Indiana’s Draft (d) List of Impaired Waters Jody Arthur Integrated Report Coordinator Office of Water Quality, IDEM

Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d) 305(b) requires states to make water quality assessments and provide water quality reports to U.S. EPA 303(d) requires states to submit a list of impaired waters to U.S. EPA Both now combined into one report submitted to U.S. EPA every two years – Indiana Integrated Water Monitoring and Assessment Report

–Monitoring –305(b) Assessment –Integrated Reporting –303(d) Listing IDEM’s Five-Year Basin Rotation

The Integrated Report A comprehensive report of water quality conditions throughout Indiana Includes: – Basin-scale assessments – Reach-specific assessments on streams – Lakes assessments Consolidated List contains reach-specific information for every lake and stream in IDEM’s Assessment Database

Assessments at Two Scales Comprehensive Assessments Reach-Specific Assessments Apply to an entire basin Results derived from statistical calculations Data from sampling sites selected randomly throughout Indiana (probabilistic monitoring) Aquatic Life Use and Recreational Use Apply only to the reach sampled Results compared to Water Quality Standards Data from randomly selected sampling sites (probabilistic) + sites selected for a specific reason (targeted) All designated uses

BASIN NAME ASSESSMENT UNIT ID ASSESSMENT UNIT NAME CAUSE OF IMPAIRMENT WEST FORK WHITE INW0384_00 BIRCH CREEK-LITTLE BIRCH CREEK ALUMINUM WEST FORK WHITE INW0384_00 BIRCH CREEK-LITTLE BIRCH CREEK DISSOLVED OXYGEN WEST FORK WHITE INW0384_00 BIRCH CREEK-LITTLE BIRCH CREEK IMPAIRED BIOTIC COMMUNITIES WEST FORK WHITE INW0384_00 BIRCH CREEK-LITTLE BIRCH CREEK NUTRIENTS WEST FORK WHITE INW0394_T1016EEL RIVERALUMINUM WEST FORK WHITE INW0394_T1016EEL RIVER IMPAIRED BIOTIC COMMUNITIES WEST FORK WHITE INW0395_T1019 CONNELLY DITCH- HEADWATERS ALUMINUM WEST FORK WHITE INW0395_T1019 CONNELLY DITCH- HEADWATERS IMPAIRED BIOTIC COMMUNITIES WEST FORK WHITE INW039D_T1025EEL RIVERLEAD Example of Reach-Specific Assessment Results for Aquatic Life Use Support Provides assessment information for specific locations

BASIN ASSESSED TARGET POPULATION BASIN SIZE (MILES) USE ASSESSED % ATTAINING % NOT ATTAINING White River, West Fork Basin Aquatic Life Use 71%29% Patoka River Basin Aquatic Life Use 46%54% Example of Comprehensive Assessment Results for Aquatic Life Use Support

Comprehensive Assessment Allows Indiana to meet the CWA Section 305(b) goal of assessing “all waters of the state” Overall trends in water quality Also allows basin to basin comparison Statistically robust with known level of confidence – Can predict water quality conditions for the basin – Does not indicate where specific impairments are located or the reasons for impairment Probabilistic monitoring – Data can also be used to make reach-specific assessments – Resource intensive leaving comparatively few resources for follow-up

Reach-Specific Assessments Allow Indiana to meet the CWA Section 303(d) goal of identifying impairments that require Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) Useful for watershed planning and restoration activities on local level Can be used to determine if improvements have occurred (measures of success) Applicable only to specific waters – Can’t extrapolate the results to other waters in the basin unless sampling data are directly representative – Incomplete picture

IDEM’s Reach-Specific Water Quality Assessments Designated uses IDEM assesses – Recreational Use (RECR) – Aquatic Life Use (ALUS) – Drinking Water Use Other Assessments – Fish Tissue – Lake Trends and Trophic State

IR Categories in IDEM’s Consolidated List All waters in Assessment Database assigned an assessment unit (AU) Each AU placed in one category of the Consolidated List for each of its designated uses 303(d) list is a subset of the Consolidated List (Categories 5A+5B) – AUs listed once for each impairment – Draft 303(d) list builds on the previously approved list – Finalized prior to submission to U.S. EPA

IR Categories in IDEM’s Consolidated List Category 1  All designated uses have been assessed and are fully supported Category 2  The use has been assessed is fully supported and no other uses are impaired Category 3  Insufficient data and information to determine if the use is supported Category 4  The use is impaired but no TMDL required Category 5  The use is impaired and a TMDL is required

303(d) List Development 1.Data are compiled and assessments made based on IDEM’s Consolidated Assessment and Listing Methodology (CALM) 2.Assessment decisions entered into Assessment Database 3.Assessment database queried for all assessments to date 4.Each assessment unit placed in appropriate Integrated Report category for each designated use in accordance with IDEM’s CALM 5.303(d) list  Categories 5A and 5B (a subset of IDEM’s Consolidated List)

U.S. EPA Delisting Rules New data indicates that Water Quality Standards are now being met Assessment and/or listing methodology changed and AU no longer considered impaired Original listing found to be in error A program other than TMDL is better suited to address the problem The problem is not caused by a pollutant TMDL is approved

The Assessment Part of IDEM’s CALM Describes IDEM’s water quality assessment criteria and how they are applied No major changes to methodology for 2010 Added clarification – Resegmentation – Data minimums required for assessment – Use of Tier I and Tier II criteria in assessments – Use of site-specific criteria in assessments

Resegmentation IDEM is Redefining AU in IDEM’s Reach Index, Assessment Database Originally developed in 2002 based on National Hydrography Database (NHD) Generally, all streams in a watershed assigned a single AU Prevented accurate application of assessment data IDEM is now revising its reach index – Breaking large AUs into smaller, more representative units for assessment – NHD now available in higher resolution, allows us to incorporate smaller reaches that didn’t show up on the map when original index was developed

Resegmentation Resegmentation splits one AU into two or more smaller AUs Previous assessment information must be reevaluated to determine applicability to each new AU Any impairments are carried over to all new AUs until reassessment can be completed Short term effect  growth in number of listings Eventually, many will likely be removed once the data are reevaluated

Example Resegmentation RECR assessment applies to entire watershed ALUS assessment applies only to one tributary system Cannot correctly characterize extent of ALUS impairment in the Assessment Database All streams in watershed assigned a single AUID RECR ALUS

Example Resegmentation RECR assessment can still be applied to each new AU ALUS assessment can now be applied to the stream on which sample was collected Extent of impairment can now be correctly characterized Original AU resegmented; data reevaluated for new AUs RECRALUS

Use of Tier I & Tier II Criteria in Assessments Numeric criteria developed in accordance with methods provided in Indiana’s Water Quality Standard Usually developed to facilitate permitting Tier I meet all data requirements necessary to be incorporated into Water Quality Standard Tier II calculated with a smaller data set  typically more stringent Both applicable for CWA assessments

Use of Site-Specific Criteria (SSC) in Assessments Usually developed to facilitate permitting SSC supersede other criteria but only for the specific substance in question In most cases, SSC are applicable only to reach(es) for which they were developed Resegmentation is often required in order to accurately apply SSC – Usually complex – Done on a case-by-case basis

Grand Calumet River Resegmentation Initiated to facilitate permitting Necessary because AU originally defined in 2002 for the headwaters of the Grand Calumet River do not accurately reflect complexities of the system – Several outfalls in downstream reaches significantly alter hydrology along the reach – SSC for Cn applicable only to a one-mile reach within the original AU

Grand Calumet River Resegmentation INC0122_00 (headwater reach) was the only AU resegmented Split into three more representative AUs Remaining Grand Calumet River reaches downstream assigned new AUIDs and AU names to ensure continuity along entire river

GCR Reassessment

Grand Calumet River Reassessment Reassessed only for cyanide and ammonia All other previously identified impairments carried over to new AUs Reassessment based on original data and more recent data collected by IDEM in 2009

2009 Sampling by IDEM Known sources of Cn and NH 3 upstream Existing fixed stations not sufficient to accurately characterize water quality conditions along newly defined AUs Monthly sampling from March – June, 2009 at two additional locations Additional data needed to determine if dilution from noncontact cooling water was indeed having a mitigating effect on upstream sources of Cn and NH 3

Effect of Grand Calumet River resegmentation on 303(d) List Apparent increase in Grand Calumet River listings not a function of water quality degradation Increase is result of resegmentation – Impairments on original, single AU now applied to three

AUID DELISTED AND RETIRED ORIGINAL AU NAME ORIGINAL AU SIZE (MI) IMPAIRMENTS ON (d) LIST NEW AUID NEW AU SIZE (MI) NEW AU NAME IMPAIRMENTS ON DRAFT (d) LIST INC0122_00 GRAND CALUMET RIVER - HEADWATER 3.2 AMMONIA CYANIDE IBC OIL & GREASE PCBs in Fish Tissue INK0346_ GRAND CALUMET RIVER - HEADWATER AMMONIA CYANIDE IBC OIL & GREASE PCBs in Fish Tissue INK0346_021.0 GRAND CALUMET RIVER (327 IAC ) AMMONIA IBC OIL & GREASE PCBs in Fish Tissue INK0346_ GRAND CALUMET RIVER (GARY, IN) AMMONIA IBC OIL & GREASE PCBs in Fish Tissue INC0122_T1097 GRAND CALUMET RIVER - GARY TO INDIANA HARBOR CANAL 6.7 CYANIDE E. COLI IBC OIL & GREASE PCBs in Fish Tissue INK0346_046.7 GRAND CALUMET RIVER (GARY, IN TO INDIANA HARBOR CANAL) E. COLI IBC OIL & GREASE PCBs in Fish Tissue INK0351_T1001 GRAND CALUMET RIVER - ILLINOIS TO INDIANA HARBOR CANAL 3.37 NUTRIENTS IBC E. COLI DISSOLVED OXYGEN CYANIDE CHLORIDES AMMONIA PCBs in Fish Tissue INK0347_ GRAND CALUMET RIVER (INDIANA HARBOR CANAL TO ILLINOIS) NUTRIENTS IBC E. COLI DISSOLVED OXYGEN CHLORIDES AMMONIA PCBs in Fish Tissue

Waterbodies added to Category 4A for completed TMDLs

Waterbodies removed from Category 5 for one/more impairments based on new assessments and QAQC

Waterbodies added to Category 5 for one/more impairments based on new assessments and QAQC

Resegmentations Added BackRemoved

Indiana’s Draft (d) List: Delistings Impairments removed from Category 5: New assessments and QAQC 70 Impairments removed from Category 5: Changes in segmentation and pending reassessment 321 Impairments removed from Category 5: GCR Resegmentation and reassessment 18 Impairments moved from Category 5 to Category 4A: TMDL development 216 DELISTING TOTAL (625)

Impairments added to Category 5: New assessments and QAQC 446 Impairments added back to Category 5: Changes in segmentation and pending reassessment 355 Impairments added to back to Category 5: GCR resegmentation and reassessment 24 ADDITIONS TOTAL 825 Indiana’s Draft (d) List: Additions

Indiana’s Draft (d) List IMPAIRMENTS ON (d) LIST 2,682 DELISTINGS (625) ADDITIONS 825 IMPAIRMENTS ON DRAFT (d) LIST 2,882

Indiana’s Draft (d) List TOP CAUSES OF IMPAIRMENT E. coli PCBs in Fish Tissue Impaired Biotic Communities Mercury in Fish Tissue324313

Public Comment Period October 28, 2009 – January 26, 2010 IDEM welcomes your comments regarding the 2010 Draft 303(d) List of Impaired Waters

Contact: Jody Arthur, Integrated Report Coordinator Office of Water Quality, IDEM Where to Find More Information