CYPRESS CREEK BASIN FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009netmwd.com/crp/CRP Documents/FY0809QAPP_final_8-15-07CypressC… · Web viewRBP Rapid Bioassessment ... which includes Microsoft Word

CYPRESS CREEK BASIN FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009Quality Assurance Project Plan

Northeast Texas Municipal Water DistrictP.O. Box 955

Hughes Springs, Texas 75656

Clean Rivers ProgramMonitoring Operations Division

Texas Commission on Environmental QualityP.O. Box 13087, MC 165Austin, Texas 78711-3087

Effective Period: 1 September 2007 through 31 August 2008

Questions concerning this quality assurance project plan should be directed to:

David ThomasTechnical CoordinatorHDR Engineering, Inc.

4401 West Gate, Suite 400Austin, Texas 78745

(512) [email protected]

Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAPP_15 August 2007 Page 1

A1 APPROVAL PAGE

TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Monitoring Operations Division

___________________________________ Patrick Roques, Manager Date

Laurie Curra, Manager

DateWater Quality Monitoring & Assessment Section Clean Rivers Program

___________________________________Jennifer Delk

Date

Jennifer Delk

DateProject QA Specialist Project Manager, Clean Rivers ProgramClean Rivers Program

Compliance Support Division

___________________________________ Stephen Stubbs Date Daniel R. Burke DateTCEQ Quality Assurance Manager Lead CRP Quality Assurance Specialist

Quality Assurance Section


CYPRESS CREEK BASIN PLANNING AGENCYNortheast Texas Municipal Water District

Walt Sears Jr., General Manager Date

Marty Muse, Project Manager

Date

HDR Engineering, Inc.

Paul Price, Project Manager Date

Peggy Jones

Date

Quality Assurance Officer/Data Manager

David Thomas DateTechnical Coordinator

Ana-Lab Corp.

Bill Peery

Date

Roy White

DateExecutive Vice President Quality Assurance Officer


The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency will secure written documentation from each sub-tier project participant (e.g., subcontractors, other units of government) stating the organization’s awareness of and commitment to requirements contained in this quality assurance project plan and any amendments or added appendices of this plan. The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency will maintain this documentation (Attachment 1) as part of the project’s quality assurance records, and will ensure the documentation is available for review.


A2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

A1 APPROVAL PAGE......................................................................................................................... 2LIST OF ACRONYMS......................................................................................................................... 5A3 DISTRIBUTION LIST.................................................................................................................... 6A4 PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION..............................................................................................7A5 PROBLEM DEFINITION/BACKGROUND................................................................................. 13A6 PROJECT/TASK DESCRIPTION................................................................................................17A7 QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA.................................................................................19A8 SPECIAL TRAINING/CERTIFICATION....................................................................................29A9 DOCUMENTS AND RECORDS.................................................................................................. 29B1 SAMPLING PROCESS DESIGN.................................................................................................. 32B2 SAMPLING METHODS............................................................................................................... 32B3 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY.....................................................................................35B4 ANALYTICAL METHODS.......................................................................................................... 37B5 QUALITY CONTROL.................................................................................................................. 38B6 INSTRUMENT/EQUIPMENT TESTING, INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE.....................43B7 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION AND FREQUENCY.................................................................43B8 INSPECTION/ACCEPTANCE OF SUPPLIES AND CONSUMABLES......................................43B9 NON-DIRECT MEASUREMENTS..............................................................................................43B10 DATA MANAGEMENT............................................................................................................. 43C1 ASSESSMENTS AND RESPONSE ACTIONS............................................................................50C2 REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT.................................................................................................. 51D1 DATA REVIEW, VERIFICATION, AND VALIDATION...........................................................52D2 VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION METHODS.....................................................................52D3 RECONCILIATION WITH USER REQUIREMENTS................................................................54

Appendix A: Task 3 Work Plan........................................................................................................... 55Appendix B: Sampling Process Design and Monitoring Schedule (Plan)............................................58Appendix C: Field/Laboratory/Assessment Data Sheets .....................................................................82Appendix D: Chain of Custody Form(s) ............................................................................................. 97Appendix E: Field and Laboratory Corrective Action Form..............................................................115Appendix F: Letter of Agreement .................................................................................................... 117

Tables:Table 1: A7.1 Measurement Performance Specifications ....................................................................20Table 2: A9.1 Project Documents and Records ................................................................................... 31Table 3: B2.1 Sample Storage, Preservation and Handling Requirements...........................................33Table 4: C1.1 Assessments and Response Requirements.....................................................................50Table 5: D2.1 Data Verification Tasks ............................................................................................... 53

Figures:Figure A4.1: Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency Organization Chart ...........................................12Figure A5.1: Cypress Creek Basin....................................................................................................... 14Figure B10.1 Data Management Process, Cypress Creek Basin, Clean Rivers Program......................45


LIST OF ACRONYMS

ALM Aquatic Life MonitoringAVS Acid Volatile SulfideAU Assessment UnitAWRL Ambient Water Reporting LimitBMP Best Management PracticesCAR Corrective Action ReportCLI Caddo Lake InstituteCOC Chain of CustodyCRP Clean Rivers ProgramDM Data ManagerDMRG Data Management Reference GuideDMP Data Management PlanDOC Demonstration of CapabilityDQO Data Quality ObjectiveEPA United States Environmental Protection AgencyETBU East Texas Baptist UniversityFCWD Franklin County Water DistrictFY Fiscal YearHDR HDR Engineering, Inc.LCS Laboratory Control Sample (formerly Laboratory Control Standard)LCSD Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (formerly Laboratory Control Standard

Duplicate)LOD Limit of Detection (formerly Method Detection Limit or MDL)LOQ Limit of Quantitation (formerly Reporting Limit)MDMA Monitoring Data Management & AnalysisNA Not ApplicableNETMWD Northeast Texas Municipal Water DistrictPM Project ManagerQA Quality AssuranceQM Quality ManualQAO Quality Assurance OfficerQAPP Quality Assurance Project PlanQAS Quality Assurance SpecialistQC Quality ControlQMP Quality Management PlanRBP Rapid Bioassessment ProtocolRWA Receiving Water AssessmentSC Sampling CoordinatorSOP Standard Operating ProcedureSWQM Surface Water Quality MonitoringSWQMIS Surface Water Quality Monitoring Information System (formerly TRACS)TC Technical CoordinatorTMDL Total Maximum Daily LoadTCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental QualityTSWQS Texas Surface Water Quality StandardsUSGS United States Geological ServiceVOA Volatile Organic AnalytesWMT Watershed Management Team


A3 DISTRIBUTION LIST

Texas Commission on Environmental QualityP.O. Box 13087Austin, Texas 78711-3087

Jennifer Delk, Project ManagerClean Rivers ProgramMC-165(512) 239-4712

Daniel R. BurkeLead CRP Quality Assurance SpecialistMC-176(512) 239-0011

David ManisManager, Data Management and Quality Assurance SectionMC-165(512) 239-5853

Cypress Creek Basin Planning AgencyNortheast Texas Municipal Water DistrictP.O. Box 955Hughes Springs, Texas 75656

Walt Sears, Jr., General Manager(903) 639-7538

HDR Engineering, Inc.4401 West Gate, Suite 400Austin, Texas 78745

Paul Price, Project Manager Peggy Jones, Quality Assurance Officer/Data Manager

(512) 912-5100 (512) 912-5100

The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency will provide copies of this project plan and any amendments or appendices of this plan to each person on this list and to each sub-tier project participant, e.g., subcontractors, other units of government. The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency will document distribution of the plan and any amendments and appendices, maintain this documentation as part of the project’s quality assurance records, and will ensure the documentation is available for review.


A4 PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION

Description of Responsibilities

TCEQ

Laurie CurraCRP Manager

Responsible for TCEQ activities supporting the development and implementation of the Texas Clean Rivers Program. Responsible for verifying that the QMP is followed by CRP staff. Supervises TCEQ CRP staff. Reviews and responds to any deficiencies, nonconformances, or findings related to the area of responsibility. Oversees the development of QA guidance for the CRP. Reviews and approves all QA audits, corrective actions, reviews, reports, work plans, contracts, QAPPs, and program QMP. Enforces corrective action, as required, where QA protocols are not met. Ensures CRP personnel are fully trained.

Daniel R. BurkeCRP Lead Quality Assurance Specialist

Participates in the development, approval, implementation, and maintenance of written quality assurance standards (e.g., Program Guidance, SOPs, QAPPs, QMP). Assists program and project manager in developing and implementing quality system. Serves on planning team for CRP special projects. Coordinates the review and approval of CRP QAPPs. Prepares and distributes annual audit plans. Conducts monitoring systems audits of Planning Agencies. Concurs with and monitors implementation of corrective actions. Conveys QA problems to appropriate management. Recommends that work be stopped in order to safeguard programmatic objectives, worker safety, public health, or environmental protection. Ensures maintenance of QAPPs and audit records for the CRP.

Jennifer DelkCRP Project Manager

Responsible for the development, implementation, and maintenance of CRP contracts. Tracks deliverables. Participates in the development, approval, implementation, and maintenance of written quality assurance standards (e.g., Program Guidance, SOPs, QAPPs, QMP). Assists CRP Lead QA Specialist in conducting Basin Planning Agency audits. Verifies QAPPs are being followed by contractors and that projects are producing data of known quality. Coordinates project planning with the Basin Planning Agency Project Manager. Reviews and approves data and reports produced by contractors. Notifies QA Specialists of circumstances which may adversely affect the quality of data derived from the collection and analysis of samples. Develops, enforces, and monitors corrective action measures to ensure contractors meet deadlines and scheduled commitments.

Eric ReeseCRP Data Manager

Responsible for coordination and tracking of CRP data sets from initial submittal through CRP Project Manager review and approval. Performs automated data validation routines and coordinates error Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAPP_15 August 2007 Page 8

correction. Provides quality assured data sets to TCEQ Information Resources in compatible formats for uploading to the statewide database. Generates reports to assist CRP Project Managers= data review. Provides training and guidance to CRP and Planning Agencies on technical data issues. Reviews and approves data-related portions of program QMP and project-specific QAPPs. Develops and maintains Standard Operating Procedures for CRP data management.

Jennifer DelkCRP Project Quality Assurance Specialist

Serves as liaison between CRP management and TCEQ QA management. Participates in the development, approval, implementation, and maintenance of written quality assurance standards (e.g., Program Guidance, SOPs, QAPPs, QMP). Serves on planning team for CRP special projects. Coordinates documentation and implementation of corrective action for the CRP.

CYPRESS CREEK BASIN PLANNING AGENCYNortheast Texas Municipal Water District

Walt Sears, Jr. General Manager

Mr. Sears is the Executive Director of the Northeast Texas Municipal Water District (NETMWD) and is a member of the Steering Committee for the Cypress Creek Basin Clean Rivers Program. Mr. Sears will provide coordination and cooperation between the Cypress Creek Basin Steering Committee and HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR).

Marty MuseProject Manager

Mr. Muse will be responsible for contact and coordination with HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR), Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), and other entities participating in the NETMWD and TCEQ CRP activities. Mr. Muse will be responsible for implementing TCEQ requirements in contracts, QAPPs, and QAPP amendments and appendices. He will coordinate basin planning activities and work of basin partners. He will coordinate with the Technical Coordinator to ensure monitoring systems audits are conducted to confirm QAPPs are followed by the CRP sampling staff and coordinate with the QAO/Data Manager to make sure all projects are producing data of known quality. He will ensure that subcontractors are qualified to perform contracted work. He will make certain that the TCEQ Project Manager and/or TCEQ QAO is notified of circumstances which may adversely affect quality of data derived from collection and analysis of samples. Mr. Muse will be responsible for coordination with the HDR QAO/Data Manager in the transmission of all data collected by NETMWD, HDR, or CRP staff that meets the data quality objectives of the project to the TCEQ.



Paul PriceHDR Project Manager

As HDR Project Manager, Mr. Price will be responsible for contact and coordination with NETMWD, TCEQ and other entities participating in the Cypress Creek Basin Clean Rivers Program activities. Mr. Price will be responsible for implementing and monitoring CRP requirements in contracts, QAPP’s and QAPP amendments and appendices. Mr. Price will designate HDR Engineering, Inc. staff with subordinate responsibility, and will oversee task progress and deliverables. He will be responsible for Conference Calls, CRP Meetings, Workshops, initial and evolving QA/QC procedural assistance with the Technical Coordinator. He will also be responsible in performing necessary data analysis and development of conclusions and recommendations in technical deliverables. Ms. Jones and Mr. Thomas will assist Mr. Price as necessary on behalf of the Cypress Creek Basin Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency to ensure that 1) monitoring systems audits are conducted to verify that QAPP’s are followed by the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency participants; 2) projects are producing data of known quality; 3) subcontractors are qualified to perform contracted work; 4) CRP project managers and/or QA Specialists are notified of deficiencies and nonconformances, and that issues are resolved; and 5) the validation of collected data are acceptable for reporting to the TCEQ.

Peggy JonesHDR Quality Assurance Officer/Data Manager

Ms. Jones will be responsible for coordinating the implementation of the Quality Assurance program that includes identifying, receiving, and maintaining project quality assurance records. This responsibility includes periodic contacts to obtain updates from the entities conducting monitoring or other activities relevant to the Cypress Creek Basin Clean Rivers Program, obtaining the results of water quality and biological analyses of samples collected by the Cypress Creek Basin field sampling personnel and coordinating with the TCEQ QAS to resolve QA-related issues. Ms Jones will be responsible for the determination and validation of all data collected to ensure the data quality objectives of the project are met and suitable for reporting to the TCEQ. Ms. Jones will notify Mr. Price of particular circumstances which may adversely affect the quality of data. Ms. Jones coordinates and monitors deficiencies, nonconformances and corrective action, coordinates and maintains records of data verification and validation, and coordinates the research and review of technical QA material and data related to water quality monitoring system design and analytical techniques. She will assist with the data management phase of the monitoring systems audit procedures for the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency.

As the Data Manager, Ms. Jones will be responsible for ensuring that field data are properly reviewed and verified. Ms. Jones will be responsible for the transfer of basin quality-assured water quality and biological data to the TCEQ in a format compatible with the SWQMIS database. The Data Manager will also document task progress and track labor and non-labor expenditures to produce the necessary reimbursement forms and progress reports specified in the CRP contract. Ms. Jones will coordinate with Ms. Sebes to provide current, readily available information for website use. Ms. Jones will be responsible for the basin Data Management Plan and assist Mr. Price and Mr. Thomas in their duties as necessary on behalf of the Cypress Creek Basin Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency.


David ThomasHDR Technical Coordinator

As Technical Coordinator, Mr. Thomas will be responsible for writing and maintaining the QAPP and monitoring its implementation that involves maintaining records of QAPP distribution (including appendices and amendments) and maintaining written records of sub-tier commitment to requirements specified in this QAPP. Mr. Thomas will be responsible for the supervision (through direct contact with the Sampling Coordinator) of all CRP field activities, including water quality and biological sampling and monitoring, and including equipment preparation, sampling, sample preservation, fieldwork, sample transport, and chain-of-custody maintenance in compliance with the approved QAPP. Mr. Thomas will be responsible for field direction of the biological monitoring efforts, analyzing samples, and producing both field and laboratory biological indices. Mr. Thomas will conduct a monitoring systems audit on the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency participants to verify and assure compliance specified in the QAPP. In cooperation with the Sampling Coordinator, Mr. Thomas will ensure that field staff is properly trained and that training records are maintained. Mr. Thomas will assist Mr. Price and Ms. Jones in their duties as necessary on behalf of the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency.

Tricia SebesHDR Web Resources Manager

Ms. Sebes will be responsible for maintaining and updating the NETMWD (www.netmwd.com) website to ensure that all information, announcements, and materials remain current and relevant. The Web Resources Manager will communicate regularly with the Quality Assurance Officer/Data Manager to provide the public with easy access to detailed information regarding CRP activities.

Dr. Roy DarvilleEast Texas Baptist College/Caddo Lake Institute, Sampling Coordinator

Dr. Darville is a professor and chair of the Department of Biology at East Texas Baptist University and will be responsible for performing field sampling and data processing duties in accordance with standard operating procedures (SOP’s), data quality objectives (DQO’s) and this QAPP, reporting to the Technical Coordinator any deviation from SOP’s or DQO’s, maintaining proper documentation of sampling events, sample preservation, sample shipment, and field procedures at CRP designated stations. Dr. Darville will review data from monitoring events and provide data quality comments to the QAO. Dr. Darville will also participate in the training of local partners interested in participating in the monitoring plan sampling efforts to provide quality assured data for the CRP database and will oversee the work of the monitoring partners during the sampling events.

Cypress Creek Basin Sampling Staff

The sampling staff will be composed of various personnel provided by HDR Engineering, Inc., NETMWD, Franklin County Water District (FCWD), Caddo Lake Institute (CLI) and Titus County Fresh Water Supply District (TCFWSD). The primary responsibility will be to assist the technical and


http://www.netmwd.com/

sampling coordinators in performing all field activities, including water quality and biological sampling and monitoring in compliance with the approved QAPP.

Bill Peery, Jr., Executive Vice President, Ana-Lab Corporation

Mr. Peery will provide supervision for laboratory procedures and will serve as the primary point of contact for all laboratory activity conducted by Ana-Lab Corporation.

Roy WhiteQuality Assurance Officer, Ana-Lab Corporation

Mr. White will provide supervision for laboratory procedures, provide laboratory quality assurance/quality control and will be responsible for updating the laboratory’s QAP.


Peggy JonesData Manager


PROJECT ORGANIZATION CHART

Figure A4.1. Organization Chart - Lines of Communication

Lines of Management


Bill Peery Exec. Vice President

ANA-LAB

Jennifer DelkProject Manager

TCEQCRP

Walt Sears, Jr.Executive Director

NETMWD

Paul PriceProject Manager


Daniel R. BurkeLead QA Specialist

TCEQ

Jennifer DelkProject QA Specialist

TCEQ

Eric ReeseData Manager

TCEQ

Cypress Creek BasinField Sampling

Staff

Laurie CurraProgram Manager

TCEQCRP

Peggy JonesQAO


Dr. Roy DarvilleSampling Coordinator

East Texas Baptist Univ.Caddo Lake Institute

Tricia SebesPublic Outreach


Roy WhiteQAO

ANA-LAB

David ThomasTechnical Coordinator


Marty MuseProject Manager

NETMWD

------ Lines of Communication


A5 PROBLEM DEFINITION/BACKGROUND

In 1991, the Texas Legislature passed the Texas Clean River Act (Senate Bill 818) in response to growing concerns that water resource issues were not being pursued in an integrated, systematic manner. The act requires that ongoing water quality assessments be conducted for each river basin in Texas, an approach that integrates water quality issues within the watershed. The CRP legislation mandates that each river authority (or local governing entity) shall submit quality-assured data collected in the river basin to the commission. Quality-assured data in the context of the legislation means data that comply with commission rules for surface water quality monitoring programs, including rules governing the methods under which water samples are collected and analyzed and data from those samples are assessed and maintained. This QAPP addresses the program developed between the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency and the TCEQ to carry out the activities mandated by the legislation. The QAPP was developed and will be implemented in accordance with provisions of the Quality Management Plan for the Clean Rivers Program (most recent version).

The purpose of this QAPP is to clearly delineate Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QA policy, management structure, and procedures which will be used to implement the QA requirements necessary to verify and validate the surface water quality data collected. The QAPP is reviewed by the TCEQ to help ensure that data generated for the purposes described above are scientifically valid and legally defensible. This process will ensure that data collected under this QAPP and submitted to the statewide database have been collected and managed in a way that guarantees its reliability and therefore can be used in water quality assessments and other programs deemed appropriate by the TCEQ. Project results will be used to support the achievement of Clean Rivers Program objectives as contained in the Clean Rivers Program Guidance and Reference Guide FY 2008 -2009.

The Cypress Creek Basin, shown in Figure A5.1, is located in Northeast Texas, between the Sulphur River Basin on the north and the Sabine River Basin on the west and south. Big Cypress Creek and its tributaries drain the 2,933 square mile watershed. Big Cypress Creek is itself a tributary of the Red River, which it joins near Shreveport, Louisiana where it is known as Twelve-Mile Bayou.

The Cypress Creek Basin in Texas has a palmate organization, with three major watersheds converging at the lowermost segment of Big Cypress Creek (Segment 0402). The four largest reservoirs in the basin are Caddo Lake (Segment 401), Lake O’ the Pines (Segment 403), Lake Bob Sandlin (Segment 408) and Lake Cypress Springs (Segment 405). These four reservoirs are impoundments of Big Cypress Creek and are designated for use as public water supplies. Four smaller reservoirs (Monticello, Welch, Ellison Creek, and Johnson Creek) have been constructed on tributary streams to be used primarily as cooling ponds for steam-electric power plants. While shoreline development has been permitted only around Lake Cypress Springs, recreational and retirement housing construction continues within the small watersheds draining directly into Lake Bob Sandlin, Lake O’ the Pines and Caddo Lake.

The Cypress Creek Basin water quality monitoring program has been established to collect surface water samples within the Basin and to continue to produce water quality data for continuing evaluation of water quality in the Basin. Previous efforts of other monitoring agencies have established reliable and useful data for evaluation under the CRP water quality screening procedures. Monitoring data has been collected at gage locations within each of the nine segments of the Cypress Creek Basin since 1981. Although there



exists a large database of valuable water quality information on the Cypress Creek Basin through previous efforts of monitoring agencies, assessments made as part of the CRP have determined a need to reorganize data collection efforts. Inconsistent sampling through time and locations, changes in detection limits, and, in many cases, a lack of sampling, are the principal reasons for creating this basin-wide water quality monitoring plan.

Low dissolved oxygen concentrations occur in stream and marginal reservoir habitats throughout the Cypress Creek Basin. All segments except 0408 (Lake Bob Sandlin), have reaches on the Draft 2006 303(d) list, or for which concerns with low dissolved oxygen concentrations are expressed in the Draft 2006 Texas Water Quality Inventory. In most locations, the low dissolved oxygen concentrations are associated with low flow conditions and with high levels of photosynthesis and respiration.

Except for ammonia, nutrient concentrations in streams rarely exceed TCEQ screening levels. However, total phosphorus and total nitrogen concentrations in streams throughout the Cypress Creek Basin are usually at levels that can result in excessive algal growth under low flow conditions, or in impoundments. The heaviest loads have been observed originating from the Tankersley Creek watershed, and to a lesser extent, from other tributary watersheds in the upper part of the basin, for example, Prairie and Lilly Creeks, and the tributaries to Lake Cypress Springs and Lake Bob Sandlin. The Southwest wastewater treatment plant in Mount Pleasant, which processes wastewater from the Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation poultry processing facility, is the source of a large proportion of the nitrogen and phosphorus load in Segment 0404 of Big Cypress Creek. Some phosphorus and a large proportion of the nitrogen load is lost during transport in Big Cypress Creek from the vicinity of Mount Pleasant and Pittsburg to the headwaters of Lake O’ the Pines, presumably through biological activity and trapping in the floodplain.

The upper reservoirs on Big Cypress Creek are continuing to assimilate the phosphorus loads entering them. The stations immediately downstream of Lake Bob Sandlin and Lake O’ the Pines exhibit much lower total phosphorus concentrations than the inflowing waters with comparable, or lower, flows. However, Lake O’ the Pines appears to be a net exporter of nitrogen with respect to inflowing and out flowing waters. Atmospheric deposition of nitrates may be significant, as may fixation of atmospheric nitrogen by blue-green, which are common members of the algal assemblage in Lake O’ the Pines. Although the total phosphorus load entering Caddo Lake from Big Cypress Creek appears to be only about half that entering Lake O’ the Pines, and the load from James Bayou is unlikely to be as much as that, the lack of water quality data from Twelve Mile Bayou precludes any firm conclusions concerning nutrient assimilation in that water body.

Marginal and backwater habitats in Caddo Lake, as in Lake O’ the Pines, occasionally exhibit dissolved oxygen concentrations below the segment standard for support of aquatic life. However, these episodes are not generally accompanied by large daily changes in dissolved oxygen concentrations, and often reflect relatively constant, low concentrations throughout a 24-hour sample period. This is consistent with a lower nutrient load entering Caddo Lake than is the case in Lake O’ the Pines, and which consequently does not support similarly intense algal production during summer conditions. It is more likely that in Caddo Lake we are observing an intense oxygen demand from the sediments during summer conditions, primarily from decomposition of rooted plant mass-produced with nutrients from the sediments.

Despite the widespread occurrence of low dissolved oxygen concentrations, elevated nutrient levels and other water quality problems, biological communities in streams throughout the Cypress Creek Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAPP_15 August 2007 Page 17

Basin continue to exhibit the abundance, trophic structure (i.e., the mixture of herbivores, detritivores and predators), and diversity appropriate to, or better than, that expected based on the quality of the habitat at those locations. To the extent that low dissolved oxygen concentrations are associated with low flow conditions, it is likely that aquatic communities in the Cypress Creek Basin are, to some extent, adapted to tolerate conditions that occur at least occasionally during summer conditions even in minimally disturbed streams.

Locally, low pH values, toxicity in water and sediments, and mercury in fish tissues appear to be phenomena associated with the lower portion of the Cypress Creek Basin. The lower basin coincides with a predominantly acid soils and forested watersheds that result in “soft”, acid waters of relatively low buffering capacity. Those conditions, coupled with the intense biological activity associated with a warm, shallow, eutrophic environment are thought to be conducive to the mobilization of heavy metals (e.g., mercury) into aquatic food chains.

During FY2007, the TCEQ staff has offered several ideas for consideration to change segments and related pH issues regarding Caddo Lake. The agency made suggestions for future discussion to (1) provide a clearer boundary description between Caddo Lake and Big Cypress Creek (Segments 0401 and 0402); (2) partition Segment 0401 into two discrete segments based on physical and hydrologic differences with the upper area referred to as “The Caddo Swamp”; and (3) establishing a different set of pH standards for “The Caddo Swamp” than that designated for the main lake. The agency’s assessment of water quality also includes a review of the dissolved oxygen (DO) levels in the lake. As more data becomes available, the TCEQ say they are recognizing a pattern of lower DO in the upper end of the lake, with a belief that these observed low levels of DO are natural occurrences and not solely the result of man-made pollutant sources.

In addition to Caddo Lake, the TCEQ has proposed several de-listings to the DRAFT 2006 Texas 303(d) List (issued on March 19, 2007 and made available for public comment) for Big Cypress Creek (0402), and James Bayou (0407). The TCEQ has developed a five-part categorization of water bodies to provide more information to the public, the EPA and agency staff about water quality status, management plans, and management activities. TCEQ has created a specific water quality management strategy for each of these five categories as explained in Chapter 4 of the 2007 TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Data Management Reference Guide (DMRG). Once a waterbody has been placed on the Section 303(d) list, a TMDL recovery plan will be developed, unless data obtained subsequent to the listing indicates that the waterbody is no longer impaired or other measures are undertaken to restore the waterbody. Originally, Caddo Lake (0401) was placed on the 303(d) list as a Category 5c for depressed dissolved oxygen (DO). The TCEQ recommends that Caddo Lake be delisted and moved to a Category 4c waterbody since “this impairment is not caused by a pollutant load that can be allocated and controlled with a TMDL”. Two separate delistings for depressed DO levels and lead in water are proposed by the TCEQ for Big Cypress Creek below Lake O’ the Pines (0402) currently listed as a Category 5c waterbody. However, it was determined that these impairments do not exist and these delistings are substantiated because “the most recent set of data demonstrates that water quality standards are now met and water quality meets the requirements for delisting”. The TCEQ also proposes to remove James Bayou (0407 from the 303(d) list for copper. Their reason for delisting is identical to that given for Segment 0402.


Overall, the primary goal of the Cypress Creek Basin Clean Rivers Program is to provide the appropriate, quality assured data to allow continuing assessment and management of water quality in the Cypress Creek Basin. Objectives of this monitoring program include local participation in the collection and submittal of quality-assured data to assist the TCEQ in attaining reliable information concerning water quality conditions within the basin. Solid assessment of accurate information provides valuable insight into the nature and source of water quality problems. These assessments, along with sound decisions based on Texas Surface Water Quality Standards help in the evaluation of permit requirements with respect to water quality conditions and trends to specific water bodies in the basin. These evaluations, in addition to historical data are used to support the development of cost-effective water quality management programs.

A6 PROJECT/TASK DESCRIPTION

Assessment and management of water quality within the Cypress Creek Basin is dependent on appropriate and accurate data. Water quality monitoring and data collection is an integral part of the Clean Rivers Program. Water quality monitoring is made possible through a cooperative program directed by Northeast Texas Municipal Water District (NETMWD). Program participants assisting NETMWD in planning, data collection, analysis, and reporting of water quality data include HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR), the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), the Clean Rivers Program Steering Committee members, basin partners Caddo Lake Institute (CLI) and affiliates, Pilgrims Pride Corporation, Franklin County Water District (FCWD), the City of Marshall, the City of Longview, Titus County Fresh Water District #1, Lone Star Steel, Texas Utilities (TXU) and AEP SWEPCO.

Historically, the monitoring program for the Cypress Creek Basin Clean Rivers Program was divided into two major areas: (1) Routine (RT) station monitoring; and (2) Intensive/Systematic (IS) monitoring. Routine monitoring of physical, chemical, bacteriological and biological parameters was used primarily to maintain and expand the long-term water quality database. The major objective of this monitoring type was to improve the ability to follow trends and to facilitate the identification of water quality changes in the major sub-basins of the Cypress Creek Basin.

Intensive/Systematic monitoring such as biological investigations was relevant to smaller, unclassified streams that would not normally be evaluated in a routine sampling program and usually contain very little historical or no water quality data. The IS monitoring schedule was originally based on a five-year rotating basin approach, with one group of stations monitored in close proximity during each of the five years to investigate known concerns and detect potential ones. The goal was to complete coverage of the Basin by the end of the schedule rotation. The design and site selection approach taken over the last few years, however, has focused attention on specific watersheds and waterbodies known or suspected to have water quality issues based either on local public concern or river segment assessment unit (AU) information contained in the TCEQ DRAFT 2006 Texas Water Quality Inventory and Texas 303(d) List.

To address the main question of bias in sampling, the TCEQ has adopted a new set of Program Codes for monitoring in FY2008. The use of IS monitoring which used biological screening studies in combination with the RT physical and chemical parameters to provide data on the health of aquatic life and long-range water quality protection has been discontinued. Routine sampling will continue into FY2008 without the intentional examination of any particular target environmental condition or event along with a new code scheme for water quality monitoring scheduled with distinct data quality Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAPP_15 August 2007 Page 19

objectives (DQOs). Diel DO monitoring and aquatic life monitoring (ALM) will now be designated as Biased Season (BS) monitoring scheduled for the environmental conditions characteristic of the index and critical periods.

The locations of the RT and BS monitoring stations recommended in this document reflect the need for continued monitoring at locations which have been sampled historically, to focus on those designated assessment units which were determined by the TCEQ to be of most concern through the segment evaluation and ranking procedure found in the DRAFT 2006 Texas Water Quality Inventory and Texas 303(d) List, and to eventually provide water quality data and analysis for the entire basin.

Reservoir monitoring usually occurs near the dam or in the major arms that receive contributory surface inflow from rivers and streams. Monitoring of reservoir aquatic habitat can serve as indicators of upstream problems and possible nearshore impacts. Different sub-watershed areas of the basin and their stations are generally sampled four times within the period of a year to provide information on water quality conditions in those areas.

See Appendix A for the project-related work plan tasks and schedule of deliverables for a description of work defined in the FY2008-2009 QAPP. See Appendix B for sampling design and monitoring pertaining to this QAPP.

Amendments to the QAPP

Revisions to the QAPP may be necessary to address incorrectly documented information or to reflect changes in project organization, tasks, schedules, objectives, and methods. Requests for amendments will be directed from the Cypress Creek Basin Technical Coordinator to the CRP Project Manager electronically. They are effective immediately upon approval by the Cypress Creek Planning Agency Project Manager, the Cypress Creek Planning Agency QAO/DM, the Cypress Creek Planning Agency Technical Coordinator, the CRP Project Manager, the CRP Lead QA Specialist, and the CRP Project QA Specialist. They will be distributed by the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency Technical Coordinator and incorporated into the QAPP by way of attachment and distributed to personnel on the distribution list. The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency Technical Coordinator will secure written documentation from each sub-tier project participant (e.g., subcontractors, other units of government, laboratories) stating the organization’s awareness of and commitment to requirements contained in each amendment to the QAPP. The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency will maintain this documentation as part of the project’s quality assurance records, and will be available for review.

Special Study Appendices

Projects requiring QAPP appendices will be planned in consultation with the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency and the TCEQ Project Manager and TCEQ technical staff. Appendices will be written in an abbreviated format and will reference the Basin QAPP where appropriate. In some circumstances, special project appendices will be written in a more “stand-alone” format as determined during the project planning phase. Appendices will be approved by the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency Project Manager, the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAO, the CRP Project Manager, the CRP Project QA Specialist, the CRP Lead QA Specialist and other TCEQ personnel as appropriate. Copies of approved QAPPs appendices will be distributed by the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency to project participants before data collection activities commence. The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency Technical Coordinator will secure written documentation from each


sub-tier project participant (e.g., subcontractors, other units of government, laboratories) stating the organization’s awareness of and commitment to requirements contained in each special project appendix to the QAPP. The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency will maintain this documentation as part of the project’s quality assurance records, and will be available for review.

A7 QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA

The purpose of routine water quality monitoring is to collect surface water quality data needed for conducting water quality assessments in accordance with TCEQ=s Guidance for Assessing Texas Surface and Finished Drinking Water Quality Data. These water quality data and data collected by other organizations (e.g., USGS, TCEQ, etc.), will be subsequently reconciled for use and assessed by the TCEQ.

Systematic watershed monitoring is defined by sampling that is planned for a short duration (1 to 2 years) and is designed to: screen waters that would not normally be included in the routine monitoring program, monitor at sites to check the water quality situation, and investigate areas of potential concern. Due to the limitations regarding these data (e.g., not temporally representative, limited number of samples, biological sampling does not meet the specimen vouchering requirements), the data will be used to determine whether any locations have values exceeding the TCEQ’s water quality criteria and/or screening levels (or in some cases values elevated above normal).

An additional objective is to collect information on the biological communities at various stream locations and provide data to evaluate the aquatic communities since limited biological data exists. The biological community data gathered may provide a framework for studies to more fully characterize the aquatic communities in the Big Cypress Creek watershed, if needed. Twenty four-hour continuous recording dissolved oxygen monitoring instruments will provide critical data to determine stream standards compliance. Due to the limitations regarding these data (e.g., not temporally representative, limited number of samples, biological sampling does not meet the specimen vouchering requirements), the data will be used to determine whether any locations have values exceeding the TCEQ’s water quality criteria and/or screening levels (or in some cases values elevated above normal). The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency will use this information to determine future monitoring priorities. These water quality data and data collected by other organizations (e.g., USGS, TCEQ, etc.), will be subsequently reconciled for use and assessed by the TCEQ.

The measurement performance specifications to support the project objectives for a minimum data set are specified in Table A7.1 and in the text following.


Table A7.1 - Measurement Performance Specifications

PARAMETER UNITS MATRIX METHOD PARAMETER CODE

AWRL Limit of Quantitation

(LOQ)

PRECISION(RPD of

LCS/LCSD)

BIAS%Rec. of LCS

LOQCHECK

STANDARD%Rec

LAB

FIELD PARAMETERSpH - Field pH(s.u.) Water EPA 150.1 and

TCEQ SOP, V100400 NA* NA NA NA

NACRP Field

StaffMaximum DailypH

pH(s.u.) Water TCEQ SOP, V1 00215 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Minimum DailypH

pH(s.u.) Water TCEQ SOP, V1 00216 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

24-hr pH # meas. Water TCEQ SOP, V1/ 00223 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Dissolved Oxygen(D.O.)

mg/L Water EPA 360.1 andTCEQ SOP, V1

00300 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

24-Hr D.O.Average

mg/L Water TCEQ SOP, V1 89857 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

24-Hr D.O.# of measurements

# meas. Water TCEQ SOP, V1 89858 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Maximum DailyD.O.


Minimum DailyD.O.


Conductivity uS/cm Water EPA 120.1 andTCEQ SOP, V1


24-Hr AverageConductivity

uS/cm Water TCEQ SOP, V1/Calculation


Maximum DailyConductivity

uS/cm Water TCEQ SOP, V1/ 00213 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Minimum DailyConductivity

uS/cm Water TCEQ SOP, V1/ 00214 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

24-hr conductivity# of measurements

# Water TCEQ SOP, V1/Calculation


Water Temperature C° Water EPA 170.1 andTCEQ SOP, V1


24-Hr AverageTemperature

C° Water TCEQ SOP, V1/Calculation


Maximum DailyTemperature

C° Water TCEQ SOP, V1/ 00210 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Minimum DailyTemperature

C° Water TCEQ SOP, V1/ 00211 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

24-hr water temperature # of measurements

# meas. Water TCEQ SOP, V1/Calculation


Secchi Depth meters Water TCEQ SOP, V1 00078 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Days since lastsignificant rainfall

days NA TCEQ SOP, V1 72053 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Maximum pool width***

meters Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89864 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Maximum pool depth***

meters Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89865 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Pool length*** meters Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89869 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

% pool coverage*** % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89870 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Total water depth meters Water TCEQ SOP, V2 82903 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Flow cfs Water TCEQ SOP, V1 00061 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Flow Estimate cfs Water TCEQ SOP, V1 74069 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff


AWRL Limit of Quantitation (LOQ)

PRECISION(RPD of

LCS/LCSD)

BIAS%Rec. of LCS

LOQCHECK

STANDARD%Rec

LAB

FIELD PARAMETERS (cont’d)Flow measurement method

1-gage2-electric3-mechanical4-weir/flume5-doppler

Water TCEQ SOP, V1 89835 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Flow severity 1-no flow,2-low, 3-normal, 4-flood, 5-high,6-dry

Water TCEQ SOP, V1 01351 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Present Weather 1-clear2-partly cloudy3-cloudy4-rain

NA NA 89966 NA* NA NA NA NA CRP FieldStaff

Wind Intensity 1-calm2-slight3-moderate4-strong


Water Surface 1-calm2-ripples3-waves


CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERSTSS mg/L Water SM 2540D, 20th

Edition00530 4 1 20 80-120 NA Ana-Lab

TDS, dried at 180 degrees C

mg/L Water SM 2540C, 20th


Sulfate mg/L Water EPA 300.0, Rev. 2.1

00945 5 1 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Chloride mg/L Water EPA 300.0, Rev. 2.1

00940 5 1 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Chlorophyll-a, fluorometric method

ug/L Water EPA 445.0 70953 3 3 20 80-120 NA Ana-Lab

Pheophytin, fluorometric method

ug/L Water EPA 445.0 32213 3 3 NA NA NA Ana-Lab

Ammonia-N, total mg/L Water EPA 350.1, Rev. 2.0

00610 0.1 0.1 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Alkalinity, total mg/L Water SM 2320B, 20th

Edition00410 20 2 20 NA NA Ana-Lab

Hardness, total (as CaC03)

mg/L Water SM 2320C, 20th


Nitrite-N, total mg/L Water EPA 300.0, Rev. 2.1

00615 0.05 0.05 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Nitrate-N, total mg/L Water EPA 300.0, Rev. 2.1

00620 0.05 0.05 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Total phosphorus-P mg/L Water EPA 365.3 00665 0.06 0.06 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

TOC mg/L Water SM 5310C, 20th

Edition00680 2.0 1 NA NA NA Ana-Lab

Total Kjeldahl N mg/L Water EPA 351.2, Rev. 2.0

00625 0.2 0.2 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab



PRECISION(RPD of

LCS/LCSD)

BIAS%Rec. of LCS

LOQCHECK STANDA

RD%Rec

LAB

TSWQS Dissolved Metals In WaterAluminum, dis. ug/L Water EPA 200.8,

Rev. 5.401106 200 100 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Arsenic, dis. ug/L Water EPA 200.8, Rev. 5.4

01000 5.0 5.0 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Chromium, dis. ug/L Water EPA 200.8, Rev. 5.4

01030 10.0 5.0 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Copper, dis. ug/L Water EPA 200.8, Rev. 5.4

01040 1for

waters <50

mg/L hardne

ss_____

_3

for waters

≥50 mg/L

hardness

1 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Barium, dis. ug/L Water EPA 200.8, Rev. 5.4

01005 1000 200 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Molybdenum, dis. ug/L Water EPA 200.8, Rev. 5.4

01060 10 10 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Nickel, dis. ug/L Water EPA 200.8, Rev. 5.4

01065 10.0 10.0 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Silver, dis. ug/L Water EPA 200.8, Rev. 5.4

01075 0.5 0.5 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Zinc, dis. ug/L Water EPA 200.8, Rev. 5.4

01090 5.0 5.0 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

TSWQS Total Metals In WaterCalcium, total mg/L Water EPA 200.7,

Rev. 4.400916 0.5 0.5 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Iron, total ug/L Water EPA 200.7, Rev. 4.4

01045 300 300 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Manganese, total ug/L Water EPA 200.8, Rev. 5.4

01055 50 50 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

Selenium, total ug/L Water EPA 200.8, Rev. 5.4

01147 2 2 20 80-120 70-130 Ana-Lab

SEDIMENT PARAMETERSAluminum mg/kg Solid EPA 6020 01108 N/A** 0.625 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-Lab

Arsenic mg/kg Solid EPA 6020 01003 7.0 7.0 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-Lab

Barium mg/kg Solid EPA 6020 01008 200.0 200.0 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-Lab

Cadmium mg/kg Solid EPA 6020 01028 0.6 0.6 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-Lab

Chromium mg/kg Solid EPA 6020 01029 21.0 21.0 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-Lab

Copper mg/kg Solid EPA 6020 01043 14.0 14.0 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-Lab

Lead mg/kg Solid EPA 6020 01052 20.0 20.0 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-Lab

Manganese mg/kg Solid EPA 6020 01053 NA** 0.5 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-Lab

Mercury mg/kg Solid EPA 7471A 71921 0.1 0.1 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-Lab



PRECISION(RPD of

LCS/LCSD)

BIAS%Rec. of LCS

LOQCHECK STANDA

RD%Rec

LAB

SEDIMENT PARAMETERS (cont’d)Molybdenum mg/kg Solid EPA 6020 01063 NA** 1.5 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-LabNickel mg/kg Solid EPA 6020 01068 15.0 15.0 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-Lab

Selenium mg/kg Solid EPA 6020 01148 1.0 1.0 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-Lab

Silver mg/kg Solid EPA 6020 01078 0.5 0.5 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-Lab

Zinc mg/kg Solid EPA 6020 01093 64.0 64.0 25 65-135 65-135 Ana-Lab

Total Phosphorus mg/kg Solid EPA 6010B 00668 NA** 5.0 25 60-140 60-140 Ana-LabTOC mg/kg Solid Walkley Black

Method90-3*****

81951 NA** 100 25 60-140 60-140 Ana-Lab

TKN mg/kg Solid EPA 351.2, Rev. 2.0

00627 NA** 1.0 25 60-140 60-140 Ana-Lab

%Clay % of Dry Weight

Solid TCEQ Lab SOP 160

82009 NA** N/A NA NA NA Ana-Lab

%Gravel % of Dry Weight



%Sand % of Dry Weight



%Silt % of Dry Weight



Oil and Grease mg/kg Solid EPA 9071C 00557 NA** 500 25 60-140 60-140 Ana-Lab

AVS mmol/kg Solid EPA Draft******

50088 NA** 25 25 60-140 60-140 Ana-Lab

Solids in Sediment % of Dry Weight

Solid SM 2540G, 20th

Edition81373 NA** N/A NA NA NA Ana-Lab

Benthics - Freshwater - ALM (Qualitative)PARAMETER UNITS MATRIX METHOD STORET LAB

Biological Data Reporting Units 1= number of individuals from sub-sample;2 = number of individuals/ft2; 3 = number of individuals/m2;4 = total number in kicknet

Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89899 CRPSampling Staff

Kicknet Effort, area kicked m2 Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89903 CRPSampling Staff

Kicknet Effort, minutes kicked minutes Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89904 CRP Sampling Staff

Snags and Shoreline Sampling Effort, minutes picked

minutes Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89905 CRPSampling Staff

Number of individuals in benthic RBA sub-sample (± 100)

# Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89906 CRPSampling Staff

Benthic Sampler 1=Surber, 2=Ekman, 3=kicknet, 4=Peterson, 5=Hester-Dendy


Undercut bank at sample point % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89921 CRPSampling Staff

Overhanging brush at sample point % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89922 CRPSampling Staff

Gravel substrate at sample point % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89923 CRPSampling Staff

Sand substrate at sample point % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89924 CRPSampling Staff

Benthics - Freshwater - ALM (Qualitative) (cont’d)

PARAMETER UNITS MATRIX METHOD STORET LAB

Soft bottom at sample point % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89925 CRPSampling Staff

Macrophyte bed at sample point % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89926 CRPSampling Staff

Snags and brush at sample point % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89927 CRP Sampling Staff

Bedrock at sample point % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89928 CRPSampling Staff

Benthic Organisms, None Present NA Water TCEQ SOP, V2 90005 CRPSampling Staff

Mesh Size, any net or sieve, average bar (diagonal measurement) for benthic collection

cm NA TCEQ SOP, V2 89946 CRPSampling Staff

Stream Order # NA TCEQ SOP, V1 84161 CRPSampling Staff

Ecoregion (Texas Ecoregion Code) # NA TCEQ SOP, V1 89961 CRPSampling Staff

Total Taxa Richness, Benthos # Water TCEQ SOP, V2 90055 CRPSampling Staff

EPT Index, Abundance # Water TCEQ SOP, V2 90008 CRPSampling Staff

Biotic Index (HBI) NA Water TCEQ SOP, V2 90007 CRPSampling Staff

Chironomidae % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 90062 CRPSampling Staff

Dominant Taxon, Benthos % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 90042 CRPSampling Staff

Dominant FFG % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 90010 CRPSampling Staff

Predators % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 90036 CRPSampling Staff

Ration of Intolerant:Tolerant taxa NA Water TCEQ SOP, V2 90050 CRPSampling Staff

Total Trichoptera as Hydropsychidae % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 90069 CRPSampling Staff

Non-insect taxa # Water TCEQ SOP, V2 90052 CRPSampling Staff

Mesh Size, any net or sieve, average bar (diagonal measurement) for benthic collection

cm NA TCEQ SOP, V2 89946 CRPSampling Staff

Collector-gatherers % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 90025 CRPSampling Staff

Total number as Elmidae % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 90054 CRPSampling Staff

Nekton- Freshwater Nekton, none captured NA Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98005 CRP

Sampling StaffElectrofishing effort, duration of shocking

Seconds Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89944 CRPSampling Staff

Seining effort # of Hauls Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89947 CRPSampling Staff

Combined length of seine hauls meters Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89948 CRPSampling Staff

Seining effort, duration minutes Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89949 CRPSampling Staff

Seined Minimum Mesh Size, net average bar (diagonal measurements) for nekton collection

in Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89930 CRPSampling Staff

Nekton- Freshwater (cont’d)PARAMETER UNITS MATRIX METHOD STORET LAB

Seine Maximum Mesh Size, net average bar (diagonal measurements) for nekton collection

in Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89931 CRPSampling Staff

Net length meters Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89941 CRPSampling Staff

Electrofishing method 1 = boat 2 = backpack 3=tote barge


Area seined m2 Water TCEQ SOP, V2 89976 CRPSampling Staff

Stream Order # NA TCEQ SOP, V1 84161 CRPSampling Staff

Ecoregion (Texas Ecoreigon Code) # NA TCEQ SOP, V1 89961 CRPSampling Staff

Total number fish species # Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98003 CRPSampling Staff

Total Individuals, seine # Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98039 CRPSampling Staff

Individuals/seine haul # Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98062 CRPSampling Staff

Total Individuals, Electroshock # Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98040 CRPSampling Staff

Individuals/minute electroshocking # Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98069 CRPSampling Staff

Total sunfish species (except bass) # Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98008 CRPSampling Staff

Total native cyprinid species, fish # Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98032 CRPSampling Staff

Total benthic invertivore species, fish # Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98052 CRPSampling Staff

Total benthic species, fish # Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98053 CRPSampling Staff

Total intolerant fish species # Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98010 CRPSampling Staff

Tolerant individuals (excluding Western Mosquitofish), fish

% Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98070 CRPSampling Staff

Omnivore individuals, fish % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98017 CRPSampling Staff

Insectivore individuals, fish % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98021 CRPSampling Staff

Piscivore individuals, fish % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98022 CRPSampling Staff

Individuals as non-native species % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98033 CRPSampling Staff

Individuals w/ disease/anomalies % Water TCEQ SOP, V2 98030 CRPSampling Staff

Physical Habitat

PARAMETER UNITS METHOD PARAMETER CODE

LAB

Streambed slope over evaluated reach (from USGS map)

NA TCEQ SOP, V2 72052 CRPSampling Staff

Approximate drainage area above the most downstream transect from USGS map

km2 TCEQ SOP, V2 89859 CRPSampling Staff

Stream Order # TCEQ SOP, V2 84161 CRPSampling Staff

Physical Habitat (cont’d)


LAB

Length of stream km TCEQ SOP, V2 89860 CRPSampling Staff

Lateral transects made # TCEQ SOP, V2 89832 CRPSampling Staff

Average stream width meters TCEQ SOP, V2 89861 CRPSampling Staff

Average stream depth meters TCEQ SOP, V2 89862 CRPSampling Staff

Instantaneous stream flow cfs TCEQ SOP, V2 00061 CRPSampling Staff

Flow measurement method 1=gage 2= electric 3= mechanical 4=weir/flume

TCEQ SOP, V2 89835 CRPSampling Staff

Channel Flow Status 1=no flow 2=low 3=moderate 4=High


Maximum pool width at time of study meters TCEQ SOP, V2 89864 CRPSampling Staff

Maximum pool depth in study area meters TCEQ SOP, V2 89865 CRPSampling Staff

Total stream bends # TCEQ SOP, V2 89839 CRPSampling Staff

Well-defined stream bends # TCEQ SOP, V2 89840 CRPSampling Staff

Moderately defined stream bends # TCEQ SOP, V2 89841 CRPSampling Staff

Poorly defined stream bends # TCEQ SOP, V2 89842 CRPSampling Staff

Riffles # TCEQ SOP, V2 89843 CRPSampling Staff

Dominant substrate 1=clay, 2=silt, 3=sand, 4=gravel, 5=cobble, 6=boulder, 7=bedrock, 8=other


Avg, % of substrate gravel >2mm % TCEQ SOP, V2 89845 CRPSampling Staff

Avg. % instream cover % TCEQ SOP, V2 84159 CRPSampling Staff

Stream Cover Types # TCEQ SOP, V2 89929 CRPSampling Staff

Avg % stream bank erosion potential % TCEQ SOP, V2 89846 CRPSampling Staff

Avg. stream bank angle degrees TCEQ SOP, V2 89847 CRPSampling Staff

Avg. width natural riparian vegetation meters TCEQ SOP, V2 89866 CRPSampling Staff

Avg. % trees as riparian vegetation % TCEQ SOP, V2 89849 CRPSampling Staff

Avg. % shrubs as riparian vegetation % TCEQ SOP, V2 89850 CRPSampling Staff

Avg. % grasses and forbes as riparian vegetation

% TCEQ SOP, V2 89851 CRPSampling Staff

Avg. % cultivated fields as riparian vegetation

% TCEQ SOP, V2 89852 CRPSampling Staff

Avg. % other as riparian vegetation % TCEQ SOP, V2 89853 CRPSampling Staff

Avg.% tree canopy coverage % TCEQ SOP, V2 89854 CRPSampling Staff

Physical Habitat (concluded)


LAB

Overall Aesthetics 1= wilderness, 2= natural3= common, 4= offensive


Texas Ecoregion Code # TCEQ SOP, V2 89961 CRPSampling Staff

Land development impact 1=unimpacted, 2=low, 3=moderate, 4=high


* Reporting to be consistent with SWQM guidance and based on measurement capability.** No AWRLs have been established by the TCEQ.*** To be routinely reported when collecting data from perennial pools.**** Based on a range statistic as described in Standard Methods, 20th Edition, Section 9020-B, Quality Assurance/Quality Control - Intralaboratory

Quality Control Guidelines. This criterion applies to bacteriological duplicates with concentrations >10 MPN/100mL or 10 organisms/100mL.***** Section 29-3.5.1, Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2, Chemical and Microbiological Properties, Second Edition, 1965.****** Draft Analytical Method for the determination of AVS in sediment (Allen, Fu, Boothman, Di Toro, and Mahoney, December 2, 1991)

References for Table A7.1:

American Public Health Association (APHA), American Water Works Association (AWWA), and Water Environment Federation (WEF), Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 20th Edition, 1998. (Note: (The 21st edition may be cited if it becomes available.)American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 11.02TCEQ SOP, V1 - TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures, Volume 1: Physical and Chemical Monitoring Methods for Water, Sediment, and Tissue. 2003 (RG-415).TCEQ SOP, V2 - TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures, Volume 2: Methods for Collecting and Analyzing Biological Community and Habitat Data, 2005 (RG-416).United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, Manual #EPA-600/4-79-020

USEPA Manual #EPA-821-R-9S-027

Ambient Water Reporting Limits (AWRLs)The AWRL establishes the reporting specification at or below which data for a parameter must be reported to be compared with freshwater screening criteria. The AWRLs specified in Table A7.1 are the program-defined reporting specifications for each analyte and yield data acceptable for the TCEQ’s water quality assessment. The limit of quantitation (formerly known as the reporting limit) is the minimum level, concentration, or quantity of a target variable (e.g., target analyte) that can be reported with a specified degree of confidence. The following requirements must be met in order to report results to the CRP:

The laboratory’s LOQ for each analyte must be at or below the AWRL as a matter of routine practice

The laboratory must demonstrate its ability to quantitate at its LOQ for each analyte by running an LOQ check standard for each batch of CRP Samples are analyzed.

Laboratory Measurement Quality Control Requirements and Acceptability Criteria are provided in Section B5

Precision

Precision is the degree to which a set of observations or measurements of the same property, obtained under similar conditions, conform to themselves. It is a measure of agreement among replicate measurements of the same property, under prescribed similar conditions, and is an indication of random error.

Field splits are used to assess the variability of sample handling, preservation, and storage, as well as the analytical process, and are prepared by splitting samples in the field. Control limits for field splits are defined in Section B5. Laboratory precision is assessed by comparing replicate analyses of laboratory control samples in the sample matrix (e.g. deioinized water, sand, commercially available tissue) or sample/duplicate pairs in the case of bacterial analysis. Precision results are compared against measurement performance specifications and used during evaluation of analytical performance. Program-defined measurement performance specifications for precision are defined in Table A7.1.

Bias

Bias is a statistical measurement of correctness and includes multiple components of systematic error. A measurement is considered unbiased when the value reported does not differ from the true value. Bias is determined through the analysis of laboratory control samples and LOQ Check Standards prepared with verified and known amounts of all target analytes in the sample matrix (e.g. deioinized water, sand, commercially available tissue) and by calculating percent recovery. Results are compared against measurement performance specifications and used during evaluation of analytical performance. Program-defined measurement performance specifications for bias are specified in Table A7.1.

Representativeness

Site selection, the appropriate sampling regime, the sampling of all pertinent media according to TCEQ SOPs, and use of only approved analytical methods will assure that the measurement data represents the conditions at the site. Routine data collected under the Clean Rivers Program for water quality assessment are considered to be spatially and temporally representative of routine water quality conditions. Water Quality data are collected on a routine frequency and are separated by approximately even time intervals. At a minimum, samples are collected over at least two seasons (to include inter-seasonal variation) and over two years (to include inter-year variation) and includes some data collected during an index period (March 15- October 15). Although data may be collected during varying regimes of weather and flow, the data sets will not be biased toward unusual conditions of flow, runoff, or season. The goal for meeting total representation of the water body will be tempered by the potential funding for complete representativeness.

Comparability

Confidence in the comparability of routine data sets for this project and for water quality assessments is based on the commitment of project staff to use only approved sampling and analysis methods and QA/QC protocols in accordance with quality system requirements and as described in this QAPP and in TCEQ SOPs. Comparability is also guaranteed by reporting data in standard units, by using accepted rules for rounding figures, and by reporting data in a standard format as specified in Section B10.

Completeness

The completeness of the data is basically a relationship of how much of the data is available for use compared to the total potential data. Ideally, 100% of the data should be available. However, the possibility of unavailable data due to accidents, insufficient sample volume, broken or lost samples, etc. is to be expected. Therefore, it will be a general goal of the project(s) that 90% data completion is achieved.

A8 SPECIAL TRAINING/CERTIFICATION

New field personnel receive training in proper sampling and field analysis. Before actual sampling or field analysis occurs, they will demonstrate to the QA Officer (or designee) their ability to properly calibrate field equipment and perform field sampling and analysis procedures. Field personnel training is documented and retained in the personnel file and will be available during a monitoring systems audit.

Contractors and subcontractors must ensure that laboratories analyzing samples under this QAPP meet the requirements contained in section 5.4.4 of the NELAC standards (concerning Review of Requests, Tenders and Contracts).

A9 DOCUMENTS AND RECORDS

Field Documentation

Field documentation will involve recording all instrument calibration/standards records, field measurements, and site characteristics on the forms supplied. There are separate forms for wet-chemistry, and biological monitoring (See Appendix C).

All field notes (including those used by monitors other than NETMWD and HDR staff) will be kept, along with the forms, in a bound notebook. Once the sampling trip concludes, these notebooks will be stored with the data at NETMWD and HDR.

Any difficulties or unusual events encountered during sampling will be so noted and reviewed by the Cypress Creek Basin QAO during their review.

Laboratory Documentation

Laboratory documentation actually begins in the field with the Chain of Custody (COC) forms (See Appendix D). There are separate COC forms for wet-chemistry and biological monitoring, which will accompany the sample set to its final destination. Documentation then carries over into the laboratory with sample custody and storage to analysis. Laboratory documentation will be the responsibility of the laboratory staff and will be kept in a bound notebook. The COC copies will be stored at Ana-Lab as well as NETMWD and HDR.

Documentation for sampling and analytical data is kept on file at the laboratory. These are always available and are reviewed during audits by the TCEQ CRP Quality Assurance Specialist. These records include chain-of-custody records, analyst's comments on the condition of the sample and progress of the analysis, raw data, instrument printouts, results of calibration, QC checks, external and internal standards records, and SOP’s. The results of routine laboratory analysis will be reported within a one month time frame. The results and problems encountered during analysis, including preservation problems, interference, and analytical difficulties will be reviewed by the Cypress Creek Basin Quality Assurance Officer.

Data Maintenance

All hard copy records will be maintained by NETMWD and HDR until they are destroyed after ten years. This will include paper copies of all analytical data, field data forms, field notebooks, and field instrument calibration notebooks. All data results will be maintained electronically as determined by the CRP Data Management guidelines (See Section B10). All field and laboratory audit results and corrective action reports will be maintained by NETMWD.

Laboratory Test Reports

Test reports from the laboratory will document the test results clearly and accurately. The test report will include the information necessary for the interpretation and validation of data and will include the following:

Title of report and unique identifiers on each page Name and address of the laboratory Name and address of the client A clear identification of the sample(s) analyzed Station, date and time of sample collection/receipt

Identification of method used Identification of samples that did not meet QA requirements and why (e.g., holding times

exceeded) Sample results Units of measurement Sample matrix Dry weight or wet weight (as applicable) Sample depth A name and title of person accepting responsibility for the report Project-specific quality control results to include field split results (as applicable); equipment,

trip, and field blank results (as applicable) Narrative information on QC failures or deviations from requirements that may affect the

quality of results or is necessary for verification and validation of data. LOQ and LOD (formerly referred to as the reporting limit and the method detection limit,

respectively), and quantification of results outside the working range (if applicable) Certification of NELAC compliance on a result by result basis

Electronic Data

Data will be submitted electronically to the TCEQ in the Event/Result file format described in the CRP Guidance. A completed Data Summary (see Data Errors and Loss in Section B10) will be provided with each data submittal.

The documents and records that describe, specify, report, or certify activities are listed in Table A9.1.

Table A9.1 Project Documents and Records

Document/Record Location Retention (yrs) Format

QAPPs, amendments and appendices TCEQ/NETMWD/HDR 10 Paper

Field SOPs NETMWD/HDR 10 Paper

Laboratory Quality Manuals ANA-LAB/HDR 5 Paper

Laboratory SOPs ANA-LAB/HDR 5 Paper

QAPP distribution documentation NETMWD/HDR 10 Paper

Field staff training records NETMWD/HDR 10 Paper

Field equipment calibration/maintenance logs

NETMWD/HDR/ETBU 10 Paper

Field instrument printouts NETMWD/HDR 10 Paper

Field notebooks or data sheets NETMWD/HDR/ETBU 10 Paper

Chain of custody records NETMWD/HDR 10 Paper

Laboratory calibration records* ANA-LAB 5 Paper

Laboratory instrument printouts* ANA-LAB 5 Paper

Laboratory data reports/results* NETMWD/HDR/ANA-LAB

10 Paper

Laboratory equipment maintenance logs* ANA-LAB 5 Paper

Corrective Action Documentation NETMWD/HDR/ANA-LAB

5 Paper

* Laboratory Records must be retained in accordance with the NELAC standards.

B1 SAMPLING PROCESS DESIGN

See Appendix B for sampling process design information and monitoring tables associated with data collected under this QAPP.

B2 SAMPLING METHODS

Field Sampling Procedures

Field sampling use in collecting CRP monitoring data will be conducted according to procedures documented in the TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures Volumes 1 & 2. Methods for measuring field parameters are detailed in the 2003 TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures Manual, Volume 1: Physical and Chemical Monitoring Methods for Water, Sediment, and Tissue, (RG-415). Procedures for fecal coliform sampling and analysis, surface water sample collection from streams and reservoirs for the analysis of conventional chemical parameters (nutrients, major inorganic constituents, chlorophyll a), metals and organic compounds in water (“clean” procedures) and sediment sample collection for conventional parameters, metals and organic compounds will also follow the sampling and sample handling guidelines presented in the 2003 SWQM Procedures Manual. The procedures for Escherichia coli (E. coli) sampling and analysis will follow Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 20th Edition, 9223 B. Enzyme Substrate Test.

Biological community assessments (including, but not limited to, habitat, nekton and benthic invertebrates) will be conducted using the standardized sampling gear, collecting techniques, and analytical procedures presented in the 2005 TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures Manual, Volume 2: Methods for Collecting and Analyzing Biological Community and Habitat Data (RG-416). Additional aspects outlined in Section B below reflect specific requirements for sampling under the Clean Rivers Program and/or provide additional clarification. Sample volume, container types, minimum sample volume, preservation requirements, and holding time requirements are presented in Table B2.1.

Table B2.1 Sample Storage, Preservation and Handling Requirements

Parameter Matrix Container* Preservation** Sample Volume

Holding Time

TDS WaterNew Plastic or New

Cubitainer Cool to 4oC, dark

250 ml 7 daysTSS Water 400 ml 7 daysAlkalinity Water 100 ml 14 daysSulfate Water 100 ml 28 daysChloride Water 100 ml 28 daysNitrate and Nitrite (N) Water 150 ml 48 hrsAmmonia Water

New Plastic or New Cubitainer

1-2 ml conc. H2SO4 to pH <2 and cool to 4oC, dark

150 ml 28 daysTotal Phosphorus Water 150 ml 28 daysTKN Water 200 ml 28 daysTOC Water 100 ml 28 daysChlorophyll-a/ Pheophytin

Water New Amber Glass Dark and ice before filtration; Dark and frozen after filtration

1000 ml 48 h Unfiltered

28 days FilteredBenthic Macroinvertebrates

Water Plastic or Glass(recycled)

70% ethyl or isopropyl alcohol, keep away from light and

extreme temp.

variable 5 years

Nekton (Fish) Water Plastic or Glass(recycled)

10% formalin, after 1 week wash and preserve in 70%

ethyl alcohol, keep away from light and extreme temp.

variable 5 years

Total Hardness Water New Plastic or New Cubitainer

Cool to 4oC, dark 250 ml 48 hours

Dissolved Metals Water HNO3 new plastic bottle

Filter at sample site with 0.45 micron in-line filter into ultra-

pure HNO3 preacidified container to pH<2

1000 ml 6 months

Total Metals (Ca, Fe, Mn and Se)

Water HNO3 new plastic bottle

Preacidified container with 5 ml ultra-pure HNO3 to pH<2

1000 ml 6 months

Sediment Metals Sediment New 1 liter glass jar with Teflon lined

lid

Cool to 4oC, dark 500 grams

28 days***

Sediment Conventionals (TOC, TKN, % grain size, AVS, Total Solids, and Oil and Grease)

Sediment New 1 liter glass jar with Teflon lined

lid

Cool to 4oC, dark 500 grams

14 days ****

* All plastic and glass containers used for lab analyses are new and used only one-time; Biological collection bottles are recycled.** Preservation is performed within 15 minutes of collection.*** Holding time for mercury in sediment is 28 days. Other metals in sediment is 180 days.**** Holding time for AVS is 14 days. Other conventionals in sediment is 28 days.

Sample Containers

Sample containers will include CubitainersTM, glass bottles and plastic bottles. CubitainersTM are purchased pre-cleaned for conventional parameters and are disposable. All glassware and plasticware provided by Ana-Lab for water and sediment are new and will not be reused. Ana-Lab provides new polypropylene containers preserved with metals grade nitric acid. The sample containers for metals are new plastic bottles that are disposed of after analysis is completed. Amber glass bottles are used for the quarterly chlorophyll and pheophytin samples. Sterile, styrene 100 ml and 250 ml Colilert

sample bottles containing sodium thiosulfate are used for E. coli analyses and are used once and disposed.

Processes to Prevent Contamination

Procedures outlined in the 2003 TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures outline the necessary steps to prevent contamination of samples. These include: direct collection into sample containers, when possible; clean sampling techniques for metals; and certified containers for organics. Field QC samples (identified in Section B5) are collected to verify that contamination has not occurred.

Documentation of Field Sampling Activities

Field sampling activities are documented on field data sheets as presented in Appendix C. For all visits, station ID, location, sampling time, sampling date, and sampling depth and sample collector’s name/signature are recorded. Values for all measured field parameters along with the type and quantity of sample preservative added are recorded. Detailed observational data are recorded including water appearance, weather conditions, the number of days since last significant rainfall and flow severity. Other applicable observational data may include type and extent of biological activity, pertinent observations related to water quality such as exceptionally poor water quality conditions/standards not met or stream uses such as swimming, boating, fishing, irrigation pumps, etc, watershed or instream activities that may have an impact on water quality such as bridge construction or livestock watering upstream, unusual odors, specific sample information and missing scheduled parameters.

Recording Data

For the purposes of this section and subsequent sections, all field and laboratory personnel follow the basic rules for recording information as documented below:

1. Legible writing in indelible ink with no modifications, write-overs or cross-outs;2. Correction of errors with a single line followed by an initial and date;3. Close-out on incomplete pages with an initialed and dated diagonal line.

Deficiencies, Nonconformances and Corrective Action Related to Sampling Requirements

Deficiencies are defined as unauthorized deviations from procedures documented in the QAPP or other applicable documents. Nonconformances are deficiencies which affect data quantity and/or quality and render the data unacceptable or indeterminate. Deficiencies related to sampling methods requirements include, but are not limited to, such things as sample container, volume, and preservation variations, improper/inadequate storage temperature, holding-time exceedances, and sample site adjustments.

Deficiencies are documented in logbooks, field data sheets, etc. by field or laboratory staff and reported to the cognizant field or laboratory supervisor who will notify the Cypress Creek Basin Technical Coordinator. The Cypress Creek Basin Technical Coordinator will notify the Cypress Creek Basin QAO of the potential nonconformance. The Cypress Creek Basin QAO will initiate a Nonconformance Report (NCR) to document the deficiency.

The Cypress Creek Basin Technical Coordinator, in consultation with the Cypress Creek Basin QAO (and other affected individuals/organizations), will determine if the deficiency constitutes a nonconformance. If it is determined the activity or item in question does not affect data quality and therefore, is not a valid nonconformance, the NCR will be completed accordingly and the NCR closed. If it is determined a nonconformance does exist, the Cypress Creek Basin Technical Coordinator in consultation with Cypress Creek Basin QAO will determine the disposition of the nonconforming activity or item and necessary corrective action(s); results will be documented by the contractor QAO by completion of a Corrective Action Report.

Corrective Action Reports (CARs) document: root cause(s); impact(s); specific corrective action(s) to address the deficiency; action(s) to prevent recurrence; individual(s) responsible for each action; the timetable for completion of each action; and the means by which completion of each corrective action will be documented. CARs will be included with quarterly progress reports. In addition, significant conditions (i.e., situations which, if uncorrected, could have a serious effect on safety or on the validity or integrity of data) will be reported to the TCEQ immediately both verbally and in writing.

In the event of equipment failure (e.g. multiparameter probe, stream velocity meter, fish electroshocker, etc.), back-up equipment will be used if available. If no back-up equipment is available, alternate methods of sampling will be employed. In the event of lost or late water or sediment samples, those stations will be re-visited to replace the samples, where feasible. In the event of sample contamination, the source of contamination will be identified and corrected before re-sampling can occur. Corrective Action Documentation will be maintained in a notebook and retained by NETMWD, HDR and Ana-Lab.

B3 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY

Sample Tracking

Proper sample handling and custody procedures ensure the custody and integrity of samples beginning at the time of sampling and continuing through transport, sample receipt, preparation, and analysis.

A sample is in custody if it is in actual physical possession or in a secured area that is restricted to authorized personnel. The COC form is used to document sample handling during transfer from the field to the laboratory and among subcontract laboratories. The following information concerning the sample is recorded on the COC form (See Appendix D). The following list of items matches the COC form in Appendix D. All COC forms to be used in the project are included in Appendix D for the TCEQ’s review.

1. Date and time of collection2. Site identification3. Sample matrix4. Number of containers5. Preservative used or if the sample was filtered6. Analyses required7. Name of collector8. Custody transfer signatures and dates and time of transfer

Sample Labeling

Samples are labeled on the container label with an indelible marker. Label information includes the site identification, the date and time of sampling, the preservative added, if applicable, designation of “field filtered” for metals as applicable, and sample type as defined in the monitoring schedule in Appendix B.2.Sample Handling

The Cypress Creek Basin Sampling Coordinator will notify Ana-Lab prior to a sampling event with information regarding the expected sampling date and number of sample containers required. Ana-Lab will deliver all sample containers, ice chests, and appropriate chain-of-custody forms to the Cypress Creek Basin Sampling Coordinator at a pre-determined location prior to the sampling event. The containers used will be provided by Ana-Lab, will be pre-cleaned with proper techniques, supplied with correct preservatives, and labeled accordingly. Quality control for sample containers will be provided by Ana-Lab.

The Cypress Creek Basin Sampling Coordinator will be responsible for collection of the samples using approved TCEQ methods. A Chain-of-Custody form will be filled out by the Cypress Creek Basin Sampling Coordinator (or person under supervision) for each sample taken during the sampling event. Ana-Lab will pick up the samples from the Cypress Creek Basin Sampling Coordinator from a pre-determined location after each day’s sampling event is completed to assure that the chain-of-custody forms are correctly filled out and signed. The Ana-Lab transfer custodian will also see that the samples arrive within holding time constraints. Ana-Lab will have a sample custodian who examines all arriving samples for proper documentation, and proper preservation. This custodian will accept delivery by signing the final portion of the chain-of-custody form. The sample custodian will log and monitor the progress of the samples through the analysis stage. Internal sample handling, custody, and storage procedures is described in Ana-Lab’s Quality Manual(s).

Deficiencies, Nonconformances and Corrective Action Related to Chain-of-Custody

Deficiencies are defined as unauthorized deviations from procedures documented in the QAPP or other applicable documents. Nonconformances are deficiencies which affect data quantity and/or quality and render the data unacceptable or indeterminate. Deficiencies related to chain-of-custody include but are not limited to delays in transfer, resulting in holding time violations; incomplete documentation, including signatures; possible tampering of samples; broken or spilled samples, etc.

Deficiencies are documented in logbooks, field data sheets, etc. by field or laboratory staff and reported to the cognizant field or laboratory supervisor who will notify the Cypress Creek Basin Technical Coordinator. The Cypress Creek Basin Technical Coordinator will notify the Cypress Creek Basin QAO of the potential nonconformance. The Cypress Creek Basin QAO will initiate a Nonconformance Report (NCR) to document the deficiency.

The Cypress Creek Basin Technical Coordinator, in consultation with Cypress Creek Basin QAO (and other affected individuals/organizations), will determine if the deficiency constitutes a nonconformance. If it is determined the activity or item in question does not affect data quality and therefore, is not a valid nonconformance, the NCR will be completed accordingly and the NCR closed. If it is determined a nonconformance does exist, the Cypress Creek Basin Technical Coordinator in consultation with the Cypress Creek Basin QAO will determine the disposition of the nonconforming

activity or item and necessary corrective action(s); results will be documented by the Cypress Creek Basin QAO by completion of a Corrective Action Report.

Corrective Action Reports (CARs) document: root cause(s); impact(s); specific corrective action(s) to address the deficiency; action(s) to prevent recurrence; individual(s) responsible for each action; the timetable for completion of each action; and the means by which completion of each corrective action will be documented. CARs will be included with quarterly progress reports. In addition, significant conditions (i.e., situations which, if uncorrected, could have a serious effect on safety or on the validity or integrity of data) will be reported to the TCEQ immediately both verbally and in writing.

B4 ANALYTICAL METHODS

The analytical methods, associated matrices, and performing laboratories are listed in Table A7.1 of Section A7. The authority for analysis methodologies under the Clean Rivers Program is derived from the TSWQS (§§307.1 - 307.10) in that data generally are generated for comparison to those standards and/or criteria. The Standards state that “Procedures for laboratory analysis will be in accordance with the most recently published edition of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, the latest version of the TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures, 40 CFR 136, or other reliable procedures acceptable to the Executive Director.”

Laboratories collecting data under this QAPP are compliant with the NELAC standards. Copies of laboratory Quality Assurance Manuals (QMs) and SOPs are retained by NETMWD, HDR and Ana-Lab and are available for review by the TCEQ. Laboratory SOPs are consistent with EPA requirements as specified in the method.

Standards Traceability

All standards used in the field and laboratory are traceable to certified reference materials. Standards preparation is fully documented and maintained in a standards log book. Each documentation includes information concerning the standard identification, starting materials, including concentration, amount used and lot number; date prepared, expiration date and preparer’s initials/signature. The reagent bottle is labeled in a way that will trace the reagent back to preparation.

Deficiencies, Nonconformances and Corrective Action Related to Analytical Methods

Deficiencies are defined as unauthorized deviations from procedures documented in the QAPP or other applicable documents. Nonconformances are deficiencies which affect quantity and/or quality and render the data unacceptable or indeterminate. Deficiencies related to field and laboratory measurement systems include but are not limited to instrument malfunctions, blank contamination, quality control sample failures, etc.

Deficiencies are documented in logbooks, field data sheets, etc. by field or laboratory staff and reported to the cognizant field or laboratory supervisor who will notify the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency Technical Coordinator. The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency Technical Coordinator will notify the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAO of the potential nonconformance. The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAO will initiate a Nonconformance Report (NCR) to document the deficiency.

The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency Technical Coordinator, in consultation with Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAO (and other affected individuals/organizations), will determine if the deficiency constitutes a nonconformance. If it is determined the activity or item in question does not affect data quality and therefore, is not a valid nonconformance, the NCR will be completed accordingly and the NCR closed. If it is determined a nonconformance does exist, the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency Technical Coordinator in consultation with the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAO will determine the disposition of the nonconforming activity or item and necessary corrective action(s); results will be documented by the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAO by completion of a Corrective Action Report.

Corrective Action Reports (CARs) document: root cause(s); impact(s); specific corrective action(s) to address the deficiency; action(s) to prevent recurrence; individual(s) responsible for each action; the timetable for completion of each action; and, the means by which completion of each corrective action will be documented. CARs will be included with quarterly progress reports. In addition, significant conditions (i.e., situations which, if uncorrected, could have a serious effect on safety or on the validity or integrity of data) will be reported to the TCEQ immediately both verbally and in writing.

The TCEQ has determined that analyses associated with the remark codes “holding time exceedance,” “sample received unpreserved,” “estimated value,” etc. may have unacceptable measurement uncertainty associated with them. This will immediately disqualify analyses from submittal to SWQMIS. Therefore, data with these types of problems should not be reported to the TCEQ.

B5 QUALITY CONTROL

Sampling Quality Control Requirements and Acceptability Criteria

The minimum Field QC Requirements are outlined in the 2003 TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures Manual, Volume 1: Physical and Chemical Monitoring Methods for Water, Sediment, and Tissue, (RG-415). Specific requirements are outlined below. Field QC sample results are submitted with the laboratory data report (see Section A9.).

Field equipment blank - Field equipment blanks are required for metals-in-water samples when collected using sampling equipment. Field equipment blank is a sample of analyte-free media which has been used to rinse common sampling equipment to check the effectiveness of decontamination procedures. It is collected in the same type of container as the environmental sample, preserved in the same manner and analyzed for the same parameter. Equipment blanks will be prepared for metals sampling every ten samples or whenever a new batch of filters is used.

The analysis of field equipment blanks should yield values lower than the LOQ, or, when target analyte concentrations are very high, blank values must be less than 5% of the lowest value of the batch, or corrective action will be implemented.

Field Split - A field split is a single sample subdivided by field staff immediately following collection and submitted to the laboratory as two separately identified samples according to procedures specified in the SWQM Procedures. Split samples are preserved, handled, shipped, and analyzed identically and are used to assess variability in all of these processes. Field splits apply to conventional samples only and are collected on a 10% basis or one per batch whichever is greater. The precision of field split results is calculated by relative percent difference (RPD) using the following equation:

RPD = (X1-X2)/((X1+X2)/2))

A 30% RPD criteria will be used to screen field split results as a possible indicator of excessive variability in the sample handling and analytical system. If it is determined that elevated quantities of analyte (i.e., > 5 times the RL) were measured and analytical variability can be eliminated as a factor, than variability in field split results will primarily be used as a trigger for discussion with field staff to ensure samples are being handled in the field correctly. Some individual sample results may be invalidated based on the examination of all extenuating information. The information derived from field splits is generally considered to be event specific and would not normally be used to determine the validity of an entire batch; however, some batches of samples may be invalidated depending on the situation. Professional judgment during data validation will be relied upon to interpret the results and take appropriate action. The qualification (i.e., invalidation) of data will be documented on the Data Summary. Deficiencies will be addressed as specified in this section under Deficiencies, Nonconformances, and Correction Action related to Quality Control.

Laboratory Measurement Quality Control Requirements and Acceptability Criteria

Method Specific QC requirements – QC samples, other than those specified later this section, are run (e.g., sample duplicates, surrogates, internal standards, continuing calibration samples, interference check samples, positive control, negative control, and media blank) as specified in the methods. The requirements for these samples, their acceptance criteria or instructions for establishing criteria, and corrective actions are method-specific.

Detailed laboratory QC requirements and corrective action procedures are contained within the individual laboratory quality manuals (QMs). The minimum requirements that all participants abide by are stated below.

Limit of Quantitation (LOQ) – The laboratory will analyze a calibration standard (if applicable) at the LOQ on each day Clean Rivers Program samples are analyzed. Calibrations including the standard at the LOQ will meet the calibration requirements of the analytical method or corrective action will be implemented.

LOQ Sediment and Tissue Samples – When considering LOQs for solid samples and how they apply to results, two aspects of the analysis are considered: (1) the LOQ of the sample, based on the “real-world” in which moisture content and interferences affect the result and (2) the LOQ in the QAPP which is a value less than or equal to the AWRL based on an idealized sample with zero % moisture.

The LOQ for a solid sample is based on the lowest non-zero calibration standard (as are those for water samples), the moisture content of the solid sample, and any sample concentration or dilution factors resulting from sample preparation or clean-up.

To establish solid-phase LOQs to be listed in Table A7.1 of the QAPP, the laboratory will adjust the concentration of the lowest non-zero calibration standard for the amount of sample extracted, the final extract volume, and moisture content (assumed to be zero % moisture). Each calculated LOQ will be less than or equal to the AWRL on the dry-weight basis to satisfy the AWRL requirement for sediment and tissue analyses. When data are reviewed for

consistency with the QAPP, they are evaluated based on this requirement. Results may not Aappear@ to meet the AWRL requirement due to high moisture content, high concentrations of non-target analytes necessitating sample dilution, etc. These sample results will be submitted to the TCEQ with an explanation on the data summary as to why results do not appear to meet the AWRL requirement.

LOQ Check Standard – An LOQ check standard consists of a sample matrix (e.g., deionized water, sand, commercially available tissue) free from the analytes of interest spiked with verified known amounts of analytes or a material containing known and verified amounts of analytes. It is used to establish intra-laboratory bias to assess the performance of the measurement system at the lower limits of analysis. The LOQ check standard is spiked into the sample matrix at a level less than or near the LOQ for each analyte for each batch of CRP samples are run.

The LOQ check standard is carried through the complete preparation and analytical process. LOQ Check Standards are run at a rate of one per analytical batch. A batch is defined as samples that are analyzed together with the same method and personnel, using the same lots of reagents, not to exceed the analysis of 20 environmental samples.

The percent recovery of the LOQ check standard is calculated using the following equation in which %R is percent recovery, SR is the sample result, and SA is the reference concentration for the check standard:

%R = SR/SA * 100

Measurement performance specifications are used to determine the acceptability of LOQ Check Standard analyses as specified in Table A7.1.

Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) - An LCS consists of a sample matrix (e.g., deionized water, sand, commercially available tissue) free from the analytes of interest spiked with verified known amounts of analytes or a material containing known and verified amounts of analytes. It is used to establish intra-laboratory bias to assess the performance of the measurement system. The LCS is spiked into the sample matrix at a level less than or near the mid point of the calibration for each analyte. In cases of test methods with very long lists of analytes, LCSs are prepared with all the target analytes and not just a representative number, except in cases of organic analytes with multipeak responses.

The LCS is carried through the complete preparation and analytical process. LCSs are run at a rate of one per analytical batch. A batch is defined as samples that are analyzed together with the same method and personnel, using the same lots of reagents, not to exceed the analysis of 20 environmental samples. Results of LCSs are calculated by percent recovery (%R), which is defined as 100 times the measured concentration, divided by the true concentration of the spiked sample.

The following formula is used to calculate percent recovery, where %R is percent recovery; SR is the measured result; and SA is the true result:

%R = SR/SA * 100

Measurement performance specifications are used to determine the acceptability of LCS analyses as specified in Table A7.1.

Laboratory Duplicates – A laboratory duplicate is prepared by taking aliquots of a sample from the same container under laboratory conditions and processed and analyzed independently. A laboratory control sample duplicate (LCSD) is prepared in the laboratory by splitting aliquots of an LCS. Both samples are carried through the entire preparation and analytical process. LCSDs are used to assess precision and are performed at a rate of one per batch. A batch is defined as samples that are analyzed together with the same method and personnel, using the same lots of reagents, not to exceed the analysis of 20 environmental samples.

For most parameters, precision is calculated by the relative percent difference (RPD) of LCS duplicate results as defined by 100 times the difference (range) of each duplicate set, divided by the average value (mean) of the set. For duplicate results, X1 and X2, the RPD is calculated from the following equation: (If other formulas apply, adjust appropriately.)

RPD = (X1 - X2)/{(X1+X2)/2} * 100

A bacteriological duplicate is considered to be a special type of laboratory duplicate and applies when bacteriological samples are run in the field as well as in the lab. Bacteriological duplicate analyses are performed on samples from the sample bottle on a 10% basis. Results of bacteriological duplicates are evaluated by calculating the logarithm of each result and determining the range of each pair.

Measurement performance specifications are used to determine the acceptability of duplicate analyses as specified in Table A7.1. The specifications for bacteriological duplicates in Table A7.1 apply to samples with concentrations > 10 org. /100mL.

Laboratory equipment blank - Laboratory equipment blanks are prepared at the laboratory where collection materials for metals sampling equipment are cleaned between uses. These blanks document that the materials provided by the laboratory are free of contamination. The QC check is performed before the metals sampling equipment is sent to the field. The analysis of laboratory equipment blanks should yield values less than the LOQ. Otherwise, the equipment should not be used.

Matrix spike (MS) –Matrix spikes are prepared by adding a known mass of target analyte to a specified amount of matrix sample for which an independent estimate of target analyte concentration is available. Matrix spikes are used, for example, to determine the effect of the matrix on a method’s recovery efficiency.

Percent recovery of the known concentration of added analyte is used to assess accuracy of the analytical process. The spiking occurs prior to sample preparation and analysis. Spiked samples are routinely prepared and analyzed at a rate of 10% of samples processed, or one per batch whichever is greater. A batch is defined as samples that are analyzed together with the same method and personnel, using the same lots of reagents, not to exceed the analysis of 20 environmental samples. The information from these controls is sample/matrix specific and is not used to determine the validity of the entire batch. The MS is spiked at a level less than or equal to the midpoint of the calibration or analysis range for each analyte. Percent recovery (%R) is defined as 100 times the observed concentration, minus the sample concentration, divided by the true concentration of the spike.

The results from matrix spikes are primarily designed to assess the validity of analytical results in a given matrix and are expressed as percent recovery (%R). The laboratory shall document the calculation for %R. The percent recovery of the matrix spike is calculated using the following

equation in which %R is percent recovery, SSR is the observed spiked sample concentration, SR is the sample result, and SA is the reference concentration of the spike added:

%R = (SSR - SR)/SA * 100

Measurement performance specifications for matrix spikes are not specified in this document.

The results are compared to the acceptance criteria as published in the mandated test method. Where there are no established criteria, the laboratory shall determine the internal criteria and document the method used to establish the limits. For matrix spike results outside established criteria, corrective action shall be documented or the data reported with appropriate data qualifying codes.

Method blank –A method blank is a sample of matrix similar to the batch of associated samples (when available) that is free from the analytes of interest and is processed simultaneously with and under the same conditions as the samples through all steps of the analytical procedures, and in which no target analytes or interferences are present at concentrations that impact the analytical results for sample analyses. The method blank is carried through the complete sample preparation and analytical procedure. The method blank is used to document contamination from the analytical process. The analysis of method blanks should yield values less than the LOQ. For very high-level analyses, the blank value should be less then 5% of the lowest value of the batch, or corrective action will be implemented.

Deficiencies, Nonconformances and Corrective Action Related to Quality Control

Deficiencies are defined as unauthorized deviations from procedures documented in the QAPP. Nonconformances are deficiencies which affect data quantity and/or quality and render the data unacceptable or indeterminate. Deficiencies related to quality control include but are not limited to field and laboratory quality control sample failures.

Deficiencies are documented in logbooks, field data sheets, etc. by field or laboratory staff and reported to the cognizant field or laboratory supervisor who will notify the Cypress Creek Basin Technical Coordinator. The Cypress Creek Basin Technical Coordinator will notify the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAO of the potential nonconformance. The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAO will initiate a Nonconformance Report (NCR) to document the deficiency.

The Cypress Creek Basin Technical Coordinator, in consultation with Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAO (and other affected individuals/organizations), will determine if the deficiency constitutes a nonconformance. If it is determined the activity or item in question does not affect data quality and therefore, is not a valid nonconformance, the NCR will be completed accordingly and the NCR closed. If it is determined a nonconformance does exist, the Cypress Creek Basin Technical Coordinator in consultation with the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAO will determine the disposition of the nonconforming activity or item and necessary corrective action(s); results will be documented by the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAO by completion of a Corrective Action Report.

Corrective Action Reports (CARs) document: root cause(s); impact(s); specific corrective action(s) to address the deficiency; action(s) to prevent recurrence; individual(s) responsible for each action; the timetable for completion of each action; and, the means by which completion of each corrective action

will be documented. CARs will be included with quarterly progress reports. In addition, significant conditions (i.e., situations which, if uncorrected, could have a serious effect on safety or on the validity or integrity of data) will be reported to the TCEQ immediately both verbally and in writing.

B6 INSTRUMENT/EQUIPMENT TESTING, INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE

All sampling equipment testing and maintenance requirements are detailed in the TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures. Sampling equipment is inspected and tested upon receipt and is assured appropriate for use. Equipment records are kept on all field equipment and a supply of critical spare parts is maintained.

All laboratory tools, gauges, instrument, and equipment testing and maintenance requirements are contained within laboratory QM(s).

B7 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION AND FREQUENCY

Field equipment calibration requirements are contained in the TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures. Post-calibration error limits and the disposition resulting from error are adhered to. Data not meeting post-error limit requirements invalidate associated data collected subsequent to the pre-calibration and are not submitted to the TCEQ.

Detailed laboratory calibrations are contained within the QM(s).

B8 INSPECTION/ACCEPTANCE OF SUPPLIES AND CONSUMABLES

All materials used for collection will be obtained from Ana-Lab. Materials used for collection will be inspected both at the laboratory and by the person(s) collecting (See laboratory QM).

B9 NON-DIRECT MEASUREMENTS

This QAPP does not include the use of routine data obtained from non-direct measurement sources.

B10 DATA MANAGEMENT

Data Management Process

The existing database developed for the Cypress Creek Basin CRP (Clean Rivers Program) will be maintained and updated with data obtained from the Cypress Creek Basin CRP monitoring programs (routine and systematic stations, permit support monitoring, special studies, and flow studies). All data results will be maintained electronically in accordance with procedures and guidelines described in the Cypress Creek Basin Clean Rivers Program Data Management Plan revised on August 18, 2003. The process described below summarizes procedures and guidelines of the Plan.

Additional water quality data collected through this monitoring program will be introduced into the system by either manual entry, or digital electronic files by the Data Manager. In each case, the data will be screened to insure (1) transcription accuracy, and (2) that the data meets the quality criteria for

that data type (e.g., were holding times exceeded, were reporting limits met) prior to its addition to the active database.

This data management process will be used as guidance for the collection, quality assurance and archiving of all data collected pursuant to the Clean Rivers Program (Figure B10-1). This plan has been developed after a full assessment of the human, data, and computer resource needs of the Clean Rivers Program as appropriate for the Cypress Creek Basin. It is anticipated that the types of data to be collected and archived in the future may change, as may future data retrieval, analysis and presentation needs. As circumstances dictate, this plan will be revised to adjust the procedures and methods necessary to reflect changes in CRP project focus, and to take advantage of opportunities for improvement of current procedures, hardware, and software.

With respect to the management of data generated in the Cypress Creek Basin CRP monitoring programs, the process begins with field sampling and ends with the data users with a typical line of transmission as follows:

1. Field Sampling2. Sample Custodian3. Lab Analyst4. Lab Supervisor/Reporter5. Database Manager6. Quality Assurance Officer7. Transfer of Data to TCEQ8. Data User

The analytical laboratory supervisor is responsible for the management and submission of valid data from the laboratory analyses. The laboratory supervisor validates the analytical data by comparing the various quality control measurements and by recalculating a random selection of the results produced by each analyst submitting data. The laboratory services manager using the labs standard reporting format will provide results to the HDR (HDR Engineering, Inc.) Data Manager. The analytical laboratory will retain files of all quality assurance verifications for five years in accordance with NELAC and make them available for inspection on request.

After the data has been received from the lab analyst, the data management plan is implemented. Data will be screened to assure accuracy, and care will be taken that the data meets the quality criteria for that data type. Quality assurance and control is integrated at all points along this process, with sample field sheets, chain of custody forms, analyst's bench sheets, control charts, and lab reports.

Original field data sheets, copies of the Chain of Custody forms sent to the lab, field notes, and other data will be deposited with the HDR Engineering, Inc. Data Manager for data screening, quality assurance, and input to the CRP database. Once the data management procedures have been completed, copies of all information will be deposited with NETMWD (Northeast Texas Municipal Water District) and retained by NETMWD in the central office files for ten years. This information will be quality checked by the HDR Data Manager by comparing it with the appropriate CRP monitoring schedule to verify that the correct stations have been sampled, that the correct sets of measurements and samples have been collected, and that calibration procedures have been correctly applied. The HDR Data Manager will be responsible for the

Figure B10-1Data Management ProcessCypress Creek BasinClean Rivers Program

NO

YES

DIGITAL

Pre-processing and format conversion

NON-DIGITAL

Manual Data Entry

DATA DEVELOPMENT

Preliminary Files

NO

YESQUALITY

ASSURANCE

Error Correction

DATA MANAGEMENT

RETRIEVAL AND

REPORTING

GIS DatabaseTabular Database

Raw Data Maps Reports Web Page

Data Meets QA

Criteria?

Data checked with source document is

correct?

Pre-processing and format conversion

CORRECT QA DEFICIENCIESDATA SOURCES

Data Processing

review of all field and laboratory generated data for consistency with QA criteria, for accuracy of the input operations, and for timely entry into the active database and transfer to TCEQ (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality). The data manager will also be responsible for assuring that all field activity reports, calibration records, and general information is maintained and properly filed according to particular investigations of the project.

The HDR Project Manager will be responsible for determining what data, if any; will be deleted from the database. The Project Manager and laboratory responsible for analysis will initially review any questions concerning analytical data. If a modification of the data originally reported is deemed necessary, documentation of the original data, the question concerning that data and the modified data along with the copies of the data change will be entered in the Data Managers data log and saved in paper format. Data will only be deleted from the database files if it is determined to be erroneous, or is found to have been collected in a manner that does not follow the TCEQ guidelines for data procurement. The Data Manager will alert the Project Manager to any abnormalities or apparent outliers. The Project Manager will evaluate the data and determine if any statistical tests need to be performed to further evaluate the data. The Quality Assurance Officer will be responsible for reviewing a random 10% of the data for any problems such as exceeded holding times or exceeded precision/accuracy limits.

All future quarterly data submittals to the SWQMIS database can be accessed on the TCEQ website (http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/compliance/monitoring/crp/data/samplequery.html). Paper copies of all data and reports are maintained both at the HDR offices in Austin, Texas and the NETMWD offices in Hughes Springs, Texas. Requests for data or reports can be made at either office.

Data Errors and Loss

Data files are initially produced in Excel format, and transferred to the preferred text-delimited format before being submitted to TCEQ. The file format utilized involves the established event and result file formats that are provided by TCEQ. An automated review process has been produced and is utilized for the result data files. This automated review checks the values entered for data based on the established minimum, maximum, and AWRL limits set for each parameter by TCEQ. Changes to any of these values by TCEQ are updated to the review checklist as noted. Any values flagged by the automated review are first checked against the laboratory analysis files to see if they are transcription errors. If the values are correct, then an e-mail querying the validity of the value reported is sent to the laboratory that did the sample analysis. Values that are verified as correct by the laboratory are flagged as outliers within the data set. In addition to the automated review check, a minimum 10% check is done on all data sets, which are produced before their conversion to text files. A data summary form (see exhibit 4B of the Texas CRP FY2008-2009 Guidance) is included with the submittal of the completed data set. This summary form includes data information and comments specific to the data set being submitted at that time.

File transfer protocols concerning conversion of Excel database files to other types of database files and their reconversion into the original format involves the import/export of files in both formats. However, care must be taken that all Excel files exported are in pipe delimited text format to ensure correct transfer of all information. After the conversion of any database files into another format, a ten-percent check of the transferred files occurs. File transfer and checking is initially a responsibility of the Quality Assurance Officer, and secondarily the Data Manager.

http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/compliance/monitoring/crp/data/samplequery.html

Development of data files is initially dependent on the use of forms and checklists appropriate to those specified in the QAPP. These documents include: 1) Field documentation which contains all instrument calibration/standards records, field measurements, and site characteristics (see Appendix C), 2) Field notes, 3) Laboratory documentation including Analyst’s comments on the condition of the sample and progress of the analysis, raw data, instrument printouts, results of calibration, QA checks, external and internal standards records, and SOP’s, 4) Chain of custody forms (see Appendix D), and 5) Laboratory Data Review Checklist (see Exhibit 2A of the Texas CRP FY2008-2009 Guidance).

Record Keeping and Data Storage

All data files and GIS data layers are stored on the HDR server. A full automated backup of all HDR files is produced on tape every Friday. In addition, differential backups are completed on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday on any files that have been modified since the last full backup. These files are stored in a fireproof server closet area at our offices. All files are kept active on the premises for three months, and are archived if not active after that time. Inactive archived files are kept off site in protected storage. No current project files or critical data are stored on the hard drive of any workstation. Copies of the final electronic and paper copies of data and reports are provided to NETMWD at the end of each quarter and stored at their offices. In addition, all data files and reports concerning the project are provided to the Project Manager at TCEQ.

The disaster recovery procedure consists of reinstalling the operation system and software either from the original software media, or from a disaster recovery CD that has been created and stored on site. Newer files would be replaced from either the weekly tape drive, or the daily differential backup files. Archived files would be replaced from the stored archive CD’s.

Data Handling, Hardware, and Software Requirements

The data management program will interface with the data users to assure efficient retrieval and manipulation of screened, quality assured data. Staff with data management skills, who have sufficient understanding of database administration and operation to coordinate the data elements needed and manage the available resources, such as trend analysis, web page updates, or public presentation will provide direct support to the various data. Administrative and data management needs can be filled with the use of current staff that have already been given appropriate training. The need for staff at a more specialized skill level is only occasional, and may be met by the use of consultants.

The primary source of data used to satisfy the objectives of the Clean Rivers Program is the descriptive data collected on water quality and natural resources within the Cypress Creek Basin. This data must be collected by reliable personnel using the established methods described in the TCEQ Program Guidance and specifically adapted to Cypress Creek Basin CRP activities in the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). In addition, the CRP data will be supplemented by acquired data sets, which may be used to establish a regional context, or to evaluate possible correlations between identified water quality problems and their likely sources. These data sets must be screened and assessed for usefulness and credibility before being integrated into the basin assessment report.

The large amount of data involved will need to be readily updateable and efficiently managed. The data must be efficiently sorted and grouped for statistical analysis. The ability to present this data in both a graphic and tabular format may be necessary to effectively communicate both the results and

basis for basin assessments to the public. This action requires the procurement and use of software that has the ability to produce both graphics and tables.

The recommended software and hardware required to meet the basic requirements of the program have been identified, and are being utilized by the Cypress Creek Basin Clean Rivers Program. Program requirements are continually evaluated by NETMWD and its consultants to insure that CRP dedicated hardware continue to be adequate to meet those requirements. Criteria for hardware will include performance capable of running anticipated software and potentially useful future software products, as well as storage capacity appropriate to maintain all program-related software, and numerous years of data. Criteria for software will include the capability to manipulate, evaluate, report, and manage data consistent with the basic requirements of the water quality assessments.

Data management procedures have been developed to screen and digitally store data, convert the data received in non-compatible formats to a format suitable for analysis, apply quality control and assurance procedures, provide data access for current and future users of the data, and support assessments of water quality conditions within the basin. These procedures utilize personal computer technology to manage the data associated with the individual tasks of the program.

Once the data has been entered, screened, and quality-checked it is submitted in TCEQ required format for use in the Surface Water Quality Monitoring Information System (SWQMIS) database. The data is also transmitted to NETMWD to be maintained for dissemination. The NETMWD computer system has a dedicated server with a zip-drive backup system. This network has five available workstations, all IBM compatible which should provide for future expandability.

HDR Engineering, Inc. maintains commercial software operating in the Microsoft Windows 2000 environment. Microsoft Office 2003, which includes Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, and Microsoft Access, is maintained for basic report preparation, data entry, and exploratory data analysis. For more complex data analysis, Sigma Stat and Statistical Ecology statistics programs are maintained. Once entered, screened, and quality checked, the data is converted into pipe delimited text files for database storage and transfer to TCEQ and NETMWD. Arc View 3.1, and Corel Draw 8.0 are maintained for GPS (Global Positioning System), GIS (Geographic Information Systems), and graphics support.

The NETMWD computer system is a Microsoft Windows based system with Microsoft Office maintained for general report production and correspondence. Additional software similar to that already available at HDR, but not currently maintained by NETMWD, may also need to be acquired in the future to facilitate data use and manipulation.

Information Resource Management Requirements

Applicable information resource management requirements for the planning agency are satisfied through the utilization of the process outlined in the previous Data Management sections. The TCEQ has the following data specification requirements: the Surface Water Quality Monitoring Data Management Reference Guide, GIS Policy (TCEQ OPP 8.11) and GPS Policy (TCEQ OPP 8.12).

Data will be managed in accordance with the TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Data Management Reference Guide and applicable Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency information resource management policies. The Clean Rivers Program grantees do not create TCEQ certified locational data using Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment. GPS equipment may be used as a

component of the information required by the Station Location (SLOC) request process, but TCEQ staff is responsible for creating the certified locational data that will ultimately be entered into the Surface Water Quality Monitoring Information System (SWQMIS) database. Any information developed by Clean Rivers Program grantees using a Geographic Information System (GIS) will be used solely to meet deliverable requirements and will not be submitted to the TCEQ as a certified data set. Because the Clean Rivers Program grantees do not create certified locational data, TCEQ’s OPP 8.11 and 8.12 do not apply.

C1 ASSESSMENTS AND RESPONSE ACTIONS

Table C1.1 presents the types of assessments and response actions for data collection activities applicable to the QAPP.

Table C1.1 Assessments and Response Requirements

Assessment Activity

ApproximateSchedule

Responsible Party

Scope ResponseRequirements

Status MonitoringOversight, etc.

Continuous NETMWDHDR

Monitoring of the project status and records to ensure requirements are being fulfilled

Report to TCEQ in Quarterly Report

Monitoring Systems Audit

of Basin Planning Agency

Dates to be determined

by TCEQ CRP

TCEQ Field sampling, handling and measurement; facility review; and data management as they relate to CRP

30 days to respond in writing to the TCEQ to address corrective actions

Monitoring Systems Audit

of ProgramSubparticipants

Once/contract by the Cypress

Creek Basin Planning

Agency on the Caddo Lake

Institute

HDR Field sampling, handling and measurement; facility review; and data management as they relate to CRP

30 days to respond in writing to the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency. PA will report problems to TCEQ in Progress Report.

Laboratory Inspection

Dates to be determined by

TCEQ

TCEQ Laboratory Inspector

Analytical and quality control procedures employed at the laboratory and the contract laboratory

30 days to respond in writing to the TCEQ to address corrective actions

Corrective Action

The Cypress Creek Basin QAO is responsible for implementing and tracking corrective action resulting from audit findings outlined in the audit report. Records of audit findings and corrective actions are maintained by both the CRP and the Cypress Creek Basin QAO. Audit reports and corrective action documentation will be submitted to the TCEQ with the Progress Report.

If audit findings and corrective actions cannot be resolved, then the authority and responsibility for terminating work are specified in the CRP QMP and in agreements in contracts between participating organizations.

C2 REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT

Reports to Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency Project Management

Each subcontractor will submit a brief quarterly report including a summary of their work efforts, analytical results, and any problems and corrective actions taken during the quarter’s work. These reports will be submitted to the QAO and will be reviewed and transmitted to the TCEQ for their review. The contract laboratory will submit data and QA/QC reports within a one-month time period from the receipt of samples for analysis.

Reports to TCEQ Project Management

All reports detailed in this section are contract deliverables and are transferred to the TCEQ in accordance with contract requirements.

Progress Report - Summarizes the Cypress Creek Basin’s activities for each task; reports monitoring status, problems, delays, and corrective actions; and outlines the status of each task’s deliverables.

Monitoring Systems Audit Report and Response - Following any audit performed by the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency, a report of findings, recommendations and response is sent to the TCEQ in the quarterly progress report.

Reports by TCEQ Project Management

Contractor Evaluation - The Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency participates in a Contractor Evaluation by the TCEQ annually for compliance with administrative and programmatic standards. Results of the evaluation are submitted to the TCEQ Financial Administration Division, Procurement and Contracts Section.

D1 DATA REVIEW, VERIFICATION, AND VALIDATION

All field and laboratory will be reviewed and verified for integrity and continuity, reasonableness, and conformance to project requirements, and then validated against the project objectives and measurement performance specifications which are listed in Section A7. Only those data which are supported by appropriate quality control data and meet the measurement performance specifications defined for this project will be considered acceptable, and will be reported for entry into SWQMIS.

D2 VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION METHODS

All field and laboratory data will be reviewed, verified and validated to ensure they conform to project specifications and meet the conditions of end use as described in Section A7 of this document.

Data review, verification, and validation will be performed using self-assessments and peer and management review as appropriate to the project task. The data review tasks to be performed by field and laboratory staff are listed in the first two sections of Table D2.1, respectively. Potential errors are identified by examination of documentation and by manual (or computer-assisted) examination of corollary or unreasonable data. If a question arises or an error is identified, the manager of the task responsible for generating the data is contacted to resolve the issue. Issues which can be corrected are corrected and documented. If an issue cannot be corrected, the task manager consults with higher level project management to establish the appropriate course of action, or the data associated with the issue are rejected. Field and laboratory reviews, verifications, and validations are documented.

After the field and laboratory data are reviewed, another level of review is performed once the data are combined into a data set. This review step as specified in Table D2.1 is performed by the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency Data Manager and QAO. Data review, verification, and validation tasks to be performed on the data set include, but are not limited to, the confirmation of lab and field data review, evaluation of field QC results, additional evaluation of anomalies and outliers, analysis of sampling and analytical gaps, and confirmation that all parameters and sampling sites are included in the QAPP.

Another element of the data validation process is consideration of any findings identified during the monitoring systems audit conducted by the TCEQ CRP Lead Quality Assurance Specialist. Any issues requiring corrective action must be addressed, and the potential impact of these issues on previously collected data will be assessed. After the data are reviewed and documented, the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency Project Manager validates that the data meet the data quality objectives of the project and are suitable for reporting to TCEQ.

If any requirements or specifications of the CRP are not met, based on any part of the data review, the responsible party should document the nonconforming activities and submit the information to the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency Data Manager with the data. This information is communicated to the TCEQ by the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency in the Data Summary.

Table D2.1: Data Review Tasks

Field Data Review Responsibility

Field data reviewed for conformance with data collection, sample handling and chain of custody, analytical and QC requirements TC and QAO

Post-calibrations checked to ensure compliance with error limits SC

Field data calculated, reduced, and transcribed correctly TC and SC

Laboratory Data Review

Laboratory data reviewed for conformance with data collection, sample handling and chain of custody, analytical and QC requirements to include documentation, holding times, sample receipt, sample preparation, sample analysis, project and program QC results, and reporting

QAO and DM

Laboratory data calculated, reduced, and transcribed correctly QAO

LOQs consistent with requirements for Ambient Water Reporting Limits. QAO

Analytical data documentation evaluated for consistency, reasonableness and/or improper practices QAO and DM

Analytical QC information evaluated to determine impact on individual analyses QAO

All laboratory samples analyzed for all parameters QAO

Data Set Review

The test report has all required information as described in Section A9 of the QAPP QAO

Confirmation that field and laboratory data have been reviewed QAO

Data set (to include field and laboratory data) evaluated for reasonableness and if corollary data agree

QAO

Outliers confirmed and documented QAO

Field QC acceptable (e.g., field splits and trip, field and equipment blanks) QAO

Sampling and analytical data gaps checked and documented QAO

Verification and validation confirmed. Data meets conditions of end use and are reportable QAO, DM, TC and PM

D3 RECONCILIATION WITH USER REQUIREMENTS

Data produced in this project, and data collected by other organizations (e.g., USGS, TCEQ, etc.), will be analyzed and reconciled with project data quality requirements. Data meeting project requirements will be used by the TCEQ for the Texas Water Quality Inventory and 303(d) List in accordance with TCEQ's Guidance for Assessing Texas Surface and Finished Drinking Water Quality Data, and for TMDL development, stream standards modifications, and permit decisions as appropriate. Data which do not meet requirements will not be submitted to SWQMIS nor will be considered appropriate for any of the uses noted above.

APPENDIX A

TASK 3 WORK PLAN

TASK 3: WATER QUALITY MONITORING

Objectives: Water quality monitoring will focus on collecting information to characterize water quality in a variety of locations and conditions. These efforts will include a combination of:

Planning and coordinating basin-wide monitoring Routine, regularly-scheduled monitoring to collect long-term information and support statewide

assessment of water quality Systematic, regularly-scheduled short-term monitoring to screen water bodies for issues Permit support monitoring to provide information for setting permit effluent limits Special study, intensive monitoring targeted to:

o identify sources and causeso assess priority water quality issueso obtain background water quality informationo provide information for setting site-specific permit effluent limitso evaluate & develop statewide, regional, and site-specific water quality standards

TaskDescription: The continued implementation of a basin-wide water quality monitoring plan is the primary focus

for this biennium. The monitoring plan for Fiscal Year 2008-2009 includes routine station monitoring and biased season monitoring.

Monitoring DescriptionA minimum of 7 routine sites will be examined quarterly for field, streamflow (where applicable), and conventional chemistry. A total of five sites will be sampled monthly for field measurements and E. coli analysis, however, the bacteria results will not be reported in SWQMIS since analysis will not follow required NELAC guidelines. Diurnal studies that include pH, dissolved oxygen, conductivity and temperature and flow will be conducted a minimum of two times during the index period (between March 15 and October 15), with one-half to two-thirds of the measurements taken during the critical period (between July 1 and September 30) at 5 sites. Metals and sediment will be sampled once a year at one location on Lake Cypress Springs. Biological studies including habitat analysis, benthic and nekton counts will be conducted once during the index period and once during the critical period in Hughes Creek at SH 155. Similar effort will be employed for the FY 2009 monitoring plan after considering input from the Basin Steering Committee, the TCEQ, or other sources of information.

All monitoring procedures and methods will follow the guidelines prescribed in the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAPP, the TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures, Volume 1: Physical and Chemical Monitoring Methods for Water, Sediment, and Tissue (RG-415) and the TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures, Volume 2: Methods for Collecting and Analyzing Biological Community and Habitat Data (RG-416).

Coordinated Monitoring Meeting - NETMWD will hold an annual coordinated monitoring meeting. Qualified monitoring organizations will be invited to attend the working meeting in which monitoring needs and purposes will be discussed segment by segment and station by station. Information from participants and stakeholders will be used to select stations and parameters that will enhance overall water quality monitoring coverage, eliminate duplication of effort, and address basin priorities. The changes to the monitoring schedule will be entered into the statewide database on the Internet (http://cms.lcra.org) and communicated to meeting attendees. Changes to monitoring that occur during the course of the year will be entered into the statewide database on the Internet and communicated to meeting attendees.

Progress ReportEach Progress Report will indicate the number of sampling events and the types of monitoring conducted in the quarter, to include all types of monitoring.

Biological Data ReportingBiological/habitat data reported to the TCEQ under an approved QAPP, will be submitted electronically using the TCEQ Events/Results file format, as well as in a pdf document using Biological Data Reporting Packet outlined in Exhibit 3D in the CRP Guidance.

Permit Support MonitoringNo permit support monitoring is scheduled for the FY2008-2009 contract period.

Special StudiesStatus reports of each special study will describe activities during the quarter. The status reports will be submitted along with the Progress Report. To help keep the public and basin stakeholders informed, the Web site will be updated in a timely manner to include key elements of Special Studies’ Reports or Summaries (e.g., status reports, executive summary, maps, data analysis).

A proposal to conduct a future Special Study at one or two locations upstream of Lake Cypress Springs was presented during FY2005 for consideration before the Steering Committee members on behalf of the Franklin County Water District (FCWD). Planning and development of this study is tentatively scheduled for the FY2008-2009 contract period.

Equipment: New equipment needed to accomplish the work for Task 3 will include the occasional required replacement of sensors and accessories for the YSI multiparameter sondes. These sondes are required for all field monitoring tasks and must be properly maintained to ensure continued effective operation resulting in data reliability and accuracy.

Deliverables& Dues Dates: September 1, 2007 through August 31, 2008

A. Conduct water quality monitoring, summarize activities, and submit with Progress Report - December 15, 2007; March 15 and June 15, 2008

B. Coordinated Monitoring Meeting - between March 15 and April 30, 2008C. Email notification, with summary of changes, that Coordinated Monitoring Schedule updates are

complete - May 31, 2008D. Biological Data Report - coordinate due date(s) with TCEQ Project ManagerE. Special Study – Status Reports – December 15, 2007; March 15 and June 15, 2008F. Special Study – Draft Report – coordinate due date with TCEQ Project ManagerG. Special Study – Final Report – coordinate due date with TCEQ Project ManagerH. Special Study – post Final Report to web – coordinate due date with TCEQ Project Manager

September 1, 2008 through August 31, 2009

A. Conduct water quality monitoring, summarize activities, and submit with Progress Report - September 15 and December 15, 2008; March 15 and June 15 and August 31, 2009B. Coordinated Monitoring Meeting - between March 15 and April 30, 2009

C. Email notification, with summary of changes, that Coordinated Monitoring Schedule updates are complete - May 31, 2009

D. Biological Data Report - coordinate due date(s) with TCEQ Project ManagerE. Special Study – Status Reports – September 15, 2007 and December 15; March 15 and June 15,

2009F. Special Study – Draft Report – coordinate due date with TCEQ Project ManagerG. Special Study – Final Report – coordinate due date with TCEQ Project ManagerH. Special Study – post Final Report to web – coordinate due date with TCEQ Project Manager

APPENDIX B

CYPRESS CREEK BASIN PLANNING AGENCY CLEAN RIVERS PROGRAMFY2008-2009 QAPP

SAMPLING PROCESS DESIGN AND MONITORING SCHEDULE (PLAN)MONITORING SCHEDULE FOR FY2008

CLEAN RIVERS PROGRAMCYPRESS BASIN FISCAL YEAR 2008

MONITORING PROGRAM

Prepared by:

HDR Engineering, Inc.4401 West Gate, Suite 400

Austin, TX 78745

Prepared for:

Northeast Texas Municipal Water DistrictClean Rivers Program - Cypress Basin Contractor

P.O. Box 955Hughes Springs, TX 75656

1 September 2007

1.0 Sample Design Rationale

The sample design is based on the legislative intent of the Clean Rivers Program. Under the legislation, the Planning Agencies have been tasked with providing data to identify significant long-term water quality trends, to characterize water quality conditions in support of the 305(b) assessment. Based on Steering Committee input, achievable water quality objectives and priorities and the identification of water quality issues are used to develop work plans, which are in accord with available resources. As part of the Steering Committee process, Northeast Texas Municipal Water District (NETMWD) and the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency, coordinates closely with the TCEQ and other participants to ensure a comprehensive water monitoring strategy within the Watershed.

The Clean Rivers Program water quality monitoring in the Cypress Creek Basin has taken place through a cooperative program directed by Northeast Texas Municipal Water District (NETMWD). Participants assisting NETMWD in planning, data collection, analysis, and reporting include HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR), Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), the Clean Rivers Program Steering Committee members, basin partners Caddo Lake Institute (CLI) and affiliates, Pilgrims Pride Corporation, Franklin County Water District (FCWD), the City of Marshall, the City of Longview, Titus County Fresh Water District #1, Lone Star Steel, Texas Utilities (TXU), and AEP SWEPCO.

The goal of this portion of the Clean Rivers Program is to provide the appropriate, quality assured data to allow continuing assessment and management of water quality in the Cypress Basin. Detailed objectives of this monitoring program include the following:

Establish a long-term monitoring program for the basin, Focus on and provide for local participation in monitoring, Provide reliable information to the public to enhance awareness and knowledge

of water quality conditions in the basin, Monitor and evaluate water quality trends, Identify the nature and source of water quality problems that result in significant

impairments, Evaluate the applicability of State Surface Water Quality Criteria to specific waterbodies

in the basin, Evaluate permit requirements with respect to water quality conditions and trends in the

basins, and, Provide data to support the development of cost-effective water quality management

programs.

Historically, data from the Surface Water Quality Monitoring (SWQM) Program have been the primary information used in determining water quality standards attainment and for setting permit requirements in the Cypress Basin. The SWQM Program provides for an integrated evaluation of physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of Texas surface water systems in relation to human health concerns, ecological condition, and designated uses. Surface water quality monitoring data provide a basis for establishment of effective TCEQ management policies that promote the protection, restoration, and judicious use of Texas surface water resources. Data

collected in the SWQM program and for special projects are used to characterize existing water quality and emerging problems, define long-term trends, determine water quality standards compliance, and describe seasonal variation and frequency of occurrence of selected water quality constituents. Data are also used to produce the State of Texas Water Quality Inventory required by Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act. This assessment enables the public, local governments, state agencies, the Texas Legislature, the EPA, and Congress to evaluate water quality in Texas and make water quality management decisions.

TCEQ Region 5 staff maintains several routine monitoring stations throughout the Cypress Creek Basin to monitor water quality. During FY 2008, a combined total of 39 routine stations will be monitored, in addition to the number of targeted monitoring or special study stations that may change during each fiscal year. The results from these monitoring stations are presently maintained in the SWQMIS database. NETMWD has developed and maintained a local database that includes this information. Since October 1, 2003, continuously monitored meteorological (wind speed, wind direction, precipitation and air temperature) and water quality parameters (dissolved oxygen, conductivity, temperature and pH) have been captured in real-time at two stations in Caddo Lake. "Real-time" means that the data collected in the field is reported almost simultaneously to the TCEQ, so the agency knows almost immediately about changes in surface water quality in this watershed. These automatic stations are currently collecting data in the transitional (TCEQ Station 17867) and open water (TCEQ Station 10283) areas of Caddo Lake. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) currently monitors the Cypress Creek Basin at six stream locations. Real-time stream flow and water level (gage height) data is measured, recorded and transmitted generally in 15-minute increments. This information along with the historical stream flow data can be accessed on the USGS web site (http://waterdata.usgs.gov/tx/nwis/current?type=flow).

The major focus of the CRP in the Cypress Creek Basin has been routine and systematic monitoring and special studies. Monitoring efforts represent a large component of the CRP, providing the raw data and information required to address any concerns regarding water quality issues in the basin. The objective of these studies has been the improvement of water quality within the Basin, and documentation of watershed conditions both current and historical. Several of these studies have been produced within the Clean Rivers Program as special studies. Special studies are additional water monitoring projects designed to address a specific concern or to provide additional information as a result of a previous monitoring effort or a current issue affecting water quality. As part of the Texas Clean Rivers Program, these special studies deal with specific water quality issues or are used to support other programs (e.g., TMDL development) addressing water quality issues in the Basin.

A number of these studies have been conducted over the last five years with recent focus on the Caddo Lake watershed in support of the Caddo Lake Watershed Protection Program. This new effort was created to protect the water quality and aquatic life of Caddo Lake. Three meetings of stakeholders were held in fiscal year 2006 to discuss this plan. This voluntary effort is being lead by basin stakeholders, with NETMWD selected as the watershed coordinator. This plan relies heavily on volunteers, although federal, state, and local organizations are actively participating in

http://waterdata.usgs.gov/tx/nwis/current?type=flow

http://waterdata.usgs.gov/tx/nwis/current?type=flow

its preparation and implementation. The challenges being considered at this time are identified as pollution affecting water quality; drought and water withdrawals; threats to habitats; floodplain management; and management of aquatic vegetation. Two special studies have been initiated during FY2006-2007 to help with the development of this plan, the Caddo Lake Water and Nutrient Budget Study (Appendix G to the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency FY2006-2007 CRP QAPP), and the Caddo Lake Watershed Sediment Study (Appendix H to the Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency FY2006-2007 CRP QAPP). The Caddo Lake Water and Nutrient Budget Study has been developed to determine the quantities, seasonal patterns and source watersheds of nutrients including nitrogen and phosphorus presently being supplied to Caddo Lake over an annual cycle. The Caddo Lake Watershed Sediment Study is designed to identify sub-basin watershed reaches with large concentrations of phosphorus and organic carbon within their sediment.

The USGS initiated a stream flow, geomorphic, and aquatic biological and habitat assessments study on Big Cypress Creek to (1) characterize segment and reach-scale channel geomorphologic features and sediment composition in Big Cypress Creek downstream of Lake O’ the Pines in advance of prescribed releases, (2) conduct baseline reach-based and synoptic biological status assessments of fish assemblages through the Big Cypress segment in advance of prescribed releases, and (3) establish instrumented cross-sections at non-gauged locations in advance of prescribed releases. The study results have not been presented at this time.

The Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program summary document developed for Lake O’ the Pines (Segment 0403) with the guidance of the TCEQ and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was approved on June 7, 2006. The next step in the TMDL process is the implementation plan, which is currently in progress. A proposed scope of work has been submitted to the TMDL Team for a water quality monitoring and model program study to track implementation of the Lake O’ the Pines TMDL. Specific goals of this study involves (1) the collection of information necessary to monitor progress toward the total phosphorus targets established in the Lake O’ the Pines TMDL studies, (2) monitor nutrient and dissolved oxygen levels in the lake to confirm that reductions in total phosphorus loading is ameliorating adverse conditions, (3) maintain regular review and communication of the monitoring results, (4) detect and respond to changes in watershed conditions or biogeochemical processes in the receiving waters, and (5) develop and validate modeling tools to assist in the analysis and interpretation of monitoring data, minimize the amount of future water quality monitoring that will be necessary, and allow projections of the potential water quality impacts of proposed land use changes or development activities in the watershed.

In cooperation with Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB), NETMWD began a study in 2002 funded through the Texas §319(h) grant program. As an integral and essential part of the Lake O’ the Pines TMDL Implementation Plan, this study will include the evaluation of nutrient losses from agricultural operations and on-site wastewater disposal facilities. Sampling for this program is scheduled to continue through the end of FY2007.

2.0 Site Selection Criteria

The Cypress Creek Basin is located in Northeast Texas, between the Sulphur River Basin and the Sabine River Basin. The 2,933 square mile basin is primarily drained by Big Cypress Creek (Segments 402 and 404), a tributary of the Red River. Big Cypress Creek joins the Red River near

Shreveport, Louisiana where it is known as Twelve-Mile Bayou. The four largest reservoirs in the basin are Caddo Lake (Segment 401), Lake O’ the Pines (Segment 403), Lake Bob Sandlin (Segment 408) and Lake Cypress Springs (Segment 405). These four reservoirs are impoundments of Big Cypress Creek and are designated for use as public water supplies. Four smaller reservoirs (Monticello, Welch, Ellison Creek, and Johnson Creek) have been constructed on tributary streams to be used primarily as cooling ponds for steam-electric power plants. While shoreline development has been permitted only around Lake Cypress Springs, recreational and retirement housing construction continues within the small watersheds draining directly into Lake Bob Sandlin, Lake O’ the Pines and Caddo Lake.

Major tributaries of Big Cypress Creek include Little Cypress Creek (Segment 409), Black Cypress Bayou (unclassified), James Bayou (Segment 407) and Black Bayou (Segment 406). Little Cypress Creek and the Black Cypress Bayou confluence with Big Cypress Creek just east of the city of Jefferson, while James Bayou and Black Bayou confluence with Caddo Lake in Louisiana.

Every two years, the state must assess the quality of their water and submit a report to the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) detailing the extent to which each water body in the state meets water quality standards. The TCEQ (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality) publishes this assessment as the Texas Water Quality Inventory and 303(d) List. This document essentially has two main parts: the Texas Water Quality Inventory, which gives the status of all the waters in the state, and the 303(d) List, which identifies waters that do not meet one or more of the standards set for their use.

The DRAFT 2006 Texas 303(d) List (March 19, 2007) currently identifies fourteen bodies of water with concerns for one or more measured parameters in the Cypress Creek Basin. These include Caddo Lake (0401), Harrison Bayou (0401A), Big Cypress Creek below Lake O' the Pines (0402), Black Cypress Bayou (0402A), Lake O' the Pines (0403), Big Cypress Creek Below Lake Bob Sandlin (0404), Ellison Creek Reservoir (0404A), Tankersley Creek (0404B), Hart Creek (0404C), Lake Daingerfield (0404N), Lake Cypress Springs (0405), Black Bayou (0406), James' Bayou (0407), Brushy Creek (0408C), Little Cypress Bayou (0409) and South Lilly Creek (0409B) . This data collection effort involves monitoring routine water quality, using procedures that are consistent with the TCEQ SWQM program, for the purpose of data entry into the statewide database maintained by the TCEQ. To this end, some general guidelines are followed when selecting sampling sites, as basically outlined below, and discussed thoroughly in the TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures, Volume 1 (RG-415). Overall consideration is given to accessibility and safety. All monitoring activities have been developed in coordination with the CRP Steering Committee and with the TCEQ.

1. Locate stream sites so that samples can be safely collected from the centroid of flow. Centroid is defined as the midpoint of that portion of stream width which contains 50 percent of the total flow. If few sites are available for a stream segment, choose one that would best represent the water body, and not an unusual condition or contaminant source. Avoid backwater areas or eddies when selecting a stream site.

2. At a minimum for reservoirs, locate sites near the dam (reservoirs) and in the major arms. Larger reservoirs might also include stations in the middle and upper (riverine) areas. Select

sites that best represent the water body by avoiding coves and back water areas. A single monitoring site is considered representative of 25 percent of the total reservoir acres, but not more than 5,120 acres.

3. Routine monitoring sites are selected to maximize stream coverage or basin coverage. Very long segments may require more stations. As a rule of thumb, stream segments between 25 and 50 miles long require two stations, and longer than 50 miles require three or more depending on the existence of areas with significantly different sources of contamination or potential water quality concerns. Major hydrological features, such as the confluence of a major tributary or an instream dam, may also limit the spatial extent of an assessment based on one station.

4. Because historical water quality data can be very useful in assessing use attainment or impairment, it may be best to use sites that are on current or past monitoring schedules.

5. All classified segments (including reservoirs) should have at least one routine monitoring site that adequately characterizes the water body, and should be coordinated with the TCEQ or other qualified monitoring entities reporting routine data to TCEQ.

6. Routine monitoring sites may be selected to bracket sources of pollution, influence of tributaries, changes in land uses, and hydrological modifications.

7. Sites should be accessible. When possible, stream sites should have a USGS or IBWC stream flow gauge. If not, it should be possible to conduct flow measurement during routine visits.

Currently, monitoring activities occurring or proposed within the Cypress Basin that could be used to make water quality management decisions include the following:

TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring (SWQM) program, USGS monitoring program, Monitoring activities directed through the Clean Rivers Program, TCEQ 305(b) Assessments Total Maximum Daily Load Determinations, Texas Forest Service studies of logging best management practices, and Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB) studies of agricultural best

management practices.

The Cypress Creek Basin Clean Rivers Monitoring Program has been divided into three areas: (1) Routine station monitoring (RT); (2) Bias Season monitoring (BS); and (3) Special Studies (SS). The locations of the RT and BS monitoring stations recommended here reflect the need for continued monitoring at locations which have been sampled historically, to focus on those segments which were determined to be of most concern through the segment evaluation and ranking procedure, and to eventually provide water quality data and analysis for the entire basin. All monitoring procedures and methods will follow the guidelines prescribed in this Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), the 2003 TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures Manual, Volume 1, and the 2005 TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures Manual, Volume 2.

2.1 Routine Station Monitoring

The RT monitoring stations are structured to provide long term data on water quality at locations draining major subwatersheds and important river segment reaches within the Cypress Creek Basin. The primary objective of collecting comparable water quality data over a substantial period of time is to identify temporal trends in water quality and to differentiate water quality characteristics, impairments and possible causes over discrete subwatershed areas. Under this program, seven stations have been scheduled in advance without intentionally trying to target any certain environmental condition. Field parameters and conventional water for laboratory analysis will be collected regardless of the conditions encountered. Due to holding time issues to meet NELAC compliance, indicator bacteria (Escherichia coli (E. coli)) will not be collected until the extension of the current holding time constraint is approved by the TCEQ. The Caddo Lake Institute (CLI) and the Franklin County Water District (FCWD) will perform the water quality data collection for the RT stations (Figure1). Parameters to be measured or sampled are listed in Table A7.1.

The CLI will conduct water quality monitoring on Caddo Lake at two routine stations. Quarterly monitoring will occur at Mid-lake (TCEQ Station 10283) and at the junction of boat lanes 1K and 1L in Turtle Shell (TCEQ Station 15249). Field parameters will include the measurements of water temperature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, pH and water clarity (Secchi depth). Conventional water quality samples will be collected for laboratory analysis of total suspended solids, total dissolved solids, alkalinity, sulfate, chloride, ammonia nitrogen, total phosphorous, nitrate nitrogen, nitrite nitrogen, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, total organic carbon, hardness, chlorophyll-a and pheophytin.

The CLI will continue to collect and enumerate E. coli bacteria samples on a monthly basis from five stations in Segments 0401 and 0402. Field parameter measurements will be taken concurrent with the bacteria sample collection at Mid-lake, Turtle Shell, the mouth of Harrison Bayou (TCEQ Station 10286), Clinton Lake (TCEQ Station 14236) and the Caddo Lake State Park Boat Ramp (TCEQ Station 15022). The results will not be submitted into SWQMIS since these samples will not be in compliance with NELAC standards. Currently, bacteria samples collected by CLI are delivered to the ETBU laboratory with 1 hour left (average) of the 6-hour holding time requirement. Drive time to Kilgore from Marshall would result in violation of this time requisite. CLI will provide funding support for all expenses associated with collection and analysis during FY2008-2009.

In cooperation with the TCEQ Clean Rivers Program, the Franklin County Water District has

conducted in-kind surface water quality monitoring on Lake Cypress Springs in accordance to methods, standards and procedures outlined in the CRP QAPP since April 2000. FCWD’s participation will involve quarterly monitoring of field parameters, E. coli, and the CRP conventional parameter set at one open water station (Lakeview Mid-Lake) in the West End Arm of the reservoir. Dissolved metals in water, total metals in water and metals in sediment samples will be collected on an annual basis to assess the potential for exposure of either humans or aquatic community to toxic concentrations.

The City of Marshall retains (and provides funding for) a routine station located on Big Cypress Creek near the City of Marshall water intake. No CRP funds are associated with this station, but will be sampled by the Caddo Lake Institute consistent with the collection procedures outlined in the 2003 TCEQ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Procedures Manual, Volume 1 during the quarterly routine station sampling events. Data obtained from this location is currently being used by the City’s Water Treatment Superintendent as a process tool to assess water quality conditions associated with Big Cypress Creek and is being provided to NETMWD for inclusion into the TCEQ SWQMIS database.

2.2 Biased Season Station Monitoring

Historically, NETMWD employed an intensive/systematic monitoring program designed on a rotational approach to investigate known areas of concern and detect areas of potential concern. The systematic monitoring-type program was intended to efficiently utilize limited resources to detect problem reaches throughout the Cypress Creek Basin, and to help localize pollutant sources to specific drainages. As described in Section A6, TCEQ has streamlined their monitoring-type strategy for those parameters which are sampled during a certain part of the year. Aquatic life monitoring (ALM) and 24-hour monitoring for DO concentrations will be measured in the index period (15 March through 15 October) and the critical period (1 July through 30 September) in accordance to the guidelines found in the SWQM Procedures Manual and Biological Fact Sheet.

Sample monitoring will focus on the Caddo Lake (Segment 0401), Big Cypress Creek below Lake O’ the Pines (Segment 0402), Big Cypress Creek below Lake Bob Sandlin (Segment 0404), James Bayou (Segment 0407), and Little Cypress Creek (Segment 0409) watersheds. Figure 2 shows the biased season monitoring locations throughout the Cypress Basin for FY 2008.

A total of five sampling location sites have been selected. The diurnal (24-hour) DO level variations will be measured at Caddo Lake near the mouth of Harrison Bayou (TCEQ Station 10286), Caddo Lake at Devils Elbow near Clinton Lake (TCEQ Station 14236), Walkers Creek upstream of Big Cypress Creek (TCEQ Station 16714), Middle Lilly Creek at Camp County Road 3322 (TCEQ Station 20135) between March and August 2008 to monitor compliance with TCEQ dissolved oxygen standards. The 24-hour DO concentrations will be measured at Hughes Creek twice; once during the index period and once during the critical period. At the remaining locations, measurements will be taken four times: twice in the index period and twice in the critical period. Flow will be measured essentially at all creek stations when flowing conditions prevail or will be recorded from a nearby USGS gaging station.

Hughes Creek at State Highway 155 northeast of Avinger, Texas (TCEQ Station 16936) has been selected for aquatic life monitoring during FY2008 based on access and habitat suitability. Biological surveys of fish and benthic macroinvertebrates to assess the aquatic community composition and integrity and a habitat evaluation will be conducted twice during the low flow period of early to late summer of next year (2008).

2.3 Special Study

Special studies are additional water monitoring projects designed to address a specific concern or to provide additional information as a result of a previous monitoring effort or a current issue affecting water quality in the Cypress Creek Basin. The focus of these studies has been the improvement of water quality within the basin, and documentation of watershed conditions both current and historical. As part of the Texas Clean Rivers Program (CRP), these special efforts deal with specific water quality issues or are used to support other programs (e.g., TMDL development) addressing water quality issues in the basin. An important indicator of the possible need for a special study within an area is the 303(d) List produced by the State. This list identifies waters for which preventive measures are not sufficient to achieve water quality standards.

A proposal to conduct a special study during the FY2006-2007 contract period was presented on FCWD’s behalf before the Steering Committee on 30 March 2005. This study was postponed until wet weather monitoring equipment currently being used by the Texas Forest Service is available. FCWD proposes to use automatic storm water sampling equipment to monitor nutrient and organic material loading in Lake Cypress Springs during high flow events. Big Cypress Creek and Frog Creek are the two watersheds (Figure 3) proposed for future wet weather monitoring based on their surface inflow contributions to the Lake Cypress Springs watershed, the range of land uses each encompasses within the Lake Cypress Springs watershed and the tendency of each to exhibit more frequent or extreme problems with water quality during past CRP monitoring.

An amendment will be prepared, under TCEQ’s directive, to detail the changes made to the Cypress Creek Basin Clean Rivers Program QAPP FY2008-2009 to update the Appendix B (Sampling Process design and Monitoring Schedule Plan) for fiscal year 2009.

3.0 MONITORING SITES

Monitoring Tables for fiscal year 2008 are presented on the following page.

MONITORING SITES FOR FY 2008

The sample design for surface water quality monitoring is shown in Table B1.2 below. This table summarizes sampling frequency, and the entity(ies) responsible for sampling each monitoring station location.

Table B1.2 Sample Design and Schedule, FY 2008for the Cypress Creek BasinBasin_id: 4

Segment: 0401 Caddo LakeRegion Site Description Station

IDStartDate

EndDate

SC1/SC2

ProgCode

Monitoring Frequencies (per year)

* ** 24hrDO

AquaticHabitat

Benthics Nekton MetalsWater

OrganicsWater

MetalsSediment

OrganicsSediment

Conventional Amb Tox Wat

Amb Tox Sed

Indicator Bacteria

Inst Flow

Fish Tissue Field

5 Caddo Lake Mid-lake 10283 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL RT 4 12

5 Caddo Lake near the mouth of Harrison Bayou

10286 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL RT 12

5 Caddo Lake near the mouth of Harrison Bayou

10286 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL BS 4 4

5 Caddo Lake at Devils Elbow in Upper Lake near Clinton Lake

14236 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL RT 12

5 Caddo Lake at Devils Elbow in Upper Lake near Clinton Lake

14236 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL BS 4 4

5 Caddo Lake at Junction of Boat Lanes 1K & 1 L in Turtle

Shell

15249 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL RT 4 12

* NT=NETMWD, CL=Caddo Lake, and FC=Franklin Count Water District** RT=Routine monitoring and BS=Biased-Season sampling

Table B1.2 (Cont’d)Basin_id: 4

Segment: 0402 Big Cypress Creek below Lake O’ the PinesRegion Site Description Station

IDStartDate

EndDate

SC1/SC2

ProgCode


* ** 24hrDO

AquaticHabitat


OrganicsWater

MetalsSediment

OrganicsSediment


Amb Tox Sed

Bacteria Inst Flow

Fish Tissue Field

5 Big Cypress Creek at Caddo Lake State Park Boat Ramp

15022 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL RT 12

5 Big Cypress near the City of Marshall water intake

16254 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL RT 4 4+ 4

5 Hughes Creek at SH 155 NE of Avinger

16936 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL RT 4 4 4

5 Hughes Creek at SH 155 NE of Avinger

16936 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL BS 2 2 2 2 2 2

* NT=NETMWD, CL=Caddo Lake, and FC=Franklin Count Water District** RT=Routine monitoring and BS=Biased-Season sampling+Internet Flow


Segment: 0403 Lake O’ the PinesRegion Site Description Station

IDStartDate

EndDate

SC1/SC2

ProgCode


* ** 24hrDO

AquaticHabitat


OrganicsWater

MetalsSediment

OrganicsSediment


Amb Tox Sed

Bacteria Inst Flow

Fish Tissue Field

5 NONE 9/1/07 8/31/08

* * NT=NETMWD, CL=Caddo Lake, and FC=Franklin Count Water District** RT=Routine monitoring and BS=Biased-Season sampling


Segment: 0404 Big Cypress Creek below Lake Bob SandlinRegion Site Description Station

IDStartDate

EndDate

SC1/SC2

ProgCode


* ** 24hrDO

AquaticHabitat


OrganicsWater

MetalsSediment

OrganicsSediment


Amb Tox Sed

Bacteria Inst Flow

Fish Tissue Field

5 Walkers Creek upstream of Big Cypress Creek

16714 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL BS 4 4 4



Segment: 0405 Lake Cypress SpringsRegion Site Description Station

IDStartDate

EndDate

SC1/SC2

ProgCode


* ** 24hrDO

AquaticHabitat


OrganicsWater

MetalsSediment

OrganicsSediment


Amb Tox Sed

Bacteria Inst Flow

Fish Tissue Field

5 Lake Cypress Springs at Lakeview Midlake

17872 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/FC RT 1 1 4 4 4

5 Big Cypress Creek at SH 37 north of Winnsboro

15260 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/FC BF x x x x

5 Lake Cypress Springs at Frog Creek

17518 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/FC BF x x x x

* NT=NETMWD, CL=Caddo Lake, and FC=Franklin Count Water District** RT=Routine monitoring and BS=Biased-Season samplingx Potential wet weather special study for bacteria/nutrients


Segment: 0406 Black BayouRegion Site Description Station

IDStartDate

EndDate

SC1/SC2

ProgCode


* ** 24hrDO

AquaticHabitat


OrganicsWater

MetalsSediment

OrganicsSediment


Amb Tox Sed

Bacteria Inst Flow

Fish Tissue Field

5 NONE 9/1/07 8/31/08



Segment: 0407 James BayouRegion Site Description Station

IDStartDate

EndDate

SC1/SC2

ProgCode


* ** 24hrDO

AquaticHabitat


OrganicsWater

MetalsSediment

OrganicsSediment


Amb Tox Sed

Bacteria Inst Flow

Fish Tissue Field

5 James Bayou at CR 1775 SW of Kildare, Texas

10321 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL RT 4 4



Segment: 0408 Lake Bob SandlinRegion Site Description Station

IDStartDate

EndDate

SC1/SC2

ProgCode


* ** 24hrDO

AquaticHabitat


OrganicsWater

MetalsSediment

OrganicsSediment


Amb Tox Sed

Bacteria Inst Flow

Fish Tissue Field

5 NONE 9/1/07 8/31/08


Table B1.2 (Concluded)Basin_id: 4

Segment: 0409 Little Cypress Bayou (Creek)Region Site Description Station

IDStartDate

EndDate

SC1/SC2

ProgCode


* ** 24hrDO

AquaticHabitat


OrganicsWater

MetalsSediment

OrganicsSediment


Amb Tox Sed

Bacteria Inst Flow

Fish Tissue Field

5 Middle Lilly Creek at Camp Co. 3322

20135 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL RT 4 4 4

5 Middle Lilly Creek at Camp Co. 3322

20135 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL BS 4 4 4

5 Lilly Creek at FM 556 20153 9/1/07 8/31/08

NT/CL RT 4 4 4


5.0 Critical vs. non-critical measurements

All data taken for CRP and entered into the TCEQ SWQMIS database are considered critical.


APPENDIX C:

FIELD/LABORATORY/ASSESSMENT DATA SHEETS

1. Field Parameters and Stream Physical Characteristics Checklist 2. Field Parameters and Reservoir Physical Characteristics Checklist3. Part I - Stream Physical Characteristics Worksheet4. Part II - Summary of Physical Characteristics of Water Body5. Part III - Habitat Quality Index6. Stream Flow (Discharge) Measurement Form7. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data Sheet (Field)8. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data Sheet (Laboratory)9. Nekton Collection Field Data Sheet10. Nekton Data Form for Laboratory Identification and Enumeration



Austin, Texas 78745(512) 912-5100

Page: ______ of ______

STREAM PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS CHECKLISTJob Name: _____________________ Job No.: _______ Date: ___/____/____ Observers: _____________

Stream: ____________________ Station ID: ________ Time: ________ Nearest Stream Segment: _______

Location of Station: ____________________________________________________________________

Weather Conditions: clear partly cloudy cloudy rain Wind Intensity: calm slight moderate strong

Length of Stream Evaluated: ______________________ Days Since Last Rain: ____________________

Stream Type:

perennial ___ intermittent with perennial pools ___ intermittent ___ Flow Severity:

1) No Flow 2) Low Flow 3) Normal 4) Flood 5) High 6) DryEvidence of

FlowFluctuations:

Observed Stream Uses:

Adjacent Left Bank -Land Use: Right Bank -

Aesthetics: 1 Wilderness 3 Common 2 Natural 4 Offensive

Water Conditions:(foam, flood, etc.)

ChannelObstructions/Modifications:

Stream Bends: No. Well Defined

No. Moderately Defined

No. PoorlyDefined:

No. of Riffles:

Turbidity: Color: Water Odor: Flow: Sediment Odor:

Air Temp:________ oCWater Temp:________ oC

pH: Conductivity: DO:

DO%:

DOC:

Secchi Depth:

____________ meters

Riparian TreesVegetation: (%): _____

Shrubs (%): _____

Grasses, Forbs (%): _____

Cult. Fields(%): _____

Other (%): _____

* Note: Copy on Waterproof Paper. Revised from TNRCC form TNRCC-WQS hqi_phys.tbl (8 Oct. 2001)

Parameters to be sampled at this station:

Field _____ Fecal _____ Total Metals in Water _____Conventional _____ E-coli _____ Dissolved Metals in Water ____Flow _____ 24 Hr. DO _____ Sediment _____Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAPP_15 August 2007 Page 87

Profile _____ Organics in Water _____Photographs Taken _____ General Observations:___________________________________________________________________ HDR Engineering, Inc. HDR Engineering, Inc. 4401 West Gate, Suite 400 4401 West Gate, Suite 400 Austin, Texas 78745 Austin, Texas 78745 (512) 912-5100 (512) 912-5100

Page: ____ of:_____ Page: ____ of:_____ RESERVOIR PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS CHECKLIST RESERVOIR PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS CHECKLIST

Job Name:____________________________________Job No.:_______Date:___/___/___Observers:________________Job Name:____________________________________Job No.:_______Date:___/___/___Observers:________________

Reservoir:___________________________Station ID:________Time:________ Nearest Stream Segment:____________Reservoir:___________________________Station ID:________Time:________ Nearest Stream Segment:____________

Location of Station:_________________________________________________________________________________Location of Station:_________________________________________________________________________________

Weather Conditions: Clear Prtly cldy Cloudy Rain Weather Conditions: Clear Prtly cldy Cloudy Rain % Cloud Cover: _______ Air Temp:__________% Cloud Cover: _______ Air Temp:__________

Adjacent Land Use: ___________________________ Days Since Last Rain:______________________________Adjacent Land Use: ___________________________ Days Since Last Rain:______________________________

Evidence of Flow Fluctuations:____________________ Observed Reservoir Uses: _________________________Evidence of Flow Fluctuations:____________________ Observed Reservoir Uses: _________________________

Water Conditions: ____________________________ Water Conditions: ____________________________ Secchi Disk Depth: ______________________________Secchi Disk Depth: ______________________________

Turbidity: ___________ Water Odor: ___________ Sediment Odor: _____________ Water Color: _______________Turbidity: ___________ Water Odor: ___________ Sediment Odor: _____________ Water Color: _______________

Reservoir Water Level : _______ ft. Below Normal Normal Above Normal Total Depth: _____________Reservoir Water Level : _______ ft. Below Normal Normal Above Normal Total Depth: _____________

Wind Intensity: Calm Slight Moderate Strong Water Surface: Calm Ripples Wind Intensity: Calm Slight Moderate Strong Water Surface: Calm Ripples WavesWaves Water Column Measurements Water Column Measurements

Water DepthWater Depth Field Parameter Field Parameter

Meters Meters Temperature (ºC)Temperature (ºC) Cond. (µS/cm)Cond. (µS/cm) pH pH D.O. (mg/L) D.O. (mg/L) D.O. (% Sat.) D.O. (% Sat.) D.O. (Charge) D.O. (Charge)

0.3 0.3

1.0 1.0

2.0 2.0

3.0 3.0

4.0 4.0

5.0 5.0

6.0 6.0

7.0 7.0

8.0 8.0

9.0 9.0

10.0 10.0

Parameters to be sampled at this station:


Field _____ Fecal _____ Total Metals in Water _____Conventional _____ E-coli _____ Dissolved Metals in Water ____Flow _____ 24 Hr. DO _____ Sediment _____

Profile _____ Organics in Water _____Photographs Taken _____ General Observations:__________________________________________________________________


Texas Commission on Environmental QualitySurface Water Quality Monitoring Program

Habitat Assessment Worksheet B Part I of III

Worksheet # Part I - Stream Physical Characteristics Worksheet Page 1 of __

Observers: Date: Time:

Weather conditions:

Stream: Stream segment no.

Location of site: Length of reach:

Observed stream uses:

Stream type (circle one): perennial or intermittent w/ perennial pools

Stream bends: No. well defined

No. moderately defined

No. poorly defined

Aesthetics (circle one): (1) wilderness (2) natural (3) common (4) offensive

Channel obstructions or modifications: No. of riffles

Channel flow status (circle one): high moderate low no flow

Riparian vegetation (%): Left Bank Right Bank Notes

Trees

Shrubs

Grasses or forbs

Cultivated fields

Other

Site map:

TCEQ 20156-A (Rev. 4-14-2005)


Worksheet # Part I - Stream Physical Characteristics Worksheet (continued) Page __ of __

Location oftransect

Streamwidth(m)

Leftbankslope(E)

Left bank erosion

potential(%)

Stream Depths (m) at Points Across Transect

Thalweg Depth:

Right bankslope(E)

Rightbank erosion

potential(%)

Tree canopy (%)

Total

Habitat type (circle one)Riffle RunGlide Pool

Dominant substrate type Dominant types riparian vegetation:Left bank:

Right bank:

% Gravel or larger

CL

CR

Macrophytes (circle one)Abundant CommonRare Absent

Algae (circle one)Abundant CommonRare Absent

Width of natural buffer vegetation (m) Instream cover types: % Instream cover

LB

LB: RB: RB

Location oftransect

Streamwidth(m)

Leftbankslope(E)

Left bank erosion

potential(%)

Stream depths (m) at points across transect

Thalweg depth:

Right bankslope(E)

Rightbank erosion

potential(%)

Tree canopy(%)

Total

Habitat type (Circle One)Riffle RunGlide Pool


Right bank:

% Gravel or larger

CL

CR




LB

LB: RB: RB

Location oftransect

Streamwidth(m)

Leftbankslope(E)

Left bank erosion

potential(%)


Thalweg depth:

Right bankslope(E)

Rightbank erosion

potential(%)

Tree canopy(%)

Total



Right bank:

% Gravel or larger

CL

CR




LB

LB: RB: RB

TCEQ 20156-A (Rev. 4-14-2005)

Part I - Stream Physical Characteristics Worksheet (continued) Page __ of __


Worksheet #

Location oftransect

Streamwidth(m)

Leftbankslope(E)

Left bank erosion

potential(%)

Stream Depths (m) at Points Across Transect

Thalweg Depth:

Right bankslope(E)

Rightbank erosion

potential(%)

Tree canopy (%)

Total



Right bank:

% Gravel or larger

CL

CR



Width of natural buffer vegetation (m)

Instream cover types: % Instream cover

LB

LB: RB: RB

Location oftransect

Streamwidth(m)

Leftbankslope(E)

Left bank erosion

potential(%)


Thalweg depth:

Right bankslope(E)

Rightbank erosion

potential(%)

Tree canopy(%)

Total

Habitat type (Circle One)Riffle RunGlide Pool


Right bank:

% Gravel or larger

CL

CR





LB

LB: RB: RB

Location oftransect

Streamwidth(m)

Leftbankslope(E)

Left bank erosion

potential(%)


Thalweg depth:

Right bankslope(E)

Rightbank erosion

potential(%)

Tree canopy(%)

Total



Right bank:

% Gravel or larger

CL

CR





LB

LB: RB: RB

TCEQ 20156-A (Rev. 4-14-2005)


Texas Commission on Environmental QualitySurface Water Quality Monitoring Program

Habitat Assessment Worksheet B Part II of III

Part II - Summary of Physical Characteristics of Water BodyUsing information from all of the transects and measurements in Part I and other sources, report the following general characteristics or averages for the entire reach:Stream Name DatePhysical Characteristics ValueStream bed slope over evaluated reach (from USGS map; elevation change in meters/reach length in meters)Approximate drainage area above the transect furthest downstream (from USGS or county highway map in km2)Stream order

Length of stream evaluated (in meters or kilometers)

Number of lateral transects made

Average stream width (in meters)

Average stream depth (in meters)

Instantaneous stream flow (in ft3/sec)

Indicate flow measurement method

Channel flow status (high, moderate, low, or no flow)

Maximum pool width (in meters)

Maximum pool depth (in meters)

Total number of stream bends

Number of well defined bends

Number of moderately defined bends

Number of poorly defined bends

Total number of riffles

Dominant substrate type

Average percent of substrate gravel sized or larger

Average percent instream cover

Number of stream cover types

Average percent stream bank erosion potential

Average stream bank slope (in degrees)

Average width of natural buffer vegetation (in meters)

Average riparian vegetation percent composition by: (total to equal 100%)

Trees

Shrubs

Grasses and Forbes

Cultivated fields

Other

Average percent tree canopy coverage

Overall aesthetic appraisal of the stream TCEQ-20156-B (Rev. 04-15-2004)


Texas Commission on Environmental QualitySurface Water Quality Monitoring

Habitat Assessment Worksheet B Part III of III

Part III - Habitat Quality Index

Habitat Parameter Scoring Category

Available Instream Cover

Abundant>50% of substrate favorable for colonization and fish cover; good mix of several stable (not new fall or transient) cover types such as snags, cobble, undercut banks, macrophytes

Common30-50% of substrate supports stable habitat; adequate habitat for maintenance of populations; may be limited in the number of different habitat types

Rare10-29.9% of substrate supports stable habitat; habitat availability less than desirable; substrate frequently disturbed or removed

Absent<10% of substrate supports stable habitat; lack of habitat is obvious; substrate unstable or lacking

Score_________ 4 3 2 1

Bottom Substrate Stability

Stable>50% gravel or larger substrate; gravel, cobble, boulders; dominant substrate type is gravel or larger

Moderately Stable30-50% gravel or larger substrate; dominant substrate type is mix of gravel with some finer sediments

Moderately Unstable10-29.9% gravel or larger substrate; dominant substrate type is finer than gravel, but may still be a mix of sizes

Unstable<10% gravel or larger substrate; substrate is uniform sand, silt, clay or bedrock

Score_________ 4 3 2 1

Number of Riffles

To be counted, riffles must extend >50% the width of the channel and be at least as long as the channel width

Abundant> 5 riffles

Common2-4 riffles

Rare1 riffle

AbsentNo riffles

Score_________ 4 3 2 1

Dimensions of Largest Pool

LargePool covers more than 50% of the channel width; maximum depth is >1 meter

ModeratePool covers approximately 50% or slightly less of the channel width; maximum depth is 0.5-1 meter

SmallPool covers approximately 25% of the channel width; maximum depth is <0.5 meter

AbsentNo existing pools; only shallow auxiliary pockets

Score__________ 4 3 2 1

Channel Flow Status HighWater reaches the base of both lower banks; < 5% of channel substrate is exposed

ModerateWater fills >75% of the channel; or <25% of channel substrate is exposed

LowWater fills 25-75% of the available channel and/or riffle substrates are mostly exposed

No FlowVery little water in the channel and mostly present in standing pools; or stream is dry

Score_________ 3 2 1 0


Part III - Habitat Quality Index (continued)

Habitat Parameter Scoring Category

Bank Stability StableLittle evidence (<10%) of erosion or bank failure; bank angles average <30

Moderately StableSome evidence (10-29.9%) of erosion or bank failure; small areas of erosion mostly healed over; bank angles average 30-39.9

Moderately UnstableEvidence of erosion or bank failure is common (30-50%); high potential of erosion during flooding; bank angles average 40-60

UnstableLarge and frequent evidence (>50%) of erosion or bank failure; raw areas frequent along steep banks; bank angles average >60

Score_________ 3 2 1 0

Channel Sinuosity High> 2 well-defined bends with deep outside areas (cut banks) and shallow inside areas (point bars) present

Moderate1 well-defined bend

or> 3 moderately-defined bends present

Low<3 moderately-defined bends

oronly poorly-defined bends present

NoneStraight channel; may be channelized

Score__________ 3 2 1 0

Riparian Buffer Vegetation

ExtensiveWidth of natural buffer is >20 meters

WideWidth of natural buffer is 10.1-20 meters

ModerateWidth of natural buffer is 5-10 meters

NarrowWidth of natural buffer is <5 meters

Score__________ 3 2 1 0

Aesthetics of Reach WildernessOutstanding natural beauty; usually wooded or unpastured area; water clarity is usually exceptional

Natural AreaTrees and/or native vegetation are common; some development evident (from fields, pastures, dwellings); water clarity may be slightly turbid

Common SettingNot offensive; area is developed, but uncluttered such as in an urban park; water clarity may be turbid or discolored

OffensiveStream does not enhance the aesthetics of the area; cluttered; highly developed; may be a dumping area; water clarity is usually turbid or discolored

Score__________ 3 2 1 0

Total Score_____________

HABITAT QUALITY INDEX

26 - 31 Exceptional20 - 25 High14 - 19 Intermediate< 13 Limited

TCEQ-20156-C (Rev. 04-15-2004)


Page 2 of 2



STREAM FLOW (DISCHARGE) MEASUREMENT FORM

Stream: Date:Station Description:Time Begin: Time End: Meter Type: Marsh McBirneyObservers: Stream Width*: Section Width:Observations: Measurements taken from left right to left right bank above below the bridge crossing

Section Section Observational Velocity Area Flowmidpoint depth Depth At Point Average WxD VxA

(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/sec) (ft/sec) (ft^2) (cfs)

m3/s x 35.3 =ft3/s Total Flow (Discharge) (3Q)Make a minimum of 10 measuremetns when the total width is >5.0 feet, 20 measurements preferredMeasure at 60% of depth from surface where <2.5 feet deep. Measure at 20% and 80% of depth in waters >2.5feet.


Austin, Texas 78745(512) 912-5100

BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE DATA SHEET

Stream: SLOC:Collector(s):

Start Time:

End Time: Date: / /

Station CharacteristicsStoret Parameter Value Units84161 Stream order n/a89961 Ecoregion TX Code89921 Undercut bank at sample point %89922 Overhanging brush at sample point %89926 Macrophyte bed at sample point %89927 Snags and brush at sample point %

Substrate Characteristics (Values must total 100%)Storet Parameter Value Units89923 Gravel substrate at sample point %89924 Sand substrate at sample point %89925 Soft bottom at sample point %89928 Bedrock at sample point %

Sampling EffortStoret Parameter Value Units89903 Kicknet Effort, area kicked m2

89904 Kicknet Effort, time kicked minutes89905 Snags and Shoreline Sampling Effort, time picked minutes89950 Benthic Sampler

1=Surber 2=Ekman 3=Kicknet 4=Peterson 5=Hester-Dendyn/a

89946 Mesh Size, any net or sieve, average bar (diagonal measurement) for benthic collection

cm

------------------------------To Be Filled Out In the Laboratory Only--------------------------------- Storet Parameter Value Units89906 Number of Individuals in Benthic subsample n/a89899 Biological Reporting Unit

1=number of individuals from sub-sample 3=number of individuals from/m2

2=number of individuals from/ft2 4=total number in kicknet

n/a

90055 Total Taxa Richness, Benthos n/a90008 EPT Index, Abundance n/a90007 Biotic Index (HBI) n/a90062 Chironomidae %90042 Dominant Taxon, Benthos %90010 Dominant FFG %90036 Predators %90050 Ratio of Intolerant:Tolerant Taxa n/a90069 Total Trichoptera as Hydropsychidae %90052 Non-insect taxa n/a90025 Collector-gatherers %90054 Total number as Elmidae %Cypress Creek Basin Planning Agency QAPP_15 August 2007 Page 98

TAG NUMBER: COMMENTS:


HDR ENGINEERING, INC. MACROINVERTEBRATE DATA FORMONE COMPANY │ Many SolutionsSM

TYPE _________________________

JOB NAME ___________________________ JOB # ___________ STATION, SAMPLE OR REP # __________

PAGE _______OF _________COLLECTOR(S) ___________ COLLECTION DATE : _____/______/______

PICKED # OF BY ________________ BOTTLES _________ _____/______/______

BOTTLETAXONOMIST ___________ # (s) _________ _____/______/______

DATA COLLECTIONENTERED BY __________ # ___________ _____/______/______

TAXACOUNT


D M Y

D M Y

D M Y

COPY ALL INFORMATION GIVEN ON SAMPLE LABEL

D M Y


Austin, Texas 78745(512) 912-5100

NEKTON COLLECTIONS FIELD DATA SHEETCollection Permit # SPR-0990-292

Waterbody: Date: Time: Station #: County:

Gear Used:Boat Mounted Electrofisher:

Low Range

High Range

AC or DC Pulses/sec % on amps (a) Duration (sec)

Backpack Electrofisher: Voltage (v)

Frequency (pps)

Pulse width (msec)

Duration (sec)

Gill Net Mesh Size Length DurationTrawl Width # Hauls DurationSeine Length # Hauls DurationCast Net Diameter # Casts DurationOtherCollectors:


NEKTON COLLECTIONS FIELD DATA SHEETCollection Permit # SP4-0990-292

Page 2 of 2

Common Name/ Scientific NameSize Classes (inches)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Total

NumberNumber

PreservedPhysical

Defects **

** 1 - Discoloration 2 - Deformities 3 - Eroded Fins 4 - Excessive Mucus 5 - Excessive Ext. Parasites 6 - Fungus


7 - Poor Condition 8 - Reddening 9 - Scoliosis 10 - Tumors 11 - Ulcers 12 - Other


HDR ENGINEERING, INC. NEKTON DATA FORMONE COMPANY │ Many SolutionsSM

TYPE _________________________ JOB NAME ___________________________ JOB # ___________ STATION, SAMPLE OR REP # __________

PAGE _______OF _________COLLECTOR(S) ___________ COLLECTION DATE : _____/______/______

STATION, SAMPLEOR REP # ________________ TYPE __________ EFFORT _____________

TAXONOMIST ___________ BOTTLE #(s) _________ _____/______/______

DATA COLLECTIONENTERED BY __________ # ___________ _____/______/______

TAXACOUNT/LENGTH/WEIGHT


D M Y

D M Y

D M Y

COPY ALL INFORMATION GIVEN ON SAMPLE LABEL

APPENDIX D

CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY FORMS

1. Biological2. Conventional Water Sample Parameters FRA6 (A)3. Conventional Water Samples Parameters NET4 (A)4. Filtered Sample: Dissolved Metals FRA6 (A2)5. Filtered Sample: Dissolved Metals NET4 (A2)6. Total Metals In Water FRA6 (A3)7. Total Metals in Water NET4 (A3)8. Sediment Sample Parameters FRA6 (A4)9. Sediment Sample Parameters NET4 (A4)



Austin, Texas 78745(512) 912-5100

CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORDBiological

Job Name: Job No.:Samplers: Page: of:Sample Location (s):

Station(ID No.)

Date Time Station Location/Description Type Sample No. of Items

Relinquished by: Date:Time:

Received by:


Received by:


Received by:


JOBS/TOOLS/COFCFORM.DOC


















APPENDIX EFIELD AND LABORATORY CORRECTIVE ACTION FORM


Field and Laboratory Corrective Action FormCypress Creek Basin Clean Rivers Program

Date:Problem:

Person(s) Involved:

Cause of Problem:

Corrective Action:

Date:Follow-up Action:

Quality Review:

Reviewed by:Field or Lab Supervisor Date

Approved by:Quality Assurance Officer Date


APPENDIX FLETTER OF AGREEMENT

ATTACHMENT 1


Letter to document adherence to the Cypress Creek Basin FY2008-2009 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) on behalf of Northeast Texas Municipal Water District

TO: (name)(organization)

FROM: (name)(organization)

Please sign and return this form by (date) to:

(address)

I acknowledge receipt of the “referenced document(s)”. I understand the document(s) describe quality assurance, quality control, data management and reporting, and other technical activities that must be implemented to ensure the results of work performed will satisfy stated performance criteria.

Signature Date
