EPA-905/9-76-003
                 ANALYTICAL STUDIES FOR ASSESSING

                  THE IKPACT OF SANITARY  SEWAGE
                 FACILITIES OF DELAWARE CO,, OHIO
                              FINAL REPORT
                 UNDER U.S.  EPA CONTRACT NO.  68-01-2853
                            24 October 1975
                               L. Peltier
                               M. Lewis
                               J. Cuneo
                               G. Shea
                               D. Wagaman
                               J. Whang
                             Performed for:

                  U. S.  ENVIRONMENTAL "'SOTECTION  AGENCY
                               Region V
                        230  South Dearborn Street
                          Chicago, 111.  60604
                                  By:

                          ENVIRQ CONTROL, INC.
                       Environmental Studies Group
                       1530 East Jefferson Street
                          Rockville, Md.  20352

-------
ANALYTICAL  STUDIES  FOR ASSESSING
 THE IMPACT OF SANITARY  SEWAGE
FACILITIES  OF DELAWARE CO,, OHIO
            FINAL REPORT
UNDER U.S.  EPA CONTRACT NO.  68-01-2853
           24 October 1975
             L. Peltier
              M. Lewis
              J. Cuneo
              G. Shea
             D. Wagaman
              J. Whang
            Performed for:

 U.  S.  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
              Region V
       230  South Dearborn Street
         Chicago, 111.  60604
                 By:

         ENVIRO CONTROL,  INC.
      Environmental Studies  Group
      1530  East Jefferson Street
         Rockville, Md.   20852
                V,
          230 South I-:,;^. -. ; C-..

-------
SMVIR017MEJTTAL

-------
                               FOREWORD



     This is the final report submitted under U.S.  Environmental Protection

Agency Contract No.  68-01-2853 calling for "Analytical Studies for Assessing

the Impact of Sanitary Sewage Facilities of Delaware County,  Ohio."  The

objectives of this study are:
          To determine the most cost-effective and environmentally
          compatible site and size for the proposed facility

          To evaluate the primary and secondary effects of the proposed
          interceptor system

          To develop mitigative measures to ameliorate adverse effects
          of the project.
     The specific tasks undertaken in pursuit of these objectives are

as follows:
     •    Investigation of the possibility and cost-effectiveness of
          regionalization of the proposed service area in Delaware
          County with Franklin County or the City of Delaware

     •    Identification of additional environmentally compatible
          treatment plant sites with suitable size and engineering
          characteristics

     •    Exploration of the possibility of a managerial framework,
          whereby regionalization across county lines could be effected
          and the determination of the way in which such a framework
          might be related to altei'nate site possibilities and to the
          proposed expansion of the Columbus interceptor systems into
          other portions of Delaware County

     e    Determination of the relationship of all existing and
          proposed treatment plant sites to other land uses with
          particular reference to residential land, parkland, and
          valuable natural areas

     •    Assessment of the impact of the interceptors, treatment
          facility, and discharge location on the degradation of the
          State Scenic River segment

     •    Investigation of anticipated biological impacts on stream
          life from the proposed interceptor construction and sewage
          effluent, including any adverse impacts on rare or endangered
          species

-------
     •    Comparison of  the  proposed  phasing  of  interceptors with
          existing areas of  waste  treatment problems

     •    Examination of population projections  and the  secondary
          growth effects of  the  proposed  interceptor  system, including
          a consideration of the effect of the proposed  project  upon  size
          of population, rate of growth,  and  geographical  patterns  of growth

     •    Discussion of  potential  mitigative  measures for  any  adverse
          effects of this project, including:

          -    Interceptor stream  crossings in terms  of  numbers
               of crossings  and  construction  techniques

               Treatment plant outfall locations

               Odor and  noise control methods at the  treatment plant

               Visual amenity of the  treatment facility  and  its
               surroundings  at all levels of  expansion

          -    Dechlorination of effluent to  lessen impact upon
               aquatic life  and  odors

     •    Preparation of draft and final  reports.


     The material is presented in  a  format and style  suitable  for  incorporation

in EPA's environmental impact statement for wastewater treatment facilities for

southern Delaware County. The correspondence between the  outline  of  EPA's

"Manual for Preparation  of Environmental  Impact  Statements for Wastewater

Treatment Works, Facilities  Plans  and 208 Areawide Waste Treatment  Management

Plans" and that of the present report is  indicated below:


                Report                       Manual

          I,     A and B               II.    B.10
          II.    A-L                   III.   B.3.b.
          III.   A-D                   V.     B.I,  3, 4,  5,  6


     Consideration of other  important alternative approaches to  wastewater

management, such as those called for in Sections III.B.3.a,  c, d of the

Manual, was not included in  the  scope of  this study.

-------
     This work was performed by Messrs.  John T.  Cuneo,  Martin H.  Lewis,




and G. Bradford Shea,  Dr.  James S.  Whang,  and Messrs.  David H. Wagaman




and Kenneth A.  Wood,  Jr.,  under the direction of Dr.  Louis C.  Peltier, Project




Director, and Dr.  Alex Hershaft, Director  of Environmental Studies at Enviro




Control.   Martha Krecklow deserves  much credit for patient and flawless




typing of the voluminous and diverse manuscripts.   The gracious cooperation




of numerous officials  of Delaware and Franklin Counties,  the City of Columbus,




the City of Delaware,  the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, and the




consulting engineering firm of Burgess and Niple,  Ltd., is gratefully




acknowledged.

-------
                           TABLE OF CONTENTS
Foreword

List of Figures

List of Tables

I.    ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT PROPOSED ACTION                        1

      A.  POPULATION AND ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS                    1
      B.  FUTURE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT                         14

II.   ALTERNATIVES                                              34

      A.  INTRODUCTION                                          34
      B.  FRANKLIN COUNTY 1-270                                 69
      C.  POWELL ROAD - OLENTANGY                               84
      D.  POWELL ROAD - POWELL                                  96
      E.  STRATFORD - OLENTANGY                                106
      F.  ALUM CREEK                                           112
      G.  OTHER BASINS                                         123
      H.  DELAWARE COUNTY - DELAWARE CITY                      125
      I.  DELAWARE COUNTY - COLUMBUS                           140
      J.  DELAWARE COUNTY - DELAWARE CITY - COLUMBUS           165
      K.  CONSERVANCY DISTRICT                                 182
      L.  SUMMARY                                              185

III.  ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION                 195

      A.  WATER QUALITY                                        195
      B.  BIOLOGY                                              225
      C.  LAND USE AND POPULATION                              245
      D.  AESTHETICS                                           260
      E.  MITIGATIVE MEASURES                                  273

APPENDICES                                                     295

      A.  FACTORS AFFECTING DEVELOPMENT                        296
      B.  THE RIVER-BANK TREES ALONG THE OLENTANGY RIVER       305
      C.  LETTER FROM C. E. FAULKNER                           317
      D.  LETTER OF US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS                 324
          NPDES PERMIT PROCESSING GUIDELINES NO. 26
      E.  VISIBILITY ANALYSIS                                  332
      F.  EXTRACTS OF APPLICABLE LAWS OF THE STATE OF OHIO     349
      G.  PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS                               358
      H.  LIMITATIONS OF ECONOMIC BASE METHODOLOGY             361

-------
                            List of Figures
Figure Number                                                   Page
1.   Population Projections for a Region Composed of              9
     Franklin, Delaware,  and Pickaway Counties

2.   Increase of Earnings in the Region Composed of              10
     Franklin, Delaware,  and Pickaway Counties in
     thousands of 1967 dollars

3.   Facilities Plan Service Area                                12

4.   Growth of Population in the Approximate Project Area        20
     Area and in Other Portions of Delaware County

5.   Population Growth in Central Ohio, 1960 to 1970             22

6.   Speculative Land in Delaware County                         23

7.   Local Alternative Treatment Plant Sites                     37

8.   Regional Alternative Treatment Plant Sites                  38

9.   Basic Plan for Sanitary Sewerage Facilities                 42

10.  Diagram of the Proposed Sewage Treatment Plant              45

11.  System Requirements for the Franklin County-                70
     1-270 Alternative

12.  Naiade (Unionidae) Population on the Olentangy              78
     Below Powell Road

13.  System Requirements for the Powell Road-                    87
     Olentangy Alternative

14.  System Requirements for the Powell Road-                    97
     Powell Alternative

15.  System Requirements for the Stratford-                     107
     Olentangy Alternative

16.  System Requirements for the Alum Creek Alternative         115

17.  Delaware County-Delaware City Regional Alternative,        126
     Subalternative 1

18.  Delaware County-Delaware City Regional Alternative,        128
     Subalternative 2

19.  Delaware County-Columbus Regional Alternative,             141
     Subalternative 1

-------
Figure Number                                                   Page


20.  Delaware County-Columbus Regional Alternative,              142
     Subalternative 2

21.  Delaware County-Columbus Regional Alternative,              143
     Subalternative 3

22.  Delaware County-Columbus Regional Alternative,              144
     Subalternative 4

23.  Delaware County-Columbus Regional Alternative,              145
     Subalternative 5

24.  The Columbus Sewer Interceptor Trunks                      149

25.  Delaware County - Delaware City - Columbus                 166
     Regional Alternative, Subalternative 1

26.  Delaware County - Delaware City - Columbus                 168
     Regional Alternative, Subalternative 2

27.  Delaware County - Delaware City - Columbus                 169
     Regional Alternative, Subalternative 3

28.  Delaware County - Delaware City - Columbus                 171
     Regional Alternative, Subalternative 4

29.  Costs of Various Alternatives                              191

30.  The 7-day 10-year Low Flow in the Olentangy River          196

31.  Profile of Projected Dissolved Oxygen (DO) Level           202

32.  Profile of Projected Ammonia Level as Nitrogen (NH--N)     203

33.  Profile of Projected Flowing Load of 5-day Biological      204
     Oxygen Demand (BOD,.)

34.  Profile of Projected Flowing Load of Ammonia as            205
     Nitrogen (NH -N)

35.  Profile of Projected Flowing Load of Organic Nitrogen      206

36.  Existing Water Quality Problem Areas in                    218
     Southern Delaware County

37.  Land Use for Delaware County                               246

38.  Land Use Plan for Delaware County                          250

39.  A Line of Sight Profile (Profile 5)                        261

-------
Figure Number                                                   Page

40.  Area of Visibility of Proposed Plant                       262

41.  Common Indoor and Outdoor Noise Levels                     270

42.  Sewage Outfalls Typed According to Locations and           280
     Methods of Sewage Dilution in Stream

A-l. Map of Berlin, Concord, Genoa, Liberty,                    297
     and Orange Townships

Profiles 1-16                              ~                  332-348

-------
                        LIST OF TABLES
 Table Number
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Population Projections
Economic Projections
Land Use Projections
Anticipated Public Sewer Service
Assumed in the Projections
Population Projections by Townships
Population Projections as Estimated
in the Facilities Plan
Historical Population Data, Delaware County
Land Development Characteristics
Percentage of Land in Farms
Change in Farm Population, Columbus Area
New Construction
Number of New Housing Starts, Delaware County
Percentage of Workers Commuting to Another County
Industries and Employment, Delaware County,
Mid-1973
Proposed Alternative Sites and Major Existing
Plants in Delaware and Franklin Counties
Pipe Requirements for the Basic Interceptor
Sewer Network
System Components for the Proposed Sewage
Treatment Plant
Costs of the Proposed Sewage Treatment Plant
for the Powell Road-Olentangy Local Alternative
Costs of the Interceptor Sewer Network for the
Powell Road-Olentangy Local Alternative
Distance From Site Center to Nearest Existing
Structure or Parkland as of 1973
Number of Fish Caught on the Olentangy River,
South of Powell Road, May to November 1974
3
4
4
7
8
8
19
24
25
25
27
28
30
31
35
47
48
51
52
56
79
22.    Costs of the Interceptor  Sewer  Network  for  the
         Delaware County-Delaware  City  Regional
         Alternative,  Subalternative  1                        131

23.    Costs of the Proposed  Regional  Sewage Treatment
         Plant for the Delaware County-Delaware City
         Regional Alternative,  Subalternative 1               132

-------
24.    Incremental Costs of Using the Delaware City
         STP as the Regional Plant,  Subalternative 2         133

25.    Costs of the Interceptor Sewer Network for the
         Delaware County-Delaware City Regional
         Alternative,  Subalternative 2                       134

26.    Capacity of Columbus Trunk Sewers                      151

27.    Incremental Costs of Using the Columbus Southerly
         Plant as the  Regional Plant for the Delaware
         County-Columbus Regional Alternative                154
28.   Costs of the Interceptor Sewer Network for the
         Delaware County-Columbus Regional Alternative,
         Subalternative 1                                    155

29.   Costs of the Interceptor Sewer Network for the
         Delaware County-Columbus Regional Alternative,
         Subalternative 2                                    156

30.   Costs of the Interceptor Sewer Network for the
         Delaware County-Columbus Regional Alternative,
         Subalternative 3                                    157

31.   Costs of the Interceptor Sewer Network for the
         Delaware'County-Columbus Regional Alternative,
         Subalternative 4                                    158

32.   Costs of the Interceptor Sewer Network for the
         Delaware County-Columbus Regional Alternative,
         Subalternative 5                                    159

33.   Costs of Various Subalternatives of the Delaware
         County-Columbus Regional Alternative                160

34.   Incremental Costs of Using the Columbus Southerly
         Plant as the Regional Plant for the Delaware
         County-Delaware City-Columbus Regional
         Alternative                                         172

35.   Costs of the Interceptor Sewer Network for the
         Delaware County-Delaware City-Columbus
         Regional Alternative, Subalternative 1              173

36.   Costs of the Interceptor Sewer Network for the
         Delaware County-Delaware City-Columbus
         Regional Alternative, Subalternative 7              174

37.   Costs of the Interceptor Sewer Network for the
         Delaware County-Delaware City-Columbus
         Regional Alternative, Subalternative 3              175

-------
38.   Costs of the Interceptor Sewer Network for the
         Delaware County-Delaware City-Columbus
         Regional Alternative, Subalternative 4              176

39.   Costs of Various Subalternatives of the Delaware
         County-Delaware City-Columbus Regional
         Alternative                                         178

40.   Summary of Impacts of Selected Local Plant Sites
         and Regional Alternatives                           186

41.   Waste Loads of the Olentangy River Reach Between
         the Delaware Dam and the River's Mouth              199

42.   Comparison Between the Waste Load of the Proposed
         OECC Plant and the Allowable Load of the
         Olentangy River                                     199

43.   The Resulting Effects of the Proposed Action
         During Various Construction Phases (based on
         7-day 10-year low flow of 3.77 cfs)                 208

44.   Water Quality of Olentangy River                       209
45.   Maximum Allowable Water Temperature in the
         Olentangy River                                     210

46.   Acute 96-Hour TL-50* of Various Fish Species           229

47.   Toxic Effects of Residual Chlorine on Aquatic
         Life                                                229
48.   The Percent Distribution of Aqueous Ammonia
         Species at Various pH Values and Temperatures       234
49.   Recreation Facilities in Acres                         248
50.   Sources of Odors in Municipal Wastewater
         Treatment Plants                                    265
51.   Odor Prevention or Removal Methods                     266
52.   Noise Level in dBA at Various Distances from
         the Proposed Blower Building                        271
53.   Comparison of Nitrogen Removal Processes               282
54.   Costs of Various Dechlorination Processes              291

-------
                I.    ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT PROPOSED ACTION

      This  chapter  contains  background information on population and
 economic  conditions  of  the  study area for the evaluation of secondary
 growth  impacts  resulting  from  the  proposed action.  These impacts are
 then  evaluated  on  pages 245-259.

 A-    POPULATION AND  ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS

      A  large  number  of  population, economic, and land use projections are
 evaluated  in  this  section,  and only a few are found reasonably accurate.
 The material  is presented in the form of overview of population and economic
 projections for the  area, discussion of the methodology used to evaluate
the  projections, description of each projection evaluated, evaluation of
 the projections, and presentation  of the best projections.

      1.    0 very Jew

           Significant future economic and population growth can be expected
      in the project  area  if the no-action alternative is selected.  Reasonably
      accurate projections of population in the project area are 22,500 for
      1980; 32,000  for 1985; 39,900 for 1990; and 61,300 for 2000.  These can
      be compared to  a highly accurate estimate of 13,196 on July 1, 1973.
      No projections  were  found which predicted future economic growth in
      either Delaware County or the project area.  However, the 1972 OBERS
      Projections (U.S.  Water Resources Council, April 1974) provide a
      reasonably accurate  view  of future economic and population growth in
      a  region consisting  of Franklin, Pickaway, and Delaware Counties.
      These projections  predict large future increases in regional earnings
      in service, manufacturing, and governmental sectors.

           Projections are simply current guesses about future conditions.
      Three major factors  influence the probable accuracy of any such guess
      about the  future.  These  factors are the assumptions made, the metho-
      dology used,  and the quality  of the current and historical data used.

-------
Assumptions are explicit statements which define which past,  current, or
probable future conditions  influence a projection.   A methodology is
the procedure by which basic  data  and assumptions  are combined  to
project future conditions.  The quality of data  is  primarily  determined
by how current and detailed they are, as well  as by how descriptive they
are of the quantity being projected.

     Three major types of projections are available for Delaware  County,
its townships, and the variously defined regions surrounding  the  City of
Columbus.   These projections  are for land use, economic development,
and population.  The most important aspects of these three  types  of
projections is that their predicted results are  highly interdependent,
because predicted changes in  one category will directly influence changes
in each of the other two categories.

2.   Description of Projections

     The name, source, and description of each evaluated projection are
listed in Tables 1 through 3.   Each description  contains a  summary of
the assumptions made, the methodology used, and  the type of data  base.

3.   Evaluation of the Projections

     There are a considerable number of relatively recent population,
economic, and land use projections which could be useful in the prediction
of future population in the proposed project area.   Because each  of these
projections predicts different results, each projection needs to  be
evaluated to ascertain its probable accuracy.  The procedure  used in
this evaluation eliminates those projections which are probably least
accurate.   First, each projection  is analyzed in terms of the appropriate-
ness of its methodology and the quality of its data base.  Those  projections
which have inappropriate methodologies or are based on low  quality data
are eliminated.  The remaining methodologies are then evaluated to
determine how reasonable their basic assumptions are.  The  result of
the entire evaluation procedure is to isolate and use the best projections
to develop a reasonably accurate representation  of the future.

-------
 3
 a.
 o
Q-





Ol

en
o
o
XJ
o

4_)
QJ
s:
i.
OJ





£
O

q-
oo

o

+J
(J
QJ

T?
CL




i O
O r—
S- OJ
Q. U
00

3
Q_
C
t-~i

OJ
4-J
OJ
Q

!.
O
•o
OJ
S
00

4->
rc

to

, —
03
4_3
• r—


OJ

03
4-J
CO




00
c
o


CL
E
00
CO
s_
o
03

0

c
03
O
C
o
03






(/]
TJ
i.
O
U
QJ
^_

to
o
E

>

QJ
4-J
03
S_

(J
U
03
XI
Ol
OJ
E
S- -i—
cn4->
S

OJ
en
ro
s-
OJ
>
o
0

O)
£


01
r—
03
3
4-J
U
03

O

en
1— r—
\

Ol
en
OS

OJ

o
o
03
s-
eC
o
u
c



oo
01
'J3
3
0
C->
c
o
0
QJ

O
s_
CL.
14^
o

O-



C
o
-£>
OS
3
CL
o
O.



00

CO U
Ol
"O 'r"5
c o
rd S-
LX
Ol
E t-
ro O


ra
E

4-J
to
UJ

C
0
•1—
4-*
rO
r-~
13
Q.
O
CU
to
OJ
















to
QJ
O
OJ
, — •
a

x>
QJ
OJ
O



 4-J

"~ 1_ S-
« — cn

S- E 4-*

4-J XJ O
OJ C S-
C ro tS

Ol
E
O rO
O 4->
C ro oj
•r- XJ 4->
03
r — C XJ
OJ S-
33 U
XI 4-> T-
•r- 01 S-
;> i- 0

-ax oo
55 S


' OJ
c.
o QJ c;
1- XI O
o oi o >>
4-> C r—
to O •<— CT
OJ C C
en i — o
cr OJ 03 to s-
03 O 3 E +->
jn c: XJ s_ co
LJ OJ -i- O
XI > 

QJ 03

ro o

en en
1 •


X) S-
C 1 •/-
03 c; to ra
!_ 4-> LL.
• a> ••-
to > c: "
O. O 3 QJ

-C r— 03
to S- 03 S
c; OJ 4-* 03
S -C C /—
O 4-> QJ QJ


n
to
OJ

si
4J
00
3
XJ
C



S-
o
0> XI C
S- QJ O
CTVr- .f-
•i- S- 4->
E 03 0
> QJ a.
XI CO -r-J J_

00
C
O
to >r~
QJ 00
E co •r".
0 ra 

OJU4->S- "tHi.rO X>
O3 OJ O. ^/) (_j *r—
>i *" OJ 4J C


•r- i- -I— QJ 4-J

•i- S- OJ nj
4-> C OJ <)- -^
X3 C 4J '"I"


oj i — cn ^

3 i- £ ^
CJ 3 ^
O-i-OI- O'r- 4-»XJ "°
XOJ-r-O'r- S_OJ03C; ^
rjjt|-4->+->XI Q-UCra "^



















O

x:


OJ
s-
3
4-J

t-

XI
Q

^ 03
-0 S-.
1 '

O 4-> 03 •* °
.— o +-> CD x> rr.
CL.r- 03 <3- C <"
E xi x) en 03 5;
OJ OJ i — ^
!- CO "CJ
C Q.^ 3 ^ O
•r- C 00 O tO J;
o o c p-> en ,°
to 4-> •<- OJ en i — ^~

en ra * ^
c 4-> i. • E 0 O g
T3 c CTI tjO o LO r~^» *^
^: QJ -r- • s- en cri *—
U£S Z24-^-r- 0-

u

E (d -C
0 >xr— 4->
Q-to cnCra'QJS  O S- 3
01 0
•O QJ 4-J oo
•—10 S-
i — OJ S~ OI
QJ 4-> O ^i
•O 4-* -Q ^_
>1 O 03 03 b
XI £ 03 _J 3














,,
C

r—
°^
C
03

U-

XI
O
O
O
•> C\J CO
0 C i—
co xj o r^
CT> c: -r- en

u
* - Ol •
LO O -r-> O
r-~ en o r^
CT> en S- en
p — i — CL i —
00

1 ••> -Q
-* to 5 <
O QJ 3 CO

0- 4-1 O CO
C C_J
"3 00
COt- 3
O CJ O -Q
CO £
'—•'->>>» 3
OJ XI 03 4-J . —

CL4-J O E O 4-


















•s
00
c:
o

40
U
OJ
•i — j
O

Q-

XJ
C
03



C
o
+j
ra
3
CL
0
n.


» c
0 0
CXI T-
LO QJ 4~>
-C • CJ
. 4-J LO QJ
o r^» •' — >
zm- cfi o
Q i— S_
•> O-
LO 3 >>
CO O3 OJ C
1 QJ ST O
CL. i- -r-

to co to rd
QJ 3 ' —
•i— . OO 3
!- CO C Q.
QJ . QJ O
CO 13 (_? Q_











to

fl
e


o
(_j

*>
<^

SI
CO

l/l
23

E
3

O
c_>
ra S M- O
S 03 CJ O



C
o
£
03
3
O.
O
Q-

00
C
1 O

•C QJ 4J
O 4-> CJ
J- Q. OJ
q— 03 oj 'f— }
O QJ CO O
00 S-
t- OJ o_
o) ct: «
-Q 4J CO
E - c a:
oj OJ QJ *3- UJ
XT 0 E l-x CQ
CJ S- 4-> Ol O
01 i- •—
ro E ro CO
QJ E O. S- r~-
t- O OJ OJ en
a: <-J Q jn i—
O OJ S- •*-*
> OJ oo •<- OJ
03 4-> S- r— 4°
QJ T- 03 >, tj f°
S- > i — OJ £
03 -r- E OJ XJ 1|—
4-J O > -^
O U S- •!- S- to
4-> OS M— 4-> O IJJ


1
" " O "
LO O OJ O
co o •!-> ir>
en o o en
00 i — CO S- i —
r— CL
OJ " •• 00 *
3 O O O C O
4-J d-
o en en o ••— en
OJ i — i — CO 4-> , —

>.

c
X) 3
C O
" 03 O
QJ ^~.
S- c: >> oo o)
O3 *r- 03 QJ S_
3 ^- S -r- rd
03 -^ OS 4-> S
r~ (= -li C 03
Cl) ra CJ 3 i 	 •
a s- T- o rjj
• — -u_ a. CJ o




o
•r-
4J
03
^
CL

Q.
0/1 r— r
• '1— = OO
^> U c
C 0

LU O 4~>
t_> u
00 OI
OJ 00 -rS
•r- QJ o
s_ u i;
CU S*. Cl_
CO 13
o *3~ c:
^ t/i r^^ o
LT> CL) Oil *r~
&C jj~ -4-J
O) TO

3 CD ^ ^
i — +J i_ Q.
o n> ex o
>• 3 < o-


OJ
-a en
CL) T3
r- CL)
'i— « — •
m S
+-> o
CD E nj
•a j^ oj

C r— ftf
O 03
C OJ
-a o .c
CU C/J -M
 -a
C t/l ••—
cu rtj r?
£ 0- CQ
* •
CD
£
O
l/l

M-
0 0) >,
-M _£Z -Q

co ta
QJ E 4- QJ
E 0 t.
XT C 13
t/) -i- t/1
r- CD O U
_Q CD-r- CL)
+-> 3 S- 0 00
l/l CD O S- CTt
O> LO O. CLr—


1
" O
o o a>
r**- Q"! *r-J
cr> en o
i — l/l i — £_
•— CL

o a o o c
IO -M CO O O
CTi U CTl O •«-
i — ra • — CM 4->

CO

•1—

M-
O
i/l
jz a.
O -r—
CD t/1
-a §
c: o












Pr5
C'
o

Ol C
OJ O

VI

4-> *r-
C £

O O

CO
QJ Olf~^«


5 c

r— iT3 r—
QJ i— 3


-------
T3
a)
3
c
 c
 o
 o
LU
_J
03



1


>i
O
^
O
Q

QJ


CD
o

O
ro T3
-M O
CO

S

(J
C
. 0
^~ ~
o




Tz
Q.





rrt
O

0
I?









c:
QJ •
g,
0
CL
!=
•^ uj

i
.C
*-J
QJ
£ •

-•-
cr
c

73
C

3.
X
jj

C

QJ




ro
prM

D
2
CL

O r

V)
*~














QJ

*-"




V)

c:
QJ
S-
+j

u
i.
0





CO
a
o

\ *


i





o
u
> M
r-





3


C I CO QJ
1 'r- o QJ CJ
CO ro -C , — -t- ro
T3 i— -Mr— T3 >i4--l-J S-



11

a












5- C C 3'i-roQJQJ •»-> O -t- •
QJCO QJ Q.2 JZ4-»4-C i — VI TJV)
0) 1
L.
O


/I •<
r- -OS- O Vl-MOOSl/l't-OJ C
h> -C c +J CLJ^ -r- QJ O -r- -M T- ro
O ro QJ >r~ ro 4-> ro -M E tr~> C O CO 3 +->
QJ 3 S- S- r— -i- QJ -OSviOOO ra •<- "-I

O r
T3

TJ

•a
a.
C (J
0)
.£:

O
3
O

>i-
i— 4- o .a" •




+->
•r-

J__
QJ
Q.

CJ1















•

r






c: t/)
t3 i-
r~ 0

5

r>
•a

3
CL
o


u

X rtj-r- -MS-'r-M-CL-MS- COQJ OJJ
^
3
/)
•0


- VI
j -a -M
3
3 -1
1>
->

1)
3 VI C 3 O O> _c ra rO QJ QJ E CO T— LJ C
H. "o O QJ Q) V) "O r— i — • 3 ^~ C_) rO t- QJ O
C *r- 4-> *r-7 CCQJrO3rO-Mi- "+-> 'r~5 O
VlQJcnrO OO3-*-*-*-1 O.i — 3 "O QJ
MS-QJ-M S^'r-OraOOCUCOc: en-
yl

0
L_
z;
D
r--4->S-CO rx+J-MO-M CLO O V) ro =3; "O O- (-)
CO
QJ
o -a
•t- QJ Q-
> S_ T- C
S- -O QJ J= O
QJ C 4- CO -r*
CO ro 4- C +->
OS ro
4- « O ' —
O CO CO 4J 3
QJ QJ rS












I-  -I- -r- .C O
S- co >>•»-> -M O a. v)
O T3 QJ .1- T- ro -O
4-> C > r— C Q) +JC
VI •- 0 VI
•r- 3 QJ "-
rc ca i- :n -




X) +-> -r-
c
o

O.

3
,
S-
£-
3
CO *

CO O

C 0
ro i-
rx
QJ
E <4-
ro O
en
OJ
cy

QJ
_c7
cr
C
-5
c
fT5
cx
**tf
LU
— f
ra -

en
c
f- t






I/)


Z3
u




c:
QJ
o

r—j
"a



c
ro














ra
S

CD
O


O
1
-a
c
ro
a.

x

a
t.
.u














CO


0
QJ



QJ
-Q


^
O
03
en



LO
en

f
ro


"O 1 r~

^^ "3 a>
(JO '"-J
•r- O t. O
§4-> en s-
CL
c tn c
O 3 O QJ
(J -C •!- -C


VI
o c o
en o CD

) - | \ ,—
(j
^ QJ n
LO 'r-J O
00 0 LO
cn i- en
i— CL i —
•• 03 I
QJ O C >>
01 C S -I-1
C QJ O C



0


3J t-  « o QJ
a. co co -i^ o
 O •!-
O QJ CO r— -a C CJ34->

QJ t. CT'^- rO 4~* 4J ** *r—
-O CL-r- JD rO (_> -C X) O
E C- r— QJ 4-> QJ •!-
3 -M ^: TO VI 3 -r-5 3 4J 4->
C C O QJ QJ CL O O LJ S—
QJ rx cn






•r- C >> C O 3
+J3rOro'O-oO. 4->-M
y^.

5'
r-
V)
r—
=
->
O.




QJ O
CO
O 4->
Ci. ro
i~

CL

-






VI

03
O
ro

CO
+J

C
3

=
O
VI









»



§5 S- C rO O QJ
^l ro E CL cn
o cnr— c
_J -i — r— " QJ 4— _<~ ro
-C 3 V) S- o 4-> ^:
O 4- QJ ra 2 Or
OJ -O -r- CO O
y) o -r- QJ O Cn QJ
r- Cn « r— •(- 4J +->
— VI -I- -M O C U


_J QJ (J QJ -M -VJ QJ
c QJ c •
QJ J= ro
—
o

CL
=
QJ
QJ
C
l->

LU-ProOrOrOi — O-'r-
V)
Q)
t->
rO
S


V)
QJ

LO
cn








OJ - rO C3 r- 3
Q >-.X> 5- O t-

V)
CL

c-

C

O
















^
g
(/
•1—
E
f—

C.


OJ

o

1 *
—





















•u s- o - e <->
co ,-r- S- S-

cj s_ r-

QJ -4-J (/) ^
QJ -*-> 3 O O
S- Q> 4- CX'«-
n -O E -»->
4->
U "-

i_ •
M -
(/)

r-
QJ
r-
C l
o
QJ O ro
c: u r~
P 3
•o o.
r- C O
O ro CL
LO
cn
*. *. V)
LO LO C 0
r-^ co o CD
cn cn O *r- cn
,_ r- cn 4J ,-
cn o

o o "-> o
r^» cyi ~o o LO
cn cn c S- cr»
r— r— rO O. r—

>«j
+J
cz
3
0
<_J


*r-
^^

C
rc3
£-
LL.




c;
O
+J
rO

's
CL
O
O-



V?
•r- ro
4J cn Q)
a> rji *£
O r—
V)
(U 3 E
CO 3
•r- i- r—
tt) 4J O
-Q CO C_J
c -a QJ
•r- C -C
LL.ro t—




CO

r«
ra































QJ
S-
CJ
3
S-
+-)
CO
>,
o
c
o
u
LU

(
r
c
r



3'
-^
TV



— CO
c
o o

ro •(->
O

in o -r-5
(T> CO O
0-> ai i-
i — i— O-

















c
o
r— >
-M
(13
^3
a.
o
a.

•



o
4J
O
LO
Ol
t—

-LJ
|
cn
c
ro
















ai
o

o

s-
0
^3
rO
— 1

•




4-
O


rO
QJ
S-
CQ
LO
g
































^
-C >>
(J r~>
t- i.
(O QJ f&
^
-*-»
W O -r-
l/l -i— tfl
a> -c s- wi
c o  O
tn 
-------
4J
 U
 OI
••-0
 O
 5L
a.
 o
 CJ



•4-
O

QJ

Cn
O

Cl

O
c~

QJ

>
,( —
•*->
O
cu

4-
OJ


i/)





Q


c/1
C
Q


U
OI
c.
c.
c

07 00
QJ -r-

"T3 1 i- ^
C OJ 1 O5 O
03 i — o xi o
3 OI C r—
03 Q- cn 13 O
4-1 C O O XI
OJ *i- CLXI -Q O
xi c .c:
00 « 03 CJ 4-1
OO OJ OI *r- OI
3 cn E "J= E
CO C O C CL
C O3 CJ O 03 QJ
OI -C C •!- i. _C
t— < o U CJ -r- 4-1 Oi f—



>
^[-~
14-J
C
QJ

u

lf_

~
o-


O
-C
cn
3
1 O

4-1
p^
03


XJ
QJ
c:
tf~
03

D-
X



ai


o


CO
S-
05
QJ
O-
Q.
03

4-1
C Oi -r-


C
o

>.
l —
cn
c
o
S-
4-1
oo

XI
OJ
00
OJ
_a








>^
cn
o
f—.
o

o
jz;
4-1
QJ
E



QJ

h-

c


X3
QJ
Q.
O


>
01
XI






OJ
OI
5-


00
3
-O
E
3

O
CJ

QJ
S-
3
4-1
O
3
S-

co


>
E
o
c
o
o
LU

O
4->

0
to
a^
f—

_^
-fj
3
O
$-
cu

-a
c
/o
















co
CTi





o

£_
o
4-1
00
• r—
f~

11-
o

OI
oo
•













00
XI
C
QJ
S-
4-1























cn
c
O
s-
4-J
CO

03

'[
O

QJ
CO



CLXJ
i- C 1 1
i: 05 o o '
CO QJ QJ QJ
C +-> -O'OXJ
O C O O 05
i- QJ S- i. (_ -O
4J E CX O.4-1 C
OJ >) 03
t— O CJ O t-
Ol r— -r- 4-1 O - Cn
s_ o- E 01 c
i- E o co co E >r~
tu oi c: c c o co
4-1 O O O CJ 3
C M- O -r- T- C O
i— o QJ 4-^ 4-1 ,
QJ

4-1
3
o.
c


03
4J
03
O

S-
O
-i — 5
O3
S
e
o
u
c
•r—

c/1
13
LO
C
OJ
o

o

CTt



XI
00
C
o
'p—
4-1
CL
E
3
00
CO
et

i.
O


fO
E
>r—
+•*
to
LU

QJ
CD
03
C.
QJ
>
O


QJ
E
•r-
h-
l/l
1—
ra
t3
-4_>
U
ftf

cy»

O>
1 —

1
c
QJ
cn
03
J_
QJ
>
O
CJ

O3
QJ
S-

O
U
c
•1 —

f.
IS)
CJ

40
c
^5
0
CJ
c
o
•r-

U
QJ

O
i-
O-

M-
0

O-



VI
03
«-— ^

O
•r—
E
o
c
o
CJ
UJ
XI
C
03


QJ
CJ C
S- 0
3 -r-
O 4-1
CO CJ
QJ
XI -0
C O
03 5_
Q_

£ M-
n3 O
S
CO
OI
4J
05
E
40
CO
UJ

C
o

40
03
i —

Q.
O
(X


03
4-1
o:


XJ
O!
4-3
03

<1
S-

XI
C
03






>
OJ
c
o
E

P—
05
4-1
O
4-1


O















*
00
OJ
u
O5

O.

XI
QJ

03
J-
0
XI C
QJ CO -r-
>, S- 4- T- 4-1
4-J OJ O CO S-
OJ C CX >> O
CXI E 3 QJ 3 i— D
r^ o o QJ t- 03 03 c
cncJco u E ex 01 c 3
' — C C O S~ — 4-1 03 -i- 4-J T- C

S_ S- QJ >, E -C O
cnoi 4-1 QJ -r- 4-i cr 03
LO XJ X ro C 4-J O 4-1
cnojoj 4-i o oo >, cj oj
"~* • •



1
o
3
) OJ

c
., —

00
o
00
OI 03
E oi
O S-
U CJ
c c

OO
QJ
03
S 4-1

40 0
oo E
QJ >-
O
CXI r—
r-* ct
cn E
r— LU
1
CO C
CX C. >.
•r- OI 4-1
jr: > C
CO O CO 3
C O>4-> O
3 ••- 0
0 S- c
4J QJ 3 C
-C T-

00 O 03 -^
03 4-1 C
QJ XI C 03
!- C QJ s-
Q- 03 03 S U_





-O

13
O>
S-
3
CO
03
OI
E
n
LO
CM
1
IX

CO
QJ
•P—
t_



OO
O3
03 	

•r- U

03 QJ E
0 E 0
i 0 c:
Sr 0 o
QJ c: cj
O-'c— 1 1 1

1-
O p-
03
3 in c
03 r~- ' o
cu cn •,-
!- ^- D-
3 QJ
OJ CP >> CtL
CO _03


CO
C
O

4-1
O
QJ

O

CL.
• s; aj

. . 4J
m oo
3 CT
«co c:
O C -r-
CO QJ XJ
in cj c
03
• QJ CL
0 +5 x





i^
-M-

00
C
O

4_)
CJ
QJ
•i —
O




S-
0
, — .

g

0
o


c
•1—
c
c
03

CL.


i

_Q


4-1
CO

XI

XI

03














%J
-^
JO


aj
c
3
-3
(
^1
0
i — -
CL
E
QJ

4-
O


O

4-1


































in
CO
cn


o
**










00
OI
• r—
i-
4-1
00
3
XI
C














^
>-
4-1
S-
QJ

t—


0
XI
S-
o
o
c
o
CJ








>^



c
ai
E





























































XJ
c
OJ

O)
XJ

cn
c

CO
3
O
^
OI
S-
• r—
^:
00

s-
tu
CQ

n
cu
cn
c;
03
i-






















QJ
CO
03
-Q

C)

E
0
C
o
CJ
QJ

QJ

r-

S
Oi
( — -

o


o
f^
cn
r—

E
QJ
f-^
S-
03
:c

XI
c
03


O3
O
C
tu
O C5





)__
03
r-
S-

co
3
XJ

r—


































QJ
OL

4J*
















































H-

00
s-
QJ
>

XJ

r—
r—

3.



1/1
(2j
4_j
fQ

r_
•4-J
V)

CD

S-
4-*
(/)
13
"O
C


r—
*U
CJ
O
_J

c:
o

-j->
^
JD

^_
•4->
LO
r—
a


























































CO
XI
c
OI
S-
4-1

CJ

S-
o
4-1
OO

^

00 4-1
S- >, QJ C
•t- QJ 4J T- OJ
til S- -O .r- S_ E
-C 03 C XI 4-1 O >,
4-lJCo3^I OC04-1 O
00 4-1 E 3 i —
01 4-13 EXIOI 01 a.
COr-CO OC3OIOO E

OI C E Cn | -r- 4-1 -O
S- O >) C i— 4-1 C
CJ-r-OCJ O03COJU 't~
CT4-li — ••!— CCJO4J-r-
•r-S_O-E OCJ03E OI
OSO CJi — CO Cn
i— 0. (U C -r- ^--i-C C
i — O O oo XI i — E O 03
•i-S-O^CJ 03CT-OCJ -C
3O-OO1 CQ033XIQJ CJ
LO
4-1 r— CO
C 03 cn oo
OI ••- LO r— C
E S- «3 O O
>, 4-1 cn •••!- co
o oo i — co 4-1 cn
r— 3 1— CJ p-
CLX3 " 03 QJ
E C •• O 3 -1-3
ai •<- 01 LO 4-) o o
cucn CJ c. LO
4- >, >,'— 03 CX OI
0^4-1 1—


^^
4-1
c
3
o
CJ

c
•r-

1 -i£
r—
O5
S_
u-



00
03


CJ
•r-

Q
c
o
CJ
LU







O5
QJ
4jj

00
3

~i
3

O
CJ

OI

h-






















OI

4-1

OO
• f—

OI
S-
3
4-1
CJ
3

4J
00






00

03
3
4-1
CJ
03






















JO

XI
QJ

3
00
03
OI
E






QJ

3
4J
CJ
3
S_
4-1
CO


-.^
g
O
c
o
CJ
LU



















l^_
O

4-1
C
03
C

E

tu

QJ
XI

f-


QJ
E

o

a.
E






o
-M

0
LO
OI


F
-C
4-1
2
0
S-
C3

XJ
c
03



4-J
3
CL
4J
3
O
I
4-J
3
CL
C


C



XI
c:
03
QJ
Nl

CO

01
S-
3
4-1
3
4-

Ol

4-1


„
CD

cn


/.
ur>
uo
cn






















XI
OI
XI
XI
03

OJ
3

'03





OJ

O3
4-1
CO
O
•i—

O

QJ

| —

*

CO
cn

XI >,
3 4J
4J C
OO 3
O
CU CJ
CO
03 C
.a •!-

CJ -^

£S 'O
O 5-
c: u_
O
CJ 4-
ai o
cn
C 4-1 C C
•r- C -I- 1 -1-
i- i — QJ 03 S- 4->
QJ ^ U E O CO
C 4-1 C 03 QJ CX •*—

4--i- cngs-xJ s-tu
O4-1 3ELl_o3i — CL
03 O O i— 4J
Cf— C.CJOE-1-OJ03

•r-CL 4-14-1CC. 034-1
4-1 O 	 ' QJ •<- 4- CO 00
•r-CL C OI 00 O
00 OI 3 >vr- til 03 LO
Oi— S-^ 	 O4-14-1.C Cn
CLOJ 3LOr— CC4JCr—
§CJ 4J 00 t- 3 3 O
O 3O1COO4-1''— C
CJr— U- r— -r- CJ U 03 4-> T-


" 00
O C
CO O
Oo LO -r-
1— CO 4J
cn o
-<— QJ

-- XI O
Oo C S-
r~ 03 0-


















t*
0}
XJ • — ^
n3 Cn
S- C
4-1 *r-

" 3
OJ O
£5 c~
o
O X>
c c
•i- OS



n
-C
o
3 !-
03 03
OI QJ
S- CO
3 Q)
CQ a:
CO
« oo -
>, CO O
4-1 QJ LO
•p- c cn
00 •*— r—
S- CO
OI 3 >^
> CQ i —
•r- 5-
C 4- OS
Z3 O Q)

-------
 cu
 3
 C
 C
 O

 U
CM


LU


































































































cu
o
13
o
C/)
T?
C



££
(rt
•yr







-^
cr
*~_
-»

p:
~I
ij
dJ

-~
QJ
s-
rt3
-C

1
.Jj
U—


^^~ * OO
=.


4->
Q.

t— *

rtj

fTl
— .

S-

•r-»
(O
Jil
M-
o
CO
~o
c
CD



U
•r—
t.
O

t/l
•r—
.

t/)

o

-i-1
Q.
E

LO
CO

^^
(
o
• r— j

^


U
•r-
C~



£_
O

U
ra
4—


LO
0
2:
cu
2
>
o
o

E
1 —


r-^
01
i — •

0
Cfl

CU
cr

c_
CU

o



cu

,-^


c£
CO
y
CO

oo
3
-Q
E
3
r-.
o

c
o
4J

CU
•1-3
o
s.
cu

OH
o

cu
a
i—



00
ra


S-
o
t- -a

"O '~~^ ro
CU 4-1
oo i- OO
3d ro
CL oo ,—
cu x cu cn
3 CU -r- 3
cr—' i. o
r- 4-> 0
C U 00 1
-C T- 3 JO
o oo -a jo
CU (O C O
4-1 JQ -r- O
C
S- 0
O •!-
ra O
U CU

•a -a o
c: c s_
i — ro CX
00
oo a> i— i—
3 r— ra ra
O -O C C
i- ro O O
CU T- -I- •!-
E S- -u cn

c > s: s-
c
•r- O
-o
CO = C
4-1 4J 4-1 O O
Ol M — $_ *' — 4-*
ro T- O 4-1
o-jci a. ra cu
00 X O 3
cu cu o c
-C "O — r*~ •(—
4-1 CU 4-1
0 •— >, C
C C ro i- O
i- CU C 4-J (_>
3 O 01
CU r- T- 3 i—
> <4- D1T3 i —
rO C CU C: -r-
.C -r- S- -r- S

-
CTi "O
01 C
00 r— 03
" — '
3 LO o O
4-1 CO O CM
o cn o O
rO r— CM 04


-a
c
ra


S- C >! 00
ra -r- ra CU
S i~ 3 ••-

r— c: -V c
CU ro U 3
Q 1,-r- 0
— 'U. Q. CJ




>, - -a >,
-Q 4-1 C -O
C ra





cu
a.
4_1


ro
E

r—

CL
oo






















CJ
S~
rs
4-0

M-

CU
.C
+-*

C


o
(/)

CO
O

•M
O
.34
s
a.


























TJ

3

00
C
O

4_i
{_j
C

4-





t/)
CU

ro
O

CU
ci:

in

C
•





















































r—

S-
3

3
O
•r-
i-
C7)
ro

S-
o
4~



-C

•1 —
2


3
CU

^>

cu

c
•r-

"O
c


0J
£
0
U
c


,__
rQ
e
0
to

QJ
CL






































tn
O)
• r-
^_
4-*
V>
rs
-o

""




cn
c


ro
je

OO
c:
o
00
S-
a>
Q.

i

o

Q-
E
cu

<+-
o

oo
cu
^
3
01

cu
s






















































4J

CU
Ci
X
CD


ttj
U
o
i —




t/i
ro

T3
OJ

3

a>

ro


c
cu
E































Ol
4_>
C
CU

^j
O
3


C
O

4~*
rO
U
O
_J









ru
Ol
-a
cu

^
o
c:
"^





cu
c~
4-1

(jj_
O

(/I
cu
s_
3

ro
CU
E




































rQ
00
Q)
1 *<^
r- i.
01 4J
CU 01
S. 3
o -a
O T3 C


S-
o


T^J
01
oo
3
























F—
ra
c:
o

cn
a>
S-

00
00
o

Ol































C *r*-
ro

CU S—
U ra

> 4-1
S- C
cu cu
00 T3































4_1
U
3
-o
o
i-
o.































(j -a cu t— oo >*
•r- CU E rO - Ol U
E
0
c
o
CJ
UJ

„
on
c
o

c
o


o
cu

o
s-
Cu

o>-
O

• r—
4J
O
CU

8
D.

CO
a:
UJ
CO
o

CM
cn
s- >, c a> c
3 0 0 E ••-
OO i — 00 O C
ra a. s_ o s-

E CU CX'r~ QJ

CO •—
• 'r-
^3 U
C
« 3
LU 0
01
CU 00
•i- CU
i- 0
cu s-
00 3
o 
§"£
r— O.
a.
E 0
UJ 4J
a
4->
C
ra CU
4-1 £
ro >•,
00
4-1
3
a.
c
i — i

ro
4J
ra
Q


O

ro
T3 O

cu a.
01 e
ra CU
jQ

U 0)
• i— 4J
e u
o cu
d '"-j ro
• O O 4->
O S- ro
^ 1 1 f\_ -^j
• «
4-> 1
C S- 4->
CU CU J_
E 4-1 ra
oo
C
0

CL

3
Ol
OO


o
ra
2:
>,  C rO
40 t- 00 -r- r—
3 O CU 3
O O- C +J CL
S~ O..t- CU O
C3 O E C O.
•
00
ra oo
3 C
4-> O
CU
cr
ra
s-
01

o
O
CU
E

U T-
rO 4->
O
o cu
r^^ ir~>
Ol O

a.
o o
co cn
CTi cn
4J 00
CU
Cr
ra
s_
cu

a


ro
(U
i.
•=c
c
o
'( tf—
0 +-1
U
0) CU

>> o
a.
c cu
3 4J C ••-
O C -i- +J
(J CU C
U 00 3
C ra CL O
•r- ••-)••- 0
.— T3 -C
J^ rO OO S-
C C CU
ra T3 S JC
S- C 0 4->
LL. ra 4J O

CU Ol
01 c:
Z3 •!—•
Ol
-a 3
c o
ra -C
•
n
c c
0 " 0
cu
o
i. C
3 C
o ••-
00 4-
c
•a a
C -f
ra C
s.
cu a.

ra >t-
•z. c
•r- O .— -r-
01 co ra oo
cu cn c: o>
fV 4J r— O •»—
CU I -1— g
o -* o 01 e
• r- t- r-~- CU O
JC ro Ol Of. CJ t—
1 OS-— I--
i O cncT>

•I- C O JC -r-
S t- 0 O C -C
00 t— 1 C U
) cu 3 4-> "a ro i-
jr O 3 -f- ( — ro
1- 1C 0 S cu S
ol 1 C
-a 4-> o ro
C O 4-1 E
QJ ra CU
s- s- t3 -a
4-> rO CU
-c: oo cn
XI 0 3 C
C -r-
fO "O CU Ol
r— t- 3
C O ra O
o jc jc:
•r- OJ CO
4J 00 O 4->
ro 3 ••— U
r— O 4-1 CU
3 -C 01 •!-»
CL T- O
O C t- S.
Q_ •(-- <1J CX

1

O
rO
i.
rO
_f-
o

•a
i — 00
O U
jd *r-
CU 4-1
00 00
3 •!-
O 1-
3H CU
»
4J CU -O CU
C JO CU 3
cu 4-> cr
E >i ra o -r-
C?i.r='i^
r— 4-1 0 CJ
CX 01 00 C CU
E CU CU O 4->
CU T- CJ
4-1 >•, CU >,
OJ- -r- r— "O
O C CU Ol 3
3 4-1 C 4-1
^ 4-> rO •!- 00
4-1 S_ S- 01
3 O 3 3 CU
O O- CJ 00
S- CL O >, ra
C3 O ra J3 JQ
•























































                                                                             4a

-------
      Those  economic  projections which depend on an economic  base metho-
 dology are  prone  to  error.   "The  Economic Base of the Metropolis", a
 detailed  article  by  Hans  Blumenfeld  in  the  1955 issue of  the Journal of
 the American  Institute  of Planners  (pp.  114-132) provides  substantive
 criticism of  the  use of economic  base studies as a projection tool
 (Appendix H).   Because  of this objection, economic projections  in
 Expanding The Regional  Plan  and The  Columbus Area Economy, Structure
 and Growth, 1950  to  1985  are each rejected.  The 1972 OBERS  Projections
 makes use of  some economic base methodologies;  however,  substantial
 use of other  methodologies as independent checks on accuracy helps
 maximize  the  probable accuracy of the projections.  All the  economic
 projections are based on  accurate data.  However, since The  Columbus
 Area Economy^Structure and  Growth,  1950 to 1985 was published  in the
 early 1960's,  its data  inputs do  not totally reflect recent  trends.

      Some population  projections depend strongly upon future employment
 figures projected  by  economic base studies.   Expand_ing the Regiona 1  P1 an
 appears to do  this,  and economic base studies are definitely the basis
 of  a  number of population projections in The Columbus Area Economy,
 Structure and  Growth, 1950 to 1985.   Past population trends, however,
 are  used  as the basis of  some population projections in The Columbus
 Area  Economy,  Structure and_Growth,  1950 to 1985.   These trends  are
 based on  pre-1970  data  and do not totally reflect current conditions.
 The  Delaware  County  Ohio  Comprehensive Hater and Sewer Development Plan
 has  an  excellent  methodology, but is based on data which is not  current.
 Population Projection,  Columbjjs SMSA is based on current data, but
 the  methodology is based  partially on economic base study techniques.
 Because the accuracy  of these economic base techniques is probably low,
 the  population projections derived from them are also probably inaccurate.

      There is  only one  actual land use projection examined that would
 provide information  relevant to the project.  This is The Mid-Ohio Region
 Housing Market Out!pok  1970-1980.  Other studies only provide information
 about current  land use  trends or present recommended concepts for the future
 distribution  of land  use.  Information on factors affecting  the geographic
distribution of land  use are  used  below (pages  14-33)  to develop pro-
jections of  geographical patterns  of area growth.   The  methodology for
The Mid-Ohio Region Housing Market Outlook  1970-1980  uses  population

-------
projections as a major base in the prediction  of housing  variables.
However, these population projections  are  based  primarily on  an  economic
base study.  Because there is  considerable doubt as  to  the validity  of
projecting population on that  type of  study, doubt must be cast  on  the
probable accuracy of the predicted housing variables.

     An analysis of the methodology and data inputs  of  the available
projections serves to reduce a large number of projections to a  small
number.  The basis for the evaluative  criterion  of the  accuracy  of  this
small number of screened projections is provided by  the explicit
assumptions on which each projective technique is based.

     Three population projections need further evaluation. One, Population
Estimates and Projections, does not predict future populations.   Instead,
it estimates population change between April 1,  1970 actuals, as determined
by the Census of Population, and July  1, 1973  estimates.   A primary
assumption is that the migration component of  population  change  in  an
area can be accurately determined from changes in residence noted on
individual income tax forms.  This assumption  seems  reasonable.   Its
accuracy depends on the accurate projections of  the  conditions which lead
to migration.  The 1973 estimates form the most  highly  accurate  documented
estimates of recent population changes.  Caution should be used, though,
in interpreting these estimates.  The  Columbus Area  Chamber of Commerce
believes that certain local economic indicators  point to  somewhat more
population growth than is indicated by the July  1, 1973 estimates (Thomas,
private communication, 1975).

     The 1972 OBERS Projections assumes that population migrates to areas
of economic activity and away  from areas of less economic activity.  This
assumption is reasonable;  therefore,  the 1972 OBERS Projections probably
forms the most accurate of existing projections  of regional (Delaware,
Franklin, and Pickaway Counties) population change.   Population  Projec-
tions was developed by the Delaware County Regional  Planning  Commission.
It assumes establishment of central sewage service in the project area
by 1978 and is based on detailed, current, and ongoing  knowledge of
development in Delaware County.  This  knowledge  of local  development
maximizes the probable accuracy of the population projections for Dela-
ware County and each of its townships.  However, it  should be noted that

-------
long-term projections for small populations,  such  as  those in each town-
ship, are highly prone to error.  This error  is  lowered  by grouping the
townships into an approximation of the total  project  area.

     Two economic projections  need further evaluation.   Population Estimates
and Projections estimates per  capita  income as of July 1, 1974.   It is
based on the accuracy of federal  income  tax returns,  so its estimates of
income are reasonable.  The  1972  QBERS  Projections is based on factors
which have influenced past regional economic change.   These factors form
a reasonable basis for regional economic projections.

     The one land use projection  was  discarded because it uses an economic
base study as a primary tool for  projecting housing demand.  A discussion
of geographic trends on pages  14-33 will,  however, shed some light on the
amounts of probable future growth of  different types  of land use.

4.   Best Projections
     The evaluation  in  the  preceding  section yields several economic and
population projections  which  project  future trends in a reliable manner.
The economic projections  are  Population Estimates and Projections and the
1972 OBERS P ro jections.   The  population projections are Population
Estimates and Projections,  Population Projections, and the 1972 OBERS
Projections.  Tables 4  and  5  and Figures 1  and 2 describe the projected
information.  Table  6,  as a comparison, lists the population projections
made in the facilities  plan (Burgess  and Niple, Ltd., 1974).

          TABLE 4.  Anticipated  Public  Sewer Service
                    Assumed in the  Projections
Township
Berlin
Concord
Delaware
Genoa
Liberty
Orange
1975 1980

partial sei
city already
sewered
very little
sewering
partial sev
partial sev>
                                       1985
                                                 1990
                                             partial sewering
                  fl.ipU'd fi'd'i l).rj. Ruroau of UK- Cup'oU',, 19/5;
                  e)01-;,-,,'e (ounty f!er,(1] Pliinniiio Co" nsiion. 1973

-------
              TABLE 5.   Population Projections  by Townships
Township
Berl in
Concord
Genoa
Liberty
Orange
Total
De 1 awa re
Total
Delaware County
1970
1,412
2,732
3,096
2,625
1,902
11,767
16,928
28,695
42,908
1975
1,778
3,412
3,735
3,353
2,174
14,452
18,621
33,073
NA
1980
2,134
4,094
4,296
6,073
5,924
22,521
20,483
43,004
75,695
1985
2,661
5,119
5,155
7,773
11,324
32,032
22,020
54,052
NA
1990
3,459
7,501
6,444
9,716
12,824
39,944
23,674
63,618
112,010
1995
NA
9,754
7,734
12,145
14,748
NA
24,854
NA
NA
2000
7,784
12,631
9,394
14,575
16,951
61,341
26,097
87,438 i
148,434
.. . , i
Source:   U.S.  Bureau of the Census,  1970;  Delaware  County Regional
         Planning Commission,  1973
                TABLE 6.  Population Projections as Estimated in
                          the Facilities Plan
Townships
Berlin
Concord
Genoa
Liberty
Orange
1980
2,100
4,170
4,722
4,014
2,899
1990
3,500
6,356
7,144
5,731
4,417
                  Source:  Burgess and Niple, Ltd., 1974

-------
            o
            o
            LO
             rt
            Cn
            LO
                                                                                       O
                                                                                       CM
                                                                                       o
                                                                                       CNJ
                                                                                       o
                                                                                       OJ
                                                                                       o
                                                                                       o
                                                                                       o
                                                                                       CXI
                                                                                       o
                                                                                       CTl
                                                                                       en
                                                                                       o
                                                                                       CO
                                                                                       en
                                                                                       o
                                                                                       r^-
                                                                                       en
                                                                                       o
                                                                                       UD
                                                                                       en
                                                                                 0)  O)
                                                                                 V) •!—
                                                                                 O -M
                                                                                 Q. C


                                                                                 O  O
                                                                                 C  >>
                                                                                 O  fO
                                                                                •r-  3
                                                                                 cn ro
                                                                                 QJ _v:
                                                                                (V  (J
                                                                                   •r~
                                                                                 tO £X

                                                                                 S- XJ
                                                                                 o  c
                                                                                M-    S
                                                                                 O  ro
                                                                                 O) •—
                                                                                •r-;  CU
                                                                                 O Q

                                                                                a.   •>
                                                                                    c
                                                                                4-i  C
                                                                                fO  (C

                                                                                's u.
                                                                                O-
                                                                                O M-
                                                                                CL.  O
                                                                                                      O)
                                                                                                      cn
                                                                                       O
                                                                                       LO
                                                                                       ai
                                                                                                                       en
                                                                             o
                                                                             c
                                                                             3
                                                                             O
                                                                                                  a>
                                                                                                  o

                                                                                                  3
                                                                                                  O
                                                                                                  
                                                                                                  ra
                                                                                                                        E
                                                                                                                        o

                                                                                                                       <+-

                                                                                                                       TD
                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                        a.
                                                                                                                        fO
o
o
CD

O
O
C\J
o
o
o
  *
o
o
LT>
O
O
O
  t\
O
o
o
o
o
o
                                                                 O
                                                                 1.0
                                                                                   o
                                                       o
                                                                                                                        o
                                                                                                                       CO
                                     NouvindOd

-------
                                                                                          o
                                                                                          CJ
                                                                                          o
                                                                                          CM
                                                                                          CD
                                                                                          CvJ
                                                                                          O
                                                                                          O
                                                                                          O
                                                                                          
                                                                                                     l(_ 03
                                                                                                     O 2
                                                                                                        ro
                                                                                                        j^
                                                                                                        O
                                                                                                     (d -I-
                                                                                                     CU D-

                                                                                                     o -a
                                                                                                     c c:
                                                                                                     i— ( rO
                                                                                                     CNl

                                                                                                      cu

                                                                                                      rs
                                                                                                      C7>
                                                                                           O
                                                                                           LO
                                                                                           cri
                                                                                                                      cn
                                                                                    o
                                                                                    c
                                                                                    rs
                                                                                    o
                                                                                    o

                                                                                    CO
                                                                                    
                                                                                    rcs
                                                                                                                      to
                                                                                                       O
                                                                                                      •a
                                                                                                       CD
                                                                                                      •4-5
                                                                                                       ex
                                                                                                       res
                                                                                                      -a
o
o
o
  rv
o
o
o
  ft
ID
o
CD
O
  f>
O
o
o
CD
O
O
  •%
O
o
o
  c\
oo
o
o
o
  n
CD
O
CD
  rt
CNJ
O
O
O
  r\
CD
O
CD
 O)
 U
 S-
 r3
 o
oo
                   SMV110Q  JO  SQNVSnOHl NI  S9NINHV3
                                                     10

-------
     The two economic and three population projections  provide  a baseline
which can be used to estimate the socio-economic environment without the
proposed action.  The value of this baseline is influenced strongly by
the length of the period of projection and the probable accuracy of each
of the five projections on which it is based.  Generally, the longer
the period of projection, the more uncertain the results; therefore, the
probable accuracy of each of the projections varies.   The regional  economic
and population projections in the 1972 OBERS Projections are expected to
be highly accurate.   The 1973 population and economic estimates presented
in Populat ion Estimates and^ Projections are also expected to be accurate.
The Columbus Area Chamber of Commerce maintains, though, that certain
economic indicators point to greater regional population growth than is
estimated by this method.  Popu 1 a t ion Pro jec t i ons can be expected to be
fairly accurate because it is based on detailed, current, and ongoing
knowledge of development in Delaware County.  A factor which hinders its
use as a projection of population without sewering is that it assumes
sewering in most portions of the project area in the  near future.  However,
considerable future development can be expected in the project  area even if
a public wastewater treatment system is not implemented (see pages  14-33).

     The populations projected for each township differ from those  projected
in The Sanitary Sewerage Facilities Plan for South-Central Delaware County,
Ohio (Burgess and Niple, Ltd., 1974).   Projections for most townships are
higher than those projected in the facilities plan.   Table 6 lists  the
facilities plan's projections and Figure 3 displays  the service area.  A
comparison of Table 5 with Table 6 shows that the projections of population
in 1980 and 1990 for Liberty and Orange Townships are considerably  higher
than those of the facilities plan.  The differences  between the two sets of
projections for Berlin, Concord, and Genoa Townships  are much more  moderate.
The high rates of growth projected by this study for  Liberty and Orange
Townships are not only supported by the best available population projection,
but are also further substantiated by a detailed analysis of land use
trends (see pages 14-33).

     According to calculations based on the population projections  in Table
the population that would be served by the proposed  sewerage system would be
11,421 by 1985 and 28,591 by 1995.  Assuming a waste  generation rate of
100 gallons per capita per day and assuming infiltration allowance  of
                               11

-------
1,260 gallons per day per inch  diameter  per mile  of  pipe, the waste
flow would average 2.47  mgd by  1985  and  5.76 mgd  by  1995.  These waste
flows would be safely within the  design  capacity  of  the  proposed
sewerage system of 6 mgd with peak capacity of  9  mgd.
, . . . , , 	 	

\ Radnor
lompson \
\
Scioto
. 	 c:

KEY

p- <•"•
Marlboro
Troy


Delaware
> 4
	 	 *i
_J>. . .



CdhCoVfl

I I I I I
.....
~fT
id
i \
1 1 1 1 \

V ... 	 	







......


» .,..,. . f . •



y 	

Oxford
Brown







V V V V V V r


• • Oramge1 • •





Kingston
•Berkshire








• •GerfoS • • k




Porter
Trenton
Harlem


Scale
t i
;
I
i
i
i
\

•'.: - Service Area 0 20,000 ft.
              Figure 3.  Facilities Plan Service Area
Source:  Adapted from Surveys Unlimited, 1973
                              12

-------
I
                                     Private  Communication
            Thomas,  James,  Director of  Research, Columbus Area Chamber of Commerce,
            29 July  1975
References
I           Blumenfeld,  "The Economic  Base  of  the Metropolis,"
            Institute of Planners,  1955.

I           Bureau of Business  Research,  The Columbus Area Economy, Structure and Growth,
            1950 to 1985,  The Ohio   University,  1960's.

            Burgess and  Niple,  Limited, The Sanitary Sewerage Facilities Plan for South-
            Central Delaware County, Ohio,  1974.

            Columbus Area  Chamber of Commerce, Population Projection, Columbus SMSA,
            September 1974.

            Delaware County  Regional Planning  Commission, Population Projections, July 1973,

            Finkbeiner,  Pettis,  and Strout, Consulting  Engineers and Planners, Delaware
            County, Ohio Comprehensive Hater and Sewer  Development Plan, 1969.

            Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission,  Expanding the Regional Plan, June 1972.

            Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission,  The  Mid-Ohio Region Housing Market
            Outlook 1970-1980,  March 1971.

            U.S. Bureau  of the  Census, Pop^jlatum Estimates and Projections, May 1975.

            U.S. Bureau  of the  Census, Population and Ho us in g, 1970.

            U.S. Water Resources Council, 1972 QBERS Projections, Vols. 1, 3, 5, 7,
            April  1974.
                                               13

-------
B.   FUTURE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT

     Growth and future development in any area  is determined by a large number of
interacting factors,  including  population growth, accessibility, employment
opportunity, recreational  opportunity,  intervening or competing opportunities,
land values, and the  total  pattern of power, gas, sewer, and transportation
lines.   These factors must be evaluated in  both a regional and local context
before  an accurate projection can  be made of the project area's probable future
growth  and development.   The following  section  presents an overview of the
probable growth and development in the  proposed project area, followed by a
discussion of the future growth and development in both a regional context and
in the  proposed project area.

     1.    Overview

          Growth of population  and industry has been occurring,  to  a  large
     extent, north of the center of Columbus.   This  trend  has  influenced
     growth in the project area in the  past and can  be  expected  to  have  an
     expanding influence in the future.  Other major factors  enhancing  growth
     potential in the project area are  its  excellent arterial  and feeder
     system of highways, its large tracts of relatively inexpensive,  level
     land,  its easy access to major centers of employment,  and its  excellent
     recreation amenities.  Poor waste  assimilative  capacities of the soil
     in most of the project area,  combined  with the  lack of sewering, is
     the major impediment to future development.   However,  private  package
     systems and septic fields  are capable, if public sewering is not
     implemented, of accommodating significant amounts  of  development.

          Most future development in the project  area can  be  expected to
     be  residential.   However,  rising costs of land  in  Franklin  County and
     Columbus combined with the availability in the  project area of large,
     level  and comparatively inexpensive tracts of land near railroads  and
     major  highways will encourage significant future industrial  development.
     Commercial development within the project area  will  be primarily
     neighborhood-oriented.  The  highest rates of residential  and commercial
     development can  be expected  in Orange and Liberty Townships.  Most
     development  in Concord Township will be residential  and most of this
     will  occur  in the Shawnee Hills-Dublin area.   In Liberty Township

                                   14

-------
considerable amounts of residential  development will  occur around
Powell and some industrial  development will  occur along U.S.  23 and
the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad.   Several  portions  of Orange Township
will experience considerable residential  development, while land adjacent
to the Penn Central  Railroad has a  potential  for industrial develop-
ment.   Some scattered areas of residential  development may be expected
in Berlin Township.   Strict zoning  regulations in Genoa Township, if
continued, would limit development  to moderate amounts of residential
and industrial uses.

2.   Regional Context

     The discussion of growth in  a  regional  context  sets a framework
for understanding growth and development in  the project area,  For the
purposes of this report, Columbus  is viewed  as being the regional
nucleus of Franklin, Delaware, Fairfield, Licking, Madison, Pickaway,
and Union Counties.   Factors determining growth and  development in the
Columbus region influence local growth and development in each of these
counties.

     The Columbus region has an excellent potential  for future growth
and development.  As Figure 2 indicates, high regional growth is
projected for services, manufacturing and government in Franklin,
Delaware, and Pickaway Counties.   Several factors provide the Columbus
region with an excellent potential  for future growth and development.
Columbus is excellently located with respect to consumer markets.  It
is within 600 miles of 60 percent  of the nation's markets and is thus
attractive to industries with national markets.  Columbus also has a
major airport, Port Columbus International Airport,  and is serviced
by three trunk railroads, one of which, Penn Central, is considerably
improving its present facilities.   Columbus  is also  located at the
intersection of Interstate Highways 70 and 71, providing rapid auto-
mobile and truck access in all directions.

     The Ohio State University and  several  other accredited colleges and
universities are located in Columbus, attracting major education-related
resources into the region.   The state capital and numerous state and
federal administrative organizations provide large amounts of stable
                               15

-------
employment, while the headquarters  of  numerous  bank  holding  companies,
insurance companies,  and savings  and loan  associations  provide  substantial
amounts of investment capital.   Columbus also has  a  diversity of research
and development activities,  including  the  Columbus Laboratories of  Battelle
Memorial Institute, The Ohio State  University,  and Ashland Chemical
Company.  It is evident that Columbus  has  a  diverse  employment  base  with
a well-educated labor force, thereby minimizing the  severe fluctuations
in employment that are common to  more  industrially-based  regions.

     There are other  factors which  provide Columbus  with  an  excellent
potential for future  growth  and development.  There  are numerous
activity-oriented recreation facilities  in Franklin  County and  nature-
oriented recreation facilities  within  the  other counties,  Columbus's
generally level topography and subsoils  are  suitable for  construction
of buildings so that  costs for building  factories, distribution facilities,
and transportation arteries  are minimized.  Finally, deposits of coarse
sands, gravel, and limestone support a significant quarrying industry.

     Although Columbus has considerable  potential  for future growth  and
development, there are major factors which inhibit growth in the Columbus
region.  These include lack  of deposits  of minerals, coal, oil, clays, gas,
or other deposits to  support most basic  processing industries and an in-
sufficient water supply to support  industrial development which requires
substantial amounts of water, such  as  steel  making,  paper mills, and
large chemical industries.  In addition,  Columbus  is in competition  with
other lake-basin centers in  the attraction of industry.

     A number of special factors determine the  location of  growth and
development within the Columbus region.   Of  particular  relevance to this
environmental impact analysis is the  determination of those  factors
which most influence  growth  and development  in  the ring of  counties,
including Delaware County, surrounding the metropolitan nucleus of
Columbus and Franklin Counties.  The  major growth-oriented  purposes
that these outlying areas serve are for  low  density  housing, inexpensive
land for industrial development,  and  recreational  land.  The major factors
in determining to what extent each  outlying  county serves various growth-
oriented purposes are:  (1)  accessibility to major areas  of  employment;
(2) accessibility to residential  services; (3)  provision  of  sewer,  water,

                              16

-------
gas, and electricity; (4)  quality and regional  scarcity of recreational
resources; (5) directions  of growth within Columbus and Franklin Counties;
and (6) the availability of sizable tracts of low cost land which does
not require costly modification to make it suitable for development.

     When Delaware County  is analyzed in terms  of the above factors,
a picture of strong potential for growth emerges.   The northern portions
of Columbus have the most  desirable centers of employment and excellent
highway arterials making the southern portions  of Delaware County very
accessible to these desirable areas of employment.   These highway
arterials also give easy and rapid access from the southern portions
of Delaware County to residential services in the City of Delaware,
Westerville, and downtown  Columbus.  In addition,  Delaware County
has widespread provision of water, gas, and electricity services and
large surpluses in facilities for most of those recreational  activities
for which there are insufficient facilities in  the rest of the region.
Finally, growth in Franklin County is occurring primarily to the north
toward Delaware County and, to a lesser extent, to the east and southeast
as numerous large tracts of land suitable for residential  subdivisions
or industrial activities are presently being held for speculative purposes

3.   Project Area

     The following discussion of growth and development within the
project area is divided into two parts.  The first part is concerned
with evaluating land use,  population, and socio-economic trends which
influence the project area as a whole.  The second part is concerned
with evaluating growth and development within each township in the
project area.

     Information gained from various population, land use, and socio-
economic trends helps define aspects of growth  and development in the
project area.  Population  trends show that population growth is
occurring at an increasingly high rate.  Land use trends show that
there are large concentrations of both speculative land tracts in
Liberty and Orange Townships and recent residential development in
                              17

-------
Concord, Genoa, and Liberty Townships.   Since  1964 there  have been  more
housing starts in the project area than  in  the much larger area comprising
the rest of the county.   The average value  of  new housing units constructed
in the project area from 1964 to 1972 well  exceeds the average value of all
units constructed in Delaware County during the same period.   Land  use
trends also reveal that significant amounts of farmland have  been converted
to other uses.  Socio-economic trends show  that significant decreases have
occurred recently in farm populations, and  that an increasing percentage
of workers are commuting to Franklin County.

     A wavelike outward growth of population density from metropolitan
core areas has been described by Hans Blumenfeld (1954) in "The Tidal Wave
of Metropolitan Expansion."  This type of theoretical basis is valuable
in explaining the significance of past trends  in population growth  from
the expansion of Columbus toward and into Delaware County. Blumenfeld's
theory is supported by considerable empirical  evidence.  The  theory
postulates that zones around a metropolis,  from the center outward, go
through subsequent stages of slow growth, rapid growth, a leveling  off,
and a decrease.  Data in Table 7 describe historic changes in population
density in each township in Delaware County.  Figure 4 illustrates  two
important aspects of population growth in the  approximate project area.
The first and most obvious aspect is that the  density of population is
growing at a greater amount per year in  the project area  (curve 2)  than
in the rest of Delaware County (curve 1).  Since 1930, the population
growth in the project area has followed  part of Blumenfeld's  theory,
changing from a stage of slow growth into a stage of increasingly rapid
growth.  Within Delaware County, two zones  of  population  growth that
correspond to Blumenfeld's concepts are  the project area, and that  por-
tion of Delav/are County outside of the project area and excluding the
City of Delaware, Delaware Township, and Harlem Township.  Exclusions
are made to the second zone because the  City of Delaware  and  Delaware
Township have grown as a central place and  Harlem Township lies in  the
same growth zone as those townships in the  project area.

      Curve  2  represents  zone 1,  while curve 3  represents  zone  2.   In this
 light,  curve  2 represents  the historic  growth  rate of a  zone which is
 influenced  by Columbus.   Curve 3 represents the  historic  growth  rate of
 a zone  that is one step  further removed  from  growth influences  in  Columbus.
                                18

-------
 O
o

 OJ
 
 rd
 o
*l—

 rd
 Q-
 O
CL.
 o
•»->
 LO
CO
r-~
cn
cr • —
o i
•r- O
4-> I~~
fti O1
Ci
0 C)
rx r-
cn
C r—
^ 0

CJ r—
S- O
CD <-L>
n cn
QJ 1
00
ra Cn
JL~ r —
CJ
-I-3 O
cr in
OJ cn

OJ O
CX <=!•
CO
cn
i —
# o

ra E
o


O
C3


0
CO






r^
, —



r-
•-






CJ


ID
O
^
CO
in
CJ
•—

CO
(^
o
•—

CO
LD
CO


CO
r^.
r^


r-
LO
f^



CO
,3-
CXJ

rx
3

a>
s_
«i —
f~
*/>

s~
O)
CQ




10 tO







CO CX)
CJ



cn to
i — i






tQ CO
, —


«=)- f^.
LO CO
CO CO
CO tO
in oo


CXJ ( —
CO tO
<3- CO


Cxj >^-
tO CO
CO CO


co cn
«3" CO
CO CO


CO CO
CO CO
CO CO



in co
ID LO
CXI CXI



o.
S CL
1— 3
h~
c
•r- C

s_ 6
QJ S^.
CQ cn




ID U>
i— CO






O CO
CO r—



cn ID
CJ r—






LO cn
CJ

-d- a- co



co •*
in cj






cn fx)


o cn
• — r--
CD in
co to
VD LO
CJ t-O
•—

o *^-
cn cj
CO •*


cj cn
LO CO
<^j- co


•sj- cj-
i— CO
«3- CO


LO CO
CO i—
CO CO



cn o
•* r-^
CXJ CXI



CX
ex S
S h-
1—
e
(X3 QJ
O r—
C S-
QJ fX3
o rxr




UD l>-
co






CJ LO
•— CJ



cn -d-
CXJ






CO
° 1-^

r— CO
•3- O
CXJ CD
in r^
co r~-
CX) CO


t— «*
( | 	
CXJ ID


<3- CO
cn cn
i — *^J-


,

LO t_
cn a>

*t — *i —
^ . 	 j




ID O
r~
1





r— M-
r— CXJ
1


CXJ CO
CO






01 r--.
CJ

CO •=!-
CO O
c— r^
•d- cxj
CO CO
i — ^.


r^. o
Cxi cn
cxi in


v3 co
CD CXJ
CJ -3-


cn o
CO O
cxj «a-


CxJ O
CO t^
CJ CO



cn o
r— ID
1 — CXJ


CL
I— CL

O h-

O O)
-O CT)

S- ra
ro s-
?- 0




Cxi
Cx(






CX)
,_



in
•-






"*


CJ
,3-
cn
^
ID
CO


CXJ
1^
f-^


CXJ
,^.
VD


CO
^.
d- co
1



cn .3-







m co
i — i

 cr
i- "O
o a
o- ct:




«a- xo







r— O
,—



I — CO
Cxj






LO I>~
1 1

to in
to LO
LO CXJ
CO Cn
LO "3"
LO CXJ


cxj r~~
^J- Cxj



•=i- Cx)
to cxi
CO CJ


LO O
CO <^f"
CO Cxj


CO «3-
cn to
CO Cx)



co r^
LO cn
CO i—


CX
CL 1—
3
I— c
o
O LO
4-1 c-v
0 E
•r- O
o .cr
LO 1 —




to uJ







i--~ cn
CJ CJ



CTv LO
^J-






cn
° r-^
1
co *i-
co o

Cx) O
r~~ cn
<^- co


Cxj «J-
r-~- cxj
CO CO


r— r—
•=f •—
CO Cx)


i— CXJ
•* tr>
CO CvJ


CJ LO
CD *^"
CO CXJ



t~- O
tD LO
CJ Cx)


•
2
1 — •

c -3.
0 l-

cr >>
OJ O
S- S_
1— h-




^
CXJ






cn
r-



cn
r






co
,_'

LO
CJ
o
in
CO
cn


CO
o
CO


0
CD
tjD


CO
CO
LO


r--
tD
in




o-i
in
•d-

>>
tr
r3
o
o

i —
ro

o
1—


                                                                                                                     Cl <—
                                                                                                                     r- O
                                                                                                                      c
                                                                                                                      o
                                                                                                                                             to
                                                                                                                                             cr
                                                                                                                                             o
                                                                                                                                             rd
                                                                                                                                             CJ
                                                                                                                                             .Q
                                                                                                                                             3
                                                                                                                                             fX
                                                                                                                                             to
                                                                                                                                             rs
                                                                                                                                             cr
                                                                                                                                             O)
                                                                                                                                             o
                                                                                                                                             rd
                                                                                                                                             CU

                                                                                                                                             rs
                                                                                                                                             CQ
                                                                                                                                             O
                                                                                                                                             $_
                                                                                                                                             4-
                                                                                                                                             OJ
                                                                                                                                             +j
                                                                                                                                             Q.
                                                                                                                                             rd
                                                                                                                                             •a
                                                                                                                                             (1)
                                                                                                                                             o
                                                                                                                                             o
                                                                                                                                             oo
                                                                        19

-------
 no.
 100-
  90-
  80-
e 701
o>
i-

-------
Curve 3 is representative of a zone still  in a stage of slow growth.
Curve 2, describing the project area, is representative of a zone in
an increasingly high rate of growth.  Figure 5 suggests that those town-
ships in the growth zone just inside of Franklin County and adjacent  to
the project area are undergoing even higher rates of growth recently
than most of those in the project area.  In conclusion, those townships
just south of the project area have been undergoing high rates of growth;
those located in the project area are probably due for substantial growth
in the near future.

     Land use and socio-economic trends help evaluate what structure  the
predicted increasingly rapid future population gains  will  take.   One  of the
more significant land use trends is the acquisition of large amounts  of
speculative land holdings in the southern  half of Delaware County. The
amount and location of this  speculative land in Delaware County  serves  as
a valuable indicator of the  location of future development and the pressure
for that development.   This  speculative land,  as  shown in the map in
Figure 6 and in Table 8, is  strongly concentrated in  Liberty and Orange
Townships.   Discussion of potential  development in these two townships
(see Appendix A) emphasizes  large amounts  of residential  development.   The
large size of the speculative tracts also  suggests their potential for
development into residential subdivisions  and planned unit developments.
Northern Franklin County has few large tracts  of land available  at prices
low enough to encourage such development.   Demand for larger and less
expensive tracts of land shifts much of the potential  for this type of
development into southern Delaware County.

     Currently, many of the  potential  developers of these speculative areas
are relatively inactive.  Two reasons  explain  this inactivity.  One reason
lies in the current national economic  problems, even  though Columbus  has
fared better than most metropolitan areas.   In addition,  many developers are
waiting to see if public sewering will become  a reality in the near future.
Public sewering would save the developers  considerable costs as  opposed to
investments in package systems for each subdivision.   A land use trend  that
typically reflects large amounts of speculative land  is a decrease in farm
orientation.  Tables 9 and 10 illustrate a  striking reduction in the  farm
population and a large increase in the amount of farmland changed to  other
land uses.
                              21

-------

0

.c
o

1 —
rt3
S-
4->
c
01
(_J
O IT)
S- O -3-
is r-. ^i-
cn s_ .3-
C r— QJ |
O > O
•r- O O C^
-VJ -4-i
ro
r— O
rs us
0.01
0 i—
Q.
*
•
*
•

I

                                                 o\
                                                 C\J
                                                         o
                                                         O
                                                         -t->
                                   11  ..--,--..-
                                 !•  «\« •»••£.,,.',
                                                   .



                                       "^"1~''
UUJScii^'r-i -T'-Uf. • -Vt^
     -

                                                                                                 O)
                                                                                                 O
                                                                                                 S-
                                                                                                 cu
o
CJ
 O

 S-
 O)
-Q
 E
 ro
x;
CJ

 n3
 OJ
                                                                                                  .a
                                                                                                  o
                                                                                                  CJ
                                                                                                  01
                                                                                                  o
                                                                                                  S-
                                                                                                  rs
                                                                                                  o
                                            22

-------
DELAWARE   COUNTY,   OHIO
                           ^F^—!
                                                                 >'.- i—S,
                       _  U- _ .Y-_J\
   KEY:
                                Scale
       -  Speculative  areas      0   10,000 ft.
               Figure 6.    Speculative  Land  in  Delav/are  County
 Source:   Surveys  Unlimited,  1973
                                    23

-------
            TABLE 8.    Land Development Characteristics
  Political Jurisdiction       P!otted S"b7        SP?^lat1ye    x
                               division Lots       Holdings (acres)
  Berlin Township                  109                   578

  Concord Township                 299                 1,003

  Genoa Township                 1,025                   762

  Liberty Township                 579                 2,705

  Orange Township                  341                 2,382

  Total for Berlin, Concord,
  Genoa, Liberty, and Orange      2,353                 7,430
  Townships

  Total for Delaware County      3,407                12,707

  Total for Berlin, Concord,
  Genoa, Liberty, and Orange        coo/                   r00/
  Townships-                       69/0                   58/0
*
  Total for Delaware County
  *Land area of Berlin,
   Concord, Genoa, Liberty,      nfi -      .,
   and Oranae Townships       =   frA   q'  .-.      =     30%
                      —
   Delaware County


   Percentage of the total
   area of Berlin,  Concord,
   Genoa,  Liberty,  and
   Orange  Townships
   which is speculative
Sources:  Adapted from Surveys  Unlimited, 1973;
          Bureau of the Census,  1967
                                     24

-------
            TABLE 9.   Percentage  of  Land  in  Farms
County
Delaware
Fairfield
Licking
Madison
Pickaway
Union
Franklin
1959
83.6
82.7
73.3
93.5
94.5
90.8
57.8
1969
74.0
75.9
64.6
96.3
96.7
89.1
46.8
Percent of
changed to
9.6
6.8
8.7
2.8 farm!
2.2 farml
1.7
11.
Farmland
other uses



and gained
and gained

0
Source:   U.S.  Bureau of the Census,  1962,  1972
     TABLE 10.   Change  in  Farm  Population, Columbus Area
County
Delaware
Fairfield
Licking
Madison
Pickaway
Union
Franklin
1970
Totals
3,669
4,166
5,200
4,936
3,900
4,179
3,387
Per Cent Change
1960 - 1970'
-42.4
-43.7
-40.7
-16.9
-34.2
-35.6
-37.2
 Source:  U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1962, 1972
                            25

-------
     A land use trend which is  an indicator of  types  of  residential  develop-
ment is the average value of recently built residential  units.   Table  11  shows
data describing the average values of dwelling  units  constructed between
1964 and 1972.  These data show that the  most recent  construction of
residential units has been concentrated in  Concord, Genoa,  and  Liberty
Townships.   The average value of new units  constructed in the project  area
from 1964 to 1972 has well exceeded the average value of all units  constructed
in Delaware County during the same period.   The average  value of the new
units has also well exceeded the average  value  of  existing  owner-occupied
units in 1970 in either Franklin or Delaware Counties.   The trend in new
home construction in the project area is  to build  fairly expensive  housing.

     A land use factor which describes the  distribution  and amounts  of
residential development is historic data  on housing starts.  Numbers of
housing starts by year and by township are  listed  in  Table  12.   The  most
important information conveyed by the data  on housing starts is that more
homes were started in the project area than in  the much  larger  area  covering
the rest of the county.  Also,  housing starts per  year slowed after  1972.
This decrease in housing production in the  project area  after 1972  reflects
national economic conditions and waiting  on the part  of  potential subdivision
developers for the resolution of public sewering issues. Each  of these
factors is temporary.

     The inexpensive large tracts of land in the project area can be expected
to be especially attractive to developers who want to economically provide
a large amount of land per dwelling.  This  can  be  accomplished  either  by
dividing land into large-lot single-family  residences or by providing
considerable public space around apartments or  clustered single-family homes.
The ability to economically obtain a large  amount  of  land per dwelling, along
with the recreation and natural amenities it implies, makes development
attractive in the project area.  Higher land costs in Franklin  County  make
similar development there more expensive  and hence less  attractive.

     Current demand for residential development is indicated by the strong
demand for year-round homes whose location  satisfies  both vacation needs
and easy accessibility to year-round employment.  Seasonal  vacation homes
are generally constructed in those areas  located within  several hours
highway travel from major metropolitan areas and have considerable
                               26

-------
       TABLE  11-   New Construction

Political Jurisdiction


Berlin Township
Concord Township
Delaware Township
Genoa Township
Liberty Township
Orange Township
Total (or average) of
Berlin, Concord, Dela-
ware, Genoa, Liberty
and Orange Townships
Total for Delaware
County
Total (or average) of
Berlin, Concord, Dela-
ware, Genoa, Liberty
and Orange Townships
Total (or average) of
Delaware County
Mew Units
Constructed
1964* - 1972

96
203
120
325
232
142

1,118

1,793


62%


Average Value
Per Unit
Constructed
in $
18,525
24,165
19,663
25,536
28,644
24,137

24,513

19,704


124%


    *  Records  started  in  October  1964
Source:   Surveys  Unlimited,  1973; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1970
                                27

-------
TABLE 12.   Number of New Housing Starts,
            Delaware County
Political
Jurisdiction
Berl in Twp.
Concord Twp.
Genoa Twp.
Liberty Twp.
Orange Twp.
Total for Berlin,
Concord, Genoa,
Liberty, and
Orange Twps.
Total for Dela-
ware County
Total for remain-
ing Townships in
Delaware County
'65
14
13
46
27
17

117

179

62

'66
3
11
43
27
12

96

158

62

'67
4
16
42
18
15

95

154

59

'68
10
20
39
15
21

105

175

70

'69
7
21
36
23
17

104

191

87

'70
10
29
35
25
21

120

224

104

'71
16
47
50
48
18

179

328

149

'72
30
46
31
48
17

172

364

192

'73
22
30
32
24
11

119

285

166

'74
5
23
23
21
5

77

170

93

(4 mo)
'75
2
3
7
5
1

18

41

23

Total
123
259
384
281
155

1,202

2,269

1,067

Source:  Surveys Unlimited, 1973;  Delaware Regional
         Planning Commission, 1975
                         28

-------
recreational  amenities.   The project area exhibits  both of these charac-
teristics.   However, because the project area is  within commuting distance
of Columbus,  there is a  strong tendency for people  to combine their needs
for a vacation home with their needs for a year-round residence.  It is
possible to live in the  project area, commute to  Columbus, and still  have
a house that  is located  in a high quality vacation  environment.   Thus,
serving vacation needs in a year-round residence  appears to be a major
factor in the location decision of many current residences in the project
area.  These  types of homes are located in areas  near the Scioto and
Olentangy Rivers, and, to a lesser extent, near Alum Creek.

     Residential development is currently constrained by a strict septic
tank ordinance.  Although there is currently no actual  building ban, a
septic tank ordinance affects development by demanding  the use of central
sewering systems in all  but the smallest subdivisions and increasing the
total cost of homes serviced by septic fields.   Septic  fields are prohibited
in any subdivision containing more than 4 lots.  This regulation requires
provision of public sewers or private package systems to any subdivision
of more than  4 lots.  This requirement increases  the total cost of new
homes serviced by septic fields because of two factors.  First,  each septic
field must be built on a lot covering a minimum of  one  net acre.  Second,
there are special requirements in each septic system for 2 tanks and drains tc
protect against limited  drainage caused by high groundwater table levels.

     Strict zoning in Genoa Township and floodplain zoning provisions in
Liberty and Concord Townships are the only current  major zoning constraints
to development in the project area.   Zoning throughout  the project
area varies from township to township.   However,  in most areas it is
flexible enough to provide for a wide range of types of development.  Most
of the zoning regulations have provisions which would allow high density
developments  such as PUD's, townhouses, and apartment buildings.  However,
at present, Genoa Township alone provides for a minimum residential lot
size of one acre.  Liberty and Concord Townships  have rudimentary floodplain
zoning provisions which  restrict development in floodplains.

     Trends in accessibility affect patterns of commercial, residential,
and industrial development.  Descriptions of each township in the project
area (Appendix A) emphasize that current accessibility  is excellent
                               29

-------
throughout most of the project area.   Improvements  are  being  built  along
U.S. Route 23 and State Route 315,  and there  are  plans  for  the  construction
in the project area of at least one interchange with  Interstate 71.
These are trends toward improving the already excellent accessibility.

     A major socio-economic trend is  the  rapidly  increasing percentage  of
workers commuting to another county,  shown  in  Table 13:
           TABLE 13.   Percentage of Workers  Commuting  to
                      Another County
County
Delaware
Fairfield
Licking
Madison
Pickaway
Union
Franklin
1960
26.8
18.1
14.3
34.1
28.2
22.3
2.4
1970
39.4
25.6
16.2
42.1
36.0
25.7
2.6
               Source:   U.S.  Bureau  of  the Census,
                        1967,  1972
This changing commuter orientation is toward Franklin County and,  because
of the close proximity of the project area to Franklin County,  a large
proportion of these out-of-county commuters live in the project area.
The other major area of employment generation for residents of  Delaware
County is Delaware Township.   Data on industries and employment as shown
in Table 14 indicate that most of Delaware County's industries  are located
in Delaware Township.  Although these industries are important  employers
of residents in the project area, their relative importance appears to
be declining in relation to the importance of employment centers in
Franklin County.

     An analysis of patterns of growth and development can be brought
into the most detailed focus through consideration of these patterns at
                               30

-------
TABLE 14.  Industries and Employment,  Delaware County,  Mid-1973
    Name of Company
         Location
Number of
Employees
Abex  Corp. Denison Div.
American Can Co.
Correct Mfg. Co.
Delco Screw Products Co.
General Castings Co.
Grief Bros. Corp.
Hughes Keenan Corp.
J. G. Castings Co.
Nestle Co.
Nippert Co.
North Electric
  Co. (Research)
P.P.G. Ind. Paint Plant
Pennwalt Corp.
R.B.  Powers Co.
Ranco Inc.
Searles Lab.
Sunray (Glenwood)
  Range Co.
Swan  Rubber Div.
Trus  Joist Corp.
Valves & Presses
Whiteside Inc.
Western Auto Dist.
  Center

Galena Tile & Shale
          Delaware
          Sunbury
          Delaware

          Liberty
          Delaware
             ii
          Ashley
          Delaware
          Powell

          Delaware
          Orange
          Delaware
          Ber'i in
          Delaware
   202
    61
    86
    95
    98
    50
    85
   322
   216
   257

   405
   380
    46
    40
  1500
   100

   418
   100
    80
    40
    44

   140
(will  expand to  300  or  more)
          Galena             120
      Source:  The Delaware County Regional Planning
               Commission, 1973
                             31

-------
a level  of detail  which deals  with  townships  and  portions of  townships.
Analysis in such detail  is  essential  to  the choice  of  both  the  proper
location and sizing of sewer interceptors  and the proper phasing of
sewer construction.  A detailed  analysis of factors  affecting localized
development patterns is  summarized  in Appendix A.   The most important
part of the analysis in Appendix A  is the  projection of probable localized
patterns of growth and development.

     Most growth and development will be residential.  However, moderate
amounts of industrial development can be expected in some areas and  small
amounts of neighborhood commercial  development can  be  expected  near
areas of major residential  growth.   Rising land costs  in the  project
area will preclude any significant  development of new  recreation areas.
Major expected areas of residential  growth and development  are:

     t    Along U.S. Route  23
     •    Along State Route 315
     0    Around the interchange of U.S. Route 36 with Interstate  71
     •    Shawnee Hills, Dublin, and the village  of Powell
     e    Around the proposed  interchange  of  Interstate 71  with
            Lewis Center and Big Walnut  Roads
     •    Northwest of the  intersection  of U.S. Route  23 and  Powell  Road.

Major expected areas of industrial  growth  and development are along
or near the Chesapeake and  Ohio  Railroad,  the Penn  Central  Railroad,
U.S. Route 23, the interchange of U.S. Route  36 with Interstate 71,
and the proposed interchange of  Interstate 71 with  Lewis Center and
Big Walnut Roads.   Commercial  growth and development is expected  to  be
oriented primarily to neighborhood  needs.  As such, some small  commercial
enterprises can be expected to locate near areas  of growth  and  development.
                              32

-------
                              References



Blumenfeld, Hans, "The Tidal  Wave of Metropolitan Expansion,"  Journal  of
the American Institute of Planners, Winter 1954.

Columbus Area Chamber of Commerce, Population Growth i_n Central  Ohio,
1960 to 1970, 1972.

Delaware Regional Planning Commission, "Industrial  Data,"  August 1973.

Delaware Regional Planning Commission, "Current Housing Start  Data,"  July 1975.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, Population of;  Counties by Minor Civil  Divisions:
J930__toJ^950, 1950.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, County_ and City Data Book, 1962.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, County and City Data Book, 1967.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, Areas of Ohio:  1960, September  1967.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, Number of Inhabitants, 1970.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, County and City Data Book, 1972.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, Popu1 ati on Estimates and Projections,  May  1975.

Surveys Unlimited, Policy Plan, Delaware  County,  1970 to 1990, October 1973.
                                   33

-------
                           II.   ALTERNATIVES









      This chapter presents the results of an investigation of local




and regional alternatives for the location and implementation of the




proposed Delaware Covinty wastewater treatment facility.   It provides the




expansion of the Burgess and Niple, Ltd. Facilities Plan that is




necessary for the presentation of an Environmental Impact Statement.







A.    INTRODUCTION







      This section provides an introduction to the scope and constraints




of the analysis of local and regional sites.  The analysis covers




engineering, land use, environmental, biological, and institutional




considerations.







      1.     Description of Alternatives







            There exist a number of possible local and regional alterna-




      tives to the proposed action.  The ones discussed here are all




      alternatives which have been suggested by local and regional




      officials, engineers involved in the wastewater management of




      the project, and other interested parties.   In cases where the




      recommendation was vague, it was necessary to make value judgments




      as to the best possible location compatible with the suggestion.







            The local alternatives are discussed first.  These comprise




      13 possible plant sites located on three of the major four basins




      in Delaware County.  These basins are those of the Olentangy River,




      Scioto River, and Alum Creek.  These sites, along with regional sites




      and pertinent existing treatment plants, are presented in Table 15.
                                    34

-------
 Cfi
4-1
 a
P-1

 bO
 0
•H
 4-1
 CO
•H
 X
 r-i
 o
 C   0
 cd   3
     O
 CO  O
 0)
 •H   G
•H  -H
CO  rH
    A!
 Q)   d
 >   cd
 cfl
 0  t3
 M   0
 0)   nj
 4-J
t-t   a)
 a)   rfl
 M  rH
 O   0)
 P, O
 O
 in   C
P-i  -H
rH


W









•







rH
CO
a
4J
rj
01
>
w

G"
o
•H
4J
ct)
>
01
l 	 (
w






























































a)
o
P
a
o
CO





o
CO
CX T3
crj er
0 g
• G
60 -i-l
>
<5
0)
>
o
43
CO rH
10
4-1 E
"4-1
C
•H





















13
O
•H
4-1
CX
•H
rJ
O
CO
P

CD
4->
•H
en












C
•H
in
nj
«
a)
T3
o
o
a)
4-1
•H
CO



i/i
r^
cr*
rH
 O
rH V-l
4J
- C
C O
•H O
a)
4-1 O
CO M
•H
• >
M d
O W



O O
O O
vD vP






O O
in VD
CO 03



[3:
o
•H
4J
O
0)
CO

•u
a)
N
•H O
rH 0
0)
d G
C -rl
CO rH
43 .*!
° g
00 r-l
d rH
O
rH C
CO -H
, — i
« e^i
0 r~-
O H
•H
rH H-l
^ 0
G
to •
>-l 5Z
CK

G 1/1"
•H rH
0
r— O
CNI -r-(
1 43
M O
<4-< U-4
o o
CO ^

X X
00 tO
d G
co rt
4-1 1-1
d C3
0) 0)
rH rH
0 O

rH OJ
f^i &J
O O

0 0
r-~ f-^
CA CTi
rH 1 — 1

CD 01
rH rH
ex rx
•H -H
'<£ !B
•O XI
G d
rO crj

en en
w to
a) cu
60 00
J-l ^
a a
cq PQ



0 O
0 0
VD vo






in m
r~ r^
r^- r--





















T3
erf

•Tl rH
K! rH
D
rH S
1 	 I Q
01 (X,
3
O "-H
fXj o
14-1 •
O CO

• 01
CO rH
•H
CD e
>~i
•H m
6r>i
t^j
rH O
,M ^
c n
crj PJ
43 43
& W

>, X
60 00
d C
CB n)
C d
0) 0)
rH rH
O O

r»i  (•_>
•1^( l-N
0 0

o
r~-
a\

-
CT>
• — 1
QJ r--
rH O1
P. rH
•H
K -
CO
•a d
d -H
cu 43
o
CO 1-1
0) 3
QJ K
CO
1-1 •
'r^J M
w ^



O 0
0 0
^O \D






o o
rH 0*1
cr\ OD





01
d
•rl
rH

X
4-1
d
3
O
O

•a
G
rt

CO
,^;
o
rt
i-i
4-J

O
o

o
rH
4-J CU
d ^
CD O
U PL,
n)
•t-, M
TJ CD
ct) m
d
rH VJ
o a)
3 >
O -H
(^ Jj
il-l M--I
0 0
CO ^5

>> X
to oo
d d
CVJ CO
d d
a) 01
rH rH
O O

-)
riT
d
CO
43
W

X
00
cO
C3
CU
rH
O

00
y*
d

o o
r^ r^
CTv ON

01 cu
rH rH
ex rx
•rl -H
¥. 'S<
T3 TJ
d G
CO CO

to en
CO CO
01 Q)
oo oo
U S-4
a a
M pa



o o
o o
v£> VD






in m
C*~) Ol
00 C»












,
CO
T3
c2

d
nj
e
ex
cO
43
O
T3
•O rJ
d o
CTJ MJ
4J
0) r4
iH 4J
•H CO
O
1 MH
d o
crj
0)
W W

14-J -M
O 4-1

• o
•l-J CD
0 0
"-> o-
^T r^"
s §
43 43
W 13

X X
oo oo
d d
CO crj
G d
01 01
H rH
0 0

o
C^ rH
1^ f*J
0 0





a>
rH
ex
4J >H
G ^
to
rH -O
PM d
CO
00
d w
•H CO
W 00
•H V!
x a
W W



o o
m o
CN \O






o m
vO CN
CO CO

























a) ^
P ai
CO 0)
3 M
crj O
r-l
cu e
Q a
rH
** *-C

4J T3
eo G
CO
X
S-i •
>J 13
0) r4
T-Cj
0 rH
rH
M-J CL)
O '£
o
•o cu
d
0) r4
crj
co d
A!
X QJ
00 Q)
c~* Vj
i-i ^-*
cO O
d [3
01 a
rH rH
0 <

H
rH rH
rr r i
JH> LJ
0 <


cr>
vo
r-l
«>
o
o

13
iJ
QJ
d
•H
CD
A;
d
•rH
Pu



in
O]
,H






O
CN
O-i





4

S-i
cd
0)
d

o
rH
o
•H
43
O

-
^f
CO

o
•H
r1
O

,
-U
u
>-)

MH
0
CO
01
rH
•H
6
m
o
,-«
QJ
0)
^
CJ
p:
5
rH
£>



O O
00 O
VD r^




















•
O
o

d
•H
rH
01 ^
G d
rH V4
fn
• 1
O TO
CJ crj
O
G Pi
•H
rH rV!
^i d
d co
CO V-l
i-l (Xi
fH
T3
d f.
U co
01
.d o
4 1 r-~
3 CM
0 1
W M
CO co



O O
4J 4-J
O O
•rl -H
0 0
CO CO

rH OJ
rv* -V
U-j P^
CO CO


0>
VO
o*\
rH
•
O
0

•^5
!-l
eu
d
•H
(U
rO
^
d
•H
py



o
in
0






o
rH
0-.


,J
O
d
•o
CO
«

(-1
CO
QJ
C

O
4-1
O
•H
0
CO

r-l
CU
>
O

0)
00
•a
•H
H
43

CO
ON
rH

O
•H
43
O

m
o
CO
01
rH
•H
m
0



o
4-1
Q
•H
O
CO

ro
|V
•*-!
CO

                                                                  35

-------
The geographical locations of the local sites are shown on the map




in Figure 7.  Each site has been given a site code.   The first two




letters in the code denote the river basin (SR denotes Scioto




River) and the number that follows is assigned on a general south




to north basis in each basin.  Existing plants which form a part




of regional alternatives are also designated according to this




scheme.  Locations of regional sites are shown in Figure 8.








       The  local alternatives are  discussed on pages  69-124.   These




alternatives  are  grouped  into geographic  areas such  that many site




characteristics within  each  group are  similar.   This  facilitates




selection  of  the  best alternatives,  since one site can  be  selected




from  each  group based on  the relative  merits within  the group. This




procedure  serves  to  reduce  the number  of  sites which  must  be  compared




in  the final  selection  process.   There are four  groups  on  the




Olentangy  River and  one on  Alum  Creek.







       The  regional alternatives  involve construction  or use  of




facilities other  than the one proposed.  Merger  of the  service




area  with  Delaware City and/or Columbus might require construction




of  new facilities, or either augmentation or increased  use of existing




ones.   In  many instances  a  number of  related possibilities which




would involve different systems  specifications and routing are




possible for  a given regionalization  plan.  These are discussed




on  pages 125-181.  A different regionalization concept, the  con-




servancy district, is presented  on pages 182-184.
                               36

-------
DELAWARE    COUNTY   OHIO
                   ^_J_	^^.o-^

                              le
                              Scale

                              0
                                       miles
              Figure  7.  Local Alternative  Treatment Plant Sites
    Source:  Enviro  Control,  Inc.,  1975
                                          37

-------
     Key





     Regional Plant Site     '^










       Figure 8.  Regional Alternative Treatment Plant Sites
Source:  Enviro Control, Inc.,  1975
                                   38

-------
2.     Scope of Analysis


       The scope in this chapter includes the analysis of many local and

regional alternatives.  Insofar as it is intended to define promising

alternatives rather than to exhaustively investigate each alternative,

the analysis is much less detailed than would be necessary in a

facilities plan.  Any conclusions drawn concerning engineering, land

use, environmental effects or biological considerations are based

on all available data but are not based on a complete on-site

investigation involving actual soil sampling, water quality moni-

toring or other factors necessary to a complete facilities plan.


      The scope of analysis is different for the local and regional

alternatives.   Local alternatives are first investigated according

to the relative merits of the sites within the group.  These

merits include considerations of:
         Engineering
         Cost
         Land Use
         Aesthetics
         Water Quality
         Biological Impact
         Institutional Problems.
      Following comparative evaluation within each group,  one site

is selected for further consideration.   This selected site is then

evaluated in a broader and more in-dcpth context for all of the

points mentioned above.  This in-depth analysis is designed to

facilitate the comparison with other selected sites and with

regional alternatives in the summary,  pages 185-194.


      Regional alternatives are presented mainly in terms of

engineering and cost components.  Environmental impacts are
                               39

-------
discussed, but in-depth analysis of  land use and biological impacts




is beyond the scope of this report.   Institutional,  legal,  and




political problems in implementing each regional scheme are also




presented.







      Pages 185-194 summarize both regional alternatives and local




alternatives that have been selected within each geographical area.




The most feasible alternatives are then recommended  for further




investigation, if they so merit.  The recommendations must  be made




on the basis of data that are readily available due  to limitations




of scope.  In certain cases data are missing or unreliable, but




could be obtained through a more in-depth study of particular




alternatives.







3.    Engineering Considerations







      This section concerns the engineering aspects  of all alterna-




tives.  The objective of this task is to identify the engineering




problems and difficulties of each alternative so that each alterna-




tive is given a fair judgment on its engineering feasibility.  Many




factors are involved.  Before these factors are discussed,  the




differentiation of the local alternatives and the regional alterna-




tives are addressed in terms of the scope of the work.







      It is assumed that the engineering study of local alternatives




is limited primarily to the STP sites and the additional sewer and




pumping requirements for  conveying the sewage from the collection




point to the proposed sites.  Because the volume of  wastewater




to be treated would be constant for all local alternative sites.
                               40

-------
the difference between any two local alternatives would be deter-

mined primarily by their system requirements between the sites

and the sewage collection point shown in Figure 9.


     On the other hand, the regional alternatives could have their

own alternative sewage collection systems and sewage treatment

facilities and the volume of wastewater to be treated would vary

between alternatives.  As limited by the scope of work, only three

regional alternatives are considered in this report.  Subalternatives

within each regional alternative are also discussed, as appropriate.  A

description of the system configuration, the construction phases,

the available facilities, and system requirements for the regional

alternatives are discussed in the pertinent sections of this chapter.


      The parameters considered in the evaluation of the local

alternatives are:
      «  Pumping facilities requirements in the context of
         topographical characteristics of the site

      e  Structural requirements for flood damage control as
         related to the site location, if it is in a floodway

      •  Sewer requirements as a function of site location with
         respect to the collection point of the sewer network

      0  Outfall pipe and construction in the context of outfall
         location

      0  Excavation and  grading  requirement  related  to  subsurface
         conditions and  slope  of the site

      0  Modification of buildings as  required by limited land
         availability

      0  Additional river,  highway,  or railroad crossings as a
         function of site location.
      Additional pumping facilities and force mains might be needed

for a given alternative site due to its higher elevation and longer

distance as compared to the sewage collection point indicated in

                              41

-------



!







to
t--
CT
d
S 5 £ S

*" A •* S ^§ 100
v>w (^M i^a wo
t !
!
t .
1 i
tt> m
01 w
>. ^,
c c
Ed J5.&
*^ W W Oi
« ^ ^£
C g EC
*/> u M 3
I I
\ \
M t
I 1


t,




 5_


 CD
                 i-n
                 t-~.
                 CTl
                  o
                  o
                  S-
                 o
                 CJ

                 o
                  c
                 UJ
                  O)

                  CL
                  c
                  fO
                  10
                  0)
                  CD
                 CQ
                  OJ
                  o

                  rs
                  o
                 CO

-------
the basic plan in Figure 9. Sites located within the zone of encroachment




of floodways would need to have their building floors and road




surfaces elevated above flood level and would require different




foundation, building materials, and design to reduce flood damage.




The distance between the site and the collection point of the sewer




system determines the length and the size of the sewer trunk lines.




Some alternative sites might require additional outfall pipe and




outfall work to alleviate environmental impacts and to avoid




hydrological and geological constraints.  Stony subsurface condi-




tions, such as indurated limestone deposits, and steep surface slope




tend to increase the excavation and preparation work of a given




site.  Land availability would dictate the building configuration.




Sites with limited available land might require that the plant be




housed in a multi-level structure which would pose some engineering




difficulty and increase construction costs.   Site location might, in




some instances, require extra river, railroad, or highway crossings




of sewers as compared to the basic, plan shox%rn in Figure 9.  Such crossings




are quite expensive, especially when deep boring or tunneling must




be employed to avoid disturbance of aquatic  ecosystems.







      All of the above criteria are used to  evaluate the engineering




feasibility of a given alternative.  However, the engineering involved




in  the  reduction of odor, noise, and residual chlorine problems is




not considered as an evaluative criterion, because all local alter-




natives would be equally involved.  They are discussed separately on pages




264-272 and 281-294.  In the latter discussion, alternative stabilization




and/or disinfection treatment of effluent, such as ozonation,




denetrification,  and dechlorination of effluent by aeration,
                               43

-------
sulfur dioxide addition,  and activated carbon adsorption are




considered.







      The criteria used in the evaluation of the regional alternatives




are essentially the same as those for the local alternatives.  The




major difference is that,  in the regional alternatives emphasis is




placed on the system configuration, available facilities and inter-




ceptor network, and the system requirements.  Therefore, such factors,




as requirements for flood abatement, excavation work and building




modification, lose significance in the evaluation of the regional




alternatives.  For example, uniform soil conditions are assumed to




be applicable to the whole region so that trenching and excavation




for a linear foot of sewer of a given diameter would be the same




throughout the whole area.







      For each regional alternative, the hydraulic capacity and level




 of sewage treatment of existing facilities  and interceptors are




 estimated.  In this context,  the system requirements include the




 expansion of existing treatment facilities  and interceptor sewers, or




 construction of a new wastewater treatment  plant, its collection system




 and pumping facilities.   An inventory of these requirements is used for




 cost-effectiveness analysis.   This analysis is presented on pages 129-134,




 153-160, and 170-177 for the three regional alternatives,  respectively.







      The Facilities Plan developed by Burgess and Niple, Ltd.  (1974),




is used with some modification as the basic plan  for comparative




evaluation of the engineering feasibility of all alternatives.  It




is shown in Figures 9 and 10.  Figure 9 presents  the sewage collection
                               44

-------
      Chlorinators  "'
      and Surae Tank!
Raw
Sewage
Q-P
oOD
oo
       JL_
Control
Room
Power
Room
                    <-
                                 1st  Stage
                 	recycle- Clarifiers
                  1st Stage
                  Aeration   '
                  o j  rj-
                  2nd  Stage
                  Aeration
                       -recycle- - --
                                                                  Aerooic
                                                                  Digesters
                                        2nd Stage
                                        Clarifiers
                                                                             Land
                                                                             Dispose
                                                     Chlorinators
o
0
o



a
an
an
na
                                                                   Rapid
                                                                   Sand
                                                                   Filters
                        River
                                         Post-Aeration
                                         Tanks
           Figure 10.  Diagram of  the  Proposed Sewage Treatment Plant
 Source:   Enviro Control,  Inc.,  1975
                                        45

-------
system; Figure 10 shows the major components of the proposed new




sewage treatment plant.







      The sewage collection system Is  designed to take full advantage




of the natural drainage patterns so that minimum pumping facilities




would be required.  The whole system is divided into three major sub-




systems, each representing a river basin.  They are the Scioto River




in the west, the Olentangy River at the middle, and the Alum Creek




in the east.  Sewage from the Scioto Basin and Alum Creek is proposed




to be transmitted to the collection point at Olentangy River and




Powell Road, by lift stations, force main, and gravity flow sewer




trunks.







      The construction of the collection system is planned in three




phases to be built over a period of 20 years.  Interceptors that




would be installed in each phase are indicated in Figure 9.  This




phasing scheme remains essentially the same as  that proposed  in  the




Facility Plan.  One change is recommended to provide sewerage service




to  Powell Township  in  the  first  phase  (page 219).  The  total  footage




of sewer pipes of a given size for a given phase of construction




is given in Table 16.






      The new STP would remain unchanged for all local alternative sites




 in. terms of capacity and  the level of  treatment.   The  new  STP would  consist




of prechlorination, two-stage extended aeration with clarification,




rapid sand  filtration, post-chlorination, and post aeration.  Sludge




would receive aerobic digestion.  For the ultimate treatment
                               46

-------
               TABLE 16.   Pipe Requirements  for  the
                           Basic Interceptor  Sewer Network






S-
O)

u
O
a_
Pipe Diameter
in in
8
10
12
15
18
20
21
24
27
30

33
36
42
10
16
18
20
Length
Phase 1
5,400
7,100
5,600
17,500
35,000
8,000
10,500
2,500
12,000
10,000

2,500
34,100
6,500
1 ,400
12,300
17,000
8,600
of Pipe in ft
Phase 2
0
0
67,000
13,500
24,000
0
38,300
4,300
0
0

0
16,500
0
0
2,500
0
0

Phase 3
0
87,400
98,400
98,400
70,400
0
9,000
4,000
3,000
3,500

7,900
0
0
0
0
0
0
Source:  Enviro Control,  Inc.,  1975
                                   47

-------
 capacity of  6  mgd with  peak  load  of  9 mgd,  the  system  components

 are shown in Table  17.
        TABLE 17.   System Components  for  the Proposed
                   Sewage Treatment Plant
       System Component            # Units   Unit  Dimensions
 Chlorinator                         9         500  Ib/day

 Aerators:    1st stage                2      12  x  14.5  x 200  ft
             2nd stage                4      12  x  14.5  x 200  ft

 Aerobic Digesters                    2      12  x  14,5  x 125  ft

 Circular Clarifiers:   1st  stage      2      12  x  100 ft (dia.)
                       2nd  stage      2      12  x   80 ft (dia.)

 Rapid Sand Filters                  7      10  x  40 x  50 ft

 Post Aerators                       2      10  x  12 x  100  ft
Source:   Enviro Control,  Inc.,  1975



       The phasing of the construction of the new sewage treatment

 plant would be concurrent with the  interceptor  phasing and  would

 also take place in three stages.  The average capacities of the

 sewage treatment plant would initially be 1.5 mgd and would have

 capacities of 3 mgd, and 6 mgd at the end of the 10th and 20th

 years after the plant becomes operational.   The expansion of the

 major components of the  proposed  plant would be proportional to

 the designed sewage flows in three  stages,  except those in the

 category of land acquisition.   Enough land would be acquired

 initially to accommodate the final  capacity of  the proposed plant,
                               48

-------
     Some basic assumptions are necessary for the formulation of the

aforementioned evaluative criteria.  They are:
     •  Equal level of wastewater treatment for both local and
        regional alternatives

     •  Extensive use of local topographical features to reduce
        pumping requirements

     •  Same construction scheme and schedule for all alternatives

     •  Construction scheme and schedule as a function of the
        temporal and spatial sewerage needs in the area
     The first assumption is needed so that all alternatives are

compared on the same scale.  The areawide interceptor sewer network

is designed in order to make the best use of topographical features.

Thus, gravity flow sewers instead of force main and the accompanying

pumping facilities are used to reduce long run power consumption and

maintenance costs.  The same construction scheme and the same schedule

are assumed for all alternatives so that the intermediate and final

goals of the proposed project can be achieved by all alternatives.

The construction scheme and schedule are assumed to be the sole

functions of the temporal and spatial sewerage needs in the area,  and

not to be influenced by other factors, such as inclement weather

conditions, engineering difficulties, or shortage of energy and

materials.


     The Powell Road-Olentangj^ plant site,  site OR3, is used as a

representative case to demonstrate the costs of the proposed project,

because this alternative has the identical sewer network as the new

sewage treatment plant described in the preceding basic plan.   The

approach taken for the cost-effectiveness analysis is discussed
                                  49

-------
further on pages  129-130.   The  results  of  the analysis  are  shown  in

Tables 18 and 19.  Table 18 gives the construction costs and the

operation and maintenance costs of the proposed plant.   Table 19

presents the construction costs of the interceptor sewer network

and its annual operation and maintenance costs.   Combining  Tables

18 and 19, and using the 6 1/8  percent discount rate recommended by

the Water Resources Council  (1975), the present worth and

the equivalent annual cost of the proposed project are  $25,479,000

and $2,017,000 respectively.


4.   Land Use Considerations


     Land use is considered in  this report in the analysis  of all

local alternative plans.  The areas of principal concern are:
        Current land use at site
        Current land use in vicinity
        Primary impacts of plant
        Secondary impacts of plant
        Primary impacts of sewers and outfall pipe
        Secondary impacts of sewers and outfall pipe.
     A primary factor in considering the geographic scope of analysis

for each alternative is that the eventual service area of each of the

alternatives is identical.  Figure 3 on page 12 illustrates the geo-

graphic  extent of  the project service area.  Not only is the

service area identical but also, through proper construction phasing

of the treatment plant and interceptors, sewer service can, in each

alternative, be delivered to the same portions of the project area

at approximately the same time.   Therefore, differential land use

impacts between the alternatives studied are limited to local effects

due to the plant or the outfall.  With this in mind, the geographic
                                50

-------
      a;

     •H
 4-1   4J
 G   nj
 cd   C
 rH   )-l
 &H   OJ
 C  -<
 CU

 4-J   Cd
 ca   o
 cj   o

 H

 OJ   00

 CO   cd

 5   pi
 c/}   CU
     rH
 Tj  O
 0)   I
 W  t3
 o   cd
 Cu   O
 O  f"I
 0)  CU

 4-1  O
    p-1
CH
 O  0)

 M  4J
 4-1
 00  }-i
 O  O
cj m
oo
W
h-J




CO

01
CO
cd
P-i











CM

CU
w
cd

PL,














i-H

/
/
/
/





o

^0













0

OO


















m

rH












T3
bfl
p
^
£
•H

L
•U
-H
a
03
Q*

£*

4-J
£
>
o -^
2
'"rj .
^3 Pi
O -H





1 — I C
Cd -rl
•H 4-1
PL, CO
cd O
O CJ
CO M
o >,
CJ -^

a
3 c
O -H







rH (3
cd -H
4-1
•H 4-1
P. CO
cd o
CJ O
CO M
O P^i
CJ --v

>g
<«3 C;
O -H





rH P!
cd -iH
4J
•H 4J
CU CO
cd o
CJ CJ



CO
4-1
CO
O
CJ



/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
I

CO
6
Q)
4J
M

4J
CO
o
CJ

o ooooo oo
O OOOOO OO
O CO i-H OOU3 CO||rH O^
m -a* si- rH vo o>i i i oo o
r^* vo co in in . ^o cs
rH rH rH



oo ooooo o
oo ooooo o
O O OO OO COIII C!O
cTcrv ovoor~oiil r-
H O m 00 rH uO
*»
rH

o ooooo oo
CD C5 ^O CO ^O sf vO C?
O CNin OOCTi CMIIO O
» «« «» «))« «
rO OOO CO^t ONllrH O
m st- o rH co m cr>
rH rH




oo ooooo o
oo ooooo o
OO OOOOOIII O
VI «l *•! >VM *lll ^
O - J >,4J>-lCJ-r-l OCd OOP!
OITJVICU'H -rH 4JCJO
co picdP^^t^C" 4-ico 'Hcj'H
4-ICdt3 MO COPV, CO
rH'iHCU'O O)H P 4-I4-1CUWO
>4-ll4-(4-ICO3''O-t-l -I-1 C! CJ'HC
O<4-| CdrH>~,COrH60CU p! CU«4-l-tH PfcU
cu w r< <4H co vi co -HP! 60 cuco 8 o > -H60
COC CUOCU fti'jHT33S-tCU V-tEP!
O -H>-l PiPirH C T3CQ rH >4H& -H p! CO ,COI O PQ CO CU CUrHCJ
O'HO 4-lcdrHcU M ^S-rl CU (A > B cd
J-4 V-) O CO i»j O Cx, ctf *O CJ ^o 60 M O O M rO
4J OCU ICUC-H 6 -HcO O Cd'H 13 Vj 4J (US
C rH CO O "^ *H P j *iH Cu PO M 15 ^ Pi O, CO P3 Cfl
O J2 JS Mtd CUCU cdS3CU
^J CJ (r^ f^i fvj «^J c^ ^J j~«^ ^^ Q^
o
o
CM
r^
c^j




o
o
rH
rO
CTi
**
CM

o
o
CTi
rs
o
o
m




o
o
o
•l
m
o
\o
**
CO
1
o
rH
\o
A
f~-
CTi
I— 1


o
0
CO
A
r^
oo
r^
A
cs
























j_j

<£*

£H

o
H
                                                                                                                                                                                                        m
 CJ
 c
H
                                                                                                                                                                                                         4-
                                                                                                                                                                                                        J

                                                                                                                                                                                                         c
                                                                                                                                                                                                         V
                                                                                                       51

-------
T3
 cd
 CU
 I
PM
 Q)
 M
 O
 O
 &
4J
 QJ
 0)  Q)
 H  4J
 O  Cfl
 •U  C
 &  t-l
 0)  0)
 a  4-1
 C rH
M  cd
     o
 QJ  O
<4-l  &0
 o  a
     cd
 10  4-J
4->  C
 tO  QJ
 O rH
<_> O
a\
rH

W





CO

QJ
W
cd
PM














CN

QJ
to
cd
£














H

QJ
to
cd
&
p j














bO
0
•H
a
a
cd
rH
Fk

O

CO
QJ
CO
cd
PM






o

v0


















O
i
ro

















ipj
•
rH











bt>
e

c
•H

^>
4-1
•r-l
O
cd
a
cd
cj
4J
C
cd
rH
4J
to
O r-l
CJ >>
s <£

^3 C!
•H
O


•CO-

rn C
cd -H
4J
•H -U
CX W
cd o
CJ c_)
4J
to •
O Vi
u >,

Is! 

c£J pj
•H
O




rH C
cd -H
4J
•H 4J
&, CO
cd o
o o
CO .
O t-J
o >-,

S •

H C
cd -H
•H 4-J
CX CO
cd o
CJ CJ


CO
4J
CO
o
CJ






/
/
/
/
/
PM/ co
/ ^
/ 2
/ M
/

/ w
/ 5
O 0 O
>tf 0 vt
CT\ m ^
tH co m
00 O CO
Csl CN




oo oooo oo
cr\ o o o co oo in
O OO O O co r-^ O

CO CFi rH VO <1" CO CO
SO rH CO CO . O^ vO
rH csl



OO OOOO OO
in r — c> 0*1 c^ in so CN
O> rH Cs! rH C5 C^ *^J" r^
•\A ^n»t^ n^
r~~co rHinoo r~~o
rHcO O
n *
co m

o o o
•JD O vO
CO O CO
OCOCN OOCsl
in CTi CN CO rH csl O
A r> **
-< Cl to O -H
QJ Cd QJ T-l 4->
4J -H > cd
C « 4-1 t-l t-l
M >i -H QJ 4J
cd r-j en co >>
& ^ -r-l -HO
O CO r"| [0 O CiO C C
fti -R -H C PM to -H 6 00 j
cdHi-H co 4-i S-i'OC^
>%S CO QJ 60a Q) < -H H
•H QJ v-to o -H B pj-as H
> o CUM js ex cu -nao
cd t-i >CJ ci Q CO bOcdCJ
V-i O -H cd 3 cd c!
CJ [T( p^ ^ p ( fLj pj

                                                                                                                                 CTi
                                                                                                                                  o
                                                                                                                                  C!
                                                                                                                                  4J
                                                                                                                                  C
                                                                                                                                  O
                                                                                                                                   O
                                                                                                                                   t-l
                                                                                                                                  •H
                                                                                                                                   >
                                                                                                                                   C
                                                                                                                                  w
                                                                                                                                   Q>
                                                                                                                                   U
                                                                         52

-------
I
I               scope of the land use analysis of each alternative is limited to an

                area within one mile of the plant, one mile of the outfall and outfall

|               line, and downstream from the outfall.


I                    There are, however, three major land use problem areas associated

                with the analysis of alternatives.  These are:


                     «  Secondary effects associated with any downstream changes
                        in water quality

                     •  Compatibility with present land uses on and near the site

                     •  Compatibility with potential or probable future land uses
                        near  the site


                     The secondary effects associated with changes in water

                quality downstream from treatment plant outfalls are primarily

                related to impacts on recreation uses.  Presently, there are numerous

                activity-oriented recreation uses located near Alum Creek and the

                Olentangy River.  Many of these uses depend, either directly or

                indirectly,  on water quality.  A major recreation plan,  Watercourse

                Plan for Columbus ani_d__Fr_anklin: County  (Labrenz Riemer, Inc., 3974),

                anticipates an even more concentrated future use of those portions of

                Alum Creek and the Olentangy River which flow through Columbus or

                Franklin County than that which prevails today.


                     Most of the alternatives are located in areas which have a good

                degree of compatibility with present aiearby land  uses.

                The primary  reason for this compatibility is that the surroundings

                of most of the sites are undeveloped.   In those alternatives which

                present some degree of incompatibility, this incompatibility generally

                reflects the effects of construction or plant operation on nearby

                residences.
                                                53

-------
     Upon consideration of future prospects,  however,  a number of




alternatives are found to be, to some degree, incompatible with potential




or probable land uses near the site.   This incompatibility arises




because the attractiveness of land for certain, future  uses will




diminish.  Most of the incompatibility is associated with potential




residential development and its associated commercial  uses.







5.    Environmental Considerations







     Four major areas of environmental problems for all the alterna-




tives are considered.  They are water quality impacts  and problems of




visual pollution, noise, and odor.  Each of them is discussed successively.







     To define and describe water quality impacts resulting from




an alternative action, the existing water quality conditions are




examined.  Water quality data collected in the past are compared




with the stream water quality standards established by the Ohio EPA




on page 199 of this report.  Violations of these standards are




reported and responsible source by types are identified on pages 207-212




and conformity of all alternative action with the Scioto Waste Load




Allocation Program is examined and discussed on page 198.  The stream




quality projected by a computer simulation, x^hich utilized the




spatial distribution of pollution sources as inventoried in the




"Waste Load Allocation Report of  the Scioto River Basin,"  is compared




with the stream water quality standards to assess the likelihood of




water quality degradation in the  future (Ohio EPA, 1974).  Following




the above analyses,  the compatibility of each alternative  action with




the  environment  in terms of water quality is assessed.
                              54

-------
I                   The  factors which entered the above considerations and analyses




                are  the dilution ratios derived from the historical mean river flow




I               and  the 7-day  10-year low flow, x^ater diversion, stream classification




_               including scenic river designation, pollution levels and pollutant




                loads.  The water quality parameters considered are based on the




                available water quality data.  They include dissolved oxygen (DO),




                biological oxygen demand (BOD), total phosphorus, ammonia nitrogen




                (NH3-N),  nitrate nitrogen (N03-N), total dissolved solids (TDS),




                total suspended solids (TSS), and coliforra bacteria.







                    Visual  impacts  of the  treatment plant  are  determined by  the




                architectural  design of the plant itself, by  the effectiveness  of




                screening, and by  the distance to receptors.  It can be seen  from




                Table  20  that  the  plant would be  within  1/2 mile and presumably




                clearly visible from residences at all local  alternative sites.




                In certain areas existing trees provide  screening.  At most




                sites, however,  the  treatment plant would probably require both




                architectural  modifications and tree screening  to hide the plant




                and  blend it into  the surrounding area.  In order to make the




                plant  aesthetically  pleasing, architectural modifications




                commensurate with  those planned for the  proposed facility




                (Burgess  and Niple,  Ltd., 1974) would be necessary.  This modi-




                fication  would ensure that  the visual impact  of the plant would




                not  be detrimental to nearby residential or recreational land uses.




                Slightly  less  expensive architectural design  might be used at some




                sites  given sufficient tree  screening.  An exact statement of required




                architectural  modification  at a given site  is dependent upon an




                assessment of  public opinion concerning  construction at that site.
                                              55

-------
TABLE 20.   Distance From Site Center to Nearest
            Existing Structure or Parkland as of 1973
Site Code
OKI
OR2
OR3
OR4
OR5
OR6
OR7
OR8
OR9
OR10
AC1
AC 2*
Distance to Nearest
Structure (parkland)
in mi
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0 (0.3)
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0 (0.1)
0.3
0.2
Distance to Nearest
Downwind Structure
(parkland) in mi
0.2
0.4
0.6 (0.3)
0.1
0.0 (0.3)
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.0 (0.2)
0.3
0.4
   *as of 1961

           Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                         56

-------
 I





 I                    Compatibility of the project with its environment depends in part




                on  ambient noise levels in the project area.  For example, locating a




 I               sewage treatment plant close to a heavily travelled highway inter-




 _               change would probably be very compatible, because the noises from




                the plant might be well masked by the traffic noises.  This example




I               demonstrates the importance of surveying existing noise conditions




                in  a noise impact study.  The second factor is the location of  such




I               sensitive receptors  as people.  Receptors farther from noise sources




                receive  less impact  than those closer to the  source.  Increasing  the




                distance of interposing noise barriers between the noise  source and




                receptor effectively minimize noise impact.   These are the evaluative




                criteria used  in the assessment of noise impact resulting from  an




                alternative action.






                      Similar  considerations apply to  the study of odor problems.




                One major difference between the two is that odors derive from




                gaseous or particulate  matters such as hydrogen sulfide,  phenolic




                compounds,  or  sulfur dioxides.






                     The sources of odors in a sewage  treatment plant are identified




                and discussed on pages 264-268.   Odor emission rate is governed by two




                major factors:   the concentrations of  the odor-causing gases in the




                sewage, and the atmospheric conditions.   Development of septic condi-




                tions in the sewage tends to increase  the potential for odor generation.




                The effects of such  atmospheric conditions as wind speed, humidity,




                and temperature on the  odor emissions  are briefly discussed  as follows.




                Wind transports the odors released adjacent  to the water surface .  The




                passage of wind would reduce the vapor pressures of the odor-producing




                substance contained  in sewage, thereby increasing the evaporation rate  of
                                               57

-------
sewage and hence,  odor emission.   Increased humidity increases  the




vapor pressure and thereby reduces the rate of evaporation and odor




emission.  Increased temperature  increases odor emission both by




promoting bacterial activity and  by increasing the rate of evaporation.







     Upon release from a sewage treatment plant, odors are carried




by the wind and dispersed by the  atmospheric turbulence which is




determined by the atmospheric stability and mechanical mixing in-




duced by wind action and the roughness of the terrain.  As the




odor "plumes" travel downwind, they expand both in vertical and




cross-wind directions and decrease in concentration as  a  result of




entrainment and dilution by cleaner ambient air.  Temperature inver-




sions and associated stagnant conditions tend to accumulate odors




in the vicinity of a plant or elsewhere in "pockets" near the ground.




In general, once the odors are generated, their transport and dissi-




pation are affected primarily by  prevailing winds, which in turn,




are strongly influenced by local topography.







     Therefore, sensitive receptors downwind from the source




would certainly receive most odor impacts.  Table 20 shows dis-




tances of the sewage treatment plant from the nearest structure and




from the nearest structure in a downwind direction.  Several assump-




tions have been made in this determination.  U.S.G.S. 7 1/2 minute




quadrangle maps were used as the basic source.  Most of these are




updated  to 1973.  Distances are measured from the center of the site




to the closest structure or parkland to determine the second column.




The downwind direction is defined to be the octant between east and
                                58

-------
I               northeast since the prevailing winds are from the west-southwest.




•               The third column specifies the nearest structure or parkland within




                this octant.  It is important to note here that nearest structure




I •              does not necessarily imply residence since these are not distinguish-




                able from the map.  From the foregoing discussions, it is concluded




I               that the sources of odors, location of sensitive receptors, prevail-




m               ing wind direction, atmospheric stability, and local topography are




                essential factors for odor problem assessment.







                     The water quality data in the study area are scant.  Most of the




                water quality data do not reveal whether they were derived during the




                day or night.  At night, respiration and the absence of photosynthesis




                can deplete dissolved oxygen more severely than during the day.  The




                scarcity of field observations prevents statistical analyses.  There-




                fore, comparison of the collected data with the stream water quality




                standards is difficult, because some of the standards are statistical




                in nature.  The representativeness of these data for the area awaits




                further investigation.  This is particularly true when one has a low




                river flow.  However, they provide a qualitative guide for the assess-




                ment of the water quality impacts.







                     The same limitations and uncertainty apply to water quality




                computer modeling.  Nevertheless, modeling can be a useful tool to




                depict the variation of water quality parameters with river reaches.




                Extending its uses beyond that xvould be erroneous.







                     Two assumptions must be made in order to delineate the water




                quality effects resulting from alternative future actions.  Major
                                                59

-------
streams in the State of Ohio were classified according to their water




uses, for example,  recreational uses or agricultural uses.   Appropriate




stream water quality standards were then designated to the  classified




stream to either maintain its existing quality or define its future




goals of water quality.  The water quality standards were then implicitly




incorporated into the Basin Waste Load Allocation Program (Ohio EPA,




1974) which defined the assimilative capacities of a stream and allotted




the permissible waste load among various pollution sources.   In order




to assess the future water quality impacts resulting from a proposed




action, the future status of water quality must be established.  There-




fore, the Basin Waste Load Allocation Program (Ohio EPA, 1974) is




assumed to be effectively implemented so that the stream water quality




standards as required by the stream classification can be achieved.




It is further assumed that the effluent quality of any pollution




sources would be effectively regulated by the responsible authority




to the extent allowed by the best technically available (BTA) treat-




ment processes.







     As discussed above, p. 57, one task is to identify the noise




sources in the sewage treatment plant.  This would be difficult unless




it is assumed that the only noise sources are the air diffusers and




the mixing action in the aeration tanks.  The other noise sources,




such as pumps, exhaust fans, and exhaust of generators, are assumed




to be fully enclosed and properly muffled so that the residual noise




levels at the property line of each alternative site are less than the




existing ambient noise levels.
                                60

-------
I                    In the odor study, it is assumed that the influent wet walls, the




I               pre-chlorination units, the post-chlorination units, and the rapid




                sand filters would be fully enclosed and ventilation exhausts would
I



I
be equipped with activated carbon adsorption columns for odor removal.




Therefore, the only possible sources of odors are the aerators and




the clarifiers.  Odors from the aerators usually are not strong and




can be minimized by maintaining high DO levels in the aerator liquor.
                Odors from the clarifiers can be reduced by decreasing the height of




                weir drops which reduces flow turbulance and evaporative emission of




                odors.  The detailed mitigative measures are presented on pages 273-294.







                6.   Biological Considerations







                     A major concern in Delaware County is the increasing problem




                associated with the county's sanitary facilities.  There is only




                one sexrage treatment plant that is over 1 mgd, and it is located




                in the City of Delaware.   This plant serves only the residents




                of the City of Delaware;  there are no other treatment facilities




                in the county other than individual septic tanks and package




                plants.   The package plants do not always operate efficiently,




                and the  individual septic fields are commonly located in soils




                that are not suitable for adequate wastewater treatment.  Thus, the




                county is faced with an increasing sanitary and health problem.  The




                Olentangy River presently exceeds the water quality standards for




                fecal coliform 100 percent of the time and causes health and water




                quality  problems  (Nottingham,  1975).   Therefore,  the county  needs  a




                sewage treatment plant  to treat  all  of these  wastes  that  are presently




                flowing  into  the river.   The other  two   river  systems  in the county
                                                61

-------
are used for drinking water supplies,  and thereby preempted as a site




for waste discharge.   Thus, the Olentangy River was chosen for assimilating




the waste discharges  of the treatment  plant.







     This river, near the Franklin-Delaware County line,  supports a




diverse and abundant  benthic fauna and fish population.   There are




various species of pollution-sensitive benthic (bottom-dwelling)




organisms present in  this area of the  river along with many fish




species that are also sensitive to the discharges of treated sewage.




Approximately 1-1/2 to 2 miles downstream from the proposed outfall




the Ohio Department of Transportation  has built an artificial riffle-




pool fish habitat area that supports an even larger fish population




than that present at  the county line.   In order to support this larger




fish population, the  benthic community in this area is assumed to be




even more abundant and diverse than that at the county line.







     The fish in the area of the plant's outfall could be harmed by




the concentrations of discharged chlorine and ammonia.  The fish most




sensitive to chlorine have been found  to be the forage fish, such as




minnows and  shiners.   These fish make up a large portion of the food




of the game fish, such as the bluegill, crappie, and the various bass




species in the river.  The concentrations of chlorine and ammonia that




would be present in the river during a low-flow condition are signifi-




cantly deleterious to the fish population near the discharge and




further downstream and possibly also to the artificial fish habitat




area downstream.  Upon expansion of the plant's capacity from 1.5 mgd




to 3 mgd to 6 mgd, the ratio of the amount of the effluent to the
                                62

-------
I

I                amount of  river  water  increases  to  the point where  the  effluent
•                would  comprise approximately  67  percent  of  the  flow of  the  river
                 during low-flow  stages.
I
     Further research is needed to determine which various rare and

endangered benthic organisms and fish in the river are also present

in this river area and might be affected by this project.   If these

designated rare and endangered organisms are found in the  project

area, then the effects of the proposed plant's discharges  upon them

also need  to be assessed.   This issue is discussed further on

pages 240-242.


7.    Institutional Considerations


     Several federal, state, and local institutions have various

responsibilities relevant to a proposed wastewater treatment

plant located either in southern Delaware County or on alterna-

tive sites.  Relevant federal institutions include the United States

Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), the Farmers Home

Administration of the Department of Agriculture, and the Federal

Highway Adminstration.  On the state level, the Ohio Environmental

Protection Agency (OEPA), the Ohio Water Development Authority, and

the Ohio Department of Transportation are concerned with the project.

The most: important institutions are local governments.  They include

those of Delaware County, Delaware City, Columbus, and Westerville.

Franklin County will play a peripheral role in this project.



     The construction of the project is dependent on the approval

and funding of the U.S. EPA.  If Delaware County's facilities p]an is
                                               63

-------
approved, the U.S. EPA,  as authorized by the Water Pollution Control




Act Amendments of 1972,  will contribute 75 percent of the funds needed




for construction.  Delaware County is considering borrowing the remain-




ing 25 percent from the  Farmers Home Administration of the Department




of Agriculture.  This agency offers loans repayable over a 40-year




period for the construction of wastewater treatment facilities only




where projects cannot otherwise be financed at reasonable interest




rates.  The other federal agency which may become involved with the




project is the Federal Highway Administration.  If the proposed project




has an outfall in Franklin County near 1-270, then Delaware County




would have to obtain the Federal Highway Administration's permission




to use rights-of-way.  This issue is discussed further on pages 93-94.







     The most important  state institution involved with the proposed




project is the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency.  The OEPA, created




by Section 3745 of the Ohio Revised Code, is given comprehensive water




resource management responsibilities.  Following these responsibilities




and acting under Section 6117.34 of the Ohio Revised Code, the OEPA,




upon complaint by the State Board of Health, has ordered Delaware




County to construct wastewater treatment facilities.  Upon completion




of a facilities plan, Delaware County must submit it to OEPA for certifi-




cation before receiving any funding from U.S. EPA.  If Delaware County's




plans include any contractual agreement with another political entity




for the joint usage or construction of any facilities, this contractual




agreement must be approved by OEPA as stipulated by Section 6117.42 of




the Ohio Revised Code.
                                64

-------
     The Ohio Water Development Authority was established in 1969 to




help fund the wastewater and water management facilities of local




communities.  Delaware County is considering applying to OWDA for a




loan to pay its 25 percent share of the proposed project (Burgess &




Niple, Ltd., 1974).  The remaining state institution which might be




concerned with the proposed project is the Ohio Department of Transpor-




tation.  If the Delaware Count}' plant is located at the proposed site,




a mitigative measure might include the emplacement of the outfall pipe




along State Route 315 to its interchange with Interstate 270.  This




action would require the use of state rights-of-way and the obtaining




of a permit from the Ohio Department of Transportation.  This issue




is discussed further on page 93-94.







     The institutions most concerned with the proposed project are




those that exist at the local level.  On June 2, 1969, the Delaware




County Commissioners established a County Sewer District under Section




6117 of the Ohio Revised Code.   This Section enables the county to




"lay out, establish, and maintain" sewer service throughout the county.




As a County Sewer District, Delaware County is also authorized to enter




into contracts with other political entities for the connection of




sewers or the joint usage of sewage facilities.  Furthermore, under




307.15 of the Ohio Revised Code, Delaware County can contract with




any municipality in its borders to assume full responsibility for




providing sewer service to that municipality.







     Both Delaware City and Columbus have their own sewer systems as




provided for by Article XVIII,  Section 3 of the Ohio Constitution.
                                65

-------
This Article enables municipalities to "exercise all powers of local




self-government" including the providing of sewer service.   In addition,




Columbus's City Charter specifically creates a sewer system to be




operated by the city's Department of Public Service (Malcolm Pirnie,




Inc., December 1974).  The other local institution which might be




involved in the proposed project is the City of Westerville in Franklin




County.  If the proposed plant were to be located at an alternative




site on Alum Creek, an outfall could be placed in Westerville, pro-




vided Westerville agreed and leased the needed land to Delaware




County.  The details of this approach are examined on page  121.







     The institutional framework exists for the implementation of the




proposed project on either the proposed site or on any of the alterna-




tive sites.  The obstacle to implementation appears to be the attitudes




of the parties involved.  This is especially pertinent to the implemen-




tation of any regional solution.  These attitudes are examined, as




applicable, in the discussion of the various alternatives.
                                66

-------
                    PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS


Calgon Corporation, July 1975.

Hinde Engineering Corporation, July 1975.

Mantor, R., Superintendent, Delaware City Sewage Treatment Plant,
August 1975.

Nottingham, James, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, July 1975.

PCI Ozone Company, August 1975.

Sprague, R., City Engineer, City of Delaware, August 1975.



                          REFERENCES
Burgess and Niple Ltd., The Sanitary Sewerage Facilities Plan for
South-central Delaware_County, _0h_ig> July 1974 (revised August 1974) .

Collins, H.F.,  and D.G. Deaner,  "Sewage Chlorination Versus Toxicity-
A Dilemma?," Journal of the Environmental Engineering Division,
American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 101, No. EE4, August 1975.

Department of Natural Resources, Ohio, Water Inventory of_ the Scioto
River Basin, Division of Water, 1963.

Environmental Science & Technology, "Ozone Bids for Tertiary Treat-
ment," Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 4, No. 11,  November
1970.  ~""

Fair, G.M.,  and J.C. Geyer, Water Supply and Waste-Water Disposal,
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., April 1963.

Finkbeiner,  Pettis and Strout, Consulting Engineers and Planners, Compre.hens
W§£eL-iS^J>f::W5y!2§^                                              1969.

Jeane, G.S.,II, and P.E. Pine, "Environmental Effects of Dredging
and Soil Spoil," Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation,
Vol. 47, No. 3, March 1975.

Labrenz Riemer Inc., Watercourse Plan for Columbus and Franklin
County, Columbus Department of Recreation and Parks, 1974.

Liptak, E.G., Environmental Engineer's Handbook,  Vol. 2, Air Pollution,
Chilton Book Company, Pennsylvania, 1974.

Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., Columbus^^Metropolitan Area Facilities Plan,
December 1974.
                                67

-------
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Scioto River Basin Wasteload
Allocation Report, June 1974.

Ohio Revised Code Annotated, 1975.

Olive, I.H., A Study of Biological Communities in the Scioto River
as Indices of Water Quality, Ohio Biological Survey, Ohio State
University Water Resources Center,  Columbus, Ohio, p. 181, March 1971,

Servizi, J.A., et al., Marine Disposal of Sediments from Bellingham
Harbor as Related to Sockeye and Pine Salmon Fisheries,  International
Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission Progress Report No.  23, 1969.

U.S. Water Resources Council, Principles and Standards for Planning
Water and Related Land Resources -Charge in Discount Rate, The
Federal Register, Vol. 40, No. 147, 30 June 1975.
                                68

-------
B.   FRANKLIN COUNTY 1-270

     This section evaluates the relative merits of two sites located in
Franklin County near the 1-270 outerbelt.  The more general engineering,
environmental, biological, and institutional characteristics of the selected
site are considered.

     1.   Overview

          The proposed sites in Franklin County are located west of the
     Olentangy River near the 1-270 outerbelt.  They are designated OR1 and
     OR2 from south to north.  These sites are considered in response to the
     recommendation of Dr. Carol Stein of the Ohio State Museum of Zoology.
     She suggested in public hearing that the plant be constructed so as to
     empty into the Olentangy in Franklin County south of the northern loop
     of Interstate 270 (Burgess and Niple, 1974).  The main intent of this
     suggestion was to introduce the effluent into the portion of the river
     which has already been biologically degraded through channelization and
     highway construction.  While a precise location was not selected by
     Dr. Stein, we have selected two sites in open areas north and south
     of the outerbelt, east of the Chesapeake and Ohio tracks.  These sites
     are shown in Figure 11.
          Site OR1 is located south of 1-270, east of the Chesapeake and
     Ohio tracks, north of Snouffer Road and almost a mile west of the
     Olentangy River.  The unused land is about 1/2 mile square.  The
     elevation here is about 860 feet above sea level, or 100 feet above
     the river.  The grade in the site area is not very steep.  This site
     is located away from the river because there is both a dense residential
     development and a zone of steep slope near the river.  The site is not
     located further south because here there is no available land outside
     of the flood plain.
                                  69

-------
                                                   Sewage fcol 'p&k. t ion

                                                   -   'XpA-tVit- r'//'5'
                                                           7  r—xT*         - '   I

                                                           5>_X_J?KLA\V^ RE_ 50 "


                                                           •>  S  KKANKUN CO
                                                        ~Jf '\2J **~ 	 " '!•••••••••" ill-"I I I"'*U^_^	-**-^ ' ' ^y^a^s










                                                        '^ / ' ;J	"'f  B«'°0£  KvJ3- "••':
      (    ! V  H '    S

   •-.  ^-  -j.i--''Al?'
   Tr""*™ —1 ^— ~rrrA/,nT.   ""^-r.
 •  (   ''  687     ''  f'

'V~~ "(•WaieT,   T "ROAD I "i   "

 I  J la"k ,to i:   ! '-"-"
                 •M>Mrs^  •^~
                 1  ll-<,  H^ x^;
                •  -\^ „..]. ! ^    H- ',
  ^^^,) %  '  i i ; ? !L.J>vio \  '

   ;^-X/^. ^"-^Cf»^- V, •,  t'

  - ::"X t  xv*-C-: "' v>«™^ y"^ '^^
 _  jiV,*-;^\ P"" ,tHi^--^^™^  ~
. >tr"("vl."  /I4^^^f^>^-    ^ .,/:r
1   '"~"i t'  '/- ''C,      "-J-   ^'I Ch,ldrer,5_ „ > V-
      •/* t; J/S"^  -"*---%--^'   yom-   ' 7/-  '
i.. -.-,>>.'1S)'.' v>^?-'c-_itr^^N  **-s^-j"--
1  ''•T'  ^•-•J-"- '  c-j,     /r     ,^<"  'c	?£----«,
                                                                               "0'
            KEY


    Trunk Line •«.
    Force Main —.-—



    Outfall Line



    Local Plant Site
                                              Scale  in Miles
     Figure 11.  System Requirements for the Franklin  County  1-270 Alternative
Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                                          70

-------
     Site OR2 is located immediately north of the previous site on the




north side of the outerbelt.   The area is bounded on the north by a




forested area and a small stream.  It is smaller than the previous




site, measuring only 1/4 mile on a side.  The elevation is similar and




is between 860 to 870 feet above sea level.  This is the-only site in




this general area which is not obviously in an existing subdivision.







     In most characteristics, sites OKI and OR2 are similar.   Both




are located at relatively high elevations, about a mile from the river.




The effluent discharges from either location would be in the  same river




reach.   The current land uses, however, are somewhat different.  The




necessary system changes from the Burgess and Niple, Ltd.  facilities




plan (1974) would include an additional interceptor line in Franklin




County, a pumping station, and an extended outfall pipe.







2.   Site Selection







     Site OR1 is the preferred site in this group.  Its selection is




based on slight but important differences in engineering,  land use,




environmental, and biological impacts.  Institutional, political, and




legal considerations would be essentially the same since both sites




are within the corporate boundaries of Columbus and the outfall would




enter the Olentangy River opposite Worthington.







     The basic engineering differences between the sites concern the




placement of interceptor and outfall lines in relation to nearby roads.




The north site (OR2) would require a line crossing of the Ohio 315 1-270




interchange or the outerbelt itself in at least two places.  Both the




intake and outfall lines would have to cross these roads.   This would




involve either tunneling or temporary disruption of a major interchange.




With the use of the Wilson Bridge Road as a right-of-way across Ohio 315,




                              71

-------
only one crossing of the outerbelt would be necessary.   This one




crossing could utilize the existing tunnel, where the river flows




under the outerbelt, to minimize additional construction.







     The land uses at the two sites are different in that  site OR2 is




immediately adjacent to a planned subdevelopment.  An on-site visit and




photographs of the site reveal that grading is in progress in some




portions and may be expanded to much of the rest of the site.   There




is current.ly enough land which is either dormant or under  agricultural




use. to accommodate the treatment plant, but there would clearly be a




significant impact on adjacent planned residences.  The southern site




is occupied by brush and scrub which have grown on previously abandoned




land.  While current land use would not interfere with location of the




plant, there are indications that the northern site at least has been




planned for residential development.  This may be true for the southern




site as well.







     Effects on the immediate environment might include problems of




odor, noise, and visual pollution.  There are a number of  residences




that could be affected near both sites.  The northern site has a high




density populated area nearby in Worthington Hills and Mount Air.  The




planned development next to the site would be well within  the objectionable




range.  The southern site is within a mile of some residences.




Density is lower here.







     Biological impacts from plants at both sites would include noise




and construction effects on nearby forested areas; the northern site




would affect a more extensive forest and a nearby stream.   Most of




the trees near the  southern site are classified as brush rather than as




grown forest.  Aquatic impacts would be identical for the sites,




                             72

-------
provided that an appropriate outfall location was utilized.   This
outfall development might entail more difficult and expensive construction
for the northern site, as mentioned above.

     On the basis of the above considerations, site OR1 is identified
as the best site in this group.   It would result in lower cost,
construction problems, and certain environmental impacts than the more
northern site.  Amplification of characteristics of site OR1 is contained
on pages 72-82.  The final comparison of the selected site with sites
from other areas is presented on pages 185-194.

3 .   Engineering Analysi_s

     Construction of the proposed facility at site OR1 would require
three major modifications of the planned system:  extension of the
large interceptor which collects from the three basins, a pumping station,
and a relatively lengthy outfall line.

     Approximately 2 1/2 additonal miles of 42 inch interceptor line
through Franklin County would be necessary to reach site OR1 (Figure 11).
This could be most easily laid near Ohio 315 south to the 1-220 inter-
change.  Here it could utilize the river underpass before running inland
to the site.

     Sewage would be regulated by the wet walls of a pumping station
located 3/4 mile south of the interchange and to the east of Highway #315
and relayed to the site by a 16 inch force main of 1 mile in length.
The pumping station would have a system lift of approximately 130 feet
and desi£'' peak flow of no less than 9 mgd.  Two minor highway ramp
crossings for tL"- A2 inch sewer line and a highway crossing for the
16 inch force main wou' •! be required.
                             73

-------
     The outfall location here is of prime importance since the major




reasons for suggesting this site were to minimize biological impacts.




The outfall should be located downstream of the areas of good aquatic




habitat.  This consideration would place the outfall location about a




half mile north of Ohio 161 and immediately downstream of the riffle




area.  At 1 1/2 mile outfall pipe would be required in order to meet




this demand.   To avoid major highway crossing and damage to forested




areas, the outfall pipe would run southwestward for approximately one




half mile, thence along Snouffer Road eastward, swing southward at




Highway #315, and cross Route 315 where the divided highway section ends.







4-   Land Use Analysis







     Land in the immediate vicinity is a mixture of unused speculative




holdings and residential or agricultural uses.  Major transportation




arteries already exist to the north and east of the site.  Nearby land




includes forested and recreational areas utilized by fishermen (Perry,




1974; Griswold, 1975).  These and other unintensive uses are being




diminished by the continued expansion of metropolitan Columbus.  Construc-




tion and operation of both the plant and its sewer system could have




impact on surrounding land use.







     The plant would have small impact on land use at the site because




it is presently composed of small trees, undergrowth and some agricultural




fields.  There are no commercial or industrial areas close by and only




light residential development at present.  Secondary effects might




include limitation of the residential and commercial development that




usually occurs near major highway interchanges.  Some local depression




in land values might be expected.




                             74

-------
     The sewer and outfall lines would cause only temporary disruption




of surrounding land during construction.   Reduction in recreational




use of this section of the river for fishing is to be expected only




during the construction period.   This use should return to normal upon




project completion since the pumping station and lines are to be




underground and the outfall would be located below the major fishing area.




Secondary effects of sewer construction might be to stimulate some growth




north of the plant if the Worhtington Hills and Mount Air areas were




to be serviced.







     The outfall itself could possibly cause impacts on the densely




populated Worthington area located east of the river.  Although exact




determination of these impacts is beyond the present scope, factors to




be considered should be possible secondary odor effects from the growth




of odor-causing algae and possible contamination of nearby groundwater




supplies.







5.   Environmental Effects







     Environmental effects on people could be significant in this




location if proper mitigative procedures are not used.  These effects




are classified as visual impacts, odor, and noise.







     Visual impact is extremely variable due to possible differences




in plant design.  If the present parklike design were to be used, this




impact would not be a significant factor.  Conventional treatment plant




architecture is not usually pleasing.  A plant at either of these sites




would be clearly visible from the outerbelt.







     Odor and noise would be much more adverse in this residential area




than in other more rural sites.   Prevailing winds could carry odors



                            75

-------
northeast to Mount Air or eastward over Worthington and  outlying suburbs




of Columbus.  The noise and odor reduction characteristics in the plant




design would have to be very carefully controlled to satisfy nearby




residents.  If left uncontrolled,  these might also influence nearby




recreational, commercial, and light industrial use.  The extra pumping




station required might also contribute a certain amount  of noise, but




this would probably be covered by the normal highway noise at the




interchange.







     Water quality degradation is determined by both the effluent concen-




tration and the instream flow.  Since the effluent concentration is assumed




to be the same at all sites and the instream flow varies to only a minor




extent, water quality effects would be nearly equal for  all sites on the




Olentangy River.







     The dilution ratio is defined as the ratio of the effluent flow to




the mixed flow.  During 7-day 10-year low flow periods,  the dilution




ratio would be 0.34, 0.51, and 0.67 for the 1st, the 10th, and the 20th




years, respectively, after the project becomes operational.  The above




numbers are based on the assumption that the Delaware City STP would




be operating 20 years from the commencement of the project operation.







     During 7-day 10-year low flow periods, water quality would




deteriorate in terms of DO, BOD , NHL, NO , and TDS, simply because of




the limited dilution water.  The problems would increase significantly




with the growth of the plant as long as the quantity of dilution water




remains unchanged.







     Under most probable conditions, the Olentangy River would have an




average flow of 223 mgd and median flow of 47.8 mgd.  Using the median




flow as the evaluative criteria, the dilution ratio would be 0.030, 0.059,





                            76

-------
and 0.112 for the 1st,  the 10th,  and the 20th years,  respectively,




after the project becomes operational.   These dilution capacities are




11.3, 8.6, and 6.0 times those in dry weather conditions.   Under most




probable conditions,  the impacts  of the project on the river water-




quality are expected  to be insignificant for DO, BOD,-, NH», NO , and TDS.









 6.    Biological Impacts







      The major point in favor of this  location is that  it  is  better suited




 to  reducing  impacts on the natural environment than  sites  in  Delaware




 County.   This particularly concerns the aquatic environment in  the




 Olentangy River.   No destruction of established forest  areas  would  be




 necessary at this site.







      The Olentangy River in Franklin County has not  been designated as




 scenic below Wilson Bridge Road,  and much  of the river  species  habitat




 in  this reach has been reduced or destroyed by channelization.   As  shown




 in  Figure 12, the populations of both  living and dead collected mollusk




 specimens are low immediately north of the artificial  fish habitat area,




 3 miles south of Powell Road.







      Table 21 shows that populations of desirable fish  reach a  distinct




 peak north of the artificial habitat area  and drop abruptly south of the




 area toward  Henderson  Road.   Benthic organisms which are the  fish's main




 food supply  are numerous and have diversity and abundance  north of  the




 site at Powell Road  (Olive and Smith,  1975).   Because there are large




 populations  of fish near the site, it  is assumed that the  benthic




 organisms in this area must  also have  high populations.  The  outfall from




 the site should be placed south  of the 1-270 interchange about  1/2  mile





                             77

-------
                                                            3
                                                            O
                                                            in
                                                                           ID   G
                                                                       60  U
                                                                       C      rH
                                                                       •H  -o   n
                                                                       >   
-------
 0)
 >
•H
 Ml  !-i
 C  0)
 n) £
 •n  S
 a  
rH  O
O !Z5

 QJ  O
^3 4J
 4-J
o
 co  01
•H  Ss
    Pn
     §
CM

w
                             rt  iw
                             o  o
 O   3  13
 w   o   cd
 M   co   o

TJ   co

 QJ
                                    OJ
                                •H
                                a  .
                            4-1      O
                            
-------
north of Ohio Route 61 in order to avoid the desirable fishing area




near the interchange.  Because of the scarcity of large organisms




downstream from the outfall, the placement of the plant and outfall




at site OR1 would have few noticeable biological effects on the river.







     The large influx of  nutrients from the effluent would result in




an increase in algal and  bacterial growth.   This growth,  however, is




largely independent of location.   It  depends on the dilution of the




effluent by the amount and flow of water in the river.   The greatest




flow and hence the largest dilution factor  occurs at the most south-




erly site due to inflow of water  from upstream tributaries.  Water




quality deterioration would be reduced slightly for these same reasons.







     Two rare and endangered species  of naiades (mollusks) and one




fish species  have been found in past  years  near the site.  Subfossil




shells of the naiad Epiqblasma torulosa rangiana (the northern riffle




shell) and more recent but empty shells of  Quadrula cylindrica




cylindrica (the cob shell) have been found  near Wilson Bridge Road.




However, no living specimens have been found here in the few studies




that have been carried out since 1961.  The Spotted Darter (Etheostoma




maculatum) is on the list of Ohio rare and  endangered fish, and has




been collected three times in the Olentangy River.   This fish was




found at Snouffcr Road on at least two occasions during the period




1958-1963 by Trautman (Ohio State University, Museum of




Zoology, 1975).  The presence of these rare and endangered species is




an important  consideration in treatment plant placement; however, due




to their low numbers, their range and present existence in the river




is poorly defined.  Further investigation into the present existence






                             80

-------
of these species needs to be conducted since the river system in the




area has been greatly altered by the artificial riffle-pool structure.







7.   Institutional Considerations







     Delaware County, as a County Sewer District under Section 6117




of the Ohio Revised Code, can not condemn land in another county for




the construction of a wastewater treatment facility.  However, Section




6117.41 of the Ohio Revised Code does enable a county to contract with




another political entity for the joint construction and usage of sewers




and wastewater treatment facilities.  Therefore, the proposed facility




can be constructed at site OR1 within Columbus if it services some




area of Columbus, and perhaps lit. Air and Worthington Hills within




Franklin County, along with Delaware County and if Delaware County and




Columbus agree to the necessary contract.  It should be noted that the




northern areas of Columbus along the Olentangy River are not yet being




serviced by metropolitan sewers.







     There are political obstacles,  however, to the signing of such a




contract between Delaware County and Columbus.  Delaware County feels




its autonomy threatened by the rapidly growing Columbus metropolitan




area while Columbus,  cognizant of Delaware County's attitude and con-




centrating on developing its own facilities plan, is not currently




anxious to cooperate.







     Delaware County  has planned to  finance the proposed facility by




obtaining 75% of the  needed funds from a United States Environmental




Protection Agency grant and borrowing the remaining 25% from either




the Ohio Water Development Authority or the Farmers Home Administration






                             81

-------
of the Department of Agriculture.   However,  if the proposed plant is




built at site OR1 within Columbus,  this funding arrangement would be




altered.  The question would arise  concerning whether Columbus or




Delaware County would be the lead  applicant  and therefore eligible for




federal funds.  A financial arrangement providing for the maintenance




and operation of the proposed plan  would also have to be decided upon




by Delaware County and Columbus.   These financial arrangements can be




successfully negotiated, but given  the distrust existing between




Columbus and Delaware County, it will be difficult for the two entities




to cooperate.
                             82

-------
                        PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS
Griswold, Bernard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1975,
                              REFERENCES


Burgess and Niple Ltd., The Sanitary Sewerage Facilities Plan for South-
Central Delaware County, Ohio, July 1974 (revised August 1974).

Ohio Revised Code Annotated,  1974.

Ohio State University Museum of Zoology, Unpublished Records, 1975.

Olive, John H.,  and Kenneth Smith, Benthic Macroinvertibrates as Indexes
of Water Quality in the Scioto River System,, Ohio.

Perry, Edward, The Effeet of Stream Improvement Structures on the Sport
Fishery in a Channelized Section of the Olentangy River, Masters Thesis
(Unpublished), Ohio State University,  1974.
                                  83

-------
C.   POWELL ROAD - OLENTANGY







     In this section the relative merits of three sites on the Olentangy




River near Powell Road are evaluated.   Engineering,  environmental,  and




institutional characteristics of the area are discussed.







     1.   Overview







          The three sites on the Olentangy River near Powell Road are




     designated OR3, OR4, and OR5 from south to north.   They were originally




     suggested by Burgess and Niple, Ltd. in their Feasibility Survey and




     Report for Sanitary Service and Sewage Treatment Facilities (1970).




     All three have been subsequently discussed as the major three feasible




     alternatives in locating the southern Delaware County facilities (Ohio




     EPA, 1973).  The southernmost site, OR3, is the site of the currently




     proposed action and thus is discussed here only in highlight form.




     More detailed reference to this site is given on pages 195-294.







          Site OR3 is located on the west bank of the Olentangy approximately




     1.2 miles south of Powell Road (Ohio 750) in Delax«ire County.  The




     site is only 900 feet north of the Delaware-Franklin County line and




     is on the lowest usable land within the county at an elevation of 770




     feet above sea level.  The site size is about 1/3 mile on a side.  It




     is 0.2 mile from the nearest structure according to 1973 data.







          Site OR4 is on the flood plain or river terrace on the east bank




     of the river about 0.25 mile south of Powell Road.  Elevation here is




     between 770 and 780 feet above sea level.  This site is smaller than




     OR3 and only has an area 0.2 mile square.  It is about 0.1 mile from




     the nearest residence as of July 1975.
                                   84

-------
                       Site OR5 is also on the east bank but to the north of Powell Road.




                  It extends from the road northward for only 0.15 mile before being




                  intersected by a small stream.  In an east-west direction the terrain




                  becomes very steep about 0.2 mile back from the river.  The entire




I                  site is on steeper terrain than either OR3 or_OR4, ranging in elevation




I                  from 770 to 800 feet.  There is a residence on the site itself.






•                       Among the most important engineering considerations are the relative




                  site, size, slope, and the presence of rocky soils.  Important impacts
I
on land use and the environment involve the effects of recreation use




on the nearby Highbanks Metropolitan Park.   Biological impacts could




be quite severe particularly on aquatic organisms.   Institutional




considerations are not a factor, since all  three sites are in Delaware




County.







2.   Site Selection







     Site OR3 is the preferred site in this group.   Its selection is




based mainly on cost,  engineering considerations,  and biological




and other environmental impacts.  Differences in land use impacts




are deemed to be minimal between the sites.  Institutional considerations




are not applicable within the Delaware County Sewer District.







     The major engineering differences between the three sites involve




differences in line length, site size, and  subsurface conditions.




These last two considerations influence the ease and expense of




excavation and other construction.   The sites are equal in terms of




pumping facilities and number of required river crossings.







     Site OR3 requires approximately one mile more of 42" interceptor




than do OR4 or OR5.  This is the interceptor which would extend from
                                                85

-------
Powell Road, south to the site.   As Figure 13 indicates,  sites OR4




and OR5 are adjacent to Powell Road and could utilize the east-west




interceptor directly with only slight rerouting.   Due to  biological




considerations, it may be advantageous to relocate the outfall down-




stream from the plant south of the county line.   This course of action




would partially or completely nullify the savings of interceptor line




at sites OR4 and OR5 since an equivalent amount  of extra  discharge pipe




would be necessary from these sites.






     The most northern site, OR5, would probably involve  some difficulty




and added expense in construction and excavation.  The site is the




smallest of the three, and there are indications that this area may




have shallow soils.  The topography is also somewhat steeper than the




other two sites.  In addition, there is currently a farm  on this site




which would have to be acquired and demolished.






     Land use at sites OR3 and OR5 is agricultural.  However, OR5




contains a dwelling and farm buildings whereas OR3 does not.  Site OR4




is on land owned by Highbanks Metropolitan Park.  The actual plant




location here is presently an undeveloped field, but development for




picnicking and recreational use is underway nearby.






     Odor, noise, and visual impact would be least significant from




the proposed plant at site OR5 since it is relatively isolated from




the park and residences.  The other sites are both visible and upwind




from some portions of the park.  Visual detriment, however, is not




expected in any site with the proposed design.  Water quality would be




equal at the three sites, but the Park Board has expressed concern over




possible airborn pathogens at site OR4 near the picnic areas.  Pathogen
                                 86

-------
                                      Si'

      ISlb^-tiir^"tteJ
      fe«^w--4:fe' 'rl£^H"^>^-
             ^sfe^
      *£•#£ »^4M' D w^4f3^
      ~J~-^4& .;^^^M. !\^. \^:J§^?^
                            ^^ ^r^-.


                            oy ir^r* . ,^''
                             X "'^-4 j ^ -, L-- [!»=:

                                 ^", -*ij.4^
                                  -~~> ^f ^—'Jvsi
                                         i'
                                       ••  /^
                                       V »7O'
                                     Ct°^'-J,^^'^;
                                       . X| ^vi^ -— _--*--.
      C>
\'{T:vr': j:  "^, S ~c£:-* '•'''^^.y-:• C^ (r     0 t   IX^^L ^ CerrTT •• i U»=  *•
5VT   7  r..  , .- J'"t' •• /A-T. , '> T "- - —•' "V  "nf^hM  ^.-/.-i H •
^^a-^f^r^"-'-'-'^.^---;--^*-.^:^-^- f>-^^•<•£';. ' ^ -in , ^  ( ^^"-h--" Uy "T^^u-y'- n



Kife^telfe¥1ts\H7^M^^^^   -
      I"  X "J>  ' ;
      .\ - C    \fi  i.
             KEY
                                 Scale in Miles
                                    1/2
      Outfall Line. .  .




      Local Plant Site-
    Figure 13.  System Requirements for the Powell Road-Olentangy Alternative




Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                          87

-------
contamination of the air seems unlikely,  but  the possibility cannot




be excluded.







     Biologically,  the equivalence or difference between the sites




depends on outfall location.   If the proposed plant at  each site were




to utilize  a discharge pipe  to a downstream location,  all three could




be considered equivalent.   If the plants  at sites OR4 and OR5 were to




discharge at Powell Road,  however, significantly more biological




damage would be done to aquatic organisms,  particularly naiades down-




stream.  The plant at site OR5 would also have some detrimental impact




to terrestrial biota because  it is adjacent to forested areas north




and east of the site.







     On the basis of the above considerations, we have selected site OR3




as the best site in this group.  The optimal course of action of locating




the sewage outfall south of the sites in Franklin County makes this




site equivalent or better from both an engineering and biological




standpoint.  It has slight advantages with respect to current land use




and only a minimal disadvantage with respect to aesthetic environmental




impacts.  Amplification of the characteristics of the selected site




is contained in the following sections.  Since this site is the one




presently proposed by the Burgess and Niple facilities plan, more detail




will be found on pages  195-294 concerning the proposed action.




Comparison with other selected sites will be presented on pages 185-194.







3 .   Engineering Analy_sis_







     As this is the site designed in the facilities plan, the interceptor




lines  required are those outlined in the plan.  The site eliminates  the




necessity for any pumping stations on the Olentangy Basin due to  its
                               88

-------
I                   low elevation.  A recommended mitigative measure to reduce biological




                   impacts is the extension of the outfall line south into Franklin




I                   County to the same point recommended for the discharge from site OR1.




•                   This extension is shown in Figure 13.






                        Construction needs for the site have been discussed  in detail  in




I                   the facilities plan.  Mitigative measures relating to river crossings




I                   are discussed on pages 273-278.  All indications are that  subsurface




                   conditions would not  pose any particular construction problems  at
I
the site.







4.   Land Use







     Site OR3 is currently devoted to agriculture.   It also serves as




part of a scenic vista from portions of the Highbanks Metropolitan




Park.   Park authorities have expressed considerable concern about




impacts to recreational use in adjacent parkland.   It is possible that




there would be slight impacts on park users from odor and noise, but




the effect would not be severe enough to change the land use of the park.







     Across Route 315 from the site, land is occupied by scattered




residences.  There is also a subdivision several thousand feet to the




west-northwest.  Significant residential development could potentially




occur in this and other nearby areas.







     The main land use impact of locating the plant at the site would




be to take a small amount of farmland out of production.  It seems un-




likely that the scenic vista from the park would be affected considering




the extensive visual design modifications in the facilities plan and the




fact that the scenic vista can only be completely protected through




the purchase of extensive amounts of land or scenic easements  west of
                                                  89

-------
Ohio 315.  Indeed,  the degradation of the scenic vista from the park




by a visually camouflaged treatment plant would be insignificant as




compared to the damage that would be caused by potential development




on land west of Ohio 315.







     A plant located here might limit future public access to the river




in this area.  This access along the Olentangy River is considered




important by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources in its Statewide




Plan for Outdoor Recreation in Ohio 1971-1977 (1970).  Construction of




the sewers would also cause changes in land use, such as differences




in industrial, commercial, and residential use.  These changes are




discussed in more detail on pages 245-259.  Location of the outfall could




cause land use changes by affecting downstream recreation.  Maintaining




water quality for recreational purposes is viewed as extremely important




by the Columbus Department of Recreation and Parks and is an integral




component of the Watercourse Plan for Columbus and Franklin County (1974)







5.   Environmental Effects







     Visual impact of the plant at this site is expected to be minimal




due to the extensively designed beautification program in the facilities




plan.  Construction of ponds, gazebos and walkways will all help the




plant blend with its surroundings. The exterior of the plant itself




is such  as to foster a wooded and parklike atmosphere.  In addition,




extensive screening with trees and shrubs is planned.  Effectiveness




of this  screening could be increased through more use of trees with




thick evergreen foliage  such as white pines  (Finns strobus), especially




in directions where visual impact is more important.
                                90

-------
 I                      Odor problems from the plant at this site might be significant




                  to the Highbanks Park.  The park is in the direction of the prevailing




 I                 winds.  It is very difficult to predict the magnitude of the odor




 I                 problem since the treatment process involves the production of odor-




                  causing substances, and its importance depends upon weather factors




 I                 and the sensitivity of the human receptor.  Mitigative steps to




                  control odor are discussed on pages 264-26'8.    It should be noted,




I                 however, that the highbanks are more than 1/4 mile from this site.







                       Noise problems should not be significant here.  Noise levels at




                  the park should be far below the decibel levels recommended by HUD




                  for recreational areas.  This topic is further discussed on pages 268-271.







                       Water quality in this section of the Olentangy has been poor both




                  historically and presently due to significant sewage discharges from




                  leaking septic tanks and nutrient runoff from surrounding farmland.




                  Water quality standards are currently violated 100 percent of the time




                  on the basis of fecal coliform counts, according to Ohio EPA (Nottingham,




                  1975).  The water is also high in both phosphorus and nitrogen, as




                  documented in Table 45 on page 209.  The plant would eventually help




                  reduce the amounts of coliform bacteria through treatment and




                  chlorination.  Levels of phosphates, nitrates, chlorine, and ammonia




                  would be increased.  The effects of these increases on aquatic life




                  are discussed below.  Possible airborne pathogens from either the




                  treatment plant or the effluent would pose no problems at this site.







                  6•   Biological Impacts







                       The major impacts upon aquatic life that might occur involve




                  effects on populations of naiades, fish, and benthic organisms.  The
                                                91

-------
naiades are organisms that feed on small particles of  organic matter




and plankton.   They are fed on, in turn, by muskrat, mink,  otter,




raccoon, and turtles.  The benthic organisms which have been investigated




are mainly insect larvae which form the main food source for the fish.







     Changes in the populations of naiades, fish, and  benthos could




result from various chemical compositions of the effluent.   The main




effects are due to oxygen depletion and toxic substances.   The highlights




of these effects are discussed below.   A more detailed description is




presented on pages 225-244.







     Untreated sewage effluent is commonly rich in nutrients and often




results in increased populations of undesirable  algae.  As  these




algae decay, oxygen in the water is consumed in the decomposition




process.  This reduction of dissolved oxygen usually occurs for some




distance downstream from the point of effluent discharge.   It could




eliminate many desirable species of fish and naiades from this part




of the river.   Insufficient information is available on expected levels




of dissolved oxygen and the effects of reduced oxygen on native species




to accurately predict the impact.






     Several biologically-toxic substances would be discharged from




the proposed plant.  Chlorine and ammonia are of particular importance




and the Ohio Fish and Wildlife Service  (Faulkner, 1975) has expressed




concern about their  effect.  An artificial habitat fishery is located




two miles south of site OR3 and it is doubtful that much of the




chlorine or ammonia  discharged would be dispersed or assimilated before




reaching this point  in  the river.  According to biological data,




significant fish kills  could result.  Supportive bioassay data is




contained on pages 226-238.
                              92

-------
 I                      Impacts upon terrestrial life would be minimal at site OR3.




                  Placement of the plant would not involve any loss of trees since most




 I                 of the site is a cultivated field.  The trees presently on the site




                  are on the riverbank.  These include typical riverbank species such as




 '                 cottonwood, sycamore, boxelder, oaks, and maples.  It is proposed to
I



I
plant various evergreen and deciduous trees around the treatment plant




for beautification and screening purposes.   These trees would also




provide some habitat for birds and small mammals (see Appendix B).
I                      Adverse impacts on or the elimination of rare and endangered species




                  could occur with respect to the naiades, mollusks, Quadrula cylindrica




                  (cob shell), and Epioblasma torulosa (northern riffle shell), and the




                  fish, Eteostoma maculaturn (Spotted darter).   These species have been




                  discussed above on page  80.   Their most probable  locations are




                  downstream from site OR3 and hence, more detailed investigation is




                  warranted.  Outfall relocation is a promising mitigative measure to




                  reduce the impact on these species.







                  7.   Institutional Considerations







                       A mitigative measure for site OR3 is the placement of an outfall




                  along the sides and median strip of State Route 135 in Delaware and




                  Franklin Counties, past the interchange of State Route 315 and Interstate




                  270 in Columbus.  Although this would involve a routine procedure,




                  it is doubtful whether it could be done in this instance.







                       The State of Ohio owns the median strip and usually 30 to 40 feet




                  on each side of the center line on state routes.  Delaware County must




                  apply to the Ohio Department of Transportation to use this right-of-way




                  along State Route 315.  The Ohio Department of Transportation would
                                                93

-------
review this application and elicit the comments of Franklin County,




Columbus, and other interested state agencies  before deciding whether




to issue the permit.   The application would also have to be approved




by the Federal Highway Administration and the  City of Columbus,  since




they contributed funds to construct the interchange of State Route 315




and Interstate 270.







     Franklin County and Columbus would probably not object to this




measure, but Worthington would.   The proposed  outfall, as indicated




in Figure 13, lies directly across from a junior high school and a




heavily populated residential neighborhood.  The likely opposition of




Worthington to the location of the outfall at  this site constitutes




a major obstacle to the implementation of this measure.
                              94

-------
                                     Private Communications
             Nottingham, James, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, July 1975.

I
                                           References
             Burgess and Niple, Ltd., Feasibility Survey and Report for Sanitary
             Service and Sewage Treatment Facilities, 1970.

             Faulkner, C.E., Acting Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
             Letter to Ned Williams, Ohio EPA, 21 July 1975.

             Labrenz Reimer, Inc., Watercourse Plan for Columbus and Franklin County,
             Columbus Department of Recreation and Parks, 1974.

             Ohio Department of Natural Resources, A Statewide Plan for Outdoor
             Recreation in Ohio 1971-1977, 1970.

             Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Evaluation of the Proposed Olentangy
             Environmental Control Center— Delaware County Wastewater Treatment
             Facility, Sub-District 1-A, 1973.
                                                 95

-------
D.   POWELL ROAD - POWELL







     This section evaluates the relative merits of two sites west of the




Olentangy River on high ground in the vicinity of the village of Powell.




The characteristics of the selected site are discussed as well.







     1.   Overview







          The two proposed sites near the village of Powell are designated




     OR6 and OR7 from south to north.  These sites are considered in response




     to suggestions by Mr. Edward Hutchins,  Director of Higlibanks Metropolitan




     Park, and Dr. Robert Teater, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, to




     the effect that the plant should be located on high ground 3/4 to 1 mile




     west of the river to minimize encroachment on Highbanks Park (Burgess




     and Niple, Ltd. ,  1975).  One site (OR7) adjacent to Powell Road has been




     selected as representative and fulfills the intent of removing the plant




     from the park vicinity.  Burgess and Niple, Ltd. selected a different




     site near the county line (OR6) to fulfill the same purpose, as documented




     by their letter to Mr. Fred Stults on  April 10, 1975 (Burgess and Niple,




     Ltd. , 1975).  Both sites are shown in Figure 14.







          Site OR6 is on land immediately east of the Chesapeake and Ohio




     tracks and immediately north of the Delaware-Franklin County line.  It




     would be advantageous to modify this location slightly by moving  it 1/4




     mile northward along the tracks to remove it from residences immediately




     south of the county line.  There is about 1/2 mile square unused  land




     with an elevation of about 900 feet on relatively level land.







          Site OR7 is located on the south side of Powell Road about 0.6 mile




     west of the Olentangy.  The site extends 0.3 mile east-west and 0.2 mile




     north-south.  It is  immediately adjacent to Powell Road to  the north and
                                   96

-------
                                                  f  |iFi!^§P^d
           KEY





Force Main —..«=.




Outfall Line. .  ,




Local Plant Site




Lift Station
Scale in Miles
                     1 MILE
          Figure 14.  System Requirements for the Powell Road-Powell Alternative
  Source:  Enviro Control,  Inc.,  1975
                                   97

-------
the forested area of Bartholomew Run to the south.   The elevation is




890 feet above sea level.   The center of the site is 0.2 mile from the




nearest structures according to 1973 U.S.G.S.  quadrangle maps.






     The major differences between the two sites derive from engineering




and cost considerations involving pump requirements and force main




length.  Environmental factors which interact with  construction are




biological impacts from sedimentation and noise, as well as effects on




planned land use development in the area.






2.   Site Selection






     Site OR7 is the preferred site in this group.   The differences




between the sites, however, are relatively minor.  Engineering and cost




differences are the main factor in favor of site OR7.   While some land




use and biological considerations argue against this selection, they




are of a minor nature in this particular instance and can be corrected




by proper mitigative procedures.  Environmental influences are nearly




identical and institutional aspects are similar to those described




on p. 93-94.






     Primary engineering and cost differences between the two sites




result from the requirement for 7,000 feet of additional force main for




site OR6 due to its distance from the river.  Increased frictional drag




in this longer force main would also necessitate larger pumping facilities




and use of more electrical power in the long run.  Burgess and Niple, Ltd.




in their April 10, 1975 communication with Mr. Fred Stults, have estimated




the incremental cost of utilizing site OR6 over site OR3 to be




$1,900,000  (Burgess and Niple, Ltd., 1975).  It is anticipated that




this incremental cost for site OR7 would be significantly less.  Force




main cost would be less than one-third and pumping requirements would




                            98

-------
I                 be about two-thirds  of this cost.







.                      With respect to land  use,  however,  site  OR7  is  at  a  slight  disadvantage




*                 The site is near the center of  one of  the  four major development areas  in




I .                the recently completed plan for the village of Powell (Lando  and Bohm,




                  1975).   Placement of the plant  at  this site would necessitate some




                  changes in the Powell plan.  Land  use  in the  area is presently extensive




                  and a slight modification to the plan  should  not  cause  any  major long




                  range problems.  Furthermore, site OR6 is  adjacent to a rail  line




                  and hence, this is an area more likley than OR7  to undergo  industrial




                  development.  The plant would be more  compatible  with this  type  of use




                  than with the residential uses  planned for OR?.







                       Environmental considerations  are  nearly  identical  at the sites.




                  Visual impact, odor, and noise  are equal,  since housing densities




                  near both sites are the same.   The proposed plant at either site would




                  not impact on recreational or other sensitive areas.  Water quality




                  would be similar, but biological impact  of water  quality  changes would




                  be greater at site OR7 unless mitigative outfall  relocation was  used.







                       The plant at site OR7 would have  some biological impact  on  the




                  nearby forested scenic ravine at Bartholomew  Run.   This impact would




                  include noise disturbance and sediment runoff, mostly during  construction.




                  Site OR6, on the other hand, is within 1/2 mile  of a small  creek and




                  woods area near the county line.  While little noise impact would be




                  expected, sediments  could  still be important  here.   Sediment  runoff




                  could damage the habitat of terrestrial  and aquatic  organisms as well as




                  destroy the scenic quality of the  ravine area.  Sediment  problems could




                  easily be avoided at both sites by use of  proper  construction procedures.




                                              99

-------
     Site OR? has been selected as the preferred site primarily due




to engineering and cost considerations.   In this case,  differences  in




environmental and biological effects are all minor  or can be mitigated




easily.  Land use disadvantages are considered to be  outweighed by  the




increased difficulties, cost,  and use of electrical energy that would




be connected with site OR6.







3.   Engineering Analysis







     Construction of the proposed facility at site  OR7  would require a




lift station located immediately south of Powell Road and on the east




bank of the Olentangy River.  A 16-inch force main  3,000 feet in length




would be required to deliver the sewage from the Olentangy and Alum




Creek Basins to the site.  The lift station would have a peak capacity




of 6 mgd and a total system head of 200 feet.  One  river crossing and




one highway crossing would be required for the force  main, which would




run along Powell Road east to the river.  The force main and interceptor




system carrying sewage from the Scioto Basin would  need to be re-routed;




however, no significant change in length of line would be required.






     The extent of outfall work depends on the selected outfall location.




Two possible locations are proposed.  One is located  immediately south




of Powell Road, and the other approximately 1 1/8 river miles south of




Powell Road at the county line.  The two would require 3,000 and 10,000




feet of outfall pipe, respectively.  Both would cross Ohio 315 once.




The general route would be east along Powell Road,  crossing Ohio 315




at the intersection and  thence following Ohio 315 south-southeasterly




for about a mile.  This  route is shown  in Figure 14.   The route would




then turn eastward toward the river near the county line.  In the entire




biologically active scenic river segment, additional outfall piping would



                            100

-------
I
                   be necessary.   The incremental piping requirements would be the same
'                  as those of site OR3.

I                       The site is on flat terrain and there is no indication of near-
                   surface bedrock, which would increase construction problems.   Some
                   grading work accompanied by rapid planting of ground cover might be
                   required on the southern end of the site to reduce sedimentation into
                   the Bartholomew Run area.

                   4.   Land Use Analysis

                        Site OR7 is currently open field, possibly used for grazing animals,
                   with some adjacent cropland.  A forest area adjoins the site on the
                   south and partially surrounds it on the west.  None of this forested
                   area is now suitable for development due to the steep gradient.  A small
                   pond exists on the western edge of the site and a dirt road defines the
                   eastern border.  There are several residences within 1/2 mile of the
                   site.  The plant would be far enough away from the Highbanks Park to
                   ensure mimimal impact.

                        Primary land use impact from the plant would be aesthetic impact
                   on drivers on Powell Road and possible changes in the casual recreational
                   use of the Bartholomew Run area.   Future impacts v/ould include necessary
                   changes in the planning concept of the village of Poxi/ell.  Currently,
                   plans for the first development stages are centered around site OR7.

                        All sewer and outfall lines would be run along road rights-of-way
                   and so would have little or no impact on land use except during
                   construction.   Secondary impacts, however, involving recreational water
                   use below the outfall would be similar to those for OR3.
                                                101

-------
5.    Environmental Effects


     Impact of the proposed plant on visual aesthetics  is  insignificant.

Although the plant will be visible from Powell Road,  trees planted  on

the northern perimeter would eliminate this impact.   No additional

expense or effort would be necessary to accomplish this, since the

proposed plan already includes significant tree and shrub  plantings.


     No significant wind channelization would be expected  due to the

high elevation of the site.  Prevailing wind flow would be similar  to

the regional pattern from the southwest.  The development  within a  one-

mile radius of the site is quite sparse so that odor and noise problems

would not be significant on residential receptors.  There  could be  odor

impacts on Powell Road.


     Water quality impacts would be identical with previously described

sites.  The amount of impact on biological organisms would be dependent

on which of the three possible outfall locations were chosen.  These

impacts have been discussed on pages  75-77, and 91-93.


6.   Biological Considerations


     All impacts on aquatic life relate to the outfall location of  the

plant at this site.  There are three possible locations:


     0    On the Olentangy directly east of the plant
     •    South of the plant site on  the Olentangy at the
          Franklin-Delaware County line

     »    On the Olentangy in Franklin County south of the
          artificial riffle-pool area.


     Placement of  the  discharge on the river east of the site would

affect  the naiade  population in this  area of the  river.  The largest

number  of living naiades was found in this area near Powell  Road by


                              102

-------
I
I
Stein (1975).  Thus,  the possibility of adverse impacts to this


population would be increased by placing the outfall in this location.


The previously discussed fish population,  considered by the Ohio Fish


and Wildlife Service  (Griswold,  1975)  to be abundant and diverse in


this area, would also be affected by the chlorine and ammonia discharges


from a plant at this  location.   The even more abundant fish populations


at 1-270 intersection would also be affected, since the chlorine and


ammonia concentrations in the discharge would not be adequately reduced


in the river.  Use of the discharge at the Delaware-Franklin County


line has been previously discussed for site OR3 in pages 91-93.



     The placement of the discharge location south of the artificial


riffle-pool area in Franklin County is the most ecologically desirable.


The areas of the most abundant naiades and fish would be avoided, since


both of these populations rapidly decrease below this area.  Although


this outfall location is ecologically desirable, it would require more


pipeline as discussed above on pages 99-101.



     The site is not  forested,  thus no clearing would be necessary to


construct the plant at this site.  This site is close to Bartholomew


Run, which is an area that contains a mixture of upland vegetation in


the higher areas and  some lowland and riverbottom vegetation in sloping


and lower areas.  The characteristic upland vegetation is comprised of


such species as beech, red and sugar maple, red oaks, white oaks, and


ash.  The lowland riverbottom vegetation is characterized by sycamore,


cottonwood, boxelder, maples, yellow poplar, and oaks.  Some of these


areas would have to be crossed in order to place the plant's outfall at


either the county line or in Franklin County below the fish habitat area.
                                                103

-------
     Rare and endangered species that would be impacted are the aquatic




naiad and fish species mentioned above on pages 92-93.  Again, the




choice of outfall location might have some effect on the threat to these




species, but existing data on their whereabouts in the river are too




sparse to draw a definite conclusion.






7.   Ins titutional Cons iderations






     The only course of action which would involve institutional




considerations is the placement of an outfall in Franklin County below




1-270.  This is discussed on pages  93-94.
                               104

-------
I
I
                        Private Communications


Griswold, Bernard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, July 1975.

Stein, Carol, Ohio State University Museum of Zoology, July 1975.



                              References
             Burgess and Niple, LTD., Letter to Fred L. Stults, Delaware County Engineer,
             10 April 1975.

             Lando, Thomas J., and Friedrich Bohm, "The Birth of a New Town," Cities and
             Villages, July 1975.
                                                105

-------
E.   STRATFORD - OLENTANGY







     This section evaluates  three sites on the Olentangy River south of the




town of Stratford.  These sites were proposed to accommodate a regional




facility combining the service areas of Delaware City and southern Delaware




County.  All of the sites are poorly suited geographically for use in




treating the southern Delaware County area alone.   An overview and site




selection are presented here, but all other aspects are discussed on pages




125-139, as part of the regional plan.







     1.   Overview







          These three sites, located on the Olentangy River 1-2 miles south




     of Stratford, are shown in Figure 15.  They are designated OR8, OR9,




     and OR10 from south to north.  The sites were originally proposed by




     Burgess and Niple, Ltd. in their Feasibility Survey and Report for




     Sanitary Service and Sewage Treatment Facilities (1970).   The intent




     of the proposal was to utilize one of the sites as a combined




     Delaware City - Southern Delaware County treatment plant.  Since that




     time, however, the Del-Co water supply intake has been constructed




     about 2.5 miles south of site OR7.  Use of any of these three sites




     would involve either outfall relocation or relocation of the drinking




     water intake.







          Site OR8 is located on the east bank of the Olentangy River at the




     junction of Chapman and Winter Roads.  It is approximately 5 miles north




     of Powell Road.  The available land measures about 0.3 mile in a




     north-south direction and 0.2 mile in an east-west direction.  On the




     north and east, the site is bordered by forested areas adjoining Camp




     Lazarus, a nearby Boy Scout camp.  The elevation is 830 feet above
                                    106

-------
                             <"<  -- ^'-- ''"'?''•¥'• '**£ livK  ••U-
                                            .^V-Ar-' '*\-.   ;\  :.]...-..'
                                              •••  -*-o,  ^ ":v  l:i-.rr
                                                   •^'•'^  "VV i"^ -..
                                               1  ^  . ^: v  r] v •.:
           KEY
           Force Main      -
           Local Plant Site
           Lift Station
           Booster  Station
                  Scale in Miles
X
Q
O
      Figure 15.   System Requirements for the  Stratford-Olentangy Alternative
Source:   Enviro Control,  Inc., 1975
                                        107

-------
sea level and is fairly level in the plant site.   However,  the slope




is much steeper immediately east of the site.







     Site OR9 is located 1/2 mile further north on Chapman  Road




opposite the point where Bean-Oiler Road intersects Ohio 315.   The




unused land here is substantially smaller than site OR? and also




somewhat steeper.  Only an area measuring 0.3  mile (north-south) by




0.1 mile (east-west) is on moderately sloping  ground.   Use  of  the




area further east would entail increased difficulty in grading and




possibly blasting due to rock.  Elevation here is from 830  to  850 feet




above sea level.  Site OR9 is bordered on the  south by the  forested




area which surrounds Camp Lazarus.







     Site OR10 is located on the river's west  bank, east of Ohio 315,




between the river and the road.  It is located 0.8 mile north of site OR9




and 0.8 mile south of Stratford.  The area here is extremely small, being




less than 0.1 mile east-west at the widest point and only 0.3 mile long.




A significant portion of this land is within the floodplain.  Elevation




is 820 to 830 feet above sea level.  River bottom vegetation covers




the eastern parts of the site; several residences are within the site




near its western boundary.







     The most important considerations in site-selection here are




engineering and  cost factors due to small land areas, steep slopes,




and encroachment of the floodplain.  There are minor differences in




land use and terrestrial biological impacts.  Environmental effects




and institutional considerations are nearly identical among the three.







2.    Site Selection
     Site OR8,  shown in Figure 15,  is  the preferred site in this  group.
                              108

-------
I
                 Its selection is based primarily on engineering considerations and
I
                  environmental  impacts;  land  use  and biological  impacts  contribute  to


I                 a lesser  degree.   Institutional  considerations  are  equivalent  for  all




I
                 three sites.
                      Engineering differences between the sites are primarily related



                 to force main and outfall length, pumping requirements, site size, and



                 subsurface conditions.  Force main length and pumping requirements are



                 governed by geographical location and elevation, whereas recommended



                 outfall line length may be governed by the distance upstream of the



                 Del-Co water intake.  Site size and subsurface conditions influence



                 construction cost and difficulty and, in extreme cases, may cause



                 changes of plant design configuration.





                      The development of any of the three sites would require the



                 emplacement of a force main from Powell Road north along the river to



                 the site.  Site OR9 would require 0.4 mile more than OR8 and site OR10



                 would require 1.2 miles more than OR8.  Pumping requirements would



                 be slightly increased at sites OR9 and OR10 because there would be



                 increased friction from a longer line; the elevations are nearly equal.





                      Outfall line length is approximately equal if each site is discharged



                 into the river at the closest point.   It might be desirable, however, to



                 locate the outfall below the Del-Co water intake.  In this case, outfall



                 line lengths would be 2.5 miles for OR8, 2.9 miles for OR9, and 3.7 miles



                 for OR10.





                      Only general descriptions can be made with respect to usable site



                 size and subsurface conditions.  Sites OR9 and OR10 are small; site



                 OR10 is partially in the floodplain (p.  106-108).  The floodplain



                 poses significant problems, because extensive flood protection features




                                               109

-------
would be required.  Subsurface conditions at these sites have not been




explored in detail.  Soil survey information, however, indicates that




limestone presumably underlies sites OR9 and OR10 at a depth of about




20 feet and site OR8 is probably underlain by sand and gravel to a




depth of at least 5 feet.







     Site OR8 is now open field with some agricultural use.  Site OR9




is covered by an open field with no agricultural use.   Site OR10 is




overgrown derelict farmland, gradually becoming forested.  There are




several buildings on the northern part of this site which would have




to be removed.







     Wastewater treatment plants at any of the three sites would have




about equal impact on the low-density residential receptors.  Plants




at site OR8 and OR9, however, might cause some odor impact on Camp




Lazarus.  Plants at all three sites xrould be roughly equivalent in




aquatic impact.  Terrestrial biological impacts would be most extensive




at site OR10 where considerable forest habitat would be destroyed




during plant construction.






     From the above discussion, it can be seen that sites OR9 and




OR10 are disadvantageous for nearly all considerations.  Site OR8




is the best of the three under all considerations except odor impact.




Site OR8 is therefore the selected site for  this group.  Further details




for this site are discussed on pages 125-139 as one of the possible




regional alternatives.
                              110

-------
I
I
I
                              References
Burgess and Niple, Ltd., Feasibility Survey and Report for Sanitary Service
and Sewage Treatment Facilities, 1970.
                                                  Ill

-------
F.   ALUM CREEK







     In this section,  the relative merits of two sites  on Alum Creek are




evaluated.  An analysis of the selected site's characteristics is presented




to facilitate subsequent comparison with selected sites in other basins.






     1.   Overview






          The two proposed sites on Alum Creek are widely separated geo-




     graphically; one is in the southern part of the county and the other is




     in the north near Kilbourne.   The sites are designated AC1 and AC2 from




     south to north.  Site AC1 was suggested by Burgess and Niple, Ltd. (1974)




     as a possible site on a basin other than the Olentangy.  Site AC2 was




     suggested by Finkbeiner, Pettis,  and Strout (1969) as a site for a 1.25




     mgd plant to service the northern Alum Creek area.  Since the time of




     this proposal, the Alum Creek Reservoir, an intended recreational and




     drinking water source, has been constructed downstream from the site.






          Site AC1 is located 0.3 mile east of Alum Creek, and 0.9 mile




     north of the Delaware-Franklin county line.  It is 0.6 mile east-southeast




     of the intersection of Powell Road and Worthington-Galena Roads.  The




     unoccupied land that is clearly above the floodplain measures 0.4 mile




     east-west by 0.5 mile north-south.  The elevation is 820-840 feet or




     15-35 feet above normal creek water level.  The grade here is flat and




     there were no buildings or forests on the site in 1973.  At this time,




     the nearest structures were 0.4 mile from the center of the site.






          Site AC2 is located 0.5 mile south of the intersection of Ohio 84




     and Ohio 10 near Kilbourne.  It is on the west side, and immediately




     adjacent to the north end, of the newly-filled Alum Creek Reservoir.




      The potential site size is 0.3 mile (east-west) by 0.6 mile  (north-south).






                                 112

-------
I





I                  The land is gently sloping and lies at an elevation of 930-940 feet



                   above sea level, or 40-50 feet above normal reservoir level.  A



I                  forested tract adjoins  the site to the northeast and to the south.



                   The most recent information on this site is 1961 data from the U.S.G.S.



                   Galena  quadrangle map.   It places the nearest structure at 0.2 mile



                   from the site center.





                   2.   Site Selection





                        Site AC1 is the recommended site in this group.  Site selection



                   between these two sites  is a simple process because there are important



                   disadvantages at the northern site.





                        Site AC1 is located below Alum Creek dam in the southern part of



                   the county.  Hence, a plant here could be fed by gravity interceptors,



                   whereas a plant at site  AC2 would require pumping stations and 13 miles



                   of force main up Alum Creek.  A plant at AC2 would have severe impacts



                   on human health and aquatic biota due to its discharge into the



                   recently constructed Alum Creek Reservoir.  The Ohio Environmental



                   Protection Agency strongly recommends against effluent discharged into



                   reservoirs and drinking  water supplies (Nottingham, 1975).





                        One reason for the  severity of impacts is that site AC2 was never



                   considered for the presently proposed facility.  It was considered as



                   a site  for a 1.5 mgd plant to service northeastern Delaware County,



                   while a plant similar to the proposed one serviced southern Delaware



                   County.  The site is particularly unsuitable for the currently proposed



                    facility because of the more recent construction of the reservoir.
                                               113

-------
     Therefore, site AC1 has been selected for this group.   However,

location of the proposed facility here is controversial from many

engineering and environmental standpoints.  Many of the controversial

points cannot presently be resolved due to lack of information.   The

individual points are presented below.


3.   Engineering Analysis


     The construction of the proposed facility at site AC1 would

require modification of the interceptor trunk, force main, and pumping

facilities between Olentangy River Basin and Alum Creek Basin, as

illustrated in the base layout of the interceptor network in Figure 16.


     The modification would require a lift station located south of

Powell Road at the Olentangy River to deliver the sewage from both

the Scioto River Basin and the Olentangy River Basin through a 20-inch

force main eastward along Powell Road beyond the ridge line approximately

500 feet east of the Norfolk and Western Railraod.  From this ridge line,

the sewage would be conveyed to the plant by a gravity flow interceptor

42 inches in diameter.  The 42-inch interceptor would take a route

along the north side of Powell Road eastward, past Worthington-Galena

Road where Powell Road terminates, then extend southeastwardly down

the valley, cross beneath the Alum Creek, and reach the plant from the

east.  The modified interceptor would require the addition of:
     •    13,000 feet of 42-inch diameter gravity flow interceptor
          line

     •    16,000 feet of 20-inch diameter force main

     •    One lift station with peak capacity of 7 mgd and system
          head of 330 feet.
                           114

-------
                                                         Scale  in  Miles
        KEY
 Trunk Line
 Force  Main —. — . — »




 Outfall Line. .....




 Local  Plant Site     X




 Lift Station     • .





       Figure 16.  System Requirements  for  the Alum Creek Alternative
Source:    Enviro Control,  Inc.,  1975
                                   115

-------
However, the following items could be eliminated:
          11,000 feet of 27-inch diameter gravity flow
          interceptor line

          13,000 feet of 18-inch diameter force main

          Lift station with peak capacity of 2.3 mgd and
          system head of 205 feet.
     The incremental cost for this modification excluding pumping

facilities is approximately $410,000.  Adoption of this alternate site

would considerably increase the construction and operation costs of the

lift station, because it would require a larger capacity and higher

lift than the base system.


     Three outfall locations are possible.  One would discharge into the

river directly west of the site, requiring a pipe length of 1,000 feet.

The route is indicated in Figure 16. Two other outfall locations have

been considered to mitigate effects on the Westerville drinking water

intake which is presently located 1/2 mile south of the Delaware-

Franklin County line.  The second outfall location would be at the

Delaware—Franklin County line.  The rationale for this is that it would

be possible for the City of Westerville to relocate their drinking water

intake north of this location in Delaware County.  It is doubtful,

however, whether this can be legally done.  Line length for this choice

would be about 0.9 mile.  The third location would be in the City of

Westerville, south of the intake.  However, Westerville would have to

agree to lease the needed land to Delaware County.


     The plant site is in a flat area with no forested areas.  The

soils are silt loams with no limestone or bedrock in the top five feet

(USDA, 1969).  Grading, site preparation and construction would be simple

and inexpensive at this site.


                           116

-------
4.   Land Use Analysis






     Presently site AC1 is an undeveloped open field.  The immediate




vicinity includes residential, transportation and recreational uses.




Residences near the site are of low density except 1/2 mile to the




northeast where there is considerable development near the Westerville




Reservoir.  Recreational use is also primarily near the reservoir.




The Alum Creek Reservoir is over two miles north of this site and would




not be significantly affected.






     Direct plant impacts would be minimal.  Possible slight impacts




would be odor impacts on nearby residences and recreation areas to




the northeast.  In the normal course of events, the land on the site




would probably become residential in the near future; plant construction




would limit this use.






     Construction of sewer and outfall lines for a plant on site AC1




would be similar in land use impact to sites on the Olentangy River.




Although the interceptor system requires additions and deletions for




this site, most of these are changes in line sizing rather than routing.




Pipeline construction areas might be somewhat larger along the major




trunk from the Olentangy to Alum Creek, but impacts would cease with




the completion of construction.  As with the Olentangy sites, some




impacts on stream recreation use would be expected downstream from




the outfall.  There are some potential recreation areas downstream,




but the extent of their use is not presently known.






5.   Environmental Analysis






     Environmental effects at this site include the usual aesthetic




impacts of visibility, odor, and noise.  In addition, however, a plant
                           117

-------
on this site would discharge water originally taken from the Olentangy




River by Del-Co Water Company into Alum Creek.   This water would not




rejoin its original water course until many miles downstream at the




confluence with the Scioto River.  Water quality impacts from the water




diversion and from the discharge are compared below with those expected




to occur on the Olentangy River.







     A treatment plant on this site would be quite visible from all




directions, although following the presently-proposed parklike




architecture for the plant would help minimize visual impact.   If




this were not done, considerable landscaping, and structural re-




arrangement would be necessary to minimize visual impact.   The




residential development in the north and northeast sectors, approximately




1500 feet and farther from the site, would receive some odors, because




it is situated in the path of the local prevailing wind.  Noise



problems would be minimal because the plant could be located nearly




1/2 mile from the nearest residence.






     Most of the water in the initial 1.5 mgd and projected 6.0 mgd




sewage flows would originate from the Olentangy River because the Del-Co




water supply which services all three basins draws its water from the




Olentangy River.  This would imply a deficit of about 6.0 mgd in the




segment of the Olentangy River south to the confluence of the Scioto




River and Big Walnut Creek, of which Alum Creek is a branch.  This




water would be added to the normal flow of Alum Creek.






     The exact effects of this withdrawal and diversion are complicated




by such factors as the schedule of withdrawal and use of holding and




storage tanks by Del-Co Water Company and the recent construction of




the Alum Creek Dam.  Complete water quality determination in these
                           118

-------
segments is beyond the scope of the present study.  Under the most




probable circumstances, however, the water diverted across basins




would be approximately 9 percent of the median flow (66.6 mgd or




103.0 cfs) in the Olentangy River.  This small amount would have, at




worst, minor adverse effects on the river's water quality.






     The low flow in Alum Creek, previous to dam construction, was




only 2.5 mgd (3.87 cfs).  The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1972)




has  indicated that a 3.23 mgd (5 cfs) low flow will be maintained by




the Alum Creek Reservoir.






     Based on this low flow of 5 cfs, the dilution ratios would be,




respectively, 0.32, 0.48, and 0.65 for the 1st, 10th, and 20th years




after the plant becomes operational.  These dilution ratios can be




compared with those expected in the Olentangy, which are 0.34, 0.51,




and 0.67, respectively; no significant differences exist.  The existing




water quality data in the Waste Load Allocation Report (Ohio EPA, 1975)




indicate that the water quality standards of total fecal coliforms has




been violated 100 percent of the time, ammonia 10 percent of the time,




and total dissolved solids 10 percent of the time.  These situations  are




very similar to those of the Olentangy River.  Thus, water quality  impact




during the most severe conditions would be similar to those discussed




for sites OR1,  OR3, and OR7 on pages 75-77,  90-91, 102.   A treatment plant




at this site could pose a significant problem to the Westerville




water supply if mitigative or ameliorative procedures discussed above




are not taken.   Expected impacts on the water supply would include




problems from ammonia, nitrates, and total dissolved solids.
                            119

-------
6.   Biological Impacts






     The effects of the new Alum Creek dam upon the aquatic biota in




Alum Creek are presently unknown.  The benthic assemblage in the creek




was studied in 1967-1969 by Olive (1971).   He reported that the benthic




community of the stream contained various  species of beetles, mayflies,




dragonflies, stoneflies, and caddisflies in the approximate area of




the proposed site.  Stansberry (1972, as cited by the U.S. Army Corps




of Engineers, 1972) states that there were five species of crayfish in




Alum Creek and that it is a rare occurrence for such a small stream to




have such a diverse grouping.  Alum Creek also had a known naiade (fresh-




water mollusk) fauna of 27 species.






     Alum Creek has been described by the U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries




and Wildlife (1961, as cited by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1972)




as a smallmouth bass and rock bass stream.  The effects of the dam




construction and operation upon the aquatic biota in the portions of




the creek below the dam need to be investigated to accurately determine




the presence or absence of the benthic and fish populations that were




previously there.  Only when this investigation is completed can a




rational decision  to use this site as an alternative be made.






     No significant terrestrial habitat would be destroyed by the use




of this site.  Scrub plant species would be removed and small animals




inhabiting the open field would relocate in nearby areas.






     The naiad, Simpsoniconcha  ambiqua, is known to occur in Alum Creek,




This mollusk is declared by  the State of Ohio as an endangered species.




It is typically found under  rocks in flowing streams.  The only




 significant population of  this naiade in  the state is in Alum Creek.




The life cycle of  this  species is precarious, since the species  depends





                             120

-------
upon the aquatic salamander Necturus maculosus as its host during its




larval metamorphosis.  The naiade species Villosa fabilis is not rare




or endangered, but its numbers are greatly reduced in the state.  This




species is characteristically found on firm sand-gravel bottoms beneath




fast-flowing waters,  It is presently uncommon to rare where it still




lives in Alum Creek and other isolated areas  (U.S. Army Corps of




Engineers, 1972).  Further investigation into these two mollusk species




in Alum Creek is necessary to accurately assess the aquatic biota in




this stream.






7.   Institutional Considerations






     The placement of the proposed plant on Alum Creek with an outfall




in Westerville below the Westerville water intake would cause grave




institutional and legal problems.  Because Westerville is located




within Franklin County, Delaware County cannot condemn easements




within that municipality.  Delaware County can place an outfall within




another county if they receive a permit to use state-owned rights-of-way.




However, there are not state highways close enough to Alum Creek to




make this action practical.  Delaware County could place the outfall




in Westerville, if Westerville were to agree to lease the land to




Delaware County.






     Institutional problems may be minimized if the outfall is located




in Delaware County.  However, this would require the relocation of




Westerville*s water intake, north of the Delaware-Franklin County line.




It is questionable whether this can be legally done (Lashutka, 1975),
                              121

-------
                        Private Communication
Lashutka, Greg, Staff Assistant for Ohio Affairs, Office of Representative
Samuel Devine, August 1975.

Nottingham, James, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, July 1975.
                              References
Burgess and Niple. Ltd., The Sanitary Sewerage Facilities Plan for South-
Central Delaware County, Ohio, July 1974 (revised August 1974).

Finkbeiner, Pettis and Strout, Delaware County,  Ohio, Comprehensive Water
and Sewerage Development Plan, 1969.

Olive, John H., A Study of Biological Communities in the Scioto River as
Indices of Water Quality, Ohio Biological Survey, Ohio State University, 1971.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Statement, Alum Creek Lake,
September 1972.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey,
Delaware County, Ohio, 1969.

Stansberry, D.H., Comments on the Draft Environmental Statement, Alum Creek
Impoundment, Alum Creek, Scioto River Basin, Ohio, May 1972.
                                  122

-------
G.   OTHER BASINS






     Two other Delaware County water basins, Scioto River and Big Walnut Creek,




merit consideration.  Only an overview is presented here, along with an explana-




tion of the problems with locating the proposed facility in these basins,




because there are strong reasons to discount the plant site that has been




proposed.






     A site on the Scioto Basin was proposed in 1969 by Finkbeiner, Pettis and




Strout for a 0.50 mgd plant to service the northern Scioto Basin.  This site




is designated SR3 to differentiate it from the regional site at the existing




Columbus Southerly Plant (SRI) and from the Frank Road Plant (SR2) in Franklin




County.  These regional sites are discussed on pages 140-164.  Site SR3 is




located 0.5 mile south of the Ohio 198 bridge over the Scioto River near Radnor.






     Site SR3 is not suitable for the presently proposed facility, primarily




because of engineering and water quality considerations.  A considerable




length of additional force main and a large number of pumping stations would




be required.  The cost in both construction and energy commitments would be




prohibitive.  Furthermore, the discharge would be into the Scioto River only




a few miles above the O'Shaugnessy and Grigg's Reservoirs, which are primary




drinking supplies for Columbus.  Discharge into these impoundments would be




very undesirable and mitigative measures such as a circumventive outfall




location would be impractical from cost and engineering considerations.




Because of these extreme problems, -this site is given no further consideration.






     No sites have been suggested on B,ig Walnut Creek primarily-because




the Hoover Reservoir extends south of the Delaware-Franklin County line,




and because Big Walnut Creek is outside of the planned service area (Burgess




and Niple, Ltd., 1974).  The City of Columbus has expressed an intent to




eventually service the southern Big Walnut Creek Basin in Delaware County




(Burgess and Niple, Ltd., 1974).



                                 123

-------
                              References
Burgess and Niple, Ltd., The Sanitary Sewerage Facilities Flan for South-
Central Delaware County, Ohio, July 1974 (revised August 1974).

Finkbeiner, Pettis and Strout, Consulting Engineers and Planners,
Comprehensive Water and Sewage Development Plans for the County of
Delaware, 1969.
                                    124

-------
H.   DELAWARE COUNTY - CITY OF DELAWARE






     This section examines the alternative of a regional system to serve




both Delaware County and the City of Delaware.  This alternative would




combine southern Delaware County and the City of Delaware into one sewered




area serviced by a regional wastewater treatment plant.   An overview is




presented, followed by a discussion of cost-effectiveness,  environmental




effects, and institutional considerations.






     1.   Overview






          The wastewater treatment plant for this alternative could be




     either a totally new plant located between the population centers of




     the two jurisdictions, designated site OR8 and described on pages 106-111,




     or the existing Delaware City wastewater treatment  plant upgraded to




     the required capacity at site OR11.  The former is  here called sub-




     alternative 1 and the latter, subalternative 2.






          The first subalternative would require both the Delaware City




     wastewater treatment plant to be phased out by year 10 in the plan,




     and the City's interceptor network to be retained.   Since, in this




     subalternative, a new wastewater treatment plant would be constructed,




     no further discussion on the available treatment facilities is needed.




     The system requirements for this subalternative are a new plant,  as




     presented on pages 40-50, and the required pumping  facilities and




     sewer works.  Compared to the basic plan for the interceptor sewer




     network as given on pages 40-50, an additional force main 20'inches in




     diameter and 30,000 feet (5.68 miles) long would be required between




     the collection point at Powell Road and the proposed site OR8 at  Winter




     Road, as shown in Figure 17.  One additional lift station with peak




     capacity of 9 mgd, a system head of 200 feet, and two additional  booster
                                  125

-------
KEY

Existing Trunk Line
Proposed Trunk Line  »n •••««»»
Force Main           ••••••.«
Regional Plant Site -
Lift Station         •
Booster Station      O
        Figure 17.  Delaware County-Delaware City Regional Alternative, Subalternative
Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                                          126

-------
stations, having the same capacity, with a system head of 130 feet each,




would be necessary, as shown in Figure 17.  An additional trunk sewer




composed of 10,050 feet of 42-inch sewer pipe and 12,750 feet of 48-inch




sewer pipe would be required to convey the sewage from the City of




Delaware to the proposed site.






     The second subalternative (Figure 18) requires the use of the existing




Delaware wastewater treatment plant (OR11), as the proposed regional




plant after required expansion.  The Delaware wastewater treatment plant




was upgraded in 1974 and has a hydraulic capacity of 2.5 mgd.  The plant




uses a contact stabilization process for sewage treatment, which is one




version of the activated sludge treatment process.  The incoming sewage




of the plant is subject to grit removal by grit chambers, followed by




contact stabilization units for removal of suspended solids and BOD, and




then chlorinated before being discharged to the Olentangy River,  The




outfall location is adjacent to the plant site.  In the contact stabilization




units, clarifiers are provided to remove suspended solids and some BOD.




The sludge from the clarifiers is dewatered by the sludge concentrators.




The concentrated sludge is subsequently deposited in sanitary landfill.






     Expansion of the contact stabilization process to accommodate more




sewage can be easily doubled by simple redesign of the units, such as




the addition of pumping facilities, and modification of sludge wasting




and piping requirements.  The existing plant can be easily expanded to




take up to 7 mgd of raw sewage with some modification (Sprague, 1975;




Metcalf and Eddy, Inc., 1972).  The County also owns 50 acres of land       • •




which would be sufficient for the expansion of the plant to an ultimate




capacity of 8.5 mgd.
                               127

-------
                   ••V*!T  r  "•
                 r.'ie J  H,.«V

                                            rppa e\
                                            ;•!-:	r:i^-.Mj
  KEY
  Existing Trunk Line
  Proposed Trunk Line
  Force Main
Regional Plant Site 7^
Lift Station         •
Booster Station      O
   Figure 18.  Delaware County-Delaware City Regional Alternative, Subalternative 92
Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975

-------
     This subalternative requires the upgrading of the plant components




from 2.5 mgd to 4.0 mgd in the first year of the project,  5.5 mgd




in the 10th year, and 8.5 mgd in the 20th year of the project.  As far




as the level of treatment is concerned,  a second  stage of activated sludge




process with clarification, and dechlorination and post-aeration of the




effluent would be added, in the expanded plant, to meet the effluent




standards promulgated by the Ohio EPA.  As Figure 18 shows, an additional




force main 20 inches in diameter and 22,800 feet  (4.3 miles) long would




be needed to convey the Delaware County sewage from the Stratford area




to the plant.  Two booster stations would be expanded in terms of system




head of lift.  The system head for each booster station would be 290 feet




in order to overcome the frictional loss and the elevation differences.






2.   Cost-Effectiveness






     The costs of the two subalternatives were calculated on the basis




of the basic plan and its phasing scheme discussed on pages 40-50»




and the additional system requirements delineated in the preceding




discussion.  The costs are separated into two major categories, the




treatment facilities and the interceptor sewer network..  In each category,




costs are broken down into three phases.  Phase 1 would extend from




completion of initial construction to the 10th year of the total planning




period, phase 2 from the llth year to the 20th year of the planning period,




and phase 3 from the 21st year after the plant becomes operational until




the end of its service life (U.S. EPA, 1975),






     Capital costs of the various treatment components, the operation




and maintenance (O&M) costs of the various treatment processes, and the




plant management were obtained from reports by Robert Smith (U.S. Department




of the Interior, 1967 and 1969), and were adjusted to the April 1975
                              129

-------
dollar utilizing several cost indices.   These indices  include the




sewer construction cost index; the sewage treatment  construction cost




index, published by the Office of Water Program Operation of the U.S.




EPA; the labor cost index for water,  steam,  and sanitary system non-




supervisory works; the wholesale price  index for industrial commodities;




and the consumer price index for residential, water, and sewerage services,




published by the U.S.  Department of Labor.






     All the costs for the first subalternative are  shown in Tables 22




and  23,  and those of  the second subalternative are  shown in Tables 24




and 25„   According to the 6 1/8 percent discount rate recommended by




the Water Resources Council (1975), both the present worth value and the




annual cost of the first subalternative are calculated as $32,005,000




and $2,533,000, respectively.  The present worth and the equivalent




annual cost of the second subalternative are calculated as $27,577,000




and $2,183,000 respectively.






3.   Environmental Effects






     The system configuration of the first subalternative is presented




in Figure 17; the configuration for the second alternative is given in




Figure 18.  Under both subalternatives, the dilution ratio during the




7-day 10-year low flow periods, assuming the outfall is located at the




proximity of the proposed plant site OR8, would be 0.34, 0.65, and




0.75  for the first year, the  10th year, and the 20th year after the




initiation of the project.  However, under the most probable conditions,




the corresponding dilution  ratios would be 0.022, 0.076, and 0.008,




respectively.






      During dry weather periods, the effects of the plant effluent on




the water quality would be  adverse, especially in terms of DO, NH  , N0_,






                               130

-------
 C
 o
o
 cO
rH   CU
 CU   >
Q  -H
     4-J
 CU   CO
 O  rH
<4H   CO
 O
 U    «
 4-1   CU
 CU   >
&  -H
    4J
 rt   CO

 |   g
 CU   CU
W  4J
 P,  CO
 CU   C
 O   O
 i-i  -H
 CU   M
 4J   CU
 C  Pi
M
     >-.
 0)   4J
rC  iH
 4J  CJ

MH   J
     CO
 co   S
 4J   (0
 CO  rH
 O   0)
O  Q
CM
CM








CO

CO
CO
cO
,c
PH











CM


cO
PH















rH

CU
CO
CO
Ji
PH











00

•H

cO

PH

14H
O

CO
cu
co
cfl
.c
PH
/









,-t
a
CO
















m
m


















to

i











60
B
•H
4-1
•H
O
CO
Cu

o

4-1
fi

rH
P-l

/
4J
CO .
O ^
^3 ^
**^fc
S^ 

o£3 rj
•H
0



I — ( £«
cO *[H
4J
•H ij
O, to
CO o
U o

4-1
CO .
O >_|
O s,,
v^
S -co-

t^3 rt
•H
0




•c/v

H (-
CO -H
4-1
•rl 4J
f^ CO
CO 0
O o



CO
4J
CO
O
O




/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
1
4-1
' M
/ 4J
/ w
X
/ o
/ u


o o o
0 . 0 . .0
0 0 °
n 1 A 1 1 «..
r^ rH 00
in O m
I-H m ^o


^


C3 ^-^ C^ ^^ ^^ C^ ^3 CO
o o S S ° o o
0 O °^ °^ O O O
co o I~t ^S •H 4-1
4-> iH > CO
0 . 4J & IH
l-l >» -rl ,
S *> uJ *^ (_)
O J3 CO CJ 60 C a
rHfioOoO CO 1-1-HCU
PH-H-HC fn co-HgW)
cOffi-rl CO 4J MtJCi--]
>. g CO Q) OOC 0) a CUIH jc P, cu -HCJO H
CO >H >CJ C 0 CO OOCflU
>H O -rl JO 3 CO C
O PM P5 S PH W W
m
 o
 C
H
 O
 v<
 4-1
                                                                                                                                o
                                                                                                                                o
                                                                                                                                fl-J
                                                                                                                                I
                                                                                                                                CU
                                                                                                                                CJ
                                                                                                                                M
                                                                                                                                3
                                                                                                                                O
                                                                                                                                co
                                                                                 131

-------
4J
 B
 3
 O
CJ

 0)
 M

 31
 cd
rH
 V
O
 C tH
 cd
rH  Q)
PM  >
   •H
4-1 4-1
 C  Cd
4J  CU
Cd  4-1

CO  -H
    4J
rH  Cd

ss
o  01
•H  4J
60 rH
T3  ctf
 CU  CJ
 CO  O
 O -H
 CU 60
 o  a>
   -H
   O
    cd
 co  S
 4J  Cd
 co H
 o  cu
0 Q
CO
CM


M




co
4-l
O
CO
CU
CO
cd

PH

7





m
00














m
i/*i















m
tH











.
Ml
0
a
'

t£
1 1
•rl
O
cd
CU
cd
o

4_(
fl
cd >
4-1
O (,
°
*"^ fj
o "^


—4
cd 'H
^"^ 1J
4|r^ rn
g-o
0
4J
CO i

° >.
s 

13 C
o


•cyv

r*
i H
4J
**"* CO
P- O
O °
4J
CO
O .
o C.
JT*
S^
•H

rH C
cd -H
1J
•H 4-J
p< CO
03 O
CJ O



CO
4-1
CO
o
O


/
i
I
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
'
rH / CO

/ §
/ 4J
/ H
/
' 4J
CO
O
o
o ooooo °oo
o ooooo °oo
O OO O^O O | | O^ OO
r~. vocom in ^cMr^
tH iH tH sO


OO OOOOO O
OO OOOOO O
O O OO O O o 1 1 1 10
O OS O . vD O r*~ cy\ i
rH 
rHvo o oo co co r*. o st moo
?H rH CO rH rH C**J in F^»
ft ft
rH CM
— 	 	 _ , — — - - • — ~
CJ C
O -H
ft CO -H >H
4-1 en t-i 4-1 cu
CJ CX 01 cd 60 CU
T3 CU B CO O CJ C
CJ 333 -H-H M 60-H
Cd |rHPHM-l'4-lrrJ «H CJ60
CUCOM-ICJ'HMrH 4JW
60 O W in Q cd O *t3 CJ
§ ^ >, S VH CJ -H Ocd CUOcT
OITJ^ICU-H -H 4JOO
CO £3cdp3.C! 4->CO -HcJ-H
4JCdTj MO COP. C/3rcicd-H 0)0 cd
CdCUCJOCUcJt34J 603 CU«-8M
ff* ^j o O bO cd c^ o3 T^ p-.j r^ [ j ^«^
iH-HCU'd OSH Q 4J4JCUCOCJ
4-l<+-(4JCO3»O4-> 4-1 C O-HCJ
O UH Cd rH ^ CU rH 60 CU CJ CU UH" *H CJ CU
CU W tHmcOMCO-HC 60CU 0 O f>'rlOQ
con cuoa> ^'"133 cu wgcJ
3 O ^ *3* 60 r~^ *& »d3rH M4JCUrrJ*H
O-HJ-i CJGrHcJTjCOrHit-i -HcJCO-,COI O (!) CU Q) CUrHOO
O'HO 4JtdrHCU M ^ -H CU|Spd > 0 Cd H
>-i McJ COSHOCU ai 'OO £* 60O O O HTJ
4J OCU ICUCJ'H g -H(d O CdrH TJ (-1 4J CUCj
CJ rHCO O<1*HPH *rH CUPQ t-* S CA Cl CX CO CJ CO
OJ3 S MCd CUQ) S03CU
                                                                                                                                              4-)
                                                                                                                                              c
                                                                                                                                              o
                                                                                                                                              o
                                                                                                                                              I-l
                                                                                                                                             •H

                                                                                                                                              C
                                                                                                                                              0)
                                                                                                                                              o
                                                                                                                                              t-l

                                                                                                                                              o
                                                                                                                                              co
                                                                     132

-------
     TABLE 24.  Incremental Costs of Using the Delaware City STP as

                the Regional Plant, Subalternative 2
     Phases of Planning                    Phase 1       Phase 2      Phase 3




                 Incremental Capacity        , ,-           1 ,-           - n
                     .     -                  -L • D           x«D           J • U

Cost Items   \      in mgd
    Incremental Capital Cost in $         1,000,000       800,000     1,700,000





    Annual O&M Cost in $/yr.                149,000       191,000       264,000







    Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                                   133

-------
 4-1
 d

 o
o

 0)
 ? CM

iH  V
 CU  >
P -H
    4J
 cu  cd
rC  d

     cu
 J-l 4-J
 O rH
IH  cd
 t-t C/)

 i   .
 4->  0)
 cu  >
55 -H
    4-1
 V4  cd
 cu  d
 &  V4
 cu  cu
CA 4->
    i-H
 rl <
 o
 4-> rH
 o.  cd
 cu  d
 cj  o
 H iH
 CU  60
 4-1  (U
 d rt
M

 CU 4->
^3 -rt
 4-1 O

IM  cu
 o  n
     ed
 to  &
 4->  Cd
 TO i-H
 o  cu
CJ Q
in
CN

w






CO

cu
CO
cd

p |














CM

cu
CO
cd
rd
P-(












rH
CU
CO
cd
*G
P-t








60
d
•H
d

Cu
rH


m
O

CO
CU
CO
cd
JS
EM








m
*
oo


















m

in
















m
•
rH







*o
d
•H

J>J
J-J
•rl
O
cd
a.
cd
CJ

4-1
d
cd
£/
to
o «
o n

{/>
«£
O iH




d
O iH



•CO-

rH d
cd in
4J
•H 4J
P, CO
cd o
CJ CJ
4->
CO
o •
CJ k
s£

c£J
C
0 -H




rH d
cd TH
•H 4J
P. to
cd o
CJ U
CO
4-1
CO
0
u



/
/
/
/
/
J
/
/
/


/
/

/ B
/ CO
/ w

/ M
/ w

/ "
000
o o o
o o o
1 1
CM .» 1 1 VO
m co co
rH VO 00


^A^. 	

OO OOOO OO
o oooo o o
o oooo o o
« H ^ A * *t »t
co o I-H vo 
o o o
000
000
« •> 1 1 •>
vo r>» I I co
r^- r^ m
vo r^

^ 	 . 	
f ~ "^^ ' ' *_)

oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo

oo oo r~H o^ oo ^o r^" r***
i-HCO OvOCMO mrH
COCO rHiHOrH OvO
«t •«#»**
CO rH rH vO
O O O
O O O
O O O
01 vo i i m
CO rH in
^tf" "*^

	
'" '

oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo

*j* CM co r*** co r*1* *^ co
O^ C^ rH CM vO rH r^» ON
MA •» *v «\
CO CO rH rH O
rH
to *d o
M d c
o> cd a)
& "V 60
CU OS rH d
WO Cd iH
M t>0 4-1
M rH CU d
O -H ^ O
4-1 Cd CJ
p4 p4 «
CU CO T)
cj t) cu d
)-l d CO CJ Cd
0) Cd QJ -H
4-1 Tt > a
d •> 4-1 It O
H >, T) CU -H
Cd rH W 4J
S ? -H cd
O -CM CJ 60 l-t
S-S-H'd3 f2 CO-HW<
idtfl-Hco 4J h *H H
p^g COCU6DdCUdO
4->' "(Ot-H d  O COJ-i ,£ CX. 0) -H-r)
cd M >o d 0 co M<;
t-i O -H rt 3 rt d
CJ FX^ pc^ ^rj p ) ft3 t^
m
r-.
O-i
                                                                                                                                             o
                                                                                                                                             C
 o
 I-l
 4->

 g
CJ
                                                                                                                                             cu
                                                                                                                                             CJ
                                                                                                                                             3
                                                                                                                                             O
                                                                                 134

-------
BOD_, and total dissolved solids (IDS).  This is also true in terms of




waste loads.  A computer simulation at low flow would have to be under-




taken; otherwise, quantification of these effects would be difficult.




The water quality impacts on the drinking water intake area would be




negligible, assuming the Del-Co Water Company would not withdraw water




from the Olentangy River during low flow periods.






     During the most probable conditions, compliance with stream




water quality standards is without difficulty.  However, the less




stringent ammonia effluent standard and the absence of an effluent




standard for residual chlorine might have some implication  for




possible deterioration of the river flora and fauna.







     The outfall of the first subalternative would be located approximately




5 river miles upstream from the Highbanks Park, providing some opportunity




for the natural cleanup of the plant's effluent before it reaches Highbanks




Park.  This advantage, however, is even stronger for the second sub-




alternative, which utilizes the existing Delaware STP, because the




northern location of the outfall would provide an additional 6 river miles




for self-purification processes.






     Siltation and erosion problems associated with project construc-




tion are the same for both subalternatives, since the additional




system requirements for each subalternative would be small compared




to the whole construction requirement.






     Referring to Figures 17 and 18, the sewage conveyance from the




collection point of the system to the proposed alternative sites is




exclusively furnished by force main.  The erosion and siltation problems




are minimal, since construction of the force main involves less excavation






                              135

-------
work and thus less exposed land surface as compared to construction of




gravity flow sewers.






     Odor problems would originate primarily from the aeration and




clarification processes and could be mitigated by providing higher DO




levels in the aerated liquor and reducing the weir drop elevation.




However, the odor problems would increase if the plant size continues




to grow.  The odor problems are less for  subalternative 2,  because




the Delaware STP is an existing plant.






     Noise would not be a problem for either alternative,  because the




only noise sources are the air diffusers in the aeration units.  Noise is




effectively mitigated by providing enough buffer distance between the




plant and the surrounding sensitive receptors.  The noises from the




regional lift station and booster stations would not be a problem, because




they would be underground, and properly isolated and insulated.






4.   Institutional Considerations






     Two legal arrangements can be devised to construct the proposed




regional facility at Stratford along the Olentangy River,  site OR8, to




eventually service both Delaware City and southern Delaware County.  Section




307.15 of the Ohio Revised Code enables Delaware City to contract with




Delaware County for Delaware County to assume full responsibility for




handling Delaware City's sewer system.  Under this contract, Delaware County




can construct the proposed plant at Stratford and gradually phase out the




Delaware City plant as they provide service to the city.  However, because




the Delaware City plant would not be phased out for another ten years, a




contractual agreement under Section 6117.41 of the Ohio Revised Code is




more likely.  Under this agreement, Delaware City and Delaware County
                               136

-------
would develop plans to provide for the eventual connection of their




sewer systems and the joint usage of the proposed plant.






     If the proposed facility is built at Stratford to provide regional




service to both Delaware County and Delaware City, it would be financed,




with only one slight difference, the same way as if it were built in




southern Delaware County to service only the county.  In both cases,




Delaware County would build the plant with 75 percent of the funds being




provided by a U.S. EPA grant.  The other 25 percent would be raised by




a loan from either the Ohio Water Development Authority or the Farmers




Home Administration of the Department of Agriculture.  This loan would




be repaid from revenue raised from tapping fees on those residences that




would be serviced (Burgess and Niple, Ltd., 1974).  This revenue would




also be used for the maintenance and operation of the plant.






     If the proposed plant serviced Delaware City along with Delaware




County, Delaware City would have to compensate Delaware County a




predetermined amount for the usage of the plant.  Through negotiations,




this amount would be agreed upon by the parties involved and approved by




the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency as provided for by Section 6117.42




of the Ohio Revised Code.  Section 6117.43 of the Ohio Revised Code




stipulates that this compensation be raised by the levy of taxes,




special assessments, or sewer rentals.






     The contractual and financial agreements needed to service both




Delaware City and. Delaware County could probably be easily negotiated.




There exists a cordial, cooperative relationship between these two




political entities.   Also, in the recent past they have considered




building one treatment plant for their mutual use.
                              137

-------
     However, despite their cordial relationship and the available




legal and financial mechanisms,  there would probably be opposition by




Delaware City to a plan which would involve the phasing out of their




plant.  Delaware City, with the  aid of U.S. EPA funds,  recently completed




in 1974 a two million dollar remodeling program of its  wastewater treatment




plant.  The remodeled plant can  be expanded considerably and is anticipated




to have a lengthy life span.  Delaware City officials are opposed to




phasing out in the near future a facility in which they recently expended




considerable planning, time, and money.  However, both Delaware City and




County officials would probably  be receptive to a plan to expand Delaware




City's plant to service the southern part of the county.
                               138

-------
                        Private Communications


Smith, Robert, Advanced Waste Treatment Research Laboratory, 25 July 1975.

Sprague, Rex, City Engineer, City of Delaware, August 1975.



                              References
Burgess and Niple, Ltd., The Sanitary Sewerage Facilities Plan for South-
Central Delaware County, Ohio,, July 1974  (revised August 1974).

Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., Wastewater Engineering, pp. 501-503, 1972.

Ohio Revised  Code Annotated, 1975.

Smith, R. A Compilation of  Cost Information  for Conventional and Advanced
Water Treatment Plants  and  Processes, U.S. Department of the Interior,
December 1967.

Smith, R., Cost and  Performance Estimates for Tertiary Wastewater Treating
Processes, U.S. Department  of  the Interior,  June 1969.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment and Earnings
Statistics for the United States, April 1975.

U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency, Office of Water Programs Operation,
Sewer and Sewage Treatment  Plant Construction Cost Index, April 1975.

U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency, Office of Water Programs Operation,
Guidance for  Preparing  a Facility Plan, Revised May 1975.

U.S. Water Resources Council,  "Principles and Standards for Planning Water
and Related Land Resources—Change in Discount Rate," The Federal Register,
30 July 1975.
                                    139

-------
I.   DELAWARE COUNTY - COLUMBUS






     This section examines the Delaware County-Columbus  regional alternative.




Under this plan, the sewage of southern Delaware County  would be diverted to




the'Columbus sewer system.  An overview of this alternative is.followed by a




discussion of cost-effectiveness,  environmental effects,  and institutional




considerations.






     1.   Overview






          If this alternative is implemented,  the sewage from southern




     Delaware County would receive the required treatment by the Columbus




     Southerly Plant located on  the Scioto River close to the Franklin and




     Pickaway County line.  The  Columbus Southerly Plant would be expanded




     accordingly to accommodate  the incremental sewage flow.  Five possible




     subalternatives were developed from engineering judgment for this inter-




     county connection of sewer  systems.  These subalternatives are depicted




     in Figures 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23.  Detailed routing of the connector




     trunk or the force main is  not attempted at this stage of the study.






          The first subalternative, shown in Figure 19,  would use the existing




     Olentangy Interceptor Trunk of the Columbus sewer network whose northern




     terminus is located between the Delaware and Franklin County line and




     the outerbelt, 1-270.  A gravity flow connector sewer 42 inches in




     diameter would be run from the sewage collection point at Powell Road




     along the Olentangy River southward to the northern terminus of the




     existing Olentangy Trunk.  It is estimated that approximately 6000 feet




     (1.14 miles) of the gravity flow sewer would be required.






          The second subalternative would involve the construction of a trunk




     line paralleling the Olentangy Trunk "and entering the Columbus system
                                    140

-------
                              _   ^^fONHUy^^CQUNTY \  y
KEY


Existing Trunk Line

Proposed Trunk Line

Force Main
                                0
                                                                           SCALE
                                               Smiles
Regional Plant Site  ~f
Lift Station          O
                     Figure 19.  Delaware County-Columbus Regional Alternative
                                 Subalternative 1
    Source:  Enviro Control,  Inc., 1975
                                          141

-------
                         ^TEs^W^W
                         :r*^R^^-d^^^ttef4
                               "A. -V  V J « J '•'TT-'-M-
                          ^^•4\JfaHA
KEY



Existing Trunk Line

Proposed Trunk Line

Force Main
                               SCALE
                          0            Smiles'
Regional Plant Site   f

Lift Station        •


Booster Station      O
             Figure 20.  Delaware County-Columbus Regional Alternative,

                       Subaltcrnative 2
   Source: Enviro Control,  Inc., 1975
                                 142

-------
I
                              \<^f TVtf  $$
                      ^^^^'fm^^^r^^^
                      H^fei \\ -irife^^p^^fe^
KEY

Existing Trunk Line
Proposed Trunk Line
Force Main
                             Regional Plant Site
                             Lift Station     O
                  Figure 21. Delaware County-Columbus Regional Alternative,
                         Subalternative 3
           Source: Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                                143

-------
Existing Trunk Line
Proposed Trunk Line
Force Main
Regional Plant Site  ~{
Lift Station          •
              Figure 22.   Delaware County-Colunibus Regional Alternative,
                          Subalternative 4
    Source:   Enviro Control,  Inc.',  1975
                                        144

-------
I
                                                               "TTTiStev
                            Ptt±3lAi&#
                                                      p,/qb.i'_.-J.q  : v± ^^',--
                                                       -^'1 ^J~l?   .../^O
                                            Southerly STP
                                           fff^NKpf^-^COUNTY \ f^
               KEY
               Existing Trunk Line
               Proposed Trunk Line
               Regional Plant Site
                           Figure 23.  Delaware County-Columbus Regional Alternative,
                                     Subalternative 5
                   Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                                                IAS

-------
near the junction of the Olentangy and Scioto Rivers.   Figure 20 indicates

that the second subalternative would require construction of a 16-inch

force main approximately 84,480 feet (16 miles)  long between the collection

point of the proposed Delaware County sewer network and the junction of

N. Broadway Street and the Olentangy River in Columbus.  This subalternative

is based on the assumption that no excess capacity of the Olentangy Sewer

Trunk would be available.  In this subalternative,  one lift station with

peak capacity of 9 mgd and system head of 400 feet would be situated at

Powell Road.  This subalternative would require  two booster stations with

the same capacity  and  a system head  of  130  feet each,  as  indicated  in

Figure 20.


     The third subalternative (Figure 21) presumes an interconnection of

the southern Delaware County sewer network with  the Alum Creek Interceptor

Trunk in Franklin County.  The combined use of a gravity flow sewer and a

force main would be necessary for the transportation of the sewage from

the Olentangy Basin to the Alum Creek Basin.  The system requirements of

this subalternative would be a lift station with peak capacity of 6 mgd

and system lift of 150 feet to accomplish the inter-basin transportation

of sewage, and an additional 13,200 feet of 42  inch sewer pipe to  provide

the inter-county sewer connection.


     The fourth subalternative is illustrated ir Figure 22.  In this sub-

alternative the Alum Creek sewer subsystem in southern Delaware County

would be separated from the other two subsystems in the Scioto and

Olentangy Basins.  The sewage from the Scioto and Olentangy River Basins

would be combined at the junction of Powell Road and the Olentangy River,

and connected to the Olentangy Interceptor Trunk of the Columbus sewer

network.  The sewage from the Alum Creek sewer subsystem would be dumped

into the Alum Creek Interceptor Trunk of the Columbus sewer network by

a gravity flow sewer.
                             146

-------
     The system requirements of this subalternative would be an additional




19,200 feet of 36-inch sewer pipe for inter-county sewer connection, as




shown in Figure 22.  This subalternative probably would be one of the




least costly, because the interbasin connection between the Olentangy




River Basin and the Alum Creek Basin and the pumping facilities would be




eliminated.  The entire system would use gravity flow connector sewers




and, therefore, no additional pumping facilities would be required as




compared to the basic plant discussed on pages 41-42.






     The fifth subalternative is shown in Figure 23.  Under this concept




the Scioto River sewer subsystem, Olentangy subsystem, and Alum Creek




subsystem would be connected to the existing Columbus Scioto Interceptor




Trunk, Olentangy Trunk, and Alum Creek Trunk, respectively.  This sub-




alternative would completely eliminate all interbasin pumping facilities




and force mains.   The system requirement would be an additional 45,600 feet




of 36-inch sewer pipe for inter-county sewer connections, as shown in




Figure 23.






     All these subalternatives would use the existing Columbus Southerly




Plant for sewage treatment.  The treatment processes of the Southerly




Plant include screening, grit removal by grit chambers, pre-aeration of




incoming sewage, one-story primary sedimentation with mechanical sludge




collection, activated sludge process with diffuser aeration, secondary




clarification, and post-aeration.  The wasted sludge is digested




anaerobically, followed by sludge thickening, vacuum filtration, and




incineration.  The treated effluent is discharged into the Scioto River




adjacent to the plant.  The plant has an average capacity of approximately




108 mgd.  No proposed expansion of the plant is anticipated.
                             147

-------
     At the last stage of the development of sewerage service in




southern Delaware County, approximately 6 mgd of raw municipal sewage




would be introduced to the Columbus treatment facilities which includes




the Jackson Pike (or Frank Road)  Sewage Treatment Plant.  This amounts




to approximately 5.6 percent of the capacity of the Columbus Southerly




Plant and approximately 3.1 percent of the total capacity of the two plants




combined.  The Jackson Pike Plant has a capacity of 88 mgd.   In the




Columbus sewage treatment facilities plan (Franklin County Regional




Planning Commission, 1964), an interconnector interceptor trunk would




be placed between the Columbus Southerly Plant and the Jackson Pike




Plant, as shown by the dashed line in Figure 24.  Because the Jackson




Pike Plant has almost identical treatment processes as those of the




Southerly Plant, the eventual destination of the sewage from southern




Delaware County would not affect the level of treatment it would receive.






     From the analysis of the sewage flows, it is found that the incre-




mental sewage load imposed on the Southerly Plant by this regional




alternative would not require drastic upgrading of the plant, because




the peaking factor used for the treatment plant design would be large




enough to compensate for it.  This would be more true if a gravity flow




sewer trunk, such as the Olentangy Trunk, Alum Creek Trunk, or Scioto




Trunk, could be used for sewage transmission instead of a force main.




The time required for the sewage to reach the plant might be so long that




it would not reach the plant during the peak hour period.  It is estimated




that  the time lag will be from 2.5 to 4.0 hours between the arrival time




in Delaware County and the arrival time at the  Southerly Plant.






     The usefulness of the Olentangy Sewer Trunk, the Alum Creek Sewer




Trunk, or the Scioto Trunk in this regional alternative is dependent upon




their available hydraulic capacities.  There are six interceptor trunk






                              148

-------
                                                   ^COUNTY
                                                                Scale
KEY

Existing Trunk  Line
Proposed Trunk  Line
Regional Plant  Site
                                                                            5 Bli
T=l
                  Figure 24. ' The Columbus Sewer Interceptor Trunks'
           Source:  Adapted from Franklin County Regional Planning Commission, 1969
                                           149

-------
lines in the Columbus Service Area:   the East Scioto Trunk,  the Olentangy




Trunk, the Alum Creek Trunk, the Big Walnut Trunk,  the Big Walnut Trunk




Outfall, and Scioto Big Run Trunk.   The Big Walnut  Trunk Outfall Sewer




was originally designed for two barrels, only one of which has been




installed to date.  Among these sewer trunks, only  the Olentangy Trunk,




the Alum Creek Trunk, and the East Scioto Trunk would be useful for inter-




connection, because of their proximity to the southern Delaware County




service area.






     An analysis of the Columbus trunk sewers was conducted  by the Franklin




County Regional Planning Commission (1969) and was  applied in the Water-




Related Facilities Plan in 1969.  The study reveals that the infiltration




and abuse allowances for sewer trunk design in the  1954 plan are greater




than those recommended in most engineering manuals  and higher than those




used in other cities (Franklin County Regional Planning Commission, 1954).




The results of the analysis are duplicated in Table 26.






     The first column in Table 26 provides, at various points, the




actual sewer capacity in cubic feet per second for  each of the major trunk




sewers.  Column "A" is the sewage flow at those points on the basis of




the 1954 design criteria and 1985 distributed population.  Column "B"




is the sewage flow on the basis of the 1954 design criteria modified to




reflect only those total acres that would be developed by 1985.  Column  "C"




is the sewage flow at each point based on 1985 population distribution,




with the peak flow factor applied only to the average sanitary flow.







     The criterion "C" modification reflects the approach in general




engineering  practice that design flow  is  equal to a factored sanitary




flow plus  an infiltration allowance.   It  is different  from the




general practice  of applying a peak flow  factor to an  infiltration
                               150

-------
           TABLE 26.  Capacity of Columbus Trunk Sewers
Sewer
East Scioto Trunk
Bethel Road
Fishinger Road
Griggs Dam
Olentangy Trunk
Outerbelt
S.R. 161
Morse Road
North Broadway
Frambes
Alum Creek Trunk
Westerville
Morse Road
U.S. 62
Broad Street
Livingston Avenue
Big Walnut Trunk
Havens Corners Road
U.S. 40
Outfall
Big Walnut Trunk Outfall
Junction
Groveport Road
Scioto Big Run Trunk
(excluding Hellbranch
Run Drainage Area)
Georgesville Road
Early Ditch
1-71
Capacity
in cfs

33
52
155

48
53
77
115
184

87
130
205
205
252

190
190
290

335
335



68
122
150
Flow in
A

44
60
180

35
56
84
117
139

62
141
200
231
279

117
163
217

507
562



35
84
132
cfs
]B

30
45
105

28
48
74
106
128

53
132
191
218
264

85
124
173

435
457



22
60
108

JC

28
42
125

22
40
59
86
106

47
109
159
189
236

82
116
164

404
443



17
59
98
Source:  Franklin County Regional Planning Commissions 1969
                                   151

-------
allowance, as is done in the 1954 criteria.  The most generous allowance




in the 1954 criteria indicates that there is excess capacity available for




additional service areas, such as southern Delaware County (Franklin




County Regional Planning Commission, 1969).






     As indicated in Table 26, the Olentangy and Alum Creek Trunks would




be marginally loaded by 1985 populations under criteria "Ar and "B", but




would have excess capacity under criterion "C".   The excess capacities




of the Olentangy Trunk by 1985 would be 16 cfs (10.9 mgd) at Outerbelt




1-270 and 23 cfs (14.9 mgd) at S.R. 161, more than that needed by




southern Delaware County 20 years after the regionalization.  The excess




capacity of the Alum Creek Trunk by 1985 would be 30 cfs (19.4 mgd),




which again would be more than what southern Delaware County would need.






     The East Scioto Trunk at Bethel Road would be overloaded by 1985




 population under criterion "A",  marginally loaded under criterion "B",




and would have excess capacity of 5 cfs (3.23 mgd) under criterion "C"




which would be marginally enough for the sewage coming from the Scioto




Basin in Delaware County.






     According to the analysis, the Olentangy and Alum Creek Trunk Sewers,




among the six of them, would be the first to be fully developed in terms




of service area.  The implication of the preceding analysis is that




excess capacity might be available after 1985.  Whether or not extension




could be made to serve Delaware County  townships, however, would




have to be based on a field analysis at  the time of sewer loadings.




In terms of availability of sewer capacity, the fifth subalternative,




which would utilize the Alum Creek, Olentangy, and East Scioto Interceptor




Trunks simultaneously, would be the most feasible one.
                              152

-------
2.   Cost-Effectiveness






     The approach taken for the cost-effectiveness analysis is the




same as discussed on pages 129-134 for the Delaware City and Delaware




County regional alternative.  The major difference is that the cost




for the new treatment facilities would have to be replaced by the




incremental costs for the modification and system upgrading of the




existing Columbus Southerly Plant, the incremental capital cost of the




plant, and the 0 & M cost for the incremental sewage treatment.






     The results of cost-effectiveness analysis for all subalternatives




are presented in Tables 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, and 32.  Table 27 shows the




incremental costs of upgrading the existing Columbus Southerly Plant




to be used as a regional plant and its annual 0 & M costs in various




planning phases.  Tables 28 through 32 give the costs of the sewer




system requirements and their 0 & M costs for all subalternatives.






     The present worth and the equivalent annual cost for each subalterna-




tive were calculated by combining Table 27 with the corresponding table,




i.e., Tables 28 through 32, and are summarized in Table 33.  From Table 33,




subalternative 5 appears to be the most economical choice.






3.   Environmental Effects






     This regional alternative uses the Columbus Southerly Plant as the




regional plant for sewage treatment.   The water quality problems caused




by the effluent of the plant, if any, would appear in the Scioto River,




because it is the receiving river for the effluent of the Southerly Plant.






     As indirect effects, the water diversion from southern Delaware County




to Columbus would result in some water quality problems in the Olentangy




River during dry weather periods.  This would occur even assuming that





                               153

-------
         TABLE 27.   Incremental  Costs  of Using the  Columbus  Southerly  Plant
                    as the Regional  Plant for  the Delaware County  -  Columbus
                    Regional Alternative
         Phases of Planning
             Incremental Flow in mgd
Cost Items
Phase 1
  1.5
Phase 2 "      Phase 3
  3.0
   6.0
  Incremental Capital Cost in $

  Annual 0 & M Cost in $/yr.
700,000

 26,000
700,000

 50,000
1,500,000

  100,000
 Source:  Enviro Control,  Inc. >  1975
                                     154

-------
 CO



I
rH
 O
O
 I
 t^
 4J
 C
 3
 O
CJ

 cu
 M
 cd
 CU
Q


 CU
 M
 O
 O   CU
 &   >
 4J  -H
 CU  4-1
25   cd
 cu   cu
 &   4-1
 CU  rH
CO   cd
 a,   A
 cu   cu
 o   >
 M  -H
 CU  4-1
4-1   CO
 c   a
M   M
     cu
 CU  4-1
,fl  rH
 4-1  <;

MH  rH
 o   cd
     d
 CO   O
 4J  -H
 CO   00
 o   cu
u  pi
oo
CN






ro

Q)
W
cd
f£















CN

01
CO
cd
PH

















rH
CU
CO
P-l












00
d
•H
d
d
cd
rH
ex,

o

CO
cu
CO
cd










o
•
vO


















o
«
CO



















m
rH









I
(3
d
•H

^
4J
•H
o
cd
ft
cd
o

4J
d
cd

PW

CO •
0 M
CJ >~V

J^ 

<-8 d
•rl
O


•co-

rn d
cd -H
4-1
•rl 4J
ft to
cd o
u o
4-1
10 •
O M
0 !>,

s 

c£J d
•rl
0




rH d
cd -H
4-1
•H 4J
ft CO
cd o
0 O
4_)
CO •
O M
CJ >,

*g^ 

u*J rt
•r(
O


•CO-

rH d
Cd -rl
4J
•rl 4J
ft CO
cd o
o u





CO
4-1
CO
o /
o /

/
/
- /
/
/
f

/
/ 0
Y cu
/ 4~*
/ rH
/
/ co
/ °
O O 0
00 0
0 0 0
| A | | A
0 1 

oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo
AA AAAA AA
OOOO rHinOrH OOrH
rHCO O^OOCJN OOO
CO CO rH H CN C^ V43
A A
ro in

o o o
00 0
O O 1 O
A | A | | A
vO I vO 1 CN
CO f>- rH
rH CM

	 ^ 	


oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo
AA AAAA AA
co co cr* CD 
0 -H n4 d
4J ca cd
ft (M «
a) co d
O t3 d) O
M d CO O -H
cu cd o) -H w
4J .rl > Cd
d " <-" MM
H f>, tH CP 4J
C8 rH • CO' CO >>
S ? -H -H CJ
o ji co o oo d d
rHdOOOO cd d-HCUJ
Ctj-rl-rld f^i C0'rl000<3
joa-H co 4-> M^ddH
^s 53 W Q) Ofl C Q)  O CUM JS ft CU -HdO
cd M >cj d 6 to oocdcj
M o TH co ri co d
O fn CJ 3 PL, W W

m
r^
o\
rH
4J
d
o
o

o
M
                                                                                                                              3
                                                                                                                              O
                                                                                                                             co
                                                                            155

-------
 >^
 4J
 cd

I
 CU
p
 CU
    CM
 o   cd
M-l   C

Ai   CU
 »-l   4J
 O  r-l
 &   Cd
 4J  ^a
 cu   3
a  co
 CU  CU
CO 4J
     cd
 M  G
 O  M
4J  CU
 CX 4J
 CU r-l
 O   Cd
 C  C
M  O
    •H
 CU  00
43  CU
IM   co
 O   9

 co   S
 4J   3
 CO  r-i
 O   O
O  CJ
CTl




CO
CU
CO
cd
.c






CM

cu
CO
cd
fi
P-(












I-H

0)
CO
cd
PM







60
C
•H
cd
i-l
PH

*4H
o
CO
CU
CO
cd
p^l







0

vC5









o
CO
















in
.
rH






60
e
•H
4-1
•rl
O

Cu
cd
o
JJ

cd
H
7-
4-1
CO .
f T M
-^
S 
«« c
o "H


•c/>
r-l pj
4-1 "H
cx, ^
0,5
4-1
°-^
S 
•3 e
(PJ
o rt

•CO-

3-9

•H jj
Clj (Q
O rj

4J
M »
O J_|
***»
*v^.
S -co-
•« c
•H
0


«.s
•H jj
CX tn
 -H > Cd
C " 4J H V4
M >, t-\ CU 4J
cd rH CO CO >,
!5 S -H -HO
O J2 CO O 60 C C
rHC6060 cd C-HCU
fi^ *j-\ »fj( pj pLj yj «|~) ^ £xQ f_J
cdB-H w 4J MTJC-CI;
>, a CO Q) 60C CU<-HH
4J «.COrHCCUCU4JO
•rl Ci> MO O -H 0 fl'OC H
> u CUM ,c &• cu -HCO
cd M >o f3 6 co 6ocdcj
M O i-l id 3 cd C
o fe p4 a P-I w w
                                                                                                                                   m
                                                                                                                                    o
                                                                                                                                    O
                                                                                                                                    (-1
                                                                                                                                    O
                                                                                                                                    o
                                                                                                                                    o
                                                                                                                                    a
                                                                                                                                    s
                                                                                                                                    w
                                                                                                                                    CU
                                                                                                                                    a
                                                                                                                                    M
                                                                                                                                    3
                                                                                                                                    O
                                                                                                                                    CO
                                                                              156

-------
 CO
 3


1
rH
 O
CJ
 I
 >.
4J
 0
 3
 O
U

 0)
 M
 Cfl
 CD
Q

 (U
r^
4J

 M
 O
<4H

^ CO
 M
 O  OJ

B3
 Q) -U
 M   M
 CU   0)
 S   +->
 0)  rH
co   co
    rQ
 M   3
 O  C/3
4J
 a.   «
 cu   cu
 o   >
 M  -H
 CD   4-1
4J   CO
 0   0
M   M
     cu
 CU   4-1
,0  rH
     to

     o
 CO  OO
 o  q
u a!
o
en
w






CO
cu
CO
CO
PH
















CM

0)
CO
CO
PH













rH

CO
cd
,0
P-<














60
0
•iH
0
0
cd
i-H
PU
"4-1
O
co

co
CO
-0











o
•
vO



















O
•
OO
















"?
rH










13
bO
g
0
•H

4-1
•H
O
cd
04
CO
O
bO
-S
0
0
cd
rH
M
co •
O M
0 S*.

a <£

t^j rt
o '




rH 0
cd -H
4-1
•H 4J
ft co
cfl O
u o

4J
CO •
O M
O >,

2 S?

<-3 0
•H
O



•CO-
rH 0
cd -H
4J
•H 4J
ft W
cd o
o u

CO •
O M
0 >,

S -co-
ca 0
iH
O



 OOO
OO CO rH rH CM O\ v£>
co in

o o o
o o o
00 0_
oo ^o 
CO
^i
(U
Q) Cd rH
CO O CO
M 00
M H cu 'd
0 -rl J 0
4J CCj Cd
P. M «
(U CO 0
CJ T3 CO O
M 0 CO CJ >H
CU Cd CU -H 4J
4J «H > Cd
0 •> 4J MM
H >, «H 0) 4J
Ctt rH - C/3 CO ^
> 3 -H -r) CJ
O ,0 CO CJ W) 0 0
rHObObb Cd 0-HCO
tx<-H.rl0 fn COiH0bOrJ
COECiTH CO 4J MT30<5
>, 2 CO Q) b00 0><3-HH
•H CU M"O 0 -H B 0T30 H
> O CUM fi ft CU -H0O
CO M >O 0 g CO bOcflCJ
M O -H S 3 CO 0
O ft, pi S PH W W
                                                                                                                         in
 o
 0
rH
 8
 4J
 0
 O
CO
                                                                                                                         U
                                                                                                                         M
                                                                                                                         3
                                                                                                                         O
                                                                                                                         CO
                                                                               157

-------
rH
 o
 0)
 n
 cd
i-H
 CU
 CU
 M

 O
<4H
 O  0)
 0)  4-1
2  cd

 *  s
 CD  
 ex.   •
 CU  0)
 o  ?>
 M -in
 CU 4-1
 4->  Cd
     IH

     0)
 CU

J3

4J
 O  CO


 CO  O

4J -H

 CO  60

 O  CU
CO
i





CO

CU
(0
cd
.£5

















CM

CU
CO
cd
P-4













rH

0)
co
cd
P-.


















60
C-J
•H
g
cd
rH
P-I
U-l
o
CO
CU
co
P-I









O
•
vD




















o
•
CO

















m
_i
HH









-d
60
6

0
•H

^>
4->
•tH
G
cd
Cu
CO
0
60
•in
jj
cd
rH
PH
4-1
CO •
O J-l
u ^
*•**,,
s 
•H 4J
CU CO
cd O
o o

4-J
CO •
O rl
0 >-,

a 

c3 pj
•rl
O


•
rH 0
cd -H
•H 4->
CU co
cd o
0 0

CO •
O rl
0 >>

a «>
tJj Cl
•H
O



 o
m %d- o
rH f-H CO




OO OOOO OO
O OOOO O O
o oooo o o
«\ A M «s •* »» A
CO O i-H vO sj-  "•
rH CO


CO
^1
(U
§ T3
CU Cd rH
co o cd
rl 60
J-l rH CU TJ
O %rl i-4 Cl
4J cd cd
CU CO C!
O T3 CU O
J-l C CO O -H
CU Cd QJ iH 4J
4-1 -H t> Cd
C •> *-> rl J-l
M >-« 'H CU 4-1
Cd rH CO CO f*>
S > tH -HO
O -C CO O 60 C C
rHCl6060 Cd C-HCU
fi,S COOJ60C!CU O CUUji CU 0) -rlCO H
cd M >O C S CO 60cdO
rl O "H cd 3 cd Ci
UCij fvi *;H fS . rTl r^
1-*^ »-*-« r— 1 >-^l *^ -1 >*H
 o
 C!
                                                                                                                                  O
                                                                                                                                  J-l
 o
u

 o
 t-l
•H
 >
 C
                                                                                                                                  CU
                                                                                                                                  O
                                                                                                                                  M
                                                                                                                                  3
                                                                                                                                  O
                                                                                                                                 CO
                                                                              158

-------
 CO


I

r-l
 O
CJ
 §
 O
o
 CU
 O
M-l

^  m
 M
 o   eu
 &   >
 4J  -H
 CU   4-1
a   cd

 M   S
 CU   CU
 &   W
 CU  rH
CO   Cd
    ,n
 H   3
 O  CO
 4J
 cx   •>
 cu   cu
 o   >
 CU
    -H
    4-1
4-1   CO
 G   G
 CU
fi
 O  cd

 co  O
4-1  -H
 CO  60
 O  CU
CJ  C£
CNl

co
W






CO

cu
to
cO
P-I













CM

CU
CO
-C
P-I
















rH

CU
co
CO
PH



















60
•H
G
G
CO
rH
P-I

*-H
o

CO
cu
a
,C
ex.









o

v£>
















o

CO



















m
•
rH










TJ
00
s
p.
•H
j>,
4-1
•H
O
CO
CX
CO
CJ

60
G
•rH
G
G
CO
rH
P-i


4J
CO •
O V-l
CJ >%

s 

c^) G
•rH
O



rH G
CO 'iH
4-J
•H 4J
cx to
CO O
CJ O

4-1
co •
O M
O !>,

S 

«-a G
•H
0



•H G
cO "H
4J
•H 4J
CX CO
CO O
O CJ

U
to •
O M
CJ >^
•*»^
s 

c£J fj
•H
O



•CO-

rH G
CO -H
4-1
•H 4-)
CU 00
CO O
CJ CJ





co
4-)
CO
o
CJ






/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/ to
/ g
/ 4J
/ M
/
4-1
CO
cS


o o o
00 0
O O I 1 O
•> -1 1 •>
•^ CM ^O
in rH VO
i-H i-l CM



OO OOOO OO
O OOOO O O
O OOOO O O
CO O rH vD ^ ^ 00
vO CM CO CO *^ O C3
O rH CM CM rH CM CM
M MM
SO rH 00



CO

S 13
0) CO rH
CO O (0
M 00
,U i-H CU 13
0 -H *1 G
AJ cd cd
ex M -
(U to G
CJ -U CU O
)-i C CO CJ -H
cu cd cu t> 4->
4J -H -H C8
G ^ i ' ^-i V^
M >, iH . Q) 4-»
CO rH CO W ?*,
& £ -H -H U
O J3 CO CJ 60 C G
rHG6060 CO G-HCU
P^-H-rlC fe CO-HBOOJ
cd ffi "H co 4J ^i *o G *tj
>,S CO CU 60G CU<-HH
4J MCOrHCOJiUjjO
•H CU HO O-H 0 C"OGH
> CJ QJM,G CXCU-rHGO
CO t-i >CJ G B CO 60COCJ
l-i O t-J cfl 3 cd G
O Pn « S PH W W
                                                                                                                        m
                                                                                                                        r^
                                                                                                                        cr.
                                                                                                                         CJ
                                                                                                                         G
                                                                                                                        M
                                                                                                                        CJ

                                                                                                                         O
                                                                                                                         M
                                                                                                                        •H


                                                                                                                        I
                                                                                                                         jj

                                                                                                                         o
                                                                                                                        CO
                                                                           159

-------
 I
 0)
 M
 at

 £
rH
 0)
«

 0)
,e
 4-1
 CO
 0)


•H <1)
4J >
 Oj 1-1
2  g
rH  <1)
 CO  4J
£>  rH
^  0
 co  a)
U-4  CO
 O  3
4J  3
 CO  rH
 o  o
CJ  O
CO
ro

w
0)
•H
4J
(0
g
0)
4J m
CO
,0
co
0)
•H
4J
CO
g
0)
4J -*
~,J
r^
cO
&
3
0)
4-1
CO
c
0)
4-1 CO
rH
&
CO
(1)
•H
4-*
to
g
0)
4J CM
rH
CO
&
CO
0)
•H
4-1
cfl
g
0)
4-1 rH
f — |
cd
,£>
3
CO











CO
4J
CO
O
o



o
o
o
ft
CO
00
Oi
VD"
rH


O
O
O

If)
IT)
^
rH


o
o
o
o
f*N»
m
o\



o
o
o
in"
vO
o\

•*



o
o
o
co"
^>
m

oo





•CO-

C
•H

_rj
4-1
1

4J
c
0)
co
cu
P4

o
o
o
A
•vf
CO
^



o
o
o
cT
CTi
CO
rH



O
O
O
oC
^~
"^
rH*



0
o
o
vo"
p^.

Q) ^.
iH -CO-
n)
> d
•H -rl
3
W
                                                                m
                                                                r-~
                                                                ON
                                                                §
                                                                CJ
                                                                •H

                                                                I
                                                                (U
                                                                g
                                                                o
                                                                co
                                                                      160

-------
Del-Co Water Company does not withdraw water from the Olentangy River.




The resultant flow by accounting  for  the water along the Olentangy River




would be only 1.26 mgd (1.95 cfs) immediately south of  the City of




Delaware with the assumption that the City of Delaware only withdraws




2.1 mgd (3.25 cfs) to suffice its basic need of drinking water.  It is




questionable whether this low flow could sustain the river ecosystems.




Further investigation of possible implications of this  action, such as




a computer simulation of water quality during dry weather periods,




would be needed.






     Under most probable conditions, the median flow in the Olentangy




River would be 66.6 mgd.  The diverted water would be 2.3%, 4.5%, and




9.0% of the median flow in the 1st year, the 10th year, and the 20th year




after the project becomes operational.  The amount of water diversion




might have some water quality effects, but they would be minor.  However,




they could be irretrievable in the sense that a huge financial penalty




would have to be taken to correct them.






     The possible water quality effects on the Scioto River derive from




the additional effluent from the Southerly Plant.  The incremental sewage




flow would contribute approximately 5.6% of the capacity of the Southerly




Plant at the fullest growth of the proposed project.  It is anticipated




that the effects on the water quality of the Scioto River would be




insignificant.  This could be attributed to the time shift between the




arrival of this incremental sewage from southern Delaware County and




the peak hours of the Southerly Plant.  Along with  the above  argument,  the




design  factor of  the plant would  be large enough to provide for absorbing




sewage  increment without sacrificing  its performance, because the chracter-




istics  of the sewage from southern Delaware County would be of domestic




type and would not upset the biological treatment processes of the plant.






                              161

-------
     It is anticipated that the noise and odor problems resulting from




this regional alternative would be much less compared to the southern




Delaware County-Delaware City regional alternative, because the current




capacity of the Southerly Plant would outweigh the incremental sewage




from southern Delaware County.






4.   Institutional Considerations






     Delaware County can contract with Columbus under Section 6117.41




of the Ohio Revised Code for its sewage to be treated by an expanded




Columbus Southerly Plant.  This law also enables Delaware County and




Columbus to contract with each other for the joint usage and/or construction




of any sewer lines needed to transport Delaware County's sewage to the




Columbus Southerly Plant.






     If Delaware County contracted with Columbus for its sewage to be




treated by the Columbus Southerly Plant, Delaware County would have to




include provision for payment to Columbus for this service.  Delaware




County would also have to contribute to any expansion of the Southerly




Plant which would be needed to accommodate the additional sewage.  This




payment would be negotiated by the parties involved as provided for by




Section 6117.42 of the Ohio Revised Code.  Delaware County could raise




this money through a variety of means, including the levying of special




taxes, special assessments, or sewage rentals.  They may also be able




to obtain their funds by securing a loan from the Ohio Water Development




Authority.






     It is unlikely that Delaware County would enter into such an agreement




because of financial reasons.  If the plant is located at the site proposed




in their facilities plan, Delaware County, as discussed previously  (p- 63-65)




might get a  grant from U.S. EPA and a loan from either the Ohio Water
                               162

-------
Development Authority or the Farmers Home Administration of the




Department of Agriculture.  This funding arrangement is probably more




attractive to Delaware County than an arrangement in which they would




have to explore different means to raise money to pay Columbus, especially




since the price to be paid would be set by Columbus.






      There  is  another  obstacle  to  the  implementation of  the required




 contractual  agreement  between Delaware County  and  Columbus.   Friendly,




 cooperative  relations  do not exist between  the two parties.   As  a  small




 semi-rural  area,  Dleaware County  is conscious  of its autonomy being




 threatened  by  the Columbus area, which is expanding rapidly.   Columbus




 is cognizant of Delaware's feeling and is also not anxious for




 regionalization.   The  idea of "home rule" is very  strong in both




 Delaware  County and Columbus.   This includes an implicit belief  that




 a political entity has the right  and responsibility to provide sewer




 service and should not give up  this aspect  of  self-government.







     Neither Columbus nor Delaware County's recent  facilities  plans




fully confront the issue of regionalization between Delaware County




and Columbus (Burgess and Niple, Ltd.,  1974; Malcolm Prime,  Inc., 1974).




Delaware County would rather provide its residents  service itself and




Columbus feels  that it first must provide service to those areas of




Franklin County which need it before providing service to another




county.   These attitudes must be surmounted before  Delaware County and




Columbus would agree to have Delaware County's  sewage treated  by an




expanded Columbus Southerly Plant.
                              163

-------
                     Private Communication
Smith, Robert, Advanced Waste Treatment Research Laboratory, 25 July 1975,
                           References
Burgess and Niple, Ltd., The Sanitary Sewerage Plan for South Central
Delaware County, Ohio, July 1974 (revised August 1974).

Franklin County Regional Planning Commission,  Metropolitan Columbus Master
Plan Study, Sewers and Sewage Treatment,  1954.

Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., Columbus Metropolitan Area Facilities Plan, December, 1974,

Ohio Revised Code Annotated, 1975.

Smith, R., A Compilation of Cost Information for Conventional and Advanced
Water Treatment Plants and Processes, U.S. Department of the Interior,
December 1967.

Smith, R., Cost and Performance Estimates for Tertiary Wastewater Treating
Processes, U.S. Department of the Interior, June 1969.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment and Earnings
Statistics for the United States, April 1975.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Programs Operations,
Sewer and Sewage Treatment Plant Construction Cost Index, April 1975.

U.S. Water Resources Council, "Principles and Standards for Planning Water
and Related Land Resources—Change in Discount Rate," The Federal Register,
30 July 1975.
                               164

-------
J.   DELAWARE COUNTY - DELAWARE CITY - COLUMBUS







     This section examines the Delaware County - Delaware City - Columbus




regional alternative.  This regional alternative of wastewater treatment




would integrate .the treatment systems of the City of Delaware, southern




Delaware County, and Columbus sewage service areas into one regional




system.  An overview of this alternative is followed by a discussion of




cost-effectiveness, environmental effects, and institutional considerations.







     1.   Overview







          Under this alternative plan the existing Delaware Sewage Treat-




     ment Plant would be phased out by the 10th year of the planning period.




     The Columbus Southerly Plant would be utilized as the regional or




     central wastewater treatment facility.  The total sewage flow from




     the City of Delaware and southern Delaware County combined would




     ultimately average approximately 8.5 mgd (13.1 cfs) .







          The system configuration would be essentially the same as that




     discussed on pages 140-152  and indicated in Figure 19.  However, it




     would be necessary to replace the proposed Olentangy sewer trunk in




     Delaware County with a larger sewer pipe and to extend this pipe to




     the existing Delaware Sewage Treatment Plant, which would be used




     as the sewage collection point for the City of Delaware sewer




     network.







          Four subalternatives of the inter-county sewer connections are




     identified.  The first subalternative, shown in Figure 25, would use a gravity




     flow sewer trunk, which would parallel the Olentangy River from the




     Delaware S.T.P. site to the northern terminus of the Columbus
                                   165

-------
KEY

Existing Trunk Line
Proposed Trunk Line
Force Main
                                     SCALE
                               0               Smiles'
                               I  .   I   I -1	1
Regional Plant Site
Lift Station
             Figure 25.  Delaware County - Delaware City - Columbus
                         Regional Alternative, Subalternative 1.
      Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                                         166

-------
Olentangy Sewer Trunk.  This sewer trunk would consist of 10,050 feet of




42 inch pipe, 6,000 feet of 48 inch pipe, 32,000 feet of 54 inch pipe, and




10,800 feet of 60 inch pipe.  This subalternative might not be feasible,




because of limited capacity of the Columbus Olentangy Trunk Sewer.






     The second subalternative shown in Figure 26 would use a gravity flow sewer




trunk and a force main to transmit the sewage from the City of Delaware and




southern Delaware County to the junction of the Olentangy River and North




Broadway Street in Columbus.  Here the sewage would be introduced to the




Columbus Olentangy Sewer Trunk.  The proposed transmission sewer trunk




would consist of 10,050 feet of 42 inch pipe, 6,000 feet of 48 inch pipe,




32,000 feet of 54 inch pipe, and 89,760 feet (17 miles) of 16 inch force




main as shown in Figure 26.  One lift station, located at Powell Road, with




a peak capacity of at least 10.5 mgd and system head of 400 feet would be




needed.  Two booster stations having the same capacity as the lift station




and a system head of 200 feet also would be required.






     The third alternative is presented in Figure 27.  The Alum Creek sewer




system in Delaware County would be separated from the Olentangy and the




Scioto sewer subsystems.  This plan differs from the first subalternative




in that the connector sewer between the Olentangy and the Alum Creek sewer




subsystems would be eliminated.  The Alum Creek sewer subsystem would be




connected to Columbus's Alum Creek Trunk with a gravity flow sewer.  The




combined Olentangy and Scioto sewer subsystems would be connected to Columbus's




Olentangy Sewer Trunk by a gravity flow sewer.  The system requirements of




this subalternative would be essentially the same as in subalternative 1,
                                   167

-------
                                                                                      ~s
KEY

Existing Trunk Line
Proposed Trunk Line
Force Main
                                     SCALE
                                               Smiles
Regional Plant Site  -
Lift Station         •
Booster Station      O
              Figure  26.  Delaware County - Delaware City - Columbus
                         Regional Alternative, Subalternative 2.
      Source:  Enviro  Control,  Inc., 1975
                                          168

-------
                                                ip^—7Y /•  :  Q  F -A/ —s/i'jsr
                                                \\7>J\\J"  ' DELAWARE COUNTY'
                                                H^IH?—U1-     ^/XtvYi
KEY
Existing Trunk Line
Proposed Trunk Line
Force Main
                                                                          SCALE
                                                                                   Smiles
Regional Plant Site  "jlf
Lift Station          9
              Figure 27.   Delaware County - Delaware City - Columbus
                          Regional Alternative,  Subalternative 3.
      Source:  Enviro Control, Inc.,  1975
                                         169

-------
except that interbasin pumping facilities and sewage transportation between




the Alum Creek Basin and the Olentangy Basin would be eliminated.  The




inter-county sewer connection between the Alum Creek subsystem and the




Alum Creek Trunk would require an additional 13,200 feet of 36 inch sewer




pipe.






     In the fourth subalternative, shown in Figure 28, the Scioto Inter-




ceptor Trunk, the Olentangy Trunk, and the Alum Creek Trunk would be




utilized simultaneously to convey the sewage to the Columbus Southerly




Plant.  No interbasin pumping facilities and sewer connection would be




required.  The system requirements of this subalternative would be essen-




tially similar to those of subalternative 3, except that no interbasin




connection between the Olentangy and the Scioto Basins would be  required




and an additional 26,400 feet of 36 inch sewer pipe would be needed to




serve as sewer connector between the Scioto sewage collection subsystem




and the Scioto Interceptor Trunk.






2.   Cost-Effectiveness






     The approach taken for the cost-effectiveness study is essentially  the




same as discussed on pages 153-160 of this chapter.  All four subalterna-




tives are considered for cost-effectiveness analysis.  The results of the




analysis are given in Tables 34, 35, 36, 37, and 38.  Table 34 presents the




incremental cost for upgrading the existing Columbus Southerly Plant to be




used as a regional plant and the annual 0 & M costs in various phases of




the planning.  Tables 35 through 38 give the costs for the system require-




ments and the annual 0 & M costs for various subalternatives.
                                   170

-------
KEY

Existing Trunk Line
Proposed Trunk Line
Regional Plant Site
                                                                          SCALE
Smiles
              Figure 28.   Delaware County - Delaware City - Columbus
                          Regional Alternative, Subalternative 4.
      Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                                         171

-------
    TABLE 34.  Incremental Costs of Using the Columbus Southerly Plant as
               the Regional Plant for the Delaware County-Delaware City-
               Columbus Regional Alternative
     Phases of Planning
Cost Items
Incremental Flow
    in mgd
                   Phase 1
1.5
              Phase 2
4.0
              Phase 3
3.0
Incremental Capital Cost in $
Annual 0 & M Cost in $/yr.
                   700,000
                    26,000
            1,800,000
               92,000
            1,100,000
              141,000
     Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                                    172

-------
 >,
*J  rH
 0
 3   01
 O   >
 ts   cu
 cd   4-1
rH  rH
 CU   Cd

«•§
4J   •>
     (1)
 M  >
 O -H
>4-l  4-1
     cd
^  0
 M  M
 O  0)
 &  4->
4J rH
 Q) <)
 >  O
 0) -rl
W  60
 O
 4-1   CO
 ft  3
 0)  43
 Q)  rH
4-)   O
 0  U
M   I

 CU  £*
43  -H
4->  O

"4-1   Q)
 CO   £
 4J   td
 W  rH
 O   CU
U  P
in
CO

w




CO

0)
CO
(d
43
PH













CM

0>
CO
cd
43
(X,















rH

0)
CD
cd
43
CM





















60
0
tH
0
8
rH
PM
<4-f
o
co
0)
co
cd

7-






m

00


















in
•
m


















m
•
rH











TJ
60
&

0
•H

^
4J
•H
CJ
cd
ft
cd
o
60
0
•H
§
Id
H
CM

CO •
O M

— .
S <«•
id 0
•H
O



ft CO
. Cd O
0 0

4-1
CO •
O M
O ?*,

S <«•

t£J Cj
•H
O


•CO-
«-H 0
Cd -rH

ft CO
cd o
0 O

4-1
CO «
O M
o >•>

a 

*•£ (3
•H
O




•CO-
i-l 0
Cd -H
4J
•H 4J
ft CO
cd O
O C_?







w

co
o
U










_
/ *-*
/ H
/
/ 4J
CO
0
0

000
000
o o o
co" •*" r~T
\O O vO
rH CM CO


>^ — — 	 '*' 	 »

OO OOOO OO
O O O O O O
O O O O O O
•1 •! *V «•• " *
r*^ CM vO ON ON CO
O . CM CO CO OO C7>
OO CM rH rH CO v£>
vD rH 00

O O O
O O O
O O O
#v rt »
\o r^* co
oo cr> oo
H CM


» ^^* • ^

oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo
rHOO OOOOCM f>»r«
mCO HrHOOCO rH>*
OOCO rHCMCMrH COCN
in rH 00


o o o
o o o
o o o

rH VO f"
m r- CM
rH CM




/ 	 ^- m y

oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo
•V* •*•>** «\«k
00 CO CM *^" ^^ VO CO CO
OOrH COrHOOON VOON
OOCTl rHCOOOrH ONCM
r^ rH CM
rH

CO tJ O
M 00
oi cd cu
|5 rO 60
CU CO rH 0
C/3 O Cd *H
H 60 4-1
t-> rH 01 0
O iH hJ O
4-1 Cd O
ft PS •>
0) CO TJ
0 TJ Q) 0
vi 0 co o cd
oi g o> -H
4-> -H > 0
0 •> 4J MO
M >-, iH CU -H
Ct) rH OT -W
& § -H Cd
O 43 CO CJ 60 M
rH 0 00 00 Cd 04-1
Clj «r-l -H 0 fH CO -H CO
Crt p^{ *|— ) 05 ^-^ r-l *lH ( 1
^** !?j CO QJ 00 Cl O C* ^C
4-1 »COrH0CUCU-HH
•HO) VJO O-H g 00O
^ o u 0 g co oo
-------
4J CM

§  Q)
O  >
O -H
    4J

tE
4J   «
    cu
 M  >
 O  -H
IM  4J
    cd
    cu
    4J
    r-l
M  cd
CU  C!

CU -H
CO  00
    cu
M (4
o
4-1  CO
P. 3
cu ja
U  B

CU rH
4J  O
(3 CJ
H  I

a) 4J
in   cu
 O   M
     cd
 co   &
 4J   Cd
 co  H
 O   0)
U  Q
co

w





CO

cu
CO
CO
A
P-I















.
4J
•H
O
cd
PI

o
00
C!
•rl
fJ
cd
rH
ex,
4-1
CO •
O M
O >>

32 

*•£! C3
iH
o

•c/>

rH J3
CO iH
4-1
•H 4J
' P. CO
cd o
O 0

4J
co •
O M
0 >•,

S <0-


co •
o >-<
CJ >~,

S ^o-

*& G
o


rH C
CO tH
4-1
•H 4J
Pi CO
cfl O
CJ CJ







CO

CO
O
CJ



/
/
/
/ i
/ ^
/ *

/ °
/
0 0 O
o o o
O 1 O 1 IO
1*1 1 *
O\ i-H O
r» vo -*
rH VO OO

/ ,


oo oooo oo
0 O 0 0 0 0
o o o o o o
•1 « *k ft - ft
r^* CM vO cr\ ON co
O ' ' C*4 CO CO 00 CTi
00 CN rH i-H CO VD
•) — •>
\D rH 00


O O O
O O O
O 1 O 1 1 O
I-l 1
co -* r~
o m m
rH ^O r^»


/ *^ (

oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo
i-Too" ocToo-a- r^oo
moo i— i oo oo -a- oocr>
OOOO i— 1 CM 00 rH - vf i— 1 CN vo
rH

CO TJ O
M C C
cu cd cu
£ T3 00
cy cd H C
CO O Cd iH
J-l 00 4J
M rH CU C
O -H (JO
4J CO CJ
P« P^ —
d) CO *X3
ej "O (0 (3
l-i a co CJ cd
CU cd CU -H
4J iH f> C
C - 4J MO
M >, -H CU -H
Cd rj CO 4J
> S -rl Cd
o ,d co 0 oo j-t
rH (3 00 00 Cd C 4-1
fH-H-HC fnW-HCO
Cd K -rl M 4J M vH J
•H CU l-iO O-H 0 figO
> O (U5-IJS PiCU-rlTSH
Cd M >O C 0 M 00
-------
 I
 t>>
4J  CO
 a
 3  
rH  H
 a)  cd
 CD  CO
 M  >
 O  -H
4J  rH
CU  
CO •
O H
0 >,

^4 

fc^J r<
•H
O


rH C
erj iH
4-J
•H 4-1
ft CO
cd o
CJ O

4-1
CO •
O H

«* —
Sd 'CO-
<# C3
•H
O




rH fi
cd *H
4J
•H 4J
ft CO
Cd O
U CJ

4J
co •
O H
O f^.
s «>

•rH
O



•00-

i-H C
Cd >H
4J
ft co
cd o
CJ CJ



CO
4-1
CO
O
O






/
/
/
/
/
f 0)
y §
/ W
/ M
/ 4-J
/ OT
f O
/ CJ
o o o
000
000
M A A
rH VO r^-
vO -if O
rH rH CO

^ 	 ^

oo oooo oo
o o o o o o
o o o a o o
r-» CM o o> ON co
O CM CO CO OO O>
00 CM rH rH CO ">O
« *v A
v£) rH "00


O O O
O O O
O O O
ft ** *•
00 CO CM
rH CM


/_ 	 ^ .

O O O O O O O
oo oooo oo
oo oooo oo
Art **tcx«v «\w
rHOO OOrHOCM f-~r-»
in CO rH rH 00 CO rH ^3"
OOCO rHCMCMrH COCM
^ * *,
m rH oo

000
O O O
o o o
(^ O^ O^
ir> i-* vO
_J _J
r^ r^

	 ^^^ 	 	
' ~ ~ T "^


oo oooo oo
oo oooa oo
oo oooo oo
* * csTin^^r-T o£ ~&
-Jr^ coocoo\ o
M rH CU 13
O *H i-} O
4J Cd 0
ft PH "
0) CO *O
o -Td cu c
M e co o cd
0) cd  d
rj •> 4J HO
H >> iH CU -H
CO I-H CO 4-1
U S -H cd
O .G CO CJ 60 W
rH C 60 60 Cd C *-•
pJHT-tvHd P4 CO'HCOi-]
CO P3 -H CO 4J H iH O ti 0 CO 60
                                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                                           o
                                                                                                                           M
                                                                                                                           •H

                                                                                                                           I
                                                                                                                            cu
                                                                                                                            o
                                                                                                                            H

                                                                                                                            O
                                                                                                                           CO
                                                                             175

-------
 g  cu
 O  >
O -H
    4J
 cu  cd
 hJ  c
 td  K
 &  4)
 Cd 4J
rH rH
 (U  Cd
 
     CU
 n   >
 O  •?!
MH   4-1
     cd
 O  0)
 &  W
 4-1 rH
 CU   O
 C cj
 M  I

 CO fr
 fi -H
 4-1 O

 <4-l  0>
 CO rH
 O  CU
CJ O
oo
co






fO
cu
co
cd
Cu












CM

CU
co
cd
PH
















T~l
CU
co
cd
CM


















60
c
•rl
rj
rt
«d
rH

o
CO
0
1

PM










m
•
oo















m

m


















m
•
rH










60
s
•S

£»,
4J
•rl
CJ
cd
o<
cd
CJ

60
c
•rl
1
i-H
CM
/
4-)
CO •
O M
CJ >%
^*.
S ^^~

„_!
•n
O


•CO-

rH C5
cd -H
4J
, J I t
(x co
cd o
CJ CJ

4-1
co •
0 M
CJ >.
s <<>

«-3 C
•rH
O



rH C
Cd -H
4J
•H 4J
PH CO
cd o
0 CJ

4J
CO •
0 M
CJ >S
a <£

i3 C
O



 #1 *
O c^J ro CO 00 ON
00 CNJ iH rH CO v£>
n An
vD iH CO
000
O O O
O O O
vO CO ^
00 ^J CO
^^ t~-]
f" "" ' ~" *^'"" • -~V



OO OOOO OO
OO OOOO OO
OO OOOO OO
A«l «IA»* «t«t
rHOO OOrHOCN r~r>.
in CO rH rH OO CO rH >d"
OOCM rHCvlCSlrH COCN
•< * »
in rH 00

O O O
O O O
o o o
rH r~ 00
m -
rH H
	 ^ 	




OO OOOO OO
OO OOOO OO
OO OOOO OO
«t«l «**•>* MA
<""> <^ c^i in CNI rH oo r*^
tn *o oo CD o^ o^ co ••3'
O rH rO CN rH CT^ CTv
«« AM
cy\ i-l rH
rH


CO T3 >~.

Q) Cd C
S tJ  CO
O rO O *C3
M (^ CO O C
CU Cd O *rl Cd
4J -H t>
(3 t. 4-1 J-l C
M >> -H Q) O
Cd H CO -H
> $ -ri 4-1
O J3 CO CJ 60 cd hJ
rHGOOOO Cd B4-l<3
CdpS-HcO 4-JJ-I-HO
>->S coQ)60rjcuCH

•H CU MO O'H 0 CS
> O CUM J! O. CU -HT3
cd vi >cj c e w M<:
V-i O 'H cd 3 cd C
C5 Cb p^ ^; f\ 1 rjj r-ri
m
 CJ
 a
 o
 M
 4-1
 c
 O
CJ
                                                                                                                             CU
                                                                                                                             CJ
                                                                                                                             H
                                                                                                                             3
                                                                                                                             O
                                                                               176

-------
     The present worth value and the equivalent annual cost for each sub-




alternative are calculated by combining Table 34 with corresponding Tables




35 through 38.  The results are summarized in Table 39 which shows sub-




alternative 4 to be the most economical.






3.   Environmental Effects






     This regional alternative would use the Columbus Southerly Plant as




the regional plant, and would have the same water quality effects as discussed




 on pages 153-162    for the southern Delaware County - Columbus regional




alternative.






     Under dry weather conditions, the Olentangy River would be subject to




adverse stresses in terms of water quality, because of the relatively large




water diversion from the Olentangy River to the Scioto River.  At the last




stage of the project development, this regional alternative plan would




cause approximately 50 percent more water to be diverted than would the




southern Delaware County - Columbus regional alternative.






     Under most probable conditions, there would be some indirect impacts




on water quality due to water diversion, but they would not be significant.




The amount of water diversion would be 2.3 percent, 8.3 percent, and 12.8




percent of the median flow in the first year, 10th year, and 20th year




after the proposed project becomes operational.  Water quality effects on




the Scioto River would not be significant for the same reasons presented on




pages 153-162 for the southern Delaware County - Columbus regional alternative.
                                   177

-------
TABLE 39.  Costs of Various Subalternatives of the
           Delaware County-Delaware City-Columbus
           Regional Alternative
Subalternative Present Worth
in $
1 24,024,000
2 32,428,000
3 22,961,000
4 21,821,000
Equivalent Annual
Cost in $/yr
1,902,000
2,567,000
1,818,000
1,727,000
           Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                           178

-------
     This regional alternative would require construction of a larger




gravity flow sewer trunk from the Delaware S.T.P. site to the Delaware -




Franklin County line than that required by the southern Delaware County -




Columbus regional alternative.  Therefore, more water quality problems




would result from this regional alternative in terms of erosion and silta-




tion, because more land surface would be exposed.






     As indicated in the southern Delaware County - Columbus regional




alternative, no significant noise and odor problems could be identified,




because the existing capacity of the Columbus Southerly Plant would out-




weigh the sewage flow from southern Delaware County and the City of Dela-




ware combined.






4.   Institutional Considerations






     Delaware County, Delaware City, and Columbus can contract among each




other to treat Delaware County's and Delaware City's sewage in an expanded




Columbus Southerly Plant.  This contract can be effected by Delaware County




contracting with Columbus in the manner previously described on pages 162-163




and by Delaware County contracting with Delaware City as provided by the




same laws, Sections 6117.41 and 307.15 of the Ohio Revised Code, as previously




discussed on pages 136-138.  In addition, Delaware City would have to contract




with Columbus in the same manner that Delaware County did unless Delaware




County assumed responsibility for Delaware City's sewage system as provided




for by Section 307.15 of the Ohio Revised Code.






     The Delaware County - Delaware City - Columbus alternative can be




legally implemented, but the same obstacles exist to its implementation
                                   179

-------
that exist for the Delaware County - Delaware City and Delaware County -




Columbus alternatives.  Delaware City does not wish to phase out its newly




remodeled plant and Delaware County and Columbus, because of financial and




other reasons, probably cannot enter into the needed contractual




agreement.  Furthermore, the needed agreements are difficult enough to




negotiate between two parties.  It would certainly be even more difficult to




successfully negotiate all the required financial and legal contracts among




three parties.
                                    180

-------
PRIVATE COMMUNICATION


Smith, Robert, Advanced Waste Treatment Research Laboratory, 25 July 1975.


REFERENCES                                       '


Ohio Revised Code Annotated, 1975.

Smith, R., A Compilation of Cost Information for Conventional and Advanced
Water Treatment Plants and Processes, U.S. Department of the Interior,
December 1967.

Smith, R., Cost and Performance Estimates for Tertiary Wastewater Treating
Processes, U.S. Department of the Interior, June 1969.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment and
Earnings Statistics for the United States, April 1975.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Programs Operation,
Sewer and Sewage Treatment Plant Construction Cost Index, April 1975.

U.S. Water Resources Council, "Principles and Standards for Planning Water
and Related Land Resources - Change in Discount Rate," The Federal Register,
30 July 1975.
                                    181

-------
K.   CONSERVANCY DISTRICT






     In the foregoing discussion of alternatives,  only existing institu-




tions were considered.  However, there are other institutions which can




be formed for the implementation of the proposed wastewater treatment plan,




especially if a regional approach is adopted.  Ohio law provides for Conser-




vancy Districts, Sanitary Districts, and Regional Water and Sewer Districts.




Sanitary Districts and Regional Water and Sewer Districts exist in various




parts of Ohio, but in no case do they have multi-county jurisdiction.




However, there is one present case in Ohio in which a regional, multi-county




approach to wastewater treatment is being implemented by a Conservancy




District.






     Section 6101 of the Ohio Revised Code provides for the creation of




Conservancy Districts.  Section 6101.04 of the Ohio Revised Code states




that "any area or areas situated in one or more counties may be organized




as a conservancy district" for a variety of purposes, including "the collec-




tion and disposal of sewage and other liquid wastes produced within the




district."  Ohio law enables Conservancy Districts to borrow funds from




the Ohio Department of Natural Resources for their incidental expenses and




to levy assessments on all real property and on all public corporations




upon which benefits have been appraised in order to fund their official plan.






     A Conservancy District encompassing several counties has been in




operation in the Miami Valley of southwestern Ohio for at least 50 years.




Although originally established for flood control, the Miami Conservancy




District recently submitted three facilities plans to the Ohio EPA.  One of
                                   182

-------
these plans includes a service area encompassing part of Warren and Montgomery




Counties (Mapes, 1975).






     If a Conservancy District were to be established to include Franklin and




Delaware Counties and to handle the wastewater treatment problems for that




area, many of the institutional problems associated with both the nonregional




and regional alternatives discussed in Sections B through J would be eliminated.




The need for agreements between unwilling parties would be eliminated as one




entity would be given responsibility for the collection and treatment of




wastewater regardless of municipal or county borders.  There is, however,




one major obstacle to implementing a Conservancy District in Delaware and




Franklin Counties.  Under Section 6101 of the Ohio Revised Code, a Conservancy




District can only be created on the initiative of the communities involved




and can only service municipalities which explicitly desire service.   It is




unlikely that the parties involved would take this initiative.






     As was described above, Delaware County, Delaware City, and Columbus each




have their own sewerage systems.  They have invested much money and effort




in their present systems and in the development of future plans.  These




parties would probably not surrender their autonomy regarding sewer service,




especially to an entity which would have the power to tax them.  Finally,



the strained relations which exist between Delaware County and Columbus




make the creation of a Conservancy District in the area in the near future




improbable.      A Conservancy District would be a means to implement the




proposed plant in any of the alternative locations by avoiding the need for




negotiation between antagonistic parties.  Ironically, however, negotiations




between these parties would be necessary for the creation of a Conservancy




District.
                                   183

-------
                         Private Communication
Mapes, Greg, Environmental Planner, Ohio EPA, August, 1975.
                                Reference
Ohio Revised Code Annotated, 1975
                                     184

-------
L.   SUMMARY






     This section summarizes both the local and regional alternatives dis-




cussed on pages 69-181.  'Local alternatives are subjected to a




second screening process.   Regional alternatives are discussed without




screening because the corresponding data are more limited.






     1.   Overview







          On pages 69-124, five sites were selected on the basis




     of a preliminary screening within each geographical area.  These




     sites were:




          •  OR1, south of the 1-270 outerbelt




          •  OR3, on the Olentangy, 1 mile south of Powell Road




          •  OR7, on Powell Road near Powell




          •  OR8, at Chapman and Winter Road




          •  AC1, on Alum Creek near Powell Road.




     Of these sites, the fourth, OR8, is actually a site for a regional




     alternative with Delaware City.  Additional regional approaches were




     discussed on pages 125-181.  The impacts of all these alterna-



     tives are summarized  in Table 41.  Each site is rated as producing




     negligible or various levels of detrimental impact for each impact




     category.  The assessment in each case is based on the most environ-




     mentally compatible mitigative measures, such as outfall relocation,




     dechlorination, and landscaping.  Recommended mitigative measures are




     discussed above under each alternative.
                                   185


-------
     Decisions on the comparative merits of the regional approaches




must be based on comparison of the best subalternatives, recommended




in each section.  It must be recognized, however, that the selection




of these subalternatives and comparison of regional concepts is




limited by the scope of this report mainly to engineering and cost




considerations.  Environmental and social impacts were assessed on




the basis of the limited information available.






2.   Local Alternatives






     Four of the five selected sites on pages 69-124 corres-




pond to alternative treatment plant locations of the proposed facility.




These four are subjected to a secondary screening, described below,




in order to determine which, if any, possibilities are comparable to




the proposed action and merit further investigation.  The comparisons




are made on the assumption that the recommended mitigative measures




for each location are followed.  In some cases changes in these measures




would greatly alter the comparability.






     Sites OR1, OR3, and OR7 on the Olentangy River are similar in




many respects if it is assumed that the outfall from each of the three




is the same in location, and in quality and quantity of effluent.  All




local alternatives require the construction of a new wastewater treat-




ment facility which must meet water quality standards promulgated by




the Ohio EPA.  Thus equal level of treatment can be assumed.






     Engineering considerations and cost of plant construction are




essentially the same for all three sites.  Site OR7 might require more
                              187

-------
construction work due to the possible presence of shallow soils.   The




cost differences in these sites mainly result from additional system




requirements of pumping, interceptor lines, and outfall lines.  On this




basis Sites OKI and OR7 are both more costly than Site OR3.






     There are only minor differences in land use among the sites.




The sites near the outerbelt might interfere with future development




near the 1-270 and Ohio 315 interchange.  It is not currently known,




however, whether or not such development is in the planning stage.




Site OR7 would affect planned residential land development and expan-




sion of the village of Powell.  Site OR3 has the least impact on land




use, although concern has been expressed by officials of Highbanks




Park that recreational use of the park might be affected.






     Aesthetic effects differ slightly in terms of proximity to receptors,




Visual impact from nearby roadways would be significant at Sites OR1




and OR7.  A plant at Site OR3 could be more easily screened by trees




and the current design includes such screening.  Although Site OR3 is




near the Highbanks park, odor and noise are not expected to cause a




significant impact.  The impact on water quality and that caused by




water diversion from all three sites depends only on outfall location.




These impacts would be identical from any of the sites if the outfall




location south of 1-270 were used.






     Use of the southern outfall location in Franklin County is designed




to minimize biological impacts on aquatic organisms.  More northern
                                188

-------
outfall locations for any of the three sites would seriously jeopar-




dize the survival of significant populations of aquatic organisms.




Only Site OR7 would have detrimental effects on forested areas.  This




is due to the small segment of the Bartholomew Run which the outfall




from this site must cross.






     From the institutional standpoint, the most difficult site to




implement is OKI.  This is due to political problems and the question




of joint usage.  The other sites would have no institutional constraints




except those of placement of the outfall line along the state highway




right-of-way in Franklin County.






     Site OR3, then, is in our judgment the preferred site on the




Olentangy River due to lower cost and least engineering difficulty.




Total impact on the environment is equal to or less than that of




other sites, provided the mitigative measures recommended here are




followed.  This site also has the advantage of being the most thoroughly




investigated.   Thus, unplanned costs are less likely.   The only remain-




ing investigation of the site is an archaeological survey now underway.






     Site AC1 on Alum Creek has certain disadvantages  and advantages




compared with Site OR3.  Mitigative measures could be  used to overcome




many of the disadvantages which include diversion of river water, dis-




charge of effluents in a stream of low median flow, discharge of




effluent above a drinking water supply, some additional pumping require-




ments, and institutional problems.   Advantages include elimination of
                              189

-------
impact on a recreational area, reduction of aesthetic impacts, and




possible reduction of biological impacts.  Little or no data is available




on the latter, however, and more detailed study is required to




adequately assess the feasibility of this site.






3.   Regional Alternatives






     The three regionalization concepts involve a merger of southern




Delaware County with:






     •    Delaware City




     •    Columbus




     •    Columbus and Delaware City.






Each of these concepts contains two or more subalternatives.  The merger




with Delaware City could be accomplished either at site OR8 or at the




site of the present Delaware City Plant.  A merger with Columbus or




with both entities involves subalternatives which differ mainly in routing




and trunkline construction.  A discussion as to which subalternatives are




best from environmental considerations cannot be made without an in-depth




study.  Therefore, only the general merits of each regional scheme are




discussed below.  A cost comparison of the various subalternatives is




given in Figure 29.  Here costs are compared in terms of equivalent annual




cost, which is explained on pages 129-130.






     Delaware City and Southern Delaware County can merge their treatment




efforts either by expanding the present  City of Delaware Plant or by




constructing a combined facility at site OR8.  Both possibilities would




require construction of a long upbasin force main.  This would result in
                              190

-------
0)
> f)
*>H fvj
<-• 0
CO
C 0)
rl 4J
(!) -H
. 4J CO


£3 *H
4-> O CO
a o c
3 1 J-i
O K**» CU
O -t-1 +J
•H rH
cu o <5
M
cO CU t-H
£ rl CO
CO cO (3
rH & O
CU CO -H
Q rH bO
0) CU
O Pi
1
CU

•H
^> *jj
c c
3 co (-1
0 3 cu
O ,O J-l
CU 3 . >^ -H
•U 4J 4J
C vH CO
3 0 C
D rl
O CU CU
1 ti [ i
CO Cfl i-H
rl & <3
cfl cO
3 rH rH
CO CO CO
rH O C
CU O
fi 1 -H
bO
CU



§
o
*
3
*
c
«u
4!
4J
!
4J

•H
s
3,
'

o o o o
o o o o
o o o o
fsT CJ eo
*° S to
cT F~) «H
^ i2 S

 > >
*J ij
Hej
e e
V  in £1 J
^r i r Iv v v

§ 8
o o
o 
<-> 41
8 S
« «i
« £
*«• -a
1 |
3 3
W M
J V V
Q i/^ O lA O
CO C^J €S rH H
CO
CU
•H
4J
CO
C
(U
4J
rH
03
3
0
•H
j^j
cfl


*+-<
O

co
4J
CO
o
o

•
CN
CU

3
bO
•H





m
CT>
i-H
CJ
c
H

•S
i-H
O
1-1
JJ
C
O
O

o
J_J
•H
fi
w

CU
CJ
rl
3
O
go
UT 3303 "[Bnuuy
     191

-------
high operation and maintenance costs, as well as increased energy




expenditure.  Environmentally, no water diversion problems would be




created.  The outfall would be above the Del-Co water intake for the




City of Delaware plant, but outfall relocation would be necessary




for OR8 because of its proximity to the water intake.  Both outfalls




would be above the most biologically sensitive portions of the river.




Site OR8 is in the scenic river segment, whereas Delaware City is not.




Institutional considerations pose some problems, but this concept




could be implemented.






     The regionalization with Columbus would involve upgrading the




existing Columbus Southerly Plant over a 20-year period.  The incre-




mental costs of upgrading the Columbus Southerly Plant would be less




than the cost of a totally new plant or of upgrading the City of




Delaware plant.  Operation and maintenance costs would also be somewhat




less than the merger with the City of Delaware.  The subalternatives




for this plan are:




     •  Connection with Olentangy Trunk




     •  Force main to Broad Street




     •  Connection with Alum Creek Trunk




     •  Connection with both Olentangy and Alum Creek Trunks




     •  Connection with the Olentangy, Alum Creek, and Scioto Trunks.




The information about the existing and future capacities of the various




trunk lines can only be estimated at this time.  Detailed environmental




impacts of each of these subalternatives would require further study.




However, water diversion by the Del-Co Water Company intake would
                               192

-------
impose a significant deficit in the Olentangy River between Home Road




and the confluence with the Scioto River.  The biological effects here




could be significant.  Institutional problems are severe in this alterna-




tive, but implementation is' possible if cooperation between the parties




can be achieved.






     The merger of the three service areas, Delaware City, Southern




Delaware County, and Columbus, is the most complex plan.  In this case,




the existing Delaware City Plant would be phased out in the first 10




years and the Columbus Southerly Plant would be upgraded.  The four




subalternatives are:




     •  Connection with the Olentangy Trunk




     •  Construction of a force main to East Broad Street




     •  Connection with the Olentangy and Alum Creek Trunks




     •  Connection with the Olentangy, Alum Creek, and Scioto Trunks.




As in the case of the previous alternative, present information and/or




projections of trunkline capacity and load are of questionable validity.




It is likely, however,  that the marginal difference between the planned load




and capacity in the Olentangy Trunk would eliminate the first subalternative.




Thus, it might be necessary to use the more expensive force main sub-




alternative or the subalternative involving connection with the Olentangy,




Alum Creek, and Scioto Trunks.  The system requirements for any of the




subalternatives would be proportionally higher than those of the Columbus-




Southern Delaware County concept.






     Environmental effects would be slightly more severe in this case




than in the case of the second alternative, because of the additional
                               193

-------
water diversion brought about by including the City of Delaware.




Biological effects of the additional river loading south of the




Southerly Plant might also be significant.  Institutionally, this




would be the most difficult alternative to implement-.  It would




probably be nearly impossible for all three groups to come to an




agreement on the implementation of the combined plant.
                               194

-------
            III.  ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS'OF PROPOSED ACTION






     This chapter examines the environmental effects of the proposed plant,




the Olentangy Environmental Control Center, described above as alternative




OR3v  The expected effects of this project on the- area's water quality,




biology, land use and population, and aesthetics are discussed.






A.   WATER QUALITY






     The effects on water quality resulting from the proposed action are




determined by the flow conditions, the waste loads introduced into the




receiving stream, and the existing and future ambient water quality condi-




tions.  Water quality problems of temporary duration are also associated




with interceptor construction and its phasing.






     1.   Flows






          The flow of the Olentangy River south of the Delaware Dam




     averages approximately 223 mgd (345  cfs) with a median flow of 47.8




     mgd (74 cfs) and the 7-day 10-year low flow of 3.36 mgd (5.2 cfs).




     Close to the proposed plant site, at the Stratford Gage station,




     the 7-day 10-year low flow is measured at 2.93 mgd (3.77 cfs).  At




     Worthington, the average flow is 227 mgd (429 cfs), the median is




     66.6 mgd (10.2 cfs)  and the measured low flow is 14.2 mgd (22 cfs).




     A schematic presentation of 7-day 10-year low flows along the




     Olentangy River is given in Figure 30.






          If the proposed project, the Olentangy Environmental Control




     Center, were to be constructed,  it would ultimately discharge 6 mgd




     (9.3 cfs) of effluent into.the Olentangy River near the Delaware-




     Franklin County line.  After the complete implementation of the
                                 195

-------
CD
C O)
i- JC
J- 4J
=3
Q M-
0 -P
CO C
O «/> 
I')
CU
I/I

•
o
10
•
0

•^p V
? 5-
tO CU
"co cu
a CXL


















* c
(O '
o c

cu
S- 0
res
•£. C.
to
f— 0
CO



1 A
£
u
C



.^,
•o

H-1*
Or-
•
^•jCVJ
4-> '^-^
•r-
O W
0) O
£LO
CM
U •• •
3) CU CO
0 ^
3 fO *
•P*
C CU
0 1-1 S-
* to
3 S- S
• o> to
0 -P r—
to cu
"



A A






^_^
T3
cn
CU E
«O VD
^g •
tO r~~
r-. •, 	 ^
CD
0£
CO O
4-> 00
E •
O CM
S-
4- *
^c
-P •
c a.
CO •
3 \—

M- "2"-
LU 2
{

U9AI
A'






T3

£
cu cr>
•»-> cr.
to «d-
s •
o
O- — '
o
1 (/)
n~ *|
O) O
Q
•>t^
CU •
-^ o
4-> *
C -)C
1-1 >,
c
S- (0
CU O-
(O O
so
t

M /CBu
''



cr "O - — -
cu s- -a
co o en
•P +•>
cu  r~>
* CD
* CO 	
•X -C 1
C -P  Q
C -P
O CU 3
«_3 S- 0
^> ^ tO
S— (O
to i — l/> t
•P CU •!-
3 Q C
-Q CU
•r- O) CO t
S- ^= fO


6^U9 [Q






a
E
flj "r
, ^ •—
tfmm ^
e^ r
v* H.
3 -P -
*" 1— ?
= « ,c
«u ^
I s: .«
_> •>•
0 0 I
III r
* rir »
31 ° "
g> -o li
§ cu
••* frt /
0 i
• *^ *
Q M
0 0 "
r -.
5

IH s



A





LJ

*
J
*>


3
3
J


i
3
" c
TJ!J>
H m
• c^
*
3
i ijE
3 S-
s




!

i
                                                                                                       CO
                                                                                                       •r-
                                                                                                       o:
                                                                                                       cn

                                                                                                       to
                                                                                        cu

                                                                                       o

                                                                                        CO
                                                                                                       o
                                                                                                       2
                                                                                                       o
                                                                                                        S-
                                                                                                        fO
                                                                                                        cu
                                                                                                                   CO
                                                                                                                   UD
                                                                                                                    S-
                                                                                                                    cu
                                                                                                                    ta
o
to
cu
       ro
       CM
o

10
vo
co
  •
co



CM
  •
LO
                  vo
                  CM
                         LO
                         CT>
                            oo
                             »

                            CM


                            CO
<£>
00
  *

CM


CO
co
Ol
  •
CM


10
  •
^J-
                                                                                                       t~»

                                                                                                        cu
                                                                                                       o
                                                                                                       CO'

                                                                                                        cu

                                                                                                        3
                                                                                                        cn
                                                                                                                   42
                                                                                                                    >
                                                                                                 *    -
                                                                                                 *   10
                                                                                                     cu
                                                                                                     U
                                                                                                  -« s-
                                                                                                 Lf)  =J
                                                                                                 r-^  o
                                                                                                 CT>  CO
                                                                                                 i—  CO
t/1 1—
S-  fO
CO  S-

•r-  ta
cn^
c
LU   »a
    Q.
>,cu
E Q
                                                                                                                coo
-o
 I
                                                                                                  CO
                                                                                                  o

                                                                                                  rs
                                                                                                  o
                                                                                                 CO
                                                          196

-------
proposed project, the dilution ratios based on the median river flow




and the 7-day 10-year low flow would be 0.083 and 0.67 respectively.




The intermediate dilution ratios based on the 7-day 10-year low flow




would be 0.34 and 0.51 for the first phase (effluent flow of 1.5 mgd)




and the second phase (effluent flow of 3 mgd) respectively.  The dry




weather dilution ratios at various locations along the Olentangy




River are shown in Figure 30.






     To arrive at these dilution ratios, it is assumed that Del-Co




Water Company would not withdraw water from the Olentangy River during




7-day 10-year low flow periods.  This assumption is justified by the




fact that, during low flow periods, the intake would be so close to




the river bed so that, for drinking purposes, extensive purification




work would be required to remove the silt content and turbidity




from the raw water.  The Del-Co Water Company has a storage reser-




voir with a capacity to meet 60-day water demand by its customers,




and the Company plans to expand the reservoir to a 90-day capacity




(Gilbert, 1975).  One of the objectives of expanding the storage




reservoir is to reserve water for dry weather periods during which




withdrawal and purification of water from the Olentangy River would




be difficult.






     The proposed project would not incur any division of water into




or out of the Olentangy River Basin, because the Del-Co Water Company




and the City of Delaware are the sole providers of water supply




systems serving the Delaware County area.  The water withdrawn by




the Del-Co Water Company and the City of Delaware would be returned




to the Olentangy River in the  form of sewage except for minor losses




due to consumption and evapo-transpiration.
                          197

-------
                                   861
         *%817  A'xa:}Bun:xo:iddB A"q pBO"[  afqBMOT^B aqt) paaoxa  ppiOAi (SCLL)




   spyjos paAjossyp je^oa aqa 3Bq:j  s«oqs afqBWOT^B asoqri  q^TM 3UB~[d




  pasodoad aq:j  uioaj spBoj aq} jo uosTjBduioQ  •£<; aiqei UT parjuasaad




    spaBpuBrjs XaT-[Bnb rjuanrjja pa^BuSTsap S^T pun pSui 9  30




      S^T uo  pasBq ^UB"[d pasodoad aq^ uioaj spBO-j; ^UB^njfod aqx
                              •anooo  saop wo^j AOf aBaX-QI  ABp-/^ B




           ~[BUT§aBui aq^ apjAojd 03  aiqB aq aou £-[u-tv}iB?  TIP1




           X-[3q3T-[S .10 Q'Z AjaaBiuxxoaddB ST uiBaS




       aq^ UT  pauBfssB JO^OBJ Xaajss aqx  * (<7£6T '




           OI  aasBW sq^ UT uoT3Bi;no-[BD joj pasn ^unorae  aq^ jo




auo UBqa  ssaf  ST qojqwi 'a^TS aq^  ^B sjo ^5- 
-------
              TABLE 42.    Waste Loads of the Olentangy River Reach Between
                          the Delaware Dam and the River's Mouth
Variables
Load entering from
upstream
Total Instream Load
Allowable Load

BOD c
in .lb/day - i
178.2
59.4
768.1
*too
TDS
n lb/day
22,194
4,293
20,250
numerous
NH3 as N
in lb/day
14.8
113.5
117.1
to count
Fecal Coliform
in 10lO/day
19.48
tntc*
7.35

      Source:  Ohio EPA, 1974
              TABLE 43.    Comparison Between the Waste Load of the
                          Proposed OECC Plant and the Allowable
                          Load of the Olentangy River
Effluent
Para- Concentration
meters Monthly Average
in mg/l(MPN/100
BOD5
TSS
TDS
NH3as N
Fecal
Col i forms
Phosphorus
Oil & Greases
Chloride
8.0
8.0
596
0.5
(200)
3.0
10
90
,. _. - n. . f nm Allowable Load of the
the Browsed Nant Olenta^ Rive^ with
the Proposed Plant Built-in Safety Factor
ml) m lb/day (10 10 /day) in lb/dgy (1010/day)
400.8
400.8
29,860
25.1
(4.54)
150.3
501.0
450.9
768.1
—
20,250
117.1
(7.35)
—
—
10,125
Source:  Ohio EPA, 1974
                                         199

-------
would limit the value of the river water for irrigation of crops.




No apparent waste load impacts are anticipated for BOD5, NH3, fecal




coliforms, and chloride.  The allowable loads for phorphorus,




total suspended solids (TSS), and oil and greases have not been




established.  Therefore, their impacts could not be quantified at




this stage of the study.  It is speculated that the nitrate load




might have some impact on the use of riverwater for irrigation of




crops according to the water quality standards for nitrate (10 mg/1)



set by the Public Health Service (Finkbeiner, Pettis, and Strout,




1969).   This speculation could not be confirmed without defining the




allowable load for the plant.






3.   Water  Quality






     Based  on the design capacity  (1.5 mgd)  of  the proposed  plant  in




the  first 10  years of  operation, a  computer  simulation  was conducted




using  the Ohio EPA computer model of  the water  quality  conditions




(Burgess &  Niple, Ltd,  1974)  for  the  river segment between the  pro-




posed  plant site  and the U.S.G.S. gage station  approximately 2.6 miles




downstream  from  the  site.   The  river  dilution flow was  assumed  to  be




8.6  mgd  (13.3 cfs),  the water temperature 25°C,  and  the flow




velocity 0.33 feet per second.  The DO,-  and NH3 concentrations, and




BOD5,  NH3,  and organic nitrogen loads were calculated  by the computer




program.  The program is based  on  the Streeter-Phelps  equations for




mixing two  pollutant streams,  and  several auxiliary  equations for




the  determination of the coefficients in the Streeter-Phelps equa-




tions.   The chief dependent variables in the Streeter-Phelps equa-




tions  are oxygen deficit and flowing load.   The major  rate coefficients
                              200

-------
are the deoxygenation rate and the reaeration rate of the river.




Equations of mass conservation were used for dilution calculation.




The computer results are given in Figures 31,  32,  33,  34,  and 35.






     In. Figure 31, .two drops of DO value are to be noticed at the




mixing points of the proposed plant and the Worthington Hills STP.




However, all the DO values are well above the 6.0 mg/1 standard




promulgated by the Ohio EPA for this river system.  In Figure 32 ,




an increase of 0.02 mg/1 of ammonia concentration from the upstream




concentration of 0.5 mg/1 is calculated at the mixing point of the




proposed plant.  This increase is attributable to the effluent of




the proposed plant.  The ammonia concentration remains approximately




constant with flow downstream and undergoes a rise of  0.31 mg/1




at the mixing point of the Worthington Hills STP.   The stream water




quality standard for NH3 in this river segment is 1.5 mg/1, there-




fore, no violation of ammonia concentration is anticipated from the




proposed action.






     The flowing load of BOD5 at the proposed site would be 270




pounds per day (Figure 33) which would be less than the allowable




BOD5 load (Table 43) established in the Waste Load Allocation




Report  (Ohio EPA, 1974).  The waste load of ammonia at the proposed




site would be 36 pounds per day of nitrogen compared to the allowable




load of 117.1 pounds per day.  Therefore, no violation would be




observed.






     The organic nitrogen load at the proposed site would be 89.0




pounds per day.  No allowable load for organic nitrogen has yet been
                              201

-------
                             >  o
                         (O
                         -c
                                0)
                                        (0
                             O)
                                        o
                                        0.
                                               cr
                                               0)
                   f- ~


    »l
!-  D)
(O  C
t-  ra
   4-
    c
   JU

rt- O
            
                                                                                                     «*>  oo
                                                                                                         O)
                                                                                                     n °-

                                                                                                         ai
                                                                                                        x:
                                                                                                        •4->

                                                                                                     o  E
                                                                                                     o  O
                                                                                                     in  s-
                                                                                                      • 4-
                                                                                                     CVJ
                                                                                                         §
                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                     in

                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                     in
                                                                                                               a;
                                                                                                               >
                                                                                      o
                                                                                      Q
                                                                                       c
                                                                                       
                                                                                       co
                                                                                              oS
                                                                                        a>
                                                                                        i-     to
                                                                                        3     to
                                                                                        a>    a>
                                                                                       •r-     01
                                                                                       Ll-     J-
                                                                                              3
                                                                                              CO
                                                                O)
                                                                u
                                                                S-
                                                                3
                                                                O
                                                               CO
                                                    202

-------







*











1

1
1
h
1 •
[
f








"


1
1

1
i
1
!





/
/
/
/

&


$














* i I i
3>
O





















0

-


















„

/
/
r
/
/ •
























i*ii
CO
o








c
O

JZ
XI
c
o
o
E
to

i
4-
V>
O.

X






















'


























11*1
r-
o







en —
c o
to «-
4- 4-
C C
CD O
5"

M- fO
O 4-
C
4- CD
C S
•— CT
0 0
CL U

X *>
— C
S LL)
D '

















































• it*
t^
o


















L.
0)
H

J


















































III!







C
O I
I 	 i _
*i — *r~
C) (0
c 
O
U UL






i_
(O
1—
rj L
Q Q)
— ^
H S

t— ^>-
O 0)
C
I- ro
C 4-
— C
O CD
a. —
O
X
Z 4-
3

















































11*1
in
o
\I-I"HN

























































j
f



1
/
/
/
/
/
I
/
/
ob
,rv
vf
0

o
o
o
t_
•
in



0
•o
U1
^




O
o
o
*
^



o
o
in




o
o
o
«
n



o
o
in
•
ry





?
(VJ



o
o
in
•->


g

-1 °
"""


o
0
iri
o





o
• o
1

























•z.
\
CU CO
+-> n:
•r— SZ
CO 	 '

"O C
cu cu
to en
0 0
a. s-
o +->
Q. "Z.
O) 10

'
E "ttJ
0 >
1- CU
<4~ —1

E ro
(O T-
cu c
S- 0
4-> E
to E
c «a:
^
O "O
Q CU
+->
to o
cu cu
•i- o r-»
s: s- ai
CU H- *
> 0
a: cu +->
r-- _l
c
o cu
Q- "a.
•Zi

CM o3
CO
CU 10
S- Q)
13 D1
O1 t-
U. CO

• •
o
S-
o

203

-------
•o
 c
 o
O
W)
oj
        0)
C  4-
   •c
   O
          TO

          to  O
             i_
          C  4-
          CO  C

          58
                            c
                            o
                            01
                            ro
                               Q)
                      W 4-

                     —  (0

                     X "o.
                                           ro
4-
 C

"o
 Q-l
                                          O
                                      nrr-r
                                              CD
                                              CO
                                              c
                                              (0
                                                     •
                                                    p
                                                                   b
                                                                   Vo
                                                                   K
                                                                   io
                                                                   o
                                                                   k3
                                                                   o
                                                                   .*;
                                                                   o
                                                                   o
                                                                   r-
                                                                   N
                                                                         Q>
                                                                         oo
                                                                          
                                                                               O
                                                                               CO
                                                                               O)
                                                                               Q
                                                                               >>
                                                                               X
                                                                      01
                                                                      o
                                                                      r—
                                                                      O
                                                                      •r-
                                                                      CQ

                                                                      >>
                                                                      (C
                                                                      -a

                                                                      10
                                                                               •o
                                                                               ta
                                                                               o
                                                                   •o

                                                                   K
                                                             o
                                                              »
                                                             O
                                                                         id
                                                                         OJ
                                                                         s_
                                                                          o
                                                                          Q

                                                                          
-------



t
*
V
«
c
•
*
_

•
•
•
«
•
*
•
*
*
•
*
*
•
*
•
•
4
4
*
*

•
•
*
*
*
,'/
tt
J
' .
«
•l

4
*
w
*•
*
»
•1
*
i
•
i
i
2
-rr-» <






4






• ill






| '











'













I

4/4
• /

/

/
/

/
l
B~?
/
Su
^^










» 1 1 1
o
•
•*>


1 * • 1




c
O

-o
c
0
O

E
(O
.
cn —
c o
ro t-
4- 4-
-c c
0) 0
o

s- ra
O 4-
C
-f— Q.
c E

0 0
f^_ V
•-.'.
x >
.5 u

D






















.














11*1
o
. *
n
in

c


a
c
»—
x:
*t~
o

M-
0

"4-
c

V- "5
0) Q
4-
C X
CD —
o :§:

<3



•




•




























1 1 «
01
*
co









0) 4-
4- c
ro to
^ - — •
~
O CO
C
4- fO
C 4-
— C
o cu
CL 	
x°
— o

o


-




.-








f









1










1 1 »
D
t
t






























'••




























E
4 1 1
Q
^
co


If
V












































•











» t



0
o

n





:>
n
.
*




^
to '
o — ^
; z:
oo
oc
2.
0 C
n 
-) 0
3  (/,
o /n
H-. TO re
• (L)
1 1 1
S- g
3 °" <
Q -^ *o
S- i
^ _. - C**
=> g c
? cu *5
*O ' ^™ O
" -t-J u

3 o3 «s r
=> .> -o
^ _.j QJ ^4^
• "^ r— _1
~* rr~
M- «
O  S»
•r- 3
U_ CO
^

-^X Jj
*\ »
•^
o
to
ui peoi fj-eHM
     205

-------

* I I i




•




a

i
j
3
^
•
4
i
^
i
•r
K
*
^
1
^
*
•
4
*
>
*
*
*
^
^
^l
M
T
4
5
»••
*t


i
«
1
M
^
4
*i J
*! • f
^ /
2 /
j /
M /
/
3 /
•3 /
i
/TV
v^/ 7
/
JE
^












»



* I I
a»

o
-*




















*

























-














*



.








t •# i
o

•*-«
•-4
«-•





• c
o
4-
•O
c
o
o
e


X











.S'
S
fT








































11*1
O
^
vD
o
^-4


>»
D>

(0
+-
C
O
'o

»*-
o

•J-
o
o.

X

s

n
.*


































•

















1 1 1 <
c

c
r
1ft • fe * *-— * A
f •

D •


—
3

o

^
0)
s
5 t-
U Q)
— -t-
> C
c o
LL) O







•








































.






1 } 1 1
* •— » •
o
•H ^
D) n
c c
w^ I
^r t
+-
U I
o <
3= t
f
»*- '
O <
(
-*- i
C f
"o
a.

X
«• •
V v
'
3
D
~


iS
o
z
V
- +-
/I C
a in
? —
a.
n
- +-
— c
• — }- 0
-. r
n £























































«~ m
* V

(O
-f-*
3 t-
jQ 0}
~ >
| ,
4- D:

s- >
O 0
C
-t-  <-•



• o
• 0
• o
• •
r •-•


• 0
« a
• ID
» •
t O






• 0
> o
i « t i i i »~T~'~V
o
•
*-«
o>
~ o
•
«O
03
/^,






















•
cu S
•^ en
•r— f~\
 g
4->
•o .T-
QJ ^^-
W ^
0 o
o. .;:
0 c
i- (0
0- o,
i.

Q) o
•— QJ ^d-
^T -r-j l>»
s: o cn
f 	 ^
i- CX ^
0>
> i»-
£ ° 2
UJ-. ^— '
Q) _l
14- OJ
O i —
S- Q.
Q_ -r-
'Z.

• o3
ir>
ro «/>
i/^

-------
promulgated ; therefore, the impact resulting from the proposed plant




cannot be quantified at the present time.






     The aforementioned computer simulation is based on a low flow




of 8.6 mgd (13.3 cfs) which is considerably .higher than the cal-




culated 7-day 10-year low flow of 29.3 mgd (3.77 cfs).  To quantify




the effects when the 7-day 10-year low flow does occur, additional




computer simulation should be conducted.  To derive a qualitative




understanding of the effects, a simple extrapolation method is




used to predict the effects.  The results are presented in Table 44




for various phases of the proposed action.  As this table illustrates,




no apparent violations of water quality and allowable waste loads




would be caused by the proposed action.  The implication of the




calculated ammonia concentration in terms of biological effects is




discussed on pages 232-238.






     Field observations of the water quality conducted by various




agencies and individuals are summarized in Table 45.  In this




table, the stream water quality standards are also listed in




comparison.  The water quality standards for temperature are given




separately in Table 46.






4.   Impacts






     In general, the water temperature, pH value, concentrations




of dissolved oxygen,  nitrate, total dissolved solids (TDS), chloride,




dissolved iron,  chromium,  zinc and copper are well within the water




quality standards.   Considering that the effluent from the proposed




plant would have at least 6 mg/1 of DO, maximum BOD,- of 8 mg/1,
                               207

-------
               TABLE  44.    The  Resulting  Effects  of  the  Proposed Action
                           During Various Construction Phases  (based  on
                           7-day 10-year  low  flow of 3.77 cfs)
Variables
Design Capacity in mgd
DO in mg/1
NH. as N in mg/1
BOD5 in Ib/day
NH3 as N in Ib/day
Organic N in Ib/day
Phase 1
1.5
6.53
0.47
270,
36
89
Phase 2
3
6.4
0.475
368
42
95 .
Phase 3
6
6.26
0.484
563
54
107
Stream Standard
or Allowable Load
___
6.0
1.5
768
117

Source:  Enviro Control, Inc.,  1975
                                             208

-------
            TABLE  45.   Water Quality of Olentangy River
Data Source
River Reaches
Measured from the
Proposed Site (miles
Conditions
No. of Observations
'Dates of
Observations
DO in ng/1
BODj in mg/1
faij as N in mg/1
K03 as K in mg/l
Organic N in og/1
Total P in irg/1
Temp, in 'C
pH
Total Conforms
in 100 ml
Fecal Coliforas
in 100 ml
Fecal Streptococci
in 100 ml
T.S.S. in ng/1
T.O.S. in mg/1
C " in iug/1
e (dissolved) in mg/1
U in tig/1
Cr in mg/1
{n in 119/1
Kg in ng/1
Cu in mg/1
Cyanide in mg/1
Turbidity in JTU
Turbidity in ppa
Burgess S
Kiple, Ltd.
0-2.5
Existing '
24
10/31, 11/7.
11/25/74
7.4-12.4
1.3-12.7
0.0-1.7
0.0-0.9
0.0-3.4
0.11-1.16
4.5-20.0
7,6-8.1
Ohio Uesleyan
Study Team
-22-1 .
Before the
Expansion of
the Delaware STP
K.A.
6/13/72-7/28/72
4.3-6.7*
...
...
0.4-4.0
...
...
,7.5-28
6.8-8.4
Sctoto River
Basin:
Waste Load • John H. Oliver
Allocation
Report
Delaware Dam - .7
to Houth •"*'
Before the Before the
Expansion of Expansion of
the Delawa're STP the Delaware STP
13 13
before 3/1/74 Sunter
1967-1969
S: Jifii*" 6-9-8-8
». 2.5-13.2
b. 2.3-4.8
«. 0.1-3.75
b. 0.0-0.1
a. 2.1-2.8
b. 2.1-2.8
a. 0.25-6.1
b. 0.5
a. 0.0-0.3 n 15 ? 11
b. 0.0-0.3 u.-ift-u
B. 25.0 41 «5«
a. 7.9-8.7 - ... .
b. 7.9-8.7 8'3 8'5
Water Quality
Standards for
The River
Segment
Delaware Dam
to Mouth
Existing
...
...
S.O
...
1.5
S.O
...
...
See Table 46
6.0-9.0
800-2.4x10**
66-44xl05
,6-1205*
b! 530-tntc***
200
26-6. ExlO4 — — —
6-65
—
40.4-73.2
...
...

...
a. 274-394
b. 274-394
a. 24-50 -,..,
b. 24-50 " "
I. 200-300
b. 200-300 "" !
500
250
' 1,000
<1 ... ... — j . s
<2-31
<20-80
...
...
1. 0.0
b. 0.0 — ;
j
100
1,000
J; }] 56-86
<25-58
<3-8
...
...
...
...
500
200
7-43
29-U6 1-
                •Only one observation per sampling location
               "Kith one low value of 1,4 mg/1 of 0.0. at Station 5
                between the Delaware STP's Sanitary Land Fill and Quarry
              ***Too numerous to count
               *,During low flow periods
               b.Other than low flow periods
Source:    Enviro Control,  1975
                                          209

-------
   TABLE 46.    Maximum Allowable Water Temperature
               in  the Olentangy River
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Temperature in °C
10
10
15.6
21.1
26.7
32.2
32.2
32.2
32.2
25.6
21.1
13.0
Source:  Ohio EPA,  1974
                                  210

-------
and allowable waste loads for BOD and Cl, only  the total dissolved




solids content is likely to cause a problem.  Although, the current




total dissolved solids concentrations are within the water quality




standards, the total dissolved solids load would exceed the allowable




load by approximately  48%.    This might have some impact on the




stream biology and the agricultural uses of instream water.






     Ammonia standards are reported to have been violated approxi-




mately 10 per cent of  the time (Ohio EPA, 1974).  Under the assumption




that the Waste Load Allocation Program (Ohio EPA, 1974) would be




successfully implemented, the instream ammonia  concentrations would




be so reduced that the ammonia concentration at the mixing point




of the proposed plant  site would be within the 1.5 mg/1 limit at




all times.






     As the plant grows to its ultimate size, some problems associated




with nitrate might occur as a result of conversion of ammonia into




nitrate in the proposed treatment processes.  Presumably, nitrate im-




pacts would be confined to the agricultural uses of the instream water.




The land south of the proposed site is limited in the acreage devoted




to agricultural uses.  By the time the nitrates reach the mouth of the




Olentangy River, the large dilution capacity there would reduce their




impact to an insignificant level.  The ground water table in the area




is generally so high that NO., contamination of the ground water system




might be insignificant.  It is calculated that, in the project area,




yields of no more than 5 gallons per minute can be developed by well




drillings (Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 1963).  These yields




are considered poor, indicating that the soils are relatively imper-




meable and that, therefore,  the interaction between ground water and




the water in rivers might be slight.  It is therefore supposed that the




                               211

-------
ground water contamination by nitrates is predominantly controlled by




molecular diffusion which is rather a slow process.  However, lack of




data on the fluctuation of ground water level and the characteristics




of the soil make the impact quantification difficult.






     The fecal coliform concentration of the river water has been




reported many times as "too numerous to count" (Ohio EPA, 1974).




The same situation has occurred throughout the entire river segment,




indicating that it is highly polluted by municipal sewage.  Municipal




sources are specified because among the total source loads of BOD5,




TSS, phosphorus, NH3, and TKN, the municipal sources account for




more than 95 per cent and their discharges correlate well with the




fecal coliform loads.  These municipal sources include the Delaware




Sewage Treatment Plant and small package treatment plants of various




commercial facilities and educational institutions (Ohio EPA, 1974).




Septic tank runoff also contributes to increased coliform levels in the




Olentangy River.  The effluent limitation of fecal coliforms is 200 per




100 ml, thereby assuring that the fecal coliform load from the proposed




plant is kept within the allowable load standards of the stream.




To achieve this goal, chlorination of the treated sewage after the




second stage clarification and prior to rapid sand filtration is




proposed in the plant design.  There is concern about the possible




adverse effects on stream fish by the residual chlorine in the




plant's effluent.  Although the post-aeration of the effluent




before discharging into the Olentangy River could drive out some




of the residual chlorine from the effluent, the residual chlorine




concentration would still be high.  The effluent concentration of




total residual chlorines is  estimated to be 0.5 mg/1 without
                               212

-------
dechlorination of effluent.  The impact of the residual chlorine on




river  flora and fauna is discussed on pages 226-232,






     No effluent quality standards have been established for other




constituents such as iron, cadmium, chromium, zinc, and copper so




that the effects of discharging effluent containing these consti-




tuents cannot be determined.  It is assumed that any industrial




wastewaters which contain high concentrations of these constituents




would be adequately pre-treated before discharge into the sewage




collection system.






     The construction of the plant is proposed to take place in




three phases.  The design capacities of each phase are 1.5 mgd,




3 mgd, and 6 mgd in the year zero, year 10, and year 20, after the




plant becomes operational.  The phasing scheme of the interceptor




sewer network is shown in Figure 9.






     Some impacts on water quality can result from the project




construction.  Erosion and siltation'problems associated with




sewer construction; dissolved oxygen depletion, BOD5, and turbidity




associated with the dredging activities for sewer river crossings




and outfall work are the major concerns.






     Erosion due to plant construction could have some effects on




water quality such as increase of turbidity, total suspended solids,




and total settleable solids.  Upon discharging these materials into




the river,  siltation might result in the downstream segment where




flow velocity decreases below that required to maintain the load




in suspension.   Siltation is a major factor in the modification
                               213

-------
of floodways and should this siltation be extensive, such




modification might contribute to an increase in flood hazards and




potential flood damages.






     Dredging activities  required by the construction of sewer




river crossings and effluent outfall structures could cause some




water quality problems.  Dissolved oxygen depression would be a




consequence of the high chemical oxygen demand by the re-entrainment




of river bed sediments.  It has been reported (Jeane & Pine,




1975) that near a harbor dredging site, the dissolved oxygen often




dropped below 4.0 mg/1, which is the water quality criteria recom-




mended by the Department of Ecology, State of Wahsington, and some-




times even down to the lethal range (Servizi et al., 1969).




Levels of total sulfides, usually considered toxic substances, and




chemical compounds of high oxygen demand would increase near a




dredging site (Jeane & Pine, 1975).  Although the river bed of the




Olentangy River is essentially of calcareous nature, the low stream




velocity  at low flow cannot preclude the existence of some organic




sediments.  The dissolved oxygen depletion may occur during




dredging periods, but will not be so significant as reported




elsewhere (Jeane & Pine,  1975), because of lower organic content




of the bottom sediments of the Olentangy River.  The degree of




depletion of dissolved oxygen due to river dredging cannot be




quantified without knowing the oxygen demand of the river sediment.






     Dredging can cause an increase of turbidity and total settle-




able solids.  The amount of increase depends upon the characteristics




of the river bed sediments, and cannot be quantified at the present




time.  Dredging of fine-grained silt and clay can increase river
                               214

-------
 turbidity considerably and the resultant high turbidity may persist

 downstream along a long reach of river from the dredging site.

 However,  in the dredging of gravels and coarse sands,  the rate  of

 sedimentation is generally much greater and the suspended sediment

 load does not tend to persist over such great distances.-  Increase

 of turbidity caused by construction might have some temporary

 impacts on the Olentangy scenic river  segment in terms of visual

 aesthetics,  and some damaging impact on sight-feeding fish species

 and benthic fauna.


      The  major impacts are summarized  into two categories, rever-

 sible impacts and irreversible and irretrievable impacts.   The

 impacts which fall into the category of reversible impacts are:


      •  Surface water contamination by the effluent total dissolved
         solids

      •  Surface water contamination by nitrate content of the effluent

      •  Surface water contamination by the possible high ammonia
         content of the effluent

      •  Surface water contamination by the residual chlorine in
         the effluent

      •  Turbidity increase of the surface water due to construction
         of river crossings,  the outfall,  and the plant

      • Possible dissolved oxygen depletion due to dredging of
         river bed for construction of  river crossings and the outfall


     The impacts which fall into the category of irreversible and

irretrievable impacts are erosion and siltation problems associated

with project construction.  These impacts include destruction of

aquatic life, some of which would be unlikely to recover.
                              215

-------
5.   Interceptor Phasing






     In the design of a new sewage system, it is important to




schedule the completion of the various interceptor lines in response




to current and anticipated needs.  This phasing would be consistent




with population densities, water quality problems and projected




growth.  Concern has been expressed,  in Delaware County, that the




proposed system does not adequately meet the needs of present




residents, but rather is designed for a planned influx of popula-




tion.  The validity of this concern is assessed here and suggestions




for improvements and modifications of the current phasing plan are




made.  The impact of alternative plant sites on phasing is evalu-




ated as well.






     The proposed interceptor lines are shown in Figure 9.  Planning




phases are expressed in terms of 10-year intervals, using 1975 as a




baseline for Phase I, though, due to delays in the permit and




impact statement processes, 1977 is a more accurate baseline date.




The first phase consists of a short line along the Olentangy River




to one proposed residential development and a major system in the




Alum Creek Basin which would serve outlying areas north of Wester-




ville in the vicinity of Westerville Reservoir, and the area




around Alum Creek Lake.  Service to the lake area would accommodate




an expected increase in recreational activity, which is of concern to the




Corps of Engineers.






     During Phase II, it is proposed to construct extentions along




the Olentangy River to include the village of Powell and more
                               216

-------
northerly areas, an expansion of the Alum Creek network, and the




completion of a force main to the lower Scioto Basin, including




Shawnee Hills.  During Phase III, it is proposed to construct an




extension of the sewer system northward in all basins and to install




minor lines (Burgess and Niple, Ltd.,1974).






     A map supplied by the Delaware County Health Commissioner




(May, 1975) shows that significant problem areas exist in Shawnee




Hills, Powell, Seldom Seen Road, Carriage Drive, Hyatts, Lewis




Center, Cheshire, and the southern end of U. S. 23 (see Figure 36).




Smaller problem areas occur in various limited areas in Liberty,




Orange, Genoa, and Berlin Townships.  These water quality problems




result from untreated or poorly treated runoff from cesspools,




septic tanks, and package plants and are caused by both the unsuit-




ability of soils in the area for use as septic tank fields and the




problems of sewage treatment.






     The Delaware County Sanitary Engineer's Office has estimated




that 1,575 people will be served by the initial phase of the project,




mostly in the Alum Creek area.  This figure is based on a house




count within 1,000 feet of the planned interceptors, an assumed




average of 3.22 persons per house, and a non-occupancy rate of




7 percent.  This phase would service approximately 13.4 percent of the




1970 population in the total service area as estimated by Burgess




and Niple (1974), or, by interpolation, 10.6 percent of the




estimated present population.  Phase II adds to this number signifi-




cantly by including Shawnee Hills and Powell.   It is not until




Phase III that over half of the present or projected population




would be served.
                               217

-------
  Y_^i^^::m\^
           1>%J i| P
                       i
            :'•_ fl_ re^  A
-  Tf* IfPf
v^af /\i'j
^-%^*a^a
 1^  \   i*>  l^
jj^^ 'P&jMfc^^*^^:
^^^."jii^i- ^^^^"~^,^-^':fi!. OJ
                                 4J U
                                 •H cd
                                 tH
                                 CO g
                                 3 Q)
                                 cr r-i
                                       tO
                                       S M
                                         cu
                                       0) rH
                                       bo T-I
                                       V Ct]
                                       cct E
                                       ,J W

                                       A •
                    co
                    cd
                    0)
                    O 4J
                    M C
                    03 CO
                    3 >
                    O- CO
                     ^H
                    t-l 0)
                    CD O
                    J-i
                    03 C
                    !S n
                     0)
                    60 ^3
                    C *J
                    •H 3
                    W O
                    CO (/)
                                           w •



                                           ^o
                                           co

                                           cu
                                           V4

                                           (50
                        in
                         0)
                         o
                         !-l

                         O
                         VI
218

-------
     Development of sewerage to residents of the afflicted areas




should be integrated with a comprehensive long-range plan.




Failure to serve the existing population effectively would result




in continuation of local water quality problems and probable low




flow septic problems in the interceptors.  These problems could be




avoided or minimized by first serving the areas which have large




population densities.






     The root of the problem with the present system is that it




is primarily designed to accommodate wastewater from the Alum Creek




Lake recreation areas.  A lesser problem is the exclusion of the




village of Powell from the first phase in favor of a planned




development area north of Powell Road.  Both of these plans avoid




high density problem areas in favor of lower density areas in




Phase I.  Solving these two problems and adding the town of Shawnee




Hills on the lower Scioto Basin to Phase I would serve a much




larger number of present residents.  The plan does, however, serve




well the densely populated southern Genoa Township area in Phase I.






     The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers has proposed to construct




package treatment plants for the wastes from the Alum Creek Lake




recreational facilities.  These wastes would fluctuate seasonally




and would be expected to grow substantially due to increasing




population influx into nearby areas.  The Corps, in its Environ-




mental Impact Statement, has postulated 911,000 visitor days per




year in 1980.  Assuming usage by each visitor for only a portion




of the day and lack of showers or other larger water uses, an




average daily sewage output of 0.04 mgd can be expected.  The
                               219

-------
actual output would be much higher in the summer and smaller during




winter months.  On an average basis,  this is comparable to use by




300-400 residents, or about 20 percent of the population served by




Phase I.  The lines for this area of the plan, however, comprise




more than 25 percent of the total length of line proposed for Phase I




and include one force main and one large reservoir crossing.  If a




line were to be laid to the lower Scioto Basin before the extension




to the Alum Creek area to the north,  it would require slightly less




line mileage and would serve over 310 houses in the Shawnee area and




72 houses along the route.  This is the equivalent of about 1,175




residents or 74 percent more than presently planned to be served




by Phase I.






     Because it is assumed that only a limited length of interceptor




lines could be laid in a given time period and because laying of the




force main and interceptors to the Scioto River would entail delay




of the northern Alum Creek lines, some provision would have to be




made for the Alum Creek sewage in the interim period.  A lagoon or




irrigation disposal method, as was discussed in October, 1973 by




soil conservationists and consulting engineers, are possible




interim provisions.  The reports  (cited in Burgess and Niple, Ltd.,




1974) indicate no particular problems with the use of some land for




this purpose.






     Another alternative discussed was to pump the Alum Creek sewage




through Westerville to Columbus, but this would still entail the




the laying of a long pipe.  Perhaps this could be done if some other




entity, such as the Corps, agreed to pay for and construct the line
                               220

-------
to Westerville, which is on the Columbus sewage system, so as not




to interfere with the Delaware County schedule.  Then in Phase II,




the line could be easily switched to the Delaware system.  The




Corps has already earmarked $600,000 for package plants on Alum




Creek Lake.  They have considered paying this money to Delaware




County in return for sewerage service.  Permission for this would




almost certainly be given by Delaware County, since it would be




extremely advantageous to them.  It would speed their laying of




lines but delay any additional expense at least until the line




could be connected with the Delaware system in Phase II.






     The village of Powell is presently not scheduled to be served




until Phase II.  A house count of Powell from the 1973 U.S.G.S.




Powell Quandragle map shows 126 residences or approximately 380




residents.  This represents 24 percent of the current planned Phase I




service.  The extension of a line from Powell from the presently




planned treatment plant site would require little additional pipe




and would actually result in a savings of pipe if the Phase I line




to a proposed development north of Powell were delayed.  This would




not cause major problems because the development might otherwise




be delayed in response to present economic conditions.  Inclusion




of Powell is also advantageous from a financial standpoint because




existing houses are more certain to yield revenue than planned ones.






     Thus, the main recommended modifications involved in the




present or nearby plant sites are to include the Powell and Shawnee




Hills areas in the first construction phase and either delay or




use alternative plans in the northern recreational areas on Alum
                               221

-------
Creek Lake.  Construction phasing modifications arising from alter-




nate plant locations are discussed below.






     Both the Franklin County 1-270 site and the highground site




south of Powell would only require 2 to 3 additional miles of inter-




ceptor line.  Both a lift station and a force main-would also be




required because these sites are significantly above river level.




It is not expected that addition of a lift station or a short amount




of line should significantly delay completion of other portions.




The phasing priorities for these two locations would then remain




as outlined on pages 219-221.






     If site OR7, north on the Olentangy, was  to be selected,




approximately 6 or 7 miles of force main would be required to pump




the Olentangy Valley wastes northward to the plant.   The inter-




ceptors from the other two basins could cross the divides either




at the south end of the county as is presently proposed, or at




the latitude of site OR7.  This latter plan, however, would entail




pumping by force main up all three basins and would  seriously delay




the interceptor construction as well as adding a large expense in




force main construction.  Even crossing at the southern end of the




county might delay completion of Phase I interceptor lines somewhat,




due to the cost and effort of laying an extra force main.






     The selection of the Alum Creek site would cause the most signifi-




cant differences in system design.  While the same line routes would




be followed, a much larger pumping station and force main would be




required in the Olentangy Basin near Powell Road to pump sewage from
                              222

-------
the Olentangy and Scioto Basins over the draining divide to Alum




Creek.  Difficulties and expenses involved in this double pumping




might make it more cost-effective to concentrate on serving the




nearby Alum Creek Basin more extensively in Phase I and postponing




connection with the Scioto Basin until Phase II.  Logical extensions




in the Alum Creek Basin, based on population densities and water




quality problems, should concentrate in the north and northeastern




directions toward Cheshire and Berkshire Townships.






     While the above discussion indicates the major considerations




affecting the interceptor system, optimum arrangement of inter-




ceptor lines should be based on a study independent of the original




concept, rather than changes in the concept.  This should be developed




only for sites for which a study of facilities plan depth is performed,




These recommendations are applicable to site OR3 because a facilities




plan has been prepared for it.  (Burgess and Niple, 1974).   Our




recommendation of site OR3 as the optimum site on the Olentangy




River includes the implementation of this phasing plan.
                             223

-------
                        Private Communications
Beemer, Harold W.-, Chief, Engineering Division, Huntington District,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 11 August 1975.

Gilbert, Gary, Delaware County Sanitary Engineer, August 1975.

May, Lloyd, Delaware County Health Commissioner, Delaware County Health
Department, July 1975.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1975.
                              References
Burgess and Niple, Limited, Supplement to the Sanitary Sewage Facilities
Plan for South-Central Delaware County, Ohio, 1974.

Finkbeiner, Pettis, and Strout Consulting Engineers and Planners,
Comprehensive Water and Sewage Development Plans for the County of
Delaware, 1969.

Jeane II, G.S. and P.E. Pine, "Environmental Effects of Dredging and
Soil Spoil", Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 47,
No. 3, March 1975.

Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water, Water Inventory
of the Scioto River Basin, 1963.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Scioto River Basin Waste Load
Allocation Report, 1974.

Servizi, J.A. et  al., Marine Disposal of Sediments from Bellingham Harbor
as Related to Sockeye and Pink Salmon Fisheries, International Pacific
Salmon Fisheries  Commission, Progress Report No. 23, 1969.
                                 224

-------
B.   BIOLOGY






     Adverse impacts of the proposed facilities on aquatic biota are




associated primarily with chlorine and ammonia discharges from the




treatment plant-  This section describes the aquatic biota in the




Olentangy River and the rare and endangered naiade and fish species




in the affected river segment.   It discusses the effects of the




increasing concentrations of chlorine and ammonia upon the fish of




the river, and the expected impacts upon terrestrial biota both at the




plant site and along the interceptor lines.






     1.   Aquatic Biota






          The benthic assemblage in the Olentangy River downstream from




     the City of Delaware is not nearly as abundant and diverse as the




     number and grouping of clean water indicator species found at




     Powell Road (Olive, 1975).  The numbers of mayflies, stoneflies,




     and caddisflies in this stretch of the river significantly increase




     upon reaching the Powell Road area of the river and further down-




     stream, thus indicating the influence that the Delaware sewage




     treatment plant has upon the benthic macroinvertebrates of the




     river.  It is apparent that the increase of the clean-water indi-




     cators, the mayflies,  stoneflies, and caddisflies, which are also




     excellent fish food sources, in the area of Powell Road marks the




     area of the river where it significantly recovers from the effects




     of sewage effluent from Delaware City.
                                 225

-------
     The fish populations in the stretch of the river between




Powell Road and the river crossing of Route 23 are similar to




those found in the Powell Road area (Griswold, 1975).  This




abundant and diverse benthic population extends downstream past the




proposed plant site to the fo-ot of the artificial riffle-pool




area at 1-270.






     The largest populations of desirable fish species, such as




the sunfish, smallmouth bass, rock bass, catfish, and bullheads,




are found at the artificial riffle-pool structures about 2 miles




downstream from the plant site.  These structures, built to supply




the fish with habitats, are effective as indicated by the




increased numbers of fish being caught by fishermen and by




electroshocking data for this area.  These stream modification




structures might also be responsible for the greatly decreased




number of naiades found in this area.  No specific data on this




artificial fish habitat area have been collected, but the benthic




community in this stretch of the river is even more abundant than




that found and described at Powell Road by Olive  (1975).  Presum-




ably, such bottom-dwelling animals as the larvae of mayflies,




stoneflies and caddisflies must be present here in large numbers




because they are essential as a food source for the fish reported




to be here.  Possible impacts to this large game fish population




from the plant's discharges of chlorine and ammonia are discussed




below.






2.   Impacts  from Chlorine Discharges






     The calculated  7-day 10-year  low flow at  the proposed




site  (4.54  cfs) was  used for the  calculations  in
                             226

-------
determining the chlorine and ammonia concentrations in the river




at the point of plant discharge (pages 195-200).   Because future




drought conditions are possible in the area, the use of the




worst river conditions is necessary for an accurate assessment




of the possible adverse impacts to the aquatic biota of"the




river froiji this plant.






     The concentration of chlorine in the effluent of the proposed




plant is expected to be 0.5 ppm.  At 1.5 mgd the concentration of




residual chlorine during a low flow period in the immediate area




downstream from the outfall would be approximately 0.17 ppm.  When




the 1.5 mgd plant is expanded to 3 mgd at a future date, the chlorine




residual concentration in the immediate area downstream from the




outfall during low flow period would be approximately 0.254 ppm.




This is slightly above the concentration that causes the fish species




diversity to go to zero (Tsai, 1971).   Upon expansion of the plant




to 6 mgd, the chlorine residual concentration in the immediate area




downstream from the discharge point during a low flow period rises




to 0.337 ppm.  This concentration is very close to the level




(0.37 ppm) at which all fish were found to be absent from the




receiving waters (Tsai, 1971).






     Combinations of chlorine with ammonia and organic matter may




occur to the detriment of aquatic life.  Thus, toxicity to aquatic




life does not solely depend upon the amount of chlorine added, but




also upon the concentration of residual chlorine remaining and on




the relative amounts of free chlorine and chloramines present.




Chloramines are formed whenever water containing ammonia, ammonium




hydroxide, or ammonium ions is chlorinated.  Chlorine and chlora-




mines are further discussed on pages 286-294.






                              227

-------
     The Fish and Wildlife Service has recommended against the




plant's discharges in a letter to Mr.  Ned Williams, Director of




the Ohio EPA (Faulkner, 1975).  This letter refers to the recommen-




dation by U.S. EPA that the concentration of residual chlorine in




the receiving waters should not exceed 0.003 ppm in order to




protect aquatic life.  Brungs (1975),  who made the 0.003 ppm of




chlorine recommendation in 1973, more recently recommended to us,




in 1975, a 0.01 ppm level to protect warm water fish.






     Research by the U. S. EPA is presently underway at a sewage




treatment plant  in Grandville,  Michigan.  The Grandville treatment




plant treats only domestic sewage and contains no industrial inputs.




Most of the species of fish used for the experiments are the




same species present in the Olentangy River; thus, comparisons can




be drawn with the results of the experiments concerning the effects




of the proposed plant's discharges.  Table 46 presents the




information obtained from the research group at the treatment




plant in Michigan. This table shows that the species most sensitive




to chlorine are such forage fish as the shiners and minnows.  These




fish are large portions of the diet of the larger and more desirable




game fish, such as the bass and sunfish.  Additional information on




chlorine effects is supplied by Table 47.






     Tsai  (1971)  studied  the diversity of fish, in three states,




in streams which maintained a residual chlorine concentration of




0.5 to 2.0 ppm below sewage outfalls.  He typically  found a  clean




bottom without living  organisms  in the immediate area below  these




discharge  locations.   He  found that the  stream bottoms near




unchlorinated outfalls were usually covered by large growths of
                            228

-------
         TABLE 46.  Acute 96-Hour TL-50* of Various Fish Species
       Species
Chlorine Concentration in ppra
     Golden Shiner
     Pugnose Shiner
     Northern Common Shiner
     Fathead Minnows

     Crappie
     Bluegills

     Largemouth Bass
      test 1)
      test 2)
      test 1)
      test 2)
O.OAO
0.045
0.051
0.095
0.082
0.127
0.278
0.195
0.241
* Median tolerance level (50 percent survival)
Source:  DeGrave, 1975

       TABLE  47.  Toxic Effects of Residual Chlorine on Aquatic Life
Species
Fathead Minnow






Black Bullhead
Yellow Bullhead
Smallmouth Bass
White Sucker
White Sucker
Walleye
Largemouth Bass
Phytoplankton
Largemouth Bass
Chlorine
Effect Endpoint Concentration
in ppm
Safe concentration
Total kill - 96 hr.
Partial kill - 96 hr.
Sublethal stress
Threshold concen.
96-hour TL-50*
7- day TL-50
All killed in 3 days
96-hour TL-50
96-hour TL-50
Absent in streams
7-day TL-50
7-day TL-50
7- day TL-50
7-day TL-50
50% reduction in
photosynthesis and
respiration
12-hour TL-50
0.0165
0.16-0.21
0.07-0.19
0.04-0.09
0.04-0.05
0.05-0.16
0.082-0.115
0.154
0.099
0.099
0.1
0.132
0.132
0.15
0.261
0.32
0.365
Reference
Arthur & Eaton,
1971
Zillich, 1972


Zillich, 1969
Arthur, 1971
Arthur & Eaton,
1971
Arthur, 1971
Arthur, 1971-72
Tsai, 1971
Arthur, 1971-72
Arthur, 1971
Arthur, 1971
Arthur, 1971
Brook & Baker,
1972
Arthur, 1971-72
* Median tolerance level (50 percent survival)
Source:   Becker and Thatcher,  1973;  Brungs,  1973
                                   229

-------
wastewater  fungi.  The fish species diversity showed a 50 percent




reduction when  the chlorine concentration increased to 0.1 ppm.




The diversity then fell to zero at a concentration of 0.25 ppm,




and no  fish at  all were found in the water when the concentration




"was 0.37 ppm.   Tsai  (1970) concluded that those species which are




sensitive to low dissolved oxygen levels and organic enrichment




decreased or disappeared in the area.  They were then replaced by




other species which  were tolerant to the low dissolved oxygen




levels  and  organic enrichment and are able to increase their




abundance.  Species  found to be adversely affected included the




important game  fish,  the smallmouth bass, largemouth bass, and




black crappie.






     Arthur (1971-72, as cited in Brungs, 1973) studied the effects




of  chlorinated  secondary wastewater treatment plant effluent con-




taining only domestic wastes on the amphipod, Gammarus pseudo-




limnaeus, and the water flea, Daphnia magna.  He concluded that




Daphnia magna is one of the more sensitive invertebrate species




because it  died when the residual chlorine concentration reached




only 0.014  ppm.  It  did have acceptable reproduction at 0.003 ppm




and below.  The amphipod, Gammarus pseudolimnaeus, had its repro-




duction reduced by residual chlorine concentrations above .012 ppm.




There were  no toxic  effects observed when the same wastewater was




dechlorinated with sulfur dioxide.






     Although there  have not been any studies done on the zooplank-




ton assemblages in the Olentangy River, the common species of the




water flea, Daphnia,  probably exist  in the river system.  It is a
                              230

-------
very important food source for both young and mature fish (Pennak,




1953).  The amphipod, Gammarus,  is also a very common fish food and




presumably is present in the Olentangy River system (Faulkner,




1975).  Olive (1971) reported the amphipod, Hyallella, to be present




in the river near Powell Road.






     Arthur (1971-72, as cited by Brungs, 1973), using a calculated




chlorine concentration of 0.03 ppm, based on dilution of a measured




concentration of 2.0 ppm, found  that phytoplankton photosynthesis




was reduced by more than 20 percent of the value obtained with a




similar experiment using effluent having no residual chlorine.




This effluent was dechlorinated  by sulfur dioxide.






     The Wyoming Bioassay Laboratory in Grandville, Michigan




(DeGrave, 1975) has conducted experiments on the effects of




100 percent dechlorinated effluent upon the following fish species:




fathead minnow, bluegill, largemouth bass, pugnose shiner, pugnose




minnow, common shiner, and golden shiner.  The effluent had been




dechlorinated by sulfur dioxide.  Except for the pugnose shiner,




no mortality was found to occur  when the fish were subjected to




a 100 percent effluent solution  that was 100 percent dechlorinated.




The pugnose shiner experienced a 25 percent mortality under these




conditions.   Reasons for this mortality are not  known,  but the




information obtained by these experiments shows that the forage




species and the largemouth bass  and bluegill, could swim through




100 percent dechlorinated effluent and survive.






     Thus,  in order to protect the benthic organisms and the




abundant sport fish in the area  of the plant site and downstream
                             231

-------
from the plant near 1-270, it is recommended that dechlorination




be used at this plant.  Detailed discussion on dechlorination




techniques is presented on pages 286-294,  and a discussion on the




best location of the outfall to protect the aquatic biota of the




river is discussed on pages 278-280.






3.   Impacts from Ammonia Discharges






     In surface and ground waters, ammonia is usually formed by




the decay of nitrogenous organic matter.  Unpolluted rivers




generally contain low ammonia concentrations, usually less than




0.2 ppm as nitrogen.  Ammonia is soluble in water and reacts with




it to form ammonium hydroxide, which readily dissociates- into




ammonium and hydroxyl ions.  This tends to increase the pH level.




At higher pH levels, the ammonium ion readily changes to NH3




which is harmful to fish.  All of the various ammonium salts are




soluble in water and yield NH^ and an anion  (Becker and Thatcher,




1973).






     The toxicity of ammonium salts and ammonia to aquatic life




is related to the amount of ammonia which is a function of the




pH of the water.  A relatively high concentration of ammonia in




water at a low pH may not have toxic effects on fish life, but




the toxicity of the ammonia would increase as the pH is increased.




The toxicity of ammonia to fish life is increased significantly




with a decrease in dissolved oxygen levels.






     The proposed sewage treatment plant would discharge 1.5 ppm




of ammonia when it first goes into operation at 1.5 mgd.  At
                             232

-------
this initial stage the concentration of total ammonia upon dilution




with the river during a low flow period would be 0.51 ppm.  Then,




when the plant is expanded to 6 mgd at some future date, the




concentration of total ammonia when diluted with the river during a




low flow period would be 1.01 ppm.  These discharges would experience




pH increases upon mixing with the river water when moving downstream.






     Cell membranes are relatively impermeable to the ionized form




of ammonia (NHJ" ) , but undissociated species (NH3) can readily




cross cellular barriers (Milne et^ _al. , 1958; Warren, 1962 as cited in




Thurston et^ _al. , 1974).  Tabata (1962 as cited in Thurston et al. ,




1974) attributes some degree of toxicity to invertebrates and fishes




to the NHt species.






     Flis (1968 as cited by Ohio Fish and Wildlife Service, Faulkner,




1975) has found that exposing carp to sublethal concentrations of




undissociated ammonia in the ranges of 0.11 and 0.34 ppm caused




rather extensive decay and tissue disintegration in various organs.




Robinette (1974 as cited by McKim £t_ al., 1975) conducted labora-




tory experiments with channel catfish fingerlings to evaluate the




effects of sublethal concentrations of ammonia.  He found that




there was a significant growth reduction at 0.12 and 0.13 ppm of




ammonia.  Further studies indicated that there was no significant




difference in the oxygen uptake between the control and experimental




fish.  Microscopic evaluation of the gills of the fish revealed




that all fish exhibited hyperplasia (an abnormal increase in the




number of cells  of a tissue or organ).  The fish that were exposed




to the highest concentrations of sublethal un-ionized ammonia-




nitrogen displayed the greatest degree of hyperplasia.
                             233

-------
     Table 48 presents the percentage of undissociated aqueous

ammonia that could be present in the plant's discharge at the

various pH ranges possible for the effluent.  These percentages

are based on the equilibrium constants for dissolved undissociated

ammonia and the ammonium ion, NH/.  The relative percentage of

these species is also governed by the water's temperature.
   TABLE 48.  The Percent Distribution of Aqueous Ammonia
              Species at Various pH Values and Temperatures
Species
NHg ° n H~0 aqueous
NH+
NH3 ° n H^O aqueous
«t
pH value

0.
99.
0.
99.
7
566
434
273
727
7.
1.
98.
0.
99.
5
77
23
859
141
7
2.
97.
1.
98.
.7
77
23
35
65
Temperature
8
5.
94.
2.
97.
38
62
67
33
in °C
25
25
15
15
Source:  Thurston ert jil.,  1974



     The pH value recorded by Olive (1971) for the Olentangy River

near Powell Road was 8.5.   The effluent's pH values from the

plant, according to its permit, can range from 6 to 9.  The pH

value of the effluent will, of course, vary, but it will usually

be near a pH of 7 or slightly higher.


     At the initial 1.5 mgd capacity,  the plant's effluent would

contribute 33 percent of the flow in the river during a low flow

period.  The effluent plume, then, would experience a pH increase

from 7 to 8 upon mixing with the river water.  As shown in Table 49,

the percentage of aqueous undissociated ammonia will increase almost
                             234

-------
by a factor of 10 when the pH value is raised from 7 to 8 at both




the 15 °C and 25 °C temperatures.  These two temperatures are within




the range commonly experienced by the river.  The increase of the




aqueous undissociated ammonia, the toxic form of NH3, by a factor




of 10 when the pH changes from 7 to 8 does not necessarily




mean that the plume's toxicity to the fish will be increased 10




times.  This relationship is not definitely known, but this




increase indicates that the fish within the mixing zone of the




effluent plume would be more likely to be harmed than would fish




outside the mixing zone.






     When the plant's capacity is expanded to 3 mgd, the plant's




effluent would contribute 51 percent of the river's flow during a




low flow condition.  The plant's effluent plume would undergo a




pH increase from 7 to 7.74 when mixing with river water at a pH




of 8.5.  As shown in Table 48 this would increase the percentage




of aqueous undissociated ammonia by a factor of 5 at both the




15 °C and 25 °C temperatures.  Upon final expansion of the plant




to 6 mgd the plant's effluent would comprise 67 percent of the




river's flow during a low flow period.  The effluent plume, when




mixing with the river water, would increase in pH from 7 to 7.5.




This increase, according to Table 48,  would increase the aqueous




undissociated ammonia level by almost a factor of 3.






     The zone of the river downstream in which complete effluent




plume and river water mixing has occurred would have the undis-




sociated  ammonia  species  present  at  the  increased  pH  levels  described




above.  This portion of the river would have complete cross channel
                             235

-------
mixing of the effluent and therefore the fish in the downstream




stretch of the river would be exposed to increased concentrations




of the toxic form of ammonia, the undissociated ammonia species.




Because at the initial level of capacity of the plant» 1.5 mgd,'




"this harmful species of ammonia would increase by a factor of




10 from the point of discharge, the potential for damage to the




fish of the river would be significant.  The most abundant and




desirable fish population would be exposed to potentially damaging




levels of ammonia within this zone of completely mixed effluent




and water.  This would occur in the river at the Interstate 270




intersection.






     Because of the toxicity of ammonia to fish, the European




Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission (EIFAC) (1970 and 1973 as  cited




by Thurston et al., 1974) has recommended a water quality standard




of not greater than 0.025 ppm of undissociated ammonia.  At a




temperature of 25 °C and a pH of 8, the total ammonia concentra-




tion necessary for a level of 0.025 ppm of undissociated ammonia




is 0.164 ppm.  As indicated above, at the initial 1.5 mgd stage,




the treatment plant would discharge, upon effluent plume dilution,




0.51 ppm of total ammonia.  If this concentration of undissociated




ammonia approximates a correct safety level, then during a low




flow river period and under these temperature and pH conditions,




the fish in the river could suffer adverse impacts from the




effluent's ammonia concentrations  and the  plume's  complete




mixing farther downstream.  Upon final expansion of the plant to




the 6 mgd capacity, though the plant's effluent upon




mixing would only experience a pH increase from 7 to 7.5, a possi-




bility for damage to the fish of the river from undissociated
                             236

-------
ammonia would persist.  The Olentangy River can experience a -tempera-




ture increase of up to 30 °C (Faulkner, 1975).  At this temperature




and with the plume's pH at 7.5,  a total ammonia concentration




of 1.01 ppm would contain the 0.025 ppm of the undissociated




ammonia which EIFAC identified as critical to. fish.  The 1.01 ppm




of total ammonia is the exact concentration that the plant would




discharge when it is expanded to 6 mgd.






     The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Faulkner, 1975) follows




the concentration recommended by U.S. EPA of 0.02 ppm of undis-




sociated ammonia to protect fish and other aquatic life.  This con-




centration is even lower than that recommended by EIFAC, and




indicates that the plant's discharges of total ammonia would have




to be even lower than those previously discussed.  In considering




this recommended standard and the worst river conditions of 30 °C during




river low flow, and a effluent plume pH increase up to 8.0 for the




1.5 mgd capacity, the plant could only discharge 0.79 ppm of total




ammonia to achieve a 0.27 ppm concentration and, upon dilution,




maintain a level of concentration of undissociated ammonia at or




below 0.02 ppm.  Under these same conditions and with a capacity




of 6 mgd, the plant could only discharge 0.4 ppm of total ammonia




to produce a concentration of 0.27 ppm total ammonia which, upon




dilution, would achieve the 0.02 ppm recommended concentration of




undissociated ammonia.






     Further research upon the effects of ammonia on fish is needed.




Thurston (1975) reports that the amount of data on the effects of




ammonia upon both cold and warm-water fish species is so limited




that an accurate assessment of the impacts from this proposed project
                             237

-------
cannot now be made.  From the available information there is




a significant possibility that the fish population of the river




would be damaged by the proposed ammonia discharges of this treat-




ment plant.






4.   Terrestrial Biota






     The proposed site is presently a cultivated field.  The only




trees on the site are those along the river bank on the east side




of the site.  These trees are the typical riverbottom species




that are commonly found throughout the country.  They include




such species as the cottonwood, sycamore, boxelder, maples, and




oaks.  These trees would not be affected at all by this project




and could serve as a portion of the buffer between the plant and




the park across the river.  The plans for the treatment plant




include the planting of various evergreen and deciduous trees




around the site to provide a scenic and aesthetic buffer.  The




planting of these trees is desirable because they would provide




food and cover habitats for the various birds in the area.  The




wildlife that might live along or near the river banks adjacent




to this site should not be affected by the operation of this plant.






     The woodland vegetation to be crossed by the interceptor lines




for this project include such upland associations as oak-hickory




and beech-maple.  There are riverbottom areas which contain




sycamore, cottonwood and boxelder trees  (Decker, 1975).  The




oak-hickory association is found on many sections of the hilltops




where the soil is low in lime content, well-drained, and in most




instances sandy.  These trees grow in soils which have a fairly




low pH; thickets of laurel, blueberries, and huckleberries are






                             238

-------
prominent as their understory.  The more prevalent upland wildlife




in these areas includes quail, rabbit, squirrel, larger mammals such




as deer, smaller mammals such as mice, moles, and shrews, and a




variety'of passerine"birds.  In addition, some higher food chain




species such as hawks, owls, foxes, and skunks presumably inhabit




these areas and have stable populations.






     The beech-maple association and the typical riverbottom




sycamore-cottonwood-boxelder association are common along the streams




and river areas in the county.  These tree types are characteristically




found in the lower elevations, along watercourses, that have moist




soil conditions.  Wildlife species common in the upland forest are




also usually found in these lower areas in fairly abundant numbers.




Such wildlife as the muskrat, mink, river otter, raccoon, opossum,




and amphibians are presumably also abundant in these areas.






     The use of various highway rights-of-way to install the inter-




ceptor lines would greatly reduce the amounts of vegetation to




be removed in construction.  This is especially true of Powell




Road because the pipeline would follow it to reach both Powell




and Alum Creek Reservoir.  This alignment would eliminate the




necessity of displacing and disrupting the wildlife and large-




sized trees in hilltop and upland areas.  The use of high-




way rights-of-way has been found to be ecologically the most




acceptable method for emplacement of pipelines, because this




location causes much less disruption to the environment than




crossing tracts of forest areas.  The wildlife in the areas
                             239

-------
that must be crossed by open trenches would be temporarily displaced




to similar habitat areas nearby.   Because such a small area of




their habitat would be used for the pipeline,  no significant crowding




or lack of available food sources should occur.   Construction of




the interceptors should not take place during  the spring but during




the summer and fall so as not to cause unnecessary destruction of




nesting areas and disruption of breeding and rearing habits.







5.   Rare and Endangered Species






     This subsection is a discussion of the rare and endangered




species in the area of the proposed project.  Stein (1975) found




shells of two species of naiade mollusks (Quadrula cylindrica and




Epioblasma torulosa rangiana) that have been declared by the State




of Ohio to be rare and endangered.  No living specimens of




Quadrula cylindrica, the Cob shell, are known to have been found in




the river system since 1961.  Only four sub-fossil




Northern riffle shell, Epioblasma torulosa rangiana have been




found in the river previously.  All of these sub-fossil specimens




were found in Columbus.






     Pleuroj)ema clara and Simpsonaias ambiqua are included in the




listing of naiades by Stein which she believes might currently be




living in the project area downstream from the proposed plant.




These two species are also considered, by the State of Ohio, as




being rare and endangered.  Stein found two dead shells of both




these species during her work on the river in 1960 to 1963*
                              240

-------
     One rare and endangered fish species, the spotted darter




(Etheostoma maculatum), has been collected from the Olentangy




River.  This species is recorded in the Ohio State University




Museum records as having been collected in 1958, 1960, and 1963




in the area between Worthington Hills and the. Interstate 270




intersection.  1963 is the last time that this species was




reported to have been found in the river.






     The bluebreasted darter (Etheostoma camurum) is considered




to be a rare fish in Ohio and is known to be found only in a few




localities in the state (Momot, 1975).  This fish is found in the




Olentangy and was collected during the electroshocking done by




the Department of Zoology of Ohio State University in 1974




(Griswold, 1975).






     The Indiana bat, Myotis sodalis, is listed as a threatened




species by the Department of the Interior (1973, 1974).  Its




present distribution is in the midwest and eastern United States




from the western edge of the Ozark region in Oklahoma to central




Vermont, to southern Wisconsin, and as far south as northern




Florida.  Its distribution is associated with large cavernous




limestone areas and areas just north of cave regions.  It is




presently decreasing in numbers with an estimated 500,000 still




in its distribution range.  These mammals breed in late June and




their breeding rate is generally a single young per season.




The Indiana bat is declining in numbers and distribution due to




the commercialization of the caves and frequent laboratory raids




for laboratory experimental animals (U.S. Department of Interior,




1973).  This endangered species has not been reported to live in
                             241

-------
the project area, thus, it is not expected to be affected by this




proposed project.






     The endangered mollusks and fish species which may live in




"the stretch of  the Olentangy River under consideration merit




further investigation  to determine their presence in the river




system and to assess the effects of the project upon them.  The




impacts on the  endangered mollusks will be difficult to determine




because their ecology  and life cycles are presently poorly




understood or altogether unknown.  To assess the impacts upon




the endangered  fish species will also be very difficult because




their  populations are  so low and there are difficulties in sampling




for these species.
                               242

-------
                        Private Communications
Beemer, Harold W., Chief of Engineering Division, United States Department
of the Army - Huntington District, Corps of Engineers, Huntington, West
Virginia, 11 August 1975.

Brungs, William, EPA National Water Quality Laboratory, Duluth, Minnesota,
14 August 1975.

Decker, Jane M., Assistant Professor of Botany, Ohio Wesleyan University,
7 August 1975.

DeGrave, Nick, Wyoming Bioassay Laboratory, EPA Project #802292, Grandville,
Michigan, 14 August 1975.

Faulkner, C. E., Acting Regional Director, United States Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Recommendation Letter to Mr. Ned Williams
of the Ohio EPA, Federal Building, 21 July 1975.

Griswold, Bernard, the Ohio Cooperative Fishery Unit, Ohio State University,
1975.
                              References
Becker, C. D., and T. 0. Thatcher, Toxicity of Power Plant Chemicals on
Aquatic Life, United States Atomic Energy Commission by Battelle Pacific
Northwest Laboratories, Richland, Washington, Wash-1249-UC-ll, Sections
D and G, 1973.

Brungs, William, "Effects of Residual Chlorine on Aquatic Life," Journal
of Water Pollution Control Federation 45 (10):2180-2192, 1973.

McKim, J. M. D. A. Benoit, K. E. Biesinger, W. A. Brungs, and R. E. Siefert,
"Effects of Pollution on Freshwater Fish," Journal of Water Pollution Control
Federation, 47 (6):1742, 1975.

Momot, Walter T., Associate Professor, Ohio State University, Letter to
Mr. Ken Fuller of U.S. EPA, Chicago, Illinois, 9 June 1975.

01 ive, John H. , A Study of Biological Communities^ in the Scioto River as
Indices of Water Quality, The Ohio Biological Survey and the Water Resources
Center, The Ohio State University, Research Project Completion Report No.
B-008-Ohio, 1971.

Olive, John H., and Kenneth Smith, Benthic Macroinvertebrates as Indexes
of Water Quality in the Scioto River System, Ohio, The Ohio Biological Survey-
New Series Bulletin, Vol. V., No. 2, Unpublished Manuscript, 1975.

Pennak, Robert W., The Fresh-Water Invertebrates of the United States, The
Ronald Press Company, New York, 1953.
                                   243

-------
Stein, Carol B., The Naiades (Phyllum Mollusca,  Family Unionidae) of the
Olentangy River Between Powell Road and Interstate 270, Delaware and
Franklin Counties, Ohio, Ohio State University Museum of Zoology,
Columbus, Ohio, 1975.

Stein, Carol B., The Unionidae (Mollusca;  Pelecypoda) of the Olentangy
River in Central Ohio, Unpublished Master's Thesis, The Ohio State University,
Columbus, Ohio, 1963.

Thurston, Robert V., Rosemarie C.  Russo, and Kenneth Emerson, Aqueous
Ammonia Equilibrium Calculations,  Fisheries Bioassay Laboratory, Montana
State University, Bozeman, Montana, Technical Report No. 74-1, 1974.

Tsai, Chu-Fa, Water Quality Criteria to Protect the Fish Population Directly
Below Sewage Outfalls, The Department of Forestry, Fish, and Wildlife,
Natural Resources Institute, University of Maryland, Completion Report
B-006-Md., 1971.

Tsai, Chu-Fa, "Changes in Fish Populations and Migration in Relation to
Increased Sewage Pollution in Little Patuxent River, Maryland," Chesapeake
Science, 11  (1):34-41, 1970.

United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service,
Threatened Wildlife of the United States, p. 209, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C., Resource Pub. 114, 1973.

United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service,
United States List of Endangered Fauna, Washington, D.C., Office of
Endangered Species, 1974.
                                    244

-------
Co   LAND USE







     This section examines the existing pattern of land use in the proposed




service area, and the secondary impacts of the proposed construction upon the




growth of the .area and therefore upon the future development of the land use




pattern.  This is followed by a discussion of the needs for planning in the




area, in the presence of these forces,  to channel development along desirable




paths.







     1.   Current Land Uses







          Most of the land in the proposed project area is either used for




     agricultural, residential, or recreational activities or is held for




     speculation and future development.   Industrial and commercial uses




     occupy a very small part of the total land area.   Information describing




     current land uses is given in Appendix A.  This subsection contains an




     inventory of current land use, relevant land use plans, and an inventory




     of valuable natural areas.







          The most current available representation of land use in the project




     area is shown in Figure 37.   The predominant residential feature of




     the project area is the occurrence in roadside strips and small sub-




     divisions of single-family detached homes interspersed with older, rural




     farm homes.  Commercial uses generally consist of service stations,




     motels, restaurants and convenience stores widely scattered along




     transportation arterials or clustered near areas of residential concentra-




     tion.  Most manufacturing is concentrated in the area west and south




     of the City of Delaware.  Elsewhere, industrial uses in the proj-ect




     area are restricted to a few scattered light industries along




     U.S. Route 23 and the railroads.
                                    245

-------
r
                                                                                                                                      o
                                                                                                                                      o
                                                                                                                                      o
                                                                                                                                       «v
                                                                                                                                  T  O
                                                                                                                              a)
                                                                                                                              cd
                                                                                                                              o
                                                                                                                                3
                                                                                                                                O
                                                                                                                                01
                                                                                                                                s-
                                                                                                                                S-
                                                                                                                                o
                                                                                                                                (U
                                                                                                                                CO
                                                                                                                               T3
                                                                                                                                C
                                                                                                                                to
                                                                                                                               a;
                                                                                                                               i.
                                                                                                                               3
                                                                                                                               cn
                                                                                           en     <_>
                                                                                           c     O>
                                                                                           •r-     S-
 S"73
 
-(-> C
C •!-
O) "O
•O 3
•r- r—
CO O
OJ C
S- -i—
•a
3
f—
O
C
•r~

(O
•r—
S-
•)->
CO
3
•a
c
en
c
•f»
-a
3
r—
O
C
•r—

O
•i—
i
JO
3
a.
^^?
C O) -r-
to -a ~o

<— ^ -r-
ro 3
s- cnjQ
3 c
4-> -r- =
•— c: s-
3 «r— (O
0 ra 14-
•i- 4->
s- c -a
en o c
(0 0 «
                                                                                                                                           CO
                                                                                                                                           r^.
                                                                                                                                           CT)
                                    C
                                    o
                                                                                                                                           CO
                                                                                                                                           CO
                                                                                                                                           o
                                                                                                                                           o
                                    cn
                                    c
                                                                                                                                           03

                                                                                                                                           a.
                                                                                                                                           to
                                                                                                                                           c
                                                                                                                                           o
                                                                                                                                           CD
                                                                                                                                           3
                                                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                                                          CJ

                                                                                                                                           QJ
                                                                                                                                           1-
                                                                                                                                           tO

                                                                                                                                           
-------
     Land used for transportation is so located as to provide excellent




accessibility to most portions of the project area.   However, the




capacity of most existing roads is not adequate to handle high volume




traffic flows and will need modification to handle the increased residential




population projected for the future.  Agriculture is a major land use;




however, a large portion of agricultural land is held for speculative




investment.







     Land devoted to recreational uses is abundant and oversupplies local




needs, but because of the regional orientation of most of the recreation




facilities, they are used extensively by residents of other counties.




The attractiveness of these recreation facilities is strongly influenced




by the types of activities supplied, the number of users the facilities




can support, the demand for the activities supplied, and the accessibility




of the facilities from concentrations of population.  The proximity and




recreational demand of the nearby, rapidly expanding Columbus metropolitan




area are significant factors which greatly influence Delaware County's




recreation system.







     A comparison of the general types and acreages of recreation facilities




available in Delaware County to those in Franklin County and each of the




five other counties adjacent to Franklin County is shown in Table 49.




Delaware County has almost half of the total acreage of regional facilities




in the entire seven-county region surrounding Columbus.  Delaware County




also has nearly half the total acreage of outstanding natural areas and




over one-third of the total acreage of natural environment areas, as




defined by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources.  All of the*Highbanks




Metropolitan Park is classified as a natural environment area and all of




those portions of state routes 745, 257, and 315 which lie in the proposed
                               247

-------















TO
CU

O
C
•H


CU
•rl
4->
rH
•rl
O
Cd
TT.

g
•H
4J
cd
«
*H
U
cu

<*

a
 O. 0)
x: cu co
x; to ^
CO
co*



CO
r-.

«*
i-l


cu
rH
CX
O
 x:
cu o
co S
4->
CO
cu to
•H O
*J cn
•H 1 3
rH 
O 4J -rl
•H -rl to
60 S tl
01
«



CM

r-.
CO
m
CN
H •

rH
CM



^>
^.






f^.
00
rH




vO
rH
CS




CM
0
rH




O
O CO
4J en 
cu en tH
to co cn
CO O 3
XI O
0 0 X
•H 4J CU
S '1c3
cu C
en N o ."•,
CU -rl -H CO
•H H 4-1 -a
4J CO 0 C
•H -rl Cd 3
rH CJ l-l O
•H CU *•> V"
CJ O. 4J 60
co en co
to rH O
rH O tO O
CO Cxi
CXrH O CJ
•H I-H -H en
O id 00
•H B CU 
CM


in
vO


in
CM
CM





p^
co
iH
CO



r^
vO
CM
•t
es



|Nfc
ON
"4*
#i
CM




!

CO
CO
CU
co en
to
iH CU
n) to
•H co
CJ
to cu
CU 0
i ">
o n
U CU
en
•a
(3 CU
CO rH
XI
CU CO
U -H
CO to
> n)
•H >
M
Oi



m
vO
rH

VO








O







vO
vO
rH




CO
^j-





^





M cd
rj fl>
•H l-l
> tO
cO
x: 
cu to
to . -a
4J U
•H ' 3
cn o
(3
 O
CO O>
m
CT>
a\ o
CO
CO

o\ o
rH
m
00

CO O
f^.
m





co m
-3- CO
CO rH
CM



rH O
r-. co
rH CM
-3*



in o
co m
CTi CM
#i
co
rH






CO CO
co n)
cu cu
to to
co n)
C *tO
cu to
B 3
(3 £
O tO
to cj
•H
> eio
CU iH
TJ
rH C!
to cd
to 4-i
3 cn
CO 3
K 0

M • >
H M
M
O r- .
vo
rH

O vo


•
O r^



.
o o




•


o o
CT*
CO




O CO
r-
rH




o •*










cn
cO
0)
to
CO

•d
g
rH
en 3
co t)
01
M *xJ
co a
cO
CU
_^ cJ
•rl -rl
4J M
•H O
S 4J
•H en
to ft
cw ?2

M

01 0\
rH CA
O CO
I*T i-T
•H

rH CO
VO

co r**

gl
rH ~;
tO ,u
4J >-l
o. 3
H O
in


248

-------
service area are classified as outstanding natural areas.


     The most current and detailed land use plan that describes the

project area is the concept plan developed by Surveys Unlimited (1973)

It describes and/or delineates the planned location of the following

land use elements for a 20-year planning period:
          Regional role of Delaware City
          Major commercial areas
          Major industrial areas
          Major residential areas
          Major public and semipublic areas
          Major vacant and open space areas
          Major improvements to the transportation system.
The geographical location of these plan elements is shown in Figure 38.


     This concept plan recommends that Delaware City be the center of

major commercial, administrative, health,  and civic needs in the county.

The increasing countywide orientation to Columbus makes the achievement

of this concept unrealistic.  New major areas of residential development

are expected in these portions of the project area:
     •    North and southeast of Powell
     •    North and south of Lewis Center
     •    East and west of Interstate 71
     •    North and south of Powell Road.
Major areas of residential expansion in the project area are expected

north of Westerville and south and west of Shawnee Hills.   Expansion of

commercial areas is encouraged for Powell and Westerville.


     The concept of planned commercial development is based upon the

recommendation that growth of a countywide market be encouraged to locate

in the City of Delaware and that convenience outlets  be  encouraged in

scattered areas throughout the county.  Major industrial development is
                               249

-------
                                                                            §
                                                                            o
                                                                            0»
                                                                            M
                                                                            cd
                                                                            I
                                                                           l-l
                                                                            0)
                                                                           P-I
                                                                            OJ
                                                                            en
                                                                           00
                                                                           ro

                                                                            d)
                                                                            S-l

                                                                            60
                                                                           •H
                                                                                 0)
                                                                                 4-1
                                                                                 •H
                                                                                 E
                                                                                  0)
                                                                                  3
                                                                                 CO
                                                                                  (D
                                                                                  CJ
                                                                                  Vi
                                                                                  3
                                                                                  O
                                                                                 CO
250

-------
recommended in the following portions of the project area:


     •    South of Home Road along the Chesapeake and Ohio  Railroad

     •    Along the Penn Central Railroad south of Powell Road and
          east of U.S.  Route 23

     •    Northeast of Westerville along Maxtown Road

     •    Near the intersection of U.S.  Route 36 and Interstate 71

     •    Near the intersection of Big Walnut Road and Interstate 71

     •    Along U.S. Route 23.


     The concept of recreational development centers around the development

of additional facilities in the Highbanks Reservation and the Alum Creek

Reservoir.  Major areas of open space preservation are recommended in

certain watersheds and along major drainageways.  Recommendations for

transportation include the improvement of the capacity of most existing

arterial roads and collectors and the building of an interchange with

Interstate 71 at County Road 109.


     The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (1970) has designated three

portions of the project area as outstanding natural areas.   This designa-

tion is recognized by the U.S. Bureau of Outdoor Recreation.  These three

areas are, in general terms, the north-south traverse of State Routes

745, 257, and 315 through the project area.  They are so classified on

the basis of the high quality of the surrounding natural scenery.


2.   Secondary Impacts on Growth


     The land use of an area is both a reflection of the economy and

society of the area and an expression of its historical evolution.  It

is an expression, supported by action, of the relative importance which

that society places upon sites and functions.  The introduction of a new
                               251

-------
element Into the landscape,  such as a sewage treatment plant,  has an




effect upon the use of land  in the surrounding area which is dependent




upon the way in which it is  viewed and valued by the neighboring




population.  It may attract  growth and development because it  provides




attractive services, contributes to the location of new homes  and




industries, or assures the preservation of public health.   It  may




repel growth because it is presumed to cast a shadow of noise,  malodor,




and disease or blight upon the neighborhood.






     Under these circumstances, secondary impacts may include  those




associated with industrial and residential development, changes in




land values, shifts in the centers of retail trade concentration,




shifts in the location of the most attractive recreational sites, and




changes in the pattern of recreational activities.






     Secondary impacts on growth which derive from the proposed action




are determined by a comparison of the amount and types of development




which would occur under a no-action alternative, which assumes that




there would be no additional public sewering, with the amount  and types




of development which are projected to occur if the proposed action is




implemented.  A description of the growth which would occur under a




no-action alternative is discussed on pages 1-33.






     One secondary growth impact resulting from implementation of the




proposed action would be an increased rate of growth in population and




in economic activity in the project area.  However, the size of the




increased rate of growth would be small because, even if no public sewering




were to be provided throughout the project area, there would still be




significant rates of growth.  High rates of growth will occur  regardless




of sewerage because the project area is highly attractive to residential




and light industrial development.
                              252

-------
     Under these conditions, the absence of public sewering will not




preclude development, but will,  instead, only make development more




costly.  The extra cost involved in land development without sewers




determines the degree to which the lack of public sewers will retard




development.   In this project area the significance of the extra cost




of private package systems or septic fields is minimal.   The project




area is attractive to buyers of  expensive housing units.  The addition




of a few thousand dollars to the initial cost of each house to provide




for the added cost of a package  system or septic field,  over that of




land serviced by public sewerage, would be expected to lower demand




for such expensive housing only  slightly.  The extra costs of providing




private treatment of the wastes  of prospective industrial users are




also expected to be a minor factor in their decisions to locate in




the project area.  Therefore, the demand for industrial development




will be lowered, at most, only slightly.







     Most of the relative increases in rates of population growth




that could be caused by the proposed action relate to the construction




of additional low and moderate cost housing.  There would be increases




in the construction of apartments, trailer courts, and lower cost




single-family detached units. Public sewering, because it is financed




in this case principally by federal monies, and because the remaining




local debt would be amortized over a long period, has considerably less




initial and long-term costs per  dwelling unit than privately financed




waste disposal.  The size of this savings is significant to the decision




to build less expensive types of residences.  These lower cost




residences would generate lower  tax revenues than the amount that local




governments might wish to spend  on the public sewers for the occupants.
                              253

-------
     The increased availability of low and moderate cost residences would




also increase the opportunity for blacks to reside in the project area.




This increase would occur because lower cost housing is especially




attractive to low and middle income families and the lower income of




these families is strongly correlated to racial distinctions.  For example,




in the Columbus region black families have generally lower incomes than




white families.  In 1970 the median income for black families and unrelated




individuals in Columbus and in Delaware County was several thousand




dollars lower than the median income for white families and unrelated




individuals (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1970).  The percentage of blacks




in Columbus, though, is much greater than in Delaware County.  Blacks




comprise 18.5 percent of the population of Columbus, compared to 2.0




percent of the population of Delaware County  (U.S. Bureau of the Census,




1970).  The proposed project would increase the availability of low and




moderate cost dwellings, and this in turn would increase the opportunity




for blacks in Columbus to move to the project area.






     The increased growth of population attracted by public sewering




would cause a number of related impacts.  These impacts would be minimal




because each impact is directly related to the amount of increased




development.  The amount of increased development, as has been explained,




would not assume large proportions.  These impacts are:






     •    Increased erosion




     •    Increased stormwater runoff




     •    More polluted stormwater runoff




     •    Increased siltation in  local streams




     •    Increased burdens on school systems and other public services.
                                254

-------
     Increased erosion would result from construction on the easily

erodable soils that exist in most parts of the project area.  Increased

stormwater runoff would result from increases in impermeable areas

resulting from increased development.   More polluted stormwater would

primarily result from rain flushing oils and other petro-chemicals

from, paved areas.  Increased siltation in local streams would result

from increased soil erosion on the slopes.   This siltation could combine

with increases in stormwater runoff to produce increased flood levels

during rain storms.


     The present schools in the project area, which are already old,

crowded, and inadequate, would have to be improved to meet pressures

caused by increased growth (Surveys Unlimited,  1973).  In general,

increased growth would increase local  costs of providing services,

but presumably would be accompanied by an expanded tax base.  It is

quite possible that revenues gained from this increased growth would not

completely cover the extra expenditures necessary to provide the

services to support the growth.


     A number of other impacts which might result from the implementation

of the proposed action are directly related to the types of growth and

development that are facilitated by public sewering.   These impacts are:
          Leapfrog development whereby suitable areas in northern
          Franklin County might be bypassed

          Increased speculation

          A lower concentration of new subdivision development
          along streams

          Lower total costs of liquid waste disposal over the
          long term.
                                255

-------
     Public sewering may possibly cause development to leapfrog past




areas in Franklin County which have not yet developed to an extent




commensurate with efficient utilization of their sewers and roads.  The




advent of public sewering,  as argued above on page 254, would not greatly




increase development in the project area.   Hence, the relatively small




amounts of excess development can be expected to cause little leapfrog




effect beyond that which is now taking place and likely to continue.




Speculation, which is generally high in areas expected to receive public




sewering, would not be greatly increased.






     Subdivisions of greater than 4 units  require waste treatment through




means other than septic fields; package plants must discharge into




continuously flowing streams.  Hence, without the proposed project,




development of subdivisions with package plants would be largely




restricted to the proximity of perennial streams.  With the proposed




project, development of subdivisions could occur in a greater variety




of locations.  Real estate development would not be as concentrated




near perennial streams for this reason and the stream corridors, which




best serve as buffers to increased urban stormwater runoff and storm-




water pollution, would be freed from some pressure for development.




Stream  corridors are ideal areas for recreation and preservation of




open space and high quality natural environments.  They are likely,




over the long range, to have greatest value as parklands.






     The costs of first building a septic field or package system and




then, at some time in the future, replacing it with a public sewer




connection are duplications and therefore costly in terms of both public




and private capital.  This is  especially true of sewering areas which




have already undergone septic  field development.  The  large lots  required
                               256

-------
for septic field development necessitate the emplacement of long feeder




lines.  The duplication of costs is significant because public sewering




will eventually become a necessity in the project area.  The difficulties




associated with the use of package plants or septic fields in the project




area in the context of projected population growth are the determining




factors which are expected to lead to the eventual installation of public




sewering.  Package plants have high operating costs per customer served,




high rates of failure, and short life expectancies.  Septic fields in




the generally poorly suited soils in the project area also have short




life expectancies and high rates of failure.







3.   Planning Needs







     Current growth pressure in the project area will necessitate changes




in local and regional planning.   These growth pressures both complicate




and magnify the importance of the planning process.  Population will grow




significantly, composition of employment will change, and the already high




accessibility will increase to all portions of the project area.  Develop-




ment, unless properly guided, will degrade valuable local recreational,




scenic, and natural resources.  Controlling development pressures will




necessitate implementation of an overall planning program that is




well coordinated between the local, county, and regional levels, not




crisis-oriented, and dynamic in its ability to meet a changing social




and technological environment and future contingencies.







     Coordination is needed between the multiple levels of planning that




are currently responsible for the project area.   These multiple levels




are municipal and township planning,  county-wide planning, and regional




planning.  Numerous planning decisions are currently made at the municipal




and township levels.   County-wide planning decisions are made by the
                                257

-------
Delaware County Regional Planning Commission.   Regional planning




decisions are made by the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission.




Frequent and detailed liaison between these three levels is needed to




ensure the compatibility of planning policies  and to facilitate the




distribution of data and other inputs into the planning process..  This




liaison requires considerable manpower.   However, the Delaware County




Regional Planning Commission is currently considerably understaffed.






     Sufficient manpower is also a pivotal factor in avoiding planning




by crisis.  A crisis-orientation to planning involves solving problems




only after they have assumed large and not easily soluble proportions.




The township and municipal planning authorities in the project area




currently engage in a  level of planning which most often operates




under crisis conditions.  Sufficient manpower  enables a planning




organization to anticipate and solve potential problems before they




affect the planning area.  Maintenance of a detailed and ongoing data




base, establishment of a long-term planning framework, and formulation




of detailed long-term goals and objectives each would aid in the




anticipation and solution of potential problems.






     A detailed and ongoing data base, a long-term planning framework,




and detailed long-term goals and objectives are also essential elements




of a dynamic planning process.  A dynamic planning process increases




a planning agency's ability to meet changing future contingencies.  For




a planning agency to achieve a dynamic planning process, it must use new




information to continuously update its long-term planning process and




refine its long-term goals and objectives.  The Delaware County Regional




Planning  Commission needs to be able to achieve these time-consuming tasks.
                               258

-------
                              References
Ohio Department of Natural Resources, A Statewide Plan for Outdoor
Recreation in Ohio 1971-1977,  1970

Surveys Unlimited, Policy Plan, Delaware County, 1970 to 1990, October 1973,
                                    259

-------
D.   AESTHETICS







     Aesthetic considerations which could be important in the selection




of a site for a wastewater treatment plant are those related to the




visual blight upon the landscape, the intensity and dispersion of




malodorous emissions, and the noise disturbance which the plant might




cause.  These considerations are taken up below.







     1.   Visual Impacts







          The visual impact is a function of the area within which a




     structure may be seen, the number of people in a position to see




     it and the aesthetic response to this sight.  The area of




     visibility surrounding the proposed treatment plant is determined




     by a line-of-sight analysis based upon the assumption of a plant




     height of 18 feet, a general tree height of 40 feet and an




     observer height of 6 feet.







          It is further assumed that an observer within a wooded area




     could see out of it, but that an observer outside of a wooded area




     could not see through it.  Sixteen, equally spaced, radial line-




     of-sight transects, were constructed from the plant site to the




     maximum limits from which the proposed plant could be seen.




     These transects are shown in Appendix E.  An example of the




     graphic line-of-sight analysis is presented in Figure  39.







          The location of the radial transects and the interpolated




     area of visibility of the plant are presented in Figure  40.




     The area of visibility is an elipse in which the major axis,




     about 4500 feet long, extends along the Olentangy Valley and
                                  260

-------
                    .west
                                                                     east-
940 -

930 -

920 -

910 -
900 -

890 ..
rH  880 -
a)
-i  870 -
cd
w  860 -
QJ
o  850 -
«  840-
QJ

d  83° "
•rl
g  820-
•H
4J
£  810 -
0)
w  800 -

   790 -

   780 .

   770 .

   760 _

   750 -
                                     C
             r
             0
                         1000            2000           3000
                              Distance in 1000's feet from the site
4000
5000
                             Figure  39.   A Line of Sight Profile  (Profile 5)

        Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                                                261

-------
                          1000
                                       1000    2000    3000     -1000     5000    6000    7000 FEET
                                                                             1 KILOMETER
                                          CONTOUR INTERVAL  10  FEET
                                            DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL
                           Figure 40.  Area of Visibility of Proposed  Plant
Source:   Enviro Control,  Inc.,  1975
                                                 262

-------
the minor axis, about 3000 to 4000 feet long, extends across the

valley.  It is noteworthy that,  because of the roughly convex

curvature of the Highbanks,  the plant would not be visible from

the top of the bluffs at an elevation of 890 feet above sea level.

Ridges which extend normal to the Olentangy Valley and buildings,

particularly in Mount Air, also obstruct visibility.


     The people who might be affected by this visual impact include

that fraction of the visitors to the Highbanks Park who climb

part-way down the cliffs to points 100 to 130 feet above the

river, about 18-20 home dwellers in the northern part of Mount

Air, about a dozen home dwellers along the Olentangy River in

Delaware County south of Powell Road and drivers along State

Route 315 south of Powell Road.


     In this context the Highbanks Park has proposed to establish

three picnic areas
     •  On the bottomlands of the Olentangy River about 5000 feet
        north of the proposed plant site

     •  On the bluff above the Olentangy River about 4000 feet
        north of the proposed plant site

     •  On the bluff above the Olentangy River about 4000 feet
        north northeast of the proposed site
Except for the screening provided by trees along the Olentangy

River and screening provided by tree planting about the site the

plant would be visible from the first site.   Because of both the

convexity of the topography and the screening effects of trees

in an intervening ravine the plant would be  obscured from the
                              263

-------
second picnic area, proposed for group events.   Similarly,  the proposed




plant would be obscured from the third proposed picnic area both by the




convexity of the topography and the intervention of trees.   However,  the




proposed plant would be visible through the trees from certain vantage




points along the proposed nature trail in Highbanks Park.






     The plan for the proposed plant and the site has a number of




provisions designed to enhance the visual impact.  The building is designed to




be compatible with the rural-suburban character of the neighborhood




and landscaping has been carefully planned to include trees that will




screen the site.






2.   Odor Impact






     Odors in the proposed plant will occur from septic conditions in




wet wells in the primary stage or as a result of upsets during the




secondary stage of treatment.  Substances which cause odorous emissions




are hydrogen sulfide and ammonia.  Other inorganic odors include sulfur




dioxide or carbon disulfide.  Organic odors identified are mercaptans,




proteins degraded by bacteria, which often transform into various




amines.  The odor threshold, or minimum level detectable by people,




of concentrations of mercaptans, certain amines, or hydrogen sulfide




is about 10 times lower than that of sulfur dioxide, and it, in turn,




is 10 times lower than the threshold for ammonia.  When several odor-




producing chemicals are emitted simultaneously, there are synergistic




effects.  However, accurate determination of these effects is difficult.






     The sources of odors in municipal wastewater treatment plants




are presented in Table 50.  These odor problems can be prevented by




proper plant design or eliminated by add-on treatment methods.




Several odor prevention or removal methods are given in Table 51.






                               264

-------
 CO
 4-1
rH
P-l

J-l

 §
 e
4J
 Cfl
 cu
 rl
H

 rl
 CU
4-1
 Cfl
 4-1
 CO
 CO
•rl
 CJ
•rl
 d
 o
13
O

"4-1
 O

 CO
 Q)
 CJ
 rJ
 3
 O
CO
O
in
w













4J
C
Q)
S
f3
0
o





























0)
o
^J
3
O
CO

^i
O
13
0


















CJ
o
•H
4->
co
a
o
rJ




d
cO
O

TO
0)
4-1
CO
cO
& M
O
rH T3
rt 0
•H
M 0)
4-1 rd
CO 4-1
3
13 >-,
d M-l
•H -H
CO
C d
•H O>
rO 4->
4-) C
r-i -rl
(D
(_>

C
•H

W
C
O
•H
t-i
U
CO
CU
r-J

U
•H
rQ
O
M
OJ
co
d
CO

{*.
,£>

t3 cu
O> d
U -H
3 <-H
13
0 (-1
l-i 0>
a. |5
01
CO CO
CO
CD
4J
C
CD
S
U
«0
O)
(-1
4-1

Ml
C
•H
S-i
(U
4J
a
0>
4-1
a) g
60 3
tfl r-l
& P.
QJ
CO










^^ -
60
d
•H
CO
CO
01
o
O
i-i
ft

13
0
0
U-l
1 — '






























































d
o
•H
4J
co
>
Q)
rH
(1)

W
CL,
O
>-(
13

M
•H
a)
&

Q)
N
•H
6
•H
C
•H
s


















0)
a
co
O
CO
a)

to
01
CO
n!
60

0)
rH
•H
4-1
cfl
rH
o
>
















CO
M
•H
0)
!3

































>-i
O

60
C
•H
C
0>
QJ
M
U
CO

**
4->
•H
M
CO

S
0
M
m
M
S a)
o w
•H CO
4J &
cO
M ^3
O CO
PL, CO
cO fe
>
W


r-l
cO
O
0
0)
M

4-1
•H
>-l
t>0

bO
C
•H
G
a>
Q)
M
CJ
en
































Q)
X
4J

J-<
0

CO
4J CO
Q) CU
rH CO
a 3
O CO
HOW
T3 rH
CO O
rH flj CO
rH rH O
CO U2 M
E ^3 01
CO 3 CO
»fl
UH M-I
O MH O
0
d d
O 0) 0
•rl CO -H
4-) p< 4J
cO CO cO
r4 rH B
O rH S-l
P. O 0
cO O >+-<
>
W

CO
d
•H
CO
CO
rQ

VJ
o

2
d
cO
4-1
d
o
•rl
4-1
CO
H
0)
-l CO
01 cu
cx^
O 4J
M
PU




>-i
o

w
)-l
o
4_l
CO CO
CU CD
to) co
•H cO
TJ 60
1
a ^
o u-t
r4 0
m
60
co d
4-1 -H
CJ A!
3 O
T3 O
0 U
J-<
& 0)
!-J
0) 3
rH CO
•H CO
4J 0)
CO ^
rH PL,
o
>
0)
60
13
3
A
CO

"4-1
O

60
.5
co
CO
01
o
o
^1
a.
4-1
«
0)
«









>-i
O
^o
o

CO
CU
a
3
t>
CU
M

60
d
•r<
rH
O
O
0
CU
60
T3
3
rH
CO

e
M
cO
s

T3
d
CO

CO
M
O
3
cr1
•H
rH

4-J
O
J2

4J
d
5
4J
CO
d
M
O!
ft
3
C/3
























H
O
-a
o

4-1
d

0)
M
&,

rH
rH
•H
&

d
O
•H
4J
CO
M
0)
-.
ja

T3
01
CO
3
cfl
o

>>
H
rH
rd
3
CO
!=>



CO
•a
CO
4-1

60
d
•H
TJ
rH
O
J2
t-t
O
CO
-n
d
o
CM


d
CO
o

4-1
d
0)
e
4-1
CO
0)
rJ M
4-1 0
T3
0) O
60
13 0)
3 4J
rH CO
CO d
•rl
rl g
QJ -H
PL,rH
O 0)
rl
PU

»S
60
rH
rH
•H
<4H
"O
d
cfl
r-l

#N
CO
&
O
3
P
4J

rv
w
n co
CU T3
4J CU
rH ,Q
•H
MH 60
d
•> -H
CO >-.
rJ l-l
O 13
>-.
0) 13
> C
d co
o
o
T3
•rl
r-l
O
CO
T3 C
d o
CO -H
4-1
60 CO
d rl
•rl CO
rH d,
T3 0)
g w
f, *d
•H
CU 3
60 cr
tJ -rl
3 rH
rH
CO

CO
d »-i
0 0
•H 13
4-1 O
CO
>-i cu
cu co
CL, CU
o ,e
4-1
t3
d cu
CO 4->
CO
d d
60 -rl
•rl S
CO -rl
01 i-l
T3 0)

rl rH
01 rH
P,'H
0 >
M
PM


















d
0
•H
4J
CO
3
ft
H
O
a

QJ
4-1
CU
•H
P<
B
0
CJ
d
M





d
o
•H
4-J
cO
M
01
d
•H
r^
•rl

CU
60
13
3
rH
C/D





































































-------
 co
TJ
 O
rH
 tO

 I
•H
4-1
 G




P-.
 O
13
O
W










g
•H
4-*
CO
CJ
o
1-3

rH
CO
CJ
•H
fi.
^"*
H





















C
O
•H
4-1
O


13
CU
4-1
co
cu
60
60

CO


















13
5
4-1
CU







CJ
W)
03

O
4-1
CO

13
C

13
C
o
U,

•I
c
o
o
60
CO
rH
G
* -H
s-i co
Q) cO

CU
CO





T)

CO

• n
CU
4J
03
4-1
•H
60
CO

13
C CU
CO C
O
}-> N
CU O
4-1
CO 5-1
S O

J-i CU
0 G
•H
J-i l-i
•H O
CO rH
13 O
13

O
•H

O

CU
CO
G
cO

13
rH
rH
O
4J
G
S §

4-1
4-1 -H
C 13
 O
cu cj
j_i
CX,




TJ
c
cO

fi
co
13
o
a,

«s
CO CO
G f^
O G
O Rj
60 4-J
CO
rH CU
60
*• CO
CO >-<
C 0
•H 4-1
CO CO
CO
m




P
O

*,
G
O Q)
•H a
4-> -H
CO ,C
G CO
•H G
ft 3
o co
i-t
J3 4J
CJ 3
O

co cu
4-1 CO
c o
CU rH
•H CJ

4-1 O
3 4-1
G

cu cu
o o
B cj
CU





CU J2
CO CJ
60 -H CU
rH ,£5 rH
eO S &
cfl
4-1 •> G
o co o

G CO 4-1
O vH CJ
•H G cu
4J CO t->
Cfl 60 ,£>
B M 0
ft 0
o o B
14-1 >-l ft
0 o
4J -H m co
G S M
cj Go
> M nj 13
CU O 0 0
(-1
P-i

*
CO
f-l CO
cu w
4-1 CU 4-1
H 4J C
•rl rH CO
U-l -H 4-1
M-l CO
60 G
G B ft
•H 3 CU
rH 3 p,
^03
CJ cO co
•r4 ^
M V-(
4J - O
CO 4-1
«- 60 CO
Cfl G CU
)-( vH 60
CU G -H
•H CU 13 CO
U-l CU ^J
•rl M 13 G
rJ U C CO
nj co cd 4-1
rH
o

















60
c
•rl
co
3
0
ȣj

A
<4_f
o
o


•s
CO
CU

o
U

13
C
•H
JS £*•»
cfl
4-> &
C cO
0)
> CO
cu s-i
M O
p( rrt
O
o
4-1 60
G
CO -rl
M >>
0 M
TJ ft
O cO
CJ
CU
G 0
•H O
Ij 1 I|
C "-n
O



0)
60
CO
^
CU
CO
)»4
£ CU
Cfl -rl
•H
•> ft
>-i cO
CU rH
•H 0
n i I
•H M
)-t O
CO 4-1
rH O
0 cfl
cu
^ V4
J_l
ccJ 'O
E f3
•H cfl
J_l
CM
CO
^J
1 CU
- G ^3
G Cfl 4J
cu B o
60 ft
>^ CU U
X CX G
O Cfl
„ s

cT-H cj"
O CO 13
•H CO -rl
4J Ctf X
Ctf 4J O
U O -rl
(U di T)
cfl
•• Q)
43 
O - CU
•H CU 4->
4-1 C CO
co o a
tj N w
•H O C>0
X
o









(4-1
o
4J
G
CU
B
4J
cfl
CU M
M CU
4-1 4J
CO
H &
cd QJ
•H W
B cb
cu &
fi
CJ










•*
*T3
c
cfl

CO

co
B
cu
4-1
•H

co
Cfl

Q)

cfl
CO

13
CU
4J
C
cu n
B cu
60 J3
3 4-1
Cfl O CO
CO
>-l ft 60
CU O
4J O
Cfl •> 4J
S CU
4-1 CU
X! -r-t C
4J M O
•H O N
S rH O
r^
CO CJ 13
0) O 13
60 P. tfl
^
I4_l ^ . «v
o co
ft rH
60 CU CO
G B 0
•H -H -^
,0 CU
3 >^ £>
/-I ^ CJ
O
C/l





13
G «>
cfl G
•H
co o
cu 3
CO 13
CO O
60 H
a
13 1
CU VH
4-1 O
O 13
CU O
rH rH
rH E>-, CO
O O -H
f\ 1 i tj
4-1 CU
4-1 CO 4J
CO CU Cfl
<1> 13 0
M
H
                                                                                                         4-1
                                                                                                         O-
                                                                                                         •H
                                                                                                         CU
                                                                                                         cj
                                                                                                         O
                                                                                                         co
                                                                   266

-------
     All of the unit operations in the proposed STP are aerobic,




hence all of the gaseous by-products theoretically produced during




sewage decomposition — for example, carbon dioxide — should be




odorless.  Septic odor-producing conditions may develop, however,  in




certain areas.  These areas include the raw sewage lift station,  the




tertiary filter building, and the sludge concentrator building.







     The raw sewage may be septic as it comes into the plant prior to




its combination with activated sludge.  Odor from fresh sewage is minimal




and is confined to the lift station.  In long sewer lines at low  flow




rates with no storm or ground water additions, sewage may become  septic.




Chlorine has been proposed as one method of odor control in the  lift




station.  This is cost-effective because chlorine will be used also




to disinfect the final effluent.  Chlorine, however, reacts with  some




of the organic components in raw sewage, and certain chlorinated




hydrocarbons, such as the chloramines, have been identified as possible




health hazards.







     In addition to the chemical control of odors in the raw sewage,




the lift station air vent will be equipped with a scrubber system.




This trap will effectively keep any lift station odors from reaching




the outside atmosphere.  This unit must be properly maintained in




order to be effective.







     The tertiary rapid sand filter and sludge concentrator building




air vents will be equipped with activated carbon filters.  Activated




carbon will adsorb and absorb any odorous compounds and prevent  their




reaching the outside atmosphere.  Although these filters are very




effective, they do wear out and must be replaced or recharged. This




maintenance is the responsibility of the plant operator and is necessary







                                267

-------
to ensure adequate odor control.   The wastewater from the periodic




backwashing of the tertiary filters will be returned to the aerators




for treatment.  Therefore, no periodic odor problems will result from




filter backwashing.






     Hydrogen peroxide, also, could be used for odor control.   No




chlorine is involved.  However, a hydrogen peroxide system, in addition




to the chlorinators for final disinfection, would add to the cost of




the plant.






     One other potential source of odor, though not necessarily an




obnoxious odor, is the aeration-dechlorination system.  One purpose




of this operation is to reduce the chlorine residual by releasing it




into the atmosphere.  The chlorine may be detectable near the aeration




tank, but its concentration there and certainly outside the plant area




should not be objectionable.  The use of another method of dechlorination,




such as sulfur dioxide or granular activated carbon, would result in




no release of chlorine into the atmosphere.






3.   Noise Impact






     Unwanted sound, referred to as noise, is generated by most mechanical




equipment including  that proposed for the Delaware County Sewage Treatment




Plant.  Noise can have an adverse impact on people that ranges from




simple annoyance to  psychological and physiological stress.  Such reactions




include increased irritability, loss of concentration, nervous tension,




impaired aptitude, and loss of sleep.  The extent of  the impact depends




primarily on  the loudness, pitch, intermittency, and  familiarity of  the




noise reaching sensitive human receivers.
                                268

-------
     Noise levels are typically measured in decibels in the "A" scale




(dBA).   The scale emphasizes a certain set of frequencies to which




the human ear is most sensitive.  Examples of common indoor and outdoor




noise levels are listed in Figure 41.







     Noise can be attentuated, i.e.,  reduced, before it reaches sensitive




human receivers.  Distance, vegetation, and topography, including hills




and walls, can reduce noise levels significantly.   For example, a five




foot wall has been shown to reduce highway noise by five dBA (Sexton, 1969)




Vegetation must be quite dense to attenuate noise.   In a dense evergreen




woods with a visibility of 70-100 feet, the attenuation of sound is




approximately 18 dBA per 1000 feet.   Trees with tall trunks to a height




of 6 to 8 feet and spaced about 10 feet apart provide no attenuation




(Embleton and Thiessen, 1962).  Planting vegetation to improve the




aesthetic appearance of the noise-generating area has been shown to reduce




local sensitivity to noise without actually reducing the noise levels




(Sexton, 1969).







     The Delaware County Sewage Treatment Plant equipment that may cause




a significant noise impact on receivers outside the plant area includes




the blowers and the emergency power generator.  The large pumps will




also produce high noise levels, but this equipment will be located




below ground level and the noise impact will be limited to plant personnel




who must service this equipment.







     The nearest non-plant receivers include a residence and a park




approximately 400 feet and 1000 feet away, respectively, from the




proposed site of the blower building.   The blowers, with their piping




and blow-offs are capable of routinely producing noise levels exceeding




100 dBA at a distance approximately three feet from the uncovered







                               269

-------
COMMON OUTDOOR
NOISE LEVELS
Jet Flyover  at 1000 ft


Gas Lawn Mower at 3ft

Diesel Truck at  50 ft

Noisy Urban Daytime


Gas Lawn  Mower at 100 ft

Commercial Area
Heavy Traffic at 300ft


Quiet Urban  Daytime


Quiet Urban Nighttime

Quiet Suburban Nighttime


Quiet Rural Nighttime
NOISE  LEVEL
    (dBA)
     •100
      90
  --80
    - 70
    - 60
   r 50
   h 40
      30
                                  20
                                -  10
                                   0
' COMMON INDOOR
 NOISE  LEVELS

 Rock Band
 Inside  Subway Train  (New York)


 Food Blender at  3 ft

 Garbage Disposal at 3ft
 Shouting at 3ft

 Vacuum Cleaner  at 10 ft

 Normal Speech at 3 ft

 Large  Business Office

 Dishwasher Next Room
  Small Theatre, Large Conference Room
  (Background)
  Library

  Bedroom at Night
  Concert Hall  (Background)


  Broadcast and Recording Studio
                                             Threshold of Hearing
          Figure 41.   Common Indoor and Outdoor Noise Levels
 Source:  U.S. Department of Transportation, 1973
                                  270

-------
operating equipment (Allis Chalmers,  Inc.,  1975).   However,  this



equipment would be housed in a structure with 8-inch thick cement


block walls, 1 1/4 thick urethane insulation, and  5/8 inch thick



redwood veneer.  If the blow-off is vented  inside  the building,  or if



it is adequately muffled and vented outside,  the total noise level



immediately outside the building should be  consistently below 90 dBA.



Using a noise level of 90 dBA immediately outside  of the building,



the noise levels at various distances from  the building are shown in



Table 53.
      TABLE 52.  Noise Level in dBA at Various Distances

                 from the Proposed Blower Building
Distance
in ft.
Noise Level 7,
in DBA
) 100 200 500 1000 2000
5 75 72 68 64 57
    Source:  Enviro Control,  Inc.,  1975







These levels are derived by the dissipation law of sound pressure,



assuming the absence of sound barriers.  Lagging the piping,  i.e.,



covering it with sound-deadening insulation,  may further reduce outside



noise levels (Allis Chalmers, Inc.,  1975).   These precautions, together



with the distances to the sensitive receivers,  should result  in a minimum



acoustical impact from this noise source.   Moreover, strategic placement



of the blower building and emergency power  generator housing  with regard
                                                               *


to existing and proposed topography, and the planting of aesthetically



pleasing vegetation, should ensure local acceptance of the minimum



acoustical impact.
                               271

-------
                         Private Communication


Allis Chalmers, Inc., 1975.

Caterpillar Manufacturing Company, 1975.



                              References
Embleton, T.F.W. and G.J. Thiessen, "Train Noises and Use of Adjacent
Land", Sound, January-February 1962.

Liptak, E.G., ed., Environmental Engineers' Handbook, Vol.2, Air Pollution,
Chilton Book Company, 1974.

Sexton, B.H., "Traffic Noise", Traffic Quarterly, July 1969.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Fundamentals and Abatement of Highway
Traffic Noise, 1973.
                                    272

-------
E.   MITIGATIVE MEASURES







     Several areas of special concern have  been discussed  relating to  the




impacts of the proposed facilities  on water quality.   Consequently,  this




section explores measures designed  to mitigate  the  impacts of  stream




crossings, outfall location,  and excessive  nitrogen and chlorine  content




in the effluent.







     1.   Interceptor Stream Crossings







          Placement of sewer  interceptor  lines  across  or beneath  stream




     beds can cause temporary or permanent  disruption  of stream flow and




     a corresponding increase in sedimentation.   This  may  in turn lead




     to impacts on water quality and sensitive  biological  organisms.




     These impacts can be minimized by careful  consideration of:







          •    Number of crossings




          •    Placement of crossings




          •    Construction phasing




          •    Construction techniques







     Minimizing the number of crossings and correct placement  of  those that




     are necessary are both important early in  the  planning process  because




     these crossings affect emplacement of  lines  that  lead away from the




     stream.  Construction phasing  provides assurance  that such adverse impacts




     as erosion or sedimentation, which might occur during temporarily delayed




     construction, would be minimized.  Construction techniques are  related




     to  sewer   emplacement  in  that bedrock depth  and soil type  are deter-




     mining factors in the identity of the  environmental problems posed and
                                    273

-------
both the cost and technical feasibility of the construction methods




used.






     The common method for minimizing stream crossings in a basin,




in which the stream runs through the service area, is to align inter-




ceptors along both sides of the river.  This permits connections to any




segment from outlying areas with the use of gravity flow interceptors.




This scheme is used on both the Scioto and Alum Creek Watersheds in




the Delaware County interceptor plans because of the difficulty of




constructing a crossing of the reservoirs.  The present design for




the Olentangy River,  however,  includes ten stream crossings between




Winter Road (Figure 15) on the north and the Delaware-Franklin County




line.  Some of these crossings are designed to avoid areas in which




rock excavation or deep entrenchment would be required; others are so




located to avoid forested areas.  The large number of crossings also




facilitates connection with future housing developments and prevents




developers from constructing their own lines across the Olentangy in




order to connect with sewer service.  In certain reaches of the river,




these objectives can also be accomplished at some additional expense




with a double line system.






     The currently planned interceptor lines include five river cross-




ings above Home Road (Figure 15) and five more at Home Road and below.




These two areas are substantially different in both topography and




the availability of highway rights-of-way.  The topography below Home




Road on the east bank of the river is much steeper than upstream and




is interrupted by a substantial number of gulleys and small waterways.




Shale lies near the surface in this area.  It would be difficult and
                                274

-------
expensive to lay a sewer line entirely on the east bank in this area.




Because there is no highway right-of-way on the east bank, it would




be necessary to locate the sewer line through forested areas.  Some




damage to the wooded area would result.  The five river crossings in




this southern area are therefore justifiable insofar as both costs




and adverse environmental impacts would be less than those incurred




by the alternative.






     North of Home Road, however, the emplacement of an interceptor




line along both east and west banks would serve to eliminate five




river crossings without significant impact on the terrestrial environ-




ment.  The topography here is less steep than farther downstream, and




Perry, Taggart, and Chapman Roads could provide convenient rights-of-




way for the line.  With the use of two lines the required size of each




interceptor would be less.






    Location of stream crossings should be determined from engi-




neering, topographic, and environmental considerations.  Engineering




and topographic limitations have been well considered in the presently




designed southern stream crossings.  No information is available con-




cerning aquatic life distribution on a fine geographic scale.  No




particular short stretches of river are known to possess important




habitat requirements.  Therefore, recommendations for small changes




in interceptor crossing locations can not be made.  The safest way to




compensate for this gap in information is to reduce impact of the




crossings through well-chosen construction phasing and techniques.






     Well-planned construction phasing takes into consideration the




adverse effects of construction sites on which work is delayed awaiting
                               275

-------
construction elsewhere.  These delays usually result from attempts to




reduce costs of mobilizing earth moving equipment by clearing all




sites at once.  Under such circumstances the savings are often oblit-




erated by increased costs generated by erosion and sedimentation.  In




this case, such a policy would result in an increased load of sedi-




ments and pollutants washed into the Olentangy as well as onto ad-




joining farm, residential, or forested areas.  A preferred phasing




policy would call for completion of all construction phases on each




river crossing site or on small segments of line construction before




proceeding to the next section.  This will prove more expensive in




short-term costs but advantageous in the long run because it would




minimize pollution runoff and lengthy habitat disturbance.






     Stream crossing construction techniques may involve diversion




or partial diversion of the river.  Total diversion of the Olentangy




would be unwise and unnecessary due to the lack of a suitable diver-




sion course and the low water volume in the river.  Other possible




techniques involve either partial diversion with temporary impound-




ments, dredging, or boring under the river bed.






     Diversion of half of the river at a time is the method proposed




by the Delaware County Sanitary Engineer's Office (Gilbert, 1975).




This entails building an embankment completely around the construction




channel for half of the river width at a time.  Both the building of




the embankment and the channelization of the stream could cause in-




creases in erosion and turbidity in the stream.  This would, in turn,




cause some detrimental impacts on downstream aquatic life.  If this




construction technique was chosen,  its impacts could be reduced  through
                               276

-------
     •  Use of sandbags or other non-eroding material for the




        embankment




     •  Agreement with Delaware Reservoir to keep the river near low




        f low




     •  Rapid completion of the crossing




     •  Resurfacing over the upper cement pipe casing with the orig-




        inal bottom sediments and restoring the original topographic




        contour of the river bottom.







These measures should all be used in conjunction in order to achieve




optimization of cost and reduction of damages.  It is particularly




important to leave the  riverbed  in its natural state after completion




of construction.  In this regard, some amount of bottom sediments




should be replaced above the pipe casing as a buffer against riverbed




changes caused by storm-generated surges in flow or by channel scour




and fill.







     Dredging and laying the pipe in an open trench without diversion




is another possible construction technique.  The pipe can be laid in




segments and the water pumped out after completion of the crossing.




This technique, however, causes a large amount of sediment to be




washed into the river and thereby results in some disruption of river




habitat.  If dredging cannot be avoided, a settling basin and long




effluent skimming weirs with significant retention time should be pro-




vided.  The settling basin would provide for settling of the fine silt




which must be dredged first as well as providing enough detention time




for the oxidation of sulfides (HS or H_S) into less toxic sulfates.
                               277

-------
     Boring under the riverbed is a more expensive but more environ-




mentally compatible solution (Levins,  1975).   In this technique,  a




hole 12-20 inches larger than the pipe diameter is bored and a steel




casing inserted as the hole is drilled.  After completion of the  hole




and pumping, pipe is inserted and the area between pipe and casing is




filled with cement.  This technique, if properly handled, has no  adverse




effects on the river, but it might have a greater effect than other




methods on the surrounding terrestrial environment because a larger




construction area is required.  The cost-benefit tradeoff may, thus,




vary with site, but this method merits consideration.






2.   Outfall Location and Design






     The location of the proposed plant's discharge is very important




from a biological viewpoint.  For example, placement of the outfall




at the Delaware-Franklin County line would subject the fish of the




river downstream of that point to potentially harmful chlorine and




ammonia discharges.  The concentrations of these compounds and their




possible damaging effects are discussed on pages  226-232.






     The best location for the outfall in order to protect the fish




populations in the river is below the artificial fish habitat area which




is located at Highway 1-270.  Emplacement of  the outfall below this area




would ensure preservation of those areas of the river that contain the




most abundant numbers of the fish found there by electroshocking  and




creel surveys  (Griswold, 1975).  The electroshocking survey shows that




from the fish habitat area of 1-270 downstream to Henderson Road, the




fish population decreases greatly because in this reach there is  slow-




moving water and a silty-mud bottom.  Because the more desirable  game




species are not found in great numbers in this area, it is the best




location for the sewage outfall.



                                278

-------
     The design of the outfall contributes substantially to the biological




impact as well.  Tsai (1971) studied the four types of outfall designs




in Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania , shown in Figure 42.  Because




Type I was located on one side of the river,  its  effluent mixed gradually




downstream toward  the opposite bank.  Type II,  located in  the center




of the river on the bottom, permitted mixing  of  the effluent downstream




toward both banks.  Type III consisted of two concrete barriers, each




built out from one side of the stream, allowing the sewage  to discharge




into the middle of the stream and providing for  thorough mixing of the




effluent.  Type IV had multiple outlet ports  across the river bottom.




Tsai found Types III and IV to have higher dilution efficiencies than




Type I.







     Type I was the most common outfall design in the three states




studied.  Type II was a commonly used design  in Pennsylvania, while




Types III and IV were represented by only one plant each.   Types III




and IV provide a quick mixing of the effluent and river water, but




produce a zone of concentrated sewage across  the  river which caused




heavy fish depletion and a barrier that adversely affected  fish movement




and migration.  In contrast, the effluent leaving a Type I  outfall




traveled a greater length of river and required a longer time before




it became completely mixed with the water across  the river.  Thus, the




effluent underwent a better dilution and natural  purification.  The




mixing zone in this type of design contained  less concentrated sewage




when compared to the other three types of outfalls.   From the standpoint




of fish protection, the primitive Type I outfall  is a better design




than the other more complicated types (Tsai,  1971).
                               279

-------
TYPE I
                     WATER  FLOW
TYPE  II
TYPE III
 TYPE IV

                                  rjx.x::::.::::::::x:;:x -x-xx- : - •:,
   Figure 42.   Sewage Outfalls  Typed According  To Locations  and
                Methods of Sewage Dilution in  Stream
 Source':  Tsai,  1971
                                  280

-------
3.   Nitrogen Removal


     The chief nitrogeneous pollutants in municipal wastewters have

been categorized (Taras et al.,  1971)  into three groups:  ammonia

nitrogen, organic .nitrogen, and nitrite and nitrate nitrogens.

Ammonia N in x^astewater is formed by the enzymatic breakdown of urea,

proteins, and other nitrogen-containing substances.  Most of the

organic nitrogen in wastewaters is in  the form of amino acids,

polypeptides, and proteins.  Nitrite and nitrate are the end products

of the oxidation of ammonia in the wastewaters.

     A high ammonia concentration on the order of 1.5 mg/1 may have

adverse effects on some aquatic flora  and fauna (pages 232-238).   A

maximum ammonia concentration of 0.27  mg/1 in the receiving water

would be desirable to protect all aquatic species.  This means that

according to the dilution ratio of 0.67, the effluent concentration

of ammonia from the plant must not exceed 0.4 mg/1 as nitrogen.


     The conventional biological treatment processes employed by the

proposed plant have a short detention  time in all biological treatment

units, as shown in Table 53, and can have only 30 to 50 percent efficiency

in nitrogen removal.  This level of efficiency is not adequate to reduce

the effluent containing a 1.5 mg/1 ammonia as nitrogen to the desired

level of 0.4 mg/1.   Therefore,  more advanced wastewater treatment

processes would have to be employed.  These nitrogen removal operations

may be categorized into biological,  chemical, and physical treatment

processes.
                                                               •

     The biological processes include  nitrification, anaerobic de-

nitrification, and algae harvesting.  The nitrification process utilizes

autotrophic bacteria of the genera Nitrosomonas and Nitrobactors to
                              281

-------
 CO
 CU
 CO
 co
 cu
 o
 o
 !-i
p-t
 Oj

 1
 OJ
Pi
 c
 cu
 bO
 o
•H

S3


>4H
 O
 CO
 V-l
 tO
in

w





































*X3
CU
4-1
tfl
a
•H
4-1
tfl
w


rH
Cfl
^
O
0
CJ





































CO
*^5
M


cu
pi










cu
O
o
H T3
cu
to co
cu o
4J P,
co co
CO T-t
S Q
rH
tfl
bO
c
•H 0
O
4-1 O
CO rH
o --~
U 0
>> 4-1
o a
C cu
CU O
•H M
o cu
•H p,
 w
p! H
O
O






























CU
d
o
a



o

CO
i
m

cxi




m

rH
g

a
cu
bO
O
>-l
4-)
•H


tO

c
o

^
to




























































4-1
pj CU
cu a
p, 4-1
CU tO
T) g
4J 4J
co cu
o n
O P*

rrj IH
c o
CO
(U
>^ CU
O M
cj bO
cu cu
•H "d
0
•H P
IH O
IH
W





"d
•H
3
cr
•H
rH



O
CO
1

rH




CN
CTi
1
O
oo




rH
Cfl
O
•H
B
CU

U








cu
bO
a
cO

o
^
w

a
o
M




T)
bO
a

o
rH
1
rH

£j
O

rr-4

                                                                                                                                  co
                                                                                                                                  3
                                                                                                                                  O
                                                                                                                                 rH
                                                                                                                                  bO
                                                                                                                                  O

                                                                                                                                  3
                                                                                                                                 ,0
                                                                                                                                  o

                                                                                                                                  o
                                                                                                                                 H
                                                                                                                                  c
                                                                                                                                  tfl

                                                                                                                                  a
                                                                                                                                  cu
                                                                                                                                  w
                                                                                                                                  CO
                                                                                                                                  cfl
                                                                                                                                 •H
                                                                                                                                 rH
                                                                                                                                 W
                                                                                                                                  CU
                                                                                                                                  O
                                                                                                                                  M
                                                                                                                                  3
                                                                                                                                  O
                                                                                                                                 C/l
                                                                            282

-------
oxidize ammonia to nitrate.  The nitrates are then reduced to nitrogen




gas by a number of facilitative bacteria including the genera Pseudomonas




anc^ Bacillus.  Methanol is required as a supplementary source of carbon




for the denitrification process in which nitrates are reduced to elemental




nitrogen.  A retention time of approximately 10 days in the anaerobic de-




nitrification unit is normally required (Eliassen and Tchobanoglous,  1969).






     Nitrogen in wastewaters may be removed by algae which are grown at




the maximum sustainable rates in specially designed shallow ponds.




Presumably, algae absorb nitrogen nutrients from the wastewater and use




them for growth of cell tissue.  It is necessary to supplement the waste




with carbon dioxide and a carbon source such as methanol to achieve complete




nitrogen removal.  The process involves a large land area, and costs  are




incurred associated with harvesting and disposal of the algae.






     On the basis of the same concept of algae harvesting, hyacinth




harvesting and use of marshes as tertiary sewage treatment methods have




been investigated.  Experiments at Bay St. Louis, Mississippi, by researchers




from the National Space Technology Laboratory (Engineering News Record,




1975) have revealed that the hyacinth readily thrives on phosphates and




nitrates in wastewater.  The hyacinth could easily be grown in a lagoon




at the treatment site.  The lagoon would serve as the tertiary bio-filtration




system for water leaving the sewage treatment plant.  As a side effect,




the rapidly groxving hyacinth could be periodically harvested and used as




a source of fuel or cattle feed.






      The use of marshes, bogs, and swamps for tertiary sewage treatment is




currently being examined by researchers from the University of Michigan




(Engineering News Record,  1975).  Preliminary studies indicate that the




natural processes at work in a marsh may provide final treatment of




secondary effluent without ecological disruption.





                                283

-------
     Chemical methods include ammonia stripping,  ion exchange,  electro-




dialysis, and breakpoint chlorination.   In the ammonia stripping method,




the pH value of the wastewater is adjusted to 10  or above and the water




is agitated in the presence of air.   By this method more than 85 percent




of the ammonia nitrogen is released  as a gas.  This generally is done in




a packed tray tower equipped with an air blower.   The process causes air




pollution problems by the release of ammonia gas  and ammonium sulfate




aerosols.  Calcium carbonate is deposited within  the treatment tower as




a product of the use of lime (CaO) to control pH  (Eliassen and




Tchobanoglous, 1969).







     Ion exchange is a unit process  in which ions of a given species are




displaced from an insoluble exchange material (resin) by ions of different




species from wastewater.  With the use of resin as an anion exchanger,




anionic nitrogen compounds can be removed efficiently.  In this process,




however, material tends to foul the  resin by selective adsorption on the




resin particles.  To make ion exchange economical for tertiary treatment,




it is desirable to use regenerants and restorants that remove both the




inorganic anions and the organic material from the spent resin (Eliassen




and Tchobanoglous, 1969).






     Electrodialysis uses an induced electric current to separate the




cationic and anionic components in the wastewater by means of selective




membranes.  Membrane fouling is the major problem with the electrodialysis,




Acidification of the wastewater is required  to reduce membrane fouling




 (Eliassen and Tchobanoglous, 1969).







     Breakpoint chlorination provides a selective means for ammonia




removal.  The process is discussed in detail on pages 286-294.   The end




products of the process are chiefly gaseous  elemental nitrogen and small
                                284

-------
amounts of nitrate and a nuisance residual of nitrogen trichloride.




Neutralization of the excess acids produced with proper mixing during




the process is required to reduce the formation of nitrogen trichloride




 (Presley et al. , 1972).  The advantage of breakpoint chlorination




 is that removal of ammonia and disinfection of effluent can be




 achieved in one process.







     The physical methods of nitrogen removal include reverse osmosis




and distillation (Eliassen and Tchobanoglous, 1969).   Reverse osmosis




involves the enforced passage of water through cellulose acetate




membranes against the natural osmotic pressure.   This method has been




used for the production of fresh water from salt water.  A major problem




associated with reverse osmosis for desalinization is membrane fouling.




In the application of this method to wastewater treatment, pretreatment




of the water with sand filtration will reduce membrane fouling.







     Distillation involves vaporization of wastewater by heating and




subsequent condensation of water vapor.  In practice, a variety of




different processes exists, such as flash distillation, differential




distillation,  and steam distillation.  They are all quite expensive.







     The efficiency of nitrogen removal and costs are shown in Table 54.




In order to reduce the ammonia concentration from 1.5 mg/1 to 0.4 mg/1,




removal or conversion of ammonia to nitrate at an efficiency of 74 percent




would be required for the proposed plant.  Among these processes,




distillation would be the most effective, but the most expensive method.




However, other methods such as ammonia stripping, anaerobic denitrification,




algae harvesting, ion exchange, and reverse osmosis would be effective,




if properly designed and operated.  Electrodialysis would be the least




cost-effective.  Breakpoint chlorination followed by dechlorination would







                                285

-------
be an effective method of removing ammonia while disinfecting the




effluent, and would be compatible with the ammonia stripping method




in terms of costs.






4.   Chlorination-Dechlorination and Ozonation.






     Chlorination is a common and cost-effective way of disinfecting




the effluent from a sewage treatment plant.  However, residual chlorine




in the effluent can cause severe biological effects on aquatic flora




and fauna in receiving streams.   One way of reducing the biological




effects is to dechlorinate the chlorinated effluent before discharging it




to natural water systems.  Ozonation of effluent proves to be an




effective method with wide acceptance in effluent disinfection, and at




the same time, increases the dissolved oxygen level in the effluent.




This section starts out with discussion of various alternative methods




of effluent disinfection  followed by the discussion of dechlorination




methods, and concludes with a discussion of ozonation methods.






     The most common disinfectants are the oxidizing chemicals such as




bromine, iodine, chlorine, ozone, and other non-oxidizing chemicals




such as acids and alkalies.  Bromination,  chlorination, and iodination




of the sewage effluent leave bromine, chlorine, and  iodine,  respectively,




in the effluent.  Disinfection by addition of acids or alkalies is not




effective unless the pH value of the water is less than 3 or greater




than 11.  Except for ozonation, all the disinfection treatment processes




which involve the addition of chemicals, discussed above, leave




significant amounts of dissolved solids in the effluent.






     Bromination and iodination are not commonly used for sewage treatment,




because bromine and iodine are more costly than chlorine.  Effluent
                                286

-------
disinfection by the addition of acids or alkalies requires large amounts

of acids or alkalies and further requires neutralization of the effluent

to pH 7.  Only the chlorination-dechlorination and ozonation methods


and their cost-effectiveness are considered here.



     Chlorination is used in wastewater treatment operations for

disinfection and reduction of BOD, ammonia-nitrogen, color, odor, cyanide,

and hydrogen sulfide concentrations.  In a plant the size of the proposed

Delaware facility, chlorine as free chlorine gas is dissolved in a

sidestream of water.  Once the gaseous chlorine  (C10) goes into solution,

it reacts almost immediately with the water (H~0) to form hypochlorous
                                             i        —
acid (HOC1) and hydrogen and chloride ions (H  and Cl ).  The hypochlorous

acid (HOC1) ionizes to form hypochlorite ions (OC1 ) and hydrogen ions (H ).

The ratio between elemental chlorine (Cl,,), hypochlorous acid (HOC1),

and hypochlorite ions (OC1 ) depends on the pH of the solution.   At the

anticipated pH level of the effluent (6-7), hypochlorous acid (HOC1)

should comprise 60-80 percent of the chlorine added, and elemental chlorine

(Cl,,) should be almost absent.  These three forms of chlorine are

referred to as "free available chlorine residuals".



     Ammonia (NH,,), present in the wastewater,  reacts with the free

available chlorine to form monochloramines (Nil Cl), dichloramines (NHC19),

and nitrogen trichloride (NCI ).  At the pH levels of wastewater, mono-

and dichloramines will predominate.  These compounds are referred to as

"combined available chlorine residuals" and have some disinfecting

ability; however, this disinfecting property is considerably less than

that of free available chlorine residuals  (Fair and Geyer, 1963).



    By the addition of extra chlorine and  the provision of adequate

detention time, the ammonia may be completely oxidized, resulting in the
                               287

-------
formation and release of elemental nitrogen gas.   This process is




referred to as "breakpoint chlorination" and is one method of nitrogen




reduction in wastewater.  In general,  the chlorine dosage required to




achieve breakpoint on a molar basis is twice that of the ammonia.  The




necessary contact time must be determined by on-site tests (Fair and




Geyer, 1963).







     In addition to reacting with water and ammonia, chlorine will also




react with organic matter in the sewage, thereby reducing the BOD but




also forming complex organic chloramines.  Certain of these compounds




are possible health hazards.







     Free and combined available chlorine compounds at varying concentrations




are toxic to aquatic organisms.  Examples of the effects of various concen-




trations of chlorine residuals on various fish types are listed in Table 48




on page 229  (Brungs, 1973; Becker and Thatcher, 1973).  The recommended




safe level for chlorine residuals in warm-water aquatic systems is




0.01 mg/1 (Brungs, 1975).  Assuming a river flow rate of 2.93 million




gallons per day  (mgd) (7-day 10-year low flow), and an effluent discharge




of 1.5 mgd, the  required residual chlorine concentration in the effluent,




to keep the stream chlorine concentration below 0.01 mg/1, would be




approximately 0.03 mg/1.  Effluent residual chlorine levels of less than




0.01 mg/1 are possible and desirable.







     Reduction of chlorine residuals in sewage effluents may be accomplished




by various methods, including aeration, sulfur dioxide addition, or granular




activated carbon filtration.  Aerating  the chlorinated effluent for




15 minutes to 8  hours will reduce the concentrations of various related




compounds, including elemental chlorine  (Cl?) , hypochlorous acid (HOC1),




dichloraminc  (NHC1 ), and trichloramine  (NC13) (Fair and Geyer, 1963;







                                288

-------
Hinde Engineering, 1975).  Monochloramine, which is an important chlorine




residual, is not removed.  Consequently, the resulting residual chlorine




concentration in the effluent is difficult to estimate without actual




operating data.  Aeration does not remove complex organic chloramines,




but it increases the dissolved oxygen concentration in the effluent.






     Sulfur dioxide addition is also a suitable technique for dechlorination.




Sulfur dioxide reacts with chlorine to form sulfuric and hydrochloric




acids; consequently, a provision for pH adjustment should be provided.




Sulfur dioxide in the gaseous state is dissolved in the chlorinated




effluent until the concentration of SO  exceeds that of the residual




chlorine.  At residual chlorine concentrations of 2 and 4 mg/1, approximately




37.5 and 62.6 pounds per day of SO- are required.  A relatively short




contact time of ten minutes is required.  The resulting residual chlorine




concentration should be less than 0.01 mg/1.  Complex organic chloramines




are not removed by the addition of sulfur dioxide.  Furthermore, chlorides




and sulfates, as end products of the method, are left in the effluent.




The increase of total dissolved solids load from this method ranges from




300 to 600 pounds per day as compared to the TDS load of 29,860 pounds




per day of the plant at flow rate of 6 mgd.






     Granular activated carbon may also be used for dechlorination.  It




is more commonly used to adsorb organic matter and other compounds




responsible for BOD and odor.  Certain types of activated carbon systems,




such as downflow units, also act as filters and remove suspended solids.




Filtration may clog the downflow units and the BOD in the effluent may




encourage the growth of microorganisms on the carbon.  Backwashing of




the downflow units reduces clogging and biological accumulations.  Counter-




current upflow units do not clog, hence do not require backwashing.




Adsorption is a non-consumptive surface phenomenon, and the carbon can be




                                289

-------
regenerated and reused.   In dechlorination,  the chlorine is  absorbed




by the pores in the carbon granules  and reacts  with the carbon to produce




carbon dioxide gas and hydrochloric  acid.  Therefore,  in this  process,




carbon is consumed.







     Activated carbon systems are more complicated and expensive to




construct and operate than either aeration or sulfur dioxide units.  A




capital cost comparison of aeration, sulfur  dioxide, and granular




activated carbon dechlorination systems is presented in Table   54.  A




sulfur dioxide system has the lowest capital cost; the aeration units,




depending on electrical rates, should have the lowest operating costs.




Aerating systems, however, do accomplish the necessary goal  of increasing




the dissolved oxygen concentration in the effluent.   A combined system




using aeration and sulfur dioxide might be very cost-effective.  The




aeration time required to raise the  dissolved oxygen concentration is less




than the aeration time necessary to  dechlorinate.







     Assuming that the effluent prior to discharge has a dissolved oxygen




concentration of 1 mg/1 and that the final effluent must have 5 mg/1, then




4 mg/1 or approximately 50 pounds of oxygen  per day must be  added.  A




typical design figure for aeration units is  four pounds of oxygen transferred




per horse power hour.  At this rate, approximately 96 pounds of oxygen




per day could be provided by a one horse power unit.







     Allowing for BOD, residual dissolved oxygen requirements, and




continuous supply regulation, two 2  horse power units would  be needed.




With a one hour detention time (instead of 8 hours), this system should




be able to meet dissolved oxygen requirements.   For dechlorination, sulfur




dioxide could be fed into the tank using the air bubbles for mixing.




This hybrid system is more expensive than the single dechlorination
                               290

-------
system, such as aeration or sulfur dioxide addition, but it appears to

be the least expensive dual purpose system.


     The dechlorination capacity depends on the residual chlorine

concentration in the chlorinated wastewater.   A pH of 7, a temperature

of 21°C, a final residual chlorine concentration of 0.01 mg/1, and a
                           3
loading of 1 gpm flows/foot  of carbon are assumed for the purpose of

subsequent calculations.  Using these assumptions, the dechlorinating

life of 1042 cubic feet of granular activated carbon for incoming residual

chlorine concentrations of 2 and 4 mg/1 is 5.3 and 1.7 years, respectively.



      TABLE 54.  Costs of Various Dechlorination Processes
  Process
  Aeration

  Sulfur Dioxide

  Granular Activated Carbon

  Combined Aeration, Sulfur
    Dioxide
Capital Cost in $
 (1.5 mgd plant)
Operating Cost
in $/1000 gal
    150,000

     50,000

    300,000


     80,000
   .016

   .011


   .016+
    Source:  Calgon Corporation, 1975;
             Hinde Engineering Corporation, 1975
     Many complex organic compounds including chlorinated forms will be

absorbed into the carbon surface.  The resulting effect on the dechlorinating

ability of the carbon should not be significant and the overall quality of

the final effluent should be improved.


     Use of ozone as a disinfectant as compared to conventional chlorination

and dechlorination is increasing for a number of reasons.  Ozone is a highly
                                291

-------
effective disinfectant and leaves no residuals and no dissolved solids.




In addition to the bacterial kills, ozone treatment can purge virus




particles and pollutants, such as surfactants, that survive treatment




with chlorine.  Coin (1969) has reported that a little more than 3




minutes of ozone treatment, with 0.4 milligram of ozone per liter of




water, kills all three types of polio virus.  Ozone is also capable of




higher reductions of residual BOD and total organic carbon (TOG) than




carbon adsorption polishing, and is fully cost competititve.   Furthermore,




ozone is more effective than chlorine against the major taste- and odor-




causing compounds, such as phenols and amines.  Chlorination merely




converts these into compounds that are less resistant to oxidation




(Environmental Science and Technology, 1970).  The shorter half-life




(20 minutes) of ozone in water, as compared to chlorine, limits its




application because it provides no residual protection against contamination.




This problem, quite pertinent to the treatment of drinking water, apparently




does not exist in the treatment of secondary effluent.







     In the process of ozonating effluent considerable amounts of air




or oxygen are introduced into the waste, thus increasing the dissolved




oxygen level of the receiving stream.  Therefore, if the ozonation




process were to be adopted for the project, the post-aeration process




could be eliminated.







     The two major inputs  for a typical ozonation system are air or




oxygen, and electricity.   The air usually is first cleaned by filtration,




its moisture removed by a  refrigerative unit, and the air is further




conditioned by air adsorptive dryer prior to ozonation.  Electrodes with




high voltage up to 20,000  volts are used to produce a corona in  the air




supply to generate ozone.  The concentration of ozone generated  is
                                292

-------
                              APPENDICES
     Technical data in support of the information contained in the report

are presented in Appendices A through F.   A record of private communications

appears in Appendix G.



     Appendix A  -  Factors Affecting Development

     Appendix B  -  The River-Bank Trees  Along the Olentangy River

     Appendix C  -  Letter from C. E. Faulkner

     Appendix D  -  Letter of US Army Corps of Engineers
                    NPDES Permit Processing Guidelines No. 26

     Appendix E  -  Visibility Analysis

     Appnedix F  -  Extracts of Applicable Laws of the State of Ohio

     Appendix G  -  Private Communications
                                   295

-------
                               APPENDIX A




                     FACTORS AFFECTING DEVELOPMENT







     Five townships, Berlin, Concord,  Genoa,  Liberty,  and Orange,  form a




close approximation of the proposed project service area in Delaware County.




A geographic description of each of the geographic boundaries of these




townships are displayed in Figure A-l.   Factors affecting the location of




development within each township are discussed in turn.




     1.   Berlin Township




          Major factors affecting the development potential of Berlin




     Township are accessibility to major highways, attractiveness  of and




     accessibility to the Alum Creek Reservoir, depth to bedrock,  soil




     drainage characteristics, and the suitability of soils for septic




     systems.  Accessibility of most of the township to  the City of Delaware




     is excellent and both the interchange of US Route 36 on Interstate 71




     and US Route 23 allow good access to population centers in Franklin




     County.  The Alum Creek Reservoir should attract considerable numbers




     of recreation seekers, but is not expected to attract extensive resi-




     dential development.




          Shallow depth to bedrock in the area of Peachblow and Platt Roads




     might cause difficulty in the construction of homes with basements.




     Generally, most of the area west of the reservoir has a high water




     table and is poorly drained.  Almost the entire township is poorly




     suited for septic tanks.  Each of these soil characteristics contributes




     substantially to the costs of development.




          Existing residential development is a mixture of old farm structures




     and newer large lot, single family homes.  These residential areas are




     located in strips along existing roads;  especially near Cheshire on




                                  296

-------
r
   AJ.NOOO    NOINO
                                                                          CO
                                                                          ex
                                                                          •H
                                                                          O
                                                                          H

                                                                          a)
                                                                          60
                                                                          c
                                                                          rt
                                                                          0)
                                                                          ,£>
                                                                          •H
                                                                          i-J
                                                                          efl
                                                                          O
                                                                          C
                                                                          0)
                                                                          e>
                                                                          T)
                                                                          n
                                                                          O
                                                                          O

                                                                          g
                                                                          u
                                                                          .5
                                                                          .H
                                                                          M
                                                                          Q)
                                                                          M-l
                                                                          O
                                                                          tfl
                                                                          S
                                                                          60
                                                                          •H
                                                                 W
                                                                 Q)
                                                                 C
                                                                •H
                                                                 td
                                                                 O
                                                                CO
                                                                     CM T
                                                                                   (1)
                                                                                   O
                                                                                   •H
O

 en
•H
60
c
w
                                                                                   4-1

                                                                                   §
                                                                                   O
                                                                                   u

                                                                                   CJ
                                                                                   QJ
                                                                                   O
                                                                     O -»•
             297

-------
Cheshire Road, along Peachblow Road,  and along Shanahan Road.   Cheshire




Village has experienced a moderate growth rate.  Small areas of commer-




cial development are located near the northeast and southwest  corners




of the township.  Industrial uses are virtually non-existent in the




township.




     There is a potential for moderate development in Berlin Township.




Most of this development should be residential, although there may be




the addition of small areas of neighborhood commercial development




oriented to serving users of the Alum Creek Reservoir.  Large lot, single




family residential development may occur in strips along existing roads




near US Route 23, near the intersection of US Route 36 with Interstate 71,




and in the area near the Village of Cheshire.




     Most of the small expected amounts of neighborhood commercial




development will probably occur near US Route 23, near the Village of




Cheshire and near the interchange of US Route 36 on Interstate 71.




Some light industrial development can also be expected near the inter-




change of US Route 36 with Interstate 71.  Residential development




which can normally be expected near a newly constructed reservoir will




probably not materialize here.  The large acreage of government-owned




land around the reservoir will preclude home sites next to the water




and severely restrict the number of potential home sites within sight




of the water.




2.   Concord Township




     Major factors affecting development in Concord Township are accessi-




bility and soil conditions.  Interstate 270, with interchanges at both




Sawmill Road and State Route 161, provides easy access between Columbus







                             298

-------
and most parts of Concord Township.  Most of the soils outside of the




Scioto River Drainage Basin area are of a Blount-Pewamo-Morley associa-




tion.  These soils present moderate to severe limitations on development




that does not have central sewering.




     The Scioto River Drainage Basin area contains Milton-Morley soils




which, primarily because of their better drainage characteristics,




offer greater advantages to development that is not centrally sewered.




As a consequence, most current development in Concord Township is located




near the Scioto River.  Erosion is a potential problem in almost all




areas of the township.




     Current development in Concord Township is predominately residential.




The two incorporated areas are Shawnee Hills and part of Dublin.




Shawnee Hills has less expensive and older housing than the areas




immediately around it.  Thus,  much recent housing development has taken




place in the area around, but  not in, Shawnee Hills.   A high income




residential area is being actively promoted in the Dublin incorporation.




Other residential development  in the township is located in scattered




sites on existing thoroughfares and in a few small subdivisions.  Generally,




this development lies relatively close to the Scioto  River.




     Commercial development is entirely of a neighborhood shopping and




service type and is scattered  on a few small sites throughout the town-




ship.  Industrial development  consists of a small site northwest of




Shawnee Hills and a quarry adjacent to 0'Shaughnessy  Reservoir.




     Potential development for that part of the township which does




not have central sewers is greatest in the area near  the Scioto River.
                             299

-------
This development is primarily expected in the Shawnee Hills-Dublin area.




Most development will be residential, although some small commercial




and industrial uses may be attracted to the township.




3.   Genoa Township




     Major factors affecting the development potential of Genoa Town-




ship are restrictive zoning, accessibility, growth pressures caused




by the presence of Westerville, and soil conditions.  Genoa Township




has two separate zoning ordinances.  One ordinance, which affects only




small portions of the proposed service area, allows for the reduction




in minimum lot size required for planned unit developments.  The other




ordinance, which affects much more of the proposed service area, does




not currently allow such reductions in the existing large minimum lot




size.  Accessibility to areas within the township, to Westerville and




to Columbus is excellent.  Growth pressures from Westerville, already




expressed by a small annexation, are mitigated by restrictive zoning




ordinances.  Poor drainage, a high seasonal water table and poor suit-




ability for septic fields contribute to the cost of any development




in that portion of the township which lies in the project area.




     Existing development is predominately residential of both strip




and subdivided varieties.  Within the project area there are some




strip residential areas along Worthington-Galena Road and several




small subdivisions near Africa Road and Worthington-Galena Road.  Al-




though commercial development is virtually non-existent, there is a




commercially zoned area near the township line on the east side of




Africa Road.  Industrial development in the project area is insignifi-




cant in area.
                             300

-------
     Potential development within that portion of the project area




lying in Genoa Township will be almost exclusively residential with




some supportive neighborhood commercial uses.  Construction of a pro-




posed interchange at Big Walnut Road and Interstate 71 would enhance




residential development and possibly light industrial development




along Big Walnut Road.  A possible interchange at Powell Road  in




Orange Township  would enhance the same type of development, but the




distance from the boundary of Genoa Township to the interchange would




limit the amount of development in Genoa Township.  Strict zoning




regulations, if continued, will most certainly retard rapid future




development of all types.




4.   Liberty Township




     Developmental factors in Liberty Township are planned major growth




for Powell, accessibility to Columbus and the City of Delaware, and




soil conditions.  The Village of Powell anticipates large amounts of




growth in the future and is presently in the first steps of implementing




a land use plan and instituting a planning process.  The plan envisions




the rapid expansion of Powell from >a village of approximately 400 people




to a city of 30,000 people.  Interchanges on Interstate 270 with Sawmill




Road and State Route 315 provide excellent access to Columbus.  State




Route 315 provides easy access to the City of Delaware.




     Soil conditions present severe limitations for septic tanks, except




for small amounts of Fox soils in the Fox-Eel associations.  All soils




have poor bearing values and most soils have poor drainage.  The poor




bearing values and poor drainage contribute to development costs.




Milton-Morley soils (steeper slopes) and Fox soils (mostly near the
                             301

-------
Olentangy River) are well drained but need erosion controls to facili-




tate environmentally sound development.




     Existing development consists of residential, commercial, and




light industrial uses.  Major residential areas consist of strip develop-




ment along Seldom Seen Road, Sawmill Road, and the Jewett Road-Olentangy




River Road area,  small clusters in Hyattville and Powell, and several




new subdivisions near Olentangy River Road.  Most commercial usage is




in scattered parcels adjacent to US Route 23, or clustered at the center




of the Village of Powell.  The major industrial users are Searle




Reference Laboratories, Inc. (just north of Powell) and North Electric




Research Center (on US Route 23).




     The greatest potential for development in Liberty Township is for




residential uses.  However, there is substantial potential for small




scale commercial and light industrial development.  The major concen-




trations of residential development are expected in the area covered




by Powell's land use plan.  The plan visualizes the first major resi-




dential growth occuring to the southeast of the present boundaries of




the Village of Powell.




     A proposed subdivision, Liberty Woods, located just west of the




Village of Powell may provide another node of residential development.




Neighborhood commercial uses are expected to develop near subdivisions.




Larger commercial uses are expected to eventually develop near the




Village of Powell and along US Route 23 as the population density




increases.  Some additional industrial development is expected both




along US Route 23 and along the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad.
                             302

-------
5.   Orange Township




     Major determinants of development potential in Orange Township




are accessibility to major highways, slope of the land, drainage,




suitability for on-site sewage disposal, and bearing strengths of the




soils.  Accessibility to Orange Township from other townships is good.




US Route 23 provides excellent north-south access to the western por-




tion of the township and Interstate 71 extends across the eastern por-




tion.  Although there are no interchanges located within the township




one has been proposed for construction, either at Lewis Center and Big




Walnut Roads or at Powell Road.




     Accessibility to most points within the township is excellent;




County Roads 10, 21, 13 and 106 serve as feeders to State Routes 315




and 750 and US Route 23.  Slopes that might hinder development are




located along the Olentangy River, Alum Creek and tributary streams.




Most of the area west of Alum Creek Reservoir and west of Interstate




71 have soils with combinations of poor drainage, high water table, low




bearing strengths, and poor suitability for sewage disposal.  These




factors add to the cost of, but do not preclude, development.




     Existing development is primarily strip residential along existing




highways.  A large amount of this residential development consists




of new homes.  Commercial development is concentrated in strips along




US Route 23.  Swan Rubber Company on US Route 23, employing less than




100 people, is the only major industrial activity in the township.




     Development potential is strong in several portions of Orange




Township.  A 244-acre residential complex is planned west of US Route




23 and north of Powell Road.  Impetus provided by the building of this







                             303

-------
complex will set the pattern for a major future node  of  development.




     The increased accessibility to Columbus created  by  the completion




of any interchanges on Interstate 71 will foster large amounts  of




development.  An interchange at Lewis Center and Big  Walnut Roads  would




enhance residential and commercial development both at the interchange




and in the vicinity of Alum Creek Reservoir.  Large incentives  for




residential development near the reservoir do not exist,  because the




government controls most of the land adjacent to or within sight of




the lake.  An interchange at Powell Road would enhance residential,




commercial, and light industrial development along Powell Road  and,  in




general, in the southern portion of the township.  Planned improvements




in the Penn Railroad may foster industrial development along its north-




south traverse of the county.
                             304

-------
                               APPENDIX B

                          THE RIVER-BANK TREES
                       ALONG THE OLENTANGY RIVER
     The following discussion describes the tree types present along the
riverbank area of the proposed plant site on the Olentangy River.  Their
expected periods of existence and replenishment are presented in relation
to their use as a buffer zone for a treatment plant west of the Highbanks
Park.  A sycamore-cottonwood-boxelder tree association predominates along
the riverbanks;  some oaks, beech, elm, willow, and maples are interspersed.
All of these trees are found on a variety of soil types, but the alluvial
river bottom areas of Ohio are excellent areas for their best and most
rapid growth.
     1.   American Sycamore
          The American sycamore, Platanus occidentalis,  is one of the
     larger eastern hardwoods.  Commonly, it can attain a height of over
     100 feet and have a diameter of 3 to 8 feet.  Growth is fast, and the
     sycamore can live 500 to 600 years.  The minimum seed-bearing age for
     a sycamore tree is about 25 years, and its optimum seed production
     occurs between 50 to 200 years.  Sycamore, generally, is not dependable
     for seed production after the age of 250 years.   The tree usually bears
     a good seed crop every 1 or 2 years with some seeds produced every year.
     The sycamore seeds are dispersed from September through May of the
     spring following ripening.   The seeds are widely scattered by the wind
     and are also carried by water.   Water-borne seeds are deposited on mud-
                                 305

-------
flats along river courses.   These mudflats usually provide favorable




conditions for germination.




     The best seedbeds for  sycamore germination are on moist  to wet




soils.  Reproduction in some instances can be greatly reduced or totally




absent if the leaf mold and other forest litter is too deep.   Sycamore




seedlings require direct sunlight to survive.  Under favorable conditions




they develop and grow rapidly, at a rate of up to 3 or 4 feet in height




the first year.  The sycamore is fast-growing throughout its  life.   Open-




grown sycamores have a large, usually irregular crown that may spread




out to a diameter of 100 feet.  Sycamore is generally classed as being




intermediate in tolerance to shade and competitive ability, and can




compete successfully with cottonwoods and willows.




2.   Eastern Cottonwood




     The eastern cottonwood, Populus deltoides, is a medium-  to large-




sized tree that can attain a height of 100 to 175 feet, and a diameter




of 4 to 6 feet.  The cottonwood is a relatively short-lived species;




trees over 70 years old begin to deteriorate, and the maximum life span




is no more than two centuries.




     Seed production begins when the trees are about 10 years old.




Flowering takes place between February and April before the leaves




appear, and the fruit matures from April through August of the first




year.  Seedfall occurs during this period.  The optimum seed-bearing




age is from 30 to 40 years;  good seed crops are the rule. Much of the




seed is carried from the parent tree by wind and by water.  Some water-




borne seeds are left on mud silt deposits.  Unless floating on or immersed




in water, the cottonwood seed needs to reach a favorable seedbed and
                             306

-------
germinate very soon after falling from the tree.  The seeds remain




viable for several weeks or longer in water,  but cannot endure more




than a week of exposure under dry conditions.  Germinative capacity




averages about 88 percent.  Seedlings grow very slowly at first but




accelerate steadily and rapidly after about three weeks.  Full light




for a substantial portion of each day is needed by the seedlings once




they are well established.  Within the better part of its range, un-




managed cottonwood stands pass the peak of their growth in about 45




years.  On the better sites, the trees often grow two-thirds to one




inch in diameter and 4 to 5 feet in height per year up to 25 to 30




years of age.




     The cottonwood is less tolerant to shade than any of its associates




except willow.  The willow generally is found on the wetter areas in




which the cottonwood occupies the slightly higher areas.  Because of




its intolerance and the absence of suitable seedbeds under existing




stands, the cottonwood does not generally succeed itself, except along




those river areas where there is a significant deposition of fresh soil




material that serves as suitable seedbed material.




3.   Boxelder




     The boxelder, Acer negundo, is a common and well-known maple.  It




is a small to medium-sized tree that reaches a height of 50 to 75 feet




and a diameter of 2 to 4 feet.  The boxelder is characterized by an




irregular bole (trunk), a relatively shallow root system, and a bushy,




spreading crown.  It is most common on deep,  moist soils and is perhaps




the most aggressive of the maples in maintaining itself in unfavorable




locations.  The boxelder grows rapidly, but it is a short-lived tree




usually of poor form.




                             307

-------
     It has sexes on separate trees with greenish-yellow staminate




and pistillate flowers.  The stamens are in drooping clusters while the




pistils are in drooping groups.   The seeds are winged,  in a V-shape,




and are from one and one-half to two inches long.   The seed clusters




hang on the trees throughout winter and fall in the following spring.




Most boxelder seeds are dispersed by wind.  Growth of the boxelder sap-




lings after germination is usually rapid.




4.   Bur Oak




     The bur oak, Quercus macrocarpa, is a medium- to large-sized tree




that can grow 80 to 100 feet tall with a diameter  of 3 to 4 feet, and




can live 200 to 300 years.  It characteristically  has a massive trunk




with a broad, open crown of stout branches.  The bur oak flowers shortly




after the leaves appear;  this period of flowering varies from about




the first of April to about mid-June.  The minimum seed-bearing age is




around 35 years, and the optimum age is between 75 and 150 years.  Good




seed crops occur every 2 to 3 years.  Light crops  occur in the inter-




vening years.




     The acorns become ripe within the year and drop from the tree




between August and November.  Germination usually  takes place soon




after seedfall, and reproduction of bur oak in open bottom-land areas




is often prolific.  The root growth is rapid, and  the taproot penetrates




deeply into the soil before the leaves unfold.  Bur oaks are relatively




slow-growing trees.  In the  sapling stage the taproot development




continues to be rapid, accompanied by abundant lateral growth.  The




bur oak is intermediate in shade tolerance.
                             308

-------
5.   Swamp White Oak




     The swamp white oak, Quercus bicolor, is a medium-sized tree




ranging from 60 to 90 feet in height and 2 to 3 feet in diameter.  Some




trees have been reported to be 7 feet in diameter and 100 feet tall.




The root system is relatively shallow, but the tree is relatively long-




lived, up to 300 years or more in some instances.




     Good seed crops of swamp white oak generally occur every 3 to 5




years;  light crops are produced during the intervening years.  The




minimum seed-bearing age is 35 years;  the optimum age is between 75 and




200 years.  The swamp white oak flowers in May or June, depending upon




its location.  The acorns are about one inch long and one-half to three-




quarter inch in diameter, mature in 1 year and fall during the months




of September and October.  The principal dispersing agents for the




acorns are rodents, gravity, and water.  In the autumn the acorns




germinate shortly after they fall from the parent tree and the root




system grows and develops.  This growth is inhibited until the following




spring by low temperatures.  The swamp white oak is intermediate in




shade tolerance, and seedlings can become established in moderate shade




conditions.   In forest stands, the swamp white oak has a straight trunk




with ascending branches and a fairly narrow crown.




6.   Pin Oak




     The pin oak, Quercus palustris, is a moderately large tree that




normally grows to a height of 70 to 90 feet and a diameter of 2 to 3




feet.  Some  specimens   120 feet tall and 4 to 5 feet in diameter have




been found.   The pin oak is not a long-lived tree;  it usually attains




its physiological maturity in about 80 to 100 years.   It has rapid
                             309

-------
height growth and the trunk is well defined and distinct throughout




the crown.  In open areas the crown is generally pyrimidal and sym-




metrical in shape.  In the forest the pin oak is tall, straight, and




has a relatively narrow crown.




     The pin oak flowers in early April to mid-May when or just after




new leaves appear.  It takes from 16 to 18 months for the acorns to




develop and they then ripen and fall from September to November.




Germination occurs the following spring.  Pin oaks bear seed between




the ages of 25 and 80 years.  During good seed crop years approximately




70 percent of the acorns are fully developed and sound as compared to




only about 10 percent during the poorest seed years.  When favorable




temperature and moisture conditions exist, shoot growth of the seedlings




starts about the time of leafing-out and continues throughout the




summer.  On typical pin oak sites, moisture is not a limiting factor




for seedling survival.




     Pin oak is more intolerant of shade than are elm and boxelder.




It is more tolerant than the cottonwood and willow.  The pin oak is a




sub-climax tree, but it persists in wet soil areas because it produces




an abundance of fertile seeds and grows more rapidly than most other




trees in the association.




7.   Beech




     The American beech, Fagus grandifolia,  under optimum growing con-




ditions, may become 120 feet tall.  Generally they average between 60




to 80 feet in height.  They live from 200 to 300 years, and occasionally




more than 300 years.
                              310

-------
     The beech flowers in late April and early May when the leaves




are about one-third grown.  They generally begin to produce seed when




they are about 40 years old, and by the time they are 60 years old




large quantities of seeds are produced.  Good seed crops occur at 2




or 3 year intervals.  The beech nuts require one growing season to




mature, and they ripen between September and November.  Seed fall




begins after the first heavy frosts have caused the burs to open,




and usually is completed within a period of a few weeks.




     The beech seeds germinate from early spring to early summer.




Sometimes germination is slow due to a dormant embryo.  On either




mineral soil or leaf litter, germination is good, but on excessively




wet sites it is poor.  The beech seedlings develop better under the




shade of a moderate canopy than they do in open areas where the surface




soil may dry out below the depth of the shallow roots.  Beech is a




very tolerant tree to shade conditions, and in some parts of its range,




it is the most tolerant species in its association.




8.   American Elm




     The American elm, Ulmus americana,  may grow in the Lake States




to a height of 100 to 125 feet and live 200 years with 300 years not




being rare.  The diameters of forest-grown trees may be up to 4 to 5




feet.  This species matures at about 150 years of age.




     The smooth flower buds of the elm swell in mid-April to early May




and appear 2 to 3 weeks before the leaves unfold.  The elm is mostly




wind-pollinated, and the flowers are largely self-sterile.  Pollination




may be hampered during a wet spring since the flowers' anthers will not




open in a saturated atmosphere.  The fruit ripens in June, and seedfall




is usually completed by late June.







                             311

-------
     Seed production by the American elm may begin in saplings as early

as 15 years of age, but this fruiting is seldom abundant before the

trees are 40 years old.  After this age, seed production continues to

be abundant until the trees are about 150 years old.   In closed stands

of trees the seed production is greatest in the exposed tops of the

trees.  The winged seeds are light and readily spread by the wind.  The

elm seeds usually germinate soon after falling, but some may remain

dormant until the following spring.

     The elm seedlings can become established on moist litter and

decaying material such as logs or stumps but not as readily as on

mineral soil.  During the first year, their best growth is with about

one-third full sunlight;  after the first year or two, best growth is

made in full sunlight.  The depth of rooting varies with soil texture

and soil moisture.  In wet soils, as along river courses, the root

system is wide spread and most of the roots are within 3 or 4 feet of

the surface.

     The elm is intermediate in shade tolerance among the eastern hard-

woods.  Once it has become dominant in a mixed hardwood stand, it is

seldom overtaken by other species.  However, it also persists as

an understory species under such species as cottonwood and willow.  The

Dutch elm disease caused by the wilt fungus, Ceratocystis ulmi, is

presently responsible for serious losses of both elm shade and forest

trees throughout the East and Midwest.  This fungus is carried on the

bodies of bark beetles brought to this country presumably in a shipment
                                                                     *
of elm veneer logs from Europe.  Due to its continued spreading across

the country, there is a possibility that the elm trees present in the

                             312

-------
buffer zone along the river may be affected by this disease.  If




this does happen, then the tall and long-lived elms will be lost and




will not be able to serve as part of the buffer zone for the treatment




plant.




9.   Black Willow




     The black willow, Salix nigra, can grow to a height of 140 feet




with a diameter of 3 to 4 feet.  The black willow is a short-lived tree.




The greatest age recorded for a sound tree is 70 years.  The average




black willow matures in 55 years.




     Seed production can begin when the tree is 10 years old, but the




optimum seed-bearing ages are from 25 to 70 years.  The trees usually




have good seed crops almost every year with only a few interspersed




poor crops.  Rare failures result from late freezes after the flower




buds have begun to open.  Flowering takes place in May or early June,




and usually occurs after the leaves appear.  The seeds mature and fall




between April and July of the following year.  When the seeds fall,




the long silky hairs act as wings for the seed.  The seeds are widely




distributed by wind action and water systems.  Unless the willow seed




is floating on water, it must reach a suitable seedbed within 12 to 24




hours, because its viability is greatly reduced by only a few days of




dry conditions.  The germinative capacity is usually high and no dor-




mancy is known.  Very moist exposed mineral soil is best for satis-




factory germination and early development.  Full sunlight promotes




rapid growth once the seedling is well established.  Seedlings, in a




favorable environment, may often grow as much as 4 feet in height the




first year.  Moisture is a controlling factor,  and the seedlings grow




best when there is abundant moisture available  throughout the growing




season.




                             313

-------
     Open-grown willows along stream and river bottoms are generally




limby and have a fairly large canopy.  The willow is also a very weak




tree and is especially subject to wind breakage.   Willow is less toler-




ant to shade than any of its associated trees.




10.  Red Maple




     The red maple, Acer rubrum, may grow under ideal conditions to a




height of 120 feet and a diameter of 5 feet.  However, average mature




red maples are usually from 60 to 90 feet in height and from 1-1/2 to




2-1/2 feet in diameter.  It is a short to medium-lived tree that seldom




lives longer than 150 years.  In northern hardwood associations, red




maple begins to give way to sugar maple and other more tolerant hard-




woods after about 80 years of age.




     The red maple is one of the first trees to begin flowering in the




spring.  The flowers are perfect structurally but never functionally




perfect.  The red maple has a tendency to have the sexes on different




trees.  Thus, some of the trees are entirely female, some entirely male,




and some have both male and female flowers, often found on different




branches.  The red maple usually has a good seed crop every year.  The




fruit, a samara, ripens during the period from March to late June.  The




seed of the red maple is the lightest of all maple seeds and their dis-




persant is wind.




     The major portion of the seeds germinate in the early summer soon




after falling, but some lie over until the following spring.  The seeds




do not need much sunlight to germinate.  A thin layer of hardwood leaf




litter poses no impediment to germination if the underlying soil is




moist.





                              314

-------
     Seedlings on wet sites tend to form short taproots and a long,




well-developed lateral root system.  When favorable moisture and light




conditions are available, the seedlings grow rapidly at a rate of




1 foot for the first year, and 2 feet or more annually during the next




few years.  Growth is rapid during early life, particularly during the




pole stage, but later growth is not often as well sustained.  The red




maple is a subclimax species.




11.  Silver Maple




     The silver maple, Acer saccharinum, can reach 2 to 4 foot diameters




and heights ranging from 70 to 120 feet.  Some trees have occasionally




grown to diameters of 5 feet or more.  Under good moisture and light




conditions it may grow as much as one-half inch in diameter a year.




Its most rapid period of growth is during the first 50 years.  The




silver maple is a short-lived tree that seldom lives over 125 years.




     The silver maple flowers from February to April, and its fruit




ripens from April to mid-June.  The flowers are vulnerable to frost




damage due to this early flowering habit.  The silver maple is a very




prolific seeder, and it usually has a good seed crop every year.  It




has the largest sized seed of all the native maples.  Forest-grown trees




begin their seed production when 35 to 40 years of age.  The seeds,




after they have ripened, fall over a period of 10 to 20 days during the




spring.  They are largely distributed by wind, but some are also dis-




seminated by water.  Due to the seeds' sensitivity to drying, their




viability is so transient that they must rapidly germinate after falling.




When the seeds are dispersed their moisture content is approximately 60




percent.  They will experience a complete loss of viability when "their




moisture content drops to 30 to 40 percent.






                             315

-------
     The best seedbed for the seeds is moist mineral soil with a con-




siderable amount of organic matter.  The seedlings'  growth is rapid




during the first year, and they may grow as much as  1 to 3 feet high.




The silver maple is usually found in mixed hardwood  stands, and it is




moderately tolerant to shade on good soil sites.




12.  Summary




     Of the trees along the river bank area, the sycamore, cottonwood,




bur oak, pin oak, American elm, black willow, and silver maple, will




tend to be the tallest in the buffer zone.  The other trees, the box-




elder, swamp white oak, American beech, and red maple, are moderate in




height and will also make up a substantial portion of the buffer zone.




All of these trees, when considered together, will act as a barrier to




reduce the visibility of the plant to the park areas and to help reduce




the transmission of odors or noise from the plant.  The additional




planting of other evergreen and deciduous trees around the plant site




would also reduce any visual impacts of the plant to the park areas.




     The trees within this area should be able to reproduce and main-




tain themselves adequately throughout the life span of this proposed




project.  The soil and moisture conditions present in the buffer zone




are adequate for growth and should be able to furnish good seedbeds for




the trees to be replenished.  This association of trees is a typical




riverine grouping that is common along river systems in this part of the




State of Ohio.
                             316

-------
                               APPENDIX C

                       LETTER FROM C. E. FAULKNER
         United  States  Department of the  Interior
                         HSilANDWIIUMlKSIRVK-H                IH«,LVK«»TO:
                           Fcdcr;il Hui!Jiii«, fort Snelinig                   ES-PER
                           Twin Cities, Minnesota 55 I ! 1
 M   M  ^ L-  ,riT                                          21  197S
 Mr,  Ned h.  Wilnams
 Ohio HPA                          RE:  Powell Sewage Treatment  Plant
 450  East. Town Street                   Powell, Ohio
 P.O. Box 1049                          Board of County Commissioners
 Columbus, Ohio  43216                  Delaware County
                                        OEFA Permit No: K 901  *AD

 Dear Mr.  llillians:

 The  U..c.  Fish and Wildlife Service has reviewed the referenced  proposed
 facility and  associated material describing the discharges and  condi-
 tions  under which the applicant proposer-, to operate the facility.   This
 supercedes  cur letter of March 24, 1975.  Our comments ?re rubmitced
 under  the authority of ana in accordance with the provisions  of the
 Fish and Uildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401> as -wended; 16  U.S.C.
 661  et sect,}.

 On March 24,  1975,  the Service sent, a "no action" letter to  Mie Ohio f.r-
 vironniental Protection Agency (EPA) to indicate that we die'  not nave
 awileble recc'jrccs,  at. the tir.,i,  to i^ke an investigation of the  ap-
 plicant's prop:;sod  facility wl present our commits r>>;-j rf.r.onn^'i'j-t'ior;;
 The  subjoc-' p:rr. fit  Lst.uir;cj effective i'ay 6,  1975,  3inc^ uor.  ti;..e.',  ?os-
 siblc1  problems of having the1 sewage t.refitinsnt. plaiit (c"i?) located  at x!-t
 proposed r-itc 'jnd ch:-.charging into tiic- Olentengy River r?ve  Lccrn  broujln
 to our attention  by several  sources.   For this reason a biologist,  from
 our  Lebanon,  Ohio,  field office made in ons-He in"c-riratios,  of the p'."o-
 pos-stJ  plc-nt site  on Hay 28,  1975.   O'.ir roncprns, v.irlch are exp":air,e'J
 below,  arc  folii.n'/oc! by recoM^i.daticn:  tiia t; we fiovs df/terr;;incd  to  be
 ncco'isar.;' to  protect  fish end wildlife rc-sourcrs of the ?ffrcteci  areas.

 The  applicant proposes to construct a sewage treatment olort  with  an
 averafjc  Affluent  flo,, of 1.5 million call on.- per oay (:,'?!)) cti)proxi-
 mately one-fourth mile north of the Delawpre-Fra'ik'iin C-ornty  line.   K'e
 understcipd  that the location of the 31T; will be within v;e flood  plair,
 but  above the  100-year flood level.   A March ?.S, 1975 i.-.c-rporandum  from
 the  U.S.  LPA  further  indicated that the initial  cepacily of  the STP
 would  be  1.5  MCD  with a 3.4  MGD peak tiow capacity.   Further  expansion
 is planned  to  6.0 MGD with 9.6 MGD peak flow.   The effluent, will  enter
 the  OlffirLuiKjy  River opposite the Mign?:anks  Metropolitan Park  located
 north  of  the  FranUiiv-Dolaware County line.   The affected reach of  the
 Oleniangy River represents one of  several streams in central Ohio with
 a water  quality adequate to  support a substantial  warmwater sport fish-
 ery  as  indicated  by the following  surveys.

\                               317

-------
                                                                    2.

In a partial creel survey conducted on the Olentangy River from June 3,
1974 to September 24, 1971 (Weber, 1974) fishermen were interviewed on
each of the 49 survey days at three 1,000-meter reaches of the rivcr--at
Powell Road, 1-270, and Henderson Road.  The Powell Road site is charac-
teristic of the natural river and is located about 1 mile upstream
from the proposed outfall.  At the intersection of Interstate 270, the
Ohio Department of Transportation has constructed a series of 5 artifi-
cial riffle-pool complexes which provide fish habitat along with a well
maintained public access.  This area is located about 2 miles down-
stream from the proposed outfall.  The sampling area at Henderson Road,
4 miles below the outfall, is characteristic of an old channelized
river in an advanced stage of recovery.  Tiie creel census data v/as ex-
trapolated to include the entire June-September period for these three
sites.  The summarized data follow:

            Total fishermen         1,560
            Number fishermen-hours  2,753
            Number of fish caught   1,079

Groups and species of fish caught expressed as a percentage include:

            Rock Bass        34%
            Sunflsh          29^
            Smallmouth bass  2C«
            Channel catfish   6%
            Other             5%

More detailed creel census information is given in Table 1 of the Ap-
pendix.  In addition, extensive elcctrofishing has been done in these
three 1,000-meter sections of the river.  This data is compiled by
month in Table 2 r,f the Appendix.  The fish population, which includes
smallioouth bass and pan fish in abundance, ic- indicative of a h?s1J:hy
warniwater stream environment.

The Ohio State University.. -opr.-tment of Zoology, conducted ether fish-
ery surveys of the affected r^-cnes of the Olentangy River and have
found the spotted darter (j[t!xx>stp_me m^^uvaTa), an endangered fish for
the State of Ohio (Ohio's Endangered" Wild Animals, Publication 316., Ohio
Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife).  Further, dead
shells of two State of Ohio endangered rnollusks, cob shsll (.Qu_ad_r_u_l_a_
cyjjjndri ca) and northern riff To shell (Fpioblasma torulpr.a ranniana),
were found in a November 1974 study of tne area (Stein, 1975).

Two parameters limited in the proposed permit could be detrimental to
aquatic life, especially during low-flow conditions:  ammonia which is
limited to 1.5 mg/1 for both a 30-day mean and a 7-day mean during the •
12-month period, and residual chlorine which is limited to 0.5 rng/1.


                            318

-------
                                                                    3.

MD il9 DJ zed_Ammoirja

Various fish  species  have yielded  mean  96-hour LCgQ values of 0.29 to
0.89 nig/1 of  un-ionized  ammonia  (Ball  1967).   Exposure of carp to sub-
letfial  un-ionized annionia concentrations  in the range of 0.11 to 0.34
mg/1 resulted  iri extensive  necrotic  changes and tissue disintegration
in various organs (Flis, "(968).  The maximum acceptable concentration
of un-ionized  oiinonia  in water  is  0.05  of the 96-hour LC5g.  We under-
stand  that the un-ionized ammonia  form  is very persistent in the aque-
ous medium.   If pi!  and temperature remain constant, un-ionized ammonia
remains toxic  until dilution  reduces the  concentration.

The concentration of  toxic  un-ionized ammonia is calculated from the
concentration  of total ammonia  limited  in the proposed permit.  Since
the percentage of resulting un-ionized  ammonia is dependent on pH and
temperature,  these  parameters must be considered in the calculations.

Using  a pH of  9 allowable in  the proposed permit, and a maximum tem-
perature of 30° C5  the final  limitation of un-ionized ammonia could bs
0.81 nig/1 (Tiiuvston,  et al.,  1974).  U. S. EPA (1973) recommends that
the concentre.lic'ri of  un-ionized arwiioriia be limited to 0.02 mg/1, or
less}  for the  protection of aquatic  life.   A  dilution factor of 40.5
would  be requires to  reduce un-icr.ized  emrnonia concentration ~;-o >">on-
toxic  leve/is  urioe-r  these conditions.  \'e  understand frcrn the U. S.
Arciy,  Co.'ps of fir.rriiieerr. '~{~.'J'. thr-  iyr!r;i:,.i,!ii flov; relasse from thj Dela-
ware Reservoir  ii set ai t  fv'/ic. feet: per second (cFs) or 3.232 MGD.
The 7-day 2-year low  flor/ for the  Olentengy River at Stratford is
3.736  f-;GD (Cross, 1965).  Under such conditions effluent from the pro-
posed  facility would  only be diluted 2.5  times, thus alien-ring toxic
concentrations  of un-ionized ammonia beyond the mixing zone.

Although the above  values are possible, the following table utilized
ranges of data  from the U.  S. Geological  Survey,  i'ater Resources Data
for C:rip_ collected  at the gauging  station on  the- (Jicntangy "River near
Worthington, Ohio.

Table  1 indicates that under certain physical  and chemical conditions
likely to occur in  The Qlc.ntar.gy River, uri-iormecl am:r,onia will be
toxic  to aquatic life.  During peak  load  operations of the STP end wit!)
the increased  volume of discharge  due to  projected expansion of the
applicant's facilities, the concentration of  un-ionized ammonia remains
toxic at a lower pH and temperature.  Such concentrations of toxic am-
monia could exist in the Olentangy River  over  extended periods of the
year.
                                                            /
In addition to  the  insurance of a minimum release of 5 cfs from the
Delaware Reservoir, we understand  from  Corps  of Lngineers personnel
that additional water (20 to 40 cfs  total)  has been released from the

                            319

-------
  cj  13  rt   •
  ft. cl  co  S  H
  o  exD in  d  o
  a.     rt  o
  o  o  4J  o  s
  ^  4J ^3  4)
  ft.   -O  "
              en
                 H-4
  O   .  O  0)

  4J          4J Q
     >M -d     O
  C  O  CJ  Fi 53
 •rt      VJ -H
      CJ -H     vO
  C  60 3  q! cx|
  eu  C  cr*  ^ o>
  60  cc  cu  o   •
  O  M  l-i .C cxi
  >-i          en rH
 «
M  V4 M     iH
 E -a o
 co  o etj   o
  SB   y c  rt
 JJ  iH O  3
  O  "G »H  ej4
 4J   S 4J  rt
     •H 3

  o   a) ft  o

  ti   a
  o          rt
 •iH   C3  •  iH
 4J  -r-l O  t!
  «   CO   O
  P   o u->  e
 4J   g cx|  fc;
 C   B     tO
  el)   rt  O
  y      4-1  'a
 C<  T3     Cll
  O   CJ O  N
  O   NO   -H
     •rl U-l  C
 C/   C! rH  Q
      O
                  CO  M
                 UH
                  O   O
                 O  ,0
                 04   !l
                eu  -a
                01  eu
                rt  4J
                ^Q  PJ
                    a)
                cu  en

                CD  S-4

                o  co

                i4-i  ci
                    'O
                •4H
                o  a
                    o
 >-,
 o
<4-<
•H
 I
         1«  I
          o  c
       -do
rH  O  Cd
---.      M  C
 60 e/i      o
 B  C  CU  -H
     O  M  4J
u-1  -H  3  C5)
  •  4-1  4J  J-J
rH  rt  rt  -U
     rH  M  C
 60 3  O  
                4-1  -H
                3  !J o fj I
o ;] rH ^ o jj

y ° i i '



1 1

[1
Ij
1 60
c
•H
^
H • 1 CD
si ! o
l || l > o
• S 1 «
u H ;i' 3 6 j Ll 1 "
°u-> • £ « 8 " « "^
cxi ^. y •!
^_ — . t; _ /
s O j 10 t
O ;{ . .1 . p .).
OD '1 ° fl *° J!
ii J t;
y i \ -H
+ 1 , 1 , 1 '

]
EK U S « 8
B °
$ 1 -H

ex; " *•' * 1 i> ?, 3
^ ', ,i *' £ ^ ti si *H
O 4 U r U 2 T-I
t^"> [I p-j H g
o"^ """ 1 r P


00 ii o 1 <^ ;j |

"E.'1 't n •
"1 fl Ij

|i ! *J

if
jj
jj

£{• y •  !j O J lA H 5
';! d iH ! + *
p^ *! si !
CJ ..~"~ ' _( j
^3 ^ i! H I
^•i CXI ij \ I
^•'\ °- [! °- i +1 +
^ ? 0 jj rH I |
33 '! i 1

i
S
+ 5 •

rt

>S
* T-l

o
4-1
rt
erf
p1 i' M
jj " ' ' { >w
!j
[i
+ ti +
g
11
•
•*
ot> ^
Q !J U
IA ^ n
i — | E; (xj Si
"^- ^- O -1 O
IO 3 • H .
• ^ 0 j --1

< i i
P*? ii
1 \


•K

+





Q LJ
S 6 r~*
rt a) x^ '\ a u
M N ij el O1 rt
4J fi rt n o cu P
C C -H -r\ (-1 O-
cu o c N 4.J rt
O -H Or! 3 ^x
C 1 r H rH t^4 ^
o C i! 'i vi o o



^j
d FTI
O O
3

U-4 •
<4-4 CO
(D
01
Q U
O TJ
>*. -H
IO o
• I*
B fi 1 *^




4*








JJ
C f^-t
O Q
3
.H 00
U-J «
U-J CO
(y
01
Q OJ
O t!
X -H
-a o
• t-4
((
*.
*

p
•
4* ' 4~
t£
a
B
j

j'.
t?

4-1 J U
G fi. ' C. ln
00 i 0 O
P i' 3
1-1 CXI t, r-H r1
c
o
•H
1

3

^4-4
O

c
o
4-1
rt

4-1
C
eu
o
a
0
o

0)
*M
o!
'J>

,1
H-


"" " i " " 4 '" "'' i
60
C
•H
•rH
CU
O
yj
eu
A
4-1
"g
e
o
•H
4-1

r-H
•rH

(-1
41

cd

cu
•rl
rH
0
•H
4-1
CC
y
rt
0
U-t

«n
S
•y
eu
N
•H
d
o
•rH
1
3

*4H
O

C2
o
•H
l i

4-1
C
CJ
ej
C
o
'j
o
•r-l
V,
O
4-f

II
1

J,<

                                                                      320

-------
                                                                    4.

reservoir to aid in controlling pollution of the Scioto River below
Columbus, Ohio.  There is, however,  no binding '"jreemcnt for this pol-
lution abatement measure.   An independent water treatment firm uses
water from the Olentangy River downstream from the  Delaware Reservoir.
If the STP is built, this  firm plans to increase its  operations,  which
would decrease flews of the river affected by the proposed STP.   Table
2 indicates periods of the water years 1961  to 1970 when the flow in
the Olentangy River v/as 20 cfs or less, at which times  (11.4%) such
flows, under conditions indicated, would be  inadequate  to dilute  toxic
levels of un-ionized ammonia.   It should also be noted  that low-flow
conditions are usually associated with the summer and early autumn when
water temperatures of the  streams are near maximum  upper limits.   The
minimum flow for the consecutive 10-year period v/as 7.6 cfs.

TABLE 2.  Periods of 4 consecutive days (96  hours), or  more,  in which
          the flow in Olentangy River near Worthington  was 20 cfs, or
          less for water years 1961  to 1970.

Water year (Oct.-Sept.) Total number of days      Periods (of 4  or more
                           with flow at 20           consecutive  days)
                           cfs or less
    1961                          36              Dsc.  9-13;  Dec.  17-Jan.  13

    19GR                          50              May  23-27;  Jim.  2-5;  Jun.
                                                8-11;  Jun.  13-23;  Jun.  25-
                                                Jul.  2

    1963                          26              Jun.  26-Jul.  1;  Jul.  7-12;
                                                Sept.  4-11; Sept.  14-30

    1964                         110              Oct.  1-Nov. 6; Nov.  24-
                                                Jan.  17; Sept. 13-19; Sept,
                                                21-30

    1965                          59              Oct.  1-Nov. 16;  Jun.  21-30

    1966                          15              Sept.  13-19;  Sept.  23-30

    1967                          36              Oct.  1-10;  Oct.  12-15;
                                                Oct.  18-24; Sept.  13-27

    1968                          25              Oct.  1-5; Oct. 11-18; Sept.
                                                14-21

    1969                          41              Oct.  12-16; Oct. 19-28;0ct.
                                                Nov.  6

    1970                   •       18 '             Sept.  13-30
                            321

-------
                                                                    5.

jResI dua 1 Chi on' no

The toxicity of chlorine in water to aquatic life depends on the con-
centration of residual chlorine and choramines v/hich are formed when
chlorine is in contact with nitrogenous materials.  Choramines, how-
ever, are not monitored in the proposed permit.  It has been shown that
total numbers of fish and diversity of fishes in receiving waters are
drastically reduced by chlorinated sewage effluents (Tsai, 1968, 1970).
Zillich (1972) determined that the threshold toxicity for fathead
minnow (Pimephales promelas) was 0.04-0.05 mg/1 residual chlorine.
The survival of Gamniarus, an important food source for game fish, was
reduced at 0.04 mg/1 and reproduction was reduced at 0.0034 mg/1.

U.S. EPA (1973) recommends that the concentration of residual chlorine
in the receiving waters should not exceed 0.003 mg/1 at any time or
place for the protection of aquatic life.  If 0.5 mg/1 were discharged,
a dilution factor of about 166 would be required to reduce residual
chlorine concentrations to non-toxic levels.  Again, under low-flew
conditions of 3.736 MGD, the effluent would be only diluted 2.5 times.

It can be concluded that if concentrations of arnnon'ie and residual
chlorine described in the issued permit are. allov/cd, important popula-
tions of game fish along with forage fish and aquatic invertebrates
will be seriously reduced or eliminated in the Olentangy River.

                         RF.COMI€NDATIGNS

It is recommended that the permit for the proposed discharge be modified
to include the following conditions:

    1.  Thst the effluent limitation on ammonia nitrogen should be
        such that un-ionized ammonia concentration in the receiving
        waters will not exceed 0.02 mg/1.  Further, we recommend
        that ammonia nitrogen be ultimately limited in the receiving
        waters as determined by bioassays, performed by the applicant
        within tv/o yc?rs after permit ii,suance» using the receiving
        water and the most sensitive aquatic fish and/or inverte-
        brate species in the locality to determine possible acute
        and chronic effects of the discharge on these organisms.
        Provided further, that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
        and other interested Federal and State agencies will be
        afforded the opportunity to review the results of these
        bioassays and submit subsequent recommendations.

    2.  That the effluent limitation on residual chlorine should
        be such that it will not exceed 0.003 mg/1 in the receiving
        waters.
                             322

-------
                                                                    6.

K!e would appreciate  a  response  to this letter as to what action  you
plan to, take with  respect  to  our recommendations.

                            LITERATURE CITED  '

Ball, I.R.  1967.  The relative suscepribilites of some species  of
  freshwater fish  to poisons.   I.   Ammonia.   Water Research  1:767-775.

Cross, W.P.  1965.   Low-flow  frequency and storage-requirement indices
  for Ohio Streams .  Ohio  Dept.  of Natural Resources, Bulletin 40.

Flis, J.  1968,  Histopathological  changes induced in carp (Cypriiius
  carjrip_L.) by ammonia water.   Acta  Hydrobiol.  10 (h): 205-238.

Stein, C.B.  1975.   The naiads  (Phylum Mollusca, family Unionidae) of
  the Olentangy River  between Powell  Road and 1-270, Delaware and
  Franklin Counties, Ohio.  Ohio State University Museum of  Zoology,
  Columbus, Ohio.  Jan. 1975.

Thurston, R.V., Russo,  R.C.,  and K. Emerson, 1974.   Aqueous  ammonia
  equilibrium calculations.   Technical Report No. 74-1 s July.  Fisheries
  Bioassey Laboratory,  f'iontana  State  University.

Tsa'i , C.P.  '!:>6fe.  iiffecio c-r ^li'sOf-'indit-a ~;.w<\gc effluet-ls oi'i fish in
  ilnr-r-v P •>•!•• iv ^p-;- R-ivr-" M--»"v'l -Mir'   r'npc-iri;v ("•• ^ri  <"> (?}•   P'-i-Q'^
  U |-^'L" i  ! u v\J Au! i t/ i\ i \ 'J •  5 i tv* i y I n ! !L' *   v,. I it .--u j -'JCJ. i\-S. vL I .  ^ \ {. j •   OO ~>O •

Tsai j C.F.  1970,  Changes in fish  populations and migration in  rela-
  tion to increased  sewage pollution  in Little Patuxent River, Maryland.
  Chesapeake Sci.  11  (1):  34-41.

U.S. EPA.  1972.   M§I_SlLaJJ'ty -ClL1"-?!1.0-  1S72 U.S.  Government Printing
  Office, Washington,"  D.'C.  '594 p.

Zillich, J,.A.   1972.   Toxicity  of  combin(?d chlorine residuals to fresh
  water fish.   Jour.   Water Poll.  Control Fed.   44:212-220.
                                                                          i
                                    Sincerely yours,
                                                 r.  FAULKNER
                                                .
                              Acting  Regional  Director

cc:  U.S. EPA, Permits Branch, Chicago
     Chief, Ohio Div. of Wildlife, Columbus
     Mr. Boussu, NMFS, Gloucester
     Mr. Edward F. Hutchins, Metropolitan  Park District of Columbus
       and Franklin Counties, Hesterville
     Mr. John T. Cuneo, Enviro Control,  Rockville
     Mr. ilarlen Hirt, Region 5 Planning  Branch,  U.S.  EPA, Chicago
                             323

-------
                               APPENDIX D

                  LETTER OF US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
                NPDES PERMIT PROCESSING GUIDELINE NO. 26


                       DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
                  HUNTINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
                               P. O. BOX 2127
                      HUNTINGTON, WEST VIRGINIA 23721
       REPLY TO

       ATTENTION OF:
ORHED-HO                                                   11 August 1975
Mr. John Cuneo
Enviro Consultants
1530 East Jefferson Street
Rockville, Maryland  20852
Dear Mr. Cuneo:

The estimated 7-day, 10-year low-flow for the Olentangy River below
Delaware Dam, which you requested by phone 24 July 1975, is 5.2 c.f.s.
The present low-flow release schedule for Delaware Lake is tabulated
below:

          Period                             Scheduled Discharge

        1-10 July                                    25
       11-20 July                                    25
       20-31 July                                    35
        1-20 August                                  40
       21-31 August                                  35
        1 September-31 October                         20
       Minimum Release                                  5

Low-flow discharges as listed above are released from storage when
inflows are insufficient to maintain the required flows.

Storage for low-flow releases were authorized during the planning phase
of Delaware Dam and the schedule of releases has been periodically
adjusted to better serve the needs of the Olentangy and Scioto River
Basins.

Any future changes in release schedules or minimum discharges must be
throughly investigated to ascertain that the best all-around use is made
of the limited storage available for that purpose.


-------
ORHED-HO                                                  11 August 1975
Mr. John Cuneo

Median flow for the Olentangy River at Worthington,  Ohio, is computed to
be 66.6 mgd.  Median flow is defined as that flow which is exceeded 50
percent of the time and is not necessarily the same  as the mean or
average flow.

                                 Sincerely yours,
                                 HAROLD W.  BEEME
                                 Chief, Engineering Division
                                 2
                              325

-------
             TABLE D-l.   Number of Fish Caught in Olentangy
                          River, May - November 1974

Month
May





June





July





August
and
September



November





May
through
November




Fish
Channel Catfish and Bullheads
Carp
Smallmouth Bass
Rock Bass
Sunfish
Other
Catfish and Bullheads
Carp
Smallmouth Bass
Rock Bass
Sunfish
Other
Catfish and Bullheads
Carp
Smallmouth Bass
Rock Bass
Sunfish
Other
Catfish and Bullheads
Carp
Smallmouth Bass
Rock Bass
Sunf ish
Other
Catfish and Bullheads
Carp
Smallmouth Bass
Rock Bass
Sunfish
Other
Catfish and Bullheads
Carp
Smallmouth Bass
Rock Bass
Sunfish
Other
Powell
Road
4
36
29
18
92
54
6
46
66
77
134
133
3
86
19
114
153
103
8
55
23
68
119
125
17
43
137
168
169
426
38
266
274
217
667
841

1-270
10
64
101
33
153
87
4
64
143
101
501
138
18
71
134
75
424
239
10
44
108
26
191
153
25
46
307
102
494
257
67
289
793
337
1763
874
Henderson
Road
2
86
8
3
11
125
5
109
5
1
61
123
11
60
9
6
113
110
3
18
4
2
34
117
16
48
21
4
72
450
37
321
47
16
291
925
Source:  Adopted from Griswold,  Bernard,  private communication,  1975
                                     326

-------
                                                           March 27,  1974
                                                     PPA:  March 12, 1975
                    NPDES Permit Processing  Guideline  No. 26
 QUESTION:
 POLICY:
What is the most stringent requirement OEPA will specify

for existing public and semi-public facilities?

Effluent requirements for existing public and semi-public

facilities shall not be more stringent than the following
       Existing  Semi-Public  Facilities
       Constituent

       BOD5
       SS
       NH3,  N, July  thru Oct.
              Nov.  thru June
       Fecal  Coliform
       P*  (1)
       DO  *(2)
               Monthly Average

               8 mg/1
               8 mg/1
               1.0 mg/1
               2.5 mg/1
               200 counts/100  ml
               1.0 mg/1
       Existing Public Facilities under 0.5 mgd capacity
               10
               12
               1.0
               2.5
               200
               1.0
      SS
           N, July thru Oct.
              Nov. thru June
      Fecal Col i form
      P*(l)
      D0*(2)
      Existing Public Facilities over 0.5 mgd capacity

      BOD5                        8
      SS                          8
      NH3, N, July thru Oct.      1.0
              Nov. thru June      2.5
      Fecal Col i form              200
      P*(l)                       1.0
      D0*(2)
Weekly Average

12 mg/1
12 mg/1
1.5 mg/1
5.0 mg/1
400 counts/100 ml
1.5 mg/1
15
18
1.5
5.0
400
1.5
                                         12
                                         12
                                         1.5
                                         5.0
                                         400
                                         1.5
      New sources are to be in conformance with the permit to install

      regulations.
*(1)  See NPDES Permit Processing Guideline No. 24
*(2)  DO: 6.0 mg/1  minimum for warm water fishery;  6.5  mg/1  minimum for cold
      water fishery.
                                      327

-------
 Page 2


POSITION PAPER
A.  BOD5 -
B.  Suspended
    Solids -
C.   Ammonia
    (NH3) -
Justification included in the position paper for NPDES Permit
Processing Guideline No.  25.
The U.S. EPA's Technology Transfer Manual entitled Process De-
sign Manual for Suspended Sol ids Removal  - January, 1975, clear-
ly indicates that monthly and weekly average effluent levels of
8 mg/1 and 12 rng/1, respectively, can normally be met with the
following processes, which are listed in  order of reliability:

1.) Filtration of chemically treated secondary effluent.

2.) Filtration of effluent from secondary biological  treatment.

3.) Secondary Treatment followed by microscreens.

Jeffrey Van Atten's thesis, which was prepared for the Univer-
sity of Cincinnati during 1969, entitled, A Field Study on the
Effect of a Surface _Sand_Fi1_ter for Polishing the Effluent from
an Extended Aeration Plant, disclosed that the suspended  solids
levels in question can be obtained.

In summary, the above treatment schemes are capable of obtain-
ing the specified suspended solids effluent levels when pro-
perly applied.
1.) Summer
      a.) Suspended Growth Systems  -  Nitrification can be
      accomplished in either single-stage  or two-stage systems.
      Single-stage systems include  activated sludge,  contact
      stabilization,  extended aeration,  and  oxidation ditches.

      The Flint Wastewater Treatment  Plant,  which  was described
      in October,  1972 JWPCF, is  an activated sludge  plant
      which was designed to obtain  an effluent ammonia nitrogen
      limitation of 0.5 mg/1.  The  design  detention times in the
      aeration  tanks, including the return sludge, was 7.0 hrs.
      at average flow and 5.0 hrs.  at maximum flow.

      The Ohio  EPA monitoring program, conducted during the
      summer of 1973, disclosed that  well  operated extended
      aeration  plants consistently  produced  average NH3 - N
      effluent  values of less than  1.0 mg/1.   Six  extended
      aeration  plants are included  in this survey. This
      efficiency was  improved by  surface sand filters, not
      appreciably  affected by rapid sand filters and  micro-
      strainers, and  reduced by tertiary lagoons.   The study
      also indicated  that oxidation ditches  accomplish high
      degrees of nitrification (0.2 mg/1 average NH?  - N
      obtained  from the one underloaded  plant tested.)
                                        328

-------
Page 3
              b.) Fixed Growth Systems - A high degree of ammonia re-
              removal can be obtained with plastic media trickling fil-
              ters which follow secondary treatment plants.   Buddies
              and Richardson in their paper OP. studies at Midland, Mich.
              entitled, Application of Plastic Media Trickling Filters
              for Biological Nitrification Systems, reported that,
              "High level nitrification can be achieved in summer at
              application rates in the range of 1.0 - 1.5 gpm/sq. ft.,
              and winter application rates in the range of 0.5 gpm/
              sq. ft. plus recycle."  However, "There appears to be a
              final effluent limitation for ammonia nitrogen in the
              range of 1 - 2 nig/1.  ' F.  F.  Sampayo in his paper entitled,
              The Use of Nitrification Towers at Lima, Ohio  reported
              that, "Ammonia nitrogen levels of less than 0.5 mg/1 can
              be achieved by using plastic media trickling filters."

        2.) Winter
              a.) Suspended Growth Systems - The U.S.  EPA technology
              transfer bulletin entitled,  Nitrification and  Dentri-
              fication Facilities,  August. 1973, states that "It has
              been well  established that no treatment plants,  including
              those of the extended aeration type,  are capable of accom-
              plishing complete nitrification,  year round,  in  our
              Northern States."  It is  obvious  that winter temperatures
              reach levels in  Ohio  which greatly affect nitrification.

              The Ohio EPA monitoring program conducted during the win-
              ter of 1974 disclosed that variable degrees  of nitrifica-
              tion are obtained with  extended aeration plants.   One of
              the plants yielded an average NH3 - N effluent of 2.7 mg/1
              for 8 tests;  however,  4 of the 8  tests  provided  effluent
              NH3 -  N levels of 0.3 mg/1 or less.   The other extended
              aeration plant tested provided an average effluent of
              4.6 mg/1.   Tests  on  an  oxidation  ditch  produced  an average
              effluent level of 0.6 mg/1  (all of the  values  were less
              than 1.5 mg/1).

              b.)  Fixed  Growth  Systems  - Our winter monitoring  program
              disclosed  that a  single-stage  plastic media  trickling  fil-
              ter plant  produced an average  NH3  - N effluent level  of
              1.3 mg/1  (all of  the  7  tests  results were  below  1.7  mg/1).
              The  study  conducted by  Duddles  and  Richardson  (noted  under
              C-l-b)  disclosed  that the  system  had  shown consistent and
              stable  performance in the winter;  however, the winter appli-
              cation  rates must  be  in the  range  of 0.5 gpm/sq.  ft. plus
              recycle.   They further  noted that,  "If a system  is  to be
              designed for high  level performance throughout the year,
              i.e. producing an effluent of  1.5 mg/1 of ammonia  nitrogen
              at  a treatment facility located in a northern climate, the
              system design would have to be based on  a relatively low
              influent feed rate."  Sampay's study  (noted under  C~l-b)
              provided the following  information:

                              329

-------
  Page 4
                         l)  Ammonia  oxidation  thiuuyh  the  tower  is  graatly
                             reduced  during  the winter.

                         2}  At the loadings  investiga^H ammonia  nitrogen levels
                             of less  than  1.0 mg/1  NH3  cannot  be  achieved in  cold
                             weather.

                         3)  Although  winter  time  operation  produces  a  higher
                             NH3 -  N  content  in the plant effluent,  the increase
                             in NH3 discharge should not be  deleterious to the
                             stream since  nitrification in  the stream will be
                             inhibited due to cold weather.  The  inhibition of
                             nitrification in the  stream will  prevent lowering  of
                             the stream water D.O.  due  to the  nitrogenous oxygen
                             demand.
                        In  summary, it is clear that some plants in Ohio are
                        obtaining ammonia effluent levels of 2.5 mg/1 monthly
                        average and 5.0 mg/1 weekly average, during winter
                        time operation.  However, the information indicates
                        that high levels of winter ammonia removal are not
                        assured with conventional type treatment plants and,
                        therefore, cannot be adequately justified.
D.  Fecal  Coliform -
The effluents limits specified are those used in the
regulations contained in 40 CFR 133, which was intended
to provide information on the level  of effluent quality
attainable through the application of secondary treatment.
Section 301(b)(l)(B) of PL 92-500 requires that effluent
limitations, based on secondary treatment, be achieved for
all publicly owned treatment works in existence on
July 1, 1977.
E.  Phosphorous  -
F.   Dissolved Oxygen  -
The position paper for NPDES Permit Processing Guide!
No. 24 is applicable.
ine
It is obvious that dissolved oxygen levels up to the
effluent's saturation point can be obtained with conservatively
designed reaeration facilities.    Guideline 17 outlines
what dissolved oxygen limitations  are applicable.
                                      330

-------
                                                                           April  30,  1975
                                                                     PPA:   April  30,  1975
                         NPDES Permit Processing Guideline No.  26.1
QUESTION:   What is the most stringent requirement OEPA will  specify for existing public
            and semi-public facilities?


POLICY:     Effluent requirements for existing public and semi-public facilities shall
            not be more stringent than the following:
POSITION
PAPER:
            Constituent

            60D5

            ss

            NH3-N - July thru  Oct.

            Fecal  Coliform

            Phosphorus  P

            DO*
                           Monthly Average

                           10 mg/1

                           12 mg/1

                           1.5 mg/1

                           200 counts/100 ml

                           1.0 mg/1
Weekly Average

15 mg/1

18 mg/1

2.5 mg/1

400 counts/100 ml

1.5 mg/1
The Position Paper for NPDES Permit Processing Guideline No. 26 demonstrates th&
the BODc,, SS, and summer NH^-N limitations can be obtained with available
technology.  The limitations are slightly less stringent than those in
Guideline No. 26, in order to provide some flexibility in the degree of
reliability which must be designed into the treatment works.  Since waste
load allocations are based on the annual  minimum 7 day average flow which
has a recurrence period of once in ten years,  this flexibility in the
reliability of the treatment works is considered appropriate.

The winter NH3-N limitation has been removed from the list of constituents
because biological  nitrification is severely inhibited by low winter temperature
It is anticipated that treatment works designed to obtain high percentage
summer NH3-N removal  will  obtain lower but parallel  levels of NH3-N removal
during the winter.   Also,  the information relative to winter nitrification
included in the Position Paper for NPDES  Permit Processing Guideline No.  26
is applicable.
*See Guideline 17
                                          331

-------
                               APPENDIX E




                          VISIBILITY ANALYSIS





     The following 16 figures describe vertical profiles of the landscape




in 16 different directions from the proposed site.   Figure 41 on page 262




describes  the direction  and extent of each profile.   Each of the pro-




files in this appendix shows the proposed STP on the left.  The placement




of the STP in no way affects the accuracy of the determined limits of




visability.
                                  332

-------
 +J
 QJ
900 '


890 -


880


870 '


860 '


850 •


840
 c 830 -I
 o

 5 820 1
 •3 810 J


   800 -


   790 •


   780


   770 -


   760 -


   750
                                                                    limits of
                                                                   visibility
                          1000            2000           3000
                         distance from treatment plant in feet
                                                                     4000
                                   PROFILE  1
Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                                  333

-------
                                          limits of
                                          visibility
     930-


     920


     910


     900


     890


     880"


     870'


   « 860


   c 850
  •r—

   § 8401
  •r—

   5 830J
   QJ

  ^ 820"


     810-

     800


     790

     780


     770-


     760-


     750-
                          1000            2000           3000

                         distance from treatment plant in feet
4000
                              PROFILE  2
Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975
                                     334

-------
                                      zone of
                                    restricted
                                    visibility
930.
920
910
900
890
880
870-
« 860 -
o>
c 850 •
§ 840 •
•r~
£ 830-
QJ
^ 820-
810-
800-
790-
780-
770-
760-
750 •"













/




                              limits of
                             visibility
                            with  foliage
  winter
 limits of
visibility
                         1000           2000             3000

                        distance  from treatment  plant  in  feet
                         4000
                             PROFILE  3
Source:  Enviro Control,  Inc.,  1975
                                    335

-------
                                           limits  of
                                           visibility
   930  •
   920  •
   910  -
   900  -
   890  •
   880  •
   870  •
a!  860  •
M-
c  850  •
o   840  1
|   830  "I
*   820  -
    810  -
    800
    790  •
    780  '
    770
    760
    750
                           1000            2000           3000
                          distance  from treatment plant in feet
4000
                               PROFILE   4
 Source:   Enviro  Control,  Inc.,  1975
                                   336

-------
   940


   930


   920


   910


   900


   890


   880


   870
g  8601
«*-

c  850-1


I  840-1


I  8301
OJ
   820-


   810-


   800'


   790-


   780-


   770-


   760-


   750J
  limits of
  visibility  /
with foliage  (
r
                 winter
               limits of
               visibility
                            1000            2000           3000

                           distance from treatment plant in feet
                                        4000
                                 PROFILE 5
  Source:   Enviro  Control,  Inc.,  1975


                                    337

-------
                                                 limits  of
                                                 visibility
   930

   920

   910

   900

   890

   880

   870

   860

-------
                                                     limits of
                                                     visibility
4,
O)
CD
930
920-
910 •
900 •
890 -
880-
870
860 '
850-
840-
830-
820-
810'
800-
790-
780-
770-
760'
750-
                         1000           2000            3000
                        distance from  treatment plant in feet
                                                                    4000
                                 PROFILE   7
   Source:  Enviro Control, Inc.,  1975
                                    339

-------
                                                      o
                                                      o
                                                    • o
                                                      IO
                                                      o
                                                      o
                                                      CD
                                                      O   CD
                                                      CD   O)
                                                      O   <4-
                                                           E
                                                           to
                                                           CO
                                                      O   E
                                                      CD   +J
                                                      CD   to
                                                      co   co
                                                           O
                                                           CO
                                                           O
CO

LU
_J
i—i
u.
o

o.
                                                      O
                                                      O
                                                      O
                                                      C\J
                                                           to
                                                      O
                                                      O
                                                      CD
                                                                       LO
                                                                       r^
                                                                       CTl
                                                                        O
                                                                        c
                                                                        o
                                                                        c
                                                                        o
                                                                        o
                                                                        S-
                                                    u O
CD
CO

0
CM
cr>

o
1™


o
CD
01

CD
CO

CD
00
00

CD
r--
co

I
0
CO
*
o
in
CO
aaj.
CD
UL Ui
o
co
oo
OLlGi
0
CM
00
\aia
0
CO

o
o
00

0
en

I
o
CO

CD
1 — .

1
CD

CD
in

                                                                        o
                                                                       co
340

-------
O -i-
   I—
l/> T-

•*-> .0
                                                      o
                                                      o
                                                      o
                                                      LO
                                                      o
                                                      o
                                                      o
                                                           O)
                                                           O>
                                                           O)
                                                      O   C
                                                      O   to
                                                      O  t—
                                                      n   o.
                                                           c
                                                           OJ
                                               03
                                                           s-
                                                           •M
                                                       §
                                                      O
                                                      o
                                                      o
                                                      CM
                                               O
                                                           O
                                                      O
                                                      o
                                                      o
                                                                          o
                                                                          c
                                                                          o
                                                                          o
                                                                          o
                                                                          o
                                                                          S-
      o
      CO
      00
C3
CM
CO
00
      o
      o
      CO
—I—
 o
 CO
o
un
                                  UL  UOL^BA9[9
cu
o
5-
rs
o
to
                  341

-------
   930-

   920-

   910-

   900-

   890-

   880-

   870-

   860 -
QJ
£  850 i

*  840

   830

   820

   810

   800

   790

   780

   770

   760

   750
c
o
re
QJ
           0
                        limits of
                        visibility
                       with foliage
                                            winter
                                           limits  of
                                          visibility
 1000           2000           3000

distance from treatment plane  in feet


       PROFILE  10
                                                                      4000
Source:   Enviro  Control,  Inc., 1975

                             342

-------
 O)
930

920

910

900 -I

890

880 •

870 •

860 -

850 -

840 -
E 830 -I
 fO

I 820 J
   810 .

   800 .

   790

   780 .

   770 -

   760-

   750 -
                                                      winter
                                                    limits of
                                                    visibility
                           limits of
                           visibility
                          with foliage
                         1000           2000            3000

                        distance from treatment plant in feet


                                PROFILE  11
                                                                    4000
Source:  Enviro Control, Inc., 1975

                              343

-------
   930-

   920-

   910-

   900-

   890-

   880'

   870"

^  860-
OJ
"  8501
c
"  840
   830-1

I  820
   810 -\

   800

   790

   780

   770

   760

   750
               limits of
               visibility
 1000            2000           3000

distance from treatment  plant  in feet


              PROFILE 12
                                                                      4000
   Source:  Enviro Control,  Inc.,  1975

                                      344

-------
                                           winter
                                         limits of
                                        visibility
    930

    920

    910

    900

    890

    880

    870

    860
 +j
 
-------
930

920

910

900

890

880

870
     ,
  8501
§840
<"820

  810

  800

  790

  780

  770

  760

  750
          r-

          0
                                                                           . winter
                                                                          limits  of
                                                                         visibility
                                  limits of
                                  visibility
                                 with  foliage
                       1000           2000            3000           4000

                               distance  from  treatment plant  in  feet
5000
                                          PROFILE  14
  Source:   Enviro  Control,  Inc., 1975
                                              346

-------
  930

  920

  910

  900

  890

  880

  870


S860
t-
c850
o840
5830
OJ
  810

  800

  790

  780

  770

  760

  750
                                                                                      winter
                                                                                    limits c
                                                                                    visibili
                                                    limits of
                                                    visibility
                        1000             2000           3000            4000
                               distance  from treatment plant in feet
                                                                                       5000
                                          PROFILE   15
 Source:  Enviro  Control,  Inc.
                                             347

-------
                                                  o
                                                  o
                                                 •o
                                                  00
                                                  o
                                                 .0
                                                  o
                                                  o
                                                 -o
                                                  o
                                                      CO


                                                      Q.
                                                                 O
                                                                 D;
                                                                 Q.
                                                      E
                                                      O
                                                      O)
                                                      (J
                                                      c
                                                  o
                                                 -O
                                                  o
                                                  n
                                                  o
                                                 •CD
                                                  CM
                                                                      un
                                                                      r^
                                                                      CTl
                                                  CD
                                                 .CD
                                                  CD
CD    CD
o    cn
CO    I—

  UL
                              o
                              00
                              I—.
O
LO
                                                                       o
                                                                       S-
                                                                       4->
                                                                       c
                                                                       o
                                                                       o

                                                                       o
                                                                       S-
 

 I

 O
C/1
348

-------
                                      APPENDIX  F
 EXTRACTS  OF  APPLICABLE  LAWS  OF  THE  STATE OF  OHIO

'•7    ]         'v:'"     *'.
       ,              \              COUXTIRS
                                                                                                 46
   3.  A county is without authority in law to join
 with  a city  in the joint  acquisition and  ownership
 of a building  for the  housing  of  county and city
 offices,  but  may  puisuant  to  CC § 2450-1  (RC
 § 307.14) cl scq,  conlntct with a city for the erection
 by the county of a buidling to house all such offices;
 and pursuant to  such contract,  such city may turn
 •over  to the county piopcrty real 01  pcisonab useful
 for such  purpose, including the  proceeds  of bonds
 issued  by the niiniicip.ility: 1952 OAG No.1573.
   4.  Such contiact may  be for such term  as  the
 county and city m.iy  agree  upon  or for an indefinite,
 term, and may  provide for  an agreed icntal basis and
 costs of maintenance:  1952 OAG No.1573.


   § 307.15  Agreements  authorized between
 board  of county commissioners and  other legisla-
 tive  authorities; relative powers and duties.  (GC
 § 2450-2)

   The board of county  commissioners may enter
 into  an agreement with The  legislative authority
 of any municipal  corporation,  school district,  li-
 brary  district,  health  district,  park district, soil
 conservation district,  water  conservancy district.
 or other taxing  district,  or with the  board of any
 other county, and such legislative authorities may
_ enter into agreements with the_ board,  whereby,
 such board  undertakes,  and is  authorized by the
 contracting  subdivision,  to  exercise  any power,
 perform  any function, or render any service,~ih
.behalf of the  contracting  subdivision or its leggs-
-lative authority, which such subdivision or legis-
 lative authority  may exercise, perform,  or render.
   Upon  the execution  ot such  agreement and
 within the limitations  prescribed by it,  the, board
_ may exercise the same; powers  as the contracting
 subdivision possesses with respect to the .perform-
 ance  of any  function nr the  rendering of any
 service, which,  by such agreement,  it undertakes,
 . to perform  or rentier, and  all powers  necessary
 or incidental thereto, ns amply as such powers are
 possessed and  exercised  by the contracting sub-
 division  directly.  In  the  absence in such agree-
 ment of provisions  determining by what  officer,
 office,  department,  agency,   or  authority  the
 powers and duties of the board shall be exercised
 or performed,  the  board shall  determine and
 assign such powers  and duties.  Sections  307.14
 to 307.19, inclusive, of the Revised  Code, or any
 agreement authorized by such sections, shall not
 suspend the  possession  by  a conli acting  sub-
 division  of  any power  or function exercised  or
 performed by the  board in pursuance of  such
 agreement.  Nor shall  the board, by virtue of any
 agreement  entered  into under this  section, ac-
 quire  any power to  levy  taxes  within and  in
 behalf of a contracting subdivision  unless other-
 wise provided for by  law.
   HISTOKY:  GC  82-150-2; JJC v 102, 82; 12-1 v 264, §11.
 Ell 10-1-5:).

 Cross-Hcferene.es to  Related Sections
   Power to levy taxes,  RC § 5113.02.
                                          Research Aids                             ,
                                            Power to contract:                              -
                                              O-Jur:  Counties §236               --;'  '
                                              Am-Jur:  Counties  § 46

                                                           CASE  NOTES-      '    ""    -\
                                            See also case notes 1, 2 under RC § 307.16.
                                            1. County commissioners,  city officials and town-
                                          ship trustees  may  not  enter  into  an  agreement
                                          whereby the  county  commissioners  or   an  agent
                                          appointed by  them would  investigate and  handle
                                          temporary  and  partial  relief cases  for  the  con-
                                          tracting subdivisions; municipalities  have  the  right
                                          to appoint an investigatoi and would have the right
                                          under this  section to enter into  an  agreement with
                                          othci  cities  or municipalities for the  appointment
                                          of an investigator and  may  contribute to  his  com-
                                          pensation because of express statutory authorization;
                                          township trustees have no power  to compensate from
                                          public  funds an  investigator which  they  may ap-
                                          point:  1937 OAG No.750.
                                            2. County commissioners and villages are  author-
                                          ized under  this  section  et  seq., to  adopt  resolu-
                                          tions providing that  the  board  of county commis-
                                          sioners sponsor the  construction  of sidewalls, street
                                          and  storm  sewer  improvement  projects  within
                                          municipal corporations within their county as works
                                          progress  administration projects, providing none  of
                                          the cost of the same is paid by  said  villages; if the
                                          villages pay any part  of such  cost, the  action  of
                                          council  providing for the expenditure  of the money
                                          of the  village on  such project must be by  ordinance
                                          and must follow the  usual legislative steps required
                                          in each case:  1938 OAG No. 2660.
                                            3. A  county  and  a municipality may not legally
                                          enter into a contract for point ownership of a police
                                          broadcasting  system  unless  such joint  ownership
                                          is  specifically provided for by  statute:  1939  OAG
                                          No.600.
                                            4. A county may, by contract, furnish to  a munici-
                                          pality  information  over   the  county  broadcasting
                                          system for a sum to be  agreed upon  between the
                                          proper county and municipal authorities.  The sum
                                          agreed  upon may be paid  by  the  municipality  in
                                          advance  of  receiving  such  information or service:
                                          1939 OAG No.827.
                                             § 307.16  Agreement to provide manner of
                                          payment.  (GC § 2450-3)                       $
                                             Every agreement  entered into under sections
                                          307.14 to 307.19, inclusive, of the Revised Code,
                                          shall  provide, either in specific  terms or by pre-,
                                          scribing a  method for determining  the  amounts,
                                          for any payments to be made by the contracting
                                          subdivision into the county treasury, in considera-J
                                          tion of the performance of the agreement.  la
                                          cases where it is  deemed practicable, the  agree-
                                          ment may  provide  that  payment shall  be mada,
                                          by the retention in the treasury of the amounts
                                          due from taxes  collected for the contracting sub-
                                          division and the county auditor  and county treas-
                                          urer shall  be governed by any  such provision in
                                          settling the accounts for such taxes.            '
                                            HISTORY: GC §2450-3; 116 v 102 (103), 8 S.  EH 10-1-53.

                                                           CASE NOTES               '
                                             1. This section  does  not prescribe  a  mandatory
                                          form  requiring payments to be made  by contracting
                                          subdivision  into  county treasury.  It  does prescribe
                                          a  mandatory form  to be followed  in case the agrec-
                                              349

-------
 (.c ?S liui-i-oii .UK! <><>o.! >_M> tui, ^ "io:i.2i, <>uu.- <
 22) to eonhacl  \\illi :i  illy  iidj.K cut to  smh scwci ""
 district for  Midi facilities  as-  aie deemed  necessary —
 to obtain a  water supply  loi  such district  and  its
 inhabit.nits,  and may pay the cost of (lie same out of i_
 (lie general  hind  ol sueli  eotintv:   1951  OAG  No.
 892.
   5:5.  Undci ('.(' s t I 7.02   Hates.   (GO § 6602-1)
   Tjic  Iniaid  .if  county  commissioners may  fi\
 leasniiablc ialt's  or rli.ircfcs (if mils to !)(•  paid
 In tin* coiinlx  loi the me  til  tlir scweis or sewage
 licalnu'iil or disposal \uiiks  referred to  in section
 6117.01 .(if  the tU'vised  Code:  by._evcry person,/
 linn, or  coiporation  whose  pu'miscs are  served,
 b\  a connectionto siu-li  scwcis or sewage trc.TT
 incnl or_disposa1 \\orks.   and may  change  such
 rates or_.ch mjvs as  it  deems advisable.  When
 am  such  charges are not paid,  the board  shall
 cerlifx  the same  to the county auditor,  who  shall
 place  them  upon the  veal property  duplicate
 against  the properly served by  such connection.
 Such charges  shall be a  lien on such  property
 from ihe date  the  same are  placed  upon the
 real property  duplicate by the auditor and  shall
 be collected in the  same  manner as other  taxes.
 All  moneys collected as  rents  for  use of  such
 sewers   or  sewage treatment  or  disposal \vorks_
 in any  sewer  district shall be paid to the  county
 treasurer and  kept in a separate and distinct fund
 to  the  credit  of  such district.   Such fund  shall
 be used for the payment of the cost of the  man-
 agement,  maintenance,  and  operation  of  the .
 sewers  of the distiict  and  sewage  treatment or
 disposal works used by the district.   Any surplus
 in such fund  may be  used for the enlargement
 or replacement of such sewers  and  sewage treat-
 ment or disposal woiks,  for the  payment of the_
 interest and principal on any  debt incurred for-
 the  construction  of  such  sewers or sewage treat-
 ment or disposal  works,  or  for the  creation of a
 sinking   fund  for  the  payment of such  debt.
 Money so collected shall not be  expended other-
 wise than for  the \ise and benefit of such district.
  HIS TORY:  (.(.: S MiO!M; 107 ,  110,  SI;  108 v  I'll 'id!!;
 HI)  \ S»2; 112  \ 275 (27I>);  12'!  \  111. SI  EH  JO-l-VI.
 Foiim-i GC 8 Gfl02-l «.is it-pi-iik-il in  11)7 v -110 ('118), g I'l.
   See RC S 6103.17 which refcis  to  this  section.
   See case note 6 under HC  5' 6117.01

   § 6117.03   Board  of county commissioners
 may lay out,  establish, and  maintain sewer dis-
 tricts.  (GC § 6602-In)
   Whenever authori/ed by the legislative author-
 jly  ol  any municipal corpoiation, the board of
..county.commissioners may by resolution  lay out,
 establish, .aid maintain one or nunc se\sci distiicts
 within its county to include a part or all  of the
 territory  within such  municipal corporation  as
 the whole, or a part of  such district.   Such jm-
 thoiity  shall  be evidenced by an  ordinance  or
 resolution  of  the  legislative authority of  such
 municipal corporation, entered upon  its recoids^
   1IISTOKV:  <-C  S 66112-1•>; lltt v 338  oTO).  EB IO-I-5'I.

 Cioss-Hcfc'rcnces to Related Sections
   See ]1C §6117.40 which  refers  to  this section.
 Ktsearch Aids
   Seweis within municipality:
     O-Jur:  Sanil.uy Oist. SS 13, 10
- '  Am-Jur:  Sanitary Dist. §.§ 20, 21, 25, 26
                  CASE NOTES
   1. Anlhonty  panted ,mcicr  GC  § 6602-1 b (RC
 S 6117 (It) and this  .section cannot  be limited or de-
 fined  by onlitiance  or  resolution of council  in such
 a manner as to K'vc supervisory powers to the coun-
 cil  (>\ei  tlic  establishment,  construction, repair and
 opeiation  of  a county sewer district.  The board of
 county commissioners should not regard  any limita-
 tion or  (nullification as  giving  the  consent  of the
 municipality to the establishment  of the sewer dis-
 tiict:  1925  OAG p.66.

   § 6117.04   Authority  of the board in re-
 gard  to sewer districts.   (GC § 6602-lb)
   The authority of the board of county commis-
 sioners  to provide sewer improvements  and_.to_
 maintain  and operate the same within <^"-pr Hic-_
 tricts which include a  part or all of the territory
 within  one  or more  municipal  corporations is
 the  same as provided  by  law  within districts^
 wholly  outside  of  municipal corporations, includ-
 ing the  levying of assessments.   Such authority
f shall  be  limited to main  works  only,  qnd  does
 not  include  construction and  maintenance  of
 lateral sewers for local service \vithin cnc
 ipnl r'Orn()yi^|'jnr|| HMTlip plni^  t;pppifjpatipnsl and
 estimated  cost for any improvement within  such
 municipal  corporation, shall be  approved by  its__
 legislative  authority prior to the'fetting of any.
 contiact lor the  construction  thereof.  'All  road
 surfaces,  curbs, sidewalks, sewers, water pipes,
 or other  public property  disturbed or damaged
 by such  construction  shall be restored to  their
 original  condition within  a reasonable time  by
 the  board,  and the  cost thereof  shall be  a part
 of the cost of such improvement.  After such main
 works are constructed, such municipal corporation
 may use  the same as an  outlet  for branch and
 local sewers constructed by it  for the service and
 use  only of thai part of the municipal corporation
 which lies  within  the  area   assessed  or  to  be
 assessed for the cost of such main works, subject
 to such  rules  and regulations as are established
 by  the board  and  subject, to all requirements
 of the department of health.
    At any time after a district  is established com-
 prising or including a part or all of the territory
                                              350

-------
 engineer.  For the  purpose of  paying for said
 sewers  and the  maintenance thereof,  the  board
 may issue bonds or certificates  of indebtedness
 and assess the cost against the  benefited property
 in  the  same manner as provided by  sections
 6117.01 to  6117.40,  inclusive,  of the  Revised
 Code, for the construction of an original sewer.
   HISTORY:. GC g 6602-Sh;  107 v 410 (418), g 16; 108 T
 I'll 368 (.171); 112 \ 275 (2'J1).  Efl t0.1-r>3. The Icgislatuie
 mimlx-rrd this  section 6602-8h,  but it  was printed 6602-h,
 In misl.ike, in  108 \ Ptl 368  ('171).

 Research Aids
    Acquisition of property li\ county:
      rage:  Counties  §§ 95, 96
      O-Jm: Counties  § 218
      Am-Jur:  Counties J 35

                  CASE NOTES
    1. Under C.C S tiiW-Mi  I.RC s 0117.38) the own-
 ei.- of premises in an aiea adjacent to a sewer dis-
 tuet nia\. by  contiact. bo petr.ntted to  connect  the
 se\\.it-V  system \\ithr.i such adi.uvnt area to the s\s-
 tein alie.idy  existing  \\itlun such  district,  and  the
 payment for  such sen ice  m.iy be made by  special
 assessment  on the lots or  parcels  of  land involved,
 b, t such assessments ma\ not be less than the onginal-
 as-essment  for  similar propertx  \\ithin  the  district.
 Such contract  payments, c\en  though made bv way
 of special assessments, do not constitute such a re-
 .ipportionmcnt of  the  cost  of die mam se\\ er  line in
 si.eh original district,  but any funds raided under such-
 arrangements  ma>  properly  be appropriated for  the
 u>e of the original se\\er district and specifically may
 be used to pay the cost of  maintenance and operation
 of the original impiovemer.i.  1953 OAG No.2364.

    § 6117.39  Right of eminent domain.  (GC
 ? 6602-Si)
    Whenever in the  opinion of the board of coun,-
 tv  commissioners it  is necessary to procure real
 estate,  a right  of way,  or an easement for the
 construction,  maintenance, or  operation of any
 sewer  or other impiovement authorized by sec-
 tions 6117.01  to 6117.45, inclusive,  of  the Re-
 vised Code,  or the  right to  construct, maintain,
 and operate  such sc\\ er or other improvement in
 and upon any property within or without a sewer
 district,  it may  purchase  the  same,  or if siirb
. board and the owners thereof are unable to agree
 upon its purchase  and  sale, or the  amount of
 damicrcs to be awarded  therefor, the  board may
 appropriate such real  estate, right of way,  case-
 ment,  or right.   For  such  purposes  the  board
 shall make an accurate  survey  and  description
 of  the  parcel of land  needed  for  such purposes
 ana shall  file  it with  the probate  judge of the
 count}-.  Thereupon the same proceedings shall
 be had  as are provided  for  the  appropriation of
 private  property by municipal  corporations  by
 the  laws governing  such procedure at the time
 such appropriation   is  made.   The board  shall
 perform all duties required  to be performed by
 the  ma\or or legislative  authority of a municipal
 corporation by  such laws and  the  passage of
 equivalent resolutions by  such board  shall fulfill
 the requirements  of  such laws  as to  resolutions
 and  ordinances to be passed by the  legislative
 authority  of a  municipal corporation.
  IHSTOKY:  GC  86602-81; 107  T  410  (448), g 17;  112 T
 275 (292).  Efl 10-1-5:1.  AnaloKous  to Supp. to P&A  ft 6602-9.

 Research  Aids
   Eminent domain:
     Page: Eminent Domain § 33
     O-Jur: Counties § 218, Eminent Domain §§ 34,
       356
     Am-Jur:  Counties  5 35. Eminent Domain S3 27,
       49  to 59, 63. 65 to SI

   § 6117.40  Board   may  construct  sewer
 within municipal corporation.  (GC § 6602-9)
   ^yhenevcr in the opinion of the board of coun-
 ty  commissioners  it  becomes necessary to  con-
 struct a ?e\vcr \\ithin the boundaries of a munici.-
 pal corporation lor the service of se\\ or districts
 wholly.  oiiKuic lit Muh   municipal corporation.'
 the board may construct such  sc\\er in the streets
 and  allc\s  of such   municipal  corporation  but
 shall  lostore all such ?tivot<  and alleys to  their
 original condition,  anil the  cost thereof shall be .
,-a part of the cost of siu'li seuer
   Prior to the picparation of plans for such im-
 provement,  such munkinal  corporation shall be
 given an  opportunity' to  co-operate in  the  con-
 struction  and use  of  such sev, er  as provided in
 'section 6117.03. 611704. or 6117.41  of the Re- _
 vised Code
  HISTORY:  C.C  g 6602-9; 112 N  275 (202).  Efl 10-1-55.
 Foinu-r GC S 6602-9,  101 \ 734 (7401, 89 was repealed in
 112 \ 275 (3061, 84.

 Research  Aids
   Severs within municipalities.
     O-Jur: Sanitary Dist. 5 16
     Am-Jur:  Sanitary Dist. §§20, 21, 25, 26

         [JOINT SEWER DISTRICTS]
   § 6117.41   Joint  construction  and  use of
 sewers and  sewage disposal works.  (GC § 6602-
 10)
   x	 board of  county  commissioners  of  any
 county or the legislative authority of any munici-
 pal  corporation  may enter into  a contract, upon
 such terms  and for such  period of  time as are
 mutually agreed upon, with any other county or
.municipal corporation to  prepare all necessary
 plans and estimates of cost, to  connect any sewers
 of such county or  municipal corporation \\ith any
 se\\crs constructed,  or to  be constructed, by any
_Qthcr county or  municipal corporation,  and to"
 provide for  the joint use  bv  such  contracting
 parties of such  sewers and  of any sewage treat-
 ment or .disposal works of  such county or munici-
 prjl  corporaHnn
   HISTORY:  GC  §6602-10; 107 v 59, g 1.  Efl  10-1-53.
 Analogous lo Supp. to P&A gg 6602-10  and 6602-11.  Tomicr
 GC 8 6602-10 was repealed in 107  v 59 (60), g 5.
                                            351

-------
OHIO CODE  SUPPLEMENT
            § 6117.42
 $ 6117.34  Director of environmental pro-
 don may order  improvement.
 Whenever  the legislative  authority  or  board
  health, or  the officers performing  the  duties
 the legislative authority or board of health  of
 Municipal corporation, the  board of health  of
 general  health district, or a board of township
 istees makes complaint in writing to the cuvi-
 imental protection agency  that unsanitary con-
 qons exist in any county, the director of cnvi-
 imental protection shall forthwith inquire into
 \d invPstijTfitfi the conditions complained  of.  If
 on investigation of such complaint the director
 .ds that it is necessary for the public  health and
 ilfare that sewer improvements or sewage treat-
 ant  or disposal works  be  constructed,   main-
 ned. and operated for the service of any terri-
 ry outside   of  municipal corporations  in any
 unty, the  director shall  notify  the board~of
 unty commissioners of such county-  of its find-
 g^. The board shall obey such order and pro-
 ed as provided in sections 6117.01  to 6117.45
 > of  the  Revised  Code, to  establish  sewer dis-
 icts,  provide  necessary  funds,  and construct
" ch sewers or treatment works, or maintain, re-
 ar, or operate the same, as are required by such
 •der and in  such manner as is satisfactory  to the
 rector. Any  or  all of the cost of  such impruve-
 finr  or maintenance may he assessed upon the.
 operty benefited as provided in sections 6117.01
 i fill 7.45 <^ nf  trip Hpvi'gffl  rnrlt.
 * HISTORY:  134 T S 597. Eft 10-23-72.

               CASE NOTES
 1. This  section provides  that  when the director
 ; health finds unsanitary conditions  existing  in any
 junty and that it i* necessary for the public health
 id welfare  that sewer  improvements  or  sewage
 eatment  works be constructed, for any  territory
 jtside  municipal corporations, he  shall order  the
 junty commissioners to  make such improvement,
 ad such commissioners are required to  construct or
 jpair such sewers or treatment works, and may assess
 ie cost thereof upon the  property  benefited: 1958
 IAG  No.  2504.

 §6117.35   Repealed,  134  v  S 397,  §2
 GC  §6602-8e;  107  v  440;  112 v  275]. Elf
 0-23-72.

 §6117.36  Order  may be  enforced by a
 ml of mandamus.
 If the board of county commissioners fails after
 hirty days after the notice and order given to it
 iy  the director  of environmental  protection to
 erform any act required of it by sections 6117.01
 3  6117.40^ of the Revised Code, and by any
 uch order and notice of the director, such order
 nay be enforced by a witt  r(  mandamus  issued
            .....lli™;«..,l I,. isylll» lllfll  Wll'tg	
                  •HISTORY: 1S4 T S S97. Eff 10-23-72.
                   [The reference In the History to this section in the
                bound volume, to 108 v PtI 368 should be to 112 v
                275  (290).]

                   §6117.38
                Research Aids
                —  Acquisition of property by county:
                     O-Jur2d:  Counties §§ 195 to  197

                                 CASE  NOTES
                   1. Where pursuant to RC 86117.38, a county ha«
                .obtained tide to  privately  owned  sewer  lines  con-
                structed  within a  sewer  district  established  by the
                commissioners of such county, and  such  lines are
                -connected  to the  county  system, the county  com-
                missioners  may  lawfully  fix  a  reasonable rate for
                "receiving and disposing of the sewage from the linej
                • so acquired, and is obligated to maintain them:  1955
                OAG No.5419.
                   § 6117.39  Appropriation  or purchase ol
                 property.
                   Whenever  in  the  opinion  of the  board of
                 county commissioners  it is  necessary  to  procure
                 real estate, a  right of way, or an easement for
                 the construction, maintenance,  or  operation of
                 any sewer  or  other improvement authorized by
                 sections  6117.01 to  6117.45, inclusive,  of  the
                 Revised  Code, or the right to  construct,  main-
                 tain, and operate such sewer  or other improve-
                 ment in and upon any property within or without
                 a sewer  district, it may  purchase the  same, or
                 if such board  and the owners  thereof are unable
                 to agree upon its  purchase  and  sale,  or  the
                 amount of  damages to be awarded therefor, the
                 board may appropriate such real estate, right of
                 way,  easement,  or  right. ^ Such  proceedings
                 shall be had  as are  provided for ^ in  sections
                 163.01 to 163.22, inclusive, of the Revised Code.
                   * HISTORY:  131 T 1429. EB !-!-««.
                 Research Aids
                   Eminent domain:
                     O-Juj2d: Counties
105 to 197
                    §6117.41
                    I. Under RC §86117.41, 6117.42 and 6117.43  •
                 board of county commissioners having established  a
                 lewer district  in  an unincorporated  area  adjoining
                 a  city,  may  enter  into  a contract  with  the city
                 whereby the county shall pay to the city a part of
                 the cost of a sewage treatment plant and interceptor
                 sewers to be constructed by such city entirely within
                 the city limits, which  contract gives the county the
                 right to discharge its sewage into the city sewer and
                 disposal works:  1958  OAG  No.6981.

                    § 6117.42  Provisions in  regard  to  pay-
                 ment on contracts; exceptions.
                    All contracts under section 6117-41 of the Re-
                 vised  Code  shall  provide  for  payment to  tha
                 ronnlv or municipal corporation  owning,  con-
            352

-------
structing, or about to construct a sewer or sewage
treatment or disposal works, to, bo jointly used, of
the amount" agreed upon by the county or muni-
cipal corporation so contracting for the joint  use
thereof. Any such county or municipal corporation
owning, constructing, or agreeing to construct any
such sewer improvement  or sewage treatment
works, as provided in sections 0117.41 to 6117.44
^ of the Revised Code, and permitting  the  use
thereof by such  other county or municipal cor-
poration, shall retain  full control  and manage-
ment of the  construction,  maintenance, repair,
and operation of such sewer improvement and
sewage treatment or disposal works, except  when
conveyed to a municipal corporation  as provided
in this  section.  Any such  contract before'going
into effect shall be  approved by the director of
environmental protection   Any  completed  sower
improvement or sewage treatment works construc-
ted under  sections 0! 17.01 to 6117.45 <^ of  the.
Revised Code, for  the nse  of any  sewer district
and located within any municipal corporation or
within  any area which  may be annexed  to or
incorporated  as a municipal corporation,  may by
mutual agreement between the board of county
commissioners and such municipal corporation be
convevcd to   such rnunicip.nl  corporation, which
shall thereafter maintain and  operate such  sewer
improvement  or sewage  tieatmcnt works.  The
board  may retain the  right to joint use  of such
sewers  or treatment works for the  benefit of  the
district. The validity of any assessments levied to
provide  means for the payment of  the  cost of
construction  or maintenance  of such sewer  im-
provement or sewage  treatment  works  or any
part thereof shall not be affected by such  convey-
ance.
  * HISTORY;  134 v S 397. Efl 10.23-72.

                CASE NOTES
  See caie  note 1 under I\C §6117.41.
  1. The county is authorized by this section  and
I 6117.43 to finance its  cost in payment of  its obli-
gation  to such city under such contract, by levy of
t&xes or by the Issuance of geneial obligation  bonds
ot the county, such  bonds  to  he  retired from  the
proceeds of special assessments levied on the prop-
erty in  the sewer district which will  be  served by
the sanitary sewers  constructed or proposed  to be
constructed by .said county in :aid  sewer  district:
1958 OAG No'6981.

   § 6117.43
  See case note 1 under RC  86117.41; 1 under RC
§6117.42.

  § 6117.46   Construction of trunk or main
sewers  in counties.
  When the  director of environmental protection
finds that a trunk or main sewer is necessary in a
county for sanitary purposes, the board of county
mrn'mi.«inm;r.-i nf such county may make surveys
thereof and prepare plans and specifications there-
of.  Upon  approval  by the  director of su
and specifications, the board  may  construct and
maintain saici trunk or main sower. or part thereof
within or without the limits of a municipal cor-
poration^ regulate the tapping thereof bv  lateral-
sewers. and prescribe the, conditions of such tap-
  * HISTORY: 134 v S 397. Eff IO-2S-72.

   § 6117.47
Research Aids
   Eminent domain:
    O-Jnr2d:  Counties §§ 195 to 197

   §6117.48   Appropriation of  property.
   When it  is necessary to procure real estate or
a  light  of  way  or  an easement therein for  a
trunk  or main sewer  provided  for  in  section
6117.40 of  the Revised Code, and the  owners
thereof are  unable to agree upon the compensa-
tion therefor, the board of county commissioners
may appropriate it  in  accordance with sections
163 01  to 163.22.  inclusive, of the Revised Code.

  •HISTORY: 151 T 14*9.  EB  M-CS.

   §6110.01   Organization of district;  pur-
pose.
   Anv  area  sihiared in any unincornnrated  part
of one or  more contiguous counties or  in  one
or more municipal  corporations, or  both,  may
be organized as a regional water and sewer  dis-
trict in  the manner and  subject to  the  condi-
tions  provided in  Chapter  6119.  of the   Re-
vised Code, for either  or  both of the following
purposes:
   (A) To ^ supply  water •& to users  within  and
without the district:
   fR) To provide for the collection, treatment,
and  disposal  of .fo waste  wiitpr «fo wit-bin—aild.
without the district.
  * HISTORY: 134 v S 166. Eff 1M9-71.
Cross-Tiefcrcnces to Related Sections
  Bonds for purchasing,  constnicting,  improving, or
    extending  water  or  sewerage systems not con-
    sidered  In  certain tax limitations, RC  S 133.03
    (D).

  C§ 6119.01.13   §6119.011   Defini-
tions.
  As used in  Chapter  8119. of  the  Revised
Code:
  (A) "Court of common pleas" or "court" means,
unless the context indicates a different meaning
or intent,  the court of common pleas in which the
petition for the organization of a regional  water
and sewer district is filed.
                                             353

-------
  31. General  Code   §§ 6828-1  to  6828-79" (RC
§6101.01 et seq)  contain abundant provisions which
grant not  only to the parties to the cause but  to
anyone who may  desire to become a complainant  or
objector, his  "day in  court" and by reason thereof
said  act does not  vrolate the "due process" clause  of
the  federal  constitution.  Tins includes  the three-
tenths mill levy ot the act: Miami County v.  Dayton,
92 OS. 215,  110  NK  726  [see  to  the same Cllcct,
Ambiosc v.  Miami Conservancy  Dist., 104 OS 615].
  32. Since  GC §6828-1 (KG  s 6101 01) et seq pro-
vide  Ioi notice in GC  §6828-5 (HC 56101.07), and
make ample provision for a  hearing in GC S 6828-6
(HC  § 6101.08), such  statute  docs  not  provide  for
taking  property without due process ot law:  Miami
County v. Dayton, 92  OS 215, lit) NIC 726 [see  to
the  same  ellcct,  Ambrose  v. Miami Conservancy
Dist.,  104  OS  615J,  Silvey v.  Commissioners, 273
Fed  202.
  33, An  adjudication  in  a  proceeding  Ioi  appiais-
mg leal property  lo  delray  the cost ol an  improve-
ment in earning out  an oilier.rl plan Ioi Hood control
under  the consci\atuy  at t  ot  Ohio (CC  -^ 6828-1
to 6S2S-79 [KG S 6101.01  el .scq!) is final and incon-
testable as  to all piopcit)  appiaiscd,  and  is  res
judicata as  to all o\\nns  ol  piopci[\  \\hicb  VA as
appiaisccl  m  .such proceeding:  State c\  rel Gioss v.
Miami Conservanc) Dist, HI  OS  52, 25 OO  149,
•16 MC(2d) 407.

Delegation of legislative power
  38. Where  a  power  is  quasi-legislative,  quasi-
admiuistialive or  quasi-judicial,  or  so mixed in  its
nature that  it may be  regarded as a combination  of
all ot them, the legislature may in  the first  instance
characterr/e such power and  confer it  cither upon
an existing agenc) ot the government or an agency
especial!)  created tor  that  purpose.  There is no
delegation  of legislative power  in  the  conservancy
act violative  oi any constitutional provision:  Miami
Count)  v. Day ton,'92  OS 215, 110 XE 726 [see  to
the same effect, Ambiosc v. Miami Conservancy Dist ,
101  OS 615J.
  39. This and following sections  providing for es-
tablishing  conservancy  districts  on  petition to  the
court ol  common pleas, do not delegate  legislative
powei  to the courts;  nor do  they delegate the power
ot taxation to the directors  of the  district  in viola-
tion  of Ait.  II, §  1 of  the Ohio  constitution:  Miami
Count)- v. Dayton, 92  OS 215, 110 N'E 726 [see  to
the  same   effect,   Ambrose  v. Miami Conservancy
Disl., 104 OS 615].
  40. This and following sections  providing for es-
tablishing  conservancy  districts  cm petition to  the
court of common pleas, do not delegate  legislative
power lo  the courts, in violation of Ait. IV, § 1  of
the Ohio constitution.  Miami  County v. Dav ton, 92
OS 215, 110 NE 726  [.see to  the same effect, Ambrose
v. Miami Conservancy  Dist., 104 OS 615],  Silvey v.
Commissioners, 273 Fed 202.

   §  6101.02  Style  of  conservancy  bonds,
books, arid  records.

   (A)  The  bonds issued under sections  6101.01
lo 6101.84,  inclusive,  of the Revised Code, may
be called "conservancy bonds,"  and shall be  so
engraved or printed on their face.
   (B)  The  tax  books and records provided  for
in such sections shall be termed "conservancy
books" or "conservancy  records," and such titles
shall be printed, stamped, or written thereon.
  HISTORY: Hiiieau of Code Revision.  Eff 10-1-53.
     Comment
       This section is derived from CG § 6828-1.  See also
     1JC §6101.01.

        § 6101.03  Short  forms and  abbreviations.
     (GC § 6828-77)
        (A)  In  any  orders of  the  court  the words
     "The court now here finds  that it hath  jurisdiction
     of  the parties  to  and of  the subject matter  of
     this proceeding" are equivalent to  a finding that
     each jurisdictions! fact necessary to confer plenary
     jurisdiction upon the  court,  beginning with the
     proper signing  and filing of the initial petition to
     the date of the order containing such  recital, has
     been scrutinized by the court and has been found
     to meet every legal requirement imposed by sec-
     tions 6101.01 to 6101.84, inclusive, of  the Re-
     vised  Code.
        (15)  No  other evidence  of the legal hypothe-
     cation  of  the special tax  to  the payment of the
     bonds is required  than the passage of a  bonding
     resolution  by the board  of  directors of a  con-
     servancy district and the issuance of bonds  in
     accordance therewith.
        (C)  In  the preparation  of any  assessment  or
     appraisal record the usual  abbreviations employed
     by engineers, surveyors, and abstractors  may  be
     used.
        (D) Where  properly  to describe  any parcel
     of land, it would be  necessary  lo use a  long de-
     scription, the board of appraisers of  a conservancy
     district, after locating the land  generally,  may
     refer to the book  and page  of  the  public record
     of any instrument in \\hich the land is described,
     which  reference shall suffice to  identify for  all
     the purposes of such sections the land described
     in the public record so referred to.
        (E)  It is not necessary  in  any notice  required
     by such sections to be  published to specify the
     names of  the owners of the  lands  or  of  the per-
     sons interested therein; but any such  notice may
     be addressed  "To All  Persons  or Public  Cor-
     porations  Interested" with like effect as though
     such notice named by name  every  owner of any
     lands  within the territory  specified in the notice
     and every person interested therein,  and  every
     Honor, actual or inchoate.
        (F)  Every district declared  upon  hearing  to
     be a  conservancy district  shall thereupon be-
     come  a political .subdivision and  a  public cor-,
     Doration of the state,  invested with  all  the powers
     .and privileges  conferred  upon such  districts  by
     such sections.
       HISTORY:  GC £6828-77;  104 v  13 (5G), 877;  117 v  163
     (21fi), 8 1.  Eff  10-1-53.

            [ORGANIZATION  OF DISTRICT]

        § 6101.04   Organization  and  purposes ol
     conservancy  districts.   (CC  § 6828-2)
        Any area  or areas situated in  one  or  more
     counties may be organized as a conservancy dis-
354

-------
                                  CONSERVANCY DISTRICTS
                                                                                       § 6101.05
 trict, in tlic manner and subject to the conditions
jrovidcd  by sections_6_101.0I to  6101.84.  inclu-
                                                  which  petition  shall  bo  signrd  fithcr bv five.
                                                 Jiundrcd  freeholders,  or hy  a mnjority  of the/
 sive, of the. Revised Code, for any of the, following
 purposes;
   (A) Preventing floods;
   (B) Regulating stream channels by changing,
 widening, and deepening the same;
   (C) Reclaiming  or filling wet and overflowed
 lands;
   (D) Providing for irrigation where it  may be
 needed;
   (E) Regulating the  flow of streams and con-
 serving the waters  thereof;
   (F) Diverting or in whole or in  part elimin-
 ating  water-courses;
   (G) Providing  a water supply  for domestic,
 industrial, and public use;
  _(H) Providing for ihc rnlWHnn find  dis
                                                  freeholders, or -by the owners of more  than half
                                                  of the property, in cither acreage or value, within
                                                  flic  limits of the territory  proposed to be organ-
                                                  ized iiitp n  distn'r^   Such- n  petition  inny be
                                                  signed bv the governing body of any. .public cor-
                                                  poration  lying wholly or partly within the  pro-
                                                  posed  district, in such manner as it  prescribes,
                                                  and when so signed by such governing body such
                                                  a petition ..on the nart  of the said governing body
                                                  shall  fill all the requirements  of representation
                                                  upon  such  petition of  the freeholders of such
                                                  public corporation, as thov  appear upon the  tax
                                                  dunlirnte: nnd thereafter  it is  not necessary  for
                                                  individuals within said public corporation to sign
                                                  such a  petih'nn   Siirb n  petition mny nkn be
                                          .posaj   signed bv railroads  and other corporations o\\-n-
 of sewage and other liquid wastes produced with-
 in the district;
   (I)  Arresting  erosion  along  the  Ohio  shore
 line of Lake Erie.
   This section does not terminate  the
 nf nny rlkrriff  nvrfprii/prl prior to July 19, 1937,
. pntiroly \vitbin ;i
   The purposes of a district may be altered by
 the same procedure as provided for the  esfabb's-b-
                                                  incr lands.
                                                    Such petition may be filed bv  any citv inter-
                                                  ested in some  degree in the improvement, upon
                                                  proper  action  bv its  governing  body.
                                                    The petition shall set forth the proposed name
                                                  of said district,  the  necessity  for the proposed
                                                  work and that it will be conducive to the public
                                                  health,  safety,  convenience, or  welfare,  and  a.
                                                 _gcncral description  of the  purpose of the con-
                                                  templated  improvement, and  of  the territory to
 ment of such  a  district.
   HISTORY:  GC  » 0828-2; 101  v  13 (14),  $ 2;  117 v 1(J3
 (1C4), g 1; 1!>2 >  157, « 1. Lit HM.jl.

 Research Aids
   Organization:
     Page:   Drainage § 49
     O-Jur:  Gonseiv.  Dist.  S 9

                 CASE NOTES
   See also case note  2 umlei  KG §6101.18.
   1. The appointment of diieetois and  appraisers for
 conservancy districts under GC  S 6828-1 (HC § 6101 -
 OJ) ct seq, is not  legislative in (haiaetei, and a giant
                                                  be_. included in f?io nronosef? rh'sfricf.
to the couit of
appoint such directors and
of legislative po\vei.  Mi,in
                              s of  the  power  to
                                                            Said de-
                     scription need not be given by metes and bounds
                     or by  legal subdivisions, but  it is  sufficient if a
                     generally accurate  description  is  given  of the
                     territory to  be organized as a district.  Said ter-
                     ritory  need not be  contiguous,  provided  it  is  so
                     situated that  the  public health,  safety, conveni-
                     ence, or welfare will be promoted hy the  organi-
                     zation  as a single  district  of the  territory dc-
                     M.-IIOOC}.  Except  in  the case  of  a subdistrirt
                     or.nani/cd in pursuance  of section 610L71 of the
                     Kc\ ised Code, said tenitorv shall not be included
aisers is not a grant   yjiollv within the  limits of a
                              M.nly  v.  D.iylmi, 92   wl,,,,ratK,n.
                                                                                      gle
 OS 215,  110  KM  720.  Il.iwlho IK- \  'hoy,  102 OS
 689, 130  KE 9«, Stale- r\  <-l Silvey  v.  Miami
 Conservancy Disl., J02  OS 690,  130 ML 9-43.
   2. The fact that an order establishing a eonsciv-
 aney district  under  GG S 6828-1 (KG S 6)0],01) et
 seq, is  rendered by a court whieh  is composed of
 more than  one common pleas judge, docs not pre-
 vent such court from being a couit of common pleas;
 nor does  it prevent such judgment iiom being  a
 judgment  of  the  court of common pie.is.  Miami
 Goimty v. Dayton, 92 OS 215, 110  N!<; 726  [sec to
 the same effect,  Ambrose v.  Miami Gons-crvam-y
 Dist., 10-1 OS  615].

    § 6101.05   Petition  to  establish  conserv-
 ancy district.  (CC S 6828-3)
    Proceedings for the  fy[jib)is-hmcnt  of n  cop-
 scrvancy  disliicl  shall bo  iniiiatcd  only bv  the
 filing of a petition m llu- nflicc of the clerk of 1)10
 court  of common  picas  ol  one of  the  counties
 containing tcrriloiv \villiin the proposed district.
                                                     Said petition  shall pray for the  organization
                                                  of the district by the name proposed.
                                                     Upon the filing  of such  petition a  judge of
                                                  the court of common picas of  the county where-
                                                  in the petition was  filed shall determine whether
                                                  it bears the necessary  signatures  and  complies
                                                  \vith  the requirements of this section as to form
                                                  and content. No petition with the requisite signa-
                                                  tures shall  be  declared  void because of  alleged
                                                  defects,  but the judge, or  the  court in  subse-
                                                  quent proceedings,  may at any  time permit the
                                                  petition to be amended in form and substance to
                                                  conform to the facts  by correcting  any errors in
                                                  the description of the territory,  or  in any  other
                                                  particular.  Several similar petitions or  duplicate
                                                  copies of the same petition for  the organization
                                                  of the same district  may  be filed  and shall to-
                                                 gether  be  regarded  as  one_p_eti_tion._ All such
                                               355

-------
6101.32 of the Revised Code,  any such  notice
may be addressed "To All Persons or Public Cor-
porations Interested" with like  effect  as  though
such notice named by name every owner of any
lands within the territory specified in  the notice
and every person  interested therein,  and every
lienor, uctual or inchoate.                      ~
  » HISTORY: 150 v Ft. 2, Z06.  EH 12-18-64.
   See  provisions, § 3 of H 19 (130 v  Ft 2, 298)
 following RC § 6101.43.

   § 6101.04
 Reseaich Aids
   Organization:
     O-Jur2d:  Conserv. Dist. 1 5

   § 6101.05  Petition to establish  conserv-
 ancy district
  .Proceedings  for  the establishment  of a con-
 servancy  district shall  be initiated only by the
 filing ot a petition in the oilice of the clerk of the
 court  of  common pleas of  one  of the  counties"
 ponfnnn'nfT teirilory  wuln'p thp proposed district,
 which  petition shall  be  sitn\eLd. either  hy  five
 hundred freeholders. or_by a majority  of  the free-
 holders, or liy  the  owners of more than half of
 the  property, iu either acreage or value, within
, the  hunts of  die  territory  proposed  to be  or-
         into n distiii't.   Snrh peHHnn  may
*•
               (TQverninfy  |jpdv
                                        -p
                                            blif
 corporation or watershed district  created  under
 section 61().'i.Q2 of the Revised (,:_pde lying wholly
 or  puitly  within _ the proposed  district,  in such
 manner as it  prescribes,  and v,hen so signed by
 such governing body such a petition  on  the  part
 of  the  s.iiJ governing  body shall  fill all the re-
 quirements ot representation upon such petition
 of  the  heeholders of such public corpoiation or
 watershed district, as they appear upon the tax
 duplicate: and  thereafter  it is  not necessary for
 individuals  within  said  public  corporation  or
 watershed d is (rift  to  siffil sn^ih fl  petition.  Such
 a petition may also  be signed by railroads and
 other corporations owning lands.
   Such petition may be filed by  anv city  inter-
 ested in some degree in the improvement,  upon
 proper  action by its governing body.,
   The  petition  shall  set forth the proposed  name.
 of  s.iid district, the  necessity  tor  the  proposed •
 work and that it will be conducive to the public-
 health,   safety,  convenience, or  \\elfare. and, a*
 general description ot  the  purpose of the coa-
 50 situated  that  the public health,  safety, con-
 venience, or welfare  will  ho  promoted by the
-Organization  as a single district of the territory
 described.  Except in the  case  of  a subdistrict
 organized in pursuance of section 6101.71 of the
 Revised  Code, said territory  shall  not be in-
 cluded  wholly  within  the limits  of  a  single
 municipal, corporation.
   Said petition  shall  pray for the organization
 of the district by the name proposed.
   Upon the filing of such petition a judge of the
 court of common pleas of the  county wherein
 the petition  was  filed shall determine whether
 it  bears  the necessary signatures  and  complies
 with the requirements of this section as to  form
 and  content.  No  petition with  the  requisite
 signatures  shall  be  declared  void  because  of
 alleged defects, but the judge,  or  the court in
 subsequent proceedings, may at  any time permit
 the petition  to  be  amended in form and sub-
 stance to conform to the facts  by correcting any
_errors  in  the description of the territory,  or in
. any  other particular.  Several  similar  petitions
 or duplicate  copies  of the  same petition for the
 organization  of  the same  district  may be filed
 and  shall together be regarded  as  one petition.
 All such  petitions  filed prior to the determination
 of the sufficiency of said  petition shall be con-
 sidered as  though they  had been filed  with the
 first petition placed on file.
   In determining when a majority of landowners
 has signed the petition, the names as they appear
 upon the tax duplicate govern  and are prima»
 facie  evidence of such ownership.
   « HISTORY:  130 T 1S78, | 1. ES 9-24-63.
   See RC § 6105.12 which refers to this section.
 Forms
   Petition to establish conservancy  district.   Bate*
     f 165.11.

 Research  Aldj
   Organization:
     O-Jur2d: Conserv. Dist f 5

   [§6101.06.13 §6101.061  Notice to
 board, director of natural resources, and director
 of emironmental protection; hearings.
   • Upon determining that a sufficient pph'tinn has
 been  filed, the judge making such determination
 shall  cause written notice thereof  to be  given
 to the director of the department  of natural re-
 sources, the director of environmental protection,
 and to the board of directors of  any coaservancv
 district having jurisdiction over all  or part of the
 territory  aifected  by  the  proceeding or  within.
 templated iinpiuvement, and  of  \hp.  teniMry tn.
                              (]f
-------
  59
OHIO CODE SUPPLEMENT
86101.07
  nriental Protection, and the directors of sueh con-
  servancy districts may appear  at  any  hearing
  xinsidering  the  establishment,  dissolution  or
  merger of any conservancy district or suBciijtrict
  thereof, and be heard, concerning t1ie~nced tor
  a .conservancy district, the.area that should be_
  included, desirable improvements, and any other
  matters which in their opinion should  be brought
  to~ the attention of  the court.
   HISTORY: 128  T  867 (Eff 10-12-59); 134 t S 397. Eff
  10-23-72.
    § 6101.07  Organization  of courtj power*
  and jurisdiction.
    Upon the determination of a judge of the court
  of common pleas that a sufficient petition has been
  filed in such court in accordance  with section,
  6101.05 of the Revised Code, he shall giye_nqtice
  thereof to  the  court  of common pleas, of each
  county included in whole or in part within the
	proposed conservancy district.  The  judge of the
  court of common pleas of each such county, or
  to the case of any county having more than one
 juch judge, one judge assigned by  order of the
 Judges  of  the  court  of  common  pleas thereof,
  shall sit as the  court of  common  picas of the,
^cojinty wherein the petition .was filed to exercise
  the  jurisdiction  conferred by sections 6101.01 jo_
  P10i.ff4, inclusive, of trie Revised  Code.  In case
  of  the inability to serve of  the  judge  of  any
  county having  only one judge,  the  chief justice
  of  the  supreme  court, upon application  of  any
  interested  person and proper showing of need,
  may assign a judge from another county to serve
  as a judge  for  such county during the  disability
  of its local judge. The court of any county, pre-
  sided  over by   the judges provided for  in  this
  section, may establish  conservancy districts when
  the  conditions  stated  in section 6101.05 of the
  Revised Code are found to exist. Except as other-
  wise provided  by sections 6101.08 to  6101.84,
 inclusive, of the Revised Code, such court ha?,
 for all purposes of sections 6101.01  to 6101.84,
 inclusive,  of the Revised  Code,  original  and
 exclusive   jurisdiction   coextensive  with   the
 boundaries and  limits  of the district or  proposed
 district and of  the  lands  and other  property
 Included in, or proposed to be included in, such
 district  or  affected by such district,  without re-
 gard to the usual limits  of its jurisdiction.  The
 judges of the court shall meet in the  first instance
 upon the call of the judge determining tho suf-
 ficiency of  the  petition  and shall  elect  one of
 their number as presiding judge.   Each  judge
 when sitting as  a member of the court shall re-
 oeive mch compensation  and  allowance for ex-
 penses as provided by law for a judge  of  the
 court of common pleas  serving by assignment
                outside  the  county  wherein he resides, which
                shall be paid as other expenses of the organiza-
                tion or operation of the district  are paid.
                  The court  shall adopt  rules of  practir-e and
                procedure not inconsistent with sections  6101.01
                to 6101.84, inclusive, of the Revised Code, and
                the  general laws of this state.  If the court con-
                sists of more than three judges,  it may designate
                three of  its members from three different  counties
                to preside over the court,  hear matters coming
                before the court, and make determinations and
                decisions or findings and recommendations, as the
                rules of the court provide,  with respect to any
                matters  authorized by such rules, the disposition
                of which is vested  in the  court, except that it
                shall not make final  decisions and orders as to:
                 (A)  The establishment, dissolution, or merger
                of the district or of subdistricts thereof;
                 (B)  Tlie  adoption,  rejection, or  amendment
                of the official  plan;
                 (C)  The appointment  and removal of directors
                and  appraisers;
                 (D)  The confirmation of the  appraisers' report
                of benefits, damages, and appraisals of property;
                 (E)  The authorization of  maintenance assess-
                ments  in excess of one per cent of benefits;
                 (F)  The authorization of a readjustment of the
                appraisal of benefits  in  accordance with section
                6101.54  of the Revised  Code;
                 (G)  The approval of the method of financing
                improvements   and   activities   under  section
                6101.25  of the Revised  Code;
                 (H)  The determination of rates  of compensa-
                tion for water under sections 6101.24 and 6101.63
                of the Revised Code;
                 (I) The  examination of die  annual  report  of
                the board of directors of the conservancy district
                as provided under section 6101.68 of  the  Revised
                Code.
                 The concurrence of two of the three judges so
                designated shall be  necessary for any  action  or
                determination  thereby and it has, if so provided
               by the rules  of the court,  the same  effect  as
               though taken  or made  by  the full court.   All
               actions and determinations by the  full court re-
               quire the affirmative vote of a  majority of the
               judges constituting the  court.   In all cases  in
               which  the judges are evenly divided  that  side
               with which the presiding judge votes shall  pre-
               vail.   In the  event the  court  consists  of  two
               judges and they find themselves unable to agree
               on any question left to their  decision, a judge  of
               the court of common pleas of some other county
               shall bo  designated  by the  chief justice of the
               supreme  court to sit and vota as a third member
               of tho court until such question is decided.
                 When  the court by its order entered  of record
               decrees tliat a  subdistrict be organized, the judge
                                               357

-------
                          APPENDIX G

                    PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS
Beemer, Harold, Chief of Engineering Division,  United States
Department of the Army - Huntington District,  Corps of Engineers,
Huntington, West Virginia, 11 August 1975.

Brungs, William, EPA National Water Quality Laboratory, Duluth,
Minnesota, 14 August 1975.

Calgon Corporation, July 1975.

DeGrave, Mick, Wyoming Bioassay Laboratory, Grandville, Michigan,
14 August 1975.

Desmond, Richard, Attorney, Squires, Sanders & Dempsey, Cleveland,
Ohio, July 1975.

Dodge, Melvin, Director, Department of Recreation and Parks,
Columbus, 31 July 1975.

Elliot, Thomas, Director, Delaware County Regional Planning
Commission, 30 July 1975.

Gilbert, Gary, Delaware County Assistant Sanitary Engineer,
4 September 1975.

Grissom, Catherine, Environmental Impact Statement Unit, United
States Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, 4 September 1975.

Griswold, Bernard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1975.

Habig, William, Director, Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission,
31 July 1975.

Hinde Engineering Corporation, July 1975.

Kacmar,  Steve, Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., 4 September 1975.

Lashutka, Greg, Staff Assistant for Ohio Affairs, Office of
Representative Samuel Devine, August 1975.

Levins, Ed, Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, July 1975.

MacMullen, Michael, Environmental Impact Statement Unit, United
States Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, 4 September 1975,

Mantor, Ray,  Superintendent, Delaware City Sewage Treatment Plant,
August  1975.


                             358

-------
Mapes, Greg, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 3 September 1975.

May, Lloyd, Delaware County Health Commissioner, Delaware County
Health Department, July 1975.

Miller, Dean, Delaware County Commissioner, 4 September 1975.

Nottingham, Jim, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 4 September
1975.

Parkinson, Robert, Director, Department of Public Service, Columbus,
4 September 1975.

PCI Ozone Company, August 1975.

Reid, Kenneth, Delaware County Commissioner, 4 September 1975.

Richards, Earl, Assistant Director, Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency, 3 September 1975.

Robbins, Payton, City of Columbus, 4 September 1975.

Savely, David, Franklin County Commissioner, July 1975.

Seiler, Albert, Burgess & Niple, Ltd., 4 September 1975.

Shepard, Paul, Burgess & Niple, Ltd., 4 September 1975.

Smith, Greg, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 3 September 1975.

Smith, Robert, Advanced Waste Treatment Research Laboratory,  25 July
1975.

Sprague, Rex, City Engineer, City of Delaware, August 1975.

Stein, Carol, Ohio State University Museum of Zoology, July 1975.

Stults, Fred, Delaware County Engineer, 4 September 1975.

Thomas, James, Director of Research, Columbus Area Chamber of
Commerce, 29 July 1975.

Virden, Bill, Contracts Division, Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency, 3 September 1975.

Walkenshaw, George, Engineer, Columbus Southerly Plant, 30 July 1975.

Whitney, James, Delaware County Commissioner, 4 September 1975.

Wilhelm, Carl A., Planning Coordinator, Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency, 3 September 1975.

                             359

-------
Williams, Ned, Director, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency,
3 September 1975.

Willis, Roger, Design Engineer, Department of Public Service,
Division of Sewerage and Drainage,  Columbus, 30 July 1975.

Wojcik, Eugene, Environmental Impact Statement Unit, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, 4 September 1975.

Wolfe, Robert, Burgess & Niple, Ltd., 4 September 1975.

Wright, Gene, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 3 September
1975.
                             360

-------
                              APPENDIX H




               LIMITATIONS OF ECONOMIC BASE METHODOLOGY









    .Hans Blumenfeld attacks the.economic base methodology in his article




"The Economic Base of the Metropolis" (page 13).   This methodology divides




all employment in a community into basic or primary employment and nonbasic




or secondary employment.   The former describes export-related employment;




the latter, employment related to local consumption.   Basic activities




are identified through the method of proportional apportionment.




     In analyzing the economic base methodology,  Blumenfeld points out




that the use of proportional apportionment to identify basic activities is




misleading.  This methodology includes only export-related employment as




a basic activity.  It neglects import-related employment,  which is equally




important.  Blumenfeld also maintains that employment is not a usable unit




of measurement for a balance of payment approach.  Rather, a value of




product measure is more applicable.




     Blumenfeld concludes that the basic-nonbasic ratio is only meaningful




in small and simply structured communities.  The  ratio is less applicable




and the methodology less useful in analyzing the  economy of a larger,




more complex community.




     To Blumenfeld's objections, it should be observed that the economic




base method is based on activities now present on the scene, with no




provision for the introduction of new activities.  This is a serious




objection, because the economic development of this country is full of




examples of the change or revival of local economies through the introduction




of new industries.
                                   361

-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on t/ie reverse before completing)
1
4
7
9.
REPORT NO. 2.
EPA-905/9-76-003 .
TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Analytical Studies for Assessing the Impact. of
Sanitary Sewage Facilities of Delaware County, Ohio
»
'AUTHOR(S)
L. Peltier, M. Lewis, J. Cuneo, G. Shea, D. Wagaman,
and J. Whang
PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Envir.o Control, Inc.
.Environmental Studies Group
1530 East Jefferson Street
Rockville, Md. 20852
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region V
230 South Dearborn
Chicago, IL. 60604
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
5. REPORT DATE (date of preparati
October 24, 1975
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
CODE
REPORT NO.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-01--2853
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
final repo'rt
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
 16. ABSTRACT
   The report was prepared to provide information to tne U.S. Environmental  Protection
   Agency for their preparation of an Environmental' Impact  Statement  on  the  Olentangy
   Environmental Control Center and Interceptor System, Delaware  County,  Ohio.   Popu-
   lation and economic projections for the area, and larger  region are reviewed.   An
   extensive study of local and regional sewage treatment service is  presented.   Site
   evaluations consider engineering, land use, biological,  environmental,  and  insti-
   tutional factors.  The environmental impacts of a sewage treatment facility at
   the chosen site are evaluated in terms of water quality,  biology,  land  use, and
   aesthetics.  Mitigative measures for reducing adverse effects  are  discussed.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
•". DESCRIPTORS
Sewage treatment
Sewers
Planning
Water quality
Land use
Fresh water biology
Population growth Esthetics
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
NTIS Only
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
Olentangy River
Delaware County, Ohio
Olentangy Environmental
Control Center
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page}
c. COSATI Field/Group
13B
08H
06F
21. NO. OF PAGES
386 pages
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)

-------
-------
rH
CO CO
B 4-1
0 B
•H cu
4-1 0
3 *rH
4-1 *O
•H  PH
•H B
rH rH 0) rH
Ai rH rH rH
B CU O CU





rH in vO






-, -H -H
S 4-1 & ? TJ
•H B
1 O 1 1 CO
rH rH rH
cO cO CO
B B B
O O O
iH -H -H
60 60 60

tf Pi P4
                                   M
                                   4-1
                               4->  a)
                               o 13
                               co
                               ex a)
                               3  M
                               •H  0)
                                   >
                               O  01
                               B  co

                               II   II

                               O v£>
                                (-1  >J  }-l
                                0)  CU  0)

                               •H  -H -H
                                r4  M  M

                                B  B  B
                                O  O  O
                                B  B  B
                               •H  -rf -H
                                O  O  O
                                CX, Cu  CL,
                                CO  CO  CO
                                cu  cu  cu
                                CO  CO  CO
                                o  o  o
                               rH  rH rH
                                O  O  0
                               rH  rH rH
                               rH  rH rH
                                cO  cO  cO
                               ifH  M-J MH
                               4-1  4-1  4-1
                                333
                                O  O  O

                               MH  MH l*H
                               •H  -H -H

                               o  m vo

                               «4H  <4H 14H
                                O  O  O

                               4-1  4J  4-1
                                o  o  a
                                cO  cO  cO

                                I*!-!-
                               •H  -H -H

                               *  *  *
                                   *  *
                                                 m
                                                 1^
                                                 ON
o
B
 B
 o
CJ
 B
W
4-1 4->
CO CO

^J T^J
CU (1)
4J 4-1
CO cO
CJ O
O 0
rH rH
CO CO
iH -H
4-1
CO

""O
CU
4-1
CO
o
o
rH
co
•H
*•
0)
o
^4
3
0
Cft




186