U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
               NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
                        WORKING PAPER SERIES
                                              REPORT
                                                ON
                                         LAKE FORT PH/WTOM HILL
                                            JONES COUNTY
                                              TEXAS
                                            EPA REGION VI
                                         WORKING PAPER No,
     CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
                                 and
    ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
•&G.P.O. 699-440

-------
                             REPORT
                               ON
                      LAKE FORT PHANTOM HILL
                          JONES COUNTY
                             TEXAS
                          EPA REGION VI
                      WORKING PAPER No,
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
 TEXAS WATER QUALITY BOARD
           AND THE
    TEXAS NATIONAL GUARD
         MARCH, 1977

-------
                               CONTENTS
                                                           Page
  Foreward                                                   ii
  List of Texas Study Reservoirs                             iv
  Lake and Drainage Area Map                                 vi

  Sections
  I.  Conclusions                                             1
 II.  Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics                  3
III.  Lake Water Quality Summary                              4
 IV.  Nutrient Loadings                                      10
  V.  Literature Reviewed                                    15
 VI.  Appendices                                             16

-------
                                 n
                          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 freshwater 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.

-------
                                Ill
     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.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

     The staff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of
Research & Development, U. S. Environmental  Protection Agency)
expresses sincere appreciation to the Texas  Water Quality Board
for professional involvement, to the Texas National Guard for
conducting the tributary sampling phase of the Survey, and to
those Texas wastewater treatment plant operators who voluntarily
provided effluent samples.

     Hugh C.  Yantis, Jr., Executive Director of the Texas Water
Quality Board, and John B. Latchford, Jr., Director, and the staff
of the Field Operations Division provided invaluable lake documen-
tation and counsel during the Survey, reviewed the preliminary
reports, and provided critiques most useful  in the preparation of
this Working Paper series.

     Major General Thomas Bishop, the Adjutant General of Texas,
and Project Officer Colonel William L. Seals, who directed the
volunteer efforts of the Texas National Guardsmen,  are also grate-
fully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.

-------
                                 IV
                  NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
                         STUDY RESERVOIRS
                          State of Texas
NAME
Amistad
Bastrop
Bel ton
Braunig
Brownwood
Buchanan
Caddo

Calaveras
Canyon
Colorado City
Corpus Christi

Diversion
Eagle Mountain
Fort Phantom Hill
Houston
Kemp
Lake O'The Pines

Lavon
Lewisville (Garza-Little Elm)
Livingston
COUNTY
Val Verde
Bastrop
Bel 1, Coryel1
Bexar
Brown
Burnet, Llano
Harrison, Marion, TX;
Caddo Parish,  LA
Bexar
Comal
Mitchell
Jim Wells, Live Oak, San
Patricio
Archer, Baylor
Tarrant, Wise
Jones
Harris
Baylor
Camp, Marion,  Morris,
Upshur
Coll in
Denton
Polk, San Jacinto, Trinity,
Walker

-------
Lyndon B.  Johnson
Medina
Meredith

0. C. Fisher (San Angelo)
Palestine

Possum Kingdom

Sam Rayburn

Somervil le
E. V. Spence
Stamford
Stillhouse Hollow
Tawakoni
Texoma

Travis
Trinidad
Twin Buttes
White River
Whitney
Wright Patman (Texarkana)
Burnet, Llano
Bandera, Medina
Hutchinson, Moore,
Potter
Tom Green
Anderson, Cherokee,
Henderson, Smith
Palo Pinto, Stephens,
Young
Angelina, Jasper
Nacogdoches, Sabine, San
Augustine
Burleson, Lee, Washington
Coke
Haskell
Bell
Hunt,  Rains, Van Zandt
Cooke,  Grayson TX; Bryan,
Johnston, Love, Marshall, OK
Burnet, Travis
Henderson
Tom Green
Crosby
Bosque, Hill
Bowie,  Cass

-------
Map Location
                                LAKE  FORT  PHANTOM HILL
                                      9  Tributary Sampling Site
                                      x  Lake Sampling Site
                                                                 is Km.
                                                  5   Mi.
                                                Scale

-------
                           LAKE FORT PHANTOM HILL
                                STORET 4814

 I.  CONCLUSIONS
    A.  Trophic Condition:
            Survey data indicate that Lake Fort Phantom Hill is eutrophic;
        i.e., well supplied with nutrients and quite productive.  Whether
        nutrient enrichment is beneficial or deleterious depends on the
        actual or potential effect on the uses of the lake.  In this
        regard, no nuisance conditions are known to personnel of the
        Texas Water Quality Board and there is little or no impairment
        of the designated beneficial uses of this water body.
            Lake Fort Phantom Hill ranked twenty-fourth in overall trophic
        quality when the 39 Texas reservoirs sampled in 1974 were compared
        using a combination of six water quality parameters*.  Twenty-
        nine of the reservoirs had less median total phosphorus, 32 had
        less median dissolved orthophosphorus, 13 had less median inorganic
        nitrogen, ten had less mean chlorophyll a_, and 30 had greater mean
        Secchi disc transparency.
            No significant depression of dissolved oxygen occurred at any
        of the sampling stations and times.  However, the lake is aerated
        from March to October to prevent stratification (Weems, 1976).
            Survey limnologists did not observe macrophytes or surface
        algal  concentrations during the sampling visits.  However, it was
        noted that the lake at times was very turbid, and the low mean
* See Appendix A.

-------
    Secchi disc transparencies (range of 0.02 to 0.9 meters)  indi-
    cate that at times primary productivity may be light-limited.
B.  Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
        The algal assay results indicate that nitrogen was  the
    limiting nutrient in October.   The lake data indicate nitrogen
    at all sampling times.
C.  Nutrient Controllability:
        1.  Point-sources—No  known wastewater treatment plants
    impacted Lake Fort Phantom Hill during the sampling year.
    Septic tanks serving lakeshore dwellings were estimated to
    have contributed about 3%  of the total  phosphorus load, but
    a shoreline survey would be necessary to determine the  actual
    significance of these sources.
        The present phosphorus loading of 0.37 g/m2/year is slightly
    more than that proposed  by Vollenweider (Vollenweider and Dillon,
    1974) as a eutrophic loading (see page 14).  However, the hydrau-
    lic retention time of the  lake is estimated and may be  in error
    due to variability of inflows  (see page 10).
        2.  Non-point sources—Non-point sources accounted  for about
    97% of the total phosphorus load reaching Lake Fort Phantom  Hill.
    More than 49% of the total was contributed by the gaged tribu-
    taries, and an estimated 43% was contributed by the ungaged
    tributaries and immediate  drainage.

-------
    LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS*

    A.  Morphometry  :

        1.  Surface area:  10.93 kilometers2.

        2.  Mean depth:   5.6 meters.

        3.  Maximum depth:   ? meters.

        4.  Volume:  61.208 x 106 m3.

        5.  Mean hydraulic  retention  time:   2.2 years  (based on outflows).

    B.  Tributary and Outlet:
        (See Appendix C for flow data)

        1.  Tributaries -

                                               Drainage     Mean  flow
            Name                               area  (kV)ttt  (m3/sec)ttt

            Elm Creek                             644.9         0.203
            Cedar Creek                           414.4         0.128,,
            Clear Fork Brazes River diversion      -              0.237
            Minor tributaries &
             immediate drainage -                 167.8         0.630

                           Totals                1,227.1         1.198*

        2.  Outlet -

            Abilene Aqueduct                      -              0.660^
            Elm Creek                            1,238.0**      0.208

                           Totals                1,238.0         0.868

    C.  Precipitation***:

        1.  Year of sampling:  85.0 centimeters.

        2.  Mean annual:  59.9 centimeters.
t Table of metric conversions—Appendix B.
tt Weems, 1976.
tit For limits of accuracy,  see Working Paper No.  175,  "...Survey Methods,
  1973-1976".
* Sum of inflows adjusted to equal  sum of outflows plus evaporation;  see
  page 10.
** Includes area of lake.
*** See Working Paper No. 175.

-------
III.   WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
      Lake Fort Phantom Hill  was sampled four times in 1974  by means  of
  a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter.   Each time,  samples  for physical
  and chemical  parameters were collected from two  or more  depths  at
  three stations on the lake  (see map,  page vi).   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 October 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 15.8
  meters at station 1, 10.7 meters at  station 2, and 6.1 meters at
  station 3.
      The sampling  results are presented in full in Appendix D and are
  summarized in the following table.

-------
PARAMETER


TEMP (C)


DISS OXY (MG/U)


CNDCTVY  (MCROMO)


PH (STAND UNITS)


TOT ALK  (MG/D


TOT P  (MG/U


ORTHO P  (MG/U


N02»N03  (MG/L>


AMMONIA  (MG/L)


KJEL N  (MG/L)


INORG  N  (MG/L)


TOTAL  N  (MG/L)


CHLKPYL  A  (UG/D


SECCHI  (METERS)
       A. SUMM4RY OF PHYSICAL AND



       1ST SAMPLING (  3/ 6/74)


             3 SITES


     RANGE        MEAN   MEDIAN


 11.9  -  15.4    13.7    13.4


  8.8  -   9.4     9.2     9.3


 615.  -  660.    635.    630.


  8.1  -   8.4     8.3     8.3


 167.  -  173.    170.    170.


0.034  - 0.057   0.042   0.039


C.018  - 0.028   0.022   0.022


C.030  - 0.090   0.048   0.050


0.030  - 0.080   0.042   0.030


0.400  - 1.200   0.645   0.500


0.060  - 0.170   0.090   0.080


0.440  - 1.240   0.694   0.570


  2.9  -   3.1     3.0     3.1


  0.6  -   0.8     0.7     0.8
                                                         CHEMICAL  CHARACTERISTICS  FOR  FT PHANTOM  HILL  LAKE
                                                          STOrfET CODE «*»H4
       2ND SAMPLING (  5/15/74)


             3 SITES


     RANOt


 23.8  -  24.5


  7.0  -   7.8


 839.  -  858.


  8.3  -   8.3


 165.  -  170.


0.047  - 0.534


0.017  - 0.033
                         7.4


                        843.

                         8.3

                        168.
                  MEAN   MEDIAN

                  24.2    24.1

                   7.4


                  845.

                   8.3

                  167.

                 0.110   0.061

                 0.023   0.020

0.040  - 0.080   0.059   0.065

0.030  - 0.060   0.049   0.050


0.200  - 1.100

0.070  - 0.140

0.270  - 1.180
4.9  -

0.2  -
           7.8

           0.5
0.500   0.450

0.108   0.110

0.559

  b.9
                   0.3
0.505

  5.0

  0.3
       3RD SAMPLING < 8/ 5/74)

             3 SITES

     rfANGE        MEAN   MEDIAN

 25.5  -  26.4    26.1    26.3


  5.2  -   7.0     6.5     6.8

 961.  -  987.    976.    978.

  8.2  -   8.4     8.3     8.3

 162.  -  167.    164.    164.

0.044  - 0.07<»   0.056   0.056

0.006  - 0.022   0.010   0.008

0.020  - 0.100   0.029   0.020

0.020  - 0.070   0.039   0.035

0.300  - 0.500   0.400   0.400

0.040  - 0.160   0.068   0.055

0.320  - 0.530   0.429   0.420

 13.7  -  15.3    14.7    15.0

  0.6  -   0.9     0.8     0.9

-------
                              A. SUMMARY OF  PHYSICAL  AND  CHEMICAL CHARACTERiSTICS FOK FT PHANTOM HILL LAKt.
                                                          STOKET CODE 4614

                              4TH SAMOLING  <10/30/74>
PARAMETER

TEMP (O

DISS OXY (MG/L)

CNDCTVY  (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)

1NORG N  (MG/L)

TOTAL N  (MG/L)

CHLRPYL  A 

SECCHI  (METERS)
3 SITES
RANGE MEAN
18.8
6.4
372.
7.9
112.
0.081
0.062
0.270
0.030
0.300
0.310
0.570
1.3
0.6
- 19.2
7.6
- 410.
8.0
- 120.
- 0.099
- 0.080
- 0.290
- 0.050
- 0.600
- 0.340
- 0.890
1.9
0.6
19.0
7.?
399.
8.0
117.
0.092
0.073
0.278
0.041
0.400
0.319
0.678
1.7
0.6
MEDIAN
18.9
7.2
402.
8.0
118.
0.092
0.073
0«280
0.040
0.400
0.320
0.670
1.8
0.6

-------
B.  Biological  characteristics:

    1.   Phytoplankton -
        Sampling
        Date

        03/06/74
        05/15/74
        08/05/74
        10/30/74
Dominant
Genera
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Chroomonas sp.
Selenastrum sp.
Microcystis sp.
Cryptomonas sp.
Dactylococcopsis sp.
Other genera

        Total

Chroomonas sp.
Microcystis sp.
Cryptomonas sp.
Centric diatoms
Euglena sp.
Other genera

        Total

Coscinodiscus sp.
Chroomonas sp.
Chlamydomonas sp.
Zoospores
Merismopedia sp.
Other genera

        Total

Chroomonas sp.
Oocystis sp.
Chlamydomonas sp.
Centric diatoms
Microcystis sp.
Other genera
Algal Units
per ml	

      706
      445
      131
      105
       78
      183
    1,648

      743
      496
      212
      177
      177
      744

    2,549

    3,378
      622
      445
      356
      267
    1,022

    6,090

      803
      223
      178
      178
      134
      402
                                         Total
                               1,918

-------
                                 8
    2.  Chlorophyll a_ -

        Sampling
        Date

        03/06/74
        05/15/74
        08/05/74
        10/30/74
Station
Number

   1
   2
   3

   1
   2
   3

   1
   2
   3

   1
   2
   3
C.   Limiting Nutrient Study:

    1.   Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
                         Ortho P
                         Cone, (mg/1)
            Inorganic  N
            Cone,  (mg/1)
Chlorophyll
     3.1
     2.9
     3.1

     5.0
     4.9
     7.8

    13.7
    15.3
    15.0

     1.3
     1.9
     1.8
Maximum yield
(mg/1-dry wt.)
0.031
0.081
0.081
0.031
0.207
0.207
1.207
1.207
6.2
6.3
25.9
15.9
Spike (mg/1)

Control
0.050 P
0.050 P + 1.0 N
1.0 N
    2.   Discussion -

            The control  yield of the assay alga,  Selenastrum capri-

        cornutum.  indicates that the potential  primary productivity

        of Fort Phantom  Hill  was high at the time the sample was

        collected  (10/30/74).

-------
    There was a significant increase in yield when only
nitrogen was added, but not when phosphorus alone was
added.  Based on these results, nitrogen limitation is
indicated at that time.
    The lake data indicate nitrogen limitation at all
sampling times; i.e., the mean inorganic nitrogen to
orthophosphorus ratios were 8 to 1 or less at all sam-
pling stations and times.  However, the mean Secchi disc
transparency of 0.6 meters indicates primary productivity
may be light-limited at times rather than nutrient-limited.

-------
                                     10
IV.   NUTRIENT LOADINGS
     (See Appendix E for data)
     For the determination of nutrient loadings,  the  Texas  National
 Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples  from  each of the
 tributary sites indicated on the map (page vi),  except  for April and
 May when two samples were collected.  Sampling was begun in September,
 1974, and was completed in August,  1975.
     Through an interagency agreement, stream flow  estimates for the
 year of sampling and a "normalized" or average year  were provided by
 the Texas District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the
 tributary sites nearest the lake.   Several  factors affect  the flow
 into and out of Lake Fort Phantom Hill.   The City  of Abilene diverts
 about 0.66 m3/sec from the reservoir for  municipal use  (Anonymous, 1976),
 and water is .pumped from the Clear  Fork Brazos River into  the lake at an
 average rate of 0.24 m3/sec (Weems, 1976).   Apparently, the variability
 of  flow is high and is sometimes affected by irregular  inflows such as
 the diversion of an undetermined amount of flood flow by gravity ditch
 from Deadman Creek to the reservoir (Anonymous,  1976).
     In this report, nutrient loads  for sampled tributaries were
 calculated using mean annual concentrations and mean annual flows.
 Nutrient loads for unsampled "minor tributaries and  immediate drainage"
 ("ZZ" of U.S.G.S.) were estimated using the mean concentrations in Elm
 Creek at station A-2 and the mean annual  ZZ flow.

-------
                                    11
    No known wastewater treatment plants impacted Lake Fort Phantom
Hill during the sampling year.
    A.  Waste Sources:
        1.   Known municipal  - None
        2.   Known industrial  - None

-------
                                    12
    B.  Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:

        1.  Inputs -

                                              kg P/           %  of
            Source                            yr             total
            a.  Tributaries (non-point load)  -

                Elm Creek                         555         13.8
                Cedar Creek                       455         11.3
                Clear Fork Brazos River diversion 970         24.1

            b.  Minor tributaries & immediate
                 drainage (non-point load)  -     1,730         43.0

            c.  Known municipal STP's - None

            d.  Septic tanks* -                   125          3.1

            e.  Known industrial - None

            f.  Direct precipitation** -          190          4.7

                        Total                    4,025        100.0

        2.  Outputs -

            Lake outlet - Abilene Aqueduct       1,080
                          Elm Creek               470

                             Total              1,550

        3.  Net annual P accumulation - 2,475 kg.
* Estimate based on 441  lakeshore dwellings;  see Working  Paper  No. 175.
** See Working Paper No.  175.

-------
                                    13
    C.  Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:

        1.  Inputs -

                                              kg N/          % of
            Source                            yr             total

            a.  Tributaries (non-point load) -

                Elm Creek                      10,520          11.5
                Cedar Creek                     6,470           7.1
                Clear Fork Brazos River diver-
                 sion                          25,515          27.8

            b.  Minor tributaries & immediate
                 drainage (non-point load) -   32,645          35.6

            c.  Known municipal  STP's - None

            d.  Septic tanks* -                  4,700           5.1

            e.  Known industrial - None

            f.  Direct precipitation** -       11,800          12.9

                        Total                   91,650         100.0

        2.  Outputs -

            Lake outlet - Abilene Aqueduct     17,860
                          Elm Creek             7,190

                             Total             25,050

        3.  Net annual  N accumulation - 66,600 kg.

    D.  Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:

        Tributary                             kg P/km2/yr    kg N/km2/yr

        Elm Creek                                <1              16
        Cedar Creek                                1              16
* Estimate based on 441  lakeshore dwellings;  see  Working  Paper  No.  175.
** See Working Paper No.  175.

-------
                                14
E.   Mean Nutrient Concentrations in Ungaged  Stream:
                                          Mean Total  P    Mean Total N
    Tributary                             Cone,  (mg/1)    Cone,  (mg/1)
    Buck Creek                                0.049          2.202
F.   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             0.37      0.23        8.4        6.1
    Vollenweider phosphorus  loadings
     (g/m2/yr)  based on mean depth and mean
     hydraulic  retention time of Lake Fort Phantom Hill:
        "Dangerous"   (eutrophic loading)             0.32
        "Permissible"  (oligotrophic  loading)        0.16

-------
                                    15
V.   LITERATURE REVIEWED

    Anonymous, 1976.   Water resources data for Texas,  water year 1975.
        Water-Data Rept.  TX-75-1,  U.S.  Geol.  Surv.,  Austin.

    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.

    Weems, W.  J.  (Water Supt.),  1976.  Personal communication (diver-
        sions  from lake for municipal use; lake morphometry; pumping
        records for Clear Fork Brazos River).   Abilene.

-------
                              16
VI.   APPENDICES
                                  APPENDIX  A
                                 LAKE  RANKINGS

-------
LAKE DATA TO 3E USED  IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE  LAKE NAME
4601  AMISTAD LAKE
•4802  BASTROP LAKE
4803  8ELTON RESERVOIR
4804  BRAUNIG LAKE
4805  BROWNHOOD LAKE
4806  LAKE BUCHANAN
4807  CADOO LAKE
4808  CALAVERAS LAKE
4809  CANYON RESERVOIR
4810  LAKE COLORADO CITY
4811  CORPUS CRISTI LAKE
4812  DIVERSION LAKE
4813  EAGLE MOUNTAIN LAKE
4814  FT PHANTOM HILL LAKE
4815  GARZA LITTLE ELM RESEHVO
4816  KEMP LAKE
4817  HOUSTON LAKE
4818  LAKE OF THE PINES
4819  LAVON RESERVOIR
4820  LIVINGSTON LAKE
4821  LYNDON B JOHNSON LAKE
4822  MEDINA LAKE
4823  LAKE MEREDITH
4824  PALESTINE LAKE
4825  POSSUM KINGDOM RESERVOIR
4826  SAN ANGELO RESERVOIR
4827  SAM RAYBURN RESERVOIR
4828  E V SPENCE RESERVOIR
MED UN
TOTAL P
0.013
0.02?
0.016
0.134
0.027
0.036
0.055
0.038
0.010
0.042
0.113
0.025
0.024
0.060
0.045
0.023
0.097
0.031
0.063
0.196
0.042
0.010
0.021
0.031
0.023
0.093
0.029
0.036
MEDIAN
INO^G N
0.500
0.090
0.1
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE 'USED IN BANKINGS
LAKE
CODE  LAKE NAME
4829  SOMERVILLE LAKE
4830  STAMFORD LAKE
4831  STILLHOUSE HOLLOA RESEKV
4832  TAWAKOM LAKE
4833  TEXARKANA LAKE
4834  TEXOMA LAKE
4835  TSAVIS LAKE
4836  TRINIDAD
4837  TWIN 8UTTES RESERVOIR
4838  WHITE RIVER RESERVOIR
4839  WHITNEY LAKE
MEDIAE
TOTAL P
0.053
0.073
O.Olb
0.046
0.106
0.042
0.018
0.389
0.029
0.020
0.028
MEDIAN
INO^O N
0.115
0.160
0.160
0.100
0.120
0.160
0.250
0.110
0.250
0.110
0.120
500-
MEAN SEC
473.833
482.714
406.250
466.417
47B.500
451.321
389.913
479.500
454.917
434.500
430.500
MEAN
OLOftA
24.491
18.457
3.917
18.246
19.119
12.493
5.595
24.300
8.708
4.333
6.912
Ib-
MIN DO
13.000
10.600
15.000
13.200
12.400
15.000
15.000
10.000
14.800
15.000
15.000
MEDIAN
DISS UrfTnO
0.013
0.012
0.010
0.013
0.030
0.018
0.007
0.240
0.009
0.009
0.008

-------
        OF LAKES »ITH
VALJES
                                        BES OK LAKES *ITI
LA
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES  (NUMBER  OF  L*THO P
30 (
39 (
51 (
30 I
1J <
21 I
84 (
0 (
63 (
63 <
76 (
101
14)
19)
10)
5)
7)
3D
0)
21)
21)
28)
INDEX
NO
20a
259
372
2^3
176
217
J84
169
311
390
357

-------
   cS RANKED BY JNDE< NOS.
RANK  LAKE CODE  LAKE NAME               INDEX NO

   1  4809       CANYON RESERVOIR           445
   2  4823       LAKE MEREDITH              441
   3  4813       EAGLE MOUNTAIN LAKE        430
   4  4816       KEMP LAKE                  423
   S  4801       AMISTAO LAKE               402
   6  4805       3RO*NWOOD LAKE             394
   7  4802       BASTRUP LAKE               393
   8  4838       WHITE RIVER RESERVOIR      390
   9  4825       POSSUM KINGDOM RESERVOIR   387
  10  4835       TRAVIS LAKE                384
  11  4803       8ELTON RESERVOIR           384
  12  4831       STILLHOUSE HOLLOW RESERV   372
  13  4812       DIVERSION LAKE             372
  14  4808       CALAVERAS LAKE             362
  15  4839       WHITNEY LAKE               357
  16  4822       MEDINA LAKE                342
  17  4827       SAM RAYBURN RESERVOIR      322
  18  4828       E V SPENCE RESERVOIR       321
  19  4837       TWIN BUTTES RESERVOIR      311
  20  4810       LAKE COLORADO CITY         310
  21  4824       PALESTINE LAKE             302
  22  4818       LAKE OF THE PINES          298
  23  4807       CADOO LAKE                 297
  24  4814       FT PHANTOM HILL LAKE       296
  25  4806       LAKE BUCHANAN              261
  26  4830       STAMFORD LAKE              259
  27  4819       LAVON RESERVOIR            258
  28  4832       TAWAKONI LAKE              253

-------
LAKES RANKED BY INDEX NOS.
RANK  LAKE CODE  LAKE NAME               INDEX NO
  29  4821       LYNDON B JOHNSON LAKE      238
  30  4834       TEXOMA LAKE                217
  31  4829       SOMERVILLE LAKE            208
  32  4826       SAN ANGELO KESERVOIR       200
  33  4833       TEXAKKANA LAKE             176
  34  4815       GARZA LITTLE ELM RESERvO   173
  35  4836       TRINIDAD                   169
  36  4804       BRAUNIG LAKE               159
  37  4811       CORPUS CRISTI LAKE         155
  38  4817       HOUSTON LAKE               139
  39  4820       LIVINGSTON LAKE             91

-------
    APPENDIX B





CONVERSION FACTORS

-------
                CONVERSION FACTORS


Hectares x 2.471 = acres

Kilometers x 0.6214 = miles

Meters x 3.281 = feet
                         -4
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

-------
                                                                                           04/l<./76
LAKE CODE 4S14
      FORT PHANTOM HILL *ts.
     TOTAL DRAINAGE ARtA OF LAKE(SO KM)
          SUH-CHAINAGE
TRIBUTARY

4814A1
4M14A2

<«814ZZ
                          JAN
                             123-.J
                                          •MA*
                                                          MAY
                                                                   JUN
                                                              FLOwSICMb)
                                                             JUL     AoG
                                                                              OCT
                                                                                                                   OtC
            )?38.0
             644.9
             41-*.4
             178.7
                   0.000
           O.OOo   0.00*5
           0.003   O.OC3
           0.001   0.001
                        TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE  =
                        SUM UF SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS    =
0.000
0.0 3«
0 . 0 C 6
0.002
0.190
0.02S
0.017
o.oos
1.019
0.461
0.311
0. 133
0.184
1.161
0.736
0.317
0.051
0.190
0.122
O.Obn
0.011
0.057
0.023
0.013
0.510
0.065
0.051
0.023
0.481
0.311
0.196
0.086
O.OCrt
0 . 0 1 V
0.011
0.005
0.017
0.0o2
0. J-+6
0.022
0.208
0.203
0. 128
0.056
                                                                    SUMMARY
                                            1233.0
                                            1233.0
     MEAN MONTHLY FLOmS AND DAILY FLOWS(CMS)
TKIBUTARY   MONTH   YEAR
               MEAN FLOW  DAY
                                      I-LOW  OAY
                                                        PLOW
                                                          TOTAL FLO*  IN
                                                          TOTAL FLO*  OUT
                                                                          FLOW
                                                                                                     4.63
                                                                                                     2.48
4814A1
4814A2
 9
10
11
12
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
74
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
IS
                                13.592
                                44.741
                                5.663
                                1.133
                                1.416
                                2.83?
                                1.416
                                0.991
                                0.566
                                1.133
                                0.850
                                0.566
                                11.327
                                19.822
                                4.248
                                0.850
                                0.708
                                4.248
                                0.566
                                0.283
                                0.283
                                0.566
                                0.142
                                0.283
7
5
2
7
4
1
1
5
3
7
5
2
7
5
2
7
4
1
1
5
3
7
5
2
0.003
0.026
8.495
2ls32
1.416
1.416
1.133
0.566
1.133
0.850
1.133
0.057
1.982
4.814
1.133
0.850
2.124
0.708
0.283
0.?63
0.425
0. 142
O.OS7






19
17










19
17



                                                                     0.850
                                                                     0.566
                                                                    0.283
                                                                    0.283

-------
                                          it FLOW INFORMATION
CODE <-814     FCHT PHANTOM ilLL

MEAN MONTHLY FLOwS AND DAILY FLOwS(CMS)

       MONTH   YEAN    MEAN FLUrt  DAY
48142Z
9
10
11
1?
1
2
3
L*. P
* C **O
1.416
0.283
0.142
0.850
0.170
0.142
0.113
0.170
0.057
O.OS7
7
5
2
7
<4
1
1
3
3
7
5
2











                                                   FLO*  OAY

                                                  O.U14
                                                  0.510
                                                  2.832
                                                  0.2*3
                                                  0.263
                                                  0.708
                                                  0.425
                                                  0.170   19
                                                  0.170   17
                                                  0.283
                                                  0.085
                                                  0.028
       OAY
                                                                                       FLO*
0.170
0.170

-------
        APPENDIX D





PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA

-------
STOPET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/02/il
                                                                  4H1401
                                                                 32 36 5b.O C99 40 05.0
                                                                 FT PIANTOM -ULL
                                                                 48253   TEXAS
DATE
FROM
TO
74/03/06




74/05/15




74/08/05



74/10/30





DATE
FROM
TO
74/03/06




74/05/15




74/08/05



74/10/30




TIME OE°TH
OF
DAY FEET
15 35 0000
15 35 0005
15 35 0015
15 35 0030
15 35 0042
16 20 0000
16 ?0 0005
16 20 0015
16 20 0030
16 20 0042
10 ?0 0000
10 20 0005
10 20 0020
10 20 0034
09 25 0000
09 25 0005
09 25 0015
09 25 0032
09 25 0052

TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
15 35 0000
15 35 0005
15 35 0015
15 35 0030
15 35 0042
16 20 0000
16 20 0005
16 20 0015
16 20 0030
16 20 0042
10 20 0000
10 20 0005
10 20 0020
10 20 0034
09 25 0000
09 25 0005
09 25 0015
09 25 0032
09 25 0052
00010
HATER
TEMP
CENT
15.4
15.3
15.0
12.1
11. V
24.2
24.4
24.1
24.0
23.8
26.3
26.3
26.3
25.5
19.1
19.2
19.2
19.1
19.0
00665
PHOS-TOT

MG/L P
0.046
0.038
0.034
0.035
0.057
0.062
0.050
0.047
0.052
0.050
0.046
0.044
0.046
0.061
0.093
0.091
0.090
O.OH1
0.0«7
00300 00077
DO T^uN'S^
SECOI
MG/L INCHES
30
9.4
9.4
9.0
8.8

7.8
7.4
7.4
7.6
6.8 35
6.8
6.8
5.2
7.6 24
7.2
7.2
7.4
7.2
32217 00031
CHLRPHYL INCUT LT
A REMNING
UG/L PERCENT
3.1




5.0




13.7



1.3




OOU94
CND'JCTVY
FIELD
MICROMHO
622
622
630
615
622
858
846
844
841
839
979
977
971
966
372
398
396
395
390























1 lEr'AuES
3
00400 00410
Pi-i I ALK

SU
8.40
8.30
8.30
8.20
8.10
8.30
8.30
8.30
8.30
8.30
8.30
8.30
8.30
8.20
8.00
8.00
7.95
8.00
8.00























CACOJ
MG/L
Ib7
168
168
168
170
167
166
165
165
165
164
164
167
165
117
117
116
112
114























2111202
0046 FEET ;E->T
00610 00625
NHJ-N TOT i^JE^
TOTAL
MG./L
U.030
0.030
0.030
0.060
0.080
0.050
0.060
0.040
0.060
0.060
0.030
0.020K
0.030
0.070
0.040
0.050
0.030
0.040
0.040























N
MG/L
0.600
0.500
0.500
0.500
0.500
0.600
0.400
0.300
0.300
0.200
0.400
0.400
0.300
0.400
0.600
0.400
0.300
0.300
0.500























00630
•.C-.ie.N03
'.-TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.070
U.090
0.040
0.070
0.060
0.070
0.070
0.020
0.020K
0.020
0.020
0.290
0.290
0.280
0.290
0.290























00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.020
0.020
0.018
0.024
0.025
O.Olo
0.020
0.020
0.017
0.017
0.007
0.007
0.009
0.022
0.080
0.079
0.072
0.066
0.062























         K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
         LESS THAN INDICATED

-------
*ET*IEVAL  OrtTE  ffc/CL'/H
33 3b 57.0 099
FT pn4NTOM -(ILL
48253
                                                                               11.0

DATE
FROM
TO
74/03/06



74/05/15


74/08/05



74/10/30




DATE
FROM
TO
74/03/06



74/05/15


74/08/05



74/10/30




TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
16 20 0000
16 30 0005
16 20 0020
16 20 0035
09 35 0000
09 ?5 0005
09 25 0009
09 45 0000
09 45 0005
09 45 0010
09 45 0019
09 40 0000
09 40 0005
09 40 0015
09 40 0032

TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
16 ?0 0000
16 20 0005
16 20 0020
16 20 0035
09 ?5 0000
09 25 0005
09 25 0009
09 45 0000
09 45 0005
09 45 0010
09 45 0019
09 40 0000
09 40 0005
09 40 0015
09 40 0032
00010
WATER
TtMP
CENT
13. <•
13.4
13.2
12.4
24.0
24.0
24.0
26.4
26.4
26.4
26.3
18.9
18.9
18.8
18. a
00665
PH05-TOT

MG/L P
0.039
0.036
0.034
0.049
0.067
0.061
0.065
0.051
0.057
0.055
0.068
0.093
0.092
0.090
0.090
00300
no

MG/L

9.
9.
9.

7.
7.
6.
6.
7.
6.
7.
7.
7.
7.
32217
OOC77
TrtANSP
SECCHI
INCHES
30
4
<*
2
16
2
2
0 34
6
0
6
2 24
6
2
0
00031
00094
CNDUCTV*
FIELO
MIC30MHG
647
642
637
628
841
841
840
984
987
981
984
400
402
403
402

HtP-LtS
3
00400 0041y
Pn

SU
8.30
8.30
8.25
8.20
8.30
8.30
8.30
8.30
8.35
8.3S
8.35
8.00
8.00
7.95
7.95

T AL«
CACOD
MG/L
170
170
171
169
168
170
168
163
164
163
163
118
118
118
119

2111202
0039 FEET 0£-
00610 00625
N!-3-N
TOTAL
M(j/L
U.030
0.030
0.030
0.040
0.050
0.040
0.030
0.040
0.030
0.040
0.030
0.040
0.030
0.040
0.040

TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
1.200
0.500
0.400
0.400
0.700
0.500
0.400
0.500
0.400
0.500
0.300
0.600
0.400
0.300
0.400

00^30
•.•„>>;, NO 3
N- TOTAL
MG/L
0.040
0.050
0.040
0.050
0.070
0.050
0.040
0.030
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.280
0.280
0.270
0.270

OOo/l
HMOS-OIS
ORTrlO
MG/L P
0.021
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.033
0.029
0.021
0.007
0.008
O.OOo
0.006
0.076
0.073
0.071
0.069

CHLRPHYL INCDT LT
A
UG/L
2.



4.


15.



1.



REMNING
PERCENT
9



9


3



9



























































































































-------
STUrttT RETRIEVAL DATE 76/02/il
                      00010
  DATE   TIME OEPTrt  WATER
  FROM    OF          TEMP
   TO    DAY  FEET    CENT

74/03/06 16 50 0000     l^.l
         16 53 0006     1^.0
74/05/15 09 50 0000     24.5
         09 50 0005     24.4
74/08/05 09 05 0000     25.6
         09 05 0006     25.6
74/10/30 10 15 0000     18.8
         10 15 0005     18.8
         10 15 0015     18.9
         10 15 0020     18.8
<*81<-03
32 34 16.0 03-?
FT PniMOM r-lLl
4825J Tt**S
ilEPALtS

00300
DO

MG/L

9.2

7.0
6.8
6.8
7.0
6.4
7.2
7.2

00077
TRANSP
SECCHI
INCHES
24

9

24

2^




00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
MIC^OMMO
660
660
850
850
961
966
407
410
410
408
3
00400
PM

Su
8.30
8.30
8.35
8.30
8.40
8.40
8.00
7.95
7.95
7.95

OOMO
T AL*
CAC03
MG/L
172
173
169
169
162
163
119
120
119
118
tl 13. C
0010
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.060
0.040
0.040
0.060
0.060
0.040
0.040
0.050
0.040
0.050
1202
FEET UE3
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.800
1.000
0.500
1.100
0.400
0.400
0.400
0.400
0.300
0.300

T-
00630
'* ;'2^'-J03
N-TOTAL
Ib/L
0.050
0.050
0.040
0.080
0.100
0.020
0.270
0.270
0.270
0.270


00671
PHOS-3I5
0-iTnC
MG/L ?
0.028
0.023
0.028
0.032
0.017
0.013
0.076
0.077
0.073
0.075

DATE
FROM
TO
74/03/06

74/05/15

74/08/05

74/10/30




TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
16 50 0000
16 50 0006
09 50 0000
09 50 0005
09 05 0000
09 05 0006
10 15 0000
10 15 0005
10 15 0015
10 15 0020
00665
PHOS-TOT

MG/L P
0.046
0.045
0.109
0.534
0.074
0.060
0.096
0.095
0.097
0.099
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
3.1

7.8

15.0

1.8



00031
INCDT LT
REMNING
DEKCENT











-------
  APPENDIX E
TRIBUTARY DATA

-------
           itVAL 04 1'E 70/03/10
                                                                  32 3? 05.0 099  40  05.0  i
                                                                  ELM C^EcX
                                                                           7.5 HAK-HY
                                                                       FUKT PHANTOM  MILL
                                                                  BANK SAMP FOOT  OF  0AM OFF  2ND-4Y 3J
                                                                  llt.-ALt.S             21112&4
                                                                   0000 f'ttT  DEPTH   CLASS  00
  DATE   TI«t OEPTri NG2c,N03
  FRUM    OF
   TO    DAY  FEET
7H/09/07
74/lu/OS
74/11/02
74/12/07
75/01/04
7S/02/01
75/03/01
75/04/05
75/04/19
75/05/03
75/05/17
75/06/07
75/07/05
75/OB/02
11 15
12 25
10 20
11 00
14 15
10 55
14 25
15 05
14 55
18 15
11 40
11 15
11 45
09 45
C630
5.N03
OTAL
IG/L
C.Olb
C.2lfc
0.296
a. 320
a. 304
2.380
0.220
0.010
0.075
0.030
0.010
0.040
0.045
0.015
00625
TOT ivJEL
N
MG/L
0.600
0.500
0.500
0.500
0.700
1.100
1.250
0.950

1.950
0.350
0.500
0.600
0.650
00610
iirl j-N
TuTAL
MG/L
0.045
0.030
0.027
0.032
0.040
0.0 60
0.060
0.030
0.260
0.105
0.015
0.060
0.020
0.020
00671
PHGS-DIS
U»THO
MG/L P
0.010
0.060
0.067
0.070
0.055
0.04fi
0.035
0.010
0.020
0.015
0.005
0.010
0.005K
0.020
00665
aHOS-TOT

MG/L P
0.040
0.080
0.100
0.080
0.070
0.130
0.040
0.030
0.180

0.010
0.020
0.040
0.120
 K VALUE KNOrtN  TO  BE
 LESS THAN  INDICATED

-------
STOnET -iETPIEVAL OAlt  76.'C 3/10
  DATE   TIME DEPTH NiO?5>N03
  FROM    or
   TO    JAY  FEET
74/09/07
74/10/05
74/11/02
74/13/07
75/01/04
75/02/01
75/03/01
75/04/05
75/04/19
75/05/03
75/05/17
75/06/07
75/07/05
75/08/02
09 40
10 ?0
Osi 45
10 00
13 55
09 05
13 20
13 50
12 50
17 00
10 40
10 00
10 OS
08 10
                                                          32 31  05.0 099 43 25.0 4
                                                          ELM C-EE*
                                                          46      ?.S HAM6f
                                                          T/LIN FOr*T PHANTOM nit_L
                                                          2NO^t  ^L) tsrJDG AT MWY 600
                                                          llEr-LE5     _       2111204
                                                           OO'.'O  FEtT  OtPTi  CLASS  JO
                                                                                                        303*.
0630
'5.N03
uTAL
IG/L
0.430
0.576
0.352
0.990
0.920
1.020
1.000
0.770
0.930
0.710
0.670
0.420
0.990
0.920
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.800
0.500
0.900
1.100
0.700
1.300
1.600
0.450
1.100
0.550
0.500
1.550
0.600
0.650
00610
NH3-N
TUML
MG/L
0.025
C.010
0.085
0.024
0.016
0.144
0.035
0.050
0.060
0.025
0.010
0.030
0.020
0.015
00671
PriOS-l'.iS
iv r NO
MG/L P
0.02S
0.010
0.045
0.015
0.010
0.150
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.035
0.005K
0.025
00665
PHOS-TOT

MG/L P
0.106
0.060
0.230
0.020
0.035
0.210
0.020
0.040
0.070

0.080

0.070
0.100
  K  VALUE KNOWN TO BE
  LESS  THAN INDICATED

-------
STORE! KETRIEVAL DATE 76/03/10
  DATE   TIME DEPTH N02f.N03
  FROM    OF
   TO    DAY  FEET

7*/10/OS 11 00
74/11/02 11 50
7-+/12/07 10 35
75/01/04 14 15
75/02/01 09 55
75/03/01 13 45
75/04/05 14 15
75/04/19 13 35
                                                                  4614S1
                                                                 32 30 40.0 099 41  25.0  4
                                                                 BUCK CREEK
                                                                 48       7.5 HAMBY
                                                                 T/LK FORT PHANTOM  HILL
                                                                 2NDRY RD 2833 BRDG 2  HI N  OF  HWY  351
                                                                 11EPMLES              2111204
                                                                  0000 FEET  DEPTH   CLASS  00
0630
'f.N03
OTAL
IG/L
1.440
0.464
0.820
1.060
3.130
0.575
0.125
0.055
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
1.100
1.500
1.600
0.800
1.000
1.500
1.050
1.400
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.065
0.048
0.040
0.088
0.065
0.070
0.060
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.020
0.030
0.005
0.005
0.063
0.005K
0.015
0.010
00665
PHOS-TOT

MG/L P
0.040
0.100
0.020
0.020
0.120
0.010

0.030
 K VALUE KNOrfN TO BE
 LESS THAN INDICATED

-------
                DATE 7c/03/10
                                                                  32 J5 <«5.0 099 40 47.0  4
                                                                  A8Ii_E'Mti A'JUEUUCT
                                                                  48      7.5 riAMBY
                                                                  o/Lr- FG*T PIANTOM MILL
                                                                  AT i^uEOUCT INTAKE  PUMPING STA E S I OE t-v
                                                                  HE^ALtS              21112.)'*
                                                                   OCOO r'EET  DEPTH   CL«5S  00
DATE
FROM
TO
7W09/07
74/10/05
74/11/02
74/12/07
75/01/04
75/02/01
75/03/01
75/04/05
75/04/19
75/05/03
75/05/17
75/06/07
75/07/05
75/08/02
THE !
OF
OAY 1
13 30
11 50
11 15
10 50
14 25
10 20
14 00
14 <»5
14 05
18 05
11 20
11 00
11 15
09 20
             FEET
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.012
0.224
0.288
0.336
0.296
0.227
0.200
0.005
3.015
0.005
0.005
0.030
0.015
0.010
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.900
0.600
0.700
0.900
0.500
0.700
1.400
0.600
0.700
1.000
0.450
0.600
0.650
0.650
00610
N-I3-N
TOTAL
Mb/L
C.035
0.040
0.030
0.024
0.024
0.040
0.055
0.010
0.030
0.035
0.005K
0.050
0.025
0.007
00671
PnOS-OIS
URTHU
MG/L P
0.010
0.060
0.065
0.060
0.05C
0.040
0.030
0.010
0.010
0.015
0.005
0.015
0.005
0.020
0066S
°HOS-TOT

MG/L P
0.045
0.090
0.100
0.090
0.070
0.070
0.040
0.010
0.020
0.050
0.040
0.030
0.030
0.050
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN  INDICATED

-------
STO^ET tfETKlEVAL  DATE  ?o/OJ/10.
  OATL   TIME DEPTH  N025.N03
  FROM    OF
   Tu    DAY  FEET
74/09/07
74/10/05
74/1 1/02
74/12/07
75/01/0*
75/02/01
75/03/01
75/04/Ob
75/04/19
75/05/03
75/05/17
75/06/07
75/C7/05
75/06/02
10 40
10 40
10 55
10 20
14 05
09 30
13 35
14 00
13 20
17 30
10 55
10 25
10 35
OB 30
                                                                   4.6 14U1
                                                                  32  JO  35.0  099  42  20.0  4
                                                                  CEJ--!  CRciEr-.
                                                                  *8       7.5 HAMdY
                                                                  T/Lr. r'U&r P-ifiNTOM  HILL
                                                                  BANK SAMP 2NQPY «0 1  
-------
     RETRIEVAL OATL ?o/oj/io
32 3b 25.0 099 42 10.0 <+
CLEAK F* 6«620S KIV£«
48      '.5 HAMBr
     FORT PHANTOM HILL
    r *D 1082 BROG 0.5 MI E OF
                                                                                                  600
11EPALES
 OOUu HEET
                                                                           DEPTH
  21112J4
CLASS uo
DATE
FROM
TO
74/09/07
74/10/05
74/11/02
74/12/07
75/01/04
75/02/01
75/03/01
75/04/05
75/04/19
75/05/03
75/05/17
75/06/07
75/07/05
75/06/02
00630 00625
TIME OEPTH NU2&N03 TOT KJEL
Of N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
11
12
10
11
14
11
14
15
15
18
12
11
12
10
25
50
05
30
50
35
40
35
?0
40
15
40
20
20
MG/L
0
2
I
4
4
4
4
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
.960
.240
.520
.400
.640
.090
.300
.050
.400
.720
.600
.250
.100
.000
MG/L
1.
0.
1.
0.
0.
1.
1.
0.
1.
0.
0.
1.
1.
1.
200
900
300
600
700
200
300
400
500
350
700
700
230
450
Ofi610 00671 00665
NHJ-N PhOS-uIb PnOS-TOT
TOTAL uPTHO
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
035
015
040
032
032
136
045
025
070
055
015
055
025
020
MG/L
0.
0.
U.
0«
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.

0.
0.
0.
0.
P
025
020
085
005
030
096
005
005K
007

060
100
045
065
MG/L P
0.105
0.110
0.290
0.010K
0.050
0.19b
0.030
0.040
0.070
0.01CK
0.120
0.440
0.145
0.160
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED

-------