A PRE-IMPOUNDMENT WATER QUALITY
J INVESTIGATION
for the
PROPOSED TREXLER LAKE
JUNE 1973
ERNEST A. KAEUFER, P. E.
Field Operations Branch
Surveillance & Analysis Division
Region III
Environmental Protection Agency
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
Table of Contents
I
I
I
I
I
Chapter Page
I. Introduction 1
II. Summary and Conclusions 3
III. Description of Areas 6
IV. Study Methodology 9
V. Analysis and Interpretation of Data 13
I
Appendix - Analytical Data 7O
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
I
I
A. Purpose
M The water quality investigation described in this report
was initiated in response to a request made by the Philadelphia
V District Corps of Engineers in a letter dated February 29, 1972.
M B. Scope;
The scope of this report is limited to the presentation
^| and interpretation of analytical data relative to the existing
water quality of waters which will constitute the Trexler Lake.
C. Objectives:
W (1) Establish a base-line record of water quality for Trexler
Lake and the Jordan Creek below the proposed dam.
(2) Determine the effects of the proposed impoundment on
the water quality for the proposed uses.
D. Authority;
This investigation was conducted and the report prepared
under the provisions of Section 102 of the Federal Water Pollution
^ Control Act Amendments of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1151) which authorizes
the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection
Agency to cooperate with other Federal agencies to make joint
water quality investigations for impoundment of water by reservolrH.
I
-------
(2)
E. Acknowledgement of Aid and Assistance
During the course of this investigation it was necessary
to obtain data and information from various sources. We are indeed
grateful for the aid given and wish to express our appreciation
to the following:
(1) Data and Information
Geological Survey (Department of the Interior)
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Department of Wastewater Treatment and Filtration
City of Allentown, Pennsylvania
(2) Field Laboratory Facilities
Wastewater Treatment Plant Laboratory
City of Allentown, Pennsylvania
Water Filtration Plant Laboratory
City of Allentown, Pennsylvania
Appreciation is also expressed to the Environmental Protection
Agency's Charlottesville Technical Support Laboratory for providing
field sampling and field laboratory personnel and analysis of
samples necessary to complete this investigation, especially to James
La Buy, Aquatic Biologist who prepared the section on biological quality.
-------
I
(3)
Chapter II
Summary and Conclusions
V An intensive field investigation, including sampling and flow
_ measurements, and laboratory analysis were conducted to determine
the existing water quality of the Jordan Creek for the proposed
fl impoundment. The summary for this study is as follows:
1. The Jordan Creek watershed, which is a sub-basin of the
Lehigh River, has a drainage area of about 53.O square miles.
2. The waters of the Jordan Creek Basin are classified by
Pennsylvania as:
ft (a) water supply for domestic, industrial, live stock,
wilklife and irrigation purposes;
(b) recreational use for warm and cold water fishery
and water contact sports;
I
(c) treated waste assimilation and power.
3. There are two municipal wastewater treatment facilities,
both of which have tertiary treatment. One is located at an
] elementary school, the other at a housing development. Both
appear to be maintained and operated properly. The elementary
9 school facility was not sampled because the school was closed anc
the treatment facility was not in operation.
I
I
I
-------
(4)
I
I
4. Major and minor nutrient concentrations far exceed the
levels generally found to be necessary to stimulate the growth
of algae and aquatic weeds thereby accelerating eutrophication V
within the proposed impoundment. m
5. The oxygen balance of the streams investigated is satisfactory.
6. The physical-chemical characteristics provide an environ-
ment which is excellent for the propagation of fish and other aquatic 0
life. M
7. Bacteriological data show high counts of indicator micro- _
organisms, indicating the potential presence of disease-causing
bacteria, suggesting direct discharges from individual homes to ft
the receiving stream and livestock waste discharges.
8. Biological data indicated extremely good water quality, for aquatic
life, within the streams investigated, l|
°/. The summary of all the physical, chemical, biological, and
bacteriological information indicates:
|
(a) The existing water quality does not meet the
requirements for water supply or water contact sporfcs.
(b) Impoundment may accelerate eutrophication.
I
I
I
-------
I
I
II 10. If this impoundment is constructed steps must be taken
to eliminate the problems outlined above.
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
-------
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
«.)
Chapter III
Description of Area
A. General:
The proposed impoundment reservoir is located on the Jordan
Creek 17.3 miles upstream from its confluence (River Mile 0)
with the Lehigh Creek. The lake formed by this impoundment will
extend upstream to approximately River Mile 25 and includes
approximately 2 miles of Mill Creek, a tributary, approximately
6 miles of Lyon Creek, a tributary, and more than 3 unnamed
tributaries. The total drainage area is 53.0 square miles, all
of which is located in townships of Lowhill, North Whitehall,
Heidelberg and Weisenberg, Lehigh County. The drainage basin
has primarily agricultural activities and includes Pennsylvania
State Game Lands and the Trexler -Lehigh County Game Preserve.
(See Figure I)
B. P hy siogr aphy
This drainage basin is located in the physiographic province
called the Valley and Ridge Province. The province is charac-
terized by rolling, well rounded hills, and well wooded with broad
intervening valleys.
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
-------
-------
I
I
I
I
(7)
C Geology:
The area is underlain by shale, slate, sandstone, and lime-
| stone. The ground water that seeps into streams from the carbonate
« rocks is alkaline. The Jordan Creek is underlain by extensive
beds of Cambrian and Ordovician limestone, dolomite, and shale and
slate. Such rocks greatly influence the chemical quality of the
streams that cross them. The limestones are dense, hard, brittle and
cavernous. The channel is tortuous, through slate and shale in the
__ upper basin where the lake will be located and limestone in the
* lower basin.
i| D. Climatology: (U.S. Weather Bureau, 1964)
The mean annual precipitation averages about 45 inches
(1931-196O). The lowest monthly average, 216 inches, normally
occurs in February, and the highest monthly average, 4.9 inches,
in July.
^ o
Mean annual air temperature is 11 c (Allentown) and
ranges from an average low of _2O in winter to an average high of
22° C in summer. A severe flood occurred in this area on June 23,
1972, which caused the investigation to be rescheduled to Septem-
ber 1972.
E. Hydrology:
The profile of the channel below the impoundment site has
a rate of fall of 9.8 feet per mile. For 11.5 miles above the site
the rate of fall is 17.4 feet per mile, while above that the rate
is 46.7 feet per mile.
I
-------
I
(8) I
The US Geological Survey Stream Gage Station No. 0145180
(Jordan Creek near Schnecksvilles Pennsylvania) is located
approximately 0.2 miles downstream from the proposed dam. The
maximum recorded (Oct. 1970-Sept. 1971) discharge was 2O20 cfs
(1548 MGD) and the minimum recorded discharge was 6.9 cfs (4.5 MGD).
The average mean discharge for 5 years was 76.8 cfs (49.6 MGD).
The relationship between rainfall and stream runoff for this area
is one (1) inch yields 0.9 cubic feet per square mile or 47.7
cubic feet for this drainage basin (53.0 sq. miles)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
(9)
I
Chapter II
Investigation Methodolgy
I A. Time Period of Study
The investigation was started on June 7, 1972. The field
JP work was completed on September 22, 1972, and all laboratory
I
analysis, except the biological, was completed December 15, 1972.
The biological analysis was completed on March 29, 1973-
B. Sampling and Analytical Methods:
9 All sampling and analysis were performed in accordance with
either "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater",
Thirteenth Edition, or the Environmental Protection Agency "Methods
for chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes", (1971 Edition). The
field laboratories were established in the City of Allentown
9 Wastewater Treatment Plant and Water Filtration Plant Laboratories.
| The field laboratories were supplemented by the Environmental
Protection Agency Technical Support Laboratory at Charlottesville,
I
I
I
I
Virginia.
I C. Hydrological Methods;
Stream flow data was obtained from the U. S. Geological Survey,
j| Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and by the utilization of a National
Bureau of Standards Calibrated "Pigmy" Flow Meter. The wastewater
flow measurements were obtained from the wastewater treatment plot flow
meter.
-------
(10)
D. Description and Location of Sampling Stations:
Table A
Station No.
River Mile
J 19.8 +S.L. 1.7
J 19.8 + N.L. 1.8
J 25.6
J 21.7 + U 0.3
J 18.0 + M 3.6
J 18.0 + M 2.2
J 17.1
J 19.1
J 13.1
Station Description
South Branch Lyon Creek at
Township Route T633 bridge
at Lyon Valley, Pa.
North Branch Lyon Creek at
Township Route T658 bridge
at Lyon Valley, Pa.
Jordan Creek at Pa. Route
100 bridge at Lowhill, Pa.
Unnamed tributary to Jordan
Creek at Township Route T649
bridge near Lowhill, Pa.
HeLdelberg Heights STP outfall
on Mill Creek near Schnecksville,, Pa.
Mill Creek at Pa. Route 309 bridge
near Schnecksville, Pa.
Jordan Creek at covered bridge on
L.R. 39058 near Schnecksville, Pa.
(U.S.G.S. Gage Station 01451800)
Unnamed tributary to Jordan Creek
near L.R. 39057 & L.R. 39060 at
Wiedasville, Pa.
Jordan Creek at Township Route
T-593 near Siegersville, Pa.
J - Jordan Creek
S.L. - South Branch - Lyon Creek
N.L. - North Branch - Lyon Creek
M. - Mill Creek
U - Unnamed Tributary
-------
oc
LJ
(f)
z
o
t-
CO
z
_l
a.
UJ
tr
u
Q
CE
O
-3
_ I
a:
o
o
I
<
5
LjJ
I
O
-------
1 J
tPA STA *.^<
M RM ZS.6
1
1
V H M ?l /
_ EPA STA * ! 1 1
RM , ' T I *
u
^ Lf'A ., iA * ;'* o W
R M 0 5 Q,
u
W Lyon C re e K
1
1
[_ PA STA » 8 (
«R M 1 ') 1
Z
<
M R M 1 8 U
1 °
£C
1 ;'
F PA STA * 7(
^ R M i r i
USGS gage 01451800
EPA STA *9<
fRM I? I
L E H 1 G H
} <
f PA S TA * 4 f
RM 0.3 T
I
Unam. Trib
»
f
\ f-A MA *"'l> *
r-'M ", 6 I
i iMiHo II ) j
i
K M H . 8 i
, 1 ''
LCA STA #bO ^
RM ;: j
iJSuS qoge
Mr Creek '
L DAM SITE
^ R M 173
r- L L G F. Ml)
f ~";r
::: ^T
L
1 CREEK
1 TREXLER LAKE
- WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
1 SAMPLING STATIONS
1
A V <
I () U K L
-------
-------
1 ,
t f-' A STA * .1 <
M RM 25 fe
1
1
0 h M ? 1 I
EPA S TA » 1 I
1 "" " i 1 *
_ tf'A ',! A tt ? o ^*J
KM .'15' a
i . u
V L y o n Creek
1
1
C PA STA * 8 I
IRM I ; 1
Z
^ RM 18 U
I 5
f PA STA * r
^ R M 1 7 i
USGS qoqe 01451800
EPA STA #9
tRM 1? I
L E H 1 G H
.
i <>
1 '
F PA S TA * 4 if
RM 0.3 T
I
Unam. Trib
[
!
t f-A STA * ' O f
i M T, 6 |
i o u t f o 1 1 ! 1
RM -t 8
i
f "
t f \\ S f A # b 4 i
PM :: <>. T ;
J S u S gage j
Mi' Creek J '
^ DAM SITE
^ RM 173
r- L E G L N 1)
> <> r
'i j
> <> i
CREEK
1 TREXLER LAKE
f WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
I SAMPLING STATIONS
1
M i r
I 0 U K L
-------
I
I
^ Chapter III
Analysis and Interpretation of Data
A« Water Quality Standards:
B Recommended national water quality criteria were developed by
the National Technical Advisory Committee to the Secretary of the
Interior and were completed April 1, 1968. A summary of these
4 criteria appear in Table B.
Water quality criteria were also developed by the Pennsylvania
Sanitary Water Board specifically for the Jordan Creek. These
criteria appear in Tables C & D.
w
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
-------
-------
10
X)
M
nl
lu
T3
fj
cd
4J
V3
>!
4J
H
cd
3
O
>-i
ru
4-1
ca
£r
H
cd
C
o
H
4-1
cd
53
<:
M
frf
W
H
M
erf
O
K
i i
g
P5 o1
M erf
i-J W
« H
<5 4-l
H ₯<
0S rH
M
0)
4-1 CO
cd s
S to
H
^S O
co cd
01 00
^ n
(14 O
0)
r-l
,0
cd
i-i
^ a
& "
K o
o ^
rl CO sf
< CN O
' 1
> O O 0\
t m oo i
* oo « in
( 1 CN .
< m rH -a-
« m
'
,
in
oo
1
O
*
vO
O CN
a -H o
O,Q CT\ O
4J O 1 CN
4-> M O - |
o cu .in
W ca i m
ri
jl
0 1 vD
vD O O
O> CO \O i-i O
I o . m o\
ro oo m m o- CM i o
oo CN en ^o CM
C
o
rl
O 4-1
O , 4J W O O
0 0\ M 0 CN
10 r Vj 3 inr-imo
co -^ ca 4J i i CN m
CM CU c3 O O
2 to m >£)
o o in
m ' o o
oo o oo o CN
1X1 f"! o i i m un
o o CN "CN
Vi3 CO vO
o
o
o cr. cr,
m . i
oo^t o
CM .
m
u
fa o cu _j
'' 0 T3 H C
CU -rl ^ .
£ t! * ^ g1 M
Bg ^ .3 « ii^ «H * B
tj[0 j -^ -a £ e ^- w «»- cu
2m ^i^ S'Hb0£
i
T^
0 i-H
CO --s.
to c>o
H e
TJ
r-l CO
ca -a
U -H
O r-H
H O
to
C3
-------
=*fc 3M3M f PC '.: MM M MM
O *-J O ON H- fD ) Ui £" OJ NJM
V -x. ^. 3-d "z,
33 M M Cu ft H-
OH O >T| KaJ{BECPJCIO> f-d htf rt 25 25 >
OO"OfD fD3OfD3H-OM fD 3* i-J H- H- B
OO rt O rf'it>3''OCX.rDHCX.CO O H- rt rt §
g pi g pj 3- |_i ft H, M i-i ft co rti-1 i-i o
O MMMMO O PJ (-" CX, H- H- TJ (Dp Pi 3
K r< 0 3 H. 3 0 3*COrt rt H-
O O O "^ 3* H- H- O (D (Dp)
3 o oofDM3 tx-q^co cn
M M M 3* "O 0 fD C Hi?
vj H-H-MOI-! cncor?i?> g
Hi Hi ,O X L> S 00
o OI-(H- c;1^ cw^-..'
g g &. c CTQ ^ M
3 B fD CW ^~. M
^~ M
M
_
i>
o
o
to
o
o
M MM
O t>J 3 O O
O OOUiMMMJ^M UiM Cu
O O UitT'OOCXlM^JNS^J O O *O Oi
O O /-^
0 25 SS
O ^
M
> < < >
M CT1 P> H- P H- CT1
OO fD OCOftCOrtfD
3 (D C (3) C 3
rt 3 SB 3 p) rt
rt M rt M
M M
xj v<
J> fo
& .
fD Ui 1
= 3O M
ft .
Ui
~>fc
~>
" ^ ~ Z - Cr
(/)
fD
3
rt
M -t^
O OJU1MMM-OM Ui
O UiO\C»CX3M^Jrs5^J
O
$
fD
3
rt
Ui M
O O
- 0 0
0 0
(SI)
*d pi
Pi rt
M fD
pi M
§ _
(T> O
rt C
(D »)
n M
H-
rt
^
pi rt pd
fD H- fD
co o n
?* S
fo e^ p)
rt i
H-
O
^
(D
H- f<
w p
H ^-
* /T\ HH
H ^§
0 ^^
" M n
s i,
S- £
i ^
A>
a*
M
m
o ^j
"-! h!
f(rt ffi
uw iw
PI CO
3 3'
H-
co s:;
3 p>
co rt
(D
k^
FJ
M f.
M, ^J.
Hi ^ j
(D p.
CO hr|
(3 P)
|3
^j. 52
1> P)
CO rt
fD
i-i
-14
D
co
rt
0
o
FT"
M
,J
ri
H
H*
M
o
t
3
3
Si
It
H-
O
M
C?
hJ
It
fD
I-i
O
C
pi
H^
H-
ft
LO
ft
Pi
ri
o-
P)
H
Cu
CO
g H
56
M f4
O
P0
M
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(16)
Table C
USES FOR PENNSYLVANIA WATERS
Jordan Creek
1.0 Aquatic Life
1.1 Cold Water Fishes - Maintenance and propagation of the family
Salmpnidae and fish food organisms.
1.2 Warm Water Fishes - Maintenance and propagation of fish food organisms
and all families of fishes except Salmonidae.
2.0 Water Supply
2.1 Domestic Water Supply - Use by humans after conventional treatment,
for drinking, culinary and other purposes.
2.2 Industrial Water Supply - Use by industry for inclusion into
products, for processing and for cooling.
2.3 Livestock Water Supply - Use by livestock and poultry for
drining and for cleansing.
2.4 Wildlife Water Supply - Use for waterfowl habitat and by
wildlife for drining arid cleansing.
2.5 Irrigation Water Supply - Used to supplement precipitation
for growing crops.
3.0 Recreation
3.2 Fishing - Use of the water for the taking of fish by legal
methods.
3.3 Water Contact Sports - Use of the water for swimming and related
activities.
3.4 Natural Area - Use of the water as an esthetic setting to
recreational pursuits.
4.0 Other
4.1 Power - Use of the water energy to generate power.
4.3 Treated Waste Assimilation - Use of the water for the assimilation
and transport of treated waste waters.
-------
(17)
Table C - Cont'd
GENERAL CRITERIA
The water shall not contain substances attributable to
municipal, industrial, or other waste discharges in concentrations
or amounts sufficient to be inimical or harmful to water uses to
be protected or to human, animal, plant or aquatic life. Specific
substances to be controlled include, but are not limited to,
floating debris, oil, scum and otherfloating materials; toxic sub-
stances; substances that produce color, taste, odors or settle
to form sludge deposits.
CRITERIA
pH Not less than 6.0; not to exceed 8.5
For lakes, ponds and impoundments only, no value less
than 5.0 mg/1 at any point.
Dissolved
oxygen Minimum daily av. 7.0 mg/1; no value less than 6.O mg/1
Total Iron Not to exceed 1.5 mg/1
Temperature Not to be increased by more than 5°F above natural
temperatures or to be increased above 58°F.
Dissolved Not to exceed 500 mg/1 as a monthly av. value; not to
solids exceed 750 mg/1 at any time.
Total For the period 5/15-9/15 of any year; not to exceed
coliforms 10OO/100 ml as an arithmetic av. value; not to exceed
1,OOO/10O ml in more than 2 consecutive samples; not
to exceed 2,40O/1OO ml in more than 1 sample
Fecal The fecal coliform density in five consecutive seonples
coliforms shall not exceed a geometric mean of 2OO/10O ml.
-------
I
g (18)
B. Physical and Chemical Quality:
V (1) Pennsylvania's temperature standards were exceeded at all
sampling points. Impounded water tends to increase temperatures.
The warm temperatures of the streams have the following concomitant
effects:
(a) higher temperatures diminish the solubility of dissolved
9 oxygen and thus decrease the availability of this
essential gas,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(b) elevated temperatures increase the metabolism, respiration,
and oxygen demand of fish and other aquatic life,
approximately doubling the respiration for a 10°C rise in
I
temperature; hence the demand for oxygen is increased
under conditions where the supply is lowered,
(c) the toxicity of many substances is intensified as
the temperature rises,
(d) higher temperatures mitigate against desirable fish life
by favoring the growth of sewage fungus and the putre-
faction of sludge deposits, and finally
(e) even with adequate dissolved oxygen and the absence of any
M toxic substances, there is a maximum temperature that
^ each species of fish or other organism can tolerate;
higher temperatures produce death in 24 hours or less.
(See Figures IV a. & b)
-------
-------
1
1
1
1
El' A GTA * 1 < > "
m RM i r
EPA ST
RM 0 J
I Lyo
1
1
1
|
1
1
^K
1
I
EPA STA * 3 <
RM 25.6
18
RM 21.7
16
r 17 *
15 W
ft.*2(> n )6 U
' ' **
L -^
115.5 «
n Creek
EPA STA * R <
RM 19 1
z
O U 1 o f\ ^^
n IVI 1 o . U
i
i
o
-3
EPA STA. *7<
RM 171
USGS goqe OI4 51800
EPA STA *9<
RM I1 1
L E H 1 G H
14
< 17
16
r16.5
F PA STA *4 O (l 15
RM 0.3
L- 13.5
Unom. Trib.
EPA STA *
RM 36
(outfall)
R M i<% n
rt ITI i j . D
20
i < 18
EPA STA *
RM 22
1 16 USGS ga»t
Mil Creek
^ DAM SITE
RM 17.3
t 20
> - 18
L- 17
i 20
i <> 18
L 17
CREEK
TREXLER LAKE
r 20.5
5<» « 18
i 18
& «' 17
1 L-,5
LEGEND
1 MAX
aj
c.» AVG.
o
ff
M IN
WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
1
I
TEMPERATURE (°C)
FIGURE
-------
-------
1 ,
EPA STA * 3 <
RM 25.6
1
1
I, 64.4
RM 21,7
_ EPA STA * i<> o 60.8
RM t 7 v-
r62.6
" L- 59 W
^ RPM*6:T6A-*2" " 60'8 £
'-"s 159.9 o
Lyon Creek
1
1
EPA STA ffl <
RM 19 1
z
IRM 18.0
°
o:
i -
EPA STA. *7
^ RM 17 1
USGS goqe 01451800
t
EPA STA * 9 <
A RM 13 1
F L E H 1 G H
66.2
< 62.6
60.8
r 61.7
EPA STA. *4 O " 59
RM 0.3 '
L-56.3
Unom. Trib.
EPA STA. *
RM 3.6
(oulfoll)
RM 19.8
( 68
> " 64.4
EPA STA *
RM 22
1 60.8 USGS goije
Mill Creek
0AM SITE
R M 1 7. 3
i 68
> " 64.4
1 62.6
i 68
> .. 64.4
L 64.4
CREEK
I TRFXL FR L AKF
68.9
5<) ' 64.4
1 55.4
r 64,4
el <> 62.6
_j L-59
LEGEND
| MAX.
-------
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(21)
(2) pH in most fresh, natural waters usually has a range
between 6.5 and 8.5. In primary contact recreation waters, the
pH should be within the range of 6.5 arid 8.3. The pH range for
surface water criteria for public water supplies is 6.0 and 8.5,
which is the same standards for this stream set by the State of
Pennsylvania Standards, except one reading at Station 6 which is
attributable to the discharge from the Heidelberg Heights waste-
water treatment.plant. (See Figure V)
(3) Stream solid concentrations are within the limits of
water quality criteria for designated usage. Solids from Heidel-
berg Heights wastewater plan are higher than desirable. Dissolved
solid concentrations limit the light penetration, which in turn
limits the food chain for aquatic growth. (See Figure VI for total
solids)
(4) The Specific Conductance of the streams were low and in-
dicated a low mineral content. The Heidelberg Heights Wastewater
treatment plan effluent value was slightly high and is reflected
in the solids analysis. However, all values were within acceptable
levels for the proposed usage. The specific conductance of inland
waters, such as the Jordan Creek, supporting good fish fauna lies
between 15O-500 micro-mhos per cu. cm. (See Figure VII).
-------
-------
EPA STA * 3 <
! RM 25.6
1
!i 8.6
RM 21.7
EPA STA * ll o 7.7
^ RM 1 7 T V
1 r 8.3 X
I 16.7 U
EPA STA. *2O " 7.5 W
§r^ RM 05 K
^ ' 16.5 W
| Lyon Creek
F
I
! EPA STA. *8
, RM 19.1
P «
RM 18.0
1°
*
0
* EPA STA. *7
RM 17.1
« USGS gage 01451800
EPA STA *9
RM 13 1
L £ H 1 G H
8.2
« 7.6
6.4
i
EPA STA. *4 <
RM 0.3 '
Unam. Trib.
RM 19.6
r 8.2
i ' 7. 4
16.9
Mill
) i
EPA
RM
(out
EPA
RM
use
Cr
^ DAM SITE
RM 17.3
| 7.7
> " 7.3
L- 7.0
7.6
> " 7. 3
17.0
CREEK
7.8
7.0
6.3
STA * 5 i
36
foil)
STA *6<
2 2
S ga
c« AVG
0
(E
MIN
TREXLER LAKE
WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
pH (units)
i
FIGURE V
-------
-------
1
EPA STA * 3 <
RM 25.6
1
1
II 209
RM 21.7
IEPA STA # ll .1 J74
RM I 7 T v
r-194 *
1140 UJ
IEPA STA. *2<( o 187 U
(l RM 05 T K
I 177 0
Lyon Creek
1
1
EPA STA. *6
RM 19 1
* Z
IRM 18.0
°
Ct
1 °
EPA STA. *7
IRM 17.1
USGS qoge 01451800
_ EPA STA #94
RM 13 1
L £ H 1 G H
153
128
83
r~145
EPA STA. *4 i> 136
RM 0.3"
' 119
Unom. Trib.
EPA STA *5<
RM 36
(out'oll)
RM 19.8
r~ 169
> .' 145
EPA STA *6|
RM 22
1 112 USGS go»«
Mill Creek
r 445
1 " 413
L--373
1 178
> < 166
1150
_ 0AM SITE
^ R M 1 7. 3
152 LEGEND
» « 135
1 103
| 151
> <> 134
1 106
CREEK
1 TREXLER LAKE
1 WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
TOTAL SOLIDS (mg/l)
1
I MAX
0)
c
-------
-------
1 J
EPA STA * 3 t
m RM 25.6
1
1
II 165
RM 21V
EPA STA * li <> 150
1 RM '7 r-240 *
1 120 UJ
_ EPA STA. *2O > 210 U
rty RM °5 o:
* . 1190 W
Lyon Creek
1
1
EPA STA * B <
IRM 19 1
Z
M RM 18.0
I °
cc
1 s
EPA STA *7
^ RM 17 I
USGS goge 01451800
FPA STA * 9
IRM IJ |
L t H 1 G H
160
« 145
120
p-175
EPA STA. #4 O " 160
RM 0.3 -
1130
Unom. Trib.
( 540
EPA STA * 5 1 (i 505
RM 3.6 T
(outfoll)
L 470
RM 19.8
r~ 215
| 240
> o 210
EPA STA *60 c 210
RM Z 2 T
1 200 USGS go<>«
Mill Creek j ' 185
DAM SITE
^ RM 173
, 200 LEGEND
> ,, 190 rM"x
i>
( i -7 c cr
p-200 5" AVG'
a:
> " 190 1_ MIN
L_ 180
CREEK
1 TREXLER LAKE
. WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
1 SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE
- (micromhos/eubic centimeter)
FIGURE VII
-------
I
I
-------
(25)
I
(5) The degree of Total Hardness of this stream can be classified
| as being primarily soft. Various investigators have found a negative
M correlation between hardness in the domestic water supply of an area
and the death rates from cardiovascular diseases. Therefore, the soft
water of this basin may cause problems if used as a public water supply.
Soft water solutions increase the sensitivity of fish to toxic substances.
I
I
I
(See Figure VIII)
Total Hardness mg/1 (as CaCop) Description
0-75 soft
7-5-150 moderately hard
(6) The Total Alkalinity in this stream is equal to the
Bicarbonate Alkalinity since the pH is less than 8.3. For the best
support of diversified aquatic life the pH values should be between
7 and 8, and have a total alkalinity of more than 90 mg/1. This
alkalinity also serves as a buffer should there be a sudden change
in pH. Although these waters have alkalinity concentrations of
less than 90 mg/1 they do meet National Criteria and can be biologically
classified as being medium to high productivity for aquatic fauna
and flora. Waters with a methyl orange alkalinity greater than 40
mg/1, such as the Jordan Creek, show a higher algae productivity rate.
(See Figure IX)
(7) A Langelier Index of zerio indicates the waters to be in
~ chemical balance, and a negative value indicates a corrosive tendency.
All index values for Jordan Creek, tributaries and wastewater treat-
ment plant were negative, therefore, corrosive in nature. (See Figure X)
I
-------
I
I
-------
1 <
EPA STA * 3 <
_ RM 25.6
1
1
II 80
RV* 21.7
EPA STA * ll u 75
|RM ir T r-80 *
170 w
EPA STA. #2O " 70 U
RM 05 ft.
-S L_60 U
Lyon Creek
1
1
EPA STA. * 8 <
IRM 19 1
z
RM 18.0
cr
0
1
EPA STA. *7
_ RM (7.1
USGS goge OI45I800
EPA STA #9
IRM 13 1
L E. H 1 G H
60
" 55
50
r 70
EPA STA. *4 O <> 70
RM 0.3.
1 _ , y
Unam. Trib.
EPA STA. *
RM 3.6
(outfoll)
RM 19.8
r 80
1 " 80
EPA STA *
RM 22
1 X USGS ga<)t
Mill Creek
_ DAM SITE
R M 1 7. 3
[ 70
> o 70
' x
1 70
i ' 68
L_ 65
CREEK
I' TREXLER LAKE
5! .> no
1 90
[ 80
ei .. 75
_J L70
LEGEND
MAX
AVG
0
a:
MIN
WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
TOTAL HARDNESS (Co Co3mg/l)
I
FIGURE VIII
-------
1
I
I
I
I
I
-------
1 <
EPA STA * 3 <
_ RM 25.6
1
1
Ir-45 .
RM 21.7
EPA STA. * 1* <> 38
|RM '7 ,-45 *
Iso W
EPA STA. *2(> '» 45 W
IRM 05 £
^ . L,X 0
| Lyon Creek
1
1
EPA STA. *8 i
IRM 19.1
Z
<
_ RM IB.O
1 °
(T
o1
1
EPA STA *7|
RM 17.1
USG5 gage 01451800
EPA STA *9|
IRM l J 1
L £ H 1 G H
45
" 45
X
r 45
EPA STA. *4 O <> 38
RM 0.3 .
L- 30
Unom. Trib.
p 45
EPA STA. * 5 A " 45
RM 3.6 T
(outfall)
* V
RM 19.6
r- 45
r45
» " 38
EPA STA *6* (i 38
RM 2 2 T
1 30 USGS gaijt
Mill Creek 1 « 30
DAM SITE
^ RM 17.3
30 LEGEND
o 30 rMAX
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
1
m EPA STA * 3 (
RM 256
1
RM 21.7
IEPA STA. * ll <>(.)|.06
RM 1 7 X
1 UJ
IEPA STA.* 20 u(-)Q.98 U
,t «M 05 K
C L_ u
1
Lyon Creek
1
1
IEPA STA. *8
RM 19.1
z
«RM 18.0
0
o:
1 ?
^ EPA STA. * 7
RM 17. 1
USGS goge 01451800
IETA STA *9
RM 13 1
L E H 1 G H
« (-) 1.16
EPA STA. *4 O «>(-) 1.74
RM 0.3"
Unom. Trib.
RPMA !TSA *5t "H'-66
(outfall)
RM 19.8
o(-)|.22
EPA STA *6« «'(-)!. 43
RM 2 2 T
1 USGS gogt
Mill Creek | '
,_ 0AM SITE
RM 17.3
, LEGEND
» n(.)i.44 rMAX
a>
c"d AVG.
or
> " (-J2.25 1 WIN
CREEK
TREXLER LAKE
WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
LANGELIER INDEX
1
FIGURE X
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
(29)
(8) Acidity concentrations and pH values indicate that the
waters are in the carbon dioxide acidity range and are not detri-
mental for the proposed usages.
(9) Carbon Dioxide concentrations are less than National
Criteria for freshwater organisms.
" (10) Chloride concentrations are lower than the National Cri-
teria for water supplies. Good fish fauna waters contain less than
170 mg/1 of chlorides; these waters contain less than this concen-
tration.
(11) Sulfate concentrations are lower than the National Cri-
teria for water supplies. These waters contain less than 90 mg/1
of sulfates, which indicates that game fish are not in jeopardy.
(12) Nitrogen and phosphorous concentrations are adequate to
stimulate growth of algae and aquatic plants. A concentration of
more than 0.30 mg/1 of inorganic (or 0.6 mg/1 of total nitrogen)
nitrogen and more th O.O1 mg/1 of soluble phosphorus (or 0.05
mg/1 of total phosphorus) at the start of the active growing season
could products nuisance blooms. The total phosphorus concentrations
of Lyons Creek and an unnamed tributary exceed National Criteria
for fish, other aquatic life and wilHlife requirements. Jordan
I Creek for the most pant has less than 4.2 mg/1 of nitrates which
« indicates a good fish environment. (See Figure XI - Total Nitrogen
and Figure XII - Total Phosphorous).
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
1 J
EPA STA * 3 <
RM 29.6
1
1
II 5.389 .
RM 21,7
EPA STA. * 14) o 5.048
IRM 1,7 vr
r- 2.759 *
' 2.196 u
EPA STA. *2O ii 2.475 U
IRM 05 a
1 . 11.247 0
| Lyon Creek
1
1
EPA STA. *p
_ RM 19 1
I Z
RM 18.0 <
1°
cr
o
1
EPA STA. *7<
RM 17. |
USGS goge 01451800
EPA STA.#9<
_ RM 13 1
1 L E H 1 G H
3.980
» ' 3.338
« 2.004
i 4.14
EPA STA. *4 <) o 3.61
RM 0.3«
1 2.6J
Unom. Trib.
EPA STA. *
RM 3.6
(outfall)
RM 19.8
r 3.919
> «> 3.437
EPA STA *
RM 22
1 3.010 USGS go««
Mill Creek
^ DAM SITE.
^ RM 17.3
I 4.409
> -. 3.637
L 3.050
| 3.410
» ., 1.931
L_ 0.300
CREEK
I TREXLER LAKE
«,
0
9
>2
p 27.450
sl . 23.809
1 20.23O
Ii 6.201
o 4.757
3.780
LEGEND
I MAX.
V
c
-------
I
I
I
I
I
-------
1 1
EPA STA * 3 <
M RM 25.6
1
1
I, 0.045
RM 21.7
EPA STA * Mi <> 0.035
"" " r-0.083*
1 0.03C U
_ EPA STA,*2<» " 0.052 U
^ RM °5 K
* V ' 10.033 <>
Lyon Creek
1
1
EPA STA. *fl \
IRM 19.1
z
RM 18.0 **
B °
" 10.583
1 8.150
r 0.172
« 0.157
' 0.142
_ DAM SITE
RM 17,3
1 0.025 LEGEND
> " 0.022
L 0.020
( 0.042
> 0.034
L 0.030
CREEK
1' TREXLER LAKE
- WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS (mg/l)
1
I MAX.
01
"(i AVG.
a
a
MIN
FIGURE XII
-------
I
I
I
1
I
-------
I
I (32>
13. Pesticide concentrations at all sample points indicate
that standards have not been exceeded.
14. The oxygen demand analyses evaluates the relationship
mm of dissolved oxygen (D.O. ), biochemical oxygen demand (B.O.D.),
chemical oxygen demand (C.O.D.), total organic carbon (T.O.C.),
theoretical oxygen demand (T.O.D.) and photosynthetic productivity.
The oxygen balance of a stream is dependent upon a number of factors.
f Some parameters add oxygen to the waters and others remove or utilize
mm the oxygen. Photo_synthesis adds oxygen; respiration of plants, a-
animals and aerobic bacteria removes or utilizes oxygen,
and diffusion either supplies or removes oxygen dependent upon the
existing concentration of dissolved oxygen in relation to satura-
Jf tion temperature, atmospheric pressure and liquid-gas interface.
.v The evaluation of the diurnal oxygen study, in-situ oxygen
study and chlorophyll at determinations indicate that there is an
abundance of algae and aquatic plants in the streams investigated.
The low B.O.D. values were attributed to the respiration caused by
the lighted B.O.D. incubator. The k2 values were erratic, ranging
from O.O1 and O.21.
The high super saturation of dissolved oxygen as shown in the
diurnal oxygen study along with the various nutrient concentrations
previously discussed indicates a possible algal bloom problem.
The probably reason this situation does not occur now is the velocity
of flow and bacteria competition.
I
-------
(33)
Table E shows the average values for the various oxygen demands.
Table F compares the ratios of these parameters.
The 5-day B.O.D.'s indicate all streams investigated are
fairly clean. T.O.C. values were all higher than the 12-day B.O.D.
values except the South Branch Lyon Creek. C.O.D. concentrations
during the June investigation were very much lower than the concen-
trations of the September investigation, which cannot be explained .
Recent studies of the B.O.D./D.O. ration by the Information Systems
and Analysis Branch, Surveillance and Analysis Division, Region III,
have proven ratio values between O.I and 0.2 indicate a normal
healthy stream, values higher than 0.4 indicates the stream is
under stress and more than 0.6 the stream is degraded. The values
calculated verify the streams investigated are healthy. The South
Branch of Lyon Creek shows a slight stress. Evaluating all the
ratios shown in Table F the stations located on the South Branch
of Lyon Creek and the Unnamed tributary (Station 8) indicate higher
values which could be caused by non=point source discharges (agri-
culture) or malfunctioning septic tanks. The D.O. saturation
values shown on Figure XIII show low values at Mill Creek (Station 6)
and Unnamed tributary (station 4). The basin area for the Unnamed
tributary (station 4) has a heavy tree cover, is very shallow and
has low flow. The low D.O. saturation value, high C.O.D. and T.O.C.
values at the Mill Creek Station 6 may be caused by septic tanks
because of the large number of dwellings located on the banks of this
stream with the discharge of the wastewater treatment plant 1.4
miles upstream.
-------
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
(3*0
TABLE E
Sta. No.
1
2
3
4
5 (b)
6
7
8
9
D.O.
rag/1
9.0
9.4
9.4
8.7
4.5
8.8
9.5
9.3
9.9
B.O.D. 5 day
mg/1
2.5
1.1
0.9
0.7
2.7
1.1
0.7
1.9
1.2
T.O.C.
mg/1
4
7.5
4.5
3.5
12.5
1O.5
4.5
4
4.5
C.O.D.
mg/1
18.8
7.7
28.0
6.4
27.0
5.9
12.8
11.4
28.5
T.O.D.
ag/l(a)
20.4
22.7
15.6
12.9
46.6
29.9
14.5
12.4
14.1
Temp.
C
16
16
17
15
18
17
18
18
18
I
I
I
I
(a) T.O.D. - (T.O.C. x 2.67) + (T.K.N. x 4.57) + (NO2 - Nxl.14)
(b) Wastewater treatment plant effluent
I
I
I
-------
(35)
TABLE F
Sta. No. BOD/ BOD/ HOD/ COD/ TOD/
D.O TOC TOD TOC T<
1 0.28 0.63 0.12 4.70 5.10
2 0.12 0.15 0.05 1.03 3.05
3 0.10 0.20 O.O6 6.22 3.47
4 0.08 0.20 0.05 1.83 3.68
5 (a) 0.60 0.22 O.06 2.16 3.74
6 0.13 0.11 0.04 0.47 2.39
7 0.07 0.16 0.05 2.85 3.22 I
8 0.20 0.48 0.15 2.85 3.1O 1
1
9 0.12 O.27 O.09 6.34 3.14 *
(a) Wastewater treatment plant effluent
I
I
I
-------
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
f
1
1
1
t
(36)
Table G
In-Situ Photosynthetic Production
(Light-Dark Bottle Technique)
Net Photosyntheis
Station 00 mg/l/h
1 (-) 0.20
(-) 0.10*
2 (-) 0.31
(-) 0.28*
3 (-) 0.22
(-) 0.14*
i 4. (-) 0.12
F.A.
6, 0.85
(-) 0.09
7 0.71
(-) 0.28*
8 0.54
(-) 0.48*
9 0.75
(-) 0.63*
F.A. - Field Accident
Respriation
Og mg/l/h.
0.23
0.14*
0.34
0.28*
0.11
0.24*
0.12
F.A.
(-) 0.78
0.13
(-) 0.66
0.32*
(-) 0.52
0.48*
(-) 0.70
0.63*
* - Dissolved Oxygen concentration was more
1
1
at start of incubation.
02 mg/l/hr - Dissolved Oxygen in
milligrams per
Gross Photosyntheis
Opmg/l/h
0.03
0.04*
0.03
0.00*
(-) 0.11
0.10*
0.00
F.A.
0.07
0.04
0.05
0.04*
0.02
0.00*
0.05
0.00*
than 100% Saturation
liter per hour
-------
\
\
1
I
-------
1 ,
EPA STA * 3 <
m RM 25.6
1
1
§1 105
RM £1.7
«EPA STA. * M) « 93
r-i.9 *
185 W
»EPA STA.02O " 102 W
. RM 0.5 g
^ 1 86 0
f
w- Lyon Creek
f
^_ EPA STA.* 8
\ RM 19.1
* - Z
»RM 18.0
°
cr
1 °
EPA STA. *7
RM 17. 1
USGS «joqe 01451800
EPA STA *9
M RM 13 1
L £ H 1 6 H
r 114
» ' 101
L. 87
__ a o
1 O O
EPA STA. *4 0 o 85
RM 0.3
L 82
Unom. Trib.
EPA STA »
RM 3.6
(outfall)
RM 19.8
p- 138
1 * 116
EPA STA *
RM 22
1 98 USGS goijt
Mill Creek
_ DAM SITE
RM 17.3
| 136
» .. 106
84
i 135
> o 109
L 86
CREEK
TREXLER LAKE
§ WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
DISSOLVED OXYGEN (% SATURATION)
t
si ( N/A
r 97
el . 89
_J L_8,
LEGEND
i MAX.
o>
en AVG
o
X
MIN.
FIGURE xiu
-------
1
1
\
1
I
1
-------
EPA STA * 3 f
m< RM 25.6 I
I
1
,-4..
t RM 21. T
«EPA STA. * ll " 2.5
RM ''T T !-'«*
10.5 w
»EPA STA. #2O " I.I U
Vx - 10.8 U
~ Lyon Creek
4
1
_ EPA STA *P !
V RM 19 1
m RM 16. 0 **
f ' ?
EPA STA. *7
fRM 17.1
USGS goqe 01451800
^ EPA STA *9«
Vl RM 13 1
L E H 1 G H
j I.Z
i « 0.9
0.7
ir
EPA STA. *4 " 0.7
RM 0.3 - T
1 0.4
Urtom. Trib.
EPA STA. »5
RM 3.6
(outfall)
RM 19. 8
r 2.7
t 1.9
EPft STA *6
RM 22
1 1.4 USGS ga«t
Mill Creek
_ DAM SITE
RM 17.3
r 1.2 L
' 0.7
1 0.5
1 l>7
> .. 1.2
L_ 0.7
CREEK
* ' TREXLER LAKE
1 WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
B.O.D. -5 DAY (mg/l)
1
* '
i
r- 3.5
<» < 2.7
L 1.4
,
L"'
J L- 0.6
E G END
i MAX
V
c<> AV6
o
ce.
U 1 td
^^^^ win.
FIGURE XIV
-------
1
1
1
1
I
1
-------
EPA STA.
RM 1.7
EPA STA * 3 <
RM 25.6
1 5
RM 21,7
i * 4
r~~ Q ^^
3 W
EPA STA. *2(> " 7.5 W
RM 0.5 g
L_ 6 0
Lyon Creek
EPA STA. *B
RM 19.1
Z
RM 18.0 **
Q
o:
0
-a
EPA STA. *7
RM 17.1
USGS gage 01451800
EPA STA *9
RM 13 I
L E H 1 G H
5
« 4.5
__ A
4
EPA STA *4 < » i> 3.5
RM 0.3
L- 3
Unom. Trib.
EPA STA. *5 t
RM 36
(outfoll)
RM 19.8
\/
r 15
i < 12.5
1 10
i 17
I n 4
EPA STA *& <> 10.5
RM 2 2 T
1 X WSGS gogt
Mill Creek I ' 4
DAM SITE
^ RM 17.3
r 5 LEGEND
. _ * | MAX.
> " 4.5
^ ?o AVG.
i 6 «
c
> " 4.5 1 MIN.
L_ 3
CREEK
TREXLER LAKE
WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (mg/l)
FIGURE XV
-------
-------
1 1
EPA STA * 3 <
g. RM 25.6
I
1
,-46 .
RM 21.7
^ EPA STA. * ll o 18.8
| "" " T r-,4 *
" 1 24 U
_ EPA STA. #2< | n 7.7 w
j^^B o IUI O It ^ ^
f
V Lyon 'Creek
I
E
EPA STA. *8
^ RM 19.1
tRM 18.0
:
i . -
EPA STA.*7<
§RM 17.1
USGS gage 01451600
EPA STA *9<
At RM 13 1
* L E H 1 G H
r 75
' 28.0
2.6
i 17
EPA STA *4 ( ( (> 6.4
RM 0.3 -
Unom. Trib.
EPA STA. *
RM 3.6
(outfall)
RM 19.8
r 24
' 11.4
EPA STA *
RM 22
1 2.6 USGS gagt
Mill Creek
_ DAM SITE
" RM 17.3
r 32
> ' 12.8
1 I.I
r 78
> « 28.5
L_ 3.7
CREEK
I TREXLER LAKE
t WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (mg/l)
1
*
r~ 30
50 i 27.0
1 26
| 14
el " 5.9
_J ''
LEGEND
i MAX.
V
cfu AVG.
o
K
MIN.
FIGURE XVI
-------
-------
1 ,
efc? £PA STA * 3 <
IS* RM 25.6
1
1
HO. 20-
RM 21.7
. EPA STA. * l<) n HO.I5
1 RM '' 1 rwo.31 *
I (-)O 1C W
A Rtf!^*20 "<->°-3° £
V L(-)0.28 ^
V Lyon Creek
1
I
EPA STA. *B 4
fRM 19.)
Z
tRM 18.0 **
°
" ^
EPA STA. *7<
fRM 17.1
USGS gage OI45IBOO
EPA STA #9
«RM 13 1
L E H 1 G H
| HO. 22
> « (-)O.I8
EPA STA. *4 O " (-)O.I2
RM 0.3
Unam. Trib.
EPA STA. » 5 «( o N/A
RM36 I f"
(outfall)
RM 19. 6
r 0.54
r 0.85
« 0.03
EPA STA *6J n 0-38
' (-)0.48 uses 909*
Mill Creek | ' H0.09
DAM SITE
^ R M 1 7. 3
0.71 LEGEND
> .. 0.22 rMAX
w
' 0.06 1 WIN
L_(-)0.63
CREEK
I TRFXLER LAKE
WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
NET PHOTOSYNTHEIS (mg/l/hr)
1
FIGURE xvu
-------
-------
1
I
1
1
1
1
f
I
1
t
1
t
1
t
1
(42)
C . Bacteriological Quality :
All bacteriological determinations were accomplished by the
Membrane Filter technique.
(1) Total coliforms are introduced to water courses via water
run-off and wastewater outfalls. They are considered significant
as indicator organisms because of the predominance in the intestinal
tracts of warmblooded animals. The total coliform density is
roughly proportional to the amount of excremental waste present.
With exceptions, elevated coliform populations are suggestive of
significant contamination by excretement of warmblooded animals.
Several factors which cause fluctuations in total coliform popu-
lations are summarized as follows:
Higher Lower
Sewage intrusion pH changes
Nutritive effluents Temperature changes
(Containing sugar, dairy
wastes, etc. )
7 /
Storm drains Land run-off (prolonged flow)
Land run-off Toxic wastes
(Initial flow)
-------
Table H
Fecal Coliform vs Fecal Streptocci
(No./100 ml)
Average Average
Fecal Streptococci FC/FS
614 1.92
143 0.90
222 0.95
151 1.23
52 0.54
69 4.96
167 1.85
178 0.17
233 0.27
Sta. No.
1
2
3
4
5 (a)
6
7
8
9
Fecal Coliform
1181
128
211
186
28
342
309
31
65
(a) Waste-water treatment plant effluent
-------
I
I
I
(44)
Lyong Creek and Mill Creek total coliform densities exceed mini-
mem National Criteria permissible requirements for public water
supply and all sample point densities exceed desirable public
water supply and farm water supply requirements. Six sample
point densities exceed irrigation water criteria. (See Fig. XVIII).
^ (2) Fecal coliforms are gaining acceptance as pollution
findicies because of their relatively infrequent occurrence, except
in association with fecal pollution. Moreover, because survival
of the fecal coliform group is shorter in water courses than for
^ the coliform group as a whole, high fecal coliform levels indicate
relatively recent pollution.
Fecal coliform densities at all sample points exceed
National Criteria for public and farm water supplies. The fecal
coliform density for the South Branch of Lyon Creek also exceeded
§ National Criteria for irrigation usage. (See Figure XIX)
(3) Fecal Streptococci do not occur in pure water or virgin
M soil; their presence in water courses indicates the existence of
warmblooded animal pollution. Their validity as an index of
pollution is enhanced by their inability to reproduce in water
courses. The following points should be considered when interpret-
w ing fecal streptococci data:
flr (a) The presence of this indicator in untreated water
indicates the presence of fecal pollution by warmblooded animals.
(b) Where the source and significance of the coliform group
1
-------
(45)
are questionable, the presence of this group should be interpreted
as indicating that at least a portion of the coliforra group is de-
rived from fecal sources. Water quality criteria for fecal strepto-
cocci has not been established; however, their presence in the
entire watershed is an indication that there is fecal pollution
present. (See Figure XX)
(4) Fecal streptocci determinations, when accompanied by
fecal coliform studies, serve as a valuable tool in the differentia-
tion of animal from human wastes. In intestinal wastes of human
origin, the ratio of number of fecal coliforms to number of fecal
streptococci tends to be greater than four. When this ratio is
less than 0.7, this suggests pollution derived predominately or
entirely from livestock or poultry wastes. Ratios falling between
4.O and O.7 are not quite so certain. Limitations to this ratio
are:
(a) Samples taken within 24 hours of flow time from
origin of pollution.
(b) pH range of 4.0 to 9.0.
These limitations do not affect the results of this investigation.
The results of this investigation indicate the cause of bacterio-
logical pollution is questionable. Two ratios indicate an animal
origin and one ratio - human wastes. The other locations are
within the grey area. (See Figure XXI).
-------
* EPA STA * 3 <
RM 25.6
1
1
1
U RM 21.7
EPA STA * (A « 1.92
RM 17 T *
1 L r u
EPA STA. #2O o 0.90 W
RM 0.5 T Q.
1 ^ L «
fLyon Creek
.
t
' EPA STA. *8
RM J9.I
RM 18.0
to
*
o
EPA STA. *7
RM 17. 1
* USGS gage 01451800
EPA STA *9
, RM 13 1
1 L E H 1 G H
" 0.95
EPA STA. *4 u 1.23
RM 0.3 T
Unam. Trib. t
EPA STA. * 5 < i
RM 36
(outfall)
f
RM 19.8
1-
» >< 0.17
EPA STA *&
C 1!
i O
CE
> « 0.27 _
CREEK
f TREXLER LAKE
! WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
| FECAL COLIFORM/FECAL STREPTOCOCC
1 FIG
0.54
4.96
MAX.
AVG.
MIN
-------
I
1
I
I
I
-------
I .
EPA STA * 3 1
^ RM 25.6
1
1
1 1360
RM 21.7
EPA STA * ll u 614
1 RM 1? I 1 r-258 *
9 154 U
EPA STA. #2* » 143 ^
IRM 0.5 T Q,
U- 54- 0
(P Lyon Creek
t
1
EPA STA *8
§RM 19.1
Z
._, " " RM 18.0 **
1 ' °
V cc
o1
I
\ EPA STA *7<
N , R M 1 7. 1
USGS goge 01451800
EPA STA *9<
§RM 131
L E H 1 G H
360
< 222
85
r 278
EPA STA *4 < | M 15)
RM 0.3
L- 80
Unom. Trib.
EPA STA. » 5 {
RM 36
(outfall)
RM 19.8
r 250
> .' 178
EPA STA *64
RM 22
1 85 (JSGS gage
Mil Creek
f
r 84
I « 52
L_ 19
r 89
i <> 69
' 49
DAM SITE
R M 1 7. 3
1 238 LEGEND
> 167
L- 90
| 289
> " 233
L_ 130
CREEK
f TREXLER LAKE
WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
1 FECAL STREPTOCOCCI (No. 7100 ml)
1
i MAX
V
en AVG
0
a:
MIN
FIGURE XX
-------
1 1
EPA STA * 3 <
RM 25.6
1
1
«, 2,300
RM 21.7
EPA STA # l< | o I, 181
J"M l? r-220 *
162 U
EPA STA. *2<> » 128 U
|r, RM 05 a-
v, N L_ 36 o
| Lyon Creek
t
1
EPA STA. *8 <
«RM 19.1
z
R M 1 8 . 0
1°
K
o
1
\ EPA STA #74
RM 17.1
£ USGS gage 01451800
EPA STA *9 |
fRM 13 1
L E H 1 G H
280
« 211
142
r 280
EPA STA. *4 <» <> 186
RM 0.3
L_92
Unam. Trib.
EPA STA. *
RM 3.6
(outfall)
RM 19.8
^ V
I 31
EPA STA *
RM 22
1 X USGS qcKje
Mil Creek
DAM SITE
RM 17.3
y
» <> 309
1 y
I 66
> " 65
1 63
CREEK
f TREXLER LAKE
WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
I FECAL COLIFORM (No. / 100 m 1 / 1)
1
V
. X
5 <4 ' 28
1 x
r 680
el n 342
_J L46
LEGEND
i MAX.
«
c"n AVG.
0
tr
MIN
c i r i i ri c
-------
-------
EPA STA * 3 <
RM 25.6
1
1
1
«i 17,600
RM 21.7
EPA STA * ll > 10,500
1RM '' T r- 20,800*
L-3,400 w
EPA STA.#2Q > 10,900 ^
RM 0.5 ft.
1 rx . K
m L- 1,000 o
ILyon Creek
1
1
EPA STA. *8
RM 19.1
<
RM 18.0
1 :
o
* v EPA STA. *7
R M 1 7. 1
A US6S gage 01451800
EPA STA.*9
RM 13.1
1 L E H 1 6 H
10,450
5,825
1,200
₯"""" 1 2 | <*i
EPA STA. »4 < > « 6,4
RM 0.3
1 e
Unom. Trib.
EPA STA. *
RM 3.6
(outfall)
RM 19.8
r 1,800
( .. 1,300
EPA STA. *
RM 2.2
1 800 USGS ga<>e
Mill Creek
DAM SITE
R M 1 7. 3
r 8,500
> i- 4,550
L 600
i 11,800
> ' 6,100
L_ 400
CREEK
f TREXLER LAKE
WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION
| TOTAL COLIFORM (No. / 100 m 1 /I )
1
V
34
67
00
pi, 025
si <> 963
1 900
f V
el o 10,300
_J X
LEGEND
i MAX
«i
c"n AVG.
o
cc.
MIN.
FIGURE XV
-------
I
(50)
I
D. Biological Quality:
V 1. Introduction
A On June 20, 1972, chlorophyll a samples were collected
from nine stations in the Jordan Creek Watershed, Pennsylvania-,
(Table I), as part of a preimpoundment survey for the proposed
Trexler Lake in Lehigh County, Pennsylvania.
£ On June 20, 1972, Stations Nos. 4, 5A, 5B, 6, 8A, and 8B, were
« samples for bottom organisms. These stations were all located on
tributaries to Jordan Creek. On June 21, Jordan Creek's water level
began to rise rapidly due to heavy rains brought on by "Hurricane Agnes."
Further biological sampling was terminated until water levels returned
(p to normal.
^ On September 12, 1972, we returned to the basin to complete
the biological sampling of the bottom organisms. A qualitative sample
V was taken at Stations Nos. 4, 5A, 5B, 6, 8A, and 8B to see if there
was any change in the bottom organism population following "Hurricane
{p Agnes." Since the June samples appeared to correlate quite well with
^ the September samples, it was decided to use the June samples for evalu-
' ation purposes. Stations No.s 1,2,3,7, and 9, were sampled for bottom
ft organisms September 12-13,1972.
2. Methods
A qualitative benthic sample was taken at each station and a
_ quantitative Surber Square Foot Sample was taken at each station, except
at 5A and 8A. A quantitative sample was not taken at 5A, which was taken
on an unnamed tributary receiving the effluent from the Heidelberg Heights
I
-------
(51)
Treatment Plant. This station was located upstream from the
«ewage treatment plant effluent and was not taken because of
the sparse benthic population which would have prevented a mean-
ingful quantitative sample.
Only a qualitative sample was taken at Station No. 8A, which
was located on a small tributary entering a farm pond adjacent
to Jordan Creek. A qualitative and square foot sample were taken
on the pond outlet 8B, which entered Jordan Creek. Since we were
primarily,interested in what was entering Jordan Creek, it was not
essential to take a quantitative sample at 8A which emptied into
the farm pond.
The water samples to be analyzed for chlorophyll a (Table I)
were collected and. filtered at the motel. The filters were dissolved
in approximately 8 ml of 90%v/v acetone in 15 ml graduated centri-
fuge tubes and were returned to the Charlottesville,Virginia labora-
tory where they were analyzed by a method adapted from Strickland and
Parsons (1960). The DU-2 Spectrophotometer was used for the readings.
The benthic organisms were qualitatively collected at each station
by sampling the various types of habitat at each station such as gravel,
rocks, wood, vegetation, and silt, and preserved in 5% formalin. The
quantitative samples were taken with the Surber Sq. Foot Sampler and
also preserved in 5% formalin. The square foot samples were taken in
the center of the stream in a habitat most representative of the sta-
tion usually in riffle areas. The preserved samples were then returned
to the Charlottesville, Va. EPA Laboratory, where they were identified
-------
m (52)
with taxonomic keys by Pennack, Ward and Whipple; Eddy and Hodson;
W Needham and Needham; Leonard and Leonard; Pain, George H., Prison,
A and Burks. Identification was taken down to genus whenever possible.
In Table J, the benthics were broken down into intolerant
M (sensitive), facultative (intermediate), and tolerant categories
based on the tolerance of various macr©invertebrate taxa to decom-
9 posable organic wastes. The subtotals for each station are shown
m as well as the grand totals. If the organism was only found in the
qualitative sample, it was indicated by an X.
In Table K, there is a breakdown of the benthic organisms
by percentage into the intolerant (sensitive), facultative (inter-
V mediate), and tolerant categories.
*i 3. Definitions
For purposes of this report, the community of bottom macro-
invertebrates was selected as the main indicator of the biological
conditions in the stream since they serve as the preferred food source
£ for higher aquatic forms and exhibit similar reactions to adverse
^ stream conditions. Macro bottom organisms are animals that live in
^ direct association with the stream bottom and are visible with the
unaided eye. They are further distinguished from micro organisms by the
fact they are retained in a 30 mesh sieve (approximately 0.5 mm apera-
^| ture). The combination of limited locomotion and life cycles of one
^_ year or more for most benthic species provide a long-term indicator of
W stream water quality.
tt Classification of organisms in this report is considered in
three categories: Intolerant (pollution sensitive), facultative (inter-
i
-------
(53)
mediate), and pollution tolerant to decomposable organic wastes.
Intolerant (pollution sensitive) organisms are those organisms
that have not been found associated with even moderate ]evels of
organic contaminants and are generally intolerant of eve:n moderate
reductions in dissolved oxygen.
Facultative (intermediate) organisms are those organisms having
a wide range of tolerance and frequently associated with moderate
levels of organic contamination.
Tolerant organisms are those organisms frequently cissociated
with gross organic contamination and generally capable of thriving under
anaerobic conditions.
In unpolluted streams, a wide variety of intolerant clean water
associated bottom organisms are normally found. Typical groups are
stoneflies, mayflies, caddisflies, and riffle beetles. These sensitive
organisms usually are not individually abundant because of natural
predation and competition for food and space; however, the total count
or number of organisms at a given station may be high because of the
different varieties present. Sensitive genera (kinds) tend to be
eliminated by adverse environmental conditions (e.g., chemical and/or
physical) resulting from wastes discharging into the stream.
In waters enriched by organic wastes comparatively fewer kinds
of animals are found, though great numbers of certain genera may be
present. Organic pollution-tolerant forms such as sludgeworms,
rattailed maggots, certain species of bloodworms (red midges), certain
leeches, and some species of air-breathing snails may multiply and
become abundant because of a favorable habitat and food supply. These
organic pollution-tolerant bottom organisms may also exist in the
-------
I (54)
natural environment, but are generally found in small numbers.
The abundance of these forms in streams heavily polluted with or-
f| ganics is due to their physiological and morphological abilities
to servive environmental conditions more adverse than conditions
M tolerated by other organisms. Under conditions where inert silts
or organic sludges blanket the stream bottom, the natural home of
W bottom organisms is destroyed, which also causes a reduction in
4| the number of kinds of organisms present.
Streams grossly polluted with toxic wastes such as mine drain-
age, etc., will support little, if any aquatic life and will reduce
the population of both sensitive and pollution-tolerance organisms.
W In addition to intolerant (sensitive) and pollution-tolerant
Ik forms, some bottom organisms are termed facultative (intermediate)
in that they are capable of living in moderately polluted areas as
well as in limited numbers, and therefore cannot serve as effective
indicators of water quality.
Vl Diversity indices such as 3 provide an additional diagnostic
^ tool for measuring water quality and the effect of induced stress
on the structure of the macroinvertebrate community. The use of these
V indices is based on the generally observed phenomenon that relatively
undistrubed environments support communities having large numbers of
^ genera with no individual general present in overwhelming abundance.
^ If the genera in such a community are ranked on the basis of their
numerical abundance, there will be relatively few genera with large
v numbers of individuals and increasing numbers of genera represented by
I
-------
(55)
only a few individuals. Many forms of stress tend to reduce diversity
by making the environment unsuitable for some genera or by giving
some genera a competitive advantage.
For purposes of uniformity, the Shannon-Wiener function was
used for calculating mean diversity "d" as recommended in Biological
Field and Laboratory Methods by EPA, National Environmental Research
Center Analytical Quality Control Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1972.(8)
The machine formula as presented by Lloyd, Zar and Karr (14) is:
c
=H (NLog10N- £niLog10ni).
Where c = 3.321928 (converts base 10 log to base 2 bits), N= total
number of individuals, n^ = total number of individuals in the 1
genera.
Mean diversity, d, as calculated in this formula is affected both
by richness of species and by the distribution of individuals among the
genera and may range from zero to 3.321928 log N.
The component of diversity due to the distribution of individuals
among the genera can be evaluated by comparing the calculated d with a
hypothetical maximum d based on an arbitrarily selected distribution.
The measure of redundancy proposed by Margalef (16) is based on the
ratio between d and a hypothetical maximum. In nature, equality of
genera is quite unlikely, so Lloyd and Ghelardi (13) proposed the
term "equitability" and compared d with a maximum based on the distribu-
tion from MacArthur ' s (15) broken stick model <> The MacArthur model
results in a distribution quite frequently observed in nature with a
few relatively abundant genera and increasing numbers of genera repre-
sented by only a few individuals. It is not necessary (nor should it
-------
f (56)
be expected) that sample data conform to the MacArthur model, since
it is only being used as a yardstick against which the distribution
I
of abundances is being compared. Lloyd and Ghelardi (13) present
a table for determining equitability by comparing the number of
genera (s) in the sample with the number of genera (s) expected from
' a community which confirms to the MacArthur model. Using their table
§^
and the proposed measure of equitability: e = where s equals the
number of genera in the sample and s1*- equals the tabulated value.
Equitability "e" as calculated may range from 0 to 1 except in
the unusual situation where the distribution in the sample is more
9 equitable than the distribution resulting from the MacArthur model.
Such an eventuality will result in values of "e" greater than 1 and
occasionally occurs in samples containing only a few specimens with
M several taxa represented. The estimate of "d" and "e" improves with
increased sample size, and samples containing less than 100 specimens
9 should be evaluated with caution, if at all.
A Wilhm (21) recently reported diversity d, values calculated from
the data of numerous authors collected from a variety of "polluted"
and "unpolluted" waters. He found that in "unpolluted" waters d was
generally between 3 and 4, while in "polluted" water d was generally
less than 1. Unfortunately, where degradation is at alight to moderate
m levels, d lacks the sensitivity to demonstrate differences. Equita-
bility "e", however, has been found to be very sensitive to even "e",
however, to even slight levels of degradation. Equitability levels
below 0.5 usually are never encountered in streams know to be un-
9 affected by oxygen-demanding wastes, and in such streams "e" generally
I
-------
(57)
ranges between 0.6 and 0.8. Even s]ight levels of degradation have
been found to reduce equitability below 0.5 and generally to a range
of 0.0 and 0.3.
4. Station Evaluation
Station #1 - South Branch of Lyon Creek (Tributary to Jordan
Creek) samples at Lyon Valley, Pennsylvania.
Basically good water quality was suggested by the nineteen
genera of bottom organisms which number 890 in square foot sample and
was dominated by 677 caddisfly larvae. The quantitative sample con-
sisted of 86.2% intolerant (sensitive) forms, 12.8% facultative (inter-
mediate), and 1.0% tolerant. The mean d (diversity index) of 167 mcikes
a clear cut evaluation impossible; however, the equitability level weis
only 0.2, which suggests that this station was subject to periodic oxygen
stress conditions.
The water was clear and minnows were readily observed. In
addition, a mudpuppy (Necturus maculosus), an amphibian, was collected
in the quantitative sample.
Cows throughout the area have access to the stream and algae was
present on the rocks. The chlorophyll a reading was 43.,5 ug/1. Using the
ug/1 figure to represent problem areas, it would appear that his stream
might have eutrophication problems in the not too distant future.
Station #2 - North Branch to Lyon Creek near Lyon Valley, Penna.
Good water quality was suggested by the 18 genera of bottom organ-
isms which was dominated by the 640 caddisfly larvae and the 152 may-
flies. The 1,004 organisms in the square foot sample consisted of
-------
(58)
91.6% intolerant forms, 8.2% of facultative, and 0.2% tolerant. The
* mean d of 2.13 (diversity index) prohibits a clear-cut evaluation,
A however, the equitability level was only 0.3 which suggests that this
station was subject to periodic oxygen stress conditions.
M A large minnow population was easily observed throughout the
area and two mud puppies (Necturus maculosus) were collected.
* Cows have access to the stream and algae was present. The
ft chlorophyll reading of 51.0 ug/1 at this station suggests this stream
already has a eutrophication problem.
Station #3 - Jordan Creek at Route 100 near Lowhill, Pennsylvania
Good water quality was indicated by the 11 genera of benthie
^ organisms dominated by 78 caddisflies and 40 mayflies in the square foot
M sample of 123 organisms. Intolerant forms made up 95.9% and facultative
4.1% of the quantitative sample. The mean d of 2.20 does not permit
meaningful interpretation but the equitability level of 0.5 suggests
borderline conditions for periodic oxygen stress conditions.
W A large fish population was observed, consisting principally
of suckers 1O" to 15". Eutrophication conditions were indicated by a
chlorophyll a reading of 75.0 ug/1.
Station #4 - Unnamed tributary to Jordan Creek
High water quality was indicated by the two genera of stoneflies,
W *He eight genera of mayflies, three genera of caddisflies, and one
£ genera of riffle beetles. It is further substantiated by the mean d of 4.76
and the equitability level of 2.2.
Eutrophication does not appear to be a problem based on a chlorophyll
a reading of 7.5 ug/1.
I
-------
(59)
Station #5A - Unnamed tributary to Mill Creek (tributary to
Jordan Creek)
This station was located upstream from the effluent outfall
from the Heidelburg Heights, Pennsylvania, Sewage Treatment Plant.
Bottom organisms were generally sparse and only five genera of bottom
organisms were found. Because of the sparse population, a quantitative
sample was not taken. Only a few caddisflies, midge larvae, blackfly
larvae flatworms, and a bristleworm were collected. Based on a mean
d of 2.32 no meaningful interpretation can be made. With an equitability
of 1.4, oxygen stress conditions do not appear to be a factor. Fair
biological conditions were indicated.
Station #5B - Unnamed tributary to Mill Creek (tributary to
Jordan Creek) downstream from the Heidelberg Heights, Pa.
Sewage Treatment Plant
Although the number of genera had increased to 10 &t this station,
70% of the forms were facultative and 30% were tolerant.
Only fair water quality was indicated at this location in spite
of a mean d of 3.19 and an "e" level of 1.3. While there doesn't appear
to be an oxygen stress condition, it appears that chlorine from the
sewage treatment plant may be responsible for the absence of sensitive
forms although they were sparse upstream from the sewage treatment plant.
Station #6 - Mill Creek (tributary to Jordan Creek)(near
Schnecksville, Pennsylvania
Good water quality as far as oxygen stress conditions would
appear to be indicated at this station based on the 14 genera which in-
cluded five kinds of mayflies, one kind of caddisfly, and two kinds of
-------
riffle beetles. Good conditions would also appear to be indicated by
* the d of 3.5 and equitability level of 1.2. However, eutrophication
is taking place based on a chlorophyll a reading of 79.5 ug/1.
Station #7 - Jordan Creek at the covered bridge.
M Good water quality was indicated by the 16 genera of bottom
organisms which consisted of 78.6% clean water forms in the 475 or-
» ganisms in the square foot sample. However a d reading of 2.23 and an
equitability level of 0.4 indicates this area is already experiencing
occasional oxygen stress conditions.
I A chlorophyll a reading of 48.0 ug/1 suggests this reach is
approaching a eutrophication problem. This could possibly be origina-
ting from the Pennsylvania Game Farm located upstream.
In spite of the above suggested problems, numerous minnows,
carp, bass, and sunfish were observed throughout the area.
I Station #8A - This station is located on "an unnamed tributary
entering a pond which in turn drains into Jordan Creek.
W Good water quality was indicated by 15 genera of benthics which
M- consisted of 67% clean water associated forms, such as five genera
of mayflies, one genera of stoneflies, three genera of caddisflies and
one genera of riffle beetles. The diversity index of 3.81 and an
equitability of 1.3 further suggests good biological conditions.
V Station #8B - This station was located on the outlet from the
M small pond (est. 1/4 acre) which drained into Jordan Creek.
Good water quality was still indicated by the twenty genera of
benthic organisms which consisted of 65% clean water associated forms.
I
-------
(61)
One genera of stoneflies, four genera of mayflies, three genera of
caddisflies and one genera of riffle beetle were present. The d reading
of 3.71 and an equitability reading of 1.0 further substantiate this
evaluation.
Eutrophication does not appear to be a problem based on a
chlorophyll reading of 4.5 mg/1.
Station #9 - Jordan Creek downstream from the proposed dam site.
Good water quality was indicated by the twenty-three genera of
bottom organisms which consisted of 95.6 clean water associated forms
in the square foot sample of 495 organisms. Occasional oxygen stress
conditions are suggested by the diversity index (d) of 2.25 and an
equitability level of 0.3.
Algae was very heavy in areas, but a chlorophyll a reading
of only 37.5 ug/1 was recorded. However, this may suggest a future
problem and may account for the low equitability ("e") level.
Minnows (primarily dace) and suckers were very abundant and
appeared to be the predominant forms.
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(62)
Table I. Chlorophyll a Data on Trexler Lake,
Jordan Creek, Pennsylvania Preimpoundment
Study
Station Chlorophyll a Reading
#1 43.5 ug/1
#2 51.0 ug/1
#3 75.0 ug/1
#4 7.5 ug/1
#5 16.5 ug/1
#6 79.5 ug/1
#7 48.0 ug/1
#8 4.5 ug/1
#9 37.5 ug/1
-------
1
I
1'
0
1-1
1 *
1
fc/3 >i
S£ *O
O) 3
*3 CO
*^
§U -P
05 C
O g
u -3
M C
IS 3
EH 0
25 ft
H E
ffl -H
0)
&H) M
IOP,
g.2
t-3 C
D (0
CO *^
IW rH
a >t
*s
w a
> 0)
^^ 0^ f^i
^H r '
^H Lfj v
^B ^
^^ 1 ^
m
fw a>
^ «H
CQ X
EH }-i
1
1
1
1
1
-
'tn
in 00 ro
& m o X H H
3 rH
0
CQ ra CM H
CO tT> in rH rH H
M
0
<2 X XX XX
co m
CO
r^ Q) in
a
0
4J
vo IB x X X X
E
in
H
C
_. «
CQ tji
in n
O
(U
-rH
S-H"
CO
C
0)
co
c
*0 X X MXX rHXX
-rl
-P
3
H
H
0 IO CM
f) OH CM CM rH
M
0 '
4J
C «
In rH
0)
rH
O
-P
C rH
rH H ID rH CM
8-
0 ft cr
C rC U) ft
O -0 co ft re
-H ft'O ft 'fttO I0-r-
4-> cnftC W'ftcOrHfO £
nj COH3 ftCOrH-HtCd
-P con) tj coco fl 0 C -H r-
co a; rH ro m 3 m Jj rJ o ft f ', .r
H ^1 In re en 4J in D Q) cu C to (.' -
H CD 3 £ cu a> --I j. r E 'S ; "
4-1 p o a -H rH - c< o> a; -P c i
oj o E o rH v C) ,n ,c o. o o ;
c en 01 H w u
OHZZ >,r-i;eauKiuEHHi-
s i
00
ai m
CM X C^ ^M X ^ ^* ^
rH rH VO rH X x
^*
X XXX X
CO ID
r*> *fr H
X H rH 00
X X X <*
X
X
-
<* H rH X "1
r^ H
X rH kO X
o m
Or- CM rH
m
CM ^T CM
rH en en vo X ^
u
n) ft
I«-H CO ft
A ft ft to
0) CO ft CO CO . ft
rHfttu -co to-ftft row
.CIOTS ft euro cuftcoco «3
Q O COfB^rH rHCO. ftEt)
0 TO ,^H 0) £ CJ -H 4J IQl CO CO O M
-p£-P CUftJO!>-rC G)fOl3l *H c! 3 c
a cu > -HMO; !," a o -H c E ro tj a> ,
QJ C S-i rH )-, O Oj 0 CQ Ml o! -H -H 0 C c
rH 0 O ^H fTl CO C O £! 'CD rH -H (^ -p.
fOCU 01 E i" r-i 03 Q) C . . C WrHMJJr;
MO-H H-HOr3> rH4J'(D (D-H4JC(
(04JU tJ^r-l^^ MH U I'/ -P tT> k O 0) j
(0 "" -H -H ."
0 a 2 Q
CM
H
H
M H
0
H
n
* 00
rH
rH
) ^*
-H H
) f-
^H
5 O^
«4
ft
^ C7l
j
4J
O
juare f
(genera
*^
to
"^ ^
J *J
£ rf!
r_j P-*
D O
3 g
^ LO
-------
X
vo
>H CO
0 00
J2
10
4->
to
o
H
10
CO
X
X
X X
.Q
10
w
0
§
o
o
a
o
X
X
X X
CO
to
£
w
X
< S1
in 5
0)
4-1
ro
-H
_ 13
X
X
X
X
0)
4J
H
O
,M.
[A
C
ft 10 H CO
w A 5 E
ft 5 ft
to ffl
e -H
C li W
C ' S'
rt ,' D
*> 4-> 3
m rO Q
ft
CO
0)
.c
CJ
ft >
ft to co
CO
to
M O ft ft 10
0 c 5 to w n
E ra rH (DOM
in fa ^ -' co
W) r-i
J5 tn 1-1
H 3 O
T) .Q CO
3 ? <
3
to ro
H X!
ii I e
^^ K
>i (0
(0 O
to a
CU C
H 4->
rH (0
ii I C
m 3
H O
a o
ft
ft at ft
to ID
ft e
10 ft (0
W rH
U) E 10 -H
rH i i
*W *"1
A: E
U -H
(0 0)
0) (P
rH U
»H 0
0) 4J
C C
ra s-i LI
H 'O CQ a.
(0
3
"5
T j
o
0
M
cu
ft
co
ft
C
o
W -H
-i
H W
r-l
U4 i;
! j .,_
01 C
to t-
£ <
0 U ' 10 rH " Vi ' -H ro
CO O U CO U 2 Q
o
n
0
> 1-1
JC
CJ
D) ft
to
D
re
,
rc
c
K
re
t-
E
(-
c
H
ft
IA
to
0)
V)
Q)
-------
1
<* XX
1-"*
*S S
§1 3
-c
w
1
1 ; . MM
1 *
1 «
W m H
i
» $
1 ,
..!
1 1
n
1'
CN
1
! t-H
1 :
c-l
jj
^ cu
O< rH CO
CX W Q Q) C CO U
to 10 m n -H 6
n1 cr m '3 £ m H 3
H ,Tt CD 3 -H -P P -H -H
-H . 1 r-H O U (0 rH (0 (-1
»c MI v, :) cu w a) 3 c w
0 ll Jl Tl U -H M (0 rH fd
H OtNM fO-M CD)j CUX
-M tnoo TI>I > DID
ra (0 OQ y CUQ no Ccn
-P >H M -H -H
_ w Q a, < t,
T
CD r*
H * XX
H rH X X
f~*
in
cu
1 <* 4J X
CO
IB
1
U
H
r** i^ cj
cr> 10 m
rt
0
0)
H
1 rfr ^} CN
ro
CO
O
1
t^ VO U rH H rH
CU
a
0
i ^ ""
CO
E
CO
H
C
(0
rH CM pi VO
o
C
ro
m *j M
cu
f*H
o
, W
^^ D^ inMX ^J O co 10 E^
-I i-5 S n o T) cu ro i" w JH a
< < CU U £ O 'W a> O (D|-H Q -H
t-< H rH -H Q) C -H Vi 101 M ,5 T5
OO -P»-i t^F-Q r, IH>H VC
H H ifl fl -0 -H y . ,c tt) 00)
CQCQ -HE 3 i-J H x-i ^-ilOilUj OH
D D M 3 rH -H rH
CD W 03 ij 03 < CQ
,«
rH fl
1 rH
m H
CM rH
CO CO
1 1
l£> rH
1 1
CM rH
CT> CM
?
0 >
>4H >0
rl
CU CU
IH C
n)
r3 J
11
3 D
tn 01
1
-------
m
a*
in
CM
CM
cn
o
"3
p CQ
01 CO
01
3
CQ
CO
m
m
en
CM
o
rl
in
NO
^f
1
in
t^
<*
NO
O
rH
1
m
CM
en'
M
1 1
*
8
r-l
O
ON
CO
- *.
P
en
rH
CO
en
cn
CM
CM
m
en
ON
rH
en
CM
en
CM
NO
t^
*
^
O
CM
CM
cn
rH
M
t^
o
rH
**»
X
0)
g
rl
X
+J
rl
Ul
rl
01
>
rl
o
C
rl
P
rt
+>
rl
4-*
C
id
g-
C
H
o
01
P
u
o>
rH
I 1
0
o
P
0
c
P
3
fi
+>
C
01
(/)
0)
M
Q.
II
X
0)
M
0)
2
01
1-1
tf)
0)
rl
P
d
+j
rl
i-H
(fl
g-
01
.c
V
c
rl
X
rH
C
0
+J
c
01
U)
4)
M
a
U)
s
to
H
C
Oi
vi (d
0
a'
|g
a o>
rl
M V)
0 in
u. rd
-------
1
1
Table K - Breakdown of Benthic Orpanisms bv Percentape
|
V
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
into Tolerant, Facultative
and Intolerant (Sensitive)
(based on the tolerance of
(Intermediate)
Catepories
various macro-
invertebrate taxa to decomposable orpanic
wastes ) .
Station Tolerant Facultative
#1 1.0% 12.8%
#2 0.2% $.2%
M~i > ~\oses.
^'-^ i
i
(67)
-------
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(68)
REFERENCES CITED
1. Anon., 1968-Water Quality Criteria, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, U. S. Dept. of Interior, Washington, D. C.
2. Anon., 1971-Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, AWWA, APHA, WPCF, 13th Ed.
3. Anon., 1971-Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes,
EPA, National Environmental Research Center, Analytical Control
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio
4. McKee, J. E. and H. W. Wolfe, 1963, Water Quality Criteria,
Publication No. 3-A, State Water Quality Control Board,
Sacramento, California
5. Winton, E. F. and L. J. McCabe, 1970. Studies relating to
Water Mineralization arid Health, & Journal AWWA Vol. 62, No. 1
6. McCarven, E. F. and W. B. Keighton, 1969, Water Quality and
Discharge of Streams in the Lehigh River Basin, Pennsylvania,
Water Supply Paper 1879-H, U. S. Geological Survey, U. S. Dept.
of Interior, Washington, D. C.
7. Geldreich, E. E. 1966. Sanitary Significance of Fecal Coliforms
in the Environment. Publication WP-20-3, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, Washington
8. Anon., 1972. Biological Field and Laboratory Methods by EPA,
National Environmental Research Center Analytical Quality Control
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio
9. Burks, B. D., 1953. The Mayflies, or Ephemeroptera, of Illinois.
Bull. 111. Nat. Hist. Surv. 26:1-216
1O. Eddy, Samuel and Hodson, A. C., 1950. Taxonomic Keys to the
Common Animals of the North Central States Exclusive of the
Parasite Worms, Insects and Birds. Burgess Publishing Co.,
Minneapolis, Minnesota
11. Frison, T. H., 1935. The Stoneflies, or Plecoptera, of Illinois.
Bull. 111. Nat. Hist. Surv. 2O: 281-371
12. Leonard, Justin W. and Fannie A., Leonard. 1962.
Mayflies of Michigan Trout Streams. Carnbrook Institute Sci.
Michigan. 139pp.
-------
(69)
13. Lloyd, Monte, and R. J. Ghelardi, 1964. A Table for
Calculating the "Equitability" Component of Species Diversity.
Am. Mid. Nat. 79 (2) : 217-225
14. Lloyd, Monte, Jerrold H. Zar, and James R. Karr. 1968.
On the Calculation of Information-Theoretical Measures of
Diversity. Am. Mid. Nat. 79 (2) : 257-272
15. MacArthur, R. H. 1957. On the Relative Abundance of Bird
Species. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., Washington, 43:293-295
16. Margalef, D. Ramon. 1957. Information Theory in Ecology.
General System 3:36-71. English translation by W. Hall
17. Needham, James G. and Paul R. Needham, 1962. A Guide to the
Study of Fresh-Water Biology. Holden-Day, Inc.
San Francisco, California
18. Paine, George H., Jr. Illustrated Flow Chart to Certain
Groups of Chironomid Larvae. U. S. Dept. of HEW, Public
Health Service, Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center
Cincinnati, Ohio 9pp.
-------
APPENDIX
(70)
-------
Station 1. South Branch Lyon Creek
@ Lyon Valley, Pa.
(71)
1 1 1 6/14
I !
'emperatuJu, water
1 i
1 - I
)xygen, dissolved j
"low,
1 t
S2Cfield|
6UC 15.5 1
0°F I 599
no/1
cfs '
mg/1
unit
specific Conductance urn/en
1
Total alkn
'heno. ~Xiy
Acidity
1
Unity "i
alinity
:a
5ulf ate
Total" Hare
"arbonate>.
Pa H^rdnes
>{g "
fton c arbor
ecal Col;
ness
Hard.
s
:i t <= ^jr1 ' .
f crip.s/l'-J
recal Str^p/ 100" ill
_ .
JOD5
3OD7 . . . _ . .
mg/1
r.g/1
tng/1
rag 71
mg/c
'10.2
10.5
0
8.2
120
0/lb i 6/20
18 ] 16
64.4 1 60.8
9.O' 1 8.0
9.2 ' 86.3
8.6
165"
i
"30 "\ 45
" 40
25
16 ~"
" " 0
" 24 '
6.7
!
20 I
-'I 80 "70 "
--1 "0
n
j r I .
50
50 "
" "25 "
9/12
17
62.6
14 . 3
7.8
_. - .
-- - - --
9/13
15
59
8.6
14.5
7.3
160
.
|
L..A ' '- 176UO 34OO
L'.A " f " -' ' i "62" j 2300
1360 - 104
"t " - | - 'I
mg/1 3.1 0.5
mg/1 4.6_ O.5
m-3/1 -r 5.9. .
mg_'l 7. «
;hloropnyll a pr/1 1
TOC
:OD
-------
Station 2. North Branch Lyon Creek
near Lyon Valley, Pa.
-
*
"-
-
-
-
-
;-
-
-
<
l~
<
Temperatuj:
,. , ,
1 6/14 6/16 6/20
9/12
e, water 0°C 15.5 17 16 17
0°F 59.9 1 b2.6 60.8) 62.6'
Oxygen, dif,solvad mg/1 j. 9.6 9.3
Fldw~7 i "cfs ~\ 2 ."4 |" 271
CO, j mg/1 1.4 0
pH (Field) ! unit
7.8
Specific conductance um/cnj 190
Total alkalinity ' rag/1" '45
Pheno. alkalinity mg/1
Acidity mg/1
~" j
Chloride
i nig/1
Ca
Sulfate
mg/1
mg/1
o" T
-48
8."3
200
~ -45-
0
8.8
6.5
-
.. .
L
20 ; 1
24
35
20
1
Total Martinet 1 -.'7/1 ' ~ 80 " | ~ 66' |
Carbonate! bar . v/1
Ca Hardness "<.; I
Mg ^ ".
Non Carbo
45 45
66 | 50
::f 1 20 10
nat--?jd. --:/! 35 ] 15 1
Total coljiforms/iC'G ml. i _L.A. __ j 2O,8OO
Fecal co Iji.forns/'l'DO nl. r .._ L.A. | 36
Fecal Strep/100 ml. 1 258 _
BOD2 I
BOD5 !
mg/1 1.0
ma/1 lil
BODy _ ; ...my/ 1 _ _
BOD,-, > njy 1
CV.orophv 11 a }i'-'l
T.O.C, |
CCD
ND-j-N
N03~N
NH3-N
TKN^
Total N
Total P__
Ortho P
Total" "Sol
Suspended
Volatile
*Cnmr>u't pel
__ .
ids
Solids
Solids
b Acf-ide
mg/1
mg/1
rag/1
mg/1
mq/1
mg/1
mg/1
. mg/1 _
ma/1
~ mg/1 ~
mg/1
mg/1
Xt
_ 1.5
6
4.1
0.010
2.189
0.56
0.56
2.759
'6.010
--- 194
7.2
_
0.5
6.8
1 1.6
9
4.9
0.013
2.287
O.O4
0.04
2 . 30O
._Q.P33_
0. 02O
177
P 8.8
-
'
. , __ .
54
-^
7.6
- - -
-
1OOO
220
116
9/13
17
62.6
9.8
3. 3T"
7.5
240
- -----
...
0.4
1.4
- -- -
i
51.0
. ._
-
14
O.OO7
1.24
0.011
O.O4
1.247
O.O40
6~.23 "
'190
6.4
37
..
9/14 9/19
- - -
3;7
" ' 5 . a'
- .-
- - '- -
i -
1
1
l_ . i
-
1
~~\
._-
"6.623"
. ._
- -.
__
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Station 3.
Jordan Creek
tg Lev.hill, Pa.
i
^
" T "
.. . ..... ,.|
6/34 | 6/16
Temperature, watei; 0°C 16.0
1 i O°F 60.8
Oxygen, dissolved; ir.y, i s>.l
j i
19
66.2
9.0
F'low, » cfs 32.4 I 20.5
CO mg/1 I-4 i °
£ T
pH (Field) | units | 7.8
8.2
Specific conductance um/cmj 120 155
i j ! i
Total alkalinity
Pheno. alkalinity
Acidity
1=9/1
55
rngTl O
ng/1 " 36
6/20
16
60.8
10.2
319
6.4
. _._ ._.
45
0
24
Chloride j mg/1 1 " 20 " ^
Ca j mg/1 j 16 I 12
Sulfate " i " ng/1 17
Total Hardness r.g/1 f 60"" " 50"
Carbonate Hardness -.-._-, 1 , 45 i 45
Ca Hardness mi. ' 1 ' 40 30
!lNon -carbonate ;.irl
rr_;/I ( 20 '2O
i-'l" " "15 "" "5"
"TTotal Colifor-ii-s/J'XI r-.l. ' L.A.
^Fecal Coliforrs/1' 0 rl. ' L.A.
"Fecal Str
llBODcr
I
.-
-
i-
1
'
_
BOD7
BODjo
Chlofophy
T.O.C.
C..Q.D,....
NOq-Ji
NO3-N
NH3-N-
TV M
.Total _N__
Total P
Ortho_P
Total So^
Suspended
Volatile
*Computed
L.A. - La
3P/100 m.
--
_. .._
-- -
._.-. - _
9/12
17
62.6
44. 1
8.0
. .
-- - -
-
i
i
10,45O 12OO
142: '230
1 360 I
^ _ |... _. .
mg/1
mo/1
0.8
t_mg/l j. . U8_
. , nq/1 ' 1.9
0.4 -
0.7
0. 9~
l 85
._
f11 a UK/I
- -
Lds
SoJL_ids.
Solids
D Accide
mgTl
_^i_.
. mg/JL
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
it
r f~ 75.0
4
6.4
o.oio
2.829
, . Q.Q4-
0.44
3,279
0^057
. O..OL
148
...J^2__
5
2 . 6
1 0,01.5
1 2,905
1,O6
3,980
0.028
0.01O
153
7.2
-
.. ._.
-
_.
. .
222
-
75
-' - -
- ---
9/13
17
62.6
44.7
7.6
16O
.
- -
- - - -
o.o
0.8"
- -
-
O.004
2.OO
..0.005
0.04
2.004
0.025
O.O15
83
O.4
23
9/14 9/19
i
59.0
.. J
- - -
.. -
68.0
1
|
" "-I
.
-
-
...
-
-------
Station 4. Unnamed tributary to Jordan Creek
near Lowhill, Pa.
L
0/14
UC
op
mg 1
13.5
5o,3
9.2"
Temperature, v/atcrj
Oxygen,dissolved j
__! _ L. ; -
liFlow, , i cfs i 0.04
lj - i * >
jjCOo _,_ j mg/'l ! _ 3 _
, " T" T'
pH (Field) unitsj__7.3
SpecifJLc_ fonductcince um/cni _ _1?Q_
""" i " r j
Total Alkalinity t m9/l_(_
Pheno.Alkalinity i. mg/l |
Acidity ! i. m<
0/16 | 0/20
-- f ^^-
59.9 | _57_.2
"9.3"!"
9/12
16
9/13
16.5
9/14,
(',4)
9/19
60.8
0.03
1.4
0.35
_7.8
175
6.3
0.05""
7.3
Chloride
--
iSulfate
mg/l
mg/1
mg/l
30
I)
__4.8__
^10^
~~2"bT
" 34 '
_45_
~ 0
24
6>.7
" 8."6"
_6.3_
170
20
07UT
I ,
,'JTotal Hardness ' -g.'l '. 7O ; 70
Carbonate
JjCa Hardne;
- jfig . . ."
_,|jNon-Carbo:
[(Total Col:
JFecal Col-
j
-
Hard.
5S
late h-^-i
---.-I i
30 j 45 j
50 ' 50 !
20..
40
....... . , _
!_.... _
__ _ . . -
. .20 . 1 ..._ j i...
25 I I J
Lfcrp^/1'^0 p.l . ; _.L.A. .12334 600.
u'onns/ 100 ml. j L.A. 92 280
Fecal ^Strep/100 :nj
BOD2
BOD^ "
-
80 i 94 278
j
mg/l i 0.4
mg/l l.O
0.4
"0.6
BOD7 mn/1 1.4
EOD^ ' "ig/l"' 1.6 "6.3"
Chlorophyll i" ' i's/1
T.O.C.
C.O.D.
N02.-N__
N03-N
NH3.N
TKN
TotaJL N
Tptal P
OrtheL-P.--
Total_Sol
S^i sp ondt>rf
Volatile .
*_T_Cojnpu
L^-A, 1,
L -
r 3 4
.
- - -
.ds
Salids_i
Jolids _,
;ed
ib -Acc^idx
1.5 _| 0.7
mg/l
mq/1
_ mg/l __
mg/l
mg/l
my/1
mg/l_
_.rog/l_ .
mg/l
_rag/l_
nt
0.005
3,140
.._9.«04
1.00
4.14O
0-066
0.06Q
. _145
8.0
.
0.0 '
" 7~. 5 ~
o.oosj
2.720
___O^Q4._
3.280
O.O25
Q.020
_ 143 ___
15.6
.
- -- -
O.4
-
17
0.002
2.65
. .0,005
6^04
2,652
O,075
- 0.040
119
19.4
i. .22
,
-
-- -
-
...
_..
,
---
. __
--
_.__ ..
- -
- - -
1
... _.,
. . . :
. . _ _ :
-
-------
Station 5. tfeiclelberg Heights S.T.P. Outfall
ne.ir Schnecksville, Pa.
*
-
-
-
_
-
-
;-
-
-
-
-
i
Temperatuj
e, water
""" ~"I
Oxygen, dissolved
- -' ---r
Flow, ,
:o2
H(Fi,ldl[
P_J _ ^__ j
Specific tontiuctar
Total alkalinity
Pheno. Alkalinity
Acidity
oC
oF
mg/1
CfG
mg/1
6/14 [
18
64.4 i
7.4 "
_.. ._ ^
36.2 [
11.5
i f
units 6.9 "
ce um/cm{ 540 [
rig/1
"mo/1
.._; .: i. . ., '
Chloride mg/1
Ca | _ rug/ 1
Sulfate [ mg/1
Total Hartiness nc/i
Carbonate Hc>rJ. "~/l
Ca Hardness I
Mg " i,
JNsi£L=£a.rbor."'te 'lord
Total co-LjLforms
Focal cQliforms/K.
-/I
. '."/I
30 ml
Fecal S.trep/100 ml
BOD^ . _...
BODr
BOD7.
Ron,-,
Chlorcphv
TOC
C,QAD._.
N03-N
TKN
Total -N .
OrjLho_P__.
Total Sol
Suspended
Volatile
* - Uompu
L*.A. - La
LI _a_
mg/1
" .."
ma /I
. .. jug/1
Tig/'i
mg/1
__j_«L/_.
._
_
Lds
Solids
Solids
tea
). Ace id
mg/1
.mg/1 .
JH£ /I
mq /I
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
:nt
45 |
0
108 " ':
55
36
110
90
" 45
"- 1
4 >
. L.A^j
L.A.
°
2.9
3. i
A.5__
10 ""
*~_ .26
0.0006
25.994
1.45
27.450.
8.150
6.700
445
20.7
~
6/16 6/20
20.5
68.9 !
5.2
13
'"5574"
36.4 ]_ 74.6
11.5
6.9" j' '"6.7
~ "505^ "
- -
45
0
9O
*?.
130
45'
10O~
30
"85
. .
-
1025
r 28
19
9/12
20
68 ~
19.5
6,3
... ...
. .
- - -
900
L.A.
84
.1.3 _j
3.5 i
"i^zt
1
! - -
-rs---j
_ 26 _
O.O11
17.139
L__ 0.04^
3.08
.20.230
9.60
421
16.4
-
-
-
_ .
...
..
. . . .
9/13
20
0.9
33.3
3.3
470"
...
_ . .. .
- - - --
0.0
1.4
30
0.097
19.9
3.75
.23.747
14.0
.10.5
373
4.O
126
- - -
[
-
-
_.
i
i
_ . .4 - .
-
-"
i
l
... .-.
- -
'
-
-
-
-------
Station o. Mill Creek
>ar Scheclcsvilie, Pa.
(76:
1
-
*
-
1
'
Temperati
Oxygen, c
6/14 6/16 6/20 9/12
re, water
lissolvec
i
CO?
PH (Fielc
Specific <
Total alk;
]
n
.onductar
ilinity j
Pheno. Alkalinity
Acidity
Chloride
pa
ISuifate
jj
jTotal Hare
'
-
--
-
-
--
-
--
I
In^ss
Carbonate Hardne=->
Ca Hardness
Non-carbo
Total Col.
Fecal Col
late hard.
I 1
°C 15 j 18
mg/1
cfs
mg/1
units
c e um/cm
mg ''I
nig /I
"mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
rr.g / 1
r.g/'l
59
9.6
4.8
64.4
9.0
4.2
11.5 : " ' 2.3
. . ,
6.9 ! 7.4
185 , 200
" """45 I " 3O "
0 0
24 " [ 36
20
24
36
80 "~
me '' 1 6O
r^/I
.forns/ LOG -a
.forms/lOO ml
20
35 J
L.A.
" L.A.
[Fecal Strsp/iOO ml 1360O.A
! " T -~I
BOD2
BOD5"~"
-
!3OI>7
EOD-,^ 1
Chlorophyll a.
T.O,C.
C.O.D. .
N02-N
NO3-N
NH3-N
TKN
Total N
Total P
Orthq P
Total Sol
Suspended
Volatile"
* - Compu
"
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
net/ 1
1.1
1.-9
, 1.9
2.1
J-'-5/l
I ma/1
mg/1
1
, mg/1
- - --
i-ds
Solids
Solids
ted
b'.~ Accfc
mg/1
mg/'l
mg/1
m.i/1
my /I
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
;nt '
17
2.6
0.009
1 3.411
0.04
0.39
3.780
0^155
0.04O
178
8.0
._
24
- -70-
30
60
17 ,
"63". 6
8,1
47.5
"7.0
- --
lo
40
roToo
"" "46"
0.4
0. 8 ~
49
__ ,
1.1
16
60.8
6.5
- -
7". 6
- -----
- ----- -
-""-5?
89
4
1..
79.5
|
1
i
0.013
3.467
0.04
6". 39 "
3.87O
0.142
0. 140
169
""9.2
1
-
-- --
- ---
9/13
17 '
~ ' 6276"
7.. 8
6.6
5.0
24O
--
. -
-
" 0.0
'-
_
; 14
O.O21
"""6". 18 "
0.025
6.O4
o! 172
O.OO7
150 ~
1.2
51
- -
i
9/14
- f ._
9.6
-
''9/10
10.2
-
~I
_ . .
--
._
j
__ -
- --
.._
- -
-
-. ...
-- -
-
- -'
1
j
-------
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Station 7. Jor \n Crv-ijk
near Scheck&vilLc, Pa.
*
Temperatu}
Oxygen, d
CO,.
pH (Field
Specific
Total Alk
-e, watei
' °C
. . . 1 . °F
Lssolvedi mg/1.
1 "" cfs
6/14 6/16 6/20
17.5
.63.5
10,7
50
" 20. | 17
68
10^.0
"~44
mg/1 3.9^ 3.9
)
^onductai
alinity
Pheno. Alkalinity
i! Acidity
_
Chloride
rca ~ :
Sulfate
.
units
ice urn/en
- - r -^
rag/1
_j3a/i ..:
"~mg/l
7l2 7.2
|
T75 " ' 190"
i
62.6
8.4
493
~7.JO"
-
30 30 - '
0 0
2~4 ^ 24 [
L7A.
rag/1 ' 24 i 19
mg/1 _ 27" [
I
Total Hardness f" mg/1 ' 70 7O
[jCirbonate, HardnesE, ng/1
_>iCa Hardness '. -:c<'l
"
-
-
-_
-
-
-
Mg " ; rr.-r/l
,3on. carbojiat e__Har c;-.e --..s. SLg ' -
Total Coliforras/.lCC nl
fecal Collforms/lpO ml
Fecal Strep/ 100 ml
BOD2
BODc;
BOD7
BOD.,,^
30 ' 3O 1
60 48 1
10
L__40_
L,A.
_22
40
L.A.
238
-
9/12
18
64.4
" 68
"7.7
.._
850O
309
90
mg/1 0.1 |_ 0.5 '
33/1 1.2 0.5
rag /I j 1.2 | |
me '1
i i
CHlorcpiiiy
T.O.C.
C.O.D.
N02
NOq
NH3
TKN "
Total N
Total P
Orth_q__P_
Total Sol
Suspended
Volatile
^""CompiTE'e
L.A, - La
11 a i
_ _
- -
ids
Solids
Solids
i" "__~~
Id^
br^Accid
r mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
_mg/l
mg/1
mg/1
__ 2.3 ' 1.2
4
5.2
0.01C
"" 3.729
0.04
0.67
4.409
0.020
0.01C
mg/1 152
mg/1 1 7.2
_ mg/lj - __
5
1.1
O.O15
2.905
0.04
O.33
3.050
0.025
o.qip__
149
6.8
371t -' | ' ' -
i
48.0
--
6OO
L.A.
174 '
:....
- -
- -
9/13
18
64.4
8.3
69 -
7.5
-2OO--
"
o.o
0.5
32
O.010
3.39
O.O14
O.O4
3.4OO
O~.020
O.OO7
103
6.8
28
- -
9/14
. ...
98
9/ 19
-
98
l
1
_
*
_
-
..
\
-- - - -
-- - -
^_
. . .
_ ...
-'
- ;
~\
_ _J
-------
Station 8. Unnamed tributary to Jr.rdan Creek
(d Vviedasvi lie, Pa.
-3)
*
'-
f
Temper at U3
Qxyaen, d:
Flow, f
i
C0~>
pH (Field
Specific i
Total Alk,
e, water
ssolyed [
i
°C "
- Op
mg/l_
cfs 1
T
[ mg/l"
-1
:on3Iictan
ilinity
Pheno. Alkalinity
Acidity
Lnits
ce urn/cm
mg/1
6/14 6/lb
I
i
16 20
60. a
_ 9.0
0.05
1.8
7.5
08
9._3__
0.04
6/20
16
60.8
__8.0
0.45
5.7
7.2
"215 "215
30 45
mg/1 0
iag/1 " 48
^TTCT
0 I
24
Chloride nig/ 1 25 |
Ca L" | mg/i ! 24 21
Sulfate lag/l , 39
. . |
iJTotal Hardness ' mr '1 80
" 'Carbonate 'Harane.,., ^'1 30
-
'~
-
-
-
-
Ca Hardness , m-j, 1
Mg "" i " " ru-'l
BD"
' "45
60 j 52
20 j 28
Non-carbonate hor>5. ".7/1 50
Total Colixorm.-5/loO nl ; L.A.
Fecal Coliforms/lG
.Fecal Strep/100 m!
"~
BODY ~" T
)0 ml L.A.
L ~250
~"ma7l 0^6~"
'35
-
o.'s
BODs .. . _ . mg/1 ,_ 1.4 __1.6
ROD., ma /I 1:4
-- -
1800
31
85"
BODj.2._ i _- . . _!_jag/l. ! 8_ | i.^7
Chlorophyll 3 u», 1 ', j
T.O.C.
C.O.D.
N02
N03
NH3
TKN
Total N
Total P
Orthp_P
Total Sol
Suspended
Volatile
* compu
L;TCT -~ta
i-ds
Solids
5qlids_
ced
D. -fteeld
mg/1 4
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
i mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1^
mg/l_
mg/1
_mg/l
intff
2.6
.0.014
"2.666
0.04
f 0.33"
3.010
0.015
__o.p_i__
169
5.2
4
7.5
0.027
2.693
0.04
0.33
3.O50
0.030
0.010
153
4,'S
~
' - V -
9yl2 9/13
19
66.2
0.06
S72' "
-
- -- -
" 800
L.A.
200
" 4.5
-
-- - --
. _.
18.5
65.3
1O.8
0.0>6
" ^B.^ -
iiuO
-
...
o'.s>
.2.7
- -
-
24
O.O09
" "0.391"
O.'OOS
OTO4 "
3.919
O.O4O
0.013
112
1.2
28
9/14 ° 14
|
0.11
;
0.07
t
1 -
" ' [ "
__ '. . 1
. .
-
-- -
. . ..
._
' "3.91
....
-
- - - '
-------
Station 9. Jordan
near Siegersville. Pa.
-------
" 1
i
i
s
J
t
'*
>;
ij
: .
i 1 !
: !
. i ..:
i
I
o
» ' -H
, , 4->
Q)
8 .
' ; "* o>
! 3
1 J
I ; S
111 3
i i *
I i fi
, i
t
1
1
i " I
i
; ' !
i i
c,
?
t
5i ;
! .J '
j -1 I
' ',
CO
0.
c
o
01
H
*-»
rH
3
Ul
0)
rS
H
ft
5
=?
<
1
LABORATOR1
H
£
5
H
w
H
M
1
S
«
q
u
h*
a
x
m
r-<
a
4-»
g
i- LINCANE PCB's
:HLER
13 £
2 o
u
5
&£
s <
B
S
z
M
S
<
z
w
S
U
Ul
Q
§
t5
a
S
r-4
b.
01
rt
H -
o
0
51
si
s
0
rH
1
u!
S
a
3
rH
N
a
z'
a
z
o
z
a
z
a
z
Q
Z
a
z
a
z
i-4
V
Q
z"
Q
a 9/13/72 . N
C
0
H
It
Ul
»
n
o
Q Q
;' z'
a a
z' z'
Q a
z z
o a
z z
a Q
z z
Q a
z z
Q a
z z
Q 0
Z Z
O Q
X Z
« -H
z V
Q a
z' z
Q a
2: z
8 *
§ §
H «r4
4 It
Ul Ul
o -<
f *f
vO -O
V
Q
Z
Q
Z
a
z
o
z
a
z
Q
Z
a
z
a
z
r-l
V
Q
Z
Q
Z
Si
?
e
0
ri
t
Ul
«
s
-H
V
»1
V
a
z
Q
Z
Q
Z
Q
Z
Q
Z
O
z
a
z
1-1
V
a
z
Q
Z
I
C
o
H
a
Ul
m
^f
-0
a
z'
o
z'
a
z
o
z
a
z
a
z
a
z
a
z
a
z
a*
z
a
z
a
z
s
*
c
0
H
a
IA
>»
f
-O
V
rH
V
a
z
a
z
a
z
a
z
a
z
0
z
a
z
rH
V
Q
Z
a
z
c
IN
e
o
rl
It
r4
<0
U)
«
3
7
a
z
a
z
Q
Z
Q
Z
a
z
a
z
a
z
Q
%
O
Z
Q
Z
a
z
X
s
c
0
H
it
in
o
f
a
e
14
i-4
It
8
0)
?
U
M
8
<-4
O
**
H
"<5
Si
o
:order re*]
5
w
It
«
H
Oi
0
**
X
**
H
>
-H
V
«
C
-------
(31)
Basin:
UISSOLVgD OXYGEN INVESTIGATIONS^
Jordan Creok Basin
Date: 9/2O/72
Station: (j.) South Branch Lyon Creek at Lyon Valley, Pa. Crew; Kaeufer
Sunrise 0648
DIURNAL OXYGEN STUDY
Sunset 1903
'Depth
Ft.
0.5 .
0.5
0.5
! 0.5
0.5
0.5
| 0.5
Time
06 1O
0755
0955
1145
1405
1645
1905
Weather
Conditions
Dark & Cloudy
Partly Sunny
it n
11 ti
11 if
Cloudy
Dark
Water Temp. C
15.5
15
17
19
18.5
19
D. O. mg/1
8.6
9.0
9.2
9.6
9.9
; 9.0
8.4
- r '
% Saturation
85
1 88
! 91
1
r - i -i
\ 99
j 1O5
j 96
89
IN-SITU BSNTHAN OXYGEN DEMAND
Total Depth 0.5 ft.
J (1) O755 a.m.-1145 noor
] Temp. °C
(2) 14OO p.m.-19O5 p.m
Temp. °C
D. O. mg/1 ,
Background
D.O.
9.0
9.9
Light Bottle
D.O.
8.2
9.4
Dark Bottle Depth
. i
D.O. ' Set ft
8.1 ; 0.5
i
i
9.2 i 0.5
-------
Basin:
Station:
(82)
DISSOLVED OXYGEN INVESTIGATIONS
Jordan Creek Basin
(2) North Branch Lyon Creek
near Lyon Valley, Pa.
Date:
Crew:
9/20/72
Kaeufer
Sunrise O(>48
DIURNAL OXYGEN STUDY
Sunset 1903
Depth
Ft. Time
I
0.5' 0620
O.5 08O5
W eat her
Conditions
Dark & Cloudy
Partly Cloudy
o
Water Temp. C
15
14
- "~ t
D. O. mg/1 3
s.a ;
10.0
; Saturation
86
96
0.5 -
i 0.5
: 0.5
. 0.5 '
j 0.5
1055 i
1155 !
1415 I
1655 '
192O
n
rf
IT
Cloudy
Dark
" j 15 . 5
" j 17. O
" | 19.0
19.0
16.5
10.8
' 11.2
11.2
10.0
8.7
| 107
1
i 115
1
1
1 119
i
i 1O6
; 88
IN-SITU BENTHAL OXYGEN DEMAND
Total Depth 0.5 ft.
(1) O8O5 a.m.- 1155
; Temp. °C
I (2) 1415 p.m.-192Op.m.
] Temp. °C
D. O. mg/1
Background
D.O.
1O.O
11.2
Light Bottle ' Dark Bottle Depth
.
D.O. ;
8.8
j
|
9.8!
.1
D.O. j Set ft
8.7; 0.5
1
i
9.8! 0.5
-------
(83)
PISSOLVED OXYGEN I WESTIJ3ATIQNS_
Basin:
Station:
Jordan Creek Basin
Date:
9/20/72
(3) Jordan Creek at Lowhill, Pa.
Kaeufer
Crew:
Sunrise O648
DIURNAL OXYGEN STUDY
Sunset 19O3
Depth
Ft.
Time
Weat her
Conditions
I
0.5 . Oo30 | Dark & Cloudy
i
0.5 !082O j Partly Sunny
Water Temp. C
15.5
D.O. mg/1
8.8
Saturation
87
15
9.4
92
, 0.5
: 0.5
, 0.5
1O20
M fl
16
12OO ' " " j 17
1425 : " " 18
10.2
10.7
10.8
102
110
114
O.5 1705
Cloudy
JJ3.5 1930 Dark_
18
17
10.1
9.6
| 106
; 99
IN-SITU BENTHAL OXYGEN DEMAND
Total Depth O.5 ft.
(1) O820 a.m.-12OO noon
* o
: leap. C
(2) 1425 p.m.-193O p.m.
Tenp. °C
D. O. mg/1
Background | Light Bottle ! Dark Bottle
D. O.
Depth
9.4
10.8
D. O.
8.6
10.1
D. O. Set ft.
9.O i 0.5
9.6 0.5
-------
DISSOLVED OXYGEN INVESTIGATIONS
Basin:
Station:
.Jordan Cr_eek_ Basin
(4) Unnamad tributary to Jordan^
Creek near" Lowhf lT7~P~a.
Date:
Crew:
_ 9/20/72
Kaeufer
Sunrise 0648
DIURNAL OXYGEN STUDY
Sunset 1903
Depth We at he
Ft. Time Condi t
O.5, 064O Dark i
r o
ions Water Temp. C D. O.
Cloudy 15 8.
O.5 ' O845 I Partly Sunny . 15 8.
O.5 1030
O.5 1205 "
0.5 1445 "
" 1 15 8.
" 16 8.
" 16.5 8.
0.5 1715 Cloudy 16.0 8.
; O.5 1945 Dark
mg/1
4 i
6 i
6 i
7 1
7 j
6
16.0 8.4
% Saturation
8.2
84
84
87
88
86
84
IN-SITU BENTHAL OXYGEN DEMAND
Total Depth 0.5 ft.
(1) 0845 a.m.-12O5 noon
Temp. C
(2) 1445 p.m.-1945 p.m.
Temp. °C
D. O. mg/1
Background
D.O.
8.6
8.7
8.7
Light Bottle Dark Bottle Depth
Removed f
Recovered
D.O.
8.2
rom st:
ream by c
bottles
D.O. Set ft.
i
8.2 i 0.5
_ . . j . . ._
)
iildren|
1
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
s Basin:
Jordan Creek Basin
(85)
DISSOLVED OXYGEN INVESTIGATIONS
Date:
Crews
_ near
Schnecksville, Pa.
9/21/72
Kaeufer
Sunrise 0648
DIURNAL OXYGEN STUDY
Sunset 19O3
Depth
Ft.
0.5 "
0.5
0.5
j 0.5
' 0.5
t
: 0.5
j_0.5
Weather o '
Time Conditions Temp. C D. O. mg/1
060O Dark 14.5 8.3 j
0750 Cloudy 15 8.4 |
1010 " 15 8.8 !
1155 " 1 16 ' 9.2 !
1515 '. " 15.5 9.8 !
1805 " 15 9.6 |
11955 Dark 15 9.3 I
% Saturation
81
82
86
92
97
94
91
IN-SITU BENTHAL OXYGEN DEMAND
Total Depth 0.5 ft.
(1) 75O a.m.- 1155 a.m.
Temp. °C
j (2) 1515 p.m.-1955 p.m.
Temp. C
Backgr
D. O. m
ound
D.O.
8.4
9.8
9/1
Light Bott
le
D.O.
11.9
9.4
f
Dark Be
>ttle Depth
. \
D.O. Set ft.
11.6 0.5
9.2 , 0.5
-------
Basin:
Station:
(86)
.OXYGEN. I.NVESIIGa.UQMS-
Jordan Creek
°ate :
(7) Jordan Creek near Schnecksville.Pa. Crew:
9/21/72
Kaeufer
Sunrise 0648
DIURNAL OXYGEN STUDY
Sunset 1903
Depth
Ft.
0.5
0.5
0.5
: 0.5
0.5
0.5
! 0.5
Weather
Time Conditions Temp . C D.O. mg/1
0615 ! Dark 15 8.6
080O Cloudy 15 8.8
1030 " ! 15 9.8
i :
1215 " i 15 10.5
15OO i " 17 13.2
1740 ; ; 17 12.6
1935 Dark 17 1O.6
% Saturation
' 84
86
', 96
, 103
i 136
| 130
109
IN-SITU BENTHAL OXYGEN DEMAND
Total Depth.O.5 ft.
(1) 8 a.m.-1215pm
Temp. °C
(2) 1500 p.m.-1935 p.m.
Temp. °C
Backgro
D.O. mg
und
D.O.
8.8
13.2
/I
Light Bott
'
«
le ' Dark Bottle Depth
D.O. J D.O. | Set ft
I
11.8 t H-6. 0.5
4. ''.... .. . .';'. _ ;
1 ---i
1
10.9: 10-7 0.5
-------
DISSOLVED OXYGEN INVESTIGATIONS
Basin:
Station:
Jor dan..C_r_eek Basi_n_
(8) Unnamed tributary to Jordan
Creek at Wiedasville, Pa.
Date:
Crew:
_ Q/21/72
__Kaeufer
Sunrise 0648
DIURNAL OXYGEN STUDY
Sunset 19O3
Depth
Ft.
0.5 '
Time
0625
Weather
Conditions
Dark
0
Temp. C D. O.
16 9.8
mg/1
% Saturation
98
0.5
0815 ; Cloudy
16
10.1
101
0.5
0.5
0.5
,5
; o.s
1O45 1 "
1J35 i "
1445
, 1725 "
! 1920 Dark
16 12.
16 11.
17.5 13.
17 12.
16.5 11.
O
4
2
3
9
120
114
; 138
127
120
Total Depth 0.5 ft.
(1) 815 a.m. - 1235 p.m
Temp. °C
(2) 1445 p.m.-1920 p.m.
Temp. °C
[N-SITU BENTHAL OXYGEN DEMAND
D. O. mg/1
Backgr
ound
D.O.
10.1
13.2
Light Bottl
e ! Dark Be
D.O.
- - .
12.5
1
1
1
1
11.0 1
ttle Depth
. i
D.O. Set ft
12.4 0.5
11.0 ; o.s
1
-------
(86)
_DI_SSOLVED__OXY
-------
«
I
I
j
-------
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
------- |