENT DECREASING TREND)
LINPEGs -.1552 CHG/YR (STDERRs .8549)
-------
Figure T-
THI.ulJ PMJT f\f
STATION: 430051
QUALITY DATA
SAYLORVILL& RES. SAMPLING
i ! I
' t !
1 !
f
t
1
1
i 1
I
! i
»
t 0 0
x n oo
I
t
I
V +
ri I
»
<° u »
1 !
T I
S 1
t
f
1
1
I
1
I
+
t
1 1
.
0 0
0 0
U 0
0
'
.
1
'
' ' ' k - -
00 0
0
0
~ ' '
.
1 1 t
5.00 * * + +
... " o "- 1
79/10
1
TIME CELLS (QUARTERS)
t
*
) 20
B4/ 9
0 = UHSITHVtt) Ctl.L (QUARTERS) AVERAGE DATA DATA COVERAGE! 100* OVERALL/100% YRS USED
X - LIN KEl> LlNf f'F t'ESEAS DATA RHOt - 02.1% (POSSIBLE DECREASING TREND)
.LIMBEG= -.0257 CHG/Yft (STDERRs 4.1930) ~"
S4
*
-------
Figure
THKNO PLOT OK
STATION! 4295RA
lb.0
DUALITY DATA
CO RD R16 BR Nfc VAN "METER"
12.0
N
0
6
3
970
/
L
3.0
0
0
r
r~
0 *»»-» + »»»- + -«-«-^«»-»4. -- + "'*'» *"-«*»- + "* "
79/10
TIME CELLS (QUARTERS)
84/ 9
o
X
OBSERVED CELL (CHARTERS) AVERAGE DATA
LIN PF.(, LINE OF DESEAS DATA
DATA COVERAGES 100% OVERALL/100% YR3 USED
RHOt + 93.7% (APPARENT INCREASING TREND)
LINREGs .9918 CHG/YR (StDERRs 3.9063)
-------
Figure T-7.
TMENU P1..0T OF
QUALITY DATA
.VUTIONI 4JOJUO ^ CO til) E26 NW OF BOONE
J
1 0
I
{ 0
A
1
1
X 0
1
1
0 t
0 I
1
N | 0
v> / I
L 1
J
1
* .
t
I
J
1
»
»
+
1
J
- -
0
0
0 00
'
0
0
0
0
: :. I ' " ''':.'
1 0
D ~T
'
""' ~
'
1 I
1 0
'
'
' ?
«
V
1
1
in
;;
ii
11
/9
H
11
I*
h /'
ik
}m
$
\J
1 »
'. ' " t*
:
j
K
*_
I
«
<*
!!
*
^
SI
*l
w
**
u
^
u
'0 7 " " 13 " 2'0
k?
79/10 TIME CELLS (QUARTERS) B4/ 9 ).'
o - OBSERVED CELL (QUARTERS) AVERAGE
X - LIN RE(i LINE OF DESEAS DATA
: DATA DATA COVERAGE! 100% OVERALL/100% YR5 USED
RHOI - 95.4% (APPARENT DECREASING TREND)
LINREGs -.3373 CHG/YR (STDERRa 6,0460)
M
M
K
1)
||
-------
X. ADEQUACY OF MONITORING EFFORTS TO DEFINE WATER QUALITY
The ambient water monitoring efforts include fixed station monitoring,
several short-term environmental studies (intensive surveys), and fish
collection each year. The fixed station network tables in Section VI of
this report include six monthly stations operated by the UHL, 32 quarterly
stations operated by UHL, and some 38 stations operated by other agencies
(the U.S. Geological Survey, Iowa State University, the University of
Iowa, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the South Dakota Department
of Water and Natural Resources and the Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency), which voluntarily supply monitoring data to IDWAWM.
The objectives for the fixed station network are to provide data:
0 to determine the overall water quality at specific locations
0 to determine the effects of point sources on stream quality
0 to determine the relationship between observed water quality and
observed stream flows
0 to determine trends in water quality
0 to assess the effectiveness of pollution abatement efforts.
To meet those objectives, the network includes the following categories
of stations:
0 upstream and downstream of major metropolitan areas
0 upstream and downstream of major impoundments
0 large and small streams
0 interstate streams
0 streams uninfluenced by point sources
0 near the mouth of major tributaries to the Mississippi and Missouri
Rivers.
The fixed station network design includes monthly sampling at one station
of each major category (upstream of municipalities, areas uninfluenced by
point sources, etc.) and quarterly sampling at the remaining stations.
The quarterly sampling includes low flow, ice cover, average flow and
springtime (high agricultural non-point pollutant loading) conditions.
The selection of parameter coverage for fixed station monitoring follows
the recommendations of the Basic Water Monitoring Program. Other parameters
are added at selected stations to assess specific problem areas. Parameter
selection for each intensive survey is governed by the specific objectives
of that survey, and may include chemical, biological, microbiological,
radiological, physical, and/or other parameters.
Given the current level of monitoring resources, the network design and
parameter coverage include the most important kinds of information needed
to assess overall water quality in the state. The personnel of IDWAWM
and the UHL are conscientious professionals who seek to make optimum use
of monitoring resources. The following observations are offered for
consideration in the routine planning process.
183
-------
The expanded network (including UI and ISU stations) includes monitoring
upstream and downstream of all municipalities with population over
50,000, with the exception of Dubuque. Addition of monitoring in that
area might provide further insights into the extent of iron and cadmium
concentrations in the Mississippi River.
The fixed station network does not include any cold water fisheries.
Although the state Class B standards include a total cyanide standard,
analyses for that parameter are not performed at the DHL stations.
Likewise, those stations do not include monitoring for total chlorine
residual.
The detection limit for most arsenic analyses performed by the UHL is
10 ug/1, while the 10-5 risk level for carcinogenesis is .022 ug/1. A
lower detection limit is needed if a thorough assessment of arsenic data
relative to that risk level is to be performed.
The network design, as implemented, represents a reasoned approach for
assessing water quality under very stringent resource constraints.
Monthly sampling at more stations would give a more complete picture of
water quality as a function of time, and would be useful for more refined
trend analyses.
IDWAWM makes extensive use of cooperative efforts with USGS, UI, and
ISU in order to avoid duplication of effort. Formal cooperative
agreements would be useful in ensuring that those stations will provide
the sampling frequency, parameter coverage, and quality assurance docu-
mentation needed to define water quality in the state.
The downstream station on the Missouri River at Council Bluffs is
upstream of several major discharges on both the Iowa and Nebraska
sides of the river. A cooperative agreement with Nebraska, to
relocate that station and/or to add another downstream station,
could be beneficial to both states.
Intensive surveys cover a wide range of environmental issues and
address the most important issues at each survey site.
The fish monitoring program has been refined over its first few years
to eliminate variability due to species and age/size differences. As
a result, the data base for the single selected species (carp) is
still quite small. Since duplicate samples were not collected prior
to 1984 (and only a few in 1984), the variability of fish data at a
given site is unknown. Continued monitoring is needed at all fish
collection sites. Since WAWM has agreed to collect duplicate fish
samples at all sites during FY-85, initial data to assess that
variability will be available soon.
184
-------
XI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Water Quality
1. Comparison of Fixed Station Data with State Standards
Water quality for most parameters in most locations, was found to meet
the state water quality standards for chemical pollutants. Exceptions
to that general conclusion are as follows. References to "Major," "Minor"
or "Unknown" pollution severities are based on evaluation criteria in
the 305 (b) guidance, and a minimum data completeness requirement of 75%
of the planned samples.
0 Fecal coliform concentrations exceeded the state standards at most
monitoring sites in the state, with pollution severities of "Major."
Continuation of the State's efforts to address the problem is recommended.
0 Nitrate concentrations exceeded the state Class C (Drinking Water)
standard in the following areas which are designated as Class C waters:
Des Moines River-Des Moines (Major Severity)
Raccoon River-Des Moines (Major Severity)
Cedar River-Cedar Rapids (Minor Severity)
Although the following areas do not have drinking water intakes at the
monitoring sites, the nitrate concentrations exceeded the Human Health
criterion, which is the same as the Iowa Class C standard:
Des Moines River-Boone to (Major Severity)
Downstream of Des Moines
Des Moines River-Upstream and (Minor Severity)
downstream of (but not in) Red Rock Reservoir
Floyd River-Sioux City (Major Severity)
Boyer River-Missouri Valley (Major Severity)
Iowa River-MarshalItown (Major Severity)
Iowa River-Upstream of Cedar Rapids (Minor Severity)
Wapisponicon River-DeWitt (Minor Severity)
Walnut Creek-Freemont Co. (Minor Severity)
Since the probable cause of those high nitrate concentrations is
agricultural non-point sources, continued investigation by the State of
measures to abate non-point pollution is recommended.
0 Mercury concentrations exceeded the Iowa Class B standards in the
following areas:
Des Moines River - Boone to Des Moines (Major Severity)
Raccoon River - Des Moines (Major Severity)
Although the number of samples was not large enough to determine the
pollution severity, mercury exceedances were observed on the following
rivers and streams:
185
-------
Des Moines River (various locations)
Skunk River (including S. Skunk and N. Skunk branches)
Little Sioux River
Floyd River
Boyer River
Iowa River-Wapello
Cedar River-(Northern half)
Nishabotna River
Walnut Creek (Freemont County)
Thompson River
Maquoketa River
Wapsipinicon River
Mississippi River-Davenport
The state has lowered the detection limits for mercury analyses in order
to help define the extent of elevated mercury concentrations in the state.
An increase in the number of mercury samples should also be considered.
0 Occasionally, pH observations exceeded the state standards, in the
following locations (all with "Minor" pollution severity):
Rock River-Sioux County
Cedar River-Cedar Falls
Thompson River-Davis City
0 Copper concentrations exceeded the state Class B standards in several
areas, but the number of samples was too small to permit evaluation of
pollution severity:
Mississippi River-Winona, MN
Walnut Creek
Nishabotna River
Iowa River-Wapello
Big Sioux River
Missouri River-(Sioux City and Omaha)
Little Sioux River
Boyer River
Further monitoring is recommended to evaluate whether or not copper is a
problem.
0 Total ammonia concentrations exceeded the state Class B standards in
two locations:
Shell rock River (Minor Severity)
Boyer River (Unknown Severity)
The Shell rock problem has been addressed by construction of a new WWTP at
Albert Lea, MN. Further monitoring on the Boyer River is recommended in
order to determine whether or not a long-term problem exists.
186
-------
2. Comparison of Fixed Station Data with National Criteria
0 Total alkalinity on the Big Sioux River was below the minimum criterion
(with pollution severity of "Major") before July 1984, but not since.
Continued monitoring is recommended to verify that the problem has been
resolved.
0 Arsenic concentrations exceeded the 10"5 risk level in most locations
where arsenic monitoring was performed.
0 Iron concentrations exceeded the freshwater aquatic life (Red Book)
criterion of 1.0 mg/1 (for protection of invertebrates) in the following
areas:
Cedar River-Upstream of Cedar Rapids
Mississippi River-Clinton and Keokuk
Skunk River-Augusta
Missouri River-Sioux City and Omaha
Big Sioux River-Akron
(Major Severity)
(Major Severity)
(Unknown Severity)
(Unknown Severity)
(Unknown Severity)
Most of those monitoring sites are operated by the USGS. The UHL stations
generally do not include monitoring for iron.
0 Un-ionized ammonia concentrations exceeded the aquatic life (Red Book)
criterion in the following locations:
Des Moines River-Red Rock Reservoir
upstream to the Minnesota line
S. Skunk River-Downstream of Ames
Mississippi River-Keokuk
Maquoketa River-Maquoketa
Cedar River- Cedar Falls
Mississippi River-Davenport
(Minor Severity)
(Minor Severity)
(Unknown Severity)
(Minor Severity)
(Minor Severity)
(Major Severity)
Zinc concentrations exceeded the aquatic life 24-hour average criterion
at the following locations:
Missouri River-Sioux City to Omaha
Floyd River-Sioux City
Little Sioux River-Onawa
Cedar River-Downstream of Cedar Rapids
Turkey River-Garber
Maquoketa River-Maquoketa
Mississippi River-Keokuk
Skunk River-Augusta
Chariton River-Chariton
Nishabotna River
Thompson River
Des Moines River-River sites from
Boone to downstream of Red Rock Dam
(Minor or Unknown Severity)
(Minor Severity)
(Minor Severity)
(Major Severity)
(Minor Severity)
(Minor Severity)
(Minor Severity)
(Unknown Severity)
(Minor Severity)
(Major Severity)
(Minor Severity)
(Unknown Severity)
187
-------
0 Total residual chlorine (TRC) exceeded the national aquatic life criteria
in the following areas:
Des Moines (Major Severity)
Davenport (Unknown Severity)
Most UHL stations do not yet monitor for chlorine residual.
0 Cadmium concentrations exceeded the aquatic life 24-hour average
criterion in the following areas:
Des Moines River-From the Saylorville (Major Severity)
Dam downstream past the Red Rock Dam
Mississippi River-Clinton (Major Severity)
Iowa River-Wapello (Unknown Severity)
Missouri River and Tributaries (Major or Unknown Severity)
0 Lead concentrations exceeded the aquatic life 24-hour average criterion
in the following locations:
Missouri River- Omaha to Sioux City (Major or Unknown Severity)
Mississippi River-Winona, MN . (Unknown Severity)
Skunk River-Augusta (Unknown Severity)
For both cadmium and lead, the criteria in the water quality criteria
documents are considerably lower than the state Class B standard. Re-
evaluation of those two state standards should be considered to ensure
that they are still appropriate.
3. Intensive Surveys
Localized problem areas due to point sources were documented by means of
intensive surveys in the following locations:
Calmus Creek - Parameters associated with cement plants
Rock Creek - Organics in ground water
Floyd River - Dissolved oxygen and ammonia
Continuation of the state's efforts to abate pollution from the respective
point sources is recommended.
188
-------
B. Trends
Trend evaluations were performed for pH, ammonia, nitrates, dissolved
oxygen, phenols and zinc. Trend evaluations for other parameters (especially
metals) were found to be infeasible because many parameters lacked sufficient
data, many data points were reported as less than the detection limit,
and for many of the metals, the detection limits changed over time.
Because most stations were limited to quarterly data collection, there is
some uncertainty in the trend identification at any given site. However,
the composite trend information for all sites leads to some useful obser-
vations.
0 Nitrate concentrations show rapidly increasing trends at many sites
in the state. At some of the sites, the concentrations have exceeded
the drinking water standard. No sites show confirmed decreasing
trends.
0 pH levels show a very gradual trend to more acidic conditions at many
sites in the state. No acidic violations of the state standards have
been observed. Two sites show possible trends to more alkaline conditions,
0 Trends in dissolved oxygen concentration show increases (improvement)
at some sites, but slow decreases at more sites.
0 Trends in ammonia concentrations show slow increases (declining water
quality) at a few sites, but improvement at more sites.
C. Monitoring Network and Parameter Coverage
Given the current level of monitoring resources, the state monitoring
program generally includes the most important types of information needed
to determine water quality in the state. The planning process is conducted
by conscientious professionals dedicated to making optimum use of the
monitoring resources. The following observations and recommendations
would improve an already good monitoring program.
0 The fixed station network, (including stations operated by the University
of Iowa and by Iowa State University) includes monitoring upstream and
downstream of all municipalities with population over 50,000 except for
Dubuque. We recommend that the state consider adding stations there.
0 The fixed station network does not include any monitors in cold water
fisheries. Addition of at least one such station is recommended.
0 Although the state Class B standards include a total cyanide standard,
analyses for that parameter are not performed at the UHL stations.
Addition of that parameter is recommended. Since implementation of a
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) standard has been proposed, addition of TRC
monitoring is likewise recommended.
189
-------
Continued monitoring for metals was recommended in Section A above at
a number of stations where the state standards and/or National criteria
were exceeded. For comparison, the concentrations of metals observed at
sites which monitor "background" water quality would provide useful
information. Addition of monitoring for the DHL's standard list of metals
is recommended at two such sites - N. Raccoon River at Sac City (423014)
and Upper Iowa River at Dorchester (821131). That monitoring is
recommended at the same frequency as metals monitoring at other stations.
Use of different analytical procedures for metals by different agencies
raises questions about data comparability for those metals. We
recommend that WAWM and UHL examine those data comparability questions,
and consider changing the UHL undigested metals data to a different
STORE! parameter code, which would specify undigested analyses.
Neither the Iowa Class B standards nor the parameter list for UHL
stations include iron. We recommend that the state consider including
iron monitoring in the fixed station network, and collect enough data to
determine whether or not a state standard for iron should be developed
for protection of freshwater invertebrates.
The detection limit for most Arsenic analyses performed by the UHL is
10 ug/1, while the 10~5 risk level is .022 ug/1. A lower detection
limit is needed if a thorough assessment of arsenic data relative to
that evaluation criterion is to be performed. We recommend that the
UHL consider lowering that detection limit.
The network design, as implemented, represents a reasoned approach for
assessing water quality under very stringent resource constraints.
Monthly sampling at more stations is recommended in order to give a more
complete picture of water quality as a function of time, and for more
refined trend analyses.
IDWAWM makes extensive use of cooperative efforts with USGS, UI, and ISU
in order to avoid duplication of effort. Formal cooperative agreements
are recommended to ensure that those stations will provide the sampling
frequency, parameter coverage, and quality assurance documentation
needed to define water quality in the state.
The downstream station on the Missouri River at Council Bluffs is
upstream of several major discharges on both the Iowa and Nebraska sides
of the river. A cooperative agreement with Nebraska, to relocate that
station and/or to add another downstream station, is recommended because
it could be beneficial to both states.
The states are responsible for determining water quality for each
water body. The current network design includes stations upstream and
downstream of major cities, upstream and downstream of major impoundments,
on large and small streams, upstream and downstream of specific point
sources, in areas unaffected by point sources, and at the mouths of
tributaries to the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers. Long segments of
190
-------
interior streams are not covered directly by fixed station monitoring.
If water quality on those stream segments is assessed, such assessment
would rely on extrapolation of data from other locations, on use of
intensive survey data, or on some qualitative assessment techniques
(e.g., a "windshield survey"). We recommend that IDWAWM review the
network to determine whether or not they are satisfied that all water
bodies are adequately addressed.
Intensive surveys cover a wide range of environmental issues and
address the most important issues at each survey site.
The fish monitoring program has been refined over its first few years
to eliminate variability due to species and age/size differences. As
a result, the data base for the single selected species (carp) is
still quite small. Since duplicate samples were not collected prior
to 1984 (and only a few in 1984), the variability of fish data at a
given site is unknown. Since duplicate samples will be collected at
all sites in 1985, information on that variability will become available.
Continued monitoring is needed at all fish collection sites.
Concentrations of chromium in fish tissue exceeded an arbitrary cut-point
(defined by the mean plus one standard deviation for all fish samples
collected in Iowa) near Des Moines in more than one year of sampling.
More intensive water monitoring is recommended for chromium at two
stations (21 Iowa station 420780 and 1117MBR station 005686).
191
-------
REFERENCES
1. Iowa Code, Section 999-61.3 (445B) Surface Water Quality Criteria.
2. Federal Register, Volume 45, number 321, Friday, November 28, 1980.
3. Quality Criteria for Water, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1976.
4. Iowa Code, Section 900-61.3(5).
5. Ambient Water Quality Criteria for , (EPA 440/5-80-015 through EPA
440/5-80-079), Office of Water Regulations and Standards, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, October 1980.
6. Wasteload Allocation Model Calibration and Verification Study, South
Skunk River-Story City, South Skunk River-Ames, Indian Creek-Nevada,
Paint Creek-Waukon, Report No. 85-6, University Hygienic Laboratory,
University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, 1985.
7. Calmus Creek Water Quality Study May-August 1984, Report No. 85-1,
University Hygienic Laboratory, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 1985.
8. Bacteriological Investigation of Selected Primary Contact Recreational
Waters-September 1984, Report No. 85-5, University Hygienic Laboratory,
University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 1985.
9. Water Quality Study of Rock Creek, Clinton-Camanche Area-November
1983, Report NO. 84-5, University Hygienic Laboratory, University of
Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, 1984.
10. Water Quality Study of the Wapsipinion River, Stanwood Area, August
1983, Report No. 84-4, University Hygienic Laboratory, University of
Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, 1984.
11. Impact of Non-disinfected Waste on Mississippi River Water Quality,
Davenport Area-August 1983, Report No. 84-3, University Hygienic
Laboratory, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, 1984.
12. Wasteload Allocation and Disinfection Studry of Four-Mile Creek,
Ankeny-August 1983, Report No. 84-2, University Hygienic Laboratory,
University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, 1984.
13. Skillet Creek Water Quality Study-August 1983, Report No. 84-1,
University Hygienic Laboratory, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
1984.
14. Yellow River Rainfall Runoff and Low Flow Water Quality Studies,
Report No. 83-3, University Hygienic Laboratory, University of Iowa,
Iowa City, Iowa 9183.
192
-------
15. Storm Lake Water Quality Study 1981-82, Report No. 83-2, University
Hygienic Laboratory, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 1983.
16. Floyd River Winter Water Quality - February 1982, Report No'. 82-19,
University Hygienic Laboratory, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa,
1982.
17. Prairie Rose Lake Monitoring RCWP Project-Year 1 (1981), Iowa Department
of Environmental Quality, March 23, 1982.
18. 1984 Annual Report, Prairie Rose Rural Clean Water Project, Shelby
County, Iowa, prepared and submitted through a joint effort of the
Local Coordinating Committee and State Coordinating Committee for
the Prairie Rose Rural Clean Water Project.
19. Green Valley Lake Monitoring, Years 1 & 2 (1981 and 1982) Iowa
Department of Water, Air and Waste Management.
20. Cooperative Grant Agreement Report, Lake Restoration for Green Valley
Lake,'Iowa, Grant Number 50071781010, February 12, 1985, Iowa
Conservation Commission.
21. Survey of the Missouri River and Its Tributaries in the Vicinity of
Omaha, Nebraska, conducted in March 1984, Environmental Monitoring
and Compliance Branch, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Kansas
City, Kansas, October 1984.
22. Methods for Classifying Changes in Environmental Conditions (Draft),
VRI-EPA 7.4-FR80-l(R), Vector Research, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan
1980.
193
-------
APPENDIX A
PARAMETER COVERAGE AT UHL AND USGS STATIONS
194
-------
UHL Fixed Monitoring Network
Water Quality Parameters
Quarterly
temperature
dissolved oxygen
PH
conductivity
fecal coliform
organic nitrogen
ammonia nitrogen
nitrate + nitrite nitrogen s
total phosphate
soluble phosphate
biochemical oxygen demand (5 day)
total solids
suspended solids
dissolved solids
total organic carbon
turbidity
alkalinity
chloride
sodium
Toxics
zinc
phenol
Annually (at quarterly sites only)
fluoride
Toxics
arsenic
barium
chromium
cadmium
copper
lead
mercury
selen'ium
silver
Monthly
temperature
dissolved oxygen
PH
conductivity
fecal coliform
total kjeldahl nitrogen
amnonia nitrogen
nitrate + nitrite nitrogen
total phosphate
biochemical oxygen demand (5
chemical oxygen demand
total suspended solids
sodium
day)
Toxics
arsenic
phenol
(Cedar River sites only)
Fish Flesh Parameters (at monthly
sites only)
Toxics
arsenic
barium
cadmi urn
copper
chromium
lead
mercury
zinc
phenol
ODD
DDT
DDE
dieldrin
heptachlor epoxide
PCB
CAC:mac/Disk45-WRI357M01.06-.32
195
-------
NASQAN Network Parameters
Quarterly at All Stations
PH
specific conductance
turbidity
total solids
total alkalinity
total nitrogen
total phosphorus
dissolved ortho phosphorus
dissolved nitrate + nitrite nitrogen
dissolved ammonia
dissolved arsenic
dissolved aluminum
dissolved barium
dissolved beryllium
dissolved cadmium
dissolved chromium
dissolved colbalt
dissolved copper
dissolved iron
dissolved lead
dissolved lithium
dissolved manganese
dissolved mercury
dissolved molybdemium
dissolved nickel
dissolved selenium
dissolved silver
dissolved strontium
dissolved valadium
dissolved zinc
dissolved calcium
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
Bimonthly
magnesium
sodium
potassium
silica
sulfate
fluoride
chloride
PH
specific conductance
turbidity
total solids
total alkalinity
total nitrogen
dissolved nitrate + nitrite nitrogen
dissolved ammonia
total phosphorus
dissolved phosphorus
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
dissolved
ortho phosphorus
calcium
magnesium
potassium
silica
sodium
chloride
fluoride
sulfate
CAC:mac/Disk45-WRI357M01.06-.32
196
-------
USGS Bench-Mark Parameters
Quarterly Analysis
DO
PH
temperature
specific conductance
calcium hardness
flow
carbonate hardness
dissolved solids
fixed dissolved solids
carbon dioxide
total phosphorus
total nitrate + nitrite
alkalinity as CaC03
carbonate
bicarbonate
fecal streptococci
fecal coliform
dissolved silica
total iron
total manganese
dissolved calcium
dissolved magnesium
dissolved calcium
dissolved sodium
dissolved potassium
dissolved sulfate
dissolved chloride
disolved fluoride
Annual Analysis
TOXICS
total cyanide
total arsenic
total barium
total cadmium
total chromium
total copper
total lead
total mercury
total selenium
total silver
total zinc
polychlorinated naphthalenes
PCB - water & sediment
heptachlor - water & sediment
heptachlor epoxide - water & sediment
endrin - water & sediment
dieldrin - water & sediment
ODD - water & sediment
DDE - water & sediment
DDT - water & sediment
aldrin - water & sediment
chlordane - water & sediment
diazinon
endosulfan
ethion
lindane
malthion
methyl parathion
methyl trithion
parathion
trithion
2, 4 D
2, 4, 5 T
si 1vex
dissolved gross alpha
dissolved gross beta
suspended gross alpha
suspended gross beta
dissolved radium 226
dissolved natural uranium
CAC:mac/Di sk45-WRI357M01.06-.32
-------
APPENDIX B
TABLES OF MAJOR POINT SOURCES,
SURFACE DRINKING WATER INTAKES
AND HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
198
-------
Page No.
03/28/85
NC^
FACILITY
MAJOR POINT SOURCES IN IOWA
CITY
MUNICIPAL/
INDUSTRIAL
BASIN
34
35
36
37
33
39
40
41
42
43
44
49
50
51
ADM. CORP. - CLINTON
ALUMINUM CO OF AMERICA
AMES CITY OF WPC PLANT
ANAMOSA CITY OF STP
ANKENY CITY OF EAST STP
ANKENY CITY OF WEST TREATMENT
ATLANTIC CITY OF STP
BOONE CITY OF STP
BURLINGTON DEPT OF PUBLIC WORK
CARROLL CITY OF STP
CEDAR FALLS CITY OF STP
CEDAR RAPIDS CITY WPC - MAIN PL
CENTERVILLE CITY OF STP
CHAR I TON CITY OF STP
CHARLES CITY TN OF STP
CHEMPLEX CO CLINTON
CHEROKEE CITY OF STP
CHEVRON CHEMICAL CO.
CLARINDA CITY OF STP
CLEAR LAKE SANITARY DIST
CLINTON CITY STP
COLL IS CO CLINTON
CONSOL PKG FT MADISON
CORALVILLE CITY OF STP
COUNCIL BLUFFS CITY OF WWTP
CRESTON CITY OF STP
DAVENPORT CITY OF MUN SEWER SY
DECORAH CITY OF STP
DEERE JOHN ?< CO
DEERE JOHN ?< CO
DEN I SON CITY OF STP
DES MOINES CITY OF MAIN WWTP
DUBUQUE CITY OF WWTP
DUPONT CLINTON
DUPONT FT MADISON
ESTHERVILLE CITY STP
FAIR-FIELD CITY STP
FARMLAND FOODS I A FALLS
FIRESTONE TIRE & RUBBER CO DSM
FORT DODGE CITY OF STP
FORT MADISON CITY OF MAIN WWTP
FREDERICKSBURG TOWN OF STP
GRAIN PROCESSING CO MUSCAT I NE
GRINNELL CITY OF STP
HAWKEYE CHEMICAL COMPANY
HUBINGER CO.
INC.
PRAIRIE CRK 1-3 CDR RPDS
INDEPENDENCE CITY STP
INDIANOLA STP - NORTH PLANT
INTERSTATE POWER DUBUQUE
CLINTON
RIVERDALE
AMES
ANAMOSA
ANKENY
ANKENY
ATLANTIC
BOONE
BURLINGTON
CARROLL
'CEDAR FALLS
CEDAR RAPIDS
CENTERVILLE
CHARITON
CHARLES CITY
CLINTON
CHEROKEE
FORT MADISON
CLARINDA
CLEAR LAKE
CLINTON
CLINTON
FORT MADISON
CORALVILLE
COUNCIL BLUFFS
CRESTON
DAVENPORT
DECORAH
DUBUQUE
WATERLOO
DENISON
DES MOINES
DUBUQUE
CLINTON
FORT MADISON
ESTHERVILLE
FAIR-FIELD
IOWA FALLS
DES MOINES
FORT DODGE
FORT MADISON
FREDERICKSBURG
MUSCATINE
GRINNELL
CLINTON
KEOKUK
FORT DODGE
CEDAR RAPIDS
INDEPENDENCE
INDIANOLA
DUBUQUE
I
I
II
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
I
M
I
M
M
M
I
I
M
M
M
M
M
I
I
M
M
M
I
I
M
M
I
I
M
M
M
I
M
I
I
I
I
M
M
I
NE
NE
SK
NE
DM
DM
SO
DM
1C
DM
1C
1C
SO
SO
1C
NE
WE
SK
SO
1C
NE
NE
SK
1C
WE
SO
NE
NE
NE
1C
WE
DM
NE
NE
SK
DM
SK
1C
DM
DM
SK
NE
NE
SK
NE
DM
DM
1C
NE
DM
NE
199
-------
Page No.
03/28/85
NOT
ACILITY
MAJOR POINT SOURCES IN IOWA
CITY
MUNICIPAL/
INDUSTRIAL
BASIN
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
INTERSTATE POWER DUBUQUE IA
IOWA CITY CITY OF POLLUTION CO
IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER CO
IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT&POWER CO
IOWA GREAT LAKES SANITARY DIST
IOWA SOUTHERN UTILITIES
IOWA-ILLINOIS SAS&ELECTRIC CO.
IPLC CNCL BLFS PLANT DSM
IPLC DES MOINES
IPS GEO NEAL STN SIOUX CITY
IPS BED NEAL STN UNIT 4 SALIX
IPS MAYNARD STN WATERLOO
64 KEOKUK CITY OF STP
65 KNOXVILLE CITY STP
66 LEMARS CITY OF STP
67 MARSHALLTOWN CITY OF WPC PLANT
68 MASON CITY CITY OF STP
69 MONSANTO CO MUSCATINE
70 MOUNT PLEASANT CITY OF STP
71 MUSCATINE CITY OF WPC DEPT
^^NEW HAMPTON CITY OF STP
^NEWTON CITY OF STP SOUTH PLANT
TTOELWEIN CITY OF STP
75 OSCAR MAYER FOODS CORPORATION
76 OSCEOLA CITY STP
77 OSKALOOSA CITY OF STP NORTHEAST
78 OTTUMWA CITY OF STP
79 PACKAGING CORP OF AMERICA TAMA
80 PELLA CITY OF STP (NORTH MAIN)
81 PERRY CITY OF STP
82 SHENANDOAH CITY OF STP
83 SIOUX CITY-CITY OF WWTP
84 SPENCER TOWN OF STP
85 STORM LAKE CITY OF STP-PLANT 2
86 TERRA CHEMICALS SER BLUF
87 UNIV OF IA PWPL IOWA CITY
88 US DEPT OF ARMY
89 VINTON CITY STP
90 WASHINGTON CITY OF STP
91 WATERLOO WPC PLANT
92 WAVERLY CITY OF WWTP
93 WEBSTER CITY STP
94 WEST LIBERTY CITY OF STP
95 WINTERSET CITY OF STP
IA ARMY AMMUN
DUBUQUE
IOWA CITY
CEDAR RAPIDS
CEDAR RAPIDS
MILFORD
BURLINGTON
BETTENDORF
COUNCIL BLUFFS
DES MOINES
SIOUX CITY
SAL IX
WATERLOO
KEOKUK
KNOXVILLE
LE MARS
MARSHALLTOWN
MASON CITY
MUSCATINE
MOUNT PLEASANT
MUSCATINE
NEW HAMPTON
NEWTON
OELWEIN
PERRY
OSCEOLA
OSKALOOSA
OTTUMWA
TAMA
PELLA
PERRY
SHENANDOAH
SIOUX CITY
SPENCER
STORM LAKE
SERGEANT BLUFF
IOWA CITY
BURLINGTON
VINTON
WASHINGTON
WATERLOO
WAVERLY
WEBSTER CITY
WEST LIBERTY
WINTER-SET
I
M
I
I
M
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
M
M
M
M
M
I
M
M
M
M
M
r
M
M
M
I
M
M
M
M
M
M
I
I
I
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
NE
1C
1C
1C
WE
1C
NE
WE
DM
WE
WE
1C
DM
DM
WE
1C
1C
NE
SK
NE
NE
SK
NE
DM
DM
SK
DM
1C
SK
DM
SO
WE
WE
DM
WE
1C
1C
1C
SK
1C
1C
DM
1C
DM
200
-------
Page No.
03/28/85
1
^WT.
SURFACE DRINKING WATER INTAKES IN IOWA
FACILITY / CITY SURFACE WATER SOURCE
POPU-
LATION
SERVED
26
27
28
29
30
31
34
35
36
37
33
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
t
49
50
AFTON
ALB IA
BEDFORD
BLOOMFIELD
BURLINGTON
CENTERVILLE
CENTERVILLE
CENTRAL WATER SYSTEM
CHARITON
CHARITON
CLARINDA
CLEAR LAKE
CORNING
CORNING
CORYDON
COUNCIL BLUFFS
CRESTON
CRESTON
CRESTON
DAVENPORT
DES MOINES
FAIRFIELD
FAIRFIELD
FORT MADISON
GREENFIELD
GREENFIELD
HUMESTON
IOWA CITY
KEOKUK
LAKE PARK
LAMONI
LAMONI
LENOX
MILFORD
MONTEZUMA
MOUNT AYR
MOUNT PLEASANT
ORIENT
OSCEOLA
OTTUMWA
PANORA
SPENCER-
SPIRIT LAKE
WAHPETON
WINTERSET
RATHBUN REG WATER
SUN VALLEY RWD
LAKE AHQUABI ST PARK
AFTON LAKE WEST
RESERVOIR
PLANT LAKE AT 102 RIVER
LAKE FISHER AND RATHBUN RWS
MISSISSIPPI RIVER
RESERVOIR
RESERVOIR
WEST LAKE
LAKE ELLIS
LAKE MORRIS
NOD AW AY RIVER, CLARINDA
CLEAR LAKE
CITY RESERVOIR
LAKE BINDER
CORYDON LAKE AND RATHBUN RWS
MISSOURI RIVER, COUNCIL BLUFFS
SUM ITT LAKE
GREEN VALLEY LAKE
12 MILE IMPOUNDMENT
MISSISSIPPI RIVER
RACCOON RIVER
IMPOUNDMENT
3 RESERVOIRS
MISSISSIPPI RIVER
NODAWAY LAKE
LAKE GREENFIELD
RESERVOIR, HUMESTON
IOWA RIVER
MISSISSIPPI RIVER
SILVER LAKE
LAKE LASHAME
HOME POND NITH
IMPOUNDMENT
WEST OKOBOJI LAKE
DIAMOND LAKE
LAKE AYR
SKUNK RIVER
RESERVOIR, LAKE ORIENT
WEST LAKE
DES MOINES RIVER
MIDDLE RACCOON RIVER
STOLLEY POND
SPIRIT LAKE
WEST LAKE OKOBOJI - PRIMARY SOURCE
CEDAR LAKE
LAKE RATHBUN
SUN VALLEY LAKE
LAKE AHQUABI
985
4184
1692
3061
31451
6558
161O
4987
9366
7458
1939
1818
56699
8429
134200
232024
10600
13520
2243
671
51577
13536
1123
2705
1338
2982
1485
1938
7372
416
3750
29148
1211
11726
4522
372
4021
15202
720
1450/DAY
201
-------
Page No. 2
03/28/85
SURFACE DRINKING WATER INTAKES IN IOWA
^wr.
FACILITY / CITY SURFACE WATER SOURCE POPU-
LATION
SERVED
51 UNIVERSITY OF IOWA IOWA RIVER 20000
52 LACEY KEOSAUQUA PARK LACEY KEOSAUQUA 305
53 LACEY KEOSAUQUA PARK LACEY KEOSAUQUA 305
54 VACATION VILLAGE WEST OKOBOJI 250
202
-------
Page No.
03/06/85
HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES IN IOWA
(ACTIVE SUPERFUND SITES)
MAP
NO.
WASTE SITE
CITY
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
ADAMS & TAYLOR COUNTY REGIONAL SERV AGCY
AGBELT INC
AIDEX CORF-
AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE
ALCOA DAVENPORT WORKS
ALTER COMPANY DISPOSAL SITE
ANAMOSA PCB SITE
APPANOOSE COUNTY LANDFILL
ARNS LANDFILL
BAIER, JAMES FARM
BAUMGARTNER GATE FACTORY INC
BELMOND SOLID WASTE DUMP
BLACK HAWK COUNTY CONSERVATION
BLACK HAWK COUNTY LANDFILL
BLOOMFIELD FOUNDRY INC
BRET LANDFILL
BRUTY SITE
BUENA VISTA COUNTY SANITARY LANDFILL
C M ST P ?< P RAILROAD CO
C M ST P S< P RAILROAD CO
C M ST P & P RAILROAD CO
C M ST P ?< P RAILROAD CO
C M ST P S< P RAILROAD CO
CARGILL INC
CARCILL INC
CARL, ROBERT CO
CEDAR JOHNSON FARM SERVICE ELEVATOR-
CEDAR RAPIDS MUNICIPAL SANITARY LANDFILL
CEDAR RAPIDS SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
CEDAR RAPIDS SLUDGE INCINERATOR
CHEMPLEX CO
CHEVRON CHEMICAL CO
CHEVRON CHEMICAL CO
CLAY EQUIPMENT CORF-
CLINTON COUNTY SANITARY LANDFILL-EAST
CLOSED DRUM SITE
CLOSED DRUM SITE
CLOW DISPOSAL SITE
COLL IS CORF-
CONSTRUCTION MACHINERY CO
CRAWFORDSVILLE FARM SITE
CURTIS ANIMAL HEALTH PRODUCTS
DANVILLE MILL & SUPPLY CO
DEERE, JOHN
DEERE, JOHN COMPONENT WORKS
DEERE, JOHN DES MOINES WORKS
DEERE, JOHN OF DEERE & CO
DELAWARE SERVICE CENTER
DES MOINES AGRICULTURAL EQUIPMENT PLANT
DES MOINES BARREL S< DRUM CO
CORNING
DES MOINES
COUNCIL BLUFFS
DES MOINES
RIVERDALE
COUNCIL BLUFFS
ANAMOSA
APPANOOSE CO
BREMER CO
WEST POINT
MANCHESTER
BELMOND
CEDAR FALLS
WATERLOO
BLOOMFIELD
MUSCATINE
WASHINGTON
STORM LAKE
MARQUETTE
GREEN ISLAND
BLAKESBURG
EAST MORAVIA
CEDAR RAPIDS
BUFFALO
DES MOINES
CAMANCHE
OXFORD
CEDAR RAPIDS
CEDAR RAPIDS
CEDAR RAPIDS
CLINTON
COUNCIL BLUFFS
NORWALK
CEDAR FALLS
CLINTON
DES MOINES
DES MOINES
OSKALOOSA
CLINTON
WATERLOO
CRAWFORDSVILLE
CORNING
DANVILLE
DUBUQUE
WATERLOO
ANKENY
OTTUMWA
DES MOINES
DES MOINES
DES'MOINES
203
-------
Page No.
03/06/35
MAP
NO.
HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES IN IOWA
(ACTIVE SUPERFUND SITES)
WASTE SITE
CITY
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
DES MOINES CITY DUMP
DES MOINES COUNTY LANDFILL
DES MOINES METROPOLITAN PARK
DES MOINES TCE
DES MOINES VOCATIONAL SCHOOL
DEXTER COMPANY
DICO COMPANY
DILLER GREENHOUSES INC
DISCHLER, JERRY SPRAYING SERVICE
DO CORP-WEST
ESB INC
EVANS TRANSPORTATION COMPANY
EVERCO INDUSTRIES INC
EX IDE BATTERY SALES
FARMERS COMMUNITY COOPERATIVE INC
FARMERS COMMUNITY COOPERATIVE INC
FARMERS COOPERATIVE ELEVATOR CO
FARMERS COOPERATIVE OIL CO
FARMERS COOPERATIVE PRODUCE CO
FARMERS ELEVATOR CO
FIRST MISSISSIPPI CORP FERTILIZER PLANT
FLOYD-MITCHELL SANITARY LANDFILL
FMC CORP-AGRICULTURAL CHEMICAL GROUP
FOOTE MINERAL CO
FREDERICKSBURG WWTP
FRENCH ?< HECHT
FRENCH ?< HECHT
FRIT INDUSTRIES
FT DES MOINES
FT DODGE NITROGEN PLANT #2
FT MADISON SANITARY LANDFILL
GLENWOOD IOWA DUMP SITE
GREASE LAKE
GRIMES PROPERTY
HAWARDEN SANITARY LANDFILL
HAWARDEN, CITY OF
HAWKEYE CHEMICAL CO
HAWKEYE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
HAWKEYE POWER PLANT
HAWKEYE STEEL PRODUCTS INC
HENRY COUNTY SANITARY LANDFILL
HOPKINS, R V INC
INDUSTRIAL PROCESSING CO
INTERCHEM INC
IOWA ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT
IOWA BEEF PROCESSORS INC
IOWA BEEF PROCESSORS INC
IOWA CITY SANITARY LANDFILL
IOWA CITY SANITARY LANDFILL-WEST
IOWA COUNTY LANDFILL
DES MOINES
WEST BURLINGTON
DES MOINES
DES MOINES
DES MOINES
FAIRFIELD
DES MOINES
COUNCIL BLUFFS
MOORLAND
DAVENPORT
DES MOINES
COUNCIL BLUFFS
OTTUMWA
DAVENPORT
ROCKWELL
CARTERSVILLE
MARTELLE
SOLDIER
FT ATKINSON
ROCK VALLEY
FT MADISON
ELMA
SERGEANT BLUFF
KEOKUK
FREDERICKSBURG
DAVENPORT
WALCOTT
HUMBOLDT
DES MOINES
FT DODGE
FT MADISON
GLENWOOD
WEST BURLINGTON
KEOKUK
HAWARDEN
HAWARDEN
CAMANCHE
WATERLOO
STORM LAKE
WATERLOO
MT PLEASANT
DAVENPORT
AMES
ALTON
MIDDLETOWN
DENISON
FT DODGE
IOWA CITY
IOWA CITY
HOMESTEAD
204
-------
Page No.
03/06/85
MAP
NO.
HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES IN IOWA
(ACTIVE SUPERFUND SITES)
WASTE SITE
CITY
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
125
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
14S
149
150
IOWA INDUSTRIAL HYDRAULICS
IOWA PAINT MANUFACTURING CO
IOWA POWER 8< LIGHT CO
IOWA-ILL I NO IS GAS S< ELECTRIC CO
IOWA-ILL I NO IS GAS S< ELECTRIC CO
JESSE ROOFING ?< PAINTING CO
JOHNSON ST DUMP
JOHNSON E F CO
K 8< 0 MANUFACTURING CO INC
KARTRIDE PAK CO
KEOKUK LANDFILL INC
KEOKUK MUNICIPAL LANDFILL 2
KEOKUK STEEL CASTING-DIV OF E METAL CORP
KNOCH, CHARLES FARM
LABOUNTY DUMP SITE
LAND 0' LAKES INC-SOYBEAN DIV
LINN COUNTY SANITARY LANDFILL
LONG GROVE DUMP
LOUISA COUNTY LANDFILL
MAHASKA COUNTY SITE
MARSHALL COUNTY LANDFILL
MAYTAG DUMP
MCCARTER, JOHN SAND PIT
MCDONALD, A Y MANUFACTURING CO
MCKEE BUTTON CO INC
MEREDITH PRINTING GROUP
MICHAEL CO
MIDDLE DUMP
MIDWEST MANUFACTURING CO
MIDWEST PROCESSING CO
MONTGORMERY COUNTY SANITARY LANDFILL
MUSCATINE COUNTY LANDFILL
NA-CHURS PLANT FOOD CO
NORTH FARM SITE-MIDWEST MFG
NORTH HIGH SCHOOL
NORTH IOWA AREA COMMUNITY COLLEGE
NORTHERN ENGRAVING CORP
NORTHERN ENGRAVING CORF-
OLD HARVEY SITE
OSGOOD GRAVEL PIT
OTTUMWA LANDFILL
OTTUMWA-WAPELLO COUNTY SANITARY LANDFILL
PEOPLES NATURAL GAS
PROGRESSIVE FOUNDRY INC
QUINN FOUNDARY ?< MACHINE
RADIUM PETROLEUM CO
RADIUM.PETROLEUM CO
RADIUM PETROLEUM CO
RADIUM PETROLEUM CO
RADIUM PETROLEUM CO
POCAHONTAS
DES MOINES
PLEASANT HILL
IOWA CITY
FT DODGE
BETTENDORF
KEOKUK
GARNER-
HULL
DAVENPORT
KEOKUK
KEOKUK
KEOKUK
WESTPOINT
CHARLES CITY
SHELDON
MARION
LONG GROVE
WAFELLO
OSKALOOSA
MARSHALLTOWN
NEWTON
CEDAR FALLS
DUBUQUE
MUSCATINE
DES MOINES
BETTENDORF
MIDDLE AMANA
KELLOGG
KEOKUK
RED OAK
MUSCATINE
RED OAK
KELLOGG
DES MOINES
MASON CITY
WAUKON
LANSING
DES MOINES
EMMETSBURG
OTTUMWA
OTTUMWA
DUBUQUE
PERRY
BOONE
FT DODGE
IOWA FALLS
VINTON
CEDAR FALLS
CENTER POINT
205
-------
Page No.
03/06/35
MAP
NO.
HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES IN IOWA
(ACTIVE SUPERFUND SITES)
WASTE SITE
CITY
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
. 193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
RADIUM PETROLEUM CO
RADIUM PETROLEUM CO
RADIUM PETROLEUM CO
RADIUM PETROLEUM CO
RADIUM PETROLEUM CO
RADIUM PETROLEUM CO
RADIUM PETROLEUM CO
RALSTON SITE
RED OAK CITY LANDFILL
RELIANCE BATTERY MANUFACTURING CO
ROBERTS RURAL SUPPLY
ROCKWELL CITY READY MIX CO
ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL
RODEO PARK DUMP
ROSE BROTHERS
RUSSELLOY FOUNDARY INC
SCHMITTY'S OIL SERVICE
SCHUTJER, ELDON E
SCOTT COUNTY LANDFILL
SEMCO LANDFILL
SHAW AVENUE DUMP
SHELLER-GLOBE CORF-
SHINE BROTHERS SALVAGE YARD
SLOAN SEWER PLANT
SMITH-JONES INC
SMITTY'S OIL SERVICE
SMS ENTERPRISES INC
SPENCER WWTP
SPERRY UN I VAC-RECORD ING S< STATISTICAL
SPRINGVILLE COOPERATIVE ELEVATOR
SPRINGVILLE COOPERATIVE ELEVATOR CO
STUTSMAN, ELDON C INC
SUDENGA INDUSTRIES INC
SWIFT INDEPENDENT PACKING CO
SWIFT INDEPENDENT PACKING CO
SWIFT INDEPENDENT PACKING CO
THERMO GAS CO
TODTZ, LAWRENCE FARM
TRIPOLI LANDFILL
TUTTLE STREET LANDFILL
TWO RIVERS SERVICE CENTER
UBBEN'S DX INC
UMTHUM TRUCKING CO
UNION ELECTRIC CO-HAMILTON SUBSTATION
UNITED HYDRAULIC CORF-
UNIVERSAL CIRCUITS INC
U S NAMEPLATE
VAN GORP CORP
VOGEL DISPOSAL SITE
W-A COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION
OTTUMWA
ALB IA
WATERLOO
MECHANICSVILLE
AMES
MOULTON
CINCINNATI
CEDAR RAPIDS
RED OAK
COUNCIL BLUFFS
AUDUBON
ROCKWELL CITY
"CEDAR RAPIDS
FT MADISON
KEOKUK
DURANT
FT DODGE
WODEN
DAVENPORT
RICHLAND
CHARLES CITY
KEOKUK
SPENCER-
SLOAN
KELLOGG
MARION
DAVENPORT
SPENCER
DES MOINES
SPRINGVILLE
SPRINGVILLE
HILLS
GEORGE
GLENWOOD
MARSHALLTOWN
DES MOINES
OTTUMWA
CAMANCHE
BREMER CO
DES MOINES
DES MOINES
HUDSON
BUFFALO
KEOKUK
HAMPTON
LAKE MILLS
MT VERNON
PELLA
MAURICE
SEYMOUR
206
-------
Page No.
03/O6/85
HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES IN IOWA
(ACTIVE SUPERFUND SITES)
MAP
NO.
WASTE SITE
CITY
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
21O
211
^12
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
TO 1
+.+- 1
WALNUT CREEK SERVICE CENTER
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF IOWA INC
WATERLOO GASOLINE ENGINE CO
WATERLOO OIL BULK PLANT
WAYNE-RINGOLD-DECATUR COUNTY LANDFILL
WEBSTER CITY LANDFILL
WEBSTER CITY LANDFILL
WEBSTER CITY PRODUCTS INC
WEBSTER COUNTY LANDFILL
WELLMAN DYNAMICS CORF-
WESTERN AREA POWER ADMIN SIOUX CITY
WIESE CORP
WILLIAMS PIPE LINE CO
WILLIAMS PIPE LINE CO
WILLIAMS PIPE LINE CO
WILLIAMS PIPE LINE CO
WILLIAMS PIPE LINE CO
WILLIAMS PIPE LINE CO
WILLIAMS PIPE LINE CO
WILLIAMS PIPE LINE CO
WINNEBAGO INDUSTRIES INC
DES MOINES
DES MOINES
WATERLOO
WATERLOO
GRAND RIVER
WEBSTER CITY
WEBSTER CITY
WEBSTER CITY
FT DODGE
CRESTON
HINTON
PERRY
WATERLOO
FT DODGE
MILFORD
DUBUQUE
CLEAR LAKE
DES MOINES
SIOUX CITY
CORALVILLE
FOREST CITY
207
------- |