U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
       Annapolis Field Office
      Annapolis Science Center
     Annapolis, Maryland  21401
        TECHNICAL REPORTS
          Volume  2

-------

-------
                        Table of Contents


                            Volume 2


13         Mine Drainage in the North Branch  Potomac
           River Basin


15         Nutrients in the Upper Potomac  River  Basin
17         Upper Potomac River Basin Hater Quality
           Assessment

-------

-------
                            PUBLICATIONS

                U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                             REGION- III
                       ANNAPOLIS FIELD OFFICE*


                              VOLUME ]
                          Technical  Reports


 5         A Technical  Assessment of Current Water Quality
           Conditions and Factors Affecting Water Quality in
           the Upper Potomac Estuary

 6         Sanitary Bacteriology of  the Upper Potomac Estuary

 7         The Potomac Estuary Mathematical Model

 9         Nutrients in the Potomac  River Basin

11         Optimal  Release Sequences for Water Quality Control
           in Multiple Reservoir Systems

                              VOLUME 2
                          Technical  Reports


13         Mine Drainage in the North Branch Potomac River Basin

15         Nutrients in the Upper Potomac River Basin

17         Upper Potomac River Basin Water Quality Assessment

                              VOLUME  3
                          Technical  Reports

19         Potomac-Piscataway Dye Release and Wastewater
           Assimilation Studies

21         LNEPLT

23         XYPLOT

25         PLOT3D


     * Formerly CB-SRBP, U.S. Department of Health, Education,
       and Welfare; CFS-FWPCA, and CTSL-FWQA,  Middle Atlantic
       Region, U.S. Department of the Interior

-------
                             VOLUME 3   (continued)

                         Technical  Reports


27         Water Quality and Wastewater Loadings - Upper Potomac
           Estuary during 1969


                             VOLUME 4
                         Technical Reports


29         Step Backward Regression

31         Relative Contributions of Nutrients to the Potomac
           River Basin from Various Sources

33         Mathematical Model Studies of Water Quality in the
           Potomac Estuary

35         Water Resource - Water Supply Study of the Potomac
           Estuary

                             VOLUME 5
                         Technical Reports


37         Nutrient Transport and Dissolved Oxygen Budget
           Studies in the Potomac Estuary

39         Preliminary Analyses of the Wastewater and Assimilation
           Capacities of the Anacostia Tidal River System

41         Current Water Quality Conditions and Investigations
           in the Upper Potomac River Tidal System

43         Physical Data of the Potomac River Tidal System
           Including Mathematical Model Segmentation

45         Nutrient Management in the Potomac Estuary


                             VOLUME 6

                         Technical Reports


47         Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Input Study

49         Heavy Metals Analyses of Bottom Sediment in the
           Potomac River Estuary

-------
                                  VOLUME  6  (continued)

                              Technical  Reports

     51          A System of Mathematical Models for Water Quality
                Management

     52         Numerical Method for Groundwater Hydraulics

     53         Upper Potomac Estuary Eutrophication Control
                Requirements

     54         AUT0-QUAL Modelling System

Supplement      AUT0-QUAL Modelling System:  Modification for
   to 54        Non-Point Source Loadings

                                  VOLUME  7
                              Technical Reports

     55         Water Quality Conditions in the Chesapeake Bay System

     56         Nutrient Enrichment and Control Requirements in the
                Upper Chesapeake Bay

     57         The Potomac River Estuary in the Washington
                Metropolitan Area - A History of its Water Quality
                Problems and their Solution

                                  VOLUME  8
                              Technical Reports

     58         Application of AUT0-QUAL Modelling System to the
                Patuxent River Basin

     59         Distribution of Metals in Baltimore Harbor Sediments

     60         Summary and Conclusions - Nutrient Transport and
                Accountability in the Lower Susquehanna River Basin

                                  VOLUME  9
                                 Data Reports

                Water Quality Survey, James River and Selected
                Tributaries - October 1969

                Water Quality Survey in the North Branch Potomac River
                between Cumberland and Luke, Maryland - August 1967

-------
                            VOLUME 9   (continued)

                           Data Reports


           Investigation of Water Quality  in Chesapeake Bay and
           Tributaries  at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Department
           of  the  Army, Aberdeen, Maryland - October-December 1967

           Biological Survey of the Upper  Potomac River and
           Selected Tributaries - 1966-1968

           Water Quality Survey of the  Eastern Shore Chesapeake
           Bay, Wicomico River, Pocomoke River, Nanticoke River,
           Marshall Creek, Bunting Branch, and Chincoteague Bay -
           Summer  1967

           Head of Bay  Study - Water Quality Survey of Northeast
           River,  Elk River, C & D Canal,  Bohemia River, Sassafras
           River and Upper Chesapeake Bay  - Summer 1968 - Head ot
           Bay Tributaries

           Water Quality Survey of the  Potomac Estuary - 1967

           Water Quality Survey of the  Potomac Estuary - 1968

           Wastewater Treatment Plant Nutrient Survey - 1966-1967

           Cooperative  Bacteriological  Study - Upper Chesapeake Bay
           Dredging Spoil Disposal - Cruise Report No. 11

                            VOLUME 10
                           Data Reports

 9         Water  Quality Survey of the  Potomac Estuary - 1965-1966

10         Water  Quality Survey of the  Annapolis Metro Area - 1967

11         Nutrient Data on Sediment Samples of the Potomac Estuary
           1966-1968

12         1969  Head  of the Bay Tributaries

13         Water  Quality Survey of the  Chesapeake Bay in the
           Vicinity of  Sandy  Point - 1968

14         Water  Quality  Survey of the  Chesapeake Bay in the
           Vicinity of  Sandy  Point - 1969

-------
                             VOLUME 10(continued)

                           Data Reports

15         Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River - 1967

16         Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River - 1968

17         Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River - 1969

18         Water Quality of the Potomac Estuary Transects,
           Intensive and Southeast Water Laboratory Cooperative
           Study - 1969

19         Water Quality Survey of the Potomac Estuary Phosphate
           Tracer Study - 1969

                             VOLUME 11
                            Data Reports

20         Water Quality of the Potomac Estuary Transport Study
           1969-1970

21         Water Quality Survey of the Piscataway Creek Watershed
           1968-1970

22         Water Quality Survey of the Chesapeake Bay in the
           Vicinity of Sandy Point - 1970

23         Water Quality Survey of the Head of the Chesapeake Bay
           Maryland Tributaries - 1970-1971

24         Water Quality Survey of the Upper Chesapeake Bay
           1969-1971

25         Water Quality of the Potomac Estuary Consolidated
           Survey - 1970

26         Water Quality of the Potomac Estuary Dissolved Oxygen
           Budget Studies - 1970

27         Potomac Estuary Wastewater Treatment Plants Survey
           1970

28         Water Quality Survey of the Potomac Estuary Embayments
           and Transects - 1970

29         Water Quality of the Upper Potomac Estuary Enforcement
           Survey - 1970

-------
   30


   31


   32
   33
   34
Appendix
  to 1
Appendix
  to 2
    3


    4
                  VOLUME 11  (continued)
                 Data Reports

Water Quality of the Potomac Estuary - Gilbert Swamp
and Allen's Fresh and Gunston Cove - 1970

Survey Results of the Chesapeake Bay Input Study -
1969-1970

Upper Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Studies - Bush River,
Spesutie Narrows and Swan Creek, C & D Canal, Chester
River, Severn River, Gunpowder, Middle and Bird Rivers -
1968-1971

Special Water Quality Surveys of the Potomac River Basin
Anacostia Estuary, Wicomico .River, St. Clement and
Breton Bays, Occoquan Bay - 1970-1971

Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River - 1970

                  VOLUME 12

               Working Documents

Biological Survey of the Susquehanna River and its
Tributaries between Danville, Pennsylvania and
Conowingo, Maryland

Tabulation of Bottom Organisms Observed at Sampling
Stations during the Biological Survey between Danville,
Pennsylvania and Conowingo, Maryland - November 1966

Biological Survey of the Susquehanna River and its
Tributaries between Cooperstown, New York and
Northumberland, Pennsylvnaia - January 1967

Tabulation of Bottom Organisms Observed at Sampling
Stations during the Biological Survey between Cooperstown,
New York and Northumberland, Pennsylvania - November 1966

                  VOLUME 13
               Working Documents

Water Quality and Pollution Control Study, Mine Drainage
Chesapeake Bay-Delaware River Basins - July 1967

Biological Survey of Rock Creek (from Rockville, Maryland
to the Potomac River)  October 1966

-------
                             VOLUME   13   (continued)

                          Working  Documents

 5         Summary of Water Quality  and  Waste  Outfalls,  Rock Creek
           in Montgomery County, Maryland and  the  District of
           Columbia - December  1966

 6         Water Pollution Survey  -  Back River 1965  -  February 1967

 7         Efficiency Study of  the District  of Columbia  Water
           Pollution Control  Plant - February  1967

                             VOLUME   14
                          Working Documents

 8         Water Quality and  Pollution  Control  Study  -  Susquehanna
           River Basin from Northumberland to West Pittson
           (Including the Lackawanna River Basin)   March  1967

 9         Water Quality and  Pollution  Control  Study, Juniata
           River Basin - March 1967

10         Water Quality and  Pollution  Control  Study, Rappahannock
           River Basin - March 1967

11         Water Quality and  Pollution  Control  Study, Susquehanna
           River Basin from Lake Otsego,  New York, to Lake  Lackawanna
           River Confluence,  Pennsylvania -  April  1967

                             VOLUME 15
                          Working Documents

12         Water Quality and Pollution  Control  Study, York  River
           Basin - April 1967

13         Water Quality and Pollution  Control  Study, West  Branch,
           Susquehanna River Basin - April 1967

14         Water Quality and Pollution  Control  Study, James River
           Basin - June 1967 .

15         Water Quality and Pollution  Control  Study, Patuxent  River
           Basin - May 1967

-------
                             VOLUME 16
                          Working Documents

16         Water Quality and Pollution Control  Study,  Susquehanna
           River Basin from Northumberland, Pennsylvania,  to
           Havre de Grace, Maryland - July 1967

17         Water Quality and Pollution Control  Study,  Potomac
           River Basin - June 1967

18         Immediate Water Pollution Control  Needs,  Central  Western
           Shore of Chesapeake Bay Area (Magothy,  Severn,  South, and
           West River Drainage Areas)  July 1967

19         Immediate Water Pollution Control  Needs,  Northwest
           Chesapeake Bay Area (Patapsco to Susquehanna Drainage
           Basins in Maryland) August 1967

20         Immediate Water Pollution Control  Needs - The Eastern
           Shore of Delaware, Maryland and Virginia  -  September 1967

                             VOLUME 17
                           Working Documents

21         Biological Surveys of the Upper James River Basin
           Covington, Clifton Forge, Big Island, Lynchburg, and
           Piney River Areas - January 1968

22         Biological Survey of Antietam Creek and some of its
           Tributaries from Waynesboro, Pennsylvania to Antietam,
           Maryland - Potomac River Basin - February 1968

23         Biological Survey of the Monocacy River and Tributaries
           from Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, to Maryland Rt. 28 Bridge
           Potomac River Basin - January 1968

24         Water Quality Survey of Chesapeake Bay in the Vicinity of
           Annapolis, Maryland - Summer 1967

25         Mine Drainage Pollution of the North Branch of Potomac
           River - Interim Report - August 1968

26         Water Quality Survey in the Shenandoah River of the
           Potomac River Basin - June 1967

27         Water Quality Survey in the James and Maury Rivers
           Glasgow, Virginia - September 1967

-------
                             VOLUME  17  (continued)

                           Working Documents

28         Selected Biological  Surveys in the James River Basin,
           Gillie Creek in the Richmond Area, Appomattox River
           in the Petersburg Area, Bailey Creek from Fort Lee
           to Hopewell - April  1968

                             VOLUME  18
                           Working Documents

29         Biological  Survey of the Upper and Middle Patuxent
           River and some of its Tributaries - from Maryland
           Route 97 Bridge near Roxbury Mills to the Maryland
           Route 4 Bridge near Wayson's Corner, Maryland -
           Chesapeake Drainage Basin - June 1968

30         Rock Creek Watershed - A Water Quality Study Report
           March 1969

31         The Patuxent River - Water Quality Management -
           Technical Evaluation - September 1969

                             VOLUME 19
                          Working Documents

           Tabulation, Community and Source Facility Water Data
           Maryland Portion, Chesapeake Drainage Area - October 1964

           Waste Disposal Practices at Federal Installations
           Patuxent River Basin - October 1964

           Waste Disposal Practices at Federal Installations
           Potomac River Basin below Washington, D.C.- November 1964

           Waste Disposal Practices at Federal Installations
           Chesapeake Bay Area of Maryland Excluding Potomac
           and Patuxent River Basins - January 1965

           The Potomac Estuary - Statistics and Projections -
           February 1968

           Patuxent River - Cross Sections and Mass Travel
           Velocities - July 1968

-------
                            VOLUME  19 (continued)

                         Working Documents

          Wastewater  Inventory - Potomac River Basin -
          December 1968

          Wastewater  Inventory - Upper Potomac River Basin -
          October 1968

                            VOLUME 20
                         Technical Papers

 1          A  Digital Technique for Calculating and Plotting
           Dissolved Oxygen Deficits

 2          A  River-Mile  Indexing System for Computer Application
           in Storing and Retrieving Data      (unavailable)

 3          Oxygen  Relationships in Streams, Methodology to be
           Applied when  Determining the Capacity of a Stream to
           Assimilate Organic Wastes - October 1964

 4          Estimating Diffusion Characteristics of Tidal Waters -
           May 1965

 5          Use of  Rhodamine B Dye as a Tracer in Streams of the
           Susquehanna River Basin - April 1965

 6          An In-Situ Benthic Respirometer - December 1965

 7          A  Study of Tidal Dispersion in the Potomac River
           February  1966

 8          A  Mathematical Model for the Potomac River - what it
           has done  and  what it can do - December 1966

 9          A  Discussion  and Tabulation of Diffusion Coefficients
           for Tidal Waters Computed as a Function of Velocity
           February  1967

10          Evaluation of Coliform Contribution by Pleasure Boats
           July 1966

-------
                            VOLUME  21

                         Technical Papers-

11         A Steady State Segmented Estuary Model

12        Simulation of Chloride Concentrations in the
          Potomac Estuary - March 1968

13        Optimal Release Sequences for Water Quality
          Control in Multiple-Reservoir Systems - 1968


                            VOLUME  22
                         Technical  Papers

          Summary Report - Pollution of Back River - January 1964

          Summary of Water Quality - Potomac River Basin in
          Maryland - October 1965

          The Role of Mathematical  Models in the Potomac River
          Basin Water Quality Management Program - December 1967

          Use of Mathematical Models as Aids to Decision Making
          in Water Quality Control  - February 1968

          Piscataway Creek Watershed - A Water Quality Study
          Report - August 1968


                            VOLUME  23
                        Ocean Dumping Surveys

          Environmental Survey of an Interim Ocean Dumpsite,
          Middle Atlantic Bight - September 1973

          Environmental Survey of Two Interim  Dumpsites,
          Middle Atlantic Bight - January 1974

          Environmental Survey of Two Interim Dumpsites
          Middle Atlantic Bight - Supplemental Report -
          October 1974

          Effects of Ocean Disposal Activities on Mid-
          continental Shelf Environment off Delaware
          and Maryland - January 1975

-------
                            VOLUME 24

                           1976 Annual
               Current Nutrient Assessment - Upper Potomac Estuary
               Current Assessment Paper No.  l

               Evaluation of Western Branch  Wastewater Treatment
               Plant Expansion - Phases I and II

               Situation Report - Potomac River

               Sediment Studies in Back River Estuary, Baltimore,
               Maryland

Technical      Distribution of Metals in Elizabeth River Sediments
Report 61

Technical      A Water Quality Modelling Study of the Delaware
Report 62      Estuary

-------
      Chesapeake Technical Support  Laboratory
                Middle Atlantic Region
    Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
           U.  S. Department of the  Interior

               Technical Report No. 13
                   MINE DRAINAGE

                       IN THE

                    NORTH BRANCH

                POTOMAC RIVER BASIN


                    Leo J. Clark


                    August 1969
                 Supporting Staff:

            Johan A.  Aalto, Chief,  CTSL
  Norbert A. Jaworski, Chief,  Engineering Section
     James W. Marks,  Chief, Laboratory Section
         William Sloan, Sanitary Engineer*

                   Survey Crews

                   William Thomas
                   Robert Home

Currently with Maryland Department  of Water Resources

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD  ..... ......... ......  ...

LIST OF TABLES  ....................

LIST OF FIGURES ........ ...... ......

Chapter

   I     INTRODUCTION .................

         A.  Purpose and Scope  ............

         B.  Authority  . . .  ....... .  .....

         C.  Acknowledgments   .... ......  ...

  II     SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS  ...........

 III     DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA   . . ........

         A.  History  ...... .  .....  .....

         B.  Geography  .......... ......

         C.  Hydrology  ..... ..... ......

         D.  Geology  .................

         E.  Economy  ... .....  ..........

  IV     FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS .....  .......

         A.  Mine Drainage Chemistry  . .  . .  . .  . . .

         B.  Water Quality Standards and Implementation
                Plans ....  ............ .

         C.  V/ater Quality Surveillance Programs  . . .

         D.  Abatement Considerations . .  ...... „
                                     vi

                                    vii



                                      I - 1

                                      1-1

                                      1-3

                                      1-4

                                     II - 1

                                    Ill - 1

                                    Ill - 1

                                    Ill - 1

                                    Ill - 2

                                    Ill - 3

                                    Ill - 5

                                     IV - 1

                                     IV - 1


                                     IV - 3

                                     IV - 6

                                     IV - 8
        ii

-------
                         TABLE OF CONTENTS  (Continued)
Chapter

   V     WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS  ..........

         A.  Headwaters to Steyer,  Maryland  „  .  .  .  .

         B.  Steyer to Kitzmiller,  Maryland  .  „  .  .  .

         C.  Kitzmiller, Maryland to Beryl,
                West Virginia  ............

         D.  Beryl to Keyser, West  Virginia  .  .  .  „  «

         E.  Summary of 1968-69 Acidity Data .  .  .  .  .

  VI     MINE DRAINAGE TRENDS AND DELINEATION OF  ACID
            LOADINGS .................

         A.  Historical Trends in pH and Acidity
                for North Branch above Luke, Maryland

         B.  Delineation of Acidity Load .......

         C.  Regression Studies  ...........

 VII     EFFECTS OF MINE DRAINAGE POLLUTION  .  .  .  .  .

         A.  Water Supply  ..............

         B.  Ecology .................

         C.  Bloomington Reservoir ..........

VIII     CONTROL METHODS AND COSTS  ..........

         A.  General Considerations  .........

         B.  Costs ..................

  IX     BIBLIOGRAPHY  ................

   X     APPENDICES  .................
   V - 1

   V - 1

   V - 6


   V - 14

   V - 23

   V - 30


  VI - 1


  VI - 1

  VI - 5

  VI - 12

 VII - 1

 VII - 1

 VII - 4

 VII - 6

VIII - 1

VIII - 1

VIII - 3

  IX - 1

   X - 1
                                111

-------
                              FOREWORD






     In north central West Virginia near the extreme southwestern



corner of Maryland's panhandle the casual visitor may come upon the



Fairfax Stone, the historic marker identifying the source of the



Potomac River.  To a visitor observing the silvery trickle sparkling



amid sylvan surroundings, it would appear that little change had




occurred since the area was first surveyed by George Washington for



Thomas, Lord Fairfax, in the middle of the eighteenth century.



     But not for long!  A few miles downstream the first evidence



of coal mining activities appears.  Both active and long abandoned



open strip mines with the attendant scarred landscape, refuse piles,



and tailings that accumulated over the past 150 years contribute



acid drainage and surface leaching to the stream, discoloring it



with iron and sulfur compounds, clogging the bottom with silt and



coal fines and rendering it sterile and devoid of fish, aquatic



plant and animal life,,



     Indifference to the degradation of the North Branch Potomac



River and its surroundings during the past century was partly the



result of its remote location, partly the lack of techniques in



treating mine drainage, and partly the high cost of preventing the




discharges, disposal of coal wastes and restoration of the ravaged



landscape.
                                 IV

-------
     Water quality surveys to identify watersheds receiving the bulk



of mine drainage and their effects on the North Branch Potomac River



have been evaluated and are presented in this report.  Corrective



action will require identification of all individual mine drainage



discharges in the area and development of feasible methods of elimi-



nating or controlling the harmful aspects of mine drainage.
                                  v

-------
                           LIST OF TABLES
Number                         Title                         Page

  III - 1     Streamflow of North Branch Potomac River
              and Tributaries above Cumberland,  Md0          III - 8

   IV - 1     Water Uses North Branch Potomac River
              Basin                                           IV - 5

   VI - 1     Tributary Contributions Upstream From
              Steyer, Md0                                     VI - 7

   VI - 2     Tributary Contributions Upstream From
              Kitzmiller, Md.                                 VI - 8

   VI - 3     Tributary Contributions Upstream From
              Barnum, W. Va0                                  VI - 9

   VI - 4     Tributary Contributions Upstream From
              Beryl, W. Va0                                   VI - 10

   VI - 5     Regression Study Results                        VI - 17

  VII - 1     Projected Water Supply Demands                 VII - 2

 VIII - 1     Preliminary Mine Drainage Abatement
              Costs                                         VIII - 9
                                 VI

-------
.1ST  OF FIGURES
Number
I -
IV -
V -
V _
V -
V -
V -
V -
V -
V -
V -
v _
V -
V -
V -
V -
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Map - North Branch Potomac River „ . . „ .
pH vs., Net Alkalinity North Branch
Potomac Biver „ ............
Elk Ran -Henry Siding, W. Va. Survey
A-'Cl UCl 3QOOOOOftOO«OOO«Q (.OO
laurel Run-Dobbin Road, Md. Survey
Data .„„ „ „..,„„.. o ......
Buffalo Creek-Bayard, W, Va0 Survey
Data ...„„.. o ...........
North Branch Potomac P.iver-Steyer, Md,
Survey Data ...... .,.....».
Stony Fiver-Mount Storm, W. Va0 Survey
Data „ . , „ „ „ . „ „ . . „ . o , „ o . ,
Lost-land Run near Bethlehem School, Md,
Survey Data «»<,<>,,o<,o°o«;>«o»
Abram Creek-Cakmcnt, W. Va. Survey Data
North, Branch Potomac River-Kitzmiller,
Md, Survey Data ....„......,,
Three Forks Bun-East Vindex, Md, Survey
Elklick Hun-Manor Hillc Survey Data . „ .
North Branch Potomac River -Barnum., W. Va.
Survey Data ...............
Piney Sv/amp Run -Hampshire, W. Va, Survey
Data ...................
North Branch Potomac River-Beryl,, W0 Va.
Survey Data ...............
Savage River USGS Gaging Station near
Bloomineton, Md. Survey Data .......
Page
I -
IV -
V -
V -
V -
V -
V -
V -
v -
V -
V -
V -
V -
V -
V -
V -
2
10
2
4
5
7
8
10
12
13
15
16
17
21
22
25
      Vll

-------
                           LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
 Number

   V - 15      Savage River-Bloomington, Md. Survey
               Data  ...................      V - 26

   V - 16      Georges Creek-Y/esternport Survey Data            V - 28

   V - 17      North Branch Potomac River-Keyser, W. Va. .      V - 29

   V - 18      Acidity Isopleth (mg/l) North Branch
               Potomac River ...............      V - 32

  VI - 1       Historical pH Trend North Branch Potomac
               River-Luke,, Md. ..............     VI - 2

  VI - 2       Historical Flow Trend North Branch Potomac
               River-Luke, Md. ..............     VI - 3

  VI - 3       Historical Acidity Trend North Branch
               Potomac River-Luke, Mda . . . . .  . . . . „     VI - 4

  VI - 4       Tributary Contributions to North Branch
               Potomac River ,,..,„......,..     VI - 13

  VI - 5       Acid Load - Stream Flow Relationship
               Buffalo Creek-Bayard,, W. Va.  .......     VI - 15

  VI - 6       Acid Load - Stream Flo?/ Relationship
               North Branch Potomac River-Barnum, W, Va, .     VI - 16

VIII - 1       Mine Drainage Abatement Costs - Preventive
               Measures  .................   VIII - 5

VIII - 2       Mine Drainage Abatement Costs - Collection    VIII - 6

VIII - 3       Mine Drainage Abatement Costs - Treatment     VIII - 7
                                 Vlll

-------
                                                                1-1






                             CHAPTER I



                            INTHODUCTION






A.  PURPOSE AND SCOPE



     The Chesapeake Technical Support Laboratory (CTSL), Middle



Atlantic Region of the Federal Water Pollution Control Adminis-



tration, as part of the President's Water Quality Task Force on



Project Potomac,, completed a water quality survey in 1966„  The



Maryland Department of Water Resources and the West Virginia



Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources,



cooperated with CTSL in conducting an intensive sampling program



in the North Branch Potomac River basin between March 1968 and




May 1969.  The principal objectives of this study were to:



     1.  Determine the extent and magnitude of existing mine



     drainage pollution,



     2.  Identify streams contributing significant acidic loadings



     to the North Branch and define temporal distribution and



     relative magnitudes of acidity,



     3.  Determine the effects of tributary flows on the main stem



     of the Potomac River,



     4.  Define existing stream use limitations resulting from



     mine drainage pollution,



     5.  Predict the water quality in the proposed Bloomington



     Reservoir after impoundment, and the impact of flow releases



     on downstream water quality during low flow periods,

-------
                   DESIGNATES APPROXIMATE
                   LOCATION OF COAL FIELDS
                   STREAMS AFFECTED BY
                   MINE DRAINAGE POL LU TON


                   STREAMS INTERMITTENTLY
                   AFFECTED BY MINE
                   DRAINAGE POLLUTION
      SCALE IN MILES
MINE DRAINAGE  POLLUTION REPORT
NORTH  BRANCH  POTOMAC
    RIVER  SUB  BASIN

-------
                                                                1-3


     6.  Suggest the extent of water quality control required to

     achieve established water quality standards, and

     7.  Determine design criteria and costs to provide required

     control measures for each drainage sub-basin.

     This study is limited to that portion of the North Branch

Potomac River basin currently affected by mine drainage discharges.

Geographically, this area includes all the Potomac drainage upstream

from Cumberland, Maryland,,  A basin map is shown as Figure I-I.

Basin schematics are shown in Appendix A as Figures A-2 through A-5.


B.  AUTHORITY

     This report was prepared under the provision of the Federal

Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. 466 et seq.),

which directed the Secretary of the Interior to develop programs

for eliminating pollution of interstate waters and improving the

condition of surface and underground waters„


C.  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

     The cooperation of the following governmental agencies,

industries and other organizations has enabled CTSL to complete

this study and their assistance is gratefully acknowledged:

     1,  Maryland Department of Water Resources

     2.  West Virginia Department of Natural Resources,
         Division of Water Resources

     3,  U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District

-------
                                                          1-4
4.  West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company*, Luke, Maryland

5.  U. S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Divisions at
    Cumberland, Maryland and Charleston, West Virginia

6.  Celanese Fibers Company, Division of Celanese Corporation,
    Cumberland, Maryland

7.  Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin
* Recently changed to Westvaco

-------
                                                                II-l






                             CHAFFER II




                      SIW/LRY Mr. CONCLUSIONS






1,  For over a century., mine drainage has been the primary cause




    of degradation in the North Branch Potomac River basin.  More



    than 40 miles of the main stem above Lulce, Maryland,  and over



    100 miles of 'tributary streams are now virtually devoid of



    aquatic life because of the effects of mine drainage,



2.  The principal constituents of mine drainage in the North Branch



    Potomac River basin are classified as follows:



         a.  Total dissolved and suspended solids,



         b.  Acid,



         c.  Iron and manganese, and



         d0  Toxic precipitates,



    Each of these substances i,? currently having a deleterious



    effect on municipal and industrial water supply, fish and



    aquatic life, water oriented recreation and other prescribed



    beneficial water uee.su



3,  The North Branch Potomar- River} between Steyer, Maryland and



    Beryl, West Virginia,, contravenes Maryland interstate water



    quality standards throughout the year.  Moreover, many of the



    tributary streams either continuously or intermittently



    contravene their respective intrastate standards.  The maximum




    acid concentration and minimum pH value observed in the main stem



    of the North Branch Potomac were 593 mg/1 and 2.3, respectively.



    Both occurred at the Steyer -tation.

-------
                                                               II-2






4.  Long-term water quality data, monitored by the West Virginia Pulp



    and Paper Company, indicate that in recant years a significant



    deterioration in water quality has occurred.  This decrease can be



    attributed to a combination of lew flow conditions and increased



    mining activities„



5,  The tributary streams in the Potomac basin producing most of the




    acid are;



         Elk Run                        35,000 Ibs/day



         Laurel Run                     13,000 Ibs/day




         Buffalo Creek                  15,000 Ibs/day



         Abram Creek                     8,000 Ibs/day



         Stony River                     4,500 Ibs/day



         Three Forks Run                 3,300 Ibs/day



         Piney Swamp Rim                 3S200 Ibs/day



         Lostland Run                    1,000 Ibs/day



6.  Approximately 54 percent of the acid loading of the North Branch



    at Beryl, West Virginia (drainage area of 287 square miles) origi-



    nates in 20 square miles of tributary streams consisting of



    Elk Run, Laurel Run, and Buffalo Creek watersheds.



7.  An estimated 79,000 Its/day of acidity is contributed by streams



    within the State of West Virginia and 39,000 Ibs/day by streams



    within the State of Maryland,,  These estimates represent 67 per-



    cent and 33 percent,, respectively, of the total acid loading in



    the North Branch Potomac River at Beryl„

-------
                                                               II-3






 8.  Elk Run, the most seriously degraded tributary stream in the



     North Branch basin contained acid concentrations approaching



     9,000 mg/1 and pH values under 2000




 9.  Active coal mines in West Virginia appear to be a significant,



     and perhaps the largest, source of acid mine drainage while




     in Maryland, drainage from inactive mines appears to be the



     most significant source,



10„  Since there are no large natural alkalinity sources in the



     North Branch above the Savage Elver, an extensive mine drainage



     control program to eliminate practically all acid discharges is



     required to achieve water quality standards„



11.  The proposed Bloomington Reservoir will impound mine drainage



     water with acid concentrations ranging from 30 mg/1 to 180 mg/1



     and pH values ranging from 207 to 4<,9o  'Ihe annual cost of



     neutralizing flow releases from the reservoir to comply with



     Maryland's current pB standard has been estimated at $238,000„



12,  A preliminary estimate of annual expenditures required to provide



     necessary prevention, collection, and treatment measures in the



     seven most critical watersheds of the Potomac basin is $5,000,000.



     Capital costs are estimated at $32,500,000,

-------
                                                               II-3





13.  Recent survey data (August 1969) indicate that a "flushing" of



mine drainage occurs during high flow periods with resultant acid



effects, including a major fish kill, observed in the North Branch



Potomac downstream from Cumberland, Maryland.



14.  An analysis of the flow release management procedures of the



proposed Bloomington Reservoir is essential to minimize the effects



of mine drainage in the releases.

-------
                                                             III-l






                            CHAPIIH III



                    DESCRI?IJO.N C F THE SJIDI AREA.






A0  HISTORY



     The lower Potomac Fiver b^sin wa£ settled early by English



colonists who recognized the potential in development of the upper




river as a gateway to the west by means of a canal connecting the




Chesapeake Bay to the Chic River bn.:, in,  George Washington surveyed



the upper river, the Chesapeake ar^' .Ibic Canal construction started,



and rapid growth in the basin seemed, assured,,



     The advent, of the railroad doomed, the future of the canal before



completion; but the discovery of coal in the North Branch basin, aided




by railroad transportion, led to r^pid exploitation of this resource



in the middle of the nineteenth century „  Ihe ravages of the coal



mining activity ar^ still evident though mining continues 'under regu-



lations to conserve the other natural rescarces„  water, forests, and



landscapes,






B.  GEOGRAPHY



     The North Branch of 4he Potomac River rises in Tucker County,



West Virginia near the Fairfax Stor.^ marking tha historic western



boundary of Maryland with Virginia, now Wept Virginia, and flows



alternately northeast ard southeast for about 98 miles tc join the



South Branch near Old torn, .Maryland to form the Potomac River.  Two



miles downstream from its source, belcw Kempton, .Maryland, the right



bank forms the southern boundary between Maryland and West Virginia«,

-------
                                                              Ill-2






On the Maryland side the river is bounded by Garrett and Allegany



counties and on the West Virginia side by Grant, Mineral, and



Hampshire counties„



     The basin's coal-bearing area lies mainly in this trough-shaped




valley, about 80 miles long with its axis in a northeast-southwest




direction,,  The North Branch flows northeastward along this axis for




almost 50 mile?,, then bends to the southeast at the three industrial



communities of Luke, Westernport, and Piedmont, and there leaves the



coal-bearing area.  Above Luke it is known as the upper Potomac coal



field.  The northeastern valley is drained by Georges Creek which



flows southwestward to join the North Branch at Westernport,



     Both the North Branch and Georges Creek valleys are steep,



narrow, and heavily wooded.  Most of the tributaries are short hill-



side runs with less than ten square miles of drainage area discharging



directly into the main stem.  The exceptions are Stony River and Abram



Creek which drain much of the North Branch basin above Luke on the



West Virginia side0  These tributaries, both of which lie in the coal-



bearing region, each approach 50 square miles in drainage area at



their mouth.  The study area encompasses some 875 square miles and



is shown in Figure T-10






C.  HYDROLOGY



     The flow in Stony River is regulated by West Virginia Pulp and



Paper Company's Reservoir about 19 miles upstream from the North



Branch and to a minor extent by a Virginia Electric and Power Company

-------
                                                              III-3






dam about nine miles upstream from the North Branch.  A reservoir



near the U, S. Eoute 50 crossing at Mount Storm, West Virginia has




been proposed by the Corps of Engineers„



     Savage River, which lies for the most part outside the coal



region, joins the North Branch just upstream from Luke,  Its flow is



regulated by the Corps of Engineers' Savage River Reservoir about



five miles upstream from the North Branch,  A reservoir upstream from



the existing reservoir (Savage II) has been proposed by the Corps of



Engineers.  The Corps of Engineers has also proposed a large reservoir,



the Bloomington Project, on the North Branch approximately eight miles



upstream from Luke„



     Because of the steep and generally impervious terrain, streams



in this region respond rapidly to changes in rain or snow runoff and




tend to have low dry-weather flows.  Pertinent data for gaging



stations within the study area, can be found in Table III-l.






D.  GEOLOGY



     The predominant coal-bearing geological formations in the upper



Potomac coal basin are the Conemaugh, Allegheny, and Pottsville



formations of the Pennsylvania system in order of depth from the



surface as well as increasing resource value.  The first two outcrop



in the basin, but all have been reached and worked from mine shafts,,



In the Georges Creek coal basin the Monongahela formation with its



thick Pittsburgh coal seam was formerly the most productive source



but has gradually become exhausted and was the major cause of

-------
                                                              Ill-4






decline in mining activity in this1 area,,  Modern mining methods



have made it feasible to recover coal from previously uneconomical



seams with the promise of coal mining activity in the area for a



long time.



     Coal was discovered in the Georges Creek basin in 1782 and has




been mined in the North Branch basin for about 150 years.  A mine




was operating before 1816 at EcMiart, Maryland ID C-eorges Creek



field, and output increased rapidly until the early twentieth



century.



     Mary land's peak production, 5.5 million tons of coal, occurred



in 1907, earlier than any other coal-producing state.  Coal produc-



tion in the North Branch basin for the 1961-1965 period was:



     1961 ....... 1,0 million tons



     1962 ....... 1.0 million tons




     1963 ,  . . . o . o 1«3 million tons



     1964 .  . . . „ . . 202 million tons



     1965 o  o . . o o . 3,3 million tons



The 1965 North Branch production amounted to 0065 percent of national



production.  About 2.2 million tons were mined in West Virginia (upper



Potomac field) and 1,1 million tons in Maryland.  Of the 1965 Maryland



production, 624,000 tons were mined from the upper Potomac field.  The



upper Potomac field accounted for 35 percent of the 1965 North Branch



basin coal production, and the West Virginia part of the upper Potomac



field made up the bulk of the recent increases„  While production for



the entire North Branch basin increased 330 percent from 196l to 1965,

-------
                                                              III-5






Maryland production increased only 60 percent0  These increases were



probably a result of use of modern mining methods and increased demand




for electric power generation,,



     The many coal seams are interspersed with marine shales, clays,



and sandstones.  Calcareous rocks, unfortunately, are not character-



istic of the basin and are sparsely present in thin strata.  Such



alkaline rocks could have provided neutralization potential for the



acids found in mine drainage discharges,,  Where limestone does occur



in the Savage River basin, it is believed to have provided the alka-



linity in Savage Reservoir and consequently some neutralisation of



acidity in the North Branch at Westernport „






E.  ECONOMY



     Cumberland, Maryland, the largest population center in the




North Branch basin, is the railroad and industrial center of the area0



It has been a transportation center .since the early 1800's when the



National Road, now TJ, S0 40, was built,,



     In 1842 the Baltimore and Ohio Hailroad, and in 1850 the



Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, reached Cumberland and rapid growth in



coal mining began.  Today the area i;-, also served by the Western



Maryland and Pennsylvania Railroads„  In addition to the railroad



activity, three large industrial plants with employment ranging



from 1,100 to 3,100 are located in the Cumberland area,,



     The remainder of the basin is sparsely populated.  Principal



towns are Frostburg, Barton, Lonaconing,, Oakland, and Luke-Westernport

-------
                                                              III-6






in Maryland and Piedmont and Keyser in West Virginia.  The West Virginia



Pulp and Paper Company mill located in the tri-town area of Luke-



West ernport -Piedmont employs 2,400 persons and is the largest "fine




paper" mill in the world.



     Coal output per man increased three times as fast in Maryland




during 1961-1965 as in the adjacent states; and in 1965, the output per



man was far greater in the Maryland upper Potomac basin than in the




Georges Creek basin.  This was a result of new explorations and invest-



ment in new equipment and was also experienced in the West Virginia



upper Potomac basin.



     Because of the increased outpat per man, mining employment in the



North Branch basin did not increase in proportion to production during



1961-1965.  Employment for these years was:



     196'1 ....... 617



     1963 ....... 657




     1963 ....... 631



     1964 ..... D . 784



     19o5 ....... 851



In 1965, 3?3 men were employed in Maryland and 478 in West Virginia.



This includes not only miners but all mine-associated employees.



     The average value of Maryland coal in 1965 was $3.63 per ton



f.o.b. mine, below the average U8 S0 price of $4.44 and the



Pennsylvania (including anthracite) and West Virginia values of $5.07'



and $4.87, respectively.  Coal values have been stable since 1950, the



average fluctuating within a range of 69 cents per ton from 1950 to

-------
                                                              III-7






1905 with West Virginia upper Potomac basin values probably comparable.



This would make the total 1965 North Branch basin coal production worth



about $12 million, or 0.53 percent of the value of all coal mined in



the United States in 1965.  Of this the West Virginia upper Potomac



coal field production during 1965 would have been $8 million, about



one percent of the total value of the West Virginia coal production.




The Maryland 19o5 production of $4 million was an almost insignificant



three ten-thousandths of one percent of the gross Maryland state product,



but about five percent of the total value of the mineral industry in



Maryland.

-------
                              TABLE  III-l

               STREAMFLOW OF NORTH BRANCH POTOMAC RIVER AND

                  TRIBUTARIES ABOVE CUMBERLAND, MARYLAND
                                      Streamflow
USGS Gaging
Station
Drainage
Area
(sq.mi.)
Mean
(cfs)
Median
(cfs)
7 Day*
10 yr, Flow
(cfs)
Remarks
North Branch at     73.0     l60       89         4.6
Steyer, Md,
Stony River at      48.8      82.1
Mt. Storm, W. Va.

Abram Creek at      47,3      61.5     27-7
Oakmont, ¥. Va.
Worth Branch at    225       ^24      238        l4
KItzmiLler, Md.
North Branch at    287       498      284        20
Bloomington, Md.

Savage River at
Bloomington, Md.


North Branch at    404       681      356        48
Luke, Md.


Georges Creek at    72.4      77-9     36         2.7
Franklin, Md,

North Branch at    596       859      4^8        ^4
Pinto, Md,,
287
106
498
162
284
76
Median and 7d-10 yr „
flows estimated from
relation with Kltz-
miller gage.

Below dam, records
unadjusted.

Median from USGS pro-
visional records,
subject to revision.

Adjusted for storage
in Stony River Reser-
voir .

Beryl, W. Va. dis-
continued
Below Sa,vage River
dam records adjusted
for storage,

Records adjusted for
storage In Stony and
Sa,'/age River Reservoirs
Unadjusted.
     * Design flow prescribed by Maryland's and West Virginia's water
       quality standards.  7 consecutive day low flow with a 10 yea,r
       return frequency.

-------
                                                              IV-1
                             CHAPTER I?



                       FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS





A0  MINE DRAINAGE CHEMISTRY



     Sulfur and iron compounds found with coal deposits become



exposed to air and water during mining operations and produce dis-



solved iron salts and sulfuric acid that interact to form iron,



aluminum, calcium and magnesium sulfates some of which form toxic



precipitates.  In addition manganese, sodium, potassium, and other



elements may be present in the resulting drainage as chlorides,



carbonates, and sulfates.



     Mine drainage control methods are based upon preventing the



exposure of pyrite or iron disulfide to air and water in order to



reduce formation of sulfuric acid and other undesirable constituents.



     Although investigators differ concerning the specific reactions



and mechanisms involved in the formation of mine drainage, the over-



all reactions can be represented by the following equations:



2 FeS2    +    70Q    +    2HpO  _^ 2 FeSO       +     2H2SO



(pyrite)    (oxygen)    (water) (ferrous sulfate) (sulfuric acid)



          +    300 __»  FeSO.     +     S00
                 c.   r      4             <-
                                    (sulfur dioxide)
               °2
The reaction yields two moles of hydrogen ions, H+, (acidity) for each



mole of iron oxidized.

-------
                                                               IV-2





     Initially, the iron in mine drainage is in the ferrous state;



however, after contact with air, ferrous iron oxidizes to ferric iron



according to the following equation:



4 FeSO^  +  SHgSO^  +  0?   —*    2 Fe^SO^) 3  +   2H20




                                (ferric sulfate)



While the oxidation of pyrite produces sulfuric acid, the above equation



indicates that the additional oxidation of iron utilizes sulfuric acid.



Dependent upon pH, temperature, and concentration of constituents the



reaction proceeds:



Fe0(SO,),      +       uH00    _j,     2 Fe(QH)(SO.)    +     SO.
  d   4 )                £     f_Z.                4             4



(ferric sulfate)     (water)      (basic ferric sulfate) (sulfate ion)



In the absence of acid, basic ferric sulfate may precipitate directly



according to the following reaction:



4 FeSO    +   0    +   2H00   _»   4 Fe(QH)(SO )
      4        <^         t-    4	              s



                                  (commonly referred to as "yellow-

                                   boy" )



There is some question as to whether the basic ferric sulfate is a



discrete compound or a ferric hydroxide containing occluded sulfate.



     In the presence of strong acid concentrations, ferrous sulfate



may hydrolyze as follows:



FeSO.   +   2H00    >     Fe(OH)0   +   H0SO.
    4         <~    ^ r           f-        c~  4



     The above equations which describe the formation of mine drain-



age compounds are theoretical.  As such, they may not always define

-------
                                                              "v—?-y <*}
                                                              .iv -3





what occurs in the field since mine drainage involves a highly dynamic



and complex system,, encompassing both chemical and biological reactions,





B0  WATER QUALITY STANDARDS ANT BdEMFNTAriCN FLAMS



1,  State of Maryland



     a.  Water Use and Water Quality Criteria



     The State of Maryland has adopted water quality standards for all



surface waters within the State0  Standards pertaining to interstate



streams were approved ty the U. S. Department cf the Interior on



August 7, 1967,  The principal indicator prescribed by Maryland!s



standards for waters receiving mine drainage pollution is pH.  The



water uses to be protected and the corresponding pH criteria for that



portion of the North Branch Potomac basin upstream from the City of



Cumberland can be found in Table IV-!„



     The water quality standards established by the State of Maryland



are to apply at all times when fIcxs are equal to or greater than the



minimum seven-eonsecutive-day-low-flcw with a ten-year return frequency,



     b.  Implementation Plan



     The State of Maryland has proposed the following programs in an



effort to abate the pollution resulting from mine drainage;



     (1)  The Maryland Bureau of Mir.es and the Maryland Department of



Water Resources will conduct frequent inspections of active operations



to determine if standards are being met„  If they are not being met,



additional improvement and early action to correct offending conditons



will be required„

-------
                                                              IV-4






     (2)  A regulation on mine drainage control will be prepared




subsequent to conferences with the Land Reclamation Advisory Committee*.




Such a regulation will only require corrective measures which are




economically feasible and practicable of -attainment and may not correct




all mine drainage pollution especially that caused by abandoned deep




mines.




     (3)  When methods of controlling or minimizing mine drainage from




abandoned mines are developed "by existing experimental work, the State




will initiate a program for such corrective action.




2.  State o£_Wesl__Y_irg^jnl^




     a.  Water Uses snd Water Quality Criteria




     The interstate and intrastate stream standards adopted by the




State of West Virginia were approved by the l\ S, Department of the




Interior in May, 19^>8.  Water uses to be protected for the State of




West Virginia can also be found in Table rr-l.




     Standards which qpply to a tn?o mile reach of the Potomac, below




its source and all tributary streams within West Virginia containing




acid mine drainage, prescribe the following criteria:




     (l)  Less than 30,0 mg/1 aluminum,



     (2)  Less than 10.0 mg/1 to'.al iron,




     (3)  pH greater than 5.5,




     (4)  Less than 200 mg/1 total suspended solids, and




     (5)  Less than 200 mg/1 sulfate.-,.
*  As of July 1, 1969, know as Land Reclamation Committee

-------
o
Water Uses to pH
Zone be Protected Criteria
rH
0
P
oi
£5
tomac R. From W. Va. - Md. State Line Municipal Water Supply 6.0 - 8. 5
te) to W. Va. Pulp & Paper Water Agricultural Water Supply
Supply Dam In Luke, Md. Industrial Water Supply
Fish & Aquatic Life (trout)
Water Contact Recreation
tomac R. W. Var Pulp & Paper Water Agricultural Water Supply 5.0 - 9.0
te) Supply Dam in Luke, Md. Industrial Water Supply
to Dam at Cumberland, Md.
o
PH

-
H
m

^
CD
p -d
CQ d

0 rH
p t>)
d ^l
•H ^Oj
o
PH


?H
m

&
o3
P TJ
CQ d
?H o3
0 rH
P t^s
d fH
^•i
ver Headwaters to mouth Same as Number 1 6.0-8,5
te)
•H oi
PH P
CQ
0 03
Ml rH
S3 P
£> fj
ra ^
reek Headwaters to mouth Fish & Aquatic Life 6.0 - 8,5
te)

nd

cd
H

£H
1
o

to
0
M

b
0
o
oi
p >d
CQ d
oi o3
rH rH
•p :>>

•rH 03
tribs. Headwaters to mouth Water Contact Recreation 6.0 - 8.5
M
0
cl
p
0

H
3
Potomac Fish & Aquatic Life (trout)
t 8= Agricultural Water Supply
Counties
te)
• P
rH 0
P3 rH
M
• o3
^ C5

P -H
03
t>3 P
d CQ
o3 o3
fcio m
0 P
H d
^
LTN
CO
1
0
VO

d
o
•H
p
oi
0
fH
o
0
p
o
oi
p

o
o

M
0
p
oi




rx
O
•H
H
| Q
f2
^
£>,
rH
ft
ft
d
ra

rH
0
P
oi

H
Oi
£
p
rH
rjj
O
•H
£_i
3
                                                                                                                        fH  r£>
                                                                                                                        0
                                                                                                                       P  -d
                                                                                                                        03   0

                                                                                                                            0
                                                                                                                       H
                                                                                                                            o
                                                                                                                            o
                                                                                                                        d   0    •
                                                                                                                        03  rd  |S
                                                                                                                           p
                                                                                                                        CQ        -v
                                                                                                                        M  CM  rd
                                                                                                                        0   O   O
                                                                                                                       P       d
                                                                                                                        o3    •   o3
                                                                                                                        |S   CQ   JH

                                                                                                                       H  -ri
                                           OJ
                                                                                           LT\
                                                                                                                      vo

-------
                                                               IV-6
     b.  Implementation Plan



     In an effort to determine the feasibility and costs of methods




devised to control acid mine drainage from abandoned mines, the




Federal Government in cooperation with the State of West Virginia



has undertaken a mine drainage control project on Roaring Creek in



Randolph County.  Information obtained from this project, and other



similar projects throughout the country, will ultimately be applied



to the entire abandoned mine drainage problem affecting interstate



and intrastate streams within West Virginia.



     The State of West Virginia feels that the coal industry's pro-



gress toward stream pollution control from active mines has been too



slow and therefore plans to initiate a program which will accelerate



this progress.  A program to prevent the possibility of future




pollution from active mines is already in effect.  Before a coal



company is issued a permit to discharge water into a stream, there



must be complete assurance that this water will not pollute the



stream.  Pollution is defined as a contravention of stream standards.






C.  WATER QUALITY SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS



1.  State Surveys



     The Maryland Department of Water Resources conducts a continuing



surveillance program to monitor the water quality in streams affected



by mine drainage.  MDWR has also compiled extensive information



regarding the locations of individual mines, the area currently dis-



turbed by strip mining, and effluent analysis for each of the mines

-------
                                                               IV-7






contributing drainage.  In addition, MDWR has conducted a pH survey



of all Maryland streams and many West Virginia tributaries to the



North Branch.



     A routine surveillance program is currently being maintained by



the West Virginia Department of Natural .Resources, Division of Water



Resources.




2.  Water Quality Monitoring by Industries



     In the reach from Luke, Maryland to Cumberland, Maryland, ten




water quality surveillance stations are currently being maintained by



three industries.  Of the ten stations, five are maintained by the



West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company; two by the Celanese Fibers




Company; and three by the Kelly-^Springfield Company.



     Data from the surveillance network is summarized annually by the



Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin.



3.  FWFCA Cooperative Surveys



     The Chesapeake Technical Support Laboratory of FWPCA conducted



mine drainage surveillance programs in the North Branch Potomac River,



upstream, from Cumberland, Maryland, during August and October of 1966



and April and November of 19670



     In March 1968, a bi-weekly sampling program was initiated in



cooperation with the Maryland Department of Water Resources and the



West Virginia Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water



Resources.,  This program was funded in part by the U. S0 Army Corps



of Engineers, Baltimore District, from their Bloomington Reservoir

-------
                                                               IV-8






Project.  For a period of about fourteen months, eighteen stations



were maintained by CTSL personnel and four by MDWR and WVDNR per-



sonnel.



     A description of the sampling stations and all data collected



since March 1968, are given in Appendices A and B.  Sampling stations



are also indicated on the basin map (Figure I-l) and on basin sche-




matic diagrams (Figures A-2 through A-5).






D.  ABATEMENT CONSIDERATIONS




     To achieve a water quality that will allow the desired uses of



the North Branch Potomac River, a reduction of certain undesirable



constituents normally found in mine drainage is necessary.  The




constituents of greatest importance are:




     1.  Total dissolved solids,



     2.  Acidity,



     3.  Iron and manganese, and



     4.  Toxic precipitates.



     Each of the above has a deleterious effect on water usage and



will be discussed in a later chapter.  The primary problem created



by mine drainage, however, is a result of excessive acidity and the



corresponding decrease in pH.  In order to simulate the response of




pH to a reduction in acidity (or increase in net-alkalinity) attri-



butable to an abatement effort, a net allsalinity versus pH relation-



ship was established for the North Branch Potomac River from existing



stream sampling data (Figure IV-l).  A plot of this type serves as  a

-------
                                                               IV-9





"tool" for ascertaining the amount of acidity removal; i.e.,  degree



of abatement required to increase pH to the minimum levels specified by



the approved state stream standards.  Moreover, it is particularly



useful for determining the quantity of acid which must be neutralized



to upgrade flow releases from the proposed Bloomington Reservoir to



acceptable levels.  Chapter VII (C) of this report discusses  the




requirements pertaining to the Bloomington Reservoir.  The general



mine drainage pollution abatement program is discussed in Chapter VIII.

-------
X
 a.
                                                                                                           FIGURE S-|

-------
                                                                V-l






                             CHAPTER V



                      WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS






     For ease of data presentation, the water quality conditions



in the North Branch are described in four separate geographical



areas as listed below:



     Area Notation                           Area



           A                    Headwaters to Steyer, Md.



           B                    Steyer, Md0 to Kitzmiller, Md.




           C                    Kitzmiller, Md. to Beryl, W. Va.



           D                    Beryl, W. Va. to Keyser, W. Va.



     Data plots of pH, net alkalinity or acidity, and stream



discharge are exhibited for each surveillance station.






A.  HEADWATERS TO STEYER, MARYLAND



     The water quality in this area was monitored at four sampling



stations, three of which v/ere on tributary streams and one on the



main stem of the North Branch,,  The three tributaries sampled were



Elk Run, Laurel Run, and Buffalo Creek.



1.  Elk Run (West Virginia)



     As presented in Figure V-l, acidity concentrations in Elk Run



approached 9,000 mg/1 during low flow periods.  Pronounced decreases



in acidity occurred during high flow periods but concentrations still



ranged in the vicinity of 2,000 - 3,000 mg/1.  From the standpoint of



acidity, Elk Run is by far the most critical stream in the entire



North Branch Potomac basin.

-------
a:
                                                            AJJOI3V  IVlOi
                                                                                                              RGURE  S-l

-------
                                                               V-3





     The high amount of acidity in Elk Run has produced exceedingly



low pH values.  In almost every instance pH was less than 3.0 and in



some cases it was under 2.0.  The pH values shown in Figure V-l indi-



cate a relatively small amount of annual variation and apparently a



lack of dependence upon flow.  The pH levels observed in Elk Run




were considerably less than the minimum pH (5.5) prescribed by the



State of West Virginia for its interstate and intrastate streams con-



taining acid mine drainage„




2.  Laurel Run (Maryland)



     Limited data presented in Figure V-2 indicate that Laurel Run




contains large quantities of mine drainage.  Maximum acidity concen-



trations approached 600 mg/1 and pH values were less than 3.0.



Acidity appeared to be inversely related to flow while pH was not.



     Although Laurel Run does not have acidity concentrations as



high as that of Elk Run, nevertheless, the Maryland stream standards



(pH 600) are contravened.



3.  Buffalo Creek (West Virginia)



     As in Elk Run, there is a definite relationship between acidity



and flow in Buffalo Creek (Figure V-3).  Low flow periods produced



acidity concentrations exceeding 600 mg/1 whereas high spring flows



reduced acidity to approximately 100 mg/1.



     The pH also varied somewhat with river discharge as shown in




Figure V-3.  On an annual basis, pH levels were usually between 2.0



and 3.00  In general the water quality in Buffalo Creek is comparable



to that of Laurel Run.

-------
d
       I
    O
    O
                                                       (V)

                                                      /WTU

-------
     (1/6,11)
A1IQOV  1V1O1
                                                                 FIGURE

-------
                                                               V-6






     The pH of the water in Buffalo Creek does not comply with the



water quality standards prescribed for this stream by the State of




West Virginia.



4.  North Branch at Steyer. Maryland



     The mine drainage contributed by Elk Run, Laurel Run, and



Buffalo Creek  is  reflected in the water quality of the North Branch



at Steyer, Maryland.  Figure V-4 shows an erratic acidity relation-



ship with flow.  Maximum acid concentrations approaching 600 mg/1



were recorded during the critical late summer months.  Minimum values



observed during the winter and spring were less than 100 mg/1.



     The pH values generally ranged from 2,3 to 3.3 and like acidity



were somewhat related to flow.  The lower pH levels prevailed during



low flow periods„  Both the acid concentrations and the pH observed




at Steyer were the most critical of any station on the North Branch



Potomac River.



     The Maryland stream standards for North Branch Potomac specify



a minimum pH of 6.0.  This criterion is not being attained at any



time or under any flow condition.






B.  STEYER TO KITZMILLER, MARYLAND



     In this area water quality was monitored at four sampling stations,



three of which were on the Stony River, Lostland Run, and Abram Creek



tributaries.  The North Branch station was at Kitzmiller.

-------
                                                                                 H*
                                                                                  9
cc
                                                      MJCICW TVlDi
                                                                                                                 FIGURE  Z-4

-------
AllNRWIV 13N
                                                  FIGURE  2-5

-------
                                                               V-9


1.  Stony River (West Virginia)

     During the survey, the net alkalinity* of Stony River varied

from -30 mg/1 to +16 mg/1 but net alkalinity (Figure V-5) was nega-

tive during most of the year with only isolated peaks of positive

net alkalinity observed.  No relationship appears to exist between

net alkalinity and flow.

     The pH levels in Stony River generally vary in a manner similar

to net alkalinity.  Values approaching 7,0 (neutrality) occurred

during periods of positive net alkalinity while minimum values of

3.0 were observed when net alkalinity indicated acid conditions.

     Water quality standards for this reach of the stream containing

the drainage from Laurel Run, however, are not being met throughout

the year,,

2.  Lostland Run (Maryland)

     An inverse relationship exists between acidity and flow, as

shown in Figure V-6.  No relationship exists between pH and flow.

Maximum acidity concentrations of 130 mg/1 occurred during September

and October,  The spring months showed a decrease in acidity to

approximately 15 mg/1.
* The net alkalinity is defined as total alkalinity minus total
  acidity.  It can assume either a positive or negative sign depending
  on whether the alkalinity (positive) or acidity (negative) is greater.

-------
AIIQIDV
                               FIGURE  S-6

-------
                                                               V-ll






     The pH levels for Lostland Run varied between 3.0 and 4.0.  A




minimum pH of 2,7 was observed in September.




     The Maryland stream standards for Lcstland Run are currently



being contravened on a continuous basis,




3.  Abram Creek (West Virginia)



     The maximum and minimum concentrations of acidity at the sampling



station were approximately 180 mg/1 and 10 mg/1, respectively.  As



shown in Figure V-7, the acidity occurred during the late summer and fall



while depressed levels were observed in the spring.



     The pH was relatively constant, ranging between 3.0 and -4.0.



The quality of Abram Creek does not comply with West Virginia's



intrastate stream standards„



4.  North Branch at Kitzmiller, Maryland




     When Figures V-4 and V-8 (North Branch at Steyer) are compared,



the similar yearly patterns for acidity, pH, and flow can readily




be seen.  In certain instances, the peate at Kitzmiller were observed



at a later date than those observed at Steyer which would compensate



somewhat for the travel time between the two stations.



     In terms of acidity concentration, there appears to be a definite



improvement in the water quality at Kitzmiller,  The maximum acid con-



centrations at Kitamiller were about 220 mg/1 whereas comparable values



approached 600 mg/1 at Steyer,



     The reduction in acidity concentration can be attributed to the



diluting effects of all tributary streams between Steyer and Kitzmiller.



The differences in pH were not as pronounced as those in acidity.  The

-------
AJJODV
                                                     (TGURE S-7

-------
                                                                         H"
                                                                          a
[5
                                                                 1V1OJ.
                                                                                                                FIGURE  3Z-8

-------
                                                               V-H






same difference is due to the sharp break in the acidity-pH relation-



ship as shown in Figure IV-1.  Much greater improvement is necessary,




though, for this stream reach to comply with the water quality




standards.



     Even with the reduction in acidity, there is contravention of




the present pH standards.






C.  KITZMILLER, MARYLAND TO BERYL^ WEST VIRGINIA



     Water quality data v/as collected routinely from four stations




between Kitzmiller and Beryl.  The three tributary watersheds



monitored were Three Forks, Elklick, and Piney Swamp Run.  Main



stem stations were maintained near the site of the U. S. Army Corps



of Engineers proposed Bloomington Reservoir Project at Barnum and at



Beryl.



1.  Three Forks Run (Maryland)



     Acidity concentrations between 600 and 700 mg/1 in Three



Forks Run were measured during low flow periods (Figure V-9).  Con-



centrations of 100 mg/1 were observed under high flow conditions.



     A direct relationship appears to exist between pH and flow for



the Three Forks Run station.  The low pH values (2.1 - 2.5) occurred



during low flow periods and values in excess of 3.2 were noted when



high flows prevailed.

-------
    (I/6")
AJJODV  TV1Q1
                                            FIGURE  2-a

-------

u
         >
         w
                                                                                                                                     8     s
                                                              A.J.IQIDV   TVO.O1
                                                                                                                         FIGURE  5Z-IO

-------
o:
Ld


5:
00


I
                                                                        d/6")

                                                                    AIIODV  1V101
                                                                                                             FX3URE  2-11

-------
                                                                V-18






     The Maryland standards prescribe a minimum pH criterion of 6.0.



 for Three Forks Run,  The maximum pH observed at the Three Forks




 station was only 3<,3«



 2o  Elklick Run (MDWR data)



     Of the three tributaries discussed in this area, Elklick Run




 ranks as the least significant in terms of acidity concentration.



 The acidity concentrations (Figure V-10) have a range from about



 8 to 50 mg/1.




     A direct acid-flow relationship was observed for the Elklick



 Run station in contrast to an indirect relationship for most other



 stations.  An exceptionally wide range in pH was noted during the



 ten month sampling period.  Values exceeding the neutrality level,



 7.0, were observed continously from August to December,  The




 acidity during the same period was at a minimum.  The lowest pH



 observed was 4.0 which occurred during a high flow - high acid



 period in April,  The unique manner in which pH and acidity varies



 with flow may possibly be attributed to inactive mines that drain



 only during wet periods or alkaline mine drainage discharges.



     The Maryland stream standards for Elkliek Run were contravened



 during February, March, April, and May of 1969.



3,  North Branch atBarnum




     Figure V-ll summarized sampling data collected from the North



Branch Potomac River at Barnum, West Virginia which is located



 immediately downstream from the proposed Bloomington Reservoir



site.   A comparison of the acidity concentration presented in

-------
                                                               V-19

Figure V-8 for the North Branch Potomac at Kitzmiller and at Barnum
indicated a slight improvement in the water quality.  The maximum
acid concentrations encountered at Barnum were about 180 mg/1 while
those at Kitzmiller were 220 mg/1,  with minimum concentrations of
approximately 30 mg/1 and 40 mg/1, respectively.  At both Barnum
and Kitzmiller,, peaks in acidity were observed during the late
summer and fall months „
     'The pK levels also indicated a slight improvement.  The
Kitzmiller station had pH values as low as 205, whereas the minimum
pH at Barnum was 2,7,  This slight improvement in water quality
from Kitzmiller to Barnum is probably due to a combination of dilution
and natural alkalinity from areas unaffected by mining operations,,
     Limited iron data were collected at the Barnum station,  A tabu-
lation of the analytical results follows;
      Date
                                                (Fe2 +• Fe )
     6/26/68                                     1.95 mg/1
     9/25/68                                     1.78 mg/1
    11/06/68                                     4.75 mg/1
    11/20/68                                     2,75 mg/1
    12/04/68                                     3.40 mg/1
    12/18/68                                     1055 mg/1
     1/08/69                                     4.30 mg/1
     1/22/69                                     1. 08 mg/1
     2/05/69                                     3,60 mg/1
     2/26/69                                     3, 00 mg/1
     3/12/69                                     2,90 mg/1
     4/03/69                                     1,00 mg/1

-------
                                                               V-20






     Although standards for iron have not been established by the



State of Maryland, the values shewn on the preceding page are about



an order of magnitude higher than recommended levels for municipal




and industrial water supply (Chapter VII-A).



     Extensive sampling data indicate that the Bloomington Reservoir



will definitely impound water of undesirable quality.




4.  Piney Swamp Run (West Virginia;



     The pH levels in Piney Swamp Run at nc time throughout the



entire year of sampling exceeded 3,0.  The minimum recorded pH



value was 2.1.  Both the acidity and pK were dependent upon flow to



a certain extent.



     Acid concentrations in Piney Swamp Run ranged from 100 to




1,000 mg/1 (Figure V-12) and were consistently greater than either



Three Forks Run or Elklick Run.  Elk Run is the only stream in the




North Branch Potomac basin having a greater acid concentration„



     The water quality of Piney Swamp Hun does not comply with West



Virginia's stream standards,



5o  North Branch at Beryl. West Virginia



     The effects of Piney Swamp Run and possibly other acid streams



on the North Branch Potomac car, be readily seen by examining



Figure V-13 which presents the water quality sampling data collected



at Beryl0  The maximum acidity concentration at Earnum was about



190 mg/1 while at Beryl it had increased to about 220 mg/1.  The pH



at Beryl varied between 207 and 3.6.

-------
1V1QI
                                           FIGURE  2-12

-------
(T
2
s




I

u

CD
X
                                              2!

                                            Hi
UKJI3V 1V1O1
                                   RGURE 2-13

-------
                                                               V-23






     Similar to the upper North Branch stations, the lowest pH values



were observed during low flow - high acid periods.  A comparison of




Figures V-ll and V-13 indicate many similarities in the average magni-




tude and annual variation pattern of pH at Barnum and Beryl.



     The water quality of the North Branch Potomac between Kitzmiller



and Beryl does not undergo any significant change from the standpoint



of pH and acid concentration.  The adverse effects of Three Forks Run



and Piney Swamp Run are diminished somewhat by the flows of small



alkaline tributaries; nevertheless, the water quality in this  entire



reach continues to contravene Maryland's stream standards.






D.  BERYL TO KEYSER, WEST VIRGINIA



     Four surveillance stations were maintained in the North Branch




Potomac basin between Beryl and Keyser.  One station on Georges



Creek, two on Savage River, both of which are tributary streams,



and one on the North Branch at Keyser were maintained within this



area.



1.  Savage River (Maryland)



     Savage River flows are regulated by Savage I Reservoir to



maintain a predetermined minimum discharge of 93 cfs into the  North



Branch at Luke, Maryland.  The only major source of mine drainage in



this watershed is Aaron Run, a small creek between Savage I Reservoir



and the confluence with the North Branch.



     Survey data for the station above Aaron Run (Figure V-L4) show



an extremely variable net alkalinity concentration, ranging from

-------
                                                               V-24






-27 mg/1 to +73 mg/1.  Savage River above Aaron Ran is usually alka-



line.  Only occasionally were acidic conditions noted.  The pH levels



at this station were generally greater than 6.0.



     Survey data for Savage River near its confluence with the North



Branch, downstream from Aaron Run (Figure V-15), indicate lower net




alkalinity when compared to the upstream station.  The net alkalinity



values ranged from -27 mg/1 to +73 mg/1 at the upstream station with



the downstream station exhibiting a range from -38 mg/1 to +32 mg/1,,




     The pH values recorded near the mouth of the Savage River were



somewhat lower than those upstream which also indicates water quality



degradation.  A minimum pH of 5.1 was observed near the confluence



whereas upstream values were never less than 5.7.



     The pH levels during the months of July and October were under



6.0, the minimum pH standard for the Savage River.



     The alkalinity content of the Savage River appears to be greater



during dry weather than during wet weather periods.  This may possibly



be attributed to the following:



     a.  Aaron Run is more likely to contribute a significant acid



loading during wet weather, and



     b.  Savage River drains a limestone region above the reservoir



and the increased percentage of groundwater inflow during dry



weather probably carries greater alkalinity concentrations into the



reservoir and thence into the release flow.

-------
13N
                                FIGURE Z-14

-------
13N
                                            FIGURE  S-15

-------
                                                               V-27
2.  Georges Creek



     Net alkalinity for the station on Georges Creek varied from



about -26 mg/1 to +4 mg/1.  The pH varied from 4.2 to 6.5 with the




lower range occurring most frequently.  As can be seen in Figure V-16,



a decrease in flow resulted in an increase in pH and had very little



effect on net alkalinity.



     Based on the limited amount of data available, Georges Creek



contributes a more acidic flow to the North Branch than Savage River;



however, neither compares with the acid contributions of most tribu-



tary streams previously discussed,




3.  North Branch at Keyser



     The North Branch Potomac River at Keyser, West Virginia repre-




sents the most downstream sampling station of this survey (Figure V-17)




Although sampling was conducted only from February through May 1969,



the data (Figure V-17) were sufficient to indicate that considerable



recovery had occurred.



     During comparable periods of the year, the maximum acidity bet-



ween Beryl and Keyser had decreased from 125 mg/1 to 65 mg/1 and the



minimum pH had increased from 2.8 to 3.5.  The acidity and pH had both



fluctuated widely at Keyser.  In a few instances, the net alkalinity



was positive and pH levels were greater than 6.0.



     The recovery in water quality observed at Keyser may be attri-



buted to the highly alkaline loads discharged from the West Virginia



Pulp and Paper Company at Luke, and the Upper Potomac River



Commission's waste treatment facility at Westernport.  Together

-------
u
o
UJ
O
     o
                                                                        MO1J
                                                                                                          I    f
                                                                                                          o    «


                                                                                                          *    I
                                                                                                  FIGURE Z-16

-------
>  o
cc  £
P


fe

Q.
0   I

s   1
1
                                                                                                                             o
                                                                                                                             o
                                                                   (I/6*)
                                                                          J.3N
                                                                                                                   FIGURE S-17

-------
                                                                V-30


these discharges provide upwards of 40,000 Ibs/day total alkalinity.

The pulp mill's water withdrawal for processing purposes accounts

for an additional acidity reduction in the North Branch of approxi-

mately 17,000 Ibs/day.  The alkalinity from various sources between

Beryl and Keyser greatly overshadows the acidity contributed by

Savage River and Georges Greek,


E0  SUMMARY OF 1968-69 ACIDITY DATA

     A summary of the acidity data for the North Branch Potomac

River is presented in isopleth* form in Figure V-18.  This indicates

that maximum acid concentrations for any given station generally

occurred during the summer and fall months while minimum concentrations

were observed during the spring months.

     The sampling station at Steyer produced higher acid concentrations

than other stations along the Potomac for comparable periods of the

year.  Maximum concentrations approached 600 mg/1 whereas maximum

concentrations at Kitzmiller, Barnum, and Beryl were approximately

210 mg/1, 160 mg/1, and 160 mg/1, respectively.  Even during the winter

months average acidity concentrations at Steyer were generally greater

than 100 mg/1.
•* An isopleth, which offers a complete graphical presentation of water
  quality with respect to location and time along the stream is useful
  for depicting variations of a parameter at a given location for a
  specific time or for a given time period along the main stem.  The
  isopleths were constructed by plotting all data for a given station
  along the stream for the twelve-month period.  A smooth curve was
  fitted to these data as representative of "average" conditions
  during the entire survey period.

-------
                                                               ¥-31





     It should also be noted that the water quality at Steyer during



the winter period was comparable to summer conditions at Barnum and



Beryl which further indicate the extreme spatial and temporal acid



distribution in the North Branch Potomac.



     Water quality data (August 1969), collected subsequent to the



survey data, presented in Chapters V and VI showed pH levels of



3.3 to 3.6 in the North Branch Potomac River at Cumberland, Maryland.



These exceptionally low pH's, which were the result of a reduction in



alkalinity from Westvaco and an acid "slug" produced by excessive



rainfall in the disturbed areas of the upper basin, caused an exten-



sive fishld.il in the lower reaches of the North Branch near Oldtown,



Maryland.  Similar water quality problems will continue to be



encountered downstream from Cumberland during high runoff periods.

-------
HDNVM8  HJ/IOS  WOMJ   S3HIW   WV3«1S
                                                                   FIGURE  2-18

-------
                                                               VI-1
                             CHAPTER VI

        MINE DRAINAGE THEMES AND DELINEATION OF ACID LOADINGS


A.  HISTORICAL TRENDS IN pH AND ACIDITY FOR NORTH BRANCH ABOVE
    LUKE, MARYLAND

     Figure VI-1 presents mean monthly pH data for a ten-year period

of record as compiled by the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company

for the North Branch above Luke.  Stream flow data are shown in

Figure VI-2.  An examination of Figures VI-1 and VI-2 indicates

that both pH and flow vary in an annual cyclical pattern.  Further

analysis of these patterns indicates that pH levels generally reach

a maximum during the late winter and spring months,  Flows during

this period of the year also have a tendency to be high.  Conversely,

minimum pH levels generally occurred during the late summer and early

fall months when flows were at a minimum.

     For the ten-year period, the average annual pH also appears to

be directly related to the average annual flows.  For example, the

extremely dry years of 1959 and 1965-66 generally showed lower pH

values.  Conversely, the relatively wet year of 1963 resulted in

higher pH values some of which approached a neutral pH of 7.0.

     In Figure VI-3, the long-term acidity data, also compiled by

the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company, reflect the increase in

mining activity as reported in Chapter III.  The average acid con-

centration increased from about 3.0 mg/1 in late 1950 to over 20 rag/1

in 1968.

-------
FIGURE a-1

-------
5   I
5:   m
P   -r
                                                                                                                    fc

                                                                                                                    (T
                                                                                                                    <
                                                     A1HJ.NOW NV3W
                                                                                                      FIGURE  m-2

-------

AJJOD* TVlQi
                                     FIGURE  30-3

-------
                                                               VI-5






     While a quantitative comparison cannot be made with CTSL data



because of differences in analytical procedures and the effect of




flow augmentation from Savage I Reservoir, the data nevertheless



indicate a marked deterioration in water quality since 1965„



Associated with this increase in average acid concentrations was an




increase in the range of acidity.






Bo  DELINEATION CF ACIDITY LOAD



     The tabulations of acidity loading for the four stations on the



main stem (Steyer, Kitzmiller, Barnum, and Beryl) are presented in



Tables VI-1, VI-2, VI-3, and VI~4, respectively.  The Steyer station



is in area A, Kitzmiller in. area B_, and Barnum and Beryl in area C



as presented in the previous chapter„




     In area A, the watersheds of Eli: Run, Laurel Run, and Buffalo



Creek, with 28,2 percent of the drainage area at Steyer, produced 70



percent of the acid loading.  As can be seen in Table VI-1, over 39



percent of this loading was from Elk Run0



     For area B, as presented in Table VI-2, tributary sampling



stations with 55,9 percent of the drainage area yielded 88 percent



of the acid at Kitzmiller,  Of the 77,700 Ibs/day measured at



Kitzmiller, 72 percent originated in area A from the Elk Run,



Laurel Run, and Buffalo Creek watersheds„




     As exhibited in Tables VI-3 and VI-4, the tributary contri-



butions also reflect the predominant influence of the three watersheds



in area A on the loadings in area C,  Within area C, the total acid

-------
                                                               VI-6


loadings increased by 22 percent from 94,000 Ibs/day at Barnum to

119,000 Ibs/day at Beryl.

     The following five watersheds, which have a total drainage

area of 116 square miles, produced over 65 percent of the acid load

at Beryl.


Watershed                   Acid Loading             Location
                              Ibs/day

Elk Run                        35,700             West Virginia

Buffalo Creek                  15,300             West Virginia

Laurel Run                     12,900             Maryland

Abram Creek                     8,300             West Virginia

Stony River                     4,300             West Virginia

Of the five watersheds listed above Elk Run, Buffalo Creek, and

Laurel Run, with a combined drainage area of 20.6 square miles,

produce over 54 percent of Beryl's acid loading.

     The tributary contributions and resulting main stem loadings as

presented in Figure VI-4 also demonstrated the influence of the mine

drainage from area A.  The close agreement between the calculated and

observed acid loadings at main stem stations above Barnum indicate

that the primary sources of acid in this area were identified.

However, between Barnum and Beryl an additional 25,000 Ibs/day of

acid were measured.  The two streams within this reach that were

monitored (an unnamed tributary and Piney Swamp Run) contained a

combined acid load of 4,700 Ibs/day resulting in approximately

-------
                  o     'd
                     ca cd
                 -p  -  o
                  a  r( J
                  3 Tj
                  r)  0) -H
                  0)  P O
                 PM  ra <<
ON
OO
                         o
                          o
                          o
fl3 «H 0
0) 0 C
'it
o
0
•N
UA
OO
O
O
OJ
rH
O
O
OO
*\
LTN
rH
0
0
Ox
OO
VO
o
o
o
r-T
ON
    §
    H

 O
    ra
P  -
 a  ^
 CD  j
 rt  CU
 CD  p
PH  ra
                                      OJ


                                      rH
      CO

      CO
O


rH
rH
                                                               O


                                                               rH
                                                               OJ
O

O
O
H
     ON
     VD
     ON
fe   oo

     C3N
ra   r-H

g
H
H
K
EH
                        ra
                                     OJ
                                            VO
                                                   o
                                                   o
                                                   CXI
                         CO
                         00
                                                                             o
                         oo
                         CO
a
H
PH
PH
p^
o
o

<5
•+H Pi
O
M
P ••
£H rl
0) CD
o ^




CM
•
LT\





OO
•
o
rH




t—

OJ
H
OJ

CO
OJ






o
o
                        Pi  0<
                            ra
                                     CO     1/N    OO

                                     oo    t—    ON
                         VO

                         o
                         OJ
                                                                            ro
                                            H
                                             0)
                                                   o

                                                   o
                         ra
                                                           H  EH
                                                           K
                                                           EH

-------
             O  0)
                r-H
             -P H
             O  N  Tj
             fH -P  -H
             CD -H  O
            PM M  <
                                  O
                                         LTN
                                                       LTN
                                                                     O
                                                                                00
                                                                                00
                                                                        O
                                                                        O
              O
              O
                                  LTN
                                  oo
                                         O
                                         O
O     O     O
O     O     O
OO     LTN     O
  *\       »\       »\
LTN     -3"     rH
                     o
                     O
                     m
                       •N
                     CO
                           O
                           O
                                                                                 t—
                              o
                              O
                              O
                               »\
                              CO
                              CO










CM
I
H
>

a
F9

1
H
NJ
EH
a
s
O
f«
fe
§
p3 O"\
E VD
EH ON
CO rH
PL, t
•^ CO
VD
H
fo
w
H CD g
PJ O (S3
^ M -P




t- 00 H rH

rH 00 ^t ON
CM







HO ON
• • •
-3r H LTN O
CM LTN O
H


                CD
                PH
3
                       •H
                                 CO

                                  OO
                     L/N

                     t—
OO

ON
CO

CO
-=t
OJ

ON
                     oo

                     t—
ON

ir\
CM
H
                                                                                           CM
                                                                                           CM
                   •n
                    0)
                    
-------
K
H
m
H
«
EH
    ON
o

-p
PI
0)
o
r(
cu
PH
a

CU
*^











































CQ
—
£3
3
a
£_(
aJ
PH

•H
O
.
rH OO _=t- ON rH J" rH
OJ rH



^^ rH O O O O O O
O CQ
H m OJ VO O CO CO O VD
Mo rH OJ OJ VD
P'

CQ
—
ri
3
g
«


-=t CO LA J" LTN CO ON
• • • • D • a
rH OJ OO CO OO t— OJ
rH rH


• T-I co Lr\ooco OJ coco
<[j
•
p
a 	
OO t— O\ CO ON t— t—
CJ* _^f -~t
CQ
^^ Pi
3
»y PH
0) Pi
0) M pi ,rf CQ
Pi rl 0) PH 0) J*!
nd
 O > CU r)
K -H -d rl O
Pi O PH Pi O PH
Pi rH rH 03
PH 0) 03 >s rH g CU
£H CH H -P 03 (D
Al PI M-l O W r) rl
rH 03 P* -P O rO c~]
H i-5 W CQ i-5 
-------










<[J
H
H
§
EH
CQ
H
t-S*

Jf
PH
W
pq
j^j
o
 VO
ON
CQ H
O
H
H
PH

P"^
O
u
>H
K
I
H
PH
EH














O ^
03
-P w O
fi — | "]
0) H
O >•> T3
rH rH *H
CD CD O
PH PQ j
CU CD
PH pq







JD H
SI PH


CH ^
0 O

4° 03

CD rH
£> g>
0) CD
PH pq



.
<;
•
n




 CD rH
PH 'ri TlS rH O
SH O PCI fl O Fq
3 H H a3
PH CD a3 >3 H £ CD
r( 'H S -P co CD
44 ^ CH O 03 rH rH
H a5 ^S -p O ,£! ^
H h-^i pq CQ hH1 <; EH



rH r-H OO

V



O O O
-=h 0 0
OO LTN CM
rH OO






000
r-H rH rH
V V V






o o t—

OJ rH rH
V




OO O t—
• • B
rH i— 1 r-H

V





t— LT\ CO
oo o -3-


ig
,12
S3 -H PH
jj ^_l H
PH EH ro
•5
^ rjj QQ
O 0)
.(— ] rf w
H a3 0)
Has
r~n f-i *r~\
P^l 1=) PH



CO O
0- 0
rH



O 0
O 0
O O
vo" ON
CO H
r-H





,3-
r-H O
LT\ O
r-H






00

OO OO
-^ VO
OJ -=f-




LfN

ON o
-=h o
H





^
CM t-
-3- 00
H OJ




J>H
PH CQ
^r | ~]
EH <-d
p~i EH [ "]
pq o P
H EH PC:
PH W
EH pq

-------
                                                               VI-11






20,000 Ibs/day of acidity attributable to the remaining portion of



the drainage area.  A prorating of this acidity based upon the res-



pective drainage areas in Maryland and West Virginia indicates that




1,500 Ibs/day originates in West Virginia and 18,500 Ibs/day is



contributed by watersheds in Maryland.




     All of the tributary streams in West Virginia which were moni-



tored contribute approximately 68,500 Ibs/day (58% of Beryl's




loading) of total acidity to the North Branch Potomac River.  The



monitored streams in Maryland contribute an average acid load of



17,600 Ibs/day (15% of Beryl's loading) and by the difference method



described previously, the watersheds on the Maryland side of the



North Branch between Barnura and Beryl contribute an estimated acid



load of 18,500 Ibs/day (16% of Beryl's loading).  By prorating the



13,000 Ibs/day of acid which enter  the North Branch directly or via



unmonitored tributary streams above Barnura, the total estimated acid



loads contributed by Maryland and West Virginia amount to 39,000



Ibs/day (33$ of Beryl's loading) and 79,000 Ibs/day (67% of Beryl's



loading), respectively.



     Based upon reconnaissance studies in the area and visual



observations, it appears that in West Virginia active mining opera-



tions contribute most of the acid drainage,,  The comprehensive



study conducted by the State of Maryland to inventory all known




mines disclosed that 22 mines had active status and 135 mines were



inactive.  Of the active mines 15 were found to be draining and of



the inactive mines 71 were draining.

-------
                                                              VI-12






C0  REGRESSION STUDIES



     The discussions in Section V present an inverse relationship



between acidity concentration and stream flow.  It therefore follows



that some relationship should exist between acid loading and stream




flow,  A series of lineer and non-linear regression analyses were



performed based upon various standard equations to determine which




would best describe the data.  A comparison of the correlation



coefficients for each equation resulted in the following expression:





     L = a  Q°                          ....... VI-I





This may be transformed to:



     log „ L = a + b log   Q            ....... VI-2





Where:




     L = acid loading (Ibs/day)



     Q = river discharge (efs)



     a = constant, defining the y intercept on a leg-log plot (a, = 10 )



     b = exponent defining the slope of the  curve  in, the form of Eq VI-2



     The above equation is an exponential function which plots as a



straight line on log-log paper.  Of particular importance in this equation



is the "b!l term, or slope, since it represents the rate at which acidity



is increasing for any given flow.



     A practical interpretation of Equation VI-1 reveals that the lower



flow range produces a maximum reaction rate between the oxygen, water,




and sulfui itic compounds „  The total acid output is limited only by the



quantity of water available,,  As flows increase, this reaction rate

-------
                                                             TRIBUTARY   CONTRIBUTIONS   to

                                                              NORTH  BRANCH  POTOMAC  RIVER

                                                                         (1968-69 DATA)
E--40-
                                                         06SERVED N. BRANCH
                                                         MAIN STEM  LOADINGS
                                      ACCUMULATIVE TRIBUTARY LOADINGS
                                                                —r~
                                                                TO
                                                  STREAM  MILES
—1—
 60
                                                                                             r
                                                                                                        I—TO :
                    50

                 RGURE H-4

-------
                                                               VI-14






decreases due to an overabundance of water compared to the availability



of the other constituents.  During exceptionally high flow periods, a



point of diminishing returns occurs.  The production of acid approaches




a maximum with the load becoming increasingly dependent upon flow.



This dependency can readily be observed by examining the following




equation which was used to derive acid loadings:



     L   =  Ac x Q x 5.4



Where:




     L   =  acid load (ibs/day)



     A   =  acid concentration (rag/1)
      o


     Q   =  flow (cfs), and



     5.4 -  conversion factor



In the calculations, the streamflow (Q) is incorporated in the load



computation, and therefore an automatic bias is injected into any



L versus Q analysis.



     Figures Vl-5 and VI-6 present least-squares regression lines in



the form of Eq VI-2 which describe the acid load - streamflow relation-



ship at two of the sampling stations investigated.  Table VI-5 presents



the equations and correlation coefficients for every regression analysis



having a minimum of 12 observations.  The regression equations shown in



Table VI-5 indicate a relatively small variation in the slope (b) term




despite gross changes in other factors.  This implies that changes in




the rate of acid production, due to increasing flow, are practically



uniform in all of the major tributary streams and consequently in the



North Branch Potomac River itself.

-------
a
i
z
O
1-
LJ
tr

>
O
2   o
 i
O
                                                           a
          CC
          <

          <
                                                                      OOl
                                                                                                           FIGURE 33-5

-------
Q_
                                                                                                      RGURE 32-6

-------
CQ  O
0> TJ
CD  CD
rl  CD
n
          VD
                 VD
                  rH
ON
OJ
                                OJ
ON
CM
                                                            OJ
a\
OJ
0
•H
-P
03
H
CD

£_j
o
o
CQ
EH
CQ
W
ir\
H j|
g CQ

3 o
EH H
CQ
CO

W O
CJ3 -H
H CQ
PH CQ
0
tj)
CD
PH










bO
M
•H
H

cd
ro
CQ




-P
CD
•H
O
•H
<+H

0
O
o
*
^;
IA
00
•
0










t—
VD

0?


0
O
•H
4>

O1
pr"]

0
o
LTN
•^
ON
H
II


bO

•H
rc$
•H
CQ

K*}
rl


£[
0
•H
•P

•P
CQ
0
W

-P


a
•j
K

*i4
H
n_~j


OJ
ON
«
O










VD
VD

Of

0
0
on
»^
OJ

1!



£_l
tt3
r^i
ro
PP

-p
ro

tM
0
0
?H
o

0
H
ct5
'-H
OH
rr>


rH
a\
•
o










t—
ir\
•
C3?

O
O
OJ
»x
LT\

II


0

0
-P
CQ

-P
05

0

1
0
-P
0


•
* •
?H S 0 ^
pq to 04-3 pq
4^ Jn CQ
• -H rCl CCi
                                                                      OJ
                                                                      00

                                                                      o
                                                                    ON
                                                                      o
                                                                      LT\
                                                                      VD
                                                                        •N
                                                                      OJ
                                                                   I
                                                                   &
                                                                   CQ
                                                                       0
                                                                       in
                                                                   g
                                                                             o
                                                                           VD

                                                                      Q?     Of
                                                     O
                                                    00
                                                     LTN
                                                      »s
                                                     OJ
                                                                              CD
                                                                             pq

                                                                              s
                                                     O
                                                     4J
                                                     O
                                                                                            0

                                                                                            cu
                                                                                           rH
                                                  CU

                                                 £

                                                 4J
                                                  03

                                                  0

                                                  H
                                                  OJ
                                                  o

                                                 s
                                                                                            Pi
                                                                                            bfl   fa
                 PQ
                                                 EH
                                                                      K
                                                                   •H
                                                                   CQ

                                                                   *
                                                                   *
                                                      OJ

                                                        I
                                                                         CQ
                                                                         fl
                                                                         O
                                                                        •H

                                                                        %
                                                                         >
                                                                         $-t
                                                                         
-------
                                                             VII -1
                            CHAPTER VII



                 EFFECTS OF MINE DRAINAGE POLLUTION






A.  WATER SUPPLY



     1.  Water Used



     The Luke, Westernport, Keyser area currently obtains its vrater



from alkaline tributaries of the North Branch Potomac River (Savage



River and New Creek) and from ground water,  The West Virginia Pulp



and Paper Company utilizes the North Branch Potomac for its entire



water supply.  The Gelanese Corporation withdraws approximately



58 mgd from the North Branch near Ameelle and obtains the remaining .



3 mgd from the City of Cumberland.  The water supply source for the



City of Cumberland is Evitts Creek which has a dependable yield of



18 mgd.




     The principal water users and the projected water supply demands



are presented in Table VII-1.  According to Table VII--1, the municipal



and industrial water supply requirements, excluding cooling water,



are projected to increase drastically over the next 50 years.  This



increased demand will necessitate further usage of the North Branch



Potomac since the Potomac is probably the only stream in the area



capable of providing sufficient flows to meet future water supply



needs.

-------
                                                             VII-2
                            TABLE VII-1

                   PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY DEMANDS
Water
User
Luke, Western/port,
Keyser
West Virginia Pulp
and Paper Company
Celanese Fibers
Company
Cumberland
Present
(mgd)
1.5
72.0*

61.0*
5.55**
1980
(mgd)
3.25
28 „ 0***

15.0***
7.70**
2000
(mgd)
5.50
4.0.0***

21 . 0***
12.75**
2020
(mgd)
6.9
56 , o***

25.0***
17.20**
*   Includes Cooling Water
**  Municipal Use Only
*** Excludes Cooling Water
2.  Effects of Mine Drainage

     Streams impregnated with constituents normally found in mine

drainage; i.e., sulfuric acid, iron, manganese, aluminum, calcium, and

magnesium salts are undesirable sources of municipal, industrial, and

agricultural water supply.  Modern and adequately designed water treat-

ment plants are capable of removing these constituents but at considerable

cost.

     In water treatment plants, high acidity and low pH may adversely

affect chemical coagulation, softening, and corrosion control with the

latter being the major problem of most industrial users.  Both iron

and manganese create serious problems in public water supplies.

-------
                                                              VII -3






These problems are caueed by the precipitation of iron and manganese



salts which are objectionable aesthetically and which stain and




corrode plumbing fixtures and laundry,,  Iron also supports the growth



of filamentous iron bacteria which ms,y obstruct the flow of water in



distribution lines.  The *,'. S0 Public Health Service recommends a



maximum iron and manganese concentration in public water supplies of




0,3 rag/1 snd 0,05 mg/i, respectively.



     Calcium and magnesium salts produce permanent hardness in water.



Hardness is objectionable in both public supplies and especially in



industrial boiler feed water.



     The North Branch at Luke, which is used as an industrial water



supply by the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company, is characterized



by low pH, high acidity, and high iron.  For the months of June, July,



and August, 1909, the total iron in the incoming water varied from a



minimum of 1.0 mg/1 to a maximum of 7.0 mg/1 with an average of 2.3 mg/1.



To meet their current process wster requirements for "fine paper" pro-



duction, the incoming water is treated to remove the acidity, turbidity,



managanese, and iron»



     To provide for- existing end future water supply needs, a 50 percent



increase in the deminerslization capsnity by the West Virginia Pulp and



Paper Company is planned.  The cost of this expansion, which is required



by the poor quality of the incoming- water, is projected to $300,000,



The increase in water supply treatment cost due to the mine drainage




constituents in the incoming water is estimated to "be about 50 percent



above normal renovation cost.

-------
                                                             VII -4






     At the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company, lime is added to



incoming cooling water to protect the condensers against corrosion.



In recent years, corrosion of the cooling water condenser at the



Celanese Fibers Company has "been observed.




     Population centers, such as Westernport, Keyser, and particu-



larly Cumberland, are situated along the North Branch Potomac River




but cannot readily utilize it as a water supply source because of




mine drainage and industrial waste pollution.  The acidity from



upstream mine drainage occasionally constitutes a major problem



in the vicinity of Cumberland, especially biologically (See Section




VII-B).  A reduction in alkalinity at the West Virginia Pulp and



Paper Company discharge, due to process change, would undoubtedly



alter the acid-alkaline balance of the North Branch Potomac for a




considerable distance and thereby lessen its potential as a water



supply source.






B.  ECOLOGY



     There are approximately 150 miles of streams in the North Branch



Potomac basin which are currently devoid of fish life because of mine



drainage.  Many of the tributary streams and portions of the North



Branch Potomac itself could otherwise support a cold water fishery.



     Biological (benthic) sampling was conducted throughout the



North Branch basin during the summer and fall of 1966.  Generally, the



tributary streams receiving mine drainage were found to be "biological




deserts."  The North Branch Potomac upstream from Kitzmiller also



contained practically no form of biological organisms„  Downstream

-------
                                                              VII-5






from Kitzmiller, the biological sampling revealed only sparse popu-




lations of acid tolerant forms,




     The North Branch Potomac does not appear to recover biologically




until it reaches Gldtown, approximately 10 miles downstream from




Cumberland.  The biologies! depression below "Luke can also be attri-




buted in part to large quantities of industrial waste being discharged




into the reach between Westernpert and Cumberland,




     One of the most critical -stresses which mine drainage exerts on




the "in-stream" environment is its extreme toxicity to all forms of




aquatic life.  Only a scant number of aquatic forms, both macroscopic




and microscopic, can exist in ar environment strongly influenced by




mine drainage.  Not only does mine drainage cause this effect near




the point of origin, but without dilution, it may destroy biological




activity for many miles downstream.  As indicated previously, much




of the upper North Branch 1? 3 "biological desert."




     The acidity in mine drainage produces low pH values in the




streams and the metallic constituents produc0 toxic precipitates.




Both of these are capable of sterilizing a stream.  It is generally




agreed that an aqu-atie environment neving a p'i less than c.O cannot




support a well balanced, aquatic population (pH values in the North




Branch Potomac were a,? Icsw as 2,,!,1,  The basic ferric sulfate,




known as "yellow boy," presently covers many miles of stream beds.




This precipitate chokes all, bentnic life thus destroying the food




chain for the higher aquatic forms.  When mine drainage depresses

-------
                                                             VII-o
the microscopic population in a stream, its ability to stabilize




sewage or organic industrial waste biochemically is also impaired,






C0  BLOOMINGTON RESERVdR




     The IJ. S, Army Corps of Engineers' Bloomington Reservoir




Project, which is in tne final siages of pre-construction planning,




will be located on the North Branch Potomac eight miles upstream




from Bloomington near Barnurn, West Virginia.  The Bloomington




Reservoir is designed as a multiple purpose project with storage




provided for water supply, water quality control, flood control,




and recreation,  At the conservation pool level, the dam will




impound 94,700 acre-feet of wster.




     Sampling data collected from the North Branch at Barnum indi-




cated that the proposed reservoir will Impound water containing




large quantities of mine drain-age.  As shown in Figure V-l"., the




pH levels of the incoming w-;, ler c-,,n be %.s low ys 20L with acidity




concentrations as high a? 180 mg/'l during the critical late summer




and early fall,,  Even diiring hip.n flow periods, prl levels under




4.0 and acid concentrations exceeding 30 mg'/l can be anticipated.




Projecting the condition from Barnum, acid leadings into the




impoundment ranging from 12,000 to 395,000 Ibs/day, with an average




of 94,000 Ibs/day, can be expected.  Total iron concentrations will




range from 1.0-5.0 mg/1.




     Since the proposed reservoir will impound s large volume of




mine drainage, it becomes necessary;  (1) to predict what chemical

-------
                                                              VII-7






reactions if any will occur in the reservoir,  (2)  to determine what




subsequent changes in water quality will result from these reactions,




and (3) to evaluate the effects of the resultant water quality on  the




intended uses of the reservoir.




     Wilkes College in Wilke£-3arre, Pennsylvania  under  contract with




FWPCA (CB-SRBP)  [13] has undertaker! a study of the kinetics  of mine




drainage impoundments.  Among the purposes of  this study was the




determination of the rate of iron, oxidation and hence, the rate of




free acid production in mine water impoundments.   Although the reser-




voirs investigated in the Wilk'is study were located in the anthracite




coal fields of northeastern Pennsylvania, a generalization of the




findings appears to be applicable to the blooinington Project.  These




findings are outlined as foilewe:




     1.  In an impoundment. v?hi.?h has a pH between  3 and  6 and an




initial iron concentration in excels of 10 rag/1, the rate of ferrous




iron oxidation appears •,:.> be approximately 3 mg/1  per day.   Below  a




concentration of 10 rag/I i>rr,:, a losser oxidation rate was



observed.  Neither- Surfs^e are--, /olame, nor temperature had a




noticeable effect on 4he resalt;-.  CJiv:e iron is oxidized, it is




removed from solution as a precipitated hydrous1 iron oxide,




     2,  A significant decrease in pH accompanied  the oxidation of




iron.




     3.  There is little change in acidity concentration as  a result




of long-term impoundment cf mine drainage.

-------
                                                             VII-8






     4.  No change was found in concentrations of manganese,  calcium,




magnesium, or hardness as a result of long-term impoundment.   Small




amounts of sulfate were found to precipitate along with iron  but the




amount was unpredictable.  From the above results, it can be  concluded




that the water quality will either remain essentially unchanged or will




deteriorate in the impoundment with the exception of ferrous  iron con-




centrations .




     If the quality in the impoundment is as anticipated, the intended




purposes of recreation and flow regulation for water quality  control will




not be developed to its full potential unless a mine drainage control




program is initiated.  The excessive mine drainage content of Bloomington




Reservoir will also lessen the utility of the impounded water for water




supply unless complete treatment, including neutralization, is antici-




pated similar to that currently being provided by the West Virginia Pulp




and Paper Company for their processed water,  Based upon a comparison of




the average acid load released from the Bloomington Reservoir and the




little alkalinity reserve in Savage I, utilising the flow releases from




this impoundment for acid neutralization in the North Branch  Potomac




below Savage River does r.ot appear to have significant potential.




     Using (1) an average acidity concentration of 100 mg/1 in the




impoundment, (2) the minimum regulated base flow from the proposed




reservoir of 205 cfs, and (3) pE-acidity relationship as developed in




Chapter IV-C, the cost of neutralizing the acid to maintain a pH within




the limits set forth by stream standards in Bloomington was determined




as follows:

-------
                                                              711-9
  (i)  Acid loading in Ibs/month
            (100 * 5) mg/1 x 205 cfs x 30 days x 5./t = 3,530,000 Ibs/month

       where
            (100 + 5) = the net alkalinity required to raise the pH to t,0

 (ii)  Lime requirements to neutralize the acid load
            _JkAtJL-£a..Q  x 3,530,000 = 1,980,000 Ibs/month
       where
            A, W.     =  Atomic weight of the compounds
            CaO       =  Calcium oxide or lime
            CaCOo     =  Calcium carbonate

(iii)  Cost of Neutralization
            1,980,000 x $.01,/lb = .l?19,800/month

       where
            the cost of lime = :|i20/ton or $,01/lb

On an annual basis the cost of acid neutralization to maintain a pH

of 6,0 would be $23&%000/year.

     Another important consideration is the possibility of any abandoned

mines in the immediate vicinity of the reservoir being subject to recurrent

filling and emptying operations thereby producing acid which otherwise

would not ha ve been generated.  I'h? generation of any additional acidity in

the North Branch above t,be Blooming tor; Feservoir would aggravate the

existing water quality problem and further detract from the usefulness of

the proposed Bloomington Project ,

     To aid in minimising hydraulic surges which contain low pH waters,

the Bloomington Reservoir could provide a direct benefit in water quality

management,  However, the magnitude of this benefit would be contingent

on the reserve storage in the reservoir pool.  For example, the fish kill

which occurred in August 1969, might have been averted had adequate storage

been available to impound the acid "slug" responsible for this fish kill.

-------
                                                            VIII-1






                            CHARTER VIII




                     CONTROL METHODS AND COSTS






A.  GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS




     There are various methods available to control or eliminate




mine drainage.  The abatement methods as discussed in this report




can generally be categorized as follows:




     1.  Prevention




     2.  Treatment




     3.  Dilution




     Measures which can be instituted to prevent the formation of




mine drainage at its source include but are not limited to:




(a) inundation of deep mine workings,, (b) reconstruction of stream




channels, (c) construction of surface water diversion ditches,




(d) restoration and filling of strip mines, (e) excavation and restora-




tion of subsidence areas, and (f) construction of impermeable seals on




or below the ground surface.  Preventive measures can be designed to




reduce the volume of mine drainage and acidity loadings by 10 to 100




percent.




     Chemical treatment of mine drainage has received considerable




attention recently, probably because this method can produce immediate




results and can be positively controlled.  A typical mine drainage




treatment plant should be capable of providing neutralization of the




acid, oxidation of the iron compounds, and settlement of precipitates.




More exotic methods of treatment such as electrodialysis, ion exchange,

-------
                                                            VIII-2






reverse osmosis, etc. are being investigated "but early indications



are that all would be too high in cost on a large scale project.




     Another important consideration is the collection and impoundment




of mine drainage prior to treatment.  In areas where extensive distur-



bance has occurred, the cost of collection may represent a significant




portion of the total expenditure.  Since over 50 percent of acid




loadings is from 20 square miles, the collection problem may be simpli-



fied.




     Dilution and neutralization of the acid content by either natural



or chemical means is also a method of reducing the "in-stream" effects




of mine drainage pollution.  If the quantity and quality of the natural




dilution flow from non-mining areas is sufficient, it will neutralize



the mine drainage acidity and also increase the pH to acceptable levels,




In the North Branch Potomac basin, the tributary streams receiving most



of the mine drainage have a minimum of natural dilution flow of good



water quality.  Furthermore, most of the acid streams, excepting



Stony River and Savage River, have no reservoirs or other provisions



for flow regulation.



     Detailed engineering studies for the purpose of establishing a



mine drainage pollution abatement program for a specific area are very



limited.  Gannett, Fleming, Corddry, and Carpenter, Inc., (GFCC),




Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, under contract with the Federal Water



Pollution Control Administration, conducted small scale studies of



this type in five selected areas of the Susquehanna River basin.

-------
                                                            VIII-3






The data obtained from these studies were subsequently used to



develop cost estimates for larger and more complex watersheds within




the Susquehanna basin.



     The findings of the GFCC study indicated a large variation in



abatement costs depending upon the schemes investigated.  The abate-



ment schemes or plans were developed on the basis of compliance with



present Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board discharge limitations.



These limitations are as follows;



     1.  pH not less than b nor greater than 9



     2.  Iron concentration not in excess of 7 mg/1




     3.  No acid



Generally, a combination of preventive measures and treatment proved



to be the most economical method of achieving the desired water




quality over the long term.  Mine drainage reduction (volume and



acidity) attributable to preventive measures alone was normally




about 20 percent.  The remaining volume and acid load has to be pro-



vided for in the design of the collection system and treatment



facility.






B.   COSTS



     In order to predict the costs of mine drainage control in the



North Branch Potomac basin, an analysis was made of the feasibility



and effectiveness of various abatement schemes Investigated in the



Susquehanna basin [15],  These schemes, which consist of xhe pre-



ventive measures discussed in the preceding section, and treatment

-------
                                                             VIII-4






appear to be applicable in the Potomac basin since there are many




similarities in the historical mining trends and current mining




activity in West Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania.  The only




significant difference is that active mining in the Potomac basin




is more predominant and therefore contributes a larger percentage




of the acid load than it does in the Susquehanna.




     The primary problem associated with predicting mine drainage




control costs in this study originates from lack of data pertaining




to individual acid discharges.  The water quality data collected




during the North Branch Potomac survey was "in-stream" sampling




data with no monitoring of specific discharges.




     Since acidity data are more indicative of mine drainage and are




more available than most other data, and since acidity loadings were




used to a certain extent for cost analysis in the Susquehanna basin,




the costs of mine drainage control for this study were developed as




a function of total acidity loadings.  The following relationships,




presented in Figures VIII-1, VIII-2, and VIIT-3, were used in com-




puting the cost of mine drainage control as developed from the




Sxisquehanna study:




     1.  First Cost-Preventive Measures vs Acidity




     2.  First Cost-Collection vs Acidity, and




     3,,  First Cost-Treatment vs Acidity




     The costs, which would be considered preliminary in nature,




are additive.  That is, for a given loading, the cost of mine

-------
                                                                                             o
                                                                                           !_ o
§
2
<
or
o

LJ

1
C/)

t/)
O
O

H    £
Z    £T

5    

-------
                                                     o
o
 NOtiD3mOD - iSC
                                             :2HI -  2

-------
                                                                          o
                                                                          o
                                                                          IM
CO


O
U
o
vn
UJ



UJ
CD  2

<  £

•  i  w
u  a:

O  H
                                                                           8?
o
o

-------
                                                            VIII-8






drainage control could consist of all three cost components:



prevention, collection, and treatment.



     In calculating the abatement costs, seven watersheds were



included (Table VIII-l).  These watersheds represent approximately



70 percent of the total acid load in the North Branch Potomac River




at Beryl.  The maximum acidity loading for each watershed was used




as the basis of computing the design criteria,



     The operation and maintenance annual costs (0 & M) were deter-




mined as a percent of the construction cost.  The figure used for



prevention was 2 percent, collection 5 percent, and treatment 30 per-



cent.  The total annual cost, as reported in Table VIII-l, consists




of 0 & M plus first cost amortized at 5 percent interest rate.  An



amortization period of 30 years was used for collection and treat-



ment with a 100 year period for preventive measures„



     Table VIII-l presents observed and design loadings along with



construction costs and annual costs for preventive measures, collection



systems and treatment facilities in seven tributary watersheds.  The



costs in Table VIII-l are preliminary and should be interpreted only as



an order of magnitude of the expense necessary to control mine drainage



pollution in the Potomac basin.



     For the above conditions, the estimated construction cost for



abatement of mine drainage in the seven watersheds is $32,450,000.



When operation and maintenance are included, the annual costs were



estimated to be about $5 million/year.

-------




























ra
EH
ra
o
0

a ti
H -H
S C/3
f~3 rrl
W CD
EH PP
^\
ffl O

H H 0
H c5 -P
M < 0
> § PL,
n) H rH
K O
< fe!
§

UjJ
p]
l_q
0
K
PH






































H
cd
-p
0
EH





H vO
cd O
§ 3
| £
•^o
•S °
CO l~f
O X
•ffr
-P VO
ra O
M H
•H X
fn -eft-

H VO



-P
ri
cu
S
-P
cd
cu
rH
EH



cd O
i $
3 -ee-
"^

VD
^ O
oo rH
O X
•«9-
-P VO
ra -p O
ij g d
•H U ri
fa o-eft-






ft
H
eg

o
•H
-p
0
a;
H
H
O
O

rH VO
cd O
ri ^
ri -e5-

•ri
-P
CU
U
JH
PM
rH VO
cd O
p! rH
ri X
S> -E*


1= VO
S o
33 rH
O X
•w-

-p VO
ra -P O
rH ra rH
•H 0 X
PH 0 -«3-


>=
ri -P >5
hD -H cS
^-H rrj rQ
ra -H "^^
i o ,0
O < H


>J
-p '"^
TH TS
•d cu s
•H > cd
O rH Td

ON
O
rH
VO
O

O
LA

VO


O
rH
O



LA
-=f

o

o
LA
rH






OJ
rH
0


O
rH

O

O
ON
rH





VO
rH

O



VO
o

o


o
rH

ro


8
o

o
LA





O
o
o
^
VO
H





£4
0)
(D
fn
O
o
H
cd
CH
<4H
£

L^
-d-
O
ON
OJ
O

o
OJ

ro


~HT
O
O



H
OJ

O

O
l^
o






00
o
o


°

0

o
ro
r-H





°

6



OJ
0

o


o
OJ

rH


o
o

O
OJ





O
o
LA
»S
-dr






oJ
>
•H
K

E?
O
-P
CO

D— ro ro
VD ro ro
o o o
OJ rH rH
J- OJ OJ
O O O

LA O O
rO rH rH

-d: OJ OJ


VO ro ro
O O O
O O O



O LA LA
rO H H

O O O

O O O
O LA LA
H O O






O VD VO
rH O O
O O O


OO LA LA
O O O

000

o o o
LA O O
H rH rH





ON to rO
O O O

O O O



-d- rH i-H
O O O

O O O


LA VO O
CO O VO

H O O


O 0 0
O O O
o o o

o o o
ro rH rH





O O O
o o o
O ro OJ
v\ *s r\
ON ro m



f-t
ri pi
pi ft;
K
jrf ft
v J4 8
 h cd
rH 0 £
o P>H ra

S 
•r\
-P
0
cd

0)
ri
o
c± rH
§ V
ra rH In
•P Vl -H
ra pi
O i>3 O1
° 32
>-H H
(U -H
o cd cu
ri a ri
cd
S ra rd
CU -ri rH
•p pi
p! (U O
•H hD £
cd cd
-H c3
tJ cd -p
§ 3 £
ra
ri 5 O 0
H
M -P 0)
oj CO >
0) O -H
>» S ra
w
ii (U cd
o S
^
oo -HO
o ra ri

* $
OJ
                                     VO

-------
                          IX.  BIBLIOGRAPHY
 1.  Chesapeake Technical Support Laboratory, Middle Atlantic Region,
     FWPCA, "Interim Report, Mine Drainage Pollution of the North
     Branch Potomac River 1966-1968,"  August, 1968

 2.  Middle Atlantic Region, FiYPCA, "Water Quality and Pollution
     Control Study Mine Drainage, Chesapeake Bay-Delaware River
     Basins,"  Working Document Number 3,  July,  1967

 3.  Chesapeake Technical Support Laboratory, Middle Atlantic Region,
     FWPCA, "Investigation of Water Quality in the North Branch Potomac
     River Between Cumberland and Luke, Maryland,"  August, 196?

 4.  La Buy, James L., Chesapeake Technical Support Laboratory, Middle
     Atlantic Region, FWPCA, "Investigation of the Benthic Fauna in
     the North Branch Potomac River Basin,"  Report in Preparation

 5.  Middle Atlantic Region, FY/PCA, Appalachian Program, "Water Supply
     and Water Quality Control Study, Royal Glen Reservoir Project ~
     Savage II Reservoir Project, South Branch and North Branch Potomac
     River Basin,"  October, 1967

 6.  Public Health Service, U. S. Department of Health, Education, and
     Welfare, "Investigation of North Branch Potomac River, Report on
     Benefits to Pollution Abatement from Low Flo?/ Augmentation on the
     North Branch Potomac River," Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering
     Center, Cincinnati, Ohio,  August, 1957

 7.  Hopkins, Thomas C., Jr., Maryland Department of Water Resources,
     "Physical and Chemical Quality from the Effects of Mine Drainage
     in Western Maryland,"  August, 1967

 8.  Plopkins, Thomas C., Jr., Maryland Department of Water Resources,
     "Western Maryland Mine Drainage Survey, 1962-1965,"  3 Volumes

 9.  Rubelinann, R. J., Maryland Department of Water Resources, "Interim
     Report Number 1 on the Western Maryland pH Survey,"  June 10, 1963

10.  Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin, "Potomac River
     Water Quality Network, Compilation of Data,"  (Annual)

11.  Maryland, State of, Water Resources Commission and Department of
     Water Resources, "Water Resources Regulation 4.8 General Water
     Quality Criteria and Specific Water Quality Standards"

-------
12.  West Virginia, State of, Division of Water Resources,  "Administrative
     Regulations, Water Quality Criteria on Inter and Intra State Streams1'

13.  Wilkes College Research and Graduate Center, "Studies  on the Kinetics
     of Iron (II) Oxidation in Mine Drainage,"  September 25, 1968

14.  Appalachian Regional Commission, "Engineering Economic Study of Mine
     Drainage Control Techniques," (Appendix B to Acid Mine Drainage in
     Appalachia), January 15, 1969

15.  Gannett, Fleming, Corddry, and Carpenter, Inc., "Acid Mine Drainage
     Abatement Measures for Selected Areas Within the Susquehanna River
     Basin," (Engineering Report - Contract Number WA 66-21),  1968

-------
o     o«
i/i      •   •
       o  -o
                                       ^ o -^ O ^  O >> O f-  O
                                       /' o -u  <">  .)  if ^\J <_) -O
                         ,-, — i     ,-NJ
       O  O o   i •„> .-i  -)ooO.>Oi>or>J(->O
       O  O C>  O O O O  O  O 3  O "3 (~  r->  o D  O  3
       O  O O  O  3 o O  O O "J  O O O  O  O  )  O O
       O  O O  C> O O '->  O O O  .J O -3  '-y  O O  o O  O


       O  1)  J   3 O O ^  O  -> '-">  O O O  -J  i 1-  ? "-  3
Z>
S-»
'"J

fcti
O
5
>H
£
CJ

f*4
35
3

*-1
as

o
Si
1







K

M
H
-<
H
CO
3
n
1-4
5
c/3

3


O

C>q
05

t~3
0












•
5
X

o
Q
VM
tA
>•
QC
U>
I


2T
at

af
Cu
—
i
fc- O <~» O <^ C f"1 C O O O r'- O
c o o o o c- c a c o t; o
o pooocococco*^
•« C C O O O C O O O O C- O
O O ^ O O O O C- O O *u o
-» — 'T' jl ,-, M IK g (^ i»^ fc^
M-^-^jHr^^ «T^r

^>-

V
*J
 o C' o o o c t-
o c o o o o c o o o C <~



C. OOOOCCOOOC'OC

lAf OOOOCOC"OOOC>0
K OOC-OOOOOOOCO
* - - * £ - S N S 2 2 ~



ai cr o": CD a- a^  4- *• «- r^ o
/\ *r\ t*~ t*\ f\i f^i
rv *, ^ - - r-s




o o o o o c o
r r> o c coo



c c o o o o o

C O C 0 0 C 0
C in O C O C O
* * ~^
       ou—*«-jo'^1o1^ft^^   •j~ O c O C O '
O C' c •• — ';• O O o f
r, c c -" '-' c • o i c. c
C' o ^ ri i- • c c > o o
-. C i~ c> c> O "i o O n
•• r f " t^ r ' i c c ' O c.'
       oo or  CT  a
                                                               c  ••» a-
                                                                                      8

-------
         J

         •f
               O-    T  o o  -j
               O  O O  D O  i •>
               O  O O  J  3  O
               O  O O  O O  O
O  O AJ  O
-»  -o -r  o
                                 o
                                 o
           O O O   J
           O O O   'l
       O O  5 ,J   3
                                                                         i  _•  '.J  ..1 O  •
                                                                        _>  ,/  o  o o
                                                                        -j  .>  O  y <->  ,
                                                                                            O '_> O
                                                                                            :> o o
                                                                                            3 O O
        O
        —     ••»> ~> o in in  13

        t-   •  Cf if\ -f -o ~<  -TO

        O      •  «*.»<
               o o  o r-  c o
               C o  o c  o o
               o o  o o  o o
               o o  o o  c  o

               o (M  m ^  M »
               -0 ^)  cr vf  —i >o
                  CM  1^ fNJ  «*> m
                                             O  i- C  C   ••" •-.  C •""•  O O  O C  ri O O  O O  O
                                             0  O C  O  u r,  C O  O O  O O  o O C.  O O  O
                                             o  ?:: c  o  •:• C-  o o  c o  c e  o o u>  o c  o
                                             O  O C  O  O C   O O  C. O  C' O  O O *•  O "C  >O
                                                      "  CO
                                                                                  rv f\* ti"\ "^
              o  o o o o o

              o  o o o o o
                                              O

                                              O
                                                    o o c  o TJ

                                                    O O f.  --• c
                                       O CJ C> O C O C   0 c

                                       "  o o o c r. o  o c
o
                                              C
                                              a
CD
m
z
-%
£
       tt.
       sr
       c
       z
       o
       o
  <:•  o o o o
                                                                                                         o
                                                                                                         O
                                                                   o

                                       c- c-  o o  o o  c- o o
                                              v\ •*•   e
O.     O O O C'
                                                                      ••.  o  o o o c  r-
                                                                 t_> c  o o
       U*     O O  H"* CD  ^ fj^
                                             o c. o  c. '_•
                                             o c' o  c  ;•
                                             O o o  ( •  :
                                             C. O C.  -'  <  .
                                                                                  Ci O  I'' C   C- c   O O
                                                                                  o c-  o c   c. o  o <->
                                                                                  cr c~  c> a-   c  a1  —* •'•J
                                                     •cj
                                                     r •
                                                            r- r,  -.
                                                            <:> c-  c
                                                            o o  •-

-------
               o  9  •f  JO
                •   ••«

               O  O *•  4,
        O
          O  '1   '   ..
 00:50-'   J   -'
• O O   )  O  O   TO

  -C —*  "1  Jj  ,f  ^   °~
 —* f*-  Ns  ~C  D  """>   ^
                                                                                                        i  o . >
                                                                                                     I  ,j  O O
                                                                                                       '">  '"5 O
        Of

        X
                                                                                                                        "i co
                                                                                                                         f O
                                                                                                                    '	' -o
               O C  C- O O
               O C'  C- C <_•
               O C
               c- o
                                                                                                      r  C' O
                                                                                                      '>   C  O
                                                                                                      •:   r* C
                                                                                                      •~.  ;v  in
                                                                                                       *   «  i*
                                                                                                      O  .?  O5
                                                                                                      ^~-  ^. **-
                                                                                                          'M —>
O
X
               O O  f, O C'  C C'  o  C. <_  t  f   ._
                •  ••B9*tt9^^e>g    ^   '^
               O o  r- o o  o <   t:-  c  r  t  <~  r  '•
n1
01
               c c  o c-  o  c  c  o c  ~-  c  c-
               o o  o C'  o  c  c  e o  o  
               o o  c o  o  o c  o c.  o  " c.      c
               o o  o o  c  c  c>  r,' c  c  -~  c  n  '_
                                                                                                    •  c-  c  o
                                                                                                      o  o o
a
cc
a
C
       C
       :?
       c
               c o  c c  c c  -   o o c

               O O  C' O  o C  O  C  ,~.  .-  .
                                                                                                  T
                                                                                                      r  O  o
                                                                                                      o o  o
                                                                                                      *A O  C>
                                                                                                  ~'^  ^v  C'  O
                                                                                                 >   1,   Q   •   *
                                                                                                  ^  "- C  O

                                                                                                         .c  m
O c  O O      O O  *"> C'
O C'  O C      C- O  O C
c c  CJ o      c  o  o c.'
                                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                                           O
       f,     c  c  <~>  ; > c  c  ~
       o     o  c  c   c- o c   c
       _/     o  O c   o o •-.  •:•
       u.     o  c  o  c- c  -•   c

              O  ^  O  I-J 9  .-  --
                                                                                                     i-  C •  O
                                                                                                     .-•  <-«  c-
       o

       o
r   r- o  '•   f
o  •-_  c  c   c
o  ci r  '-   '•i
O  c, , ,  ^  r

-------
        C     o O  o  -M -«
        ***>      •«««*
               o o  o  c- -r
               00 f  -J                 a  -*

        O            o O O  • )   '
        <"            O O O  .,)  ~>
               O O  O O O  O •  >  O   1

               O O  O '^ -M  "f -  J  -:;
              »• O  -^>^  '?

              ir> in  .r o  -M

              ^-  o  ^- o  ^-*


              O ft  CM
                                        CD
              O o e> o  c. <~  f      c
              o o o o  o c  r i     c.
              o c o o  o c  c.      c
              0- r\, -i, rn  u  -Nj  -<  ,.  •«
                         O  o C  C'
        >f                O  O <•>  C-
        ~i                O  C- O  C
        «*     C  C' C> Cf  f  (^  '%
              O  O O
                             a —
V
Or
C
       a.     o  o c -  c  Ci c  c  c~  c
       r     o  o c-  o  c  c  o o  c
       u-     C1  c o  o  o c,  c" O  r.
       t-      O  o C  O  c  t'  c  r--  o
       o
       z
              
              C' O O
              C- t' O
                         o i
                         o
<:  o c .  o i >
o  c> f.  c- c-
«_.  o t_,  <  c
o  o r '  f- >*
                                       c  <. .
                                       <  -*•
                     a  c
                            o  i..
                          i c>  r

-------
        •t         V  ^ u    r
        Q      r,' —• TO t"~  **•
                    o o o o  c;  ~>   ;
                    D O O  3  <• i  ' •    >
        a
        —     f a •*>  •*•   o   -   •.    -
        i     —• ci r- i-   ,->   o  o  o  C'  r.
                                                                                                                               -f  -Q
                                                                                                                               C   fM
               C  O C'  C   t   C.   O !   '..
                 •   *«•»«   l*J*«
               o  o c.  o  c   c>  ''• r_  r<
T


o
Uj
UJ
a.
O     T- O O  t-  C  C   ',   •••
t     O C- o  r  c  f.   f   s
u     o c  o    o  c^
               O-  —  -v
               ••^  r^.
               c  c- <~  i
               C  c o r
               <~  f O r-
               C  c o c

-------
        a
                   U . J  (_  *
                   r^ r-  t. ^
                   « a, C' "
                    £C


                    .O
            f"  ,T  -•  11
            O  *  *..   *•*
                                                                                                                              ••  o —
                                                                                                                              T-  o  :•
                    o vj  o o   } •  ^  • .>  '~'
                    O O  O O o —  "!   -  '
                O  O O  O O ' J ->  O   T  •
                o  o  r
                    f*v  o
                                                                                                         "S-1  u •  O  0**
                                                                                                         M   1  *  J"*
        o

        X
               n, *-•
                           c  c  -J
                           •*-  f-  a
oor-c-crc  o c  -
o  r>  o  o  r,  c   ::  ri c  o
o  o  f  o  <~  c  •"  o c  i"
o  o  o  c  c   c.  '.  o c  o
                                                                                                                     o c  c- c>  o
                                                                                                                     •-• o o C'  o
                                                                                                                     o c  c  r  o
                                                                                                                     c  c  t- c   f_
o
r
O  o  C  o  O  O C  C.  C  r.  C   v_>  ,r   ;.  i.   ,

o  o  c  o  o  cj o o o o  ''  :~  '-  •:  <. •   -
                                                                                                                            o o c

                                                                                                                            o c  o
 r
w
z
<
of
                                                  or
        a     o o o o  o o  c   o o
        I     r  o o o  c  o  c   c  c
        U-     O C  Ci C  C  C-  C  C  O
        k-     O O O O  O O  O  C> O o
                                                                                  -    «   '""  o  <_>  o  r   o  c o
                                                                                      -  -  o  o  J  r.  c   - <"'
                                                                                  :.   c  c;  o  c  o  o  c   o o
                                                                                  ;    c  o  o  (/"  c1  IT*  *r-  C1 o
                                           "•  f  r
                                                                                                                     >»  S3
                                                                                                                                 T>  O

c
ar
c
•-'




j
a

'-•: (T  c o o :• ' c>
o o t o C' c e o o o -. i '

a
c.' r-> t~ c' o '"• '-'' r- o f" " •:
o o '- c- c - <-' c- •; i -- c
oc-'^o o c. r: • o f - • c
O O f" (Nl C1 c •"* ^f vf "- — •-' ^
T ,' , '. ~ S X-
- - ,~ ... ,. ,-j,
C " C."* '- £ ^' ^' O
r. 'ti f. c- '- C
c > • ;, ' . . - . • r o < c > o C; c. •
C ' -• C 0 '_ ' :'• >-• f C U' , C O 0
'v *C
^ wl r * "-v '^- -'\. -*" $
't
'- r '!._'- f ' C' C O C
- O '- " : r '• c C O o
r <"* t ' . *- ., C' r_, o < r^ u-
-f , T ' t < - : - - .. r-. • •• ,-.

r-*
O
0
o
o
CO
r-J

O
c >
^->
" ,

c- r.
0 0
0 0
C 0
0 C'
CD O
™ *
M
c-
o
l/X
W 0
        f     C.  C- O  O  <„>  o  <-   r
        O     *-' O C.'  O  t   <   C   C
        _     o o c  o  c •  •-.   -'  c
        u      o o r.  c"  r   c    •  c
               O W.

               C) cf
               C  O  >"'  C   •"   r   '  '   r •"
               C' c.-  c   <   f   r  •-  -   <•
               r  r>  <~  c   '      -       -.   r
                >   r      -r
                                                                                                                             ,-  ^

-------
        a
        —     */ o  •
        c
               iNI Q ^  JO  •<•/  ,f
                                                                                                                -^  r*  ,c  P  ~«  o
        *      _> f-l i •>  O  O  O  ^     v 1
        o      o r> o  ->  '->  •_•>  3  -j —
        i/i      o o -^  o  o  o  ^   :> o
                O O O  O  r>  O   .'  7- O
                                                                                                     J«  :>  .->  -•> -1 -> O   -j  o
                                                                                                     _i  _>  r>  -'   J   jooo
                                                                                                     ^>  1-  O  •"!      _  O  O  O
                                                                                                     "J  <•>  O  -J   1 O O  O  J
                           ,">
                                                                                                 i-    -   .-  •-">  j O O
                                                                                                            r,,  rj ~.  ^ r>-  O  r^  O O
                                                                                                            -*^  *-   -?  £> x)  xi  u'i  f\j cr
                       o
                       r".  <
                                                                     •r  -t      '-   C
                                                                                                            O iT  —.   -f  ~i  -o  >

                                                                                                            )•-- K*  f^  w>  »*~  tf>  rv
               O O O  O  r.  C O C O •'   -- ;  C. r •  O C   L-
               a o C>  C'  <-   c o o o c  c •  c   i.   ;   ''-  o  t   o  c  cj e_' c  o  c.  o  o
                                                                             C   r   f   -- ir  a   t   O  O O C' O  c •  O  O
                                                                             ^,  ;-   .-.( «™ ^   K^  ,-_  <:>  O C  C  C  O  O  O
               O   o o- *"•'•*  ~<  IT
                               <>  Of  to  •"'  If' f- C-   a1
        a.     o o O      «•  o o
        3     O O O      C  O C'
        u)     a o c      o  c o
        >-     O O O  O  O  O O O O  C'
                                                              c- c

                                                              O i*~
                                                                                 C  C' C' C  C
                                                                                 ^  ,_- r   -r  C  Cv  C1 O O C"* O  C'  O  <
                       "*  &  O  —'  C O O  C
                                                                                                    "   '- O C. r~,  o  O  O  C-  O O
cr
C
u.
a
C
7
C'
                                      O
                                      O
                                      O
                   c>  c  o  o  c- o o c  c  o  c   :   '"

                   o  o  o  c   c. c o o  o  r •  c  <• • („•
                                                                                                    O  O C  O O C  O  O  C   O O
                                                                             r-- c  c,  <-• c.  o  o  •*" o o c.'  o  o  o  o o o
                                                                                    C  O      :-»  C>  "V
       C' C' O  C      O  C'  O O C  -   C>  c C  "  '•
T     <~- O O  O      '_>  O  O C' C.  "~   O  C- '-  O  ""
Q     c- o o  o      o  <'  c-i o o  <    o  c  '". ;   '-
                                                                                                    C'  C C' C1 ^ C"'  C  O  O O O
                                                                                                    o  o r  o  c  Co  c- o o
                                                                                                    <"  '-*  C  •/"  C  "   O  o  O C> U^
                   INJ  (N*  rj
               O o  t   <• •  r  i o <.   i,  r   c   .-    •-   r-  t
               G c •  c~  r.   <   c  '.-'  c • c-  i.  .    .   .-   c
               O r\>  »t   if   a  a   o  C  C •  [.,  (    •' <   '.
               «X (X^  J   IX1  <•  >  ^  C*  C  ^   -f  -  '  ~~* f-»  •
                                                                                                               i    •"   '-i  O  C-  O
                                                                                                               -   '-   <   o  r   o
                                                                                                                -«  h    ^  cr  —*  ^v
               «• r >  o  c •  „-, e •  r   o
                                                                                                                    T   r  •    "-  O
        i-      o o  c   c-
        <     <-. o  C'  c>
        C1     O O  C'  !.""•
                           'T  *'*-"<„
                                                                                                                                      a  ''
                                                                                                                                       *•>   <5

-------
a
u*  CJ' c'

r»  r- r-
               —'  ir  o i—  —'  'jo -o  uo

                 -t o    O
                             U  '•) O  O
                             O  O  C  O
        •^ v/>  ^  O  &  Q
        'M -*•>„.
                                                                                        O     O Cl  '„  ^_?  >   ^  3  O > J  ^t O  o O  O
                                                                                        o     o  _>  o  • -j  j  o r>  o o  o o  o o  J
                                                                                        -> o  o o  ' •>  j  .1  o  j  r"> o  o o  o o  o
                                                                                               O o
                                                                                                          .5 •;>   >
                         f^  f^- o
                         —*     rv
                                                                                        •3

                                                                                        r
       O O  O O  O •"•  C- n C' O
       O C>  O C  O C  C. r- o C.
       o c  c- c  o o  o o o r-
       O C1  C/ O  C' O  -O .•*!—•<.
                                                                                       o c o r.  c r   r-  r  <~  o  c <-.  c  o O o
                                                                                       O O O C   C  i_>  C  C'  O  O  C' O  C O O O
                                                                                       ooofc  c   coaoccooco
                                                                                       COO O  O t.   C  C.  O  O  C t-  CJ O O O

                                                                                       <& ^Q ^ P1^    -^  3^  'Y~i  -X)  •*} P~-  •U O *—  ^f
a
f
a.
       o  c c- o  o o  r  o  o o

       O<~O'"  OOOOC'C1
                  c  o o  o c  <->
       o  o c..  1-1 C' o  o o o o
       O  O C'  O C  C'  O O l^ u"
       y  e  ec                ai  o:
                  c o <-  °        c
 ^                o o o  o        o
O                o O c O        O
•_)     rl  C •  "-  C O <•;' T, O  C  C
        «*«•»*•«**
       C  t  c.  ifN C. (T> O C'  C C
                                                                                 «
                                                                                 >
                                                                                  «
                                                                                 X
                                                                                 _J

                                                                                 r
                                                                         at
                                                                         O
                                                                                2

                                                                                at
                                                                                &
                                                                                If
                                                                                       o
                                                                                       X
                                                                                       o
                                                                                       O  C- C  O C  O C  O O O  C  O  C- C  Co

                                                                                       o  e o  c o  c «-•  o o c,  <:•  o  o c  o o
                                                                                              o  r  o  r  o o o r;  o o  <"  o  o O  r  o

                                                                                              O  O O  O O C1 C/ O  O O  O  O  O O  O O
                                                                                                            tf  -c «  «j so
                                                                                              o o c-r>c  c
       ty-  ^  ^r  .» "^  r'
                                ji d  C


                                -1 /-  C
       o o o  c1 
       C   <.'
       r   c
                                                                                       o < -   o o  c
                                                                                       c. r   o c  o
       C'
                                                                                                  !   t   «  <
                                                                                                                                  t   t   '   f   >


                                                                                                                                    "f   f   >'  •>   *

-------
—
•f
o

•4
O



O
O
c
->
o
o

m
'»
J
O
-o
l-J

t/s
o

-o
•~' ».
1? 1
rf^ •?"
f*- r-
,t -r\
V — *
•~s i-j e
O 0 •
o o -
O 0 ^
'„ •- -/ • - - , . « -• L. < _
J "* C » •* C U- v» -, '< *' ' - *>
j r- — • -™. - „-•' -i1 r- ?- f , -_
-Jf f fe) -o r - - , , i , . ., ,-,,,. j-
•* •"* "J, ,j\ , ^ f ' -O ~* , -*


-« l> J O T - / 0 •- «, -^ ., * /•
0 O O -n, ^* "-» •"'• i-r JT, *• 'a j- ' v-
. - • " * J -' w ' ' -> J '
, "? x ?. 1 ^ ^ ':" S
, » • ' 0  r~- J . . - •> >
. •• -. ., , o , - ^
- .'. " :: A' $ « - D
r~"
^
TO
1
( ")
f-
o
*
o
o
»
0
o
o
0
•m
^v»
J5
OJ
r-
o
O
o
o
9-
IV
^
c.
r-
o
o
o
o
^
«n
r-
f-
or
•*
O
C
c>
*-
o
-c
-..
J
*
r
C'
c
c-
c
—
fs
O
J
r
c
c
c.
»,
f>J
t
(f
f
^ ,
r
c.
c
o
F-.
f^
O •" 'C - r > f -
x r *^ L • " °~ ^
r- r — ^ - "
r- r> r "* r »- ; •'. •
C-- 0 C ' • ' 0 C. C "
C' c c - .; f. f '-
>_> o ;, r, ' c- c/ r, ,;
T^ ^ f~ ^? £J* ^J U • C-
(^ ^ u tr l- ^* <"• " ,
' - - ' '" ' - ' r >"' ° •" "J
., . . . - , ,- r, .- -• f y T -g
'- • .---«"- — a, -c
•• . a - >•- t f»- T> j c
,- f- ." -. ' -, C r c ' ' C <-• C
c i : • c •- r r> o
- . ,- > •- r -• ; ci c c-> o C'
t.i • r - f "- t- • f t. x f*- t*   <: •  o  o
              O  O O  O O O
X
*
              O  O C  O c> C  O C-  O o  r
              O  O O  O o C- O O  O c  C
              O  O O  C> O C  O <..'  O O  ^'
              O  O O  C  O O C C  CO'
       fe  c'
o  c  o  c  o  o  o o
o 'o  c  o o  c   o o
o c.  o  o o  <-.   o o
O if  O  C  C.   C1  -r u^

                                                                                                          fj X5  -\J

a.
O
       c
       f
       G
              •f  cc cr  5; a^  r~ cr  y  a
c    o  t   o  c         o     o o  o
                     o  c, c-  o  c,  ^   o         o     e o  o
                     e  c  c  c-  '   t.  o         c-     o o  c<
c~  f-  F   f, ...  c- c   r  "  r   r   .    (-3  c*  O O  C' o C'  O
o c o c


o c1 o '-'
O C 0 C'
O C O Ci
<^ o •£• •*
c' <. c. ;. o i . -•• o i r '

en 'F.
r- o o o o '. : c r-
C r-i f~> O r ' ' f *" ': *~
O C O i. 5 '- <-' i.j t
C i~ -i <- -M -- -J - *-
C_' C1 O f- C w I U"- LT t" O ^ •
,? 2 * 5' ", 2 ^ *

r> " • -_ f ' •* ^ c v. o -~
'-, f^ ~ /• ; •- ^ <- r- r, o C"'
•-' «' <-' •, ^ - •, r c; o c.
'^ - -* - „. s % ~ ,_, -• / ~f
C 0 O 0
^J OC -C
03
C 0 O
•- f~ i-)
C U O
>• .-< -_ —
              c  c  c   -  • c   <-• .--  r   c
              c:  <"^ o  C  r   :  c    -'<  .
              O  I   L'  f' C.  I  • ^   '.   C
              r  <"> O  <•   !">  '   t   f   :

              oo o  -! f*  •* -*  -*  -"
              a   <7> T-
              ~C  C   '

-------
        t*
                         a
                         fN
                                     f
                                     •J
                                                           .„:  x:  --•  j, j,   v  i
                                                           ~->  n  -n  ~M ao  ^  ^ '
                                                           •^o  u  "*w  A "v   o  "•*
Q
I/)
O  O     O  O
O  O     o  <-
OO     OO
                                 O  'T o
                                 OOO
                                                              O  O "_>  O '-> O  O O O  "I vJ
                                                              o  r» '-J  o O o  O O o  j O
                                                              OOO,JOOOOOOO
                      O r«4 —»  o O
                         tM -t      M
                                                           •^ '.TV  TO  —« '•""  ~J
                                                           •^  -*•  o  -o -^  »?
                                                                 r-   o  « -^ in
                                                                 •IT:  U  tf  "' -C
              O O  O O O  O O C  C. O  c  C  c   O O  C-  r  O  C.  O C  O  O O
              O O  O O O  O O O  O O  i— f" O  f"' C  C  C^ C_  C   O C  C.  C O
              cooocoo
                             —  — o  —' r- -t
              <_>  o  c  o  c  o c-  o c  o  o
              o  o  o o  f   c  o  r; o  cs  c
              !_  COO  O  C1 Ci  O O  C  i_
                                                                     O O  C  O  O
                                                                     r.  o  t.  c  o
c
c
o  o c  o  r     c  c; c  c     o  o  c
O  O O  C  O     O  O C'  c      ~  C-  ri
o  c: c  o  ci     o  c    o o  o  r~' c  ^     c-  c    •  '••
              c  c  o  c  c- c. c-     c  c   f   r
              o-  --' >j  c  c  -c  ^  f'  -tr   ^   -~ -,°  c
                                                                             C C  c-
                                                                             C r  O
                                                                             c c>  o
                                                                             Cr O  C
                                                                                           U-- O
                                                                                    C'
                                                                                    o
                                                                                    C1
                                           >^  c
               _.  c> o
              o  c  o
              '-  -1  tr   ,t
               C  -r  r—  4

-------
*.

-r
o




^
CJ
1/1


o
fM
"<•»
JO
0
»
r-
-4

'J
O
o
o
(^
_., 1* '
i/- r—
l> UJ
u-, -C
f«- f*^

f*^ Q
•"*
0 O
o o
0 0
0 0
3 •*>
r .-• ,- _/> j> ..> j'
< si i • j ^ -J 14 ™j ~7
r -i. w ^ • -i • - -
-» ' J — r  t in v
7° -~) ^ *•''.?  O j * J 'j -'
r i o O •> J? ^ ~:
0 0 7! 0 C' o 0
O'3O'>'">o^<"
ro ••% >A _ >»• ..ft --. -.
* ; - ^ '_ -i ' ^j
» *• ' o «. « •* * v
.' - V ^ 'j % ' ,? r- " ft
J - . ^ -..,-,, ,. , I -j TJ O
. ( •> • r v 	 , «...'- ) „-. o
-» f, y ., , „ ~i T ^ ^
^ t> ,? .f- -i u* ,f> ^ —.
r r r r
• • , • i ^ .>-.-• ,3
j ^ ,- --> O _> - ( . J '-> O
_"• '.: -^ o o ~j '- ' ^ '--' o
5 •-•> o ->.-.--> o a •"> o o o cj o o
5 •- O '• "•- '-J >> *" '-! — -~ "O 3 m O
t_^
f-.
c .
rsj
O
3
'V

o
:>
Q
O
,-.
— t
4_ j
^'
'••
>*\
_j
**

O
O
o
-I
,.»
tf '
1.1
— *
U-N
V
i»
•N

O
a
0
r««
•>
                                                                              »>      J  r
0 O —
< o o u-
0
if^
^~
f7^ CT1 <> •«* l"~ ^
^» — « —1 >*- lp j
» T> •- "S, J" "
— O -• -r * ~
fSj F*~ U ^_. .M y(
r\^ MW rv C
' ^ ,7 ".' " ^' o n ^ o -j S S o ,n
5 T -- • -j ^- ' *• ^s O — ' & '** ^ -J '-J •-*
*, t *"- t - ^ ^ o "^ -" M 4- ^ r> r T;
' ^ -r e 33 -.T D •** -* i"1 -» *•* O o ^;
' /. , ^ *Jf -' W L .'• C ^- ^ — -t
"-" — • •• "**• fa £ ft* y
-* C?* O O
"^ •*• «. O
rsj f*- •> f>
» T. ^ (» O
^-* ^ o ^ o
«-. «-4 !-»•
«—
                      O c:  c r> r-  o  r- o
                      O o  o c. c.  o  t•• o
                      Oocc  r   Ooo
    c  r-. r. > c  r  r- O  n c  o
    *  C C   O  f  O O  o C'  O
    A   u^c    yj"ot^^^-
    *N)  **~ *•* s.  **^  'V C~   o o  '
Z      X     O  O C-  O  O O C  O C' O  •
O      J     O  C O  C  O C  C  r  c- C.  .
•—      41     I1*-  CC IT  TU  — /** l»-  fX< vfl '-  '
c-  o  e- c«  c  o o  o  o o c  e>
C,'  C   C  C'  C  C' C.  O  C C  O  O
c  f-   *  i  c,  ••:  c  <*•>  as o c  —
^  /i  .-v *-  >£  cc d   c  fv f^l ^  *^
                      a  ~  -t> — c-  a  — i
                                 -•        IM !
                                                                                  a1
O


O
0 O
c o
O 0
o o
0 0
o o
r c
C' O
C 0 c.
r C o
O C c
c o c
o c-
c c
c- C
<•• o <•
c
**•
r-,
- f .
C'
<"
^

o c
c c-
•J r

C
r
(~
'"'



 o
... C O ^ C' o O
                              e c
                                                                                     _.  --.  ._. »
                                                                                                       O ™>J
U;
O
•tf
ff* T1



0 c-
0 0

or
c
C"
C'
-r e
>c o
lirirfcrytr-r" ?



o c • o r r • i ., o c r^ c-
O O 0 C 0 t Or -. o


O O C C- r c O r -
r- c- <" r or' c r .
c- c. c c <_• c c ^ -
*  c
o c; c •-' c c '-• o
^ r- *-, , f- c ,— c •. f. r r
f } ^: ',t -1 -f >.' u- - tt c r CO
a- C- *~ vr « •«•• !•• c

"• , ^ ,~ ~ r " f ' O f™
" r !•_• :..- , ..-'''- - • ' 0

-! *
>r- .- ,..'",,.:. i- ,: *•
^v
o
o
C'
O C'
0 C'


C- f'
c ' r-
C' x
u.


o
o
C'
^
o
X
so



!~


o
o
o
C)
0
CO

o
^
f


*
c.
^
U-


o
o
o
<•;>
^
—«
rj 0
cr ^
o o
o e-
a, t-
-. o
c .
f
c
f
f „,
^f
(- .
o
C1
o
,.

^' '"•
c r~-
C >"•
(. i
4- t.
» '
C
O
(_
C
.J-
-^
*" > < * ' ^ t -. ;" ^" ^
r ,>••"' f ,
O ' c f - . <.,• •
c '- , . - <-> t : •
i r ' -, J- f ; i
**• "" r " *'.
. ^ ; • • c •_• r- o < o

' Q r" f „ r • *~, \ r
i - ; - . ': T_- <• <
^ '•" ' . J ^: **' j
r ,' ^ . j - u - ~ '
o c- -:•
C r i
i. : t
t.> O C J
•^ r •*


-------
          . j"  u •  ^   •' •  u  J   j*  >t> •"

           r-  r-  •*,  u,  t-  or   ~  <- <
                                                                                                                                 •i
                                                                                                                                 a
                                                                                                                                                «.-  a
                                                                                                                                                                                  O
        •O ^  -*"1  o
        o -a  •**  :>
        •n cf  o  «
        O <-» O  .-.  _>  -j  0   ^01    •   >  ,',
        _; o o  o  o o  ~>  o  o *'    '   j  ~t >  '
        O O O  O  O O  'i  O  O   l    *   >   ^ "^
        O O O  o  O O   .>  O  O O  t i   ^  f!  -5
        •o ir> o
        •O ,-n O •
                                              r   a  -t
                                                                                                                          ^     ooonoo01 00000
                                                                                                                          O     o o  -' o o  T  J o o o  a o o
                                                                                                                          i/>     OOO O OOOOO O  OOO
                                                                                                                                 OOOOOOO030OOO
               >»•  ^  Ni O  <""
           IA ^  'N
        ao o "»• -» f"-

        O rvJ *"t  —« ^


        <"y Oj ^  *f f"! I

        O ^ U^  <"M ^
                          O Ci
ooofCcr^ooc   f
c  c> o o o  o  o c  o  c   (.
ocooOooc  occ
o  o o o o  o  c. o  c.  c   o
                                                                                  •-  '.'•  r> C    o  o o c  c  c c- c   c

       o o  o  o o o  t   o r  '   o
                                                                                                                                 o  o o o  o  c- c  o  o  c  o o o

                                                                                                                                 C  O O CJ  !_>  O O O  C.  O  O <"> O
a
^
3D

I*
^>
2"
a
a

X
^
o;
C



a O
3 O
ui O
t- C
-r,
—f



.£
cr
z
c^
.„! O
c-


c
o
o
o
J-
C-j



ff



r-i
C


c.
C
o
o
IT
rvj



3C



r-
o


o
o
0
o
c
A,



Q



c
C1


OOO O t.: 0
C' r C' C C C
O 0 C. O f, t
c- o or o c- •'
a.1 CD c o O -" •?
r* j -\_ *— « fj ,. 1 —<



^ T t ~ 'f T ''



O ^ . O :"* O '
(•_, f , C' O O O '


.'- <„ c ~' C'
• • r\ f. , f r
<^ c c r c-
c c- rj o o o c- u-
v fv ^ f. .., ^ ^ „
«vj



'v-
O C' "- '." "" • C
o o o •• o ;;• "
O C' '.' -. 0 ' '
<- •: o i- •:- '. •. '.
f_, -/•' tr c «^- f." **-• -if
tf "„ * 43 ''J C"1 C
•\/ -, . -M -. "v ,-^ ,1
f ' C- O O O
T O C -J O
C C C. '-J C.'
c - / o c
, _ ., ^ J
,v,^ 'V - rf



^ r !y~
-"*

c c
,_ t. r, c ^_
,-* ,-, .J ,., ^
~J~ tf"'
4 ^~
o
o
c
0
c
r\j




c^
C'
c

o
o
•w
(;,
c.
o
o
_J
rsj




o
o
o
13
>.n
*c
»"".
                                                                                                                          Of


                                                                                                                          X
                                                                                                                          d
                                                                                                                          a.
                                                                                                                         a,
                                                                                                                         sr
                                                                                                                                            on
                                                                                                                          a     ooC'     ooo     ooooo
                                                                                                                          X     OOO     OCO     OOOOO
                                                                                                                          UJ     OOO     OCO     OOOOO
                                                                                                                          H     OOOOO  C'OOOOtflOO
                                                                                                                                        a-  jr  -r i  f  •'             tn
                                                                                                                                                               o o o      ooo
                                                                                                                                                               o o o      coo
                                                                                                                                                               o o o      ooo
                                                                                                                                        C  O  O •-  O  ' ;  u O o  O  O O O
                                                                                                                                        o  o  c> o &
                                                                                                                                                               «  O O  o
                                                                                                                                                               !N «•• O
                                                                                                                                                                          c  o
                                                                                                                                                                        I O  O
                                                                                                                                                                          &"'  CO
       c  c  c- c  o c   t   ••  f
       C  c   O c  C  r   •'    r.  O
       i"  o  O fj  c-  r-  ^   c  C
       l/  .J  J •-,  0  C    v  r-  '-
                                                                                                                                                33

                                                                                                                                 O  O «"' (_'      O C~  O  O  C1 O O  O

                                                                                                                                 C  C- r i O      <- C'  O  O  O O O  O
                                                                                                                                 O  C' C  '"'      O Ci  C'  O  to O O  O
                                                                                                                                 »»  ^4 *'  ^  c>  >/  ^"  h   aj  i o  jj  o
;.*
c
                      '"•  '   f.   '.  '   r


                      O  '"'  O  O  C  '


                      i.'   •    3   --   ^  c
                                                                                                                                 o
                                                                                                                                 o
                                                                                                                                                                      o o  o
                                                                                                                                                                      o o  o
                                                                                                                                        c

                                                                                                                                        or

-------
u

       r*" ^— AJ vl.  Tw l^; —4  If '
4     i —*  ,j s_j _.  _«


       h. f- r» w  "J ,0 o  f-
       «1 O '"^ TI  ^f -o r-   »
,»     o  o o Q  o  j» •->  o
O     OOOOOOO'J
I/'     OOOOOJ^QO
       OOOO"-^fvjO
*     O     O <"»  O  J O  O
O     o     ;j o  o  3 o  :>
*^     o     o o  o  c.  o  o
       O  O -T O  -o  * "~  J3
                                                                                                                      O
                                                                                                                      o
                                                                                                                             (COO
                                                                                                                             00 X>
                                                                                                                             K> o
                                                                                                                       O O O
                                                                                                                       o o o
                                                                                                                       o o o
                                                                                                                       e» o o
                                                                                                                                                     g
                                                                                                                                                            -t
                                                                                                                                                            o
                                                                                                                                                                O rv*
                                                                                                                                                                m f-
                                                                                                                                                                •O IM
                                                                                                                                                                o <**
                                                                                                                                                               -« m
                                                                                                                                                            -<3 —i 10
       o      •
       <     -«•
                                                                      'SS  '*''  '*-   «<  ' J  V '
                                                                      SO  «-  s  i"  -<  O

                                                                      ^iT  ^ t-  4"  •<• ^
                                                                      O  ff  ru  ''  ""1 U
                                                                                                                       •f "M  O
                                                                                                                       !J> 0
                                                                                                                      r- o
                                                                                                                                                           -"  O -O
                                                                                                                                                           o  o -o
                                                                                                                                                                      CO «D
                                                                                                                                                                      S>
       c o r-  o  t; o  C'
       O o o  o  o o  o
       O in c  -->  c ~  f^
                                                        t

                                                              C o  1-J  ;.  o  £• r' X

                                                        '«t     llf% ^   -".  '   ^   ^  ^  «'
                                                                &  J-   e  ,j  «   's   a*  *
                                                              SE/ f"  ^i   '   ir-  f>  ^~   -J
                                                              m     —4.
                                                                                                                             o  o  c
                                                                                                                             o  o  o
                                                                                                                             o  o  o
                                                                                                                             o  o  o
                                                                                                                              *   •   o
                                                                                                                             P~  IT'  O
                                                                                                                             •o  f"  '••
                                                                                                                             £i  cr-  O
                                                                                                                                                            O O O
                                                                                                                                                            o o o
                                                                                                                                                            o o o
o
              oooooooo
              C c  C- C' C  O O o
                                                              O  O
                                                              O  T
                                                              «c  c-
                                                              i  —  f
                                                                      ^,  ,/ ri
                                                                          •#
                                                                                                       «9
                                                                                                       >
                                                                                                        *
                                                                                                        I
                                                                                                                             o  o o
                                                                                                                              •   •   «
                                                                                                                             C'  O O
                                                                                                                                                             o o  o o
         :     O  O •"  <~  C' C
         v     o  c* o 'v  o rs
          o  c  c> u-  e  *•• c
It-
0
f
o
UJ
o




c
7-
o
l~




0
o
o
0
o
f*
^f
ep



cr
c


cr
C
O
o
O 0
o o
IX
l~-
er
^
o
C-
c c
^ i.
C"
s£

r^
O
(3
O
o
0
^

o
o
o
~
o
!7
\r
                                                        r
                                                       o
                                                       2
                                                                      C  t. C
                                                                      O  o :
                                                               O  '.' '-  '-  '

                                                               o  <•  c  o  -
                                                                                            •"•  c
                                                                                            C'  c
                                                                                             "  c
                                                                                                                      coo
                                                                                                                      o r-  c
                                                                                                                      O C'  O
                                                                                                                      O C   C'
                                                                                                                        •  OS
                                                                                                                      O t">  ?"
                                                                                                                       Q   *   *
                                                                                                                      o c>  o
                                                                                                                                                    a     uj
                                                                                                                                                    or
                                                                                                                                                    eo
                                                                                                                                                    C
                                                                                                                                                    z
                                                                                                                                                           o  o o
                                                                                                                                                           o  o o
                                                                                                                                                           C  O C-
                                                                                                                                                           o  o c-
                                                                                                                                                            •   •  *
                                                                                                                                                           en  (M -O
              c>  o o  o  o c-
              CJ  C' C1  0  "> C.
                                                                                                                                                            O C'  O
                                                                                                                                                            O ;,.'  O
                                                                                                                                                            O C  O
.•»
C
              o  c  c  -  •  c  i .  c-
              O  C  C'  C  C  O  c
              r-  o c •  r •  c • o  ,
              C'  O '"  «.   ^ '  "  ''
                                    O
                                                                                                                                                           t' C' c
                                                                                                                                                           O C> ,;.
                                                                                                                                                           C- O <.>
                                                                                                                                                           C- .'5 c>
                 r >
                         f •,
              ;i O     »    r   -    '^  cj


              fv (?• C*  C   i.*- ^   ^ •*

              C i"  t   O  <   .'  -*   J">
              or   -   r-  f"  t   - "


              •vJ ~" -J  ^3   '-. ^  i.-   r
                                                                                                                                                                  (—, -   o

                                                                                                                                                                   A ./"  O"'

-------
APPENDIX

-------
                     . A rit'.;">
                .'JtatioT)






w.  <'qc   -.W.R.  Sampling station






V.  '-ra.   "jlp  ar;d  aper  'o.  '>amplin,-, .')Lat,io,>
          area  squaaBB

-------
961
91.7
89.9
864
 a
 tr
 ui

 £
 I
81.8
               ELK RUN
                             2(3.6)
                BUFFALO C«££K
                              5 (93)
                                               OOMiN ROAD
                                               LAUREL RUN
                                           4(7.5)
STEYER (73)

 USGSGAGE
                              SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM

                              NORTH   BRANCH

                           AREA A - ABOVE  STEYER, Md
                                                             FIGURE A ••?

-------
8! 8
783
or
7\-3
689
                                     •
                                         6  STEYER (73)
             STONY RIVER
                         SMlSTOftM
                         USQS OASC (48.6)
            AfiRAM CREEK
                       MS OAKMONT
                       USGS GAGC (47.3)
                                            21A
                                                   LOSTLANO RUN
                                         » KITZMKJ.ER (225)
                                            USGS GAGE
                             SCHEMATIC  DIAGRAM
                              NORTH  BRANCH
                  AREAS- BELOW  STEYER,Md  ABOVE KITZMILLER,Md
                                                                      A-3

-------
68.9
65
us
ct
UJ
                    UNNA«CD TRW
548
          PINEY SWAMP RUN
                                 25 (4.8)
18  KITZMILLER (225)
                                                 THREE FORKS RUN
                                             '9 (78)
                                                      ELKLCK RUN
                                             23A (3.7)


                                             23B BARNUM  (*o.25«)
53.6
26 BERYL f287)
                                SCHEMATfC DIAGRAM

                                NORTH  BRANCH

                   APfA '- -  BELOW  KlTZMILLER.Md. ABOVE  BERYL.WVa.
                                                                  FIGURE A-4

-------
safe
26 BERYL (287)
52 4
5! 4


 t
 Q:
 UJ
 or


 i
50.0
325
19 6
                          LUKE (404)
                                              SAVAGE RIVER
                                        29A  (74)
                                                     GEORGES CREEK
           UPRC  WASTE TREATMENT

                    FACILITY
                                         33A   KEYSEJR (490)
so
                  <596>
     FORD- USGS GAGC  f875»
                             SCHEMATIC CXAGRAM

                             NORTH  BRANCH

               AREA  D   BELOW  BERYL.W Va  ABOVF WILEY FQRO.Md
                                                              FIGURE A-S

-------
   Chesapeake Technical Support Laboratory
           Middle Atlantic Region
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
       U. S. Department of the Interior
           Technical Report No. 15
                  NUTRIENTS

                   IN THE

          UPPER POTOMAC RIVER BASIN

                     by

             Norbert A. Jaworski


                 August 1969
              Supporting Staff:

         Johan A.  Aalto, Chief, CTSL
 Donald W.  Lear,  Jr.,  Chief,  Ecology Section
  James W.  Marks,  Chief, Laboratory Section
      Gerard R.  Donovan, Jr.,  Draftsman

-------
                        TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                             Page

LIST OF TABLES	     iv

LIST OF FIGURES	     vi


Chapter

  I.   FOREWORD	     1-1

 II.   INTRODUCTION	    II-l

       A.  Purpose and Scope	    II-l

       B.  Acknowledgements	    II-2

III.   SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS	'  III-l

 IV.   DESCRIPTION OF THE BASIN	    IV-1

  V.   DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLING PROGRAM AND OTHER
       DATA SOURCES	     V-l

       A.  Stream Sampling Network	     V-l

       B.  Wastewater Treatment Plant Data	     V-7

       C.  Sediment  Data  .	     V-7

       D.  Dalecarlia Water Filtration Plant Data,
           U. S. Army Corps of Engineers	     V-9

 VI.   SOURCES OF NUTRIENTS (PHOSPHORUS AND NITROGEN)  .  .    VI-1

       A.  Wastewater Discharges	    VI-1

       B.  Land Runoff and Other Sources	    VI-3
                                11

-------
                  TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Chapter                                                       Page

 VII.   ANALYSES OF NUTRIENT NETWORK DATA ........     VII-1

        A.  Phosphorus	     VII-1

            1.  Major Sub-basins  .	     VII-1

            2.  Main Stem . „	     VII-4

            3.  Tributaries of the Lower Basin Near
                Washington. . .  .	     VII-9

        B.  Inorganic and Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ....     VII-11

            1.  Major Sub-basins	     VII-11

            2.  Main Stem	     VII-13

            3.  Tributaries of the Lower Basin Near
                Washington	     VII-19

        C,,  Mass Balance of Phosphorus	     VII-19

VIII.   SEDIMENTS	    VIII-1

        A.  Effects on Nutrient Concentrations   	    VIII-1

        B.  Spatial and Temporal Variations 	    VIII-2

        C.  Sediment Loadings into the Estuary	    VIII-4

  IX.   TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF NUTRIENTS
        ENTERING THE POTOMAC ESTUARY  .	       LX-1

        A.  Historical Trends	       LX-1

        B.  Temporal Variations	       IX-1

        C.  Spatial Distribution of Nutrients 	       LX-8

APPENDIX A - Mean Monthly Data, Potomac River at Great
             Falls, Maryland  .	       A-l
APPENDIX B - Data Summaries	       B-l
REFERENCES
                                iii

-------
Number
                         LIST Of TABLES
          Potomac River Nutrient Network Stations .  .  . .
Page

  V-2
   V-l

   V-2    Wastewater Treatment Facilities Samples for
          Nutrients, Potomac River Basin  ........       V-8

   V-3    USGS Sediment Stations  .„„...„.....       V-9

  VI-1    Nutrient Loadings from Wastewater Discharges by
          Sub-regions .„....„.. 	      VI-2

  VI-2    Nutrient Loadings from Watersheds with
          Varying Land 'Jse  0 .< ............      VI-8

  VI-3    Estimated Nutrient Loadings from Land Runoff,
          Upper Potomac River Basin ...........      VI-10

 VII-1    Comparison of Phosphorus Concentrations and
          Loadings for the Major Sub-basins .......     VII-3

 V1I-2    Comparison of Phosphorus Concentrations and
          Loadings Along the Main Stem of the Potomac  .  .     VI1-9

 VII-3    Comparison of Phosphorus Concentrations and
          Loadings for Tributaries of the Lower Basin
          Near Washington .... 	     VII-11

 VII-4    Comparison of Nitrogen Concentrations and
          Loadings for the Major Sub-basins .......     VII-15

 VII-5    Comparison of Nitrogen Concentrations and
          Loadings for the Main Stem	     VII-17

 VII-6    Comparison of Nitrogen Concentrations and
          Loadings for Tributaries of the Lower Basin
          Near Washington 	     VII-21

 VII-7    Phosphorus Balance  ... 	     VII-23

VIII-1    Summary of Sediment Sampling Data, Potomac
          River Basin, 1966	    VIII-3

VIII-2    1966 Sediment Loading, Potomac River Basin.  .  .    VIII-4

VIII-3    Sediment .Data, Potomac River Basin Below
          Confluence with the Monocaey River	    VIII-6
                                IV

-------
                   LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Number                                                       Page

IX-1      1960-1967 Summary of Nutrient Data, Potomac
          River Basin at Great Falls, Maryland	    IX-3

DC-2      Predicted Average Monthly Nutrient Loadings,
          Potomac River Near Washington, D.C	    IX-7

IX-3      Spatial Distribution of Nutrients, Upper
          Potomac River Basin Above Great Falls,
          Maryland	  .    H-9

DC-4      Estimated Nutrient Loadings, Upper Potomac
          Basin, 1966	    EC-11

 A-l      Mean Monthly Flow, Nitrogen, and Sediment,
          1960-67, Potomac River, Great Falls, Maryland  .     A-2

 B-l      Total Phosphorus (rag/1) 	     B-2

 B-2      Total Phosphorus (Ibs/day)	     B-3

 B-3      Inorganic Nitrogen (mg/1) ,	     B-4

 B-4      Inorganic Nitrogen (Ibs/day)	     B-5

 B-5      Summary of Wastewater Treatment Plant
          Nutrient Data	     B-6
                                v

-------
                         LIST OF FIGURES

Number

 IV-1   Major Municipal Wastewater Discharges 	  IV-4

  V-l   Nutrient Network  ............ 	   V-6

 VI-1   Land Use Comparison - Total Phosphorus PO^	VI-4

 VI-2   Land Use Comparison - N02 + N03 as N	VI-5

 VI-3   South Branch Potomac River at Petersburg, West
        Virginia, Nutrients vs. River Discharge  	  VI-7

VII-1   Major Sub-~basins of Potomac River Basin - Total
        Phosphorus (mg/1) .......... 	 VII-2

VII-2   River Discharge for Selected Gaging Stations, 1966. .  . VII-5

VII-3   Major Sub-basins of Potomac River Basin - Total
        Phosphorus (Ibs/day)  	 VII-6

VII-4   Main Stem of Potomac River Basin - Total Phosphorus
        (mg/1)	 VII-7

VII-5   Main Stem of Potomac River Basin - Total Phosphorus
        (Ibs/day)	. . . .	VII-8

VII-6   Lower Tributaries of Potomac River Basin - Total
        Phosphorus (mg/1) . . . „	VII-10

VII-7   Major Sub-basins of Potomac River Basin - Inorganic
        Nitrogen (mg/1) .... 	 VII-12

VII-8   Major Sub-basins of Potomac River Basin - Inorganic
        Nitrogen (Ibs/day). ....... 	 VII-14

VII-9   Main Stem of Potomac River Basin - Inorganic
        Nitrogen (mg/1)	VII-16

VII-10  Main Stem of Potomac River Basin - Inorganic Nitrogen
        (Ibs/day) ..... 	 . 	 VII-18

VII-11  Lower Tributaries of Potomac River Basin - Inorganic
        Nitrogen (mg/l) 	 .  	 VII-20

 DC-1   Potomac River Basin Nitrate Nitrogen Loadings at
        Great Falls, Maryland, 1949-1967	IX-2

 IX-2   Nutrient Loadings and River Discharges, Potomac
        River at Great Falls, Maryland, 1966	IX-4

                               vi

-------
                                                                  1-1






                            FOREWORD






     In the past, engineers have been concerned primarily with two



conventional parameters indicative of water quality, dissolved



oxygen (DO) and coliform bacteria; and two wastewater treatment



plant performance parameters, percentage removal of biochemical



oxygen demand (BOD) and suspended solids (SS).  These four param-



eters have been usually adequate to assess water quality conditions



and to determine wastewater treatment requirements.




     With the continued increase in population and associated indus-



trial expansion, the waste assimilative capacity of some receiving



waters are near or already have exceeded the maximum allowable to



maintain water quality standards„  Where this has occurred it has



become essential to introduce new analytical parameters to assess




water quality conditions, to re-evaluate conventional treatment



methods, and also to investigate the long-term effects on water



quality of other constituents in domestic, industrial, and agricul-



tural discharges, such as nutrients, toxic metals, and pesticides.



     The nutrients, especially phosphorus and nitrogen, that con-



tribute to dense algal growth in the Potomac Estuary are currently



being studied.  A relationship between high nutrient content and



accelerated eutrophication in the upper Potomac Estuary has been



established.  Therefore nutrient sources, their temporal and



spatial distribution, and the transport mechanics of the Potomac



River must be better understood.

-------
                                                                 II-l






                           CHAPTER II



                          INTRODUCTION






A.  PURPOSE AND SCOPE



     The Chesapeake Technical Support Laboratory (CTSL), Middle



Atlantic Region, Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-



tion (FWPCA), has undertaken an extensive water quality management



study of the Potomac River Basin.  A significant part of this study



has been to determine the sources of nutrients, their effects on



water quality, and the development of a corrective program to achieve



water quality standards.



     To implement Recommendation Number 14 of the third session of



the conference in the matter of pollution of the interstate waters



of the Potomac and its tributaries in the Washington Metropolitan



Area (District of Columbia-Maryland-Virginia), the Interstate Commis-



sion on the Potomac River Basin called a meeting for November 13-15,



1969, to consider the water quality problem of the entire basin.



Emphasis is to be placed on the problem of nutrients, bacteria, sedi-



ments and pesticides and their effect on the Potomac Estuary.



     This report is on the nutrient concentrations and loadings in



the upper Potomac River Basin above Washington, D.C., and the



purpose is;



          1.  To present data on the nutrient concentrations and



              loadings„



          2,  To identify the portions of the basin high in nutrients.

-------
                                                               II-2


          3.  To describe the temporal and spatial distributions

              of the nutrients in the upper basin.

          4.  To determine relative nutrient concentrations attrib-

              uted to domestic wastewater, industrial discharges,

              and land runoff.

A general report considering the nutrients in the entire basin is cur-

rently available  [1 ] „


B.  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

     The assistance and cooperation of various governmental and

institutional agencies and industries in the basin greatly facilitated

the collection and evaluation of the nutrient data.  While every

agency and industry contacted provided valuable assistance, the co-

operation of the staffs of the following who participated in the

sampling program merit special recognition?

          Governmental Agencies;

              Maryland Department of Water Resources
              Maryland State Department of Health
              U. S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior
              Washington Aqueduct Division, U. S. Corps of Engineers
              Virginia State Water Control Board
              West "Virginia Department of Natural Resources
              District of Columbia, Department of Public Health
              District of Columbia, Department of Sanitary
                 Engineering

          Nutrient Network Stations °

              Petersburg, West Virginia, Water Department
              City of Romney, West Virginia
              Hagerstown, Maryland, Water Department
              Moorefield, West Virginia, Water Department
              City of Shenandoah, Virginia

-------
                                                     II-3
    Shepherdstown, West Virginia, Shepherdstown
       Utilities Company
    Luke, Maryland, West Virginia Pulp and paper Company

Wastewater Treatment Plants;

    Winchester, Virginia
    Waynesboro, Virginia
    Front Royal, Virginia
    Staunton,) Virginia
    Hancock, Maryland
    Pinto, Maryland
    Cresaptown, Maryland
    Bowling Green, Maryland
    Cumberland, Maryland
    Frederick, Maryland
    HagerstOTOj, Maryland
    Williarasport, Maryland
    Upper Potomac River Commission, Westernport, Maryland
    Celanese Fibers Company, Amcelle, Maryland

-------
                            CHAPTER 111




                      33MMARI AND CONCLUSIONS






     A 40-station stream sampling network was established for




calendar year 1966, 35 of which were In the upper basin.  Included




in the sampling program were nutrient analyses of wastewater at 13




discharges in the basin.  Nutrient and sediment data for this




study were also obtained from other sources.




     Based on the 1966 survey and other available data, the fol-




lowing were observed:




     1.  The annual average concentration of phosphorus as PO, in the




major sub-basins varied from a minimum of 0.9 mg/1 in the South




Branch to a maximum <->f 1.9 mg/1 in the Ant let-am watershed.




     2.  The annual average concentration of NO^ + N03 nitrogen as N




in the major sub-basins varied from 0,3 mg/1 in the South Branch to




2,2 mg/1 in Opequon Creek0




     3.  The annual average phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations




in the smaller tributaries 'jf the lower part of the basin near




Washington, D.C., were ao^at the same as those in the major upstream




tributaries.




     4.  The annual average concentrations of phosphates, total




Kjeldahl nitrogen (,TKN) an<3 NO-? *• NO3 nitrogen in the freshwater




stream flow entering the estuary near Washington, D.C., were 0.3,




0.3, and 0,9 mg/1, respectively.

-------

-------
                                                               III-2






     5.  The concentrations of inorganic nitrogen at most of the 35



non-tidal stations increased as the stream flow increased.




     6.  The concentrations of phosphorus and TKN at most of the 35 non-



tidal stations remained fairly constant over wide ranges of stream flow.




     7.  Approximately 18,400 Ibs/day of phosphorus as PO^ and 10,700



Ibs/day of total nitrogen (N02 + N03 and TKN) enter the streams of the



upper basin from municipal and industrial discharges.  This amounts



to a daily per capita loading of 0.04-5 pounds of phosphorus and



0.026 pounds of nitrogen.




     8.  From an analysis of watersheds with varying land uses and re-



ceiving little or no wastewater discharges, the annual average nutrient



loadings attributed to land runoff in the upper Potomac Basin were esti-



mated to be 8,600 Ibs/day of phosphorus and 43,900 Ibs/day of nitrogen.




The average annual yield per square mile was 0.8 Ibs/day of phosphorus,



3.4 Ibs/day of N02 + NO^ nitrogen, and 0.5 Ibs/day of TKN.



     9.  In the upper basin in 1966, about 70 percent of the total



phosphorus entered the surface water from wastewater discharges with



the remaining 30 percent from land runoff and other sources.



    10.  Approximately 80 percent of the estimated 54,400 Ibs/day



of total nitrogen (N02 + NO^ and TKN) entering the surface waters of



the upper basin in 1966 was from land runoff with the remaining



20 percent from wastewater discharges.  Of the 43,800 Ibs/day of total



nitrogen from land runoff, about 27,100 Ibs/day, or 62 percent,  were



from agricultural areas which comprise only 37 percent of the total



drainage area ia the upper basin.

-------
                                                                  111-3






     11.  The total phosphorus  and  NOg  +  NO 3 nitre-gen loadings (Ibs/day)



are highly related t~;  river  discharge,,  for example,,  In August of 1966,



with a river discharge of abvut  500 cfs,  less than 1,000 Ibs/day of




total phosphorus as PO^  s.nd  jMO->  -<- NO 3 nitrogen as  N entered the estuary



from the upper basin,: while  on  February 14, 1966,  with a flow greater



than 40,000 cfs, about 217,000  and  354,000 Ibs/day of PC^ and




N02 "*• NO 3 N, respectively, entered  the  estuary from the upper basin,



     120  During low flow eondifJons h.  significant proportion of the



phosphorus entering the  -Surface  water from i.he Vr.,ricjs sources in



the upper basin is retained  .in  the  stream channel„  At high stream



flow, it appears that a  large -proportion  of this phosphorus is



"flushed" out of the stream  channel and transported downstream,,




     l,3o  Mass balances  u?Ing the 1966  data indicated that about



37 percent of the pho3pharos that entered the upper basin was retained



in the stream channel.   The  long-term fate 'f thi.-. phorphorus retained



in the channel bed 1-3 unKnowii0



     14.  On an average  4a'!ly basics for 1966, the  nutrient loadings



entering the estuary from all  -curces in  the upper basin were about



17,000; 49,000; and 5,700 lbs/dd,y :,f total phcjplu-rus as PC^, N02 *



NO^ nitrogen as N, and TKN,  reope:itively0



     15.  Wastewater discharges  in  the  Washington, D.C., Metropolitan



Area add about 63,000  Ibs/Jsy  ,f i.:teil  phosphorus  as  ?0^ and 54,000



Ibs/day of total nitrogen mainly in the form of TKN to nutrient



loadings in the upper  Potomac Est!iarY0

-------
                                                                III-4





     16 „  During low flow periods over 90 percent of the total phos-



phorus and total nitrogen entering the upper estuary from all sources




is from wastewater discharges in the Washington area.



     17 „  Sampling stations in the Shenandoah and Monocacy River sub-



basins account for about 50 percent of the total phosphorus and



33 percent of the N02 4 NC^ nitrogen measured in the Potomac River



at Great Falls, Maryland.



     IB,  At five stations, sediment data collected by the United




States Geological Survey indicated that the annual yield of sedi-



ment varied from 98 to 29C kilo-pounds (kips) per square mile with



a total basin loading for 1966 of 1,897,000 kips.  In 1961, the total



basin loading was estimated to be 5,000,000 kips,



     19.  In 1966, the maximum stream flow occurred in February.



During that time about 32 to 55 percent of the total annual sediment



loadings were observed at the five sediment stations.  Maximum



nutrient loadings also occurred during the month,,



     20.  The wide variation in nutrient loadings clearly demon-



strates the need to sample more frequently over a wide range of



stream flows before a precise identification of nutrient sources can



be made,,

-------
                                                                1V-1
                            CHAPTER TV

                     DESCRIPTION OF THE BASIN


     From Its headwaters on the eastern slopes of the Appalachian

Mountains, the Potomac flows in a general southeasterly direction

some 400 miles to Chesapeake Bay,  The main stem is formed approxi-

mately 20 miles below Cumberland, Maryland, at the confluence of

the North and South Branches of the Potomac and flows southeast to

the Fall Line at Great Falls, Virginia.  Below the falls at Chain

Bridge, the lower river is tidal,

     The Potomac River Basin has a drainage area of 14,670 square

miles and encompasses parts of Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia,

and Virginia, and all of the District of Columbia.  The major sub-

basins including their drainage areas are;

              Sub-basin                   Drainage Area
                                          (square miles)

              North Branch                    1,328

              South Branch                    1,493

              Caeapon River                     683

              Conococheague Creek               563

              Opequon Creek                     34'5

              Antietam Creek                    292

              Shenandoah River                3,054

              Monocaey River                    970

-------
                                                                   IV-2






     The portion of  the  Potomac  Paver above the Fall Line is about




266 miles long and follows  a course thro.ugh the mountainous terrain




of the Alleghenies,  across  the fertile Paige and Valley Province,




through the Blue Ridge L/Io'.jntains,  and across the rolling hills of




the Piedmont Plateau to  tne Fr11 Line ard the Coastal plain.  It




drains an area of about  11,500 square miles.  Tt is a comparatively




narrow, f'a,3t~f losing stream flunked b;.  . t-:-ep banks and mountain.?,




and has many natural  ens trust ism  ant' rarid".,,




     The average discharge  of  T'ne  Potoir.ac hiver s.1  hashing ton, D.C.,




is 11,34C cubic feet per second  ,cfs},   Discharges of 484,000 cfs




and less than SCO cfe hsve  been  recorded,  The cha-e and character




of the basin are such thai  they favor rapid rtuv.ff, with high dis-




charges occurring for -short periods of time- anJ "Lev/ flows existing




for sustained periods ijring drcj^'bhs,   The Po'.-^y-iz River and its




tributaries thus -re unar»ct-:: ize^ by flash Bloods and. extremely




low f Ic-ws „




     Of the 3 million people iivine; in the bjsn;, ^oo'A. 205 million,




or 83 percent, live  in  the  Vashington,  ",C., Metropolitan Area.  The




upper basin is largely  rural with  a sea Her ing :. f sm-,ii cities having




populations of 10,000 to 20,0'JO.,  F'arriung --.nd related industries




such as canning, fruit  packing,  tannirg,  an-i dairy products processing




are major sources of income to the region.




     There are soal  mining  activities In tne North Branch sub-basin




with industrial activity iri the   esterrr-ort and Cumberland areas.

-------
                                                                IV-3





Industry has developed in the several small cities in the Potomac



Basin and is expanding rapidly in the area between Waynesboro and



Staunton and Front Royal along the South Fork of the Shenandoah River.



     Land use in the entire Potomac Basin is estimated to be 5 percent



urban, 55 percent forest, and 40 percent agriculture including pasture



lands.



     A map of the basin showing major municipal wastewater discharges



is presented in Figure IV-1.  A detailed inventory of the industrial



and municipal wastewater discharges within the basin is contained in



a separate report.



     Some of the Nation's most popular recreational areas are in the



basin.  There are many historic and scenic attractions such as the



Skyline Drive, the Appalachian Trail, limestone caverns, the Great



Falls of the Potomac, and Civil War monuments.



     The basin has abundant natural resources including coal, lime-



stone, dolomite, glass sand, clay, hard and soft woods, and granite.

-------
0

-------
                                                                 V-l





                            CHAPTER V



     DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLING PROGRAM AND OTHER DATA SOURCES






A.  STREAM SAMPLING NETWORK



     A stream sampling network was developed which consisted of



<40 stations located strategically throughout the basin.  The fol-




lowing criteria were used in locating the sampling stations;



          1.  At least one station in each major sub-basin



              representative of that sub-basin.



          2,  Where possible,, sampling stations to be located



              at or near United States Geological Survey (USGS)



              gaging stations,



          3.  In the larger sub-basins, additional stations to



              be selected for areas having varying water and land



              uses.



          4o  In the Washington area, to determine the loading to



              the Potomac Estuary, all significant tributaries to



              be sampled„



     A brief description of each sampling station is given in Table V-l



and the locations shown in Figure V-l.  Samples were obtained weekly



during the entire 1966 calendar year for most of the 4-0 stations.



     Samples were analyzed for the following nutrients;



          1.  Nitrite-nitrate nitrogen



          2.  Organic nitrogen



          3.  Ammonia nitrogen

-------












(H
CO
g
i »^
S- u^
*" 2!
Table
EVER NUTRIENT
tt
o
gi
|
ft.











4)
O
8J
Se3<3




C
Loeatio







fc
f
•H
OS



8
•H «
CO



C
O fc
.^ At
•rt m
ttJ B
•*•» 5
03 *


\t\ O IA
tO f*N -4"
CJ* O O
tfN V0 \Q
1 1 1
rH rH rH



P<
rH T3 00
£33™
fl HH 0) 1
bO * *H -P J3
fc O * fcj -C
•HO 1 O 01
> 
m m -P
-p
as as *



S
•a £
S 3 *c*
*^S (~H CO
as
a i ?


rH CM f*\





8
rH
1
rH


r»
C
•P
•a
idge-01
n
r~4
o

«
O

R
a.
*
en
»
2




2
•>i
cj
§
-a
O


>r





ir\ TV
§ S
rH rH



.C
•+•»
g
CO >>
hW) A) ffi
P ^ ^> S
CAJ s •as
<\l ^3 iH Q
Sfc K
(Q
^ * 0 O
fl> >T\
CO • W
. 
gg.'
rf ^'
•3
jO *•
93 ^>
a. «


ITS ^
lf\




§o
o
rH
1 ^1
rH rH
,
$ 1
fc
H 0 *

•a -P -H
IN "

ii ^

«
o
0 O
g 0
O S
fc fc
CQ $
CO =>


,J
* 0'
*. *
•o gr
rH

-t ff
t £
1 1


VO C^





»f\ O
rH f\
rH rH
rH rH


Aj
0
1
0
9 &
M iH
•H CQ
pa g c\j x
CT P. IT* O
0 0
• o • c
Otf O ^ S§

•

fc 0

•H O
w 1
G ft,
& fc
0 9
s B
O S3
*
0
»
jT
C0 ^??
o

^^3 s^
o
•p O
0 0
0 rt
fc 0
O X


00 <>





0
rH
VO
rH
1
to
V
fc
H
£ g
^> O
€0 ,O
e-^l
§ § a
Sft< s
•H
0 -P rH
tkp £3 rH
IIS



fc
0
Potomac Riv



g
c
O
J *>
£
0
I


o
rH




IfN
rH
P_|





C
•rH
fl
fc|
^3
j_a **"'


*
fc
o

Q>
r*
Conococheai


a
«
c
a


•H
rH
rH
•H


rH
rH



-------






















o
rj

H
1

, 5
r— i

*" ,
t j


















o
£
£4
C/j 4) «
^j &0 ^"
ScftS









§
•H
P
a

r—3





M
£
•r*
K








§
•H d)
•f^ f§
.$ z
CO



C
O M
•H 4)
-P ,0
at g
•p 9
CO *

IT-
\o
rH
^O
rH



^H
O

-p ^J
CO
gg »
** £
a
4) -
rH t>C
•a s
,0
f~\ «
C 0)
-P -H ttf


,x
CO
0>
o

f^
o
^t




BJ

»>
U)
£j
rO
a
•H
I


CM
rH




O vA
no rj^
rH rH
-O '•£)
1 1
rH rH
rH
0 O
^ ® a
Q CM
*M O
0) O ft) -p
tl£3 tkO O
T) ,G TJ O-.
•H -P -H
^Z C ^S
<£•* M T~t

Jm p o v
p co o
"~^ *Trt Q pj
to 4> -PS
0) -4" £ 4) rH rn
m p, -H v< ft)
3 +> x: c o -H
r-j « co 
P, -H
4) p
,c c
tO "^


C*"\ --^
rH rH




tr.
TO
^J
^o
rH









4
^


•o
c

ort
"i
O
T>
I
0)
x;
CO

,
tlL,
CO

*
ccJ

*,
"i
o
•a
a
0>
JH
CO


trs
rH




O
H
O^N
'yO
H



rH

| p>^
cO Q
-H* CM
t/3
s3!
•H ^
O H
w
s s
P -r)
Cc!
rg
V
1
®
f*
c/3

»
(«4
CO

•
>
•v
rH
ft

K
•g
1


x£)
rH




O
CM
f*"\
-O
rH



O
llf\
(M

a
P
Vi
o
5
M
o
z
-p
(Q
3
«
•S
O
'C
o
r^
CO

V
fe.
z


.
0

•v
^/>
g
TD
CD


r^-
rH




o

C^N
•,o
rH

4)
^
fl5
4^
C-3
M

^4
P
*
cu
p

Winch
*
ac!
"§
O
•o
4>
X3
CO

•
fc,
z

*
.*

•t,


•g
H
t3
T)
Z


CO
rH




U>
-O
r'N
"^Q
rH

"«M
o

4)
T3
•H
co

-p
4) 
4) -H
*Q rH
§ ^
-P


•
1
O
*o
c
flj
M
4)
45
CO

0
iS
*
^c
„.
^^
a
§
rH
m


CT^
iH




iTN
C*^
C'A
MD
rH



^M
O -*
'^Q
-p -^
CD
0 •
CQ
0) C
rH O
'g ^
O
NT -rl
•P CQ ho
§2 T?
3 -H
T
o
'it
§
1


o
CM




-------





















p
S3
O
o

r-i
j->
H

3?
FH













9)
u
c
s
s II





g
o
•H
•P
a
O
,3









4>
•H
OS




§


CO



e,
6 h
•H 0>
-P §
to *



«A O O O O O
SO ("A -J- iT\ UA iT\
C*A ^ ~*\r ^ -st ^xt
'•-O 0 O -0 0 -O
ll II l 1
rH rH H rH rH rH
0)
•H
 F~ ^- f* rH
 •
<0 -p p p -H +J
:=> c2 « K a: ct: S




JH <0 C
4) > 3 X,
> -H ^ cc 
•H cd  .
S -S - F ^ S

•& 9) f> *O £> O
C3 *O CO tf 03 tt)
•H CD $) O 4) C
<^i S t-5 CQ M CO


rH CM fN NT sj-
-o
rH



0)
bn
•or
•H
P^
CQ

TJ
1

«
J>
•H





o
g
CQ
r*>
•o
TJ

•
*s
•s
•9
rH
•H
>
fi


S)





AJ tfA
sr -«i-
•JJ ^
r-l rH
f-,
,j
^
o) <;
bo o
T? (Q
•H S
(-,
cc ^-*
o
•o
K ®
te
f-.
d> -p T3
> 01 >
•n 3 rH
PH ^S CQ




^
X3 CD
O »>
C -H
id ct;
CQ O
03 B
•P w
etj o
^C pL^
• •
"O *3
S, *
-t-3 CQ
3 rH
1 fi
rH -P
rH 0)
§0)
rW
CQ O


tx* (T*
CO OJ





O
-£>
1
rH





0)
&p
xT
•H
^f
CQ
-^
o-
rH
•
CC




£
cS
-P
rH
g
*H
Cj_<
CM
S
*
CO

03
rH
£
-p
*
8
o


0
f"\





o
•sf
rH
i ra
iS i w
« p
g hfl-P
O TfrH
-P -H 0)
hn f-i CQ
C CQ
•r-l
J3 • O

CL, «M ITS
0» O O
bOrH ^t
M aJ -p
O -H 10 •
c5 o w as




j^
o
1
P5
•H


§
•.
5
H
f<
•H
cd
o


rH
fA



-------
0)














P!
O
O

H
1

0)
, 	 j
rd
en






















USGS
Gage
Reference







•H
P
CD
O
a




-
h
*>
•H













to






G ,
O r-l
•H «
-P ,0

co %
OJ i> O m
ir\ ^c oo »o
NT -J- sf -J-
^ 1 tJ
iH f-i G +>
03 0) O 0}
-P O
r-i C O (O
g M CV) ^J-

+> u~\ •> D
M CT" 4) • &3


C IE 4> (S
§ * °
(fi -P O g
M g >1 O
§ 5 8 "8
•«2 o.


0
«J Q*
• > O

S •> a) o'
'O bO
^ O TH •
p Ctf) CQ CO
t°4 M
tt) »r^ • j^
T5 r-l *5 -P
0 M CO "^
"


C\J r^\ xj U"N
C'v r^N fN r*^


1-6^95
( Riverdal
1-6510
(Hyattevi


do
•o
•H
fLf
OQ

«
ij
1

CO
f-.
0>

Si

0)
*H
-p

o

"*


*
2

«,
tyj
h
rO
§
4)
"O
0)
r-t
«


0



ir\ O if\
•£) F~ ^D
--t iT\ >J-
1 1 1
r-< r-( r-4

OJ

•
-P
OH

«,
1T\ 4)
:-t$t bp
• -H tJO
01 rn TJ
P « -H
CO fn
P £ *
oJ O • H
ffl <; >• r*\

^
43 S 4)
> s >
•H O -H
K CEJ
o 3 o
S •"' 3
OB S
€ I €
0, O d,
4)
•S1
m
c
O
CO 0

•H O>
3e •> tie
C »tf
OP T!
C cr pa
"^ O
O O rH
O O C5
sfc O c*N


j> to O
C"~N C'A C"\



-------

-------
z
2
<
t
fe
g
3
y
£.
0
o
o
<
- 5
Mil
E i^a s
Z Q. £ "1 1-
• •*•«•

-------
                                                                  V-7






          4.  Total Kjeldahl nitrogen




          5.  Total phosphorus






B.  WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT DATA




     During the midsummer of 1966, the sampling program was expanded




to weekly measurements of nitrogen and phosphorus in 13 of the major




wastewater discharges of the upper basin.  For a period of six months,




nutrient analyses were made of both the influent and effluent at




each wastewater treatment fability„  A list of facilities sampled is




given in Table V-20




     A survey was made of all major wastewater treatment facilities




in the upper Potomac River Basin in 19680  All municipal and bio-




degradable industrial wastewater discharges with a flow greater than




0.5 mgd were sampled.  In the Washington Metropolitan Area, nutrient




analyses at the large wastewater facilities are made routinely.






C.  SEDIMENT DATA




     At five of the nutrient network stations, sediment loading is




routinely monitored by the U3QS,  The five sediment stations are




listed in Table V-3.




     Sediment loading to the Potomac Est'uary at Great Fails, Maryland,




was calculated by totaling the loading from the Monocacy River and




the Potomac River at Point of Roclss, Maryland,

-------
                rH


                 g
8
CQ

r\
                                                    if\
                                                           C-
                                                                 lf\
                                                                    .
                                                                  «f\
                                                                  to
                                                                                                            «O
                        O
                        V
                       to
                 &    &
                             1
                              O
                                                        •o    -o     TJ

                                                        §    §     8
                                                        000
                                                        4>    4>     
                       o

                       8
                        •
                       o
                             O
                8O     O    O    O     CM     O
                S-     O    O    O     T\     O
          c*\    D     «»\    \o    CVI     oo     \O
                                       CM
                                                                     rH

                                                                     t>


                                                                     OJ
                                                                              O
                                                                              CM
                                                                                               H
                                                                                               OJ
                                                                              C\J
                                                                                •

                                                                              O
                                                                     (M
                                                                       •

                                                                     xf
                                           0)
                                           O
                                           q
H
£3
cd
       ft!
                                                                                               •a
I
                       •H
                       CQ
                             CO
 IP
•H
rH
P

€
CO
                             o
 1?
-g     fi     Q
 c     5     S
M     CO    CO
                                       hfl
      |s
           •s
       
       W  rH
                              HP    HP
                             •H
                             rH
                                             g
                                                    •H

                                                    rH

                                                    P
                                                    CO
                                                    -a
                              §     13
                              5     S

                              ft    rH
                              efl     0)
                              co     ,a


                             o     c5
                              fi
                              a)
                             CO
                                                           -P
                                                           rH

                                                           £


                                                           H?
                                           O
                                          •H
                                           rH

                                          H
                                                           0)

                                                           T3
 §     §
CO    CO
                                                 CO

                                                 t3
                                           t2fi    0)

                                          a     I
ers
                                                                               0?
                                                                              P
                                        a?
                                                        o
                                                       •c
                                                       H
                                                                              8
                                                                              CO
                                                                                     CJ

                                                                                     (0
                                                        0)
                                                        P
                                                        H
                                                        •H
                                                        fx.
                                                                                     O
                                                                                     •H
                                                         ,    2
esbo
                                                                                               CO
                                                                                               (U
                                                                 CO

                                                                 -o
                                                                  4)
                                                        •H


                                                        O
                                                                                             • o
                                                                                            03  P«
                              €
                              CO
port
                                                                              •H
                                                                              rH
                                                                              H
                                                                                                            •a
                                                                                            G
                                                                                            cd
                                                                                            CO
                                                                                            
-------
                                                                 V-9
                             Table V-3

                      IISG3 SEDIMENT SIATION3
                        Potomac- River Basin

     Station                                       Stream

Point of Rocks, McL                           Potomac River

Jug Bridge near Frederick, McJ,                Mbnocacy River

Fairview, Md0                                 Gonocoeheague Creek

Cumberland,, Md,                               North Branch Potomac
                                                 River

Colesville, Md.                               Noithwest Branch
                                                 Anaecstia River
D.  DALECARLIA WATER FILTRATION PLANT DATA, U0 30 CORPS OF ENGINEERS

     The raw water supply at Great Falls, Maryland, for the

Washington Metropolitan A-rea 13 monitored for varioxis  chemical  and

sanitary parameters including nutrients.  In 1969, the analyses  con-

ducted by the U. s. Corps of Engineers were expanded to include

three forms of phosphorus and four forms of nitrogen.

-------
                                                                 VI-1






                            CHAPTER VI




          SOURCES OF NUTRIENTS 'PHOSPHORUS AMD NITROGEN)






A.  WASTEWATER DISCHARGES




     Nutrient loadings and wastewater treatment plant efficiencies




of 13 facilities were determined weekly for six months.  Excluding




the Amcelle and Westernport plants, which receive industrial waste




principally, the average concentrations and removal efficiencies are




given below:




       parameter






     T. PO/ as PO/




     N02 as N




     NO-3 as N




     TKN as N




     As shown in the above tabulation, the average removal of phos-




phorus was about 25 percent and the average TKN removal was 22




percent.  The nitrite and nitrate loadings to the plants were insig-




nificant.  (Summary data for individual facilities are given in Table B-5.)




     As of December 1968, there were 2~>6 wastewater discharges in the




upper Potomac River Basin  [2] „  Based on a survey of the major waste-




water treatment facilities, it was estimated that about 18,430 Ibs/day




of TPO/ and 10,680 Ibs/day of TK.N were discharged to the surface waters




(Table VI-1).  For a sewered population of 403,500, this amounts to a




per capita loading of 0.045 Ibs/day of phosphorus and 0«,026 Ibs/day




of nitrogen.
Influent
TmgTlF
39,0
0.1
0.1
21.1
Effluent
fmg/i)
2904
0,7
0,2
16.4
Removal
25.0
-
_,
22.0

-------
                           Table VI-1


          NUTRIENT LOADINGS FROM WASTEWATER DISCHARGES

                         BY SUB-REGIONS
Sub -Region
N '.rib Branch
S..Hjth Branch and
Upper Region
Opequan
C'jnococheague
and Upper-
Middle Region
Antietam and
Middle Region
Shenandoah
Catoctin Creeks
Md. and Va.
M nucacy
L wer Region
P pulation
Served
79,200

17,300
34,800
26,900

61,500
108,500

5,4oo
62,500
7,400
LOADING AFTER TREATMENT
BOD BCN TPO,
Ibs/day Ibs/day Ibs/ddy
^j, 300
.*
2,720
3,470
4,250

7,980
31,800

740
4220
200
1750

370
480
710

890
4890

110
1380
100
4850

46o
1100
1050

2380
6360

220
1830
180
TOTAL
403,500
110,630
10,680
18,430
   * A Sub-Region may include discharges to the small tributaries and
     to the wia stem of the P tomac.

-------
                                                                 VI-3






     Of the nine sub-regions (Table VI-1), the largest source of



nutrients is the Shenandoah watershed.  About 35 percent of the TPO/



and 45 percent of the TKN in the upper basin originates in this




watershed.



     Nutrient loadings from industrial wastewater discharges are




about 7,700 Ibs/day of TPO^ and 4,600 Ibs/day of TKN.  The industrial



contribution to the total wastewater nutrient loadings In the upper




basin is about 42 percent for the total PO, and about 43 percent of



the total nitrogen.  The amount of N(>> + NOo nitrogen in both the



industrial and municipal wastewater discharges is insignificant.






B.  LAND RUNOFF AND OTHER SOURCES



     To determine the amount of nutrients coming from land runoff,



analyses of loadings from three distinct land uses (forest, agricul-



tural, and urban) were made0  Using the Catoctin Creek, Maryland,



watershed basin as primarily agricultural, the Patterson Creek water-



shed as forested, and Rock Creek watershed as urban, the effect of



land uses on the concentration of nutrients in the surface waters is



illustrated in Figures VI-1 and V!-20  The watersheds above the



sampling stations in these three areas receive a relatively small



volume of wastewater.



     In the Patterson Creek watershed, the concentrations of both phos-



phorus and inorganic nitrogen were the lowedt for the three types of



land uses.  For an agricultural area such as the Catoctin Creek water-



shed, the concentrations of nutrients were higher and fluctuated

-------
81
   Q.
   (O
Ld
        .
      CC 
-------
Figure VI-2

-------
considerably.   The high MC.j + Nl^ ^oaoentraticns  were  observed during



periods of high stream flow --old:' 1 ions,,



     The high  variation in N•.'•_:• -" N'"-j m+rogen  :;ari be attributed to high



mobility cf NC^ ion as report r-i by fad Leigh  [3] and Bailey [4],



Figure VT-3 for the Sooth Bran.:h otation at  fer ersourg demonstrates



that the concentration of nitrates is dlrertly related to river dis-



charge while concentrations cf TKN and F-."^ are indirectly related.



     For the 3.^ stations in the r,on»ti-ial p'-rtion of  the basin,



regression analyses were made us i rig both linear ard log transforms.



The log transforms appeared to y.r-ij the oest  correlation resulting



in the following
where:
          C  =  concentration of f ^, TK^, or MC;  *  NCj  i,mg/i;
          Q  -- stream flow vcfV'




          a  ~ a  Curu->t-iril




          b  ~ aii exp',i"cTif




Using the slope  of  the ..oncentratirn-dirscharge relationship (the




exponent b)  and  knowing the- 3pc:-If1'\- local. :-..r, :. f  the  sampling point in




relation to  the  municipal or inrhjstri?! w-^ste '-urfai}.:••,  a  quantiza-




tion of the  sourc.63  of the nutrler.-s ::~±/, L^ -ibtained-   For example,




all stations, except one  below ar. .[Tuiuotrlal outfall  discharging




nitrates, had a  positive  slope ranging from -about 0.3 tc 007 with an




average of 0,5 -J-jggeHtlng that most of the inorganic  nitrogen comes




from land and O"»:her  sources and not from wast^waier  di.scharges.

-------
       10. Or
       1.0 •
lif
*(?+•
f-Q. (\l
 L- o
                               SOUTH   BRANCH  POTOMAC  RIVER
                                               AT
                                  PETERSBURG, WEST  VIRGINIA
TKN, NO2+N03 ond PO4  Vs. RIVER DISCHARGE
                                   100
                                                            1000
                                                                                     10,000
                                         RIVER DISCHARGE cfs
                                                                               Figure VI-3

-------
                                                                  VI-8


     The concentrations of phosphorus and TKN for most of the non-tidal

stations had either slightly positive or negative slopes indicating a

diluting effect.  The correlation coefficients for these two param-

eters were low, probably due to seasonal ani flushing effects.

     However, the slope of the relationship for stations above and

below waste outfalls definitely supports the findings of Bailey  [4]

which indicate that (1) phosphorus and organic nitrogen have low

mobility in soil, (2) PO^ and TiCN are net readily leached, and (3)

concentration appears to be related to wastewater leadings and stream

transport mechanisms.

     The average annual yields of phosphorus and nitrogen based on

the survey data for the three watersheds are given in Table VI-2.


                              Table VI-2

         NUTRIENT LOADINGS FROM WATERSHEDS WITH VARYING IAND USE


Watershed   Drainage    TPC^ as PC//     N3p_ *• NC-j as N      TKN as N
   and        Area
Land Use    (sq»mi0)  (lbs/day/sqcmi„}  (Ib3/day/sq0mi0)  (Ibs/day/sq.mi,
Patterson
Creek
(Forest) 279 0,50 2,02
Catoetin
Creek
(Agric.) 109 1,25 5/30
Rock Creek
(Urban) 77 1.10 2.70


0.41


0.65

0.67

-------
                            Table VI-2

        NUTRIENT LOADINGS FROM WATERSHEDS WITH VARYING LAND USE
Watershed    Drainage  T.PO, as PO,   NO  + NO^ as N   TKN as N
  end           Area                    2     j
Land Use     (sq.mi.)  (ibs/day/sq.mi}(Ibs/day/sq.mi) {ibs/day/sq.mi.)
Pntterson
  Creek
(Forest)       279          0.50           2.02           Q.kl

Cfjtoctin
  Creek
(Agric.)       109          1.25           5.30           0.65

Rock
  C-eek
(Urberi)         77          1-10           2.70           u.67

-------
                                                                 VI-9





Similar nutrient levels and seasonal variations were also observed




for T/atersheds having comparable land uses without large wastewater



discharges.



     For the Monocacy and Conococheague sub-basins, inorganic nitrogen




yields of over 10 Xbs/day/sq. mile were measured,  The high yields




can be attributed partly to land runoff and feed lot drainage.  At



times farm animals can be seen wading in many of the small tributaries



of the Monocacy.




     Using the same land use designation as the U.S. Corps of Engineers



in the 1958 study [5], the nutrient loading from land runoff was de-



termined and is shown in Table VI--3.  It is noted that 64 percent of



the nutrients from land runoff is from agricultural areas even though




over 62 percent of the basin is covered by forest.

-------
                                       a
                                      TS
                                       W
                                       fi
                                              O
                                             VO
O
eg
t—
»
5
03 TJ
tc "^.
CQ
LTN

O

O
-•t
6

u'1-
^O
6
O

0

                                       B»
                                                         r-i
                                                                                   8
,0
       B
 «    8
       s
                fe
                OH
                              w
                              03
                              O
                              O
                              s;
                             s
                                       (T1

                                       CQ
                                      CQ
                                      n«

                                      W
                                     JTJ

                                      cc"
                                             Q
                                             Cj
                                                         o

                                                         CV;
                                                                    •— 1
                                                                    .-I
                                                                                                                ul
                                                        a
                                                       •ct
                                                                                                                G
                                                                                                                Si
                                                                                                                B
                                             *
                                             C
                                                                               O,
                                                                               3

-------
                                                                 VII-1
                           CHAPTER VII

                ANALYSES OF NUTRIENT NETWORK DATA


     The data from the 1966 nutrient network stream sampling stations

are presented in a detailed report  [6],  A computer program especially

designed for the survey was developed to aid in analyzing the data

which are presented in three forms as follows:

     1.  Sampling station information

     2.  Input data (observed data)

     3,  Loading data (calculated information from input data)

Monthly summaries of the nitrogen and phosphorus data are presented

in Appendix B.

     The results of the nutrient network survey have been grouped

into three areas (l) major sub-basins of the upper basin, (2) the

main stem of the Potomac, and (3) tributaries of the lower region

near Washington, D.C.  Only data from the key stations of these areas

are discussed separately below„

     A,  PHOSPHORUS

     1.  Ma.lor Sub-basins of the Upper Potomac Basin (North Branch,
         South Braneh, Conococheague, Antietam, Opequon, Shenan-
         doah, and Mbnoeacy Watersheds)

     Figure VII-1 and Table Vil-i indicate the concentration of phos-

phorus to be about five times greater in the Monoeacy River, Opequon

Creek, and Antietam Creek sub-basins than in the remaining four

basins.  These higher concentrations are also reflected in large

yields of 2 to 4. Ibs/day/sq. mile, as shown in Table VII-1.

-------
GO

cr
UJ

E

O  D
<  tr
2  O
O  I
t~  Q-
o  f>
a  O

t:  Q-
Z  <
O)  I-
<  O
co  H

CD
D
Ct
O

                                             «">
                                                                 (VI
                                                                                                 FIGURE  VII-I

-------
                      Table VH-1

     COMPARISON OF PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS AND LOADINGS
                FOR THE MAJOR .SUB-BASINS

Sub-basin                       T. PO, as PO,,
(Station)
North Branch
(Oldtown, Md.)
Gcvuth .Branch
(Koraney, /.'. Va.)
Conoeocht 'vjj'-ie Creek
(williamsport, Md.)
Antietam Creek
(Aiitietam, Md.)
Opeguon d-etk
(Martin;?! 'irg, W. Va.)
Shenandoah River
( Bloomeri . W . Va . )
Monoeacy River
(Frederick, Md.)
Potomac I-.iver
(Great F^lls, Md. )
(Wi)

.352

.092

.327

1.996
1,511

• 356
1.176

.379
(Ibs/day)^ (ibs/day/sq. mi.

2,551 1.92

1,535 1.06

1,''26 2.6l

1,353 4.78
1,109 3.59

5,105 1.68
3,. ,85 4.16

17,013 1.^8

-------
                                                                 VII-4





     The phosphorus concentration displays a fairly consistent seasonal



pattern, low in months of high flow and higher during dry periods.



(See Figure VII-2 for monthly average stream flows for select gaging




stations.)



     As summarized in Table VII-1 and exhibited in Figure VII-3, the



loading (pounds/day) for the major sub-basins follows the seasonal




pattern of the river discharge.  The large increase in September 1966,



as shown in Figure VI1-3, is a result of extremely high river dis-



charges during this month.



     2.  Main Stem



     As presented in Figure VII-4 and in Table VII-2, the phosphorus



concentrations for stations along the main stem are greatly affected



by the phosphorus levels in the sub-basins.  The high concentrations



of phosphorus in the Antietam, Opequon, and Moriocacy watersheds are



diluted by main stem flows.



     The phosphorus concentration appears to vary inversely to stream



flow as did the phosphorus levels in the sub-basins (Figure VI-3).



The relatively high levels in September for Oldtown and Great Falls



which had fairly high stream flows are probably due to a flushing



action of river channel.,



     The phosphorus loadings during the low flow months of June,



July, and August of 1966 were less than one-fourth of the loading



for the remaining months.  This seasonal variation is apparent in




Figure VII-5.

-------
20.000-
                          RIVER   DISCHARGE
                                   for
                       SELECTED  GAGING STATIONS
                                   1966
 10000-
 1.000-
   100-
                                                                                   POTOMAC  R.
                                                                                   NEAR  D.C.
                                                                                   NORTH BRANCH
                                                                                 / trf  CUMBERLAND
                                                                              /   /.MONOCACY
                                                                            /   /JUG  BRIDGE
    10-
         JAN.   FEB.
MAR.  APR.   MAY
                                         JUN.    JUL.
                                               1966
                                 AUG.    SEP.    OCT.    NOV.
DEC.
   FIGURE  m-2

-------
cc
uj
O
<
< o
00 H
I
00
ce
O
-



o
0
o
0
^—-_
^^-~-
0
o
o
o"
^\ \ ~" — ~~V-!» — ~~~~—
o X b ^^*TB
r ' i i i i i i |
o
o
0

~~~- — ^
o
0
                                                 1V1O1
                                                                         Figure VII-3

-------
CD

o:
ui
> 

*g

o§

       e
   O
           o
           UJ
Oaco a O
• +
     m
     (M
        O
        O
m
(VI
                                              so    bd  IVIOI
                                                                     FIGURE  VII-4

-------
CO

<
00
or
UJ
tr
u I „

IS5  fr
O O ^_

O a £
a  , —
LU

H

tO
                                                                                                                      
-------
                                                                 VII-9
                             Table VII-2

        COMPARISON OF PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS AND LOADINGS
                  ALONG THE MAIN STEM OF THE POTOMAC
    Station              River Mile      	Total POy as PO/

Old-town, Md.
Paw Paw, W. Va0
Hancock, Md.
Hagerstown, Md.
Shepherdstown, W. Va.
Point of Rocks, Md.
Great Falls, Md.
3. Tributaries of

287 . 30
276.55
238,60
210. 2C
183,60
159 o 50
127.20
the Lower
Cmg/1)
,532
.288
.188
0126
.199
.263
.379
Basin near
( Ibs/day)
2,551
4,299
6,683
3,971
15,073
14,816
17,013
Washington
(Ibs/day/sq.m
1.92
1*38
1.64
0.80
2.54
1.54
1.48
(Cabin John
         Creek, Seneca Creek, Goose Creek, Rock Greek, Anacostia
         River, and Oecoquan Creek)

     Figure VTI-6 indicates average monthly phosphorus concentrations

of 1.5 fflg/1 and greater in the Goose Creek, Cabin John Creek, and

Anacostia River watersheds in 1966.  The high concentrations in Goose

Creek are attributed partly to wastewater discharges, while the some-

what lower levels in Cabin John Creek and Anacostia River are probably

due to disruptions in the sanitary sewer systems.  The average annual

concentration of total phosphorus In the three other tributaries of

the lower basin was less than 004 rag/1,,

     As presented in Table VII-3, the yield of phosphorus for Seneca

and Cabin John creeks was 6.14 and 8.7 Ibs/day/sq. mile, respectively.

-------
                     Table VII-2
  COMPARISON OF PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS AND LOADINGS
          ALONG THE MAIN STEM OF THE POTOMAC

Station            River Mile                T. PO,, as PO,.

Oldtown, Md.
Paw Paw, to". Va.
Hancock, Md.
Hagerstown, Md.
Shepherds town, W. Va.
Point of Rocks, Md.
Great Fall*;, Md.

287.30
276.55
238.60
210.20
183.60
159-50
127.20
(me/i)
.532
.288
.188
.126
.199
.263
.379
(Ibs/day) r (
2,551
4,299
6,683
3,971
15,073
14, 816
17,013
Ibs/day/sq.mi .
1.92
1.38
1.64
.80
2.54
1.54
1.48

-------
m

or
ui

or

O t/>

S a

Is
  Q.
  in
  O
•*. I
 o a.


UJ <
or tr
m

Or
h-

or
UJ
     en
         x-.'
          cc
          o
                  cc
                 :O
        UJ
        O
        UJ
          z cc .  < z

          o°5*tl
          °<^°So
            i)l*J  O x
          zXw aeoO
          m z° o < o
          J ujO OZO
            •u	0

                  Q
            + X
                                                                       
-------
                                                                VII-11


These yields are about fourfold greater than the 1.4-8 lbs/day/sq. mile

yield found in the Potomac River at Great Falls , Maryland.


                           Table VI I- 3

      COMPARISON OF PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS AND LOADINGS
       FOR TRIBUTARIES OF THE LOWER BASIN NEAR WASHINGTON
      Station               _ Total PQy as

Cabin John Creek
(Cabin John, Md,)
Seneca Creek
(Seneca, Md. )
Goose Creek
(Leesburg, Va0)
Rock Creek
(M St. Bridge, D.C
Anacostia River
( Bladensburg , Md . )
Occoquan Creek
(Occoquan, Va.)
B. INORGANIC AND
1. Major Sub
(ing/XT

0,662

0,290

1.010

.) 0.316

0.753
0.225
TOTAL KJELDAHL
-basins of the
(Ibs/day) "

210

774

791

116

231
1,246
NITROGEN
Upper Potomac
( lbs/day/sq . mile )

8.75

6.14

2.34

1.50

1.78
2.31

     The inorganic nitrogen concentrations in the seven larger sub-basins,

as shown in Figure VII-7, had a significant seasonal pattern (see Fig-

ure VII-2 for 1966 river discharges).  In general, the inorganic nitrogen

concentrations are directly related to the stream flow.  This is at

-------
                       Table VII-3

  COMPARISON OF PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS AND LOADINGS FOR
   TRIBUTARIES OF THE LOWER REGION NEAR WASHINGTON, D. C.

Station                          T. PO, as PO,,

Cabin John Creek
(Cabin John, Md.)
Seneca Creek
(Seneca, Md.)
Goost Creek
(Leesburg, Va.)
Rock Creek .
(M St. Bridge, D.C.)
Anacostia River
(Bladensburg, Md.)
Occoquan Creek
( Occoquan, Va.)
(fflS/1)
.662
.290
1.010
.316
• 753
.225

210
77^
791
116
231
1,2^
( Ibs /day/s q . mi .
8.75
6.1k
2.34
1.50
1.78
2.31

-------
                                     o.
to

(T
Ul
   UJ
o o

IS
O H
o
Q.
   u
 o Z

<» 1
z o
to ^
< o
DO Z

CD

51

cr
o
<0

(O

o
                                   so
                                                                  FIGURE Vi-7

-------
                                                               vn-13





variance with total phosphorus concentrations which are inversely



related to flow.



     During the high flow months, February through May, as much as




100,000 Ibs/day of inorganic nitrogen entered the Potomac (Figure VII-8).



During the low flow months of June, July, and August, the inorganic



nitrogen loadings were less than 400 Ibs/day for the major sub-basins.




     The Conocoeheague and Monocacy sub-basins had a yield of over



10 Ibs/day/sq. mile.  This is over twofold larger than the remaining



five watersheds (see Table vTI-4).




     The analysis for TKN was initiated in midsummer 1966.  Therefore



loadings for the entire year were not calculated.



     2.  Main Stem




     As shown in Figure VTI-9, the concentration of inorganic nitrogen




on the main stem varied directly with flow.  This seasonal pattern



was also observed at the sub-basin stations.



     It can be seen in Table VII-5 that the average annual concentra-



tions of inorganic nitrogen were higher for the three stations in the



lower part of the basin.  The Conocoeheague, Antietam, and Monocacy



sub-basin inputs were apparently responsible for these higher nitrogen



levels.



     The inorganic nitrogen loadings shown in Figure VII-10 demonstrate



the direct relationship between flow and concentration.  The loadings



in the high flow month of September were about 100-fold larger than



during the summer low flow months.

-------
                                   
ON
                      Figure VII-8

-------
                                                             ID
                                                             
(Xop/-tq|)  N
                                              Figure VII-8

-------
                      Table VII-4
        COMPARISON OF NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS AMD
           LOADINGS FOR THE MAJOR SUB-BASINS
Sub-Basin                      N00 + N00 as N           TKN as N
(Station)
North Branch
(Oldtown, Md.)

oouth Branch
(Romney, W. Va.)
Conococheague Creek
(Williamsport, Md.)
Antietam Creek
(Antietam, Md.)
Qpequon Cretk
(Martinsburg, W. Va.)
Shenandoan River
(Bloomery, W. Va.)
Monocacy River
(Frederick, Md.)
Potomac River
(Great Falls, Md.)
(fflg/1)

• 378


.296
1-593

1.^29
2.149

.65^
1.7^

.903
(Ibs/day)

3,26?
t

3,655
5,317

1,321
1,817

6,714
8,661

49,009
(ibs/day/sq.mi . )

2.46


2.52
11.46

4.67
5.88

2-33
10.65

4.29
(ng/1)

.784


-
.019

-536
.264

.580
.693

.270

-------
25
5S
si
O
Q.
Z ~
•5 O
  cr
2 O
liJ Z
        o
        u
        O
        UJ
       •^ ^* K v
       oauinb
       i-  a 5 <
       QJUJ±UI
       -I
-------
                      Table VII-5
     COMPARISON OF NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS AND LOADINGS
                   FOR THE MAIN STEM

Station                      NO- + NO^ as N

Oldtown, Md.
Paw Paw. W. Va.
Hancock, Md.
Hagerstown, Md.
ijhepherdctown, W. Va.
Point of Rocks, Md.
Great Falls., Md.
(ag/1)
-378
.324
.294
.279
.639
.581
.923
(Ibs/day)
3,267
7,791
10,271
8,853
27,205
26,959
49,209
J(lbs/day/sc[.mi . )
2.46
2.51
2.50
1.78
4.58
2.79
4.29
(fflgA)
.784
.432
.298
.386
.378
.422
.270

-------
o
o
q

o
o
o
o
o

                                                                                                                   10

                                                                                                                   

-------
                                                                VII-19

     On an annual "basis, TKN concentrations In the main stem were about
0.30 to 0.45 mg/1 with the exception of Qldtown, Maryland, which had
an average TKN of 0.78 mg/1.  The high concentration at Oldtown was
probably the result of the large domestic and industrial discharges
into the North Branch.
     3.  Tributaries of the Lower Basin near Washington
     The annual average inorganic nitrogen concentrations in the trib-
utaries near Washington varied from 0,48 to 1.31 mg/1 with the highest
level in the Seneca, Rock Creek, and Anaeostia watersheds.  Figure
VII-11 shows that seasonal concentrations varied widely among the
sub-basins.  For example, inorganic nitrogen was higher in summer
months and lower in winter months for Seneca Creek while showing the
opposite pattern In Goose Creek.
     On a yield basis, Goose and Seneca Creek sub-basins had contri-
butions of 7.7 and 3805 Ibs/day/sq. mile.  The remaining sub-basins
had yields of 3,0 to 4,0.  (See Table VII-6.)
     The TKN concentrations for the six select sub-basins ranged
from 0.349 to 1.130 mg/1 with higher levels in Cabin John and
Anacostia watersheds.

C,  MASS BALANCE OF PHOSPHORUS
     The phosphorus loading at any given sampling point in the basin
is dependent upon many variables such as flow, soil condition, and
land usage.  On an annual basis, the amount of phosphorus can be ex-
pressed mathematically as follows°
     Pt = Pw + PI + ?o ±  Ps

-------
CO


a:
UJ
o:
    z
O  LJ
<  O
2  O
M.  U
ui  O

5  a
<  o
H-  Z

CO

£
I-

(T.
U
     in
                       -o
                       (vi
                                                                                                
-------
                      Table VTI-6

COMPARISON OF NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS AND LOADINGS FOE
 TRIBUTARIES OF THE LOWER R^ION NEAR WASHINGTON,  D.C.

Station

Cabin John Creek
(Cabin John, Md.)
Seneca Creek
(Seneca, Md.)
Goose Creek
(Leesburg, Va.)
Rock Creek
(M St. Bridge, D.C.)
Anacostia River
(Bladensburg, Md.)
Oceoqiuan Creek
(Occoquan, Va.)
(mg/l.
.565
1.309
.924
.885
.9142
.478
) (Ibs/SayJ"
89
97!;
1,308
m
409
2,253
n-bs/day/sq.mi
3-71
7-73
38A9
3-56
3-15
4.17
. )(rbs/day/sq..mi .
• 796
.409
AIT
.3^9
1.130
.512

-------
                                                              VII-22






where:



     P^ = phosphorus observed at Point t



     Pw = phosphorus in wastewater discharge above point t



     P]_ = phosphorus coining from land above Point t



     P  = phosphorus from other sources above Point t



     Pg = phosphorus lost or released from storage in the stream bed






Utilizing the 1966 data and rearranging the above formulation, the




amount of phosphorus loadings deposited or released from storage in



the stream bed were determined as shown in Table VII-7.



     The negative signs on the phosphorus loading storage values indi-




cate that at six of the eight stations phosphorus was retained in the



stream channel, bound there by sediments and aquatic plants.  Although



no core data are available for the upper Potomac, data from the




estuary indicate that there is a more than fivefold increase in



phosphorus in the sediments near wastewater discharge points.  This



apparent loss of phosphorus to sediments may be temporary in that



during flood conditions a considerable tonnage of sediment is trans-



ported into the estuary in a matter of days.

-------























f£j
p
[23
t* — "^
1 2
HH ffl
"* CO
CD £D
H PH
rQ O
E4 E
CO
O
PH























O
* £
^ 0)
PHWCU

^" -P M
PH O 03
•—'EH 3t





Tl
H
CO
r-P

PH tl

crt
i^





w

S -P
8 c3
!»f^ £
PH fo (U
-P
to
1
0)
£_J
rn
i

cS
(U

cd
CQ
rQ
rH

-1


f*|
Cl
^

•
w
'










/• — ^
1
""*"*-«^
CO
_Q
H


V — ^
>a
5
\
to
5
x_>















































0^
0?
1





00
H
LA


_-j-
vo
\o




o
LA
•
O










O
LA
CO
*v
-3-

rH
LA
LA
OJ

CO
OJ
OO
r-T


•s
s
(^

rl
4^
j^
o
t3

O
LA
OO

-r





LA
CO
H
r-T


lA
OJ






VO

O










o
VO



LA
OO
LA
H

O
LA
-4-
H"


•8
§
^

c~j
^J)
d
0
CO

O
rH

1





O
no
H


O
t-
-=t





O
•
rH










O
81



VO
OJ
OJ
rH

ON
VD
-3"



-------
                                                              VXII-1






                          CHAPTER VIII



                            SEDIMENTS






A.  EFFECTS ON NUTRIENT CONCENTRATIONS



     The effect of sediments on the concentrations of nutrients in



the surface water are summarized below;




         1.  Sediments contain nutrients.  On the average, topsoil




             particles contain 200 rag/1 of adsorbed phosphorus  [3].



         2.  Sediments ca,n act as transport mechanisms „  Studies by



             Wadleigh [J] indicate that when phosphorus reaches the



             stream its primary vector is soil particles.



         3.  Due to the adsorption phenomenon, sediments when de-



             posited in the stream channel also trap nutrients.




         4.  More than 99 percent of the soluble nitrogen in the



             soil is the nitrate form  [4].



         5.  The forms of nitrogen present greatly affect the leach-



             ability of the material.  Nitrates leach at a more



             rapid rate than the other forms of nitrogen [4].



         6.  In contrast to the high mobility of nitrate nitrogen,



             phosphorus compounds react vigorously with soil and



             have a very low mobility  [4].



Sediments in water may also reduce the penetration of light and thus



reduce photosynthesis by algal cells„  This reduction will in turn



lessen the effect of the algal cells on dissolved Oxygen concentra-



tions in the surface waters.

-------
                                                                VIII-2






B8  SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL VARIATIONS



     A study of the sediment sources and transport was prepared by



Wark and Keller [7] in 1963 for the Interstate Commission on the




Potomac River Basin.  Their study indicated the following:



         1.  The average sediment discharge of the streams in



             the Potomac River Basin varied from 42 to



             4,600 kilopounds (kips) per square mile.  The wide



             variation was mainly due to land 'use.



         2.  During the sampling period of the study, the estimated



             annual sediment discharge of the Potomac River Basin



             was 340 kips per square mile or a total of 5 million kips,



         3.  For two streams on which daily measurements were made,



             about 90 percent of the annual load was discharged



             10 percent of the time.



In comparing the sediment loading at Point of Rocks with those of



12 other major rivers in the USA in 1963, it ranked seventh.



     An analysis was made of more recent sediment data to determine



further the effects of sediments on nutrient levels.  The sediment



data for five sampling stations during 1966 are given in Table



VIII-1.  During 1966, the annual sediment yield varied from a mini-



mum of 98 kips/sq. mile at Point of Rocks to 400 kips/sq. mile in



the North Branch at Cumberland„  For all five stations the maximum



sediment load occurred in February with a range of 34 to 57 percent



of the annual loading.

-------
 to
 ro
lft
ta
                                                     o
                                                     C7>
                                                     CXI
                                      o
                                      o
                                      CM
                        o
                        o
                                                           o
                                                           ro
                          <
                          <*H
                          O
                                           LT\
                                           LT\
                                                t—
                                                Lf\
                                   OJ
                                   m
February
February
February
February
February
H
 i
 (U
H

•3
 fH

  K
              •H
              K 
X! 0)
0 -H
o >
o m
O -H
CJ cfl
O fo
O • — '



i-,
V
t>
•H ^^^
K •
o s
o3
S *^
O Tj
-P £
O o5
0, H
• fc
?H rQ
m g

* QJ
fe^ — -
fn
(1)
t>
s

03
•rl '"^
CD Tj
o a
O
J^

-------
                                                                VIII-4
     For 1966, the sediment loading to the entire Potomac River

Basin has been estimated in Table VIII-2.


                          Table VIII-2

                      1966 SEDIMENT LOADING
                       POTOMAC RIVER BASIN
      Area
Upper Potomac
Above Point of
Rocks
Yield
                    (kips/sq0mi.)
Drainage    Annual    Percent
  Area     Loading    of Total
(sq.mi.)    (kips)
                 9,651     940,000
Total Basin
 129
14,670   1,897,000
 * Yield for Monocacy River Basin
** Yield for Anacostia River Basin
                         50
Potomac Below
Point of Rocks
and Above Estuary
Potomac Estuary


290*
130**


1,909
3,110


553,000
404,000


29
21
100
When compared to the estimate of lark and Keller  [7], the annual yield

for 1966 was about 38 percent of the loading for their sampling period

in 1961-1962.


C.  SEDIMENT LOADINGS INTO THE ESTUARY

     Data summarized in Table VIII-3 show that sediment loadings above

Great Falls may be decreasing.  The average flow for this eight-year

period also decreased.  In 1961, the annual loading was the largest

-------
                             Table VIII-2

                        1966 SEDIMENT LOADING

                         POTOMAC RIVER BASIN
     Area
                       Yield      Drainage Area  Annual Loading  ^ of Total
                   (kips/sq.mi.)    (sq. mi.)(kips)
Upper Potomac above
Point of Rocks          98

Potomac below Point
of Rocks and above
Estuary                290*

Potomac Estuary        130**

Total                  129
                                     1,909
                                     3,no

                                    14,670
                                                    9*1.0,000
  4o4,ooo

1,897,000
 29

 21

100
*   Yield for Monocacy River Basin
**  Yield for Anacostia River Basin

-------
                                                               VIII-5






(2.5 million kips) as compared to the lowest (102 million kips) in



1966.  (See Appendix A for monthly loadings at Great Falls, Maryland.)



     Table VIII-3 also shows that on an annual yield basis the aver-



age sediment yield for the period 1961-1966 was 184 kips/sq. mile



with a minimum and a maximum of 112 and 2/40 kips/sq. mile, respec-



tively.  The highest percentage of annual contributions occurred during



either February or March with values ranging from 51 to 90 percent of



annual loadings.

-------
                               CT*
                               to
                               PH
                                      O
                                      -4-
                                      OJ
       O
       o\
                                                   C\J
             on
             _*
             H
                                                                      OJ
                                      OO
                                      f—

                                      IA
                                      vo
       OJ


       VO
CO

ON
OO
                                                         VO
                                                               LfN
CO

o
LT\
CO
 i
H
H
                              t
                               O
 g     -S    •§    -8
•8
&<
                    •S
•3
EH
             O
                           g
                           •H
O
ON
CO
                                            O
                                            LTN
                                                   O
                                                   OJ
                                                   LT\
       O
       O
       VD

       LTN
Q    O
O    O
r-l    OJ
       O
       O
                                                                            LT\
                           0)
                           -p
                           o
o
o
LTN
H
ir\
OJ
O
O
VD
VD"

ON
r-T
8
CO

no
oT
8
o
OJ
LTN
O
0?
O
0
VD
OO
o
LT\
r-?
O
8
LT\
t-

r-T
O
o
o
t^

ON
r-T
                                      H    OJ     on    -4"    LA
                                     \D    VjD    VD    VD    VC
                                      ON    ON     ON    ON    ON
                                       s:

-------
                                                                IX-1
                           CHAPTER IX

         TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF NUTRIENTS
                  ENTERING THE POTOMAC ESTUARY
A.  HISTORICAL TRENDS

     The only existing long-term (more than 10 years) nutrient data

for the Potomac River Bas in are nitrogen data collected at Great Falls.

Sediment measurements at Point of Rocks and Monoeacy have been avail-

able since 1961.  Mean monthly flow, nutrient, and sediment data for

the Potomac River above Great Falls are presented In Appendix A.

     The nitrate-nitrogen loadings for the years 194-9-1967 show a

definite seasonal pattern (Figure .IX-1).  The seasonal variation

closely parallels that of river discharge.  Except for 1967, there

appears to be a slight downward trend In nitrates, especially during

low flow months.  On an average annual basis for 1960-1967 (Table IX-1)

the data also indicate a direct relationship between nutrient loadings

and river discharge.

B0  TEMPORAL VARIATIONS

     An important aspect of the nutrient control problem is the annual

variation in nutrient contributions by the various sources.  The amount

of phosphorus and nitrogen variation for the Potomac main stem station

at Great Falls can be seen in Figure IX-2.  During the summer months,

less than 1,000 Ibs/day of phosphorus entered the estuary even though

more than 18,400 Ibs/day are discharged to the surface waters in the

upper basin from wastewater treatment plants„

-------
EON
                                 FIGURE  IX-I

-------
                           I. •
                           c.
                                                          r (si.
                                                          : ' X \
                                                                        r  I Si,'
                                                                           I-
                                                                        r - '. '
                                                                        V , \, •
    i;.

>•  ft.
                                                           •  -:-t
    t"
  ,  <, -•
               r  • Si"

               s.   V
r^  i
<~^ r
                                                                           CM
sf
                 i i
                vT'
                 C^
                                              r-,
                                              x
                                                                           ^ ^
                                                          v -  f
                                                                                                            C;
                                                                                                            D.
                                                                                                                 i  i
  > ,- !          r I
f: "•          v   •
    ",J      , j  bir
,•  t-:     o   is-
                                                                                  nt    ^ ~
                                                                                   f'T • S
                                                                                  O r-l  r?
                                                                                  -t-C
                                                                                  O
                                                           i?
                                     n  L?""'
                                     -rr!   r-j
                                    C T'   rf

-------
   NUTRIENT  LOADINGS  and  RIVER  DISCHARGES
             POTOMAC  RIVER  at GREAT FALLS, Md.
	RIVER FLOWcfs
 • TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN (Ibj /day)
© COMPUTED TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN (Ibi/day)
 + N02*NO3 NITROGEN (Ibi/day) as N

	 TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS (Ibi/day]
                                                                      Figure IX-2

-------
                                                               IX-5



     The current nutrient loadings into the upper Potomac Estuary


from wastewater discharges in the Washington area are about 63,000


Ibs/day of total phosphorus as PO^ and 54 ,,000 Ibs/day of TKN.  On


an annual average basis, over 87 percent of the phosphorus and


53 percent of the total nitrogen entering the upper estuary are from


wastewater discharges in the upper basin and in the Washington area.


For the low flow months of July, August, and Sept-ember, during which


eutrophieation problems are most pronounced, ever 90 percent of the


total phosphorus and total nitrogen entering the upper estuary is


from the wastewater discharges in the Washington area  [1].


     Regression analyses were made on the data for the station at Great


Falls obtained during the period 1961™1967„  Predictive equations based


on river discharge were developed, as given below;


   Parameter Unit            	Equation	        Correlation
                             (Q=river discharge in cfs)    Coefficient


N02* (Ibs/day)          =           0.0337Q1"058              0.865


NO^* (Ibs/day)          =           0.0362Q1"475              0.903


N02 + N03«* (Ibs/day)   -           0.0361Q1-^6              0.924


TKN (Ibs/day)           -           0.0965Q0"892              0.927


Total P04 (Ibs/day)     =           0.2851Q1'179              0.964

                                           1 *7 A A
Sediments (kips/day)    •=           0.995 Q                   0.904
 * Based on data from the U.S. Arirj Corps of Engineers, Dalecarlia
   Water Treatment Plant for 1961-1967.


** Based on CTSL data for 1966.

-------
                                                                 IX-6






     As can be seen In the above listings, the exponent of the NO?




nitrogen and the N02 * NO-3 nitrogen is greater than 1.4.  This con-



firms the studies of Bailey  [4] in which he reports a positive



relationship between nitrate movement and •amount of water added  to



the test area.  The exponent of the phosphorus relationship is near



unity, indicating that the measure loading is more a dissolved



transport phenomenon and not related to silt transport which has an



exponent of 1.768.  Ii/fore data at, high flows are needed to substan-



tiate these observations.



     Table DC-2 presents the predicted average monthly nutrient  load-



ings based upon the average monthly flows from the upper basin of the



Potomac River at Great Falls, Maryland,,  The largest variations  in



the loadings were in NO? + NOj nitrogen, which varied from 17,400 to



174,800 Its/day.



     These variations are more pronounced if daily values are con-



sidered,,  For example, in August of 1966,, with a river discharge of



about 500 cfs, less than 1,000 Its/day of total phosphorus as PQ^



and N02 + NO^ as N entered the upper estuary from the upper Potomac



River Basin, while on February 1,4, 1^66, with a flow greater than



40,000 cfs, about 217,000 and j£4,GOO Ibs/day of PC^ and N02 + NGj



as N, respectively, entered the estuary.



     The wide variation in the nutrient loadings in the Potomac  River



at Great Falls and other stream monitoring stations clearly demon-



strates the need to sample various flows continuously over a long

-------

        'j Tf1? "? * /"JT
              POTOMA.C RIVER




        NEAR  WASHINGTON,  D.  C.
;  f);
')
                                                        -! V - /.i.
                                                       171,  •
                                                       -LI <4t

-------
period of time before an identification of nutrient sources can be



made,,  Moreover, as Figure IX-2 shows, sampling only under summer



low flow conditions can lead to misleading conclusions as to the



relative temporal and spatial distribution of nutrients.






C.  SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF NUTRIENTS



     Of the 11,460 square miles of drainage area, approximately



73 percent was represented by sampling in eight of the major sub-



basins (Table IX-3).  The annual yield of these sub-basins was



67.7 percent of the NCr> + NOo nitrogen and 97.2 percent of the phos-



phorus totals measured at Great Falls„



     The close agreement between the amount of phosphorus observed



at Great Falls and that accounted for by the various sources is



probably due 'to the following;




     !,„  Most of the phosphorus was from wastewater discharges,



     2.  The sampling stations were selected to reflect the



         loadings from 'urban population centers, and



     3o  Other sources of phosphorus were minor„



At Great Falls, the fairly close agreement between the drainage area



percentage of the total basin (73 = 0) and NC=2 * NO-? percentage of the



total basin nitrogen (67.7) reaffirms the conclusion that most of



the nitrogen is from land runoff„



     Table IX-3 shows that the Shenandoah and Monocacy River basins



account for about 50 percent of the phosphorus and 34 percent of the



    + NOo nitrogen recorded at Great Falls.  When the South Branch

-------
t-.
0)   ..

pi  >
                                               c
                                               C"1
                                                                                c
                                                                                            r
                                                                                            a
                                                                                                           r,;
                                                                                                           c
                                                                                                           C"
                                                                                                           a:
                                                                                                                              or

                                                                                                                              a
                                                                                                                                         X',
                                                                                                                                    C  •
                                                                                                                             v..     C  i
                                                                                                                             sO     X  \
                                                                                                                               ^      •%
                                                                                                                             C'-..     SO
I-'
I-   r    f-


hfe'E;
jl  t  ?!
ro  0-
l-t      W
n  9-  j>

h i  a*  fr
<,.•  (i,  «-
t--l  .T
F-'
*• ^
C-
                           rt
                                                                                                      sf.
                                                                                                                             C
                                                                                                                             V ,
                           --i
                          -tj
                          to
                                                                                        f'  >,
                                                                                            ',a ft

                                                                                            '-.'  ft
                                                                                            I )  T'
                                                                                            O  r-
                                                                                            *."!  I—t
                                                                                            O  -H
                                                                                                               i<  U
                                                                                                               C'  C
                                                                                                               >  f..
                                                                                                               fX-l
                                                                                                               ^  el
                                                                                                               t'  f •
                                                                                                               <7^  F
                                                                                                              C"- C
                                                                                                               c  n
                                                                                                               C.  "i
                                                                                                               ',<• (J-

                                                                                                              Oj  t,
                                                                                                                                      o!  -c
                                                                                                                                      f;  s:
                                                                                                                                         c
                                                                                                                                         -P
                                                                                                                         pr-  c,

                                                                                                                           •  4'
                                                                                                                         ?-  C
4 '
O

-------
                                                                rx-io






and the North Branch of the Potomac River are compared, it can "be



seen that the nitrite •* nitrate contributions of the two, which have



about the same drainage area, are approximately the same.  However,



in the North Branch the phosphorus loading is 60 percent greater than



in the South Branch, due primarily to a greater volume of industrial



and municipal wastewater discharges.  Based upon the estimates for




land runoff and wastewater contributions in Chapter V", an estimate




of total nutrient loadings was made (Table JX-4).  Also presented in



the table are the measured loadings at Great Falls,



     Of the 27,040 Ibs/day of phosphorus entering the surface waters,



about 68 percent is from wastewater discharges with the remaining



32 percent from land runoff and other sources„  Based upon the mass



balance equation presented in Chapter VIT, about 10,000 Ibs/day or



37 percent of the 27,04-0 ibs/day were deposited on the stream bed,



mostly in the Shenandoah and North Branch watersheds,,



     In 1966, about 79 percent of the 54,6^5 Ibs/day of total nitrogen



that entered the surface waters was from land runoff with other  sources



of wastewater contributing the remaining x'l, percent.  Most of the total



nitrogen from land and other sources was in the nitrate form with TKN



being the predominant form in municipal and industrial discharges.



About 90 percent of the total nitrogen measured in the Potomac River



at Great Falls can be attributed to either wastewater- or land runoff



sources.

-------
•8
EH
r-J
•w oj
0 -P
O

H
OJ
•e£- -P
S3
CD
•51 S
O 4^
EH -H
ft
>
(0 05
o3 TH-
IS:; CO

EH IH
O -P
t£- -P
ft
cS •—
oo 05
o -3
CO
-t- fl
H

oajv~^
SL -P
O
Oi
^ 1"
^d~ ^""^,
S ^
,-_j
• ^— s
EH


                                                                 OO
                                                                 t—
                                                                 H
                                                              •P  ra
                                                              cS H
                                                                                       O
                                                                                      •H
                                                                                      •H
-P
 cS
                                                                                      -P
                                                                                       ra
                                                                                       aJ
                                                                                      -P

                                                                                      d
                                                                                      •H
                                                                                       0)
                                                                                       (3D
                                                                                       O
                                                                                       (n
                                                                                      -P
                                                                                        OJ
g
                                                                                      O

                                                                                      -P

-------
                                                   A-l
              APPENDIX A




           MEAN MONTHLY DATA






POTOMAC RIVER AT GREAT FALLS, MARYLAND

-------
                  Taba e  A-1

MEAN MONTHLY FLOW, NITROGEN, AND SEDIMENT  L'M'-l^'i

                   POTOMAC RIVER
                  GREAT FALLS, MD

                       19oC
                                                        A-l
                                                     Sec iment

\itfs)
•:*n. . i •,-';•/
Fee. 15, «;•'
March ir,2 ^,
Apr!'; :',--,94'>-.<'
May '1 , <32{ •
June a , *-
•!'.jl;» -,,'A.
Au;; . •'/pt. .•,"•:.'-
Oct. .'-,5';..
'\'OV . • ,' Jl J
!.''"•(' . 4 V ?
A'/eragft j ; ,i'-..-y
< Utp
iniH/1) {"/uay/
.•'.KT/ tts-'st
.008 tv^:.,
,oa: bi2../
.001 177.5
.012 1,411.1
.022 l,t.5f.O
.024 5'J-.''
.032 "-.O^.v
.029 6lr;.V
.'JC; ''I/.
.00." -^.i.
.005 .;".-
.012 580.0
L&l
.01' •,:!'•".''"
.OK,- ] ,olb.C
. 'X\- I,'j62.0
. _•!/ i'32.0
.01 ' /o9.C
.Olo ..v,.0
.016 2-, -.U
.013 IcV/
.OCT ?.3.C
.i^.1 v/.C1
.oa. ?c2.'.
.012 ,V •."'.'
Tifcjfc-^— .
(rag/1)
,9f'
. '' i1
.T;
P*.
.t>3
. 6C
• "' • -*
.38
.40
.30
. -?7
. 3C'
.60
^5
.75
.93
.60
.70
.42
.44
.22
.13
.29
.37
.57
.49
r — ir VT -
(#'/day)
^,510
t.-5,313
34,339
150,886
"•4,030
^1 ,138
' ,544
/,!•':' 3
i , 50f
•',497
3,253
<',tobl
43,034
11,999
125,901
1;1,405
110,308
62,129
17,013
8,417
3,160
1 ,671
3,991
c,001
'- ,9^'i
!. 3,79t;

iff/day.
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
15(. ,000
32t ,000
31,00.

298,000
!^, 020, ("300
7,350,000
14,800,000
?, 070,000
538,000
175,000
70,200
535,400
633,000
113,000
I,o20,000
'•" ,°77 000

-------
                              Table   A-l
                                                                         A-2
            Mean  flow
                                       as NO.
 Fee.
 March
 A:>ri,
 Mev
Average
.:
•G''D
010
007
OOo
!X)r-
OlL
013
01C
ulu
CK>^
/ ,./ i.
11
Oil
015
"" '. j
(#/oay; (mg/D
343. ;< .*•
4t>0. n i.i->
i,97H. , .6,5
";<9.u .of
i, "i 5 f'. ;vv
4t'4.o .33
3 5o . 0 . 08
92/i .11
45.;^ .0?
••4'--.0
.' -1 . • . ' ' •
>47.l~ .7d
525..; .4
3
(#/day)
52,952
-'-2,379
155,833
-54,472
U.391
13 ,785
i,254
1,013
226
- , i J
i , ^9--
-,335
1,09f
  VOo
  -7-
.01-> ,:5.i.
.ou 130.0
.01.; .\c.'o.o
.OOc 3o3.(;
.011 .-V5.0
.041 1,549.0
.010 K77.C
.01- ^o.O
.CX>7 ^-.r,
.'JOt; -~'9.f
.i»^ 1,54.0
.01., UO.C'
.01} VI.-'
.f;5
.MC
. do
."V7
.0^;
.31
.,>_,
.11
.09
.05
» ' - '
.52
.3f<
c/^04
?.;,5&.
174,262
.'0,444
\147
11,719
?.,'7S8
791
52ii
244
5,^87
12,64h
,?6,o70
4,260.0iK
265.800
68,900.000
2V 0.000
313.400
1,744,000
182,000
34,700
2f. , 300
2t,450
439,000
354,000
o,401,000

-------
                                                                     A-3
                            Table  A_I    (cont.)
MontL
J n ' i .
Fer, .
fife re 1:
Aprij.
May
June
Jjly
Aug .
oept.
Oct .
N>v.
Deo.
/•verafie
Mean i^'iow
(Cfe)
i ."• , ^o'O
12,390
'iC',6f '0
i'',c'7c;
15,C;0
2,915
O T 1 r,
•-,,iu
, ,]rW
•91
' j 3" ''
1,9*.
5,671
',^/-(T/
NQ2 as NC
(rag/1) -,'^/day)
. t'Oc
.009
.CX)e
.011
.015
.015
.OOh
.008
.006
.007
.Og/
.007
.003
7^>.0
60C,: . C
1,3 ?1.0
1,062.0
1,?63.0
235.0
9^.0
5 J . •';
•:'5 . ',-
*'0 . 0
75.0
'.'13.0
4^'.0
N0.; as NQ-
3 3
.6^
.93
.dC
.60
.57
.30
.21
.lb
. ' 0
. ' V
.;• o
. i L
.4Q
33 ,654
62,' 095
132,181
59,074
4C,011
^,712
2,6l4
1,033
2,131
39^
-',151
21 , 392
34,995
(#/day)
13,600,000
1,540,000
27,540,000
9,190,000
12,500,000
107,000
1,230,000
77,100
-27,900
48 oOO
167^000
499,000
5,552,000
Jsn.
March
A|LTiI
May
June
July
Aug, .
Sept.
Oct.
Nov .
L»ec .
Average
1,013
1,097
1,038
.021
.015
.011
.011
.013
.020
.oa-*
.005
.005
.00-')
.005
.OOt-
.010
                     996
                      ;>7 -

                      •";•,-)
                      "O
.-.9
.ar/
.77
.50
.23
.20
.42
,35
 67
 39,345
 41,330
117,971
 45,321
  9,309
  2,788
  1,843
    6O7
  l,42b
  3,589
  3, IBB
 7,050,000
11,800,000
26,300,000
 2,220,000
   851,000
   300,000
   688,000
   135,000
    73,700
   198,000
    28,700
    16,200
 4,139,000

-------
                                                                       A- k
                Table
                                             ont.)
             Mean


Jan.
Fen .
Mar.
Apri./.
Way
June
July
Aug .
Sept.
Oct. ,
Ncv .
Dec.
A .'erage

(Cfs)
i • • -,
j., i..-.
j.;,xVO
l.^-'+c-G
-. -. ,,-,,-
j i , 1 V»U
13,990
2,571
f;9!;
'^36
.-, '/ 1 ' J
, , » _
• ,726
3, til 3
'',929
•;,7<.v
d.
log/1)
.006
.010
.015
.011-
.029
.021
.013
.004
.020
.009
.004
.011
.013
-!-tut2
(#/_
1.05
^ }
1.52
.82
*a ivu^
(#/day)
8,580
105,305
122,878
38,757
42,219
4,849
898
405
25,241
38,066
6,782
04,961
'^8,245
otjuiaen
(#/day
142,000
21,320,000
4,340,000
3,270,000
4,720,000
313,000
38,700
23,900
3,350,000
1,080,000
548,000
594,000
3,354,000
Feb.
iviarch
April
May
June
Average
iv , V/
 /./700
              18,0.31
.014
.011
.013
.010
.009
.012
.02V
.017
.009
. ',';< '•'
.;x)6
.Oil
.012
'' fO'
>' ^ *"*
00 0

-------
                                      B-l
  APPENDIX  B
DATA  SUMMARIES

-------
Js
US
1


>
2
3
1
w ^
IBS
sB8- i
a K c? ^
« 83O
^^ §
5 la£ 1

0 r^ ^c

S t**
i| I
I
i
i
\





0
£
fl
2

•r
-P
a
W
rH VO OJ C^
f\ in c^\ m
>t O m O

OJ OJ vo vo
OJ O m O
r*\ r^ O to
^t r-H 00 rH
OJ 0 NT rH

in O to in
>fr •>* OJ i-H
~-d" O ~*1" O
...
00 00 O O
OJ rH C^ <£
r^ H a- o
oo p- rr\ oo
Iin O £*•• o
...

--1- O 00 00
VO £\O rH
mop- O
• • • •
P- P- 0
rH m C'N
-J- 1 NJ: O
. . .




O r**\ OJ O
OJ O £\j O
§00 m oj
VD O OJ
0"\ O r"\ rH
p- O <"** in
80 >l-p- "•*
r°v O CVJ O
o o to -*
-Nj- m rH in
m o p- O
O
' lS-
.0 4) 0
i * s
i xJ H
O cq o .
O . q> O ^
•g §. I • °s *i

(3 *O CO S fl 'CJ
0 C • 0 i-*4
M 0 ^ k * ^ QJ
ii iw ii s
OJ P-

OJ >r
^1- •>!•
O O
Ovo
in rH
O 0

Bto
in
rH 0
vo vo
as
00 O
in ^>
o c3

OJ O
0 [-
in in
O O
• •




OJ O
ss
* •
§£
0 0
<*\ m
in o
O
00
O 1



•
^•S
O *
^* OQ **
* tiO
* m C

Romney,
(Blue
Petersb
r^oor^oor^vovo rHO^r-Hr^
SOOO>tOOJOJOrHOOJVO
OJOrHr^rHOmrHOJOJ
rH rH
[•~["-tf"\rn\Q[>OOi>OJ
r--VDDOrHOrHinvD!>OJ
OJ(^ir-Hr^inrHrHOJOor\OJ
OJ rH
OinOOinooomOO

rHrHOrHHOino^r-HrHrH
OJ rH
inOinoooojt>l-HOJinrHrHinrH >tVO
CSOJOrHOJrHOmi-HrHr^i
OJOOJOOJo-NOOOOr^O
•^ VD OJ rH P- OJ 00 rH ^ >n 00
CjOJOrHrHHOp-Oc»\r-l
OJ i-H

vDtoOto^tp-mOOOinr^v
8mto -Nt-Ntin^j-ojoococ^
C'XOrHC^OrHtOOrHOJ
OJ rH
c*\cr\r>Oinc''\r^p~OJOp~
SrHtOOOJOrH>tOP-rH
OJr^rHOJOJr^OOOjr^
rH rH




ojvotooj-roJ^rojr>toH
ininvDtoinOc^rH&^O "^i~
OrHOrHOJHr^OOOJOJ
rH
cocomr^inr^vOc^c^tOrH
inmct'r-iN>-inojp-OOJp-
OrHOOJOJrHVD -NtOJrHOJ
H rH
m O Co m vo O vo O r^ O >i~
SOOjr^moovDvomoJ
OJOt-HOJrHNfOVrHOJOJ
rH
VDvOtOOJOJinmp-rHOJVO
rHVO rHOOtOff-[>OJOOOtO
rH^J-rHOJinOJini-H^J-OJ^l-
OJ OJ
mo O^D vocv\<^OvO
Bin invo torr\ooo»n
Nf lOJvJ- IC«%OJOJOJ(*S

f-i as a
 •!*• 3
> ... OB • S

o -H & a c _ ,| ^. ^ eg |
Q (D *> • fi) T3 M *^ S bo O O
Q ^3 ^ ^ QJ ^j» O Cl C -j-* «v CC*
+* ^J ,jO o (•*( IB "^ 3 w .^
O .*"* ^ *• cd *• CQ O 3 jO *t3 O ** t
&<-H u*o>ia-r'3BtH-Ho
tn -".a) uaitij+JC*)*
rlH (^l+iO'HfHOJ^HCm+J
4> -)-> (BOrHOJ-H*Jl3,CCI
PlT3 rl^VCr-HbO-PHWp-H
»G OS&OTHcFCJdJSrlO
»(0 Ct,ffi,ox*a^Swcq(i<
OJ O
r-H O
rH rH

N/ tl,
ss
VOVO

O rH

-n
i-
i i
I i
"3
Q
•o
C
s
CO &

»M R
tt ** S
o >> o
f*i 0 -P
S  o -o
O -H t< 2j
Z « CQ 5

-------
                      a:
•3
H
      i
             i
43
W




I

&  t,

«5
 O -H
VJ «
                        \ \o
                      CO i*\
                        •
                      O O
                      a
                      O
                      r-t
O1VO
                       »,S
r-i   •*


II
« -o

•P  Q
  i  V
    A
  i  CO
               VO
               00
               OJ
          li

          g

          3
          0)

          w
                                      \D
                OJ
                O
                i^
                OJ
                                      00
                                      c\
                                      OJ
                                      >

                                      w


                                       r?
                                       0)
                                                   VO
                                      OJ
                                      >!•
                                      Nf
                      rr\ O          IA           t^-

                      O f\          C^           VO

                      OJ VO          rH           IfN
                                                   vo
                                                   OJ





                                                   O
                                                   CO
                                                   O
                                                   o
                                                   OJ
                                                   o
                                                   3t
                                             a)
                                             o
                             o
                             •H

                             l-l
                             4)
                             T3
 tH

 0

 >

•H

«
                                                          «
                                                          a.
                                                                         \O O  r^ m vO OJ  rH
                                                                         SrH c»\  TV OJ O r--  r"i

                                                                         c*> r^i  r^ OJ vo ao  r^


                                                                                         OJ*









                                                                        i OJ C^~\   O O  c^\ O
                                                                        \ i> O  0s c^
                                                                        ( rH <"N  C- OJ  I    I   I


                                                                                rH









                                                                        f H OJ  O OJ  I    I   I


                                            OJ                  rH    rH        i-H








                                         U~\ ITN  tfN O t~ ^ ^^ ^ C^~ C^ O O  C^- lf*\ OJ "^ fN
                                         O^ O  O^ C^- &^ rH OJ f^v tfN f*^ O VO  CT^ "^ rH "^" C^



                                            rH  r-H       OJ     O i-H                    0^






                                            SU^V  OO rH OJ
                                            rH  CT^ rH rH


                                                         NT    ->!•

                                                                OJ





                                                        .   .  _  _  ,  .  .  _' O  c^- r^i
                                                         Hop >j-r^>j-c>S-fNirs

                                                                O OJ rH 00 OJ  O OJ  I


                                                                !>












                                                                >^    VO                 OJ






                                         CO ^-  *fs O C""N t— *^
                                         r^ o  ^^ c^ ^o c"°\ o



                                                                rH






                                         C^N OJ  ^Q '^O w^* VO ^O CO '
                                         O rH  ^5 CJ O CT^ rH O i


                                                                Nf




                                                                <»N





                                                                r^











                                                                OJ*









                                                         O               ("N r'N r^\ O    O O
                                                         tf>               OJ  >J-1> \n    Co  rH
                                           I   I   I  I  1C--   I   I  I   IVDOJOJC'NIrHOJ


                                                                                rH       C-N
                                                                                          0)
                                                                                          If
                                                        •2
                                                        ! 2
                                          3
                                          >!
                                                     -S   -
                                                                                          £
                                                                .o   -
                                                                >  CO
               :-S   •>£
                rH  a  d
                                                                      rH  -H
                                                                      rH  >
                                                                       a  co
                    gp
                    ss
Mo)
^

f +J
CO  CO
0)   0) 71 CO
0> Si r-t
i     «r1
                                                                                                CO
          23£
          d)  o1
         •a  o J3 '
          cd  o +J
         rH  O ^f
           «

           •SP
          : -H
          i ^
          > CQ

-------
           O i-l H
           f\ O T\
           CM CM >T\

           CM   CM*
                                                (Jv lf\ O
                                                rH <»\ i-l
                                                H  rHV

                                               CM   -•!•   rH rH
                                                                                                   CX1M3
OJ
1
*

i
1
a
i
                               O to c«\
                               >!• lf\ UN
                               rs
                               CM 1TV O
                                                  IA CM
                                CMVO
     CM


     •*

    ' 8
CM    CM
                                                C»\CM
                                                CM H
                                                H f-
                                                  (»N CM
                                                  O CV
                                                     (M
                                                  r~ i
                                                  CM
                                            <» C\J
                                               ^O
                                               C-"\
                                          CM O H CXI O t- O
                                            f*\O\DC^C\l«»\
                                            IfN >*• O 0^ r-l H
                                                        rH i-H H rH   >*


                                                        S}8i5§"«
                                                                  \O   -*   CXI H rH
                                                                                       CM
>t   O   CM rH rH
     H   rH


  >JCM«^>l-VpCMOCVCM


      * *  *  * «^ «k    i^
     r\ C«\ f^ rH CM <»\   00
                                CM PX
                                1T\ to
                                   CM
                                                                                                   CM CM
                                                                                                   CMC^
                                  S^i-
                                  r> i
                               vo i>
                            -* xf o
                            O
                            CM
                                                                                       r^.
                                                                                       CO
                                                                                                    I  i
                        PL,


                        |



                        A
                                    en
                                    OJ
                                1  1 
-------
       CM CM
                      >n
                      O
                                         m
                                         to
                                                  CM
                                                                              <"\ CM O O
                                                                              rH rH CO rH
                                                                              O in -* m
                                                                                •V  «s  Is  »\
                                                                              is O CM m
                                                                              rH CM -*
I
      VO !>
  •    r^vo
                             o
                             f\
                             f-
                              *.
                             CM
                                                                              «
                                                                              CM
             rH t>
             O rH
             VO <"\

             rH CM*
                      O-
                                                                                                    CM  I  I   I

                                                                                                    in
      O VQ
      VQ 
      fvcrx
      rHAo

      rH
in
o
m
                                   O
                                   in
                                   NT
                                                                                  CM to       <^\



                                                             •IVOrHOCOrHCMCM--l-
                                                               CM         ...
 - - _' C«N rH
<"\vp m CM
O CTi O <»"\

O VO -* CM
CM rH -*
                                                  CM
CV1
                                                                                                    VO    TV
                                                                                                    >T\    CM
                                                                                                    O  1 O
       j
      co  m
      CU  CO
      cv  vo
                             in
                            VO
                             C*\
                                                               C^OO       rH    rH CM
                                                                              CM C- i
                                                                              to ON I
                                                                              in c\J i
                                                                                                    VO rHVO o
                                                                                                    CM H Nj-rH
                                   O
                                   B
                                                                  O    rH       rH H  --T
                                                                                                    VO !>
                                                                                                      •\  ^  ^
                                                                                                    m o -4-
                                                                                                    OJ rH Nf
                                                                                                                 -f ITl
                                                                                                                 O -4-
i
                                                                  C^D- ^
                                                                  60 VO O
                                                              VO 60 VO O f\
                                                                                        •*
                                                                                        CM
                                                                                                           OJ O O>
                                                                                                           C^vH CO
                                                                                                           rHVO >!•  I

                                                                                                           rH O C-*
                                                                                                           HVO r^
       I
                      CO
                      CM
                                                                                 CM CO CM
                                                                              r^\  I
                                                                                •N
                                                                              rH
                                                                              CO
i
                                                                                 H o H
                                                                                                           C"\    C*- O
                                                                                                           >n    Wvr
                                                                                                           m  i  a* vo
                                                                                                            *     •>  *
                                                                                                           rH    in CM
                                                                                                                 CM
       -'  -    fe      -
      >S    ±5
        f       £    2
             II    !
       §     §     °
      •H            g  CO

  «   rt     x    15
 I?    &    5    £6
                             o    at     (_,        ^
                                   o     «     (^ -
                                   Q    -a
        I  &    a    rH
        '  CO    CO    «
Fred

Love
Tribu
                                                                                   •01
                                                                                    t)
                                                                                     «)
                                                                                    rH
                                                                                                     «
                                                                                                    rH
                                                                                                    0 rH *

-------
11

i
•
1
i
.


1 i
-4
H
z

a w
Is <
i I1
i-i r\O.
i o «|
i z g

X (\J r^|
|i

i 3
i

•
i

•
i

i



1
•r
•P
CO
OJ O 00
O CM [>
C- O VO

OJ OJ e*\
\Q *f\ ^P
MN OJ "^
H CM H

O O in
-* oo c-
O OJ iH
oj -^vo
••*• OJ P\
H -*VD

r> o vo
»T\ tfN >$•
O CN -3
• • •

UN VO £-
if*\ ""tf" &^
O OJ c«\
» • •


O O n\
§ff\ £f\
•* OJ



O oo vn
00  &
r\ CM vo
f"\ ^" -w"
vo >r\ -»!•
. . .
^
• '?
0
8 ^-N
+J O
o o
OH § g
fl •** •
0 -o* 5 §
L !aj§
+34) p u ,0 +5
Ti > is M -<; TJ
O -rH 3 3 Cj- ,H
•z K o j o
rH CT^ O CJ^ OJ ^ 0s C^ r^- OJ ^ r°\ rH 00 c^ O
i-H rH OJ
OJ C^ CM VO VO VO O O 1A r^ O O O CM C—

OJ OJ rH
[>- VO OJ O IA O "A C^\VO tf\ ITv O Q C
OJrHH OrHOIfArHCMOt'MfN-J- O
H OJ
^- QQ \^J t^\ Q (V^ (**\ f\J fXJ 00 CO IA OJ C7* f^\ OJ
~^" O U"N C^ O tfN CM CJ^ VN O^ rH 00 CO VO t^ "^"
r^\ OJ ^3" VO ^ T\ u"\ VN f^N CM O VN rH r"- CM 00
CM C*N iH rH
OOg- Oc.gcpvoO^^ggS ^O
H^tH O[>Nrc^\Or^Ojvooj^-vo ^\&
rH OJ OJ rH
OOOCM OVOTvW^tOrHOOC---* C'NOJ
QJC^ir^v fNiHrNOJVOVDO -^VO VO <*N OJ <"\
C3OO OOJOC3OOrHOOOCMO rHO
rH

rr\OO OOOOtfNCMOJVOOOO voO
OOO OrHOOCMrHtSVOrHOO OJO
rH

O VO O O C" O CM C^- O CM W\ O C~- "^" *A IA
B^" VO "^ rH '^ ^Q rH *O C^~ *A *A OJ f*\ CT^ OO
CDO OrHOOrHCMrHr^CMC^vO C^irH

rH CM CM

VO C^VO m VO ~J- 00 OJ •& 00 O CM xf H O >t
OJ OJ OJ CVJ OJ rH CM C^ rH ~^i" O r^X^D ™^" tf\ *f*
rH CM CU
O^tCT^ OOr^-OOCMOOOVOrHOC^O 0"vO
rH CM rH
CVJ CV1 O ^4" U~\ O C3 t> ^- "^i" ^»1" 0s" C*N CO ^3
-^"O^O CjCVjC^i— lOOJVDrHrHCOCO \O
r-1 r-t i-H rH
OC^NI- ^ o^s-o^oto^ov
f*\ C? OJ OJ oj c*~ ^f ~^r c^- v\ co "^rf" r*"* f^\
OJ OJ OJ OJ rH r-* H
->f r*\vo Q1-^ r^or^c^TO
1 1>* 1 WN C*A 1 "^" *^ 1 ~^" C*^ rH CO 0^ 1 1
rH OJ OJ rH
1 «
§rH (D Of * 0 O
«' «' -H «J J ' ^'J ^ 1 I

PL, . . D . . „ ?s & * • m v a) 8
* . ae 0 -rl * a g ^a • 62-3 -G «> X!
££j ^P*t^r^^K'^5^c/^ ^ ^
a) rHje'f!? HJ? «^« P.S-3'gx"' 'S ~K b
H D P Or" rG"103'4tQOBrQ'aC)^ O * ^>O O
CQ "H *• JD '-'-* "^ CO ^ CJ) ,icj Q +3 Q n H *H O ¥*-t CO +* (^~*
CM J>j CQ f-* *aj oj O w 00 +3 C 4) V ^01
j3^ y 4) t J-(E-» fc+ao-HCr^.H^m^ JQ^ t3r-H ^f<
•HV M C H p*tf 2 ^
*rH Q O CJ PH (3 O J8 (H Ol *H Cd G ffi .<~J M O O "H M -H D *H
CODC 2cdCL, o a feffiOS^X-^SwCQf^ ZK mS CO«

-------
1-
c
i
f
<;















^*s
•
fO

PP
«
rH
f>
£
























IM
3 JH
3141
•
;g|
a

•
>4
•
•$
ol

i
d

4'


^

g
r»l



3
:S
*
N
41
•




•si
£1

i







€H

col
rH O
-•t -•*
VD C>

VD O
CM  H
* rH
r*\ O
xr -J-
-~fr CM
*r-T
in oo
O -~t
- m
Nl-VO


r-l *
Front Roya
Shenandoah













































r.
?
•rH
K

Shenandoah
sr
m
vO

0
CO
r-

m
m
>!•
&
r-

ir\
s
rH*

1

O
8
o
-Nt
0



~^
00
r\

O
ir\
I/N

13s
CM

.
ur\
cu
rH
H
00
£





(O
>

•^
»1
tj
rH
«
NJ- ir\ O r^ Oj 0N " ^ ^ f 3^ ^ OJ CO
Nf VD u-> OJ 00 C f CT ".' u^ > CO -<• l>
[^ *A xf H 0s f""' ^ - Nt «N ^- t)0 GV ^t
rH rH rH rH
OJ f\ UN tr\ c^\ >t\ O VN O CM ir\ CM MO 00
t^- voOOO-H O O '/"• ^J in t> CM sf CM £-
m. -st "A. sr a- Nf . - co o H o rH ;•- o
O t"N'MO^-O,--OOsr'\xO^?Mir>
rH rH .-I rH
O ojoom-£>covo
CM CM -^ CM r- O *X' P-- t> 0s ^ O O to
co -j-r^r'\r^rH^rcM'-J'to[>r>com
C^\ -H rH r~^ rH rH
c^ IN O tf\ tr\ O O C O m in vo
to CT-OOrHi^sf^^fl>^rmtO
VO OOo-4'J'Vl'SrHOJr^r-Hinl 1
^t
O r-.r^-rHO^t^rr\rH(v\OOrHCs
IN >j-oo>rc\)~3-oo'i)toi-i«ofyo
^f OCMCT'rH'T'1if^CT1ir\[>i-H'nvO
rH rH rH r-l
LTv >Tv -i) rH V.G CO O U"N t"\J O X> Nf s-£! r-H
rH rHr"tf\O,2rH'Mr^j\OOJVOOJ
ON ir\iAtOOJ!^-'COfin\^3'mfvAVDOJ
rH rH r-H rH i-H


r- «N\orrj\c«.oc\lr»-iriCVirH
00 tOr-HONr^toCMCOi-HtO-^rHtN
O VOlTvCVJCT'OC^CNr-llAOOOOHi-l
rH rH rH rH rH
O C^rHrHOfMOO^OOC^mOm
£N VOC3NCOVOC-^^O>cr\irvir\OJCO
rH ^OJrHOOrHOHOr^VOVOVOOJ
i-H i-H ,-i OJ
T\ rH"OCXJVDOO^tr--rHOvOr^Oj>
r-l OCMr^inrHOJOto c^ f> to o^\ C'N
>T\ VO^TOJrH-J-rHOtOtOOOOr^
I-H H r-H rH rH rH
I-H i>QT\T% OjJlT'tlNf'N.^'OOOO
»r\ c^OvO^xrCMOOr^vOci/rHc^
C\) 00 I> rH "J f- ( J 00 rH 'O Ch CM rH XT
CM fH *H r-! rH ^H rH rH rH
fH r rH m
C Sf f- O
I 1 I i i I o^ ; i i i o* H -J-
rH


^4
tt *
i> O
•H • ...
B! '3 «B • Q T3
rl • 2 3 • > O 2
H)ra o 35" • •ro«f>* •
>S 9 3^3^Srt»a)-ai
•H s u •>S-t3a*t>- r>-
« - 88 S S3 - rH -a -a ff
•^ -C"1-1 S^S^S^C^-HO-rlS^
,>> 0 OiVi O^5-'i Qo3bOtDOlH-QG
o in CL, rt i-i o "M ti -tiCRHC'-.kcntqcd
O (H +5 O r" « 3 n & (33
o «) IW3 cfirH-no^-a^-Pc-aJo*
O TJ *> a -H»(rH>t>mHlW<0-H1J'aO
fi «) S-H J3TJrtl»K«)Ot>4>rHc/)(ao
O /I Qrt «trt«lfcr)rl rHO
2 (», ,-5,H Oc3«nu5^4cQ,ja CT> O to
CM O ^f C*N
O^ m CM r^v
* rH
ITS
CM
in 1 1 1
rH
O
OJ
mill
<">
H
Hill
rH
O >tCM 00
CM OJ O O
<"NVO r- rH
r-H 1-H
o
rH
O 1 1 1

rH
OJ 1 1 1
vO m OJ O
in o r— I o^\
CM cr\ H in-



to CTV CM C^\
C^ 00 CM ^*-
vo CT\ ^t m.

r^\ CM O in
r- m in in

[> VD QN
CM &• O 1
« • •
r-H rH
O
r— |
in 1 I I
rH
O 00 r-
--1- CM m
CM 1 VO CM
• • •
r-H
• a
o ta
• -8
Q -H
f-,
• ^«
2 S,C
F-i T3 O
« --H to
r7 W rl rH
•H rH ff) -H 0)
BS rH * hp
CO • t3
O fc +J k iH
Oj CO P rl
I s*!w
^ gtjilg
OH C3 r-H =B (»\

-------
                               !> -n
                               r^ \o
                                                                  p-
                                                                  OJ
       to o
       rH O
       p- <"\
i
rH
P\
CT-

xf
Xf
IT\

m
p\
rH

8
P\

xf
PNCO
>r\ to
vO VO
rH
P\ in
in OJ
in XT

O\0
P\ rH
>n PN
OJ
O PN
58
*n
CO m
CO CM OJ
rH CO rH
P\ OJ O
rH~rH
O UA CO
T\ rH CM
<""\ c*- PN

CO IA V£>
XT CO O-'
xfVO i-H
rH PN
P\ P\ OJ
O** P*\ O
P% O O
xF
OJ OJ O
rHrHC^r-O^QrHO E>V£J
O 0s <"~\ CZ~ ^^ O xf O IA iA
ojojtocDo'c-.rHO ir-co
XT tf\ XT IT\ rH £-
mrHr^ r-Oa^xrO'I>^x
OJrH nAO^xftOGN^-CO
•-G 1 VO CM rH CO UJ XT
fv \D O
rH rH
OJOt-r^OO^PNrHOC^O
*Oc»NDiAxl-p%OJ!>r^Oxt
\i)xflf\tDrHC^OJVOrHxfOO
[>rHOrHt-- OJxf |>
rH OJ rH
P~[>OJ\DOvOOQp-\OP\
TirHOJ^^DrHlAOOJXfin
P>OJOl>rHrHOJCOOOJrH
UA rH O^ *A tf> O^XVD rH O
rH P\
rHxflAP\>XI^P\VJD\OtOf-
IT\\£)
rH\£)
in i-H
rH
^D "^
OJ CO
rH
oj o
r-t\0
-*C^
OJ*
P\O
s«
cvTt-T
rH !>
O
6
tf\
t>
&
xf
S
xf
PN
8
OJ
Oj"
se
                                                                t--
xf
p\
^0
trv
CO
rH
VO
*.
OJ
xf
8
xf
vo
ITv
OJ
P\
«
P\
VO
OJ
rH
^O
1TN
OJ
xf
tf\
OJ
C^
«N
P\
BS
PN OJ
rH 1A
P>
CO
OJ
OJ
O
^
•t
rH
rH
8
OJ
«
xf
0^
8J
OJ
P\ LT%
rH O
P\ XT
££
NT ?VJ
if\
&S
IT\ rH
•i
ITV
1— i
f-i
r-t
U~\
8
o
rH
8
xf
xf
OJ \O £-
C> xf O
OJ «\ OJ
r^ oj
£3
^1^
m
p\
o
iHrHxfOJC^VOPNOJVDrHO
VO xfCOCOCOP-\£l VO
rH PN P^ Xf P^
OJCCir\rHVO>n\OOJrH>Am
r-i rH rH a- ^ 95 H CO xf p\
xf CMVOOJOJHOJ P\
•* * ^ ^
rH rH rH H
P\OP\D~ xfxfOO^CJ^^PX
OJrHP\r^mCO\DCO^VOc^
COOmCr>O^rHr-PNCO»ArH
OJ rH >A m\D OJ OJ CT^ O
rH rH H P\
rHOP\c^,a"OJr>ovvriOxf
Mameoxfa^xfcoo^^voo
P\mOJ xfc^PNOmrHOJO
OrHOJPNxTOJrHPN P\
rH OJ P\
OJlAPNOOOrH xfCtp-COrH
I>COC>rH\p\.iJrHOPN>f\VO
xfcoojajCMocovoovom
m-HOOrHOJOJr~-rHCO
rH rVj rH rH OJ P\
\o xrr^OrHvoa^a^pxrHvo
CMir\CT-r^r--\or^\D\£)r--rH
tf\VOP\xfO!>- xfOiAOJCO
OJ
CO
rH
p^ PN
P\ O
rH
to
xf
t>
O
a
r-T
p\
xf
rH
1
§
rH
•*
P\
to
P\
P\
Oj"
1
1
\o
ir\
CO
R
p\
rH
rH
lf\
«
xf
PN
to
CO
m
•«
XO
K
OJ
•s
                                                  rH   <»\ OJ V
                                         r<
                                                       -f\ r^   u"\ ~vO r^\ c^\ OJ
                                                       vO p.   OJir\r^\OJiTv
                                                     1  •£! XT 1 ;> ^t t^   a^

                                                       OJ rH        1T\   CO
                                                                            !             1
                    R
1
     «
 tbl   •z.K
'    ?
;    -r5
    a  •
!  .fiS
I T3  W  *
i"J§
i!*«
i »4    O
ch
South
River
efield, W
ey, W.Va.
tersb W
       u
• hO   88
es    $ r
Pe
Upper P
Tributar
                                                   a)
                                                  >
                                                      ,
                                                     B 3
                                                     o
                                                     to  -
                                                            13
                                                          -2
                                                            -
                                                            m
                                                            C
5
w
I

.
Va
Broa
Midd
                                                                                           w
                                                                                                 #

-------
                                    VO
                                    VD
                                                                                                   to CM <^
                                                                                                   r°> r-» r^
                                                                                                   1A CO •<*•
                                                                                                        VD
                                                                                                         CM
i
                         c»\
                        VO
                                                                VO M  OJ
                        <5i
                        VO
      CM



        •s

      VO
      VO


        •>,

      •st
                                     CVJ
                                                                                                     VO
      <4   «o
                   IA

                   IA

                   >A
                                                                                                      IA to
                                                                                                      O O  I
                                                                                                       •\ «.
                                                                                                      CM r>-
                                                                                                      00 CVJ
                        O
                        •sf
                                                                                HOI
                                                                                                VO
                                                                                                rH
                                                                                                CM  I  I
-d-

PP
                        s
                        t--
                                                         -txir^
                                                          VO CO
                                                                                         O
                                                                                         CM
                                                                                   O
                                                                                   fN i  .
                                                                                   VO CVJ   I   I

                                                                                   VO O
                        C"\
                        H

                        W»
                        NT
                                              r^iACMOOCMCOVOvOCMrHCMOrN

                                                                             <"\ rH  C^v

                                                                                    oT
                                                                                       8OJ
                                                                                      VO
                                                                                   CM  &•   I   I

                                                                                   NT  r-T
i    '
                        fc
                                    s
                                     vl-
                                     IA
                                    vo
                                                                VOOCM    CMrHrHrHxT

                                                                    OJ                    O
                                                                                   00 O
                                                                                   00 CM
                                                                                   rH O   I   I

                                                                                   rAo"
                                                                                   1A CM
i
      oo
      rH

      CM
Va
                                           1
S
S     «'    r,      -    *

«    ^    5    I     S


i    *-   ^
3     >>   >>    O     'O  r(
•O     rl    O    -rl    d,  3





            I    I
                                                                                   rH VO lf\
                                                                    xf             tO O O
                                                           1  1  1      1   1   1   1
                                                                             2   • Q
                                                                             2  a
                                                                                          05

                                                                                          rj
                    .    §s
                  ^1    -r3 -H
            >>    O     Ofn    'SXBjn

            «    r,    ^B    ^»2^
            00)     M  3
            O    T>     4) ^3
            „    0)     k -H
JC    rH    O    t,     Qr.
CO    CQ    S    G    r5 El
                                                             >
                                                          -e s   •>     >
                                                                                                           •  O


                                                                                                         Q S
                                                                                                  »-H  m
                                                                                                 0]  rl rH
                                                                                                rH OQ -H  4)

                                                                                                $   .*9
                                                                                                K, +>  k -H
                                                                                                   (O  p  ^
                                                                                                +>     ¥•> co
                                                                                                 *> J5 •O
                                                                                                 4) -P  5 rH
                                                                                                 f-i >!-  O O
                                                                                                O rH » (^\

-------






































kn
i

3
f)
«





























2

S
w
§
H









* o
g 2
te

W
S
M
5
£3
^5
y*
f-H]
S ^
•3 CQ *Zi
P-I to
H >• <
@S 2
O
3 o
HO
&*
5
s pi
tH
g S

fej Uj
3 _

H
i
s
w

4)1
ll
•31 C






>
•H
H
•H
O


r-H
IS
§
«

^x
• i— 1
^t-tl hp
^^
fclrx"1
G| ftp
M'J.

S^
Op*— '
si
QJi
«l

s~**
• (H
ttl^M
u wi^e
^-^
• rH

rf] g)
' '
rH
IS

0
CU
cri


a^
^.wl Hf

• rH
51^
M —
•gu
§?i

«
^^
•]• -1-1
^-jpx.
Ml B^
• — *

_
•pT-j
^•1 SP
M'J=

<
bo

"







. —
to
IA

in
00

r-H
r-H
rH
0
vo'
CM
in
O

fT\

"^

fx^
f*A
OJ

VO
OJ

O

I>
c^-*
w\
pf\
1



to
H
VO


IA
i-H

t>
rH
m

^
p*^
t>
^f
OJ

CM
°^
O
IA

O
o
o

•D
s

•\
o
•rl
CU
1
•rH
r-H
0)
CQ
m
CO
O
r-l
1
O

r-l
<>
r-H
VO
CM
pj
rH
£
VO
rH




^j-
IA
o

IA
CO
rH
O

00
r-i
Cr%





CM


H
S

r-'
O
<^N

(^
"^"
<*N
^*
c^\

^
VO
CT\
IA

s
d


•
•o
5

o
S
o
•H
rH
03
t^N
IX
1

r*\
m
Qv
xr

CM

^j.

c>
rH





OJ
H
8

O
xr
r-i
0
CM

r-i
IA





oB
rH


IA
to

r^
lA
r^

f\
(V^
t^<
rH
CO

vO
CO
00
m
Oj
r— 1

8
CM






p, •
M T3
o s
O
d) 
OJ
\f\
OJ
1



r-l
OJ


rH
S

rH
OJ
(V^
r^

rH
0
co
o


CM
0
O
rH
VO

O
o






J
Cresapt
^
b
3

^
-*,r
xr
xr
r-H
xf
to
^
rH
OJ
r^\
m
f



in
CM
cS

|V
r .

O
rH
r-H
CO






r-H
C\j


xj
OJ

xr
to
rH
rH

^
xr
VD
O
rH

CO
OJ
OJ
Ol

<*\
o






i
1
Cumberl
CO
o
o
rH

CO
xr

CO
rH
C*A
xr

o
Oj
00
o
1A
CO




[-.
rr\
8

to
xr
OJ
o

m
H
UA





§


0
rH

in
o--
r-H

1 -
rH

OJ


o
CO
rH
O
^

1
xT






a
o
Fi-ederi
CO
CO
co

rH
m
in
!>
r-l
xr
CM
O
'~i
IA
VO
d
CM
OJ
i


m
rr^
O

OJ


O

r>
ro
r^
r-H
i



^O


rH
S

$
r-H


CO
co

in
OJ

xr
xr
rH
t>


8
OJ
rH




•
CO
rH
§
o
CM1
OJ

xL>
r^\
v.o
vr\
r-H
&
o
Ol
OJ
£
OJ
xr




U~X
0
rH

xf
00
r-H
O
OJ

CJV
(V^





I


r^\
B

fe
,~_


VO
CM
r-H
co


in
co
!-",
,H
^

OJ
to
m






I"
Hag erst
r"A
O
O
xr

xr
CO
in
[^
rH
OJ

O
CM
O
H
CM
xr
i


P*_
xT
!A"

c*\
0
rH
H
O
rH
xr
rH
r-H

1


B
m
OJ

co
B

o
o
CM
rH

in
rH

CO
CM

B
xr
OJ
r-\

VD
CM






i
Staunto
CJv
CM
in

CO
co
•o
0
rH
8
Ov
(^
OJ
CM
u"\
. — |
"•-O
C1^
I

*r\
£x_
OJ

CM


o

to
i-H
Tx
rH
OJ
1


§

OJ






§
Waynesb
0
IA
xr

vO

r-
rH

rH
CO
vO
OJ


o
2





Q
2


Q


xr
H
VO
vO





rH
(*\
r-H


C^
00

in
CO
(V^
OA

xt

m
to


r-H
O

OJ
rH

O
OJ
rH
OJ



•

S
i
Western
to
xr
m

OJ
xr

CO
OJ
CJN
rH
O
C-N
in
OJ
CM*
Q
xr
i


Q\
CO
co
O

o

rH

CO
CO
in
xr
CM
1



xr
CVJ


in
§

VO
rH
xr
CM

0
£•*_
-sl-
^
vO

^
!>
r-H
in

CM
0




rrt

t
a
•H
rH
r-H
• H
OJ
vD
>A

OJ
f"\
[>
r^
rH
CO
CO
i>
CO
rH
CO
o
C>
,_-(




O
f\
m
O

"A


O
CM
xr
vo

"A
|



xr
IA


xr
8

c~
xT
c<\
(*\

CO

c-
^
rH

OJ
r-
vo
OJ

8
OJ
^f






rt

Winches-

-------
                           REFERENCES
1.  Jaworski, N. A., Villa, 0., and Hetling, L. J., "Nutrients in
    the Potomac River Basin/' Technical Report No. 9, CTSL, MAR,
    FWPCA, May 1969.

20  Jaworski, N. A., and Aalto, J. A., "Wastewater Inventory, Potomac
    River Basin," CFS, MAR, FWPCA, December 1968,

3.  Wadleigh, C. H., "Wastes in Relation to Agriculture and Forestry,"
    U. S. Department, of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., March 1968.

40  Bailey, G. W0, "Role of Soils and Sediment in Water Pollution
    Control, Part One,"  Southeast Water Laboratory,  FWPCA, March 1968.

5.  U. S. Army Corps of Fjngineers, "Potomac River Basin Report,"
    Volume 1, Pa£t_]L, North Atlantic Division, Baltimore, Md., 1963.

6.  Data Report, "1966 Potomac Nutrient Network," CTSL, MAR, FWPCA
    (In preparation).

7.  Wark, J. S., and Keller, F. J., "Preliminary Study of Sediment
    Sources and Transport in the Potomac River Basin," Interstate Com-
    mission on the Potomac River Basin, Bulletin 1963-11, Washington,
    D.C.,

-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS  (Cant.)



Chapter



  VI.  DISSOLVED OXYGEN AND BIOCHEMICAL OXTCEN DEMAND




       A.  North Branch



       B.  South Branch



       C.  Conococheague Creek




       D.  Opequon Creek



       E.  Antietam Creek



       F.  Shenandoah River



           1.  North Fork



           2.  South Fork



           3.  Main Stem of Shenandoah River



       G.  Monocacy River




       H.  Main Stem Potomac River




 VII.  PESTICIDES



       A.  General



       B.  Water Quality Criteria



           1.  Public Water Supplies



           2.  Fish and Aquatic Life



           3.  Wildlife



           4.  Agri cultural



       C.  Analysis and Discussion



VIII.  THERMAL DISCHARGES



       A.  General



       B.  Sources and Thermal Conditions
  VI




  VI




  VI




  VI




  VI




  VI




  VI




  VI




  VI




  VI




  VI




  VI




 VII




 VII




 VII




 VII




 VII




 VII




 VII




 VII




VIII




VIII




VIII
1



1



3



3



4



5



5



7



7



10



11



15



1



1



1



2



2



2



3



3



1



1



3
                                 IV

-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cant.)

 Chapter                                                       Page

   IX.  MINE DRAINAGE - GENERAL SUMMARY                          IX - 1

    X.  NUTRIENTS                                                 X - 1

        A.  Sources                                               X - 1

            1.  Wastewater Loadings                               X - 1

            2.  Land Runoff and Other Sources                     X - 3

        B.  Spatial Distribution                                  X - 4.

            I.  Phosphorus                                        X - 4

            2.  Nitrite and Nitrate and Total Kjeldahl            X - -4
                  Nitrogen

APPENDIX

REFERENCES
                                   v

-------
   V - 1



  VI - 1


 VII - 1


 VII - 2


 VII - 3


 VII - 4

 VII - 5

 VII - 6


VIII - 1



VIII - 2


VIII - 3


   X - 1


   X - 2


   X - 3


   X - 4
              LIST OF TABLES

                  Title

Bacteriological Data - North Branch
Potomac River at Cumberland, Md.
1968-69

Fresh Water Inflow BOD Concentration
Potomac River Near Washington, D. C.

Pesticide Data Potomac River at
Memorial Bridge

Pesticide Data - Potomac River at
Great Falls

Pesticide Data - Shenandoah River at
Berryville, Va.

Pesticide Data - 1968

Pesticide Data - 1968

Pesticides Data Analyzed and Minimum
Detectable Limits

Water Quality Standards (Temperature
for Selected Stream Reaches in the
Upper Potomac River Basin

Major Thermal Discharges - Upper Potomac
River Basin

Temperature Data (INCOPOT) Upper Potomac
River Basin

Nutrient Loadings from Wastewater
Discharges by Sub-Regions

Nutrient Loadings from Watersheds with
Varying Land Use

Estimated Nutrient Loadings from Land
Runoff

Comparison of Annual Average Nutrient
Concentrations and Loadings
   V - 5


  VI - 20


 VII - 5


 VII - 6


 VII - 7

 VII - 8

 VII - 9


 VII - 10



VIII - 2


VIII - 4


VIII - 5


   X - 2


   X - 3


   X - 5


   X - 6
                                 vx

-------
                          LIST OF FIGURES

Number                         Title                         Page

 V- 1     Bacteriological Profile - North Branch
          Potomac River - July 28, 1969                         V - 2

 V- 2     Bacteriological Profile - North Branch
          Potomac River - August 18, 1969                       V - 4

 V- 3     Bacteriological Profile - South Branch
          Potomac River - July 29, 1969                         V - 7

 V- 4     Bacteriological Profile - South Branch
          Potomac River - August 18, 1969                       V - 8

 V- 5     Bacteriological Trends - South Branch
          Potomac River - 1964-1968                             V - 9

 V- 6     Bacteriological Profile - Conococheague
          Creek - July 28, 1969                                 V - 11

 V- 7     Bacteriological Profile - Conococheague
          Creek - August 18, 1969                               V - 12

 V- 8     Bacteriological Profile - Opequon Creek
          July 29, 1969                                         V - 14

 V- 9     Bacteriological Profile - Opequon Creek
          August 19, 1969                                       ? - 15

 V-10     Bacteriological Profile - South River - South
          Fork - Shenandoah River - July 28-29, 1969            V - 18

 V-ll     Bacteriological Profile - South River - South
          Fork - Shenandoah River - August 18-19, 1969          V - 19

 V-12     Bacteriological Profile - Shenandoah River at
          Harper's Ferry - July-September, 1966                 V - 22

 V-13     Bacteriological Trends - Monocacy River
          1964-1968                                            V - 25

 V-14     Bacteriological Profile - Potomac River
          July 28-29,  1969                                     V - 26
                                vii

-------
                          LIST OF FIGURES (Cont.)

Number                                                        Page

 V-15     Bacteriological Profile - Potomac River
          August 18, 1969                                        V - 27

 V-l6     Bacteriological Trends - Potomac River at
          Great Falls - 1964-1968                                V - 29

 V-17     Bacteriological Trends - Potomac River at
          Point of Rocks - 1964-1968                             V - 30

 V-18     Bacteriological Profiles - Opequon Creek
          and Cacapon River - July-September 1966                V - 33

VI- 1     BOD-DO Profiles - North Branch Potomac
          River                                                 VI - 2

VI- 2     BOD-DO  Profiles - Antietam Creek                     VI - 6

VI- 3     BOD-DO Profiles - South River                         VI - 9

VI- 4     Mean Monthly BOD and DO Concentrations -
          Shenandoah River at Berryville, W. Va.                VI - 12

VI- 5     BOD-DO Profiles - Monocacy River                      yj _ ^

VI- 6     Mean Monthly BOD and DO Concentrations
          Monocacy River near Potomac River                     VI - 14

VI- 7     Mean Monthly BOD and DO Concentrations
          Potomac River at Williamsport                         VI - 16

VI- 8     Mean Monthly BOD and DO Concentrations
          Potomac River at Point of Rocks                       VI - 17

VI- 9     Mean Monthly BOD and DO Concentrations
          Potomac River at Great Falls                          VI - 18

IX- 1     1968-69 Survey Data - North Branch Potomac
          River                                                 IX - 3
                                Vlll

-------
                          LIST OF FIGURES (Cent.)

Number                         Title                          Page

 X- 1     Nutrient Concentrations - Upper Potomac
          River Basin Survey - July 21-22, 1969                  X - 8

 X- 2     Nutrient Concentrations - Upper Potomac
          River Basin Survey - August 18-19, 1969                X - 10

 X- 3     Phosphorus Loadings - Potomac River at
          Great Falls - 1969                                     X - 13

 X- 4     Nitrogen Loadings - Potomac River at
          Great Falls - 1969                                     X - 14

-------
                                                              II-1
                             CHAPTER II




                            INTRODUCTION






A,  PURPOSE AND SCOPE



     The third session of the conference on pollution of the Potomac




River-Washington Metropolitan Area Enforcement Conference which




convened in April and May of 1969 resulted in a set of recommendations



for future corrective action.



     As a result of questions raised concerning the relative contri-



bution of upstream problems to water quality in the metropolitan area,



a recommendation to include a joint study of the entire Potomac basin




was adopted by the conferees.  The Interstate Commission on the Potomac



River Basin was requested to call a meeting to consider these upstream



contributions.



     This is one of four technical reports prepared by the Chesapeake



Technical Support Laboratory (CTSL) of the Middle Atlantic Region



(MAR), Federal Water Pollution Control Administration (FWPCA) of the



Department of the Interior to explore the general water quality in



the upper Potomac River basin.  The other reports include inventories



of municipal and industrial waste discharges, nutrient studies and



effects of mine drainage.

-------
                                                                II-2
B.  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



     To supplement the special studies of CTSL, data from governmental,




industrial, and institutional sources were collected, evaluated, and




subsequently incorporated into this technical report.  The cooperation



of the following agencies is gratefully acknowledged:




     District of Columbia, Department of Public Health



     District of Columbia, Department of Sanitary Engineering



     Maryland Department of Water Resources



     Pennsylvania State Department of Health



     U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington Aqueduct Division



     U, S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior



     Virginia Water Control Board



     West Virginia Department of Natural Resources

-------
                                                                III-l
                            CHAPTER III

                       SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
     The need for a water quality assessment of the upper Potomac


basin was the outcome of a recommendation adopted by the conferees

of the Potomac River-Washington Metropolitan Area Enforcement

Conference.  The purpose of the assessment was to investigate

pollution conditions in the upper basin and to evaluate their

possible contributions to water quality problems of the Potomac

Estuary.  This report is based on historical data supplemented

by two special surveys conducted in July and August 1969.  The

findings are summarized below:

     I,  The total coliform and fecal coliform concentrations

throughout the upper Potomac basin vary considerably.

     2.  In the Monocacy basin, persistently high bacterial den-


sities have been observed.  Total and fecal coliform counts in

excess of 160,000 MPN/lOOml* are common throughout this basin,

particularly during high flow periods.

     3.  Fecal coliform counts were also unusually high in the

North Branch Potomac below Luke and Amcelle, Maryland (90,000),

the South Branch Potomac below Petersburg and Moorefield, West

Virginia (50,000), the Gonococheague Creek below Chambersburg,

Pennsylvania (160,000), and the Antietam Creek below Waynesboro,

Pennsylvania and Hagerstown, Maryland in 1969.
* All coliform counts in this report are the most probable number
  (MEN) per 100ml.

-------
                                                               Ill-2






     4.   In the Shenandoah sub-basin, high fecal coliform densities



 occurred  in the North River near Harrisonburg, Virginia (160,000), the



 Middle River near Staunton, Virginia  (160,000), and the North Fork



 Shenandoah River below Timberville, New Market, and Edinburg,



 Virginia  (50,000) in 1969.



     5.   The water quality standards  for coliform bacteria were



 frequently contravened in the North Branch Potomac, South Branch



 Potomac,  Conococheague Creek, Opequon Creek, Antietam Creek,




 Shenandoah River (including both the  North and South Forks), Monocacy



 River and the main stem Potomac River.



     6.   Although extensive bacteriological data were collected




 throughout the upper Potomac basin, it is difficult to determine their



 significance unless the relative coliform contributions from waste




 treatment plant effluents and from various types of land runoff can



 be established.



     7.   Three areas in the upper Potomac where low dissolved oxygen



 occurred  are North Branch Potomac River from Luke, Maryland to Spring



 Gap, West Virginia (approximately 45 miles), Monocacy River downstream



 from Frederick, and the South River of the Shenandoah domistream from



Waynesboro, Virginia.  All of these areas were characterized by DO



 levels below 1.0 mg/1 during low flow summer conditions.



     8.  Less critical areas where future DO monitoring is also



warranted include the North Fork Shenandoah River below Timberville,  the



South Fork Shenandoah River below Elkton, the main stem Shenandoah below



Front Royal, and Antietam Creek below Hagerstown.

-------

-------
                                                                Ill-3






     9.  Limited data from the upper Potomac indicate that most of



the determinations for chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides were



negative.  However, significant quantities of dieidrin and DDT



(0.666 ug/1 and 0,17 ug/1) were measured in Antietam Creek during



August 1969.  Maximum DOT, dieidrin, and endrin concentrations in



the Potomac River at Great Falls for a ten-year period of record




were 0.038 ug/1, 0.04 ug/1, and 0.094 ug/1, respectively.  The



endrin concentration exceeds the recommended criteria for fish and




aquatic life (0.05 ug/l).



    10.  A definite need exists for additional surveillance of



pesticides in the Potomac basin to isolate the sources and to deter-



mine the quantities contributed over a complete hydrologic cycle.




    11.  Thermal pollution does not constitute a significant problem



in the upper Potomac basin at the present time.



    12.  Potential thermal problems exist in the North Branch Potomac



below the large industries at Luke and Amcelle and below the steam-



electric generating plant near Cumberland.  Future studies of stream



temperatures and ecological conditions will be necessary in those



areas of the North Branch.  Studies should also be planned for the



Mount Storm Reservoir below the power plant, and for the main stem



Potomac below the power plants at Williamsport and Dickerson.



    13.  Mine drainage in the North Branch Potomac basin is contri-




buted primarily from nine tributary watersheds in West Virginia and



Maryland upstream from Luke, Maryland.  The effects of mine drainage

-------

-------
                                                                Ill-4




while normally confined to the North Branch Potomac River above


Cumberland can be detected throughout most of the North Branch


Potomac River during periods of high runoff.


    14.  More than 40 miles of the North Branch and more than 100


miles of tributary streams are characterized by high acidity, low pH,


and excessive metals and solids which have rendered these streams a


"biological desert" and unsuitable for most beneficial water uses.


    15.  Based upon a preliminary appraisal, the annual expenditure


required to control most of the mine drainage in the North Branch


Potomac basin is estimated at $5,000,000.


    16.  In the upper Potomac basin approximately 18,000 Ibs/day


of total phosphate (PC.) and 11,000 Ibs/day of total Kjeldahl
                      4

nitrogen (TKN) originate in 256 wastewater discharges.  Approximately


7,700 Ibs/day of the above total PO. and 4,600 Ibs/day of the above
                                   4

TKN were from industrial wastewater discharges.


    17.  The various nutrient concentrations were generally high


in the Opequon and Antietam Creeks and the Monocacy River.  These


streams were also characterized by local heavy rooted aquatic and


phytoplankton growths.


    18.  It appears that, while the nutrient contributions from land


runoff (agricultural and urban) are significant, the most pronounced


increases are from controllable point-source waste loadings.


    19.  Based upon both long-term and recent survey data, total and


fecal coliforms in the Potomac River at Great Falls are frequently


greater than 1,000.  Maximum fecal coliform concentrations of

-------

-------
140,000 and 85,000 were measured during July and August 1968, respec-



tively.



    20.  The BOD concentrations at Great Falls are low, usually



ranging from 2 to 4 mg/1.  However, on a pounds/day basis the fresh



water inflow represented a significant organic loading to the estuary.



During the period from January to August 1969, the average BOD loading



at Great Falls was greater than 100,000 Ibs/day—or 45 percent of the



total BOD discharged into the upper Potomac Estuary from all sources.



    21.  The average monthly dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations at



Great Falls over the past ten years were generally greater than 6.0



mg/1.  The water quality standards specify a minimum of 5.0 mg/1.



    22.  During the period from January to August 1969, the average



upper basin loadings of total nitrogen and total phosphorus to the



Potomac Estuary were 27,000 Ibs/day as N and 3,600 Ibs/day as P, or



34 and 14 percent, respectively, of the total loads to the estuary.

-------

-------
                                                               IV-1





                             CHAPTER IV



                         BASIN DESCRIPTION






A.  HISTORY



     Development and population growth in the Potomac River basin



upstream from Washington, D. C. was not as rapid as in the tidal



area where port facilities had already been established in colonial



times.  Alexandria was a bustling seaport and ocean going ships



docked as far upstream as Bladensburg on the Anacostia and Georgetown



on the Potomac River.  Little Falls and Great Falls prevented upstream



commerce.  It was not until the middle of the nineteenth century that



industrial expansion in the upper basin was stimulated by the completion



of the much delayed Chesapeake and Ohio Canal to Cumberland by develop-



ment of railroads in the Valley and by mining of coal resources in the




North Branch Potomac basin.



     The Potomac River basin has been intimately involved in the



history of the nation, the westward expansion, the Civil War, and



the reconstruction and development of a central government in



Washington which became increasingly involved in domestic and



foreign affairs.



B.  GEOGRAPHY



     The historic source of the Potomac River is at the headwaters of



the North Branch in the rugged and forested Allegheny Mountains of



the Appalachian chain where the coal mining activity in the basin



is concentrated.

-------

-------
                                                                T'f 7 r~l
                                                                j. v -<=:
     The general character of the upper basin does not change appreci-


ably downstream until the Shenandoah Valley is reached.  From this


area to tidewater, the broader valleys were first used for farming,


then towns grew to serve the agricultural community and eventually


industry utilized the area's resources as the population increased.


The area covered by this report is the Potomac River drainage basin


above Great Falls which is approximately 11,500 square miles.  The


entire basin has a population of 3 million of which 2,5 million are


in the Washington Metropolitan Area.


     Mich of the basin industry is related to agriculture:  fruit


packing, poultry processing, dairying, and tanning.  Natural resources


of coal, sand, stone, and forest products are abundant and have been


the basis of industrial development in the area.


C.  GEOLOGY


     The North Branch of the Potomac River has its origin in the


Allegheny geophysical province.  It passes through the Valley and


Ridge province in which major coal and forest product development


has occurred, crosses the Great "/alley with its extensive agricul-


tural and industrial areas where many of the sediment and pollution


problems originate.  The Potomac cuts through the Blue Ridge Mountains


and the rolling hills of the Piedmont on its way to the Chesapeake Bay.


     The non-tidal river drains parts of several states:  West Virginia,


Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, and a small area of the District of


Columbia.

-------

-------
                                                                17-3
D.  HYDROLOGY



     Because of the hilly terrain, the soil density, and the rainfall



distribution, the Potomac River can be considered a "flashy" stream.




Long periods of low flow occur during dry weather in the summer and



high flows and occasional floods occur usually during the spring and



fall months.  Discharges of over 48/4,000 cfs and less than 800 cfs




have been recorded at Washington.  The average flow is 11,340 cfs.

-------
                                                                V-l






                             CHAPTER V



                      BACTERIOLOGICAL ANALYSES






A.  NORTH BR/LNCH



     Bacteriological populations in the North Branch Potomac River




upstream from the Savage River confluence at Bloomington, Maryland



are influenced greatly by mine drainage.  The extremely low pH




levels caused by mine drainage have inhibited the development of



all forms of aquatic life.



     Water quality surveys of the 50-mile reach between Luke,



Maryland and Oldtown, West Virginia were conducted by CTSL on



July 28 and August 19, 1969.  Graphical presentations of the



bacteriological data obtained from these surveys are exhibited



in Figures V-l and V-2.



     Both total and fecal coliform concentrations were extremely



high (160,000 and 92,000) below the Upper Potomac River Commission's



(UPRC) treatment plant (Figure V-l).  A reduction in coliform



organisms to 3>500 occurred downstream at Keyser, West Virginia,



This decrease was followed by a three-fold rise near Cresaptown



and a more significant ten-fold rise below the Celanese Fibers



Corporation Plant where the total and fecal coliform counts again




reached 160,000 and 92,000, respectively.  Between the station at




River Mile 311 (below Celanese) and the South Branch confluence



a sharp dieoff in coliform organisms was noted.

-------
IjOOOpOO-i
                            BACTERIOLOGICAL   PROFILE

                          NORTH BRANCH POTOMAC  RIVER
                                    JULY 28, 1969
 100.000-
 tn

 tr
 O
 u.

 O
 U ~

 _l O
 < o
  1
  10.000-
                                            	TOTAL COLIFORMS

                                                   FECAL COLIFORMS
                                           FLOW AT CUMBERLAND: 402 cfs
                      a.

                      at

                      O
K
ui
(A
Ut .
Ul-l
KUI
oo
                              o


                              K
                              hi
                              O>
                              z

                              u
   ipoo-
                       r~
           320        310
             RIVER MILES
                 340
 T—
330
                                                            300
290
                                    280

                                 FIGURE  V-l

-------
                                                                V-3






     Data collected during the August 18, 1969 survey (Figure V-2)



also indicated a substantial rise in both total and fecal coliforms




at the UPRC plant.  Fecal coliforms increased 50-fold with total



coliforms increasing over 1,000-fold.  Fecal counts of 1,000 and




total counts of 90,000 were measured downstream from this treatment



facility.  Fecal coliforms decreased to 50 and total coliforms



decreased to 170 at River Mile 311, but the total population increased



to 22,000 in the vicinity of Cumberland, Maryland.



     It should be noted that streamflows were unusually high during



both of these surveys, particularly during the August survey.  These



high flows may have reduced bacteria concentrations by dilution.



Moreover, the greatly reduced pH which occurred during the August



survey may have been responsible for the varying coliform density



patterns shown in Figures V-l and V-2.



     Bacteriological data collected by the Kelly-Springfield Company



in Cumberland for the entire 1968 water year are presented in



Table V-l.  These data also indicate variations in coliform popu-



lations.



     Bacteriological standards* have not yet been established for the



North Branch Potomac River between Luke and Cumberland, Maryland.  The



standards prescribed for the North Branch downstream from Cumberland



(5,000 total coliforms, 240 fecal coliforms) were being contravened.
  Public Hearings were held in October, 1969.

-------

-------
  100.000-l
  10,000 -
a:
O
o
o r
  £


oC K>°°
tii
z
                                           BACTERIOLOGICAL    PROFILE

                                         NORTH BRANCH POTOMAC  RIVER
                                                  AUGUST 18. 1969
    100-
     10-
                                                              	TOTAL COLIFORMS

                                                                    FECAL COLIFORMS
                                                            FLOW AT CUMBERLAND: 696ef»
                340
330
 I           I

320        310

  RIVER MILES
                                                           300
290
    '1

    Z80

FIGURE  V-2

-------
                                                                 V-5
                             TABLE V-l





                        BACTERIOLOGICAL DATA



                     NORTH BRANCH POTOMAC RIVER



                                 AT



                        CUMBERLAND, MARYLAND




                               1968-69
Above Plant (308.5)
Below Plant (308.0)
Month.
October
November
December
January
March-
April
June
July
August
September
Total
Collforms
(MPN/lOOml)
2,000
8,000
930
*N/A
23,000
230
21,000
23,000
75,000
93,000
Month
October
November
December
January
March
April
June
July
August
September
Total
Coliforms
(MPN/lOOml)
9,000
15,000
930
2,000
2,000
430
9,000
23,000
43,000
240,000
* Data not available

-------
                                                                 V-6
B.  SOUTH BRANCH



     Figure V--3 shows extrejnsly high total and  fecal  coll form



densities downstream from Petersburg and Moore field,,  West Virginia



during the July 1969 survey.  Both exceeded 50,000 at River Mile



66.2 and 30,000 three miles below Moorefield  (River Mile 53.9).  A



significant decrease in total and fecal eolifcrms occurred between



stations at River Miles 53.9 and 13.5 even though, this stream reach



receives primary effluent from the Romney, West Virginia Sewage



Treatment Plant.



     Sampling data from the August survey (Figure V-/0 likewise




indicate maximum bacterial populations downstream from Petersburg



and Moorefield followed by a sharp die-off further downstream.



The total and fecal coliform counts at River Mile 53.9 were both



54,000.  The lowest fecal count (370) was recorded at River Mile




13.5.



     Bacteriological analyses are conducted routinely by the



Romney Waste Treatment Plant.  A &unraiary of these data for the



past five years of record is shown in Figure V-5.  Bacterial con-



centrations varied considerably ovar the five year period.  Several



counts exceeded 20,000.  Coliforoi density peaks frequently occurred



during the summer months when stream flows were lew and temperatures



high.  Minimum coliform levels were generally recorded during the



winter and spring months„

-------
  100,000-
                             BACTERIOLOGICAL  PROFILE
                           SOUTH  BRANCH  POTOMAC  RIVER
                                       JULY 29, 1969
   10.000-
v>
K
S

<
*
   1,000-
     100-
                      TOTAL COLIFORMS
                     •FECAL COLIFORMS
          3
          ^
          E
\


r— J 	 1 	 	 1 	
O 60 50

40
i

30 20

10

0
                                    RIVER MILES FROM POTOMAC
                                                                             FIGURE  V-3

-------

-------
  100.000-1
   io.oo
-------
100.000
                               BACTERIOLOGICAL   TRENDS
                             SOUTH  BRANCH POTOMAC RIVER
                                 (ROMNEY TREATMENT PLANT DATA)
                                                         ABOVE. PLANT
                                                         BELOW PLANT
           1964
                           1965
                                          1966
                                      YEAR OF RECORD
1967
                1966

                 FIGURE  V-S

-------
                                                                V-10






C.  CONOCOCHEAGUE CREEK



     For the July survey, Figure V-6 shows that stations downstream



from Chambersburg and Greencastle, Pennsylvania had total and fecal




coliform populations in excess of 160,000.  Every other station on



Conococheague Creek, excepting at River Mile 5.1, had fecal coliform



counts in excess of 10,000 and total counts in excess of 50,000.



At the Pennsylvania-Maryland State Line, both counts were about




160,000.



     Figure V-7 shows a coliform density pattern quite different for the



August survey than for the July survey as presented in Figure V-6, a



further example of the extreme temporal fluctuations associated



with bacteriological populations.  Maximum fecal coliform counts



(l6o,000) occurred downstream from Chambersburg with a sharp decrease



in these organisms occurring throughout the following 50-mile reach



of the stream.  Total coliforms varied in a similar manner, except



for a large rise (9,200 to 35,000) which occurred downstream from



Greencastle near the state line.



     The West Branch, Conococheague Creek, an intrastate tributary



of Conococheague Creek, receives treated wastes from Mercersburg,



Pennsylvania.  Both total and fecal coliform counts of 92,000



(July 1969) and 5,400 (August 1969) were recorded downstream from



Mercersburg.



     Neither Pennsylvania's nor Maryland's interstate water quality



standards are being met in the Conococheague basin.

-------
  ijooojtxxH
   IOO.OOOH
  E
  O

  2 IQOOO-
I
    ipooH
     100-
                              BACTERIOLOGICAL  PROFILE

                                CONOCOCHEAGUE  CREEK
                                       JULY 38. 1969
                       TOTAL COLI FORMS

                       • FECAL COLIFORMS
                        O
                        (T

                        ffi
                        1
                        O
                    Ul
                    (T
                  60
50
       40         30

RIVER  MILES  FROM  POTOMAC
20
10

FIGURE
                                                                               V-6

-------

-------
 ipoopoo-
  100,000-
g
o „
  "e
  o
Q>
  %
   10/DOO-
    ipoo-
                              BACTERIOLOGICAL  PROFILE
                               CONOCOCHEAGUE   CREEK
                                       AUGUST 18.1969
                                                           ui
                                                           CA

	TOTAL COUFORMS
	FECAL COLIFORMS
                                                                             \
                  60
                             50
                                                             20
                                    RIVER MILES FROM POTOMAC
                    10
                   FIGURE  V-7

-------
                                                                V-13






D.  OPEQUON CREEK



     While Opequon Creek does not directly receive significant




quantities of waste, two of its tributaries, Abrams Creek and



Tuscarora Creek, receive large quantities of treated wastes from




Winchester, Virginia and Martinsburg, West Virginia.  During the



August survey, total and fecal coliform counts exceeded 161,000 in



Abrams Creek,  The influence Abrams Creek exerts on Opequon Creek



can readily be seen in Figures V-8 and V-9.  Maximum total coliform



densities (161,000) and feeal coliform densities (35,000) in Opequon



Creek were both recorded in the vicinity of Abrams Creek,  Tuscarora



Creek, to a lesser degree, also exerts an adverse effect on the



bacterial water quality of Opequon Creek.  Fecal coliform counts



increased seven-fold during the July survey and three-fold during



the August survey at the station below Tuscarora Creek,



     A bacteriological study of the upper Potomac, including a



station on the Opequon Creek below Martinsburg, was conducted by



CTSL from July 6 to September 8, 1966.  In eighteen samples which



were collected during this period, fecal coliforms ranged from 1,300



to 35,000 (See Figure V-18).



     The State of Virginia has not assigned bacterial water quality



standards to its portion of Opequon Creek,  The West Virginia standards



were contravened on numerous occasions.

-------

-------
 100.000 -,
                            BACTERIOLOGICAL    PROFILE

                                  OPEQUON  CREEK
                                      JULY 29. 1969
 10.000 -

-------
IPOQ.OOO -I
  100.000 -
(T
p
^<§
o o
                           BACTERIOLOGICAL   PROFILE

                                 OPEQUON  CREEK

                                     AUGUST 19.1969
                             A
                                \
  10,000-
   ipoo-
 TOTAL COLIFORMS

•FECAL COLIFORMS


' 1 	 ' — 1 	 1
50 40 30
RIVER MILES FROM


zo 10 o
POTOMAC FIGURE V-9

-------
                                                                V-16






E.  ANTIETAM CREEK



     The Antietam Creels basin drains portions of Pennsylvania and



Maryland.  The primary source of organic wastes within Pennsylvania



is Waynesboro and Hagerstown is the primary source in Maryland.




     Water quality surveys conducted in the Antietam basin by CTSL



and the Maryland Department of Water Resources (MDWR) revealed



widely variable coliform and fecal coliforra populations.  During




the July 1969 survey, total coliform counts were greater than



161,000 from Hagerstown to River Mile 4.6.  Fecal coliform counts



throughout this 20 mile stream reach ranged from 161,000 (Hagerstown)



to 54,200 (River Mile 13.6).  Upstream from Hagerstown, total coli-



form counts ranged from 17,200 to 161,000 (above and below Waynesboro)



and fecal coliforms ranged from 1,400 to 91,300.  (See Tables in



Appendix)



     The August 1969 survey showed a completely different distri-



bution of coliforms.  Maximum total and fecal coliform counts greater



than l6l,000 were recorded from Waynesboro to Hagerstown.  Between



Hagerstown and the mouth of Antietam Creek both total and fecal



coliforms ranged from 4,900 to 91,800.



     During July 1969, the U. S. Geological Survey reported fecal



coliforms of 10,000 in Antietam Creek near Waynesboro, Pennsylvania



and 90 near Sharpsburg, Maryland.  Data collected over the past five



years by personnel of the Hagerstown Sewage Treatment Plant (below the



outfall) show  total coliforms ranging from 1 to 3,000.

-------

-------
                                                                V-17





     The bacteriological (total coliform) standard set by Pennsylvania



is 2,400*.  Recent sampling data indicate that this standard is not



being met in Antietam Creek.  Maryland's fecal coliform standard



(less than 240) is also being contravened.



F.  SHENANDOAH RIVER



     The Shenandoah basin drains 3,054 square miles in Virginia



and West Virginia.  Because of its size, more bacteriological data




for more stations has been collected from the Shenandoah than from



any other stream in the upper Potomac basin.



     The most recent intensive bacteriological surveys conducted by




CTSL were during July 28-29, 1969 and August 18-19, 1969.  Total and



fecal coliform populations measured in the South River-South Fork-




Shenandoah River during these surveys are shown in Figures V-10 and



V-ll.



     Fecal coliform densities in excess of 20,000 were recorded down-



stream from the North River confluence, downstream from Elkton, and



immediately upstream from Front Royal, Virginia.  Moreover, a fecal



count in excess of 10,000 was recorded downstream from the North



Fork confluence.  Total coliforms at each of these locations ranged



from about 20,000 to 35,000.



     Bacterial pollution in Middle River adversely affects the South



Fork.  During the July survey, many sampling stations throughout the



Middle River sub-basin, including the North River, indicated total




and fecal coliform counts of 160,900.  Minimum counts of 22,100 total








* For the period 5/15-9/15 only

-------

-------
Ul
   V)
   o:
   I
   LJ
   to
                                                           I
    
-------
swaojnoo ivoaj  ONV
                                                   FK5I.SE V-ll

-------
                                                                V-20

and 34,800 fecal coliforms were recorded in Middle River.  The two
major pollution sources are Harrisonburg on the North River and
Staunton on the Middle River.
     The South River-South Fork-^Shenandoah River data collected by
CTSL during its August survey exhibited a five-fold increase in
fecal coliforms at the confluence of the Middle River and a ten-fold
increase at the confluence of the North Fork Shenandoah River.  Maxi-
mum total and fecal coliform densities (54,000 and 34,000) were
recorded near Waynesboro and at River Mile 5,0.
     During August, the coliform counts were again high in the North
and Middle rivers.  The North River had total coliform counts of
13,000 and 24,000 and the Middle River had fecal coliform densities
as high as 160,900.
     Unusually high stream flows occurred during the August 1969
survey.  The differences in coliform densities and trends along the
main stem Shenandoah River (between River Miles 51 and 5), as shown
in Figures V-10 and V-ll, may be attributed to this substantially
increased stream flow.
     The North Fork Shenandoah River was also bacteriologically
polluted.  During July 1969, total coliforms ranged from 2,600 to
160,900 and fecal coliforms ranged from 3,100 to 91,800,  the highest
coliform counts occurred in the vicinity of New Market and Edinburg.
     A bacteriological study of the entire Shenandoah basin was con-
ducted by CTSL during June 1967 [1].  The data compiled from this
study generally agree with the findings presented above.  High fecal

-------
                                                                 V-21
coliform counts were recorded in the North Fork Shenandoah at




Timberville (91,800), New Marker (9,180), and near Qu!cksb-jrg (5,420).



Corresponding total coliform counts at these stations ranged from



5-4,200 to 160,900.  Maximum fecal counts in the Scuth Fork (490-5,400)



occurred downstream from Elkton.  Relatively high concentrations



(180-2,100) were also recorded in the South Fork down?tream from the



Middle River confluence.  North Rive'" exhibited a maximum fecal coli-



form count of 4,600 and a maximum total coliform count of 160,900,



Fecal coliform counts in Middle Rivei* ranged from 20 to ^90 and counts



in the main stem Shenandoah River were generally le,-?3 than 20,



     The temporal variation in coliform organism? in the Shertandoah



basin is quite significant.  A special study was conducted by CTSL



from July to September 1966 to determine the extant of temporal



variation.  Based upon 13 samples, the South Fork exhibited a fecal



coliform range of 20 to 16,000; the range in the North Fork was



1,720 to 24,000.  Fecal coliform counts in the Sheriariioab. River at



Harper's Ferry are presented in Figure 7-12,  Extreme temporal



fluctuations can readily be seen, at this station despite the fact



that stream flows were relatively constant '260 to 6?4 of;?.} over



the sampling period.



     Extensive sampling data collected over the past thrss years



indicate that bacteriological water quality standards f wh^e



established in the Shenandoah ba,sin, were generally not being met



under any flow conditions.

-------
IO.OOO,OOCH
 ipoo.ooo-1
  100.000-I
M
31
ui
   lO^XX)
    100-
                             BACTERIOLOGICAL    PROFILE
                         SHENANDOAH  RIVER at  HARPERS  FERRY
                                   JULY-SEPTEMBER. 1966
                 10
                     JULY
20
  30'
PERIOD
                                            OF
 16 AUGUST   2'°
RECORD
                                               SEPT.
                                           FIGURE  V-12
                                                                                 8

-------
                                                                 V-23






G.  MONOCACY RIVER



     The total and fecal coliform populations in the Mono-easy River



"basin during July and August 1969 were considerably greater than



populations measured in other areas of the upper Potomac basin.  Of



the 13 stations sampled, ten stations produced total and fecal coli-



form counts in excess of 160,000 during the July study and five



stations produced like values during the August study.



     Although the Monocacy basin receives wastewater discharges from



many sources, the largest of which is Frederick, Maryland,, the per-



sistence of high bacterial levels indicates that rural and urban runoff



also play a significant role in affecting water quality.  During both



surveys stream flow was abnormally high which may have resulted in a



"flushing" of coliforms from the predominately agricultural watershed



and a "scouring" of sludge deposits along the stream bed.



     The Maryland Department of Water Resources investigated the



bacteriological water quality of the Monocacy River from March to



December 1966 [2]„  It was concluded from this study that domestic



animals, primarily cattle, contribute most of the coliform organisms



upstream from Frederick.  Maximum total coliform counts in the upper



Monocaey exceeded 2,000,000 with median counts over 9,000.  The maxi-



mum values occurred during high stream flow periods.



     Immediately below the city of Frederick, maximum total coliforms



during the MDWR survey exceeded 2,000,000 and median counts were



235,000.  Relatively high coliform populations (greater than 100,000)



persisted downstream to the Potomac confluence.  Maximum coliforms

-------

-------
in the lower Monocacy generally occurred when stream flows were



very low,  an indication that surface runoff is a less significant



contributor of coliforms than it was in the upper reaches.



     Long-term coliform data collected from the Monocacy River



(River Mile 2,0) "by the D, C. Department of Health, are shown in



Figure V-13.  This figure shows that the coliform counts generally



increased over the past five years of record but with considerable



temporal variation.  Maximum counts of 250,000 were recorded in



December 196? and July 1968, but high counts were also recorded



during other months.



     Bacteriological data collected in the Monocacy by various



agencies indicate that the water quality standards were being contra-



vened throughout the year.



H.  MAIN STEM



     Survey data from the main stem Potomac River are presented for



July and August 1969 in Figures V-14 and V-15.  Distribution of bac-



teria in the Potomac was similar in both the July and August surveys,



but the August survey generally yielded higher bacterial counts des-



pite comparable flows.  Relatively high total coliform counts (54,000)



and fecal coliform counts (3,300) were recorded at Paw Paw, Maryland,



a station strongly influenced by the water quality in the North Branch



Potomac.  The highest  counts  were at Great Falls where total and fecal



coliform counts were 160,000 and 10,900,  respectively.



     During the July and August surveys a sharp increase in bacterial



densities occurred between stations at River Mile 183.7 (Shepherdstown)

-------

-------
1.000,000-
 100,000-
  8
  10.000-
  1,000-
                             BACTERIOUOGICAL  TRENDS
                                  MONOCACY  RIVER
                               (D.C DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DATA)
             1964
1965             1966              1967

            YEAR OF RECORD
1968

  FIGURE V-13

-------
UJ

LJ
               M3AW ADVDONOW-
             «3AI« HVOONVN3HS-
               M33MO WV13UNV-
                X33MD NO(103dO-






                3T10V3HOO3ONCO-
       33NVH9 HinOS ONV  H1MON
                          i  i  i  i—i—i—i	r
                                                                   i  i   i—i—r—i	r
                                                   SWHQjnCO  1VD3J  CJNV 1VJ.O1
                                                                                                     FIGU« V-14

-------

-------

                                                          2

                                                          o:
                                                          UJ


                                                          £
d»ooi/u<)")
         aw  IVJ.CH
                                                 FIGURE V-15

-------
                                                                  V- 28






and River Mile 125.7 (Great Falls).  This increase may be the result



of bacterial pollution in Antietam Creek, the Shenandoah River, and



the Monocacy River.  The wastewater discharges directly to the Potomac



River appear to have a lesser effect on its bacterial content than the



major tributaries do.



     The bacteriological data for five years of record, collected at



Great Falls by the water supply facility at Dalecarlia, is shown in



Figure V-l6.  A sharp rise over those five years is evident.  Fecal




coliforra counts are also shown in Figure V-l6 for almost two years of



record (1967-68).  During this period the temporal variation of fecal




coliforms closely paralleled the variation in total coliform organisms.



Maximum fecal counts (75,000-85,000) were measured at Great Falls during



July and August 1968 when total counts exceeded 140,000.




     Similar long-term bacteriological data for the Potomac River at



Point of Rocks are shown in Figure V-17.  When these data are compared



with the data presented in Figure V-13, it appears that the influence



of the Monocacy River on the bacterial water quality at Great Falls



results in higher bacterial counts than those found in the Potomac



at Point of Rocks„



     The Maryland water quality standards of the Potomac River were



being contravened.  Throughout the main stem of the Potomac River,



populations ranging from 1,000 to 10,000 were frequently recorded.

-------
1.000,000
                                    BACTERIOLOGICAL  TRENDS
                                  POTOMAC  RIVER of GREAT FALLS
                                           (DALECARLIA DATA)
 100.000-4
 10,000--J
  I000H
   100 H
                       	 TOTAL COLIFORMS
                       	FECAL COLIFORMS
   10
                       1964
                                      1965            1966
                                        YEAR  OF RECORD
1967
               1968

                 FIGURE V-16

-------
wxxyxxH
                           BACTERIOLOGICAL  TRENDS
                        POTOMAC RIVER at POINT OF ROCKS
                             (OiC DEPARTMENT OF HEAUH DATA)
 KXWXX) ^
  IXXX)
            1964
1965
    1966
YEAR OF RECORD
                                                         1967
                                                                            FJGURE V-17

-------
                                                                  V-31





I.  DISCUSSION



     Based upon the foregoing discussions, it is apparent that coliform



populations fluctuate greatly both temporally and spatially.  It is



also apparent that bacterial water quality standards are being contra-



vened throughout the upper Potomac basin during all flow periods.



     Despite all of the bacteriological data, there are two important



questions which cannot be answered "with any degree of certainty:



(l) the effect, if any, that stream flow and rainfall have on the



bacterial content of a stream, and (2) the significance of agricul-



tural, urban, and other land runoff as a contributor of coliform



bacteria.  In order to adequately assess bacteriological water quality



in the upper Potomac, these questions must be answered.



     Some insight into the second question can be obtained by examining



Figure V-18, wherein fecal coliform densities are plotted for two



watersheds that are geographically similar but with different land use.



Figure V-18 shows that the urbanized and agricultural Opequon basin



produced fecal coliforms an order of magnitude greater than the heavily



forested Cacapon basin.



     In areas where consistently high fecal coliform counts are



encountered, a detailed sanitary survey should be conducted to ascertain



whether human wastes or other sources are the dominant cause of bacterial



contaminat ion.

-------
                                                                V-32






     To minimize bacterial pollution of the receiving waters, chlori-



nation facilities are generally provided at all sewage treatment



plants.  The effective operation of these facilities is the responsi-



bility of the various state health departments.

-------
 100000-1
                             BACTERIOLOGICAL  PROFILES

                           OPEQUON  CREEK and  CACAPON RIVER


                                     JULY-SEPTEMBER. 1966
 10,000-
3J 1000-
            	 OPEQUON CREEK


            	CACAPON RIVER
1
                                                                             A
   100-
                          A

                         /I



                              I   /
                              I   /
                              I  /
                                            \ i
                                            \i
                                            \i
                                            v
I   /

i /
\i

 V
    10-
                           SEPT.  8


                         FIGURE V-18
                T-

                 10
                     JULY
                                                      AUGUST
                                                              IS"
                                      PERIOD OF RECORD

-------
                                                                VI-1
                            CHAPTER VI

          DISSOLVED OXYGEN AND BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND


A.  NORTH BRANCH

     The major sources of wastewater discharge in the North Branch

sub-basin are listed below:

                                   Wastewater         Discharge
        Facility                   flow (mgd)       BOD (Ibs/day)

West Virginia Pulp and Paper Co.*      11,0            16,000
Upper Potomac River Commission         21.0**           5,300
Keyser, West Virginia                   0.6               400
Celanese Fibers Company                 3.0            25,000
Cumberland, Maryland                    5.2             6,930


As a result of loadings from West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company and

the Upper Potomac River Commission facility, the dissolved oxygen (DO)

from Luke, Maryland to Keyser, West Virginia was often below 1.0 mg/1

(Figure VI-1).  The Maryland water quality standard for this reach

is 4.0 mg/1.

     As a result of the BOD loadings from Celanese Fibers Company, the

DO of the North Branch from Amcelle to Cumberland was often below

1.0 mg/1 in the summer months.  Hydrogen sulfide gas was detected in

the small impoundment at Cumberland indicating septic conditions.


 * Now Westvaco

** About 20.0 mgd is from the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company

-------

-------
   Ct
   UJ
u. 2
Q
a

O
CD
      O>
      CO
   F- ~
   O o>
   CL?
   IS

   §3
   X

   CC
   O
           dis
       'dMOO
                  3S3NV13D-
                dJ.S M3SA3M-



            diS NOISSIWWOO
        «3AI« DVWOlOd «3ddn-



                 ODVA1S3M-
                                            «3AW 39VAVS

                                                                                           ft
             •*
             (M
                   (VI
                          1
                          O
                                CO
                                                   (M
                                                                I
                                                                00
I
(O
                                                                                   (Vt
                                                  (I/5™)
                                                oa-aoa
                                                                                      FiGCRE VM

-------

-------
                                                                  VI-3


     During an intensive survey by  CTSL in August of 1966, DO  concen-

trations of less than 2.0 mg/1 were observed downstream to Spring

Gap, a distance of about ten miles  from Cumberland, Maryland.  Low

DO concentrations with high BOD levels were also observed in this same

reach in July 1969 (Figure VI-1).   The DO standard for  this reach is

5.0 mg/1.

B.  SOUTH BRANCH

     Compared to the North Branch,  the South Branch of  the Potomac

River receives relatively small volumes of wastewater as tabulated

for the major facilities below:

                                       Wastewater       Discharge
          Facility                     Flow (mgd)     BOD (Ibs/day)

     Petersburg, W. Va.                   0.27            75
     Loewengart & Company                 0.40           790
     Moorefield, W. Va.                   0.04           240
     Rockingham Poultry                   0.15           670
     Romney, W. Va.                       0.34           200
     Berkeley Springs, W. Va.             0.17           280


Although localized pollution has been observed, the DO  concentrations

in South Branch were usually above  6.0 mg/1.  The standard for DO is

5.0 mg/1 for this reach of the Potomac.


C.  CONOCOCHEAGUE CREEK

     The major wastewater discharges on the Conococheague watershed

are presented below;

-------
                                                                 VI-4
                                       Wastewater       Discharge
           Facility                    glow  (mgd)     BOD  (Ibs/day)

     Chambersburg, Pa.                    1.80              730
     H. J. Heinz Co., Pa.                 0.43              290
     Loewengart & Co., Pa.                0.18              590
     Mercersburg, Pa.                     0.22               60
     Greencastle, Pa.                     0.13               50
     W. D. Byron Co.                      0.37             1,390
     Water quality data for the July and August 1969 survey  indicate

DO levels greater than 5.8 mg/1 for all the sampling stations.   While

the BOD concentrations varied from about 2.0 to over 7.0 mg/1, the

assimilative capacity of the Conococheague appears adequate  to main-

tain DO levels over 5.0 mg/1,  A Pennsylvania water quality  network

station near Worleytown established in 1962 also confirms high DO con-

centrations in the Conococheague.

D.  OPEQUON CREEK

     The major Opequon Creek sub-basin wastewater discharges containing

organic matter are listed below:

                                       Wastewater       Dis charg e
             Facility                  Flow (mgd)     BOD (ibs/day)

Winchester, Va.                           2.40               460
0'Sullivan Rubber Co., Va.                2.10            unknown
Clearbrook Woolen Mills, Va.              0.20            unknown
Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co., W. Va.           0.62               420
Musselman-Pet Milk Co., W. Va.            0,30            1,500
Martinsburg, W. Va.                       1.50              950
Corning Glass Works, W. Va.               0.53               35

     The BOD concentrations in Abrams and Tuscarora creeks for the

1969 surveys were 5.0 mg/1 and the BOD at the other stations ranged

between 2.2 and 5.0 mg/1.  At all stations the DO was above  5.0 mg/1.

(See Appendix A for data listing.)

-------
                                                                VI-5
Wastewater
Flow (mgd)
1.96
0.14
5.58
0.18
0.25
0.10
Discharge
BOD (Ibs/day)
285
5
6,900
45
260
110
     High nutrient levels were also observed in the Abrams and Tus-

carora creelcs and this is discussed in Chapter X.  In general, streams

in this watershed are in compliance with the water quality standards.


E.  ANTIETAM CREEK

     The major wastewater discharges in the Antietam Creek sub-basin

are;


           Facility

     Waynesboro, Pa.
     Ft. Ritchie, Md,
     Hagerstown, Md.
     Fairchild-Hiller Corp., Md.
     Halfway, Md.
     Sharpsburg, Md.


     The major source of BOD is from the Hagerstown sewage treatment

facility, which causes a significant DO depression during low flow

conditions (Figure VI-2).  The rapid DO recovery indicates high reaer-

ation rates in Antietam Creek.

     Diurnal observations during a cooperative study by MDWR and

CTSL demonstrated the typical daylight-dark diurnal fluctuations of

DO and C02 associated with aquatic plant growths  [2].  In the

Antietam watershed, most of the growths were rooted aquatic plants

and phytoplankton.

F.  SHEMNDOAH RIVER

     The Shenandoah sub-basin is the largest tributary of the Potomac

River.

-------
diS
                      2
2
                                                       00
                                                              i^     i
                                                             (O      V
                                                                          I
                                                                          U-

                                                                          O
                                                                          I





                                                                          *
                                                                                   
-------
                                                               VI-7


1.  North Fork

     In the North Fork Shenandoah watershed, which is mainly forested,

the major wastewater discharges are as follows;

                                       Was t ewa t er       Dis charg e
           Facility                    Flow (mgd)     BOD (Ibs/day)

     Broadway, Va.                        0.13             35
     Rockingham Poultry Corp.             0.50            650
     Shenandoah Valley Packers            0.20            290
     New Market, Va.                      0.35            355
     Caroline Foods                       0.17          unknown
     Mt. Jackson, Va.                     0.11            130
     Shenandoah Mfg. Co.                  0.30            170
     Blue Ridge Poultry & Egg Co.         0.07            750
     Woodstock, Va.                       0.35             90
     Strasburg, Va.                       0.30            100

     During the June 1967 intensive survey by CTSL, low BOD concen-

trations, with corresponding high DO levels, were observed except near

Timberville and on Smith Creek near New Market where low DO values

were measured.  Similar observations were made during the July and

August 1969 surveys.  The DO depressions occurred downstream from the

several wastev/ater discharges.

2.  South Fork

     The upper South Fork Shenandoah is composed of three tributaries—

North, Middle, and South rivers.  The major wastewater discharges in

the tributaries and the mainstream are identified separately below:

-------
                                                                VI-8
           Facility

a.  North River

     Va. Valley Processes, Inc.
     Bridgewater, Va.
     Dayton, Va.
     Harrisonburg, Va.

b.  Middle River

     Verona San. Dist.
     Staunton, Va.
     Western State Hospital

c.  South River

     Crompton Shenandoah Co.
     E. I. DuPont Co.
     Waynesboro, Va.

d.  Main Stem South Fork

     Merck & Co.
     Elkton, Va.
     Rockingham Poultry
     Moyer Brothers
     Va. Oak Tannery Co.
     Luray, Va.
     Amer. Viscose Corp.
     Front Royal, Va.
Wastewater
Flow (mgdl
   0.10
   0.26
   0.16
   2.25
   0.13
   1.50
   0.25
   0.89
  11.00
   2.30
   7.70
   0.25
   0.07
   0.10
   0.43
   0.28
   8.64
   1.20
  Discharge
BOD (Ibs/day)
    1,000
      430
      270
    1,100
       35
      410
       70
      920
    1,800
      645
    3,500
      250
      300
    1,700
      500
      420
    9,350
    1,000
     There are five reaches of the South Fork in which water quality

degradation occurs as a result of wastewater discharges.  These are

(1) South River "below Waynesboro; (2) Grassy Run below Harrisonburg;

(3) South Fork below Elkton; (4) Hawksbill Creek below Luray and

(5) Main Stem at Front Royal.  Of the five areas, the most critical

in terms of DO is the South River (Figure VI-3).  Grassy Creek, which

receives wastes from the Harrisonburg area,, also had DO ranging from

-------
                                          ho
   3
.  Q
»  2
 
-------
                                                                  VI-10
1.7 to 3.2 mg/1 with a BOD level greater than 13 mg/1 during an

intensive survey in June of 1967.

     On the main stem of the South Fork below Elkton, BOD concentra-

tions ranging from 5.7 to over 15.0 mg/1 were measured in June of

1967.  This varying BOD loading resulted in a DO variation from

4.5 to 15.8 ing/1.

     Data from the July 1969 survey indicated that the water quality

in Hawksbill Creek is degraded as a result of industrial wastes.

More data are required to evaluate the extent of the degradation.

     Discharges in the Front Royal area have the greatest adverse

effect on the main stem of the Shenandoah.  This is presented in the

following section.

3.  Main Stem of Shenandoah River

     The main stem receives the residual wastewater discharges from

the Front Royal area and from the major sources discharging into

tributaries of the main stem as listed below:
                                       Wastewater       Discharge
           Facility                    Flow (mgd)     BOD Clbs/day)

     Berryville., Va.                      0.25              104
     Charlestown, W. Va.                  0.38              443
     Halltown Paperboard Co.              1.00            4?200
     During the June 1967 survey, the DO in the main stem between

Front Royal and Harper's Ferry varied from 5.2 mg/1 at night to

12.9 mg/1 in the daytime.  The BOD during the survey also varied

diurnally from 5.2 to 11.3 mg/1.  For the July and August 1969

-------
                                                                  VI-11


survey, somewhat lower DO concentrations were observed, ranging from

5.1 to 6.7 mg/1.

     The mean monthly data for the nutrient water quality network

station at Berryville, West Virginia (Figure VI-4) indicate that the

stream is in compliance with the water quality standard at this point.

G.  MONOCACY RIVER

     The major wastewater discharges in the Monocacy River watershed

are listed below;

                                       Wastewater       Discharge
           Facility                    Flow (mgd)     BOD (Ibs/day)

     Gettysburg, Pa.                      0.90              375
     Littlestown, Pa.                     0.26              130
     Emmitsburg, Md.                      0.21               55
     Taneytown, Md.                       0.19              120
     Westminster, Md.                     0.00              410
     Union Bridge, Md.                    0.10               30
     Camp Detrick, Md.                    O.£0               10
     Frederick, Md.                       4.33            9,660

     The largest source of pollution is the Frederick waste treatment

facility.  The wide range of BOD in the Frederick facility's effluent,

caused by varying industrial wastewater loadings into the treatment

plant and extensive algal and rooted aquatic growth in the river itself,

is shown in the diurnal DO profile (Figure VI-5).

     During low flow conditions, the DO in the main stem downstream

from the Frederick facility was often below 5.0 mg/1.  The river

recovers rapidly as shown in Figure VI-5.  Near the confluence'with

the Potomac River, the monthly average was 6.0 nqg/1 and higher, and

the average monthly BOD was about 2.0 mg/1 (Figure VI-6).

-------
                  BOD-DO  CONCENTRATIONS *


                  MAIN STEM SHENANDOAH  RIVER at

                           BERRYVILLE, W. Va.

                               1961-1964
   14-
   12-
   10-
   8-
O
Q -~
0
CD
   2-
          U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DATA
           1961
1962
1963
1964
                                                             FIGURE VI-4

-------
QC
                                                                                      rO
                                                                                      -o
                                                                                          m
                                                                                          a
                                                                                          i
                                                                                      -o
  (M
                                                                                    FIGURE  VI-5

-------
                 MEAN  MONTHLY  BOD and DO *
        MONOCACY  RIVER near CONFLUENCE  with POTOMAC RIVER
                              1965-068
   16-

   12-
   10-
a g»
oj
oo
   8-
   6-
   4-
           1965
                                DO
                    SAMPLED BY D.C. HEAUH DEPARTMENT
                                                            BOD
1966
1967
1968
                                                             FIGURE Vh«

-------
                                                                 VI-15


H.  MAIN STEM POTOMAC RIVER

     From the confluence with the North and South branches to the

Potomac Estuary the major wastewater discharges to the main stem are;
                                       Was t ewat er       Dis charg e
           Facility                    Flow (mgd)     BOD (Ibs/day)

     Paw Paw, W. Va.                      0.10              50
     Hancock, Md.                         0.38              45
     Williamsport, Md.                    0.23             430
     Shepherdstown, W. Va.                0.14             235
     Halfway, Md.                         0.25             260
     Sharpsburg, Md.                      0.10             109
     Brunswick, Md.                       0.40             435
     Figures VI-7, VI-8, and VI-9 for the Potomac River at Williams-

port, Point of Rocks, and Great Falls, respectively, show that the

mean monthly DO at these stations was usually greater than 6.0 mg/1

except for the months of July and August 1963 at Great Falls.  DO

concentrations greater than 6.0 mg/1 were also recorded during the

July and August 1969 surveys.

     The BOD levels at all three stations, also shown in Figures VI-7,

VI-8, and VI-9, indicate low levels of oxidizable organic matter.

At Great Falls, the concentration of BOD ranged from about 1.0 to

4.0 mg/1 while at Williamsport the levels were lower, ranging from

about 0.5 to 3.0 mg/1.

-------
                                   -1-
                                    o
00-COS
                                      FIGURE  VI-7

-------
0-
             MEAN  MONTHLY  BOD and DO
             POTOMAC  RIVER  at POINT of ROCKS
                     RIVER MILES = 163.0
                          1965 -1968
                                                  DO
               * SAMPLED BY D.C. HEALTH DEPARTMENT
                                                        BOD
                                                         FIGURE VI-8

-------
o  •*
O  co


1^

°  ^  $

CD  g   ,,
O
    g
                                                                            ni        o
                                             OQ-OCM
                                                                                         vi-9

-------
                                                                VI-19
     The monthly BOD loadings in the Potomac River at Great Falls



from January to August 1969 are shown in Table VI-1.  The average



BOD load (107,800 Ibs/day) during this period represents 45 percent



of the total BOD discharged into the upper Potomac Estuary from



all sources.

-------
H


H
                               a
                                                                  o
                                                                  o
                                                                  o
                     0)  >?
                     bDH
                                                                                O
                                                           C-     CO     
-------
                                                                VII-1





                            CHAPTER VII



                            PESTICIDES






A.  GENERAL



     Pesticides are chemical compounds, either natural or synthetic,




used to control unwanted or noxious animals and plants.  They fall



into four general classifications depending upon their chemical




composition:



     (l)  Chlorinated hydrocarbons (DDT - dieldrin, heptachlor,




          endrin, aldrin, etc.)



     (2)  Organic phosphorus compounds (parathion, malathion,



          phosdrin, etc4)



     (3)  Other organic compounds (denithophenols, carbonates,, etc.)



     (4)  Inorganic compounds (copper sulfate, lead arsenate, zinc



          phosphide, etc.)



     The chlorinated hydrocarbons constitute the most common type of



insecticide currently used0



B.  WATER QUALITY CRITERIA



     The Committee on Water Quality Criteria, Federal Water Pollution



Control Administration, has published recommended pesticides concen-



trations for various water uses  [33.  Criteria pertaining to the



common chlorinated hydrocarbons are as follows:

-------
                                                               VII-2
1.  Public Water Supplies

                                   Permissible*
Constituent                          Criteria
                                      (ug/1)

Aldrin                                 17.0
DOT                                    42.0
Dieldrin                               17.0
Endrin                                  1.0
Heptachlor                             18.0
Heptachlor epoxide                     18.0

2.  Fish and Aquatic Life

     Aldrin, BHC, endrin, heptachlor, DDT, and dieldrin are all

acutely toxic to aquatic populations at concentrations of 5 ug/1

and less.  Based on the assumption that 1/100 of this concentration

represents a reasonable application factor, the levels of these

substances in the marine or freshwater environment should not

exceed 50 nanograms/liter (0.05 ug/1).

3.  Wildlife

     A limited knowledge of the dynamics of biological magnification

in wildlife habitats does not permit the realistic establishment of

tolerable pesticide criteria.
* The permissible levels are based upon recommendations of the
  Public Health Service Advisory Committee on use of the PBS
  Drinking Water Standards.

-------
                                                               VII-3
4.  Agricultural   (Irrigation, farmstead, and livestock water supply)

                                   Recommended*
Constituent                          Criteria
                                      (ug/1)

Aldrin                                 17.0
DDT                                    42.0
Dieldrin                               17.0
Endrin                                  1.0
Heptachlor                             18.0
Heptaehlor epoxide                     18.0
C.  ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

     Analytical pesticide data for the upper Potomac River basin,

are presented in Tables VII-1 through VII-5.  The long-term data

(Tables VII-1 and VII-3) were collected at three water quality net-

work stations (FWPCA) and the remaining data were collected at

CTSL stations during September 1968 (Table VII-4) and August 1969

(Tables VII-5).  All samples were analyzed at the FWPCA laboratory

in Cincinnati, Ohio within certain detectable limits (Table VII-6).

     An examination of the results indicates that most pesticide

determinations were negative; however, many samples showed trace

quantities of certain chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides and

samples collected in the Potomac River at Great Falls and in

Antietam Creek showed significant quantities of DDT, dieldrin., and

endrin.,  The 0,666 ug/1 of dieldrin and the 0.17 ug/1 of DDT

measured in Antietam Creek and the maximum endrin concentration

(0.094 ug/l) measured at Great Falls exceeded the recommended

criteria of these constuents for fish and aquatic life (0.05 ug/1).


* Same as criteria prescribed by PBS Drinking Water Standards

-------
                                                               VII-4





     In view of the limited number of pesticide analyses currently



available, it is essential that a more representative water quality



sampling program having a minimum duration of one year "be initiated



to obtain the necessary data for assessing potential pesticide



pollution problems in the upper Potomac basin.

-------
                                     o     co    o
                            iJ       Q     Q    o
                            ~—      o     o    o

                            B       o     o    d
                           iS
           o    o    o
                                     o    o    o
             w
                           k       8    8    %
                           18       odd
 I     a    g        H    13
H    o    B        ^ d ^       ooo


H    1    3
                                     O    O    O

                                     odd
                                                      g    M
                                                      Q)    (I)
                                                      H    3

                                                      0)    "eg
                                                      H    >>
                                                      ri
                                                      ^    0)

                                                      o    43
                                                      IU
                                                      +3    d
                                                                                a
                                                                                             &
                                                                                -f    ra
                                                                                u    m
                                                                                      «D
                                                                                      r^
                                     o     o    o
                                                                                43    0)
                                                                                a    i-i
                                                            Cl    0)


                                                            -L>    JJ





                                                             •?    +3
                                                                                43    43    43

                                                                                s    s    §
                                                                                m    m
                                                                                Q)    0)

                                                                                ft    ft
                                                      in     ra    ra
                                                            0)    QJ
 •*i
is
                                     o     o    o
                                    o     o     o
                                                                                43    43    43
                                                                                gag
                                                                                O    S    5)
                                                                                3    3    P
                                                                                -P    +3    -P
                                                                                •H    -H    -ri
                                                                                •P    -P    P



                                                                                OOO
                                                \O

-------
                         o'ddddddddoddddddd
              QoUddddddoooododddod
                        -ddddodddoododdood
                  idddddoddddoodoooo
01
                                       i
                                                                                                             OO
                                                                                                             CO
                                                                                                             o
                         OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
                               3
                    8
                         8    8
8
                 51   8
                         OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
                   f
                         ddddddddddooddddd
                         dddoddddddddddddd
                         OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

-------
 I
H
H
>
         o         o    o    o    o
         do    do    do
        o    o    o    o    o    o
 O     O    O    O    O    O    O

!        o    o    o    o    d    d
        O    O    \O    Q    Q    O

        o    o    q    o    o    o

        d    d    d    d    d    d
        o    o    o    o    o    o
              M
 h^l     O    r-i    OO   Q    Q    Q
"^     O    O   00   Q    O    Q
 rh     O    O    O   O    O    O

        o    d    d   d    d    d
        o    o    o    o    o    o
        o    o     o    o    o    o
        -^   -*    -*    lf\   VO    (—
        VO   VC    VO    \O    VO   VO
        o\   vo    on   cvj    on    o\
        CM   W    
-------
I
o     o
o     o
o     o

o"     d
                                                 O

                                                 O
                                                 O
    w>
    3
       §Q

       o

o     o
                                       o

                                       8
                             o

                             8
                             o

                             8
           o

           8
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

8
           O

           8
                       o

                       o
                             o
                             C)

                             8

                             o"
          I
          d
8    8
o    c>
                             O
                                                                      O

                                                                      V
  H

-------


















LA
1
H
j— (
^>
a
1






































CQ
-P
CO
CD






ON
H
1 ^
C^ M
^5 o
<; -H
-P CD
1 O -P
<; HP
EH H
a s
H
H
O
EH
CO







ti
O
•H
-P
03
o
Q
[_3

bQ
, i
rn
H
&
§
CO





CD
-P
O
CD
-P
CD


1
^
1
0
O
o
a





ON
VD

H 0
H 00
CO H







a3

^_i
S
•H
K
O

fa
O
-P
O
PM

-------
                     TABLE VII-6

               PESTICIDES ANALYZED AND

              MINIMUM DETECTABLE LIMITS
     Compound                Minimum Detectable Concentration
    	                  ng/1
Dieldrin                                    5

Endrin                                      5

DDT                                        10

DDE                                         5

Heptachlor                                  5

Heptachlor Epoxide                          5

Aldrin                                      5

BHC                                         5

Endosulphan                                 5

Chlordane (Tech.)                          25

Toxaphene                               1^ 000

Methoxychlor                               25




* ng/1 =  nannograms/liter

-------
                                                                VIII-1




                           CHAPTER VIII



                        THERMAL DISCHARGES






A.  GENERAL



     Thermal discharges may be defined as any discharge which has



been artificially heated above the natural temperature of the receiving



water.  Tremendo\;ts amounts of water are used by the power generating




industries for condenser cooling and subsequently discharged as thermal



wastes.  While power generation represents the principal source of



thermal wastes in the upper Potomac River basin, other industries



involved with manufacturing processes requiring cooling water also con-



tribute a significant amount of thermal discharge.



     The emission of heated water, especially in large quantities,



exerts an adverse effect on the aquatic environment because of changes




in the physical, chemical, and biological properties of water.  Fore-



most among these effects are (1) a reduction in the solubility of



oxygen and other gases, (2) an increase in metabolic activity with



abnormal growth and reproduction patterns in all freshwater and



marine organisms, and (3) a greater sensitivity of these organisms



to toxic substances due to synergistic action.



     An acute awareness and concern over large thermal waste dis-



charges has recently occurred.  This concern is manifested by the



establishment of temperature criteria in all Federal-State water



quality standards.  The temperature criteria applied to Maryland



streams which receive significant quantities of thermal wastes are




presented in Table VIII-1.

-------
                                      o  ON  o  ON
                                      CO  •   CO-
                                      ON PO  ON f*~)
                                         00     CO
                                              lAo
                                              ONlrt
                                                CO
IfNo     lAo    ^  •
O\1A   O\1A   CO O
   CO     CO      CO
        S
                                              I
                o rl
                0 S
                              4?


                              L
§
:*
                                         1
                                                             i!       3
                                      0)
                                      ts
                                                     W
        I
        (D
        W
                                                                     01

                                                                     3
                                                                     +3
                                                                    W
                              1
                                                                     ffi

                                                                     0)
                                                                     a
                  I
                                      I
I



If
                                                                     0)




                                                                     ft
                                                                     jg

-------
                                                               VIII-3





B.  SOURCES AND THERMAL CONDITIONS



     Major sources of thermal wastes in the upper Potomac basin are



presented in Table VIII-2.  Also given are the receiving waters and



waste flow for each source.



     Average monthly temperatures for the past five years of record at



representative stations throughout the upper Potomac River basin are



presented in Table VIII-3.  These temperatures were extracted from



the compilation of data published annually by the Interstate Commission



on the Potomac River Basin (INCOPOT).  The temperature values shown



in the table indicate that water quality standards were being met in



the four sub-basins investigated despite the fact that these streams



receive large quantities of heated wastes!



     The most critical sub-basin was the North Branch Potomac where



temperatures exceeding 30°C.  (86°F.) were quite common.  Heated dis-



charges from the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company (between



Stations 338.2 and 337.5) generally raised stream temperatures more



than 5°C.  Moreover, the Celanese Fibers Company in Ameelle, Maryland



(Station 314) created an additional rise in temperature averaging 3°C.



Water temperatures in the North Branch Potomac at Cumberland, Maryland



(Station 308) remained relatively high due to the heated discharge



from Potomac Edison Company's steam electric plant immediately up-



stream.  If future expansion of these industries result in greater



usage of cooling water, a thermal pollution problem in the North Branch



Potomac River will occur unless corrective measures are undertaken.

-------
s
 
I
                                                                     I
                                                                       1)
                                                                      I
                                                                                          S
                                                                                         a
                                                                                           O
                                                                                           CO
                                                                                                     •ri
                                                                                                     K

                                                                                                     0)

                                                                                                     3
                                                                                                    Ai


                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                               0)


                                                                                                               g
                                                                                                             •s        '•§       •§
                                                                                                              Q         P        Q
                                         V

                                        S
                                        AS


                                        I
                                        g
                                        o>
>j
I
          K

          |



          §
          0)

          g
                                                                                                                                            1
                                                                                                                                   .p
                                                                                                                                   co
 i:
h
                                                                                                    fc
                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                    5
                                                                                                    H
                                 I
                                 •ri
                                  bO
                                  h
                                                                                                             •ri
                                                                                                             4J
                                                                                         W^-'    «v
                                                                                                                                                     •P
                                                                                                                                                     CQ
                                                                                                                                                      S
                                                                                                                                                     CJ

                                                                                                                                                      §
                                                                                                                                                      in
                                                                                                                                             O

                                                                                                                                            S

                                                                                                                                             O
                                                                                                                                             O

                                                                                                                                                              H
                                                                                         O\
                                                                                                                       ?!

-------
0
i
"Q

•H
I


!
I 1
<< a *
•? 1 S
H >E'~S
1 I Is
1


U
^
*


1
t:
d>
^ O -d" u*\ -3" Ox u\ \o vQ -J" ir\ t — ii
•o CM CVJ CU H Oj C\J <\) OJ OJ O4
$

H U O I OJ ON HJ-.CVIl H t— LTN CVI
OI 0 CU CVIH CMCMCM CM H CVI CM
IOONI-4-O i-tLALAI 1ILAI
OoH CVIOJ CMCVICM CM
H'
1
1 O LA ^O LA LA CO t — VO CO V£) OS VO l^~
Ho CMCVICMCVI rHOJOJCVI CVICMCV1H
H-
-*
'•fs
10 ro^J-rOLA Is-v^icoco >-O t— ^* t-
-Ho CVICVICMOJ MCVIOJCVI CVICMCVIH
0
10 roiACUOs OLAroro cM-*-=tC^~
Ho OICMCVIH CMCMOJCM OJCMOJrH
-t
\o
tr—
IO ro-*CVJCO CO-*CMrH HLTvcot^
H_o CMCMCMr-1 HCVICVICVI Cvicvl'cMH
H
O
-OO LAHOscO Hr-IHaN -^rOHO
Oo CMroOJCM rorococu cvlrorocvl
-*O CVJOLAlA S-OOCO t-OSILA
Ho cvlroCMOJ ojcorocvi CMCM co
uA
^~• O OS VO LA ON V£) t — LA CM ON \O VO O
rOo HOJCMrH CMOJCMCM rHcMCMCV)
OJ
X3O LAOCTVLA HHt^LA t^CMVOLA
rOo HCVIHH OJCMHH HCVIHH
no
H1K--P O it • 4? >-4?
gHMft SHMU Id¥w
333U 33?a> 3;3?3?
l-3h) •? CQ
t--
VD
o\
H
CVI \O V£>
OJ OJ CM


?} CM
co vo i
H CVI
ro CO VQ
CM CM OJ

LA OS -^
CM CM OJ

O -4" IA
CM OJ CM

ON OJ -4-
r-( CM CM


t- -4- OS
CVI ro CVI
1 ' co

CO OS LA
CVI CM CO

Si Si Si
Hi
H
SJ



'
0

Si

OS
H

•3


o
CO
t—
CVI

OJ

a
i
m


-------
                                                               VIII-6





     In addition to INCOPOT data, other temperature data collected by



CTSL and the U. S, Geological Survey were also analyzed.  A water



quality survey in the North Branch Potomac River was conducted "by



CTSL during August 1967.  Temperatures ranging from 28°C. to 36°C.



were observed at the Luke-Piedmont Bridge, downstream from the West



Virginia Pulp and Paper Company.  Although water quality standards




assigned to this stream reach by the State of Maryland were not being



contravened based upon CTSL data, a potential problem nevertheless




exists„



     The U, S. Geological Survey maintains gaging stations on the



North Branch Potomac River at Luke and Cumberland, Maryland, and



routinely records water temperature data at these gages,  USGS data



yielded results comparable to those already presented.



     Extensive temperature and corresponding biological data have not



been collected in the immediate vicinity of the two largest thermal



waste discharges in the upper Potomac basin; namely, Virginia Electric



and Power Company at Mount Storm, West Virginia and Potomac Edison



Power Company at Biekerson, Maryland.  It is necessary to collect



such data before the effects of these facilities on the thermal



regime of the receiving streams can be evaluated.

-------
                                                                 IX-1
                             CHAPTER IX
                  MINE DRAINAGE - GENERAL SUMMARY

     A cooperative Federal-State comprehensive water quality study
of the North Branch Potomac River basin was conducted from March 1968
to May 1969 to identify the principal sources of mine drainage and to
ascertain the effects of acid tributary flows on the North Branch
Potomac River [4].  Eighteen stations were sampled bi-weekly for
pertinent water quality indicators.  The data obtained during this
survey indicated that mine drainage has created extremely low pH
levels which are destroying all forms of aquatic life in more than
4.0 miles of the North Branch Potomac and more than 100 miles of
tributary streams.  Moreover, the excessive acid, solids, and metals
such as iron and manganese in mine drainage are having a deleterious
effect on the North Branch as a source of municipal and industrial
water supply.
     The tributary streams in the Potomac basin producing most of the
acid are outlined below:
                              Average
   Watershed                 Acid Load               State
                             (Ibs/day)
Elk Run                        35,000             West Virginia
Laurel Run                     13,000             Maryland
Buffalo Creek                  15,000             West Virginia
Abram Creek                     8,000             West Virginia
Stony River                     4,500             West Virginia
Three Forks Run                 3,300             Maryland
Piney Swamp Run                 3,200    .         West Virginia
Unnamed Tributary               1,500             West Virginia
Lostland Run                    1,000             Maryland

-------
                                                               IX-2





     Approximately 79,000 Ibs/day of acid is presently being contributed



by streams within the State of West Virginia and approximately 39,000



Ibs/day by streams within the State of Maryland.  These estimates



represent 67 percent and 33 percent, respectively, of the total acid



load in the North Branch Potomac River at Beryl, West Virginia.



Although the Beryl station drains 287 square miles, approximately 54



percent of its acid originates from only 20.6 square miles comprising



the watersheds of Elk Run, Laurel Run, and Buffalo Creek,,



     A summary of the 1968-69 water quality data for the North Branch



Potomac River is presented in Figure IX-1.  An examination of these



data indicates that the North Branch Potomac was continuously acid from



Steyer, Maryland to Beryl, West Virginia, a reach representing approxi-



mately 30 miles.  This stream reach is also characterized by pH levels



generally less than 4.0, whereas the Maryland water quality standards



prescribe a minimum pH of 6.0.  In the past, large alkaline loads in



the Luke-West err-part,, Maryland area (West Virginia Pulp and Paper



Company and Upper Potomac Commission's sewage treatment plant) have



normally prevented acidic conditions in the North Branch Potomac from



extending further downstream.



     Recently, however, a reduction in the alkalinity from the West



Virginia Pulp and Paper Company, combined with a "slug" of mine



drainage flushed out of the critical acid-producing watersheds by



excessive rainfall, resulted in exceptionally low pH values in the



North Branch Potomac River beyond Cumberland, Maryland,  The data



collected in the vicinity of Cumberland during a special GT3L survey

-------
  7.0-
 6.0-
 5.0-
 4-0-1
 J
   1968-69  SURVEY  DATA
NORTH  BRANCH  POTOMAC RIVER
-480-i

-520-1
                                                                      LEGEND
                                                                       {MAXIMUM
                                                                       MEAN
                                                                       MINIMUM
-560-j
-600-*
1.000-
900-
800-
700-
600-
§ 500-
400-
300-
200-
100-
0-
c










I






^~^^












| 	 1







I 	
0 80 70 K 60 50 40
                                                STREAM MILES
                                                                                           FIGURE  IX-I

-------

-------
                                                               IX-4





on August 18, 1969, exhibited a pH range of 3»3 to 3,6,  These low pH



levels appear to be the cause of a fish kill which occurred the pre-



ceding week near Qldtown, Maryland approximately ten miles downstream



from Cumberland,,



     Since there are no large natural alkalinity sources in the North



Branch Potomac River upstream from Beryl, an extensive mine drainage



control program to eliminate practically all aeid discharges is



necessary to attain a water quality commensurate with approved water



quality standards.  Based upon a preliminary appraisal, an annual



expenditure of $5,000,000 is required to provide necessary preventive,



collection, and treatment measures in the seven most critical water-



sheds of the Potomac basin.  The first cost figure was estimated to be



about $32,500,000.

-------
                                                                X-l
                             CHAPTER X
                             NUTRIENTS

     For the 1966 calendar year, a 40-station stream sampling network
was maintained by CTSL in the Potomac River basin.  Based upon three
water quality network stations and data from the CTSL wastewater
loading surveys of 1966 and 1968, a detailed report on nutrient
sources and distribution has been prepared [ 5 ].  To further define
the nutrient forms entering the estuary from the upper basin, weekly
monitoring of nutrients at Great Falls is currently being conducted
as a component of a nutrient transport study in the Potomac Estuary,
A.  SOURCES
1.  Wastewater Loadings
     As of December 1968, there were 256 wastewater discharges in the
upper Potomac River basin [ 6].  In the upper basin about 18,430
Ibs/day of total PO, and 10,680 Ibs/day of TKN were discharged to the
                   4
surface waters (Table X-l).  For a sewered population of 403,500 this
reduces to 0,045 and 0.026 Ibs/capita/day of phosphorus and nitrogen,
respectively.
     Nutrient loadings from industrial wastewater discharges are about
7,700 Ibs/day of total PO. and 4,600 Ibs/day of TKN.  The industrial
                         4
contribution to wastewater nutrient loadings in the upper basin is
about 42 percent of the total PO  (TPO ) and about 43 percent of the
                                4     4
total nitrogen.  The amount of NOp + NO,, nitrogen in both the indus-
trial and municipal wastewater discharges is insignificant.

-------
                                     TABLE X-l

                   NUTRIENT LOADINGS FROM WASTEWATER DISCHARGES
                                  BY SUB-REGIONS*
Sub -Region
North Branch
South Branch and
Upper Region
Opequon
Conococheague
and Upper
Middle Region
Antietam and
Middle Region
Shenandoah
Catoctin Creeks
Md. and Va.
Monocaoy
Lower Region
Population
Served
79,200
17,300
34,800
26,900
61,500
108, 500

5,400
62,500
7,400
LOADING
BOD
Ibs/day
55,300
2,720
3,470
4,250
7,980
31,800

740
4,220
200
AFTER TREATMENT
TKW
Ibs/day
1,750
370
450
710
890
4,890

110
1,380
100
Ibs/day
4,850
460
1,100
1,050
2,380
6,360

220
1,830
ISO
TOTAL
403,500
110,680
10^680
18,^30
*  A Sub-Region may include discharges to the small tributaries and to the main
   stem of the Potomac.

-------
                                                                 X-3
2.  Land Runoff and Other Sources

     To determine the amount of nutrients coming from land runoff,

analyses of loadings from areas with three distinct land uses

(forest,, agricultural, and urban) were made.  Using the Oatoctin

Creek (Maryland) watershed basin as primarily agricultural, the

Patterson Greek watershed as forested, and Rock Creek watershed as

urban, the effect of land uses on the contribution of nutrients to

the surface waters is illustrated in Table X-20  These three areas

receive a relatively small wastewater volume.



                             Table X-2

      NUTRIENT LOADINGS FROM WATERSHEDS WI'IH VARYING LAND USE
Watershed   Drainage   T PC  as PC     NO  + NO,, as N       TKN as N
   and        Area         4      4      d     -5
Land Use    (sq mi)  (ibs/day/sq mi)   (Ibs/day/sq mi)   (Ibs/day/sq mi)
Patterson
Creek
(Forest) 279 0.50
Catoctin
Creek
(AgricJ 109 1.25
Rock
Creek
(Urban) 77 1.10


2002 0.41


5,30 0,65


2,70 0,67

-------
                                                                X-4




     Using the same land use designations that the U. S. Corps of


Engineers used in their 1958 study [ 7], the nutrient loading from


land runoff was determined (Table X-3).  It should be noted that the


largest contribution of nutrients is from agricultural runoff even


though over 62 percent of the basin is covered by forest.


B.  SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION 1966


1.  Phosphorus


     As can be seen in the summary of the nutrient data for the major


sub-basins in Table X-4, the phosphorus concentrations were at least


three times greater in the Monocacy River, Opequon Creek, and Antietam


Creek sub-basins than in the remaining five sub-basins,,  These three


sub-basins are primarily agricultural but receive considerable


quantities of municipal wastewater.  These higher concentrations are


also reflected in large PC  yields of from 3.6 to 4.8 Ibs/day sq.. mi.
                          4

as shown in Table X-4.


2.  Nitrite + Nitrate and Total K.leldahl Nitrogen (TKN)*


     The Conocheague, Antietam, Cpequon, and Monocacy sub-basins had


an average NCL + NCL nitrogen of 1.4 mg/1 and greater„  The Conococheague


and Monocacy sub-basins had nitrite and nitrate yields of over


10 Ibs/day/sq. mi., almost twofold larger than that of the remaining


four sub-basins.
* TKN in this report is defined as organic plus ammonia nitrogen.

-------
c^    O

«    g





S3
CQ
co

s
EH










S3
CQ
cd
o
S3
1

CM
»





^j-
g
CQ
cS
s*

*
£— I







cd
<<



0)
CO
f~*>
Id

cd
t—i
§
^
«

r-
o
VD
•v
CM

*•"""».

•r
e
c

^v^
J>
CC

V.
ft
rH
* — •
s~*
0!
T3
^x^
CO
H





U"\
VD

o



o
o
lf\
•»
CM

X—N
•H
0
o
ra

cd
CO
i-H
In
ctf
\
CQ
H


O
•
VO



o
o
H
U"\



•H
g

o
CQ

cd
tJ
CQ
rH
x — *
•H
s
a
CQ


tf\
CM
e
rH




O
O
rH
Np

*
8
<— t







-P
rH
£j
O
•rl
r)
bo

O
OJ
^
CM







O

•
O



8
VO

rH




O
*
CM



O
O
-J
C"\





O
ir\
o
0





to
vo"





•p
CQ
CD
ri
Q
fe
lf\
VD









U^N
vo

O



g
OA






o
*
o'x



o
rH







O

»
rH




O
O
H







fi
cO

£_j
!=>
                                                                 O
                                                                 vr\
                                                                 O
                                                                 O
                                                                to
                                                                CM
                                                                O
                                                                rH
                                                                VD

                                                                to
                                                                to

                                                                  *
                                                                o
                                                                O
                                                                 m



                                                                I

                                                                rH  fi
                                                                 Ctl -H
                                                                -P  CQ
                                                                 O  cd
                                                                EH M
 CQ
 
 •o
 0

 •cJ
 fl
 •H

 a>
-p
H
 r(


$

*

-------
X
           ^
            i-l
          0)

          o
          i
g ON     ft
I

(Q
as
                         O
                   o
                   (Q
                   iQ    P
                   03    fL,
          O


          ^
                               •H
                                S
                                 «
                                o1
                                03
                               I
                          so
                          05
                          oo
                         p
                          a
                         p
                               5
                               •H
                                9
                                CO
                               S
                               r-4

                                s
                         cd  cS °H
                          '  «)  8

                         C0 *3l  01
                         P tQ
                         CO*—
^t
CO
f—

vo
-4"
CM
c-
vo
CM
<*>
«n
CO
t—
oo

OJ
ON
0
H

IA
IA

CM
CM
l/N

CO
CM
OO
H


^— .
fi4
§s
fl8 *
^ $3
J2Q £E
43 *£$
Ti H
o o

I


CM
LA
CM
IA
IA
VO
Oy,
00
vo
ON
CM

VO
O

H
IA
OO
IA
».
H
ON.
O

0
tr\
i^f*
H


O o
a £5
05

b'
§o
OS
ON

O
*

OO
H
N-
H
OO
=4
in
ro

IA
r-5
H
VO
*
OJ
vo
CVi
cy

H
CM
f*"J

ON
VO


•
^4 ',]?'
0

4) .p
§> O
cd Pi

VD
OO
IA
0
e—
VO
^t
H
oH
OS
H
ON

-=fr
H
CO
£—

_d-
cn
U*N
m
0"*
H
VO
ON
ON
H
00
co
<.M


^•"V
p^4 *
0 'tJ
O «*-
s
S S
-p   ^

                                                                   g^
                                                                  og
                                                                   S3 °H
                                                                   O 4>
                                                                   o-T-i
                                                                   S) Jfi
                                                                   ftS
                                                                  o-~--
                                                                              8
                                                                               IA
                                                                               OO
                                                                               CM

                                                                               OJ
                                                                                          <»l
                                                                                        VD
                                                                                        ir\
                                                                                        vo
                                                                                        ON
                                                                                        VD
                                                               IA
                                                               q

                                                               IA
VD
IA
oo
                                                                                     as >
                                                                                     w
Sheaand
'Bloome
                                                                                                 VO
                                                                        IA
                                                                        VO

                                                                        O
                                                                                        VD
                                                                                        VO

                                                                                        co"
                                                                        ^t-

                                                                        H
                                                                        VO

                                                                        .=?
          IA
          co
          oo

          00
                                                                                                 vo
                                                                        OT)
                                                                        H
                                                                        CO
                                                                     «j> S
                                                                     5   ,
                                                                     *-g
                                                                     f»a-H
                                                                     O ^
                                                                     «J _®
                                                                     C nrj
                                                                     O -
OO
                                                                                                  -d
                                                                                                  S
                 a?

                «H
                                                                                                           -P
                                                                                                           oj
                                                                                                        •p
                                                                                                        O
                                                                                                                        60

                                                                                                                        5
                                                                                                                        H
                                                                                                                        S-i
                                                                                                                        O
                                                                                                                       I
                                                                                                                        c»
            VO

             g
            •C!
             «J
             OJ
            PQ

            *

-------
                                                                 X-7
     Since the TKN determination was initiated in the midsummer of
1.966, annual loadings were not calculated for this parameter.  The
average TKN concentration ranged from 0.017 to 0.784 mg/1.
C.  NUTRIENT CONCENTRATIONS - 1969
     Nutrient concentrations in the July and August 1969 surveys
corroborate the findings in 1966 (presented in Appendix A).  The
nutrient concentrations for July 21-22, 1969, were the highest
in the Opequon, Antiet&m, and Monocacy sub-basins (Figure X-l).
Stream flow from the upper basin, including the North and South
branches, diluted the runoff containing the high nutrient levels
from the lower sub-basins.
     Stations with high nutrient levels for selected watersheds are
presented below:

   Station              Stream                        Location
     A-3       Antietam Creek                 below Eagerstown, Md0
     MR-9      Little Pipe-Monocacy River     near confluence with
                                                 Monocacy
     MR-10     Monoeacy River                 below Md.-Pa. State Line
     0-1       Abrams Crsek-Opequon Greek     below Winchester,, ¥a0
     0-7       Tuscarora Creek-Opequon Ck.    below Afertinsburg, W. "Vac
     S-4A      South River-South Fork         below Waynesboro, Va0
               Shenandoah River
     S-8       Grassy Creek-South Fork        below Harrisonbut-g, Va,
               Shenandoah River
     Numerous other stations in the Monocacy sub-basin also had high
nutrient concentrations.  During this surveyf rainfall was fairly
heavy throughout the watershed.

-------
     +	IflAM  A3V3ONOW—
         U3AW HVOQNVN3HS


    —X33«3 WVJL3I1NV	
                             -8 •» - S5DOM JO
         X33MO


     M33IID
          H3Afti NOdVOVD  +
1
                                       -STMJ J.V3HO
                                              iMOd
                                    -NMOISOa3Hd3HS
                                          -XOOONVH
                                          -MVd-WVd
                              -r
                                      -ONIfllS ONVTOd
                                      	lNOWQ3ld
                                 FIGUie  X-l

-------

-------
                                                                 X-9

     For the August 17-18, 1969 survey, the concentration of nutrients
was also highest in the Opequon, Antietam, and Monocacy sub-basins
(Figure X-2).  Although the base streamflow was higher than during
the July survey, the rainfall prior to the survey was less.
     Sampling stations with high nutrient levels for selected sub-
basins in the August survey are summarized below:
  Station              Stream                         Location
    A-3     Antietam Creek                  below Hagerstown, Md.
    A-8     Antietam Creek                  below Waynesboro, Pa.
    C-13    Conococheague Creek             below Chambersburg, Pa.
    MR-9    Little Pipe-Monocacy River      near confluence with
                                               Monocacy
    MR-12   Rock Creek-Monocacy River       below Gettysburg, Pa,
    0-1     Abrams Creek-Opequon Creek      below Winchester, Va.
    0-7     Tuscarora Creek-Opequon Creek   below Martinsburg, W. Va.
    S-8     Grassy Creek-^South Fork-        below Harrisonburg, Va.
            Shenandoah River

D.  EFFECTS IN THE UPPER BASIN
     The data summarized in the tabulations indicate that high
concentrations of nutrients, especially phosphorus and ammonia, result
from municipal and industrial discharges.  While the contribution from
land runoff is significant, the most pronounced increases in nutrients
are from point-source discharges.
     Though the primary area of eutrophication is in the nutrient-rich
Potomac Estuary, water supply treatment operational problems have
occurred during periods of low flow for facilities on the main stem of
the Potomac at Great Falls and on the Monocacy River.  These problems

-------
   -r ui w
   =i 3 -J

   i|a

 fc*3&
 R* 2 S
II
II
                          s
                                                                -8
                                              H3AIH ADV3ONOW H	
                                                  (BAN HVOONVN3HS




                                             WVJ.3UNV+	
                                             	H33UO




                                              K33U3 3T1DV3HOOOONOD
                                                                        SYWd 1Y3MO
                                                                -8.
                                                                     -SJOOM JO INIOd
                                                                  •«	NMQi
EON + 'ON
                                                                       FIGURE  X-2

-------
                                                                  X-ll





are mainly associated with piiyt/iplanlcton growths.   High growths &.;-•



measured by chlorophyll "a": wei-i otaervad during the August 1969 survey



in the Monoeacy and. along the main stem of the  Potomac,



     Heavy rooted aquatic growths are common  in the Opequon^, Monoeacy,,



Conocosheague,  and Antietam wat-^rifheds.  These  sub-basics  are rich



in nutrients originating bcth frcoi land runoff  and  wastewater dis-



charges «,



     In determird.ng the magnitude o/l" the eu-trophieation problem in



the free-flowing upper basir. strwams1,, it has  been established that



the large  rooted aquatic ar,d pri.ytr. plankton growth occurs during low



flow periods0   During' these period,^ the major  source  of nutrients



is from wastewater discharges,,



     At higher  flows, the transport of nutrients is greatly increased



and their  effect in s,ccelerai:i::,g eatrophication if  reduced„  Thus it



appears that the mo;;t significant c^uae of eatrophication  is the con-



trollable  point-source wust*? loaSings,



E.  EFFECTS  ON  SiE E3;:\AS:;



     Based, on regret 3i.rr: bj,sly;::Ie: e^v:atior>3 from 1966  nutrient n^f,-



work data,  the  average morrj.hly ratrient loadings at C;rsat  Fall,j!



computed for the average flow ,yep,r were 21^200; 8,200; and 72,000



Ibs/day of tctal phcsphor^'  t^ ?0 j XK\'j and  N00 +  W^ nitrogen,
                                  4              £     ;>


respectively [8],   Che daily \iar-iati,xa in nutrient  loading is quits



pronounced and  is  a fur,ctior. c-.f -jtreamflow.   During the month of



August 1966,,  less  thr,n 1/000 Tt>Vday of tctal phcsphor^is as PO, and
                                                                4


NOp + N€L  as  N  entered Ihe upper estuary from the upper basin while

-------
                                                                 X-12
on February 14, 1966, about 217,000 and 354,000 Ibs/day of PO  and
                                                             4

N0p + NO-, respectively, entered the estuary.


     The streamflow hydrography of the Potomac at Great Falls for


the first eight months of 1969 was not typical.  The flows were at a


record low for the month of June with high flows occurring in August


(Figure X-3).


     Since the river discharge distribution was not typical, the


nutrient loadings into the estuary for the first eight months of 1969


were also non-typical.  As can be seen in Figures X-3 and X-4, the


total phosphorus TKN, NCL + N00 loadings from February through July


were usually less than 10,000 Ibs/day.  This contrasted with about


63,000 and 54,000 Ibs/day of total phosphorus and nitrogen, respectively,


from wastewater discharges in tidal waters of the Potomac Estuary.


     During part of July and in August, the nutrient contributions


increased tremendously due to the increase in river discharge.  Even


at the high flows, the contribution of phosphorus was greater from


the wastewater discharges in the Washington area than from all sources


in the upper basin.


     To aid in the Potomac Estuary nutrient transport study, the forms


of the various nutrients are also being distinguished.  Figure X-3


shows that only about 25 percent of the total phosphorus is in the


dissolved reactive form.  This indicates that most of the


phosphorus in the upper basin is or becomes attached to silt particles


and can be removed by settling such as behind a small dam or in the


estuary.

-------
FIGURE  S-3

-------
I  I I  [   I  I    I    p
                                  tf
                                                 N300U1N
                                                                                                 FIGURE X-4

-------
                                                                 X-15





     Fraction studies of the TKN form indicate that over 50 percent



is in the particulate form also subject to settling when the conditions



are suitable.

-------
   APPENDIX
DATA SUMMARIES

-------
                              APPENDIX


Table                       Description

A-l                North Branch Potomac July 1969

A-2                North Branch Potomac August 1969

A-3                South Branch Potomac July 1969

A-4                South Branch Potomac August 1969

A-5                Conococheague Creek July 1969

A-6                Conococheague Creak August 1969

A-7                Antietam Creek July 1969

A-8                Antietam Creek August 1969

A-9                Opequon Creek July 1969

A-10               Opequon Creek August 1969

A-ll               North Fork and Main Stem Shenandoah July 1969

A-12               North Fork and Main Stem Shenandoah August 1969

A-13               South Fork Shenandoah July 1969

A-14               South Fork Shenandoah August 1969

A-15               Monocaey River July 1969

A-l6               Monocaey Hiver August 1969

A-17               Potomac River July 1969

A-18               Potomac River August 1969

A-19               Upper Potomac Bacteriological Study
                     July through September 1966

-------
 o  al
            lA ON    ON ON
            ONt— ONO t—
            OV0 .
            (o   \o
            C— Q
                      co o
            ON t- to ^ coco ON ONt— O
            r— O CO r-i ON IAVO IA-4- IA

            t—   t—     -=t r-l   •* IA
            IAOOOOOOOOO

           -=!• O
           O ir\
           IA t—
           CO no
             H rl •
                                            •S-8  8'

-------





1

£
0

7J
t>



1
i1




^

•g
61
1







&
1





i

4)

8


H
ill

S*--^
N
•H ID
•d EH
•H *~3
oil
3\
.c !:?
Pi
'"5

w
)
< «
ifi
*
&i >~i
EH td
a


gig

gf
O R
§ 0
4-1 O


ogj



1*°
g
4) -H
ra M
1)

II

ro ir\ OJ UN
O O CM O
O\ H CU H
-3" H O oo
cy ro m PO

iH Ox -^ 0^
H ir\ S- vo
H
H 31 1*
rH l/\ PO fc^~
CO CU H O

«?j o o  U~\
"*

8 8
CO CO

IA VO
O CO
cu cu
H ON
CO CU
0
r™- \D
VO -^r
r-I
Q\ O

H r-

a a

80
cu
H £•-•

a H"~


LA
LA LA
cu cu
ON O
@ i



LA LA
H LA
t— vo
rH rH




O rH
rH H

    i SLA'
     H CO i
   a -P K i

   5> § -31
       P4 (X,
               PH I
               ^^5

              : 8 S 8'
              i £ ggi
 i  i   i  i   i  i

CO-* LAVO t— O i


te S is E K S !

-------
8 tg
s|
ill
S i-l H
CO-I
? »
SB
S-~l
(H ttf
H
Px

H
g; 8> S 81 S 8 S
01 oi co ol eij co co
^ VO QL -t ITV CO t*-
Ol rH UX ^ O CO O
CO CO CO CO t— I— O">
O ir\ o i^ O O IA
VO VO Ol r-l Q VO CXI
ITS O ir» ir» o O O
01 o 01 cu O u*> ir»
CM VO Ol Ol VO CO t—
St— o ir\ H CO vo
O ^" ^ lfv OA CO
O H O O O O O
§VO ir> O <*> "v
Q H 3 OS vo
O O r-l H O
O ON r-l CO VO r-l
no ON CJ cy O CA

*" H
j£ J± l-t CO rH VO U\
t- 3 P"> Ol W CVI O
q H o q « H H


H C Q j o o o s? s ^ v-T1
"0 O Oj F' CM CU O CD M -3"
0 *< H! « «
£I1| * " *



H!
B fi! _
lit j O Q O O
•H r-l ^ * * •< CD Ol r-l
o'fe' "" T?s w ^ * oT
O fe 0"l
£

5&o
3 £

> r-. Ol CO -=f IA VO O\
r55l § B S S S S S
ID l3| 02

0) '
i-l C
•HUD H H H r-l H H H
HCOtHirH H H H i-l i-l r-l


»'Sg



3 «
11
«l


(
t-


g CV 
03 Q)
1 i
i §i











*
3
st Virgini
£

a
|
I
Vi
o
f.
I
1
13
VO
U
•jj
s
g
1

M
1
|
o5
i
i






3
"oO
'>
fc
Is
'l»
•I-l
*1
n
o
ij
rl

1

"!
CO
t)
!]
1!
11
1

li
r,
n
d
o
j|
ti
(i
41
o

II
1
O.I
i
UA







j
i
;1
1!
t]
O
i;
g

'.i
5s
.11
4>
t;
Pi

01
i!
•rl
f,
t)
i
tf
§
!
o
11
i!
1
Ul
f
i













.
5

•rt
I

|
S

|
|
Is
"JU1
U

!


i
i
03
I
i



-------
-=t
j«;
      li
      ^
           P
             $
           -*
          H\ v
          JIP£
            28
            <<

          al
                %
                      *
                      vo
cf

in
                       8
                UN O  O O  O
                O in  O
                in c--  UN
                O CT*  <*\
                fN H  f\
                O O  O
                         a a
                  a
                fc
                      s
                o
                    g  8 8
                       M t\l  C-
                       8
                         §
                O  m o

                C*N  f\ "^"
                CM   *
                                           +*  *

                                           8
                                             5
                                             45

                                             Jf
                                             3  »
     45


     V
            •o  &.
            t>  -a
                                             *
                                          g
                                                  45
                                                  n
                                   g
                                   w
                                     *

                                     •o
     I I

     3 *•
     S §
H  O  O
4S  Si  8



II!
°  e>

.  g  g
   i-l  -H
   81>  4»
   O  O
   V  »
     gP
     £
   «  «
s
41
CO
 I
 I
 I
o

I

I
i I

3 I
p &
* %
«i

I
:-3

8 3
O Q)
*H ti
I «
i S
                                                     I
                                   .*>  «
                                A m

                                § 2  fi

                                888
                                CQ CO  CO

                                I  I  I


                                a! Si  m
                                W CO  CO
                                             o  o o
                                        I  I i  i I  &
                                        I  I I  I I  I
                                                       £
            fill
            05  «Q W  CO
             I  I   I  I   I  I
            •*  UN VD  CT*    »>4
            IB  n m  a ^  en
            m  w w  CQ J  x

-------

fi
s


s
>j 3
?TJ
H ,0
o *
fa rj
O r^
^ft
rv
g
en
O
5 H
+ "-^
£*

S

n
o a;

a
dl
0 T{
0 H
fe 0
O

g
(J_j
•H

O
O

J &
d 53
is B

a)
1
1
H
V P*
V

u ft
11
I
H
\
g
<
a

|


H
^

VH
1



c
g
H

"§
P
ft

3
s




1
s


fej

s
o
o

g
•H
1
S
d
IV
rM
g

c

1
B
__j.
-d-
en
VD
CO
LA
O
01

o

[_1

8
H


H
T en

en
CO

3
IA

g
t—




o
-d-
m




eM

en

o
to

LA
3


CO
CVI
t-
CO
m
VD
LA
en
^
CO
LA
o
&





CO
LA
H


vo
\D
H
H
VD

O
J*

0
LA
^

t-
3


IA

O
fl
CO

p
OJ

g
CO
en




<£
3




of

VD
|
O


I



3

ro

IA
S
VD
0
-!?





tA
^


CO
LA
C>
c^
^t
OJ
-d-
en


g
CO
Si



g
CO
r~\




si

t-

o


R



^

_^
CVI
IA
ON
01
VO
O
o
LA





j.
O


LA
LA
6
H
H
Ol
£
01

8
o
H



g
OJ
_3-
IA



si

CO
1
o


1



*

H
LA
LA
OJ
VO
o
o

LA
Ol
.*
H
&
'""i


O\
LA
H
H
^O
H
p.
o
H
0
CO
51



g
O\
O

i— 1

A
Si

0

o


LA
S
H



S
-
^_
t—
LA
g
vo
O
LA
VO





°Q
c5




£^
H
3
-d"
rH
H
VD
H
8
01
-d-
tA



g
^
O

r-(


81

3

0


o
d
H



*

m
01
-*
ol
vo
o
o
VC





cS
OJ


t—
VO

m
LA
LA
H
o
CO

8
o
H



8
Ol
_^.
LA



LA
d

a
1
0


IA
I



*

VD
c—
•*
ON
VO
O
LA
VO





e
H-


^•
LA
H
s
CO
H
vS
Ol
H
8
CO
ON



8
ON
O
VD
H

A
H

en

o


LA
1



*

O
Ol
J-
o
en
^
O
R





ON
H~


t-
co
6
LA
m
en
M
en
ON

g
ON
O
VD
H


g
ON
Q

H

A
ol

-d-
H
1
O


LA



C-

                                I
m^- vo »-co o rH 01 PO j-
             r-( H H H H
 I  I  I  I   I  I  I  I  I  I
OCJOOOOOOOO

-------
      I"
1
 0
SS
•H H
   •p
 fl
I,
             Oo"!O"i^£>V£!^?    O    C\J    N-
             H    lACVI-itCVjOt^Hcn

             COC\jaj-^HOJOOrOLA
                                               o
                                               01
                                                     m    tA   o
             IALALALALAO    O    LA   O    Q
             CVJ    C—   CM    t~    t—    LA   tA    OJ   lAO

             H    o   LA    co    O\    h-   -*    LA   -3-    co
             H               r-{                                H
             LA    ON   O    lA    Of)   O
                                                     en    LA   oo

                                                     O    H    H
                        moo
             M300    f—    r-f   -4"   -*    LAOGOGO
             OOVDx^    LAOJ   CV1OJ    t—   -=t    CO

             H    H                     OJ    CO    CO   CO    H
             o    s-
             O   CO
             CO    £^
                        -d-    cu
                        ri    »
                                 LA   O    -4-   -*    CO    tA
                                 LA   VO    H    OI    t~    OO
                                               H    OI     ON   LA

                                               H    H     H
R    8    8    §    3
t—    ro    t1—    -if
                  8    8    §    5    §>
                  OO    ^    -if         H
O
3
8    8
H    ON
sT    s
                                         H    H

                                         ON    ON
                              -2t    IA   LA    -4-    PI   CO   CO
                              01    w   cvi    oi    cu   cy    SI
                                   co    o
                   o    o    o    o
                                      §    a
                                                          8
             1
             LA    LA   LA    O
                        am    co   ^f
                        fl    a    a
                                                                R
          CO


          CO
                                   •«    O     0
                                                     LA   VO    I--
                                                                                       9     •   •
                                                                                                                +rf
                                                                                                                I

-------


o &
W 8
gH
§
1 IE
^ 2 &
*-°
i al
o
O r-l'C
2 ^? 2
6 en
ffi rH

1
oo

25 H
g%g
H
g-C^
^ ^
ft
. ^

P top
O BPH
tl
H 8 0
d il-i O
O -H H
p4 O g

g
H
§ 0
^H O
0~B
o B




0) Pi
i!"



r*
5
flj -H
^•g
i o
ro J



H
H CO rM


t£
1
omen
fi;
1
 ON ON
H H H




t>- CQ O\
< oj <^





O O LT\
939





CO ON O
m on j-


































0) 0)
bO -H -H

O PR
•H VO t—

TO O HJ 0>

g> « H § 8
•rt U) 3 W W
•H S) fi O fS f?
ID tj ^a VD
Mfq -H 0) Id II
'0 in Wt OS 0)
•HGOpq^O-PO-^-
ij MD -H W ^ VD VO
0) a) FQ >
1
d
^
3
1
a

-------
    e i
    I;

    R
Si
              dl
            15 S '
              E
              -S a
                l


            ill
                    O   CQ   f^>  CO   IA   Ox
                                                in
                                               CO
                                        t~   t-   in
                                        A   A
                    ot~-oot—

                    \Q   \Q  ^t   t-  VO
in  in  ro
J-  H
                                    R  S
                                    m

                                    3  *
                            m

                            H
                        rH   rH   IA   lA
                            rH   in   in   o   o  ^o
                            vo   t—   f-   o   o  o
                            m   ("N   [*-   .7   w  o
                    CM   H   cu   w
                                   S
                        CN  CD   eft   ON  CD   CA  9\
                    AJ       ON  \D  *5j
                               H  H


                               A
                                A      A   A   A




                        in   o   O      O       O
O
co
O\
O
CO
O  'n  in  o  m
Jn  -*  H  o  in
00  vfi  vo  *35  in  In
O  H  H
                        r>   cvi   m  jt   in
                        in   in   in  in   in
                                                                 4
                                                                 (M
O  m  in       •)
O  in  .4-       i)
>J5  in  in       C
                            oooooooo


                            SSSSSSSS
                            «OV00«Vtl


                            lillilli

-------
n MO
P SP4

rH O O
d 
B o
a o
0 i-J
01
H d
0) p, 4)
SEX
•H 03 OJ
^ ro ^
0)
H e

A
0\
CT\
H
O
CVJ
in
in
o



8
i>-


CVl

&




H






&



in
in

CVJ
CO
oo
VD
O
0
m

in
CVJ
CO

o

S1
OJ

o


1

rH
8
ON
^-f~

I
t-

m
OJ

S




IA
3






S



ON
OJ

OJ
VD
OJ
VD
O
in
OJ

in
t-
VD
VO
£

t—
Ol
OJ

d
in

ON
VD
H
8
no
en

g
J-


OJ

s




in
€
H






&



w

CVJ

o


o
•H
4^
.3
rH

^

OJ

H
       9
        rss
        iras:
         I S a) I
          O -H
          SO) 
-------

-------















H
11
g^

o H& *5 o
*"!* P os *** frj

B to
1 §1 * u
B P||
1

I




















1

,
§
_|
1>

pT
f
1"


j.
-I

(3







«
S






§

«




RH
§•«>
r-l
8"a>
B
-p P
•H M
•H
«l
r-t H

a9
Pirn
1
H B
fff
*
P|

H

B S


H
II
If

r-f
li
O fe
s

Sample
Location


V
i-H C
t|

B A
J5 J"
o5 S

11
a
!A
S



*

LA
CM

LA
51

§
«O
t«-
(0


O

!
g
O
I
i
s
.1
£H
S^
£*
*~ S
(0 (C

o a
(B >
1 1
M M
H
0 O
&§•
l>l<
&t>
t 1
85-





























S
•c
(S
iA
i
cc

ID
6»
i
1
O
i
&
s
i
*
























s
3
£
S

+>
£
I1
H
•a
8
«
.5
fi
3
Q

fl
i
M
"
&
£
9
1
i?



























a & «
Sts
•p »< •«
03 5 5
r i i
«&S





























&
1
£
I
•
4>
.q
ti
a
i
*
s
o
8-
&
5
i
&


































«
•S

0
s
rS
1
§
•§
,3
,
. 3

-------
                                      S3 I

                                      as'
                                 s
                                               9<
                                                13
                                               28

                                               St
                                             (4
                                             0) O.
                                               r-l  C


                                            i §  «
                                            Q CO H
                                               V  (H
                                               r-t  O
                                               PfO
                               \ cu o
                               X^O <*\
                                                       OOOO   OOOOOO      OOO
g
                                                                                       IA Q »T*
                                                                                     O !> O OJ

                                                                                      • to oj eo
                                                                                     IA to o oj
                                                       	      	.    COtOOJr-l
                                                       OO^tiHOJi-HOr-IHOO    Hr-lr-lrH
                                                                                     O ^i" tTNVO

                                                                                     r-l i-l rH r-l
                                                                 «H iH   r-t
                                                       o o o o o   o s o o o    o o Q t
                                                                                                           o
                                                                                                           J3
                                                                         , --*• f\ ^"   f-\ C"\ r-l
                                                                        tf\ rH H      r-l           O
                                                                                                         O "A M C k
                                                                                                 g.    *o£JJr
                                                                                                 to P fl*
                                                                                                   'Or-)
                                                                                                 CO C rH
OOOQQ    QQQQO   Q O O O    OW
OOOQO«^pOOOO   OOOO    O


               •^•^rf^c^O   t^^fOJOj    1^
                                                                228
                                                                S£   £
.C   
-------
                               t-- O CM -^ t^ CM \D ONCO ?7 £7    i    ^K^D    HOw1
                                                            -Pd-g     tq    -HScdH
                                                            OD>(D    MAI    a    ^3-rf
                                                858
                                               \fO    CVJ
                        8fl SJ
                        "l  C fi -
                          •H s a o

                         I O\E
                         I IA
                                                                            ^    to CO -P

                                                            o  ca ®^old  8S'I|BS85
    si-;VOCV]CVJ^O                    tA         -H^ac{fE;(U
    HH          rH                          wfuajcfiaj^Hwiu
                                              &) 4J (U 43     M     •  M d) M


                                              •HO'OOH^'rtH  *T< 
-------
Si
             ill
              1  0)1
              O
              !H  rH H
              0  H
                  I3
Fecal
oliform
100 ml
                  O
              J  S o
              i!  So
                       OJ Os H t^co O osvo O t— H -=!" H co os Os fr- en m
                       O-4- oj ovnosojcoo osco t—PO t^-w ^-^^ow
                       OJVDOJOJr-iOJrOI-—OJrHHOJ-^tOJHH   HOJ
                      CO CU LTNVD t~- VD t~ if\CO t
ir\oooo
                                    LT\   IA IA

                      O IA LA LA O IA OJ I
                               I (A t— OJ N- ITV £— O O1

                               ^t—V£>HV£'-3'1^OOJOJ l
                               I      H        H H r
                                                -
                              >-LT\Q^OJCOOjrOOJ l
                            - i-j CM

            H    H           H H
                      co Osco co LALTsmcooo LAC^OOJ t^cOOOJ H ro
                      OJ H t^-OSLAOCO C— OJ O H moJCT\t^
                      H t— LA LA-^t \O LA'CD H CniALAO t—LAO O-^T-d'
8
                      CQ
                             H^O-^-cO     ^   OON   OO-=tH
                               >^  (^ n  ^  >\      »\    *\-s    *,
                             ojcnOCMH     o   rof~   oo
                                  M3   O>     H   H
8

                      OJ
                                   ) CO CO O O OJ i
                                	           _. [-_.
                             i-H H Os'rn OS H' OJ H
                                > VD rO-=f OJ OJ
                                  ? rO O? t-^ oT
                                ir\     IA ir\ IA    LT\
mcomrooj c^ifOHrH HcnoJ rn-^- IACM ir\-* IA
OJOJCMOJOJOJCVfOJOJOJOJOJOJOJOJOJCVJOJOJ
                                            pq
                                         O\O\O r-| O(
                                                i-JrH
                                 -   lAVO OS O
                        Hi-JrHHr-irHHHOJ
                     cocoMcaaJcQcowcow
                                                                       If
                                                                       03 CD
                                                     II
     gs^535
222 2 ft B  33
asssl
                                                                      a ca
                                                             tii  i  i  i
                                                             D^OOONONOrjOJPO
                                                             xiraramcocQcoKiai
                                                                                                  i  i t  i  i  i  i  i
                                                                                                        .* IA\O ff\(
                                                                                                        H H H i-l (
                                                                                                        00 03 50 tQ !
o v
O H
:a
R o
Q 4)
««
j>«
•S S
JS
I  I
2)g

-------
   o o
   tM O
^
So
SH O
•H H
 _  Pi

SJoU
   4) -rH
   •&«
                                 -  N- m CM ir\ on oo H ir\ cvi en
           GOCO O en t— VD en fn Oi ir\-^- N- cy LT\ o\ cvi CVJ
           CVJ fr-.* t— LA CVJ LA-d O\MD 00 t— OOC^-OJ-
            OiAiAiAOOOQOOQOOOOOLT\OO

            OVD en co o LA o O LA LA LA LA o LT\ o ~=t -3- en IA
            co         t— LAOD c— vr> iv^o -3- LA IA N-      fn IA
         OQOLALAIALALT\OLAOO(
         LAO lAN-t"— f—CXfN-JAGJ OO<
                                              > LA O O LA LA
                                              > OJ lA
                                o t-—U"\
                                HHH
                   m LA t—CQ -3- CO OO i
           co    cvj m LA t— co -3- co
           O^F-Hf-y-^-OOoj
                                                       o
                                                      ;s>
                                                 -3- o
                       IrH-d-Or-lHQt—-4-\OOr-l-4'LACT\
                       icvl o. o rn t— O d\ cr\ O H cvico cncn
                                     VD CM -3- ^ tr\ t
                                     o t--* o c-
                 H    H    H OJ H CVJ H
           LAHMDlA   tnHr-if^COC—OM3pjmr-|-
           O t— en CO VD XD ^t -4" LA ON ON-=J- cnt-rH r-i i
           H cnO1^) r-iCO CXxHCO-d" C--LACO O\C*-CV1 (

              H H   LA      OJ   CVI                .
                                          80 o o o o o o
                                          o o o o o o o
                           H H H

                   A            A
           LAOD H H CM H
                                               §O O (
                                               CTs. O '
                                           ) LA O CVI '
           LALA      LAlALA     LA   LALA   LA


         MMCtiCUNMWWWWWWWWWCUaiMW





         H cncn-4--^l-\DMDCO ONCJNO rj cu cn-=t LAVD cr\o

          i  i   i  i  i  i  t  i  i  i  i   i  i   i  i   i  i  i  i
         WWCQWCDWCOCOCOWCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCQ
           oo
           CVJ
^5.
P5 « I

ll:
ra co i
                                                                 H fit

                                                                 CO CO t
                                                                                             co tS t§ £ g ti €

                                                                                          llll33ll
                                                                                                                       o
                                                                                                                       a)
                                                                                                                    §

                                                                                                                    3

-------
CO h3



fil
EH  B; >-}  '

    S    !
 in
         I  Oil
        O   H
358
           tfo
          
                   LA C\f  f^- IA fO-^- ^- H tA t~- E-- LA r-l


                                 t~- {Q t~ f~ Lf\ lT\-^f
                     IT\ IT\ lf\ U\ LT\ LT\ t— VQ I
                  OOOOOOO1AOOC5OO



                  CV1 VD l/\-4- COOJ H CVl-^tVOVO-^t CVJ
                  t>-LT\lAOt--t^OO
                  in r- O C\l H rOOXDt— CVIOJHCVJ
                  cncomoooj cvJ-4- w rovO CM ro CM
                  ONC\]c\jroOVDOONCOroOrOro
                  rH ro^j-,4- LT\VD c—t^ao c\J H rt")O
                    --
                  VD OJOOCM o rooo O\
                                               !&
                  COCO OCOONCT\r-iOr-l <-.„,_  .
                  rH-^tOONHt— -=}- r-J C\J ro PO [~- r
                  -=t H O VO \rf ON t— CO ONOJ ONt— VO

                  (M PH    W P^i

                                                   H  • W CD   -
                                                                  I  I   I  I   I  I

                                                                  ^  PH fn  ^H tn  H
                                                                  (L)   CD  (!)
                                                                  t>  t> !>  t> t>  >
                                                                  •H -H -H -H -r| -H
                                                                  K K W K M K


                                                                  o  o o  o o  y
                                                                  qj  aj aJ  aJ oJ  aJ
                                                                  o  o o  o o  o

                                                                  §§§§§§
                                                                  <5  O O ^ O JQ
                                                                                 LA b- -P ON pQ    fjQ
                                                                                 (U 0) O   i
                                                                        g  ?
                                                                        •H *H
                                                                             r^  ti f
                                                                             O  a)
                                                                     •H    0) > >> fl) >, a) ! ^ X
                                                                c!  cl -p C  a o  o
                                                                     vc r—co Q>p H

-------
           -   ONLrNiAOO\c\joocu-=i-
   O ^--.   0N O (T~J '•— _^ ON CV OO O —3~ OJ
   -g,    ......               ^





           CO CO OJ -H; ONV£>  C~- 00 o") O CO -^f ON
           o -4* ["-- ^i -H/ ON roco r—) H o t*— o~i

      6    r-\ t~- oo ro LT\ LTNVO M> C~~ ^D t~— CvJ






   -P .                              LA   in

           LTNLTNOOOOLrNOOOJOJCOLrx

                  ' H OJ H       r-f






 i  ail
 o
 L< --t r-l
 P H"


O Pt      H H






           oajvooi/NojoiAOONO
           H OJ O ON LT\ O  i/N^t- LA no u"\ LT\ H
           oo-^-ooojHOoajooo-icvi





           CO                       tA



                      H      H 
        CO
        OOOOlAU"NLr\QU"NOOOO
           t~CO ON O
           c-Or
           ON
                                   I— CO ON
                                       -
                                                     o
                                                     co
                                                             EH
                                                             CQ
                                                                S «j

                                                                   I—I

                                                           cu  cu bD >
                                                           3) Sl-d to
                                                           •a >a-H cu
                                                     •H -
                                                     ^l
                                                     CQ

                                                     CO
                                                     ftj
                                                                                   •p

                                                                           !-,    o  co
                                                                           O    (DO
                                                                           ft    ^
                                                                    *    ij c3 pQ     03
                                                                   U  m .H      -P  aj
                                                                   M JH  j-i 0) -p  aJ  d>
                                                                   T3  (I) (X) IJ3 fl3
                                                                   TH H    «a    m  ^
                                                                o
                                                        LT\ O
                                                        OO-=i-
                                                      ! ro
                                                                  vo
                                                                . .  OJ

                                                           OJ 43 OJ  CU
                                                           -P  ^3 CD  -P


                                                           P5    W  PH

                                                            • ra to   •

                                                           S t> C5  S

                                                           i  i   i   i

                                                           in  ^ ^  fn
                                                                        -d « 0) •
                                                  •H -H -H  -H '
O
ir\ t—     !> I  I  I
                                                                         .

                                                                        W
                                                        g  ?!  ?? ?!
                                                                              
                                                                          I rH O
                                                                                 OUtl
                                                                                 Q. 3 o
t—CO ON O i

§ § i i

-------
       5,
S  a«;
s
               i-1
               h r-l r
               P dt


                 o:
                 01
o i
o
               Hi-
                 ll



               if I
                 e-s
                 IJ
                               £   £  3      £
                       tA   CO
                       IA   3

                       vo   t^
             VQ   O  CO
             vS   3  3

             U3  CO  O\
                       O   *A   IA   IA


                       CO   CV   V£>   OO
      8   R   CM   8  8
                             w

                             rf
                                           1A  CO*
                                           IA  75
                                      ft
                               »  *  .*

                               6  d
                                          §  S
                                          IT\  00
                                          00  H
                                          ro  co
                                          IA  m
                               O   O  O  (7  O
                               3O   r5  fl\  «5  o
                               F-   H  j*  3  «Q
      t^-  00  VQ      CO
      CU  OJ  W      CJ
      rn  -d1   <*^  «5
             3
                                              ft
                                     B

                                     V   +1



                                     °   §



                                     «   J
                                                                              I
                    x
                    £
                i   «
                    i-t
                                             (0


                                             &
                |   |



                |   I




I   I   I   I   I   I
£   S   »   £   «   £

o   o   o   o   o   o







I    I   I   I   I   I
H   CM   «n   jj-   ir\   vo

ft   ft   *   ft   fe   ft
                                                                              (4





                                                                              «
                                                                                     J





                                                                                     j

-------
         S3
         H (
s
3 CTiCP g

3^eg m
                    I  d|
                    o

                    o 3-^
                   §<*
                    £
                   o 0,
              I,
                   I,
                                                 ^   p-   5)
                                             C\i   t~   00
                                                 ON   ^O   t—
                                                 LA        LA

                              LA   m   m   oj   co   LA   \D
                              o   o
                              UN   LA
               O    LA   O
               LA   C^   LA
                                            CM
                                            CM
                                   0000
                         I—
                         00
               s
CO   CO


(VI   H
                                   m   t—   LA
     C7\   m
     IA   CO
     CM   a
                                                 00   ^D
                                                 Is—   H
                                                 ON   O


                                                      r-i
8   a
m
                                                 o
                                                 OJ
                                                  ~
                                                 O
                                                 O
                                                 ON
                                                  *s

                                                 S
                                                      t-
                                                      OJ
                                                      H
                                            f*   §   2
                                            -rf   H   CTN
                                   CM   CV)   (O
                                            S   1C  "£
                                            222
                                                      a
O   O   O    ^%  O   O
*^    S   2?    «tf   ^n   m
^~   ^^   o    ^^  rn   JT
H   H   H    O   H   H
                                  s?   e   e   «   s
                                                                     a)

                                                                    3
                                                                       •H +:
                                                                     I  « a)
              252

              ||
                                                                                 »

-------
    H K







4  S  Q
                                      8       8
8      8
.p
Pl CO
V 1
CO t-
Pit-

• 0
M en
CM
f UN
CM
OJ
>i O
^£
*-3 ro
H
^
1-3 MD
H
0
8"
VD
r-T
UN
8
CM
OJ
O
o
t—
r-T
O
o
-4
UN
8
H"
8
t—
•\
8
eo
r-T
I
UN
8
o
o
s
o?
0
en
eo
A
8
UN
O
ro
en
0
eg
0
9,
CM"
Shenandoah R. at
Harper's By. Park
CM
oT
8
CM
CM"
o
UN
ON
0
en
en
8
CO
c\r
o
CM
CM
8
CM
o
o\
t—
8
CM
o\
ON
t—
O
r-T
O
OJ
g
8
on
0
O
OJ
oj"
1
&
^s
fc
«ff
°"°
ft 1
t~
UN
O
t—
r-l
0
O
3
8
!•
8
CM
"
O
8
en
A
O
ON
O
H
eg
O
en
en
o
en
en
Potomac River
at Shepherdstown
UN
•t
crt
|
UN
O
O
CO
CM"
8
UN
- en
8
en
H
35,000
o
o
o
o
o
CM
ON
8
CM"
8
CM
ON
8
CM
OJ
I
O
o
CM
O?
3
LA
8
Oj"
8
UN
O
O
UN
en
Opequon Cr . below
Martinsburg
e-
S
H
0
en
en
8
CA>
CM"
UN
O
ON
O
o
UN
O
en
en
8
CM
ON
8
ON
o
o
o
o
en
rn
I
O
t—
o
CO
CM
CO
1
o
en
CM
Potomac H. at
Williamsport
ro
r-T
8
CO
I
1
f


!
I
f
o
eo
en
I
o
t~
co
s
"
o
en
OJ
8
LA
•v
en
II
•ri CO
Tl +5
CO oj
CM
8
r-T
CO
O
en
en
o
rn
eo
o
8
ro
r-T
O
eo
eo
O
ON
0
eo
OJ
O
0
CM
ON
0
eo
OJ
1
S
a
s
o
a
o
H
1

1
O
en
rn
H
f
f
I
UN
0
ro
m
UN
CM
o
ro
eo
o
t-
H
"*
en
en
O
H
eo
Cacapon River at
Qreat Cacapon
CO
8
rn
i-T
o
CO
CM
O
eo
CM
o
o
OJ
•*
CJ\

o
eo
O
3
o
s
o
en
en
S
n
o
ro
CO
S
0
8
eo
r-T
Qreat Cacapon at
jjttpomery, W. Va.
0^
CM
UN
8
ir\
ir\
CO
8
o
-4-"


O
o\
-4-
1
1
|
CM"
I
3
o
o\
-4-
O
3
en
I
8
CO
-4-"
en
3
Ai
111

-------
I.  Chesapeake Field Station,  ""Water  Quality  Survey in the- 5henandoah
    River of the Potomac Paver Basin,"  CB-SE3P Working Document No0 26,
    FWPCA, WAR, April 1968

2.  DeRose, Charles R., "The Monccaey River," Report No«  1, Department
    of Water Resources, State  of Maryland,  March. - December 1966

3.  Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, "Water Quality
    Criteria," Report of the fi&ticn^l Technical Advisory "omjnitt.ee to
    the Secretary of the Interior, Washington, D.  "„, £.pril 1, 1968

4.  Clark, Leo J., "Mine Drainage  in  the "Vorth Branch Potcsnae River
    Basin,"  Technical Report  Ko.  1.3, Chesapeake Technics! -Support
    Laboratory, FWPCA, MA.R, A^ust 1969

5.  Jaworski, N0 A., "Nutrientfj in the  v/'pper  Potomac Kiver Bfetsin,"
    Technical Report No, 15, Chesapeake Technics 1  Support labcrat.ory,
    FWPCA, MAR, August 1969

6.  Jaworski, N. A., and Aalt,-., -•';'„ A.,  "Wastewa^er Inventory, Potomac
    River Basin/' Chesapeake Field, 5't^.tion, FW??A, MIR, reoejnter 1968

7.  II. S. Army Corps of Engineers, "Potomac .River  Basin Report,"
    Vol. 1, Part 1, North Atlantic Division,  Baltimore, Maryland, 1963

8.  Jaworski, N. A0, Villa, i" o ^ and Hetlirig,  Leo -"'., '''Nutrients in the
    Potomac River Basin," :J,eearicy.l Report  No. 9,  Thes.vpeake  Technical
    Support Laboratory, MAR, F*'?0i, May 1969

-------