U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
CHICKAHOMINY LAKE
CHARLES CITY AND NEW KENT COUNTIES
VIRGINIA
EPA REGION III
WORKING PAPER No, 459
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
CHICIWIINY LAKE
CHARLES CITY AND NEW KENT OXNTIES
VIRGINIA
EPA REGION III
WORKING PAPER No, 459
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
VIRGINIA STATE WATER CONTROL BOARD
AND THE
VIRGINIA NATIONAL GUARD
JUNE, 1975
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword i i
List of Virginia Study Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Area Maps v, vi
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)], 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.
-------
m
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, multivariate 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 Virginia State Water Con-
trol Board for professional involvement and to the Virginia
National Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of
the Survey.
Eugene T. Jensen, Executive Secretary of the State Water
Control Board; Michael A. Bellanca, Director; Jean W. Gregory,
Pollution Control Specialist; and Robert W. Pitchford, Pollution
Control Technician; Bureau of Surveillance and Field Studies;"
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 William J. McCaddin, the Adjutant General of
Virginia, and Project Officer Lt. Colonel James D. Manley, who
directed the volunteer efforts of the Virginia National Guardsmen,
also are gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the
Survey.
-------
IV
LAKE NAME
Bluestone
Chesdin
Chickahominy
Claytor
J. H. Kerr
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF VIRGINIA
J. W. Flannagan
Occoquan
Rivanna
Smith Mountain
COUNTY
Giles, VA; Mercer,
Monroe, Summers, WV
Amelia, Chesterfield,
Dinwiddie
Charles City, New Kent
Pulaski
Charlotte, Hallifax,
Micklenburg, VA;
Granville, Vance,
Warren, NC
Dickenson
Fairfax, Prince William
Albemarle
Bedford, Franklin,
Pittsylvania
-------
— 3727
CHICKAHOMINY
LAKE
(g) Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
i Mi .
Scale
Va.
CHICKAHOMINY
LAKE
— 37 23
02X
-------
•shldnd
CHICKAHOMINY
LAKE
(^Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
p Sewage Treatment Facility
(Drainage Area Boundary
4 8 12
-rJ L, 1 ,1 1—,-!
4 em.
Scale
37 '45-
37'30'
Ikers
'tlet
-------
CHICKAHOMINY LAKE
STORE! NO. 5112
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that Chickahominy Lake is eutrophic.
It ranked fourth in overall trophic quality when the eight
Virginia lakes sampled in 1973 were compared using a combination
of six parameters*. Five of the lakes had less median total
and dissolved phosphorus, none had less mean inorganic nitrogen,
seven had less mean chlorophyll a_, and three had greater mean
Secchi disc transparency.
Survey limnologists noted large amounts of macrophytes in
the shallow .areas of the lake at all sampling times. The lake
has been chemically treated to control extensive growths of
egeria (= elodea), Egeria densa (Corning and Prosser, 1969;
Anonymous, 1972a, 1972b, 1973a, 1973b).
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate that the lake was nitrogen
limited at the time the sample was collected (04/09/73). The
lake data indicate nitrogen limitation at station 1 in September
as well but phosphorus limitation at station 2.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—During the sampling year, listed point
* See Appendix A.
-------
2
sources contributed over 35% of the total phosphorus load to the
lake. The present phosphorus loading of 3.21 g/m2/yr is nearly
three 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 lakes with short
hydraulic retention times, the existing trophic condition is
evidence of excessive nutrient loads. Therefore, all phosphorus
inputs should be minimized to the greatest practicable extent.
Point-source phosphorus control should result in eventual phos-
phorus limitation in the lake and at least slow the present rate
of eutrophication. To this end, the Virginia Water Control Board
is requiring the County of Henrico and City of Richmond to elim-
inate all point-source nutrient discharges to the watershed
(Ketelle and Uttormark, 1971); and the Highland Springs waste-
water treatment plant included in this study was closed in April,
1974.
2. Non-point sources—During the sampling year, non-point
sources contributed about 65% of the total phosphorus load to the
lake. The Chickahominy River alone contributed almost 54% of the
total phosphorus load. Tonyham Swamp, Collins Run, Big Swamp,
and minor tributaries and immediate drainage collectively con-
tributed about 10% of the total phosphorus load.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1"
A. Lake Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 6.07 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 4.9 meters.
3. Maximum depth: Unknown.
4. Volume: 29.743 x 106 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 44 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix C for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean flow
Name area (km2)* (m3/sec)*
Chickahominy River (A-2 & -3) 697.7 7.1
Tonyham Swamp 5.1 .0.1
- -Collins Run . ..:... .17.8 Q.2.
Big Swamp ' 14.7 0.2
Minor tributaries &
immediate drainage - 33.0 O.J3
Totals 768.3 8.1
2. Outlet -
Chickahominy River (including
aqueduct) 774.4** 7.9
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 93.1 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 108.7 centimeters.
t Table of metric conversions—Appendix B.
tt Bellanca, 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
Chickahominy Lake was sampled twice during the open-water season
of 1973 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter. A planned
mid-summer sampling was cancelled because of a July application of
herbicides to control extensive growths of the aquatic weed egeria
(Egeria densa). Near-surface and 1.8 meter samples for physical and
chemical parameters were collected from the single station on the
lake during the first visit (see map, page v), and near-surface sam-
ples were taken during the last visit. A second station, which was
inadvertantly established eight miles downstream from the lake, was
sampled in a similar manner. During each visit, a single depth-
integrated (near bottom to surface) sample was composited from the
two stations for phytoplankton identification and enumeration; and
during the first visit, a single 18.9-liter depth-Integrated sample
was collected 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 1.8 meters at station 1 and
1.5 meters at station 2.
The sampling results for both stations are presented in full in
Appendix D, and are summarized in the following table for station 1.
-------
A. SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR CHICKAHOMINY LAKE
STORET -CODE 5112
PARAMETER
TEMP (C)
OISS OXY (MG/L)
CNOCTVY (MCROMO)
PH (STAND UNITS)
TOT ALK (MG/L)
TOT P (MG/L)
ORTHO P (MG/L)
N02«N03 (MG/L)
AMMONIA (MG/L>
KJEL N (MG/L)
INORG N (MG/L)
TOTAL N (MG/L)
CHLRPYL A (UG/L)
SECCHI (METERS)
1ST SAMPLING ( 4/ 9/73)
2 SITES
RANGE
14.1
8.4
70.
6.6
15.
0.062
0.017
0.050
0.070
0.500
0.120
0.550
4.9
1.5
- 14.5 ,
8.5
75.
6.8
16.
- 0.092
- 0.022
- 0.070
- 0.080
- 0.700
- 0.150
- 0.770
- 11.0
1.5
MEAN
14.3
8.4
71.
6.7
15.
0.071
0.019
0.057
0.075
0.575
0.132
0.632
7.9
1.5
MEDIAN
14.3
8.4
70.
6.8
15.
0.066
0.018
0.055
0.075
0.550
0.130
0.605
7.9
1.5
2ND SAMPLING ( 9/26/73)
! 2 SITES
RANGE
23.'5 - 24.0
5.6 - 6.8
76. - 497.
6.5 - 6.6
21. - 30.
0.054 - 0.069
0.006 - 0.010
0.030 - 0.030
0.050 - 0.070
0.90'0 - 1.000 0.950 0.950
0.080 - 0.100 0.090 0.090
0.930 - 1.030 0.960 0.980
18.4 - 20.1 19.2 19.2
0.9 - 1.0 0.9 0.9
MEAN
23.8
6.2
356.
6.5
26.
0.061
0.008
0.030
0.060
MEDIAN
24.0
6.2
495.
6.5
26.
0.061
0.008
0.030
0.060
3RD SAMPLING
0 SITES
RANGE MEAN
MEDIAN
«•»««» -»«»»«»»<»»•««»«*«*»»«<
»»»««» .»«««•««««•*««»**«**«•»
-------
Biological Characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
04/09/73
09/26/73
2. Chlorophyll a^ -
Sampling
Date
04/09/73
09/26/73
Dominant
Genera
1. Melosira sp.
2. Flagellates
3. Pennate diatoms
4. Dactylococcopsis sp.
5. Nitzschia sp.
Other genera
Total
1. Melosira sp.
2. Mougeotia sp.
3. Stephanodiscus sp.
4. Microcystis sp.
5. Cyclotella sp.
Other genera
Total
Station
Number
1
2
1
2
Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Spike (mg/1)
Control
0.050 P
0.050 P + 1.0 N
1.0 N
Ortho P
Cone, (mg/1)
0.020
0.070
0.070
0.020
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
0.068
0.068
1.068
1.068
Algal Units
per ml
853
820
292
258
34
158
2,415
4,261
355
331
260
237
1.895
7,339
Chlorophyll a_
(ug/D
4.9
11.0
18.4
20.1
Maximum yield
(mg/1-dry wt.)
2.1
2.6
17.4
4.4
-------
7
2. Discussion -
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum, indicates that the potential primary productivity
of Chickahominy Lake was high at the time the sample was
collected (04/09/73). The lack of yield increase with the1
addition of phosphorus alone until nitrogen was also added,
indicates that the lake was limited by nitrogen at that time.
Note that the addition of nitrogen alone resulted in a yield
much greater than that of the control.
The lake data indicate nitrogen limitation as well. The
mean inorganic nitrogen/orthophosphorus ratios at station 1
were 6/1 and 8/1 in April and September, respectively. Note
that the assay sample was a composite of lake station 1 and
station 2 below the outlet (see maps, pages v and vi). The
mean N/P ratio at station 2 was 4/1 indicating nitrogen limi-
tation in April. However, in September the N/P ratio was 17/1,
and phosphorus limitation would be expected.
Nitrogen limitation, as indicated by the algal assay or
by in-lake nitrogen to phosphorus ratios, does not necessarily
mean that the trophic condition of the lake can be improved by
controlling nitrogen inputs. In many cases, the apparent con-
dition of nitrogen-limitation results from excessive phosphorus
input from point sources and is often accompanied by a corres-
ponding increase in primary production. In such cases, the
reversal of the enriched condition depends upon phosphorus
control, not nitrogen control.
-------
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix E for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Virginia National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each of the
tributary sites indicated on the map (page vi). Sampling was begun in
July, 1973, and was completed in May, 1974.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the
year of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were provided by
the Virginia 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" ("II" of U.S.G.S.) were estimated using the means of the
nutrient loads, in kg/km2/year, at stations B-l, C-l, and D-l and
multiplying the means by the II area in km2.
The operator of the Henrico County-Sandston wastewater treatment
plant provided monthly effluent samples and corresponding flow data.
The operators of the New Kent Elementary School and Henrico County-
Highland Springs plants participated in the Survey but did not submit
flow data. Nutrient loads for these plants were estimated at 1.134
* See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
kg P and 3.401 kg N/capita/year. The load calculated for the Henrico
County-Highland Springs plant (abandoned in April, 1974) is based on
ten months of discharge.
The operators of the Leadbetter Industrial Park, Henrico County-
Glenwood Farms, and Hanover County-Oak Hill Estates plants also pro-
vided samples, but these plants are far upstream and are not considered
to be significant point sources; however, the data obtained are
included in Appendix E for the record.
A. Waste Sources:
t
1. Known municipal -
Name
New Kent El em.*
School
Henrico County-
Sands ton'
Highland1"
Springs
Pop.
Served
155
4,900
3,360
Mean Flow
Treatment
sand filter
tr. filter
tr. filter
(m3/d)
58.
1,644.
1,271.
7**
5
8**
Receiving
Water
Aliens Run
Broad Water
Creek
Unnamed trib.
Chickahominy
to
R.
2. Known industrial - None
* Brown, 1973.
** Flow estimated at 0.3785 m3/capita/day.
t Gregory, 1973.
-------
10
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg P/ % of
Source y_r total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Chickahominy River (A-2 & -3) 10,470 53.8
Tonyham Swamp 105 0.5
Collins Run 450 2.3
Big Swamp 570 2.9
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 925 4.8
c. Known municipal STP's -
Henrico County -
Sandston 3,475 17.9
Highland Springs 3,175 16.3
New Kent El em. School 175 0.9
-d. Septic tanks* - 20 0.1
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 105 0.5
Total 19,470 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Chickahominy River
(including aqueduct) 15,325
3. Net annual P accumulation - 4,145 kg.
* Estimate based on 73 lakeshore dwellings; see Working Paper No. 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
11
Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg N/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Chickahominy River (A-2 & -3) 186,775 81.3
Tonyham Swamp 1,195 0.5
Collins Run 4,665 2.0
Big Swamp 3,930 1.7
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 8,380 3.7
c. Known municipal STP's -
Henrico County -
Sandston 7,335 3.2
Highland Springs 9,520 4.2
New Kent Elem. School 525 0.2
d. Septic taffks*'- 780 " " 0.3
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 6.555 2.9
Total 229,660 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Chickahominy River
(including aqueduct) 227,575
3. Net annual N accumulation - 2,085 kg.
Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary kg P/km2/yr kg N/km2/yr
Chickahominy River 15 268
Tonyham Swamp 21 234
Collins Run 25 262
Big Swamp 39 267
* Estimate based on 73 lakeshore dwellings; 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/m2/yr 3.21 0.68 37.8 0.34
Vollenweider phosphorus loadings
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Chickahominy Lake:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic loading) 1.22
"Permissible" (oligotrophic loading) 0.61
-------
13
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Anonymous, 1972a. Aquatic plant control using herbicides in a
large potable water supply reservoir. Proposal submitted to
Dept. of Army by the Dept. of Fish, and Wildl. Sci., VA
Polytech. Inst. & State U., Blacksburg.
Anonymous, 1972b. Walker Dam Impoundment aquatic1plant control
project, New Kent County, Virginia. Final Environmental
Statement, U.S. Army Engr. Dist., Norfolk, and VA Comm. of
Game & Inland Fisheries, Richmond.
Anonymous, 1973a. A determination of the effects on phytoplankton
and other selected parameters induced by an herbicide appli-
cation to Chickahominy Reservoir. Proposal submitted to Corps
of Engrs., Norfolk, by the VA Comm. of Game & Inland Fisheries,
Richmond.
Anonymous, 1973b. Experimental aquatic plant control of the Walker
Dam Impoundment (Chickahominy Reservoir). Proposal submitted to
Corps of Engr., Norfolk, by the VA Comm. of Game & Inland Fisheries,
Richmond.
Bellanca, M. A., 1975. Personal communication (lake morphometry).
VA Water Contr. Bd., Richmond.
Brown, H. Kenneth, Sr. (Supt.), 1974. Treatment plant questionnaire
(New Kent Elem. Sch. STP). Quinton.
Corning, Raymond V., and Norville S. Prosser, 1969. Elodea control
in a potable water reservoir. Hyacinth Contr. Jour., vol. 8.
Gregory, Jean, 1973. Treatment plant questionnaires. VA Water Contr.
Bd., Richmond.
Ketelle, Martha J., and Paul D. Uttormark, 1971. Problem lakes in
the United States. EPA Water Poll. Contr. Res. Ser., Proj.
16010 EHR, Wash., DC.
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.
-------
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN BANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
5103 CLAYTOR LAKE
5105 JOHN W. FLANNAGAN DAM
5106 JOHN H. KERR RESERVOIR
5108 OCCOOUAN RESERVOIR
5110- SMITH MOUNTAIN LAKE
5111 LAKE CHESDIN
5112 CHICKAHOMINY LAKE
5113 RIVANNA (SOUTH FORK) RES
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.031
0.011
0.044
0.098
0.016
0.044
0.066
0.079
MEDIAN
INORG N
0.450
0.320
0.290
0.525
0.410
0.240
0.125
0.475
500-
MEAN SEC
439.500
415.700
458.937
459.750
419.667
465.778
455.333
460.222
MEAN
CHLORA
5.642
5.955
8.833
12.417
11.593
12.556
13.600
6.667
15-
MIN DO
14.900
14.800
15.000
15.000
15.000
14.800
9.400
13.000
MEDIAN
DI'SS ORTHO P
0.008
0.004
0.009
0.037
0.005
0.008
0.017
0.022
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES 'WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
5103 CLAYTOR LAKE
5105 JOHN W. FLANNAGAN 0AM
5106 JOHN H. KERR RESERVOIR
5108 OCCOOUAN RESERVOIR
5110 SMITH MOUNTAIN LAKE
5111 LAKE CHESDIN
5112 CHICKAHOMINY LAKE
5113 RIVANNA (SOUTH FORK) RES
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
71 (
100 (
43 (
0 (
86 (
57 (
29 (
14 (
5)
7)
3)
0)
6)
4)
2)
1)
MEDIAN
INORG
29 (
57 (
71 (
0 (
43 (
86 (
100 (
14 (
N
2)
4)
5)
0)
3)
6)
7)
1)
500-
MEAN SEC
71 (
100 (
43 (
29 (
86 (
0 (
57 (
14 (
5)
7)
3)
2)
6)
0)
4)
1)
MEAN
CHLORA
100 (
86 (
57 (
29 (
43 (
14 (
0 (
71 (
7)
6)
4>
2)
3)
1)
0)
S>
15-
MIN DO
43 (
64 (
14 (
14 (
14 (
64 (
100 (
36 (
3)
4)
0)
0)
0)
4)
7)
6)
MEDIAN
DISS ORTHO P
64 (
100 (
. 43 (
0 (
86 (
64 (
29 (
14 (
4)
7)
3)
0)
6)
4)
2)
1)
INDEX
NO
378
507
271
72
358
285
315
gu
-------
LAKES RANKED BY INDEX NOS.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO
1 5105 JOHN W. FLANNAGAN DAM 507
2 5103 CLAYTOR LAKE 378
3 5110 SMITH MOUNTAIN LAKE 358
4 5112 CHICKAHOMINY LAKE 315
5 5111 LAKE CHESOIN 385
6 5106 JOHN H. KERR RESERVOIR 271
7 5113 RIVANNA {SOUTH FORK) RES 213
8 5108 OCCOQUAN RESERVOIR 72
-------
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
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR I/IRGINIA
02/05/76
LAKE CODE 5112 CHICKAHOMINY LAKE
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE(SO KM)
SUB-DRAINAGE
TRIBUTARY AREA(SO KM)
JAN
FE8
774.4
MAR APR
MAY
NORMALIZED FLOWS(CMS)
JUN JUL AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE
SUM OF SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR
5112A1
MEAN FLOW DAY
5112A2
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
74
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
74
5.52
4.81
2.27
3.34
3.14
12.03
14.38
9.34
11.61
13.59
8.50
0.85
0.76
0.37
0.65
0.62
2.27
2.61
2.04
2.32
2.69
1.78
14
12
8
13
10
8
12
9
23
20
5
14
12
8
13
10
8
12
9
23
20
5
774.4
778.5
FLOW DAY
3.51
1.61
1.67
2.32
3.91
4.11
14.38
11.55
16.71
8.50
8.50
0.48
0.23
0.25
0.45
0.76
0.71
2.61
2.35
3.40
1.76
1.78
11
24
11
24
SUMMARY
TOTAL FLOW IN
TOTAL FLOW OUT
FLOW DAY
3.91
14.72
FLOW
0.76
2.97
96.28
94.86
DEC
MEAN
5112A1
5112A2
5112A3
511281
5112C1
5112D1
5112ZZ
774.4
153.8
543.9
5.1
17.8
14.7
43.3
10.48
2.10
7.36
0.06
0.23
0.19
0.59
12.46
2.52
8.78
0.10
0.31
0.27
0.74
14.72
2.83
10.19
0.12
0.40
0.31
0.88
12.46
2.55
8.50
0.08
0.28
0.27
0.74
7.93
1.61
5.66
0.05
0.19
0.16
0.45
4.81
1.16
3.40
0.05
0.16
0.14
0.37
4.53
0.93
3.11
0.03
0.11
0.0V
0.25
5.38
1.08
3.68
0.03
0.13
0.11
0.31
3.40
0.74
2.49
0.02
0.08
0.07
0.20
3.96
0.79
2.83
0.03
0.09
0.08
0.23
6.23
1.36
4.25
0.04
0.17
0.14
0.40
8.50
1.76
5.95
0.05
0.20
0.17
0.48
7.88
1.61
5.50
0.06
0.20
0.17
0.47
-------
LAKE CODE 5112
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR VIRGINIA
CHICKAHOMINY LAKE
03/05/76
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY
5112A3
5112B1
5112C1
511201
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
74
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
74
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
74
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
74
3.54
3.26
1.53
2.35
1.73
8.78
10.19
10.05
8.24
8.35
3.54
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.03
0.07
0.07
0.22
0.26
0.35
0.28
0.31
0.22
0.03
0.06
0.03
0.06
0.06
0.18
0.21
0.20
0.23
0.25
0.18
14
12
8
13
10
8
12
9
23
20
5
14
12
8
13
10
8
12
9
33
30
5
14
12
8
13
10
8
12
9
23
20
5
14
12
8
13
10
8
12
9
23
20
S
FLOW DAY
3.37
0.11
1.10
2.35
1.25
14.16
8.92
11.84
5.66
3.34
0.06
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.07
0.08
0.12
0.07
0.07
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.04
0.07
0.26
0.28
0.40
0.21
0.22
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.04
0.07
0.0,6
0.21
0.23
0.34
0.1'7
0.13
11
24
11
24
11
24
11
24
FLOW DAY
2.35
10.48
0.03
0.10
0.09
0.34
0.07
0.28
FLOW
-------
APPENDIX D
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/02/05
511201
37 24 37.0 076 56 33.0
CrilCKAHOMINY LAKE
51 VIRGINIA
DATE
FROM
TO
73/04/09
73/09/26
DATE
FROM
TO
73/04/09
73/09/26
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
09 30 0000
09 30 0006
15 50 0000
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
09 30 0000
09 30 0006
15 50 0000
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
14.1
14.1
23.5
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.063
0.062
0.069
00300
DO
MG/L
8.5
5.6
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
4.9
18.4
00077 00094
TRANSP CNOUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
INCHES MICROMHO
60
36
75
70
76
11EPALES
3
00400
PH
SU
6.60
6.80
6.50
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
15
15
21
2111202
0010 FEET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.070
0.080
0.050
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.500
0.500
1.000
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.050
0.050
0.030
00671
PHOS-OIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.019
0.022
0.010
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/02/05
511202
37 22 36.0 076 54 05.0
CHICKAHOMINY LAKE
51 VIRGINIA
00010
DATE TIME DEPTH WATER
FROM OF TEMP
TO DAY FEET CENT
73/04/09 10 50 0000 14.5
10 50 0005 14.5
73/09/26 15 35 0000 24.0
15 35 0005 24.0
00300 00077 00094
DO TRANSP CNDUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
M6/L INCHES MICROMHO
8.4
6.8
38
70
70
495
497
11EPALES
3
00400
PH
SU
6.80
6.80
6.60
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
15
16
30
2111202
0007 FEET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.080
0.070
0.070
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.700
0.600
0.900
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.070
0.060
0.030
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.018
0.017
0.006
00665 32217
DATE TIME DEPTH PHOS-TOT CHLRPHYL
FROM OF A
TO DAY FEET MG/L P UG/L
73/04/09 10 50 0000 0.069 11.0
10 50 0005 0.092
73/09/26 15 35 0000 0.054 20.1
-------
APPENDIX E
TRIBUTARY and WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/20
5112A1
37 24 25.0 076 56 18.0 4
CHICKAHOMINY RIVER
51 7.5 WALKERS
0/CHICKAHOMINY LAKE 021691
AT WALKERS DAM S OF WALKERS
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
73/07/14
73/08/12
73/09/08
73/10/13
73/11/10
73/12/08
74/01/12
74/02/09
74/03/23
74/04/20
74/05/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
16 10
10 00
11 50
10 50
10 45
10 55
10 30
10 30
10 30
11 00
11 40
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.044
0.010K
0.010K
0.015
0.010K
0.008
0.020
0.028
0.200
0.012
0.008
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
1.300
0.780
1.890
0.700
0.650
0.500
0.600
0.600
1.300
0.600
0.600
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.037
0.029
0.014
0.036
0.027
0.012
0.032
0.030
0.035
0.050
0.085
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.023
0.010
0.023
0.015
0.010
0.012
0.020
0.020
0.030
0.025
0.025
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.065
0.060
0.175
0.060
0.055
0.055
0.050
0.055
0.030
0.025
0.060
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/20
5112A2
37 25 44.0 077 02 18.0 4
CHICKAHOMINY RIVER S
51127 7.5 PROVIDENCE F
I/CHICKAHOMINY LAKE 021691
RT 115 8RDG 1.25 MI N OF SANDYBOTTOM
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
73/07/14
73/08/12
73/09/08
73/10/13
73/11/10
73/12/08
74/01/12
74/02/09
74/03/24
74/04/20
74/05/05
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL
OF N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
16 55
10 35
10 50
11 45
11 17
11 45
11 45
11 05
11 40
12 00
12 05
MG/L
0.140
0.092
0.010K
C.046
0.010K
0.010K
5.100
0.112
0.252
0.016
0.084
MG/L
0.600
0.800
0.600
0.650
0.550
0.400
0.400
0.600
0.800
0.500
0.600
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOS-DIS PHOS-TOT
TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L
0.100
0.078
0.065
0.048
0.024
0.016
0.016
0.025
0.035
0.040
0.045
MG/L P
0.056
0.078
0.009
0.050
0.040
0.032
0.020
0.020
0.030
0.046
0.045
MG/L P
0.100
0.120
0.080
0.090
0.070
0.115
0.040
0.030
0.065
0.065
0.080
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/30
5112A3
37 26 00.0 077 02 15.0 4
CHICKAHOMINY RIVER N
51127 7.5 PROVIDENCE F
T/CHICKAHOMINY LAKE 021691
RT 115 8RDG 1.5 MI N OF SANDYBOTTOM
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
73/07/14
73/08/12
73/09/08
73/10/13
73/11/10
73/12/08
74/01/12
74/02/09
74/03/24
74/04/20
74/05/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
16 25
10 30
11 20
11 10
11 10
11 30
11 00
10 55
11 30
11 45
12 00
00630
00625
N02&N03 TOT KJEL
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.138
0.150
0.138
0.086
0.010K
0.010K
0*012
0.112
0.108
0.024
0.100
N
MG/L
0.840
0.770
3.150
0.600
1.000
0.400
Oo600
0.300
0.700
0.500
0.700
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.066
0.040
0.046
0.042
0.054
0.012
0.020
0.020
0.025
0.040
0.060
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.052
0.081
0.056
0.054
0.039
0.036
0.020
0.020
0.030
0.045
0.045
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.100
0.115
0.100
0.110
0.070
0.095
0.045
0.035
0.065
0.065
0.070
K VALUE KNOWN TO HE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/05/20
5112B1
37 24 25.0 076 59 58.0 4
TONYHAM SWAMP
51 7.5 WALKERS
T/CHICKAHOMINY LAKE 021691
SEC RO 8RDG 3 MI E OF SANDYBOTTOM
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
73/07/14
73/08/12
73/09/08
73/10/13
73/11/10
73/12/08
74/01/12
74/02/09
74/03/24
74/04/20
74/05/05
00630
00625
TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL
OF
DAY FEET
17 25
11 00
11 45
11 30
11 32
14 29
11 30
11 15
13 05
12 35
12 20
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.084
0.048
0.024
0.014
0.010K
0.010K
0.012
0.028
0.060
0.016
0.024
N
MG/L
0.460
0.165
3.150
0.250
0.250
0.500
0.300
0.300
1.000
0.250
0.300
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.024
0.018
0.023
0.016
0.013
0.012
0.008
0.020
0.030
0.015
0.025
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.046
0.056
0.058
0.047
0.039
0.024
0.024
0.015
0.020
0.025
0.030
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.075
0.110
0.095
0.070
0.070
0.050
0.050
0.035
0.055
0.025
0.065
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/20
5112C1
37 24 40.0 077 02 30.0 4
COLLINS RUN
51 7.5 PROVIDENCE F
T/CHICKAHOMINY LAKE 021691
RT 614 BRDG .25 MI E OF SANDYBOTTOM
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
73/07/14
73/08/12
73/09/08
73/10/13
73/11/11
73/12/08
74/01/12
74/02/09
74/03/24
74/04/20
74/05/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
17 05
10 45
11 35
11 20
11 25
13 30
11 20
11 05
13 45
12 15
12 40
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.130
0.092
0.084
0.065
0.010K
0.028
0.040
0.116
0.104
0.040
0.060
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.830
1.260
0.220
0.650
0.200
0.100
0.300
1.300
1.100
0.200
1.100
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.044
0.053
0.044
0.200
0.026
0.008
0.020
0.130
0.045
0.010
0.037
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.048
0.058
0.058
0.044
0.040
0.028
0.032
0.020
0.025
0.035
0.040
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.085
0.090
0.100
0.085
0.077
0.085
0.070
0.080
0.050
0.040
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/20
511201
37 25 44.0 076 59 16.0 4
BIG SWAMP
51 7.5 WALKERS
T/CHICKAHOMINY LAKE 021691
US 60 E BOUND LANE BROG W OF WINDSOR SNA
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
73/07/14
73/08/12
73/09/08
73/10/13
73/11/10
73/12/08
74/01/12
74/02/09
74/03/24
74/04/20
74/05/05
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL
OF N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
16
10
11
10
11
11
10
10
14
11
11
40
10
05
55
00
00
40
45
20
15
45
MG/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
110
080
061
046
010K
028
036
060
064
028
044
MG/L
0.960
0.520
1.100
0.450
0.400
1.100
0.400
0.500
1.000
0.600
0.400
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOS-DIS PHOS-TOT
TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L
0.063
0.037
0.045
0.052
0.030
0.040
0.036
0.075
0.067
0.035
0.060
MG/L
0.
P
095
0.091
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
093
063
054
064
044
030
040
055
070
MG/L P
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.160
.210
.155
.125
.090
.130
.085
.050
.085
0.055
0
.115
K VALUE KNOWN TO HE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/20
5112FA SF5112FA POOOlbS
37 31 45.0 077 05 57.0 4
NEirf KENT CO WATKINS ELEM SCH
51 7.5 TUNSTALL
T/LAKE CHICKAHOMINY 021592
ALLENS RUN/KENT LAKE/TOE INK SWAMP
11EPALES 2141204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
74/05/07
74/06/04
74/07/09
7^/08/05
74/09/05
74/10/04
74/1 1/04
74/12/02
75/01/09
75/02/01
75/03/06
00630
TIME DEPTH N02&N03
OF N-TOTAL
DAY FEET
15
09
10
14
15
14
00
00
00
00
00
30
MG/L
48.000
57.000
39.000
26.000
16.600
44.000
50.400
46.100
20.000
56.850
49.700
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
3.800
4.300
5.700
2.000
1.600
5.800
4.500
3.700
24.000
15.000
2.300
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.670
0.460
0.160
0.061
0.120
0.058
0.100
1.400
8.800
8.910
2.080
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
11.500
10.500
15.000
10.500
6.450
2.600
11.500
6.400
7.250
7.175
12.300
00665 50051 50053
PHOS-TOT FLOW CONDUIT
RATE FLOW-MGD
MG/L P INST MGD MONTHLY
14.000
11.500
15.700
11.100
6.900
3.750
11.500
6.900
9.500
7.300
10.500L
L ACTUAL VALUE i S KiMOwN TO «L
* THAN VAi_U£ uiVtN
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/20
00630
DATE TIME DEPTH N02^N03
FROM OF N-TOTAL
TO DAY FEET MG/L
73/09/28 11 00
0.130
5112GA P05112GA
34 45 10.0 077 29 30.0 4
OAK HILL ESTATES ASHLAND
51 7.5 ASHLAND
T/LAKt CHICKAHOMINY
STONY RUN
11EPALES 2141204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
P000115
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
7.100
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.460
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
6.50:0
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
7.500
50051
FLOW
RATE
INST MGD
50053
CONDUIT
FLOw-MGO
MONTHLY
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/20
00630
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03
FROM OF N-TOTAL
TO DAY FEET MG/L
5112VA PD5112VA
37 45 25.0 077 29 15.0 4
LEDBETTER INDUST. PARK. ASHLAND
51 7.5 ASHLAND
T/CHICKAHOMINY LAKE 021591
STONY RUN
11EPALES 2141204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
50051
FLOW
RATE
INST MGD
50053
CONDUIT
FLOW-MGD
MONTHLY
74/01/07 12 00
0.240
4.700
1.720
0.165
0.680
0.085
0.085
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/20
5112XA TF5112XA P004900
37 31 20.0 077 16 00.0 4
HENRICO CO S/0 2 RICHMOND
51 7.5 SEVEN PINES
T/LAKE CHICKAHOMINY 021692
UNNAMED TRI8/BOAR SWAMP/CHICKAHOMINY RIV
11EPALES 2141204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
74/01/24
CP(T>-
74/01/24
74/02/26
CP(T)-
74/02/26
74/04/03
CP(T)-
74/04/03
74/04/30
74/05/28
CP(T)-
74/05/28
74/07/02
CP(T)-
74/07/02
74/08/26
74/10/25
CP(T)-
74/10/25
74/11/26
CP ( T ) -
74/11/26
74/12/13
CP(T>-
74/12/13
75/01/22
cpm-
75/01/22
TIME DEPT
OF
DAY FEET
11
15
11
15
10
15
15
10
15
10
15
09
13
09
15
08
12
09
13
00
00
15
15
00
30
00
30
00
00
00
00
30
15
00
30
00
00
30
00630 00625
H N02&.N03 TOT KJEL
N-TOTAL N
MG/L MG/L
7
6
6
13
12
10
5
10
11
6
.560
.800
.000
.000
.600
.900
.020
.400
.200
.100
3.300
2.700
2.000
5.700
4.800
2.900
1.500
2.600
3.100
1.300
00610 00671 00665 50051 50053
NH3-N PHOS-DIS PHOS-TOT FLOW CONDUIT
TOTAL ORTHO RATE FLOW-MOD
MG/L MG/L P MG/L P INST MOD MONTHLY
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.040
.100
.220
.980
.540
.120
.175
.260
.140
.070
3
2
2
7
6
7
2
7
5
1
.200
.600
.800
.600
.400
.700
.100
.100
.600
.150
4.100 0.430
3.700 0.420
4.600 0.450
9.300 0.450
7.900 0.430
8.800 0.400
2.500
7.100
6.550 0.120
1.700 0.600
0.420
0.430
0.440
0.450
0.440
0.410
0.600
0.120
0.120
0.600
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/20
5112YA TF5112YA P002895
37 33 07.0 077 19 23.0 4
HENRICO CO SAN DIST 4 HIGHLAND
51 7.5 SEVEN PINES
T/CHICKAHOMINY LAKE 021692
UNNAMED STREAM/CHICKAriOMINY RIVER
11EPALES 2141204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
74/01/24
CP(T>-
74/01/24
74/02/26
CP(T)-
74/02/26
74/04/03
CP(T>-
74/04/03
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
11 00
15 00
11 00
15 00
10 15
15 15
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
1.2*0
0.920
0.600
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
13.500
15.000
20.000
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
6.900
6.300
3.600
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
6.160
5.800
5.550
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
7.000
7.600
10.000
50051
FLOW
RATE
INST MGD
50053
CONDUIT
FLOW-MGD
MONTHLY
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/20
DATE
FROM
TO
00630
TIME DEPTH N02&N03
OF N-TOTAL
DAY FEET MG/L
11 00
74/01/24
cpm-
74/01/24 15
74/02/26 10
CP(T)-
74/02/26 14 45
00
45
5112ZA AS5112ZA P000282
37 34 50.0 077 23 18.0 4
HENRICO CO &LENWOOD FARMS.RICHMO
51 7.5 RICHMOND
T/CHICKAHOMINV LAKE 021691
UNNAMED STREAM/CHICKAHOMINY RIVER
11EPALES 2141204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
50051
FLOW
RATE
INST MGD
50053
CONDUIT
FLOW-MGD
MONTHLY
0.640 17.000 8.900 5.520 8.000
0.640 14.000 8.600 5.900 8.400
------- |