1996 KANSAS WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT (305(b) REPORT)

December 1996

Kansas Department of Health and Environment, Division of Environment
Bureau of Environmental Field Services
1000 SW Jackson, Topeka, KS 66612

Table of Contents - Part I - Part II - Part III - Part IV - References - Appendix

PART I: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report, the "1996 Kansas Water Quality Assessment", also known as the 305(b) Report, is the biennial assessment of the state's surface water quality as required by 33 U.S.C. 466 et seq., the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly referred to as the Clean Water Act.

The Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) assessed the water quality of 19,330 miles of streams, of which 17,364 miles were monitored and 1,966 miles were evaluated. A total of 175,260 lake acres were assessed. Of these, 169,689 acres were monitored and conditions of an additional 5,571 acres were evaluated using best professional judgement. Of the 35,597 wetland acres assessed, 25,069 acres were considered monitored.

Guidance by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the preparation of this report has continued to allow for wide variation in assessment methodologies. This report analyzed 1991-1995 Kansas water quality assessment data. In order to maintain a general level of consistency with the previous 305(b) reports and to allow for the analysis of trends in beneficial uses support over time, KDHE elected to examine data consistent with the beneficial use designations and water quality criteria applied to individual waterbody segments in the Kansas Surface Water Register (KDHE 1994).

The initial guidance by EPA for assessment of the aquatic life support use included only the acute criteria application. Using this approach for determination of aquatic life support, and considering only beach closures in assignment of nonsupport for contact recreation, 73% of Kansas streams did not support all designated uses. Subsequent guidance by EPA directed states to include both chronic and acute criteria for determination of aquatic life use support (ALUS) (Davies and Waygand 1995). Using this latter guidance, 97% of the assessed stream miles did not support all designated uses. All streams supported at least one designated use, and almost 40% of the "nonsupporting" stream segments supported all but one use. Using the initial EPA guidance, an assessment of cumulative designated use stream mileage revealed that 78% of the designated uses were fully or partially supported; using the more stringent chronic ALUS and noncontact recreational criteria, only 55% of the cumulative designated stream miles were fully or partially supported. The major causes of nonsupport, in order of prevalence, are suspended solids, fecal coliform bacteria (FCB) (pathogen indicator), dissolved solids, oxidizable organic wastes, and pesticides. Although these parameters contributed to widespread use impairments, they did not necessarily pose a serious local water quality concern.

Sources responsible for widespread pollutant loadings and beneficial use impairments included agriculture, habitat modification, natural sources, resource extraction, hydromodification, and groundwater withdrawal. Impairments attributable to point sources were substantially less widespread than those attributable to nonpoint sources (NPSs). However, the former often exerted highly significant water quality impacts within given stream segments, and some individual point sources caused or contributed to water quality impairments in multiple downstream surface water segments. Other factors contributing to localized pollution problems included, but were not limited to, combined sewer overflows, construction activities, surface mining activities, and failing septic systems. In a significant number of instances, factors responsible for contaminant loadings were unknown.

Of the assessed lake acreage in Kansas, almost 70% were stable over time, while slightly more than 25% appeared to be degrading over time. Very few lakes in the state showed any appreciable improvement in trophic state condition during this reporting cycle. Agriculture, municipal point sources and natural sources were the primary contributing factors to lake eutrophication.

Wetland studies were conducted as part of the state's overall lake/wetland monitoring program activities. Only public wetlands, comprising about 10% of the state's total wetland acres were assessed. The vast majority of the wetlands within the state are on private lands. The major causes of partial and/or non-support of designated uses in Kansas' wetlands were excessive nutrient load, salinity, high pH, and turbidity. The major sources associated with partial or nonsupport of designated uses were agriculture, watershed hydromodifications, and natural sources.

Kansas groundwater is generally very hard and often contains relatively high concentrations of total dissolved solids (TDS), manganese, and iron. In some areas, elevated levels of ammonia, sulfate, sodium and chloride also occur. These constituents normally pose no serious health concerns; however, they may create aesthetic problems such as scale deposits, stains, odors, and undesirable tastes. During the 1991-95 reporting cycle, high nitrate concentrations accounted for about 64% of the documented exceedences of the federal drinking water maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) in groundwater. The majority of the samples with excessive levels of nitrate were obtained from shallow wells (less than 100 feet) or in wells located in areas of sandy soil and high water tables. Other isolated concerns of groundwater contamination included the presence of volatile organic compounds, heavy metals, petroleum products and/or bacteria. The major sources of these contaminants included active industrial facilities, spills, leaking or overflowing lagoons, leaking storage tanks, mineral extraction activities, and agricultural operations.

The imposition of more stringent permit limits and the resulting upgrades of municipal and industrial wastewater treatment facilities have resulted in several notable improvements in surface water quality. As the number of point sources causing or contributing to significant water quality impairments continues to decline, future attention will necessarily shift to the remaining sources, primarily NPS related water quality problems. It is anticipated that watershed pollution control efforts, predicated on the development of TMDL's (total maximum daily loads) and on the allocation of allowable pollutant loadings among point, nonpoint and natural sources, will play an increasingly important role in the abatement of surface water pollution in Kansas. The Governor's multi-agency water quality initiative for the Kansas/Lower Republican Basin is designed to protect and restore the quality of Kansas surface waters.

Recommendations for improving water quality focus on consideration of the development of (1) surface water quality goals for all major river basins and implementation of long-term management plans to achieve those goals, (2) sediment quality standards for streams, lakes, and wetlands, and (3) ambient groundwater quality standards and groundwater clean-up (remediation) standards. Additionally, because states differ in their approach to beneficial use designations and water quality criteria development, and because methods and resources for water quality assessment and data analysis vary among states and regions, information presented in 305(b) reports should not be directly compared among states. It is recommended that EPA acknowledge this lack of consistency and take steps to discourage such potentially misleading comparisons.

Table of Contents - Part I - Part II - Part III - Part IV - References - Appendix

BEFS Home
| BEFS Download
| KDHE Home