STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 2016 INTEGRATED WATER QUALITY REPORT Final - April 2017 This document has been established pursuant to the requirements of Sections 305(b) and 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act /s/ Betsey Wingfield 4/25/17 ___________________________________________ _______________________________ Betsey Wingfield, Chief Date Bureau of Water Protection and Land Reuse Robert J. Klee, Commissioner Bureau of Water Protection and Land Reuse 79 Elm Street www.ct.gov/deep/iwqr Hartford, CT 06106-5127 (860) 424-3704 Table of Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1 -Connecticut Consolidated Assessment and Listing Methodology (CT CALM) .................................... 5 Chapter 2 – 305(b) Assessment Results .............................................................................................................. 30 Chapter 3 - Waterbodies Identified for Restoration and Protection Strategies Pursuant to Section 303 of the Clean Water Act ................................................................................................................................... 199 References ........................................................................................................................................................ 407 Figure 1-1. Connecticut Rivers and Lake Basins Index ........................................................................................ 11 Figure 1-2. Connecticut Estuary Basins Index. .................................................................................................... 12 Figure 1-3. Macroinvertebrate Multimetric Index (MMI) model results showing the predicted stream health condition. .......................................................................................................................................... 18 Figure 1-4. Hypoxia map interpolations are overlain on a map of sampling station locations and assessment units to assist with evaluating excursions below the dissolved oxygen criterion. ................... 22 Figure 1-5. Assessment units overlain on shellfish growing area classifications in Long Island Sound. ............. 26 Figure 1-6. Example of pivot table report showing percentage of segment area falling under each CT DA/BA classifications. ................................................................................................................................... 27 Figure 2-1. Waterbody segments assessed for one or more designated uses ................................................... 30 Figure 2-2. Waterbody segments assessed for Aquatic Life Use Support (ALUS) .............................................. 32 Figure 2-3. Waterbody segments assessed for Recreational Use Support (REC) ............................................... 33 Figure 2-4. Waterbody segments assessed for Shellfishing Use Support. ......................................................... 34 Figure 2-5. Statewide statistical assessment for aquatic life in wadeable streams in Connecticut. .................. 36 Figure 2-6. Comparing Connecticut lakes to the Nation based on Total Nitrogen from the 2007 National Lakes Assessment in Connecticut (CT, n=14) New England Region (Region; n=69), and Nationally (Nation; n=1,028) that were in the highly eutrophic, eutrophic, mesotrophic, and oligotrophic range for total nitrogen (TN) based on Connecticut’s Trophic Category System. ................................................. 38 Figure 2-7. Comparing Connecticut lakes to the Nation based on Total Phosphorus from the 2007 National Lakes Assessment in Connecticut (CT; n=14), New England Region (Region; n=69), and Nationally (Nation; n=1,028) that were in the highly eutrophic, eutrophic, mesotrophic, and oligotrophic range for total phosphorus (TP) based on Connecticut’s Trophic Category System. .............. 39 Figure 2-8. Comparing Connecticut lakes to the Nation based on Chlorophyll-a from the 2007 National Lakes Assessment in Connecticut (CT; n=14), New England Region (Region; n=69), and Nationally (Nation; n=1,028) that were in the highly eutrophic, eutrophic, mesotrophic, and oligotrophic range for chlorophyll-a based on Connecticut’s Trophic Category System. .......................................................... 40 Figure 2-9. Comparing Connecticut lakes to the Nation based on Secchi Depth from the 2007 National Lakes Assessment in Connecticut (CT; n=14), New EnglandRegion (Region; n=69), and Nationally (Nation; n=1,028) that were in the highly eutrophic, eutrophic, mesotrophic, and oligotrophic range for Secchi depth based on Connecticut’s Trophic Category System. ........................................................... 41 Figure 3-1 Key Components of Water Quality .................................................................................................. 199 Figure 3-2: Water Quality Planning and Implementation Process .................................................................. 199 Figure 3-3. CT DEEP Water Quality Concerns ................................................................................................... 201 Figure 3-4. Total segments in US EPA Category 4 and 5 ................................................................................... 204 Figure 3-5. Total segments by Designated Use that require a TMDL or equivalent plan ................................. 205 Figure 3-6 Cummulative Number of Approved TMDLs in Connecticut ............................................................ 205 Figure 3-7. In-state Areas Targeted for Nitrogen Reductions ........................................................................... 208 Figure 3-8. Freshwaters Targeted for Management Measures of Cultural Eutrophication ............................. 208 ii Table 1-1. Designated uses for surface waters as described in CT WQS and the IWQR....................................... 6 Table 1-2. Timeline for submitting data to DEEP and tiered data quality considerations for assessments of the State’s waters. ......................................................................................................................................... 8 Table 1-3. Aquatic Life Use Support (ALUS) categories and contributing decision criteria for wadeable streams......................................................................................................................................................... 15 Table 1-4. Stream flow classes adopted under the Connecticut Stream Flow Standards and Regulations ...... 17 Table 1-5. Aquatic Life Use Support (ALUS) in estuaries as determined by dissolved oxygen levels. ................ 20 Table 1-6. Fish consumption use support and criteria....................................................................................... 23 Table 1-7. Shellfish harvesting use support as determined by shellfish growing area classifications. ............... 25 Table 1-8. Decision criteria for various categories of recreational use support. ................................................ 28 Table 2-1. Designated Use support summaries for rivers, lakes, and estuaries ................................................. 31 Table 2-2. CT DEEP Probabilistic Monitoring Aquatic Life Use Support 2006-2010 Summary ........................... 35 Table 2-3. Connecticut 305b Assessment Results for Rivers and Streams ......................................................... 42 Table 2-4. Connecticut 305b Assessment Results for Lakes ............................................................................. 142 Table 2-5. Connecticut 305b Assessment Results for Estuaries ....................................................................... 161 Table 2-6. Site Specific Fish Consumption Advisories ....................................................................................... 194 Table 3-1: Designated Uses for Surface Waters in Connecticut ...................................................................... 200 Table 3-2. Definitions of US EPA Categories 4 and 5 for Assessed Waterbodies in Connecticut .................... 203 Table 3-3. Summary of Designated Uses with Common Stressors ................................................................... 210 Table 3-4. Connecticut Impaired Waters List (EPA Category 5) ........................................................................ 212 Table 3-5. Waterbodies with Adopted TMDLs .................................................................................................. 270 Table 3-6. Pollution Control Measures for Waterbody Segments (EPA Category 4b) ..................................... 342 Table 3-7. Nonpollutant Impairments (EPA Category 4c) ................................................................................. 348 Table 3-8. Reconciliation List of Impaired Waters (Delistings and Listings) .................................................... 358 Table 3-9. Priority List of Waters for Action Plan Development (including TMDL development) .................... 383 Table 3-10. List of Waters for Action Plan Development by 2022 Identified in Integrated Water Resource Management Reports ................................................................................................................................ 388 Table 3-11. Alternative Approaches to Restoring and Protecting Water Quality............................................. 405 iii