c/EPA
         United States
         Environmental Protection
         Agency
           Environmental Research
           Laboratory
           Athens GA 3061 3
EPA-600/6-82-004b
September 1982
         Research and Development
Water Quality
Assessment:

A Screening
Procedure for Toxic
and   Conventional
Pollutants—Part 2

-------
                                                       EPA-600/6-82-0045
                                                       September 1982
                     WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT:
                  A Screening Procedure for Toxic
                    and Conventional Pollutants

                              Part 2

                                by

W.B. Mills, J.D. Dean, D.B. Porcella, S.A. Gherini, R.J.M. Hudson,
               W.E. Frick, G.L. Rupp, and G.L. Bowie

                     Tetra Tech, Incorporated
                   Lafayette, California  94549
                      Contract No. 68-03-2673
              Prepared in Cooperation with U.S. EPA's

                 Center for Water Quality Modeling
                 Environmental Research Laboratory
                         Athens, Georgia

               Monitoring and Data Support Division
             Office of Water Regulations and Standards
                          Office of Water
                          Washington, D.C.

                        Technology Transfer
           Center for Environmental Research Information
                         Cincinnati, Ohio
                 ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
                 OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
               U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
                      ATHENS, GEORGIA  30613
                               -....v^^Tvf.qj protection Agency
                                  ",-iv (5PL-16)
                                <  n;:1:: Street, Boom 1670
                               ii,   60604

-------
                                DISCLAIMER

      Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S.  Environmental  Protection
Agency.
                                   n

-------
                                 ABSTRACT

      New technical developments in the field of water quality assessment
and a reordering of water quality priorities prompted a revision  of Water
Quality Assessment:  A Screening Methodology for Mondesignated 208 Areas
(EPA-600/9-77-023).The utility of the revised manual is enhanced by the
inclusion of information on the accumulation, transport,  and fate of toxic
chemicals in the environment.   The new subtitle—A Screening Procedure for
Toxic and Conventional Pollutants—reflects the added information.

      Applying the manual's simple techniques, the user is now capable of
assessing the loading and fate of conventional pollutants (temperature,
biochemical oxygen demand-dissolved oxygen, nutrients, and sediments) and
toxic pollutants (from the U.S. EPA list of priority pollutants)  in streams,
impoundments, and estuaries.  The techniques are readily programmed on hand-
held calculators.  Most of the data required for using these procedures are
contained in the manual.

      Because of its size, the manual  has been divided into three parts.  Part
1 contains the introduction and chapters on the aquatic fate of toxic organic
substances, waste load calculations, and the assessment of water  quality  para-
meters in rivers and streams.   Part 2  continues with chapters on  the assessment
of impoundments and estuaries  and appendices A, B, C, E,  F, G and H.   Appendix
D is provided in the third part (on microfiche in the EPA-printed manual).

      This report is submitted in fulfillment of Contract No.  68-03-2673  by
Tetra Tech, Inc., under the sponsorship of the U.S.  Environmental  Protection
Agency.  Work was completed as of February 1982.

-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                  PART 2
                                                                        Page
DISCLAIMER                                                                ii

ABSTRACT                                                                 iii

LIST OF FIGURES (PART 2)                                                  vi

LIST OF TABLES (PART 2)                                                    x

CHAPTER

   5   IMPOUNDMENTS                                                        1

       5.1  Introduction                                                   1
       5.2  Impoundment Stratification                                     3
       5.3  Sediment Accumulation                                         24
       5.4  Eutrophication and Control                                    65
       5.5  Impoundment Dissolved Oxygen                                  92
       5.6  Toxic Chemical Substances                                    128
       5.7  Application of Methods and Example Problem                   140
       References for Chapter 5                                          185
       Glossary of Terms                                                 187

   6   ESTUARIES                                                         191

       6.1  Introduction                                                 191
       6.2  Estuarine Classification                                     207
       6.3  Flushing Time Calculations                                   222
       6.4  Far Field Approach to Pollutant Distribution in Estuaries    251
       6.5  Pollutant Distribution following Discharge from a Marine     314
            Outfall
       6.6  Thermal Pollution                                            367
       6.7  Turbidity                                                    379
       6.8  Sedimentation                                                390
       References for Chapter 6                                          408

APPENDICES

   A   Monthly Distribution of Rainfall Erosivity Factor R               A-l
   B   Methods for  Predicting Soil Erodibility Index K                   B-l
   C   Stream and River Data                                             C-l
   D   Impoundment  Thermal Profiles                                      D-l


                                   iv

-------
APPENDICES (continued)

    E  Modeling Thermal Stratification in Impoundments
    F  Reservoir Sediment Deposition Surveys
    6  Initial Dilution Tables
    H  Equivalents of Commonly Used Units of Measurement

-------
                              LIST OF FIGURES  '

                                   PART 2

Figure                                                                   Page

V-1    Water Density as a Function of Temperature and Dissolved  Solids       4
       Concentration

V-2    Water Flowing into an Impoundment Tends to Migrate toward a  Region   5
       of Similar Density

V-3    Annual Cycle of Thermal  Stratification and Overturn in  an Im-         6
       poundment

V-4    Thermal  Profile Plots Used in Example V-1                            19

V-5    Thermal  Profile Plots Appropriate for use  in  Example V-2             23

V-6    Sediment Rating Curve Showing Suspended Sediment Discharge  as a     27
       Function of Flow

V-7    Relationship between the Percentage of Inflow-Transported Sedi-      29
       ment Retained within an Impoundment and Ratio of Capicity to Inflow

V-8    Plot of C/R and CR2 Versus R                                        34

V-9    Drag Coefficient (C) as Function of Reynold's Number (R)  and Par-    35
       tide Shape

V-10   Schematic Representation of Hindered Settling of Particles in        36
       Fluid Column

V-ll   Velocity Correction Factor for Hindered Settling                    38

V-12   Upper and Lo er Lakes and Environs, Long Island, New York           43

V-13   Impoundment Configurations Affecting Sedimentation                  47

V-14   Kellis Pond and Surrounding Region, Long Island, New York           50

V-15   Hypothetical Depth Profiles for Kellis Pond                         51

V-16   Hypothetical Flow Pattern in Kellis Pond                            52
                                    VI

-------
Figure                                                                  Page

V-17    Hypothetical Depth Profiles for Kellis Pond Not Showing Signi-    53
        cant Shoaling

V-18    Lake Owyhee and Environs                                          55

V-19    New Mi 11 pond and Environs.  New Mill pond is Subdivided for Pur-   56
        poses of Estimating Sedimentation in Regions A, B, and C

V-20    Significance of Depth Measures D, D1 , and D11  , and the Assumed  59
        Sedimentation Pattern

V-21    Settling Velocity for Spherical Particles                         60

V-22    Nomograph for Estimating Sediment Trap Efficiency                 61

V-23    Formulations for Evaluating Management Options  for Pollutants     70
        in Lakes and Reservoirs

V-24    US OECD Data Applied to Vollenweider (1976) Phosphorus Loading    72
        and Mean Depth/Hydraulic Residence Time Relationship

V-25    Relationship between Summer Chlorophyll and Spring Phosphorus     79

V-26    Maximal Primary Productivity as a Function of Phosphate Concen-   80
        tration

V-27    Conceptualization of Phosphorus Budget Modeling                   85

V-28    Typical Patterns of Dissolved Oxygen in Hyrum Reservoir           93

V-29    Geometric Representation of a Stratified Impoundment              96

V-30    Quality and Ecologic Relationships                                97

V-31    Rate of BOD Exertion at Different Temperatures  Showing the First 102
        and Second Deoxygenation Stages

V-32    Quiet Lake and Environs                                          114

V-33    Thermal Profile Plots for Use in Quiet Lake Example              122

V-34    Nomograph for Estimating Sediment Trap Efficiency                141

V-35    Generalized Schematic of Lake Computations                       147

V-36    The Occoquan River Basin                                         148

V-37    Thermal Profile Plots for Occoquan Reservoir                     152

-------
Figure                                                                   Page

V-38    Summary of Reservoir Sedimentation Surveys  Made in  the United     155
        States through 1970

V-39    Dissolved Oxygen Depletion Versus Time in the Occoquan Reservoir  180

VI-1    Typical Main Channel Salinity and Velocity  for Strati  ied Estu-    196
        aries

VI-2    Typical Main Channel Salinity and Velocity  Profiles for Well       197
        Mixed Estuaries

VI-3    Typical Main Channel Salinity and Velocity  Profiles for Partially 199
        Mixed Estuaries

VI-4    Estuarine Dimensional Definition                                  201

VI-5    Suggested Procedure to Predict Estuarine Water Quality            206

VI-6    Estuarine Circulation-Stratification Diagram                      209

VI-7    Examples of Estuarine Classification Plots                         209

VI-8    Circulation and Stratification Parameter Diagram                  212

VI-9    The Stuart Estuary                                                214

VI-10   Stuart Estuary Data for Classification Calculations               215

VI-11   Estuarine Circulation-Stratification Diagram                      218

VI-12   Alsea Estuary Seasonal Salinity Variations                         220

VI-13   Estuary Cross-Section for Tidal Prism Calculations                 223

VI-14   Patuxent Estuary Salinity Profile and Segmentation  Scheme Used    237
        in Flushing Time Calculations

VI-15   Hypothetical Two-Branched Estuary                                 241

VI-16   Cumulative Upstream Water Volume, Fox Mill  Run Estuary            246

VI-17   River-Borne Pollutant Concentration for One Tidal  Cycle           259

VI-18   Alsea Estuary River-Borne Conservative Pollutant Concentration    263

VI-19   Pollutant Concentration form an Estuarine Outfall                  265

VI-20   Hypothetical Concentration of Total Nitrogen in Patuxent Estu-    271
        ary
                                    vm

-------
 Figure                                                                   Page

 VI-21  Relative Depletions of Three Pollutants Entering the Fox Mill Run  281
       Estuary, Virginia

 VI-22  Additive Effect of Multiple Waste Load Additions                   283

 VI-23  Dissolved Oxygen Saturation as a Function of Temperature and Sa-   296
       linity

 VI-24  Predicted Dissolved Oxygen Profile in James River                  298

 VI-25  Definition Sketch for Pritchard's Two-Dimensional Box Model        302

 VI-26  Patu ent Estuary Model Segmentation                                311

 VI-27  Waste Field Generated by Marine Outfall                            316

 VI-28  Example Output of MERGE - Case 1                                   326

 VI-29  Example Output of MERGE - Case 2                                   327

 VI-30  Schematic of Plume Behavior Predicted by MERGE in the Present      332
       Usage

 VI-31  Cross Diffuser Merging                                             336

 VI-32  Plan View of Spreading Sewage Field                                355

 VI-33  Outfall Location, Shellfish Harvesting Area, and Environs          360

 VI-34  Dissolved Oxygen Depletions Versus Travel  Time                     366

 VI-35  Center!ine Dilution of Round Buoyant Jet in Stagnant Uniform       377
       Environment

 VI-36  Mean Suspended Solids in San Francisco Bay                         381

 VI-37  Water Quality Profile of Selected Parameters Near a Municipal      386
       Outfall in Puget Sound, Washington

 VI-38  Sediment Movement in San Francisco Bay System                      396

 VI-39  Idealized Estuarine Sedimentation                                  397

VI-40  Particle Diameter Versus Settling Fall per Tidal  Cycle  (12.3 hrs)   402
       under Quiescent Conditions (Spheres  with Density 2.0 g/cm3)

VI-41  Estuarine Null  Zone Identification                                 405

-------
                               LIST  OF TABLES

                                  PART 2

Table                                                                   Page

V-l    Parameter Values Used in Generation  of  Thermal  Gradient Plots       10
       (Appendix D)

V-2    Temperature,  Cloud Cover,  and Dew Point Data  for  the Ten  Geogra-    12
       phic Locales  Used to Develop  Thermal  Stratification  (Appendix  D)

V-3    Limpid Lake Characteristics                                         18

V-4    Physical  Characteristics of Lake Smith                              20

V-5    Comparison of Monthly Climatologic Data for Shreveport, Louisiana,  21
       and Atlanta,  Georgia

V-6    Hypothetical  Physical Characteristics of Upper  Lake, Brookhaven,    44
       Suffolk County, New York

V-7    Hypothetical  Physical Characteristics of Lower  Lake, Brookhaven,    46
       Suffolk County, New York

V-8    Hypothetical  Physical Characteristics of Lower  Lake, Brookhaven,    48
       Suffolk County, New York (Assuming an Epilimnion  Depth of 10 ft)

V-9    Classification of Lake Restoration Techniques                      83

V-10   Oxygen Demand of Bottom Deposits                                  104

V-ll   Solubility of Oxygen in Water                                     106

V-12   Characteristics of Quiet Lake                                     115

V-13   Water Quality and Flow Data for Tributaries  to  Quiet Lake.  Data    115
       Represent Mean Figures for 1970-1975

V-14   Precipitation and Runoff Data for Quiet Watershed.   Values  Are    118
       Means of Data Collected from  Both Stations.

V-l5   DO Sag Curve for Quiet Lake Hypolimnion                           127

V-16   Significant Processes Affecting Toxic Substances  in  Aquatic       129
       Ecosystems

-------
Table                                                                    Page

V-17   Comparison of Modeled Thermal Profiles to Observed Temperatures    154
       in Occoquan Reservoir

V-18   Annual Sediment and Pollutant Loads in Occoquan Watershed          157

V-19   Sediment Loaded into Lake Jackson                                  158

V-20   Calculation Format for Determining Sediment Accumulation in        159
       Reservoirs

V-21   Particle Sizes in Penn Silt Load                                   160

V-22   Calculation Format for Determining Sediment Accumulation in        161
       Reservoirs

V-23   Sewage Treatment Plant Pollutant Loads in Bull Run Sub-Basin       167

V-24   Calculated Annual Pollutant Loads to Occoquan Reservoir            168

V-25   Observed Annual Pollutant Loads to Occoquan Reservoir              170

V-26   Calculated and Observed Mean Annual Pollutant Concentrarions in    172
       Occoquan Reservoir

VI-1   Summary of Methodology for Estuarine Water Quality Assessment      205

VI-2   Tidal Prisms for Some U.S. Estuaries                               224

VI-3   Sample Calculation Table for Calcu ation of Flushing Time by       234
       Segmented Fraction of Freshwater Method

VI-4   Patuxent Estuary Segment Characteristics for Flushing Time Calcu-  236
       lations

VI-5   Flushing Time for Patuxent Estuary                                 239

VI-6   Sample Calculation Table for Estuarine Flushing Time by the Modi-  245
       fied Tidal Prism Method

VI-7   Data and Flushing Time Calculations for Fox Mill Run Estuary       249

VI-8   Pollutant Distribution in the Patuxent River                       257

VI-9   Incremental Total Nitrogen in Patuxent River (See Problem VI-5)    258

VI-10  Sample Calculation Table for Distribution of a Locally Discharged  267
       Conservative Pollutant fy the Fraction of Freshwater Method

VI-11  Nitrogen Concentration in Patuxent Estuary Based on Local Dis-     269
       charge

                                    xi

-------
Table                                                                   Page

VI-12   Typical Values for Decay Reaction Rates V                       273

VI-13   Sample Calculation Table for Distribution of a Locally Dis-      277
        charged Non-conservative Pollutant by the Modified Tidal
        Prism Method

VI-14   Salinity and CBOD Calculations for Fox Mill  Run Estuary          279

VI-15   Distribution of Total Nitrogen in the Patuxent Estuary due to    286
        Two Sources of Nitrogen

VI-16   Tidally Averaged Dispersion Coefficients for Selected Estuaries  289

VI-17   Tidally Averaged Dispersion Coefficients                         290

VI-18   Salinity and Pollutant Distribution in Patuxent Estuary under    310
        Low Flow Conditions

VI-19a  Water Densities Calculated using the Density Subroutine Found    320
        in MERGE

VI-19b  Water Densities Calculated using the Density Subroutine Found    321
        in MERGE

VI-19c  Water Densities Calculated using the Density Subroutine Found    322
        in MERGE

VI-20   Plume Variables, Units, and Similarity Conditions                325

VI-21   Values of Equilibrium Constants and Ion Product of Water as a    343
        Function of Temperature for Freshwater and Salt Water

VI-22   Estimated pH Values after Initial Dilution                       346

VI-23   Dissolved Oxygen Profile in Commencement Bay, Washington         351

VI-24   Subsequent Dilutions for Various Field Widths and Travel Times   358

VI-25   Data Needed for Estuary Thermal Screening                        370

VI-26   Maximum Allowable Channel Velocity to Avoid Bed Scour            393

VI-27   Sediment Particle Size Ranges                                    399

VI-28   Rate of Fall  in Water of Spheres of Varying Radii and Constant   400
        Density of 2 as Calculated by Stokes1 Law
                                    xn

-------
                                 CHAPTER 5

                                IMPOUNDMENTS

5.1  INTRODUCTION

     This chapter contains several methods for assessing water quality and
physical conditions in  impoundments.  The general topics covered are
sediment accumulation,  thermal stratification, DO-BOD, euthrophication, and
toxicant concentrations.  These topics cover the major water problems likely
to occur in impoundments.  The methods developed are easy to use and require
readily obtainable data.  Because the methods depend upon a number of
simplifying assumptions, estimates should be taken only as a guide pending
further analysis.  Also, since pollutant inputs are dependent on previous
calculations, familiarity with the methods in previous chapters will be very
helpful and expand understanding of the various processes.

     Some of the techniques are more mechanistic and reliable than others.
For example, the thermal stratification technique is based upon output of a
calibrated and validated hydrothermal model.  The model has been shown to be
a good one, and to the  extent that physical conditions in the studied
impoundments resemble those of the model, results should be very reliable.
On the other hand, the  methods for predicting eutrophication are empirical
and based upon correlations between historical water quality conditions and
algal productivity in a number of lakes and reservoirs.  Because algal
blooms are sensitive to environmental factors and the presence of toxicants
and factors other than  those involved in the estimation methods, the methods
for predicting eutrophication will occasionally be inapplicable.  Since the
planner may not be able to assess applicability in specific cases, results
may occasionally be inaccurate.

     In using the techniques to be presented, it is important to apply good
"engineering judgment"  particularly where sequential application of methods
is likely to result in  cumulative errors.  Such would be the case, for
example, in evaluating  impoundment hypolimnion DO problems resulting from
algal blooms.   If methods presented below are used to evaluate hypolimnion
DO, the planner should  determine when stratification occurs, the magnitude
of point and nonpoint source BOD loads, and algal productivity and settling

-------
rates.  From all of this, he may then predict BOD and DO levels in the
hypolimnion.  Since each of these techniques has an error associated with
it, the end result of the computation will have a significant error envelope
and results must be interpreted accordingly.  The best way to use any of the
techniques is to assume a range of values for important coefficients in
order to obtain a range of results within which the studied impoundment is
likely to fall.

     Although scientists and engineers are familiar with the metric system
of units, planners, local interest groups, and the general public are more
accustomed to the English system.  Most morphometric data on lakes and
impoundments are in English units.  The conversion tables in Appendix H
should be thoroughly familiar before using these techniques and users should
be able to perform calculations in either system even though metric units
are simpler to use.  Also, dimensional analysis techniques using unit
conversions are very helpful in performing the calculations.

     The methods presented below are arranged in an order such that the
planner should be able to use each if he has read preceding materials.  The
order of presentation is:

     •   Impoundment stratification  (5.2)
     §   Sediment accumulation  (5.3)
     •   Eutrophication  (5.4)
     t   Impoundment dissolved  oxygen (5.5)
     •   Fate of Priority Pollutants (Toxics)(5.6)

      It is  strongly recommended that all materials presented be read and
examples worked prior to applying any of the methods.   In this way a better
perspective can be obtained on  the kinds of problems covered and what can be
done using  hand calculations.   A glossary of terms has  been placed after the
reference section so that equation terms can easily be  checked.

     The final  section  (5.7) is an example  application  to a selected site.
This example allows the  user to have an  integrated view of an  actual problem

-------
and application.  Also "the goodness of fit" to measured results can be
evaluated.
5.2  IMPOUNDMENT STRATIFICATION

5.2.1 Discussion

     The density of water is strongly influenced by temperature and by the
concentration of dissolved and suspended matter.  Figure V-l shows densities
for water as a function of temperature and dissolved solids concentration
(from Chen and Orlob, 1973).

     Regardless of  the reason for density differences, water of lowest
density tends to move upward and reside on the  surface of an impoundment
while water of greatest density tends to sink.   Inflowing water seeks an
impoundment level containing water of the same  density.  Figure V-2 shows
this effect schematically.

     Where density  gradients are very steep, mixing is inhibited.  Thus,
where the bottom water of an impoundment is  significantly more dense than
surface water, vertical mixing  is  likely to  be  unimportant.  The fact that
low density water tends to reside  atop higher density water and that mixing
is  inhibited by steep gradients often results in impoundment stratification.
Stratification, which  is  the establishment of distinct layers of different
densities, tends to be enhanced by quiescent conditions.  Conversely, any
phenomenon encouraging mixing,  such  as wind  stress, turbulence due to large
inflows,  or destabilizing changes  in water temperature will tend to reduce
or  eliminate strata.
 5.2.1.1  Annual  Cycle in a Thermally Stratified Impoundment

      Figure V-3  shows schematically the processes of thermal  stratification
 and overturn which occur in many impoundments.   Beginning at  "a" in the
 figure (winter), cold water (at about 4°C) flows into the impoundment which
 may at this point be considered as fully mixed.  There is no  thermal

-------
    1.0090
    1.0070
—  1.0050
E
 o>
 c
 
-------
                   STRATIFIED
                  IMPOUNDMENT
DENSITY
PROFILE
                                                                     Density of
                                                                     Warm Influent
                                                                            Density
                                                                            of Cool
                                                                            Influent
                                                                    Density
FIGURE V-2  !IJATER FLOWING  INTO  AN  IMPOUNDMENT TENDS TO MIGRATE  TOWARD A REGION
            OF SIMILAR DENSITY

-------
      LATE FALL-WINTER
                                                                         FALL
                                                 OVERTURN
  - Water
Displaced upward
 0 i5  10  15  20 25 30

  t    T(«C)
 Inflo.
Temperoture
0  5  10 15 20 25 :
      TCC)  i
          SPRING
                                                                        SUMMER
                                     	  STRATIFICATION
  FIGURE V-3    ANNUAL CYCLE OF THERMAL  STRATIFICATION AND OVERTURN IN  AN  IMPOUNDMENT

-------
gradient over depth and the impoundment temperature is about 6 C.   During
spring ("b"), inflowing water is slightly warmer than that of the
impoundment because of the exposure of the tributary stream to warmer air
and increasingly intense sunlight.  This trend continues during the summer
("c"), with tributary water being much warmer and less dense than  the deep
waters of the impoundment.  At the same time, the surface water of the
impoundment is directly heated by insolation.  Since the warm water tends to
stay on top of the impoundment, thermal strata form.

     As fall approaches ("d"), day length decreases, air temperatures drop,
and solar intensity decreases.  The result is cooler inflows and a cooling
trend in the surface of the impoundment.  The bottom waters lag behind the
surface in the rate of temperature change, and ultimately the surface may
cool to the temperature of the bottom.  Since continued increases  in surface
water density result in instability, the impoundment water mixes
(overturns).
5.2.1.2  Monomictic and Dimictic Impoundments

     The stratification and overturn processes described in Figure V-3
represent what occurs in a monomictic or single-overturn water body.  Some
                                          o
impoundments, especially those north of 40 N latitude and those at high
elevation may undergo two periods of stratification and two overturns.  Such
impoundments are termed "dimictic."  In addition to the summer
stratification and resulting fall overturn, such impoundments stratify in
                                                            o
late winter.  This occurs because water is most dense near 4 C, and bottom
waters may be close to this temperature, while inflowing water is colder and
                                        o
less dense.  As the surface goes below 4 C, strata are established.  With
                                  o
spring warming of the surface to 4 C, wind induced mixing occurs.

-------
5.2.1.3  Importance of Stratification

     Stratification is likely to be the single most important phenomenon
affecting water quality in many impoundments.   Where stratification is
absent, water mixes vertically, and net horizontal  flow is significant to
considerable depths.  Since the water is mixed vertically, DO replenishment
usually occurs even to the bottom and anoxic (literally "no oxygen")
conditions are unlikely.  Generally speaking,  fully mixed impoundments do
not have DO deficiency problems.

     When stratification occurs, the situation is vastly different.  Flow
within the impoundment is essentially limited to the epilimnion (surface
layer).  Thus  surface velocities are somewhat higher in an impoundment when
stratified than when unstratified.   Since vertical mixing is  inhibited by
stratification, reaeration of  the hypolimnion (bottom  layer)  is virtually
nonexistent.   The  thermocline  (layer of steep thermal  gradient between
epilimnion and hypolimnion)  is often at considerable depth.   Accordingly,
the euphotic  (literally  "good  light") zone  is likely to be limited  to the
epilimnion.   Thus  photosynthetic activity does not  serve  to  reoxygenate  the
hypolimnion.   The  water  that becomes the hypolimnion has  some oxygen  demand
prior  to  the  establishment of  strata.   Because bottom  (benthic) matter
exerts a  further demand,  and because some settling  of  particulate  matter
 into  the  hypolimnion  may occur, the DO  level  in  the hypolimnion will
gradually decrease over  the  period  of  stratification.

      Anoxic  conditions in the  hypolimnion result in serious  chemical  and
 biological  changes.  Microbial activity leads to hydrogen sulfide  (HzS)
 evolution as  well  as  formation of  other highly  toxic  substances,  and  these
 may be harmful to  indigenous biota.

       It should be  noted that the winter and spring strata and overturn are
 relatively unimportant here since the  major concern is anoxic conditions in
 the hypolimnion in summer.  Thus all impoundments will be considered as
 monomictic.

-------
     Strong stratification is also important in prediction of sedimentation
rates and trap efficiency estimates.  These topics are to be covered later.
5.2.2  Prediction of Thermal Stratification

     Computation of impoundment heat influx is relatively straightforward,
but prediction of thermal gradients is complicated by prevailing physical
conditions, physical mixing phenomena, and impoundment geometry.  Such
factors as depth and shape of impoundment bottom, magnitude and
configuration of inflows, and degree of shielding from the wind are much
more difficult to quantify than insolation, back radiation, and still air
evaporation rates.  Since the parameters which are difficult to quantify are
critical to predicting stratification characteristics, no attempt has been
made to develop a simple calculation procedure.  Instead, a tested model
(Chen and Orlob, 1973;  Lorenzen and Fast, 1976) has been subjected to a
sensitivity analysis and the results plotted to show thermal profiles over
depth and over time for some representative geometries and climatological
conditions.  The plots are presented in Appendix D.
                                                  o
     The plots show the variation  in temperature ( C) with depth (meters).
Temperature is used as an index of density.  Engineering judgment about
defining layers is based on the pattern of temperature with depth.  If
stratification takes place, the plot will show an upper layer of uniform or
slightly declining temperature  (epilimnion), an intermediate layer of
sharply declinging temperature  (thermocline), and a bottom layer
(hypolimnion).  A rule of thumb requires a temperature change of at least
1  C/meter to define the thermocline.  However, this can be tempered by the
observation of a well defined mixed layer.

     To assess thermal stratification in an impoundment, it is  necessary
only to determine which of the  sets of plots most closely approximates
climatic and hydrologic conditions in the impoundment studied.  Parameters
which were varied to generate the  plots and values used are shown in Table
V-l.

-------
                             TABLE V-1
               PARAMETER VALUES USED IN  GENERATION OF
                THERMAL GRADIENT PLOTS (APPENDIX D)
Parameter

Geographic Locale








Geometry








Depth
(maximum,
feet)
20
40
75
100
200
Value
Atlanta, Georgia
Billings, Montana
Burlington, Vermont
Flagstaff, Arizona
Fresno, California
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Salt Lake City, Utah
San Antonio, Texas
Washington, D.C.
Wichita, Kansas
Surface ? 3
Area (feet ) Volume (feet )
8.28 x 106 7.66 x 107
3.31 x 107 6.13 x 108
1.16 x 108 4.04 x 109
2.07 x 108 9.58 x 109
8.28 x 108 7.66 x 1010
Mean Hydraulic Residence Time
Wind Mixing*
Days
                                               10
                                               30
                                               75
                                              250
High
Low
*See Appendix E.
                                     10

-------
     Table V-2 shows the climatological conditions used to represent the
geographic locales listed in Table V-l.  For details of the  simulation
technique, see Appendix E.
5.2.2.1  Using the Thermal Plots

     Application of the plots to assess stratification characteristics
begins with determining reasonable values for the various parameters listed
in Table V-l.  For geographic locale, the user should determine whether the
impoundment of interest is near one of the ten areas for which thermal plots
have been generated.   If  so, then the set of plots for that area should be
used.  If the  impoundment  is not near one of the ten areas, then the user
may obtain data for the parameters listed in Table V-2 (climatologic data)
and then select the modeled  locale which best matches the region of
interest.

     Next, the user must  obtain geometric data for the impoundment.  Again,
if the impoundment of  interest  is  like one for which plots have been
generated, then that  set  should be used.  If not, the user should bracket
the studied  impoundment.   As an example,  if the  studied  impoundment is 55
feet deep  (maximum),  with a  surface  area  of about 4xl07  feet2, then the 40
and 75 foot  deep  impoundment plots should be used.

     Mean  hydraulic  residence  time  (T  , years) may be estimated using  the
mean total  inflow rate (Q, mVyear)  and the  impoundment  volume (V,m3):

                                  TW  =  V/Q                             (V-l)

Again,  the  sets of  plots  bracketing  the value  of T   should be examined.
Where  residence  times are greater  than  200 days,  the residence time has
 little  influence  on  stratification  (as  may be  verified  in Appendix  D)  and
 either  the  200 day or infinite time  plots may  be used.

      Finally,  the wind mixing  coefficient was  used  to generate plots  for
 windy  areas  (high wind)  and for very well protected  areas  (low wind).  The
                                   11

-------
                           TABLE V-2


         TEMPERATURE, CLOUD COVER,  AND DEW POINT  DATA
    FOR THE TEN GEOGRAPHIC LOCALES  USED TO DEVEOP THERMAL
STRATIFICATION PLOTS ( APPENDIX D).   SEE FOOT OF  TABLE FOR  NOTES,
Temperature (°F)
Max. Mean

January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December

January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Atlanta
54
57
63
72
81
87
88
88
83
74
62
53
killings
27
32
38
51
60
68
79
78
67
55
38
32
(Lat:
45
47
52
61
70
77
79
78
73
63
51
44
(Lat
18
22
27
38
47
54
63
61
52
42
29
22
Mm.
33.8°N,
36
37
41
50
57
66
69
68
63
52
40
35
:45.8°N,
9
12
16
26
34
40
46
45
37
30
20
14
Dew 0 C"
Point (°F) F
Long:84.4°W)
34
34
39
48
57
65
68
67
62
51
40
34
Long:108.5°W)
11
16
20
28
38
46
48
46
38
31
22
15
loud Cover Wind
raction (MPH)

.63
.62
.61
.55
.55
."58
.63
.57
.53
.45
.51
.62

.68
.68
.71
.70
.64
.60
.40
.42
.54
.56
.66
.66

11
12
12
11
9
8
8
8
8
9
10
10

13
12
12
12
11
11
10
10
10
11
13
13
                            12

-------
TABLE V-2 - CONT.
Temperature ( F)

Max.
Mean
Burlington (Lat:44
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December

January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
27
29
38
53
67
54
82
80
71
59
44
31
Fl
40
43
50
59
68
77
81
79
75
63
51
44
18
19
29
43
56
66
71
68
60
49
38
23
agstaff (Lat:35
27
30
36
43
51
60
66
64
59
47
36
30
Min.
.5°N,
9
10
20
33
44
77
59
57
49
39
29
15
.2°N,
14
17
22
28
34
42
50
49
42
31
21
17
Dew Cloud Cover Wind
Point (°F) Fraction (MPH)
Lat:73.2°W)
12
12
20
32
43
54
59
58
51
40
30
17
Long:111.3°W)
14
16
17
20
22
25
43
43
35
25
20
15

.72
.69
.66
.67
.67
.61
.58
.57
.60
.65
.79
.78

.59
.49
.50
.49
.41
.24
.54
.53
.29
.31
.34
.44

10
10
10
10
9
9
8
8
8
9
10
10

8
9
11
12
11
11
9
9
8
8
8
7
      13

-------
TABLE V-2 CONT.
Temperature ( F)

Max.
Mean
Min.
Dew Cloud Cover Wind
Point (°F) Fraction (MPH)
Fresno (Lat:36.7°N, Long:119.8°W)
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December

January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
55
61
68
76
85
92
100
98
92
81
68
57
Minneapol
22
26
37
56
70
79
85
82
72
60
40
27
46
51
55
61
68
75
81
79
74
65
54
47
is (Lat:
12
16
28
45
58
67
76
71
61
48
31
18
37
40
42
46
52
57
63
61
56
49
40
38
45.0°N,
3
5
18
33
46
56
61
59
49
37
21
9
38
41
41
44
45
48
51
52
51
46
42
40
Long:93.3°W)
6
10
20
32
43
55
60
59
50
40
25
13
.67
.61
.53
.44
.34
.19
.11
Ml "
.15
.28
.44
.70

.65
.62
.67
.65
.64
.60
.49
.51
.51
.54
.69
.69
6
6
7
7
8
8
7
6
6
5
5
5

11
11
12
13
12
11
9
9
10
11
12
11
        14

-------
TABLE V-2 CONT.
Temperature ( F)


January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Max.
Salt Lake
37
42
51
62
72
82
92
90
80
66
49
40
Mean Min.
City (Lat:40.
27
33
40
50
58
67
76
75
65
53
38
23
8°N,
18
23
30
37
45
52
61
59
50
39
28
32
San Antonio (Lat:29.4°N,
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
62
66
72
79
85
92
94
94
89
82
70
65
52
55
61
68
75
82
84
84
79
71
59
42
42
45
50
58
65
72
74
73
69
60
49
54
Dew Cloud Cover Wind
/ O v * *
Point ( F) Fraction .
, Long:111.9°W)
20
23
26
31
36
40
44
45
38
34
28
24
Long:98.5°W)
39
42
45
55
64
68
68
67
65
56
46
41

.69
.70
.65
.61
.54
.42
'.35
.34
.34
,43
.56
.69

.64
.65
.63
.64
.62
.54
.50
.46
.49
.46
.54
.57
(MPH)

7
8
9
9
10
9
9
10
9
9
8
7

9
10
10
11
10
10
10
8
8
8
9
9
         15

-------
TABLE V-2 CONT.
Temperature (

Max.
Mean
Washington, D.C.
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December

January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
44
46
54
60
76
83
87
85
79
68
57
46
Wichita
42
47
56
68
77
88
92
93
84
72
34
45
37
38
45
56
66
74
78
77
70
59
48
43
(Lat:37.
32
36
45
57
66
77
81
81
71
60
55
36
F ) Dew
Min. Point (
(Lat:38.9°N,
30
29
36
46
56
65
69
68
61
50
39
31
7°N, Long:97.
22
26
33
45
55
65
69
69
59
48
44
27
Long:
25
25
29
40
52
61
65
64
59
48
36
26
3°W)
21
25
30
41
53
62
65
53
55
43
33
25
Cloud Cover Wind
F) Fraction - (MPH)
77.0°W)
.61
.56
.56
.54
.54
.51
. .51
.51
.48
.47
.54
.58

.50
.51
.52
.53
.53
.46
.39
.38
.39
.40
.44
.50

11
11
12
11
10
10
9
8
9
9
10
10

12
13
15
15
13
13
12
11
12
12
13
12
        16

-------
                    TABLE V-2 CONT.
Notes:




Mean:
Max.:
Min.:
Wind:
Dew Point:
Normal daily average
Normal daily maximum
Normal daily minimum
Mean wind speed, MPH
Mean dew point temper
temperature,
temperature,
temperature,

•ature, °F.
°F.
°F.
°F.


*Complete data were not available for Billings.  Tabulated
 data are actually a synthesis of available data for
 Billings, Montana and Yellowstone, Wyoming.

 All data taken from Climatic Atlas of the U.S., 1974.
                              17

-------
user must judge  where  his  studied  impoundment falls and interpolate in the
plots accordingly (See Appendix  D).
                                EXAMPLE  V-l
                           Thermal  Stratification

     Suppose one wants  to know the  likelihood that hypothetical Limpid Lake
is stratified during June.   The first  step  is to compile the physical
conditions for the lake in  terms of the  variables listed in Table V-l.
Table V-3 shows how this might be done.   Next, refer to the indexes provided
in Appendix D to locate the plot set for conditions most similar to those of
the studied impoundment.  In this case,  the Wichita plots for a 200-foot
deep impoundment with no inflow and high mixing rate would be chosen  (see
Table V-3).  Figure V-4 is a reproduction of  the appropriate page from
Appendix D.
                                  TABLE  V-3
                          LIMPID LAKE  CHARACTERISTICS
   1 ten
   Limpid Lake
                                                         Available Plot
  Location
  Depth,  ft (maximum)
  Volume,  ft3
  Mean residence time  (Tw)
  i-'i xi na
Manhattan,  Kansas
       180
     6xl010
     500 days
   high (windy)
Wichita, Kansas
        200
    7.66 x  1010
  -=> (no inflow)
 high  coefficient
      According to the plots, Limpid Lake is likely to be  strongly  stratified
 in  June.   Distinct strata form in May and overturn probably occurs in
 December.   During June, the epilimnion should extend down to a  depth  of
 about eight or ten feet, and the thenr,ocline should extend down to

-------
0
20
zz
i:
0
20-
5:
0_
a
40-
0
20-
r:
:c
Q_
LU
040
60
JUL



<^


I'D 2'0 3
TEMP. C
NQV


D
1


10 20 3
TEMP. C
60c
0
20
z:
i —
Q_
40
o 60c
0
20
sr
=
Q_
UJ
C3
40
60
0
DTK






10 20 3
TEMP, C
PUG



(^


3 I'D 20 3
TEMP. C
DEC



/


0
20
zr
i:
Q_
CD
40-
60
0 C
0
20-
sr
01
Q_
40
o 60
nf>i



^


10 20 3
TEMP, C
SEP



/


D 10 20 :
TEMP. C
NICHITF
0
20
3:
i —
Q_
SO
0 C
0
20-
sr
01
t—
Q_
C3
40
60
0
1 . K
JUN



^





10 20 30
TEMP. C
OC1



/





Q 10 20 30
TEMP. C
RN5R5
200' INITIRL MflXIMUM DEPTH
INFINITE HYOR. RES- TIME
MflXIMUM MIXING
D 10 20 30
TEMP. C
FIGURE V-4  THERMAL PROFILE PLOTS "SED IN EXAMPLE V-l
                         19

-------
about 30 feet.   The  gradient  in the thermocline should be about 1 C per
meter.
                             END OF EXAMPLE V-l
                               •EXAMPLE  V-2
                           Thermal  Stratification

What are the stratification characteristics of Lake  Smith?

     The hypothetical  lake is  located  east of Carthage, Texas, and Table V-4
shows its characteristics along  with appropriate values for the thermal
plots.


                                TABLE V-4

                 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF LAKE SMITH
    Item
   Lake Smith
      Plot Values
Location

Depth,  ft  (maximum)
Volume, ft
Mean  residence  time
Mixing
15 miles east of
Carthage Texas
       23
    3 x 108
    250 days
 low (low wind)
          20
      1.66 x 10
8
low mixing coefficient
      From  the  available data for Lake Smith,  it appears that  plots  for  a
 20-foot deep  impoundment with no inflow and low mixing coefficient  should
 give  a  good  indication of the degree of summertime stratification.   The one
 remaining  problem  is climate.  Data for nearby Shreveport,  Louisiana compare
 well  with  those  of Atlanta  (Table V-5), for v.'hich plots are provided in
 Appendix D,  and  latitudes are similar.  Shreveport is so.-ewhat warmer and
 insolation is  higher, but this is a relatively uniform difference over  the
                                   20

-------
                  TABLE  V-5


   COMPARISON OF MONTHLY CLIMATOLOGIC DATA
FOR SHREVEPORT,  LOUISIANA AND ATLANTA,  GEORGIA
   DATA ARE PRESENTED AS SHREVEPORT/ATLANTA
      (CLIMATIC  ATLAS OF THE U.S.,  1974)
Temperature,
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Max.
57/54
60/57
67/63
75/72
83/81
91/87
92/88
94/88
88/83
79/74
66/62
59/53
Mean
48/45
50/47
57/52
65/61
73/70
81/77
82/79
83/78
78/73
67/63
55/51
50/44
°F
Min.
38/36
41/37
47/41
55/50
63/57
71/66
72/69
73/68
67/63
55/52
45/40
40/35
Dew
Point, °F
38/34
40/34
44/39
54/48
62/57
69/65
71/68
70/67
65/62
55/51
45/40
39/34
Cloud
Cover,
Fraction
.60/".63
.5S/.62
.54/.61
.50/.55
.48/.5S
.44/.5S
.46/.6S
.40/.57
.40/.53
.3S/.45
.46/.51
.5S/.62
Wind,
MPH
9/11
9/12
10/12
9/11
9/9
8/8
7/8
7/8
7/8
7/9
8/10
9/10
      Shreveport Lat:32.5°N,  Long:94°W

      Atlanta  Lat:33.8°N,  Long:84.4°W,
                   21

-------
year.  The net effect should be to shift the thermal plots to a slightly
higher temperature but to influence the shape of the plots and the timing of
stratification little.  As a result, the plots for Atlanta may be used,
bearing in mind that the temperatures are likely to be biased uniformly low.
Figure V-5 (reproduced from Appendix D) shows thermal plots for a 20-foot
deep Atlanta area impoundment having no significant inflow and low wind
stress.  From the figure, it is clear that the lake is likely to stratify
from April or May through September, the epilimnion will be very shallow,
and the thermocline will extend down to a depth of about 7 feet.  The
thermal gradient is in the range of about 7 C per meter, as an upper limit,
during June.  Bottom water warms slowly during the summer until the
impoundment becomes fully mixed in October.
                             •END OF  EXAMPLE  V-2
                                   22

-------
0
2 •
z:
x
0.
LU
CD
6
0
2 •
H
x
Q_
LU
4 •
6c
D
2
SI
X
CL
(.1 f
a
4
6
nnit




10 20 3
TEMP, C
JUL

/


) 10 2'0 3
TEMP. C
NQV





D 10
TEMP




0
2 •
ZI
x:
a_
LU
CD
D 0
0
2 •
SI
x:
LU
C3
0 C
0
2 -
sr
x:
Q_
4

HP*




10 20 3
TEMP, C
DUC

/


) I'D 2'0 3
TEMP. C
DEC








0
2 •
ZI
x:
Q_
LU
a
4 •
6
0 C
0
2 -
2C
x:
LU
C3
4 -
o 6
nf



11
/
i

10
TEMP,
SEP


/


20 3
C
/


3 10 20 :
TEMP. C
RTLRNTF
20 '
INF
MIN

0
2
zr
x:
Q_
LU
C3
6
0 C
0
2 -
31
X
Q_
LU
O
4
o 6
1. G
JUN
/
/




10 20 30
TEMP, C
OC1






3 10 2'0 30
TEMP. C
EDRGIR
NITIRL MRXIMUM DEPTH
INITE HYDR- RES. TIME
IMUM MIXING
20 3D 0 10 20 30
. C TEMP. C
FIGURE V-5  THERMAL PROFILE PLOTS APPROPRIATE  FOR  !'SE  IN  FXAMPLE  v-2
                                   23

-------
5.3  SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION

5.3.1  Introduction

     Reservoirs, lakes, and other impoundments are usually more quiescent
than tributary streams, and thus act as large settling basins for suspended
particulate matter.  Sediment deposition in impoundments gradually
diminishes water storage capacity to the point where lakes fill in and
reservoirs become useless.  In some cases, sediment accumulation may reduce
the useful life of a reservoir to as little as ten to twenty years (Marsh,
et al_., 1975).

     Just  how much suspended matter settles out as water passes through an
impoundment, as well as the grain size distribution of matter which remains
suspended, is of interest  to the planner for  several reasons.  Suspended
sediment within an impoundment may significantly reduce light penetration
thus limiting algal and bottom-rooted plant (macrophyte) growth.  This, in
turn,  can  adversely affect food availability  for indigenous fauna, or may
slow plant succession, as  part of the natural aging process of lakes.

     Settling of suspended matter may eliminate harborage on  impoundment
bottoms thus reducing  populations of desirable animal species.  More
directly,  suspended particulates impinging on the gills of fish may cause
disease or death.

     Some  minerals, particularly clays, are excellent adsorbents.  As a
result, farm chemicals and pesticides applied to the  land find their way  to
an impoundment  bottom  and  into  its food chain.  The sediment  which settles
 is likely  to have  a substantial component  of  organic  matter which can exert
an oxygen  demand,  and  under conditions of  thermal stratification, anoxic
conditions on the  impoundment  bottom  (in  the  hypolimnion) can result  in
generation of toxic gases.   Indigenous biota  may  be harmed  or even killed as
 a result.

      Knowing  the  rate  of  sediment  transport  and  the deposition within  an
 impoundment  allows for effective planning to  be  initiated.   If sedimentation
 rates  are  unacceptable,  then  the planner  can  begin  to determine where
                                  24

-------
sediments originate, and how to alleviate the problem.   For example,  densely
planted belts may be established between highly erodible fields and
transporting waterways, farming and crop management practices may be
changed, or zoning may be modified to prevent a worsening of conditions.

     These considerations, along with others relating to sediment carriage
and deposition in downstream waterways, make estimates of sedimentation
rates of interest here.  Impoundment sediment computation methods discussed
in this section will permit the planner to estimate annual impoundment
sediment accumulation as well as short term accumulation (assuming constant
hydraulic conditions).  Application of the methods will permit the planner
to estimate the amount of sediment removed from transport in a river system
due to water passage through any number of impoundments.
5.3.2  Annual  Sediment Accumulation

     Three  different  techniques are used to estimate annual sediment
accumulation,  available  data,  sediment rating curves,  and  a three step
procedure to determine short-term  sedimentation  rates.  As discussed under
each technique,  caution  should be  used in  selecting one method  or another.
If  data  are not  available,  it  may  not be feasible  to use one  or more
techniques.  The uncertainty  in the results should be  considered in drawing
conclusions based  on  whichever analysis that  is  selected.
 5.3.2.1   Use  of  Available  Data

      Data provided  in  Appendix  F  permit  estimation  of  annual  sediment
 accumulation  in  acre-feet  for a large  number  of  impoundments  in  the  U.S.
 The  data  and  other  materials presented provide some basic  impoundment
 statistics useful to the planner  in  addition  to  annual  sediment  accumulation
 rates.

      To  use Appendix F, first determine  which impoundments within  the  study
 area are  of interest  in terms of  annual  sediment accumulation.   Refer  to  the
 U.S.  map included  in  the  appendix and find the  index  numbers of the region
                                   25

-------
within which the impoundment is located.   The data tabulation in the
appendix, total annual sediment accumulation in acre feet is given by
multiplying acerage annual sediment accumulation in acre feet per square
mile of net drainage area ("Annual Sediment Accum.") by the net drainage
area ("Area") in square miles:

             Total Accumulation = Annual  Sediment Accum. x Area        (V-2)

To convert to average annual  loss of capacity expressed as a percent, divide
total annual accumulation by  storage capacity (from Appendix F), and
multiply by 100.  Note that this  approach, as well as those presented later,
do not account for packing of  the sediment under  its own weight.  This
results  in an overestimate  in  loss of capacity.   Note also that other data
in Appendix F may be  of  interest  in terms of drainage area estimates for
determining river sediment  loading and assessment of storm water sediment
transport on an  annual basis.
 5.3.2.2   Trap  Efficiency  and  the  Ratio  of  Capacity  to  Inflow

      Where  data  are  not available in  Appendix  F  for a  specific  impoundment,
 the following  method will  permit  estimation  of annual  or  short-term sediment
 accumulation  rates.   The  method  is only useful,  however,  for  normal ponded
 reservoirs.

      To  use this approach, a  suspended  sediment  rating curve  should be
 obtained for  tributaries  to the  impoundment.  An example  of a sediment
 rating curve  is  provided  in Figure V-6.
                                   26

-------
 10.000
u
                                                           100,000
      SUSPENDED SEDIMENT DISCHARGE, S: (tons/day)
     FIGURE V-6
SEDIMENT RATING CURVE SHOWING SUSPENDED
SEDIMENT DISCHARGE AS A FUNCTION OF FLOW
(AFTER LINSLEY, KOHLER, AND PAULHUS, 1958)
                              27

-------
          On the basis of such a curve, one can estimate the mean sediment
mass transport rate (S.) 1n mass per unit time for tributaries.  If
neither rating curve nor data are available, one may estimate sediment
transport rates on a basis of data from nearby channels, compensating
for differences by using mean velocities.  To a first approximation,
it would be expected that:
                                                                   (V-3)
where
     Si  =  sediment transport rate to be determined in
            tributary "i" in mass per unit time,
                                                       •
     S.   =  known transport  rate for  comparable tributary
       J
            (j)  in  same  units as S.,

     V-   =  mean velocity for tributary  i over the  time
            period,  and

     V.   =  mean velocity in tributary j over the same
       J
            time period  as Vn-

          Once average transport rates over the time period of interest
 have been determined, the proportion, and accordingly  the weight of
 sediment  settling out in the impoundment may be estimated.  Figure V-7
 is a graph  showing  the relationship between percent of sediment trapped
 in an  impoundment versus the ratio of capacity to inflow rate.  The
 implicit  relationship is:

                                                                   (V-4)
                                     28

-------
UD
                                                                Median Curve for
                                                                Normal Ponded Reservoirs
                                                         Envelope Curves  for
                                                         Normal  Ponded  Reservoirs
                      0.001
0.003
0.007
  0.03    0.07       0.2  0.3  0.5

Ratio of  Capacity to  Inflow
                                                                       5  7  10
                        FIGURE V-7  PELATIONSHIP BETWEEN  THE  PERCENTAGE  OF  INFLOW-TRANSPORTED SEDIMFNT
                                    RETAINED  WITHIN AN  IMPOUNDMENT AMD PATIO OF TAPACITY  TO INFLOW
                                    (LlNSLEY,  KOHLER, AND PAULHUS, 1958)

-------
wh'jre
     P   =  percent of inflowing sediment trapped

     V   =  capacity of the impoundment in acre-feet, and

     Q-  =  water inflow rate in acre-feet per year

     Data used for development of the curves in Figure V-7 included
41 impoundments of various sizes throughout the U.S.   (Linsley, Kohler,
and  Paulhus, 1958).

          To estimate the amount of suspended sediment trapped within
an impoundment using this method, the capacity of the impoundment in
acre-feet must first be determined.  Next, average annual inflow, or
better, average flow for the time period of interest is estimated.

Then,
                             St =  S^P                              (V-5)
where
     S.  =  weight of sediment trapped per time period t
      P  =  trap efficiency  (expressed as a decimal) from Figure  V-7

          A word of caution is in order here.   The above described
techniques for -evaluating sediment deposition  in impoundments are
capable of providing reasonable estimates, but only where substantial
periods of time are involved - perhaps 6 months or longer.  The methods
may be used for shorter study periods, but results must then be taken
only as very rough estimates, perhaps order-of-magnitude.

 5.3.3   Short-Term  Sedimentation Rates
           The  three-step  procedure  presented below  provides  a  means
 to  make  short-term  sediment  accumulation  rate  estimates  for  storm-event
 analysis and  to  estimate  amounts  of different  grain-size fractions
                                      30

-------
passing through an impoundment.   The steps are:

          •  Determine terminal  fall velocities  for the grain
             size distribution

          •  Estimate hydraulic  residence time

          •  Compute trap (sedimentation) rate

5.3.3.1  Fall Velocity Computation

    When a particle is released in  standing water, it will remain
roughly stationary if its density equals that of the water.  If the
two densities differ, however, the  particle will begin to rise or fall
relative to the water.  It will  then tend to accelerate until the drag
force imposed by the water exactly  counterbalances the force accelerating
the particle.  Beyond this point, velocity is essentially constant,
and the particle has reached terminal velocity.   For spheres of specific
gravity greater than 1, Stokes1  law expresses the relationship between
fall velocity (terminal velocity) and several other physical parameters
of water and the particle.
where
     V    =  terminal velocity of the spherical particle (ft see" )
      max
                                                     _2
     g    =  acceleration due to gravity (32.2 ft sec  )
     p    =  mass density of the particle (slugs ft  )
                                            _ o
     p    =  mass density of water (slugs ft  )
      w
     d    =  particle diameter (ft)
                                                       _2
     u    =  absolute viscosity of the water (Ib sec-ft  )
     D    =  weight density of particle (Ib ft  )
                                31

-------
     DW   =  weight density of water (Ib ft" )

     Stokes1  law is satisfactory for Reynolds numbers between 1x10~4
and 0.5 (Camp,  1968).   Reynolds number is given by:

                               D   vd
                               * -  ~                              (V-7)

where
     R    =  Reynolds number
     v    =  particle velocity
     v    =  kinematic viscosity of water

     Generally, for particles of diameter less than 3 x 10   inches
(0.7 mm) this criterion is met.  For large particles, how far conditions
deviate from this may be observed using the following approach (Camp,
1968).  According to Newton's law for drag, drag force on a particle
is given by:

                            Fd = CAPwv2/2                           (V-8)
where
     F .  =  the drag force
     C   =  unitless drag coefficient
     A   =  projected area of the particle in the direction
            of motion

Equating the drag force to the gravitational (driving) force for the
special case of a spherical particle, velocity is given by:
                                       32

-------
                   Vmax  =
4g (pp  -  pw)d                          (V-9)
      All  variables  in the  expression  for V     (Equation V-9) may be easily
                                          Illu^
 estimated except C,  since  C  is  dependent upon  Reynold's number.  Accord-
 ing  to  Equation  (V-7),  Reynolds number is  a  function of v.   Thus a
 "trial  and error" or iterative  procedure would ordinarily be necessary
 to estimate C.   However, a somewhat simpler  approach is available to
 evaluate  the  drag coefficient and  Reynolds number.   First,  estimate
   O
 CR  using the expression  (Camp, 1968):
                      CR2 = 4pw (Pp - pw) gd3/3u2                  (V

Then, using the plot in Figure V-8, estimate R and then C.  For R>0.1
use of Equation (V-9) will give better estimates of V ,v than will
                                                     max
Equation (V-6).

    Generally, one of the two approaches for spherical particles will
give good estimates of particle fall velocity in an effectively laminar
flow field (in impoundments).  Occasionally, however, it may prove
desirable to compensate for nonsphericity of particles.  Figure V-9,
which shows the effect of particle shape on the drag coefficient C,
may be used to do this.  Note that for R<1, shape of particle does not
materially affect C, and no correction is necessary.

     A second  problem  in application of  the Newton/Stokes approach
described above is that it does not account for what is called hindrance
Hindrance occurs when the region of fluid surrounding a falling particle
is disrupted (by the particle motion) and the velocity of other nearby
particles is thereby decreased.  Figure V-10 shows this effect
schematically.
                                  33

-------
10
                        Values  of R =
     FIGURE V-8  PLOT OF C./R AND rp2 VERSUS R  (CAMP, 19B8)
                              34

-------
                                       Drag   Coefficient,  C
   CD
   c:
    I
    'Ł>
   >
   -D
^3  a
-H  m
— '  Tl
o  -n

'•TI  o

OO  Tl
T;  -2
>  -H
~O
rn  ^-v
-,o  o
en  H
oo  •—
^-^  o
    o
    Tl
    m
    -<
    ^y
    o
    m
    :o
             O  -
a>
»<
3
o  _
                                                            O
                                                             ro
                         1—TT
              o
               o>
                                                                               n	r
O   O  OJ

 I   I    I

O   O  
-------
Particles which
velocity is affected
by vertical velocity
field
Region of disruption,
upward fluid motion

Settling sphere
                                                           Water column
                                                           containing settling
                                                           particles
   FIGURE  v-10   SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATION OF  HINDERED  SETTLING
                   OF  PARTICLES  IN FLUID COLUMN
                                     36

-------
      A very limited amount of research has been done to determine the
effect of particle concentration on fall  velocity.(Camp, 1968).   Some
data have been collected however, and Figure V-ll is a plot of a velocity
correction factor, v'/Y>as a function of volumetric cancentration.
Volumetric concentration  is given  by:

                     C  , =  wt w                            (V-ll)
                      vol    p                               u  iu
where
      C   ,  =   volumetric  concentration
      vol
      C  .   =   weight  concentration
      wt        3
As  an  approximation,  the  curve  for  sand may be  used  to correct v as a
function  of  C   ,.
                              EXAMPLE  V-3
                           Settling  Velocity

      Assume that a swiftly moving  tributary to a large reservoir
receives a heavy loading of sediment which is mostly clay particles.
The  particles  tend  to  clump somewhat,  and  average diameters are on  the
order  of 2 microns.  The  clumps  have  a  specific gravity of 2.2.  Applying
Stokes1  law  for 20°C water,

                         Vmax = lk (PP •  Pw}  d2
                                                                           2
            V     =   - — - r x   (2. 2x62. 4/32. 2-62. 4/32. 2)x(6.56xlO"6)
             max     (18x2. IxlO'5)
             =  8.53x1O"6  ft  sec"1  =  .03  ft  hr"1

  Thus  the  particles  of clay might be  expected  to  fall  about  9  inches
  per day  in  the  reservoir.   It  should be noted  that  for  such a  low
                                  37

-------
                            Correction  Factor
m
r~
o
o
c— >
o
m
o
•H
o
—I
o
a
m
•TO
m
a

CO
      C

      3
      n>
      o   —
      O
      o
      3
      O
      CD
      a
      -4-
      o
UD
CJ1
00

-------
settling rate, turbulence in the water can cause very significant
errors.  In fact, the estimate is useful  only in still  waters having
a very uniform flow lacking substantial vertical components.
                          END OF EXAMPLE V-3
                         	 EXAMPLE V-4 —
                Settling., Velocity, for a Sand and Clay

       Suppose  a  river is  transporting  a  substantial  sediment  load which
 is mainly  sand and  clay.   The  clay  tends to clump  to form  particles
 of 10  micron diameter while  the  sand  is  of  0.2  mm  diameter.   The
 sand particles are  very  irregular in  shape  tending toward  a somewhat
 flattened  plate  form. The specific gravity of  the clay  is about
 1.8 while  that of the sand is  near  2.8.   Given  that the  water tempera-
 ture  is  about  5°C,  the terminal  velocity of the clay may be estimated
 as in  Example  V-3:
     Vmax  =   Ts    (pp  '  pw}
     v     =   , - §2^2 -   x  (0.8x62. 4/32. 2)x(3.28xlO"5)
      max     18x3.17x10
           =   9.4  xlO"5 ft  sec"1
           =   8  ft day"1
 For  the  sand,  apply Equation  (V-10)

      CR2   =  4pw  (pp  -  pw)  gd3/3y2
                 62-4   v  1-8x62.4     3.2.2 x  (6.56xlO"4)
                 32.2   x    32.2    x     ; - IF"? -
                                       3x(3. 17x10 V
     CR2  =  82
                             39

-------
 Referring  to  Figure V-8,  a  value  of  CR2  equal  to  82  represents  R^2.8
 and  C*10.3.   From  Figure  V-9,  the corrected drag  coefficient  for  discs
 is close to 10.3 (no  correction really necessary).   Then,  using Equation
 (V-9) as an approximation,
                                ^ (Pn - Pw) d
                      ii    -. ^i	2	w
                       max   i 3Cp
                                  W

          V    _ 14x32.2x(l.8x62.4/32.2)x6.56xlO"4
           max "^3x10.3x62.4/32.7	

          Vmax =  °'07 ft "c"1  = 252 ft hr'1

Thus the clay will  settle about  8 feet per day while the sand will
settle about 6048 feet per day (252  feet per hour).
                          END OF EXAMPLE V-4
 5.3.4   Impoundment Hydraulic Residence Time

     Once settling  velocities have  been estimated  for  selected  grain
 sizes,  the  final preparatory step  in  estimating sediment deposi-
 tion rates  is  to compute  hydraulic  residence  time.

     Hydraulic  residence time represents  the mean  time a particle  of
 water  resides  within  an impoundment.   It is not,  as is sometimes  thought,
 the  time required  to  displace all water  in the  impoundment with new.
 In some impoundments,  inflowing  water may be  conceptualized  as
 moving  in a  vertical  plane  from  inflow to discharge.  This is  called
 plug flow.   In long,  narrow, shallow  impoundments with high  inflow
 velocities,  this is often a good assumption.  As  discussed later,
 however,  adoption  of  this model  leads to another  problem, namely,
 is water within the plug.uniform or does sediment concentration vary
 over depth within  the  plug?
                                  40

-------
      A  second model  assumes  that water flowing  into an impoundment
 instantaneously mixes  laterally with the entire  receiving layer.  The
 layer may  or may  not  represent the entire  impoundment depth.  This simpli-
 fication is often  a good one  in large surfaced,  exposed impoundments having
 many small inflows.

      Regardless  of the model assumed for  the process by which water
 traverses  an impoundment from inflow to discharge, hydraulic residence
 time is  computed  as in Equation (V-l).  That is,

                               T  = V/Q
                                w     x

The only important qualification is that to be meaningful, V must be
computed taking account of stagnant areas, whether these are regions of
the impoundment isolated from the main flow by a sand spit or" promontory,
or whether they are isolated  by a density  gradient, as in the thermo-
cline and  hypolimnion.  Ignoring stagnant  areas may result in a very
substantial overestimate of T , and in sediment  trap computations, an
overestimate in trap efficiency.   Actually T  computed in this way is
an adjusted hydraulic residence time.   All  references to hydraulic
residence  time in the remainder of Section  5.3  refer to adjusted T .

      Hydraulic residence time is  directly influenced by such physical
variables  as impoundment depth, shape,  side slope, and shoaling,
as well   as hydraulic characteristics such  as degree of mixing, stratifi-
cation,   and flow velocity distributions.   The concepts involved in
evaluating many of these factors  are elementary.   The evaluation itself
is complicated, however, by irregularities  in impoundment shape and
data inadequacies.  Commonly, an  impoundment cannot be represented well
by a simple 3-dimensional  figure,  and  shoaling and other factors may
restrict flow to a laterally narrow swath  through the water  body.

-------
     In most cases,  hydraulic residence time may be estimated,  although
it is clear that certain circumstances tend  to  make the  computation
error-prone.  The first step in the estimation  process  is  to  obtain
impoundment inflow,  discharge,  and thermal  regime data  as  well  as
topographic/bathymetric maps of the system.   Since a  number of  configu-
ration types are possible,  the  methods are  perhaps best  explained  using
examples.
                             EXAMPLE  V-5
       Hydraulic Residence Time in  Unstratified  Impoundments

     The first step in estimating hydraulic residence time for purposes
 of sedimentation analysis is to determine whether there are signifi-
 cant stagnant areas.  These would include not only regions cut off
 from the main flow through the body, but also layers isolated by dense
 strata.  Consequently, it must be determined whether or not the im-
 poundment stratifies.  Consider Upper Lake located on the Carmans
 River, Long Island,, New York.  The lake and surrounding region are
 shown in Figure V-12, and hypothetical geometry data are presented
 in Table V-6.  Based upon Upper Lake's shallowness,  its long, narrow
 geometry, and high tributary inflows, it is safe to  assume that
 Upper Lake is normally unstratified.  Also, because  of turbulence
 likely at the high flows, one can assume that the small sac northeast
 of the discharge is not stagnant and that Upper Lake represents a slow
 movinq river reach.  With these assumptions, the computation of
 hydraulic residence time is as shown in Table V-6.
                                      42

-------
FIGURE V-12  UPPER AND LOWER LAKES AND ENVIRONS,
             LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK
                         43

-------
                               TABLE V-6
                HYPOTHETICAL PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
          OF UPPER LAKE, BROOKHAVEN, SUFFOLK COUNTY,  NEW YORK
Distance
from
Miles
0.05
0. 10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
Downstream
Inflow
(feet)
(264)
(528)
(792)
(1,056)
(1,320)
(1,534)
(1,848)
(2,112)
(2,376)
(2,640)
D
Average
Depth
ft.
3
4
6
7
7
8
7
8
7
10
W
Average
Width
ft.
63
no
236
315
340
315
550
550
354
350
CSA
Cross-secti
Area,_D x
ft2
189
440
1,416
2,205
2,380
2,520
• 3,850
4,400
2,478
3,500
onal
W










Total  length = 0.5 mi.  (2,640 ft.)
Inflow from upstream =  380 cfs
Outflow to downstream = 380 cfs
(steady-state)
                 mean  CSA  =  2,338  ft'
Computation
Volume (Vol) = Total length x mean cross-sectional area

     Vol  = 2,640 ft. x 2,338 ft2 = 6.17 x 106 ft3

Residence time (T ) = Vol/flow
                 W
     -r  = 6.17 x 105 ft3/(380 ft3/sec) = 1.62 x 104 sec (4.5 hr)
      w

Velocity (Vel) = length/-^

     Vel  = 2,640 ft/1.62 x 104 sec =  .163 ft/sec
                                    44

-------
     Also shown in Figure V-12 is  Lower Lake.   According  to  the
hypothetical  data presented in Table V-7,  Lower Lake is much deeper
than Upper Lake.   Its volume is significantly  greater also,  but  the
inflow rate is similar.   In this case,  particularly during  the  summer,
it should be determined if the lake stratifies.  For this example,  however,
we will assume that the time of the year makes stratification very  un-
likely, and that Lower Lake is a slow moving river reach.  We then
compute hydraulic residence time as shown in Table V-7.   Figure  V-13
in particular diagram 1, shows what these assumptions mean  in terms  of
a flow pattern for both lakes.
                         END OF EXAMPLE V-5
                            EXAMPLE V-6
     Assume for this example that Lower Lake is stratified during the
period of interest.  This significantly changes the computation of res-
idence time.  To a first approximation, one can merely revise the
effective depth of the impoundment to be from the surface to the upper
limit of the thermocline rather than to the bottom.  Figure V-13 shows
schematically what this simple model suggests for Lower Lake as a
stratified  impoundment (diagram 2 or possibly 3).  The figure also
shows wind-driven shallow, and deep impoundments.  To the right of
each diagram is a plot of the temperature profile over depth.  Actually,
the profile could represent a salinity gradient as well as a thermal
gradient.

     Table  V-8 shows the procedure to estimate travel time for strati-
fied Lower  Lake.  The upper boundary of the thermocline is assumed to
be at a depth of 10 feet.  For all later computations of sediment
accumulation, this same 10 foot depth would be adopted.  Such an assump-
tion is valid presuming that the thermocline and hypo!imnion are
relatively  quiescent.  Thus once a particle enters the thermocline it
can only settle, and can not leave the impoundment.

	 END OF EXAMPLE V-6 	
                             45

-------
                                TABLE V-7

                HYPOTHETICAL  PHYSICAL  CHARACTERISTICS
         OF LOWER  LAKE,  BROOKHAVEN,  SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK

Distance Downstream
from Inflow
Miles (feet)
0.075 ( 396)
0.150 ( 792)
0.225 (1,188)
0.300 (1,584)
0.375 (1,980)
0.450 (2,376)
0.525 (2,772)
0.600 (3,163)
0.675 (3,564)
0.750 (3,960)
0.825 (4,356)
0.900 (4,752)
0.975 (5,148)
1.050 (5,544)
1.125 (5,940)
Total length = 1 .125
Inflow from upstream

D
Average
Depth
ft.
15
20
20
25
35
30
35
35
40
42
41
51
42
40
37
mi (5,940 ft.
400 cfs )
> (
Outflow to downstream 390 cfs I
W
Average
Width
ft.
157
165
173
197
197
228
232
197
220
315
433
591
551
433
323
)

surface rising)
j /
CSA
Cross-sectional
Area,0D x W
ft2
2,355
3,300
3,460
4,925
6,895
6,840
8,120
6,895
8,800
13,230
17,753
30,141
23,142
17,320
11,951
mean CSA = 11 ,008



Average flow = 395 cfs
Computation
Volume (Vol ) - Total

length x mean

cross-sectional

area
     Vol  - 5,940 ft.  x 11,008 ft2 = 6.54 x 107 ft3
Residence Time (T ) = Vol/flow

     TW = 6.54 x 107/(395 ft3/sec) = 1.65 x 105 sec (46 hr)
Velocity (Vel) = length/Tw

     Vel = 5,940 ft/1.65 x 105 sec  =  .036  ft/sec
                                    46

-------
                               I.AIM>C tuttrAcro, >»»i- MOWN*
                                     IMPOUW>«1 NT
                                                            ICIWWI
                                                           _j	_    	
                                    "* *"•""'•''•*
                            ^SSfffffifff: $«<<•>«»' i "i" :v:v.v'.v.:x:x:''''
                             'V-HWW^vAVAVAv.v.v.vX-H'X*.* • •
                              Thermoclme (EtlcAtiolly Stagnonr)
                             L*R6E SU»F*CfO, UOOERATEtr SHALLOW j
                             iMPOUNOMtNT, VERY LOW VELOCITIES
                                             Hypoltmnion
                             l d*tr««H\ i Millrtf
                        i Itt 4«pth with  I ) dtcr*o*«4
t-I'X':v.'.vv.v.v.v.v.v.vX-X:    '

1C      ...I1)1
1 d«cr*a*«tf      mtxiMi  -S
                 (3)    i ""«« «'«
                         SHALLOW, WIND MIXED (TURBULENT) IMPOUNDMENT
                                    S«4lm«ni  Laye
                          Ort(", SUPERFICIALLY  TURBULENT
                              STRATIFIED IMPOUNDMENT
                                                          Rtcfiving
                                                          CMnntl
                                                                                        °l
FIGURE  V-13    IMPOUNDMENT  CONFIGURATIONS  AFFECTING  SEDIMENTATI
                                                               ON
                                                   47

-------
                               TABLE V-8

               HYPOTHETICAL PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
          OF  LOWER  LAKE,  BROOKHAVEN, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK
              (ASSUMING AN  EPILIMNION DEPTH OF 10 FEET)

Distance Downstream
from Inflow
Miles (feet)
0.075
0.150
0.225
0.300
0.375
0.450
0.525
0.600
0.675
0.750
0.825
0.900
0.975
1.050
1.125
D
Average
Depth
ft.
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
W
Average
Width
ft.
160
170
175
200
198
230
233
200
222
316
435
590
552
435
325
CSA
Cross-sectional
Area , 0D x W
ft2
1,600
1 ,700
1,750
2,000
1,980
2,300
2,330
2,000
2,220
3,160
' • 4,350 -
5,900
5,520
4,350
3,250
Total length = 1.125 mi (5,940 ft.)
Inflow from upstream 397 cfs

Outflow to downstream  393 cfs
Average flow - 395 cfs
               mean CSA = 2,961 ft'

(steady-state surface,  difference
 due to loss  to water  table)
Computation

Volume (Vol) = Total  length x mean cross-sectional  area

     Vol  = 5,940 ft.  x 2,961  ft2 = 1.76 x 107
Residence Time (T )  = Vol/flow


     TW = 1.76 x 107/(395 ft3/sec)  = 4.46 x 104 sec (12.3 hr)
Velocity (Vel) = length/T
                         w
     Vel  = 5,940 ft/4.46 x 10^ sec = 0.133 ft/sec
                                   48

-------
                            EXAMPLE V-7
                Large, Irregular Surface Impoundment

     Figure V-14 shows Kellis Pond and surrounding topography.   This-
small  pond is located near Bridgehampton,  New York and has  a surface
area of about 36 acres.  From the surface shape of the pond, it is
clear that it cannot be considered as a stream reach.

      Figure  V-15  shows a  set of  hypothetical  depth  profiles for the
pond.   From  the profiles,  it is  evident that  considerable  shoaling
has resulted in the  formation  of a relatively well  defined  flow
channel  through the  pond.   Peripheral  stagnant areas  have  also formed.
Hypothetical  velocity vectors  for the  pond are presented in Figure
V-16.   Based upon them,  it is  reasonable  to consider  the pond as
being  essentially the hatched  area in  Figure  V-15.  To estimate
travel  times,  the hatched  area may be  handled in  the  same  way as  for
the Upper  Lake  example presented above.   It should  be noted, however,
that  this  approach will  almost certainly  result in  underestimation  of
sediment'deposition  in later computations.  This  is true for two
reasons.   First,  estimated travel  time will be smaller than the true
value  since  impoundment  volume is underestimated.   Second,  since  the
approach  ignores  the low  flow  velocities  to either  side of  the central
channel  and  nonuniform velocities within  it,  heavier  sedimentation
than  computed  is  likely.
                              49

-------
SOUTHAMPTON
                                             BRIDGEHAMPTON
                            KELLIS POND
       WEST MECOX
       VILLAGE
                                      MILES
 FIGURE V-14  KELLIS POND AND SURROUNDING  REGION, LONG  ISLAND,
             NEW YORK
                            50

-------
FIGURE V-15  HYPOTHETICAL DEPTH PROFILES FOR KELLIS POND
                           51

-------
          •STAGNANT
STAGNANT-
     FIGURE  V-16    HYPOTHETICAL  FLOW PATTERN  IN KELLIS POND

     Still  more difficult  to  evaluate is the situation where shoaling
and scour have not  resulted in formation of a distinct central
channel.   Figure V-17  shows hypothetical depth profiles for Kellis
Pond for  such a case.

     Here,  velocity distribution data should be obtained, particu-
                                                      0
larly if  the impoundment is of much  importance.  If such data are
not available but it is deemed worthwhile to do field studies,
methods available for  evaluating flow patterns include dye tracing
and drogue floats.   A  simple  but adequate method (at least to evalu-
ate the surface velocity distribution)  is to pour a large number of
citrus fruits (oranges, grapefruit)  which float just below the surface,
into the  impoundment,  and  to  monitor both their paths and velocities.
Although  it is true that surface velocities may be greater than the
velocity  averaged over depth, this will  permit estimation of hydraulic
residence time directly or generation of data  to use  in the prescribed
method.  In the latter case,  the data might be used to define the
major flow path through an impoundment  of a form like Kellis  Pond.
	 END OF EXAMPLE  V-7 	
                         EXAMPLE V-8
                     Comb!ex Geometries

     The final hydraulic residence time example shows  the degree  of
complexity that sediment deposition  problems  may  entail.   Although
it is possible to make rough estimates  of sediment  accumulation,  it
                                 52

-------

                                         PLAN VIEW
      Ns,
                     V
                                         TRANSECTS
                                           A
                                          B
                                          D
FIGURE  V-17  HYPOTHETICAL DEPTH  PROFILES FOR KELLIS  POND
            NOT SHOWING SIGNIFICANT SHOALING
                       53

-------
is recommended that for such impoundments more rigorous methods be
used - mathematical modeling and/or detailed field investigations.

      Figure V-18 shows Lake Owyhee in eastern Oregon.   This  impound-
ment is well outside the ranpo of complexity of rr.ter bodies  which
can be evaluated using these calculation methods.   Because of geometry,
the number of tributaries, and size, it isn't feasible  to conceptually
reduce the impoundment in such a way as to estimate travel  times.   Flow
patterns are likely to be very complex, and sediment deposition is dif-
ficult to predict both in terms of quantity and location.

       In contrast, Figure V-19  shows New Millpond near Islip, New
York and surrounding features.  Although this water  body does not have
a  simple surface geometry,  it can be reduced  to three relatively
simple components  as shown  in the figure.  Bearing in mind the limita-
tions  imposed by wind mixing, stratification, and the presence of
stagnant regions described  in earlier  examples, deposition might
nevertheless be estimated in arms A, B,  and C.  Because  of the diffi-
culty  of predicting velocities  and  turbulence in section D, estimates
of sedimentation cannot  be  reliably made there.  However, it is
likely that much of inflowing sediments  will  have settled out by  the
time water  flows through  the arms and  into section D.
                          END OF EXAMPLE V-8
 5.3.5   Estimation of  Sediment Accumulation

       Estimation of quantities of sediment retained  in an  impoundment
 follows  directly from the computations of settling velocity and
 travel  time, although the computation depends upon whether the adopted
 model  is plug  flow, or a fully mixed layer or impoundment.

       In the case of  plug flow,  one of two subordinate assumptions  is
 made:   that  the plug  is fully mixed as in turbulent  flow,  or  that
 1t  moves in  a  "laminar" flow through the  impoundment.  In  terms  of
 sediment accumulation estimates,  the fully mixed  plug assumption is
                                    54

-------
                LAKE
              OWYHEE
                            SCALED
                           12345
FIGURE V-1%   IAKE OWYHEE AND ENVIRONS
                  55

-------
                         NEWMILLPOND
FIGURE V-19  NEW MILLPOND AND FNVIRONS,  HEW MILLPOND is
             SUBDIVIDED  FOR  PURPOSES OF FSTIMATING SFDI-
             MENTATION  IN REGIONS A, B, AND P.,
                           56

-------
handled in the same way as the fully mixed impoundment model.   Thus
we have two kinds of computations:
     Cases^
       A         •  Plug  flow with the plug not
                    mixed vertically
                    versus
                 t  Plug flow assuming a vertically
                    mixed plug, or

                 •  A fully mixed impoundment or stratum
     Equation (V-12) is pertinent to both cases A and B.  It defines
the mass of sediment trapped as a function of trap efficiency and
inflowing sediment mass.  Equation (V-13) should be used for case A,
and Equation (V-14) for case B.

                            St = SjP                       (V-12)

                      P =  ((TWV) + D" -Dj/D"             (V-13)

                          P »^w
                               D1                           (V-14)
where
     P   =  mean proportion of S.  trapped
     $t  =  mass of sediment trapped per unit time
     S.  =  mass of sediment in inflows per unit time
     v   =  particle settling velocity
     0   =  discharge channel depth
     D1  =  flowing layer depth
     D"  =  inflow channel  depth
                                57

-------
     Figure V-20 shows the significance  of  the  various  depth  measures
D, D1, and D" ,  and the assumed sedimentation pattern.   In  case  B,
in the absence cf substantial  erratic  turbulence  and  unpredicted
vertical  velocity components,  and within the constraints  of available
data, it is clear that this approach can give reasonable  estimates
of trap efficiencies.   In case A, however,  small  changes  in D or D"
can strongly affect trap efficiencies.   It  is important to  remember
in applying case A that P is a mean, preferably used  over a period
of time.   It is  also important to recognize that  conditions within
an impoundment leading to selection of case A or  B  are  subject to
change, thus affecting estimates.

     For convenience,  Figure V-21 is included to  provide  estimates
°f Vm3  f°r spherical  particles of 2.7 specific gravity.   The data
    max
are presented as a function of particle  diameter  and  temperature.
Figure V-22 is a nomograph relating trap efficiency,  P  (in  percent)
to depth D1, V , , and T .  The nomograph is useful only  for  case B
              (TtG X       W
assumptions.
                            EXAMPLE V-9
              Sedimentation in Upper and Lower Lakes

     Using the data from Table V-6 and settling velocities for the
clay and sand of Example V-4,  for  case A,

                                     4
                          T  = 1.6x10  sec
                           w

                    Vmax for clay = 8 ft day"1

                    Vmav for sand = 252 ft hour"
                     max
                                  58

-------
                     PLUG FLOW, PLUG  NOT MIXED VERTICALLY
                               Thermocl ine
                               Hypolimnion
                              Sediment Layer ;.;

                               IMPOUNDMENT -
                                                                  D
                                                                 J_
                                        CASE A
          Flow
PLUG FLOW, VERTICALLY MIXED  PLUG
D" : .:

••• -:::

t
\
v.v.^
'••:•



c
1
)'




IvX'XvX'X'Sediment Layer >XvX'X->X*


DOUNDME


/:•:•:
>%'t"."."."

'•'•'



•'

: .'.':'".\ D
S^. " T
CASE B

          Flow
                    FULLY  MIXED IMPOUNDMENT OR STRATUM
                              ;Sediment  Layer vX-X

                              IMPOUNDMENT —
                                                              CASE B
FIGURE 20   SIGNIFICANCE OF  DEPTH  MEASURES D,  D ,  AND
             D   ,  AND THE ASSUMED SEDIMENTATION PATTERN
                                    59

-------
     0
                       10
15
                              20
25
30
                                                                     35
   -2--
   -3--
u

'•Ł  -4
k_
o
Q.
0)
   -6 -
o»
o
   -8 - —
   -9
           .001 mm

           .00075 mm
.0005 mm





00025 mm
           I x 10   mm
       FIGURE V-21  SETTLING  VELOCITY FOR  SPHERICAL PARTICLES
                                   60

-------
 10
   -7.
IQ-0--
 10
   -s::
 10
   -4
IO"3--
  10
   -2J1
  10°--
                       Tu)
io5-
                          --10
                       10'
                       10
                           St/Sj
                           10
                             -6
                            10
                             -4
                              IO°-3=l.99°/<
                              \
                              \
                              \
                              \
                              \
                              \
                              \
                              \
                              \

                              X
           V : Settling velocity in feet/
              second

           T : Hydraulic residence time

              in seconds

           D': Flowing layer depth

           S.: Mass of sediment trapped

           S.: Mass of sediment entering

            1  impoundment


           L : Pivot axis
                                                                10
                                                                    D'
                                                                   4-
                                                                 I03"
                                                                  IQ2--
                                                                 10'--
                                                                  10°
                                                                       |0I.699=50
FIGURE  V-22   NOMOGRAPH  FOR  ESTIMATING  SEDIMENT  TRAP EFFICIENCY
                                       61

-------
Although it is not specified in Table 7-6, the inflow channel depth

at the entrance to Upper Lake is 3 feet.  The discharge channel depth

is 10 feet.  Assuming "laminar"  flow with minimal  vertical  components,
for clay:
                              [(Tw x v)  + D"  -  D]

                       TW  "        DTi
                   P =
                        [(1.6xl04x9.3xlO"5) +3-10]
                              P = -5.5


The negative value implies that the proportion settling out is

virtually zero.  Thus the clay will to a large extent pass through

Upper Lake.  However, x  for this examole is very small (4.5 hours)
                       w
Many impoundments will have substantially larger values.


For the sand,

                   p   [(1.6x104x7xlO"2)  +3-10]
                                   3


                              P = 371


All of the sand will  clearly be retained.   Note that a clay or very
                         4        1
fine silt of vmax = 5x10   ft sec   would  be only partially trapped.



                   p   [Q.6x1Q4x5x10"4)  +3-10]
                                   3


                              P = 0.33
                                     62

-------
Thus about one-third of this sediment loading would  be retained.
Note that  if D  is  large,  trap efficiency drops using this algorithm.
For the  silt, a discharge channel depth (at the outflow from Upper
Lake) of 11 feet rather than 10 would give
                         [Q.6xlQ4x5xlO"4) + 3-11]   n
                      -             3                 u
Thus with D=ll, all silt exits the impoundment.  If D is only 9 feet, then
                    p = [Q.6x104x5xlQ"4) +3-9] =
                                    o
Two-thirds of the silt is retained.  Remember that P represents a
mean value.  Clearly during some periods none of the silt will be
retained  (due to turbulence, higher velocities) while during other
periods, all of the silt will be trapped.  The key here is the word
"mean."
     If the impoundment is assumed to be vertically mixed (case B),
compute the mean depth D
                                  n
                            D =   z D./n
where

     n   =  the number of cross-sections
     Di  =  depth at the ith cross-section

For Upper Lake,

                            D = 6.7 = D1
                                 63

-------
Then
                                   V T
                              P-
                                    D'

For the clay,
                            9.3x10"5x1.6x104
About one-fourth of the clay is retained.

For the sand,
                        „   7x10"2xl.6x104
                        p = 	_	
All of the sand will be trapped within about 1/167 times the length
of the lake.  If the daily influent loading of sand is one ton, while
the loading of clay is fifteen tons, then the daily accumulation will
be one ton of sand and 0.22 x 15 = 3.3 tons of clay.

     Finally, as an example of use of Figures V-21 and V-22, assume
that the sediment loading consists primarily of silt particles in the
size range of .002mm diameter, and that the water temperature is 5°C.
Further, assume T  has been estimated as 2.77 days (10  seconds), and
that D'=50 feet.  From Figure V-21, the settling velocity is about
    -4
1x10   feet per second.
                                         -4                    d
      In  Figure  V-22,  draw  a  line  from  10   on  the V  axis  to  10   on  the
 T   axis.  The point of  intersection with  axis L.is L'.  Next,  compute
 Iog1050=1.699.   Draw  a  line  from  this  point on  the D' axis to !_' .
 Where  this  line crosses  the  S./S.  (%)  axis gives  the  log  of  the  percent
 of the sediment trapped.   This  is 10 '=1.99=2%.

	 END OF EXAMPLE V-9 	
                                    64

-------
5.4  EUTROPHICATION AND CONTROL

5.4.1  Introduction

     The presence of nutrients in an impoundment generally favors plant
growth.  Depending upon antecedent conditions, the relative abundance of
nitrogen, phosphorus,  light, and heat, and the status of a number of other
physical and chemical  variables, the predominant forms may be diatoms, other
microscopic or macroscopic algae, or bottom-rooted or free-floating
macrophytes.  The quantity of  plant matter present in an impoundment is
important for several  reasons.   First, plant  cells produce oxygen during
photosynthesis,  thereby providing an  important source of dissolved oxygen to
the  water column.   During the  sunlight hours  plant cells also consume oxygen
through  the process  of respiration.   Respiration occurs along with
photosynthesis during  the day,  but  also  occurs at night.  Oxygen consumed at
night  may be considerable,  not only because  it serves to sustain the plant
cells,  but because  the cells  actively perform various vital metabolic
functions  in the dark.

      Plant growth within  an  impoundment  is  also  important because  plant
biomass  is a major source of  nutrition for  indigenous fauna,  and the  growth
of plants  constitutes  what  is called "primary production."  The stored
 energy and  nutrients provide  food  for various grazers  higher  in the  food
 chain, either  through  direct  consumption of living  plant  tissue by fishes
 and zooplankton  or through  consumption of detritus  by fishes,
 microorganisms,  and zooplankton.  The grazers,  in  turn,  provide food for
 predatory fishes, mammals,  insects, and  other higher forms.

      Finally,  plant development in impoundments is  important  because it
 tends to accelerate impoundment aging.  As plants  grow,  organic matter and
 sediment accumulate.  As the impoundment fills  with rock  fragments,  soil,
 and plant detritus, an excellent substrate forms upon which more suspended
 matter may be trapped and which may ultimately support the growth of higher
 plants and trees.  The gradual filling  in of an impoundment in this way
 reduces its usefulness, and may finally eliminate the impoundment
 completely.
                                   65

-------
5.4.2  Nutrients, Eutrophy, and Algal Growth

     Eutrophy means literally a state of good nutrition.   Plants require a
number of nutrients, but to vastly different degrees.   Some nutrients, such
as carbon, nitrogen, potassium, and phosphorus, are needed in large
quantity.  These are termed macronutrients.  The micronutrients, e.g. iron,
cobalt, manganese, zinc, and copper, are needed in very small amounts.  In
nature, the micronutrients, carbon, and potassium are  usually in adequate
supply (although not always), while nitrogen and phosphorus are commonly
growth limiting.

     Nitrogen, particularly as nitrate and ammonium ions, is available to
water-borne plant cells to be used in synthesis of proteins, chlorophyll _a,
and plant hormones.  Each of these substances is vital for plant survival.

     Phosphorus, an element found in a number of metabolic cofactors, is
also necessary for plant nutrition.  The biosynthesis  and functioning of
various biochemical cofactors rely on the availability of phosphorus, and
these cofactors  lie at the very foundation of plant cell metabolism.
Without adequate phosphorus, plant cells cannot grow.

     Since nitrogen and phosphorus are commonly in limited supply, many
impoundments tend inherently to be clear and essentially free of clogging
algae and vascular plants.  Because of society's ever-increasing size and
need for food, chemical sources of nitrogen and phosphorus are synthesized
and spread over  vast tracts of farmland.  Stormwater washes off these
nutrients, which then flow through streams and into natural and artificial
impoundments.  Also, excessive nutrients occur in wastewaters from
municipalities and  industry.  Due to the fact that many  impoundments  have
very  low flow velocities,  impoundments represent excellent bioloaical
culturinq vessels, and often become choked with plant life when nutrients
increase.

     Since a plant cell has at any point in time a specific need for
nitrogen and for phosphorus, one or the other or both may  limit cell  growth
or replication.  Where nitrogen is the nutrient that restricts the rate of
plant growth, that  is, where all other nutrients and factors are present  in
                                         66

-------
excess, we say that nitroqen is growth limiting.  In general, N:P ratios in
the range of 5 to 10 by mass are usually associated with plant growth being
neither nitroaen nor phosphorus limited.  However, in this range, plant
growth may well be limited by N and P collectively.  Where the ratio is
greater than 10, phosphorus tends to be 1'miting, and for ratios below 5,
nitrogen tends to be limiting (Chiaudani, _et _al_., 1974).

     In addition to nitroqen and phosphorus, any necessary nutrient or
physical condition may limit plant growth.  For example, in highly
nutritious (eutrophic) waters, algal biomass may increase until light cannot
penetrate, and light is then limiting.  At such a point, a dynamic
equilibrium exists in which algal cells are consumed, settle or lyse (break)
at the same rate as new cells are produced.

     To summarize, the process of eutrophication (or fertilization) is
enrichment of a lake with nutrients, particularly nitrogen and phosphorus.
However, the problem of eutrophication resulting from increased plant
biomass caused by enrichment will be discussed.  Some of the problems of
predicting algae and the screening method will be developed for screening
purposes, a nutrient approach will be taken so that control measures can be
evaluated and then, plant biomass (algal blooms and macrophytes), will be
estimated to provide a relationship with the problem of eutrophication.
5.4.3  Predicting Algal Concentrations

     Predicting algal blooms or predominance of macrophytes using a
mechanistic approach can be a very complex problem, and most methods are not
suited to a simple hand calculation technique.  Some relationships regarding
algal productivity have been derived, however, which permit an evaluation of
the eutrophic state of an impoundment.  Because the methods permit algal
biomass to be estimated with relatively little, easily obtained data, and
because algae are very important in assessing impoundment water quality,
these techniques are useful here.  The methods presented below are based
upon the fact that in most cases (perhaps 60 percent) phosphorus is the
biomass limiting nutrient (EPA, 1975).  One such approach has been developed
by Vollenweider (Vollenweider, 1976;  Lorenzen, 1976).  It may be used to
                                          67

-------
predict the degree of impoundment eutrophication as a function of areal
phosphorus loading.  It does not, however,  permit direct estimates of algal
biomass to be made.

     Before considering application of any of the methods to assess
eutrophication, it is important to examine the nitrogen to phosphorus ratio.
This indicates whether any of the methods presented below is "likely to give
realistic results.                                           ( ',^N
5.4.3.1  Nutrient Limitation                .^xt         .^ -•    ^ )L^
                                          /$*X  '"        {>C|0'>
     Generally, an average algal cell has an elemental composition for the
macronutrients of Cioe Nie Pi.  With 16 atoms of nitrogen for each atom of
phosphorus, the average composition bv weight is 6.3 percent nitrogen and
0.87 percent phosphorus or an N/P ratio of 7.2/1.  For N/P ratios greater
than 7.?, phosphorus would be less available for growth ("limiting") and
less than 7.2, nitrogen would be limiting.  In practice, values of less than
5 are considered nitrogen limiting, greater than 10 are phosphorus limitinq,
and between 5 and 10, both are limiting.

     In many cases of eutrophic lakes, nitrogen is not limiting because of
the process of nitrogen fixation.  Some blue-green algae, a particularly
noxious type of algae, have enzymatic processes for the biochemical
conversion of dissolved elemental nitrogen into reduced nitrogen (amine
groups) suitable for growth and metabolism.  Special cells called
heterocysts perform this process and only appear when nitrogen is limiting.
It can be argued that in general nitrogen is not limiting and a "worst case"
analysis can be made for a screening approach using phosphorus.  However,
the chlorophyll produced is affected by the N/P ratio as are the algal
species.
                                        68

-------
5.4.3.2  Nutrient Availability

     Availability of nutrients is also important.  Participate nitrogen and
phosphorus in the inflowing tributaries generally settle and can therefore
be considered unavailable.  Few estimates of bioavailable nutrients have
been made and only for phosphorus.  Cowen and Lee (1976) indicated that 30
percent or less of urban runoff phosphorus was available to algae while
Dorich et aj_. (1980) found a value of 20 to 30 percent for sediment bound
phosphorus (as would occur in rural runoff).  It appears that a fraction of
0.3 would provide a conservative estimate of bioavailable phosphorus in the
absence of actual measurements.
 5.4.4   Mass  Balance  of  Phosphorus

     A  material  entering  a  lake  or  impoundment will  partition  between  the
 aqueous and  solid  phases.   The  solid  phase  can settle  and  become  bottom
 sediment or  outflow  can remove  suspended  and  aqueous phase material.   A
 diagramatic  presentation  of this concept  is shown  in Figure  V-23.   The
 concentration of the material  can be  calculated  very simply  after making
 several assumptions:  the lake  is completely mixed,  the lake is  at steady
 state  and inflowing  water equals outflow, and the  annual  average  rates are
 constant.  Although  these assumptions are not met  entirely for phosphorus,
 they are satisfied well enough  to meet requirements  for a screening analysis
 of eutrophication.  Based on its historical development the  eutrophication
 screening methods are termed the "Vollenweider Relationship."

      As shown in Figure V-23,  any of  three different forms of  the steady
 state  equation can be used to predict phosphorus concentrations in lakes.
 Each form may be more or less suitable for a specific  data set.   The
 important variables are the hydraulic flushing or dilution rate (Q/V,
 inverse of residence time), lake volume to area ratio (V/A,  equals mean
 depth), phosphorus  in the  influent (PI), and the net rate of removal  (K).

      The variables  Q, V,  A must be determined from other data.  The influent
 phosphorus can be based on measurements or estimated from calculations
 performed as  in Chapter 3  and including any municipal  and industrial
                                    69

-------
   QI = INFLOW

   XI
        CONCENTRATION
        OF  POLLUTANT
                                            A = AREA
                             WATER
                                       Y
                                                    OUTFLOW = Q
                                                          SEDIMENTS
                                             V = VOLUME

                            X = CONCENTRATION IN LAKE
For Example  - Phosphorus, P = X
LOADING
         Lp  = QI • PI / A, mg/m2  year
MASS BALANCE
     Assumptions
      Definitions
                  completely mixed,  steady state, Q = QI ,  annual  average
                  rates are constant

                  Mean depth, Z   = V/A;  hydraulic flushing or  dilution
                  rate, D = Q/V;  hydraulic loading, q  =  Q/A;    M =
                  QI • PI; K = net rate  of solid phase removal  and
                  release (proportional  to P), typically  negative when
                  averaged over the  annual cycle.
                             . KP ,
     Solving  for  P,

              D • PI
          P  =


          P  =
D + K

 M   /
                   1D + K
          p = __
                                  (Mass Balance Form)


                                  (Mass Inflow Form)


                                  (Loading Form)
FIGURE V-23
               FORMULATIONS FOR EVALUATING  MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
               FOR POLLUTANTS  IN LAKES AND  RESERVOIRS
                                   70

-------
effluents.  Generally, effluents are considered totally available for
growth.  Nonpoint sources should be assessed as 100 percent available and as
30 percent available to provide limits for screening purposes.

     Estimation of the net rate of removal (K) is not as clear.  Jones &
Bachmann  (1976) estimated that K=0.65 by least squares fitting of data for
143 lakes.

     Vollenweider (1976) and Larsen and Mercier (1976) independently
estimated the net rate of removal as a function of dilution rate:
This  approach  is  best  used  for  screening.  Also  the  value of K can be
estimated  from the  ratio  (R)  of the measured mass  phosphorus retained
(in-out) and  the  mass  inflow:
                               QI-PI - Q.-_P. = PI-JL
                                           "
                                        ._.
                                  QI-PI    "  PI
                               P-Z
      To assess the placement of a specific lake relative to a set of lakes,
 phosphorus loading (PL) is graphed as a function of hydraulic loading (q )
 (Figure V-24).  The data for 34 U.S. surface waters are shown.  (Some lakes
 occur more than once because of multi-year studies.)
                                -EXAMPLE V-10
                              Big Reservoir and
                        The Voilen wej_c!er _Re_l_at,ionship

      To use the Vollenweider relationship for phosphorus loading, data on
 long-term phosphorus loading rates must be available.   It is also important
 that the rates represent average loading conditions over time because
 transient phosphorus loading pulses will give misleading results.  Big
 Reservoir is a squarish reservoir end has the follc.-.ing characteristics:
                                   71

-------
fj
  001
                                               ™TT;
                                                .6     JJ
   10 i	1	i—i  : ; ; 11; ——i	1—i—i—TTTT]    ;r
                                       35    O
                                        «   29   16     128   /
        EUTROPHIC                              •     * /EXCESSIVE


                               ? 8        4         /  /
                               «n*  o'  °5° °        /   /PERMISSIBLE
^    |-                          °14  «46           X    X
                    47     22   «3'  30  49        /    /
                      II    ° °2    •   •      /   /
                       9       54           X   /

O    C                   3   13ź  39«» *!,,  /     ^X
                     25
                           43
                         7  «"      ./  *5I  X
                         « «44   -^       ^
                                                INVESTIGATOR-INDICATED -
O
""	       — ~~          '              TROPHIC STATE :
^                     ,  53 23-B  ^^                  O -EUTROPHIC
o:                            ""
o o
CL
to
O
X
a.
                   24-A
_9-*^                     A-MESOTROPHIC
  O24-B                    O -OLIGOTROPHIC

 012
                o
                 35
                       I9
                         002I
                     '0                              OLIGOTROPHIC
                         o                                    \

          I _, I  1  I I I M)	I   I  I  I _1 ,1 I l!	I   '  1 I  I Mil	1  . I .. .' 1 . 1 .M I
    Ol               I                10              100            1000
              MEAN  DEPTH  Z/HYDRAULIC RESIDENCE TIME . T^
                                 ( m /yr )


   FIGURE V-24    US  OECD  DATA  APPLIED  TO VOLLENWEIDER  (1976)
                    PHOSPHORUS  LOADING AND MEAN DEPTH/HYDRAULIC
                    RESIDENCE TIME  RELATIONSHIP (TAKEN FROM RAST
                    AND LEE,  1973)
                                    72

-------
                              Big Reservoir

                  Available Data (all values are means):

     Length                                          2.0 mi  = 3.22 km
     Width                                            5. mi  = .805 km
     Depth  (Z)                                       200 ft  - 20 m
     Inflow  (Q)                                       50 cfs = 1.42 cms
     Total  phosphorus  concentration  in water column           0.482 ppm
     Total  nitrogen  concentration in  water column               2.2 ppm
     Total  phosphorus  concentration  in the inflow               1.0 ppm

     In order to apply the plot  in  Figure  V-24,  the  first  step is to make as
certain as  possible  that algal  growth is  phosphorus  limited.   In this  case,
the weight  to weight N:P ratio  is  2.2/.4S =  4.6.   Presumably,  algal growth
in Big Reservoir is  not phosphorus  limited,  and  the  Vollenweider
relationship for phosphorus is  not  a good one  to use.   In  this case a
rigorous model should be used.   If  nitrogen  fixation is observed to occur
(heterocystous blue-green algae),  an estimate  of the potential problem can
be obtained by assuming phosphorus  to be  limiting:

             V  - 3220m •  805m  • 20m =  51.8 million m3

                  1.42  m3       86400 sec   365 day   .865
             D  = - — — -  • - * -    -
                  sec 51.8Mm3       day         yr       yr
             T  =1.16  years
             K  = VD  =  0.93
P  =
                       PI  =  0.482  mg/1
                  D +  K
                                      2
             Lp - Q  •  PI/A  =  17.3 g/m2  yr
             q  = Q/A  =  Z/TW  = 20/1.16  = 17.2 m/yr
                                    73

-------
 Plotting  Lp  and  q   on Figure  V-24  shows  that the reservoir could be
 extremely eutrophic.

	—	-END OF EXAMPLE V-10	
                                •EXAMPLE V-ll
                             Bigger Reservoir and
                        The Voile nwe i d er Re1 at i on ship

      The physical characteristics of Bigger Reservoir are:

                                Bigger Reservoir

                    Available  Data  (all  values are means):

      Length                                             20  mi   =  32.2  km
      Width                                              10  mi   -  16.1  km
      Depth  (Z)                                         200  ft   =  61 m
      Inflow  (Q)                                        500  cfs
      Total  phosphorus  concentration  in  inflow                   0.8 ppm
      Total  nitrogen  concentration  in  inflow                    10.6 ppm

      As  in  the  preceding example,  first determine  whether  phosphorus  is
  likely to  be growth  limiting.  Since  data are available only for influent
  water, and  since no  additional data are available  on impoundment water
  quality,  N:P for influent water will  be used.
                          \ r>/? '- 7 ^
                     -JxSvXj-^^- i  '
                             N:P = 10.6/0.8 = 13.25

       Thus algal growth  in Bigger Reservoir is probably phosphorus  limited.
  Compute the approximate surface area, volume and the hydraulic residence
  time.
               Volume (V)  = 20 mi x  10 mi  x  200  ft  x 52802  =
                            1.12 x  1012ft3 = 3.16 x  1010m3
                                  74

-------
    Hydraulic residence time ( TW)  = V/Q  =

                1.12 x 1012ft3/500 ft'sec"1 = 2.24 x 109sec = 71 yr

    Surface area (A) = 20 mi x 10 mi x 52802 =

                       5.57 x 109ft2 = 5.18 x 10V

    Next, compute q
                                 "s •
                      q  = 61 m/71 yr = 0.86 m yr'1
     Compute  annual  inflow, Q
                            J

                      Q   = Q x  3.15  x  107' sec yr"1
                       y
                          Qy  =  1.58 x 1010ft3  yr"1
Phosphorus concentration in the inflow is  0.8  ppm  or  0.8 mg/1.   Loading  (Lp)
in grams per square meter per year is  computed from the phosphorus
concentration, in mg/1:

         Lp  ,  28.3U x _LJL x O.Smg  x  - 1 - x 1>58xloio ft
               ft3      lOOOmg     *      5.18xlOBM2             yr
                                         -?  -1
                             Lp = 0.70 gm  yr

Now, referring to the plot in Figure V-23, we would expect that Bigger
Reservoir is eutrophic, possibly with severe summer algal  blooms.
                            -END OF EXAMPLE V-ll"
                                 75

-------
                               •EXAMPLE V-12
                       The  Vollenweider Relationship
                     Using  Monthly  Inflow Quality Data

     Is Frog Lake  eutrophic?  Frog  Lake's physical characteristics are as
shown below:
                              Frog Lake

                           Available  Data:
                 Mean length                  2  mi
                 Mean width                   1/2 mi
                 Mean depth                   25 ft

                 Available Inflow Water  Quality Data:

        Q (monthly mean, cfs)   Total  P  (mg/1)       Inorganic N (mg/1)
Month
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
1972
50
80
40
-
-
60
80
75
40
-
38
38
1974
65
90
40
-
-
58
80
76
70
25
20
25
1972
0.1
0.02
0.03
-
-
0.01
0.01
0.04
0.03
-
0.09
0.06
1974
0.08
0.02
0.04
-
-
0.02
0.01
0.05
0.08
0.11
0.04
0.05
1972
7.2
6.3
3.1
-
-
. 2.0
2.3
0.55
1.20
-
3.50
2.80
1974
6.0
2.4
1.5
-
-
1.9
0.50
0.52
1.35
2.01
1.29
1.00
                                76

-------
First, estimate the mean annual  flow and the hydraulic residence time.   To
compute mean annual flow,

                              y    ni         y
                        Q -  ( Z    Z  Q   )/ Z n.
where
     Q.  . =  the individual flow measurements
       i >J
     y    =  the number of years of data
     n.   =  the number of observations per year

           Q = 1050/19 = 55.3 cfs = 1.75 x 109 ft3/yr

 Now  estimate the volume, surface area, hydraulic residence time, and qs

     V  = 2 mi x 1/2  mi x  25 ft x 52802 = 6.97 x 108ft3  =
          1.98 x 10V

     A  = 2 mi x 1/2  mi x  52802 = 2.79 x 107ft2 =  2.59  x 106m2

     T  = V/Q  =  6.97  x 108ft3/55.3  cfs = 1.26 x 107sec  = 0.4 yr
       w

     q  = 25/0.4 = 62.5

 Next,  calculate  the weighted mean  inflow phosphorus  and nitrogen
 concentrations  P and  N as  follows:
                              n.                     n.
             P  (or  N)  = ( Z   Z  Q.   x C.  .)/(  Z   Z   Q   )
                         1=1 j-1  lfj     lfj    i=l j=l  1>J
                        P  = 43.86/1050 = 0.042  ppm

                        N = 2671.902/1050  = 2.54 ppm

 The N:P ratio  in  the  inflows  is 60.  Therefore  if one of the  two  is growth
 limiting,  it  is  probably  phosphorus.   Compute  the phosphorus  loading,  Lp.
                                  77

-------
      L   = j^-iAlJt x —-—y — x  y^—^-^ x  •	-	- x ^--i-^jy_LL_
       P    ft3     1000 mg       Ł        2.59xl06m2       yr
     Lp  = 0.80
 Now,  referring  to  the  plot  in Fiqure V- 23 with Lp = 0.80 and a  = 62.5, the
 impoundment  is  well  into  the oligotrophic region.

	END OF EXAMPLE V-12	
 5.4.5   Phosphorus  Levels  in  Predicting Algal Productivity and Biomass

     Another technique, which  is  also based  upon  phosphorus  loading, may  be
 even more  useful  than  the Vollenweider relationship  because  it permits
 summer  chlorophyll _a concentrations  to be  estimated  rather than  general
 impoundment trophic  status.  The  method  has  been  advanced by several
 researchers including  Sakamoto (1966), Lund  (1971),  Dillon (1974),  and
 Dillon  and Rigler  (1975). Briefly,  the  method  relates mean  summer
 chlorophyll _a concentrations to spring mean  total  phosphorus.  As shown in
 Figure  V-25, the  relationship  is  highly  correlated,  and  a regression of the
 log of  summer mean chlorophyll _a  on  the  log  of  spring mean phosphorus  is
 linear. Using a  least squares method gives  the equation of  the  line as
 (Lorenzen, 1978):

                        log (chl _a)  = 1.5 log (P)-l.l                  (V-15)

 or
                  chl a =  O.OS(P)1-5   P
-------
         1000-
        fO
          :ioo-
        Q.
        o
        or

        3
        X
        O
        a:
        UJ
10-
           1.0-
        CO
        UJ
           o.i-
      • Japanese Lakes

      a Other Lakes
                     a
                        10
                       100        1000

   SPRING MEAN TOTAL PHOSPHORUS

   MG/M3
FIGURE V-25  RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SUMMER CHLOROPHYLL AND
             SPRING  PHOSPHORUS  (FROM LORENZEN, I'NPUBLISHED)
                            79

-------
CO
o
                         500
                             0   K
0.05                 0.10

      P04= (as  P, mg/l)
0.15
                     FIGURE V-26  MAXIMAL PRIMARY PRODUCTIVITY AS A FUNCTION  OF  PHOSPHATE  CONCENTRATION
                                  (AFTER CHIAUDANI,  EIAL,,  1974)

-------
carbon productivity, as in the plot in Figure V-26, may be converted to
total algal biomass.  Since approximate analysis of dried algae has been
determined as (Stumm and Morgan, 1970):
                               1 0 6  2 6 s  1 1
                                           1 6°
 the  gravimetric  factor  is  ywr  - 2.8.  Thus, maximal carbon  productivity may
 be multiplied  by 2.8  to  give  a  rough  estimate  of maximal  algal biomass
 productivity.

      The  user  should  bear  in  mind that applying this technique can  only  lead
 to rough  estimates.   If  it is desired to  predict  biomass  or  productivity
 with accuracy, more  sophisticated approaches may  be necessary.
                                 EXAMPLE V-13
                  Spring Phosphorus and Summer Chlorophyll  a
                                                                          _3
 Lake Sara mean spring total phosphorus concentration = .03 mg/1  = 30 mg/m

                              chl  a^ = O.OS(P)1-5
                              chl  a_ = 13.1 mg/m3
                  algal  dry biomass = 13.1 x 33 = 430 mg/m3

 Maximal carbon productivity in the impoundment may be estimated from the
                                           _p   _i
 curve in Figure V-26 to be about 1950 mgCm  day   or about 5460 mg dry algal
           O    1
 biomass m'^day  .

      Observe that the two methods may lead to contradictions.  In this case,
 if Lake Sara is 5 meters deep, the concentration is 5460/5 = 1092 mg/m3.
 This does not compare well with the 430 mg/m3 value just computed, and the
 discrepancy reflects one  inadequacy in usage of the Chiaudani curve, namely,
 that it really does not permit estimates of concentration  to be made.  The
                                   81

-------
discrepancy also reaffirms the importance of applying good judgment in
evaluating estimates and in using more than one technique.
                            END OF EXAMPLE V-13
In the absence of measured data, the in-lake concentration (P) can be
computed based on the various point and nonpoint loadings (n):
                                    n
                               Lp = Ł Q..PI,
                                   1=1
                                    Z (D+K)

Then chlorophyll _a can be estimated as shown in the previous paragraphs.


5.4.6  Restoration Measures

Control of eutrophication in lakes can be evaluated by a variety of
approaches (Table V-9).  Some methods are directed at external sources (PI)
and others at in-lake sources (K).  Changes in volume (V) and inflow (0)
obviously will affect predicted results.  For example, dredging will
decrease the return of phosphorus for the sediments (i.e.  increase K) and
increase the volume (i.e.  decrease D).  If the input concentration (PI) is
the initial variable, then source controls should be investigated.  If
internal sources are involved, then in-lake controls should be evaluated.
In many lakes, both source and in-lake controls will be needed.

Problem treatment is directed at the productivity directly.  These controls
are often the only alternative for many lake situations.  These methods are
evaluated only in a qualitative way.
                                          82

-------
                                 TABLE V-9
               CLASSIFICATION OF LAKE RESTORATION TECHNIQUES
I.    Source Controls
     A.   Treatment of inflows
     B.   Diversion of inflows
     C.   Watershed management (land uses,  practices,  nonpoint source
          control, regulations and/or treatments).
     D.   Lake riparian regulation or modification
     E.   Product modification or regulation

II.   In-Lake Controls
     A.   Dredging
     B.   Volume changes other than by dredging or  compaction of
          sediments
     C.   Nutrient inactivation
     D.   Dilution/Flushing
     E.   Flow adjustment ,
     F.   Sediment exposure and dessication
     G.   Lake bottom sealing
     H.   In-lake sediment leaching
     I.   Shoreline modification
     J.   Riparian treatment of lake water
     K.   Selective discharge

III.  Problem Treatment (directed at biological  consequences of lake
          condition)
     A.   Physical techniques (harvesting,  water level  fluctutations,
          habitat manipulations)
     B.   Chemical (algicides, herbicides,  pesticides)
     C.   Biological (predator-prey manipulations,  pathological
          reactions).
     D.   Mixing (aeration,  mechanical  pumps,  lake  bottom modification)
     E.   Aeration (add DO;   e.g.  hypolimnetic  aeration)
                                    83

-------
5.4.7  Water Column Phosphorus Concentrations

     The relationships described in 5.4.5 for  predicting algal  biomass are
predicated on phosphorus levels within the impoundment.   A more precise
mechanism for estimating phosphorus lake concentrations  based on
interactions between bottom sediments and overlying water has been
developed.

     Lorenzen, e_t al. (1976) developed a phosphorus budget model
(Figure V-27) which may be used to estimate water column and sediment bound
phosphorus  in a fully mixed system.  A mass balance on both sediment and
water column phosphorus concentrations yields the coupled differential
equations:
                    dC ,      M   K AC     K, AC    C Q
                    __
                     dt
                     dt
      C   =   average  annual total phosphorus concentration  in water
      w
            column  (g/m3)
      C   =   total exchangeable  phosphorus  concentration  in  the  sediments
            (g/m3)
            total annual  phosphorus  loading  (g/yr)
            lake volume (m3)
      V   =   sediment volume  (m3)
      A   =   lake surface  area (m2)  - sediment  area  (m2)
      Q   =   annual  outflow (m3/yr)
      KL =   specific rate of  phosphorus transfer to the  sediments (m/yr)
      K2 =   specific rate of  phosphorus transfer from the  sediments
            (m/yr)
      K3 =   fraction of total phosphorus input to sediment that is
            unavailable for the exchange process
                                    84

-------
                                                                                  C(w) Q(o)
CO
cn
                              Sediir.ent
                           FIGURE V-27  CONCEPTUALIZATION OF  PHOSPHORUS  BUDGET
                                        MODELING (LORENZEN ET AL,,  1976)

-------
     When the differential  equations  relating  water  column  phosphorus  to  the
various controlling phenomena are solved analytically,  the  following
equation results for steady-state water column phosphorus concentration:

                                                                      (V-19)
                                "        Cv  N rt
                                    I +  * 3
                                           Q
or

                                r  -      M                            (V-20)
                                Cw-  Q + K^H

where
       C   =  steady-state water column phosphorus concentration in ppm
        w
       C.  =  steady-state influent phosphorus concentration in ppm
        in

     The steady-state sediment phosphorus concentration is then given by:

                           C  =
                                       -  _
                                 K2(l  + (K-iKsA/QjT
      It  is  important  to observe that these relationships are valid only for
 steady-state  conditions.  Where phosphorus loading  is changing with time,
 where sediment  deposition or  physical characteristics are changing, or where
 there are  long-term changes  in physical  conditions,  the  steady-state
 solutions  are not  applicable.

      Lorenzen applied the model to  Lake  Washington  data  and  obtained  very
 good results.  With  their data set,  the  most  satisfactory coefficients had
 the following values:

                          Kj   =  43  m/yr
                          K2   =  0.0014 m/yr
                          K3   =  0.5

 It should be recognized,  however, that  this  model  is relatively untested and
 that coefficient values for  other impoundments will vary from those cited
 here.
                                   86

-------
  _  f/75ft3   0.15 mg\    /22ft?- x  .07  mg\    / 5ft3     .21  m
M -    3ec~x    i+   -seT~x    Ł     + \ sic~  x    Ł
                    28.3U   y    1  g       3.16x107sec
                      ft       1000 mg   x      yr

                         M  = 1.24x10 7 gP  yr
                                                            7.J
  (75+22+5)ff3   3.16x107sec _ 3.22xlQ9ft3  _  9.13x107m:
-      sec           yr      "      yr              yr
                                      'm^yr"  ' 95-6

                     ^s =  168/95.6  »  1.76 m yr"1

Compute phosphorus  loading:
                         1  24x107 n vr            -?  -1
                    Lp =  i.^xiu  g yr   = Q>24 gm ^yr l
                          5.2xl07 m2
Referring to Figure V-24  with q  = 1.76 and Lp = 0.24, one can see that this
lake may have eutrophication problems under pre-diversion conditions.

After the diversion,

                       T  = 8.73x109m3    =  125 yr
                         w ~6.98xl07m3/yr

Assuming the lake depth is not materially changed over the  short  term,

                           qs -  168/125 = 1.34 ^

For the new conditions,

                           M = 8.33  x  106 gP yr"1
                                89

-------
                     Lp  =  g.33xl06
                          5.2xl07 m2
     Now,  according  to  the  Vollenweider plot (Figure V-24), this is in the
region between "dangerous"  and  "permissible" - the mesotrophic region.
Under the new circumstances,  algal  blooms  are less likely than before the
flow diversions were established, but  blooms are by no means to be ruled
out.

     Turning now to  an  estimate of  algal biomass under pre-diversion
conditions, we must  calculate the inlake concentration (P).
First,     D = I/TW = 1/125 = 0.008;  K = VD = 0.09

Since our data are already in  the loading  form:

                     P  =
                           ' Z
                           \168/  \07008+0.09
Based on chlorophyll a,
                             chl  A =

                      chl A = 0.08 (15)1'5  - 4.6 mg/m3

                   Dry algal biomass - 4.6x33 = 150 mg/m3

Under post-diversion conditions,

                   p  =  (isr)  (ooskof)  = 10

                      chl a = 0.08 (10)1'5 = 2.5 mg/m3

                   Dry algal  biomass  =  2.5x33  = 83  mg/m
                                 90

-------
Note that these low levels of chlorophyll  
-------
5.5  IMPOUNDMENT DISSOLVED OXYGEN

     Organic substances introduced into an impoundment with inflowing water,
falling onto its surface,  or generated in the water column itself through
photosynthesis, may be oxidized by indigenous biota.  The process consumes
oxygen which may, in turn, be replenished through surface reaeration,
photosynthetic activity, or dissolved oxygen in inflowing water.   The
dynamic balance between DO consumption and replenishment determines the net
DO concentration at any point in time and at any location within  the water
column.

     These processes result in characteristic dissolved oxygen (DO)
concentrations in the water columns of stratified lakes and reservoirs
(Figure V-28).  During stratification, typically during summer months, the
DO is highest on the surface due to photosynthesis and reaeration.  It
decreases through the thermocline and then, in the hypolimnion, the DO
decreases to zero in those lakes that have high organic matter
concentrations.

     During spring, after turnover, when lakes are not stratified, the DO is
essentially uniform.  However, in highly organic lakes benthic processes can
already begin to deplete oxygen from lower depths, as shown in Figure V-28.

     Essentially, the patterns result from processes that are restricted due
to incomplete mixing.  The overall effects of such patterns as shown  in
Figure V-28, are to restrict fishery habitat and create water quality
problems for downstream users, especially for deep water discharge.
                                      92

-------
                 o •-
10
CO
                              Dissolved Oxygen, mg/1
                    FIGURE V-28  TYPICAL  PATTERNS OF DISSOLVED  OXYGEN (DO) IN HYRUM  RESERVOIR
                                 (DRURY,  EI AL,^  1975)

-------
     BOD exertion is not the only sink for DO.   Some important sources and
sinks of impoundment dissolved oxyqen are listed below:

                            SOURCES AND SINKS OF
                        IMPOUNDMENT DISSOLVED OXYGEN
         Sources
     Sinks
    Photosynthesis
    Atmospheric reaeration
    Inflowing water
    Rainwater
Water Column BOD
Benthic BOD
Chemical oxidation
Deoxygenation at surface
Plant and animal respiration
     Many of the processes listed above have a complex nature.  For example,
the atmospheric reaeration rate is dependent in part upon the near-surface
velocity gradient over depth.  The gradient, in turn, is influenced by the
magnitude, direction, and duration of wind, as well as the depth and
geometry of the impoundment.

     Photosynthetic rates are affected by climatological conditions, types
of cells photosynthesizing, temperature, and a number of biochemical and
biological factors.  Exertion of BOD is dependent upon the kind of
substrate, temperature, dissolved oxygen concentration, presence of
toxicants, and dosing rate.

     Despite this degree of complexity, a number of excellent models of
varying degrees of sophistication have been developed which include
simulation of impoundment dissolved oxygen.
5.5.1  Simulating Impoundment Dissolved Oxygen

     Because an unstratified impoundment generally may be considered as
                                         94

-------
a slow-moving stream reach, only stratified impoundments are of
interest here.  For estimating DO in unstratified impoundments, one
should refer to the methods described in Chapter 4.

     To understand the phenomena affecting dissolved oxygen in a strati'
fied impoundment and to gain an appreciation of both the utility and
limitations of the approach presented later, it is useful to briefly
examine a typical dissolved oxygen model.  Figure V-29  shows a geo-
metric representation of a stratified impoundment.  As indicated
in the diagram,  the model  segments the impoundment into horizontal
layers.  Each horizontal  layer is considered fully mixed at any point
in time, and the model  advects and diffuses mass vertically into and
out of each layer.  The constituents and interrelationships modeled
are shown schematically in Figure V-30.

     The phenomena usually taken into account in an impoundment DO
model include:

                •  Vertical  advection
                •  Vertical  diffusion
                •  Correction  for  element volume  change
                •  Surface  replenishment  (reaeration)
                •  BOD  exertion utilizing oxygen
                •  Oxidation of ammonia
                •  Oxidation of nitrite
                •  Oxidation of detritus
                •  Zooplankton  respiration
                •  Algal growth (photosynthesis)  and  respiration
                f DO  contribution  from  inflowing water
                • DO  removal  due  to  withdrawals

     Many of the processes,are. complex and calculations in detailed
models involve simultaneous solution of many cumbersome equations.
                                    95

-------
                                         tributary
                                             inflow
                evaporation
      tributar
      inflow
                   vertical
                   advection
                                          control
                                            slice
           outflow

FIGURE V-29 GEOMETRIC REPRESENTATION OF A STRATIFIED
           IMPOUNDMENT  (FROM HEC, 1974)
                         96

-------
A Aeration
B Bacterial Decay
C Chemical Equiforium
E Excreta
G Growth
M Mortality
P Photosynthesis
R Respiration
S Settling
H Harvest
  FIGURE  V-30   QUALITY AND ECOLOGIC RELATIONSHIPS
                  (FROM  NEC,  1974)
                              97

-------
Among the processes simulated are zooplankton-phytoplankton interactions,
the nitrogen cycle, and advection-diffusion.   Thus it is clear that a
model which is comprehensive and potentially capable of simulating DO
in impoundments with good accuracy is not appropriate for hand calcu-
lations.  A large amount of data (coefficients, concentrations)  are
needed to apply such a model, and solution is most easily done by computer,
Furthermore, some of the terms in the model  equation of state do not
improve prediction under some circumstances.   This is true, for  example,
where there are no withdrawals or in  an oligotrophic impoundment where
chlorophyll a_ concentrations are very low.

     Hand calculations must be based  upon a  greatly simplified model
to be practical.   Since some DO-determining  phenomena are more important
than others arid if some assumptions are made about the impoundment
itself, it is feasible to develop such a model,

5.5.2  A Simp1 if ied Impoundment_DijsoJ ved_ ^xy^en__ModeT_

      For purposes of developing a model for hand calculations, the
following  assumptions are made:

      *  The only condition where DO  levels may become dangerously
        low is in an impoundment hypolimnion and during warm
        weather.

      »  Prior  to stratification, the  impoundment is mixed.  After
        strata form, the epilimnion  and hypolimnion are each fully
        mixed.

      •  Dissolved oxygen in  the hypolimnion is depleted essentially
        through BOD exertion.  Significant BOD sources and sinks to
        the water column prior to stratification are algal mortality,
        BOD settling, and outflows.  A minor source is influent BOD.
        Following formation  of strata, sources and sinks of BOD are
        BOD settling out onto the bottom, water column BOD at the time
                                     98

-------
          of stratification, and benthic BOD.

       •  Photosynthesis is unimportant in the hypo! imn ion as a
          source of DO.

       *  Once stratification occurs (a tnermocline gradient of
          1°C  or greater per meter of depth) no mixing of thermo-
          cline and hypolimnion waters occurs.

       •  BOD  loading  to the unstratified impoundment and to the
          hypolimnion  are in steady-state for the computation
          period.


5.5.2.1   Estimating a  Steady-State BOD Load  to the Impoundment    -

      Equation V-25 is an expression to describe the rate of change of BOD
concentration as a function of time:
                 —  - ' k      k r  -  k C  -  ^-        (V-
                 dt  "   a     kSC      1       V        {
 where
      C  =  the concentration of BOD in the water column in mgl"
      k  =  the mean rate of BOD loading from all sources in mgl"  day"
       3
      k  =  the mean rate of BOD settling out onto the impoundment
       5                 _T
            bottom in day
      k, =  the mean rate of decay of water column BOD in day"

      0  =  mean export flow rate in liters day

      V  =  impoundment volume in liters
                                        99

-------
 Integrating Equation V-25 gives:
                            (k   +  k c }^kh>      \t
                              a     kbVe.  b   -  ka      (V-26)
                                     kb
where
     C, = concentration of BOD at time t
     CQ = initial concentration of BOD
     kb = -ks-kr v
To estimate the steady-state loading of BOD, we set dc/dt = 0 and
obtain

                    Css  =  -  k^                             (V-27)

where
      GSS = steady-state water column  BOD

Thus Equation  (V-27) may be used to estimate a steady-state water column
BOD concentration and Equation (V-26)  may  be used to compute  BOD  as  a
function of time, initial  concentration of BOD, and the various  rates.

5.5.2.2  Rates of Carbonaceous and Nitrogenous Demands

     The rate of exertion  of BOD and therefore the value of k,  is
dependent upon a number of physical, chemical, and biological  factors.
Among these are temperature, numbers and kinds of microorganisms,
dissolved oxygen concentration, and the kind of organic substance in-
volved.   Nearly all  of the biochemical  oxygen demand in impoundments
is related to decaying plant and animal matter.   All  such material
consists essentially of carbohydrates,  fats, and proteins along with  a
vast number of minor constituents.   Some of these are rapidly utilized
by bacteria, for example,  the simple sugars, while some,  such  as  the
celluloses, are metabolized  slowly.

     Much of the decaying  matter in impoundments is carbonaceous.
                               100

-------
                      ns
 Carbohydrates  (celluloses, sugars, starches) and  fats are essentially
 devoid of nitrogen.  Proteins, on the Qther hand, are high in
 nitrogen (weight of carbon/weight of nitrogen - 6) and protein:
 therefore represent both carbonaceous and nitrogenous demands.

      The rate  of exertion of  carbonaceous and nitrogenous demands differ.
 Figure V-31, which shows the  difference  graphically and as a function of
 time  and temperature, may be  considered  to  represent the system  response
 to  a  slug dose of mixed carbonaceous and nitrogenous demands.   In each
 two-section  curve, especially where concentrated  carbonaceous wastes are
 present, the carbonaceous demand  is exerted first, and this  represents the
 first stage  of deoxygenation.  Then nitrifiers  increase in numbers and
 ammonia  is oxidized through nitrite and  ultimately to nitrate.   This later
 phase is called the second phase  of deoxygenation.

      BOD decay (either nitrogenous or carbonaceous alone) may be repre-
 sented by first order kinetics.   That is, the rate of oxidation  is
 directly proportional to the  amount of material  remaining at time t.

                            dC .  .r                       (V-28)
                            dt ' "KU

     The rate constant,  k,  is a function  of temperature,  bacterial
types and numbers,  composition and structure of the substrate,
presence of nutrients and toxicants,  and  a number of other factors.
The value of the first stage constant k,  was first determined by
Phelps in 1909 for sewage filter samples.  The value was  0.1  (Camp,
1968).  More recent data  show that at 20°C,  the value can  range from
0.01 for slowly metabolized industrial  waste organics to  0.3 for
relatively fresh sewage  (Camp, 1968).

     The typical effect  of  temperature  on organic reactions  is  to
double reaction rates  for each temperature rise  of 15°C.   The
relationship  for correcting k-, for temperature is:
101

-------
                                 201
       CD
       cr
       70
       rn
OO CO  ^3
H  X  >
>  O  H
CD  s  m
m  •—<
co  z  o
   CD  TI
   m
      dd
      CD
   ~n m
   — • x
   TO m
   CO PD
   > o
   z 2:
   a
      >
   CVO H
   m
   o C3
   o •—
   a
      m
   m m
   o -z.
   X H

   CD -H
   m m
   H m
   •— xj
   o >
   Z H
      m
      CO
                      Oxygen Used up
                      Parts per Million

-------
                             = kl,(20°C)
where
     T   =   the  temperature of reaction
     8   =   correction constant = 1.047

However, Thereault  has  used a value for fl of 1.02, while Moore
calculated  values of 1.045 and 1.065 for two  sewages and 1.025 for
river water (Camp,  1968).

     Streeter has determined  the rate of the nitrification or second
deoxygenation stage in  polluted streams.  At 20°C, k-j for nitrification
is  about 0.03 (Camp, 1968).   Mobre  found the value to be .06 at 20°C
and .035 at 10°C  (Camp,  1968).  For purposes of this analysis, BOD
exertion will be  characterized as simple first order decay using a
single  rate constant.

     Benthic demand, which is  important in  later computations,  may
vary over a wide range because in  addition  to the variability due to
the chemical nature of the benthic matter,  rates of oxidation are
limited by upward diffusion rates  of oxidizable substances  through
pores in the benthos.   Since the nature of  the sediment  is  highly
variable, benthic oxygen demand rates  vary  more than  values  for k,
in the  water column.  In a study using sludges through which  oxygenated
water was passed, initial rates of demand ranged from 1.02  g/nr day
                                                             2
(see Table V-10) for a sludge  depth  of 1.42 cm up to  4.65  g/m  day
for a sludge depth of 10.2 cm  (Camp, 1968).   In that  study,  the values
found were for initial  demand  since  the sludge was not  replenished.
The rate per centimeter of sludge  depth, then, can vary  from  a  low of
        2                                                    ?
0.46 g/m  day for 10.2 centimeter  depth sludge up to  0.76  g/m day
for 1.42 centimeter depth sludge.
                                   103

-------
                                TABLE V-10
                     OXYGEN DEMAND OF BOTTOM DEPOSITS
                            (AFTER CAMP,  1968)

Benthic
Depth
(mean) cm
10.2
4.75
2.55
1.42
1.42

Initial
Vol ume of _~
Solids, kqm
3.77
1.38
0.513
0.188
0.188
Initial Area Demand
L (gin"2)
739
426
227
142
134
initial
Derr.and
-2 -1
am day
4.65
3.09
1.70
1.08
1.02

day'1
k4(20°C)
.0027
.0031
.0032
.0033
.0033
      The constant loading rate (k )  used in Equation (V-25)  is best esti-
                                  a
mated from historical data.   Alternatively,  inflow loading (see Chapter
IV) and algal productivity estimates  (this chapter) may be used.   In
the latter case, a value must be adopted for the proportion of algal
biomass ultimately exerted as BOD.  To a first approximation, k  may
                                                               a
be estimated using this value and adopting some percentage of maximal
primary productivity (see Figure V-25).  Thus,
where
              ka(algae) = SMP x 10"3/D                      (V-30)
      ka(algae)  =  algal  contribution  to  BOD loading rate

            S    =  stoichiometric  conversion from algal  biomass  as
                    carbon to BOD = 2.67
            M    =  Proportion of algal biomass  expressed as an
                    oxygen demand (unit!ess)
                                              -2    1
            P    =  Primary production  in  mgCm  day
                                 104

-------
      The difference between algal biomass and the parameter M repre-
 senting the proportion of algal bio-mass exerted as BOD may be conceptu-
 alized as accounting for such phenomena as incorporation of algal bio-
 mass into fish tissue which either leaves the impoundment or is harvested,
, loss of carbon to the atmosphere as CH., and loss due to outflows.

      The settling rate coefficient, k  in Equation (V-25) must be esti-
 mated for the individual case.  It represents the rate at which dead
 plant and animal  matter (detritus) settles out of the water column
 prior to oxidation.   Clearly, this coefficient is sensitive to the
 composition and physical characteristics of suspended matter and the
 turbulence of the system.   Quiescence and large particle sizes in the
 organic fraction  will  tend to give high values for k  while turbulence
 and small  organic fraction particle sizes will give small values for k .

 5.5.2-3  Estimating  aPre-Stratification Steady-State Dissolved Oxygen Level
      Prior to stratification,  the impoundment is assumed to be fully
 mixed.   One of the  important factors leading to this condition is
 wind  stress,  which  also  serves to reaerate the water.   As a ru.le,
 unless  an  impoundment acts  as  a receiving body for large amounts of
 nutrients  and/or  organic loading, dissolved oxygen levels are likely
 to  be near saturation during this period (D.J.  Smith,  pers. comm.,
 November,  1976).  Table  V-ll  shows saturation dissolved oxygen levels
 for fresh  water as  a  function  of temperature, and DO levels may be
 estimated  accordingly.

     The hypolimnetic  saturation  dissolved oxygen concentration is
determined  by using  the average (or median) temperature for the hypolimnion
as determined during the  period of interest throughout the depth of the
hypolimnion.  Information on  the  hypolimnion are obtained using the
procedures  described in Section 5.2.  For  example, hypolimnetic water at  the
onset of stratification might be  4-5°C and during the critical summer months
be 10 C.  The value  10°C  should be used having a saturation DO of 11.3 mg/1.
                                  105

-------
                     TABLE V-ll
SOLUBILITY OF OXYGEN IN WATER (STANDARD  METHODS,  1971)
Chloride Concentration
Temp.
in
°C
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
0 5,000
10,000
in Water - mg/1
15,000
Sea
Water
Difference
per 100 mg
Chloride
Dissolved Oxygen - mg/1
14.6 13.8
14.2 13.4
13.8 13.1
13.5 12.7
13.1 12.4
12.8 12.1
12.5 11.8
12.2 11.5
11.9 11.2
11.6 11.0
11.3 10.7
11.1 10.5
10.8 10.3
10.6 10.1
10.4 9.9
10.2 9.7
10.0 9.5
9.7 9.3
9.5 9.1
9.4 8.9
9.2 8.7
9.0 8.6
8.8 8.4
8.7 8.3
8.5 8.1
8.4 8.0
8.2 7.8
8.1 7.7
7.9 7.5
7.8 7.4
7.6 7.3
7.5
7.4
7.3
7.2
7.1
13.0
12.6
12.3
12.0
11.7
11.4
11.1
10.9
10.6
10.4
10.1
9.9
9.7
9.5
9.3
9.1
9.0
8.8
8.6
8.5
8.3
8.1
8.0
7.9
7.7
7.6
7.4
7.3
7.1
7.0
6.9





12.1
11.8
11.5
11.2
11.0
10.7
10.5
10.2
10.0
9.8
9.6
9.4
9.2
9.0
8.8
8.6
8.5
8.3
8.2
8.0
7.9
7.7
7.6
7.4
7.3
7.2
7.0
6.9
6.8
6.6
6.5





11.3
11.0
10.8
10.5
10.3
10.0
9.8
9.6
9.4
9.2
9.0
8.8
8.6
8.5
8.3
8.1
8.0
7.8
7.7
7.6
7.4
7.3
7.1
7.0
6.9
6.7
6.6
6.5
6.4
6.3
6.1





0.017
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.009
0.009
0.009
0.009
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.008





                           106

-------
     Most lakes are near sea level  (<2000 ft elevation) and are  relatively
fresh (<2000 mg TDS/1).  For lakes  that do not meet these criteria,
corrections for atmospheric pressure differences and salting out due  to
salinity might be needed.  Pressure effects can be approximated  by using  a
ratio of barometric pressure (B) for the elevation of interest and sea  level
(BSTP) as follows:
e.g.   B at 4600 ft elevation,

                                 .  in  mm  Hg.  =  0.84
                  DOsat at 10°C = 0.84 x 11.3 =9.5 mg/1 .

 Chloride  is  an estimator of dilutions  of  sea water  in fresh water where
 20000  mg  Chloride/1 is equivalent  to 35000 mg salt  (TDS/1, that is, typical
 ocean  water.
 5.5.2,4  Estimating Hypolimnion DO Levels

     The  final  step  in  use  of  this  model  is  preparation  of  a  DO-
 versus-time  plot  for the  hypolimnion  (or  at  least estimation of DO
 at  incipient overturn)  and  estimation  of  BOD and phosphorus loadings
 which result in acceptable  hypolimnion DO levels.   An  equation  to
 compute DO at any point in  time during the period of stratification
 is
                         dt     T

where
     0  =   dissolved  oxygen  in  ppm
                                     -1
      k.  =   benthic  decay  rate in  day'
      L   =   area!  BOD  1
      D   =   depth  in m
                          _2
L  =  area! BOD load in gm
The  second  term  in  the  equation  requires  that an estimate be made of
the  magnitude  of BOD  loading  in  benthic  deposits.   To do this within
the  present  framework,  it  is  assumed  that BOD settles out  ...
                                 107

-------
 throughout the period of stratification.  Although many different
 assumptions have been made  concerning  benthic BOD decay, it was
 assumed that benthic demand was  a  function of BOD settling and the
 rate of benthic BOD decay.   This BOD includes that generated in the
 system by algal growth and  that  which  enters in tributaries and waste
 discharges.  Based upon the rate of settling used earlier in estimating
 a steady-state BOD concentration (Equation (V-25)) and rate of decay
 for conditions prior to stratification, the rate of benthic matter
 accumulation is:
                  dT  =  ksCssD-k4L
 where

      C   =   concentration  of  BOD  in  the  water  column  in  gm
             at  steady-state
The assumption of steady-state BOD concentration reduces Equation
(V-32) to the same form as Equation (V-25) and integration gives:
                        ,   .
    For steady-state deposition  (dL/dt = 0, Dkscss=  constant),

                                         ksCssD
                                   Lss » -VS-                (V-34)
 where
                                               _2
     L    =  steady-state benthic BOD load in gm

     Application of Equation (V-34) with k  and k. appropriately
 chosen  for  the month or two preceding stratification will  give an
 estimate of the benthic BOD load upon stratification.  Application
                                    108

-------
of Equation  (V-33) gives the response of L to different water column
BOD (steady-state) loading rates and changes in rate^ coefficients.

     After strata form, benthic matter decays while hypolimnion water
column BOD decays and settles.  The change in L over the period of
stratification is

                  HF = -k4L * Dksc                           (V-35)
Since
                       dC
and

                            Ct = Co e"(l<1 + ^^               (v-37)

                      ^= -k4L + DksCQ e-(kl + ksH           (V-38)
      Water column BOD in the hypolimnion is given by Equation (V-36)
and the integrated form is Equation (V-37).

      Note  that  k  ,  the  settling  coefficient is  equal  to  v  /D  where
                o                                        o
v   is  the  settling  velocity  of the  BOD,  and D is  the  depth of the
hypolimnion  (or when  the  impoundment  is  unstratified,  D  is the
depth  of the  entire  impoundment).   Also  note that we usually assume
that the DO is at  saturation  at the  onset of stratification.  Thus
we can ignore the  assumptions and calculations (Equation V-32 to V-34)
done for periods prior to onset.
                                109

-------
     The equation presented earlier  (Equation V-31) for  hypo limn ion
DO was:

                       HT = -k!C -k4L/D

Equation (V-31) is not integrable in its  present form,  but  since  L
and C are defined as functions of t  (Equations  (V-39)  and (V-37)
respectively), it is possible to determine dissolved oxygen in the
water column.   The equation for oxygen at time  t is:
                   °t = °o " AOL "  A0c
where
     0   =  dissolved oxygen at time t
     0   =  dissolved oxygen at time t = 0
     AO,  =  dissolved oxygen decrease due to benthic demand
     AOC =  dissolved oxygen decrease due to hypolimnion BOD

From Equation (V-39), and using L   as L  and C   as C ,
                                                                   (V-4T)
and from Equation (V-37),
                                                                  (V-42)
 Solution  of  Equation  (V-40)  gives an  estimated DO concentration  in
 the  hypolimnion  as  a  function  of time.
                                     110

-------
     To compute equation (V-40), a simpler form of equation (V-41) can be


derived by substituting as follows:
since
            k  C  D
          _  ss ss  ,
       "ss
                    AO.
To simplify computations, the following stepwise solutions can be made:
                               A =
         ksCss

       ks+krk4
 Then,
                               B -
                               C =





                               E =
   r _


     "
                                   kl Css


                                    kl+ks
L = A  (
AO  =
                                      B - c -
                                 A0  -  E  -  F
                                    111

-------
5.5.3 Temper ;atu re Correct ions

     All reactions are computed on the basis of the optimum temperature, but
the environment is often at different temperatures.  Some rate coefficients
for chemical and biological reactions vary with temperature.  A simple
correction for such rate coefficients to 20°C is as follows:

                        K   = K     x  1  047  (T - 20°C)
                         T     T20 X  1'U4/

For example, if a rate at 20 C = 0.01 and the lake is at 10°C, then
                        K  = 0.01 x 1.047 (10 - 2°)

                        KT = 0.00632

Generally the following optima are used:

                    ki - first order decay rate for water column BOD,
                         use 20°C.

                    ki» - benthic  BOD decay,  use 20°C.

                    P  - productivity  rate,  use 30° C.

 In  the  screening  methods we do not have  to correct for  temperature  except  in
 the oxygen  calculation for the rate coefficients,  Kj  , K4,  P  and  in  the
 toxics  section  (5.6)  for the biodegradation  rate  coefficients.
                                    112

-------
                             EXAMPLE V-15
                              Quiet Lake
                        (Comprehens i ve  Examp1e)

     Quiet Lake is located a  few miles  south  of  Colton,  New  York.  The
lake is roughly circular in plan view (Figure V-32)  and  receives
inflows from three tributaries.   There  is  one natural  outlet from
the lake and one withdrawal used for  quarrying purposes.

     The first step in evaluation of lake hypolimnion DO levels
is physical and water quality data collection.   Table V-12 shows
characteristics of Quiet Lake, Table V-13 shows  tributary discharge
data along with withdrawal and outflow levels,  and Table V-14
provides precipitation and runoff information.

     In order  to evaluate  hypolimnion DO as a function of time, the'
very first  question to be  answered is, does the impoundment stratify?
If  so, what are the beginning and ending dates of the stratified period,
how deep  is the upper surface of the hypolimnion, and what  is its volume,
and what  is the distribution of hypblimnion mean temperatures during
the period?  To answer these questions, either use field observation
data,  or  apply some computation technique such as that presented earlier
in  this section.  Assuming that methods presented earlier are used,  the
selection of appropriate  thermal profile curves hinges around three
factors.  These are

     •  Climate and location
     •  Hydraulic residence time, and
     •  Impoundment geometry
                                   113

-------
                             SUUSVILLE
    QUIETOWN
                                  Ol  PUMP HOUSE
                                 [-1  STREAM QUALITY
                                 "—'  AND FLOW STATION
                                     RUNOFF QUALITY
                                     SAMPLING STATION
                                     SAMPLES TAKEN FROM SMALL
                                     EROSION CHANNELS  NEAR LAKE
FIGURE V-32  OUIET  LAKE  AND FNVIRONS
                         114

-------
         TABLE V-12





CHARACTERISTICS OF QUIET  LAKE
Length (in di
Width
Mean Depth
Maximum Depth
Water Column

Quiet Lake
rection of flow)



P
TABLE V-13
3.5 miles
4.0 miles
22 ft.
27 ft.
= 18,480 ft.
= 21,120 ft.






0.014
-------
TABLE V-13  (Continued)

Month

October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September

Month

October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
First Creek (
Mean Flow, cfs

5
3
2
2
3
4
6
8
10
8
6
4
Second Cree
Mean Clow, cfs

14.0
13.0
12.5
5.0
1.2
2.0
2.5
4.0
8.0
12.0
8.0
5.5
Station 5)
Total N

1.0
2.0
0.5
1.2
1.3
2.3
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.5
0.8
k (Station 4)
Total N

15
16
10
9
12
13
8
6
5
7
6
8

Total P
ppm
.01
.01
.02
.01
.02
.01
.01
.02
.01
.01
.00
.00

Total P
ppm
.15
.08
.20
.15
.12
.10
.11
.07
.08
.20
.22
.25

BOD

0.5
1.0
1.5
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.8
0.8
1.0
1.2

BOD

7
8
10
7
7
6
7
9
12
3
4
8
                116

-------
                        TABLE V-13 (Continued)
Swift River (Stations 2 and 3) and Pumped Withdrawal
Month
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
Pumped
Withdrawal, cfs
22.6
22.0
3.5
1.2
0.8
0.4
12.0
24.0
30.7
89.5
29.8
43.9
Mean Monthly
Station 2
69.5
50.0
20.0
7.5
1.2
9.1
44.5
63.2
100.0
168.5
80.6
91.3
Flow, cfs
Station 3
77.0
55.0
'2.0
9.0
1.4
10.1
48.75
69.5
110.0
184.8
88.5
100.25
Notes:  All three tributaries have their headwaters within the shed.
The net inflow-outflow to the groundwater is known to be close to
zero in the two creeks.  Swift River is usually about 10%  effluent over
its entire length (10% of flow comes into the river from the
groundwater table).
                                  117

-------
                              TABLE V-14

        PRECIPITATION AND RUNOFF DATA FOR QUIET LAKE WATERSHED
        VALUES ARE MEANS OF DATA COLLECTED FROM BOTH STATIONS
        (SEE FIGURE V-31).  THE WATERSHED HAS AN AREA OF 55
        SQUARE MILES INCLUDING THAT OF THE LAKE
Mean Total
Monthly Precipi
_Month tation, inches

October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
Total

3.0
2.4
1.0
0.5
0.3
0.6
2.0
2.8
4.2
7.6
3.5
4.2
32.1
Runoff Qual ity
Total N

6.0
6.5
4.0
3.0
1.0
1.5
2.5
3.2
3.6
7.0
7.8
9.2
Total P
ppm
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.008
0.07
0.1
0.15
0.25
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
BOD

27
37
46
34
33
30
40
50
40
37
45
50
Note:   Infiltration to the water table on  a  monthly basis accounts for
roughly 30% of precipitation volume.

     In terms of climate and location, the Quiet Lake area is similar  to
Burlington, Vermont.  Examination of the  Burlington plots from Appendix
D reveals that a 20-foot maximum depth impoundment can stratify in an
area shielded from the wind.   The area surrounding Quiet Lake does pro-
vide good shielding, so the next task is  to estimate the hydraulic
residence time to select a specific set of plots.
                                    118

-------
     Inspection of all  Burlington plots  indicates  that stratification
is likely to .occur at most from May to August.  Accordingly, for pur-
poses of plot selection, we are most interested  in a  mean hydraulic resi-
dence time based on flows in the period  from about March to  August.  Since
hydraulic residence time (T )  is given by T  = V/Q, we compute mean Q
(Q).  Q represents the average of tributary inflows during this
period, computed as follows:

           *   8+40+55+85+150+70    4+6^+10+8*-6  . 2+2.5+4•»8+12+8
           Q = 	_	+  	_	, 	fi	
                 (Swift River)     (First Creek)    (Second Creek)

                            Q =  68+7+6.08 =  81.1 cfs

However, in order  to fully  account  for mass  transport as well .as  properly
estimate hydraulic residence time,  one more factor should be considered.
This is non-point inflow.   At  this  point, we have  enough information
to estimate the stormwater contribution  directly  to Quiet Lake.  In view
of the available data,  the computation is as follows:

                      QS= APK(l-L)-
where
     Q   =  stormwater  or  non-point inflow in cfs (excluding rivers and creeks)
     A   =  area  of  shed  in  square miles
     n   =  number of tributaries
     Q.  =  monthly  mean  pickup (in cfs) in the ith tributary
     P   =  monthly  total  precipitation, in inches per month
     I.  =  percent  (expressed as a decimal) of flow
           contributed by exfiltration (from the water
           table into  thr channel)
                                    119

-------
      L = the proportion of precipitation  lost  by  infiltration
          into the soil  (expressed as  a decimal)
      K = unit correction = 0.895 ft mo mi"2in"1sec"1

  As an example, the computation for October is:

      Q  = 55 mi2 x 3.0 -JŁ x 0.896 -|^-°—  x (1-0.3) -
                                    nri  in  sec

           (54(1-0. l)+5(l-0.0)+14(l-0.0) + (77-69. 5)(l-0.1)j  -  29.1  cfs

Now, since we know the pumped withdrawal rates  as  well  as  the difference
between flows at stations 2 and the sum of 1 , 4,  and 5,  and that  the im-
poundment surface is at steady-state over the mouth, we  also can  estimate
the net infiltration rate from the lake into  the groundwater.  The infil-
tration rate is (again, for October):

                 Net efflux = Q(sta U4+5) -Q2+QS-QW

                            = 73.0  -  69.5  + 29.1  -  22.6 = 10.0  cfs

     Note that the  pickup  in each  channel  above Quiet Lake  is equal  to
the flow  at the pertinent  sampling station.  This  is  the case because
the three channels  have their  headwaters within  the  watershed.    If
one were  concerned  about a subshed with tributary  headwaters  above the
subshed boundary,  the  difference in  Q  between each of stations  1,  4, and 5
and the respective  flows at the  upstream subshed  boundary  would be used.

     To estimate hydraulic residence time  add the  mean stormwater  con-
tribution over the months  of interest  to that of  the tributaries,  as
computed  earlier.   The individual  stormwater computations  are not  shown.
The method is as just  described.
          Q      -81.1+
                                   120

-------
Then the hydraulic residence time  is  given by:
                              =  V/Q ~ Trr2D/Q
                            v*  «
                                      x  5280
 where
      L  =  length of the lake  in  mi.
      W  =  width of the lake in  mi.
      D  =  mean depth  in ft.
      r  =  radius in ft.
                          r             i2
             T  = 3.14 x    3.5+4   5280   x  22/119
              w           [4         J
                = 5.69xl07 sec = 658  days

 Accordingly, the infinite hydraulic residence time plots for a 20-foot
 deep, wind-protected, Burlington,  Vermont, impoundment should suffice.
 Note that the entire impoundment volume was used in the above computation.
 Strictly, one should use the epilimnion volume during stratification.
 In this case, such a  change would not alter selection of the plots
 because T,, would still be greater than 200 days.  A reproduction of the
          W
 appropriate plot from Appendix D is presented in Figure V-33.,  As indi-
 cated, Quiet Lake is likely to be weakly stratified from May to August
 inclusive, with a thermocline temperature gradient of about l°ft" .  The
 hypolimnion should extend downward to the bottom from a depth of about
 3-1/2 meters, giving a mean hypolimnion depth of

                          22  ft     -  3.5 m = 3.2 meters
                       --
                   "   3.28  ft  nf '
                                   121

-------






0
2
jr
x
Q_
UJ
a

6c












»r« nn,
2
zr
x:
a.
CD
6
JUL








n r ••
2 •
x:
x
t—
Q.
UJ
a
4 •
g






0








To
TEMP
/
/
/
/



20
. C
NQV







3
C
0
2
x;
X
a.
UJ
Q
4 •
6o





) 10 20 3
TEMP, C
sue

/
/




I'D 2'0 3
TEMP. C
2
X
0_
Q
G
0 C
0
2 •
sr
x
Q_
UJ
a
4 .
6o
/
/


1
I 10 20 3
TEMP, C
SEP







10 20 3(
TEMP. C
2
zr
x
a.
LU
O
4 •
o c c
0
2
X
a_


4 -
. 6o

/
/
/
1





) 10 20 30
TEMP, C
OCl














10 20 30
TEMP. C
DEC

10
TEMP
20
. C
2
X
Q_
a
4

1





BURLINGTON, VERMONT
20* INITIRL MRXIMUM DEPTH
INFINITE HYDR. RES- TIME

MINIMUM MIXING

30 0 10 20 30
TEMP. C
FIGURE V-33  THERMAL PROFILE PLOTS FOR USE IN QUIET LAKE  EXAMPLE
                                 122

-------
 The approximate hypolimnion volume, then, is
                          v«= i  x VTotai
                           x  1.9X1011*, = 9.2xl010S<
Over the period of interest, the hypolimnion  mean  temperature dis-
tribution is:
                                           Mean
                   Month
                   March                    2.0
                   April                    5.5           .    .
                   May                      9.5
                   June                    12.5
                   July                    14.0
                   August                  15.5

     The next step in use of the DO model is to determine a  steady-
state or mean water column  BOD  loading  (k ) and  DO  level prior to stratifi
                                         a
cation.  This is a multi-step  process because of the  several BOD
sources.  The sources are tributaries, runoff, and  primary productivity.
First, we estimate algal productivity using methods of  this  chapter
(or better, field data).

      Using the curve in Figure V-26 and phosphorus  data  from  Table  V-13,
the maximal primary productivity should be in  the  range  1,400 mg
   -2    -1              -2-1                                11
Cm day   to 1,900 mgCm  day   .  To convert to loading in  mgl  day   ,
divide  by (1000 1m   x 6.7m).  This gives the  loading  as 0.21 to 0.28
mgl"  day" .
                                     123

-------
     Now assuming that  maximal  productivity occurs at about 30°C and
that productivity rates obey  the  same  temperature rule as BOD decay,
temperature-adjusted estimates  of productivity rates can be made.  Using
the maximal  rate range  of 0.21  to 0.28 mgl" day"  , the adjusted rates
are:

      Productivity = (0.21,  0.28) x  1 .04?(3-75-30)
                   = (.06, .08)  mgl"1  day"1

Then, according to Equation  (V-30) and assuming M = 1 , k, due to algae
                                                       a
is estimated by:

      k (algae) = 2.67  x (.06,  .08)  =  (.16,  .21) mgl^day"1
       a

      The next contributor to water  column  BOD is BOD leading of inflow-
ing waters.   The value  to be computed is  the  loading  in milligrams per
liter of impoundment water per  day.

                               /  "    LI            \  /"
      Daily BOD loading rate =  \   I    I  d-Q-  . C.  . I / VZ  d,
                               \i = l  j=l  1  1)J  1>J/ /  k=l  k
where   n' =  the number of time periods  of measurement
        V  =  volume of impoundment in liters
        d  =  the number of days per time period
        L  =  the number of inflows

For all inflows, the value is therefore approximately:

 ka(Trib)  =  (2185 +  48'3 +  643'9 +  14240) x 2'45xl°6 x       117 = °'22
            (Swift   (First  (Second  (Storm   (Units     (Impound-
             River)  Creek)   Creek)  water   Conversion) ment
                                   Runoff)             Volume)

  Now, summing the  two contributions:

        ka = ka(algae) + ka(Trib)
        k  = (.16,  .21) + .22  =  (.38,  .43)  mgl^day"1
         a
                                          124

-------
     The value of k, will be assumed as 0.1  at 20°C with 9 in  Equation
(V-29) equal to 1.047.  Then at 3.75°C,
      kl(3.75°C)=kl(20°C) xl
                 = .1 x 1.047(~16'25) = 0.047

Now Q( discharge)  (mean for March and April) and V are known, with

      Q(discharge) = 26'8  (Sw1ft River' Stat1on 2>

                     + 6.2 (pumped withdrawal) x 28'^2A = 935Ł sec"1
                                                  ftj
                   V = 1.9 x TO11*,

Then           C   = _ -38' -43 _ = 4 94  5 58
                55   (.03+.047+(935/1.9xl011))

For further computations,  C   = 5.25 will  be assumed.

      Since k  has been defined as .03, a steady-state areal concentra-
tion of benthic BOD prior  to stratification can be estimated.  If
k4(20°C) = '°03 and Css =  5<25' usin9 Equation (V-34),
                            ksCssD
                     -ss " k
4(3.75°C)
      k4(3 75°C) = -003x1. 047(3'75"20) = -0014
                     i     .03x5.25x6.7   7,.   -2
                     Lss= -     - = 754
      The next step in evaluating hypolimnion DO depression is to
estimate pre-stratification DO levels.   If we assume saturation at the
mean temperature in April  (5.5°C), the dissolved oxygen concentration
at onset of strata should be about 12.7 (from Table V-ll).
                                 125

-------
       Now-we have all values needed  to plot hypolimnion DO versus time
 using  Equations  (V-40)  through  (V-42).
 Using      L0 =  LS$


           Co =  Css

           k, =  O.lxl.047(9'5~20) = .062, (T = 9.5°C for May)
                             ks = 0.03,
           k4 =  .003x1. 047(9<5~20) =  .002, and

                            t = 5 days ,

and applying Equation (V-42),
           AH     0.062x5.25   ,   -(0. 062+0. 03)5
           A0c "  0.062x0.03
Then, according to Equation (V-41 ) ,

         L       kC                     kC        k4
        /754  .     0.03x5.25    \ /,  -0.002x5 \  /     0.03x5.25  \
   L=  I 372   0.03+0.062-0.002 H             /  ^0.03+0.062-0.002J


        I   0.002   \ L  -(0.062+0.03)5)=  2.35
        (0.062+0.03 I l'"e               /
 Then  from Equation  (V-40)
                           °t  = °o  -
                      0,  =  12.7  -  ^- -  1.94  =  10.26
                       0           D . /
 Solving the same  equations  with  increasing  t  gives  the  data  in  Table  V-15.
                                      126

-------
If it has been necessary to develop more data for the remainder of
the stratified period, appropriately updated coefficients might be used
starting at the beginning of each month.
                               TABLE V-15
                 DO SAG CURVE FOR QUIET LAKE HYPOLIMNION
Date
t = 0
5/5
5/10
5/15
5/20
5/25
AOL
0
2.35
4.68
6.99
9.22
11.54
AOC
0
1.30
2.13
2.65
2.98
3.18
°t
0
9.05
5.89
3.06
0.50
0.00
    Finally, if it is desired to evaluate the impact of altered BOD or
phosphorus loadings, the user must go back to the appropriate step
in the evaluation process and properly modify the loadings.

	END OF EXAMPLE V-15 	'	
                                  127

-------
5.6  TOXIC CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES

     Although reasonably accurate and precise methods have been prepared for
screening only a few of the many priority pollutants (Hudson and Porcella,
1981), a reasonable approach for assessing priority pollutants in lakes
based on the methods presented in Chapter 2 can be made if certain
assumptions are made:

     •   The major processes affecting the fate and transport of
         toxicants in aquatic ecosystems are known.

     •   That reasonable safety factors are incorporated by making
         reasonable most case analyses.

     t   Because it is a screening approach, prioritization can be done
         to identify significant constituents, lakes where human health
         or ecological problems can realistically be expected, and
         processes which might require detailed study.

     The major processes affecting toxicants are listed in Table V-16.  The
primary measure of the impact of a toxic chemical in a lake depends on its
concentration in the water column.  Thus, these screening methods are
primarily directed at fate and transport of toxic chemicals.  A secondary
target is the concentration in aquatic biota, principally fish.  Because of
the complexity of various routes of exposure and bioaccumulation processes,
the approach of bioconcentration is used to identify compounds likely to
accumulate  in fish.  These can be applied to lakes using the following
method:
     t   A fate model is used that incorporates sediment transport,
         sorption, partitioning, and sedimentation.

     •   Significant processes  include the kinetic effects of
         sedimentation, volatilization and biodegradation.
                                 128

-------
                                TABLE V-16

                     SIGNIFICANT PROCESSES AFFECTING
                  TOXIC SUBSTANCES IN AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS
Physical-Chemical Processes
Rate Coefficient Symbol, time
                                                                     -1
     Sorption and sedimentation
     Volatilization
     Hydrolysis
     Photolysis
     Oxidation
     Precipitation
        SED
        not assessed
        not assessed
Biological Processes
     Biodegradation
     Bioconcentration
        B
        BCF (unitless)
                                129

-------
     •   Significant biochemical processes can affect the fate of a
         toxic chemical as well as affect biota, such, as,
         bioaccumulation, biodegradation, and toxicity.

     •   In keeping with the conservative approach of the toxics
         screening methodology, some important processes are neglected
         for simplicity;  for example, lake stratification, photolysis,
         oxidation, hydrolysis, coagulation-flocculation, and
         precipitation are neglected.  Also, it is assumed that the
         organic matter is associated with inorganic particles and
         therefore organic matter settles with the inorganic particles.

     Generally the toxic chemical concentrations are calculated
conservatively, that is, higher concentrations are calculated than would
occur in nature because of the assumptions that are made.  The water column
concentrations are calculated as the primary focus of the screening method.
Then bioconcentration is estimated, based on water concentration.  To
determine concentration and bioaccumulation, point and nonpoint source
loadings of the chemicals being studied are needed.  Other data (hydrology,
sediments, morphology) are obtained from the problems previously done in
earlier chapters or sections of this chapter.   The person doing the
screening would have to compile or calculate such data.

     Occasionally, such information must be estimated based on production,
use, and discharge data.  Information on chemical and physical properties is
important to determine the significance of these estimates.
5.6.1 Overall Processes

     Several processes affecting distribution of toxic chemicals are more
significant than others.  Equilibrium aquatic processes include suspended
sediment sorption of chemicals.  Organics in sediments can have a
significant effect on chemical sorption.  Hydrolysis and acid-base
equilibria can alter sorption equilibria.  Volatilization is an equilibrium
process that tends to remove toxic chemicals from aquatic ecosystems.
Removal processes include settling of toxics sorbed on sediments,
                                    130

-------
volatilization, and biodegradation.  Chemical reactions for hydrolysis and
photolysis are included and precipitation and redox reactions could be
included if refinement of the method were desired.  Generally,
bioaccumulation will be neglected as a removal process.

     These removal processes are treated as first-order reactions that are
simply combined for a toxicant  (C,mg/l) to give:

                              dC/dt = - K x C                          (V-44)

where
       K   =   SED  + B + ky  + k  + kh
       SED =   sedimentation rate, toxicant at equilibrium with
       sediments.
       volatiliza'
B   =  biodegradation rate.
k   =  photolysis rate.
kh  =  hydrolysis rate.
       k    =   volatilization  rate.
      This  equation  is  analogous  to  the  BOD  decay  rate  equation  used  in  the
hypolimnetic  DO  screening  method.

      The  input of  toxic  chemical  substances is  computed  simply  (refer  to
Figure  V-23):

                               dt  =  V x  Cin  " f                        (V-45)
                                               w
where C.   is  the concentration in the inflow (tributary  or discharge)  and
flow  (Q),  volume of reservoir  (V) and time  (t)  are as  defined previously.

      At steady state,  accounting  for inflow (Q-C. )  and  outflow (Q-C),  and
using Q/V  =  I/TW,

                       dT= ?  (Cin - 0 - K x C = 0                   (V-46)
                             w
                                  131

-------
and solving,
                            C = W^1 + Tw x K>                      (

To determine the concentration at any time during a non-steady state
condition (assuming C   is a constant):
                           C
                       C = -^  (I  -  e-ft)  +  CQ e-ft                 (V-48)

where
     f  =  1 +  T   x  K
                w
     C  =  reservoir concentration at t = 0.
      o
5.6.1.1 Sorption and Sedimentation

     Suspended  sediment  sorption is treated as an equilibrium reaction which
includes partitioning between water (Cw) and the sediment organic phases
(C  ).  The concentration sorbed on sediment can be computed as follows:

                             Cs.   =  a x K  x S                        (V-49)

where
     C   =  the total concentration (Cw + Cs), mg/1
     S   =  input suspended organic sediment = OC x So, mg/1
     OC  =  fraction of  organic carbon.
     So  =  input of suspended sediment, mg/1
     K   =  distribution coefficient between organic sediment and water
     a   =  fraction of  pollutant in solution
         =  1/(1 +  (Kpx S)

If  K  is large, essentially all of the compound will be sorbed onto  the
sediments.  Note that S  and C must be estimated or otherwise obtained.

     The organic matter  content of suspended sediment  and the lipid
solubility of  the compound are important factors for certain organic
chemicals.  Other sorption can be ignored for screening.  A simple  linear
                                   132

-------
expression can be used to calculate the sediment partition coefficient (K  )
based on the organic sediment carbon concentration (OC)  and the
octanol-water coefficient (kow) for the chemical:

                            K  = 0.63 (kow) (OC)
                             P
     The sedimentation rate (SED) of a toxic chemical is computed as
follows:

                              SED = a x D x K                         (V-50)
                                             P
where
     D   =  P x S x Q/V, sedimentation rate constant
     P   =  sediment trapping efficiency
     Q/V =  I/T
 5.6.1.2  Biodegradation

     The biodegradation rate  (B)  is obtained from the literature or is
 computed as follows:

                                  B -  -
      Modification  to  the  rate  can  be made for  nutrient  limitation using
 phosphorus  (Cp)  as the  limiting  nutrient:
                                     B  (0.0277)C
                                                                       (v-52)
      Temperature correction  can  be  performed  using  the  following  equation:

                        B(T)  = 6(20^) x 1.072(T"20)                   (V-53)

      Previous exposure to the pollutant is important  for most  toxic  organic
 compounds.   Higher rates of  degradation occur in environments  with frequent
 or longterm loading (discharges,  nonpoint sources,  frequent  spills)  than
                                  133

-------
infrequent loadings (one-time spills).  In pristine areas, rates of one to
two orders of magnitude less should be used.

     It is assumed that the suspended sediment decay rate is the same as
aqueous phase decay.  Also benthic decay is disregarded because bottom
sediment release may be negligible.
5.6.1.3 Volatilization

     Many organics are not volatile so this process is applied only to those
which are.  It is assumed that the mass flux of volatile organics is
directly proportional to the concentration difference between the actual
concentration and the concentration at equilibrium with the atmosphere.  The
latter can be neglected in lakes.  Also, only the most volatile are
assessed.
Thus,
                                  - - ky x  C                          (V-54)
where
     kv  =  volatilization rate constant, hr

The rate coefficient is derived from the 2 resistance model for the
liquid-gas interface, but it can be estimated using correlation with the
oxygen reaeration coefficient (based on Zison _et _al_., 1978):

                            k   =  Ka   (Dw/Do)                       (V-55)
     and estimate (Dw/Do)  =
     and the surface film thickness, SFT = (200-60 -  \/w~) x 10"6
     and Kal  =  Do/SFT
     Ka = Kal/ZB

where
     Ka  =  reaeration rate, hr~
     Dw  =  pollutant diffusivity in water

                                          134

-------
                                                    -9            o
     Do  =  diffusivity of oxygen in water (2.1 x  10   m2/sec,  20 C)
     mw  -  pollutant molecular weight
     W   =  wind speed, m/sec
     Z   =  mean depth, m

The volatilization rate coefficient (k ,  hr~ )  is  determined by ky =  Ka x k
where k is obtained from literature values or computed  as  above (V&w/Do)•
The rate should be corrected for temperature (k .) even though  temperature
has only a relatively small effect:
                          k   = k  x 1.024
                           vt    v
                                          (T-20)
                            (V-56)
5.6.1.4  Hydrolysis

     Not all compounds hydrolyze and those that do can be divided into three
groups:  acid catalyzed, neutral,  and base catalyzed reactants.   A pseudo
first-order hydrolysis constant (k ) is estimated for the hydrolysis of the
compound:
                             d
                                                                      (V-57)
The rate constant (k ) is pH dependent and varies as discussed in Chapter 2.
The typical pH of the lake for the appropriate season should be obtained for
the necessary calculations.  Generally, the pH is a common measurement and
is available for most lakes.  If not, pH values for most open lakes lie
between 6-9 and can be estimated based on the following empirical values
based on Hutchinson, (1957):
                                    Hardness  (or  Alkalinity)    pH
     acid lakes
     neutral lakes
     hard water lakes
     eutrophic and alkaline lakes
 <25
25 -  75
75 - 200
 0 - 300
6   -  6.5
6.5 -  7.5
7.5 -  8.5
8.0 - 10.0
                                  135

-------
Median values on a range of values can be used to evaluate the significance
of hydrolysis as a factor affecting the fate of compounds.
5.6.1.5  Photolysis

     Generally, photolysis is a reaction between ultraviolet light (UV, 260
to 380 nm is most important)  and photosensitive chemicals.  Not all
compounds are subject to photolysis nor does UV light penetrate
significantly in turbid lakes.  In the absence of turbidity data, light
transmission can be estimated by seasonally averaged Secchi disk readings
according to the following equation:

                  In (ISD/Io) = -ke(SD)  *  In 0.1  = -2.3
                           ke =  2.3/SD

where
     ke  is the extinction coefficient and
     SD  is the Secchi depth  in meters.
     (ISD/Io = 0.1) is the relative intensity based on Hutchinson (1957).

     Photolysis for appropriate chemicals  (discussed in detail  in Chapter  2)
depends on  a first order rate constant  (k  ) incorporating  environmental
variables  (solar iradiance,  lo) and chemical variables (quantum yield, 4>,
and  absorbance,  E).  Turbidity effects are included as estimated as above
since  turbidity data are generally not  available.  These  values are
incorporated into the rate constant and the concentration  reduced as
follows (details described in Chapter 2):

                                31 =   - V                           (v-58>
 where
      kr  =  f (lo,  cf>,  E,  ke,  Z)
 and
      ko  -   kr
      KP  -
             ke-Z
                                     136

-------
                                                    -9            o
     Do  =  diffusivity of oxygen in water (2.1 x 10   m2/sec,  20 C)
     mw  =  pollutant molecular weight
     W   =  wind speed, m/sec
     Z   =  mean depth, m

The volatilization rate coefficient (kv> hr" )  is determined by ky =  Ka x k
where k is obtained from literature values or computed  as above (Vfjw/Do).
The rate should be corrected for temperature (k  .) even though  temperature
has only a relatively small effect:
                          k   = k  x 1.024
                           vt    v
                                          (T-20)
                                  (V-56)
5.6.1.4  Hydrolysis

     Not all compounds hydrolyze and those that do can be divided into three
groups:  acid catalyzed, neutral, and base catalyzed reactants.   A pseudo
first-order hydrolysis constant (k ) is estimated for the hydrolysis of the
compound:
                             dt
                                                                      (V-57)
The rate constant (k ) is pH dependent and varies as discussed in Chapter 2.
The typical pH of the lake for the appropriate season should be obtained for
the necessary calculations.  Generally, the pH is a common measurement and
is available for most lakes.  If not, pH values for most open lakes lie
between 6-9 and can be estimated based on the following empirical values
based on Hutchinson, (1957):
     acid lakes
     neutral lakes
     hard water lakes
     eutrophic and alkaline lakes
Hardness (or A1kalinity)    pH
       <25         6   -  6.5
      25 -  75     6.5 -  7.5
      75 - 200     7.5 -  8.5
       0 - 300     8.0 - 10.0
                                  135

-------
Median values on a range of values can be used to evaluate the significance
of hydrolysis as a factor affecting the fate of compounds.
5.6.1.5  Photolysis

     Generally, photolysis is a reaction between ultraviolet light (UV, 260
to 380 nm is most important)  and photosensitive chemicals.   Not all
compounds are subject to photolysis nor does UV light penetrate
significantly in turbid lakes.  In the absence of turbidity data, light
transmission can be estimated by seasonally averaged Secchi disk readings
according to the following equation:

                  In (ISD/Io) = -ke(SD)  *  In 0.1  - -2.3
                           ke =  2.3/SD

where
     ke  is the extinction coefficient and
     SD  is the Secchi depth in meters.
     (ISD/Io = 0.1) is the relative intensity based on Hutchinson (1957).

     Photolysis for appropriate chemicals (discussed in detail in Chapter 2)
depends on a first order rate constant (k ) incorporating environmental
variables (solar iradiance, lo) and chemical variables (quantum yield, ,
and absorbance,  E).  Turbidity effects are included as estimated as above
since turbidity data are generally not available.  These values are
incorporated into the rate constant and the concentration reduced as
follows (details described in Chapter 2):
                                dt

where
     kr   =  f  (lo,  cj>,  E, ke,  Z)

and

             ke-Z
                                    •  - kc
                                    136

-------
     Do  =  diffusivity of oxygen in water (2.1 x 10"   m2/sec,  20 C)
     mw  =  pollutant molecular weight
     W   =  wind speed, m/sec
     Z   =  mean depth, m
The volatilization rate coefficient (k ,  hr" )  is determined by ky = Ka x k
where k is obtained from literature values or computed as above (vt)w/Do).
The rate should be corrected for temperature (k  ,) even though temperature
has only a relatively small effect:
                          k   = k  x 1.024
                           vt    v
                                          (T-20)
                            (V-56)
5.6.1.4  Hydrolysis

     Not all compounds hydrolyze and those that do can be divided into three
groups:  acid catalyzed, neutral, and base catalyzed reactants.  A pseudo
first-order hydrolysis constant (k ) is estimated for the hydrolysis of the
compound:
                              dC
                              dt
                            (V-57)
The rate constant (k ) is pH dependent and varies as discussed in Chapter 2.
The typical pH of the lake for the appropriate season should be obtained for
the necessary calculations.  Generally, the pH is a common measurement and
is available for most lakes.  If not, pH values for most open lakes lie
between 6-9 and can be estimated based on the following empirical values
based on Hutchinson, (1957):
                                    Hardness (or Alkalinity)    pH
     acid  lakes
     neutral  lakes
     hard  water  lakes
     eutrophic and alkaline  lakes
 <25
25 -  75
75 - 200
 0 - 300
6   -  6.5
6.5 -  7.5
7.5 -  8.5
8.0 - 10.0
                                  135

-------
Median values on a range of values can be used to evaluate the significance
of hydrolysis as a factor affecting the fate of compounds.
5.6.1.5  Photolysis

     Generally, photolysis is a reaction between ultraviolet light (UV, 260
to 380 nm is most important)  and photosensitive chemicals.  Not all
compounds are subject to photolysis nor does UV light penetrate
significantly in turbid lakes.  In the absence of turbidity data, light
transmission can be estimated by seasonally averaged Secchi disk readings
according to the following equation:

                  In (ISD/Io) = -ke(SD)  *  In 0.1  = -2.3
                           ke =  2.3/SD

where
     ke  is the extinction coefficient and
     SD  is the Secchi depth in meters.
     (ISD/Io = 0.1) is the relative intensity based on Hutchinson (1957).

     Photolysis for appropriate chemicals (discussed in detail in Chapter 2)
depends on a first order rate constant (k ) incorporating environmental
                                         P
variables (solar iradiance, lo) and chemical variables (quantum yield, 4>,
and absorbance,  E).  Turbidity effects are included as estimated as above
since turbidity data are generally not available.  These values are
incorporated into the rate constant and the concentration reduced as
follows (details described in Chapter 2):

                                4r =  - k C                           (V-58)
                                dt        p

where
     kr  =  f  (lo,  4>, E,  ke,  Z)

and

             ke-Z
                                    136

-------
                                                    -9            o
     Do  =  diffusivity of oxygen in water (2.1 x  10"   m2/sec,  20 C)
     mw  =  pollutant molecular weight
     W   =  wind speed, m/sec
     Z   =  mean depth, m

The volatilization rate coefficient (k ,  hr" )  is  determined by ky =  Ka x k
where k is obtained from literature values or computed  as above (Vbw/Do).
The rate should be corrected for temperature (k ,) even though  temperature
has only a relatively small effect:
                          k   = k  x 1.024
                           vt    v
                                          (T-20)
                            (V-56)
5.6.1.4  Hydrolysis

     Not all compounds hydrolyze and those that do can be divided into three
groups:  acid catalyzed, neutral, and base catalyzed reactants.   A pseudo
first-order hydrolysis constant (k ) is estimated for the hydrolysis of the
compound:
                             _dC_
                             dt
                            (V-57)
The rate constant (k ) is pH dependent and varies as discussed in Chapter 2.
The typical pH of the lake for the appropriate season should be obtained for
the necessary calculations.  Generally, the pH is a common measurement and
is available for most lakes.  If not, pH values for most open lakes lie
between 6-9 and can be estimated based on the following empirical values
based on Hutchinson, (1957):
                                    Hardness (or Alkalinity)    pH
     acid  lakes
     neutral  lakes
     hard  water lakes
     eutrophic and alkaline  lakes
 <25
25 -  75
75 - 200
 0 - 300
6   -  6.5
6.5 -  7.5
7.5 -  8.5
8.0 - 10.0
                                  135

-------
Median values on a range of values can be used to evaluate the significance
of hydrolysis as a factor affecting the fate of compounds.
5.6.1.5  Photolysis

     Generally, photolysis is a reaction between ultraviolet light (UV, 260
to 380 nm is most important)  and photosensitive chemicals.   Not all
compounds are subject to photolysis nor does UV light penetrate
significantly in turbid lakes.  In the absence of turbidity data, light
transmission can be estimated by seasonally averaged Secchi disk readings
according to the following equation:

                  In (ISD/Io) = -ke(SD)  *  In 0.1  = -2.3
                           ke =  2.3/SD

where
     ke  is the extinction coefficient and
     SD  is the Secchi depth in meters.
     (ISD/Io = 0.1) is the relative intensity based on Hutchinson (1957).

     Photolysis for appropriate chemicals (discussed in detail in Chapter 2)
depends on a first order rate constant (k ) incorporating environmental
variables (solar iradiance,  lo) and chemical variables (quantum yield, $,
and absorbance,  E).  Turbidity effects are included as estimated as above
since turbidity data are generally not available.  These values are
incorporated into the rate constant and the concentration reduced as
follows (details described in Chapter 2):

                                4r =  - k  C                           (V-58)
                                at        p
 where
      kr  =   f  (lo,  $,  E,  ke,  Z)
 and
              kr
      kp  =
             ke-Z
                                     136

-------
where
     k  is the photolysis rate constant uncorrected for depth and
     turbidity of the lake.

     Depth (Z) is generally applied only to the photic zone and mean depth
(7)  is an appropriate measure since it approximates the mixed depth and the
photic zone.
5.6.1.6   Biocqncentration

      Bioconcentration  is a complex  subject  that  depends on many variables.
The  simplest  approach  has been developed  for  organic  compounds using the
octanol-water  coefficient (kow)  to  calculate  tissue concentrations  (Y):

               Y   =   BCF  x C,   g/kg  fresh  weight  of  fish flesh.         (V-59)

where BCF =  Bioconcentration  factor and  log BCF  = 0.75  log  kow  - 0.23,  (The
coefficients  for  the equation (0.75,  -  0.23)  are median estimates obtained
from correlation  equations  and are  default  values for occasions where  no
other data are available.)
 5.6.2  Guide 1jjT_es_f_g.r Toxics  Screening

      Generally metals do not  biodegrade nor volatilize.  However,  pH,
 hardness, alkalinity and other ions are very important and can cause their
 removal by precipitation.   The conservative approach is taken here and
 metals are calculated without removal  (K = 0).

      Organics may have variable sorption,  volatilization, and biodegradation
 rates.  If data are available in the literature, these should be used.
 Otherwise, a conservative approach should  be used and calculations made
 without removal (K = 0).  For chlorinated  (and other halogens) compounds or
 refractory compounds, biodegradation should be assumed to be  zero.
                                   137

-------
                                EXAMPLE V-16
                  Estimating Trichloroethylene and Pyrene
                      Concentrations in an Impoundment

     An impoundment with a single tributary is located in a windy valley.
The following conditions are known for E.G. Lake:

     Mean tributary flow rate = 3.6 x 101* m3 /hour
     Total volume = 1.1 x 108 m3
     Mean depth = 11 m
     Tributary average sediment load = 200 mg/1
     Sediment average organic carbon content = .05
     Inlet average pyrene concentration = 50 ug/1
     Inlet average trichloroethylene concentration = 100 ug/1
     Lake average phosphorus concentration = 50 ug/1
     Mean water temperature  = 15°C
     Mean wind speed = 6 m/sec (35 mph)
     Secchi depth = 1 m
Determine the steady state concentration of pyrene and trichloroethylene  in
                                                                    _. k\
the  lake, assuming V max for the sediment  (mostly clay)  is 3.2 x 10
feet/second.  The trapping efficiency  is obtained from Figure V-33.

 Other data                  Pyrene             Trichloroethylene
     kow                      148000                       190
      B                       IxlO"4
      k                          -                          0.45xKa
       v

The  processes of photolysis  and hydrolysis can  be neglected because
turbidity prevents photolysis  (SD  =  1  meter)  and these compounds have
negligible  hydrolysis  (see Chapter 2).

      We  use  the  summary  equation  (V-47)  for  the analysis:

                             C  - C1n/(l  +  TW-K)
                                    138

-------
     The  hydraulic  residence  time of  E.G. Lake  is:

     T  -  1.1  x  108  m3/(3.6  x  lOTnVhr)
        =  3048 hours
        =  127  days
        =  .349 year
        =  1.1  x  105  seconds
Sedimentation

     First, the suspended sediment concentration  in  E.G.  Lake  must  be
estimated.   The trapping efficiency of the impoundment  is estimated from
Figure V-34.

Data:                                                      log 10
      V max  =  5 x 10"6 fps                               -5.30
      T      =  1.1 x 106 sec                               6.04
      D1     =  11 m  =  36.1 ft                            1.56

A value of 101-95 is obtained which yields

                              P = 90   =  0.9

     In the inflowing stream, the toxicants are assumed to be  at equilibrium
with the organic matter.  Thus,

             S = OC x So - .05 x 200 x 10"6     = 1  x 10"5 kg/1

Therefore, for pyrene
                    K   = 0.63 x 148000 x 0.05  =  4660
                     P

                               + 4660 x 1 x 10"5)  -  0.955
                                139

-------
IO''-1-
  10
   -&:'.
  \c-='-i-
      ::\
  IO-^TA
  10
   -3.
  10
    0 L
                       To)
            L
                       10
3llo-6
   St/Sj
                           "\ 0-
 4No \
                               X
                              \N
                               N
                                V : Settling  velocity  in feet/
                                   second
                                T : Hydraulic residence time
                                   in seconds
                                D': Flowing layer depth
                                S : Mass of sediment trapped
                                S.: Mass of sediment entering
                                   impound.r:ent
                                L : Pivot axis
                                                                     D
                                                                         .699-
                                                                             = 50
                                                                  10
                                                                    I_L
FIGURE  V - 54  NCXCGRAPH  FOR  ESTIMATING SEDIMENT TRAP  EFFICIENCY
                                  140

-------
                   -     = 0.955 x  4660  x  1  x  10"5  =   0.044
and

                    SED - a x D x K
                                   P


                    D   = P x S x Q/V
                    D   = 0.9 x 200 x 10'6 x   -  hours
                                   -8
                    D   = 5.91 x 10   hour
                    SED = .955 x 5.91 x 10"8 x 4660
                    SED = 2.63 x 10"4  hr"1
For tr ich• 1oroethylene
                    K   =  .63 x 190 x 1 x .05  =  6
                     P
                              1 + 6 x 1 x 10   )  =  1
                        = 1 x 6 x 1 x 10"5  =  6 x 10"5  =  0
and
                     SED  = 1 x 5.91 x 10   x 6
                    SED   = 3.54 x 10"7 hr"1
 B i_qd e q radati q_n



     Assume that  the  presence of trichloroethylene does not affect the

 biodearadation  of pyrene.  Trichloroethylene does not biodegrade.  The
                                  141

-------
temperature corrected and  nutrient  limited  rate  constant for microbial decay
of pyrene are:

                    Bo    = 1.  x  10"4  hr"1
                    B     = .0277 x  50/  (1  +  .0277  x  50)

                          = .58

                    8(15)  = .58x  1.  x  10"4x  1.072  (15
                          = 4.1  x 10"5  hr"1
Volatilization

     The reaeration coefficient  for  E.G.  Lake  will be estimated for
trichloroethylene only,  because  pyrene  does  not  volatilize:

                    Kal  = 2.1  x  10"9   /     (200 - 60 x 6^ 10~6

                        = 3.96 x 10"5  m/sec

                        = .143 m/hr

                    Ka  = (.143  m/hr)     /     11 m =  .013  hr"1

For trichloroethylene  (TCE):

           kv  =  [MW(TCE)/MW(02)f2 • Ka = .45 x .013  =  .0058 hr'1

When adjusted  for temperature:

                                       (15"20)

                                   "1
                    kv  = . 0058 x 1.024
                        - .0052  hr
                                   142

-------
Volatilization for pyrene may be neglected.
Pollutant Mass Balance
     The overall decay rate constants are:  K = SED + B + k

     Pyrene:             K   = 2.63 x 10"4 + 4.1 x 10"5
                        = .000304 hr"1
     Trichloroethylene:  K   = 3.54 x 10"  + 0 + 0.0051
                        = .0052 hr"1
     Using the steady state equation:
v
                    C   =  Cin/(l+TwK)
For  Pyrene
                 C   - 50 yg/1 / ( 1 + 3048 hr x  .000304 hr'1)
                 C   = 27 yg/1

      Note:   WQC  for  human  health  is  0.0028 yg/1  at  10"6  Risk  (FR:  11/28/80
 p.  79339).

 For Trichloroethylene

                     C    =  100 yg/1  / (1  +  3048  hr  x .0052  hr"1)

                         =  5.9 yg/1

      Note:   WQC  for  human  health  is  2.7  yg/1  at 10"6 Risk  (FR:  11/28/80
 p.  79341)
                                     143

-------
     Tissue burdens (Y) can be calculated:

                               Y   = BCF x C

where
     log BCF   = .75 log kow - 0.23

For Pyrene

                  Y    = 4330 x 27  =  120000 yg/kg fish flesh

For Tri ch1oroethy1ene

                    Y   = 30 x 6 = 180 yg/kg fish flesh

Comments

     Several conclusions are apparent from this analysis

     t   Certain processes dominate the overall fate for a specific
         toxic chemical so that, practically speaking, errors  in
         estimating coefficients are negligible except for the
         important processes.  After identifying the important
         processes, the coefficients can  be varied to determine the
         range of concentrations.  For example, sedimentation  of
         trichloroethylene can be ignored;  however, volatilization
         should be studied.

     i   The more  stringent Water Quality Criteria are for toxicants
         that have significant bioconcentration;  e.g.  compare pyrene
         to  trichloroethylene.

     •   Volatilization of trichloroethylene would be  investigated  in
         detail since  this process might  not be significant  in  this
         lake because  of  its depth.  Also, the physical properties  are
         important;   e.g.  trichloroethylene has a specific  gravity  of
                                  144

-------
     about  1.5.   Thus,  it  may accumulate on the bottom of the
     reservoir  and  remain  there unless it is completely dispersed,

 •    Based  on  this  analysis,  sources of pyrene would be assessed
     first,  then  trichloroethylene.

 •    What other observations  can you draw from this analysis?

	-END OF EXAMPLE V-16 	
                              145

-------
5-7 ^iJCATIp_N OF METHODS AND EXAMPLE PROBLEM

     This chapter has presented several approaches to evaluation of five
impoundment problem areas.  These are thermal stratification, sediment
accumulation, eutrophication, hypo!imnion DO/BOD, and toxic chemicals.
Figure V-35 shows how the different approaches are linked together with
their data needs.  In studying any or all of the potential problem areas in
an  impoundment, the user should first define the potential problems as
clearly as he can.  Often the nature of a problem will change entirely when
its various facets are carefully described and examined en masse.

     Once the decision is made that an aspect of impoundment water quality
should be evaluated and the problem is clearly stated, the user should
examine available solution techniques presented both in this document and
elsewhere.  The examination should address the questions of applicability,
degree of accuracy, and need for data.  The user will generally know what
funds are available for data collection as well as the likelihood of
procuring the needed data from previously developed bases.  Also, the
decision concerning needed accuracy rests with the user, and he should make
decisions based upon the way in which his results will be used.

     Once appropriate methods have been selected, the next task is to set
down the data and to manipulate it according to computational requirements.
Data are best displayed first in tabular form and then plotted in some
meaningful way.  Careful tabulation of data and graphing can themselves
sometimes provide a solution to a problem, negating need for further
analysis.  To illustrate these steps, a comprehensive application to a river
basin system was performed in this section.
  .7.1 THE OCCOQUAN RESERVOIR
     The Occoquan River basin in Virginia was used to demonstrate the
screening approach.  A basin map is shown in Figure V-36.  Because the
Occoquan Reservoir  is a public drinking water supply downstream from
metropolitan areas, v/ater quality data were available to compare to the
screening method's  outputs.
                                   146

-------
          PROCEDURES
          APPLIED
INPUT DAT* FOR
RESERVOIRS AND LAKES
                                                      VOLUME, AREA,  MAX DEPTH
                                                       INFLCH(S) - HIGH, LOU,
                                                       AND AVERAGE CONDITIONS
                                                          HI 110 SHIELDING*
                                                        MEAN WIND VELOCITY*
                                                          NEAREST CITY*
PREDICT
SEDIMENT
FILLING OF
RESERVOIR
^
'



PREDICT
EUTROPH1CATION
LEVEL

^
P-
<„
AND
STRATIFICATION




SEDIMENT
TRAPPING
EFFICIENCY



t,
I
*
J
\
r
SEDIMENT LOADS (MEASURED
CALCULATED)
SEDIMENT DELIVERY RATIO*
SEDIMENT TYPE AND PARTICLE SIZE*

NUTRIENT LOADS (MEASURED
OR CALCULATED)
                                                        SETTLING VELOCITY*
                                                          BOD CECAY RATE*
                                                   BENTHIC OXYGEN CONSUMPTION RATE*
                                                        TRIBUTARY BOD LOAD
                                                          SATURATION DO*
                                                         TOXICANT TYPE
                                                       SEDIMENTATION RATE
                                                         REAERATION RATE
                                                             ACATiON RATE
                                                         BlOACCUMULATION
       OBTAINED FROM SCREENING MANUAL.
FIGURE  V-35   GENERALIZED  SCHEMATIC OF   LAKE  COMPUTATIONS
                                           147

-------
                                 Dulles Airport
           PRINC
              WILLIAM
                 COUNTY
                                     0  12345
                                                   ccoouan
                                                    Dam
FIGURE V-36   THE OCCOQUAN RIVER  BASIN
                        148

-------
5.7.2 Stratification

     Occoquan Reservoir is about 32 km southwest of Washington, D.C.  and
has the following morphometric characteristics:

               Volume, m3  =  3.71 x 107
               Surface area, m2  =  7.01 x 105
               Maximum depth, m  =  7.1 (Occoquan Dam)
               Mean depth, m  =  5.29

     Based upon the above geometry and the thermal plots, determine whether
the  lake will stratify, the thickness of the epilimnion and the hypolimnion,
the  depth to the thermocline, and the interval and starting and ending date
of stratification.  Also note the temperature of the hypolimnion at the
onset  of stratification.

     Predicting the extent  of shielding from  the wind requires use  of
topographic  maps.   The reservoir  is situated  among hills that  rise  25 meters
or more above the  lake surface  within 200 meters of the  shore.  The relief
provides little access for  wind to the  lake surface.  Average  annual wind
speeds are 15.6 km/hr in  Washington,  D.C.  and  12.6 km/hr  in Richmond, VA.
Inflow comes essentially  from two creeks, the Occoquan River and  Bull Run
River  (Figure  V-36).

      First,  determine needed  information  and  then  do  metric/English
conversions  as  necessary.

      The first  step in  assessing  impoundment  water quality is  to  determine
whether the  impoundment  thermally stratifies.  This  requires knowledge  of
 local  climate,  impoundment  geometry,  and  inflow rates.   Using  this
 information, thermal  plots  likely to  reflect  conditions  in the prototype are
 selected  from Appendix D.
                                   149

-------
     For the thermal  plots to realistically describe the thermal  behavior of
the prototype, the plots must be selected for a locale climatically similar
to that of the area under study.  Because the Occoquan Reservoir  is within
32 kilometers of Washington, D.C., the Washington thermal plots (Appendix D)
should best reflect the climatic conditions of the Occoquan watershed.

     The second criterion for selecting a set of thermal plots is the degree
of wind stress on the reservoir.  This is determined by evaluating the
amount of protection from wind afforded the reservoir and estimating the
intensity of the local winds.  Table V-2 shows annual wind speed  frequency
distribution for Washington, D.C.  and Richmond, Virginia.  The data suggest
that winds  in the Occoquan area are of moderate intensity.

     Predicting the extent of shielding from the wind requires use of
topographic maps.  The reservoir  is situated among hills that rise 25 meters
or more above the lake surface within 200 meters of the shore.  The relief
provides little access for wind to the lake surface.  The combinatiuon of
shielding and moderate winds implies that low wind stress plots are
appropriate.

     The geometry of  the  reservoir is the third criterion used in the
selection of  thermal  plots.  Geometric data for the Occoquan Reservoir are
summarized  in the problem.  The volume,  surface area, and maximum depth  are
all nearly  midway between the parameter  values used  in  the 40-foot and
75-foot maximum-depth plots.  However, the mean depth is much closer  to  the
mean depth  of the 40-foot plot.

     The mean depth represents  the ratio of the volume  of the  impoundment  to
 its surface area.  Because  the  volume and surface  area  are proportional  to
the thermal  capacity  and  heat transfer rates respectively, the mean depth
should  be  useful  in characterizing the thermal  response of the impoundment.
 It follows  that  the 40-foot  thermal profiles  should  match  the  temperatures
 in the  Occoquan  Reservoir more  closely than  the 75-foot profiles.   However,
 it is  desirable  to  use  both  plots in  order  to  bracket the  actual
 temperature.
                                    150

-------
     Flow data provide the final  information needed to determine which
thermal plots should be used.   The inflow from the two tributaries adds  up
to be 20.09 mVsec.
The hydraulic residence time can be estimated by using the expression
               , V .  3.71  x 10'  .'
                      20.09     x 86400
                                        - . 21-4 days
Since the residence time is midway between the thermal  plot parameter values
of 10 and 30 days, both should be used to bracket the mean hydraulic
residence time in the prototype.  It should be noted that these flow
estimates do not include runoff from the area immediately around the lake.
However, the upstream Occoquan watershed is large enough relative to the
immediate runoff and direct precipitation to justify the assumption that the
contribution of the immediate area is not significant.

     The likelihood that the Occoquan Reservoir thermally stratifies can now
be evaluated.  For a hydraulic residence time of ten days, the thermal plots
show that stratification is not likely for maximum depths of 40 to 75 feet.
In the case of a 30-day hydraulic residence time, the profiles suggest that
the reservoir develops a thermal gradient between 1°C m   and 3°C nf * for
either value of maximum impoundment depth.  The 40-foot plots (Figure V-37)
indicate stratification occurs from May to August at 5-7 meters depth.
However, the 75-foot plots predict that the impoundment will have a thermal
gradient greater than 1°C m"1 only at depths greater than 17 meters.  Since
the Occoquan Reservoir is 17.1 meters deep at the deepest station, this
suggests that the impoundment does not stratify.

     The mean hydraulic residence time can be computed using either the
average annual flow rate or the flow rate just prior to stratification.  In
order to use the latter method, the flow rate during the months of March and
April should be computed.  The flow rate for this period, 25.4 m3 sec"1,
reduces the hydraulic retention time to 17 days.  Since the model predicts
no stratification for a ten-day residence time, the judgment as to whether
stratification occurs becomes difficult.
                                  151

-------
 4 •
                                                     4 •
CL
UJ
o
                 Q_
                 UJ

                 °
               Q-
               UJ
               o
               a.
               U-l
               o
   0    10  20  3D
      TEnr.  c
                  t?
X
t—
a.
  17
 x
 t—
 O_
 LLJ
 O
  1?
0   10   20   3D
   TEnr. C

     BUt
0   10   20   30
   TEnr. c
   0   10   20   30
      TEMP.  C
   o   10   ;o   30
      TFf.P. C
                   12
0   10   20   30
   TEMP. C

      DEC
o   10  ^o   30
   TEMP.  C
                                0-
                                LU
                                o
0   10   20  30
   TEMP. C
                                                      12
                                                           10   20   30
                                                          TEMP.  C

                                                            OC1
                                                       0   10   20   33
                                                          TEMP. C
                     WASHINGTON,  B.C.

                     40 '  INI T IRL MRXIMUM DEPTH

                     30 DOT HTDR- RES. TIME

                     MINIMUM MIXING
FIGURE V-37  THERMAL PROFILE  PLOTS  FOR  OCCOQUAN RESERVOIR
                               152

-------
     Because lower flows occur during the summer, the 30-day residence time,
40 foot depth and minimum mixing should be used.  In borderline cases such
as this, the reservoir will almost certainly stratify during some part of
the summer.

     The temperatures predicted by the thermal plots match those actually
measured in the reservoir quite closely.  A comparison of predicted and
observed monthly mean temperatures (1974-1976) in both the epilimnion and
hypolimnion can be made using observed data (Table  V-17) and the plot of the
40 foot, 30 day residence time, minimum mixing  (Figure V-37).  The
difference between the  two epilimnion temperatures  averages 1.0°C and varies
between 0.2 and 1.8 C.  The difference  in the hypolimnion temperatures
averages 1.0°C and ranges from  0.2 to 2.7°C.

     The close agreement of the predicted and observed impoundment
temperatures probably results from the  relatively  long hydraulic residence
times  observed in two of the  three years on which  the averages are based.
In 1974, 1975, and 1976, the mean hydraulic residence times were 31,  18,  and
25 days, respectively.  The 30-day thermal plots should  predict results
relatively  close  to the two low-flow years.   The differences expected for
1975 would  be  less pronounced when averaged with the other  two.

      In  conclusion, Occoquan  Reservoir  does apparently stratify, the  depth
to the thermocline or  the  epilimnion approximates  the mean  depth  (5.29),  the
hypolimnion  has  a depth of  11.8 m (17.1-5.3),  and  the  interval of
stratification approximates May 1  to mid  September or  138 days.  The
hypolimnetic  temperature  is about 11 degrees  C,  typically.
 5.7.3 Sedimentation

      To evaluate potential sedimentation problems, Appendix F is examined to
 see if any data exist on the upstream reservoir (Jackson) or Occoquan
 Reservoir (Figure V-36).  Some data exist for Jackson but not for Occoquan
 Reservoir (Figure V-38 taken from Appendix F).  Thus, we can determine the
 trapping of sediment in Jackson Reservoir but trapping must be calculated
                                   153

-------
                                                 TABLE  V-17
        COMPARISON OF MODELED  THERMAL  PROFILES  TO OBSERVED TEMPERATURES  IN OCCOQUAN RESERVOIR
Month
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Hean EpU imnion
40-foot Plot (°C)J;
7
13.5
19
24
26
26
22
17
11
7
Temp.
Observed
8.4
12.6
20.5
24.8
26.6
26.5
23.8
17.2
12.2
6.2
Hean llypol imnion
40-foot Plot ("C)b)
6
10
15
18
20
21
20
16
10
7
Temp.
Observedc
6.3
9.2
14.4
. 17.2
21.2
23.7
20.2
15.8
11.6
5.8
Epil Imnion Depth
(m)
40-foot P)ott;
--
--
4.5
5.0
6.5
7
--
--
--
--
*J(lean temperatures  In ep1l1mn1on from thermal plots with T  » 30 days and a maximum depth of 40 feet.
       temperatures  1n  therrrocline and hypolimnion  from thermal plots with T  • 30 days and a maximum
  depth of 40 feet.
c>Means of observed temperatures  1n "upper" and "lower" layers of Occoquan Reservoir for 1974-1976,
  at Sandy Run.

  Source:  northern Virginia  Planning  District Commission,  January ,  1979.

-------


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER


|


RESERVOIR





STREAM






NEAREST TOWN






DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)

TOTAL [ NET



DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVG ANN
INFLOW
(ACRE-FT.
PER
AUHfc-Kll


SPECIFIC
WEIGHT
(DRY)
LB. PER
CU. FT.)


AVG. ANN
SEDIMENT
ACCUMULATION
PEB S(J. MI.
OF NET DB.
AREA FOR
PERIOD SHOWN

AC.-FT. | TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA


                                                                                     POIOMC, UPFAIUIIKXX, TOM, UK JAWS HID BASIK5
tn
tn
5-3
5-3
5-4b
5-6
5-7b
5-8
5-10
5-13
5-13
6-1
6-3
6-3
6-4






n hit
Tt*"rt *"
d

5ta t


**
•o ion
Triadelphia L. (Brignton D. )-
rt
.°
.



*°
'*rt r


South Rl»«r, Site 26 	 > 	
l
* ** *

Laki Ap^ic 	 — — — —
Frankllnton-
Oreensboro (L. Brandt) 	
High Point 	
	 to 	





If. h. Br, AncoovtU River-
t
rib. o ndlui r
rt




'rv.»
.IfKlMrl

""
rto

_ _


^°
0.

PatttJtent RiYfP-
Inch B
v ^ ««C
Ll
. t « aturent


allU lanoy Craoic
F
e oj r



»dged in 1937-1939.


Oroooee, T*. 	
Silw Spring, Md. 	
hi t »M
reen el ,
do

Sta ton T
. '
^
Hk 7
*'
fiV-f«tit° nVt
d '
do



°
•1 fftnn >M
5"*"*


W^n.rtoro, V. 	

*'
CHCW4N, ROANDKE, TAfi,



High ftiint, N. C 	

33.21
27.0
337
•1.4

60
105.0
132.8
2.7
1.8»
NEUSE, AND CA!
4.0
1.13
62.8
" &
33.07
25
336.4
to.y
59.6
104.44
50.14
2.7
1.S5
>E FŁAH Rl
4.0
1.12
73.4
62.3
Kevls.d 1
9 .cr»-r.
F*. 1938
*««. 1957
F*. 1907
F*. 1938
*/ 1930
lUr. 1938
Julj 1936
F*. 1938
A««. 1957
Jmm 1968
DM. 1925
J*Q. 1940
Jan* 1957
July 1930
Au». 1937
Jui. 1942
Oct. 1950
S«pt. 1958
Aug. 1964
S^rt. 1913
Apr. 1940
M.r. 1932
Apr. 1940
««r. 1952
Kir. 1956
ttor. 1954
Aug. 1964
H*J 1956
Hoi. 1970
S.pt. 1966
Aug. 1968
Aug. 1969
VER BASINS
— 1925
June 1941
J«n. 1925
*J 1938
F«b. 1923
Aug. 1934
Jui. 1928
Aug. 1934
Apr. 1939
968.
•t c*lned br dr<
23.1
17.5
31
1.6
19.5
14
17.5
7.2
8.3
7.9
5.9
26.6
8.1
4.0
10.4
14.5
1.9
1.0
16
13.3
11.5
~6.5
3.75
jA*762
i'e6o
1.72J
181
95
1%
186
151
UA47
373
350
4,500
4,158
20J089
19,633
19,045
3,129
3,004
7,312
7,394
20,300
20,020
21,390
20,789
6X0.4
607.0
196.97
170.99
163.72
106
94
34.7
27.3
2,870
2,610
4,354
4,135
4,038
.134
.161
•.312
•.596
•.240
.234
_

.327
.324
.317
.308
.172
.169
.28
.28
.140
.122
.117


—
•60
•60
•60
•60
•60
•60
•50
•50
61.1
•60
67
•60
•60
•60
67
•60
50.6
.257
.728
.134
.408
7.91 10
2.27 2
1.52 1
.034
.053
.141
.20
.72
1.25 1
U/.090
.036
~.643
1.15 1
.087
12/7.3916/11
3.93 5
.19
.509
.308
.541
.416
336
950
533
,337
,970
.945
184
218
784
,663
r'a
,678
110
,278
.133
743
402
596
458
SCS
SC3
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
scs
s:s
SCS
                           2/  Partial vurv«r covering e«gn«nta 1-11 In 3ton«y Brook Am Onlj.
                           \jj  Net Mdlaent contributing area was 299.4 mq. ml. until 1933 "ban Prtttyboy Daa M*B oomplet*d.
                         this ar*a was uo«d In tha I9iJ calculations.
                           */  Rr*ia»d aft«r 1961 flttrr«y.
                           6/  Conaarwtlon or »»din«nt pool only.
                           2/  Mot datamlnod - aaauned equal to that d»t*rmin«d in 1963.
                           fl/  6a*«d on origin*! •pillvsj oreat alrratlon 20^ f««t a. B. 1.
                           O/  tafu*4 nn (tpillwi* rront •l«ratl'>n 210 fo«t n. ". 1. and natlnwtM eamolty nf 2,WO acr^-f**!
Revieed due to movable control gat^s.
Koon Lake, upstream, was built In 1932.
Baaerl on total sediment in both Gordon Lake and Koon Lake.
Does not include U.JU acre-feet dredged.
Include* U.3U acre-feet dredge4 In early spring I960.
         FIGURE  V-38    SUMMARY  OF   RESERVOIR  SEDIMENTATION  SURVEYS  MADE   IN   THE  UNITED  STATES  THROUGH  1970

-------
for the Occoquan.  To refine the analysis,  calculations on Jackson Reservoir
will also be made and the results calibrated.

     To apply the Stokes1 law approach to a reservoir, we need to know the
loading first.  The necessary sediment loading estimates for the tributaries
were provided by the methods in Chapter 3 and are listed in Table V-18 (Dean
e_t aj_., 1980) Before they are used in further computations, a delivery
factor must be applied to these values.  This factor  (the sediment delivery
ratio or SDR) accounts for the fact that not all the  sediment removed from
the land surface actually reaches the watershed outlet.  Nonpoint loads from
urban sources are presumed to enter the reservoir through Bull Run River
since most of the urbanized portion of the watershed  lies in this sub-basin.

     Computing the annual sediment load into Occoquan Reservoir  is
complicated by the presence of Lake Jackson immediately upstream from the
reservoir.  The  trap efficiency must be computed for  Lake Jackson as well in
order to determine the amount of sediment entering the Occoquan  Reservoir
from Lake  Jackson.  The  steps involved are to compute the sediment delivered
(Table  V-19), the size range, the fraction trapped for each size range and
the total  amount trapped.  A table has been devised to simplify  these steps
(Table  V-20).

     Soil  types  provide  an  indication  of the particle sizes in the basin
under  study.  Soils  in the Occoquan basin  are predominately silt  loams.
Particle  size data on the principal variety,  Penn  silt  loam,  are given  in
Table  V-21.   These data  and  all  calculations  are  transcribed  into Table
V-22.

      Some effort can  be  conserved  by  first calculating  the  smallest  particle
 size  that will  be  completely trapped  in  the  impoundment.   To  do  so,  P,  the
 trap  efficiency, must first  be  computed.   Because both  reservoirs are  long
 and narrow and  have  relatively  small  residence  times, the flow will  be
 assumed to approximate  vertically  mixed  plug  flow (Case  Bl).   In this  case,
 P is  found from the  expression:
                                    156

-------
                                                        TABLE  V-18

                                     ANNUAL SEDIMENT AND POLLUTANT LOADS IN OCCOQUAN

                                           WATERSHED IN METRIC TONS PER
en
Type of Load

Total Nitrogen
Available Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus
Available
Phosphorus
BOD,.
D
Rainfall Nitrogen
'Kettle
Run
46,898
164.46
16.45
39.01
2.18
328.92
0.72
Cedar
Run
396,312
1,457.42
145.74
341.95
14.95
2,925.63
5.50
Broad
Run
142,241
518.91
51.89
114.22
5.57
1,042.45
2.00
Bull
Run
232,103
789.24
78.92
202.71
12.50
1,578.47
3.92
Occoquan
River
139,685
469.46
46.05
119.42
8.43
925.85
2.48
Urban
Runoff
12,699
12.88
5.38
2.59
1.27
77 .47
-
                  a)
                    Estimates  provided by Midwest Research  Institutes Nonpoint  Source Calculator.
                    These  values  have not yet had a sediment delivery ratio  (SDR) applied  to
                    them.   We  will  use 0.1 and 0.2 as lower and upper bounds.   The SDR  does not
                    apply  to rainfall nitrogen.

                    Note:   A large  number of significant figures have been retained  in  these
                           values to ensure the accuracy of later calculations.

-------
TABLE V-19
SEDIMENT
TRIBUTARIES
TO
LAKE JACKSON
KETTLE RUN
CEDAR RUN
BROAD RUN
TOTAL
LOADED INTO LAKE JACKSON,
1,000 KG/YEAR
AVAILABLE
SEDIMENT
46,898
396,312
142,241
SEDIMENT
LAKE
CASE I
(SDR=0,1)
4,690
39,630
14,220
58,540
DELIVERED To
JACKSON
CASE II
(SDR=0,2)
9,380
79,260
28,440
117,080
   158

-------
                                                         TABLE V-20



                      CALCULATION FORMAT FOR DETERMINING SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION IN RESERVOIRS (NOTE UNITS)
Size
Fraction

Percent
Composition

Density
Absolute

Bulk

Mean
Particle
Diameter

vmax

Fraction
Trapped (P)
A

B

Test Case

Incoming
Sediment
•
Trapped
Sediment

en

-------
              TABLE V-21

    PARTICLE SIZES IN  PENN  SILT LOAM
Particle Size           * of Particles Smaller Than
    (imp      	(By Weight)	

    4.76                            100

    2.00                              99

    0.42                              93

    0.074                             84

    0.05                              78

    0.02                              50

    0.005                             26

    0.002                             16
                     160

-------
                                    TABLE V-22



CALCULATION FORMAT FOR DETERMINING SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION IN RESERVOIRS (NOTE UNITS)
Size
Fraction
cin
.000514
.00050
.00035
.00020
>. 000518



Percent
Composition

0.3
5
5
16
73.7


Example
Calculation
Density
Absolute

2.66
2.66
2.66
2.66
2.66


SDR = C
Vol = 2
Vol of
(75 yrs
Bulk

2.24
2.24
2.24
1.28
2.33
average'


.115
4750 m3/
Jackson
lifetim
Mean
Particle
Diameter

N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A


/r
Reservoir
e)
Vpiax
m/day
1.90
1.79
0.88
0.29
-
Totals
Trapped

ast per y
Fraction
Trapped (P)
A

N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A


>a Y* ~~ -.
1
B

1.00
0.94
0.46
0.15
1.00


24750
593000
Test Case

I
II
I
II
I
II
I
II
I
II
I mtons/y
II mtons/y
I m3/yr
II m3/yr
n3/yr _ -, r/
n3
m tc
Incoming
Sediment

176
352
2927
5854
2927
5854
9366
18732
43144
86288
- 48822
- 97644
21523
43046
'year
n/yr
Trapped
Sediment
m3/yr
176 79
352 158
2751 1228
5502 1356
601
2582 1209
1405 1098
2810 2196
43144 19000
86288 37000




-------
                                     max T_w

                                P =   D'



where D1 = mean flowing layer depth,  m.




     To calculate the smallest particle  that  is  trapped  in  the  impoundment,

P is set equal to unity and the above equation  is  solved  for  V
                                                             max
                              V
                              vmax
                                         w
This expression for V    is then substituted into the  fall  velocity  equation
                     max
(Stokes1 law), which in turn is solved for d.




                         .4-8  x  1Q6  (DP  -  DW) d2   =   rr
                    %ax "             p                T



The  resulting expression is:
                     d»    	   °'  y
                                     6
                         v  4.8  x  10"  /D  - D ^ • T
                                       ^  p    w^    w



     The  trap efficiency of Lake Jackson is calculated first.   The data

 required  for these calculations are:




     V   = 1.893 x 106 m3




     Q   = 12.47 m3 sec"1




     D   = 3.34 m




     p   = 1.11    (Assuming T = 16°C as in Occoquan Reservoir)




 and Tw=l=  	1.893 x 106  m3	.- 1.76 days

           Q   12.47  m3  •  sec   • 86400 sec • day"1


     The minimum  particle  size for 100 percent trapping  is computed as:
         d  = /3-34m x 1'11	  =  5.14 x 10-4 cm

             V  4.8 x 106 (2.66 -  1.0)  •  1.76
                                   162

-------
     The amount trapped of each  size fraction  is  computed  separately for
Case B-l from the equation
                                p _  max Tw
                                       D1
For example, for size fraction 0.00035 cm,
                          p . loBm .  0.46
A composite trapping efficiency can be obtained  by determining  the  total
percent trapped (48822/58540 = 0.83).

     The sediment accumulated in Lake  Jackson  for each  size  range  is
determined from the expression:

                                S  = P •  S
                                \        i

where
     P  = trap efficiency
     S. = sediment load from tributary i
     S  = sediment trapped

For the two cases (I, II):

      St = (0.1, 0.1) x 0.83 [46898 +  132241]  metric tons/year
         = (48822, 97644) metric tons/year.

Data obtained from Appendix F of the screening manual  show that the
estimated rate of sedimentation in Lake Jackson  is 56,153 metric tons/year.
This indicates that an SDR of 0.115 would be appropriate.

     Bulk density (g/cc) includes the  water  that fills  pore  spaces  in
sediment that has settled to the bottom and  this must  be accounted  for  when
determining volume lost due to sedimentation.   Bulk density  varies  with
particle size and some approximate values for  the size  ranges for  sand
(0.005-0.2 cm), silt (0.0002-0.005 cm), and  clay (<0.0002 cm) are  as
follows:  2.56 for sand, 2.24 for silt and 1.28  for clay.  Thus, using  an
                                  163

-------
SDR of .115, 24,750 m3 (or 1.3%)  of reservoir volume would  be lost  per year.
In comparing to Appendix F data,  we find that this  value is conservative.
The loss of volume was estimated  by the SCS to be 47.5 acre feet/year while
these calculations show only 20 acre feet/year being lost.   The estimated
bulk density used by the SCS was  0.93 g/cc and we used a more conservative
value.  If the SCS figure is used, the volume lost is determined to be 46.4
acre feet/year.

     Now we compute the sedimentation in Occoquan Reservoir.  The minimum
particle size that is completely  trapped is computed using  the following
values:
      D' = 5.29
     u  = 1.11 (T = 16°C = mean of Table V-17)
     DW = 2.66 g cm "3
     Dw = 1.0 g cm"3
     TW = 21.4 days

Under stratified conditions, the epilimnion thickness should be used for D'.
Since stratification  is uncertain  in this case and the predicted average
hypolimnion thickness, 5.75 m, is greater than the mean depth, the latter
value will be used.  All particles with diameter, d, such that:
               rs
           = V ~4.
                       1.11
                   3 x 106 (2.66 -  1.0)  •  21.4

will be completely trapped in the Occoquan Reservoir.   Because this value is
smaller than the smallest size calculated for Lake Jackson (2 x 10   cm),
our computations are simple.   We assumed that 84 percent of the sediment is
totally trapped and the remainder is trapped at an efficiency calculated for
particle sizes of 0.0001 cm:

                         4.8 x  106 (2.66 -  1.)  (1  xjgjjJL
                       =                 I_TI

                       = 0.072 in/day
                                   164

-------
                   D    »•—  Tw      0.072  •  21.4
                   P =    ^      =   -   5729-

The annual sediment trapped is
                                St = P ' Si
but corrections for sources and SDR must be made:
     S  = SDR x sediment from each source.
      i

     S. = 13390 (Lake Jackson, already corrected for SDR)
          0.115 (232103) (Bull Run) + 0.115  (139685)
          (Occoquan River) + 12699 (Urban Runoff)
     S. = 68845 metric tons/year

Assuming the distribution of particle  sizes for  all  sources  are  essentially
the same and accounting for the fractions  (f) of material  that are  in  the
two different size ranges:

     S. = f, Px S. + f2 P2 S.

     S  = (0.84)  (1.0)(68845) +  (0.16)  (0.29) (68845)
      I*

     S  = 57830 ;  3194 = 61024 metric  tons
      Lr

          The volume  lost is -^"._••  = 65620 m3 /year  or  0.2  percent per
          year of the  reservoir volume.
5.7.4 Eutrophication

     What  would  be  the  consequences  to  eutrophication in  Occoquan Reservoir
of  instituting 90 percent  phosphorus removal  at the treatment plant?  If,  in
addition to  phosphorus  removal,  nonpoint source (NPS) phosphorus was reduced
by  90 percent by instituting  urban runoff and erosion control,  green belts,
and other  NPS controls,  would an improvement  in lake quality occur?
                                  165

-------
     Several assumptions concerning pollutants in the Occoquan
watershed-reservoir system are necessary in order to calculate the desired
annual loads:

     •   The unavailable phosphorus is adsorbed on sediment particles.
         Therefore, of the unavailable forms coming into Lake Jackson,
         only the fraction (1 - P  [Jackson]) is delivered to the
         Occoquan Reservoir;  Available P gets through Jackson.

     •   All of the phosphorus and nitrogen from the sewage treatment
         plants (STPs) is in available form;

     •   The output of STPs outside the Bull Run sub-basin is
         negligible compared to that of the STPs in Bull Run.  This is
         justified by the fact that during the period:  under study,
         the plants in Bull Run had a combined capacity several times
         larger than the few plants outside the sub-basin.

     •   The problems of eutrophication depend on  loading of
         phosphorus.

      By  applying  these  assumptions to the  nonpoint  source data  in  Tables
 V-18  and V-23 the total  load of each pollutant type may be calculated  (Table
 V-24).   The computation  for  the total annual  phosphorus load  in Occoquan
 Reservoir  is computed in the following  paragraphs.  First the quantity of
 total  phosphorus  coming  into the  Occoquan  Reservoir through  Lake  Jackson  is
 calculated  by:

   TP,  ,     = (1 - P         )  x  [Total P - Available  P]  +  Available P
     Jackson         cjackson

 The  total  phosphorus  from  Broad Run,  Cedar Run,  and Kettle Run  are summed
 and  the  available phosphorus  loads are  subtracted  to  give the  unavailable
 load.  This load  is multiplied  by the trap efficiency of  the lake,
 P  = 0.83,  which  yields the  unavailable load  passing  through.   This value,
 plus the available load,  is  an  estimate of the total  phosphorus entering
 Occoquan Reservoir from Lake Jackson.   This quantity  is 103.24  metric tons
 yr~ (Table V-24).  This value  is  aded  to the non-urban, nonpoint  source
                                    166

-------
                      TABLE V-23

  SEWAGE  TREATMENT  PLANT  POLLUTANT  LOADS  IN BULL RUN

          SUB-BASIN  IN METRIC TONS  PER
    Total Nitrogen      Total  Phosphorus       BODr
        108.0                  11.92           54.80
a;
  Averages for July 1974  - December  1977

  Source:  Northern Virginia Planning District Commission,
           March  1979.
                          167

-------
                     TABLE V-24

             CALCULATED ANNUAL POLLUTANT
             LOADS TO OCCOQUAN RESERVOIR
Load Source
Urban runoff
Sewage treatment
Rainfall
Other Nonpoint Source*
TOTAL
Nonpoint Source %
Point Source %

Total N
12.38
103.00
14.62
391.00
526.50
80
20
Metri
Ava i 1 . N
5.38
108.00
14.62
39.10
167.10
35
65
c Tons/Year
Total P
2.59
11.92
-
48.83
63.34
81
19

Avail .P
1.27
11.92
-
2.65
15.84
25
75

BODs
77.47
54.80
-
802.00
934.27 -
94
6
Used SDR of 0.115.
                          168

-------
loads from Bull  Run and areas adjacent to the Occoquan Reservoir (Table
V-18):
                     TPNPNU = 202-71 + I19-42 + 103.24
                            = 425.37 metric tons yr  .

This quantity is modified by the sediment delivery ratio.  The urban
nonpoint loads and STP (Table V-24) loads are added to complete the
calculation:

                     TP = (0.115) (425) + 2.59 + 11.92
                        = 63.3 metric tons yr" .

Similarly the SDR was applied to nonpoint sources of nitrogen and BOD5.  The
results of  load calculations are summarized in Table V-24.

     The calculated annual total phosphorus and nitrogen loads (Table V-24)
may be compared with the observed loads listed in Table V-25.  The  loads
observed are 1.5 to 6 times higher  than highest calculated loads for
nitrogen.   Comparison of loadings (kg/ha year) with literature values
suggest that Grizzard is most accurate (Likens e_t^ aj_. , 1977).

     The first method of predicting algal growth is known as the
                                                                        o
Vollenweider Relationship.  In the  graph of total phosphorus load (g m
yr  ) versus mean depth (m) divided by hydraulic retention time  (yrs)  (see
Figure V-24), areas can be defined  that roughly correspond to the
nutritional state of the impoundment.  For the Occoquan Reservoir,  the
values of the parameters are:
                 Lp .  (63.34)  x 10* g/yr „ g^ g m-2 yr-l
                        7.01  x 106 m2
                 L- =  „ 5-29 m  = on m vr-l
                 TW   (J.0586 yr   ^ m yr

     According  to  the Vollenweider  Relationship, Occoquan Reservoir is well
into the eutrophic  region for  loading  of total phosphorus.   Based on these
predictions a more  in-depth study of  the algal productivity  seems to be  in
order.
                                   169

-------
                                       TABLE V-25

                  OBSERVED ANNUAL POLLUTANT  LOADS TO OCCOQUAN  RESERVOIR
Mean Flow3'1
Rate Total Nitrogen Load
Period (m sec~ ) (metric tons year" )
10/74
7/75
7/76
- 9/75 24.7 805i;
- 6/76 24.0 1905C')
- 6/77 10.4 4763cj
Total Phosphorus Load
(metric tons year )
Il0b)
188c;
454c;
^Source:  USGS Regional Office, Richmond, Virginia.

i;Grizzard et al_., 1977


c;Northern Virginia Planning District Commission, March, 1979.
  Data gathered by Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Laboratory.

-------
     Solving for the phosphorus concentration  in  this  reservoir
                    Lp     1          9.04 g m"2 yr""1
                P =  —
                     Z    D+VcF     5.29mi(I7.1+VrTl)yr-1']
                       ? =  0.0305  g/m3  = 80.5 yg/1 .

     Calculated and observed pollutant concentrations are listed in Table
V-26.  The mean summer concentrations of phosphorus and nitrogen are closer
to the concentrations calculated than would be expected on the basis of the
comparison of annual loads.

     The ratio of nitrogen to phosphorus concentration in the reservoir can
be used to estimate which nutrient will  limit the rate of plant growth.  For
the Occoquan Reservoir, the N:P ratios are 10 to 1 for total  N to total P.
The calculated nutrient ratios and the N:P ratio of the observed data (11.0)
indicates that phosphorus is probably growth limiting.

     The available data also permits the estimation of the maximal primary
production of algae from the Chiaudani and Vighi Curve (Figure V-26).  The
theoretical phosphorus concentration should be about 0.08 g nf^ according to
calculations.  The maximal primary production of algae is found from Figure
                            ?     1
V-26 to be about 2500 mgC m   day    .  This level of algal production is
roughly the maximum production shown on the curve.  Both this result and the
Vollenweider Relationship suggest algal growth will contribute significantly
to the BOD load in the impoundment.

     •   Effects of  90 percent P removal at treatment plant on TP
         loading:

                    M  = 52.61 m ton/yr
                    q  = 90 m yr'1
                                   171

-------
                          TABLE  V-26

        CALCULATED AND OBSERVED MEAN  ANNUAL POLLUTANT
             CONCENTRATIONS IN OCCOQUAN RESERVOIR
                           Total  L       Available         Total
                         Nitrogen        Nitrogen       Phosphorus
                          (9 m 3)         (g m 3)         (g nf3)
Calculated (SDR = 0.115)   0.831           0.264           0.08
Observed Values
Mean
Max.
Min.
0.88
1.50
0.35
0.16
0.24
0.10
0.08
0.12
0.04
a)Assuming no removal processes for nitrogen.
b)Averages for April-October between 1973 and 1977.
  Source:  Northern Virginia Planning District Commission,
           March, 1979.
                               172

-------
         Although  improved,  we conclude that loading is still  too great
         according to Figure V-24.

     •   Effects of 90 percent STP  removal  of TP plus 90 percent NFS
         removal of TP:

                      M  = 6.334 m  ton/yr

                      .     6.334 x  106     n Qn    -2  -1
                      LP =  7.01xlOb  =  °-909m   y

         This would move Occoquan Reservoir into the bottom of the
         mesotrophic range.
         Lake concentrations of total P would be:

                       p =  	>    /	= 66  9

                                 n on
                       P = Tr
     Although the screening method shows marked improvement in Occoquan
eutrophication, 90 percent control of phosphorus NPS would be very
expensive.  Careful analysis of assumptions made in the screening method and
of control alternatives would be necessary before proceeding to map such a
control strategy.  Moreover, careful study of reservoir TP sources and sinks
and of algal productivity would be necessary.  The screening method has
served to illustrate the feasibility and potential value of such further
analysis.
5.7.5 Hypolimnetic DO Depletion

     Excessive nutrient loading plus inputs of BODs suggest that DO problems
in the hypolimnion could result.  We will use the data obtained in the first
three problems to determine the hypolimnetic DO.  These data are summarized
below.  All rate coefficients listed have already been corrected for
temperature.
                                    173

-------
Physical/Biological

     Area = 7.01 x 106 m2
     Volume = 3.71 x 107 m3
     Q = 20.09 m3 sec"1 = 1.74 x 10b m' day
     Depth to thermocline = 5.29 m (average depth)
     Interval of stratification (May to mid-September) = 138 days
     BOD loading = 934.27 106g . yr"1
     Algal loading = 11800 mgCnf  day'1
     BOD concentration =   934.27 x 106 g/yr       = 0.069 mg/1
                        3.71 x 10V x 365 days/yr
     Temperature = 10°C

 Rates  and  Input Values

     M    =  0.8                         kj    =  0.063 day"1
     S    =  2.67                        k      =   0.0378 day"1
     P    =  0.824  gC  m"2  day ~l         k^    =  0.0019 day"1
     D    =  5.29 m                      DO    =  11.3  mg/1
     TW  =  21.4 day                    t     =  138

      The simplified  model  used  to predict  hypolimnion dissolved  oxygen
 levels assumes  that  the  only  substantial dissolved  oxygen  sinks  are  water
 column and benthic deposit BOD  (Section  5.5).   Additionally,  all  sources  of
 oxygen,  photosynthesis,  etc.,  are neglected  in  the  hypolimnion after the
 onset of stratification.  Thus,  the procedure  requires  that
 pre-stratification levels of  BOD and dissolved  oxygen be  estimated in order
 to compute the post-stratification rate  of oxygen disappearance.   The
 pre-stratification concentration of water  column  BOD is determined first.  A
 simple mass  balance leads to  the following relationship,  if steady state
 conditions are assumed:
                                          k
                                           a
                                     174

-------
where
     C  =  steady state concentration of BOD in water column, mg/1
      SS                                                _o    _i
     k  =  mean rate of BOD loading from all sources g m   day
      a                i
     k  = -k  - kz -  -L
      b     s         Tw
where
     k  =  V /I - mean rate of BOD settling out onto impoundment
      s     s          ,
           bottom, day

     kj =  mean rate of decay of water  column  BOD, day"

     Q  =  mean export flow rate, m3  day"

      V  =   impoundment volume, m3

      V   =   settling  velocity, m  day"

      I   =   impoundment mean  depth,  m.

      The  BOD load to the  impoundment originates in two principal
 sources:   algal  growth  and tributary loads.  The algal BOD loading rate
 is computed from the expression:
                            k ,  .    .   = SMP/Z
                             a(algae)        '
      S  = stoichiometric conversion from algal biomass as carbon
           to BOD =2.67

      M  = proportion of algal biomass expressed as oxygen demand
                                         2
      P  = algal primary production, g m   day

      Since the Chiaudani and Vighi curve (Figure V-26) gives the
 maximal algal production, a correction should be made for the actual
 epilimnion temperature.  If the maximal rate occurs at 30 C and the
 productivity decreases by half for each 15°C decrease in temperature,
                                    175

-------
the algal production can be corrected for temperature  using  the

expression:


                     P    = P     x 1 047("1""^ C)
                     P(T)   P(30)  X 1>04/


According to the data in Table 1,  the epilimnion temperature during the

month prior to stratification is approximately 13°C.   Thus:


            P   
-------
Ideally these would be determined by using values of the physical
properties of the particles and the water in the settling velocity
equation, (V-6).  Because such data are lacking, a settling velocity of
0.2 m day   reported for detritus will be substituted.  The reported
values lie between 0 and 2 meters day" ,  with most values close to 0.2
m day"1 (Zison et al_. , 1978).  Then,

                           k  = 0.2 m day"V5.29 m = .0378 day"1
     The second constant comprising k,  is the first-order decay rate
constant for water column BOD.  Reported values of kj. vary widely
depending on the degree of waste treatement.  Zison e_t aj_. (1978)
presents data for rivers, but contains only two values for kx in lakes
and estuaries.  Both are ki = 0.2 day" .  Camp (1968) reports values
from 0.01 for slowly metabolized industrial wastes to 0.3 for raw
sewage.  Because there is considerable sewage discharge into the
Occoquan Reservoir, k: may be assumed to be in the upper range of these
values, between 0.1 and 0.3 or 0.15 day" .  Like the algal production
rate, ^ must be corrected for the water temperature.  In April, the
mean water temperature is about 11 C.
Then :
                  k  = 0.095 day"1 x 1.047 (n C"20
                     = 0.063 day"1
Finally, k,  is evaluated as follows:
             k,  = -0.0378 day"1 - 0.063 day"1	L.
              D                                 21.4 days
                = -0.148 day"1
Next, ka and kb may be substituted into the following equation to
obtain Css.
                                 177

-------
     Once the water column BOD concentration  is  known,  the  benthic  BOD
is computed from the expression:
                                  k  C   D
                                _  s  ss
where
     k4= mean rate of benthic BOD decay,  day'1.

     Values for the benthic BOD decay rate constant span a greater
range than those for water column BOD.  Camp (1968), however,  reports
values of ku very near 0.003 day   for a range of benthic depth from
1.42 to 10.2 cm (Table V-10).  Assuming this to be a good value, a
temperature-corrected value of k4 may be computed at an April
hypolimnion temperature of 10°C (Table V-17):

            k, = 0.003 day'1 x 1.047(10'2°) = 0.0019 day'1

Then,
               L   = 0-Q378 day -1 x 2.72 g m'3 x  5.29  m
                SS              0.0019 day"1

                   = 286 g m"2

     Prior to  stratification the  impoundment is assumed to be fully
mixed and saturated with oxygen.  During April, the hypolimnion
temperature  is 10°C.  Saturated water at this temperature contains 11.3
ppm  oxygen  (Table  V-ll).

     Finally,  the  dissolved  oxygen  level in  the hypolimnion may be
predicted during  the period  of stratification.  The applicable
expressions  are:
                                 178

-------
                       A      B       C       E  B
              AOL = (1.04)  [(53.1)  (0.231) - (1/53.1)]
              AOL - 12.74

                      F    E
              A0c = (1.7) (1) = 1.7
               Ot = 11.3 - 12.74 - 1.7

Therefore the hypolimnion is depleted of oxygen at the end of the
stratification period (138 days).   By selecting different conditions
for decay rates and for time of stratification a family of curves was
generated that can be compared with actual observations (Figure V-39).
As can be seen situations 3 and 4  (BOD decay of 0.3 later corrected for
                                                          O       1
temperature and a total BOD loading of 0.36 or 0.57 g . m     day  )
gave a reasonable fit of observed  data at the deepest station (Occoquan
Dam, 1973).

     Interpretation of the dissolved oxygen-time data at High Dam in
1970 presented in Figure V-39 is complicated by the introduction of
fresh oxygen after the onset of stratification.  Although a direct
comparison of oxygen depletion times is not possible, the rates of
oxygen level follows curve 2 of Figure V-39 very closely, while during
the second period of oxygen consumption the oxygen concentrations
closely match those of curve 1.  Since the reservoir is shallowest at
High Dam and the substantially lower than average flow rate in 1970
resulted in strongly stratified conditions, the oxygen depletion rates
in this case should be among the highest  likely to be observed in the
impoundment.  Curve 1 represents the fastest decay rates predicted by
the model.  Thus, the observed oxygen consumption times should be
greater than the lower limit predicted by the model in nearly all
cases.

     The above agreement of the observed with the predicted limits for
the range of oxygen depletion times  in Occoquan Reservoir implies that
the typical or average time must also fall within the predicted range.
Since it was for "average" conditions that the impoundment was modeled,
                                   179

-------
                           12r
                                                                              Curve     k,,,o, (day1)  Ka(g m" day")
oo
o
E
Ol
Z
in
                       x
                       O
                       n
                       O
                       (/)
                       u)
                       5
iY,L.-o-v^-
V  X ,v    \7
                                                                                          0 1
                                                                                          0.1
                                                                                          03
                                                                                          03
                                                                                           Dam (1970)
                                                                                       Occoquan Dam (1973)
                                                                              057
                                                                              03G
                                                                              057
                                                                              03G
                                                                                          •	•Calculated Points
                                                                                          Q	O Observed Points
                                            20
                                                    30       -10       50       60       70

                                                       TIME AFTER STRATIFICATION (DAYS)
                                                                      00
                                                                              90
                                                                           -XM
                                                                             100
                           FIGURE  V-39     DISSOLVED OXYGEN DEPLETION VERSUS TIME  IN  THE
                                             OCCOQUAN  RESERVOIR

-------
it may be concluded that the model does accurately describe the
behavior of the Occoquan Reservoir.
5.7.6 Toxicants

     It was not possible to obtain data on toxicants in Occoquan
Reservoir.  In order to provide a problem with some realism, published
data on a priority pollutant in another reservoir were obtained.  In
Coralville Reservoir, Iowa, commercial fishing was banned in 1976
because of excessive accumulation of dieldrin residues in flesh of
commercially important bottom feeding fish (Schnoor, 1981).  The
dieldrin arose from biodegraded aldrin, an insecticide in wide use
along with dieldrin before cancellation of registration of both
pesticides by USEPA in 1975.

     After 1976 there was steady diminution of dieldrin in the waters,
fish, and bottom sediments of Coralville Reservoir, until the late
1970's when dieldrin levels in fish flesh declined to less than 0.3
mg/kg (Food & Drug Administration guideline).  In 1979, the fishing ban
was rescinded.

     Using the screening methods and data abstracted from Schnoor's
paper, the potential dieldrin problem can be evaluated in Coralville
Reservoir.  Available and back-calculated data include the following
values:
               Reservoir                 Dieldrin

    TW  - 14 days = 336 hrs         kow = 305000
    Z   =   8 feet = 2.4 m          koc = 35600
    C .  = 0.05 yg/1 dieldrin        solubility in fresh water = 200 yg/1

    OC  = 0.05 (estimate)
    So  = 200 yg/1 (estimate)  =  200 x 10 "6  kg/kg
    P   = 0.9 (estimate)
                                   181

-------
     Assuming that conditions remained constant,  the steady state
concentration of dieldrin can be computed using the approach described
in Section 5.6 as follows:

                      C   =   C1n/ (1 + TW •   k)

where
     K = SED + B + k  + k  + kh-

     Evaluation of K depends on estimation of the separate rate
constants.  Information in Chapter 2 and in Callahan, et cfU (1977)
indicate that the biodegradation rate (B) in aquatic systems is
extremely small.  Similarly volatilization (k ) and hydroloysis (k,)
are negligible processes affecting the fate of dieldrin.  Photolysis
(k ) can be significant in some circumstances but the high turbidity  in
Coralville Reservoir indicates that minimal photolysis takes place.
Consequently, K = SED.  These assumptions are supported by Schnoor
(1981).

     Calculation of the sedimentation rate constant  (SED) is as
follows:
                SED  =  a x  D x K
                               P
                K    =  0.63  x  kow  x OC
                 P
                    =  0.63  x  305000  x 0.05

                    =  9610

                D    =  P  x 50  x  i
                               i
                               w
                D    =  0.9 x 200 x 10"6  x  ~ =  5.36  x
                                         336
                                    182

-------
               a   =!/(!+ kpS)

               S   = OC x 50 = .05 x 200 x 10"6 = 1 x 10"5
               a   = 0.912 x 5.36 x 10"5 x 9610
                   = 0.0047 m"1
     The steady state concentration of dieldrin in Coralville Reservoir
is estimated to be:

               C   = 0.05 yg/1  (1 + (0.0047 hr'1 x 336 hr))
               C   = 0.019 yg/1

This value is much greater than the present fresh water quality
criteria of 0.0023 dieldrin yg/1 (Federal Register:  79318-79379.
Nov. 28, 1980) and would indicate a serious potential problem in the
reservoir that would require significant action and study.

     Evaluation of bioconcentration supports this conclusion:

                              Y = BCF x C

If the default estimate is used (Section 5.6.1.6):

               log BCF = 0.75 log KOW - 0.23

                       = 3.88

                   BCF = 7642

                     Y - 7642 x 0.019 = 145 yg/kg fish flesh

This value would be  less than the FDA guideline.  However, two
published BCF values are available:  35600 from Chapter 2; 70000 from
Schnoor  (1981).  These values produce nuch higher tissue burdens, both
of which violate the FDA guideline:
                                   183

-------
                      Y  =  35600  x  0.019  =  676 yg/kg

                      Y  =  70000  x  0.019  =  1330  yg/kg

     In 1979,  it is estimated  that CI  =  0.01  (calculated  from
Schnoor, 1981).   Therefore,  assuming other conditions  are constant:

                       C = 0.01/ (1 + (.0047  x  336))

                                =  0.0039 yg/1

A value about double the water quality criterion.   Flesh  concentration would
be (using BCF = 70000):

                       Y = 70000 x 0.0039  = 270 yg/kg

This value (0.27 yg/kg)  would be less than the FDA guidelines of 0.3 yg/kg
and support the conclusion to lift the fishing ban.   Schnoor (1981) shows
the following measured data that can be compared  to the screening results:

                           1970                     1979
                     Water        f_ish_        Hater         FJ_sh
    Screening        0.019        1300        0.04          270
    Measured         0.015        1100        0.005         250
                                    184

-------
REFERENCES
Callahan, M., M. Slimak, N. Gabel, I. May, C. Fowler, R. Freed, P. Jennings,
      R. Durfee, F. Whitmore, B. Maestri, W. Mabey,  B. Holt, C. Gould,  1979.
      Water-Related Environmental Fate of 129 Priority Pollutants, Volumes
      I, II.  USEPA Report, EPA 440/4-79-029a,b.  NTIS Reports:   PB80
      204373, PB80 204381.  b.

Camp, T.R.,  1968.  Water and  Its  Impurities.  Reinhold Book Corporation.
      New York.

Chen, C.W.,  and  G.T.  Orlob, 1973.  Ecologic  Study of Lake  Koocanusa  Libby
      Dam.   Corps  of  Engineers, U.S.  Army,  Seattle  District.

Chiaudani, G.,  and M.  Vighi,  1974.   "The  N:P Ration and  Tests  with
      Selenastrurn  to  Predict  Eutrophication  in  Lakes", Water Research,
      871063^1069.

Cowen,  W.F.   and G.F.  Lee,  1976.   Phosphorus Availability  in Particulate
      Materials Transported by  Urban Runoff.  J.  Wat.  Pol.  Control Fed.
      48:580-591.

Dean, J.D.,  F.J.M.  Hudson,  and  W.B.  Mills,  1979.   Cheasapeake- Sandusky:
      Non-designated  208 Screening Methodology Demonstration.   Midwest
      Research  Institute,  Kansas  City,  MO.   USEPA Respt.  for  Env.   Res.
      Lab.,  Athens,  GA.   In Press.

Dillon, P.,  1974.   "A Manual  for  Calculating the  Capacity  of  a Lake  for
      Development",  Ontario Ministry of the Environment.

 Dillon, P.   and F. Rigler,  1975.   Journal Fisheries Research  Board of
      Canada. Vol.  32,  No.  9.

 Dorich, R.A., D.W. Nelson and L.E.  Sommers, 1980.  Algal Availability of
       Sediment  Phosphorus in  Drainage Water of the Black Creek Watershed.
       J.  Environ.  Qua").   ^.-557-563.

 Drury,  D.D., D.B.  Porcella, and R.A. Gearheart, 1975.  ThE effects of
      Artificial Destratification on the Water Quality and Microbial
       Populations  of Hyrum Reservoir.  PRJEW011-1.   Utah State University,
       Logan, UT.

 Grizzard,  T.J., J.P.  Hartigan,  C.W.  Randall, J.I. Kim, A.S. Librach, and
       M. Derewianka,  1977.   Characterizing  "Runoff Pollution-Land Use".
       Presented at MSDGC-AMSA Workshop, Chicago.   VPISU, Blacksburg, VA
       24061.  66 p.

 Hudson, R.J.M., and D.B. Porcella,  1980.  Selected Organic Consent  Deere
       Chemicals:  Addendum to Water Quality Assessment, A Screening Method
       For Non-designated 208 areas.   USEPA  Rept for  Env.  Res.   Lab, Athens,
       GA, In Press.

 Hutchinson, G.E.,  1957.  A Treatise on Limnology.   Vol.   I.   John Wiley &
       Sons,  Inc.  New York.  1015 p.
                                     185

-------
Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC),  Corps  of  Engineers,  1974.  Hater
      Quality for River-Reservoir Systems.   U.S. Army  Corp  of Engineers.

Jones, J.R.  and R.W. Bachmann,  1976.   Prediction  of Phosphorus and
      Chlorophyll Levels in Lakes.  JWPCF 48:2176-2182.

Larsen, D.P.  and H.T. Mercier,  1976.   Phosphorus  Retention Capacity of
      Lakes.  J. Fish.  Res.  Board Can.  331731-1750.:

Likens, G.E.  _et _al_., 1977.  Biogeochemistry of  a  Forested  Ecosystem.
      Springer-Verlog, New York.   146 p.

Linsley, R.K., M.A. Kohler, and  J.H.  Paulhus,  1958.  Hydrology for
      Engineers.  McGraw-Hill Book  Company, New  York.

Lorenzen, M.W. et &±., 1976.  "Long-Term  Phosphorus Model for Lakes:
      Application to Lake Washington:,  in Modeling Biochemical Processes  in
      Aquatic Ecosystems.  Ann Arbor  Science Publishers.pp 75-91.

Lorenzen, M.W., 1978.  "Phosphorus  Models  and  Eutrophication", in Press.

Lorenzen, M.W., and A. Fast, 1976.  A guide to Aeration/Circulation
      Techniques for Lake Management:   For  U.S.  Environmental Protection
      Agency, Corvallis, Oregon.

Lund, J., 1971.  Water Treatment  and  Examinatjon,  Vol.  19. pp 332-358.

Marsh, P.S., 1975.  Siltation Rates and Life Expectancies of Small Headwater
      Reservoirs in Montana.  Report  No.  65,  Montana  University Joint Water
      Resources Research Center.

Rast, W.  and G.F. Lee., 1978.  Summary Analysis of the  North American  (US
      Portion) OECD Eutrophication Project. EPA-600/3-78-008.  USEPA,
      Corvallis, Oregon 93770.  454 p.

Sakamoto, M., 1966.  Archives of Hydrobiology, Vol.  62.  pp 1-28.

Schnoor, J.L., 1981.  Fate and Transport  of Dieldrin  in  Coralville
      Reservoir:  Residues in Fish and Water Following a Pesticide Ban.
      Science.  211:804-842.

Stumm, W., and J.J. Morgan, 1970.  Aquatic  Chemistry.   Wiley-Interscience,
      New York.

Vollenweider, R.A., 1976.  Advances in defining  critical  loading  levels  for
      Phpsphorus in Lake Eutrophication.  Mem.  1st.   Ital. Idrobiol.   33:
      53-83.

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1974.  Climatic Atlas of  the United States,
      U.S.  Department of Commerce, Environmental  Sciences  Services
      Administration Environmental  Data Service, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1975.  National  Water Quality
      Inventory.  Report to Congress, EPA-440/9-75-014.

Zison, S.W., W.B. Mills, D. Deimer, C.W.  Chen, 1978.   Rates, Constants,  and
      Kinetics Formulations in Surface Water Quality Modeling.
      EPA-600/3-78-105.  USEPA,  Athens, GA  30605.   316 p.

                                         186

-------
GLOSSARY OF TERMS

     Significant variables are shown with typical  units.   Units must be
compatible or use conversion factors (Chapter 1).   Note that some symbols
are used for more than one term.
A           Lake surface area, m2 - sediment area, m2
a           Fraction of pollutant in solution = 1/(1+(K  x S)), unitless
                                   -1                  P
B           Biodegradation rate,  hr
B(T)        Biodegradation rate,  corrected for temperature T, hr~
BCF         Bioconcentration factor, unitless
Bo          Initial microbial biodegradation rate, uncorrected
              for temperature or nutrient concentration, hr~
C           Reservoir concentration at time, t, mg]
C           Initial concentration, mgl~
                                             -1
C           Concentration of phosphorus, ygPl
 P                                                                           _3
C           Total exchangeable phosphorus concentration in the sediments, g m
                                                           -1
C           Toxicant concentration sorbed on sediment, mg 1
                                                -1
C.          Concentration of BOD at time t, mg 1
                                              -1
C           Concentration in water phase, mg 1
 w                                                                  -1-3
C           Steady-state water column phosphorus concentration, mg 1  , g m
 W
C-          Steady state influent concentration, mg/1
 in                                            o
C           Steady-state water column BOD, g m
C t         Weight concentration
C  -j        Volumetric concentration
D           Depth, m
D           Discharge channel depth, ft
D           Sedimentation rate constant = P x S x Q/V, mg 1" day"
D           Dilution rate, day"
D1          Flowing layer depth,  ft
D"          Inflow channel depth, ft
D           Mean depth, m
D           Depth to thermocline, m
D,           Mean hypolimnion depth, m
Di          Depth at the ith cross-section, m
Do          Diffusivity of oxygen in water (2.1x10   m2 sec  , 20°C)
                                    187

-------
D           Weight density of a particle, Ib ft
                                           33
Dw          Weight density of water, Ib ft  , g cm
                                             2-1
DW          Pollutant diffusivity in water, m  sec
d           Number of days per time period, days
d           Particle diameter, cm
f           1 + (T  x K), unitless
                                                    -2
g           Acceleration due to gravity, 32.2 ft sec
ISD         Intensity of light at Secchi depth, relative units
I           Initial intensity of light at surface, relative units
K           Pollutant removal rate, = SED + B + k  + k  + k, ,  hr"1
                                              -1 v    P    n
K           Net rate of phosphorus removal, hr
K,          Specific rate of phosphorus transfer to the sediments,
              m yr~
l<2          Specific rate of phosphorus transfer from the sediments,
              m yr
K.,          Fraction of total phosphorus input to sediment that is available
              for the exchange process, unitless
K           Reaeration rate, hr
 a                                      -1
Ka.         Reaeration coefficient, m hr
K           Distribution coefficient between organic sediment  and water,
              unitless
K..          First order decay rate for water column BOD at 20°C, day"
K.          Benthic BOD decay rate at 20°C, day"1
 4                                                        -3   -1
K           Mean rate of BOD loading from all  sources, g m  day
                                                       -3   -1
K  (algae)  Algal  contribution to BOD loading rate, g m~ day
 cl
K  (trib)   Tributary or point source contribution to BOD loading rate,
 a               -3   -1
              g m  day x
Kb          - -«s  -KJ -(1/TW), day'1
k           Extinction coefficient, m
 e                             -1
k.           Hydrolysis rate, hr
                               -1
k           Photolysis rate, hr
k           Photolysis rate constant uncorrected for depth and turbidity
              of the lake, rf
kr          Mean rate of BOD settling out onto the impoundment bottom,

                                   -1
day"1
k           Volatilization rate,  hr
 v
                                  188

-------
koc         Organic carbon based partition coefficient,  unitless
kow         Octanol-water coefficient,  unitless
                              _?
L           Areal  BOD load, gm
                                   -2  -1
L           Phosphorus loading,  g m  yr
 P                                            -2
L           Steady-state benthic BOD load, g m
 ss                                              _j
M           Total  annual phosphorus loading, g yr
M           Proportion of algal  biomass expressed as an  oxygen
              demand (unitless)
MW          Molecular weight, g  mole"
OC          Sediment organic carbon fraction, unitless
AO          Dissolved oxygen decrease due to hypo!imnion BOD,
            mg I"1
AO.          Dissolved oxygen decrease due to benthic demand, mg  1
  L                                             _i
0           Dissolved oxygen at  time t = 0, mg 1
 o                                           i
Ot          Dissolved oxygen at  time t, mg 1
p           Sediment trapping efficiency, unitless 1 >_ P ;> 0
                                                 -2     -1
P           Primary productivity rate, g  Carbon  m   day
P           Total  phosphorus in  the water column, mg m~3
PI          Influent phosphorus, mg I"1
QI          Mean annual inflow,  m3 yr
Q           Mean Annual outflow, m3 yr~*
q           Hydraulic loading (Z/T J.myr'1
 s                                w
R           Reynolds number, unitless
r           Radius, ft
S           Stoichiometric conversion from algal biomass
              as carbon to BOD,  2.67, unitless
S           Input suspended organic sediment = OC x So,  mg 1"^
S-          Mass of sediment in  inflow per unit  time, mg 1~^
S           Input of suspended sediment, mg 1
S.          Sediment trapped, metric tons yr
SD          Secchi depth, m
SDR         Sediment delivery ratio, unitless
SED         Sorption and sedimentation rate (toxicant at
              equi1ibriurn with sediments), hr~*
T           Temperature, degrees centigrade
                                   189

-------
V           Lake or impoundment volume,  m3


V,.          Hypolimnion volume, 1
 H

V           Sediment volume,  m3


V           Terminal velocity of a  spherical  particle,  ft  sec"
 max

W           Wind speed, m sec"


Y           Tissue concentration of pollutant,


              ug kg"  fish  flesh


y           number of years


Z           depth, m


Z           mean depth, m

                                                  ~2
u           Absolute viscosity of water, Ib sec ft  ,  g sec cm  '


p           Mass density of a particle,  slugs ft
 P                                          0

p           Mass density of water,  slugs ft
 W

T           Mean hydraulic residence time (V/Q),days
                                   190

-------
                                 Chapter 6

                                 ESTUARIES
6.1  INTRODUCTION
6.1.1  General

     Estuaries are of primary social, economic, and ecologic importance to
America.  Forty-three of 110 of the Department of Commerce's Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Areas are on estuaries (DeFalco, 1967).  Estuaries
are the terminal or transfer point for essentially all waterborne national
and international commerce in this country, and biologically are more
productive on a mass per unit area basis than any other type of water body.
Essentially all conservative wastes and much of the nonconservative wastes
discharged into any inland stream in America eventually pass into an
estuary.  Yet these coastal formations on which there is such a demand for
services are less stable geologically than any other formation found on the
continent (Schubel, 1971).  Sedimentation processes, for example, are
filling, destroying, or at least altering all estuaries.  While this process
is always rapid in a geological sense, the actual length of time required
for complete estuarine sedimentation is a function primarily of the
stability of the sea level, the rate of sediment influx, and the
intra-estuarine circulation pattern (Schubel, 1971).  The instability,
variation, and complexity of estuaries make water quality assessment and
prediction especially difficult, yet the demands placed on estuaries require
a most active water quality management program.

     This chapter will describe a systematic approach which may be used to
provide estuarine water quality assessment and prediction.  Its purpose is
two-fold.  First, the planner will be provided the capability of making
elementary assessments of current estuarine water quality.  Second,
methodologies are presented by which the planner can evaluate changes in
water quality which might result from future changes in waste loading.
                                   191

-------
     Chapter 3 provided methodologies for assessing the waste load directly
entering an estuary.   Chapter 4 provided methodologies which can be used to
assess the water quality of a river or stream as it enters an estuary.  The
output of these chapters will provide information about present and
projected estuarine water quality which can be used to identify regions
having greatest water quality problems, water quality parameters of special
concern, and areas for which subsequent computer study is necessary.
Methods presented below comprise a screening tool which may be used by the
planner to focus attention on critical spatial regions and water quality
parameters.  These can then be fully assessed using computer models or other
techniques, as desired.
 6.1.2  Estuarine  Definition

      It  is  difficult  to  provide  a concise, comprehensive definition  of  an
 estuary.  The  basic elements  included  in most  current  definitions  are that
 an  estuary  is:

      a.   a  semi-enclosed coastal body  of water,

      b.   freely connected to  the open  sea,

      c.   influenced  by tidal  action,  and

      d.   a  water body in which sea  water  is  measurably diluted with
          fresh water  derived  from  land drainage (Pritchard, 1967;
          Pritchard and Schubel,  1971).

      The seaward end  of an estuary  is established by the requirement that an
 estuary be semi-enclosed.  Because  this boundary is normally defined by
 physical land features, it can be  specifically identified.  The landward
 boundary is not  as easily defined,  however.   Generally tidal influence in a
 river system extends further  inland than does salt intrusion.  Thus the
 estuary  is limited by the requirement that both salt and fresh water be
 measurably present.  Accordingly,  the landward boundary may be defined as
 the furthest measurable  inland penetration of sea salts.   The  location of
                                   192

-------
this inland boundary will vary substantially from season to season as a
function of stream flows and stream velocities and may be many miles
upstream from the estuarine mouth (e.g.  approximately 40 miles upstream on
the Potomac River, 27 miles on the James River, and approximately 16 miles
upstream for the small Alsea Estuary in Oregon) (Pritchard, 1971).  This
definition also separates estuaries from coastal bays (embayments) by the
requirement for a fresh water inflow and measurable sea water dilution.
6.1.3  Types of Estuaries

     While the above definition provides adequate criteria for segregating
estuaries from other major types of water bodies, it does not provide a
means to separate the various types of estuaries from one another.  The
variations in estuarine circulation patterns and resulting variations in
pollutant dispersion from estuary to estuary make classification a necessary
part of any water quality assessment.  Two basic estuarine classification
systems have been used  in recent years to accomplish estuarine subclass
separation:  a topographical  system and a physical  processes system (Dyer,
1973, Chapter 2 or  Ippen, 1966, Chapter 10).
 6.1.3.1   Topographical  Classification

      Under  a topographical  system,  estuaries  are  divided  into  four
 subclasses.   These  are  briefly described  below.

      a.   Drowned River  Valley (Coastal  Plain  Estuary).   These  estuaries
          are the result of  a recent (within  the  last 10,000 years)  sea
          level  rise which has kept  ahead  of  sedimentation processes at
          a  river's  mouth.  Such estuaries are,  quite literally,  rivers
          whose  lower basins have been  drowned by  the rising oceans.
          Coastal plain  estuaries are characteristically broad,
          relatively shallow estuaries  (rarely over 30 m deep)  with
          extensive  layers of recent sediment.
                                    193

-------
    b.  Fjord-like Estuaries.  These estuaries are usually glacially
        formed and are extremely deep (up to 800 m) with shallow sills
        at the estuarine mouth.  Fjord-like estuaries are restricted
        to high latitude mountainous regions and are not found in the
        United States outside of Alaska and Puget Sound in the state
        of Washington.

    c.  Bar-built Estuaries.  When offshore barrier sand islands build
        above  sea level and  form a chain between headlands broken by
        one  or more  inlets,  a bar-built estuary  is formed.  These
        estuaries are characteristically very shallow,  elongated,
        parallel  to  the coast,  and frequently are  fed by more  than  one
        river  system.  As  a  result bar-built estuaries  are usually
        very complex hydrodynamically.  A  number of examples  of
        bar-built estuaries  can be found along  the southeast  coast  of
        the  United  States.

     d.  Tectonic  Process  Estuaries.   Tectonic estuaries exist as the
        result of major  tectonic events  (movement of  tectonic plates
        with associated  faulting or  subsidence  and coastal  volcanic
        activity).   San  Francisco Bay is  a good example of  an American
        estuary of  this  type.

Based on this topographic classification  system, the vast majority of
American estuaries fall  into the drowned  river class.   As a result,  this
system is  not functional  for categorization of American estuaries.  The
classification system described below is  based on physical processes  and is
more useful.  Further, the parameters used in physical classification are
directly applicable  to estuarine pollution analysis.  Consequently, a
physical parameter classification system will be used for the water quality
assessment approach  to be presented.
                                  194

-------
6.1.3.2  Physical Process Classification

     Physical process classification systems are generally based on the
velocity and salinity patterns in an estuary.  Using these two parameters,
estuaries can be divided into three classes, each of which is of potential
importance to planners concerned with American coastal plain estuaries.  The
classes are:   stratified, partially mixed, and well mixed.

     The general behavior of salinity and velocity regimes in the three
types of estuaries has been described by a number of researchers
(Glenne, 1967, Duxbury,  1970, Pritchard, 1960, and Dyer,  1973, among others)
and  is  summarized below.

     a.  Stratified  (Salt Wedge) Estuary.   In  this type  of estuary,
         large fresh  water  inflows  ride over a salt water layer which
         intrudes  landward  along the  estuary bottom.   Generally there
         is  a  continuous inland  flow  in the  salt water layer  as some of
         this  salt water is  entrained  into  the upper  seaward-moving
         fresh water  flow.   Tidal  action  is  not  sufficient  to mix  the
         separate  layers.   Salinity (S) and  Velocity  (U) profiles  and  a
         longitudinal schematic  of this flow pattern  are shown  in
         Figure  VI-1.  The  Mississippi  River Estuary  is  usually a  salt
         wedge estuary.
          Well Mixed.  In a well mixed estuary, the tidal flow (or the
          tidal prism*) is much greater than the river outflow.  Tidal
          mixing forces create a vertically well mixed water column with
          flow reversing from ebb to flood at all depths.  Typical
          salinity and velocity profiles and a longitudinal flow
          schematic for a well mixed estuary are shown in Figure VI-2.
          As examples, the Delaware and Raritan River estuaries are both
          normally well mixed.
   *The  tidal  prism is that volume of water which enters an estuary
    during an incoming (flood)  tide and equals high tide estuarine
    volume minus low tide volume.
                                  195

-------
                                              SALINITY
     *l.etters cnrrcspond to cross sections
FIGURE  VI-1  TYPICAL MAIN CHANNEL SALINITY AND VELOCITY
              FOR  STRATIFIED  ESTUARIES
                          196

-------
 SURFACE
 BOTTOM
 SURFACE
 BOTTOM
c
o
a>
o
O
                     VELOCITY
                 C,D-
•jr >•
O i-


ll

-------
    c.  Partially Mixed.  Partially mixed estuaries lie between
        stratified  and well mixed  in terms of flow and stratification
        characteristics.  Tide-related flows in such estuaries are
        substantially greater  than river flows.   Significant  salinity
        gradients exist  as  in  fully stratified estuaries,  but are much
        less  steep.  While  velocity at all depths normally reverses
        with  ebb  and flood  tide  stages,  it is possible for net  inland
        flow  to  be  maintained  in the  lowest  layers.  Typical  salinity
        and  velocity profiles  and  a  longitudinal  schematic flow
        diagram  are shown in  Figure  VI-3.  There  are many partially
        mixed coastal  plain estuaries  in the United  States;  the lower
         James River Estuary is typical.

     Classification  primarily depends  on  the  river discharge at  the time of
classification.  Large  river flows result in  more  stratified estuaries while
low flow conditions  in  the same estuaries can lead to full mixing.   Thus the
classification of any single estuary is likely to  vary from season to season
as river flows vary.  As examples, many west  coast estuaries  are partially
mixed in winter when river flows are high and are well  mixed  in summer when
river flows are very low.
6.1.4  Po11u t ant F1ow  in  an Est uary

     The importance  of understanding  the basic types of estuarine  systems
may  be appreciated by  briefly  reviewing the general advective movements  of  a
pollutant  released into each of the  three  types  of  estuaries  (summarized
from Pritchard,  1960).  The associated  spatial and  temporal variability  of
pollutant  levels have  water system management  as well  as  water  quality
 implications.

      If  a  pollutant  flow  of density  greater  than the  receiving  water column
 is introduced  into  a salt wedge  type estuary,  the pollutant tends  to sink
 into the bottom salt water layer  and a portion can  be advectively  carried
 inland toward  the  head of the  estuary.   Frictionally  induced  vertical
 entrainment of the  pollutant  into the surface water flow is slow,  residence
 time of the pollutant is  high, and the time  required  to flush the pollutant
                                  198

-------
 SURFACE
 BOTTOM
 SURFACE
 BOTTOM
              I
              o
              O
VELOCITY
    0
a> u>
I U)
             SALINITY
     *Letters denote channel cross-sections
FIGURE  VI-3  TYPICAL  MAIN CHANNEL  SALINITY AND VELOCITY
              PROFILES FOR PARTIALLY  MIXED ESTUARIES
                           199

-------
from the estuary is also high.  Some  pollutants  which  are  sufficiently  dense
and stable remain  in or settle to the bottom  layer  of  water,  and  are  not
transported out of a salt wedge estuary.   Such constituents build  up  in the
estuarine sediment layer.

     Conversely, if a pollutant of  lower density than  the  receiving water
column is introduced into a salt wedge  estuary,  it  remains in  the  surface
layer and is readily flushed  from the system.  This is the case because
seaward flows strongly predominate  in this layer.

     At the opposite end of the estuary classification scale,  a pollutant
introduced into a  well mixed  estuary  is advectively transported in a  manner
independent of the pollutant's density.  Tidal forces  cause turbulent
vertical and lateral mixing.  The pollutant is carried back and forth with
the oscillatory motion of the tides and is slowly carried  seaward  with  the
net flow.

     Pollutants  introduced  into partially  mixed  estuaries  are dispersed in a
manner intermediate between the transport  patterns  exhibited  in well  mixed
and stratified estuaries.   Pollutant  transport  is density  dependent but
nevertheless involves considerable  vertical mixing.  Eventual  flushing  of
the pollutant from an estuary in this case depends  on  the  relative
magnitudes of the  net river outflow and the tidal seawater inflow.
 6,1.5  Estuarine Complexity and  Major  Forces

     Before outlining the complexities of estuarine systems,  a  brief  review
 of  the nomenclature used in this chapter will be helpful.   This information
 is  shown in Figure VI-4.  This  figure  shows top, side, and cross  sectional
 views of an estuary and indicates the  basic estuarine dimensions.
 Additionally, the relationship  between tidal elevation (or tidal  stage)  and
 surface water velocity is shown  in the upper right quadrant of  Figure VI-4.

     The complexities of estuarine hydrodynamics are evident  from even the
 brief qualitative descriptions  presented above.  Many variations  in  flow
 pattern and many of the forces  acting  on an estuarine water column have  been
                                    ?GO

-------
                            IOZ
   Mouth
CO

d


|_H
Z
m


j—i

m

co

o
m
Tl
o
    Head
                        O
                        m
                        <
                        rn
                     a) a>
                     Q Q
                     I!
                                TIDAL
                             VELOCITY
                                     ^-Ebb
                                              TIDAL
                                            ELEVATION

-------
omitted in order to permit a verbal description of the normally predominant.
phenomena, and it should be understood that the descriptions do not fully
account for the complexities of estuarine motion.  Estuarine circulation may
be conceived as a three-dimensional flow field with variations possible in
salinity  and velocity along the longitudinal, the vertical, and the lateral
axes.  As  a result of this complexity, and because an estuary  is a
transitional zone between fresh water and marine  systems, great variations
in a  number of major water quality and physical parameters  are possible.
For example:

      a.   pH.  Typical ocean pH  is  7.8 to 8.4.  Typically, rivers are
          slightly  acidic  (pH<7).   Thus the pH  can change  from  slightly
          acidic  to  basic  across an estuary with  resulting major changes
          in  chemical characteristics  of dissolved and  suspended
          constituents.   pH  variations from 6.8 to 9.25  across  an
          estuary  have  been  recorded (Perkins,  1974,  p.   29).

      b.   Salinity.   Over the  length of  an  estuary,  salinity varies from
          fresh  water levels (typically  less  than  1  ppt)  to  oceanic
          salinity levels (usually 32 ppt  to  34 ppt)*.   Moreover
          salinity at any given  location  in  an  estuary may vary
          substantially over one tidal  cycle  and  over the depth of  the
          water column  at any single point in time.   Salinity variations
          are especially significant in  estuarine calculations for a
          variety of reasons.   First, salinity distribution can be used
          to predict the distribution of pollutants;  second, salinity
          is a prime determinant of water density;  and third,
          variations in salinity affect other major water quality
          parameters.  For example, the saturated dissolved oxygen
          concentration normally diminishes by 2 mg/1 as  salinity increases
          from 0 to 35 ppt.

       c.  River Flow.  River flow  is a major determinant  of estuarine
           circulation and flushing characteristics.   Instantaneous  flow
           rates for  some western rivers vary by orders of magnitude from

   *opt represents parts per thousand by mass.  Sometimes the  symbol
    °/oo  is used.

                                    202

-------
          winter high flow to summer low flow periods  (Goodwin, e_t a_l_.,
          1970).  These differences in river flow result  in major
          variations in estuarine water quality characteristics.

      d.  Time.  Estuarine water quality parameters vary  over  several
          separate time scales.  First, variations occur  with  each tidal
          cycle over a period of hours.  Second, tidal cycles  vary in
          mean amplitude from spring (maximum amplitude)  to neap tides
          (minimum amplitude) every two weeks.  This  affects water
          quality since flushing characteristics are  in part dependent
          on the tidal prism which is, in turn, dependent on tide stage.
          Third, there are seasonal variations in river flow,
          temperature and waste loadings.

      The four factors just listed affecting the range and rate of variation
 of estuarine parameters pose part of the difficulty  in analyzing estuarine
 water quality.  In order to avoid large errors, both  small time increments
 and small spatial increments must be used.  This, in  turn, necessitates  a
 large number of individual calculations to fully analyze the  variation of
 even a single parameter over the estuary and sometimes requires the use  of a
 computer model.

      Further complicating the analytical process is  the  large number of
 independent forces acting on the estuarine water column  which should be
 considered.  This group includes (from Harleman and  Lee, 1969):

      a.  Ocean tides
      b.  Local wind stresses
      c.  Bottom roughness and bottom sediment types
      d.  Channel geometry
      e.  Coriolis forces'*
      f.  Nearby coastal features and coastal processes

*Coriolis  forces  reflect the effect of a rotating reference plane (the
 earth)  on particle motion.  The net  effect  is to cause a water  flow  to
 drift to  one  side as it propogates down a channel.  The same effect  tends
 to laterally  segregate fresh water flows  (moving from head to mouth) and
 salt water inflows (moving from mouth to  head) in an estuary and in  the
 northern  hemisphere to create a counterclock-wise flow pattern  with  fresh
 water to  the  right (looking from the head of the estuary toward the  mouth)
 flowing toward  the sea and salt water on  the left flowing toward the head
 of the  estuary.

-------
6.1.6  Methodology Summary

     A variety of techniques are presented in this chapter to assess water
quality in estuaries.  Table VI-1 summarizes the techniques and indicates if
they are applicable to one-dimensional  (well-mixed)  or two-dimensional
(vertically stratified) estuaries.   Many of the techniques can be applied to
conventional or toxic pollutants.  If decay rates for toxic pollutants  are
needed, Chapter 2 can be used.

     It is redundant to describe in detail each method at this point in the
chapter, because, the procedures are presented later.  As a general
statement, however, most of the methods for prediction of water quality
apply to continuous, steady-state discharges of pollutants.  The discharges
can be located anywhere within the estuary, from head to mouth.  Multiple
sources of pollutants can be analyzed by applying the method of
superposition, which is illustrated subsequently.

     Although no single sequence of calculations must be followed to use the
methodology, Figure VI-5 shows a suggested procedure.  It is often useful to
begin by classifying the estuary by season to find out when it is well  mixed
and when it is stratified.  If the estuary is never well mixed, then the
tools listed in Table VI-1 pertaining to one-dimensional estuaries should
not be used.

     Users are cautioned that the methods in this chapter are of a
simplified nature, and consequently there are errors inherent in the
calculations.  Additionally, inappropriate data can produce further
systematic errors.  Data used should be appropriate for the period being
studied.  For example, when salinity profiles are needed, they should
correspond to steady flow periods close to the critical period being
analyzed.

     Even though the methods presented in the chapter are amenable to hand
calculations, some methods are more difficult to apply than others.  The
fraction of freshwater and modified tidal prism methods are relatively easy
to apply, while the advective-dispersion equations offer greater
computational challenge.  Since the advective-dispersion equations require
numerous calculations, the user might find it advantageous to program the
methods on a hand calculator  (e.g.  TI-59 or HP-41C).
                                    204

-------
                                              TABLE  VI-1
              SUMMARY  OF  METHODOLOGY  FOR  ESTUARINE  WATER QUALITY  ASSESSMENT
      Calculations
                    Methods
                                                    Type of Estuary Applicable*
 Estuarine Classification
 Flushing Time
 Pollutant  Distribution
 Thermal  Pollution
 Turbidity
 Sedimentation
•  Hansen and Rattray
•  Flow ratio
   Fraction of freshwater
   Modified tidal  prism
   Fraction of freshwater  (conservative
   pollutants)1"
   Modified tidal  prism  (conservative or
   first-order decay pollutants)'"
   Dispersion-advection  equations
   (conservative,first-order  decay pollutants,
   and dissolved oxygen)
   Pritchard's Box Model (conservative
   pollutants)"
   Initial  dilution
   Pollutant concentration at completion
   of initial  dilution (conservative
   pollutants,  PH,  dissolved oxygen)
   Farfield distribution (conservative and
   first-order pollutants, and dissolved
   oxygen)
   AT of water passing through condenser
   Maximum  discharge temperature
   Thermal  block criterion
   Surface  area criterion
   Surface  temperature criterion
   Turbidity at completion of initial
   dilution
   Suspended solids at the completion of
   initial  dilution
   Light attenuation and turbidity
   relationship
   Secchi disk and turbidity  relationship
   Description of  sediment movement
   Settling velocity determination
   Null  zone calculations
one- or two-dimensional
one- or two-dimensional
one-dimensional
one-dimensional

one-dimensional

one-dimensional

one-dimensional

two-dimensional
one- or two-dimensional

one- or two-dimensional

two-dimensional
not applicable
not applicable
one- or two-dimensional
one- or two-dimensional
one- or two-dimensional

one- or two-dimensional

one- or two-dimensional

one- or two-dimensional
one- or two-dimensional
one- or two-dimensional
one- or two-dimensional
two-dimensional
*0ne dimensional  means  a  vertically well mixed system.   A two dimensional  estuary  is vertically stratified.
 These  methods apply to either conventional or toxic pollutants.
                                               205

-------
                    CLASSIFY ESTUARY
< tSTUAHY VERTICALLY > 	
^\ "iXED s'
T YES
CALCULATE FLUSHING
TIMES

V
PREDICT POLLUTANT DISTRIBUTIONS
USING ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING METHODS,
_ _
(CONSERVATIVE POLLUTANTS)
MODIFIED TIDAL PRISM
METHOD (CONSERVATIVE AND
TOXIC POLLUTANTS)
ADVECTlQN-DlSPERSlON
LOCATIONS (CONSERVATIVE AND !
TOXIC POLLUTANTS AND
j DISSOLVED QXYG6N)
1



No ./'is rue POLLUTANT ^\^^
* *X^^ Ul SLMAWGtL) 'HKOlKjH S*
^^^ AN OUTFALL .s
[YES
V _._
COMPUTE CRITICAL
INITIAL DILUTIOMS

^f
FOLLOWING INITIAL DILUTION,
CONCENTRATIONS, rt',
DISSOLVED OXYGEN, ETC.


SOLIDS AHD Toulon-* foLLOvti«r,
INITIAL DILUTIOM
T
PREDICT FARFIELD POLLUTANT AND
D!SSOv,VED OXYGEH CONCENTRATIONS



	 m tSTUARY IS \
I STRATIFIED J
CALCULATE CONSERVATIVE POLLUTANT
DISTRIBUTION USING PRITCHARD'S
Box MODEL






1 f


No s<^ Is SOURCE ^x^^
V
PREDICT TEMPERATURF
DISTRIBUTION
fel
w^

PREDICT TURBIDITY
IMPACTS
V
PREDICT SEDIMENTATION

^ 	
f END OF St-RFENING \
I CALCULAT IONS J

^j
SELECT MARIIINAL AND
CRITICAL AREAS FOR 	 ^
FURTHER STUDY



























PERFORM I
DETAILED l-
ANALYSIS j
FIGURE VI-5  SUGGESTED  PROCEDURE TO PREDICT ESTUARINE  WATER QUALITY
                                206

-------
6.1.7  Present Water-Quality Assessment

     The first step in the estuarine water quality assessment should be the
evaluation of existing water quality.  Before an analysis of the impact of
future waste load changes is made, the planner should know whether or not
current estuarine water quality is acceptable, marginal, or substandard.

     By far the best way to assess existing water quality is to measure it.
The planner should attempt to locate other agencies which might have already
collected acceptable samples and/or data.  Candidate organizations include
the United States Geologic Survey, the U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers, state
water quality control and monitoring agencies, and engineering and
oceanographic departments of local colleges and universities.  If such data
cannot  be located, a data collection program could be undertaken.  If at  all
possible, high tide, and especially  low  tide  in-situ measurements and
samples should be collected along the  full length of the estuary's main
channel and  in all significant  side  embayments.  Analyses should then be
made  in an appropriate  laboratory facility.   If funds for such data
collection efforts are  not  available,  the use  of a mathematical estimation
of  existing  water quality  is an alternative.   The methods presented  in
subsequent sections  and applied to  the existing discharges  can be used.
However,  it  should be remembered  that  actual  data are preferable  to  a
mathematical  estimate of existing water  quality.
 6.2  ESTUARINE CLASSIFICATION
 6.2.1   General
      Section 6.1.7 discussed making a first estimate of current estuarine
 water quality.   This section begins a calculation methodology designed to
 look at the effect of future changes in waste loading patterns.

      The goal of the classification process presented below is to predict
 the applicability of the hand calculations to be presented.  The
 classification process is normally the first step to be taken in the
                                   207

-------
calculation procedure since it reveals which techniques can be applied.
6.2.2  C1 a^ssification Methodo 1ogy

     The classification system recommended for purposes of hand calculations
is based on salinity and velocity profiles within the estuary.  As both of
these parameters vary seasonally and spatially for each estuary, their use
will result in a range of values rather than in one single classification
number.  The following section will describe in detail the procedure for use
of this system, and show examples of the procedure.
6.2.3  C a 1 c u_1 a t i on P r o c e d u re

     Hansen  and Rattray (1966) developed an estuarine classification system
using both salinity stratification and water circulation patterns  (based on
water column velocities).  This procedure involves the calculation of values
for  two parameters at various points along the main estuarine channel and
the  plotting of these intersections on the graph shown in Figure VI-6.
Figure VI-7  shows plots made by Hansen and Rattray for various estuaries at
a  single point in time.  It should be noted that each estuary is not
represented  by a point but by a line connecting the points  calculated for
the  mouth and head areas.

     The  area designations  (e.g.   la, Ib, 2b) on Figure  VI-6 were  related  by
Hansen and Rattray to previously  used classification  titles (e.g.
stratified,  well mixed).   In general, area la corresponds to well  mixed
estuaries.   Area Ib has the water circulation pattern of a  well mixed
estuary yet  shows  increased stratification.  Areas  2  and 3  correspond to the
 "partially mixed"  class of  estuaries with area  3 showing more significant
 lateral circulation within  the estuary.   Designations 2a/b  and  3a/b,  as was
true of la and  Ib,  indicate  increasing degrees  of  vertical  stratification.
Type 3b  includes fjord-type estuaries.   Area 4  represents highly  stratified,
 salt wedge estuaries.
                                   208

-------
       Increasing longitudinal circulation
  AS  „:!
                                                            t
FIGURE  VI-6   ESTUARINE  CIRCULATION-STRATIFICATION DIAGRAM
               10
            O
              10
              io'2h
                 115
         (Station code:  M, Mississippi River mouth; C, Columbia
         River estuary;  J, James River estuary; NM, Narrows of
         the Mersey estuary, JF, Strait of Juan .de Fuca;  S,
         Silver Bay. Subscripts h and 1 refer to high and low
         river discharge; numbers indicate distance (in miles)
         from mouth of the James River estuary.                   t


  FIGURE VI~7    EXAMPLES OF ESTUARINE CLASSIFICATION  PLOTS

                  (FROM HANSEN AND  RATTRAY, 1966)
                              209

-------
6.2.4  Stratification-Circulation Diagram Interpretation

     The closer an estuary falls to the lower left hand corner of a
stratification-circulation diagram the more vertically and laterally
homogeneous it is.  On the stratification-circulation diagram (Figure VI-6),
two types of zonal demarcation can be seen.  First are the diagonally
striped divisions between adjacent estuarine classifications used by Hansen
and Rattray to indicate a transitional zone between separate
classifications.  The second is a wide solid band arching around the lower
left corner of the diagram.  Estuaries falling primarily inside of this band
(to the lower left of the band) are those for which the one dimensional
calculation methods may be applied to obtain reasonably accurate results.
If an estuary falls outside of this band, the planner should use only the
methods presented which pertain to stratified estuaries, or use computer
analyses.  Within the band is a borderline or marginal zone.  Calculations
for one-dimensional estuaries can be used for estuaries falling principally
within  this zone, however the accuracy of the calculations will be
uncertain.

     The  two  parameters used with the  stratification-circulation diagram  are
described below:

     a.   Stratification Parameter:   The  stratification  parameter  is
          defined  as:
                                                     AS
                          Stratification  Parameter =  =—           (VI-1)
                                                     *o
          where

                AS = time  averaged difference in  salinity between
                     surface  and bottom water (S.  . .    - S    Ł   \
                                              v  bottom    surface),
                     ppt
          and,

                SQ = cross-section mean salinity, ppt
                                  210

-------
     The diagramatic relationship of these values is shown in Figure
VI-8.

     b.  Circulation Parameter:  The circulation parameter is defined
         as:
                                                  U
                          Circulation parameter = rr-             (VI-2)
                                                  Uf
         where
               U  = net non-tidal sectional surface velocity  (surface
                    velocity through the section averaged over a tidal
                    cycle) measured in ft/sec.  See Figure VI-8 for  a
                    diagramatic  representation of Us-
          and,
                U-  = mean  fresh  water velocity through  the section,
                     ft/sec.

      In equation form,

                                   Uf=-f                             (VI-3)
          where

                          R  = fresh water (river) inflow rate, ft3/sec,

          and

                A   = cross-sectional area of the estuary through the point
                     being used to calculate the circulation pattern and
                     stratification  parameters based on a mean tide surface
                     elevation, ft2.

      If good cross-sectional area data are not available, cross-sectional
 profiles can be approximated from the U.S.Geological  Survey (USGS) coastal  series
 topographical maps, or, more recently, from  NOAA National Ocean Survey charts.
                                   211

-------
CIRCULATION  PARAMETER

      Velocity *
                                                         STRATIFICATION PARAMETER

                                                           Salinity  *

                                                               i/  AS
                  u  -
                  Uf"  A
               * Both velocity and salinity values for these profiles  are averaged over a tidal
                 cycle (net velocity and salinity) rather than being instantaneous values.  Of
                 the two the stratification parameter is much less sensitive  to variations over
                 a tidal cycle and can be approximated by mean tide values for salinity. Surface
                 velocity (U } must be average over a tidal cycle.
FIGURE  VI-8    CIRCULATION AND  STRATIFICATION  PARAMETER  DIAGRAM
                                         212

-------
The circulation and stratification parameters should be plotted for high and
low river flow periods and for stations near the mouth and head of the
estuary.  The area enclosed by these four points should then include the
full range of possible instantaneous estuary hydrodynamic characteristics.
In  interpreting the significance of this plotted area, by far the greater
weight  should be given to the low river flow periods as these periods are
associated with the poorest pollutant flushing characteristics and the
lowest  estuarine water quality.  The interpretation of the
circulation-stratification diagrams will be explained more fully after  an
example of parameter  computation.
                                 EXAMPLE  VI-1
           Calculation  of  Stratification  and  Circulation  Parameters

      The estuary for this example is  the Stuart  Estuary  which  is  shown  in
 Figure VI-9.   The estuary is 64,000 feet long,  is located on  the  U.S.   west
 coast, and is fed by the  Scott River.   Two stations were selected for
 parameter calculation  (A  and B) with  station A  located on the  southern  edge
 of the main channel  6,500 feet from the estuary's mouth  and station B  in
 center channel 47,500 feet from the mouth (16,500 feet from the head of the
 estuary).

      Necessary salinity data were obtained from the coastal engineering
 department of a nearby university.  USGS gage data were available for  river
 flow, and, as a result of its own dredging program, the local  district
 office of the U.S.  Corps of Engineers could provide cross-sectional
 profiles in the approximate areas of  both stations.  The cross-sections are
 labeled (1) and (2)  on Figure VI-9.  The mean low tide depth reading on NOAA
 Coastal charts was used to verify Corps data.  Current meters were tied to
 buoy channel markers at A and B to provide velocity data.  The information
 obtained from these various sources is shown in graphical form in
 Figure VI-10.
                                 213

-------
OCEAN
              FIGURE  VI-9   THE STUART ESTUARY
                          214

-------
        S(%o) AT MEAN TIDE
   Surface
   Bottom
          B
          c
     Flood
  (FT/SEC)
               10
  15
\B
35
                         2000
                                         1700

                                 -2 Years Ago
                                    -Last Year
                                      -Average
                             J  F M  A M  J  Id lA
                             MONTHS
                             * Monthly Average Discharge Rates
                                                                   0 N  D
                   WINTER _
                                                               SUMMER
     CROSS SECTION OF A
                               N
                       CROSS SECTION OF

                      s
                                       N
FIGURE  VI-10   STUART ESTUARY DATA  FOR CLASSIFICATION CALCULATIONS
                                215

-------
The calculations proceed as follows:
a.  Stratifiction Parameter:
                                         STATION
         Jbp_ttpm __  surface
             -—s --
33 - 30 . gc
11 R

31.5-24.2 ,,
27.8 " ----
14.5 - 10.5 „
" 1 7 Ł.' " •3t

4 - 2'1 - 58
3.25 " —
ci r-if-trD


1 1 1 MTTD

b.   Circulation  Parameter

     1.   Calculate A^'s using cross sectional information on Figure
         VI-10

         Aa = (630 ft) (20 ft) (%) + (630 ft) (20 ft)  +  (1590  ft)
         (20 ft)  (Jg) = 34,800 ft2

         Ab = (2580 ft) (16 ft)  (h) +  (1720  ft)  (16)  (h)  =   34,400
         ft2

     For most cross-sections  it  is advisable to  use  more finely
     divided segments  than  in the  simple  example above in order to
     reduce the error  associated with  this  approximation.  The
     method for this  calculation,  however,  is identical  regardless
     of the number  of  regular segments used.

     2.  Calculate  U^'s  (with R  and A^  values obtained from Figure
         VI-10)                          STAT.OH
550 ft3/sec „ . rBj.]0-2,,,,e..

3.48xl
-------
        3.  Calculate
 Si
Jf
            Us values  are read from Figure VI-10.  The precise value
            for Us  is  the integral of  the velocity curve  (area under
            "ebb" velocity  curve minus the area  under the "flood"
            velocity  curve)  divided by the elapsed time period  (length
            of one  tidal cycle).   If the elapsed time for flood  flow
            at a  station is  only slightly below  the  elapsed  time for
            ebb flow  Us may be approximated  as
            (uebb(max) - uflood(max)
                                  STATION
. 0.15 ft/sec . , 5
1.58xJO"2ft/sec iii
0.2 ft/see . 3 ,
5.17xlO~Zft/sec ~
0.3 ft/sec ._
1.60x)0"'ft/$ec
0.* ft/iec . ,
5. Z3xlO ft/see

SUtVKR


     The circulation-stratification plots for the Stuart Estuary are shown
in Figure VI-11 with points As (station A, summer value), Aw (station A,
winter Value), Bs (station B, summer value), and BW (station B, winter
value).

     As indicated, this estuary shows a significant amount of vertical
stratification (especially at station A) but little evidence of major
lateral non-homogeneity.
                            END OF EXAMPLE VI-1
                                  217

-------
  AS
                             Uf
FIGURE VI-11  ESTUARINE CIRCULATION-STRATIFICATION DIAGRAM
                          218

-------
     Turning to Figure VI-11, the Stratification-Circulation diagram for the
Stuart Estuary, it is apparent that this estuary lies principally within the
marginal area.  Moreover, the low flow classification (line A -B ) also lies
                                                             o  j
primarily within the marginal area.  Thus, the planner for the Stuart
Estuary should calculate an additional criterion (see below) to help
determine the suitability of using the calculation procedures for well mixed
estuaries.  If the Stuart Estuary plotted more predominately below the
marginal zone, the planner could proceed with flushing time calculations
since the estuary would then meet the well mixed classification criteria.

     It should be noted that the data for the Stuart Estuary produced a
fairly tight cluster of data points.  As can be seen in Figure VI-12, the
salinity profiles for one west coast estuary (the Alsea River and Estuary
along the central Oregon coast) vary considerably more from season to season
than those  of  the Stuart Estuary.  This  increased variation would produce a
far greater spread  in the summer and winter AS/S0 parameter values.
 6.2.5   Flow Ratio  Calculation

      If application  of the  above classification  procedure  results  in  an
 ambiguous  outcome  regarding estuary classification,  another  criterion should
 be applied.  This  is the flow  ratio calculation.   Schultz  and  Simmons (1957)
 first  observed the correlation between  the flow  ratio  and  estuary  type.
 They defined the flow ratio for an  estuary as:
                                        R
                                    F =-                             (VI-4)
 where

      F  = the flow ratio,

      R  = the river  flow measured over one tidal cycle (measured in m3
           or ft3 )

 and
                                   219

-------
  I-'
  U-
  Q.
  Ld
  Q
         25 15
       0


       10


       20
             '
 ALSEA  RIVER



S(%o) AT HIGH TIDE


 0
         WINTER-Feb. 9,1968


                   20
            33  30 2511510 5
         SPRING-May 9,1968
                 33   30 25  20    15    10  5    0
         SUMMER-Aug. 9,1968
         0  I  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 II  12 13 14

                     MILES UPSTREAM
FIGURE VI-12  ALSEA  ESTUARY SEASONAL  SALINITY
               VARIATIONS  (FROM GIGER,  1972)
                      220

-------
     P  = the estuary tidal prism (in m3 or ft3)

     Thus the flow ratio compares the tidally induced flow in an estuary
with the river induced flow.  Schultz and Simmons observed that when this
ratio was on the order of 1.0 or greater, the associated estuary was
normally highly stratified.  Conversely, ratios of about 0.1 or less were
usually associated with very well-mixed estuaries and ratios in the range of
0.25 were associated with partially mixed estuaries.  A flow ratio of 0.2 or
less warrants inclusion of the estuary in the hand calculation process for
one dimensional estuaries.  Flow ratios in the range 0.2 to 0.3 should be
considered marginal.  Estuaries with flow ratios greater than 0.3 should not
be included  in the one-dimensional category.
                                EXAMPLE VI-2
                Calculation of the Flow Ratio for an Estuary

The following data apply  to the Patuxent Estuary, Maryland:

      R,  total river  discharge over one
                          tidal cycle  = 1.42 x 105m3
                                           (low  flow)
                                  and   3.58 x 106m3
                                           (high flow)
      P,  estuary tidal  prism volume    = 3.51 x  107m3

The flow ratios for  the Patuxent  Estuary at low and high  river flows  are
thus:
                                           5  3
                                    1.42xl05 m
                                    3.51x10'
                        F          -  -           a o 10
                         high flow   3.51xl07 m3
                                    221

-------
Values of F<0.1 are usually associated with well mixed estuaries.  The F
values calculated above indicate a well mixed estuary.  However, historical
data indicate the Patuxent River Estuary is partially stratified at moderate
and high river flows.
                            END OF EXAMPLE VI-2
     When tidal data are not available,  NOAA coastal  charts may be used to
estimate the difference between mean high tide and mean low tide estuary
surface areas.  As can be seen in the cross-section diagram in Figure VI-13
the estuarine tidal prism can be approximated by averaging the MLT and MHT
surface areas and multiplying this averaged area by the local  tidal  height.
Mean tidal heights (approximately 1 week before or after spring tides)
should be used for this calculation.  As indicated in Figure VI-13,  the
estuary can be conveniently subdivided into longitudinal sections for this
averaging process, to reduce the resulting error.   Table VI-2  lists  tidal
prisms estimated for many U.S.  estuaries.  These  values may be used as an
alternate to tidal prism calculations.
6.3 FLUSHING TIME CALCULATIONS
6.3.1 General

     Flushing time is a measure of the time required to transport a
conservative pollutant from some specified location within the estuary
(usually, but not always, the head) to the mouth of the estuary.   Processes
such as pollutant decay or sedimentation which can alter the pollutant's
distribution within the estuary are not considered in the concept of
flushing time.
                                     222

-------
          Mean Tide-
                                 MHT Surface'
                               /-MLT Surface*
    X
  TIDAL

  HEIGHT**
                                  .,,,...
 P. (section i) = section Length x tidal height  x  I
                                              /MHT width + MLT  width \
P  estuary
                      for all sections
 * Widths  obtained from NOAA tide table for the area

 **Avai Table from local Coast Guard Stations
FIGURE VI-13   ESTUARY  CROSS-SECTION FOR TIDAL  PRISM CALCULATIONS
                                   223

-------
              TABLE  VI-2
 TIDAL PRISMS  FOR  SOME  U.S.  ESTUARIES
(FROM O'BRIEN,  1969  AND JOHNSON,  1973)
Estuary
Plum Island Sound, Mass.
Fire Island Inlet, N.Y.
Jones Inlet, N.Y.
Beach Haven Inlet (Little
Egg Bay), N.J.
Little Egg Inlet (Great
Bay), N.J.
Brigantine Inlet, N.J.
Absecon Inlet (before
jetties), N.J.
Great Egg Harbor Entr, N.J.
Townsend Inlet, N.J.
Hereford Inlet, N.J.
Chincoteague Inlet, Va.
Oregon Inlet, N.C.
Ocracoke Inlet, N.C.
Drum Inlet, N.C.
Beaufort Inlet, N.C.
Carolina Beach Inlet, N.C.
Stono Inlet, S.C.
North Edisto River, S.C.
St. Helena Sound, S.C.
Port Royal Sound, S.C.
Calibogue Sound, S.C.
Wassaw Sound, Ga.
Ossabaw Sound, Ga.
Sapelo Sound, Ga.
St. Catherines Sound, Ga.
Coast
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic

Atlantic

Atlantic
Atlantic

Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Tidal Prism (ft3)
1.32 x 109
2.18 x 109
1.50 x 109
1.51 x 109

1.72 x 109

5.23 x 108
1.65 x 109

2.00 x 109
5.56 x 108
1.19 x 109
1.56 x 109
3.98 x 109
5.22 x 109
5.82 x 108
5.0 x 109
5.25 x 108
2.86 x 109
4.58 x 109
1.53 x 1010
1.46 x 1010
3.61 x 109
8.2 x 109
6.81 x 109
7.36 x 109
6.94 x 109
                    224

-------
TABLE  VI-2    (Cont.)
Estuary
Doboy Sound, Ga.
Altamaha Sound, Ga.
Hampton River, Ga.
St. Simon Sound, Ga .
St. Andrew Sound, Ga.
Ft. George Inlet, Fla.
Old St. Augustine Inlet,
Fla.
Ponce de Leon, Fla.
(before jetties)
Delaware Bay Entrance
Fire Island Inlet, N.Y.
East Rockaway Inlet, N.Y.
Rockaway Inlet, N.Y.
Masonboro Inlet, M.C.
St. Lucie Inlet, Fla.
Nantucket Inlet, Mass.
Shinnecock Inlet, N.Y.
Moriches Inlet, N.Y.

Shark River Inlet, N.J.
Manasguan Inlet, N.J.
Barnegat Inlet, N.J.
Absecon Inlet, N.J.
Cold Springs Harbor
(Cape May), N.J.
Indian River Inlet, Del.
Winyah Bay, S.C.
Charleston, S.C.
Savannah River (Tybee
Roads) , Ga.
Coast
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic

Atlantic

Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic

Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic

Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic

Tidal Prism (ft3)
4.04 x 109
2.91 x 109
1.01 x 109
6.54 x 109
9.86 x 109
3.11 x 108
1.31 x 109

5.74 x 108

1.25 x 1011
1.86 x 109
7.6 x 108
3.7 x 109
8.55 x 108
5.94 x 108
4.32 x 108
2.19 x 108
1.57 x 109
8.46 x 10
1 .48 x 108
1.75 x 108
6.25 x 108
1.48 x 109
6.50 x 108

5.25 x 108
3.02 x 109
5.75 x 109
3.1 x 109

    225

-------
TABLE  VI-2   (Cont.)
Estuary
St. Marys (Fernandina
Harbor), Fla.
St. Johns River, Fla.
Fort Pierce Inlet, Fla.
Lake Worth Inlet, Fla.
Port Everglades, Fla.
Bakers Haulover, Fla.
Captiva Pass, Fla.
Boca Grande Pass, Fla.
Gasparilla Pass, Fla.
Stump Pass, Fla.
Midnight Pass, Fla.
Big Sarasota Pass, Fla.
New Pass, Fla.
Longboat Pass, Fla.
Sarasota Pass, Fla.
Pass-a-Grille
Johns Pass, Fla.
Little (Clearwater)
Pass, Fla.
Big (Dunedin) Pass, Fla.
East (Destin) Pass, Fla.
Pensacola Bay Entr. , Fla.
Perdido Pass, Ala.
Mobile Bay Entr., Ala.
Barataria Pass, La.
Caminada Pass, La.
Calcasieu Pass, La.
San Luis Pass, Tex.
Coast
Atlantic

Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Atlantic
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico

Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Tidal Prism (ft3)
4.77 x TO9

1.73 x 109
5.81 x 108
9.0 x 108
3.0 x 108
3.6 x 108
1.90 x 109
1.26 x 1010
4.7 x 108
3.61 x 108
2.61 x 108
7.6 x 108
4.00 x 108
4.90 x 108
8.10 x 108
1.42 x 109
5.03 x 108
6.8 x 108

3.76 x 108
1.62 x 109
9.45 x 109
5.84 x 108
2.0 x 1010
2.55 x TO9
6.34 x 108
2.97 x TO9
5.84 x 108
  226

-------
TABLE  VI-2  (Cont.)
Estuary
Venice Inlet, Fla.
Galveston Entr., Tex.
Aransas Pass, Tex.
Grays Harbor, Wash.
Willapa, Wash.
Columbia River, Wash. -Ore.
Necanicum River, Ore.
Nehalem Bay, Ore.
Tillamook Bay, Ore.
Netarts Bay, Ore.
Sand Lake, Ore.
Nestucca River, Ore.
Salmon River, Ore.
Devils Lake, Ore.
Siletz Bay, Ore.
Yaquina Bay, Ore.
Alsea Estuary, Ore.
Siuslaw River, Ore.
Umpqua, Ore.
Coos Bay, Ore.
Caquille River, Ore.
Floras Lake, Ore .
Rogue River, Ore.
Chetco River, Ore.
Smith River, Ca.
Lake Earl, Ca.
Freshwater Lagoon, Ca.
Stove Lagoon, Ca.
Big Lagoon, Ca .
Coast
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Paci fie
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Tidal Prism (ft )
8.5 x 107
1.59 x 1010
1.76 x 109
1.3 xlO10
1.3 x 1010
2.9 x 1010
4.4 x 107
4.3 x 108
2.5 x 109
5.4 x TO8
1.1 x TO8
2.6 x 108
4.3 x 107
1.1 x 108
3.5 x 108
8.4 x 108
5.1 x 108
2.8 x 108
1.2 x 109
1.9 x 109
1.3 x 108
6.8 x 107
1.2 x 108
2.9 x 107
9.5 x 107
5.1 x 108
4.7 x 107
1.2 x 108
3.1 x 108
  227

-------
TABLE  VI-2  (Cont.)
Estuary
Mad River, Calif.
Humbolt Bay, Calif.
Eel River, Calif.
Russian River, Calif.
Bodega Bay, Calif.
Tomales Bay, Calif.
Abbotts Lagoon, Calif.
Drakes Bay, Calif.
Bolinas Lagoon, Cal if.
San Francisco Bay, Calif.
Santa Cruz Harbor, Calif.
Moss Landing, Calif.
Morro Bay, Calif.
Marina Del Rey, Calif.
Alamitos Bay, Calif.
Newport Bay, Calif.
Camp Pendleton, Calif.
Aqua Hedionda, Calif.
Mission Bay, Calif.
San Diego Bay, Calif.
Coast
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Tidal Prism (ft3)
2.4 x 107
2.4 x 109
3.1 x 108
6.3 x 107
1.0 x 108
1.0 x 109
3.5 x 107
2.7 x 108
1.0 x 108
5.2 x 1010
4.3 x 106
9.4 x 107
8.7 x 107
6.9 x 107
6.9 x 107
Q
2.1 x 10tt
1.1 x 107
4.9 x 107
3.3 x 108
1.8 x 109
    228

-------
     It was mentioned earlier in this chapter that the net non-tidal  flow in
an estuary is usually seaward* and is dependent on the river discharge.   The
non tidal flow is one of the driving forces behind estuarine flushing.  In
the absence of this advective displacement, tidal oscillation and wind
stresses still operate to disperse and flush pollutants.  However, the
advective component of flushing can be extremely important.  Consider
Tomales Bay, California as an example.  This small, elongated bay has
essentially no fresh water inflow.  As a result there is no advective
seaward motion and pollutant removal is dependent upon dispersion and
diffusion processes.  The flushing time for the bay is approximately  140
days (Johnson, e_t &]_., 1961).  This can be compared with the Alsea Estuary
in Oregon having a flushing time of approximately 8 days, with the much
larger St.  Croix Estuary in Nova Scotia having a flushing time of
approximately 8 days  (Ketchum and Keen, 1951), or with the very large Hudson
River  Estuary with a  short flow flushing time  of approximately 10.5 days
(Ketchum,  1950).
 6.3.2  Procedure

     Flushing  times  for  a  given  estuary  vary  over  the  course  of  a year  as
 river  discharge  varies.  The  critical  time  is the  low  river flow period
 since  this  period  corresponds with  the minimum flushing  rates.   The  planner
 might  also  want  to calculate  the best  flushing characteristics  (high river
 flow)  for an  estuary.   In  addition  to  providing a  more complete  picture of
 the estuarine  system,  knowledge  of  the full range  of annual flushing
 variations  can be  useful in evaluating the  impact  of seasonal discharges
 (e.g.   fall and  winter cannery operation in an estuary with a characteristic
 summer fresh  water low flow). Further,  storm sewer runoff normally
 coincides with these best  flushing  conditions (high flow)  and not  with  the
 low flow, or  poorest flushing conditions.  Thus analysis of  storm  runoff is
 often  better  suited  for high flow flushing  conditions.  However, the low
 flow calculation should be considered  for use in primary planning  purposes.

 *While net  flow  is always  seaward for  the estuaries being  considered here,
  it is possible  to have  a  net upstream flow in individual  embayments of an
  estuary.  While this  occurrence is rare  in the United States,  an  example
  of such a  situation is  the South Bay  of San  Francisco Bay where freshwater
  inflows are  so  small  that surface  evaporation exceeds freshwater  inflow.
  Thus, net  flow  is upstream during  most  of  the year.
                                   229

-------
     There are several  ways of calculating flushing time.  Two methods are
presented here:  the fraction of freshwater method and the modified tidal
prism method.
6.3.3 Fraction of Fresh Hater Method

     The flushing time of a pollutant, as determined by the fraction of
freshwater method is
                                      Vf
                                  f   R

where

     Vf  = volume  of  freshwater  in  the estuary

     T^  = flushing time  of  a  pollutant which enters  the head  of  the
          estuary with the  river  flow

 Equation VI-5 is  equivalent to  the following concept of flushing time  which
 is  more  intuitively  meaningful:
                                      M
                                  Tf = 7                                (VI-6)
                                   T  M
 where

      M = total mass  of conservative pollutant  contained in the estuary

      M = rate of pollutant entry  into the head of the estuary with the
          river water

      Since the volume of freshwater in the estuary  is the product of the
 fraction of freshwater  (f) and the total volume of water (V), Equation VI-5
 becomes:
                                   230

-------
                                T  =-
                                'f   R                                (VI-7)
If the estuary is divided into segments the flushing time becomes:

                                     fiVi
                              Tf"r "V                             (VI'8:

Equation VI-8 is more general and accurate than the three previous
expressions because both f^ (the fraction of freshwater in the ith segment)
and R- (the freshwater discharge through the itli segment) can vary over
distance within the estuary.  Note that the flushing time of a pollutant
discharged from some location other than the head of the estuary can be
computed by summing contributions over the segments seaward of the
discharge.

      A limitation  of the fraction of freshwater method is that it assumes
uniform salinity throughout each  segment.  A second limitation is that  it
assumes during each tidal  cycle  a volume of water equal  to the river
discharge  moves  into a  given  estuarine segment from the  adjacent upstream
segment, and  that  an equal  volume of the water originally  in  the segment
moves on to the  adjacent one  downstream.   Once this exchange  has taken
place, the water within  each  segment is  assumed to  be  instantaneously  and
completely mixed  and to  again become a homogeneous  water mass.  Proper
selection  of  estuarine  segments  can  reduce these  errors.


6.3.4 Calculation  of Flushing Time  by  Fraction of Freshwater  Method

      This  is  a six step procedure:

      1.   Graph the estuarine salinity  profiles.

      2.   Divide the estuary  into segments.  There is no minimum or
          maximum number of segments required,  nor must all segments be
          of the same length.  The divisions should be selected so that
          mean segment  salinity is relatively constant over the full
                                    231

-------
             length of the segment.  Thus, stretches of steep salinity

             gradient will have short segments and stretches where salinity

             remains constant may have very long segments.  Example VI-3
             provides an  illustration.


         3.  Calculate each segment's fraction of fresh water by:
                                    f  _ Ss  -  S1
                                           Ss                         (VI-9)


             where


                     f-j  = fraction of fresh water for segment  "i"


                     Ss  = salinity of local sea water*, °/oo


             and


                     S.j  = mean salinity for segment  "i", °/oo


         4.  Calculate the quantity of fresh water in each segment by:
                                    W. = f. x V.                     (VI-1Q)
                                     i    i    i
             where
                     Wi = quantity of fresh water  in segment  "i"


             and


                     V.j = total volume of segment11!" at MIL


*Sea surface salinity along U.S. shores vary spatially.  Neuman and Pierson
 (1966) mapped Pacific mean coastal surface salinities as varying from
 32.4 o/oo at Puget Sound to 33.9 o/0o at the U.S.-Mexico border; Atlantic
 mean coastal surface salinities as varying from 32.5 °/oo in Maine to
 36.2 °/oo at the southern extreme of Florida; and Gulf coast salinities
 as varying between 36.2 o/0o and 36.4 °/oo.  Surface coastal salinities
 in Long Island Sound (Hardy, 1972) and off Long Island south coast
 (Hydroscience, 1974) vary between 26.5 and 28.5 °/oo.

                                       232

-------
   5.  Calculate the exchange time (flushing time) for each segment
       by:
                                                              (VI-11)
       where
               T.  =  segment flushing time,  in tidal cycles
        and

                R   =  river  discharge  over  one  tidal  cycle
    6.   Calculate  the  entire  estuary flusing  time  by summing  the
        exchange times for  the  individual  segments:
                                    n


        where

                Tf = estuary flushing time,  in tidal  cycles

                n  = number of segments.

Table VI-3 shows a suggested method for calculating flushing time by the
fraction of freshwater method.
                                 233

-------
                                                          TABLE  VI-3



                                  SAMPLE CALCULATION TABLE FOR CALCULATION  OF  FLUSHING TIME

                                          BY SEGMENTED FRACTION  OF FRESHWATER  METHOD
Segment
Number














Mean
Segment
Salinity
S.(ppt)














Mean
Segment
Length
(m)














Mean Segment
Cross-sectional
Area (m2)














Segment Mean
Tide Volume
V,- (m3)














Fraction of
River Water
f _ Ss-Si
fi Ss














River Water
Volume
W.= fixVi
(m3)














n
EV
1=1
Segment
Flushing Time
T. = WI./R
(tidal cycles)















ro
oo
    I/I
    LU

    Q.
    ZD






    I

-------
                               EXAMPLE VI-3
        Mashing Time Calculation by Fraction of Fresh__Wa_ter_Me^th_od_

     This example pertains to the Patuxent Estuary.  This estuary has no
major side embayments, and the Patuxent River is by far its largest source
of fresh water.  This estuary therefore lends itself well to analysis by
the segmented fraction of fresh water method.

     Salinity profiles for July 19, 1978 are used  to find segment salinity
values.  Chesapeake  Bay water at the mouth of the  Patuxent Estuary had a
salinity of 10.7 ppt  (S.).  The Patuxent River discharge over the duration
of one tidal cycle  is

               R =  (12 m3/sec)(12.4  hr/tidal  cycle)(3600 sec/hr)
                 =  5.36  x  105  mVtidal  cycle
 A segmentation  scheme based on the principles laid out above is used to
 divide the estuary into eight segments;   their measured characteristics are
 shown Table VI-4.   The segmentation is shown graphicaly on the estuary
 salinity profile (Figure VI-14).

      The next step is to find the fraction of fresh water for each segment.
 For segment 1,

                                     V  S'
                                f l = -—
 where
       j  = fraction of fresh water, segment 1
      S  = salinity of local seawater
                                  235

-------
                                                      TABLE VI-4
                                      PATUXENT ESTUARY SEGMENT CHARACTERISTICS FOR

                                               FLUSHING TIME CALCULATIONS
no
GO

Mean Segment Salinity
Segment Number S., ppt
8 10.3
7 9.5
6 8.7
5 7.6
4 5.8
3 3.3
2 1.8
1 0.8

Segment Length
meters
10,400
10,400
6,100
6,100
5,800
5,000
4,650
4,650

Mean Segment
Cross-Sectional Area
meter2
16,000
12,500
11,400
7,500
4,300
3,100
2,200
1,700
Mean Tide
Seqment Volume
Vl 3
meters "
16.6xl07
13-OxlO7
6.95xl07
4.58xl07
2.49xl07
1.55xl07
1.02xl07
0.79xl07

-------
GO
—I
              10
              8
       SALINITY
         (PPD
              4
              2
                                10
                                                20                30
                                        DISTANCE FROM HEAD OF ESTUARY (Km)
                                                                                 40
      50
CHESAPEAKE BAY
               FIGURE VI-14    PATUXENT  ESTUARY  SALINITY  PROFILE  AND SEGMENTATION  SCHEME  USED
                                IN FLUSHING TIME  CALCULATIONS,

-------
     Sa = measured mean salinity for segment 1

                         = 10.7 ppt-0.8 ppt  = Q g3
                       i       10.7 ppt
The calculation is reported in Table VI-4 for segments 2 through 8.

     The volume of fresh water (river water) in each segment is next found
using the formula

                             W.  . f. x V,

For segment 1,

                    Wt = fi x Vi =  0.93 (0.79 x 107m3)
                                 =  7.35 x  106m3

The flushing time for each segment  is next calculated by
For  segment  1,
                       = 7.35 x 106m3/(5.36 x 105m3/tidal  cycle)
                       = 13.7 tidal  cycles
 Fraction  of  freshwater,  river water  volume  and  flushing  time  values  for  the
 eight  segments  are  compiled  in  Table VI-5.

     The  final  step is  to  determine  the  flushing  time  for  the estuary.   In
 this case,

                      8
               Tf  =  Z  T.  =
                T    1 = 1  1
               11.4 + 27.2  + 24.6 +24.8 + 21.5 + 20.0 + 15.8 + 13.7
               = 159 tidal  cycles, or 2.74 months
                                   238

-------
Co
                                                                TABLE VI-5
                                                   FLUSHING  TIME  FOR PATUXENT  ESTUARY

Segment Number
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1*


Mean Segment
Salinity
Si, PPt
10.3
9.5
8.7
7.6
5.8
3.3
1.8
0.8


Segment Length
meters
10,400
10,400
6,100
6,100
5,800
5,000
4,650
4,650


Mean Segment
Cross-Sectional Area
meter2
16,000
12,500
11,400
7,500
4,300
3,100
2,200
1,700


Segment Mean
Tide Volume
Vi
meter3
16.6x10'
13.0x10'
6.95x10'
4.58x10'
2.49x10'
1.55x10'
1.02x10'
0.79x10'

Fraction of
River Water
(Ss =\0.7)
0.037
0.112
0.19
0.29
0.46
0.69
0.83
0.93


River Water
Volume
Wi = fi x Vi
(meters3)
6.14xl06
14.6xl06
13.2xl06
13.3xl06
11.5xl06
10.7xl06
8.47xl06
7.35xl06


Segment
Flush Time
Ti = wi/R
tidal cycles
11.4
27.2
24.6
24.8
21.5
20.0
15.8
13.7
Sum = 159 tidal cycles
or 2.74 months
             *In this numbering scheme segment 1  is the most upstream segment.

-------
                            END OF EXAMPLE VI-3
6.3.5  Branched Estuaries and the Fraction of Freshwater Method

     Branched estuaries, where more than one source of freshwater
contributes to the salinity distribution pattern, are common.  The fraction
of freshwater method can be directly applied to estuaries of this
description.  Consider the estuary shown in Figure VI-15, having two major
sources of freshwater (River 1, Rl;  and River 2, R2).  The flushing time
for pollutants entering the estuary with river flow R2 is:
            Tf (R2) = T! + T2 + T3 + T4 + T5 + T6 =

                      fjVi   f2V2   f3V3   f4V,    f5V5     f6V6
For the  pollutants entering with RJ5 the flushing time is:

                T  ,„  .    Va   Vb   Vc    fsVs
                T f ( R i) -   __   + —-   + —   +
                 f           Ri      Ri     Ri     Ri+R2   Ri+R2

The  flushing  time computations are similar  in concept for the case of  a
single  freshwater source, modified to account for a flow rate of  Rj  +  R2  in
segments  5  and  6.
 6.3.6   Modified  Tidal  Prism  Method

     This  method divides  an  estuary into  segments  whose  lengths  are  defined
 by the maximum excursion  path  of  a  water  particle  during a  tidal  cycle.
 Within each segment the tidal  prism is  compared  to the total  segment volume
 as a measure of  the flushing potential  of that  segment per  tidal  cycle
 (Dyer, 1973).  The method assumes complete mixing  of the incoming tidal
 prism  waters with the  low tide volumes  within  each segment.   Best results
 have been  obtained in  estuaries when the  number of segments  is large (i.e.
                                    240

-------
ro
                          FIGURE VI-15  HYPOTHETICAL TWO-BRANCHED ESTUARY

-------
when river flow is very low) and when estuarine cross-sectional area
increases fairly quickly downstream (Dyer, 1973).

     The modified tidal prism method does not require knowledge of the
salinity distribution.  It provides some concept of mean segment velocities
since each segment length is tied to particle excursion length over one
tidal cycle.  A disadvantage of the method is that in order to predict the
flushing time of a pollutant discharged midway down the estuary, the method
still has to be applied to the entire estuary.

     The modified tidal prism method is a four-step methodology.  The  steps
 are:
      1.   Segment  the  estuary.   For  this method  an  estuary  must  be
          segmented  so that  each segment  length  reflects  the  excursion
          distance a particle  can travel  during  one tidal cycle.  The
          innermost  section  must then  have  a  tidal  prism  volume
          completely supplied  by river flow.   Thus,
          where
                PO  = tidal  prism (intertidal  volume)  of segment "0"
          and

                R   = river discharge over one tidal cycle.

               The low tide volume in this section (V0) is that water
          volume occupying the space under the intertidal volume P0
          (which has just been defined as being equal to R).  The
          seaward limit of the next seaward segment  is placed such that
          its  low tide volume (Vj) is defined by:
                                   V  = P  + V                   (VI-13)
                                    i    o    o
                                    242

-------
         P!  is  then  that intertidal  volume which,  at high tide,
    resides  above Vi.   Successive segments are defined in an
    identical  manner to this segment so that:

                         Vi ' PM + Vl                 (vi-14)
                                  I
         Thus  each segment contains, at high tide, the volume of
    water contained  in the next seaward section at low tide.

2.  Calculate  the exchange ratio  (r) by:
                          r.  = ——                      (VI-15)
                           1   Pi+Vi
         Thus the exchange ratio for a segment is a measure of a
    portion of water associated with that segment which is
    exchanged with adjacent segments during each tidal cycle.

3.  Calculate segment flushing time by:
                            T_J_                         (VI-16)
    where
          T.J  = flushing time for  segment  "i", measured  in  tidal
               cycles.

4.   Calculate total estuarine  flushing  time  by  summing  the
     individual segment flushing times:
                                  n
                           Tf  =  L   Ti
                            243

-------
         where

               L.  = total  estuary flushing time

       and

               n   = number of segments.

Table VI-6 shows a suggested method for calculating flushing time by the
modified tidal prism method.
                               EXAMPLE VI-4
                 Estuary Flushing Time Calculation by the
                        Modified Tidal Prism Method

     The Fox Mill Run Estuary, Virginia, was selected for this example.
During  low flow conditions, the discharge of Fox Mill Run has been measured
at 0.031 m3/sec.

     R  = river discharge over one tidal cycle

        = 0.031 m3/sec x 12.4 hrs/tidal cycle x  3600  sec/hr

        = 1384 mVtidal cycle.

The  estuary  flushing  time  is found  in  four  steps:

      1. Segmentation

               From  bathymetric maps and  tide gage  data,  cumulative
         upstream volume  was  plotted for  several  positions  along the
         estuary (See Figure  VI-16).
                                 244

-------
                                                       TABLE VI-6
                                SAMPLE  CALCULATION  TABLE FOR ESTUARINE FLUSHING TIME BY
                                            THE  MODIFIED TIDAL PRISM METHOD
Segment
Number
















Segment Dimensions
Starting
Distance
Above Mouth
(m)
















Ending
Distance
Above Mouth
(m)
















Distance
of Center
Above Mouth
(m)
















Segment
Length
(m)
















Subtidal
Water
Volume, Vi
(m3)
















Intertidal
Water Volume
(m3)
















Segment
Exchange
Ratio
ri
















n
Ł T< =
Segment
Flushing
Time, Ti
(Tidal Cycles)

















ro
rs
t/i
UJ

-------
   1000-,
    500-
                           intertidal  volume
co
 OT
 Q)
 
-------
Since

      P~  = R
      P0  = 1384 m3.
Reading across the graph from "a" to the intertidal volume
curve, then down the subtidal volume curve and across to "b",
      VQ = 490 m3.
The known cumulative upstream water volume also establishes
the downstream segment boundary.  Reading downward from the
subtidal volume curve to  "c", a VQ of 490 m3 corresponds to
an upstream distance of 2,700 meters for the segment 0 lower
boundary.

     The  low  tide  water volume for the  next  segment can be
found  by  the  equation:

                       V  =  P  +  V
                       Vl    P0    V0
 or
                 V,  =  1384 + 490 =  1874 m3
 Since the graphs of Figure VI-16 are cumulative curves,  it is
 necessary,  when entering a V-  value in order to determine a
 P.  value, to sum the upstream V. 's.  For Vj  the cumulative
 upstream low-tide volume is:

               VQ + V  = 490 + 1874 r 2364 m3
 Entering the graph where the subtidal volume is equal to
 2,364 m3 (across from "d"), we can move upward to read the
 corresponding cumulative intertidal volume "e" on the
 vertical  scale, and downward to  read the  downstream  boundary
 of segment 1 at "f" on  the horizontal  scale.   The  cumulative
 upstream intertidal volume is 5900  m3.  Since
                   5900  m3  = PQ + Pj
                           247

-------
               P, = 5900-1384 = 4516 m3
   For segment 2,

               Vz = PJ + Y! = 1874 + 4516 = 6390 m3
   To find P2, it is necessary to enter the graph at a
   cumulative subtidal volume of
     V0 + Vl + V2 = 49° + 1874 + 639° = 8759 m3(across from "9")
   This yields  a  cumulative  intertidal  volume of  14,000  m3
   (across  from "h")  and  a downstream  segment boundary of  1,650
   m3  "i".

   The tidal  prism  of Segment  2  is  found  by:

                       14000  =  PQ +  Pj  + P2
   or
                P0 + 14000 -  1384 -  4516 + 8100 m3
    The procedure is identical  for Segment 3.   For this final
    segment,
                           ''3
    and                    P3 = 36,000 m3
V3 = 14,490 m3
Dimensions and volumes of the four segments established by this
    procedure are compiled in Table VI-7.

2.  The exchange ratio for segment 0 is found by
                          PO         1384 m3
                     0   PQ+VO   1384 m3+490 m3
                            248

-------
                                                                  TABLE VI-7

                                        DATA AND FLUSHING TIME  CALCULATIONS  FOR  FOX MILL RUN ESTUARY
Segment Number
0
1
2
3
Segment Dimensions
Starts at this
Distance Above Mouth
meters
3,200
2,700
2,240
1,650
Stops at this
Distance Above Mouth
meters
2,700
2,240
1,650
180
Center Point
Distance Above
Mouth
meters
2,950
2,470
1,945
915
Segment
Length
meters
500
460
590
1,470
Water Volume
at Low Tide
Vi
meters3
490
1,874
6,390
14,490
Intertidal
Vol ume
Pi ,
meters3
1,384
4,516
8,100
36,000
Exchange Ratio
For Segment i
ri
0.74
0.71
0.56
0.71
Flushing Time
for Segment i
Ti
1.35
1.41
1.79
1.41
ro
                                                                                                                  ŁT. = 5.96 tidal
                                                                                                                           cycles

-------
    Exchange  ratios  are calculated similarly for the other three
    segments .

3.   Flushing  time for  each  segment "i"  is qiven by
    so
                  T  - _L  -  _I_  =  i  35
                  To " r0     0.74    i>JD
    Exchange ratios and flushing times for  the  four  segments  are  shown
    in Table VI-7.
4.  Flushing time for the whole estuary is found  by
                              3
                       Tf  *  *  Ti
    or                  T    i=0
           T = 1.35+1.41+1.79+1.41 =  5.96 tidal  cycles
                                   = 73.9  hours
                                   =  3.1  days
                    END OF EXAMPLE VI-4
                            250

-------
6.4  FAR FIELD APPROACH TO POLLUTANT DISTRIBUTION IN ESTUARIES
6.4.1  Introduction

     Analysis of pollutant distribution in estuaries can be accomplished in
a number of ways.  In particular, two approaches, called the far field and
near field approaches, are presented here (Sections 6.4 and 6.5,
respectively).  As operationally defined in this document, the far field
approach ignores buoyancy and momentum effects of the wastewater as it is
discharged into the estuary.  The pollutant is assumed to be instantaneously
distributed over the entire cross-section of the estuary (in the case of a
well-mixed estuary) or to be distributed over a lesser portion of the
estuary in the case of a two-dimensional analysis.  Whether or not these
assumptions are realistic depends on a variety of factors, including the
rapidity of mixing compared to the kinetics of the process being analyzed
(e.g. compared to dissolved oxygen depletion rates).  It should be noted
that far field analysis (either one- or two- dimensional) can be used even
if actual mixing is less than assumed by the method.  However, the predicted
pollutant concentrations will be lower than the actual concentrations.

     Near field analysis considers the buoyancy and momentum of the
wastewater as it is discharged into the receiving water.  Pollutant
distribution can be calculated on a smaller spatial scale, and assumptions
such as "complete mixing" or "partial mixing" do not have to be made.  The
actual amount of mixing which occurs is predicted as an integral part of the
method itself.  This is a great advantage in analyzing compliance with water
quality standards which are frequently specified in terms of a maximum
allowable pollutant concentration in the receiving water at the completion of
initial dilution.  (Initial dilution will be defined later in Section 6.5.2)

     The following far field approaches for predicting pollutant
distribution are presented in this chapter:

         •   fraction of freshwater method,
         t   modified tidal prism method,
         •   dispersion-advection equations, and
                                    251

-------
         •   Pritchard's Box Model.

The near field analysis uses tabulated results from an initial dilution
model called MERGE.  At the completion of initial  dilution predictions can
be made for the following:

         •   pollutant concentrations
         •   pH levels, and
         •   dissolved oxygen concentrations.

The near field pollutant distribution results are then used as input to an
analytical technique for predicting pollutant decay or dissolved oxygen
levels subsequent to initial dilution.  The remainder of Section 6.4 will
discuss those methods applicable to the far field approach.
6.4.2  Continuous Flow of Conservative Pollutants

     The concentration of a conservative pollutant entering an estuary in a
continuous flow varies as a function of the entry point location.  It is
convenient to separate pollutants entering an estuary at the head of the
estuary (with the river discharge) from those entering along the estuary's
sides.  The two impacts will then be addressed separately.
6.4.2.1  River Discharges of Pollutants

     The length of time required to flush a pollutant from an estuary after
it is introduced with the river discharge has already been calculated, and
is the estuarine flushing time.  Now consider a conservative pollutant
continuously discharged into a river upstream of the estuary.  As pollutant
flows into the estuary, it begins to disperse and move toward the mouth of
the estuary with the net flow.  If, for example, the estuary flushing time
is 10 tidal cycles, 10 tidal cylces following its initial flow into the
estuary, some of the pollutant is flushed out to the ocean.  Eventually,  a
steady-state condition is reached in which a certain amount of pollutant
enters the estuary, and the same amount is flushed out of the estuary during
                                  252

-------
each tidal cycle.  The amount of this pollutant which resides in the estuary
at steady-state  is a function of the flushing time.  From the definition of
flushing time, the amount of fresh water (river water) in the estuary may be
calculated by:
                                     = Tf R
where
     W  = quantity of freshwater in the estuary
     T  = estuary flushing time
and
     R  = river discharge over one tidal cycle.

Using the same approach, the quantity of freshwater in any segment of the
estuary is given by:
                                 W. = T. R                           (VI-19)
where
     Wi = quantity of freshwater in the ith segment of the estuary
and
     T.  = flushing time for the ith segment calculated by the fraction
          of freshwater method.
                                  253

-------
If a conservative pollutant enters an estuary with the river flow, it can be
assumed that its steady-state distribution will be identical to that of the
river water itself.  Thus,
                           M. = W. C  = T. R  C
                            i    i  r     i    r
and
where

     M- = quantity of pollutant in estuary segment "i"

     C  = concentration of pollutant in the river inflow

     C,- = concentration of pollutant in estuary segment "i" assuming
          all of pollutant "i" enters the estuary with the river
          discharge.  Thus direct discharges into the estuary are
          excluded

and

     V- - water volume segment "i".

The same values for C^ and M^  may also be obtained by using the fraction of
freshwater, fj , for each segment by:
                                  .  = f.  Cr                          (VI-22)
                                  254

-------
and
                                M.  = C.  V.                            (VI-23)
     Thus both the quantity of a pollutant in each segment and its
concentration within each segment are readily obtainable by either of the
above methods.  The use of one of these methods will be demonstrated in
Example VI-5 below for calculation of both C- and M-.
                                EXAMPLE VI-5
                Calculation of Concentration of Conservative
                    River Borne Pollutant in an Estuary

     The Patuxent Estuary is the subject of this example.  The problem is to
predict the incremental concentration increase of total nitrogen (excluding
N2 gas) in the estuary, given that the concentration in river water at the
estuary head is 1.88 mgN/1.

     Assume that total nitrogen is conservative and that the nitrogen
concentration in local seawater is negligible.  The segmentation scheme used
in Example VI-2 (fraction of freshwater calculation) will be retained here.
For each segment, the total nitrogen concentration is directly proportional
to the fraction of freshwater in the segment:

                                  C1  =  fi  Cr
The total  nitrogen concentration for the uppermost segment is therefore
given by:

                     Ci = 0.93 (1.88 mgN/1)  =1.75  mgN/1
                                    255

-------
For the next segment it is:

            C2 = 0.83  (1.88 mgN/1) =  1.56 mgN/1,      and  so  on.

Nitrogen concentrations for all the segments are compiled in  Table VI-8.
Note that these are not necessarily total concentrations,  but only nitrogen
inputs from the Patuxent River.

     The incremental mass of nitrogen in each segment is found by:

                                  M.  = W.  C
                                   i     i  r

The W. values for the eight segments were determined in Example VI-2.  For
segment 1, the incremental nitrogen is given by:
                     = (7.35xl06m3)(1.88 mgN/1)(103l/m3)
                     = 1.38xl010 mg or  13,800  kg
Increased total nitrogen (in kilograms) for the entire estuary is shown in
Table VI-9.
                            END OF EXAMPLE VI-5
     In this example, low tide volumes were used to calculate M- since low
tide volumes had been used to calculate f^'s.  The approach assumes that
C.j 's are constant over the tidal cycle and that M.J 's are constant over the
tidal cycle.  This leads to the assumption that calculation of a low tide C-j
and M.J  will fully characterize a pollutant in an estuary.  This, however, is
not strictly true.  Figure VI-17 depicts one tidal cycle in an estuary and
                                  256

-------
                        TABLE VI-8



       POLLUTANT DISTRIBUTION IN THE PATUXENT RIVER
Segment Number* Fraction
in
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
River
* From Example VI-2
** These are the increment
of Freshwater*
Segment fn-
0.037
0.112
0.19
0.29
0.46
0.69
0.83
0.93
1.00
concentrations
Resultant Pollutants**
Concentration
= f; x 1.88 mgN/1
0.07
0.21
0.36
0.55
0.86
1.30
1.56
1.88
1.88











of total nitrogen in the estuary due to
the river-borne input.
                           257

-------
                                 TABLE  VI-9

               INCREMENTAL  TOTAL  NITROGEN IN PATUXENT RIVER,
                           EXPRESSED AS KILOGRAMS
                             (See Problem VI-5)
Segment Number
River Water
   Volume
  W-=f.xV
   meters3
Incremental  Total  N
    M,= W^l.88)
     Kilograms
     8


     7


     6


     5
  6.14xl06


 14.6xl06


 13.2xl06


 13.3xl06
      11,500


      27,40


      24,800


      25,000
                        ll.SxlO6
                            21,600
                        10.7xl06
                            20,100
                         8.47xl06
                            15,900
                          7.35xl06
                            13,800
                                   258

-------
                                Period for tidal
                                flushing of
                               "pollutant from
                                estuary  \
   TIDAL
   ELEVATION
W,,
         Nominal
         "Mean"
                                        Period of
                                        river dis-
                                        charge into
                                        estuary
FIGURE  VI-17   RIVER BORNE  POLLUTANT  CONCENTRATION
                  FOR  ONE  TIDAL  CYCLE
                         259

-------
shows the periods of the cycle during which a pollutant is flushed out of
the estuary and during which river discharge brings pollutants into the
estuary.   During periods of high tide, rising tidal elevation blocks river
discharge and backs up river flow in the lower stretches of the river.
Figure VI-17 also shows the resulting quantity of a pollutant in residence
in the estuary (W  ) over the tidal cycle.   This variation over the tidal
cycle as a percentage of NL is dependent on the flushing time but is usually
small.  The change in the total volume of water in an estuary over a tidal
cycle is equal to the tidal prism which is  often of the same magnitude as
the low tide volume.  As an example, the Alsea Estuary in Oregon has Pt =
5.1 x 108 ft3 while Vt = 2.1 x 108 (Goodwin, Emmet, and Glenne, 1970).  Thus
the variation in estuarine volume is 2.5 times the low tide volume.  As a
result, estuarine volume variations over a tidal cycle have a much greater
impact on variations in pollutant concentrations in the estuary than do
changes in the quantity of pollutant present in the estuary over a tidal
cycle.  It is important to note, however, that low tidal volume and low MF
nearly coincide, so that variations in mean pollutant concentrations are
less severe than are estuarine water mass changes.

     This qualitative description of pollutant flow into and out of an
estuary is somewhat simplistic since it assumes that high tide and low tide
at the mouth of an estuary coincide with those at the head of the estuary.
This  is usually not the case.  There is normally a lag time between tidal
events at an estuarine mouth and those at its head.  Thus river discharge
into the estuary which depends on tidal conditions at the head, and tidal
discharge which depends on tidal conditions at the mouth, are not as
directly tied to each other as indicated in Figure VI-17.

     While WF does not vary substantially over a tidal cycle under
steady-state conditions, the mean concentration of a pollutant in an estuary
(CF) does.  Alsea Estuary data can be used to show this CE variation over a
tidal cycle.  Using data for the estuary as a whole  (mean concentration),
the equations for this comparison are:

                           WŁ  = Wp Tf                                 (VI-24)
                                   260

-------
and

                            CE  = ME/(Vt Pt),                        (VI-25)
with
     Wr = (566.4 Mg/ft3) (4.64xl06 ft3/tidal cycle),
or
     W  = 2.628xl09 yg/tidal cycle.

Then,

     Mr = (2.628xl09 yg/tidal cycle)(20.8 tidal cycle),

     ME = 5.466xl010ug,

and
     C  .     = 5.466xl010 yq/2.1x!08 ft3,
      E(low)
or
     Cp,-,  x= 260.31 yg/ft3, or 46 percent of river concentration.

However,

     CE(hi h) = 5.466xl010yg/(2.1xl08 ft3+5.1x!08 ft3),

     C,-,, . , N = 75.92 yq/ft3, or 13 percent of river concentration.
      E(rngn)

      In an actual  estuary, the concentration of a pollutant is not a
 stepwise function  as indicated by segment C.  values,  but is more
 realistically a continuous spectrum of values.   By assigning the
 longitudinal  midpoint of each segment a concentration value equal to that
                                   261

-------
segment's C-,  a resulting continuous curve can be constructed as shown in
Figure VI-18.   This type of plot is useful in estimating pollutant
concentrations within the estuary.   It can also be used, however,  to
estimate maximum allowable Cr to maintain a given level  of water quality at
any point within the estuary.  This latter use of Figure VI-18 is  based on
determining the desired concentration level (Cv) and then using the ratio of
                                              A
C  to C  to calculate an allowable C .
 x     r                            r
6.4.2.2  Other Continuous Conservative Pollutant Inflows

     In the previous section, an analysis was made of the steady-state
distribution of a continuous flow pollutant entering at the head of an
estuary.  The result was a graph of the longitudinal pollutant concentration
within the estuary (Figure VI-18).  This section addresses a continuous,
conservative pollutant flow entering along the side of an estuary.  Such a
pollutant flow (e.g. the conservative elements of a municipal sewer
discharge, industrial discharge, or minor tributary) is carried both
upstream and downstream by tidal mixing, with the highest concentration
occurring in the vicinity of the outfall.  Once a steady state has been
achieved, the distribution of this pollutant is directly related to the
distribution of fresh river water (Dyer, 1973).

     The average cross-sectional concentration at the outfall under
steady-state conditions is:
                                 c  ~  P f                           (VI-26)
                                  o    R   o
where
     C  = mean cross-sectional concentration of a pollutant at the
          point of discharge, mass/volume
                                   262

-------
         DISTANCE (x) FROM HEAD OF ESTUARY (in 1000FT)
                                                       (M9/D
FIGURE VI-18  ALSEA ESTUARY RIVERBORNE  CONSERVATIVE
               POLLUTANT  CONCENTRATION
                         263

-------
      Q  = discharge rate of pollutant, mass/tidal  cycle
      fQ  = segment fraction of freshwater
      R  = river discharge rate, volume/tidal cycle.

      Downstream of the outfall, the pollutant must pass through any cross
 section at a rate equal to the rate of discharge.  Thus,
         X
cx= C0 r= co
         0
v*x\
ss
VSo
\S= j

- 1"
Lo

,
Ss-Sx
VSo

                                                        = Ł
(VI-27)
 where
      Sv,  Cv and fv denote downstream cross-sectional values
       A   A      A                      .
and
      S0, C0 and f0 denote the cross-sectional vaues at the discharge
                    point (or segment into which discharge is made).

     Upstream of the outfall, the quantity of pollutant diffused and
advectively carried upstream is balanced by that carried downstream by the
nontidal flow so that the net pollutant transport through any cross section
is zero.  Thus, the pollutant distribution is directly proportional to
salinity distribution and (Dyer, 1973):
                                  C   = C  —
                                  x     o s
                                                                      (VI-28)
                                           o
     Downstream of the outfall, the pollutant concentration resulting from a
point discharge is directly proportional to river-borne pollutant
concentration.  Upstream from the discharge point, it is inversely
proportional to river-borne pollutant concentrations.  Figure VI-19 is a
                                      264

-------
         DISTANCE FROM HEAD_x_
                        L*
        'L = Total Estuanne Length
FIGURE  VI-19  POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION  FROM AN
               ESTUARINE OUTFALL (AFTER KETCHUM,
               1950)
                       265

-------
graph of f  versus distance from the estuary head  for  a  typical  estuary.   The
          A
solid fx line is also a measure of pollutant concentration  for  all  points
downstream of a pollutant outfall  (either discharge  location A  or B).   The
actual concentration (Cv) for any point is equal  to  this f   value multiplied
                       X                                 X
by Q /R which is a constant over all x.  Upstream  concentrations decrease
from C0 in a manner proportional to upstream salinity  reduction (see dotted
lines).  It is important to note how even a small  downstream shift in
discharge location creates a very significant reduction  in  upstream
steady-state pollutant concentration.  Table VI-10 shows a  suggested format
for tabulating pollutant concentrations by the fraction  of  freshwater method.
                                EXAMPLE VI-6
             Calculation of Conservative Pollutant Concentration
                            for a Local  Discharge

     This example will again utilize the eight-segment scheme devised for the
Patuxent Estuary in Example VI-2.  The objective is to predict the
concentration distribution of total nitrogen in the estuary resulting from a
discharge of 80,000 mgN/sec into segment 4.

     The first step is to determine the nitrogen concentration in segment 4.
From Equation VI-26,
         QD       (8xlO"mgN/secxl2.4 hrs/tidal  cyclex3600 sec/hr)(0.46)
     c   = JL  f   =  _	_	_
     0    R  °                  5.36xl05 mVtidal cycle
                  3065 mgN
                =	= 3.065 mgN/1
                     m3
For segments 1-3, upstream from the discharge, nitrogen concentration is
found by Equation VI-28,

                                 c.  =  c   ii
                                      o  SQ
                                     266

-------
                                    TABLE VI-10

        SAMPLE CALCULATION  FABLE FOR DISTRIBUTION OF A LOCALLY DISCHARGED
            CONSERVATIVE  POLLUTANT BY THE FRACTION OF FRESHWATER METHOD
              From  Table  VI-3
    Segment
    Number
      Segment
    Containing
    Discharge
in
UJ
Fraction of
Freshwater
Mean Segment
  Salinity
   (ppt)
  Pollutant
Concentrations*
   (mg/1)
    *Pollutant  concentration  =-
                  f.
               C0 — ,  down estuary of the discharge
                   o

                  si
               CQ — ,  up estuary of the discharge
                   o

-------
For segment 1,
                                = 0.8%
                             SQ = S, = 5.8%0
                             CH =  3.065  mgN/1
so
                 / Q g 
-------
                               TABLE  VI-11

                 NITROGEN  CONCENTRATION  IN  PATUXENT  ESTUARY
                          BASED  ON  LOCAL DISCHARGE
Segment
Number
Fraction of
Freshwater
             s.
Mean Segment g—
  Salinity    o
 z—    Concentration
  o        mgN/1
             0.037
                  10.3
0.08
                                 0.25
7
6
5
Discharge 4
3
2
1
0.112
0.19
0.29
0.46
0.69
0.83
0.93
9.5
8.7
7.6
5.8
3.3
1.8
0.8
-
-
-
1
0.57
0.31
0.14
0.24
0.41
0.63
1
-
-
_
0.74
1.26
1.93
3.06
1.75
0.95
0.43
                                     269

-------
The same procedure yields nitrogen concentrations in segments 6-8, also
downstream of the discharge.

     Figure VI-20 below shows the nitrogen concentration distribution over
the entire estuary.   Note that the nearer a discharge is to the estuary's
mouth, the greater the protection rendered the upstream reaches of the
estuary.
                            END OF EXAMPLE VI-6
6.4.3  Continuous Fl_cw_No_n-Conservative Pollutants

     Most pollutant discharges into estuaries have some components which
behave non-conservatively.  A number of processes mediate the removal of
compounds from natural waters, among these:

     •   sorption by benthic sediments on suspended matter

     •   partitioning

     •   decay (by photolysis or biologically mediated reactions)

     •   biological uptake

     t   precipitation

     •   coagulation.

The latter two processes are particularly significant in estuaries.  Thus,
in addition to dispersion and tidal mixing, a time-dependent component is
incorporated when calculating the removal of non-conservative pollutants
from estuarine waters.  The concentrations of non-conservative pollutants
are always lower than those of conservative pollutants (which have a decay
rate of zero) for equal discharge concentrations.  The results of the
previous section for conservative constituents serve to set upper limits for
                                   270

-------
                           4.0-1
                           3.0-
ro
•—i
                      ra

                      ~   2.0 H
                      O)
                      o
z
"cc

°    1.0-
                                           10
                                   20
30  I
  discharge
40
                                            Distance above estuary mouth (1000's of meters)
                            FIGURE VI-20   HYPOTHETICAL CONCENTRATION  OF TOTAL NITROGEN
                                            IN PATUXENT ESTUARY

-------
the concentration of non-conservative continuous flow pollutants.   Thus, if
plots similar to Figure VI-17 for river discharges and to Figure VI-19 for
other direct discharges have been prepared for flow rates equal to that of
the non-conservative pollutant under study, some reasonable approximations
can be made for steady-state non-conservative pollutant concentrations
without requiring additional data.  Assuming a first order decay rate for
the non-conservative constituent, its concentration is given by:
                              = CQe"kt                               (VI-29)
where
     C  - pollutant concentration at time "t"

     C  = initial pollutant concentration

     k  = decay rate constant

     For conservative pollutants k = 0 and C  = CQ under steady-state
conditions.  Decay rates are determined empirically and depend on a large
number of variables.  Typical decay rates for BOD and coliform bacteria are
shown in Table VI-12.  If data are not available for a particular estuary,
the use of these average values will provide estimates.
                                   272

-------
                 TABLE VI-12

 TYPICAL VALUES FOR DECAY REACTION RATES 'k1*




    Source                  BOD      Coliform


Dyer, 1973                             .578


Ketchem, 1955                          .767


Chen and Orlob, 1975       .1          .5


Hydroscience, 1971       .05-.125      1-2


McGaughhey, 1968           .09


Harleman, 1971             .069
*k values for all reactions given on a per
 tidal cycle basis,   20°C.
                   273

-------
     It should be noted that decay rates are dependent upon temperature.   The
values given assume a temperature of 20°C.   Variations in k values for
differing temperatures are given by Equation VI-30:

                               k  = k  0 9T"20°                        (VI-30)

where

     k   = decay rate at temperature T

     k?0 = decay rate at 20°C (as given in Table VI-12)

and

      0   = a constant (normally between 1.03 and 1.05).

Thus an ambient temperature of 10 C would reduce a k value of 0.1 per tidal
cycle to 0.074 for a  0 = 1.03.

     Decay effects can be compared to flushing effects by setting time equal
to the flushing time  and comparing the resulting decay to the known pollutant
removal rate as a result of flushing.  If kt in Equation VI-29 is less than
0.5 for t = Tf, decay processes reduce concentration by only about one-third
over the flushing time.  Here mixing and advective effects dominate and
non-conservative decay plays a minor role.  When kTf > 12 decay effects
reduce a batch pollutant to 5 percent of its original concentration in less
than one-fourth of the flushing time.   In this case, decay processes  are of
paramount importance  in determining steady-state concentrations.  Between
these extremes, both  processes are active in removing a pollutant from the
estuary with 3 < kTf  < 4 being the range for approximately equal
contributions  to removal.  Dyer (1973) analyzed the situation for which decay
and tidal exchange are of equal magnitude for each estuarine segment.
Knowing the conservative concentration, the non-conservative steady-state
concentration  in a segment is given by:
                                   274

-------
i=l/..,n
                             r.
  for segments downstream
  of the outfall
                                                                      (VI-31)
and
       ' i     o  i = 1,.., n S
                      r.
                    	T_
              o  \l-(l-r.)e
      for segments upstream      /..,  ~^\
-kt /  of the outfall
where
     C  = non-conservative constituent mean concentration  in segment "i"

     C  = conservative constituent mean concentration in segment of
          discharge
     r. - the exchange ratio for segment "i" as defined by the modified
          tidal prism method

     n  = number of segments away from the outfall (i.e. n=l for
          segments adjacent to the outfall;  n-2 for segments next to
          these segments, etc.)

and other parameters are as previously defined.

     In the case of a non-conservative pollutant entering from the river,
n = 1,  and the only concentration expression necessary is
                                         f.
,'nerf
                                      r.
                                       1
                                                                      (VI- 34)
                                  275

-------
Table VI-13 shows a suggested format for tabulating pollution concentrations
by the modified tidal prism method.
                                EXAMPLE VI-7
            Continuous Discharge of a Non-Conservative Pollutant
                         into the Head of an Estuary

     The Fox Mill Run Estuary (see Example VI-3)  is downstream of the
Gloucester, Virginia, sewage treatment plant.  Knowing the discharge rate of
CBOD in the plant effluent, the purpose of this example is to determine the
concentration of CBOD throughout the estuary.

     It is first necessary to determine the concentration of CBOD in Fox Mill
Run as it enters the estuary (assume no CBOD decay within the river).  The
following information has been collected:

     C ,  Background CBOD in river                    =   3 mg/1
     Q ,  River flow below treatment plant discharge  -   0.031 m3/sec
     Q ,,  Treatment plant discharge rate              =   0.006 m3/sec
     Cd,  Treatment plant effluent CBOD               =  45 mg/1

The CBOD concentration in the river downstream of the treatment plant is
found using the equation:

                               C (Q -Q.) + C.Q,
                                rwr xd'    

-------
                            TABLE  VI-13

SAMPLE CALCULATION  TABLE  FOR DISTRIBUTION OF A LOCALLY  DISCHARGED
  NON-CONSERVATIVE  POLLUTANT BY  THE  MODIFIED TIDAL PRISM METHOD
From Table VI -6

Segment
Number

Distance of
Center Above
Mouth
(m)

Segment
Exchange
Ratio
r .


Mean Salinity
(from salinity
plot)
Si
PPt


Fraction of
River Water
f - S- 1
1 Ss


B,
1



Pollutant
Concentration
i-1 n
(mg/1)


-------
To find the CBOD concentration distribution in the estuary, the following
additional data are used:

     S$,  Chesapeake Bay salinity  =  19.0 °/oo (at the mouth of
                                                Fox Mill Run Estuary)
     k,   CBOD decay constant      =  0.3/day
     T,   Tidal cycle              =  12.4 hours
so
               kt = 0.3/day x 12.4 hr x 1 day/24 hours = 0.155

Also necessary are mean salinity values for each estuary segment.  Values for
the Fox Mill Run Estuary are summarized in Table VI-14.  Fraction of
freshwater values for each segment are found using the formula:
where the variables are as previously defined.

     Next, values of the coefficient B. must be calculated for each segment
"i".  For segment 0,

                   TO,  the segment exchange ratio, = 0.74
and
                    -      rO      = _ 0.^4 _ = o 95
                 B° = l-(l-r0)e-kt = l-(l-0.74)e-°-155 =

Coefficient values for all segments are compiled in Table VI-14.
                                  278

-------
"vj
UD
                                                         TABLE  VI-14

                                   SALINITY AND  CBOD  CALCULATIONS FOR FOX MILL RUN ESTUARY
1
' From Problem VI -3
i
Center Point
i Distance Above
i Est. Mouth,
| Segment Number Meters
|
1 River \ (>3200)
0 2950
i 2470
j
I 2 i 1945
3 915
i . - _. . 1 	 i
Exchange Ratio
For Segment

_
0.74
0.71
0.56
0.71
Mean Segment
Sal ini ty
Si , ppt
(From Sal . Plot)

-0
4.7
8.6
11.6
15.3
Fraction of
Fresh (River)
fi Ss
(Ss= 19.0)

1.00
0.75
0.55
0.39
0.19
BT

-
0.95
0.94
0.90
0.94
i
i
Concentration of I
CBODU
r -r . n
Ci Ci-l fM Ci '
(mg/1 ) :
i
i
11.1 j
8.1 !
i
5.5 j
3.6
1.6
i

-------
Finally, CBOD concentrations for the individual  segment are calculated,
beginning with the uppermost segment and working downstream.  The
concentration in segment "i" is found by:

                                         f.
For segment 0, the river is taken as segment "i-1", and the calculation is as
follows:
                  CQ = 11.13 mg/1  ( ~J 0.95 - 8.1 mg/1
For segment 1,

                                 /.55 \
                  Ci  = 8.1  mg/1   I—- I  0.94 = 5.6 mg/1


and so on.

     Figure VI-21 depicts this estimate of the distribution of CBOD in the
estuary.  In addition, hypothetical concentrations of a conservative
pollutant (k = 0) and coliform bacteria (k = 1.0)  are plotted.  Downstream
concentration diminishes faster for substances having larger decay constants,
as might be expected.
                             END OF EXAMPLE VI-7
6.4.4  Multiple Waste Load Parameter Analysis

     The preceding analysis allowed calculation of the longitudinal
distribution of a pollutant, either conservative or non-conservative,
resulting from a single waste discharge.  However, the planner will probably
want to simultaneously assess both conservative and non-conservative elements
from several separate discharges.  This can be accomplished by graphing all
desired single element distributions on one graph showing concentration
                                   280

-------
                                            182
                                    Relative  Concentration  Units
                                                                        co
    cn
     i
    hO
~n PO
o  rn
x  i-
I-  <
r~  m

^o cr)
c  rn
GO
    O
    :z:
    (/>


    o
    rri
    m
>
2:

CO

m
"2.

m

i—i
z
CD
    X
    m
               a
               CO
           O
           CD
cr
o

CD


o
c

3"

g


m
en

c
0)
               O
               q
               w"
               3
               CO
               *-*•
               CD
               -^
               CO
                  CO
                  O
                      CO
                      o
                      cn

-------
versus length of the estuary.   Once graphed, the resulting concentration may
be linearly added to obtain a  total waste load.

     The pollutant concentration increment from each source is calculated by
assuming the source is the sole contribution of pollution (i.e. other waste
loadings are temporarily set equal to zero).  This method, called
superposition, is valid as the long as volumetric discharge from any of the
sources does not signicantly influence the salinity distribution within the
estuary.  This assumption is typically true, unless the estuary is extremely
small and poorly flushed, and  the volumetric discharge is large relative to
tidal and advective flushing components.
     An example of the superposition procedure is shown in Figure VI-22.
Three local point sources of pollutants discharge at locations A, B, and C.
A background source enters the estuary with the river discharge.  The
contribution due to each source can be found from the fraction of freshwater
method (assuming the pollutants act conservatively)  as follows:
                -Ji f
                 R  fX
x > 0, where x is measured from the head
       of the estuary
                         CA=^
        R   x

       Wn     S.
                                             x B
                                 R  x
                                W     S
                                T fs T  '  * < B
                                 wc
                                 T fx  '
                                 R   C R   *
                                    282

-------
00

CO
                 CD
                 C
                 70

                 m
                                     POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION
                a
                <
                m
                m
                o
                o
"O
r~
m




CO

m



ET

o



a

i—i
-i

o

CO
                               oHead
                               g

                               o
                               m
              o


              i
              m
              >
              o
                                 Mouth

-------
where

     C          = concentration due to river discharge
      b

     C , C , C  = concentrations due to sources A, B, and C,
      M   D   \j
                  respectively

     R          = river flow rate

     fn > fp,> fr = fraction of freshwater at locations A, B, C,
      ABC
                  respectively

     S., SB, Sc = salinity at locations A, B, and C, respectively.

The pollutant concentration (above background) at any location in the estuary
is:
                              Sum = CA+CB+CC

and is shown in Figure VI-22.  When this is added to the background level,
the total pollutant concentration becomes:

                            CT = (WV + Cb
The dotted line in Figure VI-22 depicts CT<

     The technique of graphing outfall location and characteristics with
resulting estuarine pollutant concentration can be done for all anticipated
discharges.  This will provide the planner with a good perspective on the
source of potential water quality problems.

     Where the same segmentation  scheme has been used to define incremental
pollutant distributions resulting from several sources, the results need not
even be plotted to determine the  total resultant concentrations.  In this
case, the estuary  is evaluated on a segment-by-segment basis.  The total
pollutant concentration in each segment is calculated as the  arithmetic  sum
of the concentration increments resulting from the various  sources.
                                   284

-------
                                EXAMPLE VI-8
     The previous two example problems involved calculations of nitrogen
concentration in the Patuxent Estuary resulting from individual nitrogen
sources.  The objective of this example is to find the total nitrogen
concentration in the estuary resulting from both nitrogen sources.

     The eight-segment scheme of Examples VI-6 and VI-7 is retained for this
problem.  For each segment, the incremental nitrogen increases are summed to
give the total concentration:

                                 C  =  Cb +  CA

where
     C, is the concentration resulting from the N source discharging  into
        the estuary at point A

For segment 1, the calculation  is:

        C = 1-75 mg/1  (from river) + 0.43 mg/1 (from  local  source)
          = 2.18 mg/1  total nitrogen

Necessary data and final  concentrations for each segment are shown in Table VI-15.

	END  OF EXAMPLE VI-8	


6,4.5 ^sj)ersj[oji-A^dvection  Equations  for Predicting _P_o_llutant_l^sjtrj_bjjtj_ons

     Dispersion-advection equations offer  an  attractive method,  at least
theoretically, of predicting pollutant and dissolved oxygen  concentrations  in
estuaries.  However, from the  point of view of  hand calculation,  the
advection-dispersion equations  are  usually tedious to  solve, and  therefore
mistakes can  unknowingly  be incorporated  into the calculations.

     Dispersion-advection equations have been developed  in  a variety  of forms,
including one-, two-,  and three-dimensional representations.   The equations  in
this section  are limited  to one-dimensional representations  in
                                      285

-------
                     TABLE VI-15

DISTRIBUTION OF TOTAL NITROGEN IN THE PATUXENT ESTUARY
            DUE TO TWO SOURCES OF NITROGEN


Segment Number
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
River
Results From
Problem VI-4
Total Nitrogen
From River
mgN/1, Cfa
0.07
0.21
0.36
0.55
0.80
1.30
1.56
1.75
1.88
Results From
Problem VI-5
Total Nitrogen
From Point A Source
(Segment 4)
mgN/1, CA
0.25
0.74
1.26
1.93
3.06
1.74
0.95
0.43
0.00

Resultant
Concentration
c=cb + CA
mgfl/1
0.32
0.95
1.62
2.48
3.92
3.04
2.51
2.18
1.88
                       285

-------
order to reduce the amount of data and calculations required.

     One-dimensional dispersion-advection equations can be expressed in quite
divergent forms, depending on boundary conditions, cross-sectional area
variation over distance, and source-sink terms.  O'Connor (1965), for
example, developed a variety of one-dimensional advection-dispersion
equations for pollutant and dissolved oxygen analyses in estuaries, some of
which are infeasible for use on the hand-calculation level.

     The advection-dispersion equations to be presented subsequently in this
chapter can be used to predict:

     •   distributions of conservative or non-conservative pollutants,

     t   pollutant distributions in embayments, and

     •   dissolved oxygen concentrations.

Solutions from advection-dispersion can be superposed to account for multiple
discharges.  Example VI-9, to be presented subsequently, will illustrate this
process.

     As the name of the equations implies, dispersion coefficients are needed
in order to solve advection-dispersion equations.  Tidally averaged
dispersion coefficients are required for the steady-state formulations used
here.  The tidally averaged dispersion coefficient (EL) can be estimated from
the following expression:
                                E  = ___                          (VI-35)
                                 L   A dS/dx
                                                                      (VI-36)
                                  287

-------
where
     S   = tidally and cross sectionally averaged salinity in vicinity
           of discharge

     2Ax = distance between the salinity measurements Sx+Ax (at a
           distance Ax down estuary) and SX_AX (at a distance Ax up
           estuary)

     R   = freshwater flow rate in vicinity of discharge

The distance interval 2Ax should be chosen so that no tributaries are
contained within the interval.

     In the absence of site specific data, the dispersion coefficients shown
in Tables VI-16 and VI-17 can provide estimates of dispersion coefficients.

     For pollutants which decay according to first order decay kinetics, the
steady state mass balance equation describing their distribution is:

                         E  ŁŁ  _  UdC  .  kc   __                     (VI.37)
                          L dx*      dx

The solution to Equation VI-37  is:

                         C   e  J2X    x  >  0(down estuary)             (VI-38a)

                         CeJlX    x<0(up estuary)
                         o

where
                            2AEL
                            2AEL
                                   288

-------
                                                       TABLE VI-16


                                   TIDALLY AVERAGED DISPERSION COEFFICIENTS  FOR SELECTED
                                            ESTUARIES (FROM HYDROSCIENCE,  1971)
00
UD
Estuary
Delaware River
Hudson River (N.Y.)
East River (N.Y.)
Cooper River (S.C.)
Savannah R. (Ga. , S.C.)
Lower Raritan R. (N.J.)
South River (N.J.)
Houston Ship Channel (Texas)
Cape Fear River (N.C.)
Potomac River (Va. )
Compton Creek (N.J. )
Wappinger and
Fishkill Creek (N.Y.)
Freshwater
Inflow
(cfs)
2,500
5,000
0
10,000
7,000
150
23
900
1,000
550
10

2
Low Flow
Net Non tidal
Veloci ty ( fps)
Ik- dd - Mouth
0.12-0.009
0.037
0.0
0.25
0.7-0.17
0.047-0.029
0.01
0.05
0 .48-0.03
0.006-0.0003
0.01-0.013

0.004-0.001
Disiiorbio i
Coef f i c iuii t
(iin^/diiy )
5
20
H)
30
10-20
5
5
27
2-10
1-10
1

0.5-1
                     *1 mi2/day = 322.67 ft2/sec

-------
                               TABLE VI-17

                 TIDALLY AVERAGED  DISPERSION COEFFICIENTS
                           (FROM OFFICER, 1976)
    Estuary
 Dispersion
 Coefficient
    Range
  (ft2/sec)
           Comments
San Francisco Bay
     Southern Arm
     Northern Arm
Hudson River
fiarrows of Mercey
Potomac River
Severn Estuary
  200-2,000
  500-20,000
4,800-16,000
1 ,430-4,000
   65-650
   75-750
(by Stommel)
  580-1,870
  (Bowcien)
Measurements were made at  slack
water  over a period of one  to  a
few  days.  The fraction of
freshwater method was used.
Measurements were taken over
three  tidal cycles at 25
locations.

The  dispersion coefficient  was
derived  by assuming E|_ to  be
constant  for the reach studied,
and  that  it varied only with
flow.  A  good relationship
resulted  between E.  and flow,
substantiating the assumption.

The  fraction of freshwater
method was used by taking mean
values of salinity over a  tidal
cycle at  different cross
sections.

The  dispersion coefficient  was
found to  be a function of dis-
tance below the Chain Bridge.
Both salinity distribution
studies  (using the fraction of
freshwater method) and dye
release  studies were used to
detemi ne E. .

Bowden recalculated  |_ values
originally determined by
Stoiuiuel , who had used the
fraction of freshwater method.
Bowden included the fresh-
water inflows from tributaries,
which produced the larger
estimates of E. -
                                290

-------
                         TABLE VI-17 (continued)
Estuary
Tay Estuary
Dispersion
Coefficient
Range
(ft2/sec)
530-1,600
Comments
The fraction of freshwater
                         (up estuary)       method  was  used.  At a given
                        1,600-7,500        location,  EL was found to  vary
                        (down estuary)      with freshwater  inflow rate.

Thames Estuary            600-1,000        Calculations were performed
                         (low flow)        using the  fraction of fresh-
                            3,600          water method,  between 10 and
                         (high flow)        30 miles below London Bridge.

Yaquina Estuary           650-9,200        The dispersion coefficients for
                         (high flow)        high flow  conditions were  sub-
                          140-1,060        stantially  higher than for low
                         (low flow)        flow conditions, at the same
                                           locations.  The  fraction of
                                           freshwater  method was used.
                                  291

-------
     U = net velocity

     k = decay rate

     W = discharge rate of pollutant (at x=0)

     For Equations VI-38a and VI-38b to accurately estimate the pollutant
distribution in an estuary, the cross-sectional area of the estuary should be
fairly constant over distance, and the estuary should be relatively long.
For screening purposes the first constraint can be met by choosing a
cross-sectional area representative of the length of estuary being
investigated.  If the estuary is very short, however, pollutants might be
washed out of the estuary fast enough to prevent attainment of a steady-state
distribution assumed by Equations VI-38a and VI-38b.  For shorter estuaries
the fraction of freshwater method, modified tidal prism method, or near field
approach are more appropriate.

     At times when the freshwater flow rate in an estuary is essentially zero
pollutant concentrations might increase to substantial levels, if tidal
flushing is small.  Under these conditions the mass-balance expression for a
pollutant obeying first order kinetics is:
E.  d2C  - kc  =  0
 L "377"?
                                                                      (VI-39)
The solution to this equation is:
          C =
                                       for x > 0 (down estuary)      (VI-40a)
                                       for  x <0 (up estuary)         (VI-40b)
where
                                                                      (VI-41)
                                   292

-------
When the pollutant is conservative (i.e. k=0), Equation (VI-39) reduces to:
The solution is:

                        CQ   ,  x < 0  (up estuary)                    (VI-43a)

                         W
             c  =
                         I
                             (L-x)  + C   , x > 0 (down estuary)      (VI-43b)
where
               WL
     C . = C. +	
      0     L   ELA
     C.  = background concentration of the pollutant  at the mouth of the
          estuary

     L  = distance from the discharge location to  the mouth of the
          estuary.

Equation VI-43 illustrates the  important concept that the concentrations of
conservative  pollutants are constant up estuary from the discharge location
(when the river discharge  is negligible) and decrease linearly from the
discharge point to the mouth of the estuary.  Equations VI-40 and VI-43 apply
to estuaries  of constant,  or approximately constant, cross-sectional area
(e.g. sl.oughs).   If the cross-sectional area increases rapidly with distance
toward the  mouth, the methods presented in Section 6.5 are more appropriate.

     The dissolved oxygen  deficit equation (where  deficit is defined as the
difference  between the saturation concentration and  the actual dissolved
oxygen concentration) for  one-dimensional estuaries  at steady-state
conditions  is:

                           I'dD . E   d2D
                           dx       dx'
                                     293

-------
where
     D  = dissolved oxygen deficit

     L  = BOD concentration

     k2 = reaeration rate

     k  = BOD decay rate

Using Equation VI-38 to represent the BOD distribution,  the  expression for
the deficit D is:
   D = —
        kW
      A(k,-k)
                 exp
              2 E,

                                       _- -- x
                                     \
                                                         exp
                                                              2 C,
                                                               (VI-45)
where
     The plus (+) sign  is used to predict concentrations  up  estuary
     (x<0)

     The minus (-) sign  is used to predict concentrations down  estuary
     (x>0)
=  2
        = U2 + 4kE
=  2
        = U2 + 4k2E,
     M  =  mass  flux of dissolved oxygen contained in the discharge
                                    294

-------
The advantage of expressing the dissolved oxygen concentration in terms of
the deficit is that the principle of superposition can be invoked for
multiple discharges within a single estuary.  Specifically
                                   D =  Z  D.
and

                                 C  =  Cs  -  Z Di                         (VI-47)
where

     D- = dissolved oxygen deficit resulting from the i^L discharge

     C  = final dissolved oxygen concentration

     C  = dissolved oxygen saturation level.

Figure VI-23 shows the relationship between dissolved oxygen saturation and
temperature and salinity.
                                EXAMPLE VI-9
      Dissolved  Oxygen Concentration Resulting from Two Sources of BOD
     Two municipal wastewater treatment plants discharge significant
quantities of BOD  into the James River in Virginia.  One discharges near
Hopewell, and the  second  10 miles further down estuary, near Uest Point.
Calculate the dissolved oxygen concentration  in the estuary as  a function of
distance.  Pertinent data are:
                                   295

-------
                                                                CD

                                                                C
                                                                70
                                                                IT]
IND

i^O
CPl
                                                                en
                                                            — l  en
                                                            m  o
                                                            2  I-
                                                            -D  <
                                                            m  m
                                                            73  O
                                                            C  X
                                                            pa  <
                                                            m  o
                                                                m
                                                            >  z
                                                            •z.
                                                            O  00
                                                                >
                                                            CO H
                                                            >  C
                                                            -<
                                                                c:
                                                                2:
                                                                o
OXYGEN SATURATION  CONCENTRATION (mg/l)

-------
     •    BOD5  in  Hopewell  plant  effluent  =  69,000  Ibs/day

     t    BOD   in  West  Point  plant  effluent,  located  10 miles  downstream
         from  Hopewell  =  175,000 Ibs/day

     •    freshwater flow  rate  =  2,900  cfs

     •    dissolved oxygen saturation = 8.2  mg/1

     •    cross sectional  area  =  20,000 ft2

     •    reaeration rate  = 0.2/day

     •    deoxygenation rate  =  0.3/day

     •    dispersion coefficient  = 12.5 mi2/day

     •    effluent dissolved  oxygen = 0.0  mg/1.

     The dissolved oxygen deficit due  to  each of the two contributions can be
determined independently of  the  other  using Equation IV-45.  The results are
plotted in Figure VI-24.   The  deficits are  added to produce the total deficit
(0(x))  due to both discharges  (Figure  VI-24a).  The distance scale in Figure
VI-24a  is referenced to the Hopewell  plant.  The West Point plant is placed
at mile 10.  When the deficit  at this  location due to the West Point plant is
calculated, set x = 0 in Equation VI-45.   The dissolved oxygen concentration
then becomes C(x) = 8.2-D(x),  and is  shown  in Figure VI-24b.

     One example calculation of  dissolved oxygen deficit will be shown to
illustrate the process.  Consider the  deficit produced at mile 0.0, due to
the Hopewell plant.  The waste loading from the Hopewell plant is:

           69,000 x 1.46 = 100,000 Ibs/day, BOD-ultimate =1.16 Ibs/sec
                                  297

-------
                                     Dissolved Oxygen Concentration, mg/l
                                                                                     Dissolved Oxygen  Deficit, mg/l
00
              CD
              c:
              xi
              m
               i
              ro
              -Cr
              m
          c_  a
          >  — •
          2  O
          m  H
          co  m
          m  co
          XI  CO
              O
              m
              O

              O
              X
              m
              ~a
              XI
              o
                               o-
   (D
   cn

   CD
^^ O
a- 5
   I   ro
   o    o
   •a
   (D

   CD
                               cn
                               O"
                                             CO
                                             b
                                              i
                                                    i
                                                          i
                                                                i
                                                                      t
                                                    03
                                                    b
                                                     i
CD
0)

CD
G>_

O
o
•a
CD

CD
                -j.     !\3    w    -C».    cn    cn    -^
                b     b    b    b    b    b    b
                I  	i	i	I	1	I	I
                                                                                                 cn
                                                                       I
                                                                       o

                                                                       CD-»O-
                                                                       $
                                                                       CD
                                                                       I
                                                                       cn
                                                                        r»o-
                                                                          cn
                                                                          o'
                                                                                                                                          HOD
                                                                                                                                          O  03  CD
                                                                                                                   D.
                                                                                                                   CD
                                                                                                                      §• c
                                                                                                                      CD  CD
                                                                                                                      <—*• <-*-
                                                                                                                      o  o


                                                                                                                      if o
                                                                                                                      cn  ^3
                                                                                                                      -<• CD

-------
When
     x = 0 Equation VI-45 simplifies to:
                         D =
                                kW
                             _  _
                             A(k2-k) \\fa7
                 _! ___ L
so
so
     Ql  =  U2  +  4k  E
/ 2900 \2
i —	 i  -f-
                   L  \20000/
                                  4(.3)(12.5)(5280)(5280)
                 81400  • 86400
=  .077
         ft2
         sec'
                             \TaT =  .278 ft/sec
           2 lr.n~2
     'a2 = U2 + 4k2EL = 0.058 ft2/sec
                                 = .242 ft/sec
The deficit is:

      D =
(.3)(1.16)
20000(.2-,3)
' 1
. .278
1 -
.242
                   = 9.3 x ID'5 lb/ft3 = 1.5 mg/1
This value is then plotted in Figure VI-24 at mile point 0.0.   The deficit  at
this location due to West Point is evaluated at x = -10 miles  in Equation
VI-45, since West Point is located 10 miles down estuary of Hopewell.   A
deficit of 0.6 mg/1 is found, and is plotted in Figure VI-24 at mile point
0.0.  The total deficit at Hopewell is 1.5 +0.6 = 2.1 mg/1, as shown in the
figure.
                             END OF EXAMPLE VI-9
                                   299

-------
6.4.6  Pritcnard's Two-dimensional  Box Model  for Stratified Estuaries

     Many estuaries in the United States are  either stratified or partially
mixed.  Because the circulation of  stratified systems is  fairly complex,  few
hand calculation methods are available for their analysis.   Instead
computerized solutions are generally used.

     One method developed by Pritchard (1969) which predicts the
distribution of pollutants in partially mixed or stratified estuaries is
suitable for hand calculations provided the user does not require too much
spatial resolution.  This method, called the  "two-dimensional  box model",
divides the estuary horizontally from head to mouth into  a  series of
longitudinal segments.  Each segment is divided into a surface layer and  a
bottom layer.  The analysis results in a system of n simultaneous linear
equations with n unknowns, where n  equals twice the number  of  horizontal
segments.  The unknowns are the pollutant concentrations  in each layer.

     Division of the estuary into only two horizontal segments results in
four simultaneous equations, which  is probably the most one would like to
solve entirely by hand.  However, many programmable hand  calculators contain
library routines for solving systems of 10 or more simultaneous equations,
which would allow the estuary to be divided into 5 or more  horizontal
segments.   If many more segments are desired, the solution could be easily
implemented on a computer using a numerical technique such  as  Gaussian
elimination to solve the resulting  system of  simultaneous linear equations.

     The following information is required for the two-dimensional box
analysis:   1) the freshwater flow rate due to the river;   2) the pollutant
mass loading rates;  and 3) the longitudinal  salinity profiles along the
length of the estuary in the upper and lower  layers, and  the salinity at the
boundary between these two layers.   The upper layer represents the portion
of the water column having a net nontidal flow directed seaward, and the
lower layer represents the portion of the water column having  net nontidal
flow directed up the estuary.  If no velocity data are available, these
layers can  generally be estimated based on the vertical salinity profiles.
                                    300

-------
     Figure VI-25 shows the parameters used in the analysis, which are
defined as follows:

     n          = segment number, increasing from head toward mouth
     (S )       = salinity in upper layer of segment n

     (S )       - salinity in lower layer of segment n

     (S )       - salinity at the boundary between the upper and lower
                  layers of segment n
     (S  )  ,    = salinity in the upper layer at the boundary between
       u n~15 n
                  segments n-1 and n
     (S  )       = sal-inity in the lower layer at the boundary between
       i n** x 5 ''
                  segments n-1 and n
      (Q  )  ,    = net nontidal flow rate in the upper layer from
       u n— i, n
                  segment  n-1 to n

      (Q  )     , = net nontidal flow rate in the lower layer from
       i n,  n-1
                  segment  n to n-1

      (Qv)n      = net upward vertical flow from the  lower to the upper
                  layer of segment n

      E          = vertical exchange coefficient between the lower and
                  upper layers of segment n

      R          - freshwater flow rate due to river

      (qu)n      = pollutant mass loading rate to upper layer of segment
                  n  (from  external sources)
                                   301

-------
o
ro
                          n-1
                                         n + 1
                                          >u'n-1,n
                                  (Qu>n-1,n
               u  -  —  -
(Su)n


(Cu)n

                                                                                                        (Qu)n,
                   .*.'•"• >:i.'"!<.": a'•/••*'i?'!V"V'-?V'";V-1 • ":•;• •^-•'''•''^.;:'''>>"';'-;<'-'.-''-'>'.;:;'-"'t;':^' VJ?'' '.V-';«-v'»'.'.''/1X.' -V-'^-o•'.••.«.•,•.•.

                   •'•V;''-X'-\'v\'-'V.:';''-»A\-V':X:-i-%>':'';-:'^\:;«:^V;p^V/o;\
                   FIGURE V 1-2:5   DEFINITION SKETCH  FOR  PRITCHARD'S TWO-DIMENSIONAL  Box MODEL

-------
     (qJri       =  Pollutant  mass  loading  rate  to  lower  layer of segment
                  n  (from  external  sources)

     (C )        =  pollutant  concentration in  the  upper  layer of segment
       u n
                  n

     (C1)n       =  pollutant  concentration in  the  lower  layer of segment
                  n

     Pritchard's two-dimensional  box analysis as  presented  here requires  the
following assumptions:

     1.  steady-state salinity distribution

     2.  the pollutant is  conservative

     3.  the concentration of the pollutant is uniform  within  each
         layer of each segment and

     4.  the pollutant concentration at the boundary between  segments
         or layers is equal  to the average of the concentrations  in the
         two adjacent segments or layers.

     Application of the two-dimensional box model involves  six steps.  These
are:

     1.  Plot the longitudinal salinity profiles  in the upper  and lower
         layers, and at the interface between the two layers.   If
         information on the net nontidal velocity distribution is not
         available to define the layers, the boundary may be  estimated
         for a given section of the estuary as the depth at which the
         vertical salinity gradient is maximum.  The resulting plots
         will be used to determine the average salinities in  each
         segment and layer,  and the salinities at the boundaries
         between each segment and layer.
                                  303

-------
2.   Segment the estuary.   The number of segments will  depend  on
    the degree of spatial  resolution desired,  and the  limitations
    of the hand calculators used to solve the  system of
    simultaneous equations.  The accuracy of the results will
    generally increase with the number of segments used, since the
    assumptions of the analysis are better satisfied.   A minimum
    of three horizontal segments should probably be used to obtain
    even a rough estimate  of the pollutant distribution in the
    estuary.  This will require the solution of six equations and
    six unknowns.

3.   Compute the net nontidal flows in the upper layer  and lower
    layer at the boundary  between each horizontal segment using
    Knudson's Hydrographical Theorem (Dyer,  1973):
                                          l, n
                (n )  ,    = R	-—-	            (VI-48)
                                     n-l, n
                    'n. n-1     (S )  ,   -(S )  ,               (VI-49)
                               v i'n-1, n v u n-1, n
    At the upstream freshwater boundary of  the estuary,
    «>'>„. n-1- °"

4.  Compute the net upward vertical  flows  between  layers  for  each
    segment using the continuity equation  for  the  upper  layer of  the
    seginent:
                        = (Qu}n,  n+1 " ^n-l,  n               (vi-50)

-------
5.   Compute the vertical exchange coefficients  between  layers  for each
    segment using the salinity balance equation for  the upper  layer of
    the segment, which can be arranged in  the following form:
Vn. n+1 
-------
     Since most pollutant discharges are buoyant, they should be considered as
loadings to the upper layer, even though they may be physically introduced at the
bottom.  Pollutants which are denser than the upper waters and which would sink
to the bottom should be considered as loadings to the lower layer.  However, the
analysis is not applicable to pollutants which tend to remain near the bottom and
accumulate in or react with the bottom sediments.

     The above mass balance equations can be simplified and rearranged into the
following form:
                                               2En+ (Vn|  '-,'„
                                     -,                               (VI-54)
                            [-n
                                     n]
                                                                     (VI-55)
for the lower layer of segment n.  This pair of equations is written for each
segment, resulting in a system of simultaneous equations where the
concentrations, (Cu)n and (Ci)n, are the unknowns, the terms enclosed in square
brackets are the coefficients, and the terms on the right hand side of the
equations are the constants.

     However, since each equation involves both the uptream and downstream
segments for a given layer, the boundary conditions at both the upstream and
downstream end of the estuary must be applied so that there will not be more
                                  306

-------
unknowns than equations.  At the upstream end of the estuary, the following
boundary conditions apply:

     (Qu)n_l5 n = R = river flow rate

     (C )  T   = CD - pollutant in river
       u n-i      K

     (Q )     ,     =0 (no salt water movement upstream into the river)

These conditions simplify the previous equations to
u\ + [2E. + i +
                                      R = ~z
                                                                      (VI-56)
for the upper layer of the first upstream segment and

            [2E<  - (Qyh] (cu), + [-2E,]  (cj, + [(QA.J (c,)2 -2(qi)i        (vi-57)

for the lower layer of the first upstream segment.

     For the lower layer of the last downstream segment  at  the ocean end  of  the
estuary, the following boundary condition is used to  simplify the equation:

     (Cj    =  0 (no  pollutant, entering  the  lower layer  from the ocean
                waters outside the mouth  of estuary)

which simplifies the  corresponding  equation  to:
n. n-l]  K.Jn-l +[2En '
                                  < Vn
     For the upper  layer of the  last  segment  at  the mouth  of  the  estuary,  some
assumption must be made about the pollutant concentration  in  the  upper  layer  just
outside the mouth to eliminate the  (n+1)  term from the equation.   If  actual data
                                 307

-------
are available based on field measurements, a measured value of  (C  ) +, can  be
used.  This simplifies the corresponding equation to:
     >n-l.  n]  n-l +  ['2En]  (Cu>n + [ 2En + <«v>n]  ^n = ~2^n + „-! ' ['2En ' 'c <«„>„. n+l ]  n + [«„ * (Qv)n]  (C, )„ = -2(qu)n
     Step  (6) of  the two-dimensional box  analysis  involves  computing  all  of the
coefficients and  constants  in the  system  of  equations  defining  each  segment and
layer (equations  VI-54 and  VI-55)  and  applying  the boundary conditions  to produce
equations  for the first upstream and last downstream segments  in  the  estuary
(equations VI-56  through  VI-60).   The  coefficients and constants  are  functions of
the variables previously  computed  in steps (3)  through (5).   The  resulting
equations  are then  solved using library routines  in programmable  hand
calculators, or by  programming an  appropriate  numerical  technique such  as
Gaussian elimination on either a programmable  hand calculator or  a computer.
                                  308

-------
     Since the analysis requires application of the boundary conditions at the
freshwater head of the estuary and the coastal mouth of the estuary to obtain the
same number of equations as unknowns, the entire estuary must be included in the
first cut analysis.  The initial analysis will yield the overall pollutant
distribution throughout the entire estuary.  Once this is determined, the
analysis could be repeated to obtain more detail for smaller portions of the
estuary by using the first cut results to estimate the pollutant boundary
conditions at each end of the region of concern, and then rearranging equations
(7) and (8) so the terms involving the concentrations outside the specified
regions are treated as constants and moved to the right hand side of the
equations.

     The Pritchard Model theoretically allows external pollutant loading to be
introduced directly into any segment along the estuary.  By moving external
loadings from the head to near the mouth of the estuary, the planner can predict
how pollutant levels are affected.  However, experience with the model has shown
that when external side loadings are considerably larger than those which enter
at the head of the estuary, model instabilities can arise.  When this occurs, the
pollutant profile oscillates from segment to segment, and negative concentrations
can result.  It  is recommended that the user first run the Pritchard Model by
putting all pollutant  loading into the head of the estuary.  This situation
appears to be always stable, and, as the following example shows, reasonable
pollutant profiles are predicted.
                                  EXAMPLE VI-10
                           Pollutant Distribution in a
                               Stratified Estuary

     The Patuxant River  in Maryland is a partially stratified estuary, where the
degree of stratification depends on the freshwater flow rate discharged at the
head of the estuary.  Table VI-18 shows the salinity distribution within the
estuary under  low flow conditions for each segment and layer.  The location of
each layer  is  shown in Figure VI-26.  Also shown in the table is the pollutant
distribution by  layer and segment for a mass flux of 125 Ibs/day (57 kg/day) of
                                    309

-------
                  TABLE VI-18

SALINITY AND POLLUTANT DISTRIBUTION IN PATUXENT
       ESTUARY UNDER LOW FLOW CONDITIONS
Segment Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
boundary
Salinity
(as Chloride,
mg/1)
Upper Layer Lower Layer
496.
1831.
3771.
6050.
8040.
9310
10010.
10790.
11240.
11830.
12100.
12750.
13500.
524.
1940.
3970.
6280.
8220.
9910.
10660.
11070.
11760.
12120.
12650.
12850.
13500.
Pollutant
Upper Layer
0.193
0.173
0.144
0.100
0.081
0.062
0.051
0.040
0.033
0.025.
0.021
0.011
0.0
Concentration
(mg/1)
Lower Layer
0.192
0.171
0.141
0.108
0.078
0.053
0.042
0.036
0.025
0.020
0.013
0.009
0.0
                   310

-------
FIGURE VI-26  PATUXENT ESTUARY MODEL SEGMENTATION
                       311

-------
conservative pollutant input at the head of the estuary.

     The pollutant distribution was predicted by solving  on a computer the
12-segment, 2-layer system (24 simultaneous equations).   The salinity
distribution shown in Table VI-18 was used as input data.  As a point of
interest, the same network was solved using the model  WASP (courtesy of
Robert Ambrose, ERL, U.S. Environmental  Protection  Agency, Athens,  Georgia),  which
is a dynamic two-dimensional estuary model.  Instead of  using salinity directly,
UASP predicts the salinity distribution based on dispersive and advective
exchange rates.  The salinity distribution predicted by  WASP is the same as shown
in Table VI-18, which was used as input to Pritchard's Model.  After running  WASP
to steady-state conditions, the pollutant distribution throughout the estuary was
virtually the same as predicted by Pritchard's Model.

     The pollutant distribution in the Patuxant estuary  will be solved in detail
using 4 segments instead of 12.  The resulting system of 8 simultaneous equations
can be solved on a variety of hand-held calculations.   The tabulations below  show
salinities at each segment boundary, and the horizontal  flow rates  in the upper
and lower layers.
Boundary (Vn-l,n
n-l,n mg/l-Cl
0, 1
1, 2
2, 3
3, 4
4, 5
*This
0.0
4960.
9420.
11445.
13500.
is the specified
mg/l-Cl
0.0
5080.
9640.
11860.
13500.
river inflow
«Un-l,n
mVsec
3.3*
116.7
139.5
94.3
156.8
rate, R.
(Q, ) ,
m3/sec
0.0
113.4
136.2
91.0
153.5

The flow rates were calculated from Equations VI-48 and VI-49, while the
salinities were found directly from Table VI-18.
                                  312

-------
The  salinities within each layer, the salinity and flow rate between the
interface of each layer, and the exchange coefficients are tabulated below.
Segment
n
1
2
3
4
(Su>n
mg/l-Cl
1830
8040
10790
12100
n
mg/l-Cl
1890
8130
10930
12380
(S])n
mg/l-Cl
1940
8220
11070
12650
(Qv)n
m3/sec
113.
23.
-45.
63.
En
m 3/sec
3260.
3140.
930
280.
The flow rates were found from Equation VI-50, and the exchange coefficients
from Equation VI-51.

     Substituting these data into the pollutant mass balance expressions
(Equations VI-54 through VI-59), the following system of equations result:
-6523. 6638. -117. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.~
6411. -6525. 0.0 113. 0. 0. 0. 0.
117. 0.0 -6275. 6297. -139. 0. 0. 0.

0. -113. 6252. -6275. 0.0 136 0. 0.
0. 0. 139. 0.0 -1856. 1811. -94. 0.
0. 0. 0. -136. 1901 -1S56. 0.0 91.
0. 0. 0. 0. 94. 0.0 -561 624.
0. 0. 0. 0. 0. -91. 499. -561









f(C T
(c,)
(C )'
U 2

i





" •"



-1.32"
0.
0.

0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
The value -1.32 in the first row of the right-hand side column vector  is
twice the loading of pollutant which comes into the upper layer of  the "first
segment, as required in Equation VI-56.  The units are in gm/sec to be
compatible with the units of the remaining terms in the equations:
so
 M = 125 Ibs/day = 0.66 gm/sec
21-1 = 250 Ibs/day =1.32 gm/sec
                                 313

-------
     The pollutant distribution which results from solving the eight linear
equations is:

                              (Cu)i   =     (0.17)
                              (C-,)i   =     (0.17)
                              (Cu)2   =     (0.08)
                              (Ci)2   =     (0.08)
                              (Cu)3   =     (0.04)
                              (C})3   =     (0.04)
                              (CUK   =     (0.02)
                              (c1)4   =     (o.oi)

These values are nearly the same as found when 12 segments were used, which
indicates 4 segments are sufficient to accurately predict pollutant distribution
for this problem.
                              END OF EXAMPLE VI-10
6.5  POLLUTANT DISTRIBUTION FOLLOWING DISCHARGE FROM A MARINE OUTFALL
6.5.1  Introduction

     Numerous coastal states have enacted water quality standards which limit the
maximum allowable concentration of pollutants, particularly metals and organic
toxicants, which can be discharged into estuarine and coastal waters.  The
standards normally permit that an exempt area, called a mixing zone, be defined
around the outfall where water quality standards are not applicable.  For
example, the Water Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters of California (State
Water Resources Control Board, 1978) sets forth the following statement directed
at toxic substance limitations:

          "Effluent  limitations shall be imposed in a manner prescribed by
     the State Board such that the concentrations set forth ... as water
     quality objectives, shall not be exceeded in the receiving water upon
                                 314

-------
     the completion of initial dilution."

     The mixing zone, or zone of initial dilution (ZID), is non-rigorously
defined as the volume of water where the wastewater and ambient saline water mix
during the first few minutes following discharge, when the plume still has
momentum and buoyancy.  As the wastewater is discharged, it normally begins to
rise because of its buoyancy and momentum, as illustrated in Figure VI-27.

     If the ambient water column is stratified and the water depth is great
enough, the rising plume will not reach the surface of the water, but rather will
stop at the level where the densities of the plume and receiving water become
equal.  This level is called the plume's trapping level.  (See Figure VI-27.)
Due to residual momentum, the plume might continue to rise beyond the trapping
level, but will tend to fall back after the momentum is completely dissipated.
Once the plume stops rising, the waste field begins to drift away from the ZID
with the ambient currents.  At this time, initial dilution is considered
complete.  Section 6.5.2, which follows, shows how initial dilution is
calculated, and then Sections 6.5.3 and 6.5.4 illustrate how pollutant
concentrations at the completion of initial dilution can be predicted.
Sections 6.5.5 and 6.5.6 explain methods of predicting pollutant and dissolved
oxygen concentrations, respectively, as the waste field migrates away from the
ZID.

     The methods presented in section 6.5.2 through 6.5.6 are applicable to
stratified or non-stratified estuaries, ernbayments, and coastal waters.  The
methods assume that reentrainment of previously discharged effluent back into the
ZID is negligible.  Reentrainment can occur if the wastewater is discharged into
a confined area where free circulation is impaired or because of tidal reversals
in narrow estuaries.
                                315

-------
                                                                     Participates
                                                                   (which settle  out
                                                                   of  drift field)
Effluent  leaving
 diffuser  ports
*. '.« *'•.•'.'„'*-''- o •'-'• '•"•'••a •"."•">'', o'.'- :.''-*'°-'.''"_'.' •' - ".•,;'• • '.'-o '.••-*•.' • •*.'«•'•".•' '••» '••'.'•'.- •'.'• ••-. „., •••.
'  . .'' .• "A «  • '• .",•.'••-••,'-°-  ••' .'•  '•'• ;•  . •*•-.'-.-• r •• - .'•?.-•()•.•••.•»?;.'.•.'•'•'•.•*•" •'•V'"*"»
     FIGURE  VI-27   WASTE  FIELD  GENERATED  BY  MARINE OUTFALL
                                        316

-------
6.5.2  Prediction of Initial Dilution
6.5.2.1  General

     Discharge to bodies of water through submerged diffusers is a common waste
water management technique.  A diffuser is typically a pipe with discharge ports
spaced at regular intervals.  Such discharges are often buoyant with high exit
velocity relative to the ambient velocity.  The resulting waste streams act as
plumes or buoyant jets.  The velocity shear between ambient and plume fluids
results in the  incorporation of ambient fluid into the plume, a process called
entrapment.  Initial dilution results from the entrainment of ambient fluid into
the plume as the plume rises to its trapping level.

     The magnitude of initial dilution depends on a number of factors including,
but not limited to, the depth of water, ambient density stratification, discharge
rate, buoyancy, port spacing (i.e. plume merging), and current velocity.  These
factors may be  referred to collectively as the diffuser flow configuration or
simply the flow configuration.  Depending on the flow configuration, the  initial
dilution may be less than 10 or greater than 500.  As attaining water quality
criteria may often require relatively high initial dilution, the need to be able
to estimate initial dilution for various flow configurations becomes apparent.

     Other than actually sampling the water after a facility is in operation,
there are various ways to estimate pollutant concentrations achieved in the
vicinity of a particular diffuser.  A scale model faithful to all similarity
criteria could yield the necessary dilution information.  Dimensional analysis
and empirical formulae may also be very useful.  Alternatively, a numerical model
based on the laws of physics may be developed.  This method is chosen to provide
initial dilution estimates here because it is more cost-effective than field
sampling and more accurate than a scale model.

     Any numerical model used to provide dilution estimates should faithfully
replicate the relevant plume relationships and should be verified for accuracy.
The plume model MERGE  (Frick, 1981c) accounts for the effects of current ambient
density stratification and port spacing on plume behavior.  In addition, it has
been extensively verified  (Frick, 1981a, 1981b;  Tesche et al., 1980;
                                 317

-------
Policastro et aj_._, 1980;  Carhart et al_._, 1981).

     There are several ways of presenting the initial dilution estimates.  MERGE
may be run for specific cases or run for many cases spanning a range of
conditions and presented in nomogram or tabular form.  The latter method is the
most compact.  The resulting initial dilution tables display values of dilution
achieved at the indicated depths and densimetric Froude numbers.  One hundred
tables are presented in Appendix 6 for various combinations of port spacing,
density stratification, and effluent-to-current velocity ratio.

     Before describing the tables in more detail and discussing examples, it may
be helpful for some users to read the following, occasionally technical,
discussions of the plume model MERGE (Section 6.5.2.2) and of basic principles of
similarity (Section 6.5.2.3).  Others may want to advance directly to
Section 6.5.2.4 describing table usage.
6.5.2.2  The Plume Model JCRGJE

     MERGE is the latest in a series of models whose development began in 1973.
Various stages of model development have been recorded (Winiarski and Frick, 1976
and 1978;  Frick, 1981c).   In the realm of plume modeling, MERGE belongs to the
Lagrangian minority since more models are Eulerian.  The model can be
demonstrated to be basically equivalent to its Eulerian counterparts (Frick and
Winiarski, 1975;  Frick, 1981c).  Time is the independent variable which is
incremented in every program iteration based on the rate of entrainment.

     To simplify the problem, many assumptions and approximations are made in
plume modeling.  In MERGE,  steady-state is assumed and the plume is assumed to
have a round cross section everywhere.

     The MERGE user may input arbitrary current and ambient density profiles.
The model includes a compressible equation of continuity so that the predictions
are also valid for highly buoyant plumes.  It accounts for merging of adjacent
plumes but only when the ambient current dilution is normal to the diffuser pipe.
In many cases, this is not a significant restriction as many diffusers are
oriented to be normal to the prevailing current direction.
                                318

-------
     The model contains an option for using either constant or variable
coefficients of bulk expansion in the equation of state.  The water densities in
Table VI-19 are generated using the model's density subroutine based on actual
temperatures and salinities (i.e. effectively using variable coefficients).   If
temperature and salinity data are unavailable then the model can be run based on
density data alone.  The latter method is satisfactory for relatively high
temperatures and salinities because the equation of state is relatively linear
with these variables in that range.  However, for low densities and temperatures
gross inaccuracies may result.  Unfortunately, the initial dilution tables are
based on the latter method.  A more accurate representation would greatly
increase the number of tables necessary to cover all the cases.  Users with
applications involving cold, low salinity water are urged to run the more
accurate form of the model.

     The success of MERGE  in predicting plume behavior  is primarily attributable
to two unique model features.  The first of these relates to the expression of
forced entrainment.  Entrainment may be attributed to the velocity shear present
even in the absence of currents, i.e.  aspiration, and  to current-induced
entrainment, sometimes called forced entrainment.

     The forced entrainment algorithm in MERGE is based on the assumption that
all fluid flowing through  the upstream projected area of the plume is entrained.
This hypothesis is based on well-established principles and observations (Rawn et
a!., 1960;  Jirka and Harlman 1973).  Paradoxically, the hypothesis has never
been implemented in numerical models before.  The projected area normally
contains linear and quadratic terms  in plume diameter,  whereas in conventional
modeling, forced entrainment is generally expressed as  a linear function of
diameter.  It  is necessary to include additional sources of entrainment to make
up the difference when so  expressed.

     The second feature  is the use of a constant aspiration coefficient.  This
coefficient is often considered to be variable (e.g. Fan, 1967).  The need for a
variable coefficient is  attributable to the fact that many models predict
centerline plume values.   For plumes discharged vertically upward into density
stratified ambient water,  such models are expected  to predict the maximum
penetration of the plume.  To achieve agreement requires a relatively small
aspiration coefficient.  However, when the same models  are used to predict the
                                   319

-------
                                                                              Table VI-19a

                                              WATER  DENSITIES  (EXPRESSED AS  SIGMA-T)*  CALCULATED  USING THE
                                                               DENSITY  SUBROUTINE  FOUND IN MERGE

                                                                            TEMPERATURE(°C)
                                                   24              5            8             10            12            14
u
5
10
15
-0.993
.721
1.535
2.31.8
3.159
3.978
9.590
6.399
7.207
8. 015
8.822
9.628
12.01.5
-0.031.
.776
1.586
2.395
3.203
d.Olfl
5.623
6.1.28
7.233
8.037
8.81.0
9.61.3
10.1.1.6
11. 2*8
12.01.9
.007
.Sid
1.628
2.1.25
3.230
d.G33
d. 836
5.639
6.1.1.1
7.21.2
8.0d2
8.8ii2
9.61.2
lO.ddl
11.21.0
12.038
.331
.835
1.637
2.d39
3.21.0
- d.OVO
d.81.0
5.639
6.dI7
7.235
8.032
8.829
9.625
10.1.21
11.217
12.012
.039
.839
1.638
2.1.37
3.23d
d.031
d.828
5.623
6.1.18
7.213
8. 007
8.821
9.59d
10.387
11.179
11.971
.030
.827
1.623
3.213
d.007
d.SOQ
5.593
6.385
7.176
7.967
. 8.758
9.5d8
10.338
11.127
11.916
. BC6
.BOO
1.593
2.385
3.177
3. 968
d.758
5.5d8
6.337
7.125
7.913
8. 7 Gl
9. d88
10.275
11. 062
11. 8d8
-0.032
.758
1 .5d8
2.338
3.126
3.911.
d.701
5.d88
6.271.
7.060
7.8«.5
8.630
9.dl5
10.199
10.983
11 .766
-C.086
.702
1.1,89
2.276
3.061
3.81.7
d.631
S.dl5
6.199
6.982
7.761.
8.51.6
9.328
10.109
10.890
11.671
-0.15d
.632
1.1.16
2.200
2.983
3. 765
d.5d7
5.329
5.109
6. 890
7.670
8.1,1.9
9.228
10.007
10.786
11 .56<«
-8.235
,5dS
1.329
2.111
2.891
- 3.671
1..I.50
5.229
6.007
6.785
7.563
8.31.0
9.116
9.893
10.669
11.1.1.5
-0.330
. d50
1.230
2. ooa
2.786
- 3.56d
d. 3dl
5.117
5.893
6. 66S
7. dd3
8.218
8.992
9.766
10.5dO
11.313
-0.d3B
1.117
1.893
2.669
— S.ddd
d.218
d.992
5.766
6.539
7.S12
- 8.081.
8.856
9.628
10.399
11.170
-0.558
.217
.992
1.766
2.539
3.312
d.856
5.627
6.398
7.168
7.939
8.708
9.d78
10.21.7
11.016
-0.691
.•82
. 85d
1.626
2.397
-s.iea
3.938
d.7CS
6.2d5
7.91*
- 7.782
6.?d9
9.317
l«.3Sd
10. 851
f\j                       0       12.850 12.851 12.836 12.807 12.763 12.705 12.63d 12.51.9 12.d52 12.3d2 12.220 12.087 11.91.1 11.785 11.618
O                       5       13.65d 13.652 13.63d 13.6D2 13.555 13.d9d 13.d20 13.332 13.232 13.120 12.996 12.860 12.712 12.55d I2.38d
                       <3^-       Id.d59 id.d53 Id.1.32 Id.196 Id.3d6 l'd.2B2 Id.205 Id.115 Id.013 13.898 13.771 13.633 13.1.83 13.322 13.151
                       -—  on   IS.263 I5.25d 15.229 15.190 15.137 15.071 Id. 991 Id.898 Id.793 Id.676 Id.5d7 Id.d06 ld.25d Id.091 13.917
                            20   16.067 16.05d 16.027 15.985 15.929 15.85° 15.777 15.681 15.573 15.d53 15.322 15.179 15.025 Id.860 ld.68d
                       ŁH       16.870 16.855 io.82d 16.779 16.720 16.6d7 16.562 16.d6d 16.35d 16.231 16.097 15.952 15,796 15.628 15.d51
                       i—i       17.67d 17.655 17.621 17.573 17.511 17.1.36 17.3d7 17.2d7 17.13d 17.009 16.873 16.725 16.566 16.397 16.217
                       Z       18.d78 18.1,55 I8.dl8 18.367 18.302 18.22d 18.133 18.030 17.91d 17.787 .17.6d8 17.d98 17.337 17.166 16.98d
                       >~\       19.281 19.255 19.215 19.161 19.093 19.012 18.919 18.813 19.69', 18.565 18.d2d 18.271 16.108 17.935 17.751
                       
-------
                                                   Table  VI-l9b

                   WATER  DENSITIES  (EXPRESSED  AS SIGMA-T)"  CALCULATED  USING  THE
                                    DENSITY  SUBROUTINE FOUND  IN  MERGE

                                                  TEMPERATURE (°C)

               16            18            20            22            24            26             28
0
5
10
^ 15
o
c^
r 2°
-0.836
-0.065
.7C5
2.21,1.
3.012
3.780
5.315
6. 082
6.81.8
8.379
9.11.5
9.910
10.675
11. «.39
12.201.
12.969
iiiiii.

-0.993
-0.221.
.51.1.
1.312
2.079
2.e<.5
3.611
«,. 377
5. 11.2
5.9Q7
6.671
7.*i35
8.198
3.962
9.725
13. 1.48
11.251
12.013
12.776
1 3.539
11,. 331
-1. 161
-0.391.
.372
1. 133
1.9C3
2.667
3.1.31
<». 195
<>.958
5. 721
6,1.33
7.21.5
8. 007
8. 768
9.530
10.291
11.052
11.813
12.573
13.331,

-1. Ji.1
-0.576
.189
.952
1.715
2.1.78
3.21.0
i.. 002
I..763
5.521,
6.285
7.QI.5
7.805
8.565
9.321.
10. 083
10. 81.3
11.602
12. 361
13. 120
13. 879
-1.532
-0.763
-0.836
.756
1.518
2.279
3.039
3.799
<..S58
5.317
6.076
6.335
7.5=3
8.351
9.108
9.866
10.623
11. 381
12. 138
12.395
13.653
-1.733
-3. 971
-0.211
.550
1.309
2. 063
2.8Z7
3.585
I..31.3
5.100
5.857
6.611,
7.371
8.127
8.883
9.639
10.395
11.150
11.906
12.652
I3.m7
-1.91,5
-1.185
-0.1.26
.333
1.091
1.81.8
2.605
3.362
«.. 118
<>. 873
5.629
6.381,
7.139
7.893
8.61,8
9.1, 32
10. 156
10.910
11. 661,
1 Z . •» 1 8
13. 173
-2.167
-1.1.09
-0.651
.106
.862
1.613
2.373
3.128
3.882
I.. 636
5.390
6.11,1,
6.397
7.650
8 .1.03
9.15t
9.908
10 .661
12.166
12.919
-2.399
-1.6I.Z
-0. 887
-0.131
.623
1.377
2.131
2.381.
3.637
•,.390
5.11,2
5.891.
6.61.6
7.397
8.1<>9
8.900
9.651
10.1.02
11.153
11.901.
12.655
-2.61.1
-1.386
-1.132
-0.378
.375
1.127
1.830
2.631
3.383
1..8S5
5.635
6.385
7.135
7.885
3.635
9.385
10.131.
10. 381.
11.631.
12.381,
-2.893
-2.139
-1.387
-0.635
.117
.868
1.619
2.369
3.119
3.868
',.618
5.367
6.116
6.861,
7.613
8.361
9.109
9.453
10.606
11.351.
12.133
-3. 151.
-2.1.02
-1.651
-C.901
-0.150
.599
1.31.8
2.397
2.81.6
3.591.
<.. 31.2
5.089
5.837
6.581.
7. 331
8.078
8.825
9.572
10.319
11.066
11. 913
-3.1.25
-2.671,
-1.925
-1 .176
-fl.i.27
.321
1.069
1.816
Z.563
3,310
I.. OS 7
<«.S03
5.51.9
6.295
7.01,1
7.786
8.512
9.278
10.023
10.769
11.515
-3. 731,
-2.956
-2.208
-1.1.60
-0. 713
.031.
.780
1.526
2.272
3.017
3.763
W.507
5.252
5.997
6. 71,1
7.1,36
3.230
8.975
9.719
10.1,61.
11.203
-3.993
-3.2«,6
-1.753
-1.007
-0.262
.%83
1.228
1.972
2.716
3.S60
5.690
6.1,33
7.176
7.920
8.663
9.* 86
10.893
     16.027  15.827  15.617 15,397 15=168 H..929 n,.6m  11..I.3I. 1U.158 13.881, 13.600 13.308  13.007  12.698 12.381
     16.792  16.590  IS.378 IS.155 15.925 15.685 15.W36  15.177 11..910 H. bji» l«,.3i.9 K..056  13.75U  13.1.1.3 13.125
o c  J---557  17.353  17.139 16.91& 16.683 16.t.iil 1&.19Q  15.931 15.662 15.381. IS.098 lt.,803  H. 500  !»*. 189 13.869
     18.322  18.115  17.901 17.576 17.1.1.1 17.19a 16. 91.516.681. 16.1.11. 16.135 1S.8I.8 15.552  15.21.7  1<>.935 llt.6t»
     19.087  18.880  18.662 18.1,36 18.200 17.955 17,701  17.1.38 17.166 16.886 16.597 ~16.30 0  15.995  15.681 15.359
     19.853  19.61,3  19.1.2<. 19.196 18.958 16.712 18.H56  18.192 17.919 17.637 17. 3<,7 17.0<,9  16.71.Z  16. <,28 16.185
     20.619  20.1,08  20.187 19.957 19.717 19.1.69 19.Z12  1S.9<,& 18.672 18.339 13.098 17.798  17.«.90  17.175 16.851
Qn  21.385  21.172  20.91.9 20.718 20.1.77 20.227 19.96S  19.701 19.1.25 19.11.1 1S.B1.9 18.51.8  18.239  17.9Z2 17.597
^U  2_2_._152  21.937  21.713 21.U79 21.236 20.985 20.725  20.1.56 20.179 19.891. 19.600 19.298  18.988  18.670 18.3«»*
     22.919  22.702  22.1.76 22.21,1 21.997 21.71.1. 21.I.8Z  21.212 20.931. 20.61.7 20.352 20.01,9  19.738  19.1,19 19.091
     23.687  23.1,68  23.2<,0 23.003 22.757 22.503 22.?«,0  21.968 21.689 21.WJ1 21.10«> 20.800  20.".88  20.168 19.8«tO
     2I..1.55  Z1..235  2I..OC5 Z3.766 23.519 23.263 22.998  22.725 22. <»«* 22.155 21.857 21.552  21.239  20.917 20.588
on 1^-221.  25.001  ?<.. 770 2U.530 2»,.2ei 2I..023 23.75r  23.1.83 23.200 22.910 22.611 22.3QI.  21.990  21.668 21.338
     fes-993  25.769  25.536 25.291. 25.QI.3 21..78I. 21..51&  2i,.2i>l 23~.957 23.665 23.365 23.058  22.71,2  22.S19 2270^8
     26.763  26.537  26.302 26.058 25.806 25.51.5 25.277  21..999 24.711. 2V.1.21 2^.120 23.811  23.1.95  23.171 22.839
     27.53U  27.306  27.069 26.821. 26.570 26.308 26.037  25.759 25.1,72 25.178 21..876 21..566  2 28.866 28.599 ?TT32i.  28.31.2 27.751 27.1.53 27. mB 26.835  26.511,  26.186 25785T
     •*•                                       ~                                                  ~~    '

      Sigma-t  (at)  is defined as:   (density-1)  x  103.   For  example,

      for  seawater  with a  density of  1.02500 g/cm3,  at =  25.

-------
                                                        Table  VI-19c

                       WATER  DENSITIES (EXPRESSED  AS  SIGMA-T)* CALCULATED  USING  THE
                                        DENSITY  SUBROUTINE  FOUND  IN MERGE
                                                       TEMPERATURE (°C)
      5  I
     10
 .177 -0.138  -fl.ii61--0.7g3 -1.131.  -l._       10.569  10.237  9.897  9.5U9   9.192  8.827  8. yi5  8.07^   7.685   7.288  6.881.  6.1.71  6.050   5.622   5.188
[_       11.312  10.979 10.638  10.288   9.931  9.56S  9,191  8.809   8. ".20   8.022  7.617  7.203  6.782   6.353   5.915
I—"       12.055  11.721 11.378  11.028  10.669 13.303  9.92s  9.5C.&   9.155   8.757  8.350  7.936  7.51«i   7.081.   6.6«.6
^       12.798  12.".63 12.119  11.768  H.i.08 11.0«.l  10.666 10.282   9.891   9. ".91  9.06U  8.669  8.2".6   7.816   7.377
—I   or  13.5M  13.205 12.861  12.508  12.m8 ll.?80  11.1.03 ILQIS  10.627  10.227  9.819  9.J.33  8.980   8.51.8   8.109
eC   C. 5  1<«.285  13.9<.8 13.602  13.21.9  12.888 12.519  12.11.2 11.757  11.361.  1J.953 10.551.  1C.138  9.71«t   9.282   B.8'>2
00       15.029  1<».691 li,.3<.5  13.990  13.628 13.258  12.881 12.<»9S  12.101  11.700 11.291  10.871. 10.".1.9 10.016   9.576
         15.773  15.1.3". 15.087  I",.732  1<..3&9 13.999  13.620 13.233  12.839  12.1.37 12.027  11.610 11.181. 10.751  10.310
         16.518  16.178 15.830  15.".75  15.111 li.,739  1I..3&Q 13.973  13.578  13.175 12.765  12.3<»7 11.921 ll."»87  11.0  1&.9Z3 16.57^  16.217  15.853 iS.i.81  15.101 j!.. 713  Id.317  13.911* 13.503  13.08fe 12.658 12.22".  11. 762
     30  18.010  17.668 17.318  16.981  16.596 16.223  15.BJ.2 15.'i.5it  15.057  l<..65t» 1<».2^2  13.823 13.396 12.962  12.520
         18.757  18.1.11. 18.063  17.7&5  17.339 16.965  le.Seu 16.195  15.798  15.39". 1J..9S2  ln.563 lis.136 13.701  13.258
         19.50".  19.160 18.809  18.1.50  18. 0 «3 17.709  17.32? 16.937  16.51.0  16.135 15.723  15.303 11..S76 !•.. <.<.!  13.9«8
         20.252  19.907 19.555  19.195  18.826 18.1.53  1S.S70 17.680  17.283  16.878 16.1.&5  16.0^.5 15.617 15,182  1"..739
     0 c  21.300  23.655 20.332  19.91.1  19.573 19.19"i  18.t»15 I'.'.Z'.  18.026  17.621 17.208  16.767 16.359 16.921;  15.1.81
     JD  M-71.9  21.1.03 21.05D  20.688  20.320 19.9".%  19.S6Q 19.169  <8.771  18.366 IT.952  17.531 17.103 16.667  16,22'.
         22.1,99  22.153 21.798  2l.«.3&  21.067 20.69Q  20.3C6 19.915  '9.516  19.110T8.696  18.276 17.8".7 17.1,12  16.969
         23.250  22.903 22.S<.7  22.185  21.315 21.1.38  21.05s. 20.662  20.263  19.856 ig.'.'.Z  19.H21 18.593 18.157  17.71V
         2«toOQ2  23.653 23.298  22.935  22.561. 22.187  21.802 21.1.09  21.010  20.603 20.190  19.766 19.31.0 1S.90<>  18.W61
     /in  ?«>-754  2U.1.C5 21..0-.9  23.615  23.3H. 22.97 6_2r  «j«i 1 22.158  21.759  21.352 20.938  7B.S17 20.088 19.653  19.210
     ^U  ?_5.5C8  2S.358 Z».80i  Ji..^T7  ju.oss Z3.6"97  23.$01 2^..aa&  21.Sit, 2.Z.101 L\. 6i7  il. Z&» 25-836 ? ^ 0 ? J 3 .,9 6 C
         *
           Sigma-t  (at)  is  defined  as:   (density-1)  x  103.   For  example,

           for  seawater  with  a density  of  1.02500 g/cm3,  at  =  25.

-------
trajectories of horizontally discharged buoyant plumes,  a larger coefficient is
required.  Consequently the aspiration coefficient must  be variable.

     Although relatively advanced, MERGE does have its limitations.   Some of
these are a result of the assumptions already discussed.  For example,  the plumes
are assumed to be round, whereas some evidence indicates substantial  deviation
from this idealization (Abramovich, 1963).  Other important limitations are
listed below.
     1.  Diffuser parallel current:  The model does not predict plume
         dilution for cases of current flowing parallel to the diffuser
         pipe.  This is a severe limitation especially in some ocean
         applications because this case may be expected to result in the
         lowest initial dilutions.

     2.  Surface entrainment interference:   The model does not properly
         account for interfacial boundary conditions.  Dilutions near the
         surface or bottom may be overestimated because entrainment will be
         assumed where water is unavailable for entrainment.

     3.  Horizontal homogeneity:  The model assumes homogeneous horizontal
         current although bottom topography, internal waves, or other
         factors may cause considerable spatial flow variations.  This is in
         addition to temporal variations which are excluded by virture of
         assumed steady-state.

     4.  Uniform discharge:  It is assumed that an infinitely  long diffuser
         exists for which there is no port-to-port variation in effluent
         characteristics.
                                    323

-------
6.5.2.3
     The success of a set of tables in describing  an infinite number of possible
diffuser, effluent, and ambient flow configurations depends on the principles of
similarity.  Basically, similarity theory states that model and prototype will
display equivalent behavior if a limited number of similarity conditions or
parameters are preserved.  Equivalent behavior means that relative to appropriate
measures the behavior will be equal.  For example, if all similarity parameters
are preserved, then the height of rise predicted by the model and observed in the
prototype will be equal when measured in terms of  the initial diameters of the
corresponding plumes.

     The number of similarity conditions is determined by the difference between
the number of independent variables and primary variables involved in the problem
(Streeter, 1961).  Primary variables must include mass, time, and distance.  The
present problem involves eleven independent variables implying eight similarity
conditions.  The independent variables, corresponding symbols, units, similarity
parameters, and their names are listed in Table  VI-20.  As the dilution tables
are based on a linear equation of state, the effluent and ambient densities p
and p, , respectively, replace four independent variables:  the effluent and
     a
ambient salinities and temperatures.  This effectively reduces the number of
similarity conditions by two to six.

      It is advantageous to further reduce the number of similarity conditions to
minimize the number of tables necessary to represent the flow conf iguratons of
interest.  From experimental observations, it is found that plume behavior is
basically  invariant for  large Reynolds numbers reducing the number of similarity
conditions to five.  Finally, the ratio Pe/Pa and the stratification parameter
can be combined  in a composite stratification parameter, SP, where,

                             SP =  (pa-pe)/(d0dpa/dz)

      This  is a satisfactory  similarity parameter providing that differences  in
model  and  prototype densities are  not too great.  The assumption  is valid for
discharge  of municipal waste water  into estuarine or coastal waters.
Figures VI-28 and  VI -29  demonstrate  the effectiveness of this  parameter.  The
same  similarity  conditions  are shared for both cases.  The two figures  show rise
                                  324

-------
                                                      Table VI-20
                                   PLUME VARIABLES,  UNITS, AND SIMILARITY CONDITIONS
            Variable
                                  Symbol
            Units
          Dimension!ess Sim. Farm
                                  Name
OJ
r\j
en
Effluent density
Effluent velocity
Effective diameter
Ambient density
Reduced gravity

Density stratification
Current velocity

Kinematic viscosity
Port spacing
                                           Pe
                                           v
                                           do
                                           Pa
                                           9'

                                         dpa/dz
v
Si
             ML
             LT
             L
             ML
             LT"
                                                          -3
-1
-3
             ML"
             LT
                                                          -i
none—primary variable
none—primary variable
none—primary variable
     Pe/Pa
                Pe/(d0dpa/dz)
                ua/v

                d0/v
    none
    none
    none
density ratio
densimetric Froude
    number:  Fr
stratification parm.
current to effluent
 velocity ratio:   k
Reynolds number:  Re
Port spacing parm.:
       PS
       Notes:   1.   g1  = ((pa-pe)/pe)g where g  is  the acceleration of gravity (9.807 msec ")•
               2.   In  the present application  a composite stratification parameter, SP, is used in
                   lieu of the density ratio and  the stratification parameter.   SP = (pa-pe)/(d0dpa/dz)
               3.   The diameter,  d   is taken to be  the  vena contracta diameter.

-------
                   CASE NUHbER    1


                   • ••*»   TEST OF COMPOSITE STRATIFICATION PARAMETER
                   INPUT DATA PSEUDO-ECHO
                          U
                       7.0200
0.0000
    A
0.1160
    T
0.0000
    s
0.0000
    B       SPC
0.0500  100.0000
ALT PEN
 0.0000
                     NDP ITFR IFRQ   NAA  NAB  MAC IDENSM
                       2 1000   25    0    0    0    1


                   (IF  IDENSrfrl THEN DENSITY VERSION USED—USE 2ND SIGMAT COL)
                   AMBIENT STRATIFICATION (AND CALCULATED SIGMAT)
OJ
ro
DEPTH(M) TEKP(C) SAL(OXOO)
0.000 0.000 0.000
. 10.000 0.000 0.000
EFFLUX TO CURRENT RATIO(K) . .
DFN5IHETR1C FROIIOE "0. ....
VOLUME FLUX (H»* 3/S) . .....
DEPTH AVE STRATIFICATION PARK.


PORT
PORT





CUR(MSS) SIGMAT
0.000 -0.093
0.000 -0.093
99999.0
43.1
SIGHAT(DEN
0.000
27.000
VER)




0.055
3703.
10.
7
0






7.02
0.000
O.OSOO





MODEL OUTPUT AFTER -J-
J
1
25
SO
75
100
125
IbO
175
200
225
250
275
300
325
350
J75
400
425
450
HOR CUH(X)
0.001
0.040
O.OP7
O.I4J
0.210
0.200
0.395
0.497
0.632
0.792
0.982
1 .208
1.477
1.797
2.177
2.628
3.162
3.792
4.534
NOMINAL TRAPPING
469
475
500
519
5.164
5.408
6.457
7.4(17
DEPTH(Z)
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
9.999
9.999
9.998
9.996
9.993
9.989
9.9H1
9.967
9.944
9.907
9.845
9.747
9.601
LEVEL REACHED
9.454
9.403
9.196
?.m
D1AMETFR
0.100
0.110
0.140
0.167
' 0.198
0.235
0.279
0.3J2
0.395
0.469
0.55P
0.6t.3
0.7b8
0.936
1.113
1.321
1 .56R
1.659
2.202

2.508
2.615
3.130
3.592
VOL OIL
.007
.1«4
.403
.664
.973
2.342
2.7RO
3.301
J.97J
4.657
5.534
6.576
7.815
9.2S9
11.042
13.127
15.606
18.555
22.064

25.169
26.238
31.204
35.Fff(.
HOR VEL(U)
6.972
5.903
4.964
4.174
3.510
2.952
2.482
2.087
1 .755
1.476
1.241
1 .044
0.878
0.730
0.620
0.522
0.439
0.369
0.310

0.272
0.261
0.219
0.192





ITERATIONS (MKS UNITS)
VF.R VEL(V)
0.000
0.001
0,003
0.004
0,006
0.008
0.010
0.012
. 0.015
0.018
0.021
0.026
0.031
0.037
0.043
0.051
0.058
0.065
0.067

0.062
0.059
0.033
-O.Oof
TOTAL VEL
6.972
5.903
4.964
4.174
3.510
2.952
2.482
2.08 '
1.755
1.476
1.241
1 .044
0.876
0.73V
0.622
0.524
0.443
0.375
0.317

0.279
0,268
0.222
0.192
DEN 01FF
26.013
22.704
19.002
16.0S4
13.500
U.3S1
0.545
8.025
6.746
5. 66«
4.760
3.991
3.336
2.772
2.276
1.P22
1 .3«2
0.9?3
0.417

-O.OP1
-0.135
-0.627
-0.740
TIME
0.000
0.006
0.015
0.027
0.045
0.070
0.105
0.155
0.226
0.326
0.468
0.668
0.951
1.352
1 .917
2.715
3.839
5.416
7.b24

9.877
10.720
J5.U7
I9.7k9
CURRENT
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
o.ooo
o.ooo
0.000
0.0«0
0.000
O.ono
o.ooo
o.ono
O.oon
O.OOfl
o.ooo
o.ooo

o.ono
o.ooo
0.0<>0
o.ooo
                   FIGURE  VI-28    EXAMPLE OUTPUT OF MERGE  -  CASE  1

-------
                  CASt NUMBER    2

                  *««*»   TEST Of COMPOSITE STRATIFICATION PARAMETER
                  INPUT DATA  PSEUDO-ECHO
                          II
                      2.J400
    V
0.0000
0.1160
    T
0.0000
                                                           0.0000
    n       SPC
0,0500  100.0000
ALT DEN
 0,0000
                    NDP 1TCR  IFRQ  NAA  NAB  NAC IDENSW
                      2 1000   25    0    0    0    t

                   (IF IDENSHit THEN DENSITY VERSION  USED—USE 2ND  SIGMAT COL)
                   AMBIENT STRATIFICATION (AND CALCULATED SIGMAT)
CO
DEPTHt") TEMPIC) SAt(0/00)
0.000 0.000 0.000
10.000 0.000 0.000
EFFLUX TO CUHRFNT RA1IO(IO . .

DEPTH AVE
DEPTH(M)
DISCHARGE
STRATIFICATION PARM.


PORT HADIUS(H) .

PORT SPACINC(N) 	



CURCM/5)
0.000
0.000
, 99999.0
• 43.1
SIGMAT
-0.093
-0.093
SIGMATCDEN VER)
0.000
3.000
0.018
J3333.3
i 10.0
2.34
, 0.000
0.0500
100.00



NODtL OUTPUT AFTER -J-
J HOR
1
25
50
75
100
175
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
325
350
375
400
425
450
COR(X)
0.001
0.041
0,0«9
0.146
0.214
0.295
0.392
0.506
0.643
0.905
0,996
1.227
1.500
1.624
2.209
2.666
3.206
3.643
4.592
NOMINAL TRAPPING
469
475
500
517
5.213
5.476
6.537
7.J90
DEPTH(Z)
10.000
10.000
10,000
10.000
10.000
10.000
9,999
9,999
9.999
9.996
9.993
9.98«
9.980
9.966
9.942
9.902
9.939
9.736
9.595
LEVEL REACHED
9.443
9.392
9.177
s. in
DIAMETER
0.100
0.118
0.141
0,167
0.199
0.237
0.292
0.335
0.398
0.473
0.563
0.669
0.796
0.946
1.124
1.336
1.565
1.B79
2.22S

2.518
2.644
3.167
3.583
VOL OIL
1.007
1.169
1.413
1.680
1.997
2.374
2.873
3.356
3.991
4.746
5.643
6.710
7.979
9.49R
11.203
13.417
15.955
18.973
22.563

2S.561
26.R32
31.909
35-.960
HOR VEL(U)
2.324
1.968
1,655
1.391
1.170
0.964
0.927
0.696
0.585
0,492
0.414
0.34R
0.2^.'
0.246
0.207
0.174
0.146
0.123
0.103

0.091
0.087
0.07J
n.Ob*





ITERATIONS (HKS UNITS)
VER VEL(V)
0,000
o.ono
0,001
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.009
0.011
0.013
0.015
0.017
0,020
0.022
0.023

0.021
0.020
0.010
O.OOff
TOTAL VEL
2.324
1.96b
1,655
1 .391
1.170
0.984
0.827
0.696
0.585
0.492
0.414
0.34H
0.293
0.246
0.207
0.175
0.148
U.125
0.106

0.094
0.089
0.074
0.06!>
DEN DIFF
2.979
2.573
2.121
1.7g4
1 .500
1 .761
1 .061
0.«92
0.749
0.630
0.529
0.443
0.370
0.10R
0.252
0.201
0.152
0.100
0.04)

-0.002
-0.019
•0.073
-0,0*3
TIME
0.001
0.019
0.046
0,084
0.138
0.214
0.322
0.474
0.6S9
0.994
1.425
2.034
2.895
4.112
5.HJO
8.254
1 1 .666
16.450
23.140

29.563
32.525
45.931
58.379
CURRENT
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0,000
0,000
0.000
o.ooo
0.000
0.000
0.000
0,000
n.ooo
0,000
0.000
n.ooo
0.000
0.000

0.000
0.000
o.o°o
o.ooo
                    FIGURE  VI-29    EXAMPLE  OUTPUT  OF MERGE  -  CASE  2

-------
and dilution to be within about  a percent of  each  other even though  the
stratification and initial  buoyancies  are much different.   With  only four
similarity conditions to be satisfied,  the problem can be  represented by
considerably fewer model runs than if  six similarity conditions  were
required.
6.5.2.4  Table Usage

     To use the dilution tables to estimate dilutions,  it is necessary to
calculate the appropriate similarity parameters and know the depth of the
outfall.  Calculation of the four similarity parameters Fr, SP, k, and PS,
given in Table VI-20 requires knowledge of all the variables except v.  The
dilution tables are shown in Appendix G.

     The depth used in the dilution tables is expressed in terms of the
diameter of the ports;  that is, the vena contracta diameter.  For
bell-mouthed ports, this diameter is approximately equal to the physical
diameter of the port.  Thus, if the actual depth of water is 10 m and the
port diameter is 10 cm, then the depth of water is 100-port diameters.

     The dilution tables are numbered from 1 through 100 and are grouped by
port spacing as listed below:

          Tables       Port Spacing (PS)  (Diameters)

           1-20                        2
          21-40                        5
          41-60                       10
          61-80                       25
          81-100                    1000  (effluent from each port
                                          acts as a single plume)

Each group of 20 is further subdivided by current velocity to effluent
velocity ratio  (k),  i.e.,
                                   328

-------
                            Current.  Velocity  to  Effluent
               Tables            Velocity Ratio  (k)

                1-5                      0.1
                6-10                     0.05
               11-15                     0.02
               16-20                     0.00 (no current)
Each subgroup of five tables is comprised of tables of varying composite
density stratification (SP):

            Tables    Composite Stratification Parameter (SP)
              1                  200 (high stratification)
              2                  500
              3                 2000
              4                10000
              5             infinity (no stratification)
Finally, each table includes densimetric Froude number, Fr = 1, 3, 10, 30,
100, and 1000 to represent cases ranging from highly buoyant plumes to
almost pure jets.  The dilutions are tabulated with plume rise.  The
following examples demonstrate how the tables may be applied.
                               EXAMPLE VI-11
                      Calculation of Initial Dilution

     ExampleA.  This example demonstrates many of the basic features of the
dilution tables and their usage.  It also includes a method for estimating
the plume diameter indirectly using information derived from the tables.
The method  is used in cases of unmerged or slightly merged plumes and is
necessary to better estimate plume dilution when the plume is shown to
interact with the water surface.
                                   329

-------
     Given that waste water is  discharged horizontally at  a depth  of  66 m from a
simple pipe opening and that:
     u      = the current velocity      = 0.15 m/s
      a

     v      = the effluent velocity      = 1.5 m/s

     Pe     = the effluent density      = 1000 kg/m3

     p      = the ambient density at discharge depth      = 1015 kg/m3
      a

     L      = the port spacing      = 3.4 m

     d      - the port discharge vena contracta diameter = 1.7 m, and

     dpa/dz = the ambient density stratification = 0.0441 kg/m4.

The four similarity parameters necessary to use the tables are:


     Fr = the densimetric Froude number = 3.0

     k  = the current to effluent velocity ratio = 0.1

     SP = the composite stratification parameter = 200, and

     PS = the port spacing parameter = infinity.

     The infinite port spacing indicates that the dilutions will be found in the
last 20 tables of the dilution tables in Appendix G, i.e. Tables 81-100.  These
tables are appropriate because merging does not occur with PS =  infinite.  The
current to effluent velocity ratio of 0.1 indicates that the appropriate
dilutions are among the first five of these 20 tables.  The stratification
parameter 200 identifies the first of these five tables as the correct reference
location.  Finally, the densimetric Froude number of 3.0 isolates the second
column as the one containing the  information  of interest.
                                   330

-------
     The column of dilutions contains a wealth of information about the plume
whose overall behavior is described in Figure VI-30.  After rising one diameter
(1.7 m), the average plume dilution (expressed in terms of volume dilution)  is
2.8.  In other words, a given amount of plume volume has been diluted with 1.8
times as much ambient fluid.  After rising 2 diameters (3.4 m),  the average
dilution is 3.7, and so on.  At 15 diameters rise, the dilution  is 21.4.  The
next entry follows in a line headed by "T", indicating that the  initial trapping
level has been reached.  This means that the plume and ambient densities are
equal at this level and momentary equilibrium has been attained.  The "trapping"
level dilution is 26.2 and the corresponding plume rise, set off in parentheses
to  the right of the dilution, is 17.0 diameters.  The parentheses are a mnemonic
for  indicating trapping while values set off in square brackets  are merging  level
plume rises.

     When a plume intercepts the water surface, it is deprived of some of its
entraining surface and consequently the dilution is less than that indicated in
the  tables.  For well-diluted, unmerged or slightly merged plumes, with k not
equal to zero, the plume diameter, d, may be estimated:

                                   d = d0/D/T                           (VI-61)

In  dimensionless units, or diameters:

                                  d/d  - \/D/k                            (VI-62)

In  the present case, the diameter at maximum rise calculated in this way is  25.2
diameters (42.8m).  Thus the top of the plume is 34.8 diameters  (22.2 + 12.6)
above the level of the outfall, i.e.  12.6 diameters above the plume centerline,
and  5.2 diameters below the surface.  Therefore, surface interaction does not
occur.

     For the sake of comparison, the plume diameter calculated by the program at
maximum rise is 23.5 diameters which compares favorably with the simplified
estimate made above.
                                    331

-------
co
CO
no
           ';• .».•; -.'; -.": • -.o>^d if f u ser
           '. '•".  T.'°..•'.-- •«,.;.';f«>-»>^
              FIGURE VI-30  SCHEMATIC  OF PLUME BEHAVIOR  PREDICTED BY MERGE  IN  THE  PRESENT  USAGE

-------
,
a
     Example B.  Suppose that all the conditions given in Example A apply here
except that the depth of water is only 29.7 diameters (50.5 m).   Table 81 is
again used to provide dilution estimates;  however, surface interaction does
occur.  A conservative estimate of initial dilution is obtained  by assuming that
entrainment stops as soon as the top boundary of the plume intersects the
surface.  In reality, some additional ambient water could be expected to enter-
through the sides of the plume.

     When the centerline depth of the plume is 20 diameters, its dilution is 37.3
and its approximate diameter is 19.4 diameters (33 m).  Consequently, the top
boundary of the plume is 29.7 diameters above the level of the outfall and is
equal to the depth of water.  Thus the dilution of 37.3 provides a conservative
estimate of initial dilution in this case.

     Example C.  Suppose the following data apply:

            - 0.15 m/s

     v      =1.5 m/s

     pe     = 1000 kg/in

     pa     - 1015 kg/m

     S-j     = 0.34 m

     dQ     - 0.17 m, and

     dpa/dz - 0.0441 kg/m".

Then, Fr = 9.5, k = 0.1, SP - 2000, and PS = 2, and Table 3 in Appendix G is the
appropriate source of dilution information.  As the Froude number is almost equal
to 10, column 3 information can be used without modification although
interpolation may be appropriate in some applications.  The plumes merge almost
immediately at a dilution of 2.1.  The initial trapping level is encountered
after the plume rises 89.4 diameters (15.2 m).  The maximum dilution is 76.2
after rising 125 diameters (21.3 ).
                                    333

-------
     For closely spaced plumes,  the diameter  may  be  estimated  from the
relationship:
                              d/do  = (irD)  (4 k  PS)                         (VI-63)
     The maximum diameter estimated in this way is  299 diameters (50.9 m).   In
contrast, the program gives a value of 268 diameters (45.5 m).   No surface
intraction occurs in deep water.   In very shallow water,  a conservative estimate
of dilution may be made by dividing the total  flow across the length of the
diffuser by the flow through the diffuser.  It is conservative  because no
aspiration entrainment is included in the estimate.

     Table 3 contains a blank entry in the second column of the 90-diameter rise
line.  The previous entry in the column indicates trapping.  This means that
trapping and the 90-diameter rise level occurred in the same iteration.
Therefore, the dilution of 41.3 is the appropriate value for this blank.

     Example D.  The methods given in Examples A and C for estimating the plume
diameter are not accurate when intermediate degrees of merging  exist.  If surface
interaction is important, it may be necessary to run the model  to obtain accurate
plume diameter predictions.

     Example E.  Sometimes outfalls or diffusers are located in water only a few
port diameters deep and, as a result,  initial dilutions may be expected to be
quite small.  However, after the plumes reach the  surface, they still have
substantial horizontal velocity and continue to entrain ambient water more
vigorously than a plume whose trajectory  is unhindered by surface constraints.
The workbook by Shirazi and Davis  (1976) may be consulted to estimate additional
dilution.

     Example F.  Strong stratification inhibits plume rise.  As stratification
weakens, plume rise and dilution tend  to  increase.  Predicting  large dilutions
and plume rises can require more program  iterations than used to develop the
tables  in Appendix G.  On the other hand,  very  large dilutions  are usually of
lesser  interest.  Consequently, the number of iterations  is arbitrarily limited
to 1000  and rise to 300 diameters.  Table  94 provides examples  in which the runs
                                    334

-------
for each densimetric Froude number are limited by the permitted  number of
iterations.  The final dilutions listed are underlined to remind the user that
larger dilutions and plume rises occur.  When the rise limitation criterion has
been reached, a rise of 300 diameters or slightly more will  be indicated.

     Example G.  Many diffusers have horizontally discharging paired ports on
each side of the diffuser.  In cross current, the resulting  plume behavior
appears somewhat like that shown in Figure VI-31.  The upstream plume is bent
over by the counter flowing current and ultimately may be entrained by the
downstream plume.  The entrainment of pollutant laden fluid  will reduce the
overall dilution in the merged plumes.  Estimates of the magnitude of this effect
may be made if it may be assumed that:
     1.  the interaction occurs

     2.  there is merging of adjacent plumes to assure cross diffuser
         merging and not interweaving of plumes

     3.  the opposite plumes have similar rise and overall entrainment

     4.  there are no surface constraints, and

     5.  the actual (not permitted) rise is provided in the tables.

     The final dilution of the merged plumes, Df, is approximately:

                               Df = (D2) (2D - De)                        (VI-64)

where D is the dilution at maximum rise of the downstream plume as given in the
tables and De is the dilution of the downstream plume upon entry into the bottom
of the bent over upstream plume (see Figure VI-31).   De is estimated by finding
the distance in diameters, 1Q, between the depth at  entry and the port depth.
The dilution at this depth is read from the appropriate line in the dilution
tables or interpolated.  The maximum radius of the plume is added to the depth at
which maximum rise occurs.  The difference between the port depth and the depth
so calculated is Ze.
                                    335

-------
               current
                                                                                                                                 merged
                                                                                                                                 dilution
                                                                                                                                 Df
CO
CO
                                               'a •.' >'•  -,•*' '«• ',' °.". •.'" ••» '.'<•••'••«':	.-..•'" .. .-! '»—"i o.'o'  .  • . '  '. „•  ,. ..  • . "..••.. ?


                                              ..-..'• •''._•»•".•.•_"' •'-:.".•:'• ...' i .*'•.'•'•'.'.• .a. * •.' . '• .".'.'•.. ° •.._•:• o' *• a ;..*•*.'..*'•.*•'. ^
                                                  FIGURE  VI-31   CROSS  DIFFUSE-R  MERGING

-------
     Given that Fr = 3, PS = 25, SP = 2000, and k = 0.1, and that identical
plumes are injected into the ambient water from both sides of the diffuser.  From
Table 63, it is found that the dilution is 270 and the rise is 55.1 diameters.
The width of the plumes may be estimated:

                         d/d0 = (7r270)/[4(0.1)(25)] = 85

(cf.  the computer calculated width of 83 diameters).  Therefore, the vertical
distance between the ports and the plume entry level is 55.1-85/2 = 12.6
diameters, and, De = 15.5 as estimated from the table at rise equal to 12
diameters.  D^ may now be calculated:

                         Df = 270/[2(270) - 15.5] = 139

This result may have been anticipated:  the dilution is effectively halved.  This
is the outcome whenever the entry level, Z , is small.  In many cases, halving
the dilution provided in the tables gives an adequate estimate of the overall
dilution achieved by the cross diffuser merging plumes.

     Example H.  Given that PS = 25, SP = 200, k = 0.0, Fr = 10, and that an
estimate of the centerline dilution at maximum rise is required.  By consulting
Table 77, it is found that the average dilution at maximum rise is 26.0.  Since
there is no current and virtually no merging, this value can be divided by 1.77
to obtain the centerline dilution (based on a gaussian profile, see Teeter and
Baumgartner, 1979).  The centerline dilution is 14.7.

     With identical conditions except for port spacing of 2 instead of 25,
Table 16 shows that the dilution at maximum rise is 11.6.  The centerline
dilution is again smaller but not by the same percentage amount.  For the 3/2
power profile, similar to the gaussian, the peak-to-mean ratio in stagnant
ambient and complete merging is 1.43 (Teeter and Baumgartner, 1979).  Thus the
centerline dilution may be found to be 8.1.

     The peak-tc-rr;ean ratios given above are flow-weighted and are obtained
through a stre-icht.for.vard integration.  Unfortunately the problem is not as
si.r.ple v;hen current is present because the caussian or other arbitrary profiles
of velocity are superimposed onto a non-zero average velocity.  Hence, in high
                                    337

-------
current, the peak-to-mean ratio for single plumes assuming the 3/2 power profile
is 3.89.  For merged plumes,  the ratio is lower.   For intermediate currents,  the
ratio is between the corresponding extremes depending on the degree of merging
and the actual current velocity.

     Fortunately, many standards and regulations  - for example, the
Federal 301(h) regulations -  are written in terms of average dilutions.  Also,
repeated measurements in the  field are likely to  provide estimates of average
concentrations before estimates of maximum concentrations are possible.  Thus,
the user of MERGE is normally not concerned with  centerline dilutions.  It is
useful to remember that estimating average dilutions using centerline models
involves not only the use of  variable peak-to-mean ratios but also variable
aspiration coefficients.
                              END OF EXAMPLE VI-11
                                     338

-------
6.5.3  Pollutant Concentration Following Initial Dilution

     The concentration of a conservative pollutant at the completion of
initial dilution is expressible as:

                                        Ce"Ca
                              Cf = Ca +	                        (vi-65)
where

     C  = background concentration, mg/1
      a

     C  = effluent concentration, mg/1

     Sa = initial dilution (flux-averaged)

     Cf = concentration  at the completion of  initial dilution, mg/1.

When the background  level, CQ, is negligible  Equation VI-65 simplifies to
                                                                      (VI-66)
 This  expression  can  be  used  to  predict  the  increased  pollutant  concentration
 above ambient, as  long  as  the effluent  concentration  greatly exceeds  the
 ambient  concentration.   It is interesting to  note  that when the effluent
 concentration  is below  ambient,  the  final pollutant concentration  is  also
 below ambient.

      Since  water quality criteria  are often prescribed as maximum  values not
 to  be exceeded following initial dilution,  it is useful  to rearrange
 Equation VI-65 to  express  the maximum allowable effluent concentration  as
 follows:
                                    339

-------
(cj     = c
  e max    a
       -Ca>
                                                                     (VI-67)
where
     (C )    = maximum allowable effluent concentration such that water
       c f I IQA
               quality criteria are not exceeded.
             = applicable water quality criterion
     (Sa)min = minimum expected initial dilution
Since initial dilution is a function of discharge and receiving water
characteristics, as discussed in detail in Section 6.5.2, finding an
appropriate "minimum" initial dilution is not a trivial problem.  Most
often, initial dilutions are lowest when density stratification is greatest.
For a given stratification profile, dilutions generally decrease at lower
ambient current speeds and higher effluent flow rates.  Based on expected
critical conditions in the vicinity of the discharge, the tables in Appendix
G can be used to predict
                               EXAMPLE VI-12
     Analysis of the effluent wastewater from a treatment plant discharging
into a large west coast estuary revealed that the effluent contained a
number of priority pollutants.  A few of the pollutants and their measured
concentrations are shown below.
     Priority Pollutant
       Concentrations (yg/1)     Criterion Level
      Dry Weather   Wet Heather       (yg/1)
          copper
          zinc
          mercury
          lindane
         32.3
         33.0
      not detected
          8.6
   61.9
  180.0
    3.5
not detected
 4.0
58.0
 0.025
 0.16
                                   340

-------
The critical initial dilution has been determined to be 30.  If the
criterion levels are designed to be complied with at the completion of
initial dilution, determine if the criteria for the four priority pollutants
are contravened.

     A cursory review of the tabulations above shows that all detected
effluent pollutant concentrations (i.e.  undiluted concentrations)  exceed
the criteria levels, other than zinc during dry weather flow conditions.
Hence if initial dilutions were to become low enough, each of the four
priority pollutants could violate water quality criterion for either dry or
wet weather conditions.

     Using the minimum initial dilution of 30, the final pollutant levels
can be predicted using Equation VI-66, by assuming background levels are
neglible.  The final pollutant levels compared with the criterion levels are
shown below.
                          Final Concentrations (yg/1) Criterion Level
     Priori ty Po 11 utant   Dry Weather     Wet Weather     (yg/1)
copper
zinc
mercury
lindane
1.1
1.1
-
0.3
2.1
6.0
0.1
-
4.0
58.0
0.025
0.16
Both mercury and lindane violate the criteria while copper and zinc do not,
However, copper levels are sufficiently close to the criterion of 4.0 yg/1
to warrant further attention.
                            END OF EXAMPLE VI-12
                                   341

-------
6-5.4  pH Followlng Initia! Pi 1ution

     The pH standard governing wastewater discharges into estuarine or
coastal waters is usually quite strict.  Typically, state standards require
that the pH following initial dilution not deviate by more than 0.2 units
from background.   A step by step approach is presented here that can be used
to determine whether a discharge will comply with a standard of this type.

     Step 1.  The following input data are required:

         Sa          = initial dilution
         Alk         = alkalinity of receiving water, eq/1

         Alk         = alkalinity of effluent wastewater, eq/1

         pHg         = pH of receiving water

         pHe         = pH of effluent wastewater

         Ka j, cKa j = equilibrium constant for dissociation of
                      carbonic acid in wastewater and receiving water,
                      respectively (first acidity constants)

         K-, o >cKa „  = equilibrium constant for dissociation of
          Q , 2.    Q , /
                      bicarbonate in wastewater and receiving water,
                      respectively (second acidity constants)

         KW  CK       = ion product for wastewater and receiving water,
                      respectively.

Table VI-21 shows values of the equilibrium constants and ion product of
water.  For seawater, typical values of pH and alkalinity are 8.3 units and
2.3 meq/1, respectively.
                                 342

-------
                    TABLE VI-21


VALUES OF EQUILIBRIUM CONSTANTS AND ION PRODUCT OF
 WATER AS A FUNCTION OF TEMPERATURE FOR FRESHWATER
                  AND SALT WATER
Temperature, °C
5
10
15
20
25

Temperature, °C
5
15
20
25
-log \f
Freshwater
6.52
6.46
6.42
6.38
6.35
-log Xw
Freshwater
14.63
14.35
14.17
14.00
f
Seawater
6.00
5.97
5.94
5.91
5.84

Seawater
14.03
13.60
13.40
13.20
-log
Freshwater
10.56
10.49
10.43
10.38
10.33





Ka,2
Seawater
9.23
9.17
9.12
9.06
8.99





                          343

-------
Step 2.  Calculate the total  inorganic  carbon  concentrations  in

         the effluent wastewater  (Ct )  and  receiving water  (C   ):



                              K

                       Alk   - -^r— +  [H+]
                                +      Ln J
and
where
                          e    H+         e
                     A1K, - _Kw  + [H+]
                                       a
            a
                                                           (VI-68)
              C     =  	5	                (VI-69)
                a          /    . «   .
             1      [H+]2 + [H+] K.    + K   K               (VI-70)
                                 d> 1     a> i 3,2
                  [H+]2 + [H+] K    + K     Ks
                                a, i    a, i   a,2
Note:  CK    and CK    are used in a,  and a,  to calculate
         a,i       a,2
                              344

-------
     Step 3.   Calculate the akalinity (Alk  )  and  total  inorganic  carbon
              (C,f)  at the completion of  initial  dilution:
                                       Alk  - Alka                   (VI-72
                     Alk,  =  Alk   +	—                 (     L
                        '         a

                                        Sa                           (VI-73)
     Step 4.  Express the final  alkalinity as:
                                            CK
                Alkf  =  Ctr (a, + 2a2)f +         -   [H+]f          (vi-74)
                           -f
     Rather than solving for [H ~\^ directly in Equation VI-74,  it  is  easier  to
calculate Alk, in Equation VI-72 for a range of [H ] values,  until  the
alkalinities computed from Equations VI-72 and VI-74 match.

     In most cases pH, will not differ from the ambient pH  by more  than  0.1  to
0.3 units.  Consequently it is usually most expeditious to  begin  by assuming
pH  = pH .  If pH >pH , then each subsequent calculation should  be  at 0.1  pH
  T     a        e   a
units higher than pH .  If pH 
-------
                                  TABLE VI-22

             ESTIMATFD pH VALUES AFTER  INITIAL  DILUTION
Seawater
Seawater
pH
5'C
10
In it
25
al Oi
50
ution
75
100
15 'C
Initial Dilution
10 25 50 75
Effluent pH = 6.0 Alk
7 0
7 5
7.7
8.0
8.3
8.5

7.0
7.5
7.7
8.0
8.3
8.5

7.0
7.5
7.7
8 0
8.3
8.5

7.0
7.5
7.7
8.0
8.3
8.5

7.0
7.5
7.7
8.0
8 3
8.5

7.0
7.5
7.7
8.0
8.3
8 5

7.0
7.5
7.7
8.0
8.3
8.5

7.0
7.5
7.7
8.0
8.3
8.5

7.0
7.5
7.7
8.0
8.3

6.94
7.37
7.56
7.88
8 ?1
8^43

6.74
6.')8
7.07
7.27
7.56
B.01

6.63
6.80
6 86
6.98
7.21
7.51

6.45
6.55
6 58
6.64
6.73
6.83

6.92
7.32
7.49
7.80
8.15
8.38

6.85
7.18
7.31
7.60
8 00
8.26

6.75
6.99
7.07
7.25
7.61
7.95

7.03
7.52
7.71
8.00
8.30
8.50

7 07
7.54
7.71
8.00
8.30
8.50
6.97
7.44
7.64
7.95
8.26
8.47

6.87
7.23
7.39
7.70
8.08
8.33

6.81
7.10
7.2J
7.48
7.91
8 20

6.68
6.88
6.96
7.11
7.41
7.78

6.96
7.42
7.61
7.92
8.24
8.45

6.93
7.35
7 53
7.84
8. 19
8.41

6.88
7 23
7.38
7.67
8.06
8.30

7.01
7 51
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50

7.0)
7.51
7.70
8 00
8.30
8.50
6 98
7.47
7 67
7.97
3.28
8.48
•
6.93
7 35
7 53
7.35
8.20
8.42

6.89
7.27
7.43
7.75
3.12
8.35

6.81
7 11
7.23
7.49
7.91
8.20

6.98
7 45
7.65
7.96
8 26
3.47

6.96
7.42
7.61
7.92
8.24
8.45

6.93
7 K
7 53
7.84
8.18
8.40

7 00
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50

7.01
7 50
7.70
8 00
3.30
8.50
6 98
7.47
7 67
7.97
8.28
8.48

6.95
7.40
7.59
7.90
8.23
8.44

6.92
7.34
7.52
7.83
3.18
3 10

6.86
7.21
7.36
7.66
3.06
8.31

6.98
7.47
7.66
7.97
8.27
8.48

6.97
7.44
7.64
7.95
8.26
8.47

6.95
7.39
7.58
7.89
8.22
3.43

7 00
7.50
7.70
8 00
8.30
8.50

7.01
7.50
7.70
8.00
3.30
8.50
6 99
7.48
7.68
7.98
3.29
8.49

6.96
7. ',2
7.61
7.93
8.25
8.46

6.94
7.37
7.56
7.87
8 21
8.42

6.39
7 27
7.43
7.75
3.12
8.36

6 99
7.47
7.67
7.97
8.28
8.48

6.98
7.46
7.65
7.96
8.27
8.47

6.96
7.42
7.61
7.92
8.24
8.45

7 00
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50

7.00
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50
6 95 6.97 6.98
7.40 7 45 7 47
7.59 7 65 7.67
7.91 7.96 7.98
8.24 8.27 8.28
8.45 8.48 8.49
Effluent pH * 6.0 Alk
6.77 6 89 6.94
7.03 7.27 7.38
7.16 7.45 7 57
7 44 7.79 7 90
7.89 8.15 8.23
8.18 8.38 8.44
Effluent pH = 6.0 AH
6.66 6.83 6.90
6.86 7.15 7 31
6.94 7.30 7.49
7.12 7 63 7 82
7 51 8.04 8.17
7.89 8.28 8.39
Effluent pH = 6.0 Alk
6.48 6.71 6 83
6.60 6.94 7 16
7.64 7.04 7.31
6.73 7 28 7.65
6.89 7.73 8.06
7.10 8.07 8.30
Effluent pH <• 6.5 Alk
6 93 6.97 6.98
7.34 7.43 7.46
7.53 7.63 7.66
7.85 7.94 7.96
8.19 8.25 8.27
8.40 8.45 3.47
Effluent pH = 6.5 Alk
6.87 6.94 6.97
7.22 7.37 7 43
7.39 7.57 7.63
7.72 7.89 7.94
8.09 8.22 8 26
8.33 8.43 8.46
Effluent pH » 6.5 Alk
6.78 6.89 6.94
7.04 7.27 7.17
7.15 7.44 7.56
7.41 7.77 7.88
7.84 3.13 8.21
8.12 8.35 8.42
Effluent pH = 9.0 Alk
7.04 7 01 7.00
7.51 7.50 7.50
7.70 7.70 7.70
8.00 8.00 8.00
8.30 8.30 8.30
8.50 8.50 8.50
Effluent pH * 9.0 Alk
7.03 7.03 7.01
7.54 7.51 7.50
7.71 7.70 7.70
8.00 8.00 8.00
8.30 8.30 3.30
8.50 8.50 8.50
Effluent pH = 9.0 Alk
7.0
7.5
7.7
8.0
8.3
8.5
7.10
7.56
7.72
8.00
8.30
8.50
7 04
7.52
7 71
8.00
8.30
8.50
7.02
7.51
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50
7.01
7.00
7.70
8.00
8 30
3 50
7.01
7.50
7 70
8.00
8.30
8.50
7.11 7 04 7.02
7.56 7 52 7.51
7.71 7.70 7 70
8 00 8.00 8.00
8.30 8.30 8 30
8.50 8.50 8.50
= 0.1
6.99
7 43
7.63
7 98
a. 29
8.49
• 0.6
6.96
7.42
7.61
7.93
8.25
8.46
= 1.0
6.93
7.36
7.56
7 83
8.21
8.42
= 2.0
6.83
7.25
7.43
7.77
8 14
8.37
= 0.5
6.98
7.47
7.67
7.97
8.27
8.47
= 1.0
6.98
7.45
7.65
7.96
8.27
8.47
- 2.0
6.96
7.41
7.61
7.92
8.23
8.44
=• 2.0
7.00
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8 50
= 4.0
7.01
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50
= 6.0
7.01
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50
100

6 99
7.48
7 63
7.99
8.29
8.49

6.97
7.44
7.63
7.95
8.26
3.47

6.95
7.39
7.59
7.91
8.23
8.44

6 90
7.31
7.50
7.83
8.13
8.40

6 99
7 48
7.67
7.98
8.28
8.48

6.98
7.46
7.66
7.97
8.28
8.48

6.97
7.43
7.63
7.94
8.25
8.45

7.QO
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50

7.00
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50

7.01
7.50
7.70
8 00
8.30
8.50
25°C
10

6.95
7.42
7.62
7.94
8.25
8 46

6.77
7.08
7.24
7.60
8.02
8.27

6 67
6.90
7 01
7.29
7.76
8.06

6 50
6.64
6.70
6.')j
7.11
7.48

6.93
7.37
7.56
7.88
8.20
8.40

6.38
7.26
7.45
7.80
8.14
8.36

6.79
7.08
7.23
7.55
7.96
8.20

7.04
7.51
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50

7.08
7.53
7.70
8.00
8.30
3.50

7 11
7.54
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50
Initial Dl
25 50

6 93
7 46
7.66
7.97
8.25
8.48

6.89
7.31
7.51
7 35
8.19
8.41

6.84
7.20
7.38
7 73
8.10
8.32

5.72
6.99
7.12
7.45
7.91
8.18

6.97
7.44
7.64
7.94
8.2C
8.44

6.94
7.40
7.60
7.92
8.24
8.44

6.90
7.30
7.49
7.82
8.16
8.36

7.01
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50

7.03
7.51
7.70
8.00
8.30
3 50

7.05
7.51
7 70
8.00
8.30
8.50

6.99
7 48
7.68
7.98
8.29
8.49

6.94
7.40
7.60
7.93
8.24
8.45

6.91
7.33
7.53
7.86
8.19
8.40

6 84
7.20
7.39
7.75
8.12
8.35

6.98
7.46
7.66
7.96
8.26
8.46

6.97
7.45
7.65
7.96
8.27
8.47

6.94
7.39
7.59
7.90
8.22
8.42

7.00
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50

7.01
7.50
7.70
8.00
3.30
8.50

7.02
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50
ution
75

6,99
7.48
7.68
7.99
8.29
8.49

6.96
7 43
7 64
7.95
8.26
8.47

6.93
7.38
7.58
7.90
8.22
8.42

6.88
7.29
7.49
7.84
8.18
8.40

6.98
7.47
7 67
7.97
8.27
8.46

6.98
7 46
7.66
7.97
8.28
8.48

6.96
7.42
7.62
7.93
8.24
8.43

7.00
7.50
7.70
3.00
8.30
8 50

7.01
7.50
7.70
8.00
8 30
8.50

7.01
7.50
7 70
8.00
8.30
8.50
100

6.99
7.49
7.69
7 99
8.29
8.49

6.97
7.45
7.65
7.96
8.27
8.47

6.95
7.41
7.61
7.92
8.23
3.43

6.91
7.34
7.54
7.88
3.21
8.42

6.99
7.48
7.67
7.97
8.27
8.46

6.98
7.47
7.67
7.98
8.28
8.48

6.97
7.44
7.64
7.94
8.25
8.44

7.00
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50

7.00
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50

7.01
7.50
7.70
8.00
8.30
8.50
Note  Value-, are shown to 2 decimal places to allow interpolation but should be rounded to 1 decimal plate for
     compdrison to s tandards.



                                         346

-------
                               EXAMPLE VI-13
     A wastewater treatment plant receives alkaline waste process water, and
because of the low level of treatment received in the plant, effluent pH
values as high as 11.1 units have been observed.  The effluent wastewater is
discharged into a water body where the pH standard permits a 0.2 unit
deviation from ambient at the completion of initial dilution.  Determine if
the standard is violated by the discharge.  The required pertinent data are:

     pH    = 8.3
       a

     Alka  = 2.3 meq/1
        a

     Alke  = 2.0 meq/1

     CKW   = 6.3 x 10~14, for the ambient water

     K..    = 10~7 , for the wastewater
       W

     CK,   = 8xlO~7,for the ambient water
       a»i

     K     = 5xlO~7, for the wastewater
       a, i
     'K    = 4.68xlO~  , for the ambient water
       a,2

     K     = 0.5xlO"10, for the wastewater
      a,2
     Sa    = 20

The dissociation constants for the wastewater, a1} and cx2, are:

            	IP"11-1 x  5 x  IP"7	
            (10"11'1)2 + 10"11'1 x 5 x 10'7 +  5 x  10"7  x  0.5  x 10"10
                                                                     = .137
                              5  x 10'7  x 0.5 x 10'10
      a2  =	_  = .863
            (lO'11-1)2 +  10'11-1  x 5  + 10'7  -H 5 x 10~7 x 0.5 x 10~:
                                                                  10
                                   347

-------
The total inorganic carbon of the wastewater is:


                    .002 - -^~Y + 10"lla

             Ct   =	= 0.000398 mole/1
               e         0.137 + 2 x .863


The dissociation constants for the ambient water  are:
                            10'8"3 x 8 + 10~7
                       	——
         (10-8-3)2 + 10-8-3 x 8 x KT7 + 8 x ID'7 x 4.68 x  HT10
and


                             a2   = 0.085


The total inorganic carbon content is:


                           6.3  x  lO'1"
                 0.0023	—	+  10"8'3


             "a          .909 +  2  x  0.085


The final alkalinity and inorganic carbon are:
           Ct  = - =  .00212  mole/1
                             0.002 - 0.0023
             Alk, = 0.0023 + - = 0.00229 eq/l
                f                  20

                             0.000398 -  0.00212
             Ct   = 0.00212 + - = 0.0020 mole/1
              lf                     20
Using Equation VI-74,  the alkalinity is  calculated  for  the  range  of  pH
values tabulated below,  beginning  at 8.3 and  incrementing by 0.1  units.
                                   348

-------
                 ŁH                  Alkalinity,  eg/1
                 8.3                    0.00217
                 8.4                    0.00222
                 8.5                    0.00228
                 8.6                    not needed
                 8.7                    not needed
                 8.8                    not needed

The actual and calculated alkalinities match at a pH barely exceeding 8.5.
Since this slightly is more than 0.2 units above ambient, the pH standard is
violated.  The pH problem that results from this discharge could be
mitigated in a number of ways, such as increasing initial dilution, or by
treating the wastewater in order to lower the effluent pH.
                            END OF EXAMPLE VI-13
6.5.5  Dissolved Oxygen Concentration Following Initial Dilution

     Dissolved oxygen standards in estuarine and coastal waters can be quite
stringent.  For example, the California Ocean Plan (State Water Resources
Control Board, 1978) specifies that:

          "The dissolved oxygen concentration shall not at any time be
     depressed more than 10 percent from that which occurs naturally,
     as the result of the discharge of oxygen demanding waste
     materials."

Since dissolved oxygen concentrations can naturally range as low as 4.0 to
5.0 mg/1 at certain times of the year in estuarine or coastal waters,
allowable depletions under these conditions are only 0.4 to 0.5 mg/1.

     The dissolved oxygen concentration following initial dilution can be
predicted using the following expression:
                                    349

-------
                     DO,  =  DO  +
                       •      a
                                  DO  -  IDOD  -  DO
                                    e           a
                                         Sa
(VI-75)
where
     DOf  - final dissolved oxygen concentration of receiving water at
            the plume's trapping level, mg/1

     D0a  = ambient dissolved oxygen concentration averaged from the
            diffuser to the trapping level, mg/1

     D0e  = dissolved oxygen of effluent, mg/1

     IDOD - immediate dissolved oxygen demand, mg/1

     Sa   = initial dilution.

The immediate dissolved oxygen demand represents the oxygen demand of
reduced substances which are rapidly oxidized during initial  dilution
(e.g. sulfides to sulfates).  The procedure for determining IDOD is found in
standard methods (APHA, 1976).  IDOD values are often between 1 and 5 mg/1,
but can be considerably higher.  When the effluent dissolved  oxygen
concentration is 0.0 mg/1  and IDOD is negligible (which is a  common
situation), Equation VI-75 simplifies to:
                        °°f  =  °°a I1  -7:                            (VI-76)
The ambient dissolved oxygen concentration which appears in Equations VI-75
and VI-76 is the concentration in the water column averaged between the
location of the diffuser and the trapping level, while the final  dissolved
oxygen concentration is referenced to the plume's trapping level.
                                    350

-------
     The dissolved oxygen concentration can change significantly over depth,
depending on the estuary or coastal system as well as on seasonal influences
(e.g.  upwelling).  As the plume rises during initial dilution, water from
deeper parts of the water column is entrained into the plume and advected to
the plume's trapping level.  If the discolved oxygen concentration is much
lower in the bottom of the water column than in the top, the low dissolved
oxygen water is advected to a region formerly occupied by water containing
higher concentrations of dissolved oxygen, and then a "pseudo" dissolved
oxygen depletion results, solely caused by entrainment and advection and not
consumption of oxygen-demanding material.  The following example illustrates
this process.
                               EXAMPLE VI-14
     Puget Sound, located in the northwest corner of the state of
Washington, is a glacially carved, fjord-type estuary.  The average depth of
water is about 100 m (330 ft).  During periods of upwelling, low dissolved
oxygen water enters the estuary at depth and produces a vertical dissolved
oxygen gradient throughout much of the estuary.  In Commencement Bay, near
Tacoma, dissolved oxygen profiles similar to the one shown in Table VI-23
have been observed.  Suppose the trapping level is 43 ft (13 m) above the
bottom and the minimum initial dilution is 28.  Find the final dissolved
oxygen concentration and calculate the percent depletion.

     The dissolved oxygen concentration varies significantly over depth,
from 5.0 mg/1 at the bottom to 7.8 mg/1 at the water's surface.  The average
concentration over the plume's trapping level is:
                            5.0 + 6.1
                            	  =5.6 mg/1
Using Equation VI-76, the final dissolved oxygen concentration at the
trapping level is:
                       DO, = 5.6 I 1	) = 5.4 mg/1
),  =  5.6  f 1	|=5.'
 f        \     28 /
                                   351

-------
          TABLE  VI-23

DISSOLVED OXYGEN PROFILE IN
COMMENCEMENT BAY,  WASHINGTON
Depth ft(m)
0 (0)
3 (1)
7 (2)
10 (3)
16 (5)
23 (7)
33 (10)
49 (15)
66 (20)
98 (30)
108 (33)
Temperature, °C
14.0
12.0
12.0
11.7
11.7
11.7
12.5
13.5
11.5
11.5
11.5
Dissolved Oxygen, mg/1
7.8
7.7
7.6
7.4
7.2
7.0
6.8
6.5
6.1
5.3
5.0
            352

-------
Compared  to  the  ambient concentration at the trapping  level  (6.1 mg/1), the
percent depletion  is:
                         6>1 " 5'4 x 100 = 11 percent
                            6.1
Compared to the average over the height of rise, the percent depletion  is
only:
                       5.6 - 5.4
                       	 x  100 = 4 percent
                          5.6
                            END OF EXAMPLE VI-14
     In contrast to the deep estuaries on the west coast of the United
States, those on the east coast are quite shallow.  In the Chesapeake Bay,
the largest east coast estuary, water depths are often in the 20- to 30-ft
(6 to 9 m) range, with channels as deep as 60 to 90ft (18 to 27 m) in
places.  Because of the shallow water depths, initial dilution is often
limited by the depth of the water and can be 10  or less at times of low
ambient current velocity.
6.5.6  Far Field Dilution and Pollutant Distribution

     After the initial dilution process has been completed, the wastefield
becomes further diluted as it migrates away from the ZID.  Since
concentrations of coliform organisms are often required not to exceed
certain specified values at sensitive locations (e.g.  public bathing
beaches), a tool  is needed to predict coliform ,(or other pollutant) levels
as a function of distance from the ZID.  This can be accomplished by solving
the following expression:
                                  353

-------
                          u 3x  = Ł   3y*~  "   kC                     (VI-77)


where

     C  = pollutant concentration

     u  = current speed

    Ły  = lateral turbulent diffusion coefficient

     k  = pollutant decay rate.

Figure VI-32 shows how the sewage field spreads laterally as a function of
distance from the ZID.  The concentration within the wastefield, C(x,y),
depends on both x and y, with the maximum concentrations occurring at
y = 0,for any x value.

     It is the maximum concentration C(x,y = 0) which is of interest here.
Solving Equation VI-77, the maximum concentration as a function of distance
x is:
                             = C  + 	exp-^                 (VI-78)
where

     DS = dilution attained subsequent to the initial dilution and  is  a
          function of travel time

and  all other  symbols have been previously defined.

The  subsequent dilution  is unity when x = 0  (i.e.   at the completion of
initial dilution), so C  = C^ at x = 0, as required.   In many  instances,  the
background  concentration is negligible, so that Equation VI-78 simplifies
to:
                                   354

-------
   Line source
                                              Sewage
                                               field
FIGURE VI-32  PLAN VIEW OF  SPREADING SEWAGE  FIELD
                         355

-------
                                  cf
                               C  = — exp  (-kt)                       (VI-79)
     Subsequent dilution gradually increases as the wastefield travels away
from the ZID and depends on mixing caused by turbulence, shear flows, and
wind stresses.  Often, dilution caused by lateral entrainment of ambient
water greatly exceeds that caused by vertical entrainment.  This is assumed
to be the case here.

     In open coastal areas, the lateral dispersion coefficient is often
predicted using the so-called 4/3 law (Brooks, 1960), where the diffusion
coefficient increases as the 4/3 power of the wastefield width.  In
mathematical form:
                           e = e   I —1_ i  / 3
                                   1  '   '                             (VI-80)
where

     ŁQ = diffusion coefficient when L = b

     L  = width of sewage field at any distance from the ZID

     b  = initial width of sewage field.

The initial  diffusion coefficient can be predicted from:


                                 eo = O.OOlbVa

where

     e  = initial diffusion coefficient, ft2/sec
                                   356

-------
     b  = initial width of sewage field, ft.
Based on Equation VI-80, the center!ine dilution, D , is given by:
D  =
                     erf
                                   1.5
                             1 +
                                                 I/
                                                     -1
                                                                     (VI-82)
where
     t = travel time

and erf denotes the error function.

     The 4/3 law is not always applicable and in confined estuaries might
overestimate the diffusion coefficient.  Under these circumstances, it is
more conservative to assume the diffusion coefficient is a constant.
Equation VI-81 can be used to estimate the constant diffusion coefficient,
unless the user has better data.  Under these circumstances, the subsequent
dilution is expressible as:
Ds =
erf
1 b2 \
16 Ł t
\ ° 1
l/2
                                               -1
                                                                     (VI-83)
     Equations VI-82 and VI-83 are cumbersome to use, especially if repeated
applications are needed.  To facilitate predicting subsequent dilutions,
values of DS are tabulated in Table VI-24 for different initial  widths (b)
and travel times (t).  The initial sewage field widths range from 10 to
5,000 feet and travel times range from 0.5 to 96 hours.
                                  357

-------
                                                        TABLE  VI-24

                                         SUBSEQUENT  DILUTIONS*  FOR  VARIOUS  INITIAL
                                               FIELD WIDTHS AND TRAVEL  TIMES
00
Travel Time(hr)
0.5
1.0
2.0
4.0
8.0
12.
24.
48.
72.
96.
10
2.3/ 5.
3. I/ 13.
4.3/ 32.
6. I/ 85.
8.5/>100.
10. />100.
15. />100.
21. />100.
26. />100.
29. />100.
50
5 1.5/ 2.0
2.0/ 3.9
2.7/ 8.5
3.7/ 21.
5.2/ 53.
6.3/ 95.
8.9/>100.
13. />100.
15. />100.
18. />100.
Initial Field
100
1.3/ 1.6
1.6/ 2.6
2.2/ 5.1
3.0/ 11.
4. I/ 29.
5. I/ 50.
7. I/ 100.
10. />100.
12. />100.
14. />100.
Width (ft)
500
l.O/ 1.1
1.21 1.3
1.4/ 1.9
1.9/ 3.5
2.5/ 7.3
3.0/ 12.
4.2/ 30.
5.9/ 80.
7.3/>100.
8.4/>100.
1000
l.O/ 1.0
l.l/ 1.1
1.2/ 1.5
1.5/ 2.3
2.0/ 4.4
2.4/ 6.8
3.4/ 16.
4.7/ 41.
5.8/ 73
6.6/100.
5000
l.O/ 1.0
l.O/ 1.0
l.O/ 1.0
l.l/ 1.2
1.4/ 1.7
1.6/ 2.3
2. I/ 4.4
2.8/10.
3.4/17.
3.9/24.
*
The dilutions are entered in the table as Nj/N2,
where Nj. is the dilution assuming a constant diffusion
coefficient, and N2 is the dilution assuming the 4/3 law.

-------
     The dilutions presented in the table reveal  that as the initial  field
width increases, the subsequent dilution decreases for a given travel time.
For a wider wastefield, a larger time is required to entrain ambient  water
into the center of the wastefield, so dilutions are lower.  This illustrates
that a tradeoff exists between large diffusers where initial dilution is
high but subsequent dilution low, and small diffusers where initial dilution
is low and subsequent dilution high.

     The table also reveals that the predicted dilutions are significantly
different, depending on whether Equation VI-82 or VI-83 is used.  In many
cases likely to be evaluated by users of this document, the 4/3 law might
overestimate subsequent dilution, even if the outfall is in coastal waters.
To attain the subsequent dilutions predicted by the 4/3 law at large travel
times, a significant amount of dilution water must be available.  Since many
outfalls, particularly small ones, are often not too far from shore,  the
entrainment rate of dilution water can be restricted by the presence of the
shoreline and the depth of the water.  The wastefield from diffusers located
further offshore might entrain water at a rate corresponding to the 4/3 law
for an initial period of time.  As the wastefield widens significantly, the
rate of entrainment could decrease, and the 4/3 law no longer obeyed.

     When travel times are small  (e.g.  12 hours or less), there is  less
discrepancy between the two methods of calculating subsequent dilution,
except for the very small initial wastefield widths.
                               EXAMPLE VI-15
Figure VI-33 shows an outfall which extends about one mile offshore.  At the
end of the outfall is a multiport diffuser, 800 feet in length.
Occassionally, fecal coliform bacteria counts as high as 10,000 MPN/100 ml
have been detected in the effluent of the treatment plant.

     The allowable fecal coliform level at the shellfish harvesting area
inshore of the diffuser is 70 MPN/100 ml.  Typically, the ambient current is
parallel to shore so that effluent is not carried onshore.  However, when
                                   359

-------
CO
en
o
                                                         shellfish harvesting
60
             •120 .
                   0
                   I
                   contours in feet
                            1 nautical miles
                            J
                                                          •180	
                                      1.5 kilometers
                     FIGURE VI-33  OUTFALL  LOCATION, SHELLFISH HARVESTING  AREA,  AND  ENVIRONS

-------
wind conditions are right, onshore transport has been observed,  and the
sustained transport velocity is 4 cm/sec (0.13 ft/sec).   Determine whether
the coliform standard is likely to be violated or not.  Other information
needed are:

     t   coliform decay rate = 1.0/day

     t   minimum initial dilution = 35.

     The width of the diffuser is 800 feet and will be used as the initial
field width.  Note, however, that the diffuser is not exactly perpendicular
to shore, so that the initial field width is probably less than 800 feet in
the travel direction.  Using 800 feet is conservative because subsequent
dilution will be somewhat lower under this assumption.

     The coliform count following initial dilution is, using Equation VI-76:

                               10000
                          C, = -  =  290 MPN/100  ml
                          f    35
The travel time to the shore is:

                               5280
                                        = 11 hours
                            0.13 x 3600


Interpolating from Table VI-24, the subsequent dilution is about 2.6.  Using
Equation VI-79, the coliform concentration at the shoreline is:
                   290      I        11  ,
               C  =  	  exp    -  1  x  —    =70  MPN/100 ml
                   2.6              24  '
The predicted coliform count  is equal to the water quality standard.  Since
the subsequent dilution was conservatively estimated, it is possible that
actual coliform counts will be less than 70 MPN/100 ml.  However, the
                                    361

-------
prediction does indicate that careful  monitoring of coliform levels at the
shoreline is needed to see that the standard is not violated.   Since
shoreward transport of effluent is infrequent,  sampling has to be conducted
at times when the transport is shoreward;  otherwise detected  coliform
levels might not represent worst-case  conditions.
                            END OF EXAMPLE VI-15
6.5.7  Farfield Dissolved Oxygen Depletion

     Oxygen demanding materials contained in the effluent of wastewater
treatment plants can produce dissolved oxygen deficits following discharge
of the effluent into receiving waters.  A method will be presented here to
predict the depletion following discharge from a marine outfall.  The most
critical cases occur when the plume and wastefield remain submerged, so that
reaeration does not occur.  The analysis presented here is applicable to
submerged plumes only.  When the wastefield is mixed uniformly across the
estuary, the methods presented earlier in Section 6.4.5 are applicable.

     The oxygen-demanding materials in the wastewater are the sum of the
carbonaceous and nitrogenous materials (CBOD and NBOD, respectively).  It is
possible that the nitrogenous demand might not be exerted if a viable
background population of nitrifiers is absent from the receiving water.
Under these circumstances, the wastefield is likely to be dispersed before
the nitrifying population can increase to numbers capable of oxidizing the
NBOD.  The user can perform analyses with and without NBOD exertion and then
determine whether NBOD is significant or not.  If it is, it is suggested
that some sampling be conducted to find out whether nitrification is
occurring.

     The dissolved oxygen concentration in the receiving waters can be
expressed as a function of travel time as follows:
                                     362

-------
DO, - DO
  I      O
               D0(t) = D0
                         a
                                             f
                                            D,
                   [l-exp(-Kt)]
                                             s
                                                                     (VI-84)
where
     D0(t) = dissolved oxygen concentration in a submerged wastefield
             as a function of travel time t, mg/1
     DO    = ambient dissolved oxygen concentration, mg/1
       a

     DOf   = dissolved oxygen concentration following initial dilution
             (see Equation VI-75)
           = BOD decay rate
     Lf    = ultimate BOD concentration  above  ambient  at  the completion
             of initial  dilution
     D     = subsequent centerline dilution

Equation VI-84 expresses the dissolved oxygen deficit which arises due to an
initial deficit at the completion of initial dilution (D0f-D0a) plus that
caused by elevated BOD levels in the water column (If).  The elevated BOD
level is either the CBOD or sum of CBOD and NBOD.  The initial dissolved
oxygen deficit tends to decrease at longer and longer travel times because
subsequent dilution increases.  However, BOD is being exerted simultaneously
and tends to cause the dissolved oxygen level to drop.  Depending on the
particular case being analyzed, one influence can dominate the other over a
range of travel times so that a minimum dissolved oxygen level can occur
either immediately following initial dilution, or at a subsequent travel
time.  The following example illustrates both cases.
                                     363

-------
                                EXAMPLE VI-16
     A municipal wastewater treatment plant discharges  its effluent through
an outfall and diffuser system.   The maximum daily CBOD  value is 270 mg/1,
and the critical initial dilution is 114.   Limited analyses have been
performed on IDOD and the results vary widely,  from 0 to 66 mg/1.  The
length of the diffuser is 500 m (1,640 ft) and  can be used as the initial
sewage field width.  Determine the dissolved oxygen deficit produced by the
discharge, assuming the wastefield remains submerged and the ambient
dissolved oxygen concentration is 7.0 mg/1.

     The BOD concentration at the completion of initial dilution is:
                  270
                  114
= 2.4 mg/l,BODc
                       = 3.5 mg/1, BOD-ultimate
The dissolved oxygen concentration at the completion of initial dilution is
(from Equation VI-75):
           D0f  =  7.0  +
or
 0.0  - 66. - 7.0
       114
= 6.4 mg/1,  when IDOD = 66
           D0f = 7.0 +
  0.0 - 0.0 - 7.0
        114
 =  6.9 mg/1, when  IDOD  =  0
Note that the IDOD of 66 mg/1 produces a deficit of 0.6 mg/1.

     Since values of IDOD vary widely due to the limited analyses, the
far field oxygen depletion curves will be calculated for the following three
IDOD's:  0, 40, and 66 mg/1.  A BOD decay rate of 0.2/day is used.  When
IDOD = 66 mg/1, the following oxygen depletions are predicted:
                                     364

-------
Travel Time(hr)
1
4
8
12
24
48
72
96
Ds(Table VI-24)
1.
1.4
1.9
2.3
3.2
4.6
5.5
6.3
DVDOt (Equation VI-84)
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
These results are plotted in Figure VI-34 (Curve A), along with the cases
for IDOD = 40 mg/1 (Curve B), and IDOD = 0.0 mg/1 (Curve C).

     When the IDOD is 66 mg/1, the maximum dissolved oxygen deficit is
0.6 mg/1 and occurs at the completion of initial dilution (a travel time of
0.0 hr).  Thus, the processes which occur during initial dilution are more
significant than the subsequent BOD exertion.  Curve C (IDOD = 0.0 mg/1)
shows the opposite situation:  farfield BOD exertion is primarily
responsible for the maximum oxygen depletion of 0.3 mg/1.  The middle curve
(Curve B) shows the case when the oxygen depletion remains relatively
constant over time and both the near field and farfield processes are
important.

     In summary, when the IDOD is above 40 mg/1, in this example the maximum
oxygen depletion is controlled by the processes occurring during initial
dilution.  When IDOD is below 40 mg/1, BOD exertion in the far field is
primarily responsible for the oxygen depletion.  For primary treatment
plants, IDOD values of 66 mg/1 are atypical;  values from 1 to 10 mg/1 are
much more common.  Depending on whether the state dissolved oxygen standard
is violated by Curve A, the user might need to make further IDOD
determinations to firmly establish the true range of IDOD values.
                          END OF EXAMPLE VI-16
                                     365

-------
                                                       CD
                                                       C
                                                       73
                                                       m
OJ
Crt
cn
%i  co
co  co
c  o
co  r~

—H m
^3  O
>
<  CD
m  x
r-  -<
    CD
—I m
                                                   m
                                                       m


                                                       m
                                                       -l
                                                       h—t
                                                       O

                                                       CO
                                                                                                     Dissolved oxygen deficit, mg/l
                              p
                              b
                                                                          CD
B
CD

Q.
01
we
CO
ro —
                                                                               co -
               p

                I
                p
                Ko
                 I
p
CO
p
Ol
 I
p
a>
P
bo
p
CD
 1

o


CO
Ol


o
o


CD


co
Ol


0
o


>


CO
en


O)
O)
o

O
c
03
0
o
c~
-T
3
B
6
o
p
3

-------
6.6 THERMAL POLLUTION

6.6.1 General

     The presence of one or more major heat sources can have a significant
impact on both the local biotic community and local water quality.  As a
result, consideration of significant thermal discharges by the planner is
essential in any comprehensive water quality analysis.  Thermal power plants
account for the vast majority of both the number of thermal discharges and
the total thermal load.  However, some industrial processes generate
significant amounts of excess heat.

     The most important of the impacts of heat discharge are:

     1.  Ecological Effects:  Water temperature increases change the
         productivity of planktonic and many benthic species.  As a
         result local community structures are altered.  Many of the
         species benefited by warmer conditions (e.g.  blue green
         algae) may be considered to be undesirable.  In addition, many
         species can perform certain life cycle functions only within a
         limited temperature range.  Elevated temperatures may prevent
         some species from completing one or more life stages, thus
         disrupting the reproductive cycle and destroying the stability
         of the population.

     2.  Water Quality Effects:  Figure VI-23 showed the relative
         effect of salinity and ambient temperature on oxygen
         saturation.   From this figure, note that a 10° C* rise in
         temperature decreases the oxygen saturation concentration by
         1.5 to 2.0 mg/1.
*Such a rise is common near power plant thermal plumes.
                                      367

-------
         Sediment Effects:   Estuarine sedimentation rates are increased
         by increasing local water column temperature.   The
         significance of this increase was discussed by Parker and
         Krenkel  (1970).  They concluded that not only  are
         sedimentation rates be increased, but vertical particle size
         distribution, particle fall  velocity, and thus bottom
         composition are also affected.

         Beneficial  Effects:  The effects of thermal discharges are not
         all  negative.  It  has been shown for example,  that marine
         biofouling  is substantially reduced in warmed  waters (Parker
         and  Krenkel, 1970).  In fact, the recirculation of heated
         discharge through  the condenser has proven to  be a less
         expensive and equally effective method of biofouling control
         than chlorination  for several California coastal power plants.
         Estuarine contact  recreation potentials are increased by
         increasing  local water temperatures, and extreme northern
         estuaries have reduced winter ice coverage as  a result of
         thermal  discharges.
6.6.2  Approach

     A number of the algorithms which appear in this section were originally
prepared by Tetra Tech, (1979) for the Electric Power Research Institute.
The thermal screening approach for estuaries is composed of procedures that
can be used to evaluate the following standards:

     •   The AT Criterion:  The increase in temperature of water
         passing through the condenser must not exceed a specified
         maximum.

     t   The Maximum Discharge Temperature Criterion:  The temperature
         of the heated effluent must not exceed a specified maximum.
                                    368

-------
     •   The Thermal  Block Criterion:   The cross-sectional  area of an
         estuary occupied by temperatures greater than a specified
         value must not exceed a specified percentage of the total
         area.

     •   The Surface Area Criterion:   The surface area covered by
         isotherms exceeding a specified temperature increment (above
         ambient) must not exceed a specified maximum.

     •   The Surface Temperature Criterion:  No discharge shall cause a
         surface water temperature rise greater than a specified
         maximum above the natural temperature of the receiving waters
         at any time or place.

     Table VI-25 presents a summary of the information needed to apply the
thermal screening procedure.  Data needed for the AT criterion and the
maximum discharge temperature criterion were included earlier in the thermal
screening section for rivers and are not repeated here.  That the maximum
discharge temperature criterion for rivers can be applied to estuaries
assumes the intake temperature is near ambient, and that tidal action does
not cause significantly elevated temperatures near the intake.
6.6.3  Application

     The AT criterion and the effluent temperature criterion can be
evaluated first following the procedures outlined in the river thermal
screening section.  The maximum allowable flow rate through the plant, which
needs to be identified for use in evaluating those criteria, may not always
have a readily determinate upper limit, unlike plants sited on rivers.  For
estuaries that are essentially tidal rivers, a fraction (say 20%) of the net
freshwater flow rate might be used as an upper limit.

     The remainder of the estuary physical screening procedure consists of
evaluating the following three criteria:  the thermal block, the isotherm
surface area, and the surface water temperature criteria.  Because of the
complexity of the flow field in estuaries, slack tide conditions have been
                                     369

-------
                                              TABLE  VI-25

                        DATA NEEDED  FOR  ESTUARY  THERMAL  SCREENING
Variable
ATc
Dp
r
u

Qp
ATtb

Atb

dtb

R
W

At
D,

K

P

c.
P
s

n
U

Rh
n
Criteria Where
Variable Used
All
All

Thermal block.
surface area
All
Thermal block

Thermal block

Thermal block

Thermal block,
surface area
Thermal block,
surface area
Thermal block
Thermal block,
surface area
Thermal block,
surface area
Thermal block,
surface area,
surface temperature
Thermal block,
surface area
Thermal block,
surface area
Thermal block,
Thermal block,
surface area
Thermal block,
surface area
Definition
Temperature rise across the condenser (°F)
Diameter of discharge pipe or equivalent diameter of
discharge canal (m)
Exit velocity of thermal discharge (m/s)

Flow rate of discharge (m3/s)
Temperature rise in estuary cross section that
constitutes a thermal block (°F)
Portion of estuarine cross-sectional area that
constitutes a thermal block (m2)
Average depth of estuary from discharge location to
ATtb Isotherm at slack tide (m)
Average freshwater flow rate flowing in the estuary
past the power plant site (m3/s)
Width of estuary at power plant site (m)

Cross-sectional area at power plant site (m2)
Longitudinal dispersion coefficient (m2/s)

Surface thermal transfer coefficient (Btu/m2 -d • °F)

Average mass density of ambient water at power plant
site (kg/mj)

Specific heat of water (Btu/kg • °F)

Tidally and cross-sectionally averaged salinity
(ppt. °/oo
Manning's n (m'/6)
Maximum tidal velocity over a tidal cycle (m/s)

Hydraulic radium (cross-sectional area divided by
wetted perimeter) (m)
Default Value
20




--

5
25% of the estuarine
cross-sectional area


70.!,,


--
see text discussion



1000 (zero salinity)

22


--
0.016 - 0.06
__

..

         Surface area         Isotherm associated with legal  surface area constraint (°F)


         Surface area         Average depth under the surface area calculated  for the
                             surface area constraint (m)

         Surface area         Legally allowable surface area  surrounded by isotherms
                             equalling and exceeding AT  (m2)
                                                     S3

                 temperature  Gravitational constant (m/s2)

                 temperature  Mass  density of thermal effluent  (kg/m3)

                 temperature  Depth to centerline of discharge  jet (m)

                 temperature  Maximum legally allowable surface temperature produced hy
                             a submerged discharge (°F)
-dp
dz
Surface

Surface

Surface

Surface


Surface


Surface
temperature


temperature  Linear  density gradient over water column depth  (kg/m3 • m)
                             Mass  density of water at depth of submerged discharge
                             (kg/m3)
                                                                               9.8





                                                                                 4


                                                                              1000
                                                      370

-------
chosen as a basis for computations when possible.   It is during these
conditions that the effects of plume momentum and  buoyancy are propogated
the greatest distance across the estuary from the  discharge site.  It is
also during slack tide that the thermal block is most likely to occur
because of the absence of an ambient current that  normally enhances plume
entrainment of ambient water.

     As the plume spreads across the estuary, the  methodology assumes it to
be vertically mixed.  Although most plumes do not  generally exhibit this
behavior due to such effects as buoyancy and stratification, this approach
will roughly estimate the capacity of the estuary at the power plant
location to assimilate the excess heat.

     In some instances, when the estuary is relatively narrow, the plume may
extend across the estuary's entire width.  In these cases  (guidelines are
given later to determine when this occurs) the near field momentum approach
can be used.  By using the well mixed assumption (even if the actual estuary
is stratified) a lower limit on the expected temperature elevation across
the estuary is obtained.

     Slack tide conditions will also be used to evaluate the maximum surface
temperature produced by a submerged discharge.  Both vertically  homogeneous
and linearly stratified conditions can be evaluated.
6.6.3.1  Evaluating the Thermal Block Constraint.  Based upon momentum
considerations, the relationship between the ATy isotherm and the distance
(y) it extends from the discharge point is given by  (Weigel, 1964):

                                                                      (VI-85)
where
     AT  = temperature rise across the condenser  (°F)
                                    371

-------
     AT  = temperature excess at a distance y from the discharge outlet
     y   = distance measured along the jet axis originating at the
           discharge point (m)

     yQ  = virtual source position (m)

     The virtual source position is usually about two to ten times the
diameter of the discharge orifice.  The equivalent diameter of a discharge
canal is the diameter of a circle whose cross-sectional area is the same as
that of the discharge canal.

     Brooks (1972) has shown that for round orifices, the virtual source
position is approximately six times the orifice diameter.  At the virtual
discharge position (y = y0) the average excess temperature is approximately
70 percent that at the discharge location.

     Since one of the assumptions used in developing Equation VI-85 is that
momentum is conserved along the jet axis, an upper limit on y must be
established to prevent the user from seriously violating this assumption.
The upper limit can be chosen to be where the plume velocity has decreased
to 1 ft/sec or 0.31 meters per second.  This implies that the minimum AT
that can be evaluated using the equation is:
                                         AT
                             „'min   "    U

where
     Up       = exit velocity of thermal discharge (m/s)

     (ATy)m-jn = minimum excess temperature that can be evaluated using
                Equation VI-86 (°F)

This constraint generally does not restrict practical application of
Equation VI-85.
                                   372

-------
     Using the value estimated by Brooks (1972)  for the virtual  source
position, Equation VI-85 can be rewritten as:
                                /ATc \  2
                       y= 3DP   AT^ 1    *fory - 6DP               (AT )  .
                  tb     p[ ATtb   I           tb - v   y'nnn
     The cross sectional area to the ATtb isotherm is (assuming the plume
remains vertically mixed):

                            Ac = ytb "dtb                             (VI-89)

where

     A   = cross sectional area measured out to the distance ytb (m2)

     d ,  = average water depth over the distance y.,  (m)

     If Ac 
-------
where

     AT   = steady state well mixed excess temperature (°F)

In this steady state approach, ATSS can no longer be estimated independently
of the estuarine flow field characteristics.  The surface transfer
coefficient K can be determined by reference to the equilibrium temperature
discussion in the river thermal screening section.  Although the equilibrium
temperature does not appear explicitly in Equation VI-90, its effect is
indirectly included since K can not be determined independently of E.  In
the process of finding K, the ambient surface water temperature of the
estuary generally should not be assumed to be at equilibrium because of the
combined influence of ocean and river water (TRACOR, 1971), each of which
may be at different temperatures.

     The dispersion coefficient, E[_, is dependent on estuary
characteristics.  A value obtained from past studies in the vicinity of the
power plant site should be used if possible.  Alternatively, the methods and
data provided earlier in Section 6.4.5 can be used.
6.6.3.2  Surface Area Constraint.  The surface area constraint can be
evaluated employing the same approach used to evaluate the thermal block
constraint.  Before beginning, Equation VI-86 should be evaluated to ensure
that AT   exceeds (AT ) - , since (ATv)m-;n establishes the minimum excess
isotherm that can be evaluated using these methods.

     The distance offshore to the ATsa isotherm (the isotherm associated
with the legal surface area constraint) can be found as:
                      ysa - 3Dp I  ^- I   for y > 6D.                <«-91>
where
                                     374

-------
     ysa = distance offshore at Al"sa  isotherm  (m)
 The  surface area enclosed by that ATsa isotherm can be estimated as:
                - 6D
                        W  + D
                                   - 6Dp I ^
                                                                      (VI-92)
where
                                  2Q
     When the estuary depth drops off rapidly from the outfall  location,  an
appropriate average depth would be the depth to the  bottom of the discharge
orifice.  If A_  J
                                                ss
(VI-93)
where
W  = width of estuary (m)

d = 1/2 IR/^DX)

C2 = 1/2  R/(ADi)
                                     + (4WL/(pCpAtD  •  24  -  3600))
                                       (WK/(pCpAtD!  -  24  •  3600))
     and ATSS was given by Equation VI-90.
     When A. -Aca the surface area constraint is not exceeded.
           S   So
                                     375

-------
6.6.3.3  Surface Temperature Constraint.  This section provides a method for
estimating the surface temperature of  a  buoyant  plume  resulting  from  a
subsurface discharge.   Slack  tide  conditions  and  a horizontal discharge
configuration are considered.  A horizontal configuration should approximate
conditions under which the lowest maximum surface water  temperature  excess
is attained.

     When the ambient water density is constant over depth the following two
dimensionless parameter groups are needed:

                                f - ~^-
                                    Dp                               (VI-94)

and
                                        1.07 Up
                     F (Froude Number) =
                                       v/P - Pp Dpg                   (VI-95)
After calculating G and F,  Figure  VI-35  can  be  used  to  find  SQ,  the
centerline dilution  relative  to  the  virtual  source position.  From this
information, the maximum surface temperature elevation can be estimated  as:
                                           AT
                                 urface
If ATsurface 
-------
                 4  6  8 10    20


                     F (Froude Number)
                    40  60 80 100
FIGURE VI-35
CENTERLINE  DILUTION OF ROUND BUOYANT
JET IN STAGNANT UNIFORM ENVIRONMENT
(AFTER FAN  AND  BROOKS, 1969)
                        377

-------
                                       I-  3/
                        ~D~  =  3'86 r T  8                         (VI-97)

where


                1.07  IL
            yppp^ c
                PS     P-
             0.87 (ps -
     2    = maximum height of rise of thermal  plume  (m)
      max              3                      K      \  /
     -Ł   = linear density gradient (kg/m3/m)

Using Equation  VI-97,   the  maximum  rise   of   the   thermal   plume  can  be
estimated.  If  it  is   less  than  the  depth   of   water,  the plume remains
submerged.  If, however, z     exceeds  the  water   depth,  the  plume  will
                          II Id /\
surface.  In  this  case  the methods given  previously  for  the nonstratified
case can be used to estimate  the  maximum   surface   temperature  where  the
ambient water density should be chosen to be the depth-averaged mean.
                                    378

-------
6.7 TURBIDITY

6.7.1 Introduction

     Turbidity is a measure of the optical clarity of water and is dependent
upon the light scattering and absorption characteristics of both suspended
and dissolved material in the water column (Austin, 1974).  The physical
definition of turbidity is not yet fully agreed upon, and varies from
equivalence with the scattering coefficient (Beyer, 1969), to the product of
an extinction coefficient and measured pathlength (Hodkinson, 1968), and to
the sum of scattering and absorption coefficients (VandeHulst, 1957).
Turbidity affects water clarity and apparent water odor, and hence is of
aesthetic significance.  It also affects light penetration, so that
increased turbidity results in a decreased photic zone depth and a decrease
in primary productivity.

     Turbidity levels in an estuary are likely to vary substantially in both
temporal and spatial dimensions.  Temporal variations occur as a function of
seasonal river discharge, seasonal water temperature changes, instantaneous
tidal current, and wind speed and direction.  Spatially, turbidity varies as
a function of water depth, distance from the head of the estuary, water
column biomass content, and salinity level.  Much of the complexity  in the
analysis of turbidity results from different sources of turbidity responding
differently to the controlling variables mentioned above.  As an example,
increased river discharge tends to increase turbidity because of increased
inorganic suspended sediment  load.  However, such an increase curtails  light
penetration, thus reducing water column photosynthesis.  This, in turn,
reduces the biologically induced turbidity.

     Methods employed to monitor turbidity include use of  a "turbidimeter".
Light extinction measurements are commonly given  in Jackson Turbidity Units
(JTU) which are based on the  turbidity of a standard clay  suspension.  Once
standardized, this arbitrary  scale* can be used as a basis to measure
changes in turbidity.
 *The  JTU  scale  is  an  arbitrary  scale  since  it  cannot  be  directly  related
  to physical  units when  used  as  a  calibration  basis for  turbidimeter
  measurement.

                                        379

-------
The turbidity calibration scale is given in APHA (1980).  From a measured
change in turbidity a relative change in water quality may be inferred.
Estuarine water is almost always extremely turbid, especially when compared
to ocean or lake waters.

     The JTU scale is not the only available turbidity scale.  In 1926
Kingsbury and Clark devised a scale based on a Formazin suspension medium
which resulted in Formazin Turbidity Units (FTU's).  More recently volume
scattering functions (VSF) and volume attenuation coefficients have been
proposed (Austin, 1974).  However, JTU's are still most commonly used as an
indicator of estuarine turbidity levels.

     As a rough indication of the wide variations possible in turbidity,
Figure VI-36 shows suspended solid concentrations for the various sub-bays
of San Francisco Bay for one year (Pearson, jrb ji]_, 1967).  The solid line
shows annual mean concentrations while the dashed lines indicate
concentrations exceeded by 20% and 80% of the samples taken at each station
over the one year time period.  These variations at stations located near
bay heads (left and right extremities of Figure VI-36) typically exceed 300%
of the annual 20th percentile values.  Use of extreme high/low values would
produce correspondingly larger annual variations.
6.7.2  Procedure to Assess Impacts of Wastewater Discharges on
       Turbidity or Related Parameters

Numerous states have enacted water quality standards which limit the
allowable turbidity increase due to a wastewater discharge in an estuary or
coastal water body.  The standards, however, are not always written in terms
of turbidity, but are sometimes expressed as surrogate parameters such as
light transmittance or Secchi disk.  The following three standards provide
illustrations:
                                   380

-------
               SOUTH  I LOWER CENTRAL! NORTH I SAN PABLO I
                BAY J/ BAY
FIGURE  VI-36  MEAN SUSPENDED SOLIDS  IN SAN  FRANCISCO  BAY
               FROM:   PEARSON EI AL,,  1967,  PG V-15
                             381

-------
For class AA water in Puget Sound, State of Washington:

     Turbidity shall not exceed 5 NTU over background turbidity when
     the background turbidity is 50 NTU or less, or have more than a 10
     percent increase in turbidity when the background turbidity is
     more than 50 NTU.

For class A water in the State of Hawaii:

     Secchi disk or Secchi disk equivalent as "extinction coefficient"
     determinations shall not be altered more than 10 percent.

For coastal waters off the State of California:

     The transmittance of natural light shall not be significantly
     reduced at any point outside of the initial dilution zone.  A
     significant difference is defined as  a statistically significant
     difference in the means of two distributions of sampling results at
     the 95 percent confidence level.

These standards illustrate the need for developing interelationships between
turbidity related parameters, since data might be available for one
parameter while the state standard is expressed  in terms of another.  Based
on these considerations methods will be presented to:

     •   predict the turbidity in the receiving  water at the completion
         of initial dilution

     •   predict the suspended solids concentrations in  the receiving
         water at the completion of initial dilution

     •   relate turbidity and light transmittance data,  and

     •   relate Secchi disk and turbidity  data.
                                 382

-------
     By treating turbidity as a conservative parameter the turbidity in the
receiving water at the completion of initial dilution can be predicted as:
where

     If = turbidity in receiving water at the completion of initial
          dilution (typical units:  JTU)

     Ta = ambient or background turbidity

     Te = effluent turbidity

     S, = initial dilution
      a

     Initial dilution can be predicted based on the methods presented
earlier in Section 6.5.2.  Equation VI-98 can be used, then, to directly
evaluate those standards written  in terms of maximum allowable turbidity or
turbidity increase.

     An expression similar to Equation VI-98 can be used to evaluate the
suspended solids concentration  in  an estuary following completion  of initial
dilution.  Specifically
                                      SSQ -  SSa
                          SSf =  SSa + _e - *                       (VI-99)
                                          a
where
      SSf  =  suspended  solids concentration  at  completion of  initial
            dilution,  mg/1
      SS   =  ambient  suspended  solids  concentration, mg/1
      SSP  =  effluent  suspended  solids  concentration,  mg/1
                                    383

-------
     S,  = initial dilution
      a

     Consider now a situation where light transmittance data have been
collected but the state standard is expressed in terms of turbidity.   A
relationship between the two parameters would be useful.  Such a
relationship can be developed by first considering the Beer-Lambert law for
light attenuation:
                            T. = exp(-ad)
                             d                                      (VI-100)

where

     Td = fraction of light transmitted over a depth d, dimensionless

     a = light attenuation, or extinction coefficient, per meter

     d  = vertical distance between two locations where light is
          measured, meters

Austin (1974) has shown that the attenuation coefficient is expressible in
terms of turbidity as:

                              a = k -JTU                            (VI-101)

where

     JTU = turbidity, in Jackson turbidity units

     k   = coefficient ranging from 0.5 to 1.0

Combining Equations VI-100 and VI-101 the turbidity is expressible as:

                            JTU = ' Td~ ln Td                       (VI-102)

The  increased turbidity ( JTU) is expressible as:
                                   384

-------
                                                                    (VI-103)

where

     Td2 = light transmittance at the final turbidity

         = light transmittance at the initial turbidity

                               EXAMPLE VI-17
     Vertical profiles of several water quality parameters,  including
percent light transmittance, have been collected in the vicinity of a
municipal wastewater discharge in Puget Sound.  Figure VI-37 shows each
of the three profiles.  If the maximum allowable turbidity increase is
5 NTU, does the discharge, based on the light transmittance  profile
shown in Figure VI-37, violate this requirement?

     It is known that the wastefield is submerged between about 10 to 20 m
below the water's surface.  Light transmittances at these depths are about
18 to 20 percent.  Deeper within the water column light transmittances are
at background values of about 55 percent.  Note that  in the  top few meters
the light transmittances are between 0 and 10 percent.  These  low
transmittances are not due to the wastefield, but rather are caused by a
lens of turbid freshwater.  Consequently, the following data will be used
here:

     t   k   =0.5

     t   d   = 1 m (i.e.  percent transmittance measured over  1 m)

     •   Td2 = 18 percent

     •   Td  = 55 percent
                                     385

-------
• - /o Light transmission
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
• - Density crT
14.0 15.5 170 18.5 20.0 21.5 23.0 24.5
A -Salinity °/oo
170 18.5 200 21.5 230 24.5 26.0 27.5
Q J 	 L 	 _ 	 	 1 	 __....



2- M
CD °
W
INJ
01'
CO
CO
Ol
T
\








^r
"^








=c

)
^x_






— - — .
-^n^



	 _





•* 	 ^.
^


^A
\





^**-^.

k
\
x \
\\
<

L

^-^









80

26.0

29.0

7
^
t

<
j




90 100

27.5 29.5

305 32 5





\
I


^

























FIGURE VI-37  WATER QUALITY PROFILE OF SELECTED PARAMETERS
              NEAR A MUNICIPAL OUTFALL IN PUGET SOUND,
              WASHINGTON
                             386

-------
The turbidity  increase  is:
                                     1n
Assuming JTU  ancl NTU units  are equivalent  (EPA,  1979), then the  increased
turbidity  is  less than the  5.0 NTU  allowable.

      It is of  interest to calculate the percent  light transmittance within
the plume  that would cause  a  5 NTU  increase  in turbidity.  Using  a typical
background light transmittance of 50 percent found  in central Puget Sound,
the minimum light transmittance  (Td )  is computed to be:

                           _,  percent for  k = 0.5
  f4 p
" 10.5
                              5 percent for k = 1.0
Light transmittances as  low as 0.5 to 4 percent have been found due to
causes other than the plume (e.g.  plankton blooms  and fresh water runoff),
but the  lowest  light transmittances associated with the plume have been
about 18 percent per meter.
                            END OF EXAMPLE VI-17
Secchi disk and turbidity can be related to each other  in the following manner.
Assume that the extinction coefficient, of visible  light  (a)  is directly
proportional to turbidity (T) and inversely proportional to  Secchi disk
(SD), or:

                                a  -  kx T                          (VI-104)

and
                               a  =
                                     SO                             (VI-105)
where ki and k2 are constants which have not yet been specified.  These two
relationships have theoretical bases, as discussed in Austin (1974) and
Graham (1968).  Combining those two expressions, the relationship between
                                     387

-------
Secchi disk and turbidity becomes:
                                  k2
                            T  =
                                  kj   SD

Typical values of kx and k2 are:

     k  = 0.5 to 1.0, where T is  expressed in JTU's

     k  = 1.7 where Secchi disk is expressed in meters

Thus Equation VI-106 provides a method of correlating turbidity and Secchi
disk data.

     When state standards are written in terms of Secchi  disk,  it is
convenient to combine Equations VI-98 and VI-106 to yield:
                                        1     1
                       1   .   l    +   SDe " SDa                    (VI-107)
                              _
                      SD-     SDa         S
                        T       a          a
or
                     SD
e     IVSDf   SDj-a'SDa
                                                                    (VI-108)
where
     SDf = minimum allowable Secchi disk reading in receiving water
           such that the water quality standard is not violated

     SDg = ambient Secchi disk reading

     Sa  = minimum initial dilution which occurs when the plume
           surfaces
                                    388

-------
     SDe = Secchi disk of effluent

Since Secchi disk measurements are made from the water's surface downward,
critical conditions (in terms of the Secchi disk standard) will occur when
the initial dilution is just sufficient to allow the plume to surface.  It
is notable that maximum turbidity or light transmittance impacts of a
wastewater plume will occur when the water column is stratified, the plume
remains submerged, and initial dilution is a minimum.  Under these same
conditions, however, Secchi disk readings might not be altered at all, if
the plume is trapped below the water's surface at a depth exceeding the
ambient Secchi disk depth.
                               EXAMPLE VI-18
     A municipality discharges its wastewater through an outfall and
diffuser system into an embayment.  The state standard specifies that the
minimum allowable Secchi disk is 3m.  Determine whether the discharge is
likely to violate the standard.  Use these data:

     SD  = 5 to 10m, observed range

     S,  = 75, minimum  initial dilution when the plume surfaces
      a

     One method of approaching the problem is to assume that violation of
the water quality standard is incipient (i.e.  SDf = 3m).  Under these
conditions the effluent Secchi disk would have to be:
               SDe
-1
  = 0.1 m
                                                  = 4  inches

Thus, if the Secchi disk of the effluent exceeds  4 inches, the standards
will not be violated even under these critical conditions.  It would be a
simple matter to measure the Secchi disk of the treated effluent to see
whether the standard could be violated or not.
                          END OF EXAMPLE VI-18
                                     389

-------
6.8  SEDIMENTATION

6.8.1  Introduction

     Like turbidity, sedimentation is a multifaceted phenomenon in
estuaries.  As in rivers, estuaries transport bed load and suspended
sediment.  However with the time varying currents in estuaries, no
equilibrium or steady state conditions can be achieved (Ippen, 1966).
Additionally, while any given reach of a river has reasonably constant water
quality conditions, an estuary can vary from fresh water ( 1 ppt.  salinity)
to sea water (  30 ppt.  salinity), and from a normally slightly acidic
conditon near the head to a slightly basic condition at the mouth.  The
behavior of many dissolved and suspended sediments varies substantially
across these pH and salinity gradients.  Many colloidal particles*
agglomerate and settle to the bottom.  In general, all estuaries undergo
active sedimentation which tends to fill them in.  It is also true for
essentially all U.S.  estuaries that the rate of accumulation of sediment is
limited not by the available sources of sediment but by the estuary's
ability to scour unconsolidated sediments from the channel floor and banks.
6.8.2  Qualitative Description of Sedimentation

     Before presenting what quantitative  information  is available concerning
sediment distribution in an estuary, a qualitative description of sediment
sources, types and distribution will be helpful.  Sediment  sources may be
divided into two general classes:  sources external to the  estuary and
sources internal to the estuary (Schultz  and Simmons, 1957).  The major
sources of sediment within each category  are shown below.   By far the
largest external contributor  is the upstream watershed.
 *Co11oidal particles are particles small enough  to remain  suspended  by
  the random  thermal motion of the water.
                                     390

-------
     1.   External:
         •   Upstream watershed
         •   Banks  and stream bed of tributaries
         t   Ocean  areas adjacent to the mouth of the estuary
         •   Surface runoff from land adjacent to the estuary
         t   Wind borne sediments
         •   Point  sources (municipal and industrial)

     2.   Internal:
         •   Estuarine marsh areas
         •   Wave and current resuspension of unconsolidated
             bed materials
         •   Estuarine biological activity
         •   Dredging

     General characterizations of U.S.  estuarine sediments have been made
by Ippen (1966) and by Schultz and Simmons (1957).  Many individual case
study reports are available for sediment characterization of most of the
larger U.S.  estuaries (i.e.  Columbia River, San Francisco Bay, Charles
Harbor,  Galveston Bay, Savannah Harbor, New York Harbor, Delaware River and
Bay, etc.).  In general, estuarine sediments range from fine granular sand
(0.01 in.  to 0.002 in.  in diameter) through silts and clays to fine
colloidal clay (0.003 in.  or less in diameter) (Ippen, 1966).  Very little,
if any,  larger material (coarse sand, gravel, etc.)  is found in estuarine
sediments.  Sand plays a relatively minor role in East Coast, Gulf Coast and
Southern Pacific Coast estuaries.  Usually it constitutes less than 5% by
volume ( 25% by weight) of total sediments for these estuaries with most of
this sand concentrated near the estuarine mouth (Schultz & Simmons, 1957).
By contrast, sand is a major element  in estuarine shoaling for the north
Pacific estuaries (i.e.  Washington  and Oregon coasts).  These estuaries are
characterized by extensive oceanic sand intrusion into the lower estuarine
segments and by extensive bar formations near the estuarine mouth.  The
relative distribution of silts and clays, of organic and inorganic material
within different estuaries, and, in fact, the distribution of shoaling and
scour areas within estuaries, varies widely.
                                    391

-------
6.8.3  Estuarine Sediment Forces and Movement

     As sediments enter the lower reaches of a river and come under tidal
influence they are subjected to a wide variety of forces which control their
movement and deposition.  First, net velocities in the upper reaches of
estuaries are normally lower than river velocities.  Additionally, the water
column comes under the influence of tidal action and thus is subject to
periods of slack water.  During these periods coarse sand and larger
materials settle.  The scour velocity required to resuspend a particle is
higher than that required to carry it in suspension.  Thus, once the coarser
particles settle out in the lower river and upper estuarine areas, they tend
not to be resuspended and carried farther into the estuary (U.S.
Engineering District, San Francisco, 1975).  Exceptions to this principle
can come during periods of extremely high river discharge when water
velocities can hold many of these particles in suspension well into or even
through an estuary.  Table VI-26 lists approximate maximum allowable
velocities to avoid scour for  various sizes of exposed particles.  Values
are approximate and are for unarmored sediment (sediment not protected by  a
covering of larger material).

     Sediments are subject to  gravitational forces and have size-dependent
settling velocities.  In highly turbulent water the particle fall velocities
can be small compared to background fluid motion.  Thus gravitational
settling occurs chiefly  in the relatively quiescent, shallow areas of
estuaries or during periods of slack water.  As mentioned earlier, particle
settling attains a maximum  in  each tidal cycle during high water  slack and
low water slack tides.   During periods of peak tidal velocity (approximately
half way between high and  low  water) resuspension of unconsolidated sediment
may occur.  Thus during  a  tidal cycle large volumes of sediment are
resuspended, carried upstream  with flood flow, deposited, resuspended, and
carried downstream on the  ebb  tide.  Only those particles deposited in
relatively quiescent areas have the potential for  long term residence.
Compounding this cyclic  movement of sediments are  seasonal river  discharge
variations which alter  estuarine hydrodynamics.  Thus, sediment masses tend
to shift from one part  of  an estuary to  another  (Schultz and Simmons,  1975).
                                   392

-------
                            TABLE  VI-26
   MAXIMUM  ALLOWABLE  CHANNEL VELOCITY TO  AVOID  BED  SCOUR  (FPS)  (KING, 1954)
     Original material excavated
 Clear
 water,
   no
detritus
  Water
  trans-
 porting
colloidal
  silts
  Water trans-
  porting non-
 colloidal silts,
sands,  gravels
   or rock
  fragments
Fine sand	   1-50
Sandy loarr	   1.75
Silt loam	   2.00
Alluvial silts	   2.00
Ordinary firm loam	   2.50
Volcanic ash	   2.50
Fine gravel	   2.50
Stiff clay	   3.75
Graded, loam to cobbles	   3.75
Alluvial silt	   3.75
Graded, silt to cobbles	   4.00
Coarse  gravel 	   4.00
Cobbles and  shingles	   5.00
Shales  and hardpans	   6.00
           2.50
           2.50
           3.00
           3.50
           3.50
           3.50
           5.00
           5.00
           5.00
           5.00
           5.50
           6.00
           5.50
           6.00
                 1.50
                 2.00
                 2.00
                 2.00
                 2.25
                 2.00
                 3.75
                 3.00
                 5.00
                 3.00
                 5.00
                 6.50
                 6.50
                 5.00
                                   393

-------
     As fresh waters encounter areas of significant salinity gradients
extremely fine particles (primarily colloidal  clay minerals) often
destabilize (coagulate) and agglomerate to form larger particles
(flocculate).  The resulting floe (larger agglomerated masses) then settles
to the bottom.  Coagulation occurs when electrolytes, such as magnesium
sulfate and sodium chloride, "neutralize" the repulsive forces between clay
particles.  This allows the particles to adhere upon collision
(flocculation), thus producing larger masses of material.  Flocculation
rates are dependent on the size distribution and relative composition of the
clays and electrolytes and upon local boundary shear forces (Ippen, 1966,
and Schultz and Simmons, 1957).  Flocculation occurs primarily in the upper
central segments of an estuary in the areas of rapid salinity increase.

     Movement of sediments along the bottom of an estuary does not continue
in a net downstream direction as it does in the upper layers and in stream
reaches.  In all but a very few extremely well mixed estuaries upstream
bottom currents predominate at the mouth of an estuary.  Thus, upstream flow
is greater than downstream flow at the bottom.  This is counterbalanced by
increased surface downstream flow.  However, net upstream flow along the
bottom results in a net upstream transport of sediment along the bottom of
an estuary near the mouth.  Thus, sediments and floes settling into the
bottom layers of an estuary near the mouth are often carried back into the
estuary rather than being carried out into the open  sea.  Consequently,
estuaries tend to trap, or to conserve sediments while allowing fresh water
flows to continue on out to sea.  At some point along the bottom, the
upstream  transport  is  counter-balanced by the downstream  transport from
the  fresh water inflow.  At this point,  termed  the  "null  zone", there  is
essentially  no net  bottom  transport.  Here sediment  deposition  is
extensive.   In a stratified estuary  this  point  is  at the  head of  the  saline
intrusion wedge.   In a partially mixed estuary  it  is harder to  pinpoint.
Nonetheless,  sedimentation  is  a useful parameter to  analyze and will  be
handles in a quantitative manner beginning with Section  6.8.4.

     To this point, flow in a fairly regular channel has  been assumed.
However,  in many estuaries geomorphic irregularities exist.   Such
irregularities (e.g.   narrow  headlands)  create eddy  currents  on their  lee
sides.  These  eddy  currents,  or gyres, slow the sediment  movement  and  allow
                                    394

-------
local shoaling.  Additionally, large shallow subtidal or tidal flatlands
exist in many estuaries.  Such areas are usually well out of the influence
of primary currents.  As a result local water velocities are usually low and
increased shoaling is possible.

     Wind and waves also have a major influence on estuarine sediment
distribution.  Seasonal wind driven currents can significantly alter water
circulation patterns and associated velocities.  This in turn determines, to
a large extent, the areas of net shoaling and scour throughout an estuary.
Local wind driven and oceanic waves can create significant scour forces.
Such scour, or particle resuspension, is particularly evident in shallow
areas where significant wave energy is present at the sediment/water
interface.  Local wind driven waves are a major counterbalancing force to
low velocity deposition in many shallow estuarine areas (U.S.  Engineering
District, San Francisco, 1975).

     Finally, oceanic littoral currents (long shore currents) interact with
flood and ebb flows in the area of an estuary mouth.  Particularly  in the
Pacific Northwest, sandy sediment fed from such littoral drift is a major
source of estuarine sediment, and the interference of littoral drift with
normal flood and ebb flows is the major factor creating estuarine bars.

     Figure VI-38 shows the schematic flow of annual sediment movement
through San Francisco Bay.  With the exception of the magnitude of annual
dredging, this is typical for most U.S.  estuaries.  The most important
thing to observe is the dominance of resuspension and redeposition over all
other elements of sediment movement including net inflow and outflow.  Also
note that there is a net annual accumulation of deposited sediment in the
bay.  This figure is also helpful in conceptualizing the sediment trap or
sediment concentration characteristic of estuaries.  In any year, 8-10
million cubic yards flow into the estuary and 5 to 9 million cubic yards
flow out.  However, over 180 million cubic yards are actively involved in
annual sediment transport within the estuary.

     Figure VI-39 is an idealized conceptualization of the various
sediment-related processes in an estuary.   It must be remembered that these
processes actually overlap spatially much more than is shown and that the
                                    395

-------
 processes active at any given  location vary considerably  over time.
                     NET ANNUAL DEPOSITION
FIGURE VI-38
SEDIMENT MOVEMENT IN SAN FRANCISCO  BAY SYSTEM
(MILLION CUBIC YARDS),  FROM:   U,S,  ENGINEERING
DISTRICT,  SAN FRANCISCO, 1975)
      From this  qualitative analysis, there are  some  general statements which
 can be made.   Ippen  (1966) drew the following conclusions on the
 distribution  of estuarine sediments:

      a)  The  major portion of sediments introduced into suspension in
          an estuary  from any source (including  resuspension) during
          normal  conditions is retained therein,  and  if transportable by
          the  existing currents is deposited  near the ends of the
          salinity intrusion, or at locations of  zero net bottom
          velocity.

      b)  Any  measure contributing to a shift of  the regime towards
          stratification causes increased shoaling.  Such measures may
          be:  structures to reduce the tidal flow and prism, diversion
          of additional fresh water into the  estuary, deepening and
                                    396

-------
         PLAN VIEW
                 MAJOR EDDY DEPOSITION

                 ^CHANNEL BANK DEPOSITION

              :;...;., AREA OF LOW ENERGY DEPOSITION
4)
         PROFILE
         AREA OF MAXIMUM
         SALINITY GRADIENTS
-FLOCCULATION

    SEDIMENT TRAP AREA
                                                                Q>
                                     NULL ZONE
                                    "SETTLING
                   -SEDIMENT MOVEMENT (NET)
                -WATER COLUMN  MOVEMENT
                      HEAVY
                      PARTI CLE
                      SETTLING
       FIGURE VI-39   IDEALIZED ESTUARINE  SEDIMENTATION
                               397

-------
         narrowing of the channel.

     c)  Sediments settling to the  bottom of an estuary are generally
         transported upstream and not downstream.   Such sediments may
         at some upstream point be  resuspended into the upper layers
         and carried back downstream.

     d)  Sediments accumulate near  the ends of the intrusion zone and
         form shoals.  Shoals also  form where the  net bottom velocity
         is zero (in the null zone).

     e)  The intensity of shoaling  is most extreme near the end of the
         intrusion for stratified estuaries and is lessened in the well
         mixed estuary.

     f)  Shoals occur along the banks of the main  estuarine channel
         where water is deep enough to prevent wave induced scour and
         where velocities are reduced from main channel velocities
         sufficiently to allow settling.

     Schultz and Simmons (1957) made similar conclusions but added the
presence of shoaling at the mouth where flood and  ebb currents intercept
littoral drift.
6.8.4  Settling Velocities

     As was stated in the previous section, settling velocities do not play
a great role in controlling sedimentation patterns in estuaries as they do
in lakes.  However, it is informative to assess settling rates for various
size particles.  The possible size classifications of particles and their
general inclusive diameter sizes are shown in Table VI-27   Table VI-28
lists terminal settling velocities for each particle size assuming spherical
particles and density of 2.0* in quiescent water.  From this table it can be
*The density of many inorganic suspended particles is approximately equal to
 that of sand (2.7 gm/cm3) while that of biomass and organic detritus is
 usually much closer to that of water and can be assumed to be about 1.1 gm/cm3,

                                    398

-------
                            TABLE VI-27
         SEDIMENT PARTICLE SIZE RANGES (AFTER HOUGH, 1957)

Derrick STONE
One-man STONE
Clean, fine to coarse GRAVEL
Fine, uniform GRAVEL
Very coarse, clean uniform SAND
Uniform, coarse SAND
Uniform, medium SAND
Clean, well -graded SAND AND GRAVEL
Uniform, fine SAND
Well -graded, silty SAND AND GRAVEL
Silty SAND
Uniform SILT
Sandy CLAY
Silty CLAY
CLAY (30 to 50% clay sizes)
Collodal CLAY (-2p>50%)
PARTICLE SIZE RANGE
Inches Millimeters
D D .
max. mm.
120
12
3
3/8
1/8
1/8
—
--
--
—
--
--
—
--
--
36
4
1/4
1/16
1/32
1/64
--
--
--
—
—
—
--
--
—
max.

--
80
8
3
2
0.5
10
0.25
5
2
0.05
1.0
0.05
0.05
0.01
D .
mm.

--
10
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.25
0.05
0.05
0.01
0.005
0.005
0.001
0.001
0.0005
10'6
(After B. K. Hough, Basic Soils Engineering, p.  69, Values listed are
approximate)
                                  399

-------
                            TABLE VI-28
                                            «

       RATE OF FALL IN WATER OF SPHERES OF VARYING RADII AND

CONSTANT DENSITY OF 2a AS CALCULATED BY STOKES1  LAWb'° (MYSELS,1959)
Radius
mm.
10
1
0.1
0.01
10'3
ID'4
10-5
10"6
io-7
Terminal
cm. /sec.
(>D
(>D
(>D
2.2xlO-2
2.2xlO-4
2.2x10-6
2.2xlO~8
2.2xlQ-10
(2.2x10-12)
velocity
cm./min.



1.3
0.013
1.3x10-4
1.3xlO'6
1.3xlO-8

            To-apply  to  other  conditions, multiply  the  u  value
            by  the  pertinent density  difference  and divide  it
            by  the  pertinent viscosity  in centipoises.
            Values  in  parentheses are calculated by Stokes'  law
            under conditions where  this  law  is not  applicable.

         c Stokes  law states  that  the terminal  velocity  is  nro-
            portional  to the particle radius squared, the differ-
            ence in density and inversely proportional  to the
            liquid  viscosity.
                                       400

-------
 inferred that particles of the medium sand class and coarser probably settle
 to the bottom within a very short time after entering an estuary.

      Turning to the other end of the particle size scale of Table VI-28,
 particles with a diameter of 10" mm fall only 3.1 x 10~  inches per hour in
 the most favorable environment (calm waters).  Such a settling rate is not
 significant in the estuarine environment.  Figure VI-40 shows the quiescent
 settling rates for particle sizes in between these two extremes since this
 intermediate size group is of real significance in estuarine management
 (primarily silts).  For particles smaller than those shown in Figure VI-40,
 gravitational settling is not a significant factor in controlling particle
 motion.  Particles substantially larger than the range shown in Figure VI-40
 tend to settle above,  or at, the head of an estuary.

      Combining Figure  VI-40 (fall per tidal cycle)** with known segment
 flushing times (in tidal cycles) the size of particles tending to settle out
 in each segment can be estimated.  If such predictions reasonably match
 actual mean segment sediment particle size, then this method can be useful
 in predicting changes  in sediment pattern.  Anticipated changes in
 river-borne suspended  sediment load by particle size can be compared to
 areas where each size  of particle would tend to settle.  This would then
 identify areas which would either be subject to increased shoaling or
 reduced shoaling and increased scour.  This type of analysis has been more
 successful  when applied to organic detritus material than for inorganic
 suspended loads.

      A number of simplifying assumptions have gone into this settling
 velocity analysis.  The most significant of these are:

      1.   Water column  density changes have been ignored.   Inclusion of
          this factor would slightly reduce the settling velocity with
          increased depth.   This  effect will  be more significant for
          organic matter because  of its lower density.

      2.   Dispersive phenomena and advective velocities  have not been
          considered.
**Based on a 12.4 hour tidal  cycle.

                                     401

-------
     3.
     4.
Table VI-27 and  Figure VI-40 are based on the fall  of
perfectly spherical  particles.  Non-spherical particles  have
lower settling velocities.

Interference between particles has not been considered.
However, in a turbulent,  sediment-laden estuary such
interference is  possible  (hindered settling).  The  analysis of
the effect of interference on settling velocities was  covered
in Chapter V for lakes.   This analysis is also basically valid
for estuaries.   The  effects  introduced there can be applied to
Figure VI-40 velocities to adjust for particle interference.
                   05      10     15
                   FALL DISTANCE PER TIDAL CYCLE (FT)
         FIGURE VI-40
                  PARTICLE  DIAMETER vs SETTLING
                  FALL PER  TIDAL CYCLE (12,3 MRS)
                  UNDER QUIESCENT CONDITIONS
                  (SPHERES  WITH  DENSITY 2,0
6.8.5  Null  Zone  Calculations

     It was  previously mentioned that substantial  shoaling  occurs  in the
area of the  null  zone.   It  is possible to estimate the  location of this
zone, and hence the  associated shoaling areas, as  a function  of water depth
and river discharge.  In  addition to the importance of  the  null zone to
                                   402

-------
shoaling, Petersone and Conomos (Peterson, ert aj_., 1975) established the
biological and ecological importance of this area in terms of planktonic
production.  The null zone, therefore, is both an area of potential
navigational hazard and an area of major ecological importance to the
planner.

     Silvester (1974) summarized the analysis for estimating the location of
the null zone with respect to the mouth of an estuary.  The basic equation
used in this analysis is:
                          S               U 2
                           n    _  1000    _r                        (VI-109)
                          So    0.7S F2
                                    o  n
where
     S  = mean salinity (averaged vertically and over a tidal cycle) at
          the null point (n), (ppt)
     S  = ocean surface salinity adjacent to the estuary in parts per
          thousand (ppt),

     Ur = fresh water flow velocity, (ft/sec)

     g  = gravational acceleration = 32.2 ft/sec2,

     d  = estuarine depth, (ft)
        = densimetric Froude number at the null zone where F  is
          defined by:
where
                                    403

-------
     Ap/pn = difference between fresh water density and that at the
             null zone (averaged over the depth of the water column)
             divided by the density at the null zone.  This value may
             be approximated for estuarine waters by:

Combining Equations VI-109 and VI-110 and solving for —    yields
                                                      pn
                              Ap     0.7  *
                              Pn    1000  bn                        (VI-111)
     This formulation is particularly good for channels which are either
maintained at a given depth (dredged for navigation) or are naturally
regular, as "d" represents mean cross section channel depth at the null
zone.

     The use of these equations first requires location of the present null
zone.  This can most easily be done by measuring and averaging bottom
currents over one tidal cycle to locate the point where upstream bottom
currents and downstream river velocities are exactly equal, resulting in no
net flow.  This situation is schematically shown in Figure VI-41.

     When this point has been established for one set of river discharge
conditions, Equation VI-111 can be substituted into Equation VI-110 to
calculate Fn.  This Fn value is an inherent characteristic of an estuary and
can be considered to be constant regardless of the variations in flow
conditions or null zone location (Silvester, 1974).

     With this information and a salinity profile for the estuary (SY
                                                                    /\
plotted against x from x = 0 at the mouth of the estuary to x = L at the
head) the location of future null zones may be calculated.  Given the new
conditions of Ur (changes in river discharge) or of d (changes in channel
depth, as by dredging activity), Equation VI-109 will allow calculation of a
new Sn.  This may be plotted on the salinity profile to caculate the
location of a new null zone position.  Even though these changes will
produce a new estuarine salinity profile, the use of Equation VI-109 and the
old (known) salinity profile will produce reasonably good estimates of
longitudinal shifts in the location of the null zone.  Salinity profiles for
                                    404

-------
           Mouth
U,
 '09
  .**
                                       .JNULLZONE
                                        NULL ZONE
                                                    U0.9
 *    U


"    U
             R
                  =  tidally averaged  velocity at  a  depth equal
                     to  0.9 of the water column depth.

                  =  river flow velocity
    FIGURE VI-41  ESTUARINE NULL ZONE  IDENTIFICATION
                            405

-------
appropriate seasonal conditions should be used for each calculation (e.g.
low flow profiles for a new low flow null zone calculation).
                               EXAMPLE VI-19
                      Estimation of Null Ipn e_location

     An estuary has the tidally averaged salinitv profile shown in the
Salinity Table below.  Mean channel depth in the area of the  existing  null
zone is 18 feet and the salinity at that point is 10 parts per thousand
(ppt).   Current (low flow) river discharge velocity is 0.5 ft/sec.  Normal
winter (high flow) velocity is 1.8 ft/sec.  It is desired to know where the
null zone will be located in summer and winter if a 30 ft deep channel is
dredged up to 70,000 feet from the mouth.
                 SALINITY DATA FOR EXAMPLE VI-19
Dis
tance from mouth (1
Salinity, (ppt)
000ft)
5
30
15
28
25
25
35
20
45
13
55
8
65
6
75
4
85
1
   From equation VI-43 and equation VI-44
F  = U
 n
                                    (Sn)  (g) (d)
              = 0.5 ft/sec/ 1 (7xlO-4)  (10 ppt)   (32.2 ft/sec2) (18 ft)
   or,
F  - 0.248
 n
                                    406

-------
     From equation VI-109 the null  zone salinity with a deeper channel  will
be:
                            Srt 1000 U2
                      5=0       r
                       n    5  0.7 F2 gd
                             o      n 3
              =  (1000)  (0.5 ft/sec)2 /0.7 (0.248)2  (32.2 ft/sec3)  (30  ft)
                    Sn  = 6.0 ppt
     From the prevous tabulation this will  occur approximately 65,000 ft
from the mouth of the estuary.

     Under winter flow conditions,

                         1000   U2
                    S  = -      r
                         0.7F2gd

              = (1000) (1.8 ft/sec)/O.7  (0.248)2  (32.2 ft/sec2)  (30 ft)

                    $n = 77.9  ppt

     This Sn is greater than ocean salinity and will  not actually  be
encountered.  Thus, null  zone shoaling will occur at  the mouth  if  it occurs
at all.  This condition is  common for rivers with seasonally variable flow
rates.
                           END OF EXAMPLE VI-19
                                  407

-------
REFERENCES
Abramovich, G., 1963.  The Theory of Turbulent Jets,  MIT Press.

American Public Health Association,  1976.   Standard Methods for  the
       Examination of Water and Wastewater.  Fourteenth edition.

APHA, AWWA, WPCF, 1980.  Standard Methods  For the Examination of Water and
       Wastewater.  Fifteenth Edition.  APHA, Washington, D.C.,  1134 pp.

Austin, R.W., 1974.  "Problems in Measuring Turbidity as a Water Quality
       Parameter," Proceedings of Seminar  on Methodology for Monitoring the
       Marine Environment.  EPA Environmental Monitoring Series,  Number EPA
       6QO/4-74-004.

Beyer, G.L., 1969.  "Turbidimetry and Nephelometry," Encyclopedia of
       Chemical Technology, New York, pp.  738-798.

Brooks, N.H., 1972.  Dispersion in Hydrologic and Coastal Environments.
       California Institute of Technology, Division of Engineering and
       Applied Science, Report No. KH-R-29.

California State Water Resources Control Board, 1978.  Water Quality Control
       Plan for Ocean Waters of California.  State Water Resources Control
       Board Resolution No. 78-2.  15 pp.

Carhart, R.A., A.J.  Policastro, S.   Ziemer, K.  Haake, and W.  Dunn, 1981.
       Studies of Mathematical Models for  Characterizing Plume and Drift
       Behavior from Cooling Towers, Volume 2:  Mathematical Model for
       Single-Source (single-tower)  Cooling Tower Plume Dispersion.
       Electric Power Research Institute,  CS-1683, Vol. 2, Research Project
       906-1.

Chen, C.W.  and Orlob, G.T., 1975.  "Ecologic Simulation for Aquatic
       Environments", Systems Analysis and Simulation in Ecology, Vol. III.
       Academic Press, Inc., New York, pp. 475-558.

DeFalco, Paul, Jr., 1967.  "The Estuary-Septic Tank of the Megalopolis,"
       Estuaries;  Ed:  G.H.  Lauff, American Association for the
       Advancement of Science, Publication No. 83, pp. 701-707.

Duxbury, A.C., 1970.  "Estuaries Found in  the Pacific Northwest,"
       Proceedings, Northwest Estuarine and Coastal Zone Symposium.  Bureau
       of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife.

Dyer, K.R., 1973.  Estuaries:  A Physical  Introduction, John Wiley and Sons,
       New York.

Edinger, J.E., 1971.  "Estuarine Temperature Distributions," Estuarine
       Modeling:  An Assessment.  Chapter 4, Environmental Protection Agency
       Water Pollution Control Research Series, No. 16070DZV 02/71.

Edinger, J.E.  and E.M.  Polk, 1969.  Initial Mixing of Thermal  Discharges
       into a Uniform Current.  Water Center Report #1, Vanderbilt
       University.
                                   408

-------
Fan, L.N., 1967.   Turbulent Buoyant Jets into Stratified or Flowing Ambient
       Fluids.  KH-R-15, W.M.  Keck Laboratory,  Cal  Tech, Pasadena,
       California.

Fisher, H.B., 1968.  Methods for Predicting Dispersion Coefficients in
       Natural Streams, with Applications to Lower Reaches of the Green and
       Duwamish Rivers, Washington.  U.S.  Geological Survey Professional
       Paper 582-A, U.S.  Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Frick, W.E., 1981a.  Projected Area in Plume Modeling.  Submitted for
       publication September 1981.  Corvallis, Oregon.

Frick, W.E., 1981b.  Comparison of PLUME and OUTPLM Predictions with
       Observed Plumes.  Tetra Tech, Inc.,

Frick, W.E., 1981c.  A Theory and Users's Guide for the Plume Model MERGE.
       Tetra Tech, Inc., Corvallis, Oregon.

Frick, W.E., 1980.  Findings and Recommendations On the Use and Modification
       of the EPA Computer Model DKHPLM.  Tetra Tech, Inc., Corvallis,
       Oregon.

Frick, W.E. and L.D. Winiarski, 1980.  Why Froude Number Replication Does
       Not Necessarily Ensure Modeling Similarity.  In:  Proceedings of the
       Second Conference on Waste Heat Management and Utilization, Miami
       Beach, Florida.

Frick, W.E. and L.D. Winiarski, 1975.  Comments on "The Rise of Moist
       Buoyant Plumes."  Journal of Applied Meteorology, Vol. 14, No.  3,
       page 421.

Giger, R.D., 1972.  "Some Estuarine Factors Influencing Ascent of Anadromous
       Cutthroat Trout in Oregon," Proceedings of the Second Annual
       Technical  Conference on Estuaries of the Pacific Northwest.  Oregon
       State University, pp. 18-30.

Glenne, B., 1967.  "A Classification System for Estuaries," Journal of the
       Waterways and Harbors Division.  February, 1967, pp. 55-61.

Goodwin, C.R., E.W.  Emmett and B.  Glenne, 1970.  Tidal Studies of Three
       Oregon Estuaries.  Oregon State University Engineering Experiment
       Station Bulletin No. 45.

Graham, J.J., 1968.  Secchi Disc Observations and Extinction Coefficients in
       the Central and Eastern North Pacific Ocean.   Limnology and
       Oceanography, pp. 184-190.

Green, J., 1968.   The Biology of Estuarine Animals.   University of
       Washington Press;  Seattle, Washington.

Hansen, D.V. and M. Rattray, 1966.  "New Dimensions in Estuarine
       Classification," Limnology and Oceanography,  Vol. XI(3), pp. 319-326.

Hardy, C.D., 1972.  Movement and Quality of Long Island Sound Waters, 1971.
       State University of New York, Marine Sciences Research Center,
       Technical  Report #17.
                                     409

-------
Harleman, D.R.F., 1964.  "The Significance of Longitudinal  Dispersion in the
       Analysis of Pollution in Estuaries," Proceedings 2nd International
       Conference on Water Pollution Research.   Tokyo,  Pergamon Press,  New
Harleman, D.F.R., 1971.  "Hydrodynamic Model  - One Dimensional  Models."
       Estuarine Modeling:   An Assessment,  Chapter II-3,  EPA Water Pollution
       Control Research Series, No.   T5D70  DZV 02/71,  pp. 34-90.

Harleman, D. and C.H. Lee,  1969.   The Computation of Tides and  Current in
       Estuaries and Canals.  U.S.  Corps of  Engineers Committee  on Tidal
       Hydraulics, Technical Bulletin No.  16.

Hodkinson, J.R., 1968.  "The Optical Measurement of Aerosols,"  Aerosol
       Science.  Ed:  Davies, C.N.,  Academic  Press, Inc., New york,
       pp. 287-357.

Hough, B.K., 1957.  Basic Soils Engineering.   The Ronald  Press  Co., New
       York, pg. 69.

Hydroscience, Inc., 1971.  Simplified Mathematical Modeling of  Water
       Quality.  EPA, Water Quality Management Planning Series, Washington,
       D.C.

Hydroscience, Inc., 1974.  Water Quality Evaluation for Ocean Disposal
       System - Suffolk County, New York.  Bowe, Walsh and Associates
       Engineers, New York.

Ippen, A.T., 1966.  Estuary and coastline Hydrodynamics.   McGraw-Hill Book
       Company, New York.

Jirka, G. and D.R.F. Harleman, 1973.  The Mechanics of Submerged Multiport
       Diffusers for Buoyant Discharges in  Shallow Water.  Report No. 169,
       Ralph M.  Parsons Laboratory, Department of Civil  Engineering, MIT,
       pg. 236.

Johnson, R.G., W.R. Bryant, and J.W. Hedgpeth, 1961.  Ecological  Survey of
       Tomales Bay:  Preliminary Report of  the 1960 Hydrological  Survey.
       University of the Pacific, Pacific Marine Station.

Johnson, J., 1973.  "Characteristics and Behavior of Pacific Coast Tidal
       Inlets," Journal of the Waterways Harbors and Coastal Engineering
       Division, August, 197, pp. 325-339.

Ketchum, B.H., 1950.  "Hydrographic Factors Involved in the Dispersion of
       Pollutants Introduced Into Tidal Waters," Journal  of the Boston
       Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 37, pp. 296-314.

Ketchum, B.H., 1955.  "Distribution of Coliform Bacteria and Other
       Pollutants in Tidal Estuaries," Sewage and Industrial Wastes,
       Vol. 27, pp. 1288-1296.

Ketchum, B.H. and D.J.  Keen, 1951.   The Exchanges of Fresh and Salt Waters
       in the Bay of Fundy and in Passamaquoddy Bay.  Woods Hole
       Oceanographic Institution, Contribution No.  593,  Reference Number
       51-98.
                                    410

-------
King, H.W., 1954.  Handbook of Hydraulics.  Revised by E.F.  Brater.
       McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, pp. 7-33.

McGauhey, P.H., 1968.  Engineering Management of Water Quality, McGraw-Hill
       Book Company, San Francisco.

McKinsey, D., 1974.  Seasonal Variations in Tidal Dynamics, Water Quality,
       and Sediment in Alsea Estuary, Oregon State University, Dept.  of
       Civil Engineering, Corvallis, Oregon.

Mysels, K.J., 1959.  Introduction to Conoid Chemistry, Interscience
       Publisher, New York, pg. 61.

Neumann, G. and W. Pierson, 1966.  Principles of Physical Oceanography,
       Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

O'Brien, M.P., 1969.  "Equilibrium Flow Areas of Inlets on Sandy Coasts,"
       Journal of the Waterways and Harbors Division, Proceedings of the
       American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 43-51.

O'Connor, D.J., 1965.  Estuarine Distribution of Nonconservative Substances.
       Journal of Sanitary Engineering Division, ASCE.  SA1, pp. 23-42.

O'Connor, D.J. and R.V. Thomann, 1971.  "Water Quality Models:  Chemical,
       Physical, and Biological Constituents," Estuarine Model ing:  An
       Assessment, Chapter III, EPA Water Pollution ControTTesearch Series
       No. 16070 DZV 02/71, pp. 102-169.

Parker, F.L. and P.A. Krenkel, 1970.  CRC Physical and Engineering Aspects
       of Thermal Pollution, The Chemical Rubber Company Press, Cleveland,
       Ohio.

Pearson, E.  ejt aj_., 1967.  Final Report:  A Comprehensive Study of San
       Francisco Bay, Volume V:  Summary of Physical, Chemical and
       Biological Water and Sediment Data, U.C.  Berkeley Sanitary
       Engineering Research Laboratory, Report No. 67-2.

Perkins, E.J., 1974.  The Biology of Estuaries and Coastal Waters, Academic
       Press, London.

Peterson, O.H.  et a^., 1975.  "Location of the Non-tidal Current Null Zone
       in Northern San Francisco Bay."  Estuarine and Coastal Marine
       Science, (1975) 3, pp. 1-11.

Policastro, A.J., R.A. Carhart, S.E. Ziemer, and K. Haake, 1980.  Evaluation
       of Mathematical Models for Characterizing Plume Behavior from Cooling
       Towers.  Dispersion from Single and Multiple Source Natural Draft
       Cooling Towers, NUREG/CR-1581, Vol. 1, Argonne National Laboratory,
       Argonne, Illinois.

Pritchard, D.W., 1960.  "The Movement and Mixing of Contaminants in Tidal
       Estuaries," Proceedings of the First International Conference on
       Waste Disposal in the Marine Environment, University of California,
       Berkeley.

Pritchard, D.W., 1967.  "What is an Estuary:  Physical Viewpoint,"
       Estuaries.  Ed:  Lauff, G.H., American Association for the
       Advancement of Science, Publication No. 83, pp. 2-6.
                                      411

-------
Pritchard, D.W., 1969.   Dispersion and Flushing of Pollutants in Estuaries.
       Journal of Hydraulics Division, ASCE,  HY1, pp.  115-124.

Pritchard, D.W. and J.R. Schubel, 1971.  "What is an Estuary,"  The Estuarine
       Environment-Estuaries and Estuarine Sedimentation,  American
       Geological Institute.

Rawn, A.M., F.R. Bowerman, and N.H.  Brooks, 1960.  Diffusers for Disposal of
       Sewage in Seawater.  Journal  of the Sanitary Engineering Division,
       ASCE, SAR, pg.  80.

Schubel, J.R., 1971.  "The Origin and Development of Estuaries," The
       Estuarine Environment-Estuaries and Estuarine Sedimentation, American
       Geological Institute.

Schultz, E.A. and H.B. Simmons, 1957.  Freshwater-Salt Water Density
       Current, a Major Cause of Siltation in Estuaries.   Commission on
       Tidal Hydraulics, U.S.  Army Corps of  Engineers, Technical Bulletin
       No. 2.

Serne, R.J. and B.W. Mercer, 1975.  "Characterization of San Francisco Bay
       Delta Sediments - Crystalline Matrix Study."  Dredge Disposal Study
       of San Francisco Bay and Estuary, Appendix F, U.S.   Army U.S. Corps
       of Engineers, San Francisco,  District.

Shiraza, M.A. and L.R.  Davis, 1976.  Workbook of Thermal  Plume Predictions:
       Surface Discharge, USEPA Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory,
       Oregon.

Silvester, R., 1974.  Coastal Engineering, II:  Sedimentation,  Estuaries,
       Tides, Effluents and Modeling, Elsevier Scientific  Publishing
       Company, New York.

Stommel, H., 1953.  "Computation of Pollution in a Vertically Mixed
       Estuary."  Sewage and Industrial Wastes, 25(9), pp. 1065-1071.

Streeter, V.L. (Editor-in-Chief), 1961.  Handbook of Fluid Dynamics,
       McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, New York.

Stumm, W. and J.J., Morgan, 1970.  Aquatic Chemistry:  An Introduction
       Emphasizing Chemical Equilibria in Natural Waters,
       Wiley-Interscience, New York, pp. 507-513.

Teeter, A.M. and D.J.  Baumgartner, 1979.  Prediction of Initial Mixing for
       Municipal Ocean Discharges, CERL-043.   USEPA Corvallis Environmental
       Research Laboratory, Oregon.

Tesche, T.W., W.D.  Jensen, and J.L.  Haney,  1980.  Modeling Study of the
       Proposed SMUD Geothermal Power Plant:   Model Application Protocol.
       SAI No. 118-E780-11, Systems Applications, Inc., San Rafael,
       California.

Tetra Tech, Inc., 1979.  Methodology for Evaluation of Multiple Power Plant
       Cooling System Effects.  Volume:  General Description and Screening.
       Electric Power Research Institute Report EA-1111.  Palo, Alto,
       California
                                       412

-------
Tracer, 1971.  Estuarine Modeling:  An Assessment For:  Water Quality
       Office, Environmental Protection Agency.

U.S. Engineer District - San Francisco, 1975.  Draft Composit Environmental
       Statement for Maintenance Dredging of Federal Navigation Projects in
       San Francisco Bay Region, California, U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1^79.  Methods for Chemical Analysis
       of Water and Wastes, EPA-600/4-79-020.

Van de Hulst, H.C., 1957.  Light Scattering by Small Particles.  John Wiley
       and Sons, Inc., New York.

Winiarski, L.D., and W.E. Frick, 1978.  Methods  of Improving Plume Models.
       Presented at the May 2-4, 1978, Cooling Tower Environment 1978
       Conference, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland.

Winiarski, L.D. and W.E. Frick, 1976.  Cooling Tower Plume Model,
       EPA-600/3-76-100.  USEPA Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory,
       Corvallis, Oregon.
                                   413

-------

-------
                       APPENDIX A

   MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF RAINFALL EROSIVITY FACTOR R

Figure A-l - Key Map for Selection of Distribution Curves
for Eastern United States

Figure A-2a through A-2i - Distribution Curves for Eastern
United States

Distribution Curves for Hawaii (Figures A-3a through A-3c)

Methods for Developing R Distribution Curves for the
Western United States
                           A-l

-------
>
INS
          FIGURE A-l  KEY MAP FOR SELECTION OF APPLICABLE EROSION-INDEX DISTRIBUTION  CURVE
                      (WlSCHMEIR AND SMITH, 1965)

-------
                                           e-v
    C1
    d
    ;O
    m

    3>
    I
    ro
Percent  of  Annual Erosion  Index

      i\>     ^     o>     oo     o
o    o     o     o     o     o
 Percent  of Annual  Erosion  Index

      ro     -t>     O)    oo     o
o    o     o     o    o     o
-<  o
CO  CO
o  •—
DC  O

m  I

m  z
PO  O
    m
>  x

O  E 3

OO  CO
 l    .

x   to
^   c:
    H
t— >  — •
LO  O
cn  z
    m
    co
    H
    -JL
    m
    co
    H
    m
 Percent of Annual  Erosion Index

      ro     -&      a)     oo     O
o    o     o      o     o     o
Percent  of  Annual Erosion  Index

      ro     .&     cn    oo     o
o    o     o     o    o     o
    m
    a

    co
    H
    m
    co

-------
T3
C
  100
   80
o
^
UJ
   60
^  4°
H-
O

-  20
o>
o
    0
  100
              4/1
                     6/1    8/1
                       Date
             10/1
       12/1
       2/1
              4/1
6/1     8/1
   Date
10/1
12/1
                                                 xlOO
                                                 a>
                                                 c 80
                                                 o
                                                 to
                                                 o
                                                    60
                                                    40
                                                 o

                                                 c
                2/1
       4/1
       6/1     8/1
         Date
             10/1
12/1
2/1
4/1
6/1     8/1
   Date
12/1
FIGURE A-2e
                  EROSION-INDEX DISTRIBUTION  CURVES FOR  THE EASTERN UNITED STATES
                  (WlSCHMEIER AND SMITH,  1965)

-------
                                           9-V
                 Percent of Annual Erosion  Index
                                      Percent of Annual Erosion  Index
    CD
    d
    73
    m
    i
    ro
    o
r=:  73
—•  o
CO  CO
O  —i
re  o

m  i

m  z
73  o
    m
>  X

a  a

CO  CO
2  H
X  CO
^   cr
    H
(_-i  H-i
CO  O
CD  Z
un
    m
    CO

    Tl
    o
    H
    X
    m

    m
    >
    CO
    H
    m
   m
   a

   GO
   m
   CO
i  i i  I I  i  I I  I I  M   i i  i i  i
                 Percent  of Annual Erosion Index
                                      Percent of Annual Erosion Index

-------
                                        9-V
                Percent  of  Annual Erosion  Index        Percent of Annual Erosion Index
    o
    cz
    73
    m
    i
    ro
    a
— •  o
CO  CO
o  — .
re  o
2  -Z.
m   i

m  z
73  a
   rn
>  X
•z.
G  C3

CO CO
X  D3
cn
                Percent of Annual  Erosion  Index       Percent of Annual Erosion  Index
   rn
   CO

   •n
   o
   m

   m
   >
   CO
   H
   m
   73
   a

   oo
   m
   CO
                                                         i i  i i  i i  i i  i i  i  i i  i  i i  i i  i

-------
  100
                    6/1    8/1
                       Date
                10/1    12/1
              4/1
   6/1    8/1
     Date
10/1
12/1
                                                   100
                                                 c 80
                                                 D
                                                 3
                                                 C
                                                 0>
                                                 o
                                                 l_
                                                 0)
                                                 0_
                                                   60
                                                   40
                                                   20
                       2/1
                                                                    19
                       4/1
       6/1    8/1
         Date
             10/1    12/1
4/1
6/1     8/1
  Date
10/1
12/1
FIGURE  A-2E
EROSION-INDEX DISTRIBUTION CURVES FOR THE  EASTERN UNITED STATES
(WlSCHMEIER  AND SMITH,  1965)

-------
>

oo
x  100
O)
•o
c

c  80
o

o
TJ
C
      o
      o
      D
      c
      o
      t_
      a>
      Q_
         60
      o
      3

      I  40
o

Ł  20

o
L.
w
°-   0
              2/1
100


 80
uJ  60
         40
         20
                                          21
                                  I
              4/1
                  6/1     8/1
                     Date
                                 10/1
12/1
                                     22
             2/1
              4/1
                  6/1     8/1

                     Date
                                 10/1
12/1
                                              T3
                                              ^


                                              C
                                              O
                                              55
                                              o
         o
         3
         C
         C
         <

         «4-
         o


         c
         o>
         o
         L_

         CL
                                                      C
                                                      a>
                                                      o
                                                         100
                                                         80
                                                   60
                                                   40
                                                   20
                                                        100
                                                
                                                T3
                                                _C


                                                c  80
                                                o
                                                         60
                                                   40
                                                 20
                                                                                   23
2/1
4/1
6/1    8/1
   Date
10/1
12/1
                                                                                     24
2/1
4/1
6/1     8/1

  Date
10/1
12/1
       FIGURE A-2p
                  EROSION-INDEX DISTRIBUTION  CURVES FOR  THE EASTERN UNITED  STATES
                  (WlSCHMEIER AND SMITH, 1965)

-------
>
      xlOO
      o>
      c 80
      o
        60
      o
      3



        4°
      C
      o>
      o
      i_
      o>
      Q.
        20
                                               100
            2/1
       100
        80
      CO
      e
      UJ
      o
      o
      c
      c
      a>
      o
      L.
      a>
      Q.
60
        40
        20
         0
            2/1
           4/1
6/1    8/1

   Date
10/1
12/1
                                 26
        J	I
                      I   I   I   I
                 J	I
           4/1
6/1   8/1

   Date
10/1
12/1
                                                     a>
                                             c  80
                                             o
                                              C.
                                              Q>
                                              O
                                                60
                                                40
                                                20
2/1
                                              x 100
                                              9)
                                              c
                                              g
                                              in
                                              o
                                                     O
                              80




                              60




                              40
                            =  20

                            Q>
                            O
4/1
6/1    8/1

   Dote
10/1
12/1
2/1
 4/1
6/1    8/1

   Date
 10/1
 12/1
       FIGURE A-2G
                EROSION-INDEX DISTRIBUTION CURVES FOR THE  EASTERN UNITED STATES

                (WlSCHMEIER AND SMITH,  1965)

-------
             4/1     6/1    8/1    10/1   12/1
             4/1     6/1    8/1    10/1    12/1
                                      2/1
4/1
6/1    8/1
  Date
10/1
12/1
                                                x 100
                                                _c
                                                c 80
                                                o
                                                to
                                                o
                                                uj 60
                                                o

                                                I 40
                                                *4-
                                                O
                                                c 20
                                                0>
                                                o
                                                   6/1    8/1
                                                     Date
FIGURE A-2n
EROSION-INDEX  DISTRIBUTION  CURVES FOR THE  EASTERN UNITED  STATES
(WlSCHMEIER  AND SMITH, 1965)

-------
   100
X
0)
•o
-  80
c
o
'tn
o
uj  60
c

<  40
§  20
i_

-------
I
I-J
to
          o
          '(A
          2
          UJ
          o
          3
          c
          o
          s.
100

80

60

40

20

 0


80

60

40

20

 0
KAUAI, Brydeswood Area
Koloa  District
                  KAUAI, Southwest  Port
                  of  Island, Waimeo  District
                 2/1   4/1  6/1   8/1   10/1   12/1
                            Date
100

80

60

40

20

 0
100

80

60

40

20

 0
KAUAI, Lihue  Area
Lihue  District
MOLOKAI, North Central
Part of Island, Hoolehua
and Kualapuu  Areas
    2/1   4/1   6/1   8/1   10/1   12/1
                Date
100

80

60

40

20

 0
100

80

60

40

20

 0
                                                                                      LANAI, Lanai City  Area
                                                                    MOLOKAI,  South Central  Part,
                                                                    of Island,  Kaunakakai  Area
                                 2/1  4/1  6/1   8/1   10/1  12/1
                                             Date
                            FIGURE  A-3A   EROSION-INDEX DISTRIBUTION  CURVES  FOR  HAWAII
                                            (SOILS  TECHNICAL  NOTE No,  3,  1974)

-------
>
         100
         80
         60
      X
      O)
         40
      c
      O
      "55
      o
      UJ
5  20
      c
      <
          0
        100
        OAHU, Leeward  Side
        of  Island
      o  80
      c
      «
      2  60
      s.
         40
         20
        OAHU,  Windward  Side
        of Island
             2/1   4/1   6/1  8/1  10/1  12/1
                         Date
100


 80

 60

 40

 20

  0
100

 80

 60

 40

 20

  0
HAWAII, Western  Part
of Island
                                                                  ill
HAWAII,  Eastern Part-
vicinity  of  Hilo, North
Hilo, South Hilo, Puna,.
Dists.
                                         2/1   4/1   6/1   8/1   10/1   12/1
                                                     Date
100


80

60

40

20


100

80

60

40

20
HAWAII, Northern Port
of Island, Hamakua
District
HAWAII, Southern Port
Ka'u District
                                       2/1  4/1   6/1  8/1  10/1  12/1
                                                   Date
                          FIGURE A-3B   EROSION-INDEX DISTRIBUTION CURVES  FOR  HAWAII
                                          (SOILS TECHNICAL  NOTE  No,  3,  1974)

-------
    CD
    C.
    33
    m
     I
    v~M
    o
GO 73
O  O
f-i  CO

r~  -<
co  o
m  i — i
n  z:
x  o
z  rn
—  X
o
>  cm
O
    CO
      i
m  co
    c:
^. -\
o  —
    m
    co

    TI
    O
    >
    s:
    >
                    Parcent of Annual  Erosion Index


               o      8      S      8       §
                                                     Percent of Annual  Erosion Index
                                                                        S
                                           03
                                           o
             ro
             a>
o
o
             CD
   ro
         Percent  of Annual Erosion  Index
                       ro
                       O
                             O)
                             o
8
o
o
Percent of Annual  Erosion Index

   8       $       8
CO
o
o
o
   ro
o
a
             Co
             ro

-------
METHODS FOR DEVELOPING R DISTRIBUTION CURVES FOR THE WESTERN UNITED
STATES (Conservation Agronomy Technical  Note No. 32, 1974)
     R  is significant in portions of this area.   Divide the annual
R  for the location by the average annual  precipitation to obtain a
factor.  Multiply each month's precipitation by this factor to obtain
monthly R  values.  Add the prorated monthly R  values to R  for the
months when snowmelt occurs, to obtain the monthly R values.  Compute
the monthly accumulative percent.   The following  example is for
Hylton, in Elko County, Nevada.  The 2-6 rainfall  for this area is
0.9 in.  The annual R  determined  from the Type II curve on Figure
III-4, is 18.   Annual precipitation average is 12.72 in.  Factor is
18 ~ 12.72 = 1.42.
     Monthly precipitation (water depth) for December through March
is 4.92 in.  Rg = 4.92 x 1.5 = 7.38.  This is prorated,  based on
local judgment to
                         January 10%  or  0.7
                         February 20% or  1.5
                         March 50%    or  3.7
                         April 20%    or  1.5


Month
(1)
January
February
March
April
May
Precipi-
tation
(Inches
Water
Depth)
(2)
1.18
1.14
1.29
1.49
1.48


R
r
(3)
1.68
1.62
1.83
2.12
2.10


Rs
(4)
0.7
1.5
3.7
1.5
-


R*
15}
2.38
3.12
5.53
3.62
2.10

Cumul
R
.(A)
2.38
5.50
11.03
14.65
16.75

ative
°i
10
(7)
0.093
21.6
43.3
57.5
65.8
^Columns (3) + (4).
                                 A-15

-------



Month
(1)
June
July
August
September
October
November-
December
Precipi-
tation
( Inches
Water
Depth)
(2)
0.91
0.63
0.52
0.63
1.17
0.97
1.31



Rr
131
1.29
0.89
0.74
0.89
1.66
1.38
1.86



R R*
(4) (5)
1.29
0.89
0.74
0.89
1.66
1.38
1.86


Cumul
R
(6)
18.04
18.93
19.67
20.56
22.22
23.60
25.46


ative
01
lo
(7)
70.9
74.4
77.3
80.8
87.3
92.7
100.
*Columns (3) + (4).
     Values in cumulative percent column (7) are the points used in
plotting the monthly R distribution curve.

f°T A-2, A-3, and A-4 Areas Shown in Figure II1-4

     RS is not significant in most parts of these areas.   Use the monthly
rainfall distribution as the R distribution.  Simply accumulate monthly
precipitation amounts and divide each by the annual  precipitation.   The
results obtained for each month will be the points for plotting the
monthly R distribution curve.

For B-1 and C Areas Shown in Figure III-4
     R  in most parts of these areas is significant.

     1.  "Multipliers" are used to time average monthly precipitation
         amounts.   Sum the results of multiplications to obtain the
         "factored annual precipitation".   Divide the annual R  for
                                  A-16

-------
the location by the "factored annual  precipitation" to
obtain a factor which will  be used to convert monthly
precipitation amounts to the monthly  R values (see
the previous section for A-l area).   Values of
multipliers are:

             Month(s)             Multipliers
        January, February,
          March                       0.1
        April                         1.0
        May                           4.0
        June, July, August            7.0
        September, October            2.0
        November, December            0.1
Add the prorated R  values to the months when the snowmelt
occurs to obtain the monthly R values.  Compute the monthly
cumulative percents which are points used in plotting
the monthly R distribution curve.  The following example
is for a hypothetical area which has an annual  rainfall
factor Rr of 25, and a RS factor of 7.5 (4.94 x 1.5 rounded
to 7.5).  The 4.94 in. is total  precipitation for December.
January, February, and March.  R  factor is prorated to:
         January         0%     or     0 in.
         February       33.3%   or     2.5 in.
         March          33.3%   or     2.5 in.
         April          33.3%   or     2.5 in.
                         A-17

-------
Month
(1)
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Total
Month
TIT
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Total
Precipi-
tation
(in.)
(2)
1.33
1.14
1.35
1.48
1.43
1.00
0.80
0.78
0.85
1.14
0.92
1.12
13.34
Monthly
Rs
(6)
-
2.5
2.5
2.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
7.5
Multiplier
(3)
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.0
4.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
2.0
2.0
0.1
0.1
Monthly R
=Rr + Rs
(7)
0.11
2.59
2.66
3.74
4.80
5.87
4.69
4.58
1.43
1.91
0.08
0.09
32.5
Factored
Monthly
pptn. (Col. 2
x Col. 3)
(4)
0.13
0.11
0.13
1.48
5.72
7.00
5.60
5.46
1.70
2.28
0.09
0.11
29.81
Cumulati
R
W
0.1
2.7
5.4
9.1
13.9
19.8
24.5
29.0
30.5
32.4
32.4
32.5
Monthly
R *
r*
(5)
0.11
0.09
0.11
1.24
4.80
5.78
4.69
4.58
1.43
1.91
0.08
0.09
25.0
ve
%
w>
-
8
17
28
43
61
75
89
94
99
100
100
*In this example,  the calculated factor value is  0.84 (25 + 29.81).
 Monthly R  is obtained by multiplying each "factored monthly pptn."
 with 0.84:
                                A-18

-------
For B-2 Area Shown in Figure II1-3
     In this area, no R  values are needed.   Follow the same  procedure
and use the same set of multipliers as the preceding section  for areas
B-l and C, except that steps for obtaining monthly R  values  are not
used.  The cumulative R and cumulative percent are computed from monthly
R  (column 5 in the preceding example).
REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX A
Conservation Agronomy Technical Note No. 32, U.S. Department of
      Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, West Technical Service
      Center, Portland, Oregon, September, 1974.

Soils Technical Note No. 3, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil
      Conservation Service, Honolulu, Hawaii, May, 1974.

Wischmeier, W.H., and Smith, D.D., "Predicting Rainfall—Erosion
      Losses from Cropland East of the Rocky Mountains," Agricultural
      Handbook 282, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture
      Research Service, May, 1965.
                                   A-19

-------
                        APPENDIX B
     METHODS FOR PREDICTING SOIL ERODIBILITY INDEX K

Nomograph for Predicting K Values of Surface Soils Using
Chemical and Physical Parameters.
Nomograph for Predicting K Values of High Clay Subsoils
Using Chemical Mineralogical and Physical Parameters.
                          B-l

-------
NOMOGRAPH FOR PREDICTING K VALUES OF SURFACE SOIL

      In 1971 Wischmeier, et al.  (1971) presented a soil credibility
nomograph derived from statistical analysis of 55 soil types.  Five
soil  parameters are included in the nomograph to predict credibility:
percent silt plus very fine sand; percent sand greater than 0.10
millimeter; organic matter content; soil  structure; and permeability.
Values of the parameters may be obtained from routine laboratory
determinations and standard soil profile descriptions.

     The nomograph is reproduced here as Figure B-l.

Description of Factors (Water Resources Administration, 1973)

     Grain Size Distribution

          Grain size distribution has a major influence on a soil's
credibility:  the greater the silt content, the greater the soil's
credibility; the smaller the sand content,  the greater the soil's
erodibility.

          Particles in the very  fine sand classification behave more
like silt than sand.   Therefore, the percentage of very fine sand
should be subtracted from the total  percentage of sand and added to
the percentage of silt.

     Organic Matter

          The percentage of organic matter  was determined, in work
by Wischmeier,  et al., by the Waikley-Black method (Walkley and
Black, 1934).   The organic matter content is approximately 1.72 times
the percent carbon.   Soil erodibility decreases as organic matter
content increases.
                                 B-2

-------
                                    s-g
c:
33
m

CO
 I
GO
o
o
a
»—«
ro
o

o

33
co
o
m
m
2
UD
                             Metric  Tons/Hectare/Metric  R Unit

                                   First Approximation  of  K


        Soil-Erodibility Factor K

   Metric  Tons/Hectare/Metric R Unit

        o  ooooooo
    o
    :_   ro    w
o   o   o    o
8   8   3  S  8
       Tons/Acre/English R Unit

           'ro   CM    >
      oooo

-------
     Soil  Structure

          The soil  structure is  descriptive  of  the  overall  arrangement
of the soil  solids.   The four parameter values  and  their  descriptions
are as follows:

 Parameter
   Value	         Descriptions	

              Granular - All  rounded  aggregates  may be  placed  in  this
              category.   These rounded  complexes usually  lie  loosely
              and are readily shaken  apart.   When wetted,  the  voids
              are not closed readily  by swelling.

     1         Very  fine  granular - less than  1 mm.

     2        Fine  granular  - 1  to 2  mm.

     3        Medium granular -  2  to  5  mm.

     3        Coarse granular -  5  to  10 mm.

     4        Blocky - Aggregates  have  been  reduced to  blocks,
              irregularly six-faced,  and with their three  dimensions
              more  or less equal.   In size,  the  fragments  range
              from  a fraction of an inch to  3 or 4  in.  in  thickness.

     4        Platy  - Aggregates are  arranged in relatively thin
              plates or  lenses.

     4        Prismatic  - Aggregates  or pillars  are vertically
              oriented,  with  tops  plane, level,  and clean  cut.
              They  commonly  occur  in  subsoils of arid and  semi-arid
              regions.
                                 B-4

-------
Parameter
  Value         	Descriptions	
    4         Columnar - Aggregates or pillars  are vertically
              oriented, with rounded tops.   They commonly occur
              when the soil  profile is changing and the horizons
              are degrading.

    4         Massive - Soil units are very large, irregular,
              featureless as far as characteristic aggregates
              are concerned.

    Soil Permeability

         Soil permeability  is the ability of the soil to transmit water.
Since different soil horizons vary in permeability, the relative perme-
ability classes refer to the soil profile as a whole.  The relative
permeability classes are as follows:
           Class          Permeability Rates in In/Hour

             1           Rapid                   over 6.0
             2           Moderately rapid       2.0 to 6.0
             3           Moderate               0.6 to 2.0
             4           Moderately slow        0.2 to 0.6
             5           Slow                   0.06 to 0.2
             6           Very slow             less than 0.06

Reading the Nomograph

     Entry values for all of the nomograph curves, except permeability
class, are for the upper 6 or 7 in. of soil.  For soils in cuts, the
entry values are for the upper 6 or 7 in. of the newly exposed layer.
In reading the nomograph, interpolate linearly between adjacent curves
when the entry data do not coincide with the plotted curves of percent
                                  B-5

-------
 sand  or  percent organic matter.  The percent of coarse fragments may
 be  significant and  is not  included in the nomograph.  Therefore, reduce
 the value of  K read  from the nomograph by 10% for soils with strati-
 fied  subsoils that  include layers of small stones or gravel without a
 seriously impeding  layer above them.

      Enter the left  scale of the nomograph with the appropriate
 percent  silt  plus very fine sand, move horizontally to intersect the
 correct  percent-sand curve (interpolating to the nearest percent),
 vertically to the correct organic matter curve, and then horizontally
 to the right  scale  for first approximation of soil  credibility.

      For soils having a fine granular structure and moderate perme-
 ability, the  value of K can be obtained directly from this scale.
 However, if the soil is other than of fine granular structure, or
 permeability  is other than moderate, it is necessary to proceed to
 the second part of the nomograph, horizontally to intersect the
 correct  structure curve, vertically downward to the permeability
 curve, and horizontally to the soil  erodibility index scale.
NOMOGRAPH FOR PREDICTING K VALUES OF HIGH CLAY SUBSOILS

     Subsoils are commonly heavier in texture than the surface soils,
In addition, subsoils likely have aggregating agents that are very
much different from those found in surface soils and the degree of
aggregation is known to have a profound influence on erodibility.

     From an EPA study (Roth, et al., 1974)  conducted at Purdue
University, a multiple linear regression equation and nomograph were
developed which can be used to estimate the  erodibility factor, K,
of many high clay soils.   Multiple regression analysis revealed that
                                  B-6

-------
amorphous iron, aluminum and silicon hydrous oxides serve as soil
stabilizers in subsoils (whereas, organic matter is the major
stabilizer in surface soils).  The nomograph was developed from
the multiple linear regression equation relating the credibility
factor to the soil texture factor, M, the amount of CDB (citrate-
dithionite-bicarbonate) extractable iron and aluminum oxides, and
the amount of CDB extractable silica.

     The equation used to derive the nomograph was:

     K    . = 0.32114 + 2.0167 x 10"4 M - 0.14440 (% Fe^ + % Al^)
                                       - 0.83686 (% Si02)
where
     K   d = predicted K value of subsoil
     M     = soil  texture factor, defined by percent new silt
             (percent new silt + percent new sand).  "New" silt
             has 2 to 100 urn mean diameter.   "New" sand has 100
             to 2,000 ym mean diameter.
     % Fe,>03 = percent CBD extractable iron  oxide of soil.
     % A1203 = percent CDB extractable aluminum oxide of soil.
     % Si02  = percent CDB extractable silica in soil.

The nomograph for estimating the credibility factor, K, of high clay
subsoils is reproduced in Figure B-2.
                                 B-7

-------
? o
E
6 '0
3 20
O
Ł 30
1 40
c/>
I 5°
L
? 6°
> 70
+
*• Of)
— OU
c 90
o>
u
« inn
rerceni \ re2^>^ T AI2U3 ; 	 n








• * • • a














-BB=.











/
^
^
^
/
/
/
^






x
__,« —


^
X
/
x






/
/>
/'
•,

^
^

P«rc
(O.I


x
//
/x/
x
^
f
f
/
"^^ *
^
^

ent
— 2

x
//
X
x
^
x'
/
/
, T***!^
^
^
*><
Sand
mm )

T
0
0.5
	
2
3 —
4

/;

60
.50
•-^.40
__—- 30
^
X

-20
• 15
NO
0
                                                    Percent







/
'/
'/
^ X
X
/
'/







/
/ s
jf
'/
' ,'
/ ,
/







/
/
J
A
f *
s
s
/'







/
/ ,
f
',*' ' 'j
f s
f
s
S J
/







/
__/
/ .
t J
• X
: x
X j
'•/
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
*
*
•


/
//
;/
X 1
/
X
'/







/
/ f,
f
'/
f t
s
X
/







/
/,
'/
r ,
X
X
X
/








' 1
0.4
1
,.j
0.3
0.2
0. 1
o









                                    0     0.2    0.4    0.6    0.8
                                        Tons /Acre/English R  Unit
                                                               i   i
0     1000   2000   3000   40OO
             Factor M
0    0.2   0.4  0.6   0.8   1.0 I.I
  Metric Tons/Hectare/Metric R Unit
      Soil Erodibility  Factor  K
  FIGURE B-2   NOMOGRAPH FOR  ESTIMATING THE  ERODIBILITY
                FACTOR  K OF  HIGH CLAY SUBSOILS
                (ROTH  ET AL,,  1974)
                              B-8

-------
REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX B
Roth, C.B., Nelson, D.W., and Romkens,  M.J.M.,  1974.   "Prediction
      of Subsoil  Erodibility Using Chemical,  Mineralogical,  and Physical
      Parameters," for the U. S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency
      (EPA-660/2-74-043), Washington, D.C.

Walkley, A., and Black, I.A., 1934.  "An Examination  of the  Degtjareff
      Method for determining Soil Organic Matter," Soil  Sci.,  37,
      pp. 29-38.

Wischmeier, W.H., Johnson, C.B.,  and Cross, B.U., 1971.   "A  Soil
      Erodibility Nomograph for Farmland and Construction  Sites,"
      J. Soil and Hater Conservation, 26:189-193.  "Technical  Guide
      to Erosion and Sediment Control Design (Draft)," 1973.  Water
      Resources Administration, Maryland Department of Natural  Resources,
      Annapolis, Maryland.
                                  B-9

-------

-------
                             APPENDIX C
                        STREAM AND RIVER DATA

Table C-l     Stream and River Reaeration and Deoxygenatlon Rates
              (From Hydroscience, 1971)

Table C-2     Deoxygenatlon Rate Constants (From Bansal, 1975)

Table C-3     Alluvial Channel and Sediment Data (From Schumm, 1960)
                                C-l

-------
                                               TABLE C-l


             STREAM AND RIVER REAERATION AND DEOXYGENATION RATES (FROM HYDROSCIENCE, 1971)


River Name Category
Grand River Shallow
(Michigan)
Clinton River Shallow
o (Michigan)
i
Truckee River Shallow
(Nevada)

Fl int River Shallow
(Michigan)



Jackson River Shallow
(Virginia)
N. Branch Shallow

Depth
(ft. )
1.9

1.58


1.67
1.67
1.67
2.1
2.6
2.6
1.7
1.9
3

2

Area
2

320.0

44.6


150.
150.
150.
210.
200.
400.
290.
400.
365.

100.

Flow
(cfs)
295.

33.


180.
195.
271.
134.
174.
174.
204.
204.
100.

100.

Velocity
(fps)
0.92

0.72


1.20
1 .30
1.81
0.64
0.83
0.44
0.73
0.51
0.27

1.0
k
a
@20°C
(I/day)
4.5

5.9


5.6
5.7
6.6
3.5
3.9
3.1
5.0
2.2
4.1

9.0
k
@20°C
(1/da.y)
0.59

3.37


0.36
0.36
0.96
0.56
0.63
0.69
0.69
0.69
1 .25

0.40
Potomac River
(Md.,  W.Va.)

-------
                                              TABLE  C-l  (continued)
      River Name
                   Category
Depth
 ft.
           Velocity
            (fps)
                                                                                           ka
                                                                                          @20 C
                                                                                                kL
                                                                                               1320 C
            (I/day)    (I/day)
o
i
oo
Clarion River
(Penna.)

South River

Ivel  River
(England)
                         Shallow
      Lark River
      (England)
                         Shallow
                   Shallow
 1
 1.9

 1-2

 1 .21
 1.51
 1.09
 1.50
 1.08
 0.38
 1.12
 1.46
 1.31
 2.44
 2.03

 1.74
 1.47
 1.82
 2.41
1  - 10.
                                                                  35.
 10.07

 10.94
 10.94
 36.20
 36.20
                                                                             0.55
4.86
4.15
3.87
15.40
4.86
4.15
3.87
15.40
15.40
10.07
0.14
0.14
0.13
0.37
0.16
0.15
0.13
0.38
0.47
0.23
0.22

0.28
0.37
0.50
0.43
                           2.26
                             35
                             06
                             20
                             37
                             57
                             09
                             18
                             18
                             18
0.90
1.66

0.78
2.12
1.41
0.31

-------
                                               TABLE  C-l  (continued)
o
      River Name

      Derwent River
      (England)
Black Beck
River
(England)
      St.  Sunday's
      Beck (Eng.)

      Yewdale Beck
      (England)
                   Category
                         Shallow
                   Shallow
                   Shallow
Depth
[ft.
      Elk  River
      (Penna.)
                   Shallow
 0.72
 0.89
 0,85

 0.40
 0.40
 0.39
 0.60
 0.69
 1.00

 0.82
 0.78

 0.64
 0.48
 0.72
 0.66
 0.67
 0.69

 0.9
Flow
(cfs)
21 .60
21 .60
21.60
2.70
2.70
2.70
17.70
17.70
17.70
19.10
19.10
5.10
5.10
17.30
17.30
17.30
17.30
Velocity
(fps)
1.37
1.19
1.07
0.44
0.56
0.63
1.83
1.81
1.54
1.07
1.27
0.46
0.60
1.16
1.31
1.30
1.25
                                                                                            a
                                                                                          @20°C
                                                                                                 kL
                                                                                                @20  C
0.97
(I/day)     (I/day)


 31 .80
 24.53
 34.57

 25.59
 28.34
 22.80
 49.17
 30.77
 18.46

 21 .05
 16.06

 12.04
 30.32
 18.90
 20.25
 17.09
 19.16

  5.84

-------
                                               TABLE C-l (continued)
o
C71
River Name


Mohawk River

Mohawk River
(New York)

North Branch
Susquehanna

New River
(Virginia)

Wabash
(Indiana)

Clinch River
(T.V.)
      Holston
      (T.V.)
Category


Shallow

Medium


Medium


Medium


Medium


Medi urn
                   Medium

Depth
(ft.)

Area
9
(ft2)

Flow
(cfs)

Velocity
(fps)
k
a
@20 C
(I/day)
k,
L
@20°C
(I/day
                                        3

                                       15
                                       5-7
 3.27
 5.09
 4.42
 6.14
 5.65
 7.17

11.41
 2.12
 2.93
 4.54
 9.50
 6.29
            143.

          3,800.


          1,700.


          1,720.
800.
                                                               1,000.
                                                               1,200.
 .21


0.60


0.70
                        .07-4.0
                           1.5
                           1.04
1,000-
5,000
3,300.
4,500
3,190
5,890
5,910
5,930
10,385
3,230
6,400
14,085
10,440
6,540


3.07
3.69
3.10
2.68
2.78
2.64
2.92
2.47
3.44
4.65
3.94
2.51


2.27
1.44
.98
.50
.74
1 .13
.28
3.36
2.79
1.57
.46
.39
 .23

 .40


0.35
2.5
0.5

 .40

-------
                                               TABLE C-1 (continued)
      River Name
                   Category
Depth
!ft.
                Flow
                'cfs'
             Velocity
              (fps)
                                                                                            ka
                                                                                           @20°C
                                                                                                @20°C
           (I/day)    (I/day)
n
      Holston River
      (T.V.)
Fr.  Broad
(T.V.)
                   Medium
                         Medi urn
      Wautaga River
      (T.V.)

      Hiwassee River
      (T.V.)
                   Medium


                   Medium
 7.52
 7.07
 5.44
 8.06
 3.98

 9.38
10.19
 3.29
 4.74
 5.72
 6.98
 4.29
 6.01
 7.16
 9.49

 3.42
 3.02
 2.83
              10,500
              10,500
               5,590
              11,930
                 952
12,
17.
44,
 8.
12.
17,
 4.
 8.
12.
                 010
                 120
                 105
                 775
                 455
                 270
                 150
                 775
                 455
              17,270

               3,112
               1 ,145
               1,145
               3.15
               3.30
               3.11
               4.28
               2.73
                .41
                .06
                .40
                .46
               4.02
              52
              85
                .75
                .23
               3.71

               5.0
               3.05
               3.91
              .27
              .55
              .54
              .60
             1.25
                                                                                            1
              .27
              .23
              .88
              .84
              .88
              .91
              .00
              .55
              .98
              .25
            43.
            11
            21
                                         5.6
                                         1.7
                                         3.2
      Ohio River
                   Deep
32
43,000
6,000
.14
                                          .06

-------
                                              TABLE C-l (continued)
     River Name
Category
                          Flow
                         [cfs'
                            Velocity
                             (fps)
                                                                                            kan
                                                                                           (?20 C
                                                                             @20°C
                             (I/day)     (I/day)
o
-q
     Upper Hudson
     (Troy, N.Y.-
     Saugerties)

     Lower Sacramento
     River
     Upper James
     River (Va.)
Deep
Deep
Deep
      Illinois River
Deep
 17.5
 21.0
15-20
 15.5
10-12
  9.2
  9.0
  8.9
 6,000
 6,750
 8,000
11,500
14,500
14,500
14,000
14,500
13,500
15,000
 3,000
 4,500
10,000
 1,800
 2,600
 9,000
 7,500
 4,500
 3,800
 1,350

 8,000
0.5
1.5
1.5
0.16
0.18
0.63
0.53
0.31
0.28
0.13
                                                                             1.37
                                                                             1.57
                                                                             1.63
.34
.34
.28
.15
.24

,15
.14
.12
.13
.22
.24
.22
                                                                    ,225
                                                                    .269
                                                                    ,224
.125
.165
.40
.48
.30
.31
.41
.39
.38
.43

.07

-------
                    TABLE C-2



DEOXYGENATION RATE CONSTANTS  (FROM BANSAL,  1975)
X-section
Discharge area Top Width
cfs sq ft. ft.
Kansas River at
15,200
2,160
2,090
2,440
1,300
828
632
1,080
Kansas River at
1,750
1 ,360
2,060
2,300
1 ,040
793
1,170
Kansas River at
3,040
1 ,460
1 ,800
2,690
1 ,900
764
631
608
Bonner Spri
4,300
1,200
1,170
1 ,300
850
550
425
710
Lecompton,
750
590
880
1 ,000
450
350
500
ngs, Kansas
770
505
500
525
450
415
405
432
Kansas
725
660
774
757
592
538
620
kj_ rates
base e/day
Temp
°C

25
28
25
24
9
5
9
14

27
32
28
10
6
0
16
Observed

.02
.12
.12
.24
.02
.16
.26
.17

.19
.15
.35
.30
.47
.23
.05
Estimated
(From Fig.
C-l)

.258
.249
.242
.241
.204
.190
.195
.213

.232
.239
.236
.201
.184
.169
.206
Topeka, Kansas
1,450
700
865
1 ,285
910
365
310
290
468
437
447
466
450
405
368
364
22
31
27
18
7
7
11
15
.08
.07
.1
.37
.14
.06
.23
.10
.241
.248
.243
.230
.200
.189
.196
.204
                       C-8

-------
TABLE C-2 (continued)
kj_ rates
base e/day
Di
X-section
scharge area Top Width Temp
cfs sq ft. ft. °C
Republic River below Mil ford,







Smoky Hill







Smoky Hill



Solomon Ri



258
657
609
201
15
36
249
River
215
100
373
146
113
210
157
River
185
67
734
ver at
61
35
117
184
412
392
140
10
26
177
at Enterprise
122
57
211
83
65
120
88
at New Cambri
87
35
252
Niles, Kansas
65
40
125
Kansas
196
251
249
166
68
77
192
, Kansas
119
69
131
91
75
118
97
dge, Kansas
86
79
88

53
49
61

24
28
24
14
1
0
16

27
32
24
6
0
15
14

27
31
29

28
30
21
Observed

.18
.19
.07
.25
.14
.23
.29

.09
.26
.16
.32
.14
.17
.24

.09
.19
.27

.21
.19
.06
Estimated
(From Fig.
C-l)

.224
.242
.283
.203
.153
.161
.208

.232
.238
.234
.193
.173
.207
.204

.232
.225
.255

.237
.234
.231
         C-9

-------
TABLE C-2 (continued)
                              k|_ rates
                            base e/day
X-section
Discharge area Top Width
cfs sq ft. ft.
Temp.
°C
Observed
Estimated
(From Fig.
C-l)
Kansas River at Wamego, Kansas
890
1,540
2,530
1,470
680
535
483
Big Blue River
1 ,060
162
90
810
961
232
50
50
Kansas River at
1 ,250
559
1,200
511
390
670
1,080
730
300
225
190
at Tuttle Creek,
1,050 -
70
42
490
1 ,000
108
30
30
Manhattan (Fort
4,250
1 ,750
4,050
367
413
468
540
462
395
381
375
Kansas
194
76
62
191
194
92
52
52
Riley),
533
493
530
247
27
26
27
15
0
2
7

22
24
27
23
8
1
6
13
Kansas
26
32
26
25
.23
.13
.30
.26
.28
.11
.06

.21
.14
.23
.28
.6
.37
.15
.2

.26
.15
.10
.09
.231
.236
.244
.214
.171
.172
.181

.251
.224
.225
.240
.217
.179
.181
.195

.268
.265
.267
.234
         C-10

-------
TABLE C-2  (continued)
                            k|_ rates
                           base e/day
Di
Solomon Ri







scharge
cfs
ver at
44
47
79
30
48
33
30
X-section
area
sq ft.
Glen Elder
38
40
58
30
41
31
30
Top Width
ft.
, Kansas
49
49
53
33
49
36
33
Temp.
°C

28
28
24
7
0
0
5
Observed

.20
.23
.10
.35
.34
.37
.35
Estimated
(From Fig.
C-l)

.229
.23
.227
.21
.172
.173
.185
Saline River at Tescott, Kansas



Smoky Hill



Smoky Hill








8.3
5.8
132
River
138
35
675
River
77
147
493
249
14
21
18
81
14
10
75
at Mentor,
88
20
288
at Langley
60
85
210
122
15
21
19
60
19.4
17.8
30
Kansas
83
81.5
92.5
, Kansas
57
67
90
75
20
23
22
58
2.7
28
21

24
26
26

23
27
24
23
7
1
6
11
.37
.25
.26

.10
.15
.42

.42
.51
.14
.14
.20
.28
.29
.33
.226
.224
.235

.226
.207
.25

.224
.236
.240
.232
.186
.176
.186
.199
          C-ll

-------
                         TABLE C-2  (continued)
k[_ rates
base e/day
Discharge
cfs
iver, Michi
295
X-section
area
sq ft.
gan
320
Top Width
ft.

168.4
Temp.
°C

20
Observed

.59
Estimated
(From Fig.
c-D

.228
River, Michigan
33
44.6
28.22
20
3.37
.225
River, Nevada
180
195
271
iver, Michi
134
174
174
204
204
150
150
150
gan
210
200
400
296
400
89.8
89.8
89.8

100
76.9
153.8
170.6
210.5
20
20
20


20
20
20
20
.36
.36
.96

.56
.63
.69
.69
.69
.226
.226
.226

.230
.233
.233
.226
.228
Jackson River, Virginia'
         100         365
122
20
1.25
,236
North Branch Potomac River (Maryland,  West Virginia)
         100         100       50         20        .4
                                ,229
North Branch Susquehanna
       1,000       1,700
425
20
 .35
,241
                                  C-12

-------
TABLE C-2 (continued)
                            k|_ rates
                           base e/day
X-section
Discharge area
cfs sq ft.
New River, Virginia
1,200 1,720
Upper Hudson, Troy, New York
3,000 6,000
4,500 6,750
Lower Sacramento River
10,000 8,000
Upper James River, Virginia
1,800 8,000
2,600 11,500
9,000 14,500
7,500 14,000
4,500 14,500
3,800 13,500
1,350 15,000
Cooper River, South Carolina
10,000 40,000
Savannah River, Georgia and
7,000 10,000
6,800 40,000

Top Width
ft.

344

343
321

457

742
935.5
935.5
903.2
935.2
871
967.7

1,000
South Carol
1,000
1,428.6

Temp.
°C

20

20
20

20

20
20
20
20
20
20
20

20
ina
20
20

Observed

.5

.125
.165

.4

.48
.30
.31
.41
.39
.38
.43

.3

.3
.3
Estimated
(From Fig.
c-D

.245

.269
.273

.269

.267
.267
.267
.267
.267
.267
.267

.286

.258
.279
          C-13

-------
                        TABLE C-2  (continued)
                                                      k^ rates
                                                     base e/day
                  X-section                                 Estimated
       Discharge     area    Top Width   Temp.              (From Fig.
           cfs       sq.  ft.     ft.        °C    Observed       C-l )'
South New Jersey

          23       2,500       208.3      20       .2         .262


Compton Creek, New Jersey

          10       1,000        69        20       .23        .265

          10         790        75        20       .23        .259
                                  C-14

-------
             TABLE  C-3

ALLUVIAL CHANNEL AND SEDIMENT DATA
       (FROM SCHUMM, 1960)
Location
Willow Creek near Cheyenne Wells, Colo-
Smoky Hill River near Arapahoe.Colo---
Smoky Hill River near Sharon Springs,
Smoky Hill River at Russell Springs,

Smoky Hill River near Arnold, Kans 	
Smoky Hill River near Russell, Kans 	
Smoky Hill River at Dorrence,Kans 	
Smoky Hill River near Kanopolis
Smoky Hill River near Bridgeport

Smoky Hill River near Junction City,

Kansas River near T^ek'a^ans
Arlkaree River near Ankaree , Colo 	
Arikaree River at Haigler,Nebr 	
Republican River near Stratton.Nebi 	
South Fork Republican River near Benk-
Republican River near Benkleman,Nebr--
Republican River near BostwickfHardy ) ,
Republican River at Concordia.Kans 	
Republican River at Junction City, Kans
South Fork Powder River near Kaycee,
Middle Fork Powder River above Kaycee,
Middle Fork Powder River near Kaycee,
Powder River below Arvada,Wyo 	
Powder River near Locate, Mont 	
Crazy Woman Creek near Arvada.Wyo —
Little Powder River at Broadus, Mont-
Bighorn River near Kane, Wyo 	
Badwater Creek near Lysite,Wyo 	
Badwater Creek at Lysite.Wyo 	

Cottonwood Creek at Winchester, Wyo--
Gooseberry Creek at Pulliam,Wyo 	
GraybuJl River near Basin, Wyo 	
Bates Creek near Alcova, Wyo 	 ---
Med i a n
grain
size,
(mm)
1.10
85
.41
1.30
.80
93
.81
1 30
63
.40
023
1.20
.70
.75
1 10
.25
38
.48
25
52
.63
.70
60
0.63
?2.0
.40
21
42
.50
4 10
16
43
24
21
1 0
8.0
50
90
Smoky Hill -Kansas Rivers system
Weighted
Silt- Silt- mean
clay in clay in silt-clay
bank channel M Width
(percent) (percent) (percent) (feet)
72
49
25
21
63
30
76
69
96
85
97
90
93
57
82
65
31
44
23
88
29
34
59
71
60
69
70
58
75
82
35
47
58
69
15
45
72
63
3 16
3 6 1
4 45
2 2.4
3 43
2 24
1 5 3
.5 44
4 14
3 13
87 89
5 6
1 3 8
5 3
Republican River System
3 4.7
3 8
3 3.4
15 34
6 67
5 44
1 2 8
2 1 .4
1 3.4
Powder River System
9 11.3
14 20
15 23
4 65
13 15
2 17
65 22
20 21
3 6.7
5 7 3
2 14
8 84
25 57
7 9 9
14 18
15
65
200
263
226
345
115
130
92
69
125
153
636
800
206
68
400
100
123
115
154
250
300
119
35
47
175
234
33
40
220
50
109
35
133
59
134
69
Depth
(feet)
1 7
2 3
2 5
3 0
2 5
2.5
3 5
4.0
5 5
5 0
18
5 0
10
18
2 2
3 0
3.0
2.3
2 5
2 7
5 0
5.0
6 5
2.3
2.5
4 4
3.5
4 5
4 4
5 5
8 5
2.3
2 5
3.9
3.5
2 4
3 1
2 8
Width
depth
ratio
(F)
8 8
28
80
88
90
138
33
33
17
14
7
31
64
44
94
23
133
43
49
43
31
50
46
52
14
11
50
52
7.5
7 3
26
22
44
9.0
38
25
43
25
Gradient
(S)

0 003



.00066
.0007
.0005

0004
0008
0005
0 002
002
003
.009
.0008
0007
0007
0.004
.005
0015
.0011



.0037
.0037
.0015
.006
.0015
0035
Mean
annual
flood
(cfs)





5,800
8,000
9,200
6,750
11,500
13,000
39,000
48,000
3,500
4,500
2,175
12,000
13,000
15,000
3,900
574
1,630
9,400
1,150
1,280
16,100

585
311
3,140
500
Mean
annual
discharge
(cfs)

30(est)


65 2
215
314
340
1,254
1,454
4,398
5,155
19.6
56 8
105
843
1,000
35
58
133
639
40
39
2,888

34
10
178
16
Drainage
area
(sq mi)




5,220
6,965
7,857
8.110
18,830
19,900
55,240
56,710
1,460
2,580
4,770
5.760
22,400
23,540
24,900
1,150
450
980

956
15,900

484
371
1,130
377
                C-15

-------
TABLE C-3 (continued)
Locati on
Sage Creek, S Dak. •
\Ł I

Sand Creek, Nebr-


Arroyo Calabasas, N. Mex. •


Bayou Gulch , Colo. :

Medano Creek, Colo •



Paradise Creek near Paradise, Kans 	
North Fork Solomon River near Downs Kans
Solomon River at Benmngton(Ni IPS ) ,Kans-
raine og
Sappa Creek at Reaver City, Nebr 	
y
Frenchman Creek at Hamlet, Nebr 	
Blackwood Creek at Culbertson, Nebr 	
Red Willow Creek near Red Willow, Nebr --
South Loup River near Cumro, Nebr 	
Niobrara River near Colclesser ,Nebr 	
White River at Interior, S Dak 	
Median
grain
size,
DSO
(mm)
0 06
06
12
12
.73
35
84
.50
75
.58
55
.24
24
.24
3 57
50
80
41
90
60
70
70
1 10
27
02
25
33
15
50
7^
Silt-
clay in
bank
(percent)
93
93
96
70
60
65
18
26
16
13
6
5
.5
5
93
74
89
90
82
97
96
95
95
93
91
91
80
47
86
89
5f,
Silt-
clay in
channel
(percent)
55
68
40
14
15
10
3
3
5
4
4
1
1
5
5 7
8
1 2
4
1 5
2
17
2
2 5
8 7
75
30
9 4
2
32 5
2
f,
Weighted
mean
•nit-clay
M
(percent)
73
79
54
23
22
20
4.1
4 8
5.8
4.4
4 1
1
1
5
11
30
16
11
19
23
43
19
35
31
81
45
16
3.3
56
5 3
3
Width
(feet)
16
20
31
75
65
36
79
92
100
130
128
340
800
820
93
32
82
112
45
43
26
40
28
36
27
45
143
224
25
293
221
Depth
(feet)
7
7
5
7
7
4
3
4
4
3
1.5
2
3
2 5
3
7.8
8.6
5
6.2
6.0
6 3
4 5
8 0
6 5
8 4
7 1
7 3
3 4
10 0
5 8
5 0
Width
depth
ratio
(F)
2 3
2.9
6 2
10 7
9 3
9.0
26.3
23.0
25.0
43
85
170
267
328
31
4.1
9 6
22
7.2
7.2
4.1
8.9
3 5
5 5
3.2
6 3
19 6
65.9
2 5
50 6
44 2
Gradient
(S)
0.0055
0045
.0045
.0015
.003
.001
013
.009
on
.010
.016
.017
.019
.016
.001
0006
0005
0013
.003
.001
001
.0013
0021
001
003
003
002
0025
Mean
annual
flood
(cfs)

	

	


	
4,300
1,300
8,000
7,000
2,600
1,800
1,360
1,000
450
850
690
2,220
2,080
880
10,900
3.660
Mean
annual
discharge
(cfs)
	
	
	
	
	
88 3
11 1
151
558
33 2
111
39 1
28 8
12 5
101
5 8
43 1
165
20 4
302
113
Drainage
area
(sq mi)
1 7
3 4
9.5
17.9
22 2
22 5
3 8
24 2
25.8
19 7
22.9
25 8
26.1
28 8
1,602
212
2,390
6,770
721
3,840
1,500
2,060
1 ,460
1 ,480
290
400
1,340
2,000
676
7,143
            C-16

-------
                                  APPENDIX D

IMPOUNDMENT THERMAL PROFILES

      Thermal profile plots are provided (on microfiche in enclosed envelope
for EPA-published manual; as Part 3, EPA-600/6-82-004c, for paper copies pur-
chased from the National  Technical Information Service) for a variety of im-
poundment sizes and geographic locations throughout the United States.   The
locations are arranged in alphabetical  order.  Within each location set, the
plots are ordered by depth and hydraulic residence time.  An index to the
plots is provided below,  and the modeling approach is described in Appendix F,
               Atlanta, Georgia

                 20-ft Initial Maximum Depth 	  D-4
                 40-ft Initial Maximum Depth 	 D-14
                 75-ft Initial Maximum Depth 	 D-24
                 100-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .... D-34
                 200-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .... D-44

               Billings, Montana

                 20-ft Initial Maximum Depth 	 D-54
                 40-ft Initial Maximum Depth 	 D-64
                 75-ft Initial Maximum Depth 	 D-74
                 100-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .... D-84
                 200-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .... D-94

               Burlington, Vermont

                 20-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-104
                 40-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-114
                 75-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-124
                 100-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-134
                 200-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-144

               Flagstaff, Arizona

                 20-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-154
                 40-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-164
                 75-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-174
                 100-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-184
                 200-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-194
                                    D-l

-------
Fresno, California

  20-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-204
  40-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-214
  75-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-224
  100-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-234
  200-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-244

Minneapolis, Minnesota

  20-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-254
  40-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-264
  75-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-274
  100-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-284
  200-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-294

Salt Lake City, Utah

  20-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-304
  40-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-314
  75-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-324
  100-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-334
  200-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-344

San Antonio, Texas

  20-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-354
  40-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-364
  75-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-374
  100-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-384
  200-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-394

Washington, D.C.

  20-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-404
  40-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-414
  75-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-424
  100-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-434
  200-ft Initial Max.imum Depth  .  .  .   .D-444

Wichita, Kansas

  20-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-454
  40-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-464
  75-ft Initial Maximum Depth	D-474
  100-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-484
  200-ft Initial Maximum Depth  .  .  .   .D-494
                     D-2

-------
                              APPENDIX E

            MODELING THERMAL STRATIFICATION IN  IMPOUNDMENTS

Figure E-1      Comparison of Computed and Observed Temperature
               Profiles in Kezar Lake

Figure E-2     Comparison of Computed and Observed Temperature
               Profiles in El  Capitan Reservoir

Figure E-3     Log of Eddy Conductivity Versus  Log Stability—
               Hungry Horse Data
                                 E-1

-------
IMPOUNDMENT THERMAL PROFILE MODEL:   BACKGROUND

     The model used for computation of impoundment temperature profiles
is based on the Lake Ecologic Model originally developed by Chen and
Orlob (1975).  The model was modified for this application to compute
temperature alone.  The purpose of the model application was to
simulate the effects of mixing, impoundment physical characteristics,
hydraulic residence time, and climate on the vertical profiles of
temperature.

Physical Representation

     Each configuration simulated was idealized as a number of horizon-
tally mixed layers.  Natural vertical mixing is computed by the use
of dispersion coefficients in the vertical  mass transport equation.
Values of the dispersion coefficients for different size lakes were
estimated from previous studies (Water Resources Engineers, Inc.,
1969).

Temperature

     Temperatures were computed as a function of depth according to
Equation (E-l).

   77 3T  _  1  J  ,. n  3Tx      9_ ,OTx + ^ ,    ,   _0_ _ T 97     (E-
   v 9l  '  c7 9z ( z°z 9z j  "  9z igU + cp U AU   cp   '9t

where   T = the local  water temperature
        c = specific heat
        p = fluid density
       A  = cross-sectional area at the fluid element boundary
                                  E-2

-------
     t = time
     z = vertical distance
    D  = the eddy diffusion coefficient in the vertical  direction
     Q = advection across the fluid element boundaries
    A  = cross-sectional area of the surface fluid element
     o
   M»A = coefficients describing heat transfer across air-water
         interface
     0 = sum of all external additions of heat to fluid volume
         of fluid element
     v = element volume

Application/Verification
     The model has recently been used in a lake aeration study
(Lorenzen and Fast, 1976).  In that study, the model was applied to
Kezar Lake in New Hampshire and El Capitan Reservoir in California
to verify that artificial mixing could be adequately simulated.

     Computed temperature profiles were compared to observed values
as shown in Figures E-l and E-2.  The model performance was judged to be
good for the intended purpose of providing guidance for further study.
PREPARATION OF THERMAL PROFILES

     The  thermal  profiles  in Appendix  D of  this  report were prepared by
 inputting the  selected climatological  conditions,  inflow  rate,  impoundment
 physical  conditions,  and wind.  Of  these, only wind warrants special dis-
 cussion  here.  The  remaining model  parameters are  discussed in  the  text
 of  Chapter 5.
Wind-Induced Mixing and the Eddy Diffusion Coefficient

     Figure E-3 is a  plot of the eddy  conductivity coefficient versus
stability.  It was used to obtain coefficients for wind mixing for the
                                   E-3

-------
0
  TEMPERATURE (°C)

20       0       10
                             26 JUL. 1968
  FIGURE E-1
COMPARISON OF COMPUTED AND  OBSERVED
TEMPERATURE PROFILES  IN  KEZAR  LAKE
                        E-4

-------
EL CAPITAN 1964 - NO MIXING


     TEMPERATURE (°C)


     10  15  20   10   15   20   1C   15   20  25   \l
    "H	1	1    i	1	1    i	1	1——-i——y
 C  0
 Q 20
   40
   60
   80
          -A
                                 1	\
                                          •Simulated
                                          -Prototype
     I SO DAYS    165 DAYS     I8ODAYS
EL CAPITAN 1966 - WITH AERATION

     TEMPERATURE (°C)


     10  15  20   10   15   20   10   15   20   10   15   20   25   V7
    n I    i    i    i    i   . . i     i    i    i.i	•    	.	v
   80
  100
     6ODAYS
                     I
                 90 DAYS     TODAYS     ISODAYS
      FIGURE E-2     COMPARISON OF COMPUTED AND OBSERVED

                     TEMPERATURE PROFILES IN EL CAPITAN

                     RESERVOIR
                             E-5

-------
                                            9-3
                     EDDY CONDUCTIVITY COEFF. D (z,t), m* seer1 x |Q4
       CD
        I
       Ovl
m
    cy^
    CO  H

    r~  o
H *•   X
m     m
33 m
   x—> rn
pa M  a
m s.   o
co —i  -<
O '—'
c     c—>
33 -n  o
o o  z
m 33  O
co     c:
»•  mo
   d  H
i—i 2:  >—
z: CT^  <
h-1 o  (->
UD 33  O
cn co  m
UD m  -n
   m  o
   co  •-<
   m  m
   O
       t)

       M
       m
       33
       co
       c
       CO
CD

r;

H


m

N

               3  _
               O
                cn
3 r





















/
7
D C
0 J















m r
D O
< 5
o" ~"
XJ
o>
Y
/
1


D C

















/




>
//
I (















>
/





^
B -















/
O







c
o

<


<





;
/'c
f
-



0
/
'D/
X

r
i


0>

°
>
O
•C
<

<

±>



D
C
u

,

o J








>
>
0
0
o
o
^ ^
x D

X
~! •• O-^

y
/

/


^ C











[
[
C
&n

0 ^
f

X





n c









U
a
3 C
fe
J
/



/





o c
r





c
n


f
a





x





r
D C
3
D C



a
a
D
D>

t>
>
p /
/ O



/f
X 	 1






o
D


U
-1




I
J
x

o
y
X
n
<
a
c
x
a





•i
c

>

1%
>






O ^

x

T C
> X>
L ro
> ~*
i
>





t» c
3 C










O
O
o
5 /











I> C
D C






o
oc


o
x











D C
3 C




-\
c

)















                                                                                          (0
                                                                                         (0
                                                                                          a>
                                                                                          3
                                                                                          a.
                                                                                       x O
                                                                                       ro —
                                                                                       a> ~


                                                                                       M
                                                                                       2 >
                                                                                       m ^


                                                                                       «3 CD
                                                                                       O> O)
                                                                                       O1 O)
                                                                                       D O

                                                                                         «>
                                                                                       01 CD
                                                                                         cn
                                                                                         c
                                                                                         r~



                                                                                         CD
                                                                                         O)
                                                                                         01

-------
model runs.  The upper envelope represents high wind mixing conditions
and the lower envelope represents low wind mixing conditions.   Note
that the plot in Figure E-3 was developed for this model,  and  the
model was then verified with data from Hungry Horse Reservoir, which
is located on the South Fork of the Flathead River in northwestern
Montana.  Accordingly, the extremes of wind mixing and the effects on
impoundment stability are as found for Hungry Horse Reservoir.  The
coefficients should be applicable elsewhere, however, because  the
eddy diffusion coefficient is relatively insensitive to climate and
location.

     The significance of the eddy conductivity coefficient and its
implications for wind mixing may be understood by examining an
equation describing transport within the system.   Mixing implies the
transfer of materials or properties within a system from points of
high concentration to points of low concentration, and vice versa.
For a system which is undergoing forced convection, it has been
observed that the time rate of transport, F, of a property, S,
through the system is proportional (other things  being equal)  to the
rate of change of concentration of this property  with distance, z.
In equation form, this rule is expressed as:

                          F = - D ||                             (E-2)

where D is the coefficient of proportionality.  The mixing process
as defined by Equation (E-2) is variously called "effective diffusion,"
"eddy diffusion," or the "diffusion analogy" because it is identical in
form to the equation describing the process of molecular diffusion.
The difference between the two processes, however, is that for molecular
diffusion,D is constant,  while for turbulent transfer, D is a function
of the dynamic character, or the turbulence level, of the system.
In general, D is a temporal and spatial variable, and thus will be
                                  E-7

-------
referred to here as-D(z,t); 'Equation (E-2) rewritten for heat flow over
the reservoir vertical axis is

                           H = -pcD(z,t) fl                        (E-3)
where   H  =  heat flux, HL'V1
                                  _3
        p  -  density of water, ML
        c  =  heat capacity of water, HM  D
                                                 O  "I
   D(z,t)  =  coefficient of eddy conductivity, L T
        T  =  temperature, D
        z  =  elevation in the reservoir, L
        t  =  time T
     From Equation (E-3), therefore, it may be seen that the rate of
heat flux (H), which describes the rate of energy transfer vertically
in an impoundment, is a function of the temperature gradient over
       J\T
depth (g^) and the degree of turbulence (induced by wind and other
factors) and is characterized by the eddy diffusion coefficient D(z,t)
in the equation.  It is this coefficient, D(z,t) which is plotted on
the ordinate (stability is on the abscissa) in Figure E-3.

Surface Heat Flux

The simulation of temperature involves the following steps:

     1.   The net heat transfer at the air-water interface is
          evaluated for all surface nodes as a function of the
          meteorological variables and nodal temperatures.

     2.   The heat input due to shortwave solar radiation is
          distributed with depth according to the light trans-
          missibility characteristics of the water (which are a
          function of the suspended particulates).
                                 E-8

-------
    3.   Heat is distributed within the water body by hydro-
         dynamic transport (advection and dispersion) in the
         same manner as conservative dissolved constituents.

The net rate of heat transfer across the air-water interface is
computed according to the following heat budget equation:
                   H = q   + q   - q  -q  + q               (E-4)
                       Msn   Mat   ^w   He - Mc              v    '

where
     H   - Net rate of heat transfer (Kcal/m2/sec)
     q   = net shortwave solar radiation across the  air-water
     Msn
           interface, including losses by absorption and  scattering
           in the atmosphere,  and reflection at the  water surface
           (Kcal/m2/sec)
     q   = atmospheric long wave radiation across the air-water
      at
           interface (Kcal/m2/sec)
     q   = long wave back radiation from the water  surface to the
      1w       3
           atmosphere (Kcal/m2/sec)
     q   = evaporative heat loss (Kcal/m2/sec)
     q   = convective heat exchange between the water surface and
           the atmosphere (Kcal/m2/sec)
The heat transfer terms for long wave back radiation,  evaporative
heat loss, and convective heat exchange depend on the  water temper-
ature in the surface nodes (A values), while the solar radiation
and atmospheric long wave radiation (y values) are independent of
water temperature.  Algorithms for the various terms of Equation E-2
are used for separate computation and then summed as shown in
Equation E-l.
                                   E-9

-------
NOTE:
     For a more detailed description of the model, its applicability,
and the eddy diffusion coefficient, the reader is referred to a
report entitled "Mathematical Models for the Prediction of Thermal
Energy Changes in Impoundments." (See the list of references  at the
end of this Appendix.)
                                   E-10

-------
REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX E
Chen, C.W., and Orlob, G.T., 1975.   Ecologic simulation for aquatic
environments in systems analysis and simulation in ecology.  Academic
Press, N.Y., San Francisco, and London.   111:475-588.

Lorenzen, M.W., and Fast, A., 1976.   A Guide to Aeration/Circulation
Techniques for Lake Management:  For U.S.  Environmental Protection
Agency Corvallis, Oregon.

Water Resources Engineers, Inc., 1969.  Mathematical  Models for the
Prediction of Thermal Energy Changes in Impoundments.   Water Quality
Office, Environmental Protection Agency.
                                 E-ll

-------

-------
                              APPENDIX F

                 RESERVOIR SEDIMENT DEPOSITION SURVEYS

        The material in this appendix consists of a reproduction of a
   bulletin compiled by F. E. Dendy and W.  A.  Champion,  which  provides
   data on rates of sedimentation in U. S.  reservoirs.

                             INTRODUCTION

     Data from known reliable reservoir sedimentation surveys  made
in the United States through 1970 are summarized in this bulletin.
Additional data from surveys made after 1970 are included for  a few
reservoirs.

     This bulletin supersedes USDA Miscellaneous Publication No. 1143,
which was published in May, 1969.-   All reservoir surveys reported in
Miscellaneous Publication No. 1143 have been repeated in this  bulletin.
In addition, it includes surveys made before 1965, but not previously
reported, and new data on reservoirs surveyed  or resurveyed since 1965.
The reservoirs are located in all of the 48 conterminous United States,
except Florida, and in Puerto Rico.  In addition to data on storage
reservoirs and ponds,  some information on debris basins  is included.

     A supplement to this bulletin, from which the data  were extracted
and summarized, contains detailed information  about each of the reservoirs

     ]_/ Dendy, F.E. and" Champion, "W.A., Compilers.  Summary of Reservoir
Sediment Deposition Surveys Made in the United States Through  1965.  U.S.
Department of Agriculture Miscellaneous Publication No.  1143,  64 pp.,
May, 1969.  (Cooperative report with the Sedimentation Committee.  Water
Resources Council).

                                   F-l

-------
listed in the summary table.  The method used in presenting this infor-
mation is given on pages F-2, F-3, F-4 and F-5.  The supplement has not
been distributed with this bulletin because of its bulk and because the
detailed information is not of general interest.   Copies are available
in the offices of the agencies represented on the Sedimentation
Committee of the Water Resources Council.  Reprints of data sheets
for specific reservoirs may be obtained on request from the Director,
USDA Sedimentation Laboratory, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Oxford,
Miss. 38655.  Requests for information not contained in this bulletin
or in the supplement should be directed to the agency supplying the
data.
     The accuracy of the survey  data  varies greatly.   Surveys  range
from reconnaissance measurements of sediment depth at a few locations
to detailed surveys based on closely  spaced cross sections  or  contours.
No attempt has been made to classify  the surveys  according  to  degree
of accuracy.

     Information in this bulletin and in the supplement should prove
useful  to engineers and watershed planning specialists in private and
public practice who are concerned with problems of reservoir sedimen-
tation.   Engineers, engineering  firms and local  government  agencies
who have data on similar reservoir surveys are invited to make this
information available to the Sedimentation Committee, WRC,  for inclusion
in supplements to this publication.

                   EXPLANATION OF THE SUMMARY TABLE

     Data in the summary table of this bulletin were obtained  from the
reservoir sedimentation survey data sheets contained in the supplement.
Dashes in columns of the table signify that data were unavailable or
that the column is not applicable for the reservoir.

     Reservoirs are grouped according to the 79 drainage areas into which
the United States has been divided as shown in the publication, "River
Basin Maps Showing Hydrologic Stations," compiled under the auspices of
the Subcommittee on Hydrology, Federal Inter-Agency River Basin

                                  F-2

-------
           2/
Committee.—   An  index map of these drainage areas is shown on page F-78.
The drainage areas  in which the reservoirs are located are shown as
subheadings in the  si'mrnary table.  The first of the two numbers identi-
fying a  reservoir indicates the drainage basin in which it is located.
The second number denotes the particular reservoir in the drainage area
and is based upon the order in which the data were prepared.  These
numbers  are the same as those identifying the corresponding survey
data sheets in the  supplement.  When a survey data sheet is revised
or when  another sheet is prepared with information for additional surveys,
the identification  number is modified by the addition of letters beginning
with a;  for example, 13-2, 13-2a, and 13-2b.

     Total drainage area includes the reservoir area and the area lying
above all  upstream dams but generally excludes noncontributing drainage
areas lying within  the watershed boundary.  Where available, the drainage
area figure published by the U.S. Geological Survey in Water-Supply
Papers is  usually used.  The net drainage area is the sediment-contrib-
uting area and generally excludes the reservoir area and the drainage
areas above upstream reservoirs, or other structures which are effective
sediment traps.

     The first date shown usually corresponds to the beginning of
storage when sediment deposition began.  However, for some reservoirs
the first  date represents the date of the contour or range survey made
after the  reservoir had been in operation for some time.

     For most reservoirs, the storage capacity given is the total
storage below the level  of the crest of an ungated spillway or the top
of gates (less gate-height freeboard, if any) of gated spillways.
Where capacity values below the spillway crest elevation are given,
footnotes are used to explain.
     2J  U.S. Inter-Agency Committee on Water Resources,  Subcommittee
on Hydrology.  River Basin Maps Showing Hydrologic Stations.   U.S.
Dept.  Com., Weather Bur., Notes on Hydrol.  Activ.  Bui.  11,  79 pp.,  1961.
                                   F-3

-------
     The capacity-average annual  inflow ratio  (C/I  ratio)  was  derived
from the reservoir storage capacity and the  average annual  inflow.
Normally the average annual  inflow for the entire period  of record
was used to compute the C/I  ratios.   This  time period  may or may  not
correspond to the period for which sediment  accumulation  was given.
Generally, the C/l ratio was not  given if  upstream structures  con-
trolled 25 percent or more of the drainage area.

     The specific weight of deposited sediment is an average or weighted
value for the reservoir, determined generally  from samples of  deposits.
In view of the variations with depth and location within  the reservoir,
specific weight is generally an approximation  for the  reservoir.  The
entry is marked by an asterisk where the specific weight  is assumed  or
is calculated from field data or  the size-frequency grading of the
deposits.

     The average annual  rate of sediment accumulation  (acre-feet  and
tons per square mile of net drainage area) pertains to sediment
deposited in the reservoir below  the full  pool elevation.   Sediment
deposited in deltas above full pool  level  or sediment  discharged  from
the reservoir is not included unless explained by footnote. For
reservoirs with more than one survey and where the latest survey
indicated an increase in the specific weight of deposited sediment,
the annual sediment accumulation  rate in tons  per square  mile  was not
always computed in the same manner.   For some  reservoirs, compaction
of earlier sediment was considered and in  others  it was not.  All of
the deposited sediment was assumed to have been transported into  the
reservoir by water.

     The agency supplying data is shown in the last column of  the table.
This agency either has the basic  data available or has access  to  it
through cooperative arrangements.  The symbols used in this column
apply to the following agencies:
                                   F-4

-------
    ARS  - Agricultural  Research  Service   ODW  - Ohio Department
                   .  ..   ,    ^.                   Natural Resources--
    BR   - Bureau of  Reclamation                 Division of Water
    CE   - Corps of Engineers              $cs  _ So1] Conservation
    FS   - Forest Service                        Service
    GS   - Geological  Survey              TVA  - Tennessee Valley
    T.,^   T-II-   •  r-,. x  .14-                    Authority
    IMS  - Illinois State  Water                          J
          Survey
              FORM FOR REPORTING RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION

     A completed sample of the reservoir sedimentation data sheet from
the supplement is shown on pages F-79 and F-80.  This sheet is a
convenient and standard form for reporting results of reservoir surveys.
An invitation is extended to readers, particularly those practicing
engineering individually, in engineering firms, or in local government
agencies, to prepare sheets covering surveys known to them but not
included in this publication.  A blank "Reservoir Sedimentation Data"
sheet is enclosed as a tear sheet on pages F-81 and F-82.  Additional
data sheets may be obtained from the department offices listed on the
title page or the form may be reproduced if desired.  The completed
forms may be sent to any one of the agencies represented on the Sedi-
mentation Committee for inclusion in supplements to this bulletin.
                                  F-5

-------
                                                                                                              SUMMARY OF

                                                                            RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS HADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970
os
                  DATA
                  SHEET
                  NUMBER
                2-1

                2-2

                2-1

                2-1.

                2-5

                2-6

                2-7
                3-2

                1-3
                4-la


                ,.-2.


                4-3

                4-4

                4-5

                4-6

                4-7a


                4-8a
STREAM











NEAREST TOWN







DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)


TOTAL | NET



DATE OF
SURVEY





PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)




CAPACITY
AVG ANN
INFLOW
(ACRE-FT
PEB



SPECIFIC
(EIGHT
(DRY)
LB. PER
CU. FT.)


AVG. ANN
SEDIMENT
ACCUMULATION
PERSQ MI.
OFNETDH
AREA FOR
PERIOD SHOWN

AC.-FT TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA



                                                                           JT. JUH» »CHI*T, PENOBSCOT, SKWEBKC,  ANDROSCROOCDI, AND PREciUMPSCOT RIVES  BAilN


HounLAin 3tre*t 	
Plant* Pond 	
SnuthllU(ton ReMrvolr 	 	
do

4Mt field 	 	 	 • 	
Schoharie (Cllbaa Ehutj 	
do

fio


t»



do
do
!±-St!L 	
Crirfin 	 	

*UrŁrt"
do

d°
Wllllxw- Dricffo
do •

do

do
^__?1o— - 	 -


Broad Brook River 	
Trib. of Bo»vor Brook 	
Kightsil* Run 	
Budd River 	

	 *, 	
	 do 	
Hoose Mountain Branch 	



*'**. n rB
0

> i;

pping

junpo «r , a v«r

0
	 do 	
Griffin Greek (Legget,} 	

ing
- rrl "
J° °*~1" "F
"* ff i-ri Msart B k
^ ror rwa o roo
do-
— do 	

ucan jTncK
3

— 1C 	 	
.•"!„,,,.,, "• 	
n«ir«Bt, *.
13.9
HOUSA-TUt*!", CONHtCTICUT, THAJCS, -I
Broad Brook, xxw, 	 5.13
Greenfield, Haas. 	
Plaflt8-/6G,410
59,864
1,991
1,953
3,746
3,686
2,686
2,232
i,on
1,0,6
3V6.19
"05.32
617. !16
56.04
<5.9C
55. M.
1P7."1
L87.13
186.70
2V..11
.oa
—
-
-
.005
.002
.025
.01')
.017
.130
.129
.128
.250
.250
.^49
                                                                                                                •50

                                                                                                                •50
                                                                                                                                                                                  •50
                                                                                                                 57.3

                                                                                                                *6C
                                                                                                                 bi.,2
                                                                                                                          .01

                                                                                                                          .10

                                                                                                                          .04

                                                                                                                          .012

                                                                                                                          .094
          609.8

           10.9

          108.9

           43.6

           13.07

          102.4
                                                                                                                •Su      I/.156   1/217

                                                                                                                •00        ."2       2o.lt.

                                                                                                                'V,      2/.20      217.8
                                                                                                                                                                                            .01
4/.618   4/808
  .187     23'

  .699     913
  .'"I     '47

  .237

  .034      —

  .394     421

  .022

  . )51     459
  .r>7     Jii
                                                                                                                                          scs

                                                                                                                                          scs
SC3

SCS

-------
4-11
4-12
4-13
4-U
4-15
4-16
4-17
4-18
fc-19
4-20
5-3 a
5-3
5-6
5-7b
s-e
5-9
5-10
5-11
5-12
5-13
6-1
6-2
6-3
6-4
\f Tic
2/ Inc
3/ Par
4/ Net
This area
y Rev
tl Con
O/ B"
Old :ia.TJfelter 	
Palinjfton Reserv«ir
' ^c '

Ice-aal* 	
" 111
-oatsviile-
Lloerty leservcir 	
	 do 	
Llttl*oDeer %°'
!tount Morr-ia 	
do
Patterson Greek flfl- 	 	 	

Latce Barcroft 	
	 do— 	

m
do

do

J°
btamiton
	 do 	
Jackson 	 . 	
Triadelphia L. (Brighton D.)-
do
do
Cordon Lake 	 	
Thomas W. Koon Lake 	
Savage River Dam 	
Rocky Gorge- 	
	 do 	 — 	
South River, Site 26 	
Lak

ao
Lake Ap?x 	
	 do 	 	 	
	 do 	
High Point 	
do

iudes 103 acre-feet of sediment d
tial survey eoverir.c sequent s 1-1
sediment contributing area wa« 2
was used in the 194J calculations
pervasion or sediment pool only.

*. 3r. :oioms >e«k— 	
>o»der ;r«e* 	
% ~ ,
. 	 Jo 	 	 	 _



Patapaco 	
do __ 	
Genesee River 	
do
Pattern :rwk 	

Trib. of Potomac Ri *'er 	
	 do 	
Pedlar River 	



ao-
0
?~
" Ivor
. do 	

Patuxerit Siver 	

rt°~
Zvitta Creek 	


Patuxent River 	
	 do 	
Inch Brancn 	


do
Swift Creak 	
	 do 	
Sallie Keaney GreeK 	
	 dc 	
Deep River 	
0

redged in 1937-1939.
4 in Stoney brook Arm Only.
99.4 iq. ui. antl_ 1933 wher Pre

Spring Grove, Pa.. — —
	 do 	

	 do- 	
Joatsville, Pa. 	
	 do 	
rfards Shaped , Hd. 	

Mount t>rri3, N. Y.—

Endwsll, '<. Y. 	

POTOMAC, H^P
rails Church, ^a. 	
	 do 	
Oronooo, Va. 	
Silver Spring, Hd.- 	
	 Jo 	 	 	
Greenbelt, Hd. 	
do


St t V
aon on, a.
	 do- 	
Kanassas, Va. 	
Brighton, Hd. 	


Cuj^erland, Md. 	
	 do 	
31oomington, Md. 	
Laurel, HI. 	 • 	
«ayne9boro, Va. 	



CHOhAN, ROANOhE, TAR,
	 do 	
Franklinton, N. C. 	
jreensboro, S. C. 	
High Point, N. C. 	

ttyboy Dam was couple ted.
»M,v of J,l«) ,cr,-f-e.
74.3
2.91
60.7

5.0
164
.74
1,07?

4.3
1.C4
2.90
-
159.1
1,011
4.3
1.64
PAriAt-.O^K, YORK, AND J
14.5 14.3
)3.21
27.0
10/.82


25
337
81.4


64
60
105.0
2.7
l.SR

33.07
26.97
.79
25
336.4
80. 0
59.6
104.44
50.14
2.7
1.85
f-TUSE, Ai'.T GAPE F-.A- R
4.0 4.-
1.13 1.12
74.1
62.8

10/
?/
i2''

73.4
62.3
Revised
tievlged
Koon "..a*
3a3ed on

Apr. 1939
1937
Apr. 1939
— 1925
Oct. 1951
July 1951
— 1916
July 1951
Julj 1954
Jan. 1962
June 1958
t.ov. 1%2
Soy. 1951
H»J 1957
May 1963
Oct. 1968
Oct. 1970
Oct. 1908
Oct. 1970
AMES RIVEH oAJLN
Jan. 1915
Feb. 1938
Aug. 1957
Feb. 1907
Feb. 1938
Mny 1930
Hw. 1938
July 1936
reb. 1938
Aug. 19^7
June 1968
Dec. 1925
Jan. 19i.O
June 1957
July 1930
Aug. 1937
Jan. 1942
Oct. 1950
Sept. 1958
Aug. 1964
3.pt. 1913
Apr. 1940
Har. 1932
Apr. 194
Kar. 1952
thr. 1956
Mar. 1954
Aug. 1964
May 1956
Nov. 1970
Sept. 1966
Aug. 1968
Aug. 1969
1325
June 1941
Jan. 1925
Aug. 1934
Jan. 1928
Aug. 1934
Apr, 19j8
19c8.
due to -_vable c
total sediment

5'
1.6
20
51
35
-.9
4.4
5.5
5.9
2
2
19.5
31
7.8
1.6
19.5
10.8
.4
17.5
7.2
8.3
7.9
5.9
8.1
4.3
10.4
14.5
1.9
1.0
16
11.5
6.5
3.7
bull
in bo

59.9 —
a, ooc
27,426
-37
1,019 —
970
138,762.4 1.133
133,227.0 1.129
0/23.3" --
Ł/!<,. IS --
336,611 .345
335,393 .344
891.43 .229
887.95 .228
272 . 18 )
271.38 .182
3/1,847 .142
8/1,762 .134
2/2,092 .161
1,860 —
1,723 -
181 —
95
196 -.312
186 *.296
151 *.2»0
U/147 -234
385 —
373
350
4,500
4,158
12/20,222 .327
20,089 .324
*9,633 .317
19,045 .338
3,129 —
7,312 —
7,294 —
20, -00 .172
20,020 .169
21,390 —
20,789 —
610.4 .28
607.0 .28
196.9- .140
170.99 .122
103.72 .117
1'jb
34.7 —
2,870
2,610
4,354
4,135 —
5 4,033
ed in early sp-ing 1968.

'3.2
»60
*50
77
*30
•60
«60

•50
•50
61.1
67
"60
»60
»60
=0.6
.669
.37
.03
.28
.426
6/1.055 1
.25
.20
0/.19 6,
.257
.723
.134
.408
7.91 *.
2.27 2
1.52 1
.034
.053
.141
.20
.72
1.2' i
.036
.643
1.15 1
.087
15/7. 3916/U
3.93 5
.19
.509
.308
.541
.416
—
433
434
3}
305
,378.
419
335
,'r,96
336
533
,337
,970
,°45
181,
213
784
,€63
840
,678
110
',133
402
596
458

-------
                                                                                          SUMMARY OF
                                                              RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MAUE [N THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970
00
...

DATA
SHEET
NUMBER




RESERVOIR




STREAM

1
i !
NEAREST TOWN

DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)

, TOTAL j NET
DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)

STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)

t

CAPACITY
AVG ANN
INFLOW
RATIO
(ACRE-KT
PER
ACHt-KIl


SPECIFIC
WEIGHT
(DRY)
LB. PER
CU. FT )


AVG ANN
SEDIMENT
ACCUMULATION
PER SO MI.
OF NET DH
AREA FOB
PERIOD SHOWN



AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA

AC.-FT.I TONS
(-5
6-6
6-7
6-S
6-9
6-lOa.
6-11
fc-12
7-7
7-4
T-5
7.6
7-7
7-10
7-11
"-1"-
--16
^ _. 	
"ic—



Roxboro City Uk« 	
Burlington Municipal 	
	 do 	

John H. K«rr- 	
Phil pott 	




	 do— - 	 	
Apptlaahl* 	
*
Albeaarl* 1-y -Ak«-



- 	 do- 	 — 	
Entwhistl* No. 3; 	
Hlgfi Rock 	

L*.ka L««
P«« DM Mfg. 3o. 	
	 do 	

Norwood L. (""illflry^ 	


	 J0 	


3

°
*
,

3»tt«rfUld Cr««k 	
3w»4=«* 	
	 do 	

Roanok* Rlirsr— 	
	 do 	 	 	
3«ith Rlvtr 	

sindy
T\irk«y Quarter ^r««K 	
South P»col«t Rivap 	

South Tyg«r Hirer 	
, r .
ong



Hi'chcock Oraek 	
Little River 	
Yadkin Biver 	 	
„ rw.lt
c i as n
Hitchcock Jr««k- 	
	 do 	
S«1M ;r«k 	
°ee De« River 	
^

_ -to


HOWA-V, BOANOKS, TAJi, KEU3E
Durhas, N. 7. — . 	 • —




koxboro, N C.-- 	
Burllrigton, H. -.- 	


South Kill, 7*. 	
BtMtt, V-. 	
PSE BEE. SAHTffi,
. '
L*nc*st*r, 3. C. 	
Flng.nrtll., o. :. 	
	 do 	
Gr~r, 5. C. 	

Lumapoll*, N. C.. 	
- do_ 	 -
	 do 	
~5b.M«ll, H. C 	
Troy, N. :. 	
Salisbury, S. -. 	


Rocklngham, H. 0. 	
	 do 	
Wlr.ston-ialen, N. 0.--
Ht jllead, N. 0. 	

__ -io 	 - 	
State .vills, N. 0. 	

AMI CAFE
107.5
3.75
30.6
7.62
397
7,800
212
AWJ roisrc
16.05
9.40
91.33
63.0
33. C
18.0
4.7
168.")
^69
3,930
50. SO
176
27.63
4,600
6.75
U,*li

FUVfi SIV-a BJO
166.7
3.73
30.3
7,52
105.0
397
7,391
185.7
5IVER BiSISS
15.92
9.34
90.6
62.8
n.7
4. 54
yil.o
269
3,863
50.34
V25
27.26
6/431
0.66
4.74
INS (0.
pr.
Ul.
«>.
tn«
pr.
pr.
HOT.
S.pt.
Apr.
July
DM.
D«.
Hov.
HOT.
Oct.
FA.
J\in«
"«J
July
Kir.
Oct.
Oct.
July
*i«.
July
Jun.
Har.
)far.
Mar.
NOT.
Aug.
Apr.
June
«a'.
Nov.
S.pt.
July
*u«.
Apr.
*y
Sept.
Mar.
Har
«pr
OKTIHU
1926
1935
1927
1941
1932
1935
1924
1941
1940
1928
1938
1949
1924
1932
1952
1959
1951
1960
1926
1937
1925
1938
1926
1934
1=>47
1*5
1965
1904
1934
1924
1939
1939
1941
1925
1935
1892
1940
1915
1940
1927
1935
1927
1938
1874
1940
1"19
1939
1928
1940
1935
1940
1951
19'7
1962
1965
.969
EC)
8.75
14.33
2.9
17.2
10.0
11.3
2/9
7.4
8.9
11
13.4
8.2
12.7
18.6
30
15.5
1.9
1 L . ?
«a.o
25.0
7.8
11.1
66
19.8
11.75
1.6
11.1
J.
12,671
12,276
103
95
1,115
1,851
531.2
460.3
448.4
1J25
1,202
974
209
2,808,400
2,750,349
201,500
198,000
682
585
190
1/3,506
.2/21891
1/2,593
4/3,109
2,500
1,600
1,070
918
2,600
2,574
1,201
1,122
184
163
1,104
976
289,432
'821
652
464
404
3,099
2,860
136,823
133,300
462
441
419
961.4
948. 5
9<.5 9
°L\I

-
— —
- ~
— 63
.002 —
.001 *43
.494 —
.484 32.6
.966 —
.949 46.2
— 65.3

- -
_ —
— 61.8
_ —
45.5
*4S5
.186
.184 7/62.2
.183 2/62-2
0.271
.150
.728
.545
1/.342
.155
.104
.2U
1.06
3.06
.55
.417
J/.412
J/.174
.48
.302
.774
1.71
.024
.019
.462
.302
.036
.696
.692
.299
.61
.18
.14
_
—
-
213
143
2OO
754
2,103
593
406
-
367
685
296
826
244
1*
SCS
SOS
scs
scs
scs
3.
3
SCS
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
305
so:
scs
scs
scs
scs

-------
                                                                       3AVAIUUH, XXKXSS.. UK ALTAMAUA RIVER BASIUS
Uh. I«WW 	 	
Lloyd 3ho»lB 	 	



North Pork Bn>*4 No. 6 	

«iorth ^ork Broad >te. ll 	

tiorth fork Broaa So. 1 	
Horth Pork Broad No. U 	
^

Omit.. *,.r 	


do
Bear Craak- 	 — — — 	

To»'e Creek 	 . 	
do
*ortto Fork Broad River 	
1-1 -J"* 	
	 do 	

Jac



Ml,

Bas

Toe


—do 	
kson, Oa. 	



., 0. 	

tonolle*, da. 	
do
«». G»- 	
—do 	
__ do 	

1,414

-yo

3.62

3.79

5.75
1.2
—
2A3.86
1,407



3.50

3.67

3.70
1.191

Apr.
De*.



J.IT

Julv

JVM
Oct.
Mar.
Apr.
1941
1910



1956
1970
1956

1958
1954
1962
1964
1969
2.9
24-3




10.8



7.4
4.5
1,748
112,538
98,578



12/780. 9
751.55
1Q/792.4
763.9
633.2
281.1
276.«
267.0
-



.176
.199

.193
.186
.148
.146

~
49.82
•60


55.1

74.8

73.8
63.2
ii/68.6
12/66.2
2.22



.335

.50

.34
,2O5
.49
.93
2.410
1,140
532

676
4O2
1,645
814
2,234
547
362

1,341

SCS



SCS

3CS

3CS
3C3

                                                                  3A7LUJI,  ST  XAKrs, ST. JOHH3. UTO SUWUOK! RIVK BASIIO
                                                                                 30UTHIW FLOtltu UUHUJt
                                                                          APAUlCHICOLi AM) OCHLOCKOHB R1VS BASDtf
U-l
11-2
11-3
12-1
12-2
U-3
12-i.
12-5
12-4
12-7
12-fl
13-1
13--1*
IV
••w*- 	 - •-.
-ii
-do


White Hanganeae Ho. 6 	
Lake Auburn 	 	 	
T ^

Lak* Pyrdy 	
do

High Pln« 3u Mo. 5 	
Barvlew- ._.--- 	
Lake Karri* 	
do
*
" U> , ** * nd

JL°
Trlb. of Chickamiaga Cr*ek
do
__
Pattlt Craek 	
Towi Creak (*rlb. of) 	
Coo RlT
Looaa^tti
Llttl. cahrti tl«r 	

.^tir»^o^i:m
Trlb. of Htgh Plna 	
Village r>«ek 	 -
Tello* Crwk 	
do
Hn I ^
ogue UM

^*^


*i i f
CHOCTAHUTCHKE, reLLOW,
Cart«r«Tille. Qa. 	
Auburn, Ala. 	
Clanton, Ala. 	
K^^f^, AU. 	
11 r
izŁr^———~-
Sowwkfl, Ala. 	 • 	
TUiCI^SKS, PAS-JiOCAJL
Blnaingham, Ala 	
TuacaloOM, Ala. 	
d°
*
° g*do**' *'
2.34
J.9
E3CA«1A,
1.60
12.46
1.6
9,087
41.74
7.45
.63
1.8
A, Affi) 0Fi
72.3
30.0
.13

2.31
2.8
AMD ALABAMA
1.51
12/U.o
1.6
9,076.5
40.22
7.18
.61
1.55
RL Rival BA3]
71.6
29.8 -
.13
»o». 1937
F*. 1945
JUM 1925
Ikl 1956
IOT! 1970
RJVKR BASICS
Julj 1929
JulJ 1939
Oct. 1929
•o.. 1938
T*>. 1931
Jan. 1937
D~. 1913
»aj 1936
Sapt. 1910
tor. 1935
Oct. 1948
"W 1957
Jug. 19S4
*7 1957
*r. 1961
Ka/ 1970
LHS
*y 1911
0~. 1935
f*. 1929
•or. 1935
Aug. 1953
Aug. 1949
War 1963
13.4
7.3
31
10.9
10.0
9.2
6.3
22.3
25.2
8.5
3
9.17
24.6
6.75
17.75
13.5
354
218.4
176.6
535.2
•90
865
1,021
900
102
95
156,525
138,520
19,0*3
18,594
1,448.0
1,325.4
65.5
60.5
389.7
385.3
11,866
9,514
2,421
2,373
15/2,636
7.631
6.963
.116
.095
.014
.012
.U2
.167
.090
».163
«.161
.061
.059
.066
.044
.040
'50
67
75.8
63.7
42.5
44.2
14/53.99
59.9
1.45
.41
3.92
1.66
1.20
.66
.089
.479
2.0
2.74
.32
1.34
.239
.110
.377
1.5*0
846
6,472
1,"40
2,63»
376.3
144
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SC3
SCS
                                                                    LOWER HISSI53IPPI HI/KB BA3IM (MATGHEZ TO THE  fCU^H)
                                                                      C&loiaivu, Htrawitau, and V*r»illon filv«r Baaina
 ExdudiiV? 2.04 acr«-f**t or ssdiaw

•'si-'n f"T58" repo O.
 Els>att->n o' dam
  •*• \ cv
         or  '
l«T,t
                    tlsert "—* -"5.0 to I''"
                    - feet anl o-I^lnal ~a
                    »c ty a"  e'f J*t.— """'
                                          fro« lak» in March 194
                                         ;  s«« H.  D,  65, 75th ^o
                                              Sept.  1956.   Dat. bas.n

                                                                                                   iy
    In 1940
    In 19..9
VO/  Changed on ba»i» of 1970 sur-fey.
Lj./  Average of 9 aaMplea.
lg/  Average of 1C sajaplaa.
lj/  Drainage aroa above reeervolr "o.  3  excluded.
14/  Weighted average   Subaergwl sedljwnt  51.75  pcf
' ' '  With s-foot flashboaHs Added In  IQf*
     Eatlaatod or aseuaad.

-------
                             SUMMARY OF
KESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER







RESERVOIR







STREAM
!
!



NEAREST TOWN ! DRAINAGE AREA
j (SQUARE






| TOTAL
MILES)




DATE OF


PERIOD STORAGE
BETWEEN CAPACITY
SURVEY SURVEYS (ACRE -FT.)
i (YFARS)


NET




CAPACITY
AVG ANN
INFLOW
UCRE-FT





SPECIFIC
»EIGHT
(DRY)
LB PER
:u FT )



AVG ANN
SEDIMENT
ACCUMULATION
PER S<3 MI.
OF NET DR

AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA

PERIOD SHOWN '
I
AC -FT ! TONS
               i (CSSISSIPP1 RIVER BA3IN5 (HELENA TO


15-2
15-3
15-4

1 5
15-6

15 7

15—8



15-10
1S-U
15-12
15-13


15-15
15-16
15-17

15 1
15-19
15-20

15 --2
15-23
15-24
l<-2<
15-26b

15-27a

ls-28a





Lake Wijiona 	
0. P. White Pond 	
B. H. Honnescuker Pond 	
* H PtinH
C. -. Hurdle Pond
Agnes Jon«s Pond 	
h
L«e Johnaon Pond
H~A1
r. T. HcAicxandcr
2°
j *t"COKa
H
Like oooLniid

Fletcher Hurdle Pond (North ;-
h ( So li 1

	 do 	
Gayooo Lake 	
Ben 0. Pettis Pond 	
do

R. X. Williams 	
ifenry W. Ramsey Pond 	
	 do 	
Dr. Braalett Pond 	
	 do 	
• ' lrl0 Pond
Ben P. Smith Pond 	
	 do 	
A. L. Rodman Pond 	
Charles Dockery Po'-d 	

do
V.. „. Murphy Pond 	
do
	 do 	
j




Alu,-n Fork Saline River 	
Trib. of Chewalia Creek 	
Trib. of Coldwater Siver--
H

""rib. of Coldwater liver—
,°^
'r * ' * Ur
"" ' C Ri
no o oiauato i r

T r
"


0
Trib. of Red Banks Creek—
Trib. of Byhalia Creek 	
0
	 do 	
Tric.^of Coffa-a Creek—
Trib. of "ississippi River
Trib. of Toby Tubby Creek-
do- ^


"Yib, of Sartor Cr-ee* 	
	 do 	
.rid. o. aiiarat^nle
Trib. o" Pigeon Roost ~r -

Trib. of Kurncare Creek—

	 do 	
Trib. of Jones Creek 	
	 do 	
East Goose Creek 	




P g > ."*
Little Rock, Ark. 	 43.0
Holly Springs, Hiss.— .OO97
Slayden, Hiss. 	 .0625
0 ^^
H "
Holly Springs, Kiss.— .0473
H° <~,"\
do . }





o . yj4
Warsaw, MISS. 	 .1019
Victoria, Miss. 	 .0406

	 do 	
riolJy Springs, Mna.— .0342
Horn Lake, Mi-is. 	 .2196
Oxford, Kiss. 	 .OO75
ao
do . 4iU
Taylor, Kiss. 	 .02'>9
Cxloru, MibS. 	 .1375
	 do 	

ates i^.e, _ss. .0456
Holly Springs, Miss.— .0278
Arkabutla, Mi-53. 	 .1563
Eudora, Miss. 	 .0644
Arkabutla, Miss. 	 1,000
	 do __ 	
'•oily Springs, Mlsa.-- .206
do
..^ord, Mi-is. 	 ,^P6
j



'
a ^
.0069
.0597

• J^
.0^51

• ' "





•4''
.0954
,011k
.0389

__
.0320
.20J.7
.'K6?

. 413

.1289
._'"
.0398
.0264
.14^8
.0566
943
	
.200
	
".4-7





Cc-,.
May
Oct.
Jan.
in
i c-
Oct.
I111"

*
UK.
""



Feb!
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.

Feb.
Aug.
Feb.
Feb.

u
^ar.
Sept.
Xar.
Jan.
Mar.
Mar.

July
Sept.
Mar.
Apr.
toy
Mov.
Sept.
Nov.
Apr.

c '



1937
1950
19*7
iq^A
1QM
1940
iqjj*
IQ^l






1942
1951
191b
1951
1947

1951
1948
1951
1942
1916
1951

1946
1951
1933
1951
1951
1951
1947
1951
1945
1946
1951
1939
1962
1953
1959
1963
1953
in a





12.6
4.0




i

f
' J
i -7
j. f.


35.0
4. -

4.0
2.7
-
-
35.0
1-;

u
IS. 2
14.2
">
-

r T
—
n»I»2
"
'.3

'~'i


                                                                    521,
:i
i,
I,
12!
p
36,
29.
8,
6,

2,
1,
2?6
94
^8,
If,
12.
12,
q.
4.
2.
5.
3.
6.
4.
53.
1.

9.
fc.
4.
2
31.
24,
lu
17.
16.
3.
3.
30.
29.
23.
22.
,300
540
060
/2P.
19.
17.
/J"
' ^s!
?i.
19.
::
.46 —
.07
,0 —
.35 —
.1* —
,0
.80
.40
.8
, i,h
,11
__
—
.1 —
.9
,1
.3
.66 —
,61
,67
,48
,cl
.47 —
,23
,0
,63 —
,07
,93
.70
,43
r4
,C
,9
	
,4
,6
,77
29
5 —
0 —
C
0
.499
.495
-4S7
-jg 5.194
1? >.169
84 «.152
77 *.l,-5
Po
3^
40
"SO
*50
—
63,
—
60,
—
o~,
	
o7,
7b.
	
84,
bl,
—
39.
—
66.
	
63,
—
63.
—
83.
—
78.


.6?

.09

.9

.27
.13

.24
.05

.9

,fi

,3

,0

,1

,e
51-85
—
'6,
—
55.
—
47.
—
41.
*37
—
52.
—
67.
—
r50
—
*44
—
**>G
*60
	
-*90
*90
*90
66
70
70
«70

,72

72

.7..

• 75


,04

58














0
—
13
—
I1;
—
7
	
12.
16
	
.11
.37

.1 18

.3 20

.78 10

.4 18
.6 27

12.4 ?2
"^
—
5.
-_
i,
—
•j,
	
12,
— .
16,
—
.Oj 10

. '2 4

.*P 6

.55 9

.5 17

.8 30

26.0 44
1.13 i
—
2,
.._
3.
—
r,1
—
2.
1.
—
3.
—
4.
—
1.
—
3,
	


	
2/8.
"3/3
2/3.
2A
2/5!
2/5.
2/1.

.19 j

T, i.

5 21

,61 2
.12

.14 3

,3° 7

.95 2

60 3

,627
620

.4 t/16
5 "a/-"
5 i/6
66 2/8
87 2/8
30 2/8
38 2/2
120
403
—
,200
—
',000
—
,700
	
,200
,500

,?00
,»OC
—
,800
—
,520

,040
	
,100
—
,400
—
,600
,530
—
,060
—
,0"0
—
i3"r
—
,37C
913
--
,'60
—
,200
—
,120
—
,420
—
819
810
	
,465.
,448.
,860.
,136.
,949.
,080.
,103.















































^
e
7
±
4
4
o

-------
15-31
15-32
16-1
16- 2
16-3
16-4
16-5
i6-6
16-7
16-9
16-10
16-11
16-12
16-15
16-16
16-17
16-18
16-19
16-20
16-21
16-22.
16-23
1

ac



Enid Reeervclr 	 — 	 	
^°
" en&cU
r oer o r-
°

-loan
°
in fl -a »
_ ..
rl
Loch H.ry 	
" 1
Dering -o*l Co. Pond 	
„ rnrtfl
Horodo
W»at Fr»nkfort 	 • 	
rfn
?° , ^
er,
Plnevlew (Middle) 	


f illarnay — — 	


0




' L*k
d °~
Crab Orchard L*K« 	


LUt-le Graa»y Like 	
Herrln Reservoir No. 1 	





.•)*dia»n'_ .ir conservation pool inly.
Original i**rfiiB«nr -ang" surveys.
Used *i ra^'rininff ,Ute of sediment da

do



Xooona River 	

lal b eh* Si
"


-*rc
„
.^o ings ~I*««K


Browi Creek 	
r t
Trib. of Wolf Creek 	




°
° „ ,
ut o o r««*
(i

°
0
Big Creek 	
q °
" H^°C 3 aP~

F rtf
" °



rt
" elf

Limb B
run ,
Little Grassy 	
Unnamed 	
.
_,




fX) S 1 *- 3 .

^°
0

*'
Enid, Miss. 	
3



LC«ER KISSIS5IPFI n
St. Fran
"!*r ,
a°~ a-
*rto^'


Kwlington, Ky. 	
T*m ° i m
Eldorado, 111. 	


W*«t Frankfort, Ul.-
0

amington ,
rf
0
Q
0
Annapoln, Mo. 	
fcpi.r fliorr, MO. 	

c
«Tion, il.


0
rf
r -^ °



iarbondal.. 111. 	
1«rrin, 111. 	





—lo 	
11 d t J



1,545 1,454
foO 516


IVEP. BASIN (3HE5TEB IX, Hn
,cio fiiv.r Basin
1.90 1.87
3.99 3.96
3.81 3.65
3.00 2.77
.219 .206
2.23 1.87
4.03 3.75

.63 .07
.56 .06
.49 .48
51 51
1,310 1,206

4.65 4.43
.339 .316
.26 .25
171 160
0.5 ^.31
15.7 14.2
1 . ^8 1 . 70
.33 .32
1.24 1.22
.925 .858
M«T 1956 2.5
S.pi.. 1959 3.3
Hov. 1963 4.1
lar. 1937 — 1
tfaj 1960 20.6 1
1940 —
— 19513/ —
Xfj 1961 9.83
1942 — 1
July 1953V ~
Hsj 1965 11.13 1
»Ai
Oct. 1930 —
July 1939 8.8
July 1939 1^
July 1939 10
— 1888 —
Dec. 1908 20
3»pt. 1948 22.1
— 1919 —
Oct. 1949 30
Oct. 1949 29
S«pt. 1936 10.1
July 1949 12.8
1939 7
1«9 9
193B7y 10
1910 —
1939 »
July 19408/ —
July 1947 7.0
Mar. 1964 16.7
P«b. 1944
June I960 16.3
1919 --
1951 32
— 1937 —
dug. 1951 14
MJJT 1940 —
July 1951 11.2
1921
July 1951 30
Mar. 1942 —
July 1951 9.3
1913 —
— 1951 38
Dec. 1925 —
»ug. l»5l 25.7
*.ug. 1954 14
1925 —
— .ulj 1960 35
6/ Net sediment volume in 1949 was 120. 5
2/' CAJH failed spring 1938, surrey conduct
3/ ^riginal data fron topographic survey
5/ Based on tncoDrlett rMurvey; 1963 ™]
* Estimatea or assumed.
18.83
17 .T)
16.47
,569,900
,549,336
060,030
657,201
, '37.400
,320,020
24.05
19.56
87.7
82.9
171
158
1,228
1,184
1,386
1,193
89.3
73.0
844.4
726.0
i/lf6*-1-
1,515.0
1,487.8
8.9
8.2
30.9
29.1
8.2
5.4
818
622
625,000
624,651
613,161
1,746
1,659
58.1
46.8
24.0
21.7
67,320
63,894
705
590
25,741
25,365
19"
178
74. b
64.7
150
138
383.94
353.59
ac.-ft. du
-,ed July 24
of 1935-36
lue of 0.57
'.102
•.096
•.089
.934
.922
1.073
1.068
.969
.957
•.0^7
•.063
-

—


-

	
•.025
•.016
.540
.539
.530
.613
.582
.265
.214
.143
.129
.611
.580
.168
.141
2.543
2.506
.173
.155
.350
.304
.201
.184
.598
.551
e to compaction
, 1939.
is nK>re reliabl
•90 2/6.2 2/12,153.2
•90 2/2.07 2/4,^57.6
•90 2/1.87 2/3,665.6
•60
•60
•40
7S4
54.8
64
•60
73. V
•76
•67

•60
•60
•65
•60
34.0
56.6
36.8
47.5
34.5
38.7
27.5
62.9
44.5
37.1
o1" earlii
e.
.667
.558
1.205
1.133
.a3
.33?
.600
3.15
2.64
2.18
6/933
1.43
3.3
.583
.133
2/.0414
.5705
1.20

.64
1.91
.61
2.85
.32
1.22
896
729
1 ,575
1,860
254
1.71
784
',,070
4,370
3,180
1,870
4,310
825
174
888
1,368
1,976
1.58
2,402
192
1,671
.69 692
1.01 816.1
er deposits.
Ci
CE
6CS
SOS
MS
IWS
IW
505
SCS
IWS
MB
Mi
MS
IWS
rws
MS
I.'S
MS

-------
                              SUMMARY OF
RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IK THE UNITED STATES THROUGH  1970



SHEET
NUMBER





RESERVOIR


1

1 |
STREAM NEAREST TO»N ; DRAINAGE AREA
I | (SQUARE MILES)

| TOTAL | NET



DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVG ANN
RATIO
(ACHE-rr
PER



SPECIFIC
(EIGHT
[DRY)
IB. PER
CU FT.)


AVG. ANN
SEDMENT
ACCUMULATION
PER SO MI.
OF NET OR
AREA FOR
PERIOD SHOW

AC -FT. | TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA


                i HISSicSlPPI RIVVi BASIS (CHE3T«B TO HKLBU)
                  St. prancis River 3*«ln (Conttnuad)

IS-36.
\^-n


lfe-2s

16-31
16-32
U-J1



16-3e
17-1
17-2a

17-3
17-j.


l"-ft
17-7
I"1-"*

17 9
17-10

17-13
17-lU


17-U*

n-1-

"'-IS

"W Ł~T^»«.rtU.- 	
Uk* .ohnton :ity 	
	 — -«o 	 	 -

Heat rrankfort (Sewi 	
~ '" ' • 1
	 -to 	 — 	 	
Hough River rtS Ho. 1 	
Oblon Creoh PRS 124 	
Had Hlver FRS Ho. 14 	
~^ LUX- flT
.«ii*J .t»«k Mr j f u
" - ^~ "

Kuntlnifburg (Uoper) 	
Oakland "ity if? 	
• n1O
Chafer Uto- 	
5pr;r,a Mill 	
10


Yerallion Lake 	
Brown Park Lace 	

'rfc1^ avUaon 3 c
Furina Lake 	
Graham Lake 	
ICRK at BlufoH 	

Olney Reservoir (New) 	
--- 1o

Plum Creek No. 15 	
— ili,-
HUM "r*ek No. 1" 	
- ---Ho -- -
-t*lner Lake-- 	

Trib. of Rwlng Creek 	
Lake Crwk 	
C°
*ndy Cr««
5t**«» ^rwir 	

Buf^*^* 	
Unnajw^ Trib. Llttl* Cr««k
Antioc- :r»-k 	
_
™
P rt-
• at rorlc
Trib. of Patoka RiT«r 	
3. Fork Pttoka River 	

Tippec.no* W.er 	
Mill Cr*«k 	
in

Trib. of Kidoan-aas Riyer—
N. Fork Vtrnliion SlYer 	
Trib. of fUccoon 3rcek 	
1
	 do 	
*>"» 	 ' 	
Trlb of Veale Cre«k 	
Trib of Flat Creek 	
Trio, of Saat Fork 	
1b *% Dianal " ek

Little Plum Creek 	
do
Trib. of Little Pljm Creek
1o
'Yib. of Pon-1 ..r-e* 	 — --

T>iompsonTlli«, HI. 	
Johniton City, in. —
^ in
r'
«est Frankfort, 111.—
M K
	 do 	
'anay farv, Ky. 	
Sharon Grove, K/ 	


ReedTvill K
' '
(^HIU HIrftR
Huntingburg, Ino, 	
Oakland City, Ind. 	

tentisello, Ind. — • —
Hltch«H, T-nd. 	


Charleston, 111. 	
Danville, m, 	
Flora, 111. 	


Ucled.. 111.— 	
Washington, Ind. 	
Bluford, 111. 	
Otwell, Ind. 	
Olney, 111. 	


Taylorovllle, Ky. 	
ź
— fa 	

"airfield, 111. 	
.519
1.799
^.85
2

7.62^

2.86
.37
9.59




BASIN KOI SON TO
Wabash Hirer Basi
.67
.52

1,700 1
15.03


1.41
267
1.34


-53«
3.353
.034
">.36


1.03

-56

.300
.512
1.725
3.75


7.288

2.85
.36
8.56




UKOHTOWN
.63
.40

,698
2/5.29


1.38
266
1.33


.531
31
3.199
-031
3.1)


1.02

.55

-'^
July
June

ug.



Kay
NOT.
Kov.
Jan.




July


June
Oct.

Sept.
Apr.
Sapt,
Jun*


June

Aug.
Aug.
June
Oct.
Sept.


Sept.

Dec.


1957
1945
1960
1926
1922


1945

1964
1955
1960
1965
1964
197O




1894
1921

1923
1940
1938

1940
1941
1947
1915
1940
1938

1959
1928
1950
1956
1926
'960
1154
1954
1926

1956

1956
1960
1945
20
15
34





16

o.33





19.0

17.2


13.1

25.3


12

6
34






1,5

1,870
35.56
27.41
300.63
471


2,654.7

515.-
617
1/30.35
1/28.90
1,379.87
_~
1,355-4
998

137
2/850.8
2/835. 8
aii.o
14,722
14,041
127
306
Z6O
X87.4
171.9
4/8,643
7,438
49. OS
37.75
187.75
175,18
13.3
104,8
104.4
67O.7
10.7
10. (3
1,555.3
1,517.4
316.75

224.3
213.2
126.3
1^3.7
121.2
53.68
4fl.fc2
.295
.103
.079
.2*3
.195


.502

.296
.236
'.23
«.22
-15
.15

.33
.154
150
".264
•2.116
•2.079
2.017
".016
-.016

•.023
*.020
::
•.061
•.052
.044
.631
.588
.046
.300

.723
.706
.516

.268
.262
.254
.263
.25?
.261
.237
38.3
51.5
48.7



35.9

•65
*eo
75.78

77. 7<

77.58
•40
•40
70
'75
•67
_
•70
72.4
•70
58.6

33.14
61.94
~

30.3

48.54
45
53
56
47
a. 3
0.64
1.06
.R80



2.41

4.6

y «
_j.


!/. 54
.617
1.937
2.490
.023
.975

,140
1.75
.179
.40
—
2.46
.19
,218
2.10
1.7O
—
1.18
1.84
4.19
2.00
3.11
1-15
534
1,1*9
934


530
1,884.4

6,512.2
i/1,498
1/742
	
1/1 710
	
1/912 4
538
1,720
3,796
38
1,420
__
213
2,760
273
510,5
—
1,775.6
256.35
	

1,460
—
1,247.5
1,803
4,837
2,439
3,180
1,034.3
IWS
IWS
IWS


IWS
sn
scs
scs
scs
scs

srs

scs
scs

scs

srs


5CS

IWS


SOS
IVS
scs
IWS
IWS

scs

scs

IWS

-------
co

l-»_io
17- a
17-22
17-73
1H-1
18- 2»
l«-1e
Ifl-flc

18-1?
in-n
19-?
io-3
19-4
10- So
I/ ">*ii
In *h« 106*1
y T*-«
*/ -

	 IP 	
•*•


Scott aburg Uk« 	
Łagl*.. Kill (Cataract




rfa
>«t Falls 	
"""
— 1°"
— to-



_..



7°
3O

Wll °"~

°
0
0
°

Pickwick Undi^ — 	

•to



1o

Dal« FUllow- 	
	 ,*> 	
J rf fto"0*7
Wolf ^r««k 'Lake Cta**

U|m*r Gn*n Rirer *< '


_., °
rora

F IttwLv,
4l*
I
	 — to 	



M Pool or,'.?
survny.
•>»-< fro« ?2P ,"i """i o '!'


	 	 tjo 	
*nKfl r •'*
** t*k
**T*do"r*
	 Trlb. of Aueatatuck
La**;-- Mill Crock 	

j
1 Ittl Rl
"
it
	 C*ney Fork River 	
ao

fto

T Rl
*""*"** 8r~


•to
rin
1
°
7°
°

tn
1
°
do
rtn
do


°



(to

	 Obey Biw 	
	 	 ,lo 	
-u-*>«rtam1 Hlvar
, . ^°
	 	 JO 	

pllot - South Fork — 	 	

j_

*"
stm*5
rte-°r
c
	 	 -JO 	 _ 	
	 Scioto Ri»«r 	
^_


••am i- -h>ry Clo«d or 1
'.T'O ic. -ft.




™
l*» Ind.
	 Seottgourg, Ii*d. 	
	 ClovM-dal*. Ind. 	
TOKE33EE RI\

HorAiosTlll
Hvh-KJaia 1J.1.I. Ky.
fto
— — — Sock I aland, Terui. 	

rto
~_
Cunt «irtll
^^ "'^ *
do-
•Vv
	 Tow Cr»«k. Al«. 	
^°
rto
ao
Fl 41

_A
	 — *, 	
do
	 	 to 	
"^^ ' T*""1'
do
d
do
dn "
t*llb.rt»yille, Ky.
~~
do
CelUia T«nn
	 	 to- 	
Old 11l.k«rj, T4.U1. 1^
'
	 	 do 	
	 Palls of Hough, Ky. 	
	 Stanford, Ky. 	
OHIO RIVER BASI
Kanaka, Big Sandy, Licking
I~*nca3t«r, '•
do
flAJ Turd , Va .
^ ™-
Dayton, Ohio
^ r*1
1o- l' °


do

igfged li»e stone sinkhole-.


.342
".294
3.95
2.98
295
rER BASlf, (B
rid and Ore.
2.1
6.10

1,675


24,450


29,590
__
30,750
-
32 820
-

40,200


935
11,674
5,789
454
1.44
N (POINT ?U
, Kentucky,
.20
329
651
270
1,053
—

.327 — 1950
— Jun. 1959
.278 — 1906
3.57 Oct. 1955
Oct. 1964
2.98 Fall 1949
Oct. 1961
287 DK. 1952
— FA. 1962
ELOV HALES BAH DAK)
n River Ba.in*
2.0 liar. 1915
— »0». 1940
— Jan. 1941
— June 1959
1,671 S^t. 1935
— Aug. 1947
Sfl*. 1960
— No*. 1969
2,550 Ko». 1940
— Jun. 1947
— Hay 1956
July 1961
675,033 Oct. 1936
— Jun. 1947
— lay 1953
June 1956
1,135 0«. 1928
D«. 1931
— 0«!. 1936
— June 1951
— Au(. 1961
1,997 F*. 1938
— 3^>t. 1946
— June 1956
Auf. 1961
7,131 Aug. 1946
Hay 1951
July 1956
Oct. 1961
987 Apr. 1943
— Jun. I960
2,741 June 1954
Jun. 1965
5,690 Aug. 1950
Jun. 196)
437.56 OK. 1959
— July 1969
1.41 S^it. 1955
- Apr. 1966
EA.ANT TO MADI30NI
Scloto, and Hiaan RiT.r Baeli
.20 Oct. 1902
— S.pt. 1941
329 Aug. 1934
July 1944
639 — 1927147
264 — 1927147
1942
1,0*2 -- 1905
— 1935
1951
8/ 1953 survey revised.
9/ Used drainage area beloM
10/ Swtlwent contributing ar
Uj Nljiue (-) indicates ecou
12/ Uncontrolled drainage ar
137 Including 19,000 cu. yd.
147 lMr survey -anges «re
Estimated or assuned.
— 52.11
9 46.5
53 54.50
9 2,409.8
— 749.02
12 713.24
i/232,370
9.17 2)0,906
— 1,31)
25.7 1,279
— 769
34 564
18.5 509
— 54,925
12.0 52,370
6.4 51,836
6.6 51,591
9.2 51,281
— 1,09", 380
6.6 1,080,897
8.9 1,073,164
5.1 1,064,228
10.7 771,071,717
6.0 8/1,061, 411
3.0 1,061,005
5.1 1,050,303
— 687,000
3.0 674,000
5.0 652,000
9.8 651,000
4.7 650,000
5.0 648,000
5.1 641,000
1,130,313
8.6 1,116,389
4-7 1,118,082
5.1 1,116,811
5.2 1,105,256
4.7 772|855!440
5.2 2/2,814,388
5.2 772,79O,«55
— 1,706,000
17.2 —
— 467,000
11 453,703
— 6,089,000
12.83
332,940
9.75 329,670
— 320.71
10.5 316.59
114
J8.9 95
1,646
10 1 ,018
15 311,648
15 105,618
— 4,563
30 3,920
16 3,928
13 3.737
Halee Bar Dam (8,935 sq.
«a reduced by eloeing Wh
IT (treated as negative •
>ea 2,776 aq. nd.
dredged in 1930.
established.
.238
.212
.391
.316
».7«7
•.76)
•.294
•.280
1.123
1.116
.135
.099
.089
.024
.023
.OJ3
.022
.023
-
1.533
.8c6
.857
.23
.19
-
•.810
*.8O9
'.554
•.552
.008
.007
.007
.007
mi.).
—l.r Da.
•diaent).
48.0
47.61
55
60.8
62.8
43
43
•60
•60
•60
•60
•55
•55
•55
•55
•55
•55
•55
•53
•53
•53
•53
•53
•53
•53
•53
•53
•53
•53
•53
70.27
59.9
-
•70
77.5
1.89
.87
2.38
1.00
.54
.600
1.00
.495
.127
.050
.022
.02
.979
.141
.687
.141
.027
.417
S/.479
2/.490
J.120
.120
.401
.274
.811
U/-.180
.125
1.113
.719
1.107
.635
.441
.765
I/. 26
1372.50
.191
.037
79.5 .097
•65 .020
59.4
.014
i.Oct. 3, 1936, to 1,
1,975.9
902. 1
2,851
1,324.2
739
936
463
166
29
26
1,171
4O8
523
32
500
552.9
565.6
138. «
138.5
462.0
1,471.0
936
144
1,285
830
1,278
7)3
1,170
i'339
291
63
168
28.3
135 aq. 91.
IKS
ns
SCS
SCS
SCS
TV*
75*
TVA
TVA
TVA
TVA
CE
CE
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
ODU

-------
                                   SUMMARY OF

RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE W THE UNITED STATES THROUGH  1970
DATA
SHEET RESERVOIR
NUMBER
STREAM NEAREST TO»N DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)
)
j TOTAL { NET
OHIO RIVES BASLH (PO1BT PUUSAJTr TU XAEISOM
lananfta, Big Sandy, ticking, Kentucky, Scioto, and tttaaj. River
19-6 °hl° Con*- K"** *> 73 	 Blacklick Cr**k 	 Colu*w», Ohio 	 ^ 24
jr* _, *
' ™'*- tJ- no. ,4 .to
19-Ba U*» ifclte— 	 P*« D««
~° An
^^ „
do -to
Valto »^ L
j_ j-


1 n D_1 1 ° • fH~
19 1? Bjllewiy ww nir*
llu 0'3hju*hn Sciot fi
™ •™*W1"""'
do
rtr rln
Deck Lak Pa't
*";


do
j- j
,, (V«nt L«t 3 11
™ ^"*n **" ~*
do do
d

19-17 Caldwell Lake 	 Trib of

19-19 Pine Lake 	 Tar Holl
	 do 	 	 do-

^
19-33 Kweole Run (Trib. an of Bweole
11-23 Alien Lake 	 Trib. of


•*•
do 2}
Creek 	 Waverlj, Oo^0 	 37-4 36.9

ii

„ **
"alien, y. .^, .21,
WilllaMaUju
uutotai , Sy . . 4 , .1,7


Dublin*1 Ohl
ublln, Ohio ^iSJ *rf/


ft Pioua Ohl
n ^an 'T1*, (*hio ~. } -.30

•» London, Ohio 5,.~ ,,.0
do
rJo
Ml 3° • —
un nt. Grab, Ohio ^j.^j ^4.97
rt
d
j
Stonej Creek 	 fcrerlj, Ohio 	 	 1.02 1.00
Chill 1° th Ohl
ow Creak 	 Gillaspierille, Ohio — 2.42 2. 40
	 	 do— L- - _- '
do
K» 	 Dublin, Ohto 	 13.8 13.7
Silver Creek 	 Kenton, Ohio 	 .50 .50
^ do~
""**• J 1.85 1.39
19-24 Sylwn Lake (Uf-pen 	 	 do 	 	 	 do 	 .40 .38
19-25 Hoatermn Lake 	 — Trib. of
19-36 Reynold* Pond 	 Trib. of


19-5fl Scbott Pond 	 Mb. of
do d
fed HiTer 	 Sprin«ri»ld, Ohio 	 1.50 1.53
Bar-en Creek 	 Bidwell, Ohio 	 .70 .70
^ —
nt.^Ciload, Ohiu 8. ,} i/5.50
Bi^ »(alnut Creek- Westerrille, Ohio 	 .82 82

19- TO ftaplo CTOT« Lake 	 3aB» Creek 	 Mt. Gllead, Ohio 	 3.05 3.04
	 do 	 — 	 	 do 	 	 do 	 — —
19-U Pond Lick Lake- 	 — 	 — Pond Lick Run 	 	 	 Friendship, Ohio 	 2.54 2.53

—

^° .40 .4 i
]«-«, HcBrid* -ak« 	 	 	 — Trib. of
Pnrd Run 	 	 do 	 	 - 	 .61 61
|
PERIOD
DATE OF BETWEEN
SURVEY SURVEYS
{YEARS^
Basina {Continued/
June 1939 2.fr
JM. 19'7
fc». 1939 2.8
Oct. 1935 —
Dec. 1947 12 0
Aug. 1951 4 0
Oct. 1941 lo




%7 193* 23.66
— 19344/ 9
— 19424/ «
Julj 1951 9
Jane 195O 10
IStA —
Jure 1949 2.6
June 1951 2.0
June 1954 3.0
D.,:. 194« —
July 195O 1.6
Sept. 1957 7.0
Aug. 1962 5."
July 1971 9.0
— 1937 —
Sept. 1949 12
— 1939 —
Sept. 1951 12.3
Fall 1938
Aug. 1950 11.7
Jan. 1940 —
Jan. 1950 10.5
July 1954 4.0
June 1962 3.0
— 1925 —
1938 —
Aug. 1951 13
Aug. 1951 1-8
1948
Aug. 19->1 2.8
Mov. 1938
Aug. 1951 12.7
1940
Aug. 195O 1J
1930
Oct.. 1948 18
1921
Aug. 1951 30
— 1901
S*pt. 1951 50
— 1932 —
Sept. 1949 17
— 1938
Juljr 1950 12.3
— 19 J6
July 1950 14.3
193 c
July 1950 15.3
1917 —
                                                                                        2.53
                                                                                        1.04
                                                                                         .52
                                                                                    3,734
                                                                                    3,338
                                                                                  i/3,706
                                                                                  2SP,949
                                                                                  *S5f?n*
                                                                                      128
                                                                                      122
                                                                                      113
                                                                                      1O6
                                                                                    8,892
                                                                                    3,538
                                                                                 3/16,67-*
                                                                                   15,604
                                                                                   14,538
                                                                                   14,162
                                                                                      115
                                                                                      ^4
                                                                                     594.0
                                                                                     530.2
                                                                                     511.0
                                                                                     486.7
                                                                                   1,140
                                                                                   1,111
                                                                                   1,068
                                                                                   1,027
                                                                                     965
                                                                                      88
                                                                                      85
                                                                                      74
                                                                                      71
                                                                                     134
                                                                                     123
                                                                                   3,215
                                                                                   3,010
                                                                                   2,929
                                                                                   2,867
                                                                                     384
                                                                                      7.3
                                                                                      4.8
                                                                                    774
                                                                                    744
                                                                                     28.1
                                                                                     23-9
                                                                                     48
                                                                                     39
                                                                                     25.4
                                                                                     23.1
                                                                                     Tl
                                                                                     32
                                                                                     13
*.D26
*.02i.
*.023
*.022
*.084
-.069
 .0564
 .0550
 .0529
 .0508
 .0478

'.120
 .073
 .06?
 .575
 .539
 .524
 .513
                                                                                                •.029
                                                                                                '.006
                                                                                                *.OO5
.014
.012
.02i
.019
.053
.048
.086
.083
.027
.02..
            *9.0
            1.5.9
            49-9
  52.6

  44.8

*45

 66.2

 57.4

*60

 57.1

 ^5. 5

 fl3.2

 58.8


 59.9?

 f>7.02

 34.01
                    '.394
                    1.73
           2.13

          2/.184

            .121
            .135
            .063

            .913

            .43
            .17
            .14

            .721
            .247
            .324
            .274
          2.«D
          2.48
           .95
2.73

3.53

 . iS

 .441

 .039

 .10

 .84

 .079
          in
          191
           60.5
          459
          l^O
   331

 1,137

   59S

 2,*>10
 2,144



   3C^

   29H

 2,664

 3,400

   548

   551

   51

  124

1,015

  143

  35-

  35r
                           ODW

                           ODW

                           OOW
                                                                                                                                     ODW

                                                                                                                                     3D*
ODW

ODW

ODW

COW

OOW

TOW

-------
!->
01

19-17
19-38
19-39
19- 4C
.0-42*
19-.J.
19-50
19- n
19-53
20-lb
20- 2b
20-3b
!'
T '
• *" t



~A~


4o


w"r oc"in* ™°- -


^tt



j
00
Lak

,
gu a e-



**re~
W. n,. «11 Creek Reservoir
(Wlnton Lake)
C*~ k h
ni" ^ r • • riulr
Whit t Lak

Ji»co Uk« 	
j
Lak


A t Lak
j
Hi-Idle Pork Restrvolr 	
" 1 ial Mln Lak
*~
"1" S+°i M1 1 Ir
r p t LMte-
5o H 1 to
*ui::::::::::::::::::::::
	 do 	




OI" rt ^^
d°~
~w. 1.°"


H


Without 1 't. flashboards a-lde^ In i«
Surrey lates Sept, -Nov. 1914, Sep'.
10"' rorr»c*lon for Marl* 'jfovs.
Rf*r-v- r ivirtla ^ j 1red*ed -n Mar-'-


*"-"" " eaK



	 do 	
Morgan Pork

U*lt*d* """


' ami " ak

,

7°
iia
~ k



''"rib. of :iear -reek 	

Olentangy . irer-
W Pork Mill Creek 	
°"reek

<*

Trib. of ^ittle Salt Creek
_M«
k1° " A




M. Fork or E. Pork White
Water ReaervoLr
°
"d'"
f^t ~" i, n i
-rcnk


	 do 	
Wat4u«a River 	
	 do 	
.. p
n or o a n iver


do
A
a
d
do-

0

Ar-1 34r. Oa-t on amount r


__„ 	
to° )hi
' °
d«-
J.u.»,td,.. 'hi=

-•ric*, *r, -.fi.o-




d*i'i

T°
~^
Wil i

' 1111
*rc * i1-*' h'°
KiHsboro, 3hio 	
*°
Uelai«re, vfiiv.
Cincinnati, Ohio 	
Butlervllle, Ind. 	
A°~

Jackaon, Ohio 	
QC


oo

° ' Jhio
hcUMd. Ind. 	
B«il h

D< vl j r
do
iO.JO J.?.^D
4.45 4. '9
10.9 10.7

1 . - J. 3 . 42
1.87 1.""


>a •> T>





,«.< 48.5
t>.60 6.4U
.73 .69
3«1 379
29.5 2B.6
13.4 13.11
19.29 19.0
1.67 :.•#

6.88 6.72


"•* 1O6.5
AS. 14 47.87
1.05 1.00
.009 .000
TBWE3SEE RIVER BASIN (ABOVE KALES BAR 0AM
Hampton, Tenr.. 	
	 do 	
„



do
•lo
do-


do

1 19S1 surveys ar- not

468 453
_
1,840 662

'..903 62
,





Julj 1950 1'.3
Spring 1947
July 1950 j.5
Aug. 1960 10.0
— 1937
June 1949 12
July 1952 3
— 1937 —
Aug. 1950 13
Apr. 1956
June 1961 5.0
1951 11
1960 120
— 1942 2.3
— 1949 ..0
— 19-SO 1
1956
1960 4,
1955 9
Ntr. 1951
Nej 1960 9.25
Dec. 19-2
•tey 1961 8.42
July 19 > 9.6
Sept. I
.86!
.612
.432
.79
.642
20.16
.249
.611
.609
.568
.430
.284
.520
.468
.012
.340
186
1.03»
820
22
963
940.711
"5
156
1,936
\720
2,104
923
1 .190
8/2O8
1,6»9
1,516.8
1,529
6-38
2,108
978.79
15,824
732
•>30
680
515
340
623
561
14.4
407
OOW
ow
OOW
-CS
OEM
OOW
ODw
OW
OOW
OOW
3
s:s
scs
cow
cow
COW
scs
SC5
SCS
TV*
TVA
TVA
TVA
TVA
.241 2*9
.276 331
a*_er capacity at a-i' Iway cr«9* el.vatio-1.
Til. to I,*?"7 oq mi. by closing o' katauga
r D«c. It, 19
-------
                                                                                                              Sl'MMARY Of

                                                                             RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH WTO
h-'
Ci
DATA
SHEET
NUMBER


2O-6d





iO-7c


20-8c


2O- 9b



20-lOfc

20-llc



r-v; a-(= Ila Ionnc33.c rtlvcr
do- - - - -o
^ T
"hatug* 	 	 	 Hiwaeaee Tiiver 	

Bottelj 	 Nottoly River 	
•1.
	 do 	 	 do 	
._„: 	 „..._ . 	
!^l!^^*r"-iiiiiri"-~ -- "i^ ""inniiii "„!
""- lk)
NEAREST TOWN . DRAINAGE -\REA
•SQUARE MILES)
TOTAL NbF
TEMKESSEE -tl ,"ER r^Jv rABCX'i HALES dA>: DA«i

^
	 Jc 	 - _
	 jo 	 	
10
~ H-°,~, ~ ,
j0 ' . 	
. - do -

Unolr ;ityf Tenn. 	 ^,550 1,;56


GlenvUle, N. C. 	 36. ^ ;-.,4
	 do 	



	 do 	 — 	
Fontana, N. C. 	 . , *TL ,.,426
	 do 	 —
do

	 ,0 	
f!ZŁ::l'™:-~ ~Q' --"
do
1
\.-rn, Ten- 	 <,<^. ^.«'i
_d^ 	
	 30 	


ao
	 -0 	 	 _
fiayesvi- - f .. . 	 -89 1 «
--^— 	
snr^ ;r-T-=: ^ 2^

-- --;--; 	 9- ^.r.
	 ^o 	
?arne^ >nr. 	 I.JI8 ^
	 3, 	
'T"
DATE OF
1 SURVEY

(Continued
Fall 1^1 '

(•pb. 1^33
Apr. 194"
Oct. ^^


Jily 19i.9
Kaj 15"




--•b. 19U
Sept. 1-50



toy L969
Kar. 1950

Get. 196"
Sept. Lu

s.c
0.-



c,.l

5.0
7.6

0.0
4.0
7.5
5.8
5.0
6.°
7.5

STORAGE
' CAPACITY
(ACRE -I- 1


'21 T~
- ^^-1
12,010
"•."6C
,,1,32-
;i 5r~'^?
:,49fc,"i2


400,9^=
)98,OoO


*" "'o =137
70,487


13?,159

i' Is'r-1
1 ,^,3,262
39,OjC
1.C52
1,580
.,347
1,118

2,047,527
2,036,324
1,195,229


1,17:., 954
242,0-2
241,502
240,516
3/176,521
175,865

174,429
174, i -7
2/439, "41
435,630
-.34,243
433 , ^68
57^979
^7,75,-

CAPACITY
•\VG ANN
INFLOW
RATIO
(ACRE-PT
PFR
ACRE-FT)

.011
.00^
.OCR
. JO6
Ct
. 00 7
.002
312
.308
,3Q \--> \
PER SO Ml • .rPL\IN
OFNETDR i ATA
AREA FOR
PERIOD SHOWN '
AC -FT7
0,252
.2.:k
.299
.32->
.107
.975
.lt>8
	
.83C
i/-.251
.7 US
.""CT
— .
-21 4
.181
.rili.
	
	
.ol
-i;
—
.28 i»
.7^)1
—
TONS "
_ ™
At.1-,
126
35"
11"
82
183
'•VA
^94
—
895
"47
— TVA
25c
il"?
807
TVA
—
731
160
TVA
34C
^..1
— TVA
                                                                                                                                                                         .692
                                                                                                                                                                         .6^1
                                                                                                                                                                         .690
                                                                                                                                                                         .689
                                                                                                                                                                         .705
                                                                                                                                                                         .704
                                                                                                                                                                         .702
                                                                                                                                                                         .701
                                                                                                                                                                         .699
                                                                                                                                                                         .586
                                                                                                                                                                         .534
                                                                                                                                                                         .581
*55
*55
•55
"55

*55
«55
*55
                                                                                                                                                                                 *55
                                                                                                                                                                                 »55
                                                                                                                                                                                 *55
                                                                                                                                                                                 *55
                                                                                                                                                                                 *55
.l&O
.305

.155
.667
.589

.219
.595
.472
.590

.415
.758
.415
.GS7
          .536
          .132
                                                                                                                                                                                        y-
                                                                                                                                                                                                  1,401.7
                                                                                                                                                                                                   337.6
  186
  799
  706
         TV*
  262.3
  712."
  565.4

   —     TVA
  497.1
  9O8.0
  521.0
  104. u
         TVA
 8/--
  125
  642
  213

1,124
l,-58

-------
20-2Oc
20-21d
20-22d
20-23c
20-24d
20-25
20-26
20-2?
20-28
21-1
21- 2a
21-3*
21-4
21 6
21-^a
1,
T
6/
it
±LL/

nldge-

io
H°
Ocoe. .to. 3 	
do
•°
- CO

do
do-
	 do- 	
	 do 	
do
°
C O. 1
0
J
do


^ UgQ
do
do
do


rfC
H
do
oo
do-


Oaceola Lax* 	
Melton Hill 	
Upper Ollis Creek ^e^ervoir —

,0
Senecaville 	
Varies "ill 	


riinckston nun
Juemahoning 	
'alt Lick 	 . 	
Srirt^eport (Uope") 	
	 do 	 • 	
Prior to 1925 dam was 35 ft. lower.
Original volume comouted froa prooin
ed from dam closure in 1913. Five fo
Revised.
in Mar. 1944.
Blue Ridge Reservoir closed 3ec. L ,
Hi
occoa i er

i

Ocoe. Hiver 	

J°
Co

do
do
	 do.™. 	
	 do- 	





ao-
10
Tenressee River 	
"
"°




r,°
"°

rto


Shepard Creek 	
Clinch River 	 	 	
' ^


	 do 	
Seneca Fork 	


t R
nincKDton un
Phoning Creek 	
Salt Lick Run 	
Jacobs 3reek 	


j
d°

Ducktown, T«nn. 	 496


0
0
rf
TJJ
	 do— 	
	 do 	 —






d
Chattanooga, Tenn. 	 20,790

0



^



0


	 do- 	
Clinton, Tenn. 	 3,343
1 1 T
o^ e, aim.
OHIC RIVER 3A5IH { ABOVE KJINT PLEASJU
	 do 	 —
Senecaville. C hio 	 121
	 do 	 —
Mansfield. Ohio 	 ao

. p T 1C,
° *
	 do- 	 	 92
	 do- 	 —
Ht. Pleasant, Pa. 	 18/31.64
Ł3 obtained Feb. 1933. Pediment deposits and nater inflow
•ot lash boards removed ^ept. lao,,.
• -napa.
1930. Oco-^ f> closed Aug.
15, 1942.
227 Apr. 19*4 —
— Aug. 1949 5.3
Aug. 1954 5.0
Apr. 1966 8.8
263 Aog. 1942 —
July 1945 2.9
- MOT. 19*6 1.3

— July 1953 3.0
Oct. 1955 2.1
Oct. 1958 3.0
— Oct. I960 2.0

Mar. 1968 2.6
10/96 D«*. 1911 — 1
— Oct. 1940 28.3
— 3«pt. 1949 8.9
- Aug. 1954 5.0

14/1,805 »OT. 1940 —
— July 1947 6.7
— Ifcy 1956 1.8
15/990 Oct. 1935 —
_ Oct. 1940 5.C
July 1947 6.7
— Aug. 1954 7.1
— Kay 1956 1.8
— June 1961 5.1
Dec. 1967 6.5
1.50 — 1908 —
— Oct. 1956 48
4.39 — 1923 —
Oct. 1956 33
422 July 1963
— Maj 1970
10.75 Apr. 1964
— Oct. 1970 0.5
JT AND LAKE EB1E DRAINAGE
195 Oct. 1938 —
— Feb. 1945 6.25
113 Oct. 193612/ —
— Xar. 1945 8.3
207 June 1938
- Sept. 1946 8.25
July 1954 7.75
^0.57 — 1905 —
— Sept. 1937 32
90.7 Jan. 1912 —
Sect. 1937 25.8
Sect. 1937 2'
13/31.52 Mar. 1887
Nov. 1937 50.6
— No*. 1964 27.0
12; Volume computed by average end
conditions.
137 Volume computed from contours
14/ Sediment contributing area redi
^ara, Feb. li., 1943.
15_/ Sorris Da* closed Mar. 4, 1936
contributing area to 99O »q. mi.
l^/ Determined during 1956 survey.
Conservation Service, U3DA.
ley Original data revised. 1964 s
from transit survey (1963).
*> estimated or assumed.
197,427
196,080
195,981
196,522
195,908
14,304
12,140
11,349
10,570
9,849
8,696
8,042
6,766
5,920
5,286
4,653
4,026
.1/109,200
12/91 , ?OO
11/86,737
87,267
86,809
16,466
746, 95i
734,970
745,178
740,367
738,320
153,483
152,928
152,251
152,992
153,032
154,002
154,012
16/246
190
125,900
125,578
461
649
87,700
87,424
88,500
87,667
88,000
85,886
85,483
3,453
3,315
35,295
34,413
.462
.454
.454
.455
.454
.017
.005
.091
.0056
.120
.093
.055
.045
.0429
.0428
.051
.050
.076
.674
.962
.953
•.657
•.641
«.638
2,432 -
642.0 .016
453.0 .011
338.5 .008
area method from first ar
cased on 1949 survey.
uced by closing .atts Bar
, and ^hickamau^a Dam clos
ranges established and sur


•55
•55
•55
•55
•64
•64
64
•64
•64
•64
•64
•64
•64
•64
•64
64
•64
•64
•64
•60 :
•60
•60
•60
61
•61
•61
•61
•01
43.1
45.7
•55
•62
•65
•65
•65
•65
•60
•60
65.4
curate ar
Dam on Ja
ed Jan. 1
veyed IT.

1.119 1,340.5
.881 1,055.35
V--498 —
.308 368
2/2.114 2/2,947
2.312 3,223
1.646 2,294
1.3T3 1,914
1.460 2,035
1.1B3 1,649
1.616 2,253
1.608 2,242
1.388 1,865
.753 1,050
.916 1,27*
4/-1.10 —
.974 1,358
.406 566
iy— iV—
U481 1,935
.168 220
.102 135
4/-.105 —
V--022 —
V--192 —
i/- —
.780 732
.428 426
.109 131
.172 232
.227 321
.89 1,260
1.24 1,755
.253 358
.408 533
.~fn —
.22 287
18/.L18 168
.134 191
ea— volume curves - ,
n. 1, 1942, and Apa]
c, 1940, reducing si
Dec. 1937 by Soil
tion and topography
TVA
TVA
TVA
TVA
SCS
SCS
TVA
TVA
CE
CE
CE
SCS
SCS
.achia
idijaent

-------
                                                                                                          SUMMARY OF
                                                                           RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1»70
OO
1

DATA
SHEET
NUMBER




I 1


RESERVOIR STREAM i NEAREST TOWN
i |
|





DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE

j [ TOTAL
KLES)



DATE Of
SURVEY

NET j


PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT )



CAPACITY
AVG ANN
INFLOW
(ACHE-FT
PEB



SPECIFIC
rciGHT
;DRY>
LB. PER
CU. FT)


AVG. ANN
SEDIMENT
ACCUMULATION
PER SQ. Ml,
OFNETDB
AREA FOB
PBUODSBOVN

AC.-FT. TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA


                                                                            OHIO Rr.Ef- 8ASIN (AF^VE PI INT PLEASANT) AJ»D I UE EHIE DKA1NAC2 (Continued)
-" 8
71-9
n i"
71-11









21 16


a.m.

71-19
71--V


a-?2t>


n-TO>




,! „„



21-27a

?\ ?S


?i --»o


] ^
?1



>l-''4fc

Sarbertim 	 Wolf >«<* 	 Barborton, Ohio 	 2S.2
Puckey^'aXe 	 s- ?o-* '-Ickin* Riw 	 MUl«raport, 5hio 	 1/49.2
Le«»vlllfl- 	 	 	 tGuire >e«k 	 LeesrUJe, Ohio 	 40,0
	 -,o 	 — 	 	 do 	 	 do 	



— 'to - - T ih OM Rl do I1
Onto Cons. Pond No. SI- rrib. o. hio iver-

3hlo Miia. FtmJ HO, }*. 3~ 0


"• *" T ' v fifi '" i to P 300
x>rl«y5 Lake- ri , o. oi^n.ogn ny n on ,
d°~ 10 ui * DM ->p< •;
i-ue fiocKwll y 3 ,^^
Stony Like 	 McGwire Creek-^ — > — 	 	 Perrysville, Ohio 	 11.75
~''° ° -.
Tabor Slub Lake 	 Snail br. tt.skinguM R ver- 	 do 	 . 56
	 do 	 	 do 	 	 do 	


	 do 	 	 do 	 	 do 	
LoyaJhanna 	 Lcyalhannfl Creak 	 Saltsburg, Pa, 	 29C
j
- -- jj do GO
MahoninK Creek-- 	 Ma^orinR -reek 	 Dayton, Pa. 	 340
	 do 	 	 1o 	 	 do 	
" " 'ri " f T-H Cit P5 277


^ga-t River 	 Tygsrt River 	 Grafton, -*. 7«. 	 1,184
	 do 	 • 	 	 do 	 	 do 	
~^° R " f P
Toughlo^henr H,»#r oughiogheny iver ' ,
Atwoor" Reserroir 	 Indian Fk. , Conottou "re«k Sherrodaville, Ohio 	 70
110 ^ Rl hft Irf Oh 02
Babb Pond Unnamej Icnrl* , i
° >1 17
	 do 	 	 	 	 -io 	 	 -do 	
^hrlstener pond 	 	 no 	 Parma, Ohio 	 .09
^°~ " 1 h*1
.^hufinbowlc ond o lcn.1 , hio


^ df • i k^ "h
	 do 	 	 do- 	 	 do- 	
	 do 	 	 io 	 	 do 	


28.0
45-.1
A5.7
.31










3/1 "4 1
"^
11. --2

.54
2.93


285


336
—



1,179
—

4*;8
66.2




.09

"



__

7.4S
-
__

MOV!















D«c.


S^pt.
June


June
Aug.



Oct.



Apr.



Apr.
—
pr.




July
Aug.
Dec.

1926
m
1936
1939
1915











195C
1927

1923
1938
1936
1941
1949
1942


1941
194B



1937



1940



1951
1940





1949
1955
1969
1935
1956
1961
—
12













36
ll.o

15


8.0
















7






10.2
5.9
14.2

6
5
2,056
2/19,940
37,400
37,390
9. U











6,88?
121
61
53.6
42.4

133,400
132,571
.5/95,300


6/74, 20C




289,600



49,700



3.24
3.40

1.29
2.B4


1,511
1,451
178
134
131
-.101
".083
•1.159
• .159
.042
.116





.028
.025



	
-

•iii5
•.034
.210
.209
.276


.180
.177
.307
.307

,175


.405
.994
.991
.019
.015

.016
,058
,076
,066
.027


.195
.187
.025
.OC2
.021
__
•55
»5O








•68

"60

46

•65

•65

•65
•44



43

*65
51

*fc5

•65
•65

•60

•60
•60

"60

•60

74.8
_
17.9

--

.067








.151

.135

.120
.319
.156
VI. 38
.326

.203
.358
.326


.178

.062
.277



.341
.29

-15

.281
.611

.567

.100

.442
.213
.199
.466
.078
__

73








224



120
452

1,500
462

287
343

272

167

87.0
30ft

106

483
410

196

367
798

741

131

720
—
164

                                                                                                                                                                                                   SCS
                                                                                                                                                                                                   SCS
                                                                                                                                                                                                   SCS
                                                                                                                                                                                                   SCS
                                                                                                                                                                                                   SCS
                                                                                                                                                                                                   SCS
                                                                                                                                                                                                   SCS
                                                                                                                                                                                                   ODW

-------
21-36

21-37

21-38

21-39«

21-40

21-41

21-42

21-43

21-44

21-45

21-46

21-47

21-48

21-49
                                             5. Br. Cuyahog. liver	

                                             Trill, of HehonUu Si»er-
                                                                           Alliance, Oh]
                                                                                do-
                                                                           Berlin Center, Ohi
                                             Broad fort Bun	—

                                             Trlb. of Sttidy Creek
Ml. Lake Park,

Hljwrvm, Ohio——
                                                                           Hilton, Ohio	-

                                                                           Lvica.t«r, Ohio	

                                                                           Logui, Ohio—	
                                                                           Orchard Pwk, ». I.—

                                                                           ElngKood, ».
             C«t.rrlU. Mil. Uk
                                                                           loungatow., Ohio-	
                                                                           	do	
                                                                           Salem, V. Va.	
                                                «• Fork	
                                                                           rredvrlcktoMn,  Ohio—
                                                                     —     Lwcijigton,  Ohio	
                                                                           •lellijigton,  Ohio	
                                                                           	jo	
                                                                           Logan, Ohio—
             leehiia Creek Site f2	
                                                                           FranklinriUe,  ».  T.—

21-5)

21-54
   I/  Drainage are* has been 115 sq. «1. (n«t) part of the tine in the past, when fed partly by
feeder from S. Fork Mrkerwille River.
   2/  At present spillway eleTatlon (lowed in 1908).   Pro* 1836 to 1908, spillway -levation
was 893.4, surface area 3,636 acres, and capacity 22.09O ae.-ft.  Pro-i 1832 to 1836, spillway
eleTatlon was lower and surface area was 3,13« acres.  Natural lake of 650 acres origijially.

   Ł/  Oa* failfl earlier In 1938 but little sedinnnt lost.
   S/  At elevation 7"^   rJ.«»ation top of gatea - 97* ft.
   S'  At e'.ev&tion l,lo^.  KleTatinn top of gates - 1,164  ft.
8.66
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— .
— .
— .
—
—
—
—
16.88
—
8.22
—
246
—
7.4
—
.07
—
.12
—
277.4
—
.11
—
.58
—
—
—
—
—
10.38
—
81.76
—
.29
—
—
—
— 1948
— 1949
— 1950
— 1951
— 1952
1953
- 195*
1955
— 1956
— 1957
1958
1959
1961
- 1962
1963
— 1964
— 1966
1967
1968
— 1969
1970
— 1939
1mm 191.9
- 1913
Aug. 1950
July 1943
•OT. 1951
— 1880*
July 1957
— 1931
1938
— 1930
— 1938
— 1916
— 1941
— 1946
— 1954
— 1930
— 1948
— 192H
Oct. 1951
— 1902
June 1952
— 1855
— 1949
— 1929
1949
Oct. 1954
Oct. 1956
Oct. 1958
D«c. 1960
—
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
7.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
—
9.7
—
37
—
8.4
—
76
—
7
—
8
—
25

8
—
18
—
23
—
50
—
94
—
20
—
2.0
2.0
2.2
30.66 uAaii 1949 —
—
—
19.79
—
—
—
32.05

—
6.12
—
U.17
—
2.75
—
—
b.iX
—
—
It elevati«
Aug. 1960
July 1970
"ay 1954
July 1955
July 1960
Aug. 1966
Oct. 1948
Aug. 1956
July 1962
Mar. 1956
June 1961
Feb. 1955
Aug. 1966
Aug. 1964
July 1967
Sept. 1969
Aug. 1964
Aug. 1967
i;epl. 1969
>n 920. Spilli
7
10
—
1.2
5
6
—.
a
6
—
5.6
—
11.8
—
2.91
2.16
—
3
2.12
ay cr*ot •!<
234
217
206
202
199
197
193
192
187
183
177
176
170
166
163
159
150
148
146
145
142
4,659
4,535
994
933
—
91.200
122.75
77.02
.15
.0
.11
.00
28,100
22,250
9.46
9.11
11.5
4.65
169.99
161.26
144.8
117.3
86.3
38.3
32,400
31,835
69.58
68.95
68.77
68.60
3,502
3,399
3,283
1,111
1,092
1,059
1,009
13,176
12,886
12,731
760.4
745.5
3,142
3,081
465
464.72
464.33
1,085
1,083.77
1,082.95
tvation - 9
.037
.035
.033
.032
.0)2
.031
.031
.031
.030
.029
.028
.028
.027
.026
.026
.025
.024
.024
.023
.023
.023
•.340
•.331


.551

~




	







	

.010
.004
.597
.586
.265
.262
.261
.261
.146
.142
.137
.0642
.0631
.0612
.0583
.565
.553
.546
.190
.186
.291
.285
.156
.156
.156
.159
.159
.159
	
9/55.7
9/50.6
"S/53
3/55.6
2/65.3
J/68.2
—
»
—
—
__
—
—
—
—
__
—
—
—
—
—
•40
—
66
•100
—
—
_
•65
—
65
__
•65
_
43.1
__
— .
—
to
	
•50
	
•65
—
•65

•60
—
	
_
	 .
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
*80
80
—
*«O
80
_ .
1.00 10/1
1.27 1
.45
.34
.25 1
.41
.14
.55
.47
.64
.18
.37
.42
.33
.45
.55
,22
.236
.136
.319
—
.759
—
.20
1.30 2
—
.081
__
.29
	
.08
	
.84 1
-_
.36
__
.657
. 	
.23
__
.117
_
.0493
—
.346

1.09 1
.31
.27
— .
.48
.378
__
.787
.341
.419
—
1.13
.806
—
.435
—
.363
—
.0345
.Ob65
—
.Oo5
.062
	
,03
,177
693
609
.239
926
-
—
—
—
__
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
_
—
—
661
—
287
,830
—
—
_
410
	
113.3
_
,199

377
__
—
_
300
_
127
—
69.6
—
489
—
,424.4
405.1
352.8
—
	
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
60.;
116
—
113.3
108
ODW



















ODU

DOW


SCS

ODH

COW

ODH

ODW

ODW

SCS

3CS

ODW

ODW

•rs



ODW


ODU



ODW


ODW

ODW

SCS


scs


                                                                                                              2/
                                                                                                              8/  In view of the United «jwunt of M-tLMtnt computed  in the X94S report  (384  He.-ft. ),  the vtluaa
                                                                                                           of the 1945 report &re not included And were not used In computing  eurrey  d»t*  for the  1959  reoort.
                                                                                                           It is considered that the longer period (21.5 JT.) waa necesBstry to develop * voluBe c«p«bl* of
                                                                                                           being measured with & rttaaoncble degree of Accuracj.
                                                                                                              9y  Density for antire period of record.
                                                                                                              10/  Computed from differences in totil sedlnent accuntilation in tons »t each vurvvy
                                                                                                              U/  Gate closed Pall 194?.  Drained Karch 195C.  Oate  closed Jtaj 1954.
                                                                                                              *    EstijButed or aaeurMd.

-------
                                                                                                                SUMMARY OF
                                                                               RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 19TO
to
o
DATA
SHEET
NUMBER



'PA-4
•a -58 Salem -
	 10
21-S9 Uprer ri
	 -ic

13-? ">..ronac


22-4a Auglaiz


dc

0
	 do
	 dc

	 dc
	 dc

— - dc
	 dc
22-1" •IjciT

22 1 a Bu.t i-=
22-14 Kohart
22-15 Vio <5u
	 r\(
22 lo -Jorvel
	 ic
?2-17 5ba-on
22-19 irookl;
22-20 Iron Md
22-21 Phoeni3
22-22 Sa-ine
22-21, artdge
22-?< Prankl
22-26 ' I'-e-1'
I ; j
i ' '
RESERVOIR STREAM i NEAREST TOWN DRAIN4C
' (SQUARE
i
TOTAL



ork No. 11A 	 Varr.er Hollow 	 alei, *. Va 	 .288

ockiug No. 1 	 Hunt-pr* -"Jin 	 -anca •?•,<•-, Ohio 	 1.04
^:^5^-,. :.^M
. _ . . _ aL - ------ 	 1o 	 	
^ 	 pine P.. of "tanistee liver- *ellston, wich. 	 -91

POIld do - - -ao -
e P.. Power 	 Auglaize ^Ivar 	 	 dc 	 2,329
° J°



-d '^ 3
	 	 do 	 	 do 	 —

IT "° O^ "1 "fl ""'S
^!!I_!T 	 	 lo 	 	 do-- 	
..!: 	 - — io 	 	 	 — ^ 	
. ^nat., ri , 3. j

	 	 do 	 	 do 	
-,-esk5/ 	 Sixmile :reek 	 Defiance, Ohio 	 '1.6
' , - ,f0 d ^h ?^
nn ,
Pond_ _ __ 	 L'-j.amei 	 Oro/er dill, ^hio 	 .021
e- Jake 	 tocky Ford >->sk 	 -indUv, Ohio 	 22. PO
	 	 io 	 — - 	 	 ^' 	
Lake 	 Hi', er ".aisin 	 '.'o" /ell , ''o.s'i. 	 59. 5
Hollo* 	 	 4o 	 Manchn->*. : , v:ch. 	 ^^.7
TI Mill Pond 	 	 do 	 Brooklyn, tch. 	 29.6
	 	 <*o 	 	 io 	
11 ftond 	 Iron Creek—— 	 	 -do 	 1- U
c "ond 	 Middle "iver Houge 	 ?lyrcwuth, Mich. 	 ^.-^
vill ?oid 	 Saline Ri- er- 	 Saline, Mich. 	 'I?.6
jay lake 	 Unnamed 	 Dexter, 'ich. 	 ". 5
	 	 dt, 	 	 	 -do 	
n ^11 Onnd - - - Pranklin Branch Houep - — "ranklir, "icn, 	 "" - . J
rri Vr,-- 	 Middle River 2ouge 	 — Northville, 'ich. 	 r4
	 . 	 	 io 	 	 do 	
i
!
JEST TOWN DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)
i


DATE OF
SURVEY


i
PERIOD ] STORAGE
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)


CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)


CAPACITY
AVG. ANN
INFLOU
RATIO
(ACRE-FT
PER


SPECIFIC
»EIGHT
(DRY)
;LB. PER
CO. FT.)


AVG. ANN.
SEDIMENT
ACCUMULATION
PEB SQ. MI.
OF NET DR.
AREA FOR
PERIOD SHOWN

AC.-FT. TONS

AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA


                                                                                                                                     Aug.  1962    —
—
.237
—
	
	
	
.94
—
July
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Dec.
June
Apr.
June
1967
195.*
1956
1958
1960
1962
1956
1962
4.9
—
c
2
2.1'
1.51
—
>.a
'1AbW-? RIVER BASIN
93

23 1

.024
—
2,326
	
5.20
—
1.91
—
.012
—
37.0
	
	
.035
—
2.79
—
.13
-
	
-"1.4
—
.7k
—
.019

22.72
—
—
25.3
—
25
—
6.2
—
6.4
—
5.2
—
56.8$
—
63
	
17
__
7.5
	
7.8
—
__
*ug.
	
Jan.
tfer.
Aug.

—
—
Julj
_
Aug.
AfiC.
July
—
June
July
Jan.
July
—
June
	
—
	
—
July
Sept,
July
Sept
July
Spring
Nov.
AU?.
—
Hay
—
fej

May

•fey
—
Aug.

b.pt.

Mar.
	
May
—
Mar.
—
»pr.
1844
1940
1912
1953
1945
1951
1912
1951
1912
1951
1912
1951
1947
1951
1941
1149
1951
1945
1951
1919
1949
1947
1951
1962
1912
1951
1943
1951
1943
1051
1939
1948
1951
—
1969
1927
1969
1948
1069
1945
1969
—
1969
—
1969
1937
1969
1906
1969
1927
1969
1833
1969
	
96
	
41
	
t>.k
—
39
—
39

39
—
4.3
—
g,3
2.1
— -
6.7
—
30
—
4
6
—
39
—
2.3

7.8
—
9.5
2.8
— .
10C.H
—
42
	
21
—
23
—
100
—
JOO
—
31
	
63
—
U
—
136
                                                                                                                                      Sept. 1969  100









JA30
106




./u
11


































1
1












654.13
653.89
53
52.25
52.O5
51.95
51.75
450
U6.13
,175
,605
6U>
27
9.5
9.1.
,400
,600
129
74
U8
104
2.6
2.5
991
929.1
902.4
5.03
». 71
242
218
9.2
7,0
7.4
6.3
975
696
59
57
2.4
2.3
248
205
186
717.6
502.3
258.1
143.9
249.3
1B6.3
288.9
259.5
,551
,159
225
170
240.1
129.6
a. 33
10.9
76.7
47.9
97.?
13.1
173
101
.21

IiSe
.166
.165
.165
.164
.882
.875
*2.193
•1.796
J.003
".0001
'.761
'".753
.012
.009
.050
.029
«.15t
*.109
•.417
•.401
.Oil
,049
.046
».239
«.22I
.120
.108
.133
.114
.10?
.091
.094
.066
.155
.150
.229
.219
.022
.019
.017
.026
.018
.016
.009
.016
.012
.09
.08
.224
.168
.0074
.0056
.0061
.0033
.0026
.0013
.0250
.0156
.Olj3
.0018
.067
.0039
                                                                                                                                                                                     •55

                                                                                                                                                                                     110. 4
W.5

73.4
                                                                                                                                                                                      53.2
                                                                                                                                                                                     •53
                                                                                                                                                                                      53.7

                                                                                                                                                                                      43.4
                                                                                                                                                                                      57.8
                                                                                                                                                                                     •49.3
                                                                                                                                                                                      43. f

                                                                                                                                                                                      37.2

                                                                                                                                                                                      26.1

                                                                                                                                                                                      53.6
                                                                                                                                                                                      57.9

                                                                                                                                                                                      23.3

                                                                                                                                                                                      30.1

                                                                                                                                                                                      43.4

                                                                                                                                                                                      31.5



                                                                                                                                                                                      41.8

                                                                                                                                                                                      44

                                                                                                                                                                                      38

                                                                                                                                                                                      46

                                                                                                                                                                                      50

                                                                                                                                                                                      39
                                                                                                                                                                                           i/o. 01;

                                                                                                                                                                                             1.3O7   1,706
                                                                                                                                                                                                      455
                                                                                                                                                                                                      209
        .348
        .16
        .443

2.64
.064
.92
.031
.27
.59
2.75
.34
1.71
.2fi
2.10
!969
.36
1.13
.53
.20
.31
.065
.11
.434
.20
3,162
154
902
-
347
675
4,396
232
392
2,001
277
3,270
1,460
343
924
301
233
391
43
72
457
137
        .75

        -OO97

        .057

        .01

         OQ3

        .079

        .013
      SCS

      535

      ODW

      ODH

      ODW

      03W

      ODW




      COW

      ODW

      ow



      ODW

      ODH

      ODH

      ODW


      SCS

      5CS

      SCS

      SCS

      SCS

      SCS
93

86

n

-------
to
22-27
22- 2P
22-29
22-30
22-32
22-33
22-34
24-l»
24-3b
24-4a
24-5
24-6
24-8
24-9
24-10,
24-11.
24-12

24-1 ^a
Jl-16
24-17

24-20
P4-21
24-22
34-23
11

TpcnmiHi fill Pond
Belleville Lake 	

Ford Lako
Barton Pond 	 ~ —
''ill ond
M. H. Fry Pond 	 —
U J. -*. I I,'
o urgh a o
AH
1 c JVdrion
Lake WilUa»on (Artie Pond)-
do

do

do
	 do 	
H° T^
	 to 	
Lake Decatur 	
do
Shaefer Pond 	
™
Lako pringfiold


1°
Brack on
	 do 	
	 do 	
Lock and Dara 2^ (Winfield) 	
do
do

Mt. Sterling 	
Lake Jacksonville 	
	 do 	

do
	 do 	 • 	
Lanj^don Pond 	

Franklin Ou.ine ~ub e
do

Nav-rly City 	

Vo
Roodhouse Park District Lake-
rtoodbine Co'im-y Club Lake 	
, ? "
Dale _ole c.ii
3e«ly Por>d 	 — 	

;j -is •)?n(i,'x) ac.-'t.
•" C ok
" M13 r°
Huron River 	
j
7*
zz3rzzzzzzzzz
ppor
Squaw Creek 	
do
"^
r°
reefc
MISSISSIPPI H
Trib. of Honey Creek 	
)to
do
/•
' "rc

	 do 	
'
	 ,„ 	
Sangaaon River 	
A
Trib. of Cahokia Creek 	
„
3u**r J^1*1 i r 3

"*" ^^ re

ru ro
	 do 	
Mississippi River 	
fa.
00
7°
Trib. of Shelby Creek 	
Sandy Creek 	
	 do 	

Unnamed 	
	 do- 	
	 do 	 • 	
do

0
j
do
do
	 do 	
do 	 _ 	
	 do 	
rt

ri
J°
	 rjQ 	 — 	




Belleville, Mich. 	 810
T 41 * * i« 1_ T«-.
pau.an , men. fyu
Ann Arbor, Mich. 	 708

Qnrtead, Mich. 	 12.45
th l«
if f c . 5t-J
Adrian, Mich.— 	 65
26. 3 — 1827
20.3 — 1929
— July 1969
11.2 -- 1933
183 - 1915
— July 1969

12.45 B«rly 1962

— S^rt. 1969
59 — 1942
GREAT LAKES DHAINAGi U« MICHIGAN AND *I3QONSIN)
IVEE BASIN (LOUISIANA TO CHESTER) ILLINOIS, KA5KA5KIA, AND MERAMJ
Carlinvllle, 111. — -- .53 -51 — 1922


u j T-il Ł1
"°rto
rto
	 Sa 	
T A ' '
	 do 	
Decatur, IU. 	 906
rt
Edward sville, IU. 	 .087
° _,
pring ,




	 -do- 	
Winfield, Mo. 	 1^2,000
A
Hn
do
Mt. Sterling, IU. 	 1.90
Jacksonville, in. 	 10.8
	 do 	 — 32.6
•>
-io
PVanklin, 111. 	 .358
0



Waverly, 111. 	 ^.^i.

	 do 	 —
Hoodhouse, 111. 	 .-.51
*'*)
jrocnrlcid,


Hl'lTlm '11. 	 .093




60 Dec. 1929
— tag. 1952
— July 1955
25.79 Jun. 1939
July 1954
Sept. 1959
902 Apr. 1922

.083 *>». 1937
July 1949
258 Jan. 1934
Aug. 1946
20.1 Apr. 192?
S^>t. 1947
8.85 Dec. 1923
— June 1949
— Dec. 1946
— July 1939
Hay 1945
Deo. 1947
Ifcy 1959
1.75 — 1935
— — 1951
10.1 — 1939
June 1952
32.2 — 1921
2.72 — 1900
June 1952
.348 — 1907

— July 1952
July 1952
9.16 Oct. 1938
— July 195*
July 1952
.439 — 1917
July 1952
.120 — 1926
— July 1952
.221 — 1924
July ' 952
.091 — i«S
V rrlbut-.-, .,-
6/ Ul flg
-------
                                                                                                       SUMMARY OF


                                                                         RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970
to
to


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER






RESERVOIR




1


STREAM






NEAREST TOWN










DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE


TOTAL
MILES)


NET



DATE OF
SURVEY





PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)



STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)





CAPACITY
AVG \NN

(ACHE-l-1
PER




SPECIFIC
VE1GHT
;DRYJ
LB. PER
CU. FT.)




SEDIMENT
ACCUMULATION
PER SQ MI.
OF NET DH
AREA FOR
PERIOD SHOWN

AC.-FT. TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA



                                                                                                             ,  KASKA3KIA, AMD KERAKBC RIVK8 BASINS (Continued)
24-24
24-25








24-30
2A-11







24-3^



74 JY
24-38
24-39
24-40
24-41




24-44*
24-45



24 47

24 4B



*•-"




TineyaM Pond 	
Knapp 	
•lo

do
-ah«lal, runt]


do • • •

•: B * Q 1. R. Lak«- 	
Bduarda Lake 	 —
<3o

: : . "fa

Klnmind

do

do

Pa
L^kv Buiikc ril I
L*ke Gilleipie- 	
Uke Nashville 	
Lake Staunton 	

do

""V ^°
^"* A
Parana Lak* 	
Po*»r Fan** °onds— 	 	 	
n ~° i v.
C°A^ ^^*
Pn
if"
rt

do
— *, 	
Walton lub k«
Lock and Da» 26- 	 	 — 	 	
	 * 	
do
	 do 	
	 do 	
Jnnaaed 	
	 do 	


Aw
tf


**

Trib. of Sangaacn River 	

V In Irf
Tr-b. of Kaakaskia Ivar-
^°
Loa, -rcofc:

K* ska ski* River
"Vlh f Gahoki '" elt
* ° -r«ek
!•

f?
nooa tu. or
3ry Pork 	
Nashville Cr*ek 	


~ r ky*n
JI" 'rtn """
d
°
Trib. of Indian Cr*«k 	
Trib. of Sanganon River — -
0 ^ I,
Hac.oon .rook
"° ok
-erra -ro
Trib " r " k
" j^"
°
	 dc 	

Hiasiaalppi River 	
	 -do 	 . 	
j°
	 -lo 	
	 dc- 	
Whlt«hall, 111.- 	
Springfield, 111. 	
a4


•a am.


BrwnsJl k Irw1
"^ '
TalliOa, 111. 	
	 do 	
Gillaapie., IU. 	
V A 1 < Til
anoolia, 111,




R rrlll I1!





Gillespie, 111. 	
Sashvill*. HI. 	
Staunton, 111. 	
	 do— 	
Urlinville, 111. 	
~...
*


Panam, 111. 	
Cantrall, Ul. 	
r- 4. n T-n
*" ' *
° 111
• *


*"
-L-ai — : 	
. '
Alton, 111. 	 • 	
— 	 do 	
	 do 	
J*°
	 do 	
	 do 	
0.054
3.49






-i -it
-.. ',
.85


' '










5. ^3
1.39
3.68





.85
.668
fl
48.4






"
in ,4?o
--



0.052
3.43


l
*


T
^.JV
.84
.40
,
•





.4«




5.62
1.13
3.5.





.84
.666









—
-

,_
—
Jan.









July








.
un





July




j







,
u«.
-
Jul
May
Hay
Dec.
Oct.



1937
1907




1906

1^A7

1902
1952
1949












1923
1936
1926
1954





1928
1940






1QT3
1950

193S
1945
1945
1947

1954









'

50






57






-

28












in

17

7.
1.

16. )3
15
1.58
181.8






?9
44 a
31.7
15-4
74.2












^09
320
1,243
1,140





IT?. «








116

395,000
390,200
406,200

85,231

.053
.093
*062





*"cT6

.067
.033
.351












.272
.3^6
.6^0
.575





.536
.011
.003







.260
.136

-

.0017









51. J

49.3















28.1






54.9



46.8



-W)
4A 4
_
-

—
—


"





9

.39















1.09
1 76




1.01
.36



.70

36

2.70
.73

-

.004
—










419















667


996


1,130
430

406

713.51



2,352
769.5

-

—

7WS
IWS








IWS
IWS




IWS







IWS
IWS
IWS



IWS

IWS
IWS
rws

IWS

TWS

IWS
TW*

CE

CE



-------
                                          ro»l ». 19 (Uto
                                                                       MlMlMlppl KiV
                                                                                                            KIHISSIP-I airai BA5i» (rAimoirf TO LOUISLUU)
                                                                                                           toi«. Stoat, «nd D.. fctn.j U'«r Bxliii
                                                                                                           low—	119,000
                                                                                                                                                                         479,550
to
co
25-2
25-3
25-4
25-5
25-t
25-7
25-«
25-*
25-10
25-11
25-13.
25-U
25-15
25-1°
25-17
25-U
25-19.
26-1.
2*-2
24-3
27-1
27-2
27-3
27-4
H

*•







IteCrwMr »•* •— Bvailtli
Buia



a.vll *
do



do
r1

dn
•-fltt*^" L*Jw { PoTMtvlll.,





•t t If* Mill ~
dn ^^ '


f 	 i *• =-
iri» i«i "mo
do
!i




,













— IktOAMd 	
Tl-ih t* m " 	 *-
^'^ ita ''•*


no




do
rt
Tfe 1

Ml «i lnoi to
T* *Q.T*r
do
i
r°
JUW HJ.IM
do
OPPBB
_, "
do
* "~

on
do
Ihqnok*t« River 	




^^ do

* "i". owwr Cr««k


W 1
™*
ConMnvtion Pool.
All 31 rugM MMW •oaur, partially du* to re«ov*l of bon
Splllwy r«lMd 2.89 ft. in 1946. Origin*! capacity MS
do
^_




An


Elnrtarhctlk HI
'
j
_
^rt*
••w Cant-on
'
~^

^'
do
	 HA^COfi, toW 	
7°
^U*"~» lwl*
Pkli-flolil

j
Qnthrl C«vt
JUUVl* LHILU r 1(IIM
	 KUC.UI.., Io«. 	






111
UU1DCT, *•"••
*
K»« ^1 IJ, Io>«
do
13.9
13.1

13.8
13.0
2.94 2.88
52.0
50.2
15.34 15.24
77.0 4/72.7
77.0
66.0
31.8
2.54
2.05
2.1
99,400
134,300
2.25
99,600
135,000
3,115
4/72.7
i/59.6
31.6
2.52
2.00

2.1
—

Z.13
3,076
WSSISSIPPI RIVER 8ASIH (PRAIRIE DU CHIZN TO SOCK ISLAND) A
Rock and Uapilpinicon River Basini
	 Rock laland. 111. 	 88,500
io
do
j
d
d°
	 SlraiAsrrT Pt. , Ioi« —
rto
	 Dubuqu., Iowa 	
UPPIB HISSIS3IPPI RIVER
Wlaconaln, Root, Ch
" do^*' lBC"
• .. l\. u*
A'
111 Wi
^L^**do 3C'
	 Pr»iri« du Sac, Wiac.-
MS.6 ac.-rt. All sedimentation
-


116
81,600
BASIN (ST.
ippeua , anc
60
50.75
138.6
fl,900
-


116
—
PAUL TO '1UIRIE
St. Croije River
60
50.73
138.2
6/600
4/ Excl
5/ Excl
?> Flo.
June 1939 10
Jun. 1946 8
Sapt. 1947 13.3
S.pt. 1924 —
Aiic. 1936 11.9
Julj 1947 11.0
kmr. 1926
A««. 1949 23.4
Dae. 1936
D.C. 1939 3
— 1941 2
1924 —
Klnter 1932 t
1921
1936 15
Dec. 1936
Dae. 1939 3
Dec. 1939 3
1935
ln*6 11
1918 15
1934
J«lT 1953 19

Har. 1938
*>v. 1949 11.7
Oct. 1937 —
Hov. 1950 13.1
Sept. 1937
Sapt. 1951 14.0
«mr. 1954 15.6
K«r. 1954 15.7
Sapt. 1958
Jan. 1964 5.33
Apr. 1968 4. >3
HO LAKE MICHIGAN DRAINA
Har. 1934
Au«. 1938 4.5
Nov. 1944 6.2
Dae. 1946 2.1
Hov. 1948 1.9
Nov. 1950 2.0
Nov. 1952 2.0
Jul7 1934
Feb. 1942 7.6
Fab. 1949 7.0
Apr. 1938
Feb. 1953 14.8
DU CHUN)
Baalna
— 926
Oct. 1541 15
June 1939 68
Juni. 1939 72
— 1933 19
udes 3.8 aq. mi. Kiaala
udea 5.B aq. mi. Miaala

312,216
660
452
273 -

308.2
•2,400 -
•1,664
738
552
3,000
1,845
3,080
2,556
•2,800
•2,290
1,154
1,070
43
25
207
166
135
185
172
113,370

87,740 -
896
831
70,800
78,040
69,570
492,000
485,400
4«0,110
SE
39,432

39,224
37,881
37,086
608
473

683
457 <
127
46
1,677 •
683 •
91,851 —
aippl River bottom
alppl River bottom
"
.145 —
.099 «60
-
•50
•85
"85
.148
.111 *60
•067
.041 *85
.068
.057 "85
.059 "85
.069
.064 *65
.069
.040 «70
.303
.242 '51.6
.198 51.6
.386 —
.359 «50



-.616 «*0
.

.46 40
.46 45






-
75.1
.018
.012 »70
•80
.022
.009 72.5
•90
land.
land.
1.11
.977
1.12
1.45
4.U
1.06
1.52
1.06
2.41
2.85
.24
.476
2.96
.795
.638
_
2.16
.001
.004
.402
.397
.002
.001
-.005
.009
-.001
.004
.078
.082
.014
.252
.023
.100
.717
•1,490
1,190
1,370
1,5»0
7,740
1,960
•1,990
1.960
4,460
5,280
340
726
3,327
893
695
2,823
—
350.2
443.2


-
127
134
384
40
158
1,4OO
SC&
ns
IMS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
CE
3
SCS
d
CE
CE
CE
SCS
CE
SCS
SCS
SCS
CE
                                        loss data b*Md an higher opillwy «levatie>a.
                                                                                                                                          *   Eotimated c

-------
                                                                                                                            SUMMARY OF

                                                                                         RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH  1970
CO
                            27-5

                            27-6.


                            27-7

                            27-8

                            27-»

                            27-10

                            27-11

                            27-12



                            27-13
30-1

10-2



30-4

30-5

30-6

30-7



30-9

30-10

30-11

30-12

30-13

30-14

30-15

30-16

30-17


DATA
S8EŁT
NUK3ER





RESERVOIR



1



STREAM




|


NEAREST TOWN








DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE


TOTAL
MILES)






! PERIOD
DATE OF
SURVEY


NET


STORAGE
BETWEEN! CAPACITY
SURVEYS (ACRE -FT.)
(YEARS)






CAPACITY
AVG ANN


PER



SPECIFIC
(EIGHT
DRY)
La PER
CU. FT.)



SEffflMfTtT
ACCUMULATION
PEB9Q. ML
OF NET DR.
AIEAFOR
PERIOD sacriN

AC.-FT

TONS


AG8XCY
SUPPLYING
DATA



                                                                                                  UPPSB HSSISSIPPI RIVES BASIH tST.  PAUL  TO  PRAUUE DU 3HIDI)
                                                                                                WSCOKSIJf, SOOT,  3HIPPIMA, AW) 3T. JBOII RIVER BASIN vConti™*l)
           Prt*h»it Pam Pi

           Stalpl.ttgh r*™ Pond	

           Hjfcl*1!*! Par-i Pond	

           Wold Pan. Pond	

           rB-28 Structure aaet Willow


           E-3 Itanalnk—
1.29


1.181

 .26P

 .230

 .384

 .193

 .433
                                                                                                                                                   July
                                                                                                                                                   P*b.
                                                                                                       do
                                                                                                                       Kov,
                                                                                                                       Mar.   1960
                                                                                                                       Apr.   3964
                                                                                                                       Hay   1958
                                                                                                                       Jun*   1962
S*pt. 1957
Mv   1962
Julv  1955
Majr   1962
Ao«.  1954
Jan.  1962
Oct.  1954

Jun*  1962
MBJ   1956
Mar.  1960
Apr.  1964
                                                                                                         UPPEH MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIM (X80VS  ST. PAUL)

                                                                                                     LAIS SUPERIOR WO) LATS OF THE W30DS AREA  (II W1WE30TA)

                                                                                                                 RED RIVER Cf TWE HURTH BA3IM
;»*- Bronao« 	 	
Blabon TH« 	
°!^-:±-zz-.ii--i^:
nviimar 3»* 	 • 	
do
'*'***? rik ' r°"d
Magnolia Da» 	
io
r%"jon 31dln«; 3a»
MalHrln Ballarud Fara Pond 	
do , „

Pterb, o«_ 	
I.* Item
Ralalgtl D..*
Sioux R»tlro*'l iUawfoir 	


B«ld*iUl Out ''I^ika A*ht*bul*)
HCMM Du (P»i-k River)
Lake o' '.h« Otnrka (Bapi«U
^. 7hi^Ui«. 	
n. Hi™, 	
Ott.tr Till Kiv-ir 	
Trlb. of GOOM Ri»«r 	
M. Br. Por«8t Siv.r 	
'*"* .^"r
Trlb. of Wild Sic* Hivw—
0- T* _!
	 d^ 	
Buffalo Crselt 	 	
Ruah Rlvar 	 	 	
do

d

Trlb. of Wild Sic. Riv«r—
Dog Tooth 3r««k 	
Park River 	
Trlb. of Wild Ric« Riv«r —
3h«7«nne Rlvar 	 —
S. Br. Park Rl»*r 	


Trlb. of Waal NodaWtf Rlvar
BroDaon, Minn. 	
	 4o 	
Fr*»»«, Him. 	
	 ,10 	
Blabon, N. Dale. 	
Adama, N. Dak. 	

Owinnar, N. Dak. 	





. j ti n L,
t^C' '


Havana, H. Dak. 	
Ral«lgh, M. Oak. 	
Ad&ma, N. Dak. 	


Vallay City, N. Dak. 	
Park Rivar, N. Dak. 	
"CSSOURI RIVER BA!

atantort, Iowa 	
	 do 	
439
210
1.219
20.2
3.755
.226
27.76
12,16
30.2
1.125
14.375
.181
4.45
16.855
37.0
i/4,138
229
SIN (NEBRASKA
14,000
.166
438.5
1.188
14.6
3.670
.222
27.76
11.72
30.2
1.121
14.356
.183
4.45
16.66
21.06
2/1,979
229
CITY. TO KERHj
13,900
.163
Oct.
Oct.
Aug.
Ma?
Jun*
Jun*
Maj
July
D*c.
Jan.
Jan.
Mar.
INN)
Peb.
Oct.
Juna
1*V
194C
195C
1926
1952
1935
1955
1935
19^7
1941
1955
1936
195fc
1939
1956
1908
1956
1912
1956
1942
1955
1934
1955
1934
1956
1909
1956
1911
1955
1938
H»
1958
1953
1958
1931
1948
1938
1949
3.4
4.1

4.1

6.8

4.7

6.8

7.3
                                                                                                                                                                  3.83
                                                                                                                                                                  4.08
$8
168.7
166.5
164.1
110.5
104.5*
14.27
13.29
19.O9
18.04
27.98
26.71
10.50
10,03
56.79
55.18
292.2
291.0
287.2

.474
.468
.461
.345
.327
.166
.155
.313
.296
.227
.217
.157
.150
.444
.431
.340
.338
.334
•90
—
•70
•TO
—
•65

49.5
__
•45
—
•55
--
51.86
—
•65
—
•50
•50
-
__
0,51
.43
—
1.23

.52
	
.96
_,.
.49
—
.331
—
.48
_
.11
.30
-
_-
778
656
—
1,741

560
	
1,359
—
5*7
—
374
~
6AO
—
120
330
CI
SCS


scs

scs

SC3

SCS

305

3CS

SOS


3,792
3,626
155
137.1
13O.69
107.29
150.7
139.6
38.70
33.36
12.92
10.29
22.82
19.10
157.92
127.40
43.15
35.40
16.78
14.47
66. S9
46.19
5.227
4.467
175.47
145.23
88.37
69.16
1,995.6
1,808.8
76,400
75,410
3,650
3.382
—
—
—
—
•3.354
•2.753
•-2O9
•.194
•.284
•.245
•2.494
•1.986
•.026
*.022
•.406
-.328
•.045
•.037
*.412
•.355
•.128
•.089
•1.191
•1.018
•.925
•.766
•.145
'.113
—
—
—

.204
.189
                                                                                                                                                                                                     32

                                                                                                                                                                                                    •90

                                                                                                                                                                                                    •90

.03«

.029

.98

.034

.101

.59

.0078

.052

.0058

.1579

.0676

.188

.144

.026

.2167

.0981

225
__
25.6

12.6
__
875
—
18. al
	
76.99
	
372.6
	
5.95

39.64
—
4.44
	
114.68
	
51. 93
—
184.3
	
109.8

18.88
—
151

192
—
441
SCS

scs

scs

scs

scs

scs

scs

scs

scs

scs

scs

scs

scs

scs

sea

CB

CI

                                                                                                                                                                 17.8

                                                                                                                                                                 10.9
                                                                                                                                            1,972,531
                                                                                                                                                  3/9.46
                                                                                                                                                    2.59
                                               .283
                                             -.231
                                             •.063
                                                           .464     598

                                                          3.87    4,200
                                                             a

                                                             scs

-------
BBS  8883    888838888838888    S   8    2   S    8 8 8  S S
  C 8  SRC8 8*8  5 43  8
        '    '       '   '   '
                             ' 1*1
                             1 "1
                                                                              3  n
I  Sift 5 I 3 If If 125* I 3 ISCIflfclPlflflllflJIflEIS If 1333 1333 1333 1333 1333 I S IS I d If I SiRS^S* & 2 SI
38  * 3g««8S53IS2      35x1
.• .• , | .' .•^^jSp.-.-j!.'.'.'. .,,!!,....
                                                                                  I3!
                                                              3SB^
                                                                                       --
«     O  r4 O  O"   ** H -*  *-<-l    ^  *•
'tai  3.aiJi*inss i» i Ja is i* i<
1 a i-* i
                                                      OW«^ P~*^3  N 8 "*
                                 isia iaij i"!-* i" id is i*4 '•* i"' 'J i™J>4 i
                                                                        (VNP-1
                                                                            is i
                                                                                                !*
IS8I8
    i | J  | « |^| ^ | ^ | | | ~ | * | |" | ' |  ' | •< | •< |» |  ' | ' I ' I ' |  ' . ' | ' | |  | ' I I I J I I  I ' I I I ' I !  I ' I ' I - I  ' I"' I I I I I  I I
S-3   BSSS    Ł8   S
           '   '         '
                                                              3   §    S   P3
  I a I -  I " I "' I  ' I • I 1 1 " I *' I I ™ I ' I  ' I J I "' I •*' I  ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I  I I  I ' 1 1 I rt I I  I  III  III  I  I " I   I * I 1 1 I I
                      r
                          li

                                                 I
                            i
                                     e
                                                        Mill
                                                         i
                                                                                 •
                                                                                 :a
                                                                                               ;?  .
                                                                                               3  g
                                                                                               :-  |
                                                                                             iiK
                                                                                             It I

                                                                                             111

                                                                                             58-
                                                                                             •J , "
                                                   c u
                                                                            B!

                                                                            it
                                                                                 I  I
                                                                       w
                                                                                               is
                                                                                                  h <-*
                                                                                                  • l^


         B R rt  B
                    sa   ssstsasas
                    *|*   «c
-------
                                                                                                        SUIDIARY OF
                                                                           RESERVOIR SEDDIEMTATION SURVEYS HADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970




NUMBER





RESERVOIR






STREAM






NEAREST TOWN






DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)

TOTAL ] NET



DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVG- ANN

(ACRE-FT
PER



SPECIFIC
fEIGHT
[DRY)
LB. PER
01. FT.)


AVG. ANN
sfmffxr
ACCUMULATION
PEBSQ. ML
OF NET DR.
A1EAFOB
PERIOD SBOWH

AC.-FT. | TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA


to
                                                                                   (CSSOUHI RIVER BASIH (NESHASXA HTT TC HSRWV) (Cent nu«i)
n-3t
n-3?
n-«o
n-u
n-u
n-u
n-45
n-47
n-w
31-52
31-53
31-54
31-55
n-56
n-57
31-5H
32-1
32-2
31-4
»-»

110 "~
%lrl^ rwal ^
*"
Tl WLMII ^




	 dp* 	 _ 	 	 do 	
	 "" 	 	 *
do oo
Rl«la»vlllo Old Cltj UJw 	 Trlb. of Carlo Crook 	
	 do 	 	 *- 	
.fc 	 do 	
	 d, 	 - -—do 	 	 	


J»it33nb«rwr 	 - *>-
Ljji SI1 T lb r tail**! a'»«r
do do
fa*«r 	 — Trlb. of *»»h« Slvw 	
Cosily Cr. tot^r*- (C-l)- a-u-cl^ Bnnch 	
	 dp 	 — 	 	 do
	 do— 	 — -do ^ r-o.,^111
Muarlxud i"_ . j«.


** THh 3t l_Mht r Mfc
	 to 	 — ^do 	 — — 	
RM«r 	 	 do 	
81*1 SOD
. ,_ao 	 	 — — 	 	 do 	
LfjMm — . 	 Trib. of KM Cr^k- 	
Qko Cum lU^rTOlr 	 Trii>. Bull CrMk 	
f_1_h'*? _.. ^
WBiniUoUi ruiLl oo
ltljd.mjiiul Lit OTT 1 oti
to 4o
H»1I ftMMl 	 *rib. Litti* 3u^r 	
JohtMcn Port 	 	 do 	

Pltam jomttf Hat* -»K« -r
Shvrtdui CooBtj SUt« Uk* 	 3*»llj,e Rir«r^ 	
• UtBKtoo JUMi-Tolr 	 Sicily Crttok 	
• • ^° , jj rt
B^^T^ mr^lr 	 	 ^ 	
** do * ^n
*
UfJrwiJ* K*n«
. '




do*
	 to 	
1 s """

HM^ll..*.—
	 do 	
	 do 	
aiohl^d Kan.. 	
Zt»dor&, K-m». •
ifantuttan, Kana.— 	
3*b*tS' K*n***" 	
ColtQobi*. Ko. 	
do- .-. .



Holt Etui
do
do '- •
G«n-*tt, Kan». 	
ftrk«r, fan*. 	 —
Soj*,or, to. 	
Edgorton, Kana. 	
SichBcnd, Kane.-. 	

Bluo Mound, Kana 	
	 do 	 — 	
S"OKT HILL AND I
" " ~Jy?°n'
Quinter, Kans. 	
Kanopolia, Kans 	
Boatrico, Nobr. 	

	 do 	
	 do 	

.18
18
1.17
3.78
2.728
.334
.119
.23
.125
3.20
.284
5.62'
—
.83
.16
.28
.23
1.17
.19
.77
.57
.86
.38
AVER RSPUBL
20.47
493
^,860
.52
.67S
-

.18
.18
1.16
3.75
—
2.633
.117
.22
.122
3.14
.280
5.515
.82
.16
.27
.23
1.16
.19
.69
.50
.84
.37
.93
ICAN RIVES BA:
20.26
463
3/2,560
.512
.661
.171

Oct.
fer.
*>».
"ay
Oct.
Sopt.
Apr1!
Nov.
Apr.
July
JoBO
July
Sopt.
July
Oct.
Oct.
June
Jan.
"ay
Apr.
"ay
Hay
June
Spr.
Apr.
Apr.
Aug.
July
July
Oct.
July
Pali
July
July
July
June
June
July
July
Sopt.
Sept.
Sept.
July
Peb.
July
July
SINS
Apr.
Aug.
AUJ.
July
Sept.
Hay'

1957
1939
1956
1947
1955
1946
1957
1937
1949
1951
1955
1962
1968
1924
1964
1950
1964
1949
1962
1950
1962
1937
1962
1955
1962
1949
1965
1956
1962
1967
1967
1969
1971
1936
1967
1958
1968
1957
1968
1956
19M
1936
1967
1961
1967
1960
1970
1960
1970
1955
1967
1955
1967
1936
1967
1929
1937
1937
1948
1946
1960
1936
1956
1947
1956
1937
1958
7.7
17,7
6.4
11
12.6
1.4
4.3
6.9
6.1
39.8
13.8
12.67
12.4
25.1
7.1
16.33
5.9
.25
2
1.9
31
9.75
11
12
31
6
10.2
10
12
12
31
8.0
10.8
20
8.75
21
50.86
20.86
19.05
1/3.78
2.42
1/29.13
17.7
290.48
212.01
2OB.14
202.23
186.07
171.52
520.0
304.0
32.26
25.55
7.94
6.73
6.77
6.26
tt.D
54.27
1/7.52
5.68
206
176
1A3-"
11.32
1,017.07
1,010.8
989.3
974.9
19.67
11.06
18.07
16.18
64.35
59.98
31.26
27.3
22.8
14.1
6,7
6.16
204.3
191.1
14.683
11.03
232.86
222.06
46.22
42.87
24.03
17.3
1,001
930
777
436
446, COO
436,320
33.101.
14,704
30.5
22.22
8.058
2.301
-

-

-
—
-
.103
.259
-
—
.05
.03
.39
.35
.80
.74
.47
.41
.049
.03
.08
.06
.607
.568
.061
.045
.68
.65
.25
.24
.05
.039
r

•60
86.7
62.01
•60
69
68
•68
69.4
64.7
55.94
58. ^4
56.8
47.9
46.7
56.2
75
50.7
41.6
53
58.2
•60
•60
•60
67
60
•60
•65
•60
•60
•60
66.5
•50.0
•65
•65
•65
1.88
.56
.90
.90
1.44
.73
.36
.62
.62
2.061
2.686
.«5
.07
1.27
2.13
.58
1.61
4.57
1.94
1.38
.34
1.19
1.47
1.43
.24
.47
1.88
.77
1.07
.76
.24
.438
.0681
1.77
1.400
1.566
2,457
1.057.5
1,201
1.1^6
2,178
807
543
1.038
614
2,511
3,436
1,051
73
1,294
2,609
947
1,777
4,144
2,379
2,059
444
1,555
1,921
1,869
350
614
2,457
1,090
1,398
993
313
98.6
294
2,506
1,982
2,217
SCS
s:s
SCS
AEJ.
AKS
AI3
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
AttS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
3CS
SCS
SCS
cz
SCS
SCS
SCS

-------
 a a n s 8 g B a  a g B s g s 8 s a 8 n B s e 8 8  g g s B 8 s a a  B s g s B § s
                                   .
    ' I J I - I ' I » | •> I ' I ' I ' I ' ! ' I ' I •* I " I J I ' I "' ! ' I * I H' I ' I " I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I " I  I ' I ' !  I ' I ' I ' I ' !  !
                             a"--J«^gg^Ri}ggR*gMpsirtgi|ssJiiBSsi8a3^^^"S**!'**a'^ ^
                                    efe^                                5
                                    *O                                °
                       ^                                               -
"' I | | ' | ' | ' | ' | ' : ' I - I ' I H° I - I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I I Ł1 ' I 4 IJ I ' I ' I 4 I ' I "•' I "' I '! '! ' I I ' I ' I "' ! •"' I ' I ' I
' I || ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I - I ' I - I - I ' I ' I ' ! ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I R I ' I H' I H' I H' I - I H' I ' I H' I H' I ' ! H' I ' I ' I ' I ' ! ~ I -«' I ~ I ' I
                                    s"
                                                              I !
                                                              11
       iii


                                                            iirntr i
•lil
                                 ill
                                                           i
                                                            liil   J
    jisiJlimi iijijiiiiHiiiiiiii
"p
si 5
5lI33s3al?§5SS?O3§XSs§l§?ISiS§II??l3[I^I
                                 F-27

-------
                                                                                                                          SUMMARY OF

                                                                                       RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE HI THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1770


DATA
SHEET
SVMBEP





RESERVOIR






STREAM





NEAREST TOW


i



DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)

TOTAL i NET



DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -IT.)



CAPACITY
AVa ANN

(AOU5-FT.
PER
ACBE^T)


SPECIFIC
(EIGHT
JWY)
[La PER
CU. FT.)




ACCUMULATOR
PERSQ.Mt
OF NET M.
AJtEAFt*

AC.-W. | TONS


Aoncr
SUPPLYING
DATA


                                                                                                   SWCT HILL AH) LOUE2 KSPUO.ICAI RIVSB BASIftS (Łontlnu*d)
                                                              	Trtb.  S. P. Sol
                                                                                                                                        2.32

                                                                                                                                        1.61

                                                                                                                                         .67



                                                                                                                                         .59

                                                                                                                                       16.93
Ifcr.  1954
A«J.  1970
Jar  1954
J»l7  1970
B0T.  1960
Jon.  1770

Aug.  1970
Jan.  1954
ImLj  1970
%j   1922
"•J   1966
16.4

16

 9.6

12
332.12
307.5
12.896
6.8
127.1
123.3
69.32
63.64
J9.05
24.52
2,180
1,455
3.519
3.271
.058
.030
1.088
1.053
.389
.357
.331
.276
.68
.45
	
•65
„
•70
__
•60
__
•60
—
•65
—
•70
__
0.65

.24
	
.59

.12
—
.a
—
.96
_
917
-
361

767
_
162
—
MO
—
1,463
SCS

SCS

3CS

SCS

3CS

3C3

                                                                                         UPPBE REPUBLICAN, KJ&TH PLATT1, aiVtt BA3IM3 (FT. LABAKIE TO NORTH  PUTTS)
                                                                                                  AM)  SOUTH FUTTK BITD BASH (3UBLETTB TO •BRTK PLATTI)
to
oo

n~3 u
J3-3*. H«
3V4« n
33-5« Gi
n-6 n
3V7 B*
33-fc a«
1>9 D«
33-10 ?>
1V11 *
1V12 3t
n-i3 P'
*3-U Be
U..L1.LOTI _.tu. HII
My 1
UUOULJ 11 IHM


irrr Strwite L*k* ((todloln* Ktdleln* <
CrMk Du)
*


f. CLatt* Bli

d
GwriM5 I«br
"So
-_^ 11 Kb


.MMhfin *«««rvotr— 	 Trib. of &*publla*n ftlivr- B»rtl«yf N«br.-— - —
ill* tin 3«ixrTOljr-- --•
n j
'* rtB *"rTO
Tiavl
••J1 J ^
-1
iioh*lt Stock Pond 	
mbmba P jd
"* ^* <5r
° P
^ ana
PMMI
*rto^*V
n_ j
•rOU'^_ftlnd
•*l*tow-Pfcrtc«r H-l H'I
oli^i 1 Stock Pociid 	
do
	 Trlb. of 1




do
	 	 	 Uhnwd—
Trib ^B**'
* * **
Trib 3«
ITl ,^3«PH
B
r "do°*
*_*!. I
Trlb. Joni
toad— Willow Cr.
	 3«l«wlek
J«W Cr«k-
i«prtlle&n B]
EftBt Curtis C


w Crw* 	
" **k
P* r

r r«
	 Itobmv, »*r. 	
, M ^ L 11 ! 	


	 	 Jo 	 _
* dfl1*'
— — AtMDod, tan.. — — -
No t° b.
j— * *
Atwoed JUn
.' °'
it G«njon Cr««k — HcDoiuld, Rani.-' —


Draw 	
c,, « ,
"** ° ' J°10'
	 Lodg.pola. Krtr... 	






	 .500 .497 -
	 3.*A 3.09 Apr.
— 1.59 1.57 —


	 — — Jan.

— 1.41 1.4 «OT.

^f'
UC1-.
— .83 .82 HOT.

Una
— 1.5 1.5
Dor
19)7
1939
1952
19*9
1951
1962
1956
1946
1956
1936
1956
1949
1953
1958
1950
1957
1948
1970
1958
1970
1948
1970
1958
197O
1963
1967
1952
1967
5.6
12.9
2.16
11.17
16
10.4
X
4
4.9
7
21.8
11.6
21.8
11.7
4
464
15.64
8.83
92,817
90,920
88,663
9.71
4.89
419.5
381.6
106.2
56.0
11.00
10.10
9.12
22.12
20.69
18.19
9.74
72.48
63.17
20.96
13.82
111.25
1O2.01
387
337.4
27.68
23.88

.229
.129
1.691
1.656
1.615
-
—
_

.968
.541
.683
.596
.329
.215
10.053
9.274
•1.92
•1.67
1.20
1.O4
•65 .66 934
57.3 .206 257
71. A 1.34 2,084
70.3 .3! 475
•TO ,6O2 918
•70 1.18 1,800
•70 1.58 2,4O9
• ii
75.6 .392 645
80.4 .28 490
•70 .28 422
•60 .24 320
•70 .07 105
•70 .96 1,467
— 1.6 —
•75 .17 277
SC3
BE
SCS
SCS
SCS
us
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
                                                                                 MOUTH PLATTE RI?EB BA3UI (ABOTE FT. LAHAKIE) SOUTH PLATTBH RIVEK BA3IK  (ASOVS SUBUTTZ)
                          34-1

                          34-2
                                      L*tc« ChtMMJV
                                                                    South Platts R.  auid Gooso
                                                                      or last P«rlr Cr.
                                                                                                       , Colo.	   1,766
166.9
—
386
—
~
675
—
—
„.
—
	
—
—
—
—
—
,460
—
i/Aug.
tor.
June
Jan.
Feb.
Jan.
Ju.
Jan.
ab.
»b.
an.
an.
ulj
Ju.i«
D«o.
Oct.
1890
1933
1936
1918
1939
1127
H31
1933
1935
1937
1939
1941
1944
1947
1957
1966
1900
—
43
—
2.25
1.00
—
3.83
2.00
2.00
2.10
2.00
2.00
3.00
3.50
9.92
9.40
—
3,834
3,126
9,802
9,710
9,424
73,810
67,840
65,050
62,940
60,930
58,430
56,600
53,180
49,150
44,800
4/45,228
79,064
                                                  7". 5

                                                  75.6
                                                                                                                                                                                                 60.7
                                                                                                                                                                                                 54
                                                                                                                                                                                                          .106
                                                                                                                                                                                                          .741
                                                                                                                                                                                                          .26
                                                                                                                                                                                                          .20
                                                                                                                                                                                                          .18
                                                                                                                                                                                                          .23
                                                                                                                                                                                                          .17
                                                                                                                                                                                                          .21
                                                                                                                                                                                                          .21
                                                                                                                                                                                                          .103
                                                                    17!
                                                                  1,220
                                                                    243
                                                                    107
                                                              SCS

                                                              SCS
                                                                                                                                                                      77,958

-------
    ** | I  I  I  I  ||  I  |  H M   | I H  5
                                                  2
 p;i<«
"I'll
 M
                                                                     r
                                                          ill
                                                                  H
                                                                  i
                                                                                   f

                          tf
«l i u inn
                                                            Will
        I  I §11 II  II  II  II M II  II  I  I  II I I 1^ I  I  I  II  I I  I  I  I  I   E  ly.1 I,-I  iplpl ..iSl 8
         s    f  s  ii   K  'st  g  s  g a s  h   * u b a   Sfi«s'SE59  :: s 3 * '- » s
             V<  ff-  Ul   O  -O  O  •  F ^ •*  ui     -4O4   PHvi^BOiH


        i  icii ii  ii  ii  M ii ii  ii  i  i  ii nip)  i  i  ii  i i  i  i  i  i   3  i-i i~i  i pi pi.oi 2i S
                                                                   '" '• it w • » a
                                                                  *" ?' «' •»' Sl Bl ?' F1 P '
 I'l?
 lii
ul>
k s
     at sc is
                         l Zf\ Kj.|^-l „! f,| ffl f,t,p\ r
                         ~K He tk i  a  fcs etc s
                                                      - -
                                                            .I
                                                                      I I I ..I I ..I I Mj-l
                                                                        it*  'y'n
      11 li li iisi li i iii a i
                     H

      . I. I. I. '. I.  '.
                             \* MM M
             a  a  a  a   a  B  a  B a  a  B   a
                                            i  wi  C  -*                 to M
                                            11^i^151   ii5i3iJiai3iiiaiSi

                                   B 8  B B B B 9 B 8    B B B B B  B B • •

-------
                                                                                                                    SUMMARY OF


                                                                                 RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH  1970


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER





RESERVOIR






STREAM






NEAREST TOWN






DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)

TOTAL j NET



DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVG- ANN.

(ACRE-FT
PER
ALHfc-KIl


SPECIFIC
tEIGHT
PRYJ
LB. PER
CU. FT.)


AVG ANN
SEfflUFNT
ACCUMULATION
PER SQ. HI.
OF NET DR.
AREA FOB
PERIOD SHOWN

AC.-FT. TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA


T
w
o
35-25



35-26



35-27



35-28



35-29



35-30.



35-31



35-32



•>5-33



35-34



35-35



35-36



35-37.



3^3«



35-39



35-40



35-41



35-42



35-43



35-44



35-45b
                                fcller Fan* Pond-
                                                                       KLSSOUHI RIVER BASIN (A3CV-: 3LAIR  TO NEBRASKA JIT:) PLATTE  RIVER BASIN I.EZLOW  UQPTH ]




                                                               Trio, of Dead Horse Creek-    Loup City,  Nebr.	




                                                               Trib. of Oak Cr*«k	    Farwell,  Nebr.	
                                Cook Hea*rroir-



                                Ingweraon Heserroir No. 1
                               Trib. of Papillion  Creek—    Arlington, ^hr.	




                               Turkey Creek—.	Louisville, Nebr.	
O'Brifn Rasermlr-




O'icill 1
                                                               Trib. of L. NoKha River—    Dunbar,  Nebr.	•	—




                                                               South Cedar Creek	Manley,  Nebr.	
                               Trib. of L. Mewaha River—    Syracuse, Nebr.	




                               Russell Creek	Unadilla, Nebr.	
L.79

.354

.26

.1RO

.383

.209

.073

. '31

.779

.257

.15*

.412

.130

.326

.100

.086

.113

.09°

.074

.29R

.177













-3'S












.3?3


Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
	
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
	
—
	
—
—
—
—
—
	
—
—
—
—
—
	
	
	
—
—
—
—
	
	
—
	
J«ly
Oct.
Sept.
Oct.
Jan.
Oe=.
Feb.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
Mar.
Aug.
Oct.
Sept.
Oct.
Jan.
Dec.
Feb.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
Aug.
June
July
Oct.
Sept.
1948
1953
1949
1953
1949
1953
1952
1957
1934
1957
1952
1957
1952
1957
1954
1957
1916
1957
1946
195?
1949
1957
1937
19C7
1936
19^7
1949
1957
1954
195^
1939
19=7
1934
1957
1936
19C7
1948
1957
1949
195?
1954
195b
1957
1958
I960
19L.C
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
I960
1969
19^4
19C6
1957
195S
1Q6C
I
1969
1954
1956
1957
—
5
—
u
—
u
—
5
—
23
	
5
—
5
—
3
	
21
—
11
—
8
—
20
—
21
—
a
—
3
	
18
—
23
—
21
—
9
—
8
—
2.33
.92
l.CP
1.33
.92
1/1.00
.92
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.17
—
2.1?
.92
1.08
1.33
.92
1/1- *
.92
l.CC
1.00
1.00
.58
2.75
—
2.33
.92
15.6
13.9
15.40
14.39
30.74
28.03
11.78
9.93
29.4
21.1
12. 1'
10.19
.^2
.19
18.73
17.01
61.5
11.2
12.8
4.33
14.48
10.92
22.09
7.28
35.69
23.98
35.76
32.35
3.18
2.96
5.04
1.40
2.30
1.60
7.63
4.38
8.12
6.71
12.7
4. U
43.9
42.0
40.?
39.6
38.9
36.5
36.0
34.7
i/35.54
34.45
?1.97
32.81
30.88
31.37
55.3
52.6
51.8
50.3
47.6
47.1
45.1
43.5
44.6
42.7
36.5
39.89
40.069
76.2
73.8
69.1
•.163
-.145
*.811
•-757
•2.135
•1.947
—
—
—
—
—
—
	
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
_
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
	
—
•1.109
•1.061
•1.015
•1.000
•.982
*.922
*.909
«.876
•.897
•.870
*.807
.828
.780
.792
•.684
•.651
•.641
•.623
*.589
•.583
*.558
•.538
*.552
•.528
".452
.494
.50
—
—
—
	
"65
—
"65
_
•65
—
•65
—
•65
	
•65
	
•65
	
•65
—
•65
—
"65
	
•65
	
•65

•65
—
•65
—
•65
—
•65
—
•65
—
•65
—
•65
	
•65
—
73.4
73.4
72.3
58.7
60.3
2/60.3
69.5
2/60.3
2/60.3
2/60.3
2/60.3
2/60.3
1/75.5
—
72.6
69.5
59.2
67.2
55.3
2/55.3
62.1
51.8
51.8
51.8
51.8 I
V71.64"
—
53.9
66.1
	
.20
—
.71
—
2.62
—
2.01
—
.921
	
1.89
	
1.43
—
1,71
—
2.90
—
2.93
__
2.72
—
1.77
—
4.29
—
1.27
—
.725
—
2.31
—
.272
—
1.55
	
2. 04
	
3.57
—
4.63
11.40
3.11
2.99
14.50
2.99
7.85
i/-4.66
6.20
13.99
4/-6.22
10.91
V-2.372
—
3.31
2.55
3.64
5.52
1.55
5.11
4.73
4/-2.8S
4.92
16.91
I/-1 5 . 704
V--298
	
3.28
15.50
	
263
—
1,005
—
3,709
	
2,646
	
1,304
	
2,676
	
2,O24
—
2,421
—
4,233
	
4,148
	
3,851
—
2,506

6,073
—
1,798
	
1,026
—
3,270
—
385
—
2,194
	
2,888
	
5,054
—
7,400
18,200
4,900
3,800
19,000
3,940
11.8PO
—
tt,140
18,370
—
U.328
—
—
5,200
3,900
4,700
8,100
1,900
6,150
6,400
—
5,550
19,OftO
—
—
—
3,900
22,300
SCS

S^S

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS













SCS












JGS



-------
CO
35-50

35-51

35-52

35-53

35-54
                                     Oak-Mlildle Creak *>terAed
                                       51t« 67-»
                                     Split Bock-
                         36-3


                         36-4

                         36-5

                         34-6
                         36-8
                   '  Ditch Old
              Dealltlnj; Baain
                                     Ifcstere Unoer Reservoir-
   I/  Adjusted to correct oreviouo ye
   2/  Based on Decker I960 sample.
   i/  fond dry when surYeyed.
   4/  *Sjnua (-} indicates scour or conpaction,  (treated aa negative  sediment).
   5/  Weight datemined by ^nim proop.

•fc


do


Trlb f Ifcl C ofc
' **"
!*-
do
	 do 	

rto
rto
(to
	 do 	
~o
rto


rto
rto
d
°
rto




.
Plmtt
°
rto
rtn


A
rt
Horth Platte 	
R
Trib. of Big Sioux RiT-r—
"""rto


Faraera1 Ditch 	
Trib. of Clay Creek 	
	 *> 	
Unnamed 	



rto
zn2=zzrjzz:^i-
j
rt

rtn
rror.

0
^
'°
1
0


— do 	
	 do 	
A
rt
H
rl
'7°


,o
-°
^°
,o
H°
10
d°
rf
-°
	 *, 	
°
°
-d
^ °K
vozad, «br.
rt
j°
°
°
7°
^°
Dwight, Nebr. 	 —
IVER BASIN (NIOBRARA TC ABOVE
a ta, ow:l
0
0
Bronson, Iowa 	
Mayfisl-i, S. Dak. 	
Volin, S. Dak. 	
Hapleton, Iowa 	
0

^°
H
~.~t-~--~-~~:
1°
H
°~


	
— — Dec.
— ''eb .

— — Jan.
.063 .O6C Oct.
— — No».
— — Sept.


— — Jan.
— — Jan,




.819 .''96 Oct.

- Sept.
— — Dec.
— — Feb.
— — Jan.

— Jan.
— — "eb.


— - Sept.
.49 .49
1.13 1.13 —
— Oct.
.89 .89 Jan.
— — Dec.
BLAIH) JAKES ASD BIG SICUX HI
41.3 41.1 July
_ Jin*
.593 .572 Dec.

— — Feb.
22.9 21.4 Apr.
. 408 . 4^ July
2.46 2.45 July
.178 .169 Dec.



.196 .186 Mar.
- - July
— — July
.075 .069 Har.


6/ Includes upstream
1960
1960
1962
1963
1964
1965
1969
1955
1956
1957
1958
1960
1960
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
196'
1968
1969
19<5
1956
1957
1958
1960
1960
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1969
1939
1964
1948
1964
1940
1964
1940
1964
1958
1964
VE» BA
1938
194°
1=>40
1949
1950
1913
1941
1945
1947
1953
1951
1953
1949
1950
1951
1952
1952
1949
1950
1<=51
1952
1949
1950
1951
1952
struct
1.33
.92
1A.OO
.92
1.00
1.00
4.11
1.08
.83
1.00
1.33
.92
1.17
.92
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.0
1.0
i.ce
1.00
.9'
l.CC
1.33
.92
1.17
.92
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.08
25
16
24
24
GINS
10.9
8.3
2.4
5.?
6
2
.79
.87
.73
.60
1.37
1.01
1.31
1.42
.98
1.30
ures.
67.8 _
06.9 —
c.4.9 —
(.4.1 —
cl.b —
63. 59
59.88
57.58
19.4 •
18.6 •]
17.7 •
17.6 •
17.1 "
16.3 •
16.1 •
15.4 *1
— —
14.7 •]
13." *
14.361
13.793
13.751
103
100
?7.4
97.2
94.6
93.2
90.8
88.7
_
86.0
80.5
73.867
ZA.°i
.72 -
16.18
13.06 -
5.97
4.99
15.7
12.7 -
175.7
59.8
61.9
55.2
2/55.2
58.0
57.8
65.44
i/65.44
.470 —
.409 77.2
.341 57.8
.333 72.8
.295 44.5
.235 56.5
.220 2/56.5
.167 60.3
56.0
.114 54.3
.038 54.3
.088 54.3
.045 5A.3
.042 5/69.5
.595 —
.578 64.4
.563 64.4
.562 64.8
.547 55.6
.539 55.7
.525 2/55.7
.513 59.4
51,1
.497 49.9
.46-5 49.9
.423 5/66.29
—
104
—
70
—
95
—
95
—
3.90
1.98
6.69
2.60
8.42
4/-6.19
11.49
1.71
—
13.30
17.9O
1.50
5.83
15.30
2.67
12.17
0
11.43
17.32
V-7.767
9.467
.65
	
4.17
3.98
.40
2.39
1.93
2.61
4.21
4/-2.02
5.46
6.86
1.055
—
.05
	
.21
—
.08
—
.11
—
5
2
8
3
10

1


22
22
2
5
18
3
16

13
20

U
30

6
5

2
2
3
5

5
7
13









,100
,700
,000
,120
,640
—
,048
112
—
.400
,500
.400
,600
.900
.300
,000
0
.500
.500

,196
,756
—
,000
,600
600
,900
,300
,200
,400

,900
,500
,419
-~
113
__
320
—
166
—
228
—
  899.0
  692.1
   78.G
   70.7
   69.1
   67.7
8/674

  275
    4.09
    '.37
   25.19
   20.10
   37.95
 5/38.20
   35.25
   34.10
   34.80
   38.1
   37.8
   34.4
   34.4
    8.45
    8.45
    7.88
 314
 242
 394
 347
 335
 326
 178

 073
 157
.129
.160
.128
 949
 955
 881
 870
 870
 866
 859
 782
 782
 497
 497
 464
 464
                                                                                                                                                                                                        46.9      1.54
                                                                                                                                                                                                       •57.8      1.82
                                                                                                                                                                                                        57.8       .98
                                                                                                                                                                               •77.7
                                                                                                                                                                               •77.7
                                                                                                                                                                                77.7

                                                                                                                                                                               •76.1
                                                                                                                                                                               •76.1
                                                                                                                                                                                76.1

                                                                                                                                                                               •72.7
                                                                                                                                                                               •72.7
                                                                                                                                                                                72.7
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 20.1
                                                                                                                                                                                                                  1.67
                                                                                                                                                                                                                  1.25
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 17.96
                                                                                                                                                                                                                  8.41
                                                                                                                                                                                                                  0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                              —     SCS
                                                                                                                                                                                                                           8,064
                                                                                                                                                                                                  1,580
                                                                                                                                                                                                  2,300
                                                                                                                                                                                                  1,240
                                                                                                                                                                                                  7,300

                                                                                                                                                                                                    411

                                                                                                                                                                                                  1.2A6
34,015
 6,211
 2,070
29,768
13,319
     0
                                                                                                                                   2/  Water  3Lcoly pool capacity.  Reservoir  capacity  is  greater at  spillway crest  elevation.
                                                                                                                                   8/  Conservation pool capacity.  Flood  pool capacity is 1,952 ac.-ft.
                                                                                                                                   9/  Increase  in capacity in 1950 was due to settlement  of dam.
                                                                                                                                   *   Estimated or assumed.
           scs

           scs
           scs



           scs
           scs
           scs
           scs
                                                                                                                                                                                                                              —     scs

-------
                                                                                                SUMMARY OF

                                                                   RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS HADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970

DATA
SHEET
NUMBER




RLSERVOIR





STREAM





NEAREST TOWN





DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)


TOTAL ! NET


DATE OF
SURVEY



PERIOD
BETVEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)


STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)


CAPACITY
AVG- ANN.
BIFU)*
(ACB&fT
pa
Aawn
SPECIFIC
•EIGHT
DBV)
La PER
=U. FT.)

. — ^ —
AVG.ANM.
ACaMULATDN
PSBSQ. MU
OF NET ML
AkEA POt
PESiaU iftirt*
AC.-FT. | TOWS

AO0CT
SOPPLYBW
DATA


CO
to
                                                                   RIT1S BASH (EOOOUfiA TO ABOVE BLAIfi) JAMES AH) BIG SIOUX SITO BASIMS (C




















_,_1 -
36-16











, —

37-lm


37-3






37-7

37-9

do .
(to *-
*
" .
,
™
*h*r*wil'rt !_.t ID do
7li*^tHild L4t-«n«I . 00
™ *
J da
(tir-tjJi da

Bartlott T9*Ktt*m
»* 1 Ci-wh
Liki HltclMll * *

rtn
1°_ C™^
Sola [fe»
^ 5 tt (V«^
3COlt »0. - 00 i
?° r?
LUn S*.*llllon *n»LJLiloo
it TiHh f Vm-^n 1
•(•lllljri ••l-rshod BO. . u * on
d° **
sr~™~ *r "



0 . rs ^^ *
°°
*^ " «^-
"*" "*
Elklns Stock Pond »o. 1 	 Br. of Pro*an»i Cr^k 	
** 7°
ClilnB Stock Pond Pk>. 2 co
L*nd Otill»«tion Project Trtb. of S*d Ri„«r 	
Ho. 226-1.
f° Pm< Ti^h ^r in
Ho. 226-2.
•_! B D
Ho. 226-4.
°^ Prr. TiHh «M *^
Ho. 226-«.
Land Otlli»atlon Project Trib. of Bad Ri.T«r 	
No. 226-13.
Ho. 226-21.
Land OtlllMtion Projact Trlb. o' Bad Rl»er 	
•o. ^26-22.
• -M^J


do 250
do
do

ore


do



^^
do ' " ^^


F 11 S Dak 1 «
*


ftwit S Dak LO2
1 r^*** " " WJ--7
^^
' " *







° S Dak 8^
do *
MISSOURI RITES BASIN (ABOVE PIERRE
Nlobrara and White Hirer B*
Hay**, S. Dak. 	 .58
0
rto . })
Pi«rr«, 3. Dak. 	 .203


J 110

^_ T

	 do 	 .166

	 tlo 	 . 514
	 do 	



234



089
.«r#
















'

*
16 27




73 *

TO MKBRARA
3i/ia
.57


.197






.163

.511






Ma











x»l7













Mar"


)
*y


Mu-.






Oct.
Jul)

MOV.
.I'llT




19W
19^














1936







•1897
1963





1907


1936






1936
1945

1936
1945



*









































8.7

8.7




















7.*6







5,183






18.61


16.7






9.1
8.3

9.2
8.3




















.909







2.234
2.198




6.84



~






_

—



••*
•6.7 9
























26

•65


51.8










_

—




7 65






"

















.87

.26
1.785

.378
.16


.822

.458

.539

.285
.521
1.389
.200



•

























492

368
2,527

426
144









—

—
•fcj


S3
















9CS







nret

sea


scs

3C3
SCS

acs
3C3

SCS

9CS

SCS
SCS

3CS

-------
BBBfiB   98898888888



I   II  II  II  II  II  II II  II  M  M  I l§IRl§ I* IS
                                                 R 8 S   1   8  C



                                                  igishgsgiggm
                                                                             SSS85
I   I   I    I   I   I   I  ~ I   I   I    I   till!





I  II  II  II  II  II  M  II  M  II   II  I If If If If IS
                                                  3  8  SSS R3 3

                                                  I 'I '\J~ 'I-- I  'UJJJJ I I
                                                  IR IR i RPS :
                                                                                 §S
                                                                N CM N (V vfl  (V c% •OO   OOOOO  OOOOO  OOOOO

                                                  I » I R I •s-ij I '*' I S I "'^'-J-'- | -rt--!- | Jrt-jJ^ | P.
   i li  II  !* !«' !J ii Is  II  II Ijrs'w'iissll |.

                             Ł   Ł  k « ^ Sg ^   E S  *  S
                                      M  I ~ I 2 I  3 t   I  I  I I I rf ! I g I  I I I I I  Mill  I I I I
3  SJ
   S   P
                S   S  S  3  C   R

               I   I   I
                            I   I   I  131  l~ I S I S.   I  I  M I" M8 I  Mill  Mill  M I I  IS I
  |U
       I  I
         !H
                i  i
                   I  !   I I  I I   I   |    I  a

                  f    I  l|   i j  ij  m
                  II  11  11  h    I  li nil}
*«
                                                     !l
          g i
                                                              * I I I I

                                                             ajiM
                                                              i\a\ i
                                                             «
                                                           I  5  -
                                                          INI
tlti'iliti
it

                      '.  4 °. * °. «
                      I  i? if i
                                    T
      «t3t*Mi f «.t * i ^ 11 f'
      ^ -^ T1  1 -d  I* •*!
      t Is I? ! MS  le sill
   1 3  1 J ~ 1' S i
                             t   t
                   2oSE55'33p          j,5-i       CJ     I
                   --HsH^^flpK          t'ac       fee     ^

              s3j*f;3^!l-3o'!ld'sj*iM     "'It    *  *i^     *
              3  a 2 ISji ^J |sJ o=!j!|sj. \s i s |" K 1 M     "i*il  illl li'ii'ir*


              -liSllJljIiiJiiJliJlilSlllilil     JinsiiiiiiJiiliiiir
                                                                         MlS

                                                                                     * f K
                                       fc R R
                                         F-33

-------
                                                                                              SUMMARY OF

                                                           RESERVOIR SEDMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER






RESERVOIR







STREAM







NEAREST TOWN













DRAINAGE AREA DATE OF
(SQUARE


TOTAL
MILES) ! SURVEY
!

i
NET I


PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)



STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)


1

CAPACITY
AVG.ANN.
INFIOI
RATIO
(ACRE-FT
PER

ACRE-FT)


iPEdFIC
(EIGHT
(DRY)
LB. PER
CU. FT)



AVG. ANN.
SEDBfiVT
ACCUMULATION
PEBSQ. m-
OF NET DR.
ARIA FOB
P. >K)D SBOWN

"AC~.-FT. | TOMS


AcncY
SUPPLYING
DATA



 I
CO
39-1

39-2.

39-3

39-1

39-5

39-4

39-7

39-8
40-1

40-2
41-1

41-2.

41-3
                                                                            MISSOURI  HIVES BASIN (HOBHIDGE TC ABOVE prERRE)
                                                                           h«r«nn* and  Bella Fourche Siver Basins (Continued)
 42-2

 12-3

S*v Dtyta-HDod .UwnTolr— -
Pr«d«rick Stock Dv* 	
	 do 	

KanMaeh Rasa-Tolr 	
-itt


""do
Col* Ra^ervoii 	 • 	


Battle Creak Detention Dta

lellou Haiei
*>
	 *> 	
	 *J 	


ind^rvon RtMi-volr 	 	

IjuVV
Ifclstoo 	

°
TO

do


^^rtn "do
	 	 -do 	 Mew Undarwod, 3. Dak.
MISSOURI RIVER
Horwu, Grand, Ctnnonb*!:
LjUBC(^"eQil n do' --- - -
Hiddanmod Cn* 	 S«lby. S. D«Jt. 	
.40,. , . . .... 	 -i-5

 161.8
                    803
                    724
                    471
                     75
                    338
            _     SCS
           183
            —     SCS
            33
            —     SCS
           166
                                                                                                                                                                                          —     SCS
                                                                                                                                                                              1.74     1,478
                                                                                                                                                                              1.21     1,553
                                                                                                                                                                              2.08     1,288
           .188

           .403
           28*. 7

            614

-------
                                                                                                       UPPKt TELLOUSTGKE RIVES BaSIH
CO
Ol
 43-lb


 43-2



 43-3


 43-4





 43-5





 43-6



 43-7




 44-U


 44-2

 44-3

44-4

44-5

44-6

44-7

44-»

44-9

44-10
                              Buf'alo Blll-
                             E«d  Spires-
Lake Boonerllle
                             Lake Fort Sent*	
                             Luke Bailey-
                             Charleston Lake-
                             Slji Mile Creek Mo. 2—
                             Sli Mile Creek Ho.
                             	do	
                             	do	
                             Sli Mile Creek Ho.
                    i'  Conservation pool capacity.  Reservoir has greater  capacity at  !
                    2/  Includes 0.03 ac.-ft. above crest deposits.
                    I/  1937-1955-39,097 eq. lai.; 1956-1961-34,692 eq.  mi.
                    lj  Suspended - lend inflow was 608 ae.-ft.;  supsended  -  load  outflc
                 p-rtod.   Deposits too small to Measure by range  surrey.
v*

Trlb. of rme«rudle CI-M*





Orahaa Draw — 	 	

do


dn
.


	 do 	
Rock Uaterhale Cr*»* 	
do






Trlb. of Petit J«*n CrMk-
Jaek and Jones Cr-sekn 	


Wiito Hirer-- •-

Poorche La Pave Hirer 	

Arkansas River Trlb. 	


3ha C 0ek
.
do
do




Trlb. of Hurricane Creek —
do
do





fin






°


j

-oa

aa

Morland, **y. 	
~_
*
u_

AUUUiSAS RIVER BA3I1 (VAN
•on**/, vx.

Booaerllle, Ark. 	
Hoantainburg. Ark.—

r **H» ™*
Brmn rfa



Horfork, Ark.-- 	
Paris, Apk. 	
Charleston, Ark. 	

*

rf-
rf
	 do 	

Peter Fender, Ark. 	

~°



.942

27.4
.81


.38


5.24
7,700


.918

27.4
.81

.38

5.20
7,670
BUSf.ll TO LITTLE BOCI) VH:
4.16 4.11

2.60
65
15.2
4,610
680
1,806
10.90
1.03
5.38
1.90
4.16

2.57
64
15
4,606
652
1,772
10.66
.93
5.26
1.81

3.91




Oct. 1954
Oct. 1955
Oct. 1958
Oct. 1961
Oct. 1954
Oct. 1958
Hov. I960
June 1949
Nov. 1949
Hay 1952
Oct. 1955
Oct. 1957
Oct. 1960
July 1948
•or. 1949
Hay 1952
Oct. 1955
Oct. 1957
Oct. 1960
Oct. 1954
Oct. 1955
Oct. 1958
Oct. 1961
Oct. 1951
Aug. 1964
tTE HITCB BaSM
June 1935
HOT. 1935
Hov. 1946
Mar. 1929
«ov. 1935
Peb. 1936
Apr. 1940
S«pt. 1937
May 1940
Mar. 1913
Aug. 1935
May 1942
Apr. 1950
June 1943
May 1950
May 1938
Dec. 1953
Apr. 1937
Dec. 1953
Oct. 1954
July 1961
Oct. 1954
July 1961
Dec. 1954
July 1961
Dec. 1954
July 1961
July 1955
July 1961
July 1955
July 1961
31.7
17.0
1
3
3
4
2
.42
2.54
3.42
2.00
3.00
1.25
2.54
3.42
2.00
3.00
1
3
3
12.8
0.4
11.0
6.75
4.2
2.7
22.4
7.9
1.9 i
15.5
16.66
6.67
6.67
6.63
6.63
6.00
6.00
455,838
439,851
421,333
99.2
98.1
96.0
93.2
90.2
87.7
83.3
12.30
11.73
11. ca
10.83
10.61
10.58
3.13
2.94
2.54
2.62
2.59
2.47
193.4
191.3
176.1
154.5
819,132
802,004
494
490
481
289
282
•13,810
13,727
629
602
43,980
23,714
336,000
i/336,000
1,560,500
A, 560, 500
2,206
2,141
325
264
6/1,613.93
6/1,608.15
1/221.96
7/215.77
6/989.25
i/983.27
2/75.92
2/70.64
                                                                                                                                                         .492
                                                                                                                                                         .474
                                                                                                                                                         .455
                                                                                                                                                        3.906
                                                                                                                                                        3.862
                                                                                                                                                        3.780
                                                                                                                                                        3.669
                                                                                                                                                        1.797
                                                                                                                                                        1.747
                                                                                                                                                        1.659
                                                                                                                                                        4.241
                                                                                                                                                        4.045
                                                                                                                                                        3.797
                                                                                                                                                        3.734
                                                                                                                                                        3.659
                                                                                                                                                        3.648
                                                                                                                                                        3.817
                                                                                                                                                        3.585
                                                                                                                                                        3.098
                                                                                                                                                        3.195
                                                                                                                                                        3.159
                                                                                                                                                        3.012
                                                                                                                                                        1.098
                                                                                                                                                        1.086
                                                                                                                                                        1.000
                                                                                                                                                         .877
                                                                                                                                                         .625
                                                                                                                                                         .612
.130
.127
                                                                                                                                                         .532
                                                                                                                                                         .532
                                                                                                                                                        1.138
                                                                                                                                                        1.138
                                                                                                                                                        «.298
                                                                                                                                                        •.290
                                                                                                                                                        •.455
                                                                                                                                                        *.370
                                                                                                                                                         .469
                                                                                                                                                         .467
                                                                                                                                                         .090
                                                                                                                                                         .087
                                                                                                                                                         .708
                                                                                                                                                         .703
                                                                                                                                                         .183
                                                                                                                                                         .177
                                                                                                                                                         .372
                                                                                                                                                         .369
                                                                                                                                                         .029
                                                                                                                                                         .027
                     .34
                     .62

                    1.2
                     .8
                    1.0

                     .02
                     .08

                    1.68
                     .35
                     .06
                     .14
                     .01

                     .39
                     .42
                    0
                     .05
                     .11

                     .40
                     .98
                    1.38
2.43
 .20

 .455

 .31

 .66

 .196
                                                                                                                                                                                                 -    V-
                     .39

                    3.94

                  6/.17

                  I/. 21*

                  6/.S3

                  I/. 51

                  6/.26

                  2/.23
                                                                                                                                                                                                                     307
SCS

CK

cz

SCS

SCS

SCS
                                                                      ipillway crest  elevation.


                                                                      pw was 200 ac.-ft.  during
                                                                                                $j  Sediaent  inflow volune  was computed  to be  2,350 ac.-ft.; Much of this probably settled out
                                                                                              over  a  large  area  in  deposits  too thin  to be Measured accurately by echo  sounders.
                                                                                                6/  Both sedinent  and  flood pools.
                                                                                                2/  Sediment  pool  only.
                                                                                                *    Estljiated or assivsed.

-------
                                                                                                      SUMMARY OF
                                                                       RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE ffl THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970
hrj
oo


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER








i
RESERVOIR STREAM











NEAREST TOWN DRAINAGE AREA


i
(SQUARE

TOTAL
MILES)

NET



DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVG ANN
INFLOW
(ACRE-FT
PEB



SPECIFIC
*EIGHT
(DRY)
LB. PER
CU. FT.)


AVG. \NN
SEDIMENT
ACCUMULATION
PEBSQ ML
OF NET DH.
AREA FOB
PERIOD SHOWN

AC.-FT | TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYOK
DATA


                                                                         ARKANSAS RIV5K BASIN (vAN BURQI IT, LITT.S ROCK) WHITE RIVER BA3TN (
44-r<
45-1
45-2
45-3
4"i-4b
45-S
45-6
45-P
45-9
4S-1C
45-11
45-12
4^13
4S-15
45-r7
45-18
45-19
45-20
45-a
45-22
45-23
45-24
45-25
45-26
Dardanelle Reservoir 	
	 do 	





f

.-do

,1o
Like McAl eater 	
	 3°






	 do- 	
Pretty Water Lake 	
Greenleif Lake 	
do
Kirk Lake
Lowell 	
Neosho County State Lake
(Lake McKinley).

^" — -

do

State Fish Hatchery Lake 	
	 do 	

do
WutAiktt Lake-
- lo
Wetumka "ity Lake 	
	 do 	
3 e voy 	 — 	
Arkansas River 	
	 do 	 . 	

Trib. of Illino e er

-10,,
Wilson -rente
Ei
	 do 	
hi " air
Paa.eab.Lc urcofc
do
Bull Creex 	
n° •
	 do 	


'P
	 do 	
	 do 	
Fourche Maline Creek 	
	 do 	

Big Greenleaf Creek— 	

nnamc
Sprg. 3. * Shoal Creek 	
Smll Trib. of Neosho River
Dog Creek 	 • 	
. -
par a rcc
Pr^ C
. r/ui-3 ice
A

Trib. of Pryor Creek 	
" C° 5 Ine '"-
~oon r. o p ing

Salt Creek 	 . 	
	 do- 	
N. Caney River 	 	 	
Big Caney River 	
Dardanelle, Ark. 	 1/1
	 do 	
	 do—- 	
ARKANSAS RIVER
Grand, Verdigris, at

do


	 do 	


0
	 do 	
0 ° ~





Wilburton, Okla. 	
	 do 	
	 do 	
Sapulpa, Okla. 	
Muakogee, Okla. 	

	 do 	
Baxter Spring?, Kana.-
Parsons, Kans. 	
	 do 	
Claremire, Okla. 	
ins Okl









Wetumka, Okla. 	
Sedan, Kans. 	
Cedar Vale, Kans. 	
	 do 	
3,703

BASIN (TULSA
4.06
2.35
8.72
20.9
30.7
40.1
21.2

2.3
19.8
fi.95
2.43
81. -5
2.41
2,210.0
3.38
56. 4A
400.0
.28
1.21
3.07
16.27
4.15
-33
.16
11,333
4.07
TO VAN BU
dian Ri»*r
3.92
2.30
S.57
19.9

28.2
39.2
18.9
2.2
4.29
19.7
8.30
2.40
79.84
2.36
2,208.6
3.24
55-70
397.2
.27
1.20
3.04
15.72
3.88
.33
.16
Oct. 1964
Oct. 1965
Apr. 1968
Oct. 1954
May 1964
Oct. 19"0
REX)
Basins
July 1937
Aug. 1947
Oct. 1930
June 1940
1913
Dec. 1935
Hay' 1943
July 1952
Apr. 1963
1919
Sept. 1941
1928
Apr. 1950
Aug. 193737
Mar. 1957
1937
Sept. 1947
1936
Apr. 1950
1933
July 1947
June 1931
Apr. 1950
Mar. 1936
Dec. 1946
Mar. 1937
Mov. 1941
1R97
Sept. 1939
Mar. 1905
Aug. 1939
July 1927
Aug. 1939
May 1931
Oct. 1939
Apr. 1924
July 1935
1923
1934
1939
1931
1939
uly 1925
pr. 1945
eb. 1954
an. 1931
eb. 1954
Mar. 1953
Sept. 1960
Jan. 1938
Sept. 1960
1.08
2.^
9.58
6.42
10.1
9. "5
22.5
11.0
9.2
10.75
22
22
12.3
9.2
10
14
14
n.e
10.75
4.7
42
34.4
12.1
8.4
11
16
5
8
19.6
8.0
23.2
'.5
22.7
4oO,3OO
,52,hOO
443,500
1,304.03
1,275.62
1, 253.26
1,260
1,249
522
517
1,094
911
4,995
4,660
4,525
18,397
17,509
10,355
9,896
3722,600
24,468
i/23,816
23,429
2/22,327
580
574
2,341
2,158
6/570
511
9,844
9,030
344
322
13,005
12,828
111
69
10,4O4
7,580
680
651
4,258
3,909
31,686
30,509
28
26.5
34.0
32.9
123
U1.9
2/4,961
4,489
4,357
2,076
1,898
20.9
20.2
22.8
a. 2
2/.0532
2/.0532
1/.0540
.446
.436
.429
-
.640
.597
.580

-

-
__
-
-
1.02ft
.930
.903
1.341
1.226
"
*80
80
68.8
76.1
54.2
94.72
94.72
-
48.10
•60
»60
51.17
-
55
60
C.o26
.321
.73
.86
.278
.23
.949
.732
1.83
.63
1.43
.532
2.8
2.7
.29
3.05
.21
.85
.47
.43
.04
.74
.749
.269
.35
.18
.46
1.51
8/1.05
1.98
.44
1,090
560
1,093
1,425
2,160
743
5.776
5,339
-
450
52.3
967
574
•x
SCS
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs

-------
T1
co
-q
45-28.1
45-29
45-30
45-31
45-32
45-33
45-34
45-35
45-37
45-38
45-39
45-40
45-41
45-42
45-43
45-44
45-45
45-46
45-47
45-48
45-49
45-50
45-51
45-52
45-53
45-54
45-55
46-lb

F









p ...


**trto


Double CreeJc Sit* No. 5






(1 "" r
T t° Ink
"iVOIido
_ _ , T>v



Hound Valley Experimental Sta.


0 -*«.

0
*r


„ p°
ono










Cane Creek Site No. 11 	
Big Wewoka Site No. 17 	



.
-" * *^












,
raddle -*noy HlTer
" Ri
mn ' r
do
rfn


^^


^
C* *


7°
anadlan
Trib. Neoaho River 	
Trib. of Pumpkin Creek 	
Trib. Verdigris River 	
K
Trib. o o
„
*

7°
Trib Duck C ok
* r°
rtn
d
ri
rtn

7°




Cans Creek 	
Big Wewoka 	


°
,







Dunlap. Sans. 	
3od*Ij Ifiin
^K^» ^U11*
llnrtfl Kan
UI' do°n' ^U1I>"
p
.odarvalo, Kana.
u i w ni.i
Ao^*~

Hamona, utL*.
~°
irk
ron.



** "*rto* *^*-
t Ban
Toronto, rn.
Wiitefield, Okla. 	

do °n*
Hound Valley. Kana. 	
Edna
_^do 	
^Lr"*t' '*QD-
K«n
d * *

™°


La Fontaine, Eana.
°°
do
Lonirto Kan
Lonffton, nano.
Burlln.rto Ka
ington, no.
^°^
HoldcmoJ.!!), Ukla.
Olomilgee. Okla. 	
Wowoka, Okla. 	
ARKANSAS RIVER
Middle Canadian, Lower
° dQPI^* ^t^°"
A

2.25
.25
.194
15.9
.2
.345
.49
732
2.39

7.65
10.16
123
730
47,522
.19
.42
.22
.23
.20
.38
1.75
.13
.23
.41
.25
2.26
8.96
2.16
BASIK (GARDEN
Cljaarron, and
1,735



2.25
.25
.192
15.3
.2
.345
.49
712
2.36

7.58
10.06
117
714
13,693
.18
.42
.22
.23
.19
.37
1.73
.13
.23
.40
.25
2.20
8.89
2.11
cm TO HJLS,
Salt Fork Ri'
1,485


Sapt. I960
Jan. 1951
Aug. 1960
Sapt. 1936
Sapt. 1960
Jan. 1939
J«l7 1957
Dae. 1936
Apr. 1954
1920
S«pt. 1960
Jan. 1938
Jul7 1957
Jan. 1943
Sapt. 1960
Fab. 1950
Jtna 1958
Feb. 1955
Apr. 1964
Sapt. 1969
Hal-. 1943
Oet. 1961
Sapt. 1936
Sapt. 1965
Bar. 1950
Dae. 1959
Mar. I960
*7 1966
Fab. 1964
June 1969
Oct. 1939
Aug. 1967
Jnna 1954
June 1968
•OY. 1953
June 1968
Dae. 1956
June 1968
Aug. 1967
Aug. 1967
— 1933
Jul7 1967
Jul7 1937
J«l7 1967
June 1937
Jul7 1967
Oct. 1948
Aug. 1967
— 1939
Aug. 1967
June 1960
Aug. 1969
HOY. 1965
Sapt. 1969
Har. 1963
Sept. 1968
O
rer Basins
Jan. 1943
June 1949
June 1958
TW 1 Q60
26
9.5
24
18.5
18.3
40
19.5
17.7
8.4
9.2
5.5
18.58
28.9
9.8
6.21
1.33
28
14
14.6
11.8
33
40
34
30
30
19
28
9.1
3.85
5.53
6.42
9,0
48.5
484
477.8
10.66
9.26
10.59
8.56
6,491
5,935
23.9
21.6
54.97
44.12
81.46
77.94
295,130
292,565
747.36
734.29
730.53
361.44
325.78
771.0
604.7
59,650
57,270
195,300
192,060
3,848,000
3,798,400
4.74
3.54
6.90
4.77
5.01
3.92
12.0
11.1
24.41
20.1
15.37
8.72
53.04
29.69
3.8
3.0
5.3
4.5
16.38
15.0
8.09
4.17
690.3
679.0
2,983.6
2,954.7
691.3
680.7
107,340
106,150
101,750
L


-


•1.591
•1.455
-


1.109
1.099
.83
.81
.81
.059
.053
.316
.248
1.447
1.389
.559
.550
.89
.88
.07
.05
.032
.022
.044
.034
.10
.093
.33
.27
.110
.062
.080
.045
.080
.062
.062
.052
.n
.098
.09
.045
.95
.94
.96
.95
1.36
1.34
1.27
1.26
1.21
1 .fA
SO
55
60
•60
70
57
60
44.2
54.3
54.3

•60
77.23
50.4
62.2
•60
•60
•60
•60
•60
•60
•60
•60
•60
•60
•60
62
55
60
57.8
67.0
ft1;.-*
.45
.29
.23
J/.60
1.99
.28
1.61
.41
.429
.60
.29
.25
.57
2.08
.731
.68
.24
.36
.32
.35
.68
.46
.40
.23
.13
.18
.56
.56
.85
.91
.125
.329
.ttil
490
347
300
J/S10.2
2,236
427
1.9W.8
536
413
710
343

745
3,499
802
921
314
470
418
457
888
601
522
300
170
235
731
762
1,018
1,189
157
498
74
SCS
aa
aa
03
scs
scs
scs
a
scs
scs
scs
a
a
a
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
ex
                           I/  22,241  sq. ni. is  probably noneontrlbuting.
                           2/  Based on  inflow  from net sediment contributing area.
                           2/  Original  topo-rraphic survey.
                           i/  Prom "A"  reconnaissance investigation, Shawnee Lake, by Victor H. Jones, Geologist, SGS.
                           %/  Present ac.-ft.  as  showi by the two surveys.
6/  Lake drained and dam raiaed 1937.  Original capacity at 1938 crest.
I/  Dam raised 11 feet Mar. 1946; all values based on prevent elevation.
8/  Dan broke Apr. 1945; rebuilt Mar. 1946; this period not included.
2/  Includes 0.03 ac.-ft. above crest deposits.
*   Estimated or assumed.

-------
                                                                                                        SUMMARY OF
                                                                         RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE W THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 197C
CO



DATA
SHEET
NUMBER




RESERVOIR



STREAM






NEAREST TOWN





DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)

TOTAL | NET



DATE OF
SURVEY

	


PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVG ANN
BATO
(ACRE-FT
PER
ACRE-FT)


SPECIFIC
(EIGHT
(DRY)
T.B. PER
CU. FT)


AVG. ANN
SEDMENT
ACCUMULATION
PEBSQ ML
OF NET DR-
AMA FOR
PERIOD SHOWN

AC.-FT.

TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA


                                                                                                     [  BASDJ  {OAHDEN CITY TC TULSjO
                                                                                                     •ron, and 5»lt Fork River Basira Continued)
,^.








46-7
fc*-8
46- 9
46-10
46-11
46-12*









46-1
46-17














46-25
46-26
46-?7
46-28
46-29
46-30
46-n


'Veat Salt Plain* 	 3*it PV. oT Arkansas rllvsr
	 do 	 	 do 	

^° at

]u- *°
(Lake L»rrmb»»).
I*°~ „ , i-d« "rrih
	 do. 	 , 	 	 do 	 —
Suita F« 	 Indiana!* Cr**k 	
Outhrie- 	 . 	 Trib. of Cc-ttonwood Cr*«fc-
«!„.. «x* F«d 	 	 lioi.JUr.Cr~ 	
H*rrlB Stock hand 	 	 	 	 do 	
Lak.Eldor.do 	 - - ^tchel Cr«k
Lake Pry«r- 	 — — tolf Cr**k 	
dC- , ~ , M,

_ . ,io do

do oo
*o. 2.
^°~ 	 r _k.

' 1 d° UmaMxl
" C3 1 - " ^r-
LongUm- 	 	 *> 	 	 	 	 —


^° \ • -.™a.
ci rj «lty Lake-- • -ow ""**
°~ „ ...

^° Trtb f So Ganadi R,
0, r . ^iott . ondn Tri _ . r ^. m/mui
IM? P Trfh f Rrlrl nt*
rcr« Hill Pond rrt -^ r unag
^ SI Cr**k
Nichlaua- Trib. Jl^uji 1 e«U
110 T-lh SI " ak
e^__ " do_
Koulouris 	 Trib. Sand Creek 	 	 	
trtj.— 	 . 	 Trib. Bluff :r*ek 	
5«ith - Case 	 "rib. Little Ark. River 	
Uorkmri 	 Trib. Medicine Lodi?e River
^n^ 	 	 	 	 1^0 	
Barrett - - 	 «1H >•* 	
' 1°~ °~'
XUlei (MI r r
Jet, Okla. 	


1 if
d
MH.) r
'


Au«urta, Uno. -
Gwthrle, Okla.——- 	
^"T"- <«--— -
dT
Eldor.*-, fan,.- -

fir1
n fio * *


" . -_

st m in
d* r" *'


^Imrron, Kan».




Andal T
nruii ^,




r
'
Wellin^to K
	 do 	
Newton, Kana. 	

Little BiY«r, Kans. 	
Medicine Lodge, Karn.-
Anthony , Kans. 	


3,200









13.30
.31

35.1
108




, _



3.36

.55














.24
.24
.56
.59
.30
.34
.67
1 20

3,156






1.84


12.95
.31

34.3
108








3.36

.54
.63







.526





.24
.23
.56
.59
.30
.34
1.20

Juno
Doc.
Apr.






Oct.

Oct.
Oct.
Apr.
Apr.






Sfipt.



S-pt.



June





July




Aug.
Oct.
Sept.
3«pi.
Dec.
June
Aug.
Mar.
June
Aug.
Spring
July
Aug.
July
1941
1949






1929
194O
1937
1920
1935
1939
1940
1940
1928
1937
1939
1947

1953
1959
1966

I960


1942
1956
1935
1955

1955

1955
1949

1941

1943

19.32
1967
1958
1967
1948
1968
196S
1958
1936
1968
1955
1968
1956
1968
19S7
196B
1959
1968
8.5
11.4






H.2
8.6
14.5
1.0
2.5
9
7.4

5.83
6.42
6.92

11.40



14
20

13

17.9



14

11.8

35

9
19.92
33.92

32.17
13.42
12.1?
	
9
.i 08 ,000
292,000
2,fll2
2,641

33

819
365
295
1,595
3,064
2,608
3.74
3.43
12.37
3,213
3,082
A44
717


385,900


2,945.06

Si/56
20.44
9.62
50.28
2/8.50

4,371
3,986
14.87
8.97
?6.3
30.7
13.38
6.43
46.14
5/13.6
4.O9
3.38
9.64
6.95
5.76
66. 89
62.29
10,0
1.79
25.26
20.29
26.73
21.91
39.92
32.24
6.08
2.87
1.067
1.011






	
—
—

—


.316

2.10
2.CT7
2.06
1.391
1.283


	
—

	
	
1.311
1.196
	
	
.085
.067
.147
071
.15
.04
-It
.13
.158
.24
1.86
1.73
.18
.03
.87
.70
.81
.66
.59
.47
.0^8
.013
48. b
58.9
*60

69.47

•60

98.52
58.1
•60
•65
•65
66
"
	 .
TO. 9
50.2
5^.1

95.66
	
•60

94.89
85.7

72. O*7
	
83.5
	
103.4
—
fc5.4
—
—
	 .
TO
	
-(SO
"60
'6C
•60
*60
•60
*60
•60
—
"60
0.586

1.93

2.68

.459

3.40
.45
2.42
1.0
.495
.426
.16

.30?

.063
	
1.92
	
2.61
—
2/.2P
.0*7
	
.32
	
1.33
—
yi.o
—
.2'
—
1.12
—
.22
—
.57
.58
1.00
.84
.44
1.23
1.1S
1.01
—
.30
62O

2.522

4,055

600

7,296
569
3,162
1,416
701
612
_
	
4,6^4
65.3
76.4
	
4.0O0.27
	
3,410.75
—
i/578.68
134
—
•^12
—
2,419
—
V2,?52

313
—
—
—
335
—
745
75«
1,307
1,098
575
1,607
1.542
1,320
—
392
OS
sns

scs

scs

scs



scs



ZK



sea

scs

scs


scs

scs

scs

scs

scs

xs

xs




scs
scs



-------
to
CO
46-33

46-34

46-35

46-36

46-37

46-38

46-39

46-40

46-41

46-42

46-43

46-44

46-45

46-46

46-47

46-48

46-49

46-50

46-51

46-52

46-53

46-54

He^B^ 	
Pond
0*1-^*^ FW.J


~°
lebcrt




do
rt
D«Tl °

Trtt

bcboo Pond



0
Harbor
„ ?°
or~'
" n_ i
u*lth rona




.
^^*^


den 	
^


CO.
Conchas Reservoir 	
rt^

do
A
°
oo
n
ttoocrroir »o. ~
do
''^ *" Ui
Reservoir No. 11 	
Eleservoir Ho. 1? 	 — 	

Kcucrvoir o. 1J

noacrvoir "o. 14

e _,
-BlU
Trib. Kedicine Lodge Hiver
Ti-ib Pn B.1
Trll*. IXtnOO HiTBr
Trib. „et Walnut Cre«* 	
Trib. BU Sandy- 	


do
rt
H«^kti* Ci-Mlr
..Q* ^reak

*"Q*eL

"

rtn
Trib. Ark. River 	


Trib. Buffalo Creek — 	 	
*_«v * Bj
. awnoo


Trih SLat C ok
F0
rto

3trinjj Ci-««k
^^*i r»«*
Trib. Little Sandj Creek—
,,, Jw ^ ,, 	 t
r "il* -^frroj
m rf ' «rt:
TIIL. lurr ur
Canadian and Conchas 	
do


7°
rt
	 do 	 . 	
, ° ,
^
j
°
	 do 	
— do 	
0
A

°


•
Hadlcine Lodge, K&na.-
Jet«i Kan
• ^ma'
Dighton, Eana. 	
rt * '


d
~°
H
fianlEnd, tana.
Kal *ta Kan
* r v
- °
1

rt
Little Siv«r, Sans. 	
Ba «1 Kan
^l*fcj*p*
THohtn° Kan
nffi . i ,

dT' n '
fiuah Cimt Kan
T™ * ' aaft3-


Con S™H S«
'd ** *B;'' ^
*" San
™~* mna"
— ^> 	
^°
J j J"13"

ohlond, tana.
AHKAN3AS RIVEE
U^per Ciaarron ai
Conches Da*, X. Hex.—
~°

d
T°

j


^°
0
	 do 	
	 do 	
J°
'°
0
0
Liberal, Kans 	

1.73
3.0
3.e
.23
1.07
7.57
1.98
2.40
1.83
1.20
1.01*
.57
2.1
.30
1.63
.56
.31
2.17
.95
.82
2.13
BASIS tLAHAE Tn
Id Upper "jnafHA
7,409




-
_
.36

1.71
3.0
2.2
.23
.90
4.75
1.97
2.37
1.82
1.20
1.07
.57
2.1
.30
1.61
.56
.31
2.0
.93
.52
2.17
GA1DEN
n Blysr '
6,976


-
-

-
.36
Sept.
Feb.
Aug.
Har.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Jan.
June
*W
June
Oct.
June
»>r
Julj
Jan.
Sept.
Dec.
Aug.
July
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
June
June
Aug.
Aug.
Dec.
Aug.
Oct.
«ug.
Aug.
Aug.
June
Julj
No-r.
July
Juni
July
JulJ
3ITY'
BasljiB
Maj
June
Oct.
Feb.
Oct.
Oct.
-

Mar.
1963
1%1
1968
1952
1967
1940
1967
1952
1966
1961
1966
1962
1966
1947
1966
1951
1967
1952
1967
1956
1967
1949
1968
1962
1968
1946
1967
1951
1967
1958
1967
1949
1967
1956
1967
1951
1966
1956
1966
1952
1966
1954
1966
1939
1940
1942
1942
1944
1949
1963
1970
1912
1946
1912
1946
1912
1946
1912
1946
1912
1946
1912
1946
1962
1QA*
18.12
7.5
15.5
27
14.5
5.2
3.7
19.2
16.75
14.75
11.13
19
6.2
21
15.75
8.8
18
11
15.1
7.75
14.5
12
1.4
2,1
ll?
4.3
14.7
6.92
34
34
34
34
34
34

                       47-2

                       47-3

                       47-4

                       47-5

                       47-6

                       i.7-7

                       47-S
   I/  Excludes 4,642 sq. mi. of watershed not contributed to runoff, 1,735 »q. nd. above Port Supply Dam,
and 25 sq. mi, surface area of Canton Reservoir,
   2/  Includes 2.33 ae.-ft. above crest deposits.
   JJ/  Water supply pool capacity.  Reservoir has greater capacity at spillway crest elevation.
   4/  Includes 0.39 ac.-ft. abov* crest deposits.
   5/  Spillway eroded 2 ft.
   o/  Capacity based on surface area x 1/3 deepest fill.
                                                                                                                                        If  During the period 1^12-46,  a  total  of 2,435-ac.-ft.  capacity was added by reservoir enlargement.
                                                                                                                                        8/  During the period 1912-4r>,  a  total  of 126-ac.-ft.  capacity was added by reservoir enlargaMnt.
                                                                                                                                        2/  Dorijig the period 1912-46,  a  total  of 6?2-ac.-ft.  capacity was added by reservoir enlargement.
                                                                                                                                        10/  During  the  period  1912-46, a total of 490-ac.-ft.  capacity was added by reservoir enlargement.
                                                                                                                                        ll/  During  the  o«riod  1912-46, a total of 264-ac.-ft.  capacity was added by reservoir enlargenent.
                                                                                                                                        *    Estia-ateri or  assumed.

-------
                                                                                                                    SUMMARY OF

                                                                                RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE W THE UNITED STATES THROUGH WTO


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER


	 — 	 1 	 ' ]

RESERVOIR



STREAM




NEAREST TOWN


DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)
TOTAL
NET
, 	 1

DATE OF
SURVEY



PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVa ANN.
INFLOW
RATIO
(ACBE^T.
PER
ACRE-FT)


SPECIFIC
(EIGHT
(DRY)
LB. PER
CU. FT.)


AVG. ANN
jxuimm
ACCUMULATHN
potso. m.
OFNCTDB.
AREA FOB
PQUODSBOW

AC.-FT TONS


AGncv
SUPPLfWG
DATA


^
o
47-9

47-10

47-11

47-12

47-13

47-14
                     4S-2

                     48-3

                     48-4

                     48-5

                     4S-6


                     48-7

                     48-8

                     48-9
                     49- la


                     49-21


                     49-3

                     40-4

                     49-5

                     40-6
                                                                                                    ARKANSAS  RIVER BAS1X (LAKAR TO GARDEN J1TT)
"regory 	 -
L*h«y 	 — 	
Hart shorn 	 	


A/wrine
ik;

John H>rt In R*aerroir
'ror-wrly Caddoa Rea. ProJ.).
	 Ł 	
--do

• - . do
-Ju
Qrowi Reservoir Ho. 1 	 	
Moddy Greek 	



3-1 3i« Sandy Creek iVqterflhed




— 4 	 __

— do 	
— 1o

Jenkins Pond 	 	 	
'xj-don :"unt,ry :iub Lake 	
-\-j

Trib. *rk. River 	
Trib. Cimrron 	
Trib. Little Bear Creek—
Trib. Cimn-en 	 	
	 do 	
(to *

:mirl«7
ArkarMs River 	


to
rfn
to
Vin Brewer Arroyo- 	
Muddy Creek. Johnny Creek-
	 40 	
TUrlt*5n

	 -Jo 	 	 	
Bl* 5andy Creek 	
Rio Chana 	





do
Kins -ra»K

Trlb. of Lewi* Creek 	
	 (JO 	 	 •••• ••

1 U Qj

Upper dafti-ron and Upper !
!*OSC^-_^B1 	
Syraauae, Kan a. 	

	 4a-_ 	
* do


6.5
2.78
1.90
1.06
.47
3.42
8.91
RIO ORA1BB BASIN (ABOVE B5PANOLA)
Harty, Colo.- 	 1/11.715



do
Trinidad, Colo. 	
Caddoa, Colo. 	

fto

	 *, .
Peyton, Colo. 	
Abiqnio, H. Hex. 	 2
Fowler, Colo. 	
RED RIVER B^SLN
Little and

	 do 	

°_


Mansfield, U. 	
Paris, Tax.—
" VI1 LA
	 do 	 	
-
-

74.6
154.2
52.01
78.8
608
"
5.4
,146
13.48
(DEHISOK
Sulphur
51.6

10.4
.35
1.41
683
Rivar Baaina
6.5
2.75
1.89
1.06
.46
3.40
8.91
AND ARKANSAS
18,102
-
74.4
152.4
47.44
78.5
606
5.3
2,127
13.34
TO GRAND SCOR
Rivar Baaljis
49.6
1.26
10.3
.32
1.30
613
(Contlm
Apr.
Juna
Oct.
Juna
Mar.
Juna
Juna
Juna
•»«.
Jane
Oar.
Juna
*pr.
Juna
RIVHi U
Apr.
July
Dae.
S*A.
Oct.
*UJ.
Har.
Sapt.
Au,.
Nor.
Fan
Dae.
HOT.
Apr.
Har.
Fab.
July
Apr.
Oct.
Har.
B!
Fab.
Tkr.
July
Har.
July
Har.
July
Sapt.
Juna
Nov.
"ay
lad.)
1951
1967
1960
1966
1950
1966
1961
196t
1961
1966
1953
1966
1951
1967
IS III
1942
1942
1943
1944
1948
1951
1957
1962
1966
1968
1900
1939
1919
1939
1900
1940
1911
1940
1912
1937
1939
1962
1965
1963
1967
1908
1968
1923
1936
1956
1900
1936
1956
1931
1941
1925
1954
1898
1959
1949
1961
16.5

 5.7

16.2',

 5

 4.8

13.3

16.5
 0.3
 1.4
 0.7
 3.7
 3.4
 5.7
 4.6
 4.5
 1.9
39.4

28.9

25
 2

 3

 4.58

60
13.1
19.7

36
20.3

10.3

29

61.0

11.5
                                                                                                                                                                     62.2
                                                                                                                                                                     50.83
                                                                                                                                                                    Ij5.6
                                                                                                                                                                    133.8
                                                                                                                                                                     14.6
                                                                                                                                                                      8.75
                                                                                                                                                                      4.5
                                                                                                                                                                      3.75
                                                                                                                                                                     31.8
                                                                                                                                                                     31.2
                                                                                                                                                                    128
                                                                                                                                                                    119
                                                                                                                                                                     92.7
                                                                                                                                                                     78.2
                                                                                                                                                         —     701,775
                                                                                                                                            690,345
                                                                                                                                            688,5?)
                                                                                                                                            683,257
                                                                                                                                            675,097
                                                                                                                                            662,870
                                                                                                                                            645,512
                                                                                                                                            642,390
                                                                                                                                            631 ,121
                                                                                                                                            618,668
                                                                                                                                                758
                                                                                                                                                 82
                                                                                                                                             16,918
                                                                                                                                             15,287
                                                                                                                                             36,203
                                                                                                                                             30,738
                                                                                                                                              4,005
                                                                                                                                              2,463
                                                                                                                                             38,274
                                                                                                                                             25,020
                                                                                                                                             23,040
                                                                                                                                                326
                                                                                                                                                302
                                                                                                                                            579,039
                                                                                                                                            572,695
                                                                                                                                                563
                                                                                                                                                527
         11,487
         10,755
         9,964
        6/1,394
         1,324
         1,285
           181
           128
           157
           150
           558
           430
        967,900
        967,900
                         1.79
                         1.50
                         4.6
                         4.5
                          .72
                          .43
                          .40
                          .33
                         6.4
                         6.2
                         3.5
                         3.3
                         1.97
                         1.65
                                                                                                                                                              .418
                                                                                                                                                              .391
                                                                                                                                                              .362
                                                                                                                                                             1.792
                                                                                                                                                             1.702
                                                                                                                                                             1.652
                                                                                                                                                              .561
                                                                                                                                                              .536
                                                                                                                                                              .742
                                                                                                                                                              .572
                                                                                                                                                             1.516
                                                                                                                                                             1.516
                                     70

                                    •50

                                    •75

                                    •75

                                     65

                                    •75

                                    •TO
0.11

 .11

 .19

 .U

 .28

 .20

 .10
   —    SCS
  167
   —    SCS
  1JD
   —    SCS
  310
   —    SCS
  229
   —    SCS
  396
   —    SCS
  327

  IK
2.43
2.43
2.41
2.38
2.34
2.28
2.26
2.22
2.18

—
_
	
	
__
—
~
	
	
	
l.°0
1.76
•3.9
•3.7
•75.7
•75.7
•75.7
•75.7
•75.7
•75.7
•75.7
•75.7
•75.7

89.07
75.25

68.36
	
75.4
"
	
	
•80
	
•75.7

—
—
.075
.443
.129
.210
.178
.0398
.147
.362

.233
.5J5

I/. 241
	
.680
.87
1.63

1.5

.65

V-045
—
124
no
213
346
29J
65.6
242
597
—
452
ST7
__
4/1.515
_
1,117
_
—
—
2.613
	
1,072
—
—









3CS
9CS

3C3

3CS
91


3CS

OK

SCS

                                     36.4


                                     31.5
                                     68.6

                                     33.14
1.13
 .81

1.54
1.52

 .50

 .78

1.62
  642
   —     SCS

1,043
   —     SCS

   —     SCS
1,165
   _     SCS
1,169
   —     d

-------
49-7.
W-8
49-9
50-1
50-2
50-3
50-4
50-5
so- 6
50-7
50-9
50-10
50-llc
50-13
50-1 5a
50-16
50-17
50-18
50-19
50-21
50-22
50- J3
50-24a
50-25
&
tola
Lake Texarkana 	
fin


H
T .

Ai-Jj-ui-a Club Lake

R-r» ^1
Bymr3 - L*ko
f i
artSj ^L^°
J. J. Harrison Lake 	
C. W. Lester Farm Pond Ho. 1-
C. W, Lester Farm Pond Ho. 2-
-anta Hona Lake

nf
Lake Duncan
i?
Like -ilnton


OOllcTUO
do


Jj°
T IT T (Q.WI D* 1
HUcc ToxoBtt tUeniasn Una;
do
A
r+in PnnH
bartHDur Pond
r tutte SI Hn
Cavalry Greek -Ate No. 1
ri°
0
Chigley Sandy Site ho. 5 	
dn
™ B
-oit Pond No. 1
n D
Dean Pond No, ^
n 0
Doan Pond No, - • •
George Pond 	
p
Hal_ Pond Nc, 1
w t
Harrison o.
. „ i
riaon No. ~
K
^-np
" -In
Hill ^reok No. 17
do
Muncrlef Farm "ond 	 	 —
Drainage area adjusted to conform
Off chainel -egervoir.
Excludes wat^- and sediment divert
Per 100 ac.-ft. of water diverted
erroir between 191C and 1939.
Sulphur liver — 	 	 . 	 	 	
0
Crnroan Barn
JW ^ J
do

3uj.pimr r
-iJdu Cro

Mri =Tt
101 rto
tu rn° f L.
3° ° r

(in *ah*ta ttiV*r
Trib. of Broken Leg Cre«k-

Beaver Creek 	
tr-t k- «k
d
Turk Cr t*
TirKQy UTeefc
rfe
P lr
LTay ^r00*
h P L- D»H
ortn or aod iu.vcr

0
BI
lirer
°°

Trib. of Little Washita R.
*
71
0

Chigley Sandy 	

Jnna-nod

„
H° ^^* "r«*k
do
do
Unnamed 	 	 	
rt
^°

rt
d




aahita

Trib. of Sandy Creek 	
with 'J 5.G.S. publis^e-i drama
ed from Arkansas River a.-.d Hor
froni Ark. River and Horse Cr.
Tejcarkana , Tex. 	
do
Shreveport, La. 	
rtn
Sulphur Springs, Tex.-
RED RIVS
ni»jrc, UKll.
Bn Okl
oya ,
u_jni I-»_T
'

Lindsay, ukla.
Cheyenne, Okla. 	

	 do 	
ern°d' ax

'
C t OtLa
anuto, UlciA.
~°

"""»

' H


T
on^3"1' "^^
~°

"hi Inaha
, *.
^ rd 11
° °ri«' **
do
	 do 	
Wynnewood, Okla 	
do
~i j . 1^.1
Ilnton, UKla,

^hoycnno, Ulcln.

rt
Canadian, Tejc. 	

odoy, UlLLa.
f rt?°
*
3
°
° T
yno , ex.
Mill Creek, Okla. 	
flo
Wynnewood, Okla. 	
ge irea.
ae Creek.
Total of 564.918 ac.-ft.
3,400

266

52.50
S BASIS {ABOVE
4.15
2.66
1.81
.88
2.04
.64
336
11.0
23.6

•1.5
2,515
39,719

.68
2.19


.81
.39
.0359
.164
.535
.20
.237
.292
2,099
1.61
.031
diverted
3,213
251

51.46
DENI50N'/
3.91
2.55
1.7O
.81
2.03
.63
334
10.4
23.1

l.U
2,104

28,925


.67
2.15


.79

.38
.0354
.161
.535
.20
.237
.292
2,067
1.58
.029
43-yr
Sept. 1954 — 2,654,300
Aug. 1958 3.92 2,654,300
July 1970 12 2,654,300
Dec. 1946 — 96,100
Oct. 1951 4.8 9fa,100
Apr. 1961 9.5 96,100
Sept. 1962 9 2,787.9
June 1938 15.5 1,644
1904 — 507
1936 — 865
Hat. 1949 13 837
Feb. 1932 — 349
Ifer. 1950 18 282
— 1945 — 42.4
June 1949 4 22.8
June 1944 — 16.3
June 1949 5.0 13.1
Oct. 1929 — 15,755
Jan. 1948 18.2 11,5*8
Oct. 1937 — 6,291
Aug. 1950 12.8 5,783
June 1938 7.4 3,961
Nov. 1950 12.4 3,343
Kay 1938 50 85
June 1948 7.5 185,035
July 1953 5.1 178,610
Apr. 1967 13.8 168,117
Oct. 1948 0.2 5.718.COO
June 1954 5.7 5,553,000
Mar. 1962 7.8 5,392,900
Sept. 1935 - 59.9
Maj 1955 19.7 41.8
July 1948 — 505.4
Sept. 1959 11.15 476,6
Aug. 1964 4.89 471.8
June 1969 4.85 458.8
June 1955 — 263.67
Aug. 1959 4.12 258.74
Oct. 1963 4.15 242.20
July 1957 10.28 21.53
Mar. 1955 11 .807
Spring 1941 — 15.8
ter. 1955 14 13.4
June 1952 — 15.197
Apr. 1958 5.796 13.463
May 1939 — 17.59
Aug. 1957 18.25 13.47
Apr. 1958 5.93 a. 706
Apr. 1958 6.59 14.242
Oct. 1922 — 560,000
Sept. 1958 36 461,757
Dec. 1948 — 498.45
July 1959 10.63 492.13
Aug. 1966 7.06 487. 11
Aug. 1935 — 8.710
Nov. 1957 22.22 7.968
Little deposition due to daai washout,
period was about 0.063 ac.-rt./nu2-yr.
Spillway crest was lowered 3 ft. in 1
Date of original survey for new dftffi o
Estinated or assumed.
.13
.13
.13
.405
.405
.405
.125
.100




—
-
—


-



-
1.74
1.61
.512
.357
3.05
2.87
2.84
2.77
1.410
1.384
1.327
.706
.591
.469
.J51
1.505
1.276
.407
.361
.239
.183
.594
.581
.419
.382
2.493
2.056
1.06
1.04
1.03
1930-47. True
932; capacitiea
ver deposits pi*
—
-

•85
40.7
~
63.4
63.3*
65.9
-
52.3
66.9
70.2
52.1
57.9
62.5
•75
74.5
74.5
60.3
60.3
61.49
91
88
70.95
•70.2
79.68
68.53
-

—


1.53
2.52
1.16
1.26
4.59
2.41
1.02
.689
3.«2
2.54
2.23
.64
.495
.599
.361
.785
1.00
.709
1.37
1.20
.46
1.25
1.52
3.22
1.07
.69
1.06
.559
-


2,832
2,234
5,275
3,505
3,201
5*4
1.104
588
991
1,2*1
9*5
2,23»
1,94*
74*
1,993
1,996
4,229
1,433
1,368
2,032
863.82
1.15 1,758.30
.325 5*4.01
.733 1,094.06
1.32 -
70 .37 564
•75 .45 816
•60 1.15 1,502.82
aediJoent accuwlation rate f
are based on present elevati
iced behind old dan.
CE
a
scs
scs
so
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
EB
a
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
scs
op

-------
                                                                                                                      SUMMARY OF

                                                                                    RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS HADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER



!



RESERVOIR




STREAM







NEAREST TOWN










DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE


TOTAL
MILES)


NET



DATE OF
SURVEY





PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)




CAPACITY
AVG. ANN


PER



SPECIFIC
(EIGHT
DRY)
ILB. PER
CU. FT.)



SfnffiHT
ACCUMULATION
PEBSQ W-
OFNETDR
AREA FOB
PEUODSMNN

AC.-FT. | TONS


AGEHCY
SUPPLYING
DATA



                                                                                                     HED RIYER BA3H (ABOVE DEKI30M) (Continuad)
to
                         5O-29»



                         50-30b


                         50-31»



                         50-32b
                         50-36b
                         50-38

                         50-39

                         50-40

                         50-4lb
3.89



6.46


3.50



2.87
 .171

 .162

 .205
8.18
—
—
—
5.22
_
—
—
—
.61
—
—
—
3. 84
—
—
—
5.2*
—
—
3.46
_
—
—
2.80
—
__
—
1.00
—
—
—
11. 28
—
—
	
5.11

—
—
10.04
—
—
—
—
2.20
	
	
—
.171
	
.162
—
.205

.60
—
—
—
.95
—
—
—
1.73
—
—
Jan.
A«e.
Oct.
*«,.
"«I
Apr.
*7
Aug.
July
Apr.
Oct.
Oct.
July
MU-.
July
S«pt.
July
Apr.
Oct.
Sept.
fer.
Oct.
Oct.
5«pt.
Apr.
Oct.
S.pt.
July
Sept.
»ay
Aug.
July
Aug.
July
S^t.
Aog.
Dm.
Oct.
S.pt.
Aug.
Aug.
Oct.
Oct.
Aug.
June
Aug.
Oc'..
Oct.
Sc.pt.
Jan.
Apr.
Oct.
Apr.
D«c.
Apr.
Ju.
S«pt.
Aug.
June
Hay
July
Oct.
July
Mar.
S«pt.
Aug.
1957
I960
1961
1970
1951
1956
1960
1965
1970
1951
1956
1961
1966
1951
1957
1961
1966
1951
1962
1967
1951
1957
1962
1967
1951
1956
1961
1966
1951
I960
1965
1970
1952
1957
1961
1966
1951
1956
1961
1966
1951
1956
1960
!%•;
1970
1951
1957
1962
1967
1947
1958
1945
1958
1944
1958
1949
1959
1964
1969
1949
1959
1963
1968
1950
1960
1965
—
3.5!
4.14
5.81
—
4.96
4.06
5.02
4.92
—
5.47
5.00
4.80
—
6.39
4.19
4.81
—
11.53
4.96
—
6.5»
5.0
4.93
_»
5.50
4.90
4.80
—
3.68
5.25
4.98
—
4.92
4.2.
4.86
—
4.62
4.88
4.86
—
5.13
4.04
4.79
4.91
—
6.16
5.0
4.96
—
11.266
—
12.564
—
13.33
—
10.70
4.91
4.85
—
10.25
4.2>
4.82
—
10.50
4.95
2,401.1
2,303.3
2,277.3
2,213.1
1,591.29
1.453.69
1,380.47
1,344.75
1,338.82
157.68
148.40
139.98
125.60
1,273.21
1,217.58
1,152.23
1,127.06
1,956.05
1,813.2
1,806.22
1,275.09
1,217.59
1,178.72
1,175.25
1,046.02
1.01B.8
943.9
888.0
315.15
283.09
286.79
275.82
4,463.43
4,294.49
4,164.87
4,038.34
2,065.88
2,033.89
1,987.93
1,979.45
1,584.9
3,465.8
3,322.4
3,292.7
3,276.0
970.7
942.12
913.51
873.9
15.794
13.943
a. 035
16.627
7.353
6.673
223.4
207.7
199.6
179.9
242.4
236.2
233.8
229.3
587. 3P
566.24
548,66
2.72
2.61
2.58
2.51
4.67
4.26
4.05
3.94
3.93
4.38
4.12
3.89
3.4?
4.45
4.26
4.03
3.94
4.12
3.82
3.80
4.94
4.72
4.57
4.56
6.23
6.06
5.62
5.29
4.85
4.43
4.40
4.24
7.29
7.02
6.81
6.60
4.41
4.35
4.25
4.23
5.53
5.15
5.13
5.06
5.06
b.14
5.97
5.78
5.63
 .329
 .290
 .438
 .346
 .197
 .179
4.33
4.02
3.87
3.49
1.11
1.08
1.07
1.05
1.780
1.716
1.663
90
90
•91
—
61.49
83.11
83.11
•83
	
70.20
77.87
•77
—
95.7
—
•80
70.7
•72
—
75.78
79.4
•SO
—
79.3
82.8
•75
—
93.08
68.1
*75
—
77.94
74.85
•76
—
8O.6
79.79
•77
	
70.4
59
59
•60
	
81.53
79.4
•83
	
77.65
—
85.34

82.73
75.68
75.68
•75
61
61
•61
—
85
74
3.34
.77
1.24
—
5.31
3.16
1.36
.23
	
2.79
2.75
4.92
—
2.27
4.06
1.36
2.36
.27
_—
2.52
2.20
.20
—
1.77
5.46
4.16

1.12
.25
2. 20
—
3.04
2.73
2.31
—
1.30
1.84
.34
__
2.31
3.53
.62
.34
	
2.08
2.W.
3.63
—
.959
—
2.167

.249
2.45
2.75
6.77
.63
.60
.98
—
1.16
2.05
6,547
1,509
2,563
__
7,111
6,263
2,462
360
„
4,266
4,672
8,184
—
4,731
5,501
1,980
3,634
529
_
4,160
4,148
436
__
3,057
9,996
5,627
—
6,320
371
3,611
—
5,161
4,209
3,874
—
2,281
3,131
402
	
3,540
5,418
797
526
	
3,694
4,445
7,036
—
1,621.88
—
4,027.81

448.66
4,038.4
4,532.9
10,872
834.1
794.4
1,274.6
—
2,147
3,304



9C3




scs



so;


scs


scs



scs



scs



scs



scs



scs




scs



scs

scs

scs
scs






scs



-------
*>•
00
50-4 5*
50-46
50-47«
5O-48
50-49
5O-5O
50- 5i
50-52
1-1
51-2
51-3
51-4
51-5
51-*
51-7
51-«b
51-9
51-10
5i-n
51-12
51-13
51-14
51-15
51-16a
51-17
51-18
51-19
51-20
~ . -
^

Chigley Sandy Sit* Ko. 4 	
do

Floo-1 H*t*rdirtg 3tmctor« Bo.
2 Su* O. Hftter*«J
Rarnlt fc 1A
. "

3ng»r Cr*** Site ft>. 13 	
Upp*r tbahlta River Sit* *2<-
Kmt Cr** *.t«-«h«d Site «.-
r? ti r L a, •>


Saddl* Mowtaln W>. 2 	

T«T*U City talw 	
























Variety Club Boys* Ranch Lake


Brid*rimort
1O^ f-Ll










	 do 	 . 	





do
tin





S-W-- =~* 	 	
«a*ita KiT.r 	
7*.




Saddle toontain Cr*«k 	





(to
ft!
HM Fk.of Trinity B±T«X> 	


Tri». »r a. cr~t 	


*
r


_ ^^
""^ Ul*ftrti


U* lu»hf rv.nk
*


~" Jw
. r '


W«»t Fork of Trtjiity 81r«r





o .ccur fvr««t





J '




rto


_lnt
• t*li-
do
Hloton, Okla. 	
dim T
-anaflla t r

*do*' T
n 1 rfci
rto ***' *'
J_
CariMgi., Okl*.— 	

SaBlBK, MECKSS,



do

IVwto T
^^ do "^

'

^

°» «r.
ao

^
_^_








D .. , •
° *


RlHrtMnm^
^ ^dfl"1" ' VX'
f r± Uartii T
° d«r^' ta~

_,_



P«l sti
1»J.O 1J1e, Tcx-
ShmtsrlU T
do *
1


3.80
2.13
4.22

1.99
7.14
l.W
2.13
3.43

AID TSltlTT
9.20
.91
.58
.3/9.48
.59
99.1

2.12
6.24
3.14
1.48
.30
1.83
,051
,875

1.05
.36
2.55
3.1S


J.73


2.05
4.11
1.93
6.96
2.05
3.37

SIYKS B1SI
8.71
.82
.54
1^157
8.56
.43
274.4
97.4


2.02
6.18
2.87
1.42
.29
1.75
1,033
J/809
1.01
.33
2.50
3.05
»««.
CM.
A<«.
*r.'
J«lj
^oljr
HOT.
rtf>!
Oct.
«0».
Julj
Apr.
Jan.
AX-
Jail
Apr.'
Apr.
S^>t.
IS
Oct.
»«.
S^t.
S^fi.
S^t.
S^rt..
Mc>!
Apr.
Apr.
fbr.
Oct.
Apr!
«OT.
OK.
JmM
Apr.
Jane
Apr.
Apr.'
F.b.
Har.
Har.
•or.
Apr.
Apr.
Apr.
JulT
1959
1963
1968
1955
1958
1963
1969
1959
196!
1958
1963
1968
1964
1965
1961
1966
1964
1966
1959
1965
1970
1959
1*5
1970
1921
1949
1895*
1949
1880
1949
1928
1938
1921
1949
1885
1949
1937
1946
1910
1935
1956
1970
1925
1730
1938
y
1950
1926
1939
1942
1950
1914
1938
1932
1943
1934
1939
1952
1899
1939
1926
1939
1919
1939
1930
195O
10.32
4.12
4.84
2.62
5.52
5.76
5.90
4.85
1.87
1.70
4.6
2.1
5.9
5.19
6
5.26
28.25
54
69
10.5
28
64
9.7
25
20.9
14.6
13.25
8.5
12.8
7.8
23.6
10.8
5
13
40
13
20
20
200.0
194.0
190.3
1,075.3
1,054.8
1,018.0
966.7
655.99
639.60
1,72). 2
1,645.9
1,633.9
532.17
503.79
1,315.92
1.3U.74
622.01
613.83
656.0
639.6
635.4
771.3
^751.4
2^19
1,605
319
205
181
92
180,759
167,072
8,012
6,657
756
659
37,520
27,100
18,158
14,276
12,321
10,743
531
509
370
328
i/2,085
iA,7U
376
298
38
33
396
275
6/292,000
283,240
6/211,000
205,175
182,000
270
204
295
271
222
199
 lakea in watershed »*»ich contributes
                         y  Lake  Clark «aa built in 1940 downvtreaii fro* "Ermis H«v Lake'
                      in 1«95.  Club Lake and a Kmli pond now sub»erg«#iich lias upatr
                                                                                                                                                                                                                           me of all Uk**
•  flood storage.
*JB  fro* Eagle Mt.  Ras«rvolr.

-------
                              SUMMARY OF
RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970



SHEET
NUMBER





RESERVOIR





STREAM





NEAREST TOWN


DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)
TOTAL
NET



DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVG ANN.
RATIO
(ACRE-IT.
PER
ACRt-KT)


SPECIFIC
WEIGHT
[DRY)
LB. PER
CU. FT.)


AVG. ANN
sfsmmrr
ACCUMULATION
PEBSQ. m,
OFNETDB.
AREA FOB
PERJOD SHOWN

AC.-FT. | TONS


AGBICV
SUPPLYING
DATA


            SABIlffi, HECHES, AH) THIMITT RIVER BASINS (Continued)
5i-a
51-22
51-23
51-21
51-25a
51-26b
51-?7b
51-28a
51-29
51-30
5i-3ia
51-32
51-33
51-34
51-35
51-36
51-37
51-36
51-39
51-10
51-41
52-1
53-2
Hun*? Lake— 	
Kerens City Lake- 	
Variety Club Lake 	
Clear Fit. Watershed Site
Ho. 10.
	 do- 	

Honey Creek Site »o. 12 	
Damon City Lake- 	
	 do 	
Lake Cherokee 	
Lavon Reservoir 	
Site Ho. 11B Kin Fk. Watershed

Gar«a-Little Sim Reserroir
(Lewisville Dan).
	 * 	 ~ 	 ":
Clear Cre«k Watershed Site
Ho. 21.
Upper Lake Fit. Watershed
Site 23
Lake Ai.cn G. Carter 	
Thanbers Creek Site 37 	
Chanters Creek Site 101-A 	
Clear Fork Watershed
Site Ho. 7.
Denton Creak Watershed
Site Mo. 17.
	 to 	 	 	
East Keechi Creek Site No. 1-
Lake Corpus Christ! 	 	 	

Hedine Lake 	
do
last Fork of Trinity River
_ 	 do 	
Cow Cr«ek 	
Trib. of Trinity River 	
Trinity River 	 • 	
	 do 	 	 	 . 	 .-
" *l .

-------
71
en
53-3
53-4
52-5
52-6
52-7
52-8a
52-9
52-10
52-11
52-12
52-13
52-14
52-15
52-16*
52-17
53-1
53-2
53-3
53-4
53-5
53-6
53-7a
53-S
53-9
53-10
53-11
53-12
53-13
53-U
53-15
53-16
53-1?
53-18
I/ Ot


•toss Ranch Stock Pond 	
Moss Ranch Stock Pond 	
Reims Tank 	
do
Bakor Lake
Calaveras Creet- Site Ho. 6 	





Steith Pond 	


do

Site Ho. 1 Escondido Creak 	
CuKiirigs Creek Watershed
Site Mo. 6.
3D
Lake Scarborough 	 • 	
do

Lake Bants 	 — 	
-Jo •• » •• •

Hubbard City Lake Ho. 3 	
Hubbard City Lake No. 4 	
Rogers Lake 	
	 do 	
Hnbbard City Lake Ho. 1 	
rfej 	 ' 	 — — —
Hubbard City Lake No. 2 	
Hubbard City Lake No. 5 	
Lake Law 	
Loraets— • 	 • —
Heridian Lake 	
Killer Lake 	


?os»u« Kingdom Lake 	

flock .ruahcr
Old Santa Anna City Lake — - —
•ieijial capacity fron nap by stere

do
S. Bull Creek 	
"». Bull Creek 	 • 	
Trib. of Sandy Creek 	
Trib. of San Antonio fii-er
C 1 ° "
r_aia araa TOOK
IVIh A<>f ' *Ar> (>••*
'do' "S"°n °
Trib. of Llano Elver 	
^ H rvir, " *V
Trio, u c. -re
Trib. of Bonito Creek 	
Cib»lo Greek 	 — 	
Qm.daJ.upo i r
Trib. of Deer Creek
GuadJtlnpe River Basin.
San Antofu.0 River 	
	 do- 	 — - — 	
e r— *
do
BRAZOS
Trib. of Jia Ned Creek 	
-~° -^
	 do 	
Mercer Creek 	 —
nm r (*•
Oi-uHi* Croak
Trlb. of E. Cottonwod Cr-
Trib. of Little River 	
Trifc. S. Cottonwod Creek-
	 do 	
East Cotton-ood Creek 	
Hedbank Cree* 	
Salt & Emory Creeks 	

Trib. of Horse Creek 	
d

Brazos River 	

liacncior Lrocic
ftikexater Creak 	
o photogramoetric aethods.
p/i
do
Llano, Tex. 	 —
	 do — , 	
	 do 	
So T
r *
San Antonio, Tex. 	


Hext, Tex. 	 	
°
*
Jourdanton, Tex. 	
Bo«me, Tex. 	
do *
T

Kenedy, Tex. 	
	 do
idd^a, «.

RIVEB BASIN (SOUTH BEMD TO
Colemn, Tex. 	 	
Santa Anna Tex
do
Cooanche, Tax. 	


Hubbard, Tot. 	
Rogers, Tex. 	
Hubbard, Tex. 	
" do
	 do 	
Lam, Tex.-
Lonata, Tax. 	
	 do 	
Meridian, TEE. 	
	 do 	 	
San Saba, Tex. 	


Graford, Tex. 	 13_/
Colemm Tox.
j '
Santa Anna, Tex. 	

9,350
.07
.20
.15
3.17
7.01
8.43
1.35
.769
.191
1.54
2.34
2.76
3.01
2.99
WASHINGTON)
10.8
1.17
13.76
11.65
.16
1.40
.55
.03
.11
13.0
4.74
3.30
.56
16.5
1' .
19,313
.07
.19
.14
3.10
6.70
7.94
1.34
.74'
.188
1.52
2.32
2.75
2.83
2.76

KIDDLE, AND
10.6
1.05
13.57
11.50
.14
1.35
.51
.5
.03
.10
12.8
4.60
3.20
.38
.55
12,955
16.48
Oraindge ar
June 1937
Feb. 1941
1909
Feb. 1941
— 1903
Feb. 1941
— 1916
Feb. 1941
Sept. 1950
Aug. 1955
Deo. 1956
Mar. 1968
July 1958
July 1960
Aug. 1951
Aug. 1955
Feb. 1951
Sept. 1955
Aur. 1953
Aug. 1955
Sept. 1952
Aug. 1955
Jan. 1949
June 1964
Sept. 1949
June 1964
Sept. 1954
June 1964
July 1969
Aug. 1958
Sept. 1963
Aug. 1969
COLORADO RIVER
May 1923
May 1940
May 1923
Apr. 1940
May 1926
Sept. 1946
May 1917
May 1940
— 1913
May 1949
— 1917
May 1949
Fall 1922
Sept. 1934
1896
H»y 1949
— 1912
May 1949
— 1925
May 1949
— 1911
— 1912
Feb. 1941
Apr. 1948
Sept. 1913
Mar. 1941
July 1925
July 1949
May 1941
Feb. 1949
1910
Feb. 1941
Jan. 1910
June 1940
e« it 31,250 sq
3.7
32
38
25
4.95
11.25
2.0
4
4.54
2.4
2.91
15.42
14.75
9.8
5.1
5.1
5.9
BASINS
17
17
20.3
23
36
32
12
51
37
24
29
14
27.5
24
7.75
31
30.5
- "i- ,
370,010
954,859
4.7
4.5
9.3
9.1
12
11.6
251
226
1,697.82
1,661.12
2,728.0
2,667.8
11.96
11.45
80.3
76.5
6.41
5.60
142.4
135.2
10/48.97
43.75
10/45.12
41.51
924.7
906.2
890.1
858.3
855.2
854.1
2,153
2,007
766
745
1,313
1,221
962
855
11/104.5
90.2
U/318.2
255.4
164
126.5
IgAlO
84
12/36.3
33.0
44.8
37.8
530
354
759
732
723
692
83
75
75.1
52.6
729,985
672,420
153
30
153
118
of which 11 , 900
".649
«.639
-
.595
.540
1.65
1.62
2.022
1.978
.081
.078
1.959
1.866
.361
.315
.578
.549
.078
.070
.061
.056
2.30
2.26
2.22
.77
.77
.76
-
-
•jq. mi. are n
34.65
66.17
47.08
45.6
27.8
28.3
49.6
51.41
45.2
43
-
.21
.07
.021
.12
1.50
.49
3.79
.09
1.12
1.80
1.64
.15
.09
.67
1.12
.22
.07
.81
1.18
.334
.40
2.86
1.45
6.12
1.0
3.0
3.0
.46
.20
.69
— .71
— 1.71
- .57
.14
1.31
oncontributing.
— SC9
_ S3
— 3C3
— SO
— SC3
1,132
— SCS
706
— 505
3,886
— SCS
— SOS
1,112
_ SCS
1,090
_ SCS
	 3CS
92
— SOS
97
— SCS
1,710
— SCS
— SCS
907
_ SCS
1,162
— SCS
— SCS
375
— SCS
_ SCS
— SOS
_ SCS
_ SCS
— SCS
— SCS
_ SCS
_ SCS
_ SCS
— SCS
— SCS
— SCS
                             Z/  "Original" or 191.5 capacity adjusted in  1961 by range  1.
                           i»e "Oct.  53" area and capacity.
                             3_/  Sediment pool oily.
                             L/  Adjusted for l°-2 survey of Lake Dallas.
                             y  Adjusted in Aor. 1963 for detailed range survey in  1952-53-5^-
                             Ł/  Determined by USGS Nov.  1961.
                             2/  1951 adjusted data.
                             Ł/  Deposits above Highway 190 bridge only.   Sot corrected for  de^
                                                                                               trola ost-abliahad  in  1953
                                   Original  capacity  doterained by  spudding on  1964  survey.
                               ll/  Daa was raised  in  1925  and  1949.   Capacities based on  1949  l
                               12/  Dam was raised  in  19.25.   Capacity based  on 1925 level.
                               1J/  Includes  1,111  sq.  mi.  of partially contributing  drainage as
                            3,900 sq.  mi.  of  non^ontributing  drainage at head of nwtershed.
                               *   Eatinated or assuaed.
i in waterahed,  excluds
i Between highway  and

-------
                                                                                                             SUMMARY OF

                                                                            RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE W THE UNITED STATES THROUGH
05


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER



	 1

RESERVOIR





STREAM



NEAREST TO»N





DRAINAGE: AREA
(SQUARE WLES)

! i TOTAL


NET


DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
\ACRE-FT.)



CAPACITY
AVG ANN
INFLOW
RATIO
(ACHE-FT
PER
ACHt-r-T)


SPECIFIC
WEIGHT
(DRY)
LB. PER
CU. FT.)


AVG. ANN
SEDIMENT
ACCUMULATION
PEBSQ ML
OF NET OB.
AREA FOB
PERJOC SHOWN

AC.-FT. ] TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA



                                                                         BRAZOS RIVER BASIN (SOUTH BUID  TO
                                                                                                                ) "IDDLE, AND :CLORADO ^IVER BAJIK5 'Continued)
53- 21
53-22
5V 24
53-25
5-5-26
53-27
53-28
53-29
53-3Cfc
53-31*
53-32
53-3U
53-36a
53-37
^3-38
53-39
53-40
53-U
'3-1,5
53-46
Old ColMM City Lake 	
	 ilO

dx>'
Uke^tt^TirtU » 	 •
	 du

R. G. Boll lagWDrth Stock
Pood.
J. S. Wan Stock PonA. 	
Milt* Tank 	
7l«.rerle« Stock Pond (Horth)-
Stlth lake 	
Philpeeo Lake- 	
do
LtUleV Bi-ilUll 	
-- u.
do

do
do

• do
LlkL EiliJlnuji
Site Mo. 3 Cow Bayou — • 	

do

Co** Bajou Mo. i.
do

Green Creek Mo. 1— 	 	 	
do
^°
do
Silver I-nke
Main Res. Deep Creek Site 5 —
Upper Rea. Deep Creek Site 5-
• do

to
Sulfur Creek Site 3 	
-- -do-
Whitney Reeervolr 	 	 	


Site No, 1O-A Hukevstar Creek
Ukn Daniel 	 • 	
"He 9 Lower 3an J«ba Bi«er--
Hra Creek 	
». ..CT - _i-
~*r
ai
	 dO 	

0
	 do 	

Trib. of Brady Cr»«k 	

Trtb.^of Jl. M =r^_
Redbank Cr^k 	
Paint Creek 	
Paean Bayou (Colo. BiTer)-
j~

U*i
*
~°
do

Fiiiit^iTeait

"do

j

j *
° „
'-^te *°"
Sreen Cr.* 	

j
H. K. Trib. of Leon Ri»er-

' do°
y*
do
i"
Mid. oloradG or
^
L.^..,., M,.r 	
do

to
' **"rtn °r

1 An^
do

GOT^e, .reek 	
Morado R,,.r 	
ColaMai , TBJL. 	
„ . ••


	 do 	 	
^^cr^~ ° ' 'at'*
*
do' ~*~
da
Brady, Ttau 	 	
Bro«TWod, T-tt. 	
La», T« 	
	 do 	
Pioneer, Tax* 	
Brownwod, T«x. 	 1
.
yo. T 'A
C°'dj ~"


do
C *iaja TOOL.
j^ '

Pfc&JJ, ex.
do




	 do 	 	
Dublin, Tax. 	




Brad T
BTTU1J, ta'






"^ , '

ui-j» » i An
— !!Sl_± 	
d *I"
n T
ng3, ex.
ftreckenrldge, rex. 	
--» -»•-. T« 	
0.73
12.0
225
74.4
1.73
2.60
.80
.13
1.04
9.04

,649

"
42
1.40

5 'lr

3.42
3.57
.37
2.91
2.19
4.75

10.81

,656
4.26
15.^6
115
3.03
0.69
11.9
224.7
1.71
2.58
.35
.60
.13
9.00
1,533
2/1,645


41.4
1.32

5.2C
3.19
3.38
.334
2.72
2.18
4.55
10.58
.2/3,480
4.02
,4.59
113
2.88
Nov.
June
fer.
Jane
Ibr.
Dec.
Feb.
Jm>e
Feb.
K»r.
«W
Feb.
»"«-
ipr!
Feb.
Jiilj
Feb.
Sept.
Apr.
Feb.
Feb.
0»:.
Oec.
Feb.
»J
Nov.
»"«.
»»«.
Ipr.
July
Sept.
HOT.
•»«.
Apr.
Jan.
Apr.
June
Julj
*ug.
July
Aug.
July
J»n.
June
July
Deo.
«o,.
Aug.
Dec.
Ap,.
Dec
Sept
Har.
A»g.
*>».
Jen.
iept.
1906
1940
1923
1941
1920
1941
1922
1941
1900
19*1
1937
1941
1927
1941
1936
1941
1941
1926
1941
1925
1941
1932
1940
195°
1930
1935
1936
1947
1964
1929
1954
1955
1960
19*5
1970
1956
1969
1953
1960
1955
1957
1962
1967
1910
1960
1953
1961
19'3
1961
1961
1965
1970
1959
1962
1968
1941
1959
1951
1966
1965
1966
1949
19^0
1960
33.6
17.-5
20.75
19.5
41
3.7
14
4.8
14.6
15.9
7.6
19.6
4.9
1.0
11.8
17.0
25.25
4.75
5.04
4.69
13.2
6.8
1.8
5.2
5.2
50
7.9
7.9
4.42
5.1
2.8
5.8
- 6/
7.4
14.8
1.4
21.4
299
273
610
560
1/1,637
1,275
iO,7U
9,032
33
29
20
14
13
12.2
4.5
3.6
1.12
.80
1O2
93
173
149,925
145,720
135,963
)9,378
33,717
31,588
22,026
15,427
6,583
5,917
458.5
393.3
375.4
366.7
l.'flS
1,833.53
925.18
881.30
1,095
1,080
1.O65
1,063
153.3
145.0
1,326.7
1,295.7
15.2
11.2
732.94
7O8.42
703.41
3,229.2
3,224.7
3,223.3
'2,013,600
1,999,500
1,409.81
1,367.81
3,164.89
3,157.99
10,731
9,515
645.79
635.49
                                                                                                                                                                      1.011
                                                                                                                                                                        .983
                                                                                                                                                                        .917
                                                                                                                                                                      1.144
                                                                                                                                                                      1.028
                                                                                                                                                                        .23
                                                                                                                                                                        .05
                                                                                                                                                                        .00
                                                                                                                                                                        .98
                                                                                                                                                                        .24
                                                                                                                                                                        .19
                                                                                                                                                                        .821
                                                                                                                                                                        .688
                                                                                                                                                                        .98
                                                                                                                                                                        .96
                                                                                                                                                                        .93
                                                                                                                                                                        .93
                                                                                                                                                                        .435
                                                                                                                                                                        .296
                                                                                                                                                                        .755
                                                                                                                                                                        .644
                                                                                                                                                                        .072
                                                                                                                                                                        .053
                                                                                                                                                                        .38
                                                                                                                                                                        .33
                                                                                                                                                                        .32
                                                                                                                                                                        .6
                                                                                                                                                                        .6
                                                                                                                                                                        .6
                                                                                                                                                                       .70
                                                                                                                                                                       .62
                                                                                                                                                                       .85
-
	
a. 9
i*2.2
	
•M.5
*5fl.5
*5«.5
	

49,2
_
	
—
	
	
	
	
7b.57

73.6
—
	
	
	
	
49.9

—
,-
—
55
62.6
	
	
	

	
US
	
—
0.67
.2.4
.06
1.19
.058
.66
.16
.24
.10
.63
.07
	
.361
.325
	
.695
1.28
.487
.236

.64
—
10.40
-J.69
l.U
	
1.19
	
2.0O
—
.11
—
.527
—
1.4*

.23

1.22
.22
—
I/. 02
.55

.71
	
-34
	
.49

.1*6
-
_
329
299
	
886
1,631
621
—

687
—
—
—
1,572
—
1,149
	
3.335
—
i/S

—
—
	
	
250

—
	
—
y*
749.88
—
—
	
—
	
512

723
XS
SCS
scs
SCS
scs
SOS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
9CS


CS




SCS

SCS



SCS

5SS

SCS

SCS

SCS

3CS

SCS


SCS
a.

SCS

SCS

iCS

SCS


-------
                                       i ri i s I s i i ft
 rt 38 3 6| R Ł  3 B

I  " I ' ' I ' I ' !  ' I ' ! ' ! ' I
                  Sfl t H i-l J tV  ^
                  O O O O O O  t



               I "' I -1 I ' ! ' I  ' I ' ! ' ! I
       1 I !f^iŁ)Ł>l2l'ii'

                                              i  fi
                                                b   S .
                                          ""
                               i   I
                               5
                                15 I





                                ~-lŁ~-3-3U-,,IQ~r4
                                     ^^^.^^^^^^^S:
r i o- i i w i 
-------
                                                                                                     SUMMARY OF

                                                                       RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE W THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970
^
00


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER


' 	

RESERVOIR


STREAM
I
1


NEAREST TOf N




DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)

TOTAL ] NET


DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVG. ANN.
WFUJt
BATTO
(ACRE-IT.
PEB
Al.RM'T)


KECmC
•EIGHT
DRY)
LR PER
CU. FT.)


AVG. ANN.
samam
ACdMDLA-nOK
POSQ. H.
OF NET W.
A3EAFDB
PERIOD SBOtJN

AC.-FT. | TONS


AGCMCY
SUPPLYBIG
DATA


                                                                                       RIO GRiSDE BAiIli (BSPAJELA TO TOUT CJUITKU
<7-lb






57-2
57-3a
57-4
57-5


57-7




57-11
57-12




57-15*


57-16
57-17


57-19







«-?







Klaph*nt Butt— 	 Wo Gr«*. RiTT 	


_,
jŁ - *•
	 to 	 	 *> 	
|y - - *l •
Ao . - 	 *» 	

Corofl»ld Ifcrti (1) 	 — 	 Trlb. of Eio Ptwroo tt»«^
Cornfiald fa* (2) 	 	 do 	


C«-nfield Utah (4) 	 	 <*• 	
_' *° - ,
_. .A, ... — 	 do 	


Oorafiald *.* (15) 	 	 do- 	
San Luis (1) 	 	 do 	 • 	 	 	


•* ** Trlh T J n
™*" do




Caballo Arroyoa Sit* 1 Oodcrwood Arroyo 	
J? A
_t* ^ 9 ™-OJO ^ JO
Sit* /3 (Rawonaa Arroyo) 	 Haaon«8 Arroyo 	

10 ^l
Horth *ltm Sito f2 toi-th 3u« ioyu
**? IF A fl TjiJ A
RoJwj (HnLi.h 7«llt/ Ariuju »j. *^. inT^-


Pwcoa RlTor

-^k. • rto-
J° tin
do do
•Jo i-
*T4*oi, .J.«o Arolany- trz-i I»c
___^ 	 , 	 	 do 	
Klaphant Butt*, *. Hex. 25,923
do
do
do
	 do 	 —
	 *> 	 	
.-do- ...
Troth or Cons«»qu«nc«»,2/3O,7OO 3^
1. fex.
B^noU, 1. NKK. 93.1
a**, «. ««. 	 .29
	 do 	 .87


—— * 	 1-ls
. 1 nj.
	 do 	
	 do 	
(U>
	 do 	 1.04
do 1 06




B.™llllo, «. Itox. 	 1,034
_i_
do
Cuba, 1. ttot. 	 .74
Dcrrr, *. Max. — 	 	 .87


	 rto 	 1.17
j




uprea PECOS HTVER BASI«





°~
n
ai-.sba<. , . ex.
	 *, 	
5,866




—


93.1
.28
.85


1.17




1.03
1.05
66



1,034


.74
.87








39.9

3,749




ofvn
'
-
Jan.



Oct.
pr.
pr.
NOT.
2«i
Apr.
Oct.
Apr.

Oct.
Apr.

Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Doc.




Oct.
Oct.
Jan.


Julj
Jul/
HOT.

D*c.
Sapt.













pr'
July
1915

1925


1947
196"?
1957
1929
1951
I960
1951

I960
1951
I960

I960
I960
I960
1953
1952

I960

I960
1953
1958

1965
1952
1962
1959

1968






1931

1936









5.0

5.5
6.5
12.2
19.9
27.4
4/10

V
4/10


4/10
4/10
4/10
4/7

4/8
Vs

v^
5/4 25
5/1.6?
i/6.33



6.7
6.3














15. 2S
2,634,900

2,339,380
2,270,300
2,219,000

2,137,219
343,990
3J58
24.0
10.3
54.1

2.6
22.1
17.4
9.2
3.0
3.1
.3

16.3
22.6
19.6

19.0
117,213
115,821

112,809
*3.0
73.21
232
160
69


190.82
17O.91
141.25
1,180
1,150
156,750



110,655


5,64?
-

	


2.2O
2.31

.190
.160
1.446
.620
3.127
2.607
.711
.313
1.277
1.006
-474
.155
.639
.023
6.593
.676


2.155
.683
2.844
2.810
2.763
2.737

15.9
14.9
6.9
4.76
5.5


•9.4
15.4
12.7

_
.946


.797



--
-

	
•60

60.0
62

80
—
—

_

__


—

—

	 .
	
—
•75.7
*75.7
•75.7
_
m

noo
•110
•no

98.5

85

	
—
•73-5

•73.5
•73.5


76.7



.475
.361

.22
.0761
.27
4.89
1.06

1.32
.40

.60
1.67
2.15
.01


.58

2,43
.317
1.1M
.162
.62
.64

3.30
6.03
27.16

.35

1.55

.083

.876

1.03
.281

6/.0263
.0599
-

	
621


357

470



_

_

-
—

—

	
	
—
523
1,860
267
	
1,547

7,187
LA, 44*
102,597

750.9

2,869

_
—
1,410

1,649
450

	
-
a







scs
OS

OB


OS
OS
OS


OS
nil

OS





scs
acs



acs

scs

acs

an




at



-------

T*
oo


*

uaruL L "1L fl
ui^ji-iLamlu Jlte fl
T*
j
7°

ft *7
™ncrv"t *^







do


*
rf-
1°


*in
** jT

*
*
Aft
*lrD°" **^
-
i*o*rnon f20

^
San Carlos (Coolidge Du) 	
0

do
Stock Tank Ho. 16 (Bryce Dam)
Roosevelt- Salt River Project-
j°
do
°
A















do




^_


do




da






do
da


do
Agu Frl* Rlw 	

^^ da ™

^
rin


-i in «. T r «*
da " **" °

~°

do
da



do
do


Cap! tan, 1. Max.— 122 93.92

do
da














do





.






COLOUDO RIVER BASIN (BHJ3W HOOTER DAK
Williams and Lower Gila Hirer Basins
GILA RIVER BASIM
Phoenix, Ari«. • 1,450 1,4-Wt

m », »_j 11 r«ifi .11 drtrt
, Ul*. J-.9OO ,VU"J
do
j
do
ii-I 6*? 69
Ml,
r ,_ r ,
do
do

— Oo 	
do
•ov.
»aj
Jane
Dec.
Jan.
July
*v
Oct.
MT
Mr.
Feb.
Jan.
Feb.
Oct.
Feb.
Oct.
Feb.
Oct.
Mr.
*v
»pr.
Oct.
Nar.
Dec.
Jan.
Jan.
Oct.
•ov.
Oct.
MX.
*v
Jan.
Oct.
Oct.
MX.
Oct.
MX.
Oct.
ipr.
Feb.
aov.
Feb.
Jan.
Mar.
Hav
Dec.
Oct.
Sept.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
1904
1910
1915
1925
1932
1940
1956
1959
1959
1961
1962
1963
1965
1955
1965
1955
1965
1955
1965
1955
1957
1959
1965
1955
1956
1958
1959
1965
1954
1965
1955
1957
1958
1958
1965
1955
1965
1955
1965
1928
1941
1928
1935
1937
1947
1966
1936
1941
1909
1914
1916
1925
1935
1939
1946
10.42
6.42
4.50
10.08
7.50
7.08
16.50
.42
1.58
.83
.92
1.92
10.67
10.67
10.67
2.17
1.91
6.50
1.75
1.08
1.00
6.75
10.92
2.17
.67
.75
7.00
10.67
10.58
12.9
6.3
1.9
10.0
19.6
5.2
5.7
1.8
8.9
9.3
4.0
7.0
73,000
61,500
45,500
42,000
40,500
38,655
2/39,400
4,972.14
4,946. 54
4,896.60
4,818.00
4,796.41
4,749. 54
4.77
3.52
7.20
1.59
4.09
1.59
2.21
1.60
1.52
.49
5.45
4.30
3.62
3.02
.55
23.78
16.05
20.19
18.04
17.99
17.58
16.05
15.60
2.20
6.55
5.77
184,500
176,456
1,266,837
1,232,725
1,230,695
1,209,343
1,170,118
11.43
5.13
1,522,200
1,495,460
1,460,150
1,425,813
1,418,013
1,398,430
1.381.580
5»-6

5»-7

58-8

58-9
58-11

58-12
58-13

58-14
60-1

60-2.
60-3

60-4
   I/  Total storage ehows a gain of 9,180 ac.-ft.  since 1947 survey attributable priaarily to compaction.
   2/  Includes 2,940 sq. Hi. in closed basin in Sen LniB Valley, Cole.
   3/  Drainage aree between gaging station below Elephant Bntte Du and gaging station below Caballo Dan
lees original water surface area of Caballo Besexvoir at elevation 4,225.3.
   ^/  Bnnoff seasons.
   5/  Tljes periods adjusted.
   y  Coejpected sediieent for 1,080 eq. ed.; values for 16,03O sq. id. are given in appendix
                                                                                                                                                                     .344
                                                                                                                                                                     .276
                                                                                                                                                                     .232
                                                                                                                                                                     J.7Z
                                                                                                                                                                     .159
                                                                                                                                                                     .153
                                                                                                                                                                     046
                                                                                                                                                                     .149
                                                             •70
                                                            5/62.4

                                                             •75
                                                              75
                                                              75
                                                              75
                                                              75
                                                                                                                                                                                •75
                                                                                                                                                                                •75
                                                                                                                                                                                •75

                                                                                                                                                                                •75
                                                                                                                                                                                •75
                                                                                                                                                                                •75
                                                                                                                                                                                •75
                                                             •75
                                                             •75
                                                             •75
                                                             •75

                                                             •75

                                                             •75
                                                                                                                                                                    6.054
                                                                                                                                                                    5.891
                                                                                                                                                                    5.882
                                                                                                                                                                    5.780
                                                                                                                                                                    5.592
                                                                                                                                                                    1.886
                                                                                                                                                                    1.853
                                                                                                                                                                    1.809
                                                                                                                                                                    1.767
                                                                                                                                                                    1.757
                                                                                                                                                                    1.733
                                                                                                                                                                    1.712
                                                              •70
                                                              •70
                                                              •70
                                                              •70
                                                              •70
                                                              •70
                                                                                                                                                                                           .116
                                                                                                                                                                                           .120
                                                                                                                                                                                           .238
                                                                                                                                                                                           .023
                                                                                                                                                                                           .013
                                                                                                                                                                                           .017
                                                                                                                                                                                           .004

                                                                                                                                                                                           .65
                                                                                                                                                                                           .34
                                                                                                                                                                                          1.01
                                                                                                                                                                                           .25
                                                                                                                                                                                           .26

                                                                                                                                                                                           .01
                                                                                                                                                                                          1.46
                                                                                                                                                                                           .24
                                                                                                                                                                                           .83

                                                                                                                                                                                          2.75
                                                                                                                                                                                          2.63
                                                                                                                                                                                          2.49
                                                                                                                                                                                          1.53

                                                                                                                                                                                           .45

                                                                                                                                                                                          1.39
                                                                                                                                                                                           .14
                                                                                                                                                                                           .7*
                                                                                                                                                                                           .31

                                                                                                                                                                                           .70

                                                                                                                                                                                           .46
                                                                                                                                                                                           .432

                                                                                                                                                                                           .455
                                                                                                                                                                                           .090
                                                                                                                                                                                           .179
                                                                                                                                                                                           .168

                                                                                                                                                                                          1.75

                                                                                                                                                                                           .819
                                                                                                                                                                                          3.350
                                                                                                                                                                                           .670
                                                                                                                                                                                           .145
                                                                                                                                                                                           .850
                                                                                                                                                                                           .418
1,060
  555
1,649
  403
  424

   16

1,500

  554

2,380
  391
1,352

4,555
4,260
4,130
2,519

  734

2,262
  228
1,241
  505

1,142

  752
                                                                                          scs

                                                                                          3CS

                                                                                          sea

                                                                                          scs
                                                                                           3C3

                                                                                           GS
1,248
5,107
1,021
   221
1,296
   637
   ?/  Increase in capacity due vainly to compaction.
   8/  Only surface samples (1.0-3.1 ft.) in approxlmtely 1/3 of r»s«r»lr area below
crest.
   2/  Drainage area is 100 ae. plus pipe flow from Pearson Al.  t-hieh has a drainage a
10 ac., plus pipe and emergency spillway flow fro« Pearson AS, which haa a drainage are
1.80 sq. KL.
   *   Eotiimted or assumed.
                                                                                                                                                                                                           a of
                                                                                                                                                                                                            of

-------
                                                                                             SUMMARY OF

                                                                  RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE W TOE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970


DATA




^.va*




STREAM




NEAREST TOWN




1

DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)

TOTAL


DATE OF
SURVEY

NET :


PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)



STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVtt ANN.
INFIX)*
RATIO
(ACHE-FT.
PEB
AC8E-FT)


iPEOFIC
RIGHT
[DRY)
La PER
:u. rr.)


AVG. ANN
stxatan
ACOMJLATnN
PE8SQ. •*,
OF NET OB.
AtEAFOB
fSUCtH^MH
AC.-FT. | TOWS


ACBICY
SWPLYKG
DATA


en
O
•0-5
60-&
40-T
«M
•O-*
60-10
40-11
40-13
40-13.
60-14
40-H
ID-It
40-17
•o-u
10-11.
40-20
 	
	 „ 	 	 * 	
-B- Bt, fe. I, 	 	 * 	
•o- m. •.. 5 	 	 do 	
^* a. iw< «.. < 	 *> 	
B^c OaftaMa ate. 4 9f 	 Trii. of KUXMOI Bry Uka —

BtlftBa 	 M». «f OU« tt»«r 	
ai 	 	 do 	
nuaaninii 	 	 do 	
Loaar »«*• "aak 	 f*ot« «aa» 	
fc^fc. 1 	 >»a.lbaB 	
*•»*>- 3 	 	 *> 	
•fetal fc. 3 	 	 * 	
Bl*Mr fmtm Ifcah 	 Foot* "»* 	
«dU*«  	 Trtt. of Foot, lull 	
ItoU IhA PM M 	 Tl*b. of (Mia Mm. 	
imilii^ r^liannr tad A 	 Trtb. of QM«D Cr«dc 	
minim n»nnn n™i *a — 	 *> 	
Big ••*« Ml. ttak fl 	 1Mb. of Cmtaonial Utah —
W* bra ». T«* *2 	 	 do 	
•»»*„* 	 	 do 	
•tot TMk 	 	 *> 	
	 ,1,. 	 	 	 do 	
Open- «» T»ik 	 tl«n- IhA 	
BirojMbAla Mt. Tank A 	 THb. of BrowR>s CaoTon
U.A
J«H* *.*. hrt«i4«, Arix. 	
Saffbrd, Arix. 	 	 	
	 do— -. - -
Sunflow«r. Ariz. 	
Safford, Arls. 	 — —

Flor«nc« Junction, Ariz.
—do.
Tonopah, Ariz. 	
	 do 	
-Ł 	
— _do- — 	 —
Saloaa, Aril 	
igulla, *rlz. 	
do • -• -
Solonn, irlz. 	

J BtSIK (Continual)
l/t." t-1'
.a
10.92
2.18
.36
12.3
5.6«
.6
.38
.2
.9
•.80
1.78
.33
21.9
.6
1..9S
.71
5,312
5,618
.60
.33
1.09
.65
.51
.U
2/.60
2/1-88
.29
1.83
.11
4. 60

.21
10.92
.36
12.3
5.63
.6
.38
.2
.9
V.63
1.78
.38
*7.0
.6
4.95
.74
190
5,614
.58
.33
1.09
.65
.51
.U
J/.60
9/1-88
.29
1.83
.U
4.57


HOT.
B3T.
Sapt.
H&r.
Nov.
•or.
Ho*.
HOY.
Oct.
«•»»
fcr
Pab.
»V
fcj
Oct.
June
June
F.b.
iug.
HOT.
Jan.
tor.
Oct.
Kov.
Jan.
Jan.
July
July
Juna
Oct.
July
Oct.
*J
Hay
Juna
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Juna
Oct.
Jan.
Jan.
July
1936
1958
1917
1958
1938
1958
1947
195«
1*2
1958
1943
1958
1%1
1958
15*9
1960
1940
1960
1941
1960
1954
1960
1936
1958
19*8
1959
1954
1959
1949
1959
1946
I960
1936
1958
1950
I960
1939
1942
1950
1964
1945
1950
1963
1936"
1964
1936*
1964
1931
1961
1944
1%1
1960
1964
1960
1964
1954*
1965
1945
1965
1960
1964
1944*
1964
1958
1964
1957
1964
1964

41
20
2/7
2/12
1/5
4/6
11
20
19
6
22
11
5.4
10
14
22
10
3.50
8.33
4.9
13.1
•28
•28
30
17
4.3
4.3
•11
4.3
JO
6.3
7
.6
279
253
2.94
Z.5.
2.55
.70
14.7
.0
.43
.0
3.0
2.7
.8
,6
6.0
4.1
4.7
2.8
6.8
3.9
6.00
1.83
14.8
13.0
5.7
2.7
1.6
1.3
6.0
3.8
1.9
1.4
24.2
19.5
3.4
1.8
132,608
179,480
7/179,548
178,4*8
67,900
8/142,830
139,238
19,10
17.10
b.462
5.325
2,10
1.00
9.33
8.95
21.30
ZJ.O6
11.46
11.26
1.27
.67
7.61
4.08
10.09
9.93
2.21
^iS
6.50
158.79
154.24
153.16
2.847
2.582
.516
.44*
.009
.002
.218
0
.009
.008
.005
.004
.312
.214
.385
.230
1.889
1.083
.368
.112
.17*.
.084
.232
.183
.099
.073
.209
.168
.254
.134
.241
.507
.494
•1.705
•1.527
•1.04,9
-.864
.197
.094
1.3*6
1.291
•7.83
•7.74
•4.88
*4.79
.397
.209
.759
.407
*6.5l
*6.41
*.22S
'.173
•11.25
•11.02
•1.649
•1.796
•1.784

•75
•75
««5
•75
•75
•90
•90
•85
•90
•SO
««5
•75
•8O
•85
76.2
72.6
60
60
47.6
•50
91.97
52.5
46
•50
76.9
•76.9

.05
.008
.85
.10
.006
.006
.29
.26
.75
.78
.13
.15
.15
.03
.06
.23
6/-154
.044
.049
.12
.12
.033
.034
.11
.U
.09
.13
.015
.18
.14
.39
_
81.7
13.1
1,573
9.8
9.8
559
520
1,388
1.530
261
278
49
105
426
199
190
43
44
114
ia>
180
148.7
15
196
234.5
653.2
sea
9CS
3C3
3C3
S3
S3
3d
913
S3
3CS
xs
9CS
9C8
9CS
xs
xs
3CS
SC3
Bt
B>
scs
so
3CS
scs
3CS
S3
scs
3CS
3C3
3CS
acs
9CS

-------
60-41

60-42

60-43
6O-46

60-47

60-48

6O-49
Three 3ar B Deoris Basin 	


0
0



.
^
"^hree B*r " Debris Basin 	

0
0
0
0
^

0
-lo
Tb Bar D Deb &a
r "n
0
0

d
_jo
d


j
Tft-ie Bar p Debris Basin 	

"°
°
0
0
,j

9 *t
cnnc.. u.


Horsethi-f Basin 	
L71U[ ^ke
Granite Basin 	


n ° Tank
" C


_ t _
""^do
Trib. of Bock Creak 	


rf
It


a
do

to
1°
j°
j°
ri
da
H

°
~°
0
'
rt
rt
d
~°



0
0
°
do
j^

d
dQ
1°
1°

_,
^°
ainut uulcn
d
rf°
Horiethief Canyon 	 —
Lynx Creek 	 — 	


V rri R'
i . crae Kivcr
°
jcn • a
Trio. Flying »E" Wash 	
°
"do ^ a
Roosevelt, Ariz. 	 .O?3

0
do-
do
°

j°
rt

iC


^4°
do
.0-
•10
rt

do
j°
°~ T>^
do .l-b
do
do
do
0
rf
rt
H
do
do-
J°
-O .107
0

do
do
do
j0
-O
-c
i^^stone, Ariz. .6
do
do ...
Crown King, Aris. 	 .85
Prescott, Ariz. 	 18.14

o i,, & ;
icottsdale. Aria. 	 .06
A AA
onopah, Ariz. .00
Wi k b A J "Q
" urS> - j-z. . V
do

.073 Aug.
Oct.
c
n^t*
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
.U9 Aug.
Oct.


-~t-
Oct.
Let.
Oct.

.126 Aug.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
n"'
Oct.
Oct.
.107 Mar.
Oct.
Oct.

Oct.
Oct.
.6 June
June
June
.35
Nov.
«10 Mov.
3 /„ °V*
AJg.
.06 Jipr.
«Ug.
.^45 June
Apr.
.77 Kay
Sept.
.I2"f Hay
1959
I960
1961
1962
196 L.
1965
1966
3967
1966
1969
1970
1959
I960
1961
1962
196A
19o5
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1959
I960
1962
1964
1965
1166
1967
1968
1969
1970
1963
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1963
1069
10?0
1961
1967
1963
1967
1934
1969
1<^2
1939
1967
19U
1970
1939
1967
1956
1970
1965
107C
1.17
1.00
1.00
2.00
1.00
l.CG
l.oc
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.1'
1.00
1.00
^.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.1'
1.00
1.00
2.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
,51
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
6
36
6
23
-:9-2
27.9
H.3
                                                                                                                                                         11/.23
                                                                                    LITTLE :OLORADO AND SAN JUAN RIVS? BASINS
                                              •erted from Hawk Hollow.
                                                                          Zuni,  N.  Hex ------
                                                                                do
Oct.  1954    —
Hay   I960  14/6
                                                                                                                                                         U/.01,
                                                                                                                                                          18
                                                                                                                                                          17
                                                                                                                                                          14
                                                                                                                                                          13.5
                                                                                                                                                          42.4
                                                                                                                                                          35.6
                                                                                                                                                       1,472
                                                                                                                                                       1,460
                                                                                                                                                          89
                                                                                                                                                          58
                                                                                                                                                          21
                                                                                                                                                          79.1
                                                                                                                                                          77.3
                                                                                                                                                            .99
                                                                                                                                                            .91
                                                                                                                                                         334.8
                                                                                                                                                         148.0
                                           .6
                                           .6
                                         1.7
                                         1.7
                                           .44
                                           .37
                                         1.07
                                         1.06
                                         *.32
                                         *.21
                                                                                                                                                           1.529     *1.91
                                         6.63
                                        20.87
                                        20.39
                                         1.59
                                         1.46
                                                                                                                                                                      1.425
                                                                                                                                                                       .630
•uo
mo
•uo
•uo
mo
•110
•uo
•uo
•uo
mo
•uo
•uo
•uo
•uo
mo
mo
•110
•uo
•uo
•uo
•110
•110
•uo
•110
mo
•uo
mo
•uo
•uo
•110
mo
•110
•uo
•uo
•uo
•uo
•uo
•uo
75
75
-
-
-
-
74.8
94.1
88.2
12/L8.77 12/44,969
12/4.66 12/U,159
0 0
12/.55 12/1,313
12/.14 12/328
12/.27 12/656
0 0
12/.14 12/328
0 0
0 0
12/5.57 12/13,345
12/.67 12/1,008
12/.67 IgA.oOS
0 0
0 0
12/.34 12/804
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
12/12.70 12/30,427
12/3.73 12/8,937
12/.63 12/1,521
12/.04 12/95
f.08 12/190
.08 12/190
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
12/.37 12/886
12/.09 12/224
12/.19 12/448
0 0
0 0
0 0
13./.08 13/2,°16
.2 326
.25 410
.22 —
.197 —
.236 -
.09 —
.21 342
.16 328
.10 192
PS

FS

SCS

SCS

SCS

SCS
   \/  Drainage area includes 1.97 so. mi. diverted from Hawk Hollow.                                           9/  Drainage area is aiiallest area that could be pc-gitively
   V  Heserroir wag fjll of sedl-nent in 1954.                                                                  10/  Storage capacity at original spUlway crest elevatio
   ^/  Const^-cte^ ! 043 t -leaned 1953.                                                                       elevation 0.53 ac.-ft,
   4/  Constructed 1041, cleaned 1952.                                                                          ll/  Basin cleaned as needed to maintain capacity.

from the 4.17 sq. -^. above this daw.                                                                           13/  Basin filled during storm of 9-5-70 and undetermined
   6_/  Baaed on total drainage area of 5,812 sq. ni. before construction of Horseshoe  Dara upstream.             14/  Runoff seasons.
   7/  Increase in caoacity probably flue to compaction.                                                         *    EstinBted cr assumed,
   8/  Capacity Lncreased 76,130 =ic.-ft. b? ijiatallation of spillway gates in ^une 1950.
                                                                                                                                                                           - storage capacity at  eroded  spiUwoy
                                                                                                                                                                              nt of sediAant ascapea froa pond.

-------
                                                                                           SOMIIAHYOF
                                                               RESERVOIR SEDMEH TATWN SURVEYS HADE Bi THE UMTED STATES THBOUGH BWO


DATA
ITOMBEB





RKSSKVCSE






STREAM






IfEAREST TOWi








DHAJHAGE AREA
(SQUASZ MLES)


TOTAL


NET


DATE OF
SURVEY





PERIOD
BETWKEH
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPAaTY
(ACHE -FT.)



CAPAorr
AVG.ANN.
BfFUM

PS)
ACiE-TO


•Plane
HLKJil!
L&ns
•». FT.)


A**a,ARM.

rSSMT*
OP 1ST 98.
ASUUKMi
***** aW*"
AC.-FT. | TOHS


^^
BATA



to
                                                                                OCLOSACO i«D 3*3 J«i« BIT3X 3A33K! (Cottin
61-3
61-4
61-3
61-4
61-7
61-6
62-1
62-2
63-3
62-4
62-;
62-6
62-7
62-S
62-9
62-10
62-11
63-13
62-14
62-15
62-16
62-17
63-1

	 do 	 	 do
	 JO 	 : 	 |8». - -
•Bumf* tank I 	 	 do 	
	 do 	 do
Ql«KSrtli Tru* 	 	 mb. fenr Lew Craaft —
"•" "J* 	 Wb.JJa««.a»« Matt-
*wt Kail Taas 	 — -*j 	
%nu Tm* H 	 nib. Plsfclae %rUg Bi


Breofcdtir teak— 	 trtb. of JeSoe^i HwS~
do 	 	 	 	 *> 	
M«;s rut Cbaroti 	 	 Ssody Oajra Kaab 	
* ~^ (Tf F h Prarf-


troCU^ Ce««re°l Streeteir*.
	 i-i 	 	 " 	
Bill 9aow Pond 	 . 	 Trib. Santa Clazv 9±rsa



	 do 	 do 	

40
	 Saanflaa, IrM. 	 -48
	 	 do .55
IWto,4rta. .25
	 aemaato, Aria. 	 2.45
ov *-rt-«'. *•*>• •»
nv- . .^o 	 .10
qp|tx)B^go BXmS Ba3B! (HAJX3 CS03S

	 j«,.- 	 — .
	 	 do 	 57.«S


I(K2i«a Bbeeesia., A2^a. 1.27

IVaao^E, fall. 5/3.49
	 b^TiociM, Otai. 	 9.2
do
p 	 St. Gaergs, Utah 	 .03



	 	 de 	 —
	 	 te 	 .09
	 	 do 	 1.09
	 — de 	 .85
	 	 do 	 .59
	 	 de 	 	 2.3
r — — — 
-------
8        3        888


 I I I I  I I I I I I I I  I I I I  I I II ! I IS
  8    8


ISM I M;
                                                                   .1 '& 'S'
                               R*«i
                               ,-t
 it  t 8Ł *  8 88  R«  SK*  . 3  P3fi*K RX fc  Ł*<« S  f S
 -*O«O*J^»*VoJoJ^j"*-4 "|J«N *l*jO'«Oii?««V'***l«>'OO«lJ|i4*t*-t"-t-'fi'p^''O'O^3'*«O'iO>^w>'O-*-*«*v«*\«<">f*\pj «
                                            *                              J«H  rfrf-1  H- !
 •«-«OOOO  <«-«OOOO  -O O O  -O O O

t^^^^^N J ^1 ,4 ^^1 .HO? IfVrHrv liNrJiN |
                                              '  «OOO  -Oc^Oi-JOOOOOOOOO  >O«^O^OOOOOOOOO  * *"* -H
                                                          j|SI?IBIISS*l?l?ilsllll  I15'?!
S        Ł        Ł    8    S                  f=    2                 3                  d »<9-
a        
-------
                                                                                               SUWIARYOF

                                                            RESERVOIB SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE » THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1OTO


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER





RESERVOIR







STREAM






NEAREST TOWN






DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE

TOTAL
MILES)

NET



DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVG. ANN.
INFLOW
(ACRE-FT.
PEB



SPECIFIC
•EIGHT
:DR„)
LR PER
CU. FT.)


AVG. ANN
SEDUENT
ACCUMULATION
PERSQ. M.
OFNETDB.
AREA FOR
PERIOD SHOWN

AC.-FT. | TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA


           Oil Itall <3-i>
                                          Trlb.  or Badger Uuti-
63-11
63-13
                                                                               COLORADO UiXB BASH (ABOVJ KAILS C2OS3IHG)
                                                                         Cunnleon, Dolores and Prewont  RiTar Basins (Continued)
                                                                      tack, Colo.	•—
0.059
—
—
—
— .
—
—
—
—
—
—
_
—
—
	
.019

—
—
—
—
	
	
—
—
—
—
—
—
.158
—
—
—
—
—
	
—
—
—
—
	
— .
—
.048
—
—
—
—
—
_
—
	
	
	
_
—
—
—
D«c.
July
HOT.
Oct.
HOT.
HOT.
HOT.
HOT.
HOT.
HOT.
•or.
Oct.
HOY.
HOT.
Oct.
D.C.
July
Her.
Oct.
Sor.
HOT.
Nor.
SOT.
HOT.
HOT.
HOT.
Oct.
SOT.
HOT.
Dec.
July
HOT.
Oct.
HOT.
HOT.
HOT.
HOT.
HOT.
HOT.
HOT.
Oct.
HOT.
HOT.
Dec.
July
HOT.
Oct.
HOT.
HOT.
HOT.
Hov.
HOT.
NOT.
HOT.
Oct.
NOT.
NOT.
Oct.
1953
1955
195*
1957
195S
1959
1961
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1966
1969
1970
1953
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1961
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1953
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1961
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1953
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1961
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
__
1.6
1.3
1.0
1.1
1.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
—
1.6
1.3
1.0
1.1
1.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
—
1.6
1.3
1.0
1.1
1.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
—
1.6
1.3
1.0
1.1
1.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
  12.92
  12.18
  12.18
  11.90
  13.90
  11.64
  11.31
  11.25
  11.21
  10.73
  10.82
  10.62
  10.15
  10.13
   9.99
   4.52
   4.31
   4.31
   4.19
   4.19
   4.16
   4.14
   4.12
   4.03
   3.89
   3.89
   3.81
   3.74
   3.83
   8.45
   6.05
   6.05
   5.94
   5.94
2/24.80
  24.18
  23.89
  23.45
  23.15
  23.23
  22.86
  21.88
  22.12
   8.10
   7.69
   7.69
   7.58
   7.58
   7.51
   7.38
   7.10
   7.05
   6.81
   6.81
   6.54
   6.07
   6.18
   6.13
5.71
5.39
5.39
5.26
5.26
5.15
5.00
4.98
4.96
4.75
4.79
4.70
4.49
4.48
4.42
9.62
9.17
9.17
8.91
8.91
8.85
8.80
8.76
8.57
8.28
8.28
8.11
7.96
8.15
2.14
1.53
1.53
l.W
1.50
6.28
6.12
6.05
5.94
5.86
5.88
5.79
5.54
5.60
4.60
4.37
4.37
4.31
4.31
4.27
4.19
4.03
4.00
3.87
3.87
3.72
3.45
3.51
3.48
•93
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
__
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
"90

•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
__
•90
•90
"90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
•90
«90
7.30
0
4.75
0
4.40
2.71
.51
.68
8.14
1A-
3.39
7.9*
.3*
2.3«
-_
6.85
0
6.32
0
1.58
.53
.53
4.74
7.37
0
4.21
3.68
l/-

9.50
0
.70
0
2.15
1.96
.95
2.78
1.90
i/-
2.34
6.20
i/~

5.4Z
0
2.29
0
1.46
1.46
2.92
1.04
5.00
0
5.63
9.80
y-
1.04
15,»9
«
9.S02
—
8,638
5,482
»97
1,329
15,947
—
6,645
15,615
664
4,651
_
13,427
—
12,380
—
3,095
1,032
1,032
9,285
14,443
—
8,253
7,222
—

18,622
_
1,365
—
2,840
3,846
1,110
5,459
3,722

4,590
12,158
—
__
10,624
—
4,492
—
2,859
2,654
5,717
2,042
9,801
-~
11,026
1«,194
—
2,042














OS













as













as















-------
                                  SS-i
  II
i in
:?:lsI• I• f y • I• i• s§• svi•!• I• I•!•
                  I!
            I   I  M
                                c
                                V&fri'
                                                            I • I • r «• I • I • I • I •
                                                            *»*» •(•( ft
,  M M I II I ! M ! I I I ! ,- !  I II I M M M M ! M M I M I I  M M  !!!!!!  I M I M M I I  I I !
                                                   8
                                   fssirsfsgff.fjrsfifjr^

  oooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooo ooooow ooooow
                                         PS cJ«  C
                                         o*fc



                                            »-r-*"


                                         5ai Si; Si
                                                            *«8
                     »5s;i!ok    ftfesssc   tt
                                                   8       a

-------
                                                                                                       SUMMARY OF

                                                                        RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER




RESERVOIR




STREAM




NEAREST TOWN




DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)

TOTAL [ NET


DATE OF
SURVEY


!

PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS!



STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVtt ANN.
INFLOW
RATIO
(ACRE-FT
PER
ACRt-TO


SPECIFIC
(EIGHT
(DRY)
LB. PER
CU. FT.)


AVfl. ANN.
SEDWENT
ACCUMULATION
PEHSQ. tO.
OF NET DR.
AREA FOB
PERIOD SHOWN

AC.-FT. | TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA


en
                                                                                         COLORADO arras BASH (ABOVE HALLS CSDSSIBG}
                                                                                    Gumison, Dolorvo and Frwont EUror Basins (Continued)





63-20



63-21


64-2
64-3
64-4


64-*
64 7
64-«


65-2




"""jo""" tlr
	 to 	
	 * 	
__ 	 do 	 	 	
	 do 	
East St. Louis Creek Weir 	
	 Ł 	 	
	 do 	
llL
HW-1 "oatcap Wash Watershed -


South Soda Cre«k Weir 	 . 	
North Fish Cr«k Weir 	
	 do 	 • 	 	
West Walton "reek Weir 	
	 _-;0 	 __ 	
- do

Niles Haalea Pond 	

Ejjt ^y°n

-do---


„
^'do'8
	 do 	
	 do 	

Easi, St. Loula Creak 	
	 do 	
	 do— 	
.-do
Roatcap fasti 	

' c"u" v
South Soda Creek 	
	 do 	 • 	

Trib. Walton Creek 	
	 do 	
	 40 	 — 	
Trib P " el
	 do 	
Trib. Twelve Mile Wash 	

j. ^ar.^n rcoc ^
Weber River 	
do(.
-do
7 do
Col
do


— 	 do—- 	
	 do 	
	 do- 	

	 oo 	



Steamboat Springs
	 do 	
	 do 	
	 do 	
	 _-JO 	

	 do- 	


	 do 	
Echo, Utah 	
Snnt i Utah

	 do 	



	 - —
	 	 -
	 3.10 3.10
	 	 -

	 __ _
	 11.6 11.5
G8EKN RIVER BASIN

, Colo. 3.40 3.4G
	 2.24 —
	 1.33 1.33
	 — —
11 11
	 1.41 1.41
	 .65 .65
G8ZAT SALT LAKE BASIN

	 732 732

SEVIER RIVBH BASIN
	 5.0 4.9


Oot.
Oct.
Oot.
Oot.
Oct.
Oot.
Oct.
Oot.
Oot.
Oot.
Oot.
Oot.
Oot.
Oot.
Oct.
Oot.
Oat.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
•or.

Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oot.
Oot.
Oct.

Oot.
Oct.
Sopt.

Oct.


Dec.
Oct.
1955
1956
1957
195*
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1964
1965
1966
1967
1963
1969
1970
1970
1942
1962
1967
1968
1969
1970
1968
1969
1967
1968
1969
1938
1968
1936
1968
1967
1942
1968
1896
1954
1930

1957
1895
1940

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
6

20
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

30
22
15
26

58
24

3
75

—

—
-
-
—

—
810.0
718
1/870


-
—
	 .
*5.0
•5.0
»2.0
•8.0
1/3,850
28,730
73,900

•65
607
598
__ _
— —

— —
	 	
— «1OO
— *100
— «100
— »ioo
•100
— *100
•6.9 —
•.236 —
•.286 «60
— »135
— 135
— "135
— «135
— «UO

	
— «70
— «60
— *70
•90
.098 —
.733 4/77.1
.364 V71
.008
.006 «90
— —
__
O.OO5
.011
.002
.002
.0003
.005
.0002
.O03
.003
.002
.001
.001
.001
.002
.002
.001
.002
.002
.001
.002
.»

.14
.005
.0003
.001
.016
.020
—
2/.T9
.cai
2/.67
2/.23

.124
.104

.47
.024
_
10.24
21.12
3.84
3.52
.64
*32
2.88
5.7«
2.24
1.73
1.50
1.50
4.00
5.45
1.35
3.40
4.20
2,90
4.25
	

183
13.43
1.08
1.62
11.74
38.28
47.90
—
1,204
14
1,021
450

208
161
—

—
n




re




xa

n
n
FS

SCS
SCS
SCS
303
BB


SCS
SCS


-------
66-3
66-4
66-5
66-4
66-7
66-8
66-9
66-10
66-ru
66-12.

R fcT F rrt
dn°
n v — '
itoeHj o
TL 1 *•

1
rt




Sari Bi-lrt
:>«n.flr arias*
Chalk Creek Debria Baain 	
rt
Fiddler* Canyon Debris Baaln-
ftll Canyon Retarding
Structure



-. „.

"T. ) CT \
dO*
r L
" "
_. ., .



rin
rtn
°?


Fiddler.* Canyon 	
T1

P3QT»TF
7°


IffUrO^
C 1 t Tti. t
do
_
CI^ *
_ Utah
do'
Utah 	
""'"dn** '

•pnl, ton
„
'*do''

" ii ci nr.h

n » »*
,
J.-.U


— 900
— 10.0
— 25.0


— 2,WŁ







— i9.5

508
900
9.92
23.4
6.9
2,436
1,089
«*0
12.6
19.5
HOT.
r«b.
HOT.
«OT.
Uov.
HOT.
Dec.
*>».


Julj
H>r.
HOT.
D«c.
DM.
19W
1915
19W3
1890
1940
1893
mo
1909
19U)
1926
19U>
1910S/
1938
1908
1932
1936
1946
1955
1947
1956
1957
I960
42
25.8
50
47
31
14
28
24
.5
10
8.5
9
3
299
23,260
21,509
2,115
790
667
430
9,000
8,550
2,500
2,200
81,200
74,010
250,000
234,462
44.12
0
0
15.00
208
ltd.
-
-
—
__
.002
0
0
«.089
•1.600
*1.431
-
-



-
__
*70
•75
75
•TO
•TO
.038
.134
.029
.508
.620
3.10
~.106
.5%
6/-T3
J/.U
a/, us
.38


	
1,112.9
228.7

221
578
90
xa
S3
90S
SCS
SC3
SCS
SCS
90S
SCS
                        67-
Ul
-3
                                                                                                     BASIS {»CHTHHi3TBal PAST in ULITOHIilA, HEVADi DTD ORKXTH!
                                                                                                                          GSŁ
-------
                                                                                                              SUMMARY OF

                                                                               RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970
Ol
CO
DATA
SHEET RESERVOIR
NUMBER


7O-a» Ch«t.«wc 	

70-10 La*w» 	 	 • 	
TO- 11 btclno 	
i :
1
STREAM WEAKEST TOWN DRAINAGE AREA [ DATE
(SQUARE WLES) ' SURV
i
1 	 j TOTAL NET
3JU.70S SEA AMD SOUTHERN itLIFORNIA XJASTAL AND GS1AT BASIN DRAIh

Trib. of Loa ln^«l«a tLi-rer — • — do 	 5.40 4. -.5 Apr,
1Y1U. of Sa:. Jaclflto RiT.r H«it, Caiif. 	 66.0 15.3
trtb. of Kw-port Baj 	 Orang., Calif. 	 .*>; .72 ^sb.
Bnclno Cr»* 	 Loa Ang^«o, Calif. 	 1.42 1.30 Maj
7CU13 r_Ln_jut -• »rrr«1op« »•! 1 «y 81™r 	 Lancaster, Calif. 	 2.-4 2.37 Oct.
70-13b littl* fcx* Irrigation M«t.- Little tock Cr»ok 	 nOatalii, Calif. 	 68.0 67.84 Apr.
, _ _ ^ 	 	 rlrt 	 -. ,. - — — JHfl»
~rŁ" 	 -* 	 - -*. 	 - - oet.
	 _^0 	 — 	 	
— 	 do 	 -
TO-Ue L!T» Oa* DM 	
	 _to 	 	 — 	 	
	 4o 	
___<*> 	 —
	 do 	 	
(to 	 	
Li« 0»k CrtxA 	 	 • •• La?«rn«, Calif.- 	 2.3 ^.3
— 	 do 	 • 	 	 t*o 	 	 	 — — »OT.
A, - -do --• -. - ">^.
~Jj — *- 	 	 *« 	 — — Har.
ID I" Kjima 'Vt-trtrwmti "rr* 	 San Diego, Calif. 	 112.0 109.4 Mar.
7O-l6b Pr*do Flood-Control R«a«rtolr Santa Ana ftlTar 	 Corona, Calif. 	 2,233 1.1J1 S«pt
TO- 17 ftoca-ianbir-i Canyon $/ 	
— tecklflgbirt Can/on 	 Arlington, Calif. 	 11.6 11.5
70-18c fUn— n Floot-Control Basin 	 "ujxw$i Cr^k 	 • 	 San Farnando, Calif.— 147 U6 $«pt



	 eta
T-t-19 Br«a ?. C. 5»sin-— 	
_do do - a"t •

IP do :|>n
* d ^'8

.rtr, _ fW-1 .
70-20c G»KM«11 (San G*bri«l Dam #2) San Gabriel Riw 	 Aiusa, Calif. 	 — 	 39.2 39.0 Apr.
	 rfO 	 	
ik>

	 10 	 	
__Ł- 	
___v.


PERIOD STORAGE
OF BETWEEN CAPACITY
EY 1 SURVEYS (ACRE -FT
(YEARS)
ACT Continued)
1931 -- 36,500
1939 1M '6,i36
1939 3. 10,077
19U) *8 11.702
1938 — i7t
1939 1/J 266
1921 — 3,229
1939 18 3,210
1913 — 7.A37
1939 l/2t 7,393
1921 — k,17
1936 iAl-0 1,139
1938 3.0 3,6iS
19^3 5.C 3,U>i
1946 3.0 3,352
1951 5.0 3,297
1953 2.2 3,313
19192/ — 2i7
1929 6.3 Ji7
1936 7.0 2U2
1939 1.! 228
1952 1..5 221
1961 9.0 17O
1962 1.0 166
196" k. 3 i/221.8
196<- 1.75 197.1
197C 1.75 251.1
1910 — 66,767
1935 25.7 60,699
I°t8 12.6 58,933
19U — 222, SW
1960 18.9 216,960
19U. - «1,000
19U 26 961
19^40 — 35.8UO
19U .8 35,200
191.3 2.3 3)., 100
19/.5 2.1 33,500
1962 16.2 33,265
1969 ^.58 29,700
19i.2 — i.,16S
19i.9 7.5 4,097
1935 -- 12,881
1936 .8 12,298
1938 2.2 10,766
1939 1.6 11,029
1°*0 l.C 11,102
1941 1.0 10,915
1043 1.9 10,501
1045 1.2 10,536
1946 1.7 10,597
1947 1.0 10,634
1957 10.2 10,585
1958 .•• 10,446
196 •• ..1 10,228
1966 3.7 9,999
1969 2.75 9,339
1937 -- 8/53,344
1938 9 47,191
T940 2.1 46,335
1941 8 45,862
1942 1.0 '.5,759
1943 l.C 44,032
1944 1.1 44,388
194' 1.0 44,342
194P 3.0 ..3,825
1951 3.0 43,928
1953 1.2 43,853
                                                                                                                                                                        .71
                                                                                                                                                                        .97
                                                                                                                                                                        .612
                                                                                                                                                                        .643
                                                                                                                                                                        .642
                                                                                                                                                                        .512
                                                                                                                                                                                 •85
                                                                                                                                                                                 •«5
                                                                                                                                                                                          .72
                                                                                                                                                                                          .25
                                                                                                                                                                                          .15
                                                                                                                                                                                           .275

                                                                                                                                                                                           .130
  .12
 2.48
 1.4
 1.62
 6.IS

28.3
 1.69
                                                                                                                                                                                           .23
                                                                                                                                                                                           .94
                                                                                                                                                                                                 1,190

                                                                                                                                                                                                 J..84C1

                                                                                                                                                                                                   710
          185
        4,460
        1,330
          460
          278
                 SCS

                 3C5

                 SCS

                 scs

                 3C3

                 SCS

-------
•61L








~
~



-







~
~





















-




'













G UOfSJSAfQ



$zi



60 S

2?

SO 9

92 02
i*7 I




f
Ł0 2









ZVT




.








6S'Ł

LI T




TT T



.




c?
f^T"

auoiBifuippry













--
















—













-


















PUP 'urea



8i









-



iO


80



iO
17 •
TO


90*

65.
r •











SŁ-

«!•

L '
Ł*7
C*7'
&7



9T)




esi



Ł56



761' I A




(??

OOc



OIL
en
IDT


8*1 VT
STS'T


6ŁI(T
7tŁ T
6ZL
t
5Ł0_

TiO

68T


SBQ'Qi
ATS'ff
*^f
^T'Cf
viiL^st

AO* f
^»//-




8ii,^8t.

y?ii2
^Q«fZ
i« .


Q UBg iq ps
BSJT; »2miT».




i V

I Ł



r./-



0


^.

t. I L
i9 C



2°.^
c6 -

AT 2

fii'T
f?*
/•
/-.*,
"

T L
8 6

6 I
•T
0 I


8'Ł



c IT


I C
.



r.^^

*•
?'T
•c


[Toj^uo= -pu -be vie /Tl
p BEU-TQ nreg sapnt^ui /of
" " "Tsed" "a*'">'s ^









?^/ .

QŁ6T -irer ^-V S-7

7^




^ ,


?C T ^UB^
" , j '

, ,, .


6e6l "1=0 AP6I/OI o'6T
Oi6T 'AON
696T ^ „







i7ol * 0

oto T ,J




0961 ^ °fj

ovol u


?^T • ^ • r~ c
^tO^i ^ _1 ^ *-*LŁ/D t I LŁ



/ .9^


?Q^T *AO
TQ^ 'Od





^
op
op
Of.
op
op
op


op
op
	 'JTIBC 's-iopuais
Op
op
op
op
op
op
^
op
Op
P
^

op
Op
op
~^~
	 . 	 . 	 op 	
p
op
op
op

op
op
op
p
p
"

op
• °P
	 op 	
op
O
p
Op

p
p
Op
°p
op
F
"

p
op
p
op
0


•pof j»d

op
op

op
op

op
cp
^
op
op
	 ^-t^ UO^-^G 2Ta
Op


op
Op
op
op
op
op
op

op
op

op

	 op 	
op
op
OT-
op
p
op
op

op
op
op
op
or • . .
	 ^_!^_!!s_

op
op
Op
op

op
op
op
OD
^
op
op
op
p
op
p


2tr[jnp jriooe jo eaneasq pa^rximoo
•Buoseee jjoinu uu ps
op
Op
CP

Op
0[,
Op
op
^
op
°r
	 trfseg -5 ',., UO^^BQ SIQ
ct
""

op
°l-
op

Op
°t-
p



op
Jp
-«rea UOTSJBAIG suoisd^p^ry
	 0[, 	
Op
op
op

^
op
°l-
^
Op

°t-
ot
, op
	 !2™__^!.'!op-J!!-
01-
op
op

Op
Op
op


Op
*"
p
op
Op

Op

^
°N /9
3t A
°N K
°N /T
»a A











39t-0i

















































LO

-------
                                                                                                                          SUMMARY OF

                                                                                      RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE » THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER



RESERVOIR




STREAM

NEAREST TOWN



DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)
TOTAL | NET


DATE OF
SURVEY



PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)



STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)


CAPACITY
AVG. AWN
INFLOW
RATIO
(ACRE-FT
PER


SPECIFIC
•EIGHT
[DRY)
1,8. PER
CU. FT.)

AVG. ANN

ACCUMUl^TrON
PERSQ Ml.
OFNETDR
AREA FOR
PERIOD SHOWN
AC.-FT. | TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA

                                                                                                       AND SOUTHH1N CALIFORNIA COASTAL AND (5SKAT  DASIJi DRAINAGE (Continued)
                                       » 3anta Anita F.  :. Basin--   Santa AnlU Creek	—    Arcadia, Calif.	      10.8
                          70-»=      Sit Tojwwa r. C.  Beiln	   Big TXJunga Creek	Sunland,  Calif.-
05
O
                          70-3CU      F.»t
-------
8             88                Be            8


 I II  II I  ! I II ! I  I I I  I I I  I !  I I !  I I I  I ! I  II I  I I  ! ! !  I I I  I I I  I I !  ! ! II !  I I I  I I I
                                                                                           u c
               A
                                           I IS33fJ:SPŁ;*33 i I I  M  I ! I  i I I  I I I  I !
                                             ;O •O*O^*u^*^w\lf\J*<.                  *<^
                                             Si            "'                  -^
              i-o i
                           tVr*  *tv I N ol t~ •* *wr?H |^OH<^  ^ r*J -4 (\ t H H <^i *^ f*

                                                                                      .fa o.
       I  I
    11
                                 *
                              lit)
                                 Jl
                        i i i i 4 .
                      jl|TfT77=
t $?°fl>?? : '  ! :  ! ! i  : i !  !,-'  ' ! i  i ! !  : i f I
f"\
'.:
s


!ll
rt
1
i
i
i I
« 1
!8°,
tT
J= 1

tn
i i
L,
f
|f '




,
"




,T


•





1
1 ^




"









T •




11


,.






-1 1




•








,





!,




!


j
, 4
' "7




. i i
H


i 4 i
„,

I

j
: i
:lV




n
8*

!
' L






,T







i
-





!n




;,









i7




!'


•





,
^ i




|T



n





• i







i

i
i
i

,i ..
'| '
!
I
1
I
- 4
" "

i



!
<^<
i
•0

;<
1
i
I
m
•v -t "* - ;
|

I
TJ
!
i

I
1
•D '

j


! -c, -




I
!
i
i
, i
^ ^
i
!



„-!




                                             F-61

-------
                                   SUMMARY OF

RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE W THE UNITED STATES THROUGH »70


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER




RESERVOIR




STREAM



NEAREST T09N

i


DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)

TOTAL | NET


DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVG. ANN.
INFLOW
RATO
(ACRE-FT.
PER



ipcctnc
(EIGHT
PRY)
LB.PER
:u. FT.)


AVG, ANN
SEQMENT
ACCUMULATION
PEBSQ.IO.
OF NET DR.
AREA FOR
PERIOD SHOWN

AC.-FT. TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA


  SALTC* SEA AHD 30UTHHH1  CALITORMIA COASTAL  AM) OKEAT B&SXI OttlBAGS (ContlnMd)

  	Slam fed™, Cilif	       0.60         0.60
Sept.  1946
J-I*.  1947
S«l*.  194«
Svt.  1949
Sept.  1950
Sept.  1952
S**.  1959
Sfft.  1962
S^t.  1968
3*1*.  1970

3«ptl  1941

hpt.  1943
                                                           a«t*.
                                                                1945
                                                                1946
                                                           s«pl.
                                                           S^t.
           Altadon*. Calif.	

           	do	
       S^t.

       s^.!
       s^t.

       s^tl
       A«.

       s^t!
       S«pt.
       Sept.
.21     Sept.
       Sept.
       S^l.


       S^t!
       Sept.
       Sept.
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1952
1956
1960
1961
1966
1970
1936
1938
1941
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
                     1
                     1
                     1
                     1
                     1
                     2
                     4.8
                     3.0
                     6.0
                     2.0
                     5
       3«pt. 1949
       S*pt. 1950
       3«pt. 1952
       3q*. 1964   U

       3*pt. 1970
       S«pt. 1936

       So>t! 1940
       3»pt. 1941
       S«pt. 1942
       Sq*. 1943
       3»pt. 1944
       S«pt. 1945
       S^t. 1946
       Sq>t. 1947
       3^>t. 1948
       S«pl. 1949
       3^*. 1950

       Sept. 1954
       3«pt. 1959
       3^>t. 19TO   11

           ' 1939
             19U
                                                                                   y-
                                                                                   i/-
                                                                                                            —     2/0.84
                                                                                                                    >.t3
                                                                                                                     .86
                                                                                                                    2.33
                                                          0
                                                          0
                                                          .09
                                                          0
                                                          0
                                                          0
                                                          1.59
                                                          1.17
                                                         27.86
                                                          2.87
                                                         2/.69
                                                         29.0
                                                          8.14
                                                          8.74
                                                          .27
                                                         10.3
                                                          Z.87
                                                          .56
                                                          3.13
                                                          1.15
                                                          0
                                                          0
                                                          0
                                                          4.07
                                                          .36
                                                          3.17
                                                          1.58
                                                       j/a.2
                                                         11.7
                                                          7.03
                                                          .34
                                                         15.7
                                                          4.59
                                                          1.11
                                                          .59
                                                          .41
                                                          .07
                                                          2.66
                                                           .02
                                                          1.67
                                                          2.05
                                                          5.28
                                                          5.87
                                                      J/46.4
                                                        47.6
                                                          3.9
                                                          4.8
                                                           .24
                                                          1.71
                                                          7.86
                                                          1.95

-------
05
O3
70-44c      Gould Debris Basin	Gould Canyon Channel	    La Canada, Calif.-

                                            	do—.—_	    	do	      —

                                            	do	    	do	
                                            	do	    	do	


70-45a      Haines Debris Basin	hsiies Canyon	    Tujunga, Calif.	       1.53
            	-io	do	    —	do	

            	fto	   	io	    —.—do	      —
            	do	•	   	do	    	do	


            	do	   	do	    	do	-—

                -do-
                -do—
            	do	do-	    	do	
70-46c      Hall's Debris Basin	Ball - Beckley Canyon	    U Canada, Calif.	      3/.S4

            	do	   	do	    	do	
            	do	   	do	    	do	
            	do	   	do	    	do	      —

            	do	   	do	    	do—	     2/1.06
            	do	.	do	.	    	do	
            	do—-	do	    	do	

            	do-

            	do-





            	do	do	    	di

   I/  Canaelty of debris basin varies.  Debris excavated at  various times.
   2/  Sediiientation values as comouted by LACFCD are based on complete water yea
          Sept. 1948     1                       —           —         .019
—        Sept. 1949     1            —         —           —       0
—        Sept. 1950     1            _         —           _       0
—        Sept. 1952     2            —         —           —       4.57
          Oct.  1956     4.1          —                      —         .U
—        June  1958     1.7          —         —           —      19.05
—        Sept. 1963     5.2          —                      —       4.76
—        Sept. 1966     3            _____      10.14
          Sept. 1968     2            —         —           —       3.10
—        Sept. 1969     1            —         —           —      46.9
  .30     Sept. 1936     1          I/—         —           —     2/31.2
—        Sect. 1938     2            _____      41.3
          Sept. 1941     3                       —           —       3.30
          Sept. 1942     1                       —           —       0
—        Sept. 1943     1            —         —           _      22.0
          Sept. 1944     1            —         —           —       6.17
          Sept. 1945     1            _         _           —       3.07
—        Sept. 1946     1            _____       2.77
          Sept. 1947     1            —         —                      -43
          Sept. 1948     1                       —           —       0
          Sept. 1949     1            —         —           —       0
—        Sept. 1950     1            —         —           —0
          Sept. 1952     2                                    —       5.47
          Sept. 1964    12                       —           —       1.23
          Sept. 1966     2            ------      16.67
          Sept. 1968     2            —         —           —      11.5
          Sept. 1969     1            —         —           —      24.6
  .47     Sept. 1948     1          I/—         —           —     2/0
—        Sept. 195O     2            —         —           —       0
—        Sept. 1952     2            —         —           —       5.32
          -one  1958     5.8          —         —           —       3.29
          Sept. 1962     4,2          —         —           --       5.83
          Sept. 1966     4.0          —         —           —       9.04
          Sept. 1968     2                       —           —       1.98
—        Sept. 1969     1                       —           —      28.7
 1.53     Sept. 1938     3          i/—         —           —     2/6.93
—        Sept. 1940     2            —         —           _       2.31
—        Sept. 1941     1            —         —           —       5.09
—        Sept. 1943     2            —         —                    4.22
—        Sept. 1944     1            —         --           —       3.58
          Sept. 1945     1            —         —           —       2.59
          Sept. 1946     1                       —                    0
          Sept. 1947     1            —         —           —         .37
—        Sept. 1948     1            —                      _-o
          Sept. 1949     1            —                      —       0
          Sept. 1950     1            —                               o
          Hay   1952     1.6          —         --           —       1.57
  .84     Sept. 1936     1          I/—         —           —     2/17.2
          Sept. 1937     1            -                              13.7
—        Sept. 1938     1            _-         —           _      75.4
—        Sept. 1941     3            —         —           —      12.0
          Sept. 1943     2            —         —           —      17.9
          Sept. 1944     1                       —                    6.10
 1.06     Sept. 1945     1                                    —       2.97
          Sept. 1946     1            —         —           —       1.00
—        Sept. 1947     1            _____       2.60
          Sept. 1948     1            —                      —      —
—        Sept. 1949     1                       —           —      —
—        Sept. 1950     1
          Sept. 1952     2                                    —       6.40
—        Feb.  1957     4.4          —         —           —         .14
—        Sept. 1959     2.6                     —           —      11.03
—        Sept. 1962     3            —         —           —         .063
—        Sept. 1964     2                       —                    4.48
          Sept. 1968     4            —         —           —       3.49
          Sept. 1969     1            „         —           _      34.4

 Drainage area 0.84 sq, mi. to 1945; L. 0659  sq. mi. beginning 1945.

-------

    s*§ai
    MiSse;
fc
      > 2 o
      ! 3 S
     C r f ^*
     Bile
      II
      ll
               8             B            S             B

                I I II I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! II I I ! M II I M I I I I M I I M I I M I II I I I I I II I ! I I I I



               Łc  rfj H00000-l«««,j^jm    000-I.J,^.; .}-rf  O rf , , , H  ^H


                I I I I I I I II II I I I I I I I I I t I I I M I ! M I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I
               a              s             R             *
               °' i M i 11 i 11 M 11 11 i ' 11 i 111 i i i i i i i i ' I i i i i i i 11 M i 11 i ' i i t i it i 11 it i 11 i
               8              3             R             *
               °' II I I M ! I I ! M I I I I ' I I I M I I I II I t I I ' ! II I II I I I I II I I I ' ! I I II I ! I ! II II II
               w\
i! J
f
I






















1



















































1






i
tC
'!






1

f>r
1
                                  I I
                                           !
                                               • •$€Ł ŁŁŁ
                                               MM I!1
                                               I I i ! 1 ! i  I
                                 F-64

-------
                                      Paradise Debris Basin	   Paradise Canyon	—	LA Canada,  Calif.	         .96           .96     Sept. 1945     1          l/~-          —           —     2/1.18
                                          -do-	.   	do	    	4o	       —           —        Sept. 1946     1            —          —           —        .92
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1947     1            —          —           —       LOO
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1948     1            —                                 -U
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1949     1            —          —                     -10
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1950     1            —          —           —       o
                                                                                                                                               .58     Apr.  1952     1.4          —          —           —       5.38
                                                                                                                                                       Htr.  1956     3.9          —          —                  „  •*
                                                                                                                                              1.84     Sept. 1936     1          I/—          -           —    2/11.0
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1937     1            —                                6.89
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1938     1            —          —           —      U.9
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1939     1                                    —       2-95
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1940     1                       —                    4.75
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1941     1            —          —           —      11-6
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1943     2            —          —           —       9.03
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1944     1            --          —           --       3-00
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 19»5     1            —          —           —        -51
                                                                                                                                                       S^,t. 1946     1            —          —                     .23
                                                                                                                                                       Seot. 1947     1            —         —           —        .37
                                                                                                                                             _        Sept. 1948     1            —          —           --        -15
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1949     1            —          —           "       0
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1950     1            —          —                    0
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1952     2            —          —           —       2.25
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1959     7            —          —                    2.81
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1966     7            —          --           —       3.41
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1970     4            —          —                    i-W
                                                                                                                                              1.3      Sept. 1946     3          I/-          —           —      i/-69
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1947     1            —         —           —        .32
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1948     1            —         —           —       0
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1949     1            —                       _       0
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1950     1                       —           —       0
                                                                                                                                                       Stpt. 1952     2            —         —                    1.23
                                                                                                                                                       Apr.  1957     4.7          —         —           —        -05
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1966     9.4          —          —           —       2.07
                                                                                                        -_-                                 —        Sept. 1969     3            —                              10.0
                                      Scholl i>ebris Basin	Scholl Canyon	Glendale, Calif.	         .66           .66     Sept. 1947     2          I/—         —           "      2/.32


                                      	ao	   —do-	do	—           —        Sept. 1950     1                       —           _       o


Q5                                   	do	   	do	    	do-	           -        Sept! 1970     9            —         -           -        .88
f-n                       ^0-550      Shields Debris Basin	Shields Channel	La Crescenta, Calif.—         .27           .27     Sept. 1938     1          I/—         —           —     2/77.0
                                           '-                              —                            '-                                  —        Sept. 1939     1                                    ~      10.1
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1941     2                                    ~      10.9
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1943     2                       —                     5.85
                                                                                                                                             —        S«pt. 1944     1                                    —        2.33
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1945     1            —         —           —        -52
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1946     1            —         —           —       1.04
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1947     1            --         —           —        -04
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1948     1            —         —           —        0
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1949     1                       —           —        0
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1950     1            —         —           —       0
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1952     1.5          —         —           —      10.9
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1961     9.5          —         —           —        2.07
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1966      5            —         —           —        6.81
                                                                                                                                               .23     Sept. 1938      2          I/—         -           —     2/22.6
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1939     1                       —                    57-°
                                                                                                                                                       Sect. 1941      2                       —                     4.4
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1943      2                                    —        8.30
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1945      2            —         —           —        .65
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1952     7            —         —           —        1-09
                                                                                                                                             —        S«pt. 1961     9            —         —           —        .06
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1968      7            —         —           —        3.30
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1969     1            —         —           —       56.5
                                                                                                                                               .84     Sent. 1947      .6        I/-         —           —      i/°
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1948      1                       —           _        0
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1949     1            —                      —        0
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1950      1            —         —                     0
                                                                                                                                                       Mar.  1952      1.5          --         —           —        3.56
                                                                                                                                             —        Feb.  1956      3.9          —         —           —        1-13
                                                                                                                                              1.65     Sept. 1943     3          I/—         —           —      2/4.22
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1944     1                       —                     2-81-
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1945      1            —                                I'76
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1946     1            —                      —        0
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 191,7      1            —         —                     "
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1950      3            —         —           —        °
                                                                                                                                             —        Apr.  1952      1.6                     —           —        2.73
                                                                                                                                             —        Sept. 1958      6.4          —         "           —         -37
                                                                                                                                                       Sept. 1960      2.0          —         —           —         .75

                             I/  Capacity of debris basin varies.  Debris excavated at various times.                             2/  Sedimentation  values as  conmuted by LACFCD are based  on complete water year.

-------
                                                                                                                   SUMMARY OF

                                                                                 RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH  1970


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER




RESERVOIR





STREAM





NEAREST TOWN







DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE
TOTAL
SOLES)
NET



DATE OF
SURVEY



PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)



STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)


CAPACITY
AVG. ANN.
BAUD
(ACBE-FT.
PEE
ACBE-FT)


SPECIFIC
(EIGHT
;DRTO
O.B. PER
CU. FT.)

AVG. ANN
SEDHENT
ACCUMULATION
PEBSQ.ML
UK NET DR.
ABEAFOR
PHUODSBOWN
AC.-FT. j TONS


AGBICY
SUPPLYING
DATA

                       70-60


                       70-610
CT>
Ol
                       70-64

                       70-6 5k


                       70-66

                       70-67«
                                                                                   3ALTO8  3E4 AND SOUTHJ3N
                                                                                                                   CO»3TAL AJO OSSAT 1US1K DUIHAOI (Continual)
                                                                                                                                           3«*. 1942
                                                                                    1.08


                                                                                   15.5
                                                                                                                     1/.64
                                                                                    1.6

                                                                                     .58
Aohurn D«brl« B*«in

Bradbury D«brl« Basin
—
	
	
—
—
__
—
—
1.00
—
_
10,0
_
—
—
	
	
—
—
—
—
—
_
—
—
y.64

	
	
__
—
—
—
—
—
.25
—
—
__
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
	
—
—
1.59
—
.58
—
—
.19
—
.6fl
—
—
—
—
3«pt. 1944
Sapt. 1945
Sapt. 1946
Sapt. 1950
Sapt. 195J
3«Rt. 1959
Sapt. 1966
3«pt. 1969
S.pt. 1946
3**.. 1947
Sapt. 1950
Sapl. 1938
Sapt. 1941
Sapt. 1943
Sapt. 1944
Sapt. 1950
3«pt. 1952
S«pt. 1953
•V 1956
Jan. 1959
^pt. 1960
S«pt. 1964
Sapt. 1966
Vpt. 1968
3»pt. 1970
S^it. 1945
Sapt. 1946
3*pt. 1947
S^jt. 1948
Sapt. 1949
S^it. 1950
rah. 1952
Apr. 1952
Sapt. 1956
s«pt. 1958
S*pt. 1936
S.pt. 1«37
S^rt. 1938
3^*. 1940
Sapt. 1941
3
-------
88      88      88      H88      888H8      B    8    B


I  I i i i :  i i M i i i i  i i i i i i i  i i i i : : i i i  i M I i I  i i i M i i  i i M i '. i i  i M I i i i i  i i  M i i  i i i M i : i  i i i i
                                                                                          5!

                                                                                          ft
as      ss;      ss      sss
 ' I I I  ' I I I I I ' I "* I I I I I ' II ! I ' M I I  I ' I I I I  ' I I I I ' I I I  !
                                                                      \XSSSXS  i >.
                                                                              I. O
                                                                              «

                                                                              f t-
                                        SfdSsiS      j    8»   *"     ** 2

                                       i ' i M ' i i ' i i i"' i : iH'  i i i  i ' i i i  ' i i i ' i i i  c t
                                       8     3
                                                        F)   a
                                              11
                                      Ill]
                                                                                3   ^
                                                                               I  i i  i o i
ill\\s\
! 1

M
r'l
                              ft
                            '
                                                    fr'

   "j|4f
     a 11 I !
PC      ?
it it      i
                                 it     Ł     *      *    4
                                           F-67

-------
                                                                                             SUMMARY OP

                                                                RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE Df THE UNITED STATES THROUGH 1970


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER





RESERVOIR






STREAM






NEAREST TOWN









DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)

TOTAL

NET



DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN
SURVEYS
(YEARS)




STORAGE
CAPACITY
(ACRE -FT.)



CAPACITY
AVa ANN.

(ACKE-FT.
PEB
ACRE-FT)


SPECIFIC
•EIGHT
PRY)
L8. PER
:u. FT.)


AVG. ANN
snwnrr
ACCUMULATION
PDSQ. ML
OF NET M.
AREAPOi
PEHJOD SHOWN
AC.-FT. TONS


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA


C-3
OO
                                                                           AID 30t.
S^t.
itopt'.
In.'
In.
Jwi.
AFT.
In.
*r.
Jon.
*"«.'
J«n.
D«.
Oat.
Ihr.
Ifcr.'
S^t'.
iimmiiliiHiHsijjiiiiiiijMlii
1956
1957
1958
1959
1967
1968
1969
1941
1944
1961
1943
1949
1959
1961
1967
1949
1969
1966
1966
1968
1969
1970
1970
1961
1969
1963
1966
1964
1968
1970
1961
1969
1970
1958
1969
1970
1967
1969
1970
1964
1966
1969
1970
1966
1969
1970
1960
1962
1969
1164
19W
1956
1969
1963
1967
1965
1967
1959
1962
1968
1970
1963
1967
.8
1.0
1.0
8
1
1
3.0
16.6
~6.6
9.3
2.2
5.7
1.6
.9
.96
1.86
.43
1.41
3
8.5
3
4
2
8
1
11
1
2
1
1.92
3
1
3
1
2.6
7
S
12.91
4.2
2.7
2.8
6
2
4.2
i/— —
_ _
-
16,720 1.00
17,437 1.04
17,296 1.03
J4.670 —
34,276 —
33,987 —
33JK5 —


2.30 .234
- -
v- -
7,033 10.0
6,615 9.45
it/



y-
- -
-*



y-



i/-


9,285 .90
6,718 .65
V-

u-


V_

- 2/30.1
— 39.3
- 17.5
.4
— 3.1


— 2.91
— 1.51
— 13.32


123.
— 1.16
— 0

2/ 71

— 2.54
— 2/8.81



— 1/10.4
- 13.5
— 2/6.77
- 16.3
— 2/66.7
— 2.78
- 2/10.50
— 21.65
— 12.70
— 19.'4
12 4

2/2 95

— 7.45

2/19.1
67


2/5.23
                                                                                                                                                                                
-------

see

SOS

SOS

COS

SOS

COS

COS

SOS

COS

SOS

COS

COS

COS

COS

COS

SOS

SOS

SOS

COS

COS

SOS

COS

COS

SOS

soc

COS


COS

SOS

COS

CDC

E
T9-itT/8
—
ow
—
184
—
ZZI

8Ł*Z69/8

%4/8

9Łi/5
—
4Tt
—
tCT
—
99*61
—
Z'OTT
—
if9
—
Ł'J6
—
92
—
6TZ
—
5oe
—
T6Z
—
75T
—
iJI
—
5-01
—
m
—
9«
—
WZ
—
1tŁ
—
LTZ
—
i'01
—
LSI
—

961
—
izy
—
—
~
_
-
cr/S
—
61"
—
168-
—
n-

8i4'/8

Z8t'/9

960 75
—
890*
_—
si-
—
9iO'
—
II'
—
99'
—
Ł50*
—
itO'
—
toe'
—
2«r
—
00Ł-
—
TOT'
—
Ł90'
—
oco-
—
ZŁT
—
i9T"
—
OTZ-
—
TSZ"
—
191-
—
ito-
—
TV
V

41 "A
—
w
—
TVT

2'8ZA
5f6>^
51*
—
04.
—
0Ł.
—
01.

44.

01.

49.
	
09»
—
01
—
OC
—
71
—
SI
—
oe
—
QU
—
04*
—
Ł9*
—
S1»
—
Ci*
—
cu*
-_
29^
—
05
—
?9
—
Z9*
—
C9
—
Z9.
—
S4
—
01
• —

09.
—
09.
—
—

_
-
                                                                                       CO
ir.i 'fm-»»    	i*»«o PIWIPTW
                                                                  901-0.
                                         	>n»»e «m»o P«<»VTV<     wi-oi

-------
                                                                                   SUMMARY OF

                                                RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYS MADE IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGH  1970


DATA
SHEET
NUMBER






RESERVOIR







STREAM



j

NEAREST TOWN






DRAINAGE AREA
(SQUARE MILES)


TOTAL j NET
1 1"


DATE OF
SURVEY




PERIOD
BETWEEN


STORAGE
CAPACITY
SURVEYS i (ACRE -FT. 1
(YEARS)






CAPACITY
AVG. ANN
INFLOW
(ACRE- FT
PER



SPECIFIC
'EIGHT
;DRY)
LB. PER
CU. FT.)


AVG. ANN
SEDIMENT
ACCIMUI.AT1ON
PEHSQ Ml.
OF NET M.


AGENCY
SUPPLYING
DATA
AREA FOB
PERIOD SHOWN !

AC -FT. ! TONS


                                                   SAK JCAQUIN AND KEEN RIVLR oASINS AND ADJACENT COASTAL  QRA IMAGE (Continued)
T«aVettl» R««5rroir Ko.  1	Teak«ttl« Cr»«lc	    Fresno, Calif.	
""




do

j0
0
^
-rtrt
~rt

rl
0
°
^



^°

""
ri°

j

°

°
H
°

ri

°
do-

°~
.

rto
7°

~
A

j '
°
do-
0
0
rt

0
^°

-ao
do
0
-no
0
0

io

FaU
FaU
Fan
FaU
Fan
Fan
FaU
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
'ill
Fan
Fall
FaU
Fan
Fall
FaU
Pall
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
Fan
F«U
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
Fall
Fan
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
Fall
FaU
Fall
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
FaU
Fall
FaU
FaU
Fall
FaU
1938
1948
1951
1955
1956
1957
1956
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
196*
1965
1938
1941
1948
1951
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1938
1948
1951
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1938
1940
1941
1948
195137
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1%5
1956 (1
1957
1958
1959
1960
	
10. C
3.0
4.0
-^
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
—
3.0
7.0
3.0
4.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
—
10.0
3.0
4.0
—
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
—
2.0
1.0
7.0
3.C
—
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
938-56)
19.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
                                                                                                                                     0,39
                                                                                                                                       .18
                                                                                                                                       .002
                                                                                                                                     1/.352    —
                                                                                                                                       .079
                                                                                                                                       .068
                                                                                                                                       .050
                                                                                                                                       .030
                                                                                                                                       .015
                                                                                                                                     2/.066
                                                                                                                                       .134
                                                                                                                                       .078
                                                                                                                                       .021
                                                                                                                                       .0022
                                                                                                                                     2/.101
                                                                                                                                       .131
                                                                                                                                       .127
                                                                                                                                       .109
                                                                                                                                       .040
                                                                                                                                       .007
                                                                                                                                     2/.U7
                                                                                                                                       .222
                                                                                                                                       .181
                                                                                                                                       .178
                                                                                                                                       .182
                                                                                                                                       .178
.159
.129
.127
.130
.127
                    0.0271
                     .UOO
                     .0078
                     .0591     —
                    0          —
                     .3158
                    0          —
                     .0065     —
                     .3228     -
                     .0*89     —
                     .0054     —

                     .0146     —
                     .0084     —
                     .028O
                     .0110     —
                                                                                                                                                                      .0241
                                                                                                                                                                      .0059
                                                                                                                                                                      .0003
                                                                                                                                                                      .0462
                                                                                                                                                                      .0572
                     .0066
                     .0250
                     .0080
                                                                                                                                                                      .0166
                                                                                                                                                                     0
                                                                                                                                                                      .0032
                                                                                                                                                                      .0032
                                                                                                                                                                      .0015
                                                                                                                                                                      .0474
                     .0026
                     .0204
                     .0112
                     .0160
   .0073
   .0042
   .0003
  0
   .0049
   .1457
   .0619
   .0338

   .029
4/-.013

-------
71-36
71-37
71-39
71-40
71-41
71-42
71-«
•T.-/J,
72-la
72-2a
72-3
72-4
72-5
72-6
72-7b
72-8
72-9
72-10
72- lib
72-12
72-13
72-14
72-15
72-l6a
72-17
72-18
I/ Overt
2/ Sedin
y Last
sediment was
4/ Loss
ji/ Perio
6/ Retire
-V Origi
8/ Origi

do


Salijias Soys Ranch 	
Ai
Oibralter 	
do
do
rf°
p
-janttt ollcla
Success Lake 	
do
-do

do
Lake Kaveah {Terminus



do

A
0.0
Big Canyon 	
°
Blodjott
Bullarda Bar 	
Co*!* (V*n Oeisen)--
1 do


	 „





	 , 	




Dan) 	







	


	
	 _


Paulke Lake ("alae Lake) 	
Gerber 	 —
te^alia 	
Stony Gorge — 	 	
Misselbeck 	
Lake Pillabury (Sco*t
, ,
Uatacoula Bar itf)
Ac
Mllliken
	
	
	
	
Dam) —




Onion Creek No. 1 	
do-
- - do
Onion -reek No. 2 	
A
A
d°
n ljrc* °- 3
GO
db a- t
lent removed in aunmer











. itiy. _ ,„

H°
Trlb. of Natividad Creek—
°
Santa Inez 	
do





Tule River 	

— 	 do 	

rt°
Kawean River— 	


cr _rc
°°
."r
0
0
Big Canjon Creek 	
Tib. of Co^es River-
North Tub« Rivev 	


T T %
-ittlc bton; -recK
N, Tk. Jenney Creek — 	 	
Trib. of Burch Creek 	
Little Butte Creek 	 	 —
Stony Creek 	 — 	 	
S. Fk. Cottonwool Creek 	
Eel River 	


u- n 1 1 r>
til n Croclc
Onior, Creek, trib. of
Amer. liver.
1°~
j°
do
-°
"
°
0


sits taken in 19J6; sediment r>
ratershea as a whelp.
1956, '0 Nov. 15, 19%.
ed from 1965 survey.

0
Salinas, Calif. 	

Santa Barbara, Calif. -
0
0



Portarville, Calif. 	

, ^0

A
Leiaon Cove, 3alif. 	

3A CRAMPS TO
1 "
H
H


French Torn, Calif. 	


:a»ptomdU., :allf.-


frt* " -M *
itonyrord, ^a^i>.
Shasta, Calif. 	
Corning, Calif. 	
Chico, Calif. 	
Elk Creek, Calif.— —
Redding, Calif. 	
Potter Valley, Calif. -


v f i t r
ap^' j
Soda Springs, Calif.—
^
H
do
A








.13 .13
.205 .203
216 6/202-2
-
425 425
393 393

_


560 560

, EEL AND tl'SSIAN RI\"ES BASI
5.7 5.6
5.1 5.03


5.50 5.48
3.12 3.05
480 479
130 129
11/101.5 98.9
.71 .68
.31 .28
li/8.23 8.08
li/199 197
12.0 11.8
283 284
.71 .69
10.5 10.4
.19 .19


.48 .48


.65 .65

vy
•irainag
12/
$
a/
rom Oct. 1 , 19"), -&l
=srt II
il/
Feb. 1954
Nov. 1956
Oct. 19537/
Sept. 1964
Sept. 1964
Oct. 1919
Aug. 1923
Aug. 1944
Feb. 1956
Aug. 1969
Oct. 1955
Oct. 1965
Sept. 1960
SOY. 1965
HOY. 1967
Dec. 1968
June 1953
Sept. 1956
Dae. 1968
Nov. 1961
Nov. 1967
Jin. 1953
Aug. 1969
June 1966
1927
May 1960
May 1966
SOY. 1934
Oet. 1945
Mar. 1940
Oct. 1945
Oct. 1919
Jan. 1939
June 1928
Oct. 1935
Dec. 1910
kc-v. 1962
1851
Dec. 1945
June 1917
Dec. 1945
Jan. 1918
Jan. 1946
Nov. 1928
Nov. 1962
May 1920
Dee. 1945
D«e. 1921
May 1959
— 1953
Nov. 1958
1924
Oct. 1958
- 1957
1959
I960
1957
1958
1959
1958
1959

e basin after
Spillway ele
Based on the
Excluding 3
The natural
., 1798-F.
Net sediment
Estijnated or
jj/1.8 1,013,200
6/3 1,011,950
2/9.65
11 9.34
— 8/8.40
13 8.15
— 15,296
3.83 13,674
a 7,720
11.42 14,777
13.5 9,654
— 101,200
10 98,730
— *86,160
5.2 86,160
2.C 83,610
1.1 83,680
539,665
•".3 539,115
12.2 534,465
— 149,599
6 147,099
16.58 10/192,574
313
36 21t
3 *775
36 660
6 643
200
11 195
— 258
5.6 254
— 31,500
19.2 28,893
7.3 7,840
52 48,940
— 130
94 120
_ 190
23.5 182
3,718
28 3,648
— 1!/50,OOO
34.1 48,160
4,300
25.5 4,086
94,396
37.5 86,785
183.0
5 181.4
2,000
34 1,938
.114
1.0 .f'i
1.0 .097
1.0 .093
1.0 .083
1.0 .081
l.C .069
— .191
1.0 .205
1.0 .186
ation 748 (limit of 8-7
1914.
vation (flashboard eras
natural drainage area.
sq. -d. above P. G. & E
.612
.611
.42
.33
.21
.41
.27
.681
.681
.660
.06!
.51
.81
.803
.389
.382

.07
.12
.29
.24
.24
.80
_
.29
.248
.228
C39
.033
.033
.032
.042
.026
.026
.0^2
.062
.067
.061
-59 surrey).
t elevation
*62
*65
•65


52
«62
*62
•62
•62
•62


"7.5
"50
50.3
44.7
46
•70
*70
55
54
78.3
48,8
54
«75
73
—

Spillway
reservoir
50,900); '1.
0." reclamation capacity curv» (3-31-45,, UjG
loss - treated as 0 gain.
assumed.
.04 54
.29 392
.23 325.6
.10 141.6
1.96 —

.43 -
1.38 —
.58 658
*o ^o
3.2»4 4,3'!3
-.163 -218.7
.074 100
.186 252
.745 1,006
10./3.79
.48 1.063

.63 686
.56 642
.069 67.2
.217 217
.284 433
.749 1,140
12/.37 U/443
.147 173
.971 1,656
.307 326
U/.27 11/319
.711 1,161
.71 1,129
.04 —
.074 —
.071 —

.0004 —
.0206

il/.ocoo —
.0273
from Stony Gor