AME R IC A ' S
CLL'JN
WATER
The States' Evaluation of Progress 1972-1982
Appendix
-------
THE STEP PROJECT
This report is the product of the Association of State and
Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators, (ASIWPCA) in
cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA).
ASIWPCA, the national professional organization of State
directors who implement the nation's Clean Water Program, has for
many years focused attention on the need to improve water quality
reporting to more accurately reflect progress towards achieving
the goals and requirements of the Clean Water Act. ASIWPCA's
proposal to design a system for streamlined reporting and to
develop common definitions for water quality evaluation resulted
late in 1982 in the initiation of a project labeled STEP -- the
S_Tates' Evaluation of progress in the Clean Water Program.
All States, Territories and Interstate Agencies were asked to
complete reports using the STEP system. Because data and records
needed to answer many of the questions were limited or unavailable
-- especially for 1972 -- the responding States were encouraged to
supplement monitoring results with their professional judgment and
direct observations. In some cases, data were extrapolated back to
1972 from records gathered later in the 1970's. The respondents
used standardized instructions and formats to derive and display
their findings. The national results contained in this report are
based on those State responses completed in accordance with the
instructions.
-------
INTRODUCTION
This volume is an Appendix to "AMERICA'S CLEAN WATER: The
States' Evaluation of Progress, 1972 - 1982". This report to
Congress, State leaders, and the public was prepared by the
Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control
Administrators in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
The information in AMERICA'S CLEAN WATER was drawn from
56 reports submitted by State, Interstate and Territorial
water pollution control agencies. Respondents used a standard-
ized format and instructions to compile and display their
findings about water quality.
Below, you will find a summary of the report form,
showing the content of each section. This is followed by the
56 submittals, prepared between June and October, 1983. THE
56 REPORTS APPEAR IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER.
The last section of the Appendix is the Instruction package
used by the States in completing their reports; it includes
the definitions specifically developed for this effort to
promote national consistency.
-------
DESCRIPTION OF STEP REPORT
SECTION I
ATLAS
SECTION II
AMBIENT
WATER
QUALITY
SECTION III
POINT
SOURCES
Provides background information on physical,
hydrologic al , and population features of each state.
Sets the stage for the remainder of the report.
Provides comparative information for 1972 and 1932
on extent to which waters support their designated
uses. Addresses water quality of streams, lakes,
estuaries, ocean coasts and the Great Lakes.
Includes trend information on extent to which water
quality has improved, been degraded or been
maintained. Also identifies pollutant sources by
category (industrial, municipal, nonpoint, etc.)
and by pollutant (nutrients, bacteria, metals, etc.)
Provides information about population served by
various levels of municipal wastewater treatment in
1972 vs. 1982 and about extent to which pollutant
loading of waters has been reduced as a result of
municipal treatment. Compares permit compliance of
"significant" municipal and non-municipal
facilities in 1972 and 1982.
Includes evaluation of severity and extent of
different types of nonpoint source pollution
(urban, si1vicu11ura 1, etc.) and of major
pollutants resulting from each source. Allows
narrative discussion of nonpoint source problems
and control strategies.
Compares Federal (both EPA and non-EPA), State and
Local capital investments in municipal wastewater
facilities. Includes narrative discussion of
state's program and changes made over past decade.
Gives information about enforcement actions taken
in 1982 against "significant" facilities in
significant non-compliance with permits, and
provides narrative description of state s approach
to promoting compliance.
SECTION VI Gives 2 examples of improvements in State water
SITE-SPECIFIC usage or of public benefits resulting from water
SUCCESSES quality improvements over the past decade.
SECTION IV
NON-POINT
SOURCES
SECTION V
PROGRAM
ELEMENTS
SECTION VII
SPFPT Al
CONCERNS AND
REMAINING
PROBLEMS
Gives narrative discussion of any water quality
problems emphasized by the state over the past
decade that had not been adequately covered in
previous sections (e.g. groundwater, wetland
protection, etc.). Also describes major problems
remaining to be addressed.
MAPS: For 1972 and/or 1982. Legend: Blue = Support Designated Uses
Yellow = Partially Support Uses
Red = Do Not Support Uses
-------
State of ALABAMA*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 3,444,165 1980 3,893,888
State Surface Area 50,767 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 14
# of River and Stream Miles 40,600 mi.; # of Border M1les*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 41 / 348,826 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 3,000,000 ac. or
# of Coast Miles 50 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 625 sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Chattahoochee/170 Name/Mileage Tennessee/10
Name/Mileage Perdi do/60 Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 12,101
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than F1shable/Swiiranable:
929
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
629
d. Miles Monitored: 1.568
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
10,762 mi.
267
1072
12,101 mi.
88.9 %
2.2%
8.9%
100$
1982
11,372 mi.
206
523
12,101 mi.
94.0 %
1.79S
4.3*
100%
- 1 -
240 mi.
sq. mi.
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
1.7% Degraded
^.3% Improved Miles Improved: 53 1.196
Miles Degraded: 195 16
Miles Maintained: 10.641
Maintained
Unknown:
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 346,708
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
56,590
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 39,000
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
346,708 ac.
346,708 ac.
100%
100*
1982
346,708 ac.
346,708 ac.
100%
10056
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
100%
Maintained
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained: 346,708
Unknown:
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans (Gulf)
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 625 sg.mi. / 50 mi.
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
593 sg.mi. / 50 mi.
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
32 sg.mi. /
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: / 25 mi.
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
442 sq.mi.
183
625 sq.mi.
71*
29*
100*
1982
593 sq.mi.
32
625 sq.mi.
95%
5*
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
B.v Percentage
Within
Category
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq. Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained: 474 sg.mi.
Unknown:
Change in
Category
151 ml.
b. Oceans
Bv Percentage
100%
Maintained
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
50 ml.
Change In
Category
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100*
mi.
mi.
%
100X
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — - By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
Nonpoint
Industrial
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Municipal 5% % Nonpoint
m
Industrial
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
Coli/DO
Industrial
X
X
X
X
X
X
Toxics/DO
Non-Point
X
X
X
Nut/Turb
Other (inc. natural)
. i
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 7
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Ml. Affected by Toxics: 0
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses 1n Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Levifjljjf Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Millions)
3 -
1-
3^
Primar
1.29
Biological
^ .w
Secondary
1.96
1.91
A.T.
Legend
Not served
by waste-
2 water system
2.18
2.11 Primary
Biological
1.51
Served by
Secondary wastewater
1 O^t
system
M
*80-85% BOO Removal
Primary
Secondary
etc.
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
1972 1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Millions)
* «.
3 "
1 -
1 -
Legend
3-85
2.9
Generated
1.26
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits rinal Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+Includes "No-Discharge" facilities
60
31
49
13
27
44
22
87
90
20
71
96
47
4
5
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
246
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
ance
Noncompliance
M
Noncompliance
Compliance
B. Non-Mun1c1pal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requ1rements+
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met*
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
74*
27** ! 75**
19
27
75
26
100
100
25
100
100 I
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
*46 of 120 significant dischagers in 1972 did not have permits.
**Total does not equal 120 (1972 baseline) due to plant closures.
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
Approx. 1225
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
100#
Compliance
Compliance
M
Noncompliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Agricultural runoff was Identified as a major potential problem through the
Statewide 208 planning program because of its wide geographical extent. The
Alabama Soil and Water Conservation Committee was involved in development of a
nonregulatory program stressing education of the agricultural community and
implementation of best management practices (BMPs) to control runoff. The ADEM,
the Alabama Cooperative Extension Service, the Agricultural Experiment Station of
Auburn University, and the USOA Soil Conservation Service continue to work
cooperatively in the control of animal waste runoff from confined feeding
operations. Application of BMPs is underway in the watershed of Lake Tholocco, a
recreational lake near Ozark chosen as one of thirteen Rural Clean Water Program
projects nationwide.
Runoff from silvicultural activities was determined to be a minor problem through
the Statewide 208 planning program, and the nonregulatory program developed by
the Alabama Forest Commission emphasizes education of forestry operators and
landowners, and implementation of BMPs to control runoff. Urban stormwater
runoff and construction runoff, evaluated as a part of the three areawide 208
planning programs in the State, were found to be a major potential problem in
major metropolitan areas. Control of these sources 1s largely a local
responsibility.
The NPS categories of residual waste and mining are addressed by regulatory
programs which have been in place for some time. The ADEM has responsibility for
control of residual wastes, and the ADEM and the Alabama Surface Mining
Commission share responsibility In the area of mining through a Memorandum of
Agreement. The impacts of hydrologlc modifications and saltwater Intrusion have
not been thoroughly evaluated, but are thought to be minor. No control programs
for these NPS categories are currently 1n effect.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si lv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent
M/L
I/W
I/L
M/L
I/L
M/L
I/L
I/L
Primary
OxDe
SS
SS
SS
SS
0
Sal.
OxDe
Pol lutants
SS
Nut.
PH
(D.O.)
M
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The Alabama Department of Environmental Management utilizes all
reasonable means to obtain compliance including technical assistance, notices of
violation, conferences, administrative orders and judicial actions.
In 1982, 13 administrative orders were Issued to industries which were not in
compliance with permits or did not have permits. Seventy-one (71) administrative orders
were issued to municipal facilities for the same period.
In 1972, 30 administrative orders were Issued to Industries; 4 administrative orders
were issued to municipalities.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Adminlstratlve Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT - $ 349
"y '"Sftt Federal
25*
Local
73%
Federal-EPA
Million
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Categories of Sources
$ 256
6
$
0
*
87
S
Million
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
Construction Grants Program
Under the construction grants program, federal funds are allocated to Alabama
municipalities for construction of needed wastewater treatment facilities. The
program has undergone continuous change since the enactment of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act of 1972; the amount of funds allocated on a national basis
has fluctuated from year to year, as has Alabama's share. For the period
1972-1981, the amount of funds available to Alabama averaged $33.9 million, and
varied from a low of $7.2 million in fiscal year 1973 to a high of $57.8 million
in fiscal year 1978.
State assumption of certain construction grants functions has improved program
management and has helped in achieving the program objectives of proper planning,
design, and construction of needed treatment facilities. To date, Alabama has
assumed responsibility for 14 of 20 construction grants functions.
Water Duality Monitoring Program
In 1974, 53 water quality trend stations were established in an effort to measure
existing water quality and to provide a framework for long-term water quality
evaluation. The initial selection took into consideration the existing water
quality network of other governmental agencies and industrial dischargers, known
or suspected problem areas, clean water areas, and the ability to support any
stations selected. The number of trend stations in 1982 was 57, including 27
stations which are a part of the U.S. EPA's National Core Network of Stations.
However, monitoring strategy is changing, with the emphasis shifting from periodic
monitoring at fixed, long-term stations to intensive monitoring of selected
streams. Intensive stream surveys are used to support activities of the
construction grants program, the NPDES permit program, and the enforcement program.
NPDES Permit Program
On October 19, 1979, Alabama was granted permitting authority by the U.S. EPA
under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Attainment of
NPDES authority was the climax of some six years of effort on the part of Alabama,
and provided one stop permitting for all industrial, municipal, and other
wastewater dischargers in the State. NPDES permits in effect in Alabama number
approximately 1900, of which 80 are major municipal facilities and 113 are major
non-municipal facilities.
Enforcement Program
The basic mechanisms utilized by the State in insuring compliance with permits,
state standards, and other legal requirements are through the Issuance of
administrative orders and by the institution of court suits for civil or criminal
penalties or injunctive relief. Alabama's general approach has been one of
graduated response, beginning with the issuance of warning or cautionary letters
to alleged violators and proceeding to the issuance of an appropriate order
including an order to "cease and desist" discharging pollution Into waters of the
state for continued noncompliance or for more serious permit violations. The
state's ultimate enforcement tool is the Institution of court action to insure
compliance and to obtain civil and/or criminal penalties for past violations.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Birmingham Area
Several small tributaries of the Black Warrior River drain much of the Birmingham
Metropolitan Area, including the heavily industrialized western and northern
areas. In 1972, three streams in particular - Valley Creek, Village Creek, and
Five Mile Creek - were severely impacted by Inadequately treated municipal and
industrial wastewaters and were considered the three "most polluted" streams in
the state. Each stream received the discharge from a large municipal treatment
facility which provided only primary treatment and which was subject to frequent
bypass of raw wastewater in wet weather, and the discharges from numerous
industries. Water quality surveys conducted in 1972 revealed grossly polluted
conditions - dissolved oxygen levels approaching 0.0 mg/1, and five-day BOD and
ammonia levels approaching or exceeding 20 mg/1. In addition, frequent fish
kills were reported in the lower sections of the streams and in the Locust Fork
of the Black Warrior River downstream of Five Mile Creek and Village Creek.
By the late 1970's, new or upgraded municipal treatment facilities had been
completed, and virtually all the industrial dischargers to the three streams were
achieving or exceeding best practicable treatment. Water quality data collected
in 1982 show significant improvement over the data collected in 1972. This
improvement is reflected in the absence of chronic fish kill events associated
with industrial and/or municipal discharges, and In the presence of species of
fish which had heretofore been absent.
Mobile Area
The City of Mobile, Alabama, is located at the upper end of Mobile Bay along the
western shore. Most of the streams draining the Mobile area are small; all are
tributary to either Mobile Bay or the Mobile River and are therefore influenced
by tidal action over some portion of their length. These streams, as well as
certain other deadend channels and inlets, exhibit poor flushing characteristics
as a result of the tidal action.
In the early 1970's, numerous fish kills were reported each year In the Mobile
area, with most occurring in Garrows Bend, a deadend inlet created by
construction of the McDuffie Island Causeway and affected by inadequately treated
Industrial wastes, and in the Eslava Creek/Dog River/Halls Mill Creek area, a
small embayment receiving wastewater from two municipal treatment facilities.
The majority of kills involved menhaden and were the result of low dissolved
oxygen levels.
Corrective action in the case of Garrows Bend consisted of connection of a major
industrial facility to the Mobile sewer system, with treatment provided at the
McDuffie Island Wastewater Treatment Plant. For the Oog River embayment, the
solution also Involved removal of the wastewters from the affected area; in this
case through the Installation of pumping facilities to transport the wastewaters
from the existing treatment facilities to McDuffie Island. The success of the
actions taken is most dramatically demonstrated by the noticeable absence of fish
kills 1n the areas in recent years.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
A decade ago, in 1972, inadequate treatment of municipal and industrial point sources,
and the resultant stream degradation, was the most serious water pollution control problem
in Alabama. With passage of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (PL 92-500),
a framework for corrective action was established. In addition to providing increased
amounts of Federal funds for municipal construction at increased matching ratios (75%
versus 555£), PL 92-500 established Federal standards for treatment by industries and
municipalities and dates for achievement.
By 1978, 90fc of all major industries in Alabama met or exceeded the applicable Federal
treatment levels, and by 1982, this figure approached 1005!. Significant improvements have
also been made with respect to municipal treatment in the past decade; however, a large
number of municipalities are awaiting funding for construction of new or upgraded
treatment facilities to correct identified problems. Ths situation has existed since the
mid-1970's, but has grown more crucial in the last several years as Federal funding has
steadily decreased (from $57.8 million in fiscal year 1978 to $30.3 million in fiscal year
1982). With estimated construction needs of over $300 million, water pollution problems
associated with publicly owned treatment works remain a concern in 1982.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
As identified above, surface water quality maintenance; groundwater resource quality
protection; identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial sources; and
municipal wastewater plant operation and maintenance are issues of concern in Alabama.
Maintenance of surface water quality in light of population and industrial growth is
tied closely to resolution of the funding problem associated with construction of
municipal facilities, a problem which will receive increased attention in the years
ahead. Protection of groundwater quality is a fairly new program effort in Alabama, and
is being addressed through the Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program. Resources
devoted to the UIC program, the groundwater protection in general, are projected to
increase in coming years.
Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial sources is a relatively
new area of concern in Alabama. Biomonitoring requirements are now being included in
certain industrial permits, and the State is evaluating its capabilities in the area of
biomonitoring. Proper operation and maintenance of municipal wastewater plants has long
been stressed in Alabama, and emphasis in this area through the Wastewater Plant Operator
Training Program will continue in the years ahead.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Alabama Department of Environmental Management
State Capitol, Montgomery. AL 36130
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: James W. Warr (205) 277-3630
DATE: September 27. 1983
- 10 -
-------
ALABAMA
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-------
ALABAMA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
] Use Partially Supported
¦ Use Not Supported
-------
State of Alaska
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 300,382 1980 400,331
State Surface Area 586,000 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 18
# of River and Stream Miles 365,000 mi.; # of Border Miles* NONE mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 300.000 / 720 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 130 to 300,000,000 ac. or sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 33,940 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 11,000,000 sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage NONE Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 3,470
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
3,470
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 262
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
*1972
ml.
mi.
%
100%
1982
8 mi.
21
3,250*2
3,279 ml.
U
6%
93%
100%
*2 Streams mainly affected by placer mining activity
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
1% Improved
Category
0
Change in
Category
8
3,454
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
8. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 6^814
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
6.814
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 3,323
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
*1972
ac.
ac.
%
10056
1982
,
5,561 ac.
1,253
6,814 ac. |
m
18*
1003! 1
~Department formed in 1971, no data available
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Degraded
18%
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
5.561
Change in
Category
1.253
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 32.251 /
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
32.251 /
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0 /
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 12.251 /
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially i Not
Supported j Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
*1972
1
!
I
%
1
1 !
i 1
. J ¦
100%
1982
19.0
i 13.25
1
32.25
59*
, 41% |
i i
100%
*Department formed in 1971, data not available
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
19.0
Change in
Category
13.25
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2A -
-------
0. Great Lakes
1. a. Mi les Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100*
1982-
mi.
mi.
%
100% :
1
Within
Category
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
B.y Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Change in
Category
- 2B -
-------
Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
1% Municipal
Nonpoint
Industrial
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
1% Industrial
99 %
Municipal
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
Industrial
/
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
j i
Coli. I D.O. j Nut.
i
PH
|| 12 Most
Temp. | Toxics^ J Turb. Other J Serious j
¦¦¦ 1 I 1 i
Municipal
X I
! j 1 !
Industrial
: x 1
IX!*
*. Tb. i
Non-Point
I !
X
1 X ~
Tm.Tb. j
Other (inc. natural)
1 t
,, .
* ;
. J . •
1
~Settled Solids, Sediments, Sludges
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: None
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: None
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: None
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: N/A
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Lev.el of Wastewater Treatment
. H
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
.3 "
.2 ~
302,58? = T
76,283
106,100
107,700
2,000 Sec.
10,500 Pri.
Provided to State's Population:
'tOO,531 = 1
z
130,231
Legend
Not served by
wastewater system
37,300
15,000
7^,500 Secondary
Served by waste-
water system
1^3,300
Primary
Primary
Secondary
etc.
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
1972 1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOO Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(millions)
.2 *
120,200
7
J1£,B50
A
1972
232,800
22Um
1982
Legend
Generated
Discharged
77
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
*
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met*
Facilities Needing Upgrading
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
None
22
19
86
86
12
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
45
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
No Permits
Noncompliance
Compllance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 InterinuPermlts Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
5
i 546
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
i
Permits
Permit Requirements"1"
2
1 60
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
40%
1 list
915
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met
data not
available
: data not
; available
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982;
Compliant,
Noncompliance
/ Non-
Compliance
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Alaska ranks non-point source pollution as a much, much more serious problem
than point source.
Placer Mining: Of all pollution problems in Alaska, placer mining is by far the
most controversial, significant, and perplexing. Except in dry areas, the art of
separating gold from and usually requires removal of water from a stream, with
silt and water being returned to the same stream. Many affected streams are very
small and remain muddy for miles. Murkiness of the water hinders growth of
aquatic plants and limits sight-feeding fish from feeding--and being caught by
fishermen. Residents of streamside villages claim silt from placer miners has
caused declines in fish, waterfowl, and furbearing animals. Although point
sources, placer miners are better described mobile operations and can oprate in
many different locations in a few weeks leaving scarred earth, sedimentation
ponds, and piles of tailings. With 400-600 operators now active, they would also
be grouped into the non-point category.
Streamside Development: Spawing salmon seem to prefer streams in areas that have
the same attributes people themselves look for when establishing homes: flat
areas with low gradient, clean water, plenty of trees for streamside shade and
protection without environment stresses like high winds. There are few areas in
Coastal Alaska that have been inhabitated by people without adversely affecting
streamside habitat. To give a few examples in Juneau:
Gold Creek - 1. Silt from placer mining in early 1900's
2. Stream bank destroyed, realigned, now a concrete-lined chute
(Gold Creek, originally known as Humpie Creek, at one time
supported a healthy salmon run, now gone).
Duck Creek - 1. Streambank buffer vegetation damaged and altered
2. Sewage disposal from trailer court sewage lagoon
3. Trash and litter dumping
4. Migration blocked by improper and clogged culverts
The Juneau list could continue. But the same type of 11st exists for Ketchikan,
Wrangell, Petersburg, Sitka, Cordova, Valdez, Anchorage, and others. A localized
intermediate problem, but one that receives considerable attention.
- 6 -
-------
Intertidal and Wetland Dredge and Fill: Alaska's Wetlands, whether located on
the coast or In the Interior, make up a large percentage of the State's lands and
are some of its most productive. In productive wetlands, streams, or intertidal
areas, dredge and fill activities destroy habitat that is valuable for the
spawning or rearing of aquatic, waterfowl, and many non-aquatic organisms.
Timber: It would seem that salmon prefer to spawn in watersheds with the most
valuable timber. Generally, these are flat areas, protected from winds, warm and
exposed to what sunlight there is in Southeast and coastal Alaska.
1. Log Storage and Transfer - Areas beneath log raft sites usually contain a
buildup of sunken logs and bark which smothers marine life. These wood wastes
then decay and release toxic material. There are nearly 150 existing log raft
storage sites in Southeast Alaska.
2. Road Construction - Erosion and mudslides from poorly constructed roads
add sediment and silt to fish spawning streams, and sometimes ruin them.
3. Slash Disposal and Timber Felling - If dumped into or felled across
streams, trees and trimmed branches and limbs clog these streams, again blocking
fish passage.
4. Erosion - Certain log skidding or dragging practices seriously aggravate
erosion and runoff of sediment and silt from timber harvesting areas.
5. Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen Effects - Absence of shade from
streamside trees raises stream temperature which, certain Southeastern Alaska
watersheds, may be lethal to cold-water fish such as salmon and trout.
On-lot Sewage Failures: Subdivisions without a sewage collection system usually
use individual septic tank and drainfields. Several of these areas have soil
conditions totally unsuitable for on-lot systems. Either no soil exists (as in
parts of Ketchikan which sits on bedrock) or soil grain size 1s too small to
treat sewage (as in the clays of Homer). Subdivisions can be found in Alaska
wherein small drainages, streams, and roadside gutters reek of sewage and are
contaminated with sewage bacteria. This 1s the only significant water pollution
control problem we have identified as a Health Concern; it is therefore very
important.
Other: There are considerations that do not fit into point or non-point
categories. One careless bulldozer operator can, in 15 minutes, completely and
irrevocably injure or destory a top-quality, very productive salmon spawning
stream. One careless chainsaw operator can do the same damage in half that
time. An improperly constructed culvert can act as barrier impassable to fish
and render extensive upstream areas unfit for rearing or spawning. On the other
hand, fish kills in Alaska from sewage are unheard of.
- 7 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
1
1
Extent
M/W
N/A
S/W
S/W
M/W
1/L
M/L
1/L
Primary
Pollutants
SS
N/A
SS
SS
SS
0
S
00
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
See Activities
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: N/A*
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions: .
Number of Judicial Actions:
*NPDES Program not delegated to State of Alaska
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $_
183.5 Million
By Percentage
State
9«
\|
.Federal - EPA
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
*
172.2 1
Other Federal:
--
State:
*
11.3
Local Match:
$
Other Local:
$
--
Million
- 8 -
-------
C. Program Activities
The Water Pollution Control (WPC) program for the Alaska Department of
Environmental Conservation breaks down activities into various organizational
groups:
Group (Man Years)
Central Office (6.5)
Regional Office (21.5)
Construction Grants (13)
Monitoring/Lab (4.0)
Miscellaneous (1.5)
Total (46.5 Man Years)
Typical Activities
Revise Standards, Regulations
Conduct Reclassification Hearings
Administer Grants for Programs
Coordinate Intra-Oepartment Activities
Administer Contracts for Research, Projects
Review Subdivision Plans
Review Plans for Non-Public Treatment Works
Inspect and Approve On-Site Sewage Systems
Inspect Logging Operations
Issue Disposal Permits and 401 Certifications
Investigate and Enforce Water Pollution Incident
Inspect Placer Mining Operations
Inspect Seafood Processing Plants
Review Plans for Grant Eligible Treatment Works
Administer Grants for Construction
Certify Operators for Treatment Works
Monitor Placer Mining Streams
Monitor Surface Coal Mining Watersheds
Assess Agricultural Impacts
Monitor Sewage Treatment Discharge Zones
Public Information -- Brochures, News
Program Management
The DEC WPC activities are directed toward water quality standards rather than toward
permit compliance. For this reason, Alaska has found it inappropriate to adopt the
NPDES program. Approximately 750 certificates of reasonable assurance are issued
annually, the bulk of which are for intertldal and wetland activities.
The WPC program invovles about 2031 of the Department's staff (220 people) and budget
($9,800,000).
- 9 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Juneau's Mendenhall Valley: A flat, spruce forest, with salmon spawning
streams, exposed by a receeding glacier. The subsurface soils contain cobbles,
sand, and silt. In 1972, the valley had been experiencing explosive
residential growth. Trailer courts sprang up, sewage from which collected in
"lagoons" (actually mined out gravel pits) and overflowed into fish streams.
Flooded drainfields leaked septic sewage into roadside ditches and backyards.
Shallow unprotected drinking water wells, often no deeper than twenty feet,
were contaminated by poliferating septic tank systems.
The health hazards were so desperate that the Department of Environmental
Conservation announced that no loan approvals would be granted for on-site
sewage disposal, halting house construction at the peak of the frantic building
season.
Crash programs for sewage collection and treatment resulted in removal of
health hazards and resumption of (ab)normal growth. In 1982, the treatment
plant has already expanded once and needs more capacity yet. It bears emphasis
that the "success" is not clearing up a river but removing untreated sewage
from residential areas and from areas near drinking water wells.
Fairbank's Chena River: In the early 1970's municipal wastes were discharged
into the Chena River from about 25,000 people in Fairbanks. These wastes
received primary waste treatment from several outdated facilities.
In 1970, coliform counts taken in the Chena River range anywhere from 37,000 to
500,000 coliform organisms per 100 ml, violating Alaska's water quality
standards. Reacting to pollution, sportsman angling for grayling and whitefish
had to go upstream of Fairbanks where the river's cold, near-arctic waters were
cleaner.
In 1982, a 100-mile-long interceptor sewer system encircles Fairbanks. Along
the way, its trunk lines receive the wastes from the city, most of its outlying
suburbs wastes are carried to the regional plant for secondary treatment.
A bacteriological survey of the Chena found that the coliform count was down to
70 coliform organisms per 100 ml, a resounding tribute to the combined local,
state, and federal cleanup actions which have saved the Chena River.
Anglers in and around Fairbanks have returned to these waters to catch grayling
-- a gourmet delight and a prince of a sportflsh -- and whitefish, a species
which is valued for its tasty white meat. Since cleanup, boat landings and a
picnic camping ground have appeared along the Chena, attracting boaters,
canoers, and nature lovers.
- 10 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
What the structure of this report has failed to accommodate is the vastness and adolescence
of Alaska.
In 1972, Alaska has been a state for 14 years. It was tne first weeks of the existence of
a pollution control department staffed by about thirty-five people. There was not one single
significant efficiently operating sewage treatment plant, primary or secondary. A few cities
were lucky enough to have sewers to get sewage out of their yards, soils in Alaska being
generally unfit for on-site septic systems. Needless to add, in 1972 the luxury of
information about monitoring streams and lakes was undreamed of. Even in 1982, with
over-ruled oil wealth it is still a luxury.
In the report format, extents of problems and monitoring are difficult to assess in terms
of "percents." There are three million lakes which are greater than 20 acres in size. Given
our present water pollution staff, that's 71,400+ lakes for each one of us. We could handly
assess, monitor, or do much with a percent of them. The four pages of Section II have limited
value to describe our water quality problems. Likewise in the table in Section IV, by far the
most significant 1 3/8" of the structured part of the report for Alaska, extent of "W"
(defined as more than 50* of state water's affected) is meaningless, even though some of our
"L" (localized) areas might be larger than some Eastern states.
Part B. Ma.ior Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of populaton
and industrial growth.
- Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point sources.
- Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Overwhelming - pollution arising from unforeseen or unpredictable natural resource
development (coal, metals, oil, etc.)
In Alaska's situation, progress in pollution/water quality is not so much
related to permit compliance as to fluctuations in prices of resources. In the
example of placer mining, if, in 1982, Herculean efforts in enforcement resulted
in 100% compliance with permit conditions, river miles in violation of water
quality standards might drop from 3000 to 1000. If on the other hand, the price
of gold dropped 50X, river miles in violation might drop from 3000 to 100 without
ar\y compliance. If the price doubled, there would be a Normandy scale Invasion.
In 1972, there was no active placer miners. The same could be said for the timber
harvesting and processing industries. Comparing to the scale of these activities,
whether or not sewage Is treated 1s like listening for flatulence in a hurricane.
With these factors in mind, "Progress 1n the Clean Water Program" for Alaska can
not be fairly measured in terms of numbers in boxes or slices in pie charts.
* Our field people have been issued bullet-proof vests and been accompanied by
Alaska State Troopers.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
Pouch 0; Juneau. Alaska 99811
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Rudy Bwliss (907) 465-2653
DATE: August 2. 1983
- 11 -
-------
State of Arizona*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 1,775,399 1980 2,717,866
State Surface Area 113,909 sq. miles
# of River Systems /Basins 9
# of River and Stream Miles 6,287 mi.; # of Border Miles*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 115 / 364,070 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 182,000 ac. or
# of Coast Miles 0 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. N/A sq. ml.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mi 1eage Colorado R. 417 Name/Ml1eage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 497
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
840
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
120
d. Miles Monitored: 270
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
150 mi.
50
157
140
*497 ml.
30 %
10
32
28
100%
1982
317 ml.
40
140
0
497 mi.
64 %
8
28
0
100%
*1982
417 mi.
sq. mi.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
Improved
Miles Improved: 3b
Change in
Category
Unknown
Miles Degraded:
Mi les Maintained:
Unknown:
0
315
140
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed:
72^400
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
26.000
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
^
d. Acres Monitored: 28,000 (1982)
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
20,000 ac.
1,295
5,445
45,660
72,400 ac.
28*
Z%
8%
62*
100%
1982
65,710 ac.
'
1,615
5,075
0
72,400 ac.
91 %
n ,
1
7%
0
100%
(1982)
i. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
It Improved
65^
Unknown
35%
Main-
tained
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
1.220
25.150
45.660
Change in
Category
370
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
Nonpoint
Indust
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
1% Industrial
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.j D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most t
Serious i
!
Municipal
X
X
X
X |
Industrial
X
X
X
X !
Non- Point
X
X
X
X
i
Other (inc. natural)
!
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 60
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 5.000
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table 11.A.2.
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population;
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
3 _
2 -
2.1 =
.25
W//,
.2
1.8 =
seconds
ry 2.2
.2
.2
.k
Primary
iry 1.33
Second
Tertia
¦y -03
Tertia
•y .05
Legend
Not served
by waste-
water system
Served by
wastewater
system
Primary
Secondary
etc
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
2. Annual Population Equivalents of 800 Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOO
(Millions) 3
2.7
1 -
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+Includes "No-Discharge" facilities
0
11
1
7
9
64
8
41
9
2
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
54
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
8y Percentage
1972 vs. 1982
1972
Compliance
Noncompliance
1982:
Noncompli
m
Compliance
Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
13
13
Total
Permits
in Effect
1n 1982
23
6
!
1 12
46
i 92
11
)
99
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Noncompliance
Compliance
5h%
Non-
Compliance
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Non-point sources of pollution dominate surface water quality for more than 5,500
miles (87SS) of rivers and streams and more than 355,000 ac. (98%) of lakes and
reservoirs. Less than full support of surface water uses is rarely associated
with non-point sources. In relatively wet climatic zones, range runoff, on-site
disposal systems and recreation are the predominant non-point sources to surface
waters.
Mineral extraction residues, primarily tailings ponds and leaching operations are
an important source of trace metals and sulfates to groundwater. More than
100,000 ac. have been impacted by present and historical mineral extraction
operations. Groundwater underlying approximately 10,000 ac. of recreation land
has been contaminated with bacteria by on-site and package plant disposal
practices. Groundwater underlying approximately 20,000 ac. of urban-industrial
land has been contaminated with industrial solvents such as TCE. Groundwater
under approximately 10,000 ac. of agricultural land has been contaminated with
D8CP.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The State maintains monthly, quarterly and yearly reports which
identify the compliance status of all wastewater treatment facilities. The reports are routinely
updated and reviewed on a priority basis. Non-complying facilities are Inspected by field
personnel and/or are sent a series of letters asking for corrective action. This "presence"
creates an environment for voluntary compliance in all but the most deliberate or difficult
problems. Violations of water quality standards discovered in response to complaints, as the
result of water quality field investigations, or from reviewing monitoring network data are
confirmed, and dialogue is established with responsible entities to seek voluntary compliance.
Formal enforcement procedures are used whenever voluntary compliance is not achieved.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 5
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 0
Number of Administrative Actions: ]
Number of Judicial Actions: 0
,B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 277.5 Million
Sources
209.3 Million
1.7
1.6
64.9
N/A
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
I
M
I
S
I
I
N/A
M
OxDe
M.O
NP
T
PH
T
Sal
M & Toxics
* Other - Organic Chemicals (Toxics)
By Percentage
.6%
State
Other
Federal
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Categories of
$
*
*
$
- 7 -
-------
Program Activities
Major components of Arizona's program are: groundwater quality protection,
planning and public participation, permitting, monitoring, compliance and
construction grants.
Arizona has recently initiated an extensive program to protect groundwater
quality. Regulations are being developed with an emphasis on pollution
prevention. A permit program is being proposed to protect beneficial uses of
our groundwater supplies. Coordination with existing state laws and programs
is a special consideration. It is essential that the new groundwater program
be coordinated with programs administered by the Arizona Department of Water
Resources, "Active Management Areas" and local designated water quality
management programs. Efforts have also been made to coordinate groundwater
quality management with the hazardous waste program as well as the State funded
water quality assurance fund which is Intended to help correct water quality
problems in public drinking water supplies.
The State's ambient water quality monitoring program consists of a small fixed
station network, intensive surveys, background surveys, enforcement surveys and
a priority pollutant network. The fixed station network has been contracted
with the U.S. Geological Survey. Intensive surveys have been done between 1973
and J979, on suspected areas with groundwater and surface water pollution.
Background surveys have been conducted to gather information for the 305(b)
report.
A resource limited program is maintained to approve and monitor the design,
construction, operation and maintenance of wastewater treatment facilities. At
the current time, the State prepares National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permits for issuance by the EPA. The State plans to receive
primacy within the next year when State regulations have been adopted after
resolving issues regarding statutory authority.
In 1979, the State received delegation of the construction grants program from
EPA. Since that time, more emphasis has been placed on expanding treatment
systems rather than Interceptor and collection systems. The State's priority
system used for the funding of projects has included criteria for environmental
degradation and health hazards. These changes in the construction grants
program are largely due to Increased local competition for limited funds.
In 1982, the Department produced a Clean Lakes Report which summarizes the
water quality conditions of lakes in the State. A priority list of water
quality problems has been included which will be used by State agencies to fund
future lake restoration programs.
Increased emphasis has been placed on implementation of activities recommended
in the 2QS program and clean lakes report.
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
City of Phoenix - In the mld-1970's the two Phoenix WWTP's were in serious
disrepair and 0 & M was poor. Discharge permit limits were not being met.
Morale was poor among plant operators. Administrative actions by the State
and EPA improved the situation dramatically. Most 0 & M deficiencies have now
been corrected. Equipment has been repaired and returned to service. There
are now on-going preventative maintenance and operator training programs.
Operator morale has iproved significantly. Both plants are meeting discharge
limits for 800, SsS, S+S, and FC with room to spare in spite of the fact that
the 91st Avenut plant is currently 25 percent hydraulically overloaded.
However, Phoenix is still in the process of addressing and correcting
potential problems relative to the discharge of trace metals.
In 1982, a Phoenix operator won the Arizona Water and Pollution Control
Association's wastewater operator-of-the-year award for her work in operator
training. In 1983, another operator won this statewide award for his
successful efforts in keeping the 91st Avenue plant running well despite the
overload and the disruptions caused by an on-going 30 MGD expansion project.
Saoino Creek - Sabino Creek drains a small watershed on the slopes of Mount
Lemmon near Tucson in the Santa Cruz River Basin. It is the only perennial
stream within fifty miles of Tucson and has heavy recreational use. In 1977,
the fecal coliform levels downstream from the community of Summerhaven
exceeded State surface water quality standards. The wastewater treatment
plant was found to be inadequate. The State Water Quality Control Council
prohibited direct discharges to Sabino Creek. A new treatment facility has
been constructed which exports the treated watewater outside of the Sabino
Creek watershed.
- 9 -
-------
I. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
A dramatic growth in population has placed strong demands on Arizona's limited
water resources. It has been a challenge to maintain water quality. The primary
water quality issue has been protection of the State's groundwater resources.
More than 50 percent of the State depends on groundwater for drinking water. For
some cities like Tucson, this figure is 100 percent. A number of studies aimed at
identifying complex sources of groundwater pollution and possible mitigation
measures have been completed successfully. In addition, the State has been
developing a formal groundwater quality control program and associated regulations.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
While the State's groundwater quality protection program is preventive rather
than corrective in nature, there is evidence that most of the groundwater quality
problems will be from existing or abandoned facilities. In the last four years,
TCE, UCE, chromium, and DBCP have been found in groundwater supplies throughout
the State. A key challenge in coming years will be how the State responds to
groundwater contamination outbreaks with limited resources and technical staff.
Even with a solid regulatory program base, adequacy of a State response to
problems will depend on funding levels.
Rapid population gains place severe demands on the need for services. It is
important that water quality programs be efficient and innovative. It is
unlikely that there will be sufficient funding for conventional water pollution
programs. Yet, the State cannot afford to maintain marginal programs. Federal
and State programs must be sensitive to new ideas and have regulatory programs
with sufficient flexibility to allow new methods without compromising the
environment or public health.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Environmental Health Services
Bureau of Mater Quality Control
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Mm. H. Shafer, Jr. (602) 255-1272
DATE: September 28. 1983
- 10 -
-------
ARIZONA
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
¦ Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
O Use Not Supported
-------
ARIZONA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
B Use Not Supported
-------
State of Arkansas*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 1.923.295 1980 2.285.000
State Surface Area 52,000 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 39
# of River and Stream Miles 10.000 ml.; # of Border Miles* 409 ml.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage ? / 600.000 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.m1. 1.608.000 ac. or sq. ml.
# of Coast Miles N^A mi.
# of Estuary sq. ml. N^A sq. ml.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage M1ss1ssipp1/339 Name/Mileage Red River/30
Name/Mileage St. Francis/40 Name/Mileage
H. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 6.000
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swlmmable:
2.000
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Flshable/Swlimiable:
4.000
d. Miles Monitored: 0*
*103 Stations exist but cannot be related to miles.
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
3,000 ml.
1,800
1,200
6,000 ml.
50%
30%
20%
100%
1982
3,000 ml.
1,300
1,700
6,000 nrl.
50%
22%
28%
100%
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
Improved 1_^L_Jeqraded
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Category
100
500
5.400
Change in
Category
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 600,000
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swirmiable:
584.000
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
16.000
d. Acres Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
600,000 ac.
600,000 ac.
100%
100%
i
1982
567,000 ac.
33,000
- t
600,000 ac.¦
94.5%
5.5%
>00> I
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
5.5% 0.8% Improved
Degrade^
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
93.7%
Maintained
Within
Category
5.000
33.000
562.000
Change in
Category
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Industrial
Municipa
Nonpoint
100%
Nonpoint
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col 1.
D.O.
Nut.
PH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
D.O.
Industrial
X
X
X
Color
DO. Toxics
Non-Point
X
X
X
Turb. Toxics
Other (inc. natural)
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 400
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes M1. Affected by Toxics: 0
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
789,500
Number of
People
(Millions)
809,^12
2
w
125,000
3,501
120,9W
Primary
86^,6^3
Secondary
7
W
Legend
110,700
Not served
2,000 b> waste"
water system
6,000
1,193,67^
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
183,126
Tertiary
Primary
Secondary
etc.
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
2. Annual Population Equivalents of 6QD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Millions)
.8't
168,000
.22
lb^/day
Moo
lbs/day
.22
235,000
lbs/day
Legend
1972
1982
61,500 Generated
lbs/day
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Level s
includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+Includes "No-Disc*
200
29
13
100
18
6
55%
62
46
40%
1
76 | 57
90
jjjir v.jsul'j'.
Unknown j Unknown
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1972:
1972 vs. 1982
1982:
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
300
55%
Compliance
h5t
Noncompliance
51%
Compliance
h3%
Noncompliance
a. Non-Munic1pal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Mun1c1pal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements-1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Wnich Requirements Met+
?
0
24
?
0
23
?
I
0 I 96
?
0
99.6%
¦""Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
500
- 5
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
Unknown
1982:
oncompliance
96%
Compliance
. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
At this time NPS controls are voluntary. Research and development is
continuing on potential control measures with the use of remaining 208 funds.
Current cost estimates.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
S11 v.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity S
Extent
I/L
S/W
M/L
S/L
N/A
S/L
I/L
N/A
Primary
P,SS,T
N, P
H, P
Temp.
Pollutants
C.M.N
SS. T
SS. T
PH
N/A
M.T.SS
SS
N/A
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The state commences enforcement action when receiving water
quality problems are obvious or a major nuisance exists.
EPA Is responsible for enforcing compliance with NPDES Permit limits.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities In
Significant Non-Compliance In 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Adm1n1strative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
97
89
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT »
By Percentage
25%
Local
75%
Federal-EPA
326
Million
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Categories of Sources
245 Million
*
?
$
0
$
81
*
0
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
WATER DIVISION PROGRAMS
The Water Division is responsible for program management under two federal
laws. These are the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act. Under the
Clean Water Act the division manages three programs. These are: (1) the base or
umbrella Water Pollution Control Programs funded under section 106, (2) Water
Quality Management Planning funded under sections 205(j), 208 and 303; and the
Clean Lakes Program funded under section 314 of the Act.
106
The Water Pollution Control Program is designed to implement those activities
necessary to accomplish the national goal which is to restore and maintain the
chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Nation's waters. These include:
1. Establishing and maintaining water quality goals and standards which will
protect the state's waters;
2. Directing the state's efforts toward achievement of the national goals,
whenever attainable, and developing programs and treatment levels which are
necessary to attain the national goals;
3. Establishing priorities among abatement and prevention needs;
4. Providing a method to obtain the most benefit from water pollution control
resources;
5. Establishing output commitments for each fiscal year, allocating resources
and assessing program development progress; and
6. Providing the EPA grant funds to supplement state funds.
UNDERGROUND INJECTION CONTROL PROGRAM
The Safe Drinking Water Act required the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
to develop minimum requirements for State programs to protect underground drinking
water sources from endangerment by the subsurface employment of fluids through well
injection. Those requirements have been established through regulations in 40 CFR
Parts 122, 123, 124, and 146 and in Section 1425 guidance.
During FY82, Department activities relative to the UIC program centered on
completing program development and all tasks necessary for State assumption and
eventual program implementation. On July 6, 1982 the Department was delegated
primacy for Class I, III, IV, and V wells.
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANNING
There are three phases of planning that have been funded under the Act. Phase
I was the river basin plans that were developed from funding under section 303.
These plans provide an overview of total water and related land resources of the
basin.
Phase II are the Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning funded under
section 208. The purpose of these plans is to Identify the controls, regulatory
programs and management agencies necessary to attain the water quality standards.
This Initial plan was conditionally approved by Governor Clinton In May, 1979.
Subsequently three additional grants were awarded to the department to study the
effect of best management practices in controlling source pollution and to develop
implementation programs. These three grants are multiyear grants and are still
active. Funding under section 208 ended with fiscal year 81 monies.
- 8 -
-------
Phase III in the continuous planning process of Water Quality Management is being
funded with 205(j) monies. The 1981 Municipal Wastewater Treatment Construction Grants
Amendments authorized these funds. The Department has one grant at the present to
develop the methodology to develop site-specific water quality standards. The
authorization for funds is until 1985.
CLEAN LAKES PROGRAM
Section 314 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Public
Law 92-500) directed the United States Environmental Protection Agency to assist the
states in controlling sources of pollution which affect the quality of freshwater lakes
and in restoring lakes which have deteriorated In quality. EPA fulfilled this mandate
with the Clean Lakes Program, which provides financial assistance to the state to:
Classify publicly-owned fresh water lakes according to water quality;
Conduct diagnostic studies of specific publicly-owned lakes and develop
feasible pollution control and restoration programs from them (Phase I); and
Implement lake restoration and pollution control projects (Phase 2).
The Department was designated by the Governor's office on May 7, 1980 as the lead
agency responsible for entering into cooperative agreements for protecting and
restoring publicly-owned freshwater lakes. The Department has entered Into seven (7)
clean lake cooperative agreements.
- 9 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
In Arkansas two major success stories can be sited over the 1972-1982 decade:
One story is about a specific river; the other covers the state as a whole.
For a specific site the Arkansas River cannot be ignored. Previous to 1970,
all of the cities along this river discharged their sewage either raw or with
primary treatment. Water quality was obviously poor at several locations along the
entire reach.
Since that time every city has ceased raw and primary discharges and has gone
to secondary treatment. Localized problems with nuisances and public health
dangers have disappeared. The day is gone when the river was obviously polluted
below every major city. The river is now considered a prime recreation spot from
border to border across our state.
This does not mean that water quality problems no longer exist on the Arkansas
River, but the ones that were obvious and distasteful are gone. Still remaining
are problems with industrial discharges and toxics generated from point and
non-point sources.
The other success story that must be told is one of holding our own against the
rapid growth in population that our state experienced over the decade.
The state population grew by 19fc over that time period, but with the increased
level of treatment by most of the major dischargers in the state, the total load of
waste discharged to the streams remained the same.
It certainly would be more desirable to be able to point at major improvements
but in Arkansas' case, it seems that just holding our own against a tide of growth
is significant.
- 10 -
-------
. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
One success story of note in our state that has not been covered is the
dramatic decrease In fish kills and 1n-stream concentration of insecticides in
Eastern Arkansas. Fish kills were common occurrences in the early seventies, but
due to the banning of these chemicals by the EPA, none has occurred in the last
several years and in-stream/sediment/flesh concentrations have declined
dramatically. Me at this agency cannot take credit for this but we can say it has
happened and give the credit to EPA.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and Industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Each of the above checked categories has the potential to seriously degrade our
state's waters in the future and will greatly tax our capabilities to control
them. What 1s not listed above, however, is beyond doubt the major cause of water
quality degradation In our state and Is also beyond our ability to Improve.
Non-point source pollution 1s its name and until effective control methods are
Implemented in this state, water quality will continue to decline Into the
foreseeable future 1n direct relationship with our population growth and changing
land-use practices.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Arkansas Dept. Pollution Control
And Ecology
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Jim Schell (501) 562-7444
DATE: September 12. 1983
11 -
-------
State of California*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 19,950.000 1980 22,600,000
State Surface Area 158,693 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 39
# of River and Stream Miles 37,000 mi.; # of Border Miles* HO mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 4.800 / 1.180,000 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 500.000 ac. or 780 sq. ml.
# of Coast Miles 1,340 ml.
# of Estuary sq. ml. 702 sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Colorado/170 Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
H. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 9,343
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than F1shable/Sw1mmab1e:
7.991
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Flshable/Swlmmable:
195
d. Miles Monitored: 4,993
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
8,050 mi.
560
391
342
9,343 ml.
86%
6%
4%
4*
100%
1982
8,733 mi.
285
166
159
9,343 mi.
93%
3%
2%
21
t
100%
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
t% Unknown
Industrial Miles Improved: 683
Change in
Category
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
0
8.501
159
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 1.110.722
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swimmable:
623.421
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
141.550
d. Acres Monitored: 546.937
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
1,024,323 ac.
32,300
2,038
28,661
1,087,322 ac.
94%
3*
-
3*
100*
1982
1,094,515 ac.
1,480
1,793
12,934
1,110,722 ac.
99*
-
-
lit
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Industrial % 1% Unknown
Within
Category
245
180
96%
Municipal
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained: 1.066.363
Unknown: 12.934
Change in
Category
31.000
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 702 / 35J
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmabl
130 / 85
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmabl
13/0
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 234 / 212
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
627 339
4 8
71 4
0 0
702 351
89% 97*
1% 2%
10% 1%
-
100%
1982
670 345
10 0
22 6
0 0
702 351
95% 98%
2% -
3% 2%
-
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Improved 1% Degraded
i?%
92%
Maintained
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq. Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
17
648
Change In
Category
32
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Improved 2% 1% Degraded
977
Maintained
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
341
Change in
Category
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100%
1982-
mi.
mi.
%
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Industrial
Nonpoint
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Co 11-
•
O
Q
Nut.
PH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
MuniciDal
X
X
X
X
X
Toxics
Industrial
X
X
X
X
Coli.
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X
X
X(salts)
Other (inc. natural)
X
X^
*(mining-hvy. metals)
*Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 1016 + 66 New River
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 333
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: 22/0
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: 1.437
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses 1n Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People 20 -
(Millions)
16
12
or
zzzza
12.83
5.71
0.16
.65
Primary
2.0*1
£ZZZ2
Secondary
Teritary
8.^3
10.82
2.72
.31
Legend
Not served
by waste-
water system
Primary
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
Teritary
Primary
Secondary
etc.
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(millions)
2^1
20-
16*
12_
8.58
7
/
,10.70/
Legend
Generated
Discharged
31
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading gg
"""Includes "No-Discharge" haciMties
128
26
324
43
23
295
34%
8856
91%
50%
98515
86%
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
1.687
17*
*1.3 improvements under const*
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Compliance
Noncompliance
Noncompliance
9%
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
57
0
168
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements"1"
36
-
165
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
63%
-
98*
Percentage of Flow for
77%
Which Requirements Met+
-
98%
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
M27
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
ance
compliance
1982:
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Urban runoff has been a relatively minor, and localized threat to maintenance of
beneficial uses, but has been a factor in Bay Area disturbance, and local estuary
siltation. Agriculture represents a widespread threat to impairment of river,
stream, lake and reservoir designated uses. Silviculture is also widespread, and
logging in the North Coast and Sierras has major impacts on local streams. An
ongoing discharge of heavy metals (esp. Cd and Cu) from both abandoned and active
mining operations has affected fisheries in the Shasta Lake area, and throughout
the Sierras, with a moderate effect on designated use maintenance. Construction
is a moderate and localized problem, notable along with agriculture for
siltation, as in the south coastal lagoons and estuaries. Dams and
channelization have a minor and localized effect, primarily associated with
downstream low flow. Saltwater intrusion has become a moderate problem, in local
areas such as the San Francisco Bay delta and Oxnard. Bay Area disturbance has
also been affected by urban runoff (above), Industrial discharge, and the cleanup
of waste discharges (suggested removal of nutrients). Non-point source problems
in general represent about 50* of the proportion of use impairment of streams,
lakes, and estuaries state wide (part II D).
California does not have USDA Rural Clean Water Programs. The Federal Clean
Water Act, 1981 amendments, included a subsection [S 205(j)] for funding (EPA) a
water quality management planning program. The State Water Resources Control
Board has primary program authority, while local, regional, and interstate
agencies (Program Advisory Committee, PAC) will provide an advisory role, and
review program development and implementation as well as provide an impartial
review of program activities.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
I/L
S/W
M/W
M/L
M/L
I/L
M/L
S/L
M,T,SS
oil &
grease
Nut,P,SS
OxDe.Sal
SS, T
M, pH
OxDe
SS, T
Lo Flo
Sal
P, M
V. MATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: Waste discharge permits, an essential element of the state water
quality control program, set limits on discharge into California waters. Permits specify
the type, amount, and concentration of the discharge; establish time schedules for
compliance; and require a self-monitoring program. Regional Boards run the program. The
State Water Resources Control Board provides legal and technical assistance and hears
appeals. For violation or threatened violation of an order, the Regional Board can issue
cleanup and abatement orders, adopt cease and desist orders, and seek fines of up to
$25,000 per day of violation.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 35
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 24
Number of Administrative Actions: §
Number of Judicial Actions: _3
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = S 4.832 Million
LoBc,alPer""^«e
Categories of Sources
, x Federal - EPA:
12% 112% Other Federal other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
72% I Other Local:
I
200
*
579
$
579
*
Federal EPA
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
REGULATORY PROGRAM
1. Permitting: The nine California Regional Water Quality Control Boards
(Regional Boards) prepare, issue, review, revise, and rescind waste discharge
orders that specify conditions to be met by dischargers, such as effluent
limitations, receiving water requirements, and time schedules. Waste discharge
requirements for waste discharges to surface waters are issued as NPDES Permits
pursuant to the California Water Code and the federal Clean Water Act. The
requirements are aimed at achieving secondary treatment for publicly owned
(municipal) treatment facilities including, where appropriate, pretreatment
standards established for industrial wastes and best available control
technology for other industrial facilities.
Waste discharge requirements are issued pursuant to the California Water Code
for the disposal of wastewater to land and for some non-point sources of
wastewater. These requirements include effluent limitations and other
specifications for the protection of the State's important ground water supply.
2. Surveillance. Monitoring, and Inspections: The statewide water quality
monitoring programs include surface and ground water monitoring, compliance
evaluation activities, and special investigation projects.
Selected ground-water basins and fresh and marine waters are the subject of a
monitoring program conducted to assess the irrpacts of waste discharges on
ground and surface water quality.
Compliance monitoring inspections are conducted for waste dischargers to assure
compliance with requirements contained in waste discharge orders and/or
enforcement remedies.
3. Enforeement: This program ensures compliance with waste discharge orders
through the use of administrative and judicial remedies, such as notice of
violation letters, cleanup and Abatement Orders, Cease and Desist orders, and
referral to the State Attorney General. •
4. Toxic Substances Control: The functions within this program are encompassed
within all water quality activities.
PLANNING PROGRAM
Water Quality Control Planning: There are 16 tydrologic basins in the State, and
water quality control plans (basin plans) have been adopted for each basin. Three
additional water quality control plans have been adopted for statewide concerns.
These plans designate beneficial uses for the waters within each basin and specify
water quality objectives to protect the uses. The plans are reviewed and revised
periodically due to changes of beneficial uses or for consistency with other
relevant plans and policies or compliance with federal/state laws and regulations.
The basin plans recommend actions to achieve water quality goals, including
programs to detect long-term effects of degradation. Important control actions
from areawide waste management plans (208 plans) are incorporated into the basin
pi ans.
- 8 -
-------
CLEAN WATER PROJECTS PROGRAM
1. Clean Water Grants: With federally appropriated motley and the sale of State
Clean Water Bonds, a program of assistance for planning, design, and
construction of municipal wastewater treatment plants is administered by the
State.
2. Operator Training: Recognizing that the most carefully planned and complete
wastewater treatment facilities are not self-sufficient, the State requires
that the plants be operated by qualified, certified operators. The State
classifies all facilities according to their respective operator needs, trains
operators for a minimum of 3,800 trainee days, tests semi-annually for five
levels of competency, and certifies qualified examinees.
3. State Assistance Program: Because some clean water activities are excluded
from the Federal Clean Water Grant program, the State funds projects such as
erosion and urban runoff control in Lake Tahoe, exportation of highly saline
water from the Santa Ana Watershed basin, and water conservation and
reclamation projects through a State grant program.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Essentially all the activities of the State and Regional Boards have built-in
mechanisms for public input, and the majority of these are mandated by law or
regulation. The State Board and Regional Boards publish notices of business meetings
and formal workshops, as well as all special hearings; a public forum segment of the
business meetings are set aside each month; written and oral comments and other
public input are encouraged and welcomed.
- 9 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
The Union Carbide Corp. (JCC) operates a tungsten mine and mill in Pine Creek
Canyon, north of Bishop (Inyo County). The discharge of untreated mine
drainage water for many years severely polluted Pine Creek, which had sustained
a significant trout fishery prior to the expansion of the mine. In 1974, the
Regional Board adopted an NPDES permit with stringent effluent limits and a
time schedule for the UCC to meet them. The UCC installed the necessary
pollution abatement equipment and now the creek again supports most of the
aquatic habitat and fishery it once did.
The South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District regional sewerage system
had discharged onto the beach at Oceano, one of the most important Pismo
clamming beaches in the State, for nearly ten years. The beach was posted and
the public warned against taking shellfish in the area. Recreational use of
the beach area has oeen intense. With the construction of an upgraded sewage
treatment plant and especially a new outfall with diffuser, the beach has been
opened up to unlimited beneficial uses.
- 10 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
California has had to deal with many special problem areas in the last decade. Ground water
salinity is and has been a major problem. The interrelationship between water quality and
water quantity is very important in many areas including the Sacramento-San Joaquin delta.
The protection of the quality of Lake Tahoe is of prime importance. Water quality problems in
streams crossing the international border with Mexico and adjacent ocean waters have been and
are a concern. A number of toxics have been a concern in the past. Recent advances in
analytical techniques and increased awareness of toxic problems have moved this issue,
particularly with respect to ground water, to the forefront.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of population
and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
X - Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point sources.
; - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Major remaining problems in addition to the maintenance activity of keeping
dischargers in compliance with requirements fall into three areas: ground water
quality and quantity with special concern for pollution by toxic organics,
alteration of water quality from both point and non-point sources due to
population and development pressures, and problems of financing municipal
collection and treatment facilities. Contamination of ground water with toxics
has become a major problem. Of particular concern is the presence of organics
such as solvents and pesticides which may cause problems at extremely low levels
due to their carcinogenic properties. These toxics originate from leaking
underground tanks, improper industrial disposal, and pesticide use. Overdraft of
ground water has caused seawater intrusion, and man's use of water has added to
the salt load on ground water basins.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: State Vlater Resources Control Board
901 P Street. Sacramento. CA 95814
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Ed Anton (916) 322-3133
DATE: September 21, 1983
- 11 -
-------
CALIFORNIA
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
~ Use Not Supported
-N-
-------
CALIFORNIA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
C] Use Partially Supported
® Use Not Supported
VX
-------
State of Colorado*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN MATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 2,209,596 1980 2,877,726
State Surface Area 104.247 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 4
# of River and Stream Miles 14,100 mi.; # of Border Mlles*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage30.421 / 260,282 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 500,000+ ac. or
# of Coast Miles N/A ml.
# of Estuary sq. mi. N/A sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage N/A Name/Mileage N/A
Name/Mileage N/A Name/Mileage N/A
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 10,000
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
700
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
130
d. Miles Monitored: 2,765
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
9,273 ml.
122
605
0
10,000 ml.
93%
1
6
0
100%
1982
9,394 ml.
171
435
0
10,000 ml.
94%
2
4
0
100%
0 ml.
_sq. mi.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
Improved 6% 1% Degraded
Miles Improved: 110
Miles Degraded: —
Miles Maintained: 9,421
Unknown: 0
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed:
50.000
Change in
Category
430
149
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored:
4,953
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
| Total Acres
Unknown [ Assessed
i
1972 ¦
40,000 ac.
10,000
0
| 50,000 ac.
80%
20%
0
1
100%
49,953 ac.
5,000
0
54,953 ac.
lyot •
91%
9%
0
j 100%
!
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
2% Degraded
Improved
18%
Maintained
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
10.000
1.000
43.953
Change in
Cateqorv
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
% Industrial
Nonpoint
Inact
Municipal
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Municipal
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*J Turb.
i
Other
2 Most |
Serious
Municipal
X
X
NH-3 |
TRC
Industrial
X
Metals
1
Non-Point
X
Other (inc. natural)
X
¦
i
. 1 i
564
*Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: N/A
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Millions)
3 -
30,000 Not Served
66,000
Require
Sustem
n-rr
1.2
Secondary
Advanced
1.3
1.5
Legend
30,000 Not Served
Not served
by waste-
water system
Secondary
w
Advanced
Served by
wastewater
system
50,000 AWT
Primary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc.
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Millions)
3.0
2.0 -
1.0 -
3.0
2A
OA
7
A
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
. 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
0
15
56
30
8
51*
42*
53*
1
**
rn
CO
52*
58*
...
82*
9
6
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
450
* Non-compliance does not include fecal coliform/TRC
nature. If included compliance would decrease to 77*.
problems which are design/operational in
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1972:
1972 vs. 1982
1982:
| Non-
[Compliance
Compliance
58%
Noncompliance \ Compliance
B. Non-Mun1cipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
0
4
57
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements*
0
3
50
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
0
75*
87*
550
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
0
90*
68*
"""Includes HNo-D1scharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Noncomplian
Compliance
100%
Noncompliance
IV. NOW-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Non-point pollution control has focused on the assessment of agricultural,
inactive mine, and urban runoff sources. Waters diverted for irrigation
contribute to salt loading of several rivers in Colorado, the most significant of
which is the Colorado River system. Colorado is participating with the other
Basin states to control salinity and several USDI and USDA programs are being
implemented to reduce salt loading from agricultural sources.
Uncontrolled drainage from inactive mine and mill sites is a major reason for
non-attainment of water quality goals in Colorado. The most significant problems
have oeen identified and in several cases improvements made where old sites have
been restored by active operators. Water quality degradation remains at most
inactive sites because a process of evaluating for regulating and controlling
drainage has not been developed and cost-effective techniques for treating
inactive mine discharges have not been evaluated.
The Denver Regional Council of Governments evaluated pollutant loading from
different urban land uses as a part of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program. They
are exploring possibilities for implementation.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si lv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent*
3*
M/2*
11*
1/3*
1*
I/O*
5*
S/l*
0/0
N/A
0/0
N/A
Primary
Pollutants
Metals
TSS.BOD
Nut.
TDS
TSS
Metals
N/A
*Assessed/Control Projects
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: work with violators to bring facilities into compliance with
permit conditions, and taking enforcement actions where necessary. Nineteen civil
penalties resulting in $128,000 fines were levied in FY '83.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 20
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 4
Number of Administrative Actions: 12
Number of Judicial Actions: 4
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 547 Million
By Percentage Categories of Sources
$ 243 Mi 11 ion
$ 10
$ 50
$ 90
$ 154*
issue passed In metropolitan Denver
28%
ate
2% Other federal
Local Match &
Federal loans
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
* Includes 126 M bond
In 1982.
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
Colorado's water quality program is founded upon stream classifications and
standards and technology based euffluent limits. Regulatory mechanisms to
implement the water quality program are established through discharge permits and
control regulations. These processes, which are state responsibilities, have
facets which are dependent upon local and regional planning and decision making.
They are coordinated through 208 plans. The Water Quality Control Division
approves site applications for domestic treatment facilities, reviews plans and
specifications for wastewater facilities, and administers the construction grants
program for both state and federal monies. The water quality monitoring is used to
establish background stream quality and to identify where water quality based
effluent limits are required. Both fixed stations monitoring and special water
quality studies are used in this program. The Division has conducted many schools
on wastewater plant operations and maintenance and licenses treatment plant
operators in order to improve treatment plant operations.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Major water quality improvement has occurred on two segments of the South
Platte River. Control of point source discharges from several sugar beet
facilities, meat packing houses, and municipal wastewater treatment plants
significantly reduced BOD loading to the lower portion of the river and has
resulted in a major water quality Improvement upstream. The South Platte River
through the Denver metropolitan area has improved due to the control or
elimination of industrial and municipal wastewater. A special survey of the
Platte River through Denver In 1976-1977 resulted 1n the elimination of over 15
unauthorized discharges. Improvement of the quality of the Platte and two of its
tributaries in Oenver, Cherry Creek and Clear Creek, has been accompanied by the
development of an extensive greenway and park system along the river which
provides water based recreation opportunities for metro area residents.
Drainage from inactive mine and mill sites is a major reason for
non-attainment of water quality goals. In several cases mining companies have
re-opened or reworked old sites and in the process have improved the quality of
drainage waters from the sites. The most significant improvement was made by the
AMAX Company 1n the pre-development mine work for the Mt. Emmons project near
Crested Butte. A plant was constructed to treat drainage water from the old
Keystone Mine, which virtually removed all metals from the water and as a result a
cold water fishery has been established In Coal Creek below the mine.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
A major part of the water quality program over the past decade has been to
maintain the existing high quality water in the light of new development. This was
accomplished through the establishment of water quality standards and stream
classifications. Several years of development went into the Basic Standards and many
hours of public involvement, statewide, were included in the classification hearings
and deliberations. Other major concerns have been to prevent the proliferation of
small wastewater facilities as the state increases its population and to improve the
operations and maintenance of wastewater facilities.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
- Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
sources.
- Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
All of the above are important to Colorado, however, the two checked will probably
require the greatest programmatic efforts. In addition, the watersheds of three
major reservoirs are about to undergo rapid urbanization. Protection of these
reservoirs will be a major concern. The Division will continue to press for
non-proliferation of small wastewater facilities as the state's population expands.
The Division needs a better understanding of existing water quality on secondary
streams and their tributaries in terms of meeting adopted water quality standards,
and there is a need to develop more site specific biological data base and analysis
systems.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Water Quality Control Division
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: J. Robert Owen (303) 320-8333 ext. 3466
DATE: August 25, 1983
- 10 -
-------
COLORADO
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
~ Use Not Supported
-------
COLORADO
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
IH Use Partially Supported
Use Not Supported
-------
State of Connecticut*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 3,032,200 1980 3,107,576
State Surface Area 5,009 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 334 Subreglonal Basins (Average 20 ml2 1n size)
(# of River and Stream Miles 8,400*(1 ) ml.: # of Border Miles* 11 ml.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 6.000 / 82,893 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.ml. 657,000 ac. or sq. ml.
# of Coast Miles 253 ml.
# of Estuary sq. ml. 600 sq. ml.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Ml1eage Pawcatuck/10 Name/M11eage Byram/1
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 839
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swlmmable:
7S-Class AA, 173-Class A*(2)
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Flshable/Swlmmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 498
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially'
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
294 ml.
300
245
0
839 ml.
35 %
36 %
29 *
0
100%
1982
538 ml.
230
71
0
839 ml.
64 %
28 %
8 %
0
100%
NOTES(1) - Approximately 90% of which 1s protected for existing or potential public
water supply {no discharges permitted by State law and policy).
(2) - Class AA - existing public water supply
Class A ¦ potential public water supply
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
B.y Percentage Category. Category
Degraded
Miles Improved: 121 326
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
25
367
8. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed:
38.840
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
20,000 - Public Water Supply Reservoirs
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored:
38.840
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
r
36,680 ac.
2,160
38,840 ac.
94%
6%
j
i
100*
37,030 ac.
1,810
! I
1 38,840 ac.
lsjot «
¦
95*
5*
1 j 10056
1 1
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Improved 1%
Maintained
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
2.180
36.310
Change in
Category
350
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
600
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed:
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0 / 0
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0 / 0
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 85 /
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
471
75
11
43
600 j
78 %
13
2*
7%
100*
1982
478
73
6
43
600
80 %
12*
1%
71
10056
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
Bv Percentage
Unknown
Improved
Maintained
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
54
496
Change in
Category
43
b. Oceans
Bv Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2A -
-------
. Great Lakes
1. a. foiles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supportea
Partially
Supported
Not
Supportec
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed j
1972
mi.
mi. 1
%
100% |
1982-
mi.
|
mi. i
%
100% i
1
i
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
3% Nonpoint
21%
Toxic
70%
Municipal *
/ 32%
lonpoint
Natural
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
ndustrial
Toxic's
None
83%
Municipal
*Includes significant combined sewer overflow problems
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
0.0.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
MuniciDal
X
X
X
D.O./Coliform
Industrial
X
X
X
X
Toxics/pH
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X
Iron
Coliform/turb
Other (inc. natural)
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: no
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: q
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: 6
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: 0
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Legend
Number of
People
(Mi U ions)
3 _
H
1.19
1 -
0.1)9
1.10
0.25
0.01
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
<1. ma mz
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements'*"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Net*
Facilities Needing Upgrading
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
48
lb
39
lb
7
36
31%
47%
92%
31%
I —
I
6>9% ! 88%
39
15 ! 3
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
85
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
by Percentage
1972:
1982:
31%
Compliance
69%
Noncompliance
20%
ance
b. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements4"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
93
28 1 62
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
550
22
19 ! 55
24%
68%
89%
46%
75% *
85% 1
+Includes "No-bischarge" Facilities
*Pfizer's 99 MGD discharge is excluded from this calculation
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Noncompliance
18 %
Compliance
Compliance
Noncompliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
In Connecticut, non-point sources of pollution affects surface water quality in
varying degrees. NPS related surface water problems are not, however, as
significant as industrial wastewater discharges and municipal sewerage problems.
In the past decade numerous NPS studies were conducted and, where appropriate,
NPS control programs implemented. The status of planning, known NPS problems and
control programs are summarized below.
Urban Runoff - Studies on a statewide basis using empirical "desk-top" analysis
methods plus limited water quality monitoring. Conclusions: 1) not a major
statewide problem; 2) short term in nature; 3) consider use of simple BMP's,
like stonnwater retention, when new development occurs; and 4) account for when
investigating point source treatment needs.
Agriculture - Not a major statewide problem but may cause local impacts.
Approximately 2% of state designated as priority for special AG NPS project
eligibility. Conservation districts are organized to seek implementation of
BMP's. State WPCA issues administrative orders when voluntary compliance fails.
One special AG BMP watershed demonstration project is near completion.
SiIviculture - Not a water quality problem.
Mining - Not a water quality problem.
Construction - A statewide threat to water quality. Municipal responsibility to
minimize this problem except for state sponsored projects where it is a state
WPCA responsibility. Numerous authorities exist to minimize this potential NPS.
Hydrologic Modification - Significant potential problem which has been minimized
by numerous state and federal regulatory program. A number of low flow problems
linger which should be resolved using existing regulatory tools.
Salt Water Intrusion - Not a surface water quality problem.
Residuals - Significant problem impacting numerous smaller streams. A major
groundwater quality concern. State requires discharge permits for leachate
discharges and considers surface water impacts during permit review process.
Routine monitoring is required in all discharge permits.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent
I/W
M/L
N.A.
N.A.
M/W
M/L
N.A.
S/L
Primary
Pollutants
c,
OxDe*
Nut, T,
SS
T,SS
Lof lo,
Nut
OxDe
Nut.pH.O**
~Important to measure as sediment oxygen demand when Investigating point source treatment needs
**Iron
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection uses a variety of methods to
obtain compliance including technical assistance and training, non-compliance
notification and follow-up civil penalties, administrative orders, cease and desist
orders and consent orders. During 1982 the Water Compliance Unit issued 161 new
administrative orders that brought the cumulative total to 3221 since May 1, 1967. The
program is comprehensive in that it deals with NPDES discharges, pretreated and other
discharges to municipal sewers and discharges to the groundwaters. Program goals are to
regulate all discharges through a comprehensive statewide program requiring treatment of
wastewaters consistent with technological feasibility.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 27
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 1
Number of Administrative Actions: 23
Number of Judicial Actions: 3
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT - $ 1.241 Million
By Percentage
Other Federal 1j> Local Match
Federal
\ EPA
\
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Categories of Sources
468 Million
12
106
82
573
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
1972 - CT DtP active and seeking secondary treatment at municipal STP's and the
equivalent of 8PT or BAT at industries discharging to either surface waters or
sanitary sewers (i.e., pretreatment).
- Federal CWA amendments passed and subsequent program grants and federal
requirements stimulated major expansion of CT DEP.
1973 - NPDES delegation received.
- The second Water Quality Standards revision process initiated.
- Water Quality limited segments designated, TMDL/WLA analyses begun.
- Ambient WQ Monitoring Program totally re-designed and implemented.
- State discharge permit requirements established for new sanitary landfills.
1974 - bulk of NPDES permits issued.
- Ambient Biological Monitoring Program initiated.
- First major municipal 201 grant award for CSO correction (Norwalk).
1975 - Adoption of CT's Civil Penalty Program.
- Began requiring State discharge permits for large septic systems-system
designs based on sanitary and hydraulic engineering principals versus "code
requirements".
- Implemented first WLA's.
- Initiated Agricultural Waste Management activities.
1976- Expanded Lakes Management activities-monitoring and assessment.
- Initial 208 grant received and studies begun on groundwater protection and NPS
Management needs.
- First 201 grant award for AT construction project (Plainville STP) based on
WLA process.
1977 - First major eutrophication study completed to set P04 removal requirements
for discharges into the Housatonic River impoundments.
1979 - Second round NPDES permits issued.
- Statewide Pretreatment Program submitted to EPA for approval.
- First 314 Lakes restoration grant award (Lake Waramaug).
- Delegated administration of Federal 201 construction grants.
- State/EPA working group formed to deal more effectively with interstate
transport of water pollutants.
1980 - Major revision to CT's WQS system was accomplished following public hearings
which resulted in a statewide groundwater classification system to serve as
the basis for a comprehensive and coordinated ground/surface water quality
management program.
- Completed trophic classification inventory of recreational lakes.
1981 - Initiated Public Hearings for specific groundwater classifications and fourth
revision of surface specific water classifications.
- Adopted lakes management priority list for 314 grants.
- Major approval by Governor of 208 NPS plan.
- Statewide Pretreatment Program approved by EPA.
- Toxic WLA's planning and monitoring increased.
- Enforcement and permit policies and priorities for groundwater discharges were
substantially refined.
1982 - Toxicity testing capabilities were developed in DEP's aquatic biology
laboratory.
- Major new approach designed for developing comprehensive WQM plans.
- Adopted groundwater monitoring strategy for existing sanitary landfills.
- Major state legislation passed regarding: diversion permits for surface and
groundwater allocation; underground fuel storage; orders to polluters to
provide alternate water supply; grants to municipalities required to provide
alternate water supply; permit fees.
- Adopted Groundwater classifications for approximately 50% of State.
- Developed strategy with EPA regarding third round NPDES permits.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
A. Connecticut Pretreatment Program
In 1972 a statewide comprehensive pretreatment program was implemented by the
Department of Environmental Protection. Point sources of pollution to streams
had been stringently controlled since the passage of the Connecticut Clean
Water Act on May 1, 1967. With the beginning of the NPOES Program it was
obvious that the Water Pollution Control Program would be incomplete without
controlling these point sources of pollution that discharged to municipal
sewerage systems. Beginning in 1972, industrial discharges to municipal
systems were surveyed and those discharging incompatible materials such as
acids, heavy metals, cyanide and solvents (approximately 400) and those
discharging compatible materials such as dye waste, and paper waste in
excessive quantities (approximately 25) were issued orders to install new
treatment facilities or renovate existing facilities. To date the Program has
been highly successful and with a few exceptions, industrial discharges to
sewers now receive the same treatment as if they were to discharge to a surface
water. This has eliminated huge quantities of toxics that might have otherwise
gone untreated, helped municipal treatment plants to operate more efficienty
and eliminated an inherent competitive advantage that had existed within
Connecticut.
B. Connecticut Ground Water Management Program
Realizing that a truly comprehensive water quality management program must
include groundwater, Connecticut revised and adopted its Water Quality
Standards and Criteria on September 9, 1980. These standards for the first
time included a use classification system for groundwater that paralleled the
existing surface water classification system. In part a reaction to
groundwater pollution cases, the primary Intent of the Program is to protect
valuable groundwater resources for present and future drinking water supplies.
The necessity for waste disposal 1s recognized and a groundwater classification
allowing waste disposal with the proper handling and treatment is provided for
certain very limited areas demonstrating specific hydrogeologic conditions.
The siting of new sanitary landfills and the placement of industrial residuals
as well as many other activities will be strictly regulated by this system.
Watersheds for public water supply reservoirs and recharge areas for water
supply wells are eliminated for consideration of most types of waste disposal.
The system is supported by a statewide resource data base including geological
information developed jointly by the Connecticut DEP and the USGS.
In addition to the classification system, Connecticut has just passed and is
now implementing a Water Diversion Program, Its purpose being allocation of
water resources including groundwater. Underground fuel storage regulations
are addressing problems related to petroleum product leakage. A variety of
other measures are also being implemented to address groundwater contamination
problems.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Combined Sewer Overflows - CSO's are one of the most significant problems
remaining. AVI CSO municipalities are under administrative order to correct
problems. Most communities have completed comprehensive facility plans and
several have begun a phased construction program. Continuing federal and state
grants are necessary to complete the program.
Pretreatment - Connecticut has developed its own ongoing program based on
treatment technology which has been highly successful.
Groundwater - Responding to a critical need, Conecticut adopted and is
implementing a statewide groundwater policy and use classification.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
JC sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
One of the most serious and far reaching problems remaining is the assessment of
toxic materials on human health. While impacts on aquatic life are becoming
understood, impacts on human health remain a mystery. More and more public
attention is focused on possible human health effects from permitted discharges
containing trace amounts of toxic materials. Although the states can assume
delegation of programs and do site specific evaluations of aquatic life, human
health is too complex and costly for anyone other than the Federal government.
To make proper decisions that protect human health, it is imperative that the
Federal government take an agressive lead role in funding and/or taking part in
necessary research, toxicological studies and epidemiological surveys to
consolidate existing information and develop meaningful human risk factors for a
wide variety of toxic compounds.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Department of Environmental Protection
Water Compliance Unit
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Robert E. Moore (203) 566-3245
DATE: August 9. 1983
- 10 -
-------
r
1
CONNECTICUT
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
B Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
S Use Not Suooorted
-------
-N-
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
IS Use Not Supported
CONNECTICUT
1982
-------
State of Delaware*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 548,104 1980 594,338
State Surface Area 2,057 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 31,0
# of River and Stream Miles 464 mi.; # of Border Miles*
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 20 / 1,160 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 106,000 ac. or 166
# of Coast Miles 381 (1) mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 720 (2) sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Delaware/79 Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 464
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
45
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
37
d. Miles Monitored: 431
79 mi.
sq. mi.
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
116 mi.
67
53
228
464 mi.
25%
492
14%
28%
11%
22%
50%
percent of total
percent of known miles
1982
237 ml.
71
111
45
464 mi.
51%
57%
15%
17%
24%
26%
10%
percent of total
... percent of known miles
(2) Includes Delaware and New Jersey portions of Delaware Bay
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
Category
58
By Percentage
Main-
tained
Unknown
Improved
7% Degraded
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
30
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown: 228
140
Change in
Category
1. a. Acres Assessed:
1,160
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 1,160
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1Q7? .
242 ac.
375
35
508
1,160 ac.
21
32
3
44
100%
j
1982 \
690 ac.
470
0
0
1,160 ac.
59
41
! 1
0 j o '
i 1
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Degraded
12%
Improved 14%
U%
\Unknown
Munici-
pal
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
344
Change in
Category
158
150
508
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources --- By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
usxria
Nonpoint
1% Municipal
Nonpoint
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.| Toxics^
j j 2 Most
Turb.! Other Serious
1
Municipal
X
X
X
l X
i I D.O. Nut.
Industrial
X
X
X
! x
j D.O. Toxics j
Non-Point
X
X
X
j
1 j Coli. Nut. |
Other (inc. natural)
X
X
X
l 1 Coli. D.O. 1
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 2£
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
-9 -
.8
Number of
People
(Millions) *7
.6-
-5
.'f -1
.3
.2
.1 -I
548104 = T
P37319:
127514
Legend
Not served by
594338 = T wastewater system
S ^5000
899^6
P 13884
S 95430
Served by waste-
water system
AS 395078
Primary
Secondary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
T reatment
1972 AS 2397 1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
f-
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(millions)
.5 -
.348
.106
.418
1972
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1982
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits* Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+
2
1
3
0
1
2
0
100
66.7
0
100
86
2
1
1
Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
1982:
V
Compliance
Noncompliance
m
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
~Interim Permits Include Consent Orders
Facilities with Permits
26
2
24
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
0
0
22 1
Percentage of Facilities for
I
Which Requirements Being Met
0
0
91.7 !
Percentage of Flow for
0
0
— —!
99 |
Which Requirements Met
Total
Permits
in Effec
in 1982
26
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
15%
Noncompliance
Compliance
C omp1iance
IV. NUN-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
The Clean Lakes and the "208" Water Quality Management Program have identified
several non-point sources of pollution concluding that 1) most of Delaware's lakes
and ponds are eutrophic; 2) the groundwater in parts of the state is contaminated
with unhealthy levels of nitrate-nitrogen; 3) the highest nitrate concentrations
occur where there is excessively well-drained soils and intensive agricultural
production; 4) poultry manure, landfills, septic tanks and fertilizers are the main
sources of nitrate contamination in the water table; 5) soil type is the major factor
in determining whether stormwater runs off into a stream, or percolates into the
water table.
The nonpoint sources of pollution (both man-made and natural) have resulted in
several water bodies not meeting their designated uses as prescribed in the state's
water quality standards. Much of the state's shellfishing grounds are presently
closed due to high levels of coliform bacteria. Primary and secondary contact
recreation is restricted or hindered in some areas. Salt water intrusion in the
coastal region has affected part of the water table aquifer and precluded its future
use.
The state's strategy toward controlling nonpoint source pollution is
multifaceted. Owners of failing septic tank systems can be arrested, fined and
forced to effect repairs. New, updated septic system regulations are being proposed
to prevent such problems in the future. The state has helped fund an environmental
specialist position in the Cooperative Extension Service to teach farmers and rural
residents the best methods of disposing of their household and farming wastewater.
The specialist has saved farmers thousands of dollars on fertilizer bills by showing
them how to apply best management practices for fertilizer and manure management
which simultaneously help safeguard ground water quality. The state will also use
the experience gained from the Rural Clean Water Program in the Appoquinimink River
Basin to reduce agricultural nonpoint source pollution. The state has also proposed
new cost sharing best management practices for the storage and disposal of animal
wastes. Regultions concerning agricultural practices and solid waste disposal will
be reviewed in the years ahead.
The presence of toxic materials in Delaware streams and ponds is rare, although
small fish kills do occasionally occur - usually in farm ponds after a heavy rain due
to toxophene in the sediment. In recent years, the state has initiated a sediment
and erosion law to reduce sediment runoff from most land distrubing activities,
except flatland agriculture.
The state has recently completed a comprehensive water management plan. Much of
this plan deals with groundwater and its management. The various nonpoint source
pollution threats to the state's groundwater resources are addressed in a special
report.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Pri mary
Pollutants
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
M/L
M/W
N/A
N/A
M/L
N/A
M/W
S/W
T,M,C
Nut.OXDE
Nut.OXUE
C & SS
..
_
SS
SAL.
NUT M, SS
V. HATER UUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: Responsibilty for compliance with permit terms and conditions
rests with the permit holder. The self monitoring data as well as DEC monitoring and
non-compliance notification provide an adequate base from which the permit holder can determine
his compliance status. Industrial violators not having adequate treatment facilities are subject
to a penalty policy designed to match penalities with the unfair economic benefit otherwise
realized by non-compliance, thus removing the economic incentive for non-compliance.
Increasingly, the emphasis is shifting to adequate operations and maintenance of existing
treatment works with penalty determinations made by DEC in accordance with the Delaware
Environmental Protection Act.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 5
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 3
Number of Administrative Actions: 2~
Number of Judicial Actions: " '
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 295.3 Million
By Percentage
State
Local
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
St at e:
Local Match:
Other Local:
$ 213.4 Mi 11 inn
*
$ 33
$ 48.9
*
-------
C. Program Activities
Approximately the first half of the 1972 decade was devoted almost exclusively
to the control of point source pollution. A strong construction grants management
program and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program
(delegation received in 1974) were the major thrusts of Delaware's overall water
quality management program for this period.
In tne mid and latter part of the decade, two areawide and the state's water
quality management planning (208) programs, a wastewater treatment plant operator
training and certification program and a clean lakes program complemented the point
source orientation and provided a balance between point source and non-point source
pollution control. Other programs in support of the state's overall water quality
program include programs in compliance assurance, enforcement, laboratory and ambient
field and public participation.
As the reporting decade drew to a close, Delaware found itself in an enviable
position compared to most states in that only two communities with populations over
500 are not either sewered or have a grant for doing so. Of the 18 municipal sewage
treatment plants in the state, only two have not been upgraded to secondary
treatment. Both of those communities are now in the design phase for upgrading.
Current emphasis in Deleware's water quality program is placed on groundwater
quality protection (see part VII: Special State Concerns). The state's groundwater
quality program is a very comprehensive one, interfaced with the state's solid and
hazardous wastes, superfund, septic system and agricultural nonpoint source control
programs and involves participation by both government and the private sector.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Scope of Wastewater Facilities Development
Forty out of Delaware's 56 incorporated municipalities are either sewered or
have a grant for doing so. Only two of the remaining 16 have populations over 500.
Today only two municipalities do not have treatment works capable of providing
secondary treatment. Both of those communities are now in the design phase for
upgrading with construction to begin in 1984.
Nutrient Management
Delaware has implemented a nutrient management program, designed to save the
farmer expensive fertilizer costs and at the same time improve surface and
groundwater quality. Utilizing the services of the University of Delaware's
Cooperative Extension Service to implement the program, the State has managed to save
a number of farmers considerable sums of money during 1982.
This voluntary approach to nonpoint source pollution control is highly
successful and fully endorsed by the state's agriculture communities.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Groundwater Quality
Groundwater in Delaware is a high quality, low cost and available source of
water which provides more than 19 billion gallons each year for all uses.
Approximately two-thirds of the state's population uses groundwater provided
through municipal and private wells. All of the fresh water for farm use and most
of the water used for irrigation and self-supplied industrial use is also derived
from groundwater. Groundwater is readily available in the Coastal Plain of
Delaware where streams are inadequate to meet demand, are typically saline, or
have highly variable seasonal flow. Groundwater also provides base flow to
streams and thus is responsible for the maintenance of a fish and wildlife
population and aquatic ecosystems. Since these ecosystems often require water of
a quality even higher than drinking water, the obligation to protect wildlife also
demands the maintenance of groundwater quality. There is evidence of groundwater
contamination in Delaware sufficient to convince many that the subject requires
serious attention in public policy. The extent of contamination, however, cannot
be stated in scientifically meaningful terms at this time. In those parts of the
state where groundwater is used excessively or where it can be so contaminated
that it is unfit for consumption, serious local economic problems can result.
Revision of the state's water pollution control regulations, the implementation of
Superfund to address the state's six qualifying superfund sites, the introduction
of best management practices to address pollution that can occur from improperly
disposed animal wastes are among major programs underway to deal with the problem
of groundwater quality.
Inland Bays Development
Residential growth in the Inland Bays region of Delaware has been sustained
over the past decade and even during the current period of deep national economic
recession. In the future, continued growth at past trend rates (43 percent per
decade) would add an additional 10,000 or more housing units by the year 2000,
involving close to $500 million in property development and real estate
transactions. This strong local economy, however, is based on a fragile,
deteriorating ecological system that is vulnerable to uncontrolled growth.
Findings of previous studies indicate that continued use of conventional on-site
wastewater treatment systems in areas of high water table and rapid percolation
rates (frequently found in the area) could result in contaminated groundwater
supplies, and in areas with low percolation rates could result in surface water
quality contamination. Ultimately, these deteriorating environmental conditions
could undermine the fragile ecological basis of the economy.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
sources.
- Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Delaware Division of
Environmental Control
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Robert H. MacPherson 302/736-4860
DATE: August 19, 1983
- 10 -
-------
DELAWARE
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-------
DELAWARE RIVER BASIN (portions of DE, NJ, NY, PA)
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
Preface: This abbreviated STEP report Is presented by the Delaware River
Basins Commission, an Interstate-federal compact comrnmission with
jurisdiction In the Delaware River Basin portions of Delaware, New Jersey,
New York and Pennsylvania. The Commission provided Information concerning
progress In the Delaware River for use 1n the STEP report to each of these
four states. The following additional information summarizes the
Commission's activities (Part V C of the STEP report), site-specific
successes that are interstate in nature (Part VI of the STEP report) and the
Commission's concerns and remaining problems (Part VII of the STEP report).
-------
C. Program Activities
WATER QUALITY MONITORING AND DATA ANALYSES
The Commission operates a cooperative sampling program covering 100
miles of the Delaware Bay and tidal Delaware River (DE, NJ & PA).
Generally, samples are collected by boat twenty times per year at eighteen
locations by the State of Delaware under contract, and analyzed for up to 25
parameters. The program has been modified at times to conduct special
studies. Monitoring of major tributaries and waste dischargers is similarly
contracted to the States of Delaware, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. The
Commission coordinates the National Ambient Water Monitoring Program for the
Delaware River including the collection of fish tissue for toxic compounds
and provides funding for automatic water quality monitors that operate in
the Delaware and Lehigh Rivers.
In the upper Delaware River the Commission conducts annual summer
1imnological studies that emphasize biological sanitary water quality
parameters. In recent years this program has directed attention to water
quality issues related to the management of river segments designated as
National Scenic and Recreational Rivers.
Water quality data are analyzed by the Commission for trends, attainment
of water quality standards and for answers to specific technical questions.
Biannually the Commission publishes a water quality status and trend
report. The Commission serves as a source of water quality information for
the general public and handles numerous requests for information each year.
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING
Water quality management including groundwater is an integral part of
the Commission Comprehensive Plan for water resources management. Pollution
abatement and related projects and plans developed by public and private
entities are reviewed for consistency with the Commission's Plan. Specified
water resources-related projects in the Basin must be submitted for
Commission approval. Commission staff provide technical and policy advice
through participation in the planning activities of local, regional, state
and federal agencies.
The Commission has specific water quality planning responsibilities; for
example, in the tidal Delaware River the Commission maintains a wasteload
allocation program which assigns pollution loadings to individual wastewater
dischargers. An on-going study is examining the necessity and costs for
updating the wasteload allocation program, including abatement of non-point
sources of pollution and the reevaluation of stream water quality
objectives. As part of its Comprehensive Plan the Commission has adopted
water quality standards for the interstate Delaware River. With the four
Basin states and the federal government, the Commission periodically reviews
and modifies, as necessary, its standards and effluent limits. The
Commission maintains various mathematical water quality models of the
Delaware River for management purposes.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
TIDAL DELAWARE RIVER
The 85-mile tidal reach of the Delaware River passing through the urban-
industrial complex of Trenton, NJ; Philadelphia, PA; Camden, NJ; and Wilmington DE
(population: 5 million) receives wastes from more than 90 municipal and industrial
dischargers. In the 1940s areas of zero dissolved oxygen were widespread, greases,
oils and other substances floated in the river and associated noxious gases
sickened dock workers, corroded ship hulls and caused other problems. The
provision of primary wastewater treatment followed by secondary treatment above
Philadelphia, after WWII, cleared up the more grossly polluted conditions.
In 1968 the Delaware River Basin Commission upgraded water quality standards
and adopted a wasteload allocation program covering the major dischargers. As a
result of this program and the coordinated programs of the federal government, and
the states of Delaware, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, further progress has been
made. Pollution loadings have been reduced over 50% compared with the early 1960s
with further reductions anticipated shortly as several large municipal upgrading
projects are completed. The 85 miles of the tidal river now displays greatly
improved water quality. Dissolved oxygen, for example, was increased one to 2.5
mg/1 or more in over 70 miles of the Estuary. Other water quality parameters,
particularly coliform bacteria concentrations, pH and acidity have also shown great
improvement, and about 70% of the tidal river now generally meets water quality
standards. In recent years urban parks have been developed along the waterfronts
in each of the large cities, a direct benefit of cleaner water.
Water pollution in the tidal Delaware impacts the American Shad, an important
anadromous fish that annually migrates to spawn in the Upper Oelaware River Basin.
Catches of shad peaked around the turn of the century when the Delaware River catch
was the largest of any river system along the Atlantic Coast. Primarily due to
pollution, shad populations declined drastically after 1901, to the point that shad
commercial and sport fishing largely ceased up and down the Delaware. In recent
years the shad have been making a dramatic come-back. Between 1975 and 1982, for
example, population estimates show a four-fold increase, with record (post - WWII)
shad runs in 1981 and 1982. Several shad festivals are now held annually along the
Delaware River during the spring shad run and the shad sport fishery is estimated
to have a annual value of $3 million.
UPPER DELAWARE RIVER BASIN
New York City has three large water supply reservoirs in the Upper Delaware
River Basin, releases from which are governed by a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court decree
and New York State law. The permitted method of releases from the three reservoirs
was causing water quality problems in the rivers below the reservoirs, particularly
in the West Branch Delaware River. Nine miles of the West Branch forms the
Pennsylvania - New York State border. There the river was subjected to minimum
flow, high temperature conditions during the summer months with periodic large flow
increases due to cold-water reservoir releases. The resultant thermal stresses and
varible flows were harmful to fish life and other recreational uses of the river.
Accordingly, modified operating procedures were developed, and in 1977 the four
Delaware River Basin states and New York City, under the auspicies of the
Commission, cooperatively agreed to an experimental modified release program. The
results of the program have been dramatic. Thermal stresses conditions have been
eliminated on the West Branch Delaware River and reduced on the Neversink River and
East Branch about 75%. Up to 35.5 stream miles have been converted to high quality
trout water and an additional 50 miles of trout fisheries receive better protection
as a result of the improved environmental-habitat conditions. Native Brook trout
have returned to the East Branch and the ranges of other trout species extended
into new areas. Improvements were also achieved for warmer water fish as well
since base flows have been stabalized and habitat areas increased.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Progress by some municipal dischargers in meeting wasteload allocations for the
tidal Delaware has been slow, due to federally-mandated detailed planning
requirements, limitations on construction grant funding, and local resistance to
regionalization of facilities.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Non-point sources (particularly combined sewer overflow and sediment oxygen
demand) must be controlled in order to progress toward the fishable swimmable
water quality goals in the tidal Delaware. Control of toxic substances will
require increased efforts to more clearly define sources, effects, ultimate fates
and abatement measures.
Recreational users of the Upper Delaware River are increasing and in many river
segments recreation is the dominant river use. The ultimate water quality impact
of this intensive use is not known. Protection of high quality waters from
recreation - related and other development in areas adjacent to the river or on
tributary streams will be an on-going concern.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Delaware River Basin Commission
West Trenton, N.J.
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Richard C. Albert (609) 883-9500
DATE: July 20, 1983
- 10 -
-------
State of District of Columbia*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 756,500 1980 638,300
State Surface Area 69 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 1
# of River and Stream Miles 40 ml.; # of Border M1les*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 1 / 107 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.m1. 5 ac. or
# of Coast Miles 0 mi.
# of Estuary sq. nvl• 6.67 sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 40
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swimmable:
0
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Flshable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 40
2, Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
6 mi.
9
6
19
40 ml.
16 %
22%
15%
47%
100%
1982
7 mi.
18
10
5
40 ml.
17 %
46%
25%
12%
100%
- 1 -
mi.
sq. mi.
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
Category
4
By Percentage
60%
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Change in
Category
11
19
Maintainec
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed:
107
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored:
107
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
ac.
107
107 ac. 1
1
%
100*
100*
1982
ac.
107
- - 1
107 ac. i
%
! 100%
1
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
Bv Percentage
Within Change in
Category Category
100%
Improved
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
107
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 6.67 / n/a
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0.42 / n/A
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0 / N/A
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 6.67 / jj7tC"
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
sq. mi.
6.67
6.67 sq. mi.
%
100%
100%
1982
sq. mi.
5.48
1.18
6.67 sq. mi.
*
82*
18%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
Bv Percentage
Sq.M1.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Ml.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
1.18
Change in
Category
5.49
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
2A
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Mi les Assessed: N/A
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swiinmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
*
100%
i
mi.
mi.
t iyot-
%
10056
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Miles Improved: _
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Municipal
Municipal
Nonpoint
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*j Turb.
| 2 Most
Other | Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
i 1 i Coli. D.O.
Industrial
! ;
1 .
Non-Point
X
X
X 1 1
Other (inc. natural)
' !
*Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Lake/Keservoir Acres Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2. nream
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
2.0 _
1.0
2.1 = T
Legend
0.18
1.92
Primary
Secondary
1.8 = T
Primary
0.063
1.737
Not served by
wastewater system
Secondary & Tertiary
(Phos. removal & _
Nitrification)
Served by waste-
water system
Primary
Secondary
etc.
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
2.1
2.0-
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(millions)
1.0 -
V.
¦ 'A
0,.58/
1972
1.8
0.50v
1982
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic! sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1*82
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met
Facilities Needing Upgrading
"""Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
0
1
0
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
0
N/A
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
1
1982:
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
0
0
7
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements
N/A
N/A
5
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
N/A
N/A
71.4
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met
N/A
N/A |
99.7%
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
12
+Includes "No-OischargeM Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
28.
No n-
omp1i an c e
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent
s/u
I/L
N/A
N/A
I/L
N/A
S/W
Primary
Pollutants|
c,ss,
T. Oxde
NVT
, 1,P
M.SS.
Sludqe i
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions: ————
Number of Judicial Actions: "
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
Other
Local
Match
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 520.474.124 Million
By Percentage
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
$ 133.133.048 Mi 11ion
$ 0
* 0
$ 231.970.038
$ 155.371.038
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
The Bureau of Water Quality Control performs four major functions in carrying out
its Water Pollution Control mission:
Water Quality Monitoring: The District has been collecting data on the Potomac
River since 1935, on Rock Creek since 1955, on the Anacostia River since 1968
and periodically on Watts Run, Oxon Run, Hickey Run and Battery Kemble Branch.
However, the data were incomplete, uncoordinated, without standard operating
procedures, apparently without a cause, and with neither data interpretation
nor reports. In 1979 all data collection came under one program and reports
have been prepared on data collected since 1977. The current program consists
of the following elements.
Ambient Monitoring: Close interval sampling for electronic measures, full
parameter stations at key and historical sites with intercalary stations for
selected chemical analyses. Rock Creek has a dense network of stations and the
other tributaries are sampled at one site monthly.
Biological Monitoring: Include annual aquatic vegatation survey, fish tissue
analyses, fish stock survey, phytoplankton and zooplankton sampling, selected
benthic macro invertebrate sampling, and periphyton sampling.
Special Surveys: Such as microbiological pathogen study and annual selected
intensive tributary studies.
Reports: Consists of the biannual Water Quality assessment with alternate year
updates.
Permits: In 1972 this program was little more than a paper shuffle. Today, while
the District does riot have authority to issue National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System permits, the 8ureau performs all routine and violation
inspections and, primary investigative work on draft permits, as well as tracking
and following up on all violations. We are in the process of obtaining legal
authority to enable EPA, at their discretion, to delegate to the District,
authority to issue permits for discharge to District waters. The Dredge and Fill
Program issues water quality certificates assuring that all such activities in
navigable water meet best management practices designed to mitigate negative
impacts on the waters. Final permits are issued by the Army Corps of Engineers.
The Emergency Response Program is still in the development phase but a program is
in operation which involves cooperation with the Coast Guard and D.C. Fire
Departments as primary clean up agencies, as well as support from the D.C. Police
Department, Hazardous Waste and Pesticide Program, and other environmental and
public service agencies. The Bureau with the aid of the Mayors Command Center, act
as the coordinator for this program.
Engineering: This Division primarily handles the Construction Grants Management
Program. Before 1981 this program was little more than a rubber stamp for the
Engineering and Construction Administration. Since then it has become a strong
program, which consists of the following activities: development of the
Construction Grants Priority List, involvement in planning phases of projects
including reviews of plans and specifications change orders and grant requests.
Engineering also assists the Bureau in evaluating waste treatment efficiencies for
determining probable effluent quality, determining permit Issuance and compliance,
and evaluating the feasibility of alternative structural nonpolnt source controls.
The Bureau is currently seeking legislative authority to enable EPA, at their
discretion, to delegate authority to issue and manage Construction Grants for
District projects.
- 8 -
-------
Planning: Prior to 1981 there was very little state level water pollution control
planning in the District. Today the Planning Division provides general water
pollution control planning which includes the Continuing Planning Process and water
quality management plans that provide the underpinnings and direction to the Water
Pollution Control Program. Other activities include writing the Water Pollution
Control Status section of the Biannual Water Quality Assessment; developing and
evaluating the annual work plan; participating in areawide planning activities,
providing review, oversight, coordination and steering functions; overseeing and
managing local universities and agencies funded under Construction Grants Planning
[205(j)] monies, managing the Public Participation Program and reviewing
environmental impact assessments.
- 9 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
The singular site specific success must be the extraordinary recovery of the
Potomac River due to large capital and OJSM expenditures on advanced wastewater
treatment at Blue Plains and to a lesser extent the other sewage treatment
plants. This effort resulted in great reduction in loadings discharged to the
river as shown in this figure. As of this writing the Blue Plains TSS and BOD
loadings have been considerably lowered (from those shown in the figure) as
result of the start up the multimedia filtration operation. This effort
coupled with the reduction of combined sewer overflow volumes has resulted in
reduced fecal coliform levels and less frequent dissolved oxygen water quality
standard violations.
COMPARISON OF 1970 1977 and 1982
REGIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
FLOWS AND LOADS
500 *
'tOO
300
200
100
0
TOTAL REGIONAL STP FLOW
MGD
Other
Blue
Plains
HO
120
100
80
60
*t0
20
1970
1977
1982
"O
140-
o
120 ¦
a
Q>
o
o
•
cz
a>
<
o
CO
V)
3
/>
I
o
v£>
ro
*
o
-3"
o
20'
0
TSS LOADING
(1000 LBS/DAY)
70"
60'
—r- ¦
o
LPs
c
a>
4->
30-
z:
20.
Total
10*
0
1970 1977 1982
TOTAL NITROGEN LOADING
(1000 LBS/DAY)
Other
Blue
Plains
Other
Blue
Plains
BOD LOADING
(1000 LBS/DAY)
1970
1977
Other
Blue Plains
1982
*t0 -
30 *
20
10 H
0
7°i
60-
50'
^01
30
20-
10-
0
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS LOADING
(1000 LBS/DAY)
1970
Other
ilBlue
1977
1982 Plains
TKN LOADING
(1000 LBS/DAY)
1970
1977
1982
1970
1977
1982
Other
Blue Plains
- 10 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Over the past decade we have made progress towards regional solutions to water quality
problems as exemplified by the Potomac Strategy Process and water Supply Agreement. The
District has made extraordinary progress in treating our wastewater which is shown by the
improved Potomac River Water quality which now supports a growing fishery and potential for
water contact recreation. The District has greatly reduced the combined sewer overflow
problem in Rock Creek greatly improving its water quality and its impact on the Potomac as
well. Recently, beginning in 1981 the District's water pollution control program has grown
into a cohesive, efficient and influential "state" level operation.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of population
_X and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
There are several problems not listed in item 1. These problems include the
continuing sludge disposal Issue, which has been generated by improved wastewater
treatment, and the need for expanded wastewater treatment as the result of
regional population growth. We must also move forward with strategies to enhance
the quality of the Anacostia River and the tributaries to our major rivers,
especially Rock Creek, Hickey Run, Oxon Run and Watts Branch. These waters,
except Hickey Run and Watts Branch, are regional problems which require a process
similar to the Potomac Strategy. We need to develop our water pollution control
regulations, including nonpoint source and stormwater management, needed to
effectively manage our aquatic resources. We must continue the effort to
eliminate the remaining combined sewer overflow problems, and finally, we must
develop a fisheries management program to properly deal with this expanding
resource.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: District of Columbia
Department of Environmental Services
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Robert S. Shlppen (202) 767-7370
OATE: September 15. 1983
- 11 -
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
U Use Supported
C Use Partially Supported
S Use Not Supported
-N-
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
S3 Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
E3 Use Not Supported
-------
State of Florida*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 7 Million 1980 10.2 Million
State Surface Area 57,261 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 14
# of River and Stream Miles 12.659 mi.; # of Border Miles*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 7,712 / 2.085,120 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 3,741,587 ac. or 5,846
# of Coast Miles 8.460 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 4.298 sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Perdido/65 Name/Mileage Chattahoochee/26
Name/Mileage St Marys/100 Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 12,659
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than
1.294
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than
__31
d. Miles Monitored: 2,000
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
4,105 ml.
4,910
1,120
2,524
12,659 m1.
32%
39%
9%
20%
100%
1982
5,865 ml.
4,075
1,645
1,074
12,659 ml.
46%
32%
13%
9%
100%
- 1 -
191 mi.
sq. ml.
Flshable/Swlmmable:
Fishable/Swimmable:
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
Unknown
Degraded
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
'""""lAles Maintained.
Unknown*.
Category
887
250
7.089
Change in
Category
1,760
525
1.074
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 741.337
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
452.362
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 600.239
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed }
623,114 ac.
72,730
45,493
___
i
741,337 ac.
197C
84%
9.8%
6.2%
—-
100%
j 604,304 ac.
75,035
61,998
...
741,337 ac.
19o<:
81.5%
10.1%
8.4%
...
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
Bv Percentage
V.7% Degraded
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
95-3% J Acres Maintained:
Maintained
S
Unknown:
Within
Category
0
Change in
Category
604.304
35.315
. 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 4,298 / 4,277
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
4.298 / 632
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
4.298 / 0
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 4,298 / 4,277
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
. ..
1
Unknown |
1
- i
Total
Assessed
1972
3,485
...
387
:
213
4,085
85.3%
...
9.5%
5.2% ;
100%
1982
4,144
...
112
2! ;
4,277
96.9%
j 2.7%
1
0.4% j
»
100%
Change in
Category
275
0
Change in
Category
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Jmproved
Degraded
i^q ^ Sq.Mi.Improved:
Unknown
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
192
118
3.671
21
Within
Category
- 2A -
-------
0. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100*
1QQO.
mi.
mi.
%
100%
— .,
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
3.8% Industrial
Municipal
Nonpoint
50%
Nonpoint
Industrial
Munici-
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
Nonpoint
70% L
Municipal
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
D.O.
Industrial
X
X
Nutrients
Non-Point
X
X
X
Other (inc. natural)
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 20
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: Unknown
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: Unknown
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: «
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
MO.2
Legend
Number of
People
(Millions)
Does Not
Requ i re
System
Not served by
wastewater system
1=7.0
Requires
System
Treatment
Secondary
.67
Primary
Served by waste-
water system
Degree of
Treatment
Primary
Secondary
etc
Secondary
2.12
AWT
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOO Loads Generated vs
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
Loads Discharged by Municipal
6
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(millions)
5
Legend
3
Generated
2
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1
Discharged
1972
1982
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+Includes "No-Discharge" facilities
78
35
90
39
34
83
50
97
92
33
99.5
94.7
78
35
3
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
4.394
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
Compliance
50%
Noncompliance
1982:
loncompliance
6.VL
93.6%
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
77
2
117
30
2
109
38.9
100
93
62
100
1
96.4
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
1.615
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
D. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Noncompliance
Compliance
38.9% \
61.1% [Noncompliance
Compliance \ /
\ 93.-'
\ Compl
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
It has been estimated that more than half of the pollutants entering Florida's
surface waters are directly related to nonpoint sources of pollution. Streets and
parking lots, construction activities, and residential lawns are the primary sources
in the urban environment. Rural problems stem from agricultural, silvicultural, and
mining activities. Agricultural pollutants include eroded soil, fertilizers,
pesticides, and animal wastes. Silviculture and mining contribute sediments and
nutrients to receiving waters.
Chapter 17-25, Florida Administrative Code, addresses all new sources of
stormwater pollution and encourages the use of certain best management practices.
The rule requires the department to be notified of the discharge and a registered
professional engineer to certify that the stormwater system properly uses the
approved practices.
Urban stormwater is an increasing problem with Florida's expanding growth rate.
The stormwater rule went into effect in February of 1982. Several local ordinances
around the state provide more stringent regulations to deal with localized critical
problem areas. Additional local ordinances are needed to link land use control and
stormwater control. Evaluation of the effectiveness of state and local efforts is
continuing.
Florida has chosen a non-regulatory approach for both agriculture and
silvicluture. The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services is the
state's lead management agency for implementation of the program through local Soil
and Water Conservation Districts and State Foresters respectively. The state
stormwater rule encourages participation in these programs by providing exemptions
for farmers who obtain and implement approved Conservation Plans for foresters who
utilized approved forestry BMP's.
Mining accounts for water quality problems in several basins in the state. The
state Stormwater Rule, state Dredge and Fill Rule, and state reclamation requirements
are addressing the problems resulting from new mining.
In Florida hydrologic modification is associated with virtually all development
activities. The water quality effects of hydrologic modifications are controlled
through the regulations governing the development activity.
Saltwater intrusion is not a widespread surface water problem in Florida. There
are localized severe ground water problems primarily in coastal areas. Regulation is
through the Water Management Districts' consumptive use and surface water management
rules.
Residuals will be controlled through the state's sludge rule, now in
development. Although the state's septic tank rule was recently strengthened, septic
tanks will continue to be a problem due to rapid population growth and urbanization.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent
M/W
M/W
I/L
M/L
M/L
M/L
N/A
I/L
Primary
Pollutants
Nut. 00
Turb.
Metals
Nut.
Turb.
Nut.
Nut.
Turb.
Turb.
D.O.
Nut.
Turb. j
D.O. 1
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: Compliance and enforcement activities are initiated by District or
branch offices and include informal conferences and warning letters, formal warning letters,
notices or violation and consent orders. Consent orders may be issued at the District level
or by headquarters General Counsel staff. Each District has a headquarters attorney assigned
to it and a separate enforcement section exists within the Office of General Council.
€fforts are made to resolve noncompliance problems without litigation. During 1982 1,167
preadministrative actions and 213 administrative actions were taken in water quality
compliance cases. In addition, 13 judicial actions were taken for domestic waste
noncompliance and 1 for industrial waste noncompliance. During 1982 approximately $57,400
was collected as a result of assessments from industrial and domestic waste administrative
actions.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against
Significant Non-Compliance 1n 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Adm1n1strat1ve Actions:
Plumber of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
244
16
LI
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT « S 1.880.1 Million
By Percentage
0„2» Other Federal
7^-7%
Federal EPA
ocal Match
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
4.0
0
*
468
*
4
Million
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
Monitoring - the State maintains a fixed-station chemical and biological
monitoring network and conducts compliance sampling, intensive surveys and special
monitoring studies. New legislation has made the Department the central repository
for all surface and ground water data collected by state, local and federal agencies
and requires the establishment of a computerized data base, quality assurance
programs, and publication of an annual bibliography of all investigations.
Construction Grants - The construction grants program is undergoing expansion
and is accepting 206(g) delegations at a rapid rate. The 1983 Legislative Session
established a State grant program with a one-time appropriation of $100 million. The
state program will be underway during calendar year 1984.
Permitting - The state, which has not assumed NPDES delegation, issues permits
for domestic and industrial waste facilities, dredge and fill projects, and
stormwater control. State permits, by law, must be issued within 90 days of receipt
of a complete application. Over 6,000 point sources are currently under permit. New
legislation provided additional positions and funds for inspection of package plants.
Ground Water - the Department's ground water monitoring and investigative
capability will be greatly strengthened by recent legislative action which
established a statewide ground water quality monitoring network, a program to prevent
or reduce the danger of contamination of public water supplies, a pesticides program
and a program to plug free-flowing artesian wells. In addition, funds have been made
available for a statewide needs assessment to identify hazardous waste generators and
advise of appropriate management and disposal methods. A $15 million trust fund was
established to match federal funds for Superfund and other uncontrolled hazardous
waste site cleanup operations.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
St. Petersburg - In 1972, the State of Florida required that those discharging to the
critically polluted areas around Tampa Bay provide advanced wastewater treatment with essentially
complete nutrient removal.
St. Petersburg responded with an alternative solution that at the same time was an
important first step toward conserving scarce drinking water.
Before the 194Qls the city drew its potable water from wells in southern Pinellas County,
but with the rapid population growth and the increasing drain on fresh water supplies, the ground
water aquifer was soon overpumped. Salt-water intrusion followed, and the aquifer had to be
abandoned as a source of fresh water. Since then the city has drawn its water from northern
Pinellas County by pipeline, and faced future needs it could not meet.
The city combined the solution to its wastewater disposal problem with a step toward
relieving its water shortage. It decided to use modified secondary treatment together with spray
irrigation. The treated effluent is sprayed on golf courses, parks, and school yards in the
city, saving scarce fresh water for more important uses.
The effluent is treated to safe levels before it is sprayed on sites accessible to the
public. The actual spray irrigation is done during hours when there is no public access. A
standby deepwell storage system stores the treated effluent during period when irrigation is
unnecessary.
Tampa - A City of Tampa treatment plant discharging to Hillsborough Bay was responsible for
health department signs warning that the waters were "hazardous to body contact." Today, after
construction of an advanced waste treatment plant with the help of federal funds, a large portion
of the bay is safe for swimming, with continuing improvement.
Jacksonville - The St. Johns River, which flows past Jacksonville, is improving
dramatically after more than 50 raw sewage outfalls were removed from the river with the help of
federal grant assistance.
Pensacola - Escambia Bay, near Pensacola, had 73 pollution-caused fish kills in its main
body and adjoining bays 1n 1970, earning it the unenviable title of the fish kill capltol of the
nation. Florida requested federal help to trace the sources of pollution and to Initiate
enforcement efforts. After implementation of the federal-state program, fish kills diminished to
the point that today, they are rare. An EPA follow-up test involving the release of a million
striped bass to the bay's Escambia River tributary found that half survived, and of the half that
died, more were eaten by other fish than died of pollution.
Orlando - Through a federal Clean Lakes grant matched by local funds significant nutrient
enrichment and heavy metals contamination have been substantially reduced in Lake Eola in
downtown Orlando. Stormwater pollution was identified as the major contributor of pollutants and
a number of innovative retrofit control techniques were developed and installed. The
installation provided an opportunity to test the efficiency of a series of new control systems
and practices. Much of this research provided the basis for the state's stormwater regulation,
Chapter 17-25, F.A.C. The clean-up of this lake was especially gratifying for the City of
Orlando because Its many lakes are a symbol of the city and this particular one appears on its
logo.
Tallahassee - Lake Jackson 1s one of Florida's finest bass fishing lakes. Increasing
development 1n the Meglnnls Arm watershed of the lake was causing severe sedimentation and other
stormwater related problems. Through a Clean Lakes grant matched by state Water Resouces
Restoration funds a large scale state-of-the-art filtration/marsh treatment system was
installed. This system is designed to deal with a significant portion of existing pollution
problems in the subwatershed. The project has also provided the state an opportunity to evaluate
the effectiveness and economics of the large regional treatment approach to dealing with
stormwater problems.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Adequate treatment of municipal and industrial waste treatment continues to be a major
concern because of continuing rapid population growth, environmentally sensitive receiving
waters which require high treatment levels and the state's dependence on ground water which
limits land applications of waste.
Between 1972 and 1982 total BOD loading from sewage treatment plants declined while
DODUlatioii increased by 45% and the volume of waste generated increased by 57%. In 1972
nearly 5056 of facilities provided less than secondary treatment. By 1980 raw and primary
discharge had essentially been eliminated from the state and a vast number of facilities have
been upgraded to high level secondary and advanced waste treatment. Much attention in the
past decade was given to control dredge and fill projects including major public works
projects. Minimizing the adverse effects of dredging and filling continues to be a major
effort.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of population and
X industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
X - Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point sources
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Continued growth of population and industry will make waste disposal increasingly
difficult and expensive. Because of generally flat terrain most streams have limited or
intermittent flow or are tidal and flow into environmentally sensitive estuaries.
Land application of wastes is a limited option due to the state's great dependence on
ground water for public and private water supplies.
Major state and federal legislation has greatly increased the responsibility of states in
protecting the environment. Programs to control toxics and hazardous materials and restore
environmentally damaged areas are now a major effort.
These problems have been recognized by the Florida Legislature which, in 1933, passed the
$117 million Mater Quality Assurance Act. The Act provided funding of $100 million for sewaqe
treatment plant construction and established or strengthened major new programs for around
water protection and monitoring, sewage treatment plant inspections, water quality data
collection, protection of drinking water well fields, pesticide control, hazardous waste
problem assessment and site cleanup, septic tank control and emergency response capability
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Fla. Dept. of Environmental Requlation
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Victoria J. Tschlnkel. Secretary
904/488-4805
DATE: September 1. 1983
- 10 -
-------
FLORIDA
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
a Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-------
-iT;
j t
V
FLORIDA
1982
*
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
B Use Not Supported
i
V
-------
State of GEORGIA*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 4.589.575 1980 5,463,105
State Surface Area 60,000 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 15
# of River and Stream Miles 20,000 mi.; # of Border Miles* 685 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 175 / 387,373 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 500,000 ac. or 780 sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 100 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi . 594 sq. ml.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Savannah/301 Name/Mileage St. Marys/127 Name/Mileage Tugaloo/23
Name/Mileage Chattahoochee/198 Name/Mileage Chattooga/36
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 17,000
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
519
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
28
d. Miles Monitored: 8,140
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
15,976 mi.
130
894
17,000 mi.
94X
U
5%
100%
1982
16,147 mi.
383
470
17,000 ml.
9S%
2%
3%
100S
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
Category
By Percentage
Improved
Miles improved;
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Charge in
Category
424
16,576
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 387,373
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 44,630
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
267,360 ac.
45,819
10,596
15,470
339,245 ac.
79%
13*
3%
5%
100%
1982
331 ,034 ac.
50,882
5,457
387,373 ac.*
86%
13%
U
100%
*Three major lakes with a total acreage of 48,128 acres were constructed since 1972.
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Improved
r/o
Degraded
'13%
Maintained
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
335,705
51,068
600
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 475 / N/A
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swimmable:
0 / N/A
c. Sq. Mi. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
13 / N/A
d. Sq. Mi ./Miles Monitored: 55 / N^A
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
458
10
7
475
95%
3%
2%
100%
1982
468
7
475
98*
2%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
2% Improved
b. Oceans N/A
By Percentage
Sq.M1.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
465
Change in
Category
10
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes (Not Applicable)
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100%
mi.
mi.
i yot-
%
! 100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
- 28 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated
1. By Pollutant Sources --- By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
Uses in 1982
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
% Industrial
Municipal
1% Industrial
Municipal
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
Industrial
15%
Natural
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
0.0.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
D.O.. Nut.
Industrial
X
X
Non-Point
X
X
Col i.. Nut.
Other (inc. natural)
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 25
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0_
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: Q_
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses 1n Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Millions)
6 —
5 -
-
1.95
4 -
1.47
-
7777-;
3 -
m
.71
-
.36
2 ~
.12
Primary
1 -
1.48
Secondary
2.72
-
".56 ~
Legend
Not served by
wastewater system
.33
Served by waste-
water system
Secondary
AST
Primary
Secondarjy
etc
Does Not
Requ ire
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
5.0
Population
Equivalents 4.5
of 60D
(millions)
4.0
3.5
3.0 -j
2.5
2.0 H
1.5
1.0-
0.5 H
A.01
4. 62
1.42
A 8
1.62
Legend
Generated
Discharged
"\>j
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Level s
1972
1982
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
84
49
60
15
42
57
18%
86%
95%
2%
90S
95%
69
49
0
Total
Permi ts
in Effect
In 1982
481
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1972:
1972 vs. 1982
1982:
%2%
Noncompliance
18%
Compliance
9%
npliance
B. Non-Mun1c1pal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial * Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
Facilities with Permits
1972
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements"*"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
90
15
80
50
15
77
56%
100%
96%
70%
100%
99.75%
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
900
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Mun1c1pal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
56%
Compliance
Compliance
W/o
Noncompliance
Noncompliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Section 208 task forces composed to evaluate major categories of nonpolnt sources
found that: 1) several categories of nonpolnt sources are adequately regulated 2)
empirical data would be necessary to evaluate adequately the statewide Impact of the
nonpolnt sources and 3) additional research would be necessary to evaluate best
management practices. Studies 1n designated planning areas revealed that urban
stormwater runoff was a significant source of degraded water. Consequently, the
management response stressed continued regulation of controlled nonpoint sources,
enactment of non-regulatory programs for uncontrolled sources, and formulation of a
statewide study to evaluate the extent and magnitude of nonpolnt sources.
Task forces found that several regulated nonpolnt sources — mining, hydrologlc
modlflcaton, saltwater intrusion, and residual wastes — had lower water quality
problem potential than other nonpoint sources. Construction, another regulated
activity, was judged to have a higher potential for causing significant water quality
problems. In those instances, the State elected to continue existing regulatory
programs.
Agricultural and silvlcultural practices and urban stormwater runoff, major
potential nonpolnt sources, are not generally controlled by water quality
regulations. Here, the management strategy emphasized the implementation of a
nonregulatory approach, assessment of the impact of nonpoint sources on water
quality, and subsequent evaluation of the need for regulatory controls.
The nonregulatory approach has been conducted through contracts with implementing
agencies -- the Georgia Forestry Commission and the State Soil and Water Conservation
Committee. Contracts have been awarded for public education and training, monitoring
of agricultural and forestry management practices, and developing planned approaches
to refining and improving the nonregulatory program. Urban stormwater management
education programs have been developed for local officials and citizens.
A nonpolnt source assessment study 1s being conducted to evaluate the extent and
magnitude of the Impact of agriculture, commercial forestry, and urban development
impacts on water quality 1n the non-metropol1 tan areas of Georgia. Significant water
quality problems revealed by this three year study will be Identified and an
appropriate response devised.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Sllv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent
*UNK/L
I/W
UNK/L
I/L
M/L
I/L
I/L
I/L
Primary
Pollutants
BOD
Sediment
Sediment
Organlcs
Nutrients
Sed.
Sed.
Sed.
D.O.
Chloride
'Severity (UNK Indicates that Impact 1s under Investigation)
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The Georgia Environmental Protection Division utilizes all
reasonable means to obtain compliance Including technical assistance, noncompliance notification,
conferences, administrative orders, consent orders, and civil penalities. In 1982, eleven consent
orders were negotiated with industries to correct permit violations. The orders included $274,000
1n negotiated settlements. In 1973, It 1s estimated that negotiated settlements collected
amounted to less than $30,000.
Effective tools to gain municipal facility compliance Include sewer connection bans and
withholding federal or state project funds until permit violations are resolved. Twenty-eight
municpalities were operating under sewer connection bans in 1982. The number of enforcement
orders has varied over the past eight years with two 1n 1975, twelve in 1980, nine in 1981, and
six 1n 1982.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against
Significant Non-Compliance 1n 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Admin1strative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
Municipal and Non-Municial Facilities in
13
5
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT
By Percentage
Other I 8%
federal Vtocal
S 1.015
Million
¦\% State
Other
Local
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Categories of Sources
591 Mil Hon
81
13
210
120
-------
C. Program Activities
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAM PERSPECTIVE
The first major legislation to deal with water pollution control in Georgia was
passed in 1957. The Act was ineffective and was replaced by the Water Quality
Control Act of 1964. This Act established the Georgia Water Quality Control Board,
the predecessor of the Georgia Environmental Protection Division whidn was
established in 1972. Early efforts by the Board in the late 1960's and early 19701s
included documenting water quality conditions, cleanup of major pollution problems
and the establishment of water quality standards. Trend monitoring efforts were
initiated and a modest state construction grants program was Implemented.
In the mid-1970's emphasis was placed on EPA construction grants program. First
and second round NPDES permits were negotiated and 08M, compliance monitoring, and
. enforcement programs initiated. Basin planning, trend monitoring, intensive surveys,
modeling and wasteload allocation work were well underway.
In the late 1970's and early 1980's effort has continued on construction grants,
permits, enforcement and monitoring. Emphasis has been placed on permit enforcement,
improving municipal plant operation, justification of advanced treatment wasteload
allocations, and monitoring to determine the extent and impact of non-point source
pollution. Work has been initiated to address industrial pretreatment and emergency
response. It 1s likely that in the mid-1980's additional work to identify and
quantify toxic substances will receive increased attention.
WATER QUALITY MONITORING
The goal of the water quality control programs is to restore and maintain the
purity of the State's waters for the maximum benefit of its citizens. In order to
determine the progress made toward this goal and to establish a baseline record of
water quality, the EPD operates a trend monitoring network in the streams, lakes, and
estuaries of the 15 river basins in the State. In addition to the trend monitoring
program, intensive stream surveys are conducted which complement the fixed-station
monitoring program.
The Clean Lakes Program identified and determined the trophic status of Georgia
publicly-owned lakes. Eight lakes were identified as in need of restoration or
protection and actions have been initiated to correct problems.
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS
The objective of the Program is to insure that needed wastewater treatment
facilities are properly planned, designed and constructed in order to eliminate
existing problems caused by inadequately treated discharges and to avoid the creation
of such problems in the future. Georgia is one of only a few states which has
assumed all of the functions that EPA can legally delegate. State assumption of the
Construction Grants Program has streamlined project reviews, eliminated duplication
of efforts, and maximized state and local responsibility for project management and
success.
PERMITS. OPERATION, AND ENFORCEMENT
The NPDES permit system provides a basis for municipal and industrial discharge
permits, monitoring compliance with limitations, and appropriate enforcement action
for violations. The State has Instituted a one-step environmental permitting
system. All of Georgia's environmental permits are issued by the EPD, therefore most
applications can be processed in 90 days.
The EPD has long recognized the difficulty associated with the operation and
maintenance of POTWs. Additional work is needed to complete and implement the
industrial pretreatment program. In a continuing effort to resolve these problems,
the EPD employs various methods of assistance including training courses, seminars
for city managers, and technical assistance.
EPD and EPA Region IV with Input from selected plant personnel, completed a
project in 1980 that defined minimum standards of performance for treatment plants.
The project identified seven categories and established minimum requirements for
each. Operation and maintenance at the majority of the plants evaluated in 1981 and
1982 has improved and improvement 1n effluent quality has occurred at some facilities.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER
In 1972, the Chattahoochee River Basin from Buford Dam to Franklin was beset with
water quality problems. Inadequately and untreated municipal and Industrial wastewater
discharges to many tributaries created grossly polluted conditions which greatly
Impaired beneficial uses. In the river upstream of Peachtree Creek fecal coliform
densities and suspended sol Ids concentrations frequently were high. It was rarely used
for recreation. Downstream of the Atlanta R.M. Clayton WPCP and other facilities which
then provided only primary treatment to a portion of their wastewaters, the
Chattahoochee River was grossly polluted. Ammonia, BOD, and fecal coliform bacterial
values were very high and the river was often septic during the warm months. The
macroinvertebrate fauna was Indicative of gross pollution.
The pollution abatement program which was begun by Georgia consisted of the
construction of interceptor sewers and WPCPs. Several overloaded and Inadequate
facilities were eliminated. Wastewaters were removed from most tributaries. Intensive
Investigations of Cobb County tributaries conducted in 1982 were compared to 1966
studies and revealed a marked Improvement 1n water quality. The formerly grossly
polluted tributaries now possess excellent water quality.
Since the removal of WPCP discharges from tributaries, fecal coliform bacterial
densities In the river have been greatly reduced and the reach from Buford Dam to
Peachtree Creek is heavily used for recreation by nature lovers, bathers, canoeists, and
rafters. In 1978 the Congress authorized the establishment of the Chattahoochee River
National Recreation Area and drinking water 1s now provided to Gwinnett, Cobb, and
DeKalb Counties and the City of Atlanta. Downstream of the R. M. Clayton WPCP, fecal
conform criterion is occasionally violated, however, the river meets the dissolved
oxygen criterion for the fishing classification. The macroinvertebrate fauna is more
diverse than in former years. A viable warmwater fishery exists. The chemical,
physical, and biological data reveal a great improvement compared to those data from
Investigations of the sixties and seventies. The reach of the river downstream of
Peachtree Creek to Franklin generally supports the fishing classification and this
despite a doubling of the metropolitan Atlanta population during the past twenty years.
SAVANNAH HARBOR
Prior to 1972, Savannah Harbor was badly degraded by partially treated and untreated
wastewater from several municipal and more than 15 industrial sources. Physical,
chemical, and bacterial analyses clearly revealed the Impact of wastewaters. Dissolved
oxygen concentrations were frequently very low whereas BOD5 and COD were higher than
in unaffected regions. pH was low in the vicinity of some Industrial outfalls. Fecal
col'lform bacterial densities were high and were detected as far downstream as the Tybee
Island recreational areas. Some criteria of water use classifications were frequently
exceeded. The region was closed to harvesting of shellfish. Other aquatic life was
also affected and the harbor created a barrier to migrating fish which spawn upstream in
the Savannah River. The harbor was useless for aesthetic and recreational purposes.
A pollution abatement program was begun In the mid-sixties with the goal of
obtaining secondary treatment for all discharges. By 1977 effective treatment measures
had been instituted for most wastewaters Including municipal. In 1982 water quality was
good 1n and downstream of the harbor. Compliance with the water use classification is
consistently maintained. The economic manifestations of good water are apparent in the
renaissance of Savannah and especially In the use of the river. Hotels have been
constructed on the river bank and shops catering to tourists are operating successfully
in buildings formerly used as warehouses. Parks have been laid out or Improved along
the now aesthetically pleasant river.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Historically, the major environmental problem in Georgia has been water pollution
from publicly owned wastewater treatment works (POTW), and this remains Georgia's
major environmental problem in 1982. The problem with municipal discharges has not
been the absence of technology but the insufficiency of funds for the construction of
the required facilities. The funding problem was partially alleviated by the passage
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (PL 92-500). Federal funding
under PL 92-500 has fluctuated a great deal and funding for Georgia projects through
the Construction Grants Program has decreased steadily since 1976 when Georgia
received approximately $117 million, to the current level of approximately $41
million per year. Georgia still has significant needs totalling over $300 million
for wastewater treatment projects of high priority to achieve water quality
standards, and still greater needs for projects for expansion and upgrading of
facilities for many small communities. New methods of financing municipal treatment
works are actively being sought by the State.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of pop-
X ulatlon and Industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
X - Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and
non-point sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Many POTW's also suffer from improper operation and maintenance. The correction
of problems with operation of these facilities is a high priority with the State of
Georgia. The State saw a reduction in major facilities which were out of compliance
with their NPDES permit limitations from 31 in 1981 to 15 in 1982. Continued
emphasis will be placed on this area.
The identification and control of toxins 1n Industrial wastewater discharges is a
concern In Georgia. The State has incorporated biomonitoring requirements into
industrial NPDES permits where there is a potential for toxicity. This program
requires the industry to formulate a two-phase biomonitoring program including first
conducting a static bioassay on the effluent to determine if toxicity is present and,
1f potential problems are identified 1n the first phase, then performing more
extensive effluent bloassays such as 96-hour flow-through tests to determine the
amount and cause of the toxicity. The results of the biomonitoring program will then
be used by the State to determine what measures are necessary for the industry to
reduce or eliminate toxicity through source control or Improved treatment. This same
approach 1s being Incorporated Into the Industrial pretreatment program to ensure
that toxins discharged by Industry Into POTWs do not Interfere with the operation of
the treatment works or pass through untreated to the environment.
Environmental Protection D1v1son
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: 270 Washington Street. S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30334
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: J. Leonard Ledbetter (404) 656-4713
DATE:_ 7-15-83
- 10 -
-------
GEORGIA
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
IS Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-N-
-------
GEORGIA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
Use Not Supported
-N-
Ji
-------
Territory of Guam*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 84,996 1980 106,979
State Surface Area 212 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 15
# of River and Stream Miles 150 ml.; # of Border Miles* N/A mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 4 / 3^5 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 3500 ac. or sq. ml.
# of Coast Miles 1_16 mi.
# of Estuary sq. ml. 1_J> sq. ml.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 36
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
70
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 36
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
ml.
36
36 mi.
%
100 %
100%
1982
30 ml.
6
36 mi.
83 %
17 %
100%
* Chemical information throughout
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown: 36
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 0
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Acres Monitored:
Unknown
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
| Partially
J Supported
Not
Supported
| Total Acres 1
Unknown ; Assessed
i
I i
1 I
| ac. ;
1079 i I
1 !
! ac. !
1
i
| 100%
1
1
IQfl?
i
ac. !
t
! ;
ac. '
1
1
i
j j 100% ;
I , !
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained: _
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed:
/
14
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Uesignated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
/
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
/
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: / 14
1. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
mi.
14
14 mi.
%
100 %
100%
1982
13.5 mi.
0.5
14
mi.
9b %
4 % [
1
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Within
Category
Sq.Mi .Improved:
Sq.Mi .Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Change in
Category
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Ueyraaed:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
14
Change in
Category
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swiminable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially ; Not , j Total Miles
Supported ! Supported j Unknown j Assessed
' ! i
1972
mi.
I -
mi.
%
!
100%
1982-
mi.
: !
j i
mi.
%
I i ] 100%
1 ! !
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2B -
-------
t. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 198^
1. by Pollutant Sources — by Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
60%
Nonpoint
Other
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great La
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
h. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Legend
Number of 0.12 -
People
(Mill ions)
0.11 -
0.08
0.06'
0.02
14,000
10,000
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met
Facilities Needing Upgrading
0
2
5
1
2
50%
1
40%*
21%
1%*
1
3*
, 3
+ Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
*The two major plants (78% of flow) have applied for waiver of secondary treatment.
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
1982:
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met
0
0
12
12
100%
100%
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
12
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
100%
Com p 1 iance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
The Guam Water Quality Management Plan (208 Plan) was approved in 1979.
Implementation of the Plan's recommendations has been largely carried out through
existing programs of the Guam Environmental Protection Agency.
Urban runoff appears to have some effect on streams in localized areas. Its
affects on marine receiving waters are unknown at present but are under study.
Runoff in northern Guam is generally routed to ponding basins and injection wells but
appears to have minimal effect on groundwater (See VII).
A survey of agriculture in relation to water quality has been completed. Due to
the generally low level of agricultural development on Guam, no impact was found.
Erosion from construction activities was a problem prior to the promulgation of
control regulations in 1975. Compliance is good and an active inspection program was
initiated a year ago.
Hydrologic modification generally affects Guam waters during construction only,
causing increased sedimentation. Adequate controls are established via local law and
construction specifications.
Saltwater intrusion is a problem in some water wells, largely as a result of well
location rather than overpumping.
Solids and hazardous wastes are controlled by local and federal law. Some
pollution from Guam only civilian landfill operation may reach a nearby stream. The
site is on the Superfund Priority List and funds are being sought to conduct core
sampling of the landfill.
The Guam Environmental Protection Agency has assumed increased responsibility for
oil spill response and investigation under a Cooperative Agreement with the Coast
Guard.
Non-Point sewage pollution is a problem for some localized stream and marine
areas and is quite likely contributing to higher-than-average nitrate levels in
groundwater. Enforcement is conducted under local law and village sewer surveys.
Criteria for management of sewage sludge are being developed.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Po 1 lutants
*U-unknown pollutants from landfill disposal
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
Enforcement against point source discharge under NPDES permits is referred to U.S. EPA,
Region IX who have authority for the program. Enforcement against non-NPDES discharges
is taken by the Guam Environmental Protection Agency under the Guam Water Pollution
Control Act. Voluntary compliance and technical assistance are preferred, but when these
fail, a Notice of Violation is issued stating the problem and specifying a remedy to be
accomplished. Failure to correct the situation leads to an Order of Compliance. At
either of these two stages, appeal to the GEPA Board of Directors is possible. Continued
non-compliance results in the case being referred to the Territorial Attorney General.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 4
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 4
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si lv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
M/L
I
N.A.
N.A.
I
I
1/L
M/L
C. Nut.
SS
Nut.,0*
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 45.25 Million
By Percentage
Local.
Ma tchy
Other
Federal
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Categories of Sources
33.41 Million
4.06
7.78
~Guam presently has a waiver of
the local match requirement.
7 -
-------
Program Activities
The Guam Environmental Protection Agency was created in 1973 from the Guam Water
ana Air Pollution Control Commissions. Legislation in force locally iri 197c
included the Guam Water Pollution Control Act, Toilet Facilities ana Sewage
Disposal Act, and Guam Water Quality Standards. Permitting activities were
carried for septic tanks and sewer connections (still a major water pollution
control activity).
Monitoring efforts were started in 1973, but systematic sampling and analysis was
not begun until 1978 when the Water Monitoring Strategy was completed. Seven
river/marine complexes are sampled for physical/chemical parameters, ana eleven
locations constitute the biological monitoring network. Marine recreational
waters are sampled weekly for bacterial contamination.
Planning activities have been carried out since 1976 and led to the completion of
the Guam Water Quality Management Plan in 1979. Implementation of the plan has
largely been through existing agency programs. A complete update/revision is
scheduled for FY 84.
The Guam Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Plan was completed in 1982. GEPA is
in the process of applying for delegation of authority for hazardous wastes. The
Agency has increased responsibilities for oil spill response ana investigation
unaer a Cooperative Agreement with the Coast Guard.
GEPA has delegation of authority for safe crinking water ana underground injection
control but is not actively seeking delegation for the NPDES program. The Agency
administers an operator certification program; the Guam Community College has
initiated training programs for both wastewater and water operators.
Public participation has been an important part of the aecisiori-making from the
beginning and was particularly emphasized from 1976-78 during the water quality
management planning process. Current activities include a citizens advisory group
arid wide circulation of documents to interested parties, in addition to the
required public hearings.
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
This is a difficult question to answer because Guam's water quality has always
been high. We have no heavy, polluting industries with the exception of power
plants. Even Apra Habor, heavily used by commerical and military shipping, is
remarkably clean.
We are proud of the fact that all raw sewage discharges to marine waters were
eliminated in 1979 with start-up of the Island's two major treatment plants.
Although most of this sewage discharge was through a deep ocean outfall, some
occurred right at the coastline or over cliffs into the water. In addition,
sewage collection and treatment facilities are being provided for southern
villages which have traditionally relied on inadequate individual systems.
The other "success" would be our groundwater management program, described in
VII.
- 9 -
-------
VII. special state concerns and remaining problems
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
The northern half of Guam is a limestone plateau through which water permeates
readily (note on the Guam map that there are no rivers in northern Guam). Water
moving through the limestone comes to rest on impermeable volcanics forming a
para-basal aquifer, or on sea water forming a basal aquifer. This groundwater
provides 703i of the Island's potable water and has been designated a principal
source aquifer under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. Because of the high
permeability of the limestone, pollutants can penetrate readily. Guam's
groundwater contains 2 to 2.5 ppm nitrates, twice the national average. The exact
cause is unknown although septic tank effluent is suspected to be a major cause.
Some wells show evidence of salt water intrusion. The Guam Environmental
Protection Agency completed a three-year comprehensive study of the groundwater at
the end of 1982. Both quantity and quality were studied. Results of several
technical investigations indicated that the groundwater is capable of supplying 60
mgd on a sustained yield basis. After analysis for 142 priority pollutants, the
water was found to be remarkably clean. The result of the study has been a
comprehensive management program, including specifications for well location,
construction and operation, legal and institutional framework, and land use
practices. The challenge for the future is to implement this management program.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
sources.
- Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Guam Environmental Protection Agency
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: James B. Branch. 011-671-646-8863
OATE: August 12. 1983
- 10 -
-------
GUAM
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
D Use Not Supported
-------
State of Hawai1*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 769,913 1980 964,691
State Surface Area 6,450 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 4
# of River and Stream Miles unknown mi.; # of Border Miles* 0 mi.
# of lakes and Ponds and Acreage / ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. ac. or 25 sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 750 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 30 sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 260
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: undetermined
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
36.4 mi.
184.6
39
**260 mi.
14%
71*
15%*
100%
1982
ml.
39
221
260 mi.
%
1556
85%
100%
~Channelized streams 4 rivers
**Major rivers/streams in Hawaii
- 1 -
-------
Change in
Category
8. Lakes and Reservoirs (Not Applicable - no publicaly owned lake or reservoirs in Hawaii).
1. a. Acres Assessed:
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Acres Monitored:
1. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
Degraded
85%
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Category
39
221
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972 •
ac.
ac.
100*
1982 •
ac.
ac.
100X
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 30 / .
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
30 /
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0 /
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 30 /
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
7 sq. mi.
7
16
30 sq. mi.
23*
23*
53%
100*
1982
21 sq. mi.
9
30 sq. mi.
70*
30%
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
50%
Degrade
Kaneohe Bay = 21 sq. mi.
Pearl Harbor = 9 sq. mi.
Sq.Mi. Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
21
Change in
Category
10
b. Oceans Mamala Bay = 2.0 sq. mi.
Kahului Bay = 2.0 sq. mi.
By Percentage Within Change in
Degraded 0.1% 0.3$ Improved Category Category
Miles Improved: 2.0 0.5
Miles Degraded: 0.5 ..
Miles Maintained: 747.5
Unknown:
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mia
%
100*
1982-
mi.
mi.
%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a.
Pristine/
Preservation
c.
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
0.0.
Nut.
pH
1
Temp.| Toxics*
| | 2 Most
Turb.! Other : Serious
Municipal
"
Industrial
X X
Non-Point
Other (inc. natural)
X
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: 0
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
Streams and Rivers
Estuaries and/or Oceans
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
d. Great Lakes
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided
1.0
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
0.75-
0.50"
0.25—
.8Vt = I
0.79
0.111
0.517
0.029 Pri.
0.135
Secondary
0.003
to State's Population:
1.08 = T
0.105
0.0^5
0.00*
Legend
Not served by
wastewater system
0.632
Primary
Served by waste-
water system
0.289
Secondary
0.005
Primary
Secondary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
1972 1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
Population
Equivalents
of BOO
(millions)
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements'*
Percentage of Facilities for
Wnich Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
7
10
1
3
14*
30*
9*
see note
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
19
NOTE: 7 of these facilities discharge into ocean outfalls and have applied for a secondary treatment
waiver.
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Compliance
86%
Noncompliance
Compliance
Noncompliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements"1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
21
20
95.5*
98.6%
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
83
+Inc1udes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
*(.5% Noncompliance
95.5%
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Erosion and sediment from agricultural runoff is a major type of nonpoint source
pollution of concern in Hawaii. Hawaii was one of the first states to enact a law to
regulate erosion and sediment. The 1974 Act required each of the four counties to
develop their own ordinances to control erosion according to criteria established by
the Department of Health. As a result, each of the counties have developed a grading
ordinance which requires a permit from the County Department of Public Works for
grading, grubbing, and stockpiling.
The Department of Health also established a Technical Comnittee on Nonpoint
Source Pollution Control to help it assess existing and potential runoff problems.
The work of the Committee resulted in a report entitled Nonpoint Source Pollution in
Hawaii: Assessments and Recommendations (May 1, 1978). This report listed BEST
MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BW) which would help reduce erosion and sediment problems.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si Iv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
V. WATER QUALITY MANASEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
Hawaii's water pollution compliance program includes plan reviews/approvals, inspections,
notifications, conferences, administrative orders, consent orders, and civil penalities.
In 1982, 28 administrative orders, notifications, and civil penalties were served on
facilities and for operations in non-compliance with water quality standards and
regulations.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
8 (private/cit.y/county
0
8
0
6. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT =
tJy Percentage
322.19
Million
Local
Match.
15%
State I 10%
Federal
75%
- EPA
Categories
of Sources
Federal - EPA:
*
241.64
Other Federal:
*
unknown
State:
*
32.22
Local Match:
*
48.33
Other Local:
*
N/A
Million
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
slater Quality Monitoring
The 00H performs pollutant source monitoring and ambient water quality
monitoring. Pollutant source monitoring refers to the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES). Ambient water quality monitoring is part of the state's
Basic Water Monitoring Program and network of fixed monitoring program. The basic
objective of the monitoring program is to provide data and information on water
quality to ensure compliance with laws and regulation for the protection and
enhancement of the beneficial uses.
Construction Grants
The objective of the program is to insure that needed wastewater treatment
facilities are properly planned, designed, and constructed in order to eliminate
existing problems caused by inadequately treated discharges and to avoid the creation
of such problems in the future. Hawaii recently assumed all of the functions that
the EPA can legally delegate. State assumption of the Construction Grants Program
has streamlined project reviews, eliminated duplication efforts, and maximized state
and local responsibility for project management and success.
Permits and Enforcements
The NPDES permit system provides a basis for municipal and industrial discharge
permits, monitoring compliance with limitations, and appropriate enforcement action
for violations. The State also issues Permits to Operate for sources which do not
require an NPDES permit. Many private STPs in the State discharge into Injection
wells and therefore do not require NPDES permits.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
MamaId Bay
Mamala Bay is located on the south shore of Oahu and has the highest
concentration of population in the State including the city of Honolulu and satellite
towns of Aiea, Pearl City, Waipau, Ewa Beach, Makakilo, and Pearl Harbor. In 1972 a
wastewater management plan was formulated for the island of Oahu with the goal to
enhance and maintain water quality through a program of source control and
treatment. At this time Mamala Bay was recognized as a water quality problem area.
Two separate municipal treatment and disposal systems were built to service this
area. The Sand Island facility eliminated nearshore outfalls in the Sand
Island-Honolulu area. Advanced primary effluent is discharged into deep oceanic
waters. The Honoliuli system was constructed to eliminate municipal wastewater
discharges into Pearl Harbor as well as nearshore discharges into Mamala Bay from
Military installations.
Kaneohe Bay
Kaneohe Bay located on the windward side of Oahu is the largest embayment in
State of Hawaii. With the opening of the Pali Highway in 1960, urbanization of
Kaneohe and Kailua began. The Water Quality of the Bay deteriorated. Significant
wastewater discharges into Kaneohe Bay were eliminated in 1977 when effluent from
Kaneohe municipal plant and Kaneohe Marine Corps Air Station were diverted to an
ocean outfall off Mokapu Peninsula.
Kahului Bay
Kahului Bay located on the north coast of Maui is the most populated and urban
area of the island of Maui. On the southern portion of the bay is Kahului Harbor, a
deep water commercial port. Completion of a 6 mgd sewage treatment plant which
serves both Kahului and Wailuku eliminated two raw sewage outfalls into the bay.
Lahaina Bay
lahaina Bay located on the west coast of Maui is both a resort and a residential
area. A 3.2 mgd treatment system completed in June 1980 eliminated the raw sewage
discharge into Lahaina Bay and Harbor.
Port Allen - Hanapepe Bay
Hanapepe Bay is located on the southwest coast of the island of Kauai between
Hanapepe town and Port Allen. Water Quality problems have been caused 1n the past by
sugar mill discharges, cesspoll seepage, and runoff from other nonpoint sources.
Centralized treatment and disposal of raw sewage for the Hanapepe-Port Allen area is
important because it will eliminate raw sewage discharge and relieve cesspool
failures that result from the location of a major portion of Hanapepe on low lands.
In 1977 the initial Increment of the Hanapepe-Eleele sewage system was completed and
eliminated raw sewage discharge into the ocean from the Port Allen-Eleele area.
- 9 -
-------
I. SPECIAL STATt CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
The State of Hawaii is striving to preserve the State's unique and excellent water
resources while meeting the enormous demands placed on these resources by a
rapidly growing population. Unlike most states, Hawaii's water quality problems
are mainly those of pollution of coastal waters. The water quality of Hawaii's
surface water is excellent near the headwater but accumulates pollutants before
reaching the ocean. The State has developed water quality standards, monitoring
programs, and point source permit systems in cooperation with the EPA.
Most of the drinking water supply in Hawaii comes from basal aquifers. Protecting
groundwater has been and continues to be a special concern for the state. An
underground injection program is being developed to prevent injection in areas
with good groundwater.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
- Pollution from widespread agricultural use of pesticides and herbicides.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Department of Health
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Shlnji Soneda (808) 548-6455
DATE: July 27. 1983
- 10 -
-------
State of Idaho*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 721,519 1980 956,247
State Surface Area 83,600 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 6 Basins
# of River and Stream Miles 15,720 mi.; # of Border Miles* 435 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 1,350 / 508,180 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 72,115 ac. or sq. ml.
# of Coast Miles 0 ml.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 0 sq. ml.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Snake River/435 Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 7,070
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swlmmable:
4.637
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Flshable/Swlmmable:
147
d. Miles Monitored: 765
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
332 ml.
370
63
6,305
7,070 ml.
4%
5%
1*
90%
100%
1982
3,975 ml.
2,268
827
0
7,070 ml.
56%
32%
12%
0
100%
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
Deqraded 1% Improved
Maintained,
89%
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed:
Category
88
Change in
Category
0
199
50
428
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Mi les Maintained:
Unknown:
* Most of these miles were probably maintained and some even
improved. However, lack of 1972 data makes an accurate evaluation
of numbers Impossible.
6.305*
465.449
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
362.762
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 465.449
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres ;
Assessed j
t
19 72
371,897 ac.
44,295
0
49,257
465,449 ac. !
' 1
7931
10%
0
11%
100% |
1982
268,719 ac.
89,615
107,115
0
t
465,449 ac.
58%
19%
233£
0
100%
The changes in use support from 1972 to 1982 reflect the greater level of detailed information now
available on Idaho lakes.
Unknown
Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
aine
Within
Category
111.789
302.903
49.257*
Change in
Category
1.500
* The majority of this acreage was probably maintained, but lack of
1972 data makes an accurate evaluation of numbers Impossible.
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
Industrial-i^L. Municipal
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
% Municipal
X
Nonpoint
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
Coli., Nut (2)
Industrial
X
X
X
X
X
D.O.. Nut. (3)
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X
X
Nut.,Turb. (1)
Other {inc. natural)
*
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 87.8**
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: N/A
**Heavy metal toxicity in stream segments SB-430, PB-140S and PB-20S
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- i •
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
I. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
1.0 _
.9 ~
Number of
People ,|
(Millions)
.7 -
.6
-5 -|
.4
.3
.2
.1
721,519 = T
222,172
1972
956,2^7 = T
76,314
107,724
Primary
219,707
Lagoons or
Trickling
Filters
95,596
Secondary
wz
w
332,700
Legend
System
Not served
by waste-
water system
30,243
5,411 Primary
87,009 Lagoons or
Filters
Served by
wastewater
system
500,884
Secondary
Primary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc
2. Annual Population Equivalents of dOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of bOD
(Millions)
6_
M
.2-
718,20(
^77:
298,640
123,575
791,000
Legend
AS.
491,145
Generated
Discharged
&
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements+
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
26%
14%
14
+Includes "No-Discharge" facilities
71%
70%
19
18
95%
94%
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
41
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Noncompliance
Noncompliance
Compliance
*Two from interim permits;
one from final permits ncrt
in compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met*
0
3
20
Total
Permits
1
3
20
in Effect
in 1982
4
100%
100%
23
1
100%
1
100% 1
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Compliance
100%
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
The majority of Idaho's surface water quality problems are associated with
nonpoint source activities. Effective nonpoint source control in the state is
complicated due to the widespread geographic distribution of nonpoint sources, their
highly variable discharge characteristics, and agency limitations on enforcement
personnel.
The state water quality standards require application of approvea Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to control nonpoint source water quality impacts, but
"approved" practices exist only for specific activities or geographic areas. Where
BMPs are lacking, an activity must demonstrate knowledgeable and reasonable efforts
to minimize water quality impacts. In these cases, voluntary BMPs are established,
with application encouraged through cooperative and information/ education programs.
Runoff from agricultural lands is the major source of pollutants delivered to
Idaho's waters. Agricultural nonpoint sources include irrigation return flows high
in seaiment ana chemicals, erosion from nonirrigated cropland and sediment, and
nutrients and bacteria from grazing activities. The state has developed an
Agricultural Pollution Abatement Plan which identifies problems associated with
agriculture and includes a catalog of best management practices. Voluntary programs
are developed in accordance with the Plan and are carried out by local Soil
Conservation Districts. In addition, 208 monies were used for planning and
monitoring BMP effectiveness on several high priority stream segments. Funds from
the State Water Pollution Control Account provide grants to Soil Conservation
Districts for technical assistance, informational activities, and cost sharing to
farmers who install BMPs in high priority watersheds. In addition, the Agricultural
Stabilization and Conservation (ASCS) Program has funded a Rural Clean Water Project
on Rock Creek with more than 10,000 acres under cost-share contract and 500 BMPs
installed.
Affects of silvicultural activities in the State are severe, but are localized
in Impact to water quality. Impacts are significant however, since most
silvicultural activities occur in relatively pristine, undeveloped drainages. The
major problem comes from sediment produced by roading activities. Existing control
programs include the Idaho Forest Practices Act (IFPA) and the 208 Forest Practices
Water Quality Management Plan. The IFPA applies only to private and state lands and
is marginally enforced due to limited manpower. The 208 management plan is
applicable statewide, but has yet to be fully Implemented.
- 6 -
-------
Past mining activities have also generated impacts on water quality. Affects of
sediment and heavy metals on streams are severe in localized areas often affecting
pristine streams. Controls on mining activities include voluntary compliance with
technical criteria for mining operations; certification and review of 404 and
Section 10 permits; and review of engineering design plans for wastewater treatment
facilities. The Idaho Surface Mining Act also provides for review of mine
reclamation plans, but once again, manpower in this area is limited.
Other nonpoint source activities which affect Idaho's water quality are more
moderate and localized in impact. Hyci-ologic modification has the potential for
severe impacts to stream flows and water temperature, especially in Idaho, where
there has been a poliferation of small hycfr-opower sites. Cumulative impacts of such
development on a drainage may be extensive.
The impacts of construction activities, residual waste/land disposal and urban
runoff are all localized water quality problems subject to voluntary compliance with
state criteria and guidelines.
- 7 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: State law requires the pursuit of an administrative order as a
prerequisite to court action except in cases of an imminent threat to the public health.
Usually the terms of a consent decree or compliance schedule are negotiated without
holding a contested case hearing. The U.S. EPA issues and enforces all water pollution
discharge permits. State actions are to enforce state water quality standards or state
design standards for wastewater treatment systems.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Non-Permitted NPOES Permitted
Facilities* Facilities**
Total Number of Facilities: 400 3
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 10 ]_
Number of Administrative Actions: 6 4
Number of Judicial Actions: 2 0
* The large total listed includes a broad spectrum of sites that are potential enforcement
issues, out that do not have NPDES permits.
** This column refers to facilities having NPOES permits, as listed in Parts III A and 111 B.
Enforcement actions are taken by U.S. EPA.
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = S 188.6 Million*
By Percentage Categories of Sources
% 130.5 Million
$ 18.2*
$ 33.6
$ 4.3*
$ 2.0*
~Estimated figures
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
I/L
S/W
S/L
S/L
M/L
M/L
N/A
M/L
M.Nut.
C.LoFlo,
Nut.,P
, M,Nut.
Sal.SS
Nut,P,SS
SS, T
pH.SS
LoFlo
C,M,Nut.
T
Temp., T
Temp.
T
SS.T
Temp.
N/A
OxDe.
tate
1%Other Local
2%Local Match
Other Federal
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
- 8 -
-------
C. Program Activities
Idaho's water quality program is adninistered by the Water Quality Bureau of the
Department of Health and Welfare's Division of Environment. In the early days of
the Clean Water Act the State's program was small and "crisis" oriented; water
quality pollution problems were dealt with as they arose, on a case-by-case
basis. As funding levels increased, the program became better organized ana
staffed. Initial management efforts concentrated on municipal and industrial
point source pollution. Grants for funding municipal facilities upgraded many
operations from primary to secondary wastewater treatment. Industrial and
municipal point source discharges were controlled with discharge permits (NPDES
program) specifying effluent limits. In addition, in the face of the clean-up
goals contained in Public Law 92-500 (Clean Water Act) many Idaho industries began
instituting best available or best practical technologies (BAT, 6PT) to decrease
or eliminate pollutant discharges on their own.
In the mid-70s the State's water program was broadened to cover nonpoint sources
of pollution. Monies from Fe(feral 208 grants were used to fund planning efforts
designed to develop solutions to water quality problems. The water quality
emphasis became, and continues to be, on planning and prevention of pollution. A
discussion of various aspects of the state water quality program follows.
Idaho's participation in the Federal Clean Lakes Program has been limited to two
projects. A classification of all Idaho's lakes has been conducted, as well as
evaluation of pollution sources and development of potential solutions for Bear
Lake. Development of a state funded Clean Lakes Project is not a viable
consideration at this time; legislative appropriation for a "new" program is
highly unlikely in light of substantial reductions in existing program budgets.
All of Idaho's pollution control and abatement programs recognize the public
health significance of good quality drinking water sources. The quality of
drinking water supplies is protected through application of Idaho's water quality
standards and controls, and the delivery of quality drinking water Is regulated
through application of regulations for public drinking water systems. The State
is presently working to develop controls for protection of grouncV/ater from oil
and gas storage contamination; to implement a groundwater monitoring program; to
increase training opportunities for plant operators; and to improve computer
storage abilities to aid in tracking and problem identification in drinking water
systems.
The historic emphasis of the municipal construction grants program has been on
meeting specific effluent requirements (especially secondary treatment) and on
protection of public health. Additional factors which now determine eligibility
for project funding include groundwater quality, population, density of
development, readiness to proceed, availability of funas, project cost and
benefits, and the requirements of the Clean Water Act. The State will continue to
assess municipal facility needs and fund high priority projects in an effort to
maintain the trend toward improved water quality.
The primary mechanism for control of point source pollution discharges in Idaho Is
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). This program is
adnlnistered by the U.S. EPA with coordinated review by the State. EPA policy
provides for regulation of only "major" discharges, and most of these are covered
under the existing program. A large portion of point source dischargers in Idaho,
however, are "minor", and the cumulative water quality Impacts of these discharges
- 9 -
-------
may be significant. Point sources of special concern that have been largely
ignore a under the existing program are geothermal wastewater, fish farm
wastewaters and discharge from feedlots and dairies. The state is pursuiny
delegation for the NPDES program, and would attempt to address "minor" discharges
under its authorities. The major stumbling block to State delegation of the
program is that EPA has determined the State has insufficient penalty authority.
The State Legislature has not granted these authorities in the past, so little
progress has been made in program delegation. Another major obstacle to program
delegation is funding for NPDES program administration.
Control of nonpoint source pollution in Idaho is discussed in detail in Section IV
of this report. In summary, nonpoint source activities have a significant impact
on water quality in the State. Agriculture and silviculture are particularly
significant in their water quality affects. The State attempts to prevent
nonpoint source impacts to water quality through an information/estication program
and to minimize impacts through voluntary compliance with best management
practices designed for specific activities.
Planning activities in the State focus on both point and nonpoint source
pollution. Municipal and industrial sources have been addressed through study anci
development of guidelines for land treatment of wastewaters, land application of
sludge and recommendations for treatment, and control and effluent limitations for
fish hatcheries. Planning projects in the nonpoint source area include extensive
work in the area of agricultural and silvicultural pollution control. Projects
emphasize development of best management practices, technical guidance documents,
ana overall planning ana management strategies for prevention of water quality
impacts.
The State has also begun to evaluate the neeu for and develop a grounctoater
quality management plan. Delegation of authority for the Underground Injection
Control (UIC) is being pursued as one aspect of groundwater quality management.
Idaho's water quality monitoring program was developed in 1967 to establish
baseline conditions to measure progress toward achievement of state ana federal
water pollution control goals. The program has undergone annual review and
revision and has remained essentially a trend monitoring network. A need to
reevaluate the entire monitoring program was identified in the spring of 1982, and
a detailed monitoring strategy has been developed to move from broad spectrum
monitoring to solution oriented monitoring of priority problem areas. This
approach enables concentration of aiminishing program funds in areas where the
greatest benefit in water quality can be derived.
- 10 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Studies of Rock Creek, Twin Falls County, Idaho made in the late '50s list sludge
banks up to 2 feet deep; red, white, and grey slimes; sacks and boxes of entrails,
bones and meat scraps; floating sewage solids; distasteful odors from sewage and
decomposing organic materials; grey and white foams; Norwegian rats, black flies and
carp; and a "desert" for large aquatic organisms in the stream. A 1959 water quality
study recommended removal of pulp waste from sugar processing plant discharges;
removal of blood, paunch manure, grease and solids from meat processing plant
discharges; removal of whey and other wastes from processing of dairy products;
movement of stockyards and feed lots away from the stream; and elimination of septic
tank overflow discharges. Companies and municipalities contributing wastes to Rock
Creek were notified in 1962 that engineering plans for waste treatment facilities
were to be developed. Over the next 20 years, the City of Twin Falls and various
industries located along Rock Creek worked extensively to improve water quality, and
by the end of the '70s, most direct discharge to the stream had been cleaned up or
removed. Wastes are now treated before discharge, or applied to the land; some
industrial wastes are treated in the municipal wastewater treatment facility.
Once the point source pollution problems were under control, cleanup efforts
turned to the irrigation return flows, which were delivering tons of topsoil and
sediment from farms into the stream. In the early 1980's the U.S. EPA provided grant
funds to the IDHW-Division of Environment and Idaho Soil Conservation Commission
which allowed the Snake River and Twin Falls Soil Conservation Districts to begin
intensive water quality planning in the watershed. Following development of a
detailed pollution control plan, the District's overall cleanup plans for Rock Creek
were submitted for approval under the new Rural Clean Water Program (RCWP) of the
USDA Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service. Rock Creek was one of 13
projects selected nationwide, and was also one of three projects in the nation to
conduct intensive monitoring to determine project success. After two years of
monitoring, data indicates that sediment loading to Rock Creek has been reduced up to
80X in sub-basin areas of the drainage where intensive Best Management Practices
(BMPs) have been installed. In addition, area farmers' awareness of water quality
problems associated with agriculture has dramatically increased, an indication that
future management efforts have a good chance of success in the Rock Creek drainage.
In the late 1960's, industrial discharges in the upper Snake River Basin were
extensive. Wastewater from food processing plants (potato, sugar and meat) alone
discharged wastewater with population equivalents equal to the entire population of
the State. Some improvements of these systems were made or initiated in the early
1970s. By 1974, for example, the potato processors had reduced their discharges by
90% from 1960 levels, while increasing production by 485%. With the Impetus of the
Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (PL 92-500) and encouragement of the state water
quality agencies, all industrial discharges of organic material to the river have
been voluntarily discontinued. As of 1982, all major industries have land treatment
of wastewater or joint municipal-industrial wastewater systems.
Point source pollution in the upper Snake River Basin has largely been
eliminated, and remaining water quality problems are a result of nonpolnt source
pollution (nutrients, sediment, bacteria) or the affect of numerous dams on the river
system (high water temperature, low dissolved oxygen concentrations). Individual
projects to correct the nonpoint pollution sources are underway, but results will not
be as rapid or dramatic for the point source discharges.
- 11 -
-------
I. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Groundwater quality protection is generally a new area of emphasis nationally, as
well as in Idaho. Past water quality management efforts have concentrated on surface
waters, with groundwater programs receiving little or no attention. Consequently,
there are few definitive management or enforcement policies for groundwater.
Recognizing the need for a management strategy, the state developed the Groundwater
Quality Management Plan. An initial step in development of the plan was an
assessment of present and future grouncwater quality and uses in Idaho. In addition,
the existing groundwater regulatory mechanisms, programs, and responsibile agencies
were adckressed, with an emphasis on the deficiencies which exist. Recommendations to
cover the areas of deficiency were developed, together with an implementation
strategy.
Part S. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial ana non-point
sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, ana rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial ana/or mining facilities.
In addition to those projects listed above, areas of future emphasis in Idaho's
water quality program will include:
Development of policy and criteria for dealing with oil and gas contamination
of groundwater.
Development of design criteria ana guidelines for oil and gas drilling fluids
aisposal.
Development of a policy on geothermal related effluent limitations.
Study of enforcement capabilities and deficiencies in the water quality
program.
Development of an overall information and education program for water quality.
Update and revision of silvicultural water quality management plan.
Development of regulations or guidelines for control of pollution from surface
impoundments.
Development of a strategy for control of nonpoint source pollution from mining
activities.
Intensive surveys designea to characterize and provide solutions to water
quality problems.
AGENCY PREPARING RtPORT: Idaho Department of Health and Welfare
Division of Environment - Statehouse Mail
Boise, ID 83720
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Susan Martin (208) 334-42 51
DATt: September 1, 1983
- 12 -
-------
IDAHO
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
EH Use Partially Supported
D Use Not Supported
Y
-N-
y
-------
IDAHO
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
Use Not Supported
-------
State of Illinois*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 11,113.976 1980 11,418,461
State Surface Area 56,250 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 1J
# of River and Stream Miles 13.200 mi.; # of Border Miles* 880 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 870 / 164.061 ac. (Publicly Owned)
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.ml. 50,000 ac. or 78 sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 63 mi. (Lake Michigan shoreline along Illinois)
# of Estuary sq. mi. sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Ohio/130 Name/Mileage Mississippi/570
Name/Mileage Wabash/180 Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 7,270
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swimmable:
1.180
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
162
d. Miles Monitored: 5.500
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
2,523 ml.
3,926
821
7,270 ml.
34.7%
54%
11.3*
100%
1982
2,792 ml.
4,231
247
7,270 ml.
38.4 J
58.22
3.4%
100%
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
Category
Miles Improved: 1,454
Miles Degraded: —
Miles Maintained: 4.706
Unknown:
By Percentage
r/o
Degraded
8. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 137.532
Change in
Category
M90
20
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
81.713
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Acres Monitored: 104.240
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
18,360 ac.
56,338
28,742
23,979
127,419 ac.
14.45£
44.2*
22.6*
18.8*
100*
1982
29,965 ac.
106,684
883
--
137,532 ac.
21.8%
77.6*
i
1
0.6*
100*
*10,113 acres of major lakes constructed since 1972
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Degrade
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
90.236
35.811
11.485
- 2 -
-------
/
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed:
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
/
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
/
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: /
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
%
100*
1982
%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
W ithin
Category
Change in
Category
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed: 63
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
63
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored: 48
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not |
Supported !
Unknown
) Total Miles
j Assessed
1972
0
mi.
10
J
53 ;
j
| 63 mi.
L
0
%
16%
00
100%
48
mi.
15
r
o ;
63 mi.
76
%
24*
0 i
i
100%
Change in
Category
58
0
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
B.y Percentage
Maintainec
8%
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
Nonpoint
Industrial
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Industria
Murucipa
d. Great Lakes
Nonpoint,
Industrial
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
ph
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
*
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
D.O.
Industrial
X
X
Ammon i a
Non-Point
X
X
Other (inc. natural)
~Other Includes TOS, Sulfate, Chloride
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 250 miles
dumber of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 8,190 acres
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: _________
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: 0.3
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
HI. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
11,100,000
11 "
1,333,000
1
10 -
927,000
9
V//,
2
8 '
683,000
Primary
7 -
6 .
5 -
k -
8,156,000
Secondary
7
S
3 -
2 _
1 .
Tertiary
1,000
Legend
Not served by
wastewater system
Served by waste-
water system
2,^83,000
Tertiary
Primary
Secondary
etc
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
19.8
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(millions)
20
18 H
16
12-
10-
6
>i -
2-
19.0
2.6
1.35
2E
Legend
Generated
2.8
Discharged
7a
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972 n- u a 1982 1982 Projected Based on 1972 Treatment Levels
Discharged
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met
Facilities Needing Upgrading
168
66
111
30
61
95
17.8%
92*
86%
32.736
98.5%
97.8%
165
66
0 - BOD & TSS
27-Nitrification only
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
753
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
17-8%
Compliance
82.2%
Noncompliance
Noncompliance
\ Compliance
\
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
88
0
108
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements
0
-
99
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
0
-
92%
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met*
0
-
99.7%
1.739
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Nonce
100%
Noncompliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Two statewide non-point sources of pollution have been identified: agriculture
and hydrographic modifications. Streams west of the Illinois River, streams in
west central Illinois, and the lower reaches of streams tributary to the Wabash
River have the highest turbidity and suspended solids. It is estimated that
agricultural non-point sources of pollution account for 316 billion pounds of
sediment per year. Hydrographic modifications are a major problem in streams in
the Chicago area, streams tributary to and south of the Illinois River, and
streams in southeastern Illinois. Five other localized non-point sources of
pollution have been identified. Eleven Superfund sites and sixteen hazardous
waste sites are located in Illinois.
There have been two Soil Conservation Service (SCS) small watershed programs
implemented in Illinois and authorization is being sought for a third plan.
Thirteen basin assessments have been targeted. Presently, the United States
Department of Agriculture is targeting its efforts nationwide to regions where
excessive erosion problems have been identified. Illinois has three selected
areas and has proposed two more. A total of 44 counties are included in these
five areas.
Two of the twenty-eight Nationwide Urban Runoff Program studies were located in
Glen Ellyn and Champaign-Urbana, Illinois. These two projects assessed the
effectiveness of wet-detention and street sweeping as best management practices.
There are five lake restoration projects underway or completed in Illinois under
Clean Lakes funding. More projects are under development.
There have been two implementation assessment programs to show how different
agricultural soil conservation practices benefit water quality: Blue Creek
Agricultural Conservation Program, Special Water Quality Project in Pike County,
and Highland Silver Lake Rural Clean Water Monitoring and Evaluation Project in
Madison County.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si lv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Brine/Salt
Residuals
C
V
V
C
C
R
C
R
S.M.I
S
I
M-S
M-S
M-S
M-S
M-S )
Severity &
L
w
L
L
(24 Co)
W
L
L
Extent
(19 CO)*
;a Co)
(14 Co)
(53 Co)
(45 Co)
(15 Co)
T,0
T ,0
0
T,0
Agri Chem
Physical
PCB Toxic
Primary
Metals
Animal
Limitations
chem tailing
Pollutants
TSS.COD
Waste
T 1
S,TtPH
T
T, DO
S,T
wastes
*(Total counties in Illinois: 102)
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The Agency enforcement process combines facility compliance, field
operations, and enforcement activities to encourage voluntary compliance. Written notices of
violations are followed by pre-enforcement conferences to promote voluntary action to either
correct the violation or agree to a schedule to achieve compliance. Enforcement cases are
prepared when voluntary compliance is not expected. Written notice is again provided to
offer another opportunity to comply prior to prosecution. If compliance is not achieved, an
enforcement package and complaint is sent to the Attorney General's Office for formal filing
with the Pollution Control Board or the courts.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
95
74
N/A due to State Law
22
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = S 3.647.1 Million
By Percentage
%%
si
State
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
- --
4.0
*
669.0
$
903.6
*
0.1% Other Federal
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
Ambient Monitoring - The program includes analysis of water quality, sediment,
habitat, flow, fish tissue and biological monitoring of indigenous aquatic life.
Water quality monitoring involves activities conducted by the State directly or by
agreements with other agencies to obtain data on the quality of waters of the
State. Water quality monitoring activities conducted directly by the IEPA include
fixed station monitoring (200 stream sites), intensive stream surveys, lake
surveys, and special investigations. Approximately 250 volunteers also participate
in the Agency's cooperative volunteer lake monitoring effort.
PIanning - The planning efforts are coordinated with federal, state and areawide
agencies to achieve better integration of the water quality management program.
Major emphasis is given to problem assessments, strategy preparation and
refinement, and follow-up of implementation activities. The four areawide and
state Water Quality Management Plans were certified in 1979. Since that time, the
plans have been consolidated into a single updated state-wide plan.
Permitting - This activity builds upon the ground work laid by the monitoring and
planning activities. Utilizing information and direction from these sources and
effluent standards and guidance, this activity establishes the basic regulatory
tool for controlling pollution sources. The NPDES program was delegated to the
Agency in 1977. The toxic industrial strategy is a part of the program.
Construction Grants Administration - This activity supports the regulatory process
with respect to municipal facilities. In fact, it is largely this activity that
will determine the degree of compliance achieved by most municipal facilities. In
recognition of this fact, the State sought and received the first delegation of the
federal construction grants program in 1978.
Compliance Assurance - This activity serves to close the loop on the system. This
is illustrated in the IMPAAT (Integrated Municipal Program to Achieve Adequate
Treatment) developed and implemented by IEPA and USEPA Region V in March, 1981.
The primary emphasis is on coordination of grants, permits, enforcement and
compliance monitoring. This activity has been successful and will provide a good
base from which to develop the national municipal policy in Illinois.
Program Management - This function interrelates with all of the other major program
activities. It serves as the central focusing mechanism and is designed to achieve
overall program accessibility, accountability and quality assurance. The emphasis
is management/administrative, public participation, interagency support and
cooperation, and program direction.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
LAKE MICHIGAN
As of 1972, North Shore Sanitary District (NSSO) had six waste water treatment
plants organically and hydraulically overloaded. The overloaded facilities were at
Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Highland Park, Waukegan, Clavey Road and North Chicago.
Moreover, NSSD had five primary treatment plants discharging 4.2 million gallons of
primary treated sewage per day into Lake Michigan. The primary treatment
discharges to Lake Michigan were at Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, and three Highland
Park pi ants.
A remedial program was developed and implemented with the assistance of state and
federal grants. This remedial program not only diverted several significant
discharges from Lake Michigan, but also phased out six smaller treatment facilities
through a regional ization effort.
Additional combined sewer overflow remedial work remains; however, the results of
the completed work include 58 miles of shoreline water quality improvement. This
is evident by a pattern of decreasing levels of phosphate, airmonia nitrogen,
coliform, and phenol. Swimming conditions have also improved. Previous frequent
beach closings were associated with the discharges into the lake.
The improvement documented above, and continuation of remedial programs, are
important in view of the broad spectrum of purposes Lake Michigan serves, which
include the source of drinking water for 5 million residents of Illinois.
ILLINOIS RIVER
Prior to 1900, untreated sewage from Chicago was discharged into the Chicago River,
which flowed into Lake Michigan. However, Lake Michigan was a public water supply
source for the Chicago area and such contamination created a critical health hazard
(one resulting epidemic caused some 90,000 deaths). Therefore, by 1900 the Chicago
River's flow had been reversed by diverting the flow through the Illinois-Michigan
Canal into the Oes Plalnes River and then into the Illinois River. The effect of
this event on the history of the Illinois River was dramatic. Reports of
disagreeable results on the character of the river included the following
statement: "Masses of sludge floated by so dense that dogs could run across the
river; the river had a mingled fish and privy odor and the color of the water was
an unnatural gray."
Early pollution control efforts (primary and secondary treatment) reduced the
population equivalent of the total combined domestic and industrial waste emptied
into the river from 6,211,471 in 1922, to 2,417,000 in 1950. These efforts have
continued with substantial federal and state construction grant assistance directed
at improving the quality of point discharges to the Illinois River and its
tributaries. The remedial efforts associated with additional treatment appear to
be strongly linked with the improvement of water quality of the Illinois River.
Improved Illinois River conditions over the past 10 years have been documented in
biological surveys and chemical assessments. The findings illustrate 60 to 200
miles of improved stream conditions and enhancement of game/sports fisheries.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Major efforts were made to issue first round NPDES permits and to assume the
responsibilities for delegation of the permits and grants programs. The first
round permits set compliance schedules for meeting effluent and water quality
limits for deoxygenating wastes, and also provided limitations for heavy metals
from both industrial and municipal discharges where they were a concern. In
addition, a sludge management permit system was established for the proper
management and ultimate disposal of municipal sludge.
Special efforts were made to complete the initial water quality management plans.
Extensive activities were initiated to respond to non-point source problems. New
initiatives were made to develop a lakes program, surface/groundwater programs,
and to address water quality/quantity issues. Cross compliance of grants, plans
and permits was achieved and included a conflict resolution process.
Part 3. Ma.jor Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
_X population and industrial growth.
_X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
_X sources.
_X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Continuing efforts are required to maintain adequate financial assistance,
enforcement, monitoring, and evaluatioin. Activity areas include point and
non-point pollution problems, combined sewer overflows, and toxics issues.
Priority will be given to further develop effective strategies for the major
remaining problems. For example, now that the management of point source
deoxygenating wastes is in operation, the implementation of a toxics strategy such
as the "TEAMS" (Toxics Elimination and Management Strategy) approach will be one of
the key programs in the coming decade. Implementation of a lake program strategy
will also require special consideration. In addition, efforts will be made to
implement the State Water Plan which covers integrated water management by multiple
state agencies.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
2200 Churchill Rd., Springfield. IL 62706
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Robert Clarke (217) 782-3362
OATE: September 1, 1983
- 10 -
-------
ILLINOIS
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
CD Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-N-
-------
ILLINOIS
1982
V
I/
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
B Use Supported
D Use Partially Supported
¦ Use Not Supported
-N-
-------
State of Indiana*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
state Population 1970 5,195,392 1980 5,490,179 (5.7% Inc.)
State Surface Area 36,532 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 8 basins
# of River and Stream Miles 90,000 mi.; # of Border Miles* 556 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 520** / 92,800 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 190,000 ac. or sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Ohio 356 miles Name/Mileage
Name/M11eage Wabash 200 miles Name/Mi 1eage
**over 50 acres
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 90,000
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
at least 125 miles
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:*
89,000 due to partial body contact recreation designati
d. Miles Monitored: 2,055
*Miles designated less than swimmabl
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
43,745 ml.
800
455
45,000***
90,000 mi.
48.6 %
0.89%
0.51%
50
100%
1982
44,000 ml.
750
250
45,000***
90,000 ml.
48.89 %
0.83%
0.28%
50%
100%
*** Vast majority of those miles are first and second order streams not
Impacted by point source discharges. It 1s estimated that a
majority of these miles are too small to be flshable or swimmable.
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
Change in
Category
Maintained
50%
Unknown
Miles Improved:
356
455
Miles Degraded:
0
0
Improved , . . j
Miles Maintained:
44,189
Unknown:
45.000
*Note: Due to Indiana's unusual hydraulic nature of a state of water origin,
and fairly flat terrain there exists a large number of miles of small head-
water streams which are not directly impacted by water pollution. This
results in very small percentages of miles improved. The two maps showing
water quality status in 1972 & 1982 probably gives a better idea on the amount
of improvement although it does not take into account improvements on water-
bodies not shown on the map.
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 92.800
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: no routine monitoring at this time.
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1Q7? .
92,800 ac.
92,800 ac.
100 %
100%
1QA? .
92,800 ac.
92,800 ac.
100 %
100*
.
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Acres Improved: Undetermined
Acres Degraded: Undetermined
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2 -
92.800
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: /
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
/ _
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
/
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: J
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
%
100%
1982
* 1
1
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Sq. Mi. Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2A -
-------
0. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
4 J
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
43 (Public Water Supply)
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 43
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1372
38 mi.
5
0
0
43 mi.
88 %
12 %
0
0
100*
1QH7-
40 mi.
3
0
0
mi.
93 %
7 %
0
0
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
100#
Improved
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
41
Change in
Category
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Industrial
Nonpoint
15%
Municipal
Municipal
Nonpoint &
Industrial
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
Industrial
88%
lonpoint & Municipal
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
coli.D.O.
Industrial
X
X
X
temp.tox.turb
Non-Point
X
brine
oilfield*
Other (inc. natural)
|
X
I
.
& abandoned
mines
~Oilfield brine and abandoned mines
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 125
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: 43
(Impact on quatic life)
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
.5,490,179
5 -
3 -
5,195,392
VZZZZZ
1,824,002
189,920
44,623
Primary
309,628
Secondary
2,830,219
AWT
2,035,499
Legend
Not served
by waste-
I67 570 water system
10*865
23,712
Primary
Secondary
2,247.837
Served by
wastewater
system
1,004,696
Advanced
Primary
Secondar
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
W 1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population 5
Equivalents
of BOU
(Millions) ^
3.204
0.W
&
1972
4.703
0.990
0.417
1982
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
•Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+Includes "No-Discharge" l-acilities
94
9
96
26
9
82
27.7
100
87.5
44
100
81
68
8
47
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
450
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1972:
1972 vs. 1982
1982:
Compliance j 27.7%
Compliance
87.5% /
/
Compliance
, Non-
12. 5% \Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982*
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements4
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
~Information for 1979 permits
Not
119
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
714
Available
84
71
79
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
, 29# \
Non- ^
j Compliance
71%
Compliance
Not Available
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Indiana believes that, to a large extent, nonpoint source pollution still remains
undefined and undetermined with respect to measureable water quality and water
use impact, and efficacy and practicality of control measures.
While much has been made of sediment borne pollutants (or of sediment itself),
little has been documented on the ultimate fate and impact of such pollutants in
the aquatic environment.
On the other hand, for contaminants that do present themselves in unacceptable
concentrations in fish, such as PCBs and organo-chlorine pesticides (chlordane),
we often have no idea as to how they got there or how to reduce concentrations,
other than banning their use.
The only documentable non-point source problem in Indiana has been acid mine
drainage from long-abandoned surface coal mines in southwestern Indiana, worked
and abandoned before State reclamation laws were enacted.
Confined animal feeding operations were controlled from their beginning by
requiring storage and controlled land application of the waste. Water quality
problems which do arise stem from poor operation or flagrant violation of the
Confined Animal Feeding Control Law and the Stream Pollution Control Law.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
Review of self monitoring data, compliance sampling data, and water quality monitoring and
bioassay data by manual and computer means will surface permit violation. When violations
are revealed, the choice of which enforcement action is appropriate will be made. The
enforcement action taken will ensure the quickest return to compliance by the permittee.
Compliance tracking will focus on significant noncompliance problems at municipal and
industrial facilities. Of particular interest will be completed municipal treatment
facilities funded under the construction grants program and not able to achieve compliance
with NPDES requirements.
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
S/L
I/L
N/A
S/L
I/L
I/L
N/A
S/L
P
SS
N/A
PH
SS
SS.O*
N/A
0**
*0 - loss of habitat and shade 0** - organic chemicals
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
49 *
17
6
3
* Exclude state and Federal facilities
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $1.190.85
By Percentage
Million
75%
Federal - EPA
10$
s\.
].2%0ther Federal
State
Local Match
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
*
892
Mill ion
Other Federal:
%
2.34
(FnHA)
State:
%
120.22
Local Match:
$
176.29
Other Local:
%
unknown
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
The major changes in the last 10 years have been brought about by the 1972
Amendments to the Clean Water Act, causing the State to gear its programs and
staffing toward implementing its requirements. Specifically, this entailed
creating a "Planning" group to do basin planning and water quality management.
Planning under Sections 303(d) and 208; changing from water quality based
requirements to a permit program under NPDES delegation, significant expansion
of construction grants staff, creating a water quality modeling unit to do
wasteload allocations, and reorganizing the Division to better fit the new
functions and conduct of operations.
Existing State programs, such as water quality monitoring, lake studies,
intensive stream surveys, emergency response activities, wastewater treatment
system plan review and approval, inspections of waste treatment facilities,
control of confined animal feeding operations, enforcement actions and operator
certification continued.
Construction grant activities are now being consolidated and expanded to
receive full program delegation. In addition, pretreatment will be fully
delegated.
New activities being proposed are hands-on operator assistance team and a
groundwater unit.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
(a) Maumee River at Fort Wayne, Indiana
In early settlement times, the Maumee River supported a fishery that
reportedly included extremely large numbers of northern pike, walleye,
muskellunge, smallmouth bass and largemouth bass. Population growth and
associated Industrial development at Fort Wayne which began in the 1830's
caused river water quality to deteriorate. Studies conducted in 1894 and 1895
disclosed that northern pike, walleye, muskellunge, smallmouth bass and
largemouth bass were no longer present. By the mid 1960's a portion of the
Maumee River failed to support any fish life and only the most pollution
tolerant species were present at a point nearly 20 miles downstream.
Since the 19701 s the City of Fort Wayne has constructed over 135 miles of
sanitary sewers, 36 miles of storm sewers and completed construction of a
60 MGD Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility with phosphorus and ammonia
removal. Also completed were stormwater retention ponds. In addition,
industries in the area organized a cooperative to contain and clean up spills
of oil and hazardous materials.
In 1977 biologists from the State Board of Health found that largemouth bass
had reappeared 1n the Maumee River in Fort Wayne, in 1979 smallmouth bass and
northern pike were included in the sample. In 1980 the Maumee River in Fort
Wayne contained significant numbers of walleye, northern pike, smallmouth bass
and largemouth bass. Except for largemouth bass which had been found in 1941,
these species had been absent since before 1894.
Although these results indicate dramatic improvement, success will not be
complete until there is better control of combined sewer overflows at Fort
Wayne.
(b) Reduced Phosphorus Loading to Lakes, Reservoirs and Susceptible Stream Areas
The Indiana Phosphate Detergent Law and the stream Pollution Control Board's
Phosphorus removal requirements for municipal and industrial dischargers have
significantly reduced phosphorus loadings to Lake Michigan, many of the
State's lakes and reservoirs and most streams susceptible to algae blooms.
Studies have indicated that in some cases the loading has been reduced enough
to improve the trophic status of the receiving water body, in others the
reduction has been sufficient to prevent further deterioration.
It should be noted that other equally impressive success stories could be
presented here if there was no restriction on space.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
(1) Municipal compliance - achieving expansion and at facilities on a timely
basis, within the constraints of the Construction Grants Program.
(2) Municipal and industrial compliance in the Lake Michigan Basin (Calumet
Area).
(3) Protecting the Salmonid fishing area at Michigan City area.
(4) Pretreatment of industrial wastes discharging to municipal sewers.
(5) Reduction of nutrient input to lakes and streams.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
(1) Need significant expansion of laboratory toxics analytical through-put
capacity to adequately assess surface and groundwater contamination.
(2) Need to expand the sludge management program.
(3) Carry out industrial waste pretreatment program.
(4) Need to address chlorinated hydrocarbon contamination of fish (source,
controllability, cost-benefit, etc.)
(5) Need to provide state hands-on assistance to operators and municipal
facilities not providing adequate 0 & M.
(6) If significant groundwater contamination is found, State will need to develop
adequate preventive and remedial programs (for other than RCRA sources).
(7j Lake renovation.
(8) Control of toxic effect of residual chlorine from wastewater treatment plants.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Earl A. Bohner, Director, Division of Water
Pollution Control, Indiana State Board of Health
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Steve M. Kim 317/633-0708
DATE: September 1. 1983
- 10 -
-------
INDIANA
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
H Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-------
INDIANA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
B Use Not Supported
-------
State of Interstate Sanitation
Commission ~
~See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN MATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 16,662,90 1980 15,680,400 (ISP*)
State Surface Area N/A sq. miles (ISD)
# of River Systems/Basins N/A
# of River and Stream Miles N/A mi.; # of Border Miles* N/A mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage N/A / N/A ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. N/A _ac. or N/A sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 709 mi.
# of Estuary sq. ml. 701 sq. mi.
# of Ocean sq. mi. 96 sq. mi.
*Used 1972 and 1981 data
~Border Rivers:
Interstate Waters/sq. ml.
Name/Mileage Hudson River/8.6 Name/Mileage Raritan Bay/48
Name/Mileage Kills/4.63 Name/Mileage Long Island Sound/225
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: N/A
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than F1shable/Sw1mmable:
N/A
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
N/A
d. Miles Monitored: N/A
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
ml.
mi.
%
100*
1982
_____
ml.
ml.
%
100«
~Interstate Sanitation District
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Miles Improved: n/A N/A
Miles Degraded: N/A N/A
Miles Maintained: N/A N/A
Unknown: N/A N/A
Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: N/A
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
N/A
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
N/A
d. Acres Monitored: N/A
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972 -
ac.
ac.
100*
1982 ¦
ac.
ac.
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
N/A
N/A
N/A
Change in
Category
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans*
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed:
797
/ 792
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmabl
0 / 0
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmabl
86 / 86
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 797
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
/ 792
*Square miles
Supporte d
Partial ly
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
*1972
513 sq. mi.
80
199
5
797 sq. mi.
64%
10%
25%
1%
100%
*1982
513 sq. mi.
177
102
5
797 sq. mi.
64%
22%
13%
1%
100%
~Water Year ¦ October 1 to September 30
3. Changes In and Mi thin Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
.1% Unknown
Sq. Mi. Improve d:
1*$ jlmprovedsq.Mi .Degraded:
/ De- Sq.Mi.Maintained:
graded
Unknown:
Within
Category
102
497
Change in
Category
97
b. Oceans
By Percentage
100%
Maintained
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
N/A
N/A
96
Change in
Category
N/A
N/A
N/A
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Mi les Assessed: N/A
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
N/A
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
N/A
d. Miles Monitored: N/A
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100%
198?-
mi.
mi.
%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Change in
Category
N/A
N/A
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
c. Estuaries anchor Oceans
d. Great Lakes
80%
Municipal/Industrial
Nonpoint
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
PH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
X
X
Industrial
X
X
X
X
Non-Point
Other (inc. natural)
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: 701
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: 96
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOUKCLS
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
18-
17-
16'
15"
Tt-
13-
12.
11
10'
9-
8.
r
6
5'
V
3
2-
1.
z
16.69 = I
1.99
Primary
6.2
1.5
15.891 = 1
Secondary
1.22
13.8
.871
Primar
Legend
served
y waste-
water system
jtot
by w
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
Primary
Secondary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
1972
1981
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads uenerated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
' of BOD
(mill ions)
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1981:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1981
*L)oes not include combined sewer overflow loadings.
*Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1981
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements+
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
81
76
40
53X
46%
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
109
les
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1972:
1972 vs. 1982
1982:
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements+
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
+Includes "No-D1scharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
The contribution of nonpoint pollution sources to degraded water quality in
the Interstate Sanitation District is much less than for point sources.
Nevertheless, urban runoff, the underwater mining of sand and gravel, and work to
maintain navigation channels do place added stress on these waters, perhaps
amounting to 10* of the total pollution load. Since great progress has been made
in controlling point sources (other than combined sewers) and many of the water
segments are still inadequate or only partially suitable for their present and
intended uses, it is important to reduce contamination from the nonpoint sources.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
*Severi
V. MATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: NPOES AND SPOES Permits for discharges within the Interstate
Sanitation District carry provisions requiring effluents to meet the requirements of the
Commission's Water Quality Regulations as well as those of the individual states. Ever
since the inauguration of the Section 402 Permit Program, the Commission has reviewed
permits and participated when necessary in permit proceedings to assure that its
requirements are Included. The Commission also does compliance monitoring.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si lv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
I to M
M.O*
ty (UNK indicates that impact is under investigation)
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT =
By Percentage
Mill ion
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Million
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
The pollution control activities of the Interstate Sanitation Commission
continue to include monitoring of effluent discharges and of receiving water
quality, standards-making and review, and cooperation with the States and U.S. EPA
in the NPDES/SPDES Permit Programs. The focus of the Commission's work is not only
on the condition and management of the waters involved, but also on the
interrelationships with conditions and developments in the waters which intermingle
among the States.
The Commission inspects public and industrial treatment works on a regular
basis and reports the results of these inspections and accompanying water quality
sampling to the States, U.S. EPA, and the discharger involved. The Commission also
conducts special samplings and analyses: e.g. for coliform conditions in
connection with examination of the States disinfection policies, with a goal of
harmonizing them.
The Commission does studies of parameter conditions for its District which show
the relationships of existing water quality conditions to applicable standards.
For example, this was done for dissolved oxygen, including conditions as they would
be in 1990 if all dischargers were then providing secondary treatment. On the
basis of these studies and of other data, especially that obtained from its
monitoring activities, the Commission reviewed 301(h) applications made by over 20
of the plants in its District.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
1. Improved Dissolved Oxygen
In the early 1970's, most of the waters of the inner portion the Interstate
Sanitation District were in seriously degraded condition. They had arrived at such
a state because of residential congestion, industrial development and intensity of
port use. Their origins were in the nineteenth century and in some respects, even
earlier. This was accompanied by long-term, failure to take sufficient preventive
or remedial measures.
Development of effluent limitations designed to allow restoration and
maintenance of reasonable water quality and intensification of efforts to construct
waste treatment facilities to provide full secondary treatment have reversed the
trend toward deterioration. In 1975, the most heavily polluted areas in the
District (notably Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull and Newark Bay) had below standard
dissolved oxygen content of the entire warm water season (four months from late
spring to early fall). By 1981 this worst period had been reduced to approximately
two months. Moreover, the readings of virtually zero dissolved oxygen which were
common, no longer occurred or did so very rarely. Other areas in the District have
also improved greatly, such as the East River.
The importance of these observations is that sustained upgrading to secondary
treatment of the District's waste treatment facilities has resulted in a marked
improvement of water quality. However, not all the plants have been upgraded.
Moreover, there remains a combined sewer overflow problem of large proportions. It
is reasonable to expect that if the remainder of the upgrading were to take place
and substantial remedial measures for combined sewer discharges were pursued, the
waters of the District could be made fully suitable for their present and intended
uses so far as dissolved oxygen is concerned. Problems of toxic pollution remain
to be addressed.
2. Decreases in Coliform
Since the mid-1970's, there has been a marked decrease in coliform
concentrations in most parts of the Interstate Sanitation District. The results
have been achieved by improvement in treatment reliability and greater application
of disinfection. Direct relation to improve availability for present and intended
uses varies, depending on the extent of the coliform reductions and the remaining
conditions.
Of great importance is the opening of beaches previously closed to bathing.
Because of the patterns of tidal flows and currents, improvements in treatment 1n
one state have been necessary to make the increased beach use in another state
possible.
Shellf1sher1es have also benefited. Limited reopenings of shellfish harvesting
areas have occurred and 1t 1s now possible to consider seriously resumption of
production on a larger scale.
While the improvements have been spectacular in many parts of the District,
they have not everywhere produced low enough coliform counts to affect uses. It 1s
also true that waters which have gone from "unuseable" for primary contact
recreation or shellfish harvesting to "marginal" might, with further efforts, be
made of really good quality for the intended uses.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
- Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandonee industrial and/or mining facilities.
Toxic pollution of surface waters, dje to an absence of meaningful pretreatment
and raw discharges from combined sewers, presents a major problem of great
importance. We have not answered VII. A. because there has been little progress in
dealing with the toxins problem to date. Until appropriate pretreatment requirements
are imposed and actually enforced, these discharges of toxics to the public sewer
systems of the area will continue to result in pollution of the receiving waters.
Public treatment plants do not remove enough toxic pollutants from influents to solve
the problem. Furthermore, one result of current processes is to produce toxic
sludges which then present their own disposal problems.
Combined sewers, which are a major phenomenon in the core of the Region,
contribute raw overflows which are detrimental to maintenance of quality for both
conventional and toxic parameters.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Interstate Sanitation Commission
Alan I. Mytelka. Ph.D
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: (212) 582-0380
DATE: August 30. 1983
- 10 -
-------
—
SANITATION
DISTRICT
NEW YORK NEW JERSEY
CONNECTICUT
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
B Use Supported
D Use Partially Supported
~ Use Not Supported
-------
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
Use Supported
EH Use Partially Supported
Use Not Supported
NflVjensev
INTERSTATE
SANITATION
DISTRICT
NEW YORK NEW JERSEY
CONNECTICUT
-------
State of Iowa*
~See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 2,825,041 1980 2,913,387
State Surface Area 55,940 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 6
# of River and Stream Miles 17,464 ml.; # of Border Miles*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage lakes 80,448 /ponds 49,000 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 76.470 ac. or
# of Coast Miles N/A ml.
# of Estuary sq. ml. N^A sq. ml.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Missouri 183 Name/Mileage Big Sioux 86
Name/Mileage Mississippi 315 Name/Mileage Pes Moines 22
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 971
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
15
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
9,598
d. Miles Monitored: 971
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
1,166 ml.
23
61
1,506
2,757 ml.
42*
IS
2%
552
100%
1982
794 ml.
144
5
28
971 mi.
82%
15%
1%
31
100%
606 ml.
sq. mi.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Mi les Maintained:
Unknown:
Category
275
20
250
Change in
Category
50
369
)egraded
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 69,55b
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
33.127
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 58.555
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
38,495 ac.
30,786
246
28
69,555 ac.
55.3*
44.2*
0.4*
0.1*
100*
1982 ¦
32,056 ac.
37,465
34
0
69,555 ac.
46%
53.9%
0.1*
0
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Degrade;
Improved/ 7%s
16%
Unknown
M
Maintained
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
5.065
11.320
52.939
28
Change in
Category
203
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Industrial
Nonpoint
Municipal
Industrial
19%
ionpoint
38%
Unknown
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
D0/NH3
Industrial
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
Siltat
ion NH3
Other (inc. natural)
* Most serious pollutant in streams
~~Most serious pollutant in lakes
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: Unknown
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
3 _
1 -
Legend
2,825,041
2,913,387
vzzm
54,055
344,089
Primary
1,639,796
Secondary
1972
AST/
AWT
Not served
by waste-
water system
39,712
34,798 Primary
1,694,420
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
293,401
Primary
Secondary
1982
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1932 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Millions) 3
2 -
3,326,000
1,110,0
JO
3,281,000
2,000
1,124,000
53
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Level s
1972
1982
^Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements+
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+Includes "No-Discharge'' Facilities
_ _ _
10
51
24
4
38
39*
40*
75*
28*
17*
82*
43
6
10
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
693
Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1972 vs. 1982
1972:
1982:
ance
Noncompl
31%
Noncompliance
697.
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
74
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements*
38
68
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
56*
92*
467
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
59*
75*
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Noncompliance
Compliance
21%
Compliance
Noncompliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Because agricultural land uses predominate in Iowa (85% of land is in
agricultural uses, 73% is row cropped), agricultural runoff is the state's major
nonpoint pollution source. Agricultural runoff carries sediment, nutrients,
pesticides, and other pollutants to the state's surface waters. The leaching of
nutrients, particularly nitrates, and pesticides from agricultural lands is
impacting groundwater quality in much of the state. Shallow aquifers overlain by
limestone or other pervious materials are particularly affected.
Controlling excessive soil erosion is an essential element of Iowa's nonpoint
pollution control program, as research has shown that erosion controls are effective
in reducing the loadings of many of the nonpoint pollutants of concern in Iowa.
Because surface waters throughout Iowa are impacted by agricultural runoff, the
state's nonpoint control program calls for expansion of soil conservation efforts
statewide, including increased funding for local, state, and federal soil
conservation programs and the development of new program approaches. As a result of
legislation enacted in 1983, funding for the state cost share program was increased
to nearly $8.5 million a year (was at $5.6 million level in FY82). In addition, a
state no-interest revolving loan fund was established for installing permanent soil
conservation practices, with $1 million appropriated for each of the next 2 years to
this fund.
Iowa's nonpoint control program also calls for the development and
implementation of site-specific control projects in the watersheds of high priority
streams and lakes, using funds from all available programs to achieve
implementation. To date, implementation projects are underway on Prairie Rose Lake
(using USOA's Rural Clean Water Program) and Green Valley Lake (using EPA's Clean
Lakes Program in conjunction with state cost share funds). Additional
implementation projects are currently being developed. The implementation projects
include use of structural and management practices to control soil erosion, use of
nutrient and pesticide management BMPs, and monitoring of water quality to determine
project impacts.
Studies are currently underway to assess the impact of agricultural drainage
wells on groundwater quality in north central Iowa and the impacts of runoff and
leaching from agricultural lands into groundwaters in the karst areas of
northeastern Iowa. The completion of these studies may lead to the development of
state groundwater control programs.
Responsibility for administering Iowa's nonpoint pollution control programs is
shared by the Iowa Department of Water, Air, and Waste Management and the Iowa
Department of Soil Conservation. Responsibility for administering individual
implementation projects varies, and 1s generally dependent upon the funding program
used to carry out the project.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent
M-L
S-W
N/A
I-L
I-L
I-L
N/A
I-N
Primary
C,M,N,T
C,N,0xDe,
M.pH
C,M,N
Pollutants
OxDe.SS
P.SS.T
--
SS.T
SS.T
SS.T
—
OxDe
~Severity (UNK indicates that impact is under investigation)*
V. MATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The decade of this report was the first to place emphasis on the
enforcement of permit requirements rather than water quality standards although the
enforcement of standards continues to be important. Iowa, like most other states, utilizes
inspections and monitoring information to identify problems. Once a violation is noted, a
sequence of actions ranging from informal notification to formal notice, administrative
orders, hearings and ultimately litigation are utilized to secure compliance. The actions
taken are a function of the severity of the violation, its impact on water quality, and the
cooperativeness of the alleged violator. The State has been willing to litigate if necessary
and has secured penalties in excess of $400,000 from an industrial source. The success of
our recent efforts to seek voluntary action by cities is exemplified by two communities who
are making $15 million in improvements without grants. While one of these began with court
action, the result surpassed the agency's expectations.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 25
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 19
Number of Administrative Actions: 3
Number of Judicial Actions: 3
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 708
Million
By Percentage
Other LocaJ
13%
Local
Match
State
1%.
62%
'Federal
EPA
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
$ 440.097.944 Million
* 15.193.400
$ 45.882.670
I 117.359.450
i 89.179.948
Other Federal
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
Iowa, like many states, began water pollution control efforts in the 19201 s under
the Department of Health. In 1973 an environmental control agency was formed which
paralleled EPA. In 1983 Iowa merged all water resource programs to more
effectively manage cross cutting water quality/water quantity issues. Highlights
of our program by function are as follows:
Planning/Standards - Iowa aggressively pursued the completion of attainable
standards for its streams. By the completion of a thorough review in 1976, the
adoption of criteria and segment classification process was essentially final.
Establishment of discharge limitations and refinement of waste load allocation
models continues to be spurred by the sensitivity of small interior streams to a
dispersed population and numerous discharges. In the mid 1970's the state embarked
on a comprehensive evaluation of nonpoint problems. Water quality based priorities
were set for state-wide nonpoint control needs, and studies were conducted to
better identify nonpoint impacts on water quality. Research on the effectiveness
of best management practices was initiated and an implementation plan was developed
and approved.
A study of groundwater problems began in 1980, focusing on a critical portion
of the state with fractured limestone, sinkholes and thin soil cover. The state's
water quality management plan identified groundwater contamination in a 22 county
area and its control as the top concern to be addressed. This effort continues
today with further attempts to define the impact of surface activities on
groundwater quality and to identify measures to control groundwater contamination.
Beyond its value for this particular area of the state the information gathered to
date serves as a model for evaluation of other groundwater concerns and for
advancing the scope of our statewide management efforts.
Water Quality Monitoring - In order to assess the quality of the state's waters and
to evaluate progress being made to improve water quality, significant resources are
committed to monitoring activities. The major elements of the monitoring effort
include ambient monitoring at a network of fixed stations, intensive stream
surveys, and discharge monitoring. Improvements to these monitoring programs
include increased monitoring for toxic pollutants and improved selection of sample
locations and flow conditions to maximize the likelihood of identifying problems.
Intensive surveys and discharge sampling are better coordinated to reduce
duplication of effort. In 1982 we began to work with a few dischargers to expand
their monitoring efforts to include instream as well as discharge sampling. With
reduced funding, Iowa has made an effort to identify and coordinate any state,
federal or local water quality monitoring. In 1982 the Iowa Legislature approved
funding to the state's Water Resources Research Institute, but mandated that the
funds should serve the needs of state agencies. The result has been better
communication and more direct correlation between research and required information.
Regional Programs - Regional offices in Iowa have a long history. The period of
1972 to 1982, however, was one of dramatic change. Historically the role of these
offices was primarily to provide technical assistance. By the mid 19701 s that role
had matured into one predominantly enforcement oriented. The extent of the
transformation was evidenced by Increased staffing, expansion of compliance
inspections and the near absence of technical assistance. Beginning in 1982, there
was a renewed emphasis on technical assistance and the development of a corps of
highly trained staff within the central office to deal with more complex problems.
The period from 1980-1982 has also seen the expansion of the regional programs'
role in compliance actions. With the legal staff they deal with non-compliance
from initial notices through referrals for legal action.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
The Cedar River
Early 1970 monitoring on the Cedar River in the Cedar Rapids area (population
110,200) shows the impact of effluent discharges on the chemical and biological
quality of the river. During the period of study, a massive fish kill also
occurred. Studies in 1976 show continuing unacceptable water quality as evidenced
by Iowa Water Quality Standards violations and "seriously disturbed" biological
populations in the reach. Population and industrial growth during the 1970's
increased the pollution potential and emphasized the need for treatment plant
improvements. Construction of a new Cedar Rapids treatment plant has dramatically
reduced the pollutant input to the stream and improved the quality of the
downstream reach. On the recreational level, previous complaints of taste and odor
problems in fish flesh and fish kills have given way to increased fish populations
and fishery use.
Cedar Rapids WWTP Discharge
BOD Ammoni a
Cone.
Load
Con.
Load
1972
94
21.003
55
11.713
1982
4.4
1.402
3.8
1.196
The Winnebago River
Improvements in the quality of the Winnebago River occurred in 1975, when Mason
City (population 30,100) put a tertiary treatment unit online. The figures shown
below demonstrate the stream's response to pollutant input in 1970, 1976 and 1979
under winter, low flow conditions. The number of fish kills reported to the Iowa
Conservation Commission dropped to near zero after the treatment improvement.
Fishery pressure for Walleye and Northern Pike in the downstream reach is now high.
V*Ur Outllty laprovratnts
W1nn»b«9o River dcwrutntM Mison City,la.
hi ion City etfliient
10 ¦#/!
Hiion City effluont
40 *9/1
Jnaonlt concentration*
Blochwlctl fey**n Duund
concentrations Ioq/1)
12 mn
0.02
)»?( in? nn
7% 19?« If 77 1971 1 ¥79
Miton CHy ttrtttry
trvitwnt crUm
H«von city UrtUvy
trcitawnt an lint
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Wnile most of the activity in the past decade has necessarily been directed toward
the refinement and implementation of point source discharge controls, other water
concerns have also been emerging. In order to better control the impact of toxic
discharges, the state requires significant contributors to execute enforceable
treatment agreements with municipalities. Concern over our ability to meet our
surface water quality objectives and to protect our drinking water supplies led to
the expansion of our efforts to quantify and control non-point source pollution.
With our dispersed population and intense livestock production, Iowa has needed
substantial resources to deal with the associated waste disposal and related odor
problems. Continued increases in spills of hazardous materials gave rise to the
development of a spill response team which is constantly challenged by unique
incidents.
Part S. Major Remaining Problems;
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
As point source problems are reduced, the need for non-point controls grows more
evident. As stated earlier, agricultural production is important to the state's economy.
The challenge is to implement strong control programs which don't impair the productive
activity. Of growing concern is the relationship between the levels of agricultural
chemicals in cropland runoff and leachate and the contamination of groundwater.
Groundwater protection programs must continue to develop. The current needs are similar
to those of surface water protection at the begining of the last decade. Problem assessment,
control method development and standard setting are the primary groundwater topics under
consideration at this time. Because of the diversity of sources of contamination,
groundwater production will require close coordination of non-point controls, solid and
hazardous waste disposal, and improvements to water supply production and treatment systems.
Progress in municipal wastewater treatment has been hampered by recent reductions in
federal funding. Iowa has developed a municipal improvement program that is based on
municipal responsibility but also relies on close cooperation between the state and local
governments in planning improvements. The program has encouraged upgrading of existing
facilities, phased improvements and reassessment of user fees to provide a base for capital
financing. Projects in the construction phase so far have ranged from thousands of dollars
to more than $10,000,000. Most of these are interim projects with final compliance to come
later, but they represent a commitment to self-improvement and an immediate reduction of the
pollutant loading to the receiving streams.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Department of Water, Air and Waste Management
Iowa
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: 0. Edward Brown 515/281-8692
DATE: 10/21/83
- 10 -
-------
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
] Use Partially Supported
¦ Use Not Supported
-N-
IOWA
1972
-------
IOWA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
¦ Use Supported
Q Use Partially Supported
Use Not Supported
-------
State of Kansas*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 2,249,071 1980 2,363,679
State Surface Area 82,264 sq. miles
# of River Systems /Basins 16
# of River and Stream Miles 20,570 mi.; # of Border Miles* 133.3 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 233 / 190,000 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 491 ,640 ac. or 768 sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 0 ml.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 0 sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Missouri River 133.3 Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 13,810
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
13.810*
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0**
d. Miles Monitored: 3,750
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
589.4 mi.
278.7
346.4
12,595.5
13,810 ml.
4%
2
3
91
100*
1982
1,838.4 ml.
617.2
948.8
10,405.6
13,810 ml.
13X
5
7
75
100%
* Kansas Water Quality Standards protect all streams for drinking water.
** Not all waters are designated for swimming.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
Improved 2% ?% Degraded
Maintai
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed:
Miles Improved: not available
Miles Degraded: not available
Miles Maintained: 615.9
Unknown: 12,652.5
150,000
Change in
Category
231.0
310.7
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
124,000
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
66,000
d. Acres Monitored: 30,000 in 1982
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
ac.
ac.
100X
1982
30,000* ac.
120,000
150,000 ac.
20*
80
100*
~Based on lakes monitored in 1932--on the basis of absence of complaints
virtually all lakes support designated uses.
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2 -
Unknown
Within
Category
not available
not available
not available
150.000
Change in
Category
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
Other
known
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Unknown
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
D.O.! Nut.
i
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
X
Toxics
Industrial
X
X
X
Other (3)
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X (1)
Other (inc. natural)
. . .
X (2)
(1) Sediment (2) Dissolved solids-mineral intrusion (3) Mineral intrusion-dissolved solids
affects significant number of drinking water users. Sediment from agric. sources is
statewide.
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 2/ 8.8**
*Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 4/ 39.000
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: -
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: -
** Exceeds designated water use standards.
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Waste^iat^ir ^jp^atment Provided
Number of
People
(Millions)
2.5
2.0 -
1.0 -
0
520,923
130,700
5,000
380,000
Primary
1,265,000
Secondary
to State's Population:
2,381,511
^81,960
Legend
93,500
hlV served by
wastewater system
187,000
Primary
Served by waste-
water system
1,616,551
Secondary
Primary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
T reatment
Degree of
T reatment
Secondary
etc.
1972 1W
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(mill ions)
900
800 ~
600
*t00 -
200 -
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements"1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
28
9
39
7
6
38
25.0*
66.7%
92*
44.4%
87.0%
98.9%
28
9
0
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
900
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
1%
Compliance
15%
Noncompliance
Noneompliance
92%
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
69
73
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements*
33
64
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
47.8*
87.756
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
5.6*
93.2*
330
"""Includes "No-Oischarge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Faci1ity Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Noncompliance
12.3%
87.7%
Compliance
52.2 %
Compliance I Non-
I Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Agricultural and urban runoff, municipal intrusion, mining (mainly abandoned
mined land), construction activities, irrigation and residual wastes are nonpoint
sources of primary concern to Kansas.
The nonpoint source management program consists of studies to characterize
and quantitize problems, and technical assistance to encourage voluntary
Implementation of control measures.
The ag nonpoint source management program is linked to soil conservation
goals. The basic policy assumptions are 1) treating all ag land to meet soil
conservation standards will result in attainment of water quality goals, and 2)
practices will be voluntarily installed if financial assistahce and technical
assistance are provided. Kansas has a Rural Clean Water Program project and a
special Agricultural Conservation Program water quality project covering about
260,000 acres. The Section 314 Clean Lakes Program is also being used to
implement the ag nonpoint source management plan. In 4 projects, Clean Lakes
study will Include a watershed needs inventory. The Phase 2 project is
considering use of Clean Lakes funds on needed practices. The State Conservation
Commission has also provided about $3 million of farmer cost-share funds over the
past 3 years.
Kansas has participated in the Nationwide Urban Runoff program (Kansas City
area) and conducted a similar study in cooperation with USGS in the Topeka area.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
(1) Heavy stormwater runoff from crop and grazing land creates significant erosion
across the entire state. Irrigation related nonpoint source is limited to western
portion of the state.
(2) Included under agricultural sector.
(3) Mineral intrusion from natural sources does not affect all waters but does affect a
significant portion of state population's drinking water.
(4) Other pollutants: oxygen demand, heavy metals, suspended solids/sediment.
(5) Other pollutants: suspended solids/sediments.
(6) Other pollutants: suspended solids/sediment, heavy metals.
(7) Other pollutants: heavy metals.
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A, Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The State of Kansas has a vigorous enforcement policy, comparable
to the federal enforcement policy and it is uniformly applied against violators. KDHE's
policy is to achieve compliance without formal enforcement action through voluntary
cooperation; however, in case no volunteer cooperation is received or no satisfactory
progress is made toward compliance, vigorous enforcement action is taken.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 13
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 10
Number of Administrative Actions: 2
Number of Judicial Actions: 1
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Sil v.
M i n i ng
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
M,L
M,W,L,(1)
NA (2)
S,L
I.L
NA
S ,L{3)
I.L
C,T
0 (4)
C.T,P,0(5)
NA
pH,T
0 (6)
0 (5)
NA
S
0 (7)
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = t 633 Million
By Percentage
Local
h% Other Federal
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
TOTAL:
7 -
316 Million
27
170
120
633
-------
C. Program Activities
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL
Activities include: Inspection, construction grant administration,
municipal/industrial ag wastewater control, NPDES permit administration, pretreatment
and enforcement.
Annual inspections are made of every wastewater treatment facility with the
exception of small ag installations. Deficiencies are noted and appropriate
corrective action initiated either verbally, by letter, by referral to the Central
Office, directive, order or penalty order. Inspections are recorded and reviewed by
the Central office assuring coordination between District inspectors and the
enforcement, industrial and municipal program managers. This also insures priority
coordination within the construction grants program. NPDES permits are also
coordinated with inspection, grants administration and municipal and industrial
wastewater control activities. This assures the compliance schedules within the
permits are appropriate. The ag waste control activities include direct technical
assistance to feeding operators. The Water Pollution Control activities are
coordinated with the Water Quality Management activities to achieve the protection of
the benefical uses of the waters of the State.
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT
Monitoring: Water quality monitoring program examines chemical and biological
quality of streams and lakes. The establishment of a bioassay laboratory is in
progress to screen for toxicity. Approximately 85£ of the perennial waters of the
State are regularly monitored.
Planning: The 208 Plan, completed in 1979, was the product of an interagency
effort and was reviewed and endorsed by the Kansas Legislature. The Plan provided
the basis for the Kansas Nonpoint Source Management Program and instituted a number
of interagency arrangements for implementation. The Plan identified a number of
additional studies to be reported to the 1984 Legislature and established a
continuing water quality planning process and water quality standards setup. The
revision of the water quality standards is in progress to achieve water-quality based
planning and decision making.
Emergency Response: Fishkills are investigated cooperatively with the Kansas
Fish & Game Commission. This information is used in program planning and institution
of enforcement proceedings.
Technical Assistance: Water Quality Management provides assistance required by
statutes and regulations as well as implementation of nonrequired but desirable
activities—control of construction site erosion and sedimentation.
Comparison of Program Expenditures for 1972 and 1982
(Excluding Capital Construction Costs for Municipal Wastewater Facilities)
1972 1982
Total Expenditures: $574,000 $1,970,199
Federal Portion: 95,900 1,271,426
State Portion: 478,100 698,773
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Clean Lakes Project
Kansas has five successful Section 314 Clean Lakes projects and four are studies.
These projects are significant in: 1) fostering cooperation between lake owners and
watershed residents; 2) illustrating the relationship between watershed activities
and lake. quality; 3) demonstrating the utility of lake and watershed management
plans; and, 4) establishing a lake and watershed operation and maintenance manual.
Cottonwood and Neosho River Cleanup
The water quality of the Neosho and Cottonwood Rivers above John Redmond Reservoir is
much improved due to agricultural (feedlots), industrial and municipal wastewater
control implementation. In the 1960's, the reservoir was closed to body-contact
recreation and fishkills were common. In the last decade, wastewater treatment
plants (3 municipal and 1 industrial) have been upgraded and five large
animal-feeding operations were provided with waste control management. Water quality
in the two rivers and the reservoir significantly improved and fishkills, algae
blooms and public health problems are eliminated. In short, John Redmond Reservoir,
once again, is fishable and swimmable.
Public Health Improvement at Weir and Pittsburg
The City of Weir and part of Pittsburg disposed of sanitary sewage in old mine shafts
creating groundwater pollution and adverse public health conditions. Construction
grant monies were used to build collector sewers and transfer the waste to the
municipal wastewater treatment plants.
Salt Mining at Lyons and Hutchinson
Salt mines and salt processing plants at Lyons and Hutchinson dumped process wastes
to Cow Creek and the Arkansas River significantly raising the chloride concentrations
of the rivers and causing unsightly sludge banks. As a result of the NPDES permit
system, the plants modified their processes and waste disposal methods to achieve
recycle except for cooling waters. Thus, water quality significantly improved.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMftlNING PROBLEMS -- Part A and B
1. Southeast Kansas Mining—Kansas has approximately 50,000 acres active/abandoned
mined land. Stabilization of waste storages and "mine water" control is
necessary.
2. Natural Mineral Intrusion—Pilot studies currently under way are expected to
indicate feasibility of control. Implementation of feasible control is
necessary.
3. Hazardous and Toxic Compounds in Surface Waters—Pre 1iminary samplings and
studies indicate the presence of pesticides and heavy metals in streams used
for drinking water. Further monitoring and studies are needed to determine
significance of these findings.
4. Diversion of Surface Waters for Irrigation—Diversion of surface waters in
western Kansas streams increases the proportion of stream flow consisting of
treated effluent. This needs to be closely monitored and a higher degree of
treatment may be needed to protect designated water uses.
5. Wastewater and Water Treatment SIudges--There are no known sludge management
problems. However, there is a public perception that these materials are
potentially hazardous. The need exists to assure that these materials are
utilized as a resource rather than a waste material. Increased production
residues due to implementation of pretreatment requirements will have to have
more attention.
6. Lake and Watershed Management Plans—The majority of Kansas water recreation is
associated with lakes. There is a need to examine the need for developing
coordinated lake and watershed management plans to assure these resources are
adequately protected and water quality maintained.
7. Continuing Planning Process—(a) 1981 Amendments to the Clean Water Act have
established the need to revise the continuing planning process for water
quality management. The process needs to integrate water quality monitoring
activities into priority setting, decision-making and implementation programs,
(b) Effective planning for orderly (utility-wise) growth control in urbanized
counties shall be provided through either the continuation of county-wide
wastewater management plan development process or by other planning means.
8. Secondary Treatment—Achievl ng 100* secondary treatment level requires
interstate coordination between Kansas and Missouri. Federal intervention is
needed.
9. Utility Concept for Municipal Wastewater Management—To phase out Federal
and/or State financial assistance to municipalities for building or replacing
wastewater works facilities, it is essential to provide technical assistance to
municipalities in implementing the utility concept of wastewater management.
10. Increased Technical Assistance for Operation and Maintenance of Municipal
Wastewater Works—To protect the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of
construction in municipal wastewater works during the last decade, it is
imperative to increase the operation and maintenance skills of operational
personnel. It urgently demands additional State assistance.
- 10 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
See page 10.
Part 8. Ma.ior Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of populat
X and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
X - Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: KANSAS DEPT. OF HEALTH & ENVIRONMENT
Division of Environment
Forbes Field. Topeka. Kansas 66620
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Gvula F. Kovach. P.E.
(913) 862-9360, Ext. 228
DATE: August 16. 1983
-------
KANSAS
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
CD Use Partially Supported
B Use Not Supported
-------
State of Kentucky*
~See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 3,220.711 1980 3,660,257
State Surface Area 40,598 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 10
# of River and Stream Miles 40,000 ml.; # of Border Miles* 862 ml.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 90 / 358,203 ac.*
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.m1. 107,000 ac. or sq. ml.
# of Coast Miles N/A ml.
# of Estuary sq. in1. N/A sq. ml.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Ml1eage Oh 10/664 Name/Ml1eage Big Sandy/27
Name/Mileage Mlssisslppl/64 Name/Mileage Tug Fork/94
Name/Mileage Tennessee**/!3
~Includes total acres of 2 border lakes (Kentucky and Dale Hollow)
~~Kentucky Lake (Tennessee River miles)
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 4,820
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swlmmable:
0
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Flshable/Swlmmable:
0*
d. Miles Monitored: 3,329
~ Domestic water supply use applies at point of withdrawal so no mileage was calculated.
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
1,770 ml.
4,330
167
62
6,329 ml.
28%
68%
32
1%
100%
1982
500 ml.
2,838
0
1,482
4.820 ml.
101
59%
0
31%
100%
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Withi n
By Percentage Category
Degraded
n.i Miles Improved: 530
vlln known r ¦
Change in
Category
Improved Miles ^graded:
Mi les Maintained:
0
5,674
Unknown:
640
167
316
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 358.203
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0*
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 345.639
* In Kentucky the domestic water supply use applies at the point of withdrawal
therefore acres were not determined. Twenty seven lakes used for this puprose are
in the B.2. evaluation however.
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
1
Supported |
1
Partially 1
Supported j
. i
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
i
307,300 ac.
25,613 j
J
0
9,448
342,361 ac.
89.7* !
7.5* 1
1
I
-
2.8*
100*
1982
324,446 ac.
1
31,759
J
573
1,425
358,203 ac.
90.6*
8.9%
0.1*
0.4*
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Degraded ^Unknown
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2 -
Within
Category
Change in
Category
703
355.889
186
1.425
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources --- By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
26 %
Non-
Point
Municipal
Other
25%
25%
In-
Non-
Point
25%
Other
25%
Munici-
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
0.0.
Nut.
PH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
X
Toxics
Metals. Nut.
Industrial
X
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X
Turb.. Nut.
Other (inc. natural)
FE.Mn
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 2,490
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: ___________
F, State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
3.66 -i
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
3.22 -
3
2 _
1 -
0.089
0.402
0.083
Data
Inconclusive
Si
Primary
Secondary
Si
0.
Sig
T e r t i a r
y.170T
0.CO2 0.(
g. A
Second
974 1.
ertiar
Legend
Data Inconclusive
Not served
by waste-
water system
rid ary
16
11
ary
273
11
^0.196
Served by
wastewater
system
Primary
Secondary
etc.
1972
1982
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Millions) 2
1 -
7.03
Legend
Generated
1972 Data
Unavailable or
Incomplete
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Level s
1972
1982
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
i. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Mich Requirements being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
191*
11
53
*
9
36
82
68
72
353»***
Unable to
determine
11
6
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
257
Facilities Needing Upgrading
*Total number of municipal dischargers permit
**Available data does not indicate which were significant.
***Based on design flow. Accurate actual flow figures are not consistently available.
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1972:
1972 vs. 1982
1982:
Inconclusive Data
ance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements'1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
53
75
7
67
13
89
1
• •
95
+Incluaes "No-Discharge" Facilities
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
648
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1572 vs. 19B2
3y Percentage
1972:
Noncompliance
39B2:
Noncompliance
87%
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Preliminary 208 assessment studies prepared in 1979 showed that uncontrolled
nonpoint sources of pollution (NPS) from agriculture, mining, forestry, and construction
pose a significant threat to Kentucky's water quality. Residual wastes, urban runoff,
salt water intrusion, and hydrologic modifications, although also problems in localized
areas, were not considered to pose widespread NPS-induced water quality problems.
Further studies conducted over the past two years to verify the earlier 1979
findings, indicated that water quality/stream uses in both of Kentucky's coalfields are
seriously affected by acid mine drainage and higt dissolved solids from coal mining. In
areas of concentrated agriculture production in Kentucky, (the Purchase, Pennyroyal, and
Western Coalfield Physiographic Regions), pesticide and nutrient contaminents, as well
as high dissolved solids, are significant NPS pollutants. Sediment deposition is also
associated with the forestry and construction industries, however, they are less
significant sources than the two former industries. Generally, construction related
impacts are confined to eight or nine highly urban/suburban population centers around
the state. Forestry NPS problems are found in the mountainous Appalachian region and
the extreme south-central portion of the Commonwealth.
In order of absolute magnitude, the agriculture NPS contribution is the greatest,
followed closely by surface mining. Construction, although a significant source on a
site-specific basis, ranks third because of the temporal and spacial variability of this
NPS category. The areal extent of construction is much less than other categories and
it does not constitute a recurring, year-after-year impact such as agriculture.
Forestry ranks fourth, with only very isolated impacts associated with road building,
logging, and livestock grazing.
The Commonwealth has or is planning 5 to 6 demonstration or assessment projects: 2
for silviculture; 1 or 2 for agriculture; and 2 for groundwater impacted by mixed
landuses. The Commonwealth also participates in an advisory capacity in the Tennessee
Reelfoot Lake RCWP project located directly below the Kentucky border with Tennessee.
Research has also indicated that the mining category can be adequately controlled
thru existing regulatory programs (ie. primacy of NPDES and the Surface Mining Control
and Reclamation Act, P.L. 95-87). For agriculture, forestry, and construction, a
non-regulatory approach (V) technical assistance, education and economic incentives has
been chosen and is near implementation. The state is also developing (or has developed)
regulatory alternatives for these categories including a model sediment control
ordiance, a farm lease agreement, and a timber sale contract. These items will no be
used, however, until such time as the non-regulatory approach is implemented and
tested. Part of the non-regulatory approach includes a legislative proposal for a state
supported cost-sharing program. The proposed legislation will hopefully be introduced
and passed by the Kentucky General Assembly in the next scheduled session (1984).
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si Iv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent
NA/L
S/W
I/L
S/L*
M/L
NA/L
NA/L
NA/L
Primary
SS/P
Pollutants
**
Nut.
SS
SS/pH
SS
**
**
**
~Localized to two regions - widespread in those regions
**Not determined
V. MATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The Kentucky Division of Water utilizes a broad range of methods
to obtain compliance. These methods include technical assistance, notice of violation,
administrative conferences at the District level with notification, administrative
conferences at the Central Office level, Agreed Orders and civil penalties. In 1982-83
Agreed Orders were negotiated with compliance schedules and penalties of $71,250. In
1973, approximately $3,500 was produced from enforcement actions. Agreed Orders,
compliance schedules, negative A-95 comments and tap-on bans are the most effective
municipal enforcement tools. Municipalities presently held under tap-on bans amount to
13. In 1973, only 2 tap-on bans existed.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 27
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 17
Number of Administrative Actions: 4
Number of Judicial Actions: 0
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 542.504 Million
By Percentage
0.0? Other Local
Local
Federal
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
394.134.900 Million
16.813.564
131.373.623
182.234
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
The goal of Kentucky's water quality control programs is to prevent, abate and control
pollution within the Commnwealth. Each of the major programs is discussed below.
Water Quality Monitoring Program: The monitoring program has undergone considerable
changes in the past ten years. The Division initially established a series of 49
bacteriological monitoring stations at selected publ ic water supply sites and 40 rnetals
monitoring stations at river sites across the State in the early 1970's. At the present
time the Division maintains a network of 30 monitoring stations for metals, bacteria ana
additional physiochemical parameters which substantially improve the Division's ability
to determine trenas in water quality conditions. Twelve new stations with similar
parameter coverage were established through a joint agreement with the U.S. Geological
Survey in 1982. biological sampling was established at 7 of the 30 Division stations
about 3 years ago. This activity is intended to be rotated approximately every two
years to obtain biological information at all of the stations over time. In 1980 a lake
classification survey was initiated to assess the trophic state of publicly owned lakes
and their need for restoration. Other recent monitoring activities include stream
surveys to aid in designating stream uses which were committed to since the adoption of
new water quality standards in December of 1979.
Construction Grants Program: This program is responsible for managing the grants
awarded to cities for construction of municipal sewage treatment plants by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In the past 3 years Kentucky has been delegated
14 of the 20 functions required for primary responsibility to aoninister the program.
The past 10 years can be characterized by major progress towards improving the water
quality of streams ana rivers affected by municipal sewage treatment plants.
Permits Program: Kentucky has been under a dual permitting program for industrial and
municipal point source dischargers since passage of the Clean Water Act in 1972. Prior
to that time Kentucky operated a permit system consisting of site suitability and
preconstruction plans reviews, operational permits with discharge limitations ana
periodical submittals of self-monitoring results. This program was merged with the
federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System to eliminate inconsistencies and
conflicting requirements. As of 1982 Kentucky has approximately 3000-3500 dischargers
in a computerized inventory, most of which have state permits. Nearly all major and
minor industrial and major municipalities have permits under the federal system.
Effective in October of 1983 Kentucky will receive delegation of authority to operate a
Kentucky Pollutant Discharge Elimination System which will eliminate the duality which
had previously existed.
Training and Technical Assistance Program: The Division operates a wastewater treatment
training and certification program through a series of 4 day training schools at 8
regional training centers. The program curriculum enables operators to proficiently
operate and maintain sewage treatment plants and includes both facility and laboratory
training.
Division staff from the District ana Central offices assist plants with identified
operation and maintenance difficulties through telephone discussions, conferences, on
site visits, and distribution of pertinent literature. A new role for technical
assistance has been in emergency response. Response to spills of hazardous and toxic
materials and containment of such materials has become a well organized, coordinated
endeavor among state, federal, and local agencies within the past three years.
- b -
-------
Surveillance and Enforcement Programs: In the past the Division has conmitted much of
its resources to inspecting major facilities to see that they were meeting the
conditions in their discharge permits. A review of the results of these monitoring
actions indicated that most of the facilities were in compliance with their permits.
During 1983 the Division has revamped its surveillance activities to direct its
resources toward monitoring problem facilities. Enforcement actions are initiated at
the District level, if not successful they are referred to the Cental office for
further action either by the Division of Water or the Cabinet's Office of General
Counsel. These steps were developed to encourage corrective action at the earliest
stages of negotiations towards compliance.
- 9 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
OHIO RIVER - MOUTH OF BIG SANOY TO GREENUP LOCK AND DAM
Prior to 1972, the Ohio River from the mouth of the Big Sandy River to the
Greenup Lock and Dam, a distance of 24 miles was badly degraded by partially
treated and untreated wastewater from a number of municipalities and five
industries. One of the municipalities contained inadequately pretreated tannery
waste. A large hot roll strip steel mill with coke ovens and 120,000 bbl/day oil
refinery and pertrochemical complex were part of the industrial group. Miles of
highly discolored water from spent pickle liquor and large areas of oil sheens
revealed, along with the physical, chemical, and bacterial analysis, the Impact
of the discharges. Floating solids of sanitary wastes were quite evident
following rainfall events. The area generated numerous complaints from the
public due to the stream's inability to provide useable recreation areas. Waste
products marred boats and rendered fish inedible.
Through the efforts of joint state/Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation
Commission action, an abatement time frame was developed in the beginning of the
seventies for obtaining secondary treatment. A compliance schedule was developed
for each discharge. Prior to 1977, all of the industries having direct
discharges were in compliance with BPT requirements (permit limits) and the
municipalities were well on their way to constructing their facilities. Four
communities combined their efforts and eliminated three discharge points and went
to a regional plant. The large municipal plant has now expanded its plant and
added secondary treatment. Water quality has improved significantly and
complaints have greatly diminished. The river is no longer discolored and turned
red. Fish tissue studies are showing much improvement and recreation is on the
upswing.
Coal Preparation Plant Discharges
In 1972 there were 65 coal preparation plants in the southeastern part of
Kentucky. Practically all of these plants discharged thousands of gallons a day
of black water heavily laden with suspended solids in the streams (mainly
tributaries of the Kentucky River). In 1982 there were 125 coal preparations in
Southeast Kentucky and all of them permitted with recirculating systems and m)
discharges to the streams.
- 10 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Oil and gas production and its resulting brine discharge has been an historical
problem in Kentucky. Efforts have been largely successful in controlling discharges in
Western Kentucky but new explorations in Eastern Kentucky in the past three years has
brought on new concerns. Regulations to control this industry are now being developed.
Reduction in funding for municipal sewage treatment plant construction will
seriously affect the progress made towards abating pollution from these sources. At
the present Kentucky is near the half-way point in controlling pollution from
municipalities. Assured funding with the retaining of the 75% federal participation
will continue this progress.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
To assess toxic pollutants and aid in the issuance of permit limits for their
discharge Kentucky needs to develop its bioassay capability. A start has been made to
develop static bioassay capability but it is in a slow developmental stage due to
resource limitations and a low priority status.
The value and extent of wetland resources in the State needs further attention. A
first step in this direction would be the undertaking of a comprehensive inventory of
this resource.
Compared to other States in the Southeast, Kentucky's ambient network of fixed
monitoring stations is small. The network needs to be expanded to obtain a better data
base to evaluate the quality of unmonitored watersheds. An effort has been made
through a joint agreement with the U.S. Geological Survey in establishing 12 new
stations. Biological surveys at more sites also need to be initiated to establish the
link between water quality and its effect on aquatic life.
Acid mine drainage from abandoned coal mining operations has affected water uses for
years in Kentucky. Water supply use and aquatic life have been negatively affected.
When the funds for reclamation of abandoned lands can be directed towards improving
streams that affect aquatic life, water quality improvements should result. Until that
time, continued degradation will be unabated.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Kentucky Division of Water
Fort Boone Plaza. 18 Re illy Road
Frankfort. Kentucky 40601
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Richard T. Shogren 502/564-3410
DATE: August 3. 1983
- 11 -
-------
KENTUCKY
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
19 Use Not Supported
-------
KENTUCKY
1982
£
¦?
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
[A Use Supported
d Use Partially Supported
B Use Not Supported
-------
State of Louisiana*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN MATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 3,643,180 1980 4,205,900
State Surface Area 140,978.25 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 12
# of River and Stream Miles 297,748 mi.; # of Border Miles* 2,175 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 116 / 453,463 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 7.5 million ac. or 11,718.75 sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 1,700 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 1,844.75 sq. mi. - tidally influence, saline marshes
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mi 1eage Pearl/365 Name/Mi1eage Mississippi/1,070
Name/Mileage Sabine/740 Name/Mileage
NOTE: These are the length of the mainstream segments for each river.
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 297,748
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swfimnable:
1.250
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Flshable/Swimnable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: unknown
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
I Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
1002
+*1982
170,103 ml.
119,099.2
8,545.8
297,748 mi.
57.13 %
40%
2.87%
100%
* Freshwater, nontidally influenced lakes (publicly owned) and publicly
owned impoundments all greater than .25 square miles in size.
** See note page 11.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
Category Category
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
3. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 1,482.617
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: unknown
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
iTotal Acres
Assessed
1972
ac.
ac.
%
100%
1982
ac.
ac.
%
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Other I
2% Natural
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
N/A
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
Coli..D.O.
Industrial
X
X
X
Color
Toxics
Non-Point
X
X
X
Nut..Tox.
Other (inc. natural)
X
X
D.O.
*Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Legend
Number of
People
(Millions)
Not served
by waste-
water system
Served by
wastewater
system
Primary
Secondary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Millions)
Legend
Generated
Discharged
%
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirement s+
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+ Includes "No-Discharge,J hacilitles
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
1982;
6. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Mjnicipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permits
Permit Requirements+ Ef^ect
Percentage of Facilities for in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met _______ ______________ __________ . .
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+ ¦ ¦ ¦ I. — .
"""Includes "No-D1scharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
The Water Pollution Control Division (WPCD) nonpoint source pollution programs
begin with the Statewide fixed station monitoring network for ambient water
quality. Monthly collections are made under this network at 120 locations
throughout the state and laboratory analyses of water samples are conducted for
(among others) indicative nonpoint source parameters such as suspended solids,
turbidity, conductivity, metals and nutrients. As a complement to the monthly
monitoring network, semi-annual collections of aquatic biota (mostly fish) are
made at 72 locations throughout the State and analyzed for a range of organic
compounds including agricultural pesticides and other compounds indicative of a
nonpoint source pollution problem. Other monitoring programs designed for more
specific purposes than the fixed monitoring network also contribute to nonpoint
source pollution detection. These include intensive surveys, special studies and
compliance assurance investigations.
Following data collection assessment is made using such documents as the Water
Quality Inventory Report required under Section 305(b). Reporting and the
results of the WPCD nonpoint source management planning activities are contained
in the Section 208 Continuing Planning Process. The following table presents 8
identified and evaluated categories and listed as a high or secondary priority
problem.
Nonpoint Source Pollution Categories
High Priority
1. Agriculture lands (soil and pesticide runoff)
2. Urban areas (urban and industrial stormwater runoff)
3. Residual waste (sewage, industrial sludge; septic tank fields)
4. Saltwater intrusion and encroachment (coastal erosion, groundwater
contamination)
Secondary Priority
5. Hydrologic modification (canal dredging)
6. Construction sites (soil erosion)
7. Mining sites (mineral extraction)
8. Silviculture
- 6 -
-------
The results of an ongoing progress of nonpoint source management planning activities are also
contained in the Section 208 Continuing Planning Process. The Section 208 Grant is dedicated
to nonpoint source programs. The Water Pollution Control Division coordinates and
contractually works with many state agencies and outside consultants for developing best
management practices for various activities or problems such as silviculture and agricultural
pesticide runoff.
- 7 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent
S. L
S, W
I. L
M, L
M, L
M, L
M, L
M. L
Primary
C,M,Nut
Nut,P
Ox.De,
C.Nut
Pollutants
Oxde.O'
SS.T
SS,T
SS,T
SS,T
Sal
Sal
OxDe
0' - Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons and other Antropogenic Organic Compounds
MATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
Louisiana has an aggressive enforcement program in order to ensure compliance
with state laws. Enforcement actions include issuance of Notices of
Violation, Compliance Orders and Cease and Desist Orders, as well as civil and
criminal penalties. In cases involving violations of state and federal laws,
enforcement actions are coordinated with EPA Region VI in order to maximize
efficiency of the limited personnel and resources. A substantial part of the
state's enforcement activities are devoted to the control of pollution from
oil and gas production. Most enforcement actions, including assessment of
civil penalties, are handled administratively. Civil suits are conducted by
the Louisiana Department of Justice. Criminal prosecutions are handled by the
District Attorneys in whose jurisdiction the violation occurred.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal
Facilities in Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 175
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 25
Number of Administrative Actions: 1_54
Number of Judicial Actions: 11
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 556 Mill ion (Total not tabulated, but in excess of $556)
By Percentage Categories of Sources
$ 417.000.000 Million
*
$
$ 139,000.000*
$
~Estimate from EPA Match Requirement
N/A
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
- 8 -
-------
C. Program Activities
In the past, Louisiana water quality protection has been less than desirable. Wastes from
homes, factories, businesses and eroding lands resulted in the deterioration of water
quality in many areas. Many streams and lakes became too polluted for fishing or swimming,
undesirable for boating and too dirty to be attractive. Sources of pollution such as
urbanization, industrial and agricultural production, oil and gas development,
silviculture, mining and hydrologic modifications are Identified and are increasing in
growth.
Solutions for many of these problems have been formulated and implemented following the
goals of the Federal Clean Water Act which established programs for the development of cost
effective solutions in an effort to meet national, State and local water quality
objectives. The following is a summary of the State's efforts in its water quality
management program.
The WPCD is actively engaged in Water Quality Management Planning activities which enable
the State to utilize funding and technical expertise provided from all sources in the most
effective manner for achieving the objectives of the Clean Water Act and the State Water
Control Act. It is the purpose of these activities to:
Establish and maintain water quality goals and standards which will protect the
designated uses of waterbodies within the State;
Coordinate and systemize the State's efforts toward meeting water quality goals;
Provide a mechanism to optimize the use of water pollution control resources;
Establish priorities for abatement and prevention needs.
The monitoring program is designed to measure progress towards achieving water quality
goals at the state and national levels, to gather baseline data used in establishing and
reviewing the State Water Quality Standards, to provide a data base for use in determining
the assimilative capacity of the waters of the State, and to document violations of state
and federal laws and regulations. Information is also used to establish permit limits for
wastewater discharges. A summary of data developed from the monitoring program is reported
in the Water Quality Inventory Report as required under Section 305(b) of the Clean Water
Act.
Lake studies are being conducted as part of the Lake Classification and Inventory Program
under Section 314 of the Clean Water Act. The State of Louisiana is currently in the
process of developing a trophic index based upon data being collected from nine (9) lakes
and data available for sixteen (16) lakes sampled for the National Eutrophication Study.
Data developed from this study will be used in evaluation and classification of lakes in
terms of the trophic condition of each lake relative to all others throughout the State.
A Diagnostic/Feasibility study is being conducted on Lake Buhlow located in the
Alexandria-Plneville area. The study is being carried out by the Rapides Area Planning
Commission with the WPCD performing an overall program management function. Preliminary
data indicate that Lake Buhlow has severe nonpoint source water quality problems.
Restoration funds are being sought through EPA for the restoration phase of this project.
A complaint situation may require emergency spill response depending upon the severity of
impact on the environment, the potential for human health hazards, or impact to private or
public property. The WPCD Is the State's designated member of the State/Federal Regional
Response Team (RRT). This team provides advisory and policy inputs contingency planning and
- 9 -
-------
spill response activities. WPCD as the designated agency coordinates with
other state and local agencies that provide scientific expertise and
capabilities for spill response. The Hazardous Waste Division of the Office of
Environmental Affairs is the lead environmental contact agency for emergency
response to spills and other releases of hazardous substances. WPCD provides
advice and technical support to the Hazardous Waste Division and Federal
agencies such as EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard when spills occur on State
waters, or when spilled substances have the potential to enter State waters.
The WPCD provides personnel with expertise in biology, chemistry, engineering,
and environmental science to develop sampling strategies and collect and
analyze samples. These personnel assess clean-up strategies and provide
background information on the chemical, physical, and toxicological properties
of the spilled substance. Water-related spills require an initial response
effort of one to three man days. Response support requires at least two
man-years of effort each year from WPCD staff.
Permits are official authorization developed and promulgated by the Water
Pollution Control Division, which establishes the wasteload content of
wastewaters discharged into the waters of the State. The permitting activities
of WPCD have been established pursuant to the Louisiana Environmental Affairs
Act (IRS 30:1051 et seq.), and are carried out in conformity with federal
regulations authorizing the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) of legal wastewater discharge controls through issuance of individual
discharger permits. A permit is required for every point source discharge into
the waters of the State of Louisiana. The permitting process allows the State
to control the amounts and types of wstewaters discharged into its surface
waters.
The involvement of all interested publics in any activity concerning rulemaking
or plan development for public-owned natural resources is both necessary and
advantageous for a public agency responsible for the conservation and
management of those natural resources. Not only is it important that the
public or other affected parties be informed of the activities of the agency;
as well they must have made available to them both ample opportunity and
appropriate format (or platform) for the expression of opinions and/or
suggestions concerning the agency's activities. Section 101(e) of the Clean
Water Act stipulates that public participation be included as an integral part
of most activities carried out under the requirements of the Act. Further
details of the activities and specific requirements to be effected by public
participation programs are published in 40 CFR Part 25.
The Water Pollution Control Division in its public participation effort
complies with the intentions and requirements of both Section 101(e) of the
Clean Water Act and the 40 CFR 25 public participation regulations. The
various activities carried out for the purpose of public participation
effectively offer to the public the opportunity and format for being Informed
of Division activities, and for having input into those activities. The effort
offers public participation in the development, revision, and enforcement of
regulations, standards, effluent limitations, plans, and programs.
- 10 -
-------
Past Government Accounting Organization (GAO) Reports have indicated that a significant
number of the POTW's constructed in this State with P.L. 92-500 funds were not meeting
their design effluent criteria or their NPOES permit criteria. Studies such as the 1980
report by Hegg et al identifies operations and management problems occurring because 0 & M
personnel need improved plant operator training programs. We feel that it is incumbent
upon the State to provide site-specific training to the municipalities in our State who
have facilities constructed with P.L. 92-500 funds and are having problems meeting their
effluent criteria. Our chief problem is the availability of funds to perform the tasks
necessary to bring the problem-plagued POTW's into initial as well as continuing permit
compliance.
The State of Louisiana does not have a State Training Facility for operator training,
however, the Legislature has recently authorized studies which should result in the
establishment of such a facility.
- 11 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Water Quality Management and the Mississippi River
The quality of natural resources, including water, has become an issue of national
concern, particularly in areas in which a water supply serves multiple purposes.
The Mississippi River between Baton Rouge and New Orleans exemplifies the
situations of an important water source that is used for a variety of sometimes
incompatible purposes, such as transportation, municipal and industrial water
supply and disposal of municipal and industrial waste, as well as recreation and
fish and wildlife propagation.
About 100 private industries are located in the Mississippi River corridor region
extending from Baton Rouge to New Orleans. Many of these facilities use river
water for industrial processes and also discharge wastewater into the stream, as
do numerous municipal treatment facilities. Because the river is the drinking
water source for several cities below Baton Rouge, including the City of Mew
Orleans, the existing water quality condition of the river is of great concern to
city residents, State legislators, environmental groups, and industry.
Three important factors were identified that affect water quality in the corridor
region: (1) activities occurring within the Mississippi River drainage basin;
(2) wastewater discharges occurring in the corridor region; and (3) the legal
regulatory framework governing water pollution control efforts.
Thorough examination of the records that both industrial and municipal dischargers
are required to submit to the Louisiana Division of Water Pollution Control (WPC)
and EPA, and proprietary industry information, has allowed evaluation of the
progress of dischargers toward improving the quality of their effluents. It would
appear that the existing laws and regulations have been a prime factor in
promoting improvement because as the regulations have become more stringent, the
discharge quality has improved. Most monitored parameters have indicated a
dramatic and consistent decrease in the amount of materials discharged to the
river and in most cases the reductions are 90 percent or more.
Based on existing information, river water quality in the corridor area meets
established water quality standards (see Section IV).
Available discharge data from EPA and industrial sources are 1n agreement and show:
There have been significant increases, during the past decade 1n the number of
facilities permitted to discharge into the river and in the production at
existing facilities.
Nevertheless, all monitored parameters except flow and total suspended solids
(TSS) have shown dramatic decreases (see Fig. XXVII and Table 13, Section VI).
Violations resulting in large settlements have increased. This is probably
due to more stringent reporting requirements and increased penalties for not
reporting.
Dischargers to the Mississippi River along the corridor have demonstrated, in
1981, a 98+ percent compliance record.
The promulgation and enforcement of water quality regulations has
significantly impacted the quality of Industrial effluents 1n the corridor
area.
- 12 -
-------
Corridor industries have spent over $1 billion dollars since 1965 to construct
wastewater treatment facilities which incorporate best practicable
technologies and in 1981 spent over $128 million to operate and maintain these
facilities.
Problems do still exist with the Mississippi River along with the other
waterbodies in the State. However, legislative and regulatory efforts as exampled
here have resulted in the prevention of the Mississippi River from degrading in
water quality even during a period of rapid industrial and economic growth in
Louisiana. Continuing efforts and more stringent criteria are proceeding to
maintain and restore Louisiana's waters for the utilization and enjoyment of the
State's various users.
T«kl* 13
DISCHARGE REDUCTIONS
1981 RELATIVE TO 1965-1970
PAT—ttar
Total Percent
Reduction
Par Plant
Percent Reduction
Total Suapended Solid*
56.0
76.0
Chemical Oxygen Danand
93.0
96.0
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
11.0
94.0
Chlorinated Organic*
93.0
99.0
Chromium
99.9
99.9
Rwtol
96.0
98.3
Peatlddaa
16.0
86.0
Bamcni
18.0
94.0
Toluana
92.0
•7.0
Oil ud Craaae
90.0
94.0
Raaldual Chlorine
33.0
79.0
Sourcaa: LCA Queetloaxulre;
and Gulf South Raaearcb
Inatltuta.
AA
Sourcaai CPA EMI fllnj and Gulf South ¦¦••arch Inatltuta.
figure XXVII. TOTAL AVERAGE LOADINGS Or CORRIDOR FACILITIES, 1976 AND 1911
• OO
COD
IOC
Sour cm I RPA OMR IIIhi and Gulf Sooth Reaeareh Inatltuta.
figure XXVIII, TOTAL AVERAGE LOADINGS PER FACILITY, 1976 AND 1981
- 13 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
A. Toxic pollutants associated with drinking water
B. Municipal sewerage
C. Groundwater utilization and contamination
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
< - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
< - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Department of Natural Resources
Water Pollution Control Division
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Robert P. Hannati 504/342-6363
OATE: October 12, 1983
- 14 -
-------
State of Maine*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN MATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
StatePopulatlon 1970 993.772 1980 1.125.030
StateSurface Area 33.562 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 9
# of River and Stream Miles 31,806 ml.; # of Border Miles* 290 ml.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 5.770 / 994.560 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.m1. 579,743 ac. or 905.8 sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 3,500 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 1,820 sq. mi.
*Borde'< Rivers:
Name/Mileage St. Croix/108 Name/Mileage SWBR St. John R/35
Name/Mileage St. John R./97 Name/Mileage Piscataqua-Salmon Falls R/38
Name/Mileage N.H.Border Lakes /12
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 2,011
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
1.210
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
801
d. Miles Monitored: 1.645
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
752 nil.
637
622
---
2,011 ml.
37%
32%
31%
---
100%
1982
1 ,275 nrf.
727
9
—
2,011 ml.
63%
36%
1%
100%
Based on best professional judgment
- 1
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Miles Improved:
(5.7) 115
52% 1.053
Miles Degraded:
(.3%) 6
0
Miles Maintained:
(41*) 844
Unknown:
— _
<1% Degraded
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 928.325 (1838 lakes)
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
928.325 (1838 lakes)
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 300.168 (244 Lakes)
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
904,965 ac.
15,305
8,055
...
928,325 ac.
97.5*
1.6*
<1*
100*
igoo
908,007 ac.
20,318
0
928,325 ac.
97.8*
2.2*
0
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Degraded 0.8% Z.% Improved
96.7%
Maintained
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Within
Category
Change 1n
Category
15.305(1.65*) 8.055 (.87*)
6. 147 (.7) 1.097 (.1)
Acres Maintained: 897.72 (96.7)
Unknown: 2.506 (.27)
Based on best professional judgement.
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 1.820
/
3.500
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
1.745 / 3.356
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
76
/
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored:
52
/
144
107
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
19 72
503/1,054
903/1,736
387/710
1,820/3,500 mi.
30*
49%
21%
100%
1982
748/1,438
967/1,860
I
105/202 |
1,820/3,500 mi.
41* j 535!
6% J
100%
3. Changes In and vJithin Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq.Mi,Degraded:
11% Degraded
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
400
20
836
Change in
Category
564
b. Oceans
By Percentage
51%
Maintained
TJT
Improved
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
<1% Degraded
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
780
10
2.017
Change in
Category
693
*based on best professional judgment
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100%
1QA9.
mi.
mi.
%
1
100%
i
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Municipal
Industrial 3
/
Industrial
Municipal
27%
Nonpoint
npoint
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
70%
Municipal
17% / Nonpoint
13%
Industrial
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
PH
| |
Temp. i Toxics*j Turb.
¦ ¦ 1
Other
2 Most
Seri ous
Municipal
X
X
I X i
FC. NUT ;
Industrial
X
X
X
X [ X
X
DO. COLOR
Non-Point
X
X
X | ! ;
X
FC. NUT
Other (inc. natural)
! **! x •' x
1dH. TEMP
**Acid Precipitation
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 7
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: -
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: -
F. State Mips for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
1.124660
Number of
People
(Millions)
1.1 -
1.0 -
.9 ~
.8 -
.7 -
.6 -
.5 -
.4 -
.3 -
.2 -
.1 -
.993772
.342772
.651
.28
-371
.189
.182
.083
.099
1972
Legend
.1(1266
Not served
by waste-
water system
.712
.52
A -56
.09
.47
.05 Primary
1 .42 (54620)
Served by
wastewater
system
Secondary
(422660)
Primary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatmeni
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc.
Based on best professional judgement
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of 80D Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOL)
(Mi 11 ions)
.9-
.8-
.7-
.6 -
.5 -
.4 -
.3 -
.2 -
.1 -
Legend
.62
358705
Generated
Discharged
For 1982.
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
Based on best profesional judgement
1972
1982
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
18
4
22
8
4
19
44*
100%
86%
38%
100%
86%
8
4 [ 0
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
150
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
56 %
i Noncompliance
Compliance
13.6°/ \
Non-
compliance
Compliance
8. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
18
0
32
I
j Total
J Permits
2
0
29
in Effect
in 1982
11%
N/A
90%
335
0
N/A
88%
J
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Compliance
11%
Noncompliance
Noncompli ance
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Since 1972, Maine citizens have become much more aware of the role of nonpoint
sources in the degradation of the State's waters. Both the Areawide Water
Quality Management Program and the Non-designated Water Quality Management
Program did much to educate the public on nonpoint source pollution and methods
to control it. As towns and industries have cleaned up their point and source
wastewater discharges, the previously overshadowed impacts of nonpoint source
pollution have in many locations become more obvious.
A succession of Maine legislatures since 1969 has enacted a number of laws that
control certain land-use activities including those likely to result in nonpoint
pollution. Many of these laws depend for their success upon the active
cooperation of citizens, local officials and regional and state agencies.
Moreover, federal programs, particularly those of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture have been pivotal in the control of nonpoint source related pollution
in Maine. Most of the 208 water quality plans concluded that, in general,
existing laws and regulations were more than sufficient for controlling nonpoint
pollution provided they were properly enforced or administered.
Agriculture is the most significant land-use activity in Maine in terms of
nonpoint pollution. Since 1972 the agricultural sector has done much to reduce
its water quality impacts. Since 1979 a total of 297 farms many of them in
watersheds of eutrophic lakes, have improved their dairy manure management
systems. Also, soil erosion declined by 18% since 1979, when the first study of
Nonpoint Agricultural Pollution was conducted, and sheet and rill erosion has
dropped by roughly 301,000 tons per year (lb.4*). Maine's legislature recently
voted to allocate ^100,000/year for 2 years to Maine's Soil and Water
Conservation Districts to step up efforts toward agricultural nonpoint source
controls.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Ir r.
Si lv.
Mi ning
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent
M/L
M/W
I/W
I/L
M/L
S/L
NA
S/L
Primary
C.NUT
C.NUT,TP
SS.T
SS NUT
M,pH,SS
Pollutants
SS.T
Ox De SS
P T
M.SS
T
Loflo
0*
NUTS
0* = NaCl
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
Maine DEP uses a 3-level approach to enforce state water quality laws. Many cases
are settled at level 1 by use of informal preenforcement action. Serious or
recurring violations are next handled at the second level. DEP staff coordinates a
series of pre-administrative steps to obtain voluntary compliance. Unresolved cases
are sent to the third level where DEP Water Bureau's Enforcement Division initiates
one of several possible administrative enforcement actions. Often such cases are
resolved by a consent agreement wherein the violator submits to a compliance schedule
worked out by DEP staff. Cases not resolved by such actions are referred to the
Attorney General's Office for prosecution through the State court system.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 1_5
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 1£
Number of Administrative Actions: 7_
Number of Judicial Actions: 6
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 436.252 Million
By Percentage Categories of Sources
245.053 Million
17.275
67.471
39.588
66.865
itate
Local Match
Local (FmHA Loans)
Other Federal
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
Maine DEP is involved in a number of programs aimed at restoring or protecting
water quality. Following is a partial listing of water quality programs
administered by DEP.
Construction Grants - Maine DEP has assumed responsibility for running the
"Construction Grants" Program, which targets federal (EPA) and State dollars to
towns which need sewage treatment facilities. A total of 78 towns are included on
the State's priority list of projects to be funded.
Small Facilities Program - This program provides up to $100,000 per town for small
sewage treatment works, primarily individual and clustered septic systems and sand
filter systems. A total of $1 million of state money per year for the next 2 years
is available at a 90% cost-share rate.
Sludge Utilization Program - Forty nine towns and several industries are
participating in this program which promotes the agricultural use of treatment
plant sludge having acceptably low contamination levels.
Permits Program - DEP and USEPA closely coordinate their respective wastewater
discharge permitting programs. At present both agencies issue permits to principal
industrial and public dischargers, after selecting which agency will take the
lead. DEP is proceeding with its takeover of the National Permit Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) from Region I EPA.
Monitoring - The Department monitors water quality, using both chemical and
biological measurements, to provide both site-specific and trend data needed for
planning licensing, enforcement, and construction grants. Monitoring supports a
number of efforts including the program to revise and update the classifications
assigned to the State's water bodies.
Lakes - The DEP sponsors an extensive voluntary lake monitoring effort. Over 300
volunteers take part in DEP's Lake Lay Monitoring Program, providing DEP with an
invaluable "early warning system" for lake water quality. Also, Department staff
conduct "baseline" monitoring to determine nutrient sources form the basis of
"Diagnostic Studies" for eutrophic lakes.
Operations and Maintenance - The DEP conducts facility inspections, discharge
monitoring, technical assistance, training and enforcement if necessary, to ensure
that municipal treatment facilities comply with their effluent limits. DEP
conducts an annual major inspection of each municipal treatment plant, including
evaluation of both effluent quality and operation and maintenance procedures.
Also, one or two minor inspections provides assistance to problem facilities on a
"worst first" basis. The DEP conducts training sessions on monitoring procedures,
compliance evaluation inspections, and operating techniques, as well as seminars
aimed at treatment facility operators.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Lakes
1. Sebasticook Lake - Maine's most severely eutrophic lake is presently undergoing
a major restoration effort involving agricultural controls and autumn lake
level drawdowns to reduce its overall phosphorus loading. Effort is expected
to result in reduction of algal blooms.
2. Annabessacook Lake - In 1977 following installation of watershed agricultural
controls DEP, in cooperation with the Cobbossee Watershed District conducted an
extensive in-lake effort to inactivate in-lake phosphorus levels through alum
applications. Since 1977, algae blooms, once an annual occurrence, have not
been observed in Annabessacook Lake.
3. Salmon Lake - This is another excessively productive lake which has not bloomed
over the past few years following the application of watershed controls.
Maine Coast
In 1972 hundreds of residence and small businesses along Maine's Coast discharged
untreated sewage into coastal waters, forcing the closure of thousands of acres of
commercially valuable shellfish harvesting area. Since then, the State has been
putting a great deal of effort into identifying and cleaning up these pollution
sources. The Department of Marine Resources conducted a 5-year coastal sanitary
survey which pinpointed hundreds of violations. At the same time DEP redirected
its Municipal Sewage Treatment Facility Construction Program and enforcement
efforts to focus on coastal discharges. As of 1982 these combined efforts had paid
off in the reclamation of over 4000 acres of soft-shell clam flats worth an
estimated $6,600,000 per year in standing crop alone. Although major work remains
to be done, the results thus far are viewed as a major success.
Kennebec River
Water quality in the once-sick Kennebec River has improved dramatically since
1972. By 1978 most of the larger industrial and municipal dischargers along the
river were applying secondary treatment to their wastewaters. DEP conducted an
intensive study in 1978 that statistically confirmed the public's perception that a
huge improvement had occurred. Odors and floating solids are gone, Atlantic Salmon
and other wildlife have returned and towns once again regard the Kennebec as a
valuable resource rather than a liability. Each sunnier since 1979 thousands of
revelers in outlandish watercraft take part in Augusta's "Great Kennebec Whatever
Race" to celebrate the return of the Kennebec to the people.
Penobscot River
Maine's largest river has improved tremendously since 1972. The Penobscot's
once-famous Atlantic Salmon run had been wiped out by the 1940's. As treatment
plant construction proceeded during the 1970's Atlantic Salmon began returning to
the Penobscot River in ever increasing numbers. The Penobscot River clean-up ranks
as one of Maine's biggest water quality successes.
Other Rivers and Streams
In addition to the dramatic improvement of the Kennebec River and Penobscot River,
clean-up efforts since the early 1970's have resulted in the elimination of
nuisance conditions in numerous other rivers and streams. Most rivers or streams
which still have serious water quality problems like the Androscoggin are at least
partially supporting their assigned classification, a vast improvement over 1972.
- 9 -
-------
I. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AMD REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
- nature and extent of groundwater resource and associated contamination
- storage and disposal of toxic and hazardous wastes
- identification and treatment of municipal, industrial and individual wastewater
discharge
- restoration of eutrophic lakes
- protection of drinking water supplies
- identification and control of nonpoint source pollution
- nature and extent of impacts associated with acid precipitation
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
All concerns mentioned in Part A above continue to present water problems in the
State of Maine. Great progress has been made in clearing up surface waters but
much remains to be done. Both groundwater pollution and acid rain are less well
understood and are the focus of efforts to better identify and control their
water quality impacts. The search for alternative energy sources has thrust
hydropower with its attendant water-use conflicts into the forefront of Maine
water quality protection. Other concerns include development of better criteria
to protect the health of humans and aquatic life as well as the continued
effective operation of scores of aging wastewater treatment facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Maine Department of Environmental Protection
Bureau of Water Quality Control
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Frank Fiore 207-289-3901
DATE: October 12. 1983
- 10 -
-------
MAINE
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
EH Use Partially Supported
HI Use Not Supported
A7
-------
MAINE
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
CD Use Partially Supported
IS Use Not Supported
-N-
-------
State of Maryland*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 3,922,399 1980 4.216,975
State Surface Area 12,687 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 19
# of River and Stream Miles 9,300 mi.; # of Border Miles* 370 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 1J!7 / 21,767 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 307,400 ac. or sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 32 mi.
# of Estuary sq. ml. 2,382 sq. ml.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Potomac/178 (VA) Name/Mileage —
Name/Mileage Potomac and North Branch/192 (WVA) Name/Mileage ™
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed:
7,440
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swimmable:
5,580*
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Flshable/Swimmable:
g
d. Miles Monitored: 2,566
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
6,699 ml.
343
398
--
7,440 ml.
90%
5%
5%
—
100%
1982
6,838 ml.
343
259
—
7,440 ml.
92%
5%
3%
—
100%
* Includes shellfish harvesting waters (Class II) and trout waters (Classes III and
IV) which have more stringent water quality and/or discharge standards.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
60
3%
Improved
3% Degraded
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
181
7,038
Change in
Category
150
11
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 20,696
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
. 0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 20,120
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1Q79
14,144 ac.
5,600
0
—
19,744* ac.
iy/c ¦
65%
35%
100%
13,596 ac.
7,100
0
--
20,696 ac.
Ijoc -
65%
35%
100%
*Bloomington Lake/Reservoir cause of difference in 1972 and 1982 total acres assessed.
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Within Change 1n
Category Category
Degraded f 7%
Maintained
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
0
1,500
19.196
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 1,726 / 32
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmabl
1,726 / 32
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmabl
0 / 0
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 1.726 / 32
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
1,726 sq. mi.
32
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,726 sq. mi.
32
100*
0
0
0
100%
1982
1,126
32
600
0
0
0
0
0
1,726 sq. mi.
32
62.5%
100
37.5%
0
0
0
0
0
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Main-
egraded
tained
Sq.Mi.Imp roved:
Sq.M1.Degraded:
Sq.M1.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
0
1.126
Change in
Category
600
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
0
32
Change in
Category
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes (NOT APPLICABLE)
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100*
19ft?-
mi.
mi.
%
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses In 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources --- By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
30%
Municipal
50%
Nonpoint
5% Industrial
Natural
Municipal
18%
% Industrial
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
30% ,
20%
Municipal / , ,
r / Natural
50%
Nonpoint
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coll.
0.0.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
0.0.. Nut.
Industrial
X
X
X
pH. Toxics
Non-Point
X
X
X
Nut., Turb.
Other (Inc. natural)
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 4 (Baltimore Harbor)
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Ml. Affected by Toxics: 0
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
5 ~
<. -
1 -
l»,081,000
it
0.
-------
Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met
Facilities Needing Upgrading
35
17
18
4
14
18
11%
82%
100*
2*
95%
100*
31
8
7
~Includes: 157 POTVI's and 193 Private
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
350*
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Noncompliance
11%
Compliance
91*
Compliance
9% Non-
compliance
6. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
1982
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
0
35
52
Total
Permits
0
29
46
In Effect
In 1982
0
83%
88.5%
613
0
13.5%
87X
"•"Includes "No-D1scharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
86.2%
Compliance
13.
Noncompliance
Maryland has a number of nonpoint source problems facing it. Foremost is the
stormwater runoff in the watersheds of its municipal drinking water reservoirs. Here
both urban and agricultural runoff contribute nutrients causing excessive algal
levels. In addition, excessive sediment runoff brings about reduction in reservoir
volume. Of next concern is the agricultural runoff which has been cited as a
significant contribution of nutrients and sediment to our many tidal waterways.
Following this comes abandoned mine drainage which results in acidic, metal-laden
waters in which little, if any, life can exist. Lastly, coastal groundwater aquifers
have shown elevated levels of nitrates jeopardizing their continuing use as a
drinking water supply.
The State is actively pursuing various procedures for controlling these nonpoint
sources. Urban runoff problems and preventive alternatives have been undertaken in a
number of areas. Part of the purpose of the Section 208 Water Quality Management
Plans is to assure that these various programs are adequately coordinated. Erosion
control laws covering runoff from construction sites are common, as are regulations
dealing with individual disposal systems. Some success has started to show forth.
Urban runoff is being attacked through application of detention basins, groundwater
infiltration basins, street sweeping ,etc. Strengthening this program is recently
enacted legislation that creates a new program in which counties and municipalities
must adopt ordinances for stormwater management for the purpose of maintaining after
development, as nearly as possible, predevelopment runoff characteristics. These
ordinances must be in effect July 1, 1984. The State will provide technical
assistance and monitor the work of the local governments.
Maryland, in conjucntion with the Department of Agriculture's Soil Conservation
Service, has developed regulations or assistance programs to deal with soil erosion
and runoff of pollutants from agricultural areas. Recent legislation establishes a
cost sharing program for the establishment of best management practices to control
nonpoint source agriculturally related pollution caused by sediment loss, animal
wastes, and chemicals. Rules and regulations to administer the program have been
adopted. The Department of Natural Resources, because it implements the State's
sediment and erosion control program, will be consulted for the purpose of
coordination. Soil Conservation Districts will be asked to provide technical
services. The program will be paid for with funds provided by the State Water
Quality Loan Act. The first grants should be made in mid-1983.
Programs for reclaiming abandoned mining areas and reducing or eliminating acid
mine drainage are progressing. The problems of groundwater contamination have not
been sufficiently evaluated to allow for any real progress at this time.
All of the control strategies being employed are only starting to address this
area of nonpoint source pollution.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si 1 v.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
S/L
M/W
I/L
S/L
M/L
S/L
N/A
I/L
C; SS;
Nut.
C; SS;
Nut.
SS
OH; M.
SS
Nut; SS
N/A
...
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The Municipal compliance program emphasizes voluntary correction
and consent agreements in meeting program objectives. Where recalcitrance is encountered
or there is a clear violation of law, corrective orders are issued.
The enforcement approach to Non-Municipal facilities is progressive use of enforcement
tools starting from inspection reports through site complaints, complaint and orders,
civil penalty assessments, and formal judicial actions.
Nonpoint source enforcement centers around erosion control laws covering runoff from
construction and laws and regulations controlling Individual disposal systems. These
problems normally result in administrative actions. Agricultural non-point source runoff
enforcement emphasizes the use of voluntary compliance. For further discussion see
Section IV.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: Jj>
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: _7
Number of Administrative Actions: 3
Number of Judicial Actions: 5
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = % 1.431
By Percentage
Million
edera
5% Other Federal
Local
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
- 7 -
*
1 •—
69
*
204
$
119
*
Million
State
-------
C. Program Activities
Maryland's water quality management program is a comprehensive environmental
management process which integrates numerous water pollution control activities.
The overall State strategy is to integrate program responsibilities under the Clean
Water Act with State programs so as to accomplish the goals and objectives of both
while assuring the integrity of each. Emphasis is placed on maintaining a water
quality management program which provides for a continuous planning process to
include an ongoing assessment of program effectiveness.
Continuous Planning Process - A continuous planning process has evolved over
the past decade which consists of: identification of problems, preliminary
investigation, additional data-gathering, analysis of data and preparation of
findings, identification of needed corrective measures, and implementation.
The identification of problems depends primarily on the 305(b) report, but also
relies on the input from the State Water Quality Advisory Committee (a committee
made up of individuals and organizations, equally balanced among four categories:
private citizens, public interest groups, public officials and economic interests).
Other water quality planning activities include reviewing and
approving/disapproving County Water and Sewer Plans for conformance with State laws
and regulations. A related major function is the review of facility plans,
priority lists, State construction permit and NPDES discharge permit applications
and items submitted to the State Clearinghouse for consistency with the approved
Comprehensive Water and Sewer Plans.
Water Quality Assessment - The assessment of water quality is a continuous
effort which manifests itself in a variety of interrrelated processes. These
monitoring and analyses processes include: core monitoring, shellfish monitoring,
sanitary surveys, intensive surveys, special water quality studies, river system
modeling, wasteload allocation inspections, NPDES discharge analysis, emergency
response surveys and studies, compliance sampling, and evaluation inspections,
operations and maintenance inspections and sampling, macroinvertebrate benthic
monitoring, and phytoplankton monitoring.
Construction Grants Management - The objective of the Construction Grants
Program is to assure that needed wastewater collection and treatment facilities are
properly planned, designed and constructed in order to eliminate water quality and
public health problems caused by inadequately treated discharges. Maryland has
assumed delegation of nearly the entire Construction Grants Program from EPA,
thereby eliminating prior duplication of effort and resulting in more timely
processing of grant projects.
Enforcement - Maryland's water pollution control enforcement and compliance
activities continue to be concentrated in three main program areas:
1. Operation and Maintenance Inspections - This activity functions as a
voluntary/cooperative program whereby permittees are encouraged to correct
problems under their own initiative.
2. NPDES Enforcement - NPDES enforcement activities initiate with the
compliance monitoring program in that violators are identified and
appropriate course of action outline. The normal administrative procedures
followed are - a) written notification, b) administrative meetings, c)
administrative orders. These orders specify corrective action which must
be taken within a specified time period and provide penalties for failure
to comply.
3. Operator Training - The Maryland Certification Program for Superintendents
of Water, Wastewater and Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facilities was
promulgated in 1967. In 1981, certification was altered to certify by
treatment process rather than volume, to require operators as well as
superintendents to be certified and to require training for certification
renewal.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
INCREASE AND STABILATION OF PERMITTING SHELLFISH HARVESTING WATERS - CHOPTANK RIVER
In general, although there continues to be numerous small shellfish closure areas
through the tidal portion of the State, the general trend since 1972 has been a sharp
reduction of closed harvesting water. This is shown In the following graph:
These successes are attributed to Improvements in
.3
.1
She
Wat
lfish Surfacewastewater treatment facilities under the Clean Water
r Arrps fln^pfi
(Millions) • and ^mProvements ln Maryland's Shellfish Sanitation
Program.
The Choptank River represents a specific example of
how water pollution control programs have resulted in
improved water quality and public use of water.
The primary sewage treatment plant servicing the
1972 1975 1981 City of Cambridge on the Choptank River was upgraded 1n
the early 1970's. This renovation included upgrading the plant to secondary capacity
using the activated sludge process along with an emergency holding pond for shellfish
water protection, and Improvements to all basic units Including the disinfection
facilities. These improvements were the principal cause of significant water quality
improvement downstream of the plant. This improvement resulted in the permanent
opening of 3,600 acres of prime oyster and soft shell clam waters in September of
1974. These waters are considered to possess some of the most valuable and
productive shellfish grounds 1n the State. They have remained open for harvesting
from 1974 to the present, and should continue to produce large quantities of
wholesome shellfish for Maryland and interstate consumers.
TIDEWATER POTOMAC CLEANUP
In the early 1970's, the upper tidewater of the Potomac River - metropolitan
Washington DC and the adjoining 50 miles of Maryland below Washington - was severely
polluted. Floating algal mats, dead fish, and noxious odors were dramatic evidence
of poor water quality. The main sources of the pollution of the "Nation's River"
were nutrients, bacteria, and oxygen-demanding substances in treated sewage. Because
of the overloaded conditions at the sewage treatment plants and dry-and wet-weather
overflows raw sewage was being dumped into the Potomac.
Also 1n the early 1970's, a Potomac River Cleanup Program was implemented; the
result of a cooperative and monetary union between the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, DC, as well as numerous local
authorities. The construction grants program allowed $1 billion to be spent 1n the
Washington area alone, mostly for the expansion and upgrading of sewage treatment
facilities. For the Potomac, sufficient data was available over a long enough period
of time to study the effects of the wastewater treatment improvements. A comparative
analysis of an earlier period (1969-1970), prior to advanced sewage treatment, and a
later period (1977-1979), reflected the effectiveness of the cleanup program.
The water quality of the tidewater Potomac Improved dramatically during the
1970's - a decade during which significant wastewater control processes were
Implemented. The result was a reversal 1n the long-term declining trend in Potomac
River water quality. The impacts of phosphorus removal, the expansion of the
capacity of the treatment facilities, the elminiatlon of dry-weather overflows, and
the reduction of the volume and concentration of wet-weather overflows all combined
to "save the river."
Washington and Maryland area residents generally agree that the tidewater Potomac
1s less polluted than 1t was 10 years ago. The news media give periodic reports of
the Potomac's beneficial Impact on recreational activities such as boating and
fishing. Largemouth bass are established in and below the city and are now routinely
caught by recreational fishermen. In fact, several sport fishing guides have
successful businessess in the metropolitan area, due to the cleanup program. Existing
water quality conditions are also reflected in other biological communities that the
tidewater currently supports. Trends 1n algal and bacterial populations also have
shown significant improvements, and the tidewater Potomac has become a cleaner, more
ecologically balanced system.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
1. Wetlands - The State of Maryland has had a tidal wetlands regulatory program since July
1970. Prior to passage of the wetlands law about 1,000 acres of wetlands were being destroyed
per year. For the 25-year period 1942-1967, wetland losses in Maryland exceeded 23,000 acres.
After the wetlands law a yearly average of 48 acres of open water wetland and 12 acres of
vegetated wetland has been allowed to be filled through the permitting process. In addition, a
yearly average of 118 acres of open water wetland and 8 acres of vegetated wetlands has been
allowed to be dredged.
2. Onsite-improvement in testing procedures - Significant improvements have been made
regarding the testing and evaluation of on-site sewage disposal systems. These improvements
have affected the site selection, design and ultimate operation of such systems.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
X - Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
1. The Chesapeake Bay represents the major problem in the State. The decline of submerged
aquatic vegetation and anadromous fish species during the last decade has seriously concerned Bay
managers. The potential impact of toxic substances throughout the Bay is also an area of
concern. U.S. EPA's Bay Program will be continued in an attempt to further define and address
these questions.
2. Non-point source pollution has emerged as an increasingly difficult and important problem.
Non-point source runoff from urban, suburban, and agricultural areas continue to impact water
quality throughout the State.
3. Nutrient problems have continued in the large reservoirs serving the Baltimore metropolitan
area. This overenrichment is generally attributed to nonpoint source runoff. This problem has
at times resulted in a use impairment. Management techniques must be developed to cope with this
problem.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Maryland Dept. of Health A Mental Hygiene
Office of Environmental Programs
CONTACT PERSON 4 PHONE #: Mr. Donald L. Elmore (301) 383-4244
DATE: September 1, 1983
- 10 -
-------
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
MARYLAND
1972
-------
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
CD Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
MARYLAND
1982
-------
State of Massachusetts*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 5.689.107 1980 5.737.037
State Surface Area 8,257 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 27
# of River and Stream Miles 10.704 mi.; # of Border Miles* 0 ml.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 2,859 / 150,341 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 362,165 ac. or 566 sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 1.519 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. sq. ml.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage N/A Name/Mileage N/A
Name/Mileage N/A Name/Mileage N^A
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 1.611
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
101
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
27
d. Miles Monitored: 1.611
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
444 ml.
444
723
0
1,611 ml.
27.6%
27.6%
44.8%
0
100%
1982
780 ml.
673
158
0
1,611 ml.
48. to
41.8%
9.8%
0
100%
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
35%
Improved
Category
0
1.046
Change in
Category
565
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 71,487 (336 lakes and two water supply reservoirs)
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 42,352 (336 lakes)
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
ac.
ac.
100*
1982
44,013 ac.
24,345
3,129
— —
71,487 ac.
61.6
34.1*
4.3*
--
100X
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Within Change in
Category Category
100%
Maintained
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
71.487
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans (Information reported for oceans only)
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 1,251 sq. mi. / 1,519 mi.
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
469.4 sq. mi. /
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Oesignated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0/0
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 1.251 sq. mi. / 1,519 mi.
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
807,226 ac.
4,475
32,658
844,359 ac.
95.6*
0.5 *
3.9 X
100*
1982
757,243 ac.
3,333
39,812
800,388 ac.
94.6*
0.4 *
5.0 %
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Within
Category
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Change in
Category
Degraded 1%
b. Oceans
8y Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
0
Change in
Category
7,154 (acres)
760.576* (acres)
~Maintenance of Non-Support Areas not included.
- 2A -
-------
0. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed: N/A
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
N/A
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
N/A
d. Miles Monitored: N/A
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partial ly
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100%
1QA2-
mi.
mi.
%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2B -
-------
t. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
a. Streams and Rivers
Other
Industrial,
Nonpoint
(General
10*
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Other
Nonpoint
5%
nici
unicipal
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
U.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
X
Coli./Toxic
Industrial
X
X
X
Toxic/D.O.
Non-Point
X
X
X
Coll./Nut.
Other line, natural)
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 1_13
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: N^A
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: 50
(Numbers provided for known miles affected by Toxics)
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Legend
Number of 6
People
(Millions)
k -
3 -
2 _
1 -
5.7
5.7
1.1
0.8
Not served by
g j wastewater system
/// /j
1.0
0.1
'///,
0.8
2.2 Primary
2.3
Served by waste-
Primary
water system
1.8 Secondary
0.5
Secondary
0.5
AT
z
Primary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc.
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
Population
Equivalents
of BOD 8.OH
(millions)
7.0
6.0-
5.0-
4.0"
5.0-
2.0-
1.0-
0
7-6
3.2
5.1
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
48
19
56
4
3
42
8
16
75
0.7
0.8
75
44
16
14
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
122
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
Compliance
92%
Noncompliance
1982:
60%
Compliance
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Noncompliance
Compliance
Compliance
5%
loncompliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
With the control of the vast majority of point source discharges over the past
decade, the evaluation of the effect of non-point sources (NPS) has become a
reasonable goal. The major components of NPS which have water quality impacts
are urban runoff, nutrient loadings from agricultural and dairy lands, and
groundwater contamination. The problem has been addressed from three major
areas: 208 programs presented a general overview of NPS on a state-wide basis
and made general recommendations such as institution of street sweeping programs
to control loadings from urban runoff and implementation of best management
practices (BMP's) for control of agricultural and dairy land runoff. The U.S.
Soil Conservation Service has undertaken site specific evaluations of nutrient
loadings to lakes and coliform bacteria loadngs from dairy land runoff. The
Division of Water Pollution Control has evaluated through water quality surveys
the effect of stormwater runoff upon the nutrient and coliform bacteria loadings
to several streams in Massachusetts. The findings have been incorporated into
the decision process of establishing point source effluent limits and, in some
cases, the NPS have been more significant than point sources.
Most implementation of NPS control is conducted on a local level such as street
sweeping, road salt containment and fertilizer application control. Concern is
mounting over groundwater contamination from NPS; some communities have initiated
watershed management programs to control NPS impacts.
Lakes and ponds are more severely impacted by NPS than rivers in Massachusetts.
Direct point discharges to lakes are nearly non-existent; thus, watershed
management plans to control NPS are an integral part of lake restoration
projects. Studies in Massachusetts have demonstrated that BMP's can be effective
in reducing NPS.
The ubiquitous nature of NPS makes its impact serious and its control difficult.
The future programs for control will consist of protection of existing
waterbodies and the implementation of localized BMP's.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si lv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent
S/L
M/L
I/L
N/A
I/L
M/W
M/L
M/W
Primary
Pollutants
C, SS
OxDe,Nut
Nut.
C
Nut.
S.S..T
OxDe,
Alqae
Chlorides
M; c,
OxDe
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The state determines appropriate enforcement action for each
violation on a case-by-case basis. In general, however, the agency will use the lowest level
in the hierarchy of enforcement actions that will result in compliance (unless violations are
the result of willful misconduct or blatant disregard of laws or regulations, or are of a
nature and severity that demand immediate court action). While this approach provides for
efficient use of agency resources and encourages cooperative action to resolve problems, it
requires careful tracking of pre-administrative and administrative actions, so that, where
there is undue delay or absence of good faith efforts, the matter will be quickly advanced to
the next level of enforcement. Referral to the Attorney General for initiation of court
action, including the seeking of fines, may occur at any state of an enforcement action,
depending on the factors noted above.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 24
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: ]2_
Number of Administrative Actions: 5
Number of Judicial Actions: 7
Investment
1972 - 1982
Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
$ 1,488.7 Mi 11 ion
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA: $ 1.060 Million
Other Federal: $ 0
State: $ 281
Local Match: $ 140
Other Local: $ 7.7
B. Municipal Facility
Cumulative Capital
TOTAL INVESTMENT =
By Percentage
71%
Federal - EPA
Other
Local
State
-------
C. Program Activities
Administrative - Under the Massachusetts Clean Waters Act (MGL, Chapter 21, Section
26, as amended), the state legislature established the Division of Water Pollution
Control, headed by a Director who would be assisted by an administrative support
staff necessary to carry out the various designated activities and programs of the
Division. Today, the Division administers three major programs: construction
grants, the regulatory branch, and the technical services branch which coordinate
the Division's efforts to obtain fishable/swimmable water in the Commonwealth.
Quality control management tools, such as five-year strategy planning, annual
program planning, and quarterly reporting, are a function of the administrative
staff and will help to facilitate and guide in new/expanded endeavors. These
endeavors will include movement toward delegation of NPDES responsibility to the
state, groundwater management, toxics control, expanded/improved treatment plant
operation and maintenance/technical assistance efforts, expanded operator training
and capability, new lakes restoration/preservation program, and coastal water
quality program.
Municipal Facilities Branch - The construction grants program will remain a
cornerstone of the pollution control effort by delegating funds to municipalities
for initial planning, design and construction of new wastewater treatment
facilities or the upgrading of old facilities which are not meeting their NPDES
permits. Although there will not be as many new treatment plants under
construction after FY84, there will be a shift toward resolving difficult economic
and technical issues, many of which will involve resource intensive environmental
impact analysis. These include non-point source controls through construction
measures, e.g., sewering around lakes to control nutrients; a community's ability
to support an expensive treatment facility; abiding by the Ocean Sanctuary Act's
preclusion of discharge to the ocean, etc. The Collection Systems Construction
Grants program will continue to provide funding assistance of $12 million annually
to municipalities building sewers to serve new or expanded industrial development
and other areas not eligible or likely to be funded under the federal program. The
state bond legislation increased grant participation in this program from 40%, or
$1 million to 50%, or $2 million and extended this program another five years thru
FY89. If federal funding levels should diminish over the next several years, this
program will take on added significance in providing funding for municipalities.
Regulatory Branch - This branch of the Division is responsible for delegating the
NPDES program which includes processing applications, issuing NPDES permits, and
operation and maintenance inspections as well as compliance monitoring of the
numerous municipal and industrial treatment facilities in the Commonwealth. In
addition, a newly formed groundwater management program will establish groundwater
quality standards and issue groundwater discharge permits on a case-by-case basis.
Technical Services Branch - This branch has four main programs: 1) engineering,
which is responsibile for water quality sampling and analyses, as well as water
quality modeling and basin planning; 2) limnology, which administers the clean
lakes grants (Chapter 628) and the nuisance aquatic weed control program (Chapter
722); 3) biological section, which places emphasis on research and demonstration,
water quality standards, and biomonitoring; 4) compliance monitoring, which works
closely with the regional offices of the regulatory branch to evaluate municipal
and industrial discharges throughout the state.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Westfield River
For more than 25 years the Westfield River suffered the indignity of putrefaction from industry
and municipalities. Various industries discharged suspended solids, organic wastes, process
dyes, various metals and cyanides into the main stem. In addition, the river received
untreated municipal wastes discharged directly into the main stem, and untreated wastes
discharged from combined sewer overflows. By 1972, the pollution loading placed on the
Westfield River's main stem in terms of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) was 12,000 pounds per
d^, or the equivalent untreated sewage load produced in one day by a city with a population of
78,000. Rafts of paper mill sludge floated downstream, degrading the shoreline and causing
nuisance odors. This gross pollution killed fish and fecal coliform bacteria posed a serious
health hazard. Fecal coliform bacteria counts recorded by the Massachusetts Division of Water
Pollution Control at the city of Westfield reached 430,000 organisms per 100 milliliters.
Through the efforts of authorities in the federal government and the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, the city of Westfield received $2.3 million to construct a conventional
activated sludge secondary treatment plant. West Springfield also received a $5 million grant
from federal regulatory agencies to upgrade its sewer system. The EPA awarded the city of
Springfield $39 million to upgrade its primary treatment plant to secondary status and to
construct a sewer interceptor system. Agawam was provided a total of $2 million to build
interceptor sewer systems and finally, in mid-1977, the EPA awarded the town of Huntington
$970,000 to construct an activated sludge secondary treatment plant with extended aeration. In
1974, the Massachusetts DWPC issued the first discharge permits under the NPDES permit program
to nine major dischargers, and dischargers along the Westfield River. Industry and government
regulatory officials worked together to construct in-house treatment facilities at three of the
four paper mills along the main stem of the river. Another mill constructed neutralization
facilities to remove dye wastes and a radiator plant installed phosphorus removal equipment.
Monitoring studies by the DWPC along the Westfield River main stem during the late 1970's
showed that water quality had improved markedly over a few years. By 1978, the overall BOD
loading to these waters had dropped from 12,000 pounds per day recorded in 1972 to 300 pounds
per day. Moreover, in 1978 at Westfield, studies indicated a fecal coliform bacteria count of
only 160 organisms per 100 ml. Sportfish returned to these waters, and anglers hauled in
sizeable catches of smallmouth bass and rainbow and brown trout. Today, the entire Westfield
River serves as a valuable recreational area for canoers and kayak enthusiasts. The entire
reach of the swiftly flowing river fits the swimming and fishing classification and hikers,
swimmers, and other outdoorsmen flock to the scenic Westfield River.
Nutting Lake
The Nutting Lake Restoration Program involved dredging of the lake bottom and harvesting and
raking of weed beds. Initial monitoring results of Nutting Lake, located in Billerica,
indicate an increased water depth from 6 to 9-10 feet and minimal regrowth of weeds. The local
community has been receptive to the clean-up efforts and an expansive public access area has
been built. Residents anticipate once again being able to swim in Nutting Lake in the near
future. The initial results show that the lake is one of the success stories of the Lakes
Restoration Program in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
- 9 -
-------
1. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
- Abatement of water pollution resulting from oil ana hazardous materials spills.
- Proper operation and maintenance of the large number of municipal facilities
built.
- Attainment of water quality standards in the state's receiving waters.
- Proper containment and elimination of abandoned hazardous waste sites.
- Eutrophication of lakes and ponds.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
- Source of funding for needeo abatement projects is unclear due to the
projected decrease in federal funds.
- Chronic toxicity and bioaccumulation are difficult to evaluate on a
wioe-scale basis.
- Rehabilitation of the infrastructure of the municipal facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Massachusetts Division of Water Pollution Control
Westview Bid]., Lyman School, Westborouqh, MA 01 btt 1
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE $: Paul M. Hogan (617) 366-9181
DATE: August 18, 19a3
- 10 -
-------
MASSACHUSETTS
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
¦ Use Supported
D Use Partially Supported
E3 Use Not Supported
-------
MASSACHUSETTS
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
[1 Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
B Use Not Supported
-------
State of Michigan*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 8.875,083 1980 9,262,078
State Surface Area 96.791 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 67
# of River and Stream Miles 46,350 mi.; # of Border Miles*
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 656 / 491,405 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 3-5,000,000 ac. or 4,700-7,800
# of Coast Miles3,251 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. N^A sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mi 1eage Wiscons1n/Montreal/48 Name/Mileage Canada St. Clair/40
Name/Mileage Menominee,Brule/188,414 Name/Mileage Detroit/32
Name/Mileage St. Marys/70
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 1.309
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swlmmable:
0
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Flshable/Swlmmable:
919
d. Miles Monitored: 1.309
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
535 ml.
324
285
164
1,309 ml.
40.9%
24.8%
21.8%
12.5%
100%
1982
348 ml.
213
250
498
1,309 ml.
26.6%
16.3%
19.1%
38.0%
100%
- 1 -
180 mi.
sq. ml.
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
109
Improved
Unknwon
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
raded
Unknown:
Maintained
Lakes and Reservoirs
15
215
640
Change in
Category
135
195
1. a. Acres Assessed: 648.499
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
23.979
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 157,094
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972 ¦
75,000 ac.
16,000
9,000
—
100,000 ac.
75*
16*
9*
--
100*
542,203 ac.
106,296
0
--
648,499 ac.
84%
16*
0
--
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
9% Improved
Maintained
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
9.000
639.499
Change in
Category
100*
- 2 -
-------
/
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: .
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
/
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
/_
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: /
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
%
100%
1982
%
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2A -
-------
Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed: See Appendix C *Documentation available from State or
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
12 public water supply intake sites
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: See Appendix C *Same as above
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
t
100%
IQfi?-
mi.
mi.
*
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
See
Appendi >
.5% Industrial
.5% Municipal
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
See
Appendix
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coll.
D.O.
Nut.
PH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
DO. Nut.
Industrial
X
X
X
X
DO. Toxics
Non-Po1nt
X
X
Pest.
Nut.,Turb.
Other (inc. natural)
X
X
X
DO. Nut.
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 260 miles
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: No Major Lakes
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: 3,231 miles
[Lake Michigan, Lake Superior Saginaw Bay,]
[Lake St. Clair, Lake Erie]
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses 1n Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
10 -
9-
8
7
6-
5 -
h -
3-
2
1
2,238,000
7^2,500
21MOO
Advanced
2,0^2,000
Secondary
3,638,000
Primary
Legend
2,799,500
Not served by
wastewater system
60,000
1,090,000
Advanced
Secondary
5,^09,000
Served by waste-
water system
1972
1982
137,500 Primary
Primary
Secondary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOO Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(millions)
6,636,500 6,696,500
6-
5 -
k
3-
2 -
1
3,169,
900
1972
648 ,000 OsVv
3,178,000
Legend
Generated
sSJ
Discharged
m
m
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1982
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
98
33
74
„
19
57
Total
58%
77%
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
67*
86%
....
33
17
384
"""Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
APPENDIX C
1982:
29$
[Noncompliance
71%
Compliance
8. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
34
0
82
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements"1"
--
--
81
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
—
—
99%
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met'1'
—
--
99.9%
916
+Includes "No-Oi scharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
See
Appendix C
Noncompliance 1 %
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Most nonpoint source problems within the State originate from agricultural
practicies, urban runoff, and construction activities. Major problem areas are
southeastern, southwestern and east central portions of the state due to
agricultural practices, soil types, and population densities. Control programs for
agricultural and urban runoff loadings are on a voluntary basis. The Soil Erosion
and Sedimentation Control Act of 1972, a regulatory program, has significantly
reduced the loadings from construction related activities.
Ongoing activities include the Southeast Saginaw Bay Coastal Drainage Basin
Monitoring and Evaluation Project (funded by Great Lakes National Program Office),
the Saline Valley Rural Clean Water Project, and a USDA river basin study in the St.
Joseph River (Saginaw River basin stuqy is in proposal stages) under P.L. 83-566.
Demonstration projects (108A) in progress are the Bean Creek Conservation Tillage
Project, the Otter Creek Special Conservation Tillage Project, and a CSO control
project in the Saginaw area.
The State participated in the Lake Erie Wastewater Management Study which
recommended wastewater management programs to restore and rehabilitate Lake Erie.
The stucty determined (1) reduction of diffuse sources of phopshorus would be
required for restoration, and (2) widespread adoption of best management practices,
particularly conservation tillage and no-till agricultural methods, would achieve
the re diction.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: Michigan has a stepped process for enforcement. NPDES permit
conditions (scheduled and effluent) are tracked via computer assistance with monthly
updates. Minor excursions and infrequent violations are resolved by logged phone calls
and/or letters. For repeat violators and more dramatic excursions, formal Notices of
Non-Compliance are issued. If these measures fail to bring compliance, administrative
proceedings for permit revocation and/or litigation are commenced.
At all levels, staff at the Department are working with the permittee to secure a quick
resolution to the problem. If Department efforts fail, the matter is referred to the
State Attorney General for litigation. In such cases, correction programs are always
sought and usually punitive penalties in the form of fines and/or liquidated damages.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 32
Number of Pre-Adm1n1 strative Actions: 12,
Number of Administrative Actions: 18
Number of Judicial Actions: 2
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT * $ 3.374.6 Million
By Percentage Categories of Sources
1.825.0 Million
25.6
302.0
552.0
670.0
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
M/L
S/W
I/L
I/L
M/L
S/L
N/A
I/L
OxDe
Nut.
Nut.
SS.T
SS
DH
SS
LoFlo
OxDe
State
Other
Local,
0.7% Other Federal
16 M
Local
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
NPDES Permit Program - The Michigan NPDES Permits Program consists of the issuance
of discharge permits for all dischargers to waters of the State. The program has
evolved from one with its basic emphasis being the elimination of gross pollutants to
one where selective intensified actions are being taken in areas of toxicant
discharges, pretreatment programs and sludge disposal.
Planning Program - In 1973, the Water Development Services Division prepared basin
plans under Section 303(e) for major subdivisions of the state. In 1975, the planning
emphasis shifted to the areawide concept with fourteen regional planning and
development commissions being given grants to carry out planning under this program.
The areawide plans were incorporated into a Statewide Water Quality Management Plan
during 1979. Following the completion of the State Plan, the State developed the
Groundwater Strategy. Current efforts in water quality planning are centered around
the Section 205(j) grant program.
Inland Lakes Program - In 1972 Michigan began sampling a limited number of lakes
to obtain "base line" information. The Inland Lake Management Unit was established in
1973. A concentrated effort was then made to sample, at least once, all Michigan
lakes greater than 50 surface acres with a public boat launch facility. This task was
completed in 1981. Lack of state funds prohibit the monitoring lakes on a routine
basis. The only monitoring effort available is through the Self-Help program which
depends on volunteer riparian assistants.
Point Source Studies - In 1972 the sampling surveys focused on several basic water
pollution concerns. Most of the surveys were first time investigations where a large
number of discharge points had to be assessed. Sampling was usually limited to
standard parameters - BOD, solids nutrients, bacteriological. Once mandated
improvements were in place (1977 and beyond), the emphasis shifted to permit limit
compliance and organic and toxic chemical investigations.
Monitoring Program - From 1973 to 1983 Michigan's surface water quality monitoring
programs have been reduced by 79%. In 1973, 436 station locations were sampled at
various frequencies for a total of 2,999 station visits/year. In 1983, 58 stations
are being sampled for a total of 616 station visits/year. The Primary Monitoring
Network has at one time or another, consisted of the following monitoring programs:
Great Lakes Tributary, Urban Area, Natural Areas, Detroit River Radioactivity, Water
Intake, and Degraded Areas. All programs have been discontinued except portions of
the Great Lakes Tributary, the Detroit River, and Urban Areas. Biological monitoring
and special studies are conducted at prioritized locales; priorities are generally
established in conjunction with permit renewal schedules.
Construction Grant Program - The program originated through the Clean Water Act,
established a grant program to assist communities in abating serious water pollution
problems by providing secondary waste treatment or treatment necessary to meet the
water quality standards. The act was amended to provide delegation of the grant
program to the states for administration. The initial delegation agreement between
EPA and the State of Michigan was signed in April of 1979. As of fiscal year 1981,
advanced treatment projects funded require rigorous review and approval from EPA to
assure necessity. This policy altered the emphasis of funding by emphasizing
restoration of a use rather than mere compliance with water quality standards.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
A. Detroit River1
The Detroit River flows 32 miles from Lake St. Clair to Lake Erie. The river has
always been important for navigation, water supply, fishing, and recreation since
people first lived in the area and is now more important than ever for these uses.
Thus, it is essential that the quality of the water be high enough to assure these uses.
The southeast area is now the most heavily populated and industrialized area in
Michigan contributing a significant waste load to the Detroit River. There are over
sixty industrial and municipal wastewater dischargers to the Detroit River. Three
major tributaries, and many combined sewers and storm sewers also flow into the river.
Beiny fed by the clean waters of the upper Great Lakes, the Detroit River is flushed
quickly when the waste inputs are reduced.
There are six municipal sewage treatment plants serving a population of 3,300,000,
discharging to the Detroit River on the Michigan side. Three others discharge from the
Canadian side. Of these nine plants, the largest is the Detroit Metro Sewage Treatment
Plant which discharges about seven times the total combined flows of all eight other
plants. Any major changes in loadings are due mainly to the Detroit plant.
Since 1971, there has been a decline in Michigan municipal phenol loadings of about
30%, and in total phosphorus of about 40% even though flow has increased approximately
26%. The decline in phenols is due in part to the secondary treatment unit in the
Detroit plant which started up in 1975, and to Detroit's industrial pre-treatment
program.
The decline in total phosphorus loadings is largely due to the required reduction of
phosphorus in household laundry detergents by Michigan's Act 226 of 1971. With less
phosphorus coming into these treatment plants, less is discharged. Phosphorus removal
processes initiated at the sewage treatment plants also contributed to this decrease in
phosphorus loadings.
There are about 3b Michigan industries which discharged wastewater directly to the
Detroit River during the past eleven years. There have been major reductions in
Michigan point source pollutant loadings to the Detroit River since 1966 despite a 17%
increase to the amount of industrial wastewater discharged. Total iron from Michigan
industrial sources has dropped 81%, chlorides 76% ana total phosphorus 63%. The major
phosphorus discharger, Monsanto Corporation, Inorganic Chemicals Division plant, has
unaer a voluntary stipulation, recUced its total phosphorus loads from 1,520 kg/day to
17 kg/day.
Continuous oil discharges from industries have been significantly reduced with an 80%
decrease in total point source discharges of oil since 1963. Oily scums along the
shore have disappeared. A duck kill used to occur almost every winter when ducks would
land in ice-free areas, which were once covered with oil. This has not happened since
1967.
Sport Fishing and recreation opportunities have increased. Salmon have been planted
and are now being caught in the river. Trout have also recently been planted in the
lower Detroit River. In 1978 alone over 500,000 people made use of the 0.1 mile Belle
Isle bathing beach.
Whe Detroit River, 19t>6-1976, A Progress Report
- 9 -
-------
B. Grand River
The Grand River has its headwaters located in northeast Hillsdale County
and discharges into Lake Michigan at Grand Haven. The drainage basin
encompasses 16 counties and approximately 5,600 square miles. The river
flows 260 miles through predominatly agricultural land with light and heavy
industry found in the Jackson, Lansing, Grand Rapids and Grand Haven urban
areas.
In the early 19701s water quality problems in the Grand River were
related to dissolved oxygen and heavy metals. The major problem areas were
the industrialized urban areas where standards violations were documented for
significant distances below these areas. Numerous fish kills were reported
on an annual basis. Discharge from combined sewer overflows were common and
add to these problems.
Since the early 1970's the municipal and industrial wastewater treatment
facilities have upgraded the level of treatment provided. Five municipal
facilities, representing a population of 37,800 and a flow of 7.6 MGD, have
upgraded from primary to secondary treatment. Four municipalities,
representing a population of 282,200 and a flow of 66 MGD, have upgraded from
secondary treatment. Pre-treatment programs have eliminated a substantial
portion of the heavy metal loadings and voluntary sewer separation programs
have significantly reduced loadings from combined sewer overflows.
With the reduced municipal and industrial loadings, a quality fishery has
returned. A significant sport fishery exists throughout most of the river.
Through a continuous stocking program the river now has a fall salmon season
and the lower portion of the river has a fall and spring steelhead and lake
trout season. Because of this, the use of the Grand River as a fisheries
resource has increased significantly.
-10-
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
In the last 10 years, special state emphasis has been placed on a number of program areas
other than those previously mentioned. A major effort is underway dealing with groundwater
contamination identification and clean-up. Additional efforts include hazardous waste
(Hazardous Waste Management Act), toxic evaluation (Toxic Substance Control Commission Act),
wetland and shoreline protection (Wetland Protection Act), phosphorus load reduction
(Detergent Phosphorus Ban) and soil erosion (Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act).
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surf ace water qual ity maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of population
and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
X - Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Special concerns that the state will be addressing in the water quality program
include groundwater and control of toxic pollutants. Major groundwater quality protection
issues include (1) issuance of permits for existing and new groundwater dischargers, (2)
licensing or closing of landfills, and (3) compliance tracking and enforcement. Serious
pollution problems remain in areas such as abondoned and unabandoned industrial sites and
dumps and petroleum products, leaks and spills.
A second area of special concern is that of toxic pollutant control. With continuous
technological and scientific advances in this area, in addition to the problems of
understanding and controling previously identified areas of concern, the problem is now
and will remain a high priority.
A significant investment has been made in the construction of wastewater treatment
facilities in the last 10 years. Continued progress in upgrading facilities, plant
operation, and maintenance will be of special concern.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Surface Water Quality Division
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: William D. Marks, Acting Chief
(517) 373-2347
DATE: August 31. 1983
- 11 -
-------
MICHIGAN
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
03 Use Not Supported
-------
MICHIGAN
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
Q Use Not Supported
-------
State of Minnesota*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 3,806,103 1980 4,077,148
State Surface Area 85,447 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 9 major basins
# of River and Stream Miles 91,871 ml.; # of Border Miles* 1,121.3 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 12,034 / 3,411,200 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 2,600,000 ac. or sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 272 mi. of Lake Superior shoreline
# of Estuary sq. ml. N/A sq. ml.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage St. Croix - 129.7 Name/Mileage Red River of the North - 457.3
(Bois de Sioux)
Name/Mileage Mississippi - 136.6 Name/Mileage Rainy - 292.1
Name/Mileage Pigeon - 49.7 Name/Mileage Northeast Border Rivers - 55.9
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 2,708
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swiiranable:
1,209
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/SwImmable:
110
d. Miles Monitored: 2,537
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
1,455 ml.
539
407
307
2,708 ml.
54 %
20
15
11
100%
1982
1,776 mi.
760
172
2,708 ml.
66 %
28
6
100%
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
Improved
Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Change in
Category
468
2.240
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 17.298
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
Q
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 17.298
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972 -
10,566 ac.
8,471
19,037 ac.
56 %
44 %
100*
1982 -
11,256 ac.
6,042
17,298 ac.
65 %
35 *
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
100%
Unknown
Within Change in
Category Category
all**
** Lakes monitored 1n 1972 are different than those monitored 1n 1982;
therefore, there Is no basis for Indicating a change in trend.
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed:
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
/
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
/
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: /
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
%
100X
1982
%
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq. Ml. Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
b. Oceans
Bv Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change In
Category
- 2A -
-------
0. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
247
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
247
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored:
247
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Sup ported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
120 mi.
127*
247 mi.
49 %
51*
100%
1982-
247 mi.
247 mi.
100 %
100%
* Due to presence of asbestos-like fibers
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
127
120
Change in
Category
2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
15%
75%
Municipal
Nonpoint
25%
15%
Municipal
Nonpoint
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
100$
Supporting
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Co 11.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
X
Nut.
Industrial
X
X
X
X
Toxics
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X
X
Other (inc. natural)
X
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 751
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 348,471
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes M1. Affected by Toxics: 0
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses 1n Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
111. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
4 J
Number of
People
(Millions^ .
2 -
uzz.
No
Sewer
Second
2. Annual Population Equivalents of 'B0D Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
1.05
Require
System*
.15
.01
Primary
ry
2.55
No
Sewer
Second
Tertia
7%
1.05
Legend
Require System
.10
.004
.01
Primary
Not served
by waste-
water system
Sewer
a r y
2.56
Served by
wastewater
system
Primary
Second arjy
etc.
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
* This is the worst case figure; some of these
municipalities will prove not to need a system
* M
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Millions^.
1-
1972
3.1
.3
Legend
92%
removal
3.8
Generated
Discharged
MS
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
~Figures provided are for 1981
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1977 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met*
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
52
20
32
16
28
65*
80*
88*
47*
97*
95*
20
0
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
539
Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1977:
Noncompliance 65%
Compliance
1977 vs. 1982
Noncompliance
1982:
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1977
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met*
44
0
44
0
35
75*
0
80*
51*
0
97*
Total
Permits
in Effect
1n 1982
472
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
• 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1977 vs. 1982
By Percentage
Noncompliance
Non-
Compliance
Compliance
1977:
1982:
Noncompliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
In Minnesota, nonpoint sources are responsible for most of the pollution in our
surface and ground waters. Our nonpoint source problems are, in general,
regional. Northern Minnesota has problems with inappropriate shoreline
development, mining and silviculture. The Central region has problems with
agricultural runoff and hydrologic modifications and construction. Southeastern
Minnesota has problems with urban and agricultural runoff and residuals.
Southern and Western Minnesota has problems with agricultural runoff and
hydrologic modifications. We estimate that about 75% of our streams, lakes and
wetlands are adversely affected by nonpoint sources. Field studies and routine
monitoring have shown the Minnesota River Basin to be particularly troubled.
Addressing such nonpoint source pollution problems has proven difficult.
Although the EPA has assisted with 208 planning and the Lake Restoration Program,
the U.S.D.A. has helped with a Rural Clean Water Project at Garvin Brook (near
Winona), federal nonpoint source pollution control measures have been very feeble.
In response to weak federal assistance on nonpoint source pollution control, the
State of Minnesota has enacted two pieces of legislation designed to address
nonpoint source pollution: the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act and the
State Agricultural Land Preservation and Conservation Policy Act. Although these
Acts provide a framework for addressing nonpoint control, the State does not have
sufficient funding to adequately implement the Acts.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent
S/L
S/W
I/L
S/L
S/L
S/W
I/W
M/L
Primary
Nut,
Nut,
M
Pol lut ants
SS,T
SS,T
SS.T
SS.O*
SS,T
LoFlo.O*
Sal
C.OxDl.P
0* - direct habitat destruction
V. MATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
The MPCA initially reviews discharge monitoring reports and correspondence files for violations.
When a significant violation surfaces, a phone call or letter is transmitted to the discharge1-.
If violations cannot be corrected in a timely manner, a meeting will be arranged to discuss the
problem and identify a compliance schedule. If the corrective action will be timely, no other
action will be initiated. If the corrective action will take additional time, a voluntary
stipulation agreement with a schedule for needed improvements will be developed. If the
discharger fails to voluntarily agree on needed improvements, legal action (via a lawsuit) can be
initiated with final resolution dictated by the court. The MPCA has an established Municipal
Enforcement Strategy to identify the management process for initiating enforcement actions.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
55
32
23
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $900.954.269 Million
By Percentage
Categories of Sources
7.3 Local
15-3% State
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:*
Other Local:
$ 697.371.800 Million
$ unknown
$ 137.590.533
j 65.991.936
$ unknown
*1972-1979: 10X local share
1980-1982: 8* local share
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
The MPCA's Division of Water Quality has focused its efforts on preventing
clean waters from becoming polluted and on abating pollution where it already
exists. Its Clean Water Program is implemented through cooperation of five
sections and 150 staff members.
The Monitoring and Analysis Section develops water quality standards. These
consist of ambient standards for Minnesota's waters as well as effluent
limitations for individual dischargers to ensure that those ambient water
quality standards are met. The section also routinely monitors lakes and
rivers at sampling stations throughout the state, conducts additional case-by-
case studies of water quality and monitors the effects of pollutant discharges
through field investigations and computer modelling.
Any industry or municipality with a direct discharge into Minnesota's waters
must obtain a permit from the Water Quality Permits Section. Permits set
specific limits on what may be discharged into waters of the state and, if not
currently being met, contain schedules to bring the discharger into compliance
with those limits. In addition to almost 1,500 such permits, this section also
issues liquid storage and animal feedlot permits, PCB certificates of
exemption, and river-dredging certifications.
The Enforcement Section monitors the performance of permit holders and takes
enforcement actions in cases of violation. An Emergency Response Unit located
in this section reacts on a 24-hour basis to several hundred spills per year of
oil and other hazardous materials.
The Technical Review Section assists municipalities and industries in ensuring
that their watewater treatment facilities are built and operated so as to meet
state water quality standards. An Engineering Unit reviews wastewater facility
designs so that the most cost-effective and environmentally sound treatment
methods are selected, and an Operations and Training Unit conducts
comprehensive training and certification programs for operators of wastewater
treatment plants and solid waste facilities.
The Grants Section administers the joint federal-state wastewater treatment
facility construction grants program, which provides up to 90 percent of the
construction costs for local treatment plants. The section both guides the
municipalities through the requirements of the program and ensures that the
available grant moneys are used to construct those facilities that will provide
the greatest water quality benefits. More than 170 municipalities have been
assisted in building or upgrading their systems since 1968.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
1. St. Louis River and St. Louis Bay - Comparison of water quality data on the
St. Louis River and St. Louis Bay from the last ten years reveals a remarkable
improvement in dissolved oxygen and significant decreases in BOD, total
phosphorus and total ammonia values. The dramatic Improvement in chemical
water quality parameters corresponds to the start up of the sophisticated
regional wastewater treatment plant at Duluth, the Western Lake Superior
Sanitary District (WLSSD) plant. WLSSD brought together seventeen municipal
dischargers and seven major Industrial dischargers to the River into one
system, discharging Into St. Louis Bay. Elimination of the discharges from
the St. Louis River and the excellent treatment supplied by the new plant have
Improved the fishery in this area dramatically. The residents have detected
the change as well and In increasing numbers are returning to fishing the area
and use of this recreational resource.
Silver Bay - For many years Reserve Mining Company discharged 67,000 tons of
waste tailings into Lake Superior every day as a result of Its processing
taconite into iron ore pellets. Associated with these tailings were
cumningtonite-grunerite mineral fibers that the federal courts ruled to be
indistinguishable from commercial anosite asbestos fibers, a known
carcinogen. After lengthy legal battles, the Minnesota Supreme Court ordered
construction of an on-land disposal basin for the tailings. That site,
Milepost 7, is now in use, and on March 15, 1980 Reserve ceased discharging to
Lake Superior. The decrease 1n total suspended solids and fibers
concentration has been quick and dramatic. Levels of fibers monitored at Lake
Superior water Intakes are now about one-tenth the level present when the
discharge existed. Continued improvement with time is expected.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Much of the effort till now has gone to reducing water quality problems through the proven
technology of point source control. Improved treatment has provided relatively rapid
dividends in improved water quality for rivers and streams in population centers. Lake
improvements have been achieved by diversion of nutrient rich effluents or supplying
treatment to reduce nutrient levels. High quality waters were protected from degradation
by good treatment. Over the past decade, the goal has been to reduce conventional
pollutant levels discharged into the State's waters and to eliminate completely all
untreated discharges.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
The newest threat to water quality in Minnesota is acid rain. Between 1400-2500 of our
lakes are sensitive to acid deposition or about 25% of the lakes classified as fishing
lakes. Acid rain may lower the pH of these waters with little buffering capacity so that
they become unsuitable for aquatic life. It also may leach increasing amounts of heavy
metals, particularly mercury, from the watersheds. The lower pH of the wastes enhances
the potential for bio-accumulation of heavy metals in fish tissue, possibly creating a
health risk to consumers. Included as threatened are such outstanding national resources
as Voyageurs National Park, Superior National Forest, and the Boundary Waters Canoe Area.
Combined sewer overflows in the Twin Cities continue to prevent achievement of
fishable-swimmable status for the Metro Mississippi River.
Spills of hazardous materials, especially leaks from underground fuel tanks and
pipelines, are causing mounting concern. Many pipelines are aging, and transport of
hazardous materials is increasing.
Contamination of groundwater and/or surface water due to improper disposal of sanitary
and hazardous wastes has been documented at 60+ sites ranging over the entire State.
Many more are suspected.
As point source discharges provide better treatment, the contribution from non-point
sources grows more important as an obstacle to achievement of the goals of the Act.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
1935 West County Road B2
Roseville. MN 55113
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Virginia Reiner 612/296-7363
DATE: October 7, 1933
- 10 -
-------
«
MINNESOTA
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
B Use Supported
II Use Partially Supported
[3 Use Not Supported
-N-
-------
MINNESOTA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-N-
-------
State of Mississippi*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 2.216.912 1980 2,520.638
State Surface Area 47.700 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 10
# of River and Stream Miles 10.274 mi.; # of Border M1les*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage / 495,191 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 642.000 ac. or 1,003
# of Coast Miles 81 ml.
# of Estuary sq. ml. 1_33 sq. ml.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Mississippi R./410 Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Pearl R./76 Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 10,274
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swimmable:
48
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Flshable/Swimmable:
5
d. Miles Monitored: 5,694
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
8,860 ml.
1,414
10,274 ml.
86.2%
13.8%
100%
1982
9,260 ml.
1,014
10,274 mi.
90.1%
9.9%
100%
486 ml.
sq. mi.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Miles Improved: 400
0
9,874
0
Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 495.191
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
38.000
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swiinmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 495.191
i. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
481,725 ac.
9,580
3,886
495,191 ac.
97.3%
1.9*
.8*
100*
1982
476,374 ac.
18,817
0
495,191 ac.
96.2%
3.8*
0
100*
,3.9*
Improved
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
98.
Maintained
Acres Improved:
Improved
t8% Acres Degraded:
1.1% Degraded
Acres Maintained:
Within
Category
3.886
5.351
485.954
Change in
Category
Unknown:
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed:
133
/
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swiirmabl
15 /
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmabl
0 /
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 25 /_^
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
111
21
1
133
83.5*
15.8%
.7%
100%
1982
118
14
1
133
88.1%
10.5*
•
00
**
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Improved
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
.7
126
Change in
Category
b. Oceans
By Percentage
N/A
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100%
mi.
mi.
%
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses In 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
%
Industrial
Municipal
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
Industrial
Nonpoint /
Municipal
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
0.0.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
Coli. DO
Industrial
X
X
X
X
DO. Nut.
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
Coli. Toxics
Other (inc. natural)
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 81J
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 12.763
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: N/[A
F. State Maps for 1972 arid 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses 1n Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Millions)
2.5 "
2.0 -
1.5 -
1.0
0.5
2.5
2.5
.3
.3
.9 Primary
.3 Secondary
AST
Legend
Not served
by waste-
water system
.7
.15
.05
•3 Primary
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
.6
1972
1982
Primary
Second arty
etc
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Mi llions)
0.5-
O.'t-
0.3-
0.2-
0.1
Legend
Generated
Discharged
%
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements'1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
43
3*
40
29
23
79.3
83
29
19
18
94.7
86.8
*(1982 final requirements)
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
391
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
93%
Noncompliance
Compliance
85%
Compliance
15 %
/Non-
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Mun1c1pal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements"1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
75
0
80
Total
Permits
28
0
71
1n Effect
in 1982
37
0
89
432
42
0
99
"^Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982;
Noncompliance
Non-
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Studies conducted during 208 Water Quality Planning have revealed two major
Non-point pollution problems in Mississippi. These are Agricultural Non-point
Source Pollution and Urban runoff along the Mississippi Gulf Coast.
Agricultural non-point source pollution has been a particular problem in the
Mississippi Delta region. This area supports very intensive agricultural
activities and lakes and streams have been impaired from sedimentation and
agricultural chemicals. In recent years more emphasis has been placed on areas
outside of the Delta. Hilly land previously not under cultivation is being
planted with soybeans. Because of the erosive nature of the soil, these areas
may prove to be our highest priority for NPS control. Me are utilizing
educational programs to promote the use of Best Management Practices to control
Agricultural NPS pollution. In addition, we are directing existing cost-share
programs toward the highest priority areas.
Extensive planning has been conducted on the Mississippi Gulf Coast to
develop a management strategy for providing effective wastewater collection and
treatment. However, studies indicate that along with improved wastewater
treatment, an intensive effort will be needed to locate and correct sources of
bacterial contamination in runoff into Mississippi Sound. Efforts have been
taken to develop an implementation strategy that could be used by each
municipality along the Gulf Coast.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
M/L
S/L
I/L
I/L
I/L
M/L
N/A
I/L
C
Nut.
P|SS,T
SS
SS
SS
0.0.
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The Mississippi Bureau of Pollution Control's approach to
enforcement is based upon the precept that each enforcement action taken is more severe
than the previous action. Enforcement actions regarding permit violations typically
start with the project engineer and may include the following activities: Certified
letters, meetings, show-cause hearings, Commission Orders, Commission hearings, or court
action. Other tools available include sewer bans and letters to Federal Funding
institutions withholding federal funds until the facility is returned to compliance. The
Commission on Natural Resources issued 39 Water Division orders in 1982 of which about
one-half were to municipalities. Also during the calendar year 1982, five CommtSsTo^
hearings were conducted and penalties were assessed for violations of State water
pollution laws to industries in the amount of $47,500.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
16
Mun.
7
I nd.
9
4
1
3
5
1
4
2 0 2
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $_
546
Million
By Percentage
Other Loce
State
Match
Other federal
Federal - EPA:
55*
Other Federal:
10%
State:
7%
Local Match:
18*
Other Local:
10*
Total:
Categories of Sources
299
- 7 -
Million
57 (Fntta)
40 State Loan Program
100 (25X of EPA Program)
50 (est.)
546
-------
C. Program Activities
The Bureau of Pollution Control's Water Division is made up of numerous
sections with defined program objectives. These sections include the Municipal
Division, Industrial Facilities Section, Conmercial Facilities Section, Water
Quality Management Section, Field Services, and Emergency Services.
Municipal Division
This section has been delegated the full responsibility for management of the
Federal Constructions Grants Program in Mississippi. NPDES Permits are issued for
each municipal facility. Emphasis is placed on operation and maintenance to insure
permit compliance.
Industrial Facilities Section
This section regulates discharges from industrial facilities through issuance
of NPDES permits. In recent years additional programs have been developed in this
section. These include the Animal Waste Program, Aerial Application/Pesticide
Formulator Program, State Operating Permit Program, and the Federal Underground
Injection Control Program.
Commercial Facilities Section
This section issues NPDES permits to privately owned facilities which have
collection and treatment systems for domestic sewage. Operation and maintenance
inspections are conducted to insure permit compliance.
Water Quality Management Section
This section performs numerous primary and support functions including Water
Quality Criteria, Stream Monitoring, Wasteload Allocation, Stream Surveys, Water
Quality Certifications for Dredge and Fill Projects, EIS review, Clean Lakes
Program, and Statewide Water Quality Planning.
Field Services
This section includes three regional offices which conduct activities such as
sampling, operation and maintenance inspections, site inspections, ambient
monitoring, and complaint investigations. In addition, the Pollution Control
Laboratory conducts all chemical and biological analyses for the agency.
Emergency Services
This section responds to all spills of oil or hazardous materials into waters
of the State. They insure that timely and proper clean-ups are conducted.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Pearl River below Jackson
The Pearl River below Jackson is classified for Recreational Usage. However,
pollution has severely impaired its use for recreation and has also reduced the
fishing resource of the river. When the Bureau of Pollution Control (formerly the
Air and Water Pollution Control Commission) was established in 1968, it was
generally recognized that besides general urban runoff the problems in the river
were attributed to discharges from the City of Jackson, Filtrol Corporation and
Jackson Packing Comapny. The City of Jackson was discharging significant
quantities of untreated or poorly treated domestic wastewater into the river.
Filtrol Corporation discharged a very acidic wastewater into the river. Jackson
Packing Company discharged untreated wastewater from its meat processing
operation. Water Quality data during this period indicated that the dissolved
oxygen values in the Pearl River below Jackson frequently were below 1.0 mg/1 and
often fell to 0.0 mg/1. Values for pH were found to be generally below 6.0 units
in the summer and at times were below 5.0 units. In addition, high fecal coliform
bacteria counts, indicative of untreated domestic wastewater, were found in the
river.
In the early 1970's, Jackson Packing Company installed wastewater treatment
facilities at its plant. Also, in 1975 a new 46 MGD wastewater treatment plant was
placed on line by the City of Jackson. This facility was intended to be the first
phase of a Regional Wastewater facility to serve the City of Jackson and other
surrounding municipalities. Since 1975, ambient monitoring data taken below
Jackson near Byram has revealed a significiant improvement in water quality in the
Pearl River. With exception of a period of time after a flood in 1979
incapacitated the treatment facility, the dissolved oxygen has not violated the 5.0
mg/1 standard. Fecal coliform, while reduced significantly since 1975, still
generally does not meet the recreational standard. (Geometric mean of 200
colonies/100 ml or instantaneous maximum of 400 colonies/100 ml). Other parameters
which do not have numerical criteria assigned have shown steady improvement. These
are suspended solids, nitrate plus nitrite, and phosphorus. In 1980, Filtrol
Corporation initiated use of a deep well injection system to dispose of highly
acidic waste which could not be treated on the surface and discharged to the
river. Since that time the pH criteria of 6.0 to 8.5 units has not been violated.
A biological evaluation of the Pearl River in 1978 indicated a healthy
population. A large number of pollution tolerant organisms were noted after the
1979 flood. Fish sampling indicated large numbers of catfish present, but
relatively few game fish. This biological evaluation indicated a water quality
rating of fair. The overall water quality of the Pearl River below Jackson is
fair-good with an improving trend.
The Jackson Wastewater Treatment Plant is fully operational again and
concentrated efforts on operation of the facility have resulted in much better
removal rates. Current plans call for expanding this facility to 70 MGD in order
to connect more surrounding areas and eliminate potential for bypasses during storm
flows.
Okatibbee Creek below Meridian
In the past, the city of Meridian treated its wastewater with an overloaded
facility designed to handle 5 MGD. Wastewater flows above this capacity were
bypassed. A new 14.0 MGD treatment plant is now completely on-line. The discharge
from the plant goes into Sowashee Creek and then to Okatibbee Creek. Both of these
streams are classified as Fish and Wildlife.
- 9 -
-------
The water quality in Okatibbee Creek is assessed using data from the ambient station in
Arundel. It has been found that this creek is generally not in compliance with Water Quality
Standards. Serious problems have been noted with temperature, dissolved oxygen, and bacteria.
Slight problems have been noted for pH and nutrients. Impacts from the municipal discharge as
well as industrial discharges, urban runoff, and hydrological modifications appear to be
responsible for these problems.
Historically, biological assessments of Okatibbee Creek have indicated that it is grossly
polluted. The macroinvertebrate population has been dominated by pollution tolerant species.
Fish collection has been very difficult due to low populations. Biologically, the stream has
been rated as poor.
Thus far during 1983, improvements have been noted now that the new facility is on-line.
Ambient data collected during FY'82 and FY'83 show dramatic improvement in coliform levels in
Okatibbee Creek. Further, periphyton data collected during 1982 suggest some improvement in
water quality in Okatibbee Creek. The Bureau will continue to conduct water quality surveys on
Sowashee Creek and Okatibbee Creek during FY'84 to document this improvement. Overall, the
water quality is rated as fair with an improving trend.
- 10 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AMD REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Pecade:
Historically, the major environmental problems in Mississippi have been the
nonpoint source contributions in the Mississippi Delta, municipal and industrial
pollution on the Gulf Coast, and pollution in the Jackson, Mississippi area. The
pollution problems in the Pearl River aelow Jackson have been substantially
corrected with the construction of a new wastewater treatment plant that went on
line in 1975 and trie subsequent Regional Sewerage system that has been under
construction since the late 70's. The municipalities on the Gulf Coast are now
making progress through the formation of three regional sewerage systems for the
three counties on the coast. Progress is now being hampered by the insufficiency
of funds for the construction of the required facilities. The problem of toxic
pollutants has been of major concern in the past but is no longer believed to be a
significant or widespread problem in Mississippi. This is primarily true because
the state is not heavily industrialized, and the existing waste treatment
facilities have been found to be successful in removing much of the toxicity
potential of the wastewater. Where necessary we require the use of biological and
chemical screening and monitoring.
Part 8. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
A major remaining problem continues to be insufficient funds for the
construction of needed Publicly Owned Treatment Works. This is particularly true
of the problems on the Gulf Coast.
Non-point Source pollution appears to be our greatest challenge in the future.
Once the remaining needs for publicly owned treatment works are addressed, control
of non-point sources will be required to attain additional water quality
improvements. Additional planning will be required to develop implementation
strategies for non-point source control. Grants or cost-share programs will be
necessary to implement control measures for agricultural activities. Urban
runoff, particularly along the Gulf Coast, must be addressed before the water
quality problems can be completely solved in this area.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Mississippi Dept. of Natural Resouces
Bureau of Pollution Control
P. 0. Box 10385
Jackson. Mississippi 39209
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Robert H. Sevfarth (601) 961-5171
DATE: October 3. 1933
- 11 -
-------
MISSISSIPPI
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
IU Use Not Supported
-N-
-------
MISSISSIPPI
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
G Use Partially Supported
B Use Not Supported
-------
State of Missouri*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 4,677,983 1980 4,917,444
State Surface Area 69,686 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 8
# of River and Stream Miles 18,448 mi.; # of Border Miles*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 80 / 231,774 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 19,500 ac. or
# of Coast Miles mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Mississippi/485 Name/Mileage St. Francis/47
Name/Mileage Missouri/178 Name/Mileage Pes Moines/29
II. AMBIENT MATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 18,448
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swimmable:
267
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
35.5
d. Miles Monitored: 3,827
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partial ly
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
17,973 mi.
81
394
18,448 mi.
97.4%
0.5%
2.1%
100%
1982
18,055 ml.
51
342
18,448 mi.
97.9%
0.3%
1.8%
100%
- 1
739 mi.
sq. mi.
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
52
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
.1% Degraded
2.1% Improved Unknown:
Change in
Category
334
15
18,039
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed:
236,013
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
15.756
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 217.413
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
168,710 ac.
2,083
0
0
170,793 ac.
98.8*
1.2*
0
0
100*
1982
230,714 ac.
5,299
0
0
236,013 ac.*
97.8%
2.2%
0
0
100%
~Between 1972 and 1982 two new reservioirs were constructed, therefore total acreage increased.
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Within Change in
Category Category
98.2 %
Maintained
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
0.1% Improved
1.7% Degraded Unknown:
329
3.945
231.739
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
M.1%
Municipal
Industrial
2.1% Other
2.6% Unknown
.5% Dissolved
Oxygen
Municipal
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
0.0.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
Industrial
X
X
sol ids
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X
sulfate
Other (inc. natural)
*Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
46
None
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
5-
4-
1 _
4,917,514 = 1
Legend
4,677,623 = 1
1,191,374
901,563
1,881,907
702,779
1,484,557
Not served
by waste-
water system
20,000
1,582,781
Served by
wastewater
system
1,658,792
171.384
Primary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc.
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(millions)
2 -
1 -
1,715,755 1,849, *>01
947,931
1972
995,327
1982
Legend
Generated
Discharged
7/
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
"Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a.
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements+
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+ lncludes "No-Discharge"' Facilities
1982
1982
1972
Interim Permits
Final Permits
55
10
54
16
10
36
29*
100*
67*
10*
100*
42*
39
10
18
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
684
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
7 Mo
Noncompli ance
Compl
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements+
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
91
27
30*
11%
95
84
88*
84*
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
1.592
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
70%
Noncompliance
Compllance
Noncompliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
The most significant sources of nonpoint pollution are Mining, Agriculture
and Hydrologic Modification. Mining problems stem from removal of coal, zinc,
lead and barite. For active coal mining, state regulations require a permit
application (with a water management plan) to be submitted prior to mining.
Permit applications must include a description of the reclamation plan and the
number of acres in each land-use category. Permits are issued by the Missouri
Land Reclamation Commission. For abandoned coal lands, the Federal Surface
Mining Control Act of 1977 provides for reclamation. Section 401 provides for a
severance tax (35tf per ton in Missouri) to be used for reclamation and
restoration of land and water resources affected by past coal mining activities.
Approximately 110 miles of stream are affected by coal-mining.
Problems associated with removal of lead and zinc result during mine
dewatering (natural seepage or intentional), and erosion of tailings piles.
Problems may result from dissolved metals (Pb, Zn, Cd) in the water column, or
physical presence of tailings in the substrate. Best Management Practices have
been developed for the operations which have potential for stream pollution.
Approximately 56 miles are impacted by lead and zinc mining.
Although agricultural erosion is more widespread than mining, it is less of a
priority problem in the state. The greatest problem is sediment transport into
ponds, lakes and reservoirs, effectively reducing the life of water supply
sources, and recreational waters. A voluntary approach of best management
practice adoption should eventually slow down the problem. Missouri has a state
cost-share program to assist land owners.
Numerous northern Missouri streams are affected or destroyed annually by
hydrographic modifications (channelization). Twenty-five miles of the East Fork
Chariton River were replaced by a straight 15 mile pilot channel during 1979.
Because of the increased gradient and inadequate channel capacity, heavy rates of
bank erosion and very high levels of suspended solids have been found in the
section of the river that contains the pilot channel. It would appear that
permits undersection 401 (P.L. 95-217) could limit stream bank erosion from
channelization activities. However, Missouri has refused certification of only a
few projects to date, due to various reasons.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
I/L
M/L
N/A
S/L
N/A
M/L
N/A
I/L
OxDe
SS.C.P
pH.M.SS
SS.O*
~Habitat elimination
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: Water Pollution Control Program (WPCP) enforcement efforts begin
with a process of conference, conciliation and persuasion to gain voluntary compliance.
This includes facility inspections, sample collection, phone calls and letters to the
responsible party, issuance of Notices of Violation, and technical assistance to improve
oeeration and maintenance of wastewater treatment facilities. If necessary, the WPCP
begins administrative action which includes show-cause orders (which require the violator
to appear in a hearing before the Clean Water Commission), permit denial, admissions
letters, and abatement orders requiring specific action to eliminate discharge of
pollutants. If this fails, the case can be referred to the State Attoryney General's
office or the local county prosecutor for enforcement action. Civil or criminal charges
(misdemeanor or felony) may be filed and can result in court ordered injunctive relief to
prevent further violation, and require payment of penalty or imprisonment or both.
Recently, WPCP has been using administrative negotiations (demands) in lieu of abatement
orders or litigation. This 1s used especially for fish kills and requires corrective
action and payment of damages and penalties.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
29
23
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 1.432
By Percentage
Other
Local
State
Other
Fedfir^l
Federal-EPA
Local Match
Mill ion
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Categories of Sources
766 Million
51
159
174
282
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
The Water Pollution Control Program consists of an administrative unit and six
sections.
The Planning Section identifies water quality problems through review of data
and environmental analyses. Problem areas, streams or basins are targeted for
control strategies. Water quality standards and criteria, and a biennial water
quality report are used to identify and display problems. When a facility is
identified as causing a water quality violation, the Planning Section determines
the most appropriate and effective method to solve the problem.
The Compliance/Review Section's responsibilities are: 1) to assess compliance
with the Clean Water Law and related regulations, and 2) to initiate appropriate
actions to foster or compel compliance in situations where the responsible party
does not voluntarily do so.
The Program Support Section performs program-wide administrative and technical
functions, including program planning and budgeting, management support, public
relations, and data management.
The Technical Services Section provides assistance to grantees, consultants,
regional office personnel and other parties to insure the proper planning, design,
construction and operation of wastewater treatment facilities.
The Permits Section issues NPDES operating permits, letters of approval for
no-discharge facilities, administers the pretreatment program, and provides
technical assistance to all wastewater treatment facilities in the state.
The Grants Administration Section's primary responsibility is to administer
several state and federal grant and loan programs which provide assistance to local
governments in the construction of water and wastewater and stormwater control
facilities.
The six Regional Offices are responsible for drafting all new and all reissued
NPDES permits. They investigate all complaints of a water quality nature and
attempt to resolve them. They are responsible for first-line contact with
municipalities required to develop an industrial pretreatment program. The
Regional Offices conduct compliance inspections of treatment facilities as
required. They are also involved in construction grant project reviews,
inspections and participation in the one-year operation and maintenance inspection.
The Laboratory Services Program collects and analyzes effluent samples and
analyzes samples collected by the Regional Offices Program. The Laboratory is also
responsible for sampling and analysis in support of the ambient monitoring
program. They conduct on-site biological evaluations. The Laboratory Services
Program supports each Regional Office through technical guidance and the conduct of
the quality assurance program.
The Water Pollution Control Program coordinates with the Public Orinking Water
Program regarding water and wastewater operator training and certification, and in
locating sites for water supply intakes and wastewater discharges.
Legal support is provided by DEQ Counsel, the Attorney General's Office and
local prosecuting attorneys.
The DNR Public Affairs Office provides assistance for meetings, news releases,
public hearings, and informational requests.
The Division of Geology and Land Survey provides geological support.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
THE CLEANUP OF WILSON CREEK
The new Springfield Southwest Wastewater Treatment Plant, designed to provide
advanced treatment, has cured past ailments of Wilson Creek. The old wastewater
treatment plant was overloaded and discharged effluent with high concentrations of
nitrogen, phosphorus, oxygen-demanding wastes, and microorganisms. This discharge
clouded the creek and consumed much of the oxygen needed by some species of aquatic
life in order to survive.
The newly expanded wastewater treatment plant greatly eased Wilson Creek's
condition. The new facility provided more advanced treatment than the old plant
and, as a result, provided a five-fold reduction in the discharge of oxygen-
demanding materials and a seven-fold reduction in suspended solids.
In 1966, the Missouri Water Pollution Board and Missouri Department of
Conservation found a much degraded stream environment at Wilson Creek. The benthic
invertebrate population consisted of very few pollution intolerant organisms and
was mostly composed of midge fly larvae and sludge worms. Fish kills were frequent
due to the low dissolved oxygen levels in the stream.
Today, a healthy, more balanced community of bottom-dwel 1 ing aquatic life may
be found in Wilson Creek at the same location that was unfit for aquatic life
fifteen years earlier. Species diversity has increased substantially and
pollution-sensitive aquatic insects such as mayflies, caddisflies and stoneflies
are common. Fishermen in Wilson Creek catch sunfish and large and smallntouth bass
more frequently than ever before.
WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS ON GROVE AND CENTER CREEK - JOPLIN, MISSOURI
The City of Joplin lies in the southwest corner of Missouri near the Kansas-
Oklahoma border. Four miles to the east of Joplin, Grove Creek flows north into
Center Creek, a stream which, in turn, flows from east to west past Joplin's
northern tip.
By 1950, the dissolved fluorides, phosphorus, ammonia, and nitrate nitrogen in
wastewaters discharged from an explosives plant and two fertilizer manufacturers
into Grove Creek had seriously degraded the water quality of that stream and that
portion of Center Creek immediately below the point where the two streams meet.
Nuisance algae growths from the nutrients in these polluted discharges, and
sludge deposits, the byproducts of inadequate industrial waste treatment, clogged
Grove Creek. Farmers openly complained about cattle which had died from drinking
Center Creek's waters. Anglers fishing on Center Creek for sunfish and large and
smallmouth bass noticed a marked drop in the number of these species. There was a
fish kill in Center Creek in the fall of 1960. In August 1962, a toxic slug
discharge from one fertilizer manufacturer caused another, severe fish kill on
Center Creek just below the point where it meets Grove Creek. The plant was
deluged with complaints from the citizens of Jasper County and the Missouri
Conservation Commission.
Shortly after the State of Missouri established intrastate water quality
standards, the fertilizer and explosives manufacturers indicated they could meet
the standards and began immediately to construct anti-pollution factilities and
make process modifications within their plants. The plants now place heavy
emphasis on establishing high housekeeping levels, including eliminating all
sources of leaks from processing equipment.
Nuisance algae and sludge deposits no longer foul Grove Creek, and fish kills
no longer plague Center Creek. Today, fishermen on Center Creek are catching
sunfish and large and smallmouth bass in far greater numbers than before and
catching them, moreover, in areas along the creek where none were to be found 20
years ago.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Historically, the major water pollution problem in Missouri has been from
publicly owned wastewater treatment plants, particularly those located in
headwater areas of recreational streams. Although Missouri is a water rich state,
the intrinsic high quality of many streams and lakes causes pollution to be quite
apparent in some localized areas. The insufficiency of funds for construction of
POTW's has been the greatest concern in areas where water protection is desired.
Part 8. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Water Pollution Control Program
Mo. Department of Natural Resources
P. 0. Box 1368
Jefferson City, MO 65102
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Fred Lafser (314) 751-4422
DATE: July 20, 1983
- 10 -
-------
MISSOURI
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
B Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
9 Use Not Supported
-------
MISSOURI
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
¦ Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
Use Not Supported
-------
State of Montana*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 694,409 1980 786,690
State Surface Area 147,045 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 16
# of River and Stream Miles 19,168 ml.; # of Border Miles* N/A mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 4,018 / 756,000 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 187,400 ac. or 293 sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles N£A ml.
# of Estuary sq. ml. N/A sq. mi.
~Border Rivers;
Name/Mileage N/A Name/Mileage N/A
Name/Mileage N/A Name/Mileage N/A
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 17,251
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
17,187
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
64
d. Miles Monitored: 3,663
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
17,099 ml.
152
17,251 ml.
99%
U
100*
1982
17,099 mi.
152
17,251 mi.
99%
H
100X
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
Improved2% «1% Degraded
Miles Improved: 367
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
40
3.249
13.588
Change in
Category
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 651.763
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
651,763
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 581.516
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
651,763 ac.
651,763 ac.
100%
100%
1982 -
651 ,763 ac.
651,763 ac.
100%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
*t% Improved
De-
graded
Unknown
Acres Improved:
(Koocausa)
Acres Degraded:
(Flathead)
Maintained ......
Acres Maintained:
(Whitchs a,Evergreen)
Unknown:
Within
Category
26.989
125,957
7.002
491.815
Change in
Category
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage (drinking, culinary and food processing uses only)
a. Streams and Rivers
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
100%
Nonpoint
Fully
Supported
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
N/A
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern: (All designated uses)
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
Industrial
Non-Point
X
X
X
Zn. Cu
X
TDS.TSS
TSS.Metals
Other (inc. natural)
LoFlo
*Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 221
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0_
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: N/A
*Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: N/A
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
1,000,000
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
500,000 -¦
182,701
262,90
3r imary
156,312
jieconda
2,500
y
77777
2^5, 2
59
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements4,
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
11
2
9
0
2
9
0
100%
100%
0
100%
100%
11
2
0
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
135
100%
Compliance
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
Unknown
1
20
Unknown
1
17
Unknown
100%
85%
Unknown
100%
44%
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
275
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Unknown
f Non-
Complianc
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Montana's major non-point source problems are sediment, salts and low flows
from agriculture, metals, acid drainage and sediment from mining, and sediment
from forest practices. Over 2,500 miles of streams have been degraded by
sediment, 1,400 miles by salts and 800 miles by excess water withdrawals for
irrigation. Over 400,000 acres of land have been lost from production due to
agricultural salinity, most of it dryland salinity (saline seep) in eastern
Montana where several local and shallow groundwater aquifers have been
salinized. Abandoned hardrock mines have polluted about 300 stream miles with
heavy metals. A recent flurry of placer mining and oil and gas production has
caused a number of localized sediment and salt problems. Roading and over
harvest of timber have caused hydrologic instability and sedimentation in many
streams in the forested western one-third of the state.
On non-federal lands, Montana has a nonregulatory agricultural non-point
source water quality management program administered by county soil and water
conservation districts (CDs). The program centers on CO adoption of Soil
Conservation Service (SCS) Engineering Standards and Specificatons and voluntary
application of these by producers with financial assistance from the Agricultural
Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS) cost-share program. For priority
problems, identified by the Department of Health and Environmental Sciences
(DHES), planning and implement ion funds have been provided by the Montana-EPA 208
and 205(j) programs, the state-funded Water Development, Renewable Resource
Development and Triangle Saline Seep programs, and the SCS watershed improvement
program. Technical assistance is provided to CDs by DHES, SCS, the Department of
Natural Resources and Conservation, the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks
and by other agencies.
On federal lands, the DHES has signed cooperative agreements with the U.S.
Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management giving those agencies primary
responsibi1ity for non-point source water pollution control on lands under their
jurisdiction. In cooperation with the Montana Department of State Lands, DHES
conducts a program of education, permits, and inspections to control pollution
from active hardrock and placer mines in western Montana. The two agencies also
developed a multi-media training program to educate loggers and private
forestland owners about timber harvest techniques that protect water quality.
The state is looking to the Superfund and Abandoned Mine Land reclamation
programs to remedy some of the more severe acid-mine drainage and metals toxicity
problems stemming from abandoned coal and hardrock mines.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
*0il/Gas substituted for Salt. Int.
H = Heat/Thermal
V. MATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The state has broad authority under the Montana Water Quality Act
to control pollution from both point and non-point sources. The Department of Health and
Environmental Sciences generally attempts to resolve violations through pre-
administrative action, then administrative action, and then judicial action, in that
order. The severity of the violation as well as the enforcement history of the violator
will determine the level of the initial enforcement action; in some cases enforcement may
begin at the judicial level.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 3
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 7
Number of Administrative Actions: 0
Number of Judicial Actions: 0
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 138.6 Million
Sources
103.12 Million
1.60
33.88
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
M i n i ng
Cons.
Hydro.
Oil & Gas*
Residuals
M/L
S/W
M/L
S/L
I/L
M/L
M/L
I/L
SS.M
SS.Sal.
LoFlo
SS
M, SS
pH
T.SS
H
Sal.
Nut.
By Percentage
1% State
Local
Categories of
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
Montana's clean water program represents balance and close coordination among
several component activities representing the different sections of the Federal
Clean Water Act. Recent years have seen Montana receive delegation of most of the
functions and responsibilities under that law. We have long operated under the
premise that programs such as these could be best implemented and administered at
the State level. In accordance with that philosophy we have received delegation in
the areas of construction grants, safe drinking water and waste discharge permits.
Our current clean water program has the following components:
Wastewater Discharge Permits. All discharges of pollutants to either surface
or groundwaters are controlled by the issuance of waste discharge permits. The
permit establishes effluent limits which will insure that water quality standards
are met and beneficial uses protected. Performance is evaluated through review of
self-monitoring data and periodic compliance monitoring.
Enforcement. The Montana Water Quality Act requires that the Department of
Health and Environmental Sciences make an investigation of and report on any
alleged violation of that law. Violations are documented and dealt with in an
appropriate manner, ranging from a letter or telephone communication to civil
action filed in district court.
Municipal Construction brants. Financial assistance is made available to
communities that are constructing new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities
to improve the quality of discharged wastewaters. The program generally provides
federal funds for 75 percent of the costs associated with such construction.
Grants are made in accordance with a priority list that reflects the severity of
the problem.
Water Quality Management. Water quality surveillance, monitoring or sampling
and planning are an important part of our program. Monitoring consists of
collection of baseline information on both chemical and biological quality as well
as intensive studies to identify specific pollution sources. This information is
essential to all other components of our program.
Technical Studies and Support. The impact of major activities (power plants,
pipelines, dams, etc.) on the aquatic environment requires a significant commitment
of time and effort. This portion of our program provides computer services,
maintaining a file of water quality data, and modeling as necessary to predict
environmental impacts of proposed projects.
Water and Wastewater Operator Certification. Montana law requires that persons
in responsible charge of water and wastewater treatment facilities be certified.
Operators receive training and are examined to insure competency. Approximately
1,100 operators have received such certification.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
A. Silver Bow Creek/Upper Clark Fork River
As late as 1969 the upper Clark Fork River ran red with acid mine drainage,
mine tailings and untreated ore processing wastewater for 120 miles from Anaconda
almost to Missoula, the cumulative effect of mining operations in the Butte mining
district dating back to 1864. In addition, untreated domestic sewage and urban
and industrial runoff added to the waste load of Silver Bow Creek and the Clark
Fork River. The two streams were biological deserts, incapable of sustaining a
sport fishery and associated aquatic life.
In 1954, three settling ponds (Warm Springs Treatment Ponds) were built near
where Silver Bow Creek enters the Clark Fork River. With the addition of lime,
these ponds neutralized the acid water of Silver Bow Creek and permitted
flocculation and precipitation of dissolved metals, thereby significantly
improving the water quality of the Clark Fork River. But there were occasional
upsets, the last major one occurring in 1969.
In 1970 the City of Butte, which had been discharging untreated domestic
wastewater into Silver Bow Creek, built a secondary wastewater treatment plant.
In 1975 the City started applying the sludge from its new treatment plant on the
land and stopped discharging it to Silver Bow Creek.
In 1972 and 1975, the Anaconda Company installed treatment systems at their
Butte operation that reduced the flow and contaminant loads to the Warm Springs
Ponds. Between 1980 and 1983, the Company phased out all operations at Butte and
Anaconda, further reducing flows and contaminant loads to the ponds.
Although the two streams, still suffer residual effects of extensive tailings
deposits and from storm water runoff from abandoned mining operations in Butte and
Anaconda, they have recovered to the point where fish food organisms can now live
in Silver Bow Creek and a productive trout fishery has become established in the
upper Clark Fork River. Invertebrate monitoring data collected by the Anaconda
Company at the headwaters of the Clark Fork River, which are presented below, show
that much of this recovery has occurred during the last ten years.
1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1976 1979 I960 1981 1982
IS5ENP • •Number*/mI 0 ONumber of Fomilitt
B. East Gal latin River
Before 1971 there was a lack of trout reproduction and severely depressed
trout populations in the East Gallatin River for several miles below the Bozeman
primary wastewater effluent. These problems were ascribed to ammonia toxicity,
residual chlorine and particles of organic sediment that accumulated on the river
bottom. In 1971 a new treatment plant went into operation that provided secondary
treatment to about half the wastewater flow. Pollutant loads to the river were
further reduced in 1975 and 1977 when several large sewer leaks were repaired.
Major additions to the Bozeman treatment plant, completed in 1982, provided
secondary treatment to the entire wastewater flow plus ammonia removal in a series
of infiltration-percolation cells. Preliminary data from instream biological
studies give promise of full recovery to the point that the East Gallatin River
may rival the trout producing capacity of sister Blue Ribbon trout streams in the
upper Missouri River basin of Montana.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
While the Department of Health and Environmental Sciences has been concerned
with a variety of problems in this time period, available resources significantly
limited our ability to provide special attention to each concern. Several years
ago the Department identified protection of groundwater quality as an area of
concern that, due to its importance, could not be ignored. Eventually the Water
Quality Bureau developed and is currently implementing a groundwater pollution
control program.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
- Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
While significant progress in water pollution control has been realized in past
years, the battle is by no means over. As priority problems are dealt with the
Water Quality Bureau moves on to other issues.
Although the previously discussed construction grants program has provided us
with excellent wastewater treatment facilities, we are finding their effectiveness
and efficiency somewhat limited by a lack of knowledge and/or ability on the part
of operators. We have identified a need for increased operator assistance to
protect the tremendous investment that we currently have in these treatment
facilities. Program emphasis will shift as necessary to deal with this concern.
Another remaining problem is non-point source pollution. Sediment, salts and
dewatering problems associated with agricultural activities continue to have a
significant impact on water quality. Previous attempts to establish a control
program, such as existed under the water quality management planning (Section 208)
effort were not totally successful. Non-point source pollution control is
complicated in Montana due to the vast acreage under agricultural production and
the sensitivity of farmers and rachers to regulatory control in agricultural areas.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Water Uuality Bureau, Dept. Health and
Environmental Sciences
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Loren L. Bahls (406) 449-2406
DATE: October 13. 1983
- 10 -
-------
MONTANA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
S3 Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
O Use Not Supported
-------
State of Nevada*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 488,738 1980 800,493
State Surface Area 110,540 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 14
# of River and Stream Miles 1 ,122/7,500 ml.; # of Border Miles* 1_71 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 384 / 425,400 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.m1. ac. or sq. ml. included 1n above
# of Coast Miles 0 mi.
# of Estuary sq. ml. 0 sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Colorado River/150 miles Name/Mileage Lake Tahoe/20 miles
Including Lakes Mead & Mohave
Name/Mileage Topaz Lake/1 mile Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 1,325
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swlmmable:
785*
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 1,019
~Denotes mileage designated Public Water Supply. Generally, Flshable, Swlmmable provides greater
protection than public water supply.
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
807 mi.
458
60
0
1,325 mi.
61%
34%
5%
100%
1982
807 ml.
458
60
0
1,325 mi.
61%
34%
5%
100%
NOTE: (1) A total of 4,909 miles of stream are designated Fish & Wildlife or
better. Zero miles are designated less than F 4 W.
(2) Most facilities Impacting water quality are not/have not been on line
long enough to change long term water quality.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Miles Improved: 0 0
Miles Degraded: 0 0
Miles Maintained: 0 0
Unknown: 0 0
NO CHANGE: Most facilities impacting water quality have not been on line long enough (or not on line
yet) to affect long term water quality.
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed:
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swinmable:
140,812
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored:
2. tvaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
2bb,400 ac.
14,800
5,000
0
276,200 ac.
93%
5%
2%
0%
100%
1982
256,400 ac.
19,800
0
0
276,200 ac.
93%
7%
0%
0%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
Within Change in
by Percentage Category Category
Maintained \ Improved: 0 S.UOO
Acres Degraded:
¦~/2% Improved
/
Acres Maintained: 256.400
Unknown:
- 2 -
-------
t. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Des
1. by Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
ignated Uses in 1982
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
25%
onpoint
75%
Municipal
Nonpoint
79% L
Municipal
Industrial
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
PH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
Nut.
1 Industrial
X**
Toxics
Non-Point
X
X
Turb.
i Other (inc. natural)
X
Temp/Flow
*Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 15
*Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
*Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
*Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
ana Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
1.00
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
0.50 --
.539 = T
0.81
zzzzz
.398
0.60
w
.02
Secondary
sec.w/o
Discharge
.887 = T
7777.
.093
.072
.63*1
Legend
.020
1982
Served by
wastewater
system
Secondary
Not served
sec. w/oby waste-
Dis- water system
charge
AT (Phosphorus
Removal)
Primary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc.
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Millions)
0.2--
0.1—
0.108
O.OTf
1972
0.177
,0.016
0.023
1982
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
7
4
3
0
2
0
100*
66%
0
27%***
63%
7
4
1
*Total Flow of 16 Muni Dischargers
**Reno Sparks achieved compliance December 1982
***w/o Reno, percentage would be 6%
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Noncompliance
Noncompli
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
9
0
9
Total
Permits
0
0
9
1n Effect
in 1982
0
N/A
100*
39
0
N/A
95%
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
10 0%
Compliance
100%
Noncompliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Regulations for control of irfater Pollution from diffuse sources (1980)
control non-point source pollution.
The State Environmental Commission may prescribe Best Management Practices
for:
1. Existing sources shown to significantly cause or add to water pollution
in violation of a water quality standard.
2. New sources if controls are necessary to prevent the degradation of any
water of high quality.
This program may be delegated to the county or city if requested. To date,
both Washoe and Clark Counties and the Cities of Las Vegas and Reno have been
delegated the program.
Problems are generally related to Agriculture, Hydrologic Modification and
Urban runoff.
- 6 -
-------
Summary -
Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: Nevada reviews discharge monitoring reports (OMRs) to determine
compliance with effluent limits and permit monitoring requirements. Based upon these
reviews, facility inspections are scheduled to verify violations and determine cause of
noncompliance. Depending on the severity of the violation and the associated
environmental and public health risks, the State initiates either pre-administrative,
administrative, or judical action.
Nevada conducts routine inspections of the major municipal and industrial dischargers
on an annual basis (more frequent where conditions warrant). Half of these inspections
involve sampling of the discharge.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 3
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 0
Number of Administrative Actions: 3
Number of Judicial Actions: 0
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = j 118.6 Million
es of Sources
88.9 Million
Unknown
0
29.7
0
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
M/L
M/L
I/L
S/L
M/L
S/L
N/A
I/L
Nut. +
SS
Nut.+ SS
+T
M+SS
SS
LoFlo
Temp
By Percentage
x 25%
Local
Federal - EPA
Categori
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
The Water Pollution Control Program is operated by the Department of Conservation
and Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Protection. The major activities are:
1. Permitting - both NPDES and State Groundwater
2. Enforcement and Compliance
3. Water Quality Monitoring and Quality Assurance
4. Water Quality Planning
5. Water Quality Standards Setting
6. Emergency Response
Because resources are limited, Nevada has identified the most significant
pollution problems and strategies to resolve them.
Consequently, the following areas have been determined to exhibit pollution
problems of most immediate concern and thus will receive the major concentration of
effort.
Problem Area Major WQ Problems
Las Vegas Wash/Lake Mead TDS, PO4
Truckee River (below Reno) PO4, CI, NH3, N, Toxics
Carson River (incl. both forks) PO4, NO3, Silt
Lake Lahontari PO4, 00, Turbidity
Those areas of a serious but secondary concern are:
Humboldt River Temp., Siltation, Color, PO4,
T urbidity
Walker River Silt, Turbidity, F. Coli
Walker Lake TDS, PO4
Lake Tahoe Siltation, Nutrients
Topaz Lake PO4, Turbidity, DO
The implementation of the proposed sewerage projects is significant in meeting
the 1985 goal of the Clean Water Act since the majority of the projects will be
utilizing some form of land application. The State has identified the significant
municipal dischargers and almost all are expected to terminate discharge by 1985.
The nonpoint source problems caused by existing on site disposal of wastewater
will be resolved by implementation of sewerage projects eliminating on lot
disposal. Strict enforcement of regulations for on site disposal and permitting of
subsurface disposal systems will prevent such disposal methods for new development
from causing ground water pollution or nonpoint source problems.
Agriculture and rangeland nonpoint sources are contributing the large sediment
loads to waters of the State. Those nonpoint sources contributing nutrients, heavy
metals and organic loads are urban drainage systems. The implementation of the
State's nonpoint source control law and best management practices are necessary to
achieve reductions of nonpoint source loads. These nonpoint source controls,
coupled with point source controls, are necessary to achieve the goals of the Clean
Water Act.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Basic Management Inc. (BMI), located in Henderson, Nevada, and comprised
primarily of TIMET, Stauffer Chemical and Kerr McGee Chemical, have eliminated all
process waste streams discharge to Las Vegas Wash, tributary to Lake Mead and the
Colorado River.
Numerous wastewater facilities throughout the State have reduced their
phosphorus discharges (or have gone to no discharge) to waters of the State. These
are:
1. Reno Sparks Joint Wastewater Treatment Plant;
2. Clark County Sanitation District;
3. City of Las Vegas
4. Incline Village Gen. Improvement District;
5. Douglas County Sewer Improvement District #1
6. City of Wells; and
7. Town of Battle Mountain
8. Carson City
9. Minden Gardnerville GID
10. Alamo
- 9 -
-------
I. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
-BMI process water discharges
-Las Vegas Bay degradation
-Truckee river degradation below Reno/Sparks
-Lake Tahoe degradation
-Lahontan Reservoir degradation
Part 8. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Division of Environmental Protection
Dept. of Natural Resources & Conservation
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Michael Reed (702) 885-4670
DATE: September 16. 1983
- 10 -
-------
NEVADA
1972
-N-
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
] Use Partially Supported
D Use Not Supported
-------
NEVADA
1982
-N-
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
B Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
B Use Not Supported
-------
State of New Hampshire*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 737,681 1980 918,629
State Surface Area 9,304 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 5
# of River and Stream Miles 14,544 mi.; # of Border Miles* 309.5 ml.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 1,300 / 185,600 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 70,853 ac. or — sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 17.8 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 27 sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Piscataqua R/13.0 Name/Mileage Connecticut/260
Name/Mileage Salmon Falls R/36.5 Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 14,544
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
667
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
52
d. Miles Monitored: 1,322
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
13,728.6 mi.
113.0
702.4
14,544.0 mi.
94.4 %
0.8 %
4.8 %
100%
1982
14,037.1 ml.
263.8
243.1
14,544.0 ml.
96.5 %
1.8 %
1.7 %
100%
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
Category
209.5
By Percentage
Improved \
Maintained .
Miles Improved:
Mi les Degraded:
Mi les Maintained:
Unknown:
23.5
754.3
Change in
Category
334.3
tJ. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 185,60U
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
20,108
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimtiable:
20
d. Acres Monitored: 7,291. 5
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
148,275 ac.
27
11,198
26,100
185,600 ac.
79.89 %
0.01 %
6.0
14.1
100%
1QW? -
lb7,563 ac.
20,714
7,323
185,600 ac.
84.9 %
11.2 %
3.9 %
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
/
Improved
1
Main\airred Unknown
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
1,506
3.967
16.812
Change in
Category
5,752
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 27.0 / 17.8 miles
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmabl
0 / 0
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmabl
0 / 0
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 27.0 / 0
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
11.5 sq. mi.
14.6
.9
...
27.0 sq. mi.
43 %
54 %
3 %
...
100%
1982
13.80 sq. mi.
12.7
0.5
...
27.0 sq. mi.
51 %
47 %
2 %
...
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
ciy Percentage
Improved
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
2.4
24.6
Change in
Category
b. Oceans
By Percentage
1007
Maintained
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
17.8
Change in
Category
2A
-------
D. Great Lakes N/A
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100*
lQft?-
mi.
mi.
%
loose
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. tiy Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Industrial
9°/»
M
Nonpoint
Municipal
Other 18
Municipal 't
Industrial 12%
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
r/o
Nonpoint
i. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious :
Municipal
X
X
Coli. D.O.
Industrial
X
Non-Poi nt
X
X
X
Nut. Turb.
Other (inc. natural)
X
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: Unknown
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: Unknown
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: Unknown
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: Unknown
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Mi 11 ions)
1.0-
0.9
0.8-
0.7"
0.6-
0.5-
0.4
0.3 -
0.2 -
0.1
Pri_m_ar
iecoTIJa
.782
.317
.171
148
105
irv .041
Primary
Second
.951
• 398
.230
.025
.105
ry -193
Legend
Not served
by waste-
water system
Served by
wastewater
system
Primary
Second ary
etc.
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD -| g
(Millions) qzx Legend
0.9
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
*Inc1udes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
. 4 .
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
30
13
33
15
12
31
502
9251
94*
60*
97*
99*
N/A
13
2
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
115
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1972:
1972 vs. 1982
1982:
Compliance
Non-
Compliance
6. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements+
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
0
3
19
Total
Permits
0
3
15
in Effect
in 1982
N/A
100 *
82 *
180
N/A
100 X
97 *
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Compliance \Noncompli
\ ance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Nonpoint Source (NPS) control in New Hampshire is concerned with the prevention
of NPS Pollution. Of primary concern are timber harvesting, construction,
agriculture and other sources which are episodic events. Every waterbody in New
Hampshire is impacted by nonpoint sources to some degree. Some do experience
extended impacts resulting in long-term loss of resource use. Lakes, as nutrient
sinks, are most sensitive. High value river fishery areas are severely sensitive
to turbidity and suspended solids. Coastal water clam beds are susceptible to
bacteria and metal laden urban runoff (a national urban runoff study is presently
being completed in which urban runoff control in coastal waters is a prime
concern).
Strong regulatory controls have been initiated by the State. The intent of these
controls is to, within available resources, limit the impact of altered land
use. Little control of existing urban runoff is possible given the financial
limitations (local, state and federal) placed on structural NPS control.
Best management practices for residuals (septage and sludge) disposition are
being implemented. Guidelines and technical assistance, combined with
groundwater regulations, provide a strong focus on emphasizing beneficial
utilization rather than disposal per se.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
Uroan
Ag/Irr.
Si lv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
M
M
M
N.A.
M
M
N.A.
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
C.M.SS,
C, Nut
Nut
Nut,
LoFlo
Nut, M, Ox
Nut, T
OxDe,
Ox De,
—
OxDe
De, SS, T
OxDe
P, SS, T
SS. T
SS. T
V. ADDITIONAL HATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
Tha Water Supply and Pollution Control Commission monitors performance by review of
incoming reports, complaint responses and by field inspections. When non-compliance
occurs the initial approach is usually to attempt to work with the operator of the
facility to correct the violation. In the absence of a willingness to cooperate, an
administrative order is issued; and, if further enforcement action is necessary, the
matter is referred to the Attorney General for whatever legal action is deemed
appropri ate.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
a. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1932
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 534.9 Million
ay Percentage
1.b% Other Local
;3.8% Local Match
26.2%
State
5.3% Other Federal
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
$
305.4
Other Federal:
28.0*
State:
*
140.3
Local Match:
*
20.4
Other Local:
%
40.8
Million
*FmHA Only
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
New Hampshire's Clean Water Program is a multi-faceted approach to
achieving its goal of improving and maintaining the quality of the
state's waters.
Construction Grants are used to finance publicly-owned treatment works
(PQTW). Priority scheduling optimizes the use of available funds where
the needs are greatest. POTW construction outside of the 201 program
compliments it, particularly in the rapidly growing southern part of the
state.
Permitting of municipal and industrial discharges is by both the Permits
Branch of the Environmental Protection Agency's Region I and the
Commission, with a close working relationship between them. The
objective is to identify all discharges of wastewater in an effort to
restore and maintain fishable/swimmable waters in the state. The
Commission also requires groundwater permits for discharges which could
potentially affect groundwater quality.
Enforcement of permit requirements involves the Commission, with review
by EPA. Operating municipal and private sanitary wastewater facilities
and industrial discharges are monitored for compliance.
Water Quality Monitoring determines whether compliance with permits and
legislated water quality standards has been met. Careful study of
specific surface waters, together with laboratory bioassay techniques,
are used to assess current water quality.
Non-Point Source management includes control of sediment and erosion,
urban runoff, subsurface waste disposal, and leachate from sludge and
septage disposal through permitting and technical review.
These and other associated activities are focused on the goal of
attaining and maintaining swimmable/fishable water quality.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Upgrading of Classification of Pemiqewasset River
The Pemigewasset River, in north central New Hampshire, had been subject
to a history of decline from a prime trout stream to a grossly polluted
stream receiving untreated and partially treated effluent from four
major industries and seven municipalities. A report published in 1966
noted that the "condition of the stream is generally worse (< Class C)
than at the time of the earlier study ( 1958) due to population and
industrial growth." Through the efforts of the public and local, state
and federal officials, pollution of the "Pemi" has been essentially
eliminated and it is now a productive and enjoyable river. On May 24,
1983, the Governor signed a new law which reclassified almost 12 miles
of the "Pemi" from Class C to Class B to reflect the river's existing
quality and to provide for future protection of this valuable aesthetic
and economic resource.
Kezar Lake Restoration
Kezar Lake, a 180 acre water body located in Southwest New Hampshire,
had an early history as an attractive recreation site for fishing,
swimming and boating activities. Discharge of secondary effluent from
the Town of New London to Lion Brook, tributary to Kezar, began in
1931. Over the years, this effluent carried high levels of the plant
nutrient phosphorus to Kezar, resulting in massive algae blooms and fish
kills by 1961 thus drastically reducing its recreational appeal.
Tertiary treatment was added in 1970 and reduced the phosphorus, but
problems persisted. A study was initiated in 1981 sponsored by the
federal clean lakes program to assess Kezar and recommend restorative
measures. Diversion of all effluent from New London to Sunapee out of
the watershed occurred by 1982. Restoring Kezar by sealing the
phosphorus rich bottom sediments with alum was recommended in the study
and implemented during the summer of 1983. Initial results are very
encouraging. Lake clarity increased dramatically to pre-pollution
levels; phosphorus levels were cut in half and obnoxious algae were
reduced. The need for additional treatment and watershed controls will
be addressed in a follow-up monitoring program.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
New Hamshire's rapid population growth (25% in 170*s) has aggravated those
impacts on water quality related with growth, particularly in the southern half
of the state. Dredging, filling, logging and other intrusions in wetlands are
regulated by permit proceses of the WSPCC and the Wetlands Board. Prime
wetlands may be designated at the community level and receive special
protection. Sediment and erosion control plans must be reviewed and approved by
WSPCC for developments disturbing 100,000 feet^ or more. Disposal or
utilization of septage as well as sludge has been inadequately addressed at the
state level. Hazardous waste transportation and disposal are currently
regulated by the Office of Waste Management, but discovery and clean up of
pre-existing sites continue to be major problems which have received highest
priority for the past two years. Development of a siting process for low level
radioactive wastes remains before a legislative study committee. Oil spills
have been cleaned up by WSPCC since 1979, and industrial discharges (NPDES)
permits issued since '73 have achieved a significant improvement in effluent
quality.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Septage and sludge disposal (or, preferably, beneficial utilization) promise
to be even more difficult to resolve in coming years. Monitoring of existing
land disposal sites is needed.
Acid rain impacts upon aquatic systems are well documented, but reduction of
emissions of acid rain precursors remains in the political arena. Of New
Hampshire lakes and ponds studied in recent years, 84% have alkalinities of 10
or less. All remote, high-altitude trout ponds examined do. Aluminum, soluble
in acidic water supplies, needs to be examined for possible public health
effects.
Improved education and enforcement efforts are needed for greater compliance
with permit processes for dredge, fill, logging, etc., in or on the border of
surface waters and for significant alteration of terrain.
For disposal of low level radioactive wastes, possible interstate compacts
or agreements as well as an approved siting process may be developed by the
legislature, with WSPCC staff assistance.
Several problems remain which are related to the lack of economies of scale
in smaller community wastewater treatment plants. Updated use ordinances are
necessary to assure adequate pretreatment of industrial discharges into local
POTW's.
Industry must identify and treat for those priority pollutants that are
present in its wastewaters.
As fuel storage tanks age, the likelihood of leaks increases. Underground
tanks, particularly, pose a difficult-to-detect pollution threat.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: New Hampshire Water Supply and
Pollution Control Commission
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Richard Flanders (603) 271-3398
DATE: September 1, 1983
- 10 -
-------
NEW HAMPSHIRE
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
CH Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-------
J
NEW HAMPSHIRE
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
9 Use Supported
CD Use Partially Supported
SI Use Not Supported
-------
State of New Jersey*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 7,171,112 1980 7,364,823
State Surface Area 8.204 sq. miles (7,505 land sq. miles)
# of River Systems/Basins 5
# of River and Stream Miles 6,448 ml.; # of Border Miles* 439 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 380 / 23,977 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 900,000 ac. or 1,400 sq. mi.
(fresh and saline wetlands)
# of Coast Miles Tj?0 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 420 sq. mi. (estuarine open waters)
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Hudson River/Upper New York Bay/26 mi Name/Mileage Atlantic Ocean/127 mi
Name/Mileage Delaware River and Bay/253 mi Name/Mileage Arthur Kill/Raritan Bay/33 mi
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers (Fresh waters)*
1. a. Miles Assessed: 6,100
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than
1.300
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than
0
d. Miles Monitored: 1.030 miles
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
235 mi.
770
110
4,985
6,100 mi.
4%
13%
2%
81%
100%
1982
365 ml.
640
95
5,000
6,100 mi.
6%
10%
2%
82%
100%
~Approximations
- 1 -
Fishable/Swimmable:
Fishable/Swimmable:
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
Bv Percentage
Maintained T ,
Jmproved
Degraded
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Category
400
100
450
Change in
Category
150
50
5.000
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 18,923
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
488
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 5,728
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1Q7P _
ac.
18,923
18,923 ac.
100*
100%
1982 -
13,593 ac.
3,788
1,542
0
18,923 ac.
72%
20%
8X
0
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Within Change in
Category Category
Not Available
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans*
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 1,225 sq. mi. /
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmabl
5 sq. mi. /
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmabl
450 sq. mi. /
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 1.100 sq. mi. /
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partial ly
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
762 sq. mi.
83
380
0
1,225 sq. mi.
62*
7*
31*
0
100*
1982
772 sq. mi.
162
291
0
1,225 sq. mi.
63*
13*
24*
0
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Degraded
17% I
b6% 4.
37%
Improved
Maintained
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
200
100
350
Change in
Category
80
30
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Degraded
Miles Maintained:
roved
Unknown:
Within
Category
50
25
285
Change in
Category
31
50
~Approximations
2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100*
1982-
mi.
mi.
*
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
Unknown/Other
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
86%
Other (toxics)
Municipal
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
Other
1% Industrial
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
PH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
**
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
DO. Nut.
I ndustrial
X
X
X
X
X
SS.Toxics
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X
Coli. Nut.
Other (inc. natural)
X
**Iron and Cobalt
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics:^ 30
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics:^ 212
~Number of Estuary and Ocean Square Miles Affected by Toxics:^ 40_
~Number of Ocean and Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Mi 11 ions)
7 -
6 -
5 -
4 -
3 -
2 _
1 "
1.80
Primary
2.96
Second:
0.79
AST
0.55
1.11
H
0.67
z
1.39
Primary
3.8A
Second
0.87
AST
0.62
0.01
Legend
H
Served by waste-
water system
Not served by
wastewater system
Primary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
Popul ation
Equivalents
of BOD
(millions) 15.0"
12.5-
10.0.
7.5-
5.0-
2.5
15-0
Legend
Generated
Discharged
2K
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a.
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements"1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading/
Regionalization
1982
1982**
1972
Interim Permits
Final Permits
N/A
298
N/A
230
Total
N/A
77%
Permits
in Effect
N/A
40%
in 1982
N/A
100
298
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
ana
1982:
77%
Compliance
**Total Permits
Noncompliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982**
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
N/A
1.018
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements"*"
N/A
804
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
N/A
79*
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
N/A
65%
1.018
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
N/A = Not Available
~Approximation
**Total Permits
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982**
By Percentage
1972:
Not Available
**A11 Non-Municipal Facilities
79%
Compliance
21%
Noncompli-
ance /
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
The quality of New Jersey's surface waters are affected by nonpoint sources of
pollution. Nonpoint source pollution is particularly complex because of the
diversity and intensity of land uses in most watersheds of the State. Prominent
nonpoint sources in New Jersey include drainage from agricultural areas (bacteria
from animal wastes, nutrients and pesticides) and contaminated runoff from
urban/suburban areas including the heavily urbanized and industrialized regions
(runoff consisting of toxics, sediment, nutrients, bacteria, petrochemicals and
metals). New Jersey's 12 Water Quality Management (208) Plans identify nonpoint
sources as contributing various pollutants at levels often equal to, or greater than,
loads generated from point sources. This has frequently resulted in difficulty in
meeting designated stream uses.
In an effort to mitigate the impacts of nonpoint sources in New Jersey, federal,
state and local agencies have been increasingly active in the area of water quality
management planning and implementation. Agricultural nonpoint source pollution, such
as soil erosion, loss of cropland nutrients and manure storage runoff, have been
receiving much attention through the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) and State
Soil Conservation Districts (SCDs). The SCS has completed 11 watershed protection
projects in the State designed to reduce soil erosion and agricultural related water
quality problems (3 additional projects have been authorized for installation). The
16 state SCDs review construction, mining, silvicultural and land disturbance
activities for compliance with State Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Standards.
The NJ Stormwater Management Act, passed in 1981, amends the State's Municipal Land
Use Law to require that updated Municipal Land Use Plans and Ordinances contain
provisions for stormwater quality/quantity management. A number of New Jersey
counties have stringent stormwater control ordinances for new development, requiring
ground recharge for both water quality and ground water protection.
Other activities in New Jersey directed at reducing nonpoint source pollution
include the Stream Encroachment Permit program which currently proposes environmental
standards for stream and hydrological modification projects; Water Quality
Certificates (Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act) for dredge and fill
projects; New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for
significant nonpoint sources and ground water discharges; and special nonpoint source
controls in the State's coastal zone (through the Coastal Area Facilities Review Act
of 1972). The NJ Department of Environmental Protection is seeking to sponsor county
demonstration projects for various watershed protection issues in the State. These
- 6 -
-------
projects will focus on stormwater detention/retention basin maintenance, aquifer
protection, remeaial measures for nonpoint source control and on-site system
management.
Increasing concern in New Jersey is being centered on the spread of toxic and
hazardous substances through nonpoint sources. Major commitments by the State have
been made to stuqy and correct this problem. There now exists statewide spill
containment requirements for industrial and chemical/fuel storage sites, and known
hazaroous waste sites receive NPDtS permits as site mitigation and clean-up
activities are underway.
The increasing number of existing and proposed nonpoint source control programs
and activities in New Jersey signifies the recognition of this pollutant source as a
major water quality problem that must be effectively dealt with if state and national
clean water goals are to be met.
- 7 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban1
Ag/I rr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.**
Residuals2
Severity &
Extent
S/W
S-M/L
T/L
I/L
M/L
M/L
S-M/L
S/L
Primary
Pollutants
C,M,Nut.
OxDe
C,Nut.,
OxDe.P,
SS
0*
SS,T
SS,T
LoFlo
Sal
M,0x De,
P, PH
0* = temperature/stream shading ** = Primarily a ground water concern
1 Includes Suburban ^ Includes Land Disposal
V. MATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: Enforcement efforts are initiated on routine compliance monitoring
inspections, review of self-monitoring reports and/or complaints received from public and
private concerns. Enforcement is undertaken in a progressive process unless the severity
of the situation would warrant immediate referral to the Attorney General with the
issuance of court ordered injunctions. This progressive approach begins with
consultation or negotiations via telephone calls, letters and conferences to arrive at an
agreeable solution to the given situation. This initial effort is highly successful and
averts formal actions in many cases. The formal actions proceed with the issuance of
directives that detail the violation, direct a remedy within a given time frame and
notifies the party of its potential liabilities. Failure to comply with a directive
results in an Administrative Order which may include a penalty assessment. Further
failure to comply results in a referral to the A.G.'s office for formal litigation.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 1,491
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 1,047
Number of Administrative Actions: 171
Number of Judicial Actions: 43
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 3,874
By Percentage
bn \
f Federal / 7% > State
^ 1% Other
Local
Million
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
1,824 M i 11 i on
16
292
316
1.426
- 8 -
-------
C. Program Activities
Water Quality Monitoring - The basic need for sound water quality monitoring
programs has not decreased in the 10 years since the passage of the National Clean
Water Act, but rather increased. New Jersey has utilized primarily fixed-station
monitoring networks in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency and
United States Geological Survey. Although the actual number of surface water
monitoring stations sampled by the Department of Environmental Protection has
decreased over the last ten years, the type of monitoring conducted has
diversified. Intensive surveys for waste load allocation and system analyses
purposes number 2-3 per year; lake surveys have been performed on all public lakes
in the States; baseline sampling programs for determining the extent of
carcinogenic and toxic substances statewide is among the most comprehensive in the
nation; greater resources are being used for ground water ambient and pollution
monitoring; and cooperative monitoring agreements with sub-state agencies is now
underway. Quality Assurance of data gathering and analysis techniques; and
computerized data storage, retrieval and analysis require separate programs.
Bacterial sampling of the State's ocean, coastal and estuarinee waters will
continue as in the past so that shellfish harvesting areas can be properly
classified.
For the future DEP anticipates greater levels of effort in the following:
intensive surveys for the purpose of identifying specific water pollution sources
and stream conditions, sub-state ambient monitoring activities, and ground water
quality data collection and analysis. DEP performed fixed-station monitoring will
play a lesser role.
Water Quality Management - Water quality management planning in New Jersey has
evolved full circle since initial planning activities were performed under the
auspices of the Clean Water Act. Basin plans, for the purpose of identifying
basin-wide wastewater treatment needs, were generated for the State in the
mid-1970's as the first comprehensive planning activity. Subsequently, the 12
areawide Water Quality Management (208) Plans analyzed both point and nonpoint
source impacts and named management agencies for control of these forms of
pollution. A Statewide Water Quality Management Plan has recently been produced by
the DEP as part of the continuing planning process, while designated Water Quality
Management agencies continue work on various projects of local interest. Water
Quality Management Plan consistency determinations and amendments are major
planning activities that are currently underway and will be ongoing in the future.
The DEP is requesting and encouraging the local Water Quality Management agencies
to perform these consistency determinations. In addition, the preparation and
revision of State Water Quality Standards and Water Quality Inventory Reports are
considered an integral part of the State's water quality planning work. Other
planning activities underway in DEP include waste load allocation/stream system
analysis, sludge and septage management planning and numerous
site/watershed-specific problem solving projects.
Permitting The proper permitting of point sources and other actions having adverse
environmental impacts is a major goal of the DEP. Prior to EPA's delegation of the
NPDES program to New Jersey in April, 1982, (subsequently, known as the New Jersey
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/NPDES program), the Department reviewed and
certified NPDES permit applications/renewals for EPA Region II. Upon delegation
the State inherited a backlog of 500 unissued and expired permits which will take
over 2 years to eliminate (there are currently approximatly 1600 permitted
discharges irt the State). NJPDES permits are issued to surface and ground water
point source discharges, selected runoff sources (primarily industrial sites known
- 9 -
-------
or suspected of containing hazardous substances and or petroleum products), sludge
disposal locations and solid waste disposal sites. Support activities include
wasteload allocation studies; sewer ban reviews; development of a comprehensive
municipal ordinance strategy addressing sewer bans; technical and conceptual review
of sewerage treatment plants; preparing and computerizing permits, their associated
limitations and self-monitoring data; and maintaining fee schedules so that the
NJPDES program is adequately funded. Industrial pretreatment programs are being
developed that rely heavily upon local agencies for implementation, with some
programs funded by Construction Grants monies.
The DEP has also streamlined the issuance and review of Division-required permits.
Water Quality certificates, NJPDES and Division Resources permits are coordinated
through a centralized office for technical review and consistency determination
with Water Quality Management Plans. This coordinated permit effort, alongwith
operation of the NJPDES program, will better identify and mitigate impacts on our
water resorces.
Construction Grants Program - The building of new, enlarged and advanced municipal
sewerage treatment facilities through the Construction Grants Program (CGP) has
been a major accomplishment of the Clean Water Act. Since 1973 $3.8 billion have
been obligated for the construction of water pollution control facilities in the
State, with an estimated $6.4 billion additionally needed through the year 2000.
To ensure the most effective allocation of these monies the DEP performs these
functions: reviews all facility plans (including construction plans and
specifications); develops and implements new plans where necessary; monitors and
tracks projects; prepares project priority lists and systems; conducts need
surveys; maintains computerized grant files; develops innovative/alternative
systems for wastewater treatment and land disposal systems; and coordinates review
of projects with other programs as necessary. In October, 1981 the DEP was granted
total program assumption under the Delegation Agreement executed with EPA. This
delegation expedites the project review and approval process by consolidating the
process into 1 program within DEP.
The CGP has been involved in 2 issues that will become of greater concern in the
future. First, DEP engineers have been working with local agencies to solve
operational problems occurring at treatment facilities. The success rate for
correcting these problems has been high. Secondly, the DEP has proposed an
innovative funding mechanism to spread limited monies to as many needed existing
and proposed facilities as possible. The proposed "Infrastructure Bank" would
convert construction grant monies to zero or low interest loans for use in a
revolving account. National and State legislation is required to bring about this
proposal, however.
- 10 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Southern Coastal Estuarlne Maters
New Jersey's shellfisheries resources have continued to support viable commercial and
recreational interests, largely because of water pollution control efforts. This is especially
true in the resource rich estuarine waters of Ocean, Atlantic and Cape May Counties. The
estuarine waters of these southern coastal counties, while only comprising 20% of the bays and
estuaries monitored for shellfish growing water quality in the State, accounts for
approximately 65% of the State's total annual shellfish harvest. This represents a significant
portion of the State's annual shellfish dockside value of $28.5 million.
The coastal estuaries and bays of Atlantic County have appeared to be the prime beneficiary of
higher treatment efficiences at municipal sewerage facilities and the abandonment of small,
poorly operating facilities into regional system. In the early to mid 1970s the County's
estuarine waters were classified by the NJDEP Bureau of Shellfish Control primarily as
condemned or special restricted (meaning shellfish can be harvested but they must undergo
further processing to cleanse themselves). Because of the large resource base found in these
poor quality waters they were able to support a relay program. This involves taking clams from
special restricted or condemned waters to approved waters for a minimum of 30 days. This
allows the clams to purge themselves of contaminating bacteria and or viruses. Antiquated and
primary municipal treatment plants discharging to the County's back bays were the principal
reason for the poor quality of these shellfish growing waters. Atlantic County and the DEP
recognized early in the Construction Grants program the need to eliminate these primary
treatment plants for the purpose of restoring shellfish harvesting areas and protecting the
many bathing beaches in the region. As a result, the proposed Atlantic County Sewerage
Authority's Coastal Region sewerage project progressed at a fast pace and received high
priority in the State's early Construction Grants Project Priority List. The result was the
completion of a secondary treatment facility in 1977 discharging to the Atlantic Ocean.
Water quality benefits to the County's back bays became evident in only 2 years. Shellfish
growing areas monitoring in 1978 and 1979 for Atlantic County's back bays resulted in
approximately 5,000 acres being upgraded from condemned to seasonal, special restricted or
approved categories. Water bodies like Reed Bay, Absecon Bay, Lakes Bay, Scull Bay and Somers
Cove once again became viable shellfish harvesting areas. Bacterial data collected in 1979
showed further water quality improvements in Steelman Bay, the Broad Creek area of Reed Bay and
Scull Bay, resulting in approved status to nearly 2,200 acres.
The upgrading and or regionalizaion of municipal treatment facilities up and down New Jersey's
coast has had positive impacts on water quality, and subsequently, the State's shellfish
industry. The elimination of primary treatment plants discharging to the ocean has also
produced the upgrading from condemned to approved status of over 22,000 ocean acres. The DEP
considers these waters quality improvements just one of the most significant in the State since
the early 1970s.
- 11 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
The number of major issues concerning water quality in New Jersey have grown over
the past decade. This is not due to an inability to solve existing problems, but
rather the i dent i f icat ion of new and or unanticipated problems. Improving
treatment efficiencies at the majority of the municipal and industrial wastewater
facilities was the prime concern for the State in the 1970s. The construction of
new regional facilities, upgrading existing treatment works and ensuring permit
compliance made up much of the OEPs early water pollution control efforts.
However, the new issues that developed were numerous and varied, and included:
maintaining water quality while developing new diversions for water supply needs
and meeting existing needs; expanding our knowledge of ground water quantity and
quality in the State, developing a ground water permitting program, and responding
to major increases in ground water pollution incidents; identifying the presence
of toxic and potentially carcinogenic substances in the State's water environment;
controlling the spread of toxic and hazardous substances from abandoned and
existing landfills, accidentia! spills and industrial facilities; initiating
pretreatment guidelines and programs; developing alternatives to the ocean dumping
of sewage sludge and studying the impacts of such dumping on the marine
environment; developing alternatives to centralized and conventional municipal
sewerage works; controlling the illegal disposal of septage; monitoring and
studying the occurrence of red tide in near shore ocean waters; and understanding
and controlling where possible nonpoint pollution sources.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
2 - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
New Jersey has placed heavy emphasis on the correction of the first 3
problems noted above. The recent 1980-1981 drought precariously reduced many
community water supplies to only a few days reserve and underscored the need to
develop additional water supply sources. Protecting the in stream quality of the
State's major water supplies is an integral part of developing these new
sources. New Jersey has nearly 140 landfill/dump sites that are known to be
contaminating surface and/or ground waters. This, in combination with the high
number of operating and abandoned chemical, petroleum and other industrial
facilities points to the potential for harmful toxic substances contamination in
many areas of the State. Ground waters are of major concern as demand for it
increases {approximately one-half of the State currently relies on it for water
supply), pollution incidences rise, water levels drop and salt water intrusion
occurs. Operationally within the DEP, the NJPDES permit program remains
backlogged with unissued and expired permits it inherited when the program was
delegated; an improved working framework for NJPDES ground water permits is
needed; proper fee schedules reflecting administrative costs must be devised;
and, if municipal treatment needs are to be met to the year 2000 and beyond,
innovative/alternative funding mechanisms will be required in the face of
severely reduced federal support.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: N.J. Dept. of Environmental Protection
Division of Water Resources
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: John Gaston - 609-292-1637
DATE: August 15, 1983
- 12 -
-------
Footnotes
Reflects only miles/acres wnere toxics have prevented a designated use (i.e. waters where
closures and fishing bans are in effect due to toxic substance contamination).
Mileage/acreage figures do not reflect areas identified with low levels of toxic substance
contamination, but only where a use has been prevented.
Square mileage figure represents area of tidal and costal waters where PCB contamination has
resulted in a closure of the waters for a use, (specifically, the sale of striped bass and
American eel taken from specified waters is prohibited). In addition to this closure,
fishing advisories have been issued by the State of New Jersey on the following fishes in
specified coastal waters, because of PCB contamination. The advisory recommends that they
not be consumed more than once weekly (area of advisory extends beyond State's jurisdictional
waters. The fish include:
- bluefish, (individuals exceeding 24 inches in length or 6 pounds in weight)
- white perch
- white catfish
- striped bass
- American eel (all waters statewide)
- 13 -
-------
NEW JERSEY
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
B Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
N
I
-------
NEW JERSEY
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
El Use Not Supported
-------
State of New Mexico*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN HATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 1,017,055 1980 1,302,894
State Surface Area 121.166 so. miles
# of Basins 1J
# of River and Stream Mi1es*a. 3,500 mi.; # of Border Miles* 1^_7 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage *b. NA / NA ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. ma ac. or NA sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles NA mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. NA sq. ml.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Rio Grande/1.7 *c. Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mil eage_
*a. Includes main-stem reservoirs. *b. Only main-stem reservoirs are
designated in the standards.
*c. Approximate mileage. State line wanders back and forth across rfver.
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 3,500
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
1.500 (domestic water supply)
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: (Points were monitored, not miles of stream)
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
3,450 mi.
50 mi.
3,500 mi.
99%
n
100*
1982
3,450 mi.
50 mi.
3,500 ml.
99%
IX
100*
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
100%
Maintained
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Category
0
0
3,500
Change in
Category
0
8. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed:
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Acres Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
147? H
ac.
ac.
100%
ac.
ac.
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Within Change in
Category Category
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — by Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
100%
Nutrients
c. Lstuaries ana/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
2. by Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
L>i scharge
Sources
Col i.
U.U.
Nut.
PH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
Nut.
Industrial
Non-Point
X
Nut.
Other ;inc• natural)
*Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 0
*Number of Lake/keservoir Acres Affecteo by Toxics:
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
dumber of Ocean or treat Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: .
F. State Maps tor 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
ana River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
111. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
b
Legend
Number of
People
(Mi 11 ions)
2
Does Not
Require
System
Non-Rur al
Not served by
wastewater system
Q-ooq
1.023 ^
0.09
.0
Requires
System
0.006
0.18
Non-Rura
0.8
0.?68
Treatment
.6
Secondary
Primary
Served by waste-
water system
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
Secondary
0.169
Application
etc.
Application
1970
1980
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
Population
hquivalents
of BOD
(m i11 ions)
1.0-
0.8-
0.6-
0.1.-
0.2-
>66
.?A
V
! 977
1.257
,110
.525
19«2
Legend
Generated
Discharged
7
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Level b
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a.
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
10
2
14
3
0
10
30*
0*
71*
15.8*
0*
87*
7
2
4
Total
Pernits
in -ffect
in 1982
45
+]ncludes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982
1972** Interim Permits
3982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
22
29
0
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements*
15
23
0
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
68*
79*
0*
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+*
63
*0nly the power plants have flow requirements.
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
**July - Sept. 1979 is substituted for 1972.
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
19/2: 1982:
21% \
Non-
Compliance
Compliance
68%
Noncomplianc
Compliance
IV. NUN-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
While tne principal categories of nonpoint sources that occur in New Mexico
are discharges to ground water (including oischarges from residual wastes/land
disposal and mining) ana agriculture/irrigation, pollutants from these sources
have little-to-no impact on attainment of designated uses of surface waters.
This same conclusion holds true for other nonpoint sources. Existing uses were
carefully considered when designateo uses were specified for stream segments.
Ground Water Discharges. In 1977 New Mexico adopted ground water quality
regulations designed to protect ground water of 10,000 mg/1 or less total
dissol vea sol i ds for present ana potential use as domestic and agricultural water
supply. Under these regulations an approved discharge plan is required in order
to discharge to ground water.
Mgriculture/Irrigation. Both tne Water Quality Management Plan and the Soil
and Water Conservation Plan encourage a voluntary program of sediment control
through the use of management practices. The water quality basins identified as
priorities for sediment control are the Upper and Middle Rio Grande, the
Arkansas-Wnite-Reo Rivers, the Pecos River, and the San Juan River.
A recent addition to the Water Quality Management Plan is a voluntary program
intended to help reduce salt loading resulting from irrigation return flows. The
benefit to be realized from use of suggested structural and management practices
is presently unquantifiable.
Si lviculture. A manual on management practices has been prepared and a
voluntary program of implementation is being encouraged through an information
ana education program.
Hyg-ologic Modification. Dissolved oxygen violations in the Pecos River
below Carlsbad have been attributed in part to low flow during the irrigation
season resulting from dams and diversions. Nevertheless, this segment is able to
support its designated use of warmwater fishery.
Urban Stornwater. Generalized over Una runoff in the Mi dole Rio Grande,
including urban runoff from Albuquerque, results in short-lived fecal coliform
bacteria violations during the summer thunderstorm season that do not affect
attainment of designated uses.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent*
Primary
Pollutants
* Surface water impact only.
** Extent includes both rangelands and irrigated acreage.
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC) has
determined that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) should be the primary
enforcer of NPlJES permit limitations. Under WQCC regulations the state must wait a 30-day
period after USEPA has provided written notice of violation to a discharge before enforcing
WQCC regulations on discharges to surface waters.
Under state law, the state must make "every reasonable effort to obtain voluntary
compliance". Necessary further action is determined by consultation between legal and water
pollution control staffs to fit the specific case. Judicial enforcement is handled under
water quality and/or nuisance statutes. As an administrative alternative, the WQCC may
accept an assurance of discontinuance negotiated with the charger that sets forth steps and a
timetable to remedy the violation.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 12
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 12
Number of Administrative Actions: 12
Number of Judicial Actions: 4 .
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
of Sources
150 Million
50
30
20
20
- 7 -
Urban
Ag/Irr. **
Si Iv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
I/L
I/W
NA/L
NA/L
NA/L
M/l
NA/L
NA/L
C
ss (Ag)
sal (Irr)
Lo Flo
TOTAL INVESTMENT = S 270 Million
By Percentage
.Other federal
Categoric
6 %
State
1.h% Local Match
7.W Other Local
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
-------
Program Activities
The Water Quality Control Commission, the policy and rule-making body for
water pollution control, was established in 1967 under the NM Water Quality
Act. The Commission has delegated major responsibilities for administering
Commission regulations and other programmatic activities to the NM
Environmental Improvement Agency (EIA) and its successor agency, the NM
Environmental Improvement Division of the Health and Environment Department
(E1D).
In 1972 tne Commission was actively involved in the development of a water
pollution control program for New Mexico. The Commission revised its
regulations to allow easier incorporation of future regulations. Throughout
the year the Commission discussed the applicability of its regulations to
specific situations, its relation to other regulatory agencies, and delegation
of its authority. The Commission endorsed EIA's requirement for certified
operators at plants receiving construction grants funding and EIA's proposal to
develop more stringent water quality standards to protect mountain streams.
In 1982, on the other hand, the Commission was involved in administrative
oversight and perfection of water pollution control programs. The Commission
held a series of discussions on state primacy in the underground injection
control (UIC) program and authorized EID and the Oil Conservation Division to
proceed with the steps in the primacy process. The Conmission approved
assurances of discontinuances, negotiated by EID, with a municipality, a
privately owned wastewater treatment plant, and an electric generating plant
that laid down conditions, schedules,and sanctions for coming into compliance
with Commission regulations. The Commission also adopted stringent wasteload
allocations, developed by EID, for two municipal dischargers to mountain
streams. A municipality was fined because of continued violations of a
stipulated judgment. The Commission adopted revised stream standards for one
stream segment and brought the state's standards into line with the most recent
updating of Colorado River Salinity Forum standards. Appointments were made to
the NM Utility Operators Certification Advisory Board.
In a similar way EIA's limited water pollution control program developed
into EIO's comprehensive program between 1972 and 1982. In the former year,
EIA's water quality program, which had a staff of 15, was directed primarily at
construction of water and wastewater facilities. Water quality surveillance
techniques were still being developed and the staff available for this activity
was limited to two. In contrast, in 1982, EID's Water Pollution Control Bureau
had a 47-member staff engaged in an integrated program of surface and ground
water monitoring and surveillance; enforcement of Commission regulations
regarding discharges to surface water, ground water quality protection, and
certification of water and wastewater utility operators; administration of the
wastewater construction grants program; and planning and evaluation for program
effectiveness. Along with this growth the water supply and water supply
construction grants program and the individual liquid waste disposal program
had been established as separate programs with central office staffs of eight
and two respectively. These programs also use EID's 99-member field staff
located throughout the State.
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
1. Successful state enforcement action against an industrial discharger.
State enforcement action regarding Public Service Company of New Mexico's
(PNM's) San Juan Generating Station is apparently resulting in the recovery of an
aquatic ecosystem in Shumway Arroyo, which received the discharge of power plant
wastewater. The state conducted a detailed compliance sampling inspection of the
plant in May, 1980. The results of this monitoring along with self-monitoring data
indicated numerous NPDES permit violations. Observations of Shumway Arroyo in April,
1982, indicated that the arroyo was essentially devoid of life. Erratic and
short-term fluctuations in salt and mineral components of the discharge may have been
responsible for eliminating aquatic life.
Due to the continuing noncompliance of the plant with state regulations
regarding discharges to surface waters and ground water quality protection, the state
negotiated an assurance of discontinuance with PNM. The assurance required PNM to
meet interim effluent limitations, take specified actions to remedy the problem, and
to develop a discharge plan for environmentally safe discharge of effluents. The
assurance also specified monitoring penalties for violations.
On May 2, 1983, the state disapproved PNM's plan for discharges into Shumway
Arroyo. As a result, the discharge was discontinued on May 13.
A state survey of the arroyo in August indicated that the lower portion of the
arroyo supported a healthy invertebrate fauna similar to the San Juan River to which
it is a tributary. In addition, mosquito fish were observed in pools.
2. Maintenance of water quality in the Middle Rio Grande water quality basin.
Despite considerable population growth in the middle Rio Grande Basin, stream
surveillance and compliance monitoring indicate that water quality has been
maintained at levels adequate to support all the designated uses assigned to the
basin's water bodies. From 1970 to 1980 the population of this basin increased from
about 380,000 or 35% of the state's population to over 560,000 or over 4011 of the
state's population.
The Middle Rio Grande Basin Plan, completed in March, 1976, concluded that, "In
general, state and local water quality management programs in the Middle Rio Grande
Basin in New Mexico are meeting present needs." The plan further noted that,
"Upgrading of treatment facilities for several municipal point sources in the basin,
including Albuquerque, Belen, Bernalillo, Los Lunas, and Socorro, is underway."
Since 1976, these plants have been upgraded through the wastewater construction
grants program.
The wastewater construction grants program, however, is not the only activity
which is responsible for the maintenance of water quality in the basin. Other
factors contributing to this accomplishment are the NPDES permit program, state
compliance sampling of municipal treatment plants under contract with the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the state wastewater operators certification
and training program, and enforcement actions taken by the state and USEPA against
permit violators, such as Bernalillo.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Increasing amounts of domestic wastewater effluents resulting from increasing usage of
recreational developments as well as inadequately treated sewage in New Mexico's mountain
areas create severe water quality impacts on our limited high quality cold water resources.
Primary emphasis has been given to these stream segments in obtaining compliance with
discharge regulations by utilizing the full array of pollution control activities including:
stream surveillance, enforcement, construction grants, and technical assistance and/or
utility operator training.
Contamination of ground water is a widespread problem in New Mexico. This is an
especially serious problem in a State like ours where public water supply systems obtain 94%
of their water from ground water sources, and nearly 909S of rural domestic water supplies
come from wells. Since ground water regulations were adopted in February 1977, over 227
discharge plans (permits) have been approved which provide for prevention of ground water
pollution. Focus on prevention of ground water pollution through regulations is a continuing
priority since ground water pollution is difficult to correct once it has occurred.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Discharges to ground water will continue to remain serious problems. Discharges of
concern include domestic wastewater effluent, dairy effluent, base and precious metal milling
discharges, and hydrocarbon fuel leaks.
1. The magnitude of discharges from dairies combined with the location of new dairies in
urban-fringe areas, often where the ground water is shallow, and the expansion of
population centers to surround older dairies creates considerable potential for ground
water pollution and public health risks.
2. A recent compilation of existing information indicates that ground water contaminations
from hydrocarbon fuels is unexpectedly widespread.
3. A survey of potential ground water discharges completed in 1980 and both undocuments
reports and field data developed since that time indicate that organic chemical compounds
are a widely distributed and significant contamination problem.
At the treatment plant operator level, some of the most frequently occurring factors
limiting municipal wastewater treatment facility performance are: lack of sewage treatment
understanding among operators; ineffective application of concepts and testing to process
control; and inadequate process control testing.
A majority of the municipalities in New Mexico have outdated rates for sewage assessment
and hook-up fees. Consequently, they are unable to generate the capital needed to provide
adequate operation and management, staff, spare parts inventories, and replacement costs for
wastewater treatment facilities. In addition, municipal governments often lack the technical
information necessary to manage wastewater treatment facilities. These shortcomings result
in poor quality wastewater treatment and water pollution.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: N.M. Environ. Improvement Div.
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Douglas Schneider (505) 984-0020
DATE: September 16, 1983
- 10 -
-------
NEW MEXICO
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
8 Use Supported
] Use Partially Supported
n Use Not Supported
\
-N-
-------
NEW MEXICO
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-------
State of New York*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 18.191.000 1980 17,558.072
State Surface Area 49.576 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 17 Basins
# of River and Stream Wiles 70.000 mi.; # of Border Miles* 242 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 4.000 / 3.392.000 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./so.mi. 945.419 ac. or 1,477 so. ml.
# of Coast Miles 3.102 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 160 miles/20 sq. ml.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Niagara RivertNY & Canada)36 mi. Name/Mileage St. Lawrence River(NY &
Canada)!20 mi.
Name/Mileage Delaware River (NY & PA)86 mi. Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed:^ 3.400
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
567
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
252
d. Miles Monitored: 3.400
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
1,468 ml.
Data Not
Available
1,932
0
3,400 mi.
43%
57%
100%
1982
2,176 ml.
379
845
0
3,400 ml.
64%
11*
25%
100%
waste discharge and which have been the subject of national attention over the
past 10 years are assessed 1n Part II of the report. Successes and shortfalls
of public wastewater discharge control policies governing these waters are
measured In Parts II.A.2, II.B.2, II.C.2 and II.D.2.
Nonpoint sources adversely Impact many additional water bodies In the State. A
discussion of these nonpoint source related problems and the activities
undertaken to control these sources is discussed in Part IV.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
Improved
Maintained
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Category
N/A
0
2,692
Change in
Category
708
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 578,714
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
104.200
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
Unknown
d. Acres Monitored: 578,714
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972 -
ac.
Data l\
ot Available
ac.
100*
1982 •
.
430,565 ac.
67,447
80,702
0
578,714 ac.
74*
12%
14%
100%
*Data not available
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Within Change in
Category Category
Data
Not
Available
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
N/A
N/A
N/A
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 523 /
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0 /
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
62 /
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 523 /
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
325 sq. ml.
67
131
0
523 sq. mi.
63%
135!
24%
100%
1982
325 sq. mi.
118
80
0
523 sq. mi.
63%
23%
14%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Irnprovedsq-Mi'De9raded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
472
Change in
Category
51
NOTE: The term "maintained" means water quality has not
improved nor worsened.
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed: *4,144 mi2
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swimtnable:
4,000 mi2 approx.
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 4,144 mi2
~Includes only portion of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario within New York.
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
584 mi.
0
3,560*
4,144 mi.
14*
0
86%
100*
1QB?-
584 mi.
0
3,560*
4,144 mi.
14*
0
86*
100*
* A health advisory exists in Lake Ontario on the human consumption of certain fish
species.
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
W ithin
Category
Change in
Category
100%
Maintained
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
0
4.144
Note: Waters maintained means water quality has not improved or
worsened.
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses In 1982
T. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. lakes and Reservoirs
Municipal
Industrial
Municipal
31*
Industrial
Industrial
50%
Other
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
Industrial
Municipal &
Other
Industrial
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
D,0.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb,
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
X
X
DO/Col1.
Industrial
X
X
X
X
X
Toxics/BOO
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
Nut./Toxics
Other (inc. natural)
X
X
X
Nut./Turb.
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 92 segments/542 miles
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 849 seqments/73.707 sq. mi.
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: 405 sq. mi.
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes M1. Affected by Tox1cs:+ 3.560 sq. mi.
+Great Lakes only.
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
17.6
Number of
People
(Millions)
18
17 -
16 ~
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
7
6 1
W
18.2
Unsewered
4.0
-85
Primary
6.25
Secondary
5-25
Tertiary
1.85
W
Unsewered
3.5
.42
Primary
2.12
Legend
Not served
by waste-
water system
Secondary
8.74
Served by
wastewater
system
Primary
Secondary
etc.
Tertiary
2.82
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOO "Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Millions)
35 -j
30
25
20
15 -
10 -
5 -
29.2
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972 1982
*Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a.
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements'*"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
in Effect
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading***
1972
1982**
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
150
143
90
106
Total
6051!
74.5*
Permits
Not
Available
70%
in 1982
561*
60
37
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
~Information not readily available
***Some need operational assistance
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1972:
*A11 municipal discharges
1972 vs. 1982
1982:
25.5* X,
Non-
Compliance
Compliance
k0%
Noncompliance
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982** 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements"1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
~~Information not readily available
400
579
50
518
12.5%
89.5*
Not
Available
85%
Total
Permits
in Effect
1n 1982
6.439*
*A11 material, private, commercial, and
Industrial
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Noncompliance
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Reconnaissance studied by the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC) show nonpoint source impacts on waterways are widespread in
the State. Approximately 460 streams (4,730 miles) and 170 lakes (600 square
miles) have quality problems caused by nonpoint sources. Eighty percent of the
problems are caused by sediment and nutrients from stormwater runoff.
Groundwaters are also contaminated. Leaking industrial chemical and
petroleum storage tanks, industrial site runoff and mismanagement of consumer
products and pesticides are a serious problem at some locations. Nearly
one-third of the landfills in the State do not meet the standards necessary to
protect groundwater quality.
Several initiatives have been undertaken by DEC to control nonpoint sources:
A model implementation program has been initiated to demonstrate the
effectiveness of management practices in controlling nonpoint sources.
The area selected is the West Branch of the Delaware River which feeds
Cannonsville Reservoir, a major source of drinking water for New York
City.
A stream corrdior management manual which contains guidance on good
conservation practices for improving water quality is nearing completion.
Agricultural agencies (ASCS and SCS) have been contacted to establish
priorities for deployment of technical and cost-sharing resources for
improvement of water quality.
Legislation has been enacted for protection of sensitive aquifers and for
control of bulk storage of petroleum.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
M/L
M/L
I/L
I/L
M/L
I/L
M/L
S/L
C, S S
O.M
C.S S.O
0
0
0
0
Sal.
C. M, 0
0 = Other (Nutrients, Sediments, Toxics)
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: New York has established enforcement priorities which consider
factors of public health, existing water quality and water use classifications. Although
enforcement is pursued for all dischargers in violaton of permit requirements, priority
is given to dischargers creating a public health problem or impairing best uses of a
receiving water. Within this policy framework, the State requires all industrial,
private, commercial, institutional and municipal dischargers to upgrade and/or operate
their facilities as necessary to achieve water quality or public health objectives
without regard to the availability of State or Federal financial support.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: (722 Total)
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
98 In Noncompliance
79
18
1
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $_
4.602
By Perc^t^ge
_Mi11 ion (72-82)
2,760 Million (Prior to 72)
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
1972-82
Mill ion
S 3.500
$ *
% 443
$ 659
S N/A
Prior to 1972
Million
$ 1,540
774
449
N/A
* Available through EPA Grants Information Control
System
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
Although the elements of New York's Clean Water Program have not changed over
the last ten years, the program emphasis on each element has changed. In 1972, the
New York State DEC was directing its resources toward the abatement of conventional
pollutants. Today, control of toxic pollutants, disposal of wastewater treatment
plant residuals and maintenance of treatment plants are the areas of priority
concern.
1. Water Quality Planning
1972- New York has a long history of water planning. In 1965, the State Legislature
authorized the Department to carry out a program of comprehensive sewerage
planning. These plans, which were prepared for each NYS county, identified
economic opportunities for inter-municipal solutions for the treatment of
domestic sewage.
1982- In 1980, the last of over 200 local plans were prepared. Today's planning
focus is on management of toxic and hazardous pollutants emanating from point
and nonpoint sources as they affect surface waters or critical groundwater
aquifers.
2. Water Quality Standards
1972- Historically, the Department has enforced standards of bacterial quality,
dissolved oxygen and total dissolved solids.
1982- Recently, the Department initiated the use of ambient criteria for setting
toxic limits on discharge permits. With experience, these criteria will be
incorporated in surface water standards.
3. Monitoring
1972- In 1972, DEC used an extensive network of surface water ambient monitoring
stations and intensive stream surveys for determining waste assimilation
capacities and setting discharge limits. Limited benthic "species diversity"
evaluations were also carried out. No organized groundwater quality monitoring
was in place or contemplated.
1982- In 1976, monitoring of the water column, sediment, and fish flesh for priority
toxic pollutants became an ever more important element of New York's monitoring
program. Plans for monitoring toxics in groundwater are now being considered.
4. Nonpoint Source Implementation
1972- Nonpoint pollution problems were not inventoried in 1972 except for water
quality impacts of CSO discharges and phosphorus loads.
1982- Since 1972, nonpoint source problems have been catalogued and several control
programs implemented. Phosphorus detergents have been banned. Use of certain
septic tank additives have been banned on Long Island. Pesticide applicators
are licensed. We are developing legislation and technical guidance for
chemical storage. "Cradle to grave" management of toxic wastes is being
implemented under RCRA.
- 8 -
-------
5. Operation & Maintenance/Training
1972- In 1972, a program to certify treatment plant operators was underway.
Municipal operators were given pre-certification training and classroom
training in specific advanced skills.
1982- Today's OJM training program contains the same elements as in 1972. However,
more emphasis is placed on providing technical assistance for the operation of
specific facilities. An industrial operator training and certification program
is also under consideration.
6. Emergency Response
1972- In 1972, cleanup of petroleum and hazardous material spills was the
responsibility of the discharger. Court actions were sometimes necessary to
effectuate the proper cleanup actions.
1982- Today, there is more emphasis on spill prevention. Spill prevention plans and
BMPs are in place for many industries particularly the petroleum industry.
When accidental spills of pertroleum happen, New York has a spill response fund
to implement cleanup actions where the discharger cannot be identified or when
immediate action Is necessary. In addition, we are developing protocols for
the reasonable removal and treatment of spill related groundwater contaminants.
7. Discharge Permits
1972- Permits were written to control conventional pollutants in municipal and
industrial discharges. During the early 70's, great strides were made in
controlling conventional pollutants from paper mills.
1982- Today, permits are being issued for industrial toxic discharges. At least one
municipality, with very significant industrial contributions is being required
to meet toxic pollutant effluent limits. Sixty municipal programs for
industrial pretreatment are also underway.
8. Enforcement
1972- In the late 60's and early 70's, many actions were taken against municipalities
and industries reluctant to treat their wastewaters.
1982- Today, there is a greater emphasis on providing technical and financial
assistance for pollution control. However, enforcement continues against the
dischargers who remain truly recalcitrant.
9. Construction Grants
1972- In 1965 and again In 1972, New York State voters passed multibillion dollar
bond acts to finance the construction of facilities for hundreds of
municipalities.
1982- Construction of facilities for the remaining municipalities without adequate
treatment capabilities continues.
- 9 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Return of the Mohawk River
Since 1966, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and its
predecessor, the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, have awarded more
than $100 million to 24 communities a 2 countywide area on and near the Mohawk
River to construct secondary and tertiary wastewater treatment plants and other
water pollution control facilities such as interceptor sewer systems, collection
systems, force mains and pumping stations.
The USEPA and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation can
now report that all projects have been built and are in operation. Only two plants
are currently unable to meet prescribed effluent limits and need additional
upgrading of treatment facilities. These facility improvements are scheduled for
completion in the mid-1980's.
Throughout the 1970's and into the 1980's, fishing has steadily improved on the
Mohawk River. Both large and smallmouth bass have come back and it is not uncommon
for fishermen to catch 30 to 40 rock bass in a few hours. Bass close to 20 inches
long and walleye of nearly 30 inches have been caught. Northern pike have
returned, and insects such as the delicate mayfly have reappeared along the river.
Reports of rainbow and brown trout, two of the most pollution-sensitive of all
fish, have been noted. The Mohawk is becoming an excellent fishery.
New York State DEC operates a water quality surveillance network with
monitoring stations along the Mohawk to show long-term trends in water quality.
Dissolved oxygen levels, one of the analyses conducted on a routine basis, provides
an overall indication of the health of the stream. Since the 1960's, dissolved
oxygen levels have steadily increased on the middle and lower reaches of the river
and are well within ranges that would be considered good quality. Studies of
biological organisms in these sections have shown increasing diversity of species -
an indication of the improved health and stability of the river environment.
The positive effect of the Clean Water Program has paid off, not only in terms
of far cleaner waters, but in the renewed enthusiasm shown by sportsmen, nature
lovers, and the general public for the river as a natural asset and recreational
stream. It is no longer necessary to bypass the Mohawk in order to enjoy boating,
canoeing and fishing or to watch the wildlife that thrives along wetlands and
waterways.
The river today teems with people, both on the water and along it shores. On
sections above and below Schenectady, boat access sites have been built and bike/
hike paths have been constructed along the shores and on the old Erie Canal
towpath. On a warm summer day it is not uncommon to see canoers, fishermen,
pleasure boats, and water skiers sharing the river while hundreds more enjoy the
bicycle path.
Pollution Control on the Susquehanna
The New York State reach of the Susquehanna River below Binghamton has
generally returned from a long era of decline.
Its rejuvenation is due to the concerted effort of Federal, State and local
governments to construct the necessary municipal wastewater treatment plants. An
$11 million Binghamton/Johnson City treatment plant was finished in 1975 and a $4
million facility at Endicott went on the line in 1972.
- 10 -
-------
And now monitoring stations all along that reach of the Susquehanna are reporting back good
news of cleaner water.
Data at the Vestal monitoring station shows that oxygen depletion has been cut by half, and
potentially dangerous bacterial contamination reduced 10-fold, from a total fecal coliform
count of 10,000 per liter of water to 1,000 and frequently less. Reduced total suspended
solids have also been recorded.
Data taken at the Smithboro station farthest downstream from the new municipal treatment
plants shows marked decreases in coliform bacteria counts.
Fish such as walleyed pike, smallmouth bass, and muskellunge are back in numbers. That
stretch of the Susquehanna, once mired In pollution, is showing the symptoms of a healthy river
again.
- 11 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Substantial progress has been made in controlling pollution over the last two
decades. The challenge to public officials for the 80's and 90's will be to
maintain this progress and to address those remaining problems associated with
point and nonpoint source control.
Over $7 billion has been invested in wastewater disposal works over the past
two decades. This has resulted in water quality restoration for 64% of the waters
in the State impacted by wastewater discharges. If this progress is to be
sustained, it will be necessary to assure that disposal facilities constructed
over the past 20 years are properly operated, maintained and rehabilitated during
80's and 90's. Water quality planning studies conducted under Section 208 show
that local sewer agencies and local governments are unable to fully meet these
responsibilities. New York is concerned that any neglect of these facilities will
seriously jeopardize public investments in environmental controls.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
- Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
sources.
- Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
In the early 70's, toxics in the State's waters became a major concern. While
water quality problems from conventional wastewater discharges were being
eliminated, toxics in groundwater, surface water and aquatic life were being
discovered. Today, there are 542 miles of the State's waters contaminated with
toxics not counting Lake Ontario where a health advisory on eating Ontario fish
have been issued. And there is a growing realization that toxics are even more
pervasive and widespread than what is known to date. Pretreatment programs,
permits for toxic discharges and BMPs for toxic controls will be necessary in the
80's to prevent further degradation by toxic chemicals.
Groundwater is a critical component of New York's water resource. Six million
people in the State rely on groundwater as their sole or primary source of water
supply. We are beginning to see evidence that historically clean and abundant
ground water supplies are in fact victims of past neglect. About 60 wells have
been ruled by the State Health Department as unfit water supplies. Quality
problems identified to date include chemical contamination from agricultural
pesticides, misuse of consumer products, poor chemical and petroleum storage
practices, urban runoff and nitrate contamination by septic tank systems.
Thousands of sources of contamination are located directly over the State's
critical water supply aquifers.
These can be broadly grouped as nonpoint sources but other more convention!
nonpoint sources also effect the waters of New York State. Silt and erosion
limits the quality of many water supplies and fisheries. Nutrients from upland
areas stimulate algal blooms and cause concomitant odors 1n drinking water
supplies and reduce aesthetic quality of recreation waters. Even the pristine
waters of the Adirondacks are impacted; by acid rain and natural processes which
place limitation on the fishery and water uses for production of quality paper
products.
- 12 -
-------
Types of nonpoint source water qual
Water Supplies
- tastes and odors
- clogging of water treatment
plant filters
- higher treatment costs
(chlorine, coagulants)
impacts include:
Recreation
- weeds/boating
- turbidity/bathing
- odors/aesthetic
Fisheries
- f1sh kills
- decrease in productivity
- habitat loses
Not all nonpoint source related problems can be practically controlled.
However, many of the nonpoint problems are man-induced, exceed reasonable levels
of tolerance and can be partially mitigated through the application of good
management and conservation practices (best management practices [BMPs]).
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
Division of Water
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Mr. Dan Barolo. (518) 457-6674
DATE: September 1. 1983
- 13 -
-------
NEW YORK
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
n Use Supported
CD Use Partially Supported
[9 Use Not Supported
-------
NEW YORK
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
Q Use Partially Supported
¦ Use Not Supported
-------
State of North Carolina
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 5.082.059 1980 5.881.766
State Surface Area 52.712 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 16
# of River and Stream Miles 39.150 ml.; # of Border Miles* 15 ml.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 88 / 320,000 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./so.m1. 3.380.000 ac. or 5.300 sq. ml.
# of Coast Miles 320 ml.
# of Estuary sq. ml. 3.200 sq. ml.
& Sound
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mi 1eage Lake Wylle (Catawba R1ver)/15 ml Name/Ml1eage
Name/M11 eage Name/M11 eage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 39.150
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than F1shab1e/Sw1mmab1e:
6-540
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Flshable/Swlmmable:
131
d. Miles Monitored: 13.350
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
28,265 ml.
7,360
3,525
--
39,150 ml.
72.2*
18.8%
9.0%
—
100%
1982
32,083 ml.
5,669
1,398
--
39,150 ml.
81.9%
14.5%
3.6%
—
100%
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
Mamta
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
7.067
28.265
Change in
Category
3.818
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 310.300
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
160,000
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 295.000
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1Q7? -
265,123 ac.
30,877
0
—
296,000 ac.
1 <7 / b
89.6*
10.4*
0
—
100*
igs? .
270,123 ac.
40,177
0
—
310,300 ac.
87*
13.08
0
—
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
ntained
Within
Category
200
Degraded
Acres Improved:
% Improved
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown: --
*Includes 14,300 for new reservoir.
- 2 -
274,213
Change in
Category
12,450
21.750*
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed:
3.200
/ 2.935
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmabl
0 / 0
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmabl
0 / 0
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 2,400 / 2.200
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
2,129 sq. mi.
1,050
21
--
3,200 sq. mi.
66.5%
32.8%
0.7%
100%
1982
2,691 sq. mi.
500
9
3,200 sq. mi.
84.1*
15.6%
0.3%
—
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
18%
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Improved
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Degraded
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
0
250
2.388
Change in
Category
562
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
10056
1982-
mi.
mi.
%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Industrial
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
10%
Industrial
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
•
O
•
o
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
X
DO. Nut.
Industrial
X
X
X
X
DO. Toxics
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
Nut.. Turb.
Other (inc. natural)
X*
Toxics
~High background levels of metals such as mercury, iron and copper as well as high natural
levels of phenols.
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
960
22.630
200
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2. rem
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Mi 11 ions)
6
5 -
i» -
"5 -
2 -
5.?A = T
2.58
ZZ2
0.17
1.04 - I
0.25
0.12
Primary
2.12
Secondary
Tertiary
2.E
V777
_059_
1.50
0.81
1972
1982
Legend
Not served
by waste-
water system
0.25
0.03 Primary
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
Advanced
Tertiary
Primary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc.
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of SOD
(Mi 11 ions)
~| Influent
BOD = 225 mg/1
2.^1
2.93
2-5 -
2.0 -
1.5
1.0-
0.5-
0.57
Efflue
BOO =
53mg/l
19mg/l
1972
1982
Legend
Generated
Discharged
7
JBt-
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Level s
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+ Includes "No-Discharge" facilities
115
28
93
28
22
81
24
79
86
20
84
79
90
28
12
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
351
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
8y Percentage
1972:
1982:
Compliance
76%
Noncompliance
Compliance
Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
159
7
190
Total
Permits
53
6
179
in Effect
in 1982
33
86
94
2,013
60
0.6
98
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Compli unce
67%
Noncompliance
Comp1i ance
Noncompliance \5%
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
The Water Quality Management Plan for North Carolina, developed as part of the
208 planning effort, identified sediment as the most widespread water quality problem
in the State. Sediment has severe physical, biological as well as chemical impacts
in the streams, lakes and estuaries of North Carolina. Physical problems include
turbidity, filling of lakes and navigable waters, increasing water treatment costs
and aesthetic problems. Biological impacts Include reduced light penetration,
reduction in habitat for fish food organisms, clogging of the gills of fish and other
organisms, etc. Sediment is also associated with nearly all other nonpoint source
pollutants. A large portion of the nutrients entering waters in runoff as attached
to sediment (particularly phosphorus). Toxic metals in urban runoff are primarily
bound to sediment. The U.S. Soil Conservation Service has estimated the erosion rate
for various types of land use as well as estimated the sources of total erosion.
Average Annual Rate of Erosion 'or Various
Categories of Land Use m North Carolina*
Erosion in Tons /acre-year
Percent of Total Eroaion in North Carolina by
Land Us« Category*
n Total Erosion
'Gfoit jnrwji rrouon >c Vortti ' jrollno if tuifnoito hy u.
Soil Strvice (o bt ,T. !4d. lib tons. The\e cattyon
uccQo'U tor i ft etctti of 83% of f owl eroiian
-------
It must be noted that this information is total erosion and not sediment yield to
waterways. However, it does provide an indication of the impact of various land uses.
Several demonstration studies have been conducted for various best management
practices (BMPs) to reduce nonpolnt source pollution. N.C. Agricultural Research
Service has approximately 13 test watersheds throughout the State where BMPs such as
grassed waterways, buffer strips, minimum or no-till, soil testing and strong
producer educational programs have been utilized. In addition, a five county
regional planning group has demonstrated the effectiveness of various alternatives to
conventional septic tank/drainfield systems; the Division of Forest Resources has two
study sites for various forestry BMPs; and the Division of Environmental Management
(DEM) conducted a three year study on a residential and central business district
sites on the effectiveness of street sweeping in improving urban runoff quality. DEM
biologists have conducted several evaluations on the instream benefits of nonpoint
source BMPs.
The Mater Quality Management Plan for North Carolina outlined strategies to
control nonpoint source pollution. A "lead agency" concept is being utilized for
program implementation. Agencies having management responsibilities over activities
directly impacting water quality are considered lead agencies. A process called
"management agency designation" is being used to clearly define the responsibilities
of these lead agencies. This process also establishes a tracking mechanism to
evaluate the success of BMP implementation programs. While many agencies have
incorporated water quality concerns into their ongoing programs, this process
formally establishes a line of communication to the Governor regarding water quality
issues. It also ensures that the significant momentum generated over the last
several years is maintained into the future.
At present, progress for agriculture and silviculture are voluntary programs;
however, cost incentives are being utilized in some critical areas. There are
regulatory programs for control of sediment from mines and construction activities.
An urban runoff control program is being formulated.
- 7 -
-------
Summary -
Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mi ning
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
S/L
S/W
I/W
S/L
S/L
M/L
M, Nut.
SS, C
SS, Nut.
P, c
SS
Nut.
SS
SS
Sal, Lo
flow
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The N.C. Division of Environmental Management has a goal of
compliance for all permitted dischargers. DEM negotiates compliance through use of
technical assistance, noncompliance notification, conferences, administrative orders,
consent order and civil penalties. Municipal facilities are not allowed to accept
additional wastewater (sewer connections) if they are not adequately treating this
wastewater. Non-compliance facilities must request permission for sewer connections, and
these requests are granted only with an agreement on means of achieving compliance.
Enforcement actions such as civil penalties are generally reserved for emergency
situations where there is quantifiable environmental damage such as fish kills. Issuance
of civil penalties is an administrative action. Judicial actions are necessary only to
collect civil penalties.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
30
30
14*
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
*Note: Mori tori urns are imposed by Statute
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 1,296
By Percentage
Million
Other
ncal
e d r r a 1
[PA
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Categories of Sources
582 Million
77
154
154
329
Other Federal
*00/ \ 1?^/ (JL .
\ S State
Local Match
- 8
-------
C. Program Activities
The following is a listing of objectives of the Water Quality Program by
Program Area:
PERMITTING - A. Operation and maintenance of an effective discharge permit
system and water quality certification program in a manner as to provide
enforceable controls on wastewater discharges necessary to protect and enhance
water quality. B. Review and processing of plans, specifications and other
supporting documents for the construction of wastewater collection, treatment or
disposal facilities to assure adequate protection of water in a cost effective
manner. C. Coordination of permitting activities with other State and Federal
agencies.
COMPLIANCE - A. Implementation of a pretreatment program to assure protection
of local wastewater treatment facilities and maintenance of receiving water
quality. B. Conduct compliance inspections/monitoring activities necessary to
meet program requirements and provide technical assistance to wastewater operation
whenever possible. C. Development and maintenance of a computer based compliance
tracking system.
MONITORING AND TECHNICAL SERVICES - A. Continue operation and evaluation of
the ambient water quality monitoring program to provide adequate information to
assess water quality conditions of the State's waters. B. Conduct surveys,
special studies, and data evaluations for specific water quality problems. C.
Perform modelling analyses and waste load allocations for proposed wastewater
dischargers. D. Continue data evaluation to define characteristics and develop
appropriate management practices for urban stormwater.
OPERATOR TRAINING - A. Conduct schools and special courses to train all levels
of wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) personnel. B. Administer examinations and
certify WWTP Operators at all grade levels. C. Continue evaluation and validation
of the WWTP examination process.
PLANNING - A. Develop and Implement additional strategies for control of water
pollution from nonpoint and point sources. B. Work with state agencies designated
for various nonpoint control programs to optimize program implementation. C.
Continue evaluation of the trophic conditions of the impoundments of coastal waters
of the State while working with all local officials adjacent to eutrophic waters to
ensure correct and equitable solutions to these problems. D. Insure optimum
utilization of time and resources for delivery of the water quality program. E.
Plan water quality activities to provide timely and accurate public understanding
of important issues.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION - A. Continue to promote the Stream Watch Program to
allow citizen Involvement in water quality protection and improvement. B. Provide
timely information for program activities at various public functions (eg. State
Fair).
- 9 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
I. Chowan River Restoration Project
The Chowan River is located in Northeastern North Carolina and has been
suffering from severe blooms of the blue-green algae since the early
1970's. This river is essentially a freshwater estuary which begins at the
NC/Virginia stateline at the confluence of the Blackwater and Nottoway
Rivers. It is a scenic river lined with Cypress trees and numerous small
creeks and has historically supported excellent commercial and sport
fishing. Fishing success and the aesthetic qualities of the Chowan River
have been declining since the onset of the algal blooms.
The State of North Carolina initiated research efforts on the algal
bloom problems following severe blooms in 1972. A cooperative effort with
the State of Virginia to develop a management plan and control program was
initiated in early 1979 following massive surface blooms with fish kills
during the summer and fall of 1978. North Carolina completed a management
plan in June 1982 indicating the required reductions in nitrogen and
phosphorus from the entire watershed (Virginia and North Carolina). The
plan also indicated how North Carolina could achieve their portion of the
required reductions through a program of municipal and industrial point
source controls and best management practices for agricultural runoff. All
municipalities in the North Carolina portion of the Chowan River basin will
have land application systems for wastewater by 1986 which will eliminate
nutrient inputs from these sources. North Carolina industries contributing
nutrients to the river have either substantially lowered their nutrient
inputs or ceased operation. State and federal agricultural agencies are
pushing an aggressive program for voluntary BMP implementation in the basin
by providing cost-sharing money, educational programs, demonstration farms
and technical assistance.
The problems of the Chowan River are not yet solved. About 75 percent
of the watershed lines in Virginia and their portion of the management plan
will not be completed until September 1983. The Chowan River continues to
suffer from declining fishing success and severe blue-green blooms even
during the summer of 1983. However, the efforts in the North Carolina
watershed are beginning to substantially reduce nutrient inputs to the
river. This joint point and nonpoint control program is being used as a
model for other areas of the State. With a similar effort in the Virginia
portion of the Chowan River watershed, the eutrophication problems will
eventually be minimized.
II. Neuse River Dissolved Oxygen Levels
As can be seen in Section III.A. 1. and 2., there have been large
improvements in the treatment of municipal wastewater in Worth Carolina
since 1972 . The estimated average effluent carbonaceous BOD concentration
in 1972 was 53 mg/1 and this value has been decreased to approximately 19
mg/1 in 1982. The Neuse River is one system where the improvements in
municipal wastewater treatment have had a marked impact on instream
dissolved oxygen levels.
- 10 -
-------
During the late 19501s and early 1960's, there were several locations
along the Neuse River where dissolved oxygen (DO) approached 0 mg/1 during
low flow periods of the summer and fall.
NEUSE RIVER
I HI
o nn
a nr*
a nrr
MDHtM HIMMS MUW MUHfKlO SaOUOW) limiON
v V 7 ? W V
i
I
s
a
si
8
RIVER HUES
The DO sags occurred downstream from major municipalities such as Durham,
Raleigh, Goldsboro, Klnston and New Bern. An industrial discharger, Wake
Finishing Company, also had a large impact on the river. By 1973, many of the
upstream dischargers were capable of at least a secondary level of treatment.
Advanced wastewater treatment facilities have been put Into operation at many
municipalities since 1973.
DO levels in the Neuse River have improved to the point that levels below
the state standard of 5 mg/1 are very rare. Some additional upgrading of
wastewater treatment facilities is still necessary in the Neuse River Basin.
Eutrophication problems resulting from point and nonpoint source nutrient inputs
are also just being addressed. However, the upgrading of wastewater treatment
along the river has served to dramatically improve the Neuse River water quality.
- 11 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
During the 1970's, the major emphasis of water pollution control programs in
North Carolina has been to minimize pollution from point source dischargers.
Nearly 1.3 billion dollars has been spent on upgrading municipal wastewater
facilities in North Carolina from 1972 to 1982. This expenditure has resulted in
a substantial improvement in effluent quality (See Section III.A.).
There is still a need for additional funding primarily for many smaller
municipal facilities. Substantial efforts have been expended in order to permit
industrial dischargers during the early 1970's. Approximately percent of all
industrial dischargers were in compliance with these discharge permits in 1982.
Since 1977, nonpoint source pollution problems have been a particular concern,
particularly erosion programs throughout the State and eutrophication of coastal
waters. Programs have been developed to deal with various nonpoint source of
pollution; however, implementation of these programs requires additional effort.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
' - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Coastal waters of North Carolina are exhibiting severe signs of eutrophication,
organic pollution, bacterial contamination, and excessive freshwater inflow.
Developing and implementating appropriate management strategies for point and
nonpoint source pollution to these waters is a high priority. Separate standards
for primary nursery areas are being considered as one approach to the coastal
problems. Eutrophication problems may necessitate additional requirements such as
nutrient removal from point source discharging.
Implementation of nonpoint source control programs is necessary to reduce
sediment inputs to the State's waterways as well as minimize other problems such
as eutrophication of inland resources. Increased erosion control is considered
the cornerstone of an effective nonpoint source control program.
The entry of toxic materials to the State's waters is an area of current and
future emphasis. Increased toxic evaluation capabilities through the use of a
mobile bioassay laboratory is allowing a comprehensive approach to evaluating
industrial and municipal (with contributing industries) effluents. An effluent
screening test procedure is being utilized to optimize the use of the mobile
laboratory.
Despite the improvement in wastewater treatment in the last decade, wastewater
discharges are still a significant cause of water quality degradation. There are
nearly 1,200 miles of degraded stream segments in North Carolina and much of this
degradation is at least partially attributable to inadequately treated
wastewater. Funds for upgrading wastewater facilities are still required in order
to minimize degraded segments.
Compliance monitoring activities will be directed toward non-compliance
facilities by a priority approach. Facilities are being targeted for standard
inspection to provide maximum assistance and on-site evaluation. This approach
allows the program to increase the number of "in-compllance" facilities and to
increase State personnel visibility among all facilities to encourage maintenance
of compliance and proper operation.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Division of Environmental Management
N.C. Dept. Natural Resources & Comm. Develop.
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Bill Kreutzberger (919) 733-5083
DATE: August 31, 1983
- 12 -
-------
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
B Use Supported
ED Use Partially Supported
a Use Not Supported
NORTH CAROLINA
1972
-------
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
¦ Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
I Use Not Supported
NORTH CAROLINA
1982
-------
State of North Dakota*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 617,761 1980 652,695
State Surface Area 70,665 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 4
# of River and Stream Miles 5,109 mi.; # of Border Miles* 428 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 165 / 862,375 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 1.5 million ac. or N/A sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles N/A mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. N/A sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mi 1 eage Red River/400 Name/Mi 1 eage N/A
Name/Mileage Bois DeSioux/28 Name/Mileage N^A
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 5,109
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swlmmable:
0
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 5,109
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
2,807 mi.
2,302
0
0
5,109 ml.
55 %
45 %
0
0
100X
1982
4,518 ml.
591
0
0
5,109 ml.
88 %
12 %
0
0
100%
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
Category
1,711
3,398
Change in
Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 850,000
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 770.000
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partial ly
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
*1972 -
ac.
ac.
%
No Data i
ivailable
100X
1
-------
E. Causes for Less .Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Point
Source
Municipal
Industrial
Nonpoint
W,'o Other
(Natural)
Industria
12%
50%
Nonpoint
37% \
Other
(Natural)
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
Ammonia
Industrial
Non-Point
X
X
X
Other (inc. natural)
X
X
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 25
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 5,000
(Fish kills resulting from suspected
unionized ammonia toxicity)
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: N^A
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Legend
.7
.6 -
.5 -
A -
.3 -
.2 _
.1 _
187,261
10,000
62,300
Primary
358,200
Secondary
Not served
by waste-
water system
150,000
502,000
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
Primary
Secondar
etc
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
1972 1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Millions)
.7
.6
.5
A
.3
.2
.1
559,2^1
58,520
62^,600
27,'»00|JH30
Legend
Generated
Discharged
%
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Pennits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
"""Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
33
10
1
23
22
9
21
67%
90%
91%
ro
88%
95%
20
10
5
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
284
Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Noncompliance
67%
Compliance
91%
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
14
0
25
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements*
12
—
23
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
86%
—
92%
83
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
99.9%
—
99.9%
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Noncompliance
Compliance
Noncompliance,
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
In North Dakota, the nonpoint sources of pollution that were identified in the
208 plan are agriculture, surface mining and land reclamation, construction,
irrigation, and silviculture. The water quality problems resulting from these
nonpoint sources are nutrients, salinity, suspended sediments, and fecal
coliform. The nonpoint source program has identified agriculture as the major
nonpoint problem and has stressed the control of pollution from agricultural
activities through a volunteer program with emphasis on education, technical and
cost share assistance, research, and monitoring. The nonpoint programs are
implemented on an individual hydrologic unit basis with initial emphasis on
improvement and protection of water quality in North Dakota lakes and
impoundments.
To date, there are five hydrologic units implementing measures to improve water
quality in the individual lake or impoundment. Intensive monitoring is also
underway in these units to determine the effects of best management practices on
runoff quality. Monitoring has shown improvements in implemented areas but not
enough monitoring has been done at this time to calculate true percentages of
improvement.
With the reduction in 208 monies, North Dakota is depending, to a great extent,
on a statewide educational program stressing minimum and no-till cropping with
the hopes of keeping the spring runoff on the land and reducing the nutrient rich
waters to our lakes and reservoirs.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
I/L
M/W
N/A
I/L
I/L
I/L
N/A
I/L
M.Nut
Nut.C.
N/A
SS
SS
Nut.
N/A
M.P
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
North Dakota's initial concern is to eliminate or at least minimize any pollution as quickly
as possible. To this end, we determine the source and work with the responsible party.
First, we seek voluntary compliance. Appropriate remedial measures are identified and an
adequate time frame for their completion is determined. As a final step, an administrative
order is drawn up outlining these items. If the requirements of the order are not properly
followed or stronger enforcement action is deemed appropriate, Complaints, Consent
Agreements, Orders for Judgment and Judgments may be filed. The severity of the pollution,
the degree of cooperation provided by the responsible party, any costs the party may have
incurred during cleanup, and any costs the party may incur to permanently eliminate the
pollution source are all items which are considered before the extent of legal action is
determined.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $_
By Percentage
103.5
Million
Categories of Sources
Local
Match
3% Other Federal
1% Other Local
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
78.5 Million
3.5
19.5
2.0
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
There is much more awareness and great steps made in the environmental programs
in North Dakota as in other states in the nation in the past years. Some
programs that have advanced environmental control in North Dakota are the 208
planning program, the ambient water monitoring program, the discharge
permitting program, clean lakes program, and the municipal construction grant
program. In the past ten years, a combination of the 208 planning process, the
ambient stream monitoring, and the clean lakes program has enabled North Dakota
to identify and prioritize water quality problem areas. This included
identifying the sources of pollution and also the corrective methods to be
implemented to solve the problems. As a result, there are four lake and
watershed improvement programs and one site specific or intensive water
monitoring program in progress on a river reach below a major city's discharge.
In the past ten years, the discharge permitting program has given the State of
North Dakota the necessary authority to regulate and inventory the municipal
and industrial discharges within the State of North Dakota. North Dakota
presently has primacy in the NPDES permit program, the construction grant
program, the underground injection control program, and the safe drinking water
program. The above mentioned programs have been very instrumental in improving
and controlling all point discharges within the state and the plans for the
future are to maintain this level of excellence in the point source area and
put major emphasis on nonpoint pollution within the State of North Dakota.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
The Red River of the North, which forms the eastern border of North Dakota,
transverses the most heavily populated area of the state; therefore, as
expected, municipal discharges have a significant impact on the water quality
of the Red River. The following bar graph demonstrates the improvements made
in wastewater treatment as a function of BOD5 discharged to the river. The
population of the area increased by approximately 16 percent between 1972 and
1982 while the BOD5 discharged actually decreased by 50 percent. We feel
this is a significant achievement and is indicative of efforts in the last ten
years to improve water quality.
lbs. BOO
(mil 1 ions)
1.0 J
.6-
1972
1982
- 9 -
-------
I. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
While major progress has been made in the installation of best management
practices on agricultural nonpoint problem areas, there is concern in North Dakota
as to the future of Federal cost share programs to continue the correction of
agricultural nonpoint source problems identified in a 208 statewide water quality
plan. Programs that were designed to continue the 208 process (Rural Clean Water
Program, Model Implementation Program, Clean Lakes Program, etc.) were never
funded or were funded in such minimal amounts, programs had very little effect
nation-wide.
North Dakota has been fortunate in the past three years to have State funds to
match ASCS programs in priority areas. However, the ASCS programs cannot continue
to be used for concentrated watershed areas. To insure progress in agricultural
nonpoint pollution, funds must be appropriated for the Clean Water Program, Model
Implementation Program, and the Clean Lakes Program, etc.
Part S. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
- Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Mater Supply & Pollution Control Div
North Dakota State Department of Health
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Dennis Fewless (701) 224-2354
DATE: September 1. 1983 ^
- 10 -
-------
NORTH DAKOTA
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
B Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
B Use Not Supported
-------
NORTH DAKOTA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
I Use Not Supported
-------
State of Ohio*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 10,650,000 1980 10,797,000
State Surface Area 40,975 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 23
# of River and Stream Miles 43,917 mi.; # of Border Miles*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 220 / 140,350 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 77,600 ac. or
# of Coast Miles 1_75 ml.
# of Estuary sq. mi. None sq. ml.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Ohio River/420 Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 3,070/6,387*
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
1,359
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
800
d. Miles Monitored: 2,893
*1972/1982
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
248 ml.
1,195
1,450
177
3,070 ml.
8%
39%
47%
6%
100%
1982
2,687 ml.
3,700
0
0
6,387 ml.
42%
58%
0
0
100%
420 mi.
sq. mi.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Improve^-—^Unknown
Miles Improved: 600 None
\1.5% Degraded
Miles Degraded: 100 None
Miles Maintained: 5.000
Unknown: 687
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 140,350
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
1 15.350*
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
1.123
d. Acres Monitored: 116,473
*State owned lakes and water supply reservoirs
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1Q79 -
68,349 ac.
72,000
0
0
140,349 ac.
48
52
0
0
100%
1982 -
98,245 ac.
42,115
0
0
140,360 ac.
70%
30%
0
0
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Improved
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
8%
Within
Category
227
140.123
Change in
Category
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans - No estuaries or oceans in Ohio
Not Applicable
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: /
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
/
c. Sq. Ml./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
__/
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: /
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
%
NOT APP
LICABLE
1005!
1982
%
,
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
N/A
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2A
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed: 175
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
160
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
15
d. Miles Monitored: 100
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
70 mi.
90
0
15
175 mi.
40%
51%
9%
100%
1Q ft ?-
120 mi.
55
0
0
175 mi.
62%
38
0
0
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
B.y Percentage
11%
23%
Improved
Maintained
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Mi les Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
40
135
Change in
Category
0
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Municipal
Industrial
Nonpoint
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
None
Industrial
Municipal / X !
' 15% M
Nonpoint
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
2 Most
Sources
Col 1.
D.O.
Nut.
PH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
0
X
X
Coll., D.O.
Industrial
X
X
X
X
X
D.O. Toxics
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X
D.O. dH
Other (inc. natural)
pH, Toxics
*Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: None
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: None
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: 1
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table 1I.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Millions)
11-
10.
9-
8
7
6.
5-
h.
3-
2
14
10,652,017
3,209,252
Unsewe
1,800,101
Primar r
5,W0,
Second
red
>08
3 r y
172,176
Advanced
1972
10,797,630
3,380,9?
Unsewei
2
ed
276,000'
i
Primary
Legend
Not served
by waste-
water system
3,606,930
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
3,533,718
Advanced
1982
Primary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Millions) Legend
Generated
INFORMATION NOT
AVAILABLE
Discharged
m
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
Unknown
114
57
Unknown
102
54
Unknown
89.5
94.7
Unknown
98.0
94.2
Unknown
113
..
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
171 significant
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
Unknown
1982:
Noncompliance
Compliance
8. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Unknown
0
82
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements+
Unknown
N/A
59
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
Unknown
N/A
71.9
95 significants
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met*
Unknown
N/A
--
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Noncompliance
\
Unknown
Compl lance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Mining
Ohio's Unreclaimed Strip Mine program funded by two sources of State funds
and federal strip mine funds is currently reclaiming approximately 750 acres of
the most seriously affected strip mined land per year. In addition, a variety of
smaller projects (land subsidence, bank stabilization, etc.) are carried out each
year in the strip mined areas of Ohio.
USGS (Ohio) is conducting a variety of surface and groundwater monitoring
programs in southeast Ohio including: (1) effects of strip mining on groundwater
hydrology, (2) monitoring under PL 95-87 at 276 sites to determine water quality
effects of strip mining, (3) analysis of sediment and brine to fingerprint
sources of pollutants, and (4) variability of groundwater quality in
coal-producing areas.
Agriculture
Lost Creek Demonstration (Section 108), Defiance County (Maumee River)
Conservation Tillage; plot and watershed water quality studies.
Allen County Demonstration (108) (Maumee River) - no tillage and upgrading
on-site systems; included water quality studies of on-site affected streams.
Accelerated Conservation Tillage Program (108) - 20 county SWCDs assisted by
USEPA to increase conservation tillage efforts in Lake Erie Basin.
Honey Creek Sandusky River (ACOE, USGS, Ohio EPA, ACP) - accelerated
application of conservation measures, especially no-tillage.
Fertility Management Demonstration Defiance County, (108 and Ohio EPA)
project to determine beneficial effects of reduced phosphorus application on
cropland.
Lake Erie Wastewater Management Study (ACOE and USEPA) - continuing effort to
monitor Lake Erie Tributaries and near shore areas.
SCS Targeting Program - 25 counties starting 10/83; concentrates on tillage
assistance and structural practices to reduce soil erosion (south, central, west-
central and northwest Ohio).
Agricultural Conservation Program (ASCS) - special projects to reduce water
pollution from agricultural land. State and national funding approximately
$300,000 in FFY 1983.
Several counties have initiated their own tillage, animal waste demonstration
projects, some of which include monitoring.
Ohio EPA critical area program has initiated intensive agricultural pollution
control projects in nine watersheds, some of which include stream monitoring.
- 6 -
-------
Construction Site Erosion
As of September, 1982, 31 municipalities and 21 counties have enacted urban sediment
control programs in Ohio under urban sediment and agricultural pollution abatement
legislation enacted in 1979.
Brine Disposal
Disposal of brine from oil and gas well drilling has become a major problem in the
northeastern one-third of Ohio. ODNR and Ohio EPA have recently developed interagency
working agreements to better enforce control regulations. Two regional agencies, Northeast
Ohio Four County Regional Planning and Development Organization (Akron) and Eastegate
Development and Transportation Agency (Youngstown) are developing regional brine disposal
plans, with recommendations for funding disposal sites and improving State oversight.
Urban Runoff
Ohio EPA is conducting a small watershed monitoring program to assess pollutant loading
from diverse urban watersheds.
DSGS (Ohio) is conducting a five year project to define the magnitude and frequency of
flood volumes in 32 Ohio watersheds. Also in progress is an urban runoff study at 30 sites
in Ohio to collect water quality sairples to develop and calibrate a rainfall-runoff model.
On-Site
Ohio EPA is conducting a Statewide on-site program focused on changing legislation and
local institutions to facilitate control of individual sewage systems through improved
inspection and maintenance.
- 7 -
-------
Summary - Non-Po1nt Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: A. If entity is not in compliance during any given month they are
sent a warning letter stating the parameter(s) for which they are in violation and
requesting that they correct the situation. B. If non compliance continues, the entity
is issued Director's final findings and orders (EFFOS) which normally contain a
compliance schedule for correcting the conditions causing non compliance and interim
limits to be met while correction is being made. C. For problem entities, the matter is
referred to the state's Attorney General's office for judicial action.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
38
854
23
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 2,562.9 Million
By Percentage
75$
25%
Local
Match
Federal - EPA
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
1.921.4 Million
Unknown
0.0
541.5
Unknown
- 8 -
-------
Program Activities
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
1. Major improvements have come about by the shut-down of marginal steel making
operations and the upgrading of waste treatment to BAT levels or better at the
remaining facilities.
These improvements occurred in the Mahoning River Basin (Youngstown), the
Cuyahoga River Basin (Cleveland), Upper Ohio River Basin, and Great Miami
River Basin (Middletown).
2. Considerable improvement of Lower Great Miami has also occurred as the result
of reduced loads by advanced municipal and paper mill waste treatment
faci 1 ities.
3. During 1982 the flow-weighted average phosphorus concentration of municipal
effluents discharged to the Lake Erie basin was 1.28 mg/1 or 4556 less than
that discharged in 1978.
4. The Walleye population growth in the western basin of Lake Erie has exceeded
all expectations and has drawn a large number of anglers from the midwest.
- 10 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
1. Drainage from abandoned coal mining operations.
2. Disposal of brine-waters associated with drilling for oil and gas.
3. Combined sewer overflows.
4. Pollution from land uses.
5. Affordabi 1 ity of collection and treatment facilities in small communities with low incomes
and poor soils for leaching of septic tank discharges.
Part B. Ma.ior Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Maan Osman (614) 462-8671
DATE: October 14. 1983
- 11 -
-------
State of otifo River Valley
Water Sanitation Comm.*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN HATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 3.575,375* 198 1 3,587,000*
State Surface Area 203,900 sq. nlles
# of River Systems/Basins 1
# of River and Stream Miles 981 mi.; # of Border Miles* 94] mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 0 / ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlamis ac./sq.ml. 0 ac. or sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 0 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mf. 0 sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mfleage Ohio Mver-941 art. Na»e/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 981
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swinunable:
0
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 981
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
310 mi.
571
100
981 mi.
31.7 %
58.3%
10%
100%
1982
630 mi.
351
981 mi.
64.2 %
35.8%
100%
~Source - OSSANCO Facilities Status Surveys
- I -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Mi les Maintained:
Unknown:
Category
0
0
661
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed:
Change in
Category
320
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Acres Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1Q 7? .
ac.
ac.
100%
1982
ac.
ac.
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses 1 ri 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Industrial
10%
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
PH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
Coli
Industrial
X
00
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X
Other (inc. natural)
X
X
X
0**
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Oceans or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
~~Low levels of toxics are detailed at numerous
sites, but uses are not threatened.
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
3,575,000 = T (1) 3,587,000 = T (1)
18,000 No
Treatment
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
3 _
2 -
1 -
X
71,000
Secondary
5,486,000
Primary or
Inter-
mediate
Legend
Not served by
wastewater system
3,058,000
Secondary
Served by waste-
water system
529,000
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Tre atment
1971 1981
(1) Sewered population direct to Ohio River
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
6i
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(mil 1 ions)
3 _
2"
1 -
U73,
w
2,867,000
/
000
4,373,000
1972
A
1982
Legend
Generated
1,430,000 Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
97
45
76
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements"*"
18
41
73
Total
Percentage of Facilities for
19*
91*
Permits
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met*
Facilities Needing Upgrading
96*
in Effect
in 1982
0.25!
74*
78*
79
43
6
121*
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
19% X
Compliance
Noncompliance
ompliance with
^current
\interim
,1 i mi t s
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
209
121
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements"1"
70*
111
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
70*
92*
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
70*
unknown
121*
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
~Total significant industrial
and municipal permits: 242
~Wastewater for Status Survey
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Noncompliance
I Non-
70% | Complia nee
IV. N0N-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Urban runoff - A significant portion of the fecal coliform bacteria problem appears
to originate from urban runoff and combined sewer overflows. Control programs are
not proceeding due to lack of construction funds.
Agricultural runoff - Studies indicate agricultural runoff is a source of nutrients,
suspended solids, pesticides and herbicides. Most of the problem on the Ohio
originates in the tributaries, which account for 95% of the drainage area; control
programs of the states will, therefore, determine the situation in the mainstem.
Mining - Acid mine drainage has long been recognized as a major problem in the basin;
major impacts on the Ohio River occurred on the upper river in past years, but have
been abated by states' control programs and flow regulation by the Corps of
Engineers. Major problems are now on tributaries; all of the states have control
programs in place.
Construction - Construction activities may have local effects, particularly increased
solids. No such impacts have been identified on the Ohio, but there are considerable
construction activities along the river.
Hydrologic Modifications - Navigation improvements have had both positive and
negative impacts. The critical low flow has been increased through flow augmentation
projects, but velocities have decreased due to the high dams. Hydroelectric power is
being developed at the high dams; the Commission is working with the developers to
assure that reaeration at the dams is maintained.
6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PRUtiKAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: (Commission)
States assume first-line responsibility for enforcing ORSANCO pollution control
effluent standards. ORSANCO may conduct investigations, hold hearings and issue
orders upon approval by state in which discharge originates.
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si lv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
S/L
M/W
NA
M/L
I/L
M/W
NA
NA
C
Nut.P.SS
PH
SS
Lo Flow
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 0
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 0
Number of Administrative Actions: 0
Number of Judicial Actions: 0
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ unknown Million
By Percentage
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
$208.45 Million
-------
C. Program Activities
The Commission has long been active in direct monitoring of Ohio River water quality,
maintaining inventories of the status of wastewater discharges in the Compact area,
serving as a communications center during spill events, and disseminating public
information. A cooperative approach to problem solving has been employed, as
evidenced by the network of advisory committees, representing industries, water
users, government agencies, and the general public, which provide input to the
Comnission.
Other program activities reflect emerging problems and shifting priorities in meeting
water quality goals. Current activities include:
1. The Organlcs Detection System, through which daily samples from 12 points are
analyzed for a variety of organic compounds. Additional sampling is initiated
in spill events.
2. Updating and implementation of Commission effluent standards for discharges to
the Ohio River.
3. Operation of the electronic monitoring network in cooperation with the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers. The Corps uses the data in the operation of dams and
reservoirs in the basin.
4. Collection of monthly samples at 37 locations.
5. Special studies of water quality problems indicated by routine monitoring
results.
6. An energy roundtable to provide a forum for discussion of regional issues
related to water quality.
7. Resolving conflicts in states' water quality standards for the Ohio River.
8. Participation in hydropower development on the Ohio River to assure maintenance
of water quality.
9. Development and implementation of a strategy for the control of toxic
pollutants in the Ohio River Valley.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Diversity of fish species has improved significantly in the Ohio River,
particularly the upper 300 miles, over the past 15 years. The increase is primarily
in sport and commercially valuable species. Major water quality factors in this
improvement Include higher pH and dissolved oxygen levels and lower levels of toxic
metals. The improvement Is reflected in the Increasing numbers of fishing
tournaments along the river, including the 1983 Bass Masters Classic at Cincinnati.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
The Commission's concern over toxic organics is reflected in the establishment of
the Organics Detection System in 1978 and special projects such as the 1979 report on
water treatment process modifications to control Trihalomethane formation.
Resolving interstate conflicts in water quality standards, treatment requirements,
and spill response procedures has long been a Commission priority.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
- Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Low levels of various toxic pollutants have been detected at virtually all
monitoring locations. Finding the sources of those materials and assuring that they
do not increase to the point where water uses are threatened is a major challenge.
Poor performance by municipal wastewater treatment plants is the major cause
of remaining problems with "conventional" pollutants.
Acid drainage from abandoned mines is a major problem on many of the
tributaries.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Ohio River Valley
Water Sanitation Commission
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Peter A. Tennant (513) 421-1151
DATE: September 14. 1983
- 10 -
-------
State of Oklahoma*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 2,172,140 1980 3,025,266
State Surface Area 69,919 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 7
# of River arid Stream Miles 23,000 mi.; # of Border Miles*
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 480,000 / 143,438 ac
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 53,000 ac. or 82.8
# of Coast Miles N^A mi.
# of Estuary sq. mf. N/A sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Red River/517.4 Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 11,985
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
1,338.5
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 11,985
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
*1972
mi.
~
11,985 mi.
%
100%
1982
9,919 mi.
1,036
1,030
11,985 mi.
82 %
9%
9%
100%
*No representative data available.
- 1 -
517.4 ml.
sq. mi.
-------
Change in
Category
822.5
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 646.664
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 324.023
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
560,501 ac.
560,501 ac.
10056
100*
1982
646,664 ac.
646,664 ac.
100*
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
Improved Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Mi les Maintained: 11.162.5
Unknown:
Total 11,985
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
No Change
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained: 646.664
Unknown:
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
Nonpoint
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Di scharge
Sources
Coli.
0.0.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
Coli/DO
Industrial
Non-Point
X
metals
Other (inc. natural)
X
fluoride
dH
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics:
*Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
979
-0-
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
3 -
NumDer of
People
(Millions)
2 ~
3.0 = 1
2.56 = T
.02
1.56
.05
.35
.18
Primary
Secondary
Advanced
M
.02
1.77
2.1
Legend
Not served
.kk by waste-
water system
.11
Primary
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
Advanced
Primary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc.
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of 800 Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1932 Load Projections*
Population 3
Equivalents
of BOO
(Millions)
1 '
2.18
2.55
Z£
.75
Legend
.87
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a.
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements'*"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
0*
25
195
0
18
117
0
12%
60%
0
80S
estimated
10%
estimated
b.
"¦"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
* No permits issued until 1984
Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
195
60%
Compliance
40%
Noncompliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1 982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
21
12
30
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements"1"
19
3
19
In Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
In 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
90i
25%
63%
560
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
N/A
N/A
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Noncompli ance
92%
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
In 1980, 104 watersheds were selected across the State to be sampled during
stream runoff conditions. To date, 1882 samples have been collected and
analyzed. From these data approximately 40 watersheds have been identified as
requiring little or no further sampling because of low pollutant levels during
runoff events. Of the remaining watersheds 11 have been selected as
implementation projects. Four of the 11 now have completed implementation plans
with the other 7 scheduled for completion by January, 1984. The plans recommend
a voluntary management program centered on the installation of proven management
practices on areas identified as having the highest sediment production potential.
The NPS chart requested in the STEP instructions has not been completed. To do
this would require a substantial amount of subjectivity, would lack validity and
would not serve any useful purpose.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pol lutants
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si 1 v.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
V. HATEfl QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
108
ljj
7
ti. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 393.4
By Percentage
7%
zr/o
Local
vMatch
Z% Other Federal
Federal-EPA>
Mi 11 ion
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
$
294.7 1
Other Federal:
$
7.1
State:
*
-0-
Local Match:
*
91.6
Other Local:
$
-0-
Million
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
Over the past ten years Oklahoma has experienced a significant growth in
population accompanied by increased industrialization and modernization of our
cities and towns. The challenge has been to maintain as well as improve water
quality. Completion of the water quality management planning process has
helped to focus our attention on problem areas.
dater quality standards in Oklahoma were initially developed under the concept
of water quality goals. Hhen we tried to make these goals enforceable
standards we found that natural conditions of our southwest climate made them
unattainaole, not enforceable and, in some instances, not even realistic
goals. Vie are now in the process of developing realistic, justifiable and
enforceable standards based upon actual stream conditions.
When delegation of the permitting program for wastewater discharges was first
discussed, institutional obstacles made it impossible in Oklahoma. These
problems are being resolved. The water quality management planning process
served as an incentive to work towards delegation for both municipal and non-
municipal facilities. The state is developing a streamlined permitting process
which will result in one permit being issued and signed jointly by EPA and the
State.
In the municipal construction grants program in Oklahoma there has been a
Historical effort to make a large number of grants to small communities in an
effort to bring everyone up to a base level of secondary treatment and to
correct existing problems with individual sewage treatment systems. At the
same time we have been addressing problems with larger communities and cities.
The present decrease in grant funding has led to changes in requirements for
grant eligiuility and a general tightening of these requirements. Implementing
the recommendations of water quality management plans has meant that waste load
allocation studies must be done to determine actual levels of treatment needed
to protect beneficial uses and achieve water quality standards.
The state's nonpoint source management program has developed a set of
management practices, or guidelines, which are designed to control nonpoint
sources of pollution. These guidelines have been distributed through local
conservation districts for voluntary implementation. A network of monitoring
stations tracks the effects of these practices,
Oklahoma also has a number of Clean Lakes projects underway to study ways to
clean up some of our reservoirs and maximize their recreational use.
- 8 -
-------
SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
-------
I. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Oklahoma has had to deal with the environmental pressures brought about by
increased utilization of our oil and gas reserves. Intense drilling activities
led to a proliferation of trailer park development in parts of the State. Many
systems were not permitted and caused water quality problems with their discharges.
Another problem associated with economic growth has been the development of resort
areas on our reservoirs.
Protection of groundwater is also an issue in Oklahoma. We are addressing the
problem through development of water quality standards for our aquifers. These
standards will be based upon existing average water quality and designed to
protect that quality from degradation.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
X Funding the 206 community wastewater projects which are included in the
immediate Oklahoma priority rating lists.
X Maintaining adequate levels of effort in the face of shrinking local, state
and federal funding.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Oklahoma State Department of Health
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Judith A. Duncan (405) 271-5240
DATE: October 1983
- 10 -
-------
OKLAHOMA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
IB Use Supported
D Use Partially Supported
CZ3 Use Not Supported
-------
State of Oregon*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 2,091,500 1980 2,544,000
State Surface Area 96,184 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 19
# of River and Stream Miles 90,000 mi.; # of Border Miles*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage3,000 / 7,500,000 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. Not Available ac. or
# of Coast Miles 362 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 71 sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Columbia/309 Name/Mileage
Name/Mi 1eage Snake/340 Name/Mi 1eage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 4,479
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
249
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
None
d. Miles Monitored: 2.968
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
2,687 mi.
1,077
353
362
4,479 mi.
60%
24%
8%
8%
100%
1982
3,309 mi.
897
273
—
4,479 mi.
74%
20%
6%
0
100%
649 mi.
sq. mi.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Witnin Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
Improved
Unknown
1.5%
Degraded
Mi les Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Category
508
65
3,221
352
8. Lakes and Reservoirs
Change in
Category
323
1. a. Acres Assessed: 191,791
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
None
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
None
d. Acres Monitored:
None
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
106,974 ac.
75,201
4,118
186,293 ac.
57.4%.
40.4*
2.2% J
100*
1982
112,472 ac.
75,201
1
4,113
191,791*ac.
5%
39*
2%
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
, Improved
l.3/o
Within
Category
Unknown
Degraded
Cnange in
Category
Acres Improved:
3,
012
Acres Degraded:
16,
528
Acres Maintained:
166,
753
Unknown:
5,
498
'Difference in 1982-1972 acres assessed and the acres
under unknown represents reservoirs created since 1972
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 66.5 / _____
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
None /
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
None /
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: __ 46.7 /
Z. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partial ly
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
3.76 sq. mi.
62.74
66.5 sq. mi.
6%
94%
100%
1982
3. 76 sq. mi.
62.74
66.5 sq. mi.
6%
94*
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
3.y Percentage
Sq.Mi. Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
36.8
29.7
Change in
Category
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100%
1982
mi.
mi.
%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Mi les Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2B -
-------
£. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
3% Industrial
Municipal,
0.5% Municipal
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Natural
d. Great Lakes
Industrial
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Di scharge
Sources
Coli.
0.0.
Nut.
PH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
Coli.
Industrial
X
Non-Point
X
X
X
Coli./Nut.
Other (inc. natural)
X
X
X
X
LoFlo
Low Flow
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: None Identified
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 2,998*
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected Dy Toxics: None Identified
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
^Naturally Occurring Mercury
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. PUINT SUUKCES
A. Municipal
I. Level of
2.5 '
Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
2,5^,000 = T
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
2.0 -
1.5
1.0-
0.5-
2,090,000 r T
700,000
27,800
500, 'tOO
Primary
8^7,900
Secondary
621,000
Legend
150,000
Not served
by waste-
water system
757,000
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
1,016,000
Better Than
Secondary
Primary
Secondary
etc.
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
13,900
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of 30L)
(Hill ions)
^ .0 -
5.0 _
2.0 -
1.0 -
Legend
Generated
Discharged
'A
I
.For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
*Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
"""Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
bb
3
d7
J 7+
3
56+
57%
100*
98%
31%+
100*
99%
22
3
10
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1972:
1972 vs. 1982
1982:
Compliance j Compliance
3.5%
Noncompliance
Compliance
a. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
Facilities with Permits
FaciIities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
34
8
28
Total
Permits
17+
7
27+
in Effect
in 1982
50%
88%
96%
560+
51%
?59%
99.9%
+Includes "No-Uischarge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
h% Nnricompl i jnco
on
Iotio i I jnce
C o m p 1 inee
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
While the record of pollution control efforts in Oregon include forty years
of attention to discharges from municipalities and industries, only ten years has
been devoted to nonpoint sources. At this stage, primarily nonpoint sources are
responsible for the waters not fully supporting their uses. Progress has been
made in assessing effects, developing institutional arrangements, and identifying
best management practices for the control of some types of nonpoint sources. But
since the program is still in its infancy, water quality results are difficult to
measure at this time.
Initially, forest harvesting operations on state and private lands came under
"control" through the adoption of a Statewide Forest Practices Act in 1971. As
the national nonpoint source program evolved, Oregon initiated studies and
projects to deal with problems associated with federal forest lands and
rangelands activities, dryland wheat farming, confined animal feeding operations,
arid irrigation practices. Seven Soil and Water Conservation Districts involved
in investigating nonpoint problems in their areas have adopted plans establishing
best management practices. Shellfish growing area protection plans have also
been developed to address elevated fecal coliform levels for two of Oregon's
major estuaries. In one coastal community, this effort has led to a £3.6 million
Rural Clean Water Project to assist dairy farmers implement animal waste controls.
The state's three largest urban areas are implementing urban runoff controls
which include combined sewer separation, construction site best management
practices and drainage and industrial site management practices.
Since 1973, a state construction permit has been required prior to installing
or modifying an on-site sewage disposal system (septic tank). This program is
designed to prevent the creation of health hazards and surface or groundwater
pollution which require sewer construction to correct.
Two hundred twenty-five square miles have been extensively studied to
determine the effect of nitrate-nitrogen from existing failing septic tanks and
cesspools. Aquifer management plans call for a variety of controls including
sewers, special on-site disposal system rules, and building moratoria.
Efforts generally continue to educate the public on nonpoint source problems
and develop control programs for those of highest priority consistent with
available resources.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si lv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
| Salt. Int.
Residuals
M/L
M/W
M/W
I/L
I/L
N/A
N/A
N/A
C.T.M,
0(oi1 &
1 Grease)]
C.LoFlo
SS, Temp
Nutrients
SS
O-Temp
SS
ss j
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The primary mechanism for achieving compliance with state and
federal water pollution laws has been the use of compliance schedules. Where treatment
or control of waste waters is inadequate and costly and, capital outlay solutions are
needed, specific detailed programs and timetables are written into either permits or
Stipulated Consent Agreements ordered by the Environmental Quality Commission. For
municipalities, these programs may include limitations or restrictions on additional
sewer connections until facilities are upgraded. Occasionally, enforcement actions which
include 5-day warning notices and notices of intent to assess civil penalties are
needed. If these go unheeded, penalties are levied. But even after a penalty has been
imposed, a reduction or elimination of penalties may be recommended if the source works
with the Department and takes remedial action.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 3
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 3
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = t 549.7 Million
By Percentage
5% State
Other Feder
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Categories of Sources
353.6 Million
38.9
?_
L
f_
jNot Determined
26.0
121.2
- 7
-------
C. Program Activities
Oregon's water quality program emphasis on pollution prevention has enabled the
state to maintain relatively high water quality while accommodating significant
population growth. Efforts over the past decade have continued to be directed
toward three principal program elements, as follows: (1) assuring necessary
pollution prevention controls are provided prior to approving new waste disposal
facilities and new waste discharges, H) requiring upgraded treatment which
minimizes waste load increases to accommodate growth and development, and 3)
developing and implementing appropriate best management practices to control
nonpoint sources of pollution. In addition, where existing high water quality in
lakes and rivers exceed those levels necessary for fisheries and recreation,
policies restrict further waste discharges that would lower water quality.
Permit issuance and technical assistance activities have been the mainstay for
implementing point source pollution control policies. Oregon began issuing waste
discharge permits in 1968, four years before NPDES permits were instituted.
Treatment requirements and schedules to remedy unacceptable discharges and/or poor
water quality conditions are incorporated into permits. Alternatives to wastewater
discharges, such as land application of treated municipal effluents and
recirculation and reuse of industrial process waste waters also are encouraged.
Oregon has found that plan review, technical assistance and sewage treatment
operator training activities are essential to promoting and achieving the necessary
efficiency and performance among waste water treatment and control facilities. To
reduce paperwork and still maintain control over sources, General Permits are now
being issued for minor impact source categories.
The state is proud of its record for prioritizing municipal waste treatment
projects and certifying grant applications based on the need to eliminate health
hazards, beneficial water use impairment and water quality standards violations.
Timely review and certification of grant applications have resulted in full
utilization of all federal sewerage works construction grant allotments. Since
grant programs will not adequately finance needed new facility construction, Oregon
has been encouraging cities to develop long-range financing plans which assure that
needs can be met without federal funds. In addition, financial incentives for
investing in pollution control facilities have been provided to industry. Through
a system of tax write-offs, a state tax credit program allows for the recovery of
up to 50% of pollution control equipment costs for industry.
An essential component of the state's preventive approach to water pollution
control is monitoring and assessment. Routine sampling at established stations,
waste discharge permit compliance monitoring and prioritized special studies and
projects have provided an orderly process for evaluating and documenting water
quality conditions. Where the magnitude and extent of pollution problems are not
easily discernable, especially where human activities generate nonpoint sources of
pollution, special projects have been very important. To the maximum extent
possible, these projects are coordinated with other resource and local government
agencies and the resulting control strategies are incorporated into the Statewide
Water Quality Management Plan. Since Oregon's citizens and resource agencies
acknowledge their role in protecting and maintaining the quality of the state's
waters, it is not uncommon for the Governor to designate other state agencies and
local government entities as responsible for implementing the pollution control
plans developed through special projects.
In the last several years toxicity evaluations using bioassays and groundwater
monitoring have been added to the program, consistent with its emphasis on
pollution prevention and problem identification.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Recognizing that local site conditions in many low density rural areas do not
permit use of conventional septic tank-drainfield systems because of the physical
limitations related to soils, groundwater tables, climate, and slope, the
Department initiated a program in 1975 to develop alternatives to the standard
system through controlled experimentation. Suitable alternatives were needed to
repair failing systems that were causing public health and groundwater problems,
as well as to permit use of marginal land for rural residential development.
The Department identified problem areas (those with either a history of
failing systems or high denial rates), designed alternatives to overcome site
limitations, supervised construction, monitored system performance, evaluated data
and adopted alternatives that would function satisfactorily. These systems
include the evaportranspiration - absorption system, the sand filter, steep slope
system, the tile-dewatering system, the split waste system, and the low-pressure
distribution system. From a technical standpoint, performance of these systems
highlights the use of soils as part of the treatment system rather than as a means
to dispose and disperse waste water. Oregon also considers this program a success
from the standpoint that on-site disposal alternatives are now available where
traditional systems would have been expected to fail. Site evaluation approval
rate statewide increased from 72 percent in 1978 to 95 percent during the first
half of 1981. Rural area development needs can now be met without causing health
hazards and water quality problems resulting from inadequate systems. Prime
farmlands, where septic tanks work well, can be preserved.
Site Specific Success (2)
BOD Loads to the Mainstem Willamette River from Pulp and Paper Mills
600,000-1
500,000"
W0,000-
300,000-
200,000"
100,000.
T9&3 1970 1982
This graph displays the significant reduction in BOD loads from pulp and paper
mill dishcarges to the mainstem Willamette River. The 80% reduction in load
between 1970 and 1982 was accompaniedby a 30% increase in pulp production and an
80% increase in paper production.
- 9 -
CIS
cr>
CD
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Addressed on previous page.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Since 1956, Oregon's publicly owned sewerage utilities have relied on federal
sewerage works construction grants to finance a major portion of their sewerage
construction and improvement costs. Many facilities built in the 1960's now are
worn out. Unfortunately, replacement needs were not addressed when facilities
initially began operation and over the years adequate consideration was not given
to the potential for a reduction in federal financial assistance. Sewerage
utilities are being encouraged to develop and implement financing plans which will
assure adequate funding for construction, operation, maintenance, and replacement
of these facilities—with or without the aid of federal funds. Failure to
accomplish the needed increases in local funding for construction, operation,
maintenance, and replacement will result in loss of much of the water quality
improvement gained over the last 20 years.
Although it's against the law to pollute any Oregon waters, there has been a
tendency until recently to concentrate efforts on surface water quality and to
deal with groundwater mostly on a trouble-shooting basis when problems have
occurred. Major concerns which emphasize prevention of groundwater pollution were
taken in 1981 when a statewide groundwater protection policy was established.
Information is being assembled on the location of various groundwater flow systems
and priorities are being set to: 1) maintain existing high quality groundwater,
2) provide special protective measures where beneficial uses could be
threatened--in areas where groundwater is the sole source of drinking water, for
example, and 3) deal with specific problems as they are discovered. Within the
next year, groundwater monitoring will be expanded and the groundwater protection
policy will be refined, leading toward adoption of groundwater standards.
With growing recognition that many chemicals have unanticipated side-effects,
Oregonians are devloping concern about toxic substances. To provide for the
elimination of toxicity, the Department has required pretreatment plans of
municipal facilities, made assurances that technology (BAT) is operational and has
conducted bioassays of waste water discharges where waste water acute toxicity is
tested on aquatic organisms typical of those that inhabit our lakes and streams.
Even though biological chemicals observations have not indicated any problems so
far, there could be traces of toxic chemicals in our waters that affect various
stages of the food chain or cause chronic toxicity. We need to go beyond the
approaches utilized to date. Standard methods for evaluating chronic toxicity and
potential synergistic effects of combined chemicals need to be established. Only
with adequate and scientifically sound information and data can we satisfy public
concern over toxics.
- 10 -
-------
A critical element in the future effectiveness of water quality control efforts in the next
decade is the balancing of the state's water resources. As land is taken out of production to
accommodate population increases and more intensive farming practices require more irrigation,
actions which may have in the past seemed unacceptable, unnecessary, too costly, or out of the
question will have to be reexamined. Historically, water management programs conducted
pursuant to state law have given clear preference to out of stream uses—withdrawal of water
for domestic and industrial supply and irrigation. As a result, summer flows in many streams
are almost totally withdrawn leaving nearly dry streambeds with water too warm for fish. In
addition, recent evidence shows that the public's water needs are being met by the rapid
depletion of some groundwater aquifers.
Maintaining a water resource balance is challenging the state to look more closely as: 1)
the installation of more efficient and costly waste treatment to permit direct recycling of
waste water or return to the stream with even less quality impact, 2) the construction of many
more dams and reservoirs to store flood flows for use and stream flow augmentation release
during the summer, 3) enforced conservation in all areas of water use so as to reduce
withdrawals while still achieving benefits, 4) reevaluation of appropriateness of granting
perpetual rights to individual citizens for exclusive use of publicly owned waters.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Oregon Dept. of Enironmental Quality
Water Quality Division
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Harold L. Sawyer (503) 229-5324
Mary M. Halliburton (503) 229-6099
DATE: October 14. 1983
- 11 -
-------
OREGON
1972
-c-O-
V\
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
B Use Not Supported
-------
OREGON
1982
-N-
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
3 Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
O Use Not Supported
-------
State of Pennsylvania*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 11,800,766 1980 11,863,895
State Surface Area 45,333 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 5 (major)
# of River and Stream Miles 12,962(major) mi.; # of Border Miles* 255 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 2400 / 149,031 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 186,963 ac. or 0 sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 63 mi. (Lake Erie)
# of Estuary sq. mi. 10 sq. ml.(Delaware-Main Stem)
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Delaware/255 Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 12,962 (Major Streams)
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
12,962
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
38*
d. Miles Monitored: 2,900**
* Tidal portion of Delaware Estuary; outer harbor of Lake Erie.
** No. of monitoring stations x 10 miles/station.
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972*
9,973 ml.
748
2,241
12,962 mi.
77%
5.7%
17.3%
—
100%
1982
10,219 ml.
468
2,275
—
12,962 mi.
79%
3.5%
17.5%
—
100%
* 1975 data substituted for 1972.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972* and 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
246
21 Miles Maintained: 12,716
Improved
Unknown:
* 1975 data substituted for 1972
Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 67,562
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fi shable/Swimmable:
67,562
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 0
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessea
1Q79 -
67,562
67,562 ac.
100%
1982 ¦
38,318 ac.
28,104
1,140
0
67,562 ac.
56.7*
41.6%
1.7%
0
100%
3. Changes In ana Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Within Change in
Category Category
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
67,562
-------
C. Estuaries arid/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 10 / 10
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0 /
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swiinmable:
1Q /
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: * / *
* Delaware River basin Commission and Corps of Engineers have monitoriny stations in
the Delaware Estuary.
t. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
-
-
-
10
10
%
-
-
100
100%
1982
-
-
-
10
10
%
-
-
100
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
Category Category
Sq.Mi .Improved:
Sq. Mi. Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
•Additional information available front Delaware River Basin
Commission.
Within Change in
Category Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2A -
a. Estuaries:
B.y Percentage
Unknown
b. Oceans
By Percentage
-------
D. Great Lakes
I. a. Miles Assessed: 63
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
63
' c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 20j^
* 2 stations x 10 miles/station.
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
63
63 mi.
%
10 05b
1902-
63 mi.
-
-
-
63 mi.
100*
-
-
-
100%
Change in
Category
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
63
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Nonpoint
Mainly abandoned
mine ^drainage
9% /
Industrial
Municipal
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d.
nonpoint sources (>50%)
Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
Industrial
X
X
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X
Other (inc. natural)
X
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 365
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: Unknown
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: _
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Prpvi deo to State's Population:
11.91 = T
0.10
10.5
Number of
People 9.0
(Mil lions)
7.5-
.0 -
"t.5~
3.0-
1.51
0. waste-
water system
Secondary
1982
Does Not
Require
Sys tem
Req u i re s
System
No
Treatment
j Primary
Served by |
wastewater j
system Secondary
!
Advanced | etc. I
Degree of
Treatment
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOO Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 19B2 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Mi 11 ions)
15 -
10-
5-
1972
13.7
Legend
Generated
ischarged
For 1982:
Projecte d
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1982
^Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
NOTL: No projection provided because population essentially did not change from
1972 to 1982.
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
{Major Dischargers)
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements'1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
includes "No-Discharge" h acuities
Not Avail.
Not Available
218
Not Avail.
Not Available
139
Not Avail.
Not Available
64%
Not Avail.
Not Available
Not Available
Not Avail.
Not Available
Not Available
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
578
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
36%
Noncompli ance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982
1972
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
(Major Dischargers)
Facilities with Permits
Not Avail.
Not Available
211
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements"1"
Not Avail.
Not Available
166
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
Not Avail.
Not Available
79*
5,847*
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
Not Avail.
Not Available
Not Available
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
~(including pending applications)
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
21%
79%
compliance
Compliance
Not Available
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Pennsylvania has been concerned about non-point source pollution since the
mid-1970's. In those days, non-point sources had a different name, but
essentially it involved any pollution caused by storm water coming in contact
with polluting materials.
In 1972, we initiated a program for controlling erosion and the subsequent
sedimentation of our waterways. It did not matter that the erosion was caused by
a construction activity, a tree harvesting operation or agricultural plowing and
tilling. All earthmoving activities (i.e., any activity which disturbed the
surface land) were required to control accelerated erosion on the site and to
prevent sediment from reaching the waters of the Commonwealth.
In 1977, we began a program to assist farmers in managing their animal
manures. This program sought to maximize the use of manure for its agronomic
value and, as a secondary benefit, to control non-point source pollution from
animal manures.
We have also initiated programs to control the use of herbicides in lakes and
streams and to control the use of pesticides both in the agricultural and
domestic setting.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control*
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Resi duals
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pol 1utants
* Information not available
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The State's Clean Streams Law provides for aaninistrative, civil,
and criminal remedies for violations. A priority system is used to identify the most
serious, willful, or cnronic violators who then receive a high priority. All violations
are brought to the attention of the violator, generally through a certified letter. This
is aone because a significant portion comply upon notification. An enforcement strategy
involving one or more of the above remedies is developed for the remaining violators.
The procedure is similar for both point and non-point source dischargers.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 5,017
Number of Pre-Actainistrative Actions: Unknown
Number of Administrative Actions: 158*
Number of Judicial Actions: 54
*Consent Orders; settlements
b. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 2,709.4 Million
By Percentage Categories of Sources
J 1,773.0 Million
$ 104.3
$ 191.1
$ 541.0
$ 100.0*
~Estimated
Other
Federal V'
State
Local
Match
Other Local
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
Monitoring
To conduct an ongoing assessment of ground and surface water quality to
determine existing conditions and to estimate future trends, and to assess the
compliance of wastewater treatment facilities with permit conditions, to oversee
local agency implementation of the permit and enforcement requirements of the
Sewage Facilities Act and to assess other activities to determine compliance with
applicable laws and regulations.
Permitting
To establish effluent limitations for discharges to protect public health and
to meet water quality and technology based standards; to assure that the design and
construction of water pollution facilities achieve established limitations and
standards.
Emergencies
To eliminate or minimize the danger or threat to public health or water quality
uses through prompt response to water pollution instances, hazards and disasters.
Enforcement
To resolve water quality and public health problems by achieving compliance
with permit conditions and applicable laws and regulations.
PIanning
To develop and maintain water quality standards for the protection of water
resources; and to develop, evaluate and maintain plans for the protection of public
health and the achievement of water quality standards.
Program Management
To achieve water quality goals and objectives through planning, directing and
evaluating program activities in an efficient and effective manner.
Administration
To provide clerical and non-technical support to the technical programs.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
305b Success Story - Wapwallopen Creek Watershed (Luzerne County, PA)
Sixteen miles, 20% of the Wapwallopen Creek watershed including the main stem,
two major tributaries, Bow Creek and Watering Run, and several small tributaries
were being degraded by inadequately treated and untreated sewage and industrial
waste. Fourteen sewage treatment plants and five industrial waste treatment
plants of varying capacities and efficiencies discharged to these streams. Water
quality within the affected area ranged from toxic to aquatic life to heavy
organic enrichment to the point of total oxygen depletion. Fish kills were common
at the polluted/unpolluted water interface as this zone became alternately
habitable then uninhabitable.
Intensive investigations into the possibilities of inplant flow reduction and
flow recycling were initiated. Stream and laboratory studies were conducted to
determine effluent receiving capacities of the streams where specific criteria had
not been established or fluctuated under differing stream conditions and where
treatment costs to extremely low levels were prohibitive. And lastly, a regional
sewage treatment plant was proposed.
The combined result of these measures was that by 1981 only two miles of the
watershed was being degraded. By 1982, the remaining two miles were improved.
Only one of the industrial waste plants remains. The remaining industrial waste
treatment plants have either been eliminated through flow reduction and recycling
or are connected to the region sewage treatment plant. Only one of the sewage
treatment plants remains, 13 have been eliminated.
Watering Run and Bow Creek now support thriving brook and brown trout
populations, as does Wapwallopen Creek. Stream investigations conducted on
Wapwallopen Creek prior to and following operation of the regional STP indicate no
adverse effects on Wapwallopen Creek.
NOTE: The Delaware River Basin Commission is providing a success story on the
Delaware Estuary and the West Branch of the Delaware River directly to ASfWPCA.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Water pollution problems in PA over the last decade have been attributable to a
variety of sources. In areas of the state with heavy industrial and population
concentrations, sewage and industrial wastes are the major pollutional sources,
with storm water and combined sewage discharges adding to the pollution problems.
These problems are predominent in the southwestern and southeastern portions of
the state. The major water pollution problem continues to be acid mine drainage
primarily from abandoned mines. Over 75% of the 2,744 major stream miles that do
riot meet water quality standards are due to non-point pollution. The primary
non-point pollutant is acid mine drainage, which has its greatest impact in the
bituminous areas of western and central PA and in the anthracite areas of
northeastern PA. Other concerns include pollution from oil and gas well drilling,
and erosion and sedimentation from earthmoving and agricultural runoff.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
The acid mine drainage problem is widespread. It is estimated that over $2
billion would be required to abate this problem in PA.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Dept. of Environmental Resources
Bureau of Mater Quality Management
CONTACT PERSON* & PHONE #: Lou Bercheni 717-787-2666
DATE: August 31, 1983
*or Cedric Karper 717-787-4317
- 10 -
-------
PENNSYLVANIA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
¦ Use Supported
D Use Partially Supported
B Use Not Supported
\
h
/
-------
State of Puerto Rico
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 2,712,033 1980 3,196,520
State Surface Area 3.420 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 96
# of River and Stream Miles 3,534.27 mi.; # of Border Miles* N/A mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 19 / 7,250.1 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 15,011 ac. or sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 413.44 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. N/A sq. mi.
~Border Rivers: (NOT APPLICABLE)
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 3,367.16 (167.11 miles were excluded because practically
no information exists)
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
3,367.16
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored: 2,147.47
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972*
226.51 mi.
541.29
1,289.16
1,310.20
3,367.16 ml.
6.7 %
16.IS
38.3%
38.9%
100%
1982
359.36 mi.
347.56
1,440.55
1,219.69
3,367.16 mi.
10.7 %
10.30%
42.8%
36.2%
100%
*Used the available data for 1975. The data for early years are not statistically
rel1able.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
Maintained
known
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Category
922.11
166.67
311.72
90.51
Change in
Category
25b .13
401.33
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 7,250.1
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swiumable:
7,250.1
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Acres Monitored: 3,751.8
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses*
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
**1972 -
ac.
ac.
%
100%
1Q9? -
blB.O ac.
3,422.3
3,209.8
--
7,250.1 ac.
a.5*
47.2*
44.3*
—
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982**
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
*Best Professional Judgement
**No regular monitoring data available prior to 1981
- 2 -
-------
/ 413.44
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: ___
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
/ 303.82
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
/ 109.62
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: / 413.44
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972*
349.79
60.08
3.57
--
413.44
84.6%
14.5%
0.956
--
100%
1982
316.79
47.49
49.16
--
413.44
7 6.6%
11. b%
11.9*
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
b. Oceans
By Percentage
1*2.2%
Degraded
33%
Main-
tained
x
2b M
Improved/
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
77.43
89.99
136.44
Change in
Category
25.26
84.32
- 2A -
-------
U. Great Lakes (NOT APPLICABLE)
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partial ly
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100%
1QA?.
mi.
mi.
%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Mi les Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2B -
-------
t. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. by Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
In-
dustrial
11.5% Unknown
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Industrial
d. Great Lakes
6.93% Unknown
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
(1)
~ ~
2 Most
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
PH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
X
C, D.O.
Industrial
X
X
X
X
D.O., Toxics
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
Nut., Other
Other (inc. natural)
** Sediments
) We know toxics are present in the discharges of industries
Unknown
Unknown
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: Unknown
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Mil1 ions)
1 -
2712033=T
/
'./V ,
K,
I y
3196520=1
Legeno
1,549,268
164,012
613,352
Primary
|385,401
Secondary
/
!/
/'
Not served by
wastewater system
1,597,493
133,155
797,664 Primary
Served by waste-
water system
_668,208 Secondary
Primary
Does Kot
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
i
l_
i
j
i
Secon dary
etc. !
i
I
Degree of
Treatment
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOO Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipdl
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(millions)
Legend
1293824.35
Generate d
//'
i
1 ¦
1,244,792.12
907.,5/
0.35 1
/
/ ..' '
i,
Discharged
!/
For 1982i
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972 1982
* In oraer to obtain the Population Equivalents
divided by 0.17 (triis number is the constant
per day given by our reference books).
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
the pounds of 600 per day were
used for BOD pounds per person
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements+
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met*
Facilities Needing Upgrading
N/A
14
5
N/A
0
0
N/A
.
N/A
N/A
14
5
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
99
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1972:
1972 vs. 1982
1982:
Noncompliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
N/A
9
45
N/A
8
27
N/A
88.9%
64.8%
N/A
99.9%
57.33%
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
136
+ Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
/ 35%
[Noncompl iance
65%
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Puerto Rico's main Non Point Source agricultural pollution problems are
inadequate animal waste management and improper application of fertilizer and use of
pesticides.
An Animal Waste Management Program has been established which requires each
farmer to implement a Water Quality Plan for their enterprise. Certificates are
issued to farmers to maintain control of adequate implementation of these Best
Management Practices. Priority has been given to the establishment of the same in
dairies. Coordination with agencies related to this activity has been established
in order to offer regulatory, financial and educational support to the Program.
Construction and mining activities are also causing severe Non Point Source
Pollution problems throughout the Island.
In construction, the variation of the natural shape of lands and slopes changes
drainage patterns and eliminates protective vegetation, causing excessive erosion
and sedimentation of nearby water bodies. Additionally unprotected construction
materials and residues of equipment maintenance materials, such as oil, are also
dragged along by runoff.
Puerto Rico's mining activity which is mainly limited to the extraction of
construction materials such as sand and gravel, rock, etc., is often carried out at
the margin of the water bodies and lacks adequate controls in order to protect the
same.
A Program requesting EQB permits for both activities in coordination with the
Department of Natural Resources, and the Rules and Permits Administration is in the
planning stage.
Fecal contamination from clandestine sanitary sewer connections to storm drains
is the most serious pollution problem posed by urban runoff. EQB is operating a
Program to detect and order correction of these connections, which concentrates in
the most affected areas.
The following Section 208 demonstrative projects in order to develop local Non
Point Source Control programs were implemented by EQB.
Non Point Source Control Program for La Plata Watershed regarding Fertilizers
and Pesticides.
Operational Program Development for Animal Waste Management.
Guidelines for the Development of a Strategy to Protect Underground Waters.
Non Point Source Control Program for Loiza Lake and La Plata River Basin which
included agricultural, construction and mining activities.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent*
Primary
Pollutants**
*8asically Sand and Gravel extraction activities **Data based on best professional judgement
V. MATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: Environmental Quality Board (EQB), current approach to enforcement
against violations of state and federal water pollution control laws and regulations is
accomplished through the following activities:
Twenty four (24) hour sampling inspections to industrial effluents
Evaluation of self discharge monitoring reports (DMR) submitted by non-municipal or
municipal facilities required by NPDES permits
Follow-up of the Schedules of Compliance issued by EPA or EQB
Inspections of the non-filers (industries which discharge wastewater to waterbodies
without NPDES permits)
Execution of dye and smoke test to verify illegal connections of sanitary sewer
systems and illegal interconnections between storm and sanitary sewer systems.
Inspections to the point and non-point source complaints.
If one or more serious violations are found as a result of any of the above mentioned
activities, enforcement action is initiated promptly against the point or non-point source
facility which has executed the violation. The enforcement action will vary in degree
depending on the nature and seriousness of the violation. Compliance with state and federal
pollution control laws will be sought through the use of pre-administrative hearings held
between EQB and the violator; administrative hearings; imposition of fines; issuance of
compliance schedules; and in case of severe violations, NPDES Permits may be terminated or
the violating facility shutdown.
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
S/W
S/W
N/A
M/L
S/W
N/A
I/L
S/W
C; OxDe
SS; T
C;P;SS
OxDe;T
N/A
SS
SS,T
N/A
Sal
C,SS,M,T
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Agai
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal
By Source of Fu
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 500.74 Million
Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
19M -i- 19 (NM) = 38
1M + 13 (NM) = 14
OM + 6 (NM) = 6
18M + ONM = 18
Wastewater Facilities
By Percentage
Categories of Sources
65.3%
3^.7%
Local
Federal-EPA
.Match
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
$ 327.096.449 Mi11 ion
$
*
$ 173.645.009
f
7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
1. Planning - Main plans developed under a continuing planning process (CPP) include
the Comprehensive Water Quality Management Plan for Puerto Rico 1970-2020 and thirteen
Basin Plans, one for each of the regions of the island. These two plans emphasize
point sources of pollution and water bodies classifications. A third plan, Water
Quality Management Plan for the Island of Puerto Rico concentrated mainly in the
control of non-point sources of pollution. The abatement strategies developed under
these plans became elements of the Continuing Planning Process. Prototype or model
programs have been developed on animal wastes management, underground water
protection, and pollution control practices for construction, mining and agriculture
related activities. Also, main elements of our planning efforts are the development
of a Priority System and its application for a resulting Priority List of projects for
the collection, treatment and disposal of sewage waters. A sub-program has been
dealing specifically with the wastewater treatment and disposal in isolated rural
communities.
2. Monitoring - Fifty seven coastal monitoring stations are sampled once every two
months and analyzed for dissolved oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus, suspended solids,
nitrates and nitrites, temperature, pH, turbidity, color, salinity, fecal coliforms, a
particular metal and, in some stations, oil, and grease. Fifty six surface stations
are monitored by the United States Geological Survey under contract with this Board,
every two months, for the following parameters: Temperature, pH, Specific
Conductance, Alkalinity, Dissolved Oxygen, Fecal Coliform, Fecal Streptocacus,
Chemical Oxygen Demand, Suspended Solids, Turbidity, Organic Nitrogen, Ammonia
Nitrogen, Nitrate, Nitrite, Total phosphorus, Dissolved Solids, (on every other visit)
and trace metals. Other studies performed include Time of Travel Studies and
twenty-four hours sampling in point sources effluent discharges.
3. Permitting - The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System has as its main
objective the control of effluent discharges through discharge permits, discharge
monitoring reports, compliance evaluation inspections and compliance sampling
inspections of all point sources under this permit program. An underground injection
permitting program has been in planning stage. Developed state regulations and
primacy request package will be submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency in
the next days.
4. Emergency Response - The Puerto Rico Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan has been developed, providing a pattern of coordinated and integrated
response by the Government of Puerto Rico with Departments and Agencies of the Federal
Government to protect the environment and encourage the development of capabilities to
handle pollution spills.
5. Lakes Clean-Up - A priority system was developed and an order established for
lakes in the Island to be eligible for federal funds in order to conduct
diagnostic-feasibility of restoration studies in case of availability of funds. A
diagnostic-feasibility study was developed in Lago La Plata, which had first priority.
6. Complaints and Surveillance - Approximately 500 water related complaints coming
from the general public are studied and attended every year by EQB's technicians.
7. Mater Bodies Restoration - A staff of five technicians is devoted to restoration
of polluted water bodies, giving priority to public use. Main problems being solved
include sanitary-storm sewer interconnections and illegal discharges.
8. Public Participation - Public participation activities include celebration of
public meetings and hearings, public notices, conferences and establishment of
advisors committees for the different programs. The public participation activities
are usually celebrated in the affected areas.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Condado Beach Restoring Program
After seven (7) years of research, monitoring, and corrective work to
eliminate the fecal coliforms pollution problem in the Condado Beach, this
sector was restored for the public use. The Condado Beach was affected by
illegal connections of sanitary sewer systems and interconnections between
storm and sanitary sewer systems which reached the beach. Water quality
analyses in Condado beach showed that in all stations for 1980, the fecal
coliforms levels were below the standard in comparison with 1979 as shown in
the Figure 1.
I si a Verde Beach Restoring Program
During January 1980 the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) intensified the
restoring activities in the Isla Verde Beach area in order to control the
pollution problems identified in previous beach years. Some of these problems
are: wastewaters that reach the beach area, illegal interconnectons from
sanitary sewer systems to storm sewers, sanitary manholes over flowing and the
presence of solid wastes in the storm sewers. Approximately 306 pollutant
discharges were identified and corrected.
To verify the scope of the corrective measures, an intensive
bacteriological study was conducted by June 22-26, 1981. Samples were taken
for fecal coliforms determinations. The results of this study are shown in
Table 1. As we can see the fecal colforms geometric mean never exceed the 200
col./lOO ml level, which is the standard established for coastal waters within
the classification S B (coastal waters in which the human body may come in
direct contact with the water).
In addition to the analysis of samples taken in this area, as part of EQB's
coastal water monitoring program, shows that fecal coliforms levels are below
the standard.
We can conclude that Isla Verde Beach area is free of significant fecal
pollution problems, in spite of the high population density, and the different
recreational, touristic and commercial activities within the area.
- 9 -
-------
FECAL CO.IFORM ANNUAL GEOMETRIC MEAN CONDADO
1979-1980
TABLE 1
I SLA VERDE BEACH AREA BACTERIOLOGICAL STUDY, 1981
FECAL COLIFORMS {C0L./100 ML)
JUNE 1981
STATION 6/22/81 6/23/81 6/24/81 6/25/81 6/26/81 Geometric
Mean
001
600
92
002
16
16
003
33
2
004
1
16
005
160
11
006
8
8
007
0
406
008
9
70
009
4
3
010
9
16
190
3
3
6
5
4
7
15
1
3
310
16
139
0
0
4
0
3
3
7
3
4
4
3
10
2
16
6
27
2
11
2
108
18
8
7
4
2
6
5
- 10 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
The groundwater sources protection has been of special concern to the state in the last
years. A groundwater prototype or model project was developed in the north aquifers to
identify main pollution problems and purpose abatement alternatives and water quality
standards. Also, an Underground Injection Control Program was developed. This UIC Program
developed state regulations and plans for a permits program implementation. In the next days
these documents will be formally submitted to the EPA requesting delegation to the UIC Program
to the State.
Of major concern to the state has also been the problem of wastewaters in our small and/or
isolated communities. Main activities developed have been the development of an inventory of
communities, a priority system and list for possible future wastewaters management projects in
these communities, a prototype or model planning and design project in a rural community and
five additional planning projects in planning areas previously delineated. The Small
Communities Program has confronted a lower progress in the last year due to lack of sufficient
local funds to match the federal funds and the extraordinary increasing costs of the already
planned projects. An interagency committee is actually working to propose alternative deal
with this problems and a strategy for future orientation of this program.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of population and
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
X - Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point sources.
- Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Environmental Quality Board
Mr. Tomas Rivera
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: (809) 723-0733
DATE: September 9, 1983
- 11 -
-------
PUERTO RICO
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
3 Use Supported
D Use Partially Supported
B Use Not Supported
-------
PUERTO RICO
1982
-N-
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
Q Use Partially Supported
0 Use Not Supported
a
I
-------
State of Rhode Island*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 949,723 1980 947,154
State Surface Area 1,214 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 7
# of River and Stream Miles 724 mi.; # of Border Miles* 12.3 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 357 / 18,432 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 45,668 ac. or -- sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 420 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 183 sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Pawcatuck/10 Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Runnins/2.3 Name/Mileage --
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 724
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swimmable:
276
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Flshable/Swimmable:
81
d. Miles Monitored: 109
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
627.8 ml.
18.1
78.1
—
724 mi.
87 %
2 *
11 *
—
100*
1982
667.0 mi.
22.3
34.7
—
724 mi.
92 %
3 %
5 *
—
100*
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Improved
Mi les Maintained:
Unknown:
Category
19
Change in
Category
4b
0
660
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 16.463
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
7.203
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swinmable:
379
d. Acres Monitored: 7,815
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
15,843 ac.
489
131
0
16,463 ac.
96 %
3 %
1 %
--
100*
1982
15,990 ac.
473
0
0
16,463 ac.
97 %
3 %
0 %
--
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Improved^
2%
Maintained
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
269
312
15.751
0
Change in
Category
131
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed:
256
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
Q /
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
29 /
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 183 J
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
230
15
11
0
256
90 *
6 %
4 %
0
100%
1982
231
16
9
0
256
90 %
6 %
4 %
0
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Improve
Degraded
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq. Mi. Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
248
Change in
Category
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
Change in
Category
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed: ,
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100*
1982
mi.
mi.
%
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources --- By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
Nonpoint
hn
Industrial
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
^Nonpoint
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
X
DO/Coliform
Industrial
X
X
X
DO/Toxics
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
Col i./Turb.
Other (inc. natural)
1
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
16
8.78
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
1.000 4
0-900
0.800 -4
0.700
0.600 -
0.500 -
O.'tOO -
0.300
0.200
0.100 -I
0.121
O.O'tO
0.001
0.381
Primary
0.^07
Secondary
Legend
Not served
by waste-
water system
0.210
0.070
0.056
Primary
0.597
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
Primary
Second arjy
etc.
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
0.01 't Advanced Treatment
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
0.800 -
PopuUti.n l
Equivalents
of BOD
(Mill ions)D. 600-
0.500-
O.'tOO -
0.300
0.200 J
0.100
1972
0.680
0.333
0.230
1982
0.793
Legend
Generated
0.388
Discharged
%
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
^Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" facilities
13
7
6
2
3
6
15 %
43 %
100 %
8 %
16 %
100 %
13
1
0
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
31
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
15/o
Compliance
Noncompllance
8. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
*
2
15
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements*
*
1
14
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
it
50 %
88 %
104
Percentage of Flow for
50 %
35 %
Which Requirements Met+
+Includes "No-Discnarge" Facilities
*No information
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: W82:
17%
Non-
No Information
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Rhode Island is the second most densely populated state in the Union. Its
population is largely concentrated in urban and suburban areas, although recent
trends have shown a migration to more rural areas.
Although the extent of urban runoff non-point pollution is not fully known, the
generally poor water quality condition of urban streams that do not have
significant point sources of pollution is evidence that the problem is a real
issue. All future Rhode Island river basin plans will include comprehensive
planning level studies of this problem.
New developments in rural areas that use retention basins for maintenance of pre-
development run-off conditions are now being required to modify these basins to
also provide some degree of sedimentation. These requirements are made on a
case-by-case basis prior to issuance of a water quality certification for the
project, as no uniform standards have yet been adopted.
Non-point source coliform contamination of shellfishing areas adjacent to
residential developments has resulted in closure of some of these areas to
harvesting. No adequate solution to this problem has yet been determined.
Application of the state's wetlands law mitigates the serious problems related to
construction and tydro power projects, both of which receive an extensive review
process and construction supervision.
Land disposal of wastes has resulted in a few serious problems regarding both
ground and surface waters. Many other areas receive minor to moderate impacts
from this activity.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
* Hydrocarbons ** toxic organic compounds
Note 1 - Sand and gravel operations
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
Rhode Island's approach to enforcement has always been founded in close monitoring of effluent
quality. The technicians conducting our monitoring programs are highly qualified and often
resolve operational problems in the course of their inspections. If a violation is not resolved
immediately, written notification of noncompliance is sent to the discharger. Meetings and/or
hearings are the next step in the process. If sufficient progress is not made toward correction
of the problem, formal legal proceedings are undertaken. Rhode Island adopted regulations for
Operation and Maintenance of WWTF in 1979. As Rhode Island does not yet have an NPDES based
system, these regulations are the main tool used against improper WWTF operations.
2. Actions Ta
SS,T,0*
„ _
SS,T
Note 1
SS.T
LoFlo
OxDe
M,Nut, pH
OxDe. 0**
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 262.927 Million
By Percentage
St ate
Categories of Sources
Federal-EPA
T/o \ Local
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
$
unknown
*
41.215
*
28.07
*
unknown
-------
C. Program Activities
1974 - Biological methods employing the use of artificial substrates began to be
utilized.
1977 - The first phase of the Water Quality Management Plans for 7 river basins in
the state was completed as required by the Clean Water Act. The 7 basin
plans were adopted as the water quality element of the State Guide Plan in
1978 and were approved by the EPA.
1979 - The Division of Water Resources began an in-house baseline survey of several
of the larger lakes and ponds under the monitoring program.
- Monitoring programs were set up to assess the environmental effects of known
hazardous waste sites in Rhode Island.
- A Surface Impoundment Assessment (SIA) of Rhode Island waste pits, ponds, and
lagoons was completed (included a rating system for judging the potential
hazards of groundwater contamination but involved no groundwater water
quality sampling and should therefore be considered an inventory report).
- The Oil Spill Contingency Plan was updated with a contingency plan for
hazardous materials included, which in 1981 was expanded as a separate
document.
- A Contract was made with USGS for water quality trend monitoring.
- The bathing area sampling program was expanded to include weekly sampling
throughout the bathing season of problem areas.
- The 208 Water Quality Management Plan for Rhode Island was completed. The
plan deals primarily with land use impacts on water quality.
1980 - A Used Oil Recovery Program was instituted.
- The Rhode Island Underground Water Source Protection Program was initiated
and is currently being developed by the Division of Water Resources with
funding support by EPA.
1981 - Rhode Island assumed major responsibilities in the construction grants
program, having been delegated responsibility by EPA for supervision of
design and construction of wastewater treatment facilities.
- The shellfish monitoring program was expanded [upgraded to 2 sampling dates/
week on a year-round basis (weather permitting) instead of special
classification surveys held only in the summer].
- The Division of Water Resources began technical training seminars for waste-
water treatment plant operators.
1983 - Rhode Island is in the process of assuming delegation of the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SHE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Blackstone River. With the upgrading to secondary treatment of one wastewater
treatment facility in 1976 and another in 1978, the Blackstone River's water
quality has improved. Water survey data indicated an improvement in both BOD
and DO, and on the basis of the surveys it was concluded that this 6 mile
segment of the Blackstone River has improved from Class D to Class C.
Woonasquatucket River. In 1978, a secondary treatment plant was completed,
replacing raw discharges to the Woonasquatucket River. Intensive monitoring
surveys between 1974 and 1979 showed significant reduction in total and fecal
coliform bacteria, indicating the elimination of raw sewage discharges
upstream. When the sewage discharges were eliminated, the segment of the
river immediately upstream of the wastewater treatment facility was upgraded
from Class C to Class B.
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Qn-Site Disposal - Beginning in 1967, the state assumed regulatory control over
design and construction of all new individual sewage disposal systems. This process
was estaDlished because of inconsistencies in local regulations which led to
inadequate public health controls. Over the last decade, the procedures and
regulations have been revised several times in order to improve environmental
protection in developing areas.
Wetlands Protection - In 1971 and 1974 the state passed comprehensive wetlands
protection acts which protect wetland areas from unnecessary or undesirable drainage,
excavation, filling, encroachment, or any other forms of disturbance or destruction.
Coastal Zone Management - In 1971, the Rhode Island Coastal Zone Management Council
was formed. This agency regulates all development in the coastal area.
Administration of CRMC programs is carried out by operational division of Rhode
Island Department of Environmental Management.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Compinea Sewer Overflows - Combined Sewer Overflows and their effects on major shell-
fishing areas of Narragansett Bay remain a major concern. There are four current
construction grants projects in the Providence area which would provide some degree
of relief of the CSO problem.
Development Pressures - Rhode Island is generally experiencing a migration from urban
and suburban areas that have sewerage systems to rural areas that do not. Although
state approval is required for all individual sewage disposal system permits, and
additional state levels of control apply to wetlands or coastal areas, development
pressures continue to increase. Water quality issues remain to be studied in greater
detai 1.
Toxic Pollutants - Although this problem has been around for some time, official and
public awareness has become greater in recent years. The issues precede our
knowledge, and will remain a problem for regulations until more information is
known. Specific problems in Rhode Island include: (1) levels of toxics in
industrial discharges to waterways and publically owned treatment works and (2) land
disposal practices which involve toxic materials.
AGENCY PREREPARING REPORT:Rhode Island Department of Environmental
Management, Division of Water Resources
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Philip H. Albert (401) 277-2234
DATE: 7 October 1983
- 10 -
-------
RHODE ISLAND
1972
J
*
i
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
S Use Supported
Q Use Partially Supported
Use Not Supported
-N-
-------
RHODE ISLAND
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
~ Use Not Supported
-------
State of South Carolina*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 2,590,713 1980 3,119,208
State Surface Area 33,055 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 4
# of River and Stream Miles 9,679 mi.; # of Border Miles*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 40 / 447,984 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 430,000 ac. or
# of Coast Miles ]_90 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 378 sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Chatooga River/36 mi. Name/Mileage Chauga River/36 mi
Name/Mileage Tugaloo River/23 mi Name/Mileage Savannah River/301 mi.
Name/Mi 1eage Lake Wylie (Catawba River)/15 mi.
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 2,765
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
360
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
3,360
d. Miles Monitored: 2,620
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
800 mi.
385
585
701
2,471 mi.
32%
16%
24*
28%
100%
1982
1,417 mi.
646
702
0
2,765 mi.
51%
24*
25%
0
100%
- 1 -
411 mi.
sq. mi.
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Miles Improved
Miles Degraded
Miles Maintained
Unknown:
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 447.984
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
3.412
d. Acres Monitored: 441,702
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
372,217 ac.
42,492
8,338
10,494
433,541 ac.
iy/L '
85.9%
9.8%
1.9%
2.4%
100%
337,949 ac.
79,767
30,268
0
447,984 ac.
l?0£ '
75.4%
17.8%
6.8%
0
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Improved 6%__5%U n known
69 % Wpegraded
Maintained
Within
Category
Acres Improved:
2.607
Acres Degraded:
18.222
Acres Maintained:
306.925
Unknown:
24.755
Change in
Category
23,322
72.153
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Unknown
M% \ Industrial
Municipal)^ Nop_
V I point j
W/„
Nonpoint
Pnint
Source
Unknown
Other
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
X
X
Coli.. DO
Industrial
X
X
X
DO
Non-Point
X
X
X
Nut.. Coli.
Other (inc. natural)
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 450
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 2,910
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
3.5
Number of^ g
People
(Mill ions)
2.5 -
2.0 -
1.5 -
1.0
0.5
3.2 = I
Legend
2.7 -- T
1,142,210
691,351
24,792
578,752
Secondary
259,306
Primary
7?
1,160,918
Not served by
wastewater system
642,298
1,362,298
Served by waste-
water system
Secondary
_58_,925 Primary
Primary
Does Not
Requ ire
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(mill ions)
4.0 _
3.5
3.0 -
2.5 -
2.0 -
1.5 -
1.0
0.5
2,346,000
587,000
647,000
061,000
Legend
Generated
1,015,000
Discharged
Z
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements"1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met
Facilities Needing Upgrading
67
24
29
13
24
22
19*
100*
76*
12*
100*
74*
54
24
7
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
324
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Compliance
Noncompliance
Noncompliance
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
99
3
120
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements"1"
32
3
102
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
32*
100*
85*
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
61*
100*
97*
1,005
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Compliance
Noncompliance
"\
Comp]iance
Noncompliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
The Statewide 208 Nonpoint Source Management Plan addresses agriculture,
construction, mining, silviculture, groundwater contamination, residual waste
disposal, hydrologic modifications, and urban runoff. The categories of greatest
concern to the State are agriculture, construction, and groundwater contamination.
The State's NPS control strategy incorporates both regulatory and voluntary
approaches to compliance. The Plan recommends that existing regulatory programs
covering mining, residual waste disposal, and hydrologic modifications are sufficient
to control these nonpoint pollution sources. Programs of voluntary compliance are
recommended for agricultural and silvicultural activities. Accelerated programs of
technical, financial, and educational assistance are recommended to encourage the
implementation of best management practices (BMPs) by these industries. The State
has been the site of two major agricultural water quality demonstration projects:
the Broadway Lake MIP and the Greenville-Spartanburg Special ACP Project. To control
construction-related nonpoint source (NPS) pollution, the Plan initially recommended
the development of a statewide regulatory program. Existing enabling legislation
allowing local governments to adopt sediment and stormwater control ordinances had
met with little success. Legislation establishing a mandatory statewide regulatory
program has failed to gain legislative support due to political and economic
pressures. The State has reassessed its approach to construction NPS and is
redeveloping a nonregulatory strategy based upon educational and technical assistance
programs.
Groundwater resources are partially protected by existing regulatory programs
which cover activities such as land disposal of residual and hazardous wastes,
feedlots, stockpiles, surface impoundments, hazardous materials spills, well
drilling, and the underground injection of wastes. To ensure adequate protection of
groundwater resources, the State is currently developing a comprehensive groundwater
protection strategy to be completed by the end of 1983. Urban runoff has proven to
be a significant nonpoint source problem in two of the State's most rapidly
developing areas: Hilton Head Island and the Grand Strand. In 1978, Myrtle Beach
was designated a National Urban Runoff Project Demonstration Area for purposes of
studying the impact of stormwater runoff upon surf water quality. The implementation
of recommended BMPs in these and other metropolitan areas of the State has lagged
primarily due to hesitancy on the part of local governments to adopt the necessary
land use controls and development standards.
The implementation of the State's NPS Management Plan is impeded by the lack of
adequate funding for the necessary educational, financial, and technical assistance
programs.
-6-
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
Urban-3
Ag/Irr.'
S i 1 v.1
Mini ng1^
Cons. '
Hydro.^
Salt. Int.'
Residual
I/L
M/W
I/L
I/L
M/L
I/L
I/L
I/L
C,M,0xDe
*0
C,Nut.,P
SS,T
SS,T
pH,SS
SS,T
SS,T
Sal
M,0xDe,
**0
~Oil & Grease l=Voluntary Control Program 3=Combined Vol. & reg. program
**Toxic Materials 2=Regulatory Control Program
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
Enforcement
1. State's Approach: It is the State's strategy to forestall major problems and bring
about permit compliance through improved plant operation and maintenance (O&M). Emphasis
is therefore placed on enforcement actions directed at 08M deficiences. These deficiences
are detected through NPDES self-monitoring data, technical evaluations, and facility
surveys. To facilitate proper 08M, the State provides technical assistance to plant
operators. More formal training for plant operators will soon be available through the
Sumter Tech Water Quality Management Institute. Enforcement tools used to obtain
compliance include noncompliance notification, conferences, administrative orders, consent
orders, and civil fines. Enforcement actions against nonpoint source dischargers are
generally limited to those activities for which regulatory programs exist: mining,
hydrologic modifications, and residual waste disposal. Compliance is sought through
technical assistance, noncompliance notification, and civil fines.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 29_
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 1_6_
Number of Administrative Actions: 10
Number of Judicial Actions: 3
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 612.2 Million
By Percentage Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA: $ 394.8 Million
Other Federal: $ 78.0
State: $ ^8
, i Local Match: $ 131.6
t-oca^ 12V Other Local: $ Not Available
Other Federal
Federal-EPA
State
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
In 1972, the State's water pollution control program was centered in the S.C.
Pollution Control Authority. This agency's activities were limited and its budget
amounted to only 14* of that of the State's water pollution control program in FY82.
In 1973, the State's environmental and health-related programs were merged to form the
present-day S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control. During the period
between FY73-82, programs such as water quality monitoring, permitting, enforcement,
and construction grants increased significantly. Additionally, the development of
water quality management plans for the State and its five designated areawides was
essentially completed. By 1932, the State's water pollution control program had
evolved into a $4.9 million effort. Following is a brief description of major
elements of the State's program:
MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION GRANTS - The objective of this program is to eliminate water
quality problems attributable to municipal discharges by providing municipalities with
technical, financial, and administrative assistance necessary to build or upgrade
their wastewater treatment plants. The State has been substantially delegated
responsibility for administering the Municipal Construction Grants Program by the
EPA. Although municipal treatment needs of approximately $500 million are still
required to fulfill program objectives. Municipal facilities still represent the
greatest threat to the State's water quality.
MONITORING - The objective of this program is to provide the data base necessary to
drive inhouse decision making processes and other information needs. The program
encompasses water quality and biological trend monitoring stations, intensive stream
surveys, facility inspections and surveys, lake studies, and a laboratory quality
assurance program. Over the past ten years the number of monitoring stations has been
significantly reduced while parameter coverage at remaining stations has been
increased. There has been an increased emphasis on biological parameters in both the
trend and facility monitoring efforts. The use of STORET and BIOSTORET for water
quality and biological data management has been implemented. During the FY80-82
period, part of the water quality trend monitoring network was inactivated to divert
resources for a statewide evaluation of point and nonpoint source problem areas.
Laboratory facilities to support the monitoring effort have increased significantly
over the past decade.
ENFORCEMENT AND PERMITTING - The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) program provides the basis for controlling the State's municipal and
industrial point source discharges. NPDES permits are based upon advanced wasteload
allocation procedures and state and federal effluent guidelines. EPA has delegated
responsibility to the State for administering the NPDES program which presently has in
force 1329 permits. Other permitting activities of the State include water quality
certifications for dredge and fill operations, construction permits for new or
upgraded wastewater treatment facilities, and operational permits for nondischarging
agricultural and land application systems. The State recently implemented a
pretreatment program designated to protect municipal facilities from incompatible
wastes contributed by industrial and other sources.
During the first half of the decade, little effort was expended on enforcement
activities. Resources were devoted toward issuing permits, placing municipals in the
construction grants program, getting industrials to upgrade to meet BPT, and placing
private domestics on compliance schedules. Since 1977, enforcement and compliance
activities have increased. There have been a greater number of penalties and orders
issued to correct deficiences. The number of facility surveys and operation and
maintenance (O&M) inspections have increased significantly. The State's enforcement
strategy is to stress proper operation and preventive maintenance to forestall the
development of major problems. Toward this end, the State now fields a special
technical assistance team to instruct plant operators in proper operation and
maintenance and formal operator training will soon be avilable at the Sumter Tech
Water Quality Management Institute.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
I. HORSE CREEK, AIKEN COUNTY
Prior to 1980, municipalities and textile industries discharged their
wastewaters to Horse Creek and its tributaries with little or no treatment.
The result was severe water quality degradation and contamination of bottom
sediments with heavy metals and organic compounds. Biological communities
within the stream were totally wiped out. Horse Creek was identified by the
S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control as the worst point source
problem in the State.
With the advent of PL 92-500, it became feasible to improve the situation.
Construction of the 20 MGD Horse Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant was begun in
1977 and completed in November, 1979. Today, 20 industrial and municipal
facilities have tied into its collection system. Follow-up sampling indicates
that water quality has significantly improved and biological communities are
rapidly recovering. There have also been detected water quality improvements
in the Savannah River below its confluence with Horse Creek, For the first
time in many years, fish are being caught within the Horse Creek drainage area.
II. PCB PROBLEM IN. LAKE HARTWELL, PICKENS COUNTY
In August, 1976, significant concentrations of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB)
were detected in Twelve Mile Creek which is a tributary to Lake Hartwell. Lake
Hartwell is a major recreational facility. The S.C. Department of Health and
Environmental Control and the Environmental Protection Agency jointly issued an
advisory against eating fish caught in the Lake and Twelve Mile Creek. This
advisory was later revised to cover only the Seneca River arm of the Lake. The
source of the PCBs was determined to be Sangamo Electric, an electrical
capacitor manufacturer which discharged wastewater into Town Creek, a tributary
of Twelve Mile Creek. PCB is a type of organic compound frequently used by the
electrical industry because of its heat resistant properties. PCBs are
dangerous because of their persistence in the environment and tendency for
bioaccumulation. Sangamo Electric immediately took steps to eliminate its PCB
discharge and in June 1977, ceased using PCBs in its manufacturing process.
In response to this crisis, the State established a special monitoring program
on Lake Hartwell. Since the beginning of this monitoring effort, PCB levels in
fish tissue sampled have steadily declined. Due to the rapid recovery of the
lake system, it is now thought that fish tissue concentrations of PCB will fall
below the critical level sooner than previously anticipated.
- 9 -
-------
VJI. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
In 1972, the State's greatest water quality problems were attributed to point
source discharges. Public Law 92-500 provided the State with legal and financial
means with which to begin making significant headway against this problem. From
1972-1982, the State awarded over $500 million in municipal construction grants.
However, the 1982 Needs Survey lists $871 million in municipal facility
requirements still to go. POTWs still present a significant water quality problem
and the inability of municipalities to provide for their own treatment needs is
just as great in 1982 as it was in 1972. The matter of future funding to meet
this critical need is a serious concern to the State.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
1. Proper operation and maintenance of POTWs and private domestic treatment
facilities. This is a significant problem within the State. It is primarily due to
insufficient operator training and outdated treatment facilities. This problem is
presently being resolved by the municipal construction grant program, technical
assistance, and operator training programs.
2. The lack of field-verified models for individual discharges. The State
doesn't possess the resources to develop the field data necessary for site-specific
models. One alternative to increase model confidence level would be to require
dischargers to develop their own models and submit it to the State for approval.
3. Nonpoint Source Pollution. Agricultural and construction activities
represent a significant threat to State waters. There are few regulatory controls
over these activities. Voluntary implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs)
by these industries is dependent upon successful educational, technical, and
financial assistance programs. The State lacks funding for such programs. Limited
federal assistance is available only for certain agriculturally-related activities.
4. The identification and control of toxic materials in point source
discharges. Progress has been made in characterizing and controlling the toxicity of
discharges. The State is presently sampling major municipals for heavy metals
content. The pretreatment program will reduce or eliminate the toxicity of
industrial wasteflows to POTWs. Much additional work remains to be done.
5. Marinas. Marina development along coastal South Carolina has raised concerns
regarding water quality, recreational, and shellfish impacts. These impacts are
presently being assessed by the State.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: S.C. Department of Health & Env. Control
2600 Bull Street. Columbia, S.C. 29201
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: R. Lewis Shaw, Chief. Bureau of Water
Pollution Control
DATE: (803) 758-5631
- 10 -
-------
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
0 Use Supported
CD Use Partially Supported
O Use Not Supported
-------
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
HI) Use Not Supported
SOUTH CAROLINA
1982
-------
State of South Dakota*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 665,507 1980 690,178
State Surface Area 77,047 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 10
# of River and Stream Miles 9,937 mi.; # of Border Miles* 283.5 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 790 / 1.003,987 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mt. 1,332,562 ac. or 2,082 sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 0 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 0 sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Missouri/121 Name/Mileage Lake Hendricks/3.5
Name/Mileage Big Stone Lake/26.0 Name/Mileage Lake Traverse/21.0
Name/Mileage Big Sioux/105 Name/Mileage Bois De Sioux/7.0
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 3,987
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
726
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
6,327
d. Miles Monitored: 3,610
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
|
Supported 1
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
1,874 mi. I
897
519
697
3,987 mi.
47% !
22%
13%
18%
100%
1982
1
2,500 mi. j
1,087
'
400
0
3,987 mi.
t
63% j
27%
10%
0
100%
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 198^
Wi thin
by Percentage
8% Improved
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Mi les Maintained:
Unknown:
Category
3Ut?
0
3,685
Change in
Category
0
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: bt>5,b97
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fisnaole/Swimmable:
655,826
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
448,161
d. Acres Monitored: 37,938
2. tvaluation or Support of Designated Uses
Supporteo
Partial ly
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessta
Insufficient
Data
100*
549,000 ac.
10b,697
655,697 ac.
84%
lb*
100k
3. Changes In ana Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
Within Change in
Percentage Category Category
0.2% Improved
Acres Improved: 1,3bU
Acres Degraded:
99.8%
Unknown / Acres Maintained:
Unknown: 654,347
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Municipal
Industrial
Municipal
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
u.o.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
NH-3. 0.0.
Industrial
X
Non-Point
X
X
X
Sed.
Sed.. Nut.
Other (inc. natural)
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 15Q
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: Unknown
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: N/A
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. PUINT SOURCES
k. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
690.178
0.7
Number of 0.6
Peopl e
(Hi 11 ions J
0.5
0.4
0.3
666,257
0.? -
0.1
175,^92
77,500
; ! lit,800 asi
9,100
Secondary
389,665
Primary
199,105
Legena
AS!
tot served
60,000by waste- ]
water system ///_
162,916
81,548
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
186,609
Primary
Does Not
J ftequ i re
; System
1972
Primary
Sec on da r y
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
1982
1. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Conpareci to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOO
twill ions)
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.2
0.1
g,
500
1972
legend
415|500 . 451,
POO
207,400
^10,-Oj
Generated
•408
T?8T
Discharged
/ /
- / /
/ / -¦
\uLjL-
For 1982:
M Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
^Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. ly82
1972 Interim Permits
19B2
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Net
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
30
12
18
2
12
16
7%
100%
89%
10
N/A
80
28
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
12
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
284
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1972:
Compliance
1972 vs. 1982
1982:
Noncompliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met4
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
8
0
16
Total
Permits
0
0
6
in Effect
in 1982
0
0
37%
83*
0
0
65
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
*Uoes not include i90 feedlots that are coverea separately by a general permit.
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
37%
63 % [Compliance
Noncompliance ...
100%
Noncompliance
IV. NUN-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
South Dakota's Non-Point Source (NPS) pollution control program has
historically focused on a specific watershed approach. Critical areas are
identified, monitoring is initiated, assessment of problem areas is made,
recommendations for improvement are formulated and implementation is initiated.
Currently, activities are underway in 17 watersheds ranging from initial
monitoring to completion of implementation. Evaluation of use impairments is not
accurately identified in Section II of this report for the following reasons:
1. Nonpoint sources are by far our largest contributor to degradation of streams
ano lakes within the State. 2. Current water quality standards are geared
primarily to point source discharges. 3. Most ambient monitoring is conducted
during periods of runoff; therefore, NPS is not adequately addressed. 4. The
system of Missouri River Impoundments seldom reflect exceedance of standards and
thus tend to overshadow the other surface water bodies of the State; however, the
majority of S.D. lakes are eutrophic to hypereutrophic due primarily to cultural
or natural NPS contributions, b. Only approximately 3 lakes (besides Missouri
River Impoundments) receive direct input from municipal or industrial
dischargers. 6. Significant water quality improvements may take years after
long term NPS degradation. Consequently only the Missouri River Impounctoents
were included as fully supporting the designated uses for lakes and reservoirs.
The Lake Herman Model Implementation Program resulted in 89% of the watershed
receiving adequate treatment for soil loss. Current data is beginning to
demonstrate reductions in sediment delivery and nutrient loading to Lake Herman.
As this is the only comprehensive monitoring program to date capable of
demonstrating water quality improvements, only Lake Herman acreage was included
as "improved" (II.B.3.). The Comprehensive Monitoring and Evaluation portion of
the Oakwoods/Lake Poinsett RCWP is intended to demonstrate long term changes In
surface ano groundwater quality as a result of BMP application.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban^
Ag/Irr.'
Silv.1
Mining2
Cons.3
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residual s3
Severity &
Extent
M/L
S/W
M/L
S/L
S/L
M/L
I/L
M/L
Primary
Nat.,SS
Nat.SS
T,SS
SS,T
M, OxDe
Pollutants
M,S
C, T, P
OxDe.SS
M
T.SS
OxDe
pH, Sal.
P, PH
^Voluntary Control Program ^Regulatory Control Program
^Combined voluntary and regulatory program
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: South Dakota has not assumed the delegation of the NPDES permit
program, consequently, enforcement of permit violations remains vested with EPA. The
State conducts various monitoring visits each year that verify compliance status for most
permittees in the State. In addition to these monitoring inspections, the State reviews
self monitoring data and receiving stream water quality monitoring results to identify
sources of NPDES noncompliance. Any permit violation problems encountered are referred
to EPA for further investigation for enforcement or the State initiates enforcement
actions for violations of State water quality standards. Actions referred to EPA are
jointly pursued by the State and EPA. Coordination between the two agencies is necessary
in order to prevent duplication and to assure orderly and continued progress on
enforcement actions.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 12
Number of Pre-Administratlve Actions: 5
Number of Administrative Actions: 4
Number of Judicial Actions: 1
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $
By Percentage
148.9
.5% State
2% Other Local
Other Federal
Local Match
Mi 111on
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Categories of Sources
$_ 109.0
Mill ion
I
8.8
$
0.6
*
27.5
*
3.0
-------
C. Program Activities
South Dakota's Clean water program consists of the following activities:
Wastewater operator training and certification, technical assistance for wastewater
operators, ambient stream sampling, special stream surveys that study the impact of
municipal and industrial wastes on receiving streams, technical assistance to
agricultural feedlot operators, inspections of municipal, industrial, and
agricultural facilities to determine NP0ES permit compliance, identifying
permittees that require enforcement actions, follow-up actions necessary to
carry-out enforcement, technical assistance and inspection of individual and small
cluster wastewater systems, quality assurance and technical assistance for
municipal wastewater laboratories, preparation of river basin water quality
management reports that result from the various EPA and State environmental
programs, administration of 7 lake restoration/assessment grants, providing
technical assistance to Tribal water quality improvement programs, establishment of
in-stream minimum flows, provide technical assistance to Rural Clean Water Program
activities, review mining permits and sites to determine potential or actual
impacts on water quality; assist in the State's hazardous spills prevention
containment and clean-up activities, provide the administration of the EPA
Construction Grants Program, and the review, analysis and updating of the State's
water quality standards.
The above activities are currently being conducted which represents a
substantial change in emphasis and level of effort by the State since 1972. Clean
water program efforts in the early 1970's were limited to establishment of State
water quality standards, prioritization of communities to receive limited federal
financial assistance for upgraded wastewater facilities, and limited Statewide and
site specific water quality and effluent monitoring.
The infusion of Federal funding for the 104, 106, 205, 208, 303, and 402
Sections of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act resulted in greater emphasis in
the State toward indentifying water quality related problems. The December 1981
Amendments further increased the State's efforts toward documenting water quality
problems and away from providing grant assistance to communities that cannot meet
minimum Federal standards. Intensive stream surveys of major dischargers are now
required prior award of EPA grant assistance and after the new wastewater
facilities are completed in order to document the results of the project.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Lead-Deadwood
The cities of Lead and Deadwood discharged raw wastes into Whitewood Creek for
over 100 years prior to construction of new wastewater facilities in 1979. The
State investigated and documented water pollution problems resulting from these
wastes and initiated enforcement action against Lead-Deadwood which resulted in
the construction of a new $4.0 million wastewater treatment system. The effect of
the elimination of these wastes and the recent construction of water pollution
control facilities at Homestake Mining Company has allowed Whitewood Creek to
begin the first stages of returning to its natural state of being a clear, cold
water mountain stream. Figure 4 provides a graphical representation of the
decrease in Fecal Coliform organisms, an indicator of the presence of human
wastes, in Whitewood Creek since July, 1979.
Mitchell
Another example of recent improvements in water quality is the James River
below Mitchell. Prior to 1979, the City discharged inadequately treated wastes to
the James River which resulted in frequent fish kills and the inability to use the
River for recreational and stock watering purposes. Through the efforts of the
State, EPA, and the City, a new innovative wastewater treatment system that
utilizes the treated water to irrigate over 1,200 acres of cropland was
constructed. The crop production on the 1,200 acres was increased by 270 percent
and fertilizer costs were reduced by over 40 percent. As the result of the
elimination of these wastes the James River now supports an active sport fishery
below Mitchell and recreational and stockwatering uses have returned. Figures 7
and 8 represent graphs that indicate improvements in water quality 1n the James
River below Mitchell. Note the significant Increase in dissolved oxygen and
decrease 1n ammonia nitrogen which is directly related to the elimination of the
Mitchell wastewater.
- 9 -
-------
tiAMI T AVL
PK1QR 7-1 IT/9
K0M1
H TUt 7-79*
r/saa
•WIP CONST.
COflilED
FIG 4.WH1TEW00D CREEK FECAL C0L1F10RMS
tt. B Kill aim lLAi> ULALNDOD WTP
:.ti - o ¦•/--Xl'X'O.I
lUwm
tilt
I jjpl
PVAAAAA^l
FIG 7. JAMES RIVER FECAL COL I FORMS
4.1 MUX BLUJI MITOCLL WTP
MMEJt/lH ML !2B4b6/ 100 11
YfARLY AVE.
PSIOB 7-1378
YLAHLY AYL
M IDI 7-7i»
•WTP CONST.
OMUIO)
• . '• •
• ; ; • 4r\'
... ... 'j> '
1
, „ i'.
¦ J,- rV'fvty.'l&ifcv£ ' -(rb
•' . j.
¦« •
• i'» . v ¦''' •' V
1
: , . < : • •
r "' i3' 1
A ' i',
Hi
.: H v
SHHH
FIG 8.JAMES RIVER PARAMETERS
4.1 MILE fHA MITOCU WTP
YUflLY AVL
miOR 7 1078
AfTEK 7-7i*
E1AZ*3
•WTP CONST.
dMIlILD
PO-4 AS f
Mf-4 AS N
DI&6. ODfrQJ
STATIOi I 7
- 10 -
-------
I. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Trie implementation of the EPA Construction Grants Program has resulted in the
completion of 51 wastewater treatment facilities and the renovation of over 200
miles of receiving streams. Another 340 stream miles are still in need of
renovation, therefore, it is imperative that funding for the Construction Grants
Program continue. Nonpoint sources of pollution are in need of implementation
funds in order to alleviate man-caused NPS problems. Existing U.S.D.A. programs
shoul a be supplemented with implementation funding within EPA's nonpoint pollution
control programs.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - brounctoater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Information on Toxics, either resulting from agriculture or mining.
Background data on grounctoater for adequate assessments and establishment
of uniform policies.
Lake rehabilitation projects remain a very high priority in South Dakota.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: South Dakota bept. of Water ano Natural
Resources
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: James D. Nelson (605) 773-3351
DATE: August 26, 1983
- 11 -
-------
SOUTH DAKOTA
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
[| Use Supported
] Use Partially Supported
¦ Use Not Supported
-------
SOUTH DAKOTA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
d Use Not Supported
-------
State of TENNESSEE*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 3,923,687 1980 4,591 ,120
State Surface Area 42,244 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins N/A River Systems/13 Basins
# of River and Stream Miles 19,236*** mi.; # of Border Miles*
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 115 / 675,550 ac
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. *See Below ac. or
# of Coast Miles N/A mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. N/A sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Mississippi/197 mi. Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Tennessee(Kentucky Lake)/! 3 mi. Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT MATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 19,236***
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
3.201**
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 9,220
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
2,500 ml.
505
140
2,755
5,900 mi.
42%
9%
2%
47%
100%
1982
2,945 mi.
945
175
1,835
5,900 mi.
50%
16%
3%
31*
100%
* No accurate Inventory exists for Tennessee. Estimates range from 700,000 acres
to 1,400,000 acres.
** Does not include 1,222 stream miles impounded in TVA or C0E reservoirs.
*** Total stream miles includes substantial numbers of non-navigable and
intermittent streams. **** Subset of II.A.l.d.
210 mi.
sq. mi.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In arid Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
^Unknown
Miles Improved: 885
Improved Miles Degraded:
35
73% Miles Maintained: 4.980
Maintained / Degraded
Unknown: 920
Change in
Category
409
72
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 675,550
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
592,836
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 670,626
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972 -
410,589 ac.
137,734
106,953
0
655,286 ac.
62.7
21.0
16.3
100*
420,489 ac.
133,337
121,724
0
675,550 ac.
52.3
19.7
18.0
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
1.2% Improved
6.9% Acres Improved: 14.594 0
Degraded
Acres Degraded: 32.030 14.761
90.9%
Maintained / Acres Maintained: 614.165
Unknown: 0
- 2 -
-------
E.
1.
Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Muni cipal
15s/
IncludesVsediment,
agrichemi\als, AMD,etc.
55%
Nonpoint
Industrial
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
* Other 1%
(Includes
artifical . ,
, .. x Nonpoint
fertilizing Ukes
/
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
Metals
D.O..Coli
Industrial
X
X
X
X
Metals
Tox.Met.
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X
Sed.
Sed..Tox
Other (inc. natural)
Nut.
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 1.031*
*Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 58,191
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
~Includes 808 miles affected by surface mine drainage
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Le^ej. cf Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
3.7
Number of
People
(Mill ions)3.3
2.7
057, 173 = 1
2.1-
1.5-
0.9*4
1
0-3 -j
~WT
1,881,9^1
Total Not
Served
1,162,889*"
Require
System*
719,052
2,175,232
Total
Served
1,9^,733
Secondary
Tertiary
1^9,529
Ml,970 Pri
ded to M
~h,591;
120 = T
135,1W
£
1,^17,269
Total Not
Served
Legend
1,^17,269**
Not served
Do Not
Req. Sys.
by waste-
56,5^6
water system
2,982,165
Total Served
W
Served by
wastewater
system
2,557,513 Secondary
311,0^6 Teritary
113,606 Primary
Primary
Secondary
etc.
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
'Numbers from data available may not
be conclusive.
1. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
^.50
Population
Equivalents
of BOD ->•"
(Millions)
3.00 _
2.25 -
1.50
>t, 329,986
**Indeterminate numbers from data
needed for treatment cannot be
gathered for this number.
3,919,961
2,^87,412
.75
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Level s
1972
1982
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements"1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
+Includes "No-Discharge" h acuities
72
24
62
65
13
55
90%
54%
88%
N/A
95.7%
73.7%
N/A
11
7
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
86 (major)
225 total
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
Noncomplianc
90%
Compliance
1982:
21%
Non-
compliance
U"'
79%
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements"1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
191
4
70
Total
Permits
N/A
4
65
in Effect
in 1982
N/A
100%
93%
1,257
N/A
N/A
N/A
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
^ 36%
oncompliance
T*%
Compliance
Compliance iNoncomplianc
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
A considerable amount of effort will be concentrated in the agricultural
non-point source area. The Division is participating with the State Rural Clean
water Coordinating Committee and other agriculture related committees, and work
with the Tennessee Department of Agriculture's Agriculture Resources Section
(ARS) in developing a priority ranking system for NPS agriculture related
pollution sources in Tennessee.
The Division plans to work closely with the designated management agency for
agriculture NPS pollution in developing a comprehensive and imp lenient able non-
regulatory program. An understanding will be developed between the designated
management agency and the other agriculture agencies to coordinate work
responsibilities in the implementation program. The designated agency will have
the lead role in establishing a set of criteria for ranking priority areas of the
state where implementation activities will occur. This will include a system for
data collection and management and data input into the priority ranking system.
The Division has also supported the Reelfoot Lake RCWP. It has conducted an
extensive lake monitoring program to provide a water quality data base for
evaluation of the RCWP program.
The Division will be working with the Tennessee Department of Conservation,
Division of Forestry (the designated management agency for forestry related NPS
pollution activities), in conducting a revision of the assessment of forestry
activities and their impact on water quality, including the development of an
incrementation plan for forestry NPS pollution control activities.
The Division has assisted the Knoxville Areawide 208 in their National Urban
Runoff Project (NURP).
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/lrr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residual s
Severity &
Extent
I/L
M/W
I/L
M/L
I/L
M/L
N/A
M/L
Primary
NUT
M
Pollutants
SS
SS.P
SS
dH.SS
SS
0*
N/A
M.O**
*Low D.O. **Toxics
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
The Division of Water Management Enforcement Policy defines the situations that require
enforcement. They are, in general, situations that endanger the public health or
environment. There are also provisions for enforcement of other violations with the approval
of the Director.
The available enforcement options remain the same. The Commissioner can issue Orders for
corrective action. These orders in some instances may invoke sewer moratoriums. These are
appealable to the Water Quality Control Board. He can issue a Civil Penalty Memorandum which
recommends a civil penalty action before the Water Quality Control Board. The Commissioner
may issue Damage Assessments to recoup damages or investigatory expenses to the State. There
is the option of various court actions, although these are nearly always reserved for
emergencies and the enforcement of Commissioner's Actions or Board Actions.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 344 (Municipal only)
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 318
Number of Administrative Actions: 30
Number of Judicial Actions: 28
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $503.949.694 Million
By Percentage
Categories of Sources
ocal
75%
Federal EPA
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match*.
Other Local:
- 7 -
$403.159.755 Million
*
S - o -
$100.789.939
I
-------
C. Program Activities
The Division is committed to the continued success of the permit program in
Tennessee to protect the environment and assure a clean supply of water for
future generations to use and enjoy. The state permit program regulated
industrial dischargers, municipal sewage treatment plants, small business and
commercial facilities, and mining operations. In FY 1972, the Division issued
357 permits to dischargers. In successive years, the number of permits issued
has grown to more than 7500 by June 1981, with the highest production year in
1975-76 with 1,285 permits issued. This monumental effort has involved many
site inspections, countless hours of plans review, and a tremendous amount of
field investigation and data collection to verify the permit conditions.
The Division will be continuing its program of data and information gathering
in its effort of ongoing assessment of the quality of the State's waters.
These efforts will take the form of intensive surveys and field
investigations. A number of these will be performed to identify current
conditions in areas where information is unavailable or very old and current
data is necessary. Some will be used to assess localized areas and/or gather
information relative to a specific discharge or suspected problem area. Others
will be done to gather stream information which will be used to support the
permitting program and the construction grants and loans information needs via
the priority ranking system.
The training of staff will continue to be emphasized. For new employees, there
will be a continuation of a Division developed orientation program which
encompasses curricula from Tennessee and EPA training programs at the
Division's training facility in Murfreesboro, and as appropriate, at selected
water and/or wastewater treatment plants within the state.
Because of the "newness" of the proposed groundwater protection strategy, the
Division of Water Management plans to intensify training and career development
in this area. In addition to the new employee orientation program, selected
staff training will be intensified to include in-depth training of experienced
field personnel to increase the level of their expertise in groundwater
monitoring, evaluation, and protection strategies. Further career development
will be selectively afforded to staff members at privately sponsored training
sessions and national conventions dealing with groundwater protection.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Significant strides toward improving water quality in Tennessee have resulted in
cleaner waters and more efficient management programs. Numerous examples exist of the
efforts of the Division of Water Management in cooperation with local, state and federal
agencies in cleaning up badly polluted and potentially dangerous streams and waterways in
Tennessee.
Several years ago, the East Fork of Mulberry Creek in Lynchburg could be pointed out
as one of the worst polluted streams in the State. Years of neglect had created
conditions in the stream which were at best an eyesore and a nuisance, and at worst, a
health hazard. Cattle feedlot runoff carried tremendous amounts of waste resulting in
high levels of bacteria in Mulberry Creek. Alarmed that this could result in widespread
infections of cattle or humans, the Division of Water Management, Jack Daniels Distillery,
the Moore County Soil Conservation District, and local farmers, all agreed on a course of
action that would remedy the problem. Local farmers who purchased their animals' mash
diet from the Distillery would comply with a Soil Conservation Service approved feedlot
site plan. The plans considered the size of the operation, nearness to local streams and
potential for pollution following rainfall. Feedlots were relocated, feeding practices
adjusted, and feed delivery techniques modified; all with the goal of improving the water
quality in Mulberry Creek.
It worked. Within a short time, bacteria in the creek diminished, and animal life
that had not been seen in Mulberry Creek for years had begun to return. This succesful
cooperative effort is continuing today as local farmers, government agencies, and private
businesses work together to improve the quality of life in Moore County.
The Division of Water Management recently worked with the City of Gallatin to correct
another potentially hazardous situation. During periods of heavy rainfall, the undersized
pumping station that served the Gallatin Sewage Treatment Plant was forced to bypass
sewage and volumes of water that it could not handle into Town Creek, a small tributary of
Old Hickory Lake. Investigations of complaints and intensive water quality surveys of the
area revealed abnormally high numbers of bacteria in the water samples. The City of
Gallatin agreed to install a larger pump and move the location of the bypass closer to the
treatment plant and any bypass will not be released to the smaller confines of Town
Creek. Subsequent bacteriological studies have shown marked improvement in Town Creek and
much lower bacteria counts. The residents of the nearby area have expressed satisfaction
in having this problem solved.
Visitors to the Gatlinburg area several years ago could enjoy any number of
recreational opportunities, but the West Prong of the Little Pigeon River was not among
the recommended tourist attractions. The tremendous influx of visitors during peak
seasons caused a severe strain on the Gatlinburg and Pigeon Forge sewage treatment plants
and as a result, both were forced to bypass into the Little Pigeon River. The Department
of Public Health posted signs along the river warning against public use of the water. A
sewer moratorium was placed on both Gatlinburg and Pigeon Forge as a temporary measure
until a more permanent solution could be found. Through state and federal assistance,
both plants were upgraded to provide advanced treatment of sewage. This level was
recommended both to protect the river and return it to usefulness as a high recreational
area. Both systems are currently in compliance with applicable state and federal
standards and considerable improvements are now seen in the West Prong of the Little
Pigeon River, which serves to further enhance the attractiveness and scenic beauty of the
Gatlinburg area.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AHP REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Several problems focus on the drinking water supply program. First, a plan
must be developed to address the non-community water supply systems. These are
predominantly wells, and serve a small or transient population. This would
include industrial plants, service stations, churches, restaurants, motels, state
parks, boat docks, and others. There is not presently enough manpower, nor a
program to assure that the nearly 1600 known non-community suppliers comply with
the provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act. Only about one of every four non-
community systems are monitoring on a routine basis and it is nearly impossible to
keep a current inventory of these systems due to their very nature. There is also
a need to revise the state statute in order to better address the current
problems. The issue of water quantity needs to be addressed as well as water
quality. The enforcement tools available to the Division need to be broadened.
This would allow for better action on the part of Division personnel and a better
chance for increased compliance with the law.
Part 8. Ma.ior Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
x population and industrial growth.
x - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
_x sources.
x - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
x - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
A related problem is one dealing with groundwater protection. A great many
people in the state, particularly West Tennessee depend on groundwater for their
drinking water supply. Not much is known about groundwater hydrology and there is
only one program in existence which attempts to regulate groundwater problems.
The extent and condition of some of the aquifers that serve Tennessee is not
known. Once an aquifer is contaminated, the education or technology necessary in
many cases to contain it or clean it up is not available. Since a "cure" for a
polluted aquifer is either impractical or impossible, the only solution is
prevention. If Tennessee is to protect these invaluable resources it must now
begin to seriously face this issue, which will come sharply into focus as
developers seek to explore and mine the extensive deposits of lignite coal in West
Tennessee. Further attention to point source dischargers must also be a priority
item. More municipal plants must be brought up to standard or face continual
problems with downstream water users and run the risk of health problems and loss
of recreational uses.
Work with hazardous materials, and more specifically, abandoned dumpsites has
brought to light new areas of concern and problems. Primary among these are the
unknown propensities of many chemical compounds and the importance of our
groundwater resources. Many environmental problems now being encountered are
complicated by these factors.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: TENNESSEE DIVISION OF WATER MANAGEMENT
150 Ninth Avenue, North/Nashville, TN 37203
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: D. Elmo Lunn. Director/615-741-6623
DATE: Report Prepared July-August. 1983
- 10 -
-------
TENNESSEE
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
¦ Use Supported
D Use Partially Supported
0 Use Not Supported
-------
TENNESSEE
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
J Use Partially Supported
¦ Use Not Supported
-------
State of Texas*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 11,198,655 1980 14,228,383
State Surface Area 267,338 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 23
# of River and Stream Miles 80,000 mi.; # of Border Miles*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 186 / 1.616,781 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 400,000 ac. or 625
# of Coast Miles 367 mi.
# of Estuary sq. ml. 2,350 sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Sabine River, Lake & Pass/180 Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Red River/480 Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 14,368.3
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
1.974.9
d. Miles Monitored: 14,368.3
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
6,003.8 mi.
2,458.5
3,944.4
1,961.6
14,368.3 mi.
41.79%
17.1U
27.45%
13.65%
100%
1982
9,678.5 mi.
1 ,902.1
2,421.5
366.2
14,368.3 mi.
67.36%
13.24%
16.85%
2.55%
100%
- 1 -
660 mi.
sq. mi.
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
Unknown
Category
Miles Improved: 2,805.6
Miles Degraded: 682.2
Miles Maintained: 2,691.9
Degraded
Unknown:
33.5
Change in
Category
4,639.1
1,705.9
1.810.1
Maintained
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 1,338,000
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 1,338.000
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
681,100 ac.
64,900 | 1,100
___L
590,900
1,338,000ac.
50.9*
4.86% ; 0.08*
44.16%
100*
1982 |
1,117,600 ac.
56,800 | 0
J
163,600
l,338,000ac.
83.53%
1
4.24* ; 0
i
12.23%
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Degraded/
%
Improved\
10°/
nown
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
7,800
119,000
524.000
17,100
1,100
12.200
656,000
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed: 5,835.971 /
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0 /
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
3.725 /
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 5.835.971 /
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
1,118.43
4,654.845
0
62.696
5,835.971
19.17%
79.76%
0
1.07%
100%
1982
5,705.42
0
130.551
0.0
5,835.971
97.76%
0
2.24
0
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
1 Total Miles
Assessed
1
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100%
1982-
mi.
J mi.
%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
B.y Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
\
/
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Municipal
22.85$ J'
.17% Industrial
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
Municipal
Great Lakes
52-99
Unknown
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
0.0.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics* Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
1 Municipal
X
X
X
1
Coli./D.O.
I Industrial
X
D.O.
1 Non-Point
I Other (inc. natural)
I
*Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 1.031.3
*Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0.0
*Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: 123.827
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: 0.0
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Number of 15"
People
(Mill ions)
10-
15.280
1.068
m
Total
11.751
Primary
0--ZP6_
0.977
m
1.607
5.808
Pr imary
6.131
Secondary
5.577
1.235
(AT)
(AT)
0.765
no disch.
0.928
Legend
ot served by
wastewater system
Secondary
Served by waste-
water system
Primary
Secondary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
1972 1982
~Includes facilities funded for construction
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(mi 11 ions)
12-
k-
7.6^5
1.2Tt
10.858
*Since state population increased by 3.529.000
between 1972 and 1982, the assumption of 1972
treatment levels in 1982 is very optimistic. If
nothing had been done many 1972 facilities would
have been severely overloaded in 1982 and unable
to perform at 1972 levels of treatment.
1972
1982
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
241
300
120
217a
50%
72.3
38.0%
60.6%
I
N/A
52b
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
2097c
+Jncludes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance6: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Compliance
50%
Noncompliance
72.3%
Compliance
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
131
1
105
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements"1"
110
102
Percentage of Facilities for
1
Which Requirements Being Met
83.97% i
97.1%
Percentage of Flow for
97.4%
99.9%
Which Requirements Met+
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
994d
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
Includes facility improvements during 1982 and attainment of permit limits. These do not
include Zh facility improvement projects ongoing or monies available to proceed.
Twenty-four of the 52 facilities are in construction or have monies available to proceed.
Twenty-eight of the 52 facilities have applied for federal grant monies.
The total number of permits in effect do not include 366 municipal no dischargers.
The total number of permits in effect do not include 198 non-municipal no dischargers.
Data source for this section is permittee self monitoring. This is unverified data.
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Noncompliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Water Quality reports developed by and for the Texas Department of Water
Resources have not identified any stream segments which are not meeting current
stream standards because of nonpoint source contributions. Indications of
potential surface water quality problems resulting from nonpoint sources have
been identified in several stream segments within the State. The verification of
site specific cause and effect relationships which provide the basis for detailed
evaluation of control mechanisms are limited. Several long-term site specific
evaluations in areas and stream segments which have been determined to have the
highest potential for water quality problems are in progress.
Erosion controls and an extensive soil conservation program established with the
aid of the Texas Soil and Water Conservation Board, the Agricultural Conservation
and Stabilization Service, and the Soil Conservation Service has existed in Texas
for approximately 40 years. Many of the activities coordinated through these
agencies have secondary effects of protecting water quality. Some urban areas of
the State have both structural and non-structural mechanisms to control urban
runoff.
During the 208 planning process several methodologies were developed for use in
water quality management planning related to nonpoint source water quality
problems. Implementation of methods included in these documents is contingent
upon completion of definitive cause and effect investigations.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
M i n i ng
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
Extent
i
Primary
Pol lutants
1 i
i
V. MATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: A Permit Compliance Assurance Program is utilized to insure the
continued validity of the permit system as an effective water quality management tool.
The program relies upon comprehensive monitoring to detect permit violations coupled with
timely application of the regulatory responses provided in the Department's enforcement
mechanism. Compliance monitoring consists of three basic elements: discharger
self-monitoring reports; discharger progress reports; and discharger inspections by
Department personnel. Regulatory responses to violations include warning letters,
citations, enforcement compliance directives, enforcement orders, and judicial
enforcement.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrati ve Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
86
7a
18
12
a These totals do not include enforcement conferences or letters issued by our
14 district offices.
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $_
3,250
Million
By Percentage
39%
Federal
EPA
Other
Loca
Other Federal
3% State
M°U Local Match
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
1,244 Million
195
103
558*
1.150*
* Estimated. Many muncipalities use other federal and state sources to finance local
share of EPA grant related projects. Total investment for EPA grant related
projects was £1,951 billion ($1,244 billion EPA, fO.707 billion other).
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
The State of Texas under State law and with State funds has developed several
effective water pollution control programs which predated many of the
provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Texas had a uniform
requirement for secondary treatment for wastewater treatment plants several
years before the passage of Federal Acts. In addition, the State has had a
waste discharge permit program since 1962, a stream monitoring program to
establish baseline and trend data of in-stream water quality since 1956,
surface water quality stream standards since 1967, and a waste load evaluation
program to support the permit program since 1968. Other programs which have
been administered through the State Health Department and subsequently the
Texas Water Quality Board, created in 1965 and the Texas Department of Water
Resources, created in 1977, include a self-reporting system wherein waste
dischargers are required to report monthly on the quantity and quality of the
wastewater discharged, requirements for the control of toxic heavy metals in
wastewater and areawide waste treatment planning program.
The approach to achieving water quality goals under both State and Federal law
are basically the same in that we (1) establish water quality standards by
stream segment for the desired uses, (2) develop waste load allocations by
stream segment to determine the assimilative capacity of streams, (3) determine
discharge treatment levels in order that stream standards will not be
substantially affected, (4) impose the required treatment level by permit, (5)
monitor permit compliance through inspections and self-reporting procedures,
(6) enforce the permits, and (7) measure in-stream water quality to verify the
results.
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES FOR 1972 AND 1982
1972
1982
Total Expenditures
Federal Portion
State Portion
$4,638,900
$ 873,200
$3,765,700
$14,750,000
$ 9,263,700
$ 5,487,200
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Much of the growth and development of the Houston area over the past 50 years is
attributed to the construction of the Houston Ship Channel which has made the Port
of Houston the third leading shipping port in the United States. The dredged,
tidal channel was constructed along the natural course of Buffalo Bayou and is
hydraulically connected to six estuarine bays before it empties into Galveston Bay
and the Gulf of Mexico. In addition to stormwater runoff from 13 tributaries which
drain the densely populated Houseton area, more than 455 million gallons per day
(1981) of industrial and municipal wastewater are discharged to the system. In
1968 approximately 460,000 pounds per day of BOD was being discharged to the
channel and it was essentially devoid of oxygen, septic and black, with an oil
sheen covering a large percentage of its surface. It was often referred to as a
"water wasteland" and "potentially the most explosive body of water in the U.S."
and the resources of Galveston Bay were threatened.
Through major efforts of federal, state and local agencies and the permitted
dischargers the total waste load to the channel has been reduced by approximately
80X during the decade of the seventies. With federal grant assistance the
construction of several large treatment facilities with advanced treatment
requirements is proceeding and should contribute to needed further reduction of
waste load and maintenance of the water quality of the Ship Channel and Galveston
Bay. Commercial and sport fishermen reported in 1979 that Galveston Bay and the
side bays were the most productive they had been for 30 years. The continued
growth in this area will require further reduction of waste load or other
alternatives to insure the inteqrityof water quality in this area.
The tidal area of the Lower Neches River has been dredged for approximately 25
miles to form a deepwater navigation channel connecting Beaumont with the
Intracoastal Waterway and the Gulf of Mexico. In addition to the municipalities of
Beaumont, Port Arthur, and Orange, 30 major oil refineries and chemical plants are
located in the area.
In 1968, the waste load discharged to the river was 223,500 pounds per day,
primarily because of inadequate treatment of the industrial and municipal wastes
from the area. Waste loads from nonpoint sources also contributed to the loading
through urban and industrial runoff, spills, and other problems. Impact of the
wastes was intensified by the flow conditions of the river from which water is
diverted upstream for domestic municipal, and industrial purposes. About five
months out of a year, during low flow conditions, there is insufficient water to
keep the lower portion of the river flushed. Then, during high flow conditions of
late winter and early spring, the waste loads that had been "ponding" in the lower
reach of the river were flushed out into Sabine Lake Estuary and the Intracoastal
Waterway.
In 1970, all of the industries and municipalities were required to upgrade their
waste treatment systems and more restrictive discharge permits were issued. In
1974, construction was started on two regional waste treatment plants, completed in
1976. And, with the help of construction grants to municipalities from EPA, the
efforts have been significant. Waste loads have been reduced from the 223, 500
pounds per day in 1968 to approximately 20,000 pounds per day by 1979. The lower
segment of the Neches River, which was ranked as the second most polluted in the
State, now ranks 67 out of 308 segments in terms of needed pollution abatement.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Texas population has increased rapidly since the first census in 1900. In each
decade growth has been above the national increase and in the decade of the 1970's
the increase was much greater than the national average, 27.1 percent for Texas
and 11.1 percent for the Nation. The population of Texas in 1900 was 3.0 million
persons. In 1930, the population of Texas had risen to 5.8 million, in 1960 to
9.6 million and in 1980, to 14.2 million. Texas has developed into a broad-based
industrial, service, trades, energy, and agricultural economy. The people, the
economy, and the environment must have dependable supplies of suitable quality
water in order to survive and to be able to continue to prosper.
Rapid population growth and economic development and demographic changes,
coupled with a climate in which water resources are scarce, have resulted in water
supply problems in many areas within the State. Industrialization and population
increases have resulted in steadily rising water requirements and water quality
protection needs for the large cities of the State. Rural areas of Texas are also
confronted with water supply problems.
Extensive development of ground water has created numerous problems, some local
in nature, while others are more widespread. In West Texas, the rate of use of
water stored in the Ogallala Aquifer for agriculture and other purposes far
exceeds the rate of natural recharge, and in parts of the Gulf Coast, large-scale
pumpage of groundwater has resulted in land surface subsidence and saltwater
encroachment in localized areas. Problems of water quality, both from natural and
man-made causes, affect the availability for use of water from portions of most
Texas' subsurface, water-bearing formations.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
- Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
sources.
- Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Water quality problems, both natural and man-made affect a significant part of
the State's surface water resources. Problems of naturally occurring salinity are
particularly severe in the upper reaches of the Red, Colorado, Brazos, and Pecos
River Basins and continue to plague development and full beneficial use of water
resources in these basins. In these areas, natural pollution, primarily sodium
chloride, results from salt springs and salt flats within the drainage areas of
the basins. In some areas, this problem has been aggravated to some extent by oil
and gas exploration and production activities which took place many years ago.
Many of the man-made water quality problems occurring in Texas streams
originate from highly populated urban areas including Dallas-Fort Worth,
Houston-Galveston, San Antonio, and others. The Trinity River below Dallas is
dominated by treated sewage effluent during summer months. A similar situation
exists in the San Antonio River below the San Antonio metropolitan area. In the
Houston-Galveston metropolitan area, water quality problems are aggravated by
urban development and an intensely developed industrial base.
It is estimated by the year 2000 more than 2,300 municipal wastewater
treatment facilities including new construction, rehabilitation, and expansion
will be needed in order to meet the goals of the federal Clean Water Act. Based
on January 1, 1980 dollars, it is estimated that between 1985 and the year 2000
more than $5 billion from federal, State and local sources will be required for
the construction of these facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Texas Department of Water Resources
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Clyde Bohmfalk (512) 475-3454
DATE: October, 1983
- 10 -
-------
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
B Use Supported
EH Use Partially Supported
E3 Use Not Supported
TEXAS
1972
-------
TEXAS
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
S3 Use Not Supported
-------
State of Utah*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN HATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 1,067,810 1980 1,509,000
State Surface Area 84,990 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 7
# of River and Stream Miles 6,856 mi.; # of Border Miles*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 3,000* / 481,638 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 1,000,000 ac. or 1,600
# of Coast Miles N/A mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. N/A sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage N/A Name/Mileage N/A
Name/Mileage N/A Name/Mileage N/A
* 20 acres and greater; does not include the Great Salt Lake
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 4,252
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swirranable:
0
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swiranable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 3,531
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
165 mi.
1,908
841
1,338
4,252 mi.
4 %
45%
20%
312
100S
1982
949 mi.
2,501
81
721
4,252 mi.
22 %
59%
1%
17%
100£
N/A mi.
sq. mi.
- 1 -
-------
Change in
Category
1,186
56
Degraded
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 481,638
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 439,265
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1 Q7P .
-- ac.
--
--
481,638
481,638 ac.
100%
100%
319,384 ac.
117,991
1,890
42,373
481,638 ac.
66 %
24 %
1 %
9 %
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
1% Unknown
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Category
244
353
2,383
30
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Unknown
\1% Improved Acres Improved: 3,453 . 2,500
I \
Main- \ Acres Degraded: 231,298 5,018
tained / h9% ]
/ / Acres Maintained: 196.996
' Degraded/
Unknown: 42.373
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
a. Streams and Rivers
Municipal
strial
Industrial 5%
Municip
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
(TSS)
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
Industrial
X
Zn
Non-Point
X
X
TDS.TSS
Nutrients
Other (inc. natural)
X
Hq.Pheno
Is X
TDS.Sed.
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 75
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 2,012
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
1.5 "I Approximately 20,000 1,509,000
required a system; 179,000
approximately 10,000 1,330,000 Legend
with no treatment or
primary treatment
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
1.0-
0.5-
Seconds
1,112,000
162,00(
920,00(
Seconda
20,000
10,000
ry
1,165,C00
ry
Not served
by waste-
water system
Served by
wastewater
system
Primary!
165-000
; Secondary
etc.
Advanced
Secondary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population 1.5
Equivalents
of BOD
(Mil lions)
1.0
0.5 H
1.0^
! .17 !
1.^2
Legend
Generated J |
Discharged
For 1982:
^ Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements'*"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
"""Includes "No-Discharge" Facili
29
10
20
18
8
18
62%
80%
90%
76%
91%
97%
15
10
0
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
90
ties
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Noncompli ance
Compliance
Non-
Compli-
ance/'
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
23
3
18
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements"1"
4
2
16
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
17%
67%
89%
160
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
30%
85%
90%
"""Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
83%
Noncompli
NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Nonpoint source water quality problems in Utah result from natural geologic
formations, agriculture, urban runoff, hydrologic modification, mining,
recreation, construction and silviculture. Natural sandstone formations in
eastern and southern Utah contribute significant amounts of sediments through
erosion. Natural deposits of salts, phosphates, fluorides, nitrates and arsenic
contribute to decreasing water quality in the State.
Agricultural water use is one of the primary sources of man induced nonpoint
pollution. Waters diverted for irrigation concentrate salts and sediments in
stream channels. Overland runoff contributes salts and sediments from non-
irrigated crop lands and coliform bacteria from pasture land.
Utah has implemented six certified water quality management plans which interact
with federal, State and local governments in planning, coordinating and
monitoring water quality projects. Presently, Salt Lake County is conducting a
Nationwide Urban Runoff Program. Mountainland Association of Sovernments is
determining the effectiveness of Best Management Practices in the Snake Creek
Rural Clean Water Project.
Six counties are involved with a wetland program to determine the value of
wetlands in flood control, urban runoff, wildlife habitat and recreational
aesthetics.
Salinity will remain a problem in Utah because of contributions of dissolved
solids from natural runoff and agriculture. The State will continue to pursue
salinity control activities with the resources available.
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State1s Approach:
The State's approach to enforcement against violations of state and federal water
pollution control laws and regulations, once a significant noncompliance situation has
been determined and the cause identified, is to initially seek voluntary compliance.
This is generally accomplished through administrative orders outlining mutually agreed
upon remedial measures and compliance time frames. This approach resolves over 90
percent of the noncompliance situations. If problems are not resolvable or appropriate
in this fashion, stronger enforcement action is taken including issuing complaints,
Consent Decrees, Construction Orders and Civil Criminal Penalties. State law does
provide for substantial penalties against violations.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 7
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: jj
Number of Administrative Actions: 2
Number of Judicial Actions: 0
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
S/L
M/W
I/L
M/L
M/L
M/W
N/A
I/L
SS,T,P
C»T*
N,T
T.N.T
T,S,pH
T,N
T,H**
N/A
C,T
~Toxics (Metals)
**Heat/Thermal
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 213 Million
By Percentage
y/o Other Local
Local Match
Other
Federal
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
145 Million
13
48
7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
Specific program activities include: review and approval of all plans for
water pollution control facilities in the State to determine compliance with
state regulations, manage the EPA wastewater treatment plant construction
grants program in Utah, conduct an operator training program to upgrade the
efficiency of wastewater treatment plants, conduct a statewide monitoring
program of waters of the State and effluent discharges to determine compliance
with discharge standards and instream water quality standards, take enforcement
actions as necessary, conduct 0 & M inspections of municipal wastewater
treatment facilities and provide technical assistance, investigate within 24
hours all oil and hazardous materials spills reported to determine the water
pollution threat and prevent or mitigate the entrance of pollutants into waters
of the state, perform 208 water quality management planning activities,
cooperate with EPA in conducting the NPDES discharge permit program including
inspections and drafting and certifying all permits issued, establish instream
water quality standards and effluent standards for dischargers, underground
injection control permit program to protect underground drinking water sources
from subsurface discharge of wastes.
Over the years, as resources have become available, increased emphasis has been
placed on monitoring, enforcement, and nonpoint source control while
maintaining a strong commitment to engineering plan reviews of all new
treatment facilities in the state. Utah has primacy in the construction grants
program and underground injection control program, but not in the federal
discharge permit program.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
JORDAN RIVER
Maintaining water quality in the face of a rapidly growing population serves to reflect a
successful program. In Utah this situation is best exemplified by municipal wastewater
control measures implemented along the Jordan River in Salt Lake County, the most urbanized
area of the State. Seven municipal wastewater treatment plants discharge treated effluent
to the Jordan River. The river, which was exposed to raw sewage discharges and exhibited
cesspool characteristics in earlier years, is part of an ambitious parkway project which
includes boating and other recreation.
In the early 1970's most of the plants were in general providing secondary treatment,
though some impairment of water quality was occurring. The extraordinary population growth
in the last decade has resulted in substantial increases in the mass organic loading to
these plants. Since 1970, the population served by these plants has increased by 7Z%, but
the BOO loading actually discharged to the Jordan River has increased only 1%. Interim
upgrading measures facilitated by construction grant funding were partially responsible for
this achievement. However, five of the facilities are presently overloaded and the other
two plants are rapidly approaching capacity and impairment of water quality is occurring.
Careful planning during the last decade indicated that, for the most part, further
rehabilitation of the existing plants would be counterproductive. The cost effective
method of solving long-term municipal wastewater pollution problems was by regionalization
of facilities.
Two regional wastewater treatment plants with a combined initial design capacity of 75.5
mgd are currently under construction to replace overloaded facilities. Discharge
requirements (10 mg/1 tJQD) for both of these facilities are based upon the designated water
quality standards for the Jordan River. As these plants are completed using federal grant
support and local funds, the organic loading to the Jordan River will decrease by 50X, and
the water quality will be improved to achieve in-stream standards.
SNAKE CREEK RURAL CLEAN WATER PROJECT
The Heber Valley is a major agricultural and dairy production area of the State. The area
drains into Deer Creek Reservoir which is used heavily for recreation, fishing, and as a
water supply source for many of the metropolitan areas in Utah County and Salt Lake
County. Nutrient enrichment is a major water quality problem in the reservoir.
The Snake Creek area, which is tributary to Deer Creek Reservoir, was selected as one of
thirteen Rural Clean Water Projects (RCWP) in the nation. The RCWP project's aim is to
remove animal wastes, primarily from dairies, from entering Snake Creek. The Agricultural
Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS) of the Department of Agriculture is the
management agency with the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) as the technical agency for
implementation of on farm Best Management Practices (BMP's). Mountainland Association of
Governments', the designated local 208 agency, has the major responsibility in monitoring
water quality for determination of the effectiveness of implemented BMP's contained within
the RCWP plan. This effort goes hand-in-hand with the recent completion of a sewage
treatment facility, utilizing land disposal, which serves all sewered areas in the valley.
This of course has also reduced the nutrient load entering the reservoir.
Water quality changes which have resulted from applied BMP's include reductions of
phosphorus concentrations in Snake Creek. Other changes in water quality are expected as
more management systems are utilized by farms in the area. Successes from this project
have caused a spin-off effect in areas outside the project. Outside farms are requesting
technical assistance from SCS and financial assistance from ASCS for planning and
implementation of animal waste systems.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
While the data in this report show some progress in improving water quality in
Utah, this achievement is more significant in light of the rapid population growth
(40%) over the past decade. This growth has obviously put increased pollution
pressure on the waters of the state from sewage discharges, industrial wastes,
urban growth and recreation. In this type of growth situation, just maintaining
existing water quality represents a significant achievement.
In spite of this progress, it must be pointed out that state resources in the
program have declined significantly in the last 4 years and many activities
including monitoring, nonpoint source management, and enforcement are being
reduced and may be reduced further in the future.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
] - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Unique conditions in Utah include the Colorado River salinity problem. Utah
cooperates with the other 6 Colorado River Basin states in a comprehensive basin-
wide salinity control program. Salinity in the lower Colorado River adversely
affects users in Arizona, California and Mexico. A significant portion of state
program resources are devoted to monitoring and implementation of the salinity
control program.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Bureau of Water Pollution Control
Utah Division of Environmental Health
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Ja.y B. Pitkin (801) 533-6146
DATE: June 17, 1983
- 10 -
-------
UTAH
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
8 Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
(Hi Use Not Supported
-N-
-------
State of Vermont*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 444,732 1980 511,456
State Surface Area 9,606 sq. miles (9,278 land, 331 water)
# of River Systems/Basins 17
# of River and Stream Miles 4,863 (See Note) mi.; # of Border Miles* 264 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 280 (20 acres)/ 223,329 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 110,000 ac. or -- sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles N/^A mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. N/A sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Connecticut/238 Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Poultney/26 mi. Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT MATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 4,863
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
115
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
308
d. Miles Monitored: 264*
~Stream and river water quality monitoring in Vermont is restricted
primarily to short term intensive surveys. No trend monitoring is
undertaken. Miles reported are those monitored by short term intensive
surveys 1972-1982.
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
4,563 mi.
189
111
4,863 mi.
94%
4%
2%
100%
1982
4,698 mi.
121
44
4,863 mi.
97%
2%
U
100%
Table completed on basis of best professional judgement for both 1971 and
1982.
Note Reference # of River and Stream Miles
The State of Vermont has approximately 8,000 miles of stream and rivers. Of these
8,000 miles, approximately 5,000 miles are capable of biosupport (propagation of fish
and wildlife) on a year-round basis. The remaining 3,000 miles of rivers and streams
are incapable of biosupport on a year-round basis only because of their intermittent
flow characteristics during dry periods.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Improved
3-'~% Miles Maintained:
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses In 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
.5% Industrial
^.5% Nonpoint
70%
Municipal
Nonpoint
12%
Other
18%
Other
Municipal
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
D.O.
Nut.
PH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Seri ous
Municipal
X
X
X
Col i. TRC
Industrial
X
X
Metals, Turb.
Non-Point
X
X
X
Coli. Nut.
Other (inc. natural)
X
X
Exotic
Plants
Nut., Turb.,
Exotic Plants
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
NOTE: For National Report, These will be aggregated to level of Fed. Region
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Legend
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
.5 -
A -
.3 -
.2 -
.1 "
AM
.279
///
////
.208
Primary
.029
Secondary
Not served by
wastewater system
.511
• 3<.1
1972
1982
Primary
Served by waste-
179 water system
.012
Tertiary & Secondary
Primary
Does Not
Requi re
System
Requi res
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc.
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Popul ation
Equivalents
of BOD 0.5 -
(millions)
O.'t -
0.3 -
0.2
0.1
0.295
0.185
0.35
0.09
17:
0.22
Legend
Generated
Discharged
9
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a.
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements'*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
1982
1982
1972
Interim Permits
Final Permits
9
6
3
2
4
3
Total
Permits
22*
67%
100%
in Effect
in 1982
*
46%
100%
9
6
102
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
22%
78% /Compli ance
Noncompllance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
22
2
29
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements*
15
0
26
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
68*
0%
90*
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
68*
OX
87%
61
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
Findings in this section are based on permits written for direct discharges only.
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
M% \
/ Non-
compliance
8*»% Compliance
32% \
Noncompliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
The primary non-point source problem is the eutrophication of embayments of
Lake Champlain, Lake Memphremagog and several inland lakes due to excessive
nutrient and sediment loss from agriculture and possibly urban runoff. Fishery
habitat loss results from careless construction and logging erosion control
practices. Some dams have created conditions for algal blooms and some release
water with a dissolved oxygen deficit.
Over five million dollars have been spent for cost sharing manure storage and
conservation cropping practices since the section 208 agricultural plan was
adopted in 1978. One watershed project is funded under the Rural Clean Water
Program. Four major and two minor watershed projects are funded under P.L.
83-566. Nutrient and sediment controls continue according to the 208
Agricultural Pollution Plan. An interim stormwater control policy is in effect.
The 208 Silvicultural Pollution Control Plan encourages the logging industry to
police itself. Educational guides have been distributed for agricultural,
silvicultural and construction erosion and nutrient runoff control. The water
quality anticipated in new dams is modeled. The operation of existing dams is
under review.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity 4
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
Note 1
Note 2
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The State's approach to enforcement against water pollution
control violations is to first meet with the violator and offer limited state assistance
aimed at correcting the violation. No enforcement actions are taken as long as the violator
is proceeding in a timely manner toward the correction of those violations. If compliance
can not be gained voluntarily through assistance, enforcement actions are taken. The
Permitting Section works very closely with the Operations and Maintenance Section and other
engineers in the Department during the assistance phase to insure that all efforts are
coordinated.
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si 1 v.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Resi duals
I/L
M/W
I/W
S/L
M
S locally
S/L
N/A
I/L
C, 0*
0**
T.O*
T.O*
pH, 0**
Note 1
T.O*
Note 2
N/A
0**
- abandoned copper mine *Nutrients
-low flow **Metals
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Again
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
7
5
1
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 174 Million
By Percentage Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA: % 131 Million
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
2% FmHa
Other Local:
Local
$
2*
?
26
$
15
$
-------
C. Program Activities
The water quality of Vermont's streams and lakes has continued to show notable
progress. This progress is due primarily to continued wastewater treatment
facility upgrading and construction and further implementation of identified best
management practices for construction, silviculture, and agriculture. Realizing
the importance of clean water to Vermont, the citizens of Vermont have set high
objectives for water uses and high technical criteria for each class of water. To
achieve this end, Vermont's Clean Water Program will continue with the following
acti vi ties:
1. Focusing its emphasis on problem treatment plants rather than focusing its
emphasis on artificial needs of major and minor dischargers. Emphasis over
the next few years will be to attempt to assist those facilities not
currently meeting their permit limits and if those facilities refuse
assistance, initiate enforcement to bring them into compliance. Likewise,
emphasis will be focused on upgrading existing treatment plants to greater
than secondary levels on our water quality limited segments. We are
reviewing expiring permits on a case-by-case basis and insuring that present
water quality concerns are still being addressed by those permits.
2. Undertake water resources planning and establish management priorities with
specific goals and objectives that anticipate limited federal and state
fiscal resources.
3. Continue to monitor the waters of the State to assume compliance with
applicable water quality standards and to resolve potential use conflicts
between multi users. Likewise, undertake special studies as deemed
appropriate to evaluate site specific problems and potential statewide
problems.
4. Provide assistance in lake and pond management to requesting municipalities
at a level contingent with available federal and state funds.
5. Continue to support training and educational activities so as to continue to
inform Vermont citizens of the quality of Vermont's water resources.
. 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
In the early 1970's, a chief pollution problem in the State of Vermont was located in rural
areas and consisted principally of discharges of domestic waste from individual homes.
Installation of 15,000 plus septic systems between 1972-1974 drastically reduced pollutional
inputs from individual homes such that by the mid 1970's pollution from this source was
virtually eliminated. This activity was accomplished by conducting basin wide sanitary surveys
to identify domestic pollution sources and by vigorous follow-up to assure compliance with
State laws.
Vermont's stone products industry during the early to mid 1970's was categorized as a major
Industrial polluter. Substantial quantities of granite fines were being discharged to surface
water courses with virtually no treatment causing excessive turbidity and suspended solids
levels in the state's receiving waters. Through the combined efforts of the Vermont Granite
Industry and the Vermont Department of Water Resources studies were undertaken to investigate
potential treatment schemes which could be employed by the Industry in the treatment of process
waste streams. Ultimate success was achieved using a combination of coagulant aids and
settling ponds as the basis treatment scheme. Settling ponds alone proved unsuccessful
primarily because of the colloidal nature of the material to be removed and the limited
available space at many existing facilities for large ponds.
The stone products industry by the late 1970's and early 1980's was categorized as a minor
industrial polluter with only incidental problems occurring from individual facilities.
Significant improvement has been achieved in the receiving waters in Central Vermont where the
stone products industry is basically located. In areas where fisheries were once procluded
because of excessive turbidity and solids levels from the stone products industry, fisheries
have again reestablished themselves and are again part of Vermont's vast fisheries resource.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Management of Waste Discharges and Municipal Growth - Discharge waste!oads
require monitoring so that proper facility planning, design and construction can
occur prior to permit limits being exceeded and water quality violations result.
Of obvious concern is the replacement or upgrading of wastewater treatment
facilities with significantly reduced federal and state aid.
Protection of Upland Streams - Increased developmental pressures by
construction of new recreational facilities, condominiums, residences, and
commercial establishments in areas with no municipal services and limited on-site
waste disposal capabilities.
Erosion/Siltation Control - Implementation of best management practices for
silviculture, agriculture and construction are necessary for future water quality
progress. These activities are essential for reducing non-point source nutrients.
Clean Lakes - Diagnostic/feasibility studies for lakes funded under Section 314
of the "Water Act" will be completed with the available federal funding. It is
unlikely that restoration efforts on these lakes will be possible if Section 314 is
not reauthorized as a part of the Act or alternative funding sources are made
available.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
_X; population and industrial growth.
_X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
sources.
_X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Water Withdrawals - The use of small streams, especially in the upland areas,
for water supplies and/or snow making operations, which requires utilizing a
stream's total hydrologic capacity.
Facilities Operation and Maintenance including Operator Training - The presence
of wastewater treatment facilities can not by themselves assure compliance with
permitted effluent levels. The operation and maintenance of these facilities is
critical to proper operation. Operator training is essential.
Wet!ands - Continued identification of wetland areas; public informational
seminars are necessary to stress value of wetland areas and to identify uses or
abuses which result in loss of values.
Acid Precipitation - Continue to gather pertinent data on the damaging impact
of acid precipitation in Vermont. Stress the need for legislation calling for the
immediate reduction of sulfur and nitrogen oxidizers being emitted to the
atmosphere through various sources.
Hydropower Development - interruption of stream flow and water quality
conditions created in resulting impoundments.
Combined Sewer and Urban Stormwater Runoff - Though identified as a problem in
a large number of Vermont's Water Quality Management plans, the issue remains to be
resolved.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Vermont Agency of Environmental Conservation
Dept. of Water Resources & Environmental Engineering
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: David Clough 802-882-2761
DATE: August 12, 1983
- 10 -
-------
VERMONT
1972
ZTT\
<
OK
h
-N-
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
¦ Use Supported
3 Use Partially Supported
B Use Not Supported
-------
VERMONT
1982
5
I
-N-
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
CD Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-------
State of Virginia*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN MATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 4,651,487 1980 5,346,818
State Surface Area 40,815 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 9
# of River and Stream Miles 27,240 mi.; # of Border Miles* ]_78 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage lj>] / 67,912 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 280,000 ac. or sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 5,000 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 2,382 sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Potomac/178 Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 4,500
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
890 mi. public water supply
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 4,500
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
*1972
mi.
mi.
1982
1,383 mi.
1,146
1,971
0
4,500 mi.
3H
25%
44X
0
100%
*Not Available.
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
We were unable to compare 1972 vs. 1982 for stream water quality data. This comparison would
have necessitated analyzing the available data for 1972 in a manner similar to the method used
for our 1982 305(b) Report. We would in other words, have had to reconstruct what a 1972 305(b)
Report would have been in order to make the comparison. (Our earliest report is the 1975
edition, which uses a very different format than the 1982 report). This task was infeasible
given the STEP project's timetable and current manpower resources.
As part of the 1982 305(b) Report we did perform extensive statistical time trend analyses
for several chemical parameters, so we can say, on a station-by-station basis, if levels for a
particular parameter have changed. At stations that showed a trend, the stations showing
improvement outnumbered stations showing a decline (2 to 1 for oxygen and 3 to 1 for bacteria).
Detailed data are avilable from the contact listed or from the ASIWPCA office.
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
67,912
1. a. Acres Assessed:
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
21,373 public water supply
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 57,211
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partial ly
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
33,194 ac.
6,617
0
18,684
58,495 ac.
57%
11%
0
32%
100%
1982 -
58,257 ac.
8,864
0
791
67,912 ac.
86%
13%
0
1%
100%
*Data provided is for 1974.
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972* - 1982
By Percentage
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
13,987
26,473
19,358
Change in
Category
8,094
*Data provided is for 1974.
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Other
Municipal 1%
Industrial 1%
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
*~
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
Co1i.. Nut.
Industrial
X
X
X
Toxics. 00
Non-Point
X
X
X
Coli.. Nut.
Other (inc. natural)
X
X
pH. Temp.
**siltation in lakes
296
0
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: 113 linear mi.
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
N/A
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
People
(Millions)
5.0 -
4.0 -
3.0 -
2.0
1.0 -
Legend
5-491
4.758
Not served
by waste-
1.11
water system
///
.329
.308
Primary
V/,
.528
1.435
Primary
2.21
Secondary
1.685
Secondary
AST /
AWT
Served by
wastewater
system
1.81
Primary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc.
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD 5.0
(Millions) t
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
Legend
.6
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
*Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance*
a.
1972**
1982 1982
Interim Permits^ Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements'1"1
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
93
14
60
9
8
30
9.7%
57.1%
50*
20.1%
61.9%
64.5%
60
14
12
**Data provided is for 1977.
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1932
898
state and EPA as "Major"
b. Significant Municipal Facility* Compliance: 1972** vs. 19823
By Percentage
1972:** 1982:
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities*
1982 1982
1972** Interim Permits^ Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
73
0
69
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements*
15
—
39
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
20.6%
56.5%
913
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
75.0%
94.9%
"•"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities *Includes those facilities defined by
State and EPA as "Major"
**Data provided is for 1977.
1 For Tables A 3(a) and B(a) : "Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit Requirements"
is defined as those facilities that were in total compliance for the
entire year.
2 Interim permits are not issued, and have not been since before July 1,
1977. For purposes of Tables in A 3(a) and B(a) we are using Consent
Orders and Interim Effluent Letters which have interim limits.
3 For Pie Charts A 3(b) and B(b), "Compliance" is defined as having no
violations in any given month. Noncompliance is defined as having any
permit violation in a given month. The % compliance for any given year is
defined as a ratio of months in compliance vs. months in which permit was
in effect.
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility* Compliance: 1972** vs. 1982-3
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
~Includes those facilities defined by State
and EPA as "Major"
**Data provided is for 1977
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
State Secretary of Commerce and Resources formed a Nonpoint Source Pollution
Committee chaired by the Director of Soil and Water Conservation Commission with
members from several concerned State and Federal agencies. Due to paucity of
water quality data supporting definition of NPS problems, a non-regulatory
approach was recommended. The State Water Quality Agency, the State Water Control
Board developed Best Management Practices Handbooks containing standards and
specifications for five of the six NPS categories* and a BMP Management Handbook
designating management agencies to implement and report on the BMP program. The
seven inter- and intrastate designated areawide planning agencies used a similar
approach. An extensive public education and involvement program was launched at
the same time, with sub-committees from the State 208 Policy Advisory Committee
participating in development of the management strategies included in the BMP
Management Handbook.
A locally-initiated citizen's program to monitor streams and land-disturbing
activities was supported by 208 funds and will be expanded to encompass more areas
of the State where response is positive.
The U.S. Soil Conservation Service prepared an assessment of potential nonpoint
source pollution from agricultural activities and prepared detailed reports for 26
priority watersheds in the non-designated State Planning Area. The State Division
of Forestry and the State Water Control Board conducted a similar assessment for
other categories of nonpoint source pollution.
Special nonpoint source watershed studies were conducted on two major lakes and
in three major river basins. The State 208 program also is supporting a Rural
Clean Water Program project as well as several water quality related Agricultural
Conservation Practice projects. Nonpoint source studies will be continued in the
Chowan and Roanoke River Basins as well as tributaries to the Chesapeake Bay.
* Handbooks were produced for Urban Runoff, Agriculture, Groundwater, Hydrologic
Modifications, and Forestry. A draft handbook for Mining was prepared but never
published, being superseded by new surface mining legislation at Federal and State
levels.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
M/W
M/W
I/L
M/L
M/W
I/L
I/L
N/A
SS.T,
C, Nut.
Nut.
pH
P, M
OxDe, SS
SS
M. T
SS, T
SS, T
PH. 0
N/A
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: Virginia utilizes many approaches to achieve compliance. Six
regional offices render technical assistance, and have day-to-day contact with
permittees. Phone calls, meetings and letters at this level are used to achieve
compliance. Headquarter's Bureau of Enforcement uses letters, Directives, Consent
Orders, hearings for issuance of Special Orders, Emergency Special Orders, and recommends
to the 7-member citizen's Board legal action for violations. In 1982 four Consent Orders
were issued, three municipal and one industrial, and the Board authorized legal action
for eight non-municipal permittees. The Board also approved five settlements of civil
cases in 1982 amounting to $51,000. We are now using a priority ranking system for
violators. Permittees who are in significant noncompliance (This definition is different
from EPA's and ASIWPCA's) are ranked based on size of discharge, toxicity of discharge,
environmental harm, unreliability, and public interest.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
66
48
5
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $_
By Percentage
1,402 Mill ion
25°/o
Loc.il
71%
Federal - EPA
h% State
Categories of Sources
Federal - EPA:
$ 998,566,
830
Other Federal:
$ 0*
State:
$ 52,078,
160
Local Match:
$ 351,476,
144
Other Local:
$ 0*
^Information not available
- 7 -
-------
C• Program Activities
The Virginia State Water Control Board was established in 1946. Most major
programs existed before passage of the Clean Water Act of 1972. But significant
program changes were made in response to the Act.
1. In 1972, the Division of Water Resources, formerly an independent agency was
merged with the Board, bringing together water quality and water quantity
planning.
2. In 1972, six Regional Offices were established. About half of the Agency's
personnel is assigned to these six regions, half to Headquarters. (NOTE: In
1982, 376 positions were authorized vs. 333 in 1972; however, only 319
positions are currently filled due to a State government hiring freeze and
budget constraints. The budget has grown from $1.09 M in FY 1972 to $10.02 M
in 1982).
3. In January 1975, the Agency assumed full delegation of the federal NPDES permit
program. The SWCB has issued state discharge permits since 1946, and continues
to issue state permits along with the federal permits.
Other programs added (or greatly expanded) since 1972:
1. Nonpoint Source Abatement Program 1974
2. Clean Lakes Program 1972
3. Chesapeake Bay Program 1978
4. Spill Prevention Control and Counter Measure Program 1973
5. Toxic Monitoring Program 1979
6. Dam Safety Inspection 1977
7. Flood Insurance 1977
8. Water Supply Planning 1977
To highlight some major programs:
NPDES Permits - 898 municipal and 913 industrial permits are in force; 61,566
kg/day of BOD5 were discharged to Virginia's water in calendar 1981. This total
has been halved since 1976.
No-Discharge Animal Waste Program - 935 certificates are in effect. This program
prevents a wasteload equivalent to 1.2 million people from reaching State waters.
Monitoring Program - 314 water quality stations are sampled monthly. Last year we
collected 17,127 water samples and performed 162,660 chemical analyses on them. In
addition 161 stations are sampled semi-annually for benthic invertebrate organisms.
Pollutioin Response - In the last two years we investigated 1,661 pollution
complaints; one-third were oil spills; 3.5 million gallons of oil were spilled,
necessitating 424 clean-up operations. About one million gallons reached State
waters. During the same two-year period, 205 fish kills were investigated; about
one-quarter were caused by pollution.
Clean Lakes - 161 publicly owned lakes were studied and classified as to trophic
state. Several are being considered for EPA lake restoration grants.
Chesapeake Bay Program - A six-year $27 million study of the Bay is nearing
completion. Recommendations for long-range management of the Bay are currently
being formulated.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
A. Occoquan Reservoir
The Occoquan Reservoir was created in the 1950's to supply drinking water to
northern Virginia. With improvements to the dam, the lake now holds 11 billion
gallons of water and serves a population of 600,000. In the 1960's, increasing
development threatened the lake, with increased runoff and increased discharge of
sewage. Algae blooms were common, necessitating frequent treatment with copper
sulfate. A moratorium on growth was imposed while an intensive study determined
the extent of the problem and recommended solutions.
The solution was a new advanced wastewater treatment plant, which consolidated
flows from eleven existing plants into one regional facility operated by the Upper
Occoquan Sewage Authority. The new plant, which began operation in 1978, treats
water to virtually drinking water standards before discharge to the reservoir.
Eutrophic conditions have improved, but non-point source problems in the 590 mi2
basin remain, although Best Management Practices are being implemented.
B. Roanoke River and Smith Mountain Lake
The Roanoke urban area is located 30 miles upstream from the dam of Smith
Mountain Lake, a 20,000 acre multi-use reservoir. The lake, completed in 1965, has
a 1,024 mi^ watershed drained by two rivers, the Roanoke and the Blackwater. The
Roanoke River arm of the lake, draining the urban area, showed symptoms of
eutrophication by the late 1960's. This condition was attributed to sewage and
urban runoff from the Roanoke area.
Beginning in 1971, "pickle liquor", a waste ferric chloride solution from the
steel industry, was used at the Roanoke STP for phosphorus removal. Conditions
began to improve in the lake, which studies had shown to be phosphorus-limited.
In 1977, a new regional advanced wastewater treatment plant began operation.
This plant, with biological nitrification, chemical-physical operations and
filtration, has consistently produced a high-quality effluent. The plant also has
flow equalization basins to hold and treat some storm runoff from combined sewers
and severe infiltration/inflow problems. The result has been a dramatic reduction
in loadings of nutrients. BOD and solids, and a great improvement in water quality.
Non-point sources in the lake's watershed continue to be a concern. A major
EPA-funded "208" study of the Roanoke area is nearing completion.
- 9 -
-------
I. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Toxic pollutants. Almost 300 miles of stream have been under fishing restrictions
due to toxic substances. Kepone contamination of the James estuary attracted
national attention. Two other rivers, the NF Holston and South River-SF
Shenandaoh are contaminated with mercury.
Water Supply. Ensuring adequate water supplies for the State's growing urban
areas in northern and southeastern Virginia has been of increasing concern.
Southeastern Virginia has been designated a Groundwater Management Area.
Additional Special Concerns - protection of the Chesapeake Bay; quality of
interstate waters, especially in the Chowan Basin; reclamation of orphaned mined
lands; regional wastewater treatment planning; and shellfish condemnation and
marine sanitation devices.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
- Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Toxic pollutant monitoring. The agency is developing a program to monitor complex
effluents for both organic and inorganic toxic substances. Program will use both
bioassays and high technology chemistry, such as GC/MS.
Comprehensive Water Supply Planning. Agency has embarked on a five-year effort to
provide a comprehensive water supply plan for all of Virginia, under a special
directive from the General Assembly.
Nonpoint Source Control. Virginia has a voluntary Best Management Practices
program, has produced six widely distributed handbooks on BMP's, has had up to
seven areawide "208" agencies. The SWCB is working closely with agricultural
interests on control of rural NPS, and conducted several studies on subbasins and
single land uses. However, a comprehensive statewide assessment of the magniture
of the problem remains to be done.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Virginia State Water Control Board
P.O. Box 11143. Richmond. VA 23230
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Ronald A. Gregory 804/257-0073
DATE: August 12. 1983
- 10 -
-------
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
D Use Partialiy Supported
@ Use Not Supported
VIRGINIA
1982
-------
State of Virgin Islands*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 75,151 1980 96,569
State Surface Area 135 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 4
# of River and Stream Miles N/A mi,; # of Border Miles*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage N/A / ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. ac. or
# of Coast Miles 172.8 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. SL5 sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage N/A Name/Mileage N/A
Name/Mileage N/A Name/Mileage N/A
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: N/A
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
100%
1982
mi.
100%
- 1 -
N/A mi.
sq. mi.
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
Change in
Category
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed:
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Acres Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
100?
1982
ac.
100S
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
/ Acres Improved:
I \ Acres Degraded:
\ / Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2 -
-------
C. tstuaries and/or Oceans
tstuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assesseu: b.b / 1/2.8
o. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Strinyent than Fishable/SwiiimaDle:
9.b / 161.8
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Desiynated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0 / 11.0
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: ^5 / 172.8
2. t aluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
19/2
%
100%
1982
lbb.8 mi.
1.0
2.0
3.4
172.8 mi.
9o .b %
0.3 %
1.2 %
2.0 %
100%
3. Chariyes In ana Within use Support Between 1972 anu lyti2
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Sq.Mi .Improved:
Sq.Mi.Oegraaea:
Sq.Mi .Maintaine a:
Unknown:
Wi thi n
Category
1.5
4.0
4.0
Change in
Category
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
l«i tni n
Category
2.9
1.0
162.y
Change in
Category
¦ Unknown:
6.0
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes
1. a. Miles Assessed:
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Part ial ly
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
mi.
mi.
%
100%
mi.
mi.
%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
N/A
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
Vessel Waste
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics^
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
X
Col i
Industrial
X
X
Turb
Non-Point
X
Other (inc. natural)
N/A
N/A
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: None
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: N/A
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
Legend
Number of
People
(Millions)
Does Not
Require
System
Not served
by waste-
water system
0.10
Requ ires
System
0.09
0.08
19,000
0.07
Treatment
0.06
Primary
Served by
wastewater
system
Degree of
T reatment
0.03
NONE
Secondary
0.02
etc.
20,000
Secondary
0.01
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Millions) Legend
Generated
No Data
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a.
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
"""Includes "No-Oischarge" Facilities
1982
1982
1972
Interim Permits
Final Permits
0
0
10
U
0
2
0
0
20
0
0
10
0
0
10
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
10
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Noncompli ance
207»
Compliance
Significant Noncompliance
tf. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
4
2
17
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permits
Permit Requirements*
N /A
N/A
15
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
N/A
N/A
88.2
17
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
N/A
N/A
90 %
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Available
ance
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
The U.S.V.I. Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program (NSPC) was initiated in
July 1981. The program was 100% federally funded (USEPA). The NSPC program's
goal was to identify the territory's nonpoint source priority polluters and
organize plans to limit the contributions of these sources. The three major
contributors are groundwater contaminants, vessel waste, and sediments from
construction site activities.
Groundwater is a vital supplement to the V.I. potable water supply, therefore,
preventing any further degradation and improving its quality became a priority.
Groundwater can be contaminated from seawater intrusion, hydrocarbons, industrial
solvents, nitrates, sewage and sediment.
Vessel Waste was found to be a significant contributing factor especially on
embayments that are shallow, enclosed or poorly flushed. Installation of marine
sanitary devices and determination of assimilative capacity of highly suspect
bays will alleviate the impact of this problem.
Sediment Production causes severe problems especially due to construction taking
place in the last two decades. It fills culverts and natural drainage areas, and
causes flooding, which in turn discolors coastal waters and affect marine
ecology. Implementation of Best Management Practices at construction sites can
reduce this problem significantly.
Agencies assisting in NSPC endeavors, other than EPA, include: The U.S.
Geological Survey; the V.I. Department of Public Works; the U.S. Soil
Conservation Service; V.I. Coastal Zone Management; U.S. Coast Guard, and the
V.I. Port Authority.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Poirit Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pol lutants
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Vessel
Waste
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
1/L
S/L
S/L
C.M.Nut,
Oxy Dem
SS
C.Nut
Oxy Dem
SS.T
C,Nut,
Oxy Dem.
SS,T
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
1. Permit Issuance
2. Compliance Evaluation and Sampling Inspection
3. Notice of Violations (letters)
4. Quarterly Non-compliance Reports
5. Court Action
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
6
6
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 18,377,005.00 Million
By Percentage
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Categories of Sources
18.327.005 Mi 11 ion
7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
I. The V.I. DCCA/NRM is charged with responsibility of providing for the
prevention, abatement, and control of new or existing water pollution. To
execute this mandate, the DCCA has developed a Water Pollution Control
Program whose activities include Water Quality Management Planning, Point
Source, and Ambient Monitoring, Permit Issuance, Enforcement, Training, and
Emergency Response.
Water Quality Management Planning:
Brings together information about water resources in the islands into one
report where it can be used as a source for making decisions for the future.
II. Point Source Program activities involves the collection of monitoring data
for verification of compliance with effluent limitations specified in the
discharge permit.
III. Ambient Monitoring Activities is comprised of collecting, analyzing and
interpreting the results of marine samples for chemical, physical and
biological information, to define water quality trends and determine
compliance with V.I. Water Quality Standards.
IV. Enforcement Activities employs water pollution control and point source
permit issuance as a means of limiting and controlling proposed or existing
discharges.
V. Personnel Training is conducted whenever an EPA approved course is offered
relating to an area where DCCA agency necessitates improved expertise.
VI. Internal informal training sessions are administered when appropriate.
System audits assess how efficiently a particular area of operation
functions including the performance level of the individuals involved in
the methodology.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
The Charlotte Amalie harbor in St. Thomas has been adversely affected by
conventional pollutant sources. Raw sewage was discharged into the harbor up
until the early months of 1973. This activity contributed significantly to
high fecal colifortn levels ( 600/100 ml), unsuitable dissolved oxygen levels
(b.7-6.0 mg/1) and decreased water clarity.
Water quality in the Christiansted harbor suffered the same type of
degradation due to conventional pollutants.
Under the Water Pollution Control Program, raw sewage discharged into the
harbors, was eliminated by construction of primary wastewater treatment plants
and other sewerage system facilities. As a result, water quality data
indicate conditions in the Charlotte Amalie harbor have improved over the last
few years. Fecal coliform levels have decreased far below (50/100 ml),
dissolved oxygen levels are now up beyond 6.5 mg/1 and water clarity has
improved.
In the Christiansted harbor, fecal coliform levels have fallen dramatically
and in stream dissolved oxygen levels have risen. Both successes can be
attributed to the USEPA Construction Grant Program and implementation of the
provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
The Division of Natural Resources Management, Water Pollution Control Program, is
especially concerned with nutrient overloading and turbidity arising from urban
runoff, municipal discharges, and unsound development practices, in certain poorly
flushed areas (Mangrove Lagoon, Cowpet Bay, Water Bay). Water quality and
biological conditions in these locations have deteriorated, in some cases, to the
point where they are impairing the highest designated use. Another important
concern has been for DCCA/NRM to use the water quality data to develop a data base
which will be useful on assessing future monitoring strategies.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Department of Conservation & Cultural Affairs
Division of Natural Resources Management
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Mr. Austin L. Moorehead (809) 773-0565
DATE: 9/19/83
- 10 -
-------
VIRGIN ISLANDS
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
C Use Partially Supported
IH Use Not Supported
ST. THOMAS
ST. JOHNS
-------
State of Washington*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN MATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 3.4 million 1980 4.1 million
State Surface Area 66,786 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 62
# of River and Stream Miles 40,492 mi.; # of Border Miles* 346 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 7,958 / 613,582 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 220,000 ac. or 344 sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 994 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 1,361 sq. mi.
~Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Columbia R./309 Name/Mileage
Name/Mileage Snake R./37 Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT MATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 6,309
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swlmmable:
44
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
984
d. Miles Monitored: 2,741
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
2,929 mi.
376
31
2,973
6,309 mi.
46%
6%
0.5%
47%
100%
1982
4,913 mi.
GO
165
358
6,309 mi.
78%
14%
3%
6%
100%
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage
<6% Unknown
Category
Change in
Category
>9 <4
Maintained
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
> 5.930
< 379
6. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 41,477
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 12,931
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partial ly
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972
13,480 ac.
16,500
10,738
759
41,477 ac.
32.5*
39.8%
25.9%
1.8%
100%
1982
19,857 ac.
17,893
3,727
—
41,477 ac.
47.9*
43.1%
9.0%
--
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Unknown
Within
Category
5.603
8.411
6.125
13.690
Change in
Category
6.552
1,096
- 2 -
-------
C. Estuaries and/or Oceans
1,361
/
964
Estuaries Oceans
1. a. Square Miles/Miles Assessed:
b. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0/0
c. Sq. Mi./Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
3.6 / 0
d. Sq. Mi./Miles Monitored: 1,254 / 837
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Support ed
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total
Assessed
1972
1161.1/807
88.2/0
4.7/0
107/157
1361/964
85.3/83. l°k
6.5/0
0.3/0
7.9/16.2
100*
1982
1162.5/807
91.5/0
0/0
107/157
1361/964
85.4/83.7*
6.7/0
0/0
7.9/16.2
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
a. Estuaries:
By Percentage
Unknown ?.no/
91.8%
Maintained
0.5?" Improved
Sq.Mi.Improved:
Sq.Mi.Degraded:
Sq.Mi.Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
1.249.3
107
Change in
Category
4.7
b. Oceans
By Percentage
Unknown
83.7%
Maintained
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
0
807
Change in
Category
157
- 2A -
-------
D. Great Lakes si/A
1. a. Mi les Assessed: ,
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swiminable:
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swiimiable:
d. Miles Monitored:
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
.
}S7Z
mi.
mi.
%
100*
IQft?-
mi.
mi.
%
100%
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Miles Improved:
Miles Degraded:
Miles Maintained:
N/A
\ / Unknown:
- 2B -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
Industrial
unicipal
Nonpoint
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
1% Municipal
99% I
Nonpoint
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
Industrial-
Municipal
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
N/A
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
0.0.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
NHo
Cl-2
Nut.. Coli.
Industrial
X
X
X
D.O., Toxics
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X
Temp., Turb.
Other (inc. natural)
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: Unknown
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: Unknown
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: Unknown
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: Unknown
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of
Number of
People
(Mill ions)
Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
FURTHER INFORMATION NOT AVAILABLE
Legend
Not served
by waste-
water system
*t.1 Not Served
5-
1-
3.^ Not Served
1.2 Served
2.8 Served
Served by
wastewater
system
Primary.
Secondary
1972
1982
Does Not
Require
System
Requ ires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Mi 11 ions)
Legend
Generated
Information Not Available
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1382
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
"""Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
46
24*
21
3
13
15
7*
29*
33*
9*
61*
23*
43*
23*
4
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
268
~Includes 1/ 301(h) applicants
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Compliance
93 %
Noncompliance
Noncompliance
Compliance
3. Non-Municipal Facility Compl iance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements"1"
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
46
40
3
Total
Permits
4
19
3
in Effect
in 1932
9*
44*
7*
541
49***
15*
59***
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
~~Includes one 650 mgd power plant
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
Comp1i ance
9%
91%
Noncompliance J
1982:
1
/ w
/
Non-
Compliance
51%
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
A nonpoint source water quality problem assessment was prepared to provide a
basis for the establishment of CWA Section 208 planning priorities. The
assessment identified the following categories in priority order:
Agriculture (Irrigated Agriculture Return flow)
(Dryland Agriculture Soil Erosion and Sediment Control)
(Dairy Waste Management)
Silviculture (All Forest Management Activities)
On-Site Waste Disposal
Urban Runoff
Sixty-four (64) fresh and marine water segments of a total of 170 segments in
the state experience water quality problems caused wholly or partially by
nonpoint sources. In addition, seven (7) eutrophic lakes, 200 acres or larger in
surface area, are known to be impacted by nonpoint sources. Although nonpoint
source impacts on ground water have not been fully assessed, nonpoint sources
appear to be significant contributors to problems in areas where assessments have
been conducted.
CWA Section 208 planning addressed the above mentioned nonpoint sources with
the following results: A voluntary program has been instituted to control
irrigated and dryland agriculture nonpoint source pollution; enforcement action
is undertaken only as a last resort. In the case of dairy waste, the NPDES
permit program is employed only when an operator refuses to take corrective
action to address identified problems.
A regulatory program has been adopted to control silvicultural nonpoint
source water quality problems. Best management practices for silviculture
activities have been incorporated into state administrative regulations.
On-site waste disposal is regulated at the state and local level. The 208
program furthered the coordination among the involved state and local agencies.
A regulatory program based on general permits has been developed to deal with
urban runoff problems. However, only communities willing to voluntarily enter
into the General Permit Program will be affected in the initial phases of
implementation.
- 6 -
-------
Summary of nonpoint source assessments, plans, research, etc.
Statewide NPS Assessment 1
Agriculture
208 Plans 6
PL 566 Projects 4
RC & D Projects 3
State Ref. 39 Projects 12
Cooperative River Basin Studies 4
Model Implementation Project 1
Research & Development Projects 3
S i lviculture
Assessments 7
Plans 3
On-Site
Plans 8
Urban Runoff
Assessment 1
Plans 14
Other
Sludge 1
Salmon Enhancement Project 1
Toxic Pollutant Inventory 1
In addition to the above, three designated planning agencies - Municipality of Metropolitan
Seattle, Snohomish Metropolitan Corporation, and Clark County Regional Council of Governments
- prepared areawide plans. Spokane County also prepared a plan for protection of the Spokane
Valley-Rathdrum Praire Aquifer.
- 7 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/I rr.
Si 1 v.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
Severity &
S/M
S/M
M/I
Extent
M/L
L
W
I/L
M/L
I/L
I/L
L
nut., T,
Primary
c, nut.
ss, Lo
T, ss
Dissolved
OxDe, M,
Pollutants
Temp.*,ss flo,C,Temp Temp.
T, ss
T, ss
Gas
Chloride
P, pH
Temp = Temperature
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: Point Sources: Civil penalties (£5000 per day max.) and
administrative orders are issued, generally in response to willful! violations or failure
to respond to pre-administrative actions. Resource damages are assessed for unlawful
discharges causing fish kills, etc. Sewer bans are used to control POTW overloading.
Bans are in effect in 16 cities. During 1982, 153 formal enforcement actions were taken
and $66,750 in penalties were assessed.
Nonpoint Sources: Enforcement is generally handled by entities responsible for 208 plan
implementation; counties or local health departments for on-site sewage disposal;
Department of Natural Resources for silviculture; voluntary assistance by conservation
districts and SCS for agriculture.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 88
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 24
Number of Administrative Actions: 10
Number of Judicial Actions: 9^
*Per instructions, civil penalties are listed as "judical" actions.
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 761 Million
Local
By Percentage
M ;
State
5*y"
Other
Federal
7 federal
EPA
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Categories of Sources
$ 489 Million
%
20
%
142
%
110
$
-------
C. Program Activities
This section will be devoted to program activities related to toxics control and ground
water quality protection because these are high priority activities that are not adequately
addressed elsewhere in the report.
Toxics Control
Direct wastewater discharges of toxic pollutants are controlled through the NPDES permit
program. EPA has continued development of effluent guidelines for discharge of toxic
pollutants by various industrial categories. Guidelines have been promulgated for several
categories and more will be promulgated in the near future. As effluent guidelines are
finalized, WDOE is modifying and reissuing NPDES permits for affected industries to upgrade
toxic discharge controls.
Since 1955, WDOE has regulated industrial discharges to municipal wastewater systems under
the state waste discharge permit program. This pretreatment program recently has been modified
in response to the federal requirements to better control toxic discharges to municipal
wastewater systems.
To facilitate the toxics control program, WDOE increased its capability for analysis of
organic chemicals through cooperative use of the EPA Manchester Laboratory. WDOE laboratory
personnel have been stationed at Manchester to make use of that laboratory's equipment for
organic chemical analysis.
Ground Water Quality Protection
An overall strategy for protection of ground water quality has not yet been clearly defined
at either the national or state level. However, progress is being made on many necessary parts
of an overall state strategy and work will continue to further integrate programs related to
protection of ground water.
A revised regulation for on-site wastewater systems (i.e. septic tanks) has been adopted by
the Washington Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS). WDOE has also developed a
draft revised regulation for larger on-site systems which complements the DSHS regulation.
As part of developing the Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program, new state
legislation was enacted in 1983 which clarifies state authority to administer the federal
program. The UIC Program is directed toward the state waste discharge permit program which
regulates discharges to the land surface and to ground water.
Baseline information regarding ground water is being improved through an ongoing U.S.
Geological Survey monitoring program and through integration of DSHS data on drinking water
quality of untreated ground water sources with WDOE and EPA water quality data systems.
Other actions to protect ground water quality are an integral part of both the hazardous
waste site cleanup program under Superfund, and the federal and state hazardous waste
management program.
- 9 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
The history of state water pollution control grant programs in the State of
Washington provides numerous site-specific successes. In 1972, voters approved a
package of state general obligation bond issues that comprised a program called "Jobs
Now/Washington's Future." Referendum 26 was a $225 million bond issue for pollution
control facilities including municipal wastewater facilities, lake restoration,
agricultural pollution control, and solid waste facilities. In 1980, voters again
approved a package of general obligation bond issues. This package included
Referendum 39 which provides £315 million for municipal wastewater facilities, $35
million for lake restoration, and $10 million for agricultural pollution control.
Municipal Wastewater Facilities
Through FY 1980, Referendum 26 funds were used to provide up to 15 percent
matching grants for "201" projects. In FY 1981, remaining Referendum 25 funds were
used to establish a separate state grant program for municipal wastewater facilities
and state funding was discontinued for new projects which received "201" grants.
Referendum 39 has been used exclusively for separate state grants.
The use of these state grant funds for municipal wastewater facilities
construction over the past decade provides numerous success stories involving the
correction of public health problems, water quality problems, etc. The shift in FY
1981 in the use of these funds also provided an early response to emergent municipal
compliance problems and shrinking grant funds.
Lake Restoration
The Liberty Lake Restoration Project was initiated in March 1977 with a Phase I -
Diagnostic Feasibility Study. The study was completed in December 1979 and
recommended a plan involving diversion of the inlet stream around a marsh which
contributed nutrients to the lake, dredging of nutrient laden bottom sediments,
nutrient deactivation, and the development of a stormwater management plan for the
Liberty Lake watershed. Although funded under the federal/state municipal grant
program, an important part of the restoration involved the construction of a
wastewater treatment facility and a sewer system around the lake to eliminate septic
tank drainage. Implementation of the restoration plan was completed in 1982 and
post-restoration monitoring is continuing. The first year of monitoring indicates
that Liberty Lake water quality has improved from a eutrophic condition to a
meso-oligotrophic state. Total cost of the entire project including Phase I was
$2,718,347. The Washington Department of Ecology has provided $1,357,470 of the total
cost, EPA $1,130,381, and the local sponsor (Liberty Lake Sewer District) $230,496.
Other lake restoration projects that have been completed, or are near completion,
and show significant improvements in water quality include Vancouver Lake
($17,400,000), Medical Lake ($306,655), Wapato Lake ($1,936,744), Lake Fenwick
($418,092), and Lake Ballinger ($893,189).
Agricultural Pollution
Johnson Creek is a $13,450 acre watershed located in Whatcom County, Washington
adjacent to the Canadian Border. Dairy farming is the main land use with more than
8000 dairy animals present. Johnson Creek, a tributary to the Sumas River and
subsequently the Frazier River in Canada, is a valuable salmon spawning stream.
Streams in the watershed had a history of poor water quality and numerous pollution
complaints. Streams were clogged with organic debris and silt to a depth of three to
five feet. The streams had excessive growths of aquatic weeds both in the waterway
and along the banks. Prior to the project, winter rain saturated area soils
preventing area dairy operators from disposing of dairy wastes on their fields due to
high water tables and standing water.
The $140,000 ($69,700 Ref. 26) project resulted in clearing and dredging more than
47,000 feet of stream channel. The channel was dredged to a depth that exposed clean
gravel. In addition, two subsurface drains totalling 12,700 feet were installed to
relieve high water levels. This project, sponsored by Whatcom County Conservation
District, has taken steps to prevent streambank erosion caused by dairy animals. The
CD is working with county ASCS and SCS offices to establish trees along the stream and
installing fences to keep dairy animals out of the streams.
- 10 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Another chapter in Washington's Clean Water Story relates the progress made in cleaning up
industrial discharges. The forest products industry is very important to the economy of the
Northwest, and pulp and paper mills are a big part of the industry in Washington State. Pulp
mills have spent more than £284 million for water pollution control. This occurred as a
result of regulatory efforts and tax incentive programs.
Efforts to clean up the pulp mills started in 1962 with a "Puget Sound Conference" called
by the Governor under the terms of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The conference
involved Washington's Water Pollution Control Commission (now the Department of Ecology), the
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration (now EPA), and state and local health
agencies. All sources of waste discharge into Puget Sound were examined, but the pulp mills
received the most publicity. The conference ended in 1967 and enforcement efforts began.
During the conference, scientific studies were conducted to evaluate the impact of pulp and
paper mill wastes on Puget Sound's valuable fisheries resources. Oysters, shellfish, and
anadromous fish (salmon) were sampled and examined using state of the art techniques. These
studies showed that the four largest sulfite mills on Puget Sound discharged sulfite waste
liquor in concentrations damaging to fisheries resources and that bottom sludge from solids in
the discharge contained toxic components harmful to fisheries resources.
As a result of the Puget Sound Conference, the four largest mills were required to design
and construct facilities to remove 80 percent of spent sulfite liquor from mill effluent or
limit (reduce) their discharges to a specified level by 1972. All mills were required to
design and construct treatment facilities to remove all "settleable solids" from mill
effluents prior to discharge by 1970. Six mills were required to dredge sludge beds from
waterways to which they were discharged. All of these requirements were to be enforced under
state law using the state's waste discharge permit authority.
There were, to be sure, many delays caused by legal challenges and some foot-dragging, but
by 1975 some dramatic improvements in water quality could be seen.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Washington Department of Ecology
PV-11, Olympia, Washington 98504
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Robert H. Monn - (206) 459-6059
DATE: October 27. 1983
- 11 -
-------
WASHINGTON
1972
(
-------
WASHINGTON
1982
1
Cm
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
B Use Supported
D Use Partially Supported
£] Use Not Supported
-------
State of West Virginia*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 1.744,237 1980 1,949,644
State Surface Area 24,282 sq. miles
# of River Systems /Basins 7
# of River and Stream Miles 22,819 mi.; # of Border Miles*
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 135 / 16,624 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 17,000 ac. or 40.3
# of Coast Miles N^A mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. N/A sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Ohio River/277 Name/Mileage Tug Fork River/101
North Branch of and
Name/Mileage Big Sandy River/27 Name/Mileage Potomac River/214
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 5262
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
5190
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 450
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
2678 mi.
1772
812
5262 mi.
51%
33%
16%
100%
1982
3116 mi.
1843
303
5262 mi.
59%
36%
5%
100%
. l .
619 mi.
sq. mi.
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Miles Improved: 919 891
Miles Degraded: 0 32
Mi les Maintained: 3420
Unknown:
'\%
Degraded
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 16,158
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
16,158
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
J
d. Acres Monitored: 14,425
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1 Q 7? -
1,520 ac.
9,152
2,930
0
13,602 ac.
11.2
67.3
21.5
0
100%
"NA9 _
1,675 ac.
12,685
1,798
0
16,158 ac.
10.4
78.5
11.1
0
100*
1.5#
Unknown
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Maint
Within Change in
Category Category
2,748
4.181
7.756
238
1.200
35
- 2
/'
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers b. Lakes and Reservoirs
Municipal
55.1%
Nonpoint
Natural
\^% Industrial
Industrial
32 %
Muni
^ 32%
Nonpoint
33.6 \
Acid Mine
Draingage
Mining
Other
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Col i.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
Coli
Industrial
X
X
X
X
X
DO Temp
Non-Point
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
dH Toxics
Other (inc. natural)
X
X
X
X
Natural
Turbidity
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 1_10
*Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: (9402)**
*Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: NA
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: NA
**Certain strata at only certain times during the year exceed the WV
State Mercury standard in 8 lakes whose combined surface area is shown.
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and River. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Lev
2.0
pi of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
1,949,644 = T
Number of _
People
(Millions]
1.4
1.0.
0.5-
0.1
1,744,237 = T
Not
Served
1,054,l|86
370,77
3rimary
519,274
Seconda
n
846,711
Legend
Not served by
wastewater system
Y77? 55,831
123,^99 Primary
Secondary Construction
Under Construction
Primar
2A711?J
Pri vat
Pkg. P
452,939
Second
to Secondary
Sector Served b* waste"
ants water s*stem
190,000
ry
Primary
Secondary
etc.
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOO Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections
1.5 -
Populat ion
Equivalents
of BOD
(millions)
1.0
0.5
0.1 _
1,482,601
143,15(
1,657.197
\ VI ,
[1,278,040
PTAnn
1,162,142
//A\
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4 -
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a.
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met4"
Facilities Needing Upgrading
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
29
30
7
27*
¦m
73%
30.3%
95.3*
22
3
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
180
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
*N0TE: Includes 5 under const.)
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
7%
Compliance
21%
Noncompli ance
13. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
62
0
97
Total
Permits
11
0
84
in Effect
in 1982
18
0
87
(2) 950
60
0
91
+Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Compli-
ance .
Noncompliance
13%
Noncompliance
Compliance
IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
West Virginia has followed the national trend of establishing a nonregulatory
approach to the nonpoint source problem. The emphasis is placed on the use of Sest
Management Practices (BMPs), which minimize the problems created by runoff and
related nonpoint sources. In order to stimulate the adoption of these BMPs, a
comprehensive educational program has been undertaken, focusing primarily on the
potential polluters.
The four major nonpoint source pollution problems originate with agriculture,
silviculture, construction and mining. For each, a plan has been prepared and
adopted by the state after approval by the Environmental Protection Agency.
In addition, the state has begun a comprehensive study of the groundwater
contamination associated with nonpoint source pollution. At this time, a specific
plan to control such pollution has not been developed, but a number of alternative
approaches are still under consideration.
The portion of the nonpoint source problem caused by improper agricultural
practices primarily involves excessive sedimentation and, to a lesser extent, runoff
of pesticides and other agricultural chemicals. The State Soil Conservation
Committee, together with the 14 Soil Conservation Districts, is engaged in a major
effort to promote adoption of BMPs by local landowners as an integral part of good
agricultural management.
Construction problems are divided into those associated with highway
construction, oil and gas drilling, and general construction. Since virtually all
highway construction is controlled under the state Department of Highways, the
appropriate BMPs are integrated into the DOH operations and contract specifications.
The problems associated with oil and gas exploration are controlled as a part of the
permit program of the Oil and Gas Division. Each operator is required to prepare and
follow a sediment control plan. General construction, including housing subdivisions
and shopping centers, do not fall within the jurisdiction of any state agencies. For
this reason, general construction activities are the target of an educational program
advocating the use of BMPs, but no control is possible at the present time to ensure
compliance.
The fourth major cause of the State's nonpoint source pollution problems is
mining. In fact, it has often been said that mine drainage, primarily from abandoned
mine operations, is WV's leading water pollution problem. Since the federal Surface
Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 provided substantial funding for
reclaiming sites of past mining abuses, the Division of Water Resources has been
conducting a thorough inventory and analysis of locations where drainage from
abandoned mines is occurring.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Severity &
Extent
Primary
Pollutants
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Si 1 v.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals
M/L
M/W
M/L
S/W
I/W
I/L
I/L
S/L
QxDe
C.M. N
P
C ,N,SS,T
SS.T
T
M.pH.SS
SS.T
SS.T
S
M, 0
C, N, OxDe
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: Voluntary cooperative action between the discharger and this
agency is always the preferred approach to resolving noncompliance issues, particularly
when additional large expenditures of capitol are needed. In these cases the most
frequent methods used are a permit modification or pre-agreed upon administrative order
with a schedule of compliance. In instances where this approach is not effective,
administrative notices and order are issued. Civil action is only necessary in a small
percentage of the cases. West Virginia has a very strong Water Pollution Control Act
with substantial penalties, both civil and criminal, for violations ($l0,000/day for
civil violations, $2,500 minimum criminal/negligent violations). Acts of non-compliance
that result in immediate environmental harm are first addressed through the criminal
enforcement program (= 300 actions/year). If the non-compliance is not corrected then or
cannot be corrected then it is dealt with administratively, and/or through civil action.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
33
20
14*
*A total of 252 criminal actions were brought in 1982 against the total permit
holding population.
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 598.7 Million
Other BV Percentage
Federal 1.8% <\% Other Local
State 1%
Local
Match
Categories of Sources
408.7
$
10.8
$
42.2
$
137.0
$
1/2%
Mi 11 ion
Federal - EPA:
~Other Federal:
~~State:
~~~Local Match:
Other Local:
~Covers only 1977-82 - no records available prior to that
~~Covers only 1977-82 - no records available prior to that
~~~Estimated cost based on 25% eligible cost in form of
bond issue.
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
The Division of Water Resources is responsible for the enforcement of state
water pollution control laws. This includes the review of permit applications
and issuance of those permits that are approved. West Virginia currently (as
of 1981) has primacy for the federal discharge permit program. Monitoring of
both ambient conditions and plant effluent is an on-going program utilizing the
traditional chemical parameters as well as various biological monitoring
techniques. Local inspectors are located throughout the state to conduct "walk
through" inspections, respond to spills and complaints, field review permit
applications, and enforce permit requirements. The construction grants program
has been delegated to the state (6035) and applications for interim primacy are
under consideration for both the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and
the Underground Injection Control program. Several other programs such as
ground water protection and solid waste disposal are administered by this
division. All of these programs are supported by an extensive inorganics and
organics laboratory.
Planning functions include: preparation of basin plans, waste load
allocation issuance, certification for stream dredge and fill permits,
cert ification for Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) permits,
coordination of nonpoint source control program, conduct abandoned mine lands
survey, conduct water use surveys, handle data processing needs, and coordinate
federal grant application programs.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Prior to 1971 the Monongahela Basin, the State's largest watershed, was
seriously impacted by acid mine drainage. This stream system was given the dubious
distinction of being more polluted as a result of mine drainage than any other major
river system in the United States. With the passage of the Act in 1972 and as a
result of state pressure to treat low pH discharges prior to that, a general
improvement in pH was observed. Surveys in the mainstem Monongahela and in Tygart
Lake showed a significant improvement in game fish population. Little survey work
was done on these waters prior to this time because the low pH values obviously
prevented establishment of a sport fishing of any importance.
The survey data was so encouraging that walleyes were stocked from 1973-1976
and are now naturally reproducing. Now that walleye fishery is one of the best in
the State. Muskies were stocked in the Monongahela from Fairmont to Morgantown in
1973, 1975, 1976, and 1977 and their growth rates are the best observed in West
Vi rginia.
The obvious improvements in the fishery are not easily explained but the
increase in pH is believed to be the main factor responsible for the improvements.
Many of the larger discharges (greater than 10 mgd) of acid mine water did not treat
their discharge prior to 1971, but with passage of the Act many companies initiated
compliance programs and began construction and operation of treatment facilities. In
addition, daylighting of abandoned deep mines by new surface mining operations has
exposed calcareous overburden and helped raise the pH of discharges from abandoned
sources. More regulatory personnel ensured better compliance with existing
regulations on active operations, but abandoned sources continue to be a serious
problem.
The improvement is dramatic. The cause is not that apparent. Some people feel
the treated discharges may mask the effect of abandoned drainage and improvements are
temporary. No one knows. But what is known is that there is a dramatic improvement
in the fish population in that stream and an important recreational use that did not
exist, now thrives.
During the late 1960s, the Kanawha River from Charleston to its confluent with
the Ohio River at Point Pleasant was routinely devoid of oxygen for three or four
months of the year. Recognizing the need for clean water, the major industrial
dischargers and the State water pollution control agency began a 3 step, phased
pollution abatement program. The summer of 1972, step 2, marked the first time the
river did not become totally devoid of oxygen. The clean water act aided the program
already in progress. That and the construction grants program has resulted in
conditions that are so much improved that there are no longer any violations of the
Dissolved Oxygen standard for that reach of river. The construction grants program
has authorized the spending of $55,813,840 since 1972 resulting in the treatment of
24 million gallons of sewage daily in this stream segment.
The tangible benefits of this improvement are readily exemplified by the heavy
recreational use of the river. Boating, water skiing, and swimming are currently
very popular pastimes on the river. The fish population has improved to the point
that the first bass tournament was held in that section last year (1982) and some of
the most productive areas were directly in the outfall of some of the major
dischargers.
Perhaps the most visible documentation of improvement is the Stern Wheel
Regatta that is held every Labor Day (in the late 1960s and early 1970s the river
would have been experiencing serious DO problems in late August). This river
festival attracted 300,000 people in 1983. Such a use of the river would have been
impossible prior to the clean up.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
The major emphasis has been the control of the traditional point source
pollutants through first the state program and later the federal program. Fine
tuning still remains to be done, but the day of the large discharge grossly
degrading miles of stream is gone. The large mine discharges that were not
treated prior to 1972 are now required to meet specific limits. This and new
surface mining regulations have greatly reduced the impact from active mining
sites. Abandoned sites have not been adequately addressed and continue to be a
problem. The foundation for the NPS program has been established and has met with
some initial success. Considerable effort has been placed on obtaining and
operating the construction grant delegation, the federal discharge permit program,
the resource conservation and recovery program, and the underground injection
control program.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
X population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
A program to evaluate and address the toxic program is needed. This will in
part be addressed through further development of our RCRA and UIC programs. Many
of our problems relate to nonpoint sources, and the state does need an aggressive
program to address those problems. Our NPDES program is relatively new and will
continue to require a great deal of department time. Abandoned mine discharges
have been reported as a major water quality problem in West Virginia. Nothing or
very little has been done to date to address water quality problems through the
abandoned mines land program. One potential project is being considered that
could have a beneficial impact on an important stream and one of our major lakes
that currently does not meet its uses. Municipal sewage plant construction in
West Virginia is threatened by the October 1984 cut off date on collection
systems and reduced funding levels for treatment plant construction. With the
current proposal the continued treatment of municipal wastewater will become a
severe problem.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Department of Natural Resources
Division of Mater Resources
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Eli McCoy (304)348-2107 or
Doug Steele (304)348-2108
DATE: September 12, 1983
- 10 -
-------
WEST VIRGINIA
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H3 Use Supported
CD Use Partially Supported
~ Use Not Supported
-------
WEST VIRGINIA
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
B Use Supported
D Use Partially Supported
~ Use Not Supported
-------
State of Wisconsin*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 4,417,933 1980 4,705,335
State Surface Area 56.090 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 28
# of River and Stream Miles 28,500 mi.; # of Border Miles*_
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 14,927 / 971 ,000 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 2,700,000 ac. or
# of Coast Miles 820 ml.
# of Estuary sq. mi. N/A sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mileage Mississippi/228 Name/Mileage Brule/47
Name/Mileage St. Croix/120 Name/Mileage Menomonie/98
Name/Mi 1eage St. Louis/23 Name/Mi 1eage Montreal/45
II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 18,500
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
7,778
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
500
d. Miles Monitored: 16,000
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
17,800 mi.
385
315
-
18,500 mi.
96.2%
2.1%
1.7X
-
1002!
1982
18,015 mi.
375
110
-
18,500 mi.
97.495
2.0%
.6%
-
1002
- 1 -
561 mi.
sq. mi.
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within
By Percentage Category
Change in
Category
Miles Improved: - 335*
Miles Degraded: 0 -
2% Improved
Mi les Maintained: 18,165
Unknown: -
* Includes 104 miles where more stringent water quality
standards are now in effect and are being achieved.
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 970,869
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
137,824
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swittinable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 163,000
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partial ly
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1972 ¦
747,497 ac.
188,372
35,000
-
970,869 ac.
77.0%
19.4*
3.6%
-
100%
14ft? -
801,497 ac.
169,372
0
-
970,869 ac.
82.6%
17.4%
-
-
100%
Maintained
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
Within
Category
Change in
Category
9«
Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Improved
Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
17,000
916,869
37,000
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
a. Streams and Rivers
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
W/o
Nonpoint
L x
Industrial
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
100%
Natural
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
D.O.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
2 Most
Serious
Municipal
X
X
X
NH-3
DO. NH-3
Industrial
X
X
X
DO. Toxics
Non-Point
X
X
X
NH-3
X
Nut., DO
Other (inc. natural)
X
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 300
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 47,000
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics:
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics:
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
5
Number of 't -
People
(Millions)
3 -
1 -
b.k 5 = I
777A
Unsewered
1.19
.06
.70
Primary
2.50
Secondary
M = T
Legend
, 1.20
iUnsewered
TZ7T.
.03 Not served
by waste-
water system
2.62
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
.95
Advanced
Primary
Secondary
etc
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
T reatment
Degree of
Treatment
1972
1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOO Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(mill ions)
7 "
b ..
3 -
2 4
1 -
Id
>i.Z
1.3
:i
5.1
1.
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements+
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
~includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
0*
21
81
17
60
0
74%
8%
85%
64
21
21
~Permit program did not begin until 1973
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972:
1982:
Compliance
26%
Non-
Compliance
No Permits in Effect
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
1982 1982
1972 Interim Permits Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
0
0
287
Total
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permi ts
Permit Requirements4"
200
-
270
in Effect
Percentage of Facilities for
in 1982
Which Requirements Being Met
20%
-
94%
1.500
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met+
85%
.
99%
~includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
Noncompli
6% /No ncomplianc
20%
Compliance
• non-point source pollution control
Nonpoint sources probably affect almost every lake and stream in the southern
two-thirds of Wisconsin. The watersheds draining to those lakes and streams most
significantly affected form a U-shaped pattern that begins in Polk County in the
northwest and continues southward through the west-central, southwest, southern
and east-central parts of the state, turns northward along Lake Michigan, and
ends in Oconto County. Included in this zone are more than 120 deep, high
quality, recreational inland lakes plus the near-shore waters of Lake Michigan.
About 40 percent of the state's Class I and II trout streams, many smallmouth
bass streams, and many severely degraded streams are also located in this area.
The major nonpoint source problems in Wisconsin arise from cropland erosion,
animal wastes, woodland grazing by livestock, construction activities and urban
runoff. Silvicultural and mining activities are generally not considered major
nonpoint sources in Wisconsin, except in some localized areas.
In recognition of the seriousness of water quality degradation from nonpoint
source pollution, the Wisconsin Legislature created the Nonpoint Source Water
Pollution Abatement Program in 1978 as part of the Wisconsin Fund. The
Legislature provided funds to be used for cost-sharing the installation of
approved land management practices which are designed to control nonpoint
sources. Financial and technical resources are concentrated in critical areas,
called priority watersheds, where maximum water quality benefits would result
from the investment made. At the present time, there are 17 ongong Priority
Watershed Projects which were selected between 1979 and 1983. In general, a
typical Priority Watershed Project follows an eight to nine year progression from
selection to completion of practice implementation.
Approximately $12 million have been allocated to nonpoint source control
through June, 1983. An additional $10 million has been appropriated for the
current biennium (1983-85). The Department has also coordinated the funding in
project areas with programs administered by federal agencies including the Rural
Clean Water Program (RCWP), Clean Lakes Program (Section 314 of PL 92-500), and
special projects funded through the Agricultural Conservation Program and the
Small Watershed Program (PL 83-566).
It should be emphasized that the 1972 and 1982 water quality maps prepared
under Part I.E. are for the most part reflective of point source related water
quality impacts (due to the point source orientation of Wisconsin's current water
quality standards).
6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals*
Severity &
Extent
S/L
S/W
I/L
I/L
S/L
N/A
N/A
S/W
Primary
Pol lut ants
C,Sa1,M
SS,Nut.
T, OxDe
C, P,
Nut.,SS,T
SS, T
SS. T
SS. T
N/A
N/A
Nut.
OxDe, C
~Includes Animal Waste
V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach: The structure of our enforcement actions is as follows: 1)
Primary Enforcement - Informal and formal contacts by the DNR field staff
("Preadministrative Enforcement"). 2) Secondary Enforcement - Formal contracts and
follow-up by the District Environmental Enforcement staff, including NOV letters,
Enforcement Conferences and other activities. 3) Referral to Dept. of Justice - Since
1972, WDNR has made 181 referrals; 111 industrials (of which 22 remain open, and 70
municipals (of which 18 remain open). In the past 18 months we have referred 28 cases
and settled 29. Forfeitures collected during the period are approximately $430,000.
Wisconsin's enforcement actions are keyed to the violations, not to the degree of
significant noncompliance with the WPOES permit. The success of the enforcement program
has been enhanced through the efforts of a decentralized and multi-disciplinary staff.
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities:
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions:
Number of Administrative Actions:
Number of Judicial Actions:
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1,735*
1,500
100
28 initiated, 29 settled, 40 remain open
* All facilities; significant facilities cannot
be separated from nonsignificant facilities.
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 1,865.196 Million
By Percentage
Federal / 37% 1 11% \State
EPA | > -
Local
Categories
of Sources
Federal - EPA:
*
699.626
Other Federal:
*
47.722
State:
$
492.510
Local Match:
$
625.338
Other Local:
$
Mi 11 ion
3%
Other Federal
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
A successful water quality management program depends on monitoring activities
sufficient to measure progress in meeting water quality goals and to provide data
useful for future decisions. Wisconsin's monitoring program includes the
collection of data to measure large-scale trends in water quality measurements of
water quality changes resulting from pollution control projects and collection of
data for use in establishing effluent limits and other program requirements and
policies.
STANDARDS AND PLANNING
The establishment of water quality standards is necessary to define and meet
the goals and objectives of state and federal law. Standards provide the basis for
specific requirements which are necessary to assure restoration and maintenance of
the chemical, physical and biological integrity of waters.
Comprehensive and consistent aproaches to implementing control programs require
planning. This activity is needed to assure that all factors and alternatives for
both point and nonpoint control are considered prior to implementation.
IMPLEMENTATION
The WPDES permit system provides the basic tool for implementing controls on
point sources. It functions as a means of attaining compliance and also enables
the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to track the continuing effectiveness of
wastewater treatment. DNR monitoring assures the accuracy of permittee reporting.
Technical assistance is provided to local communities and other permittees to
assure good operational attention for wastewater treatment plants through training
and trouble-shooting. Enforcement of permit conditions is carried out through a
system of notification, follow-up, referral to legal authorities and litigation.
Nonpoint source control programs are voluntary and implemented through a
priority watershed program. Practices for controlling pollutant runoff are
developed and installed through a cooperative program with local land conservation
agencies.
GRANTS
Construction grants for the planning, design and construction of publicly owned
treatment works are provided through either the federal program or by a state
program (Wisconsin Fund). Wisconsin has been delegated responsibility to operate
the federal construction grants program. The Wisconsin Fund, although it provides
a smaller grant share, has been an effective means to assist many small communities
in the state in complying with permit conditions. Over the period from 1972 to
1982 $1,245 million in state and federal assistance has been provided for
wastewater facilities construction.
A portion of the Wisconsin Fund program is also devoted to assisting in the
installation of nonpoint source management practices.
- 8 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Koshkonong Creek
Koshkonong Creek originates near Sun Prairie and flows 42 miles southeast to join
the Rock River at Lake Koshkonong. Prior to 1982, Sun Prairie's waste treatment
plant discharged to the creek near the southern edge of the village. Chemical and
biological samples collected in 1981 and previous studies indicated Koshkonong Creek
was extremely polluted. Water quality impacts were measurable up to 20 miles below
the plant. Past effluent monitoring data show BOD5 values of 15 to 60 mg/1 and
anoxic conditions for 2 to 4 miles below the plant. Toxic concentrations of ammonia
were found several miles below the plant. Few fish were ever found in this stretch
of stream, slime growths were abundant and the stream was aesthetically poor.
A new treatment plant was constructed 2.5 miles downstream from the old plant and
went into operation in December 1981. Water quality data collected in July 1982
indicated an effulent BOD of 3.1 mg/1 and DO concentrations in the stream ranged from
5.9 to 8.3 mg/1, all above the fish and aquatic life standard of 5 mg/1. Ammonia
concentrations in the stream are now less than 1 mg/1. Slime growths have
disappeared and an abundant population of forage fish composed of darters and other
species indicating good water quality has been observed. The greatly improved water
quality will result in an improved sport fishery further downstream.
Flambeau River
The Flambeau River is a major stream in north central Wisconsin popular for
canoeing and fishing. A paper mill has operated at the City of Park Falls and
discharged to the river since 1898. Three impoundments located in a 12-mile stretch
of river below Park Falls were severely degraded by the paper mill discharge up to
1978-1980. Water quality impacts were measurable for almost 50 miles below Park
Falls. Annual average BOD discharged by the mill in 1979 was 23,168 lbs./day, and
was higher in previous years. The 12 miles of stream below Park Falls currently has
a DO variance of 3 mg/1. Downstream from there, the 00 standard is 5 mg/1.
Dissolved oxygen in the 12-mile variance area was less than 3 mg/1 72 percent of the
time in May to October, 1976, and 68 percent of the time from April to September
1977. DO was less than 5 mg/1 82 percent of the time 12 to 18 miles below the mill
from May 1976 to September 1977. DO concentrations down to 3.3 mg/1 almost 50 miles
below the mill were measured in the winter during the late 1970's. Fishermen
regularly complained of taste and odor problems in fish taken from the 50 miles of
river below the mill. Few fish inhabited the three impoundments for 12 miles below
Park Falls. An excellent fishery is located upstream from Park Falls.
The paper mill put a new waste treatment system into operation in 1980. Effluent
BOD averaged 2,142 pounds per day during the first 6 months of 1983 - a reduction of
greater than 20,000 pounds per day. Since 1980, DO concentrations have been higher
than the fish and aquatic life standard of 5 mg/1 in all areas of the river - an
upgrading of 50 miles of stream. There have been no taste and odor complaints from
fishermen since 1978. Fish habitat in the three impoundments below Park Falls is
still poor due to over 80 years of poorly treated effluent. However, water quality
is now meeting standards and habitat will recover and allow the fishery to improve.
- 9 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
One of the primary water pollution problems in Wisconsin has been associated with
a primary state industry, the pulp and paper mills. Several rivers in the state
received virtually untreated wastewaters from one or more mills until the
installation of best practicable control technology in the mid-to-late 19701s. The
severe and persistent dissolved oxygen deficits in these rivers have disappeared and,
with more stringent wasteload allocations in place, fish and aquatic life standards
are being achieved.
Water pollution from publicly owned wastewater treatment plants were also major
environmental problems both in localized areas and from the broader perspective of
phosphorus control in the Great Lakes basin. Many municipalities experienced
substantial population and industrial growth and many facilities were reaching or
were beyond their design lifetime. Planning and design for treatment plants and for
control of combined sewer overflows in the state's major urban area (Milwaukee) were
prominent activities.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
- Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
Completion of several treatment plant projects, particularly those in the
Milwaukee area, are needed to attain water quality goals and objectives. Also,
providing proper operation and maintenance at the larger number of new treatment
plants is an important element in maintaining water quality. Assuring that operators
have the skills necessary to run the more sophisticated facilities which have been
built will require a continuing emphasis.
Although great progress has been made in controlling the discharge of
conventional pollutants, the discharge of nutrients and toxic pollutants and their
effects on water quality is a concern. Monitoring programs must be enhanced and
control strategies must be developed to assure reductions or elimination of these
pollutants from wastewater or nonpoint sources.
Assuring continued protection for Wisconsin's abundant groundwater resource is an
important element in the state's water quality program. Development of legislation
and standards to protect groundwater from contamination are an integral part of the
future water quality program.
Continued programs to control nonpoint sources of pollution are necessary to
maintain and enhance water quality. Activities are needed to establish cause-
and-effect relationships and to develop appropriate water quality standards and
control programs.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Department of Natural Resources
101 S. Webster Madison, WI 53707
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Dan Moran 608-266-8148
DATE: September 15, 1983
- 10 -
-------
WISCONSIN
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
~ Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-------
WISCONSIN
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
I Use Supported
O Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-------
State of Wyoming*
*See Introduction To Appendix
For Explanation of Format
PROGRESS IN THE CLEAN MATER PROGRAM
I. ATLAS
State Population 1970 332,416 1980 469,557
State Surface Area 97,914 sq. miles
# of River Systems/Basins 14
# of River and Stream Wiles 19,655 mi.; # of Border Miles* 0 mi.
# of Lakes and Ponds and Acreage 2,670 / 411,284 ac.
# of Marsh or Wetlands ac./sq.mi. 2,856,000 ac. or 2,900* sq. mi.
# of Coast Miles 0 mi.
# of Estuary sq. mi. 0 sq. mi.
*Border Rivers:
Name/Mi 1 eage Name/Mi 1 eage
Name/Mileage Name/Mileage
II. AMBIENT MATER QUALITY
Surface Water Uses Supported Based on 1982 Designated Uses
A. Streams and Rivers
1. a. Miles Assessed: 19,655
b. Miles Designated for Uses More Stringent than Flshable/Swimmable:
6,611
c. Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Miles Monitored: 3,500
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Miles
Assessed
1972
13,095 mi.
595
165
6,000
19,855 mi.
66 %
3 %
.8 %
30.2 %
100%
1982
19,065 mi.
550
40
0
19,655 mi.
97 %
2.8 %
.2 %
100%
- 1 -
-------
3. Changes In and Within Use Support Between 1972 and 1982
Within Change in
By Percentage Category Category
Miles Improved: 205
1% Miles Degraded:
Improved
Miles Maintained: 19,065
Unknown:
0
B. Lakes and Reservoirs
1. a. Acres Assessed: 411,284
b. Acres Designated for Uses More Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
179,362
c. Acres Designated for Uses Less Stringent than Fishable/Swimmable:
0
d. Acres Monitored: 124.389
2. Evaluation of Support of Designated Uses
Supported
Partially
Supported
Not
Supported
Unknown
Total Acres
Assessed
1Q79 .
0 ac.
0
0
389,955
389,955 ac.
—
10055
19A? -
389,738 ac.
21,546
0
0
411,284 ac.
1
95 %
5 %
0
0
100*
3. Changes In and Within Use Support 1972 - 1982
By Percentage
5.5%
\Degraded Acres Improved:
Acres Degraded:
Maintained J Acres Maintained:
Unknown:
Within
Category
21,546
389.738
Change in
Category
- 2 -
-------
E. Causes for Less Than Full Support of Designated Uses in 1982
1. By Pollutant Sources — By Percentage
b. Lakes and Reservoirs
a. Streams and Rivers
Nonpoint
Natural
3% Municipal
3% Industrial
Nonpoint
Natural
c. Estuaries and/or Oceans
d. Great Lakes
2. By Major Parameters of Concern:
Parameters
Discharge
Sources
Coli.
0.0.
Nut.
pH
Temp.
Toxics*
Turb.
Other
NH-3
2 Most
Serious
SALINITY
Municipal
X
X
X
X
Industrial
X
X
X
X
X
Non- Point
X
X
X
X
X
X
Other (inc. natural)
X
X
X
X
X
X
~Number of Stream/River Miles Affected by Toxics: 10_
~Number of Lake/Reservoir Acres Affected by Toxics: 0
~Number of Estuary Square Miles Affected by Toxics: N/A
~Number of Ocean or Great Lakes Mi. Affected by Toxics: N/A
F. State Maps for 1972 and 1982 Showing Extent of Support of Designated Uses in Stream
and Rivers. Parallel Table II.A.2.
- 3 -
-------
III. POINT SOURCES
A. Municipal
1. Level of
.5 J
Number of
People
(Millions)
.it -
.3-
.2
Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's Population:
J3
.11
.10
.09
.03
Primary
Secondary
M
.03
.3^
.10
Legend
Not served
Primary1* waste"
water system
Secondary
Served by
wastewater
system
zz:
Primary
Does Not
Require
System
Requires
System
No
Treatment
Degree of
Treatment
Secondary
etc.
1972 1982
2. Annual Population Equivalents of BOD Loads Generated vs Loads Discharged by Municipal
Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982 Load Projections*
Population
Equivalents
of BOD
(Millions)
A -
.3
Legend
Generated
Discharged
For 1982:
Projected
Based on
1972 Treat-
ment Levels
1972
1982
~Includes loads to municipal facilities from other than domestic sources
- 4
-------
3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance
a. 1982
1972 Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit
Requirements*
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow For Which
Requirements Met+
Facilities Needing Upgrading
"•"Includes "No-Discharge'1
0
6
—
5
0
4
5
0
67%
100%
0
51%
100%
0
•"-ir -rrrrr:
2
0
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
174
b. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
By Percentage
1972:
1972 vs. 1982
1982:
Unknown
Non-
Compliance
Compliance
B. Non-Municipal Facility Compliance
a. Significant Industrial & Other Significant Non-Municipal Facilities
Facilities with Permits
Facilities Meeting 1982
Permit Requirements+
Percentage of Facilities for
Which Requirements Being Met
Percentage of Flow for
Which Requirements Met*
1972
1982
Interim Permits
1982
Final Permits
0
0
31
0
0
31
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Total
Permits
in Effect
in 1982
626
'"Includes "No-Discharge" Facilities
- 5 -
-------
b. Significant Non-Municipal Facility Compliance: 1972 vs. 1982
By Percentage
1972: 1982:
100%
Compliance
Unknown
100%
Iv- NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
The State of Wyoming has adopted a voluntary approach to non-point source
pollution control based upon the availability of technical assistance and federal
cost share incentives. Because nearly 5056 of the land area of Wyoming is under
federal stewardship, intergovernmental agreements between the Department of
Environmental Quality and appropriate federal agencies have been implemented to
control non-point sources of pollution on federal lands. The Department of
Environmental Quality has funded research and extensive efforts to develop BMP's
and encourage their use. Research/extension programs have been undertaken to
reduce non-point sources of pollution originating from agricultural and grazing
activities, urban runoff and reserve pit reclamation. Non-point source BMP's are
gradually finding widespread acceptance throughout the state.
- 6 -
-------
Summary - Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Urban
Ag/ Irr.
Silv.
Mining
Cons.
Hydro.
Salt. Int.
Residuals j
Severity &
Extent
I/L
M/W
M/L
M/L
I/L
S/W
N/A
I/L |
Primary
Pollutants
C,M
OxDe
Nut.,P,SS
Sal.,OxDe
T,SS
SS.M
T.SS
LoFlo.T
SS
C.OxOe i
V. MATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Enforcement
1. State's Approach:
The Division's enforcement policy is designed to employ conference
whenever possible and to use formal enforcement actions or court
after these tactics have failed to achieve the desired objective,
taken in the Division enforcement policy are as follows:
(1) Letter of Violaton;
(2) Notice of Violation;
(3) Court Action and/or a Cease and Desist Order
2. Actions Taken Since January 1982 Against Municipal and Non-Municipal Facilities in
Significant Non-Compliance in 1982
Total Number of Facilities: 2
Number of Pre-Administrative Actions: 2
Number of Administrative Actions: 0
Number of Judicial Actions: 0
and conciliation
complaints only
The usual steps
B. Municipal Facility Investment
1972 - 1982
Cumulative Capital Investment for Municipal Wastewater Facilities
By Source of Funds
TOTAL INVESTMENT = $ 92.1
By Percentage
62.6% /"\0ther
.0% Vocal
^ 9.5?" 1 Local Match
19.9$
¦ State
Million
Federal - EPA:
Other Federal:
State:
Local Match:
Other Local:
Categories of Sources
$ 57.7 Million
*
0
*
17.4
8.7
*
8.3
- 7 -
-------
C. Program Activities
The Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) was formed in 1973. Starting
with some personnel inherited from the Health Department, DEQ has grown over the
years to handle a broad range of activities that are described below.
The Department of Environmental Quality is the state agency responsible for
coordinating water quality management planning under the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act and the Wyoming Environmental Quality Act. The Water Quality Division
is responsible for providing technical liaison with local planning agencies and
insuring that the final plans are consistent with the Environmental Quality Act and
state programs relating to the environment.
The Division has administered a program regulating the design and construction of
small wastewater systems since 1973. It requires obtaining a permit prior to
installing or modifying a small wastewater system. A large majority of these
systems are the conventional septic tank/leach field system.
The Division operates an oil and hazardous substance response program. Elements of
this program include discharge notification procedures and field response actions
from the district offices to these spill events which threaten or enter waterways
to ensure that the responsible party has initiated containment, cleanup, control,
and counter measures (SPCC) plans.
The Division administers a certification program to insure the technical competency
of the individuals operating publicly owned water and sewage treatment plants and
sewage collection and water distribution systems throughout the state. Each system
is classified by the Department according to its size and complexity. The chief
operator must be certified at least at the same level as the plant or system's
classification.
Section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act requires Wyoming to certify
a dredge or fill operation which may result in discharge into navigable waters.
Certification if granted, states that building or operating a dredge or fill
activity will not violate any of the state water quality standards. The Division
reviews proposed construction, operation and construction procedures to ensure
violations of the state water quality standards will not result from the dredge or
fill operation.
The Water Quality Division has assumed primacy for all delegable Construction
Management Assistance Grants functions. The Division also provides input to the
Wyoming Farm Loan Board which provides funds to municipalities for water and sewer
system improvements.
The Division has assumed primacy for the NPDES program and is responsible for
permits issuance, compliance monitoring and permit enforcement.
The Water Quality Division has assumed primacy of the Underground Injection Control
Program and administers groundwater protection program.
The Division has divided the state into four districts for engineering and
surveillance activities with engineering staff personnel responsible for
implementing assigned tasks in the respective areas. The range of duties and
responsibilities assigned to the engineering section includes:
- 8 -
-------
1. Plan and specification reviews for all proposed public water supply,
wastewater and land application of wastewater projects.
2. Operation and maintenance inspections of waste treatment facilities and public
water suppl ies.
3. Reconnaissance inspections of industrial facilities.
4. Complaint inspections of facilities suspected of violating water quality
standards or rules and regulations.
5. Preparation and documentation of enforcement data for necessary legal actions.
6. Cooperative efforts with the various public and private entities dealing with
either existing or proposed facilities.
7. Aid the 208 planning agencies concerning the policies and procedures of the
Division.
8. Review of Environmental Impact Statements on on-going projects in their
respective areas.
9. Respond to oil and hazardous substances spills to ensure proper control,
containment, cleanup and disposal.
10. Reviewing and upgrading regulations as necessary.
- 9 -
-------
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Prior to 1972, the North Platte River system in Wyoming was significantly impacted
by municipal, industrial and non-point source (NPS) pollutants. Despite a
tremendous increase in population throughout the North Platte River valley and
additional industrial development, water quality in the North Platte River has
improved since 1972 and major progress continues to be made.
By 1988 all municipalities discharging wastewater into the North Platte River will
be in compliance with state and federal wastewater discharge standards. Prior to
passage of P.L. 92-500, which authorized the NPOES and CMAG programs, municipal
discharges were a major pollution source in the North Platte drainage. By 1988
the cities of Encampment, Riverside, Saratoga, Casper, Mills, Evansville,
Glenrock, Douglas, Glendo, and Guernsey will all meet secondary wastewater
treatment standards. Most of the improvements to these municipal wastewater
treatment systems was funded through the CMAG program.
Since the mid 1970's, industrial discharges in the Casper area have been improved
due largely to the NPDES program. Petroleum refineries in the Casper area were
responsible for groundwater and surface water contamination from leaky
facilities. To date, all the refineries in Casper have improved their
operations. A significant amount of petroleum products causing contamination to
groundwater and the North Platte River is being intercepted and recovered.
The Department of Environmental Quality has initiated a cooperative program with
the University of Wyoming, Wyoming Conservation Commission and the U.S. Department
of Interior, Bureau of Land Management to develop and implement grazing systems to
improve and maintain riparian areas. The 208 program generated concern for NPS
pollution and provided the initial funding for the riparian management proqram.
The cooperating agencies are in the initial phase of developing riparian
management systems for public lands in the Bates and Sage Creek drainages. These
two streams were identified as significant contributors of sediment to the North
Platte River. By 1988, the riparian programs on Bates and Sage Creeks are
expected to be well underway.
The overall change of water quality during this period will result in the
attainment of all designated water uses of Wyoming's main river system.
- 10 -
-------
VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A. Special State Concerns Over Past Decade:
Salinity levels in the Colorado River have been recognized as a major interstate
and international problem. Wyoming is one of seven states involved in the
Colorado River Salinity Control Forum and efforts to address the salinity issue
activities include the establishment of water quality standards and a plan of
implementation to meet the standards as the individual states proceed to develop
their appropriations and the Colorado River Compact. Programs to limit salinity
include NPQES limitations on point discharges, construction of salinity control
projects, implementation of non-point source management practices, and on-farm
irrigation management.
Part B. Major Remaining Problems:
- Surface water quality maintenance and/or quantity assurance in light of
population and industrial growth.
X - Groundwater resource quality protection or supply assurance.
- Identification and control of toxic pollutants from industrial and non-point
X sources.
X - Municipal wastewater plant operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation.
X - Pollution arising from abandoned industrial and/or mining facilities.
AGENCY PREPARING REPORT: Department of Environmental Quality
Water Quality Division
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Dave Hogan or Mike Carnevale (307) 777-7781
DATE: September 7. 1983
- 11 -
-------
WYOMING
1972
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
B Use Supported
ED Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-------
WYOMING
1982
Evaluation of
Designated Uses
H Use Supported
Q Use Partially Supported
H Use Not Supported
-------
INSTRUCTIONS AND DEFINITIONS
FOR "STEP" REPORT ON PROGRESS
IN THE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
INTRODUCTION
The following form is designed to produce an evaluation of your
State's progress in the clean water program. Its focus is on
the relative condition of the waters -- in both streams and
lakes -- rather than on programmatic activities.
The STEP Reports prepared by each State will be used to prepare
a National State/EPA Report to Congress on Progress in the
Clean Water Program over the past decade. In the preparation
of that National Report, the information contained in the
combined States' submittals will be clarified for ease of
comprehension and for visual impact. The individual State
replies will be combined to constitute an Appendix to the
National Report.
Please complete all the items. Wherever possible, please
provide information for the years 1972 to 1982 inclusive.
The report's contents should be based on the most accurate data
available, derived from chemical, physical, or biological
monitoring. If the information available, especially for the
early years covered, is based on incomplete or uncertain
records, you are encouraged to use best professional judgment
to prepare those sections.
-------
SECTION I. ATLAS
This section is a brief description of the hydrologic and
geographic conditions in your State. Most of the entries are
self-explanatory. Please enter 'N.A.' for any item that is Not
Applicable.
For River and Stream Miles, report first the total number of
river and stream miles in your state. Then enter the number of
miles that comprise Border Rivers and Streams, i.e. those that
lie along a border with one or more adjacent states. If you have
an entry for Border Rivers, please use the space provided to
report the names and shared mileage for each such waterway.
In reporting on the waters in impoundments, please report either
the stream channel miles or the lake acres, but not both.
DEFINITIONS
o State Population: Numbers should be drawn from census data.
o River Systems/Basins: Most states subdivide their total surface
waters into major hydrologic drainage basins or river systems.
Record here the number of such units within your state.
o Lakes and Ponds ; Natural or man-made bodies of water that are
publicly owned and that could be classified under state water
quality standards.
o Marshes/Wet lands : As defined by your State (in statute or
regulation).
o Coast: Include here ocean, Culf, or Great Lakes coastal miles.
SECTION II. AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
In this section, you are asked to categorize the proportion of
waters in the state that are supporting the uses for which they
were designated in 1982. This means that if a river was des-
ignated for agricultural use in 1972, but has since had its use
designation changed to recreational, you should be expressing the
extent to which it met that recreational use in both 1972 and 1982.
Your categorization of the extent of use support is to be based
on a combination of Chemical and Biological Data and on Direct
Observation/Professional Judgment. The definitions to be used in
the categorization will be found below.
Part A. deals with Streams and Rivers.
1t em 1". a. asks for a count of the number of Miles Assessed in 1982.
1.b. asks for the Number of Miles Designated for Uses More Strin-
gent than Fishable/Swimmable (e.g. public water supply);
1.c. for the number of Miles Designated for Uses Less Stringent
than Fishable/Swimmable (e.g. navigation or agriculture).
["Fishable/Swimmable" is defined here as "providing for the
protection and propagation of fish,shel1fish , and wildlife, and
for recreation in and on the water."]
-2-
-------
In each case, it is the highest tise for which the waters are
designated that should be reported.
The entry for 1.d. should be the number of Miles Monitored.
The definitions for both 'Assessed' and 'Monitored' -- as used
in this report -- will be found below.
Item 2 is a table in which you are to evaluate the extent to
which streams and rivers are supporting, partially supporting or
not supporting their uses as designated by the state. If a river
has been designated for a specific use and for other uses
requiring less stringent criteria, it is the extent to which it
supports the highest designated use that should be reported.
The miles shown in the Total column in this table should be the
same as the number of miles reported as being assessed (in Item
1.a.). It is recognized that for 1972, both chemical and biolog-
ical monitoring data may be limited for a relatively large number
of miles. In those cases where professional judgment does not
allow evaluation of the extent of use support, these miles should
be entered in the "Unknown" column. For 1982, however, miles
entered in the "Unknown" column should be as low as possible.
I tern 3 displays the Changes In or Within Categories of Use
Support between 1 972 and 1 982. If some river miles have shown
improvement in the degree to which they meet specific chemical
criteria or have had some degradation of quality but remain in
the same category of Supporting, Partially Supporting, or Not
Supporting their Designated Use, they should be entered in the
column labeled "Within Category".
Streams that have experienced changes in quality that resulted in
shifts in category, for example from Partially Supporting a use
to Supporting the use, or from supporting designation for Minimum
Aquatic Life to supporting a Warm Water Fishery use, would be
entered in the column labeled "Changes in Category."
The separate entries in the 2 columns are to be added for
preparation of the pie chart, which should thus have 4 wedges: 1
for Miles Improved, 1 for Miles Degraded, 1 for Miles Maintained,
and 1 for Unknown.
Part B. deals with the Publicly Owned Lakes, Ponds and Reservoirs
as defined in Section I. The directions for its completion are
parallel to those for Part II.A. for Streams and Rivers.
Part C. deals with Estuaries and Oceans. The directions for its
comple t ion are parallel to those for Part II.A. Your report can
address either Estuaries or Oceans or both, depending on which
waters have Use Designations and the data available for eval-
uating Use Support. Be sure to specify the units of measurement:
Square Miles (area) for Estuaries; Miles (linear) for Oceans.
Part D. deals with the Great Lakes and is to be completed in
the same manner as Part II.A. Its units are linear Miles.
-3-
-------
Part: E.
Chart 1.a.In this pie chart, the total pie is the stream or river
miles that are not Pally supporting their designated uses in
1982; it includes miles that are Partially Supporting their use
as well as those Not Supporting the designated use. The wedges
are the percentages that are not supporting their use because of
particular types of pollutant sources. If more than 1 type of
source is impairing use support on a given waterway, the distri-
bution of miles reported here should be apport ioned by use of
professional judgment; if no objective determination is possible,
the impacts should be apportioned equally among the sources
Use the following Legend to identify each section of the pie:
M = Municipal 0 = Other (includes Natural)
I = Industrial U = Unknown
NP = Non-Point
Charts 1 .b. , 1 .c. , & 1 .d. The total pies are the lake and reser-
voir acres, estuary square miles or ocean miles, and Great Lakes
miles that are not fully supporting their designated uses. The
wedges should follow the same legend as shown in Chart 1a. above.
Chart 2 . In this chart, you should identify the major water
quali ty problems caused by each of the specified pollution
sources shown in Charts 1.a., 1.b., I.e., and 1.d. that are
impairing support of designated uses. Use an 'x' in the approp-
riate boxes to reflect the most significant or frequent problems.
Then rank the 2 most serious problems in the last column by
writing the abbreviations of the parameters of concern. If you
mark the box labeled "Other", please include a footnote to
specify the parameter(s) of concern.
Beneath the chart, report the Number of River Miles, the Number
of Lake Acres, the Number of Estuary Square Miles, and the Number
of Ocean or Great Lakes Miles Affected by Toxic Pollutants. Toxic
Pollutants are the 129 Priority Pollutants.
Part F. Using the maps provided, display the inforuation shown in
Table II. A. 2. for 1 972 and for 1 982 according to the following
legend:
BLUE = Use Supported RED = Not Supported
YELLOW = Partially Supported GREEN = Unknown
The maps do not display all the waterways reported as assessed.
You can add some rivers to the maps if these would be critical to
a reader's understanding of conditions in the state's key
waterways. If you find the maps provided unworkable in terms of
accurately depicting your State's waters, you may substitute
another map. In this case, please be certain its scale is shown.
DEFINITIONS
o Miles Assessed: Miles where information on water quality can be
derived from monitoring, intensive surveys, creel surveys,
reports from Fish & Wildlife personnel, etc. [Professional
judgment may be necessary for interpreting such information.]
-4-
-------
o Miles Monitored: A subset of the above; miles for which there
is regularly repeated chemical or biological sampling and where
trend data is available.
o Evaluating the Extent to Which Waters Support Designated Uses:
The degree to which uses will be shown to be supported or
impaired will be based on a combination of chemical information,
biological information, and direct observation/professional
judgment. These are explained briefly below and more fully on P.6
Chemical Information:
Ambient chemical data representing water column, sediment and
tissue samples, should be used in the chemical evaluation. Data
collected through routine fixed station monitoring, as well as
intensive surveys or special studies (when collected under
representative conditions) should be included in these analyses.
The analyses should be conducted for those parameters appropriate
for the designated use being evaluated. Natural background
levels of the parameter and flow should be taken into account
along with the results of the analyses when assigning the
category of use support to the waterbody being assessed.
Biological information:
General biological surveys, fishery studies, tissue analyses,
habitat analyses, creel census, capture-recapture/removal
sampling and other quantitative biological measures should be
used in the biological evaluation. Data on the fish, macro-
invertebrate, and periphyton populations should be evaluated when
available. Survival, propagation, production, dispersion,
community structure and species diversity should be taken into
account when assigning the category of use support to the
waterbody being assessed.
Professional Judgment/Direct Observation:
Qualitative information, such as direct observation of the "use"
can be factored into use support evaluations. Examples include
the observations of fish and wildlife professionals concerning
the abundance and species of fish being caught and the judgment
of water pollution control staff, based on such things as known
stream loadings, modeling efforts, and other direct and indirect
findings not demonstrated by the data above.
In some cases, the three types of information may not be entirely
consistent, and the State will need to apply careful judgment to
complete its evaluation. For instance, a river may be attaining
the State water quality criteria based on routine ambient
monitoring (i.e. primarily chemical information), but there may
be a number of fish kills. In this case, the State would
probably want to place this river in the "does not support" or
"partially supports" category, depending on the severity and
suspected cause of the fish kills.
A DESCRIPTION OF THE APPROACH YOU USE TO CATEGORIZE THE EXTENT TO
WHICH WATERS SUPPORT THEIR DESIGNATED USES SHOULD BE APPENDED TO
YOUR REPORT. THIS SHOULD NOTE THE SOURCES FOUND HELPFUL FOR ALL
THREE TYPES OF INFORMATION.
-5-
-------
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING THE SUPPORT OF A DESIGNATED USE
SUPPORT OF
DESIGNATED USE
CHEMICAL INFORMATION
BIOLOGICAL INFORMATION
DIRECT OBSERVATION/
PROFESSIONAL JUDGEMENT
Waters support
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 (in all respects
described on previous page).
Direct observation shows
that the desi to be
supported.
Waters partially
support designated
use
Standard is exceeded in 11
- 25% of the analyses and
the mean measured value is
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
fi shery may exi st.
Direct observation shows
that the use e ists in the
waterbody but professional
judgement sugg^fs that the
the use is not supported at
a maximum levol (p.g. cit-
izen complaint-: on record,
fishing succes 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
more than ll?j 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 observa! ions show
overt signs of obvious uso
impairment (e. i. severe or
frequent fish Mils), or
provide no evi'fnre that
the use exists. Profes-
sional judgmeri1 suggests
that the use c-ui not be
supported due I o known or
suspected wat^' quality
impacts.
Unknown
No representative data are
available for assessment.
Limited or no data are
available.
Limited or no Mrect obser-
vations.
-------
SECTION III. POINT SOURCES
Part A. Municipal
This Part is not strictly limited to municipal point sources; it
includes all domestic wastewater systems, including those that
are non-discharging.
Item _1. Level of Wastewater Treatment Provided to State's
Population:
This graph is designed to graphically depict the levels of
wastewater treatment provided to various proportions of the
state's population. The totals for each of the 2 bars should be
the total population of the state in the year specified.
First, a vertical bar representing the state's total population
should be constructed for each of the two reference years. These
bars should then be sub-divided beginning at the bottom (or
x-axis) to represent the incremental population being served. The
units of sub-division are reflected in the legend for the graph.
The number of people included in each section of the bar should
be shown wit'hTn or adjacent to tFat section.
It is likely that an estimate will be necessary to determine the
proportion of the state's population not served by wastewater
systems and requiring or not requiring systems in 1972.
In light of limited data availability, it may be necessary to
perform the initial analysis for the entire graph based on
wastewater flows and then convert to population estimates by
assuming a per capita discharge rate (gallons per capita per day)
and adjusting as appropriate where there are heavy industrial
contributions to municipal facilities. If this approach is used,
please specify the assumed per capita rate in a footnote.
I tern 2. Annual Population Equivalent BOD Loads Generated and
DlscVarged by Municipal Treatment Facilities Compared to 1982
Load Projections:
This graph is intended to depict the changes in BOD Loading of
waterways (between '72 and *82) resulting from changes in
Municipal Wastewater Treatment capabilities. It includes an
entry for Projected BOD Load assuming actual population increase
but no improvement in treatment since 1972.
Population Equivalents should be derived by dividing Pounds of
BOD per day by 0.2.
-V ^ v_> W w ^ a. V. ~ J » V. J. X I- w vv. *1.* W
Section III. below for meaning of this term). For this analysis,
it is recommended that the focus be on significant facilities,
with appropriate proration made for smaller facilities. Thus,
unless better data is available for 1972, influent loadings
should be determined from operating reports for 1982 and the
earliest year for which data are available (e.g. 1977). A
straight-line projection should then be assumed to estimate
influent loading for 1972.
-7-
-------
Load Discharged (=Effluent): Again focusing on significant
facilities and prorating to account for other facilities,
determine the total discharge loading for the state in pounds per
day based on actual operating records. Unless reliable data are
available for 1972, estimated discharge loadings for that year
should be calculated by applying a treatment factor for various
levels of treatment (raw = 0% removal; primary = 30% removal;
secondary = 70 to 85% removal; AST and AWT = 90 to 9 5% removal;
no-discharge = 100% removal [also see definition of "no-dis-
charge" below]) to the influent loading, based on the population
served by each level of treatment as shown in Graph III.A.1.
Projected Load Discharged: After estimating the 1972 discharge
loading, a projection to 1 982 should be made, using 1982 flows
and 1972 treatment levels. This will demonstrate the discharge
loading that would have occurred in 1982 as a result of increased
influent loading if treatment had not been improved.
Item 3. Significant Municipal Facility Compliance:
a* Facilities with Permits: For 1972, report the number of
significant facilities that were receiving either Federal or
State permits, or were otherwise recognized and authorized to
discharge by the State or EPA. See definition of "Significant
Facility" below. For 1982, report separately the number of such
facilities on interim and on final permits.
Facilities Meeting 1982 Permit Requirements: Of the total number
of Facilities above" the number that were attaining treatment
levels assigned or required as_of 1982 should be given for each
of the reference years. For *T9*T2, this determination will
probably require application of Professional Judgment. For 1982,
each facility should be compared to the requirements of its
permit — whether interim or final.
Percentage of Facilities for Which Permit Requirements Being Met:
The percentage that tine second row is of: the first row above.
Percentage of Flow for Which Permit Requirements are Being Met:
For each of the reference years, estimate the percentage of the
total flow which is served by those facilities identified above
as meeting permit requirements in effect in 1982. If actual flow
data are not available, this estimate may be based upon a
comparison of the design flow for those facilities meeting permit
requirements to the total municipal wastewater flow in the state.
Facilities Needing Upgrading: For each of the reference years,
the number of facilIties wK"icn require upgrading in order to meet
the requirements of the Clean Water Act should be reported. This
will include all facilities which are not capable of meeting the
limits of secondary treatment or more stringent limits if
required to support designated uses or meet water quality
standards.
To the right of the table, enter the Total Number of Municipal
Permits in Effect in 1982 (for both significant and other
facilities).
-------
b. Significant Municipal Facilities Meeting and Not Meeting
Permit Requirements
For each of the years shown, sub-divide the pie chart to display
the percentage of facilities in compliance vs. those in
significant non-compliance with their permit requirements.
Part B. Significant Industrial and Other Non-Municipal
Facilities' Compliance:
Both a. and b. of this Part should be completed using the same
instructions as for Part III.A.3. above.
DEFINITIONS
o Served by Wastewater System: Wastewater discharged to
conventional sewerage system.
o Require system: State residents for whom septic systems are not
an adequate method of wastewater discharge and who therefore need
a sewerage system.
o Secondary treatment is here defined to include facilities with
waivers to discharge to the ocean under §301(h) of the Clean
Water Act.
o No-Discharge Facilities: the same as some States'
"non-discharging" or "non-overflowing" facilities.
o Significant Facilities:
For Municipal Facilities:those discharging 1 MGD or more.
For Industrial Faci1ities:Set aside the discharges from
all power plants Tn tEe state. Working with a listing of
all other non-municipal dischargers, add together the sum
of the design flows from all the facilities. Then,
starting with the facility with the largest design flow,
add together the design flows of all the facilities until
you reach 95% of the total flow. Calculate too the 96th,
97th, 98th, and 99th percentile of total flow. Use the
number of facilities reflected by whichever of these
percentiles (95 - 99) that best reflects the most
important group of non-municipal wastewater dischargers.
Then add the number of power plants back into the figure
of significant facilities.
These numbers should serve as a minimum. If there are
facilities in the State that are significant because of
the toxicity of their discharge (even though small in
volume) or because, for example, they discharge into
specially protected receiving waters, they too should be
included in the count of significant municipal or non-
municipal facilities.
-9-
-------
o Compliance: Facilities that have been completed, are meeting
their 1 982 permit requirements or are not in "significant
noncompliance" with those requirements, whether interim or final.
o Significant Noncompliance: For purposes of this report a new
definition of "significant noncompliance" has not been developed.
Instead, the report will use a modification of the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency's September 1982 proposed definition.
This definition has three main categories: violations of
requirements resulting from previous enforcement actions (such as
a consent decree or administrative order), violations of
compliance schedules, and violations of permit effluent limits.
The latter are defined by magnitude and/or duration of the
violations. The complete text of the E.P.A. definition is
attached.
The modification of EPA's definition relates to the number of
exceedances of monthly average limitations. For the purposes of
this report, significant noncompliance will be said to occur for
Acute Pollutants if the TRC is exceeded in 2 months out of 3. For
Chronic Pollutants, significant noncompliance is defined as
exceedance of the TRC in 8 months out of 12.
MODIFIED VERSION OF U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S
September 1982
DEFINITION OF SIGNIFICANT NONCOMPLIANCE IN THE NPDES PROGRAM
The designation of "significant noncompliance" indicates a
violation is of sufficient magnitude and/or duration to be
considered among the regulatory agency's priorities for
regulatory review and/or response.
The categories of significant noncompliance are: violations
of requirements resulting from previous enforcement action,
violations of permit effluent limits, and violations of permit
compliance schedules. Any unauthorized discharge or bypass
considered significant by the NPDES Program Director (or
Designee) will also be reported as significant noncompliance.
Additionally, the Director of an NPDES program may designate any
instance of noncompliance which he considers to be significant.
I. Violations of Previous Enforcement Actions
Violation of a requirement imposed in an enforcement action
such as a consent decree or administrative order, except as noted
below, is considered to be significant noncompliance.
II. Violations of Compliance Schedule
Schedule violations, including portions of 309(a)(5)(A)
orders which pertain to compliance schedules, can be classified
as "significant" for both POTWs and non-POTW's. Assessing the
status of compliance of non-POTW's is a relatively straight-
forward matter because there are fewer variables involved in
their construction programs than for POTWs. For those POTWs
which rely upon the Federal construction grants process to assist
in funding, the entire grant process (including planning, design,
-10-
-------
and construction) must be reviewed to determine if the municipal
facility is making acceptable or unacceptable progress. If a
POTW facility is making unacceptable progress, its noncompliance
is considered significant. For POTWs not in the Federal grants
process and non-POTWS, schedule violations which have not been
resolved (returned to compliance with schedule requirements)
within 90 days are considered to be significant noncompliance.
III. Violations of Permit Effluent Limits
Cases of significant noncompliance for permit effluent
limits are defined according to the magnitude and/or duration of
the violation. Effluent violations should be evaluated on a
parameter-by-parameter and outfall-by-outfall basis. Three
subcategories have been created for effluent violations, as
follows:
a. Effluent Criteria for Single Events and Short-Term Limits
Single event violations (i.e., of daily maximum limits) and
short term violations (i.e., of seven-day averages) are discre-
tionary with respect to their designation as significant
noncompliance. Generally, however, any permit violation is
significant which has the potential to cause or has actually
caused adverse environmental effects, (e.g., fish kills, oil
sheens) or poses a human health hazard (e.g., spills of carcin-
ogenic, radioactive or mutagenic substances). The Director also
may consider the significance of violations detected during
compliance inspections by using a single event criterion.
b. Effluent Criteria for the Magnitude and Duration of
Monthly Average Permit Limits
Significant noncompliance for monthly average limitations is
based on exceeding Technical Review Criteria (TRC) (magnitude)
for a specified time period (duration). The TRC's are for two
groups:
Group I - Inorganic and Oxygen Demanding Pollutants TRC=1.4
(such as BOD, COD, TSS, nutrients)
Group II - Toxic Pollutants TRC=1.2
(such as heavy metals, cyanide, and organics)
The duration is evaluated for any consecutive six months.
For all permittees, significant noncompliance is exceedance of
the TRC for the monthly average for any two months in a three
month period.
c. Effluent Criteria for Chronic Violations
In some cases, a permittee will constantly violate the
monthly average permit limit but not exceed the TRC. These
chronic violations would be considered significant noncompliance
if the monthly average permit limit were exceeded any eight
months in a twelve month period.
-11-
-------
GROUP I - Inorganic and Oxygen Demanding Pollutants TRC=1.4
Oxygen Demand
Minerals
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Total Oxygen Demands
Total Organic Carbon
Other
Sol ids
Total Suspended Solids (Residues)
Total Dissolved Solids (Residues)
Other
Nutrients
Phosphorus Compounds
Nitrogen Compounds (except ammonia)
Other
Detergents and Oil
MB AS
NTA
Oil and Grease
Other detergents or algicides
Calcium
Chloride
Fluoride
Magnesium
Sod ium
Potassium
Sulfur
Sulfate
Total Alkalinity
Total Hardness
Other Minerals
Metals
Aluminium
Antimony
Beryllium
Cobalt
Iron
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Group II - Toxic Pollutants
Heavy Metals (all forms)
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Zinc
Inorganic (nonconventional)
Ammonia
Cyanide
TRC=1.2
All Organics except those specifically listed in Group I
-12-
-------
SECTION IV. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL
Use not more than one-half a page to describe the state's
Non-Point Source (NPS) problems and controls. In addition to
activities funded by U.S. EPA, you should also include USDA Rural
Clean Water program activities as well as any other relevant
programs. Wherever possible, present quantitative information
about number of stream miles or river basins affected by differ-
ent sources, number of demonstration projects undertaken, etc. In
the narrative, relate NPS discharges back to the proportion of
use impairment shown in Part II.E.
As appropriate, your discussion can include groundwater and
coastal water pollution if you consider them a NPS problem. You
should categorize your nonpoint sources based on the 3 cate-
gories of NPS shown in the chart: Urban Runoff, Agriculture/-
Irrigation, Silviculture, Mining, Construction, Hydrologic
Modification (dams and channelization), Saltwater Intrusion, and
Residual Wastes/Land Disposal.
There are two rows in the NPS chart. The first asks you to
estimate both the severity and geographic extent of each of the
8 NPS categories. Your evaluations should be based on the defini-
tions below. They will probably be based to a large extent on
best professional judgment rather than hard data.
The second row of the chart seeks an identification of the
pollutant(s) of primary concern from each of the NPS categories.
Include as many as are applicable from the following:
C = Coliform; LoFlo = Low Flow; M = Metals; Nut.= Nutrients
OxDe = Oxygen Demanding Materials; P = Pesticides or Herbicides;
pH = Acidity/Alkalinity; Sal.= Salinity; SS = Sediments or
Suspended Solids; T = Turbidity; and 0 = Other.
If you display an entry labeled "Other", please use a footnote to
explain the pollutant of concern.
DEFINITIONS
For Evaluating NPS Severity:
o S = Severe = Impairment of designated use
o M = Moderate = Some interference with designated use, but use
not precluded,
o I = Minor = Minimal effect on designated use.
o N.A.= Not Applicable = Source does not occur in state or, if it
does occur,it does not affect support of designated uses.
For Evaluating Geographic Extent:
o W — Widespread = 50% or more of state's waters are affected
by this category of NPS.
o L = Localized = Less than 50% of waters are affected.
-13-
-------
SECTION V. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS
This section is to include a description of your clean water
program over the past 10 years. If you can convey any of the
information requested in graphics (in addition to those speci-
fied), please feel free to do so.
Part A. Enforcement
Item 1. Describe the state's approach to enforcement against
vib'latTons of state and federal water pollution control laws and
regulations for Point Source and Non-Point Source dischargers.
Item 2. Refer back to the tables in Parts III.A. and III.B.
show ing Compliance by Significant Municipal and Non-Municipal
Facilities. Complete the Enforcement table here by counting the
actions taken against those facilities (both Municipal and
Non-Municipal) in Significant Non-Compliance in 1982 as reflected
in those earlier tables.
For each facility, count only the most serious action taken to
date. Thus, there should be only one entry per non-complying
facility.
Examples of activities that would be counted in the "Pre-
Administrative Action" row include the following. Actions would
be counted only if they occurred subsequent to a determination
that a facility was in Significant Non-Compliance.
- Technical Assistance
- Series of Letters
- Conferences
- Voluntary Compliance Schedules
- Voluntary Connection Limitations
Examples of entries in the "Administrative Action" row include:
- Cease-and-Desist Orders
- Directives
- Commissioner Orders
- Consent Orders
- Connection Moritoriums
Examples of entries in the "Judicial Action" row include:
- Referral to Attorney General
- Referral to State or County Attorney
- Civil or Criminal Penalty Assessment
- Court Orders
- Judicially Imposed Consent Decrees
While the name used by your State for a particular enforcement
action may vary from that shown above, the listing should enable
you to determine the appropriate category.
-14-
-------
Part B. Municipal Facility Investment In this pie chart, display
tFTe total o£ the state's capital investment for municipal
wastewater disposal facilities in actual dollars (i.e. do not
translate expenditures to uninflated common year dollars). The
wedges of the pie should be the proportions derived from the
sources specified in the legend.
The "Other Federal Agency" line can be used to record funds
provided by such agencies as the Department of Housing and Urban
Development or the Economic Development Administration.
The entry labeled "Local Match" should reflect those local funds
used to match Federal or State grant funds. The "Other Local"
entry should be used — to the extent you have the information --
to report local capital expenditures for municipal wastewater
facilities that did not involve Federal or State funds.
Part C. Program Activities In one page or less, describe the
activities that comprise your clean water program; this should
focus on the changes in the program's emphasis over the past ten
years. This discussion should be arranged in whatever form best
meets your needs: one paragraph on each component of the program
(e.g. planning, monitoring, permitting, emergency response, lake
clean-up, public participation, operator training, etc.), an
integrated text describing the various aspects of the program, or
some other arrangement.
It is especially easy in this description to rely on jargon or
Federal Clean Water Act section numbers. Please try to avoid
doing this so that the resulting narrative will be comprehensible
to a lay reader.
Inclusion of discussion of program expenditures for particular
activities is optional; discussion of assumption of delegations
of federal authorities is also optional.
DEFINITIONS
o Enforcement: includes all levels of enforcement activity,
ranging from Pre-Administrative meetings through Administrative
Orders to referrals to the judicial system.
o capital investment: money spent for facility planning, design
and construction, but not for operation and maintenance.
SECTION VI. SITE-SPECIFIC SUCCESSES
Provide up to 2 examples of how water pollution control programs
have resulted in improved water quality and/or improved public
use of waters and/or the prevention of water quality degradation
despite population or industrial growth.
-15-
-------
These examples can be presented in the form of narrative or in
graphics (e.g. bar charts showing reductions in pollutant
loadings from a particular category of discharger, tables, etc.).
If you choose the narrative form, your discussion could include:
past conditions (i.e. historical background on water quality
conditions and pollutant sources), water pollution control
actions taken, and results of those actions in terms of water
quality and/or increased use of the waters.
Each example should deal with a specific water body (or
interconnected group of water bodies -- a major river and its
tributaries, for example) or with a particular geographic portion
of the state.
Use this section to tell those stories you are proudest of, but
do it in one page or less.
SECTION VII. SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND REMAINING PROBLEMS
Part A.Past progress in issues of special concern in your State,
not otKerwise adequately reflected in previous sections. Examples
of issues discussed could include:
Groundwater Wetlands Protection Toxic Pollutants
High Resource Waters On-Site Disposal Drinking Water
Development Pressures Interstate Problems Quantity-Quality etc,
Part B. Significant water pollution problems still to be resolved
Tn your State.
Item 1 Check each of the specified issues that you foresee as a
signTTicant problem for your state's water pollution program in
the years ahead.
I tem 2. The remainder of the page should be used for a narrative
cTIscussing additional problems or expanding upon those listed in
Item 1. Problems covered here could include, for example,
non-point source control, lake management, combined stormwater
runoff, etc.
This section should not be viewed as a "shopping list" specifying
funds needed for speci£ic program activities.
-1 6-
------- |