U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
       Annapolis Field Office
      Annapolis Science Center
     Annapolis, Maryland  21401
         WORKING DOCUMENTS
             Volume 15

-------

-------
                          Table of Contents


                              Volume 15
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

-------

-------
                            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         AUT0-QUAL Modelling System

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

                                  VOLUME  7
                              Technical Reports

     55         Water Quality Conditions in the Chesapeake Bay System

     56         Nutrient Enrichment and Control Requirements in the
                Upper Chesapeake Bay

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

                                  VOLUME  8
                              Technical Reports

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

     59         Distribution of Metals in Baltimore Harbor Sediments

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

                                  VOLUME  9
                                 Data Reports

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

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

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

                            Data  Reports


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

           Biological Survey of the Upper Potomac River arid
           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 IQ(continued)

                           Data Reports

15         Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River -  1967

16         Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River -  1968

17         Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River -  1969

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

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

                             VOLUME 11
                            Data Reports

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

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

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

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

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

25         Water Quality of the Potomac Estuary Consolidated
           Survey - 1970

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

27         Potomac Estuary Wastewater Treatment Plants Survey
           1970

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

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

-------
   30


   31


   32
   33
   34
Appendix
  to 1
Appendix
  to 2
    3


    4
                  VOLUME 11  (continued)
                 Data Reports

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

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

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

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

Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River - 1970

                  VOLUME 12
               Working Documents

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

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

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

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

                  VOLUME 13
               Working Documents

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

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

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

                          Working  Documents

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

 6         Water Pollution Survey  -  Back  River 1965  -  February 1967

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

                            VOLUME   14

                          Working  Documents

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

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

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

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

                            VOLUME  15
                          Working Documents

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

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

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

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

-------
                             VOLUME 16
                          Working Documents

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

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

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

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

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

                             VOLUME 17
                           Working Documents

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

                           Working Documents

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

                             VOLUME  18
                           Working Documents

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

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

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

                             VOLUME 19
                          Working Documents

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

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

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

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

           The Potomac Estuary - Statistics and Projections -
           February 1968

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

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

                         Working Documents

           Wastewater  Inventory - Potomac River Basin -
           December  1968

           Wastewater  Inventory - Upper  Potomac River Basin -
           October 1968

                            VOLUME 20
                         Technical  Papers

 1          A  Digital Technique  for Calculating and Plotting
           Dissolved Oxygen  Deficits

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

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

 4          Estimating Diffusion Characteristics of Tidal Waters -
           May 1965

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

 6          An In-Situ Benthic Respirometer - December 1965

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

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

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

10          Evaluation of Coliform Contribution by Pleasure Boats
           July 1966

-------
                            VOLUME  21
                         Technical Papers

11         A Steady State Segmented Estuary Model

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

13         Optimal Release Sequences for Hater 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

-------
                           TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                 Page

  Ic   INTRODUCTION ...  ,..<,...,.........   I - 1

      Ao   Purpose and Scope  .. <,.. .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .   1-1

      B.   Acknowledgments  .,  o.... u  ...........   1-2

 II,   GENERAL  .  .  ...,<,,,.  .  . o  .  . .......  .  .  II - 1

      A,   Source  of Information  .,00............  II - 1

      Be   State Stream Classifications ............  II - 2

III.   SUMMARY  00  ,  ,    .  o  o  o o o  o o  ,  o o o  o  .  o  ,  ,     III - 1

      A.   Findings  0  0  ..... o .............. Ill - 1

      Bo   Immediate Pollution Control Needs  ......... Ill - 3

          1.   Waste Treatment  ................ Ill - 3

          20   Special Studies  . <,........	Ill - k

          3,   Institutional Practices  ............ Ill - k

 IV,   DESCRIPTION OF THE  STUDY AREA  . .  .  . . .  .  .  	  IV - 1

  V.   POLLUTION CONTROL PROBLEMS, NEEDS,  AND COSTS  ......   V - 1

      A.   Mattaponi River Watershed (Headwaters to
          Upstream from West  Point)  .............   V - 1

          1,,   Mattaponi Sand and Gravel Company  .......   V - 2

          2.,   Bowling Green  ,......<,......   V - 3

      Bo   Pamunkey River  Watershed (Headwaters to
          Upstream from West  Point)  ..........,   V - ^

          1.   Town of Gordonsville <,..<,........   V - 6

          2o   Town  of Mineral  ................   V - 8

          3   Other Towns  ,  .    0   .  ... ........   V - 9

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

                                                           Page

C.  West Point Area  .  .  .	    V - 9

    1.  The Chesapeake Corporation	 .    V - 10

    2.  Town of West Point	    V - 11

D.  Lower York River Basin (Below West Point to
    Chesapeake Bay	    V - 12

    1.  Community of Toano	    V - Ik

    2,  York and James  City Counties Sanitary
        District No.  1	    V - 15

    3.  Federal Installations	,    V - 15

    k.  Virginia Electric and Power Company  ......    V - 23

    5.  American Oil Company	    V - 2k

    6.  Lower York County	    V - 27

-------

-------
                                                          I - 1






I.  INTRODUCTION




    A.  Purpose and Scope




        Under the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution




Control Act (33 U0S,C. 466 et seq), Section 3(a), the Secretary




of the Interior is authorized to make joint investigations with




other Federal agencies, vith State Water Pollution Control Agen-




cies and interstate agencies, and vith the municipalities and




industries involved, of the condition of any waters in any State




or States and of the discharges of any sewage, industrial wastes,




or substance which may adversely affect these waters.  These




investigations are for the purpose of preparing and developing




comprehensive programs for eliminating or reducing the pollution




of interstate waters and tributaries thereof.




        This Working Document, by describing the immediate needs




for controlling water pollution in the York River Basin in north-




eastern Virginia, represents the first step in the development




of a comprehensive program to control water pollution in the




Basin.




        The principal objectives of the investigation and report




are as follows:




        1.  Outline existing and potential water quality




            problems in areas producing significant municipal,




            industrial, and/or other wastes, and identify sources.

-------

-------
                                                          1-2


        2.  Summarize immediate pollution control needs and esti-

            mated costs for providing these needs.

        3  Suggest various local and basin-wide pollution

            control measures which should be considered in

            planning a comprehensive program for the Basin.


    B.   Acknowledgment s

        The cooperation and assistance of the following Federal,

State,  and local agencies are gratefully acknowledged:

        U. S.  Soil Conservation Service, Charlottesville,  Virginia

        U. S.  Geological Survey, Charlottesville, Virginia

        U. S.  Army Corps of Engineers, Norfolk, Virginia

        Virginia State Water Control Board, Richmond, Virginia

        Virginia Department of Health, Richmond, Virginia

        Virginia Division of Water Resources, Charlottesville,
            Virginia

        National Planning Association, Washington, D. C.

        Local  County and Municipal Officials

        Local  Industrial Representatives

-------
                                                          II - 1






II.  GENERAL




     A,   Source of Information




         Current pollution abatement programs, existing water




 quality, and estimated costs for needed facilities were evaluated




 employing the following sources of information:




         1.  Sewage and industrial files of the Virginia State




             Water Control Board




         2o  Existing water quality and treatment plant data




             obtained from files of Federal, State, and local




             agencies




         3o  Publications of various Federal, State, and local




             agencies.




         k.  Personal communications with public  health oriented




             individuals associated with pollution abatement in




             the Basin.






         For evaluations of future water quality  requirements,




 county population and industrial productivity projections developed




 by the National Planning Association were employed.  The 1960




 Census Report was used as a base from which individual community




 projections were made^  Where applicable, industrial loadings




 were projected by type of industry on an individual production




 basis.




         Although limited data on tributary water quality and




 assimilative capacities were available, secondary treatment of

-------
                                                         II - 2






all significant waste discharges in the Basin, with 85 per cent




removal of the biochemical oxygen demand, has been assumed by




the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Chesapeake




Bay-Susquehanna River Basins Project, to be a minimum requirement




for the purpose of this report.




        Cost estimates for upgrading present facilities as re-




quired to provide the desired degree of treatment were obtained




for the most part from consulting engineers who have completed




studies of needed treatment facilities.  For communities not




having engaged an engineer, cost estimates were made of the




plant proper, employing construction cost information from the




Public Health Service Publication No. 1229, "Modern Sewage




Treatment Plants - How Much Do They Cost," and updating these




costs with the Public Health Service - Sewage Treatment Plant




current cost index (PHS-STP 105.0).




        In areas where future water quality problems are anti-




cipated, methods proposed for future actions are given for con-




sideration only, since detailed evaluations of alternatives and




comparisons of benefits have not been made.






    B.  State Stream Classifications




        Public hearings on proposed stream standards for the




estuarine reaches of the Basin have been scheduled for March




1967; however, at the writing of this report, the Virginia State




Water Control Board has not established specific water quality

-------

-------
                                                         II - 3






objectives for either State-wide or individual stream applica-




tion.  The policy in the past has been to consider each waste




discharged on its own merits, taking into consideration down-




stream water uses and assimilative capacity of the receiving




waters.  However, with certain modifications and/or expansion,




the following basic criteria are used:  (l) dissolved oxygen




not lower than U milligrams per liter in the stream; (2) no




appreciable settleable or floating solids; (3) no noticeable




coloration or discoloration of the receiving stream; (h) toxic




substance to be reduced below the toxicity limit of the stream;




(5) no appreciable change of pH of the receiving stream; and




(6) stream flow for design of sewage treatment facilities equal




to minimum average 7-day low flow occurring in a 10-year frequency.




        The Water Control Board is expected to adopt water




quality standards for the estuarine reaches of the Basin by




June 1967

-------
                                                          Ill - 1






III.   SUMMARY




      A.  Findings




          1.  The York River Basin, extending lUO miles from the




  divide on the Southeastern Mountains in Albemarle and Orange




  Counties to the Chesapeake Bay east of Yorktown, embraces ap-




  proximately 2,660 square miles of the State of Virginia.




          2,,  Two principal tributaries, the Mattaponi and the




  Pamunkey Rivers, form the York River at West Point approximately




  35 miles from the mouth.  Extensive marshes on the vide flood




  plains of the tributaries attract great concentrations of migra-




  tory waterfowlo




          3.  The Mattaponi River Watershed has no major water




  pollution problems.   Some coloration of the Mattaponi River




  results from an industrial discharge from the settling ponds




  at the Mattaponi Sand and Gravel Company near the southeastern




  edge of Caroline County.  All other waste discharges in the




  Watershed receive adequate treatment.




          h.  There is only one significant water quality problem




  in the Pamunkey River Watershed above West Point, this being in




  a small, severely degraded, unnamed tributary downstream from




  Gordonsville  The principal contributor to the water pollution




  in the area is the Town of Gordonsville which treats, in addition




  to municipal wastes, the wastes from the Gordonsville Industries




  textile plant.  Preliminary plans for a new waste treatment plant




  for Gordonsville have been approved by the State.

-------
                                                        Ill - 2






        There are no other significant pollution problems in the




Pamunkey River Watershed; however, the Town of Mineral is actively




seeking to provide a public sewerage system,




        5=  In the West Point area the Chesapeake Corporation




kraft pulp and paper mill discharges approximately 32,500 pounds




of BOD per day to the Pamunkey River,  Wo serious water quality




problems are indicated by existing data; however, studies of the




downstream reaches are needed before conclusive evaluations can




be made




        6,  Four Federal installations are contributing to nui-




sance conditions in the lower York River Basin.  At two locations,




the Coast Guard Reserve Training Center and Cheatham Annex, small




quantities of raw sewage are discharged to the York River.




        To  Oil pollution resulting from accidental discharges




from crude oil carriers has caused widespread damage, including




the killing of waterfowl in the lower York River=  Other nuisance




conditions are caused by pollution related to recreational and




commercial boating activity.,




        8,  The future growth of lower York County will depend




largely upon the provision of an adequate public sewerage system.




The area is presently served by private septic tanks, but the




soil in the County generally is not suitable for sub-surface




drainage systems.

-------
                                                        Ill - 3


    Bo  Immediate Pollution Control Reeds

        1.  Waste Treatment

        The principal immediate need /.n the Basin is for the

provision of adequate waste treatment facilities to control pollu-

tion at its source.

        Current treatment practices, needs, and cost estimates

for municipalities and industries in the study area are given

in Table I,

        A general summary of immediate waste treatment needs in

the study area is given below,,

            at  Various waste treatment facilities

                and programs should be provided at

                Federal installations in York

                County, including secondary treat-

                merit, facilities for small raw

                sewage discharges at two installa-

                tions and laboratory and stream

                analysis programs at four
                                                       cost
                ins tallations.                         undetermined


            b.  One town to provide enlarged

                secondary treatment facilities           $192,000


            a.  One community to provide new

                secondary treatment facilities            $70,000

-------

-------
                                                        Ill -
            d.  One town and one sanitary district

                to provide new sewerage systems

                including provision for secondary

                treatment


            e.  One paper mill to provide second-

                ary treatment for kraft pulp and

                paper mill waste


            f.  One small industry to provide ad-

                ditional settling ponds for efflu-
$6,805,350
cost
undetermined
                                                       cost
                ent from sand and gravel operations    undetermined
                       Total cost (excluding a,
                         e, and f)
$7,067,350
        2,  Special Studies

        Additional investigations are needed in several areas in

the Basin to provide data for comprehensive evaluations of exist-

ing or potential pollution control needs.  Table II summarizes

these needs.


        3.  Institutional Practices

        A need for action on pollution control measures by

various Federal, State, and local institutions is indicated by

the findings of this study.  Table III summarizes needed insti-

tutional practices which would enhance and strengthen pollution

control programs,.

-------
Q
EH
O
                     o
                                           H
                                        hD -p
                                        C  oi
                                       H H
                                       rH  ?!
                                        >  ft
                                        O  O
                                       cq  ft

                                         O  -d
                                                   H  O H  -H
                                                   d  B H  H
                                                   TJ  0)  O   O
                                                   
                                 n3  aJ
                                -p  ^
                                -P  O
                                 o5
                                S


(,

o
;s

>>
rQ

CO
*-.
a>
T3
in
O

JH
01
d
fi
JD


O
0
0
f\
OJ
ON
H
-W-






-d
0)
bO
rH
cd
H
a
w


t?
cd
d
a
o
O
0)
CQ



o
rH
r-H
f\
H





0)
rH
H
H
>
to
R
O
f^j
JLf
O


Vf
o

rj
Ji
O
EH
d
O)
to
CO
cd
ft

S
3
TJ
a
CU
rH
tt)
<*H
0)
fH

d
d
o
PQ
















&
05
-d
d
o
o
0!
CQ











CM
0
o

CO
3
r-H
ft






d
O
H
-P
ct5
H
r$
P(
o
ft

O
vo
ON
1 	 i
-^_^


&
c8
a
H
a
H
H
0)
SH
fL,


s
t
vo
ON
rH

H
H
(H
ft
<


































1
CQ
3
T3
a
H

d
M
a















-  *.
ON
o
H
^
r-H









0
d
0)
>
o
fH
ft
ft
03

CQ

n5
H
ft






































^  -
rH
CS
H
fH
-P

























0)
.a
-p

A3
-p
H
U

SO
C
H
-P
aJ
i-(
CU
ft
O
o
o

d
H

d
O)
d
?(
H
O
fl
H
-P
a
0)
6
-p
cd
0)
rM
-P
1
0)
fH
dn
0)
H
rH
H
>
to
a
o
T3
fH
O
O



TZ!
tfl
e


w
c
o
r^j
S-,
o
0
c
H

0)
r  |
H
H
>
CQ
^
O
d
SH
o
o

^H
o

C3
15
o
EH





CM
O

H
J;
o
EH
















CQ
^
OJ
J5
01
CQ


P
O
a


w

A,




^>j
+3


H
H
H
>
CQ
a
o
d
fH
o
o






















d
0)
a
H
g
_f
0)
-p
0)
d














CQ
O
rH
^
>

fc


























CQ
CU
H
-P
rH
H
H
O
cd
H























































W)
a
H
d
d
0)
ft

6
3
'd
a
0)
JH
0)
CM
0)
fH

T3
fl
O
M


O
LPv
PO
r
CQ



0)
-P
cd
>
H
fn
PL,



VO
VO
m












rH
cd
fH
0)
a
H
s


-------




























X  ^
CQ t)
Q 0)
M 2
W G
fe; -H
+J
 G
 

d 
D CQ

G olj
H H <;
4^ EH M
G 0 K
o <; EH
0 K CQ

Q
M EH a

m In @
S< *= 
6 "-5
-H O
P !H
CQ PL,
,'T")






01 4^

cd 0)
H S
oi cd
g CD

M EH





_p
a
0)
CQ
0)
PM


G
O
H
P
erf

ps
ft
O
a.
































0
o
H
4-1
O
<;












i >
CQ
O
O






r^-j
cu

cu
0)

G
O
H

0




G
cu

_(_3
CU
J-,
EH



-d
0)
>

cu
CO












G
o
iH
tb
o
o






















0)
G
o










1
1
1












1
1
1



i?
cd
d
G
o
o
cu
CQ




0
o
C\J
f.
OJ


o
VO
CTs
H


-p
G
H
O
CM

[VJ [ 1
PS W
< cu
|3E
p_4
S  ^-
H t
OA c

C
^
G H c
O CU > C
H ft o ^
4J cd H c
cd CM  C
(H PQ C
o 'd >>_
ft G c-

O M C
O ft CQ 4
iH *!
0) 0 FQ 4
r^J P | i
CO ^ "i
(U -p (ZJ C
ft tH H OP
cd cd i >H
CQ f-{ >H 4
0) fcd S P5 i
rG M '
O 3= t
O





CQ
r^(
01


CQ
H
VH
H
H

c~|
CQ

0) 0)
G S
O O
B 00


O
o
0
A
o
c
-se-
;
1
1




H
cd
H
>> O
f-t 0)
cd ft
>d co
CIJ
O (U
o d)
ai to
CO 
in

G
 fr
H cd
cd o ft
fn -H G
4^ 4J 0
G ft CJ
cu ai cu
O CQ CQ




0 0
O O
(T\ -4"
-s*. f*
>J cn
d
3
U
5
d
j
i
d >j
Q O +>
U G -H
1 cd o
J O
EH CQ
3 0)

o 3
j t-j
-1 K*}
H P 'd
3 -H G
j g ^
Q M ^H
U O 0
SO >H

a
cd
cu
SH 01
4J ft
co
G >

o a
d
"d G
o> o
G ft

CU bD '
^d G ^d
G -H 0)
O "d >H
O H -H
0 3
CU ,G CT1
^ QJ
cd < ^H












-  s
t>j
^,
cd
^
9
J
w

CQ
cu
H
'd
3
^_3
CQ


























J>^
_,
cd
4^ (  1
H
G 
cd O
M S
U3 -p
o> o
H 'H
G 4^
3 CQ
O -H
O O



S^
cd
Jj
-1
d>
nc5
rf
p

s
cd

CQ
a
erf
H
ft

H

G
H
fin


O
0
0
f,
0
0
u~\
f
VD
-cO"

e
cu
^_3
CQ
^s
CQ

0)
bD
cd
H
D

0)
CQ




CU

CO
H
!H
PM




O
O
O
^
-^
rH



>j
?S
cd
43
H
1
CO
CQ

CO
d
cd
O
PH

G
0
ft

Cu
w






































1
o
JL)
ft S-,
o
bD **-<
G
H CO
d G
2 O
H -H
O CO
G -H
H >
CQ
^4
G
cd

o
H
ft
0)
CQ













rM
L|
O


f-4
0)
5
o
i_3
  ^
_p
o --
H >5
-P* G
CQ ^
H O
Q 0













































>i -P
^ G
cd cu
r^j g
G 4^
O cd
o cu
(U *H
CQ -P











































ill  -  6
CU
G
O
1
1
1










1
1
1



1?
cd
d
fj
o
0
0)
CQ
o
o
CO
ndetermined Inspected by FWPCA
p
>s
in
O
-P H
CO O
k IH
O 4->
^ G
cd o
h4 O


H

H
H

cd CQ
d
G cd
o
O T.1
CU G
CQ cd
O

LA



t>3
Jn
^ cd
CO T-1
!H G
hC O
O o
^i 0)
ft CQ

*
CAJ



d cu
CU hD

cd cd
d) rCj
M 0
-P CO
H H
3 -d





CQ
4-> CU
G -H
01 ^
fi v-J
P rH
cd -H
0) O
t, cd
4-^ VH



CU
H
ft
CU

1 1

s
o

n




h
H
CQ ft

-------





























CQ
Q

W
$25

Q

" 
H ft
P' OJ
ft CQ
O
PL,











G
O
H
-P
cd
o
o

























































x  s.
T)
OJ
G
H
-P
G
O
O


03
G
O
H
P
cd
H
H
cd
P
03
G
M
rH
cd
QJ





r**
o

-3" **H
VD O
ON
"G
G OJ
H a
p

oj cd
ij ft
G OJ
OJ Q
H
2 
O CQ
0
OJ 

OJ
G
H

f*4
OJ
p
OJ
-d
G
D



i^
O
P H
05 O
H ft
0 -P
3 
t-3 O

H
1
"d CQ
co '

C oj
cd -p
d cd
G QJ
O SH
0 p
OJ G
CQ P




O
0
O

H



OJ
t>
ft
OJ
CQ ft
QJ ttJ
K -P
G
d OJ
ft U
cd
P bD
O G
H
-P C
03 -H
cd cd
0 f->
0 EH

oo




p
cd
rO
P

#t
m
fl
o
H
bO
OJ
K

f>
i-C
-p
H
cd
OJ

















i
^




0)
,0

OJ
bO
c3
g
03 
H 'd
-d OJ

OJ G
-P -H
03 P
cd G
> 0
o
I? 03
cd -H
Sn Td













03
CO 1 H
>s -P 0) G OJ
>H G -H -H 03
cd OJ P cd CQ
T3 6 -H !H OJ
G -P H -P >
bD O cd -ri
O 0 OJ 0 ft bD
JH OJ ft cd O G
ft CO -p *H 'H -H




B
O
4

































OJ
OJ
5

03
OJ
H
P
H
H
H
0
cd
C|_t

p
G
OJ
a
.p
cd
D

EH








1

1

1

O
O

t?
o
1
0

cd
J




>
cd

G
O
o
OJ
CQ



O
o
H
^3
M
o3
>







05
G
O
PJ
o3
OJ


a
o3

.



vo
C7N
r 1

J-l
CD
^o
0
4->
O
O

G
H

rd
OJ
-p
o
OJ
ft
CO

H












fq
CO
E
-P
03
""ci
S
H
O
P
















O
0


o
-p









o
H


G
O
H
^
-p
CQ


CO
G
O
H
-P
'H cd
o 'd
G
P QJ
G g
B o
-P 0
!H OJ
cd ft
ft
OJ 'd
f~~\ 0 
cd QJ
d
CQ  cd
rG B
' -P
D H OJ
cd ft
>j OJ OJ
> m >














o
ft
ft
05
H
05 
> CO
f~H 6
cd cd
G ft
co bD

















C]
O
cd
U













^- %.
U
-P

H




03
H a III - T
-P >> O
H H O
H fn OJ 
H Cd JH OJ
O QJ >d
cd "d cd
H CO
P QJ
G rt "ft
QJ OJ < 0)
B P o ts
p CJ pLj
cd QJ S co
OJ ft fc G
ft CO O
P G >> vH

cy cd
p oj t  'd
05 ft V> G
cd QJ Oi OJ
> > H 8
OJ
G
H
a

Q)
-P
OJ
nd
G
^3

TJ
*-i G
>> O  O CQ -P
JH 4Jpp, >,OJG03
O * ^j C(3 4 J-) O *rH CD S (D
jj i~H S Q ^ flj t^O QJ H "41"* ^ O jCj
>H >-l S-lT:! ^1 ft-H+J bDrH ft  hC
OJ G
CQ -H












































-------



























-*"*
CO TJ
Q 01

w q

p
o q
g; O
^~- x3
-p q D
cd CD 
t  J -1
3 co
ft CQ
O
PM





C
O
H
-P
cd
o
a























0)
q
o
^






i
i
i




H
cd
rl
O
CD
ft CQ
tQ CD
H
CD T3
CD 0
CO -P
 - CQ





bO
q
H rl
H CD
0 -p
0 cd
0 &










-d

o
 1

-p q
o cd
(U ft

w o
o
cd
H f-<
q CD
rl i*
bO O
fc PM
H











































^  ^
t?
cd
a
P
to



CD
bD
5n
cd
r|
O
to
H
d





























I
^j
 H
cd o
*q ft

to H
CD -H
H O
0
q -d
CD CD
bC -P
cd cd
bO
to -H
3 -P
o to
H CD
rl >
cd q
> -H






1
1
1



1
O

ft

-P 5-i

H
ft a

q rl
M bO


d
1 p*
ci? o3
ft
(D CQ
CO rl
O
rH -P
H Cd
0 rl

^^
i  {
cd
o
o
on .
rH q
 -H
rH C


1
ft
O
0

H
H
O


O
H
^,
CD
.f.

CD
H !
C^ O op^
CJ cd H
rl 4J Cd
xi ^ a
Jj O
H e
 rl O
Cd -P rl
CD -P 'H
rl Cd
cd w 
>j ci> w
CD H bO H
XI -H 5n CD
-P rl Cd W
cd X! 07
q a 0 CD
H -H M >
5-1 -H
q ft tf CD
o a
H CO O -H
-p -H +J +3










1
ft 'H
H O
H 3
H q D1 -P
O CD CD 2
X! O
bO is bO
q q to
H M -H -H 
rd -P 1 -P  q o -P
^ cd co u> -H o as
ft is m j- a o js












































































p
q
0)
H
cd
H
CD
q
o
H
-P
cd

ft
0
ft

d
CD

a
H
-P

3
*
III - 8

-------
                                                             Ill - 9
                                 TABLE II
     Location
                   SPECIAL STUDIES NEEDED IN THE BASIN
   Responsibility
             Need
Basin-wide
Lower Basin
  (West Point to
  Chesapeake Bay)

Various tributaries
  in Lower Basin
 FWPCA and State of
 Virginia
 FWPCA and State of
 Virginia
 State of Virginia
 and local treat-
 ment plant owners,
 including Federal
 installations
Determine assimilative capaci-
ties of all existing and pro-
posed waste receiving streams
in the Basin.

Conduct intensive water quality
studies in the estuary (includ-
ing boat pollution).

Study need for holding ponds to
lessen bacteriological pollu-
tion in shellfish bed areas.
Downstream from
  Yorktown
Basin-wide
Barfield Creek
  York County


Gordonsville
 State of Virginia,
 VEPCO and AMOCO
 FWPCA and State of
 Virginia
Department of the
Navy, Naval
Weapons Station

State of Virginia
and Soil Conserva-
tion Service
Study the effects of thermal
discharges on water quality in
the York River.

Develop comprehensive water
pollution control program for
the Basin and, for planning
purposes, utilize data from the
above studies in mathematical
simulations of the river system.

Determine if any undesirable
waste constituents such as TNT
gain entrance to the York River.

Study the effects waste dis-
charges from Gordonsville would
have on proposed SCS flood
control project downstream.

-------
                                                         Ill - 10
 Location
                 TABLE III

INSTITUTIONAL PRACTICES NEEDED IN THE BASIN

    Responsibility	Heed
Basin-vide
Basin-wide
   State of Virginia
   State of Virginia
Lower Basin
Basin-wide
Basin-wide
   Congress of the
   United States and
   State Legislature

   State of Virginia
   and local govern-
   ments
   Local governments
York County
   FWPCA and Federal
   installations
Prepare and adopt standards on
intrastate streams *

Consider legislation to provide
appropriations for State parti-
cipation in grants for construc-
tion of sewage treatment works.

Strengthen boat pollution laws.
Enhance treatment plant operator
efficiency by greater emphasis on
operator training schools and
State certification.

Reduce infiltration problems by
strengthening plumbing codes on
house connections and emphasiz-
ing infiltration tests on new
construction =

Establish minimum requirements
for sampling and analysis pro-
grams for waste treatment plants
at Federal installations,

-------

-------
                                                          IV - 1






IV,  DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA




         The York River Basin lies in east  central Virginia and




 extends about lUo miles from the divide on the Southwestern




 Mountains in Albemarle and Orange Counties to the Chesapeake Bay




 east of Yorktovn,  The Watershed embraces  approximately 2,660




 square miles, or about 6.5 per cent of the area of the State and




 includes all of King William County and a  part of Albemarle,




 Caroline, Gloucester, Hanover, Louisa, New Kent, Orange, James




 City, King and Queen, Spotsylvania, and York Counties




         The York River forms in the coastal plain where the two




 main tributaries, the Mattaponi and the Pamunkey Rivers, join at




 West Point.  From the Fall Zone, in the vicinity of U. S.  Route




 360, downstream to West Point, the tributaries meander through




 marshes and swamps on wide flood plains,,   Great flights of water-




 fowl, including geese, duck, and rail can  be seen in the marsh-




 lands when the birds come down each year in their migration.




         Below West Point the estuarine main stream is  relatively




 straight with a narrow flood plain, and numerous short streams




 flow directly into the reach.




         The Mattaponi River, formed in Caroline County from four




 small streams, appropriately named the Mat, the Ta, the Po, and




 the Ni, drains a sandy loam watershed which contributes to the




 uniform clarity of the stream.  The Pamunkey River, formed north-




 west of Hanover at the confluence of the North and South Anna

-------
                                                         IV - 2






Rivers, is frequently cloudy and heavily silted in the upper




reaches by run-off from the red clay headwaters areas.




        Elevations as high as 1,800 feet in the mountains in




the headwaters area drop rapidly in the plateau of the Piedmont




Province; and where the North and South Anna Rivers join to




form the Pamunkey, the river bed elevation is about 30 feet.




        Stream bed gradient is relatively flat throughout the




Basin, and tides affect the main streams as far west as U. S.




Route 360.




        Mean flows in principal tributaries of the York River,




based on records from U. S. Geological Survey data, are as



        */
follows:
*/
   Drought Flows in Virginia Rivers, Virginia State Water

    Control Board, Richmond, Virginia

-------
                                                              IV - 3
 Gaging Station
        YORK RIVER BASIN

                   Minimum Mean Discharge   Critical
                    (cfs) with a 10-Year    Discharge
Drainage   Years  Mean Occurrence Frequency (cfs/sm)
  Area       of        Duration (days)       (7-day
(ScL.Mi.)   Record     1	2	30     Drought)
North Anna River
near Dosvell
Hudson Creek near
Boswells Tavern
South Anna River
near Ashland
Pamunkey River
near Hanover
Totopotomoy Creek
near Atlee

U39

U.I

393

1,072

6

33

13

31

20

13

6

0

10

31

0,02

9

0

12

U5

0.05

lU

0

15

60

0.15

0.021

0.000

0.031

O.OU2

0.008
Mattaponi River
  near Bowling
  Green                251

Mattaponi River
  near Beulahville     6l9
             19
1.7
             20     16      18      28
0.008
                         0.029

-------
                                                          V - 1
V.  POLLUTION CONTROL PROBLEMS, NEEDS, AND COSTS

    A.  Mattaponi River Watershed (Headwaters to Upstream from
        West Point)

        The Mattaponi River Watershed above West Point is rural

and sparsely settled, with only one incorporated town (Bowling

Green) in the upper Watershed.  The vast marshes in the down-

stream flood plains remain, in effect, virgin wildernesses and,

since Colonial days, the Area has been regarded as one of the

best fishing and hunting sections in Virginia.  The usually

crystal clear fresh water reaches of the Mattaponi River abound

in bass, pike, and numerous varieties of the sunfish family, and

in the spring great numbers of shad are taken by net fishermen

in the lower reaches

        The marsh areas have long been noted for waterfowl.  The

large flights of duck, sora, and other marsh birds are a primary

attraction for many city dwellers who have erected cottages along

the shores of the Mattaponi.  About 50 Mattaponi Indians, a

remnant of the original Tribe, reside on a small reservation on

the River's south bank in King William County.

        The River is affected by tides and is open to navigation

as far west as Aylett; however, dredging of the channel above

West Point has been discontinued for several years  Stream

standards are to be adopted by the State in June 1967 for the

tidal portions of the stream, and standards for the upstream

-------
                                                          V - 2


reaches will probably be established in the near future.   It is

expected that the standards adopted will be designed to protect

and maintain the non-degraded quality of the waters in the

Mattaponi Sub-Basin and enhance fishing, hunting, and other

recreational benefits in the Watershed.

        Waste discharges in the Watershed, as listed below,

emanate from one municipality, seven schools, a highway rest

area, and one small gravel mining operation.
 Location
                          Est.
            Population    Flow
Treatment     Served     (mgd)	Receiving Stream
Bowling Green (1960
population 528)
Seven Schools
Highway Rest Area
Mattaponi Sand and
Gravel Company
Secondary 200
Secondary 600 - 800
(each)
Secondary
Settling
ponds  	
0.020
0.008
(each)
	
0.1
Maracassic Creek
Miscellaneous
Tributaries
Tributary of
South River
Mattaponi River
        Areas having significant waste loads and/or pollution

problems are discussed as follows:

        !  Mattaponi Sand and Gravel Company

        The only water quality problem existing in the Watershed

above West Point is a local nuisance condition caused by colloidal

solids in the discharge from the Mattaponi Sand and Gravel Company

located on the Mattaponi River near the southeastern edge of

Caroline County.  Approximately hOO gallons per minute of used

-------
                                                          V - 3






gravel washing water, which flow from the plant to settling ponds




before discharging into the Mattaponi River, contain colloidal




solids which require a detention time of approximately ten days




to settle.




        Complete removal of the suspended matter in the effluent




is not attained by the existing treatment facilities, and the




discharge results in coloration in the River.  The Water Control




Board has directed that further action, as required to correct




the color problem, be taken, and it is expected that additional




holding ponds will be constructed in the near future.






        2.  Bowling Green




        The only other significant waste source in the Watershed




is the Town of Bowling Green, the County Seat of Caroline County,




located on U. S. Route 301 at the intersection of State Route




207.  Small industries employing less than 100 persons are in




the Area, and preliminary population projections indicate an




increase of about ten per cent by the year 2000=




        Town wastes are treated by an efficiently operated second-




ary treatment plant which presently receives the waste from 38




per cent of the Town residents; and the remaining population




utilizes private septic tanks.  Treatment capacity is available




at the municipal plant for handling projected waste loads for




year 2000; and no significant water pollution problems are




anticipated in the Area.

-------
                                                          V - k


    B.  Pamunkey River Watershed (Headwaters to Upstream from
        West Point)

        The Pamunkey River Watershed above West Point is similar

to the Mattaponi River Watershed in several respects.  Tides

affect the lower reaches as far west as U. S. Route 360; great

flights of waterfowl and marsh "birds migrate into the marshes;

and the Area is essentially rural and sparsely settled.

        About 25 Pamunkey Indians, remnants of the tribe which

traded its corn and venison with Captain John Smith, reside on

an Indian reservation of about 800 acres at Lester Manor in

King William County.

        The River is not as clear in the upper reaches as the

Mattaponi because of silt deposits derived from red clay areas

in the headwaters region; however, some of the lower tributaries

are exceptionally clear.  Stream standards for the tidal por-

tions of the stream will be adopted by the State in June 1967,

and standards for the upper reaches will probably be established

in the near future.

        Four incorporated Towns are in the Pamunkey River Water-

shed above West Point, the largest being Ashland with a I960

population of 2,773

        Waste discharges in the Watershed are as follows:

-------
                                                               V - 5
     Location
            Estimated
 Type of   Population   Design
Treatment    Served      Flow
                      Receiving Stream
Gordonsville (i960
  population 1,109)
Louisa (i960
  population 576)

Ashland (i960
  population 2,773)

Eight Schools
One Convict Camp
Three Small
  Private Systems
Secondary  1,100 plus   0l6
           200,000 gpd
           industrial
           waste
Secondary
575
Secondary  2,300
Secondary  	
Secondary  	
0.075
           0.76
           0,OOU
           to 0.02
Secondary  100 - 120    0.012
                    Unnamed Tributary to
                      South Anna River
Unnamed Tributary to
  Gold Mine Creek

Mechamps Creek
         Miscellaneous Tribu-
           taries of the
           Pamunkey River

         Miscellaneous Tribu-
           taries of the
           Pamunkey River
                    Miscellaneous  Tribu-
                      taries of the
                      Pamunkey River
             Areas in the Watershed having significant waste loads

     and/or pollution problems are discussed as follows:

-------

-------
                                                          V - 6






        1.  Town of Gordonsville




        The Town of Gordonsville is located on the southwestern




edge of Orange County on U. S. Routes 15 and 33.  The I960 popu-




lation was 1,109, and projections indicate limited municipal




growth for the next 50 years.  Springs serve as the source of




supply for the Town water system, and the municipal waste treat-




ment plant treats both domestic and industrial wastes in the area.




        The only significant water quality problem presently




existing in the Pamunkey River Watershed above West Point is in




a small unnamed tributary to the South Anna River downstream from




the Gordonsville waste treatment plant.




        Severe degradation of the stream in late summer months




is indicated by the presence of slime, profuse algal growths,




textile dye coloration, and zero dissolved oxygen levels for




two to three miles below the Gordonsville municipal water treat-




ment plant.  The principal source of the polluting wastes is the



Gordonsville Industries Company, a branch of Liberty Fabrics,




which discharges approximately 200,000 gpd of textile plant waste




to the Town sewers.




        The Town contributes an additional 100,000 gpd, making




a combined municipal and industrial flow of 300,000 gpd, which




is about twice the designed capacity of the waste treatment plant.




        The textile plant, which employs an average of 236




people, plans additional expansion in the future which will

-------
                                                          v - 7






more than double the industrial discharge and create a combined




municipal and industrial waste flow of approximately 550,000 gpd.




        The State Water Control Board has directed that the Town




of Gordonsville complete construction plans by September 196? for




new treatment facilities which are to be adequately designed to




treat all municipal and industrial wastes emanating from the Area.




Pilot plant studies of feasible means of treating the textile




wastes have been made by consulting engineers.  Preliminary plans




for new facilities designed for an average flow of 0.55 mgd have




been approved by the State.  The Town of Gordonsville will con-




struct and own the new facilities which are estimated to cost




$192,000.  A bojnd referendum is scheduled for April 1967.




        A flood control structure of the dry dam type, to be




built several miles downstream from Gordonsville on the unnamed




tributary, has been proposed in the South Anna River Watershed




Plan.  A second multi-purpose structure, also proposed on another




tributary in the Area, would be used by the Town for future water




supply.  These structures would be built under Public Law 566.




The additional water available from the proposed multi-purpose




structure for the Town water supply, when discharged from the




Town waste treatment plant to the unnamed tributary, would aug-




ment the flow and probably enhance water quality in the receiving

-------
                                                          V - 8






stream.  However, additional studies are needed to determine




the possible effects the waste discharge from Gordonsville may




have on the quality of water impounded by the proposed flood




control structure.  Before the dam is constructed, it should be




ascertained that the flood control facilities will not back up




waste water and create additional water quality problems   Stand-




ards on the stream probably will be adopted in the near future.




If a section of the stream is designated as a recovery zone, the




proposed impoundment could adversely affect stream recovery.






        2.  Town of Mineral




        The Town of Mineral, located in Louisa County on U. S.




Route 522 at the intersection with State Route 22, had a I960




population of 366.  Private'-septic tanks are used for sewage




disposal.  Town officials are anxious to install a public sewer-




age system, but a high degree of treatment will be required for




any wastes discharged in the area because of low base flows in




Contrary Creek, the proposed receiving stream.




        The Town has engaged consulting engineers to design




sewerage facilities for the Town, and plans have been submitted




to the State Department of Health for approval,,  The proposed




system would include a sewage lagoon and a 90-day holding pond




designed to retain all flow during dry seasons.  The cost of the




facilities is estimated to be $306,350, with additional future




expenditures of $l8j,000 required to expand the sewerage system

-------
                                                          V - 9






for projected loads through year 2000.  A bond referendum is




planned for the spring of 196?






        3=  Other Towns




        Other Towns in the Sub-Basin either have adequate second-




ary treatment facilities or are  using individual disposal systems




The Towns of Louisa and Ashland have secondary facilities which




should be adequate for the projected growth in these Areas,  The




sewage lagoon at Ashland has experienced some disagreeable odors,




caused by decaying blue-green algae, and local operators have




cooperated with the State Department of Health in attempts to




control the problem.






    C.  West Point Area




        West Point is at the confluence of the Mattaponi and




Pamunkey Rivers,  At one time West Point was the site of the




Village of Chief  Opechancanough, implacable foe of the early




white man.  In 1622 the crafty Indian leader planned and launched




from this point the massacre which nearly wiped out the early




Virginia Colony.




        Today maritime vessels navigate up the 22-foot channel




in the York River to the Point to load kraft pulp for shipment




to foreign seaports.  It is the  kraft pulp and paper industry




located on the Point which makes West Point the principal manu-




facturing and waste producing Area in the York River Basin.

-------
                                                         V - 10


Because of the significance of the industrial discharge, the

industry vill be discussed separately from the Town of West Point,


        !  The Chesapeake Corporation

        The Chesapeake Corporation, located in the Town of West

Point, produces approximately 1,050 tons of kraft pulp per day

and employs about 850 persons; making the Corporation the most

important industry in the York River Basin  In addition to pro-

ducing kraft pulp for export, the Firm also manufactures liner

board and kraft paper=

        Both continuous and batch type digesters are used in

the sulfate pulp-making process, and approximately one-half of

the 22 to 23 nigd waste water discharge from the plant is cooling

water from waste liquor evaporators.  The untreated plant efflu-

ent, having the following characteristics, discharges to the

Pamunkey River approximately one-half mile above the mouth.

     Chesapeake Corporation Waste Discharge Characteristics

	Indicator	Range	

Total Discharge (includes used                  22 -     23 mgd
  cooling water)

B.O.D.                                      30,000 - 35,000
                                              pounds per day

pH (of pulp screening water)                     9 -      9=5


        Several years of sampling data collected in the Pamunkey

River in the vicinity of the paper mill discharge during late

-------
                                                         V - 11






summer months indicate that dissolved oxygen concentrations range




from 11.2 to 4U2 rag/1, and BOD concentrations range from 0.5 to




2,0 mg/lo  Localized coloration and foaming in the receiving




water is caused by the mill discharge,,  Available chemical data




do not indicate that the mill wastes adversely affect shellfish




and other marine life in the estuary, but further investigations




are needed before definite conclusions can be made,,




        Although the assimilative capacity of the mill waste




receiving stream is apparently not being exceeded at this time,




the magnitude of the Chesapeake Corporation waste discharge




(population equivalent one and one-half times greater than the




entire York Basin population) warrants that adequate waste treat-




ment facilities be installed to effectively treat the mill waste




and to protect and enhance the water quality in the area*  Kraft




mill wastes are amenable to effective treatment by conventional




aerobic processes, and facilities are currently removing 85 per




cent of the BOE from other kraft mill effluents in the State.






        2.   Town of West Point




        Preliminary projections indicate that the I960 popula-




tion (1,678) of the Town of West Point is not expected to




increase more than ten per cent within the next several decades.




The existing municipal secondary treatment facilities in the




Town are designed for a P0 Eo of 3,000 which should be adequate

-------
                                                         V - 12






for projected future growth, including additional waste loads




from surrounding communities which may connect with the Town




sewerage system.




        The only immediate pollution control needs in the Town




at present are maintenance related.




        Some by-passing occurs at the plant during repairs,




causing the Department of Health to close downstream shellfish




beds temporarilyo   However, some of the maintenance problems




have been corrected in the past months, resulting in less fre-




quent by-passing.






    D.  Lower York River Basin (Below West Point to Chesapeake Bay)




        The Lower York River Basin is, as are the upper regions,




essentially rural, with York County being the principal County




having significant waste producing activity.  The York River,




extending approximately 3^ miles from West Point to the Chesa-




peake Bay, is navigable throughout, with a minimum 22-foot depth




channel.  The principal uses of the stream include navigation,




fishing, recreation, and, in the lower reaches, shellfish har-




vesting.  Stream standards proposed by the Water Control Board




would establish these pursuits as the intended use of the entire




estuarine reach.




        Small municipalities, several Federal installations, and




two industries comprise the sources of significant waste discharges




in the Lower Basin; these sources are summarized below:

-------
                                                           V - 13
             Waste Discharges and Treatment Facilities
                   in the Lower York River Basin
Equivalent
Population
Location Served
Community of Toano
York and James City
Counties Sanitary
District No. 1
Camp Peary (two
plants )
*
Cheatham Annex
Naval Weapons Station
Plant 1
Plant 2
Plant 3
Plant It
Plants 5, 6, and 7
Plant 8
Plant 9
Plant 10
Coast Guard Training
School*
Yorktown Colonial
National Park
Virginia Electric and
Power Company





500


3,^00

800
5^0

689
510
ki6
688
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
72

1,000
300
to 500
220,000
gal /mi n
cooling
water
discharge
from con-
densers
Design
Type of Capacity
Treatment (mgd)
Septic Tank 0.05


Secondary 0.38

Secondary 	
Secondary O.l6

Secondary 0.15
Secondary 0.15
Secondary 0.10
Secondary 0.12
Secondary Unknown
Secondary 0.005
Secondary 0,005
Secondary Unknown

Secondary 0.15

Secondary 0.86







Receiving Stream
Ware Creek


Kings Creek

Center Creek
York River

Ballards Creek
Ballards Creek
Felgate Creek
Felgate Creek
Felgate Creek
Felgate Creek
Felgate Creek
York River

York River

Yorktown Creek






York River
These installations also have small untreated discharges.

-------
                                                              V - Ik
      Location
Equivalent
Population
  Served
  Type of
 Treatment
 Design
Capacity
 (mgd)
Receiving Stream
American Oil Company  1,130 gal/  Oil separa-  -
                      minprocess tors and
                      water and   holding ponds
                      33,000 -
                      1*5,000 gal/
                      min.cooling
                      water dis-
                      charges
                                   York River
Town of Poquoson
Rural Residential
  Areas
   ^,300
  17,300
Private
Septic Tanks

Private
Septic Tanks
          Sub-surface
            Drain Fields

          Sub-surface
            Drain Fields
             Pollution summaries of areas having significant waste

     discharges and/or existing or potential water quality problems

     are discussed as follows:

             1.  Community of Toano

             Approximately 500 persons from the Community of Toano,

     located in James City County on U  So Route 60, are served by a

     0,05 mgd septic tank which discharges to Ware Creek.   The treat-

     ment facilities were modified and chlorination facilities were in-

     stalled in 1962, resulting in considerable improvement of the water

     quality in the small receiving stream,    A need for secondary

     treatment at the primary effluent is indicated, however; and a

     conventional secondary treatment plant for the area,  based on

     current sewage treatment plant cost data, is estimated to cost

     $70,000; however, the receiving stream should be studied to

     determine the decree of treatment required.

-------

-------
                                                         V - 15






        2o  York and James City Counties Sanitary District No. 1




        A 0^38 mgd secondary treatment plant located near Williams-




burg treats the wastes from approximately 1,100 homes northeast




of Williamsburgj Virginia.




        Shellfish beds in a section of Kings Creek, downstream




from the waste treatment plant, are condemned by the State Depart-




ment of Health, probably as a buffer zone between the waste




effluent and non-restricted beds further downstream*  A need for




a holding pond is suggested; however, further analyses are re-




quired to determine the effect a holding pond would have on the




lifting of shellfish bed restrictions






        3o  Federal Installations




        Federal Installations in York County were inspected in




196^ and in early 1967 by the office staff from the Regional




Headquarters of the Middle Atlantic Region of the Federal Water




Pollution Control Administration.  Findings of the investiga-




tions are summarized as follows:




            a.  Naval Supply Center - Cheatham Annex




        Cheatham Annex is a 2$805-acre naval supply center




located on the York River in York County approximately six miles




upstream from Yorktown.  Approximately 125,000 gpd of waste from




the Center receive secondary treatment at a 0l6 mgd plant, and




the chlorinated effluent discharges to the York River.  No




laboratory control is practiced at the plant,   An additional

-------
                                                         v - 16






9,000 gallons per day from the Center flow to 19 septic tanks




and discharge to sub-surface drain fields.  To enhance effective




operation of the treatment plant and to provide data on the waste




effluent, a laboratory control program should be implemented




immediately,,




        Raw sewage contributed by 5^ persons for approximately




three days (in 19&U) every three weeks (eight hours per day) is




also discharged into the York River from the pier.




        Facilities for intercepting and treating the raw sewage




discharges from the pier should be installed immediately.  Mobile




holding tanks or chemical treatment units could be used until




permanent facilities are installed.






            b.  Coast Guard Reserve Training Center




        The Coast Guard Reserve Training Center is located ap-




proximately 2.5 miles southeast of Yorktown.  The approximate




area of the Center is 152 acres.  The population of the Center




in 196U consisted of 189 permanently stationed Coast Guardsmen,




650 reservists during the three-month training program, and 210




reservists for the remainder of the year.  Approximately 57




civilians are employed at the Center on a permanent basis.




        A training vessel with 37 personnel aboard is docked at




the Center for approximately three weeks each year, and a second




vessel with ten persons aboard is docked at the Center 80 per




cent of the year.

-------
                                                         V - 17






        Waste discharges from the Center, averaging 95,000 gpd,




receive adequate treatment at a 0,15 mgd secondary treatment




plant, and the chlorinated effluent is discharged to the York




River




        A 10,000 gpd cooling water discharge from the power




plant at the Center enters the West Branch of Wormley Creek with




no apparent adverse effects on water quality.




        Untreated raw sewage from the two Coast Guard vessels




is discharged directly to the York River.  As with Cheatham




Annex, an effective laboratory control program should be imple-




mented at this Center, and the discharging of raw sewage should




be discontinued immediately  Mobile holding tanks could be used




temporarily until necessary piping from the vessels to a pumping




station on the dock are installed






            c.  Naval Weapons Station




        The Naval Weapons Station is located in York and James




City Counties near Yorktown.  The Station has an area of approxi-




mately 1^,000 acres, and it is concerned with the manufacturing,




processing, packaging, research, and development of explosives.




        Waste disposal facilities for the Station consist of




ten treatment plants, which discharge to tributaries of the York




River, and 25 septic tanks equipped with sub-surface drain fields.

-------
                                                         v - 18






        Plants Noso 1, 2, 3, and k provide adequate secondary




treatment and chlorination for most of the waste flow from the




Station.  Plants Nos 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are equipped to pro-




vide secondary treatment without chlorination for waste discharges




from miscellaneous areas within the Station.  The present flow




at Plants 5 through 10, being intermittent and below design




values, is not sufficient to maintain the microbial community




on the trickling filters.  Consequently, the upper layers of the




filter media are devoid of biological life.  The discharge from




the ten plants all flow to the York River via various tributaries




        Industrial waste solids, suspended in plant wash water




from two explosive plants in the Station, are removed by in-plant




baffling and settling facilities before the waste water flows to




holding ponds.  Calcium, chloride, aluminum, RDX, TNT, and wax




are utilized at the two plants   Plant boiler blow-down water is




also discharged to the ponds after passing through settling pits.




        The pond which receives  wastes from Explosive Plant No.  1




supports abundant biological life, but the pond serving Explosive




Plant NOo 2 is very shallow and appears to have limited storage




capacity.  Barfield Creek receives the discharge from the ponds.




        The net effect of the waste discharges from the Station




on York River water quality is not known at present because of




insufficient water quality data in the Area.  Water Control Board




officials have expressed concern in reference to the discharge of

-------
                                                         V - 19


industrial wastes, especially TNT which is toxic to fish, and

have indicated the need for a sampling and analysis program

which will effecti'ely mcmto; the Explosive Plant waste holding

ponds

        The U. Se Public Health Service inspection team, which

visited the Station in 196U, recommended the following:

                 (l)  The Navy conduct a stream sampling program

on Felgate Creek to determine the quality of water entering the

York River.  The program should include bacteriological determi-

nations.  These data are needed to determine if chlorination

should be instituted at Treatment Plant Wos  5 through 9-

                (2)  The possibility of implementing shorter

dosing cycles at Plants Ncs-  5 through 9 should be investigated.

Shorter cycles would improve effluent quality.

                (3)  The Navy should conduct a sampling program

on Barfield Creek to determine whether any undesirable waste

constituents such as TNT are gaining entry to the York River

This procedure would determine whether addiLional treatment

facilities need be provided for the expjosive and biowdown wastes,


            d.  Colonial National Historical Park - Yorktown
                Battleground

        The Yorktown Battleground is operated by the National

Park Service as a part of the Colonial National Historical Park0

The other major facilities comprising the Historical Park are  at

-------
                                                         V - 20






Jamestown, Virginia   The Yorktown site is in York County, Vir-




ginia, and consists of approximately 5,000 acres, the greater




portion of which is on a high bank overlooking the York River




with a small area adjacent to the Ri;/er at the foot of the banko




The Government reservation entirely surrounds the Village of




Yorktown and has approximately 8*1 privately owned tracts of vary-




ing sizes within its boundaries,   U= 30 Route 17 traverses the




Battleground In a general north-south direction and divides it




approximately in half*




        The Battleground has a slightly rolling terrain, and




natural drainage is to both the York and James Rivers,   Drainage




to the York River is by way of Yorktown Creek and Wormley Creek.




Baptist and Great Runs are the major streams draining from this




Area to the James River,




        The working force and the number of visitors at the Park




vary with the seasons   The average number of visitors  during the




summer is about Uo,000 persons per month, but this figure drops




to 20,000 during the winter months.  The number of employees work-




ing an 8-hour day at the installation is kO in the summer and 20




in the winter, with an additional nine employees and their fami-




lies residing on the property in Park Service housing throughout




the year-




        The National Park Service provides sewage treatment for




the Yorktown Battleground, the Village of Yorktown, the York

-------
                                                         V - 21







County  Courthouse,, and several schools and private establish-




ments.  The average flow to the sewage treatment plant is esti-




mated to "be 50,000 gpd m the summer months and 35000 gpd in




the winter.  The secondary sewage treatment plant has a design




capacity of 86,000 gpd   The chlorinated effluent discharges to




Yorktown Creek which is very sluggish, and algal growths abound




both upstream and downstream Irom the treatment plant discharge




State Route 230 and U, S. Highway 17 both have 36-inch culverts




in the Creek which possibly have .impeded tidal action, affecting




normal stream flow Jn Yorktow~ Creek




        Results of a stream survey conducted by the Water Control




Board in the York River near the mout^ of Yorktcwn Creek during




the summer of 1966 indicated high col.form bacteria counts, possi-




bly attributable t,-; the iorkt^wn discharge.  A lack of laboratory




data from the treatmert plant, however, prevents the evaluation




of the Park Ser^r- c:j * re at merit  plant a. a pcss:,ble source of the




bacterial pollution




        A potentlaj. hazard to the publi -; beach and shellfish




grounds in the Yorktown Area exists at a sewage lift station in




the Park Service sewerage sys+era which has an overflow line lead-




ing from the wet wel:  (c the beach area.




        Programs and,'or facilities needed to improve the Park




Service water pollution control program are as follows:

-------
                                                         V - 22






                (l)  A complete laboratory control program, in-




cluding analysis for BOD, suspended solids, settleable solids,




temperature, pH, and chlorine residual, should be implemented




at the waste treatment plant at Yorktown.




                (2)  A stand-by chlorinator should be installed.




                (3)  A holding pond or effective stand-by equip-




ment should be provided to prevent untreated overflows from the




sewage lift station from reaching the York River.






            e.  Camp Peary




        Camp Peary, located in York County northeast of Williams-




burg, serves as an Armed Forces experimental training base.  The




population consists of approximately ^00 base residents and an




average trainee population of kOQ.  For administration purposes,




the Camp is under the Department of the Navy.




        Sewage treatment of Camp wastes is provided by two second-




ary treatment plants which discharge chlorinated effluents to




Carter Creek.




        Some shellfish beds are condemned downstream from the




plants, but operating data on the plant effluent characteristics




presently are not available.  Therefore, evaluations of the effect




of the discharges on the receiving stream have not been made.

-------
                                                         V - 23





        k.  Virginia Electric and Power Company



        The Virginia Electric and Power Company (VEPCO) operates



a steam-electric generating station downstream from Yorktown,



Spent cooling water discharges from the steam condenser at a rate



of 220,000 gallons per minute at peak loading, with an average



temperature rise of 8 C, and flows into the York River through



the outfall canal from the plant which continues offshore in a



trench through the inshore shallows.  The dispersion pattern of



the thermal discharge is affected by wind and tidal currents.



        A study conducted by the Virginia Institute of Marine


              . */
Science in 1963  concluded that the thermal discharge affected



the composition and abundance of marine benthic invertebrates



over a distance of 300 to hOO yards from the discharge, but the



net effect of the discharge on river water quality was not dis-



cussed in the study.  The close proximity, however, of the VEPCO



thermal discharge to the American Oil Company Refinery thermal



discharge (discussed in the next paragraph) presents a potential



thermal pollution problem which could adversely affect the water



quality and marine life of the stream.  A need for analysis of



the effects of thermal discharges in the Area is suggested.
*/
   "The Effects of Thermal Effluents on Marine Organisms,"

    Virginia Institute of Marine Science.

-------
                                                         V - 2k


        5  American Oil Company

        The American Oil Company light oil refinery is located

on the York River downstream from the VEPCO steam-electric gener-

ating station.  Approximately 50,000 barrels of crude oil are

processed at the plant each day.  The majority of the crude oil

is imported from the Middle East.

        Facilities for intercepting and removing pollutants from

the refinery waste water consist of separators, holding tanks,

settling basins, and oil skimmers.  Waste process water from the

refinery and tank farm draw-off water are collected and trans-

mitted to an American Petroleum Institute separator for oil

removal before flowing to a four to five-day holding pond,,  The

discharge from the holding pond is pumped intermittently to the

York River during the outgoing tide via a 60-inch discharge line

which extends about 3,000 feet offshore,   Cooling water from

refinery condensers and coolers flows to an effluent tank where

floating residual oil is skimmed off before discharging to the

60-incn outfall pipe.

        Characteristics of the refinery discharge are as follows:

                                                    Temperature
    Source	Discharge	BOD	Rise	

Process Water                                %
  Holding Pond       1,130 gpm      8?o5 mg/1          

Spent Cooling       35,000 -
  Water             ^5,000 gpm	          10 - 15 F.
*
   Process water discharges also contain Phenols, Nitrogen Bases,
   Ammonia, Cyanide, Copper, Oil, Sulfide, and Mercaptan.

-------
                                                         V - 25




        Other discharges from the refinery consist of drainage


from the general area ditch system, which flows to four settling


basins where dirL and oil are separar-ed and removed-,  The dis-


charge from the settling basins flows through hay baskets to an


onshore discharge point.  Caustic wastes from the refinery are


not discharged intentionally; however, in 1962 an accidental


discharge of caustics was reported^  In addition to a possible


thermal pollution problem resulting from the cooling water dis-


charge,, which mixes with the VEPCO thermal discharge discussed


previously, potentially serious toxic conditions could be created
             #

if the phenols in the process water discharge were accidentally


mixed with caustic wastes =,   Good housekeeping, which apparently


is being practiced, and monitoring of the effluent are the pre-


ventive actions necessary to prevent the discharge of toxic wastes,


        One of the most serious pollution problems in the estuary


is either directly or indirectly related to the oil industry in


the Area,  Approximately ],CO waterfowl were killed in January


1967 as the result of oil slicks in the marshes.  The source of


the oil was thought to be a leaking oil barge which unloaded at


the refinery pier, although tbis was not confirmed by Water


Control Board findings,


        In March 1967, a Liberian oil tanker unloading crude oil


at the refinery pier lost oil to the River for six and one-half


hours through a partially open valve,  An unestimated number of

-------
                                                         V - 26






waterfowl were killed, and approximately ten miles of shoreline




and beaches on the south shore were damaged.




        The day following the oil tanker spill, a skimming unit




at the refinery process water holding pond was out of operation




for repairs, and the overflow from the pond was diverted to the




drainage ditch settling basins.  The increased load on the basins




overloaded the settling basin skimming equipment, resulting in a




discharge containing refinery wastes at the onshore discharge




point.  Because of the widespread damage caused by the tanker




spill the previous day, no appreciable additional damage was




caused by the refinery discharge.  Proper coordination of main-




tenance operations and in-plant programs designed to cope with




emergency situations are the remedial actions needed to prevent




a recurrence of the waste overflows.




         At times sanitary wastes are discharged intentionally




in the River by maritime vessels which dock at the pier, adding




to the localized bacterial pollution and nuisance conditions




which are related to boating activity in the estuary.  Problems




related to boat pollution in interstate waters are currently




being studied by Federal agencies, and legislation designed to




effectively prohibit the discharging of polluting wastes from




all types of water craft will probably be forthcoming.

-------
                                                         V - 27






        6.  Lower York County




        The growth of York County is presently hampered by a lack




of sewage treatment facilities.   The soil in the Area is generally




unsuitable for sub-surface disposal systems  The County is within




the region served by the Hampton Roads Sanitation District, and a




sewerage system for the County is being planned.  The first phase,




which is expected to be started within one year, will provide




sewerage facilities for the Grafton and Bethal  Manor Areas.  A




population of approximately 1^,000 will be served by the facili-




ties including the Town of Poquoson.




        The wastes collected under the first phase of the program




will be transmitted to a new secondary sewage treatment plant




presently under construction near Newport News in the James River




Basin.  The cost of the first phase, including the transmission




lines to the treatment plant (but not the treatment plant), is




estimated to be $6,500,000.




        Under the second phase of the program, the sewerage sys-




tem would be extended to the northeastern sections of the County,




including Yorktown, and a new secondary waste treatment plant




would be built in York County.  When the new plant is constructed




(in about ten years), all wastes intercepted in York County will




then be treated at the new York County plant   The proposed future




York County waste treatment plant is estimated to cost $4,500,000.

-------
II
CO
<
CD

o:
LU
>

tr
       o:
       o
              U.O
              O
               z
              1-0


              ill
              t- -JO
              CC OUJ
              < a. K

-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                         Page

  I.  INTRODUCTION	    1-1

      A.  Purpose and Scope  .............    1-1

      B.  Acknowledgments  ..............    1-2

 II.  GENERAL	   II  - 1

      A.  Source of Information	   II  - 1

      B.  Determination of Needs	   II  - 2

      C.  State Stream Classifications	   II  - 5

      D.  Comprehensive Planning of Water Resources
          of the Susquehanna River Basin	   II  - 6

      E.  Susquehanna River Basin Compact  	   II  - 6

III.  SUMMARY	Ill  - 1

      A.  Water Quality	Ill  - 1

      B.  Immediate Pollution Control Needs   	   Ill  - 3

          1.  Waste Treatment	Ill  - 3

          2.  Comprehensive Evaluations	Ill  - 20

          3.  Special Studies	Ill  - 23

          U.  Institutional Practices	Ill  - 2k

      C.  Recent Pollution Control Progress   	   Ill  - 25

          1.  Pennsylvania	Ill  - 25

          2.  Federal and State Cooperative  Agencies  .   Ill  - 26

      D.  Water Supply	Ill  - 26

 IV.  DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA	   IV  - 1

      A.  Location	   IV  - 1

      B.  Geography	   IV  - 1

-------

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

                                                          Page

    C.  Climate  ............  	    IV - 3

    D0  Geology  ...................    IV - 3

    E.  Principal Communities and Industries 	    IV - h

V,  WATER POLLUTION PROBLEMS, RECOMMENDATIONS
    AND COSTS	     V - 1

    A.  West Branch Susquehanna River Upstream from
        Chest Creek (including Chest Creek)   	     V - U

        1.  Barnesboro, Spangler, Patton and
            Hastings Area  ..............     V - U

    B.  West Branch Susquehanna River - Chest Creek
        to Sinnemahoning Creek (Excluding Clearfield
        and Moshannon Creeks)  ...... 	     V - 9

        1.  Clearfield-Curwensville Area .	     V-9

    C.  Clearfield Creek	     V - 16

        1.  Gallitzin-Loretto-Coalport-Irvona Area . .     V - 16

    D.  Moshannon Creek  ...............     V - 20

        1.  Houtzdale-Philipsburg Area ........     V - 20

    E.  Sinnemahoning Creek  .............     V - 23

        1.  Emporium-Austin Area ...........     V - 23

    F.  West Branch Susquehanna River - Sinnemahoning
        Creek to North Bald Eagle Creek  .......     V - 28

        1.  Renovo Area  ...............     V - 28

    G.  North Bald Eagle Creek ............     V - 31

        1.  State College Area	     V - 31

        2.  Beliefonte Area  .............     V - 36

        3.  Beech Creek  ...............     V - 39

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

                                                      Page

    k.  Blancnard Reservoir	V - kl

    5.  Lock Haven Area	V - ^3

H.  West Branch Susquehanna River - North Bald
    Eagle Creek to Mouth	V - hi

    1.  Wellsboro Area	V - kl

    2.  Jersey Shore Area	V - 50

    3.  Williamsport Area	V - 53

    k.  Muncy Area	V - 56

    5.  Milton Area	V - 58

-------
                                                          I - 1




I.   INTRODUCTION




    A.  Purpose and Scope




        Under the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution




Control Act (33 U.S.C. ^66 et seq), Section 3(a), the Secretary




of the Interior is authorized to make joint investigations with




other Federal agencies, with State Water Pollution Control Agen-




cies and interstate agencies, and with the municipalities and




industries involved, of the condition of any waters in any State




or States and of the discharges of any sewage, industrial wastes,




or substance which may adversely affect these waters.  These




investigations are for the purpose of preparing and developing




comprehensive programs for eliminating or reducing the pollution




of interstate waters and tributaries thereof.




        This Working Document reports the results of the water




quality and pollution control studies carried out by staff of the




Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins Project in accordance




with the above provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control




Act.




        The primary purpose of this report is to focus attention




on existing and potential water pollution problem areas as the




basis for the initiation of immediate pollution control actions.




Specific objectives of this report are to:




        1.  Delineate present and potential water quality




            problem areas.

-------

-------
                                                         1-2






         2.  Indicate responsibility for the problems.




         3.  Indicate possible immediate actions and responsibility




             to alleviate the problem.




         k.  Estimate costs of these actions.




         The secondary purpose of this report is to present general




coverage of potential future water quality problem areas through




year 2020.  Tentative corrective actions are given for  considera-




tion in planning for future actions to insure continuing water




quality satisfactory for all desired beneficial uses.  A general




coverage of water supply is also included for each area.  Anti-




cipated water supply needs through 2020 are indicated with areas




delineated where future water shortages are anticipated.




         This report covers the West Branch Susquehanna River




drainage area in the West central portion of the Susquehanna




River Basin.  The study area includes all of portions of 19 counties




and drains approximately 6,913 square miles.  Principle tributaries




include Clearfield, Moshannon, Sinnemahoning, and North Bald Eagle




Creeks.




     B.  Acknowledgments




         The cooperation and assistance of the following Federal,




State and local agencies are gratefully acknowledged:




         U. S. Army Engineer District, Baltimore, Maryland




         U. S. Soil Conservation Service, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania




         U. S. Geological Survey, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

-------
                                                 I  -  3
U. S. Bureau of Mines, Pittsburg,  Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania Department of Health,  Central Office,
     Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and Region II,  Williams-
     port 3 Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania Department of Forests  and Waters,
     Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania Department of Mines and Mineral  Industries,
     Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

National Planning Association, Washington, D. C.

Local Municipal Officials

Local Industrial Representatives

-------
                                                        II - 1






II.   GENERAL



     A.  Source of Information



         Present water quality conditions covered in this report



were evaluated by staff of the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River



Basins Project, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,



employing the following sources of information:



         1,  Industrial water and waste facilities inventories



             gathered from questionnaires sent by the Pennsylvania



             Department of Health to industries in the Susquehanna



             River Basin,



         2.  Municipal water and waste facilities inventories



             obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of Health.



         3.  Existing data obtained from files of State, local,



             and other Federal agencies.



         k.  Results of CB-SRBP stream sampling investigations.



         5.  Public meetings and personal communications with



             Federal, State, and local planning agencies.



         A biological study of the Susquehanna River and tributaries



by CB-SRBP comprised a special investigation to supplement water



quality sampling data of chemical, biochemical,  and bacteriological



characteristics for streams throughout the study area.  Brief sum-



maries of the biological studies are given along with summaries of



quality data for most of the areas covered in this report.  For

-------
                                                        II - 2






more details of the biological conditions of streams throughout




the Susquehanna River Basin, findings are presented in two pre-




vious CB-SRBP reports (CB-SRBP Working Documents Nos. 1 and 2).




          A mine drainage study was undertaken by CB-SRBP to




delineate areas, problems, and general corrective measures for




mine drainage pollution in the Susquehanna, Potomac, and Dela-




ware Basins.  The findings of the mine drainage study are sum-




marized briefly in this report only to point out the effect of




mine drainage on water quality in the stream reaches under con-




sideration.  Detailed findings are presented in the CB-SRBP Mine




Drainage Report.




          For evaluations of future water supply and water quality




requirements, county population and industrial productivity pro-




jections developed by the National Planning Association were




employed.  The 1960 U. S. Census Report was used as a base from




which individual community projections were made.  Industrial




loadings were projected by type of industry on an invididual




production  increase basis.  Modifications were made to industrial




projections when specific information was obtained regarding




changes in processing, techniques, or plant operation.




     B.   Determination of Needs




          Water quality needs were evaluated in terms of treatment




required to upgrade and maintain stream conditions which are




generally recognized as being suitable for most beneficial uses;

-------

-------
                                                        II - 3






the minimum use being warm-water fishery.  The effects of residual



waste loadings to streams were evaluated with the degree of treat-



ment specified which was expected to maintain the desired water



quality for the immediate future.  In most cases, secondary treat-



ment with 85 per cent removal of BOD was specified.



        Beyond 1980, the degree of treatment and other alternatives



are indicated as possible solutions where water quality problems



are anticipated; however, except for secondary treatment facilities,



the methods proposed for future actions are only given for con-



sideration, since detailed evaluations of the alternatives and



comparisons of benefits would be necessary to select the most



likely alternative.



        Cost estimates for upgrading present facilities to secon-



dary treatment were obtained mostly from consulting engineers who



have completed studies of needed treatment facilities for many of



the municipalities.  For communities not having engaged an engineer,



cost estimates were made of the plant proper, employing construc-



tion cost information from the Public Health Service Publication



No. 1229, "Modern Sewage Treatment Plants - How Much Do They Cost,"



and updating these costs with the Public Health Service - Sewage



Treatment Plant current cost index (PHS-STP 114.4).  For some



communities, costs of treatment plants were estimated by the



Pennsylvania Department of Health in previous years and, where



these estimates were available, the costs were updated to indicate



current dollar values.

-------
                                                        II - k






        Needs or abatement measures to control mine drainage




pollution are discussed separately in the CB-SRBP Mine Drainage




Report; cost estimates of reducing mine drainage pollution in




the study area are given for two methods, land reclamation and




lime neutralization.  Since mine drainage pollution control needs




are discussed in greater detail in a separate document, only




general coverage is given in this report.  However, in areas




where pollution problems result from mine drainage as well as




organic wastes, measures to upgrade stream quality for beneficial




uses must include consideration of both sources.




        In evaluating the adequacy of waste treatment facilities




in areas affected by mine drainage, an assumption was made that




mine drainage would be reduced to such an extent that acidity




and heavy metals associated with mine drainage would not impair




the natural assimilative capacities of the stream.  Although




initial steps to control mine drainage may not entirely eliminate




the toxic effects of acids and heavy metals during the immediate




years ahead, measures to control or reduce mine drainage should




not be prerequisites to the provision of adequate waste treat-




ment facilities.  Therefore, in making waste assimilative evalua-




tions to determine the degree of waste treatment for both present




and future, the above assumption was made; otherwise, with mine




drainage present, stream biota would be inhibited or eliminated




so that waste assimilation could not readily be determined if




occurring at all.

-------
                                                        II - 5






     C.  State Stream Classifications




         The Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board classifies State




streams in terms of degree of treatment required.  The Board has




classified the West Branch upstream from Lock Haven and a number




of its tributaries as acid impregnated streams.  The Board presently




does not require treatment of sewage discharged to these streams




unless degradation attributable to organic waste discharges is




evident.  Primary treatment (35 per cent BOD removal) is required




prior to discharge to the West Branch downstream from Lock Haven.




At least secondary treatment (85 per cent BOD removal) is required




prior to discharge to most of the remainder of the streams in the




study area,




         As mine drainage is eliminated or reduced substantially




so that waste assimilation may occur, the tributary streams




formerly containing mine drainage are reclassified to upgrade




water quality.  The stream classifications presented in this




report are those currently assigned by the Sanitary Water Board




for streams in Pennsylvania.  These classifications should not




be interpreted to be representative of the effects of future




water quality standards .




         This report delineates specific stream classifications




and actions taken by the Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board where




municipalities and industries have been given orders to construct

-------

-------
                                                        II - 6


or upgrade treatment facilities.  Where water quality information

and other data indicate the required degree of treatment does not

appear adequate for the immediate future, the need for additional

treatment facilities is included.


     D.  Comprehensive Planning of Water Resources of the
         Susquehanna River Basin

         There exists within the Susquehanna River Basin a formal

interagency coordinating committee chaired by the Corps of

Engineers and on which the Project is an active participant.

Membership consists of governor-appointed State representatives

from New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland, as well as water-

oriented Federal agencies.  The purpose of the Committee is to

recommend a water resources development plan to Congress, based

on evaluating alternative solutions, including costs, to meet

Basin needs.

         Since all aspects of water resource development, includ-

ing water pollution control, are being considered, no attempt

has been made to prejudge the Committee findings beyond defining

immediate waste treatment needs in this report.  Evaluations

are presently underway by the agencies acting as a work group

and, upon completion, not only immediate water resource needs

and solutions, but also the long-range needs will be determined.


     E.  Susquehanna River Basin Compact

         The conservation, utilization, development, management,

and control of the water resources of the Susquehanna River Basin

-------
                                                        II  - 7






involve complex, technical, time-consuming efforts by a large




number of governmental agencies cooperating to formulate a




basin-wide program.




         In order to avoid duplication, overlapping,  and uncoor-




dinated efforts from this large number of cooperating agencies,




the Interstate Advisory Committee on the Susquehanna  River  Basin,




which was created by the action of the States of New  York,  Pennsyl-




vania, and Maryland, has, on the basis of its studies and delib-




erations, recommended that an intergovernmental compact with




Federal participation be formed.  In an area as large as the




Susquehanna River Basin, where approximately three million  people




live and work, comprehensive multi-purpose planning and adminis-




tration by a basin-wide agency is necessary to bring  the greatest




benefits and produce the most efficient service in the public




interest.




         Comprehensive planning with basin-wide administration




will provide flood damage reduction; conservation and develop-




ment of surface and ground water supply for municipal, industrial,




and agricultural use; development of recreational facilities in




relations to reservoirs, lakes, and streams; propagation of fish




and game; promotion of land management, soil conservation,  and




watershed projects; protection and aid to fisheries;  development




of hydroelectric power potentialities; improved navigation;

-------
                                                        II - 8






control of movement of salt water; abatement and control of water




pollution; and regulation of stream flows toward the attainment




of these goals.




         The Advisory Committee has prepared a draft of an inter-




governmental compact for the creation of a Basin agency.  The




States of New York, Maryland, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,




and the United States of America, upon enactment of concurrent




legislation by the Congress and by the respective State legis-




latures, agree with each other to the Susquehanna River Basin




Compact.  To date both the States of New York and Maryland have




passed legislation to adopt the Compact.

-------
                                                        Ill - 1






III.  SUMMARY




      A.  Water Quality



        The West Branch Susquehanna River originates in the



Allegheny Plateau Province in Central Pennsylvania and flows



through the Ridge and Valley Province to join the Susquehanna



River at Northumberland.  Natural stream quality and flow vary



greatly between the two Provinces.  Streams in the Plateau Pro-



vince are low in mineral content and are poorly buffered; streams



are "flashy" with high flood run-off and low drought flow.  In



the Ridge and Valley Province, streams are well buffered and



have more stable flow characteristics.



        The most serious and extensive pollution problem in the



study area is caused by mine drainage.  Mine drainage, primarily



from abandoned coal mines, has degraded quality in more than 500



miles of streams.  While emphasis in this report has been placed



on immediate needs to prevent water quality degradation attri-



butable to municipal and industrial waste discharges, immediate



actions to abate mine drainage pollution are essential to an



effective pollution control program and will largely determine



the extent of future utilization of many of the streams in the



study area.



        Aside from mine drainage, the provision of at least



primary treatment is the most pressing sewerage need in the study



area.  Twenty-six communities, having a total sewered population



of approximately 38,000, are presently discharging untreated

-------
                                                        Ill - 2






 sewage.  Most  of  these  communities discharge to  streams receiving




 mine drainage  and have  not been  required,  in the past, to provide




 treatment  facilities   However9  it is  expected that a minimum of




 primary  treatment will  soon be required prior to discharge to




 any waters in  the State of Pennsylvania, and with  implementation




 of mine  drainage  abatement measures, secondary treatment will be




 necessary  in the  near future.




         Nutrient  problems are presently being encountered in




 Spring Creek,  a headwater tributary of North Bald  Eagle Creek.




 Advanced waste treatment facilities, having nutrient removal




 capabilities,  or  other  alternatives are needed to  alleviate




 this problem.  The Blanchard Reservoir, located  further downstream




 on North Bald  Eagle Creek, will  impound these waters containing




 nutrients  when the reservoir is  filled in  1970 unless immediate




 remedial actions  are taken.




         The West  Branchs downstream from Lock Haven, is normally




 alkaline and supports a balanced aquatic population.  However,




 the Eiver  in this reach is subject to  "acid slugs" which originate




 upstream and overcome the neutralizing capacity  of the alkaline




 flows in the downstream reaches  for short  periods  of time.  The




 West Branch, from Lock  Haven to  the mouth, receives mostly




 primary  effluents from  communities and industries  throughout




-the reach.   Water quality degradation, as  a result of these dis-




 charges, is not presently evident because  of relatively large

-------
                                                        Ill - 3






flows of the West Branch.  However, secondary treatment facilities



are expected to be needed in this reach in the near future to



protect recreational use downstream, particularly in the lower



reaches of the West Branch where the recreational pool will be



created by the inflatible dam presently being constructed on



the Susquehanna River downstream from the West Branch confluence.



     B.  Immediate Pollution Control Needs



         1.  Waste Treatment



         Current treatment practices, needs, and cost estimates



for municipalities and industries in the study area are shown



in Table I.



         A general summary of the immediate treatment needs in



the West Branch Susquehanna River Watershed is given below:



             a.  Sixteen communities now having no



                 treatment or employing septic tanks



                 to provide primary treatment as an



                 initial step toward pollution abatement;



                    (l)  Estimated cost of ten primary



                         plants, exclusive of sewers



                         and appurtenances:             $1*64,000



                    (2)  Estimated costs of two



                         primary plants to serve



                         six communities, including



                         sewers and appurtenances:    $1,960,000

-------
                                            Ill - If






b.  Eleven communities now having no



    treatment or employing septic



    tanks to provide secondary treat-



    ment;



        (l)  Estimated costs of eight



             secondary plants, exclusive



             of sewers and appurtenances:   $1,231,000



        (2)  Estimated costs of three



             secondary plants, including



             sewers and appurtenances;      $2,1^1,000



c.  Seven communities now providing



    primary treatment to expand



    facilities to secondary.  Estimated




    costs;                                  $1,099,000



d.  One community to provide sewers to



    join adjacent municipal system.



    Estimated costs                           $375,000



e.  Two secondary plants to be expanded



    to provide nutrient and greater



    than 85 per cent BOD removal.



    Estimated costsi                        $6,115,000



f.  Two communities having secondary



    facilities to provide advanced




    waste treatment or waste flow



    diversion;                       Costs undetermined

-------
                                            Ill - 5






g.  One industry to provide primary



    treatment and one to provide



    secondary treatment or connect



    to municipal system.              Costs undetermined



h.  Two industries providing primary



    treatment to expand to secondary:  Costs undetermined



i.  Two institutions providing second-



    ary  treatment to renovate plants



    to increase level of efficiency



    to the equivalent of secondary.



    Estimated costs:                           $170,000



j.  One industry to provide color



    removal facilities; one to




    provide nutrient removal.         Costs undetermined
Total (exclusive of f, g, h, and j)        $13,555,000

-------

-------
                                                                                               Ill  -  6
                    OJ
                  -p
                                            o c

                                            oo 6
                                            H 0)
                                            r-i fc
 c
M
                            V
                            c
                            o
                                               e>
                                               fc
                0)
               -p -p
                CO  U

               g
                O
               p
                                           CO  fc


                                           G

                                           t< -H
                                           4) -P

                                           0> H
                                                              r
                                                               O
                                                               ft
                                              s
                                              fc
                                              0)
                                              CH
                                             CM
                                           co O
                                           X
                                           fc -P
                                           O C
                                           Is co

                                           P C5
                                           c

                                           g H
                                           B co
                                           p fc
                                           CO tt>
                                           0) >O
                                           fc 0)
                                           -P Cn
                                                           0)
                                                          -p -p
                                                           co  o
                                                          ,0  3
                                                           CO  fc -P
                                                             -p  .-.
                                                              CO  f>
                                                              C  S
                                                              O -P
                                                              o  co
o
-p
c  co  cr\
   o  i-t
   G
   CO
                               co
                                                                           fc
                                                                           0)
   O -P

   C  lo
   o  fc
   H  CO


       O
       o
       0)
    >>
H  0)
Hg

>>
O ,0
                                                                                    M
                                                                                       -P
                                                                                       O
                                                        C
                                                        o
t3
 V -P
-P  O
    0)
   r-a  CQ

00

 CO

W
O
                                                           CO
                                                           ro
                                                          -69-
                                                                          o
                                                                          o
                                                                          ON
                                                                          C\J
                                                       o
                                                       o
                                                        4*
                                                       t-
                                                       co
                                                       -69-
PQ





I
H
O

i






























0)
ey -P t3
P C 0)
CO 0) 0)

oj co c
a fc -H
H B -P
O
<

P
-P C
C 9)
4) g
w -p
(U CO
fc (U

H
C
O
*T*H *^
-p a)
CO >
H fc
a o>
ftco
o




c
o
T^
P
co
o
o







^%
fc
H
PH
O

ra
"
J^
C5
p^j
pti

jjg*
^
1

t-^
g

M
P-3
<
I
5
C3?
CO
CO

o

2
ffi
PQ

g
S

C
O
o
o>
CO






0)
G
0
S3


o
8

oo





o
o
PQ
^
^
H
tvO
G
CO
ft
CO




1^3
f-t
1
o
0>
CO






ft)
d
o
S


8

j-


#
o

0
PQ
O
O W
^Q M
CO p^
w o
c
fc H

O



^3
^|
0}
d

o
4}
co






4)
C
O
R


g
\
W




^3
0)
O
fc
f

C
0

-p
CO
PH

                                                                           CO
                                                                          d

                                                                           g
                                                                           o
                                                                           tt)
                                                                          CO
                                                                           0)
                                                                           G
                                                                           o
                                                                          a
                                                                           g
                                                                           ^
                                                                           o
                                                                          PQ
                                                                           w
                                                                           bD
                                                                           C
                                                                          H
                                                        0)
                                                        C
                                                                                                               S
                                                                                                               CvJ

-------
                       4)  f}  O
                      4>  P -H
                       OJ  O 4
                      4^      O
                      CQ  JH <
                      TJ

                      43  O
                           4>  4*
                          O W
                           O  O
                      +>  fc  O
                       W PL,
                      W
 g
 g
o
M
a
     o
CQ    0)

6    c
H   -H
H   P
O    C
<    O
K   O
PU  v^
            o
                       V P
                       4J  C
                       CO  0)
i

                           CO
            g
    o

    4J
    o
    4>
4^  C

 g  
 CQ  P
 0)  cd
 J-i
A<
                          H  h
                           3  0)
                           ft CO
                           o
i
 o
 o
 0)
CQ
                                     2
                                     o
                                            3
                                            0)
               cd
              5
              o
                                                                                                       III  -  7
                                                                                                     c
                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                    a
                                i
                                o
                                9)
                                CQ
                                                                        o
                                                                        4>
                                                                        CO
                                                                                                            o
                                                                                                            0)
                                                                                                           CQ
                                                              4)

                                                              g
                                                                        PL,
                                                            a>
                                                            
                                                                                              0)
                                                                                              c
                                                                                                                   I
                                                              g
                                                              o
                                                             PQ
                                              t
                                                                        o
                                                                        +>
                                                                        43
                                                                        0)
                                                                                          S
                                                                                         (O
                                                                                         ra
                                                                       o
                                                                       S
                                                                      PQ
                                                                                                     s
                                                                                                    o

-------
                                                                                              III  -  8
             0>
          0)  A
          -p  -p
          0  O -P
          p     t)
          CO  f-i
             o
-P


 O
o
1
o


1
rl
-P


O
-P  C

 C  4)
 0)  g

 M 43

 0)  0

 SH  0)
                         s
            -p
            3
                C

               5
               -p
                0
                O
                o
                                                  t>
                                                  I  CO
                                        
                                              1
                                              ss
                                        .3
                                        -p
          (0

          *H

          -P
          H

 C        C
                
                fc -H


               1"
               H  0
                                        u
                  !
                  o
                  0)
                  CO
                               
                               o
                               0>
                               CO
                                                                                                            I
                                                                                                           to
                                                             n
                                                             >
                                                             09


                                                          C  00
0)

V

H
 
S3
                                                                       0>
                                                                       
 2


 !
                                       H
                                  a


                                  I
                                 H
                                                          d
                                                          0
                                                          ft
                                                          m
                                                                      00
                                                                      a
                                                                       g
                                                                      a
                                                          P
                                                          3
                                                          O

                                                          w
                                                                            I
                                                                                        8
                                                                 4)

                                                                 g
                                                                                                        s
                                                                                                        a
                                                                                                       to

-------
 ec O
-P
-P
t)
                                                            III  -
                                                                          > ft-P
                                                                          0 a  w
                                                                            o
                                                                         En O  M -p
                                                                                               








CQ

1
i 
<; d
^-s CO
d CQ 3
CJ W C
3 O iH
C H -P
H En C
-POO
C < O
O p5 	
O PM
 ' P-i "3"
H fe ^
M r>.
W S H
MHO

S  
H 2
V-X
EH
25
ryi
1
o



























d
IV -P
-p o
JO) .p
o co
0 0
-P ft O
CO 04
w

0)
CD -p >d
-P c 
CO CO C
a a) o
3 M *r^
M EH -P
CJ
<


-P
-P G
 
CQ .p
0) 0)
h OJ
PL, h
EH
G
O
*H *^
P CO
o >
Ht-J
M
3 CO
ft CQ
O
PM







C
O
H
-p
CO
o
o
1-3



tt)
H 3
Jn
*d w
V ft
*d **H
3 H
r-l -H
o fjC
C P^
M

co a
ft 0)
H -P
H co
H !
fi"
tc
G H
rH 3^
O fO
^3

CO
CO
EH
o
H
-P
ft
0)
CQ


O
q

'd r-T

jj
H J2
-P t
O O
O h
 ' O
PQ
**9
M ^
B -H
f 1 >yj
fe fH
O OJ
S25 fJ
S co
*c o
&5 ^1
CQ CJ

faC
G ^
^o
d w
CO ft
d -H
3 H
H -H
O ^3
G P4
H
1
CO g
ft 0)

r-l CO
H >
,C CO
tt)
C ri
H 3
O .^
*~3






0)
G
0



I/N
c-










ft
rl
CO
g
o
EH

fl
CO
0
prj

W)
C H
H 3
^Q
d co
0) ft
d -H
3 H

O ^3
G P-4
H
1
o] g
ft CO
H .p
H CO
H >>
g

CJ M
iH )
O .^
-3






CO

O



^5
o
(A
CM






c*
tt)
0
o
o
pp
CO
H
o
CO
o
CO
o

                                                I
                                                O
                                                o
                                                U)
                                                w
                                                V

                                                I
                                                o

                                                8

                                                O
                                                CQ
                                                -P
                                                co
                                                                       CO

                                                                       
                                                                       a

                                                                      a
                                                                       o
                                                                       CJ
                                                                       CO
                                                                      CQ
                                                                       O^


                                                                       (fO
                                                                                           C

                                                                                           5
                                                                                           .p
                                                                                           o
                                                                                           CO
                                                                                              R
                                                                                              CO

-------
                                                                                                  Ill  -  10
       CO
O     CQ     3

 85
 G     H     43
H     E-i     C
4*00
H

a
       H    O
       <    H
                       tt) 45
                       43  O

                       g TO to
                       H  O  O
                       43  h  O
                       GQ PL*
                       w
       TJ
        tt>
 tt)  45 13
4J  G  4)
 co  tt)  0)

Sl*
 tt)  CO  G
 fi  a)  O

H  E-i 43
        O
                              4>
                          43  c
                           c
                           0)
                           to  -P
                           tt>  co
                           f-i  a>
                           
                              TJ
                              43
                              co
                              o
                              o
                                            C-
                                            H
                                           -68-
                                                o
                                                CO
                                            I
                                            o
                                           s
                                            o
                                            CQ
                                            o
                                            c
                                                      I
                                                      o^
                                                      ir\
                                                      (M
                                                           o
                                                          H
                                                          43
                                                           o
                                                           co
                                                           (0
                                                          -H
                                                          -P
                                 tt)
                                 
                                                       G
                                                       0)
                                                      +>  o
                                                       3  
    43
    t)
    CO
                                                                        H  C
                                                  CO


                                                  CO
                                                 E-i
43
 ft
 tt)
CO
                                                                        a
                                                  o
                                                 PQ

                                                  )
                                                  o
                                                                         o

                                                                        CO












tt)
c
0
S3
1
a
-w-
o
H
-P
O
CO

^> CD
CO -P
a --I
3 c
_* -t
M *n
CO
G
*

o
H
-P
ft
tt)
CO
o
0
ir\

tt)
O
ja
CO
>
o
c
CO . *
>-^ ft
H
o> ja
O CO
tt) 7
h O
eO E-i
H
O
CO G
"O O
C -H
O M -P
O Jd O
0> $H 3
CQ O 4
5 -p
*b CQ
e -P e
co G O
ft) O
co a
h -P M
ft) co 0)

tt) Vi C
co -P 3
*
R
CO





1?
CO
b
c
o
o
CO
to
G
CO

O
H
P

0)
CO
8
CM
r~l
a
s
o
o
PQ

r^d
tt>
0)

O
fCJ
t)
0)
0>
pa
CO M
M -P tt>
ft O TJ
W J3 r-l h
-P ) O
bD-H ft
Pi IS ^H
H C tt)
-P G 0 T3
CO O C
W)-H +> 3
H 4 G
-P CD ft) >
w bO 3 w
0) >H H -H
t> f^  ja


i





P
G H
tt) cO
H S>
M O
P S
B 


rj>
CO
-a
c
0
o
0)
CO
o
o
o^
CO
tt)
p
0(5 *D
4J c ft)
CO CO DO
4)
G) Pi rH
H .p H
G -H O
cO co o
j> ^
^1 tt) tt)
>> > -P
eo t-i eo
C C -P
G 3 CO

CM
                                                                                                                          CO

-------
Ill - 11




















eo

9
g

f~\
S X***v
^ "C
^? 03 3
4) PL) C
3 O i-l
C H -P
H H C
POO
C < O
0  ^
O PH

M fe <
a H o
m < M
|~4 fyj j}
P 5S
N^ X
E~f
23
1
o





























JL(
4) C
ft) A O
-P -P H
CO O -P
-P 0
O3 M a;
0



Tl
ft) -P
-P 0
4) -P
1-3 W
iH O O
P H O
CO pVi
W



Tl
4)
O> -P Tl
P C 4)
CO ft) 4)
Tl -P

H E-l -P
0
**

-P
p a
C 4)
a) a
CO -P
0) CO
ft 4)

H

c
O
i-l Tl
P 4>
CO >
r-l h
3 4)
O
04






fl
O
H
P
CO
O
S





CO Pi
ft) 0
i-l H
*rt d) *rt
= > w
P 4) T>
M Tl ft)
> O C 
-P -P (0
H H 4)
H t>> 0 -H
i-l S3 H
< -p


M C
CO 4)
Ti a
C -P
O CO
0 ft)
ft) rH
03 EH
'O
4)
3
C ^5
H O
-P OJ
C
61 21
v x
M
g CO iH P4
PC tt) Oj Cj Ckf "i***!
O $-1 -H W -H J3
pfl 03 3 03 C
O W>  H I 0
<< 4) O OB
W rH H C E-l
H O ft)
Q O C W to UD
p O 4) 3 -H ft)
< 43 to h H

P CO ft) CO O
^fi (p PI ft^ jjj rj
C4 4=^
PC CO
o
r-l
CO
J>
Q
O 3 rH
p ft) a
ft) fH tH
U)-P ft)
o c p T)
> CO Q ft) Tl
4> H PQ fa ft)
w PI m
"B^. 4)
t^ 4^ ir\ o CH
4) C ON Tl Vl
-P 4) 5)0
4) a -p a
r-l -P 0 -P
Pi CO 4) CO C
a ft> tH co
O M 
rl bO-H
P C -P
CO -H i-l
> -P r-l
O W -H
C -H 0
ft) X CO
PS ft) H


rH
cO
T!
C
o
o
ft)
CO



8
CM
**


rt
*S)
o

PQ

Q)
p
c
cS

H
r-l
ft)
PQ














ft)
O






i
i
l





^
g>
CO
b
c
0
o
ft>
to
CO
C
0)

O
H
P
CM
ft)
ea



8
(M
r-l



A
M
8
rl
O
PQ

t>0

^0

*
iH
Jg


g
-P Tl 0
CO M tn
4) CO ft)
rH > CO
-P O ft)
K PC; c
Tl 0
C 4) Tl -H
CO > rH -P
rl CO CO 
C ft) 43 ft) W
O W 0 fc ft)
H C O H
-P O ec 4) -P
0 -P H h i-l
ft) PQ H
H -P H IH
H C Tl -H O
|

8
o
A
CO
l/N
r-l

-69-





r?
a)
s
0
o
ft)
CO
CO
1
H

0
H
-P

ft)
03



8
CO








o
M
O
PQ

M
f
O


G C cc
H O -P
1 -H CO
bO ft) -p
C M ee g

-P fp ft) O3
OS )S Pi
M 03 O >
ft) ,O
O 0  >
CO Tl
> c -P 3
r-l O C -P
p H ft) CO
c -p a
ft) CO ft) r4
W H tH tt)
4) O -H T)
H fH 3 C
P4 |> & 3

^
g
O
\
CO
CO
CM
-^-






r?
co
T)
C
0
o
ft)
CO



^s
fn








~
ITv
H


^
rjQ
g

PQ

C
ft)
>
a
!U

0
0



-------
                                                                                     Ill  -  12
    fn
    0)  C
 c  ,c  o
.p  -P H
 as  O -P
+3      t)
CQ  M
    O
 t
-p  m
 CO  J5
 4)  CO
 Jn
-P  >>  
 ^  f  to
 >>     V
 fc  tJ  -P
 CC  4)  tQ

H  P.H
 ts  4>  CO
to  O  -H
    O  -P
    CO  "H
        c
 4)  -P  -H
 C  C
 O  4>  CO
IB  &  CO
                                          I
                                                                                            CO
                                                                                         4>  -P
                                                                                         O  G

                                                                                         co  
                5  o*
                o  &>

                G
               M  ro

                I  CQ
                                                                                        C  -P
                                                                                        O  -H
                              CO
                           41  -p
                           O  G
                           C  4)
                           cO  j

                          3
 O  O1
 O  ft)

 G
H Q

  I  CO
                           C  -P
                           O  T-l
                          a  >
S
S5
5| d*"^.
*C?
<-N CQ 4>
13 fj-l ^J
4) O C
3 M H
C E-l -P
HOC
4J < O
G re o

o ^^
M i 
a < o
9 S H
E^ t^ ^5
^S
g_4 x_x
5
p3
pu
i























Tj
ft)
ft) -P -0
P C 4>
CO 4> 4)
H S 65
t) -P
4> co G

 5s *H
H H -P



-P "c
C 43
4) 3
CO -P
ft) CO
In ft)
P-! Fi
H
G
O
H "Q
-p a>
H K
S ft)
OiCQ
O




G
O
H
4-^
CO
u
o
1-3


4)
-P S*
CO O
CO i-l
!> 4-t
o ft)
ft) 4J
O CQ
G cd
CO ^
^
5S


^
co
d

O
u
4)
CO


O

S
ir\


^!
IP
O
o
W ^

W 43
S M
0 H

M 4)

P4
G
O
T3 -H
C -P
co co
H
3,
^H 4)
CQ f-t
^1
4) ^
^ O
H H
T( CH





































CO
0
G
O
O
CQ



^>
^
S
1
3

^


o
p
*
r-t







C
0
43
ft)

CO
O

                                                               
                                                               o
                                                              CQ
                                                              I
                                                               O
                                                               f-!
                                                               O
                                                              

                                                               CO
                                                              H
 
 O
 ft)
CQ
                                                                         ir\
                                                                          CO
                                                                          4>
 V
 JH
 O

CQ
                                                CO
                                               T3

                                                S
                                                CJ
                                                ft)
                                               CQ
                                                                                       to
                                               G


                                            t5
                                            o
                                            Ptr-t
                                            co  co
                                            S  ^
                                            co -P
                                            H  G

                                            H 0
 JH
 CO

 G
 O
 o
 4>
CQ
                                                                                                   LTN
P
 G
 co

to

-p
 CQ
 

-------
Ill - 13

















CQ

lyi
S

C5
5? ^-*x
^ *Cf
.->. 0)
tJ CQ P
 W C
0 O i-l
C H -P
H E-i C
-POO
C < O

O K
W P H
13 P o

EH W 5
H 
\_^
F-i
Ej^
1
i
















c
o
*-**^ H



^
ft) C
t> 1 O
P P -H
CO O -P
-P 0
CQ M <
O



O
W -P
-P 0
J*) -P
*i""0 OQ
0 O
P h O
to pi*




O

) -P 
-P C 
CO V V
H S 53
$ -*P
ft) CO C
 o) o
6 fn H
I-l H -P
O

-P
P C
c a>
3) g
03 -P
v co

^ H
C
0
P tJ
CO ft)
H ?
3 h
O CO




C
O
H
41
(C
O

I j


*sO -P
vO co
^v C
r-l -H
^ i-l
O &
9) O

00 J^ CQ
WOW
-P
-P m -H
H 3: H
& CO *H
fi O
V >> 9
$
0
8

H
**=**, c/3
8
a
c
-H
P
c
o c
0 0

T^ ^^
hr* cO H
EH C ctJ
HD *H *^
Q fi C
S 00
i-l 0
8 8$
i

(^ t5"*
(_J ^t
c3 ffi
^j S
pt-l <>H
a 

S 0
@ s
H
<
^r f^
W M
M Jj
5 o
Q? J-i
CO O
CQ
|TJ JJ
O O
a -P
< GQ
O^J or~*
CQ O
^

tr-
  \Q    
M W O\ CQ W M W
DP t)P 03 i-l t>-P CU-P 0)PO)P
OC OC V " OC OC OCOC
C U C  >>-H CC C  C CCUCO)
cog cos M-PO-H 03 OS cogcos
r-4M H?H SH-P'O Hh Hfn i-H^Hf*
ft H ft H H>HOt> Pi'H ft -H ft -H ft -H
S0 Ssi MoS-P SP SS PSS3
o cy1 o o* o< co f-* w o cy1 o o* o o* o o*
oj o CHPH ov o oj owou
IH !H t3 M ft h H f-, N
C C CPCwC C C C
M CQ M CQ CO C O O M  HPQ MCQMpQ
S S WOO 3t IS iX3<
ICO ICO COS ICQ ICQ ICQICO
h -P h W
W^3 t)iC WcOWrQ WfC fl),C 4U,C CU.C
C-P C-P ^WTJ C-P C-P C-PC-P
Oi-l O-H 4) >H C O O-H O-H O-HO-^
* * *
  
** *v \
O t~- ITN
1 I v> I I VO O
II-* 1 1 H CM
1 1 -69- 1 1 -6S- --

^-^
C
O
H
P
0
sfe flj s(t
r ^ r> {* **
fn H Vi V< M
CO >> CO CO CO 0)
rd M *H *d *d *d
C a) P C C C
v o a -H o  O 0)0)
!B CQ (1)'^-' CO K COCO

^ ^"
cb ^> ^> cO ^> ^>
i*j H ^H ^ M ^4
O Gf ^ CH 0 5J
O H ft) S O  3
O-HC -H O -H ^H
v ^ o f-i a) f-i >H
CO Pi a PH CO to to

800 oooo
O O OOOO
c\j if\ on ITN \5 o o
-* j- c\) (X3 ON

* -H "1
P ^ O (3D
O Oh J
(H fn O A O
C O O PQ uD |H
w PQ m do
0> 3 0) O PQ
fc 0 >> C H ^
 fn h SHOM
Sj O ft) O H CQ ^4
PQ 3 *4^ r^ 13
W O C -P C JO
4) >> M O O O M
r-l O -P to ,O -P -H
Ml C C -P H r-l >
w s a ^ H ^ ^

-------
Ill - Ik




























w

p)
^3
J25
e
J2*j ^"^
^ a?
d CQ 3
0) W G
3 O H
G M -P
H H G
-POO

O p "* x
o K

&"4 t-^
HH s5 ^J
fjQ pLg
ptj Jg? ^*{
3 E-) O

*3j M p"!
H S ^5
EH! 
v 	 ^
H
*23
M
S
5
C3
































*$
6) G
l) 43 O
P -P T4
CO O -P
-P 0
oa fc 
CO >
r-1 N
3 9>
O< CO
O




 >> w
C fn 

3 >d -p
03 C H
03 O H
H O .H
S3 O 

CO %( V.O
^d ^ ^^^-^
h O -P \O
O %-t G
4? 
c5
ra

W
O

^c
W
ff^

6-1
03
g
CO
H
^$






^
G
O
O

C/2







^s
l-a



l^j
pka




O
\r\
CA
CM




^3
op
3
o
g^j
CQ
W)

J
G
H
H
^4
(iM
H

10
fl) -P
o p
G >.
o S
H W
H h

t^
o^
O 0)
4
c
H FQ
S
I CQ

S) 43
G -P
O -H
t5 !*



1
5
g
(A
O
C\J
H
-69-






&
1
O
O
d>
CO







J>^
N

S
H
^3
Pm




8
i

.*









s
fl
M
0) 43
4| (90

i o
^ fe
-P O
tj ff\
o





0)
43
-P

G
H

>S

CO

03
0)
O
0)
G
d
Ql
M
01
(0
CO
-p
G
0)
S

co
CD
-p

&

G
O
O
03

tfv
-p
C
(J)
4
CO

Oi
CD

S*4
H
4-5
G
0)

9
o

-p
o
C

S
cu

43
0

P)

>> 0>

4-1 3
H -P
&^
^
f-i cO
(S) 0)
-P G
CO
IS


*








**"-*.
-j*
0
-Sf"
H
H

X
CD
*d
j^
M

H
CQ
1
S
P-4
	 
CO
-p
0}
0
o

C
0
H
-P
O
4
-P
m

o

-p
G
4)
M
4
j
o

c
o

d

09
CO
fi


rH
C
0
-p
G

P-4
Pi

-P
G
0)
&
-P
CO
ej
+>
Vi
O
-p
O)
O
o


*








m
CJ
P



-p
CQ
OJ

tC
C
H
o>
0)
G
H
G
0)
bO
C
H
-P
i-t
3
OJ

O
^
09
0)
O
C


-P
^
3
O*
Xj
(0

U)
C3
0|-(
d

r-(
V
a
Tt

m
V
H
-P
H
H
H
O
a


-p
G
QJ
g
-p

o3
-p

-------

-------
    CO  C
 CO  fi  O
P  -P H
 co  O
-P      O
CO  h 
                                                                                              03 -p
                                                                                              t)  C
                                                                                              C  9)
                                                                                              CO  3
                                                                                             H  0)
                                                                                              O  CO
                                                                                                  (H
                                                                                              C
                                                                                               1  CO
                                                                                              (3 -P
                                                                                              O -H
                                                                                                      III   -  15
                                                            I 03

                                                           O A  ei
                                                           o -P -P
                                                              rl  C
                                                           C  >  CO
                                                           H      S
                                                               V  0)
                                                            I  O  M
                                                               C -H
                                                           0)  (0  0
                                                           C T)  a1
                                                           OHO)
                                                           (z;  P.  h
 CO
-p   I
 0  -H
 eO  CH

    0)
 (L)
 tQ  H   
 05  CO  >>
 0)  j>  t)
 NOG
 o  6  co
 C  CO 'H
H  fc  O
                                                                                              O
                                                                                             H
                                                                                              O
T)

 I
H
-P
 a
 o
o
H
-P
P C
V e
co -p
o> cd
M 0)
C -P
5 c
H CO
-P H
CO CO
H >
3 i-l
O cr
O CO
 g
H *




C
o
H
-P
CO
O
&5






c
o
1-1
n
-p
CO
d
H


Q
o
cr\
\
^t


V
eO
H
0)
-p
CO
0) CO
CO H^
^
 o

O O W
P S)
H w S
CO CO
g s
o


CO
*d
c
o

















>>
c
CO
t
o
^^





                                                                               CO
                                                                       c
                                                                       o
                                                                       O  CO

                                                                       (0  O
                                                                                                 H
                                                                                              CO 1-3
                                                                                              co
                                                                                              CO -P
                                                                                              O  C
                                                                                              O  CO
                                                                                              h  ft
                                                                                             PH CO
                                                                                              0)  >>
                                                                                              CD  fl
                                                                                             >-3  CO
                                                                                                  ft
                                                                                              n>  S
                                                                                              V
                                                                                              S
                                                                                                 o
                                                                                                         cd
                                                                                                         0)
                                                                                                        fl
                                                                                                        CO
                                                            co  C
                                                            N  -H
                                                           H  W

                                                            CO  PQ
                                                           -P  -P
                                                                                                               a co
                                                                   0)

                                                               H
                                                                   00
                                                           H  H  O
                                                           O  O  O
                                                           <  PQ O
                                                               i
                                                            CO O
                                                           H
                                                            c  o
                                                            co  co  C
                                                            c  H  cd


                                                           CM

-------
                                                                                                           Ill  .  16
d
 s
 G
 G
 O
O
1
I
-p
 G
 O
O

               H


0)
8) ,3
.p .p
CO O
P
m 1-1
o





9) -P
P C
eo o>
r"t $
^J -P
3) cd
0 Q}
Q ^4
hH ~4



-p
c
0>
at
Q

Pk


G
O

-P
(0
H

O
O

S)

S
H


















O

P
O
<




-d
0)
o
3)
V
*25

G
O
H
4J
O

-P
c



CO

*
EH

P
C

rH
CO
>
H
3

-P
a
0)
rl
^
tt)
e
G
3

0)
CO
CO
O



fa
0

>9

^
&3
jVI
^^
i
9

S

w

p^3
o

g
M
pt)
pd3
PM
o

o
S
1
M
D3

aS 1 H
I
i @
i 1
1 

G
o
H
-P
CO
O
o







CO
w
0


h H
< X

0 G
> G
o a>
G A<
Q)




^H
^H
CD
4J
EQ

^
5
ra
S
(U
p
O CO
P >9
CO
.p
t) O
o >
C 0
C G
O 0!
o w





Q? ft)
G G
0 O
& &



O
LTN
0 Jfr
i
1

U) h
C CO
-H P
H -H
0 G
O CO
O CO






O
CO
o





                                                                           CO
                                                                           at
                                                                           w
                                                                           cu
                                                                           o
                                                                           o
                                                                                   o
                                                                                  -p
                                                                                  CO
                                                                                  a
                                                                                   
                                                                                   G
                                                                                   O
                                                                                   h  Q
                                                                                  -P  S
                                                                                   0  v
                                                                                  &  lH
 CO
T)
 G
 O
 O
 0)
                                                                                   CO
                                                                                  -p
                                                                                  H
                                                                                   G
                                                                                   CO
                                                                                  CO
                                                                                   O  -P
                                                                                   CD  co
                                                                                   fn  G

                                                                                   O^
                                                                                  O  H
                                                                                      CO
                                                                                   CD  C
                                                                                  -P  O
                                                                                   C0  "ft
                                                                                  -p  -p
                                                                                  CO
                              co
                              a>
                             H
                  Tj         -P
                   0)         -H
                   G         H
                  H   h     iH
                   03   O  H  O
                  P  S-i  O  a)

                   O  -P  C
                      r(  O -P
                   >  a  1-1  G
                  r-l   C  -P  CD
                  p   >  co  a
                   G   P. t> -P
                   0)      O  CO
                   CJ  CQ  G  tt)
                   4)  S  W  h
                  P5  CO  (H P
 U)
 G
H
H
P
-P
 V
ra
                      1
                  08  4J
                      09
                      V
                                                                                              CO
                                                                                              (1)
            0)
           -P

            
           CH

-------
d
CO
3
G
H
-P
G
o
o
1
E-t










tj
CO CO G
43 ,C 0
CO 43 H
43 o 43
m o
N <
o


t
CO
CO 43 >O
43 G >
co 9) as
 o
M S-J f>pj
H iH -P
ej
<





43
43 c
G CO
cO 8
CO 43
0) CO
h co
P* Vi
6^
G 43
O C
H CO
43 H
CD CO
r-4 !>
nt l
^j n
ft 3
0 0
Pm W



CH
O 9)
45
95 CO
Oi CO
EH^







G
O
H
43
CO
0
0
1-3

i


43 >3
G f>
CO
> t3
0) 0)
M fx
ft CO
*O *
O h CH
43 O H
co
G to 43
O H to
H H
43 H fp
0 ftS
< CO CO







,
I
s
c
O
H H
43 CO
<0 0
N H
H S
H CO
CD ^3
fn U
43
3 t3
CO G
a a





9
1

CO
_=*. .I
^^ r^
T3 CO
a> 43
3 CO
G ^ S
rl ^ !
4  >s
G 3 TJ >
O G H CO
o 'H o a)
 .p < ^3
V1 r*
jaSsj ^i
@ 

8 "^ 08 >s
oo C
&4 0) h CO
i4 ?.< co ft
O < ft S
< ft O
M ep O o
43 o
Q C CO
H O O to
 ^ N
H CO PQ
MHO
EZj sji
B*l w
p^ pq
g
CO
CO 43
0 C
G CO
co 8
t-t (0
H h
ft -H
e 3
0 0<
U CO
t .
G *
M ffi

I CO

CO fi
G 43
0 H
a >








*
i




c
H
CO
S

43 CO
H G
H O
co a



CO CO
c c
0 0
>w 1-9
S ^H





hff
0) -H
r-t i-l
38
PQ 0


fn
CD
?
O
PM

G
G >8
CO G
PM co



SO 0
s

                                                                III  -  17
^3'
>>
1
43
CO
M 
CO 
s
43
CO
M 
CO CM
"d H
C CD
3 4>
CO
(0
CO CQ
CD 5
O CO
fn
O
O G
>s43 CO
fc >
CO 43 >
CO O |J) CO
nee
equire -
CO fn
H
H e
fl[ >X
S co

0 ^3
43
G -H
M *



>>
M
!
S
c
0
o
CO
CO




CO
43
c
CO
&









  43
H G
 0)
u S
H 43
& CO
CO CO
& h
O 43
H  G
SI
-as
.ss
O 43
                 8
                vo








eo
CO
(H
a;

C
CO
>
CO
as

X
H
CD
0
H
s
CO
X3
o
=8
CO
>>
o
H
CO
0
H
3
CO
^3 >s
U G
CD
CO ft
44 S
CD O
?H 0
H
(0
O
H
a
CO
^3
O
08
CO
^
1
1-t
G
<

C
CO
o
H CO
k G
CO >H
S H

-------
   0) C
9J ,3 O
-p -p -HI
co o
-p
                                      CO
                                    v -p
                                    o c

                                    88
                                    O 0<
                                    O 0)
                                      M
                                    fi
                                   H g


                                    I CO
                                   c -P
                                   O -H
                                   S3  >
   to
V -P
O C
c 
co e
-H V
i-H h



II
O 0)
   ?<
C
H g

 I CO

0) ,S
C -P
                                          0)
                                          c
                                          o
                                          S3
                      o>
                  -p  ,,
                 -PCS)
                 CO (U  (U
                 H 3
                 3 -p
                 JO <8  C
                 I go

                 HH+J
-P
s
o
H




I
         -P


          
         O
-P C
c a>
a> e
CO -P
C' CO
l-t Q)
(X, h
H
C -P
O fi
-H 01
-P H
 CO
H >
3 -H
ft 3
O 0
Pk W

ew
O 
0) M
ft CO
^*






C
o
H
p
co
o
a




F"H hJL^
CO H
o &
H Q
S o> S
V 
% 5 o
OK H
1
c3

3 0 13
8 1 C3
1 1  S
h
Q ^3
J=! 0
ra H
^
>s H
0) O
CO O
S-i ^
srH
(P Q)
CO 0)
f-l -P
> CQ
-s























CO
CD
(.1
<
4^
f*
O
P4

3
.2
H
r4
^-1
&
H
00
O
a
V
A
0




1
1



w
c
H
-P
CO
H
Pi

O
rH
b
4J
O
0)
H
(JQ

43
c
I
>>
CO


                                                              H
                                                               co

                                                              I.

                                                              II
                                                                                i  i
                                                                                i  i
                                                                                i  i
                                                                               38
                                                                               PH O
                                                                               -P
                                                                               0)
                                                                               f
                                                                               o
                                                                               o
                                                                               U

-------
H

4J


 

O
M
1
 C
H
-P

 
O
             M
             M
W
4) -p
0 C






4
V C
4) .S3 O
P -P H
CO O -P
P 0
CO M <
O



d
0)
4> -p -d
-paw
CO 4) V
H S 23
d -P

g 4) O

H H "o
<







-P
-P C

4) Q
W .p
4) CO
h 4>
PL) M
E-t
C -P
0 C
H ft)
-P H
co co
H >
ft3
0 cr
(li CtJ














d
0)
3
C
H
-P
O
0


|T{
P*i
^~i
C^
5?

o
1
Cj
S
o
3

ft
fr I
2
PQ

1

(^
*5
g

<
Ej^
SS
c
tc
W
Qf
CO

CO

*3-3
o
Ss

d i- M. N
4) PL, C Cd
3 n oH 43
C -d H -H
H -H O J3
-P o o cd
C < O CO
o
o


0 H
4> 4)
rH 0)
< -P
CO
p _
?H 0
O 4) >s

CO 4) CO
S r-H O|
cd ,c! B
H +5 O
H 4) O
H W
H

10
4) +3
0 C

03 &
H S
ft -H
la s
O O1
O 4)
f^
C
M PQ

1 CO

4) A
C -P
O 'H
K *









i
i
i








H
CO >>
V it
iH rt
d Q
4) -H
O PM


O
1
1






DD 1?
P* gj
*tH 4^
-P -H
CO C
H co
P4 CO





I
O
r-l
W

co co
4) -rl
*H C
<; efl o
W Of-)
>> rH M
O >> 4^
Jco


C
o
H
-P >
g-0
O 13
G 
JH O
H 

O 4) SH
tw JH 01
-P
w 60 co
C C
cd "H W
r-l 4) ^C
PM ^ co




4)
-p
CO
> -P
0 C
C CO
4) H








^>
fa
cO
*ci
C
o
0
4)
CO



\
rA
U)
C
H
to
08 co
Q}
H O
CO O
ft ft

C.)
H rrj
JO
O







1 
O -P
4) CO
r-l C
m M
o
o H
CO
ft) C3
-P 0
CO -H
-P -P
W


III - 19


d i
4) 4)
fn M
4) -H
d 4) 3
HOD*
09 C 4)
C CO M
0 -H
CJ rH CQ
t^p
CO 
CO
4) O ^4 -P
C -PC
O C -H 4>
S5 -rl ^ S




i?
0)
d
a
o
o
4)
CO









^>
fH



fi


8
o^

58




W
c
H
CO
O CO
-P 4)
CO O
S O
O ft
Er*l f^i




4>
Q)
Q
rH
-^J
CO 1

ft O
< m

c <
O 4)

r~H C3
H
S















4)
C
0





0)

CO
^ 4^
0 C
C CD
4) r-t
pcj Pi







^
^
a

c
0
o
4>
CO


o
V
1-1






g>
0
4-*
H
C
CO
CO


H
CO
fn
4)
"$ b
4) ^i
PE^ cd
H
-P -P
M C
cd 4)
4) -P
Q *l~l
P C
^ (D
O ^
tS5



-------
                                                        Ill - 20






        2.  Comprehensive Evaluations



        Investigations made by the FWPCA and other cooperating



Federal, State, and local agencies indicate a definite need in



some areas for pollution control action in addition to the pro-



vision of conventional waste treatment facilities.  Minimum



stream flows in waste discharge receiving streams will not be



sufficient to assimilate the waste loads from certain municipal



areas in the near future, based on evaluations of projected popu-



lation and industrial growth.  Alternative methods of protecting



and enhancing the water quality in the Susquehanna River Basin,



in the face of population and industrial growth, urbanization,



and technological change, are being evaluated during plan formu-



lation workshop sessions by agencies cooperatively participating



on the Coordinating Committee discussed in Section II, Paragraph



D.  Upon completion of the evaluations, findings will be submitted



to the Committee for final decisions on methods to be adopted.



While no attempt has been made in this report to prejudge the



Committee findings beyond defining immediate waste treatment



needs, the various alternatives to be evaluated, based on investi-



gations of needs in the area, are suggested.



        Three methods of providing supplemental pollution abate-



ment and control in areas requiring more than the protection



provided by conventional waste treatment facilities are generally



considered and are as follows:

-------
                                                        Ill - 21
            Flow Regulation

        Areas having a need for possible flow regulation and

for which potential reservoir sites will be evaluated are listed

as follows;
  Location
Curwensville Area
Shawville Area
Philipsburg Area
State College and
  Bellefonte Area
Lock Haven Area
Wellsboro Area
Responsibility
 and Site No.
        Need
 COE Curwensville
     Reservoir
 COE #69
 COE
West Branch - A minimum
release to provide a
minimum flow at Curwens-
ville Borough,

West Branch - Upstream
storage to provide
supplemental flow for
water quality control.
 No sites indicated   Moshannon Creek - Storage
                    to provide supplemental
                    flow for water quality
                    control.
 No sites indicated   Spring Creek - Storage
                    to provide supplemental
                    flow for water quality
                    control.
 Blanchard Reser-
  voir
                        Alvin Bush Reser-
                         voir
                        George B. Steven-
                         son Reservoir
 SCS
 SCS
 SCS
North Bald Eagle Creek -
Provide supplemental flow
for water quality control.

West Branch - Provide
flow for water quality
control.
Pine Creek - Storage to
provide supplemental flow
for water quality control.

-------
                                                        Ill - 22
             Waste Flow Diversion

        Because of limited drainage upstream to provide flow

regulation, waste diversion to less critically degraded stream

reaches may be a possible alternative in the following locations;

    Location	Responsibility    	Heed	
State College and
  Bellefonte Areas
Lock Haven Area
Wellsboro Area
State College and
Bellefonte Com-
munities
Lock Haven Com-
munity
Reduce waste loads in
Spring Creek by diverting
treated waste effluents
to North Bald Eagle Creek
or West Branch.

Reduce waste loads in
North Bald Eagle Creek
by diverting treated
effluents to West Branch.
Wellsboro Community  Reduce waste loads in
                     Marsh Creek by diverting
                     treated waste effluents
                     to Pine Creek.
             Advanced Waste Treatment

        Advanced waste treatment facilities designed to remove

greater than 85 per cent of the BOD from waste discharge will

be considered as an alternative method of protecting and en-

hancing water quality in the following areas;

	Location	Responsibility	Need	
Barnesboro-Spangler
  Area
Patton-Hastings Area
Barnesboro-Spangler  Reduce waste loads to the
Communities          receiving streams by
                     providing greater than
                     85 per cent removal of BOD,

Patton and Hastings  Reduce waste loads to the
Communities          receiving streams by
                     providing greater than 85
                     per cent removal of BOD.

-------
                                                         Ill - 23
     Location
Responsibility
        Need
State College and
  Bellefonte Areas
Lock Haven Area
Wellsboro Area
 State College and
 Bellefonte communi-
 ties
 Lock Haven
 Community
 Wellsboro
Reduce nutrients to Spring
Creek and provide greater
than 85 per cent removal
of BOD.

Reduce waste loads to
North Bald Eagle Creek by
providing greater than 85
per cent removal of BOD.

Reduce waste loads to Marsh
Creek by providing greater
than 85 per cent removal
of BOD.
        3.  Special Studies

        Listed below are areas in which a need for special

studies is indicated:

	Location	Responsibility	Need
Basin-wide
Chest Creek
Curwensville Area


Shawville Area
State College Area
 FWPCA and State of
 Pennsylvania
 Westover Leather
 Howes Leather Co.
 FWPCA, State of
 Pennsylvania, and
 Pennsylvania Elec-
 tric Company

 Pennsylvania State
 University
Development of mine drain-
age abatement program,
particularly for main con-
tributors in the study area,

Conduct studies of present
processing methods and
treatment to reduce color
and organic waste loads.

Investigate methods to
reduce color in waste loads,

Evaluate need for cooling
towers to reduce thermal
load to West Branch.
Investigate land appli-
lication method of waste
disposal.

-------
                                                         Ill
     Location
Responsibility
        Need
Bellefonte Area
Wellsboro Area
 FWPCA, State of
 Pennsylvania, and
 West Penn Power Co<
 FWPCA, State of
 Pennsylvania, and
 Corning Glass Co.
Evaluate effect of thermal
discharges on quality of
of North Bald Eagle Creek.

Evaluate effects of fluoride
concentrations on water
use.
        k.  Institutional Practices

        A need for additional action on pollution control measures

by various Federal, State, and local institutions in the Susque-

hanna River Basin is indicated by the findings of this study,

        Pollution control programs would be enhanced and

strengthened by the following institutional practices.

	Location	Responsibility	         Need  	
Basin-wide


Basin-wide
Basin-wide
 State of Pennsyl-
 vania

 FWPCA and State of
 Pennsylvania
 Congress of the
 United States
Basin-wide
 State of Pennsyl-
 vania
Prepare and adopt standards
on intrastate streams.

Implementation of a com-
prehensive mine drainage
pollution abatement
programo

Enact legislation which
provides authority for
Soil Conservation Service
projects in headwater areas
to include storage for flow
regulation for water
quality control.

Consider expansion of water
quality control surveil-
lance program (including
treatment plant operation
and maintenance)o

-------
                                                        Ill - 25


	Location	Responsibility	    Need	

Basin-wide              Congress of the      Enact legislation authorizing
                        United States and    the establishment of a pollu-
                        State Legislatures   tion control authority for
                                             the Susquehanna River Basin.



     C,  Recent Pollution Control Progress

         1.  Pennsylvania

         The Pennsylvania State Legislature, during the 1966

session, passed a $500,000,000 bond issue which, if voted favor-

ably by the public, will provide $100,000,000 to the Pennsyl-

vania Department of Health for sewage treatment construction

grant purposes.  In addition, $200,000,000 will be allocated to

mine drainage abatement measures, such a reclamation of areas

disturbed by mining activities.  The other $200,000,000 will be

spent on construction and development of recreational areas.

         The Pennsylvania Clean Stream Act, which became effec-

tive in January 19&6, is another step toward improvement of

water quality in areas affected by mine drainage.  The Act pro-

hibits discharge of acid waters or other polluting discharges

from active coal mines.  Enforcement actions are being taken by

the Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board under the new regulations

for cases not in compliance with the Act.  In addition to the

Clean Stream Act, the Board has revised its regulations on the

discharges from coal washing operations.  Previously, discharges

from these operations could contain as high as 1,000 mg/1 of

-------
                                                        Ill - 26






suspended solids such as coal fines and other inert material;



the revised regulations limit the discharges to 200 mg/1.



         2.  Federal and State Cooperative Agencies



         Federal and State agencies, cooperatively conducting



comprehensive water resource surveys of the Susquehanna River



Basin, have met a number of times during Fiscal Year 196? at



Workshop Sessions called by the Corps of Engineers.  These



agencies have prepared individual reports which delineate specific



water resource needs; this information serves as input to the



multi-purpose planning in the development of the comprehensive



water resource program.  These meetings to date have resulted



in initial coverage of the entire Basin, merging the needs from



each of the participating agencies and indicating possible



methods of meeting the needs, such as potential reservoir sites



to provide storage for flood control, recreation, water supply,



water quality control, and agricultural irrigation purposes.



Subsequent meetings will involve detailed planning, including



alternative methods of providing for the needs prior to formulation



of the Basin program.



     D.  Water Supply



         Municipal and industrial water usage in the West Branch



Susquehanna River study area currently amounts to about 92 mgd



and is expected to increase to about 1*30 mgd by year 2020.  The



five largest water  using areas are State College, Beliefonte,

-------
                                                        Ill  -  27






Lock Haven, Williamsport, and Milton, having estimated needs of




approximately 28, 17, 231, 66, and U8 mgd,  respectively.   Poten-




tial ground or surface water resources appear to be available




for development to satisfy the projected needs through 2020  for




the larger areas as well as the smaller communities throughout




the study area.

-------
                                                         IV -  1






IV.  DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA




     A.  Location




         The West Branch Susquehanna River drains an area of 6,913




square miles in the West central portion of the Susquehanna River




Basin (see Figure l).   The study area lies entirely within Pennsyl-




vania and includes all or portions of 19 countless  Cambria, Clear-




field, Centre, Elk, Cameron, Potter, Clinton, Columbia,  Tioga,




Indiana, Jefferson, Lycoming, Bradford,  McKean, Sullivan, Montour,




Northumberland, Union and Wyoming.  The  study area is bounded  on




the north by the Genese 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 2^-0 miles to its confluence with the




Susquehanna River at Northumberland, Pennsylvania.




     B.  Geography




         The upper portion of the West Branch watershed  lies within




the high table lands of the Appalachian  Plateau Province.  At  Lock




Haven, the river breaks through the Allegheny Front, then flows




approximately 70 miles through the Ridge and Valley Province to its




confluence with the Susquehanna River.  The study area is approxi-




mately equally divided between the 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

-------
                                                        IV - 2


Ridge and Valley Province, stream 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 turbulance and excellent mixing characteristics,

The combination of low gradient and a wide shallow channel con-

figuration 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 Pt. of
         Name                      (square miles)    Confluence

     Chest Creek                       132.2             205-3

     Clearfield Creek                  396.h             171.5

     Moshannon Creek                   288.1             135.5

     Sinnemahoning Creek             1,032.7             110.2

     Kettle Creek                      239-5             10U.1

     North Bald Eagle Creek            781.8              67.7

     Pine Creek                        973-0              57-6

     Larrys Creek                       78.8              53.6

     Lycoming Creek                    276.1              14-1.3

     Loyalsock Creek                   ^92.8              35.2

     Muncy Creek                       216.3              28.2

     Buffalo Creek                     128.2               7-7

-------
                                                         IV -  3






     C.  Climate




         The climate of the study area is divided into two distinct




regions generally conforming to the physiographic provinces.   The




lower, Ridge and Valley Province, receives an annual average




precipitation of ko inches, with approximately 10 per cent occuring




as snow.  Records for Williamsport, which are representative for




the region, indicate a July mean temperature of 73.6 F.  and a  Jan-




uary mean temperature of 28.8F.




         Because of the higher elevation, the Allegheny Plateau




Province is cooler than the Ridge and Valley Province.  Mean July




and January temperatures at Emporium are 69-3^.  and 26.4 F.




Total precipitation is approximately the same as  in the lower




portion of the study area, but a greater percentage occurs as




snow.




     D.  Geology




         The Appalachian Plateau portion of the study area is




underlain by rocks of the Pennsylvanian, Mississippian and




Devonian periods.  These rocks consits of layers  of sandstone,




limestone, clay, shale and bituminous coal.   Of major economic




importance are deposits of coal, clay and limestone.   Underlying




the Allegheny Front in the Ridge and Valley Province,  rocks are




of the Silurian, Ordovician and Cambrian age.  The formations




consist principally of sandstones, limestones, and shales.

-------
                                                        IV -  k






Limestone is mined extensively and is the principal mineral




resource of the area.  Scattered leposits of iron ore are




present >x.t are not currently mined.






     E  Principal Communities and Industries




         The 1960 population of the study area was about 426,000,




of which approximately 50 per cent was classified as urban.




Major population centers are Williamsport, Lock Haven, Clearfield,




and State College.  Population is divided almost equally between




the Appalachian Plateau and the Hidge and Valley portions of  the




study area




         The West Branch drainage area includes the most heavily




forested land in Pennsylvania, approximately 70 per cent of the




watershed being covered by forest.  Agriculture in the Plateau




Region is limited because of poor, thin soils of mediocre fer-




tility.  The residents of this region are primarily engaged in




coal and clay mining, lumbering, and light industry of various




typeso  A continuing decline in coal mining over the past 20




years has markedly depressed the economy of this portion of the




study area.  The projected growth rates for industry and popula-




tion in this area are generally low.




         The lower,, Ridge and Valley, portion of the study area




supports a thriving industrial and agricultural economy.  Farm




land is classed as above average to superior.  The leading indus-




tries are limestone quarrying, metals, chemicals, textiles, and




paper and glass products.

-------
                                                         IV - 5







         The most rapidly expanding area in the West Branch water-




shed is the State College Area, site of the Pennsylvania State




University.  Expansion of enrollment and research activities at




the University in the past 20 years has stimulated a population




growth which is expected to reach 128,000 by 2020, an approximate




thirteenfold increase over the 19^-0 population.




         Economic growth in other communities in the Ridge and




Valley Province is expected to be vigorous, if not as spectacular




as in the State College Area.

-------

-------
                                                         V - 1






V.  WATER POLLUTION PROBLEMS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COSTS








        Exploitation of the rich coal deposits, which underly




most of the Appalachian Plateau Region portion of the study area,




helped develop the economy of this area; however, mining of these




deposits is also responsible for a legacy of polluted streams




and ground water found throughout much of the study area.  Water




draining from the estimated 2,200 active and inactive mines in




the West Branch watershed carries acid and dissolved salts which




are toxic to aquatic life, and severely limit the utility of




many of the streams for most beneficial uses.




        Investigations by the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River




Basins Project personnel have determined that by far the greatest




percentage of mine drainage generated in the watershed originates




in abandoned mines which are subject to no regulatory authority.




Abatement of mine drainage pollution from this source will pre-



sumably have to be carried out using public funds.




        While coal production has declined over the years, the




total production, approximately 10 million tons per year, is




still significant.  This continued production, about equally




divided between strip mine and deep mine coal, is likely to add




to the mine drainage problem in the years to come unless regula-




tions recently adopted by the Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board




to prohibit polluting discharges from active mines can be success-




fully implemented.

-------
                                                         V - 2






        Mine drainage has rendered the West Branch Susquehanna




River acidic from its headwaters to the confluence of North Bald




Eagle Creek at Lock Haven, a distance of approximately l60 miles.




Downstream from Lock Haven, the River is subjected to "acid slugs",




originating from headwater tributaries, following periods of heavy




rainfall.  The "acid slugs", in moving downstream, overcome the




neutralizing capacity of alkalinity contributed by tributaries




downstream from Lock Haven and consequently results in the River




becoming acidic for short periods of time.  These "acid slugs"




cause massive fish kills and are the major cause of depressed




aquatic population, as observed during a recent biological survey




in the West Branch drainage area,




        In addition to the West Branch, many of its tributaries




are rendered acidic by mine drainage.,  Preliminary summaries of




data collected in the course of the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna




River Basins Project and estimates by the Pennsylvania Department




of Health indicate that about 550 miles of streams in the study




area are rendered acidic by mine drainage discharges.




        While emphasis in this report has been placed on existing




and potential stream quality degradation caused by municipal and




industrial waste discharges, it should be clearly understood that




by far the most extensive pollution problem in the West Branch




watershed is caused by drainage from active and inactive coal




mining operations.

-------
                                                         v - 3






        Tiie extent of ar.y future utilization of the water resources




of the watershed will be very closely related to the success of




efforts made to abate- or control mine drainage pollution.  Detailed




information on the extent of the problem anl possible measures to




abate or lessen the effects of mine Irainage on stream quality in




the study area may be found in the CB-SRBF Mine Drainage Report.




        In addition to the primary effect of acidic conditions




on stream quality, mine drainage has had a second, more subtle




effect on the quality of many streams over the years.  Since mine




drainage has limited stream uses, it has fostered a disrespect




for the streams on the part of the area residents.  Raw sewage,




trash and debris are deposited in the streams adding an additional




pollution loado  The Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board, recognizing




the inhibiting effect of mine drainage on the bio-chemical oxygen




demand of sewage, and the limited uses of acid streams, has for




many year's followed, a policy of not requiring the treatment of




sewage discharged to a stream impregnated with mine drainage,




unless it is determined that stream degradation is attributable




to sewage discharges.,  The staff of the Board is presently reviewing




this policy and may soon recommend, that a minimum of primary treat-




ment be provided prior to any discharge of sewage to the waters




of the C; ornmo n we a 11 h.




        At least partially because of the Board's policy, many




of the communities In the portion of the study area influenced by

-------
                                                         V - k


mine drainage co not presently provide sewage treatment.   In

many eases, poor design of outfall sewers and poor mixing

characteristics of the receiving stream combine to result in

the ponding of raw sewage in backwater areas, and the production

of nuisance conditions and potential health hazards.   Apart from

mine drainage, the provision of sewage treatment facilities,

primary in many cases being an initial step toward pollution

abatement3 is the most pressing immediate sewerage problem in

the study area.  The problem areas and needs in the West  Branch

Susquehanna River drainage area are discussed in the  following

sections


     A,  West Branch Susquehanna River Upstream from  Chest
         Creek (including Chest Creek.)

         1,  Barnesboro, Spangler, Patton and Hastings Area

             a.  Current Water Quality

         Most of the population in this portion of the study

area is centered in the four small Boroughs., Barnesboro,  Spangler,

Patton and Hastings, having a combined population of  11,500.

The economy of the area is based primarily on coal mining.  The

only significant industry in the area not associated  with coal

mining is the Westover leather Company, a specialty leather

tannery in Westover,

         The following table lists the significant sewage and

industrial waste discharges in the Area.

-------
                                                         V -  5
                                               Est.
Location
Spangler Borough
Barnesboro Borough
Hastings Borough
Carrolltown - West
Carroll Township,
Cambria County
Patton Borough
Westover Borough
Westover Leather
Company
Treatment
None
None
None
Septic Tanks
None
Septic Tanks
Oxidation ponds
Sand Filters
Population
Served
3,000
^,200
1,500
1,500
2,900
500
^,900*
Flow
(mgd)
0.30
0.^2
0.08
0.15
0.28
0.05
0.13
Receiving Stream
West Branch
Susquehanna River
Walnut Run (West
Branch)
Brubaker Run
Sub- surf ace
Chest Creek
Sub-surface
Chest Creek
* Estimated population equivalent
         In addition to the above untreated discharges and the




detrimental effects of mine drainage, the West Branch upstream




from Chest Creek (Mile 205=3) contains heavy deposits of coal




silts which apparently are washed into the stream by surface




run-off from nearby mine spoil banks.  The West Branch is also




littered with garbage and trash as the stream flows through the




Boroughs of Barnesboro and Spangler.




         The following table lists pertinent water quality data




of the West Branch above Chest Creek.

-------
                                                              V - 6
                  West Branch Susquehanna River Above Chest Creek

                              West Branch at         West Branch at
	_Indj_cator	      Carrolltown-Mile 236   McGees Mills-Mile 207

pH                             2.6 -     3.2           h.h -   6.2

Net Alkalinity mg/1          -32.3 -  -68?            -8   - -99

Total Iron mg/1               63-179             0.1-0.30

Sulfates mg/1                990   - 1,^90           330   - 520

Manganese mg/1                 2.8 -     4.3           2.0-   3.1
              Chest Creek receives sizable contributions of mine drain-

     age; however, it is an alkaline stream throughout most of its

     length.  The bulk of the mine drainage in Chest Creek originates

     in the watershed of Little Brubaker Run,  a tributary to Brubaker

     Run.  Chest Creek exhibits acid characteristics from the conflu-

     ence with Brubaker Run to Westover, a distance of about three

     miles.  At Westover a large alkaline discharge from the tannery

     overcomes the acidity of Chest Creek and  returns the stream to

     an alkaline condition.  However, colored  and oxygen demanding

     material in the tannery waste discharge degrades the stream

     quality downstream from Westover.   Sampling results on Chest

     Creek above and below Brubaker Run confluence and at the mouth

     are summarized as follows:

-------
                                                         V - 7
                            Chest Creek
Indicator
pH
Net Alkalinity mg/1
Total Iron mg/1
Sulfates mg/1
Manganese mg/1
^Pennsylvania Department
Upstream From Downstream From
Brubaker Run- Brubaker Run- Chest Creek at
Mile 16* Mile 15* Mouth-Mile 0
7.0
+ 50
0.20
150
---
of Health Data
U.O 2.8 - 7.2
-30 lU - i*5
13 0.1 - 0.1+
500 205 - 360
0 - 0.7

         The West Branch upstream from Chest Creek is an acid




stream and is used only for the conveyance of waste materials.




Immediate steps should be taken to reduce the mine drainage as




well as to provide adequate waste treatment facilities.   Because




of the extremely low stream flows (5 cfs or less) during the late




summer, secondary treatment facilities should be provided.   Esti-




mated costs for secondary facilities, exclusive of sewers and




appurtenances, for Barnesboro and Spangler are $190,000  and




$110,000, respectively.  No action is presently being taken toward




construction of the needed treatment facilities.




         Actions to be initiated toward provision of waste  treat-




ment facilities represent only a part of a needed program to




upgrade water quality.  Implementation of mine drainage  abatement




measures, as discussed in the CB-SRBP Mine Drainage Report, are




essential to an effective pollution control program.

-------
                                                         V - 8






         Chest Creek, although it is classified as an acid stream




by the Sanitary Water Board, is alkaline throughout most of its




length.  Secondary sewage treatment facilities are greatly needed




at Hastings and Patton to abate pollution.  These facilities




would cost an estimated $925^000.  Both of these municipalities




were ordered by the Sanitary Water Board to abate their sewage




discharge or construct secondary treatment facilities.  The




municipalities have failed to comply with the Board's order;




however, some progress is being made toward compliance.




         The Westover Leather Company discharge adds considerable




color to Chest Creek.  The Company presently provides about 50




per cent BOD removal, employing oxidation ponds and sand filters.




Ferric chloride is being employed experimentally in an effort




to increase solids removal.  Detailed studies should be conducted




downstream from Westover and within the Company's waste treatment




facility to determine what additional steps are necessary to im-




prove water quality downstream from the tannery discharge.





             b.  Future Water Quality




         The Barnesboro, Spangler, Patton, and Hastings Area is




expected to experience an increase in population of about two-




fold by year 2020.  Assimilative capacity evaluations indicate




that with secondary treatment and abatement of mine drainage




approximately 3 cfs additional flow would be needed in the  stream




to maintain a D.O. level satisfactory for a balanced aquatic

-------
population.  Comparable flow regulation for water quality control

in Chest Creek would be necessary.  Because of the high cost of

acquiring mineral rights under potential dam sites, it is expected

that some other alternative, possibly advanced waste treatment,

will be found to be more feasible than flow regulation.


              c.   Water Supply

         Present public water use in the area, which includes

Spangler, Patton, Hastings, and Carrolltown, is about 1.3 mgd.

Surface and ground water use are approximately equal.  Water

use by year 2020 is expected to increase to about 3.2 mgd.

Sources presently available appear to be adequate to serve

future demands.


     B.  West Branch Susquehanna River-Chest Creek to Sinnemahoning
         Creek (Excluding Clearfield and Moshannon Creeks)

         1.  Clearfield-Curwensville Area

             a.  Current Water Quality

         The major population centers in this Area are the

Boroughs of Clearfield and Curwensville with a combined popula-

tion of 20,000.  The following table lists major sewage and

industrial waste  sources in the Area;

-------
                                                             V  -  10
      Location
Treatment
Population
  Served
Eat.
Flow
(mgd)
Receiving Stream
Mahaffey Borough       None
Curwensville
  Borough              Primary
 Pike Township,
  Clearfield County    ---
                  100
                3,200
                0.01  Chest Creek and
                        West Branch
                0.6   West Branch
                      Developed por-
                      tion served by
                      Curwensville
Howes Leather
Company
Clearfield
Borough
Lawrence
Township
Pennsylvania
Electric Shawville
Power Station
Shawville-Goshen
Township
* Estimated population
Lagoon (Process
Water)
None ( Spent
Liquors)

Primary
None

Septic Tanks
equivalent
26,800*
1,700

17,000
Cooling
Water

500

0.35 West Branch
0.10 West Branch

2.5 West Branch
--- Developed por-
tion served by
Clearfield
^20 West Branch

 Sub-surface

              The West Branch Susquehanna River from Chest  Creek (Mile

     205.3) to the confluence of Clearfield Creek (Mile  171.5)  is

     influenced by mine drainage from Anderson, Montgomery,  and Wolf

     Creeks; however, the alkalinity of Chest Creek and  other  smaller

     tributaries in this reach is generally sufficient to neutralize

     the acidity during a portion of the year.   Although this  reach

     is essentially neutral, varying between weakly acid and weakly

     alkaline, the stream does not support aquatic life.  Iron  deposits

     on the streambed, characteristic of mine drainage,  are  evident.

-------
                                                         V - 11




        Stream sampling results of the West Branch between Chest




Creek and Clearfield Creek are summarized below:




     West Branch Susquehanna-Chest Creek to Clearfield Creek
Indicator
pH
Net Alkalinity (mg/l)
Total Iron (mg/l)
Sulfates (mg/l)
Manganese (mg/l)
Coliforms MPK/100 ml
Temperature F .
* Pennsylvania Department
U.S.G.S. Gage
Mile 201
h
+11
0
360
1

66
of
.2 - 6.7
- -Uo
.1 - 3.0
- 625
.k - 2.3

- 73
Health Data
Curwensville
Dam-Mile 185
k.2 -
+21
0.5 -
235 -
1.5 -

67 -

6.5
-38
2.2
580
h.i
20*
75

Clearfield
Mile 173
3.1 - 6.5
+11 - -15
0.1 - 0.6
220 - 315
0.5 - 1.6

67 - 77

        The Borough of Mahaffey, located at the confluence of the




West Branch and Chest Creek, discharges untreated sewage both to




the West Branch and Chest Creek, creating localized zones of




pollution.  Primary treatment of the Borough's waste with dis-




charge to the West Branch would alleviate the currently degraded




conditions and would represent initial pollution control action.




Secondary treatment is expected to be necessary in the near future.




Estimated cost of the primary plant, exclusive of sewers, is $27,000.




        The primary treated discharges at Curwensville are not




presently causing evident degradation during most stream flow condi-




tions; however, secondary treatment will probably be necessary in the




near future to protect recreational use of the West Branch.

-------
                                                         V - 12






        The Howes Leather Company in Curwensville is the only




industrial establishment in the Area discharging appreciable




amounts of oxygen demanding waste.  The Company processes approxi-




mately 600 hides per day to produce sole leather and other rough




leather products.  Wastes from the Company are settled prior to




discharge.  Normal stream flows are adequate to satisfactorily




assimilate oxygen demanding wastes; however, the tannery wastes




discolor the stream under most flow conditions.




        In 1966 the Corps of Engineers completed construction




of a multi-purpose dam on the West Branch immediately upstream




from Curwensville.  When access facilities are completed, boat-




ing and bathing use of the impoundment is expected to be heavy.




Sanitary quality of the water in this reach is satisfactory for




these uses; however, mine drainage influence is apparent and may




limit bathing use.




        Although the Curwensville and the Howes Leather Company




discharges do not cause evident degradation during most flow




conditions, the almost complete cessation of flow from the Cur-




wensville Reservoir on two occasions during the summer of 1966




resulted in low dissolved oxygen conditions downstream from the




discharges and caused the death of more than 3}000 fish.  Releases




from the Reservoir should be regulated so as to provide a minimum




flow of 50 cfs at the Curwensville sewage treatment plant to prevent




degradation of the River from the existing waste discharges.

-------
                                                               V - 13


              The West Branch from the confluence of Clearfield Creek

      to Sinnemahoning Creek is seriously degraded by mine drainage

      contributed by Clearfield and Moshannon Creeks and other small

      tributaries to this reach.  Stream sampling results at selected

      stations in this reach are summarized below;

                       West Branch Susquehanna Biver
                  Clearfield Creek to Sinnemahoning Creek

                            Shawville        Karthaus          Keating
      Indicator	Mile 163	Mile 132	Mile 111

pH                          3-3 -   ^      3-2 -    3.5     3.2 -    3-8

Net Alkalinity (mg/l)     -21   - -60     -109   - -230     -90   - -130

Total Iron (mg/l)           O.k - 170      207   -   12.8     1.0 -    2.1

Sulfate (mg/l)           280   - 650      k27   -  595     290   -  510

Manganese (mg/l)            3-5 -   5-9      6.6 -   10.3     ^-5 -    6.7

Conforms MPN/100 ml

Temperature F.           100   - 122       67   -   77      68   -   79


              The Pennsylvania Electric Company steam power generating

      station at Shawville adds a significant thermal load to the West

      Branch.  The power plant, having a rated output of 650,000 KWH,

      uses approximately k20 mgd for cooling purposes.  Present use

      exceeds stream flow by a factor of five or more during the late

      summer months, resulting in the need to recycle the stream flow

      through the plant a number of times.  A low head dam impounds the

      stream in the vicinity of this plant, forming a cooling pond during

      low stream flow periods.  During these periods, the temperature of

-------
                                                        v - ib






the West Branch is raised to as high as 122F. as shown in the



preceding data summary.  The heated discharge does not at present



have an adverse effect on any downstream water use, primarily



because the presence of mine drainage has greatly limited stream



uses.  However, with the abatement of mine drainage pollution,



which is essential to an effective pollution control program,



actions will be necessary to reduce stream temperatures to less




than 3^ C to provide a suitable environment for the propagation



of fish and aquatic life.



             b.  Future Water Quality



        Future growth projections indicate the combined population



of the Clearfield-Curwensville Area will increase about threefold



by the year 2020.  Waste assimilative evaluations indicate that



secondary treatment facilities will be needed prior to this date



to maintain satisfactory water quality conditions.



        The large volumes of cooling water used by the power



plant at Shawville, in relation to stream flow during the late



summer months, warrant the construction of in-plant facilities



such as cooling towers, especially if expansion of the generating



plant is planned for the future.  In addition to in-plant measures,



there are two Corps of Engineers potential reservoir sites indicated



on tributaries upstream from Shawville.  Site #7^ on Chest Creek



has been Indicated to have a potential low flow regulation yield



of about 136 cfs at a cost of $^,900 per cfsj site #69 on Clear-



field Creek has a potential yield of about kOO cfs at a cost of

-------
                                                         V . 15






$3S600 per cfs.  Development of the site on Chest Creek would



provide flow regulation in the Clearfield-Curwensville reach as



well as the downstream reach containing the electric power plant.



The site on Clearfield Creek would impound acid waters and would



only regulate flows for the latter reach.  Future planning of



the water resources of the West Branch Watershed will necessitate



evaluations of the possible development of these reservoirs.



             Co  Water Supply



        Areas of significant water use include the Clearfield,



Curwensville, and Shawville Areas.  At Clearfield and Curwens-



ville, water is obtained from upland surface water sources and



is used predominately for domestic purposes.  Total present




water use is approximately 15 mgd and is expected to increase



to about 11 mgd by year 2020,  Supplies are considered adequate



to meet present and future demands at Clearfield and Curwensville.



However, at the power plant at Shawville, the present use of



cooling water necessitates considerable recirculation to meet



the power generation needs during the late summer months.  Any



development of upstream reservoir would increase stream flow



by the power plant, but, because of the extremely high ratio of



cooling water utilization to stream flow, it is expected that



flow regulation alone would not be economically feasible to meet



future demands.  Cooling towers appear to be a necessary adjunct



to meet these demands adequately, as well as minimizing thermal



pollution of the stream

-------
                                                        v - 16


     C.  Clearfield Creek

         1.  Gallitzin-Loretto-Coalport-Irvona Areas

             a.  Current Water Quality

         Clearfield Creek, which enters the West Branch at Mile

171.5, approximately one mile downstream from Clearfield, Pennsyl-

vania, is affected by mine drainage from the headwaters to the

moutho  The economy of this Watershed is based primarily on coal

mining.  All of the communities in the drainage area are quite

small; the larger ones, including the Boroughs of Loretto, Irvona,

Gallitzin, and Coalport, have a combined population of about 6,500.

         Principal waste sources in the Clearfield Creek Watershed

are as follows;

                                           Est.
                              Population   Flow
Location
Gallitzin Borough

Loretto Borough

Sankertown Borough
Goalport Borough
Ramey Borough

Bigler Township
Bradford Township
Clearfield County
Irvona Borough
Treatment
None

Primary

None
None
None

None
None

None
Served
3,000

1,300

650
19200
275

1,000
1,000

1,000
(mgd)
0.30

0.10

0.07
0.12
0.01

0.01
0.01

OoOl
Receiving Stream
Bradley Rua (Clear-
field Creek)
Unnamed Tributary
(Clearfield Creek)
Clearfield Creek
Clearfield Creek
Little Muddy Run
(Muddy Run)
Clearfield Creek
Roaring Run (Clear-
field Creek)
Clearfield Creek
         All of the above mentioned communities have public sewers;

however, only Loretto has sewage treatment facilities.   The effluent

from the primary treatment plant at Loretto adversely affects water

-------
                                                        V - 17






quality of the receiving stream, a small alkaline unnamed tributary



discharging to Clearfield Creek at Mile 70.  The treatment facili-



ties need to be expanded to secondary to improve the existing water



quality conditions.  Plans for the addition of secondary treatment



facilities have been completed and have been approved by the Sanitary



Water Board; the cost of this expansion is estimated at $131,000.



         Gallitzin Borough discharges untreated waste to Bradley



Run, a small tributary entering Clearfield Creek at Mile 60.5.



Bradley Run is degraded by both mine drainage and the untreated



wastes from Gallitzin Borough.  In addition to mine drainage abate-



ment measures, action is needed toward provision of waste treatment



facilities.  In order to enhance water quality of the stream,



particularly during late summer months when flows are extremely



low, secondary treatment is needed.  The cost of providing secondary



facilities at Gallitzin is estimated at $120,000, exclusive of



sewers and appurtenances.



         The Borough of Ramey discharges to Little Muddy Run, an



alkaline tributary entering Clearfield Creek at Mile 25.5.  Secondary



treatment facilities are needed to alleviate the degraded conditions



of this stream.  The staff of the Sanitary Water Board is presently



evaluating the effects of Ramey's discharge on stream quality and



may soon recommend to the Board that an order be issued requiring



secondary treatment.  The cost for secondary facilities, exclusive



of sewers, is estimated at $76,000.  Secondary treatment facilities

-------
                                                        V - 18


are also needed at Bradford Township to alleviate the degraded

conditions of Roaring Run, attributable to organic wastes.  These

facilities are estimated to cost approximately $72,000 for the

treatment plant only*

         The Boroughs of Sankertown (Mile 62), Coalport (Mile 38),

and Irvona (Mile 35-5) and Bigler Township (Mile 25), discharge

untreated waste to Clearfield Creek which contains considerable

acidity from mine drainage, as indicated in the data summary below;

                          Clearfield Creek

                          At Clearfield   At Irvona   At Ashville
        Indicator	Mile 1	 Mile 36      Mile 55

pH                          3.2 -    3.5    ^.0 -   b.k  3=6 -   k.O

Net Alkalinity (mg/l)     -98   - -150    -13   - -U3  -te   - -58

Total Iron (mg/l)           0.9 -    2.0    0.1 -   1.6  2.0 -   2.2

Sulfates (mg/l)           339 -    690

Manganese (mg/l)            6.0 -   13.2       -          - 



         Mining activity in Clearfield Creek Watershed has been

intensive, and the streams in this area receive a loading of

approximately 60,000 pounds of acid per day, most >f which originates

in abandoned mines.

         Because of the inhibiting effects of acidity of Clearfield

Creek, the communities discharging to this stream have not been

required to provide treatment facilities.  It is expected, however,

that as mine drainage abatement measures are implemented in the

-------

-------
                                                        v - 19






near future, secondary treatment facilities will be necessary.



Initial actions to reduce organic pollution to the stream should



be directed toward the provision of primary treatment facilities.



Costs to provide primary treatment plants, exclusive of sewers,



are $30,000 for Sankertown; $36,000 for Coalport; $U2,000 for



Irvona; and $1*2,000 for Bigler Township.



             b.  Future Water Quality



         Future water quality of the streams in Clearfield Creek



Watershed will depend largely upon the success of mine drainage



abatment 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.  As indicated in the CB-SRBP Mine




Drainage Report, reclamation work in ten tributary watersheds



would greatly reduce the acid load in Clearfield Creek.  However,



with the reduction in acidity of this stream, expansion of primary



facilities to secondary is expected to be necessary to prevent



degradation attributable to organic wastes.



             c.  Water Supply



         Public water supplies in the Watershed are obtained pri-



marily from upstream surface sources.  Because of the small size



of the communities and small growth expected, future water supply



deficiencies are not expected.

-------
                                                        V - 20


     D.  Moshannon Creek

         1.  Houtzdale-Philipsburg Area

             a.  Current Water Quality

         Moshannon Creek enters the West Branch Susquehanna River

at Mile 135.5, approximately four miles upstream from Karthaus,

Pennsylvania.  The economy of the Moshannon Creek Watershed is

based primarily on coal and clay mining.  Major population centers

include Philipsburg, Osceola, Houtzdale, Chester Hill, and Winburne.

A decline in mining activities has essentially stopped population

growth in the Area.

         Aside from coal and clay mining operations which produce

essentially identical water-borne wastes, there are no significant

waste producing industries in the Area.  The table below summarizes

the principal municipal waste sources in the Moshannon Creek Water-

shed.
 Location
                Est.      Est.
             Population   Flow
Treatment      Served	(mgd)    Receiving Stream
Houtzdale Borough

Brisbin Borough
Gulich Township
Woodward Township
Philipsburg Borough
South Philipsburg
Borough
Rush Township
Centre County
Osceola Borough
Cooper Township
Clear fie Id County
Chester Hill Borough
Decater Township
Clearfield County
Morris Township
Clearfield County
None

Septic Tanks
Septic Tanks
Septic Tanks
None

None

None
None

Septic Tanks
Septic Tanks

Septic Tanks

Septic Tanks
850

Uoo
l,Uoo
250
3,100

360

75
2S500

2,800
1,100

3,000

3,000
0.09

_.
___
__
0,30

0.01

OoOl
0.25

 -
___

__-

__-
Beaver Run
(Moshannon Creek)
Sub-surface
Sub-surface
Sub-surface
Moshannon Creek

Moshannon Creek
Cold Stream Run
(Moshannon Creek)
Moshannon Creek

Sub-surface
Sub- surf ace

Sub-surface

Sub- surf ace

-------
                                                        V - 21


        As a result of mine drainage, the water quality in

Moshannon Creek is degraded from its source to its mouth.

Pertinent water quality data on Moshannon Creek are presented

in the following tables

                          Moshannon Creek

                           Mouth          Philipsburg     Headwaters
     Indicator             Mile 0   	Mile 33 	 Mile U8

pH                        2.8 -    3-1      2.7 -     3.6    3.1* -   3.7

Net Alkalinity (mg/l)   -80   - -300     -204   -  -38l    -82   - -85

Total Iron (mg/l)         9.U -   18.8     ih   -    22      9.1 -  15.6

Sulfates (mg/l)         UlO   -  8^0

Manganese (mg/l)          5.0 -   10.0                       



        Because of the influence of mine drainage on stream

quality and use, the Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board has not

as yet ordered all communities in the Moshannon Creek Watershed

to abate untreated sewage discharge.  Primary treatment of all

existing raw sewage discharges is needed as initial action toward

pollution abatement; however, as mine drainage abatement measures

are implemented, it is expected that secondary treatment facilities

will be needed.  Studies have been made to determine the feasibility

of collecting the sewage from Osceola (Mile 39.5), South Philips-

burg (Mile 3*0, Chester Hill (Mile 33), Philipsburg (Mile 33),

and the developed portions of Rush Township (Mile 31.8) at one

primary treatment plant.  Such a facility would serve a population

-------

-------
                                                        V - 22






of 9s500 and would cost approximately $1,500,000.  Construction



of this facility would eliminate existing raw sewage discharge



from all communities in the Area except Houtzdale which dis-



charges to Beaver Run, an alkaline stream discharging to Moshannon



Creek at Mile Ul.5.  In June 1965, Houtzdale was ordered by the



Sanitary Water Board to abate its untreated sewage discharge by



June 1967.  The Borough has failed to make satisfactory progress



toward compliance with the order.  Legal action is being taken



by the Board to force compliance with the order.  It is expected



that the enforcement proceedings will result in action being



taken by Houtzdale to provide secondary treatment as specified



by the Sanitary Water Board's classification of tributaries to



Moshannon Creek.  The cost of the secondary plant, exclusive of



sewers, is estimated at $27^,000.



              b.  Future Water Quality



         Future water quality of the streams in Moshannon Creek



Watershed will greatly depend upon the success of implementation



of mine drainage abatement measures.  At least 50 tributaries have



been identified as contributing acid to Moshannon Creek.  As



indicated in the CB-SRBP Mine Drainage Report, the Moshannon Creek



Watershed is the key to the success of any comprehensive mine



drainage pollution control program in the West Branch Watershed.



Although an abatement program would be expensive in th Moshannon



Creek Watershed, considerable reduction in the acid loading in the

-------
                                                        V - 23

stream could be attained by reclamation of several of the ten
major contributing streams and/or by providing treatment of some
of the 32 largest source discharges.
         With reduction of mine drainage and the associated
inhibiting effects on stream biota, preliminary evaluations
indicate that the expected stream flows in Moshannon Creek will
not be adequate to assimilate projected waste loadings by year
2020 if only secondary treatment is provided.  To insure accept-
able water quality in the stream throughout the projected period,
advanced waste treatment or flow regulation appear to be necessary
alternatives,,
             c.  Water Supply
         Approximately 2.3 mgd of public water supply used in
the Area is presently obtained from upland surface water sources.
The availability of raw water supply in the Area is adequate to
meet present and expected future demands of about 8 mgd.  Addi-
tional development of existing sources is needed to meet present
need at Coalport and Irvona.
     E.  Sinnemahoning Creek
         1.  Emporium-Austin Areas
             a.  Current Water Quality
         Sinnemahoning Creek, which enters the West Branch at
Mile 110.2, is the largest tributary of the West Branch (drainage
area of 1,032 square miles).  Major tributaries of Sinnemahoning
Creek include First Fork Sinnemahoning, Bennet Branch, and
Driftwood Branch.

-------
                                                              V - 2k
              Most of the Sinnemahoning Creek Watershed is heavily

      wooded and sparsely inhabited.  Population is centered in

      essentially two areas - the Emporium Area and the Bennett Branch

      Watershed.

              Significant waste sources in the Area are shown in the

      following tables:
      Location
               Est.        Est.
            Population     Flow
Treatment	Served	(mgd)    Receiving Stream
Austin Borough
None
1,000
Emporium Specialities   Plating waste  
Driftwood Borough

Emporium Borough

 Shippen Township
   Cameron County

 Sylvania Electric
   Emporium
Penfield (Huston
  Township) Clearfield
  County
None            200

Secondary     3,000
Discharge      	
Discharge
 (plating)     
 (sanitary)    
None (cooling) 	

None            350
0.10   Freeman Run
        (First Fork Sinnema-
         honing)

    First Fork Sinnema-
        honing

    Driftwood Branch

0.39   Driftwood Branch

    Developed portion
       served by Emporium.


0.02   Emporium Sewers
005   Emporium Sewers
0.20   Driftwood Branch
0.0k   Bennett Branch
              Secondary treatment is provided at Emporium for a sewered

      population of 3,000 and is not causing an apparent water quality

      problem.  A feasibility study of sewerage facilities for Shippen

      Township recommended provision of a sewer system to serve the

      Township and conveyance of waste to the Emporium system.  The

      cost of the sewer system is estimated at $375,000.

-------
                                                         V - 25






        The population of the Bennett Branch Watershed is centered




in the small mining communities of Benezette, Penfield, Weedville,




Force, and Byrnedale,,  Penfield is the only community discharging




untreated waste to Bennett Branch; the other communities are




utilizing septic tanks and are not discharging directly to the




stream.  Primary treatment is needed at Penfield as initial pollu-




tion control action; secondary facilities are expected to be needed




in the near future as mine drainage abatement measures are imple-




mented in the Bennett Branch Watershed.  The cost of the primary




plant at Penfield, exclusive of sewers, is estimated at $25,000.




        The Borough of Austin discharges untreated sewage to Freeman




Run, a tributary of the First Fork Sinnemahoning Creek.  The dis-




charge adversely affects water quality of Freeman Run and constitutes




a potential hazard to recreational use of the George B. Stevenson




Reservoir about 15 miles downstream on the First Fork Sinnemahoning.




Secondary treatment with continuous chlorination is needed at the




Borough to protect the downstream recreational use.  The Pennsyl-




vania Sanitary Water Board, in June 19&5, ordered the Borough to




provide secondary treatment by June 196?  Secondary treatment




facilities, exclusive of sewers and appurtenances, is estimated




to cost $93,000.




        Although most of the Sinnemahoning Greek Watershed lies




within the bituminous coal fields, mining activity has been




centered almost exclusively in the Bennet Branch Watershed.




Mine drainage discharges adversely affect water quality in Bennett

-------

-------
                                                               V - 26


       Branch, Driftwood Branch downstream from Sterling Run,  and

       Sinnemahoning Creek.

                Pertinent water quality data at the mouth of the Sinnema-

       honing Creek and major tributaries are presented in the following

       table %

                           Sinnemahoning Creek Watershed

                                                                  Mouth of
                  Mouth of        Mouth of         Mouth of      Driftwood
Indicator	Sinnemahoning     First Fork     Bennett Branch	Branch
                  3.5 -   U.6     6.0 -   7.8     3-2 -    U.I    7.0 -   8.0
Net Alkalinity
    (mg/l)      -15
                      - -77     +10   - +20     -87   - -160     -2   -+23
Total Iron
    (mg/l)        0.1 -
Sulfates
    (mg/l)

Manganese
    (mg/l)
                110
                          1.3     0.1 -   0.3     0.5 -    2.1    0      0.9
22   -  30     180   -  330     37
                  1.6 -   2.5     0
         0.2     3=0      5.5    0   -  1.2
                Geologic conditions are responsible for very unstable

       quality and flow conditions in most of the streams in the area.

       Natural waters are very low in alkalinity and highly susceptible
       *

       to quality changes from natural causes and waste discharges.

       Flows fluctuate widely throughout the year.  The rugged topography

       promotes rapid run-off and high spring stream flows, while low

       ground water recharge is responsible for extreae drought flow

       conditions.

-------
                                                        V - 27






         The unstable flow and variable water quality conditions



have depressed aquatic populations in many of the streams in



the area, even in streams unaffected by waste discharges.



             b.  Future Water Quality



         Although population growth is expected to be slight in



the Sinnemahoning Watershed, preliminary projections indicate a



possible fourfold increase in the population of the Emporium Area.



Preliminary evaluations indicate that flows required to assimilate



secondary effluents from the Emporium Area by 2020 will equal the



expected naturally occurring stream flows during the late summer



months.  With refinement or modification of present data, future



needs should be re-evaluated during future planning to insure



satisfactory water quality in the Emporium Area.



         In order to enhance water quality of Bennett Branch and,



consequently, the reaches of Sinnemahoning Creek downstream from



the confluence of Bennett Branch, an effective mine drainage



abatement program is essential.  Data available at this time



indicates that most of the mine drainage in the Bennett Branch



Watershed originates from abandoned deep mines and that four



tributaries contribute the bulk of the mine drainage to Bennett



Branch.  On the basis of the data at this time, it appears that



mine drainage abatement measures would involve sealing of deep



mine discharges.  In addition to the mine drainage abatement



measures, it is expected that the communities in the Bennett

-------
                                                        V - 28


Branch Watershed will need to provide secondary treatment to

prevent degradation attributable to organic wastes.

             c.  Water Supply

         Public water supply in the Sinnemahoning Creek Watershed

is obtained from both surface and sub-surface sources.  The supply

is adequate to meet present and projected demands.  Additional

development of available sources will, however, be necessary to

meet future demands.

     F.  West Branch Susquehanna River - Sinnemahoning Creek to
         North Bald Eagle Creek

         1.  Renovo Area

             a.  Current Water Quality

         This portion of the West Branch Watershed is almost

entirely wooded and is very sparsely inhabited.  Most of the

population is concentrated in the Renovo Area.

         The principal industry in the Renovo Area is the Pennsyl-

vania Railroad repair shops.  Cut-backs in activity at the shops

have seriously affected the economic structure of the community

and limited its growth.

         The following table lists the principal waste sources

in the Area.

-------
    Location
   Treatment
             Est.
Populat ion   Flow
  Served     (mgd)
                                                               V - 29
Receiving Stream
Renovo Borough
South Renovo
  Borough
Noyes Township
  Clinton County
Pennsylvania
  Railroad
None                2,600      0.26

None                  560      0.06

Septic Tanks          6kQ
Separators - oil     ---       0.11
None - cooling
None - sanitary
                     West Branch Susquehanna

                     West Branch Susquehanna

                     Sub-surface
                     Paddy's Run (West
                       Branch)
               The water quality in this reach of the West Branch is

       adversely affected by mine drainage.  Acid and metallic salts

       contributed by mine drainage inhibit aquatic life and limit

       water use.  For this reason, the communities in this reach have

       not been required to provide treatment facilities.

                Pertinent water quality data at selected sampling stations

       are summarized below:

          West Branch-Sinnemahoning Creek to North Bald Eagle Creek
Indicator
pH
Net Alkalinity (mg/l)
Total Iron (mg/l)
Sulfates (mg/l)
Manganese (mg/l)
At Westport Kettle Creek at
Mile 105 Westport-Mile 0
3,2 - k,i
-80 - -140
0.9 - 3.8
290 - Uoo
2.2 - 5.8
3.6 -
-8 -
0.3 -
70 -
1.1 -
k.Q
-85
0.8
155
3-5
At Lock Haven
Mile 70
3.2 -
-65 -
O.k -
338 -
U.3 -
3.6
-110
1.0
Uoo
5.5
                Although mine drainage constitutes the major cause of

       water quality degradation in this reach of the West Branch, most

-------

-------
                                                        V - 30






of the mine drainage originates in upstream tributaries, with



very little being contributed by tributaries within this reach.



Kettle Greek is the only tributary contributing significant



amounts of mine drainage in this reacho  Abatement measures



effecting reduction of mine drainage in Clearfield, Moshannon,



Sinnemahoning, and Kettle Creeks will largely determine the




degree of improvement of water quality in this reach of the



West Branch.  However, in order to achieve an effective pollu-



tion control program,, it is expected that in the near future,



as the inhibiting effects of mine drainage are essentially



eliminated, secondary treatment facilities will be necessary.



As initial action, immediate steps should be taken to provide



primary treatment.  The staff of the Sanitary Water Board is



presently preparing a report which is expected to recommend



primary facilities in the immediate future.  Estimated costs



for primary plants, exclusive of sewers, at Renovo and South



Renovo Boroughs are $171,000 and $25,000, respectively.  The



Pennsylvania Bailroad could eliminate untreated discharges by



connecting to the municipal plant when installed at Renovo.



             b.  Future Water Quality



         Growth projections for the Renovo Area indicate a popu-



lation increase of about twofold by year 2020.  With implementation



of a mine drainage program^ secondary treatment of the projected



waste loadings will be adequate to maintain satisfactory water



quality throughout the projected period.

-------
                                                        V - 31






             c.  Water Supply



         The Renovo Area uses both surface and underground sources



of public water supply to meet the present need of 1.2 mgd.  The



needs by year 2020 are expected to increase to about 1.7 mgd; a



need which can be met with additional development of existing



sources.



     G.  North Bald Eagle Creek



         1.  State College Area



             a.  Current Water Quality



         The State College Area located near the headwaters of



Spring Creek, a tributary entering North Bald Eagle Creek at Mile



28.1, is one of the fastest growing areas in Pennsylvania.  Rapid



population growth is stimulated by expansion of educational and



research activities associated with the Pennsylvania State Univer-



sity at State College.  The State College Area supports a thriving



economy based on agriculture, manufacturing, and service type



activities.



         Sewer construction in the Area has lagged far behind



development.  At the present time only about half of the total



population of the Area is served by sewers.  Principal waste



sources in this Area are as follows!

-------
                                                        V - 32
Location
Treatment
            Est.
Population  Flow
  Served    (mgd)
Receiving Stream
Pennsylvania State
University, State
College Borough
College Township -
Centre County
Ferguson Township -
Centre County
Harris Township -
Centre County
Patton Township -
Centre County
State Correctional
Institution, Rock-
view, Benner Town-
ship, Centre County
Nease Chemical Co.
College Township -
Centre County


Secondary

Septic Tanks

Septic Tanks

Septic Tanks

Septic Tanks



Secondary


Lagoons


36,000 ^.o

k ,000

3,800

2,000

2,1*00



1,600 0.50


Unknown 	


Thompson Run (Spring Creek)

Sub-surface

Sub- surf ace

Sub- surf ace

Sub-surface



Spring Creek


Spring Creek
         Spring Creek is highly alkaline, with fairly high con-

centrations of inorganic nitrogen and phosphorus.  The major

source of the nitrates and phosphates is the sewage treatment

plant effluent from Pennsylvania State University.  The effluent

is discharged into Thompson Run, a tributary of Spring Creek,

and contains about 4?7 pounds of inorganic phosphorus per day,

at a flow of 3.3 cfs, as determined in 1960.  These nutrients

have caused extensive algal growths in sections of Spring Creek.

The results of a biological survey conducted in 1965 indicate

that the water quality of Spring Creek is degraded downstream

from the State College Area.  Only three kinds of bottom organisms

were collected in the sample.

-------
                                                        V - 33





         The Borough of State College is now served by a k mgd



capacity secondary sewage treatment plant operated by the Pennsyl-



vania State Universityo  Although the plant provides in excess



of 90 per cent BOD removal, nutrients contributed by the plant



effluent stimulate lush aquatic growths in Spring Creek,  Plant



respiration and photosynthesis cause wide diurnal fluctuation



in stream dissolved oxygen concentrations, impairing the quality



of the water for the propagation of fish and aquatic life.



Facilities to reduce nutrient concentrations in treated waste



discharges or otherwise reduce nutrient loads on Spring Creek



are needed.  The Pennsylvania Sanitary Water Board, recognizing



the adverse effect of low dissolved oxygen levels on aquatic



life in the stream and on use of the water as a source of water



for a Pennsylvania Fish Commission trout hatchery, has ordered



the University to abate its polluting discharge.  Studies conducted



by the University into land disposal of its treated effluent have



indicated that this may be a feasible method of abating the entire



k mgd discharge to Spring Greek.



         The Townships surrounding State College are served by



septic tank systems and are presently responsible for ground water



quality degradation, and they are believed to be contributing to



the eutrophication of Spring Creek.



         A number of plans have been proposed and are presently



being considered to provide needed sewerage facilities to serve



these communities.  One of the plans receiving most serious

-------
                                                        V . 3^






consideration concerns construction of facilities to serve the



entire developed area, excluding the University, which would



continue to use its present facilities.  The facilities under



consideration include sewers and a 3 mgd treatment plant to



serve developed portions of Patton Township, Ferguson Township,



College Township, Harris Township, and State College Borough.




The proposed treatment facilities would provide 95 per cent BOD



removal and lime alum treatment for nutrient removal.  The treat-



ment facilities would have a hydraulic capacity adequate to serve



only slightly more than the present population.  Facilities to



treat an additional 3 mgd would be needed by 1975 to keep pace



with population growth.  Total project cost of the "first stage"



3 mgd facility would be $5-3 million.  Since the proposed facili-



ties would discharge to the same reach of stream in which the



existing Pennsylvania State University Plant discharges.  Nutrient



removal must be emphasized in designing the proposed facilities



to insure that the effluent does not intensify the present



eutrophication problem.



         Another possible contributor to water quality degradation



of Spring Creek is the treated waste discharge from the State



Correctional Institution at Kockview, approximately k miles down-



stream from State College.  Although BOD removal at the 0.5 mgd



plant exceeds 95 per cent, additional treatment may be necessary



for nutrient removal.

-------
                                                       V - 35






         During the past three years, periodic spills of toxic



chemicals from the Nease Chemical Company in College Township



have caused five fish kills in the headwaters of Spring Creek.



The Company has failed to take precautions to prevent future



spills, and, therefore, legal action is being taken by the



Sanitary Water Board to force compliance with the State Clean



Stream Law,,



             b.  Future Water Quality



         BOD removals in excess of those provided by conventional



secondary treatment are presently required to prevent pollution



of Spring Creek downstream from the State College Area.  By year



2020 the population is expected to increase by about three and



one-half times and will necessitate the provision of advanced



waste treatment, possibly supplemented with flow regulation,



land application, or waste flow diversion as methods to control



water pollution throughout this period.



         Because of topographic and geologic conditions in the



area, reservoir storage to provide flow regulation does not



appear to be an economically feasible method in this watershed.



Some flow regulation could be provided by additional ground



water development or inflow piped from other sources.  However,



it is expected that the most likely solution will be to reduce



the waste loadings to Spring Creek by land application or




diverting treated effluents by pipeline either to North Bald



Eagle Creek or to the West Branch.

-------
                                                               V - 36
                    c.  Water Supply

                The State College Area is currently requiring about U.2

       mgd to meet its water supply needs.  By the year 2020, this Area

       is expected to require about 28 mgd.  The abundance of good

       quality surface and ground water in the area should be adequate

       to meet the projected water supply requirements.

                2.  Bellefonte Area

                    a.  Current Water Quality

                The Bellefonte Area is located on Spring Creek about

       ten miles downstream from State College.   Although the development

       of the Bellefonte Area has been considerably slower than the

       State College Area, the Area does support a thriving economy.

       Principal industries in the Area include  Warner Company and

       Cerro Copper and Brass Company.

                Major waste sources in the Bellefonte Area are as follows:

                                                    Est.
                                      Population    Flow
Location
Bellefonte Borough
Spring Township,
Centre County
Treatment
Secondary
Served
7,200
5,000
(mgd) Receiving Stream
l.k Spring Creek
 Developed portion
Boggs Township,
  Centre County
Warner County
  Bellefonte Borough
Cerro Copper &
  Brass Co., Spring
  Township, Centre
  County
West Perm Power Co.
  Boggs Township,
  Center County
Milesburg Borough
Septic tanks        2,300
Sedimentation        
  (Lime waste)
Neutralization &     
Chemical Treatment
  (Metal Finishing)

None
(Cooling water)

Septic tanks        1,200
         served by Bellefonte

      Sub-surface
 0716    Buffalo Run (Spring
           Creek)
 0.50    Logan Branch
           (Spring Creek)
1*3.20    H. Bald Eagle Creek

-------
                                                        V - 37


         The Bellefonte sewage treatment plant constructed over

30 years ago is antiquated and overloaded.  Inadequately treated

sewage degrades the quality of the receiving stream. Spring Creek.

Plans have been developed for renovation of the existing plant

to increase hydraulic capacity from the present 1.5 mgd to 3 mgd

and increase BOD removal to 95 Pr cent.  The estimated cost of

the planned facilities is $815,000.  The Borough recently was

offered a $27^,000 grant under the P.L. 660 program.  It is

expected that construction of the facilities will be undertaken

during the summer of 1967.

         Periodic spills of toxic waste waters from the Cerro

Copper and Brass Company into Logan Branch, a tributary of Spring

Creek, have caused fish kills.  A biological survey conducted

in 1965 indicated almost complete absence of aquatic life down-

stream from the industry in contrast to an excellent biological

population upstream.  The Company, at the direction of the Pennsyl-

vania Department of Health, has taken steps intended to prevent

future spills

         Pertinent water quality data of Spring Creek at Bellefonte

is shown in the following tables

                     Spring Creek at Bellefonte

Indicator	

pH                                             7.1 -    8.U*
Net Alkalinity  (ng/l)                        +89   - +195 *
Dissolved Oxygen  % Saturation               100 *
Phosphates (rng/l)                              0   -    3-3*

 *  Pennsylvania Department of Health Data

-------
                                                        V - 38






         Spring Creek, which enters the North Bald Eagle Creek



at Mile 28.1, causes a mild degradation in the water quality of



North Bald Eagle Creek.



             b.  Future Water Quality



         Preliminary growth projections for the Bellefonte Area



indicate a potential three-fold increase in population by year



2020.  Water quality degradation is expected to increase in



severity as growth occurs unless control measures in addition



to secondary treatment facilities are implemented.  As indicated



for the State College Area, advanced waste treatment, supplemented



with flow regulation, is one possible solution.  However, because



of limited drainage area upstream and topographic conditions,



reservoir storage does not appear to be a likely solution.  If




flow regulation is provided, additional development of ground



water and possibly inflow piped from other sources may be con-



sidered.  The alternative appearing to be most likely at this



time is treated waste flow diversion, either to North Bald Eagle



Creek or to the West Branch Susquehanna River.



             c.  Water Supply



         Although the available source of public water supply is



more than adequate to meet present (k.k mgd) and projected needs



(l? mgd by year 2020) in the Bellefonte Area, inadequate pumping



and distribution capacity have combined to cause low pressure and



water shortages in the higher portions of the distribution system.



The Pennsylvania Department of Health is presently reviewing plans



for facilities designed to solve this problem.

-------
                                                               V - 39
            3.  Beech Creek

                    a.  Current Water Quality

                Beech Creek which enters North Bald Eagle Creek at Mile

       12.2 is rendered acid from the headwaters to the mouth by mine

       drainage discharges.  The economy of the Beech Creek Watershed

       is based primarily on coal mining.  The Boroughs of Snow Shoe

       and Beech Creek and the Village of Clarence are the principal

       centers of population in the Watershed.

                The following table lists the principal waste sources

       in the Areas
     Location
Treatment
Estimated    Estimated
Population     Flow
Served        (mgd)     Receiving Stream
Snow Shoe Borough
Clarence (Snow Shoe
  Township, Centre
  County
Beech Creek Borough
Septic tanks     800
Septic tanks     500
Septic tanks   1,200
                        Sub-surface
                        Sub-surface
                        Sub-surface
                None of the above listed communities have public sewers

       at the present time; however, secondary sewerage facilities to

       serve the Borough of Beech Creek are presently under construction.

       The project cost of these facilities is estimated at $350,000.

       Sewers and sewage treatment at the remaining communities are

       needed to eliminate nuisance conditions caused by faulty septic

       tank systems,  A minimum of primary treatment is needed as initial

       pollution control action; however, as mine drainage abatement

       measures are implemented, it is expected that secondary treatment

-------
                                                        V - kO


will be necessary.  Costs to provide primary plants, exclusive

of sewers, at Snow Shoe and Clarence Boroughs are $36,000 and

$30,000, respectively.

         Pertinent water quality data for Beech Creek at the

mouth are shown in the following tables

                            Beech Creek

Indicator	

pH                                        U.I -    U.3
Net Alkalinity (mg/l)                   -32   -  -55
Total Iron (mg/l)                         0.2 -    0.3
Manganese (mg/l)                          2,1 -    5.U


         Beech Creek is degraded by mine drainage and is almost

completely devoid of aquatic life.  Although North Bald Eagle

Creek, below the confluence with Beech Creek, is normally an

alkaline stream, occasionally high acid run-off from Beech Creek

overcomes the alkalinity in North Bald Eagle Creek, turning

North Bald Eagle Creek into an acid stream from the confluence

with Beech Creek to the mouth.

             b.  Future Water Quality

         The future water quality and use of Beech Creek will be

contingent upon the effective reduction of mine drainage discharges.

Most of the watershed has been mined, both by surface and sub-surface

methods.  Approximately 100 mine discharges have been located in

the watershed; however, studies indicate that most of the acid

originates from six major discharges.  Measures directed toward

-------
                                                        V - kl






abatement of discharges from these six sources will largely



influence the degree of improvement of water quality in Beech



Creek.



        The staff of the Pennsylvania Coal Research Board is



preparing preliminary plans for a mine drainage neutralization



plant to be located at the confluence of North and South Branches



of Beech Creek.  The facility is intended to discharge alkalinity




to neutralize the acidity contributed to Beech Creek downstream.



            c.  Water Supply



        Water supply in th Beech Creek Basin is obtained from



upland surface sources.  Present sources are adequate to supply



future needs.



        k.  Blanchard Reservoir



        Although satisfactory progress is being made toward



solving the difficult water pollution control problems of the



upper portion of the North Bald Eagle Creek Watershed, new



problems may very soon develop downstream as a result of the



construction of the Blanchard Dam.  The Dam, a multiple purpose



facility now under construction by the Corps of Engineers, is



located on North Bald Eagle Creek at Mile lU, immediately upstream



from Beech Creek.  The ten-mile long impoundment will contain



storage for flood control, flow augmentation, and recreation, and



is expected to be filled in 1970.  The present tendency toward



eutrophication of Spring Creek, which makes up about half of the

-------
                                                        V - k2






flow of North Bald Eagle Creek at the dam site, and the rapidly




growing waste load in the State College and Bellefonte areas




lead to speculation that severe eutrophication problems may




develop in the quiescent waters of the Blanchard Reservoir,  The




reservoir should be kept under close surveillance as it fills to




detect indicators of approaching eutrophication problems so that




steps can be undertaken to minimize or prevent the problems




before they develop to the point that use of the reservoir is




seriously affected.




         Aside from the potential eutrophication problem, the




quality of the Blanchard Reservoir should be suitable for all




proposed uses, including bathing.  Because of recreational uses




in the Reservoir, Howard Borough, located one and one-half miles




upstream, is presently constructing secondary treatment facilities.




These facilities are being designed to serve a population of




approximately 800 at the Borough and will receive waste originating




from the recreational facilities at the Reservoir.  The cost of




the secondary treatment plant and collection sewers is estimated




at $1,150,000.




         In addition to the potential problem associated with




eutrophication in the Blanchard Reservoir, a second potential




water quality problem associated with the Reservoir has caused




concern  Under present stream flow conditions, the acid carried




by Beech Creek sometimes is neutralized by the high alkalinity

-------
                                                        V - 1*3






of North Bald Eagle Creek.  Flow regulation of North Bald Eagle



Creek for flood control purposes immediately upstream from the



mouth of Beech Creek may limit the neutralizing capability of



North Bald Eagle Creek during peak acid discharges from Beech



Creek.  Alteration of the flow regime in North Bald Eagle Creek



may also adversely affect the quality of the West Branch Susque-



hanna since North Bald Eagle Creek supplies much of the alkalinity



necessary to neutralize mine drainage in the West Branch.  Addi-



tional studies are necessary to evaluate the effect of the Reservoir



on downstream water quality.



     5.  Lock Haven Area



         a.  Current Water Quality



         The Lock Haven area, characteristic of the communities



in the Ridge and Valley Province portion of the West Branch



Watershed, is prosperous, steadily expanding, and supports a



diversity of industry,  The area is located at the confluence



of North Bald Eagle Creek and the West Branch.  Municipal and



industrial wastes produced in this area are discharged to North



Bald Eagle Creek.



         The principal waste sources in the Area are as follows:

-------
Location Treatment
Lock Haven Borough Primary
Mill Hall Borough
Flemington Borough ---
Allison Township,
Clinton County 	

Castinea Township,
Clinton County 

Woodward Township,
Clinton County 

Bald Eagle Township,
Clinton County 

Dunnstable Township,
Clinton County ---

Wayne Township,
Clinton County 

American Aniline Chemical
Drake Chemical Co. Chemical
Hammermill Paper Primary
* Estimated population equivalent
Est.
Population Flow
Served (mgd)
15,000 1,30
1,900
1,600

300


1,200


1,900


1,200


800


600

3,^00* 2.0
100* 0 .02
179,600* 20.00

Receiving Stream
H. Bald Eagle Creek
Lock Haven Sewers
Lock Haven Sewers

Developed portions
served by Lock Haven

Developed portions
served by Lock Haven

Developed portions
served by Lock Haven

Developed portions
served by Lock Haven

Developed portions
served by Lock Haven

Developed portions
served by Lock Haven
N. Bald Eagle Creek
N. Bald Eagle Creek
N. Bald Eagle Creek

         The discharge of waste from Lock Haven and the Hammermill
Paper Company plant, and other industrial waste discharges, are
responsible for severe water quality degradation in the U-mile
reach at the mouth of North Bald Eagle Creek.  The Hammermill
Paper Company discharges approximately 90,000 population equiva-
lent (P.E.) of BOD after providing primary treatment.   American
Aniline Products and Drake Chemical Company discharge  colored as
well as oxygen demanding wastes to the stream.  The Lock Haven
primary sewage treatment plant discharge contributes about 9,800
P.E.  Although the establishments are in compliance with all

-------
previous Sanitary Water Board orders, stream pollution is occuring.

Preliminary computations indicate that in excess of 90 per cent

removal of BOD from the present waste load will be required for

maintenance of a balanced aquatic population.  The provision of

secondary treatment facilities is an immediate step needed toward

pollution control in the Lock Haven Area.  The cost of expansion

of the primary facilities at Lock Haven to provide secondary

treatment is estimated at $223,000.  Conveyance of all or a

portion of the treated waste to the West Branch Susquehanna is

an additional step which would reduce waste loadings to North

Bald Eagle Creek.  The staff of the Sanitary Water Board has

instituted steps which will probably lead to issuance of orders

to abate pollution of North Bald Eagle Creek.

         Water quality data for North Bald Eagle Creek in the

Lock Haven Area are listed in the table below;

              North Bald Eagle Creek (Lock Haven Area)

                                  Lock Haven          Howard *
Indicator           	      Mile 0	   Mile 19

pH                                 7.7 -   8.5       7.6 -      8.6

Net Alkalinity^ (mg/l)           +100   -+120       +9^   -   +155

Total Iron (mg/l)                  0.1 -   O.U

Dissolved Oxygen (% saturation)       ---          100

Coliforms (MPN/100 ml)                          230   - 22,000

Manganese (mg/l)                   0   -   0.3          ---

Phosphates (mg/l)                     ---            0   -      1.0
  *  Pennsylvania Department of Health Data

-------
                                                        V - U6






         North Bald Eagle Creek is normally an alkaline stream



and contributes to the neutralization of the acid waters of the



West Branch below Lock Haven.



             b.  Future Water Quality



         The population of Lock Haven is expected to increase



more than fourfold by year 2020.  This increase in population,



plus the low natural stream flows available for waste assimilation




will require pollution control measures in excess of secondary



treatment to alleviate the already critical water quality condi-




tions in North Bald Eagle Creek near Lock Haven.  The Blanchard



Reservoir, now under construction, could possibly supply additional



flow for low flow augmentation.  However, it is expected that the



most likely solution will be the conveyance of treated waste




discharges to the West Branch Susquehanna River.



         Preliminary evaluations indicate that by year 2020,



with secondary treatment of waste in the Lock Haven Area, the



needed assimilative flows in the West Branch downstream from



North Bald Eagle will exceed natural occurring stream flows by



more than 100 cfs during late summer months.  However, there are



9 Corps of Engineers and 3 Soil Conservation Service potential



reservoir sites which could be developed on upstream tributaries



to satisfy flow regulation needs in the West Branch at Lock Haven



or further downstream.

-------
                                                        V - k7


         There are also two existing reservoirs in the Sinnema-

honing Creek Watershed and are presently expected to be capable

of meeting the projected water quality flow requirements;  l)

the Alvin Bush Reservoir on Kettle Creek has an additional

potential storage of 90,000 acre-feet at a total cost of $4,500,000

and could provide a potential yield of 221 cfs at a cost of

$900 per cfs;  2) the George B. Stevenson Reservoir on the First

Fork Sinnemahoning Creek has an additional potential storage of

90,000 acre-feet at a cost of $6,000,000, yielding a potential

233 cfs at $6kO per cfs.  The additional development of either

of these reservoirs would be more than adequate to satisfy the

projected water quality needs in the West Branch at Lock Haven

and throughout the downstream reaches.

             c.  Water Supply

         Present water use in the Lock Haven area amounts to

about 59 rogd which is expected to increase to about 231 mgd by

year 2020.  Available ground and surface water sources are adequate

to meet the projected needs.

     H.  West Branch Susquehanna River - North Bald Eagle Creek
          to Mouth

         1.  Wellsboro Area

             a.  Current Water Quality

         The Wellsboro Area is located in the headwaters of Pine

Creek, a tributary entering the West Branch about 10 miles down-

stream from Lock Haven.  The economy of the Borough of Wellsboro

-------
                                                              V  -  U8


       is supported primarily by a glass factory and a milk processing

       plant.  Wastes originating in the Wellsboro Area are summarized

       below:
                                               Est.
                                Population     Flow
Location   	Treatment	Served 	(mgd)   Receiving  Stream	

Wellsboro Borough  Secondary       5,800       0.90  Marsh Creek  (Pine Creek)
 Bordon Company       	          1,500*      0.03  Wellsboro Sewers
Corning Glass      Chemical                    0.06  Charleston Run (Pine Creek)
  Company          (Etching waste)
  Wellsboro        Hone                        0.20
                   (Cooling)
Galeton            Primary         1,700       0.20  West Branch  Pine  Creek

  *  Estimated population equivalent


                Although the Borough of Wellsboro provides secondary

       treatment for 0.9 mgd of combined domestic and industrial  wastes

       prior to discharging to Marsh Creek,  a tributary of Pine Creek,

       the assimilative capacity of Marsh Creek is presently exceeded

       during low stream flow conditions. Advanced waste treatment or

       treated waste diversion to Pine Creek, supplemented with flow

       regulation, are potential solutions to improve current water

       quality.  Three potential reservoir sites have been indicated

       by the Soil Conservation Service in the headwater areas of Pine

       Creek.  These sites are;
                                               Potential     Cost  Per
       Site Number     Location	Yield (cfs)	cfs
SCS #2k-l
SCS #2^-3
SCS #2k-k
W. Branch Pine Creek
Nine Mile Run
Gene see Forks
22
12
8
$11,000
$18,000
$15,000

-------
                                                        v - 1*9






        These sites could provide flow regulation in Pine Creek



but would have no effect on stream flows of Marsh Creek on which



Wellsboro is located.  Waste flow diversion from Wellsboro to



Pine Creek would be a necessary adjunct if any of these sites



are developed.  However, since these reservoir sites will be



expensive and there will be the additional cost of the waste



diversion pipeline, it appears that advanced waste treatment may



prove to be a more favorable solution in the Wellsboro Area.



        The Corning Glass Company discharges waste waters



carrying about 20 mg/1 of fluoride to Charleston Run, a tribu-



tary to Marsh Creek.  The fluoride concentration in the receiving



stream is elevated to about 8 mg/1 during low flow periods.



Additional study of this situation is needed to determine if the



elevated fluoride concentrations adversely affect water use.



        Galeton presently serves approximately 1,700 people with



primary treatment facilities prior to discharging into the West



Branch Pine Creek.  Secondary treatment facilities are expected



to be necessary in the near future to maintain satisfactory water



quality for most beneficial uses.  The cost for expansion to



secondary is estimated at $123,000.



            b.  Future Water Quality



        The population of the Wellsboro Area is projected to



increase about fivefold by the year 2020.  The increase in popula-



tion coupled with low natural stream flows in Marsh Creek will

-------
                                                        V - 50


intensify the water quality problem in the Wellsboro Area.

Advanced waste treatment and other alternatives such as flow

diversion and stream flow regulation need to be evaluated as

possible means to meet increased water quality needs.

            c.  Water Supply

        The present water use in the Wellsboro Area is about

1 mgd; use by year 2020 is expected to amount to about 3-6 mgd.

Available surface water supply sources appear to be adequate

to meet 2020 projected demands5 however, some additional develop-

ment of existing sources may be necessary.

        2.  Jersey Shore Area

            a.  Current Water Quality

        Jersey Shore is located near the confluence of Pine Creek

and the West Branch Susquehanna River, approximately 11 miles

downstream from Lock Haven.  Principal waste sources in the area

are summarized below;

                                            Est.
                              Population    Flow
Location
Woolrich Mills,
Pine Creek Town-
Treatment
Secondary

Served
6,000*

(mgd)
0.60

Receiving Stream
Chatham Run (W. Branch)

ship, Clinton County
Avis Borough
Jersey Shore
Porter Township
Lycoming County
Salladsburg Borough
Piatt Township,
Lycoming County
Nippenose Township,
Lycoming County
Primary
Primary
-__

Septic Tanks
Septic Tanks

Septic Tanks

1,300
5,800
1,200

300
700

500

0.16
0.65
	

___
__-

__

W. Branch Susquehanna
W. Branch Susquehanna
Developed portions
served by Jersey Shore
Sub-surface
Sub- surf ace

Sub- surf ace


-------
                                                               V - 51
                                                   Est.
                                     Population    Flow
    Location	Treatment  	Served	(mgd)    Receiving Stream

Mifflin Township,     Septic Tanks       500       ---    Sub-surface
  Lycoming County
Jersey Shore Steel    None                         0.10   W.  Branch Susquehanna
  Jersey Shore        (Cooling)

  *  Estimated Population Equivalent


               Water quality degradation is not presently evident down-

       stream from the Jersey Shore Area, primarily because of the

       relatively large stream flows (^00 cfs or more) in the West Branch

       during the late summer months.  Water quality is generally satis-

       factory and can support most beneficial uses.

               Water quality data of the West Branch at Jersey Shore

       are summarized below;

                           West Branch at Jersey Shore

       Indicator	

       pH                                     5.2 -   6.6

       Net Alkalinity (mg/l)                +90   -  -9

       Total Iron (mg/l)                      0.1 -   0.2

       Manganese (mg/l)                       2.0 -   3-0

       Sulfatep (mg/l)                      1^0   - 200



               Under normal stream flow conditions, the West Branch

       below Jersey Shore is an alkaline stream.  The highly alkaline

       waters contributed by North Bald Eagle Creek mixes with and

       neutralizes the acid waters originating in the headwaters  of

-------
                                                        V - 52

the West Branch.  Mixing and chemical reactions are essentially
complete by the time the water reaches the Jersey Shore Area.
The West Branch downstream from Jersey Shore supports abundant
aquatic life and bears little evidence of the heavy load of acid
originating upstream.  During periods of unbalanced stream flow
between the West Branch and North Bald Eagle Creek, the alkalinity
contributed by Bald Eagle Creek is not sufficient to overcome  the
acid load carried by the West Branch, and acid conditions prevail
downstream, sometimes as far as its mouth, 68 miles downstream.
This condition, normally a once or twice-yearly occurrence, causes
massive fish kills.
            b.  Future Water Quality
        The population of the Jersey Shore area is expected to
increase about threefold by the year 2020.  This growth, coupled
with associated industrial expansion, may result in water quality
degradation if primary treatment only is provided.  Assimilative
studies indicate the expected stream flows in the West Branch
will adequately assimilate waste loadings from the Jersey Shore
Area and maintain satisfactory water quality through year 2020
if secondary treatment is provided.
            c.  Water Supply
        The present water use of 1 mgd is expected to increase
about fourfold by year 2020.  Available surface water supply
sources appear to be adequate to meet 2020 projected demands;
however, some additional development of existing sources will  be
necessary.

-------
                                                               V - 53
               3.  Williamsport Area

                   a.  Current Water Quality

               The Williamsport Area, with a population of 76,000 is

       the largest population center in the West Branch drainage area.

       The Area includes the City of Williamsport, the Boroughs of

       Mountoursville, South Williamsport, Duboistovn, and developed

       portions of Loyalsock and Old Lycoming Townships.  The economy

       of the Area is prosperous and is supported by numerous commercial

       and manufacturing establishments, the largest of which are the

       Avco Corporation, Sylvania Electric Corporation and the Beth-

       lehem Steel Company.

               Principal waste sources in the Area are shown in the

       following table:

    Location          Treatment
                             Est.
               Population    Flow
                 Served	(mgd)   Receiving Stream
Williamsport
Primary
 South Williamsport    	
 Loyalsock Township    
   Lycoming County
 Dairymans League      	
   Coop., Williamsport
 Coca Cola Company     	
 M & E  Bottling and
   Processing, Williams-
   port
 Darling Valve Company 	
 Avco Corporation     Chemical
   Williamsport
Central Ul,000
West     6,500
    7,000
    9,000

      Uoo*

      500*
    1,300*
7.0
0.8
W. Branch Susquehanna

Williamsport Sewers
Williamsport Sewers
 Bethlehem Steel
   Williamsport
 (Plating)
None (Cooling)
Discharge
 (Sanitary)
Chemical (Acid)
None (Cooling)
Discharge
  (Sanitary)
                   500
                                         koo
                                       1,100
                              0.02   Williamsport Sewers

                              0.02   Williamsport Sewers
                              0.03   Williamsport Sewers
                 0.07   Williamsport Sewers
                 0.05   Lycoming Creek (West
                          Branch)
                 0.90   Willimasport Sewers
                 0.20   W. Branch Susquehanna
                 0.20
                 O.l6   Williamsport Sewers

-------
                                                        V -
Location Treatment
Armstrong Township Septic Tanks
Lycoming County
Fairfield Township Septic Tanks
Lycoming County
Hepburn Township Septic Tanks
Lycoming County
Lycoming Township Septic Tanks
Lycoming County
Montoursville Septic Tanks
Lycoming County
Susquehanna Town- Septic Tanks
ship, Lycoming County
Upper Fairfield Septic Tanks
Township, Lycoming
County
Woodward Township Septic Tanks
Lycoming County
DuBoistown Borough Primary
Population
Served
600

900

1,300

1,200

5,000

800

900


1,600

i.Uoo
Sylvania Electric Chemical (Plating) ---
Williamsport

Est.
Flow
(mgd) Receiving Stream
--- Sub-surface

  Sub-surface

	 Sub-surface

 Sub-surface

 Sub-surface

Sub-surface

 Sub-surface


	 Sub-surface

0.02 W. Branch Susquehanna
0.01 Bull Run (West Branch)

* Estimated Population Equivalent
        Williamsport, South Williamsport, and adjacent sewered



areas are served by two primary sewage treatment plants which



have a total average loading of 7.8 mgd and ^8,000 P.E.   The



plants are operated by the City of Williamsport and are in



compliance with Sanitary Water Board requirements.  Population



growth and expected increased recreational use of the river will



necessitate provision of secondary treatment with chlorination



in the near future.



        With the exception of infrequent spills of toxic material,



industrial waste treatment by establishments in the area has

-------
                                                        V - 55






been adequate to prevent pollution, and, with appropriate treat-



ment plant renovation as waste loads change, should be adequate




for the near future.



        The Borough of DuBoistown with a population of i,kOO



provides primary sewage treatment.  Secondary treatment with



chlorination facilities is expected to be needed in the near



future to protect recreational use of the river.



        Pertinent water quality data for the West Branch at



Williamsport is shown in the following table:



                    West Branch at Williamsport



Indicator	



pH                                           5.8 -   6.8



Net Alkalinity (ng/l)                       -1   - +28



Total Iron (mg/l)                           -0.1 -   0.2



Dissolved Oxygen ($ Saturation)             95



Coliforms MPN/100 ml                      1000*



Manganese (mg/l)                             1.6 -   3.2



Sulfates (mg/l)                            100   - 200



  *  Pennsylvania Department of Health Data






        With the exception of several miles of the headwater



streams of Lycoming Creek, mine drainage has no significant



effect on the quality of the tributaries of the West Branch



in the Williamsport Area.  A biological survey of the basin,



conducted in 1965, indicated that the tributary streams in

-------
                                                        V -56






this Area support  a balanced aquatic population and generally



contribute to waste quality improvement of the West Branch.



            b.  Future Water Quality



        Growth projections for the Williamsport Area indicate



less than a threefold increase in population by year 2020.



A comparison of expected stream flows in the West Branch and



flows required to assimilate projected waste loads from the



Area indicate that secondary treatment should be adequate to



maintain acceptable water quality in this portion of the West



Branch throughout the period to year 2020.



            c.  Water Supply



        The present water use in the Williamsport Area amounts



to about 9 mgd which is projected to about 66 mgd by year 2020.



Available surface water supply appears to be adequate to meet



future water supply requirements.



     k.  Muncy Area



         a.  Current Water Quality



         The Muncy Area, located 28 miles upstream from the



mouth of the West Branch, consists of Muncy Borough, developed



portions of Muncy Township and Muncy Creek Township, and



Montgomery Borough.  Principal waste sources in the Area are



summarized in the following:

-------

-------
                                                               V - 57
    Location
Treatment
Population
  Served
                                                  Est.
                                                  Flow
        Receiving Stream
Eagles Mere
Muncy Borough
 Muncy Township,
   Lycoming County
 Muncy Creek Township
   Lycoming County
 Sprout Waldron
 Sylvania Electric,
   Muncy Township,

Hughesville Borough

Wolf Township, Ly-
  coming County
Muncy State Cor-
  rectional Inst.,
  Clinton Township,
  Lycoming County
Montgomery Borough
Secondary
Primary
    200
  4,500
    900

  2,000
                   500
Chemical(Plating) 	
Primary            300
 (Sanitary)
Septic Tanks     2,200

Septic Tanks     1,000

Secondary        1,000



None             4,300
0.01    Muncy Creek
0.55    W. Branch Susquehanna
	     Developed portion
         served by Muncy
     Developed portion
         served by Muncy
0.22    Muncy Sewers
0.10    W. Branch Susquehanna
0.01    W. Branch Susquehanna

	     Sub-surface

	     Sub-surface

0.10    Turkey Kun (W. Branch)
             0.60    W. Branch Susquehanna
               The primary treated effluents from Muncy are not pre-

       sently causing apparent water quality degradation of the West

       Branch.  However, secondary treatment is expected to be

       necessary in the near future to protect recreational use of

       the River.

               The secondary sewage treatment plant serving the State

       Correctional Institute for Women near Muncy has reached its

       design capacity.  Plans are being made for renovation of the

       plant.  Estimated cost of the renovation is $70,000,

               Sewers and primary degree treatment facilities are  under

       construction at Montgomery Borough and are scheduled to be

-------
                                                        V - 58







completed early in 1967.  Estimated cost of the facilities is



$U60,000.  Secondary facilities are expected to be necessary in



the near future to protect recreational use of the West Branch.



             b.  Future Water Quality



         Although this area is expected to experience a threefold



increase in population by the year 2020, no future water quality




problems are anticipated if secondary treatment is provided.



             c.  Water Supply



         The Muncy Area presently uses about 1 mgd to satisfy the



water supply needs.  The projected needs by year 2020 are ex-



pected to be approximately 5-3 mgd.  Available water supply



sources appear to be adequate to meet the projected requirements.




     5.  Milton Area



         a.  Current Water Quality



         The Milton Area includes the portion of the West Branch



and tributaries from Watsontown (Mile 23) to the mouth.  The



principal industry in the Area is the Chef Boy-Ar-Bee food



processing plant in Milton.  Bucknell University is located at



Lewisburg.  Waste emanating from the Area is summarized as



follows s

-------
                                                             V - 59
Location Treatment
Watsontown Borough Primary
Milton Borough Primary
War show and Sons 
Delaware Township, Septic Tanks
Northumberland County
White Deer Township, Septic Tanks
Union County
East Chillisquaque Septic Tanks
Township, Northumber-
land County
West Chillisquaque Septic Tanks
Township, Northumber-
land County
Turbot Township, Septic Tanks
Northumberland County
Chef Boy-Ar-Dee Plant Primary
Milton
Lewisburg Borough Primary
Kelley Township, 	
Union County
East Buffalo Town- Septic Tanks
ship, Union County
Buffalo Township, Septic Tanks
Union County
West Buffalo Township Septic Tanks
Union County
Mifflinburg Borough Primary
North East Federal Intermediate
Penitentiary, Kelly
Township, Northumber-
land County
Northumberland Borough Primary
Population
Served
2,500
8,000
1,^00*
2,UOO

2,1*00

600


1,700


1,400

68,000*

9,000
3,300

3,200

1,600

1,100

2,500
1,^00



U,200
Est.
Flow
(mgd)
0.30
0.68
O.Ik
	

	

	


___


	

1.25

1.00
___

	

	

___

0.50
0.30



0.35
Receiving Stream
W. Branch Susquehanna
W. Branch Susquehanna
Milton Sewers
Sub-surface

Sub- surf ace

Sub- surf ace


Sub-surface


Sub -surf ace

W. Branch Susquehanna

W. Branch Susquehanna
Developed portions
served by Lewisburg
Sub-surface

Sub- surf ace

Sub- surf ace

Buffalo Creek
Buffalo Creek



W. Branch Susquehanna
*  Estimated Population Equivalent
              Watsontown Borough, 23 miles upstream from the mouth of
     the West Branch, provides primary waste treatment for a popula-
     tion of about 2,000.  Water quality degradation,  attributable to
     Watsontown discharge, is not apparent, primarily because of the
     large stream flows (650 cfs or more) occurring during the summer
     and fall months.

-------
                                                        V - 6o






         The Borough of Milton, 12 miles from the mouth, provides



primary treatment for a population of about 8,000.  The municipal



discharge is very small in comparison to the waste discharge



from the Chef Boy-Ar-Dee Company food processing plant in Milton.




Tomato processing wastes from the plant have a BOD equivalent



of about 68,000 P.E.   The BOD of the treated waste discharge



(36,800 P.E.) constitutes the second largest discharge of BOD



in the West Branch Watershed.  Only the Hammermill Paper Company



at Lock Haven is responsible for a higher BOD loading.  The Chef




Boy-Ar-Dee waste discharge varies seasonally, reaching a peak



during the two month tomato canning season in late summer.



The Chef Boy-Ar-Dee plant is considered to be in compliance



with Sanitary Water Board requirements at the present time;



however, solid material attributed to the plant has been observed



in the West Branch, indicating that the waste treatment facili-



ties may be by-passed or overloaded at times.  In view of the



large loadings from the plant and downstream recreational use,



secondary treatment or "in-house" measures to reduce waste



loadings are needed.



         The Pennsylvania Department of Forest and Waters is



presently constructing an inflatible dam on the Susquehanna



River just downstream from the confluence of the West Branch



and the Susquehanna River.  The dam is scheduled to be completed



in 1968 and will provide a recreational pool which will extend

-------
                                                        V - 6l






into the West Branch,  The nearness of the impoundment to the



Milton Area appears to warrant consideration be given to secon-



dary treatment of wastes with continuous chlorination in order



to maintain water quality suitable for recreation in the reser-




voir.  The cost of expansion of the primary plant at Milton to



secondary is estimated at $167,000; expansion of the primary




plant at Mifflinburg to provide secondary treatment is estimated




to cost $130,000.



         The Lewisburg Area is located approximately k miles



downstream from Milton.  The principal source of employment in



the Area is service-type activities associated with Bucknell



University.  Primary waste treatment is provided for a popula-



tion of about 9,000, the discharges apparently causing no




evident quality degradation of the West Branch.  Similarly,



primary treatment is provided at Northumberland Borough, located



at the confluence of the West Branch and the Susquehanna River.



Because of the recreational pool being provided by the downstream



inflatible dam, secondary treatment facilities with chlorination



for both Lewisburg and Northumberland Boroughs are expected to



be necessary to maintain water quality suitable for recreation.



Costs to expand the present facilities at these two Boroughs



to provide secondary treatment are estimated at $205,000 and



$120,000 for Lewisburg and Northumberland, respectively.

-------
                                                               V - 62


                The secondary treatment plant at the North East Federal

       Penitentiary, discharging to Buffalo Creek, is antiquated and

       provides less than 50 per cent BOD removal.  Engineering studies

       are needed to formulate plans for the renovation of the plant

       to increase the level of efficiency equivalent to secondary.

                Water quality data for the West Branch in the Area

       are summarized in the following table:

                  West Branch at   West Branch at     West Branch at
Indicator	Milton-Mile 12   Lewi sburg-Mile 8   Horthumberland-Mile  0

pH                       6.5                6.5                6.5

Net Alkalinity (mg/l)   +15                +15                +16

Total Iron (mg/l)                         0.5

Dissolved Oxygen
  (% Saturation )        90                 90                 85

Coliform MPN/100 ml                    100

Manganese ( mg/l)                         0.5                	



                    b.  Future Water Quality

                Assimilative studies indicate that the anticipated flows

       of the West Branch in the Milton Area will not be sufficient to

       assimilate expected waste loads, principally from Chef Boy-Ar-Dee,

       through year 2020 if only secondary treatment is provided.  However,

       additional development of the Alvin Bush Dam or George B.  Stevenson

       Dam, to provide the needed water quality control flows below Lock

       Haven, will also satisfy the projected quality control neds at

       the Milton Area.

-------
                                                        V - 63





             c.  Water Supply



         Preliminary projections indicate a potential fourfold



increase in population of the Milton Area by year 2020.  However,




water supply requirements are projected to increase about eightfold,



primarily the result of increased water use by the Chef Boy-Ar-Dee



Company.  The available water supply sources appear to be adequate



to meet the projected requirements; however, studies should be



made within the Chef Boy-Ar-Dee plant to ascertain what measures



could be taken to reduce future water use.

-------

-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS




                                                             Page
  I.  INTRODUCTION	    I - 1




      A    Purpose and Scope	    1-1




      B,   Acknowledgments  .  	    1-2




 II.  GENERAL	   II - 1




      A.   Source of Information	   II - 1




      B.   Determination of Needs   	   II - 2




      C.   State Stream Classifications	   II - 2




III.  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS	Ill - 1




      A.   Findings	Ill - 1




      B.   Immediate Pollution Control Needs   	  Ill - U




          1.  Waste Treatment	Ill - 4




          2.  Flow Regulation  . .  .  .  '	Ill - 5




          3.  Special Studies	,	Ill - 6




          U.  Institutional Practices  	  Ill - 6




 IV.  GENERAL BASIN DESCRIPTION  	   IV - 1




  V.  WATER POLLUTION PROBLEMS, NEEDS AND COSTS   	    V - 1




      A.   Covington-Clifton Forge Area  	    V-l




          1.  Jackson River Watershed  	    V-l




      B.   Lexington-Buena Vista Area	    V - 7




          1.  Maury River Watershed  	    V-7




      C.   Lynchburg Area	    V - 11




          1.  James River Watershed	    V - 11




          2.  Buffalo River Watershed	    V - 17

-------

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

                                                              Page
      D.  Charlotte sville Area	     V -  18

          1.  Rivanna River Watershed  ..........     V -  18

      E.  Richmond Area	     V -  22

          I.  James River Watershed	     V -  22

          2.  Chickahominy Watershed	     V -  31

      F.  Hopewell-Petersburg Area	     V -  34

          1.  James River Watershed	     V -  3^

      G.  Hampton Roads Area .	     V -  39

          1.  James River Watershed	     V -  39

 VI.  APPENDICES	  .    VI -  1

      A.  Biological Survey of the Jackson and
          James Rivers	    VI -  1

      B.  Report on the Effects of Pollution on Stream
          Fishery Resources in the James River Basin ...    VI -  27

      C.  Population Projections for Major Municipal
          Areas in the James River Basin	    VI -  Uo

VII.  BIBLIOGRAPHY ..... 	  VII -  1

-------
                                                          I - 1






I.   INTRODUCTION




    A.  Purpose and Scope




        Under the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution




Control Act (33 U.S.C. ^66 et seq), Section 3(a), the Secretary




of the Interior is authorized to make joint investigations with




other Federal agencies, with State Water Pollution Control Agen-




cies and interstate agencies, and with the municipalities and




industries involved, of the condition of any waters in any State




or States and of the discharge of any sewage, industrial wastes,




or substance which may adversely affect these waters.  These




investigations are for the purpose of preparing and developing




comprehensive programs for eliminating or reducing the pollution




of interstate waters and tributaries thereof.




        This Working Document, by describing the immediate water




pollution control action needed in the James River Basin, repre-




sents the first step in the development of a comprehensive program




to control water pollution in the Basin.




        The principal objectives of the investigation and report




are to:




        1.  Delineate existing and potential water quality




            problems in areas producing significant municipal,




            industrial, and/or other wastes, and identify sources.




        2.  Summarize immediate pollution control needs and




            estimated costs for providing these needs.

-------

-------
                                                        1-2






        3.  Suggest local and basin-wide  pollution  control




            measures which should be evaluated  in planning a




            comprehensive water pollution control program for




            the Basin.




    B.  Acknowledgments




        The cooperation and assistance  of the following Federal,




State, and local agencies are gratefully  acknowledged:




        U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service




        U. S. Geological Survey




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




        U. S. Department of Commerce




        Virginia Division of Industrial Planning and Development




        Virginia Division of Water Resources




        Virginia State Water Control Board




        Virginia State Department of Health




        Virginia Institute of Marine Science




        Virginia Military Institute Research Laboratories




        City of Richmond, Department of Public  Works

-------

-------
                                                         II - 1






II.  GENERAL



     A.  Source of Information



         Present water quality conditions covered in this report



were evaluated by the staff of the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna



River Basin Project, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,



employing the following sources of information:



         1.  Existing data obtained from files of Federal, State,



             and local agencies.



         2.  Results of stream sampling investigations conducted



             by State institutions under contractual agreements



             with the FWPCA.



         3.  Personal communications with municipal and industrial



             representatives associated with pollution abatement



             activities.



         A biological study of the upper reaches of the James



River and tributaries conducted by CB-SRBP comprised a special



investigation to supplement sampling data of chemical and bio-



chemical characteristics of water quality.  Brief summaries of



the biological studies are given, along with summaries of quality



data, for most of the areas above Lynchburg, with more detailed



descriptions of biological conditions outlined in the Appendix.



         For evaluations of future water supply requirements,



county population and industrial productivity projections developed



by the National Planning Association were employed.  The I960



U. S. Census Report was used as a base from which individual

-------
                                                        II - 2






community projections were made.  Industrial requirements were



projected by type of industry on an individual production increase



basis  Modifications were made to industrial projections when



specific information was obtained regarding changes in processing,




techniques, or plant operation.



     B.  Determination of Needs



         Immediate water quality needs were evaluated in terms



of treatment required to upgrade and maintain stream conditions



which are generally recognized as being suitable for most bene-



ficial uses; the minimum use being warm-water fishery.  The



effects of residual waste loadings to streams were evaluated



with the degree of treatment specified which was expected to



maintain the desired water quality for the immediate future.



For the purpose of this report, the CB-SRBP has recommended, in



most cases, that secondary treatment with 85 per cent removal of



the biochemical oxygen demand of waste discharges be provided.



         Cost estimates for new facilities and for upgrading



present facilities to secondary treatment were calculated from



construction cost information obtained from the literature5



and updated, using Engineering News Record Current Cost Index .



Existing estimates for proposed projects were obtained from some



communities where engineering costs had been previously determined,



     C.  State Stream Classifications



         At the writing of this report, the State of Virginia has



not established specific water quality objectives for either

-------

-------
                                                        II - 3






State-wide or individual stream application.  It is anticipated,



however, that stream standards will be adopted for the James River



Basin in June 196?.  The policy in the past has been to consider



each waste discharged on its own merits, taking into consideration



downstream water uses and assimilative capacity of the receiving



waters.  However, with certain modifications and/or expansion,



the following basic criteria are used;  (l) dissolved oxygen not




lower than k milligrams per liter in the stream; (2) no appreciable



settleable or floating solids; (3) no noticeable coloration or



discoloration of the receiving stream; (U) toxic substance to be



reduced below the toxicity of the stream; (5) no appreciable change



of pH of the receiving stream; and (6) stream flow for design of



sewage treatment facilities equal to minimum average 7-day low



flow occurring in a 10-year frequency.



         Proposed stream standards for the Basin have been prepared



by the State Water Control Board and public hearings were held in



April 1967.  The standards generally follow the criteria used in



the past with certain modifications applicable to specific reaches.

-------
                                                        Ill - 1






III.  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS



      A  Findings



          The James River Basin, an area of approximately 10,000



square miles, reflects a balanced economy that was established



from the earliest colonial days.  In addition to sanitary wastes,



agriculture, chemicals, manufacturing, transportation, food pro-



cessing and forestry all contribute to pollution loads discharged



in  the basin.




         From its mouth at Hampton Roads upstream to Covington, a



distance of 3&0 river miles, one-third of the James River is ad-



versely affected by municipal and industrial wastes to the extent



that use of its water is Restricted to some degree.  Biologically



oxidizable wastes equivalent to a population of four million are



produced each day in the basin.  Present treatment and waste



reduction practices reduce this amount to about two million



population equivalents that are actually discharged to the James



River and its tributaries.  Table I summarizes municipal and



industrial waste loadings discharged to various streams throughout



the basin under present treatment levels and also indicates what



these loadings would be if a secondary (85 per cent BOD removal)



waste treatment policy were implemented.




         The most critical areas, with regard to water quality,



exhibit recurrent conditions of depleted or nearly depleted



dissolved oxygen content.  Industrial wastes resulting from pulp

-------
                                                         Ill - 2






and paper production account for a large part of the problem,




especially in the Covington and Lynchburg areas  In all, indus-




trial wastes account for about 50 per cent of the total organic




waste load presently being discharged in the basin; municipal




effluents account for the balance.  Of the ten largest producers




of organic waste in the basin including both municipal and




industrial sources, only one provides secondary treatment to its




waste.



         Surface waters of the James River Basin are presently




used for municipal and industrial water supply at a rate of 280




mgd.  Municipal and industrial water use upstream from Richmond




is now and will continue to be much less than the development




potential of the surface water supply.  Additional water supply




impoundments may eventually become necessary for quality or




convenience but this is not an immediate problem.




         At Richmond and some of the communities along the Estuary,




water supplies have reached or are approaching a critical stage.




Development of water supply reservoirs in the basin will be a




factor to be considered in any long term comprehensive water




management study.




         A comprehensive program to affect the proposed water




quality standards (see Section II - C) throughout the Basin is




beyond the scope of this study.  The investigations and resultant




recommendations of this study have been made to identify the most




urgent needs of the basin that should be met to produce a signifi-




cant improvement in stream water quality.

-------

-------
Ill - 3































H

!
1
















































w
CD
n*

W W EH Q
3 5  0
X 3 Is
?3 C3 C3^ ^C
P S W
CQ H 0
a  **
[y| ^C
Q s
PH
g

























H
CO
S>

g
0)
PC

Pi
S
00

c"j
^J)
H















CQ
0
O
c
M

rH
CO
a-
H
O
rl
c
3
S


^~N
CO
H s
5 
O CQ
H 'c
0)
t-H
CO
H >
CO iH
H 0
S "
l3 |M
d o
C -H
H -P

Q.
H O
CO PH
Qj x_x
..J
*n
0
H
gj
S







X^v
3
JM
CQ
^
0)
a)

H
co
0
5




ONVO Oi vD QCU ONONr-l
IfN CM LfN 1 ON OO O CO
H r- 1 r-H VO




*
r-l PO O< rH rH! OCOON
ITNCVI-^K r-l 1 ITNrHCQ
rH r-H CO








^t- CO O 1 IA ON CM ON VD 00
rH 1 t- CO O\ CO
CM





ITN ON COI C~- HCVJ O ITNOJ
VD -* -* 1 -* CO vO O
CM -4- C- -* CD^
CxT





*
O CO O
Pn w > bD
rH "rl ^4
C ^"x t^ ^"^ p< rj
O rH ?H ^D
tH^ Cr( rtf-trH> fnC SnM $H
Hi-l 0)0) 0)0) HH 33 -H 0) (D CO CO
r-Hpfi 3> >> 'rHpCi >g +5>.rC|>.
O W-H -rl H J> -HOCO-rHeO^H H
1 G 1 fyj ppl firt 03 cd p^ rt p^ p^ Q iyj j^
COC W 0)C to i K P
OCQ Oh HW'*>H-)C ) HCQ CQ O
-p >J -PH 7Q}) 4^ co C co o Hcu cv EH
bOo bO? ,3SC OP OQH 4)3 OS
CCO G K ,ficO*H rH*rl S CO ^3 ^CO-PcO C
Ht-3 'H CJr-gpL, rlW ^HI"3O V1^ &^ >rl
^ >^^x ^ N 	 S C N.^^^^-* CO * ' O N_XS> P^4>^^^ Q **_^ CQ
OCUh Xl-H OCO CO
OJi-5 OP5 KW pq














4
S
co
4)
M
-P
CQ

CQ
rH
,3
P

O
P
co
o
CQ
H
*d
CQ-
H
d
rH
O
CO

0
H
9
,!
r^
CQ
CH
O
.
CO
\
CQ
C
o
43

00
VO
^
f )
0)
43
H
X
0
4
PJL(
<


*


-------
                                                        Ill - U






     B.  Immediate Pollution Control Needs



         1.  Waste Treatment



         The principal immediate  need in the Basin is for the



provision of adequate waste treatment facilities to control pollu-



tion at its source.



         Immediate waste treatment needs and estimated costs for



municipalities and industries in the Basin are given in Table II.



A general summary of these needs follows %



              a.   One municipality to provide



                  primary and secondary treatment



                  for existing untreated discharge.         $125,000



              b.   One County Service Authority to



                  provide sewerage system, in-



                  cluding secondary treatment.            $1,400,000



              c.   Sixteen municipalities to provide



                  secondary treatment for existing



                  primary discharges.                    $3^,795,000



              d.   One Sanitary District Commission



                  to continue with sewerage program,



                  including secondary treatment



                  facilities at four existing primary



                  treatment plants.                      $21,200,000



              e,,   Two Federal Installations to provide



                  secondary treatment at existing




                  primary treatment plants.               $1,050,000

-------
                                                         Ill - 5


              f.  Twelve industries to provide

                  primary and secondary treatment

                  of existing untreated discharges.      $20,750,000

              go  One industry to provide enlarged

                  secondary facilities and increased

                  operating efficiency at existing
                                                        Cost
                  secondary plant                       undetermined


              Total  (excluding g)                       $79,320,000


         2,  Flow Regulation

         To adequately protect and enhance water quality in the

face of population and industrial growth, urbanization, and

technological change, water pollution control action, in addition

to the provision of conventional waste treatment facilities, is

needed in areas where stream flows are low in comparison to the

existing and/or projected residual BOD loads which the stream

must assimilate.

         Reservoir storage to provide supplemental flow for water

quality control is a possible solution to supplemental water pollu-

tion control needs in the two areas in the James River Basin where

a need for greater than 85 per cent removal of the BOD in waste

discharges is indicated.

         The areas requiring flow regulation and proposed reser-

voirs are listed in Table III

-------
                                                         Ill - 6






         3.  Special Studies



         Additional investigations are needed in several areas in



the Basin to provide the basis for comprehensive evaluations of



existing or potential pollution control needs.  Table IV summarizes



these study needs.



         k.  Institutional Practices




         A need for action on pollution control measures by various



Federal, State, and local institutions in the James River Basin



is indicated by the findings of this study.  Table V summarizes



needed institutional practices which would enhance and strengthen



pollution control programs.

-------
Ill - 7
L Annual
lost
1  ' vj
(C
-p
o
EH
G
O
tH
P
0 -P
0 W
JH O
-P U
CO
C
O
O
















d
4)
4)
S













-p
H
r-l
H
,0

CO
C
O
a
CO
V







c
o
H
P
CO
O
O
8
o
o
CM

-69-
d
t) O
c o
H O
fi
5 &
d>
d
G

CO
v 
M >
f-t O
-P CO S3
C ,G O
V 0 -H
> 8 W 0
k P "H -H
CO CO "d *M
d V CM
C r*  
O -P -P
0 W PL,
D U co EH
w >d f* CO
H
J > H O>
M O H > b
>H fn 0 O M
co ft h co
r-l fn ft -d
G 0 0 8 G
W -P 
H a o
MO 0
M O
H CM
> h O
0)
P ft G
W CO ?
 PH 0
* EH
H CM
1 CO
CM V
j e.
n M
r-l <
O
C ttf)
O rt
-P 0
bD (*.j
C
H C
> 0
0 -P
o
1
UA
r-l



8
o
s"
OJ






















**
CD
s
o
o
V
CO


4)
bO
JH
o
h
G
0
-P
CH
H
O

<4|
o

g
o
EH
CO












o o o c
80 o c
o o c
O CM CM C
rH J

-O

O O O
8 8 8 c
> n *\ (
ITv O O
CM CO OO U
H a
M



s*
p




^>
^4
co
t3
G T
o
O r
V
CO

d
G
co !>!>><
^ t-1 (j
>> CO CO p
fn 'd "d <
CO C G
S O O p
3 o t) C
fn o> OJ f,
Pi CO CO
1-
1
e



OJ
h p
O 00
O O
S CO
__ c s
> 0 rl
O r4 0)
|J M CO

CM Vn 4-1
o o o

S  0
o o o
EH EH EH
0 * 
-^f LTN VD












5 8 8 8
D O O 0
T\ O CM O
1- r-l tH



3000
C o" o" o^
D OS PO UA
D rH r-l


9- -69-
>
H

t,
3
5

3d
p-H
H
3
3
H
J
><
V
-S

1 r? r? r7
c co to co
2 -d -d -d
C G G
5 O 0 O
3 000
H t) V V
CO CO CO
q
^
H
H

CO
-P
co c
> i 
O 00
co t* c
C CO -H
4) CO M
0 rH S
PQ O i-3

SJH CH 
8
CM
CM

-69-

0
f\
CO


-69-


















gs

nrt
^?
(*4

H!
0
E^






























-------
 G
H
4^
 G
 O
O
M
M
H
           S  H
           M  CO
           m
           M  <
           02  <


           <  O
           hs  M
H
CO
js
C

^J*

1  1
CO
p
o
H



r-1
6
H
o

^
-p
ra
G
O
O

































































-p
M
O
o








-p
CO
O
O





















d
0)

















f>g
-P
H
r-H
H
10
C
o
a
as
3)
PC






G
O
H
P
CO
O
,3
a
o
o
g
-P
H
O
rH

CO

!H
hO
JH
r$
-Q
r^3
O
cj
J5>
o
o
O
y-.
CM












N
O
CO























r?
10

c
p

0)
co

M
JJ
A3
bO
-H
&
PH

M
o

H
d
1

CM
o

f~*
J3S
o
&"1
CM












C' O
0 O
o o
C*>_ "\
O CM
CM -*
~t CM



t/3
d
G
^-N -H
H g
v_x )H
80! O
-P O
O 1) O
*\ frjj r*
O G 0
ir\ 3 co
t- U~N
 +5 ,
rH W CO
o
CJ -69-
W
(I)
bO
i-l
-P CO

4/ O
i  1 CO
CO -H
> -a
H
3 
?H P>
O 0) -H
d (X

CO J-' tt) S
d c G <;
G O -H
o y CM (X
y co O
0) H O ft.
CQ O -P ^
<;
g
EH




r^
G -rH
o S
H CO
+1 G
CO CO
f-t >s
0 0
M C
O CO
o o
H
T^ M
CO (D
0) S
JgJ ^
CO _HT












o o o
0 0 O
O O O
\ ON *\
/\ m o
0 0 O
rH H IT\
"*
1  1

-&9" -t/5~ ^
M
CO

a G cu
CD O ilO
-P 0 CD
CO CD >H
>) m w
w ^
(D G W w ?
bD H K co
^ ^d ^^ *d rd
^n ^S G G
a> H K co o
iJ C' O O< O
Q> C P>n X D
m -H H co
<

g




J>3
> -P TS
-P iH G
C J O
d o a
O -4 A=3
O -P O
3 H
 >s
A3 S-" -P
H 0) -H
<; w o
rH rH
0)
H
H CO
H 0)
i
-P tJ
-p a
O CO O
H 0) g
in M A3
CO 3
-P
G
^
O
C^

*-rJ
rH
(X)
H
Cf.^
^
0)
-P
tl'
CD
A3
0
OJ












o
o
o
s
o
o\
CM









O
O
0
<^
o
0
o
T\
-^














0)
so
03
-1
CD
^

CO

"S "c
co O
ft o
X ci)
w w










r^
-P
G
3
O
r ^

O
^~
H
'M
^
GJ
W
CO












o I-
o
o
f\
o
(TN
CM






**~^
H
s. 	 ^
0
o\
U"\
CM
CM
*\
rH









-P
O
,-,
GCM
cO^  '
ft

o
u

fn
0)
ft
03
O
rH
^
fO
a

&
rH
<
-^t'












tfe
O
0
*"l
o
i-H







***%
f-i
^_jf
O
o
o
*^
o
LT\
rH











4-^
CJ
0)
f^
G

O

$_t
o

r?
CO
"d
c^
O
O
^)
CO



>>
c
CO
f-^
0
o
o

-4
0)
ft
r"5

i  I
0
:-
r
f77"
^D
fo
ir\












^


































f%

CO

f  1
CD
PD
"a
'H
c
r3
s

Q
-P










i^-v.
d
FH
0)
-p
3
o
U3


















80
O
0
*\
LT\
H







* - ^
H
v, 	 s
0
8
B\
0
o
C]











4-1
o
o
c
fl A4

o r/5

rH 1  '
O CO
ft
r^'o
CO -H
t3 G
G 3
0 g
C
0) O
CO -P



J>^
G
CO
ft
s
,-

^ ^
^-. T5
l^J f*-l
Pi CC
0} C1
05
'  1 (U
03 CO

ii}
'D
a>
fo
vd













-------
           rH
           q
           q  -P
          <  02
              O
          rH  O
           TO
          -p
           o
          H
                         o

o
o
o^
o
CM
CO



O
O
0
UA
r
-^
CM
*r>

O
8
o"



*&

o
o
o
o
OA




o
o
o
cT
CO




0
O
O
o"
UA
cvj



O
o
o
UA
f-
CM



O
O
o^
o^
vO




O
o
c^
UA
CM
CM



8
o
CT\



III - 9
o
o
o
UA
CM



O
o
O
UA
O
rH
H
-te-
           o
           H
           P
           O  -P
           3  W
           fn  O
           -P  O
           W
           q
           o
           o
'H
"o
8
o
o
c-


-ee-
rH
"o
o
o

-3-



UA
f-
t-
_-nT
co
us-
o
o
o^
a
o
CO


-t&-
a
UA
CM
CM
rH


O
o
o^
o
o




o
o
o"
o

co


                                                                               CO

                                                                               CO
o
o
o
o"
o
CO



8
o^
o
o
o
co


0
8
UA
CM
CM
rH


o
o
c^
a
UA
co



o
o
o^
o
o
o^
UA
rH
-69-
 CD

 q
H
-P
 q
 o
o
M CQ









o

CD
















J>3
-p"
H
H
 H
_o
r-l
w
a
o
P
CO
CD














q
o
H
-P
CO
O
o







































,  ,
in
CD

G
H
.p
q
0
o
^_^

CO
CD
rH


r^
q
o
a
Cj
V
H
K
-P
O
0)
q
G PU
O H
O CO
rH H
O CO
ft

fH 'O
CO -H
d q
q 3
o a
o
CD O
CO -P


r*>
q
CO
ft
gj
o
o

fH
CD
ft
CO


T3
fH
CO
r|J
q
CO
-P
CO


c















-p
o
0)
G
G PH
O fH
o ro
fH rH
O CO
ft
t>l H 
^
CD
t3
G
O
O
CD
03







rH
H
CD
^
CD
ft
O
W

CH
O

f>^
+3
H
O


H


1
CO
fH
CD
-P
CD
PH

H
rH
CD
|s
CD










^>
^
CO

q
o
o
CD







HO
1

W
F*H
(D
-p
0)
PH

CH
o

^a
-P
H
CJ


CM







CO

fH
<

iaO

^










^j
fH
CO
rrj
q
o
o
CD
CO
W
-p
,G
UO
H
CD
W
rH
CO
H
q
o
rH
o
o

<4_l
0

K">
-p
H
O


ro






















fH
O
P
>, q
fH 9)
CO H
O CO
q >
O -H
O 0

03 W

J>5
q
CO
ft
a
o
o
rH
CD f N
O H
rj CO
a CD
CD *^
.q a
C? CD
rG
tJ O
CD ^ ^
H
H
rH
> G
fH CD
CO rH
*^3 CO
G >
0 -H
O ^
CD CT1
03 W

^>
q
CO
ft
S
o
0
H
CO
O
H
fi ^~^
0) O
^! fH
O -P
H
13 S
CD 	
H
H
rH
<


UA






















fH
o
-p
>> q
fH 0)
CO H
TJ CQ
q >
0 -H
O 0
> q
fn CD
CO rH
^3 ^
G >
0 -H
CJ 3
CD D1
W W

r"*
C
cd
P!
<
0
o
G
CO
o

rH
CO
-P
C
CD
G
H
-P
q
0
o


t 






















fH
O
p
>> q
fn a)
CO H
O CO
q >
O -H
O 3
CD O*
03 W

r*5
r^J
CO
ft
a
0
o
f-f
CD

Jj
O
PH

CO
CD
H
0
CJ
fH
CD



CO

























!>>
^
CO
r)
q
0
o
0)








fH
CO
-p
H q
rH O
H .rl
S -P
C5
CD >
CD fn
i-^ CD
CO
-P CD
fn O-H
O
Cn

*
Q\















ftrQ




o
W

















-------
                                                                                                           Ill  -  10
                         
                         G
                         C
                         <  w
                             O
                         H O
                         CO
                         -P
                         O
                         C
                         O
                         H

                         -P
                         O -P
                         3  09

                         fc  O

                         -P O
                         ra


                         O

                         O
d

 
 c
H
P
 c
 o
o
I

-d
 4)
 a)
is
                                   -69-
                                   -
                                   H
                      0>
                      o
                     P5


                      O  CO
                      -p  fl)
                      ft i)
                      a <
                      CO
                     w
8
o
o
OJ
H


O
8
o
o
r-T


CM
CM


O
8
8
CO

8
t-
H


O
O
O
o
o
ir\
CM

O
8
ir\



0
8
8
CM


O O
80
o
Lf\ O
CM UA
H


0 0
8 8
0 0
o o
r-T


s
00^
r-l
-69-
O
O
cT
s
co
OJ

s
CM
lf\
<*
O

cT
OJ
oo
ON
c-
                                      CO
                                     d
                                      c
                                      o
                                      o
                                      v
                                     co
                                                   P
                                                   c
                                                   co
                                                   -p
                                                   c
                                                   H
                                                   o
                                                   a,
                                                   v

                                                   i
                                                   CO
                             co

                            1
                             o
                             a>
                            CO
                                                        -p
                                                         c
                                                         co
                                                         M
                                                         CO
                                           -P
                                           CO
                                           O
                                           pq
                                                         O
 b   b
 %4    H
 to    co
T3    tHJ

     
 o    o
 v    o>
co    co
                                                p
                                                G
                                                G    a
                                                4)    to
                                                Xl   -P
                                                      M
                                                ^j    o
                                                O   Pm
                                  -P

                                  CO
       co

      s
       o
       o
       V
      CO
            CO
            -p

            H
            H
            H



            to  o
            i-i H

            -P -P
            03  CO


            &q  r


            P  Ki
 o



-p
H     O  (
O    fei



CM    OO
                                                                                              CO

3
                                                                                          CO
                                                                                          -p
                                                                                          CO
                                                                                          o
                                                                                          o

                                                                                          -p
                                                                                          fi
                                                                                          CO
                                                                                          rH
                                                                                          ft

                                                                                          -p
                                                                                          c

                                                                                          I
                                                                                          -p
                                                                                          CO
                                                                                          4>
                                                                                                        CO
                                                                                                        ft
                                                                                                        H
                                                                                                        O
                                                                                          c
                                                                                          CO
                                                                                          .p
                                                                                          H
                                                                                                        O

                                                                                                        CO
                                                                           -P
                                                                            G



                                                                           J
                                                                            so
                                                                            0)
                                                                           -p
                                                                            CO


                                                                            CO
                                                                            ft

                                                                            W
                                                                                                        03

                                                                                                        CO
                                                                                                        -P
                                                                                                        TO

                                                                                                        (P


                                                                                                        -P
                                                                                                        CO

                                                                                                        O

                                                                                                        o
                                                                                                               OJ

-------
                                                       Ill  -  11
                              TABLE III
              FLOW REGULATION FOR WATER QUALITY CONTROL
    Location
        Responsibility
         Existing or
        Potential Need
Covington
Lynchburg
            of Engineers
        (Gathright Project)
      Corps of Engineers
Richmond
      Corps of Engineers
Jackson River - 67,000
acre-feet of storage to pro-
vide supplemental flov for
water quality control.

Potential need for storage to
provide supplemental flow for
water quality control on the
James River in the Lynchburg
area.

Potential need for storage to
provide supplemental flow for
water quality control on the
James River in the Richmond
area.
    Location
              TABLE IV

SPECIAL STUDIES NEEDED IN THE BASIN

 	Responsibility	
             Need
Covington

Lynchburg Area

Charlottesville
Hopewell
      Paper Industry

      Paper Industry

      City of Charlottes-
      ville and State of
      Virginia
      Local industries, City
      of Hopewell, and Fort
      Lee Military Reserva-
      tion.
Color removal from paper wastes,

Color removal from paper wastes

1. Study relocation of STP out-
   falls from Moore's Creek to
   stream having a more depend-
   able assimilation capacity.
2. Study nutrient enrichment
   problems in the Rivanna
   reservoir.

 Study relocation of waste dis-
charges from Bailey Creek to
James River Channel.

-------
                                                        Ill - 12
    Location
  TABLE IV (Continued)

  Responsibility	
            Need
Richmond
Basin-wide


James Estuary



Richmond
City of Richmond
FWPCA and State of
Virginia

FWPCA and State of
Virginia
City of Richmond
Investigate purchase of
Kanawha Canal water rights
to prevent low flow diversion
from James River Channel.

Develop basin-wide compre-
hensive study.

Study nutrient enrichment
problems in the estuary to
evaluate control needs.

Investigate possible solutions
to problems associated with
the combined sewerage system.
                              TABLE V
            INSTITUTIONAL PRACTICES NEEDED IN THE BASIN
    Location	Responsibility
                                   Need
Basin-wide
Basin-wide
Richmond Area
Basin-wide
State of Virginia
State of Virginia
Local Government
Local Government
Consider legislation to pro-
vide appropriations for State
participation in grants for
construction of sewage treat-
ment works.

Legislation, if necessary,
enabling approved surveillance
of industrial waste loads.

Consider the establishment of
a centralized water pollution
control authority for the area.

Reduce infiltration problem by
strengthening plumbing codes
in house connections and em-
phasizing infiltration tests
on new constructions

-------
                                                         IV - 1






IV.  GENERAL BASIN DESCRIPTION




        The James River Basin is narrow and irregular with head-




waters in the Allegheny Mountains at the West Virginia State line,




and the River flows generally southeasterly 3^0 miles through




four physiographic regions :   the Valley and Ridge, the Blue Ridge,




the Piedmont, and the Coastal Plain.  The total area drained is




10,060 square miles, of which 80 are in West Virginia at the edge




of the Appalachian region.  There is a total fall of 988 feet




from the headwaters to the "Fall Line" separating the Piedmont




and Coastal Plain at Richmond.  From this point, the James is




an estuary that joins the Chesapeake Bay at Hampton Roads.




        Captain John Smith, in describing the James River Basin,




wrote: "Heaven and earth never agreed better to frame a place




for man's habitation."  The observation is appropriate.  The




Area has a mild climate, without extremes in temperature, and




there is adequate, well-distributed rainfall to encourage agri-




cultural development of the rich soil.  Preceding the colonists,




the Indians developed a successful though primitive agriculture.




As the colonists increased, European farming methods were adapted




to the new plant species; tobacco was introduced to the Old World,




and agricultural development spread first in the Coastal Plain




and then to the Piedmont.  To this date agriculture remains a




primary activity of the Area.

-------
                                                         IV - 2






        Industry also dates back to colonial times.  The forest



resources provided lumber as well as charcoal for making iron



from the native ore, and eventually pulp for paper making which



is now one of the largest industries in the State.  The extensive



chemical industry existing in the Basin today had its beginnings



in the manufacture of indigo, tannin, tars, and turpentine.



        Transportation by water opened the land, first to the



head of the Estuary at Richmond and, later, with development



of The Kanawha Canal system to beyond the Blue Ridge.  Highways



and railroads facilitated the movement of population to major



communities at Petersburg, Lynchburg, Charlottesville, and



Covington.  The estuarine area offered the convenience of deep



water shipping to Hopewell, Newport News, Portsmouth, and Norfolk.



        As population increased in the developing communities,



public sewer systems were constructed, many being designed to



convey both storm and sanitary wastes, and the James River became



the recipient of untreated discharges from several population



centers in the Basin.  Consequently, the River essentially became,



in several reaches, an open sewer with water quality becoming



increasingly less suitable for most beneficial uses.  With the



enactment of the Virginia Water Control Law in 19^6, pollution



control programs were formulated, and the arduous task of abating



pollution in the James River began.  Much progress has been made,



but the ravages of the past are still evident.  The sewage from

-------
                                                         IV - 3





populated areas is generally treated, but not as completely as



desirable, and the industrial waste discharges fall far short



of the treatment required to restore the quality of waters to



a level acceptable for most beneficial uses.



        An analysis of the Basin by areas discharging significant



waste loads to local watersheds will serve to identify the problems,




suggest corrective actions, and estimate costs for needed actions.

-------
                                                         V - 1






V0  WATER POLLUTION PROBLEMS, NEEDS AND COSTS




    A,  The Covington-Clifton Forge Area




        1.  Jackson River Watershed




            a.  Pertinent Hydrologic Characteristics




        The Jackson River joins with the Cowpasture River approx-




imately 22 miles below Covington to form the James River.  This




section of the Jackson River is shallow, rocky-bottomed and




contains alternating stretches of riffles and pools.  During




the dry season nearly all of the base flow in the river is pro-




vided by springs, most of which are upstream from Covington.




The drainage area to the head of the reach at Covington below




Dunlop Creek is 6lO square miles.  The flow through the reach




has been assumed equal to the summation of the flows at the




Falling Spring gage on the Jackson River (DA = U09 square miles)




and the Dunlop Creek gage near Covington (DA  166 square miles).




During the dry season very little, if any, flow is added to the




reach downstream from these two gages.




        The minimum daily flow recorded at the Falling Spring




gage is 57 cfs, and the average discharge for the period of




record is 480 cfs.  The minimum and average daily discharges




recorded at the Dunlop Creek gage are 9 cfs and 157 cfs, res-




pectively.




        The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers' Gathright Project is




located on the Jackson River above Covington.  Plans for this

-------
                                                         V - 2

project, expected to be completed in the early 1970'3, include
provisions for 60,700 acre feet of storage for water quality
control.
            b.  Current Water Quality
        The Jackson River below Covington is annually afflicted
with depressed dissolved oxygen conditions during the dry summer
months.  Table VI  is a summary of dissolved oxygen measurements
made during a one-week intensive survey in July of 1966.  These
low dissolved oxygen conditions are the result of heavy organic
loadings to the stream at Covington.
                             TABLE  VI
  SUMMARY OF DO DATA COLLECTED DURING 1966 INTENSIVE SURVEY
        ON THE JACKSON RIVER BELOW COVINGTON, VIRGINIA
                        July  10-16, 1966
STATION
LOCATION
Covington Filter Plant
VEPCO Substation
Fudge ' s Bridge
Hercules Plant Bridge
Route 18 Bridge
Low Moor Bridge
Old Boat Landing
Swinging Bridge
Route 60 Bridge
Iron Gate Bridge
NUMBER
OF
SAMPLES
3
3^
15
5
3U
3^
29
19
3U
3^
AVERAGE
DO
mg/1
7.1
0.3
o.i*
0.7
O.U
1.2
1-9
2M
2.6
3.9
MINIMUM
DO
mg/1
5-9
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.8
MAXIMUM
DO
mg/1
9.1
1.2
0.6
1.1
0.6
2-9
U.3
U.3
k.k
5.6

-------
                                                         V - 3


        A biological survey made during the summer of 1966 shows

pollution tolerant organisms to be dominant among the bottom

fauna for the sections of the Jackson River between Covington

and Clifton Forge.  Appendix A is a complete report of that survey.

        A review of survey data from past studies by other inves-

tigators indicates that quality problems have existed in this

area during low stream flows for a number of years.  A survey

and report made by the U. S. Public Health Service to the Army

Corps of Engineers in 19^5, shows water quality conditions to

have been nearly the same as were found during the 1966 survey,

even though considerable pollution abatement measures have been

taken.

            c.  Major Sources of Waste and Present Pollution
                Abatement Practices

        Table VII lists the major waste contributors, their present

load and type of treatment.  West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company,

at Covington, is seen to be the largest producer of biologically

degradable waste, and even though this company maintains a secon-

dary treatment plant, the discharged waste load represents about

75 per cent of the present total load to the stream in the area.

The Towns of Covington, Clifton Forge, Iron Gate, and Selma provide

primary treatment for their municipal wastes and Low Moor presently

discharges its waste untreated into Karnes Creek, a tributary to

the Jackson River.

-------
                                                          V - U






        Although the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company waste




treatment plant operates at an average annual efficiency of 85




per cent removal or better, the variability of treatment efficiency




is apparently large, resulting in a considerably increased load




to the stream on occasion.  During the summer months treatment




variability may be critical, and some provision is needed to




assure a more uniform efficiency.  Subsequent analyses in this




report are based upon the assumption of uniform treatment efficiency




for this and all other waste discharges.  Approximately one-fourth




of the load discharged by the industry does not receive treatment.




        A somewhat unusual condition exists in this section of




the river during low stream flows when the West Virginia Pulp




and Paper Company effluent comprises  more than half of the avail-




able Jackson River flow.  The resulting mixture of waste and river




flow produces an immediate low DO water due to the lack of oxygen




in the waste effluent.  Efforts have been made by the industry to




aerate the river by using instream mechanical aerators.

-------
                                                         V - 5
                              TABLE VII
PRINCIPAL WASTE DISCHARGES
IN THE COVINGTOW-CLIFTON FORGE AREA
Location
Covington
Clifton Forge
Low Moor
Iron Gate
Selma
West Virginia Pulp
and Paper Company
Total for Water
Type of
Waste
Municipal
Municipal
Municipal
Municipal
Municipal
Industrial
Service Area
Type of
Efficiency of
Waste Removal
Primary
Primary
None
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Waste Load
Discharged
P E
8,500
5,000
600
600
700
50,000
65 ,*K)0
            d.  Recommended Immediate Pollution Control Needs




        The provision of storage for water quality control in




the proposed Gathright Reservoir was computed on the basis of




a minimum of secondary treatment, or its equivalent in BOD removal




by all waste contributors.  The largest waste contributor, the




West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company, is presently providing




secondary treatment to approximately 96 per cent of its total




waste flows.  Additional capacity to treat the remaining k per




cent9 which represents one-fourth of the total load discharged




to the river by the Company, is recommended.  In addition to




increasing the treatment capability to handle all of the waste

-------
                                                         V - 6





produced by the paper company, some provision should be made to



reduce the variability in waste load discharged to the stream



during the critical months.  The municipalities and communities



in the area (see Table VII) should increase their waste removal



facilities to provide secondary treatment either individually



or in a centralized treatment unit.



        The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers' Gathright Project,




for which construction approval has been granted, should be



expedited.  This reservoir will provide 60,700 acre feet of



storage for water quality control.  The annual cost allocated



to water quality control by this project is estimated to be



$75,000.



        Cost for increasing treatment in the area to 85 per



cent BOD removal is estimated to be $55,000 per year for a



total cost, including flow augmentation, of $130,000 per year



to satisfy immediate pollution control requirements in the



Covington-Clifton Forge area.



        Because of the large volume of waste relative to the



low stream flows, it is further recommended that no waste be



discharged to the river with a DO of less than 2.0 mg/1.



            e.  Water Supply Needs



        Table VIII shows the present and projected water supply



requirements for the Covington-Clifton Forge area through 2020.



The bulk of both the present and projected needs are for indus-



trial purposes.  Nearly all of the 38.9 mgd presently being

-------
                                                         V - 7

used is from surface water supplies, primarily the Jackson River.
The City of Covington obtains its municipal water from a Jackson

River intake at Clearwater Park.  Below this intake at Covington,

the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company withdraws an average of

35 mgd from the Jackson River for industrial use.  The water

requirements projected for 1980 and 2020 exceed minimum Jackson

River flows; howevers all of these needs are primarily for a

single industrial use.  Any plan to develop additional water

supply capacity must allow for changes to consider industrial

processes that may make drastic changes in the water requirements

for that industry.
                             TABLE VIII

          PRESENT AND PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS
                FOR THE COVINGTON-CLIFTON FORGE AREA

Municipal
Industrial
TOTAL
Average
1965
33
35.6
38.9
Daily
1980
3A
68.3
72
Demand (mgd)
2020
4.6
80.0
85
     B.  Lexington-Buena Vista Area

         1.  Maury River Watershed

             a.  Pertinent Hydrologic Characteristics

         The Maury River enters the James River at Glasgow,  Virginia,

(River Mile 279-8)  and drains a watershed of approximately

-------
                                                          v - 8


700 square miles.  The U. S. G, S. gaging station near Buena

Vista on this river drains 6^9 square miles.   The average and

minimum daily discharges at the gage are 6kO  cfs and 50 cfs,

respectively,

             b.  Present Water Quality

         The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service  reports (see Appen-

dix B) that frequent light fish kills occur in the Maury River

between its mouth and Buena Vista, approximately 12.5 miles

upstream.  At the time of this report, no chemical data was

available from which to ascertain the cause of these kills;

however, large organic waste loads, primarily of industrial

origin, are discharged to the stream in this  area, and it is

reasonable to assume that low dissolved oxygen content is at

least partially responsible.

             c.  Major Sources of Waste and Present Pollution
                 Abatement Practices

         As far as can be determined from the limited available

data, approximately three-fourths of the organic waste discharged

to the Maury River in this area originates from an industrial

wool scouring process (James Lee & Sons) at Glasgow, Virginia,

where the Maury River merges with the James,   This and other

industrial and municipal waste discharges in  the area are listed

in Table IX together with an estimate of their respective waste

loads.  Total population equivalents discharged to local water

courses is approximately ^9,000.

-------
                                                                v  -  9

                                     TABLE IX
                            PRINCIPAL WASTE DISCHARGES
                        IN THE LEXINGTON-BUENA VISTA AREA
Location
Buena Vista
Glasgow
Lexington
James Lee & Sons
James Lee & Sons
Type of
Waste
Municipal
Municipal
Municipal
Sanitary
Industrial
Type or
Efficiency of
Waste Removal
Primary
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Acid cracked and
Waste Load
Discharged
P E
^,600
900
5,300
200
38,000
                                          Lagooned
Bonded Fibers          Industrial        None                       200
     Total for Water Service Area                                ^9,200


                   d.  Recommended Immediate Pollution Control Needs
               To meet the minimum treatment requirements recommended in
       this report, all waste contributors must expand their present
       waste removal facilities to provide secondary treatment or
       equivalent.  This can be done at an estimated total cost of
       $^5,000 (per year).
               Due to high dilution provided by the Maury River and
       the fact that the area population is relatively stable (see
       Appendix C), secondary treatment or its equivalent will probably
       resolve the stream quality problems in this area.

-------
MA.,

-------
                                                         V - 11

                             TABLE X

         PRESENT AND PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS
	FOR THE LEXINGTON-BUENA VISTA AREA	

                                      Average   Daily   Demand (mgd)
	1965          1980         2020

Municipal                          2,0           3,1          3.6

Industrial                        13,6          2^.0         2k
TOTAL                             15.6          27.1         2^6


      G  Lynehburg Area

          lo  James River Watershed

              a   Pertinent Hydrologic Characteristics

          The James Rivei between Big Island and Bent Creek}  some

k? miles of stream, averages approximately 7 feet in depth under

summer flow conditions.  The river emerges from the Blue Ridge

Mountains on the Piedmont physiographic province, and a somewhat

more uniform river bed and channel gradient is found.  The river

flow is regulated to meet peak power loads at several run-of-the-

river dams upstream from Lynehburgo  The Army Corps of Engineers'

Gathright Project on the upper Jackson River, when completed in

the early 1970's, will provide 60,700 acre-feet of storage for

low flow augmentation.

          Stream flow in this section of the James River has been

referenced to the U0 S  G. S. gaging station at Holcombs Rocko

The drainage area above the gage is 3,250 square miles, and the

mean and minimum daily flows recorded are 3>^92 and 223 cfs,

respectively,

-------
                                                        V - 12








            b.  Present Water Quality




        Table XI summarizes the dissolved oxygen data collected




during the 1966 intensive survey of the James River.   These




data, supported by past studies of other investigators,  evidence




recurrent water quality problems in this section of the  James




River.  During low flow conditions, two dissolved oxygen sags




are seen to occur in the river; one between Big Island and




Lynchburg and the other below Lynchburg,  Occasional light fish




kills have been observed below Lynchburg and complaints  have




been made by the local citizens that the fish caught in  this




area have a bad taste.




        A biological study of this section of the river  (see




Appendix A) shows evidence of moderate to heavy degradation.




The U, S. Fish and Wildlife Service reports (see Appendix A)




that approximately 7 miles of the James River in this area




is adversely affected by municipal and industrial pollution.

-------
                                                        V - 13
                              TABLE XI
SUMMARY OF D 0 DATA COLLECTED
OH THE JAMES RIVER BELOW
Station Location
Parkway Bridge
Skimmer Creek
Coleman Falls West
Coleman Falls East
Holcomb Rock
Lynchburg
Six Mile Bridge
Galtz Mill
Stapleton
Eades ' Laundry
Riverville
Allen's Creek
Number
of
Samples
3k
3k
3k
3k
3k
3^
3k
3k
3k
3k
3k
3k
DURING 1966 INTENSIVE
BIG ISLAN^JTIRGINIA
Average
D 0
mg/1
6.U
k.k
3.6
6.0
7.2
6.6
2.0
2.5
2.9
3.3
k.l
5.3
Minimum
D 0
mg/1
5.7
2.5
1.8
5.1
6,0
k.7
0.6
1.3
0 = 9
1 = 5
2.9
3*k
SURVEY
Maximum
D 0
mg/1
7.1
5.9
6.0
6.9
7.6
11.5
U.I
3o7
k.6
k.Q
6.9
6.9
            c.  Major Sources of Waste and Present Pollution
                Abatement Practices

        Organic wastes resulting from pulp and paper production

along with municipal wastes constitute the major sources  of

oxygen demanding waste discharged to the James River in this

area.  Table XII lists the major contributors, their present

loads, and type of treatment  Under present treatment practices,

a total of 2^6,000 population equivalents of biologically degradable

-------
                                                        V  -  lU

waste Is discharged dally into the local watercourses.   About
85 per cent of this load is of an industrial origin.  None  of
the principal waste contributors presently provides secondary
waste treatment or its equivalent in removal of oxygen  demanding
wastes with the exception of the Owens-Illinois Paper Plant
located on the James at Big Island, Virginia   This plant has
reduced its losses to the river by approximately 85 per cent
through process changes.  The Mead Corporation, another large
paper plant located in Lynchburg, Virginia, has also reduced
its losses by about 65 per cent through process changes. The
City of Lynchburg has a conventional primary treatment  plant  for
its municipal wastes.
                             TABLE XII
PRINCIPAL WASTE
DISCHARGES

IN THE LYNCHBURG AREA
Location
Lynchburg
Madiscr: Heights
Lynch'o org Render ing
Mead Corporation
Owens-Illinois
Type of
Waste
Municipal
Municipal
Industrial
Industrial
Industrial
Type or
Efficiency of
Waste Removal
Primary
Primary
20%
In Process (65$)
In Process (85$)
Waste Load
Discharged
P E
32, UOO
1,000
1,000
12U,QQO
89,000
     Total for Water Service Area
2^6,000

-------
                                                        V -  14






waste is discharged daily into the local watercourses.   About




85 per cent of this load is of an industrial origin.  None of




the principal waste contributors presently  provides  secondary




waste treatment or its equivalent in removal of oxygen  demanding




wastes with the exception of the Owens-Illinois Paper Plant




located on the James at Big Island, Virginia.  This plant has




reduced its losses to the river by approximately 85 per cent




through process changes.  The Mead Corporation, another large




paper plant located in Lynchburg, Virginia, has also  reduced




its losses by about 35 per cent of previous losses through




process changes.  The City of Lynchburg has a conventional




primary treatment plant for its municipal wastes.




                             TABLE XII
PRINCIPAL WASTE DISCHARGES

Location
Lynchburg
Madison Heights
Lynchburg Rendering
Mead Corporation
Owens-Illinois
IN THE LYNCHBURG
Type of
Waste
Municipal
Munic ipa 1
Industrial
Industrial
Industrial
AREA
Type or
Efficiency of
Waste Removal
Primary
Primary
20 %
In Process (65$)
In Process (85$)

Waste Load
Discharged
P E
32,UOO
1,000
1,000
12^,000
89,000
     Total for Water Service Area                          2^6,000

-------
                                                        V - 15






            d.  Recommended Immediate Pollution Control Needs




        The reduction of all wastes by secondary treatment or




equivalent BOD removal is recommended as the most urgent pollu-




tion control need for this important area.  The resultant waste




load from these actions would be ho per cent less than the load




presently being discharged and the dissolved oxygen at the critical




point below Lynchburg would improve from 2.0 mg/1 average measured




during the 1966 survey to 5 mg/1 under the same flow and tempera-




ture conditions.




        The estimated total cost for the area to meet this




minimum treatment requirement is $230,000 per year.




        The completion of Gathright Reservoir on the upper




Jackson River will permit increase in dry season  river flows




and thereby reduce the severity and frequency of critically low




dissolved oxygen conditions.




            e.  Water Supply Needs




        Municipal and industrial water supply requirements pre-




sently total approximately 30 mgd for the Lynchburg area.  All




but about 0.2 mgd of this supply is met from surface water sources




and about 20 mgd is for industrial uses.  The Owens-Illinois




Paper Company at Big Island, upstream from Lynchburg on the James,




and the Mead Corporation, also a paper plant, are the largest




industrial users in the area.  Both companies obtain their water




from the James River and Mead's intake is located downstream from




the point of discharge of Owens-Illinois waste water.

-------

-------
                                                        v - 16

        The City of Lynchburg maintains a water supply reservoir

on the Pedlar River, a tributary of the James, and has an auxiliary

capability on the James River itself.

        Water supply needs for the area are projected to increase

to 88 mgd by the year 2020.  Table XIII is a breakdown of projected

requirements for municipal and industrial use.

        The projected total requirement for the year 2020 is well

below the minimum James River flow of record as recorded at the

Holcomb's Rock gage.  The minimum flow at this gage was about 150

mgd compared to the total projected water supply requirement of

88 mgd.

        No additional water supply development is indicated for

this area.

                             TABLE XIII

          PRESENT AND PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS
                       FOR THE LYNCHBURG AREA

Municipal
Industrial
Average
1965
10
20
Daily
1980
18
30
Demand (mgd)
2020
61
27
TOTAL                          30                 1*8

-------
                                                        V - 17






        2.  Buffalo River Watershed



            a  Pertinent Hydrologic Characteristics



        The Buffalo River flows southeast out of Amherst County



and joins the James River at Norwood in Nelson County.  The river



drains a watershed of 360 square miles and the critical 7-day



drought discharge is approximately 0.09^ cfs per square mile.



The mean discharge at Norwood is kjb cfs.



        The principal tributary of the Buffalo River is the Tye



River which joins the Buffalo River approximately 5 miles above



Norwood.  Piney River, a tributary of the Tye River, drains a



watershed of approximately 50 square miles and contributes a



mean flow of 87 cfs.



            b.  Present Water Quality



        Chemical water quality surveys of the Buffalo River and



tributaries were not conducted by the CB-SRBP for this report,



but reports of investigations by other agencies (see Appendix  B)



indicate that Piney River is grossly polluted with acid wastes.



Fishing resources are totally eliminated in the stream, and the



acid wastes contributed by Piney River affects water quality



downstream to the confluence of the Buffalo and James Rivers.



The pH in Buffalo River at Norwood averages 35   A recording



pH meter at Wingina, operated by the American Cyanamid Company,



indicates pH levels range from 6 to 7 in the James River below



the mouth of the Buffalo River.

-------
                                                        V - 18


            c.  Major Sources of Waste and Present Pollution
                Abatement Practices

        The source of the acid waste discharge to Piney River

is an American Cyanamid Company plant located seventeen river

miles above Norwood.  The plant produces titanium dioxide from

locally mined titanium, using sulfuric acid, and the diluted

used acid is discharged to the river.  The average discharge to

the river is about 68 tons of acid per day.

            d.  Recommended Immediate Pollution Control Needs

        To enhance and protect the water quality of streams in

the Buffalo River watershed and to reduce the possibility of

contributing damaging acid wastes to the James River, the American

Cyanamid Company should take necessary action to alleviate the

acid waste problem in Piney River.

        Neutralization or acid reclamation processes should be

employed as required to reduce acid discharges to levels which

will not adversely affect water quality in the watershed.


    D.  Charlottesville Area

        1.  Rivanna River Watershed

            a.  Pertinent Hydrologic and Physical Characteristics

        The Rivanna River drains a watershed of approximately

700 square miles, 500 of which lie above the Charlottesville Area.

The average and minimum daily discharges recorded at the U.S.G.S.

gaging station at Palmyra (DA = 6l7 square miles) are 68l cfs

-------
                                                        V - 19


and 11 cfs, respectively.  At Charlottesville, the several streams

draining the eastern front of the Blue Ridge Mountains converge

to form a relatively mature river as the Rivanna flows out onto

the Piedmont Plateau and then to the James River some 35 river

miles downstream from Charlottesville.

            b.  Present Water Quality

        Chemical water quality surveys were not conducted in the

Charlottesville  Area  for this report.  Biological observations,

however, have been made by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

and a report from that agency (see Appendix B) reveals problems

with regard to the fish population in three reaches of the Rivanna

and its tributaries.  The main stem of the Rivanna River in the

Charlottesville vicinity is shown to suffer light losses in

potential fish population.  Moores Creek is unable to support a

fish population and the Mechum River, for almost ten miles above

its confluence with the South Fork of the Rivanna, is reported

to be severely affected.

            c.  Major Sources of Waste and Present Pollution
                Abatement Practices

        All of the foregoing water quality problems are the result

of municipal and industrial waste discharges.  The major contributors

are: the City of Charlottesville, affecting the Moores Creek and

Rivanna River reaches, and Morton's Frozen Food Corporation in

the Crozet Area, affecting the Mechum River reach.  The City of

Charlottesville presently operates two secondary treatment plants

-------
                                                        V - 20






designed to serve a total population of approximately l4-3>000.



Both plants discharge their effluents to small tributaries



(Moores Creek and Meadow Creek) which flow into the main stream



of the Rivanna River.



        Morton's discharges its food processing waste into a



small tributary of the Mechum River after treatment by an acti-



vated sludge plant which was placed in operation in November



1966.  Waste from this industry has been the primary source of



pollution in the Mechum River for a number of years.  This recent



pollution abatement action is expected to effect considerable



improvement in river water quality.



        The Albemarle County Service Authority operates several



lagoons in county residential areas, and plans for a sewerage



system for the west central county area have been made.  The



system, including a secondary treatment plant, would intercept



sanitary and industrial wastes emanating from the Crozet Area.



            d.  Recommended Immediate Pollution Control Needs



        Charlottesville's two waste treatment plants discharge



to small tributaries (Meadow Creek and Moores Creek) which,



during the dry season, provide little or no flow for dilution



of the effluent.  Without detailed study, the indicated solution



to achievement of the water quality objectives in these tribu-



taries is to pipe the effluent to the nearest receiving water



having a higher and more dependable assimilative capacity.  An

-------
                                                        V - 21






alternative to changing the outfall location would be to provide



advanced waste treatment.  However, cost estimates of these two



alternatives have not been made.  A comprehensive study of the



James River Basin should consider these and other alternatives



for achieving specific water quality objectives in this area.



        The Albemarle County Service Authority Crozet Project



would enhance development in the Crozet Area and also provide



additional capacity for treatment of industrial wastes, including



Morton's Frozen Foods discharges if required.  The estimated



cost of the proposed Crozet project is $1,^00,000.



            e.  Water Supply Needs



        Several small water supply reservoirs provide raw water



storage for the City of Charlottesville, the largest water user



in the water service area, which has an average daily use varying



from U.7 to 6.2 mgd.  An auxiliary intake is located on the



Mechum River and a new 1.76 billion gallon raw water reservoir



has been constructed on the South Fork of the Rivanna River.



Adequate surface water supplies are available to meet the pro-



jected water supply needs through the year 2020.  Table XIV



shows the projected water supply requirements for the Charlottes-



ville water service area.

-------
                                                       V  - 22
                             TABLE XIV




          PRESENT AMD PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS




                    FOR THE CHARLOTTESVILLE  AREA

Municipal
Industrial
TOTAL
Average
1965
U .8
0.5
5-3
Daily
1980
8.9
1.0
10
Demand
2020
lU
2
16
    E.  Richmond Area




        1.  James River Watershed




            a.  Pertinent Hydrologic Characteristics




        At Richmond, the James River flows across the Fall Line,




which delineates the eastern edge of the Piedmont physiographic




province, and onto the Coastal Plain   As a consequence,  the




James River falls approximately 75 feet in 6 miles at Richmond




and below Richmond becomes a tidal estuary.




        Above Richmondj at Bosher Dam, the Kanawha Canal  diverts




a portion of the James River flow from the main channel and




returns it to the river at tidewater.   The U. S.  G. S. maintains




gaging stations on both the Canal and the river.   The mean and




minimum combined flows at both gages,  which is estimated  to be




the flow to the estuary, is 7,351 cfs and 350 cfs, respectively.

-------
                                                        V - 23






        During drought conditions such as have occurred during




recent years, all of the river flow is sometimes diverted into




the Kanawha Canal at Bosher Dam, producing conditions of little




or no flow in the main river channel between the diversion dam




and tidewater.  The diverted flows are utilized by the City of




Richmond and local industrial concerns which own water rights




in the Canal (see paragraph e.).




            b.  Present Water Quality




        The water quality of the James River below Richmond is




adversely affected by waste discharges from the Richmond Area




during the hot, dry summer months to the extent that the river




is unfit for most beneficial uses.  Dissolved oxygen concentra-




tions are frequently less than 1 mg/1, fish kills occur, and




gasifying sludge deposits float to the surface during warm




low flow periods.  Table XV summarizes some dissolved oxygen




analyses made by the City of Richmond in the tidal James.




        The Boulevard Bridge Station is located upstream from




most waste discharges in the Fall Zone and the terminal station




is upstream from the city's sewage treatment plant.  Although




the river is seen to be recovering at the Dutch Gap station,




which is about 12 miles below the sewage treatment plant, the




appearance of the river seriously limits its recreational and




aesthetic use downstream to the Hopewell Area.  Eutrophication




processes accelerated by nutrient enrichment from municipal and




industrial wastes are among the contributing factors of this

-------
                                                        V - 2k

degradation.  The extent of this eutrophieation and possible
decelerating actions will be examined in a FVIPCA comprehensive
project report scheduled for a later date.

                              TABLE XV
                   SUMMARY OF DO  DATA COLLECTED
          BY CITY OF RICHMOND DURING JULY AND AUGUST 1966
STATION
LOCATION
Boulevard Bridge
Intermediate Terminal
Light 168
DuPont Intake
Light 166
Dutch Gap
NUMBER
OF
SAMPLES
10
10
10
10
10
3
AVERAGE
DO
mg/1
7.1
1.9
.k
 9
.8
3.5
MINIMUM
DO
mg/1
5.1
0
0
0
0
1.7
MAXIMUM
DO
mg/1
8.2
M
2.5
3.7
*.9
*.9
        Above the head of tidewater, in that section of the river
below the Canal diversion, low flow conditions result in near
stagnant pools which become nutrient enriched from urban run-off
and combined sewer discharges.  This enrichment, in turn, promotes
the growth of phyto-plankton and algal blooms often occur.  Thus,
the major part of the river within the city is rendered unfit for
any use and is a potential health hazard under low flow conditions.

-------
                                                        V - 25


        Attesting to the seriousness of the problem is the

current awareness and concern being expressed by both public

and civic leaders in the Richmond area.

            c.  Major Sources of Waste and Pollution
                Abatement Practices

        Both municipal and industrial wastes contribute to the

problem at Richmond.  Several industries discharge their waste

to the city sewerage system and are treated at the city's

primary waste treatment plant.  A few significantly large

industrial wastes are discharged directly to the local water-

courses.  Table XVI is a list of the principal waste discharges

in the area, their present treatment, and waste effluent loads.

The City of Richmond's current plans call for the provision of

secondary treatment of all municipal wastes, including certain

areas in Henrico County, by the early 1970's.  At present the

city provides primary treatment for 70 per cent of its sewered

waste.  The remaining 30 per cent discharges untreated to the

James River through several combined sewers.  Henrico County

presently provides secondary treatment for all county waste

discharges, except for areas in the west and northwest sections

of the county which are under contractural arrangements with

the City or Richmond and discharge to the city interceptors.

Chesterfield County has recently completed a $9,000,000 sewerage

system which includes a 3 mgd primary treatment plant.  Both

Henrico and Chesterfield have expansion programs underway which

-------
                                                        V - 26






will provide sewage collection and secondary treatment for



rapidly developing county areas.



        A total organic waste loading of about U35,000 population



equivalents per day is applied to local watercourses in this



area.  Of this total, 350,000 PE's originate from Richmond



municipal sources.  Secondary waste treatment for all of



Richmond's municipal waste would reduce the Richmond contribution



to about 72,000 PE's per day.

-------
                                                         V -  27
                             TABIiE XVI
                     PRINCIPAL WASTE DISCHARGES
                        IN THE RICHMOND AREA
Type of
Location Waste
Richmond Municipal
(James River)
Untreated Richmond Municipal
Load (James River)
Chesterfield Municipal
(James River)
Crestview Apartments Municipal
(Chickahominy Watershed)
Henrico County Municipal
(Chickahominy Watershed)
Henrico County Municipal
(Chickahominy Watershed)
Hechler Village Municipal
(James River)
Byrd Airport Municipal
(Chickahominy Watershed)
Albemarle Paper Co.* Industrial
(James River)
Federal Paper Co . Industrial
(Southern)
(James River)
Federal Paper Co. Industrial
(Seaboard)
(James River)
Standard Paper Co. Industrial
(James River)
E . I . duPont Co . Industrial
(James River)
Total for Water Service Area
Type or
Efficiency of
Waste Removal
Primary
None
Primary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
In Process (20%)
In Process (20%)
In Process (20%)
In Process (20%)
None
Waste Load
Discharged
P E
236,000
115,000
13,000
100
100
1,^50
500
U50
2,300
5,200
8,800
2,000
50,000
^3^,900
*  Scheduled to close  in  spring  196?.

-------
                                                        V - 28






            d.  Recommended Immediate Pollution Control Needs



        In the Richmond area the most urgent requirement  to



improve James River water quality is secondary treatment of



Richmond municipal wastes.  The city's plans call for completion



of a secondary waste treatment plant capable of handling all of



the municipal wastes by 1971.  Expedition of these plans is



urgently recommended to improve the extremely poor conditions



in the James at and below Richmond.  The city has estimated that



a total capital cost of $15jOOO,000 is necessary for completion



of the planned program.  In terms of annual cost based on a 20



year period of amortization at k^ per cent interest and adding



an estimate for operation and maintenance, the total annual cost



would be about $2,000,000 for the city.  About $600,000 per year



would be required to treat all other wastes in the area to the



level of 85 per cent BOD removal.



        Completion of the Richmond interceptors and the secondary



treatment plant should be accomplished at the earliest possible



date.  This is, perhaps, the most urgent need in the entire river



basin.  In addition, engineering studies should be initiated and



plans formulated for delivering secondary treatment or equivalent



BOD removal to all waste discharges in the area.  The total annual



cost for attaining this secondary treatment objective is estimated



to be $2,600,000.

-------
                                                        V - 29






        Since eutrophieation of the estuary has caused serious




water quality problems, some nutrient removal by the waste




treatment plants will be necessary in the future.  Studies are




now being made to determine nutrient removal requirements and




costs.  Therefore, in waste treatment plant design, space should




be provided for possible future nutrient removal.




        Also urgently needed in the City of Richmond is the




capability of alleviating the pollution problems resulting




directly or indirectly from combined sewers in the City of




Richmond.  Raw sewage discharges during storm flow conditions




contribute significantly to the pollution of the river, and




operational problems at the municipal treatment plant created




by sand and gravel washed into the plant during storm flows




also lower treatment plant efficiency.  Studies should be made




of alternative methods of reducing pollution problems related




to the combined sewers.




            e0  Water Supply




        The present municipal and industrial water supply use




in the Richmond area averages about 52 mgd exclusive of that




used for power production.  Many industrial and commercial water




supplies are purchased from the City of Richmond.  As shown in




Table XVIIs the total requirement is projected to more than




triple by the year 2020.  Almost all of the large supplies are




obtained from the James River, which has a minimum flow at




Richmond of 350 cfs (226

-------
                                                        V - 30





        When evaluating water usage and future water supply needs



at Richmond, the water rights for 645 cfs of James River flow must



be considered.  These water rights are deeded to the Chesapeake



and Ohio Railway Company, then leased by them to others on a



long-term basis and apportioned as follows:





                  City of Richmond                 88



                  VEPCO                           173



                  Albemarle Paper Company         384
                                                  645  cfs






        During periods of summer low flow, water rights almost



equal stream flow.  The City of Richmond has negotiated an agree-



ment with VEPCO, giving Richmond use of VEPCO's 173 cfs for



municipal supply during periods of low flow when James River



flow would not meet the City's needs.  This 173 cfs is restricted



to municipal water supply only.  Combined City and VEPCO rights



amount to 26l cfs (167 mgd) which is less than the projected 2020



requirement of 180 mgd (see Table XVII).



        The completion of Gathright Reservoir on the upper Jackson



River is expected to increase the low summer flows in the James



by about 200 cfs.  Although this low flow augmentation was designed



for water quality control on the Jackson River, it will undoubtedly



benefit the Richmond area water supply by increasing the extreme



low flows.  A water supply reservoir has been approved for the

-------
                                                        V - 31

Appomattox River above Petersburg which will be a potential
future water supply source for Richmond.  This 11.5 billion
gallon development is so located as to provide a potential supply
for all water users in the lower James River Basin.  A detailed
engineering study for this development has been proposed by the
Appomattox River Development Committee.

                             TABLE XVII
          PRESENT AND PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS
                       FOR THE RICHMOND AREA

Municipal
Industrial
Total for Water Service Area
Average
1965
36
16
52
Daily
1980
70
20
90
Demand
2020
130
50
180
        2.  Chickahominy River Watershed
            a.  Pertinent Hydrologic Characteristics
        The Chickahominy River, draining a watershed of approxi-
mately ^00 square miles, has head waters in Henrico and Hanover
Counties and discharges to the James approximately seven miles
above Jamestown.   The mean flow near Providence Forge is 271
cfs.  The north side of the City of Richmond, and approximately
half of Henrico County, is drained by tributaries of the Chicka-
hominy River.

-------
                                                         V - 32


            b.  Present Water Quality

        The water quality of Upham Creek, a tributary of the

Chickahominy River which receives urban run-off from the City

of Richmond and waste discharges from Henrico County secondary

waste treatment plants, is adversely affected by organic wastes.

Recent dissolved oxygen data on the Creek is not available, but

a report by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Appendix B)

states that fishery resources are severely affected by pollution.

        Data on the Chickahominy River below Richmond indicates

significant improvement in dissolved oxygen concentrations in

the River since the early 1960's when flow from two treatment

plants, one belonging to the City and one County-owned, were

abandoned and waste flows were pumped to Richmond sewers in the

James River Watershed.  Results of analysis made in the summer

months of 196U indicated dissolved oxygen concentrations ranging

from k.2 to 9.0 .

            c.  Major Sources of Waste and Pollution Abatement
                Practices

        The principal waste discharges to the Chickahominy River

Watershed are from secondary waste treatment plants owned by

Henrico County, private developments, and Richmond's Byrd Airport

secondary plant.  (See Table XVI)  Urban run-off from the City

of Richmond also contributes to the pollution problem and some

raw sewage from City sewers flows into Upham Creek when sanitary

sewers become surcharged by storm water infiltration.

-------
                                                        V - 33


        The master plan for Henrico County's water pollution

control program includes interceptor and pumping station

facilities which would intercept and pump all county waste dis-

charges in the Chickahominy Watershed to sewerage systems in

the James River Watershed.

            d.  Recommended Immediate Pollution Control
                Needs

        The current Henrico County pollution control program in

the Chickahominy River Watershed should be continued.  This

program is designed to provide sewerage systems for the urbanized

areas without increasing waste load discharges to the Watershed.

New sewer systems flow to pumping stations which pump waste flows

to the City of Richmond sewerage system.  Plans are also being

made to reduce the present flow to the Sandston treatment plant,

which discharges to a tributary of the Chickahominy River, by

pumping a portion of the flow to the James River Watershed for

treatment.  Costs for these improvements are included in this

report under Richmond Area - James River Watershed.

        The Henrico County master plan for pollution control

would provide the capability for eliminating all county waste

discharges to the Chickahominy Watershed by pumping all flow

to James River sewerage systems.  The estimated cost for the

program, which also includes current and future County projects

in the James River Watershed, is $17,000,000.

-------
                                                        V - 3k






        The existence of two watersheds (James and Chickahominy)



and three separately administered pollution control programs



(City of Richmond, Henrico County, and Chesterfield County) in



the Richmond Area suggests the need for a comprehensive pollution



control study of the Richmond Area with the formation of a water



pollution control authority as a possible goal.






    F.  Hopewell-Petersburg Area



        1.  James River Watershed



            a.  Pertinent Hydrologic Characteristics



        Hopewell is situated at the lower end of the freshwater



portion of the James Estuary.  At Hopewell the Appomattox River,



having a drainage area of 1,335 square miles above the U.S.G.S.



gage near Petersburg, merges with the James.  The fact that the



James at this location is tidal but not saline enhances its



development appeal to large water use type industries.  A rather



sudden increase in volume capacity of the Estuary at Hopewell



provides a large amount of storage for freshwater, thereby, making



available considerably larger yields than the river flow itself.



            bo  Present Water Quality



        A dissolved oxygen sag, depressing the DO to less than



h mg/1, has been observed in the Hopewell vicinity under summer



temperature conditions.  The organic waste load to the river at



this location is higher than any other water service area in the



basin, but the capacity of the river to assimilate oxygen demanding

-------
                                                        V - 35


wastes is also greater than at points upstream.  The effect of

this high organic load on the river is more serious than is

reflected by the dissolved oxygen parameter alone.  Floating

solids, sludge deposits, and highly turbid discharges from

severely polluted creeks such as Bailey Creek in Hopewell,

all give visual evidence that inadequately treated waste is

being discharged.

        The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (see Appendix B)

reports that fish populations are moderately affected by pollu-

tion from municipal and industrial waste for about 25 miles

below Petersburg.

            c.  Major Sources of Waste and Present Pollution
                Abatement Practices

        Approximately 85 per cent of the wastes discharged to

water courses in the Hopewell-Petersburg Area are of an indus-

trial origin.  Paper and chemical production processes are the

largest contributors.  Taking the Area as a whole, an organic

waste load of 730,000 population equivalents, 610,000 of which

are from industrial sources, is presently being discharged.

This load would be reduced by approximately 75 per cent if all

waste contributors provided treatment equivalent to 85 per cent

reduction of biologically oxidizable wastes.  Table XVIII

itemizes the major waste sources and their respective loads.

-------
                                                        V - 36






            do  Recommended Immediate Pollution Control Needs



        Considering the fact that upgrading waste treatment



practices to a minimum of 85 per cent removal will result in a



75 per cent reduction in total waste load produced by the water



service area, it is recommended that a policy of secondary



treatment by all waste contributors be adopted and implemented.



Conventional secondary treatment or other waste reduction methods



capable of reducing waste loads by 85 per cent BOD removal are



feasible pollution abatement measures and should preclude alter-



nate methods of maintaining specific water quality objectives



in receiving streams.



        Bailey Creek is a small tributary to the James, draining



only 20 square miles in the Hopewell area.  This small stream is



the recipient of approximately 300,000 population equivalents of



organic wastes, principally from the Hercules Powder Company,



although the City of Hopewell and the Fort Lee Military Reser-



vation both discharge their domestic wastes to this watershed.



The bulk of this load is introduced into the watershed within



three miles from the mouth of Bailey Creek,  This lower end of



the creek,and a large area of the James into which it empties,



is very shallow and swampy.  Physically, this body of water is



not suitable for assimilating or transporting large quantities



of wastes  To remedy the existing condition of severe pollution



in Bailey Creek, it is suggested that either a very high degree

-------
                                                        V - 37

of treatment be employed by Hercules Powder Company, or the
company relocate its outfall to a more suitable receiving body
of water such as the James River Channel.   Detailed engineering
studies, considering the problem of waste  outfall locations in
Bailey Creek, should be made simultaneously with plans for waste
reduction to a minimum of 85 per cent BOD  removal at all waste
discharges.
        The estimated total annual cost for implementing the
above recommended action in the area is $1,100,000.

                             TABLE XVIII
                     PRINCIPAL WASTE DISCHARGES
                   IN THE PETERSBURG-HOPEWELL AREA
Location
Hopewell
Petersburg
Colonial Heights
Allied Chemical Co. (Chemical)
Allied Chemical Co. (Nitrogen)
Allied Chemical Co. (Fibers)
Continental Chemical Co.
Hercules Powder Co.
Firestone Co.
Fort Lee Military Reservation
Total for Water Service Area
Types of
Waste
Municipal
Municipal
Municipal
Industrial
Industrial
Industrial
Industrial
Industrial
Industrial
Sanitary
Type or
Efficiency of
Waste Removal
Primary
Primary
Primary
None
None
None
50%
k(^
None
Primary
Waste Load
Discharged
P E
11,000
96,000
9,000
U7,000
59,000
8,000
195,000
29^,000
1,000
6,000
726,000

-------
                                                        V - 38


            e.  Water Supply Needs

        Hopewell is located at the confluence of the Appomattox

and James Rivers in tidewater but above the intrusion of significant

salt concentrations.  The availability of large quantities of

fresh water has no doubt been a significant factor in the location

of several large water-using industries in this area.  The total

water use for other than power production is presently about 253

mgd.  The fifty-year outlook is for an increase to over four times

this amount by the year 2020, (see Table XIX).  The present

quantity of surface water is sufficient to meet this increase,

but water quality deterioration must be halted and salt water

intrusion controlled by returning the used water to the James.


                             TABLE XIX

          PRESENT AND PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS

                  FOR THE HOPEWELL-PETERSBURG AREA

Municipal
Industrial
Average
1965
ko*
213
Daily
1980
2k
560
Demand (mgd)
2020
83
980
Total for Water Service Area 253               58*4-           1,063

*  Old Dominion Water Corporation provides water for several
   industries in the water service area.  Projected require-
   ments separate municipal and industrial uses.

-------
                                                        V - 39






    G.  Hampton Roads Area



        1.  James River Watershed



            a.  Pertinent Hydrologic Characteristics



        The James River is the southernmost river draining into



the Chesapeake Bay and, as such, enters the bay very near its'



mouth.  The Hampton Roads area, at the mouth of the James, is



an important international shipping center.  The average salinity



at Old Point Comfort, on the northern penisula, is about 20 parts



per thousand.  Two small tributary watersheds, the Nansemond and



the Elizabeth, drain to the Hampton Roads area from the southern



peninsula.  The headwaters of the Nansemond are almost completely



dammed for freshwater supply sources.  Few, if any, suitable



sites are available for freshwater impoundments on the Elizabeth



watershed.



            b.  Present Water Quality



        During 1965 and 1966 the Virginia Institute of Marine



Sciences, under contract with the Federal Water Pollution Control



Administration, conducted a routine biological and chemical



sampling study on the tidal James River.  The following excerpts



from a report of this study sum up the current water quality in



this section of the James Estuary.



        The estuarine portion of the James River is a major oyster



producing area in the Chesapeake Bay.  In 1966, over 500,000



bushels of shucking oysters were harvested for marketing and over

-------
                                                        v - 4o






600,000 bushels of seed oysters were harvested for replanting in




other rivers  This harvest represents only a fraction of past




and potential levels because breeding populations in the lower




Estuary have been destroyed by the protozoan Minchinia nelsoni,




which is often referred to as MSX.




        In the estuarine portion hundreds of acres of oyster beds




are condemned for direct harvesting.  This industry cannot exist




in close proximity to concentration of human activities, and even




if all outfalls were removed most areas would remain condemned.




The other intended uses of Hampton Roads are not curtailed.




        The estuarine portion of the James, i.e. from Jamestown




Island to the mouth, is a suitable environment for aquatic life,




and the water quality meets the standards required for all uses




except direct marketing of shellfish harvested from populated




areas.  Protection of this area is dependent upon careful evalua-




tions of all proposed waste discharges into the Estuary and




maintenance of active programs to improve and control the water




quality of the tributary streams  These controls are actively




enforced by the State Water Control Board and its cooperating




state agencies.




        In addition to these observations, the Virginia State




Water Control Board has conducted extensive studies on the




Nansemond River.  A report of these studies is included in the




Water Control Board's Record of Hearings on the Nansemond River




held on March 23<> 1965-  This report contains data which show

-------
                                                        V - 1*1


dissolved oxygen concentrations of less than 1 mg/1 in the upper

Nansemond where the City of Suffolk as well as several industries

discharge biologically degradable wastes.

            c.  Major Sources of Waste and Present Pollution
                Abatement Practices

        Municipal wastes constitute the major portion of the

total biologically degradable waste loads discharged to the

Hampton Roads area and its tributaries.  Existing municipal waste

treatment plants in the area treat approximately 650,000 popula-

tion equivalents of waste, while available industrial waste data

indicate an industrial production of about 125,000 population

equivalents.  Of the total 775,000 PE's produced, about 300,000

are removed by treatment.

        Most of the waste treatment facilities in the area provide

only primary treatment with strictly enforced, high chlorination

standards to protect the shellfish industry.  Substantial im-

provements by effluent chlorination have been made insofar as

shellfish harvesting is concerned in the James River and Hampton

Roads waters.  Tributary waters, however, have become increasingly

worse as a result of the rapidly growing population of the area.

Table XX lists the major waste sources, their present treatment

and loads.

-------
                                                         V - U2
                              TABLE XX
                     PRINCIPAL WASTE DISCHARGES
                      IN THE HAMPTON ROADS AREA
Location
Army Base Plant
Lembert Point Plant
Portsmouth
Suffolk
Boat Harbor Plant
Patrick Henry Plant
Best Foods
Gwaltney
Joel Harrell & Sons
Luters
Virginia Packing
Total for Water
Type of
Waste
Municipal
Municipal
Municipal
Municipal
Municipal
Municipal
Industrial
Industrial
Industrial
Industrial
Industrial
Service Area
Type or
Efficiency of
Waste Removal
Primary
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Primary
Primary
20$
Lagoon (75$)
Lagoon (75$)
Lagoon (75$)
Lagoon (75$)
Waste Load
Discharged
P E
56,000
160,000
8**, 000
6,000
120,000
3,000
5,300
12,000
8,500
U,700
U,700
465,000
            do  Recommended Immediate Pollution Control Needs
        This important area, the most heavily populated metro-
politan center in the entire James River Basin,, should and could
be doing more to protect its valuable water resources.  Even
though the present primary treatment waste effluents discharging
directly to the main body of the James River may not appreciably

-------
                                                         V - 1*3





affect the dissolved oxygen content of the river,  secondary treat-



ment is an economically feasible pollution abatement measure that



would have long term benefits as well as present aesthetic benefits.



The major sewage treatment facilities in the area could be improved



by secondary treatment at an estimated total annual cost of $750,000.



        The Hampton Roads Sanitation District, the sewerage and



sewage disposal management organization for the cities of Newport




News, Hampton, and Norfolk, initiated engineering studies for an



expansion and development program of the area's sewage disposal



facilities.  A report of these studies was published in 1960 and



calls for an initial construction of four new treatment plants



totaling 12 mgd in capacity as well as expansion of waste collection



facilities.  A total cost of $11,000,000 was estimated for this



initial development in the near future.  On the basis of h^ per



cent interest and depreciation over 20 years, the total annual



cost would be about $850,000, including operation and maintenance.



It is recommended that the district expedite this development



plan as well as the previously recommended secondary treatment



program for all waste discharges.



        The approximate total annual cost of the recommended



program is $1,800,000.



            e.  Water Supply



        In the heavily populated Hampton Roads area, sources of



freshwater for municipal water supply are limited.  Existing

-------
                                                        v _ kh


supplies for the cities of Newport News, Hampton, Williamsburg,

Norfolk, Portsmouth, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach deliver an

average of 90 million gallons a day for municipal water use.

The combined safe yield of all facilities serving these cities

is about 118 mgd.  Table XXI shows the projected municipal water

supply requirements of the water service area for 1980 and 2020.

From the Table it can be seen that the water needs will exceed

the present safe yield before 1980.

        The Appomattox River above Petersburg has been considered

as a potential site for the development of a water supply reser-

voir to serve the entire lower James River Basin, including

Petersburg, Colonial Heights, Hopewell, Chesterfield County,

Norfolk, Portsmouth, and Newport News.  A consulting engineers'

report on this development indicates that the potential to

meet the municipal water supply requirements through the year

2020 is available on the Appomattox.


                             TABLE XXI

            PRESENT AND PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS

                     FOR THE HAMPTON RQADS_AREA
                                  Average       Daily      Demand (mgd)
                                                      '_ _ Z  __ 2Q2Q
Municipal                      90.0               132            280

-------
                                     VI - 1
      APPENDIX   A









Biological Survey of the




Jackson and James Rivers

-------
                                                         VI - 2
             BIOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE JACKSON RIVER

               (Between Clearwater Park, Virginia,
               and the Covpasture River, Virginia)

                        I<   INTRODUCTION
        A "biological survey of the Jackson River between Clear-

water Park, Virginia, and the Cowpasture River, Virginia, was

conducted from July 13 through July lU, 1966.

        For purposes of the study, the community of bottom (benthic)

organisms was selected as the indicator of the biological condi-

tion 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 locomo-

tion 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 populations 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 sensi-

tive organisms usually are not individually abundant because of

natural predation and competition for food and space; however,

the total count or number of organisms at a given station may be

high because of the number of different varieties present.

-------
                                                         VI - 3






        Sensitive genera tend to be eliminated by adverse environ-




mental conditions (e.g., chemical and/or physical) resulting from




wastes reaching the stream.  In waters enriched with organic wastes,




comparatively fewer kinds (genera) are normally found, but great




numbers of these genera may be present.  Organic pollution-tolerant




forms such as sludgeworms, rattailed maggots, certain species of




bloodworms (red midges), certain leeches, and some species of air-




breathing snails may multiply and become abundant because of a




favorable habitat and food supply.  These organic pollution-tolerant




bottom organisms may also exist in the natural environment but are




generally found in small numbers.  The abundance of these forms in




streams heavily polluted with organics is due to their physiologi-




cal and morphological abilities to survive environmental conditions




more adverse than conditions that may be tolerated by other organ-




isms.  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 or 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.

-------
                                                         VI - 1+






        Streams grossly polluted with toxic wastes such as mine




drainage will support little if any biological life and will




reduce the population of both sensitive and pollution-tolerant




organisms.




        Classification of organisms in this report is considered




in three categories (clean-water associated, intermediate, and




pollution-tolerant) which provides sufficient biological informa-




tion to supplement physical and chemical water quality data for




this study area.  Tentative identification and counts of specific




organisms have been tabulated for use during intensive investiga-




tions of selected areas and are available upon request.

-------
                                                         VI - 5






                  II.  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS






        1.  A biological survey of the Jackson River between




Clear-waster Park and Iron Gate, Virginia, plus the lower end of




the Cowpasture River in Virginia was made July 13 to lU, 1966.




Investigations were made at eight stations on the Jackson River




and at one station on the Cowpasture River.




        2.  Bottom organisms were selected as the primary indi-




cator of biological water quality.




        3.  From Clearwater Park, Virginia, to the Covington,




Virginia, Water Filtration Plant, extremely high water quality




was found.




        k.  From the Covington, Virginia, Playground Park to




Iron Gate, Virginia, degraded biological conditions were found.




        5.  The Cowpasture River was found to contribute high




quality water to the Jackson to form the James River.




        6,  Based on known biological sampling, the River has




recovered by the time it reaches Salisbury, Virginia, which is




a short distance downstream from Eagle Rock, Virginia.

-------
                                                         vi - 6






            III.  DATA EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION






        The Jackson River joins the Cowpasture River downstream




from Iron Gate, Virginia, to form the James River.  The Jackson




River was sampled between Clearwater Park (upstream from Coving-




ton, Virginia) and Iron Gate, Virginia, in order to evaluate the




biological conditions of this stretch of stream.




        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 asso-




ciation 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 or a Petersen Dredge (0.6 square feet),




and the number of organisms per square foot were counted or




calculated.




        Quantitative samples were not taken at some stations be-




cause of poor physical sampling conditions or organisms were sparse.

-------
                                                         VI - 7


Station #1 - Jackson River at the riffle immediately upstream
             from the Virginia Route 687 Bridge at Clearwater,
             Virginia

        The water at this station was extremely clear, and

numerous smallmouth bass were observed throughout the area.  High

water quality was indicated by the UQ kinds (genera) of bottom

organisms.  They included such clean-water forms as stoneflies

(three genera), mayflies (four genera), caddisflies (11 genera),

fishflies, hellgrammites, riffle beetles (two genera), and gill-

breathing snails (three genera).  A total of 288 bottom organisms

were collected in the square foot sample which included 86 may-

flies, 2U caddisflies, three stoneflies, 83 gill-breathing snails,

ten riffle beetles, and one fishfly.  The clean-water organisms

made up 78 per cent of the quantitative sample.  Based on the

bottom organisms, excellent water quality was indicated at this

station.


Station #2 - Jackson River at the riffle approximately 100 yards
             upstream from the Covington, Virginia, Water Filtra-
             tion Plant

        Numerous smallmouth bass and darters were observed in

the clear water at this station.  A small group of children were

seen swimming downstream from the water filtration plant.  High

water quality was again indicated by the 38 kinds (genera) of

bottom organisms which included such clean-water forms as may-

flies (eight genera), caddisflies (eight genera), stoneflies

(one genera), riffle beetles (two genera), and hellgrammites.

-------
                                                         VI - 8


A total of k2.G bottom organisms were collected in the square

foot sample which included 95 mayflies, 51 caddisflies, and 9^

riffle beetle larvae.  Clean-water organisms made up 56 per cent

of the total in the quantitative sample.  High diversification

and numerous clean-water forms indicated excellent water quality.


Station #3 - Jackson River at the Covington, Virginia, Playground
             Park

        This station was located approximately 0.7 of a mile down-

stream from the pulp and paper company and adjacent to the Coving-

ton Municipal Playground.  Virtually all of the rocks were coated

with a heavy, black slime believed to be Sphaerotilus sp.  The

water was a dark, coffee color at this station.

        The water temperature was elevated, and foam was observed.

In addition, a strong odor characteristic of a mill operation was

noted.  The air-breathing snail Physa was present in fair numbers,

but these snails were all at the waterline and on the rocks.  For

this reason, a quantitative sample was not taken.  Only a few

sludgeworms and another bristleworm (Mais sp.) were found in addi-

tion to the Physa snails.  Severe biological degradation is indi-

cated at this station when compared with the upstream station.

The enormous drop in genera from 38 (upstream station) to three

at this station, plus the complete absence of clean-water forms,

indicated heavy industrial pollution.  All three kinds of bottom

organisms found at this station were pollution-tolerant forms.

-------
                                                         VI - 9


The low dissolved oxygen and high water temperatures found by

VMI sampling during this period further substantiate the poor

biological conditions.


Station #k - Jackson River at the riffle immediately downstream
             from the Durant Road Bridge due south of Covington,
             Virginia

        Here the water conditions of the previous station:  a

coffee color, foaming, and an elevated temperature persisted.

Again black slime coated the rocks, and the strong odor prevailed.

The only bottom organisms present in fair numbers were the air-

breathing Physa snails which were exposed at the waterline and

on the rocks.  The only other bottom organism found was the

bristleworm Nais sp.  Degraded biological conditions were still

indicated by the presence of these two pollution-tolerant forms

and the absence of clean-water bottom organisms.


Station #5 - Jackson River at the Drive-in Theatre east of
             Covington on Routes 60 and 220

        The water still remained coffee colored and foaming.

Rocks were covered with a glay slime-like growth believed to be

Sphaerotilus sp.  The only bottom organisms found were pollution-

tolerant sludgeworms, the air-breathing snail Physa, and an inter-

mediate midge larva.  The quantitative sample consisted of kQQ

sludgeworms.  Heavy biological degradation Was still indicated.

-------
                                                        VI - 10


Station #6 - Jackson River off U. S. 60 and 220 approximately
             0.5 mile from the Low-Moor, Virginia, intersection

        The coffee color and foaming prevailed at this station

also,.  Most of the rocks were still black and covered with a

grayish-black slime believed to be Sphaeroti_lus sp.  There were

good populations of the air-breathing snail Physa in certain

sections of the stream, but their distribution was erratic.  A

quantitative sample was not taken because of the spotty distri-

bution of bottom organisms.  Such pollution-tolerant forms as

leeches, horsefly larvae, another air breathing snail, and a

beetle larva were also collected,,  Degraded biological conditions

were still indicated^  This indication was supported by the low

dissolved oxygen readings found in the VMI survey.


Station #7 - Jackson River at the mouth of Smith's Creek in
             Clifton Forge, Virginia

        The water continued to appear coffee colored, and foam-

ing was present.  Smith's Creek was very cloudy and appeared to

be contributing a pollutional load from Clifton Forge.  The rocks

in the area were still black and coated with slime.  Approximately

50 dead fish were observed in the area and appeared to be mostly

suckers and minnows.  Bottom organisms could not be found.  De-

graded biological conditions still existed at this point.

-------
                                                        VI - 11


Station #8 - Jackson River at the last bridge crossing downstream
             from Iron Gate, Virginia

        The water was tea colored and still showed signs of foam.

Approximately ten dead fish, primarily suckers and minnows, were

noted in the area.  The rocks were still black, and slime was still

present.  The bottom organisms consisted of ten kinds, composed

of pollution-tolerant and intermediate forms.  The square foot

sample contained k6h bottom organisms which consisted of 176 sludge-

worms, 208 air-breathing snails (two genera), eight leeches, and

72 intermediate midge larvae (three genera).  Degraded biological

conditions were still indicated at this station, although there

was some improvement.  The VMI survey also indicated some improve-

ment .   While the dissolved oxygen was still appreciably low, there

was a higher average reading than stations downstream from Covington,

Virginia.


Station #9 - The Cowpasture River at the Virginia Route 633 Bridge

        This stream was extremely clear, and numerous smallmouth

bass were observed throughout the area^  The surrounding area is

farming: country arid appeared to be primarily pasture land.  Twenty-

two kinds of bottom organisms were found which included such clean-

water forms as stoneflies (two genera), mayflies (three genera),

caddisflies (three genera), and riffle beetles (two genera).  There

was a total of h'kO bottom organisms in the square foot sample,

including 26 stoneflies, 32 mayflies, 230 caddisflies, and 80

-------
                                                        VI - 12







riffle beetles    Based, on the great diversification of bottom




organisms and the high percentage of clean-water forms, the Cow-




pasture River contributes high quality water to the Jackson River




to form the James River downstream from this station.

-------
                                                              VI - 13
Station
               BOTTOM ORGANISM DATA OF JACKSON RIVER BETWEEN
             CLEARWATER PARK, VIRGINIA, AND THE COWPASTURE RIVER

                                           Number of Organisms
                                          in Square Foot Sample
                 Location
Clean-
Water
Inter-
mediate
Pollution-
 Tolerant
Total
No, of
Kinds
         Jackson River
           Upstream from Route 687
           Bridge, Clearwater,
           Virginia                    20?

           Upstream from Covington,
           Virginia Water Filtra-
           tion Plant                  2^0
           at Covington, Virginia,
           Playground Park

           Downstream from Durant
           Road Bridge, Covington,
           Virginia

           at Drive-in Theatre,
           Covington, Virginia

           Upstream from Low-Moor,
           Virginia Intersection

           at Mouth of Smith's
           Creek, Clifton Forge,
           Virginia

           Downstream from Iron
           Gate, Virginia
           76
           36
             150
Quantitative Sample Not Taken
Quantitative Sample Not Taken
                      U88
Quantitative Sample Not Taken
Quantitative Sample Not Taken
         Cowpasture River
           at Virginia Route 633
           Bridge                      ^00
           72
           22
             392
              18
               38


                3



                2
               10
               22

-------
                                                        VI - Ik
               BIOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE JAMES RIVER

              (Between the Maury River, Virginia, and
                      Bent Creek, Virginia)
                        I   INTRODUCTION


        A biological survey of the James River between the first

dam downstream from the Maury River and Bent Creek, Virginia,

was conducted September 7 to 8, 1966.  The survey was made to

determine the biological condition of this reach of stream.

        For purposes of the study, the community of bottom (benthic)

organisms was selected as the indicator of the biological condi-

tions 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 locomo-

tion 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 populations 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

Treflation and competition for food and space; however, the total

count or number of organisms at a given station may be high because

of the number of different varieties present.

-------
                                                        VI - 15






        Sensitive genera tend to be eliminated by adverse environ-




mental conditions (e.g., chemical and/or physical) resulting from




wastes reaching the stream.  In waters enriched with organic wastes,




comparatively fewer kinds (genera) are normally found, but great




numbers of these genera may be present.  Organic pollution-tolerant




forms such as sludgeworms, rattailed maggots, certain species of




bloodworms (red midges), certain leeches, and some species of air-




breathing snails may multiply and become abundant because of a




favorable habitat and food supply.  These organic pollution-tolerant




bottom organisms may also exist in the natural environment but are




generally found in small numbers.  The abundance of these forms in




streams heavily polluted with organics is due to their physiologi-




cal and morphological abilities to survive environmental conditions




more adverse than conditions that may be tolerated by other organ-




isms.  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 clean-water situations.  These organisms occurring in limited




numbers, therefore, cannot serve as effective indicators of water




quality.




        Streams grossly polluted with toxic wastes such as mine




drainage will support little, if any, biological life and will

-------
                                                        vi - i6






reduce the population of both sensitive and pollution-tolerant




organisms.




        Classification of organisms in this report is considered




in three categories (clean-water associated, intermediate, and




pollution-tolerant) which provide sufficient biological informa-




tion to supplement physical and chemical water quality data for




this study area.  Tentative identification and counts of specific




organisms have been tabulated for use during intensive investiga-




tions of selected areas and are available upon request.

-------
                                                        vi - 17






                  II.  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS






        1,  Unpolluted biological conditions were indicated be-




tween the first dam downstream from the Maury River and Battery




Creek.




        2.  Mild degradation was indicated between Skimmer Creek




and upstream from the low level dam at Coleman Falls, Virginia.




        3.  Recovery conditions were indicated from downstream




from the low level dam at Coleman Falls, Virginia, to Holcomb




Rock upstream from Lynchburg, Virginia.




        it.  Mild degradation was indicated at Daniel Island op-




posite Lynchburg, Virginia.




        5.  Moderate to heavy pollution was indicated at Six Mile,




Virginia.




        6.  Mild pollution was indicated between Gaits Mill and




Stapleton, Virginia.




        7 =  Fair water quality was indicated at Christian Mill




Creek, Virginia.




        8.  Good water quality was indicated from Riverdale,




Virginia, to Allen Creek which is upstream from Bent Creek, Virginia.

-------
                                                        VI - 18






            III.  DATA EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION






        The James River is a fairly substantial stream between




the Maury River and Bent Creek, Virginia.  In this reach are




located two paper operations and the industrial community of




Lynchburg, Virginia.




        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 asso-




ciation 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 or a Petersen Dredge (0.6 square




feet), and the number of organisms per square foot were counted




or calculated.




        Quantitative samples were not taken at some stations




because of poor physical sampling conditions or organisms were




very sparse.

-------
                                                        VI - 19


Station #1 - James River approximately 100 yards downstream from
             the first dam downstream from the Maury River near
             Glasgow, Virginia

        The water at this station was very clear, and numerous

fish were observed throughout the area.  Most of these fish were

minnows.  Good water quality was indicated by the 16 kinds (genera)

of bottom organisms collected which included such clean-water forms

as caddisflies (four genera), gill-breathing snails (three genera),

and riffle beetles.  Out of a total of 2,025 bottom organisms in

the square foot sample, there were 536 caddisflies and 6k riffle

beetles, or 30 per cent of the quantitative sample.  Good water

quality was indicated at this location.


Station #2. - James River approximately 50 yards upstream from
             Battery Creek (West Bank) which is upstream from
             Big Island, Virginia

        Numerous minnows were observed at this station.   The

water appeared to be a light, tea color but was clear in the

bottle.  Sampling had to be confined to about four to five feet

off the bank because of the sharp drop-off, and a quantitative

sample was not taken for this reason.  Nine kinds of bottom

organisms were found which included gill-breathing snails (one

genera), air-breathing snails (two genera), flatworms, leeches,

and intermediate midge larvae (four genera).  Fair to good water

quality was indicated; however, it is strongly believed a much

greater diversification could have been found if a riffle area

had been present.  Based on known dissolved oxygen readings,

-------
                                                        VI - 20


other water chemistry, and this limited biological sampling,

unpolluted biological conditions were indicated at this station.


Station #3 - James River immediately upstream from Skimmer Creek
             and downstream from Big Island, Virginia

        The water was a dark, tea color, and fish could not be

found.  Due to a very sharp drop-off, bottom sampling had to be

confined to the immediate bank.  Bottom organisms could not be

found in this area.  While there appears to be some slight degra-

dation, it is difficult to make a judgment based on bottom organ-

isms because of poor sampling conditions and the lack of a riffle

area.  Based on dissolved oxygen readings and other known water

chemistry, this station does not appear to have a really serious

problem, although some degradation was present.  Water quality

could only be described as mildly degraded at this location.


Station #b - James River upstream from the low level dam at
             Coleman Falls, Virginia

        The water continued to be tea colored but was clear in

the bottle.  The bottom in this area appeared to be coated with

a black, gelatinous material, and bottom organisms were sparse.

Only a few bloodworms and a bristleworm (Mais sp.) could be found.

Again sampling had to be confined to the bank area due to the

sharp drop-off.  Because of the drop-off and the sparse bottom

organism population, a quantitative sample was not taken.  A few

minnows were observed in the sample area.  Based on the bottom

-------
                                                        VI - 21


organisms and known dissolved oxygen readings,  mild degradation

vas still indicated at this station.


Station #5 - James River approximately 150 yards downstream from
             the low level dam at Coleman Falls, Virginia

        The water still appeared tea colored but again was clear

in the bottle.  Only six kinds of bottom organisms were present,

and they were sparse.  They consisted of a gill-breathing snail,

an air-breathing snail, flatworms, a bristleworm, a dragonfly

nymph, and a few intermediate midge larvae.  Sampling still had

to be confined to the banks because of the sharp drop-off.  A

quantitative sample was not taken because of the poor sampling

conditions and sparse population.  Based on the known water

chemistry at this station, recovery appeared to have occurred

despite the low number of bottom organisms.  It is believed the

low number of bottom organisms sampled can be attributed to the

poor sampling conditions created by the impoundments in this area.


Station #6 - James River at Holcomb Rock upstream from Lynchburg,
             Virginia

        The water continued tea colored but again was clear in

the bottle.  Bottom organisms were sparse, and only a few sludge-

worms and gill-breathing snails could be found.  Due to a sharp

drop-off and impoundment conditions, sampling had to be confined

to the banks.  The water chemistry at this station indicated that

recovery had occurred at this station.  The poor bottom organism

-------
                                                        VI - 22


population is attributed to poor sampling conditions and poor

habitat created by impounded conditions.


Station #7 - James River downstream from a low level dam down-
             stream from Daniel Island opposite Lynchburg, Virginia
             (East Bank)

        The water was dark, tea color but was clear in the bottle.

Foam had built up in sections below the dam similar to detergent

suds.  A fisherman was observed in the area, and a dead channel

catfish approximately eight inches long was found.  Only a quali-

tative sample was taken due to the drop-off and large rocks.

Eight kinds of bottom organisms were sampled which included gill-

breathing snails (two kinds), air-breathing snails (two kinds),

Fingernail clams, f1atworms, the scud Gammarus sp., and an inter-

mediate midge larvae.  Mild degradation appeared to be present

at this station.


Station #8 - James River at Six Mile, downstream from Lynchburg,
             Virginia

        The water at this location was very turbid, and clumps

of dead algae were observed floating.  Sludge deposits were heavy

along the shore and prevented wading out very far from the bank.

The only bottom organisms found were sludgeworms and mosquito

larvae, both of which are pollution-tolerant.  Sludgeworms were

abundant.  Moderate to heavy degradation was indicated at tnis

location based on the bottom organisms and known dissolved oxygen

readings.

-------
                                                        VI - 23






Station #9 - James River at Gaits Mills




        The water at this location was tea colored but was clear




in the bottle,  A total of 15 genera of bottom organisms were




found at this station, including mayflies (one kind) and gill-




breathing snails (one kind).  Other kinds sampled included such




intermediate forms as fingernail clams, the scud Gammarus sp.,




damselflies (two kinds, and dragonflies (one kind).  Pollution-




tolerant organisms included sludgeworms, mosquitoes, air-breathing




snails (two kinds), and leeches (two kinds).  A quantitative sample




was not taken because the bottom was predominately bedrock.   The




river appeared to be recovering at this station, but recovery had




not yet occurred.  Mild pollution was still indicated.






Station #10 - James River at Stapleton, Virginia




        The tea color was still present, but the water was clear




in the bottle.  There was a recent moderate to heavy fish kill




of white suckers in the area, the majority of the suckers averag-




ing one pound in weight.  A large school of white suckers had




sought refuge in Partridge Creek and refused to leave the creek




and venture out into the James River, despite being disturbed




by the sampling activities in the mouth of the creek.  A total




of ten kinds of organisms were sampled at this station, consist-




ing of gill-breathing snails (two kinds), air-breathing snails




(two kinds), fingernail clams, leeches (two kinds), flatworms,




and intermediate midge larvae (two kinds).  A quantitative sample

-------
                                                        VI - 2k


was not taken because the riffle area was made up of large bed-

rock.  Mild pollution was still indicated.


Station #11 - James River immediately upstream from Christian
              Mill Creek

        The water at this location still had a tea color but was

clear in the bottle, indicating the color was caused by the sub-

strate.  Aquatic vegetation was heavy and included duckweed, fila-

mentous algae, moss, and submerged aquatic vegetation.   Twelve

kinds of bottom organisms were found (versus ten upstream), in-

cluding such clean-water forms as caddisfly larvae (two kinds)

and gill-breathing snails (two kinds).   Also included were air-

breathing snails (one kind), fingernail clams, flatworms, sludge-

worms, damselflies, another bristleworm, and intermediate midge

larvae (two kinds).  Out of 1,128 bottom organisms in the square

foot sample, there were 776 flatworms,  18U caddisflies, 128 inter-

mediate midge larvae, 2h sludgeworms, eight bristleworms, and

eight gill-breathing snails.  Fair water quality was indicated

at this station.


Station #12 - James River at Riverdale, Virginia

        The water still appeared tea colored but was clear in

the bottle.  The bottom organism at this station took a great

upsurge in diversification.   Twenty-three kinds were found

(versus 12 at the upstream station), including such clean-water

bottom organisms as caddisflies (four kinds), mayflies, riffle

-------
                                                        VI - 25


beetles (two kinds), and gill-breathing snails (two kinds).   Out

of 706 bottom organisms in the square foot sample, there were 280

caddisflies, 232 flatworms, 152 intermediate larvae, 2k riffle

beetles, nine air-breathing snails, and one unidentified bristle-

worm.  The river appeared to have recovered at this point, and

good water quality was indicated.


Station #13 - James River at Allen Creek upstream from Bent
              Creek, Virginia

        The water was still tea colored but clear in the bottle.

The surrounding land is in farmland, and siltation appeared heavy.

The drop-off was sharp beyond the silted area, and sampling condi-

tions for bottom organisms was extremely poor.  Only three kinds

of bottom organisms were found.  A quantitative sample was not

taken because sampling had to be confined close to the banks due

to the soft banks and drop-off.  The only clean-water form found

was a gill-breathing snail.  In addition, an air-breathing snail

and damselflies (one kind) were found.  The poor bottom organism

population was attributed to the heavy siltation, absence of a

riffle area, and generally poor sampling habitat.  Based on the

known dissolved oxygen readings and other water chemistry at this

station, good water quality still existed at this location.

-------
                                                               VI - 26
Station
Number
 BOTTOM ORGANISM DATA OF JAMES RIVER BETWEEN THE MAURY RIVER,
              VIRGINIA, AND BENT CREEK, VIRGINIA

                                    Number of Organisms
                               	In_J3^uare_ Foot _S_ample	
                               Clean-   Inter-    Pollution-
           Location            Water    mediate    Tolerant
                      Total
                      No. of
                      Kinds
  10

  11


  12

  i 3
James River
  Downstream from confluence
  of Maury River, Glasgow,
  Virginia

  Upstream from Battery Creek
  (W.B.), Big Island, Virginia

  Upstream from Skimmer Creek,
  Big Island, Virginia

  Upstream from low level dam,
  Coleman Falls, Virginia

  Povnsbream from low level
  dam, Coleman Falls,
  Virginia

  at Holcomb Rock, Lynchburg,
  Virginia

  Downstream from low level
  dam, opposite Lynchburg,
  Virginia (E.Bo)

  at Six Mile, downstream
  from Lynchburg, Virginia

  at Gaits Mills, Virginia

  at Stapleton, Virginia

  Upstream from Christian
  Mill Creek

  at Riverdale, Virginia

  at Allen Creek upstream
  from Bent Creek, Virginia
                                        600
1,2^0
                      185
Quantitative Sample Not Taken


Quantitative Sample Not Taken


Quantitative Sample Not Taken



Quantitative Sample Wot Taken


Quantitative Sample Not Taken



Quantitative Sample Not Taken


Quantitative Sample Not Taken

Quantitative Sample Wot Taken

Quantitative Sample Not Taken


 192        90^        32

 30*).        3Qh        18
16
                         2

                        15

                        10


                        12

                        23
                                       Quantitative Sample Not Taken

-------

-------
                                          VI - 27
            APPENDIX  B
A Report on the Effects of Pollution
    on Stream Fishery Resources
      in the James River Basin
                  By
   U. S. Department of the Interior
     Fish and Wildlife Service
             April 1967

-------
                                                        VI - 28
            EFFECTS OF POLLUTION OF FISH POPULATION
                    IN THE JAMES RIVER BASIN
        The geographic area covered by these interim data contains

2,556 miles of streams, comprising 87,826 surface acres, which

provide significant value fish habitat.  These waters in an unpol-

luted condition are capable of annually supporting H,117,500 man-

days of quality fishing.  This total capability is based on an

average daily creel of one pound per fishing trip and a yearly

sustained average yield that would not detrimentally affect quality

of the fishery.  Currently, pollution is estimated to cause an

annual reduction of 796,850 man-days of fishing potential.   This

figure represents 19.^ per cent of the total fresh water stream

fishing opportunity available in the James River Basin.

        Table A provides detailed data of basin fresh water fish-

ery habitat, its use and productivity, and the affect of pollution

on the resources.  A narrative description of each polluted sec-

tion follows the Table.

-------






















t 
vo
o\
rH
K
O HH1
fe, M
ffi

C-1 "^
H
EH -
0 M
M B
ft, M
M O
CO K
CO H

O 
{^
2, M

O (in !-<
PM







i
01
^
-p
CO
: rH
0}
o
H
bQ
O
H
O
O
:3


^-~x
f~)
1
^
^ 	 rf


^
1
s


^]
o
H
-p
H
H
O
PH
"o
i
^
V 	 ^

o
H
-P

H
H
O




f 
o
^

Q
S^




f 	 N
Q

s

H
erf
4^>
O
EH
0)
W
cj
0)
h
a
^
w

a
o
^




o
o
t
o







o
o
t-
0
LA










o
^^
o
LA






o
c
rH

on
rH



on
,  j
o
*
rH

O
CO







ON






O
H
CM







0
ON
O
VO
t-






O
o
on
vo
c










o
\^
0
^






t
CM
LA
r.
VO
CO



CO
O
O"\
^
rH


on
H






c






0 0
0 -3-
co at on a)
** t"1 c~*
C R
^ O O
 J" 'f~*r t^.




o o o o
O O VO O
ON ON J- CN
vo vo oo LA
CO H H
vo





o o o o
o o o o
t ON CO ON
H vo on LA
on H H
c









o o o o
~\ "^-~ ^~  ^
O LA CM LA
J- OJ H CM






H O CM VO
H LA O O
LA H LA VO
A ft % A
CM t- -=t -*
-J- CM CO
H


on vo j- LA
ON t LA on
OJ OJ H VO
A A
00 rH
H
OJ CO LA VD
co on on on
t H t OJ






vo LA -^- on








0)
C
o
^^




c

OJ
LA







O
o
CM
LA











0
^^
LA
CM






VD
VO
CM

H
LA



t
0
CM



O
CM
CM






CM






O
O
LA
r.
H
LA
C



0
0
LA
LA
VD
-=^
OJ




o
0
o
t^I
rH
OJ
n
on

















LA
_rj"
OJ
A
OJ
CO
H


0

on
A
_^-
vo
VD
OJ
OJ



H
cd
-p
O rH
EH 03
I ^
,0 -H
3 EH
CO

o
LA
on
r
LA





0
LA
H
LA
LA
CO





O
0
LA
O
O
ON



















CM
on
t

ON
0
_j-


VD
CO
,jj-
N
on
CM
O
on
on
A
CM
H
H 05
cd T3
-P -H
0 EH
EH 1
i a
1 O
PJ f=H
CO

0
LA
CO
*
vo
0\
t" 



0
LA
VO
O
OJ
on
on




o
o
LA
t
H
H
r-
_j^f

















t
t
ON
n
H
ON
LA


vo
OJ
CO
r.
t
co
vo
LA
LA
A
CM


CO
rH1
<
EH
O
EH


VI - 29

-------
                                                        VI - 30
JAMES RIVER - Mile 23-0 - 38.5

!  Location:  The entire section of the James River between
    Jamestown, Virginia, and the Surry-Isle of Wight County Line.
2  Data Reference:  1, 6.
3.  Pollution Sources:   (a) Hopewell residential and industrial
    wastes,(b) Richmond residential and industrial wastes.
h.  Pollution Effects:   Fishery resources are lightly affected
    by pollution.  Although the river immediately above this
    segment is in a seeming state of oxygen depletion recovery,
    large fish kills occur in this river section yearly.  These
    kills were recorded6 in 196U and 1965.   Circumstances behind
    these fish kills are not completely understood.  A complex
    series of events involving some delayed chemical reaction
    coupled with tidal effect is thought responsible.  During
    most of the year the fishery appears unaffected.

JAMES RIVER - Mile 38.5 - 53.3

!  Location:  The entire section of the James River from a few
    miles below Weyanoke to Jamestown, Virginia.
2.  Data Reference:  1.
3.  Pollution Sources:   (a) Hopewell industrial and residential
    wastes,(b) Richmond residential and industrial wastes.
^.  Pollution Effects:   Fishery resources are insignificantly
    affected by pollution.   The river in this segment is in a
    state of recovery.   Although pollutants are present, their
    effect on fishery resources is considered minor.

JAMES RIVER - Mile 53.3 - 77.0

1.  Location:  The entire section of the James River from Hope-
    well, Virginia, to a few miles below Weyanoke, Virginia.
2,  Data Reference:  1, 6.
3.  Pollution Sources:   (a) Richmond industrial and residential
    wastes; (b) Petersburg industrial and residential wastes;
    (c) Hopewell industrial and residential wastes; (c) Signifi-
    cant industrial waste sources from Hopewell include Firestone
    Synthetic Fabric, Hercules Powder Company, and Continental
    Can Company.
^.  Pollution Effects:   Fishery resources are moderately affected
    by pollution.  A large waste load from Hopewell reduces water
    quality in this river segment.  Very little data is available
    on water quality characteristics in this area.  However, it
    is believed that low oxygen levels combine with various other
    toxicants, lowering water quality for fish.  A large fish kill
    was recorded6 covering over lU miles of this segment in 196l.

-------
                                                        VI - 31
    Resident species are composed mostly of rough fish able to
    endure low vater quality conditions.  Spring anadromous
    spawning runs are not usually adversely affected and are
    subject to heavy fishing pressures.

JAMES RIVER - Mile 77,0 - 9?U2

1.  Location:  The entire section of the James River from the
    confluence of Falling Creek to Hopewell, Virginia
2,  Data Reference:  1, 5.
3.  Pollution Sources:  (a) industrial and residential wastes
    from Richmond, Virginia
h.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are moderately affected
    by pollution.  Organic waste loads from Richmond result in
    low dissolved oxygen levels in this river segment during warm
    weather periods.  However, water quality tests5 performed in
    1962-196U indicated the river was in a state of recovery in
    this stream segment.  Additionally, detrimental effects of
    other deleterious substances are believed somewhat reduced.
    Pollution mainly affects resident species composed primarily
    of low populations of rough fish which can exist in less
    desirable environmental conditions.  A large spring anadromous
    spawning run is exposed to a short period of heavy angling
    pressure.

JAMES RIVER - Mile 97.2 - 105.2

1*  Location:  The entire segment of the James River from Bosher
    Dam in Richmond to the downstream confluence of Falling Creek.
2-  .Data Reference:  1, 5, 6, 7.
3.  Pollution Sources:  (a) Richmond industrial and residential
    waste loads; (b) Significant industrial contributors include
    Federal Bond and Paper Company, Richmond Guano Company, Depont
    Chemical Corporation, Standard Paper Company, Virginia Carolina
    Chemical Company, and National Analine Division.
h.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are severely affected by
    pollution.  High organic waste loads reduce dissolved oxygen
    concentrations in this river segment during warm weather
    periods.  State water quality tests5 made during 1962-196^
    substantiate dissolved oxygen concentrations below 3 mg/1.
    In addition, it is thought that heavy metals, acids, phenols,
    and other deleterious substances combine to significantly
    reduce the capacity of the water for providing good quality
    fish habitat.  Fish kills are known to occur in this area
    yearly.  A large kill was recorded in 196U6, and one of unknown
    extent was recorded in 196l.  High spring flows usually dilute
    pollution sufficiently to permit anadromous runs to penetrate

-------
                                                        VI - 32
    as far as Bosher Dam.  Occasionally the spawning run suffers
    losses due to polluted conditions.  Most of the fishing
    pressure in this river segment is attributable to angling
    pressure during the spawning runs,

JAMES RIVER - Mile 208,0 - 21k ^Q

1  Location:  The entire section of the James River from the
    confluence of the Buffalo River near Nordwood, Virginia, to
    the vicinity of Wingina, Virginia.
2.  Data Reference:  1, 6.
3.  Pollution Sources:  (a) Lynchburg residential and industrial
    wastes, (b) pollution load from the Buffalo River.
k.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are lightly affected
    by pollution.  No recorded water quality data is available
    for this segment of the James River.  Water conditions present
    some problems occasionally.   In 1963 a large fish kill was
    reported6 near Wingina.  The major fishery problem attributable
    to pollution in this area is a reported bad flavor of fish
    flesh.  Sport fishing pressure is reduced because of this
    phenomenon, according to local game wardens.

JAMES RIVER - Mile 230.0 - 25^.0

1.  Location:  The entire section of the James River from Lynch-
    burg to Riverville, Virginia
2.  Data Reference:  1, U, 5, 6.
3.  Pollution Sources:  (a) Lynchburg residential and industrial
    wastes, (b) waste load of upper James River.
U.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are lightly affected.
    Organic wastes from Lynchburg coupled with waste loads present
    in the river reduce dissolved oxygen concentrations through-
    out the entire river segment during warm weather periods.
    Dissolved oxygen concentrations are particularly low immedi-
    ately below Lynchburg.  Both VMI4 and State data5 substantiate
    this fact.  Occasionally water quality may drop so low that
    it cannot support fish life.  In 1962 a large fish kill was
    reported6 which covered over four miles of the river below
    Lynchburg.  Generally water quality is adequate and supports
    populations of rough fish along with some game fish.  Recruit-
    ment of fish from tributaries and other stream areas increases
    the quality of the local fishery.  Wardens and biologists
    report disflavored fish flesh occurs during certain periods
    of the year which in turn reduces fishing demand.

-------
                                                        VI - 33


JAMES RIVER - Mile 301.7 - 339-7

1.  Location:   The entire section of the James River from the
    confluence of the Jackson and Covpasture Rivers to the
    vicinity of Buchanan, Virginia
2,  Data Reference:  1.
3.  Pollution Sources:  (a) Covington residential and industrial
    wastes; (b) Clifton Forge residential and industrial wastes;
    (c) organic wastes from Covington and an unknown chemical
    substance from Clifton Forge are thought to be the main
    pollutants o
k.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are moderately affected
    by pollution.  Heavy organic waste loads from Covington are
    diluted in this river segment by the relatively unpolluted
    waters of the Cowpasture River,  Low dissolved oxygen levels
    encourage the invasion of rough fish.  However, water quality
    standards adequate for fish survival are present except on
    rare occasions.  Tainted fish flesh seems to be the major
    problem in this area.  According to the local game wardens
    and biologists, the unpleasant flavor of the fish greatly
    reduces sport fishing demand.


JACKSOI RIVER - Mile 339-7 - 3^3.8

1.  Location:   The entire section of the Jackson River from
    Clifton Forge, Virginia, to the confluence of the Cowpasture
    River.
2.  Data Reference:  1, U, 5
3.  Pollution Sources:  (a) Covington residential and industrial
    wastes; (b) Clifton Forge residential and industrial wastes;
    (c) organic wastes from Covington and an unknown chemical sub-
    stance from Clifton Forge are thought to be the main pollutants.
h.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are moderately affected
    by pollution  While organic waste loads from Covington cause
    low dissolved oxygen concentrations, the river is recovering
    in this stream segment  The 1966 VMI Study1* revealed dis-
    solved oxygen ranged from 0=1 rag/1 to 51 mg/1.  Fish survival
    under these circumstances is doubtful.  However, this situa-
    tion does riot prevail all year long.  Water quality parameters
    are near survival levels in portions of the segment under the
    most adverse circumstances  Fish are thought to migrate into
    the area for a greater part of the year in substantial numbers.
    Compounding the dissolved oxygen problem is the report of bad
    tasting fish flesh.  Chemicals or compounds causing this flavor
    problem are unknown at present, but the source is thought to
    be Clifton Forge industrial wastes.

-------
                                                        VI - 34


JACKSON RIVER - Mile 3^3.8 - 363.6

1.  Location:  The entire section of the Jackson River from
    Covington to Clifton Forge, Virginia
2.  Data Reference:  1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
3.  Pollution Sources:  (a) Covington residential and industrial
    wastes;(b) the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company is
    thought to be the main pollution source contributing a huge
    quantity of organic effluent.
U.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are severely affected
    by pollution.  Oxidation of large quantities of organic
    material from Covington reduce dissolved oxygen concentra-
    tions throughout the entire stream segment.  A recent scien-
    tific study by VMI1* revealed dissolved oxygen levels in this
    area averaged below 1 mg/1.  State studies^ also showed water
    quality was poor.  Fish require a minimum average of 5 rag/1 s
    and at no time should dissolved oxygen drop below 3 mg/1.
    Based on the above water quality results, fish life and many
    associated food chain organisms could not survive.  However,
    a total fishery loss was not assigned to this river section.
    During certain periods of the year a combination of increased
    flow and cold water temperatures reduced the pollution effect.
    At this time some fish recruitment takes place.  An example
    is the yearly spring run of suckers that passes through the
    area.  Despite the occasional presence of fish, the waters
    in this river section are virtually worthless, providing
    only occasional low quality fishing opportunity.


UPHAM CREEK - Mile 0.0 - 3.2

1.  Location:  The stream is located just north of Richmond,
    Virginia.
2.  Data Reference: 1.
3.  Pollution Sources:  Probably domestic sewage from Richmond,
    Virginia.
h.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are severely affected
    by pollution.  High organic waste loads from the Richmond
    area periodically reduce stream dissolved oxygen concentra-
    tions to critical levels.   Fish populations are low and
    composed of hardier less desirable species.


WHITE OAK SWAMP - Mile 6.3 - 7-3

!  Location:  Near Elko, Virginia
2  Data Reference:  1.
3.  Pollution Sources:  Elko sewer wastes.

-------
                                                        VI - 35
    Pollution Effects:  The small stream segment is severely
    affected by pollution.  Oxygen levels in this small section
    of White Oak Swamp are reduced to critical levels during
    warm weather periods.  Fish populations are extremely low.
    Undesirable esthetic traits of the stream preclude sport
    fishing effort in the area.
BAILEY CREEK - Mile 0.0 - 3=5

1.  Location:  This section of Bailey Creek is located just east
    of Hopewell, Virginia.
2.  Data Reference:  1, 2, 5, 7-
3.  Pollution Sources:  (a) Hercules Powder Company; (b) resi-
    dential pollution of Hopewell; (c) Fort Lee, Virginia, military
    reservation wastes.
k.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are totally eliminated
    from this creek segment.  Oxidation of organic wastes reduces
    this stream to an aseptic condition.  Water quality tests con-
    ducted by the State5 have shown a complete lack of dissolved
    oxygen in the creek.  Plant and animal life are reportedly
    absent.
APPOMATTOX RIVER - Mile 0.0 - 12.2

1.  Location:  The entire stream segment from Petersburg to Hope-
    well, Virginia
2.  Data Reference: 1.
3.  Pollution Sources:   (a) Petersburg residential and industrial
    wastes, (b) Hopewell residential and industrial wastes.
h.  Pollution Effects:   Fishery resources are moderately affected
    by pollution.  Water quality data available does not indicate
    substandard water conditions in this stream segment; however,
    large quantities of organic waste from Hopewell and Petersburg
    are thought to reduce dissolved oxygen levels of the river
    below optimum conditions for fish.  Various other deleterious
    waste substances from Hopewell industries are thought to be
    present.  Resident  fishery resources are composed primarily of
    moderate populations of rough fish species.  A large anadromous
    spawning run passes through the area yearly, providing signi-
    ficant fishing opportunity.

-------

-------
                                                        VI - 36
RIVAMA RIVER - Mile 32.3 - 36.3

I-  Location:  A segment of the Rivanna River east of Charlottes-
    ville and below Moores Creek.
2.  Data Reference:  1.
3.  Pollution Sources:  Charlottesville industrial and residential
    wastes
1*.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are lightly affected
    by pollution.  Organic wastes from Charlottesville reduce dis-
    solved oxygen concentrations in the river segment during warm
    weather periods.  No fish kills have been reported.  Although
    water quality data is unavailable, it is believed poor environ-
    mental conditions prevail.  This situation encourages the
    invasion of rough fish species and reduces the abundance of
    fish.

RIVANNA AND NORTH FORK RIVANNA RIVER - Mile 1*1.0 - 1*2. U

1.  Location:  Just east of Charlottesville, Virginia.
2.  Data Reference:  1.
3.  Pollution Sources: Sand and gravel dredging operation.
1*.  Pollution Effects: Fishery resources are lightly affected
    by pollution.  Suspended solids in this small section of the
    river reduce productivity of the water, encourage invasion
    of rough fish, and interfere with local spawning activities.
MOORES CREEK - Mile 0.0 - 5-5

-*  Location:  This creek borders the southern edge of Charlottes-
    ville, Virginia
2.  Data Reference:  1, 2.
3.  Pollution Sources:  (a) Charlottesville Woolen Mill, (b)
    Charlottesville sewage plant #1.
k.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are totally eliminated
    from this creek segment.  Although no water quality data is
    available, wardens report the stream is in an aseptic condi-
    tion and is unable to support fish life.
MECHUM RIVER - Mile 0.0 - 9.6

1.  Location:  The entire stream segment from the vicinity of
    Batesville, Virginia, to its confluence with Moormans River.
2.  Data Reference:  1.
3.  Pollution Sources:  Mortons Frozen Foods.
IK  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are severaly affected
    by pollution.  No water quality data is available for this

-------
                                                        VI - 37
    river segment.  Large organic waste loads from Mortons Frozen
    Foods severely reduce dissolved oxygen stream concentrations.
    Fishery resources in the affected area are composed primarily
    of low populations of rough fish.  Populations are thought to
    migrate to better water areas when extremely adverse water
    quality conditions prevail^  Occasionally small fish kills occur.
HARDWARE RIVER - Mile 11.9 - 27.3

1.  Location:  The entire river segment from Red Hill, Virginia,
    to the Albemarle-Fluvanna County Line.
2.  Data Reference:  1.
3.  Pollution Sources:  Unknown.
h.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are lightly affected
    by pollution.  Heavy silt loads reduce light penetration and
    productivity of the water, in addition to affecting spawning
    success.  A fishery composed of large numbers of more tolerant
    rough fish is thought to occupy the stream because of poor
    water quality and habitat conditions.
TYE RIVER - Mile 0.0 - 15-1

!  Location:  Stream segment from the confluence of Piney River
    to the confluence of Buffalo River.  The latter stream is
    located a few miles west of Buffalo Station, Virginia.
2.  Data Reference:  1, 7.
3.  Pollution Sources:  American Cyanamid.
U.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are severely affected
    by pollution.  Piney River acid wastes are diluted and buf-
    fered by mixing waters of the Tye River.  Aquatic conditions
    of this river section border near tolerance limits of fish.
    Both productivity and carrying capacity of the stream are
    very lowo  Occasionally a fish kill occurs because of acid
    conditions.
PINEY RIVER - Mile 0.0 - 5.0

1.  Location:  Stream segment from Piney River, Virginia, to the
    confluence of the Tye River.
2-  Data Reference:  1, 2, 5, 7
3.  Pollution Sources: American Cyanamid.
U.  Pollution Effects: Fishery resources are totally eliminated
    from this river segment.  Sulfuric acid wastes from American
    Cyanamid reduce pH levels in the stream far below fish toler-
    ance levels.  Hydrogen ion concentrations of around pH 6 are
    considered a minimum acceptable level for fisheries.

-------
                                                        VI - 38
FISHING CREEK - Mile 0.0 - 1.2

1.  Location:  The entire length of this creek segment runs
    through suburban Lynchburg, Virginia.
2.  Data Reference:   1.
3.  Pollution Sources:   A meat packing plant and cannery are
    major pollution sources.
k.  Pollution Effects:   Fishery resources are severely affected
    by pollution.  Large quantities of organic material reduce
    stream dissolved oxygen concentrations significantly according
    to local wardens.  Fishery populations composed of lov numbers
    of rough fish survive in the section of the creek adjacent to
    the James River.  Upper portions of the creek are void of fish
    life.
MAURY RIVER - Mile 0.0 - 12.5

1.  Location:  The entire river segment from Buena Vista, Virginia,
    to the James River.
2.  Data Reference:  1, 2.
3.  Pollution Sources:  (a) Industrial and residential wastes of
    Buena Vista; (b) several industries contributing significant
    waste loads are Piedmont Paper Products, Inc., Leas McVitly
    Tanning Company, and a limestone and rubber treatment plant
    near Buena Vista.
k.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are lightly affected
    by pollution.  A combination of silt, deleterious chemicals,
    and reduced dissolved oxygen levels is thought to reduce the
    productivity of the stream and encourage the presence of
    rough fish species.
MAURY AND CALFPASTURE RIVERS - Mile 20.h - U6.5

I.  Location:  The entire river segment between Goshen and
    Lexington, Virginia
2.  Data Reference:   1.
3.  Pollution Sources:  Silt of unknown origin.
^.  Pollution Effects:  Fishery resources are lightly affected
    by pollution.  High stream silt loads are thought to reduce
    the quality of habitat and encourage the presence of rough
    fish species.

-------
                                                        VI - 39
                           REFERENCES
1.  Expert opinions of State game wardens, State fishery bio-
    logists, Federal fish and wildlife biologists, and other
    authoritative sources .

2.  1937 Inventory, Municipal and Industrial Waste Facilities,
    U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public
    Health Service.

3.  1962 Inventory , Municipal Waste Facilities, Region III,
    U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public
    Health Service Publication No. 1065-

U.  1966, Report on Stream Pollution Surveys in the Jackson and
    James Rivers, Parker, Clifton E. , and Knapp, John W. , VMI
    Research Laboratories,  Inc., Contract No. WA 66-7-

5.  Data Sheet of Water Quality Parameters compiled by Gary
    Gardner, FWPCA, 1966, from data of Virginia Division of
    Water Resources.

6.  Pollution Caused Fish Kills I960 - 196$, U. S. Department
    of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service
    Publication No.
7.  Industrial Waste Quality Computer Print-out , furnished by
    FWPCA, July 30, 1965.

-------
                                     VI -
        APPENDIX C
Population Projections for
  Major Municipal Areas
 in the James River Basin

-------
VI -




















^
M
O
M
s a
>\ i i
~? ^n
=?
0
si i>
M
PH PH
O

~-r1
00 
0 t-a
M
EH W
O 53
W EH

O S
(X M
P-,

P!| <$,
O ri}
1  1 (X|
EH 3j
^
h~3
^3
PM
O
































O
CM
O
CM


O
H
O
CM



O
0
O
CM



O
ON
ON
H




O
CO
ON
H






O
t
'ON
H







*
UN
VO
ON
rH






O
VO
ON
H











cfl
0)
SH
<^





0
O
o
r\
vo
ON

O
O
O
*
on
ON

0
o
o
n
H
ON

O
o
o
*t
ON
CO


0
O
O
ft
CM
t




O
O
0
ft
CM
UN





O
o
0
ft
vo





ON
r-
ON
r\
CM





01
rH
H
H
>
U)
CL)
-p
-p
0
,-H
f-t
a!
c~]
O
O
O
O
rt
CM
on

0
o
0
ft
ON
CM

O
O
O
ft
CO
CM

0
0
O
ft
CO
CM


O
O
0
f>
00
CM




O
O
O
ft
ON
CM





O
o
CO
r>
CO
CM





CO
UN
J-
rt
CO
CM





1

M
^ S3
O 0
P^i -p
bC
a a
O -H
-p >
Vi O
H U
H
0
0
O
o
ft
ON
CO

o
0
o
ft
CO
H
"^
0
o
o
t
CM
vo
on
o
0
o
ft
0
CM
on

o
0
o
^
H
ON
CM



O
O
0
ft
ON
vo
CM




O
O
O
ft
o
UN
CM




CM
on
H
f.
ON
H
CM



-P
!-i
O
ft
5
0)
H
|
a
o w
-p >
ft jj;

CO
03
O
0
o
rt
LT\
CM

O
O
O
rt
LfN
CM

O
0
o
ft
LTN
CM

O
0
0
ft
LTN
CM


O
0
o
ft
UN
CM




O
O
O
n
LTN
CM





O
0
O
N
UN
CM





ON
UN
H
*t
UN
CM




aJ
a
0)
jj
fXJ
1
j
O
-p cd
bC -P
S3 w
H -H
X >
j
j
O
0
O
^
H
0
0
H
0
O
O
f>
CM
CO
CO
0
o
o
ft
LTN
ON
t
O
0
O
f\
ON
VO
t-

O
0
O
ft
vo
CM
vo



o
o
0
n
on
0
VO




o
0
o
^
o
t





CO

CO
ft
LTN
CM
LTN






^3
-P

O
1 
rM W
H -P
O ^


W 0)
&H ft
0) O
1 ) j~j
(1)
PM
O
O
O
n
vo
o
ON
0
O
O
f\
t
CM
CO
O
O
O
ft
^j-
LT\
t-
0
o
o
ft
vo
t
vo

o
o
0
ft
u>
vo
UN



o
0
o
ft
on
UN
_^-




o
o
o
ft
o
Cvj





H

on
r.
on
CO
on










r^H
S3
O

^3
O
H
K
0
0
O
ft
ON
J-

 o
o
o
ft
ON
-3"

o
0
o
ft
ON
-}

o
0
0
ft
o\
-^t"


o
0
o
ft
ON
^J-




O
O
0
ft
_^J-
_^-





0
o
o
ft
CM





UN
UN
VO
*
ON
on












r^H
H
0
^H
^1
^
01














































w
S3
o
to
a
0)
!H

d
S3
O
H
-P
OJ
-p
Pi
ft
e
o
o

!H
O

-------
                                                        VII  -  1


                             BIBLIOGRAPHY
 1.  The James River Project Committee of the Virginia Academy
     of Science,  "THE JAMES RIVER BASIN,  Past, Present and Future",
     Richmond, Virginia, 1950.

 2.  U. S. Department of Health,  Education,  and  Welfare, Public
     Health Service, Region III,  "WATER SUPPLY AND  WATER QUALITY
     CONTROL STUDY,  GATHRIGHT RESERVOIR - JAMES  RIVER BASIN,
     VIRGINIA, Study of Needs and Value of Storage  for Municipal
     and Industrial  Water Supply  and Water Quality  Control",
     Charlottesville, Virginia, May 1962.

 3.  O'Connor, Donald J., Hydroscience, Incorporated, Englewood Cliffs,
     New Jersey,  for the West Virginia Pulp  and  Paper Company,
     "PRELIMINARY REPORT ON THE ASSIMILATION CAPACITY OF THE
     JACKSON RIVER", July 1962.

 k.  The Institute of Paper Chemistry, "A BIOLOGICAL SURVEY OF
     THE JAMES RIVER AND ADJACENT WATERS  IN  THE  VICINITY OF
     COVINGTON, VIRGINIA  1961", (Project  1575 -  Report ll),
     Appleton, Wisconsin, February 1962.

 5.  Frankel, Richard J., "WATER  QUALITY  MANAGEMENT: AN ENGINEERING
     ECONOMIC MODEL  FOR DOMESTIC  WASTE DISPOSAL", University
     Microfilms,  Incorporated, Ann Arbor, Michigan,  1965.

 6.  Wiley and Wilson, Consulting Engineers, "REPORT ON A WATER
     SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT FROM THE  APPOMATTOX  RIVER For the Cities
     of; Norfolk, Portsmouth, Petersburg, Newport News, Colonial
     Heights, and Chesterfield County, Virginia", Lynchburg and
     Richmond, Virginia, 1958.

 7.  Brehmer, Morris L. and Haltiwanger,  Samuel  0.,  "A BIOLOGICAL
     AND CHEMICAL STUDY OF THE TIDAL JAMES RIVER",  Virginia
     Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point,  Virginia, 1966.

 8.  State Water  Control Board, "RECORD OF HEARING  - NANSEMOND
     RIVER", Richmond, Virginia,  1965.

 9.  Smith, Russell  S., "REPORT OF A WATER QUALITY  SURVEY OF HAMPTON
     ROADS SHELLFISH AREAS", U. S. Public Health Service, 1950.

10.  Buck, Seifert and Jost, Consulting Engineers,  "REPORT ON A
     DEVELOPMENT  PROGRAM FOR THE  HAMPTON  ROADS SANITATION DISTRICT",
     New York, New York, April 1960.

-------

-------
                           TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                   Page

  I.  INTRODUCTION .. ....................      I - 1

      A.   Purpose and Scope  ..................      1-1

      B.   Authority  .....................      1-1

      C.   Acknowledgments  ......... .........      1-2

 II.  SUMMARY  ........................     II - 1

      A.   General  ......................     II - 1

      B.   Immediate Pollution Control Needs  .........     II - 3

          1.   Waste Treatment  ................     II - 3

          2.   Flow Regulation  ....... .........     II - k

          3.   Special Studies  ................     II - 5

          k.   Institutional Practices  ............     II - 6

      C,   Recent Pollution Control Progress  .........     II - 6

III.  DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA  .............    Ill - 1

 IV.  EXISTING WATER QUALITY ............  	     IV - 1

      A.   Biochemical Oxygen Demand and
            Dissolved Oxygen 	  ............     IV - 2

      B.   Nutrients  ....... ..............     IV - k

      C.   Bacteriological Quality  ...  ........     IV - k

      D.   Dissolved Solids ..................     IV - 5

  V.  RECENT PROGRESS IN POLLUTION CONTROL ..........      V-l

 VI.  IMMEDIATE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL NEEDS  ........     VI - 1

      A.   Treatment Requirements .<..............     VI - 1

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

                                                                    Page

       B.  Flow Regulation  .............    VI - 2

       C,  System Cost  .,:.,,......,...,,.    VI - 5

       D.  Transportation to Estuary and Estuarine
             Consideration  ............. 	    VI - 8

 VII.  APPENDICES .......... o	   VII - 1

       A.  Source of Data ...................   VII - 1

       B.  Formulation Parameters and Criteria  ........   VII - 3

       C,  Method of Data Analysis  .  .	   VII - 5

VIII.  BIBLIOGRAPHY ............. 	  VIII - 1

  IX.  TABLES .........................    IX - 1

-------
                           LIST OF TABLES

Number                                                           Page

   1    Municipal and Industrial Waste Water
          Inventory ......... 	    IX - 1

   2    Summary of Water Quality Data for Low
          Flow Periods 1961 and 1966	    IX - 1+

   3    Summary of Bacteriological Data for
          July, August, and September	    IX - 5

   k    Water Quality Data for Months of July,
          August, and September 1965	,	    IX - 6

   5    Water Quality Data for Months of July,
          August, and September 1966	    IX - 7

   6    Projected Increase in Waste Water Volumes
          for Major Treatment Facilities  	    IX - 8

   7    Mean Monthly and Design Flows	    IX - 9

   8    Monthly Volume of Patuxent Water
          Filtration Plant	    IX - 10

   9    Population Projections  	    IX - 11

  10    Basic Data for Patuxent Model	    IX - 12

-------
                                                          I - 1






Io   INTRODUCTION




    Ao  Purpose and Scope




        The purpose of this report is to direct attention to




existing and potential water pollution problems in the Patuxent




River Basin.




        Insofar as applicable, priorities for actions to achieve




immediate pollution control needs will be presented with the




specific objectives to:




        1.  Identify present and potential water quality problem




            areas.




        2.  Indicate responsibility for the problems.




        3.  Suggest immediate actions and responsibilities to




            alleviate the problems.




        h.  Estimate costs of these actions.




        This report, by describing the immediate needs for




controling water pollution in the Patuxent River Basin, repre-




sents the first step in the development of a comprehensive




program to control water pollution in the Basin.






    B.  Authority




        The basis for action can be found in the Federal Water




Pollution Control Act (PL 8^-660) as amended in 1961 (PL 87-88),




the Water Quality Act of 1965 (PL 89-23U), and the Clean Water




Restoration Act of 1966 (PL 89-753), with special emphasis upon




provisions regarding Comprehensive Programs for Water Pollution

-------
                                                          1-2







Control, Grants for Water Pollution Control Programs, Grants




for Construction, and Enforcement Measures against Pollution of




Interstate or Navigable Waters.






    C.  Acknowledgments




        The assistance and cooperation of various governmental




and institutional agencies enabled the Chesapeake Field Station




to assemble and evaluate water quality data in the Basin in what




would otherwise have taken a much longer period.  While every




agency contacted provided valuable assistance, the cooperation




of operating personnel at the Patuxent River Basin Sewage Treat-




ment Plants and the following Government agencies and institutions




merit special recognition:




        Maryland Department of Water Resources




        Maryland State Department of Health




        University of Maryland Natural Resources Institute




        Anne Arundel County Department of Public Works




        Howard County Metropolitan Commission




        Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission




        U. S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior




        Fort Meade, Department of the Army

-------

-------
                                                          II - 1






II.  SUMMARY




     A.  General




         In relation to other east coast basins, the Patuxent River




 Basin is unique in that there has been little or no historical




 urban development.  Water quality problems can be related to past




 agricultural exploitation of the land; the diversion of upstream




 flows for water supply purposes; and, currently, the rapid sub-




 urban development, especially in the central basin area.




         The accelerating population increase (255 per cent between




 19^0 and I960) was the result of growth of the metropolitan areas




 of Baltimore and Washington and the expansion of area Federal




 facilities including Fort Meade, the National Agricultural Research




 Center, and the Goddard Space Flight Center.  As the displacement




 of agriculture by suburban development continued, additional water




 supply and sewage treatment facilities were provided.  Approxi-




 mately ten million gallons per day (mgd) of fresh water and five




 mgd for developing industry are obtained primarily from surface




 water in the Basin,  In addition, UO mgd are diverted for use out-




 side the Basin in the Washington Metropolitan Area by the Washing-




 ton Suburban Sanitary Commission.




         The water quality in the Patuxent River Basin has deteri-




 orated as a result of increasing volumes of treated waste dis-




 charges and diversion of natural flows for water supply outside




 the Basin,  The population projection for 1980 is 270,000, an

-------
                                                         II - 2






Increase of 200 per cent over the I960 population of 135,000.




The projection of treated organic waste discharges shows an




increase of 1*10 per cent from the present 7 mgd to the




1980 figure of 29 mgd, primarily in the Western Branch and in




the upper Little Patuxent Sub-Basins.




        Waste treatment requirements,  based upon uniform treat-




ment policy for projected I960 loads,  a minimum dissolved oxygen




(DO) content in the stream of 5-0 mg/1, and for the 5 percentile




of the mean monthly flow, were determined to be 9^ per cent




removal of 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD).  The effect




of regulation of stream flow by discharges from Rocky Gorge and




Tridelphia Reservoirs which a total storage capacity of 13.8




billion gallons was investigated.  These Reservoirs, owned and




operated by the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission pri-




marily for water supply, should supplement the proposed waste




treatment standard of 9^ per cent BOD removal with a 20 cfs




flow to maintain the DO level.  Increasing released water to 30




cfs would have ric measurable effect in reducing treatment require-




ments,   Based upon historical and synthetic hydrological evalua-




tions of stream flow data, it was found that this multi-purpose




use of the reservoir system could be maintained with a prospec-




tive failure incidence of only about five months in every 100




years,

-------
                                                         II - 3






        Water quality in the River and Estuary has been monitored




by the Maryland Department of Water Resources since 196l; the




Natural Resources Institute is currently studying the effects of




thermal discharges from the PEPCO Plant in the Estuary; with the




IL S. Geological Survey participating and maintaining five robot




monitors




        Tentative water quality standards have been proposed by




the Maryland Department of Water Resources, and public hearings




are currently being held with plans for implementation and enforce-




ment of the adopted standards scheduled in compliance with the




Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1965.




        There are 2^ significant waste water discharges in the




Basin, with the largest organic loadings from the Laurel-Parkway,




Bowie-Belair, and the two Fort Meade treatment plants.  No major




organic industrial waste water discharges occur in the Basin.






    B.  Immediate Pollution Control Needs




        !  Waste Treatment




        In order to accommodate the increased organic pollution




load expected to occur in the Basin in the near future, the




capacity and efficiency of existing treatment plants must be




expanded.  Also, a new treatment plant on the Western Branch




will be required.  To maintain a dissolved oxygen objective of




5 mg/1 in the Patuxent River in the immediate future (i960),




organic waste discharges must receive at least 9^ per cent 5-day

-------
                                                         II -
BOD removal,-  The required increased capacity and the approxi-




mate cost of obtaining this degree of BOD removal are presented




in the following table.
                          Required Added
Treatment Plant
Laurel-Parkway
Savage
Maryland City
Patuxent Plant
Western Branch

Capacity (mgd)
2.k
7.0
0.75
2.2
5.0
17.35
Cost
$2, 26**, 000
$7,81+0,000
$1,223,000
$3,796,000
$3,857,000
$19,000,000
        To aid in the reduction of the coliform counts in all




waters of the Basin, organic waste effluents should be chlorin-




ated continuously.






        2,  Flow Regulation




        The additional treatment recommended in the foregoing




will not. achieve the immediate water quality goals in the Patuxent




River (5 ppm DO) unless at least the five per cent minimum low




flow is maintained in the River at all times.  This flow could




be achieved by releasing a minimum of 20 cfs from the Rocky




Gorge and Tridelphia Reservoirs at all times.  Rocky Gorge and




Tridelphia Reservoirs are a part of the Washington Suburban




Sanitary Commission's system which supplies water to parts of

-------

-------
                                                              II - 5


     the Metropolitan Area of Washington, D. C  Based on 1966 with-

     drawal rates from these Reservoirs, preliminary calculations

     indicate that 20 cfs could be released from the Reservoirs more

     than 99 per cent of the time without jeopardizing Washington

     Suburban Sanitary Commission water supply withdrawals.  No costs

     have been established for this flow augmentation, but means for

     its accomplishment should be investigated, and the required

     releases negotiated,,


             3o  Special Studies

             Listed below are the areas in which a need for special

     studies is indicatedo


   Location	Responsibility	Need	

PEPCO Chalk        FWPCA, State of    Determine the extent and long-term
  Point Plant      Maryland, and      effect of thermal pollution from
                   PEPCO              PEPCO's Chalk Point Generating
                                      Plant on aquatic life in the
                                      Patuxent Estuary,,

Basin-wide         F'WPCA and State    Determine the current nutrient
                   of Maryland        levels and establish the removal
                                      required.

Western Branch     WSSC, FWPCA, and   Determine the effect of the efflu-
  Treatment Plant  State of Maryland  ent from the proposed treatment
                                      plant on the Patuxent Estuary.

Tridelphia and     WSSC and State     Determine the feasibility and cost
  Rocky Gorge      of Maryland        of low flow augmentation releases
  Reservoirs                          from the Reservoirs.

-------
                                                         II - 6






        ^r  Institutional Practices




        A centralized authority should "be considered, and a




comprehensive plan developed to achieve an orderly and integrated




program for- maintaining acceptable water quality In the Patuxent




River Basin,  Since the Patuxent River Basin is entirely within




the State of Maryland, the responsibility for such an authority




would be that of State and local governments.






    C.  Recent Pollution Control Progress




        Plans for providing basin-wide water quality control




have been initiated by various State and local institutions in




the past   The principal ones are discussed below:




        !  A regional sewerage plan, prepared by Wolman, Geyer,




            and Beavin, was submitted to the Maryland State




            Department of Health In 1960=  Although the plan was




            never adopted, It has served as a guide for planning




            agencies.




        2 ,  The State of Maryland enacted the Patuxent River




            Watershed Act in i96l to regulate erosion, floods,




            and urban development




        3-  The State amended the Annotated Code of Maryland in




            1966 to require counties to submit by 1970 compre-




            hensive plans for water supply and sewerage systems




            to meet State and Federal standards.  These are




            currently In preparation.  The State Department of

-------
                                                         II - 7






            Health has "been given the authority to establish




            minimum requirements subject to review "by the State




            Department of Water Resources






        Although the Patuxent River Basin is entirely within the




State of Maryland, the River downstream from Hardesty is subject




to tidal action, and this portion of the River is classified as




a coastal or interstate stream.  In compliance with the Federal




Water Quality Act of 196"?, the State is currently in the process




of establishing water quality standards for interstate streams in




Maryland.  Also, the State is developing a plan for the implemen-




tation and enforcement of the standards.

-------
                                                          Ill - 1






III.  DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA




          The Patuxent River originates in the Piedmont geological




  area in Howard and Montgomery Counties and flows southeasterly




  approximately 110 miles through the Coastal Plain to Chesapeake




  Bay, draining an area of 930 square miles.  The Basin lies wholly




  in the State of Maryland, encompassing parts of five Counties.




  The Piedmont streams characteristically drain a rolling hill and




  valley area but become broader and more sluggish in the Coastal




  Plain, expanding frequently into swamps and marshland.




          The lower River is a tidal estuary under tidal  influence




  extending upstream as far as Hardesty, 56 miles from Chesapeake




  Bay.  During periods of low flow, salinity has been found at




  Lyons Creek some ^3 miles upstream.




          The two major tributaries of the Patuxent River are the




  Little Patuxent and Western Branch, with drainage areas of l6o




  and 110 square miles, respectively,  The Middle Patuxent, a




  tributary of the Little Patuxent, has a drainage area of 57




  square miles.




          The Patuxent River Basin receives an average of kk inches




  of precipitation annually, with a resulting surface run-off of




  about l6 inches  Average annual temperature is 55 F., ranging




  from 0 to 100 F.




          Since the days of the early settlers, land, use  in the




  Patuxent River Basin has been predominately agricultural over

-------
                                                        Ill - 2






the 930 square mile drainage area.  Tobacco was grown on the




Coastal Plain and remains a major crop, but the cereal grain




crops raised in the Piedmont Area have been displaced by dairy-




ing during the past hundred years.  More recently the Central




Basin Area on both sides of the "Fall Line" separating the Coast-




al Plain and Piedmont Areas has become suburban, with economic




bases for the most rapid population growth primarily in Balti-




more, Washington, and in the Federal activities at Fort Meade




and Beltsville.




        Agriculture, however, remains the most important economic




activity in the Basin, with a significant percentage of the south-




ern Coastal Plain Area in tobacco, and dairying now the predominant




activity in the northern Piedmont.




        The sand and gravel deposits of the Coastal Plain are the




only extensively used mineral resource of the Basin.




        According to a survey made in 1953, land use in the Basin




is as follows:






             Forests                  ^2 per cent




             Fields and Meadows       k3 per cent




             Urban and Residential    15 per cent






        When these data were compared to 1930 data, it was found




that the percentage of forested land had remained static, while




agricultural land had been lost to residential and urban use, a




trend obviously continuing.

-------
                                                        Ill - 3


        The I960 population of 135,000 represented a 255 per

cent increase over the 19^0 figure of 53,000, with the most

rapid growth in the Central Basin Area.

        About 15 mgd of potable water is used for domestic and

industrial purposes within the Basin, of which approximately

two-thirds is domestic use and the remaining industrial use.

The major surface water withdrawals from the Patuxent Basin are

as follows:


	Utility	Quantity	Source	

Washington Suburban                      Patuxent (Rocky Gorge
  Sanitary Commission      ^2.51 mgd      .Reservoir)

Fort Meade                  2.91 mgd     Little Patuxent River

Maryland House of                        Little Patuxent and
  Correction                0.82 mgd       Dorsey Run

PEPCO Chalk Point                        Patuxent Estuary for
  Plant                   720.0  mgd       cooling water


        The remaining water requirements are met from ground

water sources and are estimated to be about 5 mgd1.   About Uo

mgd of the water are diverted to the Washington, D.  C. Metro-

politan Area for use outside the Basin.

        There are 2k significant waste water discharges in the

Basin, with the largest organic loading from the Laurel-Parkway,

Bowie-Belair, and the two Fort Meade sewage treatment plants

(Table l).  No major organic industrial waste water discharges

occur in the Basin.

-------
                                                          IV - 1






IV.  EXISTING WATER QUALITY




         Increase in waste water volumes, a high density of out-




 falls in limited areas, sluggish streams, and large diversions




 from the Basin for water supply combine to cause water quality




 problems in the Patuxent Basin.  The degradation in water quality




 in reaches below the Fort Meade, Patuxent, Bowie-Belair, Laurel-




 Parkway, and Maryland House of Correction sewage treatment plant




 outfalls was very pronounced during the low flow periods of 1966.




         The most significant waste discharges enter the Patuxent




 River in the Upper Basin above River Mile 1*5-  To simplify inves-




 tigation and presentation, the Upper Basin has been divided into




 three reaches and numbered as follows:




         1.  Main Stem of Patuxent from Mile 1+5-0 to confluence




             with Little Patuxent at Mile 63-70.




         2.  Main Stem of Patuxent from confluence with Little




             Patuxent to Mile 80.9 just below Rocky Gorge




             Reservoir.




         3-  Little Patuxent from confluence with the Patuxent



             to Savage at Mile 82. U.






         The detailed field investigations and engineering studies




 necessary to evaluate the water quality in the Patuxent Estuary




 (downstream from River Mile ^5) have not been performed at this




 time.  Studies are being conducted, and the analysis of water




 quality in this portion of the Patuxent River will be reported




 at a later date.

-------
                                                         IV - 2






        As shown in Figure 1, the significant waste water dis-




charges are found in reaches 2, and 3>  Even though the majority




of the waste is receiving at least 85 per cent treatment, there




is a degradation in water quality in the reaches below Laurel




and Fort Meade.






    A.  Biochemical Oxygen Demand and Dissolved Oxygen




        During the low flow periods of July, August, and the




early part of September 1966, the water quality in all three




reaches near the confluence of the Patuxent and Little Patuxent




Rivers was typified by DO values ranging from 1.0 to ^.0 mg/1




and BOD's ranging from h.O to 22.0 mg/1.  A summary of the water




quality for selected stations is given in Table 2 and Table 3.




        When the water quality is compared to those of 196l for




the same three months, it is apparent that it has deteriorated.




Although waste water volumes have increased about 50 P6*" cent




in the past five years, some of the low quality can be attributed




to the extremely low flows during 1966.  For example, the mean




monthly flow in August at Laurel was 5-73 cfs in 1966.  The low




flows that occurred during August 1966, based on a log normal




probability relationship, have an occurrence probability of less




than 2 per cent




        As presented in Tables h and 5, the quality data for the




same selected stations in 1965 and 1966 indicate that the stream




is reaching its maximum assimilative capacity.  Due to large

-------
                                                         IV - 3






differences in temperature in some of the sample data in 1965,




a quantitative comparison cannot be made using 19&5 data.  How-




ever, data from "both years indicate poor water quality in all




reaches near the confluence with the Little Patuxent.




        A major factor which indirectly affects the water quality,




especially near the confluence with the Little Patuxent, is the




large water loss due to evaporation, transpiration, leakage, etc.




According to field measurements by the U. S. Geological Survey




in 1966, there was about an 8 to 10 cfs loss of flow in the




Patuxent between Laurel and the confluence with the Little Patuxent.




        In the Patuxent the low flows have a twofold effect on




the water quality:




        1.  The velocity of the stream is much less at low flows,




            thus there is a larger exertion of BOD on the reaches




            just below the Laurel-Parkway, Bowie-Belair, and




            Patuxent treatment plant outfalls.




        2.  The low velocities reduce the reaeration rate of the




            stream, thereby the assimilative capacity of the




            stream is drastically reduced.  For example, on




            August 8, 1966, the velocity of the Patuxent River




            near Bowie was calculated to be 0.2 fps, and reaera-




            tion coefficient was determined to be about 0.2




            (base 10).




The high water loss rate from marshy areas of the Patuxent and




small water releases from Rocky Gorge Reservoir (average of 5-73

-------
                                                         IV - k






cfs for August 1966) caused very sluggish flows in the Patuxent




from Laurel to the confluence with the Little Patuxent River.




In the Little Patuxent, the 6.0 mgd water withdrawal "by Fort




Meade and the Maryland House of correction also significantly




reduced the volume of dilution water during the low flow months.






    B.  Nutrients




        A summary of nutrient data since 196l from the U. S.




Geological Survey and Maryland Department of Water Resources for




select stations in the Patuxent River is presented below:
Location
Laurel
Fort
Meade
Hardesty
Lower
Marlboro
*
Average
Stream
Patuxent River
Little Patuxent
River
Patuxent River
Patuxent Estuary
of two samples
River
Mile
80.90
75.62
U9.68
30.65
PO, as P
(mg/1)
0.006
0.330*
0.062
0.061
NO- as N
(Mg/1)
0.5^0
0.535
O.T60
0.576
From the summary it can be seen that the nutrient levels in the




Basin are low.  There are no reported algal problems in the




Patuxent River.






    C.  Bacteriological Quality




        As summarized in Table 3, high coliform counts are indi-




cative of the water quality in the upper watershed.  The high

-------
                                                         IV - 5






counts are associated with agricultural land usage, sewage out-




falls , and population centers.




        The lower counts at Station 10 indicate a rather high




die-away rate as one moves downstream; however, the bacterial




quality of the Patuxent at Mile k2.Q is poor.  This quality




degradation is probably due to Western Branch which also has a




rather high coliform count.






    D.  Dissolved Solids




        According to a study by the U. S. Geological Survey in




1962, the average dissolved solids concentration in the Patuxent




River at Hardesty was determined to be TO mg/1.  The average




daily load, which was computed to be about 73 tons, contains




very small amounts of trace elements.

-------
                                                          V - 1






V.  RECENT PROGRESS IN POLLUTION CONTROL




        The local county governments have been responsible gener-




ally for zoning, land use planning, water supply, and waste dis-




posal.  In Howard County the initial sewerage plan was developed




in 1958.  The Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission has aided




in water supply and waste disposal planning in Prince Georges




and Montgomery Counties  For the remaining Counties in the Basin,




sewerage planning was done on a community basis.




        In 1958, officials from the interested Counties, State,




and other planning agencies agreed to study the sewerage needs




of the entire Patuxent Basin-  The regional plan, which was




developed by Wolman, Geyer, and Beavin, was completed in Decem-




ber I960, and the recommendations are summarized below:




        1.  Construct, according to formulated schedule, sewer-




            age treatment facilities at Laurel, Savage, Priest




            Bridge, and Mataponi Creek to serve the waste dis-




            posal needs of the Basin up to the year 2000.




        2.  Using low stream flows occurring less than five per




            cent of the time, with 23 cfs being released from




            Rocky Gorge Reservoir to maintain a minimum DO level




            of 50 mg/1, 90 per cent BOD removal was recommended




            for Mataponi Creek, Laurel, and Priest Bridge sewage




            treatment plants, while the Savage plant was to pro-




            vide 92-5 per cent removal.

-------

-------
                                                          V - 2

The regional plan, although never formally adopted, served as a
guide for use by County and State planning agencies.
        In 196l, the Maryland General Assembly enacted the Patuxent
Watershed Act.  According to this Act, a board of commissioners
and representatives of the State Government was to coordinate
County and State activities for:
     "...the purpose of protecting said watershed by a pro-
     gram of flood prevention, conservation, the protection
     of areas therein subject to sediment or erosion damages,
     and to prevent encroachment therein by the rapid spread
     and growth of urban development, and to cooperate with
     local, County, State, and Federal agencies; and it is
     hereby declared that such flood prevention, conservation,
     sediment or erosion protection, and the prevention of
     urban development within said watershed is a public
     benefit conducive to the public health, safety, and
     welfare."  (2, Section 1+ilA)
Attempts have been made recently to amend the Act in order to
make it more effective in accomplishing its goals.
        In 1966, the General Assembly amended the Annotated Code
of the State of Maryland relating to water supply and sewerage.
According to the amendment, the Counties are required to develop
County plans to provide adequate water supply systems and sewer-
age systems by 1970 and to include a time schedule with cost
figures to implement the program.  The State Department of Health
was designated the approving agency with opportunity for review
offered to the Maryland Department of Water Resources.

-------
                                                          V - 3






        Numerous studies have been conducted on various problems




and conditions in the Patuxent Estuary.  In order to determine




the effect of the cooling water discharge from the proposed PEPCO




Chalk Point Plant, a study was initiated by Natural Resource




Institute of University of Maryland, the U. S. Geological Survey,




and the Chesapeake Bay Institute of The Johns Hopkins University.




The power plant was placed in operation in 19^4, and part of the




study is being continued.




        In January of 1966, the Governor of Maryland announced




that the State of Maryland would comply with the Federal Water




Quality Act of 1965.  The State is currently establishing:




        1.  Water quality standards for interstate waters




            in Maryland.




        2.  A plan for the implementation and enforcement of




            the standards.




Public hearings are being conducted preliminary to the establish-




ment of such standards and plan.

-------
                                                          VI - 1






VI.  IMMEDIATE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL NEEDS




         In the design of a system for maintaining water of good




 quality in the Patuxent River Basin, the following must be




 considered:




         I,  The projected ^10 per cent increase in municipal




             water discharges by I960.




         2.  The high rate of diversion of the Patuxent River




             water by the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commis-




             sion for water supply purposes.




         3  The maximum use of assimilative capacity of the




             streams in conjunction with effective sewage treat-




             ment in order to maintain good water quality in the




             Patuxent Basin.




         k,  Possible transportation of waste water to the Estuary.




         5.  Nutrient removal.






         The design of the system must also reflect possible trade-




 offs between low flow augmentations from the presently existing




 reservoirs and increased treatment requirements.  The methods of




 analyses employed in this report are discussed in Appendix C.






     A,,  Treatment Requirements




         The various treatment levels which would be required to




 maintain a DO of 5 nig/I for the 1980 projected waste water




 volumes at various flow probabilities, if no reservoirs existed,




 are presented in the following table:

-------
                                                         VI - 2
Mean Monthly Low
Flow Probability         	Treatment Requirements
Per



*

Cent of Time
5
2
1

Per cent BOD
July
9^
9^
95

removal values
August
9^
9k
96

rounded upward
September
9^
9*
95


        The data in this table shows that, using the five per

cent mean monthly low flow and a minimum DO requirement of 5.0

mg/1, all waste water should receive a minimum of 9^ per cent

BOD removal.  In the determination, it was assumed that all the

minimum DO's in the effluent were k*0 mg/1, there was an 8.0 cfs

loss in the marsh in the critical area, and there were no reser-

voirs in the system.


    Be  Flow Regulation

        The effect of fixed release from the Rocky Gorge Reser-

voir on treatment requirements for the month of August is as

follows:

-------
                                                         VI - 3

     Release Flow                   Treatment Requirements
       ,..._(cfs)	(Per Cent of BOD Removal)
           5                                  96
          10                                  95
          15                                  95
          20                                  9k
          30                                  9^

        Data in the above table were calculated assuming all
other stream flows at the 5 percentile, a mean August stream
temperature of 21.3 C, a DO minimum of 5^0 mg/1, and a uniform
treatment policy were utilized in the calculations.
        Based on a mean September stream temperature of 18.5 C,
the effect of flow regulation on treatment requirements is as
follows:
     Release Flow                  Treatment Requi rements
        (cfs)	(Per Cent of BOD Removal)
           5                                 95
          10                                 9k
          15                                 93
          20                                 93
          30                                 93

        This table indicates that only slightly less treatment
is required to achieve the objective of 5^0 mg/1 for the month
of September.
        As indicated in the tabulation for August, a minimum of
20 cfs (which is the 5 per cent mean monthly low flow) should be
released from Rocky Gorge Reservoir in conjunction with a minimum

-------
                                                         VI - h

treatment requirement of 9^ per cent removal of BODo  Increasing
the minimum release to  30 cfs has no measurable effect on waste
water treatment requirements  Using Fiering's hydrology model,
the 30 years of unregulated historical data, 191^ to 19^, were
routed through the reservoir system.  The Washington Suburban
Sanitary Commission 1966 monthly withdrawal rate for water supply
requirements was also read into the model (see Table 8)  The
number of months in which the indicated release flow was not met
is given below:
     Release Flow                         Number of Months
        (cfs)	Deficient
          10                                     1
          15                                     3
          20                                     5
          30                                    11
          ^0                                    25

        In reviewing the 30 years of unregulated stream flow
data at the gage at Laurel, Maryland (formerly Burtonsville,
Maryland) the mean monthly flaw that occurred in 1931 has a
recurrence interval of about once in 100 years  Therefore, the
drought that occurred in the early 1930"s probably has a mini-
mun recurrence interval of once in 100 years,
        Twenty 150-year periods of synthetically generated flows
were routed through the reservoir system under the same condi-
tions as above.  The probability of not meeting the mean monthly
release as indicated is given below:

-------
                                                         VI - 5

     Release Flov                    Probability of Monthly
        (cfs)	Failure (Per Cent)
          10                             less than 0.05
          20                             less than 0.05
          30                                       0.20
          40                                       1.20

        Since increasing the release flov above 20 cfs will have
little measurable effect on lowering the BOD removal requirements,
nothing would be gained by requiring a release greater than 20
cfs.  The failure rate for the 20 cfs release rate, based on
specified treatment requirements, would be five months in 100
years, based on historical data, or less than 0.05 per cent of
the time, based on the synthetically generated flow data.  If
the 20 cfs release rate is maintained, and all waste water is
subjected to 94 per cent removal of BOD, both the 5.0 mg/1 DO
objective and the current water supply withdrawal rates of the
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission will be met greater than
99 per cent of the time.

    C.  System Cost
        No cost estimates have been established for the require-
ment of releasing 20 cfs from the existing reservoir system, but
the above analyses have indicated that it could be done with
little change in the current water supply withdrawal rates.  Means
for accomplishing this release should be investigated, and the
required release negotiated.

-------
                                                         vi - 6


        Each of the agencies has developed plans for meeting its

projected waste water treatment requirements.  The cost of the

proposed expansion program is as shown in the following table:


                                  Added
	Community	Capacity	Cost

Laurel-Parkway (WSSC)            2.k mgd            $1,850,000

Savage (Howard County)           7.0 mgd            $6,1400,000

Maryland City
  (Anne Arundel County)          0.75 mgd           $1,000,000

Patuxent Plant
  (Anne Arundel County)          2.2 mgd            $3,100,000

Western Branch (WSSC)            5.0 mgd            $3,150,000
                                                   $15,500,000
        The above costs, which include the secondary treatment

facilities only, were obtained from various consulting engineers'

reports, county plans, etc.6'7'8'9'26

        In order to maintain the water quality criteria of 5.0

mg/1 DO, 9h per cent removal of BOD for the projected 1980 waste

water discharges is required.  To aid in reducing the coliform

counts in all waters of the Basin, all organic waste effluents

must be chlorinated continuously.  The cost of the increased

BOD removal rate, according to a study by Frankel25, from 85 per

cent to 9^ per cent is about 20 per cent of the basic plant cost

for a 2.5 mgd plant and about 25 per cent for a 10 mgd plant.

-------

-------
                                                         vi - 7






Using an average cost increase of 22.5 per cent for a U.O mgd




plant, the increased construction cost is estimated to be




$19,000,000.




        Other factors that must be considered in waste water




treatment are nutrient removal requirements and cost.  Nutrient




removal requirements and cost were not determined because of




insufficient data.  However, using average nutrient loadings




from ten sewage treatment plants in the Potomac River Basin




and the limited stream sampling data available, it appears that




the Patuxent River has a large capacity for assimilating phosphorus,




        Expressing phosphorus removal by the sediments, aquatic




plants, etc., by a first order reaction, it was estimated that




the removal coefficient is about 0.30 (base 10).  Until the




mechanisms of removal and controling factors are firmly estab-




lished and the resulting algal blooms documented, treatment




requirements for phosphorus cannot be determined with precision.




As indicated above, the required uniform treatment is 9^ per




cent removal.  The type of treatment facility required to obtain




this high BOD removal rate will affect the concentration of nutri-




ents in the final effluent.  Therefore, in the waste treatment




plant design phase, consideration should be given to possible




future nutrient removal requirements.




        In lieu of formulating the nutrient removal requirements




at the present time, a study should be initiated to determine

-------
                                                         vi - 8






the current nutrient level and establish the rate of removal.




Upon completion of this study, an evaluation of nutrient treat-




ment requirements will be possible.  (Preliminary studies are




currently being conducted by the Chesapeake Field Station,




CB-SRBP.)






    D.  Transportation to Estuary and Estuarine Consideration




        In developing the Regional Beverage Plan, Wolman, Geyer,




and Beavin6 investigated the possibility of disposing of all




Basin sewage to the Patuxent Estuary by means of a continuous




interceptor system leading to a single large treatment plant




located near Mataponi Creek.  Their investigations indicated




that the Estuary was incapable of assimilating the effluent from




a single point discharge.




        Further investigation by Wolman, Geyer, and Beavin showed




the feasibility of discharging the effluent to Chesapeake Bay,




provided it is planned jointly with the District of Columbia




Government for disposal of their final effluent.  This plan for




disposal into Chesapeake Bay by the District of Columbia has not




been adopted.




        The proposed Western Branch Sewage Treatment Plant by




Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, plus the projected




increased stream load, will result in water quality deteriora-




tion in the Estuary  Due to the two-layer nature of the Patuxent

-------
                                                         VI - 9






Estuary and currently indeterminate effects of the PEPCO Chalk




Point Plant, the use of Thoman's estuary model or spectral analysis




in conjunction with substantial field work will be required to




fully evaluate the significance of this water quality deteriora-




tion,  A study of this nature will also be valuable in assessing




the effects of nutrients in the Patuxent Estuary.

-------
                                                        VII - 1






                           APPENDIX A




                         SOURCE OF DATA




        The basic population projections were obtained from the




National Planning Association^  Projections were also obtained




from the Howard8 and Anne Arundel26 County water and sewerage




master plans.  The Regional Sewerage Plan Report by Wolman,




Geyer, and Beavin6 and the Patuxent Report by the Water Manage-




ment Seminar of The Johns Hopkins Universityio were also sources




of population projections and the dichotomy of population within




the Basin.




        Surface water discharge rates were obtained from the




U. S. Geological Survey.15'16'17  The U, S. Geological Survey




has six permanent and six temporary gaging stations within the




Basino




        Chemical and biological water quality data were obtained




from the Maryland Department of Water Resources  This Depart-




ment conducts a monthly sampling program at 3^ stations within




the Basin, some of which were established in 1961 and other sta-




tions added since 1962  The Department has also conducted surveys




in the Estuary from 1962 to 196U.  Intensive surveys were also




made by the Department in the Upper Patuxent River during the




summers of 1964, 1965, and 1966,  Sampling stations for the




Patuxent River are shown in Figure 2,  Chemical quality water




data were also obtained from the Uo S> Geological Survey which

-------
                                                        VII - 2






has established five stations for monitoring vater quality in




the Estuary.




        Monthly operating reports were obtained from all major




waste treatment plants within the Basin.  Operational data for




the remaining discharges were obtained from the Maryland Depart-




ments of Health and Water Resources.




        Stream temperature data were obtained from the Fort Meade




water treatment plant records in order to establish mean monthly




water temperatures for the Patuxent River.




        Time-of-travel and cross-section data were obtained by




personnel of the Chesapeake Field Station, CB-SRBP.  Dye studies




were conducted by the U. S. Geological Survey in 1965 and were




also used to establish time-of-travel.

-------
                                                        VII - 3






                           APPENDIX B




              FORMULATION PARAMETERS AND CRITERIA






        1.  Population and Waste Water Projections




        In order to further define the water resources problems




in the Basin, the immediate needs were expanded to include re-




quirements up to the year 1980,  The population projections of




National Planning Association, as tabulated in Table 9, indicated




that the Basin population will increase about 200 per cent by




1980.  Projections by the various counties, planning agencies,




and consulting engineering firms are somewhat higher; however,




all projections indicate a rapid rate of growth in the Basin.




        Due to the large projected increase in population, each




of the major planning agencies within the Basin was contacted




and, whenever possible, supplied projected waste water discharges




for 1980.  Since planning agencies are more familiar with the




local sewage effluent problems, and only part of each County is




within the Basin, the projected waste discharges obtained from




planning agencies were used in the study.  The current and pro-




jected flows from major sewage treatment facilities are given




in Table 6.






        2.  Stream Flow




        The design stream flow used in determining pollution




control needs is the mean monthly low flow which occurs five




per cent or less of the time (Table 7).  The consecutive 7-day

-------
                                                        VII - k






low flow with recurrence interval of once in ten years, as rec-




ommended by the Maryland Department of Water Resources, is quite




similar to the design flow (as can also be seen in Table !)




The advantage of using the mean monthly flows is that flow and




temperature can be more realistically incorporated in prediction




of water quality.






        3.  Water Quality




        Since the parameter which is most indicative of water




quality in a free flowing stream is dissolved oxygen, the treat-




ment requirements and/or flow requirements were determined using




a minimum dissolved oxygen level of 5-0 mg/1.




        In order to keep the waters essentially free from heavy




growths of rooted plants, slimes, algae, and other plankton, the




Sub-Task Force on Water Quality on Project Potomac has proposed




a phosphorus maximum of 0.1 mg/1.  This has been used in this




report.

-------
                                                        VII - 5



                           APPENDIX C


                    METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS



        A mathematical model relating temperature, dissolved


oxygen (DO), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), and stream flow


vas established for the Basin.  Thomas' step method version2 of


the oxygen-sag equation is the basic algorithm in the model.


The steady-state temperature formulation of Duttweiler3 was


employed as the temperature algorithm in the model.  The reaera-


tion coefficient for each section was calculated employing the


Churchill formulation. **


        For the model study, the Patuxent River Basin above


Estuary River Mile U5.0 was divided into 28 physically-homogene-


ous sections (Figure 3).  Logarithmic velocity versus stream flow


and logarithmic depth versus stream flow relationships were


developed for the 12 gaging stations.  The relationships are as


follows:

                                 DTD
             Depth    = AA x Flow


             Velocity = CC x FlowDD


        The exponents were established at each of the gaging


stations  and extended to other sections within the model.   The


constants for the relationships were determined primarily by


cross-sections and time-of-travel studies.  Exponents and con-


stants for each of the sections are tabulated in Table 10.

-------
                                                        vii - 6






        The model, which was programed on a digital computer,




was verified by comparing the calculated results with known water




quality conditions.  The verification procedure used was as




follows:




        1.  Establish the constants and exponents for the depth




            and velocity relationship for the sections.




        2.  From existing water quality data, determine deaera-




            tion coefficient.




        3.  Compare the calculated BOD profile with field results




            and, if necessary, adjust the deaeration coefficient.




        1*.  Once the calculated BOD profiles were satisfactory,




            the calculated DO profiles are compared to field




            results.




        5.  When necessary, the depth constants are uniformly




            adjusted in order to yield a satisfactory DO profile.






        Once the model was verified, it was used to predict the




water quality at various treatment and discharge levels.  A




computed and a field data profile are shown in Figure H.  Water




quality predictions were made for the months of July, August,




and September in order to take into consideration low flow con-




ditions and water temperatures simultaneously.




        The following assumptions were made in projecting water




quality.




        1.  All waste water discharges have a DO of U.O mg/1.

-------
                                                        VII - T






        2.  The temperature of all waste water discharge was




            25 C.




        3  The deaeration rates of the waste waters will be




            equal to those as determined in the verification




            procedure.




        k.  BOD in the waste discharges will remain relatively-




            constant.






        In order to determine how much water could be released




for water quality control from Rocky Gorge Reservoir without




jeopardizing the water supply needs of Washington Suburban Sani-




tary Commission, the synthetic hydrology model of Fiering5 was




used.  The 1966 water supply figures were used in the model.

-------
                                                       VIII - 1






                          BIBLIOGRAPHY






1.  Uo S, Geological Survey, "Water and Land Resources of the




    Patuxent River Basin, Maryland,"  (Unpublished)




2,  Thomas, H. A., "The Dissolved Oxygen Balance in  Streams,"




    Seminar Papers on Waste Water Treatment and Disposal, Boston




    Society of Civil Engineers, 196l.




3.  Duttweiler, D= W0, "A Mathematical Model of Stream Tempera-




    tures," Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, The Johns Hopkins Uni-




    versity, 1963.




k.  Churchill, M.  A., et al.,  The Prediction of Stream Reaera-




    tion Rates, Tennessee Valley Authority, Chattanooga,  Tennessee,




    July 1962.




5.  Fiering, M. B., and Pisano, W  C., "Synthesis and Simulation




    Package for Reservoir Planning," prepared for Federal Water




    Pollution Control Administration,  Uo S. Department of Health,




    Education, and Welfare, 19660




6,,  Wolman, A., Geyer, J\ C.,  and Beavin, B.  E. , "Patuxent Regional




    Sewerage Report," Board of Consultants, Baltimore, Maryland,




    1961.




1,  Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission,  "Sewerage Program,"




    Fiscal 1967-1971, 1966o




80  Howard County Metropolitan Commission,  "Sewerage Report,"




    prepared by Whitman, Reguardt and Associates-Consulting




    Engineers, June 1958.

-------
                                                        VIII - 2






 9.  Howard County Metropolitan Commission,  "Water and Sewerage,"




     prepared by Whitman, Reguardt and Associates-Consulting




     Engineers, 1966




10.  Water Management Seminar,  "Report of the Patuxent River Basin,"




     The Johns Hopkins University, 1966,,




11.  Maryland State Planning Department,  "Maryland Water Supply




     and Demand Study," prepared for Maryland State Planning




     Department, Hull, Co H<, , Consultant, September 1965




12o  Maryland Geological Survey, "Chemical Quality of Water and




     Trace Elements in the Patuxent River Basin," prepared in




     cooperation with the U, S Geological Survey, 19&5-




13.  Maryland Department of Water Resources, "Physical, Chemical,




     and Bacteriological Water Quality in the Patuxent River,"




     Unpublished Report, 1967=




lit.  Potomac Interim Report to the President, Federal Interdepart-




     mental Task Force on the Potomac, Potomac River Basin Advisory




     Committee, January 1966.




15.  Uo S, Geological Survey, "Surface Water Records of Maryland




     and Delaware," 1961-1966.




16.  Maryland Department of Geology, Mines,  and Water Resources,




     "Maryland Stream Flow Characteristics," Bulletin 25,  1962.




17.  Uo So Geological Survey, "Surface Water Supply of the United




     States," North Atlantic Slope Basin, New York to York River,




     Geological Survey Water Supply Papers,  1702, 1722, and 1302.

-------
                                                        VIII - 3






l8o  Chesapeake Bay Institute, "On the Prediction of the Distribu-




     tion of Excess Temperature from a Heated Discharge in an




     Estuary," The Johns Hopkins University, Technical Report 33,




     February 1965




19-  Us S0 Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, "Waste




     Disposal Practices at Federal Installations, Patuxent River




     Basin," Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins Project,




     Charlottesville, Virginia, 196^.




20.  Nash, Carroll Blue, "Environmental Characteristics of a River




     Estuary," Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Board of Natural




     Resources, State of Maryland, December 19^7




21.  Beavin, C. F., "Temperature and Salinity of Surface Water at




     Solomons, Maryland," Chesapeake Science, Volume I, No.  2,




     April I960,




22.  U. S. Geological Survey, "Temperature and Water Quality Condi-




     tions for the Period July 1963 to December 1968, Patuxent




     River Estuary, Maryland," Department of the Interior, Open-




     File Report, 196T.




23.  Natural Resources Institute, "Patuxent Thermal Studies,"




     Progress Report for Maryland Department of Water Resources,




     University of Maryland,  1967,




2k,  Stross, Ru C., and Stottlemyer, J. R., "Primary Production




     in the Patuxent River,"  Chesapeake Science, Volume VI,  No.  3,




     September 1965.

-------
                                                        viii - U






25.  Frankel, R. F., "Water Quality Management:  An Engineering




     Economic Model for Domestic Waste Disposal," University of




     California, Berkley, Unpublished. Doctoral Thesis, 1965.




26.  Anne Arundel County, "Water and Sewerage Master Plan Report,"




     prepared by Whitman, Reguardt and Associates-Consulting




     Engineers, March 1967.

-------

























>H
K
O
EH

|r
M
K
W


 -p
ft o3

EH
-p
C H Q
CU cd O
U > PQ
O
rH B 
Q




0)
-P 
CO ft
II?


W 1 0)
CU 03 >
0) H n
>5 P 
4-^
-H
O

rrj
fi

rH
"<
C$
s

s^
o

0)
-P 0
03 CQ
M CQ
5 0)
JH ft
03 0>
P CQ
r^ O
H W
EH



&
03
H
-P
0)
EH


tr\
C7N







LP\









O
tr\
0

O






s?
03
-p
H
cd
CQ


O
VO
J-











-P to
0) ^H (U
-p 0) bC
CQ fi .




LT\
CM
H
0
O






>
cd
-P
H
a
cd
CQ


CQ
0)
H
_{
cd
^














CQ













^
CU

H
O K
-p
-p
fr S
5 S
^td
H PH
EH



fr
cd
H
-p
0)
EH


0
o\







o
o
o

H






-3-
_^-

,  j






fc
03
P
H


00


0
o
o
^
H
CM



PH
EH
CQ

^_j
H
cd
H
(U
pq
i
H
^5
O
PH















O
-p

-1 CU
03 rH
P -P
P -P
,0 -H
H (-3
EH



i?
cd
T3
c
o
o
CO


0
o
H






0









O
H
O
0
o




o{3 i  1
CtJ
? 'S
cd -p
-P tQ
H P1
CH TJ
oj a
CO M


CM
IA






^
O
a
cd
s

5
bC
0)

O
bD
P
O
Q
CU
bO

03
0
CQ
H
Q

O
5





-p
a
CU
^
"id
PH









































































PH
EH
O CO
-p
CU
0 bD
bO cd
^
i  1 n5
H CO
H
|3





0)
cu
EH
co
3
H
PH



1?
cd
r^
G
O
O
0)
CQ

w
LA
CO






w
CM
t-








0
LA
O
e
O






^>
cd
-p
H
cd
CO


o
o
\D









PH
EH
CO
a
H
bO
bD
O
H


Q




IX - 1







p -P -P
C fl fl
a) cu cu
3 3 P
-p -P -P
PH PH PH
 r-j |> H >
rcJ K ^ PH ^ CC
g g g



r? & &
o3 o3 nj
T^ f^ ^
c a o
o o o
O CJ O
CU 0) 0)
CQ CO CQ

W H
LA LA OO
CO CO CO






pJ pj pr"]
J- LA O
on o\ t
rH







ro CM LA
H LA VD
O 0 0
  0
o o o




oJ3 i  1 08 i  1 08 i  1
cd cd cd
fc ' t?' & *c
cd -p cd -p cd -p
-p CQ -P CQ -p CQ
HP -H S -H ^J
cd SH cd a cd G
CQ M CQ M CQ M


H O O
CM LA O
m o
*
OJ



!
rH
rH
O
CH jj^ Q to
0 ?H G >>
" Cd CU -H M
>^ ti fc o j^ o

H cd ^ H G O Cd
CQ H CU C5 cd W ^-i
fa Sj 4J p>j O
cu M cd " a CQ ,0
^> CvJ ^3 PH O G 03
H S 0? O ^3 J
G  O
D S h>

-------



























J-  "1.
T3
0>
-<
-J
S3
H
-P
S3
0
O
"^^

-H
r-r-1
d
m
<
EH




















































-P
(3
0)
O

SH
CU
PH









QJ
bC
SH
n3
J^
o
M
H
O








CO

(U
>3
O
rH
P4
e
M














sn
QL
S3
'H
>
H

O
0)
K

O
e
cu
o^


H
O

a
w

PH'


cy

H
H
0
>



cu
HP
CO
f^
Cu
js


1
03
M
pi
PH
O
PH

rH
O






CQ
rM
O
1
K






ct
OJ
rH
-P
CQ

-P
S3
D
e
-p
o3
OJ
f-
H

P
O
m

CH
o


OJ
bC
SH
cc
,CJ
O
CO
H
Q


^  s
Ti
bC

  .





0)
ft
EH

Ti
OJ
>
rH
D
CQ

S3
O
"H
tj
cy
S3








-p
(3
CU
X
f *
,->
-p
rrt
tu
PH

cu
H
-P
-P
H
^
r7
03
Ti
S3
O
o
/i\
W
CQ


W
LA
CO





w
o
-3-
H





CM
t-
O

O


08
^
r*S
rH
03
+J
r~i
CQ



0
O
C





PH
EH
CQ
0)
be
oJ
>
o3
CQ










f-H
cu
f>
H
P?

































H
cs3
"rH
rH
-P
CO
r-~j
Ti
f*
M
M

















       03
       Tl
       C
       O
       O
       CU
       CQ
W
LA
CO

CO
CM
O
LA
       o
       H
       03
       H
 S3
M
    H
    H
T!  s

 o3  o3  co
    H  P
  '  S3  O
a -i
    bO
            (3
            O
            -H
        H  -P
        n3  o3
        S3  rH
        O  OJ
        M  PH
        03  O
        CU
        CQ
                   ft
                  cq

                  Ti
                   S3
                   O
            o3

            H
                  O
                   CO
                   OJ
                   O
                   CM
                   O

                   CD
                   cd
                   p
                   H
                   S3
                   o3
                   CQ
 >
9)
CO
ft
o
P
r?
0$
T!
S3
O
o

-p -H
-P K
H
i-q
r?
03
T!
S3
o
o
D
CQ
^Q
CO
0
0
t-
CQ
a
CO
0)
rW
U
pi
rH
O
S3
M
-P
$3
D
X
rH
I-*
"P
oi
PH

D
H
-P
-P
H
r-q

















0
-p
0)








ft
V
>
H
P5

tf
03
T3
S3
o
CJ
1)
CQ
on
o\
0
0
-j-
               LA
               CM
                              O
                              CQ
     S3
 CU   O
 CO  -H
 Pi  -P
 O   O
W   0)
     SH
Ti   (s
 S3   O
                          03
                          S
               t-
               H
                                          r?
                                          03
                                         -P
                                         H
                                         CQ
                                                    H
   CO
    m
    o\

    o
                                               03
                                              -p
                                              H
                                                     CQ
                                      SPH
                                      -P  EH
                                      in  CQ
                                      O
                                                CU
T)
 03
 0)
S
                                                    PH
                                                 -P  EH
                                                 t*
                                                         ffi

                                                          S3
                                                          d>
                                                          CO
                                                          
                                                          O
                                                         EH
                                                          03

                                                         H
                                                          rH
                                                         PH
                                                                LA
                                                                OO
                                                         LA
                                                         ON
                                                         t
    O
    O
                                                      03 Hp
                                                      -p  CO
                                                      H  Pi
                                                            CQ
                                                                    T)
                                                                 >s S3
                                                                 _Q  3
                                                                     rH
                                                                 Ti <  >>
                                                                      S3
     rH      CD
H  -H      X
 OS   03      p!

 SQ     13
S         PH
                                                                                          IX  -  2
                                                                                           -P
                                                                                            $3
                                                                                            CU
                                                                                            X

                                                                                           HP
                                                                                            o3
                                                                                           PH
                                                                                               ft
                                                                                            CU  CU
                                                                                           H  !>
                                                                                           -P  -H
                                                                                           -P  K
                                                                                              O
                                                                                              -=!
                                                                                               -p
                                                                                               H
                                                                                               H
                                                                                               CQ
                                                                                 aJ
                                                                                 Tl  T)

                                                                                 3  
                                                                                 In
                                                                                 <  Tl
                                                                                     g
                                                                                   03
                                                                                                      -p   *H
                                                                                                O Ti
                                                                                                O  (3
                                                                                                            Oi  H
                                                                                                           CQ  CD

                                                                                                            to  a
                                                                                                           H  fc
                                                                                                           H  O
                                                                                                            O

-------






































* 

H
-P
a
o

-. 	

rH

w
3
c3^
C~J








































-p
a
o
o

^
0)










 CD
iH 0)
0> KM
0 -P
 CO
OH





-p
 Pq
O
a v.
(U O

'T3
b










O
^1

M
^J fn
-P -H
2 rO
rQ 03
H 0
$H
EH



j>^
_,
ni

a
o
o
OJ
CQ



0
CT\




O
VO
ro







O
0
oo

O --- O
>




08 r-J









a
J^
h
pq

d

D
P
03
0
*
0)
-p
a3
H
-a
(L)


0)
-P
a
i i


w
o
LPv



w
o
0
(VI







0
VO
o

o



1  '"1
4' -N ;
^i ,  S
OJ
ft a
0 -rH
a a
rl O
-P -P



^S
-P S-i
d Cl5
0) 3
X -P
pi co
-P W
cd
P^








0
<

^



<
0
^



0









o
o
o

o
CM
t**"

H
a
03
CO
                                                               IX -  3
CO
0)

O
H
P;
a
U-l


















V. ' (
i ajf
H 5nj 0

ftC/3
O
cu a
o
ii -H
0 ^'




0
<3j [ 

V
^






0
i ^
I a> o
1 S-. W ,Q
a> -H a3 M
B
cd
e^






*"_) -p
C.)
O (1)
O !-<
P-t ^
^








03
0)
P
i  !
cd
>

f^j
D
_p
ctf
g
ri
j i
to
W








^
H
,0
cS
CJ
H
H
ft
ft


-p
o


II

0
<
'

-------

-------
                                                               IX -
                                  TABLE 2

      SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY DATA FOR LOW FLOW PERIODS 19 6l AND 1966
                                                                   #*
Station
5
8
10
11
12
13
lit
15
#**
Ll
L2
L3
!.
L6
L6A
LT
L8


Ave,
River No, of Temp,
Mile Samples ( C)
kZckO
60.70
63,80
66.30
68,60
71,^3
75,0
78.03
63.80
66,80
71.20
7 it, 05
77,2
Dorsey
Run
81.35
85.2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
^
3
3
3
3
3
3
2U,3
21 ,,6
20,8
22,2
22,0
21 08
21,7
21 c 5
21,8
22 ,.7
23,3
23,7
22,0
18,3
25.0
22,7
1961
Ave,
DO
(mg/1)
6.2
6,8
6.6
6,9
6,0
3,8
6.7
8,3
6,6
6,7
7.8
7,8
7,8
5^9
8,2
8,6

Aye,
BOD
(mg/1)
1.2
0,87
1,0
0,7
1,0
3.5
1.5^
2,1
1.1
1.3
1,0
I.k
0,7
it. 5
0,9
0.5


Ave,
No, of Temp.
Samples ( C)
3
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
21*. 5
22.9
23.1
22.6
22,9
22,5
21,3
19.9
22, h
22.1
22.3
22,7
23,0
21.3
2^,2
22,0
1966
Ave,
DO
(mg/1)
5.1
2.9
1.7
5.1
3.7
3.k
6.8
8,9
3.7
U.5
6.3
1*. 5
8.2
3.2
9.1
9.2

Ave.
BOD
(mg/1)
3.3
6.7
9.3
k.l
6.3
8.5"
h.k
3.3
6.9
7.6
3.7
k.6
U.2
11.5
3.1
3.2
***
Average Flow = for the period during 1961
   at Station 15 = 11,8 cfs
   at Station L8 = 10,7 cfs

Average Flow = for the period during 1966
   at Station 15 = 6,3 cfs
   at Station L8 = 5.1 cfs

L Prefix denotes Little Patuxent River

-------
                                                       IX - 5
                          TABLE 3

              SUMMARY OF BACTERIOLOGICAL DATA
              FOR JULY, AUGUST, AND SEPTEMBER
                               Mean Coliform Count
Station
5
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
*
LI
L2
L3
L4
L6
L6A
L7
L8
River Mile
42,40
60o70
63,80
66,30
68060
71oU3
75oO
78,03
63 80
66.80
71,20
7^,05
77.20
Dorsey Run
81,35
8520
July
(MPN/100 ml)
120,000
41,000
8,000
8,000
43,000
11,000
81,000
52,000
123000
37,000
7,000
28,000
98,000
53,000
168,000
2i5000
August
(MPN/100 ml)
111, 000
22,000
1,600
1,800
1,900
1,600
170,000
36,000
2U,000
18,000
18,000
62,000
62,000
18,000
65,000
26,000
September
(MPN/100 ml)
18,000
11,000
5,000
4,000
8,000
1,500
529,800
73,000
1,800
22,000
24,000
32,000
141,000
24,000
64,000
23,000
L Prefix denotes Little Patuxent River

-------
                              TABLE k

                  WATER QUALITY DATA FOR MONTHS OF
                  JULY, AUGUST, AND SEPTEMBER 196?
                        Patuxent River Basin
                                                           IX - 6
                      BOD
DO
TEMP
Station
5
8
10
11
12
13
Ik
15
*
LI
L2
L3
Lk
L6
I-6A
L?
I,R
River
Mile
42
60
63
66
68
71
75
78
63
66
71
7k
77
,4o
70
,80
.30
.60
.^3
,0
.03
,.80
,80
.,20
05
r.
Dorsey
Run
81
85
,35
,2
min,
mg/1
2o
2,
40
?
3.
3.
2,
2,
P ^
'4C
4
5,
^
4
jy
1
5
6
1
I
l
8
8
8
5
2
6
0
1
9
i
8
a/e
mg/
3,
5.
cr
:> -
3.
'4
11
5-
4,
4,
k..
6,
6.
c;
14,
3,
3,
I
9
5
8
7
s
2
3
8
9
9
C
>
6
0
0
6
7
max,
mg/1
M
7,6
8 5
6.1
5.8
22,0
6,5
7,h
6,7
5,9
8.5
8.!*
6.1*
21.0
k-,l
6.2
min.
mg/1
k 7
1.5
2,8
6U]
5,8
5.2
6.9
8,1
5 = 5
5.14
6,6
60 U
7,3
30
7,7
7,0
ave0
mg/1
5,3
5 = 9
50
7,2
6,5
5.6
7,5
9.1
7,2
6,5
7^
7,3
7- '4
3-9
8,3
7.,7
max.
mg/1
5,9
7,k
6.0
8.0
73
6,1
8.2
97
Q.h
7.1
7,9
7,8
7.6
5,3
8.9
8.1*
min*
o c
21 o
15.
15,
Ik.
14 o
14.
15.
15-
15.
19,
20,
19.
20 o
20,
20.
19
0
2
2
5
7
5
1
6
5
2
7
5
4
3
6
4
ave.
0 C
23.8
18.5
18.6
17.8
17.8
17.7
17.7
18U4
18.7
21.6
23.0
21,1
22^0
22.0
22,4
21.0
max.
0 C
28.0
23.7
23.8
23.2
23.2
22.2
21.0
21.0
240
24.5
24.5
25.0
25.0
24.3
25.5
23,5
L Prefix denotes Little Patuxent River

-------
                              TABLE 5

                  WATER QUALITY DATA FOR MONTHS OF
                  JULY, AUGUST, AND SEPTEMBER 1966

                        Patuxent River Basin
                                                           IX - 7
Station
5
8
10
11
12
13
Ik
15
*
LI
L2
L3
L4
L6
L6A
LT
L8
River
Mile
42
60
63
66
68
71
75
78
63
66
71
74
77
.1+0
.70
.80
.30
.60
A3
.0
.03
.80
.80
.20
,05
.2
Dorsey
Run
81
85
.35
.2

mm.
mg/1
1.6
3.8
5.0
2.4
1.7
2.4
2.6
2.0
it. 6
6.8
2.0
1.4
3.7
5.6
2.1
2.1+
BOD
ave.
mg/1
3.3
6.7
9-3
4.1
6.3
8.5
4.4
3.3
6.9
7.6
3.7
4.6
4.2
11.5
3.1
3o2

max,
mg/1
4.3
12.0
22.0
11 !
9.5
18
6.1
5.4
10.0
9.1
6.3
6.2
U.6
17.0
3o7
3.7

mm.
mg/1
4.1
2.1
1,0
3.8
2.9
2.8
6.2
8.0
3.0
3.8
5.U
3.6
7.0
2.5
8.3
8.5
DO
ave.
mg/1
5.1
2.9
1.7
5.1
3.7
3.U
6.8
8.9
3.7
4.5
6.3
4.5
8,2
3.2
9.1
9.2

max.
mg/1
6.5
3.3
2.1
7.2
4.1
3.9
7.6
9-9
4.1
4.8
7.6
5.3
10.3
4.0
10.0
10.3

mm.
0 C
20.5
19-5
20.5
19-2
19-0
19.5
19.5
16.6
20.5
21.2
20.8
20.7
20.0
18.5
18.5
I8o0
TEMP
ave.
0 C
24.5
22.9
23.1
22.6
22.8
22.5
21.2
19.9
23.7
22.1
22.3
22.7
22.8
21.3
24.2
22.0

max.
0 C
27-5
24.7
25.0
24.7
24.7
24.3
22.8
22.5
25-2
24.0
24.7
25.0
25-5
23.5
28.0
24.6
L Prefix denotes Little Patuxent River

-------
                                                        IX - 8
                           TABLE 6

          PROJECTED INCREASE IN WASTE WATER VOLUMES
                FOR MAJOR TREATMENT FACILITIES
Plant
Laurel Parkway
(WSSC)
Bowie-Belair
(Prince Georges County)
Savage
(Howard County)
Maryland City
(Anne Arundel County)
Patuxent Plant
(Anne Arundel County)
Western Branch
(WSSC)
Fort Meade
#1
Fort Meade
#2
Current
Design
Flows Capacity
mgd mgd

2000 2, hO

I.hh 2, hO

OoOT loOO

O.hh 0,75

0,1+2 2.00

0.00 OoOO

1.11 2.50

0.9h 1,50
Projected
Flows
mgd

It. 80

2. hO

8.00

1.30

3.10

5.00.

2.50

1.50
Per Cent
Increase

lUO

68
Major
Expansion

195

6UO
New 
Plant

126

60
Proposed plant will be discharging into Patuxent Estuary and not
included in upstream calculations.

-------
t--
CO

o




o
M
CO

Q

p
       g
      O
     H

     IS
      p
     00

      bO
      a
      H
            cs
            CO
            03
                c  o
                cS  bC

               pa  cd
                a>  o3
               -P  (D
                w  C
                0
               S
                cd

               a*
                 *
               -P  H
                C  0!

                i
               -p  1-5
                03
               P-
               +'  -P
                C  -H
                o>  a
                X  D


               1
               P-
 C  Pi
 pi  co
K  CO
    0)

 CD
 co  to
 to  cd
 O  CD
PI  a
         2  hO
         +-  

b

o
CO



O
_^
OJ
0
m
^j-


CO
CO

CM
O
H

O
0
oo
o
j.


o
CO
H

oo
oo



CO
CO

o
n
^}-
H


OO

(U
,0
&
to
o
Q)
Q



OO
rH






CVJ
ON






rH






ON






o
C\j
rH







-*
-=f


to
n3
r*i QJ


Jj
O
H
>
O
rH

r^3
H
r*
-p
a
o
g
c
crJ

Q










H
P,

CQ
r-l
Pi
O
0
o

o
H
a



in
a
o
-p
to
PS
M
5
0)
g
^
o
to
(D
pi
H
03
^

Jj
O
rH

-------
                                                    IX - 10
                       TABLE  8
  MONTHLY VOLUME OF PATUXENT  WATER  FILTRATION PLANT
      (Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission)

  1966      	Average Water  Filtered  (mgd)
January                              28.76
February                             30.26
March                                29^76
April                                29=91
May                                  1+8,91
June                                 55-12
July                                 580*16
August                               ^875
September                            50.75
October                              1*3.87
November                             1+2^85
December                             1+2,65

Average                              h2, 51

-------
                                TABLE 9

                         POPULATION PROJECTIONS
                                                            IX - 11
Area
Anne Arundel County
Calvert County
Charles County
Howard County
Montgomery County
Prince Georges County
St. Marys County
Per Cent
in Basin
11
39
6
62
2
18
20
I960
206,600
15,800
32,600
36,200
3^0,900
357,^00
38,900
1980
^400,000
26,000
52,000
100,000
551,000
7^5,000
52,000
Per Cent
Increase
19^
16U
160
276
162
208
133
Baltimore Metropolitan
  Area

Washington, D. C.
  Metropolitan Area

Patuxent River Basin
1,800,000    2,750,000
50
2,050,000    3,550,000       73

  135,000      270,000      200

-------
                                        IX - 12
           TABLE 10




BASIC DATA FOR PATUXENT MODEL
Section
1
2
3
It
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
ll*
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2k
25
26
27
28
Lover
Node
1
2
1*
6
8
10
12
lit
16
18
20
21
22
21*
26
28
30
32
36
38
ItO
1*2
1*6
1*8
50
52
5>*
56
Upper
Node
2
It
6
8
10
12
lit
16
18
20
21
22
21*
26
28
30
32
36
38
1*0
1*2
1*6
1*8
50
52
51*
56
58
Distance
(Miles)
It It. 990
1*5.000
50.000
55-000
60.000
63.700
61*. 500
66.100
69.1*00
71.000
73.000
71*. 600
76.000
77.300
78.500
80.000
80.900
66.650
66.850
70.650
73.000
75.1*50
75.650
77-200
78.500
80.100
80.900
82.1*00
Area
(Sq.Mi.)
52U.270
52l*.270
ltlU.770
386.000
362.000
31*2.600
181.200
181.200
181.200
157-000
157-000
157-000
157.100
133.000
133-000
133.000
133.000
161.100
161.100
11*0.000
11*0.000
125.000
125.000
125.000
110.000
110.000
110.000
98.1*80
AA
0.285
0.285
0.285
0.285
0.375
0.360
0.680
0.620
0.600
1.000
0.850
0.700
0.660
0.660
0.660
0.580
0.1*80
0.660
0.660
0.550
0.550
0.530
0.500
0.580
0.580
0.580
0.1*80
0.330
BB
0.585
0.585
0.585
0.585
0.1*1*0
0.1*80
0.1*80
0.1*80
0.1*80
0.285
0.285
0.285
0.285
0.285
0.285
0.273
0.273
0.320
0.320
0.320
0.320
0.31*3
0.31*3
0.285
0.285
0.285
0.285
0.3l*0
CC
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.01*7
0.056
0.075
0.075
0.075
0.062
0.062
0.056
0.070
0.076
0.080
0.360
0.1*00
0.038
0.039
0.01*1
0.01*2
0.2ltO
0.21*0
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.100
0.135
DD
0.1*83
0.1*83
0.1*83
0.1*83
0.525
0.1*90
0.1*90
0.1*90
0.1*90
0.622
0.622
0.622
0.622
0.622
0.622
0.253
0.253
0.625
0.625
0.625
0.625
0.360
0.360
0.622
0.622
0.622
0.622
0.525

-------

-------

-------
                                                   -O -D -o z
                                                     a c
                                                   mm ml
                                                   q TI 11 m

                                                   x x x ^
                                                         r
                                                   t C r ca

                                                   + + *

                                                   z z z
                                                   o p p

                                               H    II II H H


                                            S    !?5!:j
                                            T Z     O ~> 
                                            H -0    _, O HZ
                                              I!    m<~ r
                                            n *    a "I 1*1
                                              o
       x c c =
       > x xx
       z m m m
       o z zz
       i H -in
                                            O >   ( U U (
                m
            m   C
            rn
           o
           
           r
                                            0)0
c
o
      O O OO
      z z zz
      01 Ok C* *
                              -  I
           CO  ^
           c  m
           m

           K  CD
           2  >
c

m

ro

-------

-------
                                                     m
                                                     (A
                                                     z
                                                     o
                                                                                                           CD
                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                           r
                                                                                                            I
                                           o
                                           3)
                                           O)
                                           rn
                                           -o
                                           m
                                           z
                                                                                                                 CD
                                                                                                                 3)
                                                                                                                 O
                                                                                                                 I
                                                                            3)
                                                                                                                                                  cn
                                                                                                                                                  en
                                                                                                                                                  o
                                                                                                                                                        O
                                                                   j>
                                                                   31
                                            r    o
                                            >    3J
                                            c    o
                                            X>    S
                                            m         r-

                                            r    CD    >
                                                  3)    Z
                                            T>    >    O
                                                                                             31
                                                                                             O
                                                                                             O
                                                                                             O
                                                                                             3)
                                                                                             O
                                                                                             m

                                                                                             3)
                                                                                             m
                                                                                             01
                                                                                             m
                                                                                             31
                                                                                             <
                                                                                             O

                                                                                             3)
                         O)
                         o
                         I
                         m
                         >
                                                                                                                                    o
                                                                                                                                    o
                         
                         m
                                     Ol
                                     o
                         m
                         GO
<

m
                                CD
                                >
                                CO

                                z
                                            oo
                                            o   o
                                                                     0
01
O
o
o
o
o
0
o
0
01
k,
0
                                                                      o
                                                                      o
                         o
                         o
                         m
                O
                c
                XI
                m

                OJ
                                             T3
                                             J>
                                             -I
                                             C
                                             X
                                             m
                                             z
                                                                                                                                   O
                                                                                                                                   3)
                                                                                                                                   2
                                                                                                                                   m
                                                                                                                                  o
                                                                                                                                  m
                                                            H

                                                            T3
H
S
PI
]>
O
m
#
ro

en
H
ru
FORT

S
m
>
0
m

g
^
H
m
3!


o
o
3)
cn
ni
-^
3)
C
Z
I
o
c
o>
R
O
O
O
31
31
^m
So
5=!
mO
3)Z
I
&
MMOND
CD
31
Z
0
I


SAVA
cn
m

cn
H
TJ

-------
30N3mjNOO  INBXniVd   311111  04  39809
               31ldOHd   'O'Q S  'CTO'a

         Nisva
                                                          p
                                                          o
      99
                                                     03
        9961  U36W31d3S
     'isnonv 'ATOP SNiano
      30VW SNOIJ.VAU3S80
                                                          O

                                                          O
                                                       -Zl

-------

-------