-------
FWPCA PRESENTATIONS
ORSANCO ENGINEERING COMMITTEE
MAY 13-14, 1969
SIXTY-NINTH MEETING
NETHERLAND HILTON HOTEL
CINCINNATI, OHIO
OHIO BASIN REGION
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
CINCINNATI, OHIO
-------
CONTENTS
Page
FWPCA RECOMMENDATIONS
Richard A. Vanderhoof
ACCEPTABLE WATER QUALITY IN MIXING AREAS
Kenneth M. Mackenthun
AQUATIC LIFE CRITERIA
TEMPERATURE
Present Temperature Conditions of the Ohio River
Keith 0. Schwab B
Individual States Adopted Temperature Criteria
Bern Wright C
Aquatic Life Temperature Requirements
Kenneth E. F. Hokanson, Ph.D. D
DISSOLVED OXYGEN
Present Dissolved Oxygen Conditions of the Ohio River
Keith 0. Schwab and Bernard Sacks E
Individual States Adopted Dissolved Oxygen Criteria
Bern Wright F
Productivity and Seasonal Variations Related to
Aquatic Life Dissolved Oxygen Requirements
William A. Brungs, Ph.D. G
2H
Present pH Conditions of the Ohio River
Keith 0. Schwab H
Individual States Adopted pH Criteria
Bern Wright I
Aquatic Life pH Requirements
William A. Brungs, Ph.D. J
-------
IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation Plan Compliance for the Ohio River
Robert S. Burd K
RECREATION
BACTERIA
Present Bacteriological Conditions of the Ohio River
James H. Adams, Jr. L
Individual States Adopted Bacterial Criteria
Bern Wright M
-------
RECOMMENDATIONS
R. A. Vanderhoof
SUMMARY OF CRITERIA
The objective in seeking revisions in water quality criteria
is to more precisely define the necessary water quality char-
acteristics required for a particular water use. Knowledge
of realistic water quality criteria and the existing tributary
water quality and uses must be resolved into attainable and
enforceable standards that will be consistent with existing
water quality or anticipated water quality after installation
of pollution abatement measures.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Administration has review-
ed the criteria for aquatic life and recreational uses relative
to the Main Stem of the Ohio River. The available evidence
indicates the following criteria are deemed appropriate for
acceptance by ORSANCO.
AQUATIC LIFE
A. TEMPERATURE - RECOMMENDED CRITERIA
1. To maintain well-rounded warm-water biota:
a. The water temperatures shall not exceed 90° F.
(32.2 C.) at any time or any place, and a maximum
hourly average value of 86 F. (30 C.) shall not
be exceeded.
b. The temperature shall not exceed the temperature
values expressed on the following table:
AQUATIC LIFE TABLE
Daily Mean, °F. Hourly Max., °F.
Dec. - Feb. 48 55
Early March 50 56
Late March 52 58
Early April 55 60
Late April 58 62
Early May 62 64
Late May 68 72
Early June 75 79
Late June 78 82
July - Sept. 82 86
October 75 82
November 65 72
-------
age 11
c. During any month of the year, controllable heat*
shall not be added to a stream in excess of the
amount that will raise the temperature of the
water (at the expected minimum daily flow for
that month) more than a calculated 5°F. That is,
the minimum daily low flow for the month in
cubic feet per second - converted to pounds per
second - and multiplied by 5 shall be the maximum
rate of heat addition in BTU's** per second for
that month.
2. To maintain trout habitats:
a. Inland trout streams, headwaters of salmon streams,
trout and salmon lakes and reservoirs, and the
hypolimnion of lakes and reservoirs containing sal-
monids should not be warmed. No heated effluents
should be discharged in the vicinity of spawning
areas.
d.
For other types and reaches of cold-water streams,
reservoirs, and lakes, the following restrictions
are recommended.
During any month of the year, heat should not be
added to a stream in excess of the amount that
will raise the temperature of the water more than
5°F. (based on the minimum expected flow for that
month). In lakes and reservoirs, the temperature
of the epilimnion should not be raised more than
3°F. by the addition of heat of artificial origin.
The normal daily and seasonal temperature fluctu-
ations that existed before the addition of heat
due to other than natural causes should be main-
tained .
The maximum temperatures for cold waters are
expressed in the following table:
October - April
September & May Transition
Period
June - August
Daily Mean, F.
50
58
66
Hourly Max., F.
55
62
70
* Controllable heat is defined as any heat load discharged to a
public body of water by an industrial source of any type.
** BTU - British Thermal Unit is defined as the quantity of heat
required to raise the temperature of one pound of water one
degree Fahrenheit at, or near, its point of maximum density
-------
Page iii
B. DISSOLVED OXYGEN - RECOMMENDED CRITERIA
1. Habitats for well-rounded warm water fish populations:
The D.O. concentration shall average at least 5.0 mg/1
per calendar day and shall not be less than 4.0 mg/1 at
any time or any place outside the mixing zone.
2. Habitats for cold water fish populations: The D.O.
concentration shall not be less than 6 mg/1 to be met
at any time or at any place. Spawning areas shall be
protected by a minimum 7.0 mg/1 dissolved oxygen.
C. pH - RECOMMENDED CRITERIA
Recommendat ion:
1. No highly dissociated materials should be added in
quantities sufficient to lower the pH below 6.5 or
to raise the pH above 8.5. It shall be recognized
that pH is a poor criterion for the expression of
toxicity of acids and alkalies.
2. That the addition of ammonia (as NH3 or NH4OH),
poorly dissociated inorganic acids and organic bases
and acids shall be regulated not in terms of pH,
but in terms of their own toxicities as established
by bioassay.
RECREATION
A. PRIMARY CONTACT RECREATION - RECOMMENDED CRITERIA
In addition to the presently accepted and approved total coli-
form resolution:
"Bacteria: Coliform group not to exceed 1,000
per 100 ml as a monthly average value (either
MPN or MF count); nor exceed this number in
more than 20 percent of the samples examined
during any month; nor exceed 2,400 per 100 ml
(MPN or MF count) on any day."
It is recommended that a resolution on fecal coliform should
be proposed which follows the NTAC recommendations on recre-
ational criteria:
"Fecal coliforms should be used as the indicator
organism for evaluating the microbiological suit-
ability of recreation waters. As determined by
-------
Page iv
multiple-tube fermentation or membrane filter
procedures and based on a minimum of not less
than five samples taken over not more than a
30-day period, the fecal coliform content of
primary contact recreation waters shall not ex-
ceed a geometric mean of 200/100 ml, nor shall
be more than 10 percent of total samples during
any 30-day period exceed 400/100 ml."
A transition period of several years should be utilized to
implement the change to fecal coliform. During this period,
we recommend analysis for both total and fecal coliform
organisms.
-------
ACCEPTABLE WATER QUALITY IN MIXING AREAS
K. M. Mackenthun
As stated in the National Technical Advisory Committee Report,
and to protect water quality, mixing areas must not be used
for, or considered as, a substitute for waste treatment, or
as an extension of, or substitute for a waste treatment
facility. Mixing should be accomplished as quickly as possible
through the use of devices which ensure that the waste is
mixed with the allocated dilution water in the smallest poss-
ible area. At the border of the mixing area, water quality
must meet water quality standards.
Mixing zones should not be permitted where serious damage
may be done to a recognized aquatic resource. The location
of mixing zones should be determined on a case-by-case
agreement between the Federal Water Pollution Control Admin-
istration and the involved State government and/or interstate
compact.
Where mixing zones are allowed, the following are recommended:
1. As a guideline, the maximum distance of the
mixing zone in any direction should not exceed
that obtained by multiplying the square root
of the discharged number of million gallons per
day times 200 feet (i.e., _25 mgd = /J5 x 200 =
1,000 feet); and in no case exceed 3/4 mile.
2. Mixing zones for single or cumulative discharges
should be limited to 25 percent of the cross-
A.l
-------
sectional stream area, width, or volume of flow;
when density differences between waste waters
and receiving waters produce stratification, the
stratified layer shall not extend beyond 25 per-
cent of the width of the stream;
3. At no place in the mixing zone should the 96 hour
TLm to aquatic life be exceeded;
4. Mixing areas shall be:
Free from substances attributable to municipal,
industrial or other discharges that will settle
to form putrescent or otherwise objectionable
sludge deposits;
Free from floating debris, oil, scum, and
other floating materials or other discharges
in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or
deleterious;
Free from discharged materials that produce
color, odor, or other conditions in such
degree as to create a nuisance.
Free from substances and conditions or com-
binations thereof in concentrations that
produce undesirable aquatic life.
A.2
-------
PRESENT TEMPERATURE CONDITIONS OF THE OHIO RIVER
K.O. Schwab
The activities of man have altered temperature conditions in the Ohio.
Clearing of trees along portions of the banks and construction of locks
and dams have had an effect on temperature that is difficult to define.
Somewhat more predictable is the effect on temperature of industrial
thermal discharges. The major source of industrial heat loadings is
from steam-electric power plants.
Exhibit B-l, based on information prepared by the Federal Power Commission,
shows past and projected power consumption in the basin. Continuing rapid
growth of power generation to meet human needs is a fact of life. In
the Ohio Basin, electric power generation is expected to double between
1970 and 1980. Practically all of the predicted expansion will result
from new thermal power installations, since most of the best hydro-
electric capability has already been developed. In addition, because
of the economics of scale, most of the additional capacity is expected
to come from large installations of over 500-megawatt capacity.
Exhibit B-2 shows the location of the lH present installations of over
1,000 megawatts in the basin. Nine of these are on the main stem of the
Ohio River. Some of these 14 are scheduled for expansion and additional
large installations will have to be constructed to meet future needs. A
plant of 1,000 megawatts is capable of adding enough B.T.U.'s to raise a
B.I
-------
flow of 5,000 cfs (the approximate 30-day, 10-year low flow of the Ohio
River below Pittsburgh after augmentation by existing and planned
reservoirs) by about ^°F. Plants capable of generating up to 2,600
megawatts are known to be in the planning stage in the Ohio Basin.
Exhibit B-3 shows the range of maximum hourly values by month from 1962
through 1968, as recorded on the ORSANCO robot monitors at Cincinnati and
Huntington. This Exhibit also shows the median of the maximum hourly
values by month.
A review of ORSANCO data allows the following general conclusions:
1. Maximum hourly values for a month generally are between 0.5°
and 1.5° F above the maximum daily average.
2. At ORSANCO stations other than Cincinnati, maximum values
after several years of record reach:
Maximum hourly values = 87.0 to 88.5° F
Maximum daily average - 86 to 87° F
3- At the ORSANCO Cincinnati station:
Maximum hourly value = 85° F
Maximum daily average = 8U.^° F
Information in the Markland Pool studies of FWPCA and studies carried
out on the Ohio River by the Upper Ohio Basin Office in the vicinity of
Wheeling, West Virginia, show the following:
1. The river is not thermally stratified. During the 1963 Markland
Pool study cross sectional temperature difference of about 0.1° C
existed between the surface and a depth of 18 feet.
B.2
-------
2. Cross-sectional differences are noticeable only in areas of
thermal discharge plumes and mixing areas. Some evidence
indicates that short circuiting or upstream displacement of
thermally heated discharges exists where intake and discharge
are in the same pool.
B.3
-------
Exhibit B-l
Ohio River Basin Study
Past
Year
1950
1960
1963
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
From
and Estimated Future Power
Energy Requirements
(Million Kwh)
42,495
106,273
120,227
162,650
315,950
551,400
879,500
1,281,800
1,725,800
Requirements of Utili'
Peak Demand
(Thousand Kw)
7,562
17,102
19,709
27,910
53,760
93,700
149,000
216,700
290,700
Ohio River Basin Comprehensive Survey Appendix I
Load Factor
%
64.2
70.8
69.6
66.5
67.1
67.2
67.4
67.5
67.8
Power Commission; 1966
-------
-------
CO
K K
o o
FH fa
o s co
m NO
o - ON
K S H
O H K
O O O
^ Sz •*>
< H O
CO EH «
K & X
O g H
S CM
O P NO
K is; ON
fa
>5
9
o
•
X
cd
CD
W)
cd
CD
t>
rH
•H
ci
R
M R}
EH S
M
O
H CD
O 3
rH
>
g
u
K
c*3
G
rd
CD
S
g,
G
nj
CC<
Cd
•H
CD
S
0
G
c2
PH
§
•H
0
S
0)
iJO
G
ci
K
§
»rH
•8
s
0)
faO
G
OJ
ffi
H r-_
en o
en o
^ ^
i i
O NO
O CO
en en
O CM
-3- m
^t -:?•
CO NO
NO NT)
-^T -3r
t i
CO rH
O O
^
G r^
td (D
O CM
en CM
•3- -d-
ON ON
in CM
-^j~ _^~
1 1
in ON
CO O-
en en
o c>-
5 5
in rH
S7 ^
ON O
CO rH
cn -d-
G ,0
t—^ pr .
CN- VO
O CM
in NO
O NO
in NO
i i
CM m
OO rH
-3- NO
NO CM
H en
vn NO
NO H
in NO
in NO
i |
CM in
ON CM
JT NO
Ci ti
a) ft
S <
o- ^t
0 0
>n NO
H CO
CM CM
>n NO
i i
m co
in NO
^ m
o c^-
o o
vn NO
o »n
m NO
i i
NO O-
Cj ti
a$ P<
y <3^
NO
en
O-.
CN-
CO
1
NO
OO
NO
c^
^
ON
ON
o-
1
rH
ON
NO
J>^
cd
S
CM
O
C1^—
NO
^-
O-
|
en
NO
NO
rH
El
en
£
t
ON
NO
NO
J>}
a)
S
NO
o
CO
o
en
CO
i
CO
CM
H
00
ON
^)-
CO
in
ON
^
CD
G
^
^_
£V_
^_
ON
O
CO
^T
CO
j.
rH
CO
1
NO
^
CD
G
^~f~\
JJ~\
CO
rx.
NO
CO
1
o
J-
00
ON
CO
CM
CO
CO
-J
^3-
00
H
^3
^
CM
CM
CO
^.
^j.
CO
\f*\
Q\
*~
m
CO
o
CO
1
o
CO
rH
£
NO
J-
OO
CO
vo
CO
1
c^-
CM
OO
m
CO
en
CO
CO
ON
en
CO
to
3
NO
CNJ
CO
NO
en
00
i
rH
00
cn
CO
o
of
0
CM
CO
UD
rH
ON
O-
en
rH
CO
|
CM
NO
OO
fc
OO
rH
00
ON
NO
^
-P
fl)
«
00
CN-
^
rH
OO
in
NO
^
m
g^
vn
CM
CO
A
(N_
^
-P
ft
0)
cn
rH
CM
CN-
vn
NO
i
CO
NO
NO
CM
rH
fN_
O-
1
cn
ON
NO
-P
o
0
NO
rH
c^-
rH
_^-
C^—
1
CO
[S.
NO
0
CM
CN-
vn
^
1
H
CO
NO
-P
o
0
en
o
\o
^
NO
1
NO
0
rH
NO
^_
in
NO
NO
NO
J>
Q
*
CO
ON
rH
in
NO
o
o-
en
o
NO
NO
NO
NO
f^
vn
>
•§
o
a?
-5
ON
CM
vn
1
NO
O
"*
^
§
CO
en
vn
|
H
H
J-
O
0}
P
NO
££•
NO
NO
vn
1
ON
_-v
•*
cn
§
ON
NO
vA
in
^
0
a
-------
e e
CO
CO
CSI CNJ
CO O.O?
CO CO
CM
CO
CO
CO
CD
CO
CM CO
-------
CO
CO
co
co
CO
0»
CM
CM
CO CO
• • •
CO LO CD
£ °° i- ."S
CM
CO
CO
CO
LO GO CO
. CM
-------
CO
CO
CD
CO
OO »- -H-
CM
CD „
k. CD CD
CD O i_
Q_ CD J= =
CD
CO
CD
CM CO
CM
ff+ ff* CM
CM
—» ^ CO
-------
CO
CO
TO
00
CM
CD fc-
-C CD
LT9 CD
CD
CM
09
TO
LL.
CO
^- CM
co m
^ |—i CD
CM
in
-------
INDIVIDUAL STATES ADOPTED TEMPERATURE CRITERIA
B. Wright
C.I
-------
CO
0)
O
U
o -i
"8 .H
-u
rt rt
••-1 d
JH ,
U
B
rt
a
0)
H
Q
H
O
fy*
ft
n .
<
CRITERIA
W
H
H
i— i
c5 >
.r-l O
'H a
4) o.
ft -i ^ Jn 4J L.
£^ ^? 5
Not to exceed 90° F at any time during the months of April
ber, and not to exceed 60° F at any time during the months
April. Drastic or sudden temperature changes will not be
Board will insist upon controlled changes in temperature n
per hour, nor more than a 5 F cumulative change from na
perature.
CO
"o
• 1-4
1—4
r— 1
1— 1
#
f»^
vO
£
00
I— I
>>
•""!
^
c
a
be
f-l
£
• r-l
CO
.1-1
J-t
V
•w
rt
a
rt
rt
rt
i— i
CO »
QJ
>Tr» ^
V ri t O p
•£ (Vj g -^ d)
'^ h -^ .5 •&
^ d W
rt ^ tuO *"
H SL (ft 3 ""^
i g •£ u ^' 5
of April through November, and not to exceed 60° F at any
months of December through March. Drastic or sudden te:
will not be permitted. The Board will insist upon gradual i
perature not to exceed 2° F per hour nor more than a total
of the maximum dirunal change or 9° F whichever is greati
Cold water fish habitat: Not to exceed 65 F; however, slij
i
1
J5 ~
"S *
QJ _c*i
"S m
^^ «- •
peratures maybe tolerated with higher dissolved oxygen cc
(Temperature change limitations same as for warm water J
C NO
o 0^
h
^ J< o"
4-> > <3
04 O *M
CU M X
^\ P] '"i
LJ ^ *y
w <« 2
CO
lH .^
(U J3 T-J CO
HI-
•T: ** «^H i^
0) t. ^
^ as
z M 8 g
X! « m -^
f •§ ^ «
3 fi *> rt
O in
J " ° §
•£3 ni O
Not to exceed 93 F at any time during the months of May t
and not to exceed 73° F at any time during the months of D<
April. The maximum allowable change in temperature due
on a daily basis would be 10° F and that the maximum rate
would be 2° F.
CJ
1
cu
M
u
0)
4J
CO
>iH
to
c
O
O
T3
(U
11)
Vi
0)
M
rt
CQ
T)
IH
rt
1
rt
C.2
-------
Q
W
>
0
&
OH
Pi
<
CRITERIA
W
H
j
i>- to CD
4J -H rH
S 5 «.
bC rt «
2 rn '£
< Hi 0)
emperatures as to be injurious to fish life, . . .
:ream temperatures in excess of 86° F will not
^ to
r*
ri-l
y JD'
3 iS
to ^
u_l =lt
•*-* ~tt^
rt e
CO -jH
T3 cu
•s ^
S 1-1
CT EJ
^ PQ
^ ^
cu ™
+» u
rt -d
2 S
^ 0
o H
*
0)
2
n)
.1-1
M
o
^->
• r-4
>H
O
Further, no permanent change in excess of 5 F
urally occuring background temperatures. Tern-
be limited to 2° F per hour, not to exceed 9° F in
r limited in that for any seven (7) day period the
;he 5 F change of background criteria stated above.
.ter temperature shall not exceed 90 F within the
i
•mitted to trout waters.
. 4J i-H aj ™ H
2P $ -^ JH ^ % oj
C f3 TO ^3 OJ On
•r-j -C ^| aj (U
\\l**$ I
* * 2 i i 5 S
0) T3 M ° ^ to XI
ij oj oj '£„.... u
^3 t5 ^ oj S?n 2 m
™ ti c « ^o -^ • — • "-1
•o 'S S ft 5 •" n: ^
OJ p XI M ,C M
tJflJoOr-To 2
•g ft g ^ « -3 « g
Coj^^bCHM oj
« ^ -s ^ 2 S 5 -S
^^2s,mS'S ^
,— i >H >N a) cu 2 ^
oj -g oj ti > n 'g £
xs^aftirtici-C 2
S 00
n -0
° £
ill ^H
*H |
^ i — i ,r
oj «j "*
"n > XI
» 21
x a|
H rt S
time during the months of May through November,
any time during the months of December through
of temperature is limited to an increase of 5° F.
>N J-> OJ
C ni be
n) . C
LXJ
-------
P
W
O
«yl>
CL
(X
-4
^4
CRITERIA
W
EH
EH
W
a
P
TJ
(U
"Si
V
u
W
Warm water fish habitat: Not to exceed 95 F, unless caused by
H
'a
'So
.H
>
r-"
£T
QN H
_ rt
r-" '
r— 1 ""^
n) >N JP
On) p
»H a ^
CX n) ^
rt 1-1
(H
a $
O <•*
•H
'> -t-> fX
0 CX C
MO
PL, 'O *> *•
r1 ^ 'S
^ 0) "rt
*S ±j u 'H
•* tO fli &0
0\ rH £
— -*J C *"J
O^ _2 3 ,5
-H 5 C U
natural conditions.
i
i
c»
vO
i-H
«
N
^«
0)
s
g g 2
Not to exceed 93°F at any time during the months of May through
November, and not to exceed 73 F at any time during months of
December through April. No discharge shall raise the stream te
perature more than five (5) degrees after suitable admixture abo^
normal temperature background. The rate of change shall not
exceed two (2) degrees per hour under normal operating conditioi
(After suitable abatement is affected or five years from date of
standards - the maximum temperature for the Ohio River will be
lowered to 87°F during the months of May through November.
The maximum temperature for the tributaries of the Ohio River
except for Zone 1 1 of the Kanawha River is 87°F during the
months of May through November. )
rt)
• |H
•H
bfl
•H
r"
•4-1
cn
QJ
C.U
-------
AQUATIC LIFE TEMPERATURE REQUIREMENTS
K. E. F. Hokanson
Temperature is the prime regulator of life processes
because it affects the functions and activities of organisms,
and it may be the most important single factor affecting
aquatic life. When establishing permissible water tempera-
tures to preserve and perpetuate aquatic life, cognizance
must be take.n of field and laboratory data. Because of re-
cent increasing awareness of potential problems to aquatic
life from waste heat from the growing thermal-electric
generation industry, many investigators have begun recently
to evaluate some of the temperature effects.
I will present some recent unpublished findings by the
National Water Quality Laboratory, the Tennessee Valley Au-
thority, the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, and other
agencies.
The harvestable number of aquatic organisms is depen-
dent upon the basic equation:
Annual recruitment minus mortality (including
all life stages, predation and natural death) =
harvestable surplus.
For sustained yields, consideration must be made for suffi-
cient adult carry-over to provide for new recruitment or
D.I
-------
reproduction. Because fish are mobile, naturally occurring
high temperatures are rarely a factor in natural mortalities.
When free to do so, fish will seek a preferred temperature;
this has long been recognized by outdoor magazines and other
sportsmen publications that recommend fishing for a species
at a certain depth or season based on temperature. Recent
findings indicate that the lethal temperature, such as the
96 hour TLm, may have no bearing on the quality of fisheries
within a waterway. The critical life stages include spawn-
ing, egg and fry development. Table D-l presents maximum
temperatures for growth, reproduction and survival for four
species of fishes; it indicates that the spawning or repro-
duction phase is approximately 15 to 20°F. lower than the
lethal temperature for these fish. If temperatures during
the critical recruitment phase of the fisheries population
is above maximum specified levels, there will be no recruit-
ment and a fishery will not be sustained. Table D-2 presents
some maximum temperatures for reproduction for fish present
in the Ohio River drainage basin. Included are several non-
game or forage fish that serve a very important role as the
basis of the food supply for harvestable basses, sauger or
jack salmon, and catfish. Generally, fish that spawn in
early spring have lower temperature requirements than those
that spawn in summer. This emphasizes a need for maintain-
ing the seasonal temperature cycle. If these temperatures
D.2
-------
are exceeded during the spawning season, there will be no
recruitment and eventually the species will become extinct
even though adults may thrive in these waters.
After the eggs have hatched and the fry have grown
to fingerling size, fish will prefer somewhat higher tem-
peratures which allow for optimum growth and activity
(Table D-3). None of the Ohio River fish listed have their
best growth potential at temperatures above 86°F.
Table D-A presents a summary of lethal temperature
limits of some Ohio River fishes. Should water temperatures
be increased or decreased gradually (few °F/hour) or suddenly
beyond the limits set by the acclimation temperature, fish
fatalities may be expected. Only slow rates of change
(few °F/day) will allow complete acclimation, which proceeds
slowly at colder temperatures, and changes in fish tolerance
limits. There is a range of tolerances among species; but
the fathead minnow, an important forage fish, will die when
the temperature is raised suddenly, 6° to 92°F. when accli-
mated to a temperature of 86°F. This same species can
tolerate a sudden rise of 33° when acclimated to 50°F. which
emphasizes the importance of lethal temperature limits.
A small margin of safety exists between the optimum
for growth and survival of a species. A 5°F. rise above
optimum growth would result in increased mortality (Figure 1;
Table D-5), increased deformities of fry, decreased growth,
D.3
-------
increased incidence of disease, and avoidance of heated
waters if given a choice. The net result would be a lower
standing population of the desired species, and a change
in species composition to one tolerant of warmer waters.
Consideration must be given to trout and other cold-
water fishes that inhabit many headwater streams. As shown
in Table D-5, temperatures above 61°F. present serious haz-
ards to trout fry depending on the time of exposure. Be-
cause the few remaining trout waters in the Ohio River
Basin may approach this temperature during the summer, it
was recommended by the National Technical Advisory Committee
that no thermal discharges be made to existing cold water
fishery streams.
Table D-6 presents recommended sseasonal maximum
temperatures for the Ohio River to protect existing fisheries
beyond the mixing zone. These data were selected to provide
for a continued, sustained fishery in the Ohio River includ-
ing the most critical recruitment phase. Recommended
seasonal temperature criteria follow the natural climatic
cycles for the Ohio River (Figure 2).
Table D-7 presents recommended temperature criteria
for cold water fisheries such as exist in headwater streams
in the Ohio Basin Region, especially in the Appalachia Region,
To maintain a cold water fishery, many of these streams can-
not tolerate a heat load except when ice is present.
D.4
-------
Table D-8 summarizes the percentage of species that
will be affected at various life history stages with the
existing ORSANCO temperature criteria (Fourth Progress Re-
port), the criteria proposed by the Ohio Basin Region, and
the present thermal regiment of the Ohio River. Graphic
illustration of these criteria is presented in Figure 2.
The present ORSANCO criteria will not provide protection
for the majority of fish species inhabiting the river. Tem-
peratures lethal to 43 percent of the species, and that would
interfere with reproduction of 64 percent of the species,
would be allowed. The recommended Ohio Basin Region criteria
are designed to prohibit additional water quality degradation,
provide for a self-sustaining fishery, and permit judicious
use of the river for cooling purposes.
D.5
-------
§
T3
G
ffl W
CU
'--P
H O
r^j C
> cu
•H 13
>
k CO
3 -H
CO W
cu
* .*!
G -P
0 C
•H CU
•P k
O ID
13 (Xi
"O
O
C_j •
ft rG
cu co
fc-H
•P O
£5
O CO
k cu
bO-H
O
k cu
o ft
Un co
Ft . ^J
o 0
^/ 14-1
co IH
cu o
fc C
0) CU
ft fc
6 cu
0) UH •
•P CU W
P-i 0)
6 ft -P
rJ ftj
SHE
•r( Itf -ri
X G 4->
It -H CO
S <+H 0)
•
H
1
P
0)
H
^3
T)
H
c
0
•H
e
CU -H
£H , — 1
3 O
-P O
nj
•H
•P
O
^
\ -^
~ CM|
LO CD
f-- CD
S_x
•^
OM |
co
CD
•x^
CM|
co
^
Hi Hi
0 H
r- co
V^ N^
HI Hi
.3- J-
CO LO
V..
Hi
0
LO
CU
•H -P
CL, 3
o
CH $4
1* EH
CU
•P O
h 9
Q b
53 CO
r^ UD
C^ CD
^
«s^ J- 1
CNll x-v
LO LO
CO CD
^s
^
Hi
H 0
CD
^
CN|
CD CN
CO CO
J-
oo
Hi
H CD
00 CO
%^
Hi
0 H
r- oo
LO
r-
•*^
f-< CM |
CU CO
^ X CO
O -P (t)
3 3 CQ
CO O
0) CU
•P W)
•H fc
S j
cu
bO
H
H
cu
^y
CO
3
PM
^H O
O r-
4n cn
(I) MH
J -P O
3 CU T3 6
55 ^ J
3 *O EH
"-P CU
id nj ,G ^
-P ^ co 3
IT) CU -H O
T3 -P H A
•H ,Q 1
T3 H 3 J"
CU ftCN
rG T3
co cu G G
•H X 0 0
H tO
,Q -H T3 T)
3 H CU CU
ftXI CO CO
G 3 IT) IT)
ID PL, CQ «
•^ >v^.\
H ICN |ro Id- 1
-------
Table D-2. Maximum temperatures for reproduction of some Ohio River fishes
and their observed spawning season. Parenthesis denotes esti-
mates .
Species
Largemouth Bass
Smallmouth Bass
White Bass
Sauger
Channel Catfish
Emerald Shiner
Freshwater Drum
Golden Redhorse
Buffalo
White Sucker
Fathead Minnow
Maximum Temperature (°F)
for Reproduction
Spawning - Egg Incubation
7^2/ sn2/
/ 0 — o U—
?/ 9 /
70- 75-
Spawning Season
Time
Location
3/
Mid April-Mid May Ky.-
Mid April-Mid May Ky.-
Mid March-April Ark.
3/
/
60^ I/
80*7
Mid April-Mid May Tenn.-
7
I,1-'
791/
2^
78^7
(70)^7
70^
Mid May-June
T . .. 2/ _ . 6/
Late May— -July-
May
Mid March-April
Mid March-May
April-May
April-Sept.
A 1 5/
Ark.-
Ohio-y /
Ill.f'
Ala. I-'
Ohio-7
I/ Unpublished data, NWQL, Duluth, Minnesota.
2_/ Published Literature.
_3_/ Personal Communication, Gordon Hall, TVA.
4V Personal Communication, Tom Duncan, South Central Reservoir Investi-
gation, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
_5/ Personal Communication, Kermit Sneed, Warmwater Fish Cultural
Laboratories, Stuttgart, Arkansas.
6/ Flittner, G.A. 1964. Morphometry and life history of the emerald
~ shiner, Notropis at herinoides Rafinesque. Ph.D. thesis, University
Michigan, 208 p.
II Personal Communications, Bill Wren, TVA.
~B/ Personal Communications, Gordy Priegel, Wisconsin Conservation Dept.
9V Unpublished Data, NWQL, Newtown, Ohio.
I'D/ Estimated value from spawning observation.
IT/ Based on unpublished data, NWQL, Duluth, Minnesota. Data based on
Yellow Perch, a related species that spawn at the same time of
the year.
12/ Based on white sucker data.
-------
Table D-3. Optimum temperatures for activity and/or growth
and the final preferred temperatures of some Ohio
River fishes. Parenthesis denotes estimates.
Species
Optimum
Temperature (°F)
Activity - Growth
Final (or)
Preferred Temperature
Field - Lab
Largemouth Bass
Smallmouth Bass
White Bass
Sauger
Channel Catfish
Emerald Shiner
Freshwater Drum
Golden Redhorse
Buffalo
White Sucker
84±'
86±'
6^
84^
(86)i7
(76)-X
86*'
(83)-X
£' - 90y
^ - 8 2 y
& - (76)^
72^
6 9
I/ Published literature
2/ Based on data for channel catfish. Relationship established
by the grouping of species by NTAC.
3/ Unpublished data, NWQL, Duluth, Minnesota.
47 Based on published data on final preferred temperatures of
yellow perch fry.
5/ Based on established relationship between reproduction and
~~ lethal temperatures .
6/ Personal communication, Kerinit Sneed, Warmwater Fish Cul-
tural Laboratories, Stuttgart, Arkansas.
II Based on white sucker data.
-------
Table D-4. Lethal temperatures— for some Ohio River fishes.
Parenthesis denotes estimates.
Species
Largemouth Bass
Smallmouth Bass
Sauger (Yellow
Perch)
Channel Catfish
Emerald Shiner
White Sucker
Fathead Minnow
Acclimation
Temperature (°F)
86
68
Summer
(77)
(41)
77
59
77
41
77
41
86
50
Lethal
Upper
97
90
>90
(86)
(70)
92
87
87
74
85
79
92
83
Temperature (°F)
Lower
53
42
--
(39)
(32)
43
32
46
32
43
32
51
32
I/ Hart (1947). Trans. Royal Soc. Can. 3rd Series, Sec. 5,
Vol. XLI.
Hart (1952). Publ. Ont. Fish. Res. Lab., No. LXXII. Univ.
Toronto press.
-------
Table D-5. Relationship between lethal temperatures and opti-
mum temperatures for growth of brook trout fry.
Item Temperature (°F)
1-Hour TL 82^
24-Hour TLm 79-7
7-Day TLm 76^-7
2-Month Safe 61-7
(no increase in mortality rate)
9 /
Optimum growth 61—
I/ Fry, F.E.J., et. al., 1946. Lethal temperature relations
for a sample oT young speckled trout, Salvelinus fontinalis
Univ. Toronto Stud. Biol. Ser. 54, Pub"! Ont. Fish Res. Lab.
66 ? pp. 1-35.
2/ Unpublished data, NWQL, Duluth, Minnesota
-------
Table D-6. Recommended Temperature Criteria For The Ohio River
I have critically examined the OBR temperature criteria for
the Ohio River based on a 5-year average monthly temperature
near Cincinnati and have found it to be adequate for warm-water
fish habitats on the average. However, at warm stations in warm
seasons and through warming of the "ambient" river temperature,
reproduction of most Ohio River fishes would be in jeopardy in
areas affected. It is my belief (and Dr. Mount's) that seasonal
maximum temperatures should be established in place of or in
addition to degree rise above ambient. In order to safeguard
growth, reproduction, and survival of important Ohio River fishes,
the stream temperature should not exceed the following tempera-
tures at anytime or place beyond the defined mixing zone:
Daily Mean (°F) Hourly Max. (°F)
Dec. ~ Feb. 48 55
Early March ' 50 56
Late March 52 58
Early April 55 60
L?+e April 58 62
Early May 62 64
Late May 68 72
Early June 75 79
Late June 78 82
July - Sept. 82 86
OCT. 75 82
Nov. 65 72
If a five degree rise above ambient is still desired, I
can see nothing wrong with a 10°-15°F. degree rise as long as
the above maximums are not exceeded.
-------
Table D-7. Recommended Temperature Criteria for Cold-water Fisheries
Recently completed studies on brook trout at the NWQL Labora-
tory suggest revisions of the criteria for cold-water trout streams
where natural reproduction is to occur.
Daily Mean (°F) Hourly Maximum (°F)
October - April 50 55
September and May
Transition Period 58 62
June - August 66 70
-------
Table D-8. Percentage of Ohio River fishes affected by various crite-
ria proposals
Item ORSANCO OBR Ohio
Early spring spawners not susceptible
Suboptimal—
Spawning 7/11 (64%) 0/11 (0%) 0/11 (0%)
3/
Suboptimal—
Growth 10/10 (100%) 1/10 (10%) 1/10 (10%)
Summer Avoid-
ance Response
(Field) 5/5 (100%) 4/5 (80%) 4/5 (80%)
Summer Avoid-
ance Response
(Lab) 3/4 (75%) 1/4 (25%) 1/4 (25%)
Lethal Tempera-
ture (Summer) 3/7 (43%) 0/7 (0%) 0/7 (0%)
Lethal Tempera-
ture (Winter) 0/6 (0%) 0/6 (0%) 0/6 (0%)
I/ Based on a five-year (1963-1968) grand average of maximum and mini-
mum daily average temperatures for each month in the Ohio River,
Cincinnati .
2/ More than 50 percent of the spawning season above safe temperatures
for reproduction.
3/ Above optimum temperatures for growth and activity. May-Sept.
~~ (ORSANCO); July-Sept. (OBR); periodically - July-August (Ohio River)
-------
(AVG/SS01 %) 31VH 'IdOW iSNI
CM ,—
\
\ -
0>
09
CO
oo
CM
CM
C8
oo
CJ
o
O>
E «
o> J=
0>
CM
10
(AVQ/NIV9 %) 31VH H1MOU9 '1SNI
-------
I I
—J
\
GD
OO
10
(Jo)
O g
^_- •"" ^E*
^3 CS •—p
^i-S
5^ E
?? <« 2
«* x -a
""^ **"• •>
0 E
2 « E
w «BC 2
E ^"
CO
CO
CM
CD
-------
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONDITIONS OF THE OHIO RIVER
K.O. Schwab and B.R. Sacks
The available data on dissolved oxygen in the Ohio River was evaluated
with particular emphasis on dissolved oxygen fluctuations at times when
dissolved oxygen was in a range of h.O to 6,0 mg/1. It was concluded
that with minimum hourly dissolved oxygen values of U mg/1, average
daily dissolved oxygen values may be as low as h.l mg/1. Further, with
daily average values of 5 mg/1, minimums may be below k mg/1 at times.
This evaluation is further detailed in Part II of this section.
PART I - PRESENT CONDITIONS
The dissolved oxygen conditions in the Ohio River were presented in
attachments h and 5 of the Engineering Committee Agenda. Exhibit E-l
is an extraction from attachment 5 of this agenda. This Exhibit is
largely self-explanatory and shows that, except at Cincinnati, the
minimum of h mg/1 was not met a significant part of the time during
1967. At Cincinnati, the minimum of' h mg/1 was met about 91% of the
time during the months of June through October.
The FWPCA Markland Pool Report is the basis for the following conclusions,
which subject to local variables, are probably applicable to considerable
portions of the Ohio River:
E.I
-------
1. Dior ing the time of field studies, the maximum diurnal fluctua-
tion vas 2 mg/1 with most fluctuations below 1 mg/1. Fluctua-
tions were due more to diurnal fluctuations in.waste loading
than to photosynthesis.
2. During the 1963 Markland Pool study, dissolved oxygen values
at the surface were from 0.1 to 0.3 mg/1 higher at the surface
than that found at a depth of 18 feet.
3. Lateral dispersion was Judged complete in 5 miles. Pre-
impoundment dissolved oxygen values were 0.5 to 1.0 mg/1
greater on the Kentucky shore.below the Mill Creek outfall
than on the Ohio shore. Post-impoundment conditions showed
that dissolved oxygen values were only 0.1 mg/1 greater on
the Kentucky shore.
The above observations lead to the conclusions that dissolved oxygen con-
centrations are relatively uniform across a cross-section under conditions
presently encountered on the Ohio River.
PART II - INTERPRETATIVE EVALUATIONS
This part relates the present ORSANCO criteria for dissolved oxygen (D.O.)
with the proposed amended criteria in the Ohio River.
The present criteria sets the dissolved oxygen at "not less than 5 mg/1
during at least 16 hours of any 2U-hour period, not less than 3.0 mg/1
at any time." This statement requires sampling over the 2^-hour period.
The minimum daily average dissolved oxygen would be ^.33 mg/1 based on
this criteria.
E.2
-------
The proposed amendments will be compared next using Ohio River dissolved
oxygen data collected and analyzed by ORSANCO. The two amendments are
"The D.O. concentration shall average 5-0 mg/1 per calendar day and shall
not be less than k.O mg/1 at any time or any place," and "the D.O.con-
centration shall not be less than k.O mg/1 at any time or any place."
The data for dissolved oxygen was examined for the station at Huntington,
West Virginia (mi. 30H.2) for the months of June to October, 1963 to 1968,
and for the station at Miami Fort, Ohio (mi. ^90.3) for the months of
June to October, 1965 to 1968. For 18$ of the time, the difference
between the minimum hourly and the daily average dissolved oxygen values
was 0.10 mg/1 or less for the same calendar day. Forth-six percent of
the time the difference was 0.20 mg/1 or less.
This shows that if only a minimum dissolved oxygen of h.O mg/1 would be
specified, the minimum daily average will be practically the same. The
above analysis was performed on those data where the minimum was in the
range of 3.0 - 5-0 mg/1 in order to be close to the proposed conditions.
The above percentages would have been higher if the concentrations below
2 mg/1 would have been included.
Three percent of the time at Huntington and lk% of the time at Miami
Fort, the difference between the daily average and the minimum hourly
values was greater than 1 mg/1. This indicates that a minimum daily
average of 5-0 mg/1 would permit minimum hourly values below U.O mg/1.
E.3
-------
The above analysis was performed on those data where the average was in
the range 4.0 to 6.0 mg/1 in order to be close to the proposed conditions.
The maximum difference between the daily average and minimum hourly value
was 3.50 mg/1.
The percents mentioned previously vary for each station but indicate the
trends of the data.
In summary, the FWPCA recommendation that "The D.O. concentration shall
average 5-0 mg/1 per calendar day and shall not be less than 4.0 mg/1 at
any time or any place", allows for a minimum daily average of 5-0 mg/1
D.O. with no single hourly value below 4.0 mg/1. However, the ORSANCO
Aquatic Life Advisory Committee recommendation of "The D.O. concentration
shall not be less than 4.0 mg/1 at any time or any place", allows for
minimum hourly D.O. concentrations of 4.0 mg/1 with a minimum daily con-
centration of 4.0 mg/1. The average monthly concentration will probably
be greater than 5-0 mg/1. In both cases, the D.O. concentration is
limited so that no single hourly value is below 4.0 mg/1.
E.4
-------
EXHIBIT E-l
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONDITIONS
IN THE OHIO RIVER
JUNE THROUGH OCTOBER 1967
Percent of Days Minimum D.O. Value Less than Indicated Value
D.O.
2.0
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
6.0
7.0
South
Heights
(16.0)
9.6
16.8
20.0
23.2
27.2
33.6
54.4
68.0
Stratton
(55.0)
5.7
9.8
12.2
13.8
lit. 6
14.6
24.4
32.5
Huntington
(304.2)
8.1
32.4
45-9
54.7
66.9
73.0
88.5
96.6
Cincinnati
(462.8)
0.8
1.6
3.1
7.1
10.2
39.4
67-7
Miami
Fort
(490.3)
10.9
24.5
33.6
43.6
56.4
63.6
81.8
94.5
Louisville
(600.6)
12.1
21.5
28.2
38.2
49.7
64.4
83.2
98.0
Cane
Run
(616.8)
20.1
40.3
52.3
65.1
76.5
83.9
87.2
89.9
Extracted from Attachment No. 5 - Engineering Committee Agenda
E.5
-------
INDIVIDUAL STATES ADOPTED DISSOLVED OXYGEN CRITERIA
B. Wright
F.I
-------
u
•rH
-U
re
§•
<3 CD
« <"
rH HJ
O re
MH -4^
re w
'S O
5 U
U w
d «
§ O
bo
13
CU
>
r-H
O
co
Q
p
w
o
APPR
S
K
CRITE
H
H
H
W
i-H
re
O
cu
cu
re
Pending
0
,
CO
d
re
"o
CO
rH
1 «
s
vO rH
4J .
co 2s
re jjj
4-> re
r H
bO ~^t
1 B
"^
i— i ^
bO c
a |
o
CO
m TO
cu
d ^
I §
CO
rH 0
• rH
-4-> t-l
5£
CO
'o
d
• rH
r— I
r-
0
r-H
00
r— 1
•M
CO
re .
3 d
•u "
re -t-> >>
flj ^"^
bo "H
C rH re
•H . TJ
h M M
p) d ™
CO
r-t o re
bO PO C^
ad *>
0 JS C
m' ** °
co •
dm -°
2 «J d
^ ^ |
co O •*-"
s c s
^ -o" JS
° .2
Z fH O
i,' ^
(Tl S^ • •
VU M _, v
• rH x rt
_O O -*-*
•^ 4 "
_d (M -^
^° K. _Cl
• rH r^1 '^
xo .S f •)
P* r-H H-) VJ
re
fH
re
.iH.
T>
i— 1
0)
J
-*->
>>
d
re
•<->
re
i — i
be
a
o
d
re
rd
CO
CO
cu
i — r
rH
o
d
„
CU
r— I
re
cu
re°
rH
CU
>
re
o
(NJ
^H
S rH
S re
X-l S
Excepted
approval
1969
rH
O
|
PO
c
re
"o
CO
rH
O ^
r— 1 "^
4-> .
CO f
re 5
*i Iti
™ rH
.S d
rH C
'O
i— i ro
"M d
a j
0 »
in m
cu
d "-1
re iL.
^ §
CO
CO **
s "°
rS 0
• rH
-t-* Ll
$ «
^•^ ^>j
r^*
U
fH
CU
•if-
t-
^
rH
CO
bO
^^
•S
CO
rH
CU
re
*j
o
rH
1
d
o
d
fH
O
a
a
Cu
o
m
d
re
CO
CO
CU
t— H
•+•* d
O C
d cu
Cu
co O
rH •
"re d
1 J
i ^
^,
h §
^
rH
0
^
CU
55
a °°
. o^
M _ j
Excepted
approval
March 4,
(H
•^H
(M
d
re
"o
CO
rH
O ^
r-H '^
-t-> ^
i *
-4-> re
c? bo
1 S
'O
,-H CO
bO c
a|
o
CO
in m
cu
d -H
! g . "
CO
cu T3
r-H O
• rH
55 ^ .
O
Id
O
CO
O
S
re
T3
d
cu
o
cu
rH
rH
U
+->
d
cu
CO
cu
rH
CU
F.2
-------
oo
^O
o
»-H
„
1— t
CM
^>
re
^
i — i
bo ^
o £
in °
O xD
bO
re ^J)
D re
> aj
re ir
>> re
.— 1
re .-H
T3 -H
re
i ^
p g
.S 2
• H TH
•5! a
<< -H
1 2
(M . 1
bo -^ bo
re ^ ^j
.^ o re o
re ^f !S "^
a jS a
2 fj -s •£
^H 0}
CO ^ CD
"CO CD
V V fn --H
C re _. re
h > 2 >
t2 o ,9 o
> a O a
re
• H
a
re
i— i
CO
a
a
C o^
0 ^
J-t
"*H i r^
T) ^H ^
d) nj ^^
-^ > Vt
^ S 3
u S 5
XM-( ^H
O , f^j
W re >->
•
"bC C
C tjQ
o a
•* °.
"o ^
JH "O
. 1
•^i IH
C k
S 1
•^
w~*
03 ^"
."H <0
_Q "*"*
_. »H
fw _Q
-^ re
to ^
U^ CD
;r-j
1 «
^ re
g ^
S "o
£ O
CO
is
be
•H
oo
vD
O
r— (
„
r-H
00
H^>
re
^
I 0) '
^ r-> tD
"* re in
00 £ ™
S*. H rO
"~^ r-t
^ m S
° | 2
03 < 0
J3 « 1
r?
^2 -S g
•^ >> °
re jjj ^
-< 4J in JJ
-M re co H
re ^ D -s
bo "^ "^ **
•S ti ® a
JH c .M re
P ^^ ^""^ ^j
^H PO O ,_,
•^ JH r^J ^^
P _S -2 d1
•£ u C
O 0) o
CO n_( °
in ra ^ '
D re LO
cj ' — ' CD a
2 t* -1 re
•^ O 4_> Xl
"^ a a -^
CD 0) TO
" -«" S CO
4J 0 QJ ^
•£? In n) +i
° OJ JD O
Z CL re a
re
is
'bo
• H
^
-(->
CO
0)
F.3
-------
Productivity and Seasonal Variations Related
to Aquatic Life Dissolved Oxygen Requirements
W. A. Brungs
One of the most important detrimental conditions in aquatic
environments is low dissolved oxygen concentrations. The quantity of
biological and chemical oxygen demanding wastes in this environment
is excessive in many locations. Because of the biological importance of
reduced dissolved oxygen levels and the frequency of its occurrence,
one would expect much experimental data on this subject. The technological
problems involved during dissolved oxygen experimentation is the principal
cause of the paucitv of good experimental data.
The most useful manuscript (1) available resulted from five years of
observations at 982 locations around the country bv Dr. Ellis during
1930-1935. He investigated aquatic life populations and related observed
environmental auditions to the well-balanced warmwater fish populations
he found. Exhibit G-l from this manuscript summarizes the observed dissolved
oxygen concentrations observed during the months of June to September at the
372 stations where he found good warmwater fish populations. He states that
"it may be seen that during the warm season the waters at 96 percent of the
good fish faunae stations carried 5 ppm or more dissolved oxygen, and that
in all of the 5,809 cases, good, mixed fish faunae were not found in waters
carrying less than 4 ppm. dissolved oxygen." The 5,809 cases he refers to are
the number of dissolved oxygen determinations made during his study. Data
more pertinent to us are summarized in Exhibit G-2, also from Ellis.
G-l
-------
It contains data from 37 stations in the Ohio River. The solid black
graph presents all oxygen data regardless of presence or absence of fish
at sampling stations. The stippled graph is a composite of dissolved
oxygen values for all stations at which good mixed fish faunae were found.
His observations in the Ohio River led to the same generalization he
made for the country as a whole.
More recent information is available from the Field Investigations
Branch (2), Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Their survey of the Great Miami River in 1968, ha.' resulted in the same
observations and conclusions of Ellis, thirty years earlier. One conclusion
of this recent survey was "in the Great Miami River, balanced fish populations
require minimum dissolved oxygen concentrations in excess of 4.0 mg/1."
Fortunately the available data from laboratory research provide
valuable insight into the resolution of a dissolved oxygen criterion for
the Ohio River. In a summary of dissolved oxygen requirements of fishes by
Doudoroff and Warren (3) they include, data (Exhibit G-3) that under the
described test conditions any reduction in dissolved oxygen concentrations
below saturation (8.2 mg/1) resulted in decreased growth of juvenile
largemouth bass.
Recent, and as yet unpublished data (4), shown in Exhibit G-4, were
obtained with a local fish species and water similar to that in the Ohio River.
Fry survival was significantlv reduced at 4.0 mg/1 dissolved oxygen and again
growth was reduced at concentrations below 7.9 mg/1.
G-2
-------
All these field and laboratory investigations were concerned with only
reduced dissolved oxygen levels. Overlooked, in most considerations of
reduced oxygen concentrations, is the production of many other substances,
but especially ammonia and hydrogen sulfide, both very toxic to fish at
levels as low as 20 [ig/I. An absolute minimum criterion for dissolved
oxygen cannot be considered safe for aquatic life because such a condition
usually occurs unnaturally in the presence of organic wastes and materials
formed by degradation of these wastes. These cause additional stress
on aquatic life and together with minimum safe dissolved oxygen concentrations
(safe in the absence of other stresses)Create an unsatisfactory aquatic
environment.
G-3
-------
References
1. Ellis, M. M.
Detection and measurement of stream pollution.
Bulletin of the Bureau of Fisheries, 48: 365-437 (1937).
2. Manuscript
Great Miami River Survey. wield Investigations Branch,
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, U.S. Dept. of
the Interior, Cincinnati, Ohio. (1968).
3. Doudoroff, Peter and Charles E. Warren
Dissolved oxygen requirements of fishes.
Biological Problems in Water Pollution, 3rd Seminar,
U. S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, PHS Pub. No. 999-WP-25
(1965).
4. Brungs, W. A.
Effect of reduced dissolved oxygen concentrations on reproduction
and growth of the fathead minnow. (Manuscript).
G-4
-------
GO
GO
CM
GO
GO
CM
CO
00
CM
OO
co CM *—
S3SV3 JO iN]QH3d
-------
_€/>
GO z
CSJ
V^l £•*
^— cs
I i_
oo
00
CSJ
CO CM ^—
S3SV3 JO !N33H3d
-------
200 r-
175
150
125
o
* 100
o
z 75
50
-25
EXPERIMENT-MIS DAYS)
25 h 1 • A a EXPERIMENT-2-(15DAYS)
/ ° o EXPERIMENT-3-(ll DAYS)
0, / A- A EXPERIMENT-4-(15.5DAYS)
o « EXPERIMENT-5-05DAYS)
EXPERIMENT-6-(15DAYS)
l i i i i I i I
1 2 345678910 20 30
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONCENTRATION, mg/l
G'3 Percent gains in dry weight of juvenile largemouth
bass kept on an unrestricted diet of earthworms for 11
to 15.5 days at 26°C, in relation to dissolved oxygen
concentrations. (After Stewart, 1962.)
-------
OO
00
CM CM
OO
CM CO IT>
UJ CAD
00
CO
CM co
-------
PRESENT pH CONDITIONS OF THE OHIO RIVER
K.O. Schwab
Mine drainage is recognized as a major problem which contributes to a
lower pH range in the Upper Ohio River.
The percentage of time the pH values fell within the preferred range of
6.5 to 8.5 in 1967 for the Ohio River is presented in Exhibit H-l. This
information is'extracted from the 1968 Annual Report of ORSANCQ. All
values outside the preferred range were below a 6.5 value at all stations
except Cane Run. The values not in the preferred range, and above 8.5>
were observed at Cane Run.
Mine drainage is believed to be the major but not sole cause of low pH
values at South Heights and Stratton. At Cane Run, high pH values could
be caused by a combination of tributary inflow (which at times is above
8.5), industrial discharges, and photosynthetic activity. Photosynthetic
activity is not, however, believed to be a significant factor for the
Lower Ohio River, based on existing studies. With a determined abate-
ment program for mine drainage and other sources, it appears that a
range of 6.5 to 8.5 is both reasonable and attainable.
H.I
-------
in
co
10
cs
co
co co
CO
CO
JO uj
-------
INDIVIDUAL STATES ADOPTED pH CRITERIA
B. Wright
I.I
-------
en
0)
4-1
rt
4-1
CO
O 4)
U S
53.2
« rt
O 3
rt LI
•r1 O
Ll
U
ffi
a,
Q
u
APPROV]
3
C4
w
H
i— i
rt
u
w
H
<
H
CO
Pending
approval
en
cy
,2
rt
!>
r
fl
rt
• H
T3
0)
a
Ll
O
~— '
4>
tuO
rt
Li
4)
>
rt
r^
1— 1
• r-l
rt
13
rr-1
LJ
rt
o"
CJN .
in
0)
> 00
o
rQ 13
rt fl
rH rt
o in
No values below 6. 0 n
preferably between 6.
en
'o
fl
i-H
r- 1
t— 1
#
1^
NO
ON
I-H
n
oo
r— i
!*
i-H
3
Hj
0>
M
rt
rH
4)
rt
j>>
• rH
rt
13
TJ
rt
rt
0
ON
4>
>
O
42
rt
J-l
0
fl
o
.
NO
$
o
1 — 1
CD
42
en
CD
3
r— 1
rt
j>
o
17
^—i
4-1
5
• rH
r^
.3
_fl
en
• iH
MH
Ll
4)
-4-1
rt
a
Ll
rt
15
rt
fl
rt
•rH
13
fl
i— 1
.
4)
a
>iH
4->
>s
0)
•4-1
nJ
in
00
C
rt
c^
»i-l
4->
M
(U
^ *
rt
11
in ^
06 M
T) n
fl ?
rt C
in
in
•sD
xO
H C
m ^
4) h
0) 4J
! :
^ ^t
-^ Q)
42 I-H
^ 4J
'o 5
1-° ^
rt ^
Ll
1!
^ X
(or median) values pr«
Cold water fish habita
g ON
M sD
o 5;
• ^
rH .-,
MH |
Excepted
approval
March 20
m
oo'
'd
fl
rt
IT)
NO*
fl
4)
4)
£
4->
4)
42
>>
i — i
42
rt
Ll
4)
*-H
4)
Li
0,
TJ
fl
rt
o
O
D
>
O
42
rt
Li
0
fl
O
in
£
o
r-H
4)
42
en
4)
2
i — i
rt
>
0
Z.
>*
^,
u
3
4-1
4)
w
*
r*-
NO
ON
I-H
IN-
4-1
01
3
OJO
3
rH
en -H „,
§ §•!
3 T, 4-1
I-H 4)
rt rH fl
> "^
K 4->
— fl »
fl 4) rH
rt d 4)
•H C 4->
Tl -^ rt
§ 2 ^
C ^ be
4-1 °f
f. C
« CD -S
£^ >
^ 'S
0, 4)
an - w
Xi 4J 4J
™ r-H L.
Li n
" r"
J rt 4>
> U J3
TO -i-H -4-1
t— 1
>> cu-«
r-l CL, O
• r-l "T1
r5 E
^ 4) ft
H-
03 ~ -i->
-^ fl
o -^
. ™
•±J
0s LO rj
M .
* *r-i
« 00 rt ^
> d
0 13 C 00
-rt rt o o
ro ty _jj [ \
h ^ 01 in
No value below 5. 0 no
preferably between 6.
ments shall be such a.
preferred range of 6. !
o
• rH
_rj
*M
O
CO
NO
ON
i—<
^
i— l
N
>N
rt
s
in
oo*
13
4)
4)
kJ
^S
a;
Q
•J-J
0
fl
O
vO
fl
rt
xl
4-1
en
en
4)
r— i
4-1
0
Z
i
r— <
rt
rt
'c
rt
i— i
k^
r'N
eo
fl
C
0)
ft
r-"
«nd
January '.
1969
o
ON
1
O
NO'
M
TO
• H
fl
• S
euo
JH
• r-l
>
1.2
en
rt
o
• H
4->
rt
T3
o
u
0)
Li
Ll
01
4->
• r-l
Ll
O
4-1
rt
a;
en
CJ
Li
A
•4->
•rH
*
>*
U
en
C
O
u
Li
O
(D
15
0)
0)
Ll
4)
Li
rt
Ll
rt
TJ
rt
rt
4J
CO
-------
>-i
<
o
fy*
PH
PH
P<
s
R!
S
en
cu
3
i-H
0)
>
«J
'S
0)
a
t j
M
o
0)
&0
Rj
J.
M
0^
>
R!
><
«rH
Rj
T)
T3
Pi
R)
o"
c>
(IJ
>
o
,n
R)
!H
O
p;
in
in
^
o
i— t
tp
rQ
cn
cu
S
i— t
(rl
(U
>
O
2
R)
• rH
.a
OD
h
•I-H
-tJ
tn
cu
^
h
O
T3
CU
4->
O
cu
M-l
MH
R)
tn
• M
4-1
Pi
m
<,
.
U1
oo
T)
PI
rt
m
-sO
i— i
M
CU
CU
£
4->
0>
,£!
^
, — i
^2
R)
!-<
CU
m
0)
)H
O,
tn
^i
R!
^
(U
4->
M
O
MH
,«^
R!
s
VH
O
fi
to
(Li
3
<— <
«J
I
tn
T3
M
R!
r»H
\J
ri
•J->
cn
'-H
o
V
4->
n)
T3
0)
J3
4-1
:rom
**— (
cn
f-,
Ri
0)
^>
cu
>
.1-1
m
m
00
T3
c
n)
vD
C
0)
rtl
w
^
•4->
cu
rQ
T3
I— H
cu
J2
>N
r— 1
.— I
«J
fn
CU
C
f\\
vi/
bo
JH
CU
>
0)
£
O
_c
c
0
.1-1
-u
cn
CU
id
cr
c
• »-t
R!
cu
h
R)
/1\
\v
si
-u
c
• i-H
1.3
-------
Aquatic Life pH Requirements
W. A. Brungs
The establishment of aquatic life criteria for a single watershed
such as that of the Ohio River, is, fortunately, less difficult than
establishing criteria for the United States. The environment, both
physical and biological, is less complicated in the former. Much
information OB the distribution of well-rounded, warmwater fish
populations is available for the Ohio River watershed.
Laboratory-derived criteria always require substantiation of some
sort by field experimentation and/or observation. This can be especially true for
pH. It is very difficult to separate the effects of pH on the aquatic
environment from other variables associated with pH such as carbon dioxide and
alkalinity.
The efforts of Ellis (1) in his five-year study of the distribution of
warmwater fishes within the continental United States as related to pollution
have provided a classic manuscript. His sampling represented a total of 1,125
localities. This exhibit (J-l) was constructed from the data from 409
localities where he found good, mixed populations of fish. This composite
covers a range between pH 6.3 and pH 9.0. Of most concern is the fact that
97 percent of the cases were between pH 6.7 and pH 8.6. This range was basically
the same for unpolluted waters in general. The next exhibit (J-2) is a composite
of his Ohio River data for 37 stations. As he indicated, "the effects of acid
pollution are evident in the Ohio River." The solid black graph presents all
J-l
-------
pH data regardless of presence or absence of fish at all stations.
The stippled graph is a composite of pH values for all stations at
which good mixed fish faunae were found and nearly all points were
within the range of pH 6.7 to pH 8.6.
Fish culturists have long noted that alkaline ponds and streams are
much more productive than acid ones; reduction in pH results in a
decreasing production rate. High pH values have been investigated less
than low ones but a pH over 8.5 should be suspected as being of a
pollutional nature, either from a discharge or from excessive algal growth.
This statement is especially true of the Ohio River system where highly
alkaline natural waters are rare.
The decrease in production caused by low pH has been established
also by laboratory research (2). This exhibit (J-3) includes data that
indicate a decrease in production of the fathead minnow, below pH 7.6.
There was a highly significant production decrease at pH 6.8 and egg
hatchability at pH 6.C, These data were obtained at the Newtown Fish
Toxicology Laboratory using water similar to that in the Ohio River.
Exhibit J-4 includes several pH levels between 6.0 and 6.5 that have
experimentally killed BC percent of the test organisms in 96 hours (3, A).
Each of these organisms is known to be utilized as food by important species
of fish.
In summary, the determination of a pH criterion for aquatic life must
consider several important factors such as related changes in carbon dioxide and
alkalinity, effects on fish production, and the location of the area for which
the criterion is to be recommended.
J-2
-------
A specific instance of the latter would be that a national criterion for
pH (5,6) must consider softer, and usually more, acid, natural waters.
Since these waters are not tvpical of the Ohio River watershed they need
not be considered and the oH criterion for the Ohio River should
consequently be more restrictive.
Another extremely important, and often overlooked, consideration that
is true for discussions of all criteria is that we cannot develop absolute
marginal criteria and assume that the aquatic life will be desirable. When
several conditions together with pH are marginal at the same time the
additional stresses will be more than a well-balanced warmwater fish
population can withstand.
J-3
-------
References
1. Ellis, M. M.
Detection and measurement of stream pollution.
Bulletin of the Bureau of Fisheries, 48: 365-437 (1937).
2. Mount, D. I.
The chronic effect of low pH on reproduction and growth of the
fathead minnow. Personal communication, (1969).
3. National Water Water Quality Laboratory
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, U.S. Dept. of
the Interior, Duluth, Minnesota, Summary of results (1969).
4. Gaufin, Arden
University of Montana. Personal communication (1969).
5. McKee, J. E. and H. W. Wolf
Water Quality Criteria, 2nd ed., 548 pp. Publ. No. 3-A.
The Resources Agency of California, State Water Quality Control Board (1963)
6. National Technical Advisory Committee
Report to Secretary of the Interior. Water Quality Criteria.
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, (April 1, 1968).
J-4
-------
O3 CM
• •
1^ GO
To oo
CM
CM
00
en CM
S3SV3 JO iN]Gd]d
-------
CM CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
S3SV3 JO
-------
GO —
CM IO
CM
CO CD
-------
GO
GO
CNJ
ir>
LU 00
-------
Implementation Plan Compliance for the Ohio River
R. S. Burd
We anticipate that each State sharing the Ohio River will
press forward with whatever actions are necessary to assure
compliance with the time schedules identified in the water
quality standards adopted and approved for that State. For
example, we expect dischargers located in Ohio to comply with
schedules spelled out in the approved Ohio standards, not the
latest date identified in some other State standard.
While the Kentucky water quality standards have been ap-
proved as Federal standards, in accordance with the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, it is important to note that one
condition of the approval is that a detailed implementation
plan be submitted to the Department of the Interior by July
1969. Consistency in the water quality standards of States
sharing a river basin is essential. Hopefully, the Kentucky
time schedules, when received, will be consistent with neigh-
boring States for at least the major waste sources. ORSANCO
appears to be a logical vehicle to encourage consistency in
standards among member States.
K.I
-------
PRESENT BACTERIOLOGICAL CONDITIONS
OF THE OHIO RIVER
J. H. Adams, Jr.
The total coliform group is the classical indicator of fecal pollution.
As defined in "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water ani Waste
Water" (12th ed.): "The coliform group includes all of the aerobic
and facultative anaerobic, gram-negative, nonsporeforming rod shaped
bacteria which ferment lactose with gas formation within 48 hours at
35°C."
Coliforms are always present in the intestines of humans and other
warm-blooded animals, and are eliminated in large numbers in fecal
wastes.
Unfortunately, some strains included in the total coliform group have
a wide distribution in the environment but are not common in fecal
material. These organisms are well adapted and able to multiply in
the environment as well as in the intestine of warm-blooded animals.
The fecal coliform component of the total coliform group is of rela-
tively infrequent occurrence in the environment, except in association
with fecal pollution. They generally do not multiply outside the
intestines of warm-blooded animals.
L.I
-------
Looking at bacteriological data gathered in 1963 on the Ohio River
from Cincinnati to Markland Dam, Exhibit L-l, total coliform, fecal
coliform ratios are as follows:
Station 472.4 from 5:1 to 230:1 (above Millcreek outfall)
Station 475.1 from 9:1 to 16:1 (below Millcreek outfall)
Station 503.3 from 16:1 to 23:1 (below Laughery Island, Ky.)
Station 531.2 from 3:1 to 7:1 (above Markland Dam)
Total coliform, fecal coliform ratios were computed from bacteriological
data gathered from a pollution study conducted in 1968 from Owensboro,
Kentucky to Evansville, Indiana, Exhibit L-2.
Total coliform, fecal coliform ratios were:
Above Owensboro, Ky. 280:1 to 400:1
Below Owensboro, Ky. 29:1 to 42:1
Newburgh, Ind. 35:1 to 40:1
Evansville, Ind. 115:1 to 1,300:1
Ratios were also computed from bacteriological data collected from
pollution surveillance stations in 1968, Exhibit L-3.
Total coliform, fecal coliform ratios were:
Pa.-W. Va. State Line 21:1 to 30:1
Wheeling 15:1 to 81:1
Cincinnati 13:1 to 19:1
Miami Fort 4:1 to 8:1
Evansville 17:1 to 21:1
L.2
-------
The wide differences in ratio indicate that the total coliform analyses
often detects organisms that are not of sanitary significance. Those
familiar with counting total coliform are well aware of the inherent
difficulties in this determination.
Results based on the entire total coliform group do have a disadvantage
as an "ideal" indicator of fecal pollution because several strains of
the group may come from sources other than fecal material of warm-blooded
animals and are of no sanitary significance. The enumeration of the
fecal coliform component is more specific to coliforms of fecal origin.
L.3
-------
EXHIBIT L-l
Bacteriological Quality of the Ohio River
Cincinnati to Markland Dam
1963
Date
10/25
10/31
n/7
10/25
10/29
11/4
10/25
10/29
11/4
10/25
10/29
11/4
Station
472.4
472.4
472.4
475.1
475 .1
475.1
503.3
503.3
503.3
531.2
531.2
531.2
Total
Coliform
100 ml.
27,000
460,000
64,000
7,500,000
7,400,000
330,000
4,900
5,200
3,900
78
80
140
Fecal
Coliform
100 ml.
5,200
2,000
4,400
800,000
490,000
28,000
280
320
170
22
23
19
TC:FC
Ratio
5:1
230:1
15:1
9:1
16:1
14:1
18:1
16:1
23:1
4:1
3:1
7:1
Flow
cfs
5,000
5,000
8,000
5,000
5,000
6,000
5,000
5,000
6,000
5,000
5,000
6,000
-------
EXHIBIT L-2
Ohio River Pollution Study
Owensboro, Kentucky — Evansville, Indiana
1968
Total Fecal
Coliform Coliform TC:FC Flow
Date Station 100 ml. 100 ml. Ratio cfs
10/10 Ab. Owensboro, Ky. 5,600 20 280:1 22,000
10/11 Ab. Owensboro, Ky. 20,000 50 400:1 28,000
10/10 Bel. Owensboro, Ky. 68,000 2,300 29:1 22,000
10/11 Bel. Owensboro, Ky. 28,000 6?0 42:1 28,000
10/10 Newburgh, Ind. 104,000 2,700 40:1 25,000
10/11 Newburgh, Ind. 95,000 2,800 35:1 31,000
10/10 Evansville, Ind. 21,000 370 57:1 25,000
10/11 Evansville. Ind. l^O.oon i -ann -nr-i - —
Evansville, Ind. 150,000 1,300 11511
31,000
-------
EXHIBIT L-3
Bacteriological Quality of the Ohio River
Pollution Surveillance Stations
1968
Date
7/26
12/10
7/29
12/19
8/15
12/12
8/15
12/12
8/13
12/4
Station
Pa.-W.Va. State Line
Pa.-W.Va. State Line
Wheeling
Wheeling
Cincinnati
Cincinnati
Miami Fort
Miami Fort
Evansville
Evansville
Total
Coliform
100 ml.
2,200
15,000
9,400
64,000
22,000
1,600
260,000
57,000
27,000
40,000
Fecal
Coliform
100 ml.
74
700
610
790
1,200
120
26,000
14,000
1,600
1,900
TC:FC
Ratio
30:1
21:1
15:1
81:1
19:1
13:1
8:1
4:1
17:1
21:1
Flow
cfs
7,500
pool
7,500
pool
70,000
62,000
70,000
62,000
115,000
120,000
-------
INDIVIDUAL STATES ADOPTED BACTERIAL CRITERIA
B. Wright
M.I
-------
c
0
-r-l
-M
rt
0>
»4
O tn
CD
-4J
U
rt
pq
p
w
s
ri
&
OH
•5 0
TJ h
a ex
v a
(X <
TJ
T) «
« m 4J
5 0 0
Primary contact - The fecal coliform content shall not exc
a geometric mean of 200/100 ml, nor shall more than 10%
total samples during any 30 day period exceed 400/100 ml.
Secondary contact - The fecal coliform content shall not ex
a geometric mean of 1, OOO/ 100ml, nor shall they equal or
exceed a 2, 000/100 ml in more than 10% of the samples.
10
• H
O
d
• H
t— *
i-H
1— (
•«•
t>-
NO
ON
r-H
M
oo
i-H
X
•3
in
"E'd ..
o 2 «
0 4J 0 "!
Whole body contact - Coliform group not to exceed 1, OOOA
as a monthly average value during any month of the recrea
season; not exceed this number in more than 20% of the
samples examined during any month of the recreation seas
nor exceed 2,400/100 ml on any day during the recreationa
season. (Recreational season - April through October. )
Partial body contact - Coliform group not to exceed
5, 000/100 ml as a monthly average value; nor exceed this
number in more than 20% of the samples examined during
any month; nor exceed 20, 000/100 ml in more than 5% of
such samples.
0)
9
«!-»
T3
£
O^
NO
ON
*H
o"
N
ft
|
a
s
Coliform group not to exceed 1, 000/100 ml as a monthly
arithmetical average value; nor exceed this number in
more than 20% of the samples examined during any
month; nor exceed 2, 400/100 ml on any day.
>,
A!
U
3
•w
a
V
W
8
C
0)
I
U
t-i
0)
CO
0)
!H
fX
O
a
OJ
CO
a
o
u
TJ
(U
CD
'£
0)
(-1
nt
(0
TJ
l-i
n)
•*
M.2
-------
p
w
>
0
fy*
P-t
cx
PH
<<
^
CRITERIA
W
H
<;
H
w
#
r^
xO
IT^
w
t-~
t-H
-U
CO
3
M
3
<
i-H
g
M
is
•u ^-
* 'o ^r
0) fl g
U flj 0
X °
S w -
a; o
4J r-H f\l
0 (X
C C TJ
*H rti
S 5 »
n) ro o
J3 0, X
CO ^ H
*
0)
fc
00
vO
o
i-H
«H
^T
J3
u
l-l
n)
S
>< •"
•— i C
X fl 0
s-s g
O tH
c a) >r
-° S
«i S rt
L, 000/100 ml as
>r exceed this nm
examined during
iy day.
Coliform group not to exceed ]
arithmetical average value; no
more than 20% of the samples
nor exceed 2, 400/ 100 ml on ar
o
•i»4
jC
0
oo
xO
o
i-H
i-H
f\J
>>
0)
S
01 ^H
rt TH
6 ^
T3 •— i (U
Bg-n fi^ ^^
o 2 » o § <* ^
°§^ 5'"J
^ X CU ^~ co •!•< J-
0 ° 0 .S tn •"
O - O O J3 3 jj
0 -1 -" 0 * 73 "
•* »n •*-* •* fry i--* O
- » g ^ « "g g
T3 0) « . T-, 0) .£ C
88^-5 SJ 83 .S
yCUCOa. uD^i-H
S5|S £2 S 6
5 o S " o ^ »g
May 15 to September 15 - Not
an arithmetic average value; n
in more than two consecutive s
2, 400/100 ml in more than one
September 16 to May 14 - Not
as a monthly average value, n<
in more than 20% of the sampl<
month; nor to exceed 20, 000/1
of the samples.
.5
5
r-H
>,
CO
g
V
OH
M.3
O
vO
O
t-H
••
r~
p-H
>N
!H
<3
3
G
nS
H)
'S M
" .s
S C
x 3
* TI cy
O t— I
ji T3 ,0
. tt) «j
S .s .a -•
c a u;$
cu nj CX c
bO X nJ .13
rt JS -'S
rt (x 0
^ S c -S
2 n> S o
*3 to rt T1
rj ^ «-l
0 S » o
B* » £
-•a § ?
Not to exceed 2, 400/100 ml as
this number in more than 20%
any month. The preceding val
during nor immediately followi
ri
«r-l
C
•H
be
14
>
-------
Q
W
O
tf
&
<
W
EH
HH
cd
U
W
EH
EH
W
00
xO
^
CM
n)
bC
•|H
3
CD "^
£ -v
_. c •
™ T3 .2 >N
'c a; i> d
^
-------