illinois 2002 section 303(d) list - august 2003illinois 2002 section 303(d) list 1 august 2003. i....

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Bureau of Water Post Office Box 19276 Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276

IEPA/BOW/03-016 August 2003

Illinois 2002 Section 303(d) List

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Bureau of Water

Watershed Management Section

Willoway Brook, Morton Arboretum

epa1297

This document has been formatted for double-sided printing


Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Bureau of Water

Watershed Management Section

August 2003

http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/tmdl/303d-list.html


i August 2003

Table of Contents Section Page

I. INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................1

A. Purpose.....................................................................................................................................1

B. Clean Water Act Section 303(d) ..................................................................................................1

1. Background .............................................................................................................................1

2. Section 303(d) Requirements (1992) .........................................................................................2

II. SECTION 303(d) LIST DEVELOPMENT.....................................................................................2

A. Brief Overview of 2002 Section 305(b) Assessment.....................................................................2

B. Data and Documents Used in the Development of 2002 303(d) List ..............................................3

C. Identifying Water Bodies for the Illinois Section 303(d) List ........................................................4

1. Identification of Water Quality Limited Waters (WQLWs).........................................................4

2. Illinois Section 303(d) List .......................................................................................................5

D. Prioritization of the Illinois Section 303(d) List ...........................................................................5

E. Removal of Previously Listed Waters From the Section 303(d) List Prior to TMDL Development ..8

III. ILLINOIS 2002 SECTION 303(d) LIST ..................................................................................... 12

IV. SCHEDULING OF TMDL DEVELOPMENT............................................................................ 13

V. TMDL IMPLEMENTATION..................................................................................................... 14

A. Overview of TMDL Implementation ......................................................................................... 14

B. Status Of TMDL Implementation.............................................................................................. 14

VI. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION....................................................................................................... 16

VII. WATER BODY SPECIFIC INFORMATION............................................................................. 17

VIII. WATERSHEDS OF ILLINOIS……………………………………………………………………..63

IX. REFERENCES…………..………………………………………………………………………….100

X.DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS ………………………………………………………………...102

Appendix

A. Water Body Look-up Guide

B. Illinois 1998 Section 303(d) List Segment Name Changes

C. Public Hearing and Responsiveness Summary


ii August 2003

Tables

Table 1. Previously Listed Waters, Now Assessed as Full Support.........................................................8

Table 2. Inaccurately Listed Waters................................................................................................... 10

Table 3. Perched Lakes..................................................................................................................... 12

Table 4. Tentative Long-term Schedule .............................................................................................. 14

Table 5. TMDLs Under Development ................................................................................................ 15

Table 6. Illinois 2002 Section 303(d) List and Prioritization- High Priority .......................................... 21

Illinois 2002 Section 303(d) List and Prioritization- Medium Priority ..................................... 25

Illinois 2002 Section 303(d) List and Prioritization- Low Priority ........................................... 62

Figures

Figure 1. Great Lakes/Calumet River Watershed............................................................................... 64

Figure 2a. Des Plaines River Watershed- Streams.............................................................................. 65

Figure 2b. Des Plaines River Watershed- Lakes................................................................................. 66

Figure 3. Upper Fox River Watershed............................................................................................... 67

Figure 4. Lower Fox River Watershed .............................................................................................. 68

Figure 5. Kishwaukee River Watershed............................................................................................ 69

Figure 6. Rock River Watershed....................................................................................................... 70

Figure 7. Pecatonica River Watershed................................................................................................ 71

Figure 8. Green River Watershed...................................................................................................... 72

Figure 9. Mississippi North River Watershed .................................................................................... 73

Figure 10. Kankakee/Iroquois River Watershed................................................................................. 74

Figure 11. Upper Illinois/Mazon River Watershed............................................................................. 75

Figure 12. Vermilion (Illinois) River Watershed................................................................................ 76

Figure 13. Middle Illinois River Watershed....................................................................................... 77

Figure 14. Mackinaw River Watershed............................................................................................. 78

Figure 15. Spoon River Watershed................................................................................................... 79

Figure 16. Mississippi North Central River Watershed....................................................................... 80

Figure 17. LaMoine River Watershed............................................................................................... 81


iii August 2003

Figure 18. Lower Illinois/Macoupin River Watershed........................................................................ 82

Figure 19. Mississippi Central River Watershed................................................................................ 83

Figure 20. Lower Sangamon River Watershed................................................................................... 84

Figure 21. Upper Sangamon River Watershed................................................................................... 85

Figure 22. Salt Creek of Sangamon River Watershed......................................................................... 86

Figure 23. Upper Kaskaskia River Watershed.................................................................................... 87

Figure 24. Middle Kaskaskia/Shoal River Watershed......................................................................... 88

Figure 25. Lower Kaskaskia River Watershed................................................................................... 89

Figure 26a & 26b. Big Muddy River Watershed................................................................................ 90

Figure 27. Mississippi South Central River Watershed....................................................................... 92

Figure 28. Mississippi South River Watershed................................................................................... 93

Figure 29. Vermilion (Wabash) River Watershed............................................................................... 94

Figure 30. Embarras/Middle Wabash River Watershed...................................................................... 95

Figure 31. Little and Lower Wabash/Skillet Fork River Watershed..................................................... 96

Figure 32. Saline River/Bay Creek Watershed................................................................................... 97

Figure 33. Cache River Watershed.................................................................................................... 98

Figure 34. Lakes and Streams on the 2002 303(d) List ....................................................................... 99


iv August 2003


1 August 2003

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to: • Fulfill the requirements set forth in Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and the

Water Quality Planning and Management regulation at 40 CFR Part 130 for the year 2002. • Inform the public about the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) program/process. This report is submitted to the USEPA for review and approval of Illinois' list of water quality limited waters. It provides the state’s supporting documentation required by 40 CFR Part 130.7 and rationale in fulfilling Section 303(d) requirements.

B. Clean Water Act Section 303(d)

1. Background

The Section 303(d) rules were last amended on July 13, 2000. Due to numerous concerns expressed by stakeholders, Senate hearings were held, and as a result, the U.S. Congress prohibited the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) from spending funds on the new regulations until October 1, 2001. Congress authorized funds for the National Academy of Science (NAS) to assess the scientific basis of the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) program and on June 15, 2001, the NAS published its assessment report. Subsequently, USEPA delayed the implementation of the new regulations for 18 months (until April 1, 2003). During this period, USEPA planned to seek input from stakeholders on the new regulations and the TMDL program. USEPA plans to publish the new regulations in the spring of 2003. As a result, Illinois’ Section 303(d) List for 2002 was prepared in accordance with 1992 regulations and new guidance provided by USEPA (see references in Section IX). In the interim, USEPA provided guidance on November 19, 2001, that allowed for optional development of an Integrated Report (IR) under Sections 305(b) and 303(d). Illinois EPA elected to prepare two separate reports during 2002, one for Section 305(b) and another for Section 303(d). The primary reason for this choice was that the USEPA Assessment Data Base (ADB) system did not lend itself to preparation of an IR due to requirements to use the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD). EPA has encouraged states and territories to adopt the NHD protocol to bring uniformity on a nationwide basis in identifying assessment units for their 2002 assessment. NHD reaches are typically defined from confluence to confluence. The NHD is based upon the content of USGS Digital Line Graph (DLG) hydrography data integrated with reach-related information from the EPA Reach File Version 3 (RF3). The NHD supersedes DLG and RF3 by incorporating them, not by replacing them. Additional NHD information and data are available from USGS, http://nhd.usgs.gov.


2 August 2003

2. Section 303(d) Requirements (1992)

Section 303(d) requires states, in part, to:

i) Identify waters which will not attain applicable water quality standards with technology-based controls alone (i.e., water quality limited). [40 CFR Part 130.7(b)(1)]

ii) Identify waters for which controls on thermal discharges are not stringent enough to assure

protection and propagation of a balanced indigenous population of shellfish, fish and wildlife sufficient to achieve water quality standards. [40 CFR Part 130.7(b)(2)]

iii) Establish a priority ranking for such waters, taking into account the severity of pollution and

the uses to be made of such waters. [40 CFR Part 130.7(b)(4)] iv) Target waters for development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) that would be

initiated before the next biennial reporting period. [40 CFR Part 130.7(b)(4)]

II. SECTION 303(d) LIST DEVELOPMENT

This section provides a brief overview of the 2002 Section 305(b) assessments, which forms the primary basis for the development of the 2002 Section 303(d) List. Further, this section provides information about the data and documents used in development of the Section 303(d) List; explains the sequence of steps employed in the identification of water quality limited waters; the priority ranking of water bodies; and removal of previously listed waters from the Section 303(d) List prior to TMDL development.

A. Brief Overview of 2002 Section 305(b) Assessment

Illinois EPA has organized an assessment of water bodies (i.e., stream segments, inland lakes and Lake Michigan), consistent with USEPA requirements, under a generic set of five designated use categories. These individual categories are drinking water, aquatic life, primary contact (swimming), secondary contact (recreation), and fish consumption. For each water body, and for each designated use applicable to the water body, Illinois EPA’s assessment concludes one of four possible “use-support” levels: fully supporting (Full), fully supporting but threatened (Full/Threatened), partially supporting (Partial), or not supporting (Nonsupport). Full use support means that the water body attains the designated use. Full/Threatened use support means that the water body attains the designated use, but a declining water quality related trend has been evidenced, and if continued, only Partial use support may be attained in the future. Partial use support means that the water body incompletely attains the designated use. Finally, Nonsupport means that the water body does not attain the designated use. All water bodies assessed as partial or nonsupport attainment for any designated use are identified as “impaired.” For impaired water bodies, Illinois EPA then identifies potential “causes” and “sources” of impairment of those designated uses. The 2002 Section 305(b) Report uses a “Confidence Level” approach based on data quantity, data source, and guidelines used to make potential cause determinations. Confidence is based on the amount and type of data available for the assessment, and the guideline used to assess the data (e.g., Illinois water quality standards, sediment classifications, state-wide statistical values {85th percentile}). A Confidence Level of “3” indicates Illinois EPA has relatively high confidence that the identified potential cause is contributing to impairment of the water body. A Confidence Level of “2” indicates moderate


3 August 2003

confidence, and a confidence level of “1” indicates low confidence. The Confidence Levels are available for about one-fifth of the waters assessed in the state, at this time. Potential causes of impairment identified with Confidence Levels of 1 or 2 are not recommended for use in the development of TMDLs. Waters with potential causes of impairment having low or moderate Confidence Levels will require collection of further evidence (e.g., more data gathered and assessed against new or updated Illinois water quality standards) proving or disproving that they are truly contributing to an impairment.

B. Data and Documents Used in the Development of 2002 303(d) List

USEPA regulations at 40 CFR 130.7(b)(5) state “Each state shall assemble and evaluate all existing and readily available water quality related data and information to develop the list required by 130.7(b)(1) [water quality limited waters for which technology based effluent limits are not sufficient to achieve water quality standards] and 130.7(b)(2) [water quality limited waters for which controls on thermal discharges are not sufficient to achieve water quality standards].” The primary source of data and information used in the development of the Section 303(d) List is the state’s 2002 Section 305(b) Report. Water quality assessments in the Section 305(b) Report are based on a combination of chemical (water, sediment and fish tissue), physical (habitat and flow discharge), and biological (macroinvertebrate and fish) data. Assessments are characterized as “Monitored” or “Evaluated.” Monitored assessments are based on current site-specific monitoring data believed to accurately portray existing water quality conditions. Therefore, water bodies with biological, chemical, and/or physical monitoring data no more than five years old are included in the Monitored category. Evaluated assessments are use attainment decisions based on information that does not meet the criteria for Monitored information. Information used for Evaluated assessments includes a combination of monitoring data more than five years old, land use information, location of known point and nonpoint potential sources, volunteer data such as that collected under the Illinois EPA’s Volunteer Lake Monitoring Program, or documented site-specific knowledge. A description of the different types of Monitored and Evaluated data sets and their associated codes for streams, inland lakes, and Lake Michigan can be found in the 2002 Section 305(b) Report. Data collected as part of Illinois EPA’s monitoring programs are entered into STORET, BIOS and/or a state developed database. A full and detailed description of the Illinois EPA’s monitoring programs from which data are collected and for which they are subsequently used in the Section 303(d) List can be found in the Agency’s publications “Water Quality Monitoring Strategy 1996—2000” (IEPA, December 1996) and “Water Quality Monitoring Strategy 2002—2006” (IEPA, 2002). A brief description can also be found in the Section 305(b) Reports. Data collected from sources other than Illinois EPA monitoring programs are considered in the Section 305(b) process. However, data from other sources may not be used due to their non-conformance with the Illinois EPA quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) requirements, the purpose for which the data are collected, data availability, format, etc. However, Illinois EPA is devoting additional resources in the Section 305(b) assessment process to incorporate other readily available data. Illinois EPA considers water quality related data collected by a variety of federal, state and local organizations in Illinois. The organizations include, but are not limited to:


4 August 2003

• County Public Health Departments • Illinois Dept. of Natural Resources • Illinois Dept. of Agriculture • Illinois Dept. of Public Health • Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago • ORSANCO • Other Municipalities in Illinois • Regional Areawide Planning Commissions • Regulated Dischargers • Soil and Water Conservation Districts • State Universities • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers • U.S. Dept. of Agriculture • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • U.S. Geological Survey

Several USEPA references and guidance documents regarding data use and assessment were used in developing the Section 303(d) List. They are presented in the reference section of this report.

C. Identifying Water Bodies for the Illinois Section 303(d) List

This section identifies water quality limited waters (WQLWs) and specifies the criteria used in determining which waters will be placed on the Illinois Section 303(d) List.

1. Identification of Water Quality Limited Waters (WQLWs)

The WQLWs consist of partial and nonsupport waters from the 2002 Section 305(b) Report, waters with site specific sport fish consumption advisories, and waters on previous Section 303(d) Lists. The guidance documents cited in the reference section of this report were used for listing waters on the 2002 Section 303(d) List. A further description of the WQLWs is given below.

(i) Waters for which any designated use is identified as partial or nonsupport based on

chemical, biological and/or physical data supporting the 2002 Section 305(b) Report. This includes waters in which site-specific sport fish consumption advisories are currently in effect based on contaminants that have been identified in fish tissue. In the most recent studies of fish tissue in Illinois waters, contaminants include polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), chlordane and methyl mercury. (In accordance with federal guidance, only waters identified with site specific information regarding fish tissue contamination are placed on the 2002 303(d) List. Refer to Section II (C) (2)).

Illinois has a statewide general advisory for fish consumption for methyl mercury starting on April 1, 2002. The primary source of methyl mercury in most waters of the United States is strongly suspected to be deposition from air pollution sources. These sources may occur outside the state and national boundaries. Therefore, assessment and control of mercury contamination will require interstate and international measures, which are beyond the scope of state environmental agencies. USEPA is currently conducting several studies of the mercury problem. USEPA has recommended that, at the state level, TMDLs for low-level mercury contamination be given a low priority for the time being.


5 August 2003

(ii) Waters previously listed on approved Section 303(d) Lists. This includes Illinois’ Section

303(d) List submittals to USEPA in 1992, 1994, 1996 and 1998. However, some water bodies which were on previous Illinois Section 303(d) Lists, have not been included in the 2002 List. Those water bodies and the criteria used to delist them are discussed in Section II (E).

2. Illinois Section 303(d) List

This section explains the criteria used to determine which WQLWs were placed on the Section 303(d) List for TMDL development. Any WQLW meeting the requirements of (i) or (ii) (described below) were placed on the Illinois Section 303(d) List. The criteria for placement are as follows: (i) A WQLW is assessed as partial or nonsupport for any of the five designated uses in the 2002

Section 305(b) Report by using monitored chemical, biological and/or physical data (these waters include waters assessed for site-specific sport fish tissue contamination); or

(ii) A WQLW previously listed on an approved Section 303(d) List.

Certain waters that meet the above criteria will not be placed on the Illinois Section 303(d) List. Those waters include threatened waters on the 1998 303(d) List, waters for which a TMDL has been completed or waters that meet the delisting criteria in Section II (E) (i.e., waters that currently meet water quality standards or were previously listed in error).

D. Prioritization of the Illinois Section 303(d) List USEPA regulations at 40 CFR Part 130.7(b)(4) require establishing a priority ranking of the 303(d) listed waters for the development of TMDLs that accounts for the severity of pollution and the designated uses. For the purposes of the Illinois Section 303(d) List, the prioritization process was done on a watershed basis instead of on individual water bodies. Illinois EPA watershed boundaries are based on the USGS eight-digit hydrologic units, which were subdivided into smaller-scale watersheds with the aid of USEPA’s river Reach File 3(RF3) coverage. Developing prioritization at this watershed scale provides Illinois with the ability to address watershed issues at a manageable level and document improvements to a watershed’s health. The Illinois Section 303(d) List was prioritized based on the steps listed below: Step 1 The first step in the prioritization process is based on use designations, establishing a High, Medium, and Low Priority for specific uses.

• High Priority – Watersheds containing one or more water bodies in which potential causes of impairments pose a threat to a drinking water use.

• Medium Priority – Watersheds containing one or more water bodies in which potential

causes of impairments pose a threat to aquatic life use, fishing use, or primary contact (swimming) use.


6 August 2003

• Low Priority – Watersheds containing one or more water bodies in which potentia l causes of impairment pose a threat to secondary contact (recreation).

Step 2 The second step in the prioritization process is based on the degree of confidence assigned to potential causes in the water bodies within a watershed (see Section II. A.). The watersheds in Step 1 were prioritized by taking into consideration watersheds which contain one or more water bodies that have potential causes with a Confidence Level of “3”. The number of Confidence Level 3s were summed using the major cause categories (i.e., 900—nutrients, 1200—organic enrichment) for each watershed. Watersheds with a greater number of Confidence Level 3s were identified as a higher priority for TMDL development within each of the priority groups identified in Step 1. Step 2 was used only when a Confidence Level 3 was assigned to potential causes of impairment in a water body within a watershed. EXAMPLE: Watershed “B” has potential causes of impairment with assigned Confidence Level 3 waters, and Watershed “A” has none. Watershed “B” will be ranked higher than Watershed “A” within the High Priority category identified in Step 1. Step 3 Those watersheds with potential causes of impairment without an assigned Confidence Level 3 were prioritized based on the overall severity of pollution. For the purposes of this process, “severity of pollution” is determined by summing the major cause categories (i.e., 900—nutrients, 1200—organic enrichment) for potential causes of impairment to a water body segment. The watersheds with more potential causes of impairments were identified and listed as lower priority than those listed with Confidence Level 3 watersheds within each of the priority groups identified in Step 1. EXAMPLE: Watershed “A” has three water body segments with a total of 15 causes identified. Watershed “B” has four water body segments with a total of 10 potential causes identified. Both water bodies were assessed for drinking water use. Therefore, Watershed “A” (drinking water use with 15 potential causes) will be ranked above Watershed “B” (drinking water use with 10 potential causes) for TMDL development within the High Priority Category identified in Step 1. Once the waters have been prioritized as specified above for the 303(d) List, Illinois EPA may also give consideration to the following criteria to indicate a higher priority within each priority category (High, Medium, and Low) when scheduling TMDL development. Those waters meeting the criteria may be selected for TMDL development over those that do not meet the criteria, regardless of priority ranking on the List.

i) A water body’s potential for improvement is one factor that will be considered. Best professional judgment for identifying potential improvement will be based, in part, upon the capacity of the data to pinpoint the potential cause-source relationship, and the availability of regulatory and voluntary programs to achieve water quality improvement.

ii) Illinois EPA will also take into consideration the degree of public support and source water

protection (surface water) for water body improvement. Expressions of public support for an impaired watershed may include but are not limited to: active publicly supported watershed planning groups, ongoing public water quality monitoring programs and other similar efforts.


7 August 2003

Along with the above factors, Illinois EPA may use the following criteria to indicate a lower priority within each priority category (High, Medium and Low) when scheduling TMDL development. Although these lower priority waters may not be scheduled for TMDL development at this time or may not be appropriate candidates for TMDLs in the future, the Illinois EPA will continue ongoing efforts, and support new approaches that will result in these waters being removed from the Section 303(d) List. In that regard, each of the following criteria contains a brief explanation of the actions that the Illinois EPA may take to improve or enhance the status of those waters. Those waters meeting the criteria below may be passed over on the List regardless of priority ranking.

(i) 303(d) listed waters that are interstate waters—e.g., Mississippi River, Ohio River, Lake Michigan and others. In these waters, the Illinois EPA will continue to work closely with other states and USEPA in addressing issues related to Section 303(d) requirements. USEPA is expected to take a lead role in coordinating the state efforts.

(ii) 303(d) listed waters where the potential causes of impairment are “pollutants” for which there

are no numeric water quality standards in Illinois—e.g., nitrogen, phosphorus in streams, and others. Pending development of appropriate numeric water quality standards as may be proposed by the Agency and adopted by the Pollution Control Board, Illinois EPA will continue to work with watershed planning groups and others to identify causes and treat potential sources of impairment.

(iii) 303(d) listed waters where potential causes of impairment of a water body is “pollution”—

e.g., habitat alterations, dams, and others. The Illinois EPA will continue to work with watershed planning groups and others to identify causes and treat potential sources of impairment.

(iv) 303(d) listed waters with legacy issues—e.g., mining, and in-place contaminated sediments.

The Illinois EPA will continue to work with watershed planning groups and others to identify causes and treat potential sources of impairment.

(v) 303(d) listed waters with impairment by background levels. The Illinois EPA will continue

to work with watershed planning groups and others to identify causes and treat potential sources of impairment.

(vi) 303(d) listed waters with potential causes of impairment having low (“1”) or moderate (“2”)

Confidence Levels, as described in the Illinois 2002 Section 305(b) Report. In these cases, depending upon ava ilable resources, additional data collection will be instituted to determine the accuracy of assessment. Similar efforts will be made in WQLWs where no Confidence Level has been associated with a potential cause of impairment in the 2002 Section 305(b) Report.

(vii) 303(d) listed waters with unknown causes of impairment. In these cases, depending upon

available resources, additional data collection and/or site specific analysis will be instituted to determine the accuracy of the assessment.

(viii) 303(d) listed waters for which only “Evaluated” assessments are available. In these cases,

depending upon available resources, additional data collection and/or site specific analysis will be instituted to determine the accuracy of the assessment.


8 August 2003

E. Removal of Previously Listed Waters From the Section 303(d) List Prior to TMDL Development

USEPA guidance (Guidance For 1994 Section 303(d) Lists - November 26, 1993) describes two instances when a previously listed water body may be removed from a state’s Section 303(d) List prior to TMDL development: (1) if such water body is meeting all applicable water quality standards (including numeric and

narrative criteria, antidegradation and designated uses) or is expected to meet the standards in a reasonable timeframe (e.g., two years or next listing cycle) as a result of implementation of required pollutant controls; or

(2) if, upon examination, the original basis for listing is determined to be inaccurate.

Illinois EPA considers evaluated waters initially listed on the 1998 303(d) List to be inaccurately listed. Those waters are in Table 2. (Please refer to section II B for discussion on evaluated waters.) In addition to the above waters that are being removed from the list of impaired waters, the Illinois EPA proposes not to list those waters that have been identified through water quality assessments as being “threatened.” Although “threatened” waters may deserve special attention, the intent of the 2002 Section 303(d) List is to identify and prioritize only those that are truly impaired. Those waters that were identified as “threatened” in previous Section 303(d) Lists are shown below as Criteria Three. All waters on Illinois’ approved Section 303(d) Lists from 1992, 1994, 1996, and 1998 are included on the 2002 Section 303(d) List except the water bodies under the criteria cited above. Perched lakes, waters that are privately owned and hydrologically separated, will not be included in the 2002 Section 303(d) List. The Illinois Pollution Control Board has ruled that perched lakes are not “water of the State.” The distinction, in summary, is based upon the way a cooling-water impoundment is constructed. Where an artificial diking is erected, and water to fill the resulting enclosure is largely obtained by withdrawal from a nearby natural body of water such as a lake or river, the enclosure constitutes a treatment works. Commonly known as “perched” or “side channel lakes,” these bodies of water are, as treatment works, exempt from the Board’s water quality standards, and discharges into them are not subject to the thermal effluent standards. [In the Matter of Water Quality and Effluent Standards Amendments, Cooling Lakes, Docket No. R75-2, pg. 3 (September 29, 1975)] • Criteria One—Water bodies for which new data and information indicate that the applicable

water quality standards for potential causes of previous impairment are being met. These water bodies are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Previously Listed Waters, Now Assessed as Full Support

STREAMS

WSID Water Body Segment

Water Body Name

Year Listed

ILAD02 AD 02 Cache River 1998 ILAD04 AD 04 Cache River 1994

AD 05 Cache River 1994 ILAD05 AD 06 Cache River 1998


9 August 2003


Water Body Name

Year Listed

ILAD01 AD 09 Post Cr. Cutoff 1998 AD 10 Cache River 1998 ILAD05 AD 11 Cache River 1998

ILADC01 ADC 01 Main Ditch 1998 ILADDB01 ADDB01 Little Cache Cr. 1998 ILAJFA01 AJFA21 Max Creek 1998 ILAJG17 AJG 18 Hayes Creek 1994

AK 02 Lusk Creek 1998 ILAK02 AK 07 Lusk Creek 1998

ILAO03 AO 02 Big Creek 1998 ILATF04 ATF 06 N. Fk. Saline R. 1998 ILATG03 ATG 05 M. Fk. Saline R. 1998 ILBE09 BE 09 Embarras R. 1998 ILBPJ07 BPJ 07 Salt Fk. Vermilion R. 1998 ILC21 C 21 Little Wabash R. 1998 ILCD01 CD 04 Elm River 1994 ILDJ01 DJ 01 Spoon River 1998

E 04 Sangamon River 1998 ILE24 E 24 Sangamon River 1998

ILE28 E 18 Sangamon River 1998 ILEID05 EID C8 Sugar Creek 1998 ILFA01 FA 01 Prairie Creek 1998 ILGB11 GB 11 DuPage River 1994 ILIC01 IC 03 Clear Creek 1998 ILICD01 ICD 02 Dutch Creek 1998 ILICE01 ICE 01 Hutchins Creek 1998

IIC 39 Little Marys R. 1998 ILIIC01 IICA01 Gravel Creek 1998

ILII04 IIK 27 Maxwell Creek 1998 ILIXF01 IXF 02 Mill Creek 1998

IXM 01 Cypress Creek 1998 ILIXM01 IXM 05 Cypress Creek 1998 KCA 04 Bay Creek 1998 ILKCA01 KCAI Panther Creek 1998

ILLDA01 LDA 01 S. Henderson R. 1998 LDD 14 Cedar Creek 1992 ILLDD01 LDD 20 Cedar Creek 1992

ILLF02 LF 08 Edwards R. 1998 ILMNI11 MNI12 S. Fork Apple R. 1998 ILN10 N 06 Big Muddy R. 1998

NCE 02 Panther Creek 1998 ILNC05 NCN Locust Creek 1998

ILND04 ND 14 Crab Orchard Cr. 1998 ILNE04 NE 04 Little Muddy R. 1998


10 August 2003


Water Body Name

Year Listed

ILNH06 NH 26 M. Fk. Big Muddy 1994 ILNHB01 NHB 01 Ewing Creek 1998 ILNK01 NK 02 Rayse Creek 1998 ILN08 NL 01 Snow Creek 1998 ILO20 O 20 Kaskaskia R. 1998 ILO30 O 30 Kaskaskia R. 1998 ILPB04 PB 04 Green River 1998 ILPB02 PB 08 Green River 1998 ILPBJA01 PBJA03 Coal Creek 1998 LAKES

WSID Water Body Water Body Year Segment Name Listed

ILRAL RAL LAKE OF EGYPT 1998 ILAJ01 RAT VIENNA CORRECT. 1998 LDE01 RDB SILOAM SPRINGS 1998 ILG30 RGE BECK 1998 ILGLA01 RGZO TAMPIER LAKE 1998 ILNDDA01 RNK LITTLE GRASSY 1998

• Criteria Two—Water bodies for which the original basis for listing was determined to be inaccurate. These water bodies are presented in Tables 2 and 3.

Table 2. Inaccurately Listed Waters

WSID Water Body

Segment Water Body Name Reason for

Delisting Year Listed

ILADL01 ADLA Buck Branch E 1996 AH (unnamed) E 1998 AHA (unnamed) E 1998 AIB Cave Creek E 1998

ILAF01

AIE Mill Spring E 1998 ILATFI01 ATFI-MCC4 Tenmile Cr. E* 1998 ATFI-MCD1 Tenmile Cr. E* 1998

ATHA Spring Valley Creek E 1998 ILATH01 ATHZB DeNeal Branch E 1998

ILB07 BZE Wabash Levee Ditch E* 1998 ILBEJE01 BEJO 01 Spring Point Cr. Trib. E* 1998 ILCAW01 CAWA Jamison Creek E 1998 ILCA06 CAX Conners Branch E 1998 ILGBAA01 GBAA01 Rock Run E 1998 ILGBL10 GBLC Lacey Creek E 1998 ILGL09 GLBA Meacham Creek E 1998


11 August 2003


Water Body Name Reason for Delisting

Year Listed

ILIIC01 IICC Morrison Branch E 1998 ILJ03 JA Discharge, the E* 1998 ILJQ03 JQI East Creek E 1998 ILJR02 JRBA Black Creek E 1998 ILLDH01 LDH S. Henderson Cr. E* 1998 ILLFD01 LFD 01 Camp Cr. East E* 1998 ILLFG01 LFG 01 S. Edwards R. E* 1998 ILN08 NZU Buck Cr. E* 1998 ILN14 N 18 Big Muddy River E 1998 ILNA01 NA Cedar Cr. E* 1998

NCCA Youngs Cr. E* 1998 NCEA William Cr. E* 1998 NCEB Little Beaucoup Cr. E* 1998 NCG Opossum Cr. E* 1998

ILNC05

NCH White Walnut Cr. E* 1998 ILNEB01 TN 15 Reese Cr. E 1998 ILNHB01 NHBA Tilley Cr. E* 1998 ILPBI01 PBIA Oat Creek E 1998

PBK Main Union Special E 1998 ILPB02 PBKA Keefer Branch E 1998

ILDJF01 RDZD AVONDALE VOL 1998 ILDAF01 RDZF GREENFIELD VOL 1994 ILD09 RDZX SENACHWINE VOL 2002 ILGW02 RGI GAGES VOL 1998

RGZB HASTINGS VOL 1998 ILGWAA01 RGZE SLOUGH VOL 1998

ILHF01 RHS TURTLEHEAD VOL 1998 RHZB HORSETAIL VOL 1998 ILH01 RHZC PAPOOSE VOL 1998

ILGI02 RHZF BULLFROG VOL 1998 ILH01 RHZH SAG QUARRY WEST VOL 1998 ILCD01 RIC ANNA STATE

HOSPITAL VOL 1998

ILJH02 RJH WATERLOO CITY VOL 1998 ILNE04 RNS CHRISTOPHER NEW VOL 1998 ILOPA01 ROM ST. ELMO NEW

(NELLIE) VOL 1998

ILOIM02 ROU WALTON PARK VOL 1998 ILOID01 ROY GREENVILLE OLD VOL 1998 ILOK01 ROZY KINMUNDY VOL 1994 ILPS01 RPH LEVINGS PARK

LAGOON VOL 1998


12 August 2003

WSID Water Body

Segment Water Body Name Reason for

Delisting Year Listed

UDF LITTLE SISTER VOL 1998 UDN NO. 3 STRIP MINE VOL 1998 UDO REED CITY VOL 1998

ILD99

UDR WHEEL LAKE VOL 1998 ILDT22 VTZB WEST VOL 1998 ILDTG02 VTZI BODE SOUTH VOL 1998 ILDTE02 VTZU WAUBONSIE VOL 1998 ILDTD02 VTZW GREGORY VOL 1998 ILTRF VTZX OWENS VOL 1998 ILGL09 WGN WESTBURY VOL 1998 ILHCCC04 WGZI OLD SCHOOL VOL 1998

WGZM SPRING (DuPAGE) VOL 1998 ILDTE02 WGZN WILLOW (DuPAGE) VOL 1998

ILGBL10 WGZR HIDDEN VOL 1998 ILGBK05 WGZS MUD VOL 1998 ILG30 WGZT SHERMERVILLE VOL 1998

E- Evaluated monitoring effort E*- Evaluated, but mistakenly identified as monitored in the 1998 303(d) List VOL- Volunteer data

Table 3. Perched Lakes


Water Body Name

County

ILO30 ROW Baldwin Randolph ILD23 SDX Collins

(Heidecke Lake) Grundy

ILF01 UDD Dresden Grundy ILD23 SDZG LaSalle LaSalle

• Criteria Three—There are no water bodies that are currently identified as threatened for one or

more pollutants for purposes of the 2002 303(d) List. III. ILLINOIS’ 2002 SECTION 303(d) LIST

The Illinois Section 303(d) List for 2002 are presented in Table 6. The 2002 Section 303(d) List consists of 7,219.03 stream miles, 127,674.7 inland lake acres and the Illinois portion of Lake Michigan. There are 418 watersheds comprised of 798 individual water segments/bodies. Out of the 798, 616 are streams and 182 are lakes. As required by USEPA guidance, the 2002 Section 303(d) List contains the following information from the state ADB System:


13 August 2003

• Water body I.D. number • Reach number • Stream/Lake name • Size (stream miles, lake acres) • Assessment level • Designated and Impaired Uses • Potential Causes and Sources of Impairment

The Section 303(d) List has been geographically referenced to USEPA’s Reach File, Version 3 (RF3). RF3 is a computerized database of 1:100,000 United States Geological Survey hydrologic maps. As a result of this, total stream miles now include 54,741 miles of intermittent streams in Illinois. For lakes that have not yet been indexed to the Reach File, latitude and longitude information are included. The geographical reference information is provided separately to USEPA in electronic format. Section 303(d) waters listed in Table 6 are also depicted statewide in Figure 34. To further identify waters listed, more detailed maps are provided in Figures 1 through 33. To find a specific water body, Appendix A of this report contains a Water Body Look-Up Guide. Waters are listed alphabetically by water body name.

IV. SCHEDULING OF TMDL DEVELOPMENT

In accordance with USEPA regulations under 40 CFR Part 130.7(b), “the priority ranking shall specifically include the identification of waters targeted for TMDL development in the next two years.” In addition, USEPA guidance requests states to submit a long-term schedule (8-13 years) in which TMDLs will be developed for all listed waters. In Illinois, development of TMDLs will be conducted on a watershed basis. Illinois has provided a general schedule to develop TMDLs for all waters on the Section 303(d) List (Table 6). Table 4 indicates the number of watersheds for which TMDL efforts will be initiated over the next 15 years. The two-year schedule will consist of developing TMDLs for the first 15 watersheds identified in the High Priority List. The TMDL development schedule provided here replaces all schedules previously submitted by the Illinois EPA to USEPA. The schedule will be reviewed and updated in the future, if needed, to ensure timely development of TMDLs, given available resources. The Illinois EPA’s long-term schedule for TMDL development for all waters on the Section 303(d) List, projected over a 15 year period, is consistent with other Illinois EPA program cycles which are typically five years, including statewide monitoring programs such as the rotational intensive river basin surveys and issuance of NPDES permits. The long-term TMDL development schedule will be reviewed and revised, as needed, in conjunction with future Section 303(d) Lists submitted to USEPA


14 August 2003

Table 4. Tentative Long-term Schedule

Year Number of Watersheds Scheduled for TMDLs

2002 - 2003 15 2003 - 2004 20 2004 - 2005 25 2005 - 2006 25 2006 - 2007 27 2007 - 2008 27 2008 - 2009 27 2009 - 2010 27 2010 - 2011 30 2011 - 2012 30 2012 - 2013 30 2013 - 2014 32 2014 - 2015 32 2015 - 2016 32 2016 - 2017 35

V. TMDL IMPLEMENTATION

A. Overview of TMDL Implementation

The Illinois EPA views TMDLs as a tool for developing water quality based solutions that are incorporated into an overall watershed management approach. The TMDL establishes the link between water quality standards assessment and water quality based control actions. For these control actions to be successful, they must be developed in conjunction with local involvement, which incorporate regulatory, voluntary and incentive-based approaches with existing applicable laws and programs.

B. Status Of TMDL Implementation In most cases, Illinois EPA employs contractors to develop TMDLs. TMDL development is currently in progress for 15 watersheds. In addition to these 15 watersheds, USEPA directly hired a contractor to develop TMDLs for two water bodies in Illinois: a segment of Cedar Creek (5.95 miles in length) and Governor Bond Lake (about 775 acres in surface area). Both TMDLs have been completed and approved by USEPA. Those currently in development are in Table 5.


15 August 2003

Table 5. TMDLs Under Development TMDL WSID Water Body

Segment Water Body Name Size-

Miles/Acres Altamont New Reservoir

ILC21 RCJ Altamont New Reservoir 57.00

NC 03 Beaucoup Creek 8.46 NC 10 Beaucoup Creek 9.95 NCI 01 Little Beaucoup Creek 13.46 NCK 01 Swanwick Creek 18.75 NCC 01 Walkers Creek 5.86

Beaucoup Creek

ILNC05

RNM Washington County Lake 295.00 N 12 Big Muddy River 7.97 Big Muddy

River #1 ILN12

RNC Kinkaid Lake 3475.00 NCDC 01 Bonnie Creek 9.99 NCD 03 Gallum Creek 4.48 NCD 05 Gallum Creek 13.34

Bonnie Creek ILNCD01

NCDB Little Gallum Creek 13.36 NJ 10 Casey Fork 11.83 NJ 14 Casey Fork 3.49

Casey Fork ILNJ07

NJC Sevenmile Creek 10.20 Charleston Side Channel Reservoir

ILBE09 RBC Charleston Side Channel Reservoir

346.00

GBL 05 E. Branch DuPage River 3.16 GBL 10 E. Branch DuPage River 4.63 GBL 08 E. Branch DuPage River 5.57

DuPage River- East Branch

ILGBL10

GBLB St. Joseph Creek 4.28 GBK 07 W. Branch DuPage River 6.32 GBK 09 W. Branch DuPage River 4.41 GBK 05 W. Branch DuPage River 2.86

DuPage River- West Branch

ILGBK05

GBK 12 W. Branch DuPage River 3.81 ADD 02 Dutchman Creek 14.80 Dutchman

Creek ILADD01

RAM Dutchman Lake 118.00 CH 02 Fox River 17.61 RCB Borah Lake 137.00

Fox River ILCH01

RCC Olney East Fork Lake 935.00 Kaskaskia-East Fork

ILOK01 OK 01 E. Fork Kaskaskia River 17.13

Little Muddy River

ILNE05 NE 05 Little Muddy River 15.48

Rayse Creek ILNK01 NK 01 Rayse Creek 8.34


16 August 2003

TMDL WSID Water Body

Segment Water Body Name Size-

Miles/Acres GL 09 Salt Creek 11.79 GL 03 Salt Creek 10.43 GL 10 Salt Creek 3.68 GL 19 Salt Creek 3.09 GLB 01 Spring Brook 3.14 RGZX Busse Woods Lake 590.00 GLA 02 Addison Creek 6.64

Salt Creek ILGL09

GLA 04 Addison Creek 3.87 Vandalia Lake ILO08 ROD Vandalia Lake 660.00

VI. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The Illinois EPA has a comprehensive approach to offer opportunities to stakeholders to participate, review, and comment throughout the TMDL development process. For watersheds in which the development of TMDLs is currently underway, the Illinois EPA holds two public meetings and one public hearing. When the development of TMDLs is initiated for more than one watershed at the same time, Illinois EPA holds the first public meeting at its headquarters in Springfield, Illinois. In this meeting, Illinois EPA along with its contractors provides an overview of the TMDL work to be initiated. The second public meeting is held at a location within a specific watershed to enable greater local participation. In this meeting, Illinois EPA and its contractor provide an update of the progress made to-date. The third meeting is a public hearing, held within the watershed, on the draft TMDL report. The stakeholders have an opportunity to comment 30 days prior to hearing date, during the hearing and 30 days after the hearing. In addition, where applicable, the report is distributed to the Illinois Department of Agriculture and to the USDA—Natural Resources Conservation Service, and others for technical review and input. Recently, a TMDL stakeholders group of 30 to 40 members has been assembled. The group consists of representatives from environmental groups, point source dischargers, Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group, USEPA, nonpoint sources including agricultural and commodity associations and other organizations. Meetings of this group were held on February 5, 2002 and May 7, 2002 in Springfield, Illinois. The Illinois TMDL Stakeholders Workgroup will continue to meet from time to time, serving as a sounding board and review panel for development of various program elements.


17 August 2003

VII. WATER BODY SPECIFIC INFORMATION

Definitions of Abbreviations Used in the List of Impaired Waters

The following is provided as an explanation of information found in Tables 6. Columns included on the tables are discussed from left to right.

1) Watershed ID (WSID)/Figure – Code that identifies the watershed (or portion of watershed) in

which each assessed stream segment or lake occurs. Figure represents the associated watershed map.

2) Water Body Segme nt - Alphanumeric identification code for each assessed segment.

3) Water Body Segment Name – Code that identifies each assessed stream segment or lake.

4) Size in Miles/Acres - Length of the river or stream in river miles or surface area of the lake, in

acres.

5) Year 303(d) Listed – Year in which the water body segment was first listed.

6) Assessment Level - Assessments are divided into two categories types, monitored and evaluated. These categories are subdivided into numeric codes indicating the program or method of data collection utilized to make the assessments.

M = “Monitored waters” are those waterbodies for which the assessment is based on current

site-specific ambient and/or intensive data (i.e., data no more than five years old).

200 = Physical/chemical monitoring 205 = Ambient Lake Monitoring Program chemical/physical data <5 years old. 208 = Lake Michigan Monitoring Program chemical/physical data < 5 years old. 230 = Physical/chemical Ambient Water Quality Monitoring Network data (segment

contains station) =5 years old. 250 = Chemical monitoring of sediments

260 = Fish-tissue analysis data. 300 = Facility-Related Stream Survey =5 years old. 320 = Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys 330 = Fish Surveys 420 = Water column survey (e.g., fecal coliform bacteria) data =5 years old. 700 = Intensive Basin Survey data =5 years old.

717 = Federal/Illinois Clean Lakes Program intensive data <5 years old. 800 = Assessments based on data from other sources. 860 = Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data 869 = Monitoring data =5 years old, collected by non-IEPA persons or programs.

E = “Evaluated waters” are those waterbodies for which the assessment is based on

information other than current site-specific ambient or intensive data. 130 = Land use information and location of potential sources of impairment

(used only with other codes). 150 = Monitoring data >5 but =15 years old.


18 August 2003

155 = Ambient Lake Monitoring Program chemical/physical data >5 but <15 years old. 156 = Lake Water Quality Assessment Program chemical/physical data >5 but <15 years

157 = Federal/Illinois Clean Lakes Program intensive data >5 but <15 years old. 170 = Professional judgment (used only with other codes). 190 = Biological/habitat data extrapolated from an upstream or downstream water body. 191 = Physical/chemical, data extrapolated from an upstream or downstream water body. 800 = Assessments based on data from other sources. 810 = Chemical/physical volunteer-collected data.

813 = Volunteer Lake Monitoring Program - Secchi data <5 years old. 814 = Volunteer Lake Monitoring Program - Secchi and water quality data <5 years old.

820 = Macroinvertebrate volunteer-collected data. 860 = Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data 868 = Monitoring data >5 but =15 years old, collected by non-IEPA persons or programs.

7) Designated Uses - Use Support and Designated Uses are identified by the following numeric codes:

Use Support is identified by a letter code attached to the corresponding designated use code.

F = Full T = Threatened P = Partial Support N = Nonsupport X = Indicates that a particular designated use was not assessed Designated Uses are identified by the following numbers: 1 = Overall Use 44 = Secondary Contact (recreation) 20 = Aquatic Life 46 = Secondary Contact and Indigenous Aquatic Life

21 = Fish Consumption 50 = Drinking Water Supply 42 = Primary Contact (swimming)

8) Potential Causes - Indicates potential causes of impaired uses from the codes below.

H = Confidence Level 3 M = Confidence Level 2 S = Confidence Level 1 T = No Confidence Level assigned

0 = cause unknown 300 = priority organics 400 = nonpriority organics 410 = PCBs 420 = dioxins 500 = metals

510 = arsenic 520 = cadmium 530 = copper 540 = chromium 550 = lead

560 = mercury 570 = selenium 580 = zinc

600 = ammonia (unionized) 700 = chlorine 720 = cyanide 750 = sulfates 800 = other inorganics (fluoride) 900 = nutrients

910 = phosphorus 920 = total ammonia-N


19 August 2003

921 = inorganic -N (nitrates) 925 = nitrogen, total (nitrates

+ TKN) 930 = nitrates

1000 = pH 1100 = siltation 1200 = organic enrichment/Low DO

1210= organic enrichment 1220 = low dissolved oxygen

1300 = salinity/TDS/chlorides 1320 = TDS (conductivity) 1330 = chlorides

1400 = thermal modification 1500 = flow alteration 1600 = habitat alteration (other than flow)

1700 = pathogens 1900 = oil and grease 2000 = taste and odor 2100 = suspended solids 2200 = excessive native aquatic plants 2210 = excessive algal growth 2500 = turbidity 2600 = exotic species 3000 = pesticides (half life = 90 days)

3100 = atrazine 3200 = cyanazine 3300 = alachlor 3400 = metolachlor 3500 = metribuzin 3600 = trifluralin 3700 = butylate

9) Potential Sources - Indicates the potential sources that contribute to the potential causes listed above.

POINT SOURCES 100 : industrial point sources 200 : municipal point sources 210 : major municipal point sources 400 : combined sewer overflows

500 : collection system failure 800 : wildcat sewer 900 : domestic wastewater lagoons

NONPOINT SOURCES

1000 Agriculture 1050 : Crop Related Sources

1100 : non-irrigated crop production

1200 : irrigated crop production 1300 : specialty crop production

1350 : Grazing Related Sources 1400 : pasture land

1600 : feedlots - all types 1700 : aquaculture 1800 : animal holding/management areas 1900 : manure lagoons

2000 Silviculture 3000 Construction

3100 : highway/road/bridge 3200 : land development

4000 Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers 5000 Resource Extraction

5100 : surface mining 5200 : subsurface mining 5400 : dredge mining 5500 : petroleum activities 5600 : mill tailings

5700 : mine tailings 5800 : acid mine drainage 5900 : abandoned mining

6000 Land Disposal (runoff/leachate from permitted areas) 6100 : sludge 6200 : wastewater 6300 : landfills 6350 : inappropriate disposal/wildcat dumping 6400 : industrial land treatment 6500 : on-site wastewater systems (septic tanks, etc.) 6600 : hazardous waste 6700 : septage disposal

7000 Hydrologic/Habitat Modification 7100 : channelization 7200 : dredging 7300 : dam construction 7350 : upstream impoundment 7400 : flow regulation/modification 7500 : bridge construction

7550 Habitat Modification 7600 : removal of riparian vegetation


20 August 2003

7700 : streambank mod./destabilization 7800 : draining/filling of wetlands

7900 Marinas and Recreational Boating 8000 Other 8100 Atmospheric Deposition 8200 Waste Storage/Storage Tank Leaks 8300 Highway Maintenance and Runoff 8400 Spills (Accidental) 8500 Contaminated Sediments 8540 Sediment Resuspension 8600 Natural Sources 8700 Recreation and Tourism Activities 8900 Salt Storage Sites 8910 Groundwater Loading 8920 Groundwater Withdrawal 8930 Waterfowl 8940 Lake Fertilization 8950 Other 8951 Herbicide/Algicide Application 8960 Forest/Grassland/Parkland 9000 Source Unknown


21 August 2003

Table 6. Illinois 2002 Section 303(d) List and Prioritization- High Priority

Note: All lakes are capitalized and streams are in lower case.

High Priority

WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT

WATER BODY NAME SIZE MILES / ACRES

YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM

DESIGNATED USES POTENTIAL CAUSES POTENTIAL SOURCES

RDZP PALMYRA-MODESTO 35.00 1994 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, P50, X21

H1000, H1200, H1220, H2210, H3000

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 8700, 8960

DAG 02 Hodges Cr. 10.69 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1100 7000 RDF OTTER 765.00 1996 M 205, 260 F20, F21, P1, P42,

P44, P50 H2210, H3000 200, 1000, 1050, 1100,

7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 7900

ILDAG01 (Figure 18)

SDZF HETTICK 110.00 1996 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F21, F50, P42, P44

H1200,H1220,H2210,H900, H910

1000,7000,7400,8960

ROL GLEN SHOALS 1350.00 1994 M 205, 260 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, P50

H1200, H1220, H2210, H3000, H900, H910

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 7900, 8960

ILOIL01 (Figure 24)

ROT HILLSBORO OLD 108.70 1998 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

H1200, H1220, H2210, H3000, H900, H910, M500, M580

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8700,8960

RBD VERMILION 608.00 1998 M 260717 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, P50

H1100, H1200, H1220, H2210, H900, H930, S2100, S925

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8700, 8960

ILBPG09 (Figure 29)

BPG 09 N. Fk. Vermilion R. 5.91 1998 M 230, 700 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000 CA 05 Skillet Fk. 10.96 2002 M 230, 260 P1, P20, P21, P42,

P50 T3100, T410, T3000, T1000, T1100, T1200, T2100, T500, T900, T920, T1700

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100, 9000

CA 02 Skillet Fk. 19.96 2002 M 260, 700 P1, P20, P21 H410, T1100, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 1800, 7000, 7100, 7200, 9000

ILCA03 (Figure 31)

CA 03 Skillet Fk. 7.18 1998 M 230, 260 F42, P1, P20, P21 H410, T560, T1000, T1100, T1200, T2100, T500, T530, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 1800, 7000, 7100, 9000


22 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


RDG CARLINVILLE 168.00 1996 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, P50, X21

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930

900, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7550, 7700, 8700

DA 04 Macoupin Cr. 19.73 1998 M 230, 260 F1, F20, F21, N42 T1700 9000 DA 05 Macoupin Cr. 43.89 1998 M 260, 300 F21, P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T900, T910,

T920 200, 1000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7700

DAZN Briar Cr. 3.97 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T900, T910, T920

200, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

ILDA04 (Figure 18)

RDH BEAVER DAM 56.50 1998 E 260, 813 F20, F21, N44, P1, P42, X50

T1100, T2200, T2210, T900, T910

7550, 7700, 8500, 8960

RBX PARIS TWIN WEST 56.70 1994 M 205, 260 F21, N42, P1, P20, P44, P50

T1200, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8300, 8930, 8960

BM 02 Sugar Cr. 12.87 2002 M 230, 700 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000 BM C2 Sugar Cr. 2.95 1998 M 300 P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1500, T900 200, 7000, 7400

ILBM02 (Figure 30)

RBL PARIS TWIN EAST 162.80 1994 M 205, 260 F21, F50, P1, P20, P42, P44

T2100, T2210, T600, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8300, 8930, 8960

SDA EVERGREEN 700.00 1998 M 260, 717 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, P50

T1000, T2210, T600, T900, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8960

DK 17 Mackinaw R. 18.09 2002 M 260, 700 F1, F20, P21, X50 H410 9000 DK 20 Mackinaw R. 21.19 2002 M 260, 700 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000 DK 21 Mackinaw R. 22.37 2002 M 260, 700 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000 DKN 01 Sixmile Cr. 11.18 2002 M 700 P1, P20 M1600 7000, 7100, 7400

ILDK17 (Figure 14)

DKS Turkey Cr. 10.87 2002 M 300 P1, P20 S900, S910, M1600, M2210 800 OKA 01 N. Fk. Kaskaskia R. 10.25 1994 M 230, 700 F21, P1, P20, P42,

P50 T3000, T3100, T1100, T1200, T2100, T500, T900, T910, T920, T1700

1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5500 ILOKA01 (Figure 24)

OKA 02 N. Fk. Kaskaskia R. 15.31 2002 E* P1, P20, P42, P50 H3000, H3100, T1200, T500, T520, T1700

1000, 1050, 1100

RBP OAKLAND 23.40 1998 M 205, 260 F21, N42, P1, P20, P44, P50

T2100, T2210, T500, T600, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 1800, 7550, 7700, 9000

ILBEZX01 (Figure 30)

RBK WALNUT POINT 58.70 1998 E 155 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 8500, 8960

ROZA HIGHLAND SILVER 550.00 1994 M 205, 260 P1, P20, P21, P42, P44, P50

H300, T1100, T1200, T2100, T2210, T410, T900, T910, T920, T3100

1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400 ILODL02 (Figure 25)

ODL 02 E. Fk. Silver Cr. 5.59 2002 M P1, P20 T1600, T900, T910 1000, 1100 OK 01 E. Fk. Kaskaskia R. 17.13 1998 M 230, 700 F42, P1, P20, P50 T1000, T1100, T1200, T2100,

T500, T900, T910, T920, T3100 1000, 1050, 1100 ILOK01

(Figure 24) SOB FARINA 4.00 2002 M 205 F1, F20, F42, F50,

P44, X21 T500, T530, T900, T910, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 8951


23 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


BPJ 03 Salt Fk. Vermilion R. 9.97 1994 M 230 F1, F20, P42, P50, X21

T1700, T930 9000

BPJ 08 Salt Fk. Vermilion R. 3.17 2002 M 700 F1, F20, P50 T930 9000 BPJ 10 Salt Fk. Vermilion R. 13.60 2002 M 700 F1, F20, P50 T930 9000

ILBPJ03 (Figure 29)

RBO HOMER 80.80 1998 M 205, 260 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, X50

T2100, T2210, T500, T600, T900, T910, T920, T 930

1000, 1050, 1100, 3000, 3200, 7550, 7700, 8960

SDL MAUVAISSE TERRE 172.00 1994 M 205, 260 F21, N42, P1, P20, P44, P50

T1100, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8960

ILDD04 (Figure 18)

DD 04 Mauvaise Terre R. 36.55 1998 M 230 ,260, 300, 700

F21, N42, P1, P20 T1600, T2100, T900, T910, T1700

200, 1000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600, 7700

RBS GEORGETOWN 46.10 1996 M 205 N42, P1, P20, P44, P50, X21

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T 930

1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 4000, 8500, 8960

BO 04 Little Vermilion R. 2.77 2002 M 300, 700 F1, F20, P50 T930 9000 BO 05 Little Vermilion R. 0.37 2002 M 300, 700 F1, F20, P50 T930 9000

ILBO07 (Figure 29)

BO 07 Little Vermilion R. 5.11 2002 M 230, 700 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000 ILC09 (Figure 31)

C 09 Little Wabash R. 21.83 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F21, F42, P1, P20, P50

T3100, T1000, T1100, T1700, T2100, T3000, T1200, T900, T920

1000, 1100, 9000

ILC19 (Figure 31)

C 19 Little Wabash R. 35.89 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F21, P1, P20, P42, P50

T3100, T3000, T1000, T1100, T1200, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T1700

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7300

ILREF (Figure 20)

REF SPRINGFIELD 4040.00 1994 M 205, 260 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, P50

T1000, T1100, T1200, T1700, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930

100, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 7900, 8300, 8700, 8960, 9000

ROO NASHVILLE CITY 42.00 1998 M 260, 717 F20, F21, N42, P1, P44, P50

T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T3100

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 8960 ILOJAF01 (Figure 24)

OJAF-NVC1 Nashville Cr. 3.11 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T1500, T900, T910, T920 200, 1000, 1050, 1100 ROR SALEM 74.20 1996 M 205 N42, N44, P1, P20,

P50, X21 T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T3100

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 8930

OJK 02 Town Cr. 6.73 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T900, T910, T930 200, 4000

ILOJK02 (Figure 24)

OJK 03 Town Cr. 1.50 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T900, T910, T930 200, 4000 ILO03 (Figure 25)

O 26 Kaskaskia R. 3.27 2002 M 191, 330 P1, P20, F21, P50 T900, T910, T920, T1100, T1500, T1600, T2100, T930

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100

ILDGZO01 (Figure 17)

RLE CARTHAGE 36.10 2002 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, P50, X21

T1100, T2100, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 3000, 3200, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8700, 8960

DS 06 Vermilion R. 13.98 1998 M 230, 700 F21, P1, P20, P42, P50

T1100, T2100, T900, T920, T930, T1700

1000, 7000, 7100 ILDS06 (Figure 12)

DS 14 Vermilion R. 17.81 2002 M 700 F1, F20, F21, P50 T930 9000


24 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


O 08 Kaskaskia R. 16.67 2002 M 230, 700 F1, F20, F21, F42, P50

T3100 1000

O 33 Kaskaskia R. 13.95 2002 M 700 F1, F20, P50 T3100 1000

ILO08 (Figure 24)

ROD VANDALIA 660.00 1994 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

T1000, T2210, T900, T910, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700, 8700

ILEL01 (Figure 20)

EL 01 Spring Cr. 34.50 1998 M 230, 700 N42, P1, P20, P50 T1200, T1600, T900, T910, T930, T1700

400, 1000, 4000

ILO20 (Figure 25)

O 91 Kaskaskia R. 13.01 2002 M F21, P1, P20, P50 T2100, T900, T910, T920, T3100 1000, 1100, 9000

ILDKP02 (Figure 14)

RDO BLOOMINGTON 635.00 1994 M 260, 717 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, P50

T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930 1000, 1050, 1100, 3000, 3200, 8960


25 August 2003

Table 6. Illinois 2002 Section 303(d) List and Prioritization- Medium Priority

Medium Priority

WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


G 28 Des Plaines R. 8.84 1998 M 260, 700, 860 P1, P20, P21 H500, H560, T1500, T1600, T300, T720, T900, T910

200, 400, 3000, 3100, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7400, 7700, 8500, 9000

G 32 Des Plaines R. 6.13 2002 M 200, 260 P1, P20, P21 H410, H500, H560, T1200, T1220, T1300, T1320, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 400, 3000, 3200, 4000, 8300, 9000

G 15 Des Plaines R. 3.49 1994 M 230, 260 N42, P1, P20, P21 H500, H560, T1200, T1220, T1300, T1320, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

200, 400, 3000, 3200, 4000, 8300, 9000

G 30 Des Plaines R. 5.05 1998 M 200, 260 P1, P20, P21 H500, H560, T1200, T1220, T1300, T1320, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 400, 3000, 3200, 4000, 8300, 9000

RGF OPEKA 40.50 1998 E 155 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T2200 4000, 8960

G 07 Des Plaines R. 10.28 1994 M 230, 260, 700, 860

F1, F20, N42, P21 H500, H560, T1700 9000

G 22 Des Plaines R. 4.12 1994 M 230, 260 F1, F20, P21, P42 H500, H560, T1700 9000 G 26 Des Plaines R. 5.93 1998 M 200, 260, 700 F1, F20, P21 H500, H560 9000 G 35 Des Plaines R. 5.10 1998 M 260, 700, 860 F1, F20, P21 H500, H560 9000 G 36 Des Plaines R. 6.95 1998 M 200, 260 F1,F20,P21 H500,H560 9000 SGF SCHILLER POND 6.00 2002 M 260 P21, X1, X20, X42,

X44, X50 H410 9000

ILG30 (Figure 2)

RGL BIG BEND 22.00 2002 M 205 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T1000, T1300, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 7550, 7700

ATHG01 Sugar Cr. 4.18 1992 M 230, 700 F42, N1, N20 H1000, H1200, H500, H520, H530, H580, H750, M1300, S2100, S900, S910

5000, 5100, 5700, 5800

ATHV01 East Palzo Cr. 3.15 1998 E 150 N1, N20 T1000, T1300, T500, T900, T920

5000, 5100, 5800

ILATHG01 (Figure 32)

ATHG05 Sugar Cr. 0.90 1992 M 230 P1, P20, X42 H1000, H1200, H1220, H500 5000, 5100, 5800


26 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


DT 09 Fox R. 6.65 2002 M 230, 260, 700, 860

N42, P1, P20, P21 H1200, H1220, H410, M1700, M300, S1100, S1500, S1600, S2100, S900, S921

200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8500, 9000

DT 38 Fox R. 12.13 2002 M 230, 260, 860 N42, P1, P20, P21 H1000, H1200, H1220, H410, M1700, S1100, S1500, S1600, S2100

400, 4000, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 9000

DT 69 Fox R. 4.64 2002 M 260, 700, 860 P1, P20, P21 H1000, H1200, H1220, H410, M300, S1500, S1600, S900, S921

200, 4000, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8500, 9000

DT 58 Fox R. 4.28 2002 M 260, 860 P1, P20, P21 H1200, H1220, H410, S1500, S1600

7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 9000

DT 03 Fox R. 5.84 2002 M 260, 700, 860 F1, F20, N42, P21 H410, T1700 9000 WGZL PICKEREL 22.00 1998 M 205 F1, F20, F42, P44,

X21, X50 H2210 8960

ILDT38 (Figure 4)

RTO JERICHO (MIGHELL) 22.00 1998 E 155 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T1200 1000, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7700, 8000, 8930, 8960

FLGB-C1 Ashkum Cr. 3.07 2002 M 300 N1, N20 H1200, H1220, H1300, H1320, H500, H600, M1210, S900, S910

100

FLGZ-C1 Clifton South Cr 2.04 2002 M 300 N1, N20 H1100, H1200, H1220, H500, S1210, S900, S910

800

ILFLG01 (Figure 10)

FLGB-C4 Ashkum Cr. 2.60 2002 M 300 P1, P20 H500, S1100, S1600 100, 800, 7000, 7100 RND MURPHYSBORO 143.00 1998 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44,

X21, X50 H1000, H1200, H1220, H2210, M500, S900, S910

8500, 8940, 8960, 9000 ILN12 (Figure 26)

N 12 Big Muddy R. 7.97 1994 M 230, 260, 700 F21, F42, P1, P20 H1000, H1200, H500, H750, S2100

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100

FLEA-C1 Clifton N 1.27 2002 M 300 N1, N20, X21, X42 H1100, H1200, H1220, H1300, H1320, H500, H530, H600, M1210, S900, S910

800 ILFLE01 (Figure 10)

FLE 02 Langan Cr. 0.77 2002 M 300 N1, N20, X21, X42 H1300, H1320, H500, H600, S1200, S1210, S900, S910

800

NA 01 Cedar Cr. 3.98 1998 M 230, 700 F42, P1, P20 H1000, H1200, H500, H530, S2100

1000, 1050, 1300, 1400, 7000, 7400, 9000

RNZM LITTLE CEDAR 70.00 2002 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

H1000, H1100, H2210 8960

NAC 01 Cave Cr. 8.90 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1200, T1600 1000, 1400

ILNA01 (Figure 26)

RNE CEDAR (JACKSON) 1800.00 1996 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F42, F44, F50, P21

H500, H560 8600


27 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


DT 01 Fox R. 2.88 2002 M 230, 260, 300 F42, P1, P20, P21 H1000, H2210, H410, S1100, S1500, S1600, S2100

4000, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 9000

DT 11 Fox R. 3.59 2002 M 260, 700, 860 P1, P20, P21 H1000, H1100, H1200, H1220, H410, M300, S1500, S900, S910

7000, 7400, 8500, 8540, 9000

DT 46 Fox R. 4.48 2002 M 230, 260, 860 P1, P20, P21, P42 H1000, H410, S1100, S1500, S2100, T1700

7000, 7400, 9000

DT 02 Fox R. 11.22 2002 M 260, 860 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000 DT 36 Fox R. 2.59 2002 M 260, 700, 860 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

ILDT46 (Figure 4)

DT 41 Fox R. 12.17 2002 M 260, 860 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000 ND 04 Crab Orchard Cr. 11.49 1998 M 230, 700 P1, P20, P42 H1000, H1200, H500, H750,

M1300, M1700, S2100 1000, 1050, 1100, 1400, 1800, 5000, 5100, 9000

ND 08 Crab Orchard Cr. 2.43 1998 M 700 P1, P20 T1000, T1200, T1300, T1320, T1600, T2100, T500, T750

1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100, 7000, 7100

ND 10 Crab Orchard Cr. 3.81 1998 E 190, 191 P1, P20 T1200 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000

ILND04 (Figure 26)

RNL MARION 220.00 2002 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

H1100, H1200, H1220, H2210, H900, H910, M300, M500, M530

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 8951

HB 01 Little Calumet R. S. 8.55 1992 M 700, 869 N1, N20, X21, N42 M300, M500, H800, S900, S910, S920, H1000, H1200, H1220, S1600, H1700, H1900, S2600

200, 400, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7200, 8500

ILHB42 (Figure 1)

HB 42 Little Calumet R. S. 4.08 1992 M 230 N1, N20, P42 T1100, T1200, T1600, T2100, T300, T720, T800, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700,

400, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7200, 7600

BC 02 Bonpas Cr. 28.31 1994 M 230, 260, 700 F21, N42, P1, P20 T1200, T1700, T1000, T1100, T1600, T2100, T500, T530, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 1800, 7000, 7100, 9000

RBZN WEST SALEM OLD 2.00 2002 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

H1000, H2210, H900, H910 1000, 1050, 1100, 8951

ILBC02 (Figure 31)

RBQ WEST SALEM NEW 32.00 2002 M 205 F20, F50, N42, P1, P44, X21

H1000, H2210, H900, H910 1000, 1050, 1100

ILADC01 (Figure 33)

RAB MERMET 452.00 2002 M 205, 260 F20, F21, N44, P1, P42, X50

T1000, T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T920

7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8600, 8930, 8960

ILATH05 (Figure 32)

ATH 05 S. Fk. Saline R. 7.94 1992 M 230, 700 F42, N1, N20 H1000, H1200, H500, H520, H750, S1300, S2100

5000, 5100, 5800, 7000, 7100

ILN01 (Figure 26)

N 99 Big Muddy R. 28.20 2002 M 191, 260, 330 F21, P1, P20 H1000, H1200, H500, H750, S2100

200, 210, 1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100


28 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


GL 19 Salt Cr. 3.09 1992 M 260, 300, 420, 700, 860

F21, P1, P20 T1200, T1220, T1600, T2100, T300, T410, T500, T720, T900, T910, T930

200, 400, 3000, 3100, 4000, 7000, 7100, 8500

GLB 01 Spring Brook 3.14 1998 M 300, 420 P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1220, T1500, T1600, T2100, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T930

200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7350, 7400, 8500

GL 03 Salt Cr. 10.43 1992 M 260, 300, 700, 860

F21, P1, P20 T1200, T1220, T1300, T1320, T1600, T2100, T300, T410, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 400, 500, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 8500

GL 09 Salt Cr. 11.79 1992 M 230, 260, 300, 420, 700, 860

F21, N42, P1, P20 T1300, T1320, T1500, T2210, T300, T410, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

200, 400, 500, 4000, 7000, 7350, 7400, 8500

GL 10 Salt Cr. 3.68 1992 M 260, 300, 420, 700

F21, P1, P20 T1300, T1320, T1500, T1600, T900, T910, T930

200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7350, 7400

GL Salt Cr. 11.19 1992 E 150, 260 F21, X1, X20 T900, T1300, T1700 200, 400, 7000, 7100, 7600, 8000, 8800

RGZX BUSSE WOODS 590.00 1998 M 205, 260 F20, P1, P21, P42, P44, X50

H1300, H1320, H2210, H410, M300

3000, 3200, 4000, 8300, 8930, 8960, 9000

ILGL09 (Figure 2)

WGZY INDIAN 13.00 2002 M 717 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

H1000, H2210, H900, H910 8930, 8960

DT 06 Fox R. 11.96 2002 M 230, 260, 700, 860

F42, P1, P20, P21 H1200, H1220, H410, M300, S1100, S1500, S1600, S2100, S900, S921

4000, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8540, 9000

DT 18 Fox R. 7.53 2002 M 191, 260, 860 P1, P20, P21 H1200, H1220, H410, M300, S1100, S1500, S1600, S2100, S900, S921

200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8500, 9000

DT 22 Fox R. 8.15 2002 M 230, 260, 700, 860

N42, P1, P20, P21 H410, M1700, S1100, S1500, S1600, S2100, S900, S921

4000, 7000, 7400, 8500, 9000

DT 20 Fox R. 5.62 2002 M 260, 860 P1, P20, P21, X50 H1200, H1220, H410, S1500, S1600

7000, 7400, 7550, 9000

DT 23 Fox R. 28.83 2002 E 260 P21, X1, X20 H410 9000 RTG BANGS 297.00 1998 E 155 F1, F20, F42, P44,

X21, X50 T900, T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200

1000, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 8000, 8500, 8700, 8960

VTZH CRYSTAL LAKE 228.00 1998 E 814 F1, F20, X21, F42, F44, X50

T900, T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200

1000, 1100, 1300, 3000, 3200, 4000, 6000, 6500, 7000, 7700, 8000, 800

ILDT22 (Figure 3)

VTZO JAYCEE PARK 8.00 1998 E 814 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T900, T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200

1000, 1100, 4000, 5000, 5100, 8000, 8500, 8930, 8960


29 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


G 03 Des Plaines R. 8.56 1998 M 200, 260, 700, 860

P1, P20, P21 H410, H500, H560, T1200, T1220, T1300, T1320, T1500, T2100, T300, T720, T900, T910, T920

200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 8500, 9000

G 11 Des Plaines R. 3.17 1992 M 230, 260, 700, 860

N21, P1, P20, P42 H410, H500, H560, T1200, T1220, T1300, T1320, T1500, T2100, T300, T720, T900, T910, T920, T1700

200, 4000, 7000, 7400, 8500, 9000

ILG11 (Figure 2)

G 39 Des Plaines R. 15.96 1998 M 230, 260, 700, 860

N42, P1, P20, P21 H410, H500, H560, T1300, T1320, T1330, T1500, T2100, T300, T720, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7400, 8500, 9000

AT 06 Saline R. 9.94 1998 M 230, 700 F42, P1, P20 H1200, H1300, H1320, H500, H750, S1100, S2100, S900, S910

1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100, 5800

ILAT06 (Figure 32)

AT 07 Saline R. 7.29 1998 M 191, 330 F21, P1, P20 S1000, S1200, S1300, S1320, S1600, S500, S750, S900, S910

1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100, 7000, 7100

NH 06 M. Fk. Big Muddy 12.56 1994 M 230, 260 F21, N42, P1, P20 H1000, H1100, H1200, H500, M1700, S2100, S900, S910

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 1800, 5000, 5100, 5500, 9000

NHH Sugar Camp Cr. 13.20 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T500, T900, T920

1000

ILNH06 (Figure 26)

NH 07 M. Fk. Big Muddy 18.59 1998 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 H1100, M1200, M500 1000, 1050, 1100, 1400, 5000, 5100, 5500

EO 02 S. Fk. Sangamon R. 16.29 1998 M 230, 260 F42, P1, P20, P21 H300, T1100, T1200, T2100, T900, T920, T930

1000, 5700, 9000

EO 04 S. Fk. Sangamon R. 10.75 1998 M 230, 260 F42, P1, P20, P21 H300, T1100, T1200, T2100, T900, T920, T930

1000, 5700, 9000

ILEO02 (Figure 20)

EO 05 S. Fk. Sangamon R. 13.48 2002 E 150, 260 P1, P20, P21 H300, T1100, T1200, T500 1000, 9000 RIA HORSESHOE

(ALEXANDER) 1890.00 1998 M 205 N1, N42, N44, P20,

X21, X50 H1000, H1100, H1200, H1220, H2210, H900, H910, S1600, S2100, S925

1000, 1050, 1100, 8930, 8960 ILIX04 (Figure 33)

IX 06 Cache R. 12.66 1998 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1600, T2100 1000, 1100, 7000, 7100 REC TAYLORVILLE 1148.00 1996 M 205, 260 F50, N42, N44, P1,

P20, P21 H1200, H1220, H2210, H300, H900, H910, S2100

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 8700, 8960

ILEO10 (Figure 20)

EO 13 S. Fk. Sangamon R. 20.02 2002 E 150, 260 P1, P20, P21 H300, T1100, T1200, T500 1000, 7000, 9000 ATH 02 S. Fk. Saline R. 7.97 1992 M 230 P1, P20, P42 H1000, H1200, H500, H520,

M1700, S2100 100, 1000, 1800, 5000, 5100, 5800, 7000, 7100, 9000

ATH 14 S. Fk. Saline R. 4.03 1992 M 700 P1, P20 M1200 100, 200, 7000, 7100

ILATH02 (Figure 32)

ATH 11 S. Fk. Saline R. 8.52 1992 M 700 F1, F20 T500, T1600 100, 1000, 1100 ILNK01 (Figure 26)

NK 01 Rayse Cr. 8.34 1994 M 230 P1, P20, P42 H1000, H1200, H500, M1700, S2100, S900, S910

1000, 1050, 1100, 1600, 1800, 9000

ILHBDB03 (Figure 1)

RHR GEORGE (COOK) 8.00 1998 M 205, 260 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, X50

H1000, H1100, H1200, H1220, H2210, H900, H910, M300

1000, 1050, 4000, 7550, 7700, 8930


30 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILN08 (Figure 26)

N 08 Big Muddy R. 37.70 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F21, F42, P1, P20 H1000, H1200, H500, S2100, S900, S910

1000, 1050, 1100, 1600, 5000, 5500, 9000

ATGC01 Bankston Fk. 4.31 1998 M 230, 700 P1, P20, P42 H500, H750, M1200, M1300, M1320, M1700, S2100

1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100, 5800, 5900, 7000, 7100, 9000

ATHS01 Brier Cr. 4.59 1998 E N1, N20 T1000, T1300, T1600, T500, T800

5000, 5100, 5800, 7000, 7100

ATGC11 Bankston Fk. 9.46 1994 E 150 P1, P20 T1300, T500, T750, T900, T920

5000, 5100

ILATGC01 (Figure 32)

ATGC02 Bankston Fk. 4.70 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T1300, T500, T750 1000, 5000, 5100, 5800, 5900, 7000, 7100

ATG 03 M. Fk. Saline R. 7.41 1998 M 230, 300, 700 P1, P20, P42, X21 H1000, H750, M1300, M1320, M1700, S2100, S900, S910

1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100, 5200, 5800, 5900, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600, 9000

ATG 04 M. Fk. Saline R. 4.73 1998 E 150 F1, F20 T500, T750, T900, T920, T1000, T1100, T1300, T2100

200, 1000, 1100, 5000, 5100, 5200, 5800, 5900, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

ILATG03 (Figure 32)

RAI HARRISBURG RESV. 208.90 1998 E 155 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T2100, T2200, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8960

RDA ANDERSON & CARLTON

1360.00 1998 E 155 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T2100, T2200, T2210, T500, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8500

ILD03 (Figure 13)

SDZC SCHUY-RUSH 191.20 1998 E 155, 260 F21, N44, P1, P20, P42, X50

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8960

D 31 Illinois R. 81.16 1998 M 230, 260 P1, P20, P21, P42 H1200, H1220, H410, H500, H560, M1700, S2100, S900, S910, S921

9000 ILD31 (Figure 13)

RDZV MATANZAS 360.90 1998 E 156 F20, N42, N44, P1, X21, X50

T1100, T2100, T2200, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8500

RNB REND 18,900 1998 M 205, 260 F21, F50, P1, P20, P42, P44

H1100, H1200, H1220, H2210, H900, H910, S2100

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 7550, 7700, 8700

ILRNB (Figure 26)

RNO BENTON 67.60 2002 M 205 F20, N44, P1, P42, X21, X50

T1000, T1100, T2100, T2210, T900, T910

1000, 3000, 3200, 4000, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700, 8960

ILHAB01 (Figure 1)

HAB 41 Grand Calumet R. 2.85 1998 M 250, 869 N1, N46, X21 M300, M410, M500, M510, M520, M530, M540, M550, M580, H600, S900, S910, S920, S921, H1100, H1200, H1220, S1600

200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600, 8500, 8950

ILREA (Figure 21)

REA DECATUR 3093.00 1996 M 205, 260 F50, P1, P20, P21, P42, P44

H1100, H1200, H1220, H2210, H300, H410, H900, H910, M500, S2100, S925

100, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 7900, 8960

FLHA01 Shavetail Cr. 9.46 1998 E 150 P1, P20 H1100, H1200, S1600, S2100, S900, S921

1000, 1100, 7000, 7100 ILFLH01 (Figure 10)

FLH 02 Spring Cr. 61.52 2002 M 700, 860 P1, P20 H1100, H1200, H1220 1000, 1050


31 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


EO 12 Illinois R. 2.59 1998 E 150, 260 P1, P20, P21 H300, T1100, T1200, T500 200, 400, 1000, 1100, 9000 ILEO01 (Figure 20)

EO 01 S. Fk. Sangamon R. 15.54 1998 M 230, 260 P1, P20, P21, P42 H300, T1200, T1700 1000, 1100, 7000, 7100, 9000 ILRCF (Figure 31)

RCF MATTOON 765.00 1994 M 260, 717 F20, F21, F50, P42, P44, T1

H1000, H1100, H2210, H900, H910, M500

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 7900

RDP PITTSFIELD 241.00 1994 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F21, F50, P42, P44

H1100, H1200, H1220, H2210 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8960

ILD32 (Figure 18)

D 32 Illinois R. 34.00 1998 M 230, 260 F1, F20, F42, P21 H410, H500, H560 9000 P 06 Rock R. 13.08 2002 M 230, 260, 700,

860 F1, F20, N42, P21 H410, H500, H560, T1700 9000 ILP06

(Figure 6) P 21 Rock R. 18.72 1998 M 200, 260, 700,

860 F1, F20, P21 H410, H500, H560 9000

P 14 Rock R. 11.21 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, P21, P42 H410, H500, H560, T1700 9000 ILP14 (Figure 6)

P 23 Rock R. 8.41 2002 M 260, 700, 860 F1, F20, P21 H410, H500, H560 9000 ILN14 (Figure 26)

N 17 Big Muddy R. 9.93 1996 E 150, 191, 260, 330

F21, P1, P20 H1200, H500, H520, H530, S1100, S2100

200, 1000, 1100, 5000, 5100, 5700, 9000

ILC24 (Figure 31)

RCG PARADISE (COLES) 176.00 1996 M 260, 717 F21, F50, P1, P20, P42, P44

H1000, H1100, H2210, H900, H910, S925

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 8960

ILRON (Figure 24)

RON LOU YAEGER 1205.00 1994 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F21, F50, P42, P44

H1100, H1200, H1220, H2210, H900, H910, S925

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 7900, 8960

G 25 Des Plaines R. 6.92 1994 M 260, 700, 860 P1, P20, P21 H500, H560, T1100, 3000, 3200, 4000, 9000 ILG08 (Figure 2)

G 08 Des Plaines R. 0.99 1998 M 230, 260, 700, 860

F1, F20, P21, P42 H500, H560, T1700 9000

ILRNC (Figure 26)

RNC KINKAID 3475.00 1996 M 205, 260 F20, F50, P1, P21, P42, P44

H1000, H1100, H500, H560 1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8600

NCK 01 Swanwick Cr. 18.75 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1600, T500, T750, T900, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400

RNM WASHINGTON CO. 295.00 1994 M 205 F50, P1, P20, P42, P44, X21

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700, 8960

NC 10 Beaucoup Cr. 9.95 1998 E 260, 700 F21, P1, P20, X50 T1200, T1600, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 1000, 1050, 1100

NCC 01 Walkers Cr. 5.86 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1300, T1600, T500, T750 1000, 1400, 5000, 5100, 5700 NCI 01 Little Beaucoup Cr. 13.46 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T500, T900,

T920 1000, 1100, 1400

NC 03 Beaucoup Cr. 8.46 1998 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 M1200, M1300, M1320, M750 200, 1000, 1100, 5000, 5100

ILNC05 (Figure 26)

RNH PINCKNEYVILLE 165.00 2002 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F21, F50, P42, P44

H1000, H2210 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 7550, 7700


32 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


GBK 05 W. Br. DuPage R. 2.86 1992 M 230, 700 N42, P1, P20 T1300, T1500, T1600, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

200, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400

GBK 12 W. Br. DuPage R. 3.81 1992 M 200, 700, 860 P1, P20, X21 T1300, T1500, T1600, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400

GBK 09 W. Br. DuPage R. 4.41 1992 M 230, 300, 700 N42, P1, P20, X21 T1300, T2100, T500, T530, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

200, 3000, 3100, 3200, 4000

GBK 07 W. Br. DuPage R. 6.32 1992 M 200, 700 P1, P20, X21 T1300, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 3000, 3200, 4000

GBK 11 W. Br. DuPage R. 9.00 1992 M 300 P1, P20, X21 T1500, T1600, T900, T910, T930

200, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400

WGM HERRICK 20.50 2002 M 205, 260 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, X50

H1000, H2210 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 8930, 8960

ILGBK05 (Figure 2)

RGD SILVER (DuPAGE) 56.90 2002 M 205 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T1000, T2200 7550, 7700, 8930, 8960

HC 01 S. Br. Chicago R. 4.94 1994 E 150, 260, 800 F1, F46, N21 H410, T1000, T1200, T1500, T1600, T500, T600, T900

100, 200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 8500, 9000

HCB 01 Chicago R. 1.27 1994 E 150, 260, 800 F1, N21, P20 H410, H500, H560 9000

ILHC01 (Figure 1)

HCA 01 S. Fk. S. Br. Chicago R 1.54 1998 E X1, X20 T500, T600, T1500, T1600 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 8000, 8500

GG 02 Hickory Cr. 9.93 1994 M 230 N42, P1, P20 T1300, T1320, T1500, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T1700

200, 400, 3000, 3200,4000, 7000, 7400

GGC-FN-C1 Union Ditch 1.42 2002 M 300 N1, N20 T1200, T1220, T600, T900, T920

200

GGF Frankfort Trib. 4.12 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T1300, T1320, T900, T910, T930

200, 4000

ILGG02 (Figure 2)

RGZZ SEDGEWICK 75.00 2002 M 260, 717 F20, F21, N44, P1, P42, X50

H1200, H1220, H2200, H2600, S2100

4000, 8960

RNZH CAMPUS 40.00 2002 M 205, 260 F20, P1, P21, P42, P44, X50

H410, H500, H560, T1200, T2210, T300, T900, T920

4000, 8400, 8930, 8960, 9000

NDB 03 Piles Fk. 6.99 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T300 4000

ILNDB01 (Figure 26)

RNI CARBONDALE CITY LAKE

135.60 1998 M 205 F50, N42, P1, P20, P44, X21

H2210, S2100 4000, 8960

ND 01 Crab Orchard Cr. 9.60 1994 M 230, 700 N42, P1, P20 H1000, H1200, M1700, S2100, S900, S910

100, 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 5000, 5100, 9000

ILND01 (Figure 26)

NDA 01 Little Crab Orchard Cr. 12.21 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T300, T500 1000, 1050, 1100, 1400, 4000


33 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


RED WELDON SPRINGS 29.40 1998 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

H1200, H1220, H2210, M300, M500

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 8700, 8960

REI CLINTON 4895.00 1996 M 205, 260 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, X50

H2210, M500 100, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7900

ILEI06 (Figure 22)

EI 06 Salt Cr. 15.62 2002 M 230, 700 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000

P 25 Rock R. 13.46 1998 E 150, 260 P1, P20, P21 H410, H500, H560, T0 1100, 1400, 9000

P 04 Rock R. 30.22 2002 M 230, 260, 300 F1, F20, P21, P42 H410, T1700, H560 9000

ILP04 (Figure 6)

P 24 Rock R. 23.08 1998 M 260, 700, 860 F1, F20, P21 H410, H560 9000

ILC22 (Figure 31)

C 22 Little Wabash R. 21.41 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F21, N42, P1, P20 T1200, T1700, T2100, T1000, T1600, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 9000

NG 02 Pond Cr. 17.18 1998 M 230, 260 F21, F42, P1, P20 H500, H530, T1000, T1200, T2100

1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5500, 7000, 7100

ILNG02 (Figure 26)

NG 01 Pond Cr. 5.40 1994 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 M1300, M750 1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100, 7000, 7100

ILD20 (Figure 11)

D 20 Illinois R. 16.06 1998 M 260 F1, F20, N21, X42 H410, H500, H560, T1100, T1500, T2100, T900

200, 1000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 9000

ILRNA (Figure 26)

RNA CRAB ORCHARD 6965.00 1996 M 205, 260 F20, P1, P21, P42, P44, X50

H1100, H2210, H410, H900, H910, M300

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 6000, 6600, 7550, 7700, 8500

ILDJBZ01 (Figure 15)

DJBZ01 Slug Run 3.85 1994 M 230, 700 N42, P1, P20 H1300, H1320, H750, M1100, M1700

5000, 9000

ILD05 (Figure 13)

D 05 Illinois R. 14.62 1998 M 230, 260 F1, F20, N21, N42 H410, H500, H560, M1700 9000

ILDJB18 (Figure 15)

DJB 18 Big Cr. 29.40 1998 M 230, 300, 700 N42, P1, P20 H750, M1700, S900, S910 200, 5000, 9000

ILNDJ01 (Figure 26)

RNZC HERRIN NEW 46.10 2002 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

H1000, H1100, H2210 7550, 7700, 8960

Lake Michigan**

Open Water Waukegan Harbor Other Harbors (Great Lakes NTC, Wilmette, Chicago and Calumet) Beaches (12) Beaches (18)

63.0

0.6

3.1

14.4

28.2

1998

1998

1998

1998

1998

M

M

M

M

M

208, 260, 869 250, 260, 320 260 420, 869 420, 869

F1, F20, N21, F42, F44, T50 N1, N20, N21, X42, X44 X1, X20, N21, X42, X44 P42 N42

M300, H410 H410, M500, M510, M520, M530, M540, M550, M580, S900, S910, S925 H410 H1700 H1700

4000, 8100, 8500, 9000 100, 4000, 8500 9000 400, 4000, 8930, 9000 400, 4000, 8930, 9000


34 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILP20 (Figure 6)

P 20 Rock R. 23.69 2002 M 230, 260, 700, 860

F1, F20, P21, P42 H410, H500, H560, T1700 9000

ILA31 (Figure 32)

A 31 Ohio River 67.33 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, F42, F50, P21

H410, H500, H560 9000

ILA32 (Figure 33)


H410, H500, H560 9000

ILA33 (Figure 33)


H410, H500, H560 9000

ILA34 (Figure 33)


H410, H500, H560 9000

ILAR01 (Figure 32)

AS Cane Cr. 2.76 2002 E 260 P21, X1, X20 H410, H500, H560 9000

ILD01 (Figure 18)

D 01 Illinois R. 48.26 1998 M 230, 260 F1, F20, F42, P21 H410, H500, H560 9000

ILD09 (Figure 11)

D 09 Illinois R. 35.81 1998 M 260 F1, F20, N21, X42 H410, H500, H560 9000

ILD23 (Figure 11)

D 23 Illinois R. 25.46 1998 M 260 F1, F20, F42, N21 H410, H500, H560 9000

ILD30 (Figure 11)

D 30 Illinois R. 26.54 1998 M 230, 260 F1, F20, F42, F50, N21

H410, H500, H560 9000

ILDJE01 (Figure 15)

DJE 02 Coal Cr. 15.29 2002 M 700 P1, P20 H1300, H1320, H750 5000

ILP09 (Figure 6)

P 09 Rock R. 5.33 2002 M 200, 260, 700, 860

F1, F20, P21 H410, H500, H560 9000

ILREJ (Figure 20)

REB SANGCHRIS 2165.00 1998 M 205, 260 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, X50

H1200, H1220, H2210 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7900, 8960


35 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


RTI CHANNEL 318.00 1998 M 260, 717 F20, F42, P1, P21, P44, X50

H410, T1200, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700, 8700, 8951, 8960

RTQ GRASS 1478.00 1998 M 205, 260 F20, N42, N44, P1, P21, X50

H410, T1200, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 7000, 7200, 8700, 8960

RTU PISTAKEE 2048.00 1998 M 205, 260 F20, P1, P21, P42, P44, X50

H410, T2100, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 8700, 8960

RTD CATHERINE 147.00 1998 M 260, 717 F20, F42, P1, P21, P44, X50

H410, T1200, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700, 8700, 8951, 8960

RTF FOX 1709.00 1998 M 205, 260 F20, P1, P21, P42, P44, X50

H410, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700, 8700, 8960

RTUA NIPPERSINK 592.00 2002 M 205 N42, P1, P20, P44, X21, X50

T1200, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 8700, 8960

RTJ LONG (LAKE) 335.00 2002 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 8500, 8960

RTR MARIE (LAKE) 516.00 1998 M 205, 260 F20, P1, P21, P42, P44, X50

H410, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 8700, 8960

RTZG DUCK 92.00 1998 E 814 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

M2210, M2600, S1600 1000, 1050, 3000, 4000, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8700, 8930, 8960

RTH ROUND 228.60 2002 M 205 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T2200, T2600, T900, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 8960

VTJ BLUFF 86.00 1998 M 205 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T2210, T900, T910, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 8700, 8960

RTK CEDAR (LAKE) 285.00 2002 M 205 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T2200, T900, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700, 8930, 8960

RTZJ LILY 89.00 1998 E 155 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T900, T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200

1000, 1100, 3000, 3200, 4000, 6000, 6500, 8000, 8500

RGZT SPRING (LAKE) 1.50 2002 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 8700

VTW PETITE 165.00 1998 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T2100, T2210, T900, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 7000,7350, 7550,7700, 8700

ILRTF (Figure 3)

VTZA TURNER 34.00 2002 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T2200, T2210, T900, T920 8930, 8960


36 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


GBL 08 E. Br. DuPage R. 5.57 1992 M 300, 420 P1, P20, X21 T1100, T1200, T1500, T1600, T2100, T2210, T720, T900, T910, T920

200, 3000, 3100, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7350, 7400

GBL 10 E. Br. DuPage R. 4.63 1992 M 230, 300, 420, 700

N42, P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1300, T1600, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

200, 3000, 3100, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100

GBL 05 E. Br. DuPage R. 3.16 1992 M 300, 420 P1, P20, X21 T1200, T1220, T1300, T1320, T1600, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100

GBLB01 St. Joseph Cr. 4.28 1998 M 300, 420 P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T1900, T2100, T2210

200, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600, 7700, 9000

GBL 11 E. Br. DuPage R. 3.57 1992 M 300, 420 P1, P20, X21 T1600, T900, T910, T930 200, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7600, 7700

GBL 02 E. Br. DuPage R. 8.44 1992 M 300, 420, 700, 860

F1, F20, X21 T900, T1100, T1200, T1600, T1700, T1900

200, 1000, 1100, 3000, 3100, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100

WGC STERLING POND 2.10 2002 M 717 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T1200, T2200, T2600, T300, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 1300, 2000, 4000, 7550, 7700, 8930, 8960

WGB MARMO 3.70 2002 M 260, 717 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, X50

T1100, T1200, T2200, T2210, T300, T900, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 1300, 2000, 4000, 7000, 7350, 7550, 7700, 8930, 8960

WGA MEADOW 4.90 2002 M 260, 717 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, X50

T1100, T2210, T2600, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1300, 2000, 4000, 7550, 7700, 8910, 8930, 8960

ILGBL10 (Figure 2)

WGZW RICE (DuPAGE) 38.00 2002 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

H2210 8960

LDD 23 Cedar Cr. 4.06 1992 M 300, 700 P1, P20 T1100, T1600, T2100, T300, T410, T600, T 900, T910, T920, T930

200, 400, 1000, 7000, 8500

LDD-C1 Cedar Cr. 1.23 1992 M 300 P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T300, T410, T600, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 400, 1000, 4000, 8500

LDD-C2 Cedar Cr. 1.52 1992 M 300 P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T300, T410, T600, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 400, 1000, 1800, 4000, 8500

LDD-A1 Cedar Cr. 0.90 1992 M 300 P1, P20 T1200, T2100, T300, T410, T900, T920

400, 4000, 8500

LDD-C3 Cedar Cr. 3.05 1992 M 300 P1, P20 T1200, T300, T410, T600, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 400, 1000, 1800, 4000, 8500

LDD-C3a Cedar Cr. 2.55 1992 M 300 P1, P20 T300, T410, T600, T900, T910, T920

200, 400, 1000, 8500

ILLDD01 (Figure 16)

LDD-C6 Cedar Cr. 5.62 1992 M 300 P1, P20 T1100, T1600, T410, T900, T910, T920

1000, 7000, 7550, 7700, 8500


37 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


GI 03 Chic. San. & Ship Canal 4.85 1992 E 150, 260, 860 F1, F46, N21 H410, T1000, T1200, T1500, T1600, T900, T910, T920

100, 200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 7550, 7600, 7700, 9000

RHX DOUGLAS PARK LAGOON

19.00 1998 E 157, 260 F1, F20, F21, P42, P44, X50

T500, T900, T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200

4000, 8000, 8500, 8930, 8960

QZF WASHINGTON PARK LAGOON

21.70 1998 E 157, 260 F1, F20, F21, F42, P44, X50

T500, T900, T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200

4000, 8000, 8500, 8930, 8960

RHU SHERMAN PARK LAGOONS

14.00 1998 E 155, 260 F1, F20, F21, F42, P44, X50

T500, T900, T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200

4000, 8000, 8500, 8930, 8960

ILGI03 (Figure 1)

RHW GARFIELD PK. LAGOON

13.70 1998 E 157, 260 F1, F20, F21, F42, P44, X50

T500, T900, T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200

4000, 8000, 8500, 8930, 8960

GI 02 Chic. San. & Ship Canal 15.26 1992 M 230, 260, 860 N21, P1, P46 H410, T1200, T1220, T1500, T1600, T2100, T300, T500, T520, T540, T560, T580, T720, T900, T910, T920

100, 200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 7550, 7600, 7700, 8500, 9000

GI 05 Chic. San. & Ship Canal 7.95 1992 M 260, 860 F1, F46, N21 H410, T1000, T1200, T1500, T1600, T900, T910, T920

100, 200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 7550, 7600, 7700, 9000

GI 06 Chic. San. & Ship Canal 4.52 1992 M 260, 860 F1, F46, N21 H410, T1200, T1500, T1600, T900, T910, T920

100, 200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 7550, 7600, 7700, 9000

GI 04 Chic. San. & Ship Canal 1.86 1992 M 260, 860 F1, F46, N21 H410, T1500, T1600 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 7550, 7600, 7700, 9000

ILGI02 (Figure 2)

RHD MAPLE 58.40 2002 M 717 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T1000, T2600, T900, T920 8951, 8960

CH 02 Fox R. 17.61 2002 M 230, 700 F21, N42, P1, P20 T1200, T1700, T1000, T1100, T1600, T2100, T500, T900, T910, T920

100, 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5500, 9000

CH 03 Fox R. 22.76 2002 M F21, P1, P20, X50 T1100, T1200 1000, 1100, 5000, 5500

RCC OLNEY EAST FORK 935.00 1998 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

T1100, T1200, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 3000, 3200, 4000, 6000, 6500

RCB BORAH(OLNEY NEW) 137.00 1994 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1000, T1100, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 8700

ILCH01 (Figure 31)

RCA VERNOR 36.00 1998 M 205 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T1000, T1100, T2210, T500, T530, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 8700, 8930, 8951

GLA 02 Addison Cr. 6.64 1992 M 230, 300, 420 N42, P1, P20 T1200, T1220, T1300, T1320, T1330, T1600, T1900, T2100, T2210, T300, T500, T540, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7350, 7550, 7600, 7700, 8500

ILGLA01 (Figure 2)

GLA 04 Addison Cr. 3.87 1992 M 300, 420 P1, P20 T1200, T1220, T1500, T1600, T2100, T2210, T300, T410, T500, T530, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7350, 7400, 7550, 7600, 7700, 8500


38 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


OHA 04 Lake Branch 1.93 1992 E N1, N20 T1100, T1200, T2100, T500, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1100, 1400, 1600

OHA 02 Lake Branch 3.97 1992 E N1, N20 T1100, T1200, T2100, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1100, 1400, 1600

OHA 05 Lake Branch 1.24 1992 E N1, N20 T1100, T1200, T2100, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1100, 1400, 1600

OHA 03 Lake Branch 2.00 1992 E N1, N20 T1200, T2100, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1100, 1400, 1600

ILOHA01 (Figure 25)

OHA 06 Lake Branch 3.35 1992 E N1, N20 T1200, T2100, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1100, 1600, 7000, 7100

HBD 04 Thorn Cr. 7.84 1994 M 230, 700, 860 N42, P1, P20 T1600, T2100, T300, T410, T500, T530, T720, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7700, 8500

HBD 05 Thorn Cr. 10.15 2002 M 860 P1, P20 T1200, T1220, T1500, T1600, T900, T920

4000, 7000, 7350, 7400, 7550, 7700

ILHBD04 (Figure 1)

RHI SAUK TRAIL 28.80 2002 M 205 N1, N42, N44, P20, X21, X50

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2210, T410, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7400, 8500, 8960

RJF MT. OLIVE NEW 47.80 2002 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F21, F50, P42, P44

T1000, T1100, T1200, T2210, T300, T600, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1350, 1400, 3000, 3200, 8500, 8960

RJG MT. OLIVE OLD 32.50 2002 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

T1000, T2100, T2210, T300, T500, T530, T600, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1350, 1400, 3000, 3200, 8500, 8960

ILJQ03 (Figure 27)

RJA STAUNTON 78.80 2002 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

T1100, T2210, T300, T900, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8951, 8960

OJ 08 Crooked Cr. 10.11 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F21, P1, P20, P42 T1100, T1200, T1600, T2100, T500, T900, T910, T920, T1700

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 7000, 7550, 7600

ROI CENTRALIA 450.00 1996 M 205 F50, P1, P20, P42, P44, X21

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 3000, 3200, 4000, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700

ROK RACCOON 925.00 1994 M 205 F50, N44, P1, P20, P42, X21

T1100, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700

ILOJ08 (Figure 24)

OJ 07 Crooked Cr. 15.64 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, F21, P42 T1700 9000 BFC 19 Robinson Cr. 0.74 1992 M P1, P20 T300, T500, T700, T900 200, 4000

BFC 10 Robinson Cr. 2.55 1992 E N1, N20 T300, T500, T900 100, 200, 4000, 7000, 7100 BFC 11 Robinson Cr. 0.85 1992 M N1, N20 T300, T500, T900 100, 200, 4000 BFC 25 Robinson Cr. 0.17 1992 M P1, P20 T300, T500, T900 200, 4000 BFC 26 Robinson Cr. 1.05 1992 M N1, N20 T300, T500, T900 100, 200, 4000

ILBFC10 (Figure 30)

BFC 20 Robinson Cr. 2.87 1992 M P1, P20 T300 100, 4000


39 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


QA C4 Pettibone Cr. 0.23 2002 M 250 P1, P20 T1600, T300, T410, T500, T510, T530, T550, T560, T580

100, 4000, 7000, 7100, 8500, 8950

QC 03 Waukegan R. 5.41 2002 M 700, 860 P1, P20 T1300, T1320, T1600, T300, T410

4000, 6000, 6300, 7000, 7100, 8100, 8500

QC 05 Waukegan R. 0.52 1998 M 700 P1, P20 T1300, T1320, T300, T410 4000, 8100, 8500 QCA 01 S. Br. Waukegan R. 0.86 1998 M 700, 860 P1, P20 T1300, T1320, T300, T900,

T920 4000, 8100, 8500

ILQ01 (Figure 1)

QAA D1 S. Br. Pettibone Cr. 2.48 2002 M 250 P1, P20 T300, T410 4000, 8500, 8950 WGZV LITTLE BEAR 26.20 1998 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44,

X21, X50 T1300, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 7550, 7700, 8960

WGZU BIG BEAR 25.60 1998 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T2210, T300, T 900, T910, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 7550, 7700, 8960

RGB DIAMOND 149.00 1998 E 813 F1, F20 T300, T500, T900, T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200

3000, 3200, 4000, 6000, 6500, 8000, 8500, 8960

ILGU02 (Figure 2)

GU 02 Indian Cr. 10.51 2002 M 700, 860 P1, P20, X21 T300, T900, T920 200, 3000, 3200, 4000, 8500 C 33 Little Wabash R. 33.08 2002 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T500, T1100, T1200, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 1800

RCZJ FAIRFIELD 16.00 2002 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

H2210 7000, 7400

CCA-FF-A1 Johnson Cr. 1.87 2002 M 300 P1, P20, X21 T1200, T1600 4000 CCA-FF-C1 Johnson Cr. 2.71 2002 M 300 P1, P20, X21 T900, T910, T930, T1200,

T1600 200, 4000, 7000, 7100

CC-FF-C3 Pond Cr. 7.30 2002 M 300 P1, P20, X21 T900, T910, T930, T1200, T1600

200, 7000, 7100

ILC08 (Figure 31)

CC-FF-D1 Pond Cr. 4.53 2002 M 300 P1, P20, X21 T1200, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100

G 01 Des Plaines R. 2.40 1992 M 260, 860 N21, P1, P20 H410, H560, T1500, T1600, T500, T530, T540, T900, T910, T920

100, 200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 8500, 9000

G 12 Des Plaines R. 9.40 1992 E 150, 260 N21, X1, X46 H410, H560, T1500, T1600, T500, T530, T540, T900, T910, T920

100, 200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 8500, 9000

ILG01 (Figure 2)

G 24 Des Plaines R. 4.19 1992 E 260, 300 N21, P1, P20 H410, H560, T1500, T1600, T500, T540, T900, T910, T920

100, 200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 8500, 9000

NCD 03 Galum Cr. 4.48 1996 E 700 P1, P20 T1100, T1300, T1600, T500, T750

1000, 1100, 5000, 5100, 7000, 7100

NCDB Little Galum Cr. 13.36 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1300, T1600, T500, T750 1000, 1400, 5000, 5100 NCD 05 Galum Cr. 13.34 1996 E 700 P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T500 1000, 1050, 1100 NCDC01 Bonnie Cr. 9.99 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1600, T750 1000, 1050, 1100

ILNCD01 (Figure 26)

RNZA WESSLYN CUT 24.20 2002 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T900, T910 5000, 5100, 7550, 7700, 8600


40 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


CA 06 Skillet Fk. 16.63 2002 M 230, 260 P1, P20, P21, P42 T410, T1000, T1100, T1200, T2100, T500, T900, T910, T920, T1700

1000, 1050, 1100, 1800, 9000

CA 09 Skillet Fk. 19.77 2002 M 260, 700 P1, P20, P21 T410, T1100, T1200, T1600, T750

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100, 9000

CA 07 Skillet Fk. 11.94 2002 M 260, 700 F1, F20, P21 T410 9000

ILCA06 (Figure 31)

CA 08 Skillet Fk. 10.64 2002 M 260, 700 F1, F20, P21 T410 9000 IX 04 Cache R. 7.30 2002 M 230, 260, 700 F21, P1, P20, P42 T1600, T1000, T1100, T1200,

T2100, T500, T530, T900, T910, T920, T1700

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100

IX 05 Cache R. 7.31 1998 E 150, 260 F21, P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1000 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100, 7400

ADY 01 Old Cache R. 3.83 1994 E 150, 260 F21, P1, P20 T1500, T1600 7000, 7100, 7400

ILIX01 (Figure 33)

IX 03 Cache R. 3.91 1998 M 150, 260, 330 F21, P1, P20 T1100, T1600 1000, 1100, 7000, 7100 OH 01 Sugar Cr. 9.06 1994 M 230, 700 N42, P1, P20 T1000, T1100, T1200, T1600,

T2100, T500, T530, T900, T910, T920, T1700

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400

OH 05 Sugar Cr. 8.81 1998 E P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1600, T900, T910

200, 1000

ILOH01 (Figure 25)

OHC Grassy Branch 7.62 1998 E P1, P20 T1200, T1300, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 1000, 1100

E 16 Sangamon R. 7.06 1998 M 230, 260 P1, P20, P21, P42 H410, T1300, T900, T910, T920, T1700

200, 1000, 7000, 9000

E 27 Sangamon R. 6.07 1998 M 260, 300 P1, P20, P21 H410, T1300, T900, T910 200, 1000, 7000, 9000 E 30 Sangamon R. 7.15 1998 M 300 F21, P1, P20 T1300, T900, T910 200, 1000, 7000 E 32 Sangamon R. 7.47 1998 M 300 P1, P20, F21 T1300, T900, T910 1000, 7000 E 05 Sangamon R. 7.06 1998 M 230, 260, 300,

700 F1, F20, P21, P42 H410, T1700 9000

E 11 Sangamon R. 3.70 1998 M 200, 260 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

ILE16 (Figure 21)

E 13 Sangamon R. 2.72 1998 M 260, 300 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000 HCCA01 N. Shore Channel 2.27 1992 E 150, 260, 800 N21, P1, P20 H410, T1100, T1200, T1500,

T1600 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 9000

HCCA03 N. Shore Channel 2.02 1992 E 150, 260 F1, F46, N21 H410, T1500, T1600 200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 8300, 8950, 9000

HCCA04 N. Shore Channel 1.47 1992 E 150, 260, 800 F1, F46, N21 H410, T1500, T1600 200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 8300, 8950, 9000

ILHCCA01 (Figure 1)

HCCA05 N. Shore Channel 1.88 1992 E 150, 260, 800 F1, F46, N21 H410, T1500, T1600 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 9000


41 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ND 02 Crab Orchard Cr. 1.91 1998 M 230 F42, P1, P20 T1200, T1500, T500, T900, T920

7000, 7350, 7400

ND 11 Crab Orchard Cr. 0.94 1994 M P1, P20 M1000, M1100, M1200, M500 1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100 ND 12 ILND02 1.12 2002 M 300 P1, P20 M500, S900, S910, M1000 1000, 1050, 1100, 5000,

5100

ILND02 (Figure 26)

ND 13 Crab Orchard Cr. 1.50 1994 M P1, P20 M1200, M500, S900, S910, S921 1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100 OD 06 Silver Cr. 3.30 1994 M 230 P1, P20, P42 T1100, T1200, T1300, T2100,

T500, T530, T900, T910, T920, T1700

200, 1000, 1050, 1100

OD 09 Silver Cr. 18.48 2002 M P1, P20 T1200, T1300, T1600, T2100, T500, T530, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1100

ILOD08 (Figure 25)

ODM Wendell Branch 7.86 1998 E P1, P20 T900, T910, T930 200, 1000, 1100, 4000 ATE 04 Eagle Cr. 1.57 1998 E P1, P20 T1000, T1200, T1300, T500,

T750 1000, 1100, 5000, 5100, 7000, 7100

ATE 03 Eagle Cr. 2.52 1994 E P1, P20 T1200, T1300, T500, T750 1000, 1100, 5000, 5100

ILATE01 (Figure 32)

ATE 05 Eagle Cr. 1.71 1994 E P1, P20 T1200, T1300, T500, T750, T900, T920

1000, 1100, 5000, 5100

CPD 03 Second Salt Cr. 1.38 1992 E 150 P1, P20 T1200, T900, T910, T920, T1100, T2100, T500

1000, 1100, 1600

CPD 01 Second Salt Cr. 2.67 1992 E 150 P1, P20 T1200, T900, T910, T920, T1100, T2100

1000, 1400, 1600

ILCPD01 (Figure 31)

CPD 04 Second Salt Cr. 2.91 1992 E 150 N1, N20 T1200, T900, T910, T920, T1100, T2100

1000, 1100, 1600

RJK FRANK HOLTEN 1 97.00 1998 M 205, 260 F20, N42, P1, P21, P44, X50

H410, T1100, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

4000, 6000, 6500, 8700

RJM FRANK HOLTEN 3 80.00 1998 M 205 N42, P1, P20, P44, X21, X50

T1200, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

4000, 6000, 6500

RJL FRANK HOLTEN 2 40.00 1998 M 205 N42, P1, P20, P44, X21, X50

T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

4000, 6000, 6500, 8700

ILJMAC02 (Figure 27)

JMAC02 Harding Ditch 10.57 1994 M 230, 700 F1, F20, N42 T1700 9000 NE 06 Little Muddy R. 20.75 1998 E 260 F21, P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T750 1000, 1100

NEE 01 Little Indian Cr. 7.48 1998 E P1, P20 T1600, T750, T900, T910 200, 1100, 1400, 5000, 5200 NEI 01 Puncheon Cr. 7.21 1996 E P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T500 1000, 1800

ILNE04 (Figure 26)

NEF White Oak Cr. 6.38 1998 E X1, X20 T900, T1100, T1300, T2100 1400, 5000, 5100 BF 01 Sugar Cr. 4.76 1992 M 230, 300, 700 N1, N20, N42 T1100, T1300, T2100, T720,

T750, T900, T 910, T920, T930, T1700

100, 200, 4000 ILBF22 (Figure 30)

BF 11 Sugar Cr. 1.47 1992 E N1, N20 T1300, T1700, T2100, T300, T500, T900

100, 200, 4000, 7000, 7100


42 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


B 06 Wabash R. 5.70 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, P21, P42 H410, M1700, H560 9000

B 05 Wabash R. 18.61 2002 E 260 P21, X1, X20 H410, H560 9000 B 98 Wabash R. 13.84 2002 E 260 P21, X1, X20 H410, H560 9000 B 99 Wabash R. 17.36 2002 E 260 P21, X1, X20 H410, H560 9000 TB 13 Wabash R. 18.03 2002 E 260 P21, X1, X20 H410, H560 9000

ILB06 (Figure 30)

TB 14 Wabash R. 6.17 2002 E 260 P21, X1, X20 H410, H560 9000 ATGH09 Brushy Cr. 1.45 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T1300, T1600, T500, T750,

T900, T920 5000, 5100, 5700, 5800, 7000, 7100

ATGH10 Brushy Cr. 2.91 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T1300, T1600, T500, T750 5000, 5100, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

ILATGH01 (Figure 32)

ATGH04 Brushy Cr. 7.05 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T1600, T2100, T900, T910 5000, 5100, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

O 01 Kaskaskia R. 7.48 2002 M F21, F50, P1, P20 T1000, T1100, T1200, T2100, T720, T900, T 910, T920

1000, 1100, 7000, 7100 ILO30 (Figure 25)

O 97 Kaskaskia R. 7.45 2002 M F21, F50, P1, P20 T1000, T1100, T1200, T2100, T720, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1100, 7000, 7100

OC 04 Richland Cr.-South 3.46 1998 M 230, 700 N42, P1, P20 T1100, T1600, T 2100, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

200, 400, 1000, 4000, 5000, 5100

OC 03 Richland Cr.-South 3.73 2002 M P1, P20 T1600, T900, T910, T930 200, 400, 1000, 4000, 5000, 5100

OC 90 Richland Cr.-South 3.07 2002 M P1, P20 T1600, T900, T910, T930 200, 400, 1000, 4000, 5000, 5100

OC 92 Richland Cr.-South 3.50 2002 M P1, P20 T1600, T900, T910, T930 200, 400, 4000, 5000, 5100

ILOC04 (Figure 25)

OC 05 Richland Cr.-South 5.39 2002 M P1, P20 T900, T910 200, 400, 1000, 4000, 5000, 5100

AT 05 Saline R. 9.44 1998 M 700 F21, P1, P20 M1100, M1300, M1320, M1400, M500, M750, S1600

1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100, 5800, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

ILAT05 (Figure 32)

RAF GLEN O. JONES 105.00 1996 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1000, T1200, T2210, T300, T900, T920

8940, 8960, 9000

RJC HORSESHOE (MADISON)

2107.00 1998 M 205, 260 N42, P1, P20, P21, P44, X50

H410, T1000, T2100, T2210, T600, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700

JO Chain o Rocks Canal 16.73 2002 E 170 P1, P20, P21 T1100, T1600, T2100, T300 100, 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 7000

ILJ81 (Figure 27)

J 01 Mississippi R. 39.72 1992 E 260 P21, X1, X20, X50 H410 9000


43 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


IIHA31 North Fk. Cox Cr. 3.12 1998 E 700 P1, P20, X21 T1100, T1300, T1600, T300, T750

1000, 1050, 1100, 1800, 4000, 5000, 5100, 7550, 7600, 7700

IIHA-STC1 North Fk. Cox Cr. 2.17 1998 E 300 N1, N20 T1100, T1200, T2100, T900, T920

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 5000, 5100

ILIIH01 (Figure 28)

IIH 36 Cox Cr. 11.24 1998 E P1, P20 T1600, T2100 200, 1000, 1100, 5000, 5100, 7000, 7100

RNU JAYCEES 105.00 1998 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

T1100, T2100, T2210, T900, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 7550, 7700

NJ 07 Casey Fk. 7.72 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, N42, P21 H410, M1700 9000 NJC Sevenmile Cr. 10.20 1998 M 700 P1, P20 M1200, M500 1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400 NJ 10 Casey Fk. 11.83 1998 E 190, 191, 260,

700 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

NJ 14 Casey Fk. 3.49 1994 E 190, 191, 260, 700

F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

ILNJ07 (Figure 26)

NJ 28 Casey Fk. 8.33 2002 E 260 P21, X1, X20 H410 9000 HAA 01 Calumet R. 1.39 1992 E 150, 260, 800 N21, P1, P20 H410, T1500, T1600 100, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7550,

7600, 9000 HAA 02 Calumet R. 7.34 1992 E 150, 260 N21, P1, P20 H410, T1200, T1600 100, 400, 4000, 7000, 7100,

7550, 7600, 9000 HAA 40 Calumet R. 0.37 1992 E 150, 260 F1, F46, N21 H400, T1200, T600 100, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7550,

7600, 9000 RHA WOLF 419.00 1998 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F42, F44,

P21, X50 H410 9000

ILHAA01 (Figure 1)

RHO CALUMET 1600.00 2002 M 205, 260 F46, P1, P21, X20, X42, X44, X50

H410 8500, 9000

H 02 Calumet-Sag Channel 9.48 1992 M 200, 260 N21, P1, P46 H410, T1200, T1600, T300, T500, T600, T900

100, 200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600, 8500, 8950, 9000

ILH02 (Figure 1)

RHZE ARROWHEAD (COOK) 14.00 1998 M 260 F21, X1, X20, X42, X44, X50

T900, T1200, T2100, T2200 800, 8100, 8500, 8930, 8960

RNZX ARROWHEAD (WILLIAMSON)

30.00 1998 E 155 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T2200, T900 1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400

NGA 02 Lake Cr. 11.84 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T300, T500, T1200, T1600 1000, 5000

ILNGA01 (Figure 26)

RNZE JOHNSTON CITY 64.00 1998 E 813 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T900, T1100, T1200, T2100 1000, 1100, 8000, 8500, 8960

NC 07 Beaucoup Cr. 26.35 1994 M 230, 260, 700 F21, P1, P20, P42 M1700, T1000, T1100, T1300, T2100, T500, T750, T900, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100, 9000

ILNC07 (Figure 26)

NCB 01 Rattlesnake Cr. 9.75 1996 E 700 P1, P20 T1200, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100 J 05 Mississippi R. 24.57 1998 M 230, 260 F42, P1, P20, P21 H410, T1100, T2100, T500,

T900, T910, T920, T930 100, 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 9000

ILJ83 (Figure 27)

J 06 Mississippi R. 18.75 1998 E 170, 260 P1, P20, P21 H410, T1100, T1500, T1600, T900

1000, 7000, 9000


44 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


SDT GILLESPIE OLD 71.00 2002 M 260, 717 F21, F50, N44, P1, P20, P42

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 7550, 7700, 8500

ILDAH01 (Figure 18)

SDU GILLESPIE NEW 207.00 2002 M 260, 717 F21, F50, N44, P1, P20, P42

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8500

DB 04 Apple Creek 45.20 2002 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1600, T900, T920

1000, 7000

SDC WAVERLY 135.00 2002 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F21, F50, P42, P44

T1100, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 3000, 3100, 7000, 7100, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8960

DBC Seminary Cr. 10.81 1998 M 300 P1, P20 T900, T910, T930 200, 1000

ILDB01 (Figure 18)

DB 01 Apple Cr. 20.91 2002 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, F21, N42 T1700 9000 HCC 07 N. Br. Chicago R. 11.55 1992 M 230, 700 N42, P1, P20 T1300, T1600, T2100, T300,

T720, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7700, 8300, 8500

ILHCC07 (Figure 1)

RHZA GOMPERS PARK LAGOON

1.00 1998 E 260 F21, X1, X20, X42, X44, X50

T900, T1100, T2100 7000, 7700, 8000, 8500, 8960

ILG23 (Figure 2)

G 23 Des Plaines R. 3.16 1992 M 230, 260 N21, P1, P46 H410, H560, T1200, T1220, T1500, T1600, T2100, T500, T510, T530, T540, T550, T580, T720, T900, T910, T920

100, 200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 8500, 9000

HA 04 Little Calumet R. N. 2.01 1992 M 190, 191, 260, 800

N21, P1, P46 H410, T1200, T1220, T1500, T1600, T300, T500, T550, T560, T580, T900, T910, T920

100, 200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 7550, 7600, 7700, 8500, 9000

ILHA04 (Figure 1)

HA 06 Little Calumet R. N. 5.59 1992 E 150, 260, 800 F1, F46, N21 H410, T1600 100, 200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600, 9000

MJ 01 Plum R. 12.29 1994 M 230, 700, 860 P1, P20, P42 M1700, S1100, S1600, S2100, S900, S921

1000, 1050, 1200, 7000, 7100, 9000

ILMJ01 (Figure 9)

TM 24 Plum R. 3.22 1996 E 190, 191 P1, P20 S1100, S1600, S2100, S900, S921

1000, 1050, 1200, 7000, 7100

RAM DUTCHMAN 118.00 1998 E 155 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200, T2210, T900, T920

1000, 1350, 1400, 8500, 8960

ADD 02 Dutchman Cr. 14.80 1998 M 700 P1, P20 T1200, T1500, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100, 7400

ILADD01 (Figure 33)

ADD 01 Dutchman Cr. 5.00 1994 E 150 P1, P20 T900, T910, T920 200, 1000, 1100, 1800, 7000, 7100

NE 05 Little Muddy R. 15.48 1994 M 230, 260, 700 F21, P1, P20, P42 H1000, H1200, H500, H750, M1300, M1320, M1700, S2100

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100, 7000, 7100, 9000

ILNE05 (Figure 26)

NEA 02 Sixmile Cr. 9.78 1998 E 700 F1, F20 T800, T1100 1000, 1400, 5000, 5100, 5200


45 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


RNQ WEST FRANKFORT NEW

214.00 2002 M 205 F20, N42, N44, P1, X21, X50

T1000, T1100, T2100, T2210, T900, T910

1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 3000, 3200, 4000, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700

ILNHB01 (Figure 26)

RNP WEST FRANKFORT OLD

146.00 2002 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 7550, 7700

KCA 01 Bay Cr. 17.20 1998 M 230, 700 N42, P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T1700

1000, 7000, 7550, 7700

KCA 02 Bay Cr. 7.40 1998 M 200 P1, P20 T1600, T900, T920 1000, 7000

ILKCA01 (Figure 19)

KCA 03 Bay Cr. 3.90 1998 M 700 F21, P1, P20 T1600, T900, T920 1000, 7000, 7550, 7700 B 01 Wabash R. 53.00 2002 E 260 P21, X1, X20 T410, H560 9000

B 03 Wabash R. 52.09 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, P21 H410, H560 9000

ILB07 (Figure 31)

RBZH BEALL WOODS 14.00 1998 E 155 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200, T900

1000, 1050, 1100, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700, 8500

H 01 Calumet-Sag Channel 5.80 1992 M 230, 260, 860 N21, P1, P46 H410, T1200, T1220, T1500, T1600, T300, T500, T550, T560, T580, T900, T910, T920

100, 200, 400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 7550, 7600, 7700, 8500, 9000

ILH01 (Figure 2)

RHH SANGANSHKEE SL 325.40 1998 M 260 P21, X1, X20, X42, X44, X50

H410 9000

ATHU01 Peters Slough 3.98 1998 E 150 N1, N20 T1000, T1300, T500, T580, T750, T900, T920

200, 1000, 1100, 5000, 5100, 5800

ILATH01 (Figure 32)

ATH 13 S. Fk. Saline R. 12.56 1992 E 150 N1, N20 T1000, T1600, T500 5000, 5100, 5800, 7000, 7100

RAA DOLAN 71.30 1998 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1000, T1100, T1200, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 8940, 8960

ILATFH01 (Figure 32)

ATFH01 Wheeler Cr. 10.88 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1500, T1600, T900, T920 1000, 1100, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

CSB 07 E. Br. Green Cr. 3.23 1992 E 150 P1, P20 T1200, T900, T910, T920, T1100, T2100

1000, 1100, 1600 ILCSB07 (Figure 31)

CSB 08 E. Br. Green Cr. 5.63 1992 E 150 P1, P20 T1200, T900, T910, T920, T1100, T500

1000, 1100, 1600

CDG-FL-C6 Seminary Cr. 1.99 1998 M 300 P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T900, T910, T920

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000

CDG-FL-A1 Seminary Cr. 1.14 1998 M 300 P1, P20 T1200, T900, T910, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000 CDG-FL-C4 Seminary Cr. 1.84 1998 M 300 P1, P20 T900, T910, T920, T1600 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000,

7000, 7100

ILCDG01 (Figure 31)

CDG-FL-C1 Seminary Cr. 1.68 1998 M 300 P1, P20 T900, T920 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000


46 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


EOA 01 Sugar Cr. 3.90 1998 M 230, 300 F42, P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T500 100, 400, 4000, 7000, 7350

EOA 06 Sugar Cr. 3.17 1998 M 300 P1, P20 T1600, T500, T900, T910, T920 100, 200, 1000, 7000, 7350, 8950

EOAD11 Hoover Branch 2.57 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T1100 1000, 4000

ILEOA01 (Figure 20)

EOAF01 Clear Lake Ave Cr. 1.09 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T1600 4000 RAW VIENNA CITY 6.40 2002 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42,

P44, X21 T1000, T2210, T900, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400

ADDB02 Little Cache Cr. 2.09 1994 E 150, 300 F21, P1, P20 T1100, T1200 200, 1000, 1100, 7000, 7100

ILADDB01 (Figure 33)

RAZI BLOOMFIELD 52.00 2002 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

T1000, T2210, T900, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 8960

RHJ SKOKIE LAGOONS 225.00 1998 M 205, 260 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, X50

H1000, H2210, H900, H910, M300

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 1300, 4000, 7000, 7350, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8960

ILHCCD09 (Figure 1)

RHJA CHICAGO BOTANIC GARDEN

60.60 2002 M 717 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1000, T2200, T2210, T2600, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1300, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8930, 8960

OC 94 Richland Cr.-South 1.69 2002 M P1, P20 T1600, T900, T910, T930 200, 400, 4000

OC 95 Richland Cr.-South 2.89 1994 M P1, P20 T1600, T900, T910, T930 200, 400, 4000 OCE Douglas Cr. 11.46 1998 E P1, P20 T1600, T900, T910, T930 200, 1000, 1100, 5000, 5100

ILOC94 (Figure 25)

OCF Kinney Branch 4.97 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T900, T910, T920, T1100 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000

OO 01 Ramsey Cr. 15.24 2002 M 230, 700 F1, F20, F21, P42 T1700 9000 ILOO01 (Figure 24)

ROE RAMSEY 46.60 1998 E 155 F20, F42, P1, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2210, T300, T500, T560, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8960

EZV Owl Creek 6.35 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

E 29 Sangamon R. 77.02 1998 M 230, 700 F1, F20, F21, P42 T1700 9000

ILE29 (Figure 21)

REG LAKE OF THE WOODS 23.20 1998 E 155 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T900, T1100, T1200, T2200 1000, 1100, 1400, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7700, 8000, 8500, 8960

JQ 07 Cahokia Div. Channel 4.94 2002 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T500, T530 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100

JQ 05 Cahokia Cr. 9.89 1998 M 230, 260 F1, F20, F21, N42 T1700 9000

ILJQ05 (Figure 27)

RJO TOWER (MADISON) 77.00 2002 M 205 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T 910, T1000, T 2100, T2210 100, 4000

ILJN02 (Figure 27)

JN 02 Cahokia Canal 11.64 1994 M 230, 300, 700 F21, N42, P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1600, T2100, T300, T500, T900, T910, T1700

1000, 1050, 1100, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100


47 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


JNA 01 Canteen Cr. 4.31 1998 M 230, 300, 700 F21, N42, P1, P20 T1100, T1300, T1600, T2100, T500, T530, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100

ILJNA01 (Figure 27)

JNA 02 Canteen Cr. 9.11 1994 M 700 F21, P1, P20 T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000 PQ 13 Kishwaukee R. 18.31 2002 M 260, 700 P1, P20, P21 H410, T1100, T1600, T300,

T900, T920 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100, 8500, 9000

PQ 07 Kishwaukee R. 4.53 2002 M 260, 700 F1, F20, F42, P21 H410 9000

ILPQ10 (Figure 5)

PQ 10 Kishwaukee R. 11.56 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, N42, P21 H400, H410, T1700 9000 JR 02 Wood R. 2.30 2002 M 230, 300, 700 N42, P1, P20 T1100, T1300, T2100, T500,

T530, T900, T910, T920, T1700 100, 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 7000, 7100

ILJR02 (Figure 27)

JRA 02 E. Fk. Wood R. 19.85 1994 M 700 F1, F20 T500, T1600 500, 700, 7100 ILC23 (Figure 31)

C 23 Little Wabash R. 17.13 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F21, P1, P20, P42 T1200, T1700, T1000, T1600, T2100, T500, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1100, 5000, 5500, 7000, 7400, 9000

ILD10 (Figure 11)

D 10 Illinois R. 10.79 1998 M 260 F1, F20, N21 H410, H560, T1100, T1500, T2100, T300, T500, T900

200, 1000, 7000, 7100, 7400, 8500, 9000

COC 10 Dieterich Cr. 8.20 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T2100, T900, T910, T1100, T500, T530

1000, 1050, 1100, 1400, 1600 ILCOC09 (Figure 31)

COC 09 Dieterich Cr. 0.97 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T1100, T2100, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1100, 1400

SDZM SPRING NORTH 578.00 1998 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1200, T2200, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 8960 ILD99 (Figure 13)

RDQ SPRING SOUTH 610.00 1998 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T2100, T2200, T2210, T900, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 8960

IIC 38 Little Marys R. 11.32 1998 E 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1200, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 1800, 7550, 7600, 7700

IICD01 Welge Cr. 8.48 1998 E 700 P1, P20, X21 T1600 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600, 7700

ILIIC01 (Figure 28)

RIB RANDOLPH 65.00 1998 E 155 F20, F42, P1, P44, X21, X50

T2100, T2200, T2210, T500, T520, T900, T910, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 7550, 7700, 8600, 8940, 8960

GB 03 DuPage R. 5.57 1994 M 200, 700 F1, F20, X21 T500, T900, T 1100, T1200, T1600

200, 1000, 1100, 1400, 1600, 4000

GB 09 DuPage R. 5.66 2002 M 200, 300, 700 F1, F20, N42, X21 T1700 9000

ILGB11 (Figure 2)

GB 10 DuPage R. 2.27 1992 M 230, 300 F1, F20, N42 T1700 9000 ILATFI01 (Figure 32)

RAZA McLEANSBORO NEW

75.00 1998 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1000, T1100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7550, 7700

NEB-DQA2 Reese Cr. 3.50 1998 E 300 P1, P20, X21 T1100, T1200, T900, T910, T920

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100

NEB-DQC1 Reese Cr. 1.27 1998 E 300 P1, P20 T900, T910, T920, T1200 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 1600, 5000, 5100

ILNEB01 (Figure 26)

RNG DUQUOIN 244.00 1998 E 814 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T2210, T900, T910, T920 6000, 6500


48 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


BE 14 Embarras R. 5.56 1998 M 230, 700 P1, P20, P42, X21 T1600, T900, T930, T1700 1000, 7000, 8600

BE 19 Embarras R. 13.26 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1600, T900, T930 1000, 7000

ILBE14 (Figure 30)

BE 20 Embarras R. 11.37 2002 M 200 P1, P20 T1600, T900, T930 1000, 7000 ILOD07 (Figure 25)

OD 07 Silver Cr. 12.40 1994 M 230, 700 P1, P20, P42 T1000, T1100, T1200, T2100, T500, T530, T900, T910, T920, T1700

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100

ILATHT01 (Figure 32)

ATHT01 Stillhouse Cr. 3.31 1994 E 150 P1, P20 T1000, T1200, T1300, T500, T750, T900, T920

5000, 5100, 5800

ILOIP10 (Figure 24)

OIP 10 Cattle Cr. 2.70 1994 E N1, N20 T1100, T1200, T1300, T2100, T500, T530, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1100, 1400, 1600

MQ 01 Galena R. 8.58 1998 M 230, 260, 700, 860

N42, P1, P20, P21 H1100, H410, M1700, S1600, S2100

1000, 1350, 1400, 4000, 7000, 7100, 9000

ILMQ01 (Figure 9)

MQ 02 Galena R. 7.67 2002 M 260, 700, 860 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000 RBF SAM DALE 194.00 1998 M 205 N44, P1, P20, P42,

X21, X50 T1000, T1100, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8960

ILCAR01 (Figure 31)

CAR 01 Brush Cr. 21.27 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 1800 ATFJ01 Cane Cr. 2.70 1998 E F21, P1, P20 T1100, T1600, T2100, T900 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000,

7100, 7550, 7600 ILATFJ01 (Figure 32)

ATFJ02 Cane Cr. 12.16 1994 E 700 F21, P1, P20 T1600, T900, T930 100, 1000, 1100, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

PBI 02 Spring Cr. 17.22 1998 M F21, P1, P20 T1100, T1500, T1600, T900, T930

1000, 7000, 7100, 7400 ILPBI01 (Figure 8)

PBI 03 Spring Cr. 2.25 1998 E F21, P1, P20 T1100, T900, T930 1000, 7000, 7100 RBC CHARLESTON SIDE

CHANNEL 346.00 1994 M 205, 260 F21, F50, P1, P20,

P42, P44 T2100, T2210, T600, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8960

ILBE09 (Figure 30)

BEL 01 Hurricane Cr. 16.85 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1600, T500 1000, 7000 RCR NEWTON 1750.00 1998 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44,

X21, X50 T1100, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

100, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8960

ILCJ01 (Figure 31)

CJAE01 Big Muddy Diversion Ditch

5.46 1994 M 700 P1, P20 T1600, T1200 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100

RDU DEPUE 524.00 1998 M 205, 260 F21, N42, N44, P1, P20, X50

T2100, T2210, T300, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 8500, 8700, 8960

ILD16 (Figure 11)

D 16 Illinois R. 25.97 1998 M 260 F1, F20, N21, X42 H410, H500, H560 9000 PB 05 Green R. 8.49 2002 M 260 F21, P1, P20 T1100, T1500, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000,

7100, 7400 PB 02 Green R. 9.51 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, F21, N42 M1700 9000

ILPB02 (Figure 8)

TP 03 Green R. 5.71 1998 E 260 F21, P1, P20 T1600, T900, T 920, T930 1000, 7000, 7100 ILCD01 (Figure 31)

CD 01 Elm R. 17.31 1994 M 230, 260 F21, P1, P20, P42 T1200, T1000, T2100, T500, T900, T910, T920, T1700

1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5500, 7000, 7100


49 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILHCCC04 (Figure 1)

HCCC02 Mid Fk. N. Br. Chic. R. 18.87 1994 M 230 N1, N20, N42 T1200, T1220, T1300, T1320, T1600, T2100, T900, T920, T1700

4000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600, 7700

ILOU01 (Figure 23)

OU 01 Jonathon Cr. 17.97 2002 M 230, 700 F21, N42, T1, T20 T1100, T1200, T1600, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 1800

RPC PIERCE 162.20 1998 M 205, 260 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, X50

T1000, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 8930, 8960 ILP15 (Figure 6)

P 15 Rock R. 19.81 2002 M 230, 260, 700, 860

F1, F20, P21, P42 H410, H500, H560, T1700 9000

PQC 02 S. Br. Kishwaukee R. 12.44 2002 M 260, 700 F1, F20, P21 H400, H410 9000

PQC 05 S. Br. Kishwaukee R. 15.59 2002 E 150, 260 N1, N20, P21 H410, T0 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 9000 PQC 06 S. Br. Kishwaukee R. 5.36 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, N42, P21 H410, T1700 9000 PQC 09 S. Br. Kishwaukee R. 9.10 2002 M 260, 700 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

ILPQC06 (Figure 5)

PQC 11 S. Br. Kishwaukee R. 6.92 2002 M 260 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000 ILATGM01 (Figure 32)

ATGM01 Harco Br. 3.07 1994 E 150 N1, N20 T1000, T1300, T500, T580, T750, T900, T920

5000, 5100, 5800

CP-EF-C2 Salt Cr. 2.33 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T900, T910, T920, T930, T1200

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000

CP-EF-C4 Salt Cr. 1.76 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T900, T910, T930 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000

ILCP01 (Figure 31)

CP-TU-C3 Salt Cr. 0.81 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T500, T900, T910, T920 200, 1000, 1050, 1100 ROP GOV BOND

(GREENVILLE) 775.00 1994 M 260, 717 F1, F20, F21, F50,

P42, P44 T1000 1000, 1050, 1100, 1350,

1400, 4000, 6000, 7550, 7700 ILOID01 (Figure 24)

ROG COFFEEN 1038.00 1998 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F21, F42, P44, X50

T1100, T1400, T300, T900, T910

100, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8960

ILLDDC01 (Figure 16)

LDDC Markham Cr. 5.74 1998 M 300 N1, N20 T1100, T1200, T1300, T500, T900, T910, T920, T930

200

ILNCDA01 (Figure 26)

NCDA01 Pipestone Cr. 12.12 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1100, T1300, T1600, T500, T750

1000, 1100, 5000, 5100, 7000, 7100

ILOHAA07 (Figure 25)

OHAA07 Bull Branch 3.73 1992 E N1, N20 T1100, T1200, T2100, T500, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1100, 1600

ILPBO10 (Figure 8)

PBO 10 Fairfield Union Sp Ditch 5.63 1998 M P1, P20 T1100, T1500, T1600, T300, T900, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100, 7400, 8500

ILPBP01 (Figure 8)

PBP 01 Walnut Special Ditch 4.39 1998 M P1, P20 T1100, T1500, T1600, T300, T900, T920, T930

7000, 7100, 7200, 7400, 7550, 7600, 8500

ILC21 (Figure 31)

RCJ ALTAMONT NEW 57.00 1998 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

T2210, T300, T500, T530, T600, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 6000, 6100, 8960

ILROA (Figure 24)

ROA CARLYLE 24580 1998 E 260, 869 F21, F50, P1, P20, P42, P44

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200, T900

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8700, 8960

ILROC (Figure 23)

ROC SHELBYVILLE 11000 1998 E 260, 868 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, X50

T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200, T900

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8700, 8960


50 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


HCC 08 N. Br. Chicago R. 5.62 1992 E 150, 260, 800 N21, P1, P46 H410, T1000, T1200, T1220 200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 8300, 8950, 9000

ILHCC08 (Figure 1)

HCC 02 N. Br. Chicago R. 2.05 1992 E 150, 260, 800 F1, F46, N21 H410, T1600 4000, 7000, 7100, 8300, 8950, 9000

PBG 12 Big Slough Ditch 0.95 1994 E F21, P1, P20 T1600, T500, T900, T920 1000, 1100, 1600, 7000, 7100 ILPBG01 (Figure 8)

PBG 10 Big Slough Ditch 6.60 2002 M F21, P1, P20 T1500, T1600 7000, 7100, 7400 IIK-SPC1A Maxwell Creek 2.24 1998 M 300 P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T900, T910,

T920, T930 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000 ILII04

(Figure 28) RIJ SPARTA OLD 26.30 2002 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42,

P44, X21 T2210, T900, T910, T920 1000, 1050, 1100

JMA 01 Canal No.1 4.12 2002 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1100, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 7000, 7100

JMAA01 Prairie Du Pont Cr. 14.33 2002 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1200, T900, T910, T920 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 1600, 1800, 4000

ILJMA01 (Figure 27)

JMAABA-C1 Stookey Creek 1.11 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 7000, 7100

RBA SAM PARR 180.00 1998 E 155 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T2100, T2200, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8960

ILBE07 (Figure 30)

BE 07 Embarras R. 12.11 1998 M 230, 700 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000 SOC SPARTA NW 33.00 2002 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42,

P44, X21 T1000, T1200, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100 ILOZC01 (Figure 25)

OZC 01 Plum Cr. 10.29 1998 M 230, 700 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000 KI 03 Bear Cr. 1.60 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T1600, T500 1000, 7000, 7550, 7600,

7700 KI 06 Bear Cr. 11.07 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T1600, T900, T920 1000, 7000, 7100, 7550,

7700

ILKI02 (Figure 19)

KI 02 Bear Cr. 10.76 2002 M 230, 700 F1, F20, F21, P42 T1700 9000 PE 05 Rock Cr. 8.95 1994 M 230 F1, F20, N42 T1700 9000 ILPE05

(Figure 6) RPF CARLTON 75.40 1998 M 205 F1, F20, F42, P44,

X21, X50 T1000, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8960

ILGBE01 (Figure 2)

GBE 02 Lily Cache Cr. 9.55 1992 E 860 P1, P20, X21 T600, T900, T1100, T1600, T1700

200, 1000, 1100, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7700

ILEIJ01 (Figure 22)

REE DAWSON 150.00 1998 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F21, P42, P44, X50

T900, T1100, T1200, T2100, T2200

1000, 1100, 6000, 6500, 7000, 7700, 8000, 8500, 8960

ILJ03 (Figure 27)

J 11 Mississippi R. 43.86 1998 E 260 P1, P20, P21, X50 H400, T1100, T1600, T2100, T300

100, 200, 400, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 7000, 9000

ILEOH01 (Figure 20)

EOH 01 Flat Br. 36.13 1998 M 230, 700 P1, P20, P42 T1100, T1200, T1600, T2100, T1700

7000, 7100, 7550, 7700, 8600

ILOT02 (Figure 23)

OT 02 W. Okaw R. 4.96 2002 M 230 F21, P42, T1, T20 T1100, T1200, T2100, T900, T910, T930, T1700

1000, 1050, 1100


51 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILOZZT01 (Figure 23)

OZZT01 Asa Cr. 9.05 1998 M 230 P1, P20, P42 T1100, T1200, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000

BPJC06 Saline Br. 10.26 1998 M 230, 300, 700 P1, P20, P42 T1200, T900, T910, T930, T1700

200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7700

ILBPJC06 (Figure 29)

BPJCA Boneyard Cr. 3.21 2002 M 300 N1, N20 T1200, T900, T920, T930 4000, 7000 O 13 Kaskaskia R. 8.80 1994 E 260, 300 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

O 31 Kaskaskia R. 5.21 2002 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, P21, P42 T410, T1700 9000 O 35 Kaskaskia R. 15.08 2002 M 260, 700 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

ILO13 (Figure 23)

O 37 Kaskaskia R. 7.83 2002 E 150, 260 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000 ILAJK01 (Figure 32)

AJK 01 Bay Cr. Ditch 8.48 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1600, T500 1000, 1100, 7000, 7100

ILATEE08 (Figure 32)

ATEE08 Rose Cr. 3.06 1994 E P1, P20 T1300, T500, T750, T900, T920

5000, 5100

ILATHC01 (Figure 32)

ATHC01 Battle Ford Cr. 6.76 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1000, T1200, T1600, T500 1000, 1100, 9000

ILDSQC01 (Figure 12)

DSQC01 Kelly Cr. 11.11 2002 E 150 P1, P20 T1100, T1600, T2100, T900 1000, 7000, 7100

ILE26 (Figure 20)

E 26 Sangamon R. 10.97 1998 M 230, 300, 700 F21, F42, P1, P20 T1300, T2100, T500, T900, T910

100, 400, 1000, 7000

ILGWAA01 (Figure 2)

GWAA Hastings Cr. 4.72 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T1100, T1500, T1600, T900, T910, T930

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7350, 7400

ILIXM01 (Figure 33)

IXM 04 Cypress Cr. 5.17 1998 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1600, T500 1000, 1050, 1100, 1400, 1800, 7000, 7100

ILK04 (Figure 16)

K 22 Mississippi R. 86.39 2002 M 230, 260 F50, P1, P20, P21, P42

H410, M1700, T1200, T300 9000

ILN10 (Figure 26)

NZN 13 Andy Cr. 9.97 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T300, T900, T920

1000, 1100, 1400

ILNDC01 (Figure 26)

NDC 02 Drury Cr. 1.23 1998 E F1, F20 T500, T800, T1000, T1100 1000, 1100, 5000, 5200

ILNF01 (Figure 26)

NF 01 Hurricane Cr. 10.22 1996 E 700 P1, P20 T1600, T300, T500, T750 200, 1000, 1100, 1400, 5000, 5100

ILODE01 (Figure 25)

ODE Loop Cr. 11.13 1998 M P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T2100, T900 200, 1000, 1100, 4000, 7000, 7100

ILODG01 (Figure 25)

ODG 01 Little Silver Cr. 12.54 1994 M P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1600, T900, T910, T930

200, 1000, 1100

ILOG02 (Figure 25)

OG 02 Elkhorn Cr. 9.29 2002 M P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T500, T900, T910

1000, 1100

ILOIB01 (Figure 24)

OIB 02 Beaver Cr. 18.04 2002 M P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1600, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1100, 5000, 5500


52 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILOIC01 (Figure 24)

OIC 02 Locust Fork 4.23 1998 E P1, P20 T1200, T2100, T500, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1100

ILOIO09 (Figure 24)

OIO 09 Chicken Cr. 1.91 1994 E N1, N20 T1200, T2100, T500, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1100, 1400, 1600

ILOJB01 (Figure 24)

OJB 02 Lost Cr. 11.26 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T2100, T500 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5500

ILOW01 (Figure 23)

OW 01 Lake Fork 9.10 2002 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1600, T2100 1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7600

ILQZK (Figure 1)

QZK LINCOLN PK NORTH PND

9.30 1998 E 157 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T2100, T2200, T2210, T900, T910

4000, 8930, 8960

ILATFC01 (Figure 32)

RAR NORRIS CITY RES 28.00 2002 M 205 F50, P1, P20, P42, P44, X21

T1100, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100

ILBEA01 (Figure 30)

RBB RED HILLS ST PARK 40.00 1998 E 155 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T2100, T2200, T2210, T900, T910, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8940, 8960

ILRCD (Figure 31)

RCD STEPHEN A. FORBES 525.00 1998 M 205, 260 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, X50

T1100, T1200, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 3000, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700, 8700, 8960

ILDZH01 (Figure 13)

RDD CANTON 250.00 1998 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F21, F50, P42, P44

T1100, T1200, T2100, T900, T910, T920, T930

400, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700

ILDGL01 (Figure 17)

RDR SPRING (McDONOUGH) 277.00 1994 M 205 F50, P1, P20, P42, P44, X21

T1200, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8700, 8960

ILOEB01 (Figure 25)

ROV COULTERVILLE 23.60 1994 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42, P44, X21

T1000, T1100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 8500

PWF-L-C1 Coolidge Cr. 3.15 2002 M 300 P1, P20, X21, X42 T1500, T2210, T900, T920 7000, 7350, 7400 ILPWF01 (Figure 7)

PWF-W-C1 Coolidge Cr. 2.33 2002 M 300 N1, N20, X21, X42 T900, T910, T920, T930 200 RIE DONGOLA CITY RES 70.00 1998 M 205 F20, F50, P1, P42,

P44, X21 T1100, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 6000, 6500, 7550, 7700, 8960

ILIXJ01 (Figure 33)

IXJ 01 Big Cr. 8.07 1998 M 700 P1, P20 T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 1400, 1800, 7000, 7100

DK 13 Mackinaw R. 11.27 2002 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, P21, P42 H410, M1700 9000

DK 04 Mackinaw R. 9.83 2002 E 150, 260 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

ILDK13 (Figure 14)

DK 15 Mackinaw R. 5.12 2002 M 260, 700 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000 JH 03 Fountain Cr. 17.66 2002 M 260, 700 F21, F50, P1, P20 T1600, T900, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 1800,

7000, 7100 ILJH02 (Figure 27)

JHE-C1 Waterloo Creek 0.98 2002 M 300 N1, N20 T1200, T900, T910, T920 200, 4000 ILLDH01 (Figure 16)

RLB STOREY 132.00 1998 M 205, 260 F21, P1, P20, P42, P44, X50

T1100, T2100, T2200, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 4000, 7550, 7700, 8500, 8960


53 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILDR01 (Figure 11)

DR 01 Little Vermilion R. 3.53 1998 M F1, F20, P42 T2100, T500, T520, T560, T580, T900, T910, T920, T930, T1700

400, 500, 1000, 6000, 6400, 8500

O 02 Kaskaskia R. 13.14 2002 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, P21, P42 T410, T1700 9000

O 15 Kaskaskia R. 11.36 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, P21, P42 T410, T1700 9000

ILO15 (Figure 23)

O 17 Kaskaskia R. 10.74 2002 M 260, 700 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000 ILLD02 (Figure 16)

LD 02 Henderson R. 22.10 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, F21, N42 T1100, T2100, T900, T910, T930, T1700

1000, 7000

ILAJ01 (Figure 32)

AJ 10 Bay Cr. 11.45 1998 E 190, 191 F1, F20 T500, T1200, T1600 1000, 1100, 7000, 7550, 7600

ILAJF01 (Figure 32)

AJF 16 Cedar Cr. 11.92 1994 M 700 P1, P20 M1200, M500, S900, S920 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100

ILBEZB07 (Figure 30)

BEZB07 Indian Cr. 14.39 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1600 1000, 4000, 5000, 5500

ILBPGD01 (Figure 29)

BPGD Hoopeston Br. 4.72 1998 M 300 N1, N20 T1200, T1300, T900, T910, T920, T930

100, 200, 400, 6000, 6200, 7000

ILCAN01 (Figure 31)

CAN 01 Horse Cr. 28.21 2002 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T500 1000, 1050, 1100, 1400, 1600, 1800

ILCJA01 (Figure 31)

CJA 02 Little Muddy Cr. 33.82 2002 M 700 F21, P1, P20 T500, T1200, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 1800

ILCM01 (Figure 31)

CM 02 Dismal Cr. 23.82 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T500, T1200, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100

ILCPC01 (Figure 31)

CPC-TU-C1 First Salt Cr. 1.44 2002 M P1, P20 T500, T900, T910, T920, T1200

200, 1000, 1050, 1100

ILDGLC01 (Figure 17)

DGLC 01 Drowning Fork 17.85 2002 M 700 F50, P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T1600 1000, 1100, 1400, 7000, 7100

ILDKD01 (Figure 14)

DKD 01 Indian Cr. 6.02 2002 M 300 P1, P20 S900, S910, S921, M1600 200, 1000, 7000

ILDSQ01 (Figure 12)

DSQ 03 N. Fk. Vermilion R. 29.94 2002 M 700 F50, P1, P20 T1100, T1600, T2100 1000, 7000, 7100

ILE24 (Figure 20)

EZJ Town Branch 4.11 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T1200, T600, T900, T910, T920

200, 1000, 1400

ILE25 (Figure 20)

E 25 Sangamon R. 38.71 1994 M 230, 700 F42, P1, P20 T1600, T2100, T900, T910 1000, 1100, 7000, 7100, 7600

ILEOA02 (Figure 20)

EOA 04 Sugar Cr. 32.48 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T900, T910, T920

200, 1000, 7000

ILERA01 (Figure 21)

ERA 01 Long Point Slough 17.17 1994 E 150 F21, P1, P20 T1300, T500, T900, T930 100, 200, 1000, 7000

ILGK03 (Figure 2)

GK 03 Flag Cr. 7.75 1994 E 150 P1, P20 T1300, T1320, T1600, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 3000, 3200, 4000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7700


54 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILIC01 (Figure 28)

IC 05 Clear Cr. 15.63 1998 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1200, T1600, T300 1000, 1100, 7000, 7100

ILIXC01 (Figure 33)

IXCC01 Pulaski Slough 5.06 1998 E 150 F21, P1, P20 T1100, T1200, T500 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100

ILK03 (Figure 19)

K 17 Mississippi R. 37.58 2002 E 190, 230, 260 F50, P1, P20, P21 H410, T1200, T300 9000

ILK06 (Figure 19)

K 21 Mississippi R. 112.82 1998 E 190, 260 P1, P20, P21 H410, T1200, T300 9000

ILN11 (Figure 26)

N 11 Big Muddy R. 10.66 1994 M 230, 260, 700 F21, F42, P1, P20 H1200, H500, H520, H530, S2100

200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100, 9000

ILOE03 (Figure 25)

OE 02 Mud Cr. 21.11 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T500, T1000, T1200 1000, 1050, 1100, 5000, 5100

ILOPC01 (Figure 24)

OPC 01 Wolf Cr. 24.72 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1300, T1500, T500 5000, 5500

ILPBD01 (Figure 8)

PBD 02 Mineral Cr. 12.31 1994 M P1, P20 T0, T1500, T1600, T900, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100, 7400, 8500, 8600, 8950

ILPBM11 (Figure 8)

PBM 11 Fairfield Ditch 7.57 2002 M 260 F21, P1, P20 T1500, T1600, T300 7000, 7100, 7400, 8500

ILPQC07 (Figure 5)

PQC 13 S. Br. Kishwaukee R. 14.06 2002 M 260, 700 P1, P20, P21 H410, T1100, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100, 9000

ILAJD15 (Figure 32)

RAZO SUGAR CREEK LAKE 94.00 1998 E 155 F20, N42, N44, P1, X21, X50

T1100, T1200, T2100 1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 7550, 7800, 8960

ILPWQ04 (Figure 7)

RPA LE-AQUA-NA 39.50 1998 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T1000, T2210, T900, T910, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8960

ILDKJ01 (Figure 14)

SDS EUREKA 30.00 2002 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44, X21, X50

T2200, T2210, T300, T900, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 3000, 3200, 7550, 7700, 8930, 8960

IIB 40 Mill Cr. 10.95 1998 E 700 P1, P20 T1100, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 1600, 1800, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

ILII03 (Figure 28)

II 03 Marys R. 11.81 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, F21, P42 T1700 9000 PB 28 Green R. 4.32 1998 E F21, P1, P20 T1600, T900, T930 1000, 7000, 7100 ILPB04

(Figure 8) PB 09 Green R. 13.06 1998 E 260 F21, P1, P20 T900, T930 1000, 1100, 1400 RML GEORGE (ROCK

ISLAND) 167.00 1998 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44,

X21, X50 T2210, T900, T910, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 8700,

8930, 8960 ILM10 (Figure 9)

M 10 Mississippi R. 44.37 2002 E 191, 260 F1, F20, P21, X42 H410 9000 RPD JOHNSON SAUK TRAIL 58.00 1998 M 205 F20, P1, P42, P44,

X21, X50 T1000, T900, T910, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 7550,

7700, 8700, 8930, 8960 ILPBJA01 (Figure 8)

PBJA04 Coal Cr. 4.56 1998 E F21, P1, P20 T1600 7000, 7100


55 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


DAD Bear Cr. 10.12 1996 E 150 P1, P20 T1100, T900, T910, T920 100, 1000, 7550, 7700 ILDA06 (Figure 18)

DA 06 Macoupin Cr. 26.22 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, F21, N42 T1700 9000 DF 05 Indian Cr. 2.31 1998 M 260, 300, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1600 1000, 7000, 7100

DF 06 Indian Cr. 22.97 1998 E 190, 260 F21, P1, P20 T1600 1000, 7000, 7100

ILDF04 (Figure 18)

DF 04 Indian Cr. 12.13 1998 M 230, 260 F1, F20, F21, N42 T1700 9000 ATF 07 N. Fk. Saline R. 5.51 1998 E 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1300, T1600 1000, 1100, 5000, 5500,

7000, 7100, 7550, 7600 ILATF05 (Figure 32)

ATF 05 N. Fk. Saline R. 7.90 1998 E 190, 260, 700 F1, F20 T1600 1000, 1100, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

ILPQEC01 (Figure 5)

PQEC-A Lawrence Cr. 4.32 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T900, T1200, T1300 100

ILBPJG01 (Figure 29)

BPJG01 Upper Salt Fork 23.88 2002 M 300, 700 P1, P20, P42 T1600, T900, T910, T930, T1700

200, 7000, 7100

E 06 Sangamon R. 0.78 1998 M 230, 260, 300 F1, F20, F42, P21 H410 9000 ILE09 (Figure 21)

E 09 Sangamon R. 2.42 1998 M 230, 260, 300 F1, F20, P21, P42 H410, T1700 9000 PW 01 Pecatonica R. 6.93 1998 M 230, 260 F1, F20, P21, P42 H410, T1700 9000 ILPW01

(Figure 7) PW 02 Pecatonica R. 18.48 2002 M 260, 700, 860 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000 PW 04 Pecatonica R. 7.23 2002 M 200, 260, 700,

860 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000 ILPW08

(Figure 7) PW 08 Pecatonica R. 7.48 2002 M 230, 260, 700,

860 F1, F20, P21, P42 H410, T1700 9000

ILADCD01 (Figure 33)

ADCD01 New Columbia Ditch 9.91 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T1600, T1100 1000, 1100, 7000, 7100

ILADP01 (Figure 33)

ADP 01 Bradshaw Cr. 13.80 1998 E 150 F21, P1, P20 T1200, T1600 1000, 1100, 1400, 1800, 7000, 7100

ILADX01 (Figure 33)

ADX 01 Cache Cr. 2.04 1998 M 300 P1, P20 T1600, T900, T910, T920, T930

200, 1400, 4000

ILATFF01 (Figure 32)

ATFF02 Contrary Cr. 12.00 1998 E 700 F21, P1, P20 T1300, T1600 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

ILATZM01 (Figure 32)

ATZM02 Cypress Ditch 8.29 1998 E 150 F21, P1, P20 T1200, T1600 1000, 1100, 5000, 5200, 5500, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

ILBEJ01 (Figure 30)

BEJ 01 Muddy Cr. 17.60 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1200, T500 7000, 8600

ILBEN01 (Figure 30)

TBE 05 Kickapoo Cr. 13.51 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T1600, T900, T910, T930 200, 1000

ILBER01 (Figure 30)

BER 01 Scattering Fk. 13.37 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1600, T900, T930 1000, 1800, 7000, 7100


56 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILBFCA21 (Figure 30)

BFCA22 Marathon Cr. 0.84 1992 M N1, N20 T300, T500 100

ILBPE02 (Figure 29)

BPE 02 Grape Cr. 10.33 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T500, T540, T580, T900, T920, T930

100, 4000, 5000, 5700

ILCAW01 (Figure 31)

CAW 04 Dums Cr. 25.38 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1200, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 1600, 1800

ILCHE01 (Figure 31)

CHEA11 Big Cr. 10.77 1994 E 150 P1, P20 T1200, T500 100, 1000, 1400, 5000, 5500

ILEID05 (Figure 22)

EID C1 Sugar Cr. 21.54 1998 M 300 P1, P20 T1600, T900, T910, T930 4000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

ILEOC01 (Figure 20)

EOC 02 Horse Cr. 34.12 2002 M 700 F50, P1, P20 T1200, T1600 1000, 1100, 1400, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600, 7700, 8600, 8950

ILEOCA02 (Figure 20)

EOCA02 Brush Cr. 12.94 1994 M 700 P1, P20 T1200, T1600 1000, 8600, 8950

ILEOF01 (Figure 20)

EOF 05 Bear Cr. 3.28 1994 E 150 P1, P20 T1200, T1600 1000

ILEQ01 (Figure 21)

EQ 01 Mosquito Cr. 21.78 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1200, T1600 1000, 7000

ILES01 (Figure 21)

ES 13 Stevens Cr. 18.15 1998 M 700 P1, P20 T1500, T1600 4000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

ILHBDC02 (Figure 1)

HBDC Deer Cr. 6.62 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T1600, T900, T910, T930 200, 4000, 7000, 7100

ILIXF01 (Figure 33)

IXF 01 Mill Cr. 12.19 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T1200, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100, 7400

ILJD01 (Figure 27)

JD 02 Maeystown Cr. 12.52 2002 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1600, T500 1000, 1050, 1100, 1800, 7000, 7100

ILKCAG01 (Figure 19)

KCAG01 Honey Cr. 12.66 1994 E 150 P1, P20 T1100, T1200 1000, 7000, 7550, 7700

ILLDG01 (Figure 16)

LDG 01 Middle Henderson Cr. 14.26 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T1100, T900, T930 1000, 7000

ILMNID01 (Figure 9)

TM 36 Mud Run 4.57 1998 E 150 N1, N20 M1200, M1210, S0, S900, S910, S921

200

ILNDDA01 (Figure 26)

NDDA01 L Grassy Cr. 4.53 1998 E P1, P20 T1500, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 1700

ILNZM01 (Figure 26)

NZM 01 Prairie Cr. 9.91 1998 E P1, P20 T1300, T750 1000, 1100, 5000, 5100

ILOB01 (Figure 25)

OB 03 Horse Cr. 11.66 2002 M P1, P20 T1100, T1600 1000, 1100

ILOCB99 (Figure 25)

OCB 99 Prairie du Long Cr. 23.50 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T900, T1100 1000, 1050, 1100


57 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILOJA01 (Figure 24)

OJA 01 Little Crooked Cr. 16.62 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1200, T900, T910 200, 1000, 1050, 1100

ILPBE01 (Figure 8)

PBE 01 Geneseo Cr. 13.69 1998 E P1, P20 T1100, T900, T930 1000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

ILPO01 (Figure 6)

PO C1 Mill Cr. 1.90 1998 E 150 P1, P20 T1200, T1220, T900, T910, T920

200

ILPQEA01 (Figure 5)

PQEA01 Mokeler Cr. 10.10 1994 E 150 P1, P20 T500, T900, T910, T930 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000

ILPWH01 (Figure 7)

PWH 02 Sumner Cr. 10.92 2002 M 700, 860 P1, P20 T1100, T1600 1000, 1050, 1100

ILDTZT02 (Figure 3)

RTZD MCCULLOM 245.00 1998 E 260, 814 F20, F21, P1, P42, P44, X50

M2200, M2600 1000, 4000, 6000, 6500

DK 12 Mackinaw R. 28.25 2002 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, F42, P21 H410 9000 ILDK12 (Figure 14) DK 19 Mackinaw R. 9.02 2002 M 260, 700 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

PWB 01 Sugar R. 5.50 2002 E 260 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000 ILPWB01 (Figure 7) PWB 03 Sugar R. 4.50 2002 M 260, 700, 860 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

OI 05 Shoal Cr. 12.38 2002 M P1, P20 T1600 1000, 1100 ILOI08 (Figure 24) OI 08 Shoal Cr. 13.10 1998 M 230 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000 ILDV04 (Figure 11)

DV 04 Mazon R. 18.24 2002 M 260 F1, F20, P21, P42 H410, T1700 9000

ILPQ02 (Figure 5)

PQ 02 Kishwaukee R. 4.56 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, N42, P21 H410, T1700 9000

ILPQ12 (Figure 5)

PQ 12 Kishwaukee R. 10.83 2002 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, P21, P42 H410, T1700 9000

EIE 04 Kickapoo Cr. 41.44 2002 M 230, 700 F1, F20, N42 T1700 9000 ILEIE05 (Figure 22) EIE 05 Kickapoo Cr. 19.89 2002 M 230, 700 F1, F20, N42 T1700 9000 ILATF04 (Figure 32)

ATF 04 N. Fk. Saline R. 5.15 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, F21, P42 M1700 9000

ILATFE01 (Figure 32)

ATFE01 Rector Cr. 18.93 1998 E 700 F21, P1, P20 T1600 1000, 1100, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7600

ILBFCB12 (Figure 30)

BFCB12 Quail Cr. 2.79 1992 M P1, P20 T300 1000, 1100, 4000

ILCAG01 (Figure 31)

CAGC01 Auxier Ditch 27.83 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 1800, 5000, 5100, 7000, 7100

ILCDF02 (Figure 31)

CDF 02 Raccoon Cr. 21.63 2002 M 700 P1, P20, F21 T1600 1000, 1050, 1100

ILDGJA01 (Figure 17)

DGJA02 Killjordan Cr. 3.85 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T900, T910, T920 200, 4000


58 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILDJ02 (Figure 15)

DJ 02 Spoon R. 24.05 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, F21, P42 M1700 9000

ILDJ06 (Figure 15)

DJ 06 Spoon R. 25.18 2002 M 230, 260, 700

F1, F20, F21, P42 M1700 9000

ILDJ08 (Figure 15)

DJ 08 Spoon R. 34.75 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, F21, P42 M1700 9000

ILDJ09 (Figure 15)

DJ 09 Spoon R. 33.25 1998 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, F21, P42 M1700 9000

ILDJI01 (Figure 15)

DJIA Swab Run 10.35 2002 M 150 P1, P20 M1600 1000, 7000, 7100, 7550, 7700

ILDJL01 (Figure 15)

DJL 01 Indian Cr. 24.78 2002 M 230, 700 F1, F20, N42 M1700 9000

ILDKB01 (Figure 14)

DKB 01 Hickory Grove Ditch 2.97 2002 M 700 P1, P20 M1600 7000, 7100, 7550

ILDQ03 (Figure 11)

DQ 03 Big Bureau Cr. 5.32 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, F21, P42 M1700 9000

ILDQA01 (Figure 11)

DQA 01 East Bureau Cr. 24.89 1994 E P1, P20 T900, T920, T930 200, 1000

ILDT35 (Figure 3)

DT 35 Fox R. 3.21 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, F42, P21 H410 9000

ILDTAB01 (Figure 4)

DTAB01 Little Indian Cr. 16.41 2002 M 700, 860 P1, P20 T1600 7000, 7100

ILDV03 (Figure 11)

DV 06 Mazon R. 28.57 2002 M 260 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

ILDZZP03 (Figure 11)

DZZP03 Farm Cr. 18.49 1998 M 230, 300 F1, F20, N42 M1700 9000

ILEIDD01 (McLean)

EIDD Goose Cr. 1.78 1994 M 300 P1, P20 T1600 7000, 7100, 7550, 7700

ILEK01 (Figure 20)

EK 01 Richland Cr. 4.24 2002 M 700 P1, P20 T1200 1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400

ILFLF01 (Figure 10)

FLF 01 Pike Cr. 17.88 2002 M 700, 860 P1, P20 S1600 7000, 7100

ILFLI02 (Figure 10)

FLI 02 Sugar Cr. 23.12 2002 M 230, 700, 860

F1, F20, N42 M1700 9000

ILI01 (Figure 28)

I 05 Mississippi River South 47.13 1998 E 230, 260 F50, P21, X1, X20, X42

H410 9000

ILI84 (Figure 28)

I 84 Mississippi R. 77.17 1998 M 230, 260, 860 F1, F20, F42, P21 T410 9000

ILICD01 (Figure 28)

ICD-JB-C2 Dutch Creek 1.33 2002 M 260, 300 P1, P20, F21 T1200 200

ILIXD01 (Figure 33)

IXD 01 Sandy Cr. 11.66 1998 E 150 F21, P1, P20 T1600 1000, 1100, 1800, 7000, 7100


59 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILIXI01 (Figure 33)

IXI 01 Indian Camp Cr. 1.28 1998 E 150 F21, P1, P20 T0, T1500 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7100, 7400

ILJQA01 (Figure 27)

JQA 01 Indian Cr. 21.14 2002 M 260, 700 F21, P1, P20 T1600 1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 1600, 1800, 7000, 7100

ILM02 (Figure 9)

M 06 Mississippi R. 47.33 2002 E 191, 260 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

ILM03 (Figure 9)

M 03 Mississippi R. 48.97 2002 E 191, 260 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

ILM04 (Figure 9)

M 04 Mississippi R. 24.43 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, F42, P21 H410 9000

ILM05 (Figure 9)

M 05 Mississippi R. 29.37 2002 E 191, 230, 260 F1, F20, F50, P21 H410 9000

ILMN03 (Figure 9)

MN 03 Apple R. 30.26 2002 M 230, 260, 700

F1, F20, F21, N42 M1700 9000

ILMN04 (Figure 9)

MNJ 01 Kentucky Cr. 1.60 1998 E 150 P1, P20 S900, S921 1000, 1200, 1400

ILOJCB20 (Figure 24)

OJCB19 Sewer Cr. 2.74 2002 M 300 P1, P20 T900, T910, T930 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 5000, 5500

ILPBJ01 (Figure 8)

PBJ 04 Mud Cr. 25.50 1998 E F21, P1, P20 T900, T930 1000, 5000, 5700

ILPQ14 (Figure 5)

PQ 14 Kishwaukee R. 10.59 2002 M 260, 700 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

ILPW06 (Figure 7)

PW 06 Pecatonica R. 22.91 2002 E 150, 260 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

ILPW07 (Figure 7)

PW 07 Pecatonica R. 20.25 2002 M 260, 700, 860 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

ILPW13 (Figure 7)

PW 13 Pecatonica R. 8.78 2002 E 260 F1, F20, P21 H410 9000

ILHBA01 (Figure 1)

RHZI MIDLOTHIAN RESERVOIR

25.00 2002 M 260 P21, X1, X20, X42, X44, X50

H410 9000

ILPQCL01 (Figure 5)

RPZG SYCAMORE LAKE 7.50 2002 M 260 P21, X1, X20, X42, X44, X50

H410 9000

ILDJHD01 (Figure 15)

SDZA BRACKEN 172.00 1998 M 260 P21, X1, X20, X42, X44, X50

H410 6000, 6300

ILBE01 (Figure 30)

BE 01 Embarras R. 6.85 1996 M 230 F1, F20, F21, P42 T1700 9000

ILBEF05 (Figure 30)

BEF 05 N. Fk. Embarras R. 5.71 1998 M 230 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000

ILBN01 (Figure 30)

BN 01 Brouilletts Cr. 37.82 2002 M 230, 700 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000


60 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILBP01 (Figure 29)

BP 01 Vermilion R. 4.91 2002 M 230, 260, 300, 700

F1, F20, F21, P42 T1700 9000

ILDE01 (Figure 18)

DE 01 McKee Cr. 14.86 2002 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, F21, P42 T1700 9000

ILDG01 (Figure 17)

DG 01 La Moine R. 22.18 2002 M 230, 260, 700 F1, F20, F21, P42 T1700 9000

ILDG04 (Figure 17)

DG 04 La Moine R. 11.01 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, F21, P42 T1700 9000

ILDL01 (Figure 13)

DL 01 Kickapoo Cr. 18.82 2002 M 230, 700 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000

ILDTB01 (Figure 4)

DTB 01 Somonauk Cr. 9.11 2002 M 230 F1, F20, F21, N42 T1700 9000

ILDTD02 (Figure 4)

DTD 02 Blackberry Cr. 15.96 2002 M 230, 700, 860 F1, F20, N42 T1700 9000

ILDTG02 (Figure 3)

DTG 02 Poplar Cr. 14.82 2002 M 230 F1, F20, N42 T1700 9000

ILDTK04 (Figure 3)

DTK 04 Nippersink Cr. 14.90 2002 M 230, 700, 860 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000

ILDW01 (Figure 11)

DW 01 Aux Sable Cr. 20.34 2002 M 260 F1, F20, F21, P42 T1700 9000

ILE28 (Figure 21)

E 28 Sangamon R. 16.71 1998 M 230, 700 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000

ILEI02 (Figure 22)

EI 02 Salt Cr. 11.04 1998 M 230, 700 F1, F20, P42, X21 T1700 9000

ILEID04 (Figure 22)

EID 04 Sugar Cr. 9.79 1998 M 230, 700 F1, F20, N42 T1700 9000

ILEIG01 (Figure 22)

EIG 01 Lake Fk. 21.03 1998 M 230, 700 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000

ILLF01 (Figure 16)

LF 01 Edwards R. 13.62 2002 M 230, 260 F1, F20, F21, P42 T1700 9000

ILOI09 (Figure 24)

OI 09 Shoal Cr. 3.94 1998 M 230 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000

ILOL02 (Figure 24)

OL 02 Hurricane Cr. 23.64 2002 M 230, 700 F1, F20, P42, X21 T1700 9000

ILON01 (Figure 24)

ON 01 Hickory Cr. 22.20 1998 M 230, 700 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000

ILOQ01 (Figure 23)

OQ 01 Beck Cr. 27.02 2002 M 230, 700 F1, F20, F21, P42 T1700 9000

ILPH16 (Figure 6)

PH 16 Elkhorn Cr. 16.68 2002 M 230, 260, 700, 860

F1, F20, F21, N42 T1700 9000

ILPL03 (Figure 6)

PL 03 Kyte R. 6.77 2002 M 230, 260, 700, 860

F1, F20, F21, N42 T1700 9000


61 August 2003


WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILPQB02 (Figure 5)

PQB 02 Killbuck Cr. 6.20 2002 M 230 F1, F20, P42 T1700 9000

ILPQF06 (Figure 5)

PQF 07 Coon Cr. 21.99 2002 M 230 F1, F20, N42 T1700 9000

ILPWN01 (Figure 7)

PWN 01 Yellow Cr. 4.50 2002 M 230 F1, F20, N42 T1700 9000

ILPHB01 (Figure 6)

PHB 01 Sugar Cr. 13.33 2002 M 700, 860 P1, P20 T0 9000


62 August 2003

Table 6. Illinois 2002 Section 303(d) List and Prioritization- Low Priority

Low Priority

WSID/ FIGURE

WATER BODY

SEGMENT


YEAR 303(D)

LISTED

ASSESS-MENT LEVEL

ASSESS-MENT

PROGRAM


ILBPK07 (Figure 29)

RBN MINGO 170.00 1998 E 155 F20, F42, P1, P44, X21, X50

T1100, T2100, T2210, T900, T910, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 8500, 8960

ILDC01 (Figure 18)

RDI JACKSONVILLE 476.50 1998 M 205 F1, F20, F42, F50, P44, X21

T1100, T2200, T2210, T900, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 4000, 6000, 7000, 7400, 7550, 7700, 8960

ILBH01 (Figure 30)

RBW MILL CREEK POND 811.00 1998 M 205 F20, F42, P44, T1, X21, X50

T1000, T1200, T2210, T900, T920

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8700

ILDGLA01 (Figure 17)

RDE ARGYLE 95.10 1998 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F21, F42, P44, X50

T1100, T2210, T900, T920, T930

1000, 1050, 1100, 7550, 7700, 8960

ILDGZR01 (Figure 17)

RDZE LAHARPE 9.20 2002 M 205 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T1200, T300, T900, T920 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 1350, 1400, 7000, 7400

ILRCE (Figure 31)

RCE SARA 765.00 1996 M 205 F1, F20, F42, P44, X21, X50

T2210, T900, T920 1000, 1050, 1100, 3000, 7550, 8300, 8700

ILOQCA02 (Figure 23)

ROF PANA 219.50 2002 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F21, F42, F50, P44

H2210, M500 200, 1000, 1050, 1100, 7000, 7400

ILDTA01 (Figure 4)

VTU SHABBONA 318.00 1998 M 205, 260 F1, F20, F21, F42, P44, X50

H2210, S900, S925 1000, 1050, 8700

* This water body segment (OKA 02) is evaluated for aquatic life use, but monitored for drinking water supply use. ** For detailed Lake Michigan monitoring data, please refer to the 305(b) Illinois Water Quality Report 2002, Appendix C.

LEE

PIKE

WILL

COOK

OGLE

MCLEAN

LASALLE

KNOX

ADAMS

HENRY

IROQUOIS

FULTON

BUREAU

SHELBY

WAYNE

KANE

FORD

EDGAR

LAKE

LOGAN

PEORIA

LIVINGSTON

CLAY

CHAMPAIGN

HANCOCK

FAYETTE

MACOUPIN

COLES

VERMILION

MADISON

MACON

DEKALB

WHITE

MASON

PIATTCASS

POPE

SANGAMON

CLARK

ST. CLAIR

JASPER

MARION

PERRY

GREENE

MERCER

BOND

JACKSON

CHRISTIAN

UNION

MORGAN

WHITESIDE

WARREN

TAZEWELL

KANKAKEE

MCHENRY

CLINTON

JO DAVIESS

RANDOLPH

SALINE

JEFFERSON

JERSEY

DEWITT

GRUNDY

CARROLL

MONTGOMERY

WOODFORD

MONROE

MCDONOUGH

STEPHENSON

STARK

DOUGLAS

FRANKLIN

WINNEBAGO

SCHUYLER

WASHINGTON

DUPAGE

BROWN

EFFINGHAM

BOONE

HAMILTON

SCOTT

CRAWFORD

JOHNSON

MENARD

MARSHALL

RICHLAND

WILLIAMSON

KENDALL

ROCK ISLAND

LAWRENCE

MOULTRIE

HENDERSON

GALLATIN

MASSAC

CALHOUN

WABASH

CUMBERLAND

PULASKI

HARDIN

EDWARDS

ALEXANDER

PUTNAM

6

31

3018

11

9

2

24

5

26

8

4

10

20

22

15

32

16

13

7

25

19

23

29

21

1

17

12

3

27

14

33

28

VIII. WATERSHEDS OF ILLINOIS

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233

Great Lakes/Calumet River WatershedDes Plaines River WatershedUpper Fox River WatershedLower Fox River WatershedKishwaukee River WatershedRock River WatershedPecatonica River WatershedGreen River WatershedMississippi North River WatershedKankakee/Iroquois River WatershedUpper Illinois/Mazon River WatershedVermilion (Illinois) River WatershedMiddle Illinois River WatershedMackinaw River WatershedSpoon River WatershedMississippi Central River WatershedLa Moine River WatershedLower Illinois/Macoupin Creek WatershedMississippi Central River WatershedLower Sangamon River WatershedUpper Sangamon River WatershedSalt Creek of Sangamon River WatershedUpper Kaskaskia River WatershedMiddle Kaskaskia River/Shoal Creek WatershedLower Kaskaskia River WatershedBig Muddy River WatershedMississippi South Central River WatershedMississippi South River WatershedVermilion (Wabash) River WatershedEmbarras/Middle Wabash River WatershedLittle and Lower Wabash River/Skillet Fork River WatershedSaline River/Bay Creek WatershedCache River Watershed

63

GI 03QZFRHURHWRHXH 02RHZEHA 04HA 06HAA 01HAA 02HAA 40RHARHOHAB 41HB 01HB 42RHZIHBD 04HBD 05RHIRHRHBDCHC 01HCA 01HCB 01HCC 07RHZAHCC 02HCC 08HCCA 01HCCA 03HCCA 04HCCA 05HCCC 02RHJRHJAQA C4QAA D1QC 03QC 05QCA 01QZK

ILGI03

ILH02

ILHA04

ILHAA01

ILHAB01ILHB42

ILHBD04

ILHBDB03ILHBDC02ILHC01

ILHCC07

ILHCC08

ILHCCA01

ILHCCC04ILHCCD09

ILQ01

ILGZK

Chicago Sanitary & Shipping CanalWashington Park LagoonSherman Park LagoonsGarfield Park LagoonDouglas Park LagoonCalumet-Sag ChannelArrowhead (Cook)Little Calumet River NorthLittle Calumet River NorthCalumet RiverCalumet RiverCalumet RiverWolfCalumetGrand Calumet RiverLittle Calumet River SouthLittle Calumet River SouthMidlothian ReservoirThorn CreekThorn CreekSauk TrailGeorge (Cook)Deer CreekSouth Branch Chicago RiverSouth Fork South Branch Chicago RiverChicago RiverNorth Branch Chicago RiverGompers Park LagoonNorth Branch Chicago RiverNorth Branch Chicago RiverNorth Shore ChannelNorth Shore ChannelNorth Shore ChannelNorth Shore ChannelMiddle Fork North Br. Chicago RiverSkokie LagoonsChicago Botanic GardenPettibone CreekSouth Branch Pettibone CreekWaukegan RiverWaukegan RiverSouth Branch Waukegan RiverLincoln Park North Pond

WSID WBSEG NAME

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

Zion

Evanston

Monee

HickoryHills

Wheeling

GreenOaks

Lynwood

LAKE

DUPAGE

COOK

WILL

GI 03

H 02 HA 04

HA 06

HAA 01

HAA 02

HAA 40

HB 42HBD 04

HBD 05

HBDC

HC 01

HCA 01

HCB 01

HCC 02

HCC 07

HCC 08

HCCA 01

HCCA 03HCCA 04

HCCA 05

HCCC 02

QA C4QAA D1

QC 03

QC 05QCA 01

RHJ

QZF

RHU

RHWRHX

RHZE

RHA

RHR

RHZA

RHO

RHI

RHJA

QKZ

RHZI

HAB 41HB 01

#

County Boundaries

Reference Communities

Subwatershed BoundariesStreams

Subwatersheds with 303d Listed Waters303d Listed Streams

303d Listed Lakes

LEGEND

Illinois EPABOW/Watershed Management SectionNovember 2002

Figure 1. Great Lakes/Calumet River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

Page 64

Figure 2a. Des Plaines River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

LAKE

COOK

DUPAGE

WILL

KENDALL

GRUNDY

Waukegan

LakeZurich

Antioch

Channahon

WestChicago

OakPark

TinleyPark

G01

G03

G07

G08

G11

G12

G15

G22

G23

G24

G25

G26

G28

G30

G32

G35G36

G39

GB03

GB10

GBE02

GBK05

GBK07

GBK09

GBK11

GBK12

GBL11GBL08GBL10GBL05GBL02

GBLB01

GG02 GGC-FN-C1

GGF

GI02

GI04

GI05

GI06

GK03

GL

GL03

GL10

GL19

GLA04GLA02

GLB01

GU02

GWAA

H01

GB09

GL09

#

County BoundariesReference CommunitiesSubwatershed BoundariesStreamsSubwatersheds with 303d Listed Waters303d Listed Streams303d Listed Lakes

LEGEND

WSID WBSEG NAME

G 01G 12G 24G 08G 25G 03G 11G 39G 23G 07G 15G 22G 26G 28G 30G 32G 35G 36GB 03GB 09GB 10GBE 02GBK 05GBK 07GBK 09GBK 11GBK 12GBL 02GBL 05GBL 08GBL 10GBL 11GBLB 01

ILG01

ILG08

ILG11

ILG23ILG30

ILGB11

ILGBE01ILGBK05

ILGBL10

DesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDesPlaines RiverDuPage RiverDuPage RiverDuPage RiverLily Cache CreekWest Branch DuPage RiverWest Branch DuPage RiverWest Branch DuPage RiverWest Branch DuPage RiverWest Branch DuPage RiverEast Branch DuPage RiverEast Branch DuPage RiverEast Branch DuPage RiverEast Branch DuPage RiverEast Branch DuPage RIverSt. Joseph Creek

WSID WBSEG NAME

GG 02GGC-FN-C1GGFGI 02GI 04GI 05GI 06GK 03GLGL 03GL 09GL 10GL 19GLB 01GLA 02GLA 04GU 02GWAAH 01

ILGG02

ILGI02

ILGK03ILGL09

ILGLA01

ILGU02ILGWAA01ILH01

Hickory CreekUnion DitchFrankfort TributaryChicago San. & Ship CanalChicago San. & Ship CanalChicago San. & Ship CanalChicago San. & Ship CanalFlag CreekSalt CreekSalt CreekSalt CreekSalt CreekSalt CreekSpring BrookAddison CreekAddison CreekIndian CreekHastings CreekCalumet-Sag Channel

Streams Only - See 2b for Lakes


Page 65

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

####

#

#

#

# SGF

RGZZ

WGM

WGAWGBWGC

RHD

RGD

WGZVWGZU

RHH

RGZX

RGL

RGF

WGZY

TinleyPark

WestChicago

Channahon

LakeZurich

Waukegan

GRUNDY WILL

DUPAGE

COOK

LAKE

Antioch

KENDALL

OakPark

WGZW

RGBWSID WBSEG NAME

ILG30

ILGBK05

ILGBL10

ILGG02ILGI02ILGL09

ILGU02

ILH01

RGFRGLSGFRGDWGMWGAWGBWGCWGZWRGZZRHDRGZXWGZYRGBWGZUWGZVRHH

OpekaBig BendSchiller PondSilver (DuPage)HerrickMeadowMarmoSterling pondRice (DuPage)SedgewickMapleBusse WoodsIndianDiamondBig BearLittle BearSanganshkee Slough

#

County BoundariesReference CommunitiesSubwatershed BoundariesStreamsSubwatersheds with 303d Listed Waters303d Listed Streams303d Listed Lakes

LEGEND

Figure 2b. Des Plaines River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

Lakes Only - See 2a for Streams


Page 66

Figure 3. Upper Fox River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

MCHENRYLAKE

COOKDUPAGE

Woodstock

Elgin

LakeVilla

LakeZurich

SouthBarrington

Hebron

DT06

DT18

DT20

DT22

DT23

DT35

RTJ

RTG

VTZO

RTZD (2)

RTD

RTF

RTI

RTQ

RTR

RTURTZG

RTZJ

VTJ

VTW

RTH

RTKRTUA

VTZARGZTDTK04

DTG02

VTZH

#

County Boundaries




303d Listed Lakes

LEGEND

WSID WBSEG NAME

DT 06DT 18DT 20DT 22DT 23RTGVTZHVTZODT 35DTG02DTK04RTZDRGZTRTDRTFRTHRTIRTJRTKRTQRTRRTURTUARTZGRTZJVTJVTWVTZA

ILDT22

ILDT35ILDTG02ILDTK04ILDTZT02ILRTF

Fox RiverFox RiverFox RiverFox RiverFox RiverBangsCrystal LakeJaycee ParkFox RiverPoplar CreekNippersink CreekMcCullomSpring (Lake)CatherineFoxRoundChannelLong (Lake)Cedar (Lake)GrassMarie (Lake)PistakeeNippersinkDuckLilyBluffPetiteTurner

Illinois EPABOW/Watershed Management SectionNovember 2002Page 67

##

#

DEKALB

KANE

KENDALL

LASALLE

DUPAGE

WILLLEE

Ottawa

Shabbona

Elgin

Yorkville

DT01

DT02

DT03

DT09

DT11

DT36

DT38

DT41

DT46

DT58

DT69

DTAB01

VTU

RTO

WGZL

DTD02

DTB01

#

County Boundaries



Subwatersheds with 303d Listed Waters

303d Listed Streams

303d Listed Lakes

LEGEND

Figure 4. Lower Fox River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

DT 03DT 09DT 38DT 58DT 69RTOWGZLDT 01DT 02DT 11DT 36DT 41DT 46VTUDTAB01DTB 01DTD 02

ILDT38

ILDT46

ILDTA01ILDTAB01ILDTB01ILDTD02

Fox RiverFox RiverFox RiverFox RiverFox RiverJericho (Mighell)PickerelFox RiverFox RiverFox RiverFox RiverFox RiverFox RiverShabbonaLittle Indain CreekSomonaukBlackberry

WSID WBSEG NAME


#

WINNEBAGO BOONE MCHENRY

OGLE

DEKALB

KANE

DavisJunction

MaplePark

Huntley

PoplarGrove

Harvard

PQ02

PQ07PQ10

PQ12

PQ13

PQ14

PQC02

PQC05

PQC06

PQC09

PQC11

PQC13

PQEA01

PQEC-A

RPZG

PQB02

PQF07

Figure 5. Kishwaukee River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

County Boundaries

Reference CommunitiesSubwatershed BoundariesStreams


303d Listed Lakes

LEGEND

PQ 02PQ 07PQ 10PQ 13PQ 12PQ 14PQB 02PQC 02PQC 05PQC 06PQC 09PQC 11PQC 13RPZGPQEA 01PQEC-APQF 07

ILPQ02ILPQ10

ILPQ12ILPQ14ILPQB02ILPQC06

ILPQC07ILPQCL01ILPQEA01ILPQEC01ILPQF06

Kishwaukee RiverKishwaukee RiverKishwaukee RiverKishwaukee RiverKishwaukee RiverKishwaukee RiverKillbuck CreekSouth Branch Kishwaukee RiverSouth Branch Kishwaukee RiverSouth Branch Kishwaukee RiverSouth Branch Kishwaukee RiverSouth Branch Kishwaukee RiverSouth Branch Kishwaukee RiverSycamoreMokeler CreekLawrence CreekCoon Creek

WSID WBSEG NAME


Figure 6. Rock River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

#

WINNEBAGO

STEPHENSON

OGLE

LEE

CARROLL

WHITESIDE

ROCKISLAND

HENRYMoline

Lee

Tampico

Rockford

Chadwick

Rockton

P04

P06

P09

P14

P15

P20

P21

P23

P24

P25

PE05

PHB01

POC1

RPC

RPF

PH16PL03

WSID WBSEG NAMERock RiverRock RiverRock RiverRock RiverRock RiverRock RiverRock RiverRock RiverRock RiverPierceRock RiverRock CreekCarltonElkhorn CreekSugar CreekKyte RiverMill Creek

ILP04

ILP06

ILP09ILP14

ILP15

ILP20ILPE05

ILPH16ILPHB01ILPL03ILPO01

P 04P 24P 25P 06P 21P 09P 14P 23P 15RPCP 20PE 05RPFPH 16PHB 01PL 03PO C1


#

County Boundaries


Subwatershed Boundaries

Streams


303d Listed Stream Segments

303d Listed Lakes

LEGEND

Page 70

#

Warren

Stockton

Shannon

Winnebago

Rockton

STEPHENSONJO DAVIESS

CARROLL

WINNEBAGO

OGLE

PW01

PW02

PW04

PW06

PW07

PW08

PW13PWB01

PWB03

PWF-L-C1

PWF-W-C1

PWH02

RPA

PWN01

Figure 7. Pecatonica River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

County Boundaries



Streams



303d Listed Lakes

LEGEND

WSID WBSEG NAMEPecatonica RiverPecatonica RiverPecatonica RiverPecatonica RiverPecatonica RiverPecatonica RiverPecatonica RiverSugar RiverSugar RiverCoolidge CreekCoolidge CreekSumner CreekYellow CreekLe-Aqua-Na

ILPW01

ILPW06ILPW07ILPW08

ILPW13ILPWB01

ILPWF01

ILPWH01ILPWN01ILPWQ04

PW 01PW 02PW 06PW 07PW 04PW 08PW 13PWB 01PWB 03PWF-L-C1PWF-W-C1PWH 02PWN 01RPA


Page 71

#

WHITESIDE

HENRY

BUREAU

LEE

GreenRock

Kewanee

Orion

Ohio

Le

DeerGrove

PB05

PB09 PB28

PBD02

PBE01

PBG10

PBG12

PBI02

PBI03

PBJ04

PBJA04

PBM11

PBO10

PBP01

TP03

RPD

Figure 8. Green River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

County Boundaries



Streams



303d Listed Lakes

LEGEND

WSID WBSEG NAMEGreen RiverGreen RiverGreen RiverGreen RiverGreen RiverMineral CreekGeneseo CreekBig Slough DitchBig Slough DitchSpring CreekSpring CreekMud CreekCoal CreekJohnson Sauk TrailFairfield DitchFairfield Union Special DitchWalnut Special Ditch

ILPB02

ILPB04

ILPBD01ILPBE01ILPBG01

ILPBI01

ILPBJ01ILPBJA01

ILPBM11ILPBO10ILPBP01

PB 02PB 05TP 03PB 09PB 28PBD 02PBE 01PBG 10PBG 12PBI 02PBI 03PBJ 04PBJA 04RPDPBM 11PBO 10PBP 01

Illinois EPABOW/Watershed Management SectionNovember 2002 Page 72

Figure 9. Mississippi North River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

JO DAVIESS

CARROLL

WHITESIDE

ROCK ISLAND

MERCER

STEPHENSON

EastDubuque

Moline

NewBoston

Nora

Lanark

M03

M04

M05

M06

M10

MJ01

MNJ01

MQ01

MQ02

TM24

TM36

RML

MN03

#

County Boundaries



Streams



303d Listed Lakes

LEGEND

WSID WBSEG NAME

Mississippi RiverMississippi RiverMississippi RiverMississippi RiverMississippi RiverGeorge (Rock Island)Plum RiverPlum RiverApple RiverKentucky CreekMud RunGalena RiverGalena River

ILM02ILM03ILM04ILM05ILM10

ILMJ01

ILMN03ILMN04ILMNID01ILMQ01

M 06M 03M 04M 05M 10RMLMJ 01TM 24MN 03MNJ 01TM 36MQ 01MQ 02


Figure 10. Kankakee/Iroquois River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

FORD

IROQUOIS

KANKAKEE

WILL

Wabash

Roberts

Braidwood

ParkForestSouth

VERMILION

FLE02

FLEA-C1

FLGB-C1FLGB-C4

FLGZ-C1

FLH02

FLHA01 FLI02

FLF01

#

County Boundaries



Streams



303d Listed Lakes

LEGEND

WSID WBSEG NAMELangan CreekClifton NPike CreekAshkum CreekAshkum CreekClifton South CreekSpring CreekShavetail CreekSugar Creek

ILFLE01

ILFLF01ILFLG01

ILFLH01

ILFLI02

FLE 02FLEA-C1FLF 01FLGB-C1FLGB-C4FLGZ-C1FLH 02FLHA 01FLI 02


#

PUTNAM

LA SALLE GRUNDY

KENDALL

MARSHALL

LIVINGSTON

WOODFORD

TAZEWELL

FORD

KANKAKEE

WILL

BUREAU

Compton

Buda

Peoria

Minonk

Oglesby

Ottawa

Kempton

Braidwood

Odell

D09

D10

D16

D20

D23

D30

DQA01

DR01

DV04

DV06

DZZP03

RDU

DW01

DQ03

#

County Boundaries



Streams



303d Listed Lakes

LEGEND

Figure 11. Upper Illinois/Mazon River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

WSID WBSEG NAME

Illinois RiverIllinois RiverIllinois RiverDepueIllinois RiverIllinois RiverIllinois RiverBig Bureau CreekEast Bureau CreekLittle Vermilion RiverMazon RiverMazon RiverAux Sable CreekFarm Creek

ILD09ILD10ILD16

ILD20ILD23ILD30ILDQ03ILDQA01ILDR01ILDV03ILDV04ILDW01ILDZZP03

D 09D 10D 16RDUD 20D 23D 30DQ 03DQA 01DR 01DV 06DV 04DW 01DZZP 03


LASALLE

WOODFORD

FORD

MCLEAN

DS06

Oglesby

Streator

Minonk Pontiac

Fairbury

Sibley

Kempton

LIVINGSTON

DSQ03

DSQC01

DS14

WSID WBSEG NAMEILDS06

ILDSQ01ILDSQC01

DS 06DS 14DSQ 03DSQC 01

Vermilion RiverVermilion RiverNorth Fork Vermilion RiverKelly Creek

Figure 12. Vermilion (Illinois) River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)


#

Reference CommunitiesSubwatershed BoundariesStreamsSubwatersheds with 303d Listed Waters303d Listed Stream

303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

Page 76

#

#

#

#

#

#

Peoria

Canton

Manito

Beardstown

Rushvil le

Astoria

Kilbourne

PEORIA

FULTON

TAZEWELL

MASON

SCHUYLER

D05

D31

RDD

RDA

RDQ

RDZV

SDZM

SDZC

DL01

Figure 13. Middle Illinois River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#


303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

WSID WBSEG NAME

ILD03

ILD05ILD31

ILD99

ILDL01ILDZH01

RDASDZCD 05D 31RDZVRDQSDZMDL 01RDD

Anderson & CarltonSchuy-RushIllinois RiverIllinois RiverMatanzasSpring SouthSpring NorthKickapoo CreekCanton


Page 77

#

#

#

BloomingtonNormal

Manito

Morton

Minonk

Sibley

MCLEAN

TAZEWELL

WOODFORD

FORD

MASON

DK04

DK12

DK13DK15

DK17

DK19

DK20

DK21

RDO

SDA

SDS

DKN01

DKS

DKD01

DKB01

WSID WBSEG NAME

Mackinaw RiverMackinaw RiverMackinaw RiverMackinaw RiverMackinaw RiverMackinaw RiverMackinaw RiverMackinaw RiverSixmile CreekTurkey CreekEvergreenHickory Grove DitchIndian CreekEurekaBloomington

DK 12DK 19DK 04DK 13DK 15DK 17DK 20DK 21DKN 01DKSSDADKB 01DKD 01SDSRDO

ILDK12

ILDK13

ILDK17

ILDKB01ILDKD01ILDKJ01ILDKP02

Figure 14. Mackinaw River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

Reference CommunitiesSubwatershed BoundariesStreamsSubwatersheds with 303d Listed Waters

303d Listed Stream

303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND


Figure 15. Spoon River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

Galesburg

Havana

Neponset

Princevil le

Canton

Prairie City

KNOX

PEORIA

FULTONMCDONOUGH

WARREN

HENRY BUREAU

MARSHALL

STARK

DJ02

DJ08

DJ09

DJB18

DJBZ01

DJE02

SDZA

DJIA

DJL01

DJ06

#


303d Listed Stream

303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

WSID WBSEG NAME

ILDJ02ILDJ06ILDJ08ILDJ09ILDJB18ILDJBZ01ILDJE01ILDJHD01ILDJI01ILDJL01

DJ 02DJ 06DJ 08DJ 09DJB 18DJBZ 01DJE 02SDZADJIADJL 01

Spoon RiverSpoon RiverSpoon RiverSpoon RiverBig CreekSlug RunCoal CreekBrackenSwab RunIndian Creek


Figure 16. Mississippi North Central River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

HANCOCK

WARREN

KNOX

HENRY

MERCER

HENDERSON

New Boston

Cambridge

Galesburg

Galva

Gladstone

Rosevil le

Dallas City

Warsaw

Ferris

MCDONOUGH

K22

LD02LDD-C6

LDDC

LDG01

RLB

LF01

LDD-A1LDD-C1LDD-C2LDD-C3LDD-C3aLDD23

#


303d Listed Stream

303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

WSID WBSEG NAME

ILK04ILLD02ILLDD01

ILLDDC01ILLDG01ILLDH01ILLF01

K 22LD 02LDD 23LDD-A1LDD-C1LDD-C2LDD-C3LDD-C3aLDD-C6LDDCLDG 01RLBLF 01

Mississippi RiverHenderson RiverCedar CreekCedar CreekCedar CreekCedar CreekCedar CreekCedar CreekCedar CreekMarkham CreekMiddle Henderson CreekStoreyEdwards River


#

#

#

#

MCDONOUGH

SCHUYLER

BROWN

ADAMS

HANCOCK

HENDERSON

Bushnell

Rushvil le

MountSterl ing

Carthage

Golden

DGJA02

DGLC01

RDE

RDR

RLE

RDZE

DG04

DG01

#


303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

WSID WBSEG NAMEILDG01ILDG04ILDGJA01ILDGL01ILDGLA01ILDGLC01ILDGZO01ILDGZR01

DG 01DG 04DGJA 02RDRRDEDGLC 01RLERDZE

LaMoine RiverLaMoine RiverKilljordan CreekSpring (McDonough)ArgyleDrowning ForkCarthageLaHarpe

Figure 17. LaMoine River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)


Figure 18. Lower Illinois/Macoupin River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#CALHOUN

PIKE

ADAMS

BROWN

CASS

MORGAN

SCOTT

JERSEY

GREENE

MACOUPIN

MONTGO

Grafton

Jerseyvil le

Pittsfield

Camp Point

Beardstown

Waverly

Farmington

Ashland

Hardin

Gillespie

SANGAMON

D01

D32

DA04

DA05

DA06

DADDAG02 DAZN

DB04

DBC

DD04

DF04

DF05DF06

RDF

RDGRDH

RDIRDP

RDZP

SDL

SDZF

SDTSDU

SDC

DE01

DB01

#


303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND


WSID WBSEG NAME

Illinois RiverIllinois RiverPittsf ieldMacoupin CreekMacoupin CreekBriar CreekCarlinvilleBeaver DamMacoupin CreekBear CreekHodges CreekOtter Palmyra-ModestoHettickGillespie OldGillespie NewApple CreekApple CreekSeminary CreekWaverlyJacksonvilleMauvaise Terre RiverMauvaisse TerreMcKee CreekIndian CreekIndian CreekIndian Creek

D 01D 32RDPDA 04DA 05DAZNRDGRDHDA 06DADDAG 02RDFRDZPSDZFSDTSDUDB 01DB 04DBCSDCRDIDD 04SDLDE 01DF 04DF 05DF 06

ILD01ILD32

ILDA04

ILDA06

ILDAG01

ILDAH01

ILDB01

ILDC01ILDD04

ILDE01ILDF04

Page 82

Figure 19. Mississippi Central River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002) Warsaw

Carthage

Quincy

New Salem

Batchtown

HANCOCK

ADAMS

PIKE

CALHOUN

K17

K21

KCA01

KCA02

KCA03

KCAG01

KI03

KI06

KI02

#

Reference CommunitiesSubwatershed BoundariesStreamsSubwatersheds with 303d Listed Waters303d Listed Stream303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

WSID WBSEG NAMEMississippi RiverMississippi RiverBay CreekBay CreekBay CreekHoney CreekBear CreekBear CreekBear Creek

K 17K 21KCA 01KCA 02KCA 03KCAG 01KI 02KI 03KI 06

ILK03ILK06ILKCA01

ILKCAG01ILKI02


Figure 20. Lower Sangamon River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

#

#

Pana

Macon

Harvel

Virden

Virginia

Williamsville

Easton

Edinburg

NewBerlin

CHRISTIAN

SANGAMON

MACOUPIN

MENARD

MACON

SHELBY

MONTGOMERY

LOGAN

MORGAN

CASS

MASON

E25

E26

EK01

EL01

EO01

EO02

EO04

EO05

EO12

EO13

EOA01

EOA04

EOA06EOAD11

EOAF01

EOC02EOCA02

EOF05

EOH01

EZJ

REB

REC

REF

#


County Boundaries

LEGEND

WSID WBSEG NAME

Town BranchSangamon RiverSangamon RiverRichland CreekSpring CreekSouth Fork Sangamon RiverSouth Fork Sangamon RiverSouth Fork Sangamon RiverSouth Fork Sangamon RiverSouth Fork Sangamon RiverSouth Fork Sangamon RiverTaylorvilleSugar CreekSugar CreekHoover BranchClear Lake Ave. CreekSugar CreekHorse CreekBrush CreekBear CreekFlat BranchSpringfieldSangchris

EZJE 25E 26EK 01EL 01EO 01EO 12EO 02EO 04EO 05EO 13RECEOA 01EOA 06EOAD 11EOAF 01EOA 04EOC 02EOCA 02EOF 05EOH 01REFREB

ILE24ILE25ILE26ILEK01ILEL01ILEO01

ILEO02

ILEO10

ILEOA01

ILEOA02ILEOC01ILEOCA02ILEOF01ILEOH01ILREFILREJ


Figure 21. Upper Sangamon River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

#

Rantoul

Ellsworth

Mansfield

Monticello

Maroa

BlueMound

Dawson

MACON

SANGAMON

PIATT

CHAMPAIGN

FORD

MCLEAN

DEWITT

CHRISTIAN

E05

E06

E09E11E13E16

E27

E28

E29

E30

E32

EQ01

ERA01

ES13

EZV

REA

REG

#


County Boundaries

LEGEND

WSID WBSEG NAME

Sangamon RiverSangamon RiverSangamon RiverSangamon RiverSangamon RiverSangamon RiverSangamon RiverSangamon RiverSangamon RiverSangamon RiverSangamon RiverOwl CreekLake of the WoodsMosquito CreekLong Point SloughStevens CreekDecatur

E 06E 09E 05E 11E 13E 16E 27E 30E 32E 28E 29EZVREGEQ 01ERA 01ES 13REA

ILE09

ILE16

ILE28ILE29

ILEQ01ILERA01ILES01ILREA


Page 85

#

#

#

TAZEWELL

MASON

SANGAMON

MENARD

MACON

DEWITT

MCLEAN

PIATT

LOGAN

BloomingtonNormal

Mansf ield

MasonCity

Warrensburg

Minier

Elkhart

EI02

EID04

EID C1

EIDD

EIG01

RED

REE

REI

EIE05

EIE04

EI06

#


County Boundaries

LEGEND

Figure 22. Salt Creek of Sangamon River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

WSID WBSEG NAMESalt CreekSalt CreekWeldon SpringsClintonSugar CreekSugar CreekGoose CreekKickapoo CreekKickapoo CreekLake ForkDawson

EI 02EI 06REDREIEID 04EID C1EIDDEIE 04EIE 05EIG 01REE

ILEI02ILEI06

ILEID04ILEID05ILEIDD01ILEIE05

ILEIG01ILEIJ01


#


303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

Kaskaskia RiverKaskaskia RiverKaskaskia RiverKaskaskia RiverKaskaskia RiverKaskaskia RiverKaskaskia RiverBeck CreekPanaWest Okaw RiverJonathon CreekLake ForkAsa CreekShelbyville

O 13O 31O 35O 37O 02O 15O 17OQ 01ROFOT 02OU 01OW 01OZZT 01ROC

ILO13

ILO15

ILOQ01ILOQCA02ILOT02ILOU01ILOW01ILOZZT01ILROC

WSID WBSEG NAME

Figure 23. Upper Kaskaskia River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

Il linois EPABOW /W atershed Management SectionNovember 2002

#

#

Champaign

Arcola

CharlestonMattoon

Stewardson

CerroGordo

Pana

PIATT

CHAMPAIGN

DOUGLAS

COLES

MOULTRIE

SHELBY

FAYETTE

CHRISTIAN

EFFINGHAM

O02

O13

O15

O17

O31

O35

O37

OT02

OU01

OW01

OZZT01

ROF

ROC

OQ01

Page 87

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

MONTGOMERY

BOND

CLINTON

SHELBY

FAYETTE

MARION

EFFINGHAM

WASHINGTON

Stewardson

Farina

Kell

Nashvil le

Harvel

Litchfield

Germantown

CHRISTIAN

JEFFERSON

OI05

OI08

OI09

OIB02OIC02

OIO09

OIP10

OJ07OJ08

OJA01

OJAF-NVC1

OJB02

OJCB19

OJK02

OJK03

OK01

OKA01

ON01

OPC01

ROA

ROD

ROE

ROG

ROI

ROK

ROL

RON

ROO

ROP

ROR

ROT

OL02

O08

OO01

OKA02 SOB

O33

Figure 24. Middle Kaskaskia/Shoal River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#


County Boundaries

LEGEND

Kaskaskia RiverKaskaskia RiverVandaliaShoal CreekShoal CreekShoal CreekBeaver CreekLocust ForkCoffeenGov. Bond (Greenville)Glen ShoalsHillsboro OldChicken CreekCattle CreekCrooked CreekCrooked CreekCentraliaRaccoonLittle Crooked CreekNashville CreekNashville CityLost CreekSewer CreekTown CreekTown CreekSalemEast Fork Kaskaskia RiverFarinaNorth Fork Kaskaskia RiverNorth Fork Kaskaskia RiverHurricane CreekHickory CreekRamsey CreekRamseyWolf CreekCarlyleLou Yaeger

O 08O 33RODOI 05OI 08OI 09OIB 02OIC 02ROGROPROLROTOIO 09OIP 10OJ 07OJ 08ROIROKOJA 01OJAF-NVC1ROOOJB 02OJCB 19OJK 02OJK 03ROROK 01SOBOKA 01OKA 02OL 02ON 01OO 01ROEOPC 01ROARON

ILO08

ILOI08

ILOI09ILOIB01ILOIC01ILOID01

ILOIL01

ILOIO09ILOIP10ILOJ08

ILOJA01ILOJAF01

ILOJB01ILOJCB20ILOJK02

ILOK01

ILOKA01

ILOL02ILON01ILOO01

ILOPC01ILROAILRON

WSID WBSEG NAME

Il linois EPABOW /W atershed Management SectionNovember 2002Page 88

#

#

#MONROE

ST. CLAIR

MADISON

MACOUPIN

BOND

CLINTON

WASHINGTON

RANDOLPH

PERRY

Ellis Grove

Oakdale

Breese

Mt.Olive

OldRipley

Troy

Waterloo

O01

O91

O97OB03

OC03

OC04

OC05

OC90

OC92OC94

OC95

OCE

OD06

OD07

OD09

ODE

ODG01

ODL02

ODM

OG02

OH01

OH05

OHAA07

OHC

OZC01

ROV

ROZA

OHA06OHA05OHA04OHA03OHA02

SOC

O26

OCFOCB99

OE02

Figure 25. Lower Kaskaskia River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

Reference CommunitiesSubwatershed Boundaries

StreamsSubwatersheds with 303d Listed Waters

303d Listed Stream

303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

Kaskaskia RiverKaskaskia RiverKaskaskia RiverKaskaskia RiverHorse CreekRichland Creek SouthRichland Creek SouthRichland Creek SouthRichland Creek SouthRichland Creek SouthRichland Creek SouthRichland Creek SouthDouglas CreekKinney BranchPrairie du Long CreekSilver CreekSilver CreekSilver CreekWendell BranchLoop CreekLittle Silver CreekEast Fork Silver CreekHighland SilverMud CreekCoultervilleElkhorn CreekSugar CreekSugar CreekGrassy BranchLake BranchLake BranchLake BranchLake BranchLake BranchBull BranchPlum CreekSparta NW

O 26O 91O 01O 97OB 03OC 03OC 04OC 05OC 90OC 92OC 94OC 95OCEOCFOCB 99OD 07OD 06OD 09ODMODEODG 01ODL 02ROZAOE 02ROVOG 02OH 01OH 05OHCOHA 02OHA 03OHA 04OHA 05OHA 06OHAA 07OZC 01SOC

ILO03ILO20ILO30

ILOB01ILOC04

ILOC94

ILOCB99ILOD07ILOD08

ILODE01ILODG01ILODL02

ILOE03ILOEB01ILOG02ILOH01

ILOHA01

ILOHAA07ILOZC01

WSID WBSEG NAME


Page 89

Figure 26a. Big Muddy River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

Kell

Thompsonville

AltoPass

Coulterville

Nashvil le

GrandTower

Marion

Ina

PERRY

JACKSON

UNION

JEFFERSON

FRANKLIN

WILLIAMSON

JOHNSON

HAMILTON

WASHINGTON

N08

N11

N12

N17

N99

NDC02

NA01

NAC01

NC03

NC07

NC10

NCB01

NCC01NCD03

NCD05

NCDA01

NCDB

NCDC01

NCI01

NCK01

ND01

ND02

ND04

ND11ND10ND08

NDA01

NDB03

NDDA01

NE05

NE06

NEB-DQA2

NEE01

NEF

NEI01

NF01

NG01

NG02

NH06

NH07

NHH

NJ07

NJ10

NJ14

NJ28

NJC

NK01

NZM01

NZN13

RNA

RNB

RNC

RND

RNE

RNG

RNI

RNM

RNU

RNZE

RNZX

RNL

RNO

RNP

RNQ

RNZA

RNZC

RNZH

RNZM

ND13ND12

RNH

NEA02

NGA02

NEB-DQC1

#



StreamsSubwatersheds with 303d Listed Waters

303d Listed Stream

303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

See 26b for List of Impaired Waters


Page 90

WSID WBSEG NAME

ILN01ILN08ILN10ILN11ILN12

ILN14ILNA01

ILNC05

ILNC07

ILNCD01

ILNCDA01ILND01

ILND02

ILND04

ILNDB01

ILNDC01ILNDDA01ILNDJ01ILNE04

ILNE05

ILNEB01

ILNF01ILNG02

ILNGA01

ILNH06

N 99N 08NZN 13N 11N 12RNDN 17NA 01NAC 01RNERNZMNC 03NC 10NCC 01NCI 01NCK 01RNHRNMNC 07NCB 01NCD 03NCD 05NCDBNCDC 01RNZANCDA 01ND 01NDA 01ND 02ND 11ND 12ND 13ND 04ND 08ND 10RNLNDB 03RNIRNZHNDC 02NDDA 01RNZCNE 06NEE 01NEFNEI 01NE 05NEA 02NEB-DQA2NEB-DQC1RNGNF 01NG 01NG 02NGA 02RNZERNZXNH 06NH 07NHH

Big Muddy RiverBig Muddy RiverAndy CreekBig Muddy RiverBig Muddy RiverMurphysboroBig Muddy RiverCedar CreekCave CreekCedar (Jackson)Little CedarBeaucoup CreekBeaucoup CreekWalkers CreekLittle Beaucoup CreekSwanwick CreekPinckneyvilleWashington CountyBeaucoup CreekRattlesnake CreekGalum CreekGalum CreekLittle Galum CreekBonnie CreekWesslyn CutPipestone CreekCrab Orchard CreekLittle Crab Orchard CreekCrab Orchard CreekCrab Orchard CreekCrab Orchard CreekCrab Orchard CreekCrab Orchard CreekCrab Orchard CreekCrab Orchard CreekMarionPiles ForkCarbondale City LakeCampusDrury CreekLittle Grassy CreekHerrin NewLittle Muddy RiverLittle Indian CreekWhite Oak CreekPuncheon CreekLittle Muddy RiverSixmile CreekReese CreekReese CreekDuQuoinHurricane CreekPond CreekPond CreekLake CreekJohnston CityArrowhead (Williamson)Middle Fork Big MuddyMiddle Fork Big MuddySugar Camp Creek

West Frankfort OldWest Frankfort NewCasey ForkCasey ForkCasey ForkCasey ForkSevenmile CreekJayceesRayse CreekPrairie CreekCrab OrchardRend BentonKinkaid

RNPRNQNJ 07NJ 10NJ 14NJ 28NJCRNUNK 01NZM 01RNARNBRNORNC

ILNHB01

ILNJ07

ILNK01ILNZM01ILRNAILRNB

ILNRC

WSID WBSEG NAME (Cont.)

Figure 26b. Big Muddy River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

See 26a for Map of Impaired Waters

Il linois EPABOW /W atershed Management SectionNovember 2002 Page 91

#

#

###

#

#

#JERSEY

MACOUPIN

MADISON

ST. CLAIR

MONROE

RANDOLPH

CALHOUN

Mt.Olive

Shiloh

Waterloo

Grafton

Alton

PrairieDu Rocher

Sauget

J01

J05

J06

J11

JD02

JH03JHE-C1

JMA01

JMAA01

JMAABA-C1

JMAC02

JN02

JNA01

JNA02

JO

JQ05

JQ07

JQA01

JR02

JRA02

RJC

RJKRJLRJM

RJA

RJF

RJG

RJO

#


Subwatershed BoundariesStreamsSubwatersheds with 303d Listed Waters

303d Listed Stream

303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

Figure 27. Mississippi South Central River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

Mississippi RiverMississippi RiverChain O Rocks CanalHorseshoe (Madison)Mississippi RiverMississippi RiverMaeystown CreekFountain CreekWaterloo CreekCanal No. 1Prairie Du Pont CreekStookey CreekHarding DitchFrank Holten 1Frank Holten 2Frank Holten 3Cahokia CanalCanteen CreekCanteen CreekStauntonMt. Olive NewMt. Olive OldCahokia CreekCahoki a Di vers ion ChannelTower (Madison)Indian CreekWood RiverEast Fork Wood River

J 11J 01JORJCJ 05J 06JD 02JH 03JHE-C1JMA 01JMAA 01JMAABA-C1JMAC 02RJKRJLRJMJN 02JNA 01JNA 02RJARJFRJGJQ 05JQ 07RJOJQA 01JR 02JRA 02

ILJ03ILJ81

ILJ83

ILJD01ILJH02

ILJMA01

ILJMAC02

ILJN02ILJNA01

ILJQ03

ILJQ05

ILJQA01ILJR02

WSID WBSEG NAME


Page 92

#


Subwatershed BoundariesStreamsSubwatersheds with 303d Listed Waters303d Listed Stream

303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

Mississippi River SouthMississippi RiverDutch CreekMarys RiverMill CreekClear CreekMaxwell CreekSparta OldLittle Marys RiverWelge CreekRandolphCox CreekNorth Fork Cox CreekNorth Fork Cox Creek

I 05I 84ICD-JB-C2II 03IIB 40IC 05IIK-SPC1ARIJIIC 38IICD 01RIBIIH 36IIHA 31IIHA-STC1

ILI01ILI84ILICD01ILII03

ILIC01ILII04

ILIIC01

ILIIH01

WSID WBSEG NAME

Figure 28. Mississippi South River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

#

JACKSON

ALEXANDER

UNION

PERRYRANDOLPH

Sparta

Thebes

AnnaJonesboro

Cairo

Chester

Gorham

I05

I84

IC05

II03

IIB40

IIC38IICD01

IIH36IIHA-STC1

IIHA31

IIK-SPC1A

RIB

RIJ

ICD-JB-C2


Page 93

Figure 29. Vermilion (Wabash) River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

#

#

#

IROQUOIS

FORD

CHAMPAIGN

Hoopeston

ChampaignUrbana

Danvil le

Rantoul

Ridge Farm

Melvin

EDGAR

VERMILION

BPE02

BPG09

BPGD

BPJ03BPJ08BPJC06

BPJCA

BPJG01

RBD

RBN

RBO

RBS

BPJ10

BP01

BO07

BO04BO05

#



303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

Little Vermilion RiverLittle Vermilion RiverLittle Vermilion RiverGeorgetownVermilion RiverGrape CreekNorth Fork Vermilion RiverVermilionHoopeston BranchSalt Fork Vermilion RiverSalt Fork Vermilion RiverSalt Fork Vermilion RiverHomerSaline BranchBoneyard CreekUpper Salt ForkMingo

BO 04BO 05BO 07RBSBP 01BPE 02BPG 09RBDBPGDBPJ 03BPJ 08BPJ 10RBOBPJC 06BPJCABPJG 01RBN

ILBO07

ILBP01ILBPE02ILBPG09

ILBPGD01ILBPJ03

ILBPJC06

ILBPJG01ILBPK07

WSID WBSEG NAME


Page 94

Figure 30. Embarras/Middle Wabash River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

###

#

#

#

#

#

CharlestonMattoon

COLES

CUMBERLAND

DOUGLAS

EDGAR

CRAWFORD

JASPER

LAWRENCE

RICHLAND

CLARK

VERMILIONCHAMPAIGN

B05

B06

B98

B99

BE01

BE07

BE14

BE19

BE20

BEF05

BEJ01BEL01

BER01

BEZB07

BFCB12BFCA22BFC26BFC25BFC20BFC19BFC11BFC10BF11BF01

BMC2

TB13

TB14

TBE05

RBA

RBB

RBC

RBK RBL

RBP

RBW

RBX

BN01

BM02

Russellville

Ridge Farm

Claremont

Palestine

Vermilion

Montrose

Savoy

CharlestonMattoon

#



303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

Wabash RiverWabash RiverWabash RiverWabash RiverWabash RiverWabash RiverEmbarras RiverEmbarras RiverSam ParrHurricane CreekCharleston Side ChannelEmbarras RiverEmbarras RiverEmbarras RiverRed Hills State ParkNorth Fork Embarras RiverMuddy CreekKickapoo CreekScattering ForkIndian CreekWalnut PointOaklandSugar CreekSugar CreekRobinson CreekRobinson CreekRobinson CreekRobinson CreekRobinson CreekRobinson CreekMarathon CreekQuail CreekMill Creek PondSugar CreekSugar CreekParis Twin EastParis Twin WestBrouilletts Creek

B 05B 06B 98B 99TB 13TB 14BE 01BE 07RBABEL 01RBCBE 14BE 19BE 20RBBBEF 05BEJ 01TBE 05BER 01BEZB 07RBKRBPBF 01BF 11BFC 10BFC 11BFC 19BFC 20BFC 25BFC 26BFCA 22BFCB 12RBWBM 02BM C2RBLRBXBN 01

ILB06

ILBE01ILBE07

ILBE09

ILBE14

ILBEA01ILBEF05ILBEJ01ILBEN01ILBER01ILBEZB07ILBEZX01

ILBF22

ILBFC10

ILBFCA21ILBFCB12ILBH01ILBM02

ILBN01

WSID WBSEG NAME


Page 95

Figure 31. Little and Lower Wabash/Skillet Fork River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

JEFFERSON

FAYETTE

MARION

SHELBY

EFFINGHAM

CUMBERLAND

CLAY

RICHLAND

WAYNE

COLES

MOULTRIE

LAWRENCE

WABASH

JASPER

HAMILTON

WHITE

B01

B03

BC02

C09

C19

C22

C23

CA02

CA03

CA05

CA06

CA07

CA08

CA09

CAGC01

CAN01

CAR01

CAW04

CD01

CDG-FL-A1CDG-FL-C1CDG-FL-C4CDG-FL-C6

CH02

CHEA11CJAE01

COC09COC10

CPD04CPD03CPD01

CSB08CSB07

RBF

RBZH

RCA

RCBRCC

RCD

RCE

RCF

RCG

RCJ

RCR

RBQRBZN

RCZJ

St. Francisville

Mount Carmel

McLeansboro

New Haven

Grayville

ClaremontKinmundy

MontroseAltamont

CharlestonMattoon

Maunie

Kell

C33

CCA-FF-A1CCA-FF-C1CC-FF-C3CC-FF-D1

CDF02

CH03

CJA02

CM02

CP-EF-C2CP-EF-C4CP-TU-C3CPC-TU-C1

#



Streams


303d Listed Stream

303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

Wabash RiverWabash RIverBeall WoodsBonpas CreekWest Salem NewWest Salem OldLittle Wabash RiverPond CreekPond CreekJohnson CreekJohnson CreekFairfieldLittle Wabash RiverLittle Wabash RiverAltamont NewLittle Wabash RiverLittle Wabash RiverParadise (Coles)Skillet ForkSkillet ForkSkillet ForkSkillet ForkSkillet ForkSkillet ForkSkillet ForkAuxier DitchHorse CreekBrush CreekSam DaleDums CreekElm RiverRacoon CreekSeminary CreekSeminary CreekSeminary CreekSeminary CreekFox RiverFox RiverVernorBorah (Olney New)Olney East ForkBig CreekBig Muddy Diversion DitchNewtonLittle Muddy CreekDismal CreekDieterich CreekDieterich CreekSalt CreekSalt CreekSalt CreekFirst Salt CreekSecond Salt CreekSecond Salt CreekSecond Salt CreekEast Branch Green CreekEast Branch Green CreekStephen A. ForbesSaraMattoon

B 01B 03RBZHBC 02RBQRBZNC 33CC-FF-C3CC-FF-D1CCA-FF-A1CCA-FF-C1RCZJC 09C 19RCJC 22C 23RCGCA 02CA 03CA 05CA 06CA 07CA 08CA 09CAGC 01CAN 01CAR 01RBFCAW 04CD 01CDF 02CDG-FL-A1CDG-FL-C1CDG-FL-C4CDG-FL-C6CH 02CH 03RCARCBRCCCHEA 11CJAE 01RCRCJA 02CM 02COC 09COC 10CP-EF-C2CP-EF-C4CP-TU-C3CPC-TU-C1CPD 01CPD 03CPD 04CSB 07CSB 08RCDRCERCF

ILB07

ILBC02

ILC08

ILC09ILC19ILC21ILC22ILC23ILC24ILCA03

ILCA06

ILCAG01ILCAN01ILCAR01

ILCAW01ILCD01ILCDF02ILCDG01

ILCH01

ILCHE01ILCJ01

ILCJA01ILCM01ILCOC09

ILCP01

ILCPC01ILCPD01

ILCSB07

ILRCDILRCEILRCF

WSID WBSEG NAME


Page 96

Figure 32. Saline River/Bay Creek Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

#

#

#

#

#

HARDIN

MASSAC

SALINE

GALLATIN

WHITE

HAMILTON

WILLIAMSON

FRANKLIN

JOHNSON

POPE

A31

AJF16

AJK01

AS

AT05

AT06

AT07

ATE03ATE04ATE05ATEE08

ATF04

ATF07

ATFE01

ATFF02

ATFH01

ATFJ01

ATFJ02

ATG03ATGC01

ATGC02

ATGC11

ATGH04ATGH09

ATGH10

ATGM01

ATH02

ATH05

ATH11 ATH13ATH14

ATHC01

ATHG01ATHG05

ATHS01

ATHT01ATHU01

ATHV01

ATZM02

RAA

RAF

RAI

RAZA

RAZO

RAR

Old Shawneetown

Thompsonville

Cave-In-Rock

McLeansboro

Gorevil le

New Haven

Golconda

AJ10

ATF05

ATG04

#

Reference CommunitiesSubwatershed BoundariesStreams

Subwatersheds with 303d Listed Waters303d Listed Stream

303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

Ohio RiverBay CreekSugar Creek LakeCedar CreekBay Creek DitchCane CreekSaline RiverGlen O. JonesSaline RiverSaline RiverEagle CreekEagle CreekEagle CreekRose CreekNorth Fork Saline RiverNorth Fork Saline RiverNorth Fork Saline RiverNorris City ReservoirRector CreekContrary CreekWheeler CreekDolanMcLeansboro NewCane CreekCane CreekMiddle Fork Saline RiverMiddle Fork Saline RiverHarrisburg ReservoirBankston ForkBankston ForkBankston ForkBrier CreekBrushy CreekBrushy CreekBrushy CreekHarco BranchSouth Fork Saline RiverPeters SloughSouth Fork Saline RiverSouth Fork Saline RiverSouth Fork Saline RiverSouth Fork Saline RiverBattle Ford CreekSugar CreekSugar CreekEast Palzo CreekStillhouse CreekCypress Ditch

A 31AJ 10RAZOAJF 16AJK 01ASAT 05RAFAT 06AT 07ATE 03ATE 04ATE 05ATEE 08ATF 04ATF 05ATF 07RARATFE 01ATFF 02ATFH 01RAARAZAATFJ 01ATFJ 02ATG 03ATG 04RAIATGC 01ATGC 02ATGC 11ATHS 01ATGH 04ATGH 09ATGH 10ATGM 01ATH 13ATHU 01ATH 02ATH 11ATH 14ATH 05ATHC 01ATHG 01ATHG 05ATHV 01ATHT 01ATZM 02

ILA31ILAJ01ILAJD15ILAJF01ILAJK01ILAR01ILAT05

ILAT06

ILATE01

ILATEE08ILATF04ILATF05

ILATFC01ILATFE01ILATFF01ILATFH01

ILATFI01ILATFJ01

ILATG03

ILATGC01

ILATGH01

ILATGM01ILATH01

ILATH02

ILATH05ILATHC01ILATHG01

ILATHT01ILATZM01

WSID WBSEG NAME

Il linois EPABOW /W atershed Management SectionNovember 2002 Page 97

Figure 33. Cache River Watershed 303d Listed Waters (2002)

#

#

#

#

#

#

Gorevil le

Jonesboro

Cairo

Metropolis

Vienna

Hamletsburg

POPE

JOHNSON

UNION

ALEXANDER

PULASKI

MASSAC

A33

A34

ADCD01

ADD01

ADD02

ADDB02

ADP01

ADX01

ADY01

IX03

IX04

IX05

IX06

IXCC01

IXD01

IXF01

IXI01

IXJ01

IXM04

RAM

RIA

RIE

RAB

RAW

RAZI

A32

#


303d Listed Lakes

County Boundaries

LEGEND

Ohio RiverOhio RiverOhio RiverMermetNew Columbia DitchDutchman CreekDutchman CreekDutchmanLittle Cache CreekVienna CityBloomfieldBradshaw CreekCache CreekOld Cache RiverCache RiverCache RiverCache RiverCache RiverHorseshoe (Alexander)Pulaski SloughSandy CreekMill CreekIndian Camp CreekBig CreekDongola City ReservoirCypress Creek

A 32A 33A 34RABADCD 01ADD 01ADD 02RAMADDB 02RAWRAZIADP 01ADX 01ADY 01IX 03IX 04IX 05IX 06RIAIXCC 01IXD 01IXF 01IXI 01IXJ 01RIEIXM 04

ILA32ILA33ILA34ILADC01ILADCD01ILADD01

ILADDB01

ILADP01ILADX01ILIX01

ILIX04

ILIXC01ILIXD01ILIXF01ILIXI01ILIXJ01

ILIXM01

WSID WBSEG NAME

Il linois EPABOW /W atershed Management SectionNovember 2002Page 98

#

##

#

#

#

##

##

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

###

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

##

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

###

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

##

#

##

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

###

#

###

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

##

##

#

#

#

#

#

####

##

#

#

#

##

#####

## #

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

###

##

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

Figure 34. Lakes and Streams on the 2002 303(d) List

#

County Boundary

Streams on 303(d) ListBasin Boundary

Lakes on 303(d) List

LEGEND


Page 99


100 November 2002

IX. REFERENCES

2002 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report Guidance by Robert H Wayland III, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, USEPA, November 19, 2001.

40 CFR Part 130, Water Quality Planning and Management, as published July 1996. Assessing the TMDL Approach to Water Quality Management, National Research Council, National

Academy of Sciences, 2001. Clean Water Act of 1987. Draft TMDL Program Implementation Strategy, USEPA, November 18, 1996. EPA Guidance for Water Quality Based Decisions: The TMDL Process, April 1991. FACA Workgroup on Section 303(d) Listing Criteria, memo from Geoffrey H. Grubbs, Director,

Assessment and Watershed Protection Division, USEPA, March 1997. Guidance for 1994 303(d) Lists, memo signed by Geoffrey H. Grubbs, USEPA, November 1993. Guidance: Use of Fish and Shellfish Advisories and Classifications in 303(d) and 305(b) Listing

Decisions, USEPA, Office of Water, WQSP-00-03, October 24, 2000. Illinois EPA 1992, 1994, 1996 and 1998 303(d) Lists, as approved by USEPA. Illinois Water Quality Report 2002 Section 305(b) Report. Illinois EPA, Surface Water Monitoring Strategy, 1996—2000, December 1996 (IEPA/BOW/96-

062). Illinois EPA, Surface Water Monitoring Strategy, 2002—2006, 2002 (draft document). National Clarifying Guidance for 1998 State and Territory Section 303(d) Listing Decisions. Robert

H. Wayland III, Director, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watershed, USEPA, August 27, 1997.

New Policies for Establishing and Implementing Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) –Robert

Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator, Memorandum, USEPA, August 8, 1997. Supplemental Guidance of Section 303(d) Implementation, memo signed by Geoffrey H. Grubbs,

USEPA, August 1992. TMDL Coordinators Guidance for 1994 Section 303(d) Lists by Mimi Dannel, Acting Chief,

Watershed Management Section, USEPA, December 1993.


101 November 2002


102 November 2002

X. DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS

ADB

Assessment Data Base

Background Levels Confidence Level

Levels representing the chemical, physical, and biological conditions that would result from natural geomorphological processes such as weathering or dissolution. An estimate of the relative reliability of the Illinois EPA’s identification of potential causes based on the amount and type of data available for the assessment, and the guideline used to assess the data (e.g., Illinois water quality standards, sediment classifications, state-wide statistical values {85th percentile}).

CFR Code of Federal Regulations (U.S. EPA)

CWA Clean Water Act

Illinois EPA Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Interstate Water Water bodies sharing boundaries with more than one state.

NAS National Academy of Sciences

NHD National Hydrography Dataset

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NRC National Research Council

Perched Lake Lakes privately owned and hydrologically separated Pollutant Dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator residue, sewage, garbage, sewage

sludge, munitions, chemical wastes, biological materials, radioactive materials, heat, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt, and industrial, municipal, and agricultural waste discharged into water. (See CWA section 502(6)).

Pollution The man-made or man-induced alteration of the chemical, physical,

biological, and radiological integrity of water (See CWA section 502(19)). RF 3 EPA Reach File Version 3

Section 303(d) Section of the federal Clean Water Act

Section 305(b) Section of the federal Clean Water Act

TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load. A written, quantitative plan and analysis for attaining and maintaining water quality standards in all seasons for a specific water body and pollutant.

USDA United States Department of Agriculture

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

USGS United States Geological Survey


103 November 2002

Water Quality Standards

Provisions of state or federal law which consist of a designated use or uses for the waters of the U.S. and water quality criteria for such waters based upon such uses. Water quality standards are to protect the public health or welfare, enhance the quality of water and serve the purposes of the CWA.

WQLW Water Quality Limited Water is defined in 40 CFR 130.2(j) as “water quality

limited segment,” as “Any segment where it is known that water quality does not meet applicable water quality standards, and/or is not expected to meet applicable water quality standards, even after the application of the technology-based effluent limitations required by sections 301(b) and 306 of the [Clean Water] Act.”

This page intentionally left blank.

Appendix A

Water Body Look-Up Guide

Illinois 2002 Section 303(d) List- Appendix A

A1 August 2003

APPENDIX A Water Body Look-Up Guide This is a look-up guide for the water bodies in the Illinois 2002 Section 303(d) List. The water bodies are arranged alphabetically by water body name. Water Body Name WSID/ Figure Segment Page

Addison Cr. ILGLA01 (Figure 2) GLA 02 37

Addison Cr. ILGLA01 (Figure 2) GLA 04 37

ALTAMONT NEW ILC21 (Figure 31) RCJ 49

ANDERSON & CARLTON

ILD03 (Figure 13) RDA 30

Andy Cr. ILN10 (Figure 26) NZN 13 51

Apple Cr. ILDB01 (Figure 18) DB 01 44

Apple Creek ILDB01 (Figure 18) DB 04 44

Apple R. ILMN03 (Figure 9) MN 03 59

ARGYLE ILDGLA01 (Figure 17) RDE 62

ARROWHEAD (COOK)

ILH02 (Figure 1) RHZE 43

ARROWHEAD (WILLIAMSON)

ILNGA01 (Figure 26) RNZX 43

Asa Cr. ILOZZT01 (Figure 23) OZZT01 51

Ashkum Cr. ILFLG01 (Figure 10) FLGB-C1 26

Ashkum Cr. ILFLG01 (Figure 10) FLGB-C4 26

Aux Sable Cr. ILDW01 (Figure 11) DW 01 60

Auxier Ditch ILCAG01 (Figure 31) CAGC01 57

BANGS ILDT22 (Figure 3) RTG 28

Bankston Fk. ILATGC01 (Figure 32) ATGC01 30



Battle Ford Cr. ILATHC01 (Figure 32) ATHC01 51

Bay Cr. ILAJ01 (Figure 32) AJ 10 53

Bay Cr. ILKCA01 (Figure 19) KCA 01 45



Bay Cr. Ditch ILAJK01 (Figure 32) AJK 01 51

BEALL WOODS ILB07 (Figure 31) RBZH 45

Bear Cr. ILDA06 (Figure 18) DAD 55

Bear Cr. ILEOF01 (Figure 20) EOF 05 56

Bear Cr. ILKI02 (Figure 19) KI 02 50



Beaucoup Cr. ILNC05 (Figure 26) NC 03 31

Water Body Name WSID/ Figure Segment Page



Beaver Cr. ILOIB01 (Figure 24) OIB 02 51

BEAVER DAM ILDA04 (Figure 18) RDH 22

Beck Cr. ILOQ01 (Figure 23) OQ 01 60

BENTON ILRNB (Figure 26) RNO 30

BIG BEAR ILGU02 (Figure 2) WGZU 39

BIG BEND ILG30 (Figure 2) RGL 25

Big Bureau Cr. ILDQ03 (Figure 11) DQ 03 58

Big Cr. ILCHE01 (Figure 31) CHEA11 56

Big Cr. ILDJB18 (Figure 15) DJB 18 33

Big Cr. ILIXJ01 (Figure 33) IXJ 01 52

Big Muddy Diversion Ditch

ILCJ01 (Figure 31) CJAE01 48

Big Muddy R. ILN01 (Figure 26) N 99 27





Big Slough Ditch ILPBG01 (Figure 8) PBG 10 50

Big Slough Ditch ILPBG01 (Figure 8) PBG 12 50

Blackberry Cr. ILDTD02 (Figure 4) DTD 02 60

BLOOMFIELD ILADDB01 (Figure 33) RAZI 46

BLOOMINGTON ILDKP02 (Figure 14) RDO 24

BLUFF ILRTF (Figure 3) VTJ 35

Boneyard Cr. ILBPJC06 (Figure 29) BPJCA 51

Bonnie Cr. ILNCD01 (Figure 26) NCDC01 39

Bonpas Cr. ILBC02 (Figure 31) BC 02 27

BORAH(OLNEY NEW)

ILCH01 (Figure 31) RCB 37

BRACKEN ILDJHD01 (Figure 15) SDZA 59

Bradshaw Cr. ILADP01 (Figure 33) ADP 01 55

Briar Cr. ILDA04 (Figure 18) DAZN 22

Brier Cr. ILATGC01 (Figure 32) ATHS01 30

Brouilletts Cr. ILBN01 (Figure 30) BN 01 59

Brush Cr. ILCAR01 (Figure 31) CAR 01 48


A2 August 2003


Brush Cr. ILEOCA02 (Figure 20) EOCA02 56

Brushy Cr. ILATGH01 (Figure 32) ATGH04 42



Bull Branch ILOHAA07 (Figure 25) OHAA07 49

BUSSE WOODS ILGL09 (Figure 2) RGZX 28

Cache Cr. ILADX01 (Figure 33) ADX 01 55

Cache R. ILIX01(Figure 33) IX 03 40



Cache R. ILIX04 (Figure 33) IX 06 29

Cahokia Canal ILJN02 (Figure 27) JN 02 46

Cahokia Cr. ILJQ05 (Figure 27) JQ 05 46

Cahokia Div. Channel ILJQ05 (Figure 27) JQ 07 46

CALUMET ILHAA01 (Figure 1) RHO 43

Calumet R. ILHAA01 (Figure 1) HAA 01 43



Calumet-Sag Channel ILH01 (Figure 2) H 01 45

Calumet-Sag Channel ILH02 (Figure 1) H 02 43

CAMPUS ILNDB01 (Figure 26) RNZH 32

Canal No.1 ILJMA01 (Figure 27) JMA 01 50

Cane Cr. ILAR01 (Figure 32) AS 34

Cane Cr. ILATFJ01 (Figure 32) ATFJ01 48

Cane Cr. ILATFJ01 (Figure 32) ATFJ02 48

Canteen Cr. ILJNA01 (Figure 27) JNA 01 47

Canteen Cr. ILJNA01 (Figure 27) JNA 02 47

CANTON ILDZH01 (Figure 13) RDD 52

CARBONDALE CITY LAKE

ILNDB01 (Figure 26) RNI 32

CARLINVILLE ILDA04 (Figure 18) RDG 22

CARLTON ILPE05 (Figure 6) RPF 50

CARLYLE ILROA (Figure 24) ROA 49

CARTHAGE ILDGZO01 (Figure 17) RLE 23

Casey Fk. ILNJ07 (Figure 26) NJ 07 43




CATHERINE ILRTF (Figure 3) RTD 35

Cattle Cr. ILOIP10 (Figure 24) OIP 10 48

Cave Cr. ILNA01 (Figure 26) NAC 01 26

CEDAR (JACKSON) ILNA01 (Figure 26) RNE 26

CEDAR (LAKE) ILRTF (Figure 3) RTK 35


Cedar Cr. ILAJF01 (Figure 32) AJF 16 53

Cedar Cr. ILLDD01 (Figure 16) LDD 23 36

Cedar Cr. ILLDD01 (Figure 16) LDD-A1 36

Cedar Cr. ILLDD01 (Figure 16) LDD-C1 36



Cedar Cr. ILLDD01 (Figure 16) LDD-C3a 36


Cedar Cr. ILNA01 (Figure 26) NA 01 26

CENTRALIA ILOJ08 (Figure 24) ROI 38

Chain o Rocks Canal ILJ81 (Figure 27) JO 42

CHANNEL ILRTF (Figure 3) RTI 35

CHARLESTON SIDE CHANNEL

ILBE09 (Figure 30) RBC 48

Chic. San. & Ship Canal

ILGI02 (Figure 2) GI 02 37









CHICAGO BOTANIC GARDEN

ILHCCD09 (Figure 1) RHJA 46

Chicago R. ILHC01 (Figure 1) HCB 01 32

Chicken Cr. ILOIO09 (Figure 24) OIO 09 52

Clear Cr. ILIC01 (Figure 28) IC 05 54

Clear Lake Ave Cr. ILEOA01 (Figure 20) EOAF01 46

Clifton N ILFLE01 (Figure 10) FLEA-C1 26

Clifton South Cr ILFLG01 (Figure 10) FLGZ-C1 26

CLINTON ILEI06 (Figure 22) REI 33

Coal Cr. ILDJE01 (Figure 15) DJE 02 34

Coal Cr. ILPBJA01 (Figure 8) PBJA04 54

COFFEEN ILOID01 (Figure 24) ROG 49

Contrary Cr. ILATFF01 (Figure 32) ATFF02 55

Coolidge Cr. ILPWF01 (Figure 7) PWF-L-C1 52

Coolidge Cr. ILPWF01 (Figure 7) PWF-W-C1 52

Coon Cr. ILPQF06 (Figure 5) PQF 07 61

COULTERVILLE ILOEB01 (Figure 25) ROV 52

Cox Cr. ILIIH01 (Figure 28) IIH 36 43

CRAB ORCHARD ILRNA (Figure 26) RNA 33

Crab Orchard Cr. ILND01 (Figure 26) ND 01 32



A3 August 2003







Crooked Cr. ILOJ08 (Figure 24) OJ 07 38

Crooked Cr. ILOJ08 (Figure 24) OJ 08 38

CRYSTAL LAKE ILDT22 (Figure 3) VTZH 28

Cypress Cr. ILIXM01 (Figure 33) IXM 04 51

Cypress Ditch ILATZM01 (Figure 32) ATZM02 55

DAWSON ILEIJ01 (Figure 22) REE 50

DECATUR ILREA (Figure 21) REA 30

Deer Cr. ILHBDC02 (Figure 1) HBDC 56

DEPUE ILD16 (Figure 11) RDU 48

DesPlaines R. ILG01 (Figure 2) G 01 39





DesPl aines R. ILG11 (Figure 2) G 03 29













DIAMOND ILGU02 (Figure 2) RGB 39

Dieterich Cr. ILCOC09 (Figure 31) COC 09 47

Dieterich Cr. ILCOC09 (Figure 31) COC 10 47

Dismal Cr. ILCM01 (Figure 31) CM 02 53

DOLAN ILATFH01 (Figure 32) RAA 45

DONGOLA CITY RES

ILIXJ01 (Figure 33) RIE 52

Douglas Cr. ILOC94 (Figure 25) OCE 46

DOUGLAS PARK LAGOON

ILGI03 (Figure 1) RHX 37

Drowning Fork ILDGLC01 (Figure 17) DGLC 01 53


Drury Cr. ILNDC01(Figure 26) NDC 02 51

DUCK ILRTF (Figure 3) RTZG 35

Dums Cr. ILCAW01 (Figure 31) CAW 04 56

DuPage R. ILGB11 (Figure 2) GB 03 47



DUQUOIN ILNEB01 (Figure 26) RNG 47

Dutch Creek ILICD01 (Figure 28) ICD-JB-C2 58

DUTCHMAN ILADD01 (Figure 33) RAM 44

Dutchman Cr. ILADD01 (Figure 33) ADD 01 44

Dutchman Cr. ILADD01 (Figure 33) ADD 02 44

E. Br. DuPage R. ILGBL10 (Figure 2) GBL 02 36





E. Br. Green Cr. ILCSB07 (Figure 31) CSB 07 45

E. Br. Green Cr. ILCSB07 (Figure 31) CSB 08 45

E. Fk. Kaskaskia R. ILOK01 (Figure 24) OK 01 22

E. Fk. Silver Cr. ILODL02 (Figure 25) ODL 02 22

E. Fk. Wood R. ILJR02 (Figure 27) JRA 02 47

Eagle Cr. ILATE01 (Figure 32) ATE 03 41



East Bureau Cr. ILDQA01 (Figure 11) DQA 01 58

East Palzo Cr. ILATHG01 (Figure 32) ATHV01 25

Edwards R. ILLF01 (Figure 16) LF 01 60

Elkhorn Cr. ILOG02 (Figure 25) OG 02 51

Elkhorn Cr. ILPH16 (Figure 6) PH 16 60

Elm R. ILCD01 (Figure 31) CD 01 48

Embarras R. ILBE01 (Figure 30) BE 01 59





EUREKA ILDKJ01 (Figure 14) SDS 54

EVERGREEN ILDK17 (Figure 14) SDA 22

FAIRFIELD ILC08 (Figure 31) RCZJ 39

Fairfield Ditch ILPBM11 (Figure 8) PBM 11 54

Fairfield Union Sp Dtch

ILPBO10 (Figure 8) PBO 10 49

FARINA ILOK01 (Figure 24) SOB 22

Farm Cr. ILDZZP03 (Figure 11) DZZP03 58


A4 August 2003


First Salt Cr. ILCPC01 (Figure 31) CPC-TU-C1

53

Flag Cr. ILGK03 (Figure 2) GK 03 53

Flat Br. ILEOH01 (Figure 20) EOH 01 50

Fountain Cr. ILJH02 (Figure 27) JH 03 52

FOX ILRTF (Figure 3) RTF 35

Fox R. ILCH01 (Figure 31) CH 02 37

Fox R. ILCH01 (Figure 31) CH 03 37

Fox R. ILDT22 (Figure 3) DT 06 28

















FRANK HOLTEN 1 ILJMAC02 (Figure 27) RJK 41

FRANK HOLTEN 2 ILJMAC02 (Figure 27) RJL 41

FRANK HOLTEN 3 ILJMAC02 (Figure 27) RJM 41

Frankfort Trib. ILGG02 (Figure 2) GGF 32

Galena R. ILMQ01 (Figure 9) MQ 01 48

Galena R. ILMQ01 (Figure 9) MQ 02 48

Galum Cr. ILNCD01 (Figure 26) NCD 03 39

Galum Cr. ILNCD01 (Figure 26) NCD 05 39

GARFIELD PK. LAGOON

ILGI03 (Figure 1) RHW 37

Geneseo Cr. ILPBE01 (Figure 8) PBE 01 57

GEORGE (COOK) ILHBDB03 (Figure 1) RHR 29

GEORGE (ROCK ISLAND)

ILM10 (Figure 9) RML 54

GEORGETOWN ILBO07 (Figure 29) RBS 23

GILLESPIE NEW ILDAH01 (Figure 18) SDU 44

GILLESPIE OLD ILDAH01 (Figure 18) SDT 44

GLEN O. JONES ILAT05 (Figure 32) RAF 42


GLEN SHOALS ILOIL01 (Figure 24) ROL 21

GOMPERS PARK LAGOON

ILHCC07 (Figure 1) RHZA 44

Goose Cr. ILEIDD01 (McLean) EIDD 58

GOV BOND (GREENVILLE)

ILOID01 (Figure 24) ROP 49

Grand Calumet R. ILHAB01 (Figure 1) HAB 41 30

Grape Cr. ILBPE02 (Figure 29) BPE 02 56

GRASS ILRTF (Figure 3) RTQ 35

Grassy Branch ILOH01 (Figure 25) OHC 40

Green R. ILPB02 (Figure 8) PB 02 48


Green R. ILPB02 (Figure 8) TP 03 48



Harco Br. ILATGM01 (Figure 32) ATGM01 49

Harding Ditch ILJMAC02 (Figure 27) JMAC02 41

HARRISBURG RESV.

ILATG03 (Figure 32) RAI 30

Hastings Cr. ILGWAA01 (Figure 2) GWAA 51

Henderson R. ILLD02 (Figure 16) LD 02 53

HERRICK ILGBK05 (Figure 2) WGM 32

HERRIN NEW ILNDJ01 (Figure 26) RNZC 33

HETTICK ILDAG01 (Figure 18) SDZF 21

Hickory Cr. ILGG02 (Figure 2) GG 02 32

Hickory Cr. ILON01 (Figure 24) ON 01 60

Hickory Grove Ditch ILDKB01 (Figure 14) DKB 01 58

HIGHLAND SILVER ILODL02 (Figure 25) ROZA 22

HILLSBORO OLD ILOIL01 (Figure 24) ROT 21

Hodges Cr. ILDAG01 (Figure 18) DAG 02 21

HOMER ILBPJ03 (Figure 29) RBO 23

Honey Cr. ILKCAG01 (Figure 19) KCAG01 56

Hoopeston Br. ILBPGD01 (Figure 29) BPGD 53

Hoover Branch ILEOA01 (Figure 20) EOAD11 46

Horse Cr. ILCAN01 (Figure 31) CAN 01 53

Horse Cr. ILEOC01 (Figure 20) EOC 02 56

Horse Cr. ILOB01 (Figure 25) OB 03 56

HORSESHOE (ALEXANDER)

ILIX04 (Figure 33) RIA 29

HORSESHOE (MADISON)

ILJ81 (Figure 27) RJC 42

Hurricane Cr. ILBE09 (Figure 30) BEL 01 48

Hurricane Cr. ILNF01 (Figure 26) NF 01 51

Hurricane Cr. ILOL02 (Figure 24) OL 02 60


A5 August 2003


Illinois R. ILD01 (Figure 18) D 01 34










ILND02 ILND02 (Figure 26) ND 12 41

INDIAN ILGL09 (Figure 2) WGZY 28

Indian Camp Cr. ILIXI01 (Figure 33) IXI 01 59

Indian Cr. ILBEZB07 (Figure 30) BEZB07 53

Indian Cr. ILDF04 (Figure 18) DF 04 55



Indian Cr. ILDJL01 (Figure 15) DJL 01 58

Indian Cr. ILDKD01 (Figure 14) DKD 01 53

Indian Cr. ILGU02 (Figure 2) GU 02 39

Indian Cr. ILJQA01 (Figure 27) JQA 01 59

JACKSONVILLE ILDC01 (Figure 18) RDI 62

JAYCEE PARK ILDT22 (Figure 3) VTZO 28

JAYCEES ILNJ07 (Figure 26) RNU 43

JERICHO (MIGHELL)

ILDT38 (Figure 4) RTO 26

Johnson Cr. ILC08 (Figure 31) CCA-FF-A1

39

Johnson Cr. ILC08 (Figure 31) CCA-FF-C1 39

JOHNSON SAUK TRAIL

ILPBJA01 (Figure 8) RPD 54

JOHNSTON CITY ILNGA01 (Figure 26) RNZE 43

Jonathon Cr. ILOU01 (Figure 23) OU 01 49

Kaskaskia R. ILO03 (Figure 25) O 26 23














Kelly Cr. ILDSQC01 (Figure 12) DSQC01 51

Kentucky Cr. ILMN04 (Figure 9) MNJ 01 59

Kickapoo Cr. ILBEN01 (Figure 30) TBE 05 55

Kickapoo Cr. ILDL01 (Figure 13) DL 01 60

Kickapoo Cr. ILEIE05 (Figure 22) EIE 04 57

Kickapoo Cr. ILEIE05 (Figure 22) EIE 05 57

Killbuck Cr. ILPQB02 (Figure 5) PQB 02 61

Killjordan Cr. ILDGJA01 (Figure 17) DGJA02 57

KINKAID ILRNC (Figure 26) RNC 31

Kinney Branch ILOC94 (Figure 25) OCF 46

Kishwaukee R. ILPQ02 (Figure 5) PQ 02 57






Kyte R. ILPL03 (Figure 6) PL 03 60

L Grassy Cr. ILNDDA01 (Figure 26) NDDA01 56

La Moine R. ILDG01 (Figure 17) DG 01 60

La Moine R. ILDG04 (Figure 17) DG 04 60

LAHARPE ILDGZR01 (Figure 17) RDZE 62

Lake Branch ILOHA01 (Figure 25) OHA 02 38





Lake Cr. ILNGA01 (Figure 26) NGA 02 43

Lake Fk. ILEIG01 (Figure 22) EIG 01 60

Lake Fork ILOW01 (Figure 23) OW 01 52

Lake Michigan 33

LAKE OF THE WOODS

ILE29 (Figure 21) REG 46

Langan Cr. ILFLE01 (Figure 10) FLE 02 26

Lawrence Cr. ILPQEC01 (Figure 5) PQEC-A 55

LE-AQUA-NA ILPWQ04 (Figure 7) RPA 54

LILY ILRTF (Figure 3) RTZJ 35

Lily Cache Cr. ILGBE01 (Figure 2) GBE 02 50

LINCOLN PK NORTH PND

ILQZK (Figure 1) QZK 52

LITTLE BEAR ILGU02 (Figure 2) WGZV 39

Little Beaucoup Cr. ILNC05 (Figure 26) NCI 01 31


A6 August 2003


Little Cache Cr. ILADDB01 (Figure 33) ADDB02 46

Little Calumet R. N. ILHA04 (Figure 1) HA 04 44

Little Calumet R. N. ILHA04 (Figure 1) HA 06 44

Little Calumet R. S. ILHB42 (Figure 1) HB 01 27

Little Calumet R. S. ILHB42 (Figure 1) HB 42 27

LITTLE CEDAR ILNA01 (Figure 26) RNZM 26

Little Crab Orchard Cr.

ILND01 (Figure 26) NDA 01 32

Little Crooked Cr. ILOJA01 (Figure 24) OJA 01 57

Little Galum Cr. ILNCD01 (Figure 26) NCDB 39

Little Indian Cr. ILDTAB01 (Figure 4) DTAB01 58

Little Indian Cr. ILNE04 (Figure 26) NEE 01 41

Little Marys R. ILIIC01 (Figure 28) IIC 38 47

Little Muddy Cr. ILCJA01 (Figure 31) CJA 02 53

Little Muddy R. ILNE04 (Figure 26) NE 06 41

Little Muddy R. ILNE05 (Figure 26) NE 05 44

Little Silver Cr. ILODG01 (Figure 25) ODG 01 51

Little Vermilion R. ILBO07 (Figure 29) BO 04 23



Little Vermilion R. ILDR01 (Figure 11) DR 01 53

Little Wabash R. ILC08 (Figure 31) C 33 39





Locust Fork ILOIC01 (Figure 24) OIC 02 52

LONG (LAKE) ILRTF (Figure 3) RTJ 35

Long Point Slough ILERA01 (Figure 21) ERA 01 53

Loop Cr. ILODE01 (Figure 25) ODE 51

Lost Cr. ILOJB01 (Figure 24) OJB 02 52

LOU YAEGER ILRON (Figure 24) RON 31

M. Fk. Big Muddy ILNH06 (Figure 26) NH 06 29

M. Fk. Big Muddy ILNH06 (Figure 26) NH 07 29

M. Fk. Saline R. ILATG03 (Figure 32) ATG 03 30

M. Fk. Saline R. ILATG03 (Figure 32) ATG 04 30

Mackinaw R. ILDK12 (Figure 14) DK 12 57









Macoupin Cr. ILDA04 (Figure 18) DA 04 22



Maeystown Cr. ILJD01 (Figure 27) JD 02 56

MAPLE ILGI02 (Figure 2) RHD 37

Marathon Cr. ILBFCA21 (Figure 30) BFCA22 56

MARIE (LAKE) ILRTF (Figure 3) RTR 35

MARION ILND04 (Figure 26) RNL 27

Markham Cr. ILLDDC01 (Figure 16) LDDC 49

MARMO ILGBL10 (Figure 2) WGB 36

Marys R. ILII03 (Figure 28) II 03 54

MATANZAS ILD31 (Figure 13) RDZV 30

MATTOON ILRCF (Figure 31) RCF 31

Mauvaise Terre R. ILDD04 (Figure 18) DD 04 23

MAUVAISSE TERRE ILDD04 (Figure 18) SDL 23

Maxwell Creek ILII04 (Figure 28) IIK-SPC1A 50

Mazon R. ILDV03 (Figure 11) DV 06 58

Mazon R. ILDV04 (Figure 11) DV 04 57

MCCULLOM ILDTZT02 (Figure 3) RTZD 57

McKee Cr. ILDE01 (Figure 18) DE 01 60

McLEANSBORO NEW

ILATFI01 (Figure 32) RAZA 47

MEADOW ILGBL10 (Figure 2) WGA 36

MERMET ILADC01 (Figure 33) RAB 27

Mid Fk. N. Br. Chic. R.

ILHCCC04 (Figure 1) HCCC02 49

Middle Henderson Cr. ILLDG01 (Figure 16) LDG 01 56

MIDLOTHIAN RESERVOIR

ILHBA01 (Figure 1) RHZI 59

Mill Cr. ILII03 (Figure 28) IIB 40 54

Mill Cr. ILIXF01 (Figure 33) IXF 01 56

Mill Cr. ILPO01 (Figure 6) PO C1 57

MILL CREEK POND ILBH01 (Figure 30) RBW 62

Mineral Cr. ILPBD01 (Figure 8) PBD 02 54

MINGO ILBPK07 (Figure 29) RBN 62

Mississippi R. ILI84 (Figure 28) I 84 58

Mississippi R. ILJ03 (Figure 27) J 11 50




Mississippi R. ILK03 (Figure 19) K 17 54




A7 August 2003


Mississippi R. ILM02 (Figure 9) M 06 59





Mississippi River South

ILI01 (Figure 28) I 05 58

Mokeler Cr. ILPQEA01 (Figure 5) PQEA01 57

Mosquito Cr. ILEQ01 (Figure 21) EQ 01 56

MT. OLIVE NEW ILJQ03 (Figure 27) RJF 38

MT. OLIVE OLD ILJQ03 (Figure 27) RJG 38

Mud Cr. ILOE03 (Figure 25) OE 02 54

Mud Cr. ILPBJ01 (Figure 8) PBJ 04 59

Mud Run ILMNID01 (Figure 9) TM 36 56

Muddy Cr. ILBEJ01 (Figure 30) BEJ 01 55

MURPHYSBORO ILN12 (Figure 26) RND 26

N. Br. Chicago R. ILHCC07 (Figure 1) HCC 07 44



N. Fk. Embarras R. ILBEF05 (Figure 30) BEF 05 59

N. Fk. Kaskaskia R. ILOKA01 (Figure 24) OKA 01 22

N. Fk. Kaskaskia R. ILOKA01 (Figure 24) OKA 02 22

N. Fk. Saline R. ILATF04 (Figure 32) ATF 04 57



N. Fk. Vermilion R. ILBPG09 (Figure 29) BPG 09 21

N. Fk. Vermilion R. ILDSQ01 (Figure 12) DSQ 03 53

N. Shore Channel ILHCCA01 (Figure 1) HCCA01 40




NASHVILLE CITY ILOJAF01 (Figure 24) ROO 23

Nashville Cr. ILOJAF01 (Figure 24) OJAF-NVC1

23

New Columbia Ditch ILADCD01 (Figure 33) ADCD01 55

NEWTON ILCJ01 (Figure 31) RCR 48

NIPPERSINK ILRTF (Figure 3) RTUA 35

Nippersink Cr. ILDTK04 (Figure 3) DTK 04 60

NORRIS CITY RES ILATFC01 (Figure 32) RAR 52

North Fk. Cox Cr. ILIIH01 (Figure 28) IIHA31 43

North Fk. Cox Cr. ILIIH01 (Figure 28) IIHA-STC1 43

OAKLAND ILBEZX01 (Figure 30) RBP 22

Ohio River ILA31 (Figure 32) A 31 34





Old Cache R. ILIX01(Figure 33) ADY 01 40

OLNEY EAST FORK ILCH01 (Figure 31) RCC 37

OPEKA ILG30 (Figure 2) RGF 25

OTTER ILDAG01 (Figure 18) RDF 21

Owl Creek ILE29 (Figure 21) EZV 46

PALMYRA-MODESTO

ILDAG01 (Figure 18) RDZP 21

PANA ILOQCA02 (Figure 23) ROF 62

PARADISE (COLES) ILC24 (Figure 31) RCG 31

PARIS TWIN EAST ILBM02 (Figure 30) RBL 22

PARIS TWIN WEST ILBM02 (Figure 30) RBX 22

Pecatonica R. ILPW01 (Figure 7) PW 01 55







Peters Slough ILATH01 (Figure 32) ATHU01 45

PETITE ILRTF (Figure 3) VTW 35

Pettibone Cr. ILQ01 (Figure 1) QA C4 39

PICKEREL ILDT38 (Figure 4) WGZL 26

PIERCE ILP15 (Figure 6) RPC 49

Pike Cr. ILFLF01 (Figure 10) FLF 01 58

Piles Fk. ILNDB01 (Figure 26) NDB 03 32

PINCKNEYVILLE ILNC05 (Figure 26) RNH 31

Pipestone Cr. ILNCDA01 (Figure 26) NCDA01 49

PISTAKEE ILRTF (Figure 3) RTU 35

PITTSFIELD ILD32 (Figure 18) RDP 31

Plum Cr. ILOZC01 (Figure 25) OZC 01 50

Plum R. ILMJ01 (Figure 9) MJ 01 44

Plum R. ILMJ01 (Figure 9) TM 24 44

Pond Cr. ILC08 (Figure 31) CC-FF-C3 39

Pond Cr. ILC08 (Figure 31) CC-FF-D1 39

Pond Cr. ILNG02 (Figure 26) NG 01 33

Pond Cr. ILNG02 (Figure 26) NG 02 33

Poplar Cr. ILDTG02 (Figure 3) DTG 02 60

Prairie Cr. ILNZM01 (Figure 26) NZM 01 56

Prairie du Long Cr. ILOCB99 (Figure 25) OCB 99 56

Prairie Du Pont Cr. ILJMA01 (Figure 27) JMAA01 50


A8 August 2003


Pulaski Slough ILIXC01 (Figure 33) IXCC01 54

Puncheon Cr. ILNE04 (Figure 26) NEI 01 41

Quail Cr. ILBFCB12 (Figure 30) BFCB12 57

RACCOON ILOJ08 (Figure 24) ROK 38

Raccoon Cr. ILCDF02 (Figure 31) CDF 02 57

RAMSEY ILOO01 (Figure 24) ROE 46

Ramsey Cr. ILOO01 (Figure 24) OO 01 46

RANDOLPH ILIIC01 (Figure 28) RIB 47

Rattlesnake Cr. ILNC07 (Figure 26) NCB 01 43

Rayse Cr. ILNK01 (Figure 26) NK 01 29

Rector Cr. ILATFE01 (Figure 32) ATFE01 57

RED HILLS ST PARK

ILBEA01 (Figure 30) RBB 52

Reese Cr. ILNEB01 (Figure 26) NEB-DQA2 47

Reese Cr. ILNEB01 (Figure 26) NEB-DQC1 47

REND ILRNB (Figure 26) RNB 30

RICE (DuPAGE) ILGBL10 (Figure 2) WGZW 36

Richland Cr. ILEK01 (Figure 20) EK 01 58

Richland Cr.-South ILOC04 (Figure 25) OC 03 42







Robinson Cr. ILBFC10 (Figure 30) BFC 10 38






Rock Cr. ILPE05 (Figure 6) PE 05 50

Rock R. ILP04 (Figure 6) P 04 33










Rose Cr. ILATEE08 (Figure 32) ATEE08 51


ROUND ILRTF (Figure 3) RTH 35

S. Br. Chicago R. ILHC01 (Figure 1) HC 01 32

S. Br. Kishwaukee R. ILPQC06 (Figure 5) PQC 02 49






S. Br. Pettibone Cr. ILQ01 (Figure 1) QAA D1 39

S. Br. Waukegan R. ILQ01 (Figure 1) QCA 01 39

S. Fk. S. Br. Chicago R

ILHC01 (Figure 1) HCA 01 32

S. Fk. Saline R. ILATH01 (Figure 32) ATH 13 45





S. Fk. Sangamon R. ILEO01 (Figure 20) EO 01 31






SALEM ILOJK02 (Figure 24) ROR 23

Saline Br. ILBPJC06 (Figure 29) BPJC06 51

Saline R. ILAT05 (Figure 32) AT 05 42



Salt Cr. ILCP01 (Figure 31) CP-EF-C2 49

Salt Cr. ILCP01 (Figure 31) CP-EF-C4 49

Salt Cr. ILCP01 (Figure 31) CP-TU-C3 49

Salt Cr. ILEI02 (Figure 22) EI 02 60

Salt Cr. ILEI06 (Figure 22) EI 06 33

Salt Cr. ILGL09 (Figure 2) GL 28

Salt Cr. ILGL09 (Figure 2) GL 03 28




Salt Fk. Vermilion R. ILBPJ03 (Figure 29) BPJ 03 23



SAM DALE ILCAR01 (Figure 31) RBF 48

SAM PARR ILBE07 (Figure 30) RBA 50


A9 August 2003


Sandy Cr. ILIXD01 (Figure 33) IXD 01 58

Sangamon R. ILE09 (Figure 21) E 06 55













SANGANSHKEE SL ILH01 (Figure 2) RHH 45

SANGCHRIS ILREJ (Figure 20) REB 34

SARA ILRCE (Figure 31) RCE 62

SAUK TRAIL ILHBD04 (Figure 1) RHI 38

Scattering Fk. ILBER01 (Figure 30) BER 01 55

SCHILLER POND ILG30 (Figure 2) SGF 25

SCHUY-RUSH ILD03 (Figure 13) SDZC 30

Second Salt Cr. ILCPD01 (Figure 31) CPD 01 41



SEDGEWICK ILGG02 (Figure 2) RGZZ 32

Seminary Cr. ILCDG01 (Figure 31) CDG-FL-A1

45

Seminary Cr. ILCDG01 (Figure 31) CDG-FL-C1

45


45


45

Seminary Cr. ILDB01 (Figure 18) DBC 44

Sevenmile Cr. ILNJ07 (Figure 26) NJC 43

Sewer Cr. ILOJCB20 (Figure 24) OJCB19 59

SHABBONA ILDTA01 (Figure 4) VTU 62

Shavetail Cr. ILFLH01 (Figure 10) FLHA01 30

SHELBYVILLE ILROC (Figure 23) ROC 49

SHERMAN PARK LAGOONS

ILGI03 (Figure 1) RHU 37

Shoal Cr. ILOI08 (Figure 24) OI 05 57



SILVER (DuPAGE) ILGBK05 (Figure 2) RGD 32


Silver Cr. ILOD07 (Figure 25) OD 07 48



Sixmile Cr. ILDK17 (Figure 14) DKN 01 22

Sixmile Cr. ILNE05 (Figure 26) NEA 02 44

Skillet Fk. ILCA03 (Figure 31) CA 02 21







SKOKIE LAGOONS ILHCCD09 (Figure 1) RHJ 46

Slug Run ILDJBZ01 (Figure 15) DJBZ01 33

Somonauk Cr. ILDTB01 (Figure 4) DTB 01 60

SPARTA NW ILOZC01 (Figure 25) SOC 50

SPARTA OLD ILII04 (Figure 28) RIJ 50

Spoon R. ILDJ02 (Figure 15) DJ 02 58




SPRING (LAKE) ILRTF (Figure 3) RGZT 35

SPRING (McDONOUGH)

ILDGL01 (Figure 17) RDR 52

Spring Brook ILGL09 (Figure 2) GLB 01 28

Spring Cr. ILEL01 (Figure 20) EL 01 24

Spring Cr. ILFLH01 (Figure 10) FLH 02 30

Spring Cr. ILPBI01 (Figure 8) PBI 02 48

Spring Cr. ILPBI01 (Figure 8) PBI 03 48

SPRING NORTH ILD99 (Figure 13) SDZM 47

SPRING SOUTH ILD99 (Figure 13) RDQ 47

SPRINGFIELD ILREF (Figure 20) REF 23

St. Joseph Cr. ILGBL10 (Figure 2) GBLB01 36

STAUNTON ILJQ03 (Figure 27) RJA 38

STEPHEN A. FORBES

ILRCD (Figure 31) RCD 52

STERLING POND ILGBL10 (Figure 2) WGC 36

Stevens Cr. ILES01 (Figure 21) ES 13 56

Stillhouse Cr. ILATHT01 (Figure 32) ATHT01 48

Stookey Creek ILJMA01 (Figure 27) JMAABA-C1

50

STOREY ILLDH01 (Figure 16) RLB 52

Sugar Camp Cr. ILNH06 (Figure 26) NHH 29

Sugar Cr. ILATHG01 (Figure 32) ATHG01 25


A10 August 2003


Sugar Cr. ILATHG01 (Figure 32) ATHG05 25

Sugar Cr. ILBF22 (Figure 30) BF 01 41

Sugar Cr. ILBF22 (Figure 30) BF 11 41

Sugar Cr. ILBM02 (Figure 30) BM 02 22

Sugar Cr. ILBM02 (Figure 30) BM C2 22

Sugar Cr. ILEID04 (Figure 22) EID 04 60

Sugar Cr. ILEID05 (Figure 22) EID C1 56

Sugar Cr. ILEOA01 (Figure 20) EOA 01 46



Sugar Cr. ILFLI02 (Figure 10) FLI 02 58

Sugar Cr. ILOH01 (Figure 25) OH 01 40

Sugar Cr. ILOH01 (Figure 25) OH 05 40

Sugar Cr. ILPHB01 (Figure 6) PHB 01 61

SUGAR CREEK LAKE

ILAJD15 (Figure 32) RAZO 54

Sugar R. ILPWB01 (Figure 7) PWB 01 57

Sugar R. ILPWB01 (Figure 7) PWB 03 57

Sumner Cr. ILPWH01 (Figure 7) PWH 02 57

Swab Run ILDJI01 (Figure 15) DJIA 58

Swanwick Cr. ILNC05 (Figure 26) NCK 01 31

SYCAMORE LAKE ILPQCL01 (Figure 5) RPZG 59

TAYLORVILLE ILEO10 (Figure 20) REC 29

Thorn Cr. ILHBD04 (Figure 1) HBD 04 38

Thorn Cr. ILHBD04 (Figure 1) HBD 05 38

TOWER (MADISON) ILJQ05 (Figure 27) RJO 46

Town Branch ILE24 (Figure 20) EZJ 53

Town Cr. ILOJK02 (Figure 24) OJK 02 23

Town Cr. ILOJK02 (Figure 24) OJK 03 23

Turkey Cr. ILDK17 (Figure 14) DKS 22

TURNER ILRTF (Figure 3) VTZA 35

Union Ditch ILGG02 (Figure 2) GGC-FN-C1

32

Upper Salt Fork ILBPJG01 (Figure 29) BPJG01 55

VANDALIA ILO08 (Figure 24) ROD 24

VERMILION ILBPG09 (Figure 29) RBD 21

Vermilion R. ILBP01 (Figure 29) BP 01 60

Vermilion R. ILDS06 (Figure 12) DS 06 23

Vermilion R. ILDS06 (Figure 12) DS 14 23

VERNOR ILCH01 (Figure 31) RCA 37

VIENNA CITY ILADDB01 (Figure 33) RAW 46

W. Br. DuPage R. ILGBK05 (Figure 2) GBK 05 32






W. Okaw R. ILOT02 (Figure 23) OT 02 50

Wabash R. ILB06 (Figure 30) B 05 42




Wabash R. ILB06 (Figure 30) TB 13 42

Wabash R. ILB06 (Figure 30) TB 14 42



Walkers Cr. ILNC05 (Figure 26) NCC 01 31

WALNUT POINT ILBEZX01 (Figure 30) RBK 22

Walnut Special Ditch ILPBP01 (Figure 8) PBP 01 49

WASHINGTON CO. ILNC05 (Figure 26) RNM 31

WASHINGTON PARK LAGOON

ILGI03 (Figure 1) QZF 37

Waterloo Creek ILJH02 (Figure 27) JHE-C1 52

Waukegan R. ILQ01 (Figure 1) QC 03 39

Waukegan R. ILQ01 (Figure 1) QC 05 39

WAVERLY ILDB01 (Figure 18) SDC 44

WELDON SPRINGS ILEI06 (Figure 22) RED 33

Welge Cr. ILIIC01 (Figure 28) IICD01 47

Wendell Branch ILOD08 (Figure 25) ODM 41

WESSLYN CUT ILNCD01 (Figure 26) RNZA 39

WEST FRANKFORT NEW

ILNHB01 (Figure 26) RNQ 45

WEST FRANKFORT OLD

ILNHB01 (Figure 26) RNP 45

WEST SALEM NEW ILBC02 (Figure 31) RBQ 27

WEST SALEM OLD ILBC02 (Figure 31) RBZN 27

Wheeler Cr. ILATFH01 (Figure 32) ATFH01 45

White Oak Cr. ILNE04 (Figure 26) NEF 41

WOLF ILHAA01 (Figure 1) RHA 43

Wolf Cr. ILOPC01 (Figure 24) OPC 01 54

Wood R. ILJR02 (Figure 27) JR 02 47

Yellow Cr. ILPWN01 (Figure 7) PWN 01 61

Appendix B

Illinois 1998 Section 303(d) List Segment Name Changes

Illinois 2002 Section 303(d) List- Appendix B

B1 August 2003

APPENDIX B Illinois 1998 Section 303(d) List Segment Name Changes Some of the segments from the Illinois 1998 Section 303(d) List have had segment ID changes. This list contains the 1998 segment ID and the newer 2002 segment ID.

WSID 1998 Water Body Segment

2002 Water Body Segment (new WSID)

Segment Name On 2002 303d List

Reason to Delist

A 31 (ILA31) Ohio R. Yes



OHIO A


ILAD01 AD 01 AD 09 Post Cr. Cutoff DELIST Full Support-Table 1

ILAJ01 AHA AHA (ILAF01) Alcorn Cr. DELIST Mistake- Table 2 ILAJ01 AIE AIE (ILAF01) Mill Spring DELIST Mistake- Table 2 ILAJF01 TA 15 AJF 16 Cedar Yes ILAJG17 AJG 17 AJG 18 Hayes Cr. DELIST Full Support- Table 1 ILAK02 AK 12 AK 02 Lusk Cr. DELIST Full Support- Table 1

ILAT06 AT 01 AT 06 Saline R. Yes ILATFE01 TA 10 ATFE01 Rector Cr. Yes ILAT06 AT 02 AT 06 Saline R. Yes

ILAFT01 ATFIa ATFI-MCC4 Tenmile Cr. DELIST Mistake- Table 2

ILATFI01 ATFIb ATFI-MCD1 Tenmile Cr. DELIST Mistake- Table 2 ILATFJ01 TA 07 ATFJ01 Cane Cr. Yes ILATH02 ATH 08 ATH 14 S. Fk. Saline Yes ILATH01 ATH 12 ATH 13 S. Fk. Saline Yes ILB07 B 07 B 03 Wabash R. Yes

CDG-FL-A1 Seminary Cr. Yes

CDG-FL-C1 Seminary Cr. Yes CDG-FL-C4 Seminary Cr. Yes

ILCDG01 CDG

CDG-FL-C6 Seminary Cr. Yes

ILCH01 CH 11 CH 02 Fox R. Yes ILCPD01 CPD 02 CPD 03 Second Salt Cr. Yes ILD01 D 22 D 32 (ILD32) Illinois R. Yes

D 01 Illinois R. Yes ILD01 D 93 D 32 (ILD32) Illinois R. Yes

ILD01 D 98 D 01 Illinois R. Yes ILD01 TD 01 D 01 Illinois R. Yes

D 31 (ILD31) Illinois R. Yes ILD03 TD 04

D 32 (ILD32) Illinois R. Yes ILD03 TD 05 D 31 (ILD31) Illinois R. Yes ILD03 TD 06 D 31 (ILD31) Illinois R. Yes


B2 August 2003




Reason to Delist

ILD05 D 06 D 05 Illinois R. Yes ILD05 D 28 D 05 Illinois R. Yes ILD05 TD 08 D 05 Illinois R. Yes

D 09 Illinois R. Yes ILD09 D 12

D 16 (ILD16) Illinois R. Yes ILD09 D 24 D 30 (ILD30) Illinois R. Yes ILD10 D 26 D 10 Illinois R. Yes ILD16 D 14 D 16 Illinois R. Yes ILD16 D 19 D 16 Illinois R. Yes ILD16 D 20 D 20 (ILD20) Illinois R. Yes ILD20 D 15 D 20 Illinois R. Yes ILD20 D 37 D 20 Illinois R. Yes

D 20 (ILD20) Illinois R. Yes ILD23 D 18

D 23 Illinois R. Yes ILD30 D 08 D 30 Illinois R. Yes ILD30 D 27 D 30 Illinois R. Yes ILD31 D 04 D 31 Illinois R. Yes ILD32 D 02 D 32 Illinois R. Yes ILD32 D 73 D 32 Illinois R. Yes ILD32 TD 02 D 32 Illinois R. Yes ILD32 TD 03 D 32 Illinois R. Yes ILD99 D 80 D 31 (ILD31) Illinois R. Yes ILDF04 DF 03 DF 04 Indian Cr. Yes

DJ 01 Spoon R. DELIST Full Support- Table 1 ILDJ01 DJ 12 DJ 08 (ILD08) Spoon R. Yes

ILDJ02 TD 40 DJ 02 Spoon R. Yes ILDJ09 DJ 04 DJ 09 Spoon R. Yes ILDJ09 TD 38 DJ 09 Spoon R. Yes ILDJ09 TD 39 DJ 09 Spoon R. Yes ILEID05 EID C4 EID C1 Sugar Cr. Yes ILEID05 EID C5 EID C1 Sugar Cr. Yes ILEID05 EID C6 EID C8 Sugar Cr. DELIST Full Support- Table 1

ILEID05 EID C7 EID C8 Sugar Cr. DELIST Full Support- Table 1 ILEID05 EID C9 EID C8 Sugar Cr. DELIST Full Support- Table 1

ILEID05 EID D1 EID C1 Sugar Cr. Yes ILEOA02 EOA 03 EOA 04 Sugar Cr. Yes

G 03 DesPlaines R. Yes ILG11 G 18

G 39 DesPlaines R. Yes ILGBL10 GBLB GBLB 01 St. Joseph Cr. Yes ILGLA01 GLA 01 GLA 02 Addison Cr. Yes ILGLA01 GLA 03 GLA 04 Addison Cr. Yes


B3 August 2003




Reason to Delist

ILHC01 HC HC 01 S. Br. Chicago R. Yes ILI01 I 01 I 05 Mississippi R. Yes

ILI01 I 98 I 05 Mississippi R. Yes ILI01 TI 05 I 05 Mississippi R. Yes

ILI01 TI 06 I 05 Mississippi R. Yes

ILI01 TI 08 J 11 (ILJ03) Mississippi R. Yes ILI02 I 02 I 84 (ILI84) Mississippi R. Yes ILI84 I 81 I 84 Mississippi R. Yes ILI84 TI 01 I 84 Mississippi R. Yes ILI84 TI 03 I 84 Mississippi R. Yes ILI84 TI 04 I 05 (ILI01) Mississippi R. Yes ILIC01 IC 04 IC 05 Clear Cr. Yes ILII03 IIB IIB 40 Mill Cr. Yes ILII04 IIK IIK-SPC1A Maxwell Cr. Yes

IIC 38 Little Marys R. Yes ILIIC01 IIC IIC 39 Little Marys R. DELIST Full Support- Table 1

ILIIC01 IICA IICA 01 Gravel Cr. DELIST Full Support- Table 1

ILIIC01 ILCD IICD 01 Welge Cr. Yes IIHA 31 North Fk. Cox Cr. Yes ILIIH01 IIHA

IIHA-STC1 North Fk. Cox Cr. Yes

ILK06 TK 02 K 21 Mississippi R. Yes ILK07 K05 K 21 (ILK06) Mississippi R. Yes ILIX04 IX 02 IX 06 Cache R. Yes

IXM 04 Cypress Cr. Yes IXM 05 Cypress Cr. DELIST Full Support- Table 1

ILIXM01 IXM 02

IXM 01 Cypress Cr. DELIST Full Support- Table 1

ILJ03 J 03 J 11 Mississippi R. Yes ILJ03 J 96 J 11 Mississippi R. Yes

JA Mississippi R. DELIST Mistake- Table 2 ILJ03 TJ 05

J 11 Mississippi R. Yes ILJ03 TJ 06 J 01 (ILJ81) Mississippi R. Yes ILJ81 J 81 J 01 Mississippi R. Yes ILJ81 J 82 J 01 Mississippi R. Yes ILJ81 TJ 11 JO Mississippi R. Yes ILJ81 TJ 12 J 01 Mississippi R. Yes ILJ81 TJ 17 J 01 Mississippi R. Yes ILJ83 J 83 J 05 Mississippi R. Yes ILJ83 TJ 04 J 05 Mississippi R. Yes ILJ83 TJ 13 J 05 Mississippi R. Yes ILJ83 TJ 14 J 06 Mississippi R. Yes ILJ83 TJ 15 J 06 Mississippi R. Yes


B4 August 2003




Reason to Delist

ILJ83 TJ 16 J 06 Mississippi R. Yes ILK01 K 09 K 21 (ILK06) Mississippi R. Yes ILK01 K 98 K 21 (ILK06) Mississippi R. Yes ILK01 TK 07 K 21 (ILK06) Mississippi R. Yes ILK02 TK 12 K 17 (ILK03) Mississippi R. Yes ILK06 K 02 K 21 Mississippi R. Yes ILK06 TK 01 K 21 Mississippi R. Yes ILK07 K 05 K 21 (ILK06) Mississippi R. Yes ILK07 K 14 K 21 (ILK06) Mississippi R. Yes ILK07 TK 04 K 21 (ILK06) Mississippi R. Yes ILK07 TK 06 K 21 (ILK06) Mississippi R. Yes ILLF02 LF 09 LF 08 Edwards R. DELIST Full Support- Table 1 ILN11 TN 01 N 11 Big Muddy R. Yes ILN14 N 19 N 18 Big Muddy R. Yes

ILNCD01 NCDC NCDC01 Bonnie Cr. Yes ILNDA01 NDA 01 NDA01(ILND01) Little Crab Orchard Yes

NEB DQA2 Reese Cr. Yes ILNEB01 NEB 02 NEB DQC1 Reese Cr. Yes

ILNGA01 NGA 01 NGA 02 Lake Cr. Yes ILOHA01 OHA 01 OHA 02 Lake Branch Yes ILQ01 QC 07 QC 03 Waukegan R. Yes

Appendix C

Public Hearing and Responsiveness Summary

Illinois 2002 Section 303(d) List- Appendix C

C1 August 2003

APPENDIX C

Section 303(d) List Responsiveness Summary

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Background Information………………………………………………….C2 Public Hearing and Hearing Record………………………………………………………………...…..C3 Public Participation……………….………………………………………C3 Questions and Responses……………………………..…………………..C4 Glossary of Acronyms………………………………………………..….C37 Distribution of Responsiveness Summary…………………………….…C38 Bureau of Water Staff Who Can Answer Your Questions………………C38


C2 August 2003

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

IN THE MATTER OF: ) Impaired Waters of Illinois ) Draft Section 303(d) List ) IEPA File 341-02

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Illinois EPA or Agency) conducted a public hearing at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, September 11, 2002, in the Illinois EPA Training Room, located at 1021 North Grand Avenue East, Springfield, Illinois. The purpose of this hearing was to provide an opportunity for the public to comment on the Bureau of Water (BOW) Draft Section 303(d) List for 2002. The Illinois EPA is required under Section 303 of the federal Clean Water Act (Act) to assess waters of the state and evaluate compliance with applicable water quality standards and designated uses. Waters that are assessed as not achieving those standards are identified on the Section 303(d) List. Waters identified on the Section 303(d) List are deemed impaired for specific chemical constituents and consequently additional loadings (i.e., discharges) of those constituents may be restricted. In addition to possible restrictions on future loadings to these listed water bodies, waters identified in the Section 303(d) List are subject to the development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). A TMDL is the sum of the allowable amount of a single pollutant that a water body can receive from all contributing sources and still meet water quality standards and designated uses. TMDLs in Illinois may take the form of a watershed study in which the chemical constituent causing impairment to that water body is evaluated.


C3 August 2003

PUBLIC HEARING AND HEARING RECORD

The 41non-Agency persons in attendance at the September 11, 2002, hearing represented public water providers, consulting firms, environmental organizations, industry, soil and water conservation districts, sanitary districts, Illinois Department of Agriculture, Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group, Illinois Farm Bureau, Farm Week, Chemical Industry Council of Illinois, University of Illinois, Exelon Nuclear and citizens. The hearing record remained open for written comments postmarked through midnight October 11, 2002. This responsiveness summary provides the Agency response to comments and questions from the September 11, 2002, public hearing and written comments and questions received from July 31, 2002, through October 11, 2002.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Pursuant to the federal regulations for public participation in 40 CFR 25, the hearing was announced in state and multi-state publications including:

- Edwardsville Intelligencer (state newspaper) on July 31, August 8 and August 12, 2002;

- IEPA Environmental Progress, spring 2002; The public hearing notice was sent via first class mail to persons and groups on lists provided by:

- Illinois EPA, Bureau of Water - Illinois EPA, Division of Legal Counsel

Prairie Rivers Network e-mailed the public hearing announcement to more than 200 of its members. The Springfield State Journal Register announced the hearing on September 8, 2002, and Farm Week publicized the hearing on September 10 and October 3, 2002. The public hearing notice was featured on the IEPA Internet Web Site www.epa.state.il.us. All Illinois EPA regional offices posted the hearing notice in a public area. The written materials were available to all those who attended the hearing, were available on request from the BOW throughout the comment period and were accessible on the Illinois EPA web site.


C4 August 2003

Questions and Responses Illinois EPA responses appear in bold following each question or comment.

FROM THE HEARING TRANSCRIPT 1. The majority of the watersheds located within the Illinois watersheds in which our (Illinois-American Water Company) surface water treatment facilities are located have 303(d) listed waters. However, only two water body segments in the Vermilion River watershed are listed as high priority. We believe it imperative that all stream segments in the watersheds upstream of our surface water treatment facilities be listed as 303(d) waters and receive high priority for the establishment of total maximum daily loads (TMDLs). We are particularly concerned that only a small portion of the Vermilion River watershed has 303(d) listed waters. The Vermilion River has a well-documented history of high nitrate levels due to agricultural runoff. RESPONSE: Many of the waters to which you refer are interstate waters. Because of the complexity of issues surrounding interstate waters (i.e., multiple state involvement, differing state–established water quality standards, differing impairments, differing priorities), Illinois EPA assigns these waters a low priority. TMDL development is directed (prioritized) to those waters that we think will bring successful results. Illinois EPA will continue to work closely with other states and USEPA in addressing issues related to Section 303(d) requirements. USEPA is expected to take a lead role in coordinating states’ efforts regarding interstate waters. 2. It has become clear (based on past activities with parties in the watershed and on recent data) that the voluntary efforts in this watershed (Vermilion River) are not sufficient to improve the nitrate situation. We suggest that all river and stream sections in the Vermilion River watershed be categorized as 303(d) listed waters and placed high on the priority list. The fact that treatment (for drinking water) is in place is no surrogate for continued reduction of pollutants at the source. RESPONSE: Illinois EPA believes that comprehensive, well directed, locally supported voluntary efforts for nonpoint source control, based on a watershed approach, is the best method available to deal with impaired waters. While we list only segments assessed as less than full support, practices applied throughout a watershed to achieve compliance with water quality standards can and have been applied to all waters (i.e., tributaries), not just those that have been identified as impaired. Public water supply assessment is made at the point of withdrawal, not from the finished water (see page 50 of the 2002 305(b) Report for additional information). Consequently, the degree of treatment is not a factor in determining impairment. We agree that treatment is not a surrogate for the continued reduction of pollutants. Best management practices, designed and installed to control pollutants before they enter a water body, not only improve water quality but may also result in reduced treatment costs for public water supplies.


C5 August 2003

3. Page two of the Draft Section 303(d) List states "Target waters for development of TMDL daily loads that would be initiated for next biennial reporting period." It says that is to be included. We were not clear where that appears in the List. Is that the high priority waters? RESPONSE: Yes. We intend to initiate TMDLs on 15 watersheds in 2002-2003, and those watersheds will be selected from the High Priority waters. To the greatest extent practicable, the selection will follow the order in which they appear on the List. 4. Does the Agency have an estimate for an average cost of preparing a TMDL? What's the annual expenditure on the TMDL program today? What's the precise federal source of the program’s funds? RESPONSE: Many factors affect how much a TMDL will cost. In general, rural TMDLs are less expensive than urban TMDLS. Factors affecting the cost of a TMDL include the number of impairments per watershed, the complexity involved in developing a TMDL for certain impairments versus the simplicity of others, the amount of data available, the complexity of the models used, and the number of models used. So far, TMDL development in Illinois has ranged from approximately $46,000 to $267,000 per watershed. These figures are for contractor support and do not include Agency staff costs. The annual expenditure on TMDL development varies by year based on how many TMDL watersheds we have under development. Each year the number of watersheds under development has increased. Funds from Section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act are the primary source used for TMDL development in Illinois. Over the next year, we anticipate spending approximately $1.2 million for TMDL development for the next 15 watersheds. 5. Do you use any of the Illinois DNR River Watch monitoring data now? RESPONSE: No. However, we have worked with Illinois DNR this past year to develop a quality assurance project plan (QAPP) regarding their River Watch monitoring program, thereby making the data potentially usable in future assessments. 6. In the section ‘Data and Documents Used in the Development of the 2002 303(d) List’, you refer to the “Water Quality Monitoring Strategy 2002 to 2006.” Is that a document that is publicly available? RESPONSE: Yes. The document (IEPA/BOW/02-005) was in publication at the time of this hearing. It is now available from the Illinois EPA in hard copy and is on the Agency’s web page at http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/water-quality/monitoring-strategy/index.html. 7. There is some continuous monitoring being done by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) at a few sites. Were those data used in preparing the List? Were any data collected by anybody after September 2000 considered in the List?


C6 August 2003

RESPONSE: No USGS continuous monitoring data or data collected after September 2000 were used to make 2002 Section 305(b) assessments. Therefore, they were not used in the development of the Draft 2002 303(d) List. At the time of publication of the Draft 303(d) List, USGS had not fully assessed the continuous monitoring data. These data were therefore not considered “existing and readily available” for purposes of this List. In two other cases (refer to RESPONSES #66 and 98) additional data from sources other than the Illinois EPA were considered. 8. In the section on ‘Identification of Water Quality Limited Waters’, I wasn't quite clear on how mercury was dealt with. I gather there is a statewide advisory on fish contamination for mercury, but you did not list every water body. RESPONSE: USEPA guidance allows the Agency some flexibility in how we address this issue. We could list all waters as impaired for mercury. We do not think that resolves the problem, conveys useful information not otherwise provided in the fish advisory, or expedites development of a TMDL for any particular water body. We have specific data for several waters in Illinois for mercury, and the guidance from USEPA requires us to list those waters. In further researching this issue, we found that not all water bodies with site-specific fish tissue data for mercury contamination were identified in the Draft 2002 303(d) List. We have revised the Final 303(d) List by adding appropriate cause information for mercury contamination and impairment of the fish consumption designated use for the following water bodies: Water body Name WSID WATER BODY SEGMENT Wabash River ILB06 B 05; B06; B 98; TB 13; TB 14 ILB07 B 01; B 03 Rock River ILP04 P04; P 24 That same federal guidance gives us flexibility in how we approach the remainder of the state for which we issued a fish advisory based on data from various, but not all, locations. We elected not to list every water body segment as impaired for mercury. The Agency is now involved and will continue to work with USEPA, other states and interested organizations in an effort to address continuing mercury contamination and remedies. 9. Did you have mercury water column data, based on the human health standard? RESPONSE: The listings were based on fish tissue data. 10. How does something get listed for a secondary contact impairment? If you look at Lake Shabbona, which is the last thing listed in the entire List, it states the designated uses are full support for overall use, aquatic life, fish consumption, swimming, but partial support for secondary contact (P44). How is it that a water could be okay for all of those other designated uses, but then partially impaired for secondary contact? RESPONSE: Lake Shabbona is impaired for secondary contact recreation, meaning boating. There are specific assessment criteria for secondary contact


C7 August 2003

recreation that do not apply to other designated uses. Refer to page 51 of the 2002 305(b) Report that explains the criteria for secondary contact recreation use. The criteria on page 51 happen to be for lakes, so this would be specific to the question on Shabbona. The primary determinant in listing a water body as impaired for secondary contact is the Trophic State Index (TSI), an aggregate value based on phosphorus concentration, Secchi depth and chlorophyll a concentration. It is not necessary to exceed the phosphorus standard if the water column concentration is high enough, the Secchi is low enough and the chlorophyll a is also high enough to result in a TSI value in the eutrophic range (which is most often the case). We also evaluate the macrophyte coverage and nonvolatile suspended solids (sediment) in making impairment decisions for secondary contact recreation. 11. On page six at the top, it states "The watersheds with more causes of impairments were identified and listed as lower priority than those listed with confidence level three watersheds within each of the priority groups identified in step one." Is a water body with more causes of impairments given a higher or a lower priority? RESPONSE: If it has a confidence level of three, it gets a higher priority. Please refer to the Definition and Acronyms section for an explanation of “confidence level.” 12. So the fact that it has more causes or less causes doesn't affect the prioritization? It's the confidence level that affects the prioritization? RESPONSE: Both the confidence level and the number of causes affect the prioritization of waters on the List. Those waters with confidence levels assigned to them receive the highest priority and are ranked higher than waters with no confidence level assigned (note: not all waters have a confidence level assigned to them). Those waters without confidence levels assigned to them are prioritized based on the number of causes identified, and are ranked lower than those with confidence levels. 13. Let's use an example. Let's say we have two water bodies, one of which is impaired by three causes all at the highest confidence level, and the other one is impaired by two causes, both at the highest confidence level. Which one gets the higher priority among those two? RESPONSE: The one with the greatest number of confidence level three causes. Assuming by “highest” you mean “level three”, then the first water body in your example would be prioritized higher than the second water body. In the boxes that appear on pages five and six of the List, we attempted to provide examples of how that should work. Step two involves ranking segments by confidence levels. Only one fifth of the waters in the state have assigned confidence levels. When confidence levels were not available, we used the number of causes as a ranking criterion.


C8 August 2003

14. On the bottom of page six, you list various things that would cause something to generally indicate a low priority, and item (v) refers to 303(d) listed waters with impairment by background sources. What is meant by background sources? RESPONSE: These categories are generally identified by USEPA as being impaired due to background or naturally occurring sources. For example, groundwater that may be naturally high in total dissolved solids, contributing to a stream, would be a “background” source. 15. There are several waters on the List in 1998 based on evaluated data that are still on the List. Is that correct? You are using evaluated data, but at some places, looking at page ten, it states “Inaccurately Listed Waters.” Then it just gives the reason for delisting as “E”. What does that mean when you use an “E” as opposed to an “ND”, on pages 10 and 11 on the “Inaccurately Listed Waters” table? RESPONSE: There are evaluated waters on the 1998 List that remain on the 2002 List because those waters have a fish consumption advisory. We list waters with fish consumptions advisories regardless of the monitoring status, be it monitored, evaluated, or not assessed. Waters that would otherwise be fully supporting may be on the List due to a fish consumption advisory alone. Based on this, the only waters identified as being evaluated on the 1998 List should be due to a fish consumption advisory. If there was no fish consumption advisory, and a water body is evaluated and listed on the 1998 List, then it was done so mistakenly. Illinois EPA lists only monitored waters as described in Section II(B). Any water listed as evaluated that did not have a fish consumption advisory was inaccurately listed in 1998, and is being delisted in 2002. In regard to what we mean when we use "E” as opposed to an "ND", the "E" means "Evaluated"--those waters for which the data are more than five years old. The "ND" meant "No data". In the Final 2002 List we have changed the "ND" to "VOL" ("Volunteer data"). In all of the instances shown on this table, we have only volunteer data. We are delisting these waters because we do not use volunteer data alone to list 303(d) waters, and therefore these waters were inaccurately listed and should not have been on the 1998 List. Please also refer to RESPONSE #39. 16. Some waters are still listed although you're using evaluated data, and for some waters the reason for delisting is evaluated. So, apparently, you decided that some evaluated data were good enough to continue the listing, and some evaluated data were weak enough so that you should take those waters off. Can you explain that? RESPONSE: The Agency’s approach in previous years, and today, is that we consider only “monitored” waters for listing (see Section II(B), page 3 for a description of “monitored” and “evaluated”). The waters in Table 2, Inaccurately Listed Waters, that are identified as “evaluated” waters in the Reason for Delisting column are being delisted because they were “evaluated” waters at the time of their original listing. For this reason, they should not have been listed originally.


C9 August 2003

The reason there are “evaluated” waters on the 2002 List is that these waters were previously listed on the 1992, 1994, 1996, or 1998 Lists. At the time of their original listing, they were “monitored” waters. They are now identified as “evaluated” waters because no new data have been collected on these waters since their original listing, and the data have therefore become more than five years old. They remain on the List because the federal regulations require Illinois EPA to list previously listed waters (unless we have performed a TMDL or new data indicate those waters are fully supporting designated uses). 17. On page seven it says, "The Illinois EPA proposes not to list those waters that have been identified through water quality assessments as being threatened." How did you reach that decision? RESPONSE: The 303(d) List is a list of impaired waters. Illinois EPA does not consider threatened waters impaired since they are in full support of all of their designated uses. Therefore, we did not include them on the 2002 List. 18. There are some threatened waters listed in the 305(b) Report. RESPONSE: Threatened waters are at full support, and, therefore, are not part of this List. See RESPONSE #17. 19. In the second to last paragraph on page seven, you state that all waters are included on Illinois' approved List except waters under three specified criteria cited in the text. The text shows a “(1)” and a “(2)”, and we were wondering what the third criterion was. RESPONSE: In the paragraph following (2), the third criterion is "In addition to the above waters that are being removed from the List, Illinois EPA proposes not to list those waters that have been identified through water quality assessments as threatened." 20. On a number of causes that are listed, there are water quality standards. In other cases there are percentage bases that come out of the 303(d) List. On pesticides, particularly atrazine and the other organics, how did you figure out when something was impaired? Where are those criteria described? RESPONSE: The 2002 305(b) Report contains a detailed explanation about how those data are developed, and what sort of monitoring is done that provides the data--fish tissue versus sediment versus water, for example. That information appears on Table 3-7 of the 305(b) Report (pages 33-36) for streams and Table 3-24 (pages 54-56) for lakes. The level at which impairment is identified due to atrazine, according to that table, is 1.0 ug/L based on samples collected through our Ambient Water Quality Monitoring Network. The 2002 305(b) Report describes the source of various criteria (refer to Table 3-7 footnotes). The criterion for atrazine (1.0 ug/L) is based on procedures for the determination of the chronic aquatic toxicity criterion for an individual substance, as specified in 35 Il. Adm. Code 302.627.


C10 August 2003

21. There are water bodies listed, but there's no cause or source given. Is that corrected in the errata sheet? RESPONSE: Yes. 22. We see a lot of PCB listings in water bodies that had been thought to be relatively high quality, and we were wondering what new PCB data existed, and where they were finding PCBs. RESPONSE: Those listings of impairment are based on fish tissue data. 23. Is there recent fish tissue data for the Fox River on PCBs? RESPONSE: The most recent fish tissue data for the Fox River are from 16 stations, between the Stratton Dam at McHenry and the Dayton Dam, for several species collected in 2000. Those species include carp, channel catfish and smallmouth bass. Fish tissue data for PCBs have been collected since 1988 and serve as the basis for fish consumption advisories. The most recent advisory for the Fox River was effective April 1, 2002. 24. We have concerns with the premise that the development of TMDLs fits with nonpoint source issues. How can the Agency work with daily loads for nonpoint sources when those nonpoint sources are really related to episodic events, not daily loads of pollutants? RESPONSE: When developing nonpoint source (NPS) TMDLs, we will take into consideration seasonal variation and wet weather events. The TMDL will be developed to identify a comprehensive, long-term reduction for NPS pollutant load and will not be based on daily load limits. 25. We have concerns with the data used to place nonpoint source waters on the List, and we still have concerns with the information used to list waters. Data used to place water segments on the List should be taken from various sections of a water segment at multiple times of the year in order for the data to accurately reflect that stream condition, and the data should also be current. RESPONSE: Illinois EPA places a great deal of our resources, and confidence, in our monitoring programs. Every effort is made to collect data in a manner that gives us the most representative and scientifically valid results possible with the staff and financial resources we have available. Each year we work to improve our data collection and assessment procedures based on experience, new knowledge, new technology, and available resources. Additional information on the monitoring program, including sampling frequency and funds expended by the Agency, is provided in the 2002 305(b) Report. Illinois EPA used existing and readily available data to identify these waters.


C11 August 2003

26. The use of confidence levels may not eliminate problems associated with the use of water quality endpoints based on statistical analysis that may not be appropriate in all instances. RESPONSE: That is the exact purpose of developing confidence levels. Lower confidence levels are given to those endpoints that are based on statistically developed guidelines. The alternative is to continue doing TMDLs for which established water quality standards are not available. We believe this latter approach subjects those TMDLs to criticism concerning the endpoints or targets and make defense of the TMDL an issue rather than making water quality improvement the issue. 27. The List overall remains challenging to use, and we would suggest placing county names in the tables that you have in the earlier part of the List, and then also number the pages in consecutive order all the way through. RESPONSE: Noted. We made several revisions to the Final List that are intended to make the List more “user friendly.” 28. Illinois EPA needs to share specific field data used to list water segments with local people. The Agency has this information, and with the increasing use of technology, local people should be able to quickly get the field data that the Agency collected and used to list their water. RESPONSE: The Agency continues to provide existing data to anyone requesting them. Water quality data are also available via the Internet from STORET at http://www.epa.gov/STORET/. The Agency has efforts underway to provide greater access via the Internet to other forms or data used in making listing determinations. When the Agency develops a TMDL, we present information to the public at meeting and hearings. In addition, interim TMDL reports are prepared and posted on the Agency’s web page http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/tmdl/. 29. There should be an awareness that each stream in Illinois is different, and cannot be treated the same. There should be recognition that human uses of land have impact. We need to ensure that we're working to improve water quality, but there needs to be a realistic process used not only in the listing process, but also in the development of plans to address water quality issues that recognize these differences. RESPONSE: Thank you for this comment. The Agency will continue to use its authority under the law to develop the List and TMDLs with this in mind. 30. I have some specific questions on the Deer Creek assessment. It was based on a facility related stream study. The study was done in October 1996. The segment was considered monitored. Could you explain the five-year difference and the two-year lag, and would it still be considered a monitored study?


C12 August 2003

RESPONSE: There is seven-year time frame related to the collection, assessment and publication of monitored data. The 2002 305(b) Report (and therefore the 2002 303(d) List) is based on data collected through September 2000. To be considered for a monitored assessment, data would have been collected in the years 1996 through 2000. The Deer Creek assessment was based on data from October 1996 and is therefore considered a monitored assessment. The two-year lag refers to the period between the most recently available data (in this assessment and reporting cycle, the data are from September 2000) and the publication of the most recent 305(b) Report (July 2002). 31. The MBI (Macroinvertebrate Biotic Index) in this study of Deer Creek included data collected in October. I'm a river watch volunteer, and the time frame that we have collect in is from May 1st to June 30th. How does your sampling compare to one that I would do? In addition, the data that I reviewed didn't really say why it's impaired. The MBIs downstream of our effluent are actually better than upstream. Some chemical constituents are a little higher downstream, but so is the source water. The groundwater is very high in TDS, magnesium, potassium, and that is where the water from the sewage treatment plant effluent originates. Why is this segment listed? RESPONSE: Illinois EPA uses a macroinvertebrate collection period (index period) from June 1 to October 15. We developed our index period to reflect base flow conditions. Base flow is an important aspect of monitoring streams that receive point source discharges because base flow provides the least amount of dilution of pollutants. Monitoring pollutants at maximum concentration depicts the worst-case scenario. For example, if effluent standards are protective during the worst-case scenario, the resource is likely protected during all flow regimes. Comparing macroinvertebrate communities collected from different seasons is often difficult. Macroinvertebrate communities often exhibit seasonal shifts. As species emerge, they are often replaced by a different species. These seasonal shifts are often due to changes in temperature, flow and photoperiod, among other factors. Many species have evolved survival strategies, such as diapause or synchronous egg stages, which allow them to bypass stressful conditions. Illinois EPA conducts all macroinvertebrate sampling during the summer months. Comparing these samples to spring, late fall or winter samples is not recommended. Subsequent to the hearing, the commenter submitted data to the Agency from monitoring conducted in October 2002. The commenter’s additional questions and the Agency’s response are at Comment/RESPONSE #98. 32. When might you be looking at Boneyard Creek? RESPONSE: Boneyard Creek is watershed segment BPJCA. It is a medium priority. Given the fact that it is a medium priority, unless there was an active group with which we could coordinate activities, and which was willing to implement and coordinate efforts to effect stream improvement through the process of developing the TMDL, a TMDL will likely remain several years off.


C13 August 2003

33. The City of Champaign is currently working on our NPDES Stormwater Phase II application. How do these two programs—TMDLs and Phase II—interact? As we implement best management practices for the NPDES Phase II program, those efforts could change our future rating of the stream--it might fall off the List, or it might stay on. How do the TMDL study and the NPDES Phase II work together? RESPONSE: Strictly in terms of listing impaired waters and the effects that the NPDES Phase II program may have on those waters, implementation of Phase II BMPs--short term or long term—-should be done consistently and in a manner that would benefit the stream. If BMP implementation is conducted properly and consistently, future monitoring may cause us to re-assess that segment and de-list because of improvement in water quality conditions. That, of course, would be the preferred outcome. We are also mindful that stream improvements that may be used as part of Phase II will take some time to set in place and longer to show results. Any TMDL done on a stream should account for ongoing BMPs, such as those conducted under the Phase II program. Implementation of stormwater BMPs can be credited towards reduction of nonpoint source loadings as part of TMDL implementation. 34. When is the next List due out? You mentioned the five-year rotating samples. Could you explain that process? Are the samples related to the next List? RESPONSE: The five-year rotating basin scheme, which we've alluded to in response to questions here and in documents in the narrative portion of the 303(d) List, describes how and when we conduct our stream and lake monitoring, and what other data we rely upon to make decisions on use impairment. Unfortunately, there are different schedules for different parts of what the Agency does in the water program. Some of that is directed by USEPA, some is based on resource management, and some of it is a little bit of both. We are continually monitoring streams, as we have described in this document and in the 2002 305(b) Report. We do that on a rotating watershed basis. Every segment that we monitor, we rotate through on a five-year basis. Those data are updated and segment status is revised in accordance with the results. The timing of the next 303(d) List is difficult to predict at this time. That schedule is set by USEPA, and right now we are on a two-year schedule in accordance with current regulations (1992). But we also know that USEPA is working on and will soon release the Watershed Rule. That new rule, if released and adopted as proposed, has a different time frame for 303(d) List submittal. Depending on when those new regulations are released and when they become effective, the submittal schedule could change. Right now, it's a two-year schedule. 35. When considering chemical data as published in the 305(b) Report, there are some thresholds of 11 percent and 25 percent of the data, where if less than 11 percent of the samples exceed a criterion, that is considered supporting a particular designated use with respect to the chemical data. What is the basis for those percentile thresholds? How do those percentiles relate to actual protection of a designated use? In setting criteria or evaluating data with regard to whether it protects a designated use such as aquatic life, criteria are best expressed in terms of a dose, a duration and frequency of exceedence in


C14 August 2003

addition to that dose. Is there some correlation between those percentiles and those types of parameters that would protect the use? RESPONSE: Referenced percentile thresholds are taken from guidelines provided by USEPA (Guidelines for Preparation of the Comprehensive State Water Quality Assessments [305(b) Reports] and Electronic Updates: Report Contents. EPA-841-B-97-002a. USEPA. September 1997; and Guidelines for Preparation of the Comprehensive State Water Quality Assessments [305(b) Reports] and Electronic Updates: Supplement. EPA-841-B-97-002b. USEPA. September 1997). These percentiles are used to assess available water chemistry data only and were developed by a workgroup of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators, and various state agency personnel in the early to mid-1980’s. While no correlations with biological impairment were directly drawn, the agreed upon thresholds were determined to be reasonable breakpoints to use in a national water quality assessment framework (e.g., USEPA guidance), and their use continues today. Keep in mind that other data, including fish, macroinvertebrate, and habitat data, are all used with chemical data to make a final aquatic life use support assessment in streams. 36. With respect to the biological data and the assessment of that data, the IBI (Index of Biotic Integrity) and the MBI (Macroinvertebrate Biotic Index), there are also some thresholds specified in the flow chart and in the text of the 305(b) Report. What are the bases for those criteria? RESPONSE: The IBI scoring ranges used to define biotic integrity classes, particularly the thresholds used to assess aquatic life use, were determined by a consensus of Illinois water resource professionals, established as the Biological Stream Characterization Workgroup--a joint effort of the Illinois EPA and the Illinois Department of Conservation (currently, the Illinois Department of Natural Resources). These biotic integrity/resource value classes were first published by the Illinois EPA in 1989 (Biological Stream Characterization (BSC): A Biological Assessment of Illinois Stream Quality. Special Report #13 of the Illinois State Water Plan Task Force), and then updated in a 1996 report (Biological Stream Characterization (BSC): Biological Assessment of Illinois Stream Quality through 1993. IEPA /BOW/96-058). In early 2003, the Illinois Biocriteria Workgroup (a formal workgroup coordinated by Illinois EPA and comprised of various public and private water resource interest groups) will be reviewing new scoring ranges for interpreting newly revised IBIs, particularly with respect to using IBI scores for assessing aquatic life use in streams. We plan to present, discuss, and document the decision criteria used to create new IBI scoring ranges that define the biotic integrity/resource value classes. The MBI-score ranges currently used by Illinois EPA for assessing aquatic life use were developed through an Illinois EPA effort in the mid-1980s to use macroinvertebrate data to better define categories of stream impairment for facility-related stream surveys. Illinois EPA's MBI score thresholds (i.e., 5.9 and 8.9) are roughly equivalent to W.L. Hilsenhoff's thresholds that distinguish "Fair"(5.51-6.50) from "Fairly poor"(6.51-7.50) water-quality conditions and "Poor" (7.51-8.50) from "Very poor" (8.51-10.00) water quality conditions. These thresholds are reasonable for helping us distinguish among the three levels of attainment of aquatic life use. W.L. Hilsenhoff is the developer of the biotic index. Illinois EPA's MBI is a direct derivative of this index as published in the following two journal articles:


C15 August 2003

i. Hilsenhoff, W.L. 1987. An improved biotic index of organic stream pollution. Great Lakes Entomologist, 20:31-39; and

ii. Hilsenhoff, W.L., 1998. A modification of the biotic index of organic stream pollution to remedy problems and permit its use throughout the year. Great Lakes Entomologist, 31:1-12.

37. With respect to the primary contact use, there's some discussion regarding how fecal coliform data are assessed for protection of that use, and the 305(b) Report indicates that essentially the only data that are considered are for total suspended solids data less than the median. So, essentially, the cleanest half of the data is what is assessed. Is my understanding correct? On page 40 and onto page 41 of the 305(b) Report, it states, "Individual sample estimates are considered only if the corresponding total suspended solids estimate is not greater than the 50th percentile value of total suspended solids for solids for that station." It is difficult to ensure that fecal coliform levels are acceptable during extremely high flood events, but 50 percent of the time does not seem to be protective of that primary contact use. It seems like a 50th percentile is perhaps going a little lower than what the public might find acceptable. Essentially, that use is only protected 50 percent of the time. RESPONSE: Contrary to the comment that "...the 305(b) Report indicates that essentially the only data that are considered are for total suspended solids data less than the median", Illinois EPA assesses primary contact (swimming) use in a stream by considering all measurements of fecal coliform bacteria (FCB) collected in May through October over a five-year period in that stream. If the geometric mean of these FCB measurements is high (i.e., greater than 200/100ml), then primary contact (swimming) use is considered to be impaired. These determinations do not rely on culling FCB measurements based on a threshold value of total suspended solids. Only when the geometric mean of all FCB measurements is less than 200/100ml do we consult an additional assessment guideline that incorporates the 50th percentile value of total suspended solids, which is assumed to indicate normal or low-flow conditions, conditions when instream FCB is less likely to be influenced by runoff events and when primary contact (swimming) use is most likely to occur. Whereas we think that this use of the 50th percentile of total suspended solids is reasonable in this context, we recognize that the 50th percentile threshold value has some degree of subjectivity. 38. If 11 percent of the samples are allowed to violate the criterion, my concern would be that that might be the 11 percent of the time that you were experiencing critical conditions. Is information regarding whether or not data were collected during critical conditions incorporated into the evaluation of that monitored data? If you have three years of data, and during the low flow time of year, each year you're having a water quality problem, if that falls below 11 percent of your samples, you're still having a problem in that water, and I would hope that that would not fall through the cracks of this assessment. Please provide more clarification on whether information collected is during noncritical conditions, and whether there's any type of extrapolation that is attempted to critical conditions. RESPONSE: Two primary monitoring programs exist for collecting data to assess streams. The Ambient Water Quality Monitoring Network program allows for the collection of water chemistry data every six (6) weeks, or approximately nine


C16 August 2003

(9) times per year. Therefore, data are collected in both “critical” and “non-critical” periods. A separate data collection program, based on intensive basin surveys, yield data collected between late June and September—the summer “critical” season. All data collected are used to make an assessment. Overall, assessing biological conditions accounts for critical conditions no matter when they occur. 39. My understanding of evaluated data is that it's fairly broad and best professional judgment and land use seems to encompass a lot of different data. How would a water body have been listed for “no data”? What information falls under the category of “no data”, whatever may have caused that water body to be listed in the past? RESPONSE: Most of the water bodies in Table 2 of the List are lakes. The listing was based on volunteer data that we should not have considered in the first place. Volunteer data are not subject to strict quality assurance and quality control protocols, thus rendering them useful for purposes of public education and information, but not as reliable as data collected by Agency or other trained personnel under an approved quality assurance project plan, or QAPP. Volunteer data are also not as informative in identifying lake impairment if they are the only data available. These data are used with other data and information collected by the Agency, and are not used alone in making impairment determinations. That is why we are proposing to delist those waters. We changed the manner in which we identified what we previously called “No data” and have now identified that data as “Volunteer data” in Table 2 of the List. 40. Are volunteer data considered in your evaluated assessments? RESPONSE: Yes. 41. In Table 1, there is a list of waters that are now assessed as fully supporting. Please clarify what the threshold for new data and information is that would invalidate previous data and information. RESPONSE: Table 1 contains water bodies on the 1998 List that were identified as impaired based on data from 1988 through 1996. New data would have been collected and evaluated after September 1996. The 2002 List is based on data subsequent to that (1996 to 2000). Any data collected in 1996 through 2000, showing full support for these waters, resulted in a change in the impairment designation for that water body. 42. Is there a minimal amount of data that is required, or could, say, one data point invalidate the previous five years' of data? In the 305(b) Report there was some discussion of various programs that collected different types of data. How much new data must exist to offset a previous listing? RESPONSE: The most recent data collected are used to make an updated assessment. Generally, the same amount of data is collected from one five-year sampling cycle to the next, at approximately the same location. However,


C17 August 2003

different types of data are used differently. For instance, given one IBI (Index of Biotic Integrity) value and one MBI (Macroinvertebrate Biotic Index) value in an assessment, we would give greater weight to those “one-time samples” than three water chemistry samples for an evaluation of aquatic life use. Therefore, we cannot respond directly to your question with the information provided. The type and amount of data and the use being assessed are also important factors. 43. On the topic of the secondary contact use designation, you had mentioned in your comments that there were five specific use designations. When you look at the second page of the Water Body Specific Information, there are two different listings for codes 44 and 46. One is “secondary contact”, and the other is “secondary contact and indigenous aquatic life”. Even looking at pages 50 and 51 of the 305(b) Report, I didn't see an explanation of the difference between code 44 and code 46 use categories. RESPONSE: Designated uses and the concept of use support are explained in the 2002 305(b) Report, Section 3-Surface Waters Assessment, pages 11, 12, and 20. Regarding the distinction between the two designated uses in question (i.e., 44=Secondary Contact [recreation] and 46=Indigenous Aquatic Life), please note that secondary contact (recreation) use was not assessed for streams in the most recent cycle of assessments (as stated on page 44 of the 2002 305(b) Report). Therefore, the statement on pages 2 and 5 of Appendix A of the 2002 305(b) Report regarding Secondary Contact (Recreation) could have been omitted for purposes of these assessments. The designated use Indigenous Aquatic Life was assessed only in the 82 (or so) miles of rivers, and canals plus one lake (Lake Calumet) in which Secondary Contact and Indigenous Aquatic Life Use standards apply (Figure 3-1, page 13 in the 2002 305(b) Report). Please refer to Table 3-4, page 20 in the 2002 305(b) Report for further relevant information. 44. In the 305(b) Report, in the discussion on secondary contact use on page 50, it makes reference to a recreational use index. What is the source of that index? Has it been adopted by rule, for example, in Illinois? Who developed the index? Am I interpreting it correctly that it's intended only to apply to lakes, not to rivers and streams? RESPONSE: The index is in Table 3-20 on page 51 of the 2002 305(b) Report. There are three factors: One is an index by itself, meaning it has several subfactors, and the other two factors are macrophyte impairment and sediment impairment. We look at all three and weigh them accordingly. We then draw a conclusion based on the overall evaluation of those three factors. Part of the index was developed by the Agency. The recreational use impairment index, the RUI, used for lake assessment, was developed by the Agency. The trophic state index, TSI, was developed by an independent researcher (Carlson). 45. I noted on page six of the Draft 303(d) List that the IEPA does state that interstate waters are going to be given low priority within their categories. My comment is that, for example, the state of Missouri recently opted to delete all but one segment of the Mississippi River from its 303(d) List. And I think that Illinois should consider that a lower priority will be given where it's an interstate water and the neighboring state has decided that the water segment


C18 August 2003

does not qualify for its 303(d) List. Otherwise, I think there is a real risk of prejudice to the Illinois dischargers to that water if the State of Illinois were to go ahead without the neighboring state's acknowledgment of a problem or willingness to share in trying to solve the problem. RESPONSE: Issues such as these, and many others, will need to be addressed prior to the development of any TMDLs on interstate waters. Because of the complexity of issues surrounding interstate waters (i.e., multiple state involvement, differing state–established water quality standards, differing impairments, differing priorities), Illinois EPA considers these waters low priority. Illinois EPA will continue to work closely with other states and USEPA in addressing issues related to Section 303(d) requirements. USEPA is expected to take a lead role in coordinating states’ efforts regarding interstate waters. 46. On page one of the draft 303(d) List in the second paragraph under section 1(B), the primary reason for the lack of integration this time around between the 305(b) Report and the Draft 303(d) List is that USEPA’s assessment database did not lend itself to preparation of an integrated report due to requirements to use the National Hydrography Dataset, the NHD. Can you explain why it didn't lend itself to the preparation of an integrated report due to the requirements of the NHD? Is that something you're going to need federal funding to do? Is that something that right now you don't have the resources to do? How long will it take—will it possibly be done by the next listing cycle? RESPONSE: We had been using USEPA's Reach File 3 (RF3) index. RF3 is a different way of codifying segments within a watershed. The NHD is a recent effort between USEPA and USGS. Our data system, the ADB, did not readily lend itself to being switched from RF3 to NHD by the time the 2002 303(d) List was due. What we have to do to resolve this is essentially a software change, with staff training on the use of the NHD system. This work on the ADB is now underway and we expect it to be completed well before the next listing. 47. When you mention that you had the list of how many TMDLs you were going to do each year organized, when I go back to the first page of the high priority list, the first row in the list is the WSID indicators, and then there is the water body segment indicator. When you say you're going to do 15 TMDLs between 2002 and 2003, are you looking at the second row, for example, ILDAG01—would that whole watershed be one TMDL, including all of those four or five water bodies? RESPONSE: When we say TMDL in this case, one TMDL would be, for example, Palmyra-Modesto, Hodges Creek, Otter, and Hettick Lakes. The second TMDL we would do would be Glen Shoals and Hillsboro Old Lake, and so forth. That, in effect, is why we refer to doing TMDLs on a watershed basis. FROM WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE 48. We believe all waters listed in 1998 should remain listed unless there are new data showing that the waters are not impaired. As to the waters listed in 1998 as the result of professional judgment rather than monitored data, no one


C19 August 2003

familiar with the Illinois officials responsible for the 1998 List would seriously suggest that any "evaluated" water was listed without very good reason to believe it was impaired. RESPONSE: All waters in the 1998 303(d) List appear on the Draft 2002 List except for those based on 1) new data or 2) erroneous data from a previous listing. These include waters previously listed as impaired that are now in full support, waters that were mistakenly identified as “Monitored” when they were actually “Evaluated” and never should have been in the 1998 303(d) List, and waters that were mistakenly put on the 1998 303(d) List as “Evaluated. If we had one-year old fish tissue data and 10-year old aquatic life use data, the assessment would be identified as “Evaluated”. In other cases some “Evaluated” waters, particularly lakes for which little data were available, were placed in watersheds with other “Monitored” waters without clarifying their actual status or the basis for the listing. In many instances, the same Illinois EPA staff that helped make the earlier evaluated assessments, reviewed the data and provided input as to whether those segments should be removed from the 2002 Draft 303(d) List. 49. If Illinois EPA implemented the standards regarding heat (35 Ill. Adm. Code 302.211), it would result in the listing of the lower Des Plaines River and every low flow stream receiving sewerage effluent in the winter as violating the numeric temperature standards. Such listings could be made with as great or greater certainty as listings made based on monitoring data because these waters must be in violation of standards as a matter of mathematics. RESPONSE: The criteria used to determine impairment due to heat (thermal modification) are used only when a thermal point source is present. For streams, at least one violation of the standard for temperature within the most recent three years is required for stations associated with the Ambient Water Quality Monitoring Network (AWQMN), or a single violation for stations associated with an intensive basin survey or facility related stream survey. In all cases, stream monitoring data are used to identify potential impairment. No evaluations are made on the basis of “mathematics.” 50. Nutrient pollution is almost certainly not identified as the "cause" of impairment more than a fraction of the times when such pollution in fact caused or contributed to a listed impairment. The concentration of phosphorus that must be in a stream for phosphorus to be identified by the draft List as a cause, is a high multiple of the federal reference condition and of the concentration level of phosphorus that research has tied to adverse aquatic effects. See Miltner, R.J and Rankin, E.T., Primary nutrients and the biotic integrity of rivers and streams, Freshwater Biology, (1998) 40, 145-158. Sierra Club volunteer water monitors have repeatedly found levels of phosphorus in excess of this federal reference condition in nearly all of the waters they have sampled. RESPONSE: Criteria used to identify impairment due to nutrients are found in the 305(b) Report, and are not based on proposed federal nutrient guidance. The Illinois EPA is currently developing nutrient standards for all waters of the state with the assistance and involvement of various federal, state and local governmental agencies and institutions, and representatives from the industrial, municipal and agricultural sectors. Federal guidance on nutrient standards


C20 August 2003

development gives each state several years to develop appropriate criteria, and to do so with full public input. Until the Pollution Control Board adopts nutrient standards, the Agency will evaluate stream and lake impairment based on the standards and criteria now at hand. As a result, listing decisions will place impairment due to nutrients in an appropriate confidence level category and TMDLs will be conducted accordingly. In regard to the Agency not identifying nutrient pollution as a cause more than a fraction of the time, note that on the basis of the data from the 2002 305(b) Report, nutrients were identified as a potential cause on 3,082 of 5,495 river miles, or 56.1 percent of the time. We believe this is consistent with the data used in the 2002 303(d) List. 51. We have serious concerns that the Agency will not be able to meet the schedule proposed for completing TMDLs in light of our experience with TMDLs already underway, the current funding for the program, and generally difficult state budget situation for the foreseeable future. We strongly encourage the Agency to identify, propose, and support new funding mechanisms to ensure that the wait for clean water is as short as possible for affected communities. RESPONSE: We agree that the wait for clean water should be as short as possible. We are also mindful of our obligation to provide the public, including local watershed landowners and those responsible for the funding and operation of wastewater treatment facilities, with high quality determinations of impairment and scientifically sound evaluations of all loads responsible for that impairment. These determinations and evaluations may take longer than some would expect or be willing to accept. Future decisions regarding funding of TMDLs will be made in context with other funding needs for all of the water programs and at present are not anticipated to require additional state funds. 52. We are aware that U.S. EPA is revisiting the federal rule governing the preparation for TMDLs. We strongly urge the Agency to be an advocate for the statewide interest in completing effective TMDLs as soon as possible in this process. RESPONSE: The Illinois EPA has had the opportunity to discuss the development of the new rule with USEPA on several occasions. We will continue to do so, advocating for effective TMDLs, as additional opportunities arise. 53. Crystal Lake Outlet which runs through Crystal Lake, Lake-in-the-Hills and Algonquin is not on the 303(d) List even though it is listed as impaired in the 2000 305(b) Report. RESPONSE: Crystal Lake was mistakenly omitted from the List. The errata sheet distributed at the hearing states that Crystal Lake will be added to the Final 2002 303(d) List that will be submitted to USEPA for approval. 54. Many stream and lakes in the Fox River basin are suffering in silence due to the lack of information. Of 57 lakes in the 305(b) Report only 17 have


C21 August 2003

monitored assessments. Why does Shabbona Lake, which was on the 1998 303(d) List, have a low priority? RESPONSE: The Agency’s current monitoring program allows us to evaluate only a portion of the state’s waters. In 2000, we assessed 369 lakes in the state, or approximately 60.5 percent of all lakes (excluding Lake Michigan). Lake Shabbona is listed as low priority in the Draft 303(d) List due to impairment caused by excessive algal growth, nutrients and total nitrogen. Only secondary contact use (boating) was identified as impaired by these causes, and the lake consequently was assigned a low priority. Also see RESPONSE #10. 55. Highland Silver Lake (Madison County) is listed as a high priority but with causes for which there is a “no confidence level” assigned. Please explain. RESPONSE: Highland Silver Lake is on the high priority list because it is a public water supply and is listed as impaired for its drinking water use. It does not have confidence levels assigned to the “causes” because only those waters assessed in 2000 were given confidence levels. The high, medium and low priority groups are based on designated uses, whereas confidence levels were used to prioritize water bodies within the high, medium and low priority groups. 56. Data used to place water segments on the List should be taken from various sections of a water segment and at multiple times of the year in order for the data to accurately reflect that stream condition. The data should be current. There should be an awareness that each stream is different—they cannot be treated the same. RESPONSE: See RESPONSE #25. 57. We are concerned that the implied commitment to develop TMDLs on stream segments beyond the two years required by USEPA may make it difficult to remove any that may be listed in error in the future. Removal of a listed water body after a community has been convinced of the need to implement measures to improve it, could put the Agency in a difficult position with local supporters. We do not believe that segments after the immediate two years should be identified. RESPONSE: The 2002 List does not contain a long-term list of watersheds for TMDL development. The List is in priority order, although other factors will be used in determining TMDL development. Prior to developing a TMDL, the Agency reviews all available data, including the data and information used to place that watershed on the List. If the data and information indicate the segment is then at full support, the segment can be de-listed. We intend to do this review as soon in the TMDL development process as possible, thereby reducing confusion and loss of confidence in the TMDL program. 58. We encourage the Illinois EPA to integrate the 305(b) Report and the 303(d) List. In doing so, the data and information used to develop the Integrated Report should be made available to the public.


C22 August 2003

RESPONSE: The Agency intends to completely integrate the next 305(b)/303(d), as directed in USEPA guidance. See RESPONSE #28 for information on the use of STORET data and the future of publicly accessible information. 59. The biological health indices (i.e., IBI and MBI, the Index of Biotic Integrity and the Macroinvertebrate Biotic Index, respectively) are not Illinois water quality standards. In addition, the Illinois EPA has arbitrarily selected impairment values for some chemical constituents, such as total phosphorus, for which no water quality standard exists. The Illinois EPA should base impairment decisions, especially the listing of impaired waters, on promulgated Illinois water quality standards. These standards should be clear, fully developed in a regulatory proceeding before the Illinois Pollution Control Board, and include public participation. RESPONSE: The derivation of the IBI and the MBI are explained in RESPONSE #36. IBI and MBI criteria were not developed to replace established water quality standards. However, under the federal Clean Water Act, states are required to interpret if their waters are meeting national goals (e.g., fishable, swimmable). In order to interpret the vast amount of biological data collected and render decisions regarding use attainment and so that appropriate emphasis is given to biological indicators, the Illinois EPA, like many other state water quality management agencies, developed and continues using IBI and MBI indices. A single IBI/MBI score represents a focused selection and refinement of a large amount of information. Therefore, an IBI/MBI contains much greater information value than does a single or even multiple raw data estimates of any water chemistry parameter. The reliability of a use impairment determination based on a single biological index score is far greater than the reliability of a conclusion based on a few, raw data estimates of water chemistry compared against their water quality standard values. In regard to the use of “arbitrarily selected impairment values for some chemical constituents, such as total phosphorus,” Illinois EPA does not use total phosphorus data when determining whether a stream segment is or is not impaired for aquatic life use. We do use total phosphorus data and a statistically derived threshold total phosphorus concentration to determine if excess phosphorus is potentially contributing to impairment of aquatic life. Illinois EPA recognizes that potential causes identified via statistically derived guidelines are troublesome to some. Yet, we are required by the Clean Water Act to assess not only if waters are meeting national goals, but what potential causes and sources exist when impairment occurs. Where IPCB standards are available, they are used. Where they do not exist, other criteria have been developed and are used in an effort to comprehensively and justifiably respond to the federal mandate. 60. A narrative description of each water body segment should be included in an appendix in the 305(b) Report and the 303(d) List. The narrative should include a landmark (bridge, confluence of rivers, etc.) describing the start and the end of each segment, and use the river mileage for Illinois streams as defined by the USGS. RESPONSE: See RESPONSE #28. Much of this information is currently in our assessment database (ADB). However, it has not been a routine part of published


C23 August 2003

305(b) Reports or 303(d) Lists as this information would be very voluminous to print. When requested, narrative descriptions of individual water bodies have always been readily and timely provided by Agency staff. In the future, the Agency hopes to utilize GIS technology, like our new mapping tool found at http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/water-quality/index.html, to disseminate this and other types of information. 61. The “Full/Threatened” use is defined as “attaining the designated use, but a declining water quality trend has been evidenced.” An explanation as to the specific methodology used to determine when water body segment exhibits a declining trend should be included. RESPONSE: For assessing stream trends for purposes of 305(b) Reports, we look for a downward trend in water chemistry over the last 10 years using a seasonal Kendall test. In lakes having a minimum of three years of Trophic State Index values, a Mann-Kendall nonparametric trend test is now used. Also see RESPONSE #17. 62. The discussion of evaluated and monitored assessments refers to data more than five years old for the former and data that is five or less years old for the latter. However, the actual range in years is not mentioned. Please clarify the actual years used for the listed segments in the 2002 303(d) List. RESPONSE: Refer to RESPONSE #30. 63. Mention is made for the potential use of data from other sources. The use of actual data from these sources is not identified. The Illinois EPA approved the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago’s (MWRDGC) Ambient Water Quality Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Project Plan in July 2001, but the data have not been used in the 2002 305(b) assessments. Please clarify if any data from other sources were used and indicate the sources for the listed segments. RESPONSE: MWRDGC data were not used during this 2002 cycle of the 305(b) Report or the 303(d) List since approval of the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) occurred after the closure of data collection used in the current assessment cycle (September 2000). However, future assessments will include their data assuming that it meets the guidelines established in the QAPP. Many of the organizations that collect data considered in the 305(b) and 303(d) processes are identified on pages 3 and 4 of the Draft 303(d) List. Two main sources of data and information utilized include beach collections of fecal coliform bacteria from the Lake County Health Department, and IDNR fisheries data used to develop IBI (Index of Biotic Integrity) values for the determination of aquatic life use. 64. Waters are included on the Draft List if they were included on a previous List even if no new data have been collected on these waters. Water quality attainment decisions should be based on the most recent five years of data. If data older than five years are used in the assessments, the Illinois EPA should


C24 August 2003

explain why it is assumed that the older data continue to reflect current water quality conditions. RESPONSE: Correct. Waters on previous Lists must be placed on the 2002 List, unless they were mistakenly placed on the List or new data indicate those waters are now fully supporting their designated uses. We agree that assessments for water quality attainment should be based on recent data five years of age or less (monitored data). Only new data stating that a water body is meeting its designated uses can result in the removal of a water body from the List. Without any new data, a water body must remain on the List until or unless new data are collected, a TMDL is developed, or the original assessment is determined to be inaccurate. Older data may not reflect current water quality conditions. But without any of the above three conditions being met, especially new data indicating the water body is not impaired, the water body must remain on the List. Waters without any new data are considered evaluated and will be given a low priority for TMDL development as described on page 7 of the 303(d) List. 65. It should be mentioned that Water Quality Limited Waters previously listed were not listed according to the same criteria used for the 2002 List. Further, for previous Lists, there was no public hearing and no public hearing record to document public comment. RESPONSE: Criteria used in each 303(d) List, past and present, are identified in the respective Lists and the appropriate 305(b) Report and assessment criteria are also referenced in those Lists. The 1998 Final 303(d) List was submitted to USEPA after two public hearings, both following the same Agency rules for administering public hearings. Written transcripts were developed for those hearings, and a Responsiveness Summary was written by the Agency that was submitted with the List for USEPA approval. That Responsiveness Summary is included in the 1998 List as an appendix. 66. The Grand Calumet River (HAB 41) and the Little Calumet River (HB 01) are listed for the reason “evaluated monitoring effort.” Does this mean that the evaluation of the data was inaccurate or the data used in the evaluation were inaccurate? Please clarify. It is known that there are combined sewer overflows into these segments and based on MWRDGC’s data, water quality conditions are similar to listed segments upstream or downstream. RESPONSE: The Grand Calumet River (HAB 41) and the Little Calumet River (HB 01) were not on the Draft 2002 List. We originally proposed to delisted both segments based on the fact that the most recent data for these segments are from 1990 and 1983, respectively. This decision was consistent with the Agency’s policy in previous years, and today, that we consider only “monitored” waters for listing (see Section II(B), page 3 for a description of “monitored” versus “evaluated). In response to this comment, the Agency requested, received and reviewed water quality data from the MWRDGC from two stations—Ashland Avenue on the Little Calumet and Burnham Avenue on the Grand Calumet. These data were collected between January 2000 and July 2002. In addition, we reviewed Agency collected sediment samples from four stations on the Grand Calumet from 1997, and 2001 intensive basin survey data (macroinvertebrates, water quality and sediment) and


C25 August 2003

IDNR’s 2001 fish data from the Little Calumet. Based on our assessment of all these data, we are revising the List for HAB 41 and HB 01 as follows: Segment Segment Designated ID Name Uses Causes Sources HAB 41 Grand N1, N46, M300, M410, H500 200, 400, Calumet X21 M510, M520, M530, 4000, 7000, River M540, M550, M580, 7100, 7550, H600, S900, S910, 7600, 8500, S920, S921, H1100, 8950 H1200, H1220, S1600 HB 01 Little N1, N20, M300,M500, H800 200, 400, Calumet X21, N42 S900, S910, S920, 3000, 3200, River H1000, H1200, H1220, 4000, 7000, S1600, H1700, H1900, 7100, 7200, S2600 8500 67. The Mississippi River is inappropriately listed. “Shared waters” should not be placed on a state’s 303(d) List unless the other state(s) bordering that water segment include that water segment on its 303(d) List. The listing of such waters by one state and not another raises serious issues of equity. All other things being equal, if a facility is given the option of continuing to do business in Illinois, where NPDES permit conditions will be more onerous due to the water segment’s inclusion in Illinois’ 303(d) List, or can cross the river to obtain an equivalent permit with less stringent conditions, it is certainly plausible that this facility will cross the river and leave the state. Illinois EPA should encourage USEPA to establish a “shared waters” category that would allow for waters to be listed, but would also recognize that in some instances special circumstances exist that must be resolved before a state undertakes development of a TMDL. RESPONSE: The CWA does not give us the flexibility to decline listing waters that by Illinois criteria are determined to be impaired just because the neighboring state does not share our approach. Our only option is to give low priority to TMDL development and work with neighboring states toward a consistent assessment. This issue extends beyond simply when or if a TMDL would ever be completed for a large border river. The ways states set water quality standards, conduct their monitoring and evaluate those results all contribute to determinations of impairment. Under the federal Clean Water Act, states are allowed to address each of these water program elements in their own way, although USEPA must approve certain aspects and maintains oversight of federal funds expended by the states for the conduct of the program. Establishing reasonable standards for water quality at the state level was done with a particular purpose in mind—so that local biological, chemical and physical conditions and societal needs could be taken into consideration, not be imposed by the federal government in a manner that could not account for these same conditions and needs. The drawback, of course, is that standards are or can be inconsistent from state to state. We are not empowered to seek consistency with other states, although we confer and exchange data. On a related matter, the commenter should recognize that no single state-to-state agreement would effect this change to consistent standards. A change of that nature would require all states within a large


C26 August 2003

basin, like the Mississippi River, to adopt the same standards—no matter the local conditions, uses or impact. 68. The data for Clinton Lake, as shown on Table 4b (revised to Table 6 in the Final List), indicates that data were acquired from Assessment Programs 205 and 260. The 303(d) List defined the 260 program as “Fish tissue analysis” but 205 is not explained. RESPONSE: The designation for Assessment Program 205 was inadvertently omitted from the page of “Definitions of Abbreviations used in the List of Impaired Waters”. Several listings were affected by this omission. Code 205 indicated an assessment program from the “Ambient Lake Monitoring Program chemical/physical data < 5 years old”. This will be corrected in the final 303(d) List. 69. Several parameters—priority organics, PCBs, metals, copper, cyanides and sulfates—were listed in previous 303(d) Lists for Thorn Creek (HBD04), but the 2002 305(b) Report does not identify these as potential causes. RESPONSE: In the 2002 305(b) Report, these causes (priority organics, PCBs, copper, cyanide and sulfates) were inadvertently omitted from the list of causes of potential impairment for Thorn Creek (HBD04). The list of causes for this segment in the 2002 Draft 303(d) List is correct, however. Please refer to RESPONSE #70 concerning sulfates. 70. Copper and cyanide should not be causes of impairment for Thorn Creek (HBD04) since all the Agency’s monitoring data indicate compliance with the standard. Sulfates, TDS and conductivity should be removed as causes since the Pollution Control Board granted an adjusted standard under AS94-7 for TDS (2100 mg/L) and sulfates (1000 mg/L), later revised to (in AS01-09) to 2650 mg/L and 1350 mg/L, respectively. RESPONSE: The Agency does not assess the quality of discharges in 305(b) associated stream monitoring activities. We assess the quality of the stream. If the data show ambient levels high enough to exceed our criteria, then those parameters are identified as potential causes of impairment and will be listed. Since dischargers may be known contributors of the parameter, they will be listed as a potential source. When a TMDL is developed for this stream, we will consider that the discharger is meeting the water quality based effluent standards set by the Pollution Control Board. Illinois EPA typically uses both macroinvertebrate and fish data to assess the degree of aquatic life use support. Biological data from Thorn Creek indicated impairment. Agency water quality data from Thorn Creek (HBD-04) indicated that the General Use acute copper standard and the criteria for total recoverable cyanide were exceeded. Following Agency assessment guidelines, these parameters were listed as potential causes of impairment. In addition, the General Use standards for TDS (conductivity) and sulfate were exceeded in 27 percent and 29 percent of the samples, respectively. Therefore, we included sulfate and TDS (conductivity) in the list of potential causes.


C27 August 2003

The Agency assessed the quality of Thorn Creek (HBD04) in 1999. The Illinois Pollution Control Board (Board) granted the adjusted standard (AS01-09) from sulfates and TDS in January 2002. Pursuant to 40 CFR 131.21, the Agency is required to submit all revisions to state water quality standards to USEPA for its approval. The federal regulations mandate USEPA approval before such water quality standards become effective. The adjusted standard (AS01-09) was submitted to USEPA in May 2002. Since it is the finding of the Board that TDS and sulfates are not resulting in an impairment of the stream in this case, we are removing these parameters as causes for segment HBD04. 71. We question the listing of nutrients (P and N) as possible causes of the alleged partial support for Thorn Creek (HBD04). We believe those listings are based on statistical comparisons to other streams in the state, and are not supported by site-specific data including those for dissolved oxygen. RESPONSE: See RESPONSE #59. The listing of nutrients as possible causes of less than full aquatic life use is based on the 85th percentile of statewide nutrient data from over 200 stream stations (including stations from the Chicago metropolitan area). The criteria are higher than most recommended criteria and therefore are quite conservative. The criteria for total phosphorus (0.61 mg/L), ammonia nitrogen (0.41 mg/L) and nitrite/nitrate (7.8 mg/L) were exceeded in 96 percent, 31 percent and 4 percent of the samples from Thorn Creek (HBD-04), respectively. Nutrients are listed as potential causes when biological data and/or Pollution Control Board established water quality parameters (e.g. dissolved oxygen, pH, etc.) indicate impairment. 72. Priorities based on the existence of a locally lead watershed group should be made at the request of the group and there should not be an automatic prioritization. Alternatively, the Agency should set aside listed segments if there is a local watershed group. RESPONSE: The Agency intends to take advantage of prior commitments by local groups and use that interest or work as a positive indicator that water quality improvements—as may be developed in a TMDL implementation plan—could be supported by that local group. We believe we can work cooperatively with such groups and TMDLs would be accomplished more effectively. 73. We agree with the emphasis on biological data to make stream assessments. Where we believe the process falls short is in the use of the same numeric goal for the IBI (>40) and MBI (<6.0) (Index of Biotic Integrity and the Macroinvertebrate Biotic Index) for every stream segment in the state. The Illinois EPA has been working on biocriteria that recognizes differences in the expected aquatic biological community in different ecoregions across the state. This effort needs to be completed with active public participation and included in the stream evaluation process to further improve the methodologies used. RESPONSE: By virtue of the development and design of a fish IBI, a particular IBI score (e.g., 41) represents the same degree of biotic integrity anywhere in the state (where an IBI is applicable). Therefore, how an IBI score is interpreted and used in the context of assessing aquatic life use becomes the real issue. Using the same IBI-score threshold (e.g., 41) to assess aquatic


C28 August 2003

life use in every stream segment (in which an IBI is applicable) in the state is valid if a) "full support" of aquatic life use is a reasonable expectation for those stream segments, and b) an IBI score of 41 accurately represents the threshold between full support and less-than-full support for aquatic life use. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, Illinois EPA assumes that a stream segment can reasonably be expected to attain full support for aquatic life use; therefore, using a single IBI-score threshold for judging attainment of this use in streams throughout the state is valid. Regarding the question of whether a particular IBI or MBI score adequately represents the threshold between full support and less-than-full support for aquatic life use, please see comment #36 and its response. 74. Illinois EPA does take into account habitat, but only in limited circumstances. According to Figure 3-3 in the 2002 305(b) Report, habitat is only considered in Box 7, which is not reached for most streams. For example, a stream with and IBI of 30 and a MBI of 6.5 (Index of Biotic Integrity and the Macroinvertebrate Biotic Index) would be labeled as partial support without regard to habitat. Abiotic data should be used at all levels and steps for assessing aquatic life use. RESPONSE: We believe that a fish IBI score directly reflects habitat influences on the fish community. Because we are assessing aquatic life use, direct measures of aquatic life (e.g., a fish IBI score) are the most reliable criteria. Habitat and physicochemical conditions of the water body provide helpful, indirect information for assessing the health of aquatic life. We recognize this benefit and use this information in supplemental ways because they have less value than direct biological measures (please see Comment and RESPONSE #59 for additional explanation on this issue). Given the potential benefits of incorporating habitat and water conditions in assessments of aquatic life use, Illinois EPA continually reviews, reevaluates and revises the use of this information in such assessments. 75. Horseshoe Lake (Madison County) was listed previously as being contaminated for heavy metals. It is not listed as such this year, although recent testing by a local university indicated high levels of lead, zinc and cadmium in the sediment. Industrial discharges and urban runoff are not listed as sources, although Granite City/National Steel and part of Granite City’s stormwater are discharging to Horseshoe Lake. All waters in the state have been listed for mercury. Why is this not indicated? Has Horseshoe Lake been tested for mercury? If so, what was the concentration, and if not, why not? What is the concentration for PCBs, and what is the source? RESPONSE: The Agency was not aware of the testing done by the local university. Use of those data could be problematic since all data used in an assessment must be done in accordance with Agency established quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) requirements. Source identification is based on our understanding and judgment of the watershed. Generally, source identification does not affect listing, the manner in which that water is prioritized or how a TMDL is conducted. Mercury listings and the statewide advisory are discussed in the Draft 2002 303(d) List on pages 4 and 5.


C29 August 2003

Horseshoe Lake (RJC) has been tested for mercury. Two samples of largemouth bass and one of bluegill were sampled in 1999, and no mercury was detected (detection limit of 0.10 mg/Kg). Carp and channel catfish, the two species listed in the advisory for Horseshoe Lake, were sampled for PCBs in 1998, 1999 and 2000. PCBs were detected in four of five carp samples, ranging from 0.10—0.19 mg/Kg, and in all five channel catfish samples, ranging from 0.12—0.34 mg/Kg. In addition, four samples of largemouth bass (collected in 1998 and 1999), and one sample of bluegill (collected in 1999) and bigmouth buffalo (collected in 2000) were analyzed and no PCBs were found (detection limit of 0.10 mg/Kg). The source(s) of PCBs is unknown at this time. 76. Many people fish in Horseshoe Lake as their main source of protein, yet there are no signs warning them of contaminants. With all the contamination it is listed only as a medium priority. Last time it was a high priority. Nothing has changed except the de-listing of metals and the lowering of priority. We ask you to please re-visit the metals issue and re-classify to high priority. If you do not, we believe it to be an environmental justice issue. RESPONSE: Properly advising the public of fish consumption advisories is an important component of that program. Posting and notification procedures are a matter for consideration by the state’s full “Interagency Fish Contamination Coordination Committee.” Illinois EPA will refer this recommendation to the full committee at its next scheduled meeting. The 1998 List prioritized on the basis of lake size, among other factors. We propose to change the priority ranking approach in 2002 so that the state established water quality standards are used to identify the use designations (federal regulations state that the significance of pollution and the uses made of the waters be used to prioritize impaired waters—see pages 5-7 of the Draft List for additional information). 77. The points raised in Comments #75 and 76 also apply to several waters in the American Bottoms—Frank Holten State Park Lake, Chain of Rocks Canal, Mississippi River, Harding Ditch, Prairie DuPont Creek and Canal, Canteen Creek, Cahokia Canal, Cahokia Diversion Canal and Wood River. None are listed as high priority, none have been scheduled for TMDLs, and none has been cleaned up, yet nearly all are impaired. RESPONSE: Please refer to our RESPONSES #75 and 76. All of these waters are impaired and are on the 2002 List. None of these waters are designated for public water supply use and consequently are not identified as high priority waters for purposes of the 2002 List. 78. Several waters have been delisted although no new data exist to show they currently meet water quality standards. RESPONSE: The criteria for delisting waters are provided in Section II(E), on pages 7-11 on the 303(d) List. An explanation of how we use new data is also provided. The distinction between “Evaluated” and “Monitored” data and how that influences delisting is provided in RESPONSE #16.


C30 August 2003

79. Only those streams that exceeded the bacteria standard more than half the time were listed. Many more streams may be unsafe. RESPONSE: See RESPONSE #37. 80. Dissolved oxygen (DO) is typically not collected during pre-dawn hours when oxygen is at the lowest levels, leading to misleading readings. RESPONSE: Routine Agency monitoring programs are not collecting data during pre-dawn hours when DO concentrations may be at their lowest during a 24-hour period. The Agency normally collects DO and other data between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. during normal business hours, Monday through Friday. Like all environmental data, these readings must be reviewed in light of the time the data were collected, where and how they were collected, etc. In an effort to respond to previous criticisms in this regard, the Agency took the following actions several months ago. To learn how to better interpret our monitoring data--in particular, how a single mid-day measurement of DO at a site relates to DO values occurring throughout a typical 24-hour period--the Agency initiated a pilot study of continuous monitoring of DO and other parameters at eight locations throughout the state. One result of this monitoring effort will be an analysis of 24-hour diel DO swings at both impaired and unimpaired sites. The continuous monitoring program was initiated in 2001 to provide data to support the potential adoption of an improved DO standard, and for use in the nutrient standards development process. 81. Criteria used to list impairment due to nutrients are not yet justified and are several times higher than federal reference criteria and criteria scientifically determined to cause adverse affects in aquatic systems. RESPONSE: See RESPONSE #50. 82. For all pollutants, an arbitrary number of violations are considered acceptable. This is in no way based on the standards or the needs of aquatic life. RESPONSE: See RESPONSE #35. 83. Swimming was not assessed along with other uses for Lake Michigan. Swimming is one of the most significant use impairments impacting the lake and it should be listed as such. We are also concerned that Illinois EPA failed to assess secondary contact uses for the lake. This leaves boaters and other recreational users with important unanswered questions. High levels of mercury prompted IDNR to issue a fish consumption advisory this year for all of the lake. Illinois EPA must list Lake Michigan as impaired by mercury. The 1998 303(d) List acknowledged that air deposition (source code 8100) was the primary source of mercury—according to USEPA, 86 percent of the mercury deposited in the lake comes from air sources. We urge you to revisit this significant omission.


C31 August 2003

RESPONSE: The listing of Lake Michigan in Table 4b in the Draft Section 303(d) List is incorrect. The corrected Lake Michigan listing is in the Final List, on Table 6. The specific data for this listing were derived from Waukegan Harbor and should not have represented the entire Lake. Swimming use was not assessed for Waukegan Harbor. Lake Michigan was assessed for swimming as well as other uses including aquatic life, fish consumption, secondary contact and public water supply. Assessments for the Illinois portion of Lake Michigan includes three distinct environments: open lake, harbors and beaches (see Appendix C, Tables C-1, C-2 and C-3 of the 2002 305(b) Report). Harbors are not assessed for swimming use due to the inherent safety issues of swimming in navigation channels and the potentially conflicting uses made in these waters. There is a general statewide mercury advisory for predator fish. However, general statewide fish consumption advisories are not used in assessing attainment of this use. There are several water bodies in Illinois that have a special mercury advisory based on site-specific data, but Lake Michigan is not one of these. Lake Michigan does have a fish consumption advisory due to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Please refer to RESPONSE #8 for additional information on the statewide mercury advisory and how the Agency addresses this in the 2002 303(d) List. 84. What cause is associated with “S925”? And what is the source code “8950”? RESPONSE: This cause code was inadvertently omitted. S925 indicates a cause of impairment by total nitrogen (nitrates plus total Kjeldahl nitrogen, or TKN). The source code 8950 is for unknown sources. This information was included in the Errata sheet provided to attendees at the September 11, 2002, public hearing on the Draft 303(d) List, and was posted on our TMDL web page at the time of and following the hearing, at http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/watershed/reports/303d-report/index.html. 85. How is it possible for fish consumption to be listed as an impaired use for all four segments of the North Shore Channel, while aquatic life is not? If fish are contaminated enough to pose a danger when eaten, it should follow that the health of the fishery is impaired. RESPONSE: Illinois EPA assesses each designated use independently. Fish consumption is assessed for water bodies in the state using the same health protection criteria for various chemicals developed in accordance with the “Protocol for a Uniform Great Lakes Sport Fish Contamination Advisory.” It is possible for the appropriate aquatic life criteria to be more restrictive than the human health criteria for certain contaminants. The opposite is also true for other contaminants. It is therefore possible, depending on the specific contaminant, for a fish population to be contaminated at or above advisory levels, thereby posing a human health risk, without inhibiting reproduction, population size or other metrics within the fish community. Illinois has two sets of water quality standards to protect aquatic life. General Use standards apply to the majority of water bodies in Illinois and are used to help assess the degree of aquatic life use support. Secondary Contact and indigenous aquatic life standards apply to about 84 miles of canals and streams in northeastern Illinois, including about 3.5 miles of the North Shore


C32 August 2003

Channel. These standards are less stringent then General Use standards and are used to assess the degree of indigenous aquatic life use support in waters limited by the physical configuration of the water body. Segment HCCA01 is designated a General Use water and the other three segments of the North Shore Channel are designated as secondary contact and indigenous aquatic life waters. 86. What is Illinois EPA doing about PCBs as a cause of impairment in the North Shore Channel? Does the Agency know which industrial facilities are responsible for discharging such a highly toxic substance? RESPONSE: Sources identified for the North Shore Channel that may contribute to the PCB load include urban runoff/storm sewers, municipal point sources, combined sewer overflows and unknown sources. No specific source has been identified for purposes of the 2002 List. It is likely that PCB contaminated sediment and other nonpoint sources are also contributing to impairment. 87. Secondary Contact is not listed as a designated use for the North Shore Channel—evidence of boater use has been submitted to the Agency previously. The segment from Howard Street to Wilmette Harbor is officially designated as a General Use waterway. How does the Illinois EPA reconcile these contradictory facts? RESPONSE: Secondary Contact use applies to all of North Shore Channel, except for a 2.3-mile segment between Wilmette Harbor and Emerson Street in Evanston (not Howard Street, which is about 2.3 miles south of Emerson Street). In this small segment (HCCA01), General Use standards apply. Given that both the Secondary Contact and General Use reaches of the North Shore Channel are appropriately listed according to their respective designated uses, we do not recognize the "contradictory facts" raised by the commenter. 88. It is surprising that contaminated sediment is not listed as a source of impairment for the Calumet River. Please discuss what support the Agency has for the decision not to list for this source. RESPONSE: Sediment data collected in 1981 by the Army Corp of Engineers and stored in STORET (USEPA’s national database) were the only sediment data readily available and accessible when the assessment was made. We believe these data are too old, and of unknown quality, to use in the assessment process. Sediment samples from the Calumet River have not been collected by the Agency in recent years. 89. Habitat modification is noticeably absent from the cause of impairment for Lake Calumet. Both historical filling of open lake waters and the diversion of water caused by the elimination of wetlands have contributed to a decrease in the quality of habitat in the Lake. This impairment should be added to the List. RESPONSE: Using available data and the uses identified for Lake Calumet, fish consumption was identified as the only impaired use. Habitat modification is


C33 August 2003

not a relevant factor in determining the cause of impairment for fish consumption use. We currently do not use habitat assessments for lake assessments. The only time we use habitat alterations as a cause is if there is documented site-specific knowledge that habitat alterations are a known cause of a fish kill or known to have other impacts on lake uses. Much of the habitat lost in Lake Calumet was over an extended period and was legally altered for the legitimate purpose of expanding the navigational use of the lake. Under those legal and legitimate circumstances, we would not consider habitat loss to be a cause of impairment. 90. Slip One on Lake Calumet contains contaminated sediment. Has the Agency been able to conclusively determine whether the contaminated sediment in this slip is somehow “feeding” the rest of the Lake? Regardless of the answer to that question, since it is part of the Lake the listing should reflect this reality. RESPONSE: The Agency did find highly elevated PCBs in the sediments at our Lake Sampling Site #1. Lake Sampling Site #1 is the only site for which sediment data were readily available (i.e., available to the Agency and in conformance with the necessary quality control protocols). Since PCBs are listed as a potential cause of impairment resulting in a fish advisory, we agree that contaminated sediments should be listed as a potential source of impairment for Lake Calumet and have made that revision to the List. We have no information on migration of sediment from Slip One to other parts of the lake. 91. Data and information that were considered in making listing decisions were too limited. Developing and evaluating information during critical conditions and at critical locations is necessary to ensure that water quality standards will be met at all times and locations. No evidence was provided that all information identified in the federal regulations (40 CFR 130.7) was assembled and evaluated for any of the waters. At the public hearing, the delisting criteria in Section II(E) were further clarified to suggest that many of the waters were removed from the List because the original listing was based on information other than numeric monitoring data. For many of these waters, no new information has been collected to determine whether the water is currently impaired. RESPONSE: See RESPONSE #38 concerning the Agency’s sampling programs and how these apply to critical conditions. The criteria for delisting waters are provided in Section II(E), on pages 7-11. An explanation of how we use new data is also provided. The distinction between “Evaluated” and “Monitored” data and how that influences delisting is provided in RESPONSE #16. New information will be collected again when a particular water body is the focus of an intensive basin survey or non-Agency data collection under an approved QAPP. 92. Threatened waters should also be listed since that listing can i) serve as an indication of potential impairment for Agency permit writers, ii) TMDL-type analysis would be much more useful before the watershed is converted, and iii) rapid, poorly planned development may have caused impairment that will be difficult to address in a fully developed watershed.


C34 August 2003

RESPONSE: Listing any water must be conducted with consideration of the Clean Water Act and federal regulations. Federal guidance indicates that states do not need to list threatened waters. While permit writers would have to account for a listed threatened water in issuing an NPDES permit, the basis for that listing is, by definition, more tenuous and less defensible than waters listed for partial or nonsupport. Since increased urban runoff is the biggest potential source of water quality impacts from development, the best preventative action in a threatened watershed is to put in place best management practices (BMPs). A TMDL is not needed to do that. 93. The Agency’s analysis of numeric monitoring data is inconsistent with standards. For aquatic life use assessments, the 2002 305(b) Report explains that when at least 11 percent of measurements for most pollutants exceed a standard and/or two violations for any acute toxic criteria occur, the water body was considered impaired. This ignores the time frames identified in the standards for DO and toxics. By allowing up to an 11 percent exceedence there is no assurance that standards are met during critical conditions. RESPONSE: See RESPONSE #35 concerning the application of percentile thresholds, as applied from guidelines provided by USEPA. Note that these percentiles are only used to assess available water chemistry data. Within the practical constraints of our current surface water monitoring program, we cannot sample dissolved oxygen multiple times at various sites during selected 24-hour periods. Consequently, we apply only the instantaneous part of the standard that dissolved oxygen shall not be "...less than 5.0 mg/l at any time.” In regarding to sampling during critical conditions, we may not know during what periods of time or under what physicochemical or hydrological conditions a particular substance in a stream has greater potential to be harmful to aquatic life. Numeric water quality standards are often developed with the implicit understanding of multiple physicochemical parameters, variable hydrological conditions, and variable habitat conditions interacting through time and affecting aquatic life in streams. Therefore, we do not need to define critical conditions since these conditions are already considered within the water quality standard. In sampling and assessing Illinois surface waters, we necessarily take an approach that incorporates each parameter and all available physicochemical estimates of that parameter, regardless of a particular window of time or window of specific ambient conditions. 94. The effect of data selection, as conducted by the Agency when collecting samples for fecal coliform, is that only half of the data with the lowest values are considered. This half of the data was then subject to criteria that allows for an additional 10 percent of the remaining data to exceed 400 colonies/100mL. This means that the Agency finds that any water that meets a criterion for human contact only 45 percent of the time is fully supporting a swimming use. RESPONSE: See RESPONSE #37.


C35 August 2003

95. Dissolved oxygen (DO) could be listed as a potential cause if at least one sample violates the standard. Presumably and preferably, the Agency would consider a daytime DO result less than 6.0 mg/L as violating the standard because nighttime results would reasonably be expected to be even lower. Please clarify. RESPONSE: The Agency does not collect dissolved oxygen data at a frequency that allows application of the part of the DO standard that states, "DO shall not be less than 6.0 mg/L during at least 16 hours of any 24 hour period...". Within that constraint, we can only apply the instantaneous part of the standard that states DO shall not be "less than 5.0 mg/L at any time." As stated in Response #80, while we agree that pre-dawn DO can reasonably be expected to be lower than DO typically collected during the daytime by Agency field staff, we feel it is inappropriate to list DO as a potential cause of impairment based on this presumption rather than on actual data that we can compare against the DO standard. 96. Several comments (i.e., 91-95) would suggest that water bodies might need to be added to the 2002 List. Any such additions to the List should not be avoided simply because other waters are higher priorities for TMDL development. RESPONSE: Additions to the 2002 List due to comments will not be influenced by the size of the List, the number of TMDLs underway, the location of the segment. Only data indicating that the water is or is not meeting its designated uses will be considered. 97. We request that two waters listed as high priority be reevaluated. These are Skillet Fork (CA 05) and the North Fork of the Kaskaskia River (OKA 02). Both are listed for impairment of a drinking waster use, with the cause identified as atrazine (cause code 3100). The Agency should explain what its expectations are for these waters on the high priority part of the List. Patoka, using the North Fork, employs powdered activated carbon in the community water supply treatment system. Therefore, finished water sample results for atrazine from the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) compliance monitoring program should be representative of the raw water concentrations. In Wayne City’s case (Skillet Fork), since they use a side-channel storage system, the pumping schedule will influence the atrazine concentrations. A comparison of the SDWA data with the ambient stream monitoring data would be helpful in assessing the status of these waters. RESPONSE: This assessment is focused on and pertains to the surface waters of the State and their attainment of designated beneficial uses. Skillet Fork and the North Fork Kaskaskia River serve as the source water for potable water supplies and are so classified under state water quality standards. This report speaks to their ability to provide a reliable high quality source water, not the performance of the community water treatment and distribution systems. Expectations for source water supplies are based in part on 35 Il. Adm. Code Section 302.303: "Water shall be of such quality that treatment consisting of coagulation, sedimentation, filtration, storage and chlorination or other equivalent processes, the treated water will meet" finished water standards. Source waters containing contaminants requiring supplemental treatment technologies, such as activated carbon adsorption for pesticide and organics removal, are viewed as impaired under this criteria.


C36 August 2003

98. The Illinois EPA based its decision to include Deer Creek (HBDC) on the 2002 303(d) List on data collected in 1996. When these data were collected, the University Park Wastewater Treatment Plant (UPWWTP) was in the midst of significant upgrades and since that time Consumers Illinois Water Company (CIWC) has continued that upgrade. These upgrades have subsequently improved effluent quality substantially. As a result, the 1996 data do not reflect current conditions. To confirm that, CIWC conducted a stream survey and water quality analysis in October 2002. This analysis includes the findings that: 1) Lower MBI (Macroinvertebrate Biotic Index) values at and downstream of the UPWWTP outfall, all at or below 5.9. 2) Lower nitrate concentrations at and downstream of the UPWWTP outfall, the highest being at 1.5 mg/L which places that below the criteria in the 2002 305(b) Report of 7.8 mg/L. 3) Lower phosphorus concentrations at and downstream of the UPWWTP outfall, with the exception of a single sampling station, which were lower than concentrations from the 1996 data. 4) On an overall basis, the stream water quality was demonstrated to be comparable or improved at and downstream of the UPWWTP outfall. Given this updated information, the Illinois EPA should not include the HBDC segment on the 2002 303(d) List. RESPONSE: Agency staff was provided a copy by CIWC of the October 2002 stream survey and water quality analyses report. Assuming appropriate quality assurance/quality control procedures were adequately followed for sample collection, transportation, analyses and reporting, some chemical data would indicate stream improvement. However, other data were presented that confirms the Agency’s 1996 finding that aquatic life use impairment continues to exist. Supplemental Agency data collected in 2001 furthermore suggest continued impairment. Finally, Agency field biologists have several concerns regarding the CIWC macroinvertebrate survey and its reported findings. Specifically, we are concerned about the reported number of crane flies (Tipulidae; n=49) collected at station C3 (and hence the reported MBI value of 4.8). This constitutes an extremely large number of individuals never recorded in or around the area. Therefore, after a comprehensive review of the information provided by CIWC, the Agency does not see sufficient justification to remove Deer Creek from the 2002 303(d) List. The Agency would be happy to host a meeting with CIWC upon request to more thoroughly discuss their findings.


C37 August 2003

Glossary of Acronyms

Agency Illinois Environmental Protection Agency BOW Bureau of Water in the IEPA CFR Code of Federal Regulations (U. S. EPA) Illinois EPA Illinois Environmental Protection Agency ILCS Illinois Compiled Statutes Ill. Adm. Code Illinois Administrative Code (IAC) Public Hearing Record Period of time before and after the public hearing

for collection of written testimony, including the hearing transcript. The hearing record opened on July 31, 2002, and closed October 11, 2002.

Responsiveness Summary A document prepared by the IEPA that responds to relevant

comments, questions and issues received during the public hearing record.

TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency 303(d) List Section of federal Clean Water Act in which a list is required

from all states, identifying waters for which the effluent limitations are not stringent enough to implement any water quality standards applicable to those waters.

305(b) Report Section of the federal Clean Water Act in which each state is

required to submit a biennial report, in even-numbered years, containing, among other matters, the status of water quality in all navigable waters in that state, an analysis of the extent to which those waters provide for balanced wildlife populations and allow for recreational activities, and a description of the nature and extent of nonpoint sources pollution. In Illinois, this report is identified as the Illinois Water Quality Report.

* * * * * * * * * * * *


C38 August 2003

Distribution of Responsiveness Summary

Copies of this responsiveness summary were made available in September 2003, to all who registered at the hearing, to all who sent in written comments, and to anyone who requested a copy. Additional copies of this responsiveness summary are available from Bill Hammel, IEPA Office of Community Relations, e-mail [email protected], phone 217-785-3924.

Bureau of Water Staff Who Can Answer Your Questions

Questions Concerning 303(d)…………………..Bruce Yurdin….……..217-782-3362 Legal procedures…………………………..……Sanjay Sofat…...……..217-782-5544 Hearing Officer……………………………..….Lisa Moreno….….…….217-782-5544 The following items are available from the IEPA Hearing Officer for examination and review:

1. Public Hearing Notice. 2. Transcript of September 11, 2002, hearing. 3. Public Hearing Attendance and Source of Exhibits (mailing list). 4. Hearing Record Exhibit List of Letters, document and notices. 5. Letters, documents and notices contained in the Hearing Record.

The public hearing notice, the hearing transcript and this responsiveness summary are available on the Illinois web site: www.epa.state.il.us Click on Hot Topics

Click on Public Notices.

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 1021 North Grand Avenue East P.O. Box 19276 Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276