U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
O'SHAUGHNESSY RESERVOIR
DELAWRE COUNTY
OHIO
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No,
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
O'SHAUGHNESSY RESERVOIR
DELAWARE COUNTY
OHIO
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 407
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 4
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 5
IV. Nutrient Loadings 9
V. Literature Reviewed 14
VI. Appendices 15
-------
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)], 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.
-------
iil
Beyond the single lake analysis, broader based correlations
between nutrient concentrations and leading) 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, muTtivariate evaluations for the
relationships between land use, nutrient export, and trophic
condition, by lake class or use, are being developed to assist
in the formulatipn 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 & Developraefltj 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.
-------
1v
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF OHIO
LAKE NAME
Atwood
Beach City
Berlin
Buckeye
Charles Mill
Deer Creek
Delaware
Dillon
Grand Lake of St.
Grant
Hoiiday
Hoover
Indian
Loramie
Mosquito Creek
O'Shaughnessy
Pymatuning
Pleasant Hill
Rocky Fork
Shawnee
Tappan
Marys
COUNTY
Carroll, Tuscarawas
Stark, Tuscarawas
Mahoning, Portage, Stark
Fair-field, Licking, Perry
Ashland, Rlchland
Fayette, Plckaway
Delaware
Muskingum
Auglalze, Mercer
Brown
Huron
Delaware, Franklin
Logan
Auglaize, Shelby
Trumbull
Del aware
Ashtabula, OH; Crawford, PA
Ashland, Rlchland
Highland
Greene
Harrison
-------
«0-45—
84°00'
O'SHAUGHNESSY
RESERVOIR
® Tributary Sampling Site
x Lake Sampling Site
• Sewage Treatment Facility
^5 Drainage Area Boundary
9 f , f , ',' , 'fKm
0 4 8Mi.
Scale
83'30
•Scioto River i
-------
O'SHAUGHNESSY RESERVOIR
STORE! NO. 3931
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that O'Shaughnessy Reservoir is eutro-
phic. It ranked last when the 20 Ohio lakes sampled in 1973
were compared using a combination of six parameters*. Nineteen
lakes had less median total phosphorus, median dissolved phos-
phorus, and inorganic nitrogen. However, none of the lakes
had less mean chlorophyll a^, and 10 had greater mean Secchi disc
transparency. Marked depression of dissolved oxygen with depth
occurred at stations 2 and 3 in August and October.
Survey limnologists noted macrophytes along much of the
shorelines near the sampling sites.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results are not indicative of reservoir
conditions at the time the.sample was collected (04/26/73) because
of nutrient losses during shipment of the sample from the field
to the laboratory. The reservoir data indicate phosphorus limitation
during the spring and summer (April 26, 1973, and August 2, 1973);
i.e., the mean N/P ratios were 20/1 or greater. However, the
October data indicate that the reservoir was limited by nitrogen
at the time; i.e., the mean N/P ratio was 6/1.
* See Appendix A.
-------
2
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—The total phosphorus contribution of the
listed point sources accounted for 24.5% of the total load reaching
O'Shaughnessy Reservoir during the Survey sampling year. The
major contributors were the wastewater treatment facilities at
Marion and Marysville which accounted for 18.5% and 4.8% of the
total, respectively. The phosphorus export rate of the Scioto
River (see page 13) was substantially higher than the 56 kg/km2/yr
export of the Olentangy River, tributary to nearby Delaware
Reservoir*, and it is likely that point sources outside of the
40-kilometer limit of the Survey** (e.g., Kenton) contributed
significantly to the phosphorus load in the Scioto River and/or
the phosphorus contribution of the City of Marion was under-
estimated. In any case, it is probable that the point-source
contribution of phosphorus was greater than estimated in this
report.
The present phosphorus loading of 70.73 g/m2/yr is nearly 27
times greater than that proposed by Vollenweider (Vollenweider
and Dillon, 1974) as a eutrophic loading (see page 13). However,
the mean hydraulic retention time of O'Shaughnessy Reservoir is
a very short nine days, and Vollenweider's model probably does
not apply. Nonetheless, the existing trophic condition of the
reservoir is evidence of excessive nutrient loads, and all point
source phosphorus loads should be minimized to the greatest prac-
ticable extent to at least slow the present rate of eutrophication
* See Working Paper No. 399, "Report on Delaware Reservoir".
** See Working Paper No. 175, "...Survey Methods, 1973-1976".
-------
3
of O'Shaughnessy Reservoir.
2. Non-point sources—The phosphorus contribution of non-
point sources was 75.5% of the total input to O'Shaughnessy
Reservoir during the sampling year. The Scioto River contributed
64.5% of this total, Mill Creek contributed 10.4%, and Eversole
Run contributed 0.2%. Ungaged tributaries and immediate drainage
were estimated to have contributed a total of 0.4%.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1"
A. Lake Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 3.35 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 4.8 meters.
3. Maximum depth: >15.5 meters.
4. Volume: 16.080 x 106 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 9 days (based on outflow).
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix C for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean flow
Name area (km2)* (mVsec)*
Scioto River 1.994.3 18.1
Mill Creek 463.6 4.2
Eversole Run 28.0 0.3
Minor tributaries &
immediate drainage - 46.3 0.5
Totals 2,532.2 23.1
2. Outlet -
Scioto River 2,535.6** 21.5
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 112.6 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 92.5 centimeters.
t Table of metric equivalents—Appendix B.
ft Youger, 1975.
* For limits of accuracy, see Working Paper No. 175, "...Survey Methods,
1973-1976".
** Includes area of lake.
*** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
5
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
O'Shaughnessy 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 usually from a number of depths at
each station (see map, page v). During each visit, a single depth-inte-
grated (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 1.5 meters at station 1, 9.4 meters at station 2, and 15.5
meters at station 3.
The lake sampling results are presented in full in Appendix D and
are summarized in the following table.
-------
PARAMETER
TEMP (C)
DISS OXY (MG/L)
CNDCTVY (MCROMO)
PH (STAND UNITS)
TOT ALK (MG/L)
TOT P (MG/LI
ORTHO P (MG/L)
N02*N03 (MG/L)
AMMONIA (MG/L)
KJEL N
INORG N (MG/D
TOTAL N (MG/L)
CHLBPYL A (UG/L)
SECCHI (METERS)
A. SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL AND
1ST SAMPLING ( 4/26/73)
3 SITES
RANGE
8.7
6.4
425.
7.7
128.
0.163
0.124
2.700
0.060
0.600
2.930
3.600
3.2
0.2
- 1S.7
8.6
- 625.
7.9
- 202.
- 0.286
- 0.300
- 3.500
- 0.230
- 1.200
- 3.640
- 4.700
9.6
0.5
MEAN
13.6
7.9
5S8.
7.8
179.
0.191
0.153
3.000
0.118
0.931
3.116
3.931
6.1
0.4
MEDIAN
14.7
a.o
580.
7.9
189.
0.174
0.151
3.000
0.110
0.900
3.080
3.900
5.6
0.5
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR O'SHAUGNESSY RESERVOIR
STORE! CODE 3931
2ND SAMPLING ( 8/ 2/731 3HD SAMPLING (10/10/73)
3 SITES 3 SITES
RANGE
14.6
0.1
375.
7.4
112.
0.124
0.097
1.340
0.100
1.200
2.560
3.440
2.2
0.4
- 24.8
6.2
- 625.
7.9
- 275.
- 0.295
- 0.203
- 4.750
- 1.220
• 2.100
- 5.430
- 6.750
4.4
0.5
MEAN
21.3
2.5
459.
7.6
170.
0.216
0.151
3.766
0.323
1.515
4.109
5.302
3.4
0.4
MEDIAN
22.9
1.5
453.
7.5
133.
0.222
0.159
4.160
0.1SO
1.500
4.370
5.720
3.5
0.4
RANGE
14.8
0.1
403.
7.2
116.
0.174
0.145
0.040
0.060
0.800
1.230
2.010
2.4
0.2
- 20.1
5.0
- 686.
7.9
- 260.
- 1.020
- 0.750
- 2.390
- 2.440
- 3.600
- 2.630
- 4.390
- 15.9
1.2
MEAN
18.3
2.3
SSI.
7.5
204.
0.397
0.280
1.061
0.583
1.600
1.644
2.661
7.1
0.7
MEDIAN
18.7
1.8
566.
7.5
203.
0.238
0.171
1.210
0.240
1.400
1.290
2.330
2.9
0.9
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
04/26/73
08/02/73
10/10/73
2. Chlorophyll a_ -
Sampling
Date
04/26/73
08/02/73
10/10/73
Domi nant
Genera
1. Flagellates
2. Cryptomonas sjj.
3. Stephanodiscus sp_.
4. Synedra sp.
5. Qscillatoria sp.
Other genera
1,
2,
3.
4.
5.
Total
Cryptomonas sp_.
Stephanodiscus sp.
Synedra sp_.
Melosira sp.
Scenedesmus sj3.
Other genera
Total
1. Euglena sp_.
2. Stephanodiscus sp.
3. Flagellates
4. Cryptomonas sp.
5. Lepocinclis sp.
Other genera
Total
Station
Number
01
02
03
01
02
03
01
02
03
Algal Units
per ml
1,634
195
130
86
43
43
87
584
1,487
178
155
133
111
444
2,508
Chlorophyll a -
3.2
5.6
9.6
4.4
2.2
3.5
15.9
2.9
2.4
-------
8
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
The algal assay results are not indicative of conditions
in the reservoir at the time the sample was taken (04/26/73)
because of significant losses of nutrients during shipment from
the field to the laboratory. The reservoir data indicate that
primary production was limited by phosphorus during the early
spring and summer; i.e., the mean inorganic nitrogen/ortho-
phosphorus ratios were 20/1 on April 26, 1973, and 27/1 on
August 2, 1973. During the fall sampling, the data indicate
that nitrogen became limiting; i.e., the mean N/P ratio on
October 10, 1973, was 6/1.
-------
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 deter-
mined 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 nutrient loads,
in kg/km2/year, at station C-l and multiplying by the ZZ area in km2.
The operator of the Marysville wastewater treatment plant provided
monthly effluent samples and corresponding flow data. The communities
of Marion and Richwood and the Girls Industrial School did not participate
in the Survey, and nutrient loads were estimated at 1.134 kg P and 3.401
kg N/capita/year (the phosphorus load given for the Girls Industrial
School is based on 80% removal). The .septic tank nutrient loads from the
* See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
10
towns of Prospect and Shawnee Hills were estimated at 0.1134 kg P and
4.263 kg N/capita/year.
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal -
Name
Marysville*
Marion**
Ri chwood**
Girls Ind.
Sch.***
Prospect
Shawnee Hills
Pop.
Served
5,744
38,646
2,072
700
1,031
428
Mean Flow
Treatment (m3/d)
act. sludge 3,714.1
trickling 14,627.5
filter
trickling 784.3
filter
secondary, 265.0
P-removal
septic tanks ?
septic tanks ?
Receiving
Water
Mill Creek
Little Scioto
River
Fulton Creek
O'Shaughnessy
Reservoir
Scioto River
O'Shaughnessy
Reservoir
2. Known industrial - None
* El kins, 1974 (population shown is 1970 Census; more than 25% of total
waste load is from food processing industry; population equivalence of
12,000-15,000).
** Anonymous, 1971 (population shown is 1970 Census; flow estimated at
0.3785 m3/capita/day).
*** Anonymous, 1975 (in operation for last two years); flow estimated at
0.3785 m3/capita/day.
-------
11
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Scioto River 152,850 64.5
Mill Creek 24,660 10.4
Eversole Run 540 0.2
b. Minor tributaries & imnediate
drainage (non-point load) - 880 0.4
c. Known municipal STP's -
Girls Industrial School 160 0.1
Marysville 11,420 4.8
Richwood 2,350 1.0
Marion 43,825 18.5
d. Septic tanks* - 195 0.1
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 60_ <0.1
Total 236,940 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Scioto River 153,670
3. Net annual P accumulation - 83,270 kg.
* Estimate based on population of Prospect and Shawnee Hills plus 110
lakeshore dwellings; see Working Paper No. 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
/ 12
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg N/ % of
Source yjr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Scioto River 2,621,835 79.3
Mill Creek 454,555 13.8
Eversole Run 20,580 0.6
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 34,030 1.0
c. Known municipal STP's -
Girls Industrial School 2,380 0.1
Marysville 22,415 0.7
Richwood 7,045 0.2
Marion 131,435 4.0
d. Septic tanks* - 7,390 0.2
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 3.615 0.1
Total 3,305,280 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Scioto River 3,301,920
3. Net annual N accumulation - 3,360 kg.
* Estimate based on population of Prospect and Shawnee Hills plus 110
lakeshore dwellings; see Working Paper No. 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
13
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary kg P/km2/yr kg N/km2/yr
Scioto River 77 1,315
Mill Creek 53 980
Eversole Run 19 735
E. Yearly Loadings:
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 mesotrophic loading
would be considered one between "dangerous" and "permissible".
Note that Vollenweiders's model may not be applicable to
water bodies with short hydraulic retention times.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
grams/m2/yr 70.73 24.86 986,7 1.0
Vollenweider phosphorus loadings
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of O'Shaughnessy Reservoir:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic loading) 2.66
"Permissible" (oligotrophic loading) 1.33
-------
14
LITERATURE REVIEWED
Anonymous, 1971. Inventory of municipal waste facilities. EPA
Publ. OWP-1, vol. 5, Wash., DC.
Anonymous, 1975. Personal communication (waste treatment facilities
at Girls Industrial School). Shawnee Hills.
Elkins, George, 1974. Treatment plant questionnaire {Marysville STP).
Milliard.
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.
-------
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
3901 BEACH CITY RESERVOIR
390? BUCKEYE LAKE
3905 CHARLES MILL RESERVOIR
390b DEER CREEK RESERVOIR
3907 DELAWARE RESERVOIR
3908 OILLION RESERVOIR
3912 GRANT LAKE
3914 HOOVER RESERVOIR
3915 INDIAN LAKE
3917 LORAMIE LAKE
3921 MOSOUITO CREEr. HESEKVOIR
3924 PLEASANT HILL LAKE
3937 LAKE SAINT MARYS
3938 ATWOOD RESERVOIR
3939 BERLIN RESERVOIR
3930 HOLIDAY LAKE
3931 O'SHAUGNESSY
3933 ROCKY FORK LAKE
3933 SHArtNEE LAKE
3934 TAPPAN LAKE
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.132
0.179
0.127
0.098
0.086
0.163
0.113
0.040
0.120
0.165
0.058
0.036
0.148
0.031
0.042
0.125
0.208
0.067
0.069
0.040
MEDIAN
INORG N
i.y9o
0.3SO
0.465
2.980
2.340
1.590
0.570
1.640
0.380
1.380
0.150
0.455
0.200
0.20S
0.900
0.575
3.070
0.790
2.380
0.260
500-
MEAN SEC
489.000
490.000
482.555
470.125
4«4.111
481.250
486.333
462. 7SO
485.222
494.000
465.333
456.833
484.167
462.000
465.4355
465.333
479. 333
473.000
474.333
466.111
MEAN
CHLOKA
10.867
186.567
67.144
9.887
10.856
27.400
40.533
13.017
76. 8SS
104.100
36.267
22.850
79.150
lb.442
15.496
55.350
5.522
36.022
39.567
37.711
15-
MIN 00
11.600
9.600
15.000
13.900
14.500
14.300
12.200
14.800
14.200
8.200
11.600
14.700
8.200
14.700
13.600
15.000
14.900
15.000
15.000
15.000
MEDIAN
DISS OHTriO 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
0.014
0.005
0.006
0.034
0.159
0.010
0.009
0.007
-------
PERCENT OF LBKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBEK or LAKES WITH'HIGHEK VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
BEACH cur W
3902 auCKElfE LAKE
3905 CHARLES MILL RESERVOIR
390& DEE* CREEK RESERVOIR
3907 DELAWARE RESERVOIR
3908 OILL10N RESERV01K
3912 GRANT LAKE
391*. HOOVER RESERVOIN
3915 INDIAN LAKE
3917 LORAHIE LAKE
3921 MOSQUITO CREEK WESERVOIR
3924 PLEASANT HILL LAI\E
3927 LAKE SAINT MAHfb
3928 ATrfUOD HESEHVOIR
3929 bEHLl
3930 HOLIDAY LAKE
3V31 O'SHAUGNESSY
3932 ROCKf FORK LAl\E
3933 SHAWNEE LAKE
3V34 TAPPAN
MEDIAN
TOTAL P.
37 (
11 (
26 (
53 <
58 1
16 (
47 <
87 t
42 (
5 (
74 (
95 <
21 (
100 (
79 (
32 (
0 (
68 (
63 (
87 (
7)
2)
51
10)
11)
3)
9)
16)
8)
1)
14)
18)
4)
19)
15)
6)
0)
13)
121
161
MEDIAN
INOrtu N
21 <
76 (
63 <
5 <
16 (
32 <
58 (
26 t
76 (
37 (
100 (
68 (
95 (
89 (
42 (
53 <
0 (
47 <
11 (
04 (
4)
14)
12)
1)
3)
6)
11)
5)
14)
7)
19)
13)
181
17)
61
li}>
0)
9)
2)
16)
500-
MEAN SEC
11 (
5 (
J7 (
63 (
32 <
42 <
16 (
89 (
21 (
0 (
82 <
100 <
26 (
9S t
74 <
62 (
47 (
58 (
53 (
68 <
2)
1)
7)
12)
6)
tt)
3)
17)
4)
0)
Ib)
19)
5)
Id)
14)
Ib)
9)
11)
10)
13)
MEAN
CrtLOHA
84 (
0 (
21 (
95 (
89 (
58 <
32 (
T9 (
16 <
5 (
53 (
63 (
11 <
68 <
74 (
26 (
100 (
42 (
37 I
47 (
16)
0)
4)
18)
17)
11)
6)
IS)
3)
1)
101
12)
2)
13)
14)
5)
19)
8)
7)
9)
Ib-
MIN UO
82 I
89 (
11 (
63 I
47 <
S3 <
74 (
32 (
58 (
97 (
82 (
39 (
97 (
39 (
68 (
H (
26 (
11 (
11 <
11 (
15>
17>
0)
121
9)
10)
14)
6)
ID
18)
IS)
7)
16)
7)
13)
0)
5)
0)
0)
0)
MEOIAN
01 Sb UhiTHO P
42 (
26 (
58 (
11 <
21 (
5 (
34 (
79 t
53 (
34 (
92 (
66 (
47 (
100 <
92 I
16 (
0 (
66 (
74 (
84 (
8)
5)
11)
2)
4)
1)
6)
IS)
10)
6)
17)
12)
9)
19)
17)
3)
0)
12)
14)
16)
INUEX
NU
277
207
216
290
263
206
261
392
266
178
483
431
297
491
429
220
173
292
249
3U1
-------
LAKES RANKED BY INDEX NOS.
RANK LAKE. CODE LAKE NAME
1 392d
2 3921
3 3924
ft 3929
5 39i<*
6 3<»3<.
7 3927
8 3V38
9 3906
10 3901
11 391S
12 3907
13 3912
14 3J33
15 3930
16 3905
17 3902
18 3908
19 3917
20 3931
INUEX NO
ATwOOO
MOSOUITO CRtEK. R£SErtVOl»
PLEASANT HILL LAKE
dE^LiN RESERVOIR
HOOVER RESERVOIR
TAPPAN LAI^E
LAKt SAIM MAHYS
ROCKY FOWK LAKE
DEER CREEK RESERVOIR
8EACH CITY HtSERVOJR
INDIAN LAKt
DELAWARE RESERVOIR
GRANT LAKE
SHArfNEE LAKt
HOLIDAY LAKE
CHARLES MILL RESEHVOIR
eUCKEYE LAK£
OILLION RESERVOIR
LOR AM IE LAKt
O'SHAUGNESSY RESEHVOlH
483
431
429
381
297
292
290
277
?66
263
261
?49
220
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"4 = 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
-------
LAKL CODE 3931
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR OnIO
OShAUGHMEbSt RESERVOIR
1/27/75
TOTAL DRAINAGE AktM OF LAKEfSU KM) 253S.b
NORMALIZED FLOwSICMS)
TRI8UTAHY AREA(S
3931A1
3931A2
3931bl
3931C1
39JIZ2
199-4.3
2535.6
463.6
28.0
49.7
27.i7
3B.7*
ti.16
0.40
0.71
29.17
38.il
8.24
0.«5
MAH
44.17
49.27
10.26
0.71
1.22
AHR
35.08
40.49
8.U7
0.57
0.99
MA if
21.44
23.22
4.22
0.34
O.b?
JUN
14.61
17. 9b
3.68
O.la
0.34
JOL
8.S2
a. 66
0.99
0.12
(1.21
AOG
4.11
6.31
0.&8
O.Ufa
0.10
SEP
3.e>5
4.96
0.51
0.04
U.07
OCT
4.87
4.67
0.42
O.Ob
0.0V
NOV
e.bo
7.H4
l.bS
0.10
0.19
DEC
15.60
18.46
3.34
0.23
0.40
MEAN
18.09
21.50
4.17
0.27
0.48
SUMMARY
TOTAL DRAINAGE ARtA OF LAKt =
SUM OF SUB-DflAiNAt>£ ARtAS =
2S3S.6
TOTAL FLOW IN
TOTAL FLOW OUT
277.Ib
259.lb
MEAN MONTHLY FLOmb ANO JAILf FLOWS (CMb)
MONTH YLAK MEAN FLOW OAr
KLUW DAY
KLOW UftY
FLOW
39J1A1
J9J1A2
5
6
7
R
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
f>
7
B
9
10
11
i2
1
2
3
;,
73
7J
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
7t
74
74
7J
73
73
7J
73
7j
73
73
74
74
It
74
18.63
20.47
22.46
24. 55
2.yl
4.05
15.77
33.41
73.28
25. RS
31.71
36.25
23.36
27.41
25.77
28.6'J
2,83
3.6S
22.9^
42. 7o
loo. sa
32.00
4U.21
49. S5
S
4
10
4
8
13
3
1
b
2
2
b
S
4
10
«+
B
13
3
1
b
2
2
&
Ib.Hi)
7.96
c.at)
b.32
l.^b
2.d6
H.u /
64.£rs
13.34
db.d2 17
3b.bl 19
101.37
21.27
lu.bl
1U.42
t,. 77
J.14
J.63
lO.bB
66.61
16.31
Jb.25 17
47. ab 19
111.29
1 7 . b6
25.06
22.51
3b.<56
-------
LAKE COUE 3931
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR OHIO
OSHAUGHNESSY RESERVOIR
1/27/75
MEAN MONTHLY Fl_0hb AND DAILY FLOWS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY MONTH YLAH MEAN FLO* DAY
393ibl
3931C1
3931ZZ
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
it
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
it
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
?
3
4
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
It
It
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
2.H3
6.54
2.49
3.40
0.45
0.71
6.20
7.82
14.70
6.83
7.33
7.96
0.65
0.25
0.31
0.22
0.03
U.08
0.40
0.54
O.H8
0.42
0.45
0.4d
l.lu
0.4U
0.1J7
0.15
0.74
1.59
0.74
0.79
0.85
5
4
10
4
8
13
3
1
5
2
2
6
5
4
10
4
8
13
3
1
5
2
2
6
FLO* DAY
FLOW DAY
FLOW
3.57
2.07
0.79
0.85
0.40
0.37
1.59
6.54
2.44
4.84
fa. 61
7.28
0.34
0.82
0.19
0.06
0.03
0.02
u.l 1
0.45
O.lt
0.31
U.54
u.45
17
19
17
19
4.16
4.11
0.26
0.25
-------
APPENDIX D
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STO«£T RETRIEVAL DATE 75/01/27
393101
40 14 42.0 08J 08 47.0
O'SHAUtiNESSf
39041 OHIO
OATt
FHOM
TO
73/U4/26
73/U8/02
73/10/10
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
11 45 0000
11 00 0000
11 00 0005
15 10 0000
15 10 0005
00019
»ATER
TfcMP
CENT
12.6
23.0
22.7
17.9
17.2
8.6
fa.2
5.0
0030U U0077 00094
DO TrtANSP CNDUCTW
SECCHI FtELD
INCHES
8
17
600
623
625
403
443
HEP ALES
3
00400
PM
bU
7.8U
7.90
7.90
7.7o
00410
T ALK
CACOj
MG/L
192
270
275
116
2111202
0005 FEET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MWL
0.140
0.120
0.120
0.240
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
1.200
1.300
1.300
2.000
00630
N02tkN03
N-TOTAL
Mli/L
3.500
2.900
2.860
2.390
00671
PHOS-OIS
OHTHO
MG/L P
0.200
0.203
0.192
0.456
00665 32217
UATt TIME DEPTH PHOS-TOT CHLRPhYL
fKOM UF A
TO DAY FEET MG/L H UG/L
7J/04/26 11 45 0000 U.286 3.2
73/08/02 11 00 0000 0.293 4.4
11 00 0005 0.29s
7J/10/1U 15 10 0000 O.blO 15.9
-------
STORE.T RETRIEVAL DATE 75/01/87
393102
40 11 22.0 083 OH 03.0
O'SHAUGNESSY KES£Ry/01H
39041 OHIO
DATE
FHOM
TO
73/04/26
73/OU/02
73/10/10
DATE
FROM
TO
73/04/26
73/OS/02
73/10/111
TIME DEPTH
OF
OAY FEET
14 05 0000
14 05 0006
14 05 0015
14 05 0022
14 05 0031
10 20 0000
10 20 0005
10 20 0010
10 20 0015
10 20 0020
10 20 0025
10 20 0030
15 25 0000
15 25 0015
15 25 OU3U
TIME DEPTH
OF
OAY FEET
14 05 0000
14 05 0006
14 05 0015
14 05 0022
14 05 0031
10 20 0000
10 20 OOOb
10 20 0015
10 20 0020
'10 20 0030
IS 25 0000
15 ;>5 001S
15 25 U030
U0010
WATER
TtMP
CtNT
14.9
14.7
14.2
13.8
10.6
24.3
24.2
24.1
23.3
22.8
21.4
1S.1
20.1
19. S
18.8
0066b
PHUS-TOT
MG/L f
0.206
O.lel7
0.210
0 . 1 9<«
0.174
u.233
U.E27
0.230
0.222
0.17-4
0.218
o . 1 v3
1.020
00300
DO
MG/L
8.0
6.4
7.6
7.4
4.B
4.8
2.1
0.9
0.2
4.4
0.6
3.8
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
b.6
2.2
2.9
Uu077 00094
T«ANSP CNDUCTVY
SECCHl FltLO
INCHES M1CHOMHO
20 600
600
625
600
470
17 401
412
409
400
410
493
509
36 576
575
686
1
11EPALES '
3
00400
Phi
SU
7.80
7.90
7.90
7.90
7.70
7.70
7.60
7.50
7.40
7.50
7.90
7.50
7.50
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
193
192
202
197
143
126
131
127
133
200
201
203
218
2111202
0035
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.110
0.110
0.140
0.130
0.170
0.160
0.150
0.100
0.110
0.660
0.060
O.OriO
0.530
FEET DEPTH
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
1.200
0.900
0.900
0.900
0.900
1.500
1.500
1.500
1.500
2.000
1.100
o.aoo
1.600
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
Mb/L
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
4.160
4.220
4.500
4.480
4.750
1.230
1.210
1.360
00671
PriOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.161
O.lbl
0.170
0.164
0.130
0.171
0.173
0.161
0.137
0.120
0.168
0.145
0.7SO
-------
STurtET RETRIEVAL UATt 75/01/27
393103
40 09 25.0 083 07 37.0
O'SHAUGNESSf
39041 OHIO
DATE
FROM
TO
73/0<+/26
7j/0d/02
7^/10/10
FIME DEPTH
OF
OAT
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
16
Ib
16
16
16
FLET
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
30
30
30
30
30
0000
OOUb
0015
0022
0030
0040
0049
0000
0005
UU10
0015
0020
0025
0030
0035
0040
0045
0050
0000
0015
0027
U040
0051
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
15.7
15.7
15.?
15.7
15.1
9.0
8.7
24.8
24.7
24. b
24.3
23.2
20.4
17.4
16.6
15. a
15.4
14. b
iv. a
19.4
18.6
17.2
14.8
UEPALES
00300
DU
MG/L
B.6
a. 4
8.0
9.0
a. 3
7.3
5.2
4.4
0.9
0.5
0.3
i,.l
4.4
l.B
U.I
0.1
a. 2
00077 00094
TKANSP CNOUCTVY
SEccrii FIELD
INCHES MICHOMHO
18 580
580
580
570
580
425
440
18 376
382
380
375
401
508
498
496
494
494
495
46 558
5t>0
576
553
571
3
(J0400
PH
SU
7.90
7.9C
7.90
7.90
7.90
7.80
7.70
7.7U
7.40
7.40
7. SO
7.SJ
7.40
7.80
7.50
7.40
7.<*G
7.2u
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
189
169
lae
189
188
128
134
115
112
122
17*
1^8
220
200
201
212
226
260
2111202
0053
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.070
0.060
0.070
0.070
0.08U
0.160
0.230
0.160
0.130
0.110
0.460
0.680
1.220
0.070
0.080
0.620
1.130
2.440
FEET DEPTH
00625
TOT *JEL
N
MG/L
0.700
0.600
1.000
0.900
0.800
1.000
1.100
1.700
1.300
1.200
1.300
1.500
2.100
0.900
0.800
1.400
2.200
3.600
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
Mti/L
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
2.800
2.700
4.140
4.540
4.690
4.060
2.580
1.340
1.190
1.210
0.610
0.310
0.040
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.150
0.151
G.1S6
0.149
0.148
0.124
0.126
0.162
0.159
0.151
0.133
0.109
0.097
0.154
0.146
0.171
0.205
0.328
-------
RETRIEVAL DATE 75/01/27
DATE
TO
73/04/26
73/08/02
73/10/10
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
14
14
14
14
14
14
1<*
09
09
09
09
U9
09
16
16
16
16
16
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
30
30
30
30
30
0000
0006
0015
0022
0030
004J
0049
0000
0015
0020
0025
0030
0050
0000
0015
0027
0040
0051
00665
'HUS-TUT
MG/L P
0.170
0.168
o.iba
0.169
0.169
0.162
U.2ud
0.220
(J.218
U.224
0.201
0.141
0.124
U.I 74
O.lbl
0.236
0.453
32217
CHLfcPHYL
A
UG/L
9.6
3.5
2.4
393103
40 09 25.0 083 07 37.0
U«:>HAJGNESSr
OnlO
11EPALES
3
21U202
0053 FEET
DEPTH
-------
APPENDIX E
TRIBUTARY and WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
-------
STOKET RETRIEVAL DATE 7b/02/03
40 17 20.0 083 09 35.0
SCIOTO KIVEK
39 7.5 OSTrtAfcOEK
1/OSHAUGHNESSr KES
US 36 bKDG .7 MI N OF' WHITE SULPHUk
11EPALES 2111204
H 0000 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
73/05/05
73/00/04
73/07/10
7J/08/04
73/<;9/Orf
73/10/13
73/11/03
73/12/01
7^/02/02
74/u2/17
74/03/02
74/03/19
74/04/Ob
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH M02&N03 TOT KJEL
OF M-TOTAL N
JAY FEET
13
12
19
14
15
14
14
14
It
17
14
16
14
15
50
10
30
00
37
50
40
00
43
?5
45
35
MG/L
3.
o .
4.
2.
0.
2.
3.
6.
H.
3.
i,.
4.
3.
400
U10K
300
300
010i\
700
600
400
000
600
100
800
OO'J
M(3/l
1.
0.
1.
0.
0.
1.
1.
1.
1.
0.
1.
1.
3.
600
910
760
810
3(JO
400
300
600
100
900
100
600
100
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOb-DIS PHOS-TOT
TOTAL ORTHO
Mti/L ,;WG/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.070
.006
.132
.056
.043
.057
.104
.060
.110
.100
.135
.085
.055
0.
0.
.0.
• o.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1 o.
0.
0.
0*
p
200
005K
210
270
220
490
430
168
110
145
120
120
090
MG/L P
0.275
0.390
0.270
0.330
0.440
0.640
0.530
0.370
0,210
0.230
0.260
0.260
K VftLUt
TH-.N
10 Bt
-------
bTOKET HtTwIEVAL DATE 75/02/10
3931A2
40 09 14.0 (,83 07 35.0
bClOTO RIVER
3-* 7.5 SHAtfNEE HILL
0/OSHAUGHNESSt ktS
USHAUGHNESSY 0AM
11EPALES 21
4 oooo FEET
DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
7j/05/0b
73/06/0**
73/0^/10
7J/OB/04
73/09/Od
73/1U/13
7J/11/03
73/12/01
7^/01/05
74/02/02
74/02/17
7<*/u3/02
74/03/19
74/04/06
00630 00625
THF. DEPTH fj02(siN03 TOT KJEL
OF" N-TOTAL N
DAt KtET
12
12
IB
13
14
13
14
15
1J
13
If
U
16
13
25
15
23
40
05
S5
55
25
20
25
10
50
15
55
MG/L
3.
u.
6.
3.
0.
1.
1.
b.
6.
2.
3.
4.
3.
3.
000
010K
900
400
920
20u
52U
700
000
700
300
600
800
000
MG/L
1.
0.
2.
2.
1.
0.
0.
1.
1.
0.
0.
1.
1.
2.
s*ou
^20
310
300
600
950
900
400
200
900
900
200
100
600
OOblO 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOS-QIS HHOS-TOT
TOTAL ORTnU
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
U.
0.
3.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
J.
140
012
360
0^2
080
Ot.5
04B
092
095
090
125
IbO
125
145
MG/L
0.
u.
0.
0.
0.
o.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
p
126
102
126
147
068
173
184
184
118
075
140
125
135
105
MG/L P
0.19J
0.165
0.210
0.270
0.160
0.200
0.230
0.390
U.200
0.260
U.I 95
U.250
0.220
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE? RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/03
3931B1
40 14 44.0 OH3 04 10.0
MILL CREEK
39 7.5 SHAtfNEt HILL
T/OSHAUCJHiMESSr RtS
SF HwY 257/745 BftDb AT bELLEPOINT
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FriUM
TO
73/05/05
73/06/04
73/U7/10
73/08/04
73/09/08
73/10/13
73/11/03
73/12/01
74/02/02
74/U2/17
74/03/02
74/03/19
74/04/06
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH IM02S.N03 TOT KJEL
OF iM-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
13
12
IB
14
14
14
14
14
13
17
14
16
14
00
45
53
20
45
30
40
25
50
35
20
40
25
MG/L
1.
0.
4.
1.
0.
1.
3.
3.
2.
1.
2.
2.
1.
640
010K
400
BfaO
220
040
400
700
300
900
600
200
800
MG/L
1.
0.
1.
1.
2.
0.
1.
1.
0.
0.
1.
0.
1.
980
800
815
300
500
90U
350
000
500
900
100
800
90U
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOS-uIS PnOS-TOT
TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L
0.
u.
If.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
039
018
130
220
069
046
072
056
150
085
065
030
165
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
u.
u.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0*
0.
p
U92
OObK
231
240
231
370
330
115
110
075
080
095
Mli/L P
u.ldO
0.330
0.345
0.310
0.35u
0.390
0.40G
0.210
Q.190
0.190
0.220
0.175
0.290
K VALUE KNOWN TU BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STOKET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/03
3931C1
40 10 50,0 083 03 55.0
Etft«SOL£ KUN
3-J 7.5 SHAwNtE HILL
T/OSHAUGHNESSV RES
2NLSKY HO dHOG .5 MI M OF SI HirfY 74b
UE^ALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FfcUM
To
73/05/05
73/06/04
73/07/10
73/08/04
73/uy/Oi
73/10/13
73/11/03
73/12/01
7<*/ol/05
74/02/02
74/02/17
74/03/02
74/0 3/H
74/04/06
TIME DEHTH
OF
DAY FEET
12 45
12 33
18 40
14 05
14 2S
14 10
14 25
14 10
13 40
13 35
IX 2\
14 00
16 25
14 10
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
1.500
0.010K
1.100
0.300
0.160
O.Obfa
4.800
3.080
1.900
1.600
1.090
2.100
0.900
1.760
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.460
0.890
1.700
O.B40
2.300
0.375
1.200
0.800
0.300
0.300
0.300
0.700
0.500
1.600
00610
NHJ-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.014
0.055
0.220
0.100
0.180
0.021
0.036
0.024
0.024
0.025
0.020
0.020
0.015
0.065
00671
PHOS-01S
(WHO
MG/L P
0.007
0.013
0*046
O.U24
0.025
0.025
0.052
0.048
0.016
0.020
0.020
0.025
0.015
0.055
00665
HHOS-TOT
MG/L P
O.UlD
0.040
O.OdO
0.042
0.042
0.050
0.065
0.135
0.030
0.040
0.035
0.075
0.035
0.20G
K VALUE ivNOwN TO Bt
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STOKET KETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/03
3931BA AS3931BA POJ4000*
40 14 30.0 083 21 50.0
MARYSVILLE
39151 UNION COUNTY
T/0'SHAUGHNESSY KESEKVOI
HILL CWEEK
lltPALES 2141204
4 0000 FEET OEPTH
DATE
FKOM
TO
73/08/23
CP < T > -
73/08/23
73/09/21
CPIT)-
73/09/21
73/11/19
CP-
73/11/19
73/12/06
cpm-
73/12/Ob
74/02/2b
CP00
12.000
12.000
19.000
19.000
19.000
15.000
21.UOO
19.000
00610 00671 00665 50051 50053
NH3-N PHOS-OIS PhOb-TOT FLOrf CONDUIT
TOTAL ORTHO RATE FLOH-MGD
Mfa/L M6/L P MG/L P iNbf MbD MONTHLY
3.000 8.400 0.9S8 0.989
3.950
6.950
4.700
2.200
3.200
0.300
6.9QO
7. (JUO
3.050
10.000
7.700
6.730
8.750
5.500
7.000
5.900
6.800
8.900
8.100
9.200
7.00U
7.300
7.
9.
6.
7.
7.
9,
9.
10.
9.
8.
U.
600
550
000
550
400
100
600
000
900
1
400
uOO
0.917
0.875
0.940
1.000
1.020
0.911
0.659
0.883
0.925
0.840
O.B31
1.120
1.060
1.130
1.100
0.970
0.980
0.991
0.867
0.79S
0.847
0.925
------- |