U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
An Associate Laboratory of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
&GPO 697.032
-------
REPORT
ON
CHARLES MILL RESERVOIR
ASHLAND AND RICHLAND COUNTIES
OHIO
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 397
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
AND THE
OHIO NATIONAL GUARD
JUNE, 1975
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword i i
List of Ohio Study Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map v
Sections
I. Conclusions 1
II. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 3
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 4
IV. Nutrient Loadings 8
V. Literature Reviewed 13
VI. Appendices 14
-------
11
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophication Survey was initiated in 1972 in
response to an Administration commitment to investigate the nation-
wide threat of accelerated eutrophication to fresh water lakes and
reservoirs.
OBJECTIVES
The Survey was designed to develop, in conjunction with state
environmental agencies, information on nutrient sources, concentrations,
and impact on selected freshwater lakes as a basis for formulating
comprehensive and coordinated national, regional, and state management
practices relating to point-source discharge reduction and non-point
source pollution abatement in lake watersheds.
ANALYTIC APPROACH
The mathematical and statistical procedures selected for the
Survey's eutrophication analysis are based on related concepts that:
a. A generalized representation or model relating
sources, concentrations, and impacts can be constructed.
b. By applying measurements of relevant parameters
associated with lake degradation, the generalized model
can be transformed into an operational representation of
a lake, its drainage basin, and related nutrients.
c. With such a transformation, an assessment of the
potential for eutrophication control can be made.
LAKE ANALYSIS
In this report, the first stage of evaluation of lake and water-
shed data collected from the study lake and its drainage basin is
documented. The report is formatted to provide state environmental
agencies with specific information for basin planning [§303(e)J, water
quality criteria/standards review [§303(c)], clean lakes [§314(a,b)],
and water quality monitoring [§106 and §305(b)] activities mandated
by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
111
Beyond the single lake analysis, broader based correlations
between nutrient concentrations (and loading) and trophic condi-
tion are being made to advance the rationale and data base for
refinement of nutrient water quality criteria for the Nation's
fresh water lakes. Likewise, multlvariate evaluations for the
relationships between land use, nutrient export, and trophic
condition, by lake class or use, are being developed to assist
in the formulation of planning guidelines and policies by EPA
and to augment plans implementation by the states.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The staff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of
Research & Development, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency)
expresses sincere appreciation to the Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency for professional involvement, to the Ohio National Guard
for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the Survey, and to
those Ohio wastewater treatment plant operators who provided
effluent samples and flow data.
Ned Williams, Director, and Tom Birch, Ken Carr, Larry
Dietrick, Ron Havlice, Larry Korecko, Rod Mehlhop, Terry Wheeler,
and John Youger, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, provided
invaluable lake documentation and counsel during the Survey,
reviewed the preliminary reports, and provided critiques most
useful in the preparation of this Working Paper series.
Major General Dana L. Stewart, then the Adjutant General
of Ohio, and Project Officer Lt. Colonel Robert C. Timmons,
who directed the volunteer efforts of the Ohio National Guards-
men, are also gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to
the Survey.
-------
IV
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF OHIO
LAKE NAME
Atwood
Beach City
Berlin
Buckeye
Charles Mill
Deer Creek
Delaware
Di11 on
Grand Lake of St. Marys
Grant
Holiday
Hoover
Indian
Loramie
Mosquito Creek
O'Shaughnessy
Pymatuning
Pleasant Hill
Rocky Fork
Shawnee
Tappan
COUNTY
Carroll, Tuscarawas
Stark, Tuscarawas
Mahoning, Portage, Stark
Fairfield, Licking, Perry
Ashland, Richland
Fayette, Pickaway
Delaware
Muskingum
Auglaize, Mercer
Brown
Huron
Delaware, Franklin
Logan
Auglaize, Shelby
Trumbull
Delaware
Ashtabula, OH; Crawford, PA
Ashland, Richland
Highland
Greene
Harrison
-------
40 55
CHARLES MILL
RESERVOIR
® Tributary Sampling Site
* Lake Sampling Site
f Sewage Treatment Facility
•v Drainage Area Boundary
m Land Subject To Inundation
9 . ? . 1 . 9 . ?Km.
P ~T^ 4 Mi.
Scale
'Al
Black
Fork
Mohican
River
T
Map Location
8245
82 15
-------
CHARLES MILL RESERVOIR
STORE! NO. 3905
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that Charles Mill Reservoir is eutrophic.
Of the 20 Ohio lakes sampled in 1973, it ranked sixteenth in
overall trophic quality based on a combination of six water
quality parameters*. Fourteen of the lakes had less median
total phosphorus, eight had less median dissolved orthophosphorus,
seven had less median inorganic nitrogen, 15 had less mean chloro-
phyll a_, and 12 had greater mean Secchi disc transparency. Deple-
tion of dissolved oxygen with depth occurred at station 2 in July.
Survey limnologists noted that the water was turbid on all
sampling occasions except for station 2 in July.
Significant numbers of blue-green algae at all sampling times
indicate an enriched condition (see page 6).
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results show that Charles Mill Reservoir was
phosphorus limited at the time the assay sample was collected
(04/20/73). The reservoir data indicate phosphorus limitation
in July as well but nitrogen limitation in October.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—During the sampling year, point sources
* See Appendix A.
-------
2
contributed 57.4% of the total phosphorus load to Charles Mill
Reservoir. The wastewater treatment plant at Shelby contributed
38.6% of the load, and three other facilities at Imperial Estates,
Eastview, and Crestwood Hills collectively contributed an esti-
mated 18.6%. Septic tanks contributed an estimated 0.2%. In
addition, a wastewater treatment plant at Ramada Inn of unknown
nutrient significance is located in the drainage basin (see page 9).
Three industries also are located 1n the drainage but are
not of nutrient significance (Youger, 1976).
The present phosphorus loading of 5.56 gm/m2/year is over
five times that proposed by Vollenweider (Vollenweider and
Dillon, 1974) as a eutrophic loading (see page 12). Although
Vollenweider's model may not be applicable to water bodies with
hydraulic retention times as short as 20 days, the present
trophic condition of Charles Mill Reservoir is evidence of exces-
sive nutrient loads. While even complete removal of phosphorus
at the point sources would still leave a eutrophic loading, the
reservoir is phosphorus limited much of the time, and all phos-
phorus inputs should be minimized to the greatest practicable
extent to at least slow the present rate of eutrophication.
2. Non-point sources—Non-point sources contributed 42.6%
of the total phosphorus input to Charles Mill Reservoir during
the sampling year. The Black Fork of the Mohican River con-
tributed 37.4%, Whetstone Creek contributed 1.5%, and Unnamed
Creek B-l contributed 0.4%. Minor tributaries were estimated
to have contributed 3.0%.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1
A. Lake Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 5.46 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 1.7 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 9.4 meters.
4. Volume: 9.282 x 106 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 20 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix C for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean flow
Name area (km2)* (m3/sec)*
Black Fk., Mohican River 375.5 3.7
Unnamed Creek B-l 21.5 0.2
Whetstone Creek 43.5 0.4
Minor tributaries &
immediate drainage - 116.0 1.1
Totals 556.5 5.4
2. Outlet -
Black Fk., Mohican River 562.0** 5.3
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 107.6 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 90.8 centimeters.
t Table of metric conversions—Appendix B.
tt Youger, 1975.
* For limits of accuracy, see Working Paper No. 175, "...Survey Methods,
1973-1976".
** Includes area of lake.
*** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
4
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Charles Mill Reservoir was sampled three times during the open-water
season of 1973 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter. Each
time, samples for physical and chemical parameters were collected from
three stations on the reservoir and from one or more depths at each station
(see map, page v). During each visit, a single depth-Integrated (4.6
m or near bottom to surface) sample was composited from the stations
for phytoplankton identification and enumeration; and during the first
visit, a single 18.9-liter depth-integrated sample was composited for
algal assays. Also each time, a depth-integrated sample was collected
from each of the stations for chlorophyll a_ analysis. The maximum depths
sampled were 0.9 meters at station 1, 8.2 meters at station 2, and 1.5
meters at station 3.
The sampling results are presented in full in Appendix D and are
summarized in the following table.
-------
PARAMETER
TEMP
01SS OXY (MG/L)
CNDCTVY (MCROMO)
Ph (STAND UNITS)
TOT ALK (MG/L)
TOT P (MG/L)
ORTHO P
N02*N03 (MG/L)
AMMONIA (MG/L)
KJEL N (MG/LI
INORG N (MG/L)
TOTAL N (MG/L)
CHLRPYL A (Ufi/L)
SECCHI (METERS)
A. SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL AND
1ST SAMPLING < 4/20/73)
3 SITES
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR CHARLES MILL RESERVOIR
STOHET CODE 3905
2ND SAMPLING ( 7/27/73)
3 SITES
3RD SAMPLING (10/ 6/73)
3 SITES
RANGE
10.7
7.8
370.
8.2
122.
0.038
0.006
0.360
0.040
0.500
0.400
1.160
41.7
0.5
- 14.4
- 14.1
- 460.
8.9
- 146.
- 0.067
- 0.008
- 1.200
- 0.150
- 1.200
- 1.250
- 2.030
- 75.9
0.8
MEAN
13.1
10.9
406.
8.5
129.
0.057
0.007
0.726
0.061
0.857
0.787
1.583
63.5
0.6
MEDIAN
13.7
10.9
390.
8.5
132.
0.060
0.007
0.570
0.050
0.800
0.720
1.600
72.9
0.6
RANGE
11.9
0.0
365.
7.2
IIS.
0.138
0.010
0.090
0.070
1.200
0.160
l.SOO
40.2
0.3
- 27.1
9.4
- 427.
8.7
- 192.
- 0.800
• 0.028
- 0.680
- 4.600
- 7.600
- *.720
- T.720
- 91.2
0.4
MEAN
21.6
3.6
383.
7.9
136.
0.249
0.016
0.247
0.766
2.356
1.012
2.602
72.3
0.3
MEDIAN
25.2
3.2
378.
7.9
132.
0.185
0.016
0.120
0.170
1.700
0.650
i.aeo
85.5
0.3
RANGE
18.8
6.6
328.
7.9
119.
0.092
0.011
0.020
0.060
1.300
0.090
1.320
49.6
0.3
- 19.7
9.4
- 460.
8.3
- 167.
• 0.198
- 0.018
- 0.060
- 0.090
• 2.000
- 0.130
- 2.060
- 06.2
0.6
MEAN
19.3
8.1
369.
8.1
136.
0.129
0.013
0.037
0.070
1.550
0.107
1.587
65.6
0.4
MEDIAN
19.3
8.4
344.
8.1
126.
0.114
0.011
0.035
0.06S
1.450
0.105
1.4U5
61.1
0.3
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
04/20/73
07/27/73
10/06/73
2. Chlorophyll a^ -
Sampling
Date
04/20/73
07/27/73
10/06/73
Dominant
Genera
1. Synedra sp.
2. Flagellates
3. Ankistrodesmus
4. Melosira sp.
5. Stephanodisciis sp.
Other genera
Total
1. Stephanodiscus _sp_.
2. Oscillatoria sp.
3. Melosira sp.
4. Nitzschia sp.
5. Merismopedia sp.
Other genera
Total
1. Centric diatoms
2. Melosira sp.
3. Flagellates
4. Oscillatoria sj>.
5. Raphidiopsis sp.
Other genera
Total
Station
Number^
01
02
03
01
02
03
01
02
03
Algal Units
per ml
8,183
6,677
2,245
1,655
620
591
19,971
18,427
5,770
4,793
4,514
2,885
9.259
45,648
17,119
7,294
4,615
3,771
2,680
27.389
62,868
Chlorophyll ^
72.9
75.9
41.7
91.
40,
85,
86.2
49.6
61.1
-------
7
Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Ortho P Inorganic N Maximum yield
Spike (mg/1) Cone, (mg/1) Cone, (mg/1) (mg/1-dry wt.)
Control 0.044 0.992 4.1
0.050 P 0.094 0.992 20.6
0.050 P + 1.0 N 0.094 1.992 24.2
1.0 N 0.044 1.992 3.8
2. Discussion -
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum c_a_p_r_i_-
cornutum, indicates that the potential primary productivity
of Charles Mill Reservoir was moderately high at the time the
assay sample was collected {04/20/73}. Also, a significant
increase in yield with the addition of orthophosphorus alone
indicates that the lake was limited by phosphorus at that
time. Note that the addition of nitrogen alone resulted in
a yield no greater than that of the control.
The lake data indicate phosphorus limitation in July as
well; i.e., the mean inorganic nitrogen/orthophosphorus
ratios were 35/1 or greater at all stations, and phosphorus
limitation would be expected. However, the mean N/P ratios
in October were 10/1 or less at all stations, and nitrogen
limitation would be expected.
-------
8
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix E for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Ohio National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each of the
tributary sites indicated on the map (page v), except for the high
runoff months of February and March when two samples were collected.
Sampling was begun in May, 1973, and was completed in April, 1974.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the
year of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were provided by
the Ohio District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the
tributary sites nearest the lake.
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were
determined by using a modification of a U.S. Geological Survey computer
program for calculating stream loadings*. Nutrient loads shown are
those measured minus point-source loads, if any.
Nutrient loads for unsampled "minor tributaries and immediate
drainage" ("ZZ" of U.S.G.S.) were estimated using the means of the nutrient
loads, in kg/km2/year, at stations B-l and C-l and multiplying the means
by the ZZ area in km2.
The operator of the Shelby wastewater treatment plant provided
monthly effluent samples and corresponding flow data. The operators
of Imperial Estates, Eastview Sewer District #4, and Crestwood Hills
Sewer District #4 did not participate, and nutrient loads were estimated
at 1.134 kg P and 3.401 kg N/capita/year. The operator of the wastewater
* See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
treatment plant at Ramada Inn also did not participate, but nutrient
loads could not be estimated because the population served is not known.
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal* -
Name
Pop.
Served
Treatment
Mean Flow
(m'/d)
**
Shelby
Imperial
Estates
Eastview
SD #4
Crestwood
Hills SD #4
Ramada Inn
10,000 act. sludge 4,868.0
2,000*** ext. 757.0
aeration
,t
400*** ext.
aeration
600ft ext.
aeration
? ext.
aeration
908.4
227.1
?
Receiving
Water.
Black Fk.,
Mohican River
Unnamed Trib/
Charles Mill
Reservoir
Black Fork,
Mohican River
Black Fork,
Mohican River
Unnamed Trib/
Black Fork,
Mohican River
2. Known industrial* -
Three industries are located in the drainage basin but
are not of nutrient significance.
* Youger, 1976.
** Burberry, 1974.
*** Population estimate based on 4 people/home.
t Estimated at 0.3785 m3/capita/day.
tt Population estimate based on flow of 0.3875 m3/capita/day.
-------
10
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg P/ % of
Source yjr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Black Fk., Mohican River 11,345 37.4
Unnamed Creek B-l 110 0.4
Whetstone Creek 460 1.5
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 910 3.0
c. Known municipal STP's -
Shelby 11,710 38.6
Imperial Estates 2,270 7.5
Eastview SD 2,720 8.9
Crestwood Hills SD 680 2.2
Ramada Inn ?
d. Septic tanks* - 50 0.2
e. Known industrial - not
significant
f. Direct precipitation** - 95_ 0.3
Total 30,350 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Black Fk.,
Mohican River 25,060
3. Net annual P accumulation - 5,290 kg.
* Estimate based on town of Miff!in (served entirely by septic tanks),
82 shoreline dwellings, one park, and one camp area; see Working Paper
No. 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
11
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg N/ . % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Black Fk., Mohican River 347,220 69.9
Unnamed Creek B-l 10,585 2.1
Whetstone Creek 23,485 4.7
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 59,870 12..1
c. Known municipal STP's -
Shelby 30,700 6.2
Imperial Estates 6,800 1.4
Eastview SD 8,160 1.6
Crestwood Hills SD 2,040 0.4
Ramada Inn ?
d. Septic tanks* - 1,895 0.4
e. Known industrial - not
significant
f. Direct precipitation** - 5.895 1.2
Total 496,650 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Black Fk.,
Mohican River 448,155
3. Net annual N accumulation - 48,495 kg.
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary kg P/km2/yr kg N/kmVyr
Black Fk., Mohican River 30 925
Unnamed Creek B-l 5 492
Whetstone Creek 11 540
* Estimate based on town of Miff!in (served entirely by septic tanks), 82
shoreline dwellings, one park, and one camp area; see Working Paper No. 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
12
E. Yearly Loads:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus loadings
are compared to those proposed by Vollenweider (Vollenweider
and Dillon, 1974). Essentially, his "dangerous" loading is
one at which the receiving water would become eutrophic or
remain eutrophic; his "permissible" loading is that which
would result in the receiving water remaining oligotrophic
or becoming oligotrophic if morphometry permitted. A meso-
trophic loading would be considered one between "dangerous"
and "permissible".
Note that Vollenweider's model may not be applicable to
water bodies with short hydraulic retention times.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
grams/mVyr 5.56 0.97 91.0 8.9
Vollenweider phosphorus loadings
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Charles Mill Reservoir:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic loading) 1.08
"Permissible" (oligotrophic loading) 0.54
-------
13
LITERATURE REVIEWED
Burberry, Robert (Supt.), 1974. Treatment plant questionnaire
(Shelby STP), Shelby.
Vollenweider, R. A., and P. J, Dillon, 1974. The application of
the phosphorus loading concept to eutrophication research.
Natl. Res. Council of Canada Publ. No. 13690, Canada Centre
for Inland Waters, Burlington, Ontario.
Youger, John, 1975. Personal communication (lake morphometry). OH
Env. Prot. Agency, Columbus.
, 1976. Personal communication (point sources in the
drainage area). OH Env. Prot. Agency, Columbus.
-------
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
CODE LAKE NAME
3901 BEACH CITY RESERVOIR
3902 6UCKETE LAKE
3905 CHARLES MILL KESEHVOIR
390b DEER CREEK RESERVOIR
3907 DELAWARE WESERVOIH
3908 DILLION RESERVOIR
3912 GRANT LAKE
391<* HOOVER RESEftVUlfi
3915 INDIAN LAKE
3917 LORAMIE LAKE
3921 MOSQUITO CREEi\ RESERVOIR
3924 PLEASANT HILL LAKE
3927 LAKE SAINT
3-338 ATwuOD
3929 BERLIN RESEKVOIrf
3930 HOLIDAY LAKE
'1931 O'SHAUGNESSr r.442
15.496
55.350
5.522
38.022
39.567
37.711
15-
MIN DO
11.600
9.600
15.000
13.900
14.500
14.300
12.200
14.800
14.200
H. 200
11.600
14.700
a. 200
14.700
13.600
15.000
14.900
15.000
15.000
15.000
MEDIAN
OISS ORTHO P
0.015
0.020
0.011
0.036
0.024
0.037
0.019
0.008
0.012
0.019
0.006
0.010
0.01<*
0.005
0.006
0.034
0.159
0.010
0.009
0.007
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
" VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKE^ WITH HIGMEK
3V01 DEACH CITf
3902 6UCKEVE LAKE
3905 CHARLES HILL *ESE«tfOI«
3906 DEE*! CREEK RESERVOIR
39l)7 DELAWARE
3908 OILL10N
3912 GRANT LA*E
391*. HOOVER
3915 INDIAN LAKE
3917 LORAHIE LAKE
3921 MOSQUITO C«EEK «ESEHvOIK
3924 PLEASANT HILL LANE
3927 LAKE SA1M HAKYb
392rt ATrfOOD kESEHVOIR
3929 BERLIN
3930 HOLIDAY LAKE
3V31 O'SHAU'.iNEbSr
393? RUCKT FORK LAMi
3933 SnAWNEF LAKE
39J-* TAMPAN LAfE
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
37 (
11 (
26 (
53 <
58 (
16 <
47 (
87 <
42 (
5 (
74 (
95 <
21 <
100 (
79 <
32 <
0 (
68 (
63 <
87 <
71
2)
5)
10)
It)
3)
9)
16)
8)
1)
141
16)
4)
19)
151
t>>
0)
13)
1?)
161
MEDIAN
INOhto M
ill (
76 <
63 ^
S (
16 (
32 (
58 (
26 (
76 I
37 <
100 I
6fl (
95 (
89 (
4? (
53 <
0 (
47 <
11 <
04 (
4)
14)
12)
1)
3t
6)
11)
S)
14)
7)
19)
13)
16)
17)
til
10)
0)
9)
2)
161
500-
MEAN SEC
1 1 (
5 (
J7 (
63 (
J2 <
42 t
16 (
69 (
21 <
0 (
62 (
100 (
26 (
95 (
74 (
62 (
47 (
58 (
53 (
68 I
2)
1)
7)
12)
6)
u)
3)
17)
4)
0)
15)
19)
51
Id)
14)
IS)
9)
11)
101
13)
MEAN
CHLOrtA
84 (
0 (
21 (
95 <
89 I
SB (
32 <
79 (
16 (
5 (
53 (
63 (
11 (
66 (
74 (
26 <
100 (
42 (
37 (
47 1
16)
0)
4)
18)
17)
11)
6)
IS)
3)
1)
101
12)
2)
13)
14)
5)
19)
8)
7)
9)
Ib-
nir» DO
82 I
89 I
11 (
63 (
t*7 t
53 <
74 (
32 (
58 (
97 (
82 (
39 (
97 (
39 I
68 (
11 (
26 (
11 <
11 (
11 <
IS)
17)
0)
12)
9)
10)
14)
6)
11)
18)
lb)
7)
18)
7)
13>
0)
5)
0)
0)
0>
MEUI AN
DlSa OKTrlO P
42 t
?6 (
58 (
11 (
21 (
5 <
34 <
79 (
53 <
34 <
92 (
66 (
47 (
100 (
92 I
16 (
0 (
66 (
74 (
84 (
8)
5)
11)
2)
4)
1)
6)
15)
10)
6)
17)
12)
9)
19)
17)
3)
0)
12)
14)
10)
INUE*
Nu
277
207
216
290
263
206
261
392
266
178
483
431
297
491
429
220
173
292
249
381
-------
LAKES RANKED BY INDEX
LAKE CODE LAKE NAHE
1 392d
2 3421
3 3924
4 392^
5 3914
6 3934
7 3927
B 3V3Z
9 3906
10 3901
11 3915
12 3907
13 3912
14 3^33
15 3930
16 3905
17 3902
18 3908
19 3917
20 3931
NO
ATwUOO
MOSUUITO CRLEK.
PLEASANT MILL LAKE
rfE^LiN RESERVOIR
nOOVEfi KESErtVOIH
TAPPAN LAKE
LAKE SAINT MAHYS
HOCKY FOWK LAKE
DEER C«EEK HESESvOIR
BEACH CITr wfcSERVOIR
INDIAN LAl\t
DELAWARE RESERVOIR
GRANT LAKE
SHArfNEE LAKE
HOLIDAY LAKE
CHAtRLtb MILL RESERVOIR
HUCKETE LAnt
UILLION RESEKVOIR
LORAM1E LAKE
O'SrtAUGNESSr RESEWVOlH
483
431
439
39?
381
297
290
277
266
263
261
?49
216
207
206
178
173
-------
APPENDIX B
CONVERSION FACTORS
-------
CONVERSION FACTORS
Hectares x 2.471 = acres
Kilometers x 0.6214 = miles
Meters x 3.281 * feet
Cubic meters x 8.107 x 10 = acre/feet
Square kilometers x 0.3861 = square miles
Cubic meters/sec x 35.315 = cubic feet/sec
Centimeters x 0.3937 = inches
Kilograms x 2.205 = pounds
Kilograms/square kilometer x 5.711 = Ibs/square mile
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
LAKE CODE 3905
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR OHIO
CHARLES MILL RESERVOIR
02/18/76
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE(SO KH)
SUB-DRAINAGE
TRIBUTARY AREA(SO KM)
JAN
FEB
556. 8
MAR
APR
HAY
NORMALIZED FLOWS(CMS)
JUN JUL AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
MEAN
390SA1
390 5A2
390 SB 1
390 5C1
3905*2
562.0
375.5
21.5
43.5
116.3
6.99
5.89
0.28
0.59
1.78
9.S1
6.60
0.37
0.71
2.07
12.37
8.78
0.5*
1.08
2.80
9.32
7.08
0.45
0.88
2.27
7.42
4.19
0.25
0.51
1.33
4.25
2.63
0.14
0.28
0.76
3.68
1.61
0.09
0.18
0.48
1.56
0.96
0.04
0.08
0.2B
0.93
0.82
0.03
0.06
0.21
0.99
0.82
0.04
0.08
0.22
2.27
1.70
0.08
0.16
0.48
4.39
3.37
0.17
0.34
1.02
5.28
3.69
0.20
0.41
1.14
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE =>
SUM OF SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS •>
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR
3905A1
MEAN FLOW DAY
3905A2
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
8.66
13.54
6.43
3.20
0.82
1.76
4.13
11.13
16.00
13.96
17.36
9.34
6.12
8.98
4.28
2.15
0.59
1.30
3.57
7.45
13.85
5.49
11.50
6.06
5
9
7
S
17
19
19
a
12
10
9
7
S
9
7
5
17
19
19
8
12
10
9
7
556.8
556.8
FLOW DAY
7.90
13.88
9.83
1.70
O.S9
1.30
1.70
8.44
5.52
8.21
15.21
24.78
3.34
14.22
7.87
1.02
0.34
0.54
1.16
3.65
2.32
3.51
16.20
16.11
27
18
27
18
SUMMARY
TOTAL FLOW IN
TOTAL FLOW OUT
FLOW DAY
FLOW
10.08
28.03
4.90
13.OS
65.58
63.68
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR OHIO
02/18/76
LAKE CODE 3905 CHARLES MILL RESERVOIR
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR
390SB1
390SCI
390S2Z
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
n
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
\
2
3
4
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
MEAN FLOW DAY
0.37
0*45
0.23
0.09
0.02
0.06
0.16
0.37
0.68
0.31
0.71
0.40
0.74
0.96
0.48
0.18
0.05
0.12
0.34
0.76
1.39
0.59
1.42
0.74
1.95
2.61
1.27
0.62
0.15
0.34
1.02
2.27
4.19
1.73
3.68
1.93
5
9
7
5
17
19
19
8
12
10
9
7
5
9
7
5
17
19
19
8
12
10
9
7
FLOW DAY
FLOW DAY
FLOW
0.19
0.82
0.45
0.06
0.01
0.03
0.07
0.31
0.13
0.20
0.93
0.93
0.40
1.64
0.91
0.12
0.02
0.06
0.13
0.42
0.27
0.40
1.87
1.87
27
18
27
18
0.28
0.74
0.57
1.50
-------
APPENDIX D
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
KETklEVAL DATE 75/01/27
390501
40 46 36.0 032 23 30.0
CHAKi-ES MILL
39139 OHIO
DATt
FrtG;>i
TO
73/U4/20
73/U7/27
73/iu/Ob
TIME DEPTH
OF
UAV FEET
11 20 UOOO
14 i?b uOOO
14 25 0003
11 35 0000
ObOlU
wATEh*
TEMP
CENT
14.4
25.2
2b.2
IH.C)
003UJ
DO
MG/L
11. a
3.9
9.4
00077 OOU94
TrtANSP CNDUCT^V
5LCCHI F1LLD
INCHES MICrfOMrlO
Id
12
450
427
416
4bO
11EHALES
3
00400
PH
SU
a.4c
B.lu
7.VU
8.30
00410
T ALi\
CAC03
Mo/L
146
139
139
167
2111202
0006 FILET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
Mti/L
0.040
0.170
U.220
0.060
00625
TOT K.JEL
N
MG/L
1.100
2.000
1.200
2.000
00630
N02&N03
N- TOTAL
MG/L
0.930
0.490
0.680
0.060
00671
PriOS-OIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.008
0.018
0.019
0.018
UAlti TIME DLHTH ^hOS-TOT ChLRPHVL
FrtOM OF n
TO bAY FEET MO/L h- UG/L
73/04/20 11 20 UOOO 0.052 72.9
7J/07/2? 14 25 0000 d.ltj* 91.2
14 ?5 OOOJ U.2&4
73/lu/Oh 11 35 OOutt y.lita 86.2
-------
7b/01/27
DATE
FKOM
TO
I HE JEPTh
Or
OAT FtEI
73/U4/20 11 35 OOOU
11 3S OOOo
11 35 0012
11 35 0019
7J/07/27 14 50 0000
14 SU JOUb
If 50 OOU7
1*. BO 0010
14 SO 0015
in SO OUti'O
14 50
1^ 50 UOE7
73/10/06 11 50 0000
CENT
13.7
12.4
10.7
?7.l
14.7
J03JO
Lto TKANSP
iECCrll
Mti/L
00044
MOUCT
FlfLU
14.1
...7
0.0
L.O
JO
15
4l
22
390
JOS
367
370
383
37a
365
372
378
326
328
HO 4b' 27.0 082 22 Od.O
3^uOb UMIu
I1EHALES 2111202
3 0023 FEET DEPTH
004^0 00410
Pn T ALK
CAC03
SU MG/L
a. 7o
7.70
7.60
7.40
7.2U
7.90
7.90
132
135
122
118
132
l*d
121
00610 00625 00630 00671
MD3-N ToT KJEL N02^N03 PriOS-DIS
TOTAL N N-TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P
0.040
O.ObO
0.040
0.050
0.070
O.lbO
0.540
o.ddo
4.600
0.090
0.070
0.600
0.500
0.800
1.200
1.700
1.400
1.900
2.200
7.600
1.400
1.300
1.200
1.200
0.360
0.400
0.100
0.110
0.120
0.120
0.040
0.020
0.006
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.010
0.016
0.028
0,014
0.020
0.011
0.012
DATE
f HUM
TO
7J/U4/20
7 j/o 7/2''
73/ U'/oo
CC66b 3221
TIME (JL^li KhOb-TCir CML^Pn
or A
OrtY FEET MG/L
11
11
11
11
14
1>»
!•*
U
1-*
11
1 1
J5
3S
35
36
50
50
-)Ci
bO
3U
su
t'O
ouuu
OOU6
0012
o o iy
joou
U JO 7
•JO 10
0 J l'j
OC2 f
C'OLO
000 3
I
o
u
0
J
0
u
o
0
il
J
»
•
*
«•
•
*
k
•
*
.
«
u UG/L
0 Jt» 7h
oe><:
ifc2
067
Ut) <.0
1 JV
lib
1-45
OvlO
O'V? •.•*
11 1
-------
STORE! KETrtiEVAL DATE 75/01/27
390503
40 44 29.0 082 21 45.0
CrtAKLEb HILL
39005 OMIU
DATE
FKOM
TO
73/04/20
73/U7/27
73/10/06
OATt
FROM
TO
73/04/2U
73/07/27
7J/10/06
TI*4E DtPTH
OF
OAY FEET
12 00 0000
12 00 J005
15 25 0000
15 ?S 0005
12 00 0000
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
12 00 OOOU
12 00 0005
15 25 0000
15 25 0005
12 00 0000
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
13.7
12.9
26. J
25.4
19.1
U0665
HMOS-TOT
MO/L P
u.uba
0.06U
0.1/2
J.lo7
0.117
11EPALES 2111202
3 0009 FEET DEPTH
00300 OG077 00094 00400 00410 00610 00625 00630 00671
DO TKAN5P CNDUCTi/Y PH T ALK NH3-N TOT KJEL N02&N03 PHOS-DIS
SECCHl HELD CAC03 TOTAL N N-TOTAL ORTMO
MG/L INCHES M1CKOMHO SO MG/L Mii/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P
9.7
9.4
6.8
8.4
32217
CriLWPHYL
A
UG/L
41.7
O3 * .?
61.1
24 380 8.50 122 0.060 0.600 0.420 0.007
370 8.90 122 0.150 1.000 0.570 0.006
12 388 8.60 120 0.100 1.600 0.250 0.010
388 8. ID 122 0.150 1.600 0.260 0.011
12 360 U.30 US 0.060 1.500 0.030 0.011
-------
APPENDIX E
TRIBUTARY and WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/1)3
3905A1
40 43 14.0 082 22 25.0
BLACK FORK MOHICAN RIVER
39127 7.5 PERRYSVILLE
0/CHAKLE5 MILL RESERVOIR
ST H*Y 603 BROG I MI SSW OF CHARLES MILL
11EPALES 211)204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
73/05/05
73/06/09
73/07/07
73/OB/OS
73/09/17
73/10/19
73/11/19
73/12/08
74/01/12
7^/02/10
7W02/27
74/03/09
74/03/18
74/04/07
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH U026.N03 TOT KJEL
OF N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
13
13
13
08
14
13
14
13
14
13
14
14
13
35
30
57
50
30
47
00
50
15
45
30
55
50
MG/L
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.
2.
2.
1.
1.
1.
1.
920
080
940
220
042
14U
216
100
100
000
840
840
415
500
MG/L
1.
600
2.000
1.
3.
1.
2.
1.
0.
0.
0.
1.
1.
1.
1.
890
400
320
000
000
850
900
300
000
200
800
600
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOS-DIS PHOb-TOT
TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L
0*
0.
0.
0.
0.
G.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
015
021
no
110
019
037
028
032
132
087
070
030
123
055
MG/L P
0.
0*
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
uoa
013
016
016
033
028
012
032
036
035
030
025
025
040
MG/L P
0.095
0.125
0.150
0.135
0.165
0.140
0.240
0.110
0.105
0.080
0.120
0.160
0.130
0.280
-------
bTQKET KETHIEVAL DATE 75/02/OJ
JS05A2
40 bl 55,0 0«2 26 24.0
bLACK FOKK MOHICAN
39 /.b PA\/UMIA
I/CriA*LEb MILL
bT rimy 54b BROG 1.7 Ml SS* OF
IIE^ALES 2111204
4 0000 F£ET DEPTH
DATE
FrtOM
TO
73/05/05
73/»>6/04
73/07/07
73/08/05
73/09/17
73/10/19
73/11/1V
73/12/Ori
7^/01/1?
7^/02/10
74/02/27
74/03/Oy
74/03/ld
74/04/07
0063U 00625
TIME DEPTH N02
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/03
3905B1
40 49 30.0 082 23 46.0
UNNAMtU CREEK
39 7.5 PAVONlA
T/CHARLES MILL RESERVOIR
bT Hrfy b03 BRDG 0.2 MI NW OF FIVE POINTS
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
73/05/05
73/06/09
73/07/07
73/08/05
73/09/17
73/10/19
73/11/19
73/12/08
7^/oi/ia
7^/02/10
74/02/27
74/03/09
7^/03/lB
74/04/07
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOf KJEL
OF N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
14
13
14
09
14
13
13
14
14
14
14
15
14
14
10
55
17
10
45
33
45
10
35
10
15
15
55
05
MG/L
C
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
.660
.510
.370
.2J1
.046
.078
.180
.010
.180
.blO
.440
.792
.500
.750
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
2.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
U.
0.
780
420
560
000
320
550
550
HOO
200
800
700
600
700
00610 00671 00665
NHj-N PHOS-DIS PHOS-TOT
TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0*
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
017
008
017
108
Oil
013
040
044
025
060
075
090
070
040
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0*
0.
0.
p
006
007
016
005K
026
014
008
014
010
010
010
MG/L P
0.006
0.015
0.020
0.010
0.170
0.014
O.OOb
0.030
0.01S
0.010
0.030
0.035
0.
0.
020
010
O.U3G
0.015
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STOKET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/03
390SC1
40 52 10.0 082 25 44.0
WHETSTONE CHEEK
39 f.b PAVONIA
T/CHAKLES MILL KESEKVOIK
VANULdUKG rtD HRDG U.5 MI t OF Sf H*Y545
HEPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTrt
DATE
FROM
TO
73/05/05
73/06/09
73/0//U7
73/08/05
73/09/17
73/10/19
73/11/19
73/12/08
74/01/12
74/02/10
74/u2/27
74/03/09
74/G3/1H
74/U4/07
UObJO 00625
TIME DEPTH N03t.N03 TOT KJEL
OF N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
14
14
ib
U9
14
13
13
14
15
14
14
15
14
14
55
21
00
27
05
20
35
45
05
55
05
30
50
30
MG/L
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
a
i
i
.650
.460
.5BO
.048
.042
.022
,1<*4
.6UO
.520
,faCO
.600
.340
.700
.180
MG/L
1.
0.
1.
1.
0.
1.
0.
0.
050
460
150
470
690
250
400
800
O.nOO
0.
0.
1.
0.
800
400
000
500
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOb-OIb PhOS-TJT
TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L
0.
0.
u.
U.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0 .
0.
0.
019
021
110
llu
044
056
028
036
048
060
035
150
065
030
MG/L P
0
U
0
0
U
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
.009
.02B
.023
.007
.010
.012
.008
.024
.016
.01S
.010
.095
.025
.019
MG/L P
0.02C
0.05U
U.050
O.U3i)
O.OJ5
0.025
O.U15
0.045
O.U25
O.G2b
O.Otb
0.055
0.040
-------
bTOHET HETH1EVAL DATE 75/03/03
3905AA AS3905AA P010000
40 54 Sb.O 082 35 30.0
SHELtfY 5.T.P.
39 HIGHLAND COUNTY
T/CHAKLES MILLS KtSCRVOl
bLACK FORK MOHICAN HIVEK
HEPALES 2141204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665 50051 50053
DATE TIME DEPTH NU2iNOJ TOT KJEL NH3-N PnOS-OIS PHOS-TOT FLOW CONDUIT
FROM
TO
73/08/20
CP(T)-
73/06/20
73/09/20
CPUJ-
73/09/20
73/10/10
CP(T>-
73/10/10
73/11/20
CP-
73/11/20
73/12/16
CP-
73/12/la
7^/01/16
CP(T>-
74/01/16
74/02/19
CP ( T 1 -
74/02/19
74/03/21
CP-
74/OJ/21
74/04/23
CP ( T 1 -
74/u<*/23
7<*/05/2^
CP ( T 1 -
74/db/2?
74/06/19
CP(TI-
7^/06/19
7^/07/22
CP ( T > -
7^/07/22
OF
DAY FEET
06
20
oa
18
oa
20
08
le
08
20
06
20
08
20
ua
20
UB
20
08
2J
08
20
08
2U
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
N-TOTAL
M6/L
6
0
0
2
b
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
.6UO
.075
.060
.9*0
.900
.400
.QUO
.480
.240
.120
.036
.526
N TOTAL
MG/L MG/L
12.300 2.720
22.100 11.800
18.500 4.800
17.500 3.700
5.700 0.044
14.000 0.040
7.600 U.340
8.000
11.000
23.000 6.500
26.000 8.700
23.000 13.UOO
ORTMO
MG/L P
5.700
4.500
9,900
b.400
2.700
4.600
2.200
2.800
5.500
7.650
9.UOO
MG/L
6.
9.
S.
10.
7.
7.
5.
3.
3.
7.
9.
9.
RATE FLOrt-MGD
P 1UST MOD MONTHLY
700
500
000
bOO
000
200
200
300
300
400
100
6UO
1
0
1
0
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
0
.200
.BOO
.000
.960
.260
.700
.800
.800
.800
.600
.100
.850
1.200
0.900
0.900
0.920
1.400
1.600
1.600
1.700
1.800
1.600
1.100
0.900
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL OAld 7b/02/03
DATE
FROM
TU
CMTJ-
006JO
TIME DEPTH N02t,N03
OF i-J-TOTAL
JAY FEET MG/L
08 00
20 00
O.O'+U
28.000
J^ObAA ASJVObAA
tO b4 58. 0 082 35 30.0
SriELbY S.T.H.
39 KICHLANU COUNTY
I/CHAKLtS MILLS ktSEKVOI
bLAC^ FORK MOHICAN
P010000
0000 FE£f OEPTrt
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
00610
NrtJ-N
TOTAL
MG/L
00671
PHOS-OIS
OWTriO
MG/L P
00665
PHOb-rOT
MG/L P
S0051
FLOw
RATE
HvST MGO
bo053
CONDUIT
FLOW-MOD
MONTHLY
8.100
6.700
7.SOO
0.900
1.100
------- |