WATER   RESOURCE  STUDY
        SALEM  CHURCH  RESERVOIR
      RAPPAHANNOCK  RIVER, VIRGINIA
                              PA.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HE A LT H , E DUG AT ION, AN D WELFARE
             PUBLIC  HEALTH  SERVICE
                 REGION  HL
          CHARLOTTES VILLE , VIRGINIA
                 MAY  1964

-------
                                                                                           giona] Center for Environmental Information

                                                                                                     US EP\ Region III

                                                                                                       16SO Arch St

                                                                                                   Philadelphia, PA 19103
W.'V..'*  ft',?  ;'..•'-;.•"-'.,'  •'•-"-   .,.'•-•-

                    v••::",  .  •'  .'-'-••'  ,

 X'..".?.'''',*'.*.'^^Jir'J.V.  ". -'--•  ''<
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
               WATER RESOURCE STUD!


              SALEM CHURCH RESERVOIR


           RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER, VIRGINIA
      Study of Potential Needs and Value of
     Water Storage for Municipal, Industrial
           and Quality Control Purposes
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
        Public Health Service, Region III
            Charlottesville, Virginia

             In Cooperation With The


           U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARW
  U. S. Anny Engineer District, Norfolk, Virginia


                     May 1964
                               U,S. EPA- Region III
                               Regional Center for Environmental
                                Information
                               1650 Arcli Street *3PM52)
                               Philadelphia, PA 19103

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                                      TABLE  OF CONTENTS


               LIST  OF TABLES	,	  .  .  .  Ill

               LIST  OF fJ'JJRES   ........................    v
I                INTRODUCTION 	   1
                   Request and Authority .  	   1
                   Purpose and Scope	   1
                   Acknowledgments	   1
               SUMMARY	    3

               CONCLUSIONS   	    5

               DESCRIPTION   	    7
                  The  Area	„  .    7
                  Reservoir  Location and  Description  	  .  .    7
                  Hydraulics	    7

               THE  ECONOMY	    9
                  Present	    9
                  Projected	21
                PROJECT  INVESTIGATION	   25
                   Estuarine Studies	25
_                 Inventories	28
               WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES	33

               WATER USES	37
               WATER REQUIREMENTS  FORECASTS	   39
•                   General	   39
                   Municipal and Service  District Water Supplies  	   39
                   Industrial Water Supplies	  .   41

I             QUALITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS	43
™                 Municipal and Industrial Waste Loads  ....  	   44
                   Municipal and Industrial Quality Control  Requirements  ....   45
                   Oystering Area	   46

-------
                               ii
                                                                             I
                                                                             I
DISCUSSION OF BENEFITS	49
   Area Considered	49         I
   Water Supply Benefits	49         *
   Water Quality Control Benefits	51
BIBLIOGRAPHY	65         |
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                            LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 - Population of the Rappahannock River Basin by
          Political Subdivisions	   10

Table 2 - Bappahannock River Basin Population by Region and
          by Place of Residence, 1940-1960	   12

Table 3 - Personal Income - Virginia and Rappahannock River
          Basin; 1939, 1953, I960	   13

Table 4 - Number and Per Cent of Employees by Industrial
          Categories - Rappahannock Basin - 1940, 1950, I960   15

Tablซ 5 - Number and Per Cent of Employees by Industrial
          Categories for Regions of the Rappahannock Basin -
          1940, 1950 and I960	   16

Table 6 - Value of Farm Products Sold - Actual and Constant
          Dollar Value; Rappahannock River Basin, by Regions   17

Table 7 - Forest Products - Annual Growth and Annual Cut,
          1957	   17

Table 8 - Distribution of Manufacturing Establishments by
          Region and by Number of Employees, Rappahannock
          River Basin, 1958	   19

Table 9 - Distribution of Manufacturing Establishments by
          Region and by Industrial Group, Rappahannock River
          Basin 1958	   20

Table 10- Population Projections, Rappahannock River Basin..   23

Table 11- Projected Employment by Occupational Categories,
          Rappahannock River Basin - Total and by Regions
          1970-2010	   24

Table 12- Minimum Average Discharge by Months vd.th Recur-
          rence Frequency 1 in 20 years for Rappahannock
          River at Fredericksburg	   35

Table 13- Projected Fredericksburg Area Water Supply
          Requirements	   42

Table 14- Municipal Service District and Industrial Waste
          Loads Discharged Within the Fredericksburg Area...   45

Table 15- Water Supply and Quality Control Requirements
          for the Fredericksburg Area	   47


                               iii

-------
Table 22- Wastes and Waste Loads - Municipal and Industrial....  63
Table 23- Water Sources and Supplies - Municipal and Industrial  64
                                      IV
                                                                              I
                                                                              I
Table 16- Tabulation of Survey Results, Virginia State
          Water Control Board^, Statical 110 ........... ..........  57
Table 17- Tabulation of Survey Results,, Virginia State                         •
          Water Control Board, Station 12„0.„„„.„.„„.„.........  58            •
Table 18- Tabulation of Survey Results, Virginia State
          Water Control Board,, Station 13......................  59            •
Table 19- Tabulation of Survey Results,, Virginia State
          Water Control Board, Station 14.	  60            •
Table 20- Tabulation of Survey Results, Virginia State
          Water-Control Board, Station 15.0...	  61            —
Table 21- Tabulation of Survey Results, Virginia State                         ™
          Water Control Board,, Station 17	  62
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                        LIST OF FIGURES

                                                             Follows
                                                               Page

Figure 1 - Map of Rappahannock River Basin	   64

Figure 2 - Labor Force and Employment - Agriculture, Manufac-
           turing, and Non-Commodity Occupations, Rappahannock
           River Basin	   12

Figure 3 - Per Cent of 1945 Farm Acreage in Farms in 1950,
           1954 and 1959, Rappahannock River Basin                14

Figure 4 - Population of the Rappahamoek River Basin, 1940,
           1950 and I960 with Projections to 2070	   24

Figure 5 - Map of Upper Rappahannock River Estuary Showing
           Locations of Sampling Stations 	   26

Figure 6 - Assimilative Capacity of the Rappahannock River
           Immediately Below Fredericksburg for Varying Flow
           and Temperature Conditions (Minimum D. 0.-4 mg. per
           liter; Initial D.O. Deficit - 1 mg. per liter) ...   28

Figure 7 - Assimilative Capacity of the Rappahannock River
           Immediately Below Fredericksburg for Varying Flow
           and Temperature Conditions (Minimum D.O.-4 mg. per
           liter; Initial D.O. Deficit - 2 mg. per liter) ...   28

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                          INTRODUCTION

REQUEST AND AUTHORITY

        The District Engineer, Corps of Engineers, Washington District,
requested by letter dated January 19, 1961, that the Public Health
Service restudy the proposed Salem Church Reservoir and revise, if
necessary, a Public Health Service report of November 22, 1955.  Since
the date of request, the responsibility for the Rappahannock River
Basin has been transferred to the Norfolk District.  The restudy
includes an evaluation of water supply and water quality benefits
which might accrue from providing storage for regulating flows in the
lower Rappahannock River.

        This restudy was made under the provisions of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, Public Law 84-660, and the Federal Water
Supply Act, Public Law 85-500, both of which were amended in 1961 by
Public Law 87-88.  A Memorandum of Agreement dated November 4, 1958,
between the Department of the Army and the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, sets forth the assistance to be provided by
the Public Health Service in implementing the Water Supply Act.

PURPOSE AND SCOPE

        The objectives of the Public Health Service restudy were:
(l) to identify all water uses within the Rappahannock River Basin;
(2) to estimate future water uses based upon economic projections;
(3) to determine the effects of future waste loads on stream quality
under natural flow conditions; (4) to discuss waste treatment and
stream flow required to meet established water quality objectives;
and (5) to determine benefits which might accrue to reservoir storage
for water supplies and water quality control.

        Using the above objectives as a basis, the report presents
the need for and value of storage for water quality control and water
supply.  The expected future water requirements in the Basin have
been developed for the 100-year period 1970 through 2070.  The restudy
includes the entire Rappahannock River Basin; however, emphasis was
placed on the Fredericks burg, Virginia, area because this is the
major population and industrial center within the Basin.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

        Acknowledgment is gratefully extended to the following agencies
and officials for furnishing information necessary in the preparation
of this report:

               Corps of Engineers, U. S. Army Engineer
                        District, Norfolk

                                -1-

-------
                                                                   I
                                                                   I
U. S. Geological Survey                                            _
         Surface Water Branch                                      I
         Charlottesville, Virginia                                 •
Virginia State Water Control Board                                 •
Virginia State Department of Hฎalth
Virginia fiuployment Service                                        I
Office of Governor, Virginia Division of                           _
         Industrial Development and Planning                       I
Local municipal officials


                                                                   I

                                                                   I

                                                                   I

                                                                   I

                                                                   I

                                                                   I

                                                                   I

                                                                   I

                                                                   I

                                                                   I

                                                                   I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                            SUMMARY
1.  The Rappahannock River Basin can be divided into three regions,
    upper, central, and lower, based upon economic, population, and
    geographic considerations.  The upper region is primarily agri-
    cultural with scattered towns j the central region containing
    Frederieksburg is the economic and population center; and the
    lower region is a narrow strip bordering the estuary with a
    land and water-oriented economy.

2.  The Rappahannock River is approximately 190 miles in length
    with tidewater extending up to the vicinity of Frederieksburg,
    a distance of about 107 miles.

3.  Above Fredericksburg the Rappahannoek River is of good quality
    for all uses.

4.  Present Frederieksburg area municipal and industrial water
    supplies are withdrawn from the Rappahannoek River at the ap-
    proximate rate of 33 mgd.  Fredericksburg's source is above
    tidewater| whereas, the American Viscose Corporation, the major
    industry of the area, utilizes the upper estuaryป

5.  The discharge of untreated and partially treated manicipal and
    industrial wastes into the extreme upper Rappahannoek estuary
    causes, during periods of low-flow, zero dissolved oxygen condi-
    tions which extend downstream from the City of Frederieksburg,
    a distance of 12 to 18 miles.  In addition, nuisance conditions
    exist within the City of Fredericksburg.

6.  Oyster beds within the lower Rappahannoek estuary are classified
    as one of the prime areas remaining in the State of Virginia.
    IXiring the period 1959 to 1963, production had an average value
    of $2,785,000.  Natural spring river discharges cause a salinity-
    time-temperature condition not normally found in other growing
    areas which affords control of oyster predators and diseases.
                             -3-

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                          DESCRIPTION

THE AREA

        The Rappahannock River Basin is located in eastern Virginia
and is bounded on the north and west by the Potomac Riyer Basin|
on the east by the Chesapeake Bayj and on the south by the York
and James River Basins.  The basin includes all of Culpeper, Madison,
Rappahannoek, and Richmond Counties and parts of Caroline, Essex,
Fauquier, Greene, King George, Lancaster, Middlesex, Orange, Spot-
sylvania, Stafford, and Westmoreland Counties,

        The headwaters of the Rappahannoek River and its principal
tributary, the Rapidan River, lie on the eastern slopes of the Blue
Ridge Mountains.  The river flows approximately 190 miles in a
south-easterly direction across the Piedmont Plateau and the Coastal
Plain to enter the Chesapeake Bay.  Tidal effects extend up to the
"fall line"—a distance of about 107 miles and in the vicinity of
Fredericksburg.  The total drainage area is approximately 2700
square miles.

        Climate within the basin varies with elevation and distance
from the Chesapeake Bay.  However, the mean annual temperature is
about 57ฐ with an average annual rainfall of about 42 inches.

RESERVOIR LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

        The site of the proposed Salem Church Dam is located approxi-
mately 5.6 miles upstream from the City of Frederieksburg as shown
on Figure 1 (follows page 64),  The proposed structure will be a
concrete gravity section supplemented with earth dikes or embank-
ments extending from each abutment.  There are approximately 1600
square miles of drainage area above the site.

HXDRAULICS

        The U.S. Geological Survey maintains several stream gaging
stations within the Basin.  Continuous flow records are available
from October 1907 for a station located 3,8 miles above the City
of Fredericksburg on the Rappahannoek River,  According to the
records, flows at this station have varied from a minimum of 5 ffs
to a maximum of 140,000 cfs, with a mean discharge of about 1,670 efs.
                                -7-

-------

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                             THE ECONOMI
PRESENT

       The Rappahannock River Basin is located at the southern end of
the northeastern megopolis, extending from Boston to Washington, D.G,,
and lies between the fast growing areas of Washington and Richmond.
It is made up of three rather distinct regions based on physiographic
and economic characteristics.  These regions are shown in Figure !„
The upper region is largely a rural area.  However, the main trans-
portation routes between Washington, Charlottesville, and Lynchburg
cross the region, and the northern towns on this route have been af-
fected by the growth of the Washington Metropolitan Area.  The central
region is part of what has been named the Metropolitan Corridor, an
area including the four large metropolitan complexes of the State of
Virginia-Arlington, Alexandria, and Fairfax; Richmond, Petersburg,
and Hopewell; Hampton and Newport News; and the Norfolk-Portsmouth
area.  The lower region is essentially a rural area, but the land re~
sources and the type of farming differ considerably from the upper
region.

       Determination of existing population and projection of future
Basin population was based on minor civil division boundaries as used
in the Census of Population.  The civil divisions utilized for this
purpose were those which closely approximate the hydrologic boundaries
of the Basin.  Other economic statistical data is available only on a
whole-county basis; therefore, all economic analyses other than popu-
lation were based on county figures even though the counties may lie
partly in other basins.

       The economy of the Basin has been undergoing a transition from
agriculture to manufacturing and non-commodity employment.  This tran-
sition is manifested by a 65.8 per cent decline in the farm population
from 1940 to I960; an increase of 11.8 per cent in manufacturing em-
ployment's share of the labor force, and an increase of 19.1 per cent
in, non-commodity employment.
Population

       The population of the Basin has increased from about 125,000
in 1940 to about 139,000 in I960.  (See Table 1 and Figure 4.)  This
is an annual compound increase of 0.5 per cent while the State popu-
lation has been increasing at ,an annual rate of 2 per cent and the
United States at 1.5 per cent.
                                  -9-

-------
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
               Table 1 - population of the RapuahaKnock River

                      Basin by Political Subdivisions

UPPEft REGION                         1943         1950          I960

Culpeper County                     13,365       13,242        15,088           I
Fauquier County                                                                 •
   Marshall District                 3,820        3,043         3,205
   Centre District                   6,035        6,598         7,995           |
   Lee District                      4,001        3,956         4,185           |
Greene County
   Standardsville District           1,762        1,574         1,672           m
   Ruckersville District             1,666        1,566         1,731           •
Madison County                       8,465        8,273         8,187
Orange County                       12,649       12,755        12,900           m
Rappahannock County                  7.208        6.112         5.368           •
             Total                  58,971       57,119        60,331           •

CENTRAL REGION
                                                                                 I
Caroline County
   Port Royal District               2,409        1,743         1,812            _
   Bowling Green District            5,51-4        4,404         4,364            •
Frederieksburg City                 10,066       12,158        13,639            *
Spotsylvania County
   Chancellor District               2,072        2,547         3,175            •
   Courtland District                3,092        4,834         5,780            •
Stafford County
   Hartwood District                 2,107        2,896         3,205            ง
   Fal-mouth District                3ป127        4.033         7.093            |
             Total                  28,387       32,615        39,068
                                                                                  I
LOWER REGION

Essex County                         7,006        6,530         6,690
King George County                   5,431        6,710         7,243             •
Lancaster County                     8,786        8,640         9,174             •
Middlesex County                     6,673        6,715         6^319
Richmond County                      6,634        6,189         6,375             •
Westmoreland County                                                               |
   Washington District               3.372        3.562         3f958
             Total                  37,902       38,346        39,759             .

             Basin Totals          125,260      128,080       139,158             •

             Virginia Populaticm 2,678,000    3,318,000     3,966,000             •

Source: Census of Population

                                                                                  I
                                                                                   I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                                  -11"-
       The rate of population, increase differs among the three regions:
of the Basin. The population in the lower and upper regions has in-
creased very little while the central region, which is dominated by
the City of Fredericksburg, has shown an annual population increase
of 1.6 per cent.

       As shown in Table 2S the population of the Basin is predomi-
nantly rural with only 15.8 per cent of the I960 population living in
small towns and cities.  Farm population has been decreasing rapidly
in the last 20 years and 78 per cent of the rural population is now
rural residential.

       Warrenton and Orange are the only population centers of over
2500 people in the uppei1 basin.  There are also five small towns in
the upper region with a total population of 4594.  Culpeper alone
accounts for 2400 of these people.  In the central region, which in-
cludes Fredericksburg, there are two small incorporated towns in
Caroline County with a total population of 650 people.  In the lower
region there are also two small incorporated towns which account for
2163 people.

       The Basin has a population density of 39 people per square
mile as compared with 100 for the State of Virginia.
Personal Income

       Table 3 shows the relative total and per capita income situa-
tion of the Basin and the State at different dates.  Per capita in-
comes in both the upper and lower regions of the Basin was considerably
below that of the central region in I960, but even that region was
below the state average.
Labor Force and Employment

       The civilian labor force in the Basin increased by about 10
per cent between 1940 and I960 and remained at about 36 per cent of
the population.

       There has been a considerable change in the proportion of employ-
ment in the various categories during the twenty-year period as shown
in Figure 2,  Commodity employment as a whole has decreased 17.8 per
cent from 53.8 to 36 per cent of the labor force.  This resulted from
the sharp decline in agricultural employment which dropped nearly 38.5
per cent from 52,4 to 14.1 per cent of the labor force.  Manufacturing

-------
                     Table 2 - Ratrpahannock River Basin Po-pulatic
Bv Region and BY Place
1940
Area
UPPER
Total Population
Total Rural Population
Farm
Rural Residential
Small Town
Urban
CENTRAL
Total Population
Total Rural Population
Farm
Rural Residential
Small Town
Urban
Total Population
Total Rural Population
Farm
Rural Residential
Small Town
Urban
RAPPAHANMOGK BASIN
Total Population
Total Rural Population
Farm
Rural Residential
Small Town
Urban
Kfupiber

67,944
60,610
45,948
14,662
7,334
— -

43,464
32,734
22,075
10,659
664
10,066
44,042
42,937
27,481
15,456
1,105
•**•

155,450
136,281
95,504
40,777
9,103
10,066
%

100.0
89.2
67.6
21.6
10.8
0.0

100.0
75.3
50.8
24.5
1.5
23.2
100.0
97.5
62.4
35.1
2.5
0.0

100.0
87.7
61.4
26.2
5.9
6.5
gf Residence 1940
1950
Number

66,375
57,340
34,088
23,252
3,937
5,098

48,451
35,549
14,775
20,774
755
12,147
44,932
43,137
17,562
25,575
1,795
—

159,758
136,026
66,425
69,601
6,487
17,245
%

100.0
86.4
51.4
35.0
5.9
7.7

100.0
73.4
30.5
42.9
1.6
25.1
100.0
96.0
39.1
56.9
4.0
0.0

100.0
85.1
41.6
43.6
4.1
10.8
- I960*

I960
Number

70,324
59,253
18,206
41,047
4,594
6,477

57,059
42,764
^ 5,515
37,249
656
13,639
46,843
44,680
8,880
35,880
2,163
OTtt*

174,226
146,697
32,601
114,096
7,413
20,116
%

100.0
84.3
25.9
58.4
6.5
9.2

100.0
74.9
9.7
65.3
1.1
24.0
100.0
95.4
19,0
76.4
4.6
0.0

100,0
84.2
18.7
65.5
4.3
11.5
*County Data

Source: C@nงus of Population
I
I
I
I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
   I
   I
   I

-------
1
•
1
^H
o
ICO


1
1
1
_
• m
cr>
1

1
1

1
o
1 CD

1
••


LABOR FORCE - 100 %

AGRI.
1 4. 1 %


MFG.- 20.2%

NON-COMMODITY OCCUPATIO







NS-59.8%

LABOR FORCE - 100 %
AGRICULTURE
26.4%
MFG. -19. 2%
NON-COMMODITY
OCCUPATIONS- 49.4%








LABOR FORCE - 100 %

AGRICULTURE -38.5%

MFG.
13.2%
NON-COMMODITY
OCCUPATIONS - 40.8%
• 0 10 20






30 40 50





















60













































70
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES (X 1000)
1


•LABOR FORCE AND EMPLOYMENT
AGRICULTURE, MANUFACTURING, AND NON- COMMODITY

OCCUPATIONS
• RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER BASIN
1


FIGURE

-------

-------
1
1
1

1
•
1
1

1

1

1



1

1


1
1
1
1
1
Table 3 - Personal Income
Virginia and RaTroahflTOiock River Basin
Total Income*

Area 1939

Virginia $ 1,128,000,000 $ 6
iRappahannoclc Basin 44,961,000
Per Capita Incqme*-
193g
Virginia $422
Rappahannoclc Basin 289
i
Per CaDita Income*

United States

Virginia
Rappahannock Basin
Upper Region
Central Region
Lower Region


-1939r 1958T 1960

1958 %
ipMMiMMM* ^™
,600,000,000
240,767,000

1958 %
$1745
1399

*
1960
$1849

1603
1227
1184
1344
1155


* Source; Bureau of Population and Research, University of Virginia,
** Stmroej I960 Census of Population
.13-








Increase

490
436

Increase
314
384











1958





-------
                                                                                I
                                                                                I
employment made up for part of this decline and non-commodity or ser-           |
vice industries increased in importance even more.,  (See Table 4ฐ)

       These changes in the Basin have lagged 'behind those in the               I
State where by I960 agricultural employment had declined to only 7.1
per cent of the total labor force and non-commodity employment had
increased to 65=5 per cent.                                                     •

       The changes in the different regions of the Basin followed the
same pattern but differed in extent.  The upper region has a consider-          •
ably 'higher percentage of its labor force in agriculture than.the other         |
two regions.  Non-commodity employment has reached the highest percent-
age in the central region.  This is to be expected with the higher per
capita income of the central region.
 oe expected wn/n xne nigner per          •
(See Table 5.)        ,                    |
       Age of Persons in Labor Force„  In each of the three regions of          •
the Basin the percentage of the labor force over 45 years of age was            ซ
greater than the 33.4 per cent for the State as a whole, while in each
of, the age groups between 18 and 44 "the percentage for the Basin was            •
less than for the State,  These relationships indicate that for some            |
time the Basin has not been retaining as large a. percentage of the
young people maturing into the labor force as the average for the State,        •


       Extractive, Ind;us;tries „  The land area and labor force in agri-
culture-have been decreasing as shown in Figure 3*  (Per cent of 1945           I
Farm Acreage in Farms) and Figure 2 (Labor Force and Employment).               •
However, agricultural production has increased due to advances in the
technology of farming0  (See Table 6, Yalue of Farm Products Sold.)             •
Livestock, dairying, and poultry products account for  78 per cent of           |
the value of farm products sold in 1959,,

       Irrigation has not been an important water use in the Basin be-          •
cause of a limited acreage of high value crops such as vegetables.              ™

       Logging and sawmilling employed only 5,2 per cent of the labor           I
force even though 56 per cent of the land area was in forest.  Table 7          •
shows that the annual cut of saw timber is exceeding growth, and the
annual cut of the total growing stock is, only slightly larger than              •
annual cut,                                                                     |

       Minerals are a minor resource in the Rappahannoek Basin with             _
only about 100 people employed in stone quarries.                  .             I
                                                                                I

                                                                                I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
  o
  o
    00
  QC 2
  LJ O
  Q. ฃ5
  ^UJ
  -> tr
  < 2
  cr o
  to
  UJ
  o
    UJ
  UJ O
  O UJ
        1945
        I960
        1954
        1959
        1945
1950
1954
        1959
        1945
1950
        1954
        1959
        1945
1950
1954
        1959
        1,903,000   ACRES   100%
        1,768,000   ACRES   93%
        1,712,000   ACRES    90%
        1,565,000   ACRES    82%
        1,045,000   ACRES   100%
967,000  ACRES    93%
944,000  ACRES    90%
         926,000   ACRES    87%
         413,000   ACRES   100%
378,000  ACRES    92%
         365,000   ACRES    88%
         292,000   ACRES    71 %
         445,000   ACRES   100%
423,000   ACRES    95%
403,000  ACRES    91 %
         347,000   ACRES
     0    10    20    30    40   50   60
                           PERCENT
                                70
                            80
90
100
PERCENT  OF  1945  FARM ACREAGE  IN  FARMS  IN
                 1950,  1954, AND  1959
   RAPPAHANNOCK  RIVER  BASIN  AND  REGIONS
                                                          FIGURE

-------
1
1





1

1








1

1

1

1



1

1
1
1
1
Table 4. - Number and Peฃ Cent of Employees bv Industrial Categories
Rairoahannpck Basin - 1940. 1950. I960
1940
Category Number %
Labor Force, Civilian 57

Agriculture 22
Forest and Fisheries 1
Mining and Quarrying
Manufacturing 7
Logging and Savmilling 2
Furniture and Wood Products
Primary Metals
Fabricated Metals
Other Durable Goods
Food and Kindred Products
Textile Mill Products
Apparel, etc.
Printing and Publishing
Chemicals 1
Other Non-Durable Goods
Construction 3
Transportation, Communi-
cation, Utilities 1
Trade 4
Other Services 12
Commodity Employment 30

Non-Commodity Employment 23
Unemployed 3
Source: Census of Population




,249

,013
,110
85
,580
,558
230
44
190
51
802
774
808
158
,578
308
,181

,689
,592
,394
,788

,363
,098





100,0

38.5
1.9
0.2
13.2
4.5
0.4
0.1
0.3
0.1
1.4
1.4
1.4
0.3
2.8
0.7
5.6

3.0
8.0
21.6
53.8

40.8
5.4


-15-


1950
Number
57 .,010

15,052,
1,230
110
10,955
4,2*9

143
569
133
1,130
828
848
229
2,320
506
5,035

2,543
7,104
13,474
27,34V

28,154
1,509





%
100.0

26.4
2.2
0.2
19.2
7.5

0.3
1.0
0.2
2.0
1.5
1.5
0.4
4.1
0.9
8.8

4.5
12,5
23.6
48.0

49.4
2.6







1960
Number
62,883

8,837
948
123
12,719
3,263

177
1,358
193
1,628
565
1,401
268
2,574
432
5,565

2,819
9,683
19.558
22,627

37,628
2,628





_J
100.0

H.I
1.5
o..?.
20.2
5.2

0.3
2.2
0.3
2.7
0.9
2,2
0,4
4.1
0.7
6,9

4.5
-.;>.<,
31.1
36.0

49.8
4.2






-------
Table 5 - Number and Per
For Regions of
Cent of Employees by Industrial Categories
the RaTOahannoclc Basin - 194.0. 1950.
1940
UPPER REGION
Labor Force, Civilian
Agriculture
Fisheries
Mining
Manufacturing
Commodity Employment
Non-Commodity Employment
Unemployed

CENTRAL REGION
Labor Force, Civilian
Agriculture
Fisheries
Mining
Manufacturing
Commodity Employment
Non-Commodity Employment
Unemployed
LOWER REGION
Labor Force, Civilian
Agriculture
Fisheries
Mining
Manufacturing
Commodity Employment
Non-Commodity Employment
Unemployed

Number

24,268
11,429
6
28
1,794
13,257
9,697
1,314


16,602
4,176
28
52
4,068
8,324
7,629
649

16,379
6,408
1,066
5
1,718
9,197
6,047
1,135

%

100.0
47.1
—
0.1
7.4
54.6
40.0
5.4


100.0
25.2
0.2
0.3
24.5
50.1
46.0
3.9

100.0
39.1
6.5
_ _
10.5
56.2
36.9
6.9

1950
Number

23,242
8,687
12
43
3,102
11,844
10,848
550


17,517
2,409
51
57
5,023
7,540
9,605
372

16,251
3,956
1,167
10
2,830
7,963
7,703
587

%

100.0
37.4
0.1
0.2
13.3
51.0
46.7
2.4


100.0
13.8
0.3
0.3
28.7
43.0
54.8
2.1

100.0
24.3
7.2
0.1
17.4
49.0
47.4
3.6

and I960 '

1960
Number

25,643
5,562
16
59
3,898
9,535
15,292
816


20,416
1,153
40
61
5,251
6,505
13,145
766

16,824
2,122
892
3
3,570
6,587
9,191
1,046

#
/ป

100.0
21.7
0.1
0.2
15.2
37.2
59.6
3.2


100.0
5.7
0.2
0.3
25.7
31.9
64.4
3.8

100,0
12.6
5.3

21.2
39.2
54.6
6.2

1
1
1




















1







1
Source: Census of Population









-16-


















1
1
1
1

-------
II
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
     Table 6 - Value of Farm Products Sold. Actual
Dollar Value;
           River
                                                 b  Region
                             Value of Products Sold - Actual Dollars
                                         1949
                             195Z.
                                                           1959
Rappahannoek Basin
  Upper Region
  Central Region
  Lower Region
Rappahannock Basin
  Upper Region
  Central Region
  Lower Region
21,821,916   28,128,472
 7,842,476   10,992,097
 9,189,353   11,379,649
 4,790,087    5,756,726
                                           32,817,377   46,793,291
                                           14,532,320   21,043,082
                                           11,031,709   17,027,466
                                            7,253,348    8,722,743
                                        Constant Dollars*
11,076,805
 3,980,841
 4,664,516
 2,431,443
                              11,351,389
                               4,396,839
                               4,551,860
                               2,302,690
13,340,264
 5,907,388
 4,484,390
 2,948,486
19,494,085
 8,766,548
 7,093,642
 3,633,895
Source:  Census of Agriculture
* Deflated by index of prices paid and received by farmers - USDA
  1910-14 ซ 100
    Table 7 - Forest Products Annual Growth and AnflwJ, Cut.  1957

                          Annual Growth               Annual Culb

  Saw Timber        186.9 million board feet    197 million  broad feet

  Growing Stock     855.1 thousand cords        676 thousand cords

  Source:  1957 Forest Survey
                                -17-

-------
                                    -IS-
II
I
I
        Commercial fisheries made a significant contribution to the income
of the lower region of the Happahamock Basin„  The oyster harvest, one           •
part of the fishery, according to the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, had         I
an average value of $2 ,,785,000 from 1959 to 1963 reported for Essex,
Richmond, Lancaster and Middlesex Comities „  Also., additional value was
added for fisti caught in the Chesapeake Bay or is the ocean and landed            I
in the counties along the River.                                                  ™

        ManufaetttEJag;.  Mstnufaefuylog has been Increasing in the Basin,           •
as measured by both number of employees and value added in aaoafacture.           |
The number of manufacturing employees In the Basin is shown in Table 4,
The value added by manufacture as reported by the Census axiereased from           •
about $29,000,000 in 1954 to $36,000,000 in 1958, bat this is far from            •
complete because of the need to withhold data to avoid disclosure of
information about an Individual company 0                                          —

        The leading manufacturing industries as measured by employment            •
and as reported in the 1960 Census in the order of iatportanee are log-
ging and sawmilling, food and Kindred products, apparel, fabricated               •
metals, and furniture and wood products,,  In the upper region, logging            |
and sawailling are the leading industries.  In the central region^ the
chemical industry is far the most ijaportarxt, followed by logging and              •
sawmillingo  In the lower region, logging and sawmllling and food and             I
kindred products are the most iiaportant industries, followed by asetal             *
fabrieationซ

        The industry of the Basin is characterised by a large percentage          9
of small establishments in a wide range of industrial groups,,  In 1958
there were 387 manufacturing establishments in the Basin0  Of these, 311          •
or 80 per cest employed from 1 to 19 employees,  (See Table 8 and 9.)             |

        The American ?iscose cellophane plant in Spotsylvania Goimty              •
just outside of Fredericisburg (with 2500 employees) overshadows in size          •
all other manofaaturing establishments in the Basin0  The next largest            *
company has only about 700 employees„  The sales of cellophane since
1946 have been increasirjg at a rate between 5 per cent and 6 per cent             I
per year,,  However<, the production of the Frederieisburg plant Ms re-            m
mained constant for a number of years.

        Of the other four ffiarcifaetaring plants in the Basin employing             |
over 250 employees, three are in the textile and apparel industrial
groups, and one is in the furniture and fixtures industrial group„                •
Food and Idndred products Is the only industrial group in the Basin               I
besides chemicals which might be a heavy water user in terms of waste             *
                                                                                  I

                                                                                  I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
      Table 8 •ป Distribution of Manufacturing Establishments bv
HfigAipn fffld bv Number of Emolovees . RacDahannock River Basin,, 1958
Number of
Employees
1-19
20 - 95
100 - 249
250 and over



Upper
80
11
6
_JL
100

PrnHnn
Central
95
15
4
2
116


Lov/er
136
33
2
V*
171

Basin
Total
311
59
12
	 5_
387

Per Cent of
Total
80 . 4
15.2
3.1
-1*2.
100.0
Source: 1958 Census of Manufacturers



discharge and/or water intake.  The seventy establishments in this in-
dustrial group are small,, employing less than 100 employees eaeh0
Fifty-one of the seventy establishments were in the lower or tidal est-
uary section of the Basin,
       Non-Commodity Industries. Non-commodity or service employment
including construction,, transportation, communication, public adminis-
tration, utilities, trade and other services has increased between 1940
and 1960 from 23,000 employees to 37,600 employees„  This  represents
not only an absolute increase  in the number of employees, but also a
greater proportion of civilian labor force.  In 1940 non-commodity em-
ployment made up only 40.8 per cent of the labor force, while in I960
it made up 59,8 per centc  This compares with 65.5 per cent for the
State as a whole in I960.


       Non-commodity employment has consistently been a higher percent-
age of the labor force in the central region than either the upper or
lower regions„
       Transportation Facilities.  The Rappahannoek Basin is crossed
by the following ma.jor highwaysi  II.S. I and 301 North and South through
or near Fredericksburg between Washington and Richmondฐ Routes U.S. 29
and 15 across the upper region through Culpeper; and Route U.S. 17 which
runs lengthwise through the Basin and at the southeastern end turns south
toward the Norfolk area.  There are numerous other Federal, State, and
County highwayso

       The Basin is served by a large number of trucking companies, and
by the Southern Railroad across the upper Basin through Orange and Cul-
peper and the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad through


                                  -19-

-------
                                                                               I
    Table 9 - Distribution of Manufacturing Establishments by

Region and by Industrial Group, Rappahannock River Basin,   1958            •
                                    Number of Establishments
Industrial Group
Food and Kindred
Products
Textile Mill Products
Apparel and Related
Products
Lumber and Wood Products
Furniture and Fixtures
Printing and Publishing
Chemicals and Allied
Products
Leather and Leather
Products
Stone, Clay and Glass
Products
Primary Metals
Fabricated Metals
Transportation Equipment
All Groups

Utxoer
11
5
2
59
6
8
1
—
3
2
3
-
100
Region
Central Lower
8 51
-
3 1
96 90
-
4 7
1
1
2 5
-
1
17
116 171
Basin
Number
70
5
6
245
6
19
2
1
10
2
4
17
387
Total
Per Cent
18.1
1.3
1.6
63.3
1.6
4.9
0.5
0.3
2.6
0.5
1.0
4.3
100.0
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
Source; 1958 Census of Manufacturers
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
                                  -20-                                         •
                                                                               I
                                                                               I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                                -21-
Frederieksburg,,  The Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, an east-west line,
connects with the Southern at Orange and with the Richmond, Fredericks-
burg and Potomac just sooth of Caroline County.

       There are no commercial airports in the area, but complete ser~
vice is provided at Washington and Richmond.

       The interstate highway system, as planned, will enter the Basin
in two areas.  The North-South Route 95 will cross the Basin near Fred-
ericksburg.  East-West Route 66 will cross Fauquier County and connect
Washington to the North-South Route 81.  This will put Fredericksburg
in an even more advantageous position with regard to major highway
arteries.
PROJECTED

       The location of the Basin and the nature of the labor force are
the economic factors which, in conjunction with a continued expansion
of the national economy, indicate that the Basin's prospects for growth
are good.

       The proximity of the nearby large urban areas make the area
attractive to industries producing consumer goods, and further develop-
ment of residential areas for people working outside the Basin is anti-
cipated, together with the service industries which accompany such
development.

       A labor supply will be available from the release from agri-
culture and the maturing population^ and while training for skilled
occupations may be necessary, the educational attainments of the labor
force are good.

       The Basin is well endowed with a historical heritage and many
preserved historical sites, and it has areas with recreational poten-
tial along the river and the Bay at its mouth.  These assets in con-
junction with the fact that the Basin is on the main routes between
the population center of the Northeast and the winter resort areas of
the South should provide the basis for a considerable expansion in
travel and recreation business.

       As agricultural and industrial production in the country have
become more efficient and as incomes have risen, there has been a
steady increase in the employment of service industries.  This trend
has been apparent in the Rappahannock Basin, but at a slower rate
than in the State.  In the future, because of the characteristics of
the Basin discussed above, there should be a considerable increase
in both absolute and percentage employment in non-commodity occupations.

-------
         Print No. 5, U. S.  Government Printing Office, Washington,
         B.C., I960, page 6, Table III, Middle Rate of Growth.
                                                                               I
                                                                               I
       Agriculture will continue to be economically important in the           |
Basin, although the agricultural labor force and the farm population
are expected to continue to decline.  Livestock numbers will probably          •
continue to increase.  The use of irrigation is not likely to expand           I
as the acreage of crops of sufficient value per acre to pay irrigation
costs is very limited, and the soil resources of the Basin are not such
as to encourage expanded acreage of such crops.                                •

       The natural resources of the region will not greatly foster
economic growth.  There is a possibility that the timber of the Basin          •
can be the basis of some increased wood products manufacturing, as most        |
of the wood is now taken elsewhere to be processed and manufactured in-
to various products.  However, current cutting is equal to or greater          M
than current growth, so any increased lumber production is unlikely.           I

       Manufacturing employment has been increasing in the Basin and
should continue to do so for some time until automation and other              I
efficiencies in commodity-producing industries make it possible for            •
more people to be released for service employment.   The present manu-
facturing of the Basin is very diversified as to type and the future           •
expansion will probably be in the form of many small diversified in-           |
dustrial operations producing consumer goods.  The strategic location
of the area in regard to markets'and its labor situation should assure         •
this growth.                                                                   I

       At least a partial alternative to increased manufacturing
employment as a basis for the economic development of the Basin will           I
be increased employment of Basin residents in Washington and Richmond          I
as the interstate highways system is completed and driving time is
reduced.                                                                       •


Population and Employment Projections                                          •

       The expected population growth and the economic development of
the region of which the Rappahaimock Basin is a part is a basic consid-
eration in making population and employment projections for the Basin.         I
The State of Virginia has been selected as the region with which to            I
relate the Basin, and the population projections of the Basin have been
developed through an analysis of the past and expected relationships           •
between the Basin and the State.  As a measure of the expected growth          |
in the State population, this report has accepted population projections
published by the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Natural Resources.*           _


^Source: U. S. Senate Select Committee on National Water Resources,
I

I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                                  _23-
       Because of the more intensive development of the Fredericksburg
urban area, projections for that area are included.  The Fredericksburg
urban area is defined as the City of Fredericksburg and the four sur-
rounding political districts, Chancellor and Courtland Districts in
Spotsylvania County, and Hartwood and Falmouth District in Stafford
County.

       The Fredericlcsburg urban area had a population of 32,892 in I960
of which about 16,840 or 51 per cent were served with municipal water.
It is expected that as the population increases, the water supply facil-
ities and sewers will be extended to a greater portion of the area.  It
is estimated that by 2000, 70 per cent of the urban area population will
be served by municipal water systems, and in 2060, 80 per cent will be
served by municipal systems.

       Population projections for all regions of the Basin and the Fred-
ericksburg urban area are given in Table 10.  Figure 4 graphs past and
projected population changes. '

       Labor force and employment projections are given in Table 11 by
employment categories for each region.  These are based on recent trend
relationships between population and labor force and trends in the
characteristics of employment and judgment evaluations as to future
changes in those characteristics.
    Table 10 - Pp-pulation Projections Rappahannock River Basin

                    (Minor Civil Division Area)

                       1970      1980     2000       2010     2070
Rappahannoek Basin   150,700   178,600  239,300    277,800  500,000
   Upper Region       63,200'    71,50,0   90,400    101,000
   Central Region     46,700    61,200   95,800    118,800
   Lower Region       40,800    45,900   53,100     58,000

   Fredericksburg
     Urban Area       39,700    52,000   81,400    100,900  240,000
     Population

     Served with      22,200    31,700   57,000     70,600  190,000
     Municipal Water

-------
-24-
                                          I
                                          I
                                          I
      Table 11 - Projected Employment by Occupational Categories

     Rap-pahannock River Basin - Total and "by Regions — 1970 - 2010
             i
                             1970        1980        2000      2010
Ra-ppahannock Basin

  Labor Force               68,600      81,600     110,100     128,200
    Agriculture              7,300       6,400       5,000       4,400           •
    Fisheries                1,000       1,000       1,000       1,000           •
    Mining                     200         200         200         200
    Manufacturing           13,200      14,100      13,600     13,600           •
  Commodity Employment      21,700      21,700      19,800     19,200           |
  Non-Commodity Employment  44,200      56,700      85,900     103,900
  Unemployed                 2,700       3,200       4,400       5,100           •

Upper Region

  Labor Roce                27,100      30,600      38,700     42,800           I
    Agriculture              4,500       3,800       2,800       2,400           •
    Fisheries                              -
    Mining                     100         100         100         100           •
    Manufacturing            4,100       4,300       4,100       3,900           |
  Commodity Employment       8,700       8,200       7,000       6,400
  Non-Commodity Employment  17,400      21,200      30,200     34,700           •
  Unemployed                 1,000       1,200       1,500       1,700           •

Central Region

  Labor Force               24,200      31,600      49,200     61,200           I
    Agriculture              1,000         900         800         700
    Fisheries                  -           -                  '     -             •
    Mining                     100         100         100         100           |
    Manufacturing            5,500       6,300       6,900       7,900
  Commodity Employment       6,600       7,300       7,800       8,700           m
  Non-Commodity Employment  16,600      23,100      39,400     50,100           I
  Unemployed                 1,000       1,200       2,000       2,400           m

Lower Region                                                                     I

  Labor Force               17,300      19,400      22,200     24,200
    Agriculture              1,800       1,700       1,400       1,300           •
    Fisheries                1,000       1,000       1,000       1,000           |
    Mining
    Manufacturing            3,600       3,500       2,600       1,800           _
  Commodity Employment       6,400       6,200       5,000       4,100           I
  Non-Commodity Employment  10,200      12,400      16,300     19,100           •
  Unemployed                   700         800         900       1,000
                                           I

                                           I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
              I960  2000  2020  2040  2060  206O
IO, OOO
               POPULATION OF THE

       RAPPAHANNOCK  RIVER BASIN
 1940 J950, 6 I960 WITH PROJECTIONS TO  2070
 LEGEND:

   I TOTAL BASIN
   3 CENTRAL  REGION
   3 FREDERICKSBURG WATER SERVICE  DISTRICT
                                                     FIGURE 4

-------

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                     PROJECT INVESTIGATION

ESTUARINE STUDIES

        During 1959, I960, and 1961, the Virginia State Water Control
Board made a series of sampling runs on the lower Rappahannoek River.
Seventeen sampling stations were established — sixteen in tidewater
extending from the mouth of the river to the Route 3 bridge in Fred-
ericksburg and one above tidewater and the waste discharges of the
Fredericksburg area.  Figure 5 shows the location of those stations
in the vicinity of Fredericksburg.

        Samples were collected using the "same slack" method of tide-
water sampling.  This method requires that the samples be collected
during high and low tides just prior to tide reversal.  At such time
there is no water movement due to tidal currents.

        The following determinations were made on the majority of the
samples; temperature, dissolved oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand,
pH, solids (total, suspended and settleable), alkalinity, acidity,
chlorides and sulfates.  The sanitary significance of these deter-
minations and others is discussed below.

T enroeratur e

        Temperature controls the solubility of oxygen in water and
consequently the saturation level of dissolved oxygen in the stream.
The rate of bacterial action is increased or decreased with higher
or lower temperatures, respectively.
Dissplved Oxygen

        Normally the amount of oxygen dissolved in a stream is limited
by the saturation value which is a function of water temperature.  In
some cases, as a result of the photosynthetic processes of water plants,
this value may be exceeded causing "supersaturation".   Dissolved oxygen
must be present to support fish and other aquatic life, for natural
aerobic purification of streams, and to prevent nuisance conditions
associated with putrefactive decomposition of waste materials.  Values
below the saturation level are an indication of the presence of un-
stable organic substances which demand or utilize oxygen.  The gross
effect of oxygen demanding substances in a particular stream reach is
measured in terms of the deficiency in dissolved oxygen content below
the saturation value.
                               -25-

-------
                                     -26-
whereas, values higher than 7.0 indicate the presence of alkalies or
alkaline earth salts
Solida
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
                                                                                  I
        The biochemical oxygen demand (usually referred to as B000D.)             •
of sewage, sewage effluents, polluted waters or industrial wastes is              I
the amount of oxygen (expressed in mg/l) required to stabilize the
decomposable organic matter "by aerobic bacterial action.  Complete                •
stabilization requires more than 100 days at 20ฐC., but measurement               |
of BOD based upon such long periods are impractical for use in field
investigations „  Consequently, a much shorter period of laboratory                _
incubation is used,,  Incubation for 5 days at 20ฐC. is normally the               I
recommended procedure because of expediency.  Ultimate or complete                *
demands can be reasonably estimated from the 5-day BOD values.


J&
                                                                                  I
        pH is defined as the negative logarithm of the hydrogen ion               I
concentration (in moles per liter).   The pH value indicates the
relative acidity or alkalinity of a water, with the neutral point at
pH 7.0.  Values lower than 7.0 indicate the presence of acid salts;               I
 hereas    les hher   a  70 indicae te    see    aie  o               '
                                                                                  I
        Settleable solids data provide a means for estimating the amount          I
of material that can be expected to settle out in a stream.  Suspended
solids data may bฎ used to estimate the amount of material which may
be swept long distances downstream to be deposited or dissolved, de-              •
pending on stream conditions.                                                     B


           aad
        The alkalinity of water is usually due to the presence of bi-             M
carbonates and carbonates.  In some waters hydroxide, borate, silicate            I
or phosphate may also contribute to the alkalinity.  The acidity of
water is normally due to the presence of carbon dioxide, mineral and
organic acids, and salts of strong acids and weak bases.                          •



                                                                                  I
        Sulfates are a common decomposition product of organic matter
and are also a waste product of several industrial operations.  In                _
water supplies sulfates above certain concentrations have undesirable             •
physiological effects in man.

                                                                                  I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
                 ^EXISTING VEPCO DAM


                                -FREDERiCKSBURG
                                                                                      >
LEGEND:

ฉ-•=VIR6MA STATE WATER CONTROL
   ฎ=U.S.G& STREAM GAGE
  U=APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF  PROPOSED  DAM
                                                  SCALE IN MILES
                                                                            RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER  BASIN, VIRGINIA
                                                                                     RAPPAHANNOCK
                                                                                     RIVER     BASIN
                                                                        U 5  DEPARTMENT  OF  HEALTH,  EDUCATION, AND  WELFARE

                                                                               PUBLIC  HEALTH SFRV'CE  - REG'ON  HI

                                                                                   CHARLO71 EoV ILLE ,  ^IRG'N'.-

                                                                                          MAY  1964
                                                                                                     FIGURE  5

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
                                -27-
 Chlorides

         Chlorides  are found in practically all natural waters.  The
 analysis can be used as  one means  of determining the magnitude of
 sea-water  intrusion.
 Coliform
        This  determination is an indicator of sewage pollution since
 coliforms are normally found in small numbers in unpolluted streams .
 Coliform bacteria are  present in the intestines of warm-blooded
 animals and are discharged in large numbers in feces.
 Iron
        The presence of more than trace quantities of iron and manga-
nese will stain porcelain fixtures and laundry.  In higher concen-
trations water is discolored and has a disagreeable taste.
        The presence of high hardness causes excessive soap consump-
tion in homes and laundries; the formation of water scums and curds
in homes, laundries and textile mills; the toughening of cooked veg-
etables; and the formation of scales in boilers, hot-water heaters,
pipes and coolriLng utensils.
Data Analysis

        Tables 16 thru 21 are tabulations of the laboratory results
for certain selected sampling stations.

        It should be noted that the B.O.D. results are inconsistent
for those stations in the vicinity of the American Viscose Corpora-
tion outfall.  Interference of an unknown nature caused these vary-
ing results.

        The laboratory results were used to determine the waste assimi-
lation capacity of the upper estuary immediately below the Fredericks-
burg area.  This is the critical reach of the river because of the
present waste loads and the expected future area growth.  All known
physical and chemical variables were considered, including river dis-
charge, tides, deoxygenation and reaeration rates, temperature,

-------
                                     -28-
dissolved oxygen and waste load.

        Figures 6 and 7 are families of curves which indicate the
assimilative capacity of the upper estuary for various water temper-
ature and stream discharge conditions with initial dissolved oxygen
deficits and 1 and 2 milligrams per liter "below saturation, and a
minimum dissolved oxygen content of 4 milligrams per liter.  These
curves are utilized as illustrated by the following example:  assum-
ing a water temperature of 20ฐC and a daily waste load of 7000 Ibs.
of 5-day B.O.D., the curves (Figure 6) indicate that a discharge of
400 cfs would "be required to maintain a mini mum D. 0. of 4.0 mg per
liter within the stream should there exist an initial D. 0. deficit
of 1.0 mg per liter.

INVENTORIES

        Inventories were made in 1963 of water uses, waste discharges
and water quality data.  This information was obtained from the
Virginia Department of Health, Tirginia State Water Control Board,
local contacts and published reports.
Water Inventory

        The water inventory includes data on sources, uses and con-
sumption.  Table 23 is a tabulation of the inventory.  A summary of
these data is given below.
Use

Municipal
Municipal
Industrial
Waste Inventory
Source

Surface
Ground
Surface
Population
  Served

  21,660
   7,300
      Average
Consumption (MGD)

        3.12
        0.60
       30.00
        The waste inventory includes such items as sewered population,
treatment facilities, and strength of wastes in terms of population
equivalents.  Table 22 is a tabulation of the inventory.  A summary of
these data is given as follows:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Q
UJ

         o
         ci
I  "•   *
    1   t
    ง
    ง
    GQ

       FIGURE  6

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
 1
             O
             *

          ง
           2

           *
             IO
              „


                                         2
                                        8

                                                                              X
                                                                               ,0
BE
DIA
RIVER
HA
R
THE
ASSIMILA
DITIONS
MPERATURE
CK

TE
AND
DE
                                                                                             k.

                                                                                             a.
                                                                                             9
                                                                                             E
                                                                                             CM
D.O. Defi
                                                                                              S.
.O. ซ 4
TY OF

FOR V

Minimum D.
E CAPAC

RICKSBURG
                                                                                           R6URE 7

-------

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                                  -29-
                                                     Population Equiv-
Waste Source               Sewered Po-pulat ion        alent Discharged

Municipal                       24,380                    14,875
Industrial                         -                      38,800
Surface Water Quality

       Data relating to several measures of water quality were collected
during .a 1951 Public Health Service Field survey of the Rappahannock
Riveiv  The results of this survey for samples collected at the U.S.
Geological Survey gaging station above Fredericksburg are summarized
below:

Constituent                      Hange                     Average
Dissolved oxygen (% saturation)  82.1 - 115.7                94
5-Day BOD (rag/l)                  0.6 -   1.1                 0.8
Coliforms (MPN per 100 ml)       20   - 230                 100
Chloride (mg/l)                   2-5                   2.8
pH                                6.8 -   7.2

       Samples collected by the U. S. Geological Survey during water
year 1956 at the Frederieksburg gaging station gave the following
measures of water quality .2/

Constituent                      Range                     Average

Iron (ffig/1)                      0.01 -  0.16                 0.09
Chloride (mg/l)                  2    -  4.5                  2.9
Sul-fate (ing/1)                   1.9  -  6.3                  3.6
Total Hardness (mg/1)           19    - 28                   23
pH                               6.8  -  7.6

       Field studies in 1959, I960 and 1961 by the Virginia State Water
Control Board produced the following measures of water quality for the
Virginia Electric Power Company Canal at Fredericksburg.  The canal is
assumed to be representative of the river at the gaging station.

-------
                                    -30-
Constituent                         Range                    Average
                                                                                  I


                                                                                  I


                                                                                  I

 Dissolved oxygen (% saturation)     28   - 138                 92
 5-Day BOD (mg/l)                     0.4 -   3.4                1.6              I
 Chloride (mg/l)                      3-30                  5                •
 Sulfate (mg/l)                       0-30                 10
 Alkalinity,  IAD (mg/l)               11   -  29                 20                •
 pH                                   6.1 -   6.9                                 I

        The results of these independent field surveys  indicate that              m
 Rappahannock River water above Frederieksburg is of good quality.                I
 Further, it appears that the quality of the Rappahannock River at this
 point has changed very little over the ten-year period covered by these
 records.                                                                         I

        The quality of the Rappahannock River immediately below the Fred-
 erieksburg area  varies with river discharge and tides.   For the lower            •
'range of flows (less than 500 to 700 cfs) when the fresh water inflow is         |
 not sufficient to overcome the tidal effect (a condition which bccurs
 for extended periods each year),wastes tend to accumulate in the upper            •
 estuary. Independent field studies performed by the Public Health Service        •
 and the Virginia State Water Control Board indicated that during low
 flows zones of zero dissolved oxygen extended for as much as 12-18 miles
 below the Viscose outfall.  This condition combined with the actual ac-          I
 cumulation of wastes makes the river highly undesirable for most legit-          •
 imate water uses.
Ground Water Quality
                                                                                 I
       Ground water in the Rappahannock Basin is generally of poor               _
quality having high iron and manganese concentrations, and in some cases,         •
appreciable quantities of hydrogen sulfide.  In addition, the water is           ™
considered to be corrosive due to low pH and alkalinity combined with
a high dissolved carbon dioxide content.                            ••             I


       Analyses of several ground water supplies in the basin, performed
by the Virginia State Health Department, produced the following data.             •


              Constituent                     Ran^e


              Iron (mg/l)                     0.1 -7.0                        I
              Manganese (mg/l)                0-9.0                        ™
              Hardness (mg/l)                 2   - 145
              Carbon Dioxide (mg/l)           0-70                          •
              Chloride (mg/l)                 6   -• 56                          I
              Fluoride (mg/l)                 0   -   4.0
              pH                              6   -   8.5                        •
                                                                                I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                             -31-
        With few exceptions the iron and manganese content of the
ground waters exceed the recommended limits of the Public Health
Service Drinking Water Standards. J/  These standards state that
iron and manganese should not be present in a water supply delivered
to the consumer in excess of 0.3 mg/1 and G005 Kg/1, respectively.

Ground Water Availability

        No records of major exploration of large scale ground
water supplies in the Basin area are available.  In the Fredericks-
burg area numerous domestic wells produce four to five gpm each.
Shallow wells, less than 50 feet, yield up to 10 gpmj deeper wells,
100 to 400 feet deep, produce an average of about 15 gpm,,  These
yields will supply adequate water for most domestic and farm needs,
but these quantities are not considered sufficient to meet munici-
pal or industrial demands.

        Wells in the Piedmont area drilled to depths less than 200
feet yield on the average of 5 to 20 gpm.  At greater depths, the
quality becomes very poor with no increase in volume.  Decreases in
production are prevalent during dry periods.

        Ground water sources in the Coastal Plain portion of the
Basin yield varying quantities depending on location and depth.
Generally, the larger yields contain objectionable amounts of
bicarbonate and fluoride.

-------

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                    WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES

        There are indications that water requirements in future
years will be so great that they can be met only by the most ef-
ficient use of all available sources.  In addition, the difficulty
of maintaining water quality is continually increasing 'because of
the growing quantity and variety of pollutants discharged to water
courses.  Therefore, current and expected future water uses with
accompanying quality requirements must be weighed and quality
objectives established to insure efficient development and utiliza-
tion of water resources.

        The Virginia Water Control Board has not established spe-
cific water quality objectives for either State-wide or individual
stream application.  Each waste discharge is considered on its own
merits, taking into consideration downstream water uses and assimi-
lative capacity of the receiving waters.  However, with certain
modifications and/or expansion the following basic criteria are used:
(l)  dissolved oxygen - not lower than 5 milligrams per liter in the
stream; (2) no appreciable settleable or floating solids| (3) no
noticeable coloration or discoloration of the receiving stream; (4)
toxic substances to be reduced below the toxicity limit of the stream;
(5) no appreciable change of pH of the receiving stream; and (6)
stream flow for design of sewage treatment facilities equal to
minimum average 7-day low-flow occurring on a 10-year frequency.

        The Water Control Board has established a dissolved oxygen
objective for that reach of the Rappahannock River below the waste
discharges of the Jredericisburg area.  This objective is to main-
tain at least average dissolved oxygen concentration of 4 milligrams
per liter, with individual Tni-nimum values of not less than 3 milli-
grams per liter.  Establishment of the oxygen concentrations was
made after consultation with the Virginia Institute of Marine Science.
Both agencies believe that river uses will not be contravened by
these requirements.  In addition, the State has indicated a desire
that oxygen-saturated, or near-saturated, water be released from the
proposed reservoir in order to continue the present flow of good
quality water to the upper estuary at Fredericlcsburg.  Present flows
average approximately 92 per cent of dissolved oxygen saturation.

        The ability of a stream to assimilate an organic waste load
is directly related to the amount of oxygen available at the time of
waste introduction.  For maximum assimilative efficiency, it is,
therefore, necessary that a stream be saturated with oxygen.  Lower
oxygen values require greater volumes of water to accomplish the same
result.  Higher dissolved oxygen values in reservoir releases can best
be attained through the use of multi-level outlets.  Because of verti-
cal stratification in deep impoundments, water quality, in general,

                               -33-

-------
                                                                                   I



                                                                                   I

decreases with depth.  Having the ability to discharge water from several          •
depths allows for selection of water of the best quality and for mixing            I
of waters from various levels.  The net result is better control of the
discharge to meet downstream quality requirements.                                 •

        The dissolved oxygen objectives established by the Water Control
Board are values which are generally accepted as necessary for maintain-           —
ing any stream in satisfactory condition for downstream water uses, to             I
protect aquatic life, and to prevent nuisance conditions.  These objec-            '
tives are considered both reasonable and adequate and have been adopted
for purposes of this study.                                                        •

        Computations of assimilative capacities to meet established aver-
age or minimum dissolved oxygen objectives are necessarily based on aver-          •
age conditions including temperatures and waste loads.  Temperature and            I
waste load, however, vary considerably with time, i.e., a 24-hour period.
Therefore, even when using a maximum average temperature condition
(usually for the summer months) and a known waste load, these normal flue-         I
tuations cause variable dissolved oxygen concentrations in the receiving           '
streams for any constant flow condition.  In an attempt to satisfy the
dissolved oxygen objectives, calculations of assimilative capacity in this         •
                                                                                   |
report have been based upon a fflijTvfmtmi average dissolved oxygen concentra-
tion of 4 milligrams per liter.  This value was selected recognizing the
variables and their effects upon oxygen concentrations.  Actual individual         •
values could possibly range from 3 to 5 milligrams per liter.                      I


        The optimum in water quality control would be to establish a
quality condition suitable for all stream uses and to maintain that condi-         I
tion 100 per cent of the time.  Seasonal and even daily variations in              •
natural stream flows render the maintenance of such an objective impractical
from engineering and economic standpoints.  Since complete quality control         •
is not feasible, particularly in streams receiving large waste volumes, a          |
design low-flow condition is selected with a recurrence frequency which
would not render poor water quality more often than would be practical             •
when related to intended uses.  Therefore, quality control measures are            I
designed on the basis of maintaining the established minimum quality
objectives when stream flows equal a design low-flow condition.


        After considering present and expected future uses of the Eappa-           •
bannock River, the minimum average annual flow with a recurrence frequency
of one in 20 years was selected as the design low-flow condition.  To              •
determine the probable unregulated flow sequence on a seasonal basis, this         |
annual flow was reduced statistically to monthly flows (See Table 12).
This means, statistically, that during approximately one year out of every         _
twenty, there will occur stream flows which will average less than the             I
design flow.  A greater recurrence frequency is undesirable from several
aspects.  Population projections indicate extensive growth in the Freder-
icksburg area which, with improved water quality, would enhance development        I
                                                                                   I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                                     -35-

      of traditionally desirable river front properties for residential,
      commercial, and recreational uses.  Frequent periods of poor
      quality would suppress river front development for most uses be-
      cause of the increased risk of nuisance conditions and of damage
      to floating and adjacent structures because of accelerated corrosion
      and paint deterioration.  Increased frequency would also be harmful
      to fish and other aquatic life in that normal populations might
      never exist since recovery following a kill usually requires three
      to five years.
Table 12 — IffinliMffiliP Average Uneontro^e.fl Digcha.rpe by t/fcyyth? ^ffih Recurrence

      Frequency 1 in 20 Years for Ratroahannock River at

               Mon$h                            Flow (cfs)

              January                               624
              February                              732
              March                                1122
              April                                 993
              May                                   600
              June                                  419
              July                                  208
              August                                 99
              September                              99
              October                               109
              November                              198
              December                              301

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                           WATER USES

        Water uses within the basin include domestic, municipal, and
industrial water supplies, commercial and sport fishing, recreation,
agriculture and waste disposal.  All of these uses are dependent upon
surface waters except for water supplies and agriculture which utilize
both surface and ground sources.

        The Rappahannock estuary serves as a spawning area for shad
and striped bass.  The lower estuary, near the Chesapeake Bay, has
been called the only prime oyster growing area remaining in the
State of Virginia although production is comparatively small in terms
of dollar value.

        The location of the proposed reservoir will effect only those
surface water uses in the vicinity of and downstream from the im-
poundment.  Upstream uses are too far removed to utilize water from
the proposed project.  The two most significant water users in the
basin, the City of Predericksburg and American Viscose Corporation,
have their water intakes and discharge their wastes in the reach of
river immediately downstream from the proposed reservoir.

        Fredericksburg obtains water from the Virginia Electric and
Power Company (VEPCO) Canal which receives its flow from a diversion
created by a low-level dam located above the City (Figure 5).  The
canal supplies water for the Embrey hydroelectric power station and
during low-flow periods, the entire river discharge passes through
this waterway.  At flows less than approximately 50 cfs power genera-
tion ceases,and the City is permitted to utilize all available water.

        The American Viscose Corporation plant, although obtaining
a small portion of its water supply from Fredericksburg, utilizes
the upper estuary as its major source of raw water.  During low-
flow periods, wastes discharged by Fredericksburg and the plant
tend to accumulate in the upper estuary and at times, because of
tidal action, wastes actually flow upstream.  This upstream move-
ment places wastes at the plant intake and causes nuisance condi-
tions within the City of Fredericksburg.  Wastes, particularly
sulfates within the plant wastes, in the intake water are harmful
to the industrial processes making it necessary to employ demineral-
ization equipment on quality critical water.  This equipment is
placed into operation at river discharges less than approximately
60 cfs.
                              -37-

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                           CONCLUSIONS

 1.  The proposed Salem Church Reservoir will have no direct effect on
     upstream areas since upper region communities are too distant for
     economic utilization of reservoir storage,,

 20  The proposed upstream water uses will not affect the quality of
     stored water in the proposed Federal reservoir.

 3.  The Fredericksburg area will continue to be the center of popula-
     tion and economic growth and will, therefore, continue to have
     the greatest need for water,

 4.  Population projections indicate that in the years 1995, 2020, and
     2070 there may be 50,650; 90,400j and 190,000 persons, respectively,
     served by central water and sewer facilities in the Fredericksburg
     area,

 5o  By the years 1995„ 2020, and 2070, it is estimated that the Fred-
     ericksburg Water Service District will have a total water supply
     requirement of 5<>6j, 14, and 27 mgd, respectively.

 60  Ground water sources within the Fredericksburg area are capable
     of supplying individual farm, home and small sub-division needs;
     however, yields are inadequate to meet the concentrated demands
     of the Water Service District.

 7.  The water supply design low-flow condition for the Rappahannock
     River at the point of intake for the City of Fredericksburg is
     5=53 mgd^ based upon a flow which is expected to occur one day
     during any 16-year period.

 80  The cheapest alternate sources of dependable water supply for the
     Fredericksburg Water Service District, in the absence of the
     proposed Federal project, are stage-constructed single-purpose
     reservoirs.  To meet the estimated 2070 needs of 27 mgd will re-
     quire an annual draft on storage of 3210 acre-feet which will
     have an annual benefit attributable to the Federal project of
     $36,500 including operation, maintenance and amortization for
     100 years at 3 per cent interest.

 9o  Industrial water requirements in the year 1995, 2020, and 2070
     are estimated to be 37, 45* and 45 mgd, respectivelyc,  These re-
     quirements , primarily cooling water, are expected to be met using
     the estuary as the source0

10.  The quality objectives used in this report for the Rappahannock
     River immediately downstream from the Fredericksburg area, which
                                 -5-

-------
                                                                                 I
                                                                                 I
     are in agreement with those established by the Virginia Water
     Control Board, are to maintain at least a minimum average dis-              •
     solved oxygen value of 4 milligrams per liter, with individual              |
     minimum values of not less than 3 milligrams per liter.

11„   The design, condition for water quality control is the minimum               I
     average annual low-flow having a recurrence frequency of one in             ™
     twenty years„  This annual flow was reduced statistically to
     monthly flows to determine the probable unregulated flow sequence           I
     on a seasonal basis,,                                                        I

12.   Expected municipal and industrial waste loads from the Fredericks-          •
     burg area in the years 1995, 2020, and 2070 are estimated to be             |
     6,500; 7,700j and 8,500 pounds of 5-day BOD, respectively,,

13 c,   The Rappahannoek River is incapable of assimilating, at design flows,       •
     either present or projected residual waste loads after adequate             ™
     treatment, and meeting the established quality objectives.

14.   The cheapest alternate means of meeting the water quality objectives        •
     is a combination of modified secondary waste treatment and stage-
     constructed single-purpose reservoirs.  The annual cost of this             •
     method, and, therefore, the benefit attributable to annual draft on         |
     storage (130,,400 acre-feet) for the purpose of water quality control,
     is $595,500 including operation, maintenance, and amortization for          _
     100 years at an interest rate of 3 per cent.                                I

15o   Storage provided within the proposed Salem Church Reservoir for
     water quality control will produce many intangible benefits by              I
     improving conditions in the Rappahannock River for approximately            I
     100 miles from the dam to the Chesapeake Bay,  In addition to im-
     proved recreational opportunities, the availability of a more               •
     uniform quality will be beneficial to fish, aquatic life and wild-          J
     life| aesthetic qualities will be improved; and property values
     will probably be enhanced0                                                  _

l60   The benefits are widespread in scope and appear sufficient in magni-        •
     tude to warrant the provision of the required volume of storage for
     water quality control„                                                      •

17o   Water quality in deep impoundments becomes degraded with depth be-
     cause vertical stratification prevents mixing of surface and bottom         •
     waterso  It is recommended that multi-level outlets be incorporated         I
     in the proposed structure to allow releases from several depths, there-
     by providing positive control of the discharges to meet particular
     downstream dissolved oxygen requirements„                                   I

                                      -6-
                                                                                 I

                                                                                 I

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
                WATER REQUIREMENTS FORECASTS

GENERAL

        Nationally, total water requirements have spiraled upward
during the past 5 or 6 decades.  New products and methods as well
as the growing demand for manufactured and processed items have
magnified industrial water demands.  Agriculture utilizes water to
create additional tillable lands and to obtain a greater yield per
unit of area.  Irrigation is already practiced nationwide, and each
year the total acreage increases.  Metropolitan and urban areas with
central water supplies having complex distribution systems, elaborate
household plumbing, and air-conditioning, combine with an ever
increasing standard of living to place greater demands on our water
resources.  Total water requirements will continue this upward trend,
if for no reason other than the expanding population.

MUNICIPAL AND SERVICE DISTRICT WATER SUPPLIES

        A study of 58 municipal systems operated by the American
Water Works Company indicates that residential sales of water per
service, for the years 1939-59, increased at the rate of approxi-
mately two per cent per .year  .ij  The U.S. Senate Select Committee
on National Water Resources, in their Committee Print No, 7, states
that in 1954 average municipal water use was 147 gallons per capita
per day (gpcd) and that this could conceivably increase to 185 gpod
in 1980 and to 225 gpcd in the year 2000, with a possible leveling
off thereafter,j>/  This indicates an increase in per capita consumption
of approximately 1.1 per cent per year.

        Municipal water use rates are affected by the size of the
community, its location, habits and standard of living, availability
of water, quality and cost of water, existence of sewers, extent and
uses of water meters, and other variables,,  Since the present economy
of the Rappahannock Basin is somewhat below the State and national
averages and since present water comsumption is considerably lower
than the Select Committee average, it is anticipated that per capita
water use will increase faster than the mean projections as the area
grows through modern urbanization.  The annual unit increase for
municipal use is projected as 1.5 per cent of the I960 per capita
figure of 80 gallons per capita per day for fifty years.  After this
time the per capita demand is expected to reach a plateau and continue
at a constant rate.
                               -39-

-------
                                                                                   I


                                   -40-                                            •

       Expanding populations and increasing per capita consumption                 I
have made it necessary for a majority of the communities within the
upper basin to seek additional sources of water.  Surface waters appear            •
to be the only feasible source because of low yields and poor quality              I
of the ground water available within the area.  Recently, in order to
insure sufficient raw water, the Town of Culpeper made arrangements to
utilize a Soil Conservation Service reservoir located upstream from                I
the Town reservoir.                                                                •

       Madison, another upper basin community, is presently making                 •
final plans to purchase water supply storage in a proposed Soil (Jon-               |
servation Service reservoir to be constructed near the Town on White
Oak Run.  The existing well sources are inadequate because of low yields
and seasonal fluctuations in the ground water table.
I
       The Town of Warrenton, which obtains its water from the Potomac
River Basin and discharges its wastes to the Rappahannock Basin, is now            •
acquiring land to construct a raw water impoundment.  Although the                 •
reservoir will be in the Potomac Basin, the need for water resource
development is apparent in order to meet increasing uses.                          •

       Location of communities in the upper basin dictates that water
supplies be developed locally.  The proposed Federal Reservoir would               _
not, because of distance, be a feasible source of water for these com-             I
munities.                                                                          ~

       Lower basin communities are so located that ground water is                 I
most likely to continue as the source of supply.  In this region surface           •
sources are impractical from the standpoint of both quality and quantity
since most surface water in the Coastal Plain is saline  and any fresh             •
water is usually completely dependent upon rainfall.                               |

       The central basin, and in particular the Fredericksburg area,               _
can effectively utilize the main stem of the Rappahannock River as its             •
source of raw water.  In I960 approximately 16,840 persons in the Fred-            *
ericksburg urban area were served by central water systems, representing
about 51 per cent of the urban population.  It is estimated that as the            •
population increases, both water and sewerage facilities will be extended          I
to serve a greater percentage of the populace.  By the year 2000, 70 per
cent of the urban population will be centrally served and by the year              •
2060 this will increase to about 80 per cent.  For purposes of this                |
report, the area has been designated as the Fredericksburg Water Service
District.  The remaining portion of the population is expected to be               _
served by individual wells and individual waste disposal systems.  The             I
following tabulation gives the project populations, as derived from the            •
economic study, for the Fredericksburg urban area and the Water Service
District.                                                                          •
                                                                                   I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
            Population Project ions -Fredericteburg Area

                 Urban Potjulation            Service District Pomlation

 1960                32,892                            16,840
 1995                74,000                            50,650
 2020               124,000                            90,400
 2070               240,000                           190,000


        Based on the projected populations and the expected per capita
 water use,the Fredericlosburg Service District will require in the
 years 1995, 2020, and 2070 an estimated 6, 14, and 27 mgd, respectively,


 INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLIES

        Industries can be classified as two general types, dry and
 wet.  Dry-type industries use little or no water in the manufacturing
 processes, thereby having no significant waste discharges.  Wet in-
 dustries use varying quantities of water depending on the product, and
 in numerous cases, water use in the manufacture of identical products
 will vary from plant to plant.

        In the United States between 1900 and 1955 industrial water use
 increased six-fold, with water use primarily in manufacturing processes
 and  for cooling.  There have been many predictions of future industrial
 needs ranging from very nominal increases to increases of 16 per cent
 per year.  The smaller increases are generally based on growth of exist-
 ing  facilities, whereas the larger predictions are based on the establish-
 ment of new plants.

        Economic investigations indicate that the natural resources
within the region will not support a new wet industry of any magni-
 tude.   Therefore, water requirements for industrial groT/th within
 the Fredericksburg area are based on nominal increases in water use
by existing establishments and allowing for the possible location of
 light water using industries.  Industrial water supply needs are
 estimated to increase at the rate of 0.2 mgd per year for fifty years
 after which time the demand is expected to remain constant.  It is
 anticipated that the primary source of industrial supply will be the
upper Rappahannock estuary.
                               -41-

-------
Table J. 3— Projected Fredsrioksfoxii  Area Water Supply Requirements
Water Sutxolv Reauirements (mffd)
Use
Service District
Industrial
TOTALS
Present
1.7
30.0*
31.7
1995
6
37
43
2020
14
45
59
2070
27
45
72
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
* Water withdrawn from the estuary.                                                 •
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                  QUALITY CONTROL BEOJIRIMENTS
        Maximum efficiency in the utilization of water resources can
only be attained through the effective control of water quality.  Each
of the various -water uses such as public and industrial -water supplies,
recreation, fish and wildlife, and waste disposal have differing water
quality requirements.  With many uses often competing for the water
within a single system, quality control, of which waste treatment is an
integral part, must be practiced in order that any one use does not cause
a quality unsatisfactory for other uses.  Water for human consumption
has the highest priority; therefore, a good quality must be maintained
to meet the demands of public water supplies before being made available
for uses of lesser priority.

        For purposes of determining the value of storage for water
quality control attributable to the proposed Salem Church Reservoir, it
is assumed that conventional secondary treatment will be provided for
all sources of domestic sewage and its equivalent for industrial wastes.
Conventional secondary treatment of domestic sewage within the Fred-
ericksburg area is expected to stabilize approximately 85 per cent of
the oxygen-consuming wastes through the year 2020.  Although greater
waste reductions are presently attainable, it is not reasonable to
assume a higher removal when an unknown quantity of organic material
will reach the watercourse through individual home disposal systems,
storm water sewers, and small sub-division treatment facilities.  As
the area becomes more densely populated and sewers are extended, more
and more of the populated area wastes will receive control treatment.
It is expected as this occurs that over-all reduction of the area waste
load will increase and that after the year 2020, 90 per cent of the
organic material will be stabilized.

        For some time the American Viscose Corporation has been engaged
in a program to reduce its waste loads discharged to the Rappahannocl!:
River.  During the past 10 years the company has reduced the organic
waste load to the stream by approximately 50$ through process modifica-
tions and improved housekeeping.  In addition, this program has included
the separation of waste from the cooling and rinsing waters and collect-
ing them in a concentrated waste flow.  There are in effect two effluents
being discharged from the plant; one of approximately 24 mgd with a
BOD of 6-10 mg/1, and the second of approximately 6 mgd with a BOD of
about 120 mg/1.  The Virginia Water Control Board has assisted plant
personnel in studies which aided in the separation of these wastes.

        The Viscose Corporation reports that the wastes in the weak
effluent come from rinsing the cellophane in the final steps of
                               -43-

-------
                                                                                   I
manufacture and that there is no known method of preventing the waste              •
from entering the rinse -water.  Further, there is no taiown method of               |
treating such a low waste concentration.

        Although the company does not now provide any external waste               I
treatment, recent pilot plant studies performed on the more concentrat-
ed waste water indicate that the highest degree of waste reduction can
he attained using an activated sludge process.  Some treatment process             I
changes are necessary, however, including among other things nutrient              •
addition and extended aeration periods which will obtain about an 85%
reduction in the oxygen consuming wastes.  The 85% reduction is consider-          •
ed to be equivalent to conventional secondary treatment for this waste             |
through the year 2020.  It is expected that the industry will continue
its current program of in-plant modifications which have already reduced           _
waste loads significantly and after the year 2020 treatment efficiencies           •
of approximately 90$ are anticipated.  The Virginia Water Control Board            ™
has, in fact, instructed the company to continue its efforts to reduce
the waste load being discharged.                                                   I

        For the purpose of this investigation,the waste load considered
for evaluating water quality control needs is, therefore, the total of             •
the two waste water streams.  The total includes that waste load remain-           |
ing following secondary treatment of the concentrated wastes added to the
waste in the less concentrated water.                                              _


MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL WASTE LOADS

        Waste loads from domestic sources are estimated to be equivalent           I
to 0.23 pounds of 5-day BOD per person per day.  This value is based
upon present waste strengths with adjustment for expected future waste             •
loads.  Industrial wastes, however, are complicated by many variables.             •
Even the manufacture of any one product,because of different industrial
techniques, results in wide variations in quantity and strength of                 _
wastes.  Future industrial discharges are estimated either by area or              •
by individual plants utilizing available discharge data as a basis for             •
design whenever such data are available.

Within the upper basin (see Figure l) existing domestic and industrial             I
tmste discharges affect only short reaches of stream.  Every community
having a municipal collection system provides effective secondary treat-           •
ment, and industries within the area having significant T/astes  discharge          g
into these community systems.  Projections of population and industrial
growth in the upper basin indicate that future discharges will not pro~
duce significant adverse effects on stream qualities,                              •



                                                                                   I

                                     -44-                                          _




                                                                                   I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
        The Prederieksburg  Service District represents the primary
source of domestic wastes within the central basin.  Waste loads to the
Rappahannock River, as estimated using the District population projec-
tions and the expected degree of treatment, are 1,800; 2,600; and 4,400
pounds of 5-day BOD for the years 1995, 2020, and 2070, respectively.

        Industrial waste discharges in the Fredericksburg area, as
determined from the economic projections, the expected nominal increases
in vet manufacturing processes, and the degree of treatment expected,
are estimated for the years 1995,2020, and 2070 to be 4,700; 5,100; and
4,100 pounds of 5-day BOD, respectively.

        Total waste loads, Service District plus industrial, in the
Erederieksburg area, are estimated in the years 1995,2020, and 2070
to be 6,500; 7,700; and 8,500 pounds of 5-day BOD, respectively.

        Waste loads in the lower basin (see Figure 1) are not now a
problem, nor does an analysis of the economic forecasts indicate that
they will be a problem in the future.  The area is rural in nature
and raw materials are not available for industrial development.
   Table 14 - Municipal Service District and Industrial Waste

                                t*Hr? Frederic^burg Area

                                               Q, Pounds of 5 -da  BQD
Type Work          Present            1995* _ 2020* _ 2070*

Municipal
District            2550              1800        2600        4400

Industrial          6600              4700        5100        4100

TOTALS              9150              6500        7700        8500



*  Based upon the provision of adequate treatment.

MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL Q0AIJTY CONTROL REOJIRMENTS

        The Rappahannock River below Erederieksburg is incapable of
assimilating the projected waste loads at the stream design low-flow
condition.  Therefore, in addition to adequate waste treatment and
in order to meet the established dissolved oxygen objectives, flow
regulation is necessary.  Maintenance of these objectives will require
annual drafts on storage of 97,000; 114,000; and 130,400 acre-feet
by the years 1995, 2020, and 2070, respectively.

                              -45-

-------
OYSTERING- AREA
                                    -46-
I
I
I
        The oyster beds within the lower Rappahannoek estuary are                 _
classified by fisheries experts as one of the prime areas remaining               I
in the State of Virginia because of relatively low infestations of                ™
oyster predators and oyster diseases.,  Representatives of the Yirginia
Institute of Marine Science and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service               •
state that oyster predators and diseases are controlled by a salinity-            I
temperature-time relationship.  In general,, the relationship is that
the lower the salinity and the higher the water temperature, the less             •
the time required to provide effective control.  Water temperatures               g
must be greater than 15ฐC for low salinity concentrations to be
effective.  At lower temperatures the diseases and predators ax-e                  _
nearly dormant and are only slightly affected, while, conversely,, at              I
high water temperatures, the oysters themselves could be harmed by                •
low salinities.

        Almost yearly during April and May, when the Rappahannoek Siver           I
temperatures first climb above 15ฐC, high spring run-off oeerors which re-
duces the salinity to a level which Mils oyster predators and diseases.          •
Each summer infestation occurs through slow upstream movement and trans-          I
planting of young oysters from infested areasj however, the degree of
infestation reached prior to cold weather and the doraant stage of the
seasonal cycle is such that only a small percentage of the oysters are            •
harmed.                                                                           •

        In order to insure continuance of the above natural phenomena,            •
the proposed reservoir should release or pass flows equivalent to nature's        |
April and May river discharges,,  Information available at this time indi-
cates that satisfactory control of the predators and diseases? a 3d.ll of          •
approximately 50 per cent, can be accomplished by about twenty eonsecu-           •
tive days of 10 parts per thousand salinity at oyster bed depth (15 feet)
at River Mile 14.  The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Yirginia
Institute of Marine Science are collecting additional data to more ac-            I
curately fix the required conditions,  A more detailed discussion contain-        B
ing actual salinities, time, and flow requirements will be presented in
the U, S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report | therefore, more accurate              •
volumes and durations of river discharge and optimum salinities necessary         |
to provide effective disease and predator control should "be based on
these findings.                                                                   H
I

I

I

-------
1

1
1
^B
1


1



1

1
1

1

1


1


1

1
_
^H
^H
^™


1



1

1



cd
0
3
,0
M
o
•H
FH
0
•O
0
^
(X
5
•p
CO
•p
i
•ซj
*n
S1
o

p
g
0
r*>
^2
•H
H

irt
9
rH
S4
ง*
CO
f-i
0
1

1

*f\
H
0
H
,0
cd
EH




•P
>srH 0
-P O 0
O H H -P\ 1 1
CM C9 O t>
0 .-%
>H >> CM
0 Pi *O O O
P S bp • •
cd 0 0 C>- VN


P
f>ปrH 0
^-P O 0

O iH H -P\ 1 1

O S[ O f-t
CM a? o o
at
3
l>4 !>> CM
0 p) t if\
5e CO' — rH >t

!>>rH 'S
P O 0
"-.•H h <^
CJ^"*-^ Cd fl 0
o a o ^
H c5 o o
cd
cs ^
0 Pi >^) o O
-P Pi M • •
SB CO *—" c*\


-P O 0
"r7rH -P\ 1 1
s^. OJ fi 0
•P <5 O O
g 3
TO
0 ,-N
6 >s CM
0 cL *^5 t^ C^
P S bp * •
Cd 3^13 rH O


0
o
ฃH fU i~H
0 P cd
CQ O -P -H
JD T3 CO 0> O J-|
, g o -* -P
h S 0 -H 14 co
a> +> > -P is
-P 03 h CQ T3
cd eg 0 -H o
> S= CO W M



8
o"
H

O
CM



^5
^5
ซ\
H
H

0*
O ho
• gJ
CJ^ M
IfN O
-p
CO
ง
o C
8^
rH Cd

O P
0
"*3" **-!
i
0
0
cd
O "O
OS 0
•v CO
O* CQ
- 1
0
H
ฃ"• O
* Jj
H P
C^ (H
0
o
•H
H
cd
CQ S
s ^r
1"— 1 '^•t^
-47-




















,
M
fl$
•p
CQ
0



1
3
•H
rl
0
-P

K

H
cd
•H
p



M
CM



-------

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
                     DISCUSSION OF BENEFITS
AREA CONSIDERED

        The location of the proposed Salem Church Reservoir will affect
only those water uses within the vicinity of, and downstream from, the
City of Fredericksburg.  Located within this area are the most signifi-
cant water uses of the Basin, including the raw water intakes and waste
outfalls of Fredericksburg and American Viscose Corporation, as well as
the oyster beds of the lower Rappahannock estuary.  In addition, econom-
ic projections indicate the Fredericksburg area will continue as the
Basin leader in population and economic growth and, consequently, will
continue to have the greatest need for water.
WATER SUPPLY BENEFITS

        Water supply benefits are calculated in terms of costs of obtain-
ing the same quality and quantity of water by the cheapest alternate
means which would most likely be developed by the potential users in the
absence of the Federal project.  Alternates considered in the determina-
tion of the value of storage in the proposed Federal reservoir included!

        a.  Development of ground water sources„

        b.  Single-purpose water supply reservoirs.

        The water supply needs of the Fredericksburg Water Service
District are estimated for the years 1995, 2020^ and 2070 to be 6, 14,
and 27 mgd, respectively.

        An investigation of ground water yields within the Fredericks-
burg area indicates that ground water sources are capable of supplying
individual farm, home and small sub-division requirements | however,
yields are inadequate to meet the concentrated demands of the Water
Service District.

        A recent water supply report prepared by Alvord, Burdick, and
Howson (Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Jfettern), engineering consultants em-
ployed by the City of Frederieksburg, indicates the safe gravity yield
of the Virginia Electric and Power Company dam (all available flow to
the Canal) to be 5.53 mgdS/.  This estimate was based on the low-flow
conditions which occurred in the Rappahannock River in late summer of
1954 and represents a flow which is expected to reoccur one day during
                               -49-

-------
Date of Need Supplied Annual Draft Construe- Initial
Total Water Need by Draft on on Storage tion Date Invest-
SuDDlv_Nฃฃdjj (Year) Storaee (acre— feet) (Year) ment 0 fa M
14 mgd
27 mgd
2020 8.5 mgd 860
2070 21.5 mgd 3210
1980 $680,000 $2000
2020 $1,860,000 $5600
                                     -50-
                                                                                    I
                                                                                    I
any 16-year period.  The consultants used this flow as a basis for calculat-
ing future raw water storage requirements for the City of Frederieksburg.            •
Since the one in 16-year low-flow condition is reasonable, 5.53 mgd has             I
been taken as the design low-flow for determining additional water require-
ments necessary to meet future Service District needs.  This compares with          •
the minimum recorded flow of 3.2 mgd, which occurred on two successive days         I
in October 1930.

        The most feasible alternate sources of dependable water supply, in          I
the absence of the proposed Federal project, are single-purpose water supply        ™
reservoirs.  These reservoirs must be capable of increasing the design low-
flow from 5.53 mgd to the estimated 2020 and 2070 requirements of 14 and 27         •
mgd, respectively.  The following schedule indicates draft on storage needs,        I
dates and costs to meet the estimated future water supply needs.
                                                                                    I

                                                                                    I

                                                                                    I
        The average annual cost of the single-purpose reservoirs amortized          I
at an interest rate of 3 per cent over a 100-year period is $36,500, includ-
ing operation and maintenance.  The annual cost was discounted to 1970 from
1980, the year of first need, to correspond with the probable construction          I
schedule of the proposed Federal project.  The annual cost is a measure of          •
the value of storage for water supply in Salem Church Reservoir.

        The area around Fredericksburg was investigated, and it was found           |
that there are a number of reservoir sites capable of yielding the required
volumes of water.  Reservoir costs were computed based upon average unit            H
values derived by the Norfolk District, Corps of Engineers, for construction        •
with the area.  In addition, the Corps of Engineers computed the annual
draft on storage required to meet future water supply needs.  Since the
water is expected to be transported within the natural stream bed, no costs         I
will be incurred for transmission.                                                  H

        Adequate volume of water is available to meet the supply require-           •
ments of industry because withdrawals are from the tidal portion of the             |
Rappahannoclc River.  A quality problem does exist, however, as is discussed
under the section on water uses.  The effects of the proposed reservoir on          _
stream quality are given in the following section on water quality control          I
benefits.                                                                           *
I

I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WATER QUALITY CONTROL BENEFITS

        In the planning of any Federal reservoir, a consideration
most be given to inclusion of storage for regulation of stream flow
for the purpose of water quality control, except that any such stor-
age and water releases shall not be provided as a substitute for
adequate waste treatment.  Adequate treatment has been interpreted
to be a m-iirimipn of conventional secondary treatment for municipal
sewage or its equivalent for industrial wastes.

        Benefits attributable to storage for stream flow regulation
may be tangible, have a measurable dollar value, or may be intan-
gible, with no measurable dollar value.  Water quality control by
the proposed Salem Church Reservoir will provide many intangible
benefits by improving conditions in Rappahannock River for approx-
imately 100 miles from the dam to the Chesapeake Bay.  Improved
quality will provide increased water-oriented recreational oppor-
tunities to an estimated year 2070 Fredericksburg area population
of 240,000.

        In addition to the recreational benefits, the availability
of water of a more uniform quality will be beneficial to fish,
aquatic life and wildlife; aesthetic qualities will be improved;
and property values will probably be enhanced along the improved
reach.  There also exists the possibility with the higher regulated
summer flows that the oyster predators and diseases will not reach
even the limited levels presently attained under natural flow conditions,

        It is, therefore, concluded, based on the above, that the
benefits are widespread in scope and appear sufficient in magnitude
to warrant the provision of the required volume of storage for
water quality control.

        After conventional secondary treatment of the Fredericksburg
area wastes, the waste load discharged to the Rappahannock River will
be in excess of the organic load that can be assimilated under the
design low-flow conditions.  At this design flow the river at Fred-
ericksburg can assimilate during the critical period approximately
2,000 pounds of the 8500-pound BOD load estimated for the year 2070.
Assimilative capacity for the critical period was estimated based
upon the following criteria:

        a.  River discharge of 99 cfs (minimum average August dis-
            charge with recurrence frequency of 1 year in 20 years).

        b.  Maximum average temperature of 28.5ฐC,

        c.  Initial dissolved oxygen deficit of one milligram per
            liter.  (Equal to approximately 87 per cent of satura-
            tion at 28.5ฐC observed values above Fredericksburg in
            vicinity of proposed dam site average about 92 per cent).

                               -51-

-------
                                                                                  I

                                                                                  I
        d.  Minimum average dissolved oxygen concentration of 4 milli-
            grams per liter.                                                      I
Figures 6 and 7 (following page 28) are families of curves giving assimi-
lative capacities for various temperature and flow conditions.                    •
        Without stream flow regulation, present poor stream quality condi-
tions with accompanying zero dissolved oxygen values will continue to             .
recur.  As the area grows and waste loads increase, quality will worsen.          I
The result will be an increasing reach of stream detrimental to property          ™
values, unfit for fish, the source of noxious odors, and of little value
for recreational uses.  Dependent upon the recurrence frequencies of              I
natural low-flows, degraded stream quality can exist for periods of
several days to as long as five months during each year.

Value of Benefits
        2.  Storage and regulated release of waste effluents.
                                     -52-
                                                                                   I
        The value of water quality control storage in a Federal reservoir          _
can be computed in terms of the cost of achieving, in the absence of the           •
Federal project, the established stream quality objectives by the cheap-           •
est alternate method.  Methods considered included:

        1.  Complete removal of all pollutants from a portion of the               I
            waste load.
                                                                                   I

        3.  Combination of modified secondary waste treatment and
            single-purpose quality control reservoirs.                             I

        4.  Single-purpose quality control reservoirs.

        Complete Removal of All PQlfoitflytffj? — Treatment methods which               |
would economically accomplish substantially complete removal of all
pollutants are not presently available.  Certain processes are, however,           •
far enough advanced to be considered in coisparison with other alternate            •
methods.  Freezing and gas hydrate processes for demineralizing sea
water can be adopted to reclaiming waste waters by concentrating the
dissolved solids to about one per cent by volume.  The estimated cost              I
is approximately $0.40 per 1000 gallons and includes the cost of the               •
conventional secondary treatment.  Treatment of the Frederieisburg area
wastes would have an estimated average annual cost over the 100-year               •
life of the proposed Federal project of approximately $1,100,000, in-              |
eluding operation, maintenance, and amortization.
                                                                                   I

                                                                                   I

                                                                                   I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
        The estimates derived above do not include the costs of
treating or disposing of the concentrated solids produced "by the
processes 0  Since further treatment results In additi/e costs to
an already expensive method, no farther analysis was made0
        gtgrjtge__ancL itej^ Iglf ^BgAgMJL _gฃ _JM t-gJEffluer^g - Holding
ponds can be utilized to store that portion of a waste load which
cannot be assimilated during low stream flows for regulated release
at a time when the stream stage is higher,,  Investigations indicate
that approximately 3900 acres of holding ponds would be required
to store the wastes from the Frederidceburg area.  These wastes f
however „ eontaar large quart it ies of sulfate which could create
severe problems both during storage and after release to the river,
Ground waters could become contaminated through seepage into the
water table unless some cosit-ive means of .sealing were employed 0
Storage of this waste, which could easily become septic,, would result-
in a biological reduction of the sulfate^ producing hydrogen sulfide,
an extremely obnoxious gas detectable over a large area.  In addition,
following any reduction of the sulfate^ the waste would be toxic to
aquatic life when discharged and have an immediate chemical oxygen
demand which in itself could result in low dissolved oxygen conditions <>

        Holding ponds ^ because their use will, not result in main-
taining stream quality objectives, cannot be considered as a feasible
alternate met bod,

        Combination of Modified. Secondary Treatment and Single-Purpose
Reservoir - Provision of modified secondary waste treatment,, additional
treatment above and beyond conventional secondary, can be expected to
increase treatment efficiencies^,  thereby reducing organic waste loads
discharged to a watercourse „  Engineering practice has demonstrated
that greater efficiencies can be obtained by constructing additional
secondary treatment units in series with a conventional plant j how-
ever, because of the relatively large cost involved per unit of BOD
removal _y this method is rarely used0  Since wastes from the Fredericks-
burg area are amenable 4o further treatment ^ the following over-all
reductions in organic content are expected in comparison to conventional
treatment „
       Treatment                                Treatment
   1970 tc Year 2020                        2020 to Year 2070
  Per Cent BGC Eemcval                     Per Gent BOD Removal
Conventional   ___Modif;ied                Conventional  ___ Jfodj|ฃigd_

     85             90                        90              90

-------
        Even with the provision of modified secondary treatment, the
stream quality objectives cannot be met.  In addition to this treatment,
an annual draft on storage of 130,400 acre-feet will be required in the
year 2070„

        The following schedule indicates the storage yields and construc-
tion^ operations and maintenance costs required to meet the water quality
objectives:

Year Con-
structed
1970
1995
2.020
2045

Modified
Treatment*
$ 759,000
1,170,000
-
—

0 & M
(per Unit)
33,700
47,900
_
—
Single-
Purpose
Reservoir
$ 9,126,000
7,647,000
10,833,000
1,932,000
Annual Draft
on Storage
(Acre-feet )
40,750
30,150
51,100
8,400

0 & M
(per Unit)
127,300
22,900
32,700
5,800
* MR Construction Index of 900

        As is shown in the above schedule, stage-construction of the combi-
nation single-purpose reservoirs and modified treatment have been estimated
based upon a 100-year period to correspond with the life of the proposed
Federal project*,  The combination has an estimated annual cost of $595,500
including operation, maintenance, and amortization at 3 per cento

        The area around Fredericks'burg was investigated, and it was estimated
that there are a number of reservoir sites capable of storing the required
volumes of water.  Reservoir costs were estimated "based, upon average unit
values derived by the Norfolk District, Corps of Engineers,

        Single-Purpose Quality Control Reservoirs - The stream quality
objectives can be met through regulating the stream flow by using stage-
constructed single-purpose reservoirsป  To assimilate the estimated year
2070 waste loads will require after secondary treatment an annual draft
on storage of 130,400 acre-feet.,  The following schedule indicates storage
yields and costs:

Year Con-
structed
1970
1995
2020
2045
Annual Draft,
on Storage
(Acre-feet)
97,000
17,000
8,000
8,400
Reservoir
Construction
Costs
$16,005,000
3,910,000
1,840,000
1,932,000

0 & M
(per Unit)
$47.500
11,700
5,500
5,800
                                      -54-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
        Water quality storage within the above single-purpose reservoirs
has an estimated annual cost of $640,000 over a 100-year period to
correspond with the probable construction date of the proposed Federal
project.  The annual cost includes operation, maintenance, and amortiza-
tion at 3 per cent interest.

        Summation - Of the four methods discussed above, the combination
of modified secondary treatment and single-purpose reservoirs is estimated
to be the cheapest alternate means of meeting the stream quality objec-
tives, in the absence of the Federal project.  Therefore, the average
annual benefit credited to the Salem Church Reservoir for water quality
control storage would be $595,500.  To accrue this benefit will require
an annual draft on storage of 130,400 acre-feet.

        The following gives the approximate required drafts on storage
by months which will be required by the year 20TQ:
Month
June
July
August
September
October
November
Draft on Storage ( acre-feet)
15,650
30,000
35,200
28,700
18,250
2,600
        In earlier discussions it was pointed out that when flows are less
than approximately 60 cfs, it is necessary for the American Viscose Corpo-
ration to utilize demineralization equipment on a portion of its raw
water taken from the Bappahannock River estuary.  Demineralization becomes
necessary because water quality problems are created by "flood" tides
reversing the small flow of the river and carrying wastes upstream to the
plant water intake.

        River discharges resulting from flow regulation will provide suf-
ficient water volumes to prevent wastes from reaching, through tidal
action, the plant intake.  Regulated flows would, therefore, serve a dual
purpose, but would not provide for the same water additive benefits for
quality control.  The benefit to improved industrial water quality is an
integral and inseparable part of the total benefit attributable to over-
all quality control.
                                -55-

-------

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 16 - Tabulation of Survey Results
Virginia State Water
Control Board
Station 11

Date
8-31-6!
8-2-61
8-7-61
10-5-61
7-27-60
8-3-60
8-9-60
9-15-60
9-3-59
10-1-59
11-5-50

Tide
L.W.S.
L.W.S.
H.W.S.
H.W.S.
L.W.S.
H.W.S.
L.W.S.
H.W.S.
L.W.S.
H.W.S.
L.W.S.

Temp.
29
28
23
19
26
30
30
21
28
21
14

D.O.
3.2
2.2
6.4
5.0
3.9
7.9
4.0
5.8
3.2
7.8
0.2

B.O.D.
1.6
3.0
0.8
2.1
1.2
2.0
3.6
3.0
0.0
-
0.0

Total
Solids
95
122
303
141
155
179
151
193
160
240
111

Sulfates
36
38
40
45
56
54
37
14
27
65
14

7 -Day Avg.
River
Discharge
497
423
1467
236
273
324
421
2163
543
631
753
               -57-

-------
Table 17 - Tabulation of Survey Results
Virginia State Water Control Board


Date Tide Temp. D.O.
7-31-61 L.W.S. 28 2.5
8-2-61 L.W.S. 28 2.6
8-7-61 H.W.S. 23 6.6
10-5-61 H.W.S. 19 2.6
7-27-60 L.W.S. 26 3.7
8-3-60 H.W.S. 30 6.2
8-9-60 L.W.S. 29.5 1.8
9-15-60 H.W.S. 21 5.9
9-3-59 L.W.S. 26 2.8
10-1-59 H.W.S. 21 7.7
11-5-59 L.W.S. 14 8.8








Station 12

7-Day Avg.
B.O.D. Total Sulfates River
Solids Discharge
2.2 90 38 497
1.2 125 49 423
1.6 338 49 1467
3.6 162 58 236
1.8 118 42 273
2.0 188 33 324
1.8 158 48 421
2.4 135 20 2163
0.0 120 15 543
298 87 631
0.0 113 10 753





-58-


1
1
1

1
1

1
1
*

1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I

1
1

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
Table 18 - Tabi^Latian of Survey Results
Virginia State Water Control Board
Station 13

Date
7-31-61
8-2-61
8-6-61
10-5-61
7-27-60
8-3-60
8-9-60
9-15-60
9-3-59
10-1-59
11-5-59

Tide
L.W.S.
L.W.S.
H.W.S.
H.W.S ,
L.W.S.
H.W.S.
L.W.S.
H.W.S,
L.W.S.
H.W.S.
L.W.S.

Temp.
28
27
23
18
26
30
29.5
21
28
21
13.5

D.O.
2.6
2.4
6.6
2.4
3.7
3.6
2.2
6.5
4.2
0.0
10.3

B.O.D.
1.8
1.4
1.6
1.2
1.6
1.6
2.8
1.3
0.0
-
0.0

Total
Solids
105
123
262
161
112
164
128
201
-
229
110

Sulfates
44
43
17
72
51
32
35
21
16
73
21

7-Day Avg.
River
Discharge
497
423
1467
236
273
324
421
2163
543
631
753
                  -59-

-------
Table 19 - Tabulation of Survey Results
Virginia State Water Control Board
Station 14

Date
7-31-61
8-2-61
8-7-61
10-5-61
7-27-60
8-3-60
8-9-60
9-15-60
9-3-59
10-1-59
11-5-59

Tide
L.W.S.
L.W.S.
H.W.S.
H.W.S*
L.W.S.
H.W.S.
L.W.S.
H.W.S,
L.W.S,
H.W.S.
L.W.S.

Temp.
29
27
23
18
26
30
29.5
21
28
21
13.5

D.O.
2.2
1.8
6.2
2.6
2.9
2.3
2.3
6.1
4.4
5.7
11.5

B.O.D.
3.2
1.2
2.0
2.1
2.4
0.0
3.2
2.6
0.0
-
0.0

Total
117
128
236
171
125
176
165
192
-
228
118

Sulfates
53
43
24
68
58
62
31
31
21
49
12

7-Day Avg.
River
Discharge
497
423
1467
236
273
324
421
2163
543
631
753
                   -60-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 20 - Tabulation of Survey Results
Virginia State Water Control Board
Station 15

Date
7-31-61
8-2-61
8-7-61
10-5-61
7-27-60
8-3-60
8-9-60
9-15-60
9-3-59
10-1-59
11-5-59

Tide
L.W.S.
L.W.S.
H.W.S,
H,W,S.
L.W.S.
HปWปSป
L.W.S.
H,WปS.
L.W.S.
H.W.S.
L.W.S.

Temp.
29
29
24
18
27
30
29.5
21
28
21
15.5

D.O.
3.4
2.3
7.0
2.2
1.3
1.7
3.3
7.2
4.7
7.4
10.2

B.O.D.
3.4
5.0
2.3
1.5
4.4
2.0
3.0
1.6
1.0
_
0.0

Total
Solids
103
158
178
195
200
165
181
170
-
101
110

Sulfates
37
63
32
60
72
45
26
17
34
13
13

7 -Day Avg.
River
Discharge
497
423
1467
236
273
324
421
2163
543
631
753
                  -61-

-------

Table 21 - Tabulation of Survey Benefits

Virginia State Water Control Board
Station 17


Date Tide Tenrp. D.O. B.O.D. Total Sulfates
Solids

7-31-61 L.W.S. 20 7.1 3.2 53 4.6
8-2-61 L.W.S. 22 7.3 1.2 65 3.9
8-7-61 H.W.S. 11 7.0 1.0 188 30.0
10-5-61 H.W.S. 22 9.3 0.8 75 1.8
7-27-60 L.W.S. 26 7.2 0.4 88 5.0
8-3-60 H.W.S. 21 7.6 0.6 78 9.0
8-9-60 L.W.S. 28.5 6.3 1.7 92 7.0
9-15-60 H.W.S. 24.5 8.3 1.7 80 11.0
9-3-59 L.W.S. 28 2.2 1.6 - 19.0
10-1-59 H.W.S. 22 7.9 - US 16.0
11-5-59 L.W.S. 15.5 13.8 3.4 70 0.0






-63-







7 -Day Avg.
River
Discharge

497
423
1467
236
273
324
421
2163
543
631
753









1
1


1

1

1

1
1

1

1
1

1
1
1
1
1

1
1

-------
1
1
1
•

1

1




1

1

1

1
1

1

1
1
1
1
1
1
Table 22 - Wastes and Waste

Municipality
or
Industry

American Viscose
Corporation
Cottage Green
Sub-Division

Culpeper
Falmouth S. C.
Ferry Farms
Sub-Division
Fredericksburg
Madison
Orange
Remington
Tappahannoek
Urbanna
Warrenton
Totals









Population
Served


—

215

3,500
350

1,000
12,600
300
3,000
290
1,200
125
1.800

24,380







Loads - Municipal and Industrial
(1963)


MGD


30.000

0.015

0.300
0.350

0.050
1.330
0.020
0.300
0.030
0.150
0.004
0.220

32.769





-63-




Treatment


None

Primary

Secondary
Primary

Primary
Primary
Secondary
Secondary
Primary
Primary
Primary
Secondary










P. E.
Discharged


38,800

200

700
225

650
10,830
100
600
200
1,100
90
180

53,675








-------
Table 23 - Water Sources and

Supplies - Municitial and Industrial
(1963)
Population
Municipality or Industry Served
American Viscose Corporation
Bellview Court Subdivision
Culpeper
Ferry Farms Subdivision
Fredericksburg
Grafton Village Subdivision

Greenfield Village Subdivision
Irvington
Lancaster
Lively
Madison

Orange
Port Royal
Remington
Saluda
Sylvania Heights Subdivision

Tappahannock
tJrbanna
Warsaw
White Stone
TOTALS



_
210
3,500
1,000
14,830
190

100
600
90
225
410

3,330
125
340
270
700

1,400
550
500
350

28,960

-64-


Gallons Per Day
Ground Surface
30,000,000
12,000
570,000
70,000
2,230,000
11,000

5,000
82,000
3,500
8,500
17,700

320,000
5,000
12,000
10,000
40,000

275,000
17,000
20,000
13.100

601,800 33,120,000



1
1
1
I
"

1

1



1

1



1

1



1

1



1

-------
2
O
ET
Z
I/)
CD
tr
>
u
o
Zi
S r
0.
a
a:



^ 2
O y^^}
^ CD
^
X
II
tr ir





0








i
a.















-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                             BIBLIOGR/LPHX
1. Federal Security Agency, Public Health Service, Environmental
   Health Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, and North Atlantic Drainage
   Basins Office, Division of Water Pollution Control, New York,
   Rappahannock  River Investigation in the • Vicinity of the
   Proposed Salem Church Reservoir.  February 1952.

2. U. S. Department of Interior, Geological Survey, Quality of Surface
   Waters pf the United States f. Farts !-<ฃ.; North Atlantic S^ooe Basins
   to the St. Lawrence River Basin. Geological Survey Water Supply
   Paper 1450.

3. U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health
   Serivce^ Pffofcfop Water Standards. Federal Register, 2152-5,
   March b, 1962.

4. The Task Connnittee, American Water Woris Association, "Study of
   Domestic Water Use", Journal of American Water Works Association.
   November 1958.

5. "Water Resources Activities in the United States-Future Water
   Requirements for Municipal Use", Comm-fttee Print No. 7.  Select
   CffiBPIji'frtee on National Water Resourcesf United States Senate, U.S.
   Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., I960.

6. Alvord, Burdick and Howson (Hayes, Seay, Jfettern and Mattern),
   Water Supply Report for Fredericksburg. Virginia. October 1955.
                                -65-

-------

-------