DRAFT REPORT - epa.state.il.us · the Integrated Water Quality Report. Water bodies on the 303(d)...

DRAFT REPORT

Rend Lake Watershed TMDL Stage 1 Report Draft Report Prepared for Illinois EPA

February 2014

DRAFT i

Table of Contents

Section1GoalsandObjectivesfortheRendLakeWatershed

1.1 TotalMaximumDailyLoadOverview...........................................................................................1‐11.2 TMDLGoalsandObjectivesfortheRendLakeWatershed.................................................1‐21.3 ReportOverview....................................................................................................................................1‐4

Section2RendLakeWatershedDescription

2.1 RendLakeWatershedLocation.......................................................................................................2‐12.2 Topography..............................................................................................................................................2‐12.3 LandUse....................................................................................................................................................2‐1

2.3.1 SubbasinLandUse..........................................................................................................2‐22.4 Soils..............................................................................................................................................................2‐6

2.4.1 RendLakeWatershedSoilCharacteristics..........................................................2‐62.5 Population.................................................................................................................................................2‐72.6 Climate,PanEvaporation,andStreamflow................................................................................2‐8

2.6.1 Climate..................................................................................................................................2‐82.6.2 PanEvaporation...............................................................................................................2‐82.6.3 Streamflow..........................................................................................................................2‐9

Section3RendLakeWatershedPublicParticipation

3.1 RendLakeWatershedPublicParticipationandInvolvement............................................3‐1

Section4RendLakeWatershedWaterQualityStandards

4.1 IllinoisWaterQualityStandards.....................................................................................................4‐14.2 DesignatedUses.....................................................................................................................................4‐1

4.2.1 GeneralUse.........................................................................................................................4‐14.2.2 PublicandFoodProcessingWaterSupplies........................................................4‐1

4.3 IllinoisWaterQualityStandards.....................................................................................................4‐24.4 PotentialPollutantSources...............................................................................................................4‐3

Section5RendLakeWatershedCharacterization

5.1 WaterQualityData................................................................................................................................5‐15.1.1 StreamWaterQualityData..........................................................................................5‐2

5.1.1.1 DissolvedOxygen.....................................................................................5‐25.1.1.2 FecalColiform............................................................................................5‐35.1.1.3 pH...................................................................................................................5‐35.1.1.4 Metals............................................................................................................5‐4

5.1.2 LakeWaterQualityData...............................................................................................5‐55.1.2.1 RendLake....................................................................................................5‐5

5.1.2.1.1 TotalPhosphorusinRendLake................................5‐65.1.2.1.2 ManganeseinRendLake.............................................5‐7

5.1.2.2 BentonReservoir.....................................................................................5‐85.1.2.2.1 TotalPhosphorusinBentonReservoir.................5‐9

5.1.2.3 AshleyReservoir...................................................................................5‐105.1.2.3.1 TotalPhosphorusinAshleyReservoir...............5‐11

Contents

ii DRAFT

5.1.2.3.2 DissolvedOxygeninAshleyReservoir................5‐125.1.2.4 JayceesReservoir..................................................................................5‐12

5.1.2.4.1 TotalPhosphorusinJayceesReservoir..............5‐135.2 ReservoirCharacteristics................................................................................................................5‐14

5.2.1 RendLake.........................................................................................................................5‐145.2.2 BentonReservoir...........................................................................................................5‐155.2.3 AshleyReservoir............................................................................................................5‐155.2.4 JayceesReservoir..........................................................................................................5‐15

5.3 PointSources........................................................................................................................................5‐165.4 NonpointSources................................................................................................................................5‐17

5.4.1 CropInformation...........................................................................................................5‐175.4.2 AnimalOperations........................................................................................................5‐185.4.3 SepticSystems................................................................................................................5‐19

5.5 WatershedStudiesandOtherWatershedInformation......................................................5‐19

Section6ApproachtoDevelopingTMDLandIdentificationofDataNeeds

6.1 SimpleandDetailedApproachesforDevelopingTMDLs....................................................6‐16.2 AdditionalDataNeedsforTMDLDevelopmentintheRendLakeWatershed...........6‐36.3 ApproachesforDevelopingTMDLsforStreamSegmentsinRendLake

Watershed................................................................................................................................................6‐46.3.1 RecommendedApproachforMetalsandFecalColiformTMDLsfor

StreamSegments.............................................................................................................6‐46.3.2 RecommendedApproachforpHTMDLinBigMuddyRiver

SegmentN‐08....................................................................................................................6‐46.3.3 RecommendedApproachforDOTMDLsinImpairedStream

Segments.............................................................................................................................6‐56.4 ApproachesforDevelopingTMDLsforLakeSegmentsintheRendLake

Watershed................................................................................................................................................6‐56.4.1 RecommendedApproachforTotalPhosphorusandDOTMDLs................6‐56.4.2 RecommendedApproachfortheManganeseTMDLinRendLake............6‐5

Appendices

AppendixA–LandUseCategoriesAppendixB–SoilCharacteristicsAppendixC–WaterQualityData

Contents

DRAFT iii

List of Tables

1‐1 ImpairedWaterBodiesinRendLakeWatershed...................................................................1‐22‐1 LandCoverandLandUseinRendLakeWatershed...............................................................2‐22‐2 LandCoverandLandUseintheAshleyReservoirSubbasin..............................................2‐32‐3 LandCoverandLandUseintheLakeBentonSubbasin.......................................................2‐32‐4 LandCoverandLandUseintheLakeJayceesSubbasin.......................................................2‐42‐5 LandCoverandLandUseintheSnowCreekSubbasin........................................................2‐42‐6 LandCoverandLandUseintheGunCreekSubbasin...........................................................2‐52‐7 LandCoverandLandUseintheCaseyForkSubbasin..........................................................2‐52‐8 LandCoverandLandUseintheBigMuddyRiverSubbasin..............................................2‐62‐9 AverageMonthlyClimateDatainMountVernon,Illinois....................................................2‐82‐10 StreamflowGagesintheRendLakeWatershed.......................................................................2‐94‐1 SummaryofNumericWaterQualityStandardsforPotentialCausesofLake

ImpairmentsinRendLakeWatershed.........................................................................................4‐24‐2 SummaryofNumericWaterQualityStandardsforPotentialCausesofStream

ImpairmentsinRendLakeWatershed.........................................................................................4‐34‐3 ImpairedWaterBodiesinRendLakeWatershed...................................................................4‐45‐1 ExistingDODataforImpairedStreamSegments....................................................................5‐25‐2 ExistingFecalColiformDataforCaseyForkSegmentNJ‐07..............................................5‐35‐3 ExistingpHDataforBigMuddyRiverSegmentN‐08............................................................5‐35‐4a ExistingManganeseDataforBigMuddyRiverSegmentN‐08..........................................5‐45‐4b ExistingManganeseDataforGunCreekSegmentNI‐01......................................................5‐45‐4c ExistingIronDataforGunCreekSegmentNI‐01....................................................................5‐55‐5 YearsSampledbyStationatRendLake.......................................................................................5‐55‐6 RendLakeDataInventoryforImpairments..............................................................................5‐65‐7 SampleCounts,ExceedancesofWQStandard,andAverageTotalPhosphorus

ConcentrationsinRendLakeatOne‐FootDepth.....................................................................5‐65‐8 RendLakeDataAvailabilityforDataNeedsAnalysisandFutureModeling

Efforts.........................................................................................................................................................5‐75‐9 SampleCounts,ExceedancesofWQStandard,andAverageTotalManganese

ConcentrationsinRendLake............................................................................................................5‐85‐10 YearsSampledbyStationatBentonReservoir........................................................................5‐85‐11 BentonReservoirDataInventoryforImpairments................................................................5‐95‐12 BentonReservoirDataAvailabilityforDataNeedsAnalysisandFuture

ModelingEfforts.....................................................................................................................................5‐95‐13 SampleCounts,ExceedancesofWQStandard,andAverageTotalPhosphorus

ConcentrationsatOne‐FootDepthinBentonReservoir...................................................5‐105‐14 YearsSampledbyStationatAshleyRevervoir......................................................................5‐105‐15 AshleyReservoirDataInventoryforImpairments..............................................................5‐105‐16 AshleyReservoirDataNeedsAnalysisandFutureModelingEfforts..........................5‐115‐17 SampleCounts,ExceedancesofWQStandard,andAverageTotalPhosphorus

ConcentrationsatOne‐FootDepthinAshleyReservoir....................................................5‐115‐18 AverageDissolvedOxygenConcentrationsaboveLakeThermoclineand

MonitoringEventswithReportedExceedancesoftheMinimumDOStandardinAshleyReservoir............................................................................................................................5‐12

5‐19 YearsSampledbyStationatJayceesReservoir.....................................................................5‐12

Contents

iv DRAFT

5‐20 JayceesReservoirDataInventoryforImpairments.............................................................5‐135‐21 JayceesReservoirDataAvailabilityforDataNeedsAnalysisandFuture

ModelingEfforts..................................................................................................................................5‐135‐22 SampleCounts,ExceedancesofWQStandard,andAverageTotalPhosphorus

ConcentrationsatOne‐FootDepthinJayceesReservoir...................................................5‐145‐23 AverageDepthsforRendLakeSegmentRNB.........................................................................5‐145‐24 AverageDepthsforBentonReservoir.......................................................................................5‐155‐25 AverageDepthsforAshleyReservoir........................................................................................5‐155‐26 AverageDepthsforJayceesReservoir.......................................................................................5‐165‐27 PermittedFacilitiesDischargingtoorUpstreamofImpairedSegmentsinthe

RendLakeWatershed.......................................................................................................................5‐165‐28 TillagePracticesinFranklinCounty...........................................................................................5‐175‐29 TillagePracticesinJeffersonCounty..........................................................................................5‐175‐30 TillagePracticesinMarionCounty..............................................................................................5‐175‐31 TillagePracticesinWashingtonCounty....................................................................................5‐175‐32 FranklinCountyAnimalPopulation............................................................................................5‐185‐33 JeffersonCountyAnimalPopulation...........................................................................................5‐185‐34 MarionCountyAnimalPopulation..............................................................................................5‐185‐35 WashingtonCountyAnimalPopulation....................................................................................5‐186‐1 Impairments,DataNeeds,andRecommendedApproachesforTMDL

DevelopmentintheRendLakeWatershed...............................................................................6‐26‐2 DataAvailabilityandDataNeedsforTMDLDevelopmentintheRendLake

Watershed................................................................................................................................................6‐3

List of Figures

1‐1 RendLakeTMDLWatershed...........................................................................................................1‐52‐1 RendLakeWatershedElevation..................................................................................................2‐112‐2 RendLakeWatershed2012AerialImagery...........................................................................2‐132‐3 RendLakeWatershedLandUse...................................................................................................2‐152‐4 RendLakeWatershedSoils............................................................................................................2‐172‐5 RendLakeWatershedActiveUSGSGages................................................................................2‐192‐6 RendLakeWatershedAverageStreamflow............................................................................2‐215‐1 RendLakeWatershedMonitoringLocations..........................................................................5‐215‐2 RendLake–BigMuddyRiverSubbasin....................................................................................5‐235‐3 RendLake–CaseyForkSubbasin................................................................................................5‐255‐4 RendLake–GunCreekSubbasin.................................................................................................5‐275‐5 RendLake–SnowCreekSubbasin..............................................................................................5‐295‐6 RendLake–AshleyReservoirSubbasin...................................................................................5‐315‐7 RendLake–LakeJayceesSubbasin............................................................................................5‐335‐8 RendLake–LakeBentonSubbasin............................................................................................5‐355‐9 DissolvedOxygeninBigMuddySegmentN‐08.....................................................................5‐375‐10 DissolvedOxygeninCaseyForkSegmentNJ‐07...................................................................5‐395‐11 DissolvedOxygeninGunCreekSegmentNI‐01....................................................................5‐41

Contents

DRAFT v

5‐12 FecalColiforminCaseyForkSegmentNJ‐07.........................................................................5‐435‐13 pHinBigMuddySegmentN‐08...................................................................................................5‐455‐14 DissolvedManganeseinBigMuddySegmentN‐08.............................................................5‐475‐15 DissolvedManganeseinGunCreekSegmentNI‐01............................................................5‐495‐16 DissolvedIroninGunCreekSegmentNI‐01...........................................................................5‐515‐17 TotalPhosphorusinRendLake(RNB)......................................................................................5‐535‐18 TotalManganeseinRendLake(RNB).......................................................................................5‐555‐19 TotalPhosphorusinBentonReservoir(RNO).......................................................................5‐575‐20 TotalPhosphorusinAshleyReservoir(RNZB).....................................................................5‐595‐21 DissolvedOxygeninAshleyReservoir(RNZB).....................................................................5‐615‐22 TotalPhosphorusinJayceesReservoir.....................................................................................5‐635‐23 NPDESOutfallLocationsintheRendLakeWatershed......................................................5‐65

Contents

vi DRAFT

Acronyms

BMPs bestmanagementpracticesCBOD carbonaceousbiochemicaloxygendemandcfs cubicfeetpersecondcfu colonyformingunitCWA CleanWaterActDO dissolvedoxygenGIS geographicinformationsystemIDA IllinoisDepartmentofAgricultureIDNR IllinoisDepartmentofNaturalResourcesIILCP IllinoisInteragencyLandscapeClassificationProjectIL‐GAP IllinoisGapAnalysisProjectIllinoisEPA IllinoisEnvironmentalProtectionAgencyINHS IllinoisNaturalHistorySurveyIPCB IllinoisPollutionControlBoardISWS IllinoisStateWaterSurveyLA LoadAllocationLC LoadingCapacityLRS loadreductionstrategyµg/L microgramsperlitermg/L milligramsperlitermL millilitersMOS MarginofSafetyNA notapplicableNAIP NationalAgricultureImageryProgramNASS NationalAgriculturalStatisticsServiceNCDC NationalClimaticDataCenterNED NationalElevationDatasetNRCS NaturalResourcesConservationServiceRC ReserveCapacitys.u. standardunitsSSURGO SoilSurveyGeographicSTORET StorageandRetrievalTMDL totalmaximumdailyloadTSS totalsuspendedsolidsUSDA UnitedStatesDepartmentofAgricultureUSEPA UnitedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgencyUSGS U.S.GeologicalSurveyUSLE UniversalSoilLossEquationWLA WasteLoadAllocation

DRAFT 1‐1

Section 1

Goals and Objectives for the Rend Lake Watershed

1.1 Total Maximum Daily Load Overview Atotalmaximumdailyload,orTMDL,isacalculationofthemaximumamountofapollutantthatawaterbodycanreceiveandstillmeetwaterqualitystandards.TMDLsarearequirementofSection303(d)oftheCleanWaterAct(CWA).Tomeetthisrequirement,theIllinoisEnvironmentalProtectionAgency(IllinoisEPA)mustidentifywaterbodiesnotmeetingwaterqualitystandardsandthenestablishTMDLsforrestorationofwaterquality.IllinoisEPAdevelopsalistknownasthe"303(d)list"ofwaterbodiesnotmeetingwaterqualitystandardsevery2years,anditisincludedintheIntegratedWaterQualityReport.Waterbodiesonthe303(d)listarethentargetedforTMDLdevelopment.TheIllinoisEPA'smostrecentdraftIntegratedWaterQualityReportwasissuedinDecember2012andiscurrentlyawaitingapprovalbyUnitedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgency(USEPA).InaccordancewithUSEPA'sguidance,thereportassignsallwatersofthestatetooneoffivecategories.303(d)listedwaterbodiesmakeupcategoryfiveintheintegratedreport(AppendixAofthedraft2012IntegratedReport).

Ingeneral,aTMDLisaquantitativeassessmentofwaterqualityimpairments,contributingsources,andpollutantreductionsneededtoattainwaterqualitystandards.TheTMDLspecifiestheamountofpollutantorotherstressorthatneedstobereducedtomeetwaterqualitystandards,allocatespollutantcontrolormanagementresponsibilitiesamongsourcesinawatershed,andprovidesascientificandpolicybasisfortakingactionsneededtorestoreawaterbody.

Waterqualitystandardsarelawsorregulationsthatstatesauthorizetoenhancewaterqualityandprotectpublichealthandwelfare.WaterqualitystandardsprovidethefoundationforaccomplishingtwooftheprincipalgoalsoftheCWA.Thesegoalsare:

Restoreandmaintainthechemical,physical,andbiologicalintegrityofthenation'swaters

Whereattainable,toachievewaterqualitythatpromotesprotectionandpropagationoffish,shellfish,andwildlife,andprovidesforrecreationinandonthewater

Waterqualitystandardsconsistofthreeelements:

Thedesignatedbeneficialuseorusesofawaterbodyorsegmentofawaterbody Thewaterqualitycriterianecessarytoprotecttheuseorusesofthatparticularwaterbody Anantidegradationpolicy

Examplesofdesignatedusesareprimarycontact(swimming),protectionofaquaticlife,andpublicandfoodprocessingwatersupply.Waterqualitycriteriadescribethequalityofwaterthatwillsupportadesignateduse.Waterqualitycriteriacanbeexpressedasnumericlimitsorasanarrativestatement.Antidegradationpoliciesareadoptedsothatwaterqualityimprovementsareconserved,maintained,andprotected.

Section 1 Goals and Objectives for the Rend Lake Watershed

1‐2 DRAFT

1.2 TMDL Goals and Objectives for the Rend Lake Watershed TheIllinoisEPAhasathree‐stageapproachtoTMDLdevelopment.Thestagesare:

Stage1–WatershedCharacterization,DataAnalysis,MethodologySelection

Stage2–DataCollection(optional)

Stage3–ModelCalibration,TMDLScenarios,ImplementationPlan

ThisreportaddressesStage1TMDLdevelopmentfortheRendLakewatershed.Stages2and3willbeconducteduponcompletionofStage1.Stage2isoptionalasdatacollectionmaynotbenecessaryifadditionaldataarenotrequiredtoestablishtheTMDL.

Followingthisprocess,theTMDLgoalsandobjectivesfortheRendLakewatershedwillincludedevelopingTMDLsforallimpairedwaterbodieswithinthewatershed,describingallofthenecessaryelementsoftheTMDL,developinganimplementationplanforeachTMDL,andgainingpublicacceptanceoftheprocess.FollowingaretheimpairedwaterbodysegmentsintheRendLakewatershed:

BigMuddyRiver(N‐08) GunCreek(NI‐01) CaseyFork(NJ‐07) SnowCreek(NL‐01) RendLake(RNB) LakeBenton(RNO) LakeJaycee(RNU) AshleyReservoir(RNZB)

TheseimpairedwaterbodysegmentsareshownonFigure1‐1.ThereareeightimpairedwaterbodysegmentswithintheRendLakewatershedthatwillhaveTMDLsand/oraloadreductionstrategy(LRS)developedatthistime.Table1‐1liststhewaterbodysegment,waterbodysize,andpotentialcausesandsourcesofimpairmentforthewaterbody.

Table 1‐1 Impaired Water Bodies in Rend Lake Watershed

Segment ID

Segment Name

Potential Causes of Impairment

Designated Use Potential Sources (as identified by the 2012 303(d) list)

N‐08 Big Muddy River

Manganese Aquatic Life Sources Unknown, Natural Sources, Agriculture,

Total Phosphorus Aquatic Life Natural Sources, Agriculture

Dissolved Oxygen Aquatic Life Natural Sources, Agriculture

pH Aquatic Life Source Unknown

Sedimentation/Siltation Aquatic Life Loss of Riparian Habitat, Natural Sources, Agriculture

NI‐01 Gun Creek Iron Aquatic Life Source Unknown

Dissolved Oxygen Aquatic Life Source Unknown

Manganese Aquatic Life Source Unknown

NJ‐07 Casey Fork Dissolved Oxygen Aquatic Life Source Unknown

Total Suspended Solids (TSS)

Aquatic Life Crop Production, Agriculture

Fecal Coliform Primary Contact Recreation

Source Unknown

NL‐01 Snow Creek

Dissolved Oxygen Aquatic Life Sources Unknown

TSS Aquatic Life Crop Production, Agriculture


DRAFT 1‐3

Table 1‐1 Impaired Water Bodies in Rend Lake Watershed

Segment ID

Segment Name



RNB Rend Lake Total Phosphorus Aesthetic Quality

Municipal Point Sources, Crop Production, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers, Littoral/shore Area Modifications (Non‐riverine)

Manganese Public and Food Processing Water Supply

Source Unknown

Aquatic Algae* Aesthetic Quality

Littoral/shore Area Modifications (Non‐riverine), Municipal Point Sources, Crop Production, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers

TSS Aesthetic Quality

Littoral/shore Area Modifications (Non‐riverine), Municipal Point Sources, Other Recreational Pollution Sources, Crop Production, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers

RNO Lake Benton

Total Phosphorus Aesthetic Quality

Septic Systems, Crop Production, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers, Runoff from Forest/Grassland/Parkland

Aquatic Algae* Aesthetic Quality

Septic Systems, Crop Production, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers, Runoff from Forest/Grassland/Parkland

RNU Lake Jaycee

Total Phosphorus Aesthetic Quality

Littoral/shore Area Modifications (Non‐riverine), Runoff from Forest/Grassland/Parkland

TSS Aesthetic Quality

Littoral/shore Area Modifications (Non‐riverine), Runoff from Forest/Grassland/Parkland

RNZB Ashley Reservoir

Dissolved Oxygen Aquatic Life Crop Production

Total Phosphorus Aquatic Life, Aesthetic Quality

Crop Production

TSS Aquatic Life, Aesthetic Quality

Crop Production

Sedimentation/siltation Aquatic Life Crop Production

Bold Causes of Impairment have numeric water quality standards and TMDLs will be developed. Italicized Causes of Impairment do not have numeric water quality standards and an LRS may be developed where appropriate. Some italicized causes of impairment will not have an LRS developed as it is likely that implementing strategies to reduce the loading of other parameters of concern (e.g. reducing phosphorus loading to lakes) will result in reduced loading of additional parameters of concern (e.g. TSS in lakes). * Although algae is not a pollutant, it has been listed as a cause of impairment. Excess algae is often linked to high nutrient levels and its presense depletes oxygen levels in lakes leading to eutrophication.

IllinoisEPAiscurrentlyonlydevelopingTMDLsforparametersthathavenumericwaterqualitystandards.ForpotentialcausesthatdonothavenumericwaterqualitystandardsasnotedinTable1‐1,TMDLswillnotbedevelopedatthistime.However,LRSsmaybedevelopedwheretargetvalueshavebeenestablishedbyIllinoisEPA.Inaddition,someofthesepotentialcausesmaybeaddressedbyimplementationofcontrolsforthepollutantswithnumericwaterqualitystandards.

TheTMDLforthesegmentslistedabovewillspecifythefollowingelements:

LoadingCapacity(LC)orthemaximumamountofpollutantloadingawaterbodycanreceivewithoutviolatingwaterqualitystandards


1‐4 DRAFT

WasteLoadAllocation(WLA)ortheportionoftheTMDLallocatedtoexistingorfuturepointsources

LoadAllocation(LA)ortheportionoftheTMDLallocatedtoexistingorfuturenonpointsourcesandnaturalbackground

MarginofSafety(MOS)oranaccountingofuncertaintyabouttherelationshipbetweenpollutantloadsandreceivingwaterquality

ReserveCapacity(RC)oraportionoftheloadexplicitlysetasidetoaccountforgrowthinthewatershed

Theseelementsarecombinedintothefollowingequation:

TMDL=LC=ΣWLA+ΣLA+MOS+RC

Wheretargetcriteriaareavailableforparameterswithoutestablishednumericcriteria,LRSswillbedevelopedthatincludeaLC,reductionsneededtomeettheLC,andaMOSwhereapplicable.TMDLandLRSdevelopmentwillalsotakeintoaccounttheseasonalvariabilityofpollutantloadssothatwaterqualitystandardsaremetduringallseasonsoftheyear.Also,reasonableassurancethattheTMDLwillbeachievedwillbedescribedintheimplementationplan.TheimplementationplanfortheRendLakewatershedwilldescribehowwaterqualitystandardsandtargetswillbemetandattained.Thisimplementationplanwillincluderecommendationsforimplementingbestmanagementpractices(BMPs),costestimates,institutionalneedstoimplementBMPsandcontrolsthroughoutthewatershed,andatimeframeforcompletionofimplementationactivities.

1.3 Report Overview Theremainingsectionsofthisreportcontain:

Section2RendLakeWatershedCharacteristicsprovidesadescriptionofthewatershed'slocation,topography,geology,landuse,soils,population,andhydrology.

Section3PublicParticipationandInvolvementdiscussespublicparticipationactivitiesthatwilloccurthroughoutTMDLdevelopment.

Section4RendLakeWatershedWaterQualityStandardsdefinesthewaterqualitystandardsfortheimpairedwaterbodies.

Section5RendLakeWatershedCharacteristicspresentstheavailablewaterqualitydataneededtodevelopTMDLs,discussesthecharacteristicsoftheimpairedstreamsegmentsinthewatershed,andalsodescribesthepointandnonpointsourceswithpotentialtocontributetothewatershedload.

Section6ApproachtoDevelopingTMDLandIdentificationofDataNeedsmakesrecommendationsforthemodelsandanalysisthatareneededforTMDLdevelopmentandalsosuggestssegmentsforStage2datacollection.

FIGURE 1-1

Rend LakeTMDL Watershed

Big Muddy River N-08

Snow CreekNL-01

Gun CreekNI-01

Casey ForkNJ-07

Big Muddy RiverN-08

F R A N K L I NC O U N T Y

H A M I LT O NC O U N T Y

J E F F E R S O NC O U N T Y

M A R I O NC O U N T Y

P E R R YC O U N T Y

W A S H I N G T O NC O U N T Y

W AY N EC O U N T Y

SesserEwing

Benton

Dahlgren

Dix

Mount Vernon

BlufordWoodlawn

Belle River

Waltonville

Bonnie

Nason

Ina

Wamac Kell

Walnut Hill

Tamaroa

Hoyleton

IrvingtonNew Minden

Richview

Ashley

Radom

Du Bois

£¤51 §̈¦57

§̈¦64

Seve

nmile

Cree

k

B igMu

ddyR

iver

Snow

Creek

Case

yFork

Rayse Creek

Gun Creek

Novak Creek

Lake JayceeIL_RNU

Rend LakeIL_RNB

Lake BentonIL_RNO

Ashley ReservoirIL_RNZB

Legend303(d) Listed Segment

303(d) Listed Reservoir

River and Stream

Lake and Reservoir

Rend Lake Watershed

Highway

Municipality

County Boundary

0 2.5 5 7.5

Miles

´

LakeMichigan

Springfield

St. Louis

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILLINOIS

INDIANA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT


1‐6 DRAFT

Thispageintentionallyleftblank.

DRAFT 2‐1

Section 2

Rend Lake Watershed Description

2.1 Rend Lake Watershed Location TheRendLakewatershed(Figure1‐1)islocatedinsouth‐centralIllinois,flowsinasoutherlydirection,anddrainsapproximately311,000acres.Approximately258,500acres(83percentofthetotalwatershed)lieinJeffersonCounty,40,100acres(13percentofthetotalwatershed)lieinnortheasternFranklinCounty,11,400acres(3.7percentofthetotalwatershed)lieineasternWashingtonCounty,and1,050acres(0.3percentofthetotalwatershed)lieinsouthernMarionCounty.

2.2 Topography Topographyisanimportantfactorinwatershedmanagementbecausestreamtypes,precipitation,andsoiltypescanvarydramaticallybyelevation.NationalElevationDataset(NED)coveragescontaining30‐metergridresolutionelevationdataareavailablefromtheU.S.GeologicalSurvey(USGS)foreach1:24,000‐topographicquadrangleintheUnitedStates.ElevationdatafortheRendLakewatershedwereobtainedbyoverlayingtheNEDgridontothegeographicinformationsystem(GIS)‐delineatedwatershed.Figure2‐1showstheelevationsfoundwithinthewatershed.

ElevationintheRendLakewatershedrangesfrom642feetabovesealevelinthenorthernportionofthewatershedto396feetattheoutfalloftheRendLakedamatthesouthernextentofthewatershed.ThesurfaceelevationofRendLakeis405feetatfullvolume.

2.3 Land Use LandusedatafortheRendLakewatershedwereextractedfromtheIllinoisGapAnalysisProject(IL‐GAP)LandCoverdatalayer.IL‐GAPwasstartedattheIllinoisNaturalHistorySurvey(INHS)in1996,andthelandcoverlayerwasthefirstcomponentoftheproject.TheIL‐GAPLandCoverdatalayerisaproductoftheIllinoisInteragencyLandscapeClassificationProject(IILCP),aninitiativetoproducestatewidelandcoverinformationonarecurringbasiscooperativelymanagedbytheUnitedStatesDepartmentofAgriculture(USDA)NationalAgriculturalStatisticsService(NASS),theIllinoisDepartmentofAgriculture(IDA),andtheIllinoisDepartmentofNaturalResources(IDNR).Thelandcoverdatawasgeneratedusing30‐metergridresolutionsatelliteimagerytakenduring1999and2000.TheIL‐GAPLandCoverdatalayercontains23landcovercategories,includingdetailedclassificationinthevegetatedareasofIllinois.AppendixAcontainsacompletelistingoflandcovercategories.(Source:IDNR,INHS,IDA,USDANASSs1:100,000ScaleLandCoverofIllinois1999‐2000,RasterDigitalData,Version2.0,September2003.)

ThelanduseoftheRendLakewatershedwasdeterminedbyoverlayingtheIL‐GAPLandCoverdatalayerontotheGIS‐delineatedwatershed.Table2‐1containsthelandusescontributingtotheRendLakewatershed,basedontheIL‐GAPlandcovercategoriesandalsoincludestheareaofeachlandcovercategoryandpercentageofthewatershedarea.Datafrom2012werealsodownloadedfromtheNationalAgricultureImageryProgram(NAIP)inordertocomparecurrentaerialphotographytothe2000landcoverdata.Figure2‐2showstherecentaerialimagewhileFigure2‐3illustratestheland

Section 2 Rend Lake Watershed Description

2‐2 DRAFT

usesofthewatershed.Acomparisonofthetwodoesnotappeartoshowsignificantchangebetweenthetwotimeperiods.

Table 2‐1 Land Cover and Land Use in Rend Lake Watershed

Land Cover Category Area (Acres) Percentage

Soybeans 72182.6 23.2

Rural Grassland 42779.4 13.7

Dry‐Mesic Upland Forest 41632.7 13.4

Corn 34682.8 11.1

Wet Floodplain Forest 24834.2 8.0

Water 22513.3 7.2

Winter Wheat/Soybeans 14868.7 4.8

Mesic Upland Forest 9771.5 3.1

Winter Wheat 9204.6 3.0

Low / Medium Density Urban 5781.2 1.9

Partial Canopy/Savanna Upland 5775.6 1.9

Other Agriculture 4806.4 1.5

Other Small Grains and Hay 4013.4 1.3

Shallow Marsh/Wet Meadow 3619.8 1.2

High Density Urban 3094.9 1.0

Urban Open Space/Urban Grassland 3066.4 1.0

Deep Marsh 2475.9 0.8

Seasonally/ Temporarily Flooded 1875.4 0.6

Wet‐Mesic Floodplain Forest 1459.1 0.5

Shallow Water Wetland 1068.5 0.3

Mesic Floodplain Forest 630.9 0.2

Barren & Exposed Land 513.7 0.2

Dry Upland Forest 183.5 0.1

Swamp 155.7 0.1

Coniferous Forest 148.8 0.0

Total 311139.3 100.0

Thelandcoverdatarevealthatover182,000acres,representingapproximately59percentofthetotalwatershedarea,aredevotedtoagriculturalactivities.Soybean,ruralgrassland/pasture,andcornfarmingaccountfor23.2percent,13.8percent,and11.1percentofthewatershedarea,respectively.Forestanduplandareasrepresentatotalof27.5percentofthewatershed(85,501acres).Approximately10percentofthewatershedarea(31,163acres)isdeveloped,urbanizedland.Wetlands,marshes,andopenwatermakeuptheremaining4percent(12,294acres)oftheRendLakewatershed.

2.3.1 Subbasin Land Use ThesubbasinareasdrainingtoeachimpairedsegmentwerefurtherdelineatedthroughGIS(seeFigure2‐3).Landcoverdatawerethenintersectedwiththesubbasinboundariestodeterminethelandusescontributingrunofftoeachimpairedwaterbody(Tables2‐2through2‐8).


DRAFT 2‐3

Table 2‐2 Land Cover and Land Use in the Ashley Reservoir Subbasin


Soybeans 258.3 33.8

Corn 149.1 19.5





Water 17.6 2.3





Deep Marsh 5.1 0.7







Total 763.5 100.0

Table 2‐3 Land Cover and Land Use in the Lake Benton Subbasin


Soybeans 308.9 19.8

Corn 281.4 18.1


Water 156.6 10.1








Swamp 25.9 1.7




Coniferous Forest 12.4 0.8

Dry Upland Forest 10.7 0.7





Deep Marsh 2.0 0.1



Total 1557.9 100.0


2‐4 DRAFT

Table 2‐4 Land Cover and Land Use in the Lake Jaycee Subbasin





Water 92.4 5.9

Soybeans 77.9 5.0



Corn 38.6 2.5








Deep Marsh 6.9 0.4






Total 1559.0 100.0

Table 2‐5 Land Cover and Land Use in the Snow Creek Subbasin


Soybeans 3230.5 24.7



Corn 934.7 7.1













Deep Marsh 47.1 0.4



Water 27.4 0.2



Total 13078.1 100.0


DRAFT 2‐5

Table 2‐6 Land Cover and Land Use in the Gun Creek Subbasin


Soybeans 5171.2 30.4

Corn 3377.1 19.9











Deep Marsh 65.8 0.4








Water 14.6 0.1


Total 16983.7 100.0

Table 2‐7 Land Cover and Land Use in the Casey Fork Subbasin



Soybeans 14591.8 18.9



Corn 5221.5 6.8










Water 1013.1 1.3








Total 77341.9 100.0


2‐6 DRAFT

Table 2‐8 Land Cover and Land Use in the Big Muddy River Subbasin


Soybeans 39211.3 28.3



Corn 16609.2 12.0










Water 1332.3 1.0









Total 138792.8 100.0

2.4 Soils SoilsdataareavailablethroughtheSoilSurveyGeographic(SSURGO)database.ForSSURGOdata,fieldmappingmethodsusingnationalstandardsareusedtoconstructthesoilmaps.Mappingscalesgenerallyrangefrom1:12,000to1:63,360makingSSURGOthemostdetailedlevelofsoilmappingdonebytheNaturalResourcesConservationService(NRCS).

AttributesofthespatialcoveragecanbelinkedtotheSSURGOdatabases,whichprovideinformationonvariouschemicalandphysicalsoilcharacteristicsforeachmapunitandsoilseries.OfparticularinterestforTMDLdevelopmentarethehydrologicsoilgroupsaswellastheK‐factoroftheUniversalSoilLossEquation(USLE).ThefollowingsectionsdescribeandsummarizethespecifiedsoilcharacteristicsfortheRendLakewatershed.

2.4.1 Rend Lake Watershed Soil Characteristics AppendixBcontainsatableoftheSSURGOsoilseriesfortheRendLakewatershed.Atotalof77soiltypesexistinthewatershed.Thethreemostcommontypes—Blufordsiltloam(0‐2percentslopes),Belknapsiltloam(0‐2percentslopes,frequentlyflooded),andAvasiltloam(2‐5percentslopes)—eachcoveronlyasmallpercentageoftheoverallwatershed(10.0,8.1,and6.1percent,respectively).Allothersoiltypeseachrepresentlessthan6percentofthetotalwatershedarea.ThetableinAppendixBalsocontainsthearea,dominanthydrologicsoilgroup,andK‐factorrange.Eachofthesecharacteristicsisdescribedinmoredetailinthefollowingparagraphs.

Figure2‐4showsthehydrologicsoilsgroupsfoundwithintheRendLakewatershed.Hydrologicsoilgroupsareusedtoestimaterunofffromprecipitation.Soilsareassignedtooneoffourgroups


DRAFT 2‐7

accordingtotheinfiltrationofwaterwhenthesoilsarethoroughlywetandreceiveprecipitationfromlong‐durationstorms:

GroupA:Soilsinthisgrouphavelowrunoffpotentialwhenthoroughlywet.Wateristransmittedfreelythroughthesoil.

GroupB:Soilsinthisgrouphavemoderatelylowrunoffpotentialwhenthoroughlywet.Watertransmissionthroughthesoilisunimpeded.

GroupC:Soilsinthisgrouphavemoderatelyhighrunoffpotentialwhenthoroughlywet.Watertransmissionthroughthesoilissomewhatrestricted.

GroupD:Soilsinthisgrouphavehighrunoffpotentialwhenthoroughlywet.Watermovementthroughthesoilisrestrictedorveryrestricted.

WhilehydrologicsoilgroupsB,C,D,B/D,andC/DareallfoundwithintheRendLakewatershed,groupsCandDarethemostcommontypesandrepresent53.7and17.4percentofthewatershed,respectively.GroupB,B/D,andC/Dcoverarelativelysmallerportionofthewatershedat8.2,8.1,and5.0percentofthewatershed,respectively.Themostcommontype,GroupC,isdefinedashaving"moderatelyhighrunoffpotentialwhenthoroughlywet."Thesesoilsarepoorlydrained.GroupDsoilsaredefinedashaving"highrunoffpotentialwhenthoroughlywet."Thesesoilshaveverylowdrainage.GroupB/DandC/Dsoilsaredualhydrologicsoilgroupsbecausethesesoilscanbeadequatelydrained.Thefirstletterappliestothedrainedconditionandthesecondtotheundrainedcondition.Forthepurposeofhydrologicsoilgroup,adequatelydrainedmeansthattheseasonalhighwatertableiskeptat24inchesbelowthesurface(NRCS2007).

AcommonlyusedsoilattributeistheK‐factor.TheK‐factor:

Indicatesthesusceptibilityofasoiltosheetandrillerosionbywater.(TheK‐factor)isoneofsixfactorsusedintheUniversalSoilLossEquation(USLE)topredicttheaverageannualrateofsoillossbysheetandrillerosion.Lossesareexpressedintonsperacreperyear.Theseestimatesarebasedprimarilyonpercentageofsilt,sand,andorganicmatter(upto4percent)andonsoilstructureandpermeability.ValuesofKrangefrom0.02to0.69.Thehigherthevalue,themoresusceptiblethesoilistosheetandrillerosionbywater(NRCS2005).

ThedistributionofK‐factorvaluesintheRendLakewatershedrangefrom0.24to0.49.

2.5 Population TheCensus2010TIGER/LinedatafromtheU.S.CensusBureauwereretrieved.GeographicshapefilesofcensusblocksweredownloadedfortheentirestateofIllinois.Allcensusblocksthathavegeographiccenterpoints(centroids)withinthewatershedwereselectedandtalliedinordertoprovideanestimateofpopulationsinallcensusblocksbothcompletelyandpartiallycontainedbythewatershedboundary.Approximately37,400peopleresideintheRendLakewatershed.ThemajormunicipalitiesinthewatershedareshowninFigure1‐1.ThelargesturbandevelopmentinthewatershedisthecityofMountVernon,withapopulationofapproximately15,200.


2‐8 DRAFT

2.6 Climate, Pan Evaporation, and Streamflow 2.6.1 Climate South‐centralIllinoishasatemperateclimatewithhotsummersandcold,moderatelysnowywinters.MonthlyprecipitationdatafromMountVernon,Illinois(stationid.115943)inJeffersonCountywereextractedfromtheNationalClimaticDataCenter(NCDC)databasefortheyearsof1895through2013.ThedatastationinMountVernon,IllinoisisnearthecenteroftheRendLakewatershedandisexpectedtoberepresentativeofprecipitationthroughoutthewatershed.

Table2‐9containstheaveragemonthlyprecipitationalongwithaveragehighandlowtemperaturesfortheperiodofrecord.Theaverageannualprecipitationisapproximately41.1inches.AprilandMayarehistoricallythewettestmonthswhileJanuaryandFebruaryarethedriest.

Table 2‐9 Average Monthly Climate Data in Mount Vernon, Illinois

Month Total Precipitation

(inches) Maximum Temperature

(degrees F) Minimum Temperature

(degrees F)

January 2.5 40.3 31.2

February 2.5 43.9 34.3

March 3.5 54.9 44.4

April 4.2 66.7 40.0

May 4.5 76.4 49.7

June 4.0 85.4 73.9

July 3.5 89.5 77.9

August 3.4 88.3 76.3

September 3.4 81.6 69.3

October 3.1 70.1 57.5

November 3.5 55.5 45.2

December 3.0 27.8 19.0

Total 41.1 65.1 51.6

2.6.2 Pan Evaporation ThroughtheIllinoisStateWaterSurvey(ISWS)website,panevaporationdataareavailablefromninelocationsacrossIllinois(ISWS2007).TheCarlyle,IllinoisstationwaschosentoberepresentativeofpanevaporationconditionsfortheRendLakewatershed.TheCarlylestationislocatedapproximately25milesnorthwestoftheRendLakewatershed.Thisstationwaschosenforitsproximitytothe303(d)‐listedwaterbodiesincentralIllinoisandthecompletenessofthedataset.TheaveragemonthlypanevaporationattheCarlylestationfortheyears1980to2000yieldsanaverageannualpanevaporationof44.2inches.Actualevaporationistypicallylessthanpanevaporation,sotheaverageannualpanevaporationwasmultipliedby0.75tocalculateanaverageannualevaporationof33.1inches(ISWS2007).


DRAFT 2‐9

2.6.3 Streamflow AnalysisoftheRendLakewatershedrequiresanunderstandingofflowthroughoutthedrainagearea.FiveactiveUSGSgageswithinthewatershedhaveavailableandrecentdata(Figure2‐5).Table2‐10summarizesthestationsalongwiththeirrespectiveinformation.

Table 2‐10 Streamflow Gages in the Rend Lake Watershed

Gage Number Name Available Data Type POR

5595700 Big Muddy River near Mount Vernon, IL Gage Height 1993‐2013

5595730 Rayse Creek near Waltonville, IL Gage Height, Discharge 1979‐2013

5595765 Big Muddy Sub‐impoundment near Waltonville, IL Gage Height 1993‐2013

5595820 Casey Fork at Mount Vernon, IL Gage Height, Discharge 1985‐2013

5595860 Casey Fork Sub‐impoundment near Bonnie, IL Gage Height 1993‐2013

TwoofthefivegageshaveavailabledischargedataandmaybeusedtoestimatestreamflowsforimpairedsegmentswithintheRendLakewatershed;USGSgage5595730(RayseCreeknearWaltonville,Illinois)andgage5595820(CaseyForkatMountVernon,Illinois).TheaveragemonthlyflowsinRayseCreek(gage5595730)rangefrom6.8cubicfeetpersecond(cfs)inAugustto173.6cfsinMarch(seeFigure2‐6).TheaveragemonthlyflowsintheCaseyFork(gage5595820)rangefrom12.2cfsinAugustto184.1cfsinApril(seeFigure2‐5).Thedrainageareastothesegagesare88.0and76.9squaremilesforthegageonRayseCreekandthegageonCaseyFork,respectively.

USGSgage5595820(CaseyForkatMountVernon,Illinois)islocatedwithintheimpairedsegmentNJ‐07andmaybeusedtodirectlyestimateflowsforthatimpairedsegmentoftheCaseyFork.DatafromthisgagealongwithdischargedatafromUSGSgage5595730(RayseCreeknearWaltonville,Illinois)willbeusedtoestimateflowvaluesforotherimpairedwaterbodiesintheRendLakewatershedusingthedrainagearearatiomethod,representedbythefollowingequation:

where Qgaged = Streamflowofthegagedbasin Qungaged = Streamflowoftheungagedbasin Areagaged = Areaofthegagedbasin Areaungaged = Areaoftheungagedbasin Theassumptionbehindtheequationisthattheflowperunitareaisequivalentinwatershedswithsimilarcharacteristics.Therefore,theflowperunitareainthegagedwatershedmultipliedbytheareaoftheungagedwatershedestimatestheflowfortheungagedwatershed.USGSgage5595730(RayseCreeknearWaltonville,Illinois)isinthewesternhalfofthewatershedandonatributarytotheBigMuddyRiverandwillserveasasurrogategagefortheimpairedsegmentoftheBigMuddyRiver(N‐08).USGSgage5595820(CaseyForkatMountVernon,Illinois)isintheeasternhalfofthewatershedandwillserveasasurrogategagefortheimpairedsegmentofGunCreek(NI‐01),whichisapproximately8.5milessoutheastofthisstation.

DatadownloadedthroughtheUSGSforthesurrogategagesfortheavailableperiodsofrecordwillbeadjustedtoaccountforpointsourceinfluenceinthewatershedupstreamofthegagingstation.

ungagedgaged

ungagedgaged Q

Area

AreaQ


2‐10 DRAFT

AveragedailyflowsfromallNPDESpermittedfacilitiesupstreamofthesurrogateUSGSgagesaresubtractedfromthegagedflowpriortoflow‐per‐unit‐areacalculations.Theresultingestimatesaccountforflowsassociatedwithprecipitationandoverlandrunoffonly.AveragedailyflowsfrompermittedNPDESdischargesupstreamoftheimpairedsegmentsintheRendLakewatershedcanthenbeaddedbackintotheequationtomoreaccuratelyreflectestimateddailystreamflowconditionsinagivensegment.

FIGURE 2-1

Rend LakeWatershed Elevation


Snow CreekNL-01

Gun CreekNI-01

Casey ForkNJ-07

Big Muddy RiverN-08£¤51 §̈¦57 §̈¦64

§̈¦64

Seve

nmile

Cree

k

BigMu

ddy R

iver

Snow

Creek

Casey Fork

Rayse Creek

Atc

hison Creek

Gun Creek

Novak Creek

C L I N T O NC O U N T Y







W AY N EC O U N T Y

Lake JayceeIL_RNU

Lake BentonIL_RNO




River and Stream

Rend Lake Watershed

Highway

County Boundary

Elevation (feet)

130 - 411

412 - 424

425 - 435

436 - 446

447 - 458

459 - 470

471 - 483

484 - 494

495 - 505

506 - 515

516 - 526

527 - 537

538 - 550

551 - 571

572 - 6300 2.5 5 7.5

Miles

´

LakeMichigan

Springfield

St.Louis Mount

Vernon

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILLINOIS

INDIANA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT


2‐12 DRAFT


FIGURE 2-2

Rend Lake Watershed2012 Aerial Imagery


Snow CreekNL-01

Gun CreekNI-01

Casey ForkNJ-07

Big Muddy RiverN-08








W AY N EC O U N T Y

£¤51

§̈¦57

§̈¦64

Seve

nmile

Cree

k

BigMu

ddy R

iver

Snow

Creek

Casey Fork

Rayse Creek

Atc

hison Creek

Gun Creek

Novak Creek

Lake JayceeIL_RNU

Rend LakeIL_RNB

Lake BentonIL_RNO




River and Stream

Rend Lake Watershed

Highway 0 2.5 5 7.5

Miles

´

LakeMichigan

Springfield

St.Louis Mount

Vernon

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILLINOIS

INDIANA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT

Data Source: USDA/NRCS 2012 NAIP Aerial Photographyhttp://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov/GDGHome.aspx


2‐14 DRAFT


FIGURE 2-3

Rend LakeWatershed Land Use


Snow CreekNL-01

Gun CreekNI-01

Casey ForkNJ-07

Big Muddy RiverN-08

Casey ForkSubbasin

Lake JayceeSubbasin

Gun CreekSubbasin

Lake BentonSubbasin

Big Muddy RiverSubbasin

Ashley ReservoirSubbasin

Snow CreekSubbasin

£¤51

§̈¦57

§̈¦64

Seve

nmile

Cree

kBig MuddyRiver

Snow

Creek

Case

y Fork

RayseCr eek

Atchison Creek

Gun Creek

Novak Creek



H A M I L T O NC O U N T Y





W A Y N EC O U N T Y

Lake JayceeIL_RNU

Rend LakeIL_RNB


Legend303(d) Listed Segment303(d) Listed ReservoirRiver and StreamRend Lake SubbasinRend Lake WatershedHighway

Land CoverCornSoybeansWinter WheatOther Small Grains and HayWinter Wheat/SoybeansOther AgricultureRural GrasslandUpland

Partial Canopy/Savanna UplandConiferous ForestHigh Density UrbanLow / Medium Density UrbanLow Density UrbanUrban Open Space/Urban GrasslandShallow Marsh/Wet MeadowDeep MarshSeasonally/ Temporarily FloodedFloodplain ForestSwampShallow Water WetlandWaterBarren & Exposed Land

0 2.5 5 7.5

Miles´

LakeMichigan

Springfield

St.Louis Mount

Vernon

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILLINOIS

INDIA NA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT


2‐16 DRAFT


FIGURE 2-4

Rend LakeWatershed Soils


Snow CreekNL-01

Gun CreekNI-01

Casey ForkNJ-07

Big Muddy RiverN-08£¤51 §̈¦57

§̈¦64

Seve

nmile

Cree

k

BigMu

ddy R

iver

Snow

Creek

Casey Fork

Rayse Creek

Atc

hison Creek

Gun Creek

Novak Creek








W AY N EC O U N T Y

Lake JayceeIL_RNU

Rend LakeIL_RNB

Lake BentonIL_RNO




River and Stream

Rend Lake Watershed

Highway

Hydrologic Soil GroupA

B

B/D

C

C/D

D

Water

0 2.5 5 7.5

Miles

´

LakeMichigan

Springfield

St.Louis Mount

Vernon

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILLINOIS

INDIANA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT


2‐18 DRAFT


FIGURE 2-5

Rend LakeActive USGS Gages

USGS Gage 5595765

USGS Gage5595860

USGS Gage 5595730

USGS Gage 5595820

USGS Gage 5595700

#I#I

#I

#I

#I


Snow CreekNL-01

Gun CreekNI-01

Casey ForkNJ-07

Big Muddy RiverN-08







W AY N EC O U N T Y

SesserEwing

Benton

Dahlgren

Dix

Mount Vernon

BlufordWoodlawn

Belle RiverWaltonville

Bonnie

Nason

Ina

Wamac KellWalnut Hill

Tamaroa

HoyletonIrvingtonNew Minden

Richview

Ashley

Radom

Du Bois

£¤51 §̈¦57

§̈¦64

Seve

nmile

Cree

k

B igMu

ddyR

iver

Snow

Creek

Case

yFork

Rayse Creek

Gun Creek

Novak Creek

Lake JayceeIL_RNU

Rend LakeIL_RNB

Lake BentonIL_RNO


Legend#I Active USGS Gage

303(d) Listed Segment303(d) Listed ReservoirRiver and StreamLake and ReservoirRend Lake WatershedHighwayMunicipalityCounty Boundary

0 2.5 5 7.5

Miles´

LakeMichigan

Springfield

St. Louis

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILLINOIS

INDIANA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT


2‐20 DRAFT


Figure 2‐6:Monthly Average Daily Streamflow

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

180.0

200.0

January February March April May June July August September October November December

Monthly Average

Flow (cfs)

Rayse Creek near Waltonville, Gage 5595730

Casey Fork at Mount Vernon, Gage 5595820


2‐22 DRAFT


DRAFT 3‐1

Section 3

Rend Lake Watershed Public Participation

3.1 Rend Lake Watershed Public Participation and Involvement Publicknowledge,acceptance,andfollow‐througharenecessarytoimplementaplantomeetrecommendedTMDLs.Itisimportanttoinvolvethepublicasearlyintheprocessaspossibletoachievemaximumcooperationandcounterconcernsastothepurposeoftheprocessandtheregulatoryauthoritytoimplementanyrecommendations.

IllinoisEPA,alongwithCDMSmith,willholdpublicmeetingstopresentStage1oftheTMDLaswellasthefinalTMDLresultsandimplementationplan(Stage3).Themeetingswillbeheldwithinthewatershedandpubliccommentswillbesolicitedandincorporatedwhereappropriate.Thissectionwillbeupdatedaspublicmeetingsoccur.

Section 3 Rend Lake Watershed Public Participation

3‐2 DRAFT


DRAFT 4‐1

Section 4

Rend Lake Watershed Water Quality Standards

4.1 Illinois Water Quality Standards Waterqualitystandardsaredevelopedandenforcedbythestatetoprotectthe"designateduses"ofthestate'swaterways.InthestateofIllinois,settingthewaterqualitystandardsistheresponsibilityoftheIllinoisPollutionControlBoard(IPCB).Illinoisisrequiredtoupdatewaterqualitystandardsevery3yearsinaccordancewiththeCWA.ThestandardsrequiringmodificationsareidentifiedandprioritizedbyIllinoisEPA,inconjunctionwithUSEPA.Newstandardsarethendevelopedorrevisedduringthe3‐yearperiod.

IllinoisEPAisalsoresponsiblefordevelopingscientificallybasedwaterqualitycriteriaandproposingthemtotheIPCBforadoptionintostaterulesandregulations.TheIllinoiswaterqualitystandardsareestablishedintheIllinoisAdministrativeRulesTitle35,EnvironmentalProtection;SubtitleC,WaterPollution;ChapterI,PollutionControlBoard;Part302,WaterQualityStandards.

4.2 Designated Uses ThewatersofIllinoisareclassifiedbydesignateduses,whichinclude:GeneralUse,PublicandFoodProcessingWaterSupplies,LakeMichigan,andSecondaryContactandIndigenousAquaticLifeUse(IllinoisEPA2013).ThedesignatedusesapplicabletotheRendLakewatershedaretheGeneralUseandPublicandFoodProcessingWaterSuppliesUse.

4.2.1 General Use TheGeneralUseclassificationisdefinedbyIPCBasstandardsthat"willprotectthestate'swaterforaquaticlife,wildlife,agriculturaluse,secondarycontactuseandmostindustrialuses,andensuretheaestheticqualityofthestate'saquaticenvironment."PrimarycontactusesareprotectedforallGeneralUsewaterswhosephysicalconfigurationpermitssuchuse.

4.2.2 Public and Food Processing Water Supplies ThePublicandFoodProcessingWaterSuppliesUseisdefinedbyIPCBasstandardsthatare"cumulativewiththegeneralusestandardsofSubpartBandmustbemetinallwatersdesignatedinPart303atanypointatwhichwateriswithdrawnfortreatmentanddistributionasapotablesupplyorforfoodprocessing."

Section 4 Rend Lake Watershed Water Quality Standards

4‐2 DRAFT

4.3 Illinois Water Quality Standards Tomake303(d)listingdeterminationsforaquaticlifeuses,IllinoisEPAfirstcollectsbiologicaldataandifthesedatasuggestthatimpairmenttoaquaticlifeexist,acomparisonofavailablewaterqualitydatawithwaterqualitystandardswillthenoccur.Forpublicandfoodprocessingwatersupplywaters,IllinoisEPAcomparesavailabledatawithwaterqualitystandardstomakeimpairmentdeterminations.Tables4‐1and4‐2presentthenumericwaterqualitystandardsofthepotentialcausesofimpairmentforbothlakesandstreamsintheRendLakewatershed.OnlyconstituentswithnumericwaterqualitystandardswillhaveTMDLsdevelopedatthistime.LRSsmaybedevelopedforconstituentswithnarrativewaterqualitystandards.CDMSmithiscurrentlyworkingwithIllinoisEPAstafftodetermineappropriatetargetvaluesintheseinstances.ThissectionwillbeupdatediftargetcriteriaareselectedandappliedforthedevelopmentofLRSs.

Table 4‐1 Summary of Numeric Water Quality Standards for Potential Causes of Lake Impairments in Rend Lake Watershed

Parameter Units General Use Water Quality Standard

Regulatory Reference

Public and Food Processing Water Supplies


Dissolved Oxygen

mg/L March through July ≥5.0 minimum & ≥6.0 7‐day daily mean averaged over 7 days; August through February ≥3.5 minimum, ≥4.0 7‐day minimum averaged over 7 days & ≥5.5 30‐day daily mean

(1)

302.206(b) No numeric standard

NA

Manganese µg/L Dissolved: Acute = eA+Bln(H) X 0.9812* where A = 4.9187 and B = 0.7467 Chronic = eA+Bln(H) X 0.9812* where A = 4.0635 and B = 0.7467

302.208(e) Total: 1000

302.304

Total Phosphorus

mg/L 0.05(2) 302.205 No numeric standard

NA

µg/L = micrograms per liter mg/L = milligrams per liter NA = Not Applicable H = hardness * = Conversion factor multiplier for dissolved metals (1) Standard applies above the thermocline in stratified lakes and throughout the water column in unstratified lakes. (2) Standard applies in particular to inland lakes and reservoirs (greater than 20 acres) and in any stream at the point

where it enters any such lake or reservoir.


DRAFT 4‐3

Table 4‐2 Summary of Numeric Water Quality Standards for Potential Causes of Stream Impairments in Rend Lake Watershed

Parameter Units General Use Water Quality Standard


Public and Food Processing Water Supplies


Iron (dissolved)

mg/L 1.0 302.208(e) 0.3

302.304

Manganese µg/L Dissolved: Acute = eA+Bln(H) X 0.9812* where A = 4.9187 and B = 0.7467 Chronic = eA+Bln(H) X 0.9812* where A = 4.0635 and B = 0.7467

302.208(e) Total: 1000

302.304

Dissolved Oxygen

mg/L March through July ≥5.0 minimum & ≥6.0 7‐day daily mean averaged over 7 days; August through February ≥3.5 minimum, ≥4.0 7‐day minimum averaged over 7 days & ≥5.5 30‐day daily mean

302.206(b) No numeric standard

NA

Total Fecal Coliform

Count/ 100 mL

May through October 200(1), 400(2)

302.209 2000(1) 302.306

pH s.u. 6‐9 302.204 No numeric standard

NA

µg/L = micrograms per liter mg/L = milligrams per liter NA = Not Applicable s.u. = standard units H = hardness * = Conversion factor multiplier for dissolved metals (1) Geometric mean based on a minimum of five samples taken over not more than a 30‐day period. (2) Standard shall not be exceeded by more than 10 percent of the samples collected during any 30‐day period.

4.4 Potential Pollutant Sources InordertoproperlyaddresstheconditionswithintheRendLakewatershed,potentialpollutantsourcesmustbeinvestigatedforthepollutantswhereTMDLswillbedeveloped.Table4‐3providesasummaryofthepotentialsourcesassociatedwiththelistedpotentialcausesforthe303(d)listedsegmentsinthiswatershed.


4‐4 DRAFT

Table 4‐3 Impaired Water Bodies in Rend Lake WatershedSegment ID

Segment Name



N‐08 Big Muddy River

Manganese Aquatic Life Sources Unknown, Natural Sources, Agriculture,

Total Phosphorus Aquatic Life Natural Sources, Agriculture

Dissolved Oxygen Aquatic Life Natural Sources, Agriculture

pH Aquatic Life Source Unknown

Sedimentation/Siltation Aquatic Life Loss of Riparian Habitat, Natural Sources, Agriculture

NI‐01 Gun Creek Iron Aquatic Life Source Unknown

Dissolved Oxygen Aquatic Life Source Unknown

Manganese Aquatic Life Source Unknown

NJ‐07 Casey Fork Dissolved Oxygen Aquatic Life Source Unknown

Total Suspended Solids (TSS)

Aquatic Life Crop Production, Agriculture

Fecal Coliform Primary Contact Recreation

Source Unknown

NL‐01 Snow Creek

Dissolved Oxygen Aquatic Life Sources Unknown

TSS Aquatic Life Crop Production, Agriculture

RNB Rend Lake Total Phosphorus Aesthetic Quality Municipal Point Sources, Crop Production, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers, Littoral/shore Area Modifications (Non‐riverine)

Manganese Public and Food Processing Water Supply

Source Unknown

Aquatic Algae* Aesthetic Quality Littoral/shore Area Modifications (Non‐riverine), Municipal Point Sources, Crop Production, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers

TSS Aesthetic Quality Littoral/shore Area Modifications (Non‐riverine), Municipal Point Sources, Other Recreational Pollution Sources, Crop Production, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers

RNO Lake Benton

Total Phosphorus Aesthetic Quality Septic Systems, Crop Production, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers, Runoff from Forest/Grassland/Parkland

Aquatic Algae* Aesthetic Quality Septic Systems, Crop Production, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers, Runoff from Forest/Grassland/Parkland

RNU Lake Jaycee

Total Phosphorus Aesthetic Quality Littoral/shore Area Modifications (Non‐riverine), Runoff from Forest/Grassland/Parkland

TSS Aesthetic Quality Littoral/shore Area Modifications (Non‐riverine), Runoff from Forest/Grassland/Parkland

RNZB Ashley Reservoir

Dissolved Oxygen Aquatic Life Crop Production

Total Phosphorus Aquatic Life, Aesthetic Quality

Crop Production

TSS Aquatic Life, Aesthetic Quality

Crop Production

Sedimentation/siltation Aquatic Life Crop Production

Bold Causes of Impairment have numeric water quality standards and TMDLs will be developed. Italicized Causes of Impairment do not have numeric water quality standards and an LRS may be developed where appropriate. Some italicized causes of impairment will not have an LRS developed as it is likely that implementing strategies to reduce the loading of other parameters of concern (e.g. reducing phosphorus loading to lakes) will result in reduced loading of additional parameters of concern (e.g. TSS in lakes). * Although algae is not a pollutant, it has been listed as a cause of impairment. Excess algae is often linked to high nutrient levels and its presense depletes oxygen levels in lakes leading to eutrophication.

DRAFT 5‐1

Section 5

Rend Lake Watershed Characterization

InordertofurthercharacterizetheRendLakewatershed,awiderangeofpertinentdatawerecollectedandreviewed.Waterqualitydataforstreamsandreservoirs,aswellasinformationonpotentialpointandnonpointsourceswithinthewatershed,werecompiledfromavarietyofdatasources.Thisinformationispresentedanddiscussedinfurtherdetailintheremainderofthissection.

5.1 Water Quality Data IllinoisEPAmonitoringprogramsthatcontributedatatotheassessmentofstreamsincludetheAmbientWaterQualityMonitoringNetwork,thePesticideMonitoringSubnetwork,Facility‐RelatedStreamSurveys,IntensiveBasinSurveys,andtheFishContaminantMonitoringProgram.ProgramsthatcontributedatatoinlandlakeassessmentsincludetheAmbientLakeMonitoringProgram,CleanLakesProgramIntensives,andtheVolunteerLakeMonitoringProgram.ThemajorityofdatausedforthisreportcamefromtheAmbientWaterQualityandLakeMonitoringProgramsandIntensiveBasinSurveys.TheAmbientWaterQualityNetworkandAmbientLakeMonitoringProgramsinclude213fixedstreamstationsstatewidethataresampledevery6weeksand50lakesthataremonitoredannuallyinApril,June,July,August,andOctober.AdditionaldataarecollectedduringIntensiveBasinSurveys,whichtypicallyincludeapproximately100basin‐specificstationsperyearandareconductedona5‐yearcycle.AdditionalinformationonIllinoisEPA'smonitoringprogramscanbefoundinthe"IllinoisWaterMonitoringStrategy"(http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/water‐quality/monitoring‐strategy/).

Datafromatotalof54historicwaterqualitystationson,orupgradientof,impairedstreamsandreservoirswithintheRendLakewatershedwerelocatedandreviewedforthisreport.ThesewaterqualitydatawereprimarilyprovidedbytheIllinoisEPA;however,someadditionalwaterqualitydataprovidedbytheUSGSandothersourceswerepulledfromtheUSEPA'sStorageandRetrieval(STORET)database.Co‐locatedstationswithmultiplelocationidentifierswerecombinedforuseinthisreport.Figure5‐1showsthewaterqualitydatastationswithinthewatershedthatcontaindatarelevanttotheimpairedsegments.Figures5‐2through5‐8showthesubbasinsdrainingtoeachimpairedsegment(excludingRendLake,whichisshownonFigure5‐1).Thefiguresincludelanduse/landcoverdatathatwerepresentedinSection2.3.1andalsoshowthelocationsofpermitteddischarges(furtherdiscussedinSection5.3).

TheimpairedwaterbodysegmentsintheRendLakewatershedwerepresentedinSection1.RefertoTable1‐1forimpairmentinformationspecifictoeachsegment.DataaresummarizedbyimpairmentanddiscussedinrelationtotherelevantIllinoisnumericwaterqualitystandard.Datasummariesprovidedinthissectionincludeallavailabledaterangesofcollecteddata,insomecasesdatingbacktothe1960s.However,futuredataanalyseswilllikelybelimitedtothemorerecentlycollecteddatasets.TheinformationpresentedinthissectionisacombinationofUSEPASTORETdatabaseandIllinoisEPAdatabasedata.ThefollowingsectionswillfirstdiscussdatafortheimpairedstreamsegmentsintheRendLakewatershedfollowedbydataforimpairedlakesandreservoirsinthewatershed,includingRendLake.

Section 5 Rend Lake Watershed Characterization

5‐2 DRAFT

5.1.1 Stream Water Quality Data FourimpairedstreamsegmentswithintheRendLakewatershedareaddressedinthisreport(shownonFigures5‐2through5‐5).ThereisoneactivewaterqualitystationoneachoftheimpairedsegmentsofGunCreek(NI‐01)andSnowCreek(NL‐01).AtotaloffivestationswithavailablewaterqualityinformationexistontheimpairedsegmentoftheBigMuddyRiver(N‐08).Inaddition,16waterqualitysamplinglocationswereidentifiedalongtheimpairedsegmentofCaseyFork(NJ‐07).Thedatasummarizedinthissectionincludewaterqualitydataforimpairedconstituentsaswellasparametersthatwilllikelybenecessaryforfuturemodelingandanalysisefforts.AllhistoricalwaterqualitydatafortheimpairedsegmentsintheRendLakewatershedareavailableinAppendixC.

5.1.1.1 Dissolved Oxygen

CaseyForksegmentNJ‐07,GunCreeksegmentNI‐01,andSnowCreeksegmentNL‐01arelistedforimpairmentoftheaquaticlifeusebylowdissolvedoxygen(DO)concentrations.Table5‐1summarizesavailablehistoricalDOdataonthesesegments.ThegeneralusewaterqualitystandardforDOprovidesseasonalinstantaneousminimumandminimumweekly(7‐day)averageconcentrationsforDOinstreams.Duetoinconsistentandlimiteddatasets,onlytheinstantaneousminimumstandardsof5.0mg/LforMarchthroughJulyand3.5mg/LforAugustthroughFebruarywereusedtoidentifyviolationsofthestandardinthissectionofthereport.Theavailabledatasetswerenotassessedforimpairmentoftheweekly(7‐day)minimumDOlimits;however,futuredataanalysesmaytaketheweeklystandardsintoaccount.

Table 5‐1 Existing DO Data for Impaired Stream Segments

Sample Location and Parameter

Illinois WQ Standard (mg/L)

Period of Record and Number of Data

Points Mean Maximum Minimum Number of Violations

Big Muddy River Segment N‐08; Sample Locations N‐05, N‐07, 48486, 5595700

Dissolved Oxygen 5.0(1), 3.5(2) 1972‐2011; 381 6.72 17.4 0 125

Casey Fork River Segment NJ‐07; Sample Locations NJ‐07, NJ‐15, NJ‐16, NJ‐17, NJ‐18, NJ‐22 NJ‐26, NJ‐28, NJ‐29, NJ‐30, NJ‐91, NJ‐93, 48163, 5595830

Dissolved Oxygen 5.0(1), 3.5(2) 1962‐2011; 453 7.25 16.4 0.73 90

Gun Creek Segment NI‐01; Sample Location NI‐01

Dissolved Oxygen 5.0(1), 3.5(2) 1990‐2008; 5 5.14 8.3 2.1 1

Snow Creek Segment NL‐01; Sample NL‐01

Dissolved Oxygen 5.0(1), 3.5(2) 1995‐2008; 8 6.65 11.2 3.2 3 (1) Instantaneous Minimum March‐July (2) Instantaneous Minimum August‐February

ThesummaryofdatapresentedinTable5‐1reflectssinglesamplesfromeachsegmentcomparedtothestandardsduringtheappropriatemonths.Alargenumberofviolations(125)werenotedintheavailabledatasetforBigMuddyRiversegmentN‐08,representing33percentofavailableDOmeasurements.Similarly,violationsoftheminimumDOcriteriaoccurredin20percent(90of453)ofthemeasurementrecordedonsegmentNJ‐07ofCaseyFork.TheavailabledatasetsforGunCreekandSnowCreekwerenotasrobust;however,violationsoftheminimumDOcriteriawereobservedinoneofsixmeasurementsfromGunCreekandtwoofeightmeasurementsreportedforSnowCreek.Figures5‐9through5‐11showtheDOmeasurementscollectedovertimeateachimpairedsegment.

Ingeneral,DOconcentrationsineachofthestreamsegmentstendtobelowestduringsummermonths.Reportedexceedancesineachstreamsegmentoccurmorefrequentlyinthesummerandfallwhentemperaturesarehighandstreamflowsaretypicallylow.Likewise,considerablymore


DRAFT 5‐3

exceedancesoccurduringtheMarch‐Julyperiodwhenthe5.0mg/LdailyminimumstandardappliesthanduringtheAugust‐Februaryperiodwhenthe3.5mg/Lstandardapplies.AllexceedancesreportedinGunCreekandSnowCreekoccurredinthemonthofJuly.Althoughexceedancesofthe3.5mg/LminimumdailystandarddooccurinbothN‐08(BigMuddyRiver)andNJ‐07(CaseyFork),amajorityofreportedexceedancesforbothsegmentsstilloccurduringtheMarch‐Julyperiod(77of125and65of90exceedances,respectively).

5.1.1.2 Fecal Coliform

CaseyForksegmentNJ‐07islistedforimpairmentcausedbyfecalcoliform.Table5‐2summarizesavailablehistoricalfecalcoliformdataonthesegment.Thegeneralusewaterqualitystandardforfecalcoliformstatesthatthestandardof200colonyformingunits(cfu)per100milliliters(mL)notbeexceededbythegeometricmeanofatleastfivesamplesin30days,norcan10percentofthesamplescollectedexceed400cfuper100mLinprotectedwaters,exceptasprovidedin35Ill.Adm.Code302.209(b).Samplesmustbecollectedovera30‐dayperiodorlessduringthemonthsofMaythroughOctober.Exceedancesofthe200cfu/100mLgeometricmeanand400cfu/100mLstandardsoccurregularly(133and97of182samples,respectively)inthehistoricaldatasetforsegmentNJ‐07.ThesummaryofdatapresentedinTable5‐2reflectssinglesamplescomparedtothestandardsduringtheappropriatemonths.Figure5‐12showsthefecalcoliformsamplescollectedovertimeatsegmentNJ‐07.Thedatadonotshowanydiscernibleseasonalorlong‐termtemporaltrends.

Table 5‐2 Existing Fecal Coliform Data for Casey Fork Segment NJ‐07 (Sample Locations NJ‐07, NJ‐15, NJ‐16, NJ‐17, NJ‐18, NJ‐22 NJ‐26, NJ‐28, NJ‐29, NJ‐30, NJ‐91, NJ‐93, 48163, 5595830)


Period of Record and Number of Data Points Maximum Minimum

Number of samples > 200 (1)

Number of samples > 400 (1)

Total Fecal Coliform (cfu/100 mL)

1968‐2010; 182 76,000 10 133 97

(1) Samples collected during the months of May through October

5.1.1.3 pH

SegmentN‐08oftheBigMuddyRiverislistedforimpairmentcausedbypH.Asampleisconsideredaviolationifitfallsbelow6.5orabove9.0standardunitsatanytime.Atotalof416sampleshavebeencollectedsince1972fromtheimpairedsegment,13ofwhichwereoutsidetheallowablerangeofpHandrepresentviolationsoftheapplicablewaterqualitystandard(Table5‐3).All13violationsofthestandardreportedintheN‐08datasetwerereportedbelowtheminimumacceptablevalueof6.5standardunits(Figure5‐13).

Table 5‐3 Existing pH Data for Big Muddy River Segment N‐08 (Sample Locations N‐05, N‐07, N‐08, 48486, and 5595700)


Illinois WQ Standard

Period of Record and Number of Data Points Mean Maximum Minimum

Number of Violations

pH (standard units) 6.5‐9.0 1972‐2011; 416 7.23 8.5 6.0 13


5‐4 DRAFT

5.1.1.4 Metals

Thefollowingsegmentsarelistedforaquaticlifeuseimpairmentscausedbymetals:

BigMuddyRiversegmentN‐08:Manganese GunCreeksegmentNI‐01:ManganeseandIron

BigMuddyRiversegmentN‐08andGunCreeksegmentNI‐01arebothlistedforimpairmentcausedbymanganese.Acuteandchronicgeneralusewaterqualitystandardsformanganesearedependentonsamplehardness.Hardnessdatahavebeencollectedinconjunctionwiththeseparameters.ThenumberofviolationspresentedinTable5‐4aand5‐4bforthesehardness‐dependentparametersrepresentviolationsofthegeneralusechronicstandardscalculatedbasedonsample‐specifichardnessvalues,whereavailable.Wherecorrelatedmanganeseandhardnessvalueswerenotavailable,thesampleresultwasnotusedforassessmentpurposes.Figure5‐14showsmanganeseconcentrationovertimeontheBigMuddyRiversegmentN‐08.Acuteandchronicgeneralusestandardscalculatedbasedonthemedianhardnessforthissegmentarealsoshownforcomparisonpurposes.

Figure5‐15providesmanganeseconcentrationsandcorrelatedacuteandchronicgeneralusestandardsforsegmentNI‐01ofGunCreek.Basedonthecurrentlyapplicableacuteandchronicstandards,GunCreeksegmentNI‐01hasnotshownanexceedanceofthemanganesecriteriainanyofthefivesamplescollectedsince1995.AlthoughthereportedvaluefordissolvedmanganesewasrelativelylowforthesamplecollectedMay13,2008(164µg/L),nohardnessdatawasavailableforthisdateandthissamplecannotbedirectlycomparedtothehardness‐dependentdissolvedmanganesestandards.Basedonthelackofreportedexceedancesforthedissolvedmanganesestandard,itisrecommendedthatsegmentNI‐01beconsideredforremovalfromthe303(d)list.

Table 5‐4a Existing Manganese Data for Big Muddy River Segment N‐08 (Sample Locations

N‐05, N‐07, 48486, 5595700)




Manganese (dissolved)

1981‐2011; 201 648 5,200 15 2

Note: Acute and chronic standards for dissolved manganese in streams are hardness‐dependent.

Table 5‐4b Existing Manganese Data for Gun Creek Segment NI‐01 (Sample Locations NI‐01)

Station Date Hardness, Total

(results) Manganese,

Dissolved (μg/L) Acute Chronic Violation of Standard

GUN CR 7/25/1995 181 1,300 6,637 2,822 False

GUN CR 2/22/1996 171 280 6,361 2,704 False

GUN CR 8/18/2008 79.1 795 3,577 1,520 False

GUN CR 9/8/2008 110 1,100 4,575 1,945 False


DRAFT 5‐5

GunCreeksegmentNI‐01isalsolistedforimpairmentcausedbyiron.Thegeneralusewaterqualitystandardfortotalironstatesthatthestandardof1.0mg/L(1,000µg/L)notbeexceeded.FourofthefiveavailabledatapointsfortotalironconcentrationsatNI‐01areviolationsofthetotalironcriteria(Table5‐4candFigure5‐16).

Table 5‐4c Existing Iron Data for Gun Creek Segment NI‐01 (Sample Locations NI‐01)


Illinois WQ Standard (µg/L)



Iron (Total) 1,000 1995‐2008; 5 2,098 3,190 930 4

5.1.2 Lake Water Quality Data FourimpairedlakesandreservoirsexistwithintheRendLakewatershed—RendLake,AshleyReservoir,BentonReservoir,andLakeJaycee.Thedatasummarizedinthissectionincludewaterqualitydatafortheimpairedconstituentsaswellasparametersthatcouldbeusefulinfuturemodelingandanalysisefforts.AllhistoricalwaterqualitydataareavailableinAppendixC.

5.1.2.1 Rend Lake

RendLakeislistedforimpairmentoftheaestheticqualityusecausedbytotalphosphorousandmanganese.Dataareavailablefrom10separatewaterqualitysamplinglocationsonRendLake(seeFigure5‐1).AnalyticaldataforsamplinglocationswithincloseproximitytoeachotherhavebeengroupedaccordingtotheIllinoisEPAmonitoringstationidentifiers.TheyearsinwhicheachsiteatRendLakehasbeensampledarepresentedinTable5‐5.AninventoryofallavailabledataassociatedwiththeimpairmentsinRendLakeispresentedinTable5‐6.

Table 5‐5 Years Sampled by Station at Rend Lake

Station Years Sampled

RNB‐1

1973, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982,

1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988,

1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994,

1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2005,

2008

RNB‐2 1973, 2000, 2005, 2008

RNB‐3 1973, 2000, 2005, 2008

RNB‐4 1973, 2000, 2005, 2008

RNB‐5 1973, 2000, 2005, 2008


5‐6 DRAFT

Table 5‐6 Rend Lake Data Inventory for Impairments

Rend Lake Segment RNB; Sample Locations RNB‐1, RNB‐2, RNB‐3, RNB‐5, RNB‐5, 1735011, 1735021, 1735031, 1735041, and 55959502.

RNB‐1 (Stations RNB‐1, 55959502, 1735011) Period of Record Number of Samples

Manganese in Bottom Deposits 2000‐2008 3

Manganese, Dissolved 1979‐1998 122

Manganese, Total 1979‐1998 391

Phosphorus in Bottom Deposits 2005‐2005 1

Phosphorus, Dissolved 1979‐2008 70

Phosphorus, Total 1973‐2008 383

RNB‐2 (Stations RNB‐2 and 1753021)



Total Suspended Solids 2000‐2008 14











RNB‐5 (Station RNB‐5)


Manganese, Total 2000‐2008 14



Phosphorus, Total 2000‐2008 26 1 Sampling station established by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 2 USGS sampling station.

5.1.2.1.1 Total Phosphorus in Rend Lake

TheapplicablewaterqualitystandardfortotalphosphorusinRendLakeis0.05mg/L.Compliancewiththetotalphosphorusstandardisassessedusingsamplescollectedata1‐footdepthfromthelakesurface.Theaveragetotalphosphorusconcentrationsata1‐footdepthforeachyearofavailabledataateachmonitoringsiteinRendLakearepresentedinTable5‐7.

Table 5‐7 Sample Counts, Exceedances of WQ Standard (0.05 mg/L), and Average Total Phosphorus Concentrations (mg/L) in Rend Lake at One‐Foot depth

2000 2005 2008

Station

Data Count; Number

of Violations Min. Max. Avg.

Data Count; Number


Data Count; Number


RNB‐1 5; 3 0.03 0.11 0.06 5; 5 0.052 0.219 0.12 5; 5 0.085 0.202 0.13

RNB‐2 5; 4 0.03 0.12 0.08 5; 5 0.051 0.291 0.16 5; 5 0.092 0.234 0.14

RNB‐3 5; 4 0.03 0.10 0.06 5; 5 0.065 0.302 0.17 5; 5 0.074 0.208 0.12

RNB‐4 5; 4 0.04 0.11 0.08 5; 5 0.074 0.328 0.17 5; 5 0.093 0.193 0.13

RNB‐5 5; 3 0.03 0.12 0.06 5; 5 0.048 0.209 0.12 5; 5 0.084 0.183 0.12

Lake Avg 25; 18 0.03 0.12 0.07 25; 25 0.048 0.328 0.15 25; 25 0.074 0.234 0.13


DRAFT 5‐7

Atotalof68ofthe75availablesampledatapointsfortotalphosphoruscollectedat1‐footdepthinRendLakeexceededthetotalphosphorouswaterqualitystandardof0.05mg/L.TotalphosphorusconcentrationswereconsistentlyhighandaveragevaluesaremorethantwicethewaterqualitystandardforallsamplingstationsonRendLake(Figure5‐17).

Table5‐8containsinformationondataavailabilityforotherparametersthatmaybeusefulindataneedsanalysisandfuturemodelingeffortsforphosphorusimpairmentassessmentatRendLake.TheinventorypresentedinTable5‐7representsdatacollectedatalldepths.

Table 5‐8 Rend Lake Data Availability for Data Needs Analysis and Future Modeling Efforts

Rend Lake Segment RNB; Sample Locations RNB‐1, RNB‐2, RNB‐3, RNB‐5, RNB‐5, RN‐B01‐B‐1, RN‐B01‐B‐2, RN‐B01‐B‐3, RN‐B01‐B‐4, 1735011, 1735021, 1735031, 1735041, and 55959502.

RNB‐1 (RNB‐1, 55959502, RN‐B01‐B‐1, 1735011) Period of Record Number of Samples

Chlorophyll a, corrected 2000‐2008 12

Depth, bottom 1973‐2005 58

Dissolved Oxygen 1973‐2008 370

Temperature, Water 1973‐2008 311

RNB‐2 (RNB‐2, RN‐B01‐B‐2 and 1753021)





RNB‐3 (RNB‐3, RN‐B01‐B‐3 and 1753031)





RNB‐4 (RNB‐4, RN‐B01‐B‐4 and 1753041)





RNB‐5 (RNB‐5, RN‐B01‐B‐5 and 1753051)



Temperature, Water 2000‐2008 132 1 Sampling station established by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 2 USGS sampling station.

5.1.2.1.2 Manganese in Rend Lake

ThecurrentapplicablewaterqualitystandardfortotalmanganeseinRendLake(asappliedtothepublicwatersupplyuse)is1,000µg/L(or1mg/L).TotalmanganesedatainRendLakeisavailableforanumberofyears(1979‐2008)butfromonlytwosamplinglocationsonthelake(RNB‐1andRNB‐5).Althoughexceedancesofthemanganesestandardhaveoccurred,noviolationsofthecurrentstandardhavebeenrecordedsince1988andrecentsamplesatsiteRNB‐5haveallbeenbelowtheapplicablestandard(Figure5‐18).ThenumberofviolationsandaveragetotalmanganeseconcentrationsforeachyearofavailabledataateachmonitoringsiteinRendLakearepresentedinTable5‐9.Itshouldalsobenotedthattheapplicablestandardhaschangedandthepreviousassessmentofimpairmentwasbasedonastandardthatnolongerapplies.Basedontheassessmentusingthecurrentlyapplicablestandard,itisrecommendedthatmanganeseimpairmentinRendLakebeconsideredforremovalfromthe303(d)list.


5‐8 DRAFT

Table 5‐9 Sample Counts, Exceedances of WQ Standard (1,000 µg/L), and Average Total Manganese Concentrations (µg/L) in Rend Lake

RNB‐1 RNB‐5 Lake Average

Year

Data Count; Number of Violations

Average (µg/L)


Average (µg/L)


Average (µg/L)

1979 7; 3 684 7; 3 684

1980 15; 1 446 15; 1 446

1981 21; 1 358 21; 1 358

1982 24; 0 257 24; 0 257

1983 27; 0 212 27; 0 212

1984 26; 0 261 26; 0 261

1985 27; 0 218 27; 0 218

1986 24; 0 181 24; 0 181

1987 26; 0 266 26; 0 266

1988 27; 3 531 27; 3 531

1989 26; 0 217 26; 0 217

1990 24; 0 223 24; 0 223

1991 21; 0 195 21; 0 195

1992 15; 0 169 15; 0 169

1993 12; 0 178 12; 0 178

1994 18; 0 154 18; 0 154

1995 17; 0 144 17; 0 144

1996 14; 0 137 14; 0 137

1997 11; 0 220 11; 0 220

1998 9; 0 163 9; 0 163

2000 5; 0 328 5; 0 328

2005 4; 0 323 4; 0 323

2008 5; 0 249 5; 0 249

5.1.2.2 Benton Reservoir

BentonReservoirislistedforimpairmentoftheaestheticqualityusecausedbytotalphosphorous.DataareavailablefromeightseparatewaterqualitysamplinglocationsinBentonReservoir(seeFigure5‐8).AnalyticaldataforsamplinglocationshavebeengroupedaccordingtotheIllinoisEPAmonitoringlocations.SamplecollectioninBentonReservoirhasoccurredatsomewhatirregularintervalsateachmonitoringlocation(Table5‐10).AninventoryofallavailabledataassociatedwiththeimpairmentsinBentonReservoirispresentedinTable5‐11.

Table 5‐10 Years Sampled by Station at Benton Reservoir


RNO‐1 1981, 1989, 1990, 1996, 1997, 2008

RNO‐2 1981, 1990, 1996, 2008

RNO‐3 1981, 1990, 1996, 2008


DRAFT 5‐9

Table 5‐11 Benton Reservoir Data Inventory for Impairments

Benton Reservoir Segment RNB; Sample Locations RNO‐1, RNO‐2, RNO‐3, RN‐B01‐D‐1, RN‐B01‐O‐1, RN‐B01‐O‐2, RN‐B01‐O‐3.

RNO‐1 (Stations RNO‐1,RN‐B01‐D‐1, RN‐B01‐O‐1) Period of Record Number of Samples




RNO‐2 (Stations RNO‐2 and RN‐B01‐O‐3)



Phosphorus in Bottom Deposits 1990 1

RNO‐3 (Stations RNO‐3 and RN‐B01‐O‐2)



Phosphorus in Bottom Deposits 2008 1

Table5‐12containsinformationondataavailabilityforotherparametersthatmaybeusefulindataneedsanalysisandfuturemodelingeffortsforphosphorusimpairmentassessmentatBentonReservoir.TheinventorypresentedinTable5‐10representsdatacollectedatalldepths.

Table 5‐12 Benton Reservoir Data Availability for Data Needs Analysis and Future Modeling Efforts

Benton Reservoir Segment RNB; Sample Locations RNO‐1, RNO‐2, RNO‐3, RN‐B01‐D‐1, RN‐B01‐O‐1, RN‐B01‐O‐2, RN‐B01‐O‐3.

RNO‐1 (RNO‐1,RN‐B01‐D‐1, RN‐B01‐O‐1) Period of Record Number of Samples

Chlorophyll a, corrected 2008 5




RNO‐2 (RNO‐2 and RN‐B01‐O‐3)





RNO‐3 (RNO‐3 and RN‐B01‐O‐2)





5.1.2.2.1 Total Phosphorus in Benton Reservoir

TheapplicablewaterqualitystandardfortotalphosphorusinBentonReservoiris0.05mg/Landcompliancewiththetotalphosphorusstandardisassessedusingsamplescollectedata1‐footdepthfromthelakesurface.Thenumberofsamples,acountofexceedances,andtheaveragetotalphosphorusconcentrationsata1‐footdepthforeachyearofavailabledataateachmonitoringsegmentinBentonReservoirarepresentedinTable5‐13.

Exceedancesofthewaterqualitystandardfortotalphosphorusoccurateachlocationineveryyearoftheavailabledata(Figure5‐19).AveragetotalphosphorusconcentrationsforeachyearateachstationinBentonReservoirarealsoconsistentlygreaterthanthewaterqualitystandard.


5‐10 DRAFT

Table 5‐13 Sample Counts, Exceedances of WQ Standard (0.05 mg/L), and Average Total Phosphorus Concentrations (mg/L) at One‐Foot Depth in Benton Reservoir

RNO‐1 RNO‐2 RNO‐3 Lake Average

Year


Average (µg/L)


Average (µg/L)


Average (µg/L)


Average (µg/L)

1981 4; 4 0.15 2; 2 0.10 2; 2 0.08 8; 8 0.12

1989 2; 2 0.47 2; 2 0.47

1990 10; 8 0.12 5; 4 0.13 5; 4 0.10 20; 16 0.12

1996 10; 10 0.17 5; 5 0.16 6; 6 0.17 21; 21 0.17

1997 10; 8 0.32 10; 8 0.32

2008 5; 5 0.12 5; 5 0.13 5; 5 0.11 15; 15 0.12

5.1.2.3 Ashley Reservoir

AshleyReservoirislistedforimpairmentoftheaestheticqualityusebytotalphosphorousandtheaquaticlifeusebothtotalphosphorusandlowDO.DataareavailablefromthreeseparatewaterqualitymonitoringstationswithinAshleyReservoir(seeFigure5‐6).SamplecollectioninAshleyReservoirhasoccurredoveranumberofyearsinthe1980sand1990s(Table5‐14).AninventoryofallavailabledataassociatedwiththeimpairmentsinAshleyReservoirispresentedinTable5‐15.

Table 5‐15 Ashley Reservoir Data Inventory for Impairments

Ashley Reservoir Segment RNZB; Sample Locations RN‐B01ZB‐1, RN‐B01ZB‐2, RN‐B01ZB‐3

RNZB‐1 (RN‐B01ZB‐1) Period of Record Number of Samples





RNZB‐2 (RN‐B01ZB‐2)









Table5‐15containsinformationondataavailabilityforotherparametersthatmaybeusefulindataneedsanalysisandfuturemodelingeffortsforphosphorusimpairmentassessmentatAshleyReservoir.TheinventorypresentedinTable5‐16representsdatacollectedatalldepths.

Table 5‐14 Years Sampled by Station at Ashley Reservoir


RNZB‐1 1981, 1985, 1988, 1989, 1990

RNZB‐2 1981, 1985, 1988, 1990

RNZB‐3 1981, 1985, 1988, 1990


DRAFT 5‐11

Table 5‐16 Ashley Reservoir Data Needs Analysis and Future Modeling Efforts

Ashley Reservoir Segment RNZB; Sample Locations RN‐B01ZB‐1, RN‐B01ZB‐2, RN‐B01ZB‐3

RNZB‐1 (RN‐B01ZB‐1) Period of Record Number of Samples

Ammonia, as Nitrogen 1981‐1990 33

Chlorophyll a, uncorrected 1981‐1990 14

COD 1981‐1990 13


Nitrate + Nitrite as N, Total 1981‐1990 14

Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl 1981‐1990 16





COD 1981‐1990 6








COD 1981‐1990 6





5.1.2.3.1 Total Phosphorus in Ashley Reservoir

TheapplicablewaterqualitystandardfortotalphosphorusinAshleyReservoiris0.05mg/L.Compliancewiththetotalphosphorusstandardisassessedusingsamplescollectedata1‐footdepthfromthelakesurface.Thenumberofsamples,acountofexceedances,andtheaveragetotalphosphorusconcentrationsata1‐footdepthforeachyearofavailabledataateachmonitoringsegmentinAshleyReservoirarepresentedinTable5‐17.

Basedonthefairlylimiteddataset,exceedancesofthewaterqualitystandardfortotalphosphorusappeartobeprevalentandoccurateachlocationineveryyearwithavailabledata(Figure5‐20).AveragetotalphosphorusconcentrationsforeachyearateachstationinAshleyReservoirarealsoconsistentlygreaterthanthewaterqualitystandard.

Table 5‐17 Sample Counts, Exceedances of WQ Standard (0.05 mg/L), and Average Total Phosphorus Concentrations (mg/L) at One‐Foot Depth in Ashley Reservoir

Year

RNZB‐1 RNZB‐2 RNZB‐3 Lake Average

Data Count; Number of Violations Average




1981 2; 2 0.07 2; 1 0.06 2; 1 0.06 6; 4 0.06

1988 1; 1 0.07 0; NA ‐ 0; NA ‐ 1; 1 0.07

1989 1; 1 0.11 0; NA ‐ 0; NA ‐ 1; 1 0.11

1990 5; 5 0.18 5; 5 0.21 5; 5 0.20 15; 15 0.20


5‐12 DRAFT

5.1.2.3.2 Dissolved Oxygen in Ashley Reservoir

ThewaterqualitystandardforDOinAshleyReservoirisaseasonallyvariablestandardbasedonaminimuminstantaneousDOvalueof5.0mg/LfromMarchthroughJulyand3.5mg/LfromAugustthroughFebruary.CompliancewiththeminimumDOstandardisassessedusingmeasurementsrecordedatdepthsabovethethermoclineofathermallystratifiedwaterbodyorthroughoutthewatercolumninanun‐stratifiedwaterbody.Thethermoclineisdefinedasthedepthwithinthewatercolumnatwhichwatertemperaturesdeclinesharplyandindicatestheboundarybetweenthewarmerupperlayerofthelake(epilimnion)andthecoolerlowerlayerofthelake(hypolimnion).Thedepthofthethermoclinecanvaryfromlocationtolocationandatdifferenttimesofyear;however,inthecaseoftheAshleyReservoirdataset,thethermoclineconsistentlybeginsatapproximately5‐footdepth.Thenumberofsamples,acountofexceedances,andtheaverageDOconcentrationsatalldepthsaboveeachsite'sthermoclineforeachyearofavailabledataateachmonitoringstationinAshleyReservoirarepresentedinTable5‐18.

ExceedancesofthewaterqualitystandardforDOoccurateachlocationinatleast1ofthe3yearsofavailabledataforAshleyReservoir(Figure5‐21).AverageDOconcentrationsforeachyearateachstationinAshleyReservoirarealsogreaterthanthewaterqualitystandard.

Table 5‐18 Average Dissolved Oxygen Concentrations above Lake Thermocline and Monitoring Events with Reported Exceedances of the Minimum DO Standard (5.0 mg/L from March‐July and 3.5 mg/L August‐February) in Ashley Reservoir

Year

RNZB‐1 RNZB‐2 RNZB‐3 Lake Average Monitoring Events;

Events with Violations

Average DO above

Thermocline (mg/L)

Monitoring Events;


Average DO above

Thermocline (mg/L)

Monitoring Events;


Average DO above

Thermocline (mg/L)

Monitoring Events;


Average DO above

Thermocline (mg/L)

1981 2; 1 6.0 2; 0 6.9 2; 0 6.9 6; 1 6.6

1989 1; 0 13.2 0; NA NA 0; NA NA 1; 0 13.2

1990 5; 3 4.8 5; 2 6.0 5; 2 6.0 15; 7 5.5

5.1.2.4 Lake Jaycee

Accordingtothe2012303(d)list,LakeJayceeisimpairedfortheaestheticqualityusewithtotalphosphorousasthecause.DataareavailablefromthreeseparatewaterqualitymonitoringstationswithinLakeJaycee(seeFigure5‐7).SamplecollectioninLakeJayceehasoccurredoveranumberofyearsinthe1980sand1990sandwasmostrecentlysampledin2011(Table5‐19).AninventoryofallavailabledataassociatedwiththeimpairmentsinLakeJayceeispresentedinTable5‐20.

Table 5‐19 Years Sampled by Station at Lake Jaycee


RNU‐1 1989, 1993, 1996, 2001, 2011

RNU‐2 2001, 2011

RNU‐3 1996, 2001, 2011


DRAFT 5‐13

Table 5‐20 Lake Jaycee Data Inventory for Impairments

Lake Jaycee Segment RNU; Sample Locations RNU‐1, RNU‐2, RNU‐3, RN‐B01‐U‐1 and RN‐B01‐U‐3.

RNU‐1 (RNU1 & RN‐B01‐U‐1) Period of Record Number of Samples

Phosphorus in bottom deposits 1989‐2011 6




RNU‐2 (RNU‐2)




RNU‐3 (RNU‐3 & RN‐B01‐U‐3)

Phosphorus in bottom deposits 1996‐2011 4




Table5‐21containsinformationondataavailabilityforotherparametersthatmaybeusefulindataneedsanalysisandfuturemodelingeffortsforphosphorusimpairmentassessmentatLakeJaycee.TheinventorypresentedinTable5‐21representsdatacollectedatalldepths.

Table 5‐21 Lake Jaycee Data Availability for Data Needs Analysis and Future Modeling Efforts

Lake Jaycee Segment RNU; Sample Locations RNU‐1, RNU‐2, RNU‐3, RN‐B01‐U‐1 and RN‐B01‐U‐3.

RNU‐1 (RNU1 & RN‐B01‐U‐1) Period of Record Number of Samples





RNU‐2 (RNU‐2)





RNU‐3 (RNU‐3 & RN‐B01‐U‐3)





5.1.2.4.1 Total Phosphorus in Lake Jaycee

TheapplicablewaterqualitystandardfortotalphosphorusinLakeJayceeis0.05mg/L.Compliancewiththetotalphosphorusstandardisassessedusingsamplescollectedata1‐footdepthfromthelakesurface.Thenumberofsamples,acountofexceedances,andtheaveragetotalphosphorusconcentrationsata1‐footdepthforeachyearofavailabledataateachmonitoringsegmentinLakeJayceearepresentedinTable5‐22.

Basedonthelimiteddataset,exceedancesofthewaterqualitystandardfortotalphosphorushaveoccurredattwoofthethreesamplinglocationsintheavailabledatafrom1996andagainfrom2001,althoughnoexceedanceswerereportedduringanyoftheother3yearsofdata(Figure5‐22).


5‐14 DRAFT

AveragetotalphosphorusconcentrationsforeachyearinLakeJayceearebelowthewaterqualitystandard.Recentlycollecteddata(2011)suggeststhatthelakeisnolongerimpairedandmaybeconsideredfordelisting.

Table 5‐22 Sample Counts, Exceedances of WQ Standard (0.05 mg/L), and Average Total Phosphorus Concentrations (mg/L) at One‐Foot Depth in Lake Jaycee

Year

RNU‐1 RNU‐2 RNU‐3 Lake Average





1989 1; 0 0.028 NA NA NA NA 1; 0 0.028

1993 1; 0 0.007 NA NA NA NA 1; 0 0.007

1996 5; 1 0.041 NA NA 5; 2 0.051 10; 3 0.046

2001 4; 1 0.081 5; 1 0.033 5; 0 0.035 14; 2 0.047

2011 5; 0 0.027 5; 0 0.030 5; 0 0.027 15; 0 0.028

5.2 Reservoir Characteristics 5.2.1 Rend Lake RendLakeisalargereservoirlocatedinFranklinandJeffersonCounties.NearbytownsandcitiesincludeBenton,Sesser,Waltonville,Nason,MountVernon,Bonnie,Ina,Whittington,amongothers.RendLakeisthesecondlargestman‐madelakeinIllinoisandthelargestbodyofwaterinthewatershedwithasurfaceareaof18,900acresandmorethan162milesofshoreline.ConstructionofRendLakebeganin1965asajointprojectbetweentheIllinoisDepartmentofConservation,theRendLakeConservancyDistrict,andtheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers.Constructionofthelakeoccurredovera5yearperiodandthelakewasfilledbytheearly1970s.

TheprimaryfunctionofRendLakeistoprovideaconsistentanddependablewatersupplyforthearea.DrinkingwaterfromthelakeisdistributedfromInter‐CityWaterthroughalargesystemthatserves7countiesofsouthernIllinois.Thirty‐fivetownsandwaterdistrictspurchasewholesalewaterfordistributiontotheircustomerswhileanother1200retailcustomersalsoreceivetheirwaterfromInter‐CityWater(rendlake.org).

RendLakealsoprovidesawidevarietyofrecreationalopportunitiesincluding:fishing,watersports,swimming,andhunting.Thelakehasamaximumdepthof35feetandanaveragedepthof10feet.Depthvalueswereavailablewithassociatedwaterqualitysamplingandaveragedepthsbyyear(Table5‐23).

Table 5‐23 Average Depths (feet) for Rend Lake Segment RNB

Year RNB‐1 RNB‐2 RNB‐3 RNB‐4 RNB‐5

2000 29 17.5 10.5 8.5 25

2005 29 18 9.5 11.5 25

Average 29 17.75 10 10 25


DRAFT 5‐15

5.2.2 Benton Reservoir BentonReservoir(LakeBenton)isarelativelysmallreservoirlocatedinthesoutheasternportionoftheRendLakewatershedinFranklinCounty.LakeBentonwasoriginallyconstructedin1939asapublicwatersupplysource.ThelakeceasedprovidingthisfunctionwiththedevelopmentofRendLakeandisnowusedforrecreationalpurposes.Thelakeisinapartiallydevelopedsubbasinthatdrainsapproximately1,600acreswithresidentialdevelopmentalongthelakeshore(seeFigure5‐8)andlargeportionsofthewatersheddedicatedtoagriculturaluse.Thereservoirisdividedintothreeportions.ThemiddlesectionofthereservoirisassessedbyIllinoisEPAandhasasurfaceareaofapproximately41acresandamaximumdepthofapproximately15feet.DepthvalueswereavailablewithassociatedwaterqualitysamplingandaveragedepthsbyyeararepresentedinTable5‐24.

Table 5‐24 Average Depths (feet) for Benton Reservoir (RNO)

Year RNO‐1 RNO‐2 RNO‐3

1981 15.0 13.3 9.0

1989 16.0

1990 15.5 9.5

1996 15.0 11.0

2008 15.0 10.4 10.8

Average 15.0 13.3 9.0

5.2.3 Ashley Reservoir AshleyReservoir(alsoreferredtoasAshleyLake)islocatedinWashingtonCountyinthenorthwesternportionoftheRendLakewatershed.AshleyReservoirwasdevelopedintheearly1940stoserveasthepublicwatersupplyforthecityofAshley.Thereservoirservedasthepublicwatersupplyuntil1998whenthecitybeganpurchasingwaterfromtheWashingtonCountyWaterCompany.Thereservoirisnowprivatelyownedandislocatedinarelativelysmallsub‐basinthatdrainsapproximately760acresoflandprimarilydevotedtoagriculturalactivities(seeFigure5‐6).Thelakehasasurfaceareaofapproximately26acresandamaximumdepthof13.5feet.Depthvalueswereavailablewithassociatedwaterqualitysamplingandaveragedepthsbyyeararepresentedbelow(Table5‐25).

Table 5‐25 Average Depths (feet) for Ashley Reservoir (RNZB)

Year RNZB‐1 RNZB‐2 RNZB‐3

1981 12.4 4.4 5.9

1985 10.5 4.5 4.5

1988 9.5 5.5 5.0

1990 12.1 6.9 5.6

Average 12.0 5.1 5.7

5.2.4 Lake Jaycee LakeJayceeislocatedinthenortheasternportionoftheRendLakewatershedinJeffersonCounty.LakeJayceewasoriginallyconstructedin1905foruseasadrinkingwatersourceforthetownofMountVernon,aswellasforrecreationalpurposes.ThecityofMountVernonstoppedutilizingthelakeaswatersupplyreservoirin1998.Thedamstructurewasmodifiedin1997andthelakecurrentlyhasasurfaceareaofapproximately115acresandamaximumdepthofapproximately21feet.Depthvalueswereavailablewithassociatedwaterqualitysamplingandaveragedepthsbyyeararepresentedbelow(Table5‐26).


5‐16 DRAFT

Table 5‐26 Average Depths (feet) for Lake Jaycee (RNU)

Year RNU‐1 RNU‐2 RNU‐3

1989 20.5

1993 21.0

1996 20.8 5.8

2001 21.0 14.2 6.1

2011 21.0 14.3 6.4

Average 20.9 14.3 6.1

5.3 Point Sources Thereare13activepointsourceslocatedwithintheRendLakewatershedthatdischargetoorupstreamofimpairedsegments.Table5‐27containspermitinformationforthesepointsourceswhileFigure5‐23showsthelocationsofoutfallsforeachfacility.PermitlimitsanddischargemonitoringreportswillbeanalyzedandfurtherdetailedduringStage3TMDLdevelopment.

Table 5‐27 Permitted Facilities Discharging to or Upstream of Impaired Segments in the Rend Lake Watershed

Facility ID Facility Name Impaired Segment

IL0038717 RICHVIEW STP Big Muddy

IL0034240 GRAND PRAIRIE CCSD #6 Big Muddy

IL0049123 WALTONVILLE STP Big Muddy

IL0056499 TA OPERATING LLC Big Muddy

ILG580161 WOODLAWN STP Big Muddy

IL0051063 MT VERNON QUALITY TIMES INC STP Big Muddy

IL0027341 CITY OF MT. VERNON STP Casey Fork

IL0035017 CONTINENTAL TIRE THE AMERICAS LLC Casey Fork

IL0052639 DODDS COMMUNITY CONSOLIDATED DISTRICT #7 Casey Fork

ILG551042 ROLLING MEADOWS MOBILE HM COMM Casey Fork

ILG551074 IDOT GOSHEN RD REST AREA‐E STP Casey Fork

ILG551092 FIELD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL‐DIST 3 Casey Fork

ILG580062 DIX‐KELL WATER&SEWER COMM STP Casey Fork

IL0004677 Springfield Coal Company, LLC Orient Mine No. 3 Rend Lake

IL0004707 Springfield Coal Company, LLC Orient Mine No. 6 Rend Lake

ILG580032 INA STP Gun Creek

IL0036021 CONSOLIDATION COAL‐REND LAKE Rend Lake

IL0038369 Whittington Woods Campground at Benton Lake Benton

IL0044610 REND LAKE CONSERVANCY WTP Rend Lake

IL0046116 COY & WILMAS ONE STOP Rend Lake

IL0072940 ILLINOIS COAL RECOVERY LLC Rend Lake

ILG580119 BONNIE STP Rend Lake

TheRendLakeWatersheddoesnothaveanycurrentMS4permits,andwillnothaveanyaddedasaresultofthe2010census.


DRAFT 5‐17

5.4 Nonpoint Sources TherearemanypotentialnonpointsourcesofpollutantloadingtotheimpairedsegmentsintheRendLakewatershed.Thissectionwilldiscusssite‐specificcroppingpractices,animaloperations,andareasepticsystems.DatawerecollectedthroughcommunicationwiththelocalNRCS,SoilandWaterConservationDistrict,publichealthdepartments,andcountytaxdepartmentofficials.

5.4.1 Crop Information Approximately59percentofthelandwithintheRendLakewatershedisdevotedtoagriculture.Oftheagriculturallands,cornandsoybeanfarmingaccountforapproximately11percentand23percentofthewatershed,respectively.Tillagepracticescanbecategorizedasconventionaltill,reducedtill,mulchtill,andnotill.Thepercentageofeachtillagepracticeforcorn,soybeans,andsmallgrainsbycountyaregeneratedbytheIllinoisDepartmentofAgriculturefromCountyTransectSurveys.Themostrecentsurveywasconductedin2011.DataspecifictotheRendLakewatershedwerenotavailable;however,Franklin,Jefferson,Marion,andWashingtonCountypracticeswereavailableandareshowninthefollowingtables.

Table 5‐28 Tillage Practices in Franklin County(2011)

Tillage System Corn Soybean Small Grain

Conventional 79% 25% 17%

Reduced ‐ Till 1% 2% 54%

Mulch ‐ Till 4% 9% 8%

No ‐ Till 17% 64% 21%

Table 5‐29 Tillage Practices in Jefferson County(2011)




Mulch ‐ Till 15% 15% 88%

No ‐ Till 20% 47% 7%

Table 5‐30 Tillage Practices in Marion County (2011)




Mulch ‐ Till 0% 4% 1%

No ‐ Till 19% 62% 19%

Table 5‐31 Tillage Practices in Washington County(2011)




Mulch ‐ Till 3% 21% 11%

No ‐ Till 25% 52% 7%


5‐18 DRAFT

AccordingtolocalNRCSofficials,thelocalNRCSofficesdonotkeeprecordsonwhichfarmsusetiledrainage.Moredetailedsite‐specificdatawillbeincorporatedifitbecomesavailable.Withoutmorepreciselocalinformation,soilsdatamaybereviewedforinformationonhydrologicsoilgroupinordertoprovideabasisforthetiledrainestimates.

5.4.2 Animal Operations AnimalpopulationsareavailablefromtheNationalAgriculturalStatisticsService.DataspecifictotheRendLakewatershedwerenotavailable;however,theFranklin,Jefferson,Marion,andWashingtoncountyanimalpopulationswerereviewedandarepresentedinthefollowingtables.Datafrom2007hasbeenpublishedontheUSDAwebsite.

Table 5‐32 Franklin County Animal Population (2007 Census of Agriculture)

2002 2007 Percent Change

Cattle and Calves 7,746 6,668 ‐14%

Beef 3,135 3,464 10%

Dairy 599 366 ‐39%

Hogs and Pigs 30,011 25,120 ‐16%

Poultry 422 1,149 172%

Sheep and Lambs 67 NA NA

Horses and Ponies 634 813 28%

Table 5‐33 Jefferson County Animal Population (2007 Census of Agriculture)



Beef 7,660 6,705 ‐12%

Dairy 628 340 ‐46%

Hogs and Pigs 9,972 13,602 36%

Poultry 424 757 79%

Sheep and Lambs 781 305 ‐61%

Horses and Ponies 1,119 1,579 41%

Table 5‐34 Marion County Animal Population (2007 Census of Agriculture)



Beef 5,238 NA NA

Dairy 226 NA NA

Hogs and Pigs 8,601 NA NA

Poultry NA NA NA

Sheep and Lambs 331 331 0%


Table 5‐35 Washington County Animal Population (2007 Census of Agriculture)



Beef 4,482 4,542 1%

Dairy 7,834 6,648 ‐15%

Hogs and Pigs 62,113 53,716 ‐14%

Poultry 396 NA NA

Sheep and Lambs 359 386 8%



DRAFT 5‐19

CommunicationswithlocalNRCSofficialshaveprovidedmorewatershed‐specificdetails.InJeffersonCounty,whichcomprisesthemajorityofthelandwithinthewatershed,NRCSofficialsstatedthatthelivestockinthiscountyisevenlydistributedwithnohighconcentrationsofaparticularlivestockinanyarea.Officialsstatedthatthereisnotalotofpoultrywithinthewatershed.Anyadditionalsite‐specificinformationthatbecomesavailablewillbeincorporatesintothefinalTMDL.

5.4.3 Septic Systems ManyhouseholdsinruralareasofIllinoisthatarenotconnectedtomunicipalsewersmakeuseofonsitesewagedisposalsystems,orsepticsystems.Therearemanytypesofsepticsystems,butthemostcommonsepticsystemiscomposedofaseptictankdrainingtoasepticfield,wherenutrientremovaloccurs.However,thedegreeofnutrientremovalislimitedbysoilsandsystemupkeepandmaintenance.

AcrosstheU.S.,septicsystemshavebeenfoundtobeasignificantsourceofphosphorouspollution.Failingorleakingsepticsystemscontributetofecalcoliformpollution,althoughanimalwaste,urbanrunoff,andpermittedpointsourcescanalsocontribute.Theinformationontheextentofseweredandnon‐seweredmunicipalitieswasobtainedfromtheJeffersonCountyHealthDepartment.HealthdepartmentofficialsstatedthatBonnie,Ina,Waltonville,Dix,Woodlawn,andMountVernonareservedbysewersystems.Anyhomesbeyondthelimitsofthesecitiesandtownsareservedbysepticsystems.HealthdepartmentofficialsalsostatedthatthecommunitiesofOpdyke,Nason,SpringGarden,Bakerville,andSchellerwerenotservedbysewersystemsorprivatesystemstotreattheirwaste.HealthdepartmentofficialsalsoemphasizedthecommunitiesofOpdykeandNasonwereofparticularconcern.

ManyofthelargerincorporatedtownsandvillagesinFranklinCountyoffermunicipalsewerservicestoresidents.Ofthese,onlythetownofSesseriswithintheRendLakewatershed.MuchoftherestoftheRendLakewatershedinFranklinCountyutilizesprivatesewagetreatmentsuchassepticsystems.

MarionCountyHealthDepartmentofficialsstatedthatthecityofKellwasonapublicsewersystem,butthatoutsideofthecitytherearehomesthatstillrelyonprivatesewagetreatment.ThetownofWalnutHillisentirelyonprivatesystems.

WashingtonCountyHealthDepartmentofficialsstatedthatthecommunitiesofAshleyandRichviewareonpublicsewersystems.However,anyhomesoutsideofthesecommunitieslikelyhaveprivatesewagetreatment.

5.5 Watershed Studies and Other Watershed Information TheextentofpreviousplanningeffortswithintheRendLakewatershediscurrentlyunknown.Itisassumedthatthisinformationwillbecomeavailablethroughpublicmeetingswithinthewatershedcommunity.Intheeventthatotherwatershed‐specificinformationbecomesavailable,itwillbereviewedandallapplicabledatawillbeincorporatedduringStages2and3ofTMDLdevelopment.


5‐20 DRAFT


FIGURE 5-1

Rend Lake WatershedWater Quality Stations

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.

!.!.!.!.

!.!.!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.!.

!.

!.

!.!.!.

N-05

N-08

NI-01

NJ-14NJ-16

NJ-17 NJ-18NJ-22

NJ-26

NJ-28

NJ-29NJ-30

NJ-91

NJ-93NJ-07

NJ-MV-E1

NL-01

RN-B01-B1

RN-B01-B3

RN-B01-B4

RNB-2

RNB-3RNB-4

RNU-1RNU-2

RNU-3

48163

48486

173502

173503173504

5595700

5595830

RN-B01-B-2

RN-B01-U-1

RN-B01-U-3

RN-B01ZB-1RN-B01ZB-2RN-B01ZB-3


Snow CreekNL-01

Gun CreekNI-01

Casey ForkNJ-07

Big Muddy RiverN-08






W A Y N EC O U N T Y

SesserEwing

Benton

Dahlgren

Dix

Mount Vernon BlufordWoodlawn

Belle River

Waltonville

Bonnie

Nason

Ina

Wamac

Walnut Hill

Hoyleton

Irvington

Richview

Ashley

Radom

Du Bois

£¤51

§̈¦57

§̈¦64

BigMu

ddyR

iver

Snow

Creek

CaseyFork

Rayse Creek

Novak Creek

Lake JayceeIL_RNU

Rend LakeIL_RNB

Lake BentonIL_RNO

Legend!. Water Quality Station

Highway

River and Stream

303(d) Listed Segment


Lake and Reservoir

Rend Lake Watershed

Municipality

County Boundary0 2.5 5 7.5

Miles´

!.

!.

!. !.

!.

!.!.

!.

!.!.

!.

RNB-1RNB-5 RNO-1

RNO-2RNO-3

173501

5595950 RN-B01-B-6

RN-B01-O-1

RN-B01-O-2RN-B01-O-3

Rend LakeIL_RNB Lake Benton

IL_RNO

§̈¦57

DRAFTInset Map

Inset Map

Section 5 • Rend Lake Watershed Characterization

5-22 DRAFT

This page intentionally left blank.

FIGURE 5-2

Rend Lake - Big Muddy River Subbasin

!(!(

!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.

!.!.

!.!.!.

SPRINGFIELD COAL COMPANY, LLCORIENT MINE NO. 3 -- IL0004677


GRAND PRAIRIE CCSD#6 -- IL0034240

RICHVIEW STP-- IL0038717

TA OPERATING LLC-- IL0056499

WOODLAWN STP-- ILG580161

MT VERNON QUALITY TIMES INC STP -- ILG580161

WALTONVILLE STP-- IL0049123

N-05

N-08

NL-01

484865595700

RN-B01ZB-1RN-B01ZB-2

RN-B01ZB-3

Lake JayceeIL_RNU

Rend LakeIL_RNB


Snow CreekNL-01

Big Muddy RiverN-08

Gun CreekNI-01

Casey ForkNJ-07



P E R R Y C O U N T Y


£¤51§̈¦57

§̈¦64

Big Muddy River

Snow Cree

kRayse Creek

Novak Creek

Legend!( NPDES Location

!. Water Quality Station



River and Stream

Big Muddy River Subbasin

Rend Lake Watershed

Highway

Land CoverCorn

Soybeans

Winter Wheat

Other Small Grains and Hay

Winter Wheat/Soybeans

Other Agriculture

Rural Grassland

Upland

Partial Canopy/Savanna Upland

Coniferous Forest

High Density Urban

Low / Medium Density Urban

Low Density Urban

Urban Open Space/Urban Grassland

Shallow Marsh/Wet Meadow

Deep Marsh

Seasonally/ Temporarily Flooded

Floodplain Forest

Swamp

Shallow Water Wetland

Water

Barren & Exposed Land0 1.75 3.5 5.25

Miles

´

LakeMichigan

Springfield

St.Louis Mount

Vernon

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILL INOIS

INDIANA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT


5-24 DRAFT


FIGURE 5-3

Rend Lake - Casey Fork Subbasin

!.

!.

!.!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.!.

!.!.

!.

!.

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

CITY OF MT. VERNONSTP -- IL0027341

DODDS COMMUNITY CONSOLIDATEDDISTRCIT #7 -- IL0052639

ROLLING MEADOWS MOBILEHM COMM -- ILG551042

IDOT GOSHEN RD RESTAREA-E STP -- ILG551074

DIX-KELL WATER &SEWER COMM STP -- ILG580062

FIELD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - DIST 3 -- ILG551092

CONTINENTAL TIRE THE AMERICAS LLC -- IL0035017

NJ-14

NJ-16NJ-17

NJ-18NJ-22NJ-26

NJ-28

NJ-29

NJ-30

NJ-91

NJ-93

NJ-07

NJ-MV-E1

RNU-1RNU-2RNU-3

481635595830

RN-B01-U-1

RN-B01-U-3

Gun CreekNI-01

Snow CreekNL-01

Casey ForkNJ-07

Big Muddy RiverN-08

Rend LakeIL_RNB


Lake JayceeIL_RNU

£¤51

§̈¦57

§̈¦64

Sev e

nmile

Cree

kCase

y Fork






W AY N EC O U N T Y





River and Stream

Casey Fork Subbasin

Rend Lake Watershed

Highway

Land CoverCorn

Soybeans

Winter Wheat

Other Small Grains and Hay

Winter Wheat/Soybeans

Other Agriculture

Rural Grassland

Upland

Partial Canopy/Savanna Upland

Coniferous Forest

High Density Urban

Low / Medium Density Urban

Low Density Urban

Urban Open Space/Urban Grassland

Shallow Marsh/Wet Meadow

Deep Marsh

Seasonally/ Temporarily Flooded

Floodplain Forest

Swamp

Shallow Water Wetland

Water

Barren & Exposed Land

0 1.6 3.2 4.8

Miles

´

LakeMichigan

Springfield

St.Louis Mount

Vernon

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILL INOIS

INDIANA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT


5-26 DRAFT


FIGURE 5-4

Rend Lake - Gun Creek Subbasin

!.

!.

!(NI-01

RN-B01-B4

Sugar Camp CreekIL_NHH

Gun CreekNI-01

Rend LakeIL_RNB

GunC

reek



INA STP --ILG580032 Legend

!( NPDES Location!. Water Quality Station

303(d) Listed Segment303(d) Listed ReservoirRiver and StreamGun Creek SubbasinRend Lake WatershedHighway

Land CoverCornSoybeansWinter WheatOther Small Grains and HayWinter Wheat/SoybeansOther AgricultureRural Grassland

UplandPartial Canopy/Savanna UplandConiferous ForestHigh Density UrbanLow / Medium Density UrbanLow Density UrbanUrban Open Space/Urban GrasslandShallow Marsh/Wet MeadowDeep MarshSeasonally/ Temporarily FloodedFloodplain ForestSwampShallow Water WetlandWaterBarren & Exposed Land

0 0.5 1 1.5

Miles´

LakeMichigan

Springfield

St.Louis Mount

Vernon

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILL INOISINDIANA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT


5-28 DRAFT


FIGURE 5-5

Rend Lake - Snow Creek Subbasin

!(

!.

Big Muddy RiverN-08

Snow CreekNL-01

§̈¦57

Snow

Creek



NL-01


303(d) Listed Segment303(d) Listed ReservoirRiver and StreamSnow Creek SubbasinRend Lake WatershedHighway

Land CoverCornSoybeansWinter WheatOther Small Grains and HayWinter Wheat/SoybeansOther AgricultureRural Grassland

UplandPartial Canopy/Savanna UplandConiferous ForestHigh Density UrbanLow / Medium Density UrbanLow Density UrbanUrban Open Space/Urban GrasslandShallow Marsh/Wet MeadowDeep MarshSeasonally/ Temporarily FloodedFloodplain ForestSwampShallow Water WetlandWaterBarren & Exposed Land

0 0.6 1.2 1.8

Miles´

Derby Outfall

LakeMichigan

Springfield

St.Louis Mount

Vernon

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILL INOISINDIANA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT


5-30 DRAFT


FIGURE 5-6

Rend Lake - Ashley Reservoir Subbasin

!.

!.

!.

RN-B01ZB-1

RN-B01ZB-2

RN-B01ZB-3


£¤51


LakeMichigan

Springfield

St.Louis Mount

Vernon

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILL INOIS

INDIANA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT




River and Stream

Ashley Reservoir Subbasin

Rend Lake Watershed

Highway

0 0.15 0.3 0.45

Miles

´Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community.


5-32 DRAFT


FIGURE 5-7

Rend Lake - Lake Jaycee Subbasin

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!(

RNU-1

RNU-2

RNU-3

RN-B01-U-1

RN-B01-U-3

Casey

Fork

Lake JayceeIL_RNU

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN,IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

LakeMichigan

Springfield

St.Louis Mount

Vernon

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILL INOIS

INDIANA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community.




River and Stream

Lake Jaycee Subbasin

Rend Lake Watershed

Highway

0 0.2 0.4 0.6

Miles

´


5-34 DRAFT


FIGURE 5-8

Rend Lake - Lake Benton Subbasin

!. !.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!(

RNO-1 RNO-2

RNO-3

RN-B01-O-1

RN-B01-O-2

RN-B01-O-3

§̈¦57

WHITTINGTON WOODS CAMPGROUND AT BENTON -- IL0038369

LakeMichigan

Springfield

St.Louis Mount

Vernon

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILL INOIS

INDIANA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community.





River and Stream

Lake Benton Subbasin

Rend Lake Watershed

Highway

´0 0.15 0.3 0.45

Miles


5-36 DRAFT


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)

N‐08 Result

Standard (March‐July)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)

N‐08 Result

Standard (August‐February)

Figure 5‐9 Dissolved Oxygen

Big Muddy Segment N‐08


5-38 DRAFT


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

5/5/1965

5/5/1967

5/5/1969

5/5/1971

5/5/1973

5/5/1975

5/5/1977

5/5/1979

5/5/1981

5/5/1983

5/5/1985

5/5/1987

5/5/1989

5/5/1991

5/5/1993

5/5/1995

5/5/1997

5/5/1999

5/5/2001

5/5/2003

5/5/2005

5/5/2007

5/5/2009

5/5/2011


NJ‐07 Result

WQ Standard (March‐July)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

1/16/1962

1/16/1964

1/16/1966

1/16/1968

1/16/1970

1/16/1972

1/16/1974

1/16/1976

1/16/1978

1/16/1980

1/16/1982

1/16/1984

1/16/1986

1/16/1988

1/16/1990

1/16/1992

1/16/1994

1/16/1996

1/16/1998

1/16/2000

1/16/2002

1/16/2004

1/16/2006

1/16/2008

1/16/2010


NJ‐07 Result

WQ Standard (August‐February)

Figure 5‐10 Dissolved Oxygen

Casey Fork Segment NJ‐07


5-40 DRAFT


Figure 5‐11

Dissolved Oxygen

Gun Creek Segment NI‐01 and Snow Creek Segment NL‐01

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Dis

solv

ed O

xyge

n (

mg/

L)

Collection Date

Gun Creek (NI-01)Snow Creek (NL-01)

5.0 mg/L instantaneousminimun (March‐July)

3.5 mg/L instantaneousminimun (August‐February)


5-42 DRAFT


Figure 5‐12

Fecal Coliform

Casey Fork Segment NJ‐07

1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

5/1/

1990

11/1

/199

0

5/1/

1991

11/1

/199

1

5/1/

1992

11/1

/199

2

5/1/

1993

11/1

/199

3

5/1/

1994

11/1

/199

4

5/1/

1995

11/1

/199

5

5/1/

1996

11/1

/199

6

5/1/

1997

11/1

/199

7

5/1/

1998

11/1

/199

8

5/1/

1999

11/1

/199

9

5/1/

2000

11/1

/200

0

5/1/

2001

11/1

/200

1

5/1/

2002

11/1

/200

2

5/1/

2003

11/1

/200

3

5/1/

2004

11/1

/200

4

5/1/

2005

11/1

/200

5

5/1/

2006

11/1

/200

6

5/1/

2007

11/1

/200

7

5/1/

2008

11/1

/200

8

5/1/

2009

11/1

/200

9

5/1/

2010

11/1

/201

0

Feca

l Col

ifor

m (

CFU

/100

ml)

Collection Date

NJ-07

Standard (200 cfu/100ml)

Standard (400 cfu/100ml)


5-44 DRAFT


Figure 5‐моpH Values


5

5.5

6

6.5

7

7.5

8

8.5

9

9.51/

9/19

90

7/9/

1990

1/9/

1991

7/9/

1991

1/9/

1992

7/9/

1992

1/9/

1993

7/9/

1993

1/9/

1994

7/9/

1994

1/9/

1995

7/9/

1995

1/9/

1996

7/9/

1996

1/9/

1997

7/9/

1997

1/9/

1998

7/9/

1998

1/9/

1999

7/9/

1999

1/9/

2000

7/9/

2000

1/9/

2001

7/9/

2001

1/9/

2002

7/9/

2002

1/9/

2003

7/9/

2003

1/9/

2004

7/9/

2004

1/9/

2005

7/9/

2005

1/9/

2006

7/9/

2006

1/9/

2007

7/9/

2007

1/9/

2008

7/9/

2008

1/9/

2009

7/9/

2009

1/9/

2010

7/9/

2010

1/9/

2011

7/9/

2011

pH (

Stan

dard

Uni

ts)

Collection Date

N-08

Standard Minimum Value (6.5)

Standard Maximum Value (9.0)


5-46 DRAFT


Figure 5‐14Manganese, Dissolved


0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000Man

ganese, D

issolved (µg/L)

Collection Date

Manganese, Dissolved

Acute Standard

Chronic Standard


5-48 DRAFT


Figure 5‐15Dissolved Manganese

Gun Creek Segment NI‐01

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Con

cent

rati

on (

µg/

L)

Collection Date

Chronic Standard (sample hardness)

Acute Standard (sample hardness)

Gun Creek NI-01


5-50 DRAFT


Figure 5‐16

Total Iron

Gun Creek Segment NI‐01

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

7/25/1995 2/22/1996 5/13/2008 8/18/2008 9/8/2008

Total Iron (µg/L)

Collection Date

WQ Standard1,000 µg/L


5-52 DRAFT


Figure 5‐17Total Phosphorus at 1‐foot Depth

Rend Lake (RNB)

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35To

tal Phosphorus (m

g/L)

Collection Date

RNB‐1

RNB‐2

RNB‐3

RNB‐4

RNB‐5

Standard 0.05 mg/L


5-54 DRAFT


Figure 5‐18Total Manganese

Rend Lake (RNB)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

May‐1979 Sep‐1982 Dec‐1985 Apr‐1989 Jul‐1992 Oct‐1995 Feb‐1999 May‐2002 Sep‐2005 Dec‐2008

Total M

anganese (µg/L)

Collection Date

RNB‐1

RNB‐5

Manganese Standard (1,000 µg/L)


5-56 DRAFT


Figure 5‐19

Total Phosphorus at 1‐foot Depth

Benton Reservoir (RNO)

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3To

tal Phosphorus at 1 ft depth (mg/L)

Collection Date

RNO‐1

RNO‐2

RNO‐3

Standard‐0.05 mg/L


5-58 DRAFT



Ashley Reservoir (RNZB)

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

6/26/1981 8/28/1981 6/16/1988 7/6/1989 4/24/1990 6/12/1990 7/11/1990 8/15/1990 10/10/1990

Total Phosphorus at 1 ft depth (mg/L)

Collection Date

RNZB‐1

RNZB‐2

RNZB‐3

Standard‐0.05 mg/L


5-60 DRAFT


Table 5‐21Dissolved Oxygen


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

6/26/1981 8/28/1981 7/6/1989 4/24/1990 6/12/1990 7/11/1990 8/15/1990 10/10/1990

Minim

um Dissolved Oxygen* (mg/L)

Collection Date

RNZB‐1

RNZB‐2

RNZB‐3

Seasonal MinimumDO Standard5.0 mg/L (March ‐ July)

Seasonal MinimumDO Standard3.5 mg/L (Aug. ‐ Feb)

* Minimum reported DO concentration per event in portion of the lake above the thermocline (depth typically <5 feet).


5-62 DRAFT



Jaycees Reservoir (RNU)

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3To

tal Phosphorus at 1‐ft Depth (mg/L)

Collection Date

RNU‐1

RNU‐2

RNU‐3

WQ Standard0.05 mg/L


5-64 DRAFT


FIGURE 5-23

Rend LakeNPDES Locations

!(!(

!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(


Snow CreekNL-01

Gun CreekNI-01

Casey ForkNJ-07

Big Muddy RiverN-08

SPRINGFIELD COAL COMPANY, LLC

ORIENT MINE NO. 3 -- IL0004677


CITY OF MT. VERNONSTP -- IL0027341

GRAND PRAIRIE CCSD#6 -- IL0034240

CONTINENTAL TIRE THE AMERICAS LLC

-- IL0035017

CONSOLIDATION COAL-REND LAKE -- IL0036021

WHITTINGTON WOODSCAMPGROUND AT

BENTON -- IL0038369

RICHVIEW STP-- IL0038717

REND LAKE CONSERVANCYWTP -- IL0044610

COY & WILMAS ONESTOP -- IL0046116

WALTONVILLESTP -- IL0049123

MT VERNON QUALITY TIMES

INC STP -- IL0051063

DODDS COMMUNITYCONSOLIDATED

DISTRICT #7 -- IL0052639

TA OPERATINGLLC -- IL0056499

ILLINOIS COAL RECOVERYLLC -- IL0072940

ROLLING MEADOWSMOBILE HM COMM

-- ILG551042

IDOT GOSHEN RD RESTAREA-E STP -- ILG551074

FIELD ELEMENTARYSCHOOL-DIST 3 -- ILG551092

INA STP --ILG580032

DIX-KELL WATER&SEWERCOMM STP -- ILG580062

BONNIE STP-- ILG580119

WOODLAWN STP-- ILG580161








W AY N EC O U N T Y

Sesser

Benton

Dix

Mount Vernon

Woodlawn

Waltonville Bonnie

Nason

Ina

Richview

£¤51

§̈¦57 §̈¦64

§̈¦64

BigMuddyRiver

Snow

Creek

Case

yFork

Rayse Creek

Atchison Creek

Novak Creek


Lake JayceeIL_RNU

Rend LakeIL_RNB



303(d) Listed Segment303(d) Listed ReservoirRiver and StreamRend Lake WatershedHighwayCounty Boundary

0 2.5 5 7.5

Miles

´

LakeMichigan

Springfield

St.Louis Mount

Vernon

Chicago

WISCONSIN

MISSOURI

IOWA

ILL INOISINDIANA

KENTUCKY

DRAFT


5-66 DRAFT


DRAFT 6‐1

Section 6

Approach to Developing TMDL and Identification

of Data Needs IllinoisEPAiscurrentlydevelopingTMDLsforpollutantsthathavenumericwaterqualitystandards.OfthepollutantscausingimpairmenttostreamsegmentsintheRendLakewatershed,iron,manganese,fecalcoliform,DO,andpHarealloftheparameterswithnumericwaterqualitystandards.Fortheimpairedreservoirsinthewatershed,totalphosphorus,manganese,andDOaretheparameterswithnumericwaterqualitystandards.RefertoTable1‐1forafulllistofpotentialcausesofimpairment.IllinoisEPAbelievesthataddressingtheparameterswithnumericstandardsshouldleadtoanoverallimprovementinwaterqualityduetotheinterrelatednatureoftheotherlistedpollutants.Additionalanalysesmaybecompletedfortotalphosphorusand/orTSSinimpairedstreamsegments.ThissectionwillbeupdatediftargetcriteriaareselectedandappliedforthedevelopmentofLRSs.RecommendedtechnicalapproachesfordevelopingTMDLsforstreamsandlakesarepresentedinthissection.Additionaldataneedsarealsodiscussed.

6.1 Simple and Detailed Approaches for Developing TMDLs TherangeofanalysesusedfordevelopingTMDLsvariesfromsimpletocomplex.Examplesofasimpleapproachincludemass‐balance,load‐duration,andsimplewatershedandreceivingwatermodels.Detailedapproachesincorporatetheuseofcomplexwatershedandreceivingwatermodels.Simplisticapproachestypicallyrequirelessdatathandetailedapproaches.Therefore,thesearetheanalysesrecommendedfortheRendLakewatershed.EstablishingalinkbetweenpollutantloadsandresultingwaterqualityisoneofthemostimportantstepsindevelopingaTMDL.Asdiscussedabove,thislinkcanbeestablishedthroughavarietyoftechniques.RecommendedapproachesforestablishingtheselinksfortheconstituentsofconcernintheRendLakewatershedarepresentedonasegment‐by‐segmentbasisinTable6‐1anddiscussedingreaterdetailinthefollowingsectionsofthisreport.

Section 6 Approach to Developing TMDL and Identification of Data Needs

6‐2 DRAFT

Table 6‐1 Impairments, Data Needs, and Recommended Approaches for TMDL Development in the Rend Lake Watershed.

Impaired Segment

Impairment for Potential TMDL Development

Recommended TMDL Approaches

Additional Data Needs/Rationale for

Delisting

Big Muddy River (N‐08)


Load Duration Curve Modeling

Dissolved Oxygen QUAL2K Modeling Additional data collection recommended

pH Spreadsheet approach, Hydrogen ion load modeling

Gun Creek (NI‐01)

Iron, Total Load Duration Curve modeling, Basic spreadsheet analysis

Additional data collection suggested for Load Duration Curve approach


Removal from 303d list No impairment based on currently applicable standards


Casey Fork (NJ‐07)


Fecal Coliform Load Duration Curve Modeling

Snow Creek (NL‐01) Dissolved Oxygen QUAL2K Modeling Additional data collection recommended

Rend Lake (RNB)

Phosphorus, Total BATHTUB Modeling


Removal from 303d list No impairment based on current data and currently applicable standards


Phosphorus, Total BATHTUB Modeling


Dissolved Oxygen BATHTUB Modeling

Phosphorus, Total

Lake Jaycees (RNU) Phosphorus, Total Removal from 303d list No impairment based on current data


DRAFT 6‐3

6.2 Additional Data Needs for TMDL Development in the Rend Lake Watershed Table6‐2containssummaryinformationregardingdataavailabilityforallimpairmentsaddressedbyTMDLsintheRendLakewatershed.

Table 6‐2 Data Availability and Data Needs for TMDL Development in the Rend Lake Watershed

Waterbody Name

Impairment

Data Points for

Impairment Assessment

Period of Record

Additional Data Needs

Big Muddy River (N‐08)

Manganese, Dissolved 392 1981‐2011 None

Dissolved Oxygen 381 1972‐2011 Synoptic data for flow,

hydraulics, DO, temperature, nutrients, CBOD

pH 416 1972‐2011 None

Casey Fork (NJ‐07)

Fecal Coliform 182 1968‐2010 None



Gun Creek (NI‐01)

Iron 5 1995‐2008 Additional data for total iron

recommended



Snow Creek (NL‐01)



Rend Lake (RNB) Phosphorus, Total 75 2000‐2008 None


Phosphorus, Total 8 1981‐2008

Additional phosphorus data collection recommended for potential model calibration

and verification


Dissolved Oxygen 15 1981‐1990 Additional phosphorus and DO data collection recommended for potential model calibration

and verification Phosphorus, Total 15 1981‐1990

TheavailabledatasetforaddressingimpairmentsonGunCreeksegmentNI‐01isminimalwithonly5datapointsreportedsince1995.InordertodevelopamorerobustTMDLforthissegment,additionaldatapertainingtothestreamsegment’simpairmentsmayneedtobecollected.Atminimum,additionalsamplecollectionspecificallyfortotalironanddissolvedmanganesecouldbeconductedpriortoStage3ofTMDLdevelopment.Samplecollectionatvarioustimesofyearandoverarangeofflowconditionswouldalsoaidinassessingtheentirerangeoftotalironanddissolvedmanganeseconditionsthatmayoccurwithinthesegmentandwouldprovideforamoreaccuratedepictionofpotentialfactorsinfluencingtheimpairmentsinthissegment.


6‐4 DRAFT

TheBigMuddyRiver(N‐08)andtheCaseyFork(NJ‐07)appeartohavesufficientquantitiesofrecentlycollecteddissolvedmanganeseandfecalcoliformdata.TheavailabledatasetforpHonBigMuddyRiverSegmentN‐08isalsorobustandcontainsover400datapointscollectedsinceoverthecourseofmorethan40years.AdditionaldatacollectionforTMDLdevelopmentfortheseimpairmentsatthesesegmentswilllikelynotbenecessary.

WhilesufficientdataareavailableforGunCreek(NI‐01),SnowCreek(NL‐01),BigMuddy(N‐08),andCaseyFork(NJ‐07)toassessimpairmentoftheDOstandardinthesestreamsegments,spatialdataarelimitedandadditionaldatacollectionisrecommendedtosupportmodeldevelopment.Specificdatarequirementsincludeasynoptic(snapshotintime)waterqualitysurveyofeachreachwithcarefulattentiontothelocationofthepointsourcedischargers.Thesurveysshouldincludemeasurementsofflow,hydraulics,DO,temperature,nutrients,sedimentoxygendemand(SOD),andcarbonaceousbiochemicaloxygendemand(CBOD).ThecollecteddatawillbeusedtosupportthemodeldevelopmentandparameterizationandwilllendsignificantconfidencetotheTMDLconclusions.Additionaldatawouldprovevaluableforallfourimpairedsegments,andwouldlikelybeimperativetomodeldevelopmentforsegmentsNL‐01andNI‐01.

TheavailabledatasetforimpairmentsoflakesandreservoirsinthewatershedappearstobeadequateforbaselineTMDLdevelopment.Additionaldatacollection,althoughnotessential,mayproveusefulforcalibrationandverificationofthemodeloutputsandcouldaddconfidencetoTMDLsdevelopedforimpairmentsinlakesandreservoirswithintheRendLakeWatershed.

6.3 Approaches for Developing TMDLs for Stream Segments in Rend Lake Watershed 6.3.1 Recommended Approach for Metals and Fecal Coliform TMDLs in Stream Segments TherecommendedapproachfordevelopingTMDLsforthesesegmentsandparametersistheload‐durationcurvemethod.Theload‐durationmethodologyusesthecumulativefrequencydistributionofstreamflowandpollutantconcentrationdatatoestimatetheallowableloadsforawaterbody.DuetotheminimaldatasetavailableforironinGunCreek,furtherdatacollectionmaybewarrantedforsegmentNI‐01.Ifnoadditionaldataarecollected,abasicspreadsheetanalysiswilllikelybeperformedtocalculateapercentreductionneededbasedontheexceedancedataandthestandard.TheremainingsegmentsoftheBigMuddyRiver(N‐08)andtheCaseyFork(NJ‐07)appeartohavesufficientquantitiesofrecentlycollecteddatafortheloaddurationcurveapproach.

NoexceedancesofthecurrentwaterqualitystandardsformanganesehavebeenreportedintheGunCreeksegmentNI‐01dataset.Itisrecommendedthatthisimpairmentberemovedfromthe303(d)list.

6.3.2 Recommended Approach for pH TMDL in Big Muddy River Segment N‐08 SegmentN‐08oftheBigMuddyRiverislistedforpHimpairments.AlthoughthesampledatasetforpHatthissegmentisfairlyrobust,only13of416samplesviolatedthepHstandardbyfallingbelow6.5.PotentialapproachestodevelopingthepHTMDLforthissegmentincludeaspreadsheetapproachthatwouldtakeintoaccountnaturalconditionsinthewatershed.AmoredetailedproceduretodevelopthepHTMDLwouldbebasedonananalyticalproceduredevelopedbytheKentuckyDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtection(2001).TheprocedurecalculatesamaximumallowablehydrogenionloadinginthewatercolumntomaintainpHstandardsandisrecommendedforthis


DRAFT 6‐5

watershed,providedthattheavailabledatasetsforpHandadditionalinputsaresufficienttocalibrateandrunthemodel.

6.3.3 Recommended Approach for Dissolved Oxygen TMDLs in Impaired Stream Segments TherecommendedapproachtoTMDLdevelopmentforDOimpairmentsinstreamsisthedevelopmentandparameterizationofaseriesofQUAL2Kmodels.QUAL2Kisanupdatedspreadsheet‐basedversionofthewell‐knownandUSEPA‐supportedQUAL2Emodel.ThemodelsimulatesDOdynamicsasafunctionofnitrogenousandCBOD,atmosphericre‐aeration,SOD,andphytoplanktonphotosynthesisandrespiration.ThemodelalsosimulatesthefateandtransportofnutrientsandBODandthepresenceandabundanceofphytoplankton(aschlorophyll‐a).Streamhydrodynamicsandtemperatureareimportantcontrollingparametersinthemodel.Themodelissuitedtosteady‐statesimulations.ItisnotanticipatedthatanadditionalwatershedmodelwillbeneededtodevelopDOTMDLsforthesestreams.

6.4 Approaches for Developing TMDLs for Lake Segments in the Rend Lake Watershed 6.4.1 Recommended Approach for Total Phosphorus and DO TMDLs RendLake,BentonReservoir,AshleyReservoir,andLakeJayceearealllistedforimpairmentcausedbytotalphosphorus.Inaddition,AshleyReservoirisalsolistedforimpairmentcausedbylowDO.RecentdatacollectedinLakeJayceeindicatesthattotalphosphorusisnolongeranissue,whichmaysupportadelistingforthatwaterbody.TheBATHTUBmodelisrecommendedforTMDLdevelopmentfortheremainingreservoirimpairments.TheBATHTUBmodelperformssteady‐statewaterandnutrientbalancecalculationsinaspatiallysegmentedhydraulicnetworkthataccountforadvectiveanddiffusivetransport,andnutrientsedimentation.ThemodelreliesonempiricalrelationshipstopredictlaketrophicconditionsandsubsequentDOconditionsasfunctionsoftotalphosphorusandnitrogenloads,residencetime,andmeandepth(USEPA1997).Oxygenconditionsinthemodelaresimulatedasmetalandhypolimneticdepletionrates,ratherthanexplicitconcentrations.Watershedloadingstothelakeswillbeestimatedusingeventmeanconcentrationdata,precipitationdata,andestimatedflowswithinthewatershed.

Additionaldatacollection,althoughnotessentialtodevelopmentoftheBATHTUBmodel,wouldbeusefulforcalibrationandverificationofthemodeloutputs,especiallyifcollectedforlakeswithminimalandoutdateddatasetssuchasAshleyReservoir(5samplingevents,allpriorto1991).

6.4.2 Recommended Approach for the Manganese TMDL in Rend Lake RendLakeistheonlyreservoirinthewatershedthatisalsolistedforimpairmentofthepublicwatersupplyusebymanganese.TheapplicablepublicwatersupplywaterqualitystandardformanganeseinRendLakeis1,000µg/L.Thestandardwasrecentlychangedfromthepreviousvalueof150µg/L.Becauseoftheupdatedstandard,datacollectedfromthereservoirshowthataviolationofthecurrentstandardhasnotbeenrecordedsince1988.Further,thereissufficientdatacollectedsincethoseviolationstoshowthatthelakeisnolongerimpairedduetomanganeseconcentrations.Itisrecommendedthatthiscauseofimpairmentberemovedfromthe303(d)list.


6‐6 DRAFT


Appendix A Land Use Categories

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

File names and descriptions:

Values and class names found in the IL-GAP Land Cover of Illinois version 2.0 2003.

Value Class Names0 Background

AGRICULTURAL LAND 11 Corn 12 Soybeans 13 Winter Wheat 14 Other Small Grains & Hay 15 Winter Wheat/Soybeans 16 Other Agriculture 17 Rural Grassland

FORESTED LAND 21 Upland 25 Partial Canopy/Savannah Upland 26 Coniferous

URBAN & BUILT-UP LAND 31 High Density 32 Low/Medium Density 35 Urban Open Space

WETLAND41 Shallow Marsh/Wet Meadow 42 Deep Marsh 43 Seasonally/Temporally Flooded 44 Floodplain Forest 48 Swamp 49 Shallow Water

OTHER51 Surface Water 52 Barren & Exposed Land 53 Clouds 54 Cloud Shadows

Appendix B Soil Characteristics

SOIL CHARACTERISTIC DATA AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST

CONTACT ILLINOIS EPA AT (217) 782-3362

Appendix C Water Quality Data

WATER QUALITY DATA AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST

CONTACT ILLINOIS EPA AT (217) 782-3362

DRAFT REPORT - epa.state.il.us · the Integrated Water Quality Report. Water bodies on the 303(d)...

Documents

Transcript of DRAFT REPORT - epa.state.il.us · the Integrated Water Quality Report. Water bodies on the 303(d)...