Biological and Water Quality Study of the Portage River Basin, Select Lake Erie Tributaries, and Select Maumee River March 2010 Tributaries, 2006 - 2008 Watershed Assessment Units 04100010 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 07, and 04100009 09 Hancock, Lucas, Ottawa, Sandusky, Seneca and Wood Counties OHIO EPA Technical Report EAS/2010-4-4 Ted Strickland, Governor Lee Fisher, Lt. Governor Chris Korleski, Director DSW/EAS 2010-4-4 Portage River Basin, Select Lake Erie Tributaries and Select Maumee River Tributaries March 9, 2010 Biological and Water Quality Survey of the Portage River Basin, Select Maumee River Tributaries, and Select Lake Erie Tributaries 2006 - 2008 Hancock, Lucas, Ottawa, Sandusky, Seneca, and Wood Counties, Ohio March 9, 2010 (Revised December 15, 2011) OEPA Report DSW/EAS 2010-4-4 Prepared by State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Division of Surface Water Lazarus Government Center 50 West Town Street, Suite 700 P.O. Box 1049 Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049 State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Northwest District Office 347 North Dunbridge Road Bowling Green, Ohio 43402 Mail to: P.O. Box 1049, Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049 Ted Strickland, Governor Chris Korleski, Director State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Ohio EPA received financial assistance for this work from U.S. EPA and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. DSW/EAS 2010-4-4 Portage River Basin, Select Lake Erie Tributaries and Select Maumee River Tributaries March 9, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................................................... IV INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................... 1 STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................................... 3 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................................................................ 13 POINT SOURCE POLLUTANT LOADINGS ‐ NPDES .............................................................................................................................. 13 CHEMICAL WATER QUALITY .......................................................................................................................................................... 33 RECREATIONAL USE ..................................................................................................................................................................... 79 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES .............................................................................................................................................................. 89 SEDIMENT QUALITY ..................................................................................................................................................................... 90 PHYSICAL HABITAT .................................................................................................................................................................... 109 FISH COMMUNITY ..................................................................................................................................................................... 115 Trends .............................................................................................................................................................................. 116 MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITIES .......................................................................................................................................... 131 Trends .............................................................................................................................................................................. 136 FISH CONSUMPTION ADVISORY ................................................................................................................................................... 150 LAKE SAMPLING RESULTS ........................................................................................................................................................... 150 SUMMARY WATERSHED ASSESSMENT UNITS ............................................................................................................... 153 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 168 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................................ 172 Ohio EPA received financial assistance for this work from U.S. EPA and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. DSW/EAS 2010-4-4 Portage River Basin, Select Lake Erie Tributaries and Select Maumee River Tributaries March 9, 2010 SUMMARY All rivers and streams in Ohio are used for various purposes such as recreation or to support aquatic life. Ohio EPA evaluates each stream to determine the appropriate use designation and to also determine if the use is meeting the goals of the federal Clean Water Act. Thirty streams in the study area were evaluated for aquatic life and recreational use potential between 2006 and 2008 (see Figure 1 and Table 1 for sampling locations). Twenty-two of the streams listed in the Ohio Water Quality Standards for the study area are assigned the Warmwater Habitat (WWH) aquatic life use designation and four previously undesignated streams are being recommended for the WWH aquatic life use designation (Table 23). Otter Creek is the only stream designated Modified Warmwater Habitat (MWH) in the study area. Wolf Creek/William Ditch (tributary to Cedar Creek at RM .01) will retain the Limited Resource Water (LRW) aquatic life use designation, while two tributaries to Rocky Ford Creek are being recommended for WWH though their existing use is LRW. The two tributaries to Rocky Ford Creek are also being recommended for Primary Contact Recreation rather than the existing Secondary Contact Recreation Use. All remaining streams in this study should retain the Primary Contact Recreation use or Secondary Contact Recreation use, along with the Agricultural and Industrial uses (Table 23). Nearly half of the sites within the Portage River basin did not meet the Clean Water Act biological integrity goal, as only 54% were in full attainment, 27% were in partial attainment, and 19% were in non-attainment of the assigned/recommended aquatic life use designation (Table 2). While 60% of the Portage River mainstem was in full attainment, siltation and nutrient/eutrophication from the surrounding agricultural activities combined with point sources, such as Brush Wellman and various wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), contributed to the partial attainment (10%) and non-attainment (30%) noted in the lower reach of the mainstem. Portage River tributaries were negatively influenced by the surrounding agricultural landscape and poor sewage treatment with only 53% of sites in full attainment, 29% in partial attainment and 17% in non-attainment. Specific point source and non-point source pollution related issues which should be addressed to improve water quality throughout the Portage River basin include the following. • Fostoria has increased its discharge of ammonia in recent years, likely due to inadequate denitrification at the WWTP. This, in addition to the CSOs, should be addressed in order to improve water quality within the East Branch Portage River. • Controls to reduce nitrate levels in source water obtained from the East Branch Portage River would be of great benefit to lake water quality and also reduce the cost of drinking water treatment. This would benefit Fostoria and other communities that rely on the East Branch Portage River for their drinking water supply. • Elevated levels of PAHs were found in the sediments of the East Branch Portage River downstream from Fostoria. A request was made to Ohio EPA’s Division of Emergency and Remedial Response (DERR) on January 25, 2010 to conduct a site assessment of the former Fostoria City Dump, aka Portage Park, to determine if there is an impact on the East Branch Portage River. iv DSW/EAS 2010-4-4 Portage River Basin, Select Lake Erie Tributaries and Select Maumee River Tributaries March 9, 2010 • Brush Wellman continues to negatively impact the water quality of the Portage River, accounting for 6 water quality violations in 2008: 4 for acute whole effluent toxicity (2 for C. dubia and 2 for P. promelas) and 2 for copper. The source of these violations should be addressed and possible limits on nitrate should be examined during the NPDES renewal process. In addition, legacy and potential ongoing PCB contamination within the sediments and fish of the Portage River are likely in part attributable to Brush Wellman. PCBs were again detected in a water sample of Hyde Run in 2008, so it is recommended that PCB monitoring be reinstated in the NPDES permit. • Construction activities during the sampling period at the Port Clinton WWTP may be responsible for recent ammonia spikes. Now that construction is completed, follow-up sampling should be conducted to make sure that adequate treatment is occurring. • Proposed ‘cleaning’ of 46 miles of the East Branch Portage River and