U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
       Annapolis Field Office
      Annapolis Science Center
     Annapolis, Maryland  21401
      WORKING DOCUMENTS
          Volume  13

-------

-------
                            PUBLICATIONS

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


                              VOLUME 1
                          Technical  Reports


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

 6         Sanitary Bacteriology of  the Upper Potomac Estuary

 7         The Potomac Estuary Mathematical Model

 9         Nutrients in the Potomac  River Basin

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


                              VOLUME 2
                          Technical  Reports


13         Mine Drainage in the North Branch Potomac River Basin

15         Nutrients in the Upper Potomac River Basin

17         Upper Potomac River Basin Water Quality Assessment


                              VOLUME  3
                          Technical  Reports


19         Potomac-Piscataway Dye Release and Wastewater
           Assimilation Studies

21         LNEPLT

23         XYPLOT

25         PLOT3D


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

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

                         Technical Reports


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


                             VOLUME 4
                         Technical Reports


29         Step Backward Regression

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

33         Mathematical Model Studies of Water Quality in the
           Potomac Estuary

35         Water Resource - Water Supply Study of the Potomac
           Estuary

                             VOLUME 5
                         Technical Reports


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

39         Preliminary Analyses of the Wastewater and Assimilation
           Capacities of the Anacostia Tidal River System
41         Current Water Quality Conditions and Investigations                 '
           in the Upper Potomac River Tidal System                             .

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

45         Nutrient Management in the Potomac Estuary                          *


                             VOLUME 6                                          <,

                         Technical Reports                                     ^
                                                                               \
47         Chesapeake  Bay  Nutrient Input Study

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

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

                                   Technical Reports

          51         A System of Mathematical Models for Water Quality
                     Management

          52         Numerical Method for Groundwater Hydraulics

          53         Upper Potomac Estuary  Eutrophication Control
                     Requirements

          54         AUTJ3-QUAL Modelling System

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

                                       VOLUME  7
                                   Technical Reports

           55         Water Quality Conditions  in the Chesapeake Bay System

           56         Nutrient  Enrichment and Control Requirements  in  the
                     Upper Chesapeake  Bay

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

                                        VOLUME  8
                                   Technical  Reports

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

*          59          Distribution of  Metals  in  Baltimore Harbor Sediments

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

                                        VOLUME  9
r
                                       Data  Reports

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

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

-------
                            VOLUME 9   (continu.-rd)

                           Data Reports


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

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

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

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

           Water Quality Survey of the  Potomac Estuary - 1967

           Water Quality Survey of the  Potomac Estuary - 1968

           Wastewater Treatment Plant Nutrient Survey - 1966-1967

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

                            VOLUME 10

                           Data Reports

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

10         Water Quality Survey of the  Annapolis Metro Area - 1967

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

12         1969 Head  of  the  Bay Tributaries

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

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

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

                           Data Reports

15         Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River - 1967

16         Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River - 1968

17         Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River - 1969

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

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

                             VOLUME 11
                            Data Reports

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

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

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

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

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

25         Water Quality of the Potomac Estuary Consolidated
           Survey - 1970

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

27         Potomac Estuary Wastewater Treatment Plants Survey
           1970

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

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

-------
   30


   31


   32
   33
   34
Appendix
  to 1
Appendix
  to 2
    3


    4
                  VOLUME 11  (continued)
                 Data Reports

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

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

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

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

Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River - 1970

                  VOLUME 12

               Working Documents

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

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

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

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

                  VOLUME 13
               Working Documents

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

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

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

                          Working  Documents

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

 6         Water Pollution Survey  -  Back  River  1965 - February 1967

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

                            VOLUME   14
                          Working  Documents

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

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

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

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

                             VOLUME 15
                          Working  Documents

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

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

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

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

-------
                             VOLUME 16

                          Working Documents

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

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

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

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

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

                             VOLUME 17
                           Working Documents

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

                           Working Documents

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

                             VOLUME  18
                           Working Documents

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

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

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

                             VOLUME 19
                          Working Documents

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

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

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

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

           The Potomac Estuary - Statistics and Projections -
           February 1968

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

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

                         Working Documents

          Wastewater  Inventory - Potomac River Basin -
          December  1968

          Wastewater  Inventory - Upper  Potomac River Basin -
          October 1968

                            VOLUME 20
                         Technical Papers~

 1          A  Digital Technique for Calculating and Plotting
           Dissolved Oxygen Deficits

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

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

 4          Estimating Diffusion Characteristics of Tidal Waters -
           May 1965

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

 6          An In-Situ Benthic Respirometer - December 1965

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

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

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

10          Evaluation of Coliform  Contribution by Pleasure Boats
           July 1966

-------
                            VOLUME  21

                         Technical Papers

11         A Steady State Segmented Estuary Model

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

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

                            VOLUME  22
                         Technical  Papers

          Summary Report - Pollution of Back River - January 1964

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

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

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

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


                            VOLUME  23
                        Ocean Dumping Surveys

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

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

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

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

-------
                            VOLUME 24

                           1976 Annual
               Current Nutrient Assessment - Upper Potomac Estuary
               Current Assessment Paper No.  1

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

               Situation Report - Potomac River

               Sediment Studies in Back River  Estuary, Baltimore,
               Maryland

Technical      Distribution of Metals in Elizabeth River Sediments
Report 61

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

-------
           WATER QUALITY

                AND

      POLLUTION CONTROL STUDY
           MINE DRAINAGE

CHESAPEAKE BAY - DELAWARE RIVER BASIN
                   CB-SRBP Working Document No.  3
                   FWPCA
                   Middle Atlantic Region
                   July 1967

-------
                          Table of Contents


                             Volume 13
           Water Quality and Pollution Control  Study,  Mine
           Drainage - Chesapeake Bay-Delaware  River  Basins
           July 1967
           Biological  Survey of Rock Creek (From Rockville,
           Maryland to the Potomac River)   October 1966
           Summary of Water Quality and Waste Outfalls,  Rock
           Creek in Montgomery County,  Maryland  and the
           District of Columbia - December 1966
6          Water Pollution Survey Back River 1965 -  February 1967
7          Efficiency Study of the District of Columbia  Water
           Pollution Control  Plant - February 1967

-------

-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS


                                                          Page_
   I.  PURPOSE AND SCOPE	       1-1

  II.  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 	 ......      II - 1

 III.  INTRODUCTION	     Ill « 1

  IV.  FORMATION OF MINE DRAINAGE POLLUTION  ....      IV - 1

   V.  SOURCES OF MINE DRAINAGE POLLUTION  .....       V - 1

  VI.  DAMAGES . .... 0 .............      VI - 1

 VII.  ABATEMENT ....... 	  .....     VII - 1

VIII.  STATE ACTIVITIES AND REGULATIONS  	    VIII - 1

  IX.  STUDY PROCEDURES  .........  	      IX - 1

   X.  SUB-BASIN DESCRIPTION  ............       X - 1

       A.  West Branch Susquehanna River Basin ...       X - 1

       B.  Juniata River Basin 	 ......       X - 29

       C.  Tioga River Basin  ............       X - 38

       D.  Anthracite Area - Susquehanna River Basin
             and Delaware River Basin  .......       X - 44

       Eo  North Branch Potomac River  .......       X - 79

  XI.  ABATEMENT COSTS  ...............      XI - 1

-------

-------
                        LIST OF FIGURES



Figure Number                    Description

Sub-Basin Maps

     1 a.   West Branch Susquehanna River

     1 b.   Juniata River

     1 c.   Tioga River

     1 d.   Anthracite Area

     1 e.   North Branch Potomac River

       Profiles of Flows pH}Net Alkalinity Loading, Tributary
       Contributions of Net Alkalinity, and Concentrations of
       Net Aciditys Sulfate9 Iron3 and Manganese

     2      West Branch Susquehanna River

     2 a.   West Branch Susquehanna River

     3      Raystown Branch Juniata River

     3 a.   Raystown Branch Juniata River

     4      Tioga River

     4 a.   Tioga River

     5      Johnson Creek

     5 a.   Johnson Creek

     6      Lackawanna River

     6 a.   Lackawanna River

     7      Susquehanna River

     7 a.   Susquehanna River

     8      Nescopeck Creek

     8 a.   Nescopeck Creek

-------
Figure Number                    Description




Sub-Basin Maps




     9      Catawissa Creek




     9 a.   Catawissa Creek




    10      Shamokin Creek




    10 a.   Shamokin Creek




    11      Mahanoy Creek




    11 a.   Mahanoy Creek




    12      Mahantango Creek




    12 a.   Mahantango Creek




    13      Wiconisco Creek




    13 a.   Wiconisco Creek




    14      Swatara Creek




    14 a.   Swatara Creek




    15      North Branch Potomac River




    15 a.   North Branch Potomac River

-------
                                                              I  -  1


   I.   PURPOSE  AND  SCOPE

           The  purpose  of  this  report  is  to  provide  background

   information  to be  used  in the  development of  a  program  to

   eliminate or reduce  the effects  of  mine drainage  pollution

   on  the quality of  the streams  in the Susquehanna  River,  Delaware
v'
   River, and Potomac River Drainage Basins.  The  report covers

   both the anthracite  and bituminous  coal mining  areas in these

   Basins.

           The  principal objectives of the report  are  to:

           1.  Generally describe the  chemical and physical

               processes involved in the  formation and occurrence

               of mine  drainage pollution.

           2,  Identify and characterize  the watersheds contributing

               mine drainage.

           3.  ^Relate mine drainage contributions  of the tributaries

               to  the main stem of  the receiving stream.

           4-.  Isolate  and identify significant  discharges in

               terms  of quality and quantity,

           5.  Identify and estimate the  extent  of areas disturbed

               by mining operations,

           6>  Suggest  measures to  be  taken  to abate or alleviate

               the  effects of mine  drainage  pollution  in specific

               sub-basins,

-------
                                                            1-2







          7.   Estimate costs of mine drainage pollution  abatement




              and control.







          All conclusions3  recommendations,  and estimates




  contained in this report  are subject to further refinement as




  the program of the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins




  Project progresses.
y

-------

-------
                                                          II - 1


II.  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

     A.  Summary

         1,   The Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins Project

             is engaged in a comprehensive water pollution control

             study in a portion of the area covered by this

             report.  Studies to determine the source of mine

             drainage pollution and the estimated cost of
   J
             abatement have been carried out and are continuing.

         2.   Preliminary data have been compiled relative to

             the extent, causes and abatement of mine drainage

             pollution in the Susquehanna, Delaware3 and Potomac

             River Basins,  Studies to be conducted in 1967 are

             expected to supplement data collected to date, making

             possible more refined estimates concerning the extent

             of mine drainage pollution in the Study Area and

             appropriate abatement measures.

         3.   For the purpose of this report, the Study Area has

             been subdivided into sub-areas;  The West Branch

             Susquehanna River Basin, the Juniata River Basin,

             the Tioga River Basin, the Susquehanna River Basin

             Anthracite Area,, the Delaware River Basin Anthracite

             Area, and the Potomac River Basin-

         4,   Mine drainage has rendered approximately 1S000 miles

             of streams in the Study Area acid.   The quality of

-------
                                                 II  -  2







    another 1S000 miles of streams  is degraded  by




    other mine drainage constituents  and  by intermittent




    influence of mine drainage on streams or portions




    of streams not usually significantly  affected by




    mine drainage.




5.   An estimated 5D000 mining operations  have been




    active in the bituminous coal fields  in the period




    1800 to the present, producing  about  1 billion




    tons of coal.  An estimated 1,000 major mining




    operations in the anthracite coal fields produced




    5 billion tons of coal.




6.   Of the 679 major mine drainage  discharges located




    in the Pennsylvania portion of  the Study Area




    of the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins




    Project, 188, or 28 per cent, were found to be




    contributing 90 per cent of the acid  loading.




    Comparable data are not presently available for  the




    Potomac River Basin portion of  the Study Area.




7.   Restoration of the 208,500 acres of the Study Area




    disturbed by surface mining will cost on the order




    of $273 million.




8,   The estimated cost of  lime neutralization of residual




    mine drainage loadings not abatable by land reclamation




    methods will range from $258 to $983  million.  Estimates

-------

-------
                                                     ii - :


        are based on construction and 10 years  of

        operation of treatment facilities,

    9.   Restoration of the quality of streams presently-

        polluted by mine drainage to a level  consistent

        with quality required for desired water uses is

        estimated to range in cost from $531  to $1,256

        million,


B.  Conclusions

    1.   Sub-basins have been identified in which mine

        drainage pollution abatement appears  to be

        attainable with a comparatively small expenditure

        of time and money as compared to the  remaining  sub-

        basins in the Study Area.  These sub-basins should

        be considered for highest priority in any limited

        mine drainage pollution abatement program.  These

        sub-basins are:

            a,  Anderson Creek - West Branch Susquehanna
                River Basin

            b.  Loyalsock Creek - West Branch Susquehanna
                River Basin

            c.  North Bald Eagle Creek - West Branch
                Susquehanna River Basin

            d.  Tioga River - Chemung River Basin

            e.  Little Juniata River - Juniata  River Basin

            f,  Frankstown Branch Juniaca River -  Juniata
                River Basin

-------
                                                 II  -  4






        g.   Aughwick Creek - Juniata River Basin




        h.   Nescopeck Creek - Susquehanna River Basin




        i.   Mahantango Creek - Susquehanna River Basin




        j „   Lehigh River - Delaware River Basin




        k.   Abram Creek - Potomac  River Basin




        1.   Elk Run - Potomac River Basin





        m.   Laurel Run - Potomac River Basin (Maryland)







2.   Coal production is expected to continue throughout




    most of the Study Area.  Existing water pollution




    control authority in Pennsylvania is adequate within




    the limits of economic and technical feasibility




    to essentially prevent additional stream quality-




    degradation in conjunction with future mining.




    Present regulatory authority in Maryland and West




    Virginia appears to offer much less restriction to




    pollution caused by future mining.




3.   State regulatory agencies and the mining industry




    have done considerable work in determining and




    applying methods of abating and controlling mine




    drainage pollution from both active and abandoned




    mines.   Funds are not presently available at the




    State level to undertake the costly program of mine




    drainage pollution abatement from both active and




    inactive mines on a comprehensive basis,  A bond

-------

-------
                                                  II  -  5






    issue,,  recently approved in Pennsylvania,  will




    make approximately $200 million available  for




    mine drainage pollution abatement and control




    activities over a 10-year period,




4.   Reclamation of land disturbed by surface mining




    is needed to restore its utility.  This  activitys




    coupled with mine flooding, restoration of  surface




    drainage disturbed by subsidence, and other




    activities aimed at altering existing drainage




    patterns will reduce mine drainage contributions




    to the streams of the Basin.  It is doubtful  that




    such work alone will completely abate mine




    drainage pollution.  Mine drainage treatment




    facilities and/or flow regulation for water quality




    control will be needed in some areas.  Additional




    studies are needed to evaluate the most feasible




    approach to mine drainage pollution control in




    individual sub-basins.

-------

-------
                                                          Ill -  1


III.  INTRODUCTION

          Mine drainage has been defined by the Susquehanna

  River Basin Study Mine Drainage Work Group as any "discharge

  influenced by or originating from surface or underground

  mining operations and natural discharges which by the nature

  of their chemical or mineral characteristics exert detrimental

  effects on the receiving environment„

          Although mine drainage does occur in the natural

  process and from the mining of many mineral deposits, by far

  the most serious mine drainage pollution problem in the Study

  Area results from the commercial mining of coal.  The areal

  distribution of the major coal fields within the area of

  responsibility of the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins

  Project (CB-SRBP) is shown on Figure 1.

          An estimate of the area containing coal and allied

  deposits in the Study Area is as follows:

          Anthracite - Northern, Western Middle, Eastern
                       Middle, and Southern Fields ..... 529 sq. miles

          Semi-Anthracite - Mehoopany, Towanda, Pine, and
                            Loyalsock Creek Basins , ,.,,  55 sq. miles

          Bituminous - Broad Top-Juniata Basin .........  81 sq. miles
                       West Branch Susquehanna River Basin
                                               ........ 3,606 sq. mi 1es
                       Tioga River Basin  ...............  59 sq. mi 1es
                       North Branch Potomac River Basin. 370 sq, miles

-------

-------
                                                         Ill - 2







        Water pollution problems associated with mine drainage




are not new.  Discharges flowing from mineral deposits




through natural faults and fissures have, undoubtedly, always




possessed mine drainage characteristics.  Long before the




first commercial coal mine was opened, the Indians of the area




were aware of the "black stone" that burned.  They used the




many hued mud deposits of early mine drainage streams as




a source of pigments and dyes.




        Although mine drainage occurs naturally, the growth




of the commercial coal mining industry has greatly accelerated




the production of mine drainage discharges deleterious to




the receiving streams.  Since the opening of the first




commercial coal mine over 150 years ago, the harmful effects




of mine drainage discharges have become increasingly more




significant.  What was once a localized problem in the early




days of the mining industry is now widespread.  Today, after




the production of over 1 billion tons of bituminous coal and




5 billion tons of anthracite coal9 more than 1,000 miles of




streams in the Study Area are rendered acid by mine drainage




discharges.  Mine drainage has rendered at least an additional




1,000 stream miles undesirable for some water uses.




        Increasingly stringent regulatory control has been




placed on the raining industry by State water pollution control




agencies and pollution caused by active mines is expected to

-------
                                                         Ill  -  3







diminish,  Most of the mine drainage entering the streams of




the Study Area originates, however, in abandoned mines.




Responsibility for abatement of pollution from this  source




has fallen to State, local, and Federal agencies. A




rational9 efficient approach to the problem on a basin-wide




basis involves the identification of pollution sources,  their




effect on stream quality, and the development of a comprehensive




pollution abatement plan based upon costs and benefits to




be derived.  This report is intended as a first step toward




development of such a plan.

-------
                                                           IV -  1







IV.   FORMATION OF MINE DRAINAGE




     A.   Chemistry




         Many minerals are sufficiently reactive to form




 water soluble salts when they are mined and exposed to air,




 Ground or surface water coming in contact with the minerals




 dissolves the salts and carries them to the surface3  causing




 stream pollution.  In the course of the mining of coal, large




 amounts of sulfuritic material are exposed to the atmosphere.




 When water comes into contact with these materials, sulfides




 and other minerals are dissolved, producing a drainage that




 contains ferrous and ferric iron, aluminum, calcium,  and




 magnesium sulfates.  In addition, manganese, sodium,




 potassium, and other elements may be present in the resulting




 drainage as chlorides, carbonates, and sulfates.




         The concentration of the pollutants present in mine




 drainage is a function of the availability of metallic




 sulfides5 water, and oxygen, their exposed surface area,




 their contact time with each other, along with temperature




 and various catalytic agents,  Sulfuritic materials associated




 with the various mineral deposits are the principal precursors




 of the salts and sulfuric acid found in coal mine drainage.




 The minerals, mainly pyrite, oxidize in the presence  of air  and




 water to form ferrous sulfate and sulfuric acid.  Although




 investigators differ concerning the actual reactions  and

-------

-------
                                                         IV - 2


mechanisms involved in the formation of acid drainage, the

overall reactions can be represented by the following equations :
        2 FeS2 + 7 02 + 2 H20  >»»•»•>•» 2 Fe SO^ + 2H2
        (pyrite) (oxygen)             (ferrous sulfate;   (sulfuric
                                                          acid)

        Fe S2 + 3 02  »»-»»»•»•> » •»» Fe SO^ + S02
                                                (sulfur dioxide)

        2 S02 + 02 + 2 H20  > » >»».>.>.*> 2 H2 SOj^

The reaction yields two moles of hydrogen ions (acidity)  for

each mole of iron oxidized.

        Initially, the iron  in mine drainage is in the ferrous

state; however, after contact with air, ferrous iron oxidizes

to ferric iron, i.e.,

        U Fe SO  + 2H  SO  + O   »»» 2 F&
     (ferrous sulfate)              (ferric  sulfate)

Dependent upon pH, temperature,  and  concentration of  constituents,

the  reaction proceeds:

        Fe  (SO, )  -f 6 HO  >'»»»))»  2  Fe  (OH)  +  3 H  SO,
                          (ferric hydroxide)

and/or

                   + 2 H0  »»»»•»» 2 Fe  (OH)

                          (basic  ferric sulfate)

 In the absence of  acid, basic  ferric  sulfate may precipitate

 directly  according to the reaction:

        U Fe SO, +0+2 HO  ->»»»»  k  Fe (OH)  (SO, )

-------

-------
                                                         IV  - 3
There is some question as to whether the basic ferric




sulfate is a discrete compound or a ferric hydroxide




containing occluded sulfate.




        In the presence of strong acid concentrations,




ferrous sulfate may hydrolyze as follows:




        Fe SO, + 2 H0 ->-*•>•> > > > >->•> >•>-»-*-»* Fe (OH>  +
     B, Microbiology




        Although  there  are  conflicting opinions among




 researchers as  to the importance of  micro-organisms in the




 productions of  mine drainage  pollution, there is evidence to




 indicate  that micro-organisms do contribute to initial pyrite




 oxidation.  A number of bacterial species (Thiobacillus




 thiooxidams, Thiobacillus ferroxidams, and Ferrobacillus




 ferrpxidams) have been  isolated from mine drainage waters,




 but  the extent  of their role  in the  formation of mine drainage




 pollution is not  presently  known.

-------

-------
                                                          V - 1







V.  SOURCES OF MINE DRAINAGE




        The gradual increase in the detrimental effect of




mine drainage pollution in the Study Area is closely associated




with the commercial mining of coal.  Mining operations are




carried out in a variety of ways depending primarily upon the




location and configuration of the coal deposit to be mined.





The way in which the mine is developed and operated has a




profound effect on the quality and quantity of mine drainage




produced by the mine.




        Mines are classified as either "deep mines" or




"surface mines".




    A.  Deep Mines




        Deep mines may be further classified as "shaft", "slope",




or "drift" mines.




        1.  Shaft




            A shaft mine is one in which a vertical opening is




            driven downward to a coal seam which may not




            outcrop at the ground surface at that point.  Coal




            seams which are mined through shaft openings




            usually lie beneath the ground water table.  During




            the period the mine is active, water which finds




            its way into the mine must be pumped to the surface




            through the shaft or through boreholes drilled for




            this purpose.


-------

-------
                                                  V -  2







2.   Slope




    A slope mine is one in which the coal  is  removed




    through an entry which slopes downward to intercept




    the coal seam,   As is the case with shaft mines,




    while mining is being carried out, water  which




    enters the mine must be pumped to the  surface.




    When shaft and  slope mines are abandoned, infil-




    trating ground  water fills the mines to the natural




    level of the ground water table in the area or to




    a level in the  mine at which the water can find




    its way to the  surface by gravity.  This  "natural"




    inundation of sulfuritic material has  been observed




    to have a beneficial effect on the quality of




    drainage from mines.  In the Anthracite Area many




    shaft and slope mines are kept dewatered  by a




    system of rock  tunnels which were driven  expressly




    to provide gravity drainage of the mines  in a given




    coal basin.




3.  Drift




    A drift mine is one in which the opening  is driven




    into the outcropping of the coal seam. Drainage




    from a drift mine is usually by gravity through




    open channels,  however, local dip areas may be

-------
                                                          V -  3






            dewatered by siphoning or pumping while the mine




            is active.  Drift mines are identified as a




            major source of mine drainage in the Study Area




            because, when abandoned, they tend to discharge




            mine drainage with a quality equal to or worse




            than that experienced while the mine was active.







    B.  Surface Mines




        Drainage from surface mines may be either by gravity




or pumping, depending upon the elevation of surface drainage




in the area.  In addition to provisions for handling ground




water which enters surface mines9 steps must be taken to




divert surface drainage in such a way that it does not enter




the mine workings .




        Surface mines may be sub-divided into strip and auger




mines.




        1.   Strip




            A strip mine is one in which the coal is removed




            from an open pit following complete removal of




            strata overlying the coal seams.




        2.   Auger




            Auger mining is usually associated with some form




            of strip mining.  However, it is also used to extract




            coal near the outcrop which was not recovered by

-------

-------
                                                          V -  4







            earlier deep mining or where underground




            mining is not feasible.  Coal is  extracted by




            boring horizontally into the exposed coal  seam.







        Most of the coal production in the Study Area  has




been accomplished by deep mining methods; however,  in  recent




years (since 1945), the percentage of coal produced by




stripping operations has steadily increased.   At present




approximately 60 per cent of the coal production in the Study




Area is by the strip mine method.




        Studies conducted by the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna




River Basins Project have located a considerably smaller




number of major mine drainage discharge sources than the




total number of mining operations recorded to have  been




located within the Study Area.  Some of the reasons for




this difference are:




        1.  Studies were conducted during summer low




            stream flow periods when mine drainage  flow




            would be expected to be at a minimum.  Mines




            which discharge only during wet weather periods




            were thus not located.




        2.  Interconnection of mine workings, both  intentionally




            and unintentionally, has in many cases  consolidated




            drainage from many mines into one discharge.

-------

-------
                                                         V  -  5







        3.   Many abandoned mines have been sealed in the




            course of mine sealing programs and as a result




            of surface mining operations.




        4.   Some mines have filled with water,  interrupting




            the air-water-sulfuritic material  interaction.




            Discharges from these mines do not  exhibit  the




            characteristics of mine drainage and were,




            therefore, not considered in the tabulation




            of "mine drainage" discharges.




        The number and acid loading of mine drainage sources




located to date are summarized by source category as shown




in the table on:page V.- 6.







        The quality and quantity of mine drainage produced




from a mining operation is dependent upon a number of factors.




The chief factors'are:




        1.  The operating status of the mine (i.e. active




            or abandoned).




        2.  Hydrologic and geologic features of the surrounding




            terrain.




        3.  The type of mining method employed.




        4.  Availability of precursors (air, water,  and




            suiftiritic materials).




        5.  Contact time of the required precursors.




        6.  Character of surface topography.

-------

-------

I BASINS
___— 	 : 	 : 	 , 	 -1
JOR MINE DRAINAGE SOURCES
3UEHANNA RIVER AND DELAWARE RIVEI
MA,
CHESAPEAKE BAY-SUSC
, — i
cd
4J
0
H
Inactive
Deep and Strip
erations
Inactive Op
Active Operations




1
a
•H
4J
co
CO
co
C
•H
2
a
0)
(!)
O
to
a)
C
2
a
4-i
CO
co
CD
C
•H
2
o
cu
Q
cd
T3 "O T3
O O 43
o a
0 -H
& Q
cd
-a T3 -a
0 0 42
O j J
o a
• co
O -H
ZZ Q
CC
T3 T3 *O
•H cd ~-~.
cj O f
C U
• co
O -H
S O
T3 T3 T3
•H C8 -^
U 0 43

T3 "O -O
•H cd ^.
0 O 4i
<: j j
j ^4f
o a
• CO
0 -H
^ Q*
Basin
0
O
CN
00
CM
LT1

        -H
    6  cd
cdC
CCOcd
cd,c
sea)
            CO
     0)
     >
    -H
  -Oi
 S-<
pau
     cd
X6
4-1O
 s-i4->
 OO
                                         oo
                      CD
                      >
                                 >  S-i  Si
                                 QJCJU
                                 QJCO
                                                      >
                                                      cfl
C
0)
W
4-1
 O
 c

 cd
4J
 cd
O

-------
                                                          V - 7
        The production of mine drainage from a mining




operation may be continuous or intermittent.  Underground




mines developed below the ground water table usually




"make" mine drainage on a continuous basis; the concentration




of the pollutant varying as a function of the volume of water




entering the mine, contact time, and available precursory




materials.  In cases where the ground water table is below




the mining level during some seasons or when the mine receives




direct surface water contributions, the discharge quality




and quantity may vary greatly.




        In surface mines the production of the pollutant is




often intermittent, generally occurring during and immediately




after periods of precipitation.  Runoff in stripped areas




may find its way to a surface stream or be trapped in




inadequately restored trenches or pits formed during the




stripping operation.  When the runoff is trapped, pools which




may contain high concentrations of mine drainage indicators




are formed,  During subsequent periods of high runoff, these




pools may overflow, releasing concentrated "slugs" of mine




drainage pollution to receiving streams.  The pools thus




formed constitute reservoirs of potential mine drainage.




They often drain slowly into the backfill to emerge in the




form of mine drainage seepages downslope from the stripping

-------
                                                          V - 8
operation.  They may also drain to underground mines


underlying the stripped area, thus increasing the mine


drainage flow from these mines.


        Mine drainage may continue to flow from both surface


and sub-surface mining operations long after the mines have


been "worked-out" and abandoned.  As long as the precursor


materials (air, water, and sulfuritic material) are available,


the mine will continue to produce the pollutant.


        Pollution having mine drainage characteristics may


also originate at refuse and "gob" piles associated with


mining operations.  The refuse piles are spoil areas where


impurities removed from the mined coal are deposited.  The
                                        i

impurities in the spoil area may contain a sulfur-bearing


material; and, when exposed to air and water, mine drainage


type discharges may result.  The pollution emanating from


these "gob" piles is usually intermittent, occurring only


during and immediately after periods of precipitation.


Several instances have been found, however, where the piles


interrupt surface drainage.  The water passing through


the spoil banks thus constitutes a vehicle for transport


of soluble salts, thereby forming a "mine drainage discharge".


Although discharges from spoil piles may be extremely


significant, particularly in small watersheds, information


is not presently available to permit a general statement on

-------
                                                          V -  9







the effect of spoil piles on water quality on a basin-wide




basis or to estimate the cost of reclamation of spoil piles




which cause pollution.  This facet of the mine drainage




problem will be discussed more comprehensively in future




reports„




        Both surface and deep mining operations are responsible




for the heavy silt load carried by many of the streams in




the area.  During surface mining operations, large tracts




of land are completely denuded, exposing the soil to erosion




by water and wind.  Coal fines are often introduced to




receiving streams by coal processing operations and by surface




runoff from piles of coal refuse.  This material may itself




contain sulfuritic material and constitute a source of




"mine drainage" pollution.

-------
                                                         VI - 1







VI„   DAMAGES




        When mine drainage is discharged to a receiving




stream, limitations may be placed on the value of the stream




and adjoining land for recreational, industrial, municipal




and other uses.  The effect of mine drainage on stream




quality is not necessarily limited to a reach near the point




of origin.  Although the diluting and neutralizing effect of




unpolluted streams generally limits acid conditions to streams




within the coal fields, damages attributable to other mine




drainage indicators are often experienced far downstream from




the point of origin.  Although the damages attributable to




mine drainage in the Study Area are not difficult to enumerate,




they are difficult to completely evaluate in monetary terms.




The only information available on the monetary value of




damages attributable to mine drainage relates to sports




fishing.  Although this damage is certainly not the only one,




it is believed to be the largest in monetary terms and by




far the most significant in the Study Area at present.  Future




development of the Basin's water resources may, however,




create increased demand for the use of streams receiving mine




drainage, thereby increasing calculable damages.  It is hoped




that more detailed information on monetary damages can be




developed for inclusion in future Project Mine Drainage




Reports.  Although damages caused by mine drainage may be





categorized in many ways,  for this  report we have chosen to

-------

-------
                                                         VI - 2







categorize these effects in terras of "in-stream", "with-




drawal",, and "other" effects.




    A.  In-Stream Damages




        The most striking and probably most economically




important in-stream damage caused by mine drainage is its




effect on aquatic life.  Only a limited number of aquatic




forms can exist in an environment strongly influenced by




mine drainage.  Mine drainage produces low pH values and the




formation of toxic precipitates, which restrict, and in some




cases practically eliminate, all aquatic life.  It is




generally agreed that an aquatic environment having a pH




outside the range 6.3 to 9.0 cannot support a balanced




aquatic population.  If the pH drops below 6, as it often




does in streams influenced by mine drainage, both macroscopic




and microscopic populations are adversely affected.




        The most economically important members of the




macroscopic population are game fish and the organisms that




make up their food supply.  A draft report prepared by the




U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service    states:  "There are




about 3,000 acres involved in the 824 miles of cold water




streams and 3,300 acres in the 206 miles of warm water




streams affected by mine acids.  Elimination of this adverse




factor in all streams so affected would result in increased




fishing in the amount of 500,000 fishing days annually with

-------
                                                         VI - 3







a recreational value of $1,125,000 and related expenditures




valued at $2,660,000 annually".




        Unsightly precipitates, accumulations of inert "silt",




and low pH combine to render most of the stream miles




discussed above unsuitable for other recreational uses.




        Mine drainage depresses the microscopic population




in a stream.  This may retard the ability of a stream to




biochemically stabilize sewage or organic industrial waste.




The organic material is, in a sense, "pickled" in the acid




water and is stabilized further downstream at a point where




stream alkalinity increases.




        A more subtle effect of mine drainage on industrial




and municipal waste disposal is its fostering of a general




disregard for streams presently polluted by mine drainage.




The present limited uses of these streams depress the




incentive for sewage and industrial waste pollution abatement




on the part of Basin residents.  Their attitude seems to be




that until mine drainage pollution is abated and a full




spectrum of uses restored, sewage and industrial discharges




are not really polluting the stream.  This philosophy is




reflected in the attitude of many area residents who use




the streams as a dumping ground for garbage and trash.




        The constituents of mine drainage tend to erode




concrete structures and corrode metal structures in the

-------

-------
                                                         VI  -  4







stream.  This effect may also be observed on intake structure




and the raw water piping of "withdrawal" users of mine




drainage effected streams.




    B.  Withdrawal Uses




        Mine drainage has a definite adverse effect on




the use of streams for industrial, municipal, and agricultural




water supply.  The principal sources of the adverse effect




are sulfuric acid, iron, manganese, aluminum, calcium,




and magnesium salts contributed by mine drainage.




        In water treatment plants, high acidity and low pH




may result in adverse effects in chemical coagulation,




softening, and corrosion control.  Corrosion control is the




major problem of most industrial users; however, industrial




establishments employing chemical or biological processes




experience serious difficulties if the iron concentration or




acidity of the water supply is not or cannot be adequately




controlled by their water treatment plants.




        Both iron and manganese create serious problems




in public and in some industrial water supplies.  The




problems associated with iron are caused by the precipitation




of iron salts, which are objectionable from an aesthetic




point of view.  Iron salts stain plumbing fixtures and




laundry and interfere with certain industrial processes.




Iron also supports the growth of filamentous iron bacteria

-------

-------
                                                         VI - 5






which restrict and may completely stop the flow of water in




distribution lines.  Manganese has much the same effect as




iron9 except that the precipitate formed is black.




        The U. S. Public Health Service has set the maximum




suggested concentration of iron and manganese in public




water supplies at 0,3 milligrams per liter (mg/1) and




0.05 mg/19 respectively.  Some industrial processes are5




however,, adversely affected by any measurable concentration.




        Some sulfate compounds and the end-products of




their reaction with calcium and magnesium carbonate (the




principal constituents of the alkalinity of many streams)




produce permanent hardness in water.  Hardness is objectionable




in public supplies, particularly because consumers are




forced to use more soap for cleaning purposes.  Permanent




hardness in boiler feed water forms scale, which cuts down




the heat exchange efficiency of boilers and is thus objectionable




to industrial water users.




        The undesirable characteristics of mine water can




be removed by modern, adequately designed water treatment




plants.  To an industrial establishment contemplating locating




at a particular  site, the additional cost of treating water




polluted by mine drainage could, however, be a very important




consideration.

-------
                                                          VI - 6







        The use of mine drainage for crop irrigation tends




to increase the acidity of the normally acid soils of the




Study Area and may cause a chemical reaction in the soil,




adversely affecting its physical properties.




        In general; withdrawal uses of streams influenced by




mine drainage are very limited in the Study Area,  In most




cases water users have been able to utilize ground water or




streams unaffected by mine drainage to meet their needs to




date.  No information is presently available on the incremental




cost of utilizing these sources as compared to the cost of




utilizing mine drainage affected streams if they were unaffected,




    C.  Other Damages




        In addition to damages directly assignable to water




uses 3 other damages, real but presently undefined in monetary




forms 9 may occur in areas drained by mine drainage polluted




streams.  Unsightly deposits of iron salts have ruined the




natural beauty of many streams discouraging recreational use




of the streams and adjoining land»  This impairment of use may




be reflected in depression of adjacent property values.




Industrial or commercial development nearby may be discouraged




because of aesthetic considerations associated with the mine




drainage polluted streams,

-------

-------
                                                         ra = i





VII.  ABATE&iENT AND CONTROL MEASURES



          Over the many years that mine drainage pollution has



  teen recognized as & problem, numerous methods have been



  advanced as possible solutions„  The method* may be categorized



  as either "abatement" or "control" measures„



          "Abatement measures" as discussed here are considered



  to be methods intended to reduce amounts of mine drainage



  pollutants at their source„  "Control measures" are considered



  here to be measures intended to eliminate or reduce the



  polluting effects of mine drainage after the pollutants have



  been formed and are present in the mine discharge or surface



  stream „  It is not the purpose of this report to exhaustively



  discuss the applications of various specific methods„  Several



  of the basic abatement and control methods are briefly-



  discussed below.  The least expensive solution of a given



  problem could involve any or the combination of any of the



  following•



      A0  Abatement Measures



          Abatement measures found to have some degree of success



  are based upon the prevention of the siamltaneous contact of



  air, water, and sulfuritie material„  Some of these measures are;



       .-  1.  Mine Sealing



          Traditionally the term "mine sealing" has been used to



  describe  efforts to exclude air frcan deep mines by sealing taiown

-------
                                                       VII - 2





openings v/hile permitting the flow of water from the mine0  This



method is generally considered to be ineffective because the



mine continues to "breathe" through hidden fissures after all



visible entries have been sealed„



        A variation in this procedure, segregation and burial



of acid-forming refuse, is used successfully to prevent and



abate mine drainage discharges frcm surface mines and coal



refuse piles„  An impervious clay blanket is used to cover the



material and prevent oxidation of the sulfuritic material „



        2 a  Inundation



        This method utilizes the observation that sulfuritic



material Immersed in water cannot come into contact "with the



third basic requirement for mine drainage formation, air0  The



method is applicable to both deep mines and surface mines „



Flooding of certain shaft and slope mines and strip mines, in



which the sulfuritic material lies below the level of the pool



formed, has been observed to prevent formation of mine drainage„



        3o  Water Control and Diversion



        This measure is probably the most universally applicable



of the measures described here0  Although soluble metallic salts,



the pollutant in mine drainage, may be formed by the action of



air, air moisture, and sulfuritic material, flowing water is



needed to dissolve and carry the salts frcm the mine to form



mine drainage„  Complete exclusion of water from a mine or

-------
                                                       ¥11 - 3





elimination of contact of -water with, sulfuritic material while



in the mine would eliminate mine drainage pollution.  In active



and inactive mines, both strip and deep, reduction in the



amount of mine drainage pollutants discharged can "be accomplished



by reducing water flow into the mine,



        Ibile the mines are still active, water that does enter



may "be conveyed tack to a surface water course quietly and vd-th



little contact -with sulfuritie material by the utilization of a



system of pumps and closed conduits.  In abandoned mines, where



t&is control is not possible, emphasis must be placed upon



preserving surface drainage patterns and minimizing the contri-



bution of surface water to the mines,



        Regrading and planting of areas disturbed by surface



mines or deep mine subsidence promotes surface runoff, minimizes



perculation of water impounded in the disturbed area through



sulfuritie material disturbed by the surface mining, and



minimizes contribution of water to underground mines which may



underlie the area0



        A major secondary benefit results from the reclamation



of areas disturbed by mining„  The land is restored to a



configuration which makes it more suitable for beneficial use,,



    B.  Control Measures



        It is not always feasible to abate mine drainage



pollution by interrupting the chemical processes by which the

-------

-------
                                                       VII - 4





pollutant is formed.  In such cases a variety of control



measures may "be utilized to eliminate or reduce its effect on



stream quality„  Sane of these ares



        10  Treatment



        Numerous methods have been proposed for the treatment



of mine drainage to remove its polluting properties,  Probably



the most widely practiced treatment method to date has involved



the addition of lime, limestone, soda ash, caustic soda, or



other basic material to neutralize acid and induce precipitation



of certain metallic salts 0  Considerable research and develop-



ment worlc has been accomplished on variations of this method by



both public agencies and private industry,  A number of treat-



ment plants of this type are in routine operation at present,



A major disadvantage of this method is the operation cost, which



has been reported to range as high as $!„30/1,000 gallons.



Major expenditures involved in this method include the cost of



the basic material added and the cost of sludge removal.  The



precipitate formed in the course of treatment is frequently



difficult to dewater to the point at which landfill disposal



can be utilised,  A second disadvantage of this method is its



failure to remove certain dissolved mineral constituents and



only a portion of the suspended materials  Added in the process



are materials which may in themselves cause pollution„  The



hardness of the treated water, for example, may be raised by



lime neutralisation treatment.

-------

-------
                                                       VII - 5





        Other treatment methods proposed involve removal and



concentration of pollutants in mine drainage.  Many of the



methods proposed are also being investigated in conjunction



•with the Federal desalinization program „  Some of the methods



are ion exchange, evaporation, and eleetrodialysis„  Major



problems associated with these methods involve high operating



cost and disposal of the separated pollutants„  No full-scale



treatment plants utilizing these principles have as yet been



constructed in the Study Area,  The Pennsylvania Coal Research



Board has, however, sponsored the design of experimental



treatment plants •which utilize evaporation and ion exchange



principles „



        At present a need exists for reliable information on



the cost of constructing and operating various types of



treatment facilities under a variety of conditions„  Cost data



presently available have been derived mainly from bench-scale



and pilot~plant studies and may not be applicable to all field



conditions encountered„  Research and development programs



presently in progress and operating data from full-scale plants



in operation and soon to be placed in operation should provide



more reliable data on which to evaluate treatment alternatives



in the future,



        20  Impoundment and Controlled Release of Mne Drainage



        In certain situations, benefits may be realized from



impounding mine drainage for release in such a way as to

-------

-------
                                                       VII - 6





minimize its effect on stream quality.  The objective of this



procedure is to maximize utilization of the assimilative



capacity of the receiving stream „



        For several years, the storage capacity of -underground



mine water pools in the Northern Anthracite Field has "been



utilized to store mine water during periods of low flow in the



Susquehaxma River,  The stored water is discharged to the river



during periods when streamflow and assimilative capacity are



high.



        The same general procedure could "be followed utilizing



surface impoundments,  An advantage of utilization of surface



impoundments over subsurface impoundments is the reduced



likelihood that additional mine drainage will be formed,



Variation of •underground pool levels may result in further



deterioration of the quality of the Impounded water "because of



increased contact vd.th sulfuritic material„  Preliminary results



of studies of surface impoundments conducted by a private



contractor indicate that impoundment has no significant effect



on the mineral content of mine drainage„  These studies and a



parallel study being conducted in cooperation -with the Corps of



Engineers are expected to be completed in late 1967 0



        30  Streamflow Regulation



        This method is closely related to impoundment and



controlled release of mine drainage.  The objective is to

-------

-------
                                                       ¥11 - 7





impound good quality water for release during periods of minimum



stream assimilative capacity to increase the assimilative capac=>



ity of streams receiving mine drainage.  The impounded water



should be high in alkalinity and low in mine drainage indicators



so that the releases may have the dual value of neutralizing



acid while decreasing concentrations of other mine drainage



indicators by dilution,



        Obviously streamfloir regulation is applicable only to



situations in which the stream's natural assimilative capacity



is adequate to prevent pollution under most conditions „  The



releases act simply as loans of good quality "water which are



drawn from the stream's total assets.  A stream perennially



polluted by mine drainage cannot be reclaimed by flow regulation



alone„



        Because of variations in buffer systems in waters



encountered in areas in which this method is applicable, it is



presently impossible to accurately predict the quality resulting



from blends of mine drainage and natural waters „  This gap in



our technical knowledge makes it presently impossible to



accurately estimate the amount of streamflow regulation required



for mine drainage pollution control purposes „  Studies, are in



progress, both by Federal Water Pollution Control Administration



personnel and a private contractor, to develop procedures for



predicting the resultant quality of blends of mine drainage and



natural water.

-------

-------
                                                       ¥11 - 8





        4»  Conveyance and Diversion



        Under certain conditions the effects of mine drainage



on water uses may "be controlled lay conveying the mine drainage



to another stream which has a greater assimilative capacity or



a less critical water use0  Diversion of good quality water



between watersheds may also "be feasible In some cases to



increase the assimilative capacity of the receiving stream „



In contrast to the procedure described under "Streamflow



Regulation", Inter~watershed diversion could result in a



perennial benefit to the quality of the receiving stream„



        In order to rationally implement this method,



procedures must be developed to permit prediction of the



quality resulting from the blending of mine drainage and



natural water.

-------

-------
                                                          VIII - 1





VIII.  STATE ACTIVITIES AND REGULATIONS



       A e  Pennsylvani a



           Pennsylvania's mine drainage pollution control program



   "began in 1945 with the amendment of the State ''Clean Stream Law"



   giving the State Sanitary Water Board limited authority over



   acid mine drainage.  Coal mine operators were required to obtain



   Board approval of a plan of drainage before a mine could be



   opened, reopened} or continued in operation.  The Aet prohibited



   the discharge of acid mine drainage into "clean -waters", which



   were defined as those waters which were, at the effective date



   of the Act, unpolluted and free from industrial waste and



   authorized sewage discharges except for discharges which received



   secondary treatment,,  The Act also authorized the Board to



   provide necessary diversion works to carry acid mine drainage



   away from clean waters for discharge to polluted or "unclean



   waters"„



           The provisions of the 1945 amendment to the "Clean Stream



   Law" had the effect of preventing pollution of streams which were



   unpolluted on the effective date of the Act.  Ihey did not,



   however, provide for effective control of discharges to streams



   which did not fall within, the rather narrow definition of streams



   to be protected.



           In 1965 the "Clean Stream Law" was again amended,,



   removing all exemptions in the Law relating to mine drainage „

-------

-------
                                                       ¥111 = 2





Under the provisions of the 1965 amendment which 'became



effective on January 1, 1966, mine drainage is subject to the



same controls as sewage and industrial waste.  Discharges may



not cause pollution,,  The intent of the amended law ia to



"restore to a clean, unpolluted condition all waters of the



Common-wealth."  Regulations adopted "by the Board to implement



the most recent amendment to the law include the provision that



discharges from active mines have net alkalinity and a maximum



of 7 fflg/1 dissolved iron0



        In addition to making water pollution control laws more



stringent, the Pennsylvania Legislature has over the years



progressively increased requirements concerning the backfilling



and restoration of areas disturbed by mining.  Present require-



ments, which are administered by the Department of Mines and



Mineral Industries, demand pronpt and, in some eases, complete



restoration of the disturbed area.  Regulations have been



adopted to prevent acid drainage and soil erosion fr«sn areas



disturbed by strip mining, both during and after mining is



completed„



        Present State mine drainage pollution control and strip



mine reclamation regulatory authority appears to be adequate to



essentially prevent additional stream quality degradation as &



result of future mining activities.  The extent of stress



quality degradation from future mining will depend largely upon

-------

-------
                                                       VIII - 3





the degree of enforcement of the present authority and upon



technical factors which could make complete enforcement of the



authority of the Sanitary Water Board impractical or impossible



in some eases,



        In addition to the enforcement activities described



above, considerable effort is being expended by both the



Sanitary ?/ater Board and the Coal Research Board, an adminis=



trative agency within the Department of Mines and Mneral



Industries, to determine and demonstrate new methods of abating



mine drainage pollution,  fliese activities are intended to



demonstrate -ways of preventing pollution from active operations



as -well as determining methods of abating pollution from the



thousands of abandoned mines already causing pollution„



        Sanitary Water Board and Department of Health activities



include %



        10  Sponsorship of basic research into the formation of



            polluting constituents in mine drainage „  This wor3c



            was carried out from 194-6 through 1953 at the Mellon



            Institute in Pittsburgh and resulted in the discovery



            of basic methods of minimizing and preventing



            formation of polluting characteristics in mine



            drainage„



        20  Sponsorship of several engineering studies intended



            to determine the solutions and associated costs of

-------
                                                       VIII - 4





            mine drainage pollution abatement in the Susquehanna



            River between the confluence with the Lackawanna



            River and the confluence with the West Branch



            Susquehanna River,



        3o  Sponsorship of an engineering study of the feasi-



            bility of neutralizing streams in a portion of the



            Slippery Rock Greek Basin in the Ohio River Basin „



        The Coal Research Board and Department of Mines and



Mineral Industries have been very active in pollution abatement



activities.  Their activities includes



        10  Sponsorship of an investigation into the feasibility



            of adapting distillation processes currently used



            for desalinization of sea water to the treatment of



            mine drainage,,



        20  Sponsorship of pilot plant studies of lime neutrali-



            zation process as a mine drainage pollution



            abatement method0



        30  Sponsorship of the design of an ion exchange plant



            to remove objectionable constituents in mine



            drainage„



        4«  Sponsorship of the design of a lime neutralization



            facility to treat a major mine drainage discharge



            in the Sinnemahoning Creek watershed.

-------

-------
                                                       VIII - 5






        In early 1967 the Pennsylvania Legislature adopted a




$500 million conservation bond issue which y-nas approved "by the



voters "by a wide majority.  The bond issue will make approxi~



mately $200 million available to the Department of Mines and



Mineral Industries for the reclamation of areas disturbed by



mining and for the abatement of mine drainage pollution.  The



funds will be expended over a 10-year period,






    B.  Maryland



        In March 1967 the Maryland Legislature passed a new



strip mining law which differs from the old (1963) law in



several respects.  The 1967 law contains a provision for



pollution control;  "The operator is responsible for the



prevention of avoidable stream pollution in excess of standards



established by the Department of Water Resources."  The law



specifically states that the Bureau of Mines shall not issue



additional permits to an operator who has failed to meet the



provision for pollution control.



        The 1967 law requires baeikfilling to "as near normal



as is satisfactory to the Bureau" (of Mnes) and replanting of



the disturbed area.  The 1963 law required backfilling to a



specific geometrical configuration but did not require



replanting.



        The 1967 Maryland law is now in the hands of the Land



Reclamation Advisory Committee.  After review by the Committee,

-------

-------
                                                       VIII - 6



administrative regulations "will "be issued by the responsible



State agencies.



        Maryland has no laws or regulations governing deep mine



discharges.  The only permit required is a certification by the



operator that he •will comply with the Bureau of Mines * safety



regulations.





    C.  West Virginia



        Legislation recently enacted in West Virginia provides,



for the first time, statutory control of drainage from strip



mining operations.  Under the new law, strip mining, except for



safety regulations, is placed under the control of the Director



of the Department of Natural Resources.  The law requires public



liability insurance for operators, maintenance of a reclamation



fund, and submission of a plan of operation before mining.  The



Director of the Department of Natural Resources has the power to



cancel or prohibit strip mining to prevent destruction of



natural beauty in areas as extensive as an entire watershed.  He



also has broad powers to impose rules and regulations.  Until



this law was passed, West Virginia's only basis for control of



mine drainage v/as tier membership in the Ohio River Valley Water



Sanitation Compact and her agreement to carry out provisions of



ORSANCO resolutions governing mine drainage.  Administrative



rules and regulations issued earlier under ORSANCO membership



now have a statutory basis.  These regulations are probably

-------
                                                       VIII - 7





adequate to control mine drainage pollution from strip mines.



The nsT» law provides no control of pollution caused by deep



mines.

-------

-------
                                                          IX - 1







IX..  STUDY PROCEDURES




         Field investigations, sampling programs and laboratory




 analyses were conducted by personnel of the Chesapeake Bay-




 Susquehanna River Basins Project primarily during the periods




 of June through October in 1964, 1965, and 1966.




     A.  Field Investigation and Sampling Procedure




         The field investigations were conducted in two phases -




 "Reconnaissance" and "Control Sampling".




         During the reconnaissance phase of the survey, primary




 effort was directed toward the identification of Study Area




 watersheds which contributed significant amounts of mine




 drainage pollution.  Existing Federal, State, and industrial




 data were reviewed.  To the extent possible, streams affected




 by mine drainage pollution and sources of the pollution were




 identified and located on U. S.  Geological Survey or county




 maps.  In cases in which the existing data were inadequate to




 characterize mine drainage pollution, survey crews made field




 determinations of pH, alkalinity, acidity, conductivity, flow,




 and, as practicable, ferrous iron.  Field survey crews also




 located and identified point sources of mine drainage pollution




 when possible.  Information supplied by the States of Maryland




 and West Virginia was used to locate sampling stations in the




 Potomac Basin.




         Results of stream biological surveys conducted during




 the course of the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins Project

-------

-------
                                                         IX - 2







Study were used as an aid in determining the streams affected




by mine drainage pollution.




        Based on existing data and the results of the reconnaissance




survey, control sampling stations were established on all




streams significantly affected by mine drainage pollution.




Depending upon the prevailing conditions, six to eight samples




were normally taken at each station.  Samples taken were iced




and transported to the laboratory for physical and chemical




analyses.  Time in transit from the field to the laboratory




usually varied from 6 to 24 hours.  In the Potomac Basins most




of the analyses were made in the field.  At the time of the




sampling, field determinations were made of the flow, pH, and




specific conductivity.  During this phase of the Study, every




effort was made to locate and characterize every significant




discharge.  Detailed investigations in the Sinnemahoning,




Kettle Creek, Chest Creek, Pine Creek, and other minor water-




sheds in the West Branch Susquehanna River Basin, as well as




in minor watersheds in the Anthracite and Semi-Anthracite Areas,




are yet to be completed.  In the Potomac Basin, the Western




Maryland Mine Drainage Survey by the Maryland Department




of Natural Resources lists significant discharges in Maryland.




Investigation of sources in West Virginia remains to be




completed.




        Considerable information on major mine drainage discharges




and their effects on stream quality is still needed.  Basic data

-------

-------
                                                         IX - 3







collection is planned for the summer of 1967.




        Responsibility for reporting on mine drainage in




the Delaware Basin was assigned to the Chesapeake Bay-




Susquehanna River Basins Project late in the summer of 1966.




The time and personnel available permitted only a reconnaissance




and limited laboratory analyses of discharges found flowing




during the period of search and study.  The limited period




did not allow the development of a population of data similar




to that developed in the area of prime responsibility, the




Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins.




    B.  Laboratory Procedures




        Mine drainage pollution is generally characterized by




increased concentrations of:




        1.  Specific indicators above usually accepted levels; or




        2.  The presence of ions of elements considered unique




            to mine drainage discharges.




Although these indicators may be common to some types of




industrial waste or result from natural discharges, their




sources can be determined as well as their significance.




        In the course of the Project's Mine Drainage Study efforts,




samples of both discharges and receiving streams were analyzed




for the following indicators:




        1.  Physical




            a.  pH

-------

-------
                                                         IX -  4







            b.   Conductivity




            c.   Solids




            d.   Temperature




        2.   Chemical




            a.   Acidity




            b.   Alkalinity




            c.   Iron - Ferrous and Total




            d.   Hardness




            e.   Calcium




            f.   Magnesium




            g.   Manganese




            h.   Aluminum




            i.   Sulfate




Methods used and significance of the individual analyses are




discussed below:




        1.  pH - by Potentiometric measurement (pH meter)




            (Laboratory and Field).  pH is a term used to express




the degree of acidity or alkalinity of a system and is defined




as the logarithm of the reciprocal of the hydrogen-ion




concentration.   The pH scale is a logarithmic scale.  Fractions




of a pH scale do not represent arithmetic values but rather




logarithmic values.




        The pH measurement is a measure of the actual hydrogen




ion concentration  (or activity) present in a given system at

-------
                                                         IX - 5







a given time and temperature and is, therefore, the only




true measure of how such a solution will affect another system




which is sensitive to hydrogen of hydroxyl ions.




        Natural waters usually exhibit a pH in the range of




pH 6.0 to 9.0.  Generally, acid mine drainage will vary from




pH 2.5 to 6.0.  Alkaline mine drainage occurs with pH in




the order of 6.0 to 8.0.  The pH of the receiving stream




varies according to the severity of pollution and the state




of reaction of the pollutants.




        2.  Conductivity - by Conductivity Bridge (Laboratory




and Field)




        Conductivity is expressed in terms of the reciprocal




of resistance  (mho) and is a measure of the electrical conducting




power of the systems.  The measurement indicates the degree




of dissociation of the constituents of the system.  It is




generally indicative of the concentration of dissociable




constituents,  essentially inorganic, and is thereby associated




with the amount of dissolved matter (dissolved solids) in




solution.  The measurement is dependent primarily upon the




number of molecules concerned (not their nature) and is




influenced by  temperature.  Waters uncontaminated by mine




drainage exhibit conductivities in the order of 100 micro




mho.  Measurement of mine drainage discharges varies generally




from 500 to 8,000 micro mho.  Receiving streams exhibit




intermediate measurements depending upon the degree of dilution.

-------

-------
                                                         IX - 6







        3.  Solids




            a.  Non-filterable (suspended) solids - by




filtration of a standard volume (250 ml) drying to constant




weight at 105°C (Standard Methods-12th Edition).




        This measurement determines that fraction of particulate




matter retained by the filter, i.e., so called suspended




matter of a given sample procured under the existing sampling




conditions.




            b.  Filterable (dissolved) solids - by evaporation




of filtrate from the previous paragraph and drying the residue




to constant weight at 105°C.  Measurement of filterable solids




indicates the concentration of materials dissolved and in




solution,




            c.  Total Solids - by calculation, i.e., the sum




of the two preceding paragraphs.




        A.  Acidity




            a.  Cold Acidity - by potentiometric titration




to pH 8.3 (SFS modification of Standard Methods-12th Edition).




Laboratory analyses were conducted potentiometrically.




Field analyses were conducted potentiometrically or colorimetrically.




This procedure measures the titratable acidity including




volatile acidity which can be made to combine with a base.




It is a measure of the uncombined hydrogen ion immediately




present and that which can be available from all potential




sources under the titration conditions.

-------

-------
                                                         IX - 7







        In samples containing high concentrations of potential




acidity precursors, the total potential acidity may not be made




available under the conditions of the determination.




        Mine drainage normally contains acidic precursors such




as ferrous iron, manganese, and aluminum.  Where concentrations




are low,(less than 10 mg/1), the reactions leading to the total




release of hydrogen ion will usually occur under the titration




conditions.  Howevers where the concentrations are high,




(greater than 10 mg/l)s reactions during titration may be




incomplete under the conditions of a cold titration.




Preoxidation, either by addition of ozone, peroxide, or heating,




is therefore required for the measurement of total acidity.




            b.  Hot Acidity - by potentiometric titration to




pH 8.3 end point.  (SFS modification of Standard Methods-




12th Edition)




        This procedure measures the titratable acidity




(hydrogen ion) which is available in the sample and which is




made available by heating the sample to boiling temperature




for 2 minutes with the addition of hydrogen peroxide.  The




sample is either cooled to room temperature under controlled




conditions (C02 free atmosphere) or titrated at 70 - 90°C.




Volatile acidity produced during the heating step may be




removed and  thereby not titrated..




        The method determines the acidity made available from




 potential  sources, one of which is ferrous iron.  It does not

-------

-------
                                                         IX - 8







measure any contribution to acidity of volatile constituents




either present initially or produced by subsequent reactions.




In effect, the "hot acid" titration may determine a portion




of the potential acidity present when volatile acidic precursors




are present.  This determination is applicable to relative




measurements such as the effect of an abatement procedure or




the characterization of a discharge.  However, it may not be




useful in stream analysis since it does not measure all sources




of acidity.




        5.  Alkalinity - by potentiometric measurement.  Titration




to pH 4.5 (Standard Methods-12th Edition).  Laboratory analyses




were conducted potentiometrically.  Field analyses were conducted




potentiometrically or colorimetrically.




        This procedure measures the titratable alkalinity of




the system which in most waters of this Basin is essentially




bicarbonate and/or carbonate in origin.




        Under the conditions of the determination, alkaline




mine drainage exhibits a final positive alkalinity when the acidity




produced in the course of the titration does not exceed the




available alkalinity.  It is, therefore, essential that reactions




yielding acidity be completed before the alkalinity determination




is attempted.




        6.  Net or Residual Alkalinity - by calculation




        This calculation is the difference between the alkalinity




and acidity determined by cold titration on a given sample.

-------
                                                         IX - 9







For purposes of calculation, acidity is considered to be




equivalent to negative (-) alkalinity.




        7.  Sulfate - by precipitation with, benzidine-




dihydrohloride




        This procedure measures the concentration of sulfate




of the sample and is considered an indicator of mine drainage




pollution.  Unpolluted waters of the Basin contain low




levels of the indicator derived from the leaching of soils,




rock, etc.




        Mine drainage originates as the result of the




oxidation of pyrite associated with coal-bearing strata.




The sulfur is ultimately oxidized to sulfate.  Therefore,




levels of this indicator above natural stream concentration




are indicative of mine drainage pollution.  Whereas relatively




unpolluted waters contain concentrations normally below 50




mg/ls mine drainage discharges often exhibit concentrations




in the order of 300 to 10,000 mg/1.  Receiving stream concentrations




will be intermediate dependent upon the degree of dilution.




Sulfate analysis of samples collected in the Potomac Basin




were analysed colorimetrically using barium chloranilate.




        8.  Hardness - E.D.T.A. titration hydroxy napthol blue




indicator.




        This procedure measures the total concentration of




such ions as calcium, magnesium, lithium, etc.  It does not

-------

-------
                                                         IX -  10







differentiate between species.




        Unpolluted waters usually exhibit lower values in




the order of 100 mg/1 as Ca COo as compared to mine drainage




500 to 23000 mg/1 as Ca C03<




        9.  Calcium - by E.D.T.A. titration - Eriochrome




Black T Indicator or by Atomic  Absorption.




        This procedure measures only the concentration of




calcium, a component of hardness.




        Concentrations of this  indicator in unpolluted waters




are in the order of 15 to 30 mg/1.




        10.  Magnesium - by Atomic Absorption.




        This procedure measures only the concentration of




magnesium, which is also a component of hardness.  Concentrations




of this indicator in unpolluted water are in the order of




10 to 20 mg/1.




        11.  Manganese - by Atomic Absorption.




        This procedure measures the concentration of




manganese, normally an acidic precursor.  Concentrations




in natural streams do not usually exceed 0.05 mg/1.  This




indicator is usually associated with coal-bearing strata and




resultant mine drainage pollution.  Concentrations in the




order of  5 mg/1  to 20 mg/1 are not uncommon in mine drainage.




        12.  Aluminum - by Colorimetric determination.




        This indicators a potential acidic precursor, is




usually present  in rather low concentrations in unpolluted

-------

-------
                                                         IX - 11







water.  High concentrations are usually found as a result of




the leaching of deposits of clays associated with the coal-




bearing strata by the acid mine drainage.




        13.  Iron - Ferrous and Total by 1,10 Phenanthroline




(SFS modification of Standard Methods-12th Edition).




        Generally mine drainage pollution contains iron in




both the ferrous and ferric states.  Ferric iron does not




contribute to acidity.  Ferrous iron, a major contributor to




acidity, is usually present in high concentrations in active




mine drainage discharges.  The presence of ferrous iron in




a receiving stream usually indicates that the reactions have




not gone to completion.  The ferric iron present in systems




above a pH of 3 is in the particulate state.




        In receiving streams, measurements of the total iron




concentration are complicated by sampling problems, since




the amount of ferric iron present is dependent upon the stream




velocity and sampling depth.




        Unpolluted streams in the Basin have iron concentrations




frequently less than 0.3 mg/1.  Mine drainage influence may raise




iron concentrations to in excess of 100 mg/1.

-------
                                                          X - 1
X.  SUB-BASIN DESCRIPTION




    A.  West Branch Susquehanna River




        1.  Introduction




        The West Branch Susquehanna River drains an area of




6,913 square miles in the west clentral portion of the Susque-




hanna River Basin.  The Basin lies entirely within Pennsylvania




and includes all or portions of 19 counties:  Cambria,




Clearfield, Centre, Elk, Cameron, Potter, Clinton, Columbia,




Tioga, Indiana, Jefferson, Lycoming, Bradford, McKean, Sullivan,




Montour, Northumberland, Union, and Wyoming.  The Basin is bounded




on the north by the Genesee and Chemung River Basins, on the




south by the Juniata River Basin, on the east by the Susquehanna




River Basin and on the west by the Allegheny River Basin.  The




West Branch Susquehanna River has its source in northwestern




Cambria County and flows a distance of 240 miles to its confluence




with the Susquehanna River at Northumberland, 123.5 miles from




its mouth.




        The upper portion of the Basin lies within the high




tablelands  of the Appalachian Plateau Province.  At Lock Haven




the river breaks through the Allegheny Front, the escarpment




which divides the Appalachian Plateau and Ridge and Valley




Provinces, then flows approximately 70 miles through the Ridge




and Valley Province to its confluence with the Susquehanna




River.  The Basin is approximately equally divided between the

-------

-------
                                                          X - 2







Appalachian Plateau and Ridge and Valley Provinces.  In the




Appalachian Plateau Province, stream valleys are narrow and




are flanked by high, steep hills.  In the Ridge and Valley




Province, valleys are generally broad and fertile and are bounded




by rugged forested mountains.  Moderate to steep gradients




of streams in the Appalachian Plateau Province provide considerable




turbulence and excellent mixing characteristics.  The combination




of low gradient and a wide} shallow channel configuration combine




to produce poor mixing characteristics in the Ridge and Valley




Province.




        Major tributaries of the West Branch, their drainage




areas and the mile point of  their confluence with the main 'Stream




are tabulated in the following table:







                           Drainage Area      Mile Point of
Name
Loyal sock Creek
Lycoming Creek
Pine Creek
North Bald Eagle Creek
Kettle Creek
Sinnemahoning Creek
Moshannon Creek
Clearfield Creek
Chest Creek
(square miles)
493
276
973
782
239
1,033
288
396
132
Confluence
35.2
41.3
67.6
67.7
104.1
110.2
135.5
171.5
205.3

-------

-------
                                                          X -  3







        Figure 1-A is a map of the West Branch Susquehanna




River Basin, illustrating major tributaries and other pertinent




physical features.




        2.  Geology




        Consolidated rocks which outcrop in the area are all




of the Paleozoic era and are generally those of the Pennsylvanian




and Mississippian systems.  In descending order, the specific




rock formations are identified as:  Conemaugh, Allegheny,




Pottsville, Mauch Chunk Shale, Pocono, Oswago and Catskill. Of




these, only the Conemaugh and the Allegheny formations contain




coal beds of economic significance.




        A portion of the main Pennsylvania Bituminous Field




lies within the Basin underlying all or a portion of Clearfield,




Cameron, Clinton, Centre, Lycoming, Potter, Cambria, Indiana,




McKean, and Elk Counties.  The bituminous coal beds lie within




the Appalachian Plateau Province in the western part of the




Basin - (See Figure 1-A).  Other coal deposits underlie portions




of Blair, Huntingdon, Bedford, Fulton, Bradford, Tioga, and




Sullivan Counties.




        3.  Economy




        The rich bituminous coal deposits of the Pennsylvanian




system play a dominant role in the area economy.  It is estimated



                          (2)
that approximately 4,400     mines have been opened in the Basin,




most of which have long been abandoned.  Estimates by watershed

-------

-------
                                                          X - 4



           (2)
as of 1962     indicate the opening of about 830 mines in



the Moshannon Creek watershed, 1,150 in the Clearfield Creek



watershed, 330 in the Bennett Branch Sinneraahoning Creek



watershed and 180 in the Beech Creek watershed.   The remaining



mines were opened in the watersheds of minor tributaries to



the West Branch upstream from the mouth of Loyalsock Creek.



        Of the original bituminous coal reserves in the sub-

                                                 / o \
basin estimated to be 4,140 million tons in 1928    , about



2,535     million tons still remained as "recoverable reserves"



in January 1963.  About 431 million tons of the depletion of



the reserves is attributed to production  ^'.  The remainder



is considered "loss in mining", pillers, fines,  unminable coal,



etc.  An estimated 1,334 million tons, more than half of the



recoverable reserves, underlie Clearfield County ^'.  Coal



production in the Basin has been relatively stable, averaging



about 9 million tons per year since 1945.  Recently Clearfield



and Centre Counties have accounted for about 80 per cent of



the production in the Basin '"'.



        Prior to 1945, deep mines accounted for most of the



coal production in the Basin; however, development of large



earth-moving equipment during World War II greatly stimulated



surface mining activity.  Strip mining accounted for 45 per



cent of the Susquehanna River Basin's production in 1945 and



77 per cent in 1955 (6).  Of the 8,650,000 tons  of coal

-------

-------
                                                          X -  5
produced in 1962, about 84 per cent was mined at strip



operations.  Clearfield County produced 83 per cent of its


                       (2)
total from strip mines    .   Strip mine production in the


remaining coal producing counties exceeded 90 per cent of the



total production.


        Basin production for 1970 is projected at about



8,040,000 short tons.  A gradual increase in production to


13,380,000 short tons in 2020 is expected ^.  ^he following



table lists projected bituminous coal production for the West



Branch Susquehanna River Basin:


Projected Production of Bituminous Coal by Economic Subregion


                  (thousands of short tons)



Economic Subregion	1970      1985	2020
Clinton
Centre
Lycoming
Cameron
Clearfield
Total

960


7,080
8,040

530


8,610
9,140

450


12,930
13,380
        4.  Sub-Basin Description


        A detailed discussion of the mine drainage sources in



 the Basin, their effect on stream quality and possible abate-


 ment methods follow:



            a.  Headwaters to Chest Creek



                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on

                     Stream Quality



        A total of 88 major mine drainage discharges have been


 located in this sub-basin, contributing approximately 70,000

-------

-------
                                                          X - 6







Ibs/day net acidity.  Most of the mine drainage originates in




abandoned mines.




        The first major addition of mine drainage in this reach




enters in the form of a pumped discharge from an active deep




mine.  The discharge contributed a loading of 4,100 Ibs/day




net acidity during the sampling period.  This contribution is




primarily responsible for the mean acidity concentration of




450 mg/1 and an associated loading of 4,800 Ibs/day net acidity




recorded at the first project sampling point on the West Branch




about two miles downstream (See Figure 2).




        Within the next seven miles, the river gains an




additional 14,000 Ibs/day net acidity; however, the net acidity




concentration declines to 200 mg/1.




        Major mine drainage contributors in the reach include




three spoil piles and four abandoned deep mines.  Their total




contribution is 30,000 Ibs/day net acidity.  The three spoil




piles were responsible for about 30 per cent of this total at




the time of sampling.




        Between Mile 229 and 220 the acid load is reduced by




about 10,000 Ibs/day and the acidity concentration declines




to 50 mg/1.  The responsible sources of alkalinity are not




yet known; however, the reduction is probably the result of the




neutralizing action of naturally alkaline tributaries to the




reach.  Several of these tributaries had alkalinities in




excess of  150 mg/1 during the survey period.

-------

-------
                                                          X - 7







        From Mile 220 to its confluence with Chest Creek5 the




West Branch did not exhibit a significant change in alkalinity




during the survey period, although a slight increase in other




mine drainage indicators was evident.




        In general, concentrations of mine drainage indicators




declined throughout the length of the reach from the headwaters




to Chest Creek.  Mean iron and manganese concentrations, which




were 120 and 3.6 mg/1, respectively, at the head of the reach,




declined to 1.1 and 2.5 mg/1., respectively.  Sulfates declined




from 15300 mg/1 to 550 mg/1 (See Figure 2-A).




                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        Abatement and control of mine drainage pollution in




the sub-basin will involve reclamation of areas disturbed by




strip mines, flooding of deep mines9 restoration of drainage




presently impeded by refuse banks, and possibly treatment.




        Diversion of streams presently seeping through refuse




banks would appear to be the most immediately effective and




least costly abatement activity in this sub-basin.  This work




could be expected to reduce the acid loading on the West Branch




by about 30 per cent in the reach from Mile 239 to Mile 229.




        Research presently being conducted by the Barnes and




Tucker Coal Company into the blending of acid and alkaline mine




waters may result in the development of a relatively inexpensive




method of reducing acid contributions from the Company's active

-------

-------
                                                          X -- 8


mines9 one of which contributed about 10 per cent of the acid

contributed to this reach of the West Branch during the survey

period.

            b.  Chest Creek

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        Chest Creek, during the survey period, contributed

approximately 2,500 Ibs/day net alkalinity to the West Branch.

Preliminary reconnaissance data indicate that, although the

stream is alkaline at its mouth, a 3-mile reach is degraded by

mine drainage originating in the watershed of Brubaker Run.

Mining activity has been very heavy in the Basin.  Sources of

mine drainage include both deep and strip mines and refuse

piles.  Acid loads on the order of 1,000 Ibs/day from Brubaker

Run degrade the quality of Chest Creek from its confluence

with Brubaker Run to Westover.  At Westover a large alkaline

discharge from a tannery adds significantly to the stream's

alkalinity assets.  Although the stream is alkaline downstream

from Westover, significantly high levels of other mine drainage

indicators were measured.

        Active mining operations in the Brubaker Run watershed

were greatly curtailed in March 1967.  Although detailed

location characterization work has not been completed in the

sub-basin, it is believed that discharges from active mines

contributed a significant portion of the mine drainage loading

-------

-------
                                                          X - 9


to Brubaker Run.  The effect on stream quality of the closing

of the active mines cannot be estimated at present.

                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures

        Abatement of mine drainage pollution in the Brubaker

Run watershed will involve an extensive program of deep and

strip mine reclamation and treatment.

        Because of the very intense mining activity that

has taken place in the watershed and the absence of any known

use of Brubaker Run, initial abatement efforts should

probably be directed toward reducing the mine drainage load to

the extent that Brubaker Run does not degrade the quality of

the receiving stream. Chest Creek.  Abatement work in the

watershed should, however, be held in abeyance until the effect

of the closing of active mines is fully determined.

        c.  West Branch Susquehanna River-Chest Creek to Clearfield

Creek (not inclusing Anderson Creek)

            (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                 Stream Quality

        Only two significant mine drainage discharges were

located in this Sub-Basin.  Both discharges, with a combined

loading of 2,300 Ibs/day net acidity, originate in abandoned

drift mines.

        The West Branch Susquehanna River is essenially neutral

in the reach from Chest Creek to Anderson Creek.  The reach

varies between weakly acid and weakly alkaline, depending

upon hydrologic conditions.  The minor tributaries to this

-------

-------
                                                          X - 10







reach 3 although in general slightly influenced by mine




drainage, contribute alkalinity.  Acid contributions by




Anderson Creek, Montgomery Creek, and Wolf Creek, totaling




about 3,100 Ibs/day, were outweighed by alkaline contributions




within the reach.




        The pH within the reach ranged from 3.1 to 7.6.  The




mean total iron concentration declined from 1.1 mg/1 to




0.25 mg/1 through the reach.  Manganese and sulfate concentrations




declined from 2.5 mg/1 and 553 mg/1, respectively, to 0.05




mg/1 and 270 mg/1, respectively.  Fish and other aquatic




life have been observed in this reach, although the population




is probably somewhat depressed by residual amounts of mine




drainage.




            (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        Although mine drainage pollution abatement work in




this Sub-Basin should be included in a comprehensive program




of pollution abatement in the West Branch Susquehanna River




Basin, the work should probably have low priority in view of




the relatively minor effect on the receiving stream.




        The recently-completed Curwensville Dam, a multi-




purpose structure controlling the West Branch immediately




upstream from Anderson Creek, might profitably be employed




in a comprehensive pollution abatement and control program




by providing flow regulation for water quality control.

-------

-------
                                                          X - 11


Cooperative studies are presently underway to determine

the effect of impoundment on water quality in the reser\oxi.

        d.  Anderson Creek

            (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                 Stream Quality

        Anderson Creek contributed an average of 1 ,750 Ibs/

day net acidity to the West Branch during the survey period.

Most mining activity has been confined to the lower reaches of

the watershed, and stream quality is not seriously impaired

by mine drainage upstream from the confluence with Little

Anderson Creek.  (See Figure 1-A)  Downstream from Little

Anderson Creek, the stream is rendered acid by mine drainage

which is tributary to Little Anderson Creek.  Minor tributaries

from the right downstream from Little Anderson Creek add

to the acid loading of Anderson Creek.

        Mean total iron, manganese, and sulfate concentrations

measured at the mouth were 3.9 mg/1, 3.4 mg/1 and 160 mg/1,

respectively.

        Most of the mine drainage in the watershed originates

in abandoned mines.  Although 28 discharges were observed,

about 70 per cent of the acid load measured originates at

five discharges.

            (2)  Abatement and Control Measures

        Mine drainage pollution abatement in this watershed

will require surface reclamation, mine flooding and possibly

-------

-------
                                                          X - 12


treatment.  Two drift mine discharges close to the Little

Anderson Creek watershed discharge an acid loading approximately

equal to the net acid loading at the mouth of Anderson Creek.

Abatement of the polluting properties of these discharges,

through sealing or treatment accompanied by relatively

minor abatement work at other discharge points, could reduce

the acid load to a level at which Anderson Creek could

probably assimilate the residual under most flow conditions.

        e.  Clearfield Creek

            (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                 Stream Quality

        Clearfield Creek is rendered acid by mine drainage

from its source to its mouth.  During the survey period,

the stream contributed an average of 57,000 Ibs/day acidity

to the West Branch.

        At the mouth, mean net acidity concentrations of

115 mg/1 were measured.  Total iron concentrations were

relatively low (1.4 mg/1); however, other mine drainage

indicators were present in high concentrations.

        Although mining activity has been very extensive

throughout most of the watershed, about 45 per cent of the

acid load in Clearfield Creek originates in 10 tributaries

which have a combined drainage area of 95 square miles, or

about 25 per cent of the area of .the Clearfield Creek watershed.

-------
                                                          X - 13







        The streams responsible for most of the acid load




in Clearfield Creek are shown in the following schematic diagram




and tabulation:




      PRINCIPAL DRAINAGE CONTRIBUTORS TO CLEARFIELD CREEK
STREAM
Roaring Run
Long Run
Potts Run
Upper Morgan Run
Lost Run
Japling Run
Muddy Run
Powell Run
Brubaker Run
Trap Run
STREAM MILE
( on Clearfield
Creek)
1.3
4.2
18.2
19.6
22.1
24.9
25.5
45.7
49.7
61.6
DRAINAGE
AREA (Sq.
Mile)
12.2
4.0
15.4
12.2
2.5
3.2
30.6
11.2
2.5
1.5
NET ACID
LOADING
(Ibs/day)
550
960
3,180
760
3,180
3,900
6,500
2,280
920
1,210
        Seventy-eight major mine drainage discharges were




 located in the Sub-Basin.  Field analysis of the discharges




 indicated that 16 of these major discharges, with a combined




 flow of 11 cf s , contributed about 30,000 pounds acidity per




 day, or about  60 per cent of the acid load at the mouth.




        Most of the major discharges are recorded as discharges




 from strip mine areas; however, they are in many cases a

-------

-------
25.5 - INDICATES RIVER MILES
j** 3 sr /*. o w* * c s n    f* o sr cr v
oLcAArnc-L-u    OnLiiA

DIAGRAM  OF STREAMS  AFFECTED
MINE  DRAINAGE  POLLUTION
            BY

-------

-------
                                                          X - 14







combination of drainage from both deep and strip mines.  Since




in many cases strip mines have intercepted shallow deep




mines or crossed deep mine portals, it is particularly




difficult in this Sub-Basin to differentiate between deep and




strip mine drainage.  Essentially all the acid drainage




located in the Sub-Basin is discharged from abandoned mines.




            (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        Extensive disturbed areas, large numbers and varieties




of mine drainage sources, and heavy acid loadings combine




to make Clearfield Creek one of the most difficult streams




in the Study Area to reclaim.




        Survey data indicate that reclamation work in the




watersheds of the 10 tributaries found to be contributing




most of the acid drainage would reduce the mine drainage




load in Clearfield Creek.  Although complete restoration




of the quality of Clearfield Creek might not be attainable




in the immediate future, any reduction in the mine drainage




loading to tributaries of Clearfield Creek will have a




beneficial effect on the quality of Clearfield Creek and the




West Branch Susquehanna River.  Because of the extensive




work required in this Sub-Basin to produce a measurable




improvement in the quality of Clearfield Creek3 pollution




abatement work should perhaps be undertaken only in conjunction




with a comprehensive mine' drainage pollution abatement program

-------

-------
                                                          X - 15


aimed at restoring the quality of all streams in the West

Branch Susquehanna River Basin or a very limited project

intended to abate pollution in a tributary of Clearfield

Creek.

             f.  West Branch Susquehanna River-Clearfield

Creek to Moshannon Creek                     "***'

                 (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                      Stream Quality

         The quality of the West Branch in this reach is

seriously degraded by mine drainage contributed by Clearfield

Creek and several minor tributaries within the reach.  As shown

in Figure 2, acid loadings increase from about 4,000 Ibs/day

net alkalinity at Mile 173 upstream from Clearfield Creek to

53,000 Ibs/day net acidity at Mile 163 about 9 miles downstream

from Clearfield Creek.  The acidity concentration both upstream

and downstream from Clearfield Creek was about 50 mg/1

during the sampling period.  The acid load increased to about

108,000  Ibs/day at Mile 144, upstream from Moshannon Creek,

the result of acid contributions from minor tributaries.  Iron

and manganese concentrations of 6 and 7 mg/ls respectively,

were common  (See Figure 2-A).

         Significant contributors of mine drainage sampled

include  the  following streams:  Lick Run, Trout Run, Millstone

Run, Surveyor Run, Murray Run, Congress Run5 Deer Run, Sandy

Creek, and Alder Run.  The total acid contribution by the nine

streams  was  about 40,000 Ibs/day.  Location and characterization of

-------

-------
                                                          X - 16


mine drainage discharges in these stream basins has not

been completed.  It is believed, however, that most of the

drainage originates in abandoned deep mines, with a somewhat

lesser amount originating in abandoned strip mines.

                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures

        Since the sources of mine drainage in this watershed

have not been located, no definite statement on abatement

methods can be made.  The nine minor tributary sub-basins do,

however, contribute a very significant portion of the mine

drainage load to the West Branch and should be included in any

comprehensive mine drainage pollution abatement program.

            g.  Moshannon Creek

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        Moshannon Creek is the largest contributor of mine

drainage to the West Branch Susquehanna River.  During the

survey period the stream contributed an average of about 130,000

Ibs/day net acidity to the West Branch.

        Stream quality at the mouth is fairly representative

of  stream quality throughout most of its length.  Mean net

acidity was 228 mg/1.  Iron and manganese concentrations were

15.3 mg/1 and 7.6 mg/1, respectively, during the survey period.

        As in the Clearfield Creek Sub-Basin, mining has been

accomplished over most of the Sub-Basin both by surface and

-------

-------
                                                          X - 17






subsurface methods.  The quality of most of the streams in




the watershed is influenced by mine drainage to some degree.




A survey conducted in 1964 located 50 tributaries which were




contributing acid to Moshannon Creek.  The 10 streams listed




in the following table are considered to be the most significant




contributors of mine drainage:




      PRINCIPAL MINE DRAINAGE CONTRIBUTORS TO MOSHANNON CREEK

STREAM
Moravian Run
Grass Flat Run
Sulphur Run
Hawk Run
One Mile Run
Cold Stream
Laurel Run
Trout Run
Big Run
Beaver Run
STREAM MILE
(on Moshannon
Creek)
11.6
13.5
22.2
29.9
30.5
31.8
32.3
40.0
41.0
41.5
DRAINAGE
AREA (Sq.
Mile)
1.8
1.0
2.3
2.4
0.5
23.6
19.5
11.0
2.5
19.0
NET ACID
LOADING
(Ibs/day)
820
4,970
14,360
19,540
8,270
1,980
5,870
29,650
2,080
1,980
        The following figure is a schematic representation




of the principal mine drainage contributors to Moshannon Creek.

-------

-------
                                         25.5 - INDICATES  RIVER MILES
             MOSHANNON     CREEK

SCHEiVIATIC   DIAGRAM   OF  STREAMS   AFFECTED  BY
             MINE   DRAINAGE  POLLUTION

-------

-------
                                                          X -  18







        One hundred and thirty-three discharges contributing




about 144,000 Ibs/day acidity have been located in the Sub-




Basin.  Of the 133 discharges, 32 contributed most of the




acid load.  Preliminary information indicates that one




discharge contributes about 29,000 Ibs/day acidity, or about




20 per cent of the acid load in Moshannon Creek at the mouth.




As in the Clearfield Creek Sub-Basin, essentially all of the




mine drainage in this watershed originates in abandoned mines,




and many discharges are a combination of deep and strip mine




drainage.




            (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        Because of very extensive mining activity over most




of the Sub-Basin and the resultant large mine drainage load,




the Moshannon Creek watershed is the key to the success of any




comprehensive mine drainage pollution abatement and control




program in the West Branch Basin.




        Any comprehensive program in the Moshannon Creek




watershed would, however, be very costly.  Considerable




reduction in the acid loading in Moshannon Creek could be




attained by reclamation of several of the 10 major contributing




streams and/or by providing treatment of some of the 32




largest discharges.




        Detailed engineering studies in the Sulphur Run watershed




are being accomplished by a consulting engineer under contract

-------
                                                          X - 19


with the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins Project.

The consultant will determine appropriate methods and the

attendant costs of mine drainage pollution abatement.  This

study, one of five sponsored by the Project, will serve to

further refine estimated costs of mine drainage pollution

abatement throughout the Bituminous Coal Fields.

        h.  West Branch Susquehanna River-Moshannon Creek

to Sinnemahoning Creek

            (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                 Stream Quality

        In this reach the quality of the West Branch is severely

degraded by mine drainage contributed in upstream reaches and

by Moshannon Creek.  Acid concentrations and loadings vary

slightly within the reach; howevers the variations are not

considered significant.  Mean net acidity during the survey

was about 130 mg/1.  Sulfate concentrations were in the

800 to 1,000 mg/1 range.

        Most of the minor tributaries to this reach are mildly

acid or mildly alkaline and have no significant effect on the

quality of the West Branch.

        Mine drainage location and characterization work has

not been completed in this watershed; howevers it is known

that a limited amount of mining has been accomplished.

            (2)  Abatement and Control Measures

        Minor tributaries to the West Branch in this reach

lie in a remote, almost inaccessible area.  It is believed

-------
                                                          X - 20


that most of the mine drainage contributed in this Sub-

Basin originates in abandoned deep mines.  Abatement work

would have very little effect on any streams with significant

public use or on the quality of the West Branch.

        Work in this Sub-Basin should probably have low

priority.

        i.  Sinnemahoning Creek

            (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                 Stream Quality

        During the study period Sinnemahoning Creek contributed

about 369000 Ibs/day net acidity to the West Branch.  The

Creek, with its drainage area of 1,032 square miles, has the

largest watershed area tributary to the West Branch.  It

encompasses approximately 40 per cent of the area of the West

Branch Basin at their confluence.  Major tributaries include

the First Fork Sinnemahoning, Bennett Branch Sinnemahoning,

and Driftwood Branch Sinnemahoning.

        Although the stream has a large watershed area3

topographic and geologic conditions combine to produce

"flashy" flow characteristics with low drought flows and low

natural alkalinity reserves in the stream.  These characteristics

combine to give it a very poor capacity to assimilate

mine drainage discharges,

        Although most of the watershed lies within the

Bituminous Coal Fields, mining activity has been restricted

-------

-------
                                                          X - 21






almost exclusively to the watersheds of the Bennett Branch




Sinnemahoning and Sterling Run, a minor tributary to the




Driftwood Branch Sinnemahoning.  The Bennett Branch is




essentially acid from its source to its mouth.  Its in




turn, renders Sinnemahoning Creek acid from their confluence




to its mouth.  Sterling Run, while not overcoming the




alkalinity reserve in the Driftwood Branch, does add mine




drainage indicators.




        Although quite acid (136 mg/1 net acidity), the




Bennett Branch is relatively low in concentrations of other




mine drainage indicators.  The mean total iron and manganese




concentrations were,, for example, only 1 mg/1 and 4.1 mg/1,




respectively5 during the survey period°  Concentrations of




most mine drainage indicators at the mouth of Sinnemahoning




Creek are about half of Bennett Branch concentrations,




reflecting the "diluting" effect of other tributaries of




Sinnemahoning Creek.




        Mine drainage discharge location and characterization




work has not been completed in this Sub-Basin; however,




preliminary  reconnaissance indicates that most of the mine




drainage originates in abandoned deep mines.  The make of the




mines is, however, significantly influenced by strip mining




operations.  Preliminary information indicates that the




discharges from four tributaries to the Bennett Branch may




equal the acid loading in the Sinnemahoning Creek at its mouth.

-------

-------
                                                          X - 22


                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures

        Data available at this time indicate that abatement

work in this watershed would involve surface reclamation, inun-

dation, and treatment.

        The Pennsylvania Coal Research Board has contracted

with the Pennsylvania State University to design a 4 mgd

lime neutralization plant to treat a large discharge near the

Village of Hollywood, which is near the source of the Bennett

Branch.  The plant3 intended as a demonstration project, will

neutralize that which is reputed to be the largest acid

discharge in the watershed.

        The George B. Stevenson Dam, a flood control reservoir

which controls a portion of the First Fork Sinnemahoning

watershed, might profitably be utilized for flow regulation

for water quality control in a comprehensive pollution abatement

program.  The low natural alkalinity in the impounded water

tends 9 howevera to limit the utility of this water.

        j.  Kettle Creek

            (1)  Mine Drainage  Sources and Their Effect  on
                  Stream Quality

        Kettle Creekg with its contribution of 155000 Ibs/day

acidity during the survey period, is the most downstream direct

source of mine drainage to the West Branch.  Throughout most

of its lengths Kettle Creek flows through heavily forested

land and  is considered an excellent trout stream.  In its

-------
                                                          X - 23


lower 2 miles,, its naturally low alkalinity is overcome by

mine drainage contributed by Two Mile Run and discharges

which enter directly.

        Mine drainage discharge location and characterization

work has not been completed in this Sub-Basin; however, it is

believed that the mine drainage originates in abandoned

surface and subsurface mines.

                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures

        Abatement work in this Sub-Basin will probably require

an extensive surface reclamation and deep mine inundation

program coupled with treatment and/or conveyance of mine

drainage directly to the West Branch.

        A portion of the Sub-Basin is controlled by the

Alvin C. Bush Dam, a flood control structure.  The naturally

low alkalinity of the impounded water limits its utility for

water quality control purposes.

        k.  North Bald Eagle Creek

             (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                 Stream Quality

        North Bald Eagle Creek is responsible for neutralizing

most of the acid load in the West Branch.  Its contribution

of 132,000 Ibs/day alkalinity during the survey period was

the  largest  single source of alkalinity to the West Branch.,

        Considerable mining has taken place in the Sub-

Basin, however, and  the quality of the lower reaches of North

Bald Eagle Creek is  influenced by mine drainage.  Essentially

-------

-------
                                                          X » 24







all the mining in the Sub-Basin has been accomplished in




the watershed of Beech Creek, a major tributary.  Beech




Creek is acid from its source to its mouth and contributed




about 10,000 Ibs/day net acidity to North Bald Eagle Creek




during the survey period.  Under most natural flow conditions,




the alkalinity in North Bald Eagle Creek is adequate to




neutralize the acid contributed by Beech Creek.  During periods




of unbalanced rainfall and runoff in the Sub-Basin9 high flows




from Beech Creek have significantly reduced the alkalinity




in North Bald Eagle Creek,  Flow regulation by Blanchard




Dam,, a multi-purpose structure now under construction immediately




upstream from Beech Creek, may tend to accentuate this condition.




        Mining conditions in the Beech Creek watershed are




very similar to those in the nearby Clearfield and Moshannon




Creek watersheds.  Much of the watershed has been mineds




both by surface and sub-surface methods.  Although more than




a hundred mine drainage discharges have been located in the




watersheds preliminary evaluation of the data indicates that




most of the acid originates in six major discharges.




                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        A combination of almost all abatement methods will




probably be applicable in this Sub-Basin.  Abatement work




should have a high priority, since reduction of acid loadings




is needed to protect the quality of North Bald Eagle Creek

-------

-------
                                                          X - 25


during periods of unbalanced streamflow caused by natural

conditions and by flow regulation by the Blanchard Dam,

        A project in the Beech Creek watershed intended to

reclaim 379 acres in the Sproul State Forest is in the late-

planning stages.  This project,, to be financed with Appalachia

Funds3 is expected to affect some stream quality benefit.

        1.  West Branch Susquehanna River-Sinnemahoning Creek

to Mou th

            (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                 Stream Quality

        As shown in Figure 2S the quality of the West Branch

in this reach varies significantly in response to several

major inputs.

        Acid contributed by Sinnemahoning Creek was responsible

for a 153000 Ibs/day net acidity increase in the acid load in

the river from Mile 111 to Mile 105 during the survey period.

The contribution of an additional 153000 Ibs/day acidity by

Kettle Creek further increased the acid loading at Mile 98.

Although acid concentrations do not vary appreciably between

Kettle Creek and North Bald Eagle Creek, net acidity loadings

increase with increases in flow at successive sampling stations.

The apparent increase in loading is believed to be primarily

the result of limitations in the precision of analysis and

flow measurement procedures, and not to mine drainage discharges

in the reach.

-------

-------
                                                          X - 26







        At Mile 68 (Lock Haven), North Bald Eagle Creek, with




its contribution of 132,000 Ibs/day net alkalinity during the




survey period enters the West Branch and contributes most




of the alkalinity required to neutralize the acid load in




the West Branch.  Ocher major alkaline tributaries in the




reach between Mile 68 and Mile 040 (Williamspoxt) which





contribute no the neutralization of the West Branch include




Pine Creek, Larry's Creek, Lycoraing Creek, and Antes Creek.




        Downstream from Williamsport, the West Branch is




normally weakly alkaline (10 rag/1 net alkalinity) and receives




no direct mine drainage discharges.  During unusual flow




conditions, when the ratio of the flow in the West Branch




to the flow in North Bald Eagle Creek is considerably higher




than normal9 the acid load carried by the West Branch is not




neutralized, and acid conditions prevail downstream from




Williamsport5 sometimes to the mouth.  This condition frequently




occurs in  late summer in conjunction with heavy rains in the




Clearfield and Moshannon Creek watersheds with no




corresponding rainfall in the North Bald Eagle Creek watershed.




The condition, normally a once-yearly occurrence, causes




extensive  fish kills downstream from Williamsport.




                 (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        No significant mine drainage sources which discharge




directly  to  the West Branch have been located in this reach,




except  those which are described in the discussion of major




sub-basins.

-------

-------
                                                          X - 27
        Flow regulation to control the chronic "acid slug"

condition may be possible if greater utilization of the

water quality control capability of existing flow regulation

structures and more timely information on water quality and

flow conditions can be attained.

        Blanchard Dam? now under construction on North Bald

Eagle Creeks would probably be the key to any program of flow

regulation for water quality control.  The high alkalinity of

the impounded water (110 mg/1 during the survey period)

will make it by far the most promising source of "stored

alkalinity" in the Basin.

        m.  Loyal sock Creek

            (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                 Stream Quality

        Although Loyalsock Creek is an alkaline stream at

its mouth and bears no significant evidence of mine drainage

indicators throughout most of its length,, it does receive

mine drainage from abandoned mines in an isolated semi-

anthracite deposit in the headwaters.

        Two drainage tunnels near the Village of Lopez (See

Figure 1-A) discharge mine drainage with a net acidity

concentration of approximately 60 mg/1.  The addition of this

slightly acid discharge to the stream, which has a naturally

low residual alkalinity- causes degradation for approximately

eight miles downstream.

-------

-------
                                                          X -  28







                (2)  Abatement and Control  Measures




        One method of abating polluting discharges  in this




Sub-Basin would be to remove all of the remaining coal in the




Sub-Basin, using surface mining methods.   Restoration of the




stripped area would probably abate the polluting discharges.




        Because of the relatively small mine drainage loading




and the great effect on stream quality, considerable benefit




could be attained by relatively low cost abatement  measures.




This area should have a high priority for future abatement work.

-------

-------
                                                          X - 29








    B.  Juniata River Basin




        1.  Introduction




        The Juniata River, 86 miles long with a drainage




area of 3,406 square miles, is formed by the junction of the




Little Juniata River and Frankstown Branch Juniata River in




Huntingdon County3 3.5 miles southeast of Huntingdon,




Pennsylvania.  The stream flows easterly by a circuitous




route to its confluence with the Susquehanna River.




        All of Blair and Huntingdon Counties are located




within the confines of the Basin.  Also included are portions




of Bedford, Centre, Fulton3 Mifflin, Juniata, and Perry




Counties.  Figure 1-B is a map showing major streams and other




pertinent features of the Basin.




        2.  Geology




        Virtually the entire Juniata River Basin lies within




the "Ridge and Valley" Province.  This area is characterized




by an alternate succession of long ridges and valleys,




generally oriented from southwest to northeast.  The ridges




comprising the western part of the Basin are steep and rugged,




whereas,  the eastern part is considerably more rolling in




nature.  A small area on  the western edge of the Basin drains




a part of the Appalachian Plateau Province„




        Extremes in elevation range from 340 to 2,900 feer




above mean sea level.

-------

-------
                                                          X - 30








        Forests occupy approximately two-thirds of the total




watershed and,  for the most part, cover the higher ridges and




mountains.  Farmland is predominantly confined to the lower,




more fertile valleys and encompasses approximately one-fourth




of the Basin area.




        The coal fields influencing stream quality are located




in the southwestern portion of the watershed in Blair,, Huntingdon,




Bedford,and Fulton Counties,  The largest coal deposit in




the watershed is the Broad Top Coal Field, located in Bedford;




Huntingdon,, aid Fulton Counties.  The field, approximately 81




square miles in area9 lies in a highly dissected plateau




known as Broad Top Mountain and is east of the Allegheny




Mountains., totally isolated from the main bituminous coal




fields.  The largest portion of the coal deposit and major




producing area lies in the northeast corner of Bedford County.




The remainder of the field lies in the southern end of




Huntingdon County with an extension into the northwest corner




of Fulton County,




        A small portion of the main bituminous coal field




lies within the watershed on the western edge of Blair County




along the eastern slope of Allegheny Mountain.




        3.  Economy




        The production of bituminous coal constitutes an

-------

-------
                                                          X - 31








important industry in the Juniata Basin, although no longer




a major one.  The first authenticated record of coal mining




in the area occurred during the Revolutionary War when coal




was mined for home use.  The first commercial shipments were




made in 1853, reaching a peak production of.approximately 2.7




million short tons in 1918.  By 1964 coal production had




diminished to about 0.4 million short tons.




        Projections of production in the Juniata Basin are




as follows:


                                                              (6)

        Projected Bituminous Production (Thousand Short Tons)




             1_970            1985           2020




              490             780          1,520




        Reserves of coal have been estimated to total 215




million short tons of which approximately 129 million short



                       (5)
tons are recoverable.




        4.  Sub-Basin Description




        Data collected during a reconnaissance and sampling




program conducted by personnel of the Chesapeake Bay-




Susquehanna River Basins Project in August 1965 indicate that




mine drainage is contributed to four major tributaries of




the Juniata River.  The Little Juniata and Franks^cwn Branch




are influenced primarily by active and abandoned mining operations




in the coal measures along the eastern slope of Allegheny Mountain




in western  Blair County,  The Raystown Branch and Aughwick

-------

-------
                                                          X - 32



Creek receive mine drainage originating in the Broad Top

Coal Field.

            a.  Little Juniata River

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        Mining activity in this Basin has been limited almost

exclusively to the Bells Gap Run watershed which has been

extensively deep and strip mined.

        Sampling of the Little Juniata River upstream from the

confluence with Bells Gap Run indicated an initial net

alkalinity of 100 mg/1 accompanied by low level concentrations

of other mine drainage indicators.  Bells Gap Run3 despite

mine drainage contributions, exhibits very little evidence of

mine drainage indicators at its mouth and contributes an

alkaline loading of approximately 170 Ibs/day to the Little

Juniata River.

                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures

        Mine drainage pollution abatement in this watershed

will involve extensive restoration of areas disturbed by

surface mining.  Since the stream is used as a source of public

water supply, it may prove economically feasible ro provide

 treatment  facilities  such as  ion  exchange, which will produce

a high  quality water  suitable  for use as a public water supply,

              b.   Frankstown Branch Juniata River

                  (1)  Mine Dranage Sources and Their Effect  on
                      Stream Qjality

-------

-------
                                                              33
        The Frankstown Branch exhibited an alkaline reserve




of 110 mg/1 net alkalinity at its confluence with the Little




Juniata during the sampling period.  The stream, while alkaline,




contains significant levels of iron and hardness, mine drainage




indicators.




        The major contributor of mine drainage during the




sampling period was the Beaver Dam Branch, which contributed




approximately 3,000 Ibs/day net acidity.  The major sources of




mine drainage to the Beaver Dam Branch were Burgoon Run and




Sugar Run.




        Burgoon Run receives mine drainage from Kittanning




Run and Glenwhite Run, small streams whose watersheds have been




almost completely disturbed by surface mining.  Kittanning Run




is diverted around a public water supply reservoir serving




the City of Altoona and enters Burgoon Run downstream from




the Reservoir,  The flow of the upper reaches of Burgoon Run




and the normal flow of Glenwhite Run form the reservcir supply.




During periods of high runoffs however, the flow of Glenwhite




Run is also diverted to the by-pass.




        Sugar Run had an acid loading at its mouth of 1 ,,000




Ibs/day net acidity.  Most of the acid originates in the




discharge from one abandoned deep mine.




                 (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        Mine drainage pollution abatement activities in this

-------
                                                          X -  34



Basin should be directed toward producing a water suitable

as a source of public water supply.  Altoona is in serious

need of additional public water supply.  Treatment of the

mine drainage normally diverted around the reservoir would

add appreciably to the city's supply.  Ion exchange, or some

other method which produces a high quality product, would be

the most desirable treatment process.

        Preliminary data collection activities are in progress

on a demonstration project in the Glenwhite Run watershed5

being carried out jointly by the FWPCA and the Bureau of

Mines.  Reclamation work carried out wil!9 it is hoped? reduce

the mine drainage effect on the quality of Glenwhite Run

and reduce the need for by-passing the water supply reservoir

during high flow periods.

        Since one discharge is the primary source of pollution

of Sugar Run5 mine flooding and/or treatment would appear to

be applicable abatement methods in that watershed.

            c.  Rays town Branch Juniata River

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        Mine drainage in this Sub-Basin originates in the Broad

Top Coal Field and is conveyed to the Raystown Branch by Longs

Run 3 Six Mile Run, Shoups Run, and Great Trough Creek.  Each

of the first three streams is acid from its source r.o its mouth.

-------
                                                          X - 35









Great Trough Creek is acid throughout its length in the coal




fields, approximately five miles.  Alkaline tributaries




neutralize the acid load and provide an alkaline reserve of





200 Ibs/day at its mouth.




        The three acid streams contributed the following acid




loading to the Raystown Branch during the survey period;




        Longs Run -- 5,600 Ibs/day net acidity




        Six Mile Run -- 2,800 Ibs/day net acidity




        Shoups Run -- 3,200 Ibs/day net acidity




In spite of the sizable acid contributions, as shown in Figure




33 the alkaline reserve of Raystown Branch upstream (^2,000




Ibs/day during the sampling period) was more than ample to




assimilate the acid contributed.  The Raystown Branch downstream




from the coal fields exhibited essentially no evidence of the




mine drainage loading.




        Water quality in the three acid streams was generally




comparable.  They had pH!s of less than ^.55 and elevated




concentrations of manganese, sulfate3 hardness, and other mi,ne




drainage indicators.  Inexplicably, the iron concentration in




Shoups Run was normally less than 1 mg/1; while in Longs Run




and Six Mile Run, mean concentrations exceeded 10 mg/1.




        All of the mine drainage discharges located in  the




watersheds tributary to the Raystown Branch originated  in deep

-------
                                                          X - 36



mines.  A limited amount of surface mining has taken place

in the Basin and may be influencing deep mine discharges;

however, no surface discharges were observed.

                 (2)  Abatement and Control Measures

         In view  of  the  relatively minor effect of mine drainage

on the quality of the Raystown Branch, abatement programs in

the watersheds influenced  by mine drainage might include

conveyance of at least  a portion of the mine  drainage to  the

Raystown Branch, in addition to more conventional methods such

as treatment, surface reclamation, and mine  flooding.

         The  limited effect on existing water  uses and on

downstream water quality in the Raystown  Branch suggest a low

priority for abatement  work in this Sub-Basin.

             d.   Aughwick Creek

                 (1) Mine  Drainage Sources and Their Effect  on
                     Stream Quality

         A  small  percentage of the Broad Top  Coal Fields  lies

in the  Aughwick  Creek Sub-Basin.  Roaring Run, a tributary of

Sidling  Hill Creek, which  in turn is tributary to Aughwick

Creek,  is  the only  known contributor of mine  drainage in  the

Sub-Basin.   Roaring Run with its acid  loading of 750 Ibs/day

during  the  sampling period degraded the quality of  Sidling Hill

Creek at their  confluence. Alkalinity  contributed  by other

 tributaries  enabled Sidling Hill Creek  to recover from the acid

 loading and  have an alkaline reserve at its  mouth.

-------

-------
                                                          X - 47








                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        Most of the mine drainage contributed to Roaring Run




originates in one discharge.  Abatement of pollution from this




source would have considerable value, reclaiming a number of




miles of otherwise unpolluted streams.

-------
                                                          X - 38








    C.  Tioga River Basin




        1.  Introduction




        The Tioga River originates in Armenia Township in




western Bradford County.  The drainage area (within Pennsylvania),




689.5 square miles5 is contained in portions of Potter, Tioga,




and Bradford Counties.  The stream is 58 miles long, 45 miles




of which are in Pennsylvania.  It flows in a southwesterly




direction into Tioga County near Blossburg, Pennsylvania;, and




thence in a northerly direction to join the Chemung River in




New York State.  Figure 1-C is a map of the portion of the




Susquehanna River Basin which includes the Tioga River Basin.




        2.  Geology




        Located within the Allegheny Plateau physiographic




province, the Study Area is characterized by broad valleys




and steep, rounded hills.  Shale and sandstones along with coal




in the upper portion of the Sub-Basin, are the dominant




geologic formations.  Most of the stream channels are bordered




by wide alluvial flood plains containing deposits of glacially-




derived boulders and gravel.




        Most of the alluvial valleys are devoid of tree cover.




In contrast, the hills in the Sub-Basin are steep- rugged,




uncultivated and heavily wooded.




        Coal deposits in the Sub-Basin are located in T~he extreme




headwaters of  the stream and are contained in two canoe shaped

-------

-------
                                                            - 3-)
synclinal basins.  The first and most important, the Blcssburg




Basin underlying the Morris Run, Coal Creek, and Bear Creek




watersheds, extends in a general northeast-southwest dLrecLion.




The second 5 the Gaines Basin underlying the Jchnsert Creek




watershed, is a few miles north of and approximately parallel




to the Blossburg deposit.  Of the four minable beds cor.tcuned




in the Basins, three have been or are being mined.




        3.  Economy




        Historically 3 the mining of bituminous coal in Line




Area was the primary industry.  Mining activity began in




the 1840!s reaching a maximum of approximately 1.4 million




tons in 1886.  Production has since declined !ro a level of




approximately 0.4 million tons in 1964.  Great emphasis is




placed on surface mining.  Approximately 80 per cent of the coal




is produced by this method.  Projections of production for the




Tioga River Basin are shown in the following table:




        Projected Bituminous Coal Production (Thousand Short Tons)




               1970            1985            2020




                360             460             660




        Reserves of coal have been estimated     ar, a




total of 41 million short tons, with approximately 16 million




short tons considered recoverable.




        4.  Sub-Basin Description




        The results of the reconnaissance and sampling program

-------

-------
                                                                           X  - 40
                  conducted by personnel of the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna

                  River Basins Project during September and October 1965 indicate

                  the quality of the Tioga River above its confluence with

•                Morris Run is not significantly affected by mine drainage.

                  The stream is, in fact5 classified as a trout stream by the

                  Pennsylvania Fish Commission.  Below this points however, for

                  a distance of more than 25 miles, the stream is rendered acid

                  by mine drainage contributed by Morris Run, Coal Creek,

                  Johnson Creek and Bear Creek.  Downstream tributaries have weak

                  alkalinity common to this Area, but succeed in neutralizing

                  the acid load downstream from Crooked Creek.  Biological

                  studies indicate mine drainage inhibition of aquatic life

                  downstream to the confluence with the Canisteo River, an

                  additional 27 miles downstream.

                          The Corps of Engineers is planning a multipurpose dam

                  and reservoir at the confluence of Crooked Creek and the Tioga

                  River.  The dam will impound both streams in separate

                  impoundments.  Mine drainage influence on the quality of the

                  Tioga River impoundment will limit water uses.  The mean net

                  acidity at the dam site was  100 mg/1 during the survey.  Iron

                  and manganese concentrations were 2.1 and 3.7 mg/1, respectively.

                  The pH ranged from 3.7 to 4.1.

                          a.  Johnson Creek

                               (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                                   Stream Quality

-------

-------
                                                          X - 41


        Although Johnson Creek contributes a weak alkaline

loading to the Tioga River, it does receive mine drainage from

abandoned surface and sub-surface mines near the Village of

Arnot.  As shown in Figure 5, mine drainage contributed in the

Arnot area overcomes the stream's alkalinity for a short

distance.  Mine drainage indicator concentrations are low in

Johnson Creek downstream from Arnot.  Two discharges with a

total net acid loading of 300 Ibs/day were determined to be the

major mine drainage contributors in the watershed.

        2.  Abatement and Control Measures

        A limited program of mine sealing and surface reclamation

would probably substantially improve water quality in this

watershed.

    b.  Morris Run, Coal Creek, and Bear Creek

        (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
             Stream Quality

        Although Morris Run, Coal Creek, and Bear Creek

constitute individual sources of mine drainage to the Tioga

River, they overlie a common coal deposit.  Underground and

surface mining has diverted surface and ground water from water-

shed  to watershed.  The three watersheds will, therefore, be

discussed as a single mine drainage source to the Tioga River.

        As illustrated in Figure 4, the total acidity discharge

from  the  three streams exhausted the Tioga River's rather weak

-------

-------
                                                          X - 42








alkaline reserve and produced an acid residual of 15,500




Ibs/day acidity downstream from Bear Creek during the survey




period.  The mean net acidity concentration downstream from




Bear Creek was 180 mg/1.  Mean iron and manganese concentrations




were 16 and 4.9 mg/1, respectively.  Other mine drainage




indicators were proportionately high.




        All of the three streams are acid from source to mouth,




as are most of their tributaries.  The quality of the three streams




is essentially uniform from source to mouth.  All have acidity




concentrations in the 500 to 1,000 mg/1 range, iron concentrations




in the 20 to 100 mg/1 range, and manganese concentrations of




20 to 50 mg/1.  Morris Run receives mine drainage from two major




sources and approximately 20 less significant sources.  Most




of the drainage originates in abandoned deep mines; however,




their flow is undoubtedly influenced by contributions from strip




mines, some of which lie in the Coal Creek and Bear Creek




watersheds.




        Mine drainage in the Coal Creek and Bear Creek watersheds




is contributed by many major discharges which are combinations




of drainage from abandoned surface and sub-surface mines.




        (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        Mine drainage pollution abatement work in this watershed




will involve an extensive program of surface reclamation, mine




flooding, and probably treatment.

-------
                                                          X - 43








        Since the coal measures are isolated from the main




bituminous field and cover an area of only about 10 square




miles, abatement work could be accomplished without involving




a large geographical area.  The extensive degradation of the




quality of the Tioga River resulting from mine drainage discharges




in the watershed and its effect on uses of water impounded by




the proposed Tioga River Dam should give the area a high priority




in future abatement programs.




        A consulting engineer under contract with the Chesapeake




Bay-Susquehanna River Basins Project is presently making a




detailed engineering study of methods and associated costs of




mine drainage pollution abatement in the watersheds.




        Because of the mine drainage influence on the quality




of the water to be impounded in the proposed Tioga River Dam,




discharge schedules should be designed to take full advantage




of the neutralizing capacity of Crooked Creek.  Flow regulation




at the dam may be an effective method of minimizing mine drainage




influence on water quality downstream.

-------

-------
                                                          X -  44
    D.  Anthracite Area




        1.  Introduction




        Anthracite coal deposits in the Study Area lie in four




individual fields in Northeastern Pennsylvania (See Figure 1-D).




The coal fields, underlying a total area of 529 square miles,




are designated the Northern Field, Western Middle Field, Eastern




Middle Field, and Southern Field.




        All of the Northern Field lies within the Susquehanna




River Basin.  Approximately 50 per cent of the Eastern Middle




Field, 90 per cent of the Western Middle Field, and 40 per cent




of the Southern Field are drained by the Susquehanna River and




its tributaries.  The remainder of the fields drain to the




Delaware River through its tributaries, the Lehigh and




Schuylkill Rivers.




        Major streams draining the Anthracite Area are as




follows:
Name




Susquehanna River Basin




   Lackawanna River




   Nescopeck Creek




   Catawissa Creek





   Shamokin Creek





   Mahanoy Creek
Drainage Area
(square miles)
346
172
155
138
155
Mile Pt. of
Confluence
195
159
143
122
112






-------

-------
                                                          X - 45


                              Drainage Area        Mile Pt. of
Name                          (square miles)       Confluence

   Mahantango Creek               164                  102

   Wiconisco Creek                116                   96

   Swatara Creek                  567                   60

Delaware River Basin

   Lehigh River                 1,373

   Schuylkill River             1,916


        The Area includes portions of Dauphin, Schuylkill,

Northumberland, Columbia, Luzerne, Lackawanna, Carbon, Monroe,

and Pike Counties.

        The Area lies entirely within the Ridge and Valley Province

of the Appalachian Highlands, the principal feature of which is

a series of canoe shaped valleys in which the anthracite fields

are located.  The ridges trend generally northeast-southwest

with elevations varying from 1,400 to 2,700 feet.

        2.  Geology

        All the rocks of the Area are of sedimentary origin

and are of the Paleozoic age.  They belong to the Carboniferous,

Devonian, and Silurian systems, with one formation of the

Ordovician System found locally.  The Carboniferous System is

sub-divided into the Pennsylvanian and Mississippian series.

The Pennsylvanian Series is further sub-divided into the Post-

Pottsville and Pottsville Formations.

-------

-------
                                                          X -  46







        The Post-Pottsville Formations found within the four




fields contain the most economically important deposits of




Pennsylvania anthracite coal .   These formations consist of beds




of sandstone, shale, fireclay, black carbonaceous slate, and




beds of coal ranging from seams several inches thick to the




great Mammoth bed which has a thickness, in areas, in excess




of 60 feet.  The anthracite-bearing formations contain from 12




to 26 minable coal beds which are separated by from a few feet




to as much as 200 feet of intervening shale, sandstone and/or




conglomerate.  While several anthracite beds found in the




Pottsville Formation are locally minable, the major production




is from the Post-Pottsville Formation.




        In the Northern Field, coal deposits are contained within




a canoe-shaped syncline which has a flat bottom and steep sides




which outcrop along the mountain ridges.  The Field is about




62 miles long, 5 miles wide and covers an area of approximately




176 square miles.




        At Ashley, south of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvanias the




coal measures reach a depth of 2,100 feet and contain 18 workable




strata, having a combined thickness of about 100 feet.  A unique




feature of the Northern Field is its separation into two coal




basins, the Lackawanna and Wyoming, by a structural saddle (the




Moosic saddle) near Old Forge, Pennsylvania.

-------

-------
                                                          X -  47








        The Eastern Middle Field, with an area of approximately




33 square miles, consists of a number of long, narrow coal




basins trending east to west.  These coal basins are separated




by members of the Pottsville conglomerate which contain no




anthracite.  Most of the deposits lie above surface drainage




level and are drained by tunnels driven expressly to provide




gravity drainage to surface streams.  Numerous mine openings,




slopes, drifts, and short tunnels also provide drainage.




        The Western Middle Field consists of a series of




parallel, irregularly shaped coal basins covering an area of




approximately 120 square miles.  The Field, about 42 miles




long and from two to five miles wide, contains strata which




locally lie nearly horizontal or pitch steeply.  Deposits




resemble those in the Eastern Middle Field, except that most




of the deposits lie below surface drainage level and are now




flooded.




        The Southern Field, about 7O miles long and 1 to.6




miles wide, covers an area of about 200 square miles.  The Field




consists of a series of basins, extending from Mauch Chunk on




the west to the "fish tail" formed by a separation of the coal




measures extending almost to the Susquehanna River at the western




extremity.  The geologic structure of the Southern Field is more




complicated than that of the other fields.  The dips of the




synclinals and anticlinals are much steeper than elsewhere.

-------

-------
                                                          X - 48


and mining conditions are difficult.  The largest tonnage of

anthracite reserve lies in this Field.

        3.  Economy

        Approximately 95 per cent of the Nations' true anthracite

lies in Pennsylvania in the watersheds of the Susquehanna and

Delaware Rivers.  This, the "hard coal" of commerce, has found

its greatest use as a domestic and industrial fuel.  Since

1808 the anthracite industry has shipped over five billion tons

of clean coal.  Peak production was slightly more than 100 million

     (91
tons   '.  Production has decreased gradually to a low of about

16.5 million tons in 1964.

        Production during the period 1962-64 was only 75 per

cent of that during the 1946-48 period.  Strip and underground

mining production declined by 33 per cent and 83 per cent,

respectively.

        Projected estimates of anthracite production for the

area are as follows:

        Projected Anthracite Production  (Thousand Short Tons)

                1_970           1985          2020

Susquehanna
  Basin         5,900          3,200         2,500

Delaware
  Basin         5,300          4,200         9,500

        Anthracite coal reserves within  the Susquehanna River

Basin have been estimated at 8.2 billion short tons.  Recoverable

-------

-------
                                                          X - 49


reserves are estimated at 1.6 billion short tons.

        4.  Sub-Basin Description

        A detailed discussion of the mine drainage sources in

the Anthracite Area, their effect on stream quality, and possible

abatement methods follow:

            a.  Lackawanna River

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        Changes in mining activity and mine drainage discharge

points have greatly altered the quality of the Lackawanna River

within the past 10 years.  Prior to I960, extensive mining with

associated mine drainage discharges severely degraded stream

quality.  Declines in demand for anthracite coal,  the cost of

pumping high volumes of water encountered, and other circumstances

gradually forced the abandonment of most of the deep mines in

the watershed.

        Cessation of mine water pumping resulted in a very

significant increase in stream alkalinity although some mine

drainage influence on stream quality persists.

        In January 1961, the mine water pools which had been

developing in the abandoned underground workings broke through

the surface in the form of a gravity discharge to the Lackawanna

River at Duryea, approximately two miles from its mouth.  The

largest discharge of mine drainage in the Anthracite Field

is a combination of the "Duryea Gravity Discharge" and the

-------

-------
                                                          X - 50







discharge from a borehole, which was subsequently drilled




one mile upstream at Old Forge in order to stabilize the level




of the underground pools.  The combined discharges contribute




an average flow of about 58 mgd, an acid load of approximately




132,000 Ibs/day net acidity, and an iron load of approximately




62,000 Ibs/day.




        Although most of the mine water developed in the




Lackawanna River watershed discharges to the river through




the Duryea and Old Forge discharge points, as illustrated




in Figure 6, water quality in the river is also influenced by




other mine drainage discharges.




        The initial effect of mine drainage on stream quality




is evident immediately above Carbondale, Pennsylvania, downstream




from Elk Creek.  This stream receives mine drainage from two




deep mines.  At Carbondale, further water quality impairment




occurs as a result of discharges from two deep mines.  Based




on an acidity-alkalinity balance, this reach of the Lackawanna




River receives a net acid loading of at least 1,000 Ibs/day from




the combined flows described above.




        Between Carbondale and Old Forge, the river receives




mine drainage contributed primarily by the Jermyn Water Tunnel,




which contributes approximately 5,500 Ibs/day net acidity.




        Below the entry of the Jermyn discharge and the




confluence with the Susquehanna River, the Lackawanna River

-------

-------
                                                          X - 51







receives the Duryea and Old Forge discharges.  These discharges




overcame the stream's residual alkalinity and were primarily




responsible for the acid loading of 47,000 Ibs/day net acidity




discharged to the Susquehanna River during the sampling period.




The Lackawanna River discharge does not deplete the Susquehanna




River's alkalinity reserve; however, iron loadings originating




in the Duryea and Old Forge discharges are responsible for




substantial degradation of the quality of the Susquehanna River.




        Variation of mine drainage indicators throughout the




length of the river is illustrated in Figure 7-A.  At its




mouth the pH is generally between 4 and 6.  The acidity concen-




tration is about 150 mg/1 and iron and manganese concentrations




are normally in the 50 mg/1 and 10 mg/1 range, respectively.





                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        Because of the vast extent of the underground mine




workings and the large area disturbed by surface mining in




the Sub-Basin, it is doubtful that reclamation work alone




will constitute a completely effective pollution abatement program,




This work, although needed to reduce the amount of surface water




which is diverted to the underground mine workings, will not




completely abate mine drainage pollution in the Lackawanna River




watershed.  Treatment conveyance, or some other abatement




method will also be needed.

-------
                                                          X -  52



        A consulting engineer under contract with the Pennsylvania

Sanitary Water Board has completed a preliminary study of methods

and the associated costs of lowering the underground mine

water pools below the level of the Duryea and Old Forge discharges

and constructing lime neutralization facilities to treat the

new combined discharge.  The cost of facilities to collect and

treat the present average flow is estimated to be $4.3

million.  Total annual cost of. the facility is estimated to

be $760,000.

            b.  Susquehanna River-Lackawanna River to Nescopeck
                Creek

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        The quality of the Susquehanna River is impaired in

this reach by mine drainage contributed by the Lackawanna River

and by discharges originating in the Wyoming Valley portion

of the Northern Anthracite Field.  Tributary streams contributing

most of the mine drainage originating in the Wyoming Valley

include:  Mill Creek, Solomons Creek, Warrior Run, Nanticoke

Creek,and Newport Creek,  The streams act as conveyances for

discharges from large mine-pumping stations.  The qualities

of the tributaries approximate the qualities of contributing

discharges.

        The discharges originate in active deep mines and in

abandoned deep mines in which the level of the pool is maintained

-------

-------
                                                          X -  53







constant by pumping to prevent the water from entering areas




where mining is actively accomplished.




        All of the pumping operations which contribute a




significant amount of acid to the Susquehanna River are operated




by the Blue Coal Company.  The company operates a total of 27




pumps at 17 locations.  Pumps which stabilize the pool level




in abandoned mines were purchased and installed with public funds




provided by equal allocations by the State and Federal Governments




to a $8.5 million fund, the Joint Federal-State Anthracite




Mine Water Control Program, which was established in 1955.




Of the  $7 million of  the appropriations'which have already




been spent, $5 million was spent for 26 deep-well pumps operated,




at some time, by the Glen Alden Coal Company, predecessor of




the Blue Coal Company.




        The total flow of pumped discharges averages 62 mgd,




the acid loading averages 361,000 Ibs/day net acidity and the




iron loading averages 134,000 Ibs/day.




        Under the direction of the Pennsylvania Sanitary Water




Board,  the company regulates its discharges in accordance with




streamflow, pumping only as necessary to prevent flooding of




the active mines during low streamflow periods.  Calculations




based on pumping records and discharge and stream quality




records indicate the  following contributions from major sources




during  the period of  sampling in the area -- August 1965:

-------

-------
                                      X -  54








(a)   Mill  Creek - 85,000 Ibs/day net




     acidity from the  Delaware  pumps.




(b)   Solomons Creek -  26,700 Ibs/day  net




     acidity from Huber (14,700 Ibs/day)




     and the treated South Wilkes-Barre




     #5 discharge (12,000 Ibs/day).   The




     latter discharge  is permitted only with




     treatment during  low flow  periods and




     was active only during the period




     August 19-31.




(c)   Warrior Run - 3,600 Ibs/day net




     acidity originating in discharges




     from Sugar Notch  #3 West (840 Ibs/day)




     and Sugar Notch Shaft (2,830 Ibs/day).




(d)   Nanticoke Creek - 24,000 Ibs/day from




     the Askam pumped  discharge.  The Loomis




     outfall, permitted with treatment during




     the low flow period, was operated only




     53 hours during the month and is not




     considered here.




(e)  Newport Creek - 18,000 Ibs/day net




     acidity from the  Wanamie mining




     complex.

-------

-------
                                                          X - 55









        The total contribution of 147,000 Ibs/day net acidity




was, during the sampling period, about half of the average




contribution from these sources as indicated by pumping records




and miscellaneous water quality data available.




        Although the river received sizable acid contributions




from the pumped discharges during the survey period, as




shown in Figure 7, its alkaline reserve was not seriously




threatened.  Other mine drainage indicators, particularly man-




ganese and sulfates, weres however, present in relatively high




concentrations.




        Samples collected in August 1966 at Mile 196 upstream




from the Lackawanna River and at Hile 179 downstream from all




significant Northern Anthracite Field mine drainage sources




indicate a significant reduction in alkalinity and increases




in  other mine  drainage indicators through the reach.  Alkalinity




dropped from about 84 mg/1 to 38 mg/1.  Irons manganese, and




sulfates increased from 0.1, 0.09, and 30 mg/1 to about 0.3,




1.5, and 190 mg/1, respectively.  During the sampling period




iron concentrations in this reach were abnormally low.  Other




data available indicates  that the change in concentrations




of  iron and other mine drainage indicators through the reach




is  considerably more dramatic under other flow conditions.




        The last regularly sampled discharge in this reach




is  a gravity discharge from an isolated mine water pool at

-------

-------
                                                          X - 56







Mocanaqua.   The discharge contributed approximately 6,000




Ibs/day net acidity and had no observable effect on the




alkaline reserve of the Susquehanna River.




        Downstream from Nescopeck Creek9 stream quality




rapidly improves.  Downstream tributaries draining the




Anthracite Area, while contributing mine drainage indicators,




do not significantly affect stream quality.  Biological




surveys determined significant degradation of aquatic life




in the reach from the Lackawanna River to Nescopeck Creek and




slight effect further downstream.  Periodic degradation of




stream quality downstream from Nescopeck Creek has been




observed during periods of high stream flow following extended




low flow periods.  Iron salts which precipitate during low




flow periods to form sludge deposits in the river upstream




from Berwick are scoured out by increased stream velocities




and are evident downstream to the confluence with the West




Branch Susquehanna River.




                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        The Blue Coal Company and its predecessor, the Glen




Alden Coal Company, have, in accordance with Sanitary Water




Board requirements, restricted pumpage during low stream flow




periods and in some cases provided lime neutralization of




key discharges in an effort to minimize the effect of its discharge




on stream quality.  Although this action has preserved the

-------
                                                          X -  57


alkaline reserve of the Susquehanna River, additional action

is needed to abate water quality degradation caused by other

mine drainage indicators.  Treatment of at least a portion

of the present average discharge will, no doubt, be required

as a part of any effective pollution abatement program in the

Area.

        A preliminary study conducted in 1962 by a consulting

firm retained by the Glen Alden Coal Company estimated that

lime neutralization type mine drainage treatment facilities

to treat the Company's pump discharges, which were then slightly

larger than those at present, would cost about $18.9 million.

Average annual costs were estimated to be about $4 million.

        The Mocanaqua gravity discharge is presently under

study preparatory to carrying out abatement work as a part

of a joint U. S. Bureau of Mines - FWPCA Mine Drainage

Demonstration Project.  Work on this discharge, while not of

major significance to stream quality, may point to ways of

abating polluting discharges in other portions of the

Anthracite Area.

            c.  Nescopeck Creek

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        The results of a sampling program conducted during

August and September 1965 indicate that the quality of the

upper reaches of Nescopeck Creek above its confluence with

-------

-------
                                                          X - 58







Little Nescopeck Creek is not significantly degraded by




mine drainage.  In fact, this 10-mile reach is classified as




a trout stream by the Pennsylvania Fish Commission.  Below




the confluence, however, stream quality is degraded by the




contribution of mine drainage from Little Nescopeck Creek




and Black Creek.




        Initial water quality degradation in Nescopeck Creek




is caused by mine drainage contributed by Little Nescopeck




Creek.  As Figure 8 illustrates, the contribution of approximately




7,000 Ibs/day net acidity by Little Nescopeck Creek overcomes




Nescopeck Creek's natural alkaline reserve and renders it an




acid stream.




        The prime source of pollution of Little Nescopeck Creek




is the Jeddo Tunnel, which serves as a gravity discharge point




for a large area of abandoned deep mine workings in Black Creek




Coal Basin in the Western Middle Field.




        The tunnel discharged an average of about 20 mgd with




an acid loading of 98,000 Ibs/day net acidity during the sampling




period.




        The quality of Nescopeck Creek improves slightly from




its confluence with Little Nescopeck Creek to its mouth.  Although




Black Creek contributes sizable loadings of mine drainage




indicators  (the acid contribution was 14,000 Ibs/day),




concentrations of mine drainage indicators are less than those in

-------

-------
                                                          X - 59







Nescopeck Creek.  The mixture of the two streams thus




slightly improves the quality of Nescopeck Creek.




        During the survey period, the mean acidity was 240




mg/1 and the mean manganese concentration (8 mg/1) exceeded




the total iron concentration (6.5 mg/1) in Nescopeck Creek




immediately downstream from the confluence with Little




Nescopeck Creek.  Stream quality gradually improved in the




18 miles to the mouth.  However3 as shown in Figure 8,




stream quality was still poor at the mouth.




        Black Creek receives mine drainage discharges from




the Gowan and Derringer Drainage Tunnels, which are believed




to be the major mine drainage contributors in the watershed.




        In addition to mine drainage pollution. Little




Nescopeck Creek and Black Creek receive contributions of




coal silt from coal-processing operations and surface runoff




from piles of coal fines.




                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        Since most of the mine drainage contributed to




Nescopeck Creek can be attributed to three drainage tunnels,




treatment as a primary abatement method may be feasible.




Conveyance or diversion of the mine drainage to an adjacent




stream basin or the Susquehanna River may be a feasible interim




step.  Since the drainage tunnels were drilled for the express




purpose of collecting and providing gravity drainage for

-------

-------
                                                          X -  60


the mine water from a large area in the coal  field,  mine

flooding and surface restoration as primary abatement methods

would probably be quite costly and have limited prospects

of complete success.

            d.  Catawissa Creek

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        As a result of mine drainage contributions,  Catawissa

Creek is an acid stream throughout most of its length.

        Approximately 38 miles from its mouth, the stream, which

at that point is normally alkaline although bearing  evidence

of mine drainage contributions, is diverted underground in

an abandoned surface mining complex which has completely

disrupted surface drainage patterns.  The stream then apparently

flows through abandoned deep mine workings for a distance of

approximately 4,000 feet, emerging as the Green Mountain Water

Level Tunnel discharge.  The stream, bearing  an acid load of

about 150 Ibs/day net acidity during the study period, is

further degraded about three miles downstream by the

contribution of a total of about 24,000 Ibs/day net acidity

from two drainage tunnels, Audenreid and Green Mountain.  The

stream, as shown in Figure 9, never recovers  from this heavy

acid loading.

        As Figure 9-A illustrates, iron, manganese,  and net

alkalinity concentrations were essentially equivalent to those

-------

-------
                                                                          X - 61
                measured in Nescopeck Creek.  Sulfate concentrations were,




 _              however, about  twice as great in Catawissa Creek as in




                Nescopeck Creek.




 •                      Tomhicken  Creek, with its contribution of 1,700




                Ibs/day net acidity during  the  survey period, constitutes




                the only other  significant  contributor of acid and other




 ^              mine  drainage indicators.   Its  contribution does not, however,




                significantly degrade the quality of Catawissa Creek, since




 H              indicator concentrations are somewhat lower than those in




                the receiving stream.  Most of  the acid contributed by




 m              Tomhicken Creek originates  from the Cox #3 drainage tunnel,




^              which contributed  about 1,200 Ibs/day net acidity during




                the  survey.




II                      Although all of the known mine drainage discharges




                enter Catawissa Creek in the upper one-third of its length,




                the weak natural alkalinity and relatively small flow of




                downstream  tributaries are  not  adequate to neutralize the




                heavy acid  loadings contributed in the headwaters.  Catawissa




                Creek contributed  approximately 18,500 Ibs/day net acidity




                to the Susquehanna River during the sampling period.  This




                 loading was about  80 per cent of  the largest single contribution,




                 the  Audenreid Drainage Tunnel.




                        Unlike  many of the  streams in the Anthracite Area,




                Catawissa  Creek is not significantly influenced by coal silt.

-------

-------
                                                                          X - 62
                This absence of coal silt probably sterns from the fact that

                there are no active coal processing operations in the Sub-

                Basin.

                                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures

                        A comprehensive mine drainage pollution abatement

 I              program in the Sub-Basin would involve restoration of surface

 I              drainage, reclamation, mine flooding, and probably treatment.

                        Abatement of polluting characteristics of the

 I              Audenreid discharge would provide an immediate benefit by

                restoring Catawissa Creek to an alkaline condition, although

 I              its quality would be somewhat degraded by other discharges.

 »                      A consulting engineer under contract with the

                Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins Project is presently

 •              studying methods and associated costs of abating pollution

                from mine drainage originating in the coal basin drained

                by  the Green Mountain Tunnel and Green Mountain Water Level
 I
Tunnel.

            e.   Shamokin Creek
                                 «(1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        Shamokin Creek is an acid stream throughout 28 miles
^j|

                 of  its  35-mile  length.  The remaining seven miles, the
                 extreme headwaters, although alkaline, were found to have high
                 concentrations  of mine drainage  indicators, particularly
^B              iron  and  mangenese.  As  shown  in Figure 10, downstream from

i

-------

-------
                                                          X - 63







Mile 29 the stream is rendered acid by mine drainage




contributed by the North Branch Shamokin Creek and the Excelsior




Drainage Tunnel.  Although the acidity decreased fairly




uniformly from about 200 mg/1 at this point to about 100




mg/1 at the mouth, the acid loading increased from about




9,000 Ibs/day net acidity to about 35,000 Ibs/day net




acidity in the next 10 miles, then remained constant the




remaining 18 miles to the mouth.




        As shown in Figure 10-A, the total iron concentration




reached a peak of 147 mg/1 at Mile 23 then declined to less




than 20 mg/1 at its mouth.  Mean manganese concentrations




ranged from 6 mg/1 to 3 mg/1 along the length of the stream.




Sulfate concentrations ranged from 470 mg/1 at Mile 22 to




430 mg/1 at the mouth.




        In the Shamokin Creek watershed, all mine drainage




discharges enter in the headwaters area, which is typical of




the Anthracite Fields .  Seven major discharges were located




in the upstream third of Shamokin Creek drainage.  All




the discharges originated in underground mines, although




they were undoubtedly influenced by surface water diverted




underground in areas disturbed by surface mining.  At the




time of sampling, the seven major discharges contributed a




flow of 13.1 mgd and 38,000 Ibs/day net acidity.




        Additional study of this watershed is needed to




confirm the origin of the major acid loads; however, it is

-------

-------
                                                          X - 64


believed that most of the acid originates in abandoned

mines and is conveyed to the stream by drainage tunnels.

        In addition to constituents attributable to

mine drainage3 the stream is heavily laden with coal silt,

much of which apparently originates at coal cleaning and

processing operations in the Sub-Basin.

                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures

        A comprehensive mine drainage pollution abatement

and control program in the Sub-Basin would involve extensive

surface mine reclamation, mine flooding, reclamation of spoil

banks, and, undoubtedly, treatment.  Since much of the

drainage is collected by drainage tunnels and discharge points

are not numerous or widely scattered, treatment may prove

feasible.  As a first step, treatment or diversion of the

Excelsior discharge and surface restoration might be a feasible

method of reclaiming a 12-mile reach upstream from the

Borough of Shamokin, where the remaining major discharges

are clustered.

            f.  Mahanoy Creek

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        Mahanoy Creek, although contributing a loading of

approximately 1,000 Ibs/day net alkalinity to the Susquehanna

River, is one of the most severely degraded streams draining

the Anthracite Area.  A study carried out in July, August, and

-------

-------
                                                          X - 65







September 1965 determined the source of stream quality




degradation to be alkaline discharges which contained high




concentrations of iron, manganese, and other mine drainage




indicators.  Severely degraded stream quality was observed




throughout the entire 52-mile length of Mahanoy Creek.




        Major contributions of mine drainage reach Mahanoy




Creek through the following tributaries:  North Branch Mahanoy




Creek, Waste House Run, Shenandoah Creek, Big Mine Run, Big




Run Creek, and Zerbe Run.  In addition, five large deep mine




discharges enter Mahanoy Creek directly.




        A.S shown in Figure 11 and 11-A, the stream's natural




alkalinity is overcome in its upper reaches.  This is primarily




the result of an 800 Ibs/day net acidity contribution from




the East Barrier Gravity discharge, an intermittent pumped




discharge from the Springdale Tunnel which was discharging 4,200




Ibs/day net acidity on the one day during the survey when it




was found to be discharging, and a 10,5OO Ibs/day net acidity




contribution by Waste House Run which originates in




predominately pumped discharges.




        Alkaline contributions by the Girardville #1 and




#2 Drainage Tunnels and Big Mine Run overcame the acid residual




and increased the stream's alkaline reserve to a peak of




approximately 15,000 Ibs/day at a sampling station downstream




from  Big Mine Run.  This reserve steadily decayed to a minimum

-------

-------
                                                          X - 66







of 1,000 Ibs/day at the mouth.  Reductions in the alkaline




reserves occurred in response to contributions of acid and




to the oxidation of acid precursors contributed in the large




alkaline discharges.  The largest acid contribution in the




portion of the Basin downstream from Big Mine Run was Zerbe




Run with its loading of 7,900 Ibs/day net acidity.  Zerbe Run




received essentially all of its acid loading from the Trevorton




Tunnel discharge which contributed 12,000 Ibs/day net acidity.




        As illustrated on Figure 11-A, concentrations of




mine drainage indicators vary greatly along the length of the




stream.  Mean manganese concentrations range from 2.7 mg/1 to




20 mg/1; mean total iron concentrations range from 3 mg/1




to 110 mg/1.  Sulfate concentrations range from 13050 mg/1




to 1,500 mg/1 throughout most of the length of the stream.




        Coal silt discolors the stream and practically




chokes the channel in some reaches.




                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        This Sub-Basin will be one of the most difficult in the




Anthracite Area in which to develop an effective pollution




abatement program because of  the large area involved and the




large number and variety of quality of discharges.  Since a




number of the major discharges originates in active mines,




treatment will probably play  a major role in any pollution




abatement program.  Mine drainage and conveyance facilities

-------

-------
                                                          X - 67


may be applicable in combining acid and alkaline discharges

prior to their entering the stream.

        Treatment facilities such as ion exchange or

distillation would appear to be the most applicable in

reducing the polluting characteristics of the alkaline

discharges which have high concentrations of other mine

drainage constituents.

        The magnitude and complexity of the work necessary in

the Sub-Basin suggest that it receive a low priority if only

a limited abatement program is possible in the Anthracite

Area.

            g.  Mahantango Creek

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        Mahantango Creek is an acid stream throughout

approximately 17 miles of its 32-mile length and contributes

approximately 3,500 Ibs/day net acidity to the Susquehanna River.

        Essentially all of the mine drainage discharged in

the Mahantango Creek Sub-Basin comes to the surface in the

watershed of Rausch Creek, a small (10-square-mile drainage area)

tributary to Pine Creek, which is in turn a tributary of

Mahantango Creek.

        Rausch Creek, with its acid loading of 5,000 Ibs/day

net acidity, exhausts the alkaline reserve of Pine Creek at

their confluence and renders it an acid stream for the

remaining 13 miles of its length.  The quality of Pine Creek

-------

-------
                                                          X - 68







is slightly improved by water contributed by alkaline




tributaries, the largest of which is Deep Creek.   Although




influenced by mine drainage originating in the Hans Yost




Creek watershed, Deep Creek contributes an alkaline loading




of about 70 Ibs/day net alkalinity.




        As shown in Figure 12, the residual acid  loading of




about 3,000 Ibs/day net acidity which reaches Mahantango Creek




easily overcomes its weak alkaline reserve and renders it




an acid stream to its mouth.  The portion of Mahantango




Creek upstream from Pine Creek, although low in alkalinity,




is of generally good quality.  A biological reconnaissance




in 1964 determined that this reach supported normal aquatic




life.




        Upstream from Pine Creek, Mahantango Creek is almost




free of all mine drainage indicators and has, in  fact,




surprisingly low mineral content.  For example, its mean




sulfate concentration was 7 mg/1.  Mean iron and  manganese




concentrations were 0.4 mg/1 and 0, respectively.  Downstream




from Pine Creek stream quality was relatively constant.  Iron




and manganese concentrations were slightly less than 0.6 mg/1.




Mean net acidity ranged between 35 and 45 mg/1 (See Figure




12-A).




        Mine drainage sources in the Mahantango Creek Sub-




Basin, although clustered in a relatively small area of the

-------

-------
                                                          X - 69







Rausch Creek watershed, are not, as is the case in some of the




sub-basins already discussed, collected by drainage tunnels.




Mine drainage is contributed to Rausch Creek through 22




known pumped discharges and 10 gravity discharges, the largest




of which are the Markson and Valley View discharges.  These




two discharges were responsible for a total contribution of




1,600 Ibs/day net acidity during the sampling period.




                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        Because of the large number of discharges and the




large percentage of active operations in the Sub-Basin,




abatement of pollution in the immediate future would




probably be accomplished most feasibly by treatment.  A




treatment plant to treat the entire Rausch Creek flow would




have been called upon to treat approximately 5 mgd during




July 1965, the period of sampling in the Sub-Basin.  This,




while admittedly a low-flow period, is an indication that




the treatment plant required would not be unusually large.




Because of the low acidity concentrations encountered and




the general low mineralization of the waters of the Sub-




Basin, treatment should be relatively inexpensive because




alkaline reagent needs would be modest and volumes of sludge




produced would be low, thereby minimizing the cost of sludge




disposal.




        In view of the great length of stream influenced by




mine drainage originating in the Rausch Creek watershed, the

-------

-------
                                                          X - 70


relatively low expected cost of treatment, and the relative

ease of collecting sources of mine drainage for treatment,

this Sub-Basin should receive high priority in any limited

mine drainage pollution abatement program.

            h.  Wiconisco Creek

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        Wiconisco Creek is an alkaline stream throughout its

length and it contributed approximately 6,000 Ibs/day net

alkalinity to the Susquehanna River during a survey of the

Sub-Basin in 1965.  Its quality is degraded by coal silt,

untreated sewage, and mine drainage indicators for at least

a portion of its length.

        The major mine drainage sources located during the

survey were the Porter and Keefer Drainage Tunnels and

Bear Creek, which receives its mine drainage contribution

from two drainage tunnels.  All of the major discharges are

located in the upper one-third of the stream's length.  Figure

13  illustrates the effect on stream alkalinity reserves of

the contribution of 6,000 Ibs/day net alkalinity by Bear

Creek, which overcomes the effect of 900 Ibs/day net acidity

contributed by the Porter and Keefer Tunnels.

        Although iron, manganese, and sulfate concentrations

in Wiconisco Creek are temporarily elevated by contributions

from Bear Creek, about 25 miles of stream downstream from

-------
                                                          X - 71


Bear Creek are of relatively good chemical quality (See

Figure 13-A),  A summary of a biological survey of the stream

conducted in 1964 reports essentially no aquatic life upstream

from Bear Creek.  Several species of clean water organisms

were collected at the mouth, indicating at least partial

recovery from the upstream pollution loadings.

        Coal silt loadings in the stream were heavy.  These

apparently originated in coal washeries in the Sub-Basin.

                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures

        Because of the relatively small number, low volume,

and low strength of major discharges in this Sub-Basin,

abatement work could probably be accomplished at relatively

low cost.  Lime neutralization and conveyance to combine acid

and alkaline discharges would appear to be applicable.  As in

the Mahantango Creek watershed, low dissolved solids concentrations

in the major mine drainage sources suggest that treatment could

be accomplished with minimum utilization of costly sludge

disposal facilities.  Inundation of the numerous deep mines

in the Sub-Basin would also probably prove beneficial.  A

parallel program aimed at abating polluting sewage and coal

silt contributions to the streams should be undertaken.

            i.  Swatara Creek

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        Mine drainage renders Swatara Creek acid from its

headwaters to its confluence with Mill Run, a distance of

-------

-------
                                                         X - 72







approximately 24 miles.  Streams found to be contributing




significant amounts of mine drainage to Swatara Creek during




a survey of the Sub-Basin in October and November 1965 were:




Panther Creek, Good Spring Creek, and Lower Rausch Creek.




As illustrated in Figure 14, Panther Creek, with its contribution




of only 13 Ibs/day net acidity, does not significantly affect




the alkalinity reserve of Swatara Creek.  It does, however,




contribute other mine drainage indicators.  Figure 14




illustrates how the alkalinity reserve of Swatara Creek was




affected by the contribution of 23000 Ibs/day net acidity from




Good Spring Creek.  Most of the mine drainage in the Good




Spring Creek watershed originates in the watershed of Middle




Creek, a tributary which enters Good Spring Creek about




one mile from its mouth.




        Lower Rausch Creek contributed a net acid loading




of 1,300 Ibs/day, most of which originated in three drainage




tunnel discharges.




        As shown in Figure 14, the acid loading in Swatara




Creek reached a peak of 3,600 Ibs/day net acidity at Mile




589 immediately downstream from Lower Rausch Creek, and




then declined in response to the influence of alkaline




tributary streams.




        As illustrated in Figure 14-A, stream quality in




the headwaters reach fluctuates rather weakly in response




to contributions by streams bearing mine drainage,  Mean

-------

-------
                                                          X - 73






iron and manganese concentrations were about 3.5 mg/1.




Sulfate concentrations were normally less than 250 mg/1.




Downstream from Mile 60, concentrations of all mine drainage




indicators declined.




        Considerable mining is presently being accomplished




in the Sub-Basin; however, most of the significant mine




drainage discharges observed during the survey originated




in abandoned mines.  About 4,600 Ibs/day net acidity loading




on the stream during the survey could be attributed to  four




deep mine discharges and the discharge of Middle Creek.




                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        A portion of the Middle Creek watershed is presently




being studied by a consulting engineer under contract with




the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins Project to




determine alternate pollution abatement measures and associated




costs.




        The Pennsylvania Department of Mines and Mineral




Industries is presently carrying out a reclamation program




in the Middle Creek watershed.  Work recently completed




prevents a small tributary of Coal Run from entering the




underground mine workings and subsequently emerging as  an




acid mine drainage discharge.  Planned work will involve




reclamation of other areas disturbed by surface mining.  When




completed, the project will probably substantially reduce




the mine drainage contribution to Middle Creek.




        Since acid loadings on Swatara Creek are relatively

-------

-------
                                                          X - 74


Low, a minimum of reclamation work may at least restore

the alkalinity of Swatara Creek.  Complete abatement of mine

drainage pollution will probably involve treatment of all

active mine discharges and certain inactive discharges which

are not amenable to abatement by other methods.

            j.  Schuylkill River

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        The Schuylkill River, a tributary of the Delaware

River, drains a large portion of the Southern Anthracite

Field.

        Tributaries discharging significant amounts of

mine drainage to the Schuylkill River include Mill Creek,

West Branch Schuylkill River, and the Little Schuylkill

River.

        The Schuylkill River is rendered acid at its head-

waters, apparently by runoff from refuse piles.  Numerous

discharges from all source categories add to the acid

load upstream from the confluence with Mill Creek.  Eleven

major discharges to this reach contributed 2,200 Ibs/day

net acidity on the day of sampling.

        Mill Creek received drainage from four major discharges

and contributed approximately 11,000 Ibs/day net acidity on

the day of sampling.

        The next downstream source of acid is the West

Branch Schuylkill River.  The West Branch receives drainage

-------

-------
                                                          X - 75







from numerous mines of all source categories and contributed




approximately 4,500 Ibs/day net acidity on the day of




sampling,  Most of the acid contributed by the West Branch




may be attributed to one drainage tunnel which had an acid




contribution of 6,900 Ibs/day on the day of sampling.




        The Little Schuylkill River is rendered acid at its




source by several drainage tunnel discharges and receives




additional acid from Wabash Creek (2,000 Ibs/day) and




Panther Creek (6,000 Ibs/day).  Although no samples were




collected downstream from the mine drainage sources, it




is believed that the quality of the Little Schuylkill




River is degraded by mine drainage throughout its length.




Nine major discharges contributing about 6,000 Ibs/day net




acidity were located in this watershed.  Drainage originated




in both active and inactive mines.




        Acid contributed in the headwaters coupled with the




acid contributed by Little Schuylkill River render the




Schuylkill River acid downstream to Reading.




        Mine drainage discharges and the receiving streams




in this Sub-Basin are generally low in iron and manganese




concentrations.  Net acidity and sulfate concentrations are




relatively high.




        The quality of  the Schuylkill River immediately




downstream from  the West Branch Schuylkill River is representative

-------

-------
                                                          X - 76


of the quality of most of its upstream tributaries.   On the

day of sampling the net acidity was 78 rag/1.   Sulfate, iron,

and manganese concentrations were 590 mg/1, 2.5 mg/1, and 7.8

mg/1, respectively.

                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures

        Because of the wide variety of sources and large

geographic areas involved, abatement of mine drainage pollution

by reclamation alone would probably not be feasible  in this

Sub-Basin.  Since mine drainage discharges in the Sub-Basin

have relatively low iron concentrations, treatment of major

discharges or in-stream treatment might be accomplished at

relatively low cost since the need for costly sludge handling

facilities would be minimal.

            k.  Lehigh River

                (1)  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on
                     Stream Quality

        Mine drainage contributed to the Lehigh River

originates in the eastern edge of the Eastern Middle and

Southern Anthracite Fields.

        Streams contributing significant amounts of mine

drainage to the Lehigh River include;  Sandy Run, Buck

Mountain Creek, Black Creek, and Nesquehoning Creek.

Essentially all the mine drainage in this Sub-Basin  originates

in abandoned mines.  Upstream from Sandy Run, the Lehigh River

is almost neutral with a very low mineral content.  Sandy Run

-------

-------
                                                          X - 77







with its acid load of 6,000 Ibs/day net acidity on the day




of sampling overcomes the weak natural alkalinity reserve




and renders the Lehigh River acid.  About 80 per cent of




the acid loading contributed by Sandy Run on the day of sampling




originated in the Owl Hole Drainage Tunnel discharge.  Both




Sandy Run and Pond Creek, its major tributary, are rendered




acid from source to mouth by drainage from six major discharges,




three of which are drainage tunnels.




        Buck Mountain Creek contributed about 1,900 Ibs/day




net acidity to the Lehigh River on the day of sampling.




Essentially all of the acid originated in the discharges from




two drainage tunnels. Buck Mountain #1 and Buck Mountain




#2.  The tunnels discharge to the extreme headwaters of




Buck Mountain Creek and render it acid throughout its length.




        Black Creek contributed to the Lehigh River approximately




5,000 Ibs/day net acidity, all of which originated in one




discharge, the Beaver Meadow (Quakake) Drainage Tunnel.  The




discharge constitutes most of the flow of Quakake Creek,




a  tributary of Black Creek.  Both streams are rendered acid




by the discharge.  Because of its large flow, Nesquehoning




Creek, although only weakly acid at its mouth (13 mg/1 on




the day of sampling) contributed a sizable net acidity of




1,200 Ibs/day to the Lehigh River.  The Creek is acid




throughout its length and receives most of its acid load




from two drainage tunnels.

-------

-------
                                                          X - 78







        Although no samples were collected downstream




from the acid tributaries on the day of sampling, other




available data indicate that the Lehigh River is severely




degraded by the mine drainage downstream to Northampton.




        The quality of mine drainage discharges in this




Sub-Basin is similar to that in the Schuylkill River watershed.




The iron and manganese concentrations are relatively low,




while acidity and sulfate concentrations are high.




                (2)  Abatement and Control Measures




        It is doubtful that reclamation measures alone will




be adequate to restore the quality of the Lehigh River




and its tributaries to an acceptable level.  Treatment of all




nine major discharges to the Sub-Basin would involve treatment




of a total of only about 4 mgd under low flow conditions„




In view of the benefits to be derived from abating pollution




in 39 miles of the Lehigh River, a major river, treatment




would appear to be feasible.  Because of the low iron




concentration in most of the discharges, sludge handling




costs associated with lime-neutralization-type treatment




plants should be moderate.  In-stream neutralization might




also prove feasible.

-------

-------
                                                         X - 79







    E.  North Branch Potomac River




        1.  Introduction




        The North Branch of the Potomac River rises in




Tucker County, West Virginia, and flows alternately north-




east and southeast in a zigzag pattern for about 98 miles




until it meets the South Branch to form the Potomac River




(See Figure 1-E).




        The North Branch forms the boundary between Maryland




and West Virginia downstream from Kempton, Maryland.  The




North Branch is bounded on the Maryland side by Garrett and




Allegany  Counties and on the West Virginia side by Grant,




Mineral, and Hampshire Counties.




        The coal-bearing area of the North Branch Basin lies




in a continuous trough-shaped valley about 80 miles long,




oriented in a northeast-southwest direction.  The North Branch




flows northeast through the center of the Basin for almost




two-thirds of its length, then bends southeast at Westernport,




Maryland, and leaves the coal region.  The northeast part of




the valley is drained by Georges Creek, which flows southwest




through the center of the valley to join the North Branch at




Westernport.  The coal-bearing region southwest of Westernport




is known as the Upper Potomac Coal Fields.  The coal region




drained by Georges Creek, Savage River, and two small tributaries




of Wills Creek is known as the Georges Creek Coal Field.  Coal




is mined from the Pittsburgh, Tyson, Bakerstoxvn, Waynesburg,

-------

-------
                                                          X - 80






Freeport and Kittanning coal seams.




        2.  Economy




        Cumberland, Maryland, is the largest population




center in the North Branch Basin and is the railroad and




industrial center of the area.  Cumberland has been a




transportation center since the early 1800's when the




National Road (now U. S. 40) was built.  During the 1820's




the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad and the Chesapeake and Ohio




Canal reached Cumberland.  Today the area is also served




by the Western Maryland Railroad and the Pennsylvania




Railroad.  In addition to the railroad3 three large industrial




plants, with employment ranging from 1,100 to 3S1005 are




located in the Cumberland area.




        The remainder of the Basin is sparcely populated.




Principal towns are Frostburg, Barton, Lonaconing, Oakland,




and Luke-Westernport in Maryland and Piedmont and Keyser




in West Virginia.  The West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company




mill located in the tri-town  area of Luke-Westernport-




Piedmont employs 2,400 persons and is the largest "fine paper"




mill in the world.




        Coal has been mined in the North Branch Basin for




about 150 years.  A mine was operating before 1816 at




Eckhart, Maryland, in the Georges Creek Coal Field.  Good




transportation facilities stimulated early development of

-------

-------
                                                          X - 81






North Branch coal fields, particularly the Georges Creek




Field.




        Maryland's peak production of coal occurred in 1907,




earlier than any other major coal-producing state.  Coal




production in the North Branch Basin for the 1961-1965




period was:




        1961 	 1.0 million tons




        1962 	 1.0 million tons




        1963 	 1.3 million tons




        1964 	 2.2 million tons




        1965 	 3.3 million tons




The 1965 North Branch production amounted to 0.65 per cent




of national production.  About 2.2 million tons were mined




in West Virginia (Upper Potomac Field) and 1.1 million tons




in Maryland.  Of the 1965 Maryland production, 624,000 tons




were mined from the Upper Potomac Field.  The Upper Potomac




Field accounted for 85 per cent of the 1965 North Branch




Basin coal production, and the West Virginia part of the Upper




Potomac Field made up the bulk of the recent increases.  In




1961 and 1962, Maryland accounted for about 75 per cent of




the coal produced in the North Branch Basin; in 1965




Maryland accounted for only 33 per cent.  While production




for the entire North Branch Basin increased 330 per cent from




1961  to 1965, Maryland production increased only 60 per cent.

-------

-------
                                                          X - 82







These increases are probably a result of the general U.  S.




economic upturn during these years, and are not indications




of the long-term trend.  However, they are significant in




terms of present water quality.




        Output per man increased three times as fast in




Maryland during 1961-1965 as in the U. S. and the adjacent




states; and in 1965 the output per man was much greater in the




Maryland Upper Potomac Field than in the Georges Creek Field.




The increased output was a result of new explorations and




investment in new equipment and was also experienced in the




West Virginia Upper Potomac Field.




        Because of the increased output per man, mining




employment in the North Branch Basin did not increase in




proportion to production during 1961-1965.  Employment for




these years was:




        1961 	 617




        1962 	 567




        1963	 631




        1964 	 784




        1965 	 851




Of the 1965 employment, 373 were employed in Maryland and




478 in West Virginia.  The figures include not only miners




but all mine-associated employees.




        The average value of Maryland coal in 1965 was $3.63




per ton f.o.b. mine, below the average U. S. price of $4.44

-------

-------
                                                          X - 83







and the Pennsylvania (including anthracite) and West Virginia




values of $5.07 and $4.87, respectively.  Coal values have been




stable since 1950.  The average U. S. value f.o.b. mine




fluctuated within a range of 69C per ton from 1950 to 1965.




West Virginia Upper Potomac Field values were probably comparable,




This makes the 1965 North Branch Basin 1965 production worth




about $12 million, or 0.53 per cent of the value of all U. S.




coal mined in 1965.




        The West Virginia Upper Potomac 1965 production would




have been worth $8 million, about 1 per cent of the total value




of the West Virginia coal production.  The Maryland 1965




production of $4 million was about three ten-thousandths of




1 per cent of the gross Maryland state product, and about 5




per cent of the total value of the mineral industry in




Maryland.




        3.  Sub-Basin Description




        During a sampling program conducted by the Chesapeake




Bay-Susquehanna River Basins Project personnel in August and




October 1966 and April 1967, the North Branch of the Potomac




River was acid as a result of coal mine drainage from its




source to Luke, Maryland.  Until recently, spent process lime




discharged by the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company's Luke




mill neutralized the acid contributed upstream; but the lime




is no  longer discharged and acid conditions will extend further




downstream in the future.

-------

-------
                                                          X  -  84







        Sampling by the Maryland Department of Water Resources




(MDWR) in April, July, and November 1966 and a period of




continuous monitoring by MDWR in April  1967 revealed similar




conditions.  This report is based partly on the MDWR data.




        The data are the result of year-round sampling




programs rather than low-flow surveys.   They do, however,




represent water quality at below average and relatively




uniform flow conditions.  In the few cases where samples




were taken at high-flow conditions; the data were not




used in computations.  The highest sampling-time flows used




in computations ranged from 25 to 50 per cent of the mean




flows of record at gaging stations in the area, except for one




sampling-time flow at Steyer, which exceeded the mean flow of




record by 20 per cent.




        The acid load at high flows was several times the  load




computed at below average flow conditions, although the high




flow acid concentrations were always less than the low flow




concentrations.  There are acid slugs at high-flow conditions,




probably as a result of a washout of acid accumulated in




surface and sub-surface impoundments.




        From its source to the area of Westernport, Maryland,




where it leaves the coal region, the North Branch receives




acid mine drainage from at least eleven tributaries (See Figure




1-E).  Of these tributaries, Elk Run, Laurel Run, and Abram




Creek contributed 65 per cent of the total measured net acidity




load in the North Branch Basin.

-------

-------
                                                          X -  85







        Eighty-one per cent of the total net acidity measured




in the stream originated in the Upper Potomac Coal Field,  2




per cent in the Georges Creek Field, and 17 per cent was




unaccounted.  Fifty-seven per cent of the total measured net




acidity originated in the headwaters above the USGS gage




at Steyer, Maryland.  West Virginia sources contributed 63




per cent of the total measured acid load in the North Branch




Basin.  Maryland tributaries added 20 per cent.




        In 1966, a total of 130 miles of stream in the North




Branch Basin was continuously polluted by mine drainage, and




an additional 30 to 40 miles were mildly or intermittently




affected.  Most of these streams carried a net acid load.




There are few sources of natural alkalinity in the region.




Shales and sandstones containing coals and fire clays dominate




the geology.  There is only one limestone stratum in the North




Branch Basin, and that lies in the Georges Creek watershed.




        Biological sampling throughout the North Branch




Basin revealed, in general, only sparse populations of acid-




tolerant benthic organisms.  In several cases, no benthic




life could be found.  These conditions are attributed to mine




drainage pollution.  Except in Georges Creek watershed, sewage




pollution is not a significant problem, and there are no




industrial discharges upstream from Luke,




        4.  Mine Drainage Sources and Their Effect on Stream




Quality

-------

-------
                                                                          X - 86







                        A detailed discussion of the mine drainage sources




                 in  the North Branch Basin and their effect on stream quality




                 follows:




                            a.  North Branch Headwaters to Steyer, Maryland




                        The North Branch was sampled at Kempton, Maryland,




                 approximately  two miles downstream from its source.  As shown




                 in  Figure 15,  at Kempton the North Branch discharged 400 Ibs/day




                 net acidity, less than 1 per cent of the net acidity




                 contributed in the Sub-Basin.  Fourteen miles downstream




                 from  Kempton,  at Steyer, Maryland, the net acidity load had




                 increased to 52,000  Ibs/day.  The acidity measured at Steyer




                 was 82  per cent of the total net acidity measured in the




                 North Branch.   The three tributaries discussed below discharged




                 36,000  Ibs/day to the North Branch in this reach.




,                                 (1)  Elk Run




                        Elk Run, a minor tributary in terms of drainage area,




                 contributes more net acidity to  the North Branch than any




                 other tributary.  At its confluence with the North Branch9




                 Elk Run had a  pH of  2.8, a mean  net acidity concentration




                 of  1,900 mg/1, a mean  sulfate concentration of 11,000 mg/1




                 and a mean total iron  concentration of 3,500 mg/1.  The




                 measured flows ranged  between 1.7 and 3.3 cfs, but the enormous




                 acid  concentration resulted in a mean contribution of 24,000




*                Ibs/day net acidity  to the North Branch.  This load represents
1




1

-------

-------
                                                          X - 87







38 per cent of the total measured net acidity in the North




Branch.  Elk Run's streambed was colored a bright orange, a




purplish brick-red, and green (algae) and was covered with




a crusted sediment more than a foot thick in many places.  The




Elk Run sampling station lies a few hundred yards downstream




from a coalyard and mines operated by the Alpine Coal




Company.




        Three water samples collected at the same site by the




West Virginia Division of Water Resources indicate that acid




concentrations were roughly an order of magnitude lower than




present concentrations as late as May 1966.  Elk Run1 acid




load is due principally to recent mining operations.




                (2)  Laurel Run




        Laurel Run discharged 8,900 Ibs/day net acidity to




the North Branch, 14 per cent of the total measured net acid




load.  Although there are strip mines in the watershed,




most of the mine drainage originates in an abandoned deep




mine near Kempton.  Much of the nine is in West Virginia.




                (3) Buffalo Creek




        Buffalo Creek discharged 2,900 Ibs/day net acidity




to the North Branch, 5 per cent of the total measured net




acid load in the North Branch Basin.  Samples were taken a




few hundred feet above the confluence with the North Branch at




Bayard, West Virginia.  The North Branch Coal Company yard is

-------

-------
                                                          X - 88







located upstream.  Buffalo Creek also receives untreated




sewage from Bayard.  Except for Georges Creek, this is the




only case of sewage pollution in the waters studied.




            b.  North Branch - Steyer, Marylands  to Kitzmiller9




Maryland




        Thirteen miles downstream from Steyer, at Kitzmiller5




Maryland, the acid load in the North Branch was 64,000 Ibs/day




net acidity, an increase of 12,000 Ibs/day over the load at




Steyer.  The acid load at Kitzmiller equals the total net




acidity measured in the North Branch.  Below Kitzmiller the




net acidity contributions are small and are balanced by




natural contributions of net alkalinity.  The three tributaries




discharging net acidity to the North Branch in this reach are:




Stony River (1,600 Ibs/day), Wolfden Run (120 Ibs/day), and




Abram Creek (8,400 Ibs/day).




                 (1)  Stony River




        The quality of Stony River is very mildly influenced




by mine drainage near Mount Storm, West Virginia, about 5




miles above its confluence with the North Branch.  At Mount




Storm the river supports trout.  The only known contribution




of mine drainage to Stony River is from Laurel Run, a small




intermittently polluted tributary several miles upstream.




Stony River itself does not flow through coal-bearing areas.




                 (2)  Abram Creek

-------

-------
                                                           X -  89







         The 8,400 Ibs/day acidity contributed to the




North Branch by Abram Creek is 13 per cent of the total




measured net acidity in the North Branch Basin.   The major




part of the mine drainage in Abram Creek originates in the




headwaters at Bismark, West Virginia.  The net acidity load




at this point was 3,800 Ibs/day.  Downstream, at Mt. Pisgah,




West Virginia, Abram Creek carried 9,000 Ibs/day net acidity,




a load substantially equal to that discharged to the North




Branch.  Two tributaries, Glade Run and Emory Creek, discharged




an estimated total of 2,000 Ibs/day net acidity below Mt. Pisgah,




but some neutralization occurs before the water reaches the




North Branch.




             c.  North Branch - Kitzmiller, Maryland, to Beryl,




West Virginia




         At Beryl, West Virginia, fourteen miles downstream from




Kitzmiller, Maryland, the North Branch carried 62,500 Ibs/day




net acidity, a decrease of 1,500  Ibs/day from the acidity load-




ing at Kitzmiller.  Measured contributions of net acidity in the




Kitzmiller-Beryl reach amounted to 4,200 Ibs/day, indicating




that neutralization occurs in this reach.  The North Branch is




grossly polluted at Kitzmiller.  Measured pH values were  less




than 3.5 and benthic  sampling revealed no organisms.  The four




tributaries discharging net acidity  to the North Branch between




Kitzmiller and Beryl  are:




                 (1)   Three Forks Run

-------
                                                          X -  90







        Three Forks Run discharged 1,900 Ibs/day net acidity




to the North Branch, 3 per cent of the total measured net




acidity load in the North Branch Basin.  It is grossly




polluted by runoff from mines and possibly from spoil piles




in the watershed.  In August 1966, a pH of 1.8 was measured




in Three Forks Run.




                (2)  Deep Run




        Deep Run discharged an insignificant net acidity load




to the North Branch, less than 1 per cent of the total




measured net acidity in the North Branch Basin.  Benthic




sampling indicated sparse populations of clean-water organisms.




Deep Run is mildly polluted by mine drainage.




                (3)  Elklick Run




        Elklick Run was sampled once, during April 1967,




just above its confluence with the North Branch.  The stream




lies in Maryland about a mile downstream from Shaw, West




Virginia.  Elklick Run contributed 600 Ibs/day net acidity to




the North Branch, about 1 per cent of the total measured load




in the watershed.




                (4)  Piney Swamp Run




        Piney Swamp Run contributed 2,500 Ibs/day net acidity




to the North Branch, or 4 per cent of the total measured net




acidity in the watershed.  Samples were taken at Hampshire, West




Virginia, a few hundred feet above the confluence with the




North Branch.  The Hampshire station lies at the foot of an

-------

-------
                                                        X - 91







active mining area operated by Masteller Coal Company.




Above these operations, the flow in Piney Swamp Run is




only about 15 per cent of the flow at the mouth and stream




quality is considerably better than at Hampshire.




            d.  North Branch - Beryl, West Virginia to




Cumberland, Maryland




        Until recently, spent process lime discharged




from the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company mill at Luke,




one-half mile downstream from Beryl, neutralized the acid




load in the North Branch.  Since late 1966, due to in-plant




changes, this spent lime has been reprocessed within the




plant.  As a result, the acidity that originates upstream




from the mill is no longer completely neutralized.  Other




waste discharges by the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company




mill reduce the acidity considerably.  These effects have




become more significant since the lime discharge was stopped.




As a result of many years of lime discharge, the riverbed,




during the most recent survey, was covered by a lime-gypsum




sludge with considerable neutralizing capacity.  Floods




in the spring of 1967 probably washed out much of the




sludge, but data are not available to indicate whether the




river has reached equilibrium with the bottom or the extent




to which acid conditions have moved downstream.  Studies




are continuing to determine the effects of mine drainage




below Luke.  Savage River and Georges Creek, the two

-------

-------
                                                          X - 92







tributaries in the Luke-Piedmont-Westernport area, exert




minor effects in comparison to the mill.  Tributary and mill




effects are discussed below in the order in which they occur:




                (1)  Savage River




        The Savage River enters the North Branch a few




hundred feet below the Beryl sampling station.   The quality




of the Savage River is mildly degraded by mine  drainage in




a one-mile reach from its mouth to Aaron Run.   In this reach,




Savage River maintains about 5 mg/1 net alkalinity.  This




results in a discharge of 1,600 Ibs/day net alkalinity, which




is not adequate to appreciably reduce the net acidity load in




the North Branch although some reduction in acid concentration




occur by dilution.  The Savage River is regulated to maintain




a minimum flow of 93 cfs in the North Branch at Luke,




Aaron Run, the only contributor of mine drainage to Savage




River, is badly polluted.  Upstream from Aaron  Run, the water




in Savage River is of excellent quality.




                (2)  West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company




        The West Virginia Company withdraws more than 20 mgd




of process water from the North Branch at Luke.  This reduces




the acid load by about 16,000 Ibs/day or about  25 per cent.




Waste is returned downstream at Westernport, except for boiler




house3 evaporator, and flyash discharges at Luke.  These discharges




have  some neutralizing effect, but will be discontinued soon.

-------

-------
                                                                               93
                         During April  1967,  the Maryland Department of Water


                  Resources monitored  the  pH  of the North Branch below the West


                  Virginia Pulp and  Paper  Company mill.  The pH alternated


                  between 3.5 and  4.5,  depending presumably on intermittent


                  discharges of alkaline waste.  After  the waste discharges


                  are  stopped, the pH  will probably not  rise above 4.0.


                                  (3)   Georges Creek


                         Georges  Creek, which enters the North Branch at

i
*'                 Westernport, Maryland, contributes 1S100 Ibs/day net acidity,


**!                 or 2 per cent of the total  measured net acidity in the North


                  Branch Basin.  Most  of the  acidity in  Georges Creek enters


|                 directly from deep mines which line the sides of the valley.


                  Georges Creek is badly polluted by a  combination of mine


                  drainage and sewage.


                                  (4)   Upper  Potomac River Commission Waste


                  Treatment  Facility


                         This waste treatment plant is  located on.the down-


                  stream side  of Westernport, Maryland,  4^ miles below Beryl.


                  About 95 per cent  of the plant's  load  consists of process


                  wastes from  the  West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company Luke


                  mill.  The UPRC  plant discharges  an average of 20 mgd, which


                  contributes  a  load of 17,000  Ibs/day  net alkalinity to the


                  North Branch.  This  is  equivalent to  27 per cent of the  total


                  measured net acidity in  the North Branch Basin.  Three miles


                  downstream from  the  UPRC plant, at Keyser, West Virginia. pH

-------

-------
                                                          X - 94







values between 6 and 7 were observed in the North Branch early




in 1967.




                (5)  Wills Creek




        Wills Creek, which enters the North Branch in downtown




Cumberland, Maryland, does not contribute acidity to the




North Branch, although mine drainage residual effects (high




hardness and sulfate concentrations) are apparent in chemical




data.  Braddock Run and Jennings Run, tributaries which enter




Wills Creek from the Georges Creek Coal Field to the wests




are degraded by mine drainage.  Braddock Run receives the




discharge from the Hoffman Tunnel3 a drainage tunnel bored in




the early 1900ss to drain deep mines in Georges Creek Basin.




        At Cumberland9 Maryland, high hardness and sulfate




concentrations are apparent in North Branch chemical data,,




but acid conditions have not been observed.




        5.  Abatement and Control Measures




        The North Branch Potomac River mine drainage sampling




program xvas a stream  sampling program designed to isolate




tributary basins which contribute large amounts of acid to




the North Branch.  No program was undertaken to sample mine




effluents.  Because individual contributors are not yet known,




an estimate of abatement costs is not possible.




        The problem watersheds of Elk Run, Laurel Run, and




Abram Creek contribute only 65 per cent of the total measured




net acidity load.  Completely eliminating these acid loads

-------

-------
                                                          X - 95







probably would not raise the pH of the North Branch above




6.0.




        The largest contributions of acid to the North




Branch Sub-Basin come from areas in which there are active




mines.  The proportion from active mines is believed to be




significant.




        Field work will be continued by the Project and




State agencies to locate and characterize mine drainage discharges,

-------

-------
                                                        XI - 1






XI.  ABATEMENT COSTS



         The major sources of mine drainage pollution in most of



 the Study Area have been located as the result of studies con<=



 ducted by the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins Project,



 Although sources of mine drainage pollution have been pin-



 pointed and their flow and quality determined under one flow




 condition, data are not available to permit precise estimation



 of the cost of abating pollution under all flow conditions in



 each sub-basin influenced by mine drainage.



         As previously noted, the least expensive method of



 abating mine drainage pollution in a given sub=»basin slight



 involve any combination of the many abatement measures



 available.  Determination of the most appropriate combination



 of abatement measures and their associated costs would involve



 detailed engineering studies beyond the scope of Project



 activities.



         To obtain an estimate of the order of magnitude of the



 cost of mine drainage pollution abatement in the Study Area,



 two separate approaches were ta&ens  (1) Estimation of the cost



 of surface reclamation in areas disturbed by mining and (2)




 Estimation of the cost of Hrne neutralization treatment of



 major acid contributions located during periods of lew flow.



 Although the first approach would theoretically abate pollution,



 a realistic appraisal indicates a conservative estimate of the

-------

-------
                                                       XI - 2






cost of mine drainage abatement would "be the sum of the two



approaches.  This conclusion is "based on the assumption that



mine drainage discharges located to date during the low-flow



periods under v;hich field activities are carried out represent



the maximum annual residual mine drainage loading in each sub-



basin after all feasible land reclamation measures are applied„



        The cost of reclamation of land disturbed by surface



mining is estimated based upon average reclamation costs of



$500/acre for the Bituminous Area and $2,500/acre for the



Anthracite Area.  Data on area disturbed in the Anthracite



Fields are based on field reconnaissance and the measurement



of the area indicated as disturbed on recent UoS^GoSo maps.



Data on area disturbed in the Bituminous Fields are based on



measurement of areas indicated as disturbed on UoSoGoS,, maps,



some of which were surveyed more than 30 years ago0  Additional



work is planned by the Project and cooperating agencies to more



accurately determine the area disturbed in the Bituminous Fields,



        Table 3 includes a tatnilation of the area disturbed by



mining and the estimated reclamation cost for the various



counties of the five major areas considered in the Pennsylvania



section of the Project area.  No information is available for



the Potomac River Basin portion of the Study Are®5 however, the



disturbed area is not "believed to be significant when compared



to that studied in Pennsylvania,,

-------

-------
                                                       XI ~ 3





        The cost of lime neutralization of major acid contrite



utors in the Study Area has been estimated "by sub^basin^  Major



discharges to each sub-basin were identified and the costs of



lime neutralization facilities to treat the individual discharges



•were estimated.  In each sub-basin, an effort was made to include



sufficient discharges in which the total net acidity contribution



was greater than the maximum acid loading measured in the stream,,



        The capital cost of individual treatment plants was



estimated with the aid of curves developed by Gannett, Fleming,



Corddry and Carpenter, Inc,, Consulting Engineers, Harrisburg,



Pennsylvania,,  The curves were based upon preliminary designs of



approximately 30 lime neutralization type mine drainage treatment



plants of varying sizes.  The preliminary cost estimate was made



by the Consultant for each treatment plant on the basis of



reinforced concrete units and sludge disposal by means of vacuum



filtration and landfill disposal„  None of the treatment facil-



ities used to develop the curves has been built and the design



estimate of costs has not been verified,,  It is believed, how=>



ever, that the precision of the cost estimates determined from



the curves falls well "within the precision of the mine drainage



source data available and the estimate of costs can be considered



to be valid„



        Available estimates of the cost of operation of lime



neutralization mine drainage treatment facilities are based on

-------

-------
                                                                       XI •= 4





                 very little actual experience.  Most estimates vary between



                 $0.30/1,000 gallons and $1030/1,000 gallons.  Estimates  of mine



                 drainage pollution abatement costs developed herein include the



                 cost of operation of the treatment facilities for 10 years at



                 the two extremes of treatment cost, $0030/1,000 gallons  and



                 $1.30/1,000 gallons.  Table 2 lists estimates of the total



                 costs of construction and 10 years of operating the needed



                 treatment facilities in each major division of the Study Area.



                         Table 3 lists the total estimated cost of reclamation



f                and treatment in each major division of the Study Area in



                 Pennsylvania.



I                        The total estimated costs for construction and 10 years



§ -               of operation of a treatment plant range frem $258 million to



                 $983 million, depending upon which one of the two extremes in



                 treatment cost is applied.  The estimated reclamation cost is



                 $273 million.  The total estimated expenditure required to



                 abate and control mine drainage pollution in the Study Area



                 over a 10-year period therefore ranges from $531 million to



                 $1.2 billion.  It should be noted that operating costs



                 constitute a large percentage of the treatment costs 0

-------

-------
                          REFERENCES




1.   Draft Report to  District  Engineer,  U.  S.  Army  Engineer




    District, Baltimore,  Maryland,  August  17, 1966




2.   Lorenzs  Walter C.,  Mineral  Industry Water Requirements




    and Waste Water  in  the Susqueha'nna  River  Basin.   U«  S.




    Bureau of Mines, 1966, 116  pp




3.   Reese, J. F« and J. D. Sisler,  Bituminous Coal Fields




    in Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Topographic and  Geologic




    Survey Bulletin  MG  pt 3,  Harrisburgs Pennsylvania,




    1928, 153 pp




4.   Central  Pennsylvania  Coal Producers Association Estimate




    for January 1963




5.   Wessel3  William  F., Mineral Resources  in  the Susquehanna




    River Basin9 Uo  S.  Bureau of Mines, 1966, 85 pp




6.   Wessel,  William F., Donald  J. Frendzel, and Gabriel




    F. Cazells Mineral  Industry Economics  in  the Susquehanna




    River Basin, U.  S.  Bureau of Mines,, 19643 90 pp




1,   Thomson. Rober D.,  Private  Communications December  1966

-------

-------



















W
r •)
i^j
*f. to
Z; K
••"** C/5
(->/ s*1
d (3
'jj ei
S W
t-j ;>
^ ji
r-! rj
^
H <
W -f
£UJ
< Q
W
Cii £3
r 	 j ^f.
*3
2:
O -
£ >
I—* Q£
C 1
[d •*••
2: M
>— ^
w cr
>
o <

to w
O :*
U <
R Ri
J2 ^
5 ^
•« ""*
W























3 ttf d
1- ., ••-.(
4-1 >< -P1
U) O
C O I-
O *—i 1s
U C.
«•• o
•-i 3
4-J pj
O


V» 4_>
— *1 IP
•O
M
C
•r-t
tO

CD
a
o
j_,
cd
•
O
r— 4
SLW
" O
0
«

1-t
cC
*•*
a)
fi
O
i— *
3
<




-a
u































•— < t 	 .
co- C
C
3 -



t
O cfl
co O
o' o
 O
o
®J -.

1 — 1
O cd
CO O
—> O
- c
o

0 0
0 U
T3 cd
cd O
O -*

' —


^
O «4-l
— i CJ
fn ^
O f,
O
• Ul
O 'r-l
S5 Q








C
•H

rt
W
i
J2
_3
C/5

-t
-co
9




in
00
cr>





O
O
CM
CO




s
r-





O

en




. J*
o'

m
•^
CM

O
8
m
ro



in
d
—i



,—4
r-H
171
C
C

*-4 Q
3J O
•3 wC V-1 »M
O" CJ *M  4J 0]
C in ^/ CU
Cj C1 CL ^G
M C2 3 O
cc

ll J
Q"'






CM
a^
o"





O
i — 1
CO





o
o"


N


.-H
m
o"




o
o"

CN
CN
d

1
1
1




o
t— 4




r-4







y^
0)
Q)
U
u

4J
in
Co
^C
u


CM
».-, » •*• • » _ -^
.m -3" •* " ^ JfN ^ -- -r^.
' 	 * •''"T'^ i ,.^~
' c * ' - """ ' -t ^.J*
- * , - . ' "" ' - -' .'^
" '" " **' "'* " fc-^SB
- ,<. •-;- v-r'.'-.-4?.;-""^
o o '-. • -; o .- -;L. , 4c, , ,v%a
CM CO CO . - '-CO -*fSpf
m in " •' r^ • ' -" in *§
c0-/-:," Vj«^3
- = .'- >^S"j**-S^^@
'" ' if-> '" '-'-; ~ *' • "'^"^?^^

- c « " ' ^"S" r^ ' " jci
r»> ^» - ~w* ^'*«^E '*"vfe- *i7 ^r*
, - • ~^S» - *^*i-"^'^-1'^-
O O O •"' " r^O • •"''•
CM ro r~ " " ; ^ 
10 • t) *W •
M J^ *— 4 ^ ^ ^4 ^ _X
gj cJOCjcy as e2oa)
T3 CU Cu CO.
C • 0 »- -« - S- !-
< SE *J u u 5: U U

.
co -J m sc
^-i cr. r-. ,c
o^ . — i •— <





co c^ in co
 in en
O CO CM CM
0 O O C

§000
O 0 C
— « O co O
o^ O r^ in
CO CO c~
•"^


CJ\ Cf CO O
-> r-i
n




cc
*-i c ^:
[_) -rJ C)
C 0
C C C 1-
O J3 3 U
c i rf
c e CD
^ C; ^ »— i
x; c ,-i 4J
J> C O -u
O •'-^ C i1
A! CO U u;


r^- CQ cr> o
'-
• — •





^_
in
CO





O
c*





CM
CM
CM





^»
C7>
O




CM
CM
O

C7>
OJ
•«^

O
C
G~\




^
CO




\o





Ci
,»(
OC
cS

*o
^-1
to
CO

•
;z


^
OC
1 -
CM




CM
CC
00
f^




o
co
0^
in
CM



«
C7>
m




m
o~>
CM




00
O>
in

CM
0
cr
•"*
8
CM
CO
*-*
fO


en
CNi
OC



I — ,
oc







_,
C3

o
f— «

»D
r3
CO




-------

-------
0^1 ^ "
t - o
j- C co- O
3 « c ^ c
i >• '£
". cc
- C >~
~ ,— < c; *~*
r^. c C  C
c c
'^J & —'
— •{ a
e — •
jj ••-( o ta
cS u ro O
a. c;
>- i- C C
o  ~
AJ
~! o —
O O rd
ro O
K •
C — O
'r* W- C
<-J O
c  —>
o.
C — '
O cc
--J CO O
rt •
DOC
c: co- 0
C O
*->
u: j->
C o
O O
c_) CJ


,_,
"O " CO
•- r O
C C ~-x
<£ , 	 ; :^.


3 y-
G IH
' — ' x-
U- -
"4-1
O JS
'J

^oo _ -o-
— I xC "— '
— i r-^ ,' in





r^ co C
CN CM CO
ro ro m
»— 4

C C O
ro oo cr*
c 
C "^ ^
. - »
~> r~  v— c**i
 vD
r-- CM CJ — — ' in
CM CS! — i CS CM

o
O O C cr — C
O \£) ^-J CO CM ("1
ro o m oo oo CM





COO C
ro CM cc co G> co
. . .
OO CM ,-, cr oc in
CM
\



O O C cr — O
»*D vC •—* fO CN CO

ro CT^ in OC co CN



*
CO CN 00 CO G> n
oo CN — H a^ cc m
......
O CM _. ^i — C

C ^0 — 
C 00
•— ' r^


in CM
co cr
CM





C O
OC r~-

C vC





in CM
ro cr
•
C CM




oo r-
O vC

C C

CM cr
CM —i
•
^"* •



O O
C 0
*•
^J-


—. in
.
^-* CT^





CM v£
00
_
CO
-3"




CM
•^
£


r^
, — ,
vt



00
•J1
cfl
c
>-.
^

o
i-J
C!
CO

c
c
C
<0
«C

C
cp

c",
X.
O
cr
C
C
CJ
*c
Oi
3
cr


££
tj
Q,
D.
O

u

03
L
U
C
'j,
rj
4-J


C
•r->
__^'
C
G
r



"?'•
O
C
(C
J--
c
ac
c:
cc
A-J
C
fj
J^
c-:I
cq
?-•1
'pl
                 cr
                en
                                                                                                  cr.


                                                                                                  c
                                                                                                  D
                                                                                                 v.

-------

-------
^ *-t i~
3 cr o
5- 5, -i-l
.u) £>- J-J
c c i-
O — ' C
u t-
o O
— i D

4_» CX{
C
vr t—
C
•Si ^-


• —
tt
O C_
ro
• C
C, O
c
f- IGJ —
O "r
CO o
4-J
;/
O
u
-•^
—•1 w
c
>-. -H
CC ^-*
a ca
^ j«
Cj
c a
"* Ol
4J
-- U
->\ C
U

CX
(2
•1-1
.u
O
»-.
o
a
c

r-4
«
3
C
C
<
—i O
 —
,_,
O cj
CO Q
•
0 0
- o
c
& -

•— *
C cd
ro o
•
•—t Q
<0- O
c
s^ *~-*



*-H
C o;
CO QJ
.
C 0
<0- C
o
a -•
J-
I 4-J
C if.
o c
~
•c -c CD
•* r, O
S. O -v.
< .-J =Jfc
N^>

^-X
2i
O 4-4
St.. •— -

U-i
O f.
o
L
C -H
•z. c






c
•r^
y
td
Ci-
^
CN —





r^* cj*
t^ CO

MD —
o^


ro
CM
c^ o
• — 1 »-i




0 O
*
•H
1- Cf
> ~  H j "C
cc -H a CB c
.C .£-• -0 K (0
CL C 0 3 }-
^ ^ c/i w o o
^j CC r
C/!, j C- £

?
c - • o
r-- ^-4 CM 4_J

























































Li
00

U-(
0)
C if--i
&0 -O
(/; Ji
T3 cc
P^» CO
U) >-
1- to X
c3 C ' — •
,.. , .^ 1 1
— EC
O -H 0
C-3 *^^ C'
a- c
<4- ^ >_
O cv. o.
U C J-<
C 0 C
o c
•rt X
c. a
, — 1 .J *-(
•r- rj C
"•^ d" ^^


C C \ **+* is
o a, i -| * ?

-------

-------
v" tr —<
, £ 1- O 03
,j\ cd c; fi O
». .^ CC — ' ~ C
L/- J-" O O <> u: M Q O
!.\i O &v coj -H
'** u u-i
Jj| _ ^ °
T2>*' 03 e t/: — i
-*Bi -u >- C O 05
jjj* o i o ri u
' *P§ ' ' £— < C t-t •
'5JI ;-\ CD -H O C
•iiSb H •— i f> C
•**&! -H o
--g5.fi s ® -1
11}
If § £o«
.-^ -1-4 o) cd ro d
a> 4-1 ^< •— * •
co cc •— • «—• o
N C O  O
cp ~< >< n o
ZH *-* (SJ ' — '
>-< cC C U-l
CO ^ Ol O
 O
U W 4J -H •
> O! u: i-< O O
Hi—1 S O i- '  O
2: CS ^ U -H O
y -^ x e> — i
^_, ki^
W oi
H <£ ^
< 3: C f.
CC < o 0 M
^ *-J *H C fd
W 4J O — •
Z: O CO J-J -H — 1
O E ". — i 0
t-i O ctf O --i P
fc-i 25 — < U -rt
to < u E «*-i
*— * cu s^-' o
rl K (£
-'• O W
,J CM >
:•-'. i-l
< W CC
H c; -O
-- cd
< -< »-• 3 Oi
cf, jn o •*-* j-t
O W <; y; 
£ 00
Q >^
W <
55 « ^
2 W iJ
»-< t^ c
H < 3
CO W O
W PLI CJ
<
CO
w
nc
0










cd
  • f p-< O OJ CN .-< ^-i CO l— 1 -f-f c; rd c c c! J= QJ 3 cr u: 3 CO -C o c coj £ j_j -' vO OC CN m \o • 00 cxi *~" CM oo eo r- CM ' es oo • 00 r> oo o "~> CM in cr« ^. _ o r- vf vc C C O c 0 _ C o *c •o ao 1- C C O »- O V- M -H U U t: — < 3 3 cc cc P- sr c -H (/ cd ca i- — 0,1 a > *-• -r-l G V, H J) S 3 ctfj f: — < j r- 1 *~ 1 CM m in ^- _, Q O CM \O ^C ^-i 00 "~^ r\j O O O u~i ^t O CO O vO r-i c Sf M^ \C iA .'. cC •-< cd OK C2 !^ — < r C 1- C J-1 0 t. C O > u to f— ' -rH -^ X" • C£ 0 3, _n p- ; .- •>- rv. _. 3 cr. - cr c/;- yl jr. . C] t^j 3

  • -------
    

    -------
    1
    u •— <
    t-> o n
    E cc co o
    nj — •
    w •—!•--' O
    00 O  G
    ±J O C5 C
    0 in  — <
    C P-< «*••
    u o
    t^
    ,-H CQ V) •— *
    co a c c < o en o
    Q 1 i-l •
    H C — i O O
    Oj r-1  O
    t-1 -H O
    :E <3> — i
    C OJ «-i
    O U O 03
    t-i cc eg co o
    U V* r- 4 •
    cs q) — • — < O
    N <8 O Vt- O
    11 >< a o
    ^-^ ^2J r-M
    cc C *w
    W.  o
    .u 1-1
    o u. — > O C
    E O r-4 •<
    >H C It
    '-^ JJ O — i
    T3 C3 *-> -<-i •-<
    c g i/. -t O
    3 rt O — < Q
    c — . U v-j
    "*^ O ' Q>, ^W
    xj d) ^-* O
    c c£
    ^0
    v^
    co -a
    ^-^ cu
    •.^ oj ja
    .- CJ l-i
    t: ^ 3 cd
    < O 4J 4/
    H < u) >-
    « — T* *£
    O
    
    »
    
    ^
    
    
    
    
    
    £) ~~
    •^ CM
    
    O
    co
    ir^
    
    csi
    *-»
    C^l
    00
    ff>
    
    1
    \
    
    
    
    
    
    
    vc en c co 
    
    t^.
    ITl
    1 ^
    
    00 Sf 
    lT\ CM CM -J-
    \D   CT> (T*
    * •* M
    vo ^o r^
    xO •— ' --"
    
    c
    m
    oo
    o
    CM
    
    •a
    
    >- c
    *J •— ' CC
    C >~~ \~ — • C • -*
    D "C CU »— t C *-^
    O 4! •£> •>-* CO if
    O3cE.*.c ^
    COCO— 'O C — '
    — f Ci-J.CP'sIjO O>>
    .u tcjcujjacrc j^3
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    _
    
    
    
    
    
    4J tcjcujJDcrc ^-_-
    C J3N!~.CUJ>, ^^:
    o cii^oo^cd cACv
    u jj^stnws ocn
    C
    •H
    'J- *^.
    rt «?»t
    cc e
    •H C
    ^ U". -H
    CJ cO t
    > pa cj
    •e -H «
    'J C£ J-
    -^ CJ V-i
    SI Cj P> 2,
    C T- 1 -^ ^. >
    C CJ Ci (3 -H
    Cd -*-1 AJ £ii
    rf: O a, _o
    Cu f— t ^~t H O
    3 I 1C * c?
    cr xi 3 J2 e
    ' 3 C DO
    3 c/: — w; wi
    ( C/"> C O i
    1 o! a,!
    
    
    
    
    ,
    CO
    4_j
    fX
    T3
    C
    CS
    i-
    O
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    |
    I *
    3
    c^
    •--(
    ffl
    s
    C C C3
    •r-l -^
    y. u. ?-,
    cJ c — •
    (Q CG *J
    c
    c c c
    •— T-l 1-
    o
    C cc ;-
    etc.
    )- >-
    ctt Ct) JJ
    C
    n- uj c
    c o
    CC
    S-? ^ u
    i L^ C ci
    }<".-.&
    

    -------
    

    -------
    

    -------
    

    -------
    

    -------
    
    

    -------
    

    -------
     r-S l
     5V
    m >
    -  -H
    £5
                C_
                <=
                m
               CO
               c:
               CD
                i
               CD
               >
               CO
                        0)2
                        > >
                        -< CD
                         i  m
                        o
    < 33
    m m
    33 TJ
       O
    0)2
    J>-l
    cn
    

    -------
    
    
    IO
    0
    O
    O
    U
    i*
    O
    
    X
    E
    
    
    150-
    100-
    50-
    0 "
    -50-
    
    -IOO-
    
    -I5O-
    -2OO-
    -250-
    _ E ° «
    £> ° -
    in ^ ^ '•
    u, K or
    S Ul < 3
    — r: Q LJ n
    " Z _l C
    1 < o :
    1 1 1*1 1 1
    ) j J-J1 . ^ 1 2_J f-
    
    
    
    
    
    
    I §5
    = 5
    £ U) S
    III II
    !l
    
    TRIBUTARY CONTRIBUTIONS
    MEAN NET ALKALINITY
    
    
    
    L
                                                                     WEST BRANCH SUSOUEHA.NNA
                                                                     MEAN NET ALKALINITY
                                                       170     150     130
    
                                                       STREAM  MILE
    L
                      PROFILE  OF FLOW, NET ALKALINITY  OF  WEST  BRANCH  SUSQUEHANNA  RIVER
                                                            AND
                                    TRIBUTARY  CONTRIBUTIONS  OF  NET  ALKALINITY
                                                                                                           FIGURE
    

    -------
    

    -------
    §!
                     2 20    200     I BO     160    140     120     100     SO    GO
    
                                      RIVER      MILES
    
    
                      PROFILE  OF pH,  MANGANESE,  IRON S  SULFATE
    
                           CONCENTRATION  AND  NET ALKALINITY
    
    
                        WEST   BRANCH,  SUSQUEHANNA   RIVER
                                                                                        z
                                                                                        UJ
                                                                                        u
                                                                                        z
                                                                                          FIGURE  2-A
    

    -------
    

    -------
    o
    o
      so-
    
    
    
    
       0-
    
    
    
    
     -50'
    
    
    
    
    -100-
    
    
    
    
    -150-
    
    
    
    
    -200
    
    
    
    
    -250-
    
    
    
    
    -300-
    
    
    
    
    -350
                                                                       TRIBUTARY  CONTRIBUTIONS
    
                                                                       MEAN  NET  ALKALINITY
    #
    
    10
    O
      70-
    
    
    
    
      60-
    
    
    
    
      50-
    
    
    
    
      40-
    
    
    
    
      3O-
    
    
    
    
      20-
    
    
    
    
      10
                                                                       RAYSTOWN  BRANCH JUNIATA
    
                                                                       MEAN NET ALKALINITY
     U.
    
     O
      175
    
    
    
    
      ISO
    
    
    
    
      125
    
    
    
    
      100
    
    
    
    
      75
    
    
    
    
      50
    
    
    
    
      25
    
    
    
    
       O
                                                                        RAYSTOWN  BRANCH JUNIATA
    
                                                                        MEAN  FLOW
                                               40      35      30
    
    
    
                                               STREAM   MILE
         PROFILE  OF  FLOW,  NET   ALKALINITY  OF   RAYSTOWN   BRANCH   JUNIATA  RIVER
    
                                                      AND
    
                          TRIBUTARY  CONTRIBUTIONS  OF  NET  ALKALINITY
                                                                                                               FIGUR
    

    -------
    

    -------
    < z
    OL <
    
    2 2
    
    oS
    2
    O (B
    O
     •z
    zo
    
    UJ —
    •s.
     o
     u
     t>
     o
                                                                                  z
                                                                                  o
                                    RIVER
                                               MILES
                     PROFILE  OF pH, MANGANESE, IRON B  SULFATE
                         CONCENTRATION  AND  NET  ALKALINITY
    
                       RAYSTOWN   BRANCH, JUNIATA  RIVER
                                                                                    FIGURE  3-A.
    

    -------
    

    -------
    *=*« s
    «. c°° 5
    
    200-
    
    
    -200-
    
    -400-
    -600-
    -800-
    -IOOO-
    a ,^K 0
    — a ax< S
    O o oliJ U
    1
    1 1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    m 1 1 III 1 1 1
    
    
    
    
    r i i -j 	 1 	 1 i
    TRIBUTARY CONTRIBUTIONS
    MEAN NET ALKALINITY
    
    
    
    
    O
    D
    O
    "o    -'°- -
                                                               TI06A  RIVER
                                                               MEAN  NET  ALKALINITY
          30-
    
    
          25'
    
    
          20-
    
    
          15-
    
    
          IO-
    
           5
    
    
           0
    -I-
                        TlOGA RIVER
                        MgAN FLOW
                                                                                          50
                                           75        70
    
                                             STREAM   MILE
                   PROFILE   OF  FLOW,  NET ALKALINITY  OF  TIOGA   RIVER
                                                 AND
                       TRIBUTARY  CONTRIBUTIONS  OF  NET ALKALINITY
                                                                                                          FIGURE
    

    -------
    

    -------
    •- E
    
    2w
    S? to
    *- Ul
    < 2
    (r <
    h- o
    2 2
    UJ <{
    
    z
    oas
    u
      2
    2 O
         - 5O -
    
    
    
        - 100 -
    
    
    
        - : 5O-
    
    
    
        - 200-
    
    
    
        - 250-
    
    
    
        - 300 -
    • 450
    
    
    
    • 400
    
    
    
    • 350
    
    
    
    • 300
    
    
    
    • 250
    
    
    
    • 200
    
    
    
    • 150
    
    
    
     I OO
    
    
    
    •  50
    
    
    
      0
                                        RIVER      MILES
    
    
                       PROFILE  OF  pH,  MANGANESE, IRON a  SULFATE
    
                            CONCENTRATION  AND NET  ALKALINITY
    
    
                                         TIOGA   RIVER
                                                                                               FIGURE  4-A
    

    -------
    

    -------
    -20-
    - 60-
    
    -100-
    -140-
    - 180-
    -220-
    -260-
    • 	 r—
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1 	 1 	 1 	 1 	 1 |
    TRIBUTARY CONCENTRATIONS
    MEAN NET ALKiLINITY
    
    
    
    
    
    + 50
    
    
      0
    
    
    - 50
    
    
    - 100
    
    
    - ISO
    
    
    -200
    
    
    -250'
    JOHNSON  CREEK
    MEAN NET ALKALINITY
                                                   JOHNSON  CREEK
                                                   MEAN  FLOW
                                  25      20      15
    
                                  STREAM   MILE
            PROFILE  OF FLOW, NET  ALKALINITY  OF  JOHNSON  CREEK
                                       AND
                 TRIBUTARY  CONTRIBUTIONS  OF NET  ALKALINITY
                                                                                    FIGURE
    

    -------
    

    -------
    cr <
    i- a
    z o
    < c
                                    RIVER
                                               MILES
                     PROFILE  OF  pH, MANGANESE, IRON a SULFATE
    
                         CONCENTRATION  AND  NET  ALKALINITY
    
    
                                   JOHNSON  CREEK
                                                                                   FIGURE  5-A
    

    -------
    

    -------
        50
    
        40
    
    
        30
    
        20
    
        IO-
    
          O-
    
    
        -10
    
        -2O
    
    
        -30
    
        -4O-
    
    
        -50-
    
    
        -60
    TRI8UTA9Y  CONTRIBUTIONS
    WEAN  NET  ALKALINITY
    
    
    
    IO
    O
    O
    0
    O
    
    O
    >-
    <
    O
    *x
    in
    0
    
    
    
    15-
    IO-
    5-
    
    0-
    
    
    -5-
    
    -IO-
    
    
    -15-
    
    -20-
    -25-
    -30-
    -35-
                                                  LACKAWANNA RIVES
                                                  MEAN NET ALKALINITY
    u.
    O
                                                 20
    
                                         STREAM  MILE
              PROFILE  OF FLOW,  NET  ALKALINITY  OF  LACKAWANNA  RIVER
                                             AND
                     TRIBUTARY  CONTRIBUTIONS  OF NET ALKALINITY
                                                                                                 FIGURE  6
    

    -------
    

    -------
                                L E S
    PROFILE  OF pH,  MANGANESE, IRON a-SULFATE
        CONCENTRATION  AND  NET  ALKALINITY
               LACKAWANNA    RIVER
    

    -------
    

    -------
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    M
    8
    o
    
    0
    ^
    9
    |=
    
    
    
    
    
    4OO -
    300 -
    
    2OO -
    IOO -
    
    - 100 -
    
    -200-
    
    -300-
    
    -4OO -
    
    -5OO-
    -6OO-
    -7OO-
    -800-
    -900-
    _ QC
    (r
    < I
    - ! \
    <
    1 ^ .. 1
    1 '
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    i
    L
    (
    t.
    e.
    j
    • {
    j «
    - <.
    : V
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    5 *
    rs
    > K
    o
    !§§
    ^
    , <«
    1 ? Z
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    IU
    tt
    o
    j O
    
    1- 0
    £ 5
    °- 3
    ui •
    I 1 Z ! 1 1 * f
    
    1 TRIBUTARY CONCENTRATIONS
    • MEAN NET ALKALINITY
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    X
    z
    CC
    
    -------
    

    -------
        2 25-
    
     J
     I _  20-
    
    
    
    
     ^  -
    
    
     : ul  ' s -
    t- O  125-
    z z
    O 5
    z
    OtO
    I 0 -
    
    
    
    0 75-
    
    
    
    0 50-
    
    
    
    O 25-
                                       PT h  I   If
                     192    IB4    176    I6B    160    152    144    136    128
    
                                     RIVER     MILES
    
    
                      PROFILE  OF  pH, MANGANESE, IRON  a SULFATE
    
                          CONCENTRATION  AND  NET  ALKALINITY
    
    
                                SUSQUEHANNA   RIVER
                                                                                      FIGURE   7-A
    

    -------
    50-
    -50-
    S"-ioo-
    d
    u
    -150-
    o
    _ -200-
    6 -250-
    -30O-
    -350-
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    J m
    1 1 II 1 II 1 1
    TRIBUTARY CONCENTRATIONS
    MEAN NET ALKALINITY
    
    
    
    
    
    I2O-
    
    
    IOO'
    
    ao
    
    
    6O
    
    40-
    
    20
    
     0
    NESCOPECK CREEK
    MEAN FLOW
                                  12      10
    
                                 STREAM  MILE
          PROFILE  OF  FLOW, NET ALKALINITY  OF  NESCOPECK  CREEK
                                      AND
                TRIBUTARY  CONTRIBUTIONS  OF  NET ALKALINITY
                                                                                     FIGURE 8
    

    -------
    o 5
    2
    O CO
    2 O
    < o:
                                                                                        E
    
                                                                                        o
                                      RIVER      MILES
    
                      PROFILE  OF  pH,  MANGANESE,  IRON 8  SULFATE
    
                           CONCENTRATION  AND  NET  ALKALINITY
    
                                   NESCOPECK    CREEK
                                                                                          FIGURE  8-A
    

    -------
    

    -------
    z'z z
    Kt- UJ
    22 X
    o
    rz J
    
    UIUJ g
    013 ^"
    1 1 1 I.I 1 1 1
    -10-
    
    -20.
    -40-
    -60-
    -80-
    -100-
    
    
    
    
    
    
    A
    
    
    
    
    TRIBUTARY CONCENTRATONS
    MEAN NET ALKALINITY
    
    
    
    
    
                         STREAM
                                 MILE
    PROFILE  OF FLOW, NET  ALKALINITY OF  CATAWlSSA  CREEK
                               AND
          TRIBUTARY  CONTRIBUTIONS OF  NET  ALKALINITY
                                                                            FIGURE  9
    

    -------
    

    -------
    < z
    o: <
    u S
    z
    O a)
    u
     z
                                    RIVER      MILES
    
    
                     PROFILE  OF  pH,  MANGANESE, IRON 8 SULFATE
    
                          CONCENTRATION  AND  NET ALKALINITY
    
    
                                  CATAWISSA  CREEK
                                                                                   o
                                                                                   *-
                                                                                   <
                                                                                    FIGURE   9-A
    

    -------
    

    -------
    o-
    -IOO-
    
    -2OO-
    -3OO-
    -4OO-
    -500-
    I
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1
    I
    1
    i
    
    
    1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 t 1
    j 1
    
    1
    
    
    
    
    , - • -i 	 — T r- 	 1 	 "T | | — r
    TRIBUTARY CONCENTRATIONS
    MEAN NET ALKALINITY
    
    
    
    
                                                                         J—MH
    7O
    
    
    
    60-
    
    
    
    SO
    
    
    40
    
    
    
    30
    
    
    2O
    
    
    
    10
    
    
    
     O
                                                       SHAMOKIN  CREEK
                                                       MEAN  FLOW
    •-r	f
    -^	HH
     10  9   0
                                     20
    
                                    STREAM
                                                MILE
           PROFILE   OF  FLOW, NET  ALKALINITY  OF  SHAMOKIN  CREEK
    
                                         AND
    
                 TRIBUTARY  CONTRIBUTIONS  OF  NET ALKALINITY
                                                                                           FIGURE  I
    

    -------
    

    -------
    y fi
    h- UJ
    
    < 2
                                                                                       Z
                                                                                       o
                                                                                       z
                                                                                       o
                                                  MILES
                      PROFILE  OF  pH,  MANGANESE, IRON  8 SULFATE
    
                           CONCENTRATION  AND  NET  ALKALINITY
    
    
                                    SHAMOK1N    CREEK
                                                                                         FIGURE  10-A
    

    -------
    

    -------
          u N
            »
    200-
    
    150-
    
    100-
    
    
    
    50-
    
    -50 •
    -100-
    
    -150-
    -200'
    -250-
    -300-
    — ^
    o
    _ _j
    z
    __ z
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    z
    X
    •t
    
    X
    o
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    X U
    O -J
    o —
    1 s
    x1 5
    in w
    
    
    
    ,
    
    t-
    4
    m
    
    
    
    
    0
    
    = sc
    « §
    a 2
    5 x
    
    
    
    9 1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1
    •
    
    
    
    
    il
    0
    0
    b
    r
    111)
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    rRIBUTASY COXCENTRATtONS
    
    
    
    
    j
    3
    cz
    JD
    JQC
    1 II
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
                                                            MAHANOY  CREEK
                                                            MEAN NET ALKALINITY
    60-
    40-
    20-
    5
    „„-.»_ — — — -•""" * MAHANOY CREEK
    	 • 	 MEANFLOW
    - /— ""
    /
    /
    w /
    	 	 -•
    i *""" ill i i i i I i
    5 50 40 30 20 IO 0
    STREAM MILE
    PROFILE OF  FLOW,  NET  ALKALINITY OF  MAHANOY  CREEK
                             AND
    
          TRIBUTARY  CONTRIBUTIONS OF  NET ALKALINITY
                                                                      FIGURE I
    

    -------
    

    -------
    < 2
    K <
    Z 2
    UJ<
    US,
                                                                                 K
                                                                                 (-
                                                                                 2
                                   RIVER
                                               MILES
                     PROFILE  OF pH, MANGANESE, IRON 8 SULFATE
    
                         CONCENTRATION  AND  NET ALKALINITY
    
                                  MAHANOY   CREEK
                                                                                   FIGURE  II-A
    

    -------
    i
    0
    o
    0
    0
    o
    _
    ca
    E
    O-
    
    
    - 25-
    
    - 50-
    
    - 75-
    	 1 	
    
    
    -
    
    ~
    	 1 	 1 	 , 	 , 	 1 	 , 	 , 	 , 	 1
    
    
    TRI8UTAHY CONTRIBUTIONS
    MEAN NET ALKALINITY
    
    
    
                                                                       MAHANTANGO  CREEK
                                                                       MEAN NET ALKALINITY
                                                    STREAM  MILE
                          PROFILE  OF  FLOW,  NET  ALKALINITY  OF  MAHANTANGO CREEK
                                                        AND
                                 TRIBUTARY   CONTRIBUTIONS  OF  NET ALKALINITY
                                                                                                           FIGURE  I
    

    -------
    

    -------
                                                                    E
                                                                    z
                                                                    o
                                                                    o
                                                                    o
    
                                                                    2
                               MILES
    PROFILE  OF  pH, MANGANESE, IRON  & SULFATE
        CONCENTRATION  AND  NET  ALKALINITY
               MAHANTANGO   CREEK
                                                                    o
                                                                    t-
                                                                      FIGURE  12-A
    

    -------
    

    -------
    
    
    
    
    
    ro
    O
    0
    O
    D
    o>
    E
    
    
    
    
    IOO-
    
    
    73'
    
    30-
    
    
    25-
    
    
    -25-
    
    -50-
    -75-
    -too-
    — ^ ^
    _j -i
    
    — 2 Z
    2: -z
    t~ H
    tt DC
    Ul LU
    — tu oc
    LJ O
    J
    
    
    
    
    •; a.
    • i
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    
    
    ?
    Ul
    t~
    H
    _J
    1 1 t 1 111
    
    TRIBUTARY CONCENTRATIONS
    MEAN NET ALKALINITY
    
    
    
                                                      WISCONISCO  CREEK
                                                      MEAN NET  ALKALINITY
    U.
    O
                                                      WISCONISCO  CHEEK
                                                      MEAN FLOW
    4O-
    30-
    20-
    10-
    0-
    — _»
    __ — ^ r- —
    "™ 	 „ 	 9~~~
    — ^~~° 	
    __ ^t «^
    1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1
    40 35 30 25 20 15 1O S O
                                        STREAM MILE
               PROFILE OF FLOW,  NET  ALKALINITY OF  WISCONISCO  CREEK
                                           AND
                    TRIBUTARY  CONTRIBUTIONS  OF  NET  ALKALINITY
                                                                                         FIGURE  13
    

    -------
    

    -------
    o 5
    2
    O
                                    RIVER
                                               MILES
                     PROFILE  OF pH,  MANGANESE, IRON a  SULFATE
    
                         CONCENTRATION  AND  NET  ALKALINITY
    
                                 WICONISCO   CREEK
                                                                                  FIGURE 13-A
    

    -------
    

    -------
    o
    O -   5
        15-
    
    
        20 -
    
        J5 -
    
    
        30 •
    
    
        35 -
    
        40 •
    
        45 •
                                                                    TRIBUTARY CONCENTRATIONS
                                                                    MEAN NET ALKAUN1TY
                                                                   SWARTARA CREEK
                                                                    MEAN NET ALKALINITY
                                          575     55    525
    
                                            STREAM  MILE
                    PROFILE  OF  FLOW,  NET ALKALINITY  OF  SWARTARA  CREEK
                                               AND
                         TRIBUTARY  CONTRIBUTIONS OF NET ALKALINITY
                                                                                             FIGURE
    

    -------
    

    -------
    ^ E
    
    
    Is
    t- iLl
    < 2
    tr <
                                                                                    z
                                                                                    o
                      PROFILE  OF pH,  MANGANESE,  IRON a SULFATE
    
                          CONCENTRATION  AND NET  ALKALINITY
    
    
                                   SWATARA   CREEK
                                                                                      FIGURE  14-A
    

    -------
    

    -------
    
    -------
    

    -------
    K J ^ S ^
    W cj V 3 o lu
    t£ U. Z el L. UJ Q_
    * o IL o a J a iij
    _l^ i
    1 I s
    CL tfl O
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
                                              NORTH  BRANCH POTOMAC
                                              WEAN NET  ALKAUNITr
                               STREAM
    PROFILE  OF FLOW. NET ALKALINITY OF  NORTH BRANCH POTOMAC  RIVER
                                    AND
               TRIBUTARY  CONTRIBUTIONS  OF  NET ALKALINITY
                                                                           FIGURE 15
    

    -------
    

    -------
                                                              6
    
                                                              2
                                                              O
    PROFILE OF  pH,  MANGANESE, IRON  8 SULFATE
        CONCENTRATION  AND  NET ALKALINITY
    
                 POTOMAC   RIVER
                                                               FIGURE IS-A
    

    -------
    

    -------
                                TABLE OF  CONTENTS
    
    Section                                                               Page
    	1 	-| -.!_.                                                                II II II II iVtu I
    
        I.   INTRODUCTION  	    1
    
       II.   SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS	    3
    
      III.   DATA EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION	    5
                                  LIST OF TABLES
    
    Table                                                                 Page
    
      I      Bottom Organism Data of Rock Creek and
               Tributaries	    13
                                 LIST OF FIGURES                       Follows
    Figure                                                              Page
    
      1      Map of Study Area and Profile of Biological
               Conditions on Rock Creek	Ik
    

    -------
                            I.  INTRODUCTION
    
    
    
    
    
    
            A biological survey of Rock Creek, a tributary of the Potomac
    
    
    
    
    River, was conducted in August 1966.  The survey was made to determine
    
    
    
    
    the biological condition of the stream from north of Rockville, Mary-
    
    
    
    
    land, to the mouth of the stream in Washington, D. C.  (See Figure 1,
    
    
    
    
    following page 1^.)
    
    
    
    
            For purposes of the study, the community of bottom (benthic)
    
    
    
    
    organisms was selected as the indicator of the biological condition
    
    
    
    
    of the stream.  Bottom organisms serve as the preferred food source
    
    
    
    
    for the higher aquatic forms and exhibit similar reactions to adverse
    
    
    
    
    stream conditions.  The combination of limited locomotion and life
    
    
    
    
    cycles of one year or more, for most benthic species, provide a long-
    
    
    
    
    term picture of the water quality of a stream.  Fish and algal popu-
    
    
    
    
    lations were given some consideration, but only to the extent that
    
    
    
    
    obvious conclusions could be drawn based upon casual observations.
    
    
    
    
            In unpolluted streams, a wide variety of sensitive clean-
    
    
    
    
    water associated bottom organisms are normally found.  Typical groups
    
    
    
    
    are stoneflies, mayflies, and caddisflies.  These sensitive organisms
    
    
    
    
    usually are not individually abundant because of natural predation
    
    
    
    
    and competition for food and space; however, the total count or num-
    
    
    
    
    ber of organisms at a given station may be high because of the number
    
    
    
    
    of different varieties present.
    
    
    
    
            Sensitive genera tend to be eliminated by adverse environmental
    
    
    
    
    conditions (e.g., chemical and/or physical) resulting from wastes
    

    -------
                                                                       2
    
    
    
    
    
    
    reaching the stream,  In waters enriched, with organic wastes, compara-
    
    
    
    
    tively fewer kinds (genera) are normally found, but great numbers of
    
    
    
    
    these genera may be present.  Organic pollution-tolerant forms such a,s
    
    
    
    
    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 natural environment but are generally found in small num-
    
    
    
    
    bers.  The abundance of these forms in streams heavily polluted with
    
    
    
    
    organics is due to their physiological and morphological abilities to
    
    
    
    
    survive environmental conditions more adverse than conditions that may-
    
    
    
    
    be tolerated by other organisms.  Under conditions where inert silts
    
    
    
    
    or organic sludges blanket the stream bottom, the natural home of
    
    
    
    
    bottom organisms is destroyed, causing a reduction in the number of
    
    
    
    
    kinds of organisms present.
    
    
    
    
            In addition to sensitive and pollution-tolerant forms, some
    
    
    
    
    bottom organisms may be termed intermediates, in that they are capable
    
    
    
    
    of living in fairly heavily polluted areas as well as in clean-water
    
    
    
    
    situations.  These organisms occurring in limited numbers, therefore,
    
    
    
    
    cannot serve as effective indicators of water quality.
    

    -------
                      II.  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
    
    
    
    
    
    
            1.  A biological survey of Rock Creek and tributaries from
    
    
    
    
    north of Rockville, Maryland, to the Potomac River in Washington,
    
    
    
    
    D. C., was conducted in August 1966.  Investigations were made at
    
    
    
    
    16 stations on Rock Creek and at four  stations on tributaries.
    
    
    
    
            2.  Bottom organisms were selected as the primary indicator
    
    
    
    
    of biological water quality.
    
    
    
    
            3.  From Avery, Maryland, to the small tributary east of
    
    
    
    
    Rockville, Maryland, an abundance of minnows and clean-water bottom
    
    
    
    
    organisms indicated good water quality.  From the tributary to Viers
    
    
    
    
    Mill Village, some degradation of water quality was noted, but indi-
    
    
    
    
    cated water quality was generally good.
    
    
    
    
            U.  Trash and degraded aquatic life were observed at Viers
    
    
    
    
    Mill Village, indicating fair water quality.
    
    
    
    
            5.  Improved aquatic life, indicating good water quality,
    
    
    
    
    was found from Garret Park, Maryland, to North Chevy Chase, Maryland.
    
    
    
    
            6.  Evidence of pollution increased as the Rock Creek Survey
    
    
    
    
    continued downstream to the Potomac.  Coquelin Creek contributed
    
    
    
    
    nitrogen and phosphorus, and Piney Branch contributed a mild organic
    
    
    
    
    pollution load to the stream.  Sparse clean-water genera at Rock Creek
    
    
    
    
    Recreation Center indicated fair water quality, while intermediate and
    
    
    
    
    pollution-tolerant genera in the reach from Beach Drive to P Street
    
    
    
    
    indicated mild pollution.
    

    -------
            7.  Slash Run and P Street outfall severs were contributing
    
    
    
    
    organic pollution to Rock Creek.  Moderate to heavy pollution was
    
    
    
    
    indicated from P Street to the Potomac River.  Dominant bottom organ-
    
    
    
    
    isms consisted of intermediate and pollution-tolerant genera.  Only
    
    
    
    
    one bottom organism  was found at the mouth of Rock Creek.   Tidal
    
    
    
    
    action diffuses salt water into the mouth of the stream, which prob-
    
    
    
    
    ably accounted for the low population of bottom organisms in the area.
    

    -------
    

    -------
                III.  DATA EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION
    
    
    
    
    
    
            Rock Creek is a small, scenic stream flowing southeast from
    
    
    
    
    north of Rockville in Montgomery County, Maryland, and discharging
    
    
    
    
    into the Potomac River in Washington, D. C.  Bridle paths, picnic
    
    
    
    
    and recreation areas, and the National Zoological Park are among the
    
    
    
    
    facilities along the banks of the stream.
    
    
    
    
            Storm sewers discharge into the stream at various points, but
    
    
    
    
    no sanitary or industrial sewers discharge directly into the stream
    
    
    
    
    upstream from P Street in Washington, D. C.
    
    
    
    
            Sampling stations were located after consideration of the
    
    
    
    
    following conditions:
    
    
    
    
            1.  Tributaries
    
    
    
    
            2.  Areas having a known waste problem
    
    
    
    
            3.  Physical capability for sampling.
    
    
    
    
            Bottom organisms are animals that live directly in associa-
    
    
    
    
    tion with the bottom of a waterway.  They may crawl on, burrow in,
    
    
    
    
    or attach themselves to the bottom.  Macroorganisms are usually defined
    
    
    
    
    as those organisms that will be retained by a No. 30 sieve.  In essence,
    
    
    
    
    the organisms retained by the sieve are those that are visible to the
    
    
    
    
    unaided eye.
    
    
    
    
            Each station was sampled once, and the kinds of macro bottom
    
    
    
    
    organisms were observed for the purpose of evaluating water quality.
    
    
    
    
    Quantitative bottom samples were also taken, using a Surber Square
    
    
    
    
    Foot Sampler, and the number of organisms per square foot was counted.
    

    -------
                                                                       6
    
            Quantitative samples were not taken at stations in non-critical
    
    areas or where organisms were very sparse.
    
            Discussions of stations proceed downstream unless otherwise
    
    noted.
    
    
    Station #1 - Rock Creek at Avery Road Bridge north of Rockville,
                 Maryland
    
            The water at this station was clear, and numerous minnows were
    
    observed throughout the area.  A total of nine genera of bottom organ-
    
    isms were found, including such clean-water forms as mayflies (two
    
    genera), caddisflies, and fishflies.  Good water quality was indicated
    
    based on the bottom organisms.
    
    
    Station #2 - Rock Creek, East Branch at Route 115 Bridge, north of
                 Rockville, Maryland
    
            Very clear water and numerous minnows were observed in this
    
    area.  A total of 17 different genera of bottom organisms were col-
    
    lected and included such clean-water forms as stoneflies, mayflies
    
    (three genera), caddisflies (two genera), fishflies, and riffle
    
    beetles.  A total of 109 bottom organisms were collected in the square
    
    foot sample, which included 35 caddisflies, 20 mayflies, 15 riffle
    
    beetles, and four fishflies.  Excellent water quality was indicated.
    
    
    Station #3 - Rock Creek tributary at Avery Road, east of Rockville,
                 Maryland
    
            A sparse population of four genera of bottom organisms was
    
    found in this tributary, mayflies and caddisflies being the dominant
    
    organisms.  Fair water quality was indicated.
    

    -------
    _S_ta_t_ion_gU - Rock Creek at Route 28 Bridge, East of Hockville,
                 Maryland
    
            A total of l6 genera of "bottom organisms were sampled at this
    
    station and included such clean-water forms as mayflies, caddisflies
    
    (two genera), fishflies, and riffle beetles.  The water was somewhat
    
    murky, but small schools of minnows could be observed.  Only 35
    
    bottom organisms were collected in the square foot sample, with finger-
    
    nail clams (an intermediate) being the dominant form with 15 in nxunber,
    
    Good water quality was indicated.
    
    
    Station #5 - Rock Creek upstream from Randolph Road at Viers Mill
                 Village, Maryland
    
            Cloudy water, abundant trash, and sparse bottom organisms
    
    were noted at this station.  Only one clean-water caddisfly was among
    
    the four bottom organisms found; the balance consisted of two inter-
    
    mediate genera and a pollution-tolerant form.  Fair water quality was
    
    indicated.
    
    
    Station #6 - Rock Creek at Route 5^7 Bridge, Garrett Park, Maryland
    
            The water was clear, and small schools of minnows were ob-
    
    served at this station.  Bottom organisms were not abundant, and only
    
    five genera were sampled.  The sample, however, included such clean-
    
    water forms as mayflies (two genera) and caddisflies.  Good water
    
    quality was indicated.
    

    -------
    Station #7 - Rock Creek at Beach Drive and Cedar Lane, Kensington,
                 Maryland
    
            Exceptionally clear water, numerous minnows, and ten differ-
    
    ent genera of bottom organisms were found at this station.  Included
    
    in the sample were such clean-water forms as mayflies (two genera)
    
    and caddisflies (two genera).  A total of 22U bottom organisms were
    
    collected in the square foot sample, which included 27 mayflies and
    
    three caddisflies.  The dominant form was an intermediate midge larva
    
    which made up 190 of the total count.  Good water quality was indicated.
    
    
    Station #8 - Rock Creek at Jones Mill Road, Chevy Chase, Maryland
    
            At this station the water was again exceptionally clear, and
    
    numerous small minnows were observed.  Only three genera of bottom
    
    organisms were found, but they consisted mainly of two genera of
    
    caddisfly larvae.   Good water quality was indicated.
    
    
    Station #9 - Coquelin Creek at Jones Mill Road Bridge, North Chevy
                 Chase, Maryland
    
            On this small tributary to Rock Creek, the water was clear,
    
    but the filamentous algae was heavy in much of the area, suggesting
    
    excessive nitrogen and phosphorus.  Oil slicks arose when some of
    
    the bottom was stirred up by wading.  A total of 12 genera of bottom
    
    organisms was found and included a fair population of mayflies and
    
    caddisflies.  Blackflies were the dominant organism and made up 155
    
    of the 192 organisms in the square foot sample.  Only fair water
    
    quality was indicated.
    

    -------
    Station #10 - Rock Creek at East-West Highway 1*10, Rock Creek
                  Recreation Center, Maryland
    
            Clear water and minnows were observed in this area.  A total
    
    of ten genera was found, but bottom organisms were generally sparse.
    
    A small population of mayflies, consisting of only 23 organisms, was
    
    collected in the square foot sample.  Fair water quality was indicated.
    
    
    Station #11 - Rock Creek at Wise Road and West Beach Drive,
                  Washington, D. C.
    
            Only three genera of bottom organisms, consisting of two
    
    pollution-tolerant genera and one intermediate genera, were sampled
    
    at this station.  Bottom organisms were sparse, and a quantitative
    
    sample was not taken.  About 20 yards downstream, a large storm sewer
    
    empties from the left bank (facing downstream).  The bottom in this
    
    channel appeared to be coated with oil, and oil slicks came to the
    
    surface when the bottom was disturbed.  Mild pollution is suggested
    
    in this area.
    
    
    Station #12 - Rock Creek at Military Road, Washington, D. C.
    
            This station was located at a roadside park.  Five genera of
    
    bottom organisms were found, consisting of three organic pollution-
    
    tolerant genera and two intermediate forms.  Generally, bottom organ-
    
    isms were sparse.  A small tributary comes in from the left bank a
    
    short distance downstream.  This tributary was very heavy with fila-
    
    mentous algae, suggesting high nitrogen and phosphorus.  Mild organic
    
    pollution is suggested.
    

    -------
                                                                      10
    
    
    Station #13 - Rock Creek at Park Road Bridge, Washington, D. C.
    
            The water vas clear, and small schools of minnows were
    
    observed in the area.  Eight genera of bottoir organisms were sampled,
    
    consisting of four organic pollution-tolerant and four intermediate
    
    forms.  Bottom organisms were not abundant; only 27 were collected in
    
    the square foot sample.  Mild organic pollution is suggested.
    
    
    Station #lj+ - Piney Branch at Park Road Bridge, Washington, D. C.
    
            In this tributary to Rock Creek, the water was clear, but
    
    filamentous algae was extremely abundant on the rocks and gravel.
    
    Nine genera were collected, but the sample contained only one clean-
    
    water associated form (mayfly).  The balance consisted of four  inter-
    
    mediate forms and four pollution-tolerant forms.  The dominant form
    
    was an intermediate midge larva, which made up 75 of the 113 bottom
    
    organisms in the square foot sample.  A faint sewage odor was detected.
    
    In addition, heavy algae suggested high nitrogen and phosphorus con-
    
    centrations.  Piney Branch is believed to contribute a mild pollutional
    
    load to Rock Creek.
    
    
    Station #15 - Rock Creek at Harvard Street Entrance to the National
                  Zoological Park, Washington, D. C.
    
            In this area the water was clear, but the rocks were coated
    
    with slime.  Although nine genera of bottom organisms were found, only
    
    fair populations of an intermediate midge larva and a pollution-
    
    tolerant snail were sampled.  The other bottom organisms were sparse.
    

    -------
                                                                      11
    
    
    The intermediate midge larva made up 86 of the 103 bottom organisms
    
    in the square foot sample.  Mild organic pollution is suggested.
    
    
    Station #16 - Rock Creek at Calvert Street Bridge, Washington, D. C.
    
            Clear water and numerous minnows were observed at this sta-
    
    tion; however, a faint sewage odor was detected.  Although ten genera
    
    of bottom organisms were found, the only clean-water associated form
    
    consisted of a few caddisfly larvae.  An intermediate midge larva made up
    
    1*6 of the 55 organisms collected in the square foot sample.  Sludge-
    
    worms , the bloodworm midge Chironomus, blackflies, and two genera of
    
    pollution-tolerant snails were collected.  Mild organic pollution was
    
    indicated.
    
    
    Station #11 - Rock Creek upstream from P Street Outfall, Washington,
                  D. C.
    
            Rock Creek was sampled immediately upstream from the P Street
    
    outfall.   The water was clear, and small schools of minnows and sun-
    
    fish were observed upstream but not downstream from the outfall.
    
    Broken glass and trash were heavy in the stream.  Six genera of bot-
    
    tom organisms were collected, consisting of four organic pollution-
    
    tolerant  forms and two intermediate forms.   The dominant forms were
    
    an intermediate midge (98) and sludgeworms  (U3) out of the 158 bottom
    
    organisms collected in the square foot sample.  Mild organic pollu-
    
    tion was  indicated.
    

    -------
                                                                      12
    
    Station Hib - Rock Creek downstream from P Street Outfall, Washington,
                  D. C.
    
            This station was located approximately 2? yards downstream
    
    from the P Street outfall in Washington, I)0 C.  A faint sewage odor
    
    was detected, and trash vao observed in the stream*  Only five genera
    
    of bottom organisms were found, and these consisted of four organic
    
    pollution-tolerant forms and one intermediate "Kind-  'i'he pojlx,!.ion-
    
    tolerant genera consisted of bloodworms, sludgeworms» leecher.. and a
    
    pollution-tolerant snail.  Moderate organic pollution was inoicetea,
    
    Station #19 ~ Rock Creek at Slash Run Outfall! , Washington, Do C.
    
            Rock Creek was sampled downstream from the Slash Run outfall}
    
    which is downstream from the P Street cut fall in Washington, 1). C.
    
    The water was murky, and the sewage odor was  strong.  The bottom
    
    organisms consisted of three pollution-tolerant genera and two inter-
    
    mediate genera.  The U80 organisms in the square foot sample included
    
    390 intermediate midges and 71 sludgeworms,  Moderate organic pollu-
    
    tion is indicated at this station.  The source appears to be the
    
    Slash Run sewer.
    
    Station #20 - Rock Creek at the Potomac River, Washington, D. C,
    
            The last station on Rock Creek was located approximately 30
    
    yards upstream from the mouth, near the canoe rental concession.
    
    The water was very turbid, and oil slicks were stirred up by wading.
    
    After approximately 15 minutes of intensive searching, only one blood-
    
    worm could be found-  A quantitative sample was not taken for this
    
    reason.  Tidal action washes trash and waste  into the area,
    

    -------
                                                   13
             TABLE I
    
     BOTTOM ORGANISM DATA OF
    ROCK CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES
    Station
    Number
    1
    2
    3
    k
    5
    6
    1
    8
    9
    10
    11
    Location
    Avery Road Bridge,
    Maryland
    Route 115 Bridge, Rock
    Creek North Branch,
    Maryland
    Tributary at Avery Road,
    Maryland
    Route 28 Bridge, Maryland
    Randolph Road, Viers Mill
    Village, Maryland
    Route 5^7 Bridge, Maryland
    Beach Drive and Cedar Lane,
    Maryland
    Route 1+95 and Jones Mill
    Road, Maryland
    Coquelin Creek at Jones
    Mill Road Bridge, Maryland
    Route UlO at Rock Creek
    Recreation Center,
    Maryland
    Wise Road and West Beach
    Drive, Washington, D. C.
    Bottom
    No. of
    Kinds
    9
    17
    1*
    16
    k
    5
    10
    3
    12
    10
    3
    Organisms
    No. Per
    Sq. Ft.
    Not
    Taken
    109
    Not
    Taken
    35
    Not
    Taken
    Not
    Taken
    22k
    Not
    Taken
    192
    23
    Not
    Taken
    Dominant
    Forms
    Mayflies
    Caddis flies
    Caddisflies
    Mayflies
    Mayflies
    Caddisflies
    Fingernail
    Clams
    Intermediate
    Genera
    Mayflies
    Caddisflies
    Midge Larva
    Mayflies
    Caddisflies
    Caddisflies
    Blackflies
    Intermediate
    Genera
    Pollution-
    Tolerant
    Genera
    Indicated
    Water
    Quality
    Good
    Excellent
    Fair
    Good
    Fair
    Good
    Good
    Good
    Fair
    Fair
    Mildly
    Polluted
    

    -------
    

    -------
    TABLE I (Continued)
    Station
    Number
    12
    13
    Ik
    15
    16
    IT
    18
    19
    20
    Bottom
    No. of
    Location Kinds
    Military Road, Washington, 5
    D. C.
    Park Road Bridge, 8
    Washington, D. C.
    Piney Branch at Park Road 9
    Bridge, Washington, D. C.
    National Zoo, Harvard 9
    Street, Washington, D. C.
    Calvert Street Bridge, 10
    Washington, D. C.
    Upstream from P Street 6
    Outfall, Washington, D. C.
    Downstream from P Street 5
    Outfall, Washington, D. C.
    Slash Run Outfall, 5
    Washington, D. C.
    Mouth of Rock Creek, 1
    Washington, D. C.
    Organisms
    No. Per
    Sq. Ft.
    Not
    Taken
    27
    113
    103
    55
    158
    Not
    Taken
    U80
    Not
    Taken
    Dominant
    Forms
    Pollution-
    Tolerant
    Genera
    Intermediate
    and
    Pollution-
    Tolerant
    Genera
    Midge Larva
    Pollution-
    Tolerant
    Genera
    Midge Larva
    Pollution-
    Tolerant
    Genera
    Midge Larva
    Sludgeworms
    Bloodworms
    Intermediate
    Midge
    Sludgeworms
    Bloodworms
    Sludgeworms
    Leeches
    Intermediate
    Midge
    Sludgeworms
    Bloodworm
    Indicated
    Water
    Quality
    Mildly
    Polluted
    Mildly
    Polluted
    Mildly
    Polluted
    Mildly
    Polluted
    Mildly
    Polluted
    Mildly
    Polluted
    Moderately
    Polluted
    Moderately
    Polluted
    Moderate
    to Heavy
    Pollution
    

    -------
                           TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                               Page
          LIST OF FIGURES	   ii
          LIST OF TABLES	   ii
          APPENDICES	   ii
      I.  INTRODUCTION  	    1
     II.  PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION  	    2
    III.  THE STUDY	    3
     IV.  SUMMARY OF FINDINGS	    7
      V.  BIBLIOGRAPHY	   18
     VI.  APPENDICES	   1-1
          Appendix 1	   1-1
          Appendix 2	   2-1
    

    -------
                                                                      11
                            LIST OF FIGURES
    
    
    
    
    1.  Coliform Counts, June-August 1966
    
    
    
    
    2.  Bacterial Quality for 1965, from D. C. Data
    
    
    
    
    3.  Total Phosphorus, January-July 1966
    
    
    
    
    k.  Suspended Solids for 1965, from D. C. Data
    
    
    
    
    5.  Map of Rock Creek Basin Showing Sampling Points
                             LIST OF TABLES
    
    
    
    
    1.  Summary of Sample Analyses, by Chesapeake Field Station
    
    
    
    
    2.  Nitrogen and Phosphorus Analyses, by Chesapeake Field Station
    
    
    
    
    3.  Turbidities, Storm of October 19, 1966
                               APPENDICES
    
    
    
    
    1.  Inventory of Outfalls
    
    
    
    
    2,  Biological Survey
    

    -------
                            I.   INTRODUCTION
    
    
    
    
    
    
            At the request of Secretary Stewart Udall of the Depart-
    
    
    
    
    ment of the Interior, on July 3, 1966, the Federal Water Pollution
    
    
    
    
    Control Administration was  requested to make a study of the pollu-
    
    
    
    
    tion problems in the Rock Creek Sub-Basin of the Potomac River
    
    
    
    
    Basin and prepare a corrective program to permit water recreation
    
    
    
    
    by October 196?.  In accordance with this request, the Chesapeake
    
    
    
    
    Field Station was directed  to make a determination of water quality
    
    
    
    
    in Rock Creek and an inventory of waste outfalls.
    
    
    
    
            The cooperation of  the following agencies in providing
    
    
    
    
    information assisted appreciably in the completion of this inves-
    
    
    
    
    tigation:
    
    
    
    
            Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission
    
    
    
    
            Maryland Department of Health
    
    
    
    
            Maryland Department of Water Resources
    
    
    
    
            Montgomery County Department of Health
    
    
    
    
            D. C. Department of Sanitary Engineering
    
    
    
    
            D. C. Department of Public Health
    
    
    
    
            U. S. Geological Survey
    

    -------
                       II.  PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
    
    
    
    
    
    
            Rock Creek drains a watershed, area of approximately 77
    
    
    
    
    square miles and has its source south of Laytonsville in Mont-
    
    
    
    
    gomery County, Maryland.  It flows generally southerly for a
    
    
    
    
    distance of approximately 30 miles, discharging into the Potomac
    
    
    
    
    River Estuary.  The lower ten stream miles of Rock Creek drain
    
    
    
    
    approximately l6 square miles of the highly urban District of
    
    
    
    
    Columbia.  The urban area can also be considered as extending
    
    
    
    
    northerly to Rockville, beyond which the predominately rural
    
    
    
    
    agricultural area is rapidly becoming suburban (Map, Figure 5).
    
    
    
    
            The watershed is generally upstream from the geologic
    
    
    
    
    Fall Line and located in the Piedmont Zone, which consists of
    
    
    
    
    moderately well-drained, rolling country with fairly narrow flood
    
    
    
    
    plains.  The flood plain in the District of Columbia is protected
    
    
    
    
    by park development under the administration of the National Park
    
    
    
    
    Service.  A program of land acquisition and park development is
    
    
    
    
    being carried out along the Montgomery County flood plain by the
    
    
    
    
    Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission—.
    

    -------
                            III.  THE STUDY
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    A.  SURVEYS
    
    
    
    
            Data for evaluation of the bacteriological, biological,
    
    
    
    
    and other water quality characteristics of the stream were obtained
    
    
    
    
    by field surveys and from records of healtn agencies in the area.
    
    
    
    
    The following field investigations were conducted by the Chesapeake
    
    
    
    
    Field Station:
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    !•  Bacteriological
    
    
    
    
            A stream survey conducted by the Chesapeake Field Station
    
    
    
    
    (CFS) in August 1966, supplemented by earlier sampling during
    
    
    
    
    June, were primary sources of coliform bacteria data.   In addition,
    
    
    
    
    bacteriological records of the D. C. Department of Public Health
    
    
    
    
    collected during 1965 provided the remaining source of information.
    
    
    
    
    The year 1965 was selected in order to have an annual cycle of
    
    
    
    
    data.  Comparison of the various sets of data indicate relative
    
    
    
    
    agreement.
    
    
    
    
            A moderate storm that occurred during the August sampling
    
    
    
    
    period permitted one observation of bacterial concentrations
    
    
    
    
    resulting from urban runoff.
    
    
    
    
            Since coliform bacteria are not positive indicators of
    
    
    
    
    the presence of human fecal pollution, concentrations of fecal
    
    
    
    
    coliforms and fecal streptococci were also determined by the CFS
    
    
    
    
    laboratory.   The ratio of fecal coliforms to fecal streptococci
    

    -------
    (FC/FS) is considered a more valid index for establishing the
    
    
    
    
    presence of human excreta.  An FC/FS ratio of in excess of 2.5
    
    
    
    
    is generally considered indicative of human pollution—.
    
    
    
    
            Coliform densities were compared with Water Quality Sub-
    
    
    
    
    Task Force, Project Potomac, standards adopted for water contact
    
    
    
    
    recreation which recommend levels of less than 1000 MPN/100 ml at
    
    
    
    
    least 50 per cent of the time and less than 2^00 MPN/100 ml at
    
    
    
    
    least 90 per cent of the time, based on arithmetic averages.
    
    
    
    
    (Figure 1, Table l)
    
    
    
    
    
    
    2-  Biological
    
    
    
    
            The CFS biologist conducted studies of stream biota to
    
    
    
    
    define water quality as measured by type and numbers of genera
    
    
    
    
    of bottom organisms.  Although not a part of the study, casual
    
    
    
    
    observations of fishlife were noted.
    
    
    
    
            Benthic surveys were made at several locations to distin-
    
    
    
    
    guish between siltation and possible sediment from untreated or
    
    
    
    
    partially treated sanitary waste discharges.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    3.  Waste Outfalls
    
    
    
    
            With the assistance of the D.  C. Department of Sanitary
    
    
    
    
    Engineering and the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission,
    
    
    
    
    personnel from the CFS located and identified 211 outfalls capable
    
    
    
    
    of discharging sewage or storm water into the Rock Creek Water-
    
    
    
    
    shed.  When there were flows from an outfall, both the discharge
    

    -------
    and the receiving vaters were observed and, where pollution was
    suspected, samples were taken and analyzed.
    
    U.  Surfactants
            During the survey period, samples were collected arid
    analyzed for surfactants (detergents) and the data utilized to
    indicate possible human pollution.  Surfactant concentrations
    greater than 0.5 mg/1 are considered presumptive indicators of
                             II
    sanitary waste discharges—.  A special study was made October
    18 to determine detergent levels following a report of extensive
    foaming in Rock Creek.
    
    5.  Nutrients
            Analysis for total phosphorus was made over the six-
    month period of January-June 1966 by CFS using samples collected
    at the M Street Bridge in Washington, D. C., by the D. C. Depart-
    ment of Public Health (Figure 3).  Samples collected during this
    period were analyzed for both phosphorus and nitrogen (Table 2).
    
    6.  Inorganic Solids
            Turbidities were determined on October 19, 1966, using
    samples taken after a three and one-half inch rainfall (Table 3).
    Suspended solids in District of Columbia reaches of Rock Creek
    for 1965 are shown in Figure U.
    

    -------
    

    -------
    B.  EXISTING POLLUTION ABATEMENT PROGRAMS AND REGULATIONS
    
    
    
    
    
    
            A review of current and proposed pollution abatement pro-
    
    
    
    
    grams and regulations was made, and a summary is included in this
    
    
    
    
    paper.
    

    -------
                        IV.  SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
    
    
    
    
    
    
    A.  EXTENT AND SOURCES OF POLLUTION
    
    
    
    
    -*••  Bacteriologi cal
    
    
    
            Based upon bacteriological analysis of Chesapeake Field
    
    
    
    
    Station samples taken during June and August, no reaches of Rock
    
    
    
    
    Creek, from the junction with the Potomac River to the headwaters,
    
    
    
    
    meet the Water Quality Sub-Task Force, Project Potomac, criteria
    
    
    
    
    for water contact recreation of coliform counts less than 2^00
    
    
    
    
    MPN/100 ml at least 90 per cent of the time.
    
    
    
    
            In the lower reaches, high coliform counts are a matter
    
    
    
    
    of record, as is indicated by data from the District of Columbia
    
    
    
    
    included in this paper (Figure 2).  A tabulation of results of
    
    
    
    
    Chesapeake Field Station bacteriological analyses (Figure 1 and
    
    
    
    
    Table l) indicates generally high coliform counts in all but the
    
    
    
    
    upper reaches of the Basin.  In the upper reaches coliform counts
    
    
    
    
    are generally low, but consistent.
    
    
    
    
            Sources of pollution in Montgomery County are:
    
    
    
    
            1.  Soil erosion and storm runoff in agricultural areas
    
    
    
    
                near the headwaters carry fertilizers and animal
    
    
    
    
                waste into Rock Creek and increase bacterial levels
    
    
    
    
                in the stream.
    
    
    
    
            2.  Urban storm runoff pollution has increased as a
    
    
    
    
                result of the rapid change from rural to suburban
    
    
    
    
                land occupancy in the upper Rock Creek Basin (Map,
    
    
    
    
                Figure 5).
    

    -------
            3.  Montgomery County is served by a separate sewer
    
                system, and, in the past, some manholes have over-
    
                flowed when the capacity of D. C. sewers in the
    
                reaches of Rock Creek was exceeded.
    
            In the District of Columbia reaches, the principal
    
    sources of pollution were identified as follows:
    
            1.  Certain combined sewer outfalls that are subject
    
                to overflow during periods of heavy rainfall—
    
            2.  Defective or broken sewers
    
            3.  National Zoological Park
    
            k.  Urban runoff
    
    
    2.  Biological
                                             D /
            Findings of the Biological Survey—  indicated good water
    
    quality in the stream reach from Avery Road to Rockville in Mont-
    
    gomery County.  Some degradation was indicated in the reach from
    
    Rockville to Viers Mill Road, but general water quality was good.
    
    The Viers Mill reach was degraded to fair quality, but recovery
    
    with good quality was indicated from Garrett Park to North Chevy
    
    Chase.
    
            Evidence of pollution increased as the Rock Creek survey
    
    continued downstream to the Potomac.  Coquelin Run contributed
    
    nitrogen and phosphorus, and Piney Branch contributed a mild
    
    organic pollution load to the stream.  Sparse clean-water genera
    
    at Rock Creek Recreation Center indicated only fair water quality,
    

    -------
    while intermediate and pollution-tolerant genera in the reach
    
    
    
    
    from Beach Drive to P Street indicated mild pollution.
    
    
    
    
            Slash Run and P Street outfall sewers were contributing
    
    
    
    
    organic pollution to Rock Creek.  Moderate to heavy pollution
    
    
    
    
    was indicated from P Street to the Potomac River.  Dominant bottom
    
    
    
    
    organisms consisted of intermediate and pollution-tolerant genera.
    
    
    
    
    Only one bottom organism was found at the mouth of Rock Creek.
    
    
    
    
    Tidal action diffuses salt water into the mouth of the stream,
    
    
    
    
    which probably accounted for the low population of bottom organ-
    
    
    
    
    isms in the area.  (Appendix 2)
    
    
    
    
    
    
    3.  Nutrients
    
    
    
    
            Phosphorus concentrations ranged from 0.15 to 1.0 mg/1;
    
    
    
    
    nitrogen concentrations ranged from 0.62 to 1.96 mg/1.
    
    
    
    
            One source of phosphorus is the discharge from sludge
    
    
    
    
    control operations in boilers and air-conditioning cooling towers
    
    
    
    
    in commercial and larger residential buildings.  The chemicals
    
    
    
    
    used are principally phosphates for removal of scale-producing
    
    
    
    
    compounds, primarily carbonates, from the system.  Discharges are
    
    
    
    
    made into storm-water drains.  Discharges into sanitary sewers
    
    
    
    
    are prohibited by the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission
    
    
    
    
    and the District of Columbia.
    
    
    
    
            Coquelin Run, Piney Branch, and the Slash Run Interceptor
    
    
    
    
    were found to contribute phosphorus and nitrogen to Rock Creek
    
    
    
    
    (Appendix 2).
    

    -------
                                                                      10
    k.  Inorganic Solids
    
    
    
    
            Erosion in the Rock Creek Watershed has resulted in
    
    
    
    
    silting of the stream bed and high turbidities, both of which
    
    
    
    
    contribute to objectional concentrations of inorganic solids
    
    
    
    
    and destroy the aquatic environment needed for the survival and
    
    
    
    
    propagation of fishlife.  The condition is especially serious in
    
    
    
    
    the reaches in Montgomery County where rapid development of
    
    
    
    
    residential areas has resulted in exposure of the subsoil to
    
    
    
    
    active erosion.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    5.  Other Wastes
    
    
    
    
            Rapid urbanization of formerly rural areas in Rock Creek
    
    
    
    
    Watershed, with the resulting increase of paved and roofed areas,
    
    
    
    
    has increased the per cent of runoff as well as causing more
    
    
    
    
    erratic discharges in the stream.  Storm water from these urban
    
    
    
    
    areas transports all types of waste into watercourses.
    
    
    
    
            The presence of large quantities of discarded articles
    
    
    
    
    and refuse in the Creek and its tributaries could not be directly
    
    
    
    
    related to pollution; however, aside from being esthetically
    
    
    
    
    objectional, visible trash and refuse tends to invite others to
    
    
    
    
    use the Creek as a general disposal vehicle.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    B.  STREAM REACH SUMMARY
    
    
    
    
            The following describes briefly, by sections of the Water-
    
    
    
    
    shed, the conditions found during the field investigations.
    

    -------
                                                                      11
            Upper Rock Creek, Montgomery County:  The reaches north
    
    
    
    
    of Rockville are not free of bacterial contamination; however,
    
    
    
    
    the concentrations of coliform bacteria did approach levels
    
    
    
    
    generally considered acceptable for body contact recreation.
    
    
    
    
    Pollution sources appeared to be of animal and agricultural
    
    
    
    
    origin and, as such, would not pose serious health hazards in
    
    
    
    
    the concentrations found.  The biological survey indicated a good
    
    
    
    
    quality of water, as evidenced by the numerous schools of minnows
    
    
    
    
    and the existence of a balanced population of clean-water aquatic
    
    
    
    
    life.
    
    
    
    
    
    
            Lower Rock Creek, Montgomery County:  Water quality within
    
    
    
    
    this portion of the Watershed was found to be somewhat degraded
    
    
    
    
    (when compared to the upper rural areas).  An increase was observ-
    
    
    
    
    ed in coliforms identifiable as originating from warm-blooded
    
    
    
    
    animals (possibly humans).  The increase in surfactants in the
    
    
    
    
    East-West Highway area extending to the District line suggested
    
    
    
    
    this pollution was from domestic sources.  While the counts are
    
    
    
    
    generally low, they are consistent.  An attempt to trace out
    
    
    
    
    sources of pollution was inconclusive, except that Coquelin Run
    
    
    
    
    was a significant contributor.  It appears that, since a small
    
    
    
    
    part of the Coquelin Run area is served by individual septic tanks,
    
    
    
    
    significant seepage from the sub-surface disposal systems may at
    
    
    
    
    times reach the watercourse.   The biological survey identified
    
    
    
    
    variable populations of minnows and suppressed numbers of clean
    

    -------
                                                                      12
    water genera, and, when compared with the bacteriological results,
    
    
    
    
    suggested only fair water quality in this reach.
    
    
    
    
    
    
            Upper Rock Creek, District of Columbia:  In general, the
    
    
    
    
    lower coliform counts, as exhibited in Table 1, suggest this
    
    
    
    
    reach as one of recovery, especially between Sherrill Drive and
    
    
    
    
    Pierce's Mill.  A large sewer outfall at Klingle Road, presumably
    
    
    
    
    plugged and out of service, had a small discharge into a pool
    
    
    
    
    that was turbid and discharging gas bubbles with a characteristic
    
    
    
    
    sewage odor, suggesting that septic action was taking place.  A
    
    
    
    
    discharge with a distinct sewage odor was also observed entering
    
    
    
    
    Broad Branch at Albemarle and 32nd Streets.  Oil seepage from the
    
    
    
    
    ground, noticed on the east side of Connecticut Avenue just north
    
    
    
    
    of 3701, was assumed to originate from an apartment house heating
    
    
    
    
    plant.  The oil was transported by a spring-fed tributary to Rock
    
    
    
    
    Creek.
    
    
    
    
            A broken or leaking sewer crosses Broad Branch behind the
    
    
    
    shopping center at kkOO Connecticut Avenue and was discharging at
    
    
    
    
    a low rate directly into the stream.  The leakage from the defec-
    
    
    
    
    tive sewer resulted in very high coliform counts in Broad Branch.
    
    
    
    
    The FC/FS ratio indicated the bacteria to be of human origin.
    
    
    
    
    Although some schools of minnows were observed, the biological
    
    
    
    
    conditions suggested mild organic pollution.
    

    -------
                                                                      13
    
    
    
    
    
    
            Lover Bock Creek in the District of Columbia:  The reach
    
    
    
    
    of the Creek extending from Piney Branch to the mouth shows high
    
    
    
    
    counts of coliforms, fecal coliforms, and fecal streptococci.
    
    
    
    
    The contribution of urban runoff caused by storms cannot be
    
    
    
    
    entirely separated from the effects of periodic discharges of
    
    
    
    
    combined storm and sewage flows into Rock Creek below Piney
    
    
    
    
    Branch.  The CFS sampling on August 15 occurred shortly after
    
    
    
    
    an appreciable shower, and the increase in coliform count for
    
    
    
    
    two miles downstream from Piney Branch was clearly evide'nt.  At
    
    
    
    
    M Street the biological survey indicated severe organic pollu-
    
    
    
    
    tion, and the high incidence of surfactants suggested this pollu-
    
    
    
    
    tion to be of domestic origin.
    
    
    
    
            The high fecal counts at the ford below the zoo 'are evi-
    
    
    
    
    dence of pollution by warm-blooded animals, with the lower sur-
    
    
    
    
    factant level indicating a lesser contribution of domestic wastes.
    
    
    
    
    The National Zoological Park has initiated corrective action to
    
    
    
    
    control discharge of sanitary wastes into Rock Creek, but there
    
    
    
    
    are outdoor exhibit areas, paved and unpaved, from which surface
    
    
    
    
    discharges eventually reach the watercourses.
    
    
    
            At the time of inspection, piles of bedding and 'animal
    
    
    
    
    wastes were observed on the ground at the Park Police stables
    
    
    
    
    at Connecticut Avenue, and there was evidence of movement of
    
    
    
    
    these wastes toward and into the Creek.   Drainage from the park-
    
    
    
    
    ing lot, corral, and stable discharges into Rock Creek.  '
    

    -------
            A seepage of dark and obviously septic liquid was enter-
    
    
    
    
    ing the Creek under the north abutment of the highway bridge
    
    
    
    
    leading to the tunnel, approximately 200 feet north of the Calvert
    
    
    
    
    Street Bridge during the initial survey, but it had stopped flow-
    
    
    
    
    ing on later observations.
    
    
    
    
            The bacteriological and chemical samples taken near the
    
    
    
    
    Slash Run Interceptor, south of P Street in Washington, D. C.,
    
    
    
    
    were extremely high in fecal bacteria, phosphorus, chlorides, and
    
    
    
    
    ammonia, and biological samples indicated the presence of only
    
    
    
    
    pollution-tolerant and intermediate forms.  Visual observation
    
    
    
    
    of particulate human fecal and attendant matter, coupled with
    
    
    
    
    olfactory evidence, confirmed severe pollution by sanitary sewage.
    
    
    
    
    Flow was observed from the Interceptor during early sampling,
    
    
    
    
    but it had stopped on later observations.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    C.  EXISTING POLLUTION ABATEMENT PROGRAMS
    
    
    
    
    1.  Erosion
    
    
    
    
            A work plan was developed in 1962 for the upper Rock
    
    
    
    
    Creek Watershed as a joint operation by Montgomery County, the
    
    
    
    
    Montgomery Soil Conservation District, and the Maryland-National
    
    
    
    
    Capital Park and Planning Commission, with the cooperation of the
    
    
    
    
    Soil Conservation and Forest Services of the United States Depart-
    
    
    
    
    ment of Agriculture.   The plan provided for park development
    
    
    
    
    along the larger watercourses with two flood control-sediment
    

    -------
                                                                      15
    trap-recreation reservoirs.  Approximately 70 per cent of the
    
    
    
    
    acreage has already been acquired; one reservoir has been com-
    
    
    
    
    pleted, and the dam for the second is under construction.  The
    
    
    
    
    completed reservoir will be operated for sediment control when
    
    
    
    
    upstream projects under development by the Soil Conservation
    
    
    
    
    Service are also in operation to prevent premature silting.  The
    
    
    
    
    flood regulatory feature is designed to reduce downstream erosion
    
    
    
    
    and augment flows, with resultant quality benefits, during low
    
    
    
    
    stream flow periods.  The work plan is revised periodically and,
    
    
    
    
    at present, construction of a chemical treatment basin is under
    
    
    
    
    way upstream from the completed reservoir on Rock Creek.  It is
    
    
    
    
    anticipated that two-thirds of the sediment can be removed by
    
    
    
    
    this means, to extend the life of the reservoir 200 per cent and
    
    
    
    
    to make the water immediately available for recreational use.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    2.  Sewerage Separation
    
    
    
    
            In the District of Columbia a substantial part of the
    
    
    
    
    Rock Creek drainage area is already served by separate storm and
    
    
    
    
    sanitary sewerage.  This is in the newly developed northwest area
    
    
    
    
    where only storm drainage discharges into Rock Creek.   In the
    
    
    
    
    older developed areas, combined sewers carry both surface and
    
    
    
    
    sanitary wastes via the trunk sewers to the District of Columbia
    
    
    
    
    Water Pollution Control Plant, from which the treated effluent is
    
    
    
    
    discharged into the Potomac River.  Construction of intercepting
    
    
    
    
    sewers has eliminated all discharges from sanitary sewers under
    

    -------
                                                                      16
    
    
    
    
    
    
    dry weather flow conditions, but overflow during heavy storm runoff
    
    
    
    
    results in discharges of diluted sanitary sewage into Rock Creek
    
    
    
    
    because of inadequate interceptor capacity.  The estimated cost
    
    
    
    
    of the sewerage separation program for the Rock Creek drainage area,
    
    
    
    
    tentatively scheduled for completion by the year 2000, is $103
    
    
    
    
    million.  This does not include diversion of stormwater drains
    
    
    
    
    from discharging into Rock Creek.  At the current rate of alloca-
    
    
    
    
    tion of funds, the separation program will not be accomplished
    
    
    
    
    according to schedule.  Even if the program were accelerated, it
    
    
    
    
    would not be possible to complete the separation in less than 20
    
    
    
    
    years without seriously disrupting the traffic arteries by con-
    
    
    
    
    struction.
    
    
    
    
            Industrial wastes and sediment runoffs are not problems
    
    
    
    
    in the District of Columbia.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    D.  POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
    
    
    
    
    1.  Erosion
    
    
    
    
            Montgomery County has pioneered in the regulation of
    
    
    
    soil erosion by formation of a Rock Creek Watershed Land Treat-
    
    
    
    
    ment Task Force in 1965-  Members to the Task Force are:  Maryland-
    
    
    
    
    National Capital Park and Planning Commission, the Montgomery
    
    
    
    
    County Council, the Montgomery Soil Conservation District, and
    
    
    
    
    the United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation
    
    
    
    
    Service.  Subdivision plans are submitted by the developers to
    
    
    
    
    the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission for
    

    -------
                                                                      17
    approval, after which the planned erosion and sediment control
    
    
    
    
    practices become a part of the Public Works Improvement Agree-
    
    
    
    
    ment under the Subdivision Regulations for Montgomery County.
    
    
    
    
    The County Department of Public Works reviews and enforces com-
    
    
    
    
    pliance with the approved plans.
    
    
    
    
            Control of soil erosion and washing of deleterious
    
    
    
    
    materials in the District of Columbia is provided for in Article
    
    
    
    
    3 of the Police Regulations, which prohibits discharge, except
    
    
    
    
    house sewers, into public sewers and requires maintenance of
    
    
    
    
    conditions so that materials cannot be washed across public pave-
    
    
    
    
    ments and sidewalks into storm drains.  The District of Columbia
    
    
    
    
    Code, Chapter 17, Harbor Regulations, Section 22-1703, specifically
    
    
    
    
    prohibits discharge of industrial wastes into Rock Creek or the
    
    
    
    
    Potomac River.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    2.  Sewerage
    
    
    
    
            The Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission has the
    
    
    
    
    authority to construct and maintain the sanitary sewerage system
    
    
    
    
    in Montgomery County.  All trunk sewers and any other sewers 15-
    
    
    
    
    inch or larger must receive the approval of the State and County
    
    
    
    
    Health Departments to assure orderly development of the area's
    
    
    
    
    comprehensive sanitary sewerage system.  In addition, the Wash-
    
    
    
    
    ington Suburban Sanitary Commission approves plans submitted for
    
    
    
    
    stormwater drainage facilities for land development projects.
    

    -------
    

    -------
                                                                      18
                            V.  BIBLIOGRAPHY
    1.  Watershed Work Plan for the Upper Rock Creek Watershed,
        Montgomery County, Maryland, August 1962.
    
    2.  Sediment Control Program for Montgomery County, Maryland,
        adopted June 1965-
    
    3.  Sewer Separation Program for Washington, D. C., Department
        of Sanitary Engineering, D. C. Government, 1966.
    
    U.  Pollutions! Effects of Stormwater and Overflows from Combined
        Sewer Systems, DWS&PC, USPHS, November 196k.
    
    5.  Comprehensive Survey, Potomac River Basin, Supplement to Vol.
        VI, Appendix F, USDA, July 1966.
    
    6.  Geldreich, E. E., Clark, H. F.,  and Huff, C. B., "A Study of
        Pollution Indicators in a Waste  Stabilization Pond," Journal
        Water Pollution Control Federation, 36, 11, 1372 (Nov.  196k)
    
    T.  Standard Methods, Water and Wastewater, llth Edition, I960.
    
    8.  Biological Survey of Rock Creek,  FWPCA, Chesapeake Bay-
        Susquehanna River Basins Project, Working Document No.  ky
        October 1966.
    

    -------
    

    -------
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CO
    o
    1
    
    CO VO
    W vo
    CO ON
    <>; ^
    
    § <1>
    « o
    r-rl i_J .LJ
    ft 3 US
    w fe ^ o
    §<|j 03 T3
    CO C
    to cd
    o o C •
    o o -P
    CG >H -3
    W ^
    hH
    pQ
    «
    EH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    H
    CO --
    < bO
    3 S
    CO
    En
    U
    fe
    CO
    j?^ |T^
    I-H 0
    < CJ CO
    o -3-
    W PM
    fc W tsl
    
    EH >
    CO W
    CO
    
    j 2 ETJ
    
    ,0
    
    S-4
    0)
    Ji
    
    CO
    
    
    C—
    •
    o
    
    
    
    
    o
    0 t-
    o' o'
    
    
    0 0
    OJ O
    OJ
    ft
    c—
    H
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    o
    LA
    ON
    
    
    
    O O
    ON O
    ON
    O
    VO
    H
    A
    
    
    
    ^
    O
    
    H
    H
    VO
    vo vo
    VD --,
    •^ ON
    ON OJ
    OO VO
    
    
    
    
    
    -P
    4) 43
    0) bO
    f-t TH
    -p ffi
    CO
    •
    ^J ^H
    h^
    J^
    cd (u
    co t>
    fl 0
    ,0
     *
    ,M 0) Ai flj
    C to u to
    cd o
    PQ K
    
    
    t— CO
    • •
    0 0
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    0*
    H
    
    O
    O
    A
    OJ
    
    
    
    
    o
    o
    o
    -=}-
    OJ
    
    
    o
    o
    o
    _^r
    OJ
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    vo
    vo
    
    ON
    CO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    a
    
    K
    
    c-f
    m
    cd
    H
    CO
    
    
    ON
    
    o
    CM
    H
    LA
    •
    H
    0 -3-
    O ON
    
    
    0 O
    O ON
    O -3
    **
    CO
    H
    ON
    
    
    
    0 O
    0 0
    O VO
    OO .3-
    H
    
    
    O O
    o o
    0 0
    ON H
    0 H
    VO
    M
    H
    A
    
    ,_,
    LA
    ^J-
    0
    H
    vo
    vo vo
    •^ vo
    ON--
    OJ H
    VO CO
    
    
    ^-^
    !-,
    
    
    to
    -P
    -P
    (D
    W
    £j
    J3
    O
    «J
    to
    to
    cd
    S
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    LA
    LA O
    VO O
    
    
    O O
    0 0
    ft ft
    LA OJ
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    O H
    O H
    LA
    OO
    
    
    0 O
    o o
    o oo
    _jT r-J"
    LA
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    vo vo
    vo vo
    — ^ *•*. ^
    OJ CO
    CO CO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    •p
    CO
    0)
    
    -p
    CO
    
    -p
    £_f
    0)
    £>
    H
    03
    U
    
    
    vo
    
    OJ
    

    -------
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    *•— •.
    f^
    
    CO W
    CO
    
    ^^1 p*j ?TJ
    < 0
    U Pt< -J'
    W M CM
    fr, i-3
    o o
    0 H
    
    «
    re c5 co
    o pq re
    Pn W
    M pt,
    1-3 s oo
    o o -=t
    o o
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    M pr"]
    EH °8 S
    
    Q &H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    £*J
    o
    H
    EH
    
    O
    3
    
    ftj
    fe
    §
    CO
    
    
    
    
    
    re co
    ^> 1 *|
    ti 11
    re S
    
    
    
    
    LA H
    O t—
    
    o o
    o o
    co o
    -=)• ON
    00 ^t
    
    
    
    
    o o
    o o
    LA O
    c— co
    rH -*
    oo
    
    o o
    0 O
    ON O
    O CO
    VO -3"
    H 00
    A
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    vo
    vo vo
    vo -^
    "s^ l/\
    ON rH
    co co
    
    
    o
    o
    
    
    £_j
    OJ
    Jj
    o
    rH
    
    ^
    O
    H
    0)
    
    •
    £
    O
    o
    CM
    Tl
    a rH
    •H O
    cd Vi
    Q
    
    f-
    CM
    LA-J-
    — 1" j I
    -— J nn
    o o
    
    
    -3- VO
    0 H
    
    O O
    CM O
    LA CM
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    0 0
    O ON
    CM OO
    
    
    
    0 O
    O O
    ON O
    O H
    VO CM
    H
    A
    
    
    
    
    
    * — X S-^
    LA O
    -J" -3"
    O O
    H H
    S^X **~-S
    
    \O VD
    MD VD
    --^ **^_
    H CM
    CM CM
    VO VO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    O
    co
    g
    H
    OJ
    
    T)
    
    O
    
    t-
    CM
    
    
    
    
    _=f OJ
    -*' oo
    
    o o
    o o
    ON O
    C- OJ
    t-
    H
    
    
    
    O O
    0 0
    co o
    -3" CM
    00 J-
    l/\
    
    O O
    O 0
    CO O
    H CM
    LA
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    VO
    VO VO
    vo \
    ^ IA
    ON H
    OO CO
    -P
    O
    rH
    
    hO
    a
    •H
    *^
    L^
    ni
    ft
    
    O
    o
    co
    
    •H
    H
    a u
    2 §
    •o -p
    
    r^ ^_,
    O 0}
    •H a
    CO
    
    o
    OO
    
    
    
    
    VO
    H
    
    O
    O
    ON
    O
    rH
    
    
    
    
    o
    O
    LA
    c-
    rH
    
    
    O
    O
    ON
    O
    vo
    H
    A
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    VO
    vo
    •""•^
    ON
    CO
    
    O
    O
    co
    
    «H
    o
    
    rg
    a
    0)
    
    f<
    -p
    
    o a
    a -H
    
    r^ rH
    0) -H
    § "°
    H
    d) O
    ho a
    
    0) -p
    CO
    
    CM
    oo
    
    
    
    co
    o o
    0 rH
    
    o o
    o o
    CM O
    -3- O\
    LA -Zj"
    
    
    
    
    0 O
    o o
    CM 0
    J- ON
    -3-
    
    
    O O
    0 O
    ON O
    O O
    VO -*
    H OJ
    A
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    VO
    vo vo
    VO "x^-
    -^s^ {f\
    ON H
    co co
    
    1
    o
    a>
    [0
    ^
    
    a
    •$ ^
    V cS
    ^H O
    o re
    
    O (-1
    o 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    c-^-
    
    0
    o
    o
    0
    oo
    H
    
    
    
    0
    o
    o
    OO
    H
    ON
    
    O
    O
    O
    ON
    0
    VO
    f
    rH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    VO
    vo
    "-x^
    LT\
    H
    CO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    £_i
    Q)
    >
    01
    CO
    
    a
    0) -P
    *** D
    ° £
    ^Q ^-3
    CO
    
    § T!
    {•H Cd
    pp 3
    0)
    oS H
    
    S
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    r-
    rH
    
    o
    o
    o
    ON
    c-
    
    
    
    
    o
    o
    o
    o
    oo
    H
    
    O
    o
    o
    o"
    CM
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    VO
    VO
    ' 	 s^
    LT\
    H
    CO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    £-4
    OJ
    
    0)
    w
    
    S -P
    
    ° £
    CQ «M
    CO
    
    § Tl
    JH cd
    PQ ^
    (U
    «i H
    
    rH
    
    
    
    

    -------
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    x— s
    r(J
    OJ
    J3
    G
    W -P
    W G
    W O
    PH O
    O ^— "
    
    fc*H
    O
    O H
    K
    
    I *)
    PH
    
    EH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    H
    CQ \
    <£ tiC
    J S
    CQ
    
    O
    fe
    CQ
    s a5
    J 0
     S
    M M
    « S
    ON
    •H/
    OJ
    
    
    NO UN
    H H
    H
    
    CO O
    NO OO
    00
    
    
    
    
    O O
    ON ON.
    t— j-
    
    
    
    
    O o
    0 0
    -=)• -&
    M *
    CM CM
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ,*— «»,
    t—
    H
    O
    H
    •*—**•
    
    vo
    *\O VD \O
    \o vo *****».
    "^x """x OO
    CM CM H
    
    CO CO O
    H
    
    
    1
    O (1)
    §
    >j O O
    
    0) O co pq
    0) -H 'tJ
    o o oJ > C
    •H
    0 TT, O PH
    0 0
    PH H
    CM OJ
    J- ,^-
    ^
    ON
    O
    
    OJ
    O O
    O i— I
    
    
    O O
    ON O
    t- O
    **
    ON
    
    
    OO O
    H 0
    O
    A
    ON
    "*
    
    O O
    -3- O
    OJ O
    « «
    UN O
    00
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    s~*
    OJ
    OJ
    o
    H
    «. — *
    
    VO VO
    V£> VO V£)
    VO ~^~^
    ^^ UNCO
    ON H H
    
    CO OO O
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    0)
    H
    •H
    -P
    
    G
    •H
    <&
    IH
    ^
    
    A
    O
    C
    oJ
    FH
    
    ^»
    (1)
    
    •H
    
    
    -*'
    CO LTN t—
    UN CM t—
    0 O 00
    * • *
    
    H C^
    O t--
    1-1
    
    0 0
    -X OJ
    H OJ
    
    
    
    
    O O
    OJ O
    V t~-
    M
    H
    
    
    O O
    0 0
    H O
    * ft
    oj oo
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ^— N *~- -x x— >.
    O O -=!•
    OJ H OJ
    H H O
    H rH H
    »— " •»*—'• **-^*
    
    VO VO VD
    VO VO VO
    "****«. "***•*, >x*s.
    H OJ CO
    OJ OJ H
    
    vo vo o
    H
    
    
    A
    *
    P-t
    
    ( — |
    H
    •H
    s
    
    Q)
    0
    »H
    (U
    •H
    PH
    
    0>
    
    0
    cd ^"J
    cd
    H O
    0 P5
    O
    PH
    t—
    -*'
    UN CO OJ
    OJ t-- OO
    0 O OJ
    
    
    C— O CO ON
    \O UN CO V£>
    H OJ
    
    OO O O CO
    t— _=t CO t—
    H
    
    
    
    
    O O O O
    o o o o
    00 t- t- H
    M **
    H OJ
    
    
    O O O O
    o o o o
    ON 00 H O
    ft * * *
    -3- 00 CM H
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ^~* ^-^ ^-^
    UN O t—
    -* OO O
    rH H O
    H H H
    *^-* *— •* •«— ^
    
    vo vo NO
    VO VO *^3 VO NO
    vo ^^ ^~vo —
    ^-. H CM -^.OO
    H CM CM H H
    ~~-^ ***^ "^^ "*^ ^"^
    CO NO NO CO O
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
     PH
    <^
    G r?
    (U 
    t»0 -H
    (d H
    H -H
    PH 2
    ON CO
    -^j- NO
    OO UN O
    00 ON ON
    o o oo
    
    
    OO OONO
    o o o
    
    
    O 0 O
    t— CO O
    ON
    *
    o
    H
    
    
    o o o
    OJ CM O
    V V -3-
    r*
    NO
    
    
    O 0 0
    o o o
    00 H ON
    ft ft f>
    OJ OO O
    \Q
    H
    A
    
    
    
    
    ^— "* ^-^ * — s
    O UN UN
    o j- j-
    OJ H -3-
    H H H
    •»^^ N 	 J V 	 X
    
    V£) VD VO
    vo vo vo
    *****%. *****.. ^^»
    H OJ ON
    CM CM CM
    
    NO NO NO
    
    0}
    0)
    
    OJ
    0
    •H
    G
    o
    •H
    PH
    
    -P
    Hi
    0>
    
    •H
    
    Q
    
    H
    H
    •H
    
    J_j
    0)
    X!
    CQ
    H
    CO
    
    
    
    
    
    00
    o
    
    
    o
    o
    oo
    ft
    1-1
    
    
    0
    oo
    00
    
    
    
    
    o
    oo
    H
    A
    ON
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    NO
    NO
    "-•^
    CO
    --v^
    CO
    
    
    
    *M
    0
    -p
    03
    0)
    
    
    •p
    03
    
    *-J
    ^fj
    o
    §v<
    0)
    
    PQ f-i
    o
    O 4^
    •H O
    > o
    G PH
    OJ
    
    oo
    *
    ON
    

    -------
    O
    o
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    X— fc
    •d
    
    CO W
    &K
    *i K a
    <: o
    C_> PH J"
    
    pr, |_^
    O O
    o w
    
    3
    ffi O C/3
    gpq ffi
    a
    M Pn
    i_3 £; CO
    O O -=}•
    O U
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    w w
    < M
    O EH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    S!
    0
    M
    EH
    
    O
    s
    a
    *g*
    ^
    CO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    K CO
    rvi M
    > a
    M M
    « S
    O OO VO CM
    t— VO H O
    O O OO H
    
    OO IAOOVQ LT\ l/N ITN
    OOOCMOOOOOOO
    rH CM
    
    
    OOOOOOOO
    OOl— OOOt— ONOOO
    CM CM H H -3- 00 O
    ft M
    CM t—
    H
    
    
    
    OOOOOOOO
    OOOONOCMI/NO
    
    A A A A
    IT\ PO r-H CO
    
    
    
    OOOOOOOO
    OOOOOCOOOO
    OOCM ONJ' ir\Jtj' o
    vo -*
    H
    A
    
    
    
    
    ^-x *~* *~^ *~*
    ir\ LA o o
    o o oo tr>
    oo CM J- ON
    H H H O
    vo vo vo vo vo
    VO VO VO VO VO VO VO VO VO
    ~v» --N, ~~xVO VO VO VO ' — *•>.
    H CM ON "•>, • — ""x. ^»» IfN CO
    CMCMCMHCMCOONrHH
    
    vovovocococococo o
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    cu
    bO
    -d
    •H
    PQ
    CD
    a
    •H
    J
    
    -p
    o
    •rl
    -p
    CO
    •H
    Q
    
    
    o
    o
    H
    ON
    ON
    0
    
    oo
    o'
    
    
    
    0
    o
    D —
    
    
    
    
    
    
    0
    o
    CM
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    O
    0
    oo
    rH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    *~^
    O
    CM
    -=r
    H
    \o
    ^o
    ON
    CM
    
    VO
    
    1
    cu
    CO
    
    0
    fi
    
    £.4
    cu
    -p -p
    H 0)
    0) 
    rH 'd
    ^H O
    h O
    (U [S
    ^
    0
    
    
    t-
    o
    H
    O H
    -3" ^O
    o o
    
    H O H H -=f
    0 CM 0 CM O
    
    
    
    O O O OO O
    CO CM O VO O
    H t— O O
    A A A A
    CT\ rH OO t—
    H H
    
    
    
    O O O O O
    o o o -a- o
    CO -d" I/N H O
    A A A
    00 H C—
    
    
    
    O O O O O
    O O O O O
    co co ON oo o
    -3- H O H 00
    ONVO OO
    H
    A
    
    
    
    
    ^— X ,^~x ^^
    o o o
    CM -=r o
    oo 00.3-
    rH H H
    vo vo vo vo
    vo vo vo vo vo
    H CM ON -~-- l/N
    CM CM CM H H
    Xx^_ *x^ x,^ x^^ x,^^
    VO VO VO CO CO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1
    4
    •H
    a
    
    -p
    CO
    0)
    1
    -p
    CO
    0)
    
    
    
    rH
    H
    rH
    CM
    t —
    0
    
    ONVO co o
    O rH O H
    
    
    
    O O O O
    CM ON CM O
    V t— t— O
    A A
    rH 00
    OO
    
    
    
    CO O O O
    rH O O O
    oo oo o
    A A A
    H H 00
    OO
    
    
    O O O O
    ON co co O
    -J- _* _=!• O
    oo oo oo
    oo
    
    
    
    
    
    
    t 	 X
    C—
    oo
    ON
    o
    vo vo
    vo vo vo vo vo
    VO VO VO ^^
    	 	 ,-^x. ITNOO
    H OO ON H H
    
    CO CO CO CO O
    H
    
    H
    •H
    S
    
    CO
    CU ' — x
    fl cu
    0 >
    t-0 -H
    -P O
    0)
    §1
    K CU
    PH
    
    •H
    H -d
    cu cd
    pl O
    & PH
    o
    o
    
    
    oo
    H
    H
    
    
    
    
    O rH
    rH C—
    
    
    
    O O
    0 0
    t— OO
    A A
    rH H
    
    
    
    
    O O
    CM CO
    t— H
    A A
    H ON
    
    
    
    O O
    0 0
    O O
    VO -3
    rH CM
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    VO VO
    VO VO
    "-^ ***s«^
    oo ON
    ^\ "-w^
    co oo
    
    -p
    o
    •H
    -P
    0
    CU
    a
    a
    o
    o
    -p
    03
    «
    
    a cu
    •H 3
    H G
    CU 
    O* ^ -»^
    co oo
    
    
    -p
    CO
    cu
    
    i
    -P
    en
    cd
    
    cd
    «
    r*S
    c! cd
    •H &
    «•§)
    3 *H
    O^ W
    o
    0
    LTN
    H
    OO
    H
    H
    

    -------
    

    -------
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    y — s
    •d
    0)
    
    c
    i*3 "H
    W -P
    w a
    K 0
    O CJ
    
    W
    CJ
    O rH
    «
    
    3
    5
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    H
    CQ "^~
    
    CQ W
    CO
    s§ K
    < o
    o fa -=r
    W H CM
    fa t~P
    O O
    CJ W
    
    pq
    ^ ^
    PH O CO
    o PQ «
    fa W
    M fa
    t-3 !=3 CO
    00-4-
    0 CJ
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    £3 r-fi
    EH 08 g
    
    Q EH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    <^
    0
    M
    EH
    
    CJ
    s
    
    g
    
    ^1
     (J
    M M
    « S
    
    
    
    
    
    -3"
    CM
    
    
    O
    H
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    0
    VO
    OJ
    
    
    
    
    
    0
    o
    CM
    O\
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    vo
    vo
    H
    co
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    0)
    c
    0)
    >
    
    c
    o
    -p
    a
    •H
    w
    
     	 ^ ^^^ —
    
    ^O V^ VO
    VO VO VO VD
    ~^ ^^^~vo
    CM OJ OJ H
    V£> VO VO CO
    
    
    
    ^
    QJ
    ^_!
    U
    
    v{
    O
    O
    
    %
    
    
    CO
    
    
    
    
    0 0 O
    OO OO O
    00 00 OO
    «\
    oo
    
    
    
    o o o
    CM H O
    1— CM O
    H CM 00
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    s~~*.
    H
    OO
    O\
    0
    ^^
    
    VO ^O
    MD VO VO VO
    VO VO ^-^~.
    CO O\ H H
    COCO CO O
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    vo ON
    O oo
    
    
    0 0
    oo oo
    H OO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CO O
    c— o
    oo
    *
    H
    
    
    
    o o
    0 O
    oo _=r
    H OJ
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    VO V£>
    vo vo
    H OJ
    CO OO
    
    
    
    
    ^
    0
    •p
    •H
    T)
    
    ffi
    M
    b^ CJ
    i a
    OJ
    QJ r*
    rt <£
    3
    0)
    
    o3 *j
    Tj O
    (1) C
    CJ W
    
    -^t 00
    
    LTN t^-
    rH rH
    ;o
    oo
    o
    
    
    co co
    oo o
    
    
    O 0
    oo t—
    rH rH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    o oo
    ir\ H
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    o oo
    t— oo
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    . — »
    0
    rH
    
    H
    <^^f
    
    VD
    V£5 VO
    \VQ
    CM CM
    VO CO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    •d
    oj
    0
    
    i~)
    f— 
    
    CM
    
    H
    CM
    H
    oo
    0
    
    
    V£> \£>
    H O
    
    
    O O
    oo oo
    rH OO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O 0
    rH O
    CM CM
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    VO O
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    f — v
    0
    OO
    _^J-
    H
    v 	 *
    
    ^O
    V£> VO
    V£> ^s.
    OJ CM
    CO VO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    T)
    cd
    O Tlf
    PH Cd
    o
    o
    (U r*>
    O J_j
    J-i (L)
    O >
    a <:
    
    H CO
    9 0
    oo oo
    CM CM
    
    
    
    
    
    H
    O
    
    
    O
    t—
    rH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    0
    CM
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    0\
    J-
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    V£)
    
    CM
    CO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    t-- H
    t— rH
    
    
    0 0
    t— 0
    H H
    «
    CM
    
    
    
    
    0 O
    0 0
    00 J"
    * #1
    H CM
    
    
    
    0 0
    O O
    00 _=f
    rH IT\
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    VQ VO
    VO VO
    CM CM
    CO CO
    cd
    O
    K
    
    0)
    -p
    U3
    cd
    o
    r*
    ^
    
    13
    
    t^
    0
    0)
    o
    
    ^
    fj
    o
    «
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    VO
    OO
    
    
    oo
    ON
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    oo
    oo
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    o
    oo
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    V£>
    
    CM
    CO
    
    oj
    O
    «
    T3
    0
    O
    >
    
    0)
    £
    
    $
    
    1^
    d)
    (U
    O
    
    oj
    Q
    O
    K
    
    
    
    
    
    

    -------
    

    -------
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    en
    1
    
    CO
    * w
    O CO
    >H
    ^
    
    Cd a
    E3 •> 3
    5^3 . ^"^
    PJ p^j
    0 8 §
    WO PS
    OB O
    0 H W
    P"*^ |*y* p [
    CQ CO
    < 0
    M |
    ^ Q
    M W £*«
    OH O ^
    Q
    OH a
    ^J PH W
    53 « O
    o o
    r | r j p*"
    O W EH
    P-i W H
    EH
    CO
    & CM'
    1
    EH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    HH
    aJ >-.
    "o a
    EH
    O H
    
    O
    &
    
    bO H
    O W
    cs a
    H
    
    £3
     ON
    > H
    
    
    
    O VO CO
    CO H OO
    
    
    ON CM LA
    H H H
    
    
    VO CM CO
    CO H -^
    ON co ON
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    -X O
    CO CO CM
    ON O OO
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CM CM 00
    O O O
    O O O
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CO CM
    CM H
    
    
    
    
    CO O LA
    H CM CM
    
    1 1 1
    
    H H H
    
    
    
    t- H O O VO
    CO-* LA C— CO
    
    
    -=r LA t— ON LA
    CM CM H CO H
    
    
    OO CM H O CO
    LA CO CM CM OO
    ON LA H t— H
    H H H H H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    OO CM
    OO OO CO LA C—
    LA CM O CM ON
    H H H H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CM CM
    O O H CO
    O O O Q O
    O O O a O
    V
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    t- O -3 t- H
    CO CO O -* CM
    
    
    
    
    O\ O VO COCO
    H H CM CM
    
    1 1 1 1 1
    
    CM CM CM CM CM
    
    
    
    J- CM -* CM
    CM CO H H
    
    
    LA ON t— VO
    H H O O
    
    
    t— CM H H
    LA CO VO LA
    CM-* CO OO
    H H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O ON t- ON
    CM H t- t-
    H H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    H CM H H
    0000
    O O O O
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    vo -* ONVO
    O CM O O
    
    
    
    
    ONVO co o
    H CM CO
    
    1 1 1 1
    
    CO CO CO CO
    
    
    
    CM VO O
    H CO LA
    
    
    t- LA t—
    O H H
    
    
    OO-3- OO
    CM VO t-
    VO CO t—
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    -* -* VO
    LA t— VO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CO-* CO
    O O H
    O O O
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    OO CM O
    O H H
    
    
    t—
    rH
    i
    VO -* O
    CM
    0
    1 -P 1
    
    -* H ~t
    H
    1
    ,^
    H -* 00 CO
    LA CM CM CO
    
    
    OH H
    CM H -*
    
    
    LA LA H
    -* VO H
    CO t— CO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CO OO O
    t- LA t—
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    LA LA H
    H CO CM
    0 O O
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    LA O ON
    OHO
    
    
    CO
    1
    LA O CO LA
    H H CM
    O
    •Pill
    
    CM LA LA LA
    
    1
    LA
    

    -------
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    VQ
    VQ
    ON
    rH
    ON
    
    rH
    0)
    fQ
    o
    -p
    o
    w o
    p£|
    W 1
    K
    O *
    CO
    w w
    O M
    O EH
    K H
    
    H
    ffl
    
    
    EH
    
    
    •
    O^
    
    J
    9
    EH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    EH
    O
    M
    PQ
    EH
    H
    *?
    M
    EH
    >H
    EH
    H
    Q
    M
    pq
    «
    =8
    H
    §
    M
    EH
    
    >H
    EH
    M
    Q
    M
    S
    
    £n
    
    08
    
    rvi
    5*
    H
    EH
    
    
    
    >H
    EH
    M
    Q
    M
    
    BH
    \ i
    EH
    °8
    r-r-T
    *ij
    M
    EH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    s
    O
    M
    EH
    O
    s
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    OJ
    
    
    o
    o
    OJ
    H
    
    
    ITN
    t—
    
    
    
    O
    o
    0
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    I—
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    o
    CO
    0
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    0
    vo
    
    
    
    
    o
    rH
    VO
    0
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    rtf
    o3
    o
    K
    r?
    crJ
    -p
    •H
    , — |
    •H
    s
    
    
    VO CO
    ON OJ
    
    ir\ t—
    o o
    OJ OJ
    rH H
    
    
    I/N CO
    CO OJ
    
    
    
    IT\ t—
    0 O
    0 O
    H H
    
    
    
    
    
    OJ CO
    co rn
    
    
    
    
    
    LTN t —
    rH rH
    CO CO
    O O
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    l/> LfN
    t— m
    
    
    
    
    O LP>
    OJ OJ
    vo vo
    o o
    
    
    TJ O
    cd o
    O K
    £4
    pq a)
    ^>
     
    r^
    ^) a3
    o a
    o
    K
    
    
    CO
    ON
    
    O
    OJ
    OJ
    H
    
    
    CO
    t —
    
    
    
    O
    OJ
    0
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    ON
    
    
    
    
    
    LfN
    CO
    CO
    o
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    t—
    CO
    
    
    
    
    0
    UA
    VO
    o
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    o
    tS]
    
    o
    -p
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    •
    s~*
    £
    
    -P
    
    EJ
    •H
    X
    O
    
    p.]
    Qj
    
    ^
    
    -------
    

    -------
                                                                   1-1
                               APPENDIX 1
    
                   INVENTORY OF ALL DRAINS, CULVERTS
                     AND PIPES ENTERING ROCK CREEK
    
       (Includes D. C. Combined Sewer Outfalls Previously Listed)
    Rock Creek from M Street Bridge to below Massachusetts Avenue Bridge
    
         Al.  100 yards above M Street Bridge stone culvert 3 feet
              diameter—dry.  West bank.  D. C. overflow No. 1. Olive
              Street extended.
    
         A2.  200 yards above M Street.  East side.  Drop culvert dis-
              charging 6/17/66.  Has been cut off since.  This is D. C.
              Sewer No. 3.  N Street.
    
         A3.  UOO yards above M Street Bridge.  Street drain.  Dry.
              West side.
    
         A.k.  U50 yards above M Street.  Large box culvert connected to
              sewer manhole; no discharge.
    
         A5.  Large manhole on west bank.
    
         A6.  100 yards downstream at "P Street Beach"—12-inch culvert
              built into abutment.  No discharge.  East side.
    
         AT.  8-foot diameter pipe with invert below water.  Discharging
              a grayish material.  This is Slash Run interceptor.  Flow-
              ing 6/17/66; has been effectively cut off since August 1.
    
         A8.  100 feet below P Street Bridge 1 1/2 x 2 foot culvert set
              in stone abutment; no flow.  East bank.  Storm drain.
    
         A9-  F Street sewer—discharging under a nicely designed outlet
              structure which conceals flow.  East bank on upstream side
              of P Street Bridge.  This is D. C. Sewer No. 7.  Northwest
              Boundary Trunk Sewer.
    
        A10.  1 1/2 x 2 foot culvert, west side, 50 yards above P Street
              Bridge.  No drainage.
    
        All.  Q Street Bridge—dry culvert, west side.  D. C. overflow
              No. 26.
    
        A12.  Several drain pipes on west of stream through retaining
              wall.  No flow observed.
    

    -------
                                                                   1-2
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
        A13-  Several drains in east side draining flat park area.  No
              flow observed.
    
        AlU.  Dam below Massachusetts Avenue Bridge.
    Rock Creek from Dam below Massachusetts Avenue Bridge and proceeding
      upstream to ford at south side of National Zoological Park
    
         Bl.  2-foot drain and overflow pipe west bank 50 feet above dam.
              Pipe dry.  Dam at Dumbarton Oaks Park Creek.  Confluence.
    
         B2.  4-inch pipe over overflow from powerhouse (?).  Both dry.
              100 feet above dam.  East bank.
    
         B3.  Storm runoff 200 feet above dam.  East bank.
    
         BU.  D. C. Sewer No. 21.  West bank.
    
         B5.  2 1/2-foot drain 150 feet above  dam;  clear water flowing.
              West bank.
    
         B6.  Storm runoff 100 feet south of Massachusetts Avenue Bridge.
              West bank.
    
         B7.  Three storm drain pipes 6-8 inches draining Massachusetts
              Avenue Bridge, east bank.
    
         B8.  18-inch storm drain 150 yards above Massachusetts Avenue
              Bridge, east bank.
    
         B9.  2-foot pipe 300 yards south Sewer Ho.  2k.  West bank.   Pipe
              3/U submerged in creek.
    
        BIO.  6-inch pipe, continuous flow, water clear.   No visible sign
              of sewage.  300 yards south of D. C. Sewer No. 28. East bank.
    
        Bll.  18-inch storm drain 250 yards south of Sewer No. 28.  Dry.
              East bank.
    
        B12.  Normanstone Creek.
    
        B13.  D. C. Sewer No. 28.
    
        BlU.  10-inch storm drain.  East bank.  Dry.
    

    -------
                                                               1-3
    
    
                     APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    
    
    B15.  D. C. Sewer No. 29-
    
    Bl6.  D. C. Sewer No. 9-
    
    BIT.  Storm drain 200 yards south of D. C. Sewer No. 30. East bank.
    
    B18.  D. C. Sewer No. 30.
    
    B19.  18-inch storm drain east bank across from D. C. Sewer No. 30.
    
    B20.  l8-inch storm drain east bank above D. C. Sewer No. 30.
    
    B21.  Small stream 75 yards above D. C. Sewer No. 30.  West bank.
          Light flow, slightly cloudy, sewage smell and visible sewage.
    
    B22.  D. C. Sewer No. 10.
    
    B23.  75 yards above 10, 12-inch pipe, dry.  West bank.
    
    B2l*.  Open sewer 100 yards above Sewer No. 10, west bank.  Light
          flow.  Green colored pool at mouth.  This may be corral
          washings from Park Police stable.
    
    B25.  9-inch pipe 300 feet south of Sewer No. 31.  West bank.  Dry.
    
    B26.  Storm drain Connecticut Avenue Bridge.  West bank, dry.
    
    B27-  Drainage from Park Police stables enters on east side on
          downstream side of Connecticut Avenue Bridge.  Evidence of
          manure and stableage materials entering Rock Creek from a
          parking lot drain was found.
    
    B28.  D. C. Sewer No. 11.
    
    B29.  D. C. Sewer No. 31.
    
    B30.  25 feet above Sewer No. 31 dry gully, strong sewage odor,
          east bank.
    
    B31.  D. C. Sewer No. 12.
    
    B32.  ll*-inch storm drain above stable bridge dry.  West bank.
    
    B33.  Storm drain, dry, 100 yards above Sewer No. 12, west bank.
    

    -------
                                                                   l-U
    
    
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
        B3U.  100 yards above Sewer No. 1? (A) Extremely heavy ground
              seepage; (B) U-inch pipe continuous flow, east bank.  This
              is a surface stream which flows behind a retaining wall and
              is discharged into Rock Creek.
    
        B35.  Storm drain, dry, Calvert Street Bridge. West bank.
    
        B36.  100 feet above Calvert Street Bridge storm drain, dry,
              east bank.
    
        B37.  Storm drain by tunnel bridge slow flow.   East bank.
    
        B38.  Center foundation of tunnel bridge.  East bank broken sewer
              source.  Bottom seep in stream bed.  This has been sampled.
              This has been cut off and has not been observed recently.
    
        B39.  75 yards below ford, dry storm drain, east bank.
    Rock Creek from National Zoological Park, West Bank, below Ford to
      Porter Street
    
         Cl.  Zoo Sewer 12—Steady flow, oily, 5-foot pipe.
    
         C2.  Zoo Sewer 5—18-inch pipe flowing.
    
         C3.  Zoo Sewer 3—Culvert 3-foot diameter flowing has been sampled.
    
         C4.  Zoo Sewer 2—12-inch pipe flowing.
    
         C5.  Zoo Sewer k—Effluent smelly, partially closed by silt.
    
         C6.  Zoo Sewer 6—18-inch pipe corrugated heavy flow, yellow color.
    
         C7.  Zoo Sewer 13—Runoff storm drain, oily water,  drains parking
              lot.
    
         C8.  Zoo Sewer Ik—Flowing, storm runoff from parking lot.
    
         C9.  Zoo Sewer 15—Flowing, 8-inch iron pipe, cantilevered k feet,
              duck pond drain.  Heavy flow.
    
        CIO.  Zoo Sewer 16—Parking lot runoff, oily plus trash.
    
        Cll.  Zoo Sewer 17—Oily, trash, no flow.
    

    -------
    

    -------
                                                                   1-5
    
    
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    
    
        C12.  Runoff from Zoo parking lot, 8-inch pipe, dry.
    
        CIS.  Zoo Sewer 1—Culvert at Harvard Street Bridge, flowing.
    
        ClU.  1-foot pipe, dry.
    
        C15.  Storm drain, nearly closed.
    
        Cl6.  10-inch pipe, slightly running, heavy oil.
    
        C17-  Zoo Sewer 7—1-foot pipes, minor flow.
    
        Cl8.  Zoo Sewer 8—1-foot pipes, minor flow.
    
        C19.  Zoo Sewer 9—1-foot pipes, minor flow.
    
        C20.  Zoo storm drain, garage, oil.
    
        C21.  Zoo Sewer 10—Extreme amount of sewage on the creek bank.
    
        C22.  Storm drain, runoff, dry.
    
        C23.  Stream, very light flow.
    
        C2it.  Stream, light flow, clear, next to Sewer 32.
    
        C25.  D. C. Sewer 32, flowing, estimate 0.2-0.5 cfs.  Has been
              sampled.  This is the largest observed overflow and is from
              a supposedly plugged sewer.
    
        C26.  12-inch drain running sewage.  (East bank through to Klingle
              Road)
    
    
    Rock Creek from National Zoological Park, East Bank from Ford to
      Porter Street Bridge
    
         Dl.  150 yards above ford, 10-inch pipe, no visible flow.  East
              bank Zoo ford to Porter Street.
    
         D2.  Storm drain 50 feet from start of wall filled with silt.
    
         D3.  Storm drain 100 yards north of start of wall.
    
         Dh.  Storm drain 150 yards north of start of wall.
    

    -------
                                                                   1-6
    
    
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    
    
         D5.  Storm drain 200 yards north of start of wall.
    
         D6.  25 feet south Sewer 13.  Storm drain dry.
    
         D7.  D. C. Sewer 13.
    
         D8.  2-foot storm drain 50 feet south of Zoo bridge, dry.
    
         D9.  D. C. Sewer Ik.
    
        D10.  Storm drain 25 feet south of Sewer 15, running, high iron
              content.
    
        Dll.  D. C. Sewer 15-
    
        D12.  Storm drain 100 feet north Sewer 15, dry.
    
        D13.  D. C. Sewer l6.
    
        Dll*.  D. C. Sewer 1?.
    
        D15.  300 yards north of D. C. Sewer 17 storm drain, dry.
    
        Dl6,  500 yards north of Sewer 17 storm drain, dry.
    
        D17.  600 yards north of Sewer 17 storm drain, dry.
    
        Dl8.  650 yards north of Sewer 17 storm drain, dry.
    
        D19.  750 yards north of Sewer 17 storm drain, dry.
    Soapstone Creek, Tributary of Rock Creek, West Side in Park, from
      32nd and Albemarle Street downstream
    
         El.  5-foot sewer line head of Soapstone Creek.  Pool below mouth
              of sewer covered with scum, soapsuds, paper, and miscellane-
              ous materials not surface runoff type.  Odor of sewage
              noticeable.
    
         E2.  200 feet below mouth of sewer, it-inch pipe, steady flow,
              water clear, possibly from apartment building.
    
         E3.  50 feet below No. 2 same as above.
    

    -------
                                                                   1-7
    
    
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
         EU.  H-foot sewer crossing creek, broken in one area.  Raw sewage
              leaking out.  A gray mossy growth commonly found in sewage
              was observed in Soapstone Creek downstream from this point.
    
         E5.  18-inch sewer, slight flow with evidence of sewage; signs
              of heavy flow at times.
    
         E6.  3-foot pipe, heavy flow, water looks clear.  Just below apart-
              ment building.  This flow comes from the west under Connecticut
              Avenue.
    
         ET.  Two 1-foot pipes, ground seepage.  Just below apartment building.
    
         E8.  Small creek from spring, appears to be clean.
    
         E9-  Small creek from 18-inch pipe under building under construc-
              tion, water slightly cloudy.  Evidence of iron content at
              mouth of pipe.
    
        E10.  Small creek, water clear, spring source probable.
    
        Ell.  Runoff from street, dry.
    
        E12.  2-foot pipe near end Audubon Terrace Drive, slight flow.
              Water clear.
    
        E13.  75 feet below No. 12 small stream, water clear.  Opposite
              No. 13, ground seepage from concrete block, strong odor of
              s ewage pre s ent.
    
        ElU.  18-inch pipe, possible runoff, dry.
    
    MelvinC. Kazan Park Creek.  From Connecticut Avenue downstream
    
         Fl.  Oil flowing out with spring water.  Hearsay evidence indi-
              cates that this oil was spilled at the Broadmoor Apartments
              1 1/2 blocks south of this point.  D. C. Health Department
              has been notified and has made preliminary inquiries.
    
         F2.  Flows 50 feet, emerges with sewer.  Discharge looks clear.
              No sign of sewage.
    
         F3.  Rocks in stream coated with oil scum.  Oil layers observed
              in quiescent pools.
    

    -------
                                                                   1-8
    
    
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    Rock Creek from Porter Street Bridge to D. C. Line
    
         Gl.  Approximately 300 yards above Porter Street—2 storm drains,
              dry.
    
         G2.  Drain near Kazan Park drainage confluence.  Near Pierce Mill,
              east side of creek.  Dry.
    
         G3.  Drain pipe above Item 2,  east side of creek.
    
         G^.  Drain pipe at Tilden Street Bridge, west side of creek near
              playground.
    
         G5.  Military Road, in bridge abutment, east side of creek.
    
         G6.  200 yards above Military Road—3-inch pipe draining from east.
    
         GT.  Sewer manhole No. 335 below USGS gaging station.
    
         G8.  100 yards above Sherrill Drive.  One large drain and one
              small drain.  West side of Rock Creek at playground.  Small
              pipe drains drinking water fountain.  Large pipe appears to
              drain the parking lot.
    
         G9.  500 yards above Sherrill Drive—storm drain.
    
    Pinehurst Branch from Origin downstream to Extinction
    
    Creek begins 100 yards west of Oregon Avenue.  50 feet below beginning,
    H-foot pipe enters from left.  Slight flow, visible signs of sewage.
    Strong sewage odor.  Creek dries up 50 feet below Oregon Avenue.
    
    
    Rock Creek from D. C. Line North to Capitol Beltway
    
         HI.  Bridle Path Bridge Blackhorse Trail, two 2i*-inch storm drains,
              dry.  West bank.  Foot of Windalle Road.
    
         H2.  Small stream storm drainage, light flow 50 yards above 1.
              East bank.
    
         H3.  3-foot pipe above ford, dry.  Storm.  West bank.
    
         Ek.  8-inch pipe 75 feet below pedestrian stoplight.  West bank.
              Light flow, visible sewage.
    

    -------
    

    -------
                                                                   1-9
    
    
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    
    
         H5-  Storm drain 75 yards above -pedestrian crossing„   East bank.
    
         H6.  lU-inch pipe below school, water clear, slight flow.  West bank.
    
         HT.  Small creek from ^-foot storm drain and 1^-inch  pipe.
              (Woodbine Street Sewer.)
    
         H8.  E-l (Donny Brook) Confluence.
    
         H9.  Creek 100 yards above E-W Highway.  West bank.  Slight flow.
    
        H10.  W-2 (Coquelin Run) Confluence.
    
        Hll.  Creek, light flow, runs in above green house, west bank.
    
        H12.  Creek, light flow, broken sewer leaking into creek bed.
              (Locate and inspect this one.)
    
    
    Rock Creek from Capitol Beltway to Cedar Lane
    
         Jl.  East of Beltway overpass storm drain running heavily.  Water
              clear.
    
         J2.  West lane, west side, stream runoff, bed dry.
    
         J3.  West, north side, runoff dry, 25 yards from Beltway bridge.
    
         Jh.  2it-inch pipe leading to creek, slow flow, signs  of sewage.
    
         J5-  South side, storm drain, dry, 100 feet below Connecticut
              Avenue exit sign.
    
         J6.  3-foot pipe, dry, above sign.
    
         J7-  Creek, one-half mile from bridge drain small amount of flow.
    
         J8.  South side of Creek storm drain, dry.
    
         J9-  North side of creek, stream, flow heavy.
    
        J10.  2^-inch pipe drain, east of Connecticut Avenue Bridge.
    
        Jll.  25-inch pipe one-fourth mile above Connecticut Avenue Bridge,
              flow slight.
    

    -------
                                                                  1-10
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    
    
        J12.  3-foot pipe.  Water black, soap north side of creek.
    
        J13.  Creek south bank.  Water slightly polluted looking below
              Summit Avenue.
    
        Jlk.  Creek west bank, small amount of flow.
    
        J15.  Storm drain, no flow south bank.
    
        Jl6.  It-foot sewer, running, soapsuds, 100 yards south of Cedar
              Lane, west side of creek.
    
    
    Rock Creek from Cedar Lane to Knowles Avenue
    
         Kl.  W-3 Confluence of unnamed stream.
    
         K2.  Storm drain; under beltway, dry.
    
         K3.  2-foot storm drain, east bank, dry.
    
         K^.  Small creek, east bank, dry.
    
         K5.  W-U and W-5 Confluences of unnamed stream.
    
         K.6.  Storm drain east bank, dry.
    
         K7.  3-foot drain east bank, dry.
    
         K8.  2-foot drain east bank, dry.
    
         K9.  Stream west bank, W-6, Confluence of unnamed stream.
    
        K10.  2-foot drain west bank in woods, slight flow.
    
        Kll.  Stream west bank, dry.
    
    
    Rock Creek from Knowles Avenue to Gaynor Road
    
         LI.  Runoff from Newport Drive dry.
    
         L2.  Creek from ^-foot pipe, no flow.
    
         L3.  Dry creek storm drain east bank.
    

    -------
                                                                  1-11
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    
    
         LU.  Stream, clear flow (E-5).
    
         L5.  Stream, dry, storm drain.
    
         L6. .Small creek, dry.  West bank.
    
         L7.  Stream, dry.
    
         L8.  Creek, light flow, clean.
    
         L9.  Creek, clear light flow, west bank.
    
        L10.  Creek, slight flow, clear.
    
        Lll.  it-inch dry pipe 200 yards above swings on playground, east
              side.
    
        L12.  lU-inch overflow; street overflow just below Randolph Street,
              west bank.
    
        L13.  3-foot storm drain across from above.
    
        LI it.  Stream emptying from a i|-foot sewer, some sewage, slight odor
              (above Randolph Street).
    
        L15.  Creek, east bank, light flow, water clear.
    
        Ll6.  Stream, no flow, pools covered with scum.
    
    
    Rock Creek from Gaynor Road to JJorbeck Road
    
         Ml.  W-10.
    
         M2.  Pool UOO yards off Viers Mill Road and St. Judas School.
              Signs of sewage, smell and discoloration of water.
    
         M3.  Creek south side of second bridge, west bank, water light
              brown in color; 300 yards above second bridge stream east
              side bank strong odor, brown color of water.
    
         Mi*.  W-12.
    
         M5.  Creek west side bank, dry.
    
         M6.  Creek east side small flow.
    

    -------
                                                                  1-12
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    
    
         M7.  Creek west side small flow,
    
         M8.  Creek 25 feet above bridge clear, running fast.
    
         M9.  Creek east bank running slight.
    
    
    Rock Creek North of Norbeck Bridge
    
         Nl.  Creek west bank, slight flow.
    
         N2.  Sewers on both sides of creek, no visible leakage.
    
         N3.  Creek 20 feet north of sewers.  No flow, east bank.
    
         N^.  Spring west bank clear slight flow.
    
    
    Coquelin Run upstream from Jones Mill Road Bridge near Confluence with
      Rock Creek
    
         01.  3-foot storm drain 300 yards above bridge, dry.
    
         02.  18-inch pipe, light flow, extreme amount of algae.
    
         03.  U-inch pipe 100 yards above No. 2 same side of creek, pipe,
              dry.
    
         OU.  U-inch pipe 100 yards above No. 3, light flow, water clear.
    
         05.  Stream, dry.
    
         06.  18-inch storm drain, dry.
    
         07.  2U-inch storm drain from Connecticut Avenue, dry.
    
         08.  Stream above  Connecticut Avenue flowing under chlorine tanks
              from swimming pool, water clear.
    
         09.  West  end of lake small stream, flow fairly clear.  Lake is
              cloudy green.  Coliform counts high.
    
        010.  Just  inside country club fence, pools of cloudy green water.
              Laboratory analyses show high coliforms.
    

    -------
                                                                  1-13
    
    
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    
    
        Oil.  Numerous sewer lines just before East-West Highway.  Water
              cloudy and green.  Sources unknown, but some evidence of
              pollution.
    
        012.  Creek east bank, slight flow, water hazy.
    
        013.  Two 18-inch storm drains at end of Maple Avenue, both dry.
    
        01^.  Two 6-inch pipes and street runoff on east bank, water clear.
    
        015.  6-inch drain, east bank, dry.
    
        Ol6.  l8-inch drain west bank, no flow.
    
        017.  2-foot drain west bank, no flow.
    
    
    E-2:  This stream drains Forest Glen, and its confluence with Rock Creek
      is at the Capitol Beltway Bridge
    
         PI.  Stream on the left, running slow, clear.
    
         P2.  Sewer 2-inch pipe 500 yards below first bridge, strong odor,
              white stuff all around.  Forest Glen.
    
         P3.  Sewage line burst, very little running out, 25 feet below
              second bridge (Capitol View Avenue).
    
         Pk.  Pipe ^-inch, no flow, 25 feet below second bridge.
    
         P5.  2k-inch pipe clean, dry, below third bridge.
    
    
    E3:  This stream drains Rock Creek Hills, and its confluence with Rock
      Creek is near the Capitol Beltway Overpass, over Story Brook Drive
    
         Ql.  Dry
    
    E-U;  This stream drains the Kensington area, and its confluence with
      Bock Creek is at the Kensington Parkway Bridge
    
         Rl.  18-inch storm drain, dripping, east bank.
    
         R2.  75 yards above bridge, stream, no flow.
    
         R3.  18-inch storm drain 100 yards above bridge, dry.
    

    -------
                                                                  1-lU
    
    
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    
    
         R^.  8-inch storm drain 125 yards above bridge, dry.
    
         R5.  Two storm drains, slight flow, 200 yards above bridge, water
              clear.
    
         R6.  2-foot storm drain, Frederick Avenue, dry.
    
         R7.  2-foot storm drain, dry, 75 yards above Frederick Avenue.
    
         R8.  300 yards above Frederick Avenue, east bank, storm sewer,
              heavy flow, water clear, no odor.
    
         R9-  50 yards below Kent Street 18-inch storm drain, west bank, dry.
    
        RIO.  50 yards above Kent Street 18-inch storm drain, west bank, dry.
    
        Rll.  50 feet below street storm drain slight flow.
    
        R12.  Runoff, dry, halfway between bridges.
    
        R13.  Storm drain at bridge dry.
    
        Elk.  Small creek, light flow, clear.
    
        R15-  Storm drain from parking lot flowing; something being washed
              off.
    
        Rl6.  Storm drain from Murdock Road, dry.
    
        R17-  Storm drain from school ground, dry.
    
        Rl8.  3-foot storm drain slight flow, muddy water.
    
        R19-  Runoff from school parking lot, dry.
    W-2:  Stream Draining National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda.   Proceed-
      ing upstream.
    
         SI.  Inside of hospital grounds stream, east bank, slight  flow,
              water clear.
    
         S2.  Stream, moderate flow, fluid is extremely cloudy and  milky
              in color, behind Exchange.
    

    -------
                                                                  1-15
    
    
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    
    
         S3.  2^-inch sever, light flow and clear, below stream pipe went
              into sewer.
    
         Sk.  Overflow from evaporation slight.
    
         S5.  3-foot sewer below third bridge, slight flow, looks clear.
    
         S6.  3 dry storm drains around foot bridge.
    
         ST.  18-inch pipe about 20 feet below second bridge, dry.
    
         S8.  Same as above, 12-inch pipe with very slow flow, pool below
              pipe very full of pollution substances.
    
         S9.  24-inch sewer opposite parking lot, dry.
    
        S10.  6-inch and 2-inch pipes below parking lot, both dry.
    
        Sll.  Two 12-inch drain pipes 75 yards below fence (Jones Bridge
              Road).
    
        S12.  Stream goes underground from hospital fence to Wisconsin
              Avenue.
    
        S13.  2^-inch sewer just above Wisconsin Avenue, slight flow,
              algae in area.
    
        Slk.  3-foot storm sewer, slight flow.
    
        S15.  Parking lot runoff.
    
    
    W-3:  This stream drains the National Institutes of Health upstream
      from confluence with Rock Creek.
    
         Tl.  Creek starts from a 6-foot pipe.
    
         T2.  2U-inch pipe, running slow, 75 feet from bridge.
    
         T3.  2^-inch pipe, running fast, soapsuds beside second bridge.
    
         T4.  2-foot pipe, dry, 25 feet from third bridge.
    
         T5.  2-foot pipe, dry, 25 feet from third bridge.
    
         T6.  8-inch pipe, dry, 75 feet from third bridge.
    

    -------
                                                                  1-16
    
    
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    
    
         TT.  25 feet below fourth bridge, stream running fast, needs to
              be walked.
    
         T8.  U-foot pipe, slight flow, storm drain.
    
         T9.  3-foot pipe 3A submerged below fourth bridge, no flow.
    
        T10.  2lt-inch pipe, no flow, 25 feet below fifth bridge.
    
        Til.  2-foot pipe, no flow, 25 feet below fifth bridge.
    
        T12.  2-foot pipe, no flow, above fifth bridge.
    
    
    W-U:  This stream drains north Bethesda from Pooks Hill.  Its conflu-
      ence with Rock Creek is near Wisconsin Avenue.
    
         Ul.  Dry
    
    
    E-5:  This stream drains Viers Mill Village and Connecticut Gardens
    
         VI.  Spring west bank, dry.
    
         V2.  75 yards below creek (No. 3), scum on top of water brown
              in color.
    
         V3.  Creek east bank, no flow, water muddy with trash.  Probably
              E-5-A.
    
         Vk.  600 yards above creek (No. 3), creek west bank, light flow.
    
         V5.  2-foot drain at the end Garrett Park Road dry, trash below.
    
         V6.  Creek west bank, light flow, orange scum on the water.
    
    
    E-5-A
    
         Wl.  2l+-inch storm drain, Viers Mill Road, dry.
    
         W2.  Goes into pipe at Weisman Road, storm drains emptying at
              intervals.  Comes out at lower part Valleywood Road.
    
         W3.  Farnell and Valleywood Roads, 12-inch storm sewer, oily,
              algae.
    

    -------
                                                                  1-17
    
    
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    
    
         WU.  Hathaway and Valleywood Roads, storm sewers, oily, algae.
    
         W5.  300 yards below head, 12-inch storm runoff, dry.
    
         W6.  150 yards below head, 12-inch storm runoff, dry.
    
         W7.  Head emerges from 2-foot pipe, water full of newspaper and
              trash.
    
    
    E-5-C
    
         XI.  Stream runs in underground pipe storm drainage, water flowing.
    
         X2.  Large amount fine silt deposited.
    
    
    W-5:  Drains Weldwood Manor
    
         Yl.  2-foot pipe 3 A full of water, no flow.  At head of creek.
              Signs of sewage.
    
         Y2.  2U-inch pipe 3A full of trash, no flow.  25 feet below first
              bridge on the hill.
    
         Y3.  Stream running clean, 600 yards from first bridge.
    
         YU.  Storm drain right below second bridge.
    
         Y5.  Storm drain, running slow.
    
    
    W-6:  Drains Garrett Park and Garrett Park Estates
    
         Zl.  Pool 50 yards from mouth full of speckled and brown trout.
    
         Z2.  Creek turns into small pond in Grosvenor Park Apartments,
              water below dam filled with algae and brown scum.
    
         Z3.  6-inch drainage from apartments, light flow, clear.
    
         Zh.  Storm drainage from road, dry.
    
         Z5.  Storm drainage from Route 70, dry.
    

    -------
                                                                  1-18
    
    
                         APPENDIX 1 (Continued)
    
    
         Z6.  3-foot storm sewer, dry, Cheshire Drive, water full of algae
              and shopping carts.
    
         Z7.  Runoff from swimming pool, 25 yards above Cheshire Drive.
    
         Z8.  Dry stream comes out at Grosvenor storm sewers.
    
    
    W-6-A
    
         All storm drainage and runoff.
    
    
    W-6-B
    
        AA1.  Creek bed at source, dry.
    
        AA2.  Pond in farmyard, water muddy, flowing, brown algae in pond.
    
        AA3.  Creek continues dry after pond.
    
        AA.H.  200 yards from pond pools of muddy water.
    
        AA5.  Farm road fords creek.
    
        AA6.  100 yards from ford, water reappears in creek, slight flow.
    
        AA7.  Creek east bank, dry, 150 yards from start of flow.
    
        AA8.  250 yards from start of flow, flow ends (creek bed muddy).
    
        AA9.  150 yards from No. 8, road ford.
    
       AA10.  Creek west bank, slight flow.
    
       AA11.  100 yards below mouth of No. 10, flow stops in creek.  After
              flow stops, pools of water at intervals.
    
       AA12.  Creek west bank, moderate flow, water clear.
    
       AA13.  Trestle, not in use, 100 yards from side creek.
    
       AAllj.  Creek passes under road through pipe.
    
       AA15.  After road, creek enters Grosvenor Park Apartments.
    
       AAl6.  200 yards from road, creek enters pond, slight scum.
    

    -------
                                                                   2-1
                               APPENDIX 2
    
                      BIOLOGICAL SAMPLING STATIONS
                               ROCK CREEK
    Station #1
    
            This station was located at the Avery Road Bridge north of
    Rockville, Maryland.  The water was clear, and numerous minnows
    were observed throughout the area.  A total of nine genera of bottom
    organisms were found, which included such clean-water associated
    forms as mayflies (2 genera), caddisflies, and fishflies.  Good water
    quality was indicated based on the bottom organisms.
    
    Station #2
    
            This station was located on the East Branch of Rock Creek at
    the Maryland Route 115 Bridge north of Rockville, Maryland.  The water
    was very clear, and numerous minnows were observed.  A total of IT
    different genera of bottom organisms were collected, which included
    such clean-water forms as stoneflies, mayflies (3 genera), caddisflies
    (2 genera), fishflies, and riffle beetles.  Excellent water quality
    was indicated.  A total of 109 bottom organisms were collected in the
    square foot sample, which included 35 caddisflies, 20 mayflies, 15
    riffle beetles, and U fishflies.
    
    Station #3
    
            This station was located on a tributary to Rock Creek at Avery
    Road on the east edge of Rockville, Maryland.  Only four genera of
    bottom organisms were found, and the population was sparse.  However,
    mayflies and caddisflies were the dominant organisms.  Fair water
    quality was indicated.
    
    Station A
            Rock Creek was sampled at the Maryland Route 28 Bridge east
    of Rockville, Maryland.  A total of l6 genera of bottom organisms
    were sampled, which included such clean-water forms as mayflies,
    caddisflies (2 genera), fishflies, and riffle beetles.  The water
    was somewhat murky, but small schools of minnows could be observed.
    Only 35 bottom organisms were collected in the square foot sample
    with fingernail clams (an intermediate) being the dominant form with
    15 in number.  Good water quality was indicated.
    

    -------
                                                                   2-2
                         APPENDIX 2 (Continued)
    
    
    Station #5
    
            The next station downstream was located off Gaynor Road
    immediately upstream from Randolph Road at Viers Mill Village, Mary-
    land.  The water was somewhat cloudy, and trash was fairly abundant
    in the stream.  Bottom organisms were sparse, and only four genera
    were found.  Only one clean-water caddisfly was found.  The balance
    consisted of two intermediate genera, and a pollution-tolerant form.
    Only fair water quality was indicated.
    
    Station #6
    
            This station was located at the Route 5^-7 Bridge (Knowles
    Avenue) at Garrett Park, Maryland.  The water was clear, and small
    schools of minnows were observed.  Bottom organisms were not too
    abundant, and only five genera were sampled.  However, they included
    such clean-water forms as mayflies (2 genera) and caddisflies.  Good
    water quality was indicated.
    
    Station #1
    
            This station was located at Beach Drive and Cedar Lane near
    Kensington, Maryland,  The water was exceptionally clear, and
    numerous minnows were observed.  Ten different genera of bottom
    organisms were found, which included such clean-water forms as may-
    flies (2 genera) and caddisflies (2 genera).  A total of 22U bottom
    organisms were collected in the square foot sample, which included
    27 mayflies and 3 caddisflies.  The dominant form was an intermediate
    midge larva which made up 190 of the total count.  Good water quality
    was indicated.
    
    Station #8
    
            The next station downstream was located at Jones Mill Road
    downstream from the Beltway-Route ^95 at Chevy Chase, Maryland.
    Again the water was exceptionally clear, and numerous small minnows
    were observed.  Only three genera of bottom organisms were found,
    but they consisted mainly of two genera of caddisfly larvae.  Good
    water quality was indicated.
    
    Station #9
    
            The next station was located on Coquelin Creek at Jones  Mill
    Road Bridge at North Chevy Chase, Maryland.  Coquelin Creek enters
    Rock Creek a short distance downstream.  The water was clear, but the
    

    -------
                                                                   2-3
    
    
                         APPENDIX 2 (Continued)
    filamentous algae was heavy in much cf the area suggesting excessive
    nitrogen and. phosphorus „   Oil slices arose when some of the bottom
    was stirred up by walking.  (This stream is quite small.)  A total
    of 12 genera of bottom organisms was found, which included a fair
    population of mayflies and caddisflies.  Blackflies were the dominant
    organism and made up 155 of the 192 organisms in the square foot
    sample.  Only fair water quality was indicated.
    
    Station
            The next station downstream on Rock Creek was located down-
    stream from the East-West Highway hlO at the Rock Creek Recreation
    Center.  The water was clear, and minnows were observed.  A total of
    10 genera was found, but bottom organisms were generally sparse.  A
    few mayflies were sampled, but only 23 organisms were collected in
    the square foot sample.  Fair water quality was indicated.
    
    Station
            This station was located approximately 100 yards downstream
    from West Beach Drive at the junction with Wise Road in Washington,
    D. C.  The water was clear, but only three genera of bottom organisms
    were found, which consisted of two pollution-tolerant genera and one
    intermediate genera,  Bottom organisms were sparse, and a quantita-
    tive sample was not taken.  About 20 yards downstream a large storm
    sewer empties from the left bank (facing downstream).  The bottom in
    this channel appeared to be coated with oil, and oil slicks came to
    the surface when the bottom was disturbed.  Mild pollution is sug-
    gested in this area.
    
    Station #12
    
            This station was located at the roadside park immediately
    downstream from Military Road, Washington, D. C.  The water was clear,
    but only five genera of bottom organisms were found, which consisted
    of three organic pollution-tolerant genera and two intermediate forms.
    Generally, bottom organisms were sparse.  A small tributary comes in
    from the left bank a short distance downstream.  This was very heavy
    with filamentous algae, suggesting high nitrogen and phosphorus.
    Mild organic pollution is suggested.
    
    Station #13
    
            Rock Creek was then sampled at Park Road Bridge in Washington,
    D. C.  The water was clear, and small schools of minnows were observed.
    

    -------
                                                                   2-k
    
    
                         APPENDIX 2 (Continued)
    Eight genera of bottom organisms were sampled, "but they consisted
    of four organic pollution-tolerant forms and four intermediate forms.
    Bottom organisms were not abundant.  Only 27 were collected in the
    square foot sample.  Mild organic pollution is suggested.
    
    Station #lk
    
            Piney Branch, a tributary to Rock Creek, was sampled at
    the Park Road Bridge in Washington, D. C.  The water was clear, but
    filamentous algae were extremely abundant on the rocks and gravel.
    Nine genera were collected, but the only clean-water form found was
    a mayfly.  The balance consisted of two intermediate forms and six
    pollution-tolerant forms.  The dominant form was an intermediate
    midge larva, which made up 75 of the 113 bottom organisms  in the
    square foot sample.  A faint sewage odor was detected, and high
    nitrogen and phosphorus are suggested by the heavy algae.   Mild
    organic pollution is suggested at this station.  Piney Branch is
    believed to contribute a mild pollutional load to Rock Creek.
    
    Station #15
    
            The next station downstream was located near the Harvard
    Street Entrance at the National Zoological Park at Washington, D. C.
    The water was clear, but the rocks were coated with slime.  Although
    nine genera of bottom organisms were found, only fair populations of
    an intermediate midge larva and a pollution-tolerant snail were
    sampled.  The other bottom organisms were sparse.  The intermediate
    midge larva made up 86 of the 103 bottom organisms in the  square foot
    sample.  Mild organic pollution is suggested.
    
    Station ttl6
    
            The next downstream station was located at the Calvert Street
    Bridge in Washington, D. C.  The water was clear, and numerous minnows
    were observed; however, a faint sewage odor was detected.   Although
    ten genera of bottom organisms were found, the only clean-water form
    consisted of a few caddisfly larvae.  An intermediate midge larva made
    up k6 of the 55 organisms collected in the square foot sample.  Sludge-
    worms, the bloodworm midge Chironomus, blackflies, and two genera of
    pollution-tolerant snails were collected.  Mild organic pollution was
    indicated.
    

    -------
                                                                   2-5
    
    
                         APPENDIX 2 (Continued)
    
    
    Station #17
    
            Rock Creek was then sampled immediately upstream from the
    P Street outfall in Washington, D. C.  The water was clear, and small
    schools of minnows and sunfish were observed, but they did not venture
    downstream below the outfall.  Broken glass and trash were heavy in
    the stream.  Six genera of bottom organisms were collected, which
    consisted of four organic pollution-tolerant forms and two intermediate
    forms.  The dominant forms were an intermediate midge (98) and sludge-
    worms (U3) out of the 316 bottom organisms collected in the square
    foot sample.  Mild organic pollution is indicated.
    
    Station
            The next station was located approximately 25 yards downstream
    from the P Street outfall in Washington, D. C.  A faint sewage odor
    was detected, and trash was observed in'the stream.  Only five genera
    of bottom organisms were found, which consisted of four organic pollution-
    tolerant forms and one intermediate kind.  The pollution-tolerant genera
    consisted of bloodworms, sludgeworms, leeches, and a pollution-tolerant
    snail.  Moderate organic pollution is indicated.
    
    Station #19
    
            This station was located downstream from the Slash Run outfall,
    which is downstream from the P Street outfall in Washington, D. C.
    The bottom organisms consisted of three pollution tolerant genera and
    two intermediate genera.  An intermediate midge with 390 organisms
    and sludgeworms with 71 were the dominant organisms out of the H80
    organisms obtained in the square foot sample.  Moderate organic pollu-
    tion is indicated at this station.  The source appears to be the
    Slash Run sewer.
    
    Station #20
    
            The last station on Rock Creek was located approximately 30
    yards upstream from the mouth, near the canoe rental concession.  The
    water was very turbid, and oil slicks were stirred up by our walking.
    After approximately 15 minutes of intensive searching, only one blood-
    worm could be found.  A quantitative sample was not taken for this
    reason.  Floating debris noted in the stream could have been washed
    up out of the Potomac, as this area is affected by the tide.  Moderate-
    heavy organic pollution is suggested.
    

    -------
    
    CO
    CO
               0>
               o m
               S^
               So
    
               5C
               
    -------
     CO
     c
     CO
     -o
     m
     z
     o
    CO
    o  _
    
    
    5  O
    co  o
    
    •n  >^
    o
        o
        30
        m
        m
    IO  JQ
    0)  __
    01  m
    P
    P
    
    o
    
    >
    o
    c
               m
               C/5
               CD
    
               O
    o
    c
    -1
    I
    
    o
               O
    
               O
               O
               m
               m
                                   \
                                                                                                                         S
                                                                                                                         c:
                                                                                                                         2
                                                                                                                         o
                          PENNSYLVANIA  AVENUE
                          PARK  ROAD
                           MILITARY  ROAD
                           SHERRILL   DRIVE
    

    -------
     03
     >
     o
     H
     m
     o
     c
        o
        O
     o
     33
     0)
     Ol
                23
                
             o
             3)
             m
             m
    C
    3)
                                           >±
                                           H I>o
                                           O  C
                                           2-n>
                        THEODORE  ROOSEVELT  ISLAND
                        PENNSYLVANIA  AVENUE
                        PARK  ROAD
                        MILITARY  ROAD
                        SHERRILL  DRIVE
                        NEAR  DC  LINE
                                                                                         \\
    \\
                                                                                                  \x
                                                                                                     \v
    

    -------
    MPN / 100 ml.
    

    -------
                                                           4
    
    
                                                           3
    Xa    =   ARITHMETIC  MEAN
    
    Xg    =   GEOMETRIC   MEAN
    
    90%<-   MPN<  INDICATED  VALUE
             90 %  OF  THE  TIME
         100,000
               9
               8
               7
               6
    
               5
    
               4
    (PLANNING  GOALS  IN  ACCORDANCE
    WITH  REVISED  PROJECT  POTOMAC
    WATER  QUALITY  SUB-TASK  FORCE
    REPORT  OF  NOV I, 1966 )
    o
    o
                                                UJ
                                                Q
                                                     10,000
                                                           9
                                                           8
                                                           7
                                                           6
                          *  WA'
                             CRI
                             REi
                                                CC.
                                                O
                                                u.
                                                _J
                                                o
                                                o
                                                      1,000
    

    -------
    

    -------
     1.00-
      .90-
      .80-
    2
    
    fL
    
    a
      .70-
      60-
    CO
    1)
    
    -------
          2 +
      1,000
          9
          8
          7
          6
    
          5
    
          4
           2 -h
    E
    o
    k_
    o>
    E      ._L
        100
           9
           8
           7
           6
    
           5
           4
    
           3
    O
    05
           24-
    O
    UJ
    o
    z
    UJ
    Q.
    CO
    ^>
    CO
           8
           7
           6
    
           5
    
           4  —
    
    
           3  --
           2-h
         1.0
    

    -------
    

    -------
    

    -------
    

    -------
    (a 9 w)  31 va  men j
                                                                  FIGURE  2
    

    -------
    

    -------
    moo
                              £ g
                              2 5
    
                              1 i
    2 I
    £ £
                              U Q J u.'
                                  FIGURE I
    

    -------
    16
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ON
    
    3
    pQ
    ^j
    EH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    0>
    ti CQ
    G t)
    O> -H
    O.H
    to O
    S CQ
    CQ
    U
    « Q
    O
    PQ
    0)
    -p
    H cd
    CO 45
    -p p.
    o w
    EH 0
    £1
    0
    rH -H G
    x-x cd G O
    H -P Cd rO
    co o bO ^
    CQ > EH f* cd
    MO O U
    H S
    O 0)
    S K
    W
    M -P
    CJ G -d
    MO) (U
    pr , ^_) Q2 r^ [Q
    pr | pT] G rd
    PL] ^ O (U -H
    01 ft H
    pL< WO
    ~-- 3 CQ
    CQ
    Q
    O
    PH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    •P
    G
    •H
    O
    PL.
    
    bD
    G
    •H
    H
    &
    8
    CQ
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    m co i
    co ir\ 1
    
    
    
    
    oo on i
    co t— i
    
    
    
    
    
    on o cvj
    CM OJ H
    
    
    
    
    
    H H CO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    -a- o t—
    co \o u~\
    
    
    
    rH LTN O
    CO t— t-
    
    G O>
    •H iH
    H O
    & ^!
    co cd
    CQ S
    
    H
    0 cd
    G
    -p • -H
    G Q En
    (U --' v-^
    0
    H -P -P
    CM G a
    CH 0) 0)
    H H
    ^ CM V-.
    ^j cjn , — N CM
    cd ' - -pel -p W
    G H -H H
    O Cd O Cd
    
    O> -H -H
    CQ P=H P^<
    
    
    
    OJ
    VO
    
    
    
    
    on
    t-
    
    
    
    
    
    LA
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    on
    vo
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    t—
    KO
    
    
    
    t-
    t-
    
    B
    5
    JH
    CM
    id
    0)
    -p
    
    P<
    
    O OJ
    o o
    N 	 • £*
    cd
    -P H
    G cd
    H
    H |
    G S
    •H
    fc
    

    -------
    15
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    to
    §
    
    EH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
     Q
    CO Q
    
    
    •
    O
    Q
    
    -P
    H a*—
    a fi (ii
    CO -P ft
    g; O CQ ra
    0 EH O oJ
    H rC *^p-'
    H P-i
    K
    EH
    O CJ
    S5 H -H C
    O — * cd fl O
    OH -p CO ft
    \ O bO ft
    Q tC EH in cd
    W 0 O 0
    § V"'
    Si *
    W CO
    2 En t)
    t3  -d w
    O CO S3 "d
    
    « K ft H
    m mo
    > co 2 co
    <; EC, co
    o
    
    
    
    
    Q
    O
    pq
    
    
    
    
    
    
    -P
    a
    •H
    O
    p_l
    
    tiC
    c
    •H
    H
    £3
    Co
    CO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ON
    on
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CM
    t—
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    V0
    •
    t—
    CM
    
    
    
    
    
    
    VD
    H
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    t—
    on
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CO
    t> —
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    -P
    a
    0)
    
    H
    a
    M
    
    -P
    
    CO
    H
    PH
    
    •
    <£
    
    
    
    on
    CM
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    on
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    on
    «
    H
    CM
    
    
    
    
    
    
    on
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    H
    CM
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    _^j-
    on
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    $
    
    
    •
    0
    *
    *
    *
    t — ON
    CM LA I
    CM 1
    * 1
    CM
    
    
    
    *(•
    *
    *
    C— t—
    IA ^f 1
    H 1
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    ON o on
    • • •
    on -3 -3
    -=t CM CM
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    on ON CM
    t— -=f LA
    VD
    
    
    
    
    
    
    t— o ON
    t— MD VD
    \o
    A
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CO t— VO
    ON -^ LA
    _^-
    
    
    
    JH
    0) • H
    4J O Cd
    cd £3
    tZ -^ jrj
    C~] v 	 * ^J N 	 -
    CO C
    Cd -p -r-l -P
    > co a
    (U PL, QJ
    a 3 s
    O H (JO H --x
    -P Vi -H Vt H
    cd W H WO
    
    tr~ i £H
    cd CD
    3 c co as
    H -H -H
    W P^ C^t
    
    • • •
    Q p£] PTI
    
    
    
    O
    O
    • •
    O
    H
    e
    O
    <£n
    
    to
    H
    cd
    J>
    *H
    -P
    a
    •H
    ^
    o
    c^
    i
    CM
    
    -P
    cd
    
    0)
    -p
    o
    i — 1 VO
    H V£>
    O ON
    0 H
    CO "
    0) H
    H H
    it* ^i
    CO ft
    e
    LA 0)
    CM -P
    ft
    CM Ci)
    O CO
    
    • — * C
    ts O
    O
    H (3
    CQ O
    O
    O £5
    -P
    O
    boo
    
    •H CM
    U H
    O 0
    0 -P
    o
    cd ON
    N 	 •
    ft
    tt) 
    bC ft
    cd g
    ^H CD
    0) -p
    > ft
    03 (L)
    CQ
    lu c
    -P 0
    
    li •
    •H S
    0) •
    ^ 
    G
    •H
    W
    
    cd
    
    fi
    o
    
    •d
    (U
    w
    cd
    pq
    
    *
    *
    *
    

    -------
                          TABLE 7
    
    ANALYTICAL RESULTS - FINAL EFFLUENT (FINAL MANHOLE)
                     SAMPLING STATION F
                           (mg/1)
    Date Time
    Nov. 9, 1966 1000
    1220
    11*10
    1615
    1815
    2015
    2215
    Nov. 10, 1966 0010
    0213
    01*15
    0610
    0800
    1000
    1200
    11*11
    1615
    1815
    2015
    2215
    Nov. 11, 1966 OOll*
    0209
    Ql+09
    0612
    0800
    1000
    Ipnn
    5-Day
    BOD
    50.2
    36.8
    1+2.2
    71+-0
    >ll+7
    26.8
    35-0
    50.8
    1+5.0
    65-0
    86.8
    5!+. 8
    18.1*
    37.2
    29.6
    22.8
    70.8
    l+l+.O
    37.1+
    30.1+
    1+8.1+
    52.0
    98.2
    115.1+
    73.6
    
    Suspended
    Solids
    6
    7
    16
    80
    —
    21+
    1+6
    27
    260
    52
    136
    l+O
    12
    22
    28
    37
    ll+2
    55
    28
    17
    32
    62
    131+
    260
    138
    , , TJr, Rnm-nl A T
    Total
    Organic
    Carbon
    31+.0
    32.0
    29-5
    61.5
    800.0
    36.8
    1+0.0
    37-9
    38.3
    55.8
    126.8
    1+1.6
    36.0
    3l+. 5
    29.5
    3l+. 3
    75.1
    1+6.5
    38.0
    36.2
    38.5
    51.8
    86.6
    128.6
    68.0
    
    Total
    Phosphate
    
    21.070
    
    23-823
    
    23.31+1+
    
    28.732
    
    33.61+0
    
    26.1*30
    22.300
    
    16.282
    
    21+.896
    
    22.1+18
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    -------
    

    -------
                                                              13
                             TABLE 6
    ANALYTICAL RESULTS - FINAL EFFLUENT (D.  C.  SAMPLING POINT)
                        SAMPLING STATION E
                              (mg/1)
    Date Time
    Nov. 9, 1966 1000
    1210
    1405
    1605
    1805
    2005
    2205
    Nov. 10, 1966 0005
    0205
    01*09
    O6o4
    0800
    1205
    11*05
    1605
    1805
    2005
    2205
    Nov. 11, 1966 0008
    0203
    0403
    0603
    0800
    1000
    1200
    5-Day
    BOD
    1*1*. 5
    39.8
    35-3
    68.2
    59.2
    35.0
    36.3
    1*6.9
    1*7.4
    62.6
    21.1*
    54. 1*
    1*2.1
    34.9
    1*9.2
    66.8
    1*8.3
    1*2.8
    50.5
    1*3.4
    50.1
    51*. 1
    53.7
    1*6.1*
    39.8
    Suspended
    Solids
    28
    26
    35
    —
    134
    58
    52
    34
    53
    90
    73
    53
    44
    39
    109
    124
    50
    50
    37
    44
    50
    6l
    71
    59
    No Sample
    Total
    Organic
    Carbon
    38.2
    35.0
    35-3
    47.5
    49.7
    51.3
    43.2
    42.5
    44.0
    76.3
    74.5
    51.8
    47.0
    38.0
    58.8
    77.0
    46.5
    41.4
    43.4
    44.0
    46.5
    50.5
    48.6
    45.6
    38.3
    Total
    Phosphate
    
    22.627
    
    20.950
    
    24.302
    
    26.337
    
    32.803
    
    28.790
    
    16 . 872
    
    21.238
    
    21.710
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    -------
                                                       12
                      TABLE 5
    
    ANALYTICAL RESULTS - ELUTRIATION WASH WATER
                 SAMPLING STATION B
                       (mg/1)
    Date Time
    Nov. 9, 1966 1000
    1215
    11+07
    1610
    1810
    2010
    2210
    Nov. 10, 1966 0008
    0209
    01+12
    0607
    0800
    1000
    1207
    11+09
    1610
    1810
    2010
    2210
    Nov. 11, 1966 0011
    0206
    Oi+06
    0609
    0800
    1000
    1200
    5-Day
    BOD
    762.0
    796.0
    388.0
    8l6,0
    121+.0
    3Q1+.0
    598.0
    552.0
    710.0
    1+55-0
    1+3*+. 0
    637-0
    661.0
    1+9^.0
    1+1+7.0
    559-0
    757.0
    609.0
    1+82.0
    31+3.0
    275-0
    1+05.0
    152.0
    1+51.0
    219-0
    521+.0
    Suspended
    Solids
    1070
    2620
    2100
    1660
    2l+0
    I61t0
    1680
    1010
    168
    2030
    1260
    1150
    1720
    2330
    11+20
    1650
    291+0
    1850
    1550
    lll+O
    780
    1+20
    691+0
    1200
    870
    No Sample
    Total
    Organic
    Carbon
    695
    IQl+O
    81+0
    1126
    70.8
    75^
    717
    61+0
    700
    936
    686
    525
    770
    850
    630
    816
    1000
    71+6
    559
    31+8
    1+37
    1+18
    580
    1+90
    1+63
    665
    Total
    Phosphate
    
    188.799
    
    116.21+8
    
    132.770
    
    86.1+38
    
    221.121+
    
    113.863
    161.296
    
    127.078
    
    176.636
    
    115.279
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    -------
                                                                11
                               TABLE 4
    
             ANALYTICAL RESULTS - VACUUM FILTER FILTRATE
                          SAMPLING STATION C
                                (mg/1)
    Date Time
    Nov. 9, 1966 1000
    1225
    11*12
    1620
    1820
    2020
    2220
    Nov. 10, 1966 0013
    0215
    o4i8
    0613
    0800
    1000
    1212
    1414
    1620
    1820
    2020
    2220
    Nov. 11, 1966 0017
    0212
    0412
    0615
    0800
    1000
    1200
    5-Day
    BOD
    370
    230
    280
    292
    331
    316
    222
    237
    221
    243
    257
    335
    266
    333
    331
    427
    287
    266
    323
    228
    26l
    26k
    246
    344
    348
    309
    Suspended
    Solids
    186
    347
    178
    49
    67
    271
    83
    53
    39
    32
    26
    160
    172
    302
    86*
    3334
    270
    —
    276
    56
    47
    40
    27
    228
    79
    No Sample
    Total
    Organic
    Carbon
    181.2
    157-0
    180.8
    157-2
    158.0
    216.6
    154.6
    133.2
    129.4
    129.6
    183.8
    181.0
    174.8
    211.0
    172.6
    408.0
    210.0
    145.6
    196.6
    163.6
    147.2
    146.6
    143.4
    212.0
    170.6
    165.8
    Total
    Phosphate
    
    106.191
    
    108.466
    
    127.741
    
    98.290
    
    87.396
    
    117.639
    109.734
    
    122.359
    
    121.179
    
    127.078
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Was upside down in box
    

    -------
                                                  10
                 TABLE 3
    
    ANALYTICAL RESULTS - SECONDARY EFFLUENT
            SAMPLING STATION B
                  (mg/1)
    Date Time
    Nov. 9, 1966 1000
    1230
    ll*17
    1625
    1825
    2025
    2225
    Nov. 10, 1966 0016
    0220
    01*21
    0617
    0800
    1000
    1215
    1M8
    1625
    1825
    2025
    2225
    Nov. 11, 1966 0020
    0215
    OU15
    06l8
    0800
    1000
    1200
    5-Day
    BOD
    38.0
    19.0
    23.0
    38.7
    28.6
    28.9
    U3.3
    35.5
    39.9
    29.7
    1+0.0
    26.6
    33.9
    30.1*
    33.8
    26.5
    31*. 5
    3U.3
    36.8
    36.1
    37.9
    1*0.5
    38.9
    36.3
    31.6
    30.2
    Suspended
    Solids
    21*
    26
    18
    22
    18
    21
    28
    17
    18
    16
    6
    6
    5
    30
    19
    25
    31
    20
    25
    19
    26
    23
    21*
    33
    26
    No Sample
    Total
    Organic
    Carbon
    31.3
    30.3
    29-3
    31.7
    29-9
    33.2
    36.8
    36.8
    35.0
    37.0
    53.8
    33.2
    35.3
    3^.1
    33.2
    31.5
    3^.7
    33.5
    33.3
    33.0
    33.5
    3H.3
    3U.1
    3U.3
    30.6
    30.2
    Total
    Phosphate
    
    20.592
    
    19- 271*
    
    22.7^6
    
    26.936
    
    25.7^0
    
    2i*.66o
    21.356
    
    1U.866
    
    lU.512
    
    22.061*
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    -------
                  TABLE 2
    
    ANALYTICAL RESULTS - PLANT INFLUENT
             SAMPLING STATION A
                   (mg/1)
    Date Time
    Nov. 9, 1966 1000
    1200
    11*00
    1600
    1800
    2000
    2200
    Nov. 10, 1966 0002
    0203
    Ql*06
    0601
    0800
    1000
    1200
    11*00
    1600
    1800
    2000
    2200
    Nov. 11, 1966 0005
    0200
    oi*oo
    0600
    0800
    1000
    1200
    5-Day
    BOD
    186.5
    220.5
    225.5
    
    197-0
    186.0
    167.5
    219.0
    21*3.0
    200.5
    125-0
    11*3.5
    90.5
    152.5
    15^.0
    171.5
    199.5
    181.0
    191.0
    235-5
    225.0
    188.5
    11+3.5
    109.0
    131.5
    161.0
    Suspended
    Solids
    107
    110
    139
    ll*2
    127
    119
    115
    111
    184
    119
    92
    79
    86
    179
    276
    153
    157
    173
    120
    107
    313
    109
    101*
    97
    111*
    No Sample
    Total
    Organic
    Carbon
    90.1
    11.5- 1*
    128.0
    172.6
    152.0
    ll+l.O
    151*. o
    ll*l*.6
    13U.O
    113.1*
    81.2
    81. U
    72.0
    121.6
    105.0
    115.6
    122.2
    151.6
    122.2
    127.6
    1^5-0
    90.6
    89.6
    87.6
    82.1*
    83.0
    Total
    Phosphate
    
    21*. 51*2
    
    35.317
    
    38.908
    
    31.81*5
    
    2l*.302
    
    17.580
    16.990
    
    20.1*12
    
    33.510
    
    32 . 329
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    -------
                                TABLE 1
    
                EFFICIENCY BASED ON DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
                        "FINAL EFFLUENT" SAMPLES
                           (Per Cent Removal)
    MONTH
    January
    February
    March
    April
    May
    June
    July
    August
    September
    October
    November
    December
    BOD
    58
    66
    62
    65
    TO
    67
    69
    67
    63
    51
    51
    51
    1965
    SS
    1+8
    63
    56
    53
    69
    69
    &\
    67
    58
    ^9
    31
    h6
    1966
    BOD
    37
    Ik
    62
    58
    63
    63
    Ho
    56
    7U
    73
    73
    63
    SS
    23
    26
    55
    59
    63
    70
    7^
    52
    75
    7U
    69
    68
    Annual
    62
    53
    56
    59
    

    -------
                              CONCLUSIONS
    
    
    
    
    
    
            1.  The efficiency of the District of Columbia Water
    
    
    
    
    Pollution Control Plant on November 9 and 10 was  JO per cent
    
    
    
    
    removal of BOD and 57 per cent removal of suspended solids.
    
    
    
    
            2.  During the study period the differences in plant
    
    
    
    
    efficiency vhen calculated using the District of  Columbia final
    
    
    
    
    sampling point, the final manhole sampling point, and a material
    
    
    
    
    balance were small and of little significance to  our use of  this
    
    
    
    
    data for planning purposes.
    
    
    
    
            3.  The decrease in plant efficiency caused by the addi-
    
    
    
    
    tion of elutriation wash water to the final effluent is significant,
    

    -------
    District of Columbia sampling point,  while slightly underestimat-
    
    
    
    
    ing the gross load to the river, is representative  of the  total
    
    
    
    
    load to the Potomac River.
    

    -------
    

    -------
                               DISCUSSION
    
    
    
    
    
    
            Except for the elutriation wash water, there is reason-
    
    
    
    
    ably good agreement "between the values as computed from the study
    
    
    
    
    samples and the values measured by the District of Columbia.
    
    
    
    
    Since the District of Columbia values on the elutriation wash
    
    
    
    
    water are based on only three grab samples, this difference is
    
    
    
    
    not unexpected.  In every case the final efficiency as determined
    
    
    
    
    by the Field Station is within five per cent of the values as
    
    
    
    
    determined by the District of Columbia.  (Table 9)
    
    
    
    
            The apparent difference between efficiencies represented
    
    
    
    
    by concentration of the final effluent samples and the calculated
    
    
    
    
    concentration from a materials balance which has consistently
    
    
    
    
    occurred in the historic records was not observed during this
    
    
    
    
    study.  The differences in plant efficiencies calculated both
    
    
    
    
    ways using either the Chesapeake Field Station data or the Dis-
    
    
    
    
    trict of Columbia data are small and well within normal sampling
    
    
    
    
    error.  The over-all efficiency of the plant (greater than 70
    
    
    
    
    per cent removal of 5-day BOD) was higher than efficiencies indi-
    
    
    
    
    cated by the historical data for the same period during previous
    
    
    
    
    years.
    
    
    
    
            The concentration of all parameters measured was higher
    
    
    
    
    at the final manhole sampling point (F) than that measured at
    
    
    
    
    the District of Columbia final effluent sampling point (E).  This
    
    
    
    
    difference is small and is consistent.  This indicates that the
    

    -------
                               THIS STUDY
    
    
    
    
    
    
            The study involved analysis for 5-day BOD, suspended
    
    
    
    
    solids, and total organic carbon every two hours for a US-hour
    
    
    
    
    period, and total phosphorus every four hours for a 30-hour
    
    
    
    
    period at the following sampling points shown on Figure 1:
    
    
    
    
            A.  Plant Influent
    
    
    
    
            B.  Secondary Effluent
    
    
    
    
            C.  Vacuum Filter Filtrate
    
    
    
    
            D.  Elutriation Wash Water
    
    
    
    
            E.  Final Effluent (D. C. Sampling Point)
    
    
    
    
            F.  Final Effluent (Final Manhole)
    
    
    
    
    
    
            Sampling Point F was chosen at a manhole approximately
    
    
    
    
    25 yards down from the final effluent sampling point of the
    
    
    
    
    District of Columbia.  This was done to provide a check because
    
    
    
    
    of the previously described apparent difference between the final
    
    
    
    
    effluent values at Point E and those from a material balance of
    
    
    
    
    the component waste loads.
    
    
    
    
            The analytical results of sampling during the study are
    
    
    
    
    shown in Tables 2-7-  Plant flows as recorded by plant flow meters
    
    
    
    
    are shown in Figure 2.
    
    
    
    
            Using the measured flows and concentrations, the values
    
    
    
    
    in Table 8 were computed.  Values measured by District of Columbia
    
    
    
    
    are also shown in Table 8.
    

    -------
    and (h) periodic raw sewage by-passes.   Thus, the total amount
    
    of material discharged from the four sources enumerated above
    
    should be equivalent to the amount of material found at the "final
    
    effluent" sampling point.  However, the sum of the four source
    
    flows is consistently higher with respect to solids and BOD  than
    
    that found at the "final effluent" sampling point.  The following
    
    example for April 1965 is typical.  All of the data shown is based
    
    on information contained in plant operating records.
    
    
                               APRIL 1965
    
                                             SUSPENDED SOLIDS FLOW
           SOURCE                            	(Ib/day)	
    
    Secondary effluent                               55,710
    Elutriation overflow                             11,89^
    Secondary sludge                                 71,221*
    Raw sewage                                       17,728
                                                    156,556
    "Final effluent" data                           109,733
    
    
            These data show that in April only two-thirds of the
    
    solids reported as being discharged in the four component flows
    
    was picked up in the "final effluent" sample.  This anomaly was
    
    consistent throughout the year and usually applied to the BOD  load
    
    as well.  In no case did the "final effluent" sample load exceed
    
    the calculated total load.
    

    -------
                            HISTORICAL DATA
    
    
    
    
    
    
            The District of Columbia Department of Sanitary Engineer-
    
    
    
    
    ing has established an intensive sampling program of the plant
    
    
    
    
    for operational control purposes.  Flow proportional composites
    
    
    
    
    (2^-hour) are collected by automatic samplers at the plant influent,
    
    
    
    
    primary settling effluent, secondary settling effluent, and final
    
    
    
    
    plant effluent.
    
    
    
    
            These samples are analyzed daily for suspended solids
    
    
    
    
    and 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD).  Efficiencies
    
    
    
    
    based upon the operational sampling program of the District of
    
    
    
    
    Columbia for each month during 1965 and 1966 at the Final Plant
    
    
    
    
    Effluent Sampling Point are shown in Table 1.  In addition, data
    
    
    
    
    on daily grab samples of the elutriation wash water are available
    
    
    
    
    from the District of Columbia operational sampling program.
    
    
    
    
            There has been some question as to whether the "final
    
    
    
    
    effluent" sample is a representative one.  This question was
    
    
    
    
    raised by an apparent difference between the "final effluent"
    
    
    
    
    sample results and the final effluent characteristics as cal-
    
    
    
    
    culated from reported characteristics of component parts.
    
    
    
    
            The "final effluent" sample is collected from the plant
    
    
    
    
    outfall at a point which is reported to be below the entry of
    
    
    
    
    all of the various plant outflows.  These outflows consist of
    
    
    
    
    (l) secondary clarifier effluent; (2) elutriation tank overflows;
    
    
    
    
    (3) periodic sludge (primary, secondary, or digester) by-passes;
    

    -------
                              INTRODUCTION
    
    
    
    
    
    
            An operational efficiency study of the District of Columbia
    
    
    
    
    Water Pollution Control Plant was made by staff of the Chesapeake
    
    
    
    
    Field Station, Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins Project, of
    
    
    
    
    the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration on November 9,
    
    
    
    
    10, and 11, 1966.  The purpose of the study was to verify the
    
    
    
    
    results of a daily composite sampling program carried out by the
    
    
    
    
    District of Columbia Department of Sanitary Engineering in order
    
    
    
    
    to establish the reliability of this data as input to a mathe-
    
    
    
    
    matical model of the Potomac Estuary.  Total phosphates were also
    
    
    
    
    measured in order to determine the operational efficiency of a
    
    
    
    
    conventionally operated, large activated sludge plant in removing
    
    
    
    
    this nutrient.
    
    
    
    
            A simplified schematic sketch of the plant is shown in
    
    
    
    
    Figure 1.  The plant is operated similarly to most high rate acti-
    
    
    
    
    vated sludge plants, except that the elutriation wash water and
    
    
    
    
    the filtrate from the vacuum filters are discharged to the final
    
    
    
    
    effluent pipe instead of being recirculated back to the beginning
    
    
    
    
    of the plant.
    

    -------
                           TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                               Page
    INTRODUCTION	   1
    
    HISTORICAL DATA  .....................   2
    
    THIS STUDY ...... 	  ......   k
    
    DISCUSSION	,	   5
    
    CONCLUSIONS	   7
                             LIST OF TABLES
                                                               Page
    1.  Efficiency Based on District of Columbia
          "Final Effluent" Samples 	
    2.  Analytical Results - Plant Influent,
          Sampling Station A ............ .....   9
    
    3.  Analytical Results - Secondary Effluent,
          Sampling Station B ..... .  ...........  10
    
    i+.  Analytical Results - Vacuum Filter Filtrate,
          Sampling Station C ...........  . .....  11
    
    5.  Analytical Results - Elutriation Wash Water,
          Sampling Station D .............  ....  12
    
    6.  Analytical Results - Final Effluent (D. C.
          Sampling Point ) , Sampling Station E  .  .  . .  .  .  .   .  13
    
    7.  Analytical Results - Final Effluent (Final
          Manhole), Sampling Station F ............  1^
    8.  Average Measured Concentrations  ...... .....  15
    
    9.  Efficiencies ........ ..... ........  16
    

    -------
                                                              V - 1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
                               APPENDIX V
    
    
    
    
                  RESEARCH PROJECT OF MR. JACK GRAVES
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
            Mr. Graves of the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health,
    
    
    
    
    as his Master's thesis, conducted tests in both the Back River
    
    
    
    
    and Middle River to try to determine why milfoil, which is abun-
    
    
    
    
    dant in the Middle River, does not grow in the Back River.  In
    
    
    
    
    fact, very few if any bottom aquatic plants can be found in the
    
    
    
    
    Back River.  Since there are numerous opportunities for the
    
    
    
    
    milfoil plant to have been introduced to Back River, and since
    
    
    
    
    its environment is very similar to that of the Middle River,
    
    
    
    
    there would appear to be some inhibitory factor present in the
    
    
    
    
    Back River.
    
    
    
    
            For his investigation Mr. Graves removed milfoil plants
    
    
    
    
    from the Middle River, washed their roots, and replaced half of
    
    
    
    
    them in boxes of Middle River bottom sediments and half of them
    
    
    
    
    in boxes of Back River bottom sediments.  Boxes of each type were
    
    
    
    
    placed in the Back River and in the Middle River.  Within three
    
    
    
    
    weeks the plants in the boxes in the Back River were essentially
    
    
    
    
    dead.  After the same period of time, the plants in boxes placed
    
    
    
    
    in the Middle River were found to be flourishing, regardless of
    
    
    
    
    the source of the sediment in which they were rooted.
    

    -------
                                                             IV - 1
                              APPENDIX IV
    
           REGULATIONS OF THE MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF HEALTH
           AND MENTAL HYGIENE GOVERNING PUBLIC SWIMMING POOLS
           AND BATHING BEACHES, REGULATION 1*3 L Ok, APRIL 26,
           1951, SANITARY QUALITY OF WATER, ETC,   (part)
    Under authority conferred by Section 2 of Article h3 of the
    
    Annotated Code of Maryland .  .  .
    
            "The bacteria.! quality of water of natural bathing
    
    beaches is acceptable when the water shows an average ' most
    
    probable number ' (MPN) of coliform bacteria not in excess of
    
    1,000 per 100 milliliters in any one month during the bathing
    
    season, provided a sanitary survey discloses no immediate
    
    danger from harmful pollution.   The presence of such pollution
    
    shall be determined from the findings of sanitary surveys made
    
    by the State Board of Health and Mental Hygiene.
    
            "The right is reserved to close any swimming pool or
    
    bathing beach because of continued failure to meet the above
    
    standards."
    

    -------
                                                            Ill - il
    
            olog        R                    alog       R
            0.00       1.00                  l.Oi*      17-T
            0.30       1.27                  1.08      21.9
            0.1*8       1.83                  1.12      26.8
            0.60       2.6l                  1.15      32.5
            0.70       3.65                  1.18      39-1
            0.78       1+.98                  1.20      U6.7
            0.85       6.65                  1.23      55-3
            0.90       8.67                  1.26      65.1
            0.96      11.2                   1.28      76.2
            1.00      Ik.2                   1.30      88.8
    
            Thus, for the data in Figure A-l where o    is 0.55, R
                                                    xog
    may be estimated for the table as being 2.29.  This value must
    also be corrected for the variability of the MPN test by multiply-
    ing it by a factor of 0.85 for a 5-tube test or 0.76 for a 3-tube
    test.  In this example, five tubes were used, and R has a cor-
    rected value of 1.95.  Thus, the arithmetic mean is found to be
    almost twice the geometric mean, or 1950.
            The arithmetic mean will always be larger than the geo-
    metric mean due to the nature of the log-normally distributed
    data which is skewed toward the higher values.  As shown in the
    table above, the discrepancy rapidly becomes very large as the
    variability of the data (or a,  ) increases.
                                 log
    

    -------
                                                           Ill - 3
    
    
    
    
    
    
            This information may now be used to calculate the coli-
    
    
    
    
    form density that would occur with any given frequency.  The
    
    
    
    
    value exceeded five per cent of the time, for example, would be
    
    
    
    
    the mean density plus 1.65 times the corrected standard deviation.
    
    
    
    
    In this example ,
    
    
    
            i n  £r   n -m\   n   i n™   n   /Value exceeded-,
            (1.65 x 0.30) + loglOOO = log (5j; Qf
    the value exceeded five per cent of the time is found to be 3120.
    
    
    
    
            The term, mean coliform density, is usually presumed to
    
    
    
    
    refer to the geometric mean, since the variation of coliform
    
    
    
    
    bacteria in natural waters is best described by a log-normal
    
    
    
    
    distribution.  However, it is sometimes desired to know the arith-
    
    
    
    
    metic mean density.  This may be determined accurately only by
    
    
    
    
    calculation using the geometric mean density and standard devia-
    
    
    
    
    tion as determined from Figure A-l.  This calculation has been
    
    
    
    
    simplified to a ratio (R) of the arithmetic mean to the geometric
    
    
    
    
    mean.  This ratio depends upon the magnitude of the uncorrected
    
    
    
    
    standard deviation as shown in the table below:
    

    -------
                                                            Ill - 2
    
    
    
            Since the analytical procedure itself has a predictable
    
    
    variability, it is necessary that this be eliminated from the
    
    
    test results before they are subjected to further statistical
    
    
    analysis.
    
    
            The procedure used to accomplish this is as follows:
    
    
            1.  The test results of samples from each station are
    
    
    plotted on log-probability paper as in Figure A-l and a straight
    
    
    line drawn through the points.
    
    
            2.  The geometric mean is found at the intersection of
    
    
    the plotted line and the 50 per cent occurrence line (i.e., MPW
    
    
    of 1000/100 ml).
    
    
            3.  The standard deviation of the log-normal distribution
    
    
    is obtained from the plot.  This may be done by subtracting the
    
    
    logarithm of the value (280) found at the intersection of the
    
    
    plotted line and the -la vertical from the logarithm of the geo-
    
    
    metric mean (1000), i.e., log 1000 - log 280 = 0.55.
    
    
            k.  This standard deviation is then corrected for the
    
    
    variability of the test procedure by reducing it by an appro-
    
    
    priate factor depending upon the number of tubes used, i.e.,
    
                                                      #
    0.32 for three portions and 0.25 for five portions .  Since five
    
    
    portions were used in these tests, the corrected standard devia-
    
    
    tion in the example is 0.55 - 0.25, or 0.30.
       Velz, C. J.
    

    -------
                                                            Ill  -  1
                              APPENDIX III
    
                     STATISTICAL PROCEDURES USED FOR
                    ANALYSIS OF BACTERIOLOGICAL DATA
            The 'basis for the statistical manipulations performed
    
    on the bacteriological data is the log-normal distribution.
    
    This best describes the variability of bacterial numbers in
    
    natural waters.  The log-normal distribution applies where the
    
    logarithms of a set of data rather than the data themselves  are
    
    normally distributed.  The appropriate measure of central tend-
    
    ency of such a distribution is the log mean or geometric mean
    
    which coincides with the median or the value exceeded 50 per
    
    cent of the time.
    
            As stated previously, the serial tube dilution method of
    
    analysis was used to estimate bacterial numbers (MPN) in each
    
    sample collected.  The result of a single such test is actually
    
    just a statistical estimate of the true number of bacteria pres-
    
    ent.  If a series of such tests were performed on a single sample,
    
    these results would also be distributed in a log-normal fashion
    
    due to the statistical nature of the test itself.  The best
    
    estimate of the true bacterial density of the sairmle would be
    
    the mean of the logarithms of the results or the geometric mean.
    
    The variability of the results obtained using this method of
    
    analysis depends upon the number of portions or tubes used for
    
    each sample dilution.  The greater the number of tubes, the less
    
    will be the variability of the test results.
    

    -------
    II - 8
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CO
    rH 3
    e o
    M
    0 EH
    LA O <
    VO H EH
    ON^. CO
    rH a
    1 £j EH
    
    -3- vo o
    1 ON CO pq
    < H W
    M PH
    W -En EH
    J « H CO
    pq w CQ
     a w
    EH M Cd ffi
    ffi Q O
    W S H
    c_> S EH
    <; o 1-3
    pq PH <;
    H pq
    
    0 EH
    0 <
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    c—
    1
    pq
    
    
    vo
    I
    pq
    
    
    LTN
    1
    pq
    
    
    i
    pq
    
    
    
    
    
    
    on
    1
    pq
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CM
    pq
    
    
    
    
    
    eq
    1
    i — 1
    pq
    
    
    
    
    <
    rH
    1
    pq
    
    
    
    rH
    1
    cp
    
    
    cJ
    o
    •H
    -P
    Ctf
    -P
    CO
    
    . — -
    o
    H
    
    
    f — •-,
    ON
    • 	 "
    
    
    s~*
    00
    
    
    
    fn
    •s 	 x
    
    
    
    
    
    
    f 	 S
    VD
    N^_X
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    "LA
    •• —
    
    
    
    
    
    
    --^
    ^
    
    
    
    
    
    
    on
    X 	 .
    
    
    
    
    * — *
    CXI
    X 	 "
    
    
    
    > • -p
    H rt H bo ft
    --' 3 pS pi (U
    H^ r~3 > •
    rH C rH bD
    ^2 '"S ^
    VO
    on o on on
    o -* v
    CO
    CO
    vO
    
    on o o on
    CM LfAJ-
    H CM
    on vo
    t— o on on
    LT\ J-
    H
    
    rH
    ON o on on
    on -3- ON
    ON
    
    
    
    
    
    
    on o o on
    ON LfN-d- OJ
    rH CM
    
    
    
    
    
    
    LT\ on on on
    
    
    
    on
    •
    O t- UA 0
    O rH LTS
    O rH
    O
    VO
    -^
    
    O O O O
    o m on o
    on ON ON o
    -3- O
    o
    rH
    H
    o o o o
    o m o on
    i/\_3- on j
    * *%
    t— CM
    
    co on on t—
    '— - -H CM H rH
    -^d"
    VO
    ON 0) >i • -p
    rH g rH b£) ft
    hs ^ <; co
    rH O VO
    ON O on
    
    
    
    O O rH
    
    0 0 ON
    
    
    rH H
    on ON ON
    CNJ
    
    
    VO
    o") on LA
    _* rH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    on on LA
    OJ CM t—
    
    
    
    
    
    H
    .
    on ON 0
    -=r o
    -&
    CM
    
    
    
    000
    on o o
    oj o on
    O ON
    vo
    -=!•
    
    O O O
    on ^t o
    ON CM on
    ON
    
    
    
    on o o
    ON o o
    O LA
    *! **
    -=f rH
    CM
    VO H VO
    -— • rH CM rH
    LA
    VO
    ON > •
    rH 5 rH hO
    """ "-3 ^ <
    

    -------
                                                                                                II  -  7
           o o
           CM CM
           V  v
    o o     o  o
    CM CM     CM  CM
    V  V     V  V
              o o
              CM CM
              V  V
    o o
    CM CM
    V  V
    O O
    CM -=t
    V
    o o
    O CM
    ro  v
     ft
    H
    O O
    CM CM
    V  V
    o o     o  o
    CM CM     CM  CM
    V  V     V  V
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ." — .
    t)
    CJ
    £j
    G
    •H
    -P
    G
    O
    O
    •• — ^
    m
    i
    <3^
    
    JV]
    CD
     o
    CM rH
    H ~-.
    i a
    H ^
    ^
    cu to
    ,0 0)
    E -H
    CU -P
    > -rt
    O CO
    a G
     OCM
    OOV rH VV -3- O V
    ft
    vo
    H
    
    
    
    OO OO OO OO OO OO OO
    CMCM CMCM CMCM CMCO CMCM CMCM OOCM
    v vvvvv vvvro
    
    
    O
    CO
    
    
    
    O
    H
    H
    
    
    
    
    O
    t—
    rH
    
    
    
    O
    CM
    V
    
    
    
    
    O
    m
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    0 O O
    CM CM LA
    V V
    
    
    
    
    o o o o o o
    CM CM CM H CM CM
    V rH V
    
    
    
    O O O O O O
    CM CO CM -=t CM CO
    V H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O O O O O O
    CM CM CM CM CM CM
    V V V V
    
     0)
    £
    o
                     CM
     I
    rH
    ro
    
    
    rH
    H
                         H
                         rH
     I
    H
                                             CO
    
                                              I
                                   O
                                   H
                                    I
                                                                                            rH
                                             CM
                                             H
                                              I
                                             H
    

    -------
    II
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    LA
    VQ rH
    ON g
    rH
    0
    *> O
    CM H
    1 £5
    H P_H
    fc?
    ^
    0) to
    ,0 0)
    S -H
    > -H
    ro o &
    1 JSS d
    *-^ (U
    •> Q
    J H w
    CP > 3
    •^ rX CJ
    EH D u
    CO O
    G
    K 0
    w +•*
    > Of
    t~l 0)
    (X s^
    -p
    W CO
    CJ
    < rH
    33 Cd
    CJ
    DO 0)
    
    O
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CO
    
    
    t-
    
    
    y
    
    
    
    ^
    vo
    
    
    
    
    r~
    £-/ c3
    Rj VD
    ^j
    -p
    
    ,1-,
    a
    •n O
    C!i LA
    s
    j-j
    0
    
    ro ,0
    C LA
    O
    •H
    -p
    Cd
    -P
    CO
    03
    LA
    
    
    
    
    
    
    -^.'
    
    
    ro
    
    
    CM
    
    
    rH
    
    
    O
    I 3
    ci
    £2
    O O
    LA V£)
    
    O CJ
    CM v£>
    
    O O
    LA -3-
    
    
    
    o o
    CO CO
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    CM t—
    V CM
    
    
    
    
    
    O O
    _3- LA
    
    
    
    
    O O
    cj ro
    rH
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CM LA
    V
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CM CM
    V
    o
    CJ
    y
    0
    CJ
    V
    o
    CM
    V
    rH
    
    1
    rH
    H
    O p
    
    H r-i
    0 0
    t~- tA
    H
    0 0
    CM CM
    
    
    
    O O
    ro CM
    CJ V
    
    
    
    o o
    VO OJ
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CM CM
    v
    
    
    
    0 0
    CM CV
    V V
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    CJ CvJ
    V
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    LA CM
    
    o
    cv
    V
    0
    CO
    V
    o
    CV
    V
    CM
    
    1
    rH
    H
    O O
    IA ~}
    
    0 0
    CM CO
    V v
    0 0
    CM LA
    V
    
    
    0 0
    CM CM
    V
    
    
    
    O 0
    CM CM
    V V
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CM CM
    V V
    
    
    
    O O
    CM CM
    v v
    
    
    
    
    O O
    CO CM
    V V
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O O
    CM CO
    V V
    O
    CO
    V
    0
    CV
    V
    o
    CM
    V
    on
    
    I
    i — i
    rH
    0 0
    on _=i-
    H
    0 0
    ON CM
    
    O O
    CM C—
    V
    
    
    o o
    LA CM
    V
    
    
    
    0 C
    ro LA
    rH
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    t- CM
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CJ CO
    V
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CJ CJ
    V
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CO CO
    V
    o
    CJ
    V
    o
    CO
    V
    o
    CM
    V
    ^
    
    1
    rH
    H
    o o
    LA LA
    
    0 0
    Co CM
    V
    o o
    CM CM
    V V
    
    
    0 0
    CO LA
    V
    
    
    
    0 0
    CM CO
    
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    CM CM
    V V
    
    
    
    O O
    CM OJ
    V v
    
    
    
    
    O O
    CO OJ
    V
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CO CM
    V V
    0
    CO
    V
    0
    CM
    V
    o
    CM
    
    LA
    
    1
    H
    rH
    O O
    CM t—
    rH
    0 0
    CM ro
    ro
    0 0
    H t--
    H
    
    
    0 0
    LA CM
    V
    
    
    
    0 0
    CO CM
    V V
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CJ CO
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CO CJ
    V
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CJ f-
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CM CM
    V V
    0
    CO
    V
    o
    CM
    V
    0
    CM
    V
    CO
    
    1
    rH
    H
    O O
    ON rH
    0 H
    n
    H
    O O
    O -d-
    ro H
    H
    o o
    O CO
    -=^
    CO
    
    0 0
    Q\ VQ
    -^
    
    
    
    0 O
    CO ON
    -3" rH
    n
    ro
    
    
    
    o o
    ro f—
    ro H
    
    
    
    o o
    O. Co
    ,J3"
    
    
    
    
    C O
    ro LA
    LA
    *-
    CJ
    
    
    
    
    o o
    Co CJ
    H v
    0
    ON
    J-
    o
    rH
    CM
    0
    r—
    rH
    ON
    
    1
    rH
    H
    O O
    CM -^r
    rH
    0 0
    ro ro
    rH ro
    0 0
    co ro
    V CM
    
    
    O 0
    cj ro
    CM
    
    
    
    c o
    CJ O
    V JA
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    CV CJ
    V V
    
    
    
    o o
    CM CJ
    V
    
    
    
    
    C 0
    CO CJ
    V V
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CM CO
    V V
    o
    cv,
    V
    o
    CM
    V
    0
    CO
    V
    o
    H
    1
    
    rH
    O O
    CO CJ
    V
    0 0
    Cj H
    V H
    0 0
    CO CO
    V
    
    
    0 0
    CM CM
    v
    
    
    
    0 0
    _=!• CM
    V
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    CJ CM
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    cv co
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    -3- CO
    V
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CM CM
    V V
    0
    CJ
    V
    0
    CO
    V
    o
    a
    V
    H
    H
    1
    rH
    rH
    0 0
    CO LA
    
    0 0
    LA CM
    
    0 0
    CJ CM
    V
    
    
    0 0
    -=t CM
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    CM CM
    V V
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    CM CO
    V V
    
    
    
    0 O
    CM CV1
    V
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CO Co
    V
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CVJ CM
    V V
    o
    a.
    V
    o
    CM
    V
    0
    CM
    V
    co
    rH
    1
    r-H
    i — i
    

    -------
                                                                                                                  II  -  5
                               o o
                               o o
                               CM CM
                               V  V
              O O
              o o
              C\J CM
                 V
              O O
              O LA
              CM
              V
    O O
    o\ o
                                                                C\J
    o  o
    O  CM
    OO
      r>
    
    VD
    O O
    CM OJ
    V  V
    o o
    t— CM
    rH CM
    O O     O  O
    CM CM     ON  CM
    v  v     r—  v
    o o
    CM LA
     V
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    LA
    VO
    ON
    H
    
    " £3
    CM
    rH O
    1 O
    H H
    £H S
    0) PL,
    n S
    1i
     0)
    T3 O -H
    OJ £5 -P
    3 -H
    fl "tQ
    •H >-, C
    -P M (L>
    C > Q
    O K
    
    
    O
    CM K  H
    H O
    
    
    to M
    Q)
    •H
    fn
    05
    -P
    
    o
    •H
    £H M
    EH
    
    bO
    H
    •rH
    
    O
    H
    =H C5
    1
    0)
    CD
    £
    
    £j
    O
    px.
    to
    fi
    o
    •H
    -p
    03
    -P
    CQ W
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    O
    oo
    *
    H
    
    
    
    O
    0
    
    *
    00
    
    
    
    
    o
    0
    o
    ft
    ON
    
    
    
    
    O O
    -=f O
    VO CM
    V
    
    
    
    0 0
    o o
    OJ OO
    oj oo
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    ON
    t—
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    0 O
    oo oj
    f. v
    oo
    
    
    
    
    o o
    0 0
    ON CM
    f V
    ^j-
    
    
    
    
    0
    t—
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    o
    o
    oo
    rH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    O CM
    
    ft ft
    H LA
    
    
    
    o
    o
    CO
    *
    CM
    
    
    
    
    0
    0
    ON
    
    t-^
    
    
    
    
    O
    r—
    rH
    
    
    
    
    O O
    0 VD
    ^"^
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    CO
    OJ
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    0
    o
    ft
    t-
    H
    
    
    
    O O
    o o
    vo o
    f\ ft
    j- o
    vc
    rH
    
    
    o o
    t— 0
    H CM
    V
    
    
    
    o
    o
    CO
    CM'
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    0 0
    OJ OO
    r- ft
    OJ 00
    
    
    
    o o
    0 0
    ON H
    * f>
    t— -3-
    
    
    
    
    o
    o
    o
    A
    o
    H
    H
    
    
    O
    CO
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    ON
    t—
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    0
    OO
    *
    oo
    
    
    
    o
    o
    CO
    ft
    OJ
    
    
    
    
    o
    o
    OJ
    ft
    OJ
    
    
    
    
    0 O
    O\ LA
    C—
    
    
    
    
    0 O
    0 0
    OO LA
    ft
    oo
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    o
    t—
    «*
    H
    
    
    
    o o
    0 0
    oo ON
    r. r,
    H 0
    H
    
    
    
    0 0
    0 0
    OO LA
    ft f\
    ~3" -^
    oo
    
    
    
    o
    CO
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    ON
    -^
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    0 O
    ON CM
    t— V
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    O
    OO
    ft
    oo
    
    
    
    
    0
    o
    o
    ft
    oo
    oo
    
    
    
    o
    ON
    t-
    
    
    
    
    c o
    ON O
    O- OJ
    v
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    O
    o
    
    o
    vo
    rH
    
    
    o
    oo
    rH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    O
    CO
    ft
    OJ
    
    
    
    0 0
    o oo
    o -=r
    r>
    oo
    rH
    
    
    
    O
    o
    o
    ft
    CM
    OJ
    
    
    
    o
    OO
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    H
    00
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    W
           K
           u
           E
           o
              H
    
    to
    
    CM
    O O
    O O
    CM C—
    V t
    rH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O O
    CM O
    ON
    
    
    
    ooooooooo
    OOOOCMJ-OOt— O
    CMOJ-^fC— ONrHrHOO
    V V f f
    OJ rH
    OO O O OO OO OO OO OO OO
    CMOO C— OJ OON OO OO OO OO OO
    V CM OJ -3" OO £•— CO CM t— CO OJ OJ OJ CO IA CM
    r, r. ft v v
    LA rH rH
    
    OO OO QO OO OO OO OO OO OO
    oo oo oo oo ONCO rH co ojoo cr\ oo c~- oo
    OJOvJ OJLA J-OO OJOJ t— t— H-d- H -=rOO OJ
    v V „ f. r. f, f.
    O\H H w ^
    
    
    oo oo oo oo oo oo oo oo oo
    OO OO CMO OOO LAVO OOO OJCM OOOO OJOO
    OJ OJ CO LA rHrHCO OOOOVVrHH OJ
    V V r, ft
    H OU
    
                        -p
                         ctf
                        P
    H
    
    
     I
    rH
    
    H
     I
    r-H
                                                   oo
      I
    H
    rH
      I
     H
    CO
    
    
      I
    rH
    H
                                                                                            ON
    
                                                                                             I
                                                                 O
                                                                 rH
                                                                  I
                         rH
    
                          I
                         H
                         OJ
                         H
                          I
                         rH
                         rH
    

    -------
    

    -------
    II -
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    LfN
    VO
    ON
    H
    CM
    H 0
    1 O
    rH rH
    SH ^
    tU P
    -9 §
    a
    ti> w
    CM O -H
    1 S -P
    < -H
    •• M
    W >- C
    9 ^ Q
    EH S £
    CO J-i
    o
    PH ^
    W *H
    j> | — j
    M O
    pc; u
    
    1^ 1
    o cd
    < a
    PQ 0)
    [i.
    CO
    O
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    OO
    
    
    
    
    
    t—
    
    
    
    o
    ^o
    
    
    
    ,0
    vo
    
    
    
    &U
    cdKo
    ^
    -p
    to
    t3
    s!
    •Hi
    cd u
    ^ LTN
    
    a
    o
    m
    g
    C £5
    •H LfN
    -p;
    EC
    -p
    to
    
    
    as
    LfN
    
    
    
    
    -^
    
    
    
    on
    
    
    a
    
    
    rH
    
    
    i
    1
    
     •%
    H 00
    o o
    o o
    00 LTN
    f.
    H
    
    O C
    0 O
    oo CO
    00
    
    
    
    
    O 0
    CM CO
    _^J- _^J-
    r* t*
    ir\ oo
    
    0 0
    LfN h-
    1 — i
    
    
    
    
    
    0 O
    LT\ CM
    rH
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    vo ON
    
    0
    -^
    
    
    o
    oo
    rH
    
    o
    CM
    V
    
    
    CO
    
    1
    rH
    1 — i
    O 0
    O 0
    co oo
    *
    H
    o o
    o o
    CM OO
    r.
    CM
    0 C
    C 0
    CM CO
    
    
    0 0
    o o
    CM CM
    V
    
    
    o o
    0 0
    CO CO
    
    
    
    
    
    O O
    vo ON
    _-f [*_
    
    
    
    0 0
    VO ON
    ~^d~ ^3"
    
    
    
    
    
    0 O
    ON ON
    _-f _^J-
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    ON rH
    -3- CJ
    o
    tr—
    H
    
    O
    
    
    
    o
    CM
    V
    
    
    OA
    
    1
    rH
    rH
    O O
    o o
    CM CM
    V V
    
    O O
    0 0
    CM CM
    V
    
    O O
    0 0
    CM CM
    V y
    
    O O ON
    O o t—
    CM CM
    V V
    
    
    o
    0
    CM
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    LfN CM
    'V
    
    
    
    0 0
    CM CM
    V V
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CM CM
    
    V V
    
    
    
    0 0
    CM CO
    V V
    O OO
    CM OO
    V
    
    O CM
    CM
    V
    co
    O H
    CM
    V V
    
    
    O
    H
    1
    H
    
    O O
    O O
    LfN CM
    V
    
    0 0
    O 0
    CM CO
    
    
    0 0
    o o
    Cvj CM
    
    
    O O
    O O
    t- >-
    ^ t*
    H H
    
    0 0
    0 O
    O CM
    »> V
    oo
    rH
    
    
    
    O O
    LfN CM
    t--
    ft
    H
    
    0 0
    t-- OJ
    ^
    Cv
    LTN
    
    
    
    O 0
    OO CO
    i — i -^r
    r*
    OO
    
    
    o o
    rH CM
    H
    o
    LfN
    
    
    0
    CM
    V
    
    0
    CO
    V
    
    
    H
    rH
    1
    H
    rH
    0 0
    0 0
    LfN CO
    
    
    0 0
    O 0
    CO CM
    V
    
    0 0
    O O
    CM ON
    V
    
    0 0
    o o
    CM LfN
    
    
    
    0 0
    0 0
    OJ CM
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    LfN -^3"
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    CM D—
    V
    
    
    
    
    
    O 0
    CO OO
    H
    
    
    
    
    O O
    CO LfN
    V
    o
    CM
    V
    
    O
    CM
    V
    
    O
    CM
    V
    
    
    CM
    rH
    1
    H
    H
    

    -------
                                                                                      II  -  3
    o o
    o o
    C\J CM
       V
    o o
    o o
    LA CM
        V
    o o
    o on
    CM rH
    V
    o o
    O\ O
                                    CM
    O O
    O CO
                                           o\
    o o
    CM H
    V H
    O O
    ON o
    o tn
    o o
    CO CM
        V
    o o
    O CM
    CM V
      r<
    ON
    O O
    CM CO
    V rH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Lf\
    ^O
    ON
    
    A
    CM
    H H
    1 S
    H
    O
    ^ rl O
    tJ  --^
    £j £q r"^
    fl (Up.
    •H r* §
    -P 0
    fi S tQ
    O  -H
    ^-x >H 40
    W -H
    i-l > W
    i K a
    
    CQ Q
    w
    KB
     O
    EH H «H
    05 -H
    H
    W O
    o o
    pq
    
    CQ
    
    u
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ra
    0)
    •H
    JH
    c$
    -p
    
    rQ W
    •H
    £_j
    EH
    bC
    a
    •H
    J5
    O
    H O
    
    1
    
    •H
    
    EH O
    H
    cS
    •rH
    EH
    
    a PQ
    o
    
    w
    a
    o
    •H
    I 1 <^
    03
    -p
    CQ
    
    
    H
    H
    
    
    O
    0
    O
    *
    O
    on
    H
    
    
    
    
    O
    O
    rH
    n
    rH
    
    
    
    0 0
    O LA
    O t-
    ON H
    -^
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    O
    CO
    
    
    
    
    O
    t—
    H
    
    
    
    O O
    0 0
    -3- on
    A
    H
    
    
    
    O O
    o o
    CJ t—
    n
    rH
    
    on
    
    I
    rH
    H
    O
    0
    on
    on
    
    
    
    
    o
    o
    o
    A
    O
    rH
    H
    
    O O
    O O
    0 CO
    
    ON ^t
    t- on
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    on o
    on CM
    V
    
    
    
    
    o
    o
    0
    on
    rH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    o
    ON
    t*
    ^3-
    
    
    o o
    CM O
    -f O
    LA VO
    H
    
    0 0
    O O
    LA LA
    A
    t-
    H
    
    
    O 0
    CM 0
    H
    A
    rH
    
    -4"
    
    1
    H
    H
    0 0
    O O
    o on
    c— on
    
    
    
    
    o o
    o o
    O CM
    A A
    on^t
    on LA
    
    
    o
    o
    o
    A
    o
    H
    rH
    
    
    
    
    0
    on
    on
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    0
    0
    t—
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    o
    ON
    A
    ^$
    
    
    o o
    O ON
    -=!• t—
    CM
    
    
    O O
    O O
    t— -3-
    A
    on
    
    
    
    o o
    CM O
    CM CO
    
    
    
    LA
    
    1
    rH
    rH
    O
    0
    o
    o
    CO
    CM
    
    
    O
    o
    o
    A
    ON
    t—
    
    
    O
    0
    0
    
    ON
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O O
    0 0
    O ON
    A A
    -J- t-
    rH
    
    
    O O
    o o
    ON o
    t— -3-
    CM
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    o
    o
    A
    t—
    
    
    o o
    o o
    O ON
    -^ -=r
    rH
    
    o o
    0 0
    vo o
    A A
    -4" -^
    CM
    
    
    O O
    O CM
    CM t—
    A A
    O\ H
    
    CO
    
    1
    rH
    H
    0
    O
    O
    on
    on
    
    
    
    o o
    o o
    0 0
    r> rt
    CM CM
    CM ON
    
    
    O O
    0 0
    O O
    A A
    O O
    O V£>
    t— rH
    •> A
    H
    
    
    O
    ON
    t—
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    0
    o
    n
    ON
    t-
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    O
    O
    A
    VD
    H
    
    O O
    O O
    ON ON
    t—-3-
    
    
    O O
    CM CM
    
    r> A
    rH LA
    
    
    
    O O
    on ON
    on o
    A
    , — i
    
    ON
    
    1
    rH
    H
    O O
    0 0
    ONVO
    t— -3-*
    
    
    
    
    O
    O
    ON
    «v
    —4"
    
    
    
    o
    o
    o
    rt
    0
    on
    on
    
    
    
    
    o
    0
    on
    «%
    CM
    
    
    
    O O
    o o
    0 CC
    O -d-
    on on
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    rH
    CM
    «>
    CM
    
    
    O O
    0 0
    t— CM
    H t—
    
    
    O 0
    on o
    on ~rj"
    A
    C\J
    
    
    
    o o
    on ON
    on -cj
    
    
    
    o
    rH
    |
    rH
    H
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    0
    O
    LA
    A
    _j-
    on
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    on
    on
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    o
    o
    -3-
    A
    CM
    
    
    O O
    0 0
    CO H
    CM
    
    
    O 0
    ON O
    .3- on
    A
    rH
    
    
    
    0 0
    o -3-
    e— ON
    
    
    
    ,_(
    H
    1
    H
    H
    O
    0
    0
    CM
    CM
    
    
    
    0 0
    o on
    O -=f
    r,
    ON
    t—
    
    
    O
    O
    O
    «\
    O
    on
    on
    
    
    
    
    o
    o
    on
    ^
    CM
    
    
    
    O
    O
    o
    rH
    rH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    CM
    
    «s
    LA
    
    
    O O
    o o
    on on
    on CM
    
    
    o o
    CO CM
    
    rt rt
    on H
    
    
    
    o o
    on on
    on on
    
    
    
    CM
    H
    1
    
    rH
    

    -------
    II - 2
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    UA
    V0
    />v
    LJ \
    H
    «•!
    CM
    H H
    i s
    i — i
    o
    !s 0
    H P
    P-H1 W -H
    pq > to
    < « G
    rH £> CU
    r A ^~*\
    CU M
    PS e
    W k
    t> o
    H <»H
    K -H
    H
    gtS
    < — ' (_>
    CO
    P«H
    O
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    rr~i
    \-w
    
    
    
    r*—
    L^
    
    
    
    o
    vo
    xw
    
    
    
    vg
    VLJ
    
    
    *s_j frt
    PH Uj
    PH VO
    <:
    3
    EH
    CO
    W
    
    a o
    H ir\
    
    
    a
    o
    
    GO
    *^» o
    ^ r*-*
    O UA
    H
    EH
    <
    EH
    CO
    
    05
    i r\
    u \
    
    
    xj-
    
    
    
    
    
    ro
    
    
    CM
    
    
    
    H
    
    
     CO
    _=r
    o o
    0 0
    LTN O
    00
    H
    
    
    
    O O
    0 0
    CM CM
    
    
    
    
    
    O O
    0 0
    CO CO
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    o o
    00 CM
    H
    0 0
    oo oo
    OO H
    
    
    o
    H
    H
    
    
    O
    CM
    V
    
    O
    CO
    
    CM
    
    1
    H
    H
    0 0
    ON O
    ^r t-
    
    
    o o
    0 0
    CM CO
    
    
    O O
    0 0
    U~N uA
    
    
    OOO
    0 0 VO
    CM Ovj _=r
    Vw
    V
    o o
    o o
    00 00
    H
    
    
    
    
    o o
    0 0
    OJ C\i
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    o o
    CM ITN
    V
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    0 0
    CO LTN
    
    o o
    oo oo
    H 00
    
    
    o o
    CF\ OO
    t— CM
    1
    H
    -3-
    o oo
    ON CM
    _3-
    CO
    O VO
    CM
    1
    -3-
    00
    
    1
    H
    H
    0 0
    O O
    CM O
    ONVO
    H
    O O
    0 0
    CM CM
    t-^-3-"
    H l/N
    0 0
    0 0
    OO CVI
    H-=f
    ir\
    0 0
    0 0
    oo oo
    H OO
    o o
    0 0
    0 0
    o oo
    U3 H
    H
    
    
    0 0
    0 0
    LTN CM
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    0 0
    f— LTN
    
    
    
    
    
    O O
    O O
    CO CM
    
    0 0
    Ovj H
    CM H
    
    
    O
    oo
    H
    
    
    O
    CVi
    
    
    O
    CM
    
    _3-
    
    |
    H
    H
    0 0
    CM CM
    -4- t~-
    LP> H
    
    0 0
    0 0
    OJ ON
    CVJ [--
    
    0 0
    o o
    oo oo
    CM OO
    
    O O
    O O
    CM 00
    CM 00
    0 0
    0 0
    OO OO
    r-T 00
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    0 0
    I/A 00
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    o o
    ON t-
    t— H
    
    
    
    
    o o
    0 0
    H H
    -3- H
    H
    0 0
    OOCO
    H
    
    
    O
    CO
    
    
    
    O
    H
    H
    
    O
    CVJ
    V
    ir\
    
    1
    H
    rH
    O O
    0 0
    O OO
    -a-'cvj"
    H
    0 0
    O O
    o oo
    -=f 00
    CM
    0 0
    o o
    0 0
    -=t t-
    CM
    0 0
    O O
    vo oo
    ON CVJ
    0 0
    0 0
    O CO
    oo
    1 — i
    
    
    
    0 0
    o o
    cvi o
    ** ft
    CNVD
    H
    
    
    0 0
    O CO
    O -3-
    VD 00
    H
    
    
    
    o o
    o o
    CM CM
    ON ON
    0 0
    O CO
    CM -^r
    I* *
    ON oo
    o
    o
    CM
    f-
    ON
    o
    CN
    -3"
    
    0
    OJ
    V
    CO
    
    1
    H
    H
    O O
    0 0
    oo ON
    CM -J-
    
    O O
    O O
    oo o
    CM OO
    H
    O O
    O O
    H H
    OJ rH
    
    O 0
    O O
    1XN U\
    
    0 0
    o o
    ON CM
    -=f OJ
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    -3- vo
    ON-^T
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    ON 0
    o oo
    H H
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    O CO
    -* -3-
    CM 00
    O O
    O CM
    OO t—
    *r *>
    H H
    O
    OO
    00
    
    
    0
    H
    H
    
    0
    OJ
    
    CN
    
    1
    H
    H
    0 0
    0 0
    oo vo
    OO _3-
    
    o o
    o o
    oo oo
    oo oo
    
    o o
    o o
    LTN CO
    
    
    OOO
    000
    CM CM -3-
    H
    o
    o
    _=f
    H
    
    
    
    
    o o
    ON ON
    -=t t—
    
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    o oo
    oo oo
    H
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    ON CN
    i-_ t^_
    
    0 0
    ON oo
    t— oo
    
    
    0 0
    t*- oo
    H 00
    
    
    O CN
    t— t—
    
    
    o oo
    CM CM
    V
    o
    H
    1
    H
    H
    o o
    0 0
    H OJ
    H OJ
    
    o o
    0 0
    LTN ON
    t—
    
    0 0
    o o
    CO H
    H
    
    o o
    0 0
    t- ON
    H -^r
    0 0
    o o
    CM CM
    t—
    H
    
    
    
    0 0
    OO CO
    00 J-
    f\
    oo
    
    
    
    o o
    CM O
    CU O
    vo
    H
    A
    
    
    o o
    H 0
    00 CM
    ON
    0 0
    CM O
    CM t-
    
    
    o
    f —
    H
    
    
    O
    CM
    V
    
    0
    CM
    V
    H
    H
    1
    H
    H
    0 0
    O O
    CO OO
    CVi
    
    O O
    o o
    f— oo
    H*00
    
    o o
    o o
    H CJ
    H CVJ
    
    O O
    O O
    CVi UA
    Oj"
    o o
    0 0
    t-- oo
    H H
    
    
    
    
    0 0
    ON 00
    ^t OO
    
    
    
    
    
    o o
    oo o
    oo-j-
    CM
    
    
    
    
    o o
    CM ON
    c— o
    H H
    0 0
    t— o
    H t—
    **
    H
    O
    OO
    H
    
    
    O
    OJ
    V
    
    o
    Cvi
    V
    CM
    H
    1
    H
    H
    

    -------
                                            II - 1
             APPENDIX II
    RESULTS OF BACTERIAL ANALYSES
    

    -------
                                                              1-2
    
    
    2.  Maryland State Department of Health
    
            Certain samples collected by the Health Departments of
    
    Baltimore City and Baltimore County were analyzed for coliform
    
    and fecal coliform by the Maryland State Department of Health
    
    laboratory as a service to the Chesapeake Field Station.   The
    
    procedures were virtually the same as CFS procedures, and data
    
    have been treated identically with CFS data,
    
    
    3.  Baltimore City
    
            Bacteriological samples collected by Baltimore Back
    
    River STP over the period 1962-1965 were analyzed by the Balti-
    
    more City Health Department laboratory.  The MPN's were based
    
    on presumptive tubes, using three tubes per serial dilution.
    
    Samples taken from chlorinated plant effluent were analyzed
    
    both with and without addition of thiosulfite.
    CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL*
    *  Standard Methods for the Examination of Water, Sewage, and
       Industrial Wastes, APHA.
    

    -------
                                                              I - 1
                               APPENDIX I
    
                         ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
    
    
    BACTERIOLOGICAL
    
    
    1.  Chesapeake Field Station
    
    
            (a)  All multiple-tube analyses were performed using five
    
    
    tubes per serial dilution.  Samples for Most Probable Number of
    
    
    the chlorinated effluent of the sewage treatment plant were col-
    
    
    lected in bottles containing sodium thiosulfite which reacts with
    
    
    the chlorine to prevent a nontypical disinfection contact time
    
    
    between collection and inoculation.
    
    
            (b)  Method for Coliform Group.  Analyses were performed
    
                                 *
    according to Standard Methods , using the fermentation tube tech-
    
    
    nique.  All presumptive tubes were incubated for U8 hours and
    
    
    those positive submitted to the confirmed test, using brilliant
    
    
    green lactose bile broth.  MPN's were taken from positive con-
    
    
    firmed tubes.
    
    
            (c)  Method for Fecal Coliform Group.   Analyses were per-
    
    
    formed according to Standard Methods, using EC medium at 44.5° C.
    
    
    All tubes were incubated U8 hours.
    
    
            (d)  Method for Fecal Streptococcus.  Analyses were per-
    
    
    formed according to Standard Methods, using the azide broth pre-
    
    
    sumptives and ethyl violet aside broth confirming media.  Both
    
    
    presumptive and confirmed tests were performed.  All tubes were
    
    
    incubated for kQ hours.
    *
       Standard Methods for the Examination of Water,  Sewage,  and
       Industrial Wastes, APHA.
    

    -------
       CC. If
       Ul t-
       I- Z
       4 UJ
       * 2
    
        '  5
       * UJ
       O fi
       o.
                                                                             v>
                                                                . CM
                                                                 #
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1
    1
    1
    } -
    1
    1
    Bl
    J —
    4
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    m
    "#
    >.
    oc
    V) _
    z Zj
    0 l_
    .» r r-
    * < (O
    « UJ
    (9 f^0
    m W ^
    * 3 UJ
    Q. ^
    2 S
    . to
    * ^
    2
    O
    Ul
    CO
    u.
    0
    
    E
    u
    Q.
    O
    
    Z
    (0
    
    tr
    UJ
    J
    
    z
                                                                                            < w
                                                                                            OD Q:
                                                                                                O
                                                                                                X
                                                                                                Q.
                                                                                                CO
                                                                                                O
         o
         o
         o
         10
              o
              o
              o
                                S1N3WIQ3S -
         o
         o
         o
    o
    CD
    O
    
    10
    O
    
    IO
                                  H31VM - t»0d   I/Bui
                                                                                            FIGURE  14
    

    -------
    INIOd  MNV8AV13  „.
       INIOd  «31«0d
      iNIOd
          INIOd  XOD
           39oiaa s
                                    o
                                    (O
    Q
    ro
                        
    -------
     JLNIOd  XNV8AV10
        INIOd  d31HOd
    0-NIOd  AdnaSNVIS
                1MVM
            INIOd  XOO
             390ia8  S
    
    
             390IH9  'N
                        o
                        in
    O
    o
    O
    m
                                                                                             CO
                                                                                             Z
                                                                                             O
                                                           (O
                                                           t-
                                                           z
                                                           UJ
                                                           ^
    
                                                           Q
                                                           UJ
                                                                                                     O
                                                                                                 <0
                                                        (T
                                                        UJ
                                                                                                 O
                                                                                                 <
                                                                                                 CO
                                                                                                     O
                                                                                                     o:
                                                           I
    
                                                           O
                                                           _l
                                                           UJ
                                               UJ6/6UJ    N-1HVQ13PX
                                                                                          FIGURE  12
    

    -------
    INIOd  «31«0d
    INIOd
        iNIOd  XOD
         aooma   s
         390IH8   N
               o
               *>
               CM
    o
    o
    (M
    o
    o
                                                                         •t
                                                                            CO
                                       UJ
                                       2
    
                                       o
                                       UJ
                                       CO
                                                                         *«.   co  e
                                                                            v    UJ 10
                                    Ul
    
                                    >
    
                                    tL
                                                                                 O Q:
    
    
                                                                                 CD °
                                       o
                                       a:
                                       o
                                                                                   FIGURE  II
    

    -------
    

    -------
    iNIOd  XNV9XV1D
      iNIOd  H31HOd
         xanasNViS
      iNIOd  iflNIVM
         iNIOd  XOO
                                                         Q.
    
                                                         o
                                                      51
                                                      
                                                            UJ
                                                      Ul o
                                                        cr E
                                                        o o
                                                        r
                                                      < O
    
                                                      CD ?
                                                          o
                                                          i-
    1N3WIQ3S
                           SnUOHdSOHd  1V101
                                                          FIGURE  10
    

    -------
                                                          CO
                                                          UJ
                                                          CO
                                                          UJ
    
                                                          £
                                                          O
                                                          O
                                                             UJ
    
    
                                                             o
                                                             ui
                                                             CO
           CD
    
           
    -------
    SEDIMENT  DEPTH, (in.)
       OO^O
       CM            —
    
    WATER  DEPTH, (ft.)
    CORE  DEPTH,  ( inches )
                                               FIGURE   8
    

    -------
    AiNnoo  nva
       XTio  ilva
                                       (U
                                       K
                                       o
                                       Ul
                                       ac.
                                       UJ
                                       S
                                       tu
                                       OT
                                       1
                                        CO
    
                                        CD u.
                                           o
    CO
    
    o
    
    u.
    or
    UJ
    
    o
    
    cc
    
    i-
    
    §
    o:
    o
    i-
    co
                                              to
                                        O
                                        <
                                        CD
    CO
    
    
    CD
    
    
    QL
                                              UJ
                                              CO
                                         FIGURE  7
    

    -------
                              o
                              a
                o
                o.
    to
    IK
    <
    
    Z
                oc
                (9
                   z
                   ui
                      o
                      Q-
                      X
                      o
    _ <   m
    
    moo
    
    
    444
    t- I-   I-
    o> at   co
                                           o
                                           OL
    (C
    O
    a.
                                           ro
                                           CD
                                                    O
                                                    a.
              z
              <
              CD
                                                                o
                                                                a
                                                    Z
    
                                                    3
    
                                                    C
                                                    O
                         10
    
                         CD
                                    ±co
                                    0~
                                    a.
                                                                           h-
                                                                           m
    o
    o
      100,000
      10,000- —
    UI
    z
    tc.
    t-
    IU
    X
    o
    u
    o
    o
    4
    m
    
    
    Z
    tc
    o
       1,000- —
                        60     S.O     40     3O     ZO
    
    
                       MILES  ABOVE  MOUTH OF BACK RIVER
                                                         1.0
                                                               o.o
                                1.0     2.0     3.0     4.0
    
    
                             MILES INTO CHESAPEAKE  BAY
                      BACK    RIVER   ESTUARY
    
          PROFILE  OF  RIVER  COLIFORMS,  GEOMETRIC  MEANS,  STP BOAT STATIONS
                                                                                    FIGURE  6
    

    -------
                             Ul
                             s
    xiNnoo  nva
       AlTo  1TV8
                                            z
                                            o
                                            to
    
                                      Z    uj
                                      —    oc
                                      CO    o
    
                                      <    5
                                      CD u.
                                         O Q.
                                      CD
    o
    <
    CD
    
    
    UJ
    £C
    O
                                            CD
                                       FIGURE
    

    -------
    CO
           to
    
           o
           J-
           <
           H-
           co
    
           J-
    
           o
    Ul  o oc
        o oc
        o
    O
    <
    CD
           o
    
           00
    
    
           UJ
           o:
           o
           2E
    
           t-
    
    
           m
     FIGURE   4
    

    -------
                   UJ
                   UJ
    
                   (C
    
                   o
                     z
                     (£
                     (n
                     4
                     III
    UJ
    >
    
    o
    OB
    4
    
    
    CD  N-
    
    
    4  4
    I-  )-
    in  in
    O
    Q.
    
    
    X
    O
    (J
    
    
    UJ
    
    
    4
    o
    a.
    
    
    t-
    3
    Z
    J
    
    
    I
                                      in
    
    
                                      4
    
                                      in
                    O
                    a.
    o
    10
    z
    <
    t-
    cn
                                                       O
                                                       a.
    O
    a.
                                       o
                                       a.
    >-
    
    _i
    o
                                                   o
                                                   a.
    ac
    a
    o
    o
      100,000-
    
    -------
    

    -------
    o
    O
    ^
    
    a.
    2
    UJ
    S
    UJ
    
    2
    O
    UJ
    (9
    (C
    UJ
    O
    <
    a
    a:
    o
    o
    o
    lOO.OOO-i—
      i p.ooo —
       1,000- —
        100-
         10-
                  UJ
                  UJ
                  cc
                  o
                   o
                   >
    O
    a.
    
    Ul
    z
    Ul
    O
    ffl
    00
    <
    CD
    2
    OC
    UJ
    1—
    CO
    UJ
    h-
    <
    
    K
    Z
    o
    a.
    X
    O
    o
    to
    <
    o
    a
    H
    3
    _l
    *
    in
    <
    
    cr
    m
    z
    <
    v>
    t
    <
    o
    a.
    tc.
    UJ
    H
    K
    0
    0.
    IO
    <
                           (6A)
                                                            o
                                                            a.
                                                              z
                                                              <
                                                              m
                                                              o
    
    
                                                              CM
                                                                        o
                                                                        a.
                                                                          (E
    
                                                                          O
                 8.0     7.0     6.0     5.0     4.0     3.0     2.0
    
    
                               MILES  ABOVE  MOUTH  OF BACK  RIVER
                                                                  1,0     0.0
                              BACK    RIVER   ESTUARY
    
                 PROFILE  OF RIVER  COLIFORMS,  GEOMETRIC  MEANS, CFS
                                                                           FIGURE  2
    

    -------
    (O     o
    
    
    <     H
    
    00  u.  g
    
        O  m
    UJ  g  z
    
    >  i-  H
    —  <  o.
    CD
      FIGURE   I
    

    -------
    I I  I I I  I I I I  I I I  I I
    I I  I I I  I 1 I  I I I  I I I
        10          +20
                SAMPLE  PROBABILITY  PLOT
                                                 FIGURE   A-l
    

    -------
                                                    36
                   TABLE 10
    
    
    
    
               BACK RIVER BASIN
    
    
    
    
    CAPACITIES OF SEWAGE PUMPING STATIONS
    Pumping
    Station No.
    1
    2
    3
    U
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    Unnumbered
    Operated by
    Baltimore City
    Baltimore City
    Private
    Private
    Baltimore City
    Private
    Private
    Private
    Baltimore City
    Baltimore City
    Baltimore City
    Capacity
    gpm
    360
    1,600
    Unknown
    1,800
    1,000
    1.U50
    Unknown
    5^5
    70
    200
    Unknown
    

    -------
                                                                     35
                                    TABLE 9
    
                          BACK RIVER, 1962 - 1965
    
                  SUMMARY OF COLIFORM DENSITIES AT BALTIMORE
                      SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT BOAT STATIONS
    Station
    B-l
    B-l-A
    B-l-B
    B-2
    B-3
    B-l*
    B-5
    B-6
    B-T
    No, of
    Samples
    lit
    13
    Ik
    Ik
    14
    14
    Ik
    D4
    13
    Geometric
    Mean
    MPN/100 ml
    1,400
    1,400
    1,700
    91
    45
    44
    32
    18
    13
    Percentile Limits
    Geometric ,
    Std.Dev.-
    0.58
    0.70
    1.57
    0.60
    0.21
    0.38
    0.54
    0.83
    0.52
    95$
    MPN/100 ml
    12,000
    20,000
    63,000
    870
    98
    180
    250
    410
    92
    5$
    MPN/100 ml
    160
    99
    46
    9.5
    21
    11
    4.1
    0.79
    1.8
    a/
    —   Expressed as a logarithm.  Variability of the 3-tube MPN test
        eliminated by subtracting 0.32.
    
        Samples collected June through September of each year and analyzed
        using the presumptive test with 3 tubes per serial dilution.
    

    -------
                               TABLE 8 (Continued)
    
    
                             BACK RIVER, 1962 - 1965
    
    
                   SUMMARY OF COLIFORM DENSITIES-/ AT BALTIMORE
    
                 BACK RIVER SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT SHORE STATIONS
                               June - October 1964
    
    Station
    (1)
    S-l
    S-2
    S-4
    S-5
    S-T
    Spillway
    c/
    TCT-
    
    
    
    Station
    (1)
    S-l
    S-2
    S-4
    S-5
    S-T
    Spillway
    m /TT1 S^.
    Nou of
    Samples
    (2) T
    12
    18
    18
    IT
    IT
    18
    IT
    
    
    No. of
    Samples
    (2)
    14
    14
    14
    1.4
    14
    14
    14
    Mean
    MPK/100 ml
    (3)
    2,400
    4,900
    1,000
    2,800
    1,400
    7.6 x 106
    1,000
    May -
    *
    Mean
    MPN/100 ml
    (3)
    3,400
    9,100
    2,200
    910
    1,400
    7.6 x 10
    2, TOO
    Standard
    Deviation £/
    (4)
    0.61
    0-88
    0,02
    0.56
    0.65
    0.09
    0 = 95
    September 1965
    
    Standard
    Deviation IS.'
    (4)
    0.30
    0.88
    0.86
    0.4l
    0.62
    0.20
    0.84
    Percentile
    95'£
    (5)
    24,000
    13,000
    10,000
    23,000
    16,000
    11 x 10 5
    36,000
    
    
    Percentile
    95$
    (5)
    11,000
    250,000
    56,000
    4,300
    15,000
    16 x 10 3
    65,000
    Limits
    5*
    (6)
    240
    1,800
    95
    340
    120
    .4 x 106
    28
    
    
    Limits
    5$
    (6)
    1,100
    330
    86
    190
    130
    .6 x 106
    110
        Geometric
    
    a/
    —   By Presumptive Test usinjr 3 tubes per dilution.
    
    
    —   Corrected to eliminate variability in MPN test; reported in log units,
    
    c/
    —   Samples treated with thiosulfate to inhibit chlorine.
    

    -------
                                                                      33
                                     TABLE 8
    
    
                             BACK RIVER, 1962 - 1965
    
    
                   SUMMARY OF COLIFORM DENSITIES-/ AT BALTIMORE
    
                 BACK RIVER SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT SHORE STATIONS
    
    
    
                               May - September 1962
    Station
    (1)
    S-l
    S-2
    S-l*
    S-5
    S-7
    Spillway
    c/
    TCT-
    
    Station
    (1)
    S-l
    S-2
    S-l*
    S-5
    S-T
    Spillway
    TCT£/
    No. of
    Samples
    (2)
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    18
    
    Wo. of
    Samples
    (2)
    13
    16
    16
    16
    16
    16
    16
    *
    Mean
    MPN/100 ml
    (3)
    3,800
    1,700
    U , 300
    1,200
    1*,100
    2.1 x 106
    It, 100
    May -
    *
    Mean
    MPN/100 ml
    (3)
    2,800
    1,100
    1,700
    1,200
    2,800
    6.1 x 106
    1,700
    Standar§ , ,
    Deviation —
    (U)
    0.52
    o.6k
    0.50
    0.51
    0.1*3
    0.36
    0.67
    September 1963
    Standard
    Deviation 5/
    (U)
    0.57
    0.78
    0.63
    0.1*8
    0.1*8
    0.26
    0.70
    Percentile
    95#
    (5)
    27,000
    19,000
    28,000
    8,300
    21,000
    8.2 x 106
    52,000
    
    Percentile
    95%
    (5)
    2l*,000
    21,000
    18,000
    7,1*00
    17,000
    16 x 10 2
    21*, 000
    Limits
    5^
    (6)
    5^0
    150
    650
    170
    800
    5Uo,000
    330
    
    Limits
    5%
    (6)
    330
    58
    160
    190
    1*50
    .3 x 106
    120
       Geometric
    a/
    —  By Presumptive Test using 3 tubes per dilution.
    
    
    —  Corrected to eliminate variability in MPN test; reported in log units,
    
    c/
    —  Samples treated with thiosulfate to inhibit chlorine.
    

    -------
                                                                        32
    
                                       TABLE 7
                       CFS BACK RIVER SURVEY, November 5, 1965
                             HEAVY METALS CONCENTRATIONS
    Zinc^7
    Station
    1
    2
    3
    4
    
    5a
    
    5b
    
    5c
    
    6a
    
    6b
    
    6c
    
    7
    
    8
    A
    
    B
    
    C
    D
    H
    I
    J
    
    Soluble
    mg/1
    0.02
    0.03
    0.01
    0.01
    0.06
    0.01
    0.05
    0.01
    <0.01
    0.05
    <0.01
    0.03
    0.05
    <0.01
    0.02
    <0.01
    0.01
    <0.01
    <.0.01
    0.08
    0.06
    0.06
    0.03
    0.04
    0.08
    <0.01
    0.03
    <0.01
    0.04
    0.03
    Part icul ate
    mg/gpy
    2.6
    1.3
    2.1
    0.9U
    1.0
    l.U
    0.93
    2.9
    1.5
    l.U
    0.6
    2.1
    1.1
    7.2
    1.9
    2.7
    2.2
    2.0
    1.6
    1.7
    1.2
    l.U
    1.9
    1.8
    U.3
    1.7
    3U
    36
    lU
    1.6
    Copper—
    Soluble
    mg/1
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    Particulate
    mg/gV
    U.2
    1.5
    1.6
    0.63
    0.32
    0.06
    0.04
    0.69
    0.06
    o.4o
    O.l6
    1.1
    0.43
    3.1
    1.2
    2.0
    0.95
    1.4
    0.68
    0.94
    0.56
    0.57
    1.5
    1.3
    3.2
    0.95
    2k
    19
    7.5
    0.8
    Chromium-
    Soluble
    mg/1
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <:0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    <0.01
    Particulate
    mg/gk/
    1.0
    0.43
    3.7
    0.78
    1.9
    1.3
    1.2
    0.98
    1.8
    1.7
    0.50
    2.5
    1.3
    6.7
    9.3
    U.O
    7.6
    5-2
    7.8
    1.7
    1.3
    2.8
    2.4
    1.6
    4.3
    2.8
    16
    13
    2,7
    2.2
    *
        All samples were taken on November 5.
    aj  Expressed as weight of metal regardless of valence.
    b_/  Milligrams per gram of suspended solids.
    

    -------
                                                                   31
                                  TABLE 6
                 CFS BACK RIVER SURVEY, November 1-12,  1965
                  SUMMARY OF CHEMICAL DATA (EXCEPT METALS)
                PH
    Chlorides
    Oil
    Chlorophyll
    Station
    (1)
    1
    2
    3
    It
    5a
    5b
    5c
    6a
    6b
    6c
    7
    8
    A
    B
    C
    D
    E
    F
    G
    H
    I
    J
    Mean*
    Value
    (2)
    7.7
    8.0
    8.1
    8.3
    8.5
    8.6
    8.7
    8.7
    8.7
    8.7
    9.0
    9.1
    8.3
    8.8
    9.1
    8.7
    —
    7.6
    —
    —
    7.2
    7.1
    No. of Median
    Samples Cone.
    mg/1
    (3) (It)
    2
    2
    2
    It
    It
    It
    It
    It
    It
    It
    It
    It
    k
    It
    3
    2
    -
    1
    -
    -
    1
    U
    *,950
    lt,81tO
    U,230
    3,810
    3,290
    3,360
    3,390
    2,600
    2,720
    2,750
    2,ltltO
    2,380
    3,7*0
    3,180
    2,310
    2,900
    2it
    18
    It H
    65
    33
    120
    No. of
    Samples
    (5)
    10
    10
    10
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    18
    19
    10
    k
    It
    It
    It
    3
    20
    Mean
    Cone.
    mg/1
    (6)
    6
    It
    6
    2
    It
    6
    6
    8
    7
    5
    9
    it
    7
    6
    it
    -
    -
    -
    -
    -
    -
    -
    No. of
    Samples
    (7)
    1
    1
    1
    It
    It
    U
    U
    It
    It
    It
    It
    3
    k
    U
    3
    -
    -
    -
    -
    -
    -
    -
    Mean No. of
    Cone . Samples
    MR/1
    (8) (9)
    31*
    92
    lltO
    160
    200
    200
    230
    190
    180
    2ltO
    260
    250
    280
    250
    180
    —
    —
    —
    —
    —
    —
    —
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    -
    -
    -
    -
    -
    -
    -
    Geometric Mean
    

    -------
                                                              30
                             TABLE 5
            CFS BACK RIVER SURVEY, November 1-12, 1965
                     SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL DATA
    Light Extinction Depth
    by Secchi Disc
    Station
    (1)
    1
    2
    3
    h
    5a
    5b
    5c
    6a
    6b
    6c
    7
    8
    A
    B
    C
    D
    E
    F
    G
    H
    I
    J
    Median
    Value
    inches
    (2)
    30
    23
    15
    12
    11
    10
    11
    10
    11
    11
    10
    10
    12
    10
    9
    —
    —
    —
    —
    —
    —
    	
    No. of
    Samples
    (3)
    10
    10
    10
    20
    19
    19
    19
    19
    19
    18
    19
    19
    18
    17
    18
    —
    —
    —
    —
    —
    —
    ^ ,_
    Total Susp. Solids
    Mean
    Cone.
    mg/1
    (10
    38
    U6
    67
    boo
    220
    130
    1,900
    160
    71
    92
    81+
    150
    290
    110
    UU
    9^
    —
    —
    —
    U
    5
    66
    No. of
    Samples
    (5)
    1
    1
    1
    2
    2
    2
    2
    2
    2
    2
    2
    1
    j_
    2
    2
    1
    1
    -
    -
    -
    1
    1
    2
    Water Temperature
    Median
    Value
    °C
    (6)
    10.0
    9.5
    9.5
    10.5
    10.5
    1.0. h
    10.5
    11.0
    11.0
    10.9
    10.8
    10.5
    10.it
    10.6
    10.6
    —
    —
    —
    —
    —
    —
    — —
    No. of
    Samples
    (7)
    10
    10
    10
    20
    20
    20
    19
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    18
    19
    —
    —
    —
    —
    —
    —
    _ —
    

    -------
                                                                                                                                    29
    EH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ITN
    V^Q
    ON
    H
    
    n
    CM
    H
    1
    H
    
    ^
    0)
    £>
    S
    0)
    
    o
    
    rt
    ^H
    §
    PS
    CO
    
    K
    pr"]
    M
    K
    
    Jyj
    o
    
    pq
    
    CO
    
    o
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CO
    
    CJ
    p"]
    £3
    o
    CO
    g
    o
    M
    K
    <3j
    J>
    
    >H
    pq
    CO
    Si
    0
    M
    B
    M
    K
    EH
    s;
    8
    
    v-3
    «3f
    M
    K
    
    £-1
    O
    
    M
    
    cjj
    i_3
    [T-^
    K
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    rH
    03
    -p
    O
    i^ ON
    £ ^~* — '
    o °
    H
    O
    
    H'-^
    0^
    n> '"""*•
    £ X CO
    
    on
    s 	 ^
    
    -p
    o
    EH '—
    t-
    CH > 	
    W O
    5^
    O
    •H
    H
    O '-»
    CJ -3-
    
    f — V
    X VO
    ^^-'
    on
    ^ 	 ^
    
    
    
    
    ^-j
    EH
    M
    CQ
    Si
    
    Q
    
    *
    
    ^
    H
    J5^
    
    
    
    
    w —
    H C >^---
    n3 O
    O Vt
    0) -H •
    fc H H
    0 S
    CJ
    o
    o
    CQ H
    
    £H r^t
    O O i
    ^H §
    •rH
    H —«•
    o -=r
    
    
    
    on
    rH
    
    
    CM
    O
    rH
    X
    
    
    O\
    CM
    H
    
    
    CO
    •
    on
    
    
    
    
    on
    0
    rH
    
    X
    
    
    CM
    H
    CM
    
    
    
    
    O
    O
    H
    rH
    
    
    
    
    
    
    O
    O
    0
    
    CO
    H
    
    
    O
    d
    
    
    CM
    O
    
    CO
    
    
    rt
    p
    K
    
    w
    JH
    cu
    S
    S
    dJ
    4J
    CO
    0!
    0)
    
    o
    
    GJ
    CQ
    
    o
    
    TJ
    (U
    PH
    
    
    
    
    
    K
    
    CO
    0>
    rH
    o
    o
    
    
    
    pj
    £J
    p^
    
    bC
    a
    •rH
    rH
    JH
    0)
    31
    
    
    
    
    Trf
    
    cd
    
    r^j
    cd
    0)
    rH
    pq
    ID
    cu
    rH
    O
    
    CU
    CQ
    OJ
    cu
    c]
    CJ
    
    
    
    -p
    C
    OJ
    
    rH
    VH
    
    -------
    

    -------
                                                                      28
                                     TABLE 3
    
                    CFS BACK RIVER SURVEY, November 1-12,  1965
    
           SUMMARY OF FECAL COLIFORM AND FECAL STREPTOCOCCUS  DENSITIES
    Station
    (1)
    1
    2
    3
    1*
    5a
    5b
    5c
    6a
    6b
    6c
    7
    8
    A
    B
    C
    D
    E
    F
    G
    H
    I
    J
    FECAL COLIFQRM
    No. of Mean
    Samples MPN/100 ml
    (2) (3)
    12
    12
    12
    20
    20
    20
    20
    19
    22
    19
    19
    19
    20
    18
    18
    10
    13
    13
    13
    13
    12
    20
    <20
    12
    37
    56
    ll*0
    130
    150
    630
    280
    200
    320
    530
    ikO
    280
    350
    550
    1,100
    160
    16,000
    3,800
    1,1*00
    23
    FECAL STREPTOCOCCI Ratio:
    Std. No. of Mean Std. Fecal Coli.
    Dev. Samples MPN/100 ml Dev. Fecal Strep.
    a/ a/
    (1*) (5) (6) (7) (8)
    —
    .89
    .73
    .55
    1.00
    .98
    .99
    .97
    .82
    .95
    1.00
    .1*6
    .80
    .87
    .65
    .63
    • 55
    .1*8
    .95
    .53
    .52
    1.30
    10
    10
    10
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    20
    18
    18
    10
    1*
    1*
    1*
    1*
    3
    20
    <20
    <20
    <20
    <20
    10
    5.1*
    9-1
    28
    27
    21*
    37
    52
    <20
    35
    13
    19
    115
    <30
    11*0
    105
    32
    <20
    —
    —
    —
    —
    .80
    1.18
    .92
    1.05
    .80
    .72
    .82
    .1*3
    —
    .91
    1.17
    .63
    1.00
    —
    .70
    1.28
    .kg
    —
    —
    >.6
    >1.8
    >2.8
    ll*
    21*
    16
    22
    10
    8
    9
    10
    >7
    8
    27
    29
    10
    5
    111*
    36
    1*1*
    >X
       Geometric Mean.
    
    a/ Standard deviation is expressed in logarithmic units.  No correction was
       applied.
    

    -------
                                                                        27
                                       TABLE 2
    
    
    
                      CFS BACK RIVER SURVEY, November 1-12,  1965
    
    
    
                            SUMMARY OF COLIFORM DENSITIES
    Station
    1
    2
    3
    1+
    5a
    5b
    5c
    6a
    6b
    6c
    7
    8
    A
    B
    C
    D
    E
    F
    G
    H
    I
    J
    No. of
    Samples
    12
    12
    12
    20
    20
    20
    20
    19
    22
    20
    20
    20
    20
    18
    19
    10
    13
    13
    13
    13
    12
    20
    Arith~
    Mean—
    MPN/100 ml
    
    
    
    
    3
    2
    
    12
    3
    2
    13
    6
    1
    3
    1*
    11
    1*8
    5
    200
    60
    20
    10
    22
    270
    270
    860
    ,700
    ,200
    600
    ,000
    ,1*00
    ,300
    ,000
    ,000
    ,1+00
    ,700
    ,900
    ,000
    ,000
    ,100
    ,000
    ,000
    ,000
    ,000
    Geometric
    Mean—
    MPN/100 ml
    
    
    
    
    1
    1
    
    2
    
    1
    3
    3
    
    1
    3
    3
    21
    
    100
    25
    10
    
    12
    It 8
    170
    1*00
    ,200
    ,000
    1*20
    ,100
    960
    ,300
    ,500
    ,200
    UK)
    ,600
    ,000
    ,800
    ,000
    900
    ,000
    ,000
    ,000
    90
    Geometric
    Std. Dev.
    a/
    .23
    .56
    .17
    .29
    .1*0
    .29
    .12
    .57
    .kk
    .21
    .1*6
    .24
    .39
    .32
    .18
    .38
    .31
    .56
    .26
    .33
    .26
    1.09
    Percentile Limits
    95%
    MPN/100 ml
    
    
    
    -i
    i.
    5
    3
    
    18
    5
    2
    20
    8
    1
    5
    5
    16
    67
    6
    280
    88
    27
    5
    28
    1*00
    320
    ,200
    ,1*00
    ,000
    670
    ,000
    ,000
    ,900
    ,000
    ,000
    ,900
    ,1*00
    ,900
    ,000
    ,000
    ,900
    ,000
    ,000
    ,000
    ,1*00
    5%
    MPN/100
    5
    6
    90
    130
    260
    330
    260
    21*0
    180
    610
    610
    1,300
    100
    1*70
    1,500
    890
    660
    120
    39,000
    7,100
    3,700
    1
    ml
    .0
    .0
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    .5
    a/
    —   Computed by Thomas' relation.  See Appendix III.
    
    
    
    —   Expressed as a logarithm*  Variability of the 5-tube MPN test eliminated by
    
        subtracting 0.25-
    

    -------
                                                                      26
                               TABLE 1 (Continued)
    Designation
    Stream
    River
    Mile
    Description
    Thiosulfate Contact Tank,
      Sewage Treatment Plant
      Effluent
    6.76   After chlorine contact chamber,
             samples treated with thio-
             sulfate to inhibit chlorine.
    

    -------
                                                                      25
                               TABLE 1 (Continued)
    Designation
          Stream
    River
    Mile
    De s c ript i on
       B-5
       B-6
       B-7
                  Back River            1.70
    Back River            0.00
    Chesapeake Bay       -1.60
    Chesapeake Bay       -3=53
            Midstream, between Claybank
              Point and unnamed point on
              western shore.
    
            Midstream, at river mouth
              between Rocky Point and Drum
              Point.
    
            Midway between Wells Point and
              Millers Island,
    
            About 1_5 mile northeast of
              Millers Island and 2.2 mile
              east of Wells Point—Booby
              Bar headland.
                     (Sewage Treatment Plant Shore Stations)
       S-l
       S-2
       S-h
       S-5
       S-7
    Back River
    Back River
    Back River
    Back River
    Back River
    Spillway Within Sewage Treatment
      Plant
     7.12   From western shore at Green-
              marsh Point„
    
     7.65   At southwestern end of Eastern
              Boulevard Bridge.
    
     7.65   At northeastern end of Eastern
              Boulevard Bridge.
    
     6.1^4   From eastern shore at foot of
              Scandalwood Road, about Chi
              mile southeast of mouth of
              Deep Creek.
    
     6.28   From eastern shore at foot of
              Riverside Drive about 0.1
              mile northwest of Cox Point,
    
     	    Point at which flow is diverted
              to Bethlehem Steel Company
              Plant.
    

    -------
                                TABLE 1 (Continued
    Designation
          Stream
    River
    Mile
             Description
       B
       D
       G
    
       H
    
       I
    Deep Creek (tidal)    6.30
                          8,00
    
    
    Deep Creek (tidal)    6.30
                  Northeast Creek
                    (tidal)
    Stemmers Run (non-
      tidal)
                                        8.00
                  Redhouse Creek (non-  9,20
                    tidal)
    Moores Run
    
    Herring Run
    
    Bread and Cheese
      Creek
    
    Sewage Treatment
      Plant Effluent
    10.20
    
     9.20
    
     6.90
            Midstream, near mouth, between
              two unnamed points.
    
            Midstream, about 0,2 mile
              above mouth.
    
            Midstream, about 0.2 mile
              above Marilyn Avenue Bridge.
    
            At bridge, on Stemmers Run
              Road (continues as Back River
              Neck Road).
    
            At bridge, on U. S. UO.
    At bridge, on U. S. HO.
    
    At bridge, on U. S. Uo.
    
    At bridge, on North Point
      Boulevard.
                                        6.76   After chlorine contact chamber.
                      (Sewage Treatment Plant Boat Stations)
       B-l
    
    
       B-l-A
    
    
       B-l-B
    
       B-2
    
    
       B-3
    Back River
    
    
    Back River
    
    
    Back River
    
    Back River
    
    
    Back River
     7.11   Midstream, opposite Greenmarsh
              Pointo
    
     6.78   At Sewage Treatment Plant
              Effluent discharge.
    
     6.29   Midstream, opposite Cox Point.
    
     U.91   Midstream, about 0.2 mile
              downstream from Walnut Point„
    
     3.12   Midstream between Porter Point
              and Todd Point.
    

    -------
                                                                      23
                                     TABLE 1
    
                         DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLING STATIONS
    Designation
    Stream
    River
    Mile
    Description
                       (Chesapeake Field Station Stations)
                  Back River
                  Back River
                    0.00   Midstream, at river mouth,
                             between Rocky Point and
                             Drum Point„
    
                    1.69   Midstream, between Claybank
                             Point and unnamed point on
                             western shore.
    3
    k
    5a
    5b
    5c
    6a
    6b
    6c
    7
    8
    Back River
    Back River
    Back River
    Back River
    Back River
    Back River
    Back River
    Back River
    Back River
    Back River
                                        3.11   Midstream,  between Porter Point
                                                 and Todd  Point.
    
                                        H.39   Midstream,  opposite Stansbury
                                                 Point.
    
                                        5-3T   Near western shore, opposite
                                                 Walnut  Point.
    
                                        5.37   Midstream,  opposite Walnut
                                                 Point.
    
                                        5.37   Near eastern shore, opposite
                                                 Walnut  Pointo
    
                                        6.32   Near western shore, opposite
                                                 Cox Point.
    
                                        6.32   Midstream,  opposite Cox Point.
    
                                        6.32   Near eastern shore, opposite
                                                 Cox Point „
    
                                        7.65   Midstream,  at Eastern Boulevard
                                                 Bridge.
    
                                        8.00   Midstream,  opposite unnamed
                                                 point at  confluence of Back
                                                 River and Northeast Creek.
                  Muddy Gut (tidal)      ^.90   Midstream,  at  mouth.
    

    -------
    

    -------
                                                                 22
                           VI.   BIBLIOGRAPHY
    1.  "Summary Report-Pollution of Back River,"  Chesapeake  Bay-
        Susquehanna River Basins  Project, Public Health Service,
        Region III, U.  S. Department of Health, Education,  and
        Welfare, January
    2.  "A Study of Pollution Indicators in a Waste Stabilization
        Pond," Geldreich, Clark and Huff, Journal of the Water
        Pollution Control Federation,  Vol.  36, No.  11,  pp 1372-1379,
        November 196k.
    
    3.  "Physical Condition of Streams in Baltimore," Ira L.  Whitman,
        December 1966,  prepared for Baltimore (City) Department  of
        Public Works.
                                                                , if  , '.',   •
    

    -------
                                                                 21
    
    
    
    
    
    
    The schedule of development of this plan could te a significant
    
    
    
    
    factor in control of pollution in Back River.   A proposed channel,
    
    
    
    
    as part of the development of port facilities, could be quite
    
    
    
    
    effective in increasing the amount of tidal excursion,  the result-
    
    
    
    
    ing dilution of nutrients, and the lowering of water temperatures.
    
    
    
    
    The beneficial water quality aspects of a deepened shipping
    
    
    
    
    channel is directly related to the concurrent  development of
    
    
    
    
    pollution control facilities in the area and correction of exist-
    
    
    
    
    ing inadequacies.
    

    -------
                                                                 20
    
    
    
    
    
    
    established priorities for sewer extensions by cooperation of
    
    
    
    
    the public works and health departments.  All sources of pollu-
    
    
    
    
    tion from private sewage disposal systems have been located,
    
    
    
    
    priorities established, some extensions completed, some are
    
    
    
    
    presently under construction, and the remainder are in some
    
    
    
    
    stage of right-of-way acquisition or design.  There is some evi-
    
    
    
    
    dence of pollution in Herring Run and Moores Run within the
    
    
    
    
    Baltimore City limits which appears to originate as a result of
    
    
    
    
    deficiencies in the sewerage system.  Inspectors have been as-
    
    
    
    
    signed to locate and identify any questionable outfall discharges— ,
    
    
    
    
            It can be estimated with reasonable accuracy that 1,100
    
    
    
    
    homes remain to be sewered at an estimated cost of $^.5 million,
    
    
    
    
    with the exceptions previously mentioned.  The costs include the
    
    
    
    
    necessary sewage pumping stations and additional treatment plant
    
    
    
    
    capacity required.
    
    
    
    
            The time schedule for the completion of the program is a
    
    
    
    
    function of the availability of funding which, in turn, depends
    
    
    
    
    upon State and Federal aid availability.  The corrective action
    
    
    
    
    program then is to accelerate the sewer extension program to
    
    
    
    
    complete the design and make the appropriate funds available.
    
    
    
    
            On March 23, 1966, the Baltimore County Planning Board
    
    
    
    
    adopted the Report on the Master Plan and Comprehensive Rezoning
    
    
    
    
    Map for the Eastern Planning Area.  Part of this area includes
    
    
    
    
    the peninsula along the north shore of the Back River Estuary.
    

    -------
                                                                 19
    
    
    
    
    
    
                     V,  CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM
    
    
    
    
    
    
            In accordance with Federal Water Pollution Control
    
    
    
    
    Administration policy, all pollution studies include a program
    
    
    
    
    of corrective action with cost estimates, if applicable.  The
    
    
    
    
    196^ study suggested several areas for water quality improve-
    
    
    
    
    ment which were not evaluated because of lack of information
    
    
    
    
    which this study now furnishes.  The original proposals to (l)
    
    
    
    
    control marine craft waste discharges, (2) regulate solid waste
    
    
    
    
    disposal areas, and (3) develop land use regulations in unsewered
    
    
    
    
    areas, remain valid and are provided for in continuing studies
    
    
    
    
    and in the new regional plan.  In addition, the increase in
    
    
    
    
    diversion of the effluent from the Back River Sewage Treatment
    
    
    
    
    Plant (currently 80 per cent) to industrial water use is effec-
    
    
    
    
    tive in retarding the rate of eutrophication and additional diver-
    
    
    
    
    sion should be encouraged.  The cooperation of industry in in-
    
    
    
    
    creasing the degree of treatment of wastes is also desirable.
    
    
    
    
            The most effective program to improve water quality in
    
    
    
    
    the Kstuary was identified in the current study as the extension
    
    
    
    
    of sewerage to eliminate private disposal systems in all loca-
    
    
    
    
    tions where a significant pollution problem exists and where such
    
    
    
    
    extensions are economically feasible.
    
    
    
    
            Prior to the recent Amendment to Article ^3 of the Laws
    
    
    
    
    of Maryland requiring all counties to provide plans for adequate
    
    
    
    
    sewerage systems before 1970, the Baltimore County government had
    

    -------
                                                                 18
    
    
    
    
    
    
            Present diversion of most of the Treatment Plant effluent
    
    
    
    
    for industrial use has probably slowed the eutrophication process.
    
    
    
    
    A planned further increase in the industrial use of the treated
    
    
    
    
    effluent may, for practical purposes, reduce nutrients to negli-
    
    
    
    
    gible levels in Back River.  Land use in the Back River watershed
    
    
    
    
    has stabilized in urban and suburban development, so that factors
    
    
    
    
    other than treated waste discharges are not pertinent.
    

    -------
                                                                 17
    
    
    
    
    
    
    bottom core observations made during the survey which showed
    
    
    
    
    rapidly increased thickness of organic deposits of reduced oxygen
    
    
    
    
    content some distance downstream from the Treatment Plant out-
    
    
    
    
    fall.  These deposits then generally decreased in thickness ap-
    
    
    
    
    proaching the Bay, presumably as the nutrient-stimulated algal
    
    
    
    
    growth was dispersed and diluted.  Nitrogen, phosphorus, and
    
    
    
    
    organic carbon determinations of the sediment water interface
    
    
    
    
    samples also showed a rapid downstream decrease after an initial
    
    
    
    
    build-up below the Treatment Plant outfall.  These oxidized and
    
    
    
    
    reduced deposits with their high available nutrient content appear
    
    
    
    
    to be the result of treated effluents from the Sewage Treatment
    
    
    
    
    Plant since it was placed in operation in 1911.
    
    
    
    
            In summary, it can be concluded that eutrophication of
    
    
    
    
    the Back River Estuary has been accelerated by discharges from
    
    
    
    
    the Sewage Treatment Plant from evaluations of the following:
    
    
    
    
    (1) the relative position of the underlying gray clay and its
    
    
    
    
    relatively low phosphorus content, (2) an examination of the
    
    
    
    
    available nautical charts for the Back River Estuary since the
    
    
    
    
    l870's, (3) the underlying gray clay sediment deposits of homo-
    
    
    
    
    geneous, small-sized particles which are evidence of the geologic
    
    
    
    
    stilling basin effects of a small watershed discharging into a
    
    
    
    
    relatively large estuary, and (k) the increased chlorophyll for-
    
    
    
    
    mation in the lower estuary.
    

    -------
                                                                 16
    
    
    
    
    
    
    in the channel and a gradual build-up to a sill at the mouth.
    
    
    
    
    The sediments generally show a recent fluvial oxidized material
    
    
    
    
    in the upper estuary; extensive deposits showing reduced oxygen
    
    
    
    
    conditions extending from the Sewage Treatment Plant gradually
    
    
    
    
    decreasing in thickness toward the mouth of the estuary; and
    
    
    
    
    below this a fine, compact, gray clay of obviously different
    
    
    
    
    origin than the overlying material with a relatively low phos-
    
    
    
    
    phorus content (Figure 9).  The phosphorus content of both oxi-
    
    
    
    
    dized and reduced deposits (Figure 9) is similar and is in marked
    
    
    
    
    contrast to the low content of the underlying gray clay.
    
    
    
    
            The phosphorus in the top 5 cm of bottom cores was
    
    
    
    
    measured and plotted (Figure 10) as representing that available
    
    
    
    
    for uptake into the estuary water.  Organic carbon and nitrogen
    
    
    
    
    determinations in the same samples (Figures 11 and 12) confirm
    
    
    
    
    the observation that there is a rapid nutrient build-up beginning
    
    
    
    
    at the Sewage Treatment Plant to a maximum at Cox Point (Station
    
    
    
    
    6) and a gradual reduction to values approximating conditions
    
    
    
    
    above the Treatment Plant effluent discharge point.
    
    
    
    
            The effects of the extensive eutrophication in the Back
    
    
    
    
    River Estuary, accelerated by the high nutrient content of the
    
    
    
    
    Back River Sewage Treatment Plant effluent, are not as serious
    
    
    
    
    as the effects in the non-tidal body of water.  The fraction of
    
    
    
    
    nutrient escape is large because of the shape of the Estuary and
    
    
    
    
    the effects of tidal excursion.  This deduction is supported by
    

    -------
    

    -------
                                                                  15
    
    
    
    
    
    
    sediment fraction of the water samples.   Significantly higher
    
    
    
    
    particulate concentrations of each of these metals were found
    
    
    
    
    in samples from Herring Run, Bread and Cheese Creek, and the
    
    
    
    
    Back River Sewage Treatment Plant effluent.  The reason for the
    
    
    
    
    higher concentrations at these locations could not "be determined,
    
    
    
    
    but may be related to particular industrial activities on the
    
    
    
    
    drainage watersheds above the sampling points.
    
    
    
    
             All of the dissolved metal concentrations observed were
    
    
    
    
    well below levels considered toxic to aquatic life, and the metals
    
    
    
    
    contents of the suspended particulate matter is of little signi-
    
    
    
    
    ficance in Back River.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    C.  EXTENT AID SOURCE OF NUTRIENTS IN THE ESTUARY
    
    
    
    
             During and after the water pollution survey in November
    
    
    
    
    1965, analyses of nutrients were made to determine the extent of
    
    
    
    
    phosphorus compounds in the estuarial water and bottom sediments ,
    
    
    
    
    nitrogen and organic carbon in the sediments, and phytoplankton
    
    
    
    
    in the water.  The results are plotted in Figures 8 to lU.  Water
    
    
    
    
    was sampled with a PVC Van Dorn bottle, and sediments were sampled
    
    
    
    
    with a two-foot Phleger cover.  The observations included tempera-
    
    
    
    
    ture, salinity, and Secchi disk readings.  The analyses gave values
    
    
    
    
    for total phosphorus, phosphate, Kjeldahl nitrogen, organic carbon,
    
    
    
    
    and sand-silt-clay ratios.
    
    
    
    
             The profile of the river bottom and sediment depths
    
    
    
    
    (Figure 8) shows an estuary with a maximum water depth of ten feet
    

    -------
                                                                  lU
    
    
    
    
    period preceding the survey.   A slight lateral chloride stratifi-
    
    
    
    
    cation in the Estuary may be  noted at Stations 5 and 6 just below
    
    
    
    
    the treatment plant outfall where the chloride concentration shows
    
    
    
    
    a slight increase from the west to the east bank.  The chloride
    
    
    
    
    gradient is probably caused by the lower chloride concentration
    
    
    
    
    in the effluent discharged by the Back River Sewage Treatment
    
    
    
    
    Plant on the western shore, which apparently promotes a counter-
    
    
    
    
    clockwise horizontal circulation.  Such a flow pattern would also
    
    
    
    
    explain the higher bacterial  densities found on the western side
    
    
    
    
    of the Estuary.
    
    
    
    
             Results of analyses  for oils are inconclusive because
    
    
    
    
    of the low accuracy of the analytical method used at the levels
    
    
    
    
    encountered and the influence of sampling techniques.  Samples
    
    
    
    
    were scooped from the water's surface where oil content should
    
    
    
    
    be highest.  No trend in oil  concentration distribution was found
    
    
    
    
    along the Estuary, although the levels found at Station 7 below
    
    
    
    
    the Eastern Boulevard Bridge  were consistently higher than at
    
    
    
    
    any other location.  The amounts of oil detected during this
    
    
    
    
    particular period are not considered to be excessive.
    
    
    
    
             Analyses for heavy metals such as zinc, copper, and
    
    
    
    
    chromium were performed on water samples from each station;
    
    
    
    
    results are shown in Table 7.  Dissolved copper and chromium
    
    
    
    
    were riot detectable (<0.01 mg/l) while zinc concentrations of
    
    
    
    
    from <0.01 to a maximum of 0.08 mg/l (at Stations 8 and C) were
    
    
    
    
    found.  These metals were readily detected in the suspended
    

    -------
                                                                 13
    
    
    
    
    
    
            It is interesting to note, hovever, that despite the
    
    
    
    
    existing growth stimulating conditions, Back River is virtually
    
    
    
    
    free of the Eurasian milfoil plant that is so prevalent in other
    
    
    
    
    areas of the Bay.  Experiments conducted by the School of Public
    
    
    
    
    health, The Johns Hopkins University (see Appendix V), in which
    
    
    
    
    milfoil plants were transplanted from the adjacent Middle River
    
    
    
    
    Estuary to Back River, seem to indicate that some quality charac-
    
    
    
    
    teristics of Back River waters are detrimental to the plant.
    
    
    
    
    Further study to determine these characteristics is certainly
    
    
    
    
    warranted.
    
    
    
    
            Results of transparency measurements in Back River could
    
    
    
    
    also be an indicator of the high algal populations present.   Trans-
    
    
    
    
    parency and chlorophyll concentrations appear to be inversely
    
    
    
    
    correlated; i.e., as the Bay is approached, transparency steadily
    
    
    
    
    improves from 10 inches to 30 inches, while chlorophyll levels
    
    
    
    
    decline.  It is not unusual to find that high algal densities
    
    
    
    
    reduce the clarity of the water considerably.  However, it should
    
    
    
    
    also be noted that the Estuary becomes deeper and contains fewer
    
    
    
    
    suspended solids as the Bay is approached.  This factor could
    
    
    
    
    also have a decided influence on clarity of the water.
    
    
    
    
            Observed chloride concentrations increased from about
    
    
    
    
    2,^00 mg/1 at the head of the Estuary to almost 5,000 mg/1 at
    
    
    
    
    the mouth, which is approximately 15 per cent of that of sea water.
    
    
    
    
    These high concentrations were due both to the low stream inflows
    
    
    
    
    normally expected in the late fall  months and the extended drought
    

    -------
                                                                 12
    
    
    
    
    
    
    B.  PHYSICAL AID CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ESTUARY
    
    
    
    
            A limited amount of data on certain physical and chemical
    
    
    
    
    characteristics of Back River was collected.  These data are sum-
    
    
    
    
    marized in Tables 5, 6, and 7-
    
    
    
    
            Temperature varied slightly along the length of the Es-
    
    
    
    
    tuary within the range of 9-5 to 11.0 degrees Centigrade.  The
    
    
    
    
    pH dropped steadily from a high value of 9-1 at the upper end of
    
    
    
    
    the Estuary to 7-7 at the mouth.  This is a reflection of the
    
    
    
    
    high level of algal activity in the Estuary which diminishes as
    
    
    
    
    the Bay is approached.  This activity is also shown by the
    
    
    
    
    chlorophyll levels which are highest (approximately 250 yg/l) at
    
    
    
    
    the head of the Estuary and drop steadily to low levels (3^ yg/l)
    
    
    
    
    near the mouth (Figure 13).
    
    
    
    
            The chlorophyll pigment levels found are among the highest
    
    
    
    
    ever reported in the Chesapeake Bay area.  This is not unexpected,
    
    
    
    
    however, because of the relatively large nutrient addition by the
    
    
    
    
    Back River Sewage Treatment Plant effluent to the shallow Estuary.
    
    
    
    
    During warm weather the Estuary receives a small amount of fresh
    
    
    
    
    water inflow which promotes desirable flushing and exchange with
    
    
    
    
    the waters of the Bay.  As a result, ideal conditions are created
    
    
    
    
    for a large increase in algal population, which is readily ap-
    
    
    
    
    parent in the green color of the Back River waters.  This could
    
    
    
    
    ultimately cause an accumulation of unsightly and odoriferous
    
    
    
    
    floating mats of decaying algae along the shore.
    

    -------
                                                                 11
    
    
    
    
    
    
    FC:FS ratio was never found to be less than one at any estuary
    
    
    
    
    location, suggesting bacterial pollution from other than human
    
    
    
    
    sources is not a significant factor affecting bacterial quality
    
    
    
    
    of Back River.
    
    
    
    
            An examination of the standard deviation and the upper
    
    
    
    
    and lower percentile limits presented in Tables 2 and 3 reveals
    
    
    
    
    the variability of the coliform densities observed in the Estuary.
    
    
    
    
    The greatest variation in coliform density is found in the Treat-
    
    
    
    
    ment Plant effluent (J) which had a standard deviation of 1.09.
    
    
    
    
    The variability is also reflected in high standard deviations at
    
    
    
    
    Stations 5a, 5b, 6a, 6b, and 7; however, because of the downstream
    
    
    
    
    locations of these stations, the variability is apparently direct-
    
    
    
    
    ly influenced by the Treatment Plant discharge.  This variability
    
    
    
    
    diminishes both above and below these stations.  It would appear
    
    
    
    
    from these data, as well as certain of the chemical data discussed
    
    
    
    
    below, that the Sewage Treatment Plant effluent travels along the
    
    
    
    
    west bank of the river for some time before being mixed through-
    
    
    
    
    out the entire cross-section.  Further studies of water movement
    
    
    
    
    and circulation in the Estuary are needed to ascertain flow
    
    
    
    
    patterns, but the findings of this study indicate that while the
    
    
    
    
    Treatment Plant effluent normally contributes a small percentage
    
    
    
    
    of the total bacterial contamination, it will periodically cause
    
    
    
    
    high coliform densities, particularly on the west bank of the
    
    
    
    
    Estuary.
    

    -------
                                                                  10
    
    
    
    
    
    
             The influence of polluted tributary  inflows  discussed
    
    
    
    
     previously is  reflected markedly in the  high bacterial  levels
    
    
    
    
     found in the samples collected at Stations 7, 8>  and C  (Figure
    
    
    
    
     l).   These stations  were located upstream from the Sewage  Treat-
    
    
    
    
     ment Plant outfall,  and the bacterial levels were three of the
    
    
    
    
     four highest found in the estuary, all being 3,000  (MPN/100 ml)
    
    
    
    
     or greater (See Table 2).
    
    
    
    
             The highest  coliform density in  the  estuary, 3,800 (MPN/
    
    
    
    
     100 ml), was at Station D in Deep Creek.  Since the  density at
    
    
    
    
     the mouth of Deep Creek, Station B, was  less than half  (1,600)
    
    
    
    
     of that found at Station D, it would appear  that an  additional
    
    
    
    
     source of bacterial  pollution may exist  in the vicinity of the
    
    
    
    
    Marilyn Avenue Bridge crossing Deep Creek. A ratio of fecal coli-
    
    
    
    
     form to fecal streptococci of 29 at Station  D suggests  that the
    
    
    
    
     source of pollution  is of human origin.
    
    
    
    
             The high coliform densities found at the head of the
    
    
    
    
     Estuary decrease rapidly proceeding downstream (Figure  2).  The
    
    
    
    
     geometric mean coliform density decreases to 1,000  (MPN/100 ml)
    
    
    
    
     near Cox Point approximately 6.3 miles above the mouth, remains
    
    
    
    
     the same for about one mile downstream to Walnut Point, and then
    
    
    
    
     diminishes steadily  to a low level of 12 (MPN/100 ml) near Rocky
    
    
    
    
     Point (Station l).
    
    
    
    
             The fecal coliform and fecal streptococci densities
    
    
    
    
     follow the same trend, being highest at  the  head of  the Estuary
    
    
    
    
     and dropping steadily to very low levels at  the mouth.   The
    

    -------
    originate from animals.  An intermediate ratio is considered to
    
    
    
    
    be inconclusive.
    
    
    
    
            In each of the tributary streams the FC:FS ratio was
    
    
    
    
    greatly in excess of 2.5, indicating that the coliforra densities
    
    
    
    
    were probably of human origin.
    
    
    
    
            The coliforms observed in the treated sewage effluent
    
    
    
    
    are obviously of human origin.  The FC:FS ratio (>l) was incon-
    
    
    
    
    clusive, however, because the unexpectedly low FS density could
    
    
    
    
    only be expressed by an upper limit (>20/100 ml).
    
    
    
    
            2.  Back River Estuary
    
    
    
    
            Regulations governing the bacterial quality of natural
    
    
    
    
    bathing beaches, adopted by the Maryland State Board of Health
    
    
    
    
    and Mental Hygiene, require that the average most probable num-
    
    
    
    
    ber (MPN) of coliform not exceed 1,000 per 100 milliliters.
    
    
    
    
            Examination of Figure 2 shows that the mean coliform
    
    
    
    
    density exceeds the regulatory limit in the upper three miles
    
    
    
    
    of the Back River Estuary or in that area upstream from Walnut
    
    
    
    
    Point.  This conclusion is based upon the geometric mean coli-
    
    
    
    
    form density which is often used to describe bacterial data.
    
    
    
    
    Consideration of the arithmetic mean density which is always
    
    
    
    
    higher than the geometric mean would place the limit for accept-
    
    
    
    
    able bathing waters slightly downstream or at Stansbury Point,
    
    
    
    
    as shown in Figure 3.  The State regulations do not specify
    
    
    
    
    which mean value should be used.
    

    -------
    

    -------
    locations sampled, reflecting the operational difficulties asso-
    
    
    
    ciated with maintaining a uniform chlorine residual in treatment
    
    
    
    plant effluents.
    
    
    
            To determine relative significance of the bacterial con-
    
    
    
    tribution of the tributary inflows to Back River, it is necessary
    
    
    
    to consider both their bacterial densities and rate of flow.
    
    
    
    The product of these two factors gives a relative index of the
    
    
    
    total numbers of bacteria contributed per unit time by each
    
    
    
    tributary.
    
    
    
            This procedure was carried out (Table h) and revealed
    
    
    
    that Herring Run was the source of almost 90 per cent of both
    
    
    
    coliform and fecal coliform bacteria contributed by the five
    
    
    
    streams and the Back River Sewage Treatment Plant.  Moores Run
    
    
    
    and Stemmers Run, together, provided about 10 per cent of the
    
    
    
    total, while the contributions of the Back River Sewage Treat-
    
    
    
    ment Plant effluent, Bread and Cheese Creek, and Redhouse Creek
    
    
    
    contributed about one per cent or less.
    
    
    
            Analyses of samples for fecal coliform (FC) and fecal
    
    
    
    streptococci (FS) densities were performed to provide an indica-
    
    
    
    tion of the source of the coliform bacteria observed.  It has
    
    
                    2.1
    been established—  that a ratio of FC to FS (FC:FS) densities
    
    
    
    exceeding 2.5 at any location indicates that the coliform bacteria
    
    
    
    present are presumably of human origin.  Where the FCrFS ratio
    
    
    
    is less than one, the coliform density observed is likely to
    

    -------
                        IV.  SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
    
    
    
    
    
    
    A.  BACTERIAL QUALITY OF BACK RIVER
    
    
    
    
            The individual results of bacteriological analyses of
    
    
    
    
    all samples are presented in Appendix II.  These results are
    
    
    
    
    summarized in Tables 2 and 3 where the geometric mean and stand-
    
    
    
    
    ard deviation of the data from each station are given.  The
    
    
    
    
    statistical procedures used to determine these properties are
    
    
    
    
    described in Appendix III.  Bacterial quality of the Estuary
    
    
    
    
    and various tributaries is summarized as follows:
    
    
    
    
            1.  Back River Tributaries
    
    
    
    
            Four of the five tributary streams sampled showed coli-
    
    
    
    
    form densities greater than found at any other survey location.
    
    
    
    
    Moores Run (with a geometric mean coliform density (MPN) of
    
    
    
    
    100,000/100 ml) was the most highly polluted location encountered
    
    
    
    
    in the survey.  Herring Run (MPN 25,000/100 ml), Stemmers Run
    
    
    
    
    (MPN 21,000/100 ml), and Bread and Cheese Creek (MPN 10,000/100
    
    
    
    
    ml) were the other three tributaries containing excessive coli-
    
    
    
    
    form densities, while Redhouse Creek contained only MPN 900/
    
    
    
    
    100 ml.
    
    
    
    
            The effluent from the Back River Sewage Treatment Plant
    
    
    
    
    may be considered to be a major tributary inflow to Back River.
    
    
    
    
    The bacterial quality of this chlorinated effluent was quite
    
    
    
    
    good, the mean coliform density being 90/100 ml.  The coliform
    
    
    
    
    density of the effluent was also the most variable of any of the
    

    -------
    

    -------
    properties of the estuarial system.  Dye was released at a con-
    
    
    
    
    stant rate into the effluent outfall sewer of the Back River
    
    
    
    
    Sewage Treatment Plant.  Shortly after the test was started,
    
    
    
    
    however, the dye discharge device was destroyed by an act of
    
    
    
    
    vandalism, resulting in the unplanned release of large amounts
    
    
    
    
    of dye at unknown rates and times.  A subsequent repetition of
    
    
    
    
    this incident forced cancellation of the dye dispersion study.
    
    
    
    
    The small amount of data collected did not reveal any signifi-
    
    
    
    
    cant amount of useful information.  This type of test will be
    
    
    
    
    repeated at a later date.
    
    
    
    
            3.  Nutrient Studies
    
    
    
    
            Concurrently with and following the other sampling and
    
    
    
    
    analysis program, analysis of nutrients was made to determine
    
    
    
    
    the extent of phosphorus compounds in the estuarial waters and
    
    
    
    
    bottom sediments, nitrogen and organic carbon in the sediments,
    
    
    
    
    and phytoplankton in the water.
    
    
    
    
            Water was sampled with a PVC Van Corn bottle, and sedi-
    
    
    
    
    ments were sampled with a two-foot Phleger cover.  The observa-
    
    
    
    
    tions included temperature, salinity, and Secchi disk readings.
    
    
    
    
    The analysis gave values for total phosphorus, phosphate,
    
    
    
    
    Kjeldahl nitrogen, organic carbon, and sand-silt-clay ratios.
    

    -------
            The Back River Sewage Treatment Plant was also sampled
    by Chesapeake Field Station personnel.
            A total of 368 water samples were collected for analysis
    of bacteriological, chemical, and physical properties.
            Analyses were performed by Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna
    River Basins Project personnel and by the Maryland State Depart-
    ment of Health laboratory personnel in Baltimore.  In each case
    analyses were initiated within a few hours of sample collections,
            The following water quality indicators were measured:
    
    Bacteriological
    Coliform                             Most Probable Number (MPN)
    Fecal Coliform (FC)                  Most Probable Number (MPN)
    Fecal Streptococcus (FS)             Most Probable Number (MPN)
    Chemical
    Oil
    Chlorides
    pH
    Chlorophyll
    Metals (Zinc, Copper, Chromium)
    Physical
    Transparency
    Total Suspended Solids
    Water Temperature
            The analytical methods used are presented in Appendix I.
            2-  Dye Dispersion Studies
            A dye dispersion study was initiated during the survey
    period for the purpose of defining the mixing and transport
    

    -------
                            III.   THE STUDY
    
    
    A.  SURVEYS
    
            Data required for the evaluation of the water quality
    
    of Back River was obtained from field surveys conducted by the
    
    Chesapeake Field Station of the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River
    
    Basins Project in cooperation with State and local public works
    
    and health agencies during November 1965.   The following programs
    
    were carried out:
    
            1.  Bacteriological,  Physical, and Chemical Sampling
                and Analysis Program
    
            Seven stations located on streams  and coves tributary
    
    to Back River were sampled from ten to 20  times by personnel
    
    from the Baltimore County Department of Health and the Baltimore
    
    City Department of Health.  Samples were taken from bridges both
    
    in the morning and afternoon.
    
            Fifteen stations located in the Back River Estuary were
    
    sampled by Chesapeake Field Station personnel.  Since tidewater
    
    quality indicators of primary interest could be expected to reach
    
    extreme values at the time of slack water, samples were taken
    
    at mid-depth during boat runs scheduled to coincide with the
    
    predicted time of slack water.  An equal number of samples col-
    
    lected at times of successive slack waters should have provided
    
    good tidal average values but, due to wind effects, actual tidal
    
    times varied appreciably from predicted times, and the results
    
    must be evaluated accordingly.
    

    -------
                           II.   INTRODUCTION
    
    
    
    
    
    
            In the Summary Report-Pollution of Back River—  prepared
    
    
    
    
    by the Public Health Service, U. S. Department of Health, Educa-
    
    
    
    
    tion and Welfare, January 1961*, it was concluded that the complex
    
    
    
    
    nature of pollution problems in the Back River Basin required
    
    
    
    
    that additional studies be undertaken before a Basin water quality
    
    
    
    
    control program was finalized.
    
    
    
    
            The Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins Project con-
    
    
    
    
    ducted a survey in November 1965 for the purpose of obtaining
    
    
    
    
    some of the desired information.  Specifically, this survey was
    
    
    
    
    designed to investigate the following aspects of the problem:
    
    
    
    
            1.  The relative magnitude of various tributary sources
    
    
    
    
    of bacteriological pollution of Back River,
    
    
    
    
            2.  The extent of the area adversely affected by bacterio-
    
    
    
    
    logical pollution.
    
    
    
    
            3.  The extent to which the existing bacteriological
    
    
    
    
    pollution is due to human sources.
    
    
    
    
            k.  The dispersion and flushing which takes place in
    
    
    
    
    this tidal Estuary.
    
    
    
    
            5.  Other significant pollution problems that might
    
    
    
    
    exist.
    
    
    
    
            This report presents the findings of the survey, an
    
    
    
    
    evaluation of these findings, and recommendations for corrective
    
    
    
    
    action to supplement the previous Summary Report.
    

    -------
    of data indicates that a major contributor of nutrients  to the
    
    
    
    
    River is the Back River Sewage Treatment Plant.
    
    
    
    
            To minimize or eliminate these undesirable conditions,
    
    
    
    
    the following actions should be considered:
    
    
    
    
            1.  The program of elimination of inadequate private
    
    
    
    
    sewage disposal systems remaining in the Back River Basin should
    
    
    
    
    be accelerated.  These sources of bacterial pollution have been
    
    
    
    
    identified, and priorities for extension of public sewerage were
    
    
    
    
    established by the Baltimore County Department of Health.  Since
    
    
    
    
    the Summary Report of 196^, approximately 25 per cent of the
    
    
    
    
    inadequate systems have been, or are being, eliminated.   Comple-
    
    
    
    
    tion of the program is estimated to cost five million dollars.
    
    
    
    
            2.  The nutrient loads being contributed by the  Back
    
    
    
    
    River Sewage Treatment Plant should be reduced,  either by com-
    
    
    
    
    plete diversion of the effluent to a more suitable location or
    
    
    
    
    by treatment to remove nutrients.
    
    
    
    
            Elimination of this rich source of nutrients would sig-
    
    
    
    
    nificantly decelerate the eutrophication of Back River.
    
    
    
    
            As reported in the Summary Report of 196U, the Bethlehem
    
    
    
    
    Steel Company at Sparrows Point is continuing to use greater
    
    
    
    
    quantities of the Sewage Treatment Plant effluent which  decreases
    
    
    
    
    the discharge to Back River.  Complete industrial reuse  of the
    
    
    
    
    effluent, which is presently being planned, is desirable.
    

    -------
                  I.  CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
    
    
    
    
    
    
            A field survey, designed for the purpose of determining
    
    
    
    
    the source, extent, and significance of bacterial pollution of
    
    
    
    
    the Back River Estuary, was conducted in November 1965 by the
    
    
    
    
    Chesapeake Field Station of the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River
    
    
    
    
    Basins Project, in cooperation with State and local public works
    
    
    
    
    and health agencies.  Significant vater quality problems indicated
    
    
    
    
    by survey findings are as follows:
    
    
    
    
            1.  The bacterial water quality of Back River upstream
    
    
    
    
    from the vicinity of Stansbury Point does not meet the Maryland
    
    
    
    
    State Department of Health regulations governing natural bathing
    
    
    
    
    areas.  Coliform bacteria counts in the stream exceed the State
    
    
    
    
    standards, and the discharge from a large waste treatment plant
    
    
    
    
    in the area creates an immediate danger from potentially harmful
    
    
    
    
    pollution.
    
    
    
    
            2.  Bacterial pollution of human origin is contributed
    
    
    
    
    to the Back River by Herring Run and other small tributary head-
    
    
    
    
    water streams, and also by the Back River Sewage Treatment Plant
    
    
    
    
    effluent.  Additional sources may exist in the Deep Creek area.
    
    
    
    
    The primary sources of bacterial pollution are inland and shore-
    
    
    
    
    front overflowing septic tanks.
    
    
    
    
            3.  The eutrophication of Back River is advancing rapidly,
    
    
    
    
    as evidenced by an extremely high algal population.  Evaluation
    

    -------
                              LIST OF FIGURES
                            (Following Page 36)
    
          Location of CFS Sampling Stations
    
          Profile of River Coliform,  Geometric Mean,  CFS
    
          Profile of River Coliform,  Arithmetic Mean, CFS
    
          Location of Baltimore Back  River STP Boat Stations
    
          Location of Baltimore Back  River STP Shore Stations
    
          Profile of River Coliforms, Geometric Mean, Back River GTP
    
          Location of Sewage Pumping  Stations and Storm Water Overflows
    
          Sediment Profile, Back River Estuary
    
          Phosrshorus Content, Bottom  Core Sanroles
    
     10.   Total Phoschorus, 'i'op 5 err  of Bottom Sediment
    
     11.   Organic Carbon, Tot) 5 cm of Bottom Sediment
    
     12?.   Kjeldahl Nitrogen, Top 5 cm of Bottom Sediment
    
     13.   Chlorophyll Content and Secchi Disk Readings
    
     1^4.   Comparison of Phosphorus in Water and Bottom Sediment
    
    
                                 APPENDICES
    
      I.   Analytical Procedures	   I - 1
    
     II.   Results of Bacterial Analyses	II - 1
    
    III.   Statistical Procedures Used for Analysis of
            Bacteriological Data	Ill - 1
    
     IV.   Maryland State Board of Health and Mental
            Hygiene Regulations 	  IV - 1
    
      V.   Research Project of Mr. Jack Graves	   V - 1
    

    -------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
                                                                 Page
    
      I.  CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 	     1
    
     II.  INTRODUCTION  	     3
    
    III.  THE STUDY	     h
    
     IV.  SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 	     7
    
      V.  CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM 	    19
    
     VI.  BIBLIOGRAPHY	    22
    
    
    
                               LIST OF TABLES
    
                                                                 Page
    
      1.  Description of Sampling Stations  	    23
    
      2.  Summary of Coliform Densities 	    27
    
      3.  Summary of Fecal Coliform and Fecal
            Streptococcus Densities 	    28
    
      U.  Bacterial Contributions by Various
            Sources	    29
    
      5.  Summary of Physical Data	    30
    
      6.  Summary of Chemical Data (Except Metals)	    31
    
      7.  Heavy Metals Concentrations 	    32
    
      8.  Summary of Coliform Densities at Shore
            Stations	    33
    
      9.  Summary of Coliform Densities at Boat
            Stations	    35
    
     10.  Capacities of Sewage Pumping Stations 	    36
    

    -------
                             ACKNOWLEDGMENT
    
    
    
    
    
    
            The following State and local agencies participated in
    
    
    
    
    this study:
    
    
    
    
            Baltimore City Department of Health
    
    
    
    
            Baltimore City Department of Public Works
    
    
    
    
            Baltimore County Department of Health
    
    
    
    
            Baltimore County Department of Public Works
    
    
    
    
            Maryland State Department of Health
    
    
    
    
            Maryland State Department of Water Resources
    
    
    
    
    
    
            The cooperation and valuable assistance of these groups
    
    
    
    
    are gratefully acknowledged.
    

    -------